Ordinance 35-12RECORD OF ORDINANCES
Ordinance No. 35 Passed 20
AN ORDINANCE REZONING APPROXIMATELY 4.91 ACRES,
ON THE EAST SIDE OF AVERY- MUIRFIELD DRIVE
APPROXIMATELY 500 FEET NORTH OF THE INTERSECTION
WITH TARA HILL DRIVE, FROM PUD, PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT (INDIAN RUN MEADOWS
COMMERCIAL) TO PUD, PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
DISTRICT (INDIAN RUN MEADOWS COMMERCIAL REVISED)
TO REVISE THE DEVELOPMENT TEXT TO PERMIT UP TO
1,680 SQUARE FEET OF OUTDOOR PATIO AREA IN FRONT OF
AN EXISTING RESTAURANT WITHIN THE SHOPPES AT
ATHENRY SHOPPING CENTER. (CASE 12- 017Z /PDP /FDP)
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Dublin,
' of its elected members concurring, that:
Section 1. The following described real estate, (see attached legal
description), situated in the City of Dublin, State of Ohio, is hereby rezoned
PUD, Planned Unit Development District, and shall be subject to regulations
and procedures contained in Ordinance No. 21 -70 (Chapter 153 of the
Codified Ordinances), the City of Dublin Zoning Code and amendments
thereto.
Section 2 . The application, including the list of contiguous and affected
property owners, and the recommendations of the Planning and Zoning
Commission, are all incorporated into and made an official part of this
Ordinance and said real estate shall be developed and used in accordance
there within.
Section 3 . This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force from and after the
earliest period allowed by law.
Passed this c2 /st day of 2012.
Mayor - Pre e i g Officer
ATTEST:
SAI-
.f
Office of the City Manager
City of Dublin Phone: 614 - 1 410-4400 • Fax:b614 --410 -4490 1090
Memo
To: Members of Dublin City Council
From: Marsha I. Grigsby, City Manager
Date: May 17, 2012
Initiated By: Steve Langworthy, Director of Land Use and Long Range Planning
Claudia D. Husak, AICP, Planner II
Re: Ordinance 35 -12 - Rezoning Approximately 4.91 Acres, on the East Side of
Avery- Muirfield Drive, Approximately 500 Feet North of the Intersection with
Tara Hill Drive, from PUD, Planned Unit Development District (Indian Run
Meadows Commercial) to PUD, Planned Unit Development District (Indian Rur
Meadows Commercial Revised) to Revise the Development Text to Permit up
to 1,680 Square Feet of Outdoor Patio Area in Front of an Existing Restaurant
within the Shoppes of Athenry Shopping Center (Case 12- 017Z /PDP /FDP)
Summary
Ordinance 35 -12 is a request for review and approval of a rezoning with preliminary
development plan from PUD, Planned Unit Development District (Indian Run Meadows
Commercial) to PUD, (Indian Run Meadows Commercial Revised) to revise the development
text to permit up to 1,680 square feet of outdoor patio area in front of an existing restaurant
within the Shoppes of Athenry shopping center.
The ordinance was introduced at the May 7, 2012 City Council meeting and Council Members
generally favored the proposal. A nearby resident spoke regarding the proposal and voiced
concerns that not all issues discussed at the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting were
addressed. The resident was also concerned with the general operations of the shopping
center, not related to the patio application. He requested particularly that parking behind the
shopping center be eliminated as part of this rezoning ordinance. In an email sent following the
Council meeting for first reading of Ordinance 35 -12, Mr. McCash, a representative for adjacent
residents, summarized the issues the adjacent neighbors have as:
1) The enclosure of the existing patio area;
2) The operations of pizza restaurants within the shopping center;
3) A concern that the prior commitments and conditions on prohibiting parking in the rear
are not being enforced; and
4) Continued issues with trash pick -up outside of designated hours.
As part of the discussion at the first reading, Council requested information regarding the Code
enforcement activities for the shopping center be provided at the second reading.
Memo re. Ordinance 35 -12 - Rezoning with Preliminary Development Plan
Indian Run Meadows PUD
Shoppes of Athenry — Mary Kelley's
May 17, 2012
Page 2 of 3
Issues
Patio
1) Patio enclosure: At the April 12, 2012 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, Mr.
McCash worked with the Commission and staff to address concerns the residents had
regarding the patio operations. The applicant agreed to make the changes suggested,
including modifying the development text to require a rezoning for any future patios and
limiting patio service to the front of the tenant space. Apparently, there was one additional
request of which Planning was unaware that was made after the meeting regarding
enclosure of the existing patio space. To meet the request of Mr. McCash, the applicant has
further revised the site plan to include a wrought -iron fence (rather than a gate) at the
north end of the existing patio to eliminate the possibility of patio service occurring through
the existing patio space. The opening at the southern end will be enclosed with a gate, as
required by the Planning and Zoning Commission. A gate must be provided on at least one
side of the enclosed patio area to meet the Fire Code. Planning has received
correspondence from Mr. McCash stating that this redesign is acceptable.
Shopping Center
2) Fast -food interpretation: The development text for the commercial areas within the Indian
Run Meadows PUD states "Eating and drinking places "shall include full line restaurants and
shall not include fast food or drive -in restaurants. It is the opinion of adjacent residents that
the City has violated the development text by permitting pizza places within the shopping
center. This issue was raised in 2008 and addressed by the Law Director at that time. The
Law Director concluded that while the since the Zoning Code does not include a specific
definition of "fast food" the interpretation of the development text must be made in favor of
the property owner. (See attached memo from the Law Director.) No drive in facilities have
been approved or operated within the center.
3) Parking: Planning researched the issue of parking behind the shopping center and has not
found a strict prohibition against parking behind the center as part of the Planning and
Zoning Commission records. Some commitments may have been made between the
landowner and the residents, but these are not enforceable by the City, except for those
areas marked by Washington Township Fire Department for hydrants and safe passage.
4) Trash pick -up: City Code requires trash in commercial areas within 500 yards of residential
areas to be picked up between the hours of 7 a.m. and 9 p.m. There is history indicating
that the property owner for the shopping center agreed to limit the pick -up hours to
between 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. Code Enforcement has consistently worked with either the
property manager or the trash contractor to achieve adherence to these pick -up limitations.
(See correspondence made available in Council Planning room.)
Code Enforcement
Attached is code enforcement history since 2008 and activity regarding this shopping center as
well as a summary of history from 2000 to 2007. There is a substantial packet of material prior
to 2008, which has been placed in Council Planning for your review. Also included are the many
emails and responses that have been sent to the City and addressed by various divisions as
appropriate. Not all issues were related to specific code items and therefore could not be
enforced by the City.
Memo re. Ordinance 35 -12 - Rezoning with Preliminary Development Plan
Indian Run Meadows PUD
Shoppes of Athenry — Mary Kelley's
May 17, 2012
Page 3 of 3
Recommendation
Planning recommends City Council approval of Ordinance 35 -12 at the second reading /public
hearing on May 21, 2012.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Steve Langworthy, Director of Land Use and Long Range Planning
Gary Gunderman, Planning Manager — Design Development
FROM: Stephen Smith, Law Director
Jennifer Readler, Assistant Law Director
DATE: July 29, 2008
RE: Marco's Pizza's Operation within the Shoppes of Athenry
L INTRODUCTION
A resident in the Indian Run subdivision has raised an issue regarding whether Marco's
Pizza, a restaurant located within the Shoppes of Athenry center, is a permitted use. Marco's
serves Italian cuisine but does not offer a place for patrons to sit when they frequent the
restaurant. Instead, customers can either take away their order or call in the order and Marco's
employees deliver it to them.
The resident has pointed out that the Indian Run text permits only "full line" restaurants
and prohibits "fast food" restaurants. The resident argues that Marco's Pizza is not a "full line
restaurant" and is instead a prohibited "fast food" restaurant.
This memorandum will analyze this issue in more detail.
II. ANALYSIS
A. Indian Run Development Text
The Indian Run Development text provides the following with regard to permitted and
prohibited uses:
H. Permitted Uses
1. Those permitted uses shall be those listed in Chapter 1161, Neighborhood
Commercial District except "Eating and drinking places" shall include full
line restaurants and shall not include fast food or drive -in restaurants or
places primarily designed for entertainment or dancing and referred to by
various names such as dance hall, cabaret, and night club and the
following uses listed in Chapter 1163, Community Commercial District.
(H02224402}
It is settled law in Ohio that, when reviewing an ambiguous zoning regulation, the
interpretation of the regulation must be made in favor of the property owner.' This is consistent
with the holding by the Supreme Court of Ohio where it was determined that:
The general rule, with respect to construing agreements restricting the use of real
estate, is that such agreements are strictly construed against limitations upon such
use, and that all doubts should be resolved against a possible construction thereof
which would increase the restriction upon the use of real estate.
With reference to zoning regulation interpretation, any ambiguity in either a zoning
ordinance or a development plan must be construed in favor of the property owner.' While
reviewing the ordinance or development plan, one must interpret the scope of the zoning
regulation within the written document and not extend any limitation not clearly prescribed.'
Therefore, although the teat permits full line restaurants and proscribes fast food restaurants, it
does not clearly prohibit restaurants that would not be considered either fast food or full line
restaurants.
Neither the Dublin Code nor the Indian Run Development Teat contains definitions for
"full line" or "fast food" restaurants. In these situations, Ohio law requires that the terms be
given their common and ordinary meaning. Consequently, we have researched definitions
found in other widely recognized resource materials.
B. Common Definition
Webster's Collegiate Dictionary defines the two terms as follows:
• Fast -food: Specializing in the rapid preparation and service
of food (as hamburgers or fried chicken).
• Full -line: The term "full line" is not defined, however, the
term "full- service" is. The definition for "full- service" is
"[p]roviding comprehensive service of a particular kind."
Although Marco's Pizza may not qualify as a "full line" restaurant, it also does not
appear that Marco's Pizza would fit Webster's definition of "fast food."
C. North American Industrial Classification System Definition
The U.S. Census Bureau's North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) is
used to facilitate the uniform collection, tabulation, presentation, and analysis of data relating to
'Saunders v. Clark County Zoning Department (1981), 66 Ohio St. 2d 259, 261, 421 N.E.2d 152, State ex rel. Moore
Oil Co. v. Dauben (1919), 99 Ohio St 406, syl., 124 N.E.2d 232, Solid Rock Ministries International 138 Ohio
App.3d at 51.
2 Loblaw, Inc. v. Warren Plaza, Inc. (1955), 163 Ohio St. 581 citing 14 American Jurisprudence, 621, Section 212.
' Kenkel v. Hamilton County Board of Commissioners (Dec. 21, 2001), Hamilton App. No. C- 010347, 2001 WL
1635770.
Cash v. Cincinnati Board of Zoning Appeals, 117 Ohio App.3d 319 (1996)
' State ex rel. Spiccia v. Abate, 2 Ohio St. 2d 129, 130 (1965).
{H02224402 }
business and industrial establishments. Federal and State agencies, trade associations, private
businesses, and other organizations use NAICS classifications to collect or publish data
according to industry.
NAICS classifies restaurants as either "full- service" or "limited service ". Full- service
restaurants are "establishments primarily engaged in providing food services to patrons who are
served while seated ...and pay after eating. " Limited - service restaurants, in contrast, are those
restaurants where patrons order and select items, pay before eating, and consume the food on the
premises, take the food away, or have the food delivered. Within this category are many sub-
categories of restaurants, including delicatessens, pizza delivery shops, pizza parlors and fast
food restaurants. Fast food restaurants and pizza parlors are listed in two separate subcategories,
suggesting that they are viewed as categorically different types of restaurants by the NAICS.
Under NAICS, Marco's Pizza would not be classified as a fast food restaurant.
III. CONCLUSION
The terms "fast food" and "full- line" as used in the Indian Run Development text are
undefined and ambiguous. As such, these terms must be defined using their common and
ordinary meanings. The common definition of "fast food" used by Webster's Dictionary does
not appear to include pizza shops such as Marco's Pizza. Furthermore, the Federal government's
North American Industrial Classification System expressly categorizes pizza parlors separately
from fast food restaurants. Marco's Pizza, therefore, should not be considered a fast food
restaurant within the definition of the Indian Run Development text.
6 "North American Industry Classification System -- Update for 2002 ", 60 Fed. Reg. 21242 -01 (April 20, 2000).
7 "722110 Full- Sery ice Restaurants ", U.S. Census Bureau, available at: http: / /www.census.gov /eos /www /naies/
htmis/7 /722110.htm.
8 "722211 Limited- Service Restaurants ", U.S. Census Bureau, available at: http: / /www.census.gov /eos/www /naies/
htmis/7 /722211.htm.
{H02224402 }
Code Enforcement Actions Shoppes of Athenry
2008 — Present
All items included in this summary are actions taken by Code Enforcement. Items not included
are communications concerning after hours deliveries and trash pick -up. Many of these
complaints were directed to the Police Department or lacked necessary information to be
addressed by Code Enforcement. In addition, to the violations noted below, Code Enforcement
conducted a series of inspections of the Shoppes at Athenry site during between August 2008
and September of 2009 at City Council's request. These inspections totaled 70 in 2008 and 151
in 2009. Any formal violations found during these inspections are noted in the totals below. If
Code Enforcement noticed a violation during these inspections, as always, the initial approach is
to resolve the matter without filing a formal violation by contacting the property owner or the
management company. In many instances a potential violation was addressed without the
necessity to file a formal violation.
Sign Violations
Consist of prohibited signs such as neon, banners, signs installed on City right -of -way or signs
installed without a permit.
