Ordinance 70-21
To: Members of Dublin City Council
From: Dana L. McDaniel, City Manager
Initiated By: Jennifer M. Rauch, AICP, Director of Planning
Sarah Tresouthick Holt, AICP, ASLA Senior Planner
Date: October 19, 2021
Re: Ordinance 70-21 – Rezoning one parcel (PID 273-009067) and one partial
parcel (PID 273-008414), both city-owned, from R-1, Restricted Suburban
Residential District to SO, Suburban Office and Institutional District to
establish the Wright Way Corporate Park, totaling approximately 9.02-acres
located northeast of Emerald Parkway and Riverside Drive intersection (Case
21-101Z).
Summary
Ordinance 70-21 is a city-sponsored request for review and approval of a standard district
rezoning to facilitate orderly development, through a consistent zoning designation, in
accordance with the Dublin Community Plan. Two city-owned parcels, or a fraction thereof,
totaling approximately 9.02 acres are proposed to be rezoned from R-1, Restricted Suburban
Residential District to SO, Suburban Office and Institutional District. Corresponding Preliminary
and Final Plats will establish a single development lot, open space reserves, a landscape
easement, and additional right-of-way for a cul-de-sac bulb at the terminus of Wright Way. The
Preliminary and Final Plats are scheduled for City Council’s consideration at the November 8,
2021 meeting (21-102PP/21-103FP).
Background
In furtherance of the Community Plan and Future Land Use Plan, the City has consistently
identified the Wright Way site for economic development purposes to help realize the high-
quality, office-corridor vision for Emerald Parkway. The final extension of Emerald Parkway,
Phase 8 opened up the area to leverage future economic development potential along with
providing a major east-west connector. Emerald Parkway was built with utilities and Dublink to
ensure sites were ready for immediate development.
In 2010, the City purchased the property at 4729 Bright Road (Ord 34-10), located between
Bright Road and Emerald Parkway, which contains the Ferris-Wright Park within the northern
two-thirds of the site. The remaining undeveloped portion of the site was set aside for future
economic development opportunities, as outlined in the Bright Road Special Area Plan.
In 2011, the City established a Holder-Wright Farm and Earthworks Master Plan. The plan
contemplates multiple phases of development including Visitor Orientation Space, Interpretive
Center, Eastern Trail System, and Western Trail System. The land along Emerald Parkway is not
included in the park design and is specifically reserved for office development.
Office of the City Manager
5555 Perimeter Drive • Dublin, OH 43017-1090
Phone: 614-410-4400 • Fax: 614-410-4490
Memo
Memo re. Ord. 70-21 – Wright Way Corporate Park Rezoning
October 19, 2021
Page 2 of 3
In 2014, an Informal Review was conducted by the Planning and Zoning Commission for a two-
story, 30,000-square-foot building, with the potential for a 20,000-square-foot expansion, which
was consistent with the Future Land Designation of “Standard Office and Institutional”.
Neighbor comments at the meeting centered on the size and scale of the building in relation to
the adjacent residential uses. The proposal for the site, which included the undeveloped portion
of the site on the Ferris-Wright parcel and the southern portion of the parcel to the west was
not pursued at that time.
In 2018, the City purchased 4 acres at the northeast corner of the intersection of Riverside
Drive and Emerald Parkway (Ord 86-18) for economic development purposes, which aligned
with the Community Plan recommendations, as follows:
• Allow for the preservation of the wooded acreage along Riverside Drive,
• Combine parcels to maximize developable acreage,
• Protect the boundaries of Ferris-Wright Park, and
• Provide a wooded buffer to the Grandee Cliffs neighborhood.
The City had the opportunity at that time to purchase the remaining portion of the parcel to the
north, but chose not pursue this as the Future Land Use designation was identified as
residential or parks and open space. Thus, further strengthening the goal to concentrate on
revenue-producing development within the corridor. As part of the discussions regarding the
future development of the Wright Way site, the City engaged area residents in a number of
meetings to discuss and develop an agreement for the scale and size of potential development
on this parcel, which was achieved and will remain part of the eventual site development.
Proposal Details
SO, Suburban Office and Institutional District
The intent of the SO District is to provide a broad range of premier office uses primarily
engaged in general administration, supervision, purchasing, accounting and other management
functions.
Community Plan
The Community Plan is a key policy document adopted by City Council to guide decision-making
for the future of Dublin’s natural and built environments. The Community Plan includes Future
Land Use (FLU) recommendations, which should be considered when a rezoning is under
consideration. The FLU recommendation for the site is Suburban Office/Institutional, which
aligns with the proposed rezoning to the SO District zoning classification. Ferris-Wright Park is
included with the related platting requests it is not included as part of this rezoning. Ferris-
Wright Park will retain R-1, Restricted Suburban Residential District to preserve and protect a
13.326 acres public park.
The Community Plan also includes the Thoroughfare Plan and Special Area Plans. The
Thoroughfare Plan identifies functional street classifications, future roadway connections, and
planned right-of-way widths. Emerald Parkway is designated a Minor Arterial, with a
recommended right of-way of 100 feet; no additional right of-way is being sought. Riverside
Drive is designated a Major Arterial with a recommended right-of-way of 112 feet. Access for
this development area is only provided via Wright Way.
Memo re. Ord. 70-21 – Wright Way Corporate Park Rezoning
October 19, 2021
Page 3 of 3
The Bright Road Special Area Plan depicts office development on this site, with access from
Wright Way and the preservation of the wooded areas. The goal outlined of the Bright Road
Area Plan is to “To build upon and enhance the existing residential character of Bright Road
between Riverside Drive and Emerald Parkway while ensuring the preservation of key natural
features and historic sites. High quality office development should be encouraged along
Emerald Parkway that focuses on quality architecture and site design that complements the
surrounding natural environment and residential neighborhoods”. The proposed rezoning
request and the plat for the site are consistent with the recommendations.
Recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission
The Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed and recommended disapproval to City Council
of this rezoning at their October 7, 2021 meeting. The Commission indicated that parks and
open space is a preferred land use despite the Community Plan recommendations, based on the
proximity of the site to the Ferris-Wright archaeological park, the stream corridor, and wooded
area to the west.
With the recommendation of disapproval from the Commission, a super-majority from City
Council would be required to approve this rezoning request.
Recommendation
Recommendation of approval of Ordinance 70-21 at the second reading/public hearing on
November 8, 2021.
Rezoning Application Narrative – Wright Way Corporate Park
Zoning Request: The current zoning for the property is R-1, Restricted Suburban Residential
District. The City of Dublin is requesting a zoning change to SO, Suburban Office and
Institutional to facilitate economic development initiatives. In addition, rezoning the site to
Suburban Office and Institutional will align the site’s zoning with the Community Plan and
Future Land Use Map. This zoning change will bring to fruition the vision for Emerald Parkway
to be a highly desirable office location.
Adjacent Uses: In the vicinity of the subject lot, there are R-1, Restricted Suburban
Residential parcels to the north and east, including Ferris-Wright Park to the north, single family
development across Wright Way to the east. Across Riverside Drive is additional R-1, Restricted
Suburban Residential parcels. Emerald Parkway and I-270 are to the south.
Legal Description and Survey: A survey of the property is included with this submission.
The acreage on the legal description includes an additional .751 acres to be dedicated for public
right-of-way.
Property Owners within 300 feet
a. 3593 Jenmar Ct.: PID 273008743, City of Dublin
b. 3601 Jenmar Ct.: PID 273008744, City of Dublin
c. 3614 Jenmar Ct.: PID 273008746, Janice S. Varga
d. 3615 Jenmar Ct.: PID 273008745, City of Dublin
e. 6969 Grandee Cliffs Dr.: PID 273008747, Richard and Monica Zaborsky
f. 6987 Grandee Cliffs Dr.: PID 273008748, Roth Randolph and Allison Sweeney
g. 6988 Grandee Cliffs Dr.: PID 2730087388, Mark Armstrong
h. 6968 Grandee Cliffs Dr.: PID 273008739, Zachary and Sara Miller
i. 7001 Grandee Cliffs Dr.: PID 273008749, Carl and Donna Gleditsch
j. 7115 Grandee Cliffs Dr.: PID 273008750, Dennis and Kimberly Durkin
k. Riverside Dr.: PID 273008396, Diane Hornung and Thomas McDowell
l. 7049 Riverside Dr.: PID 273008600, Eric and Mara Ward
m. Riverside Dr.: PID 273009097, City of Dublin
CITY OF DUBLIN COMMUNITY PLAN1
Existing Character
The Bright Road focus area is bordered
by Hard Road and I-270, and stretches
west from Sawmill Road to Riverside
Drive, comprising the northeast portion
of the Emerald Corporate District.
Defined by the planned extension of
Emerald Parkway, the area includes a
significant list of planning and land use
challenges that were initially addressed
in the 1990 Bright Road Land Use Study.
Physical features vary significantly
throughout the area, and portions along
Riverside Drive are of scenic and historic
significance. The area is characterized
by the remnants of three geometric
earth mounds (known locally as the
Holder-Wright Earthworks) constructed
between 300 B.C. and 500 A.D. by
the Hopewell tribe. The ceremonial
mounds consist of a large rectangular
enclosure approximately 390 feet by
220 feet in size and two circular bank-
and-ditch enclosures located nearby.
Archaeologists interpret the earthen
enclosures as symbolic forms used as
a locus for periodic mortuary or other
ritual activity. The area also contains
scenic portions of Wright’s Run (also
known as Billingsley Creek), providing
substantial wooded areas, waterfalls
and ravines. This western portion of
the study area includes terrain that
slopes significantly up the River bluff
to Grandee Cliffs Drive, while portions
south of the earthworks and ravine
provide the opportunity to cluster
development among significant tree
stands along the future extension of
Emerald Parkway. The City of Dublin
acquired 19 acres of land in 2010,
including portions of the Holder-Wright
Earthworks and Wright’s Run, and has
prepared a master plan for a new city
park in this location.
Bright Road and surrounding
neighborhoods are characterized
by modest, low-density residential
homes in a rural setting that is typical
of older homes constructed within
Bright Road Area
the township prior to annexation.
