Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
118-03 Ordinance
RECORD OF ORDINANCES Dayton Legal Blank, Inc. Form No. 30043 Ordinance No. 118-03 Passed 20 AN ORDINANCE TO REZONE APPROXIMATELY 24.3 ACRES, ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF PERIMETER DRIVE AND AVERY- MUIRFIELD DRIVE, REVISING SUBAREAS Al AND A2 OF THE EXISTING PCD COMPOSITE PLAN (CASE N0.03-1192 -RIVERSIDE HOSPITAL PCD, SUBAREA A). NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Dublin, State of Ohio, ~ of the elected members concurring: Section 1. That the following described real estate (see attached map marked Exhibit "A") situated in the City of Dublin, State of Ohio, is hereby rezoned PCD, Planned Commerce District, and shall be subject to regulations and procedures contained in Ordinance No. 21-70 (Chapter 153 of the Codified Ordinances) the City of Dublin Zoning Code and amendments thereto. Section 2. That application, Exhibit "B", including the list of contiguous and affected property owners, and the recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Commission, Exhibit "C", are all incorporated into and made an official part of this Ordinance and said real estate shall be developed and used in accordance therewith. Section 3. That this Ordinance shall take effect and be in force from and after the earliest period allowed by law. Pa ed this/ r ~ day of ~Dr~ l , 20(~~ ~ r Mayor -Presiding Officer Attest: Clerk of Council Sponsor: Planning Division I hereby certify that copies of this Ordinance/Resolution were posted in the City of Dublin in accordance with Sectio 731.25 of the Ohio Revised Code. D ty Clerk of Council, Dublin, Ohio Department of Development Division of Planning 5800 Shier-Rings Road • Dublin, Ohio 43016 CITY OF DLBL[N Phone: 614-410-4600 • Fax: 614-410-4747 M e m 0 TO: Members of Dublin City Council FROM: Jane S. Brautigam, City Manage~~, ~ (j _ DATE: April 14, 2004 ~~ff INITIATED BY: Gary P. Gunderman, Assistant Planning D~r~.~~d'r' ~ RE: Ordinance 118-03 -Riverside Hospital PCD, Subarea Al-A3 -Rezoning (Case #03-1192) SUMMARY: Rezoning application 03-1192 was submitted in September 2003 to revise the existing composite plan for Subarea A of the Riverside Hospital PCD. The current text permits office and institutional uses, nursing facilities, hospice, daycare centers, and banks. Bank drive-thrus are a conditional use. The proposed modifications to the zoning text still permit office and institutional uses, banks/financial institutions, and daycares. Bank drive-thrus are also still a conditional use. Modifications include the elimination of nursing and hospice facilities and the targeted addition of limited restaurant and retail along the more intense Avery Road and Perimeter Drive corridors (Subareas A2 and A3). Subarea A2 on Avery Road includes a 13,500-square foot neighborhood center that will include restaurant and retail uses. Subarea A3 along Perimeter Drive will permit the construction of two sit-down restaurants. Fast food and drive-thrus will not be permitted for restaurants in either subarea. RECOMMENDATION: The Community Plan identifies the site as "office" and "mixed-use employment emphasis." The proposed modifications are generally consistent with the existing uses and will provide additional neighborhood-scale services to support surrounding office buildings and employees. The Planning and Zoning Commission made a positive recommendation for the proposed rezoning on March 4, 2004, that included a total of twelve conditions. The Commission heard further discussion regarding identification signage and restaurant odor control on March 18, 2004. The applicant worked with staff to address many conditions from the previous meeting, and the Commission made a revised recommendation for approval of the proposed rezoning with five conditions. RECORD OF ORDINANCES Diyrun Legal DIanA, In<. Fnnn No. 1(NN 1 Ordinance Na. 11g-03 Pressed 20 - - t AN ORDINANCE TO REZONE APPROXIMATELY 24.3 ACRES, ON THE NORTIiWEST CORNER OF PERIMETER DRIVE AND AVERY- MUIRFIELD DRIVE, REVISING SUBAREAS Al AND A2 OF THE EXISTING PCD COMPOSITE PLAN (CASE N0.03-1192- RIVERSIDE HOSPITAL PCD, SUBAREA A). NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Dublin, State of Ohio, of the elected members concurring: Section 1. That the following described real estate (see attached map marked Exhibit "A") situated in the City of Dublin, State of Ohio, is hereby rezoned PCD, Planned Commerce District, and shall be subject to regulations and procedures contained in Ordinance No. 21-70 (Chapter t53 of the Codified Ordinances) the City of Dublin Zoning Code and amendments thereto. Section 2. That application, Exhibit "B", including the list of contiguous-and affected property owners, and the recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Commission, Exhibit "C", are all incorporated into and made an official part of this Ordinance and said real estate shall be developed and used in accordance therewith. Section 3. That this Ordinance shall take effect and be in force from and afrer the earliest period allowed by law. Passed this day of , 2003. Mayor -Presiding Officer Attest: Clerk of Council Sponsor: Planning Division _~,a EXHIBIT "B" REZONING APPLICATION, (Code Section 153.234) \ TO EXPIRE ~ \ `'~i4 ORDINANCE NO._ Division of Pbns>>ag CITY COUNCIL 1 ST Reading o saoasnier-Rinpseood CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING Dublio,Ohia43416.1236 CITY COUNCIL ACTION Phone/f DD: 614 A 10•~160G fax: 614.7bi-6566 Web Site: www.dubiin.oh.tn OF R OFFICE USE ONLY -pAp~_,~._.._~______~__.~ Amount Application No: P&Z Date(s): P8Z Action: Received: t-~ ? v ~ ~ q Z Receipt No: M!S Fee No: Date ve~ Received By: Z Type of Request: _..J NOTE: Applicants are highly encouraged to contact the Division of Planning at 410-4600 for assistance to discuss the P&Z review process prior to submitting a formal application. CHECK THE TYPE OF APPLICATION: ? Composite Plan (§153.058) ? Preliminary Development Plan (§153.056) ¦ Other (Please Describe) Mxif?Tcation of PCD Text- - i fi cation to SLlbarea A of the Riverside PCB Text (2~+-acres at the corner of 1ter Drive, Av~~eld Drive, and. Rat Road) FAX CONFIRMATION WILL FOLLOW THE SUBMISSION OF THIS FORM PROPERTY INFORMATION: To be split fmn ~ Parcel Size: Tax ID/Parcel Number: 273-001895 ~ (Acres) ~•3 a~.S Property Address: See below. North~st corner of I~riit~ter Drive aryl AverY~`~.iirfield. Drive Side of Street 0 s, E, w>: of Peritreter Drive, Guest of Avery-M~irfield Drive, and Saith of Post Road. Nearest Intersection: Post Distance from Nearest Intersection; See FEET, N, S, E, W (Circle) from Nearest Intersection Existing Land Use Development: ~-Cl11tl~'al ~ ~ Proposed Land Use Development: Hlgll--eC1Cl, pll office ar>cl service Oriente~"r~ dev,~~~.^'T. _.T.~_.~~.,_..___ - _~.__._._~_.._,___~,T_._...T.__-- ~___,__.-___..._____M.~. Current or Existing Zoning District: ,Requested Zoning District; i Number of Acres told°fjezQn~e~J:' " PCD None i N/A i.._ ~ _ . , ~Q03 Page 1 of 5 Rezoning Statement; State briefly how the proposed zoning and development relates to the existing and potential future land use character of the vicinity. 'Il>e plarx>ecl office/service-orient~3 retail develc~zt is cansist~t with the oar~rci,al (re ~devplapr>ent to the south aryl southeast, try ct>rralt aricl prc~ose,3 office developT~it to the Est arrl the rrri~d office/service retail/institutional uses to the east aryl north. The proposed developrrt`nt will elevate the duality arid. character of the neiglibor~ng existing uses. State briefly how the proposed zoning and development relates to the Dublin Community Plan. die Ftattae Land Use Map (Nhp 8) in the Caimmity Plan c~tai>plates the clevPlopT>~t of this site as Mixed. Use-Hnplcryrrerzt Hr>phasis . The proposed. devplo~~t is oc~isistetlt with thet In that the ~ developT~t will combine office uses aryl service .oriented retail uses in a rrmaier that will c~r>pLiment tree er~~t aril oontar>plated developn~its in aril arrx.md the ~ricr~ter/l~v+-r~Miir£_el area. Previous Application: Has an application for rezoning the propEarty been denied by the City Council within the last two (2) years? No. If Yes, When? State the basis of reconsideration: IF A PLANNED DISTRICT IS REQUESTED, IS A COMPOSITE OR PRELIMINARY PLAN ATTACHED? YES ¦ NO ? IF A PLANNED DISTRICT IS REQUESTED, IS THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT ATTACHED? YES ¦ NO ? J l i~ . s.... Page 2 of 5 IV. PLEASE SUBMIT THE FOLLOWING: ? TWO (2) ORIGINAL SIGNED AND NOTARIZED APPLICATIONS AND THIRTEEN (13) COPIES OF THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION ? 14 COPIES OF LEGAL DESCRIPTION Legal description of the property to be zoned consists of , ~ page(s). ? 14 SETS OF A SCALED, SITE/STAKING PLAN {NOT GREATER THAN 24" x 36") AND 14 SETS OF REDUCED SITE DRAWING(S) (NOT GREATER THAN 11" X 17"} SHOWING: a. The site and all land 500 feet beyond the boundaries; b. North arrow and bar scale; c. Locations, size, and dimensions of all existing and proposed conditions and structures (significant natural features, landscaping, structures; additions, decks, access vrays, parking, etc.); d. Proposed Uses (Regional transportation system, densities, number of dwellings, building/unit types. square footages, parking/open space, etc.); 2. Existing and proposed zoning district boundaries; f. Size of site in acres/square feet; and g. All property lines, setbacks, street centerlines, rights-of-way, easements, and other information related to the site. ? 14 COPIES OF COUNTY TAX PARCEL ID MAP: (NOT LESS THAN 8'/1" X 1 i'" AND NOT MORE THAN 18" X 20"} Showing contiguous property owners within 500 feet from the perimeter of the area to be rezoned. ? 14 SETS OF SCALED, DETAILED ARCHITECTURAL ELEVATIONS (IF APPLICABLE) ? FOR SIGNS, 14 COPIES OF ACCURATE, SCALED DRAWINGS SHOWING: a. Location of sign and sign type {wall, ground, projecting, or window) b, All dimensions of sign, including) letter sizes and proposed distance from sign to grade c. Proposed copy layout and lettering styles (fonts) d. Materials and manufacturer to k~e used in fabrication e. Total area of sign face {including frame) f, Type of Illumination ? MATERIAL AND COLOR SAMPLES (color chips, phctos, plans or brochure of product information). Include manufacturer name and number, ~ D 3 ~l~ Page 3 01 5 s~F~ i~ I .s ~ ~ _ ~ d l CONTIGUOUS PROPERTY OWNERS: List all neighboring property owners within 300 feet from the perimeter of the property. Information must be in accordance with the County Auditor's current tax list. Electronic copies of property owner lists are encouraged. (Use additional sheets as necessary.) ~ __~.~._.__._r,_,~._~.____~_~_.m___ - - PROPERTY OWNER I i (not Mortgage Company or Tax Service} ; MAILING ADDRESS + CITY/STATE2IP CODE ._.....~...z~.~.__._._~..._f...._..~_m..~__.__,__,...~...~~ .............~e_._._......_..._~.._._.___._._.~. See Attacl~t A .~..~~__.~_~._.~._A....____~._,.._.._.~~_._..___._~.__.-_.---.r~__.~~~~____~----.--__...~__~._~__._.______..._._____._~_...~~ I I ...~_v~.__.____.~~._.~..._..~._.~...,~..~_T._I..,_.....~.__~~___._.~.~_~________._......_~_._.._._________.___~_.__ ; I I ~.~~______.~_.,...~.m_..er,.._..,__~..~_~. -~_~..__~.__.__.~_~..e_. ___f.__.___.__.~~_~__~.._T___~.__._._~...._v._____.~ _~.._._.__~~__._.____~~.___,_..___~.e~._._ _M._~.~~~..._._~..~__.a___._.__~_~~ _.~«____s___.~._.~._ T._. .n~...__.1.a.m_~.~____~~,~.~_,__~2__.-_.~__.___T ~TT._~~__._.~.H ~_n...~~_.,~~.~.~._~__.___~.______.~___..~_~ .__a..._.__._e_.~._._..~_.__.~~...T.m«~.~~_.__~.~.~~~.~~.._~_e__.=.u.__.._______.______.._. . .______~_~_r_._~~_~..___._._~__._.~...__.___.._____ : T it k ` i. (~7 Page 4 at 5 j~~~~" X00 , Y . VI. PROPERTY OWNER /APPLICANT INFORMATION: Current Property Owner/Applicant: AU2~ Peri>reter I~ . _ , ~___...n__~__.__._....__._,_...e_,___......_.__.~_.~ ~ _ Mailing Address: C~O 'Ile Tktimler C-xC~, Ir1c. , 1533 Lake Shore Drive, Coltmbtas, Ohio 432(X+ (Street, City, State, Zip Code} Daytime Telephone: Fax: (614) 488r~+2/+ (614) 488-OG03 VII. OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE INFORMATION: Representative if different from property owner or applicant: Pahl G. Qiidotti (Also complete Section IX) _ Matting Address, 1533 Lake Shore Drive, Collmbus, Chio 4324+ (Street, Daytime Telephone: City, State, Zip Code) Fax: Daytime Telephone: (614) 488-G42~+ i (614) 488--0603 E-MAIL ADDRESS (IF AVAILABLE} p~• VIII. PRIMARY CONTACT: Who is the primary contact person? Paul G. C~7iClotti (If different from Owner's Representative and Applicant) IX, AUTHORIZATION TO VISIT THE PROPERTY: Site visits to the property by Ciry representatives are necessary in order to process this application. The Owner/Applicant hereby authorizes City representatives to visit, photograph and post a notice on the property described in this application. X. UTILITY DISCLAIMER: The Gfty of Ciublin will make every effort to provide essential services to the property as needed. However, the rapid growth of the City of Dublin and northwest Franklin County 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 future date. The AppllcanUOwner acknowledges that 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 said Applicant. XI. OWNER AUTHORIZATION FOR AGENT/REPRESENTATIVE: I Avety Pexi~ter LIl? the owner/applicant, hereby authorize G. C-hidotti to act as my agenUrepresentative in all matters pertaining to the processing and approval of this application including modifying the project, and I agree to be bound by ail representations and a reements made b the desi Hated a t. Signature or Cuyr nt rop y Owne • Date: 9~2Fj~O3 Q~ D XII. APPLICAN AF (DAVIT: ' I Paul G. Q1iClOtti the appiicanUauthorized representative, have read and understand the contents of thi application. The information contained in this application, attached exhibits and other information submitt 's complete and in r pacts true and correct, to the best of my knowledge and ~~~b***elief. Signature of Applicant or date: 9~26~03 a . Authorized Repreaentative; Subscribed~gj;d sworn to befcre me this _ ~ day of ,f'~.1.~ ' 0 o~PRtA1 3 ' ;~p~~'`\~~~f%'Fy'~- NotaryPubiic,!l~l/~.t~..v_~c~ _ ~ - KRISTINA V. BEZAK~ ; rl ? i Notary Public, State of Ohio ~ ~ ~ My Commission Expires 03-28-05 .Y L X708 Date ©8x'26/03., Rezoning Applicatior» uT ~ Page 5 of 5 f` ~ ~ R ' a PUD R-1 PUD PUD R-1 PLR PUD R-1 R_1 PUD R-1 1- - ~ PUD PCD PCD m PCD PCD PCD PCD -v PCD 3 m PCD P i 03-0162 City of Dublin Riverside PCD N Division of Planning Subarea A 0 500 Feet PUD U PUD PUD U ° PLR _ PUD R-1 P PUD R PUD - PUD R-1 ost Road R1 PUD PCD , PCD ° PCD PCD ° PCD C PCD PCD P PC PCD PCD PCD PCD PCD PCD 03-1192 City of Dublin Riverside Hospital PCD N Division of Planning Feet Subarea A 0 250 500 \ - EXHIBIT "B" REZONING APPLICATION. (Code Section 153.234) \ TO EXPIRE ORDINANCE NO. 6ivisioaofPlararing CITY COUNCIL 1ST Reading ~o~[~_ ssaosti;er-ain~eaod CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING o~~,,Ohw43016-1236 CITY COUNCIL ACTION Phane/fDO:614-410.460G foz: 614.761-6566 Web Site: w~w.dublin.oh.us !~1 FOR OFFICE USE ONLY Amount Application No: P8Z Date(s): P8Z Action: j Received: ~3 ~ ~ i q Z Receipt No: MIS Fee No: Date Received: Received By: Z > Type of Request: 1 a i - I NOTE: Applicants are highly encouraged to contact the Division of Planning at 410-4600 for assistance to discuss the P&Z review process prior to submitting a formal application. CHECK THE TYPE OF APPLICATION: ? Composite Plan (§153,058) ? Preliminary Development Plan (§153.056) ¦ other (Please Describe) Mxl~ficatial of l~ Text- - i ficatia> to Su}x-area A of the Riverside (2/+~s at the ~nrr of F~rilrleter Dries, Avery-M>_irfield Drive, and. lost Road) FAX CONFIRMATION WILL FOLLOW THE SUBMISSION OF THIS FORM PROPERTY INFORMATION: To be Split fart Parcel Size: Tax IDJParcel Number: 2~3--~~1~s (Acres) ~•3 aCr~S Properly Address: See belaa. I~br~tra~st corr;er of l~ritr>?ter Drive and Aiirfield. Drive Side of Street N S, E, vv>: of l~ritreter Drive, [~st of Aver~Mlirfield Drive, atx3. South of l~St Road. Nearest Intersection: l1JSt Distance from Nearest Intersection: See above. FEED, N, S, E, vJ (Circle) from Nearest Intersection I Existing Land Use Development 1.C7U~-tU>"d~_ Proposed Land Use Development: N.i~l-QY1_, )7l~D~EC~ Off ~02 aild Service Oriented L">rts37~~dEV`•• Current or Existing Zoning District: ? Requested Zoning District: Number of Acres ta~`~Fj$z¢ e ~ L.f L i~~.t- I~ j I~r1e N/A Page 1 of 5 _ Attachment A 273-000299 Owner: WILLIAMS DEVELOPMENT LTD Address: 6760 POST RD Mail To: WILLIAMS DEVELOPMENT LTD 857 BABBINGTON COURT WESTERVILLE OH 43081 273-000378 Owner: NORTHWEST PRESBYTERIAN CHRCH PCA INC Address: 6488 POST ROAD Mail To: NORTHWEST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH PCA INC 6488 POST ROAD DUBLIN OH 43016 273-000388 Owner: CITY OF DUBLIN Address: 6825 AVERY ROAD Mail To: DUBLIN CITY OF 5200 EMERALD PKWY DUBLIN OH 43017-1066 273-000438 Owner: POMANTE LINDA K Address: 6800 AVERY RD Mail To: POMANTE LINDA K 949 OAKLAND PARK AVE COLUMBUS OH 43224 273-000441 Owner: HOLLINGSHEAD WYNN & JUDY Address: 6810 AVERY RD Mail To: HOLLINGSHEAD WYNN & JUDY 6810 AVERY MUIRFIELD DR DUBLIN OH 43017 273-000795 Owner: FOGLE GERALD E Address: 6336 POST RD Mail To: FOGLE GERALD E 6336 POST RD DUBLIN OH 43017 ~ ? . ~ ~ ~ ~ 273-000886 Owner: MAZZA JOSEPH G MAZZA MARY A Address: 6344 POST RD ~ Mail To: CHASE MANHATTAN TRANS/RENAISSANCE TOWER ~ 1201 ELM ST STE 400 ~3 4,-~ DALLAS TX 75270 ~ ~ : /0~~ P:MrtkMV~TTACNMENT AA.Ex 273-001895 Owner: HOSPITAL PROPERTIES INC Address: 00000 POST RD Mail To: OHI1O HEALTH OFFICE OF GENERAL COUNSEL STE K 3722 OLENTANGY RIVER RD COLUMBUS OH 43214 273-001900 Owner: BJL LP Address: Mail To: BJL L P PO Box 671 LONDON OH 43140 273-001944 Owner: POMANTE RICHARD L & LINDA K Address: 6600 AVERY RD Mail To: POMANTE RICHARD L 6800 AVERY RD DUBLIN OH 43017 273-003959 Owner: DUBLIN SENIOR COMMUNITY L P Address: 06470 POST RD Mail To: BURKE & NICKEL 3336E 32ND ST STE 217 TULSA OK 74135 273-003964 Owner: VILLAGE OF DUBLIN Address: 6500 POST RD Mail To: DUBLIN CITY OF 5200 EMERALD PKWY DUBLIN OH 43017-1066 273-004286 Owner: DUBLIN GERIATRIC CARE CO Address: 6430 POST RD Mail To: AEGIS 1661 OLD HENERSON RD COLUMBUS OH 43220 273-005361 Owner: STATE SAVINGS BANK Address: 6260 PERIMETER DRIVE , ~ i r_~ ~.~.H Mail To: FIFTH THIRD BANK PROPERTY ~ ~ a ATTN JIM BALDWIN 21 E STATE ST 4T" FL .~4 2~~~ COLUMBUS OH 43215-4228 ~ `'eE t" , i ~o~ f P:VnukN~ATfACHMENT M.OOc 273-005567 Owner: BANK ONE COLUMBUS NA Address: 6271 PERIMETER DR Mail To: INDUSTRY CONSULTING GROUP PO BOX 1919 WICHITA FALLS TX 76307 273-005749 Owner: AERC PERIMTER LAKES INC Address: 6146 PERIMTER DR Mail To: FIRST AMERICAN TAX VAL L J MELODY CO INC PO BOX 560807 DALLAS TX 75356-0807 273-007064 Owner: GRDEN FRANCES Address: 6333 POST RD Mail To: GRDEN FRANCES 6333 POST RD DUBLIN OH 43017 273-007470 Owner: LWM PARTNERS LLC Address: 6759 AVERY RD Mail To: LWM PARTNERS LLC 3100 TREMONT RD STE 200 COLUMBUS OH 43221 273-007471 Owner: PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA FOUNDATION INC TR Address: 6400 POST RD Mail To: PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA 6400 POST ROAD DUBLIN OH 43017 273-007589 Owner: MCDONALDS CORP Address: 6830 PERIMETER LOOP RD Mail To: NORTHWEST MGMT INC PO NOX 226 PLAIN CITY OH 43064 i7. , 273-008207 Owner: DUBLIN OAKS LIMITED Address: 6850 PERIMETER LOOP DR Mail To: CASTO DON MICHELLE HESCH 70Q3 209 E STATE ST ~ ~ t ;.3-~~!~ i zi h i~ COLUMBUS OH 43215-4309 3o~'~y P:MsrkNWTTACHMENT AA.tlac 273-009357 Owner: CITY OF DUBLIN Address: POST RD Mail To: DUBLIN CITY OF 5200 EMERALD PKWY DUBLIN OH 43017-1066 273-009755 Owner: GELPI PAUL A Address: 6241 PERIMETER DRIVE Mail To: GELPI PAUL A 1535 BETHEL ROAD COLUMBUS OH 43220 273-010212 Owner: PERIMETER WEST BUILDING LLC Address: 6805 PERIMETER LOOP RD Mail To: NATIONWIDE LIFE INSURANCE RE INVESTMENTS 1-34-02 ONE NATIONWIDE PLAZA COLUMBUS OH C J` ~~aa 0 ~uo~ ~?3 ~ ~ P:MerkaDATTAGMMENT MAac > hJ ; ~ r M Exhibit A ~ ~ ~kv.S SITUATED IN THE STATE OF OHIO, COUNTY OF FRANKLIN, CITY OF DUBLIN IN VIRGINIA MILITARY SUR~~'S 2999 AND 3452, AND BEING 24.335 ACRE TRACT OUT OF AN ORIGINAL 111.649 ACRE TRACT CONVEYEIS ~'O HOSPITAL PROPERTIES, INC. BY DEED OF RECORD IN OFFICIAL RECORD 13642, PAGE G19 RECORDER'S OFFICE, FRANKLIN COUNTY, OHIO, SAID TRACT BOUNDED AND DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING, FOR REFERENCE, AT A P.K. NAIL FOUND AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE CENTERLINE OF POST ROAD (SIXTY (60) FEET IN WIDTH) WITH THE CENTERLINE OF AVERY-MUIRFIELD DRIVE (VARIABLE WIDTH) AND AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID ORIGINAL 111.649 ACRE TRACT; THENCE SOUTH 89° 02' S2" WEST ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF POST ROAD AND ALONG A PORTION OF A NORTH LINE OF SAID ORIGINAL 111.649 ACRE TRACT, A DISTANCE OF 112.07 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE SOUTH 00° 5T 08" EAST PERPENDICULAR WITH THE CENTERLINE OF POST ROAD, A DISTANCE OF 30.00 FEET TO A 3/4" LD. IRON PIPE SET IN THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF POST ROAD AND AT THE TRUE PLACE OF BEGINNING OF THE TRACT HEREIN INTENDED TO BE DESCRIBED; THENCE SOUTH 47° 23' 35" EAST ALONG THE SOUTHWESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE AT THE INTERSECTION OF POST ROAD AND AVERY-MUIRFIELD DRIVE, A DISTANCE OF 68.91 FEET TO A 3/4" I.D. IRON PIPE SET IN THE WESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF AVERY-MUIRFIELD DRIVE; THENCE SOUTH 03° 50' 02" EAST ALONG THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF AVERY-MUIRFIELD DRIVE, A DISTANCE OF 288.01 FEET TO A 3/4" I.D. IRON PIPE SET AT AN ANGLE POINT IN THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF AVERY-MUIRFIELD DRIVE; THENCE SOUTH 04° 55' 34" EAST ALONG THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF AVERY-MUIRFIELD DRIVE, A DISTANCE OF 228.31 FEET TO A 3/4" LD. IRON PIPE SET AT A POINT OF CURVATURE AND AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF PERIlVIETER DRIVE (VARIABLE WIDTH) WITH THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF AVERY-MUIRFIELD DRIVE; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY, ALONG A NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF PERIMETER DRIVE AND WITH A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, DATA OF WHICH IS: RADIUS = 65.00 FEET AND DELTA = 90° 00' 00", A CHORD DISTANCE OF 91.92 FEET BEARING SOUTH 40° 04' 35" WEST TO A 3/4" LD. IRON PII'E SET AT THE POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 85° 04' 26" WEST ALONG A NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF PERIMETER DRIVE, A DISTANCE OF 9.00 FEET TO A 3/4 I.D. IRON PIPE SET AT A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE WESTERLY, ALONG A NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF PERIMETER DRIVE AND WITH A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, DATA OF WHICH IS: RADIUS = 550.00 FEET AND DELTA = 20° 26' 44", A CHORD DISTANCE OF 195.22 FEET BEARING NORTH 84° 42' 11" WEST TO A 3/4" LD. IRON PIPE SET AT THE POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 74° 28' S0" WEST ALONG A NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF PERIMETER DRIVE, A DISTANCE OF 449.27 FEET TO A 3/4" I.D. IRON PIPE SET AT A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE WESTERY, ALONG A NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF PERIMETER DRIVE AND WITH A CURVE TO THE LEFT, DATA OF WHICH IS: RADIUS = 490.00 FEET AND DELTA = 23° 39' S2", A CHORD DISTANCE OF 200.95 FEET BEARING NORTH 86° 18' 45" WEST TO A 3/4" I.D. IRON PIPE SET AT THE POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 81° 51' 18" WEST ALONG A NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF PERIMETER DRIVE, A DISTANCE OF 333.90 FEET TO A 3/4" LD. IRON PIPE SET AT A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE WESTERLY, ALONG THE NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF PERIIvIETER DRIVE AND WITH A CURVE TO THE LEFT, DATA OF WHICH IS: RADIUS = 2040.00 FEET AND DELTA = 04° 15' 07", A CHORD DISTANCE OF 151.35 FEET BEARING SOUTH 79° 43' 44" WEST TO A 3/4" I.D. IRON PIPE SET AT AN ANGLE POINT IN THE NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF PERIMETER DRIVE; THENCE NORTH 12° 23' 49" WEST ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF PERIMETER DRIVE, A DISTANCE OF 10.00 FEET TO A 3/4" I.D. IRON PIPE SET AT AN ANGLE POINT IN THE EASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF PERIMETER DRIVE; THENCE SOUTH 77° 36' 11" WEST ALONG A NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF PERIMETER DRIVE, A DISTANCE OF 486.85 FEET TO A 3/4" LD. IRON PIPE SET IN THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID ORIGINAL 111.649 ACRE TRACT AND IN THE EASTERLY LINE OF AN ORIGINAL 83.149 ACRE TRACT OF LAND CONVEYED TO BJL LIMITD PARTNERSHIP BY DEED OF RECORD IN OFFICIAL RECORD 10507, PAGE D03, RECORDER'S OFFICE, FRANKLIN COUNTY, OHIO; THENCE NORTH 04° 42' 28" WEST ALONG A PORTION OF THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID ORIGINAL 111.649 ACRE TRACT AND ALONG A PORTION OF THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID ORIGINAL 83.149 ACRE TRACT, A DISTANCE OF 698.38 FEET TO A 3/4" LD. IlZON PIPE SET IN fiHE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF POST ROAD; THENCE SOUTH 87° 23' 18" EAST ALONG A SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF POST ROAD AND PARALLEL TO, AND THIRTY (30) FEET SOUTHERLY BY PERPENDICULAR MEASUREMENT, A NORTH LINE OF SAID ORIGINAL 111.649 ACRE TRACT, A DISTANCE OF 903.99 FEET TO A 3/4" LD. IltON PIPE SET AT AN ANGLE POINT IN THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF POST ROAD; THENCE SOUTH 89° 16' 37" EAST ALONG A SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF POST ROAD AND PARALLEL TO, AN THIRTY (30) FEET SOUTHERLY BY PERPENDICULAR MEASUREMENT, A NORTH LINE OF SAID ORIGINAL 111.649 ACRE TRACT, A DISTANCE OF 670.59 FEET TO A 3/4" I.D. IRON PIPE SET AT AN ANGLE POINT IN THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF POST ROAD; THENCE NORTH 89° 02' S2" EAST ALONG A SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF POST ROAD AND PARALLEL TO, AND THIltTY (30) FEET SOUTHERLY BY PERPENDIULAR MEASUREMENT, A NORTH LINE OF SAID ORIGINAL 111.649 ACRE TRACT, A DISTANCE OF 247.25 FEET TO THE TRUE PLACE OF BEGINNING, CONTAINING 24.335 ACRES OF LAND MORE OR LESS. G ~ ~r ~ PROPOSED TEXT Subarea A -Post Road Related For purposes of clearly defining and limiting uses that are permitted within Subarea A of the Riverside Dublin PCD, three separate subareas are established. Each of these subareas (referred to as subarea At, A2, and A3) is identified on the attached Exhibit A. Permitted Uses: The following uses shall be permitted within each of Subarea A~, A2, and A3, respectively: Subarea A~ a) Those uses listed in §153.026(A)--Suburban Office and Institutional District--of the Zoning Code. b) Financial service organizations and financial institutions (conditional use for drive-thru bank); provided that all such organizations and institutions shall be located only in Subarea A between Avery-Muirfield Drive and the access drive within Subarea A which lines up with the western access to Avery Square (the Kroger center) to the south of Subarea A (the "Demarcation Line"). The Demarcation Line is depicted on the attached Exhibit A. c) Daycare centers (including a preschool or any type of institution which provides education to toddlers and children up to the age of 13 years old). Subarea A2 a) Those uses listed in §153.026(A)--Suburban Office and Institutional District--of the Zoning Code. b) Financial service organizations and financial institutions (conditional use for drive-thru bank; provided that any such drive-thru that might be contained within a structure located along Avery-Muirfield Drive shall be screened to the satisfaction of staff and consistent with the Master Plan (defined below)). c) Coffee shops, cafes, ice cream shops, bakeries, or casual or fine dining eating and drinking establishments, specialty retail stores, bookstores, florists, stationary stores, gift/novelty shops; or stores providing goods and services which support office buildings or occupants of office buildings (e.g. copy shops, office supply/equipment sales, delivery service providers, etc.) Subarea A2 shall contain no more than 11,000 square feet of area in total of those uses described in the preceding sentence. In addition, one eating or drinking establishment within the neighborhood retail center located within Subarea A2 will be permitted to incorporate an outdoor seating area, along the pond between the building and P:NUM1NMxxr RwMVeryPerimxx S~Mru A Uw - HYMN Q11391.0oc 5 Avery-Muirfield Drive, as part of such establishment; provided that such seating area shall have a maximum square footage area no more than 15% of the interior space of such establishment. Subarea A3 - a) Those uses listed in §153.026(A)--suburban office and institutional district--of the Zoning Code. b) Casual and fine dining eating and drinking establishments with "table service" or bakery/cafes; provided that at no time shall this Subarea A3 include: (i) more than two such establishments, (ii) more than 11,000 square feet of area dedicated thereto, or (iii) adrive-thru, pick-up window. Notwithstanding any of the uses listed above in any of Subareas Ai, A2, or A3, none of the following uses shall be permitted anywhere within Subarea A at any time: (i) auto service; (ii) auto repair; (iii) gas station; (iv) tire store, (v) muffler or brake shop; (vi) car dealer or any other type of business which offers cars for sale or resale; (vii) car wash; or (viii) fast food restaurant (with or without adrive-through window). Furthermore, in the event any financial service organization or financial institution that is located along Avery-Muirfield Drive desires to change to a use other than that which is permitted under (a)-(c) of Subarea A~, above, that new use shall be subject to review and approval of the Planning Commission. Density/Lot Coverage: The density of each site shall not exceed 10,000 sf/acre. In addition, the total maximum lot coverage for all of Subarea A shall be equal to or less than 65% for the overall development and no individual site shall have a lot coverage greater than 70%. . Yard and Setback Requirements: a) In 1988, the Riverside Dublin PCD text originally contemplated a large setback for Subarea A along its Post Road frontage. In an effort to reallocate setbacks and associated green space areas to reflect the nature and character of how all of the neighboring uses have since been developed as commercial/institutional uses and to adequately reflect the transitional nature of Subarea A from those same surroundings, it is desirable to adjust and increase certain setbacks within Subarea A (see attached Table A). The main goal of this reallocation is to treat the Avery-Muirfield Drive frontage with special attention. As a result, a substantial parking and building setback shall be created along Avery-Muirfield Drive and within that setback a large pond with two fountains and a cascading waterfall shall be constructed to more appropriately reflect the gateway nature of Subarea A in a manner that is complimentary to its environs. With this P:NUrkN~Avery Ro~CNVeryPwFeWer SuMraa A Uw-rwisaA 0]12M.mc G reallocation of setbacks, the following setbacks for Post Road, Avery-Muirfield Drive, and Perimeter Drive are created: Building Setback Pavement Setback Avery-Muirfield Drive 85' 75' Perimeter Drive 40'' 20'' Post Road (east)2 100' 40' Post Road (west}3 100' 70' b) Side yard setbacks shall be 15' for pavement and 25' for buildings. However, in order to promote prudent planning and to encourage the location (or relocation) of green space to more desirable areas, the planning commission may permit pavement setbacks (and rear yard pavement setbacks defined in (c), below) to be reduced to less than 15' (and even to a zero lot line situation wherein parking lots of adjoining properties would be shared). Notwithstanding the foregoing, the neighborhood retail center proposed at the northeast corner of Subarea A which is a single structure which is located in both Subarea A~and A2 shall be permitted to straddle the Subarea A~/A21ine. c) Subject to (b), above, rear yard setbacks shall be 25' for pavement and buildings. d) Total ground covered by all buildings shall not exceed 25% of the total lot area. Parking and Loading: a) Size,, ratio, and type of parking and loading facility shall be regulated by Dublin Code Chapter [153.200]. b) All sites within Subarea A shall comply with the City of Dublin exterior lighting guidelines and will utilize "shoe-box" light fixtures with pole heights not greater than 28 feet from the grade of the parking lot. Circulation: Circulation within Subarea A and access to and from the adjacent publicly-dedicated streets shall be provided for in accordance with the approved development plan for Subarea A set forth in the Master Plan (defined below). Subarea A shall have no direct access onto Avery-Muirfield Drive. Which is consistent with the current required setbacks less the additional right-of-way grant required. 