2008 (10)
2010(l)
2011(l)
2012(l)
Landscape Violations
Consist of missing plant material and maintenance of existing plant material. Landscape site
inspections are conducted on a routine basis every two years or by complaint.
No violations
Miscellaneous Complaints
Consist of trash and litter complaints, daytime noise complaints, and maintenance of the
perimeter fence and the shopping center site. This also includes any unapproved use of outdoor
seating.
No violations
Weed Violations
Consist of lack of maintenance of weeds and grass in excess of six inches on the property on
the residential side of the perimeter fence.
2008(l)
Office of the City Manager
5200 Emerald Parkway • Dublin, OH 43017 -1006
crrY OF DUBLIN- Phone: 614410 -4400 • Fax: 614 -410 -4490
Memo
TO: Members of City Council
FROM: Jane S. Brautigam, City Manager
DATE: September 18, 2007
INITIATED BY: Steven Langworthy, Land Use and Long Range Planning Director
RE: The Shoppes at Athenry Past Activity
A recent amended final development plan application for an additional building at The Shoppes at
Athenry has generated renewed interest from surrounding property owners and elected officials. In
addition, interest has been shown regarding City actions on a number of issues related to the site. The
purpose of this memo is to provide an overview of the history of The Shoppes at Athenry and the related
planning reviews and code enforcement actions.
Zoning History
Zoning for Indian Run Meadows was established in 1978 as a Planned Unit Development with
subsequent revisions to the preliminary development plan in 1984 and 1986. Final development plans
for the residential sections, St. Patrick's Episcopal Church, and the Scottish Corners Elementary School
were approved and built in subsequent years. A list of planning reviews associated with the Indian Run
Meadows PUD is attached for your information.
The history of the PUD's retail area known as The Shoppes at Athenry begins in 1997 with a final
development plan approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission. A conditional use permit to allow
a patio at Mary Kelley's Restaurant was submitted to the Planning and Zoning Commission in 1999.
During the public review of the application, adjacent property owners opposed the request for the patio
based on the increase in noise and traffic in the commercial center. The Commission denied the
application. A second conditional use permit for a patio at Mary Kelley's Restaurant was submitted in
2005. The public reiterated its opposition to the more intense use of the site and the request was again
denied.
Code Compliance
Certain aspects of the commercial operations have created consistent problems for the residents in the
immediate area. Because of these problems, The Shoppes at Athenry has been the focus of many Code
Enforcement complaints and investigations over several years. A summary of Code Enforcement
actions in response to regular review or citizen complaint is attached for your review. As noted, many
of the complaints submitted to or discovered by the City have been resolved without formal enforcement
procedures. From a compliance standpoint, however, it is difficult to provide evening coverage or
incident related response. As a result, Code Compliance and Legal have attempted to engage the
management of the center. Attached is a copy of a letter from the property manager to the tenants of the
center which is in response to City efforts to encourage prompt action by the management company to
complaints from nearby residents.
Current Status
The current application before the Commission seeks the approval of a 2,400 - square -foot building
located in the southwest corner of the site, adjacent to the United Dairy Farmer's building. The case was
presented and tabled at the Commission on June 7, 2007. The applicant is currently revising plans in
response to Commission comments and plans to present these revisions at the October 11, 2007
Commission meeting.
Code Enforcement Actions Shoppes of Athenry
Between 2000 & 2007
All items included in this summary are actions taken by Code Enforcement. Items not included are
communications concerning after hours deliveries and trash pick -up. Many of these complaints were
directed to the police department and lacked necessary information to be addressed by Code
Enforcement. Information on after hours activities given directly to Code Enforcement has been
forwarded to the Law Director's office.
Sign Violations
Sign violations consist of prohibited signs such as neon, banners, signs installed on City right -of -way or
signs installed without the appropriate permits.
2007,(4)
2006,(4)
2005, (11)
2003,(4)
2002,(l)
2000,(2)
Landscape Violations
Landscape violations consist of missing plant material and maintenance of existing plant material.
Landscape site inspections are conducted on a routine basis every two years or by complaint.
2007,(2)
2006,(2)
2005,(1)
2001,(1)
Miscellaneous Complaints
Miscellaneous complaints consist of trash and litter complaints, daytime noise complaints, and
maintenance on the perimeter fence and the shopping center site. This also includes the unapproved use
of the patio at Mary Kelly's.
2007,(1)
2005,(3)
2004,(2)
2003, (1 l )
2002,(1)
2001,(1)
2000,(3)
Weed Violation
Weed violation complaints consist of lack of maintenance on weeds and grass in excess of six inches on
The Shoppes of Athenry property focused on the residential side of the perimeter fence.
2006,(3)
City of Dublin
Rd
257
Site
Tara Hill Dr. 745
270
LOCATION MAP
NOT TO SCALE
METAL POSTS WITH BEVELED CAP
RAIL
STEEL PICKETS
S 1 MAX
FHAS 1: 1,000 51= PATIO (KEEP LANDSCAPE BEDS)
FHA 2 : 1,680 5F PATIO (NO PLANT BEDS± RAILING AND
BOX PLANTERS)
PROPOSED CHAIR
AND CHAIRS EXTEND SOLID FENCE (NO
\\ GATE) TO THE EXISTING
LIMITS OF FENCING ` S BUILDING WALL
e ,' •• i P • ►'•'
°. 1 • •° ►
° p• D M
. %A
KELLEY
\��� o . ° : ► .. PLANT BED
\ �� • y, ° PROPOSED PATIO AREA
( +- 43051=) I TABLES
EXISTING TREE TO
REMAIN � \\\ �°C
PLANT BED
EXISTING FIRE HYDRANT,
REMOVE EXISTING SHRUB BED
AND REPLACE WITH \ \�\\ �`� "
PROPOSED PATIO AREA
CONCRETE S TABLES
LIMITS OF FENCING
PROPOSED TABLE
PATIO CHAIR TO BE WROUGHT IRON ►. A I I
CAFE SERIES, ROCKPORT SLIDE CHAIR \\ ° p" I
BY CONTRACT FURNITURE COMPANY. NOTE: \\ D ► ,
TUBULAR STEEL FRAME WITH POWDER PATIO FURNITURE LAYOUT IS TO \\ '. :o: ► " I EXISTING STONE
COATED PAINT. COLOR: CHARCOAL DETERMINE CAPACITY ONLY. LAYOUT IS \\ , • o °. , : °� ': WALL
BLACK SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED ON NORMAL \\ • '�
OUT 00 INN IN USE
NOT TO SCALE
PATIO TABLE TO BE 36" SQUARE SOLO
TABLETOP WITH BELMAR 4 TABLE BASE
BY CONTRACT FURNITURE COMPANY.
MELAMAINE TABLETOP WITH ALUMINUM
BASE. COLOR: CHARCOAL BLACK.
PROPOSED TABLE
NOT TO SCALE
0
c{1
4 G 4 4 .V - 4 - .Q G 4' 4 Q Q' --
� /\ �� / / \ / / EXISTING CONCRETE WALK
SURFACE MOUNT FENCE
FENCE TO BE POWDER COATED. COLOR:
CHARCOAL BLACK.
PROPOSED FENCE
NOT TO SCALE
�l�MM�F � ! I ..• °• • I
1,000 51= PATIO \\ . ••'. ►:,,
44 PATIO SEATS
EXISTING LIGHT POLE I
T REMAIN (T \ \` D . s " • 4D'• -Ike PROPOSED GATE
I ,
\\ L
EXISTING TREE TO
PATIO PHASE I REMAIN (TYP) \
SCALE: 1'= 10' -0"
18 "X18 "X18 "H F18ERGLA55 BOX PLANTER FENCE STYLE RAILING PLANTER
(TYPICAL OF 8) (TYPICAL OF 12)
RAILING AND BOX PLANTERS (PHASE 2)
NOT TO SCALE
�0/ t►
PLANTER BOX (TYP)
RAILING PLANTER (TYP)
MARY
KELLEY'S
NOTE: RAILING AND BOX
PLANTERS TO BE USED TO
REPLACE LANDSCAPING
REMOVED.
PROPOSED PATIO AREA
( + (o8051=) S TABLES
\� O PROPOSED PATIO AREA
(+- 1,00051=) 11 TABLES
to
a
\\ O
(0 '
\ / k
1,680 51= PATIO \\ ' D , ►
(o PATIO SEATS \ \\ D ►. ° °
PATIO PHASE 2 ► p _° I
SCALE: 1'= 10' -0"
t ►'
1
Flo d Central Ohio
740.363.6792
B e 740.363.6536 fax
800.325.7647
roup
Solutions for Your World
www.FloydBrowne.com
NORTH
0 10' 20'
GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET
0
m o
w
LU °C
NORTH
Q 0
0
U
U)
z
0
U
0
a
a o
a]
O
w U)
w
cr
0
0
a
0
• • w
O a
z 0
CD 06
z
� wU
� J Z
0 Ir _j -
Z� Yw
(f) �w �U
zU °o
LU a cf)
oQ
Q °
PROJECT NO.:
12- 00073 -010
DESIGNED BY:
GS
DRAWN BY:
MBS
CHECKED BY:
GS
DATE ISSUED:
04.16.12
FINAL
DEVELOPMENT
PLAN
1 OF 1
JAPR0JECTS \KELLEY \12 - 00073 -01P (ATHENRY) \DESIGN \PLAN \SITE PLAN.DWG - 5/9/2012 4:44:38 PM
FENCE TO MATCH PHOTO (TAKEN FROM MATT THE
MILLER'S TAVERN, 6125 AVERY- MUIRFIELD DR.)
Office of the City Manager
City of Dublin Pho n ne: 614 - 410.4400- Fax:b614 --410 -4490 43017-1090
To: Members of Dublin City Council
From: Marsha I. Grigsby, City Manager
Date: May 3, 2012
Initiated By: Steve Langworthy, Director of Land Use and Long Range Planning
Claudia D. Husak, AICP, Planner II
Memo
Re: Ordinance 35 -12 - Rezoning approximately 4.91 acres, on the east side of
Avery- Muirfield Drive approximately 500 feet north of the intersection with
Tara Hill Drive, from PUD, Planned Unit Development District (Indian Run
Meadows Commercial) to PUD, Planned Unit Development District (Indian Rur
Meadows Commercial Revised) to revise the development text to permit up to
1,680 square feet of outdoor patio area in front of an existing restaurant
within the Shoppes of Athenry shopping center. (Case 12- 017Z /PDP /FDP)
Summary
Ordinance 35 -12 is a request for review and approval of a rezoning with preliminary
development plan from PUD, Planned Unit Development District (Indian Run Meadows
Commercial) to PUD, Planned Unit Development District (Indian Run Meadows Commercial
Revised) to revise the development text to permit up to 1,680 square feet of outdoor patio area
in front of an existing restaurant within the Shoppes of Athenry shopping center.
Background
Several applications for the approval of a patio for the Mary Kelley's tenant space have been
submitted since 2000. None have been approved by the Commission or City Council, primarily
because of concerns and issues raised by nearby residents. The current proposal was first filed
in 2010 as an informal review and was generally well received by the Commission and
neighboring residents.
Description
The Shoppes of Athenry have two buildings forming an L -shape connected by an open area
initially intended for an outdoor dining patio. The shopping center buildings are in the
northeastern portion of the site with parking in front. The center has two shared driveways
along Muirfield Drive. A service drive provides access to the service area to the rear of the
buildings. The site has 469 feet of frontage on Muirfield Drive, and the rear boundary line abuts
single - family lots on Wichita Court and Cavalry Court in the Indian Run Meadows subdivision.
Memo re. Ordinance 3S -12 Rezoning with Preliminary Development Plan
Indian Run Meadows PUD
Shoppes of Athenry — Mary Kelley's
May 3, 2012
Page 2 of 3
Mary Kelley's occupies approximately 7,550 square feet of the north building, immediately
adjacent to the 1,800- square -foot open area, which is not intended to be used for a patio due
to its location near residential lots.
Proposed Development Text Revision
This proposed development text revises the permitted uses section of the Indian Run Meadows
Commercial Uses text to allow up to 1,680 square feet of outdoor dining patio area in front of
Mary Kelley's, which may be constructed in two phases. The text requires high quality patio
amenities and restricts outdoor amplifiers, music and lighting (other than allowed building
lighting) in the patio area. The text continues to state that the conditional uses allowed by the
Neighborhood Commercial District of the Zoning Code are prohibited, unless otherwise
referenced within the text. The text has also been updated to accurately reference current
Zoning Code sections. Based on input from a representative for nearby residents, the Planning
and Zoning Commission requested that the applicant clarify that any other patios only be
approved through a rezoning process. All other language in the text remains.
Preliminary Development Plan
The applicant is seeking approval of the patio at build -out of 1,680 square feet, divided into two
sections on either side of the main entry of the restaurant. Patio service will be through the
main entry door as conditioned in the final development plan approval. Food service for the
patio area will end at 10:30 p.m. and the patio will close at 11 p.m. Flower boxes and planters
are proposed for the patio area, and the plans have been revised to show the flower boxes
inside of the fence as requested by the Commission.
Patio Details
Two phases are proposed for constructing the patio area. Ultimately, eight tables seating a total
of 27 patrons to the left of the restaurant entrance and 11 tables seating a total of 40 patrons
to the right of the main entry are planned. The patio will be enclosed by a 3.6 -foot tall, black
aluminum fence; black aluminum patio chairs; three -foot square, tan - topped tables with a black
base, and green market -style umbrellas are the proposed patio amenities.