Residential developments within the
area include Grandee Cliffs, Glenbrier
and Kiplinger Estates. Wright’s Run and
its surrounding woodlands create a
distinctive backdrop for the area, and
Kiplinger Pond created by a spillway
is located just east of MacBeth Drive.
Future completion of Emerald Parkway
will unite the area and provide major
access for infill development along
I-270. Planning efforts focus on
the ability to maintain and protect
neighborhoods in a balanced manner
with future growth along Emerald
Parkway.
Planning Challenges
and Issues
Protect and buffer existing
residential areas
Bright Road incorporates a very
distinctive rural residential character
that has been established over time by
many factors such as housing stock,
lot sizes, building setbacks and natural
surroundings. All efforts should be
made to maintain the quaint character
of the area’s neighborhoods, and road
access for residents should be improved
while discouraging through traffic.
Encourage greater open space and
pedestrian connections
Due to the era in which development
took place along Bright Road, the
area lacks sidewalks and pedestrian
infrastructure common to today’s
residential subdivisions. Every effort
should be made to improve pedestrian
connectivity and movement throughout
the area, while sensitively considering
Emerald Parkway Development Graphic
CITY OF DUBLIN COMMUNITY PLAN2
| BRIGHT ROAD AREAthe visual character and impacts of
pedestrian infrastructure. Incorporation
of additional open space near existing
neighborhoods should be provided to
facilitate pedestrian connections and
park opportunities.
Improve traffic circulation, access
and movement
The completion of Emerald Parkway
from Wright’s Run to Riverside Drive
will be a significant milestone for
Dublin. Providing relief to I-270, the
parkway will provide full access from
Tuttle Crossing to the south to Sawmill
Road on the north. Completion of
this last phase will provide greater
transportation network options east
of the Scioto River, while facilitating
a balance of greater access to area
neighborhoods and an expected
reduction in through traffic on local
roads. Significant multi-jurisdictional
efforts should be made to improve
traffic and access management along
the Sawmill Corridor to the benefit of
area businesses and residents. With the
completion of Emerald Parkway, Bright
Road will be converted to a cul-de-sac
at Riverside Drive to improve motorist
safety at this problematic intersection.
With a significant amount of office
development planned along Emerald
Parkway, future options for an overpass
connection to the Bridge Street District
south of I-270 should be explored to
connect these important economic
development areas while providing an
alternative to Sawmill Road.
Preserve important archaeological
and natural features
The Bright Road Area contains
invaluable natural and man-made
features for which every effort should
be made to protect. The Holder-Wright
Earthworksis an ancient man-made
landform that has critical archaeological
importance, and the adjacent Wright’s
Run ravine is a location of importance
for its scenic and natural beauty.
Nearby historic cemeteries that are
poorly surveyed and studied also have
importance to the area’s heritage.
Establish a high quality, visible
gateway into Dublin
Located adjacent to the Sawmill/I-270
interchange, the area is Dublin’s
major entry point from the northeast.
Establishing high quality visible
architecture, site planning and
landscaping is important to represent
Dublin’s image and quality of life.
Buildings fronting the interchange
should be of a larger scale and establish
an architectural statement that
contrasts them from adjacent suburban
retail and big box developments.
Bright Road Area Plan
NOTE: Area Plan concepts are general guides to indicate potential development options. Plans are schematic only, and the actual
mix of land uses, locations, and configurations of buildings, parking areas, streets and access points will be determined through the
public review process for individual development proposals. Properties retain all existing rights.
CITY OF DUBLIN COMMUNITY PLAN3
| BRIGHT ROAD AREAUse capital improvements as a
catalyst for development
Implementation of major improvements
within the area will require initiative on
the part of both the public and private
sectors. Planned capital improvements,
including the final connection of
Emerald Parkway and associated
infrastructure should be encouraged
to provide greater transportation
connectivity, access and development
potential along this key area of I-270
visibility.
Verizon Wireless Office along I-270
Bright Road & Sawmill Rendering
Maintain expectations for
appropriate, high quality
development
As Dublin’s premier business address,
locations along the future Emerald
Parkway extension should include high
quality office development that respects
the area’s context. Higher profile offices
should be preferred in areas where
freeway and interchange visibility can
be maximized, while appropriate scale
and architectural style is provided near
residential areas. Throughout the Bright
Road Area retail is limited to service uses
associated with office development that
will reduce arterial trips by employees;
integration of such support uses within
the ground floors of offices is highly
encouraged. Redevelopment proposals
between Sawmill Road and Emerald
Parkway should also be carefully
considered to ensure that residential
areas are fully integrated across Emerald
Parkway and Bright Road.
Planning Goals
…To build upon and enhance the
existing residential character of Bright
Road between Riverside Drive and
Emerald Parkway while ensuring the
preservation of key natural features
and historic sites. High quality office
development should be encouraged
along Emerald Parkway that focuses
on quality architecture and site design
that complements the surrounding
natural environment and residential
neighborhoods.
CITY OF DUBLIN COMMUNITY PLAN4
| BRIGHT ROAD AREA1
2
1
3 32
4
5
6
7
8
9
5
10 11 12
13 13
1414
15
16
17
18
17
18
15
19
20
21
22
23
24
CITY OF DUBLIN COMMUNITY PLAN5
| BRIGHT ROAD AREASymbol Recommendation/Description
Riverside Drive at Future Emerald Parkway (looking northeast).
The Billingsley Creek provides a unique opportunity to blend new development with
natural and archealogical treasures.
Sawmill/I-270 interchange (looking northwest).
Interchange development should display Dublin’s attention to high standards and qual-
ity development.
Restrict access along Riverside Drive.
Provide minimum 200-foot scenic setback along Riverside Drive.
Protect stream corridor, ravine and existing woodland areas.
Preserve Ferris Cemetery area.
Provide bike path connection from Riverside Drive through park to Grandee Cliffs
and Emerald Parkway.
Cul-de-sac Bright Road to improve access management.
1
2
1
2
3
4
5
6
CITY OF DUBLIN COMMUNITY PLAN6
| BRIGHT ROAD AREASymbol Recommendation/Description
Future parking for community park will be determined at a later date.
Restrict access in park along Bright Road to through traffic.
Preserve Holder-Wright Works (Hopewell Mounds) with option for potential
interpretive center and park elements.
Future buffer and pedestrian connection.
100-foot landscape buffer and sound barrier treatment for adjacent residential.
Access point to provide connection with Grandee Cliffs.
Creation of internal neighborhood park space.
Large residential lots and setbacks on Bright Road to blend with existing homes.
100-foot setback from Emerald Parkway with parking to side and rear of architecture
along the street.
Explore opportunities for vehicular overpass connection between Emerald Parkway
and the Bridge Street District.
100-foot high tension power line easement.
Two-story office and support services.
100-foot landscape buffer to provide residential transition and view of Bright Road.
Bright Road widened to four lanes between Emerald and Sawmill.
Residences to be sensitively sited among trees.
Large scale office oriented to I-270.
Limited and/or restricted access along Sawmill Road.
Consistent landscape treatment along Sawmill (to match development to north)
13
14
15
8
9
10
7
11
12
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
9
Holder-Wright Park Master Plan
LEGEND
Entrance Drive
Visitor Orientation Space
Planned Office Development
Natural Play Area and Pedestrian
Bridge
Interpretive Trail
Multi-Use Trail
Interpretive Center and Outdoor
Classroom Space
Picnic Area/Open Lawn
Existing Earthwork
Habitat Restoration Area
Demonstration Earthwork
Restored Ferris Cemetery
Creek Overlook
Demonstration Garden
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
The goal of the master plan is to guide development
of the park in a way that provides amenities and
attractions to visitors interested in both the natural and
cultural resources of the site as well as the recreational
aspects. Included in the plan are areas that focus on
the archaeological features of the site such as; the
interpretive center and outdoor classroom, existing
earthworks, Ferris Cemetery, and demonstration
earthwork. For the casual visitor, there are picnic
areas, shelter, creek overlook and habitat restoration
areas.
Linking the numerous proposed amenities is an
interpretive trail system that meanders through the
park closely following the hillside contours. The rustic
gravel trail offers an up close view of Wright’s Run,
meadows, reconstructed Ferris Cemetery, farm house
and earthworks. In addition to the interpretive trail,
there is a multi-use asphalt trail around the perimeter
of the site that allows visitors an alternative way to
access and view the site. At Wright’s Run, there
are plans to remove invasive shrubs and weeds and
replant with hardy natives to open views to this scenic
creek and provide additional wildlife habitat. Just to
the north of Wright’s Run are two unprogrammed
picnic/open lawn areas that will provide the casual
visitors an opportunity to enjoy the site, sun bathe,
play catch or have a picnic. Within the picnic area
will be a rustic shelter that provides an informal place
for family gatherings or a quick lunch. And adjacent
to Wright’s Run is a dramatic overlook that will give
visitors a chance to see the waterfalls and view the
geology of the area. On the southern portion of the
site is a proposed office development. It contains
approximately 70,000 square feet of office space.
Highlights of this development include preservation
of existing vegetation, pedestrian path system,
stormwater bioswales and rain gardens. Riverside DriveEmerald Parkway
Bright Road
1
2
3
66
5
12 9
8
9
8
107
9
5
6
11
10
3
13
4
9
14
6
6
0
Holder-Wright Park
PLANNING 5200 Emerald Parkway Dublin, Ohio 43017 phone 614.410.4600 dublinohiousa.gov
DRAFT RECORD OF ACTION
Planning & Zoning Commission
Thursday, October 7, 2021 | 6:30 pm
The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action at this meeting:
4. Wright Way Corporate Park at 4420 Emerald Parkway
21-101Z Rezoning
Proposal: Rezoning of two parcels from Restricted Suburban Residential District to
Suburban Office and Institutional District.
Location: Northwest of the intersection of Emerald Parkway with Riverside Drive.
Request: Review and approval of Rezoning under the provisions of Zoning Code
§§153.232 and 153.234
Applicant: Dana L. McDaniel, City Manager, City of Dublin
Planning Contact: Sarah T. Holt, AICP, ASLA, Senior Planner
Contact Information: 614.410.4662, sholt@dublin.oh.us
Case Information: www.dublinohiousa.gov/pzc/21-101
MOTION: Mr. Grimes moved, Mr. Schneier seconded, to recommend approval of the Rezoning to City
Council.