2 Between Avery-Muirfield Drive and the Demarcation Line. s Between the Demarcation Line and the western boundary of Subarea A. ~ ~ P:VrrrMlNVery RoaCNVeryPMmNer S.bn~ A Usn - riwnM Q11201.EOC 7 Offsite Infrastructure: In order to promote improved traffic efficiency on Post Road, Avery-Mui~eld Drive, and Perimeter Drive proximate to Subarea A and in accordance with the November 20, 2003 letter from the City of Dublin (attached Exhibit B), all of the following shall occur to the satisfaction of the City of Dublin: a) Right-of-Ways. (i) An additional 15' of right-of-way shall be granted to Dublin along the west side of Avery-Muirfield Drive. (ii) An additional 10' of right-of-way shall be granted to Dublin along the north side of Perimeter Drive up to the point at which the existing right-of-way is 100'. b) Road/Infrastructure Improvements. (i) Payment of the proportionate cost (as determined by the City of Dublin) for the improvements associated with the addition of an east bound left turn ° " lane on Post Road (west of Avery-Muirfield Drive) which proportionate costs relate to additional traffic which will be generated by Subarea A as a result of the Post Road access. (ii) Payment of all costs associated with the addition of a left turn lane from Post Road into Subarea A at the single access point on Post Road. The applicant shall attempt to coordinate completion of these improvements with those required of the church property on the north side of Post Road. (iii) Payment of 25% of the cost associated with any future traffic controls installed at the third intersection on Perimeter Drive (west of Avery-Muirfield Drive) if, and when, such traffic control is warranted. Waste and Refuse: All waste and refuse shall be contained and fully screened from view by a solid wall or fence as required by the Dublin Code. Fences: Other than as required for any daycare center located within Subarea Ai, no fences shall be permitted on any site unless otherwise approved by staff or otherwise required , for screening service areas, mechanical units, etc. P:~.«v,.~y awawK.yv~n sw.,.. ~,,,~,.,„a., mna.eo~ Storage and Equipment: a) No materials, supplies, equipment or products shall be stored or permitted to remain on any portion of a parcel outside a permitted structure. Mechanical equipment or other utility hardware on roof, ground or buildings shall be screened from public view with materials harmonious with the building as required by the Dublin Code. Landscaping: a) Landscaping shall be according to the Dublin Landscape Code Chapter [153.130-153.139]. In addition, landscaping treatment along Post Road shall be provided within the Post Road setback and shall include a grass mound with a mixture of ornamental, evergreen, and shade trees. The mound shall be contoured, natural, and undulating in appearance and shall be broken up into sections of varying lengths between 130' and 150' in length and with varying heights ranging from three and a half feet to six feet in height. Landscape plantings shall be in accordance with the Master Plan described in (c), below, and sample elevations are included as attached Exhibit C. b) In addition, landscaping along Perimeter Drive shall include a three and a half foot contoured, landscaped mound with street trees planted 50' on center within the right-of-way and planted within five feet of the right-of-way line. c) In order to appropriately transition the institutional and residential uses to the north of Subarea A with the fast food and strip center retail development to the south of Subarea A, Subarea A will incorporate a large pond (with an appearance similar to The Preserve at the southeast corner of Frantz Road and Tuttle Crossing Boulevard) fronting along Avery-Muirfield Drive with a higher reflective pond that will include a cascading water fall feature. This pond will be "well-fed" in the manner approved by the City of Dublin. In addition, the pond will contain fountains at the north and south ends along Avery-Muirfield. This frontage treatment will provide for an appropriate gateway feature for vehicular traffic as it moves from the residential development to the north south towards the SR33/161 interchange. This overall landscaping plan for Subarea A will be consistent with the Comprehensive Site Master Plan prepared by Faris Planning & Design and approved by the Planning Commission (the "Master Plan"). Traffic Calming: Along the private, internal, east-west street that runs parallel to Post Road and Perimeter Drive, traffic calming measures (e.g. textured pavement, raised tables, etc.) acceptable to the City of Dublin shall be installed to slow the movement of traffic at the intersection of the driveway that provides access from the Subarea A to Post Road. P:NWkNMwrv RuRN~nrvPr4Mer SuW ru A Uaat - nVbeA OJ1201.0x n Architecture: Generally: The architectural design of all buildings within Subarea A shall be traditional in look and feel and will be finished with natural materials. The particular architecture for all buildings within Subarea A that will contain uses other than those permitted in §153.026(A) (the "Non-Office Uses") shall be consistent with, or complimentary to, the style of architecture of those submitted as "conceptual" with this application (i.e. the small neighborhood retail center and The Huntington Bank branch). The intent of the foregoing is that these commercial structures have a residential feel and flare similar in design and feel to the Perimeter Center development. The architectural design of all uses within Subarea A permitted under §153.026(A) (the "Office Uses") shall be consistent with the office buildings proximate to Subarea A along Perimeter Drive and Post Road. In addition to the foregoing, the following guidelines shall be followed: Height: 1) No Non-Office Uses shall have a height in excess of 28' as measured by the Dublin Code (i.e. for pitched or hipped roofs, such a measurement shall be made to the mean height of such roof). No Office Uses shall have a height in excess of 35' as measured by the Dublin Code (i.e. for pitched or hipped roofs, such a measurement shall be made to the mean height of such roof). Color Palette: 1) Earth tones and muted/natural tones shall be required on all structures within Subarea A so as to be consistent with those earth tone and muted/natural colors of nearby structures. In addition, storefront colors for the neighborhood retail center shall be selected from a palette of colors approved by the planning commission as part of the development plan approval for that neighborhood center. Materials: 1) Warm tone brick, stone or synthetic stone, cedar siding and trim, and engineered wood composite material (e.g. hardi-plank or smartside siding and trim). 2) Specifically for Non-Office Uses, windows shall be residential in character (where appropriate for the particular type of commercial use). Windows should include mullions and muntins to reduce large expanses of glass areas. However, "store- front" glass is acceptable and appropriate in service-oriented areas for Non- Office Uses. P:Nar..Mwry RwCNveryPerlm««SWa,aa, USe.ravned 03,]OI.Ex - 10 Roof: 1) All buildings shall have a pitched or sloped roof (whether hipped or gabled). However, for Office Uses, this requirement may be satisfied by partial roofs, towers, or pagodas--similar ~to that utilized at The Preserve. In addition and regardless of whether a building is an Office-Use or aNon-Office Use, each such roof may provide open areas to house and permit the functionality of mechanical and other typical roof top equipment. 2) All structures shall contain roofing material consisting of dimensional asphalt shingles, cedar shakes or shingles, or slate (whether synthetic or authentic slate), all of which shall be in a color and style deemed appropriate by the planning commission as compatible with the neighboring buildings. 3) The use of dormers, vertical vents, and other architectural treatments which interrupt vast expanses of roof are encouraged for roofs on Non-Office Use structures. Scale: 1) All structures within Subarea A should be of a size and character complimentary with the existing nearby structures. 2) Structures should be designed to harmonize with the Master Plan. 3) Each Non-Office Use building must use articulated building elements, including, but not limited to porticoes, dormers, recesses, and other such elements to help break up the mass and bring each such building into a more residential character. Wall Articulation/Fenestration: 1) In addition to using building elements to articulate the building mass, individual walls must be articulated with fenestration, pattern, or structural expression equally on all sides of each structure. 2) With the exception to enclosed service corridors, all buildings shall have the same degree of exterior finish on all sides. Other than for necessary service areas, blank facades on the "rear" of any building will not be permitted, however, articulating such facades with recesses, fenestration, fences, pilasters, etc. is encouraged. 3) The amount of fenestration should be balanced with the amount of solid facade. gyn. P:NrvkelNvery Ro~CNveryPmreler $WIw A Uw - raNaN Ql1]IYt.EOC 11 Signage and Graphics: All signs shall comply with the Dublin Sign Code [Section 153.150]. In the event of any conflict between the Dublin Sign Code and this text, this text shall control. a) Materials and Landscaping: 1) All monument signs with a base located within Subarea A shall have an appearance consistent with, or compatible to, that depicted on Table C attached hereto. 2) All monument signs shall have landscaping around the base of the sign as required by the Dublin Code. b) Dimensions of Sign: 1) Maximum area of sign face: 50 square feet per face, with a limit of no more than two faces per sign. 2) Area of sign base (if any) shall not exceed area of sign face. The base shall not be included in the overall area permitted for the sign face. 3) Maximum overall height: 8'-0" above top of adjacent street curb. Signs located on grass mounds shall maintain conformance to 8'-0" maximum height above top of adjacent curb. c) Sign Graphics: 1) Graphic identification shall be limited to the site user's name, logo, and street number. 2) The area of graphic images such as logos shall not exceed 20% of the sign face. 3) Street numbers shall be located in the lower corner of the sign face or base nearest the right-of-way. 4) The maximum height of any letter or number shall be 16". d) Quantity: No more than one ground sign shall be permitted on any one lot devoted to one specific use or user; except that for buildings or uses having frontage on two or more public rights-of-way, two ground signs are permitted. In the event any lot P:krurkMNVery RwEVlveryPerimMerSWarx ~Usea-revlsaE O]12oa.Cx _ 12 qualifies for two ground signs, those signs shall comply with the Dublin Sign Code and shall consist of no more than 66.67 square feet in the aggregate. e) Illumination: All monument signs shall be non-illuminated or feature internally illuminated graphics or back-lit graphics. f) Setbacks: - The setback for all signage shall be no less than eight feet from the right-of-way of any site consistent with the Dublin Code. g) Traffic/Directional: All traffic and directional signage shall conform to Section 153.152 of the Dublin Zoning Code. h) Sian Location: Other than approved as part of the neighborhood retail center as described below, no sign shall be painted or posted on the surface of any building, wall, or fence (i.e. all signage other than for the neighborhood retail center shall be monument signs). No wall murals shall be allowed. No roof signs shall be permitted, nor shall any sign extend higher than the building. i) Window Signage: Other than described below relating to the neighborhood retail center, no sign shall be applied to any windows for the purpose of outdoor or exterior advertising. j) Neighborhood Retail Center: All of the following signage standards shall relate specifically to the neighborhood retail center that will be situated west of the pond located along the west side of Avery-Muirfield Drive, the following signage criteria is established: 1) Each tenant store front within the retail center shall only have the right to install wall signage consistent with that depicted in the attached Table B and only along the west elevation of the retail center. 2) All such signs shall not exceed a placement height of 15 feet. 1lMwyRaEMwryPalm~brSW~mAUr-nvbW (p1201Aee 1 3) Each tenant store front sign shall be limited to one wall sign and one projecting sign along the western elevation of the retail center. Such wall signs shall be in accordance with Table B. The color of the wall sign and the projecting sign for each user shall be the same. 4) The background color of wall signs and projecting signs shall be selected from a palette of trim colors approved by the planning commission as part of the development plan approval process. 5) For purposes of aiding the public with locating a particular use within this center, each user shall be allowed to apply temporary signage to the east elevation of the retail center consistent with the Dublin Signage Code. 6) In addition to the wall signs which may be located on the west side of the retail center as described in 3, above, the occupant located at the north end of the retail center (i.e. Tenant 7) shall have the right to locate one monument sign along Avery-Muirfield Drive which identifies only that occupant provided that such monument sign complies with all of items (a) - (i), above, and provided further that that occupant (Tenant 7) is limited to a total amount of signage of no more than 66.67 square feet. That monument sign shall be located as noted on Table C . 7) No projection signage located along the west elevation of the retail center shall be illuminated. 8) Wall signs located along the west elevation of the retail center should be externally lit by "goose-neck" light fixtures. ~/3~/y ~~~fRY Yei~~rf~.2 LLB EXHIBIT A - ` a~»~_ - - - - x_ ~ A~ER~'-~ _ _ - - - _ - - - r _ - - - ; oa - ~ ~ I~ _ - - ~..I i III ~ g L ~ I ~_d ~ i ~ ~ j~ s I ~ '~~i I I ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~o w r ' ;rI v , 7 ~ j' ~ ~ 1 ~ ' I ~ ~ ~ ~~~r y- ~ ~ i o ~ I l,lf ~~1 ~ l FI ! ' I I Iii I ,l I ~ ~ / , ~ , ~b~~ ~ I I ~ 1 'dtk (i ~ ~ I I J , ~ a~ i l~ LI 1 I I ~ ~ ' _ _ ~ ~ ~ ~ i r ~ ti/ ~ I I ~ ~ ~ t ~ ~ i I I 1 , - ~ I I i ~ i ~ v~i - ~ i ~ , I , i it I I = f~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i o~ ,I ~ ~ I ~ i' I I I ~ ~~','~I \ I - + ~ , - 1 i. I / I 1 ' ; ~ ~ 4,, V i ~ o i_ ''i,' ~ ; , i ~ I ~1 , - - i~ i - _ i ~ I ~ ~ / ~1 r,1 rT i t-_- I - I------------- 1~ 1~,, ~ ~,1', ~ C~ w i; \ I ~ f ~ ;1,; ~ ,1 / a. II I i i ~ LL Z ,1`1,1,11 1 t O j, ~ I ~ ~ 1 ~1 ~ ~ W w ~ f j m ~ h •1~'~,` 1 Q ~ ~ I ~ ~ Z ,,1, ~ ~ I ~ ~ 111 ~ W w ~ ~ ~ , ~ I n ' I ~c,aw,nuw sx' - , ~ ~L,, r ~ ~ O ~ I - ~ ~ p j i ~ ~ a a nowmsm~ I ~ d = EXHIBIT B November 20, 2003 Mr. Paul G. Ghidotti .t:f'1~1 OF~ Ol~I3Ll\ The Daimler Group, Inc. 1533 Lake Shore Drive D'+vision of Engineering COlumbuS, Ohio 43204 5800 Shier-Rings Road Dublin, Ohio 43016-123b Phone/1DD: b14--010-4600 The Fain~ay Fax: b14-16i •6506 U3-X04-COi~1 Web Site: vnvw.dublin.oh.us Dear Paul: Regarding the traffic questions that arose at our meeting on November 12, 2003, I emailed both your traffic consultant (Garry Wilcox) and ours (Doyle Clear) a listing of the items that needed to be addressed. I have received a response from our consultant and have reviewed that information and the recorded plat that created part of your property. The following indicates the questions (as they were emailed) and our desired resolution (in italics): 1. The east bound left hand turn lane on Post Road onto Avery-Muirl:ield Drive is noted in the report to need 290 feet of stacking. The report says that the City provided this information. Hovv much of this stacking is generated by the traffic from this 24-acre site? `Tv'e need to portion the cost of this improvement I have not received a response from Traffic Engineering Setwices on this. 1 sent my email on Thursday, November 13. 2. How much right-of--way (width and length) is needed to accommodate the turn lane in Item I ? Additional right-o, f-way is not needed along the Post Road frontage of your property. 3. How long of a turn lane is needed on Post Road for the site access (if granted)? Srnce the Planning and Zoning Commission agreed to this access point last Thursday evening, this turn lane needs to be accommodated between the hvo driveways on the north side of Post Road fvr the clzzrrch. Alsa the design shoz~ld be coordinated to acconttnodate the fixture required left hand turn lane info the church property. 4. Hove much right-of--way= is needed from this site along the Avery-Muirfield frontage? I believe we have to accommodate an additional through lane and an additional southbound right hand turn lane at Perimeter. Only a southbound right-hand turn lane at Perimeter Drive from Avery-1Lluirfield Drive is needed in the ultimate improvement of Avery-~i~luirfield Drive and its • intersection tivith Perimeter Drive. An additiona113 feet ofright-of-tii°ay is needed along the Avery-_Lluirfreld Drive frontage of your property. According to the recorded plat (a copy is attached for yozrr reference), a 30 foot roadway easement already exists along this frontage. This needs to be reflected on your site plan. GT%e could use this space to build the infrastructure that ti1`e need, but I am not comfortable tivith the i i T^,Documents\CO~'1\2003i03004C0'~1 Trai]ic Lettcr.doc I o~,m.M~ . November 20, 2003 Mr. Paul Ghidotti RE: The Fairway 03-004-COM Page 2 of 2 long-term use of this easement. YVe woz~ld prefer to reduce the easement (for coverage over the existing bike path) and have actual right-of-way for the planned improvements. Also the landscaping in the northwest corner of this intersection will need to remain outside the visibility triangle for the ultimate intersection conf guration. 5. How much right-of--way (width and length) is needed on Perimeter Drive at the intersection with Avery-Muirfield is needed to accommodate the future additional eastbound left turn lane? The enclosed recorded plat answers the question as to the increase of the right-of--way at the western end of your Perimeter Drive frontage. The right-of--way tapers from 100 feet to 80 feet as it moves westward from the Avery-Muirfield Drive intersection. When Perimeter Drive was extended to the west in 2000, we acquired the 100 feet of right-of--way on the far western portion of your frontage. The adopted Thoroughfare flan indicates that Perimeter Drive is to have 100 feet of right-of--way in this area. Therefore, we need an additional 10 feet dedicated from the intersection with Avery-Muirfield Drive westward to the point where the 100 feet of right-of--way exists. This tivill create 110 feet ofright-of--way near the intersection with Avery-11lirirfield (that tapers as the existing right-of--way does) and 90 feet of right-of- rvay where only 80 feet exists today. 6. What portion of the traffic that will warrant the traffic signal at the Kroger Drive is generated from this site? Again, this is to portion the costs. Considering this signal will have four approaches to it, the logical distribution of the costs is: 50% by the City, 2~% by you, 2~% by the Avery Square owners. Also, as I stated at the meeting, the approach 1.vithin the right-of--way at this location will include the items that we need to facilitate the installation of the signal in the futz~re. As indicated, the only outstanding item is #1. Once I have received a response from your consultant, we ~~~ill review the information and respond accordingly. If you have any questions on these items, please contact us at your earliest cony°enience. Sincerely, Barbara A. Coy, P.E. Assistant Director of Engineering -Development Attachment Cc: Paul A. Hammersmith, P.E., Director of Engineerint/City Engineer Kristin K. Yorko, P.E., Civil Engineer Chad Gibson, AICP, Senior Planner Doyle Clear, Parsons Transportation Group T:1Documtn[s`~CO!~1\2003'.03004COA4 Traffic Lctter.doc EXHIBIT C ~ ~ p Q i ~ _r ; + ~ p ~ ~ I ~ I ~ + ~ ~ o- ~ I 100' S MPLE' ~ ~ 2 BUFFE ING ~ ~ ' I ' ~ I ~ I ~ p + I I ' ' ' W ' I I ~ LL ~ I ~ ~ ~ m w ~ J ~ ~ ~ } ~ ~ N I + { II I Q i I i _ I ~ ~ J 1 I _ ~ Q ~ ~ o v ~ ~ ~ I ! I i w~ r ~ 2 + N w to W w ~ r" w I- J `~i F-- N 1-- ~ z O w w ~ _ o O ~ LL W ~ tL o N ~ ~ w m w ~ ~ N _ _ 1 W m _ w J= o t J cn Q ~ N ~ mow`" w ~ W NO Q ~ ~ w ~ Z ~ II ~O ~ w Q ~ w z~ ~.,0~ ~ ~ ~ z - ~ ~ Q J~ o m p w O U cn ~ » Q z °~O 000 w ~ _ ~ w ~ U` D D D ~ O v, v~ ~ N ~z UUU j ~ D ~ ~ Q Q c~ o~ o0 . ~ _ ------w f N m ~ i I ~ _w cwi~ I O ~ w I i I 1 ~ I I 1. 1 i~ 1 S I 1 ' 1 1 ~f 0/ I I ~ ~7 dJ - x + ' O x ~ I ~ x ~ ~ I x ~ ° ~ x 1 1 1 1 ; x x ~ / ~ x x O ~ 1 ~r 1 I t x / I ( 1 } ~ ' C 1 1 i 1"~~,,, ~ ' I p ~ \ i1 6 ~ i I ; ° 1 1 1 ~ ~ ` 1 ~aa 1 I av". " vv ~ 1 / 8 U v ~ ~ m ~ 1 I 1 i % I +I z ' ~ ~ Q 1 ° p > v ~ , ~ 1 DO I I ~ p Q I v ~ ~ v.. ~ ~4 i z 1 v v av o 1 I v ( z w t , v 1 1 w v x 1 x x L.L 1 v I v i I 1 ° i I I °a ~ I ~ _ - ~ 1 w I 1 ~ 1 0=-- vv v I C~ O 1 I ~ vv b ~ v Q II 1 1 - w~ ~ w I ~U,., p i ' 1 1 v I I - ~ 1 v v v. i I 1 Q~ < ~ J v i o V v o _ ~ v v-i ~ ~'4 ' v i v - v v ~ ~ - ~ v $ - - a a ° - v ~ v v-• /7 p~09 ~ Qv V'~ v ~ dv-,• gq i vv o W ~ ~ ~ ~ Qzz p ~ ~ D j ,LL'l, O = O ANN v av a v v vv v v v \ o v / $ v > i do-~ v xx ` z mo ~ Q Q, d ~ o i ~ ~ v o m vQ~76, } v v • d Op ~O ~ Z ~ ~ v z v° ma v - ' LLJ W ~ 6~ ~e ~ ~ 'r/`g~Ag ~ ^ ~m~ U UaU x x x x x R x x B~ ~ B U x x x v J O a x ~ I x x ~ N x W x x ~ w J x ~ ~ N x ,ov V ' C~ x ' ' U U ~ O N z z ~ wpm w Z ~`LO ~ O UZF=- ~ U w e N w Q Q Z ~ ~ Ow ~ ~ Z w w ~ 00~ ~~nQ pQQ ~?w~ Q = ~t c~ D N „0-,S Z ~ „9-,~ 1 F- e U w o ~ ~ `n ~ ~ ti Z_ o Z 3 ~ w w - ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ oa 3 ~ U 3 ~ ~ 3~` ~a w fy~~~~3~ Q N ~ ~ k ~ . w w / ~ : ~ ~ U I ~ r U U O O ~ ?~N o z z~U~ z z ~ O z O w Z ~"'O w ~ O U z F= ~ - N Nwh- w J ~ ~ ~ J Q Z J ~ ~ O_?N ~wZ N Z ~ w w z_ DOQ ~w~ Q=v~ MAN „0-,S „9-,£ ~ Z o ~0 0 €"~3 ~ o ~ ~ U 3 ~ W ~ 3 3 Z 1 ~ ~ , ~ z 3 ~ w o ~ ~ /w~ ~ ~o U v~. w o ~ N ~ _ : , W r- , ~ Q D ~ ~,l ~ 0 ~ c~ o ~ o ~ ~ ~n o ~ c~ co 0 0 ~ r~ ~ ~ 1 ~ Q 1 ~ y 1 ~ ~ = I = ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ o ~ ~ N ~ O ~ ONO ~1 f~ O O ~ 1~ O m O ~ CO , -0 r' ~Y t _ t0 ~ Q CA d' O O tt Y ~ W ~ ~ J d Q ~ m ~ L Q ~ a I- ~ a ' ~ i a ~ ~ 0 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ rn v o o ~ v _o ~ m 1 1 I I ~ ~ ~ Y N d ~ .a C ~ ~ N d ~ ~ ~ C ' ~ ~ H ~ ev Q ~ Q C C ~ ~ V ~ a d = ~ ~ ~ 'C V Q N ~ Z TABLE "B" GENERAL SIGNAGE SPECIFICATIONS LIGHT FIXTURES: Goose Neck Mounted Fixtures. Abolite Designer Lighting, RLM Series (Ark Lighting). Color: Black TYPICAL WALL SIGN: The typical wall sign will be a 2'-0" x 10'-0" x 1-1 /4" single faced M.D.O. (medium density overlay) sign with radiused corners and routed bullnose borders. The measured perimeter within which the letters, numbers or emblems shall be placed will be 1'-4" x 9'-0". The letters, numbers and emblems shall be 1"thick, custom redwood or plastic painted gold. The background color shall be selected from an approved palette. KEY BANK WALL SIGN: The Key Bank wall sign will be 6'-0" x 8'-0" x 1-1 /4" single faced M.D.O. (medium density overlay) sign with radiused corners and routed bullnose borders. The measured perimeter for the "key" logo will be 3'-0" x 6'-6" and the measured perimeter for the text will be 1'-1" x 6'-6". The letters and logo will be 1"thick, custom redwood or plastic. The logo is to be painted red and the letters white. The background color shall be selected from an approved color palette. TYPICAL HANGING SIGN: The typical hanging sign will be 1'-8" x 2'-8" x 1-1 /4" double faced M.D.O. (medium density overlay) projecting sign with gold vinyl letters to match gold paint, suspended from wall with approved aluminum bracket. The background color shall match corresponding wall sign background color. There shall be no illumination of hanging signs. FONTS: All fonts will be permitted with the exception of fonts using portions of the letter to highlight the tenant name (i.e., the tail of a "y" that underlines the entire tenant name) unless such font is part of a trademarked logo. Insignificant portions of letters may extend beyond the measured perimeter subject to landlord and Dublin Planning Staff approval (i.e., the tail of a "q" or "y"). I; ~ ti _ _ ui ni W o p u ~ 'y ~ w o ~ m R ~ Tl ~ N fY_ 3 ~ II m z z < ° W u v> p~p W !'j V ~ ~ K J Q 3~~ ~ < Q Q Q ~ ~ J ~ N f- .8-.I ~ Q I - W >C ~ ~ I ..a ~ e e y l~ ~ m U z W z Uz i i~,-- a- ~ ~ ~ ~ j I ~ I I I f i I I I I ~ ~ I, I _ I a I I ~ i _ f 'I ~ ~ ~ .2-.. ~ ~ .I-.I ~ w I I ~ 1 1 w j F O w I I I ~ i ~ I? 2' I I j z K ~ ~ I I i I ~ I Q Oj 'j ~ I I ~ Z w I I I ~ ~ tY I - I v a L I it ~9 7- :u 'I i ~ I ' O ~ a I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ to u ~ ~ I f I I Q w (Y I I I } I I z ~ I I I ~ Z ~ 'I I j j f n ~ f O O j Q i i I I - I ~ ~ e I I I - ~ I m I I Q I O ~ O w ~ I I I I I I ~ L L II . I I I ~ I - I / ~ u I f , ° _ ~ I II I ~ a I I I ~I ~ _ I ~ - ~ ~I ~ ~ ~ Iii / i ~ ~I ~I - ~ I '~'I Q ~ Ij Q j W ~ 'I ! W ~ I I ~ I -I I I ~I I D I I i I I I I ! ~ I I ~ i ~w I I - I 11 I / 11 ~ i ~ - 1~ ~ 6~ ~.J I I "f I 'A ~ I I ~ I I < I ' a - ~ - c, .n ~ ~ ---I--~--~ I I _ I .m-~t ~ I .a-.° ~ - I SJ ~~~m o ~ J _ ~ U m ~ W Q Q ~ ~ Zoe CQl h_-~ ~ i i t_, , r o e z~l ~ e~ C~ 0 0 ° IO ~ o ~ z o ~ , - .m-.51 O O v O CJ ~ ~ ~ Z$I ~ ~ Ca~ i ~ i I ~ , r- O .n 'i C~ ~ a~ Zoi o ~ Z!-' i U ~ Q 0 0 ° ~ ~ ~;O Z(°! d o ~ ~ ~¢i CD - ~®o o ®o o , 0 000 ~ ° ~ I~ i , 0 0 0 0 3 c z ®o Z~w _ m Z i ~.v O N ;~m I~ "awz Z Qm Z o - _ ~ -----J :~=Z~ Q ' Z > ~ Q w Q. ~ Y LLI I I I O EXISTING SUBAREAS - ' 1~ 1 1 - , - - j ~l l ~ I -::_t ' 1 ~ 1 _ 1 1 / 1 ~ Lam/ 1 ~ L ~ 1 LL 1 ` ~ - 1 1 ft } - ~ ~ , ~ J _ .i. r~ ~ 1 ~ W _ 2 r' - _ _ _ - ao _ a~ _ - Q J ~ ~ ' ~ r i ~ 1~~ 1 ~ P° ~ ~ - r ~ a ~ r• _ a - _ _ ~ _ _ ~ 1 ~ . V 1 I - ~ ~-i 1 - / - _ _ ~f _ _ ~ ~ 1 - ~ _ ` 1 _ ~ w - ~ ~ ~ ~ , 1= r i~ i ~ ~ ' ' - ~ -1 1_ Il ~ i ~ I t ~ 1 . r--~ 03-0192 Riverside Hospital PCD, Subarea A ~ ~a I , - I ~ _ m ~ _ . I h\,C~'ll 11 Z 11 - - .may ~ ~ /,1(- - W16fff0ACK1~PfOPOfW~ O I I I ~ _ _ I ~+i ~ 'D^I6 I I~ f Q SPM~4w+19M I I I ~ ~ 1\`I I I III `'III $ I II I ~•°~~s - - I I I ~ I P., " ' i f l, ~I ~ I I 1 I •81 ~ I / N 1 l ~ 1 I I ' ~ II I I I I 1 I ~ / ~pll QN~0 I I , ~ ~ tl~/f obz I / I~ ~ ' ~ / r l I' a '@ ° , ~ ~l i/ I I !!i ~f' o m~ f ~ _I ~J Q, I I I I ® ' / I I ~ III I I I I I . e ~~i I? r I II I II / 1 I I I ` / 1 V I ~ ~ I I ~ ~Gri ~ ~ 1 I II Q ~ J'' I a~j~i I ~ " 1 ~ Q 1 I I ~ ~ f j III \ I ' 'il'I , f ` _ 1 1 1 / it 1 ~ II I f a~ I I_i ® ~ I I O N I ~ Z / ' t I I I I ~ I ~ m I j I 'I I, ' I . 8 / I I~° I I I I I ' ° . e ; , ~ I I ® 111 1 / 1 \ A II a ad I I I I f / I I 111 11 "~J\ h >b / I j 11 I , -U ~ I I ~z z ' / ~ N I ;11111 .,'~'1 N w I I I O / / ~ j 11 I 11 I ~o~ I I I ~~yAI f/~ ~ I~ 11~' ~ I ~ ~ W ~ / / pC I 1 1 1 ~ ~ w ~ I LLWJ~a I ff L~i Iii ' 11 i O~ i t >~u_ .P 1 1 I II I as j O ' ~ I I `1 . 8 < Z 1 a a I I 1 I I I I ~ _ S~ µ~O 8 ~ I 1 ~i 8 2r- 18 i ~ f ~ 1 ` . B . 8 ~ b~ II 8 11 I ` i ~ I , .18 1 ~ 1 I I I II U I I I I I 1 1 ~ U j I' ~ I C I III ffi ~ III ° Q 1 ~i ~ I ' I w II ~ t I 52 I I ~ s i 1 ~o~ ~II I , II , ~ y~ N I I I , 8 • 8 ' I I I w 1 NN u~. I II I~ ~ '8 1 I I I U~~BQ~BQ AP 82 II I ~ - 1 1 1 Nm•o .-I:.-.-~ I I t '8 c .8 .8 I I 1 III ~~~N~~g M?' II - .8 I 1 1 I ,d.-ncJ •orvi I ' ' ~ ~I ' i8 I ~ yp+ fwfd~ I I I a I III j I 1 i 11 ~ III ~~b; bo b; b; 3;bv~ . III I I $ ~ ~ 1s ~ ~ p&~~3~~~:~ U~ Q I I I n I i ~ 1 ~ III I I i I is \ J Z .I / I I I I .8 1 11 ~ I s-- I ffi p3 I I I I I ~ 1 I II O&~va~vri:~i I I I ~ I ~ j ` e II ~ li r ~ ~N$~~~ ova ^ O T- ~ kab L.L I I I I I ` ~ "8 -r 111 11 18 1 II 1,I 1I1 d ~ W ~ ;III i-- - - • II ~ ; 1 'I ~s _ 9~~^~~~~~ ~ ~ 1 ' I I I I I _ ; 1I1. \111 II\ \III 1 ,1 11 l~ mQ^v`1°-Inn of £Z ~1~ 1 I Ca) I ' ' I I \ 1 I 1 I I ~ w S O I I I - - ~ ~ 1 `I 1 II 1 1 11 1; ~ ~ W ~ ~ W I II I "-j- O~d II 1 1 II ~5 ;UUtiUVUU '.a III Itf ~ZO~ ~ 11 1 1 11 II 1 0~~ <paaaaaaaa~ ' I I a0 a 1 II 1 1 1 ` a~~ ~~O~~na~o- ~ 1 I I j . ua~~ 1 I 1\ III <~c'~ o~~~~~~~N i ~1 I I ' I i~ ij Ur ~ a Z I` \I 1 ,1 1 1` 1` 1 ~ a ~ ~ Q- I I$ ~ Z ~ ~ 1Ir~ I , 1 II I ~ III IR jr \ r4s3 ,I~~ III III \ 1~1 1I1 1I1 ~~apapaaoao<oaap W ~ I i ~ ~ , ` J ~j, \ ;1 ,1 I~ 1 1` 1\ ,1 O Q~ of ~ ~ ~ ~ N t(L) I ' i O ~ g ~ Z ~ ~ ~ $ ' 1\I i '\I 11\1 , 1\1 \1 ~ jmjVj W ~ ~ J I I I LL Z ~ O a ,II 1 11 1 I11 I\1 ~ III I p~$w ~ ~zg~ ,II I 1 , , \ a ~ ~ ~Q~ t I- ~ ~ w 11 11 Ifl m I I I i ~~j+? ~ ~ ~ III 11 1 11 1 11, 1II 1 U 1~ ~ ~ N d ~ o \ t 1 1 III ji ~}<}~~87 I-~ °<aou~~ 1111 1 1 I 1~ 1I 1~~ p 7~ I I I ! ~IT72O ~ Z ccy~N 1`I II I 11 I \ 1 `I ~ ~ F f~ ~ r~ pN[ ~ Z I, N 1 \ 11 1 II 1 I UU (~~9 LL N I I I °I-`~pODUt' ~ ~~p~~ 111111 I II II ` ~U_g Q< S O _ I I ~ ~GmGO ~,p~f~ewaV i~~ ~1 II ~I I~ II III ~ Z>Z ~~-.LL O ~ ~Ll-~ I f 'a in m ~i O _~IJ I II 1 1 I I 6 N S U I ~ I 1 I \ N I I I ' ~ I ----~--,s~ro-uu¢Inrsr~~-.._.