Existing Patio Area
Access to the existing patio area south of the Mary Kelley's tenant space will be restricted by
metal gates to address concerns by nearby residents of patrons possibly using the area to
loiter.
Parking
The center requires 189 parking spaces, calculated at one space per 150 square feet of gross
floor area for a shopping center. There are currently 196 spaces. The calculations for required
parking included the retail buildings (26,400 square feet), and the original outdoor seating patio
(1,800 square feet). Since the 1,680- square -foot proposed patio does not exceed 1,800 square
feet, parking requirements are met. Any changes to the former patio location, such as an infill
building, must be approved by the Commission and additional parking must be provided for any
intended use.
Memo re. Ordinance 35 -12 Rezoning with Preliminary Development Plan
Indian Run Meadows PUD
Shoppes of Athenry — Mary Kelley's
May 3, 2012
Page 3 of 3
Landscaping
The second phase of the patio will eliminate the landscape area in front of the restaurant to
accommodate additional seating. This landscaping was not required as part of the final
development plan or the Zoning Code. Two existing trees in the planned patio area will be
preserved.
Recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission
The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of the rezoning and preliminary
development plan to City Council on April 12, 2012 with the condition listed below. The
condition has been incorporated into the development text submitted for approval to City
Council.
Rezoning /Pre liminary Development Plan Condition
1) That the development text be amended to delete the language regarding additional patio
areas on page 4 and require a rezoning process to permit any additional patio areas.
The Commission concurrently reviewed and approved a final development with six conditions.
The plans submitted to City Council have been revised to address Conditions 1 and 5. Planning
will work with the applicant to address Condition 4 and monitor Conditions 2, 3 and 6.
Final Development Plan Conditions
1) That gates be installed for both patio areas;
2) That all outdoor furniture be stored out of sight from November 1s to April 1 5C unless the
furniture is set up for use, not covered in any way, and weather conditions are appropriate
for use;
3) That the patio fence be removed if the restaurant discontinues use of the space;
4) That the applicant work with Planning to decrease the patio area along the sidewalk to
provide additional sidewalk area;
5) That the plan be revised to place the flower boxes inside the fence; and
6) That all service to the patio occur from the front of the restaurant tenant space.
Recommendation
Planning recommends City Council approval of Ordinance 35 -12 at the second reading /public
hearing on May 21, 2012.
12- 017Z /PDP /FDP N
City of Dublin Rezoning /Preliminary & Final Development Plan A
Land Use and Shoppes at Athenry - Mary Kelley's Patio
Long Range Planning 7148 Muirfeld Drive Feet
0 200 400
7
CITY OF DUBLIN,
Land use and
Long Range Planning
5800 Shier -Rings Road
Dublin, Ohio 43016.1236
Phone/ TDD• 614 - 410.4600
Fox. 614 -410 -4747
Web Site. www dublin.oh.us
r ~'
ti
February 2009
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPLICATION
(Code Section 153.232)
I. PLEASE CHECK THE TYPE OF APPLICATION:
❑ Informal Review
❑ Final Plat
(Section 152.085)
❑ Concept Plan ❑ Conditional Use
(Section 153.056(A)(1)) (Section 153.236)
Preliminary Development Plan / Rezoning ❑ Corridor Development District (CDD)
(Section 153.053) (Section 153.115)
EZ Final Development Plan
(Section 153.053(E))
❑ Amended Final Development Plan
(Section 153.053(E))
❑ Standard District Rezoning
(Section 153.018)
❑ Preliminary Plat
(Section 152.015)
❑ Corridor Development District (CDD) Sign
(Section 153.115)
❑ Minor Subdivision
❑ Right -of -Way Encroachment
❑ Other (Please Specify):
Please utilize the applicable Supplemental Application Requirements sheet for
additional submittal requirements that will need to accompany this application form.
11. PROPERTY INFORMATION: This section must be completed.
PropertyAddress(es): 148 Muirfield Drive
Tax ID /Parcel Number(s):
Parcel Size(s) (Acres):
273 - 003599 -00
4.91 acres
Existing Land Use /Development:
Neighborhood Retail Center
IF APPLICABLE, PLEASE COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING:
Proposed Land Use /Development: Applicant is requesting to add patio service area to
existing neighborhood retail center.
Total acres affected by application:
Less than one acr
III. CURRENT PROPERTY OWNER(S1: Please attach additional sheets tf needed.
Name (Individual or Organization):
Athenry Shoppes Limited
Mailing Address:
(Street, City, State, zip Code)
250 E . Broad Street
Columbus, OH 43215
F ILE C OP Y
Daytime Telephone: 614
228 -5775
Fax:
Email or Alternate Contact Information:
1�%dP
Page 1 of 3 MAR 0 6 2012
IV. APPLICANT(S) This is the person(s) who Is submitting the application If different than the property owners) listed In part III.
Please complete if applicable.
Name:
Athenry Shoppes Limited
Applicant Is also roer
ppty owner. yes no[]
Organization (Owner, Developer, Contractor, etc.):
Pat Kelley
Mailing Address:
(street, City, State, zip code) 250 E. Broad Street, Columbus, OH 432? 5
Daytime Telephone: (614) 228 -5775
Fax.
Email or Alternate Contact Information:
V. REPRESENTATIVE(S) OF APPLICANT / PROPERTY OWNER This is the person(s) who is submitting the application
on behalf of the applicant listed in part IV or property owner listed In part Ill. Please complete if applicable.
Name:
Jill S. Tangeman, Esq.
Organization (Owner, Developer, Contractor, etc.):
Vorys, Sater, Seymour and Pease LLP
Mailing Address:
(Street, City, State, zip Code) 52 E. Gay Street, Columbus, OH 43215
Daytime Telephone: (614) 464 -5608
Fax: (614) 719 -4638
Email or Alternate Contact Information:
istangeman @vorys.com
VI. AUTHORIZATION FOR OWNER'S APPLICANT or REPRESENTATIVE(S) If the applicant Is not the property owner,
this section must be completed and notarized.
the owner, hereby authorize
w ° e to act as my applicant or Xl"
representatives) in a1I matt rs pertaining to the processing and approval of this application, including modifying the project. I agree
to be bound by all representations and agree made by the designated representative`.
I Signature of Current Property Owner: I ; Its, J I , ^ I Date: 14/12/
❑ Check this box if the Authorization for Owner's Applicant or Represeettative(s) Is attached as a separate document
1
Subscribed and sworn before me this k fi day of _,Lk4 -,-
i
State of
Alan G Parrott
County of �rLG 1 Notary Public . *
` Notary Public, State of Ohio
". o My Commission Expires 11 -16 -2014
s�
VII. AUTHORIZATION TO VISIT THE PROPERTY: Site visits to the property by City represe pdntial to process this
application. The Owner /Applicant, as noted below, hereby authorizes City representatives to visit, ph post a notice on the
property described in this application.
I the owner or authorized representative, hereby
authorize W to visit, photograph and post a notice on the property described In this application.
Signature of applicant or authorized
of 3
t
VIII UTILITY DISCLAIMER The Owner /Applicant acknowledges the approval of this request for review by the Dublin Planning and
Zoning Commission and /or Dublin City Council does not constitute a guarantee or binding commitment that the City of Dublin will be able
to provide essential services such as water and sewer facilities when needed by said Owner /Applicant.
I Jill S. Tangeman, Esq., , the owner or authorized representative,
acknowledge that approval of this request does not constitute a guarantee or binding commitment that the City of Dublin will be able to
provide essential services such as water and sewer facilities when needed by said Owner /Applicant.
Signature of applicant or authorized representative \( I I
IX. APPLICANT'S AFFIDAVIT This section must be
and notarized.
I Jill S. Tangeman, Esq . , the owner or authorized representative, have
read and understand the contents of this application. The information contained in this application, attached exhibits and other
information submitted is complete and in all respects true and correct, to the best of my knowledge and belief.
Signature of applicant or authorized representative: � ' & 1 Da t f' I n o 1 a
� J � L �
Subscribed and sworn to before me this o `7 ay of 20
State of
County of i Notary Public O 4, DW= R.C4dl,AtlomeyA1 6W
* *= NOTARY PUBLIC -STATE OF OHIO
My moo Ilas no elgiUAm date
SK 147.03 RC.
of
E USE ONLY
ved27
F
Application No: 12-019
P&Z Date(s): /_ , /2 - 12
P&Z Action: it
Receipt No: 7/517q
Map Zone:
Date Received: 3 _ �6 . 0
Received By: I ,
City Council (First Reading): S-
City Council (Second Reading):
i
City Council Action:
Ordinance Number:
Type of Request:
2ezai ;n pmli
rl1. 'ne'v. / 4w f- Dew. Pi6".7
N, S, &W (Circle) Side of:
E, W (Circle) Side of Nearest Intersection:
f / nen
�YJ fX V
Distance from Nearest Intersection:
Existing Zoning District. <. , ,,
Requested Zoning District:
Page 3 of 3
t - 0 1'7 z-( POP I FO i-_'
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
Athenn, Shonnes Ltd.
Situated in the State of Ohio, County of Franklin, City of Dublin and being a part of Reserve "C"
as shown and delineated upon the record plat of Indian Run Meadows Section 5, of record in Plat
Book 65, Pages 64 and 67 records of the Recorder's Office, Franklin County, Ohio, and being
more particularly described as follows:
Beginning, for reference, at point of centerline intersection of Muirfield Drive (100 feet in width)
and Tara Hill Drive (60 feet in width);
Thence North 47 °18'26" East, a distance of 225.00 feet with the centerline of Muirfield Drive to
a point;
Thence South 42 °41 `34" East crossing said Muirfield Drive, a distance of 50.00 feet to a point
at the northwesterly corner of a 0.758 acre tract as conveyed to Lindvest, an Ohio Partnership of
record in ORV 15457 B05 and the true point of beginning;
Thence with the easterly right -of -way of said Muirfield the following two courses:
1) North 47 °18'26" East, a distance of 143.56 feet to a point of curvature;
2) A curve to the left having a radius 2050.00 feet, a central angle of 09 °06'26" and a chord
bearing of North 42 °45" 13" East and a chord distance of 325.51 feet to a point at the
northwesterly corner of Reserve "C" and also the southwesterly corner of Reserve "D" of said
plat;
Thence South 51 °47'59" East with said northerly line, a distance of 450.00 feet to a point on the
northeasterly corner of said Reserve "C" and the southeasterly corner of Reserve "D ";
Thence South 34 °37'51 West with the easterly line of said Reserve "C ", a distance of 506.27 feet
to a point on the northeasterly corner of a 0.958 acre tract as conveyed to Kinder -Care Properties,
Inc., of record in ORVI 1690111;
Thence North 40 °28'40" West with the northerly line of said 0.958 acre tract, a distance of
172.00 feet to a point on the northwesterly corner of said 0.958 acre tract and on the easterly line
of a 1.370 acre tract as conveyed to Roby Company Limited Partnership of record in ORV 26284
HO1;
Thence North 49 °26'52" East with said easterly line, a distance of 74.50 feet to the northeasterly
corner of said 1.370 acre tract;
Thence North 40 °33'05" West with said northerly line, a distance of 190.62 feet to the
northwesterly corner of said 1.370 acre tract;
Thence South 47 °18'26" West with the westerly line of said 1.370 acre tract, a distance of
133.50 feet to a point at the northeasterly corner of said 0.758 acre tract;
19 -0 1'721 PoP/j =-0(0
Thence North 42 °41'34" West with the northerly line of said 0.758 acre tract, a distance of
170.00 feet to the true point of beginning and containing 4.914 acres of land more or less.
This description was prepared by Civil Engineering Associates, Inc., Columbus, Ohio from
existing record deeds. The basis of bearing is North 47 °18'26" East for the centerline of
Muirfield Drive and all other bearings are calculated from this reference.
MAR 0 6 2012
a 01 '7Z 1PDe FDP
22 2, 12 1311 !IiFc
r nce E� Mingo li
county A for
Property Report Generated on 02/22/12 at 0163 24 PM
273 -003599 -00 273- NO90CA -167 -00 1 7142 -196 MUIRFIELD DR
GIs
r r r'� f
X
I .Q .0.�
This drewing is prepared for the real property inventory within thks county. It is compiled from recorded deeds.. survey plats, and other public records and data.
Users of this drawing are notified that the public pnmary Information source should be consulted for verification of the information contained on this drawing. The
county and the mapping companies assume no legal responsibilities for the Information contained on this drawing Please notify the Franklin County GIS Division of
an discre pancies, _ __ � _ __
The information on this web site is prepared for thereat property inventory wi this coun Users of this data are notified that the public primary information source should be consulted for
verification of the information contained on this site The county and vendors thin assume no legal responsibilities for the information contained on this site. Please notify the Franklin County
Audilor•s Real Estate Division of any discrepancies.