VOTE: 2-3-1.
RESULT: The recommendation of approval to City Council of the Rezoning failed.
RECORDED VOTES:
Jane Fox Abstain
Warren Fishman No
Mark Supelak No
Rebecca Call Absent
Leo Grimes Yes
Lance Schneier Yes
Kim Way No
STAFF CERTIFICATION
_____________________________________
Sarah Tresouthick Holt, AICP, ASLA,
Senior Planner
Planning and Zoning Commission DRAFT
Meeting Minutes of October 7, 2021
Page 11 of 16
Mr. Supelak stated that the next two cases concern the same property and would be heard together.
4. Wright Way Corporate Park at 4420 Emerald Parkway, 21-101Z Rezoning
A request for the Rezoning of two parcels from Restricted Suburban Residential District to Suburban Office
and Institutional District. The 9.01-acre site is northwest of the intersection of Emerald Parkway with Riverside
Drive.
5. Wright Way Corporate Park at 4420 Emerald Parkway, 21-102PP/21-103FP,
Preliminary/Final Plat
A request for a subdivision of a +/- 7.35-acre lot to establish two open space reserves and one public right-
of-way. The site is northwest of the intersection of Emerald Parkway with Riverside Drive
Staff Presentation
Ms. Holt stated that this is a request for rezoning of two parcels from R-1, Restricted Suburban Residential to
SO, Suburban Office and Institutional District and subdivision of a +/- 7.35-acre lot to establish two open
space reserves and one public right-of-way. The 9.01-acre site is located northeast of the intersection of
Emerald Parkway with Riverside Drive. The applicant is the City of Dublin Economic Development Department.
The intent of the rezoning and platting applications is to create one developable lot for economic development
purposes. The two lots on the south side of the acreage are the lots intended for rezoning. Ferris Wright Park
extends north to Bright Road. The current zoning is R1, Restric ted Suburban Residential. The rezoning request
is for the 9.016 acres to be rezoned to SO, Standard Office and Institutional District for the Wright Way
Corporate Park. The rezoning request conforms with both the Future Land Use Map and the Thoroughfare
Plan, components of the Community Plan. The rezoning application meets the criteria for a Standard Zoning
District, and staff recommends the Commission provide a recommendation of approval to City Council. In
addition to the area intended for development, also created will be Reserve A, a landscape easement, a cul-
de-sac right-of-way, and Reserve B for Ferris Wright Park. Reserve A located on the western portion of the
site will preserve woods and steep slopes. There is a no disturb area to accommodate a stream that runs
immediately off site. The lot intended for development is in the center of the site. A cul-de-sac right-of-way
will be created for Wright Way. On the east side of the site is a landscape easement, which will create a slight
buffer between the residential area to the east. All Preliminary and Final Plat criteria have been met, and staff
recommends approval with one condition.
Commission Questions
Ms. Fox requested clarification of the site width. The GIS map on Dubscovery does not depict Reserve A as
encompassing most of the woods and slope. She would like clarification of the area of Reserve A and its width
from Riverside Drive to the lot line. She is having difficulty comprehending the extent of the woods, specifically,
where the tree line starts and stops and if it is part of Reserve A.
Ms. Holt stated that on the drawing, there is a distinct line 1 /5th the distance of the southern portion anticipated
to be rezoned, which coincides with Reserve A. It is approximately 230 feet wide.
Ms. Fox stated that she measures the widest width at approximately 280 feet. Is that is at the tree line?
Mr. Hendershot stated that the dimensions shown on the Plat are correct. The 96 feet listed is the bearing for
the tangent along the right-of-way. In the table on the top left of the plat, in the curve, a length is added to
the 96 feet; therefore, the length of Reserve A is wider than 96 feet.
Ms. Fox stated that if that is at the tree line, she is satisfied.
Mr. Hendershot clarified the Reserve line on the plat.
Mr. Way stated that he would like to pose a larger question: does the City really need to put office space on
this site? There is an existing park here, which contains an element of historical significance. There is a
Planning and Zoning Commission DRAFT
Meeting Minutes of October 7, 2021
Page 12 of 16
residential subdivision to the east and an elementary school. On Emerald Parkway to the east, there is a
significant amount of land, which is already zoned for Office.
Ms. Rauch stated that it is currently zoned Residential but the Future Land Use map shows it as Office, as it
does for this site, as well.
Mr. Way inquired what the zoning is of the property north of the stream.
Ms. Holt responded that the area is zoned R-1, and it is identified as Parks and Open Space in the Community
Plan.
Mr. Way stated that this corner of Emerald Parkway and Riverside is very precious, and he is happy that it will
be reserved and not built upon. The stream is an interesting open space connection that leads to the river,
and there are many important environmental components. There is also the historic park and the parking for
the park. The investment for that park was relatively recent. This small piece of 7 acres seems to have
become an island. Is that precious 7 acres really needed for additional Office Space, or could we preserve the
entire site as open space based on the historic nature of the Indian Mounds at Ferris Wright Park?
Applicant Presentation
Colleen Gilger, City Economic Development Director, stated that the City does need office space. When the
City purchased the land, it also considered the Future Land Use Plan. We were aware of the Indian Mounds
located north of the stream and knew that maintaining that stream was very important to City Council. There
are several caves and falls within that area. When the City purchased the site further to the west, it was with
the intent for an office site. As a reminder, the purpose of the construction of Emerald Parkway was to create
an artery for future office development.
Mr. Way pointed out that there are also 1,000 acres available within the West Innovation District. This area is
a precious part of the City along the river, a gateway at Emerald Parkway and Riverside Drive. He is aware
that Emerald Parkway was constructed to open up the area for development, but given all that exists here,
including the school, he would like to ask his fellow Commissioners if what is proposed is the right thing to
do.
Mr. Fishman stated that although Emerald Parkway was constructe d in anticipation of future office, due to the
proximity of I-270, it was intended to have limited access. The access to the proposed office development
cannot be from the park or Riverside Drive, so the only access will have to be from Emerald Parkway.
Ms. Gilger clarified that the development would share the park driveway; there would not be another curbcut.
Creating another curbcut would require extensive blasting, due to the slope of the land, which would sacrifice
too much of the acreage. Because of the limited acreage, nothing exceeding 50,000 square feet will fit on the
site. The site will be marketed to small office users requiring 50,000 square feet or less. This is consistent
with the Community Plan, which indicates small office development here.
Mr. Fishman noted that factors have changed since the Community Plan was adopted. He is happy, however,
that no additional access would be created.
Ms. Fox inquired the anticipated height of the buildings.
Ms. Gilger stated that the buildings would be no more than two stories.
Ms. Fox inquired what percent of the site a 50,000 square foot building would encompass.
Ms. Holt responded that the maximum lot coverage is 70 percent, including parking.
Ms. Fox stated that Mr. Way has posed some very important points. If there were to be any development
here, it would need to be extremely sensitive to the stream, which has historical significance. The Community
Plan’s Future Land Use Plan calls for all of the area to the north to be preserved as park and open space and
not be developed. The Community Plan also provides for pedestrian connectivity from Riverside Drive along
that stream bed, throughout this area and to the historic park. If this site were to be rezoned, it would be
Planning and Zoning Commission DRAFT
Meeting Minutes of October 7, 2021
Page 13 of 16
extremely important to understand that the sensitivity of the site must be preserved. Typically, visibility of
commercial properties is anticipated. However, instead of this site being a focal point, it should be cradled
within the surrounding beautiful landscape. The surroundings should remain the focal point.
Ms. Gilger responded that, interestingly, previous projects that had some interest in this site desired that their
buildings be located further to the west, tucked more into the landscaping. Because this property is City-
owned, it would be necessary to seek an economic development agreement from City Council before selling,
transferring or incentivizing the land.
Mr. Fishman stated that when Emerald Parkway was developed, other than Cardinal Health, the intent was
that there would not be accesses off the roadway. Buildings would be located back from the roadway, but
would be tall ensuring visibility from I-270. The land was considered very valuable due to its proximity to I-
270. Now, factors are different and this area is very sensitive. He believes further study is warranted before
making a decision.
Ms. Gilger stated that it was anticipated that building heights would gradually increase from Riverside Drive
to Bright Road and toward Sawmill Road. The Community Plan shows small, one to two-story office next to
residential, and this site and the school are the only uses adjacent to the residential neighborhood. Buildings
constructed east of the school will be taller.
Ms. Fox inquired if Suburban Office Institutional zoning permitted no height greater than two stories or if it
was designated by the Community Plan for this area.
Ms. Gilger responded that it reflects the City’s agreement with the surrounding neighborhood. A 3-story project
was previously approved, to which the neighborhood objected. Consequently, a decision was made that any
future development proposals would not exceed two stories.
Mr. Supelak inquired if the development would be a PUD.
Ms. Rauch responded that, as currently proposed, it would be a standard district. Staff has engaged the
neighborhood in discussions regarding the City’s plans.
Ms. Gilger noted that because it is a City-owned site, the City has discretion concerning the end user.
Mr. Boggs stated that, as previously noted, any economic development agreement, whether it be for sale or
lease of the property, must be considered by City Council. In that circumstance, Council would act as the
property owner and be able to impose restrictions. There would not be the same due process considerations
inherent with the City’s zoning authority.
Ms. Fox inquired if the Commission has concerns due to the sensitivity of this site, what would be the
appropriate method to ensure Council was made aware of those concerns.
Mr. Boggs responded that this discussion will be reflected in the history that Council will be provided with the
application. There is an able representative of the Commission who sits on Council, who can relay those
concerns. The Commission is a recommending body for rezonings. If the Commission were to put conditions
on its recommendation, and Council were to disagree with those conditions or consider them to be too
restrictive, per the City Charter, five votes of Council would be required to remove the condition recommended
by the Commission. A super majority vote of Council could overturn a condition.
Mr. Supelak stated that there is unease on the Commission with this application. However, there are future
steps in the process, wherein this unease either can be assuaged or it be prohibited from going forward.