----^' _ _ 1-*'"' 11 II 1 1 Q = z o a ~ a v ~ w ~ ~ 1 ,'1 I I I 11 I OO N r/ o vl ~o n m Z ~ 1//~11 ~ N I I I 1 II N ~I a. o: I I I 1. 1 I 'II t ~ ~ ~ r? ~ U r ~ U O 'J ~ _ 5,( ~ u U ~ ~ z ~ O , `yGJ 5 O Z ~SF ~ ~ ~ Z J _ ~~o ~~o o z,~ ~ ~a~ ~O~ Q O„~~ C+1~~ ~y QZ~ oc3~ a EE00" S°~ < ~ off. ~ W ~ a ~ RSA V fh N Z op t__. ~ ~ spa U?wa ..0-.S ~y Q ~Q Qxa nOc~ ~A-~S ..9-~£ Z $ U t'~' f= s' z 3 N ~ ~ ~ w ~ , z ~o$ w ~ E ' w ~ U w + , L ; ~ i N ,q U .f ~ N W- J ~ QII o N~ ° ~ _ _ _ _ ON ~U u ~ ~ . ,o ~I / v _ L ° Y i I _ ~ a I - - - ~ Z ~ . j ' i ~ I I ~ I. J s ~ o 1 f ~~cYOs , . • ~ ~ I ~ ~ <-Z ~ Z O ONH a I a I a t vo o e I i I ~ ~ . ~ ~ ~ 1 Z ~ Z • Z ~ ~ Z w ~ `~l~ w ~ a ~ ' 'U ~ ~ U I W W I + ' v ~ ~ J J I i g ~ Q~ Q~ t W ~ w + i M I ~ ° Q O ~ fi ~ I I ~ - ~ I 6 p ~ ~ + L~ + ~ ~ MPLE~ ~ BU FE ING ~ ' ~ ~ i ~ ~ i 2 I I + O ~ ~ ii , A \ o u (J, / Z ~ pp + I o O y ~ ~ ' ~ W o I ~ - ~ _ ~ ~ J ~ X w ~ w i~ m ~ ~R ~ _tu _ I w w WJ ~ Q III b Q ~ ; , it ~ < ~ H I ~ ga ~ ~ ~i~, ooh ~ ~ ~ _ " _ ~ N - ~ ' ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~o N 7 C as °a~ W Z O W ~o ~ W~ w~ U ~ ~ f71 ~ ~ - - ° - ~ sp _ ~ tTl < - ~ - - p ii I ~ j~ i~~ /f% p~(~ 1 1 1 ~ ~ p ,r ~/i - b. ~ ~ I iii, ' ~ ~ L~ ~ r ~ °p I I ~ > ~ °s V' ~ 1 p 1 C z n ° InT I ~ m ~ pp ° z O ~ I CT7 ',1 Z ° j • ° ~ ~ -~D I II , I i ; I ~ p° ° I I I I ~ ii/i p ° I ° p ~ ' b, ; j ° 1 I T I I ~ e I I I Q ~~V~ll D 5 g "~YJ I I 1 ~ I ~ n y 0 1 1 I s Z I j° ~ ~ P °e T ~ I ° I I 11 I ~ e / O I 1 I 1 ~ I I 11 1 ~ ~ C~ I p l p I I bu. I I I° ~ i I ° Z ICI O 1 I 1 \ II I ° D I _ D I ° 1 I\ I ~ D ° ° o I I C A ° t~r~• Z 8 o D I II ~~11 A~+ Z I ° I ~ ~ / O ° I ° 1 1 + + Z I °p I I ° 1 ~ ~ C I I of I 1 + Trn I ~o V II II ~ °O ° 1 I I 11 O rn V~ + + e 1 I A ` ° 1 . • 1.--~ I ~ I I ~ ~ ° o e I I I ° I ` s I i ~ I ~ I ~ \ ° I I C pO I ° 11 \ ~.r ~ II rn ~ ~ r I I Z m~ I ~ ° ~ I ~ \ D .Zl pp I ~ 1.. ~ ~ I% ~ ~ 1' I p° p i v I I I ~ °o D x ® ~ I I ° I o ~ Z VC I I I ° ~ N ° i..: m I I ° I p ° s. ~ ° 5 I ° ° I I I° >I ~ I II I p I 77p~gg ° D sp p° Z ® ° II II II I O<< ° l.~ I I 1 .p~ A ° ° I ...~ZZS1111 ° ° I ° e 1 ° II I I ~ •I I'' ° I I I I I' I : p ~ ' ~ a 1 I ~C 1 ' I ° I I, ~I o 0 1 I 1 I of ~ ~ I ~ I ' HI I A Oo 1 °D O I f I£ D° o I i ° s 1 `1 I 1 I ~ ° ° I s° I I I ~ o I I I ~ / S -Z~ I 1 I I I~ ~ I~ i%' I a M I r 1 ~ Z I I~ I° _ p° I ° °p o ~ I ° IZ O I I I p I I I I 1 aI °q, I I I ZZ % ~ °s O I I I ° I ~ I 1 ~ I I ° s: i i~ ° e ° Z I ~~%i ' o_ Q ~ I I I I ~i'~ ° ° ~ ~ ~ I I I to ° I II i~//. s ~y I r I I I I ~ ~ ~ p Z /~3r' o a I W ( I I ~ I II I ~ m F~ ~ ~ + p ~ ~ r v~ I ~ . - - - -a-- - - - ~ ~ i l rn \ r i ~r ~ ~ . ~ ~ 1 \ _---P~~T ''OAD Department of Development Division of Planning 5800 Shier-Rings Road • Dublin, Ohio 43016 CITY OF DUBLIN Phone: 614-410-4600 • Fax: 614-761-6566 Memo TO: Members of Dublin City Council FROM: Jane S. Brautigam, City Manager~,._k,t,,,,,~5, (~j DATE: October 14, 2-003 RE: Ordinance #118-03 -Riverside ospital PCD, Subarea A -Rezoning (Case #03-1192) INITIATED BY: Gary P. Gunderman, Assistant P r~y~Director ~~~f SUMMARY: Rezoning application 03-1192 was submitted in late September of 2003. The proposal is to revise the composite plan for Subarea A of the Riverside Hospital PCD, Planned Commerce District. This application represents a proposed modification of the existing PCD text, and is for amixed-use development including office, retail, restaurant, bank, and daycare uses. The Future Land Use Map within the Community Plan designates this site as "mixed-use employment emphasis." RECOMMENDATION: Introduction of the ordinance and referral to Planning and Zoning Commission. Attachments EXISTING TEXT Sub:u-ca Standards l': teas>/lil:utl(cs(s/ri~~c~si<Iclx'~1 Riverside Uubliu July l , 1988 Revised August 25,1988 Revised September 30, 1988 - Revised December 15; 1988 Revised December 20, 1988 Revised January I1, 1989 Revised January I3, 1989 Revised February I0, 1989 Revised October 5, 1998 Revised November 26, 1999 (additions are noted by underlining) The following Subarea Descriptions and Development Standards by subarea shall be made part of the Concept Plan are further discussed and illustrated in the Subarea Plan. Subarea Dcscrinfions Subarea A Post Road Related: 27.3 ac_ This area is characterized by its relationship to residential and nursing home uses on the north side of Post Road. Development within this subarea should be of the office type and should reflect residential scale and character. A reasonable landscape setback buffer should be provided between the residential uses and the proposed development within Subarea A, and A2. Subarea R Pro(~oscd Rclait Center: 25.1 ac. Subarea l3 is sandwic(icd between the lighter office related uses of Subarea and tlic more intense hospital and freeway of~icc related uses of Subarea C,. This area contains a mix of retail/commercial uses in an integrated shopping environment typical in size to a small comnninity cef~ter_ "l~ltis self-contained area also has access on two sides and is closely related to both traffic signals on Avery load to create an even distribution of traffic. I 03-0192 Riverside Hospital PCD, Subarea A EXISTING TEXT Subarea B, fi Bz Aver~~ Road Ou(harceis= 4 ac. Retail outparccls located along Avery Road and tlic proposed entry drive_ Uses and Arcliitecturc will be integrated into proposed retail center located in Subarea B. Uses in Subarea BZ will be for either retail oulparce( or medical office buildings. r~ee Subarea C~ Iios~ital/Stale Route IGI Related Uses: 33.7 ac. Uses within Subarea C, focus around development of a community hospital or medical/institutional campus. Because of extensive State Route 1G1 frontage, additional uses within Subarea CZ wilt be freeway oriented, including general office. Subarea CZ MedicaVAver~~ Road Related Uses: f8.4 ac. Uses within Subarea CZ will primarily service those uses Located within Subarea CI but wit( not include hospital beds for overnight stay. Because of extensive Avery Road frontage, these uses will include primarily medical office, hotel, clinical and diagnostic service uses. Within this subarea approximately 8.6 acres will be dedicated for completion of the interchange. .5~,: Subarea Devclonment Standards General L If these standards conflict in any way with the City of Dublin Codified Ordinances, then the Planned Commerce District shall prevail Standards in the Dublin Zoning Code applicable io matters not covered in this document shall apply to each of the subareas in the Planned Commerce District. 2. The street plan sho«m is the general scheme which will be platted and constructed. It is not however, intended to be prccisc, and while the functional system will be preserved, its prccisc location naay vary from that shown so long as the functional objectives continue to he attained. 2 ..a, 03-1197. Riverside Hospital 1'CD Subarea A EXISTING TEXT 3. Signagc and Graphics: a_ llll signagc and graphics s(iall conform to Dublin Sign Codc Chapter 1189, cxccpt as provided by this text for Subarea B, and cxccpt as provided for in the Signagc Criteria and approved as part of the Development Plan_ b. A(( signagc siiati be subject to applicable signagc setbacks of C(iapter 1189, Signs. c. Al( ground supported signagc shall reflect a uniform shape and shall be set in a frame of dark brown, black or bronze color. d. Within Subarea A, and AZ, no signagc shall be located on or oriented toward Post Road. e. Al( uses within Subarea B, and BZ shall have signagc of uniform size, shape and materials, signs base shall be made of wood, brick, stone or stucco and shall reflect the materials of the building. These signs shalt have a maximum height of 6' and contain no more than 50 Sr of area per face. Landscaping shall be integrated into signagc feature. f. All uses within Subarea B, and BZ shall be allowed two ground signs, one sign oriented toward Avery Road and one sign oriented toward either a second public strcel provided the site has at toast I00 feet of frontage on two public streets) or the internal access road on the west side_ g. No building mounted signs will be allowed along Avery Road frontage. h. Within Subarea B, two overall project identity signs shall be allowed for retail center, ome located at the eastern Perimeter Loop Road entrance to the center, and one located al the western Perimeter Drive customer entrance. Signagc base ~a~ould rcClect similar materials to Subarea B, and Bz. All building mounted signagc should conform to Dublin Signagc Code except as provided herein and reflect a conunon sl?ape, size, material and base color. i. No sign shall be painted or posted directly on the surface of any building, wall or fence cxccpt as provided Herein or as permitted as tenant's main identification sign under paragraph l3_?_. of the "Signagc and Graphics" section of "Subarea 13 - I:ctail Center" hercin_ No ~~~all murals shall be allowed. j _ No signs shall tic applied to windo~~~s for tfic purpose of outdoor or enter for advcrtisinf~,_ 3 03-0192 Riverside Hospital PCD, Subarea A EXISTING TEXT k. No roof signs shall be permitted. Nor should a sign cxtcud liiglicr than the building- L No flashing, traveling, animated or intermittently illuminated signs may be used. m. No billboards, or electrical or oQier advertising signs shall be allowed other than a sign carrying [he name of the business occupying the si(e. n. On site permanent directional sign, e.g. employee and visitor parking, deliveries, etc_ will be of a common design, material and size must meet signage standards. 4. Lighting: a. External lighting within ail subareas shall be cutoff type fixtures. b. A!( parking, pedestrian and other exterior lighting shalt be on poles or wall mounted cutoff fixtures and shall be from the same type and style_ c. All light poles and standards shall be dark in color and shalt be constructed of dark wood, oc dark brown, black or bronze metal: d. Parking lot lighting shall be no higher than 28'. e. Cutoff type landscape and building uplighting shall be permitted. 4 03-0192 Riverside Hospital PCD, Subarea A EXISTING TEXT Subarea A ['osl Road IZciatcd ['crmitlcd Uscs The following uses shall be permitted within Subarea A,. - a) T(iose uses listed in Section 1159.01 (SO) of the Zoning Code. b) Skilled Nursing Facility. c) I~ospice. d) Daycare Center. The following uses shall be permitted within Subarea AZ. a) Those uses listed in Section I I59A1 (SO) b) Financial Institution (Condition Use drive-thru for Bank). Density: The density shall not exceed 10,000 SF/AC. Yard and Setback Requirenieuts: 1. Setback from Post Road shall be 75' for pavement and 100' for buildings. 2. Side yards stlall be 25' for pavement and buildings. 3. Rear yards shall be 25' for pavement and buildings. 4. I=rant yard and parking setback from publicly dedicated local access streets shall be 25' for paven~cnt and 50' for buildings. 5. "Dotal ground covered, exclusive of parking garages, by all buildings shall not exceed 25%~ of flit total lot arca_ "I~he setback from /~verp Road shall be 30' for paving, 50' for building. 7_ Setback from I'crin~etcr l~rivc extension shall be 30' for pavement and 50' for building. S 03-0192 Riverside Hospital PCD, Subarea A EXISTING TEXT llcigltl [Zcquircntcnts: i. Maximum height for structures within Subarea A shall be 35' as measured per Dublin Zoning Code. Parking and Loading: l . Size, ratio and type of parking -and loading facility shall be regulated by Dublin Code Chapter 1193. Circulation: 1. Existing Post Road shall remain a 60' right-of-way and relocated Post Road intersecting with Perimeter Drive Extension shall be an 60' right-of-way with a 32' pavement. 2. The Perimeter Drive Extension shall have a I00' right-0f-way and 56' pavement width at the intersection and taper down to an 80' right-0f==way and a 36' pavement. 3. All other local public access streets shall have 60' rights-0f-way with 32' pavement. 4. Avery Road shall have a 112' right~f-way consistent with preliminary plan for Avery Road widening prepared by E.M.I. & T. 5. Curb cuts on Pcritnctcr Drive extension shall be spaced a minimum of 200' (as measured from the driveway's centerline) with opposing curb cuts offset no less ~+w than 100' or directly aligned wherever possible consistent with prudent traft-ic engineering principles and practice. ~'~~astc and Rcfusc: 1 _ All ~~~aste and refuse shall he containerized and fully screened from vie~~~ by a soiid wall or fence. Storal,c and I?quipnicnt: 03-0192 Riverside Hospital PCD, Subarea A EXISTING TEXT I. No nratcrials, supplies, equipurcnt or products shall be stored or pcruriticd to remain on any portion of a parcel outside a permitted structure- Mechanical cquipnrcnt or ottrcr utility Irardwarc on roof, ground or buildings shall be scrccxrcd from public vices witty materials harmonious with the building. Landscaping: 1_ Landscaping strap be according to the Dublin Landscape Code C(rapter l I87. [n addition, landscaping shall be provided within the Post Road setback shall include a sodded or seeded mound with a mixture of ornamental, evergreen and shade trees. T(rc mound shall be natural in appearance and shalt vary between 130' and 150' in length, and 5' to G' in height. Landscape plantings will be in accordance with the attached "Avery-Muirfield Buffer Landscape Treatment" dated 9/15!95. 2. In addition, landscaping within Perimeter Drive Cxtension shall include a 3' to 4' landscaped mound with street trees planted 50' on center within the right-of-way and planted 1' from the right-of--way line~ 3_ A comprehensive landscape plan along Avery Road corridor is provided as shown in "Avery-Muirfield Buffer Landscape Treatment" dated 9!15/95_ The plan incorporates plant materials, stone pillars, signage, lighting and grading with a single design element creating a unique, aesthetic entrance to the Dublin Area. Architecture: L All buildings steal[ be finished with natural materials: brick, wood, stone, stucco and shalt be of earth tone colors. Roofs shall have a pitdr no flatter than 6:12 and shall use dimensional asphatt shingles. 2. The Planning Commission shall have the right to review materials to assure tlrcy arc consistent with other building materials used in the area. The Planning Conunission may accept alternative materials and colors if they are consistent witty other building materials and add to the overall architectural quality. 3 "hhc building shall have the same degree of finish on all four sid~s~ 4. [3uildings alone /very Road shall be designed to re(lcct the existing character of /~vcry Road and be sym~~athctic of tl~c residential areas to the no~1h. 7 03-0192 Riverside Hospital PCD, Subarea A PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ~ - RECORD OF ACTION MARCH 18, 2004 CITY OF DLBLIN,. Division of Planning _ 5800 Shier-Rings Road Dublin, Ohio 43016-1236 Phane/IDD:614-410-4600 Fax: 614-410-4741 Web Site: www.dublin.oh.us The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action at this meeting: 1. Rezoning Application 03-1192 -Riverside Hospital PCD, Subarea A Location: 24.3 acres located at the northwest corner of Perimeter Drive and Avery- Muirfield Drive. Existing Zoning: PCD, Planned Commerce District (Riverside Hospital plan). Request: A revision to the existing PCD composite plan under the provisions of Section 153.058. Proposed Use: Amixed-use development of office, bank financial, retail, restaurant, and daycare uses. - Applicant: Paul Ghidotti, The Daimler Group, Incorporated., c/o Paul Ghidotti, 1533 Lake Shore Drive, Columbus, Ohio 43204. Staff Contact: Carson C. Combs, AICP, Senior Planner. MOTION: To approve this rezoning application because the plans properly address concerns raised by the Planning and Zoning Commission, the composite plan generally complies with criteria set forth in Section 153.058(E) of the Dublin Zoning Code, and the rezoning will provide a quality development with necessary support services within the employment core of Dublin, with five conditions: 1) That the timing for proposed off-site traffic improvements be coordinated with and completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; 2) That cross-access agreements be provided within all portions of the proposed development, to the satisfaction of staff; 3) That the same level of finishing be required on the east roof of the retail center that provides an appearance with residential character; 4) That concerns of pedestrian connectivity within this retail center and to the south be properly provided for residents to the north of Post Road; and these connections shall include an connection from the senior housing to Post Road; and Page 1 of 2 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECORD OF ACTION MARCH 18, 2004 1. Rezoning Application 03-1192 -Riverside Hospital PCD, Subarea A (Continued) 5) That all monument signs will be uniform in the material, base, casing, and setback. * Ben W. Hale, Jr. agreed to the above conditions. VOTE: 7-0. RESULT: This rezoning/revised preliminary development plan was approved. It will be forwarded to City Council with apositive/negative recommendation. STAFF CERTIFICATION Frank A. Ciarochi Acting Planning Director Page 2 of 2 STAFF REPORT DUBLIN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MARCH 18, 2004 CITI' OF DUBLIN,. Division of Planning 5800 Shier-Rings Road Dublin, Ohio 43016-1236 Phone/TD0:614-410-4600 Fax: 614-410-4747 Web Site: vnvw.dublin.oh-us 1. Rezoning Application 03-1192 -Riverside Hospital PCD, Subarea A Location: 24.3 acres located at the northwest corner of Perimeter Drive and Avery- Muirfield Drive. Existing Zoning: PCD, Planned Commerce District (Riverside Hospital plan). Request: A revision to the existing PCD composite plan under the provisions of Section 153.058. Proposed Use: Amixed-use development of office, bank/financial, retail, restaurant, and daycare uses. Applicant: Paul Ghidotti, The Daimler Group, Incorporated., 1533 Lake Shore Drive, Columbus, Ohio 43204. r~. Staff Contact: Carson C. Combs, AICP, Senior Planner. UPDATE: On March 4, 2004, the Commission approved a rezoning application for a mixed-use development. As a condition of approval (see Draft Record of Action #03-119Z), the Commission requested that the applicant return to further discuss the issues of signage and odor control for restaurant facilities. The applicant has revised the text to address most of the conditions from the March approval, and staff believes that the applicant has worked at length to address issues raised by the Commission. Staff recommends approval of the revised composite plan with four conditions. BACKGROUND: Case Summary: This is a follow-up review to address issues as part of a positive recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission for a composite plan (rezoning) request to expand permitted uses within Subarea A of the Riverside Hospital PCD, Planned Commerce District. The rezoning establishes Subareas Al through A3, and this follow-up review requested by the Commission is limited to the issues of signage and odor control for restaurant facilities. Case Procedure: The Planning and Zoning Commission must review and make a recommendation on this rezoning request. The application will then be returned to City Council for a public hearing and final vote. A two-thirds vote of City Council is required to override a negative recommendation by the Dublin Planning and Zoning Conuuission Staff Report -March 18, 2004 Page 2 Commission. If approved, the rezoning will become effective 30 days following the Council vote. A new preliminary plat will be needed to address the creation of the proposed lots, to modify access, establish easements, place utilities, etc. Additionally, all development will require development plan approval by the Commission prior to construction. Review Criteria: The PCD provisions of Section 153.058(E) establish the following criteria for approval of a composite plan (rezoning): 1) That the proposed development is consistent in all respects with the purpose, intent, and applicable standards of the zoning ordinance; 2) That the proposed development is in conformity with appropriate comprehensive planning or portion thereof as it may apply; 3) That the proposed development advances the general welfare of the municipality and immediate vicinity; 4) Where applicable, that the relationship of buildings and structures to each other and to such other facilities maintains the image of Dublin as a planned community; 5) That the acceptability of setbacks, distances between buildings, yard space, suitability of open space systems, traffic accessibility and other elements having a bearing on the overall acceptability of the development plans, shall contribute to the orderly development of land within the city; 6) The location of access points shall maintain the function of adjacent thoroughfares by relating to existing access points on surrounding development, the street patterns, the Thoroughfare Plan, and the intensity of proposed uses; 7) Development within this district shall provide safe, convenient, and non-conflicting circulation systems for motorists, bicyclists and pedestrians; 8) That the plan provides for the coordination and integration of individually designed buildings into one planned district; and 9) That by deed restrictions or otherwise there is a sufficient assurance that once development commences, later phases will be consistent with those already in place. CONSIDERATIONS: Signage: • Proposed identification signage for most uses within the development will consist of an 8- foot, monument-style ground sign that will be no more than 50 square feet in area (Refer to Table C of the text). This is consistent with other developments and will blend into the Avery Road corridor. Uses on corner lots will be permitted two ground signs in compliance with Code. • The proposed sign package for the neighborhood retail center in Subarea A2 will consist of one 20-square foot wall sign and one 4.5-square foot projecting sign that will be located on the west elevation of the building. No signage will face located facing Avery Road (Refer to Table B of the text). This package is generally consistent with adjacent shopping centers. • As a corner site, the north anchor tenant for the neighborhood retail center in Subarea Al will be permitted a total of two signs that include one wall sign on the west elevation to be consistent with the remainder of the neighborhood center (Refer to Table B of the text) and one monument ground sign that will be located along Avery Road (Refer to Table C of the text). Both signs will total no more than 66.7 square feet, consistent with Code. Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Staff Report -March 18, 2004 Page 3 Odor Control: ' The Commission requested that the applicant return to further discuss issues of odor control for the proposed development. The applicant is researching this issue and would like to discuss it in greater detail with the Commission. Below are approximate distances from restaurant portions of the development. At this time, staff is not aware of any feasible mechanical devices that will eliminate food odors. - ' - ~ i ~ A2:(Neighborhood; 650 feet 300 feet 750 feet A3 (Sit-down) 1050 feet 650 feet 775 feet Prior Conditions (March 4, 2004): • Section B -Yard and Setback Requirements on Page 8 of the proposed text has been revised to indicate "Side yard setbacks shall be a~et~-ef 15' for pavement..." Item 6 under Section J -Neighborhood Retail Center on Page 15 has been modified to indicate that Tenant #7 will be allowed no more than 66.67 square feet of total permitted sign area. Financial services have been eliminated as a permitted use in Subarea A3 on Page 7 of the proposed text. Page 1 of the proposed text has been amended to limit children in daycare uses within Subarea Al to ages 13 and under. The proposed text has been revised to include lighting standards consistent with the City of Dublin Exterior Lighting Guidelines. Light poles/fixtures will be of a coordinated shoebox design and will be no greater than 28 feet in height. • Section F -Setbacks on Page 14 has been modified to indicate that all monument ground signs will be located no less than eight feet from the right-of--way, consistent with the provisions of the Sign Code. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The proposed modifications to the existing zoning will provide for a mix of uses, decreased peak-hour traffic, and provide a unique landscape feature along the Avery-Muirfield Drive frontage. The proposed development will provide a sign package that is consistent with both the character of the adjacent shopping centers and the precedent of monument ground signs that has been well established along the Avery-Muirfield corridor. Staff believes that there is no feasible option at this time that would eliminate odor produced by restaurants, and that a sufficient distance is present to minimize any potential impacts. The applicant has worked at length with staff to provide standards that will result in a quality development within the Avery Road and Perimeter Drive corridors. Staff recommends approval of this rezoning request with four conditions. Conditions: 1) That the timing for proposed off-site traffic improvements be coordinated with and completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; 2) That cross-access agreements be provided within all portions of the proposed development, to the satisfaction of staff; Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Staff Report -March 18, 2004 Page 4 3) That the same level of finishing be required on the east roof of the retail center that provides an appearance with residential character; and 4) That concerns of pedestrian connectivity within this retail center and to the south be properly provided for residents to the north of Post Road. Bases: 1) The proposed revised plans properly address concerns raised by the Planning and Zoning Commission. 2) This revised composite plan generally complies with criteria set forth in Section 153.058(E) of the Dublin Zoning Code. 3) The proposed rezoning will provide a quality development with necessary support services within the employment core of Dublin. Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission . Minutes -March 18, 2004 Page 6 1. Rezoning Application 03-1192 -Riverside Hospital PCD, Subarea A Mr. Gerber said this is a follow-up review from two weeks ago where the Commission asked to look at signage. He noted that the staff report also included odor control for restaurants, which puzzled him. He wondered where those things existed, and thought this discussion was just about signage. Mr. Combs said that further discussion of odor control was a condition of approval at the last meeting. Mr. Gerber noted that the text stated that all signs would comply with the Dublin Sign Code, and in the event of conflict between the Sign Code and the text, that the text would control. He asked for an explanation. Mr. Combs said this was afollow-up to the zoning that was recommended for approval by the Commission on March 4, 2004. He showed slides of the site. The site is located at the southwest corner of Post Road and Avery-Muirfield Drive. To the north are institutional uses, to the south is an existing retail center, and there are a variety of offices and financial institutions and other restaurant uses to the south and east. The site is zoned PCD as part of the Riverside Hospital PCD. To the north is PUD and a variety of residential. To the northeast are additional offices in a PCD to the east as well, across Avery Road. The first of two issues that were required to return to the Commission was signage. In general, there are three subareas, Subarea A2 permits a mix of retail and restaurants, Subarea A3 is sit- down restaurant uses, and Subarea Al allows a mix office and financial uses. A signage package for the neighborhood center along Avery Road will be placed on the west elevation so it will not face Avery Road. Tenants 1-6 will each have a 4.5-square foot projecting sign for pedestrian orientation and a 20-square foot wall sign. The entry tenant for the neighborhood center will have a combination of a wall sign and monument sign that will total no more than 66.67 square feet, which generally complies with Code. He showed a slide denoting where the various buildings will have the monument-style signage. The neighborhood center sign package will be oriented away from Avery-Muirfield Drive. Mr. Combs answered the question indicating that every planned district text has standards that supersede the regular Sign Code. If there is something not specifically addressed in the text, then staff refers back to any applicable Code requirements. Mr. Combs also noted that the Commission also brought up the issue of odor control when the case was last heard. He said Subarea A2 permits small-scale coffee shops, cafes, and ice cream shops. Subarea A3, farther to the south, along Perimeter Drive allows casual and fine dining, and well as bakeries or cafes. Mr. Combs said odor control has come up before in other cases, and staff did look into how it could be addressed, but there is no economically feasible means that staff is aware of that will eliminate food odors. He showed a slide indicating Subarea A2 and the general distances to surrounding land uses. With southwest prevailing winds, staff believes that odor should not be a problem for the uses and distances involved. Dublin Planning and Zoning Cornn~ission Minutes -March 18, 2004 Page 7 L.rs Mr. Combs then showed a slide of Subarea A3 and general distances to surrounding institutional uses to the north, residential uses to the northeast, and office, retail, and restaurants to the east and south. He said that given the issues of distance and economic feasibility, the issue of odor control can not be addressed. Uses to the south are fast-food, and staff has not received complaints from nearby residents with those particular uses. Mr. Combs said the applicant had worked at length to address the conditions recommended at the last meeting and the text reflects changes_to meet them. Mr. Combs said the conditions generally deal with traffic improvements, cross access easements, architectural finish of the neighbor center on the east side, and pedestrian connectivity. He said staff recommends approval with four conditions: 1) That the timing for proposed off-site traffic improvements be coordinated with and completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; 2) That cross-access agreements be provided within all portions of the proposed development, to the satisfaction of staff; 3) That the same level of finishing be required on the east roof of the retail center that provides an appearance with residential character; and 4) That concerns of pedestrian connectivity within this retail center and to the south be properly provided for residents to the north of Post Road. Ben W. Hale, Jr., representing the applicant, said there was only one element that varied from the Sign Code in the text. He clarified that the Code does not permit a mix of monument signs and wall signs for uses. He pointed out that Key Bank, under the Code, would get a monument sign on both Avery Road and Post