N
MAR 0 6 2012
I PoPIFoP
12- 0172Z /PDP /FDP Shawn & Stephanie Arden Alan & Jennifer Assaf
Mary Kelley's 7125 Schoolcraft Drive 5964 Tara Hill Drive
Shoppes at Athenry Dublin, OH 43017 Dublin, OH 43017
Athenry Shoppes Limited Matthew & Laura Atkin Mary Barrow &
7142 — 196 Muirfield Drive 6053 Tara Hill Drive Jane Corson
Dublin, OH 43017 Dublin, OH 43017 6075 Tara Hill Drive
Dublin, OH 43017
BLC Emerald Crossings LLC Dennis & Kimberly Bowdy Susanna Briggs &
7220 Muirfield Drive 7081 Wichita Court Edward Skornicka
Dublin, OH 43017 Dublin, OH 43017 6000 Tara Hill Drive
Dublin, OH 43017
John & Barbara Cannizzaro
Xiaoping Chen & Pei Ping
Stephen & Kathleen Cianca
7219 Sundown Court
7025 Cavalry Court
5925 Muncie Court
Dublin, OH 43017
Dublin, OH 43017
Dublin, OH 43017
Gennifer Corson
Joan Costello
Benedetto & Anita Cusumano
7091 Wichita Court
7046 Cavalry Court
7082 Cavalry Court
Dublin, OH 43017
Dublin, OH 43017
Dublin, OH 43017
John & Sharon Daehler
Gregory & Lisa Diamond
Debora & Richard Fitch
5988 Tara Hill Drive
7043 Cavalry Court
7096 Wichita Court
Dublin, OH 43017
Dublin, OH 43017
Dublin, OH 43017
Govindasamy & Ukthambal
Green Oasis LLC
Faruq Hasan MD
Gounder
Tara Hill Drive
Jamilatul Karim
6019 Tara Hill Drive
u
Dubl,
Dublin OH 43017
7071 Wichita Court
Dublin, OH 43017
Dublin, OH 43017
George & Ruthann Hunton
KC Propco LLC
Michael & Sheri Kielian
5915 Muncie Court
6036 Tara Hill Drive
7183 Mojave Street
Dublin, OH 43017
Dublin, OH 43017
Dublin, OH 43017
Kevin & Sandra Lawson
Hongbo Li & Juan Du
Lindvest LP
7058 Cavalry Court
6009 Tara Hill Drive
7076 Muirfield Drive
Dublin, OH 43017
Dublin, OH 43017
Dublin, OH 43017
Farid & Judith Masri
Jamee & Shawn Mattingly
Becky Miles
7061 Cavalry Court
6041 Tara Hill Drive
7076 Wichita Court
Dublin, OH 43017
Dublin, OH 43017
Dublin, OH 43017
Kathleen & Tod Munger
7070 Cavalry Court
Dublin, OH 43017
Patrick & Kimberly O'Brien
6097 Tara Hill Drive
Dublin, OH 43017
Jeffrey & Bonnie Roby
6046 Tara Hill Drive
Dublin, OH 43017
Brent Shirley & Erin Kerrick
7061 Wichita Drive
Dublin, OH 43017
Josephine & Tod Thal
7222 Sundown Court
Dublin, OH 43017
Gary & Julie Williams
5997 Tara Hill Drive
Dublin, OH 43017
Janis & Timothy Redman
7101 Wichita Court
Dublin, OH 43017
Peter Murray & Karen Feather Joshua & Elizabeth Nye
6063 Tara Hill Drive 6031 Tara Hill Drive
Dublin, OH 43017 Dublin, OH 43017
Michael Reynolds & Roby Co L P 7
Gayle Mowery 100 Muirfield Drive
7079 Cavalry Court Dublin, OH 43017
Dublin, OH 43017
Carol Roston TR
Anthony Sallustro
7234 Sundown Court
7228 Sundown Court
Dublin, OH 43017
Dublin, OH 43017
Fellowship of St. Patrick's David Terlesky
Episcopal Church 7086 Wichita Court
7121 Muirfield Drive Dublin, OH 43017
Dublin, OH 43017
Shen -Hui Wang & Yi -Hua Yeh Jack G III & Nichole Weber
6012 Tara Hill Drive 7005 Fallen Timbers Drive
Dublin, OH 43017 Dublin, OH 43017
Anna Wilson Andrew & Sheri Wolpert
5976 Tara Hill Drive 6085 Tara Hill Drive
Dublin, OH 43017 Dublin, OH 43017
Athenry Shoppes
Narrative Statement
The subject site is an existing neighborhood commercial center that was zoned as part of the
Indian Run Meadows development.
The applicant is seeking a rezoning and approval of a preliminary / final development plan for
the purpose of permitting a patio area at the front of an existing neighborhood commercial center
adjacent to an existing restaurant.
At the time of the original construction of the commercial center, an open patio area was
installed. However, said existing patio area has never been utilized due to the fact that this patio
runs from the front of the building to the rear and is therefore contiguous to the residential
development to the east.
In order to allow the center to have a patio area for outdoor restaurant seating without impacting
the residential development to the east, the applicant is seeking to install the patio at the front of
the shopping center adjacent to an existing restaurant known as Mary Kelley's. By placing the
outdoor seating at the front of the shopping center, the neighboring residential development
would be shielded from the patio by the existing building.
The applicant has identified a limited number of tables as well as fencing and baskets and potted
plants as part of the outdoor seating installation.
Because a patio was originally planned for this shopping center, the applicant currently has
parking sufficient to allow for 1,800 square feet of patio area. A copy of a survey showing the
existing parking is included with the application.
The proposal is consistent with the Dublin Community Plan and the existing development plan
as the neighborhood commercial center use is not changing and because a patio was always
contemplated to be constructed as part of this development. The proposal however will reduce
any impact such outdoor seating might have on the adjacent residential neighborhood. Other
than the requested patio, there is no change to the development plan, building, lighting or signage
requested as part of this application.
MAR 0 6 201?
Ig- o11zIPOPI D"
M P201z is S296u
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENTTEXT
As submitted to CC 05 -07 -12
INDIAN RUN MEADOWS
COMMERCIAL USES
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
A. Yard Requirements
1. Front Yard setback: For structures and parking 50'.
2. Side and rear yard setback adjacent to residential uses: All structures 50', all
parking, service and loading areas 30': for non - residential uses, 25' setback for
structures and 15' for parking, loading and services areas.
B. Building Area Development Standards
1. Maximum building height: Shall not exceed thirty five (35) feet.
C. Parking Standards
1. Off street parking shall be provided at one space per 150 square feet in area or
at the rate required under the Dublin Zoning Code as it applies to commercial
uses. whichever is less.
D. Lighting Standards
1. All lighting in the area shall be cut -off type fixtures (down lighting) maximum
height of fixtures will not exceed 35'.
2. All external outdoor lighting fixtures to be used within a given development shall
be from the same family, or similar manufacturer's type, to insure aesthetic
compatibility. All light poles and standards shall be of wood or metal painted
black, brown, or bronze.
E. Signage and Graphics Standards
1. All signing shall be of ground type (no pole signs) and shall be of a standard
shape and frame. All sign frames shall be of natural wood, stone or metal painted
black, brown or bronze. Internally illuminated graphics with opaque background
shall be permitted, as well as externally lighted signs that do not interfere with
safe vehicular movement.
2. Types of signs prohibited include signs with flashing lights or changeable copy,
projecting signs, roof signs, billboards, co -ops signs, rotating signs, and trailer
type signs. Any directory signs shall be more than 30 feet from the right -of -way.
Page 1 of 4
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENTTEXT
As submitted to CC 05 -07 -12
3. Individual store graphics shall be integrated within the architectural design of the
facia, and the background shall be of the same family and color.
F. Additional Development Standards
1. Curbcut locations: One full service curbcut and median cut into Muirfield Drive
will be provided to jointly service the commercial and institutional parcels to be
located on the common property line. There shall be only one full service cut into
the southerly right -of -way. One (1) right turn in- and -out curbcut shall be permitted
onto Muirfield Drive but have no median break. The Dublin Planning and Zoning
Commission may determine that an additional break or separate median breaks
for each use are more appropriate based on a Final Development Plan.
2. Landscape Buffer
a. Where commercial development abuts residential development, a
landscape buffer will be installed containing a board -on -board fence as
detailed on page 9 and a landscape buffer of both deciduous shade,
ornamental, and evergreen trees. Minimum size at installation shall be 2-
1.2" cal for deciduous shade trees, 1 -1/2" cal for ornamental trees, and 6'-
8' on evergreen. Landscape plant material will be placed on the
residential side of the fence at a spacing of 1 tree per 15 linear feet of
property line. Landscape buffer will be installed prior to the beginning of
any construction on the sites. With the installation of Muirfield Drive, the
site will be graded and seeded. The developer or his successor shall mow
and properly maintain the site until it is developed.
b. The Muirfield Drive frontage of the multi - family site, commercial site,
office institutional site, church site, undeveloped single - family site, school
site, and park site shall be landscaped with plant material at least of a
size, quantity and quality that currently exists on the east side of Muirfield
Drive south of Tara Hill. The landscaping and mounding shall be in
conformity with the drawing contained in the Indian Run Meadows single -
family design guidelines. Weather permitting, landscaping and mounding
shall be installed contemporaneously with the construction of Muirfield
Drive. Mounding along both sides of Muirfield Drive and within the median
strip shall be sodded. All other parcels shall be landscaped prior to
occupancy of any building on such parcel.
Landscape Frontage Treatment on Side Streets
Page 2 of 4
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENTTEXT
As submitted to CC 05 -07 -12
A landscaped earth mound shall be installed where the commercial,
church, school, multi - family and office /institutional parcels front the side
streets.
The mound shall have a minimum height of 4 feet above top of curb and shall be
noncontinuous in height.
The same landscaping standards as shown on page 10, "Muirfield Boulevard
Landscape Edge Treatment' shall be the standards applied to the frontage
treatment on side streets.
3. Dumpster Enclosures
All dumpsters shall be enclosed with a 4 sided enclosure of wood, stone, brick or
stucco. All enclosures will be of the same architectural materials as the main
structure and will conform to all building setback requirements.
4. Street Grade
The street grade for the single - family street west of Muirfield Drive shall be at the
same or less grade than Muirfield Drive.
The foundation of any house located on any lot abutting Muirfield Drive shall not
be higher than three (3) feet above the street grade of the abutting street.
G. Architectural Standards
1. In keeping with the residential framework of the area, all architecture will be of a
residential character and constructed of natural materials being stone, brick,
wood and stucco. All buildings will be of the same finished quality on all 4 sides.
Stone accent will be integrated into all buildings.
H. Permitted Uses
1. Those permitted uses shall be those listed in Chapter 153.027, Neighborhood
Commercial District except "Eating and drinking places" shall include full line
restaurants and shall not include fast food or drive -in restaurants or places
primarily designed for entertainment or dancing and referred to by various names
such as dance hall, cabaret, and night club and the following uses listed in
Section 153.028, Community Commercial District.
Mens and boys clothing and furnishings stores
Womens accessory and specialty stores
Page 3 of 4
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENTTEXT
As submitted to CC 05 -07 -12
Womens ready to wear stores
Shoe stores
Custom tailors
Furriers and fur shops
Book and stationery stores
Jewelry stores
Camera and photographic supply stores
Optical goods stores
2. A maximum of 1,680 square feet of outdoor dining patio area located in front of
the restaurant operating at 7148 Muirfield Drive at the time of approval of this development text.
This patio shall be constructed only in the location shown on the preliminary development plan.
The patio shall use amenities (such as tables, chairs, fence, umbrellas, flower boxes) that are of
high quality. Patio chairs shall be black in color. Table tops may use a different color. Umbrellas
shall be market - style. No outdoor amplifiers or music shall be permitted in the patio area. No
additional lighting (other than allowed building lighting) shall be permitted in the patio area. The
food service for this patio shall end at 10:30 p.m. and the patio operations shall cease at 11 p.m.
A rezoning process will be required for any other patio areas.
Other than as set forth in the foregoing paragraph, the conditional uses contained in Section
(Section 153.027(8)) are hereby prohibited.
Intensity
1. Within the commercial site the total square footage shall not exceed 10,000
square feet per acre. No single store shall exceed 30,000 sq. ft. and one -third of
the total square footage shall be in stores which are less than 20,000 square feet
in area.
Other than the standards listed above, all remaining development standards shall be as listed
and applicable under Section 153 of the Dublin Code.
Page 4 of 4
City of Dublin
Rrnn Rd
257
a
Site
.i
745
Tara Hill Dr.
270
LOCATION MAP
NOT TO SCALE
FENCE TO MATCH PHOTO (TAKEN FROM MATT THE
MILLER'S TAVERN, 6125 AVERY —MUIRFIELD DR.)
METAL POSTS WITH BEVELED CAP
RAIL
STEEL PICKETS
8' MAX —�
NOT TO SCALE
m
c{1
4 44
EXISTING CONCRETE WALK
SURFACE MOUNT FENCE
FENCE TO BE POWDER COATED. COLOR:
CHARCOAL BLACK.
PROPOSED FENCE
NOT TO SCALE
r
a
OUTDOOR DINNING USE. I •
1,000 51= PATIO \\ ► ► • D , • i. ► ` : '
44 PATIO SEATS \\ I I ►D' • , D
EXISTING LIGHT POLE—_ ° '• ''' p: ► "'
TO REMAIN (TYP) \ PROPOSED GATE'
I ,
\\ '
EXISTING TREE TO
PATIO PHASE I REMAIN (TYP) \
SCALE: I'= 10' -0"
IS "X18 "XIS "H FIBERGLASS BOX PLANTER FENCE STYLE RAILING PLANTER
(TYPICAL OF 8) (TYPICAL OF 12)
RAILING AND BOX PLANTERS (PHASE 2)
NOT TO SCALE
PLANTER BOX (TYP)
MARY
D >.
b . e
• ' • . , ► ..
� p �� . • :p�p � RAILING PLANTER (TYP)
s . ::.. p KELLEY S
NOTE: RAILING AND BOX
PLANTERS TO BE USED TO
REPLACE LANDSCAPING
O REMOVED.