Provided the Commission can articulate its unease, he is not adverse to moving forward with the
recommendation. That would be with the understanding that the Commission will have future opportunities
to address the concerns, if desired.
Mr. Way stated that he will argue that there is a higher community purpose for this piece of land than what
has been proposed today. He would like this to be discussed and explored before moving forward with this
Planning and Zoning Commission DRAFT
Meeting Minutes of October 7, 2021
Page 14 of 16
application. Due to the proximity of the Dublin Arts Council, perhaps the site might have an arts-related focus
in addition to its historic nature.
Mr. Supelak responded that he believes this site has the potential to be something remarkable for the City,
and Suburban Office may not be it. He is unsure how that plays into the Commission’s consideration tonight.
Mr. Boggs stated that he would presume that the reason the City is requesting to rezone the site to Suburban
Office at this point is to aid the City in marketing this property. Suburban Office may not necessarily be its
final zoning, once a suitor is selected by the City. Would that be a fair assumption?
Ms. Gilger responded that would be a fair assumption, although this use is considered the best fit.
Mr. Boggs stated that it is also entirely possible that, in addition to an economic development agreement,
which could attach some conditions and which would be considered by City Council, the eventual user of this
property could request a PUD approval from the Commission.
Ms. Gilger responded that is possible, also.
Mr. Boggs stated that the point is that this is not the last word on how this site will be used; it is the first step.
Mr. Way stated that if, however, the site were left in its current zoning, the Commission could receive a future
application proposing a use other than Suburban Office.
Mr. Boggs responded that its current zoning is Residential; the Future Land Use Plan identifies it as Suburban
Office. Other than re-opening the conversation concerning the Future Land Use for this site, which the
Commission might be suggesting, the reason City administration has submitted this application is that they
believed the use had already been determined.
Mr. Way responded that the reason for his suggestion that the Commission discuss the potential use of this
area further is that he believes the Future Land Use map for this site might be incorrect and should be
reconsidered.
Mr. Schneier stated that he has a process question. The City purchased this land and determined what the
highest and best use would be for the City, no doubt with Economic Development’s input. It is not necessarily
the intent that the Commission rubberstamp that, but if we substitute our judgment, would it be possible for
the City to request a zoning appeal, and ultimately take it to City Council? The end result could be the same
because, presumably, this is what City Council wants.
Mr. Boggs responded that property rezonings and plat approvals are legislative decisions with the final
decisions made by City Council. The Commission is a recommending body with respect to both rezonings and
plats.
Mr. Schneier stated that in the end, this is not the Commission’s decision; we provide only a recommendation.
In view of that, he would favor making a recommendation of approval.
Ms. Fox stated that she would like to re-assure the Commissioners of an important point. The Planning and
Zoning Commission is the citizens’ commission, and provides the citizens’ opinions as to what they would like
to see developed. They recommend their opinions to City Council. If the Commission disagrees or agrees with
a proposal, City Council considers that. They should not focus on Council’s ultimate decision. If the Commission
does not express its opinion, Council would not be aware of it. The Commission does not serve as a rubber
stamp. As representatives of the residents, their opinions make a difference. Their opinion may differ, but it
is important for Council to hear the Commission’s honest opinion.
Public Comment
Linda Paulsen, 4158 Bright Road, Dublin, OH, stated that she and her husband recently moved from Houston
to Dublin, and are happy with that decision. She did not anticipate the late hour of this meeting, but she has
learned a great deal in the process. One of the most significant things she has learned is that this Commission
is very thorough and considers every detail. She is hopeful that they also look at the issue of greenspace with
the same level of detail. It is easy to look at business and tax revenue as progress. It is, and she has no
objection to business. She does not yet know Dublin as well as the Commission. Perhaps the City goes need
more business space, but she would ask the Commission to consider very carefully what she heard Mr. Way,
Planning and Zoning Commission DRAFT
Meeting Minutes of October 7, 2021
Page 15 of 16
Ms. Fox and others say – that this parcel is very special. She requests that not only because she lives nearby,
but because this site is special to the Dublin. She would urge the Commissioners to do as Ms. Fox encouraged
-- give your voice to City Council. Let them know that this is a very special greenspace, and that there is ample
space elsewhere for more business. It does not appear that this site offers much space for business, anyway.
If you are familiar with this site at all, you are aware that the parking lot at Ferris Wright Park is very small,
accommodating only 20 vehicles. If the City adds a business in there, people from that business will be using
this parking lot, particularly if the access to the business is through the parking lot. She agrees that the best
use of this land is not business. It provides a wonderful, beautiful greenspace for Dublin, and she requests
the City to preserve it as such.
Mr. Supelak inquired if the approval of the plats is contingent upon the approval of the rezoning.
Mr. Boggs responded that the approval of the plats does not necessarily hinge upon the recommendation of
approval for the rezoning.
Mr. Grimes moved, Mr. Schneier seconded a recommendation of approval of the rezoning.
Vote on the motion: Mr. Fishman, no; Mr. Way, no; Mr. Schneier, yes; Mr. Grimes, yes; Mr. Supelak, no; Ms.
Fox abstained, noting that this vote should be an opinion of the citizens, and she will have a final vote on the
application.
[Motion failed 2-3 with 1 abstention.]
Mr. Grimes moved, Mr. Schneier seconded a recommendation of approval of the Preliminary Plat with one
condition:
1) The applicant make any minor technical adjustments to the plat prior to submission for
acceptance to City Council.
Vote on the motion: Mr. Way, no; Mr. Schneier, yes; Mr. Fishman, no; Mr. Grimes, yes; Mr. Supelak, yes; Ms.
Fox abstained.
[Motion passed 3-2 with 1 abstention.]
Mr. Grimes moved, Mr. Schneier seconded a recommendation of approval of the Final Plat with one condition:
1) The applicant make any minor technical adjustments to the plat prior to submission for
acceptance to City Council.
Vote on the motion: Mr. Supelak, yes; Mr. Grimes, yes; Mr. Fishman, no; Mr. Way, no; Mr. Schneier, yes; Ms.
Fox abstained.
[Motion passed 3-2 with 1 abstention.]
Mr. Grimes noted that the current time is past 10:30 p.m. Does the Commission proceed with case reviews?
Mr. Boggs responded that, according to the Planning and Zoning Commission Rules of Order, no new items
are to be heard after 10:30 pm. However, that rule can be waived by an affirmative vote of 5 to suspend the
rules.
Consensus of the Commission was not to waive the rules. The additional case will be rescheduled to a future
agenda.
OTHER ACTIONS
Ms. Martin noted the need to schedule an additional meeting in November to accommodate the case
load. Commission members were requested to consider the date of Tuesday, November 16, 2021.
Mr. Supelak moved, Mr. Way seconded a motion to schedule a Special Meeting for Tuesday, November 16, at
6:30 p.m.
Vote on the motion: Ms. Fox, yes; Mr. Fishman, yes; Mr. Supelak, yes; Mr. Grimes, yes; Mr. Schneier, yes;
Mr. Way, yes.
[Motion passed 6-0.]
Planning and Zoning Commission DRAFT
Meeting Minutes of October 7, 2021
Page 16 of 16
Ms. Martin noted that there is a need to reschedule the Thursday, December 9 regular PZC meeting
due to a special City event occurring on that date.
Mr. Schneier moved, Mr. Way seconded a motion to re-schedule the Thursday, December 9 regular PZC
meeting to Wednesday, December 8, at 6:30 p.m.
Vote on the motion: Mr. Fishman, yes; Mr. Way, yes; Mr. Schneier, yes; Ms. Fox, yes; Mr. Grimes; yes; Mr.
Supelak, yes.
[Motion passed 6-0.]
COMMUNICATIONS
Ms. Martin stated that the developer of the northeast corner of Bright Road/Emerald Parkway site has
requested a Commission site review preceding the November 4 consideration of a revised Concept Plan
for senior housing. This site has a number of natural features and is significantly wooded. Per the
Commission’s Rules of Order permitting a 24-hour Special Meeting notice, staff will contact
Commissioners via email with an a proposed date within the upcoming week. The previous Concept
Plan considered by the Commission in 2020 has been emailed to Commissioners to facilitate their site
review. Although the revised Concept Plan for the November 4 meeting is not yet finalized, they
anticipate providing it early next week. Printed copies will be provided to the members to have in hand
when they tour the site.
The next regular PZC meeting is scheduled for 6:30 p.m., Thursday, October 14, 2021.
The meeting was adjourned at 10:45 p.m.
Chair, Planning and Zoning Commission
Assistant Clerk of Council
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 7, 2021
PLANNING 5200 Emerald Parkway Dublin, Ohio 43017 phone 614.410.4600 fax 614.410.4747 dublinohiousa.gov
21-101Z – WRIGHT WAY CORPORATE PARK
REZONING
Summary Zoning Map
Rezoning of one future parcel on Wright Way,
from R-1, Restricted Suburban Residential to
SO, Suburban Office and Institutional.
Site Location
Northeast corner of Riverside Drive and
Emerald Parkway.
Zoning
R-1, Restricted Suburban Residential District
Proposed Zoning
SO, Suburban Office and Institutional District
Property Owner
City of Dublin
Applicant/Representative
Dana L. McDaniel, City Manager
Applicable Land Use Regulations
Zoning Code Sections 153.232 and 153.234
Case Manager
Sarah Tresouthick Holt, AICP,
ASLA, Senior Planner
(614) 410-4662
sholt@dublin.oh.us
Next Steps
Upon a recommendation of approval from the Planning and Zoning Commission, the request will be forwarded to
City Council for their consideration.
City of Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Case 21-101Z| Wright Way
Thursday, October 7, 2021 | Page 2 of 5
1. Context Map
City of Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Case 21-101Z| Wright Way
Thursday, October 7, 2021 | Page 3 of 5
2. Overview
Background
This request is to rezone 9.016 acres, currently not addressed, located on Wright Way to Suburban
Office and Institutional (SO) District in order to align with the Community Plan. The Community Plan
identifies the parcel as “Suburban Office/Institutional”. In conjunction with the rezoning, the land is
proposed to be platted, and a portion of the parcel, totaling .253-acres, will be dedicated as
additional Wright Way right-of-way. The intent of the rezoning and platting applications is to create
one developable lot for economic development purposes.