Road, because of the two frontages. He said they instead have one sign on the western side of the building for recognition from the parking lot. Paul Ghidotti, Damiler, said at the previous Commission meeting, the appearance of the east and west elevations were discussed as well as where the one Key Bank monument sign should be located along Avery Road. He showed renderings of both. He said the monument sign for Key Bank would be tucked in so as to give the pond an undulating feel. He said it would be behind the current bikepath that meanders onto the site, and would be the only sign on that side of the retail center. Mr. Ghidotti showed renderings of both elevations of the center. The west elevation incorporates wood signs with gooseneck lighting similar to Perimeter Center. No wall signs are on the east elevation. h1 lieu of the signs, there will be awnings. He said the type and color of the awnings will be presented later at the development plan stage. Dormers and finials have also been added to the east elevation for residential character, as requested by the Commission. Ms. Reiss agreed that two signs of the same type on the corner of Perimeter Drive and Avery- Muirfield Drive (proposed Huntington Bank) would be permitted by Code, but considering other banks in the area, she preferred that this parcel signage be reduced to one monument sign closer to the corner. Mr. Ghidotti said Fifth/Third Bank actually has two signs, one on Avery Road and one on Perimeter Drive. He said their ATM sign is also very visible from Avery Road at night. Even Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes -March 18, 2004 Page 8 Burger King has two signs at the corner. Bank One only has one sign, even though it fronts on both streets. He believed Wendy's/Tim Horton's has two also. Mr. Combs said Walgreens, Tim Hortons/Wendy's, and Burger King did have two signs, as well as all the properties between Perimeter Loop and Avery-Muirfield Drive. He believed McDonald's only had one sign. He noted that the slide was taken from aerial photography and that not every sign may have been visible in the picture. Ms. Reiss suggested one sign on the corner as an alternative, with a wall sign facing to the west or northwest to minimize eye-clutter along Avery Road. Mr. Ghidotti said they could incorporate that. Ms. Reiss said that was just her opinion. Mr. Ghidotti asked if one sign could be on Avery Road and the other actually on the south or west elevation. Ms. Boring thought there was already a sign on the west elevation proposed. Mr. Hale clarified that there were only ground signs for the site at the southeast corner, and no wall signage was proposed on that side. He said they wanted to communicate with traffic coming from the west, either with a ground or wall sign, but it probably did not make a difference. He said it was probably better if it is on the wall. Ms. Reiss thought they could communicate either coming from the east, west, north, or south by having one ground-mounted sign located in between where the two signs are proposed. Mr. Ghidotti said they could do that, but questioned if they wanted to put a sign there that might detract from the view of the water, fountain, and plantings. He said the signs have not been designed yet. If Fifth/Third and Bank One have monument signs on two streets, Huntington Bank will also ask where they can put their two signs. He said if that is the Commission's desire, they just need to tell them where they should be located. Ms. Reiss agreed that the view corridor should be kept open. Mr. Ghidotti noted that if they put the sign too far back, anyone traveling north is not going to know that it is Huntington Bank. They have to make sure signage serves a purpose to enable people to find the business. Mr. Hale said it did not make any difference whether there were afree-standing double signs. Mr. Combs cautioned that staff would prefer not to have signage at the corner if it creates a sight visibility issue. Ms. Reiss asked if the wall sign would be better on the northwest side of the building. Mr. Combs said he had no problem if it were acceptable to the Commission. He asked that if they had two signs, that they total no more than 66.67 square feet to comply with the area requirements of the Sign Code. Ms. Reiss noted it does not have to be one the corner, just on that side of the building. Dublin Planning and Zoning Couunission Minutes -March 18, 2004 Page 9 Ms. Reiss asked why a sign was wanted on Avery Road at all. Mr. Ghidotti said they wanted to tell people going south on Avery Road it is time to get over, and for people on Perimeter Drive to know that they have missed it and need to turn around. Mr. Ghidotti inquired why Huntington was being treated differently than the same uses on the neighboring corners. Mr. Saneholtz preferred two monument- signs to help the driving public actually find the driveway to the Huntington Bank. Having a sign on the corner, he thought, would complicate matters. He had no problem with the two monument signs. Ms. Boring said sometimes to make it look less cluttered, each sign is regulated to be the same material, and setback. She suggested that this be required in the text. She did not want to limit colors for the individual businesses, but wondered if they could include that kind of restriction. Mr. Zimmerman asked if Ms. Boring was talking about making the monument sign design, casing, and base the same. Ms. Boring said yes, so they look uniform. Mr. Ghidotti said as you drive on Avery Road, there are brick buildings with brick signs, brick buildings with stone signs, and stone buildings that have brick signs. He said it was nice because it was different. He said most of their development is going to be predominately brick, so they could do a sign with a brick base and a simple acrylic box on top of it. He said his company had design review over all the development. Mr. Gerber asked about staff's concern for the monument signs. Mr. Combs said Ms. Reiss was contemplating a corner sign so he raised the issue of visibility. Mr. Gerber asked if, as it stood, staff has a problem with the diagram shown. Mr. Combs said it could comply with Code. Mr. Gerber supported Ms. Boring's condition: That all monument signs will be of a uniform material, base, casing, and setback. Ms. Reiss noted that Mr. Combs said that businesses could not have two signs greater than 66.67 square feet in area. She asked if they were identical to each other in size (33.34 square feet), that meant that everyone else in the development would have to have a 33.34-square foot sign. Mr. Combs said, yes, depending on how the Commission worded the condition. Mr. Gerber asked the Commissioners if the thought was to have all signs the same size, as well. Mr: Zimmerman asked what materials were preferred for the sign. Ms. Boring assumed that the signs would be uniform in material, base, casing, and setback. Ms. Boring said she did not have a preferred material, but would be willing to add that. She said Mr. Ghidotti would like to make it brick, and if Mr. Zimmerman wanted the condition to say brick, it could be added. Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission ~ ' t~~ Ra P: tF Minutes -March 18, 2004 ~ ' ~ ~ ` Page 10 Mr. Sprague asked if the setback would be an issue progressing through the planned district, and would having a uniform setback present any problems. Ms. Boring wanted to avoid sign clutter. Mr. Sprague said Ms. Boring had uniformity in five areas. He asked if staff was okay thinking that the uniform setback restriction won't have some sort of unintended consequence or inapplicability to anything within the district, or does it seem fine anyway. Mr. Combs said the way the text is written, the developer must have all signs a minimum of eight feet behind the right-of--way, which is consistent with the Code. This is the rezoning stage, and he did not know whether the standard proposed by the Commission would impact mounding, landscaping, or any kind of design elements. Ms. Reiss read a section of the text that discussed the sign height. Mr. Combs said that all monument signs will be limited to eight feet, which is generally consistent with other signs in the corridor. Ms. Reiss noted that it was eight feet from the curb. Mr. Combs said that was generally how signage is measured by the Code. Ms. Reiss said if there were mounding, they would either have to tuck into the mounding or lower the sign height to take into account how much elevation the mounding. Mr. Combs said that was correct. Mr. Sprague said the answer was that it seemed like it will work, but we're not positive, because not all is known at this stage. He said there would be a remedy if it became a problem at some future time. Mr. Combs said yes, but cautioned that future changes to the text to correct any issues would require the applicant to go back through the rezoning process. Mr. Hale said they had control over the mounding and were doing a grading plans, so they can make it work. Ms. Boring asked if they wanted to specify a brick base. Mr. Ghidotti said the only concern he had with the condition proposed was the size issue, because if a use has two 30-square foot signs in order to comply with the 66.67-square foot requirement, then everyone else after that will be limited to the 30 square feet for their one sign. Mr. Ghidotti also did not think the Commission wanted the Commission to force future uses to use a bigger sign than what they may want. He was uncomfortable with the size issue. Ms. Boring asked for help. She wanted to establish uniformity. She thought Mr. Ghidotti made a good point about the size, and indicated that shape is really what she is driving at. - Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes -March 18, 2004 Page 11 Mr. Ghidotti said there was variety now along Avery-Muirfield Drive, and was not sure if that was necessarily bad. He said he was not sure the signs could all be the same size because it is going to be dictated by corporate logos. Bank One and McDonalds are more horizontal, while Fifth/Third is more vertically-oriented. He hated to come back with a condition that boxes them in, when it wasn't really intended by the Commission. Ms. Reiss said rectangles and squares the same size provide design leeway, asking Ms. Boring if . identical signs were wanted. Ms. Boring said all she was trying to do was hear Ms. Reiss's concern and find a compromise. She liked the idea of a uniform base, casing, and material. Ms. Boring said she was going to eliminate the idea of same "size." Mr. Saneholtz said the signs at Perimeter seemed uniform to him. Mr. Combs said those signs are integrated into the pillar and hedge treatment. The pillar serves as the back end of the sign, with a brick or stone base upon which the sign cabinet is affixed. Mr. Saneholtz asked if that was the situation staff envisioned along Perimeter. He said in that case, they are not all identically proportioned signs. Mr. Combs said the sign cabinets may be the same size, but the variety of design gives them a different appearance of scale. He said Burger King had pin-mounted lettering, while Wendy's/Tim Norton's used the acrylic panels. Mr. Saneholtz clarified that he was discussing the east side of Avery Road with the BP and Shell (Giant Eagle shopping center). He said when thinking about sign consistency, he was not thinking of vertical and horizontal and then vertical of the same mass. He was just trying to find something everyone could relate to. Mr. Hale understood that the Commissioners wanted the signage to look uniform. He said uniformity, to him, was the base and type of the sign, not how you letter them. If they are basically the same base, frame, and size, you will have a sign that looks uniform. He said there maybe some variation in exactly how square they are, but they will generally look the same. Mr. Gerber said part of the difficulty is that they do not know who the tenants will be. Mr. Hale pointed out that the Commission will see all of the signs at the development plan stage. Mr.,Gerber agreed. At that point the tenants will be known and their signs will be seen. It is not something subject to staff approval. Mr. Zimmerman and Ms. Boring agreed. Ms. Boring asked if the signage on the building was the same as Perimeter Center to continue what has been established. Mr. Combs said it is generally the same. Ms. Reiss asked how much sign square footage would be allowed if it was not a corner lot. Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission ~ ~ Minutes -March 18, 2004 Page 12 Mr. Combs said that one monument sign would be allowed that totaled 50 square feet, consistent with the Sign Code. Mr. Hale agreed to the conditions listed above. Mr. Gerber asked to see the projecting signs proposed. Mr. Hale said they were just like at Perimeter Center. Mr. Gerber asked if the Key Bank sign would be red and white, while the other signs utilize different colors. Mr. Ghidotti said he did not know at this stage. Mr. Gerber said his preference would be that the signs in the neighborhood center are the same color. He said the Key Bank will have a monument sign to show the corporate logo, and centers of this caliper often have something like a green background with gold lettering. Mr. Ghidotti said the whole idea behind this type of retail center is to make it feel like Old Dublin. There is relief to make it look like it was built in phases. He said a variation ofcolors in storefronts is needed, but not necessarily the signage. Ms. Boring said the idea was good, but asked how that would blend in with what exists across the street. Mr. Combs said the text would require the applicant to come back with a palette ofcolors at the time of the development plan. He noted that the applicant is intending to immediately return with the development plan for the entire Avery Road frontage. Mr. Saneholtz understood that the large Key Bank sign will not be colored red while everything else is gold. Ms. Boring said it may, but the Commission has discretion at the development plan stage to set colors. Mr. Saneholtz understood. Mr. Gerber understood that there wasn't a type of mechanism available that the applicant can r~s utilize to meet odor control expectations. Mr. Hale recalled that Mr. Harvey was asked by the Commission at the last hearing if he knew of any systems. He said staff looked at distances, prevailing winds, and where houses are located. He said Mary Kelley's is one case where homes are forty feet away, but here the nearest home is over two football fields away. Mr. ,Gerber said that was his feeling also. He recommended that the odor control condition be eliminated. He said there were nuisance ordinances and other things that he thought could legally be enforced if it does become too much of an odor problem. Ms. Reiss noted that outdoor seating was proposed in Subarea A2, and suggested that outdoor cooking be restricted within the development. Mr. Gerber asked if there was a Code provision to address that already. Ms. Reiss asked if it is a Board of Health issue. . E Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission ~ Minutes -March 18, 2004 ~ ~ c,~ Page 13 Mr. Zimmerman cautioned that some businesses like to have promotions with outdoor cookouts, and a condition might impact that. Ms. Reiss said an outdoor grill that stays from Memorial Day until Labor Day is not wanted. She used City Barbeque and their outdoor smoker on Henderson Road as an example. Mr. Hale said they were happy to restrict outdoor grills. They did not care. Mr. Gerber said he did because it seems the Commission is adding many conditions that are addressed by the Code or other regulations. He did not think extra conditions made for a clean record and makes administration of the project difficult for staff. He thought it is excessive to put another condition on an applicant when there is something in the law that would prevent it. Mr. Messineo agreed. Mr. Gerber said nuisances can be reported to the police. Mr. Messineo suggested that staff check if there are Health Code requirements or restrictions for outdoor cooking. Mr. Harvey said the Health Code applies to sanitation, but generally not for odors. Mr. Sprague said staff could pursue that at a later time. Mr. Messineo agreed and said he was not interested particularly for this case. Mr. Zimmerman added that businesses should not be prevented from having outdoor promotions with grills. Mr. Gerber agreed staff should look at this at a later date. Ms. Reiss asked if the applicant envisioned canopies or awnings with graphics. Mr. Gerber said it was a condition at the last hearing. Ms. Reiss asked if there would be any signage on the umbrellas. Mr. Combs said it would not be permitted. Ms. Boring said she was disappointed in staff's response regarding odor control. She said in this case, all that was reported was distances. Ms. Readler was present during previous meetings when they were discussed. She indicated this is something the Commission should consider in the future when approving restaurants. Mr. Harvey apologized for not providing additional information and believed that it was. to be discussed at the time of the development plan. Ms. Boring said that would be fine, if the applicant agrees. Mr. Ghidotti said they did intensive research and talked to two engineering companies. There are two ways odor control is handled. One is a very tall metal stack that expels odors at a higher level so that the smells do not impact the pedestrian level. He said that would ruin the architecture of the building. Mr. Ghidotti said another method uses carbon filters. However, they are not recommended for restaurant uses because of the risk of fire. All odor control devices they found stated they were not to be used for restaurant uses or food preparation areas. Mr. Messineo asked if the Health Department inspected stacks and exhaust fans. Ms. Reiss said the fire department did annual inspections. Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes -March 18, 2004 ~ ~ g Page 14 Ms. Reiss wanted Condition 4 to be better clarified. She said there was an existing walkway through the property to connect the multi-family with the Kroger shopping center. She would like wording so that people will not walk further than what they currently do. She suggested that the pathway be lengthened no greater than ten percent from its current distance. Mr. Saneholtz asked why the Commission was discussing something other than signage and odors. Mr. Gerber said he would like that same clarification. Ms. Reiss said this is the first time they have seen the condition in writing. Mr. Combs said it was a condition approved by the Commission at the last meeting. Mr. Gerber asked why Condition 4 was part of the sign package this evening. Mr. Combs said that tonight's , review is a follow-up that is part of the rezoning request. He said it is a condition that will be forwarded to City Council for the public hearing on the rezoning. Mr. Combs said the Commission previously wished to discuss signage and odor control, but it is the discretion of the Chair. Mr. Gerber was troubled by the staff report. He recalled there were up to twelve conditions at the last meeting, but they are not all here. Tonight there were four conditions that did not pertain to signage or odor control. Mr. Combs again clarified that the conditions were those that remained outstanding from the last meeting. Mr. Gerber said this did not help the Commission complete their task. Mr. Combs explained that the four conditions are part of the rezoning record that will be carved forward to City Council. Mr. Hale also explained that there were many conditions that required changes to the development text. They worked with staff over the past two weeks to revise the text and eliminate conditions. The four remaining conditions in this report are those things that did not involve the text. Mr. Gerber said he assumed that when this went to City Council, all 14 conditions will be in there as well. Mr. Combs said there was no reason to include them in this report because they were revised in the text. If the Commission would like staff to place all of them in this report, that could be accomplished. Mr. Combs said staff would add the other conditions. Ms.. Boring asked how the Commission could double-check that. Mr. Hale said the text could be compared to the conditions. Mr. Gerber said they were trying to limit the discussion to signage, but there has been a change. He asked how Ms. Reiss wanted to revise the wording of Condition 4, and asked if what she proposed was possible. Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes -March 18, 2004 t~~ t: ~.=a-~-~~~ Page 15 ~ _ f"•{ . Mr. Ghidotti said it was not. He showed a slide of the current walkway that indicated the path was centered on the two assisted living facilities, but aligns with the rear service entrance for Kroger. He said it doesn't serve a great purpose at that point. Mr. Ghidotti said it is also in the location suited for a larger office building. If there is a restriction about it being a straight line or under a percentage greater in length, it is problematic. They want to make sure they provide a path through the development that makes sense. Ms. Reiss agreed the existing pathway dr-upped off at a bad location and should be relocated at the other driveway. Mr. Ghidotti said he had no idea if they could work within the 10 percent limit until they know how the area will ultimately develop. Mr. Gerber noted the case was beginning a second hour with a difficult case to follow. He asked how Mr. Ghidotti intended to comply with Condition 4. Mr. Ghidotti said the condition does not relate to what is being discussed now. He said it relates to people coming down on Post Road and getting to the retail center without having to go down to Perimeter Center and backtrack. Ms. Reiss said that was not what she talked about at the last meeting. She was concerned about the other walkway. Mr. Hale recalled that the condition said. a walkway will be brought through. It was not specifically located, 'but they did agree to provide one from Post Road from the residential facility down to the south. Mr. Combs clarified that the purpose of Condition 4 was to address any residences north of Post Road, which included those to the northeast and the institutional uses. The intent of the adopted condition was to provide pedestrian mobility to this site and to the retail to the south (Kroger center). Mr. Gerber reminded the Commissioners that they would see this again at the development plan stage. Ms. Reiss said that was the issue: If it comes through as a development plan, does the Commission have any leeway. Mr. Gerber said the Commission will determine whether it meets the condition. Ms. Reiss said that Mr. Ghidotti seemed to agree that he understood the intent of the condition. Mr. Hale suggested adding to Condition 4: "...and it shall include a connection from the senior housing to Post Road." He said that is what they were going to do, and at the last meeting, they committed to do both paths for connectivity. Mr. Gerber made the motion to approve this rezoning application because the plans properly address concerns raised by the Planning and Zoning Commission, the composite plan generally complies with criteria set forth in Section 153.058(E) of the Dublin Zoning Code, and the Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission ' Minutes -March 18, 2004 ` Page 16 rezoning will provide a quality development with necessary support services within the employment core of Dublin, with five conditions: 1) That the timing for proposed off-site traffic improvements be coordinated with and completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; 2) That cross-access agreements be provided within all portions of the proposed development, to the satisfaction of staff; 3) That the same level of finishing be required on the east roof of the retail center that provides an appearance with residential character; 4) That concerns of pedestrian connectivity within this retail center and to the south be properly provided for residents to the north of Post Road; and these connections shall include an connection from the senior housing to Post Road; and 5) That all monument signs will be uniform in the material, base, casing, and setback. Mr. Hale agreed to the conditions as listed above. Mr. Zimmerman seconded the motion. Mr. Harvey requested that the amendment to Condition 5 be repeated. Ms. Boring repeated the condition: That all monument signs will be uniform in the material, base, casing, and setback. The vote was as follows: Mr. Messineo, yes; Mr. Saneholtz, yes; Mr. Sprague, yes; Ms. Boring, yes; Ms. Reiss, yes; Mr. Zimmerman, yes; and Mr. Gerber, yes. (Approved 7-0.) Mr. Gerber thanked Mr. Hale and Mr. Ghidotti for their indulgence. Ms. Boring said she found that not having exactly what was passed last time to be confusing. } She likes to go to the text and make sure everything is there. It was difficult for her on this case ' that all the conditions were not listed. Mr. Harvey indicated that it was staff was working to address these kinds of issues in the initial sections of the report. Mr. Combs clarified that page three of the report included a section that explained how each of the conditions from the March 4, 2004, meeting were addressed with this submittal. Versions of the text have also utilized bolding and strikethroughs to indicate changes. Administrative Busi ss Mr. Gerber called a hort break at 8:15 p.m. 2. Rezoning/ evised Preliminary Develop ent Plan 03-0452 - NE Qua PUD Retail, Subareas 5 and SB -Kroger Center - Sa mill Road Mr. Gerbe said this is a preliminary deve opment plan/rezoning applicatio ,which is binding and sec d of the three PUD stages, a d it is binding. It establishes t e permissible uses, density and development standards, a serves as the preliminary plat. he Commission is to mak a recommendation on this rezo ~ g and forward it to City Council or a public hearing and fin vote. ~a PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECORD Or ACT ION MARCH 4, 2004 CITY OF DUBLIti._ division of Pknning - ~800 Shier-Rings Road lin, Ohio 43016-1236 Phone/TDD:614-410-4600 ftix:6l4-410-4741 Web Site: www.dublin.oh.us The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action at this meeting: 1. Rezoning/Revised Composite Plan 03-1192 -Riverside Hospital PCD, Subarea A Location: 24.3 acres located at the northwest corner of Perimeter Drive and Avery- Muirfield Drive. Existing Zoning: PCD, Planned Commerce District (Riverside Hospital plan). Request: A revision to the existing PCD composite plan under the provisions of Section 153.058. Proposed Use: Amixed-use development of office, bank, retail, restaurant, and daycare ' uses. Applicant: The Daimler Group Inc., c/o Paul Ghidotti, 1533 Lake Shore Drive, Columbus, Ohio 43204. Staff Contact: Carson C. Combs, AICP, Senior Planner. MOTION: To approve this rezoning/revised composite plan application because the plans address concerns raised by the Planning and Zoning Commission on November 3, 2003, it generally complies with criteria set forth in Section 153.058(E) of the Dublin Zoning Code, and the rezoning will provide a quality development with necessary support services within the employment core of the City, with 12 conditions: 1) That Section B -Yard a~zd Setback Requirements of the proposed text be revised to read: "Side yard setbacks shall be a--teal--e€ 15' for pavement..." prior to scheduling for a public hearing at City Council; 2) That proposed sign standards for Tenant 7 of the Neighborhood Retail Center (Subarea A1) be revised to provide a total permitted sign area of no more than 66.67 square feet to comply with Code prior to scheduling for a public hearing at City Council, subject to staff approval; 3) That the timing for proposed off site traffic improvements be coordinated with and completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; 4) That the proposed development comply with the City of Dublin Exterior Lighting Guidelines and that all sites utilize coordinated shoe box lighting no greater than 28 feet in height; Page 1 of 2 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECORD Or ACTON MARCH 4, 2004 1. Rezoning/Revised Composite Plan 03-1192 -Riverside Hospital PCD, Subarea A (Continued) 5) That fencing be utilized oily for the purposes of screening service structures, mechanical units, etc. or required by State regulations, to the satisfaction of staff; ~ 6) That cross-access agreements be provided within all portions of the proposed development, to the satisfaction of staff; 7) That a full sign package to be brought back to the Commission for approval prior to the development plan stage; 8) That the same level of finishing be required on the east roof of the retail center that provides an appearance with residential character; 9) That concerns of pedestrian connectivity within this retail center and to the south be properly provided for residents to the north of Post Road; 10) That the text be revised to include no financial services in Subarea A3; 11) That text language regarding daycares be revised to include an age limit of 13 years or under; and 12) That the issues of odor control be brought back to the Commission for further consideration prior to the development plan stage. * Ben W. Hale, Jr., representing the applicant, agreed to the above conditions. VOTE: 6-0. RESULT: This rezoning/composite plan was approved. The rezoning application will be forwarded to City Council with a positive recommendation. The entire sign package will return to the Commission for review and approval at a later date. STAFF CERTIFICATION Frank A. Ciarochi Acting Planning Director Page2of2 Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes -March 4, 2004 Page 3 apply. He suggested that a ubcommittee of three meet ith staff to put something on aper to pass it on to City Counci nd the Code Revision Task rce who are looking at this ~ sue. Mr. Zimmerman, Mr. Gerbe and Ms. Reiss volunteered t serve on the subcommittee. Mr. Gerber made motion that the Commissi establish a subcommittee o address the ' Conservation desi process for further clarific ion. Mr. Messineo seconded he motion, and the vote was as f lows: Ms. Reiss, yes; Ms. ring, yes; Mr. Zimmerman, y s; Mr. Messineo, yes; and Mr. G ber, yes. (Approved 5-0.~ Ms. Readle said the subcommittee meet' gs should be advertised like ny other Commission meeting. s. Farley said she would ber sponsible for notifying the me is of the meetings at the approp ' to time. Mr. erber said that any other Co issioners who want to attend ere welcome. He asked t t al he Commissioners be notified Mr. Gunderman informed the ommission that an updated Ad inistrative Case update h been distributed tonight. Mr. Ge er noted that a lot of work h been accomplished over the last eight months. Mr. Gerber asked fora ow of hands of those present f each case on the agenda t fight. Mr. Gerber announ d that the Informal Case (Case )would be held first folio ed by Cases 1, 2, 3, and 4. [ ter in the meeting, Case 4 as tabled as requested b the applicant's representative d to time limitations, before Cas 2 was heard. The minute effect the order of the published agenda.] 