PROPOSED PATIO AREA
O ° ( + (o8051=) 8 TABLES
\� O PROPOSED PATIO AREA
( +- 1,00051=) 11 TABLES
(0
\\ O
> (0
p
��IMM�R�= \\ '�• �'
1,6 80 51= PATIO
6l PATIO SEATS \\ D. '. ' • ; .: a .'
PATIO PHASE 2
SCALE: I'= 10' -0"
FH ,45E 1: 1,000 51= PATIO (KEEP LANDSCAPE BEDS)
FH ,45E 2 : 1,680 5F PATIO (NO PLANT BEDS± RAILING AND
BOX PLANTERS)
►� • e • ,p ► .. •. .4
. , • ... •� • • • ►... • : • ' ......e MARY A� ....::;
A A KELLEY
D
•
• PLANT BED
\ \ \\ i • , •. a ►. p ►••• .. e
\ \� :' •' e PROPOSED PATIO AREA
( +- 43051=) I TABLES
EXISTING TREE TO
REMAIN
PLANT BED
EXISTING FIRE HYDRANT,
REMOVE EXISTING SHRUB BED
AND REPLACE WITH \\\� x PROPOSED PATIO AREA
CONCRETE \\ ( +- 51051=) 8 TABLES
LIMITS OF FENCING
PROPOSED TABLE
AND CHAIRS
LIMITS OF FENCING ` S
ri g .e o
\\ D > ..
4
NOFrrH
PROPOSED CHAIR
PATIO CHAIR TO BE WROUGHT IRON
e -• e
CAFE SERIES, ROCKPORT SLIDE CHAIR
BY CONTRACT FURNITURE COMPANY. NOTE: \\ ° D
TUBULAR STEEL FRAME WITH POWDER PATIO FURNITURE LAYOUT IS TO \\ '. :o: - ► I EXISTING STONE 4 •'
COATED PAINT. COLOR: CHARCOAL DETERMINE CAPACITY ONLY. LAYOUT IS \ ;' °. •° ` : ° ► p ®' I — WALL •. •
SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED ON NORMAL \\ ► D D
` I 6 • ° ,
\\ • ° ',e. I I ' •.. •D °
BLACK
NOT TO SCALE
PATIO TABLE TO BE 36" SQUARE SOLO
TABLETOP WITH BELMAR 4 TABLE BASE
BY CONTRACT FURNITURE COMPANY.
MELAMAINE TABLETOP WITH ALUMINUM
BASE. COLOR: CHARCOAL BLACK.
PROPOSED TABLE
1
d Central Ohio
Flo 740.363.6792
B 740.363.6536 fax
800.325.7647
roup
Solutions for Your World
www.FloydBrowne.com
NORTH
0 10' 20'
GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET
0
m o
w
LU °C
Q 0
0
U
z
0
U
0
m
O
w
w
cr
CD
0
LU
a
a
O ❑
CD 06
z
� wU
� J z Cc _j O � Y w
C/) z <
zU LU 0
°o
LU Q co
� oQ
Q
0
PROJECT NO.: 12- 00073 -010
DESIGNED BY: GS
DRAWN BY: MBS
CHECKED BY: GS
DATE ISSUED: 04.16.12
FINAL
DEVELOPMENT
PLAN
1 OF 1
JAPR0JECTS \KELLEY \12 - 00073 -01P (ATHENRY) \DESIGN \PLAN \SITE PLAN.DWG - 4/25/2012 7:52:51 AM
C of Dublin
Land Use and Long
aRange h e 9
Shier Ring Road PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
Dublin., Ohio 43016 -1236
phone 614.410.4600 RECORD OF ACTION
f< x 614.410.4747
www.dublinohlousa.gov
-- _ APRIL 12, 2012
The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action at this meeting:
1. Indian Run Meadows PUD — Shoppes At Athenry — Mary Kelley's Patio
7148 Muirfield Drive
12- 017Z/PDP/FDP Rezoning/ Preliminary Development Plan/
Final Development Plan
Proposal: A revision within the development text to permit up to 1,680 square feet
of outdoor patio area in front of an existing restaurant within the
Shoppes of Athenry shopping center. The application also includes all
final design details of the proposed patio. The site is located within the
Indian Run Meadows Planned Unit Development on the east side of
Avery- Muirfield Drive approximately 500 feet north of the intersection
with Tara Hill Drive.
Request: Review and approval of a rezoning/preliminary development plan and
final development plan application under the provisions of Zoning Code
Section 153.050.
Applicant: Pat Kelley, represented by Jill Tangeman, Esq.
Planning Contact: Claudia D. Husak, AICP, Planner II.
Contact Information: (614) 410 -4675, chusak @dublin.oh.us
Motion 1— Rezoning with Preliminary Development Plan:
To recommend approval to City Council of this rezoning with preliminary development plan because it
meets the applicable review criteria and the development standards in the area with one condition:
1) That the development text be amended to delete the language regarding additional patio areas
on page 4 and require a rezoning process to permit any additional patio areas.
* JEII Tangeman, Esq, on behalf of the applicant, agreed to the above conditions.
VOTE: 5- 00
RESULT: This Rezoning/ Preliminary Development Plan application was approved.
RECORDED VOTES:
Chris Amorose Groomes
Yes
Richard Taylor
Yes
Warren Fishman
Yes
Amy Kramb
Yes
John Ha rdt
Recuesed
Joseph Budde
Yes
Victoria Newell
Recuesed
1. Indian Run Meadows PUD — Shoppes At Athenry — Mary Kelley's Patio
7148 Muirfield Drive
12- 017Z/PDP/FDP Rezoning/Preliminary Development Plan/
Final Development Plan
Motion 2— Final Development Plan;
Mr, Taylor made the motion to approve this Final Development Plan application because the proposed
modifications are consistent with surrounding development and the applicable review criteria and
requirements of the Zoning Code with six conditions:
1) That gates be installed for both patio areas; and
2) That all outdoor furniture be stored out of sight from November 1 to April 1 unless the
furniture is set -up for use, not covered in any way and weather conditions are appropriate for
use;
3) That the patio fence be removed if the restaurant discontinues use of the space;
4) That the applicant work with Planning to decrease the patio area along the sidewalk to provide
additional sidewalk area;
5) That the plan be revised to place the flower boxes inside the fence; and
6) That all service to the patio occur from the front of the restaurant tenant space.
Jill Tangeman, Esq, on behalf of the applicant, agreed to the above conditions.
VOTE; 5-00
RESULT: This Final Development Plan application was approved.
RECORDED VOTES:
Chris Amorose Groomes
Yes
Richard Taylor
Yes
Warren Fishman
Yes
Amy Kramb
Yes
John Ha rdt
Recuesed
Joseph Budde
Yes
Victoria Newell
Recuessed
STAFF CERTIFICATION
d a0 l, A�.P'a ImJ41
Claudia D. Husak, AICP
Planner II
I of Dublin
Land Use and Long
Range Planning PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
5800 Shier Rings Road
Dublin, Ohio 43016 -1236
phone 614.410.4600 MEETING MINUTES
fax 614.410.4747
www.dublinohiousa.gov APRIL 12, 2012
1. Indian Run Meadows PUD — Shoppes At Athenry — Mary Kelley's Patio
12- 017Z /PDP /FDP 7148 Muirfield Drive
Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan
Final Development Plan
John Hardt and Victoria Newell recused themselves from this case.
Chair Chris Amorose Groomes introduced this request for review and approval of a revision of the
development text to permit up to a 1,680- square -foot patio area in front of an existing restaurant. She
said that the application also includes all final design details of the proposed patio. She said the site is
located within the Indian Run Meadows Planned Unit Development on the east side of Muirfield Drive,
north of the intersection with Tara Hill Drive. Ms. Amorose Groomes said the application contains two
components, and the Commission will have to make two motions. She said the preliminary development
plan requires the Commission to make a recommendation to City Council and the Commission is the final
authority on the final development plan. She swore in those intending to address the Commission on this
case including the representative for the application, Jill Tangeman, Vorys, Sater, Seymour, and Pease,
and City representatives.
Jennifer Readler provided a summary of two pieces of litigation in the past involving this shopping center.
She said the first case, filed by the City involved an injunction, enjoining the use of the patio space
existing today to the south of the Mary Kelley's tenant space. She said in that lawsuit, the parties
entered into a settlement and as part of that settlement entry it if outdoor seating cannot be set up on
that specific patio area unless conditional use or rezoning approval is obtained. Ms. Readler said the
entry only spoke to that limited piece of the parcel.
Ms. Readler said the second case was more recent and it involved an outparcel that was disapproved by
the Commission in 2006 -2007. She said there was a 2506 case filed by the center owner. She said the
Municipal Court reversed the Commission's decision and the City of Dublin appealed that to the Court of
Appeals who reversed the Municipal Court remand. She said the Municipal Court, in turn remanded it to
the Commission. She said around July 2010, there was a very extensive hearing where a proposed
settlement was discussed at length to dismiss the case and that involved all kinds different of
components. Ms. Readler said that City Council decided at that point that it was not feasible to complete
those settlement negotiations, and so they were called off and nothing further happened in the case until
recently when the landowner came through again with a proposed space in front of the Mary Kelley's
tenant space, which had been previously discussed as one component of a settlement agreement in July
2010. She said they filed a voluntary dismissal of the 2506 case on March 29 and then filed this
application which is primarily just related to that patio use in front of the Mary Kelley's tenant space.
Ms. Readler said that the outparcel litigation really had nothing to do with the patio use, but they used
patio seating in front of Mary Kelley's as a way to possibly settle the case. She said this was a completely
new application and there has not been a court case involving this outdoor seating in front of this tenant
space.
Warren Fishman asked what was the negotiation about the space where the original patio was to be
located. He asked if it could be developed now.
Ms. Readler explained that the text presently says that they have to get a conditional use approval for
outdoor seating, so they would have to come back before the Commission. She said that they have had
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
April 12, 2012 — Meeting Minutes
Page 2 of 5
discussions with the residents' attorney and the applicant's attorneys, so she thought they were going to
suggest striking that section in the text so that if they want to come through with additional patio space
anywhere else on the site, including that existing patio space to the south, they would have to come in
for a full rezoning.
Mr. Fishman asked if they could build on the space that originally was to be the patio.
Claudia Husak said they could only build on it if they came back to the Commission for an amended final
development plan as well as an amendment to their parking requirements. She said they do not have
enough parking on their site to allow additional use without any kind of relief from the Commission.
Mr. Fishman said that space then, would never be a building or patio unless they came in for an approval.
Ms. Husak presented a site map. She said there is an amendment proposed to the development text that
would permit 1,680- square feet of patio area by right for this particular tenant space. She said another
portion of the application; the final development plan shows all of the patio details. She said the
development text addresses the size, location, amenities, and the operational details of the patio. She
presented picture of Mary Kelley's with the patio proposed on either side of the main entrance in the
landscaped area.
Ms. Husak explained that the final development plan consists of two phases for the patio, but the
Commission is asked to eventually approve Phase II, knowing that the patio will be built in two phases.
She said there is a patio portion proposed north of the main entrance and a portion south of the main
entrance. She said the two trees that exist within that area will be maintained and intended to be
incorporated into the patio. She said a mixture of four, two, and three patron seating areas are
proposed. Ms. Husak said the patio is proposed to be enclosed with a fence. Ms. Husak said the final
development plan also includes two small gates for the area, which is not fully enclosed that is the
existing patio area. She said due to many concerns of residents about people using that space to smoke,
talk, or loiter the applicant has agreed to fully enclose that area with two small portions of a fence.
Ms. Husak presented the patio amenities that are described in the proposed development text
amendment and included in the final development plan. Ms. Husak said that the fence proposed is the
same as is used at the Matt the Miller's Restaurant. She said the applicant is also proposing planters to
be hung off the patio railing and planters with flowers landscaping within the patio area. She said black
wrought iron chairs are proposed.
Ms. Husak said that Planning proposes two conditions on the final development plan, one about the
offsite storage of patio furniture during off seasons and the eight -foot gaps on either side be fenced in or
that gates be installed in those two areas. She said Planning has no conditions proposed for the
development text.
Jill Tangeman, Vorys, Sater, Seymour, and Pease, representing the applicant said that they were trying to
strictly limit this to the patio area. She said that they had discussed with Tom McCash two amendments
to which they agreed that any future patio areas would have to come to the Commission as a rezoning
and that all access to this patio is through the front door.
Ms. Amorose Groomes invited comments from the public regarding this application.
Tom McCash, 55 South High Street, Suite 210, representing 27 adjoining property owners, said that they
had tried to reach a compromise on this issue, addressing their concerns raised in 2010. He said the
residents were concerned with the use of this site currently and with any future rezoning effecting their
property values and quality of life. He said in the spirit of compromise and in trying to move this forward
they have looked at the proposed development text, and the sentence that provides any other patio
areas may be permitted through the approval of a conditional use by Planning and Zoning Commission
according to the Zoning Code, they have asked the applicant if they would agree to strike the sentence
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
April 12, 2012 — Meeting Minutes
Page 3 of 5
and they have agreed to that particular provision. Mr. McCash said his clients are happy with having the
provision that would in essence require that any other outdoor seating on this site would have to come
through as a rezoning and they could address those particular issues at that time.