Site Characteristics
Surrounding Land Use and Development Character
North: R-1, Restricted Suburban Residential (Ferris-Wright Park and agriculture)
East: R-1, Restricted Suburban Residential (Single Family Residential)
South: Emerald Parkway/I-270
West: Riverside Drive and R-1, Restricted Suburban Residential (Single Family Residential)
Road, Pedestrian and Bike Network
The parcel has approximately 1,300 feet of frontage along Emerald Parkway and 500 feet of
frontage on Riverside Drive. Access is provided via Wright Way, a dead end that will serve both
this parcel and Ferris-Wright Park. As part of the concurrent platting process, a cul-de-sac bulb,
in the form of public right-of-way, will be created. A shared-use-path currently exists along
Emerald Parkway and Wright Way.
Process
Zoning Code Section 153.232(B)(2) charges the Planning and Zoning Commission with making
recommendations to City Council on amendments to the Zoning Map, which is the purpose of a
rezoning. The proposed amendment will be forwarded to City Council for their consideration as an
Ordinance.
Proposal
Rezoning this parcel to SO, Suburban Office
and Institutional District, will align with the
adopted Community Plan. The intent of the SO
District is to provide a broad range of offices
primarily engaged in general administration,
supervision, purchasing, accounting and other
management functions. No retail trade or
stock of goods is permitted in this zone.
Community Plan
The Community Plan is a key policy document
adopted by City Council to guide decision-
making for the future of Dublin’s natural and
built environments. The Community Plan
includes Future Land Use (FLU)
recommendations, which should be considered
City of Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Case 21-101Z| Wright Way
Thursday, October 7, 2021 | Page 4 of 5
when a rezoning is presented. The site has one FLU recommendation, Suburban
Office/Institutional, and the SO District aligns with this recommended development character.
While Ferris-Wright Park is included with the related platting requests it is not included as part of
this rezoning.
The Community Plan also includes the
Thoroughfare Plan and Special Area Plans.
The Thoroughfare Plan identifies functional
street classifications, future roadway
connections, and planned right-of-way
widths. Emerald Parkway is designated a
Minor Arterial. The recommended right of-
way width for Emerald Parkway is 100 feet;
no additional right of-way is being sought.
Riverside Drive is identified as a Major
Arterial, and no additional right of way is
being sought for this road. Wright Way is
the only access for this parcel, and
additional right of way will be dedicated to
the City to create a cul-de-sac bulb.
This site is included within the Bright Road Special Area Plan, and is identified as Standard
Office/Institutional. Additionally, the western portion of the site shows no access along Riverside
Drive for both safety, topographic, and tree preservation reasons. The stream and ravine along
the north side of the property is recommended for protection. Both of these stipulations are
accommodated in the concurrent plats.
3. Criteria Analysis
Standard District Rezoning §153.232 and §153.234
1) The proposal is consistent with the intent of all applicable regulations, plans, and policies including
the Future Land Use recommendation.
Criteria Met. The proposal is consistent with the FLU plan, which calls for Suburban
Office/Institutional. This unique site, directly on Emerald Parkway and next to an existing
archaeological park, will offer a future business a distinctive office location.
2) The proposal is consistent with the intent of all applicable regulations, plans, and policies including
the Thoroughfare Plan recommendation.
Criteria Met. The proposal is consistent with the Thoroughfare Plan recommendations. Needed
right of way for a cul-de-sac bulb on Wright Way will be provided through the concurrent
Preliminary Plat and Final Plat processes.
3) The proposal is consistent with the intent of all applicable regulations, plans, and policies including
the Special Area Plan recommendation.
Criteria Met. The site is identified within the Bright Road Special Area Plan. The primary planning
goal identified is “High quality office development should be encouraged along Emerald Parkway
that focuses on quality architecture and site design that complements the surrounding natural
environment and residential neighborhoods”. The proposed rezoning to SO meets this vision.
City of Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Case 21-101Z| Wright Way
Thursday, October 7, 2021 | Page 5 of 5
4. Recommendation
The proposed Rezoning is consistent with the intent all applicable regulations, plans, and policies.
Planning recommends the Planning and Zoning Commission make a recommendation of
approval to City Council.
RECORD OF ORDINANCES
Dayton Legal Blank. Inc.
Ordinance No.
86-18
Passed
Form No. 30043
20
AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE
A REAL ESTATE PURCHASE AGREEMENT AND THE NECESSARY
CONVEYANCE DOCUMENTATION TO ACQUIRE A 4.215 ACRE,
MORE OR LESS, FEE SIMPLE INTEREST FROM THOMAS FAMILY LP
WHEREAS, the Thomas Family LP, an Ohio limited partnership (the "Seller's is the
owner of a certain parcel of real property situated in the City of Dublin, County of
Franklin and State of Ohio, containing 4.215 acres, more or less, with a tax parcel
number of 273-009067 (the "Premises'; and
WHEREAS, the Premises is unimproved real property located on the northeast corner
of Riverside Drive and Emerald Parkway in the City of Dublin and County of Franklin;
and
WHEREAS, the City of Dublin (the ""City' and the Seller participated in good faith
discussions and have come to mutually agreeable terms for the acquisition of the
necessary property interest for the sum of Six Hundred Thirty -Two Thousand Two
Hundred Fifty Dollars ($632,250.00); and
WHEREAS, the City desires to execute necessary conveyance documentation to
complete the transaction between the City and the Seller prior to the end of the year.
NOW, RET FORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Dublin, State of
Ohio, of the elected members concurring, that:
Section 1. The City Manager is hereby authorized to execute all necessary
conveyance documentation to acquire 4.215 acres, more or less, for the sum of Six
Hundred Thinly -Two Thousand Two Hundred Fifty Dollars ($632,250.00), said property
located within Franklin County Pard No. 273-009067.
Section 2. The Ordinanc
F:' T:7. V - M
Mayer — Presi#ng O
ATTEST:
II take effect at the earliest date allowed by law.
eALV-e,li. 2018.
Clerk of Council
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
MEETING MINUTES
MAY 1, 2014
AGENDA
1. Emerald Parkway Phase 8 – Office Building Emerald Parkway
14-027INF Informal Review
(Informal Discussion)
2. Conditional Use–Corporate Center-Fitness Edge 6250 Corporate Center Drive
14-030CU Conditional Use
(Approved 6 – 0)
3. Ohio University Heritage College of Osteopathic Medicine – Signs
14-025WID-DP/SP West Innovation District-Development Plan/Site Plan
6775 and 6785 Bobcat Way
(Tabled 5 – 0)
Chris Amorose Groomes called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. and led the Pledge of Allegiance. Other
Commission members present were Amy Kramb, Richard Taylor, Victoria Newell, Amy Salay, and John
Hardt. Joe Budde was absent. City representatives were Steve Langworthy, Gary Gunderman, Claudia
Husak, Jennifer Readler, Kristin Yorko, Alan Perkins, Marie Downie, Katie Ashbaugh, Dana McDaniel,
Colleen Gilger, and Flora Rogers.
Motion and Vote
Richard Taylor moved to accept the documents into the record as presented. Amy Kramb seconded. The
vote was as follows: Ms. Newell, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Hardt, yes; Ms. Amorose Groomes, yes; Ms.
Kramb, yes; and Mr. Taylor, yes. (Approved 6– 0.)
Ms. Amorose Groomes said they had meeting minutes for approval dated April 17th, but they were not
placed into Dropbox for review, so they are not going to approve the meeting minutes until the
Commissioners has the opportunity to review them. Ms. Husak said she will put them in for the next
meeting.
Ms. Amorose Groomes said there are three cases this evening and one case is eligible for consent and
said they will hear that case first. She said the order of the cas es would be heard case 2, 1 and 3 on the
agenda and briefly explained the rules and procedures of the Planning and Zoning Commission.
1. Emerald Parkway Phase 8 – Office Building Emerald Parkway
14-027INF Informal Review
Ms. Amorose Groomes said the following application is a request for informal feedback for the potential
development of a 30,000-square-foot office building with the potential for a 20,000-square-foot
expansion with associated parking and site improvements to be located on the north side of Emerald
Parkway Phase 8, approximately 750 feet east of the intersection with Riverside Drive.
Land Use and Long
Range Planning
5800 Shier Rings Road
Dublin, Ohio 43016 -1236
phone 614.410.4600
fax 614.410.4747
www.dublinohiousa.gov
____________________
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
May 1, 2014 – Meeting Minutes
Page 2 of 21
Ms. Husak presented this application that was intended to be heard at the last meeting in April but more
time was requested for this request of review of an informal proposal for a potential office building on
land that is owned by the City of Dublin just north of I-270.
Ms. Husak said the site is approximately five acres of an almost 20 -acre parcel with access off Bright
Road to the north and to the south Emerald Parkway has started construction and this will be the last
phase of Emerald Parkway connecting Sawmill Road to Tuttle Crossing Boulevard to the south. She said
the proposal is only for the southern portion of the entire parcel, the northern portion is a farm house
and earth works intended to be a City park.
Ms. Husak showed a copy of the Future Land Use Map from the Community Plan and said the southern
portion, south of the creek and the tree line is slated for a standard office and institutional land use which
would allow offices at a density of 12,500 -square-feet per acre and the northern portion of the site that
the City owns as well as some land there adjacent to Riverside Drive is intended to be open space. She
said there are existing residences on Grandee Cliffs and Jenmar Court which are shown in the Community
Plan to continue to be a residential use. She said the area plan land use is shown as office with buildings
along Emerald Parkway which is the road to the south with parking to the rear with access to the park as
part of the Emerald Parkway access point for any future development.
Ms. Husak said the Bright Road Area Plan also includes some perspective drawings and as the case
always is with the Community Plan and the Area Plans they are not intended to be prescriptive as in what
the development has to look like, it is just a character idea of what development could look like within the
area.
Ms. Husak said there is a Master Plan for the Holder Wright parcel that includes the land the City does
not currently own and there is plans for retaining the farm house, creating a nature education center,
and keeping the park passive and having an educational uses in that area with a general layout showing
the southern portion with offices.