1. Rezoning/Revised Composite Plan 03-1192 -Riverside Hospital PCD, Subarea A Carson Combs said this is a proposed revision to the existing composite plan for the Riverside Hospital PCD for 24.3 acres located north of Perimeter Drive. This has been before the Commission a number of times. When heard in November 2003, the Commission discussed nine general issues that they requested be resolved by the developer and staff: 1) The proposed sign package does not comply with Code and is not in keeping with nearby multi-tenant retail development. 2) The text does not clearly indicate developer participation in related off-site traffic improvements. 3) The plans and text should be revised to provide additional opaque landscaping to screen the drive-thru stacking areas. 4) The text should be revised to reflect appropriate setbacks based on required right-of--way dedication and traffic improvements. 5) The text permits non-earth tone colors that are not in keeping with the overall character of the area. 6) The text should be revised to provide maximum overall lot coverage of less than 65 percent. 7) The plans need revised to provide less opportunity for cut-through traffic. 8) The text should be revised to prohibit Avery-Muirfield Drive access. 9) The Subarea boundary is not clearly demarcated on the plans. Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes -March 4, 2004 Page 4 He showed slides of the site located at the southwest corner of Post Road and Avery-Muirfield Drive. The site is agricultural south of Post Road, with one existing barn located on the west end of the site. Properties to the west and south are part of the Riverside PCD. Across Post Road, to the north, are a variety of institutional uses that are zoned PUD, Planned Unit Development District. The site is relatively flat, and a pedestrian connection exists from the institutional uses on the north side of Post Road to the Avery Square shopping center. This plan proposes to modify the existing Subarea A into three different subareas. In general, most of the uses will be the same as the existing text. The changes are generally in Subareas A2 and A3, which provide for retail and restaurant uses that are not in the existing text. Mr. Combs said staff has worked with the applicant to resolve all of the above nine issues. He said most of the issues dealt with technical aspects of the proposed development text. Staff feels very comfortable with this revised plan and the Community Plan indicates this site should be mixed-use/employment emphasis. Staff believes that the proposed uses will provide a mix that is called for in the Community Plan, and is consistent with the overall goals. Due to the narrow nature of the site, it will be bisected from east to west to provide for uses that will served by a single, interior access drive. Curbcuts will be located along Perimeter Drive. The site extends west to the portion of Subarea Al that is undefined for future office use. He said in general, there are a total of four access points on Perimeter Drive that include aright-in one, and three full-service curb cuts (one with a traffic light). One access on Post Road was agreed to by the Commission several meetings ago, and the text specifies there will be no access onto Avery-Muirfield Drive. The site includes a mix of different office uses that will be highlighted by sit-down restaurants and a neighborhood center that will provide for a mix of ` smaller retail and cafe-type uses. Mr. Combs said a large entry feature will be located along the Avery-Muirfield frontage. The applicant has also proposed landscape treatments along Post Road as well as along Perimeter Drive that are attached as exhibits to the development text. Signage proposed is more consistent with the Code and surrounding shopping centers. For each tenant in the neighborhood center, one wall sign (20 square feet) and one projecting sign (4.5 square feet) for pedestrian orientation is permitted, similar to the other centers. There will be a total of seven tenants. He said Tenants 1 through 6 would have that sign package. The seventh tenant (Key Bank) will have one larger wall sign (48 square feet) and the ability for a monument sign along Avery Road. Mr. Combs said Tenant 7 is located on a corner with two frontages. In general, Code would permit two monument signs that total 66.67 square feet in total area. He said with this particular development, staff is trying to balance the fact that they want to keep Post Road as scenic and uncluttered as possible, while providing something that blends with the center and the established monument-style signage along the Avery Corridor. He said other buildings will be permitted one monument-style sign totaling 50 square feet, which is consistent with Code. The maximum height for all monument signs is eight square feet. Any additional corner property would be permitted to have two. signs that comply with the 66.67- square foot Code requirement. Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes -March 4, 2004 Page 5 Ms. Boring asked if the bank on the southern corner would be allowed two signs. Mr. Combs said yes. It is in a different subarea and is located on a corner with two frontages. He said staff had worked with the applicant to limit monument signs to a maximum of two along Avery- Muirfield Drive. Ms. Reiss understood that other tenants in the multi-tenant building would not have monument signs on Avery-Muirfield Drive. Mr. Combs said Tenants 1-6 will only have a wall sign facing to the west, so there would be no signage oriented towards Avery-Muirfield Drive. Ms. Reiss ' asked if the projecting signs would also be on the west side of the building. Mr. Combs said yes, they are oriented toward the parking lot and pedestrian movement. He said Key Bank will have one wall sign on that side of the building and one monument sign on the other side facing Avery Road. Mr. Combs said staff is recommending that the applicant work with staff so that both signs total no more than 66.67 square feet in area. Ms. Reiss questioned the text wording regarding signage because she was confused about who was getting a monument sign, how many there would be, where they would be located, and if the wall signs were on the east or west side of the building. Mr. Combs said staff had reviewed the text and thought it was clear. Exhibits are attached that reference the elevations, so the particular position for each sign on the building is noted. Mr. Gerber requested Commission questions be held until the completion of the presentation. He noted there were individuals in the audience that wished to speak, and that there will be ample time for questions. Mr. Combs said staff believes the proposed application is consistent with the Community Plan. The applicant has worked at length with staff to address all the issues raised by the Commission. Staff recommends approval of this revised composite plan with six conditions: 1) That Section B -Yard and Setback Requirements of the proposed text be revised to read: "Side yard setbacks shall be metal--ef 15' for pavement..." prior to scheduling for a public hearing at City Council; 2) That proposed sign standards for Tenant 7 of the Neighborhood Retail Center (Subarea A1) be revised to provide a total permitted sign area of no more than 66.67 square feet to comply with Code prior to scheduling for a public hearing at City Council, subject to staff approval; 3) That the timing for proposed off-site traffic improvements be coordinated with and completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; 4) That the proposed development comply with the City of Dublin Exterior Lighting Guidelines and that all sites utilize coordinated shoe box lighting no greater than 28 feet in height; 5) That fencing be utilized only for the purposes of screening service structures, mechanical units, etc., to the satisfaction of staff; and 6) That cross-access agreements be provided within all portions of the proposed development, to the satisfaction of staff. Ben W. Hale, Jr., representing the applicant, said he was not present the three previous times this application was presented, although he had reviewed those staff reports. He said he knew there had always been a concern about what happens on the other corner with this setting a precedent. Mr. Hale suggested discussing only where the uses will be changed. Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes -March 4, 2004 Page 6 The use on the north side is not being changed. A bank is permitted already. He said the drive- through is a conditional use. Therefore, they have not changed the zoning on this property, except for two small areas. However, since the City wanted additional right-of--way to accommodate the expansion of Perimeter Drive, they have made the setback about ten feet smaller. Other than that, he said the standards for this site remain the same. Mr. Hale said he had the advantage of knowing what was being done elsewhere because he worked in many other cities such as Westerville, Easton, and New Albany. He said Dublin has a great deal of office shown in the Community Plan. He said part of being competitive with other , cities is to have the amenities that office employees want. The office jobs drive the quality of life. He said Dublin has an expanding residential base, and office uses are needed to continue to ~ r~ keep the balance. Mr. Hale however, has observed crowded parking the times he has come to Dublin to eat lunch. He said Dublin is under-served with restaurant uses for the amount of office that exists today. They are suggesting a nice neighborhood center with the ability to have sit- down restaurants without drive-thrus. He said the remainder of the site is basically the same as the existing development text. Mr. Hale accounted the history of the adjacent shopping centers and said this center is exceptionally well done. He said the total density is 65 percent and it will service an existing need today. If built, he said all the restaurants will be successful. Perimeter Center, which is turning largely into restaurants, shows there is a great demand for such uses. Mr. Hale said all the sign issues had been resolved. He said this proposed design, construction ham, and material is very expensive. He said it will demand a high dollar per square foot and receive it. Mr. Hale said these uses have been and are needed. He requested the Commission to look at this with a very open mind because he thought this was appropriate for the site. He understood the precedent argument, but everything to the north is developed and nothing else is going to happen. This will not have any domino effect. The zoning at the southwest corner is exactly the same as on the southeast corner. He said if it does not meet the community standard in how it looks and feels from Avery Road, the Commission should say no. Mr. Hale said there is no question that it fits a current need in the community. It is important to help current office uses because Dublin is "under-restauranted" right now. Mr. Hale said at peak hour, traffic will be under what it would be if the site was developed as currently zoned, and there is not a traffic or density issue. He said the Commission needs to decide if this is an appropriate look and a need that should be filled. Dr. Larry Allen, pastor of Northwest Presbyterian Church, north of the site, said they felt this would be a very good use. He said the advantage of this proposed development to the church was that the properties facing them look like offices. Dr. Allen said when they expand their sanctuary in a couple of years, they must install a left turn lane. By doing this development now, they will cooperate with the Damlier Group and do both turn lanes at the same time so they coordinates. He said they would love to have restaurants this close after worship on Sundays. A resident east of this site said he worked for Ashland and there is no place now to pick up a sandwich at lunchtime in an hour. He questioned how, if there were additional offices, the employees would be fed. He agreed that this area is "under-restauranted." Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes -March 4, 2004 Page 7 Andy Keller, 6586 Weston Circle East, said he lived north by Dublin Jerome High School and worked at Cardinal Health. He said now there are only fast-food establishments and bars to meet clients in this area. He said his family likes to meet for coffee on weekends, and the only place in town is in Historic Dublin, which takes too long to get there. He said it would be nice to have a nearby place to meet for coffee or a meal; especially on Sundays. Dana Freudeman, Prime Medical Group, (representing Ohio Health), said approximately two years ago they approached the Planning staff with an idea for the property they owned. They were considering uses that would compliment and supplement not only patients and visitors, but also their staff and physicians working 24/7. He said staff, at the time, told them they were sympathetic to their proposal and ideas for sit-down restaurants and felt the west side of Dublin lacks this type of use. He said they then engaged. Mr. Hale because they are healthcare developers and build medical buildings. He said doing a large mixed-use development on 24 acres at a prominent corner like Post and Avery Roads was out of his area. They partnered with the Damlier Group because they knew they build and produce a quality product and have done a lot of work in Dublin. Mr. Freudeman said at the recent State of the City Address, City leaders had the opportunity to meet their president who will have the sole task to put together the development of the Dublin hospital. He said Post and Avery Roads will be the hospital's front yard. He said they think this plan is proper for the corner and asked for the Commission's support. Martha Hubbell, Huntington Bank, said they were thrilled with the opportunity to partner with Daimler on this development. She said they are very anxious to expand their presence in Dublin with a third location. Ms. Hubbell said the restaurants are needed. Huntington has over 20 employees that live in the neighborhoods directly to the north who are all excited about a location at this site and the other services provided including the daycare and sit-down restaurants. They welcome the opportunity to be in Dublin at this new location. Another resident who lived north of the site near Karrer Middle School, who has a law office in Dublin said his biggest concern is there is currently no place to meet a client for a sit down lunch or dinner in Dublin. There are twelve restaurants near Perimeter Center that he considered fast- food restaurants. He said a nice sit-down restaurant would help the area. He saw no negativity about it. Mr. Gerber noted that this case had previously been before the Commission. A concept plan was approved 5-1. Mr. Combs said it was discussed in August and November 2003 and was tabled in February 2004. Mr. Gerber reiterated that the Commission's previous concerns had been addressed with staff. Ms. Reiss referred to page 14 of the proposed development text under Item 6 and said she did not see Item "K." Mr. Combs said there was no Item "K", but that referenced to the Key Bank tenant location under "A" through "J." He said that portion of the text allows one monument sign that complies with all the text standards and Code. Ms. Reiss said this section was confusing because the beginning of Item "J" discusses the retail center. It does not say one tenant of the retail center or the northern tenant of the retail center gets to do all these things. Mr. Combs said the text refers directly to Table B, which is attached as an exhibit of the text and shown on a slide that clearly identifies the wall signs. There is an attached detail specifying the dimensions and text for each of the signs. Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes -March 4, 2004 Page 8 Mr. Gerber asked if there were any monument signs further south on either side of this development. Mr. Combs said there were many monument signs along Avery Road. Most are located on the east side, but there is the Riverside Hospital signage, as well as Wendy's and Burger King signs. Across the street, there are a number of banks, as well as Panera Bread, McDonald's, and the gas stations with monument signs. Ms. Boring said City Council did not want more monument signs on Avery-Muirfield, and that in order to get what is present, Mr. Hale had to do a "jig." She was very concerned about putting in more monument signs, especially since there is such a short distance. Mr. Hale thought Avery Road was to be all monument signs with no wall signs. He said they wanted a monument sign and wall sign on Burger King, but they only got a monument sign approved. He said everybody has a monument sign. Mr. Combs reaffirmed that all texts for surrounding developments specify monument signs as a standard for the Avery-Muirfield Corridor. Mr. Gerber said the Burger King and Wendy's signs seemed to be set back a distance from the road. Mr. Combs said that was likely a function ofright-of--way width. Code requires signage to be a minimum of eight feet outside the right-of--way. Mr. Gerber asked how far the signs would be from the road. Mr. Combs said the text specifies that the Commission will determine the location of the signage during the development plan stage. Mr. Gerber said the Commission needed to scrutinize the signage issue at some point in some detail. It is not necessarily adeal-killer, but the proposed signage will have to be reviewed carefully. Mr. Hale said they would be happy to bring the full signage back with locations, etc. to the Commission for review and approval at a separate meeting before the development plan. ` Mr. Saneholtz's concern was with the pond, which is a completely different treatment than the properties to the south (Burger King and Wendy's). He thought their signs were close to the hedgerow or incorporated into it, off the road. He did not want the applicant to say, because of this pond, that signage on the backside won't work because it would not be seen or that on the front side of the pond it will only be 15 feet away from the roadway. Mr. Hale said they agreed to comply with the Sign Code. Mr. Saneholtz asked how far off the road was the signage setbacks for Burger King and Wendy's. Mr. Combs guessed they are at least eight feet off the right-of--way. Mr. Hale said there was a large right-of--way. He there was a considerable amount of greenspace between the curb and the signs. Mr. Gerber asked the Commissioners how they felt about pulling the signage package out and considering it separately from this. Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes -March 4, 2004 Page 9 Ms. Boring suggested a condition: That a full signage package be brought back to the Commission for approval prior to the development plan stage. She said that made sense and would allow the Commission to take more time to scrutinize because they had many things to consider. Mr. Hale agreed to separate the full sign package out from this application and bring it back for the Commission's consideration. Ms. Reiss asked how long temporary signage would be limited. Mr. Combs said they must comply with Code. Ms. Boring said although she had seen Damiler's products and they looked fine, she wanted to make sure that she saw the cascading pond. She asked if there were any stone wall treatments in the area. Paul Ghidotti, Damiler, said they would match the hedgerow to the south on both sides of the street with the evergreen hedge and columns required in the text along the entire Avery- Muirfield Boulevard frontage. He said on the ends, they proposed to sweep the plantings into the water and have the columns actually in it to provide a different feature. He said the upper pool has a radius fall, and the water will cascade. It is not meant to be a waterfall, but a smooth cascade similar to the one at the entrance of Ballantrae. Ms. Boring asked what material would be used for the walkway. Mr. Ghidotti said it would be paver material. There would not be a walkway area between the terrace and the pond. The terrace would extend into the water. Ms. Boring said she would like the east elevation to be more detailed with a more residential appearance. Mr. Ghidotti said the elevation she was referring to was the west elevation (there was no drawing of the east elevation). He said although six tenant spaces were shown, it would likely be three or four, depending upon their configuration. He said there are offsets to make it feel like traditional storefronts. Ms. Boring said she did not want it to look like storefronts. She wanted it more residential, although she appreciated the architectural relief. She said the roofline was too ordinary. She said at the daycare across the street, dormers were added on both sides of the roof. Mr. Ghidotti said finials will provide a feeling of height to the center, different than what exists now. He said the building is four-sided and the materials will all be the same. Ms. Boring said it appeared that the retail space had been reduced tremendously as requested. She understood the total limit was 20,000 square feet. Mr. Ghidotti said the structure was 13,500 square feet. The bank is portion 3,000 square feet, so there is approximately 10,500 square feet within the retail portions. He said they had signed commitments from Caribou Coffee and Camille's Sidewalk Cafe. He said they were also talking to another restaurant operator who was not comfortable being discussed. He said the three-acre subarea can, at most, hold 11,000 square feet of sit-down, casual restaurants (no drive-thrus or fast food restaurants). The text is very specific in its limitations. Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes -March 4, 2004 Page 10 Ms. Boring said the applicant did a great job of providing parking in the back of the retail center, although she wanted the back to look better than the front. She said there is an office building along Post Road where the parking is proposed in front. She asked why parking could not be pushed behind that building. Mr. Ghidotti said the issue they struggled with on this site was its linear nature. There is approximately 2,000 feet of frontage on Post Road. The building could only be moved about 25 feet to the north, and there would not be rpom to park for the office building. Mr. Gerber asked to see landscape features along Post Road. Mr. Ghidotti said along Post Road their landscape architect had worked closely with staff to come up with a typical 100-foot cross section for Post Road. He said in each 100 feet, there are three deciduous shade trees, nine ornamental trees, and eight deciduous medium shrubs, in addition to the 3% to 6-foot mounding. Ms. Boring asked if anything blooming would be added for special effect. Mr. Ghidotti said the Post Road text is not very exciting, so they substantially increased it. They are proposing plantings comparable to Upper Metro Place without the stone wall. Mr. Gerber noted that Upper Metro Place looked nice in the summer, but not in the winter. Ms. Reiss said there were housebound residents across the street from this office building who would be looking at the parking lot out their windows, especially in the winter. Ms. Boring said they actually would be looking at the mounding. Ms. Reiss said she agreed with Ms. Boring about trying to flip the office building, but she understood that the setback for pavement is less than the building setback. Mr. Gerber said the Commission saw a case about two years ago on the northwest corner and the one regret he had was that they required the parking in the rear. That forced the building right out on the corner and it seemed like it gave it a larger proportion to the area. If it were sufficiently mounded with nice landscape features, he thought the building would not be so ~e imposing. Mr. Gerber asked that the traffic pattern from the north be explained for those who would be stopping at the daycare center. Mr. Ghidotti explained how access to the site would be made. He said they are picking up their portion of the improvements for the intersection to add a left turn movement to go north on Post Road. Ms. Boring said the Commission has concerns about odor control. She asked if staff knew of any odor control devices that could be installed as restaurants are built. She wanted soiree odor control to be incorporated. Ms. Readler said she vaguely remembered the situation with Indian Run Meadows when they investigated mechanisms. She did not think many of the smaller restaurants have any sophisticated methods, but large high-rises have special mechanisms. However, they found in the research that the most important thing to keeping the odors down was to have good cleaning procedures in place and to follow them. She said any kind of more sophisticated odor control system is much too expensive. Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes -March 4, 2004 Page 11 Ms. Boring asked for an investigation to ensure that all bases have been covered. Brandol Harvey said staff would look into it further. Having designed some restaurants previously, he said one of the problems with odor control is that there are many possible sources and it is hard to guarantee that it is going to be under control. Ms. Boring appreciated Mr. Harvey's observations and believed that the exhaust would affect the church first. She asked for a condition that odor control be brought back with the sign package. Mr. Hale agreed to work with staff and come back with suggestions. He said this is south of all the residential, and typically there is a west wind. Ms. Boring also wanted bikepath connections to make this aspedestrian-friendly as possible. Mr. Ghidotti committed they will relocate the bikepath to make sure there is a connection. He said they would provide connections from the various office buildings to a walkway system. He said they are not required to extend the bikepath on Post Road. Mr. Saneholtz noted that most of the residents are to the north of this property. To ride a bike to the neighborhood center, one would have to ride past it to go to Perimeter Drive and ride back up. Mr. Ghidotti said the existing bikepath will be moved back because of the right-of--way and plantings. Mr. Ghidotti committed to a bikepath connection. Ms. Reiss suggested a condition that the bikepath not be in the exact same spot. It should start in the same place, bend to the west, and end at the same place. She said many Dublin Village Retirement Center residents walk to Avery Square. That would attract them to these restaurants also. Mr. Ghidotti agreed. Ms. Boring asked if the shoebox lighting, because it is part of a Guideline, needed to be a condition. Mr. Combs said that already listed in the report as a condition. Ms. Boring suggested that dumpster signage be on the doors and reflected in the zoning text. Mr. Saneholtz said the architecture proposed was fabulous, and he had come 180 degrees on the retail center. However, he could not get over the hurdle of the drive-thru on the corner of Avery and Post Road. He heard the neighbors say restaurants are needed, and he only saw one free- standing restaurant, some restaurant/retail space, and three drive-thru banks. He said this is a visible corner, and he did not want to see adrive-thru. He said the bank to the south of the retail center is fine. He said there are three conditional uses on this property already with drive-tlu-us and he thought it was highly intensive. He suggested flipping the location of the bank. He preferred a restaurant with patio seating to the north where people can be seen enjoying themselves, rather than seeing drive-thru lanes. Mr. Saneholtz referred to page 6 of the development text (Subarea A3), which lists "casual and fine dining and drinking establishments with table service or bakery/sales..." He said the Commission had discussed bakeries/cafes where customers came in and left quickly. He was in favor of table service, but doubted bakeries or cafes without table service should be included. He felt the text was too vague. Dublin Planning and Zoning Conunission Minutes -March 4, 2004 Page 12 Mr. Ghidotti said the classification of bakery/cafes is meant to include a Panera Bread-type of operation. He said Camille's Sidewalk Cafe had operations in the 2,500- to 3,000-square foot range and it caters mostly to breakfast and lunchtime crowds. They close around 6 or 7 p.m. Mr. Gerber said the bank drive-thrus are conditional uses and will have to be brought back to the Commission. Mr. Hale said if there is an irresolvable issue, in order to use this for a restaurant site they would have to expand it. Mr. Saneholtz said it could not be expanded to the corner. Mr. Gerber said the issue was that the drive-thru could be seen from the intersection. Mr. Ghidotti said they have studied the issue at length because they too, are concerned about the drive-thru bank. They worried about the precedent this creates here. A larger sit-down restaurant that would have wonderful exposure would be good. Mr. Messineo said the drive-thru seemed a very intense use of this land. He said they were talking like there was no open space to the west. He asked if there were any other locations on Perimeter Drive to US 33 that a bank with adrive-thru could be constructed. Mr. Combs confirmed that there are other sites within the City, but they are talking about this particular proposal. He had not heard a clear consensus from the Commission. Ms. Boring said they did not want to "junk up" the area to the west because there is enough room to construct atwo- or three-story office building, which means income to the City. That office building cannot be placed to the east because of the setbacks required. , Mr. Gerber asked if the concern with the bank drive-thrus was aesthetic in nature. Mr. Saneholtz said very much so. He was willing to concede about the southernmost portion of the property and he was willing to concede the one to the west. However, he questioned if three drive-thru banks on this parcel was the best use of the property. He said another nice restaurant was needed. He did not want the drive-thru seen on the corner, yet he did not want it so screened that it looked like a screened drive-thru. Mr. Ghidotti said in November, the tabled proposal was required to provide effectively a 100 percent opacity and they have. He considered flipping the Key Bank drive-thru within the middle of the building, but that created cars stacked on the water. He said the water should be seen and not hidden. Mr. Saneholtz felt this proposal was being driven by the fact that Key Bank was ready to buy the corner. He did not want to discount that fact, but felt as a resident he did not want to see adrive- thru on that corner. Mr. Gerber reiterated that the drive-thru had been landscaped. Mr. Saneholtz said he understood. However, BP in front of Tuttle Mall had opaque landscaping with ten-foot tall pine trees, but it was not visually appealing whatsoever. rt,~. Mr. Gerber said if Key Bank is flipped, there will be two banks back to back. Mr. Saneholtz said he did not like that either. He was proposing a bank on the corner and a bank to the west. Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes -March 4, 2004 Page 13 Mr. Ghidotti said they can only have four financial institutions/banks. However, he clarified that the two-story Champaign Financial Services regional headquarters office building will have a bank on the first floor. There was a discussion about how many banks are proposed. Mr. Messineo counted five. He said he liked the original office zoning for this site. However, the residents wanted restaurants. Ms. Boring hoped this becomes an economic tool to get the rest of the site developed into fi.. offices. She said a bank is open 5'/2 days a week and not at night. They are not open until peak traffic gets through the area. Mr. Messineo said he did not hear anyone say more banks are needed to service the coming offices. Mr. Gerber asked if the drive-thru bank on the corner concerned any of the remaining Commissioners. Ms. Boring was not concerned because she thought the screening made a difference. She felt if the uses were flipped it would ruin the total look of the development. Ms. Reiss said the aesthetics of a drive-thru at the corner bothered her. However, putting a restaurant at that corner with outdoor seating also bothered her due to the longer hours. It could be intrusive if the northeast corner becomes residential. Mr. Gerber agreed with Ms. Reiss about the restaurant. He said as long as the drive-thru is landscaped as proposed, he had no problem. Mr. Zimmerman agreed with Mr. Gerber. Mr. Hale understood concern about opacity for the drive-thru. He said the landscape plan would be provided at the time of the development plan. Mr. Gerber and Ms. Boring had no problem with there being four banking facilities in the development. Ms. Reiss said there is no restriction in the text, except in Subarea A3, on the number of square feet. In the rest of A1, there is no restriction as to how many of any use there could be in the development. She said there could be 100 percent office, bank or daycare uses. Mr. Hale said there are hundreds of acres of office uses surrounding this site where a bank is a .permitted use and adrive-thru is a conditional use. Ms. Boring was not interested in creating a row of restaurants, and Mr. Saneholtz was not interested in creating a row of banks. Mr. Saneholtz said this site was over saturated with banks because they are the present buyers. He would rather see a more creative use of this land and he would like to know what is still available to the west of this property. Mr. Saneholtz said if the only potential restaurant land is used up as banks, it would not solve any challenges. Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission ' Minutes -March 4, 2004 Page 14 Mr. Hale agreed to remove the bank from the corner site. Mr. Ghidotti said they were willing to change a subarea so that financial services are not permitted. It could be office and restaurant uses. Mr. Combs pointed out for the record that the land is already zoned for financial institutions and every site could develop as a bank today. Ms. Reiss referred to Condition 5 about the fencing around the mechanicals. She asked if fencing included landscaping to screen them. a:...rs Mr. Combs said fencing was not addressed in the text, so it must meet Code requirements. The Code. allows combinations of mounding, screening, stone wall, etc. to comply. Ms. Reiss would rather shrubbery or greenery be used to screen mechanicals instead of fencing or putting up additional walls. Ms. Reiss asked about the age of children attending the daycare center. Mr. Ghidotti said the Primrose School would accept children from six weeks through the first grade (six or seven years old). Ms. Reiss suggested the text read: Children up to age ten years, instead of "young" children. She said that would quantify it, as opposed to something like a Sylvan Learning Center where high schoolers might be tutored, etc. Mr. Ghidotti agreed. Ms. Reiss said Condition 3 should read ...education to toddlers and children up to age ten. j' Ms. Boring asked why there was concern about the age of children educated at the school. Ms. Reiss wanted a more solid, quantifiable situation that it is either permitted or not permitted. Mr. Gerber said there may be children eleven or twelve years old dropped off after school and the age restriction would prevent it. Ms. Reiss wanted to clarify that it is an educational place and not a daycare. Ms. Boring expected it to be used as a daycare. Mr. Zimmerman noted that children six weeks old would be accepted, so it might be considered a daycare. Mr. Ghidotti said Primrose School was not a daycare. Ms. Boring had a problem with limiting the age. She did not think Code Enforcement should check the age of children. Ms. Reiss suggested not using the adjective "young" in text. Mr. Combs indicated that the Zoning Code does not reference any age limits for daycares or similar uses. There is no way to enforce it. t,,. Mr. Hale agreed to limit the age of children in the daycare to thirteen years old. Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes -March 4, 2004 Page 15 Mr. Zimmerman asked if there would be fencing around the playground. He was concerned that the text limited fencing. Mr. Ghidotti was sure fencing would be needed. Mr. Combs clarified that fencing is required for playground areas by State regulations. He modified Condition 5 adding "...or as otherwise required by State regulations." Ms. Boring said (in the interest of Mr. Sprague, who was absent) there is concern about the right- in/right-out access being so close to the intersection. She asked if there would be a deceleration lane. Mr. Ghidotti said the issue had been addressed thoroughly with staff. He said it was the preference not to do the deceleration lane, but to be sure the geometry for the right-in only would be very easy coming off to Perimeter Drive. Mr. Ghidotti said there would be "Do Not Enter" signage and an area on site with no competition for stacking. Mr. Messineo asked if the undesignated area to the west was was for office. Mr. Ghidotti said two 9,000-square foot office buildings will be developed. One would be occupied with a family practitioner. When the office market gets better, the other area will be a perfect location for a REA Financial-sized type building. Ms. Boring made a motion to approve this rezoning/revised composite plan application because the plans address concerns raised by the Planning and Zoning Commission on November 3, 2003, it generally complies with criteria set forth in Section 153.058(E) of the Dublin Zoning Code, and the rezoning will provide a quality development with necessary support services within the employment core of the City, with 12 conditions: 1) That Section B -Yard and Setback Requirements of the proposed text be revised to read: "Side yard setbacks shall be a-tetaf-ef 15' for pavement..." prior to scheduling for a public hearing at City Council; 2) That proposed sign standards for Tenant 7 of the Neighborhood Retail Center (Subarea Al) be revised to provide a total permitted sign area of no more than 66.67 square feet to comply with Code prior to scheduling for a public hearing at City Council, subject to staff approval; 3) That the timing for proposed off-site traffic improvements be coordinated with and completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; 4) That the proposed development comply with the City of Dublin Exterior Lighting Guidelines and that all sites utilize coordinated shoe box lighting no greater than 28 feet in height; 5) That fencing be utilized only for the purposes of screening service structures, mechanical units, etc. or required by State regulations, to the satisfaction of staff; 6) That cross-access agreements be provided within all portions of the proposed development, to the satisfaction of staff; 7) That a full sign package to be brought back to the Commission for approval prior to the development plan stage; 8) That the same level of finishing be required on the east roof of the retail center that provides an appearance with residential character; Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission ' Minutes -March 4, 2004 Page 16 9) That concerns of pedestrian connectivity within this retail center and to the south be properly provided for residents to the north of Post Road; 10) That the text be revised to include no financial services in Subarea A3; 11) That text language regarding daycares be revised to include an age limit of 13 years or under; and 12) That the issues of odor control be brought back to the Commission for further consideration prior to the development plan stage. Mr. Gerber seconded the motion. Mr. Hale agreed with the conditions listed above. The vote was as follows: Ms. Reiss, yes; Mr. Zimmerman, yes; Mr. Saneholtz, yes; Mr. Messineo, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes; and Ms. Boring, yes. (Approved 6-0.) Mr. Gerber thanked Mr. Hale and Mr. Ghidotti for their hard work. Administrative Business At 9 p.m., Mr. Gerber ca ed a short recess. 2. Revised Devel ment P1anlConditional Use 04 23RDP/CU -Avery Square Addit' n - 6355-7090 P imeter Loop Road Mr. Gerber sai there are two applications being c nsidered, a revised development plan nd a conditional u e. Separate votes will be required Since both were administrative cases, hose who intend d to speak before the Commissio ere swore-in. Jamie dkins said this site is located no h of SR 161, west of Avery-Muirfie Drive. She show d slides of the site. The Avery S are shopping center is L-shaped and h two outparcels on very-Muirfield Drive. The sit is zoned PCD as part of the large Riverside PCD. Surrounding parcels are zoned PCD, swell. Ms. Adkins said the proposed ddition is a vacant site that would connect two portio of the shopping center, as originally s wn on the approved reliminar develo ment lan. eneral, landsca in arkin etc. or this addition were P Y P p g P g, P g~ installed previously. Four tenant spaces are prop ed for this addition with two outdoor di ing areas. The total square footage of this addition is 4,557 square feet, and the patio area is 1 55 square feet. Ms. Adkins said staff r commends approval of the developmen plan with eight conditions: 1) That the rear service area be restriped to provide for empl ee parking, and that a revised as- , built plan show gall existing/proposed building space existing/proposed square footages, and parking s aces be submitted, subject to staff appro 1; 2) That a rev ed landscape plan be submitted that includes all required additional to landscapi ,subject to staff approval; 3) That pl s be submitted indicating the location of sewer and water service fort site, subjec to staff approval; 4) That e site design comply with applicable St water Regulations, to the satisfac ~on of the City Engineer; 5) That revised elevations be submitted in icating materials consistent with ie existing building, subject to staff approval; STAF'li REPORT DUBLIN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MARCH 4, 2004 CITI' OF DUBLIN,_ Division of Planning X800 Shier-Rings Road in, Ohio 43016-1236 Pr. _./TDD:614-410-4600 Fax: 614-410-4747 Web Site: www.dublin.oh.us 1. Rezoning/Revised Composite Plan 03-1192 -Riverside Hospital PCD, Subarea A Location: 24.3 acres located at the northwest corner of Perimeter Drive and Avery- Muirfield Drive. Existing Zoning: PCD, Planned Commerce District (Riverside Hospital plan). Request: A revision to the existing PCD composite plan under the provisions of Section 153.058. Proposed Use: Amixed-use development of office, bank, retail, restaurant, and daycare uses. Applicant: The Daimler Group Inc., c/o Paul Ghidotti, 1533 Lake Shore Drive, Columbus, Ohio 43204. Staff Contact: Carson C. Combs, AICP, Senior Planner. UPDATE: The Commission disapproved a rezoning application for amixed-use development (Case #03- 0162) for this site on May 15, 2003, that included uses such as restaurants, retail, and funeral homes. The Commission indicated the proposal did not provide adequate land use transition, and the application was withdrawn by the applicant. An informal application for the site was heard on August 14, 2003, that included amixed-use development with increased setbacks and a water feature along Avery Road. The Commission generally favored the concept, and recommended that no large-format retail be allowed. The Commission stressed the need for additional landscape features, high quality materials (similar to Pacer Global Logistics), parking behind buildings, and addressing traffic issues. Based upon feedback from the Commission, a fornlal rezoning application was submitted, and on November 13, 2003, (Case #03-1192) the Commission heard a revised request that included bank, retail, restaurant, and daycare uses. The request was tabled, and the Commission sited the following issues: Revising the proposed sign package to comply with Code and be consistent with the nearby retail development; • Clearly indicating off-site traffic improvements to be completed by the developer; Providing additional standards for landscape screening around proposed drive-thru areas; Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Staff Report -March 4, 2004 Page 2 • Creating appropriate setbacks based on required right-of--way dedication and traffic improvements; Limiting proposed colors to earth tones that are in keeping with surrounding character; Providing a maximum overall lot coverage of less than 65 percent; • Revising plans to limit the potential for cut-through traffic and prohibiting access onto Avery-Muirfield Drive; and • Clearly demarcating proposed subarea boundaries on all plans. On February 5, 2004, the case was tabled prior to discussion by the Commission so that the applicant could resolve outstanding issues. Staff believes that the applicant has worked hard to address the above issues raised by the Commission and recommends approval of the proposed revision to the Composite Plan with six conditions. BACKGROUND: Case Summary: This is a request for the review and approval of a rezoning application to expand permitted uses within Subarea A of the Riverside Hospital PCD, Planned Commerce District, and to approve revised development standards that will facilitate a comprehensive, multi-use development along the Perimeter Drive corridor. The proposed rezoning will permit uses that include office, limited retail, restaurants, daycare, and financial institutions. Procedure: The Planning and Zoning Commission must review and make a recommendation on this rezoning request. The application will then be returned to City Council for a public hearing and final vote. Atwo-thirds vote of City Council is required to override a negative recommendation by the Commission. If approved, the rezoning will become effective 30 days following the Council vote. Anew preliminary plat will be needed to address the creation of the proposed lots, to modify access, establish easements, place utilities, etc. Additionally, all development will require development plan approval by the Commission prior to construction. Review Criteria: The PCD provisions of Section 153.058(E) establish the following criteria for approval of a composite plan (rezoning): 1) That the proposed development is consistent in all respects with the purpose, intent, and applicable standards of the zoning ordinance; 2) That the proposed development is in conformity with appropriate comprehensive planning or portion thereof as it may apply; 3) That the proposed development advances the general welfare of the municipality and immediate vicinity; 4) Where applicable, that the relationship of buildings and structures to each other and to such other facilities maintains the image of Dublin as a planned community; 5) That the acceptability of setbacks, distances between buildings, yard space, suitability of open space systems, traffic accessibility and other elements having a bearing on the overall acceptability of the development plans, shall contribute to the orderly development of }and within the city; Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Staff Report -March 4, 2004 Page 3 6) The location of access points shall maintain the function of adjacent thoroughfares by relating to existing access points on surrounding development, the street patterns, the Thoroughfare Plan, and the intensity of proposed uses; 7) Development within this district shall provide safe, convenient, and non-conflicting circulation systems for motorists, bicyclists and pedestrians; 8) That the plan provides for the coordination and integration of individually designed buildings into one planned district; and 9) That by deed restrictions or otherwise there is a sufficient assurance that once development 5' ' commences, later phases will be consistent with those already in place. CONSIDERATIONS: Site Characteristics: The site consists of 24.335 acres and is flat and undeveloped. It is a long and narrow parcel, located on the west side of Avery-Muirfield Drive between Perimeter Drive and Post Road. The site has 650 feet of frontage along Avery-Muirfield Drive, 1,900 feet of frontage along Perimeter Drive, and 1,850 feet of frontage along Post Road. A barn is located in the west-central portion of the site that is listed on the Ohio Historic Inventory, and a temporary bikepath connector runs through the site to connect the shopping center to existing uses on Post Road. There is minimal vegetation on site, with the exception of street trees along Perimeter Drive and some smaller trees and shrubs near the barn. Across Post Road to the north are atwo-story office, the Northwest Presbyterian Church, and two senior housing facilities, all zoned PUD, Planned Unit Development District. To the south, across Perimeter Drive, is the Burger King fast food restaurant, the rear elevation of the Avery Square shopping center, and additional vacant office ground, zoned PCD. A bank and one-story tenant office complex is located to the east across Avery-Muirfield Drive that are also zoned PCD. Additional ground zoned PCD for offices is also located to the west. Community Plan Issues: The Future Land Use Map in the 1997 Community Plan indicates this site as "mixed use -employment emphasis." The Community Plan defines this as predominantly non- residential uses including office, research and development, and light industry with residential or retail uses as secondary (Page 46). Staff believes the proposed mix of uses is generally consistent with applicable plans for the area. • The Land Use Element of the Community Plan (Page 58) specifically addresses retail development and recommends limiting additional regional and community-scale retail due to fiscal implications and traffic impacts. However, "locally-serving" retail services •to support concentrations of employment are recommended where appropriate (Page 59). Staff believes that future office and institutional development of the State Route 161-Post Road corridor will require such additional service-type uses. In the Community Plan transportation modeling, land uses were assigned to all parcels. In this case, "office" was the assumed use at 10,000 square feet of building per acre. A revised traffic study was submitted based on the uses proposed (See Traffic Engineering Services, Inc. letter dated November 13, 2003). The study indicates that while overall traffic will be slightly greater, less peak hour traffic will be generated. This is attributable to financial and daycare uses producing traffic during non-peak hours. Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Staff Report -March 4, 2004 Page 4 • Post Road is designated as a scenic road with a 60-foot right-of way. The Community Plan recommends increased setbacks to preserve rural character. A variable mound and landscape treatment along Post Road has been included in the proposed text to limit the visibility of parking areas. • The Thoroughfare Plan shows Avery-Muirfield Drive with a 150-foot right-of--way, and Perimeter Drive with a 100-foot right-of--way. Dedication of right-of--way and participation in off-site traffic improvements have been satisfactorily included in the proposed zoning text. Land Use and Zoning: The existing PCD text characterizes the site as having a "relationship to the residential and nursing home uses" on the north side of Post Road. Current uses include an office, church, and large-scale institutional uses. The current text permits office and institutional uses, nursing facilities, hospice, daycare centers, and banks. Bank drive-thrus are a conditional use. • The proposed text still permits office and institutional uses, banks/financial institutions, and daycares. Bank drive-thrus are still a conditional use. Modifications include the elimination of nursing and hospice facilities and the targeted addition of limited restaurant and retail along the more intense Avery Road and Perimeter Drive corridor (Subareas A2 and A3). Restaurant and retail uses in Subarea A2 will be limited to 11,000 square feet, and Subarea A3 will permit no more than 11,000 square feet of sit-down, casual and fine dining establishments. Staff believes that the proposed uses are adequately located on the site and are sufficiently limited in nature. Exhibits have also been added to the text to clearly delineate subarea boundaries, as requested by the Commission. Site Layout: • The overall proposal indicates nine buildings on the eastern three-fourths of the site, with the remaining acreage at the west noted as future office and institutional use. No specific lot lines are provided, and the creation of separate parcels will require a subdivision plat. The site is bisected by an internal east-west service drive that provides internal access to parking areas within the development. Buildings have been oriented along major public streets to create a more appropriate orientation between the architecture and street frontage. The overall parcel is long and narrow with three public road frontages, and this scenario provides for a challenging site layout. Pavement setbacks absorb about 20 percent of the site. • The site plan includes a large, linear pond along the Avery-Muirfield Drive frontage. The pond is located mainly within the setback area and provides vistas to the retail and bank buildings from Avery-Muirfield Drive. The pond is 600 feet long from north to south, and ranges from about 40 to 80 feet in width. The pond includes a small upper pool area between the retail center and the southern bank building. Tllis upper pool is about 40 feet by 40 feet and cascades down to the lower pool. A proposed outdoor dining terrace is shown at the southeast corner of the retail building, overlooking the pond. ' Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Staff Report -March 4, 2004 Page 5 signage: Proposed identification signage for single uses will consist of an 8-foot tall monument ground sign with a maximum pernitted sign area of 50 square feet. This is consistent with other developments and will blend into the Avery Road corridor. Uses on corner lots will be permitted two ground signs in compliance with Code. • Seven tenant spaces are shown within the neighborhood retail center (Subareas Al/A2). The proposed development text provides specifications and exhibits for the construction and placement of all signage. Tenants 1-6 are permitted a 20-square foot wall sign and a pedestrian-oriented, 4.5-square foot projecting sign (See Table B). Staff believes the proposed sign package is generally consistent with adjacent shopping centers. No wall or window signage will be permitted along Avery Road. The proposed text for the anchor tenant in neighborhood retail center (See Table B, Tenant 7) includes one 48-square foot wall sign and one 50-square foot monument sign that totals 98 square feet. Tenant 7 is in a separate subarea and will be located on a corner lot, unlike the remainder of the center. For this use, Code would permit two ground signs that total 66.67 square feet. Staff has worked with the applicant and believes that a combination of ground sign and wall sign will help reduce overall signage on Post Road, coordinate with the sign character of the neighborhood center, and also blend with the monument style of signage along the Avery corridor. Staff and the applicant agree that the total area of the wall and monument sign combination should not exceed Code (66.67 square feet) and staff recommends that the text standards be revised to comply prior to scheduling for City Council. • The text states that signage setbacks are to be approved by the Commission at the time of development plan approval. All directional signage must comply with Code. Access and Traffic Management: • Access for the site will be provided by a total of four curbcuts along Perimeter Drive and one along Post Road. Aright-in only driveway is shown on Perimeter Drive, 250 feet west ofAvery-Muirfield Drive, along with three other full-service access points spaced at least 350 feet apart. The fifth access point is afull-service driveway along Post Road, aligned with the existing church. The text has been modified to restrict access onto Avery Road as requested. The Avery-Muirfield Drive/Perimeter Drive intersection has been identified as a critical link for the City's future traffic flow. Additional right-of--way dedication and improvements will be required on all three public street frontages. Right-of--way should be dedicated along Avery-Muirfield Drive for the addition of a southbound, right-turn lane at Perimeter Drive. A deceleration lane for the right-in only driveway on Perimeter Drive is also needed. Access onto Post Road from the site will also require the modification of signal timing at Perimeter and Avery Muirfield Drive, as well as the installation of turn lanes (both directions) at Post and Avery-Muirfield. A westbound left turn lane at the access point on Post Road will also be needed. The development text has been modified to include right-of--way dedication and participation in all necessary off- site traffic improvements, as requested by the Commission. • Interior access through the site is provided by an east-west private drive that bisects the site. The applicant has discussed traffic calming with staff and has revised the text to include commitments for such measures. Dublin Planning and Zoning Conunission ' Staff Report -March 4, 2004 Pagc 6 Future development of remaining acreage to the west should provide cross-access to the third curb cut on Perimeter Drive. A traffic signal is proposed at this location, and the entire site should have access to it. Additional cross-access to future office development is recommended. Development Standards: • Maximum density for the site is currently 10,000 square feet per acre and will remain the same. • Required setbacks have generally been reduced from the existing zoning along Post Road and Perimeter Drive to compensate for increased setbacks and frontage treatments along Avery-Muirfield Drive. As proposed, Post Road setbacks are 40'/70' for pavement and 100 feet for buildings. Setbacks along Avery Road are 85 feet for buildings and 75 feet for pavement, surpassing Code requirements. • Proposed setbacks along Perimeter Drive are primarily 40 feet for buildings and 20 feet for pavement. Code would generally require a 50-foot building line and 30-foot pavement setback, which is adhered to on the west end of the site. Modified setbacks are requested due to the very linear nature and lack of depth for the site. • Internal setbacks between lots are proposed at 25 feet for buildings and 15 feet for pavement, but can be reduced to zero by the Commission for design choices such as consolidated/shared parking. Staff recommends that Section B -Yard and Setback Requirements of the text be revised to read: "Side yard setbacks shall be ~-tet~-e€15' for pavement..." • The proposed text requires that parking for the site meet minimum Code requirements. All proposed development will be required to comply at the development plan stage. • Maximum building coverage per lot may not exceed 25 percent. The text has been revised to indicate that total maximum lot coverage for the entire site shall not exceed 65 percent, and individual lots may not exceed 70 percent. The proposed standards meet Code requirements. • The maximum pern~itted heights for office buildings will be 35 feet and non-office uses are limited to 28 feet, as measured by Code. Staff believes these standards will blend suitably with surrounding development. Landscaping: • The text indicates that landscaping will comply with the Zoning Code. Landscape treatments for Post Road will have varied mounding with a mixture of ornamental, evergreen, and shade trees. Exhibits have been provided in the text to ensure the installation of suitable buffering. Additional exhibits have been provided within the text for drive-thru screening along Avery Road to comply with Code. • Along Perimeter Drive, there will be mounding with street trees planted at 50 feet on center. The street trees required for the project are Sweetgums along Avery-Muirfield Drive, and "Celebration" Freeman maples along Post Road and Perimeter Drive. • Fencing standards have not been addressed in the proposed text and must comply with Code. Staff recommends that fencing only be permitted, as required by the Landscape Code, to screen service structures, mechanicals, etc. Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Staff Report -March 4, 2004 Page 7 Architecture: • The proposed text indicates that all buildings in Subarea A shall be traditional in look and feel, and shall be finished with natural materials. The text also states that architecture will be consistent with a style complimentary to the conceptual elevations submitted for the proposed retail center and bank buildings. It further proposes that the development have a residential feel similar to the Perimeter Center development. Staff believes that the general architecture standards will provide a development consistent with the surrounding character. Brick, stone or synthetic stone, cedar siding and trim, and composite siding are proposed as primary building materials. For non-office uses, residential-scale windows with mullions and muntins are required. The proposed roofing materials include dimensional asphalt shingles, cedar shakes, or slate. Roof color is subject to Commission review. Staff believes the proposed materials are compatible, and earth/natural tone colors are required by the text. The Commission will determine final color palettes at the development plan stage. • The proposed text addresses issues of scale, massing, articulation and fenestration at length. Staff believes the proposed text will provide a quality development. Utilities, Storm Water, and Lighting: • A 16-inch water line is located on the south side of Post Road and on the west side of Avery-Muirfield Drive. A 12-inch water line is on the north side of Perimeter Drive. Adequate service will be provided to the site. • A 12-inch sanitary sewer is located on the west side of Avery-Muirfield Drive and on the south side of Perimeter Drive, which reduces to a ten-inch line near the middle of the existing shopping center. This property is tributary to the Perimeter Center line and will be adequately serviced. • The site is located within the South Fork Indian Run watershed. Stormwater management must comply with the Stormwater Regulations. A combination of parking lot storage and underground facilities are proposed on this site to meet the Stormwater Regulations. • No standards regarding exterior site lighting have been proposed, and the site must comply with Code. Staff recommends that the site comply with the City of Dublin Exterior Lighting Guidelines, and that a coordinated shoebox fixture no greater than 28 feet in height be used. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The proposed modifications to the existing zoning will provide for a mix of uses, decrease peak- hour traffic, and provide a unique landscape feature along the Avery-Muirfield Drive frontage. The applicant has worked at length with staff to provide standards that will result in a quality development within the Avery Road and Perimeter Drive corridors. Staff recommends approval of this rezoning request with six conditions. Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Staff Report -March 4, 2004 Page 8 Conditions: 1) That Section B -Yard a~ad Setback Requireme~its of the proposed text be revised to read: "Side yard setbacks shall be a-teal--e€ 15' for pavement..." prior to scheduling for a public hearing at City Council; 2) That proposed sign standards for Tenant 7 of the Neighborhood Retail Center (Subarea A1) be revised to provide a total permitted sign area of no more than 66.67 square feet to comply with Code prior to scheduling for a public hearing at City Council, subject to staff approval; r 3) That the timing for proposed off-site traffic improvements be coordinated with and completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; 4) That the proposed development comply with the City of Dublin Exterior Lighting Guidelines and that all sites utilize coordinated shoe box lighting no greater than 28 feet in height; 5) That fencing be utilized only for the purposes of screening service structures, mechanical units, etc., to the satisfaction of staff; and 6) That cross-access agreements be provided within all portions of the proposed development, to the satisfaction of staff. Bases: 1) The proposed revised plans address concerns raised by the Planning and Zoning Commission on November 3, 2003. 2) This revised composite plan generally complies with criteria set forth in Section 153.058(E) of the Dublin Zoning Code. 3) The proposed rezoning will provide a quality development with necessary support services within the employment core of the City. PLANNING ANI) ""/,ONING CO)V'IMISSION RECORD Or ACTION NOVEMBER 13, 2003 CITI' OF DUt~I,['~ . Division of Planning 5800 Shier-Rings Road Ouhlin, Ohio 43016-1236 Phone/100: 614 ~ l O 4600 fax: 614-161 X566 Web Site: www.d~hlia.oh.us The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action at this meeting: Rezoning Application 03-1192 -Riverside Hospital PCD, Subarea A Location: 24.3 acres located at the northwest corner of Perimeter Drive and Avery- Muirfield Drive. Existing Zoning: PCD, Planned Commerce District (Riverside Hospital plan). Request: A revision to the existing PCD composite plan. Proposed Use: Amixed-use development that includes office, bank, retail, restaurant, and daycare uses. Applicant: The Daimler Group, Inc., c/o Paul Ghidotti, 1533 Lake Shore Drive, Columbus, Ohio 43204. Staff Contact: Chad D. Gibson, AICP, Senior Planner. MOTION: To table this rezoning application to address the following nine issues: 1) The proposed sign package does not comply with Code and is not in keeping with nearby multi-tenant retail development. 2) The text does not clearly indicate developer participation in related off-site traffic improvements. 3) The plans and text should be revised to provide additional opaque landscaping to screen the drive-thru stacking areas. 4) The text should be revised to reflect appropriate setbacks based on required right- of--way dedication and traffic improvements. 5) The text permits non-earth tone colors that are not in keeping with the overall character of the area. 6) The text should be revised to provide a maximum overall lot coverage of less than GS percent. 7) "l~he plans need revised to provide less opportunity for cut-through traffic. The text should be revised to prohibit Avery-Muirfield Drive access. Page 1 of 2 03-0192 Riverside Hospital PCD, Subarea A 1'I,nNNING ANU TONING ~'OMMlSS1ON IZI;CORD OIL AC"I'lON NOVEMI3ER 13, 2003 5. Rezoning Application 03-1192 -Riverside Hospital PCll, Subarea A (Continued) 9) The Subarea boundary is not clearly demarcated on the plans. k * Paul Ghidotti agreed to the tabling. VOTE: 4-I. . RESULT: This rezoning application was tabled. STAFF CERTIFICATION _ Frank A. Ciarochi Development Director and Acting Planning Director Page2of2 03-019 Z Riverside Hospital PCD, Subarea A Dublin I'lannin~ andloning Commission Minutes November 13, 2003 I'agc 12 5) That the lands pe plan and street tr ~ plan be revised to incur rate staff comments, including eping and augmenti? the fencerow vegetation ong Sununitview Road, diversi ?ng the tree species and including the water within the homeowner ' as ciation's easement, etc.- 6 hat a tree survey, a tre reservation plan, and tree r acement plan be submitted th each residential buildin rmit for Lots 5, 6, 20, 21, , 31, and 32; 7) That evergrce creeping and/or moundin e installed on the south sid f Summitview Road, acro rum the entrance, within days of the installation of b e paving of Conine Drive, ject to field placement and Bather conditions; 8) Th the sign and stone walls b aced outside the visibility t ' glen as determined by the ity Engineer; That the intersection ri -of--way be revised on the pl o reflect the comments in th~ staff report; 10) That the gazebo of be changed to standings metal roof to match the barn• 11) That the ex ng field tiles be inspected and aintained as warranted; and 12) That th eveloper install the street trees Mr prague seconded the motion. . Ruma agreed to the abov nditions. The vote w ollows: Mr. Messineo, no; Saneholtz, yes; Mr. Gerbe no; Mr. Sprague, yes; Mr. Zimmerman, yes. (Approve -2.) Mr. Ruma thanke e Commission and said hoped that they did n take this as an impression that ey did not want to work the City and develop t plan properly. He appreciated eir consideration. Mr. erber said he was sure this going to be a very fine pr ' t. 5. Rezoning Application 03-1192 -Riverside Hospital PCD, Subarea A Chad Gibson presented this rezoning application to revise the PCD, Planned Commerce District composite plan to expand the permitted uses in Subarea A. He said the Commission disapproved a rezoning application in May 2000 which was withdrawn. The Commission also heard an informal application in August and general feedback was provided to the applicant at that time. He showed slides of the site and described the site and the surrounding area. Mr. Gibson said major site plan changes include the addition of a water feature along the entire Avery-Muirfield Drive frontage with a cascading waterfall. Retail and restaurant uses, a daycare, and banks with drive-thrus at both comers and to the west are proposed. An area at the west of the site is indicated for future office and institutional uses. He showed slides of schematic elevations representative of the retail center and bank close to Avery-Muirfield Drive. He said staff is recommending a tabling of this case tonight. The following issues remain to be discussed and resolved: 1) The proposed sign package does not comply with Code and is not in keeping with nearby multi-tenant retail development. 2) The text does not clearly indicate developer participation in related off-site traffic improvements. 03-0192 Riverside Hospital PCD, Subarea A lhibli~i I'lannin~ andl_.oning Commission Minutes -November 13, 2003 I'a~;c 1 i 3) "fhc plans and text should be revised to provide additional opaque landscaping to screen the drive-thru stacking areas. 4) The text should be revised to reflect appropriate setbacks based on required right-of--way dedication and traffic improvements_ 5) The text permits non-earth tone colors that are not in keeping with the overall character of the area. 6) The text should be revised to provide maximum overall lot coverage of less than 65 percent. 7) The plans need revised to provide less opportunity for cut-through traffic. 8) The text should be revised to prohibit Avery-Muirfield Drive access. 9) The Subarea boundary is not clearly demarcated on the plans. Mr. Gerber asked Mr. Ghidotti, the applicant if he would either agree to a tabling or take 20 minutes to give his presentation and hear'feedback from the Commission. Mr. Ghidotti said he would like to address three specific concerns and receive feedback. He said they would then like to come back to the December 4 meeting. He said the site today, as zoned, would permit 243,000 square feet of office, daycare, financial services, assisted living facilities, and hospice per the current PCD text. He said the Community Plan contemplates this site as one of the very few sites north of Perimeter Drive that is referred to as mixed use, employment emphasis. He said their revised proposal is less dense than what was presented in August. He said the large format retail grocery store is not included in this plan. He said this plan is approximately 100,000 square feet less dense than what is permissible under the current zoning and 126,000 square feet of the uses shown are currently permissible. Approximately 20,000 square feet (less than ten percent of the currently. permissible zoning) are being asked for additional uses not currently included. He said that the Community Plan, contemplates predominately office orientation with secondary uses for either residential or retail. Mr. Ghidotti said they did not believe this is an appropriate site for residential use, so they think the proposal is in keeping with the Community Plan. He said in addition, the type of retail they are proposing is severely limited. The text is very specific on what can and cannot be here and all of the target retail is employment-oriented type service; i.e. coffee shops, casual and fine-dining restaurants, etc. He agreed to limit the issues he wanted to address tonight to traffic, setbacks, and signage. He said they had an extensive meeting yesterday with Paul Hammersmith and Barb Cox. He thought they clarified the issues regarding traffic. Many improvements are needed in and around this area, but they identified those. improvements not specifically related to their project. If anything they are doing on this site increases what would have been there with current zoning or under the Community Plan, they agreed to be responsible. He said they sent a commitment letter to the Engineering staff and Mr. Gibson. Mr_ Ghidotti said rights-of--way are another traffic consideration. A substantial amount of rights- of-way are required to do many of the improvements that arc not necessarily related to their application but need to happen today. This is a congested area and traffic needs to be a paramount issue that they make sure to address and do not overlook. He said they are willing to 03-0192 Riverside Hospital PCD, Subarea A Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes November 13, 2003 Page 14 make rights-of=way grants. "l~hcy only ask that they arc done in a manner where it does not reduce the site enhancements they are trying to accomplish. They do not want to reduce the size of the pond along Avery Road because they believe the Avery Road frontage is the most important part of this site. It is highly visible and they think that is where the dollars should be spent to enhance the area. He said because they have frontage on three roads, they have nearly seven acres out of the 24 acres currently in a building setback, and nearly five acres currently in a parking setback. He asked that their ability to do these nice features or have their building envelopes not be limited. Additional right-of--way was needed at The Preserve on Tuttle Road, and they gave up the additional right-of--way to Dublin, without adjusting the setback line. If additional landscaping } was needed because some areas are close to the road, they are willing to consider that here. They only ask this because they have a site wish list and with large setbacks. He said for all of their uses, with the exception to the neighborhood retail center, they are not asking for any signage more than what was currently permitted on Avery Road and Perimeter Drive today. All of the freestanding uses that will either front on Perimeter Drive or Avery Road will have attractive-type monument signage with a base made of materials that aze the predominant material of the building. They will meet all the Sign Code requirements as it relates to size and height, etc. The neighborhood retail center will be four-sided with two front doors. The retail use will be seen driving Avery Road, but the entrance is from Perimeter Drive to the back. There are not many two fronted uses in Dublin. He gave Starbucks in Old Dublin as one example of a use with two signs. Mr. Ghidotti said two signs are necessary. Dublin Code states that signage should provide equitable standards for businesses, provide safe and affective means of locating services and businesses, and provide for a safe and friendly vehicular and pedestrian environment. Mr. Ghidotti said having a sign on one side does not achieve the intent of the Code. Mr. Ghidotti said at the Big Bear Perimeter Center development, each user is allowed one wall sign, one protruding blade sign, and one sign which cannot have any logos. They can also put a sign on a canopy. He saw no business with three signs there, but there were many that had a face sign and a blade sign. He showed photographs of other signage in Dublin. He said they intended to make their sign match the colors of the storefront. He said at no point could two signs be seen at the same time in their development. He asked for direction from the Commission so that they could move forward with this application. He said they have a signed letter of intent with Caribou Coffee, Camille's Sidewalk Cafe, an office user, and a financial service regional headquarters. He said Mr. Zimmerman requested in August that office uses be incorporated into the development. Owner-occupant offices have been discussed for Locations 7 and 8. Mr. Gerber wanted to keep this as an informal hearing to provide direction. Mr. Zimmern~an said the plan he was provided in his packet was different than that shown tonight Mr. Gerber's plan was also different. Both had unfortunately reviewed the wrong plan for the meeting due to an error. 03-0192 Riverside Hospital PCD, Subarea A Dublin Planning andLoning Commission Minutes - November 13, 2003 Pa~c 15 Mr_ Sancholtz asked how the traffic on the straight center drive would be calmed. Mr. Ghidotti said they wanted to leave the opportunity to get a bigger office user. If they can gel a 40,000 to 50,000 square foot user, it might terminate there. This is the only part of the site where it is wide enough to accommodate alarge-scale office user. Mr. Ghidotti said the entire site is approximately 1,900 feet deep or about %4 of a mile. Mr. Saneholtz thought some type of signage was needed to limit the speed on the drive. Mr. Saneholtz said he would never be able to support drive-thru banks with the drive lanes visible on Avery Road, even with screening. He could not support any retail on this site because it was part of a larger plan where a lot of retail was zoned to the south. He said this neighborhood did not need more retail. The daycare use was acceptable and one upscale restaurant. He did not want drive-thru banks on this site, and certainly not two off of Avery Road. Mr. Messineo asked about the restaurandfinancial service building. Mr. Ghidotti said that was Site 6. He said at the August meeting, they were encouraged to try to get casual and fine dining restaurants. He said they do not have specific users to date. They want to maintain some site flexibility on Site 6. Mr. Gibson said two freestanding restaurants were permitted on the north side of Perimeter Drive. Mr. Ghidotti said Champps had indicated interest. Mr. Messineo asked what was the square footage ratio for retail to the future office/institutional uses. Mr. Ghidotti said with the proposed setbacks, they would not be able to exceed 150,000 square feet on this site regardless that the Community Plan recommends 233,000 square feet. He said without a single user, it would be extremely hard to get more than 150,000 square feet on the site. He said the Mt. Auburn study contemplates this as a Tier 3 site because of its size and configuration. Mr. Ghidotti said the total retail was up to 21,000 square feet with up to two restaurants, a maximum of 11,000 square feet. Mr. Ghidotti said they were developing this site per the Community Plan. He said this is less dense than they could do. Mr. Messineo disagreed. Mr. Sprague asked for examples of 35,000 to 40,000 square foot buildings. Mr. Ghidotti said the two-story REA Financial building was 36,000 square feet, the second Children's Hospital building was 20,000 square feet, and the Preserve building was 65,000 square feet in area. The new Dominion Homes building was approximately 38,000 square feet. Mr. Sprague asked if this was seen as a reasonable transition from the principal components of Pacer and what larger users will build to the west. Mr. Ghidotti agreed. Mr. Zimmerman said as he did at the last hearing, the existing text for this subarea said this area is characterized by its relation to the residential and nursing home uses on the north side of Post Road. The development of this subarea should residential scale office. Reasonable landscape buffers should be provided between the residential uses and Subareas Al and A2. There is office support nearby with Perimeter Center, The Shoppes of Athenry and Avery Square. He understood the daycare center in an office environment However, Site 1 was a strip center with 03-0192 Riverside Hospital PCD, Subarea A ih?hlin t'lanning andLoning Conmission Minutes -November 13, 2003 ('age 1 G three banks. [ Ic did not consider Champs fine dining. [fie said there was enough outparccl s~r?cc near Kroger for a restaurant. He said area restaurants are not overcrowded al lunchtime. Mr. Zimmerman would vote to keep the existing text. Mr. Gerber and Mr. Zimmernlan said they wished they had the right map to review. Mr. Zimmerman did not want the traffic flow at Big Bear and the gas stations be mimicked here. He asked that the traffic flow here be carefully examined. He understood the necessity for identification signage on this site and agreed that an upscale restaurant was needed. Mr. Gerber was disappointed with the northeast section of the plan. In August, he thought it was to be a bank financial support office use with a small amount of retail. The area should not be over-retailed. He said it was obvious that a lot of effort had been put into this and he wanted to continue the dialogue. Mr. Ghidotti said he had been thrown off and apologized. He said the August 14~' meeting minutes reflected there would be a unique opportunity for outdoor seating on the water at the northeast site. He said they had improved the plan from August, but he was only hearing tonight that they had not gotten past the land use question. He said the problem was that they based tonight's application on what was discussed in August. He said the only opportunity they had to talk to the Commission was in an informal setting. He thought they had followed the Commission's directions in May and August. He asked for guidance on how to proceed. Mr. Gerber said :there had been many applications lately that have taken many months to work through and this may be one of those. The only building he had a problem with was the northeast one. He loved the gateway feature, but was concerned about creating too much retail. Mr. Ghidotti said he had spoken to the HR departments at Cardinal Health, Pacer, and REA Financial who said there was a shortage of places to eat lunch. Mr. Gerber agreed, but said the problem was that just to the south there were two large shopping areas that were not full. Mr. Ghidotti agreed. Mr. Gerber said more of an office flair was needed. Mr. Gerber said although the Commission was not complete tonight, he sensed three Commissioners believed this site should be nothing but office use. He heard one "maybe" and one "yes", with conditions. Mr. Ghidotti asked if they should put an office and/or bank at Site 1, where the retail center was proposed. The frontage would only have currently permitted uses. He did not want to come back a fourth time and waste the Commission's time. Mr. Gerber said for him, that would help a lot. He had the most concern with the retail building. Mr. Saneholtz understood that the site was zoned for banks and institutions, but the drive-thru components and their visual impacts from Avery Road are primary issues for this properly. The tluee drive-thrus are conditional uses. He saw a fourth building that had the ability to be a financial institution. Mr. Ghidotti said they were not proposing to put the drive-tluu canopy right on Avery Road like at C'ifth/Third Bank. What should be seen is the pond with the cascading waterfall. He said 03-0192 Riverside Hospital PCD, Subarea A Dublin Planning and Lonint, Commission Minutes - November 13, 2003 Pa~c 17 economically, unless they het some uses like banks, they couldn't atiord exciting things like the pond. `hhey have tried to follow the direction of the Commission and come back with a plan they felt was given a nod of approval in August. Mr. Saneholtz said he was not interested in rezoning this site, but making the original existing zoning work to meet the demands of today. He did not want bank drive-thru traffic on this site. Mr. Saneholtz said a lazger, upscale -restaurant in the difficult narrow area oriented towards Perimeter Drive with waterscaping to the north might work. He said the drive-thru bank to the west was not a problem. It would open up Post Road. He said a 40-foot wide pond did not really help him get past the fact that there was retail and drive-thrus on Avery Road. He said flee water on Avery Road was almost inconsistent with the corridor. A water feature is not needed here. He suggested using the pond space to get the drive-thins off Avery Road and leave the setbacks on Post Road. Mr. Ghidotti said the ponds will be comparable to those at the entrance of Ballantrae. The cascading waterfall will have a 30-foot wide radius. It will be unique. Mr. Saneholtz did not want any traffic distractions on Avery Road. He did not want drivers on Avery Road looking over the water trying to read signs for the retail uses. He expected accidents would occur. Mr. Messineo said it seemed backwards and suggested developing the office/institutional first then develop the retail to serve it. Mr. Ghidotti said they were requesting approval of a1123 acres at this time. Mr. Gerber said the Commission was not going to re-design this parcel. He said they were not ready for a preliminary at this time. He suggested that the applicant keep working and coming back on this. He understood the frustration, but he saw no Commission consensus at this time. Mr. Ghidotti said he had not received enough comment to make changes. He said they followed what was requested in August. Mr. Sprague said the comments tonight were directed at the Avery Road corridor, the pond, the retail uses and the banks. He said that might be the principal area on which to focus to take the ~ next step. He suggested that the drive-thru bank on Avery Road could be problematic. Mr. Gerber said Building 1, the bank on the southeast corner, and upscale restaurants on Avery Road should be reconsidered. Mr. Ghidotti asked if the retail center were moved to have frontage on Perimeter Drive, would it be supported. Mr. Gerber said it sounded as though there would be acceptance, although not unanimous. Mr_ Zimmernlan asked if the Dublin Historic District had a different sign code- Mr. Gibson said yes, it referred to the Old Dublin Design Guidelines. r 03-0192 Riverside Hospital PCD, Subarea A Dublin Planning and %oning Commission Minutes - Novcmbcr 13, 2003 Page 18 Mr. Gcrbcr said that ~~~as all they could provide tonight on this canc. Mr. Gibson apologized for the plan mix-up and assured the Conunissioners it would not happen again. Mr. Gerber said no harm was done. Mr. Gibson asked if the Commission had any consensus on the Post Road access that aligned with the church access across the street. Mr. Ghidotti said they have had three different traffic studies done, and staff and Doyle Clear have encouraged them to keep that access. Mr. Ghidotti said they have agreed to pay for the road improvements at Post Road necessary to make that happen. The Commissioners indicated there was no problem with the Post Road access. Mr. Gerber made the motion to table this rezoning application, pursuant to the staff report recommendation. Mr. Zimmerman seconded the motion, and the vote was as follows: Mr. Messineo, no, because he did not want to send a misleading message to Mr. Ghidotti; Mr. Saneholtz, yes; Mr. Sprague, yes; Mr. Zimmerman, yes; and Mr. Gerber, yes. (Tabled 5-0.) Mr. Gerber called a short recess at 7:50 p.m. At 8:00 p.m., the meeting reconvened to hear Case 2, above. The meeting was adjourned at 9:10 p.m. Regpectfully submitted, ~~~r Libby Farley Administrative Assistant Planning Division 03-0192 Riverside Hospital PCD, Subarea A ,,.x PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RCCORD OF ACTION _CITI (IF I1GIt1,1;~ AUGUST 14, 2003 Divisioa of elaaaiag . 5800Shier-Rings Road Du61ia,Oha 43016-1236 wae/100:614~10~600 Fax: 614-761 ~Sbb !eh Site: www.duhtm-oh.us The Planning and Zoning Commission took no action on the following case at this meeting: 2. Informal Hearing -Rezoning 03-0162 -Riverside Hospital PCD -Subarea A Location: 24.3 acres located at the northwest corner of Perimeter Drive and Avery- Muirfield Drive. Existing Zoaing: PCD, Planned Commerce District (Riverside Hospital plan). Request: Informal feedback from the Commission. Proposed Use: Amixed-use development that includes retail, restaurant, office, and funeral home uses. Applicant: Hospital Properties, Inc., 3722 Olentangy River Road, Suite K, Columbus, Ohio 43214; represented by The Daimler Group, Inc., c% Paul Ghidotti, 1533 Lake Shore Drive, Columbus, Ohio 43204. Staff Contact: Chad D. Gibson, AICP, Senior Planner. RESULT: There was a 30-minute discussion of two possible development scenarios. The Commissioners, except one, liked the concept in general. The Commission stressed the need for additional landscaping features, high-quality materials similar to those used at the Pacer building, parking to be to the rear of the building, and addressing traffic flow. There was generally less ~ support for the version that included a large format retail use. No vote taken on this informal case. STArF CCRTIPICATION Barbara M. Ctarkc Planning Director 03-0192 Riverside Hospital PCD, Subarea A Dublin I'Iannint~ and %c~nin~~ Ccnnmissicin Minutes - Au~,ust 14, 2003 1'a~~c (i 2. Informal I{caring -Rezoning 03-OIGZ - Riverside Hospital PCD -Subarea A Mr. Gerber announced that this informal case would not exceed 30 minutes. Chad Gibson said this site is part of the Riverside Hospital PCD, Planned Conunerce District, which includes the Avery Square shopping center. He noted the Commission disapproved a rezoning application for this site in May 2003, which was later withdrawn. This is a request for informal feedback on a mixed-use development. The major changes are to the uses and including a linear pond along the Muirfield/Avery Drive with substantial setbacks. Mr. Gibson said Concept 1 is two restaurants, two banks, a daycare, retail center, and office. Concept 2 includes one restaurant, two banks, a daycare, retail center, a specialty food store and two offices. Hs showed slides of the area. Paul Ghidotti, Damiler Group, said their design team took a fresh look at this site. They have two designs with architecture and aesthetics as nice as anything else in Dublin. They want ~to assure the Avery Road corridor is appropriately treated. Both concepts retain the office and provide for locally supported retail services in this transitional site. The Community Plan shows the site as `mixed-use employment emphasis.' Mr. Ghidotti said a pond was added along the Avery/Muirfield frontage on both concepts. The setbacks total 4.5 acres due to so much road frontage and provide the most beneficial view of this site. By moving all the development back 150 feet, they have recognized the Avery/Muirfield frontage and the transitional nature. He showed renderings of the concepts. Mr. Ghidotti said the linear pond will be very similar to the pond on Frantz Road in front of the Preserve building. It will have a natural edge, not stone. Water will cascade down from an upper pool, similar to the park on Woerner-Temple Road at Ballantrae. An arched waterfall will be 30 feet in its radius. At the two ends of the pond, there will be water plumes and a reflection pond. This layout will lend itself to some small sitting areas on the pond, such as for a nice cafe. Mr. Ghidotti said the access reflects what the Engineering staff approved in May. Regarding to the land located farther west, they know it needs to be office. It is a third tier site in the Mt. Auburn study, with many better office sites available. They tried to incorporate the Commission comments from May into a transitional concept. He wants to be sure they are on course. Mr. Ritchie said this was a good job, and the May application was just another shopping center. He said they combined some unique retail qualities and a pedestrian enviroruncnt. He liked the interaction between the retail and the lake. Mr. Ritchie thought a specialty grocery store was needed. I-Ie did not compare Concept 1 and 2. He liked the destination idea. Mr. Messineo said he liked Concept 2, and the pond is a big bonus. Mr. Sprague said this was a really good job on a challenging site. While he liked both concepts, he preferred Concept 1. He noted the need to have infrastructure in place to support this, primarily to address traffic. If this is planned carefully, he felt this would succced_ 03-0192 Riverside Hospital PCD, Subarea A ! . Dublin l'lannin~; and lonin~ C'ouuuission Minutes !