Mr. McCash said another matter they had concern with on the final development plan proposed is access,
and how that particular outdoor patio area is served. He said the on the plan in both Phase I and II, two
gates are proposed in the formal patio area designation. He said there has been a consistent problem in
the past where that area has been used for access from the bar for smoking and loud conversations
which creates problems for the neighbors because it is a very cavernous, noisy area. He said it has been
a consistent problem with the conditional use applications before the Commission. Mr. McCash said that
they did not want to see that area being used now for service to the patio area for wait staff and
bartenders with plates, dishes, and things like that. He said as long as there is a condition with the final
development plan that the patio areas are only serviced from the front entry, which Mr. Hammond and
Ms. Tangeman have agreed is the way they are going to serve the patio, and not used for service of the
patio, they would be fine with it.
Warren Fishman said that he thought this would be a wonderful addition to the shopping center. He
asked if music and so on would be allowed on the patio.
Ms. Husak explained that the development text specifically prohibits it.
Mr. Fishman said he felt that it should be allowed, only because they face into the shopping center and it
could do nothing but enhance the value of the center. He pointed out that at the Shoppes at River
Ridge, there was music all the time, and it was very pleasant. He said this patio will add vibrancy to the
center and he could not see how it would affect the neighbors at all to have music in the center.
Ms. Husak said that it is in the details of the patio as proposed in the development text, that music is
specifically prohibited with the idea that the patio area is supposed to be as low- impact as possible
toward the adjoining residences.
Mr. Fishman said that Tucci's always had music on their patio, and on the front patio here, it was far
away from the neighbors. He said he hesitated to prohibit that here.
Joe Budde said he was empathetic to the neighbors' situation, but he applauded Mr. McCash for working
to try to come up with some compromise that appears to be acceptable. He said he thought it would be
a nice addition, but he did like the conditions that will help the neighbors feel more secure that there will
be the least amount of impact to them as possible. Mr. Budde said he supported it and liked the quality
of what is being done.
Amy Kramb suggested that the standard condition language used for previously approved patios
regarding the use of outdoor furniture be added for consistency. She asked about the size of the two
gates used to close the eight -foot gaps in the fence. She was concerned that an eight -foot gate would
swing into the walkway.
Ms. Husak explained that the details had not been reviewed by Planning. She said that the intention was
that it might be a four -foot gate and two additional pieces of fence. She said a sidewalk, eight -feet or
more went into the restaurant.
Ms. Kramb said because there was not a large waiting area, people would be waiting outside. She said
she preferred that the gates opened inward.
Ms. Husak said she was concerned that there might be a Code requirement that the gates open outward
to allow people to leave faster.
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
April 12, 2012 — Meeting Minutes
Page 4 of 5
Ms. Amorose Groomes said that the condition could be made that the gate would be subject to approval
by staff.
Ms. Kramb asked about the timelines for Phase I and II. She asked if Phase II was an option that might
not be built.
Ms. Tangeman said it was a financial matter at this time. They did not want to remove the landscape
beds and tables if the patio was not successful for some reason. She said it was an option.
Ms. Kramb asked if tables would be added to Phase I rather than spending money on Phase II.
Ms. Tangeman said they could only do what was shown for Phase I, unless they went to Phase II.
Richard Taylor said he agreed that the condition about the tables and chairs should be consistent with
the condition on previously approved patios. He did not think music should be permitted and that the
text should remain as it is proposed. He said he was fine with two patios. He pointed out there was six
feet from the back of the curb to the fence, a light pole, and flower boxes, so there was plenty of space
for people to walk. Mr. Taylor suggested more might be better. He noted that including Phase II, at
build out there will be 1,680 square feet of seating area, about 25 square feet per seat for 67 seats. He
said if this were inside the building, the Building Code would allow as low as 15 square feet, which would
be 112 seats. He said there was plenty of room to move the fence away from the curb to make the
walkway a little wider and still have more than enough room for 67 seats. He said he wanted it pushed
back to provide plenty of room.
Ms. Kramb recalled that for other patio applications, that the Commission has asked that the flower boxes
hang to the inside, to make sure there is that extra space.
Mr. Taylor said he did not think it would be as pretty that way.
Ms. Amorose Groomes recalled that Sunny Street Cafe was required to hang the planters on the inside of
the fence. She said she liked it that way.
Mr. Taylor pointed out that the patio space at Sunny Street Cafe was really limited and underneath the
canopy of the building. He said he would like to see the fence moved back a foot or two away from the
curb.
Gary Schmidt, Landscape Architect, Floyd Browne Group, 3763 Columbus Pike, Delaware, said that they
looked at making it wider, and it did not work as well to get the tables in there, however, they can take
another look at it. He said that five feet is the minimum, and they are over that.
Mr. Taylor said the difference here is that it was originally designed as something of a gathering area in
front of the whole center, and now they are privatizing that area. He said by making the sidewalk wider,
he thought a little of that would be given back to the public.
Ms. Tangeman said they would be happy if it was left to staff. She said that Mr. McCash had mentioned
there may be an ADA issue if the fence is moved. She agreed to a condition that they work with Planning
with the location of the fence.
Mr. Taylor noted that on the top left corner of the drawing where the fence angled back towards the
business to the north, in Phase II, the fence was moved and straightened, but it was not shown on the
other drawing. He said that area on the other drawing was shown as becoming paving. He said the
fence in Phase I and II were identical, except for that. He suggested the fence could be built in Phase I
instead of moving it so that they would be done with it.
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
April 12, 2012 — Meeting Minutes
Page 5 of 5
Mr. Taylor noted that at the very end of the development text, there were two typos. He said on Page 4
of 4, the proposed development text #2, the last sentence, 'No addition' should be 'No additional lighting
and the end of the sentence, Patio operations shall seipe cease at 11 p.m.
Ms. Amorose Groomes said she would like the flower boxes moved to the interior of the patio to provide
more clearance for the exterior sidewalk.
Mr. Fishman said he was very happy to see that Mr. McCash and Mary Kelley's work out a compromise.
He said regarding the music, if it affects the neighbors, he withdrew his suggestion.
Motion #1 and Vote — Rezoning with Preliminary Development Plan
Mr. Taylor made the motion to recommend approval to City Council of this rezoning with preliminary
development plan because it meets the applicable review criteria and the development standards in the
area with one condition:
1) That the development text be amended to delete the language regarding additional patio areas
on page 4 and require a rezoning process to permit any additional patio areas.
Mr. Fishman seconded the motion.
Ms. Tangeman, on behalf of the applicant, agreed to the above condition.
The vote was as follows: Ms. Kramb, yes; Mr. Budde, yes; Ms. Amorose Groomes, yes; Mr. Fishman,
yes; and Mr. Taylor, yes. (Approved 5 — 0.)
Motion #2 and Vote — Final Development Plan
Mr. Taylor made the motion to approve this Final Development Plan application because the proposed
modifications are consistent with surrounding development and the applicable review criteria and
requirements of the Zoning Code with six conditions:
1) That gates be installed for both patio areas;
2) That all outdoor furniture be stored out of sight from November li to April ls unless the
furniture is set -up for use, not covered in any way and weather conditions are appropriate for
use;
3) That the patio fence be removed if the restaurant discontinues use of the space;
4) That the applicant work with Planning to decrease the patio area along the sidewalk to provide
additional sidewalk area;
5) That the plan be revised to place the flower boxes inside the fence; and
6) That all service to the patio occur from the front of the restaurant tenant space.
Mr. Fishman seconded the motion.
Ms. Tangeman, on behalf of the applicant, agreed to the above conditions.
The vote was as follows: Ms. Amorose Groomes, yes; Ms. Kramb, yes; Mr. Budde, yes; Mr. Fishman,
yes; and Mr. Taylor, yes. (Approved 5 — 0.)
Page 1 of 1
RESIDENT CORRESPONDENCE
Claudia Husak - Fwd: 10 -025
From: planningcases
To: Husak, Claudia
Date: 7/8/2010 8:27 AM
Subject: Fwd: 10 -025
>>> <glmessineo @hotmail.com> 7/7/2010 3:17 PM >>>
comments: This email is to state our opposition to the request by Mary Kelley/Es restaurant for an outdoor patio
in the Shoppes of Athenry, which resides in the middle of our residential neighborhood, Indian Run Meadows.
Mary Kelley/Es and the Shoppes of Athenry have not been good neighbors. We live on Mojave Street, which is
across the street from Muirfield Drive, west of the restaurant. We like to leave our windows open as the weather
permits, and some of our windows face east, towards the shopping center. We are awakened by the trash
collectors picking up and dropping the dumpsters as they collect trash from the restaurant in the morning, often
as early as 5:00 a.m. We also hear loud conversations in the parking lot at late hours as the restaurant closes.
There is open space, trees, and Muirfield Drive, between our house and the restaurant, but the noise from the
shopping center is still loud.
We are very concerned about the noise that will be generated by dining and music on a patio. We noticed on
the Planning and Zoning Application that neighbors within the proximity of 150 ft. of the restaurant were listed
in the application. Our address is not listed in this application, however we are also disturbed and awakened by
the noise generated from Mary Kelley/Es.
We live in a lovely residential neighborhood and we hope you will consider these concerns and vote against the
request for a patio.
name: Gail and John Messineo
email: glmessineo @hotmail.com
utma: 18684716. 726828174.1213363303 .1278529633.1278529633.38
_utmz: 18684716.1278515010.36.33. utmccn =(organic) I utmcsr=bing I utmctr=city of dublin planning and
zoning I utmcmd= organic
utmb: 18684716
style: A-
utmc: 18684716
Sender's IP address: 206.211.177.194
file• / /C'• \T)nciimentc anti 4ettinPS \hij-,acd \1.ocal 4ettines\ Temn \XPemwise \4C358BF5Dublin... 7/8/2010
1 (4/12/2012) pla nningcases -12 -017 page 1 j
RESIDENT CORRESPONDENCE
From: < glmessineo @hotmail.com>
To: <planningcases @dublin.oh.us>
Date: 4/12/2012 4:37 PM
Subject: 12 -017
comments: We oppose the development of a patio at Mary Kelly's restaurant. We live on Mojave Street
and the back of our house faces the parking lot at the Shoppes at Athenry. In the summer evenings when
our windows are open or when we're relaxing on my backyard deck we can hear noise from the parking
lot and people talking as they leave the restaurant. We am also concerned that a patio would eventually
lead to live music or entertainment in the space. These things have a way of encroaching beyond their
permitted use. The noise generated from the trash collectors emptying the dumpsters remains an
nongoing problem. While a restaurant patio may be a good idea in a commercial area, this restaurant in in
the middle of a residential neighborhood. Please have more consideration for the noise and the effect this
outside patio dining area will have for the neighbors who live in the immediate vacinity and less for the
occasional diner that only visits our neighborhood. Thank you for!
your consideration.
name: Gail and John Messineo
email: glmessineo @hotmail.com
_utma: 18684716. 390508814.1333392096 .1334258148.1334258636.9
_utmz: 18684716. 1334067297.6.5. utmccn= (organic)lutmcsr= binglutmctr =city of dublin ohio
jobslutmcmd= organic
utmc: 18684716
Sender's IP address: 206.211.177.199
RESIDENT CORRESPONDENCE Page 1 of l
audia Husak - Mari Kelley's Rezoning Application
From: info a indianrunmeadows.com
To: <chusak c dublin.oh.us
Date: 4/11/2012 11:55 AM
Subject: Mary Kelley's Rezoning Application
CC: <tmccasli(a;columbus.com - waldonia @ c wowway.com
Dear Ms. Husak:
The following represents the official feedback of the Indian Run Meadows Civic Association, Inc with rega d to
case 12 -017Z, Indian Run Meadows PDU Shoppes at Athenry — Mary Kelley's Patio.
The Association would support a rezoning to allow Mary Kelley's to have patio seating with the following
restrictions:
1. Outdoor seat be limited to sidewalk area directly in front of Mary Kelley's primary tenant space. No
other outdoor seating is permitted without rezoning.
2. The Patio identified on the 970 -0083 DP Final Development Plan is not to be used for special
events, smoking /gathering, or for service /delivery to the outdoor seating area.
3. Dumpster enclosures are to be locked or otherwise restricted to prohibit access to waste haulers
outside the hours of 7:00 PM to 7:00 AM.
4. We encourage the use of softscape elements within the former Patio area to mitigate no se from this
area.
5. Fast food restaurants continue to be prohibited from the Shoppes at Athenry as indicated in the
original rezoning and the city shall enforce this restriction immediately.
We have received numerous complaints over the years from our residents adjacent to the Shoppes of Athenry,
particularly those on Calvary Ct. We feel these modest restrictions strike a balance between the interest of
owners and tenants of the shopping center, and those of the residents adjacent.
Sincerely,
Steven Schmidt (6656 Fallen Timbers Dr)
President, Indian Run Meadows Civic Association, Inc.
Michael Welsh (6857 Fallen Timbers Dr)
Secretary, Indian Run Meadows Civic Association, Inc.