Ms. Husak said the City owns this land and there have been some interests from the development
community to developing this site and staff is asking for feedback from the Commission so that they can
potentially give some ideas of what the character would be appropriate on this site.
Ms. Husak said the proposal is a two phase approach with phase one for an office building that has a
15,000-square-foot footprint with two stories at a total of 30,000 square feet. She said phase two the
footprint is 10,000 square feet with two stories would yield another 20,000 square feet for a total of
50,000 square feet. She said the plan shows a parking ratio of 5.7 spaces per 1,000 which exceeds
Code. She said the Code would require a 4 per 1,000 parking ratio and they have heard from a lot of
different office users that offices tend to get smaller with a lot more people that fit into buildings these
days, so the ratio seems to be what is needed by the market.
Ms. Husak said the access point would be a full access off Emerald Parkway intended to be a public road
to provide access not just to this office development but also to any potential development to the west as
well as providing access to a visitors parking lot for the park with bike path and multi -use path
connections from Emerald Parkway going north to the park with a potential to extend from Jenmar Court
bike path to the park. She said the plan shows consolidated stormwater management possibility
detention or retention shared with the site to the we st located along the common property line.
Ms. Husak said one of the discussion questions that is outlined is whether or not the site and the building
is designed and located appropriately in terms of the Area Plan and the Parks Master Plan.
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
May 1, 2014 – Meeting Minutes
Page 3 of 21
Ms. Husak showed some examples of architecture along Emerald Parkway and said the buildings tend to
be taller than what is being proposed with the example to the south not being in Dublin, but is a two -
story office building using materials generally of glass, stone, a nd brick. She said they wanted some
feedback from the Commission on what type of architecture and materials would be appropriate within
this area.
Ms. Husak said the other discussion questions relate to signs. She included the IGS building because it
has one of the interstate related signs for office buildings which the Code permits for sites with frontage
along I-270 and the Code states it is for corporate offices of at least two stories. She said the Code would
allow for a two story building with a 100-square-foot sign and a maximum square footage of a sign along
the highway would be 300 square feet. She said they would like to get some feedback on whether or not
the Commission would think it is appropriate to have the highway oriented signs for this site with
Emerald Parkway between the highway and the site, but there is not any other developable land between
this site and the highway. She said the other focus of the question is whether or not the Commission
could see two of such signs for a building where the Code would allow one sign and what other signs
would be appropriate in this area, whether being a combination of ground signs or wall signs at lower
heights and smaller in size.
Ms. Husak showed a map with Emerald Parkway in its completed stage fro m Riverside Drive, past Bright
Road toward the current stub by Lifetime Fitness. She showed a map of the Bright Road Area Plan in its
entirely showing a couple more sites along future Emerald Parkway that would have similar conditions
where there are frontage on Emerald Parkway and also frontage along I270.
Ms. Husak said they have had a meeting with some of the residents on Jenmar Court last week where
they discussed the Community Plan and what it sets out for land use, character, and the screening bein g
installed along Emerald Parkway south of Jenmar Court.
Ms. Husak said the discussion questions are outlined and Dana McDaniel is present for any questions.
Ms. Amorose Groomes said this is a City application and asked if the applicant would like to com e forward
and share any additional thoughts with the Commission.
Dana McDaniel, Director of Development with the City of Dublin, 5800 Shier Rings Road, thanked the
Commission for taking the time to let them bring this forward and said it is an unusual app roach but
given the activity on this site for the last five years they thought it would be prudent to bring it and get
feedback on the potential development of this site.
Mr. McDaniel said this is not unusual that the City leverages City-owned land into economic development
opportunities just as they did with Delta Energy at Perimeter and Emerald Parkway, and a companion
building to Delta with Everhart Financial to build out the remainder of that site, and Ohio University next
on the agenda is a great example. He said Nestle’s Quality Assurance Center expansion was on City-
owned land and in a transaction with the City they which allowed the expansion. He said there is another
100 acres that the City owns out at Houchard and Post Road that could be potent ially used for
commercial development.
Mr. McDaniel said the key points are that the development of a portion of this property be consistent with
the Community Plan and the Park Master Plan. He said their intent is to be good neighbors as the City
would want to be and to do this with a good level of quality and to set a good example on this new
Phase 8 extension which could be one of the first sites to be built out based on the amount of recent
activity. He thanked them for their feedback and said that there was a parking ratio study completed
that is being shared with City Council on some of the competiveness efforts that the City is undertaking
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
May 1, 2014 – Meeting Minutes
Page 4 of 21
with Suburban Office to keep them competitive with results showing parking ratios are creeping up
because of the amount of people per square feet that are going into buildings these days. He said they
will be very conscious of the trees with consolidating stormwater on this site with the Thomas property to
the west would be best for both sites. He said it is shown on the map but is not where it would
necessarily be placed and they know of the tree issues that they will be very sensitive to the placement of
the stormwater. He said relevant to the Thomas site to the west he has been in negotiations with them
for Emerald Parkway right-of-way and has a relationship with the Thomas Family and had some level of
discussion regarding access to their site and while staff has not been able to share this plan, but he
knows their concerns. He said should an opportunity to consol idate the sites for an economic
development opportunity arise the City would work together to entertain the options.
Mr. McDaniel said the proposal is only a reflection of the Ruscilli project that was being proposed and
over the last five plus years they have several options of potential development of this site, in learning a
lot through the discussions, they didn’t get to a level for a formal application, but with the road going in
and it has caused excitement for the possibilities of development on Eme rald Phase 8. He said he would
answer any questions.
Ms. Amorose Groomes said there was a speaker sign in sheet and there are three folks that signed up to
speak, but if anyone did not have the opportunity to sign in, it will not preclude anyone from shar ing their
thoughts. She said the Commission wants to hear what everyone has to say about this development and
keep the community involved.
Ms. Amorose Groomes reminded the speakers that the meetings are recorded, so step forward and state
your name and address for the record.
Donald Spangler, 3614 Jenmar Court, said he is the closest house to the Phase 1 building. He said there
are a lot of things that the City of Dublin does very well, however he questions the size of the building as
an office next to residential areas. He said they used to be a nice out of the way residential neighborhood
and they would like to retain that and most of the residents have lived there for 10 to 35 years and
several have retired to stay there and many have planned to stay. He said they have an established
community of mostly single-story homes suitable for retirees where they all know each other. He said
they accepted the original Bright Road Area Plan years ago and in the plan they felt it was not too
destructive to their community and they like being in Dublin based on the original plan and being told
that multi-story buildings would never be built on that site and that the multi -story buildings would be
built near Sawmill Road. He urged the Commission to vote no on this big multi-story office proposal and
said the Bright Road Area Plan originally called for single-story office, the plan respected the park, the
neighborhood, and the natural beauty of the stream and the waterfalls. He asked if they consider placing
a library on the site. He said this would be for Dublin residents and library traffic would be minimal at
rush hour, moderate throughout the day, and relatively a low impact. He said walking connections to the
historic park would be right over the bridge and if they build the elementary school on Bright with the
library on the field under discussion, the students could walk to the library and park and enjoy field trips
from the school to the library and park.
Sandra Taylor, 7143 Grandee Cliffs Drive, said she agrees with everything Mr. Spangler has said. She said
her husband died in January but he would have been very much in favor of sticking with the original
Bright Road Area Plan. She asked that they consider the greenness of Dublin and the changes to the
original plan seem to be reducing the greenness that they have become accustomed to.
Carla Clifton, 3875 Inverness Circle, said their condominium is located on Bright Road at Sawmill and
having a large office building with the current Sawmill Road traffic would clog up the entire city and no
one could get anywhere and the I-270 intersection could not handle it. She said they have been there
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
May 1, 2014 – Meeting Minutes
Page 5 of 21
for many years and like their quiet community. She said Bright Road cannot handle that extra traffic
even with Emerald Parkway going through to Hard Road. She said the traffic pattern and the
environment is not suitable for a large office building and it would more than just affect their
neighborhood it would affect the whole quadrant and they would have a lot of unhap py residents.
Pat Terrell, 7243 Inverness Court, said she is a realtor and moved into the Village at Inverness in 2002.
She said she has seen the property values go up in the good years but now they are below 2002 values,
and even though the recession has ended, they are not recovering in the community. She said the units
that back up to Bright Road currently are more difficult to sell and remain on the market more days and
the values are decreasing. She said she compared 2000 – 2013 the values which are 13.2% lower and
the average days on the market in 2013 was 167 days compared to 2002 at 18 days. She said this is
because when people look at units they are concerned about the traffic on Bright Road. She asked the
Commission to think about the people and t he community that has existed there for a long time and the
impact on their pocket books and lifestyle.
Julia Felts, 7187 Grandee Cliffs Drive, said currently the traffic to get to Sawmill is chaotic and if they
increase the volume of traffic and they lose their draw as a charming historic, nature- and family-friendly,
intelligent community. She said the original Emerald Parkway plans have one -story buildings to the west
of Grandee Cliffs and Jenmar Court. She said keeping the office buildings low around the historic park
and Indian Mounds, and their family homes, while maintaining the greenspace and retention ponds of the
original design will ensure that they maintain their Dublin character of tree -loving, innovative, integrative,
high class, professional, family friendly and historical. She said when you maximize the growth
opportunities with the sole focus of financial gain they lose the integrated identity of the Dublin they all
moved here for. She said if they allow those buildings to increasingly exp and then it is going to ruin the
neighborhood and bring the value of their homes and condominiums down.
Scott Clayton, 7239 Sawmill Road, said he owns a chiropractic office and is a business owner and he has
been there for 25 years. He said his ability to do his business is affected by the current traffic, he loses
patients because of the traffic and adding more is not a good business solution for existing and future
business owners in the area.
Diane Armstrong, 6988 Grandee Cliffs Drive for the last 23 years, said they have a really cool
neighborhood and used to tell people they are in Sawmill traffic and turn left in a corn field and then they
are at their house. She said the last three months have been so depressing with the trees that came
down, the blasting, but they knew it was coming. She said while they were fine with the original plan,
they now feel that this new proposal will ruin their neighborhood, it already has and they knew I -270 was
there but they could not see it, but now they can see it from their front porch and could give traffic
reports in both directions along I-270. She said the plan is not prescriptive but it is what has been
presented to their neighborhood for the last 20 plus years and asked the Commission to consider the
impact on the neighborhood and on their property values.