\u~ust 14, 2003 l'agc 7 Ms. 13orin~ aplncciated that the applicant had directly addressed both the Conununity flan and the Mt. Auburn study. She was disappointed that the funeral home was not included because Dublin needs one. She liked the idea of the parking in the back, and the outdoor seating/eating is a great concept. She said s(re preferred Concept 1 because of the sustainabilily of large-scale retail in Dublin is questionable. There are better Dublin locations for a grocery store. Ms. Boring said unless Dublin sets a policy that there will not be more big boxes, there will be continued vacancy and turnover. She favored two restaurants; she has heard repeatedly that are inadequate facilities for employees to get lunch. To encourage the employment emphasis, lunchtime eating places must be provided. Ms. Boring liked the setbacks. She was disappointed that the previous artwork discussed was not included. Ms. Boring noted that page 5 of the text limits ground coverage by buildings, exclusive of parking garages, to 25 percent of the lot, and that seemed restrictive. Mr. Ghidotti said this concept has not been detailed. Mr. Ghidotti said regarding sustainability of the larger store, the two users proposed have 50 to 100 existing stores. One is publicly traded, the other is family owned, and both are stable. Ms. Boring noted several large store vacancies, and she questioned if new retail space is needed. Mr. Ghiddoti said both retailers had specific criteria for their store function and location. Both require their own free-standing stores with docks. Ms. Boring said it may be time for Dublin to be tough about building new large format uses. Mr. Zimmerman said both concepts were nice. He is concerned that the original subarea plan addressed locations for offices and for retail, including restaurant outparcels. The current text °n° requires this subarea to be offices that reflect residential scale and character. He said the Pacer building is one of the nicest looking ones in Dublin, and this site was intended to be office use. Mr. Ghidotti said the Community Plan shows their site as one of the few in this area as "mixed use employment emphasis." That contemplates office use primarily and secondarily either retail or residential. This site is inappropriate for residential use. Mr. Zimmerman said the concepts were beautiful, but he was looking for office use here. Mr_ Ghidotti said while office buildings could be constructed, parking would be a problem due to the narrow width. He said these uses would support the Pacer office building. Mr. Gerber summarized that five of the six Commissioners present could support this concept, including himself. He said he was unsure of another big box, given the national performance of some retailers- He appreciated how Mr. Gibson had addressed the Community Plan issues- He said this is a mixed use in a transition area, but office should still be the predominant use. There is a shopping center to the south. He liked how the restaurants were located and the transitional nature of the design. He said landscaping is a key issue, and this should be more than roadways and buildings. He like the landscape features, but there should be more at this gateway. The development here will act to shape the future growth to the west- The uses were acceptable. [fie said his preferred materials would be those similar to the Pacer building. He asked if the applicant wanted to return for another informal discussion or with an application. 03-0192 Riverside Hospital PCD, Subarea A Uuhlin I'lannin~; and %oning Conuuissi<~n Minutes August 14, 2003 Page Mr. Ghidotti said they will subulit ~i formal reioniug application based on thew conuucnts. Ms. Boring said she would like more parking to the rear to be incorporated. Mr. Ghidotti said they would like to have the elevation of the internal private roads dip down so traffic moving in and out will not be seen from the exterior street. Mr. Gerber said hoped traffic would flow well. Mr. Ghidotti said in May, they were requested to contribute infrastructure needed today. They agree to accept the burden for any impacts they cause, but they should not be required to bear the burden for anything that exists today. Mr. Gerber said it needed to be worked out with the staff. Mr. Ghidotti asked for direct feedback on Concept~2, which has the larger format retail. It could be removed, if need be. He thought Dublin's 30,000 residents need services, and the closest house in Lowell Trace is farther away from this site than the Avery/tJS 33 interchange. Mr. Gerber believes a big box retailer will leave at some point. Ms. Boring said the big box will be a specialty store, and that meant it was destination driven. She preferred retail uses that serve the local area. There are other sites in Dublin that could be modified for a large retailer. Mr. Ghidotti said Concept 2 has two retail users, one with 19,100 square feet, and the other either 21,000 or 26,000 square feet. He said it was an outstanding wine/cheese/gift-type shop. Mr. Gerber said five of the Commissioners present were in agreement with the basic concept. He told Mr. Gibson that he had done a very nice job on this report. 3. Prelim ary Plat 03-033PP -Bishop un Mr. Gerber s e in those who identified a de ~ e to speak on this administr ~ve case. Kolby Turnock said t ~ is a preliminary plat for 35 es on Hyland-Croy Road. r. Turnock said Bishop's Run is zon for 56 lots, and Bishop's Cr ing was zoned for 112 to eight of which are being transferred to this preliminary plat. The plicant chooses to inclu those ht lots with this prelimin lat for Bishop's Run, butt Bishop's Crossing text ~ll con ~ ue to apply to them. This plat ~ eludes the western section of ~ Ilymore Drive. Mr. Turnoc eviewed the minimum lot siz and development standards in ach text. He noted only Lots 1-5 e required to meet the diver ~ standards, and Lots 57-64 not. The (ols backing up to the tro Park (Lots 7-17) are all 1 feet wide at the request of th ommission at the rezoning, and the will not vary in lot width. St e the approval of the Bishop' rossing preliminary plat, Dublin re ested that the bikepath along Ilymore Drive be shifted no and is has been done. He noted re will be speed tables at th ntrances to the Metro Park, a the ~ will provide traffic calmin and increase pcdeslrian sa There arc two five-foot concre aths between lots for Metro 'k access. Mr. Turnock ~d the frontage treatment aloe Ryland-Croy Road was do for the "Wow!" program. It has ques, evergreens, grasses, wi owers, fencing and a bikcp with a 100- foot landscape buffer ng Tullymore Drive. This Ian cape plan needs to show the ounding. 03-0192 Riverside Hospital PCD, Subarea A r - PLANNING AND 'CONING COMMISSION ` RECORD OIL ACTON MAY I5, 2003 _c[Tr OF UU[i(.[N Oiviswa of Planning 5800 Sfi~atmgs Road Oahliq, Oha 13016-1236 fane/IDO: 611~10~600 _ fmc b1/-161566 Ne5 Site: veww-du6(ia.ohvs The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action ai ibis meeting: 4. Revised Composite Plan 03-0IGZ - Riverside I~ospita(PCD -Subarea A Location: 24.3 acres located at the northwest corner of Perimeter Drive and Avery- Muirfield Drive. Existing Zoning: PCD, Planned Commerce District (Riverside Hospital plan). Request: A request to rezone the property ttuough the revision of the composite plan and development text under flee PCD provisions of Section 153.058. Proposed Use: Amixed-use development that includes retail, restaurant, office, and funeral home uses. Applicant: Hospital Properties, Inc., 3722 Olentangy River Road, Suite K, Columbus, Ohio 43214; represented by The Daimler Group, Inc., c/o Paul Ghidotii, 1533 Lake Shore Drive, Columbus, Oluo 43204. Staff Coatact: Chad D. Gibson, AICP, Senior Planner. MOTION: To disapprove this rezoning application because the proposal does not support the concept of a transition zone, the development is not necessarily consistent in all respects with the purpose, intent, applicable standards and preferred land uses as noted in the Community Plan, the preliminary site layout does not maintain the image of Dublin as a planned community, and there is a likelihood of an increase in traffic in the area which is a great concem of the residents. a VOTC: 7-0. RIJSULT: This rezoning application «~as disapproved. It will be forwarded to City Council with a negative recommendation. STAFi~ CCRTIF[CATION r~ ~-1; -tom ~i c ' Barbara M- Clarke Planning Director =a.. 03-0192 Riverside Hospital PCD, Subarea A Uublin 1'lannin~~ and %ciuin~, Cc~nuuissi<ni Minutes -May 1 S_ 2003 Page 5 1) T al a rezoninb ' ~plication to lh PCD, Planned :onuncrce Uis ict, (~c tiled ~~~i iin 90 da~~s f approval; 2) ~I1iat the land pe plan be r vised to confo m to the curr it l~idscape .ode, acid that landscaping completed by une 30, 2004 0 occupancy per iit, whichever mcs later; That tree pr tection zones b located along Il tree rows o he site, with f icing througho all constru -ion phases; an 4) That the to lighting co ly with the Li ting Guideline and utilize onl cut-off fixture . Mr. Rite ~ ~ seconded th motion, and ie vote was . follows: Messineo, ye ; Mr. Sanehol ,yes; Mr. Sp ue, yes; Ms. ring, yes; Mr. erber, yes; .Ritchie, yes; d Mr. Zimme an. (Approv 7-0.) Mr. Ger r thanked Mr. rim and comp mented the ad 'ion. 4. Rezoning 03-016Z-Riverside hospital PCD -Subarea A Chad Gibson said this is a request to rezone Subarea A of the Riverside Hospital PCD to expand the mix of uses and change the development standards. He said site currently permits offices and institutional uses in buildings that have a residential scale. The site is long and narrow and borders Post Road, Avery Road, and Perimeter Drive just north of Avery Square. The open field only contains a barn at the west end and a temporary bikepath. lie said the proposal has six subareas. Subarea 1 and 5 will .permit office and institutional uses including a bank. Subarea 2 permits restaurant, bank, and office uses. Subareas 3 and 4 are proposed for retail, office, and restaurant uses, and Subarea 6 permits a funeral home and offices. Access points include aright-in only on Perimeter Drive, a full service access aligned with the service access across Perimeter Drive, a full service access aligned with the Kroger driveway, and a full service access on Post Road opposite the church driveway. Mr. Gibson said a traffic study and. a memo from the traffic consultant were distributed. This overall development produces ten percent more traffic than if it were developed as currently permitted. During the AM and PM peak periods, 25 percent less traffic is produced. He said when the preliminary plat was approved, it had a condition which discouraged any access onto Post Road. Mr. Gibson noted the sign package does not yet meet Code. The density and amount of retail and restaurant uses are unresolved. Mr. Gibson said the amount of restaurant and retail uses pernitted in Subareas 2, 3, and 4 needs to be reduced- Staff recommends that Subarea 2 remain an office zone. Subareas 3 and 4 should include all of the retail and restaurant components- Staff recommends a 12,000 square foot limit on restaurant and a maximum retail area of 20,000 square feet. Staff also believes the restaurant or retail uses in Subareas 3 and 4 should be oriented towards the back of Avery Square. He said the existing temporary bikepath needs permanent placement through the site. Mr. Gibson said the traffic study recommends an eastbound left turn lane on Post Road at Avery- Muirfield Drive. Substantial improvements arc needed at the intersection of Perimeter Drive and Avery-Muirfield Drive, including more right-of-way. 03-0192 Riverside Hospital PCD, Subarea A r Dublin Planning and loniug C<inunission Minutes May 1 S, ?_003 Page G Mr. Gibson said staff rcconuncnds <y>proval with dcvcn conditi<lus: 1) T1ral the text be revised to limit restauraill use to 12,000 square feet and retail use to 20,000 square feet for fire entire development; 2) That restaurant uses be permitted only in Sub-subareas 3 and 4, and that they be oriented toward Perimeter Drive only; 3) That a plat be submitted which meets all requirements of the zoning text and staff, and permanently relocates fire bikepath; 4) That the text be revised to require a minimum open space requirement of 35 percent; 5) That the proposed development signage be limited further in the text; 6) That drive-thru facilities be treated as conditional uses in all subareas; 7) That right-of--way be dedicated consistent with the Thoroughfare Plan, recommendations w within the previously accepted traffic studies, and be incorporated into the text as required by Engineering staff, subject to staff approval; 8) That all site access points have geometry approved by the Ciry Engineer, 9) That flee text be revised to require adherence to the Stormwater Regulations; 10) That bright trim colors be eliminated from the permitted color palette; and 11) That a west bound left-turn lane be installed on Post Road and that aneast-bound left-turn lane be installed at Post and Avery Roads, and that a 25 percent contribution towards signal installation at the Kroger entrance drive along Perimeter Drive be made prior to occupancy of any portion of the site. Mr. Gibson said Condition 11 had not been discussed with the applicant. Mr. Gibson said the Community Plan recommended "mixed-use employment emphasis" which generally has office as the primary land use. Other accessory uses, including retail, could be included. Severely limiting regional and large scale retail uses is recommended. Mr. Gerber asked if this is to be a transitional area. Mr. Gibson said yes. The current plan requires an office park of residential scale. Paul Ghidotti of Daimler Group said this was one of the finest projects they have brought to Dublin in 20 years. He thanked the staff for its work on tlus_ This is an in-fill site, and they ~ must elevate the level of qualify already achieved. It will be a transitional area. He said the site has been unsuccessfully marketed for some time. Daimler recommended a first class mixed use ~ project with a main focus of office use for fife site. Mr. Gludotii introduced Daimler's design teanl including Jim Bean, Gary Wilcox, Jolui Hart, and the Glimcher Organization. He said Daimler has developed over 12 million square feet of commercial space in 20 years, and over 2 nulllon square feet within Dublin. He gave background on income tax revenue produced. Mr. Ghidotti showed a Power['oint presentation of Daimler's Dublin projects including the Preserve, Dominion Domes office, etc. Daimtcr developed Upper Metro Place which had a TIT: for extraordinary landscaping. Mr. Gerber said the Commission was aware of the fine projects Daimtcr had produced, and he requested that Mr. Ghidotti discuss this application. 03-0192 Riverside Hospital PCD, Subarea A Ihiblin Planning and 'lonint~ Couunissi<in Minutes -May 1 S, 2003 I'agc 7 Mr. Ghidolti said their goals were iv elevate the quality of tlic devclopnient, and tci rccc~t~,nii.c the transition zones. They arc trying to implement the mixed uses as mcnUoncd in the Community Plan. He described the site and surrounding development. The landscape plan has two plaza areas- They will extend the bikepath along Post Road. The Avery Road hedgerow and columns will be continued. A dry laid stone wall, ponds with fountains, and a kinetic metal sculpture are planned. Mr. Ghodotti said they met with nearby neighbors oh des ~ t d' g tdo respondM~dows and Lowell Trace. He was aware of their concerns, to wluc y ~ He said medical groups may want small single-story buildings. They are focusing on specialty retail, restaurants and two boutique specialty food stores. Schoedinger Funeral Homes is interested. Mr. Ghidolti said buithe arclutecgture of Panoera Breadeand Monro Muffl ~-0ffice uses must have shake roofs, matching He said there are only two full access points on Perimeter Drive, not four as shown. The first is right-in only and part of it is not an access point to the development, it is for Sdioedinger. Farid Masri, Indian Run Meadow Civic Association,e i would be strictlyf toff ce. He said tl e planned. He said it may not be not realistic to assum landscaping proposed was very mce. Limiting the offices along Avery Road to one story was also attractive. They do not want more fast food restaurants along Avery Road. Mr. Masri said that retail uses should be limited by square footage and quantity, and the number of restaurants should be limited. He said the area needs ahigh-end quality restaurant, especially to serve the office uses. Restaurants may cause nuisance issues such as odors or noise to the neighbors, and they attract outside customers. He said the zoning text should require that restaurants facing Avery Road include environmental controls to minimize odors. A barbeque restaurant would not be appropriate. Minimizing light pollution and noise should be included. Wood shakes require too much maintenance, and he suggested using state or imitation slate. Shawn Meddock, Lowell Trace Civic Association, summarized resident feedback on this project. He said the all 25 residents he spoke to oppose this rezoning. They believe there are already adequate shops, restaurants and services. Vacancies at Perimeter Center and Avery Square should be filled first- They oppose alcohol sales. They questioned the need for more banks or a funeral home. The nearest residents were concerned about noise and light pollution. He said if this becomes a retail development, he thought the staff suggested conditions arc very reasonable. Ms. Boring said she appreciated the d not want mode facto-lfood and drivac-thrus 1 cre_he altemativc is often fast-food restaurallts. Shc Mr. Gerber asked how far was the nearest residence to this proposed restaurant site- Mr. Gibson said there were residents on the north side of Post Road. Mr. Ghidolti asked to respond to this issue. Mr. Gerber said no, to please Ict the Conunissioncrs ask their qu~stions~ 03-0192 Riverside Hospital PCD, Subarea A Dublin I'lanuing and %<niiug ('cinuuis~iun Minutes - May I S, 2003 Pa~;c h Mr. %inuncrn~an cstinrit~x1 ll~crr wcr~ 300 units in tlu~ Dublin i:ctirrnic~nl ('cnic~_ ~~r. (~il~sun said Gorden Farms was fu~thcr ~a~cst ou Post Road, but he did not know tlic number of units. Mr. Zinuncrnlan and Mr_ Sprague agreed there were quality of lift issues for the residents of llic retirement center facing Post Road to be considered_ Ms. Boring said for the cast side of Dublin, they created amulti-fatni[y area so fliat there could be a pedestrian-type atmosphere so they could walk io the transition zone. Mr. Sprague there were multi-fancily areas and senior living already established. The bikepaths are connected, and it is more pedestrian-friendly. Mr. Ritchie said the uses proposed tonight are those of which you need an automobile. Mr. Gerber understood that the Community Plan was trying to establish a buffer between activity or destination area (Perimeter Center) and the neighborhoods_ The point was to maintain some level of privacy and to limit traKc_ He said for a deviation from the Community Plan use of a transition office area, the facts must be compelling. He has not yet been persuaded this evening. Ivhs. Boring reported previous conversations with Mr. Glidotii. She was concerned about the retail. She believed it was responsible to state fliere is enough retail space in place_ She noted there is a need for restaurants and for a funeral home in Dublin. Mr. Saneholtz said the only "retail" use north of Perimeter Drive is the FiRh-Third Bank. The area's character is residential. Supporting this, means supporting change in flee area's character. He quoted from the April 7, 1988 Commission minutes. It was clear then that officelinstitutional would be expected at this site. Mr. Saneholtz said flee Commission is remaining consistent with the 1988 understanding that retail was not necessarily envisioned for this parcel_ Mr. Saneholtz said one upscale restaurant to the center of the property, fronting onto Perimeter Drive with significant waterscape, landscape buffer, and land buffer between it and Post Road, could be an effective use of this property. There was no opposition to the fiuieral home use, and its conduct would be closer to office than retail in character. However, cremation activity here might not be appropriate. He would prefer a restaurant with a serene waterscape to one with an outdoor patio facing the retirement center. He could support one sizable restaurant on the south edge of the property. Otherwise, he said he preferred ofCce and institutional uses for this site_ Mr. Sprague said the traffic impact issue was significant. There has been tremendous study of traffic impacts for this and related silts. The City made improvements to enable carrying significant traffic for much of the day. He said a great job had been done. With an increase in the level of activity acid density, (here will be adverse impacts on the infrastructure. Ice noted tl?at more turn (ants and signals, as well as re-routing traffic, would be needed. [ic noted the 'area currently experiences traffic back-ups on Perimeter Drive. He said office use, as it is zoned, would be an appropriate land utili7~tion leading to a better quality of life_ Me Gerber said this is still a transition area as set forth in tlic Community Plan_ 03-0192 Riverside Hospital PCD, Subarea A Dublin I'lannin~; and '/,oning Conunission Minutes -May 1 S, 2003 I'agc 9 Mr. Sanchollz said tlic existing felt turn lane on 1'criu~ctcr Drive to go north on MuirGcld 1)riv~~ needs to be addressed now. i{e said access onto Post Road would not be necessary. Barb Cox said the Post Road access helps to balance the traffic and to give drivers options. Shc noted the existing problems at PerimeterlAvery-Mui~eld Drive. Without access onto Post Road for tlus site, there will be even more problems. Although this proposal increases overall traffic, it does not concentrate so much traffic in the peak hours. She noted further study is needed. Mr. Sanchollz does not want to see traffic stacking on Post Road to get onto this property. However, exiting traffic is less of a concern. He would prefer a double left turn to pushing that traffic onto Post Road. Mr. Messineo agreed and said it takes him two full signal cycles to get through in the AM peak- Things will worsen with additional development. Mr. Messineo asked what "comparing baseline traffic wifli permitted uses" meant in flee study. Gary Wilcox, Traffic Engineering Services, said Dublin's original traffic model assumed all this land to be office at 10,000 square feet per acre. The zoning actually permits other uses, like banks. The modified baseline traffic adds some of those other permitted uses. Mr. Messineo said this would really be a "worst case" and indicates the maximum loading of the site. He thought there should have been a comparison to the Dublin's tested baseline. Testing against the worst case scenario is misleading. Mr. Wilcox said part of this issue is terminology. Trips generated and traffic impact are two different things. There are morning peak hour problems, and more offices will worsen it. Retail and restaurants are not open during the AM peak- If you measure the affect on the major nearby intersections, the proposal, the modified baseline, or the original plan all have similar results, in terms of capacity analysis. Mr. Messineo said this site was a transition to the serenity of Red Trabue Nature Preserve. Mr. Gerber said it seemed that the Conunissioners were saying that this is truly a transition area, consistent with what was laid out in the Community Plan. Mr. Ritchie said he was looking at this proposal for sustainability. If the site is developed as offices or a balance of offices, he thought it was more sustainable and will have more long teen benefits for Dublin than restaurants. Looking at the long term, office and institutional arc best. Ms. Boring said Daimler Group does a great job. Shc liked the artwork and the Post Road treatmcnt_ Shc said there was no question about the actual dcvclopmcnt or the developer. the biggest reason for disapproval was the transition in the land use issue and the long term sustainability of that land. Mr. Gerber agreed and said he sensed that the Commission wanted to maintain this as a transition area. Mr. Sanchollz made the motion to disapprove this rezoning application because the proposal does not support what the Commission would anticipate being a transition zone, the dcvclopmcnt is not necessarily consistent in all respects wills the purhosc, intent and applicable standards for 03-0192 Riverside Hospital PCD, Subarea A Uubliu I'lanninf~ and %onint~ Commission Minutes Ma}~ I5, 2003 Page 10 llte penuissiblc laud uses as Holed in the Conununily flan, tli~~ pr~.liniinary site layout d<~cs ncit maintain the image of Dublin as a planned community, and (litre is a likelihood of an increase in traffic in the area which is a grew( concern of the residents. Mr. Gerber seconded the motion. The vote was as follows: Mr. Ritchie, yes, because of the lack of long-term sustainabilily and lack of conformance with the Conununity Plan; Ms: Boring, yes, and she agreed with the other Commissioners; Mr. Zinunernian, yes, citing the Community P[aii and other thoughts of the Commissioners; Mr. Sprague, yes, the development is not consistent in all respects to the purpose, intent, and applicable standards, permissible land uses, and the density is not in conformance with the a comprehensive plans; Mr.Messineo, yes, because it was not in conformance with the Community Plan; Mr. Gerber, yes, because the criteria established in Section 153.05(E) have not been sufficiently met by the applicant and with respect to the Community Plan, and he did not hear any compelling evidence to deviate from that plan; Mr. Saneholtz, yes. (Disapproved 7-0.) Mr. Ghidotti asked for more time to speak. Mr. Gerber said he had been allotted over 20 minutes for the presentation, and the Commission has now voted. Mr. Ghidotti thanked him. Mr. Gerber at 8:10 p.m called a short recess. The meeting reconvened at 8:30 p.m. 5. Rczoai b 02-13GZ - cursed Comp site Plaa - T tic Crossiag CD Subarea 4 - Chipo e Mcxicaa Gr' i - 5520 Blaz r Parl.-way Kelly D enfeiser pres lted this rezon lg application permit a seco d restaurant i Subarea 4 of th Tuttle Crossi PCD. The t o-acre site h two buildings and is on the iorthwest corner f Tuttle Cross" g Boulevard d Blazer Park ay. The soutl building is a cDonald's _ testa ant, and the n rth building is enison Wirel ss retail sales d is half va nt. No site layo t changes are oposed. The estion is whet er a Chipotle exican Grill i be added to the tern half of e retail buildi 7. s. Dannenfels said Subarea A4 was create in 2000 for r it uses with reduced parki g equirement (fr m 121 to 83 paces). That zoning permi ed the const iron of the G, 00 square foot re ail building the 4,000 sq e foot restau ant. Due top king constrait s, a second testa ant at ibis site as prohibited. She said s ff has inspect this site on n merous occasi ns during pe ~ unch hours, a d about half of t lot is open fo parking. She lowed an aeri slide which w s taken on a w ~ekday al 12:32 p n. It showed is parking are was fairly op n acid the driv -thru at McD iald's was pacee Ms. Dannenf scr said staff ~lieves that the c two restaura scan work to ,ether, but it is no convinced tha any two restar -ants could wo k in hannon}~. Staff reconul nds that any fut ~ restaurant be onsidcred a co ditional use, r uiring Plannin ~ Commission pproval. T e wall sign pr posed does n meet tlic le " standards. Dannenfcls said the "l~ut c, tossing arc nc .ds additional r staurants, and _ taff believes t at tl~c Chipotl .and McDona 's can work toget cr. Staff recoi mends approv with six cond~ ions: 03-0192 ` ` Riverside Hospital PCD, Subarea A ~ ' V i CO Q N ~ ~ ~ O LL ~ ~ O' + ~ N C~ AIM d^ ~ Ned.. ~ ~ M N' M ~ ~ ~ m ~ to ~ Q Q ~ N ~ 1 ~Io V- ` f ~ d' ~ ~ Opp M ~ tt ol~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ l a~ I~ a~ ~ ~ ~~U ~ ~ ~j~ N U O ~ ~ Cn ~ Q ~ O Q ~ v o ~ O O ~ ...2003 N ~ ~ ' O /~~t ~ r ~ Q) - _ ~ i ~ ~ ~ - - III ~ _ ~ Q ~ ~ ~ mU ~ r ~ I ~ y . I I Q N S 1 ~ W V e / / ~ op ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ so ~ = r' ~ . ~ ~ ~ I ~ r ~ ~ P ~ ~ J ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ Q z~~. ~I ii ~F~ . Y ~ i~ , s v m .F (i`, ~ ~ I Y I i a ~ I1 ~ 1 e - - i ~ ~ 1 1 ~ ~~i ~ ~ pp C I o I 1 Y~r w `I~ e; ~ ~~1' C i i 1 ,I 11','11 ~i 1 ~ ~ ~ I ~ li ~1 ~ 1 i 11 ~ :°m (n 1 1~ 1 l J 1 111 1111 Q ~ 11 11 ~ 1 1 1 Z u 1 1 ll . x~~ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ~,i 111 - ~ ~c 1 1 1 t 11 ~ ~ Il 11 - Q Z I 111 1 1 t LL 1 } l 11 1 1`~ 1 iq C~ pap4^~ , 1 1 1 1 ~ f=g" t 1 dl ~ 11 ~ 1 11 N O ~y;: i.t 1 11 1 1 1 N LL ` I I 1 111 Z W 1, 1 ~ 1 ~ i11 1 , ~ ~ ~ Q e I I ~ U I! I II I ~ ~ ~ ~ o I ~ I J {„L ~Q- ~ ~ Q W° C~3 - r"rq ~ i;,r~ U o ~LL f., a l~ m , wd w~ (n 0 r° .~J J ~ a~~ ~ i l l i~~ a I ~ ~ ! ~ ~ x - ~ +~n~ / ~3 ~ ,1 I I Z I~ LL 1 r ~I ~ ~ Q ~ z ~1 ~ ' ~ J 1 1 / 0 S~ ~1 I / ~ N ~ ~ I, ! CJ r- •b FQ- w ~ ~ o ~ _ i ~ ~ ~ , r' t, i a ~ `^il i 1 ~ „ ~ 1 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ III Z ~ m ~ 'i: ~ o ~ ~ 1 1 i-1 ~ ~~>i 1 1 ~ . _ g I ~ 1 1`~I' ~ ' E 1 1 1~: j ~a11 1 1 I I I , ~ ,I 1 ^ Ik 1, 11 N i1 ` I ~ fp11`i1 m N 1 ~ 1 1 1 f i 11 f. 11 J \ I ~1111~111` 11 1111 Q I' 1 1 1 1 1 1 Q ~ I!I_ i.: 11-~i.1 ~ i it ; 1 1 1 1 1 ~ 1 1 1 13 '1111 1 , 1 1 ~ U O _ ~ ;1111;:1 ~ IS 11\ :~1 1 111 1 1 1•f C~ pFi ~ ~ V 1 1 1 1 1 1 W O I ~ Ada: .5°11~ 1, 1 1 1 1 ~ N r, ~ 1 L.L 1 ~ Z i - 1 1 1 1 ~ LLl 1 1 1 ,J J ii~~ 11 ~ r ~ U (n Qa. 1 I m N ~ ~ 'I ~ I ~ ~ ~ I C I N ~ w i' I i ! Z w~ Q Ww ~ `5_ U Lo ~LL M ~ W W Q' 'W a LL / ~do ~ t- ~ " ~ w ~ ~ ~ III > _ Q ' o ~ ~ ~n1~ - 'i ~l Z w Z Z s I W III ~ ~ ~ % ~ QQ Q° ~ ~=~Q ~ I~~ ~o f~ri pz pO I~i~a r _ ~l~ I I ~ ~ i I ~ ' ' - ~/~r'~~ 'a' i ~ . I I ~p I I 9 ~ ~ ~ r , ~ / I ~ i ~ ~ ' 00oO ~.Il; I~, ' 11 0000 i ~ I I'1 ~ ~ 8ti 8~e 11 ~ r 1 i'. I~~, cn ~ (i ~ i 1 ~~;11 ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 a',t` Z ~ III{ ~ ~ 'r~~11;~' U 1 III II - ~ 1t 1 ~1 11 1 t1 ~ a ~ I ~ ~ I I' - - , _ ~ ~ ~ ~ 4 t 1 ~ ~1~ 1 ~1 111V l/~ 11 1 11 ,n 'II ~ rn~~ 1 1 1~ 1 1 1 v ~ i - 1111 ~ '1't, Z o 11 ~ 11~, ~ t 111, ~ ~ _ 1111,,,111 11~ Q 1 11 111 1P , I i4 ~ls± 1~1 i 1,~~1 1 ~1 Q ~ I~ ~Ba• 1 ~~',Ih~ 1 1 1 l1J ~ ' . , - _ - - '1 l1`II O it 111 ~ ~ w I lj i' r ~ Q vi Q~ I I i I ~i o- I , ~ ~ ~ c~ ~II~ ,•I ~ Q w ~ i ! Z W~ Q W° ~ U <o m ~ W~= W w ~ ~~m a; ~ ~ ~ w r.:~. p Q ~ ~ ~ U _ ~ 7 1 I ~ I - ~ ~ ~ 3~a ~ (~~--1 " ~ ~ ~ Q (U w o ~ ~ ~ Q Q ~ - ~ f ~ N T''~ _ ~ ~ ~ p ~ II aJ o , ~ ~ n w (n ~ OZOU ' ' z z ~ o°~ III p w p Q 4 l~, ~ _ .J W J T ~ ~ da `rb~_.Is ~I Owp~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a ~ ~ ~ I I h S ( ~ n ~ ~ / o ~ ~ ~E 000 Q i- ~ ~ 11 1 000p a 1 ~ j I 1 ~.1 ~ ~i~~~ ' o ' ~I,;' p' WU' , z ~ ~,I1 ~ I U ° 1~, , * 1. i _ \ ~ I I ~I 1 1 1 1 m I - - - 1 1 1 1 1 ~ f~l I' - - 11111 ,1 11 1111 ~ - - 1, 11, ~ 11 1 1 1 ~ 1\ ~ ~.1 \.J ~ ,i~ t; 11 11 1 1 111 111111 ~ Z 1 1 1,~ Q O U ~ - , . - 1 1 ~ 11 1 1 J ~I~I~.' `F y = 11 1 ,11111, 1111.1 ~ 1 yr f~, 1~ 1~ m LJ/ a9• ~ 1 y 1 , ~tg~ ~ 1 11,q t l 1 1 p ~ I f ~dA: `y .t 1 1 ; ,11 11 111 ~ ~ 'I _ - ~ L.L 1 1 O W 1 1 ~ iLl I~~i ~I11 ~ ~ Q I I I II ~ vUi (n Q ~ 'I~, ~ 1 j J I i ! ~ Q W Q W° U ~o Q m w wwn ~ a&