PO Box 1960
Dublin OH 43017
file: / /C: \DOCUmCI1ts and Settings \husacd \Local Settings\ Temp \XPgrpwise \4F857140Dubli... 4/12/2012
(4/9/2012) planningcases -12 -017
RESIDENT CORRESPONDENCE
From: <joebratton1 @ gmail.com>
To: <planningcases @dublin.oh.us>
Date: 4/5/2012 9:28 PM
Subject: 12 -017
comments: I wholeheartedly support allowing the creation of this outdoor patio. When we built our house,
the property north of Tara Hill was undeveloped but we knew then that the area in question was zoned
commercial. The individuals who choose to purchase property butting the commercial property did so with
full knowledge of what they were doing. Trying to stop this project is a little like buying a house next to an
airport and then complaining about the planes.
name: Joe Bratton
email: joebratton1 @gmail.com
_utma: 18684716. 1695704720. 1330954471 .1330954471.1333674938.2
utmb: 18684716
_utmz: 18684716. 1330954471.1.1. utmccn= (organic)lutmcsr= googlelutmctr =2011 primary ballott dublin,
ohiolutmcmd= organic
utmc: 18684716
Sender's IP address: 184.57.41.143
Page 1
(4/9/2012) planningcases -12 -017
RESIDENT CORRESPONDENCE
From: <rich.brown @kingthompson.com>
To: <planningcases @dublin.oh.us>
Date: 4/6/2012 10:54 AM
Subject: 12 -017
comments: Stop delaying the project. Approve it. When a home owner purchases next door to a
commercial property (Value of home is impacted at purchase) they should not impede a normal function
of that business. In this case one that is fully seasonal and not late night.
name: Rich Brown
email: rich.brown @kingthompson.com
utma: 18684716.1241474920.1330528057 .1333721537.1333724046.5
_utmz:
18684716. 1333283859 .3.2.utmccn = (referral)) utmcsr= bizjournals.comlutmcct= /colum bus /news /2012/03/2
7 /dublin -oks- bridge - street- corridor.html lutmcmd= referral
utmc: 18684716
utmb: 18684716
Sender's IP address: 24.106.124.138
Page 1
(4/9/2012) plannin -12 -017
RESIDENT CORRESPONDENCE
From: < gdecker @columbus.rr.com>
To: <planningcases @dublin.oh.us>
Date: 4/6/2012 8:03 PM
Subject: 12 -017
comments: I support the proposed patio for Mary Kelley's. I think it's a great idea for our local pub.
name: Glenn Decker
email: gdecker @columbus.rr.com
utma: 18684716. 1814914802. 1333756751 .1333756751.1333756751.1
utmb: 18684716
utmc: 18684716
_utmz: 18684716 .1333756751.1.1.utmccn =(d irect)lutmcsr= (direct)lutmcmd= (none)
Sender's IP address: 204.210.252.19
Page 1
(4/9/2012) planningcases -12 -017
RESIDENT CORRESPONDENCE
From: <dss.v1.0 @gmail.com>
To: <planningcases @dublin.oh.us>
Date: 4/7/2012 7:11 PM
Subject: 12 -017
comments: It would be horrible if life in our part of Dublin became as pleasant as other communities. Say
Grandview. I would much rather visit places like Easton for a couple hours. Music, a few drinks and then
a tong drive home a little tipsy. So much better.
Seriously, I can't believe it has taken this long to fix this error. I previously lived right behind Karric
Square. Moved because our family outgrew our home, not the bars or the Barley Bin. Now I am jealous of
our old neighbors. Change The Zoning.
name: Dan Sabo
email: dss.v1.0 @gmail.com
utma: 18684716.823385060.1333839318 .1333839318.1333839318.1
utmb: 18684716
utmc: 18684716
_utmz:
18684716.13338393181.1.utmccn= (referral )lutmcsr= facebook.com lutmcct= /1 /2AQGKQh9OAQHwUXee3
CZmNOFT5vChKFM jGKzf35ss06gO7Q/www.dublin .oh.us /planning/projects/12- 017 /index.phplutmcmd =r
eferral
Page 1
Sender's IP address: 75.185.74.123
(4/912012) pl anningcas es -12 -017
RESIDENT CORRESPONDENCE
From:
<annaliv @att.net>
To:
<planningcases @dublin.oh.us>
Date:
4/9/2012 10:24 AM
Subject:
12 -017
comments: I am writing to support the application for patio dining at Mary Kelley's Restaurant. I see no
reason why this application should be denied. Outside dining will be a welcomed addition to the
neighborhood and will prompt many residents from the nearby neighborhoods walk or bike to the
restaurant. Outside dining should not be limited to Old Dublin. Family -owned restaurants like Mary
Kelley's should have that opportunity as well where it is appropriate.
name: Paul Weirtz
email: annaliv @att.net
utma: 18684716. 407265577.1333980733 .1333980733.1333980733.1
utmc:18684716
_utmz: 18684716 .1333980733.1.1.utmcsr =e -News from Dublin,
OhioJutmccn= 97e9195c9f- Dublin_City_Council_Meeting4 9_20121utmcmd =email
utmb: 18684716
Sender's IP address: 144.160.5.25
Page 1
Correspondence Submitted for Adjacent Residents
By Tom McCash as Related to the Patio
THOMAS M. MCCASH
ATTORNEY AT LAW
55 SOUTH HIGH STREEI'
SUITE 210
DUBLIN, OHIO 43017
614408 -8367
Fax: 614-408-8282
Web: www.mccashlau con.
April 11, 2012
City of Dublin
Planning & Zoning Commission
Shier Rings Rd.
Dublin, Ohio 43016
Attn: Claudia Husack, AICP Planner II
RE: Indian Run Meadows PUD — Athenry Shoppes Rezoning Case # 12- 017Z/PDP /FDP
Dear Claudia,
As I'm sure you are aware, I continue to represent 27 neighbors in Indian Run Meadows many
of whom are abutting property owners to the above referenced project.
I was a bit surprised to learn that this case is set for hearing on April 12, 2012 before the
planning commission given that I have repeatedly over the past 9 months attempted to get a
meeting set up between the City's Law Department and the Centers owner's to try to reach
some type of compromise position that would allow a limited amount of outdoor seating.
After the July 2011 P &Z hearing, I had prepared a draft of a proposed amended development
text to start a discussion but the centers owner has never responded to our request to meet
which we had presented through Mr. Hammond and attorney Greg Finnerty who at the time was
representing Mary Kelly's.
I was finally able to receive via email this afternoon the staff report as well as the proposed
Revised Development Text given that it still has not been posted on the city's website. I am very
concerned that the staff report continues to provide yet another incomplete record of events
surrounding this site and its original rezoning. These issues, promises and commitments are a
key factor in any discussion on a rezoning for this site and have consistently been overlooked
and ignored by staff. In fact, the development plan approved in 1997 failed to note or indicate
the underlying zoning prohibitions on outdoor seating and drive thrus.
Since this center has opened, staff has permitted fast food type of uses to be approved even
though the zoning specifically prohibits such uses. Regular zoning violations on deliveries,
parking behind the center, trash pick -up and maintenance occur on this site yet I find it amazing
that there are no staff conditions relative to the rezoning request which leads me to believe that
something else is going on here than the residents have been told.
Correspondence Submitted for Adjacent Residents
By Tom McCash as Related to the Patio
We will be in attendance for the hearing on April 12, 2012 and we are submitting the attached
documents to you for staff review and dissemination to the Planning Commission prior to that
hearing. These are submitted so that you may have the opportunity to review the contents
therein and be prepared to discuss the issues at the hearing.
While we are concerned that this application has proceeded to be scheduled and placed on the
agenda without the opportunity, requirement or commitment that the Owner meet to discuss the
application with either the adjoining property owners or neighborhood association, we continue
to request such a meeting in order to try to work out a solution to this continuing problem in the
community. Indian Run Meadows and these neighbors deserve to be treated like any other
neighborhood that was in existence PRIOR to the original commercial rezoning.
My clients have proposed, at the very least, the following acceptable proposal:
1. Outdoor seating be permitted solely in the front area of the Primary Restaurant Tenant,
Mary Kelley's, and that all other outdoor seating continue to be prohibited pursuant to
the original rezoning text and commitments.
The proposed Development Text, Item 2 provides that any other outdoor seating is to
a conditional use and the staff report states (p4 of 11) that any other patio areas are
required to be approved through rezoning or conditional use processes. I don't see how
any future patio areas will require rezoning given the text language.
2 Dumpster enclosures are to be locked or otherwise restricted to prohibit access to was'f-
haulers outside of the 7A -7P hours.
3. The Patio identified on the 970 -0083 DP Final Development Plan is not to be used fo:
special events, smoking /gathering or for service /delivery to the outdoor seating areas.
We encourage the use of softscape elements, i.e. trellis or other green elements, wi'
this area to mitigate noise from the patio area between the buildings. Given the current
configuration of Mary Kelley's this area will be used for service of the outdoor seating
areas and for bar patrons to step outside for a smoke, which they currently do.
Discussion with Mary Kelley's owner Mr. Hammond, suggested the door be relocated to
have direct access to the outdoor patio area form the front of the restaurant. This is
achievable by building code from an exiting standpoint and is a minimal modification of
the bar, particularly given the cost of the work being performed for the patio.
4. Hours of operation should be consistent with other patios in the same or similar proximity
to residential properties within the city of Dublin. Refer to the attached chart for your
review.
5. The enforcement of parking behind the building, fast food uses and overall maintenance
commitments must be addressed.
Again, I will be attending the April 12, 2012 meeting and will be prepared to discuss the above
items as well as the overall project application in greater detail. Please ensure that the encloser
documents are provided to the Planning Commission for their reference during the meeting
Correspondence Submitted for Adjacent Residents
By Tom McCash as Related to the Patio
Sincerely,
Thomas M. McCash
Enclosures
Cc: Clients
Correspondence Submitted for Adjacent Residents
By Tom McCash as Related to the Patio
# 0,stdoor
Speaker
Closest
Patio
Business
Seas
Hours of Operation
-
Permitted?
Residential Lot
Square
Footage
Donatos O d
18
May 1 - Sept 30 Daylight Hours on /
No
200 Feet
n: a
Dub
and no later than, 9 PM
BW3
48
Sunday - Thursday 11 P1.1 Friday and
Yes
2.200 Feet
r a
Saturdav: 12 AM
Oscars
57
Weeknights: 10 PM Weekends:
Yes
250 Feet
We
11 PM
Brazennead
48
Monday - Thusday: 1 AM Friday
No
250 Feet
na
and Saturda : 2 AM
Monday -Thursday 10 PM
Jason's
n
Fridayand Saturday: 11 Phi Sunday:9
No
550 Feet
405 sq. ft
PM
Tuesday - Friday: 9:30 PM
La Sca!a
40
Saturday: 10 PM Sungay: 9
No
300 Feet
n!a
PM
Hoggy's
Weeknights and Weekends: 2 AM
No
650 Feet
650 sq ft.
Mench,e's
16
Business Hours
No
625 Feet
170 sc. ft
Tuula's
10
Sunday- Saturday: 8 -10 PM
No
490 Feet
120 so. ft
Bruegger's
14
Business Hours
No
500 Feet
200 sq. ft.
Bagels
Yncenzos
10
Business Hours
No
1,500 Feet
207 sq. ft.
Cold Stone
6
Sunday - Thursday: 12 -9 PM Friday
No
1,700 Feet
258 sq. ft.
Creamery
Saturday: 12 -10 PM
Potbelly
30
Monday - Sunday: 11 -9 PM
No
570 Feet
430 sq. ft.
Averace Joe's
64
Monday - Sunday: 11 -2 AM
Yes
650 Feet
750 sq. ft.
Matt the Millers
n,a
Sunday -Thursday 11 -11 PM Friday
Yes
600 Feet
-300 sq. ft.
- Saturday 11 -12 AP +1
Emerald Town
Tuesday - Thursday: 5 -9 PI41 Friday
Center
28
- Saturday 5 -10 PM Tuesday-
Yes
500 Feet
1.300 sq. ft.
Saturda 12.2:30 PM
Sunday - Thursday: 4:30 -11 PM
Clarior Tio'el
n'a
Friday: 4:30 -2 AM Sunday:
n;a
2.000 Feet
1.400 sq. ft.
11:30 -2 AM
Digger and
rya
Business Hours
Yes
440 Feet
2,322 sq. ft.
Finch
Tucci's
48
n!a
Yes
300 Feet
3.240 sq. ft.
Golf Club of
n/a
n/a
Yes
500 Feet
3,344 sq. ft.
Dublin
Our Cu caker
12
n/a
No
170 Feet
210 sq. ft.
Muirfield
Country Club
122
Business Hours
No
130 Feet
7 800 sq. ft.
La Chatelaine
n/a
Business Hours
I No
240 Feet
955 sq. ft.
Correspondence Submitted for Adjacent Residents
By Tom McCash as Related to the Patio
• aA A
■ An A /f
■ ■ ■rX
LEM DynAmp Inc.
3735 Gantz Road
Grove City, Ohio 43123
Phone: 614 -871 -6900
FAX: 614 -871 -6910
FAX TRANSMITTAL
TO: Gary Gunderman DATE SENT: 11/10/2005
COMPANY: City of Dublin, Land Use and Long FAX NO.
Range Planning Office
FROM: Farid Masri NUMBER OF PAGES: 5
SUBJECT: Mary Kelley's Patio
Gary,
CC:
I am faxing you copies of a signed objection to the proposed patio at Mary Kelley's. The signatures are
from residents in the immediate vicinity of the shopping center. I hope that this copy be included on
record. I will submit the original at the meeting tonight.
Thanks,
Farid Masri
Documentl
Correspondence Submitted for Adjacent Residents
By Tom McCash as Related to the Patio
7�- ^ lb—IV-e-0 -- I - 3 - L I . —
Petition to deny approval of outdoor service dining and drinking patio �..
93.
[. undersigned below object to granting permission for an outdoor service patio at the Shoppes of
Athenry, in Dublin Ohio. I believe that such a patio will degrade the quality of life in my C.2
neighborhood, generate too much noise, increase the risk to our children, and decrease the Lai r
adjacent property values. The patio is too close to the adjacent properties and is not an a ,
appropriate use at the proposed site. — _
V.