Jay Simonds, 3570 Jenmar Court, said he is on the east side. He said he moved 7½ years ago with his
new wife because of the trees, greenspace and the plan that they saw. He said they are expecting a
greenspace not more businesses. He said he measured the traffic which is at 74 decimals tonight and it is
a quiet night, and wondered what will it be like when Emerald is in and they add two more buildings next
to their neighborhood. He said he moved here knowin g that Emerald Parkway was going in and it is fine,
he wants sewer and water, but he is worried what the effect will be.
Judy Long, 4345 Bright Road, said they can see the traffic on I-270 and she had never seen the traffic on
I-270 from where she lives until they cut down all the trees to put in Emerald Parkway. She said they
came in with Igel and put in drainage and messed up their water shed and now it floods. She said
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
May 1, 2014 – Meeting Minutes
Page 6 of 21
everyone is talking about rush hour traffic but on a Saturday they cannot go anywher e. She said she sat
there for three green lights to get onto Sawmill Road. She asked that they fix the current issues before
they add to the existing conditions.
Neal Johnson, 7172 Grandee Cliffs, said he has lived there roughly 20 years and this is his third or fourth
Community Plan and of all the Community Plans they have always called for protecting preserving the
rural characteristic of their neighborhood. He said he has spent over 120,000 dollars improving his home
based on that concept plan and he w as lead to believe with the new plan it was going to be low density,
single-story to relieve traffic. He said this proposal is not relieving traffic and by his estimates it will be
13,000 cars that will be in this area at one time from 8 to 5. He said he w as concerned that this does not
do anything but detract from their neighborhood and the beauty of Dublin.
Randy Roth, 6987 Grandee Cliffs Drive, said his house is real close and he could talk about the fun
experiences with the blasting. He said he wante d to speak as a fellow commissioner serving as a
member of the Community Plan Steering Committee from 1995 to 1997 and on the transportation
subcommittee. He said he also served as a member and chair of CSAC. He said the plan presented is the
Bright Road Area Plan, the tweaks and updates have been in terms of the zoning language, they turned
the residential single family area to the east to medium density. He said it is the same basic plan and the
version he wanted to share has bubbles on it that explains in detail what the plan still entails indicating
going from one story to four. He said he would like to get joint ownership of Sawmill Road to get the
timing of lights and pay half the maintenance if Columbus let Dublin plan Sawmill Road. He said in this
area they need to go from one to four stories because they think that is survivable with the
improvements they are making with Emerald Parkway.
Deb Allard, 7291 Macbeth Drive, said they moved here when her son was one and now he is 20 years
old. She said they have seen the deer and wildlife and love being tucked away in the woods but able to
get to the shops and restaurants. She said her kids have gone through Dublin Schools and she has a
senior next year. She said they own a business in Dublin and understands why they have to have the
businesses in order to pay for things. She said before she goes to her office south of Bethel and Sawmill,
she does her errands and heads north from Bright Road and is shocked that at 8:30 in the morning, on a
weekday, you cannot go south on Sawmill from Summer Drive just north of Hard Road. She said the wait
is very long just to get to I-270. She said she wanted the Commission to think about hurting the
businesses when they are not thoroughly thinking it through.
Ms. Amorose Groomes asked if there were anyone else that would like to comment. [There were none.]
Ms. Amorose Groomes said there are some discussion questions asked of the Commission and is sure
there will be lots of other thoughts that they might have and anyt hing else that might come up as a
result of their discussion.
Ms. Kramb said she agrees with the concerns on traffic and that Sawmill Road is a mess and they have to
remember that it is in the City of Columbus and that District 6 ODOT has a current progra m project that
runs from I-270 up to Billingsley from the northbound lane and the studies are available and residents
can get information from District 6.
Ms. Kramb said she drives in the traffic every day and is about a ¼ mile to the north of this site off
Riverside and she sees the traffic. She said this building should not be seen from the Park because the
mounds in the park are on the National Register of Historic Places and one of the criteria for those
listings are the setting and environment of tho se particular things. She said she does not think they
should harm the integrity of those sites. She said whatever gets developed on this site needs to stay
below the trees so they cannot see it from the park. It is going to be a wonderful park and she is very
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
May 1, 2014 – Meeting Minutes
Page 7 of 21
glad to see it as the first kind in the area that will have any type of mounds preserved. She said she is
okay with something going on the site and understands the need to put something along Emerald
Parkway. The development needs to be very sensitive to the wonderful waterfall and ravine. She said
the parking lot cannot be lit or have a sea of lights like at Cardinal Health knowing that lighting is
necessary for safety reasons but it needs to be sensitive to the park.
Ms. Kramb said the building is facing the freeway and she is okay with a freeway sign but only one per
building with lighting restricted facing away from the park. She said a ground sign would be appropriate
off Emerald Parkway.
Ms. Kramb said she does not have an opinion on the a rchitecture. She does not feel it has to match what
is on the other side because they are starting with a new phase on this site. She is fine with a new
unique building but cannot distract from the park keeping below the trees and not visible from the pa rk.
She said it is a great opportunity to do some really neat buildings that are incorporated into a natural
environment like Frank Lloyd Wright.
Ms. Newell thanked the residents for coming in and talking with the Commission. She said she feels their
pain in terms of traffic, prior to this evening’s case she drove through the area and it took 30 minutes to
get through the intersection of Sawmill and Bright Road and she was concerned to arrive in time for the
meeting. She said they have a beautiful neighborhood within the City of Dublin and is very respectful to
their community and property.
Ms. Newell said this site is going to be developed but what is proposed can be done better. She said they
are showing a building that is a box and that is the least i nnovative and is not appropriate for this site
and they need something more respectful to the parkland and more integrated within the site. She said
the best architecture to her is something that is integrated within its surroundings and needs a much
better presentation of screening and there is none shown on the plan.
Ms. Newell said the architecture was supposed to have a residential feel and character with a building
with varying roof lines. She said she does not think that a two -story building might be out of scale, but
the scale can be tiered and played with so that they can be respectful to more residential surrounding
properties.
Ms. Newell said the signage and frontage means just that, while she realizes that the land cannot be
developed she can think of other properties that have the same conditions where it has been held against
them and she is not supportive of that change. She said she does not know where they would stop using
that for the other properties along Emerald Parkway. She said she is obviously not supportive of two
signs, if she cannot support freeway frontage.
Mr. Taylor thanked everyone who came here tonight and said he is excited to see a large crowd that
shows up for a meeting because this Commission is really about the public a nd the public input. He said
when they get the planning reports they try to learn as much as the can about a project and a site, he
never feels like he has a complete picture until he hears from the people and the comments from the
ground level is really important.
Mr. Taylor said he wants to know what they are thinking when Emerald Parkway is completed and all the
buildings are built out and Emerald Parkway ends at Sawmill Road, and are there plans for the traffic and
how it is addressed.
Ms. Husak said they do not have anyone from Traffic Engineering here but within the Community Plan
the land uses have not changed between the 2007 plan and the current plan. She said in 2007 they did a
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
May 1, 2014 – Meeting Minutes
Page 8 of 21
City wide modeling where all the land uses were plugged into a traffi c model that then generated
appropriate densities for the offices, so it is something that has been looked at and studied at least as
part of that plan. She said Sawmill Road is not within the corporate limits of the City but they are working
with them on improvements on Sawmill and Hard. She said she has had conversations with Paul
Hammersmith where he said Emerald Parkway needs to be there for a while for it to get established and
for people to change their patterns.
Mr. Taylor said what he heard was a common theme in all the comments that when this gets done and
developed if nothing else changes Sawmill Road will be a bigger disaster then it is now. He said he does
not like the site plan finding it very un-imaginative, uninventive and it does not use the things that are
here to take advantage of making this a better plan or the site better and he thinks there are elements of
this that could be rearranged to help them out a lot.
Mr. Taylor said the access road dead ends on the far west and even when some thing is built to the west
it is another office building that means all the traffic that comes into here has to turn around at some
point to get back out. He said the park is going to be visited by school buses and the buses will not be
able to get in here safely and turn around and get back, so that leads him to think the access drive is in
the wrong place. He said if they were to move the access to where the detention pond is, it would make
the traffic go the other direction and allow people to loop aroun d and pull in the parking lot properly and
visit the park. He was concerned that the detention pond is a real afterthought in this plan, and it could
be an attractive visual thing but also be a buffer because the fountain would make noise enough to mask
a lot of road sound and block other sounds.
Ms. Husak said there will be another access points planned on Emerald Parkway for those two sites and
there is grading issues due to the natural flow of the water toward Riverside Drive and down toward
Billingsley.
Mr. Taylor said the parking layout is un-imaginative and he is concerned about the straight line of
evergreens along Emerald Parkway and there is an opportunity here to do something that presents a
more attractive face to the street and visitors to Dub lin then basically a hedge row along the front. He
said that is reflective of the architecture as just a box and it needs to look at something far beyond that.
Mr. Taylor said they should be thinking about how these buildings are going to look from the fr eeway and
they might be seeing the roofs of these buildings needing to take that into account. He said he is
concerned about two-story buildings going in on this site and the overall Master Plan for this area being
there is more appropriate places for that and he is concerned as they get closer to Riverside Drive and to
the corridor that is very rural that they keep buildings as low as possible. He said he would prefer to see
buildings lower and smaller.
Mr. Taylor said the signage issue on this particular site it is effectively on I-270 so he would not have a
problem looking at this as meeting the criteria for the I -270 signs, however one sign per building is
appropriate.
Mr. Hardt thanked the residents who have come tonight and said they are citizen volu nteers that are also
residents of Dublin and all too often they talk about cases trying to contemplate the impact on the City
and unfortunately sometimes the room is empty. He said it is great to see so much interest in your
community and neighborhood and to hear their feedback helps the Commission.
Mr. Hardt thanked the applicant for bringing this in for an informal review because they get cases that
are fully baked when they land at the Commission and developers presentation is like it or not and seeing
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
May 1, 2014 – Meeting Minutes
Page 9 of 21
something this early in the process so they have an opportunity to influence and provide feedback before
considered amount of effort has been put into it is very helpful and is appreciative.
Mr. Hardt said he is familiar with this area of town and is symp athetic to the traffic problems and he does
not pretend to know what the answer is, but there have been very valid questions that need to be
answered and he looks forward to seeing details on traffic and other things like that when this is brought
forward as a developed detailed plan.
Mr. Hardt said the overall building and siting is essentially the same as the area plan was showing but as
he looked at it closely there are some items associated with this site that are different than in the
Community Plan Area Plan. He agrees with Mr. Taylor about the street and the dead end and specifically
there are two other streets like this in the City and that is Shawan Falls and the stub of Rings Road by
the new post office and both are similar and extraordinarily awkward. He said Shawan Falls has a cul -de-
sac to turn around and a park off to one side much like this site and both are confusing to.
Mr. Hardt said the Community Plan shows a building at the eastern edge of this site oriented north south
with the parking toward the west which has the effect of providing some physical structure to screen the
parking from the neighborhood and the architecture and the massing be broken up to serve as a
bookend to separate the parking from the homes. He said there is an opportunity to do better.
Mr. Hardt said he understands that corporate users have asked for higher parking counts and
unfortunately it puts an acute burden on the site to accommodate all that parking and before he can be
comfortable he needs to know if they are trying to accommodate a specific identified corporate citizen
with a specific need or are they just building this much parking because they think they might need it
someday.
Mr. Hardt said he has some heartburn regarding the phase two approach, wit h a number of sites within
the City that have greenspace adjacent to a building where a phase two was intended to be built and for
a variety of reasons it never got built and they are left with an unfinished looking site. He said he
understands the need to try and accommodate a flexible building footprint and would prefer to a site plan
that puts parking up against the phase one building with the stormwater configured in a way that that
the parking can easily be peeled out later or something that condenses the footprint on the site
recognizing a phase two might be built but not look unfinished in the interim.
Mr. Hardt said two or multi-stories is not necessarily a problem but the overall square footage is the
bigger issue and how much development and density is being put on this site and once that is established
in many cases building multi-story building can be more attractive and a better option because it stacks
occupied space on top of each other and reduces the footprint on the site and provides more greenspace
and if done well. He said the overall square footage that they need to be cautious of and how it impacts
the traffic and the other issues that have come up.
Mr. Hardt said the architecture of the building in the examples provided are very attra ctive buildings and
brick, stone and glass is a good place to start as far as materials go but he was not prepared to give
more feedback other than that the buildings are far larger in scale even higher or taller buildings so
whether that fenestration is appropriate for that site he does not know until he sees some specific
architecture for this building.
Mr. Hardt said the signage issue given the fact that there is not any buildable land on the south side of
Emerald Parkway meets the definition of -I270 frontage, however he would want to see that addressed in
a formal way within a PUD. He said it would also be appropriate to have a monument sign on the street
side so that vehicles along Emerald Parkway can find the entrance and know where the building is as
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
May 1, 2014 – Meeting Minutes
Page 10 of 21
opposed to the freeway frontage which the freeway signage which is intended more for corporate identity
purposes.
Ms. Salay thanked the residents. She said she started out her civic career about 20 years ago as a
resident worried about an office development adjacent to her neighborhood, so she understands what
the residents are going through and how much heartburn they have when you think about your home,
family, and how much you have invested in your homes and not the finances but with your heart a nd
soul. She said the new tag line is Dublin is Home and they have talked a lot about this site and the good
news is that the City of Dublin owns the site so Council has spent a lot of time talking what is appropriate
to go on this site. She asked as this goes forward that the history of discussions about interstate-oriented
signs be included.
Ms. Salay said she is missing the plan that Dublin has for traffic in this area and would like to see exactly
how the roadways connect and traffic counts and what is anticipated in much more detail. She said they
could do something creative with the stormwater and make it more of the park like setting.
Ms. Salay said the siting is preferred as indicated in the Community Plan with the buildings pulled up to
toward Emerald Parkway. She said if they are going to have one business occupy the entire Phase 1 and
Phase 2 then they get one sign if it is a two-story building.
Ms. Salay said she loves a backlit sign and likes the example of Graeter’s on Bethel Road where you can
see their corporate sign during the day and at night it is really attractively backlit and you can see their
name is very visible. Ms. Salay also thought that a monument sign can be appropriate on Emerald
Parkway. She said if this is done in a PUD, the n they can tailor it to a specific a corporate customer that
wants to go here.
Ms. Salay said she does not think a two-story building is the worst thing that can happen to this site, but
she thinks it has to be placed in such a way on the site that they are really sensitive to the neighbors, the
creek, ravine and the sacred ground to the north. She said the City chose to purchase that land to
develop an incredible park.
Ms. Salay said the buildings have to take queues from the plan and use more stone tha n brick or glass,
make this blend in with the park and make it a selling feature of this site.
Ms. Salay said they need to remain sensitive to lighting. She said she has an office building adjacent to
her neighborhood with a really heavy screening that w as planted way before the office buildings were
built and would ask that they start as soon as they have the ability to go out and start planting the
screening so the screening gets a head start especially since they have already cut down the trees to
build Emerald Parkway and to get into replacement mode soon than later where they can do it and get
the screening. She said the park will be closing at dusk and there would be gates thinking they do not
want visitors in the park at night.
Ms. Amorose Groomes said she is very glad to see all the folks here because she grew up with them on
MacDuff and really appreciates them coming because this is what makes Dublin the community that it is.
Ms. Amorose Groomes said she is not excited about the primary entry feature of this being on the east
side of the property adjacent to the residential component and would like to see a more centrally located
entrance feature that would “T” out and provide access. She said she understands the entrance to the
Holder Homestead will not be from Bright Road and will be with this development so they need to think
about the ease of which they can move through this space with about 600 cars with busloads of kids
because they have spent too much time and energy to come up short on the safety of the transportation.
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
May 1, 2014 – Meeting Minutes
Page 11 of 21
Ms. Amorose Groomes said she does not see two stories as a bad thing and would agree that the overall
limitation should be on the square footage particularly from the I -270 vista because it is very difficult to
make a roof look very attractive and it is easier to hide roof mechanicals on a two -story building. She said
she would like to hold the square footage less than what is contemplated and hold the parking and the
intensity of the use down as well.
Ms. Amorose Groomes said that this site essentially has I-270 frontage because there is no buildable land
between I-270 and the front of this property with one sign to the scale with the building.
Ms. Amorose Groomes said she is thankful to the City for bringing this in as an informal review so that
they can get layout issues resolved. She said the layout is the more important thing is that they are
making sure that they are not obtrusive onto the adjacent neighborhood. She said she agrees that the
illustrations that were given in terms of architecture is not representative of what would be seen on this
site, but would like to see them hold a different line because of the historic nature and its proximity to
the park. She said the nearby Gelpi site is near and dear because Elea nor Gelpi was once Eleanor
Amorose and all of this should look like it should come together fully with the use of stone and
appropriate materials.
Ms. Amorose Groomes said Cardinal Health dealt with the stormwater on their property with having the
creek come through the property with a water feature extending far beyond the detention portion. She
said there is a creek bed that is primarily dry but is beautiful and she can see them doing a dry creek bed
sort of thing that will mimic Cardinal. She said she i s not in favor of the shape of the pond and would like
to see it with more frontage to I270 and be more of an amenity than an afterthought.
Ms. Amorose Groomes said she is concerned with the lighting and there are so many options while being
sensitive to the park and residents. She said this is an informal review and the City of Dublin has done
the community a great service by bringing this as an informal review and that’s why they brought this to
get their thoughts and to make sure you were engaged in thi s entire process so that when it becomes
developed, they are all as comfortable as possible.
Ms. Amorose Groomes said she is concerned with access onto Emerald Parkway and they are going to
have to have a left hand turn out of there and her least favorit e area of this part of town is Tuttle where
there is a “U” turn to travel east on Tuttle to access I-270 and she does not want to create that near this
site.
Ms. Husak asked that if any of the residents would like to sign the sign in sheets so that they can be
added to the notification lists for future application and reviews.
Mr. McDaniel thanked the audience and apologized for causing any anxiety that this is a plan that pushes
the envelope in density by design so that they can get the hard feedback be fore they go market it and be
sensitive to the all the issues
[Ms. Amorose Groomes said this concludes their discussion for this case. She said they will take a short
break at 8:22 pm.]
RECORD OF ORDINANCES
Ordinance No.
34 -10
Passed 20
AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE ACQUISITION OF
21.49 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED AT 4279 BRIGHT ROAD,
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A REAL
ESTATE PURCHASE AGREEMENT, AND APPROPRIATING
FUNDS THEREFOR (HOLDER PROPERTY).
WHEREAS, a goal of City Council is to continue to acquire parkland for recreation, open
space and preservation of natural and man-made features; and
WHEREAS, the Holder -Wright Works, an ancient man-made landform that has critical
archaeological importance, is located on this land; and
WHEREAS, the Community Plan recommends the Holder -Wright Works be preserved;
and
WHEREAS, funding for the acquisition of the property has been programmed in the
City's Capital Improvements Program; and
WHEREAS, it is necessary to amend the annual appropriations measure to provide
adequate funding authorization for the acquisition of the property.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Dublin, State
of Ohio, & of the elected members concurring, that:
Section 1 . The City Manager is hereby authorized to execute the Real Estate Purchase
Agreement and any related closing documents related to the acquisition of the property
located at 4279 Bright Road as identified on the attached Exhibit.
Section 2 . There be appropriated from the unappropriated balance in the Parkland
Acquisition Fund the amount of $1,500,000 to account number 402 - 0210 - 780 -2510 for
the acquisition of 4729 Bright Road.
Section 3 . The Ordinance shall take effect and be in force in accordance with Section
4.04(b) of the Dublin City Charter.
Passed this day of e , 2010
i
Mayor - Prtoing •
ATTEST:
Clerk of Council