Name N
Number & Street Z
Zip code S
Si nature D
Date
o. N&ft'o -
-10 4 3 CetgoLl q
q 3 t
C 7
70?��
�5
'I'To Caie'a 7
7 (c,,,alfy (f t
tf 361 l
laj3l�•s
Jen 1<2 1
1071 AJj
706c LqSek(rTA -
- ps .
. b
- 71 - 75
e
J
05 -154CU
Mary Kelley's Patio
7142 Muirfield Drive
Correspondence Submitted for Adjacent Residents
By Tom McCash as Related to the Patio
Petition to deny approval of outdoor service dining and drinking patio O ZN"
CL.
I, undersigned below object to grading permission for an outdoor service patio at the Shoppes of C=
Athemy, in Dublin Ohio. I believe that such a patio will degrade the quality of life in my C ' 7
neighborhood, generate too much noise, i icrease the risk to out children, and decrease the L&J
adjacent property values. The patio is too close to the adjacent properties and is not an —
date use at the proposed site. "'d
4.
Name
Number & Street
re
Date
�N.DrDGV�
R W
.i o ft a �iO A) i z2fl
^1 z S�rNpoo u:,.I
GO C[
11 l��'
3017
VatiXlean AOQ
_7610 CILA y ol- s
/4-39(7
3esS;� cam
�o C WI nq Gf_
4301 r7
An il. ar u
'761B.Iavattma
J,Ohh 3
I
1 (3 01 1
I +,) -S
J 4A ' r i
70 ! ry Cr
05 -154CU
Mary Kelley's Patio
7142 Muirfield Drive
d
Correspondence Submitted for Adjacent Residents
By Tom McCash as Related to the Patio
Zi code
Si nature
Date
Petition to deny approval of outdoor service dining and drinldng patio
I
I, undersigned below object to granting permission for an outdoor service patio at the Shoppes of
CZ
Adienry, in Dublin Ohio. I believe that such a patio will degrade the quality of life in my
y3 0 7
neighborhood, generate too much noise, increase the nsk to our children, and decrease the
Lai
adjacent property values_ The patio is too close to the adjacent properties and is not an
• J
appropriate use at the proposed site
LL.
Name
Number &Street
Zi code
Si nature
Date
WILWAm . yAaN
7100 6 X*0L& A
-7 Z( W I ck ?R fl-4
y3 0 7
F
At-11 A; KEy
7031 u3tctitTot
p tz .
ti3a�
6 o q'f ja•� t4�i1
_
//
�U��l
i�3�
Jyj���
l rr/6
I I-
S'
05 -154CU
Mary Kelley's Patio
7142 Muirfield Drive
6
Correspondence Submitted for Adjacent Residents
By Tom McCash as Related to the Patio
Indian Run Meadows Civic Association
Sign -in Sheet
Special Meeting: Mary Kelly's Patio issue
December 13, 2005
Name
Street Address
a -
Q �.7OI S
G CAVA
t?lf N Tqi✓ 0
6 !0/ �?��IcKNga/ k CT
N C L c N
`7 i' 1 C" 4-M rt--
9
�q. s
'7 (NO
b )
4 7
7�l 4 7
131 m,v ax4r s5
7 2 z Q 5L, N D c
— 0 Y' J Q a.J 1
/
Page Z of I
�1
Correspondence Submitted for Adjacent Residents
By Tom McCash as Related to the Patio
A k Indian Run Meadows Civic Association
Sign -in Sheet
Special Meeting: Mary Kelly's Patio issue
December 13, 2005
Name
Street Address
Meeting witnessed by Attornev Kristie
Camobell Kuhn
Page �- of
Correspondence Submitted for Adjacent Residents
By Tom McCash as Related to the Patio
Petition to deny approval of outdoor service dining and drinking patio
1, undersigned below object to granting permission for an outdoor service patio at the Shoppes of
Athenry, in Dublin Ohio. The proposed settlement deal regarding the out lot building has no relation to
the outdoor seating and proceeding with such a deal not only sets a bad precedent, but undermines the
quality of life in our neighborhood.
According to the Indian Run Zoning text, Outdoor service is prohibited. In addition, this use does not
meet several criteria that all other patios in Dublin have to meet, including but not limited to conditions
1, 3, 4, 7 and 9 of Dublin's Conditional Use Review Criteria. I believe that such a patio will degrade the
quality of life in my neighborhood, generate too much noise, increase odor, produce second hand smoke,
increase the risk to our children via increased traffic and drinking; and decrease the adjacent property
values.
At a distance of 114 feet, the proposed patio is too close to the adjacent properties and is not an
appropriate use at the proposed site. It would increase traffic by about 25% in evenings and weekends.
In 2006, the Planning and zoning commission denied a similar application at the same restaurant due to
failure to meet the same criteria above and continuing problems with the center. Mitigation for those
same criteria has not been provided in this application.
Name
Number & Street
Zip code
Signature
Date
C (A ,�
o v'-- Cam.., o( ct
l��e�� 7
/D cu, C
217 /r
A I L
711
l e-r J "/I I L
I
P 4-"f��
- 7-1
4 , x
( m fr -•
m Ck-
7 C
P V►
`\
"
` 1
I 7- ,0
Lt (� is Ch�1
let 9 Cosa) ry CA •
301
dog/ 91-(4 4 Of
�3 0 f7
1, 7 to
70 Cl 1p (,(1 C�
�3oi?
7 7 -4
AOL Y ►'
70(of c, y c+
y30)7
49t )nom
>._ ?!
Page _ of _
Correspondence Submitted for Adjacent Residents
By Tom McCash as Related to the Patio
Petition to deny approval of outdoor service dining and drinking patio
I, undersigned below object to granting permission for an outdoor service patio at the Shoppes of
Athenry, in Dublin Ohio. The proposed settlement deal regarding the out lot building has no relation to
the outdoor seating and proceeding with such a deal not only sets a bad precedent, but undermines the
quality of life in our neighborhood.
According to the Indian Run Zoning text, Outdoor service is prohibited. In addition, this use does not
meet several criteria that all other patios in Dublin have to meet, including but not limited to conditions
1, 3, 4, 7 and 9 of Dublin's Conditional Use Review Criteria. I believe that such a patio will degrade the
quality of life in my neighborhood, generate too much noise, increase odor, produce second hand smoke,
increase the risk to our children via increased traffic and drinking; and decrease the adjacent property
values.
At a distance of 114 feet, the proposed patio is too close to the adjacent properties and is not an
appropriate use at the proposed site. It would increase traffic by about 25% in evenings and weekends.
In 2006, the Planning and zoning commission denied a similar application at the same restaurant due to
failure to meet the same criteria above and continuing problems with the center. Mitigation for those
same criteria has not been provided in this application.
Name
Number & Street
Zip code
Signature
Date
lA A hkks
- 1 0- 51 G.t t ' D
L - 30 L
�'- a r
: V &
/ ✓ iY/ r ` AK
' /0/ I
71-7116
S• s i'
0 "24 r
X 73 X17
e
7 /v
� -M 1 1 o Z
7 UJI
_;0(7
7/ 7 /) b
Kom' 44,.c,
7o5v c,
1 /3017
�an s
?os G
t o]
�����
Page of
Correspondence Submitted for Adjacent Residents
By Tom McCash as Related to the Patio
Petition to deny approval of outdoor service dining and drinking patio
I, undersigned below object to granting permission for an outdoor service patio at the Shoppes of
Athenry, in Dublin Ohio. The proposed settlement deal regarding the out lot building has no relation to
the outdoor seating and proceeding with such a deal not only sets a bad precedent, but undermines the
quality of life in our neighborhood.
According to the Indian Run Zoning text, Outdoor service is prohibited. In addition, this use does not
meet several criteria that all other patios in Dublin have to meet, including but not limited to conditions
1, 3, 4, 7 and 9 of Dublin's Conditional Use Review Criteria. I believe that such a patio will degrade the
quality of life in my neighborhood, generate too much noise, increase odor, produce second hand smoke,
increase the risk to our children via increased traffic and drinking; and decrease the adjacent property
values.
At a distance of 114 feet, the proposed patio is too close to the adjacent properties and is not an
appropriate use at the proposed site. It would increase traffic by about 25% in evenings and weekends.
In 2006, the Planning and zoning commission denied a similar application at the same restaurant due to
failure to meet the same criteria above and continuing problems with the center. Mitigation for those
same criteria has not been provided in this application.
Name
Number & Street
Zip code
Siggature
Date
Pl ax i
v4it-,
Cy r t
�13�� 7
,�
7-7
,a
L tt We 4y
- 72, `� ��;�-
q3017
aaw cll- tLl
7-7-A)
Page — of —
Correspondence Submitted for Adjacent Residents
By Tom McCash as Related to the Patio
Petition to deny approval of outdoor service dining and drinking patio
I, undersigned below object to granting permission for an outdoor service patio at the Shoppes of
Athenry, in Dublin Ohio. The proposed settlement deal regarding the out lot building has no relation to
the outdoor seating and proceeding with such a deal not only sets a bad precedent, but undermines the
quality of life in our neighborhood.
According to the Indian Run Zoning text, Outdoor service is prohibited. In addition, this use does not
meet several criteria that all other patios in Dublin have to meet, including but not limited to conditions
1, 3, 4, 7 and 9 of Dublin's Conditional Use Review Criteria. I believe that such a patio will degrade the
quality of life in my neighborhood, generate too much noise, increase odor, produce second hand smoke,
increase the risk to our children via increased traffic and drinking; and decrease the adjacent property
values.
At a distance of 114 feet, the proposed patio is too close to the adjacent properties and is not an
appropriate use at the proposed site. It would increase traffic by about 25% in evenings and weekends.
In 2006, the Planning and zoning commission denied a similar application at the same restaurant due to
failure to meet the same criteria above and continuing problems with the center. Mitigation for those
same criteria has not been provided in this application.
Name
Number & Street
Zip code
Signature
Date
a -
��.�`� �
1 /30/7
r
� �Q�tK.2��r[S
7 1 -/ s+ J�4 Aj oo w ^J
Dc —)l 0H JW
SF3�
/
?!4l /0
as /v ouN
1 43017
Dc!�.C�e 1
y3O ,
7-- to t 0
C b i. i s C ca.n n i Z 2uno
-73 -iy Kk Vio"L
0 11
7/6/1
t � is hail ')�
- 10 - 7 q c04 V4 ^�/
Irl
(V��
'7i� � ti
ayl z Flay -y�o lds
7o7Q CKv«i2y C
�,�61
7
I l�;ti X40
eo
n , o �r��
�iL��(�0��. -S
7v cl (k,r &i�� �-
AZ4
-�7 1-6-d-
Page _ of
Correspondence Submitted for Adjacent Residents
By Tom McCash as Related to the Patio
Petition to deny approval of outdoor service dining and drinking patio
1, undersigned below object to granting permission for an outdoor service patio at the Shoppes of
Athenry, in Dublin Ohio. The proposed settlement deal regarding the out lot building has no relation to
the outdoor seating and proceeding with such a deal not only sets a bad precedent, but undermines the
quality of life in our neighborhood.
According to the Indian Run Zoning text, Outdoor service is prohibited. In addition, this use does not
meet several criteria that all other patios in Dublin have to meet, including but not limited to conditions
1, 3, 4, 7 and 9 of Dublin's Conditional Use Review Criteria. I believe that such a patio will degrade the
quality of life in my neighborhood, generate too much noise, increase odor, produce second hand smoke,
increase the risk to our children via increased traffic and drinking; and decrease the adjacent property
values.
At a distance of 114 feet, the proposed patio is too close to the adjacent properties and is not an
appropriate use at the proposed site. It would increase traffic by about 25% in evenings and weekends.
In 2006, the Planning and zoning commission denied a similar application at the same restaurant due to
failure to meet the same criteria above and continuing problems with the center. Mitigation for those
same criteria has not been provided in this application.
Name
Number & Street
Zip code
Signature
Date
�� .► a��, t,.
Sy3l f <chcm �t.
311
C� !� -
7
Cad Wexundei
59y�{ sachem cf-
30 :i
74 //d
Dv lin o i4
t
- e�jccc G��swc�
5152 ��CClticwt C�
qw7
��R
1011b
ub i a
$acL-te" CT
o 14
'
Md. �aY th6v I`1 n
�o�r ta,eki�& GT
9301
..
D4 \', b'
Abby ? L' Y
'7 (L4D ScJn= c
-
a), 6&
7' L' io
4 ��
71 yn Sc DVImp' a.
D
�l►
—
7 G l D
D
I
1 1�
- 71 7-9 5c — ) 00 1 r
Pu bu& o
Z 4
Page _ of _
Correspondence Submitted for Adjacent Residents
By Tom McCash as Related to the Patio
Petition to deny approval of outdoor service dining and drinking patio
1, undersigned below object to granting permission for an outdoor service patio at the Shoppes of
Athenry, in Dublin Ohio. The proposed settlement deal regarding the out lot building has no relation to
the outdoor seating and proceeding with such a deal not only sets a bad precedent, but undermines the
quality of life in our neighborhood.
According to the Indian Run Zoning text, Outdoor service is prohibited. In addition, this use does not
meet several criteria that all other patios in Dublin have to meet, including but not limited to conditions
1, 3, 4, 7 and 9 of Dublin's Conditional Use Review Criteria. I believe that such a patio will degrade the
quality of life in my neighborhood, generate too much noise, increase odor, produce second hand smoke,
increase the risk to our children via increased traffic and drinking; and decrease the adjacent property
values.
At a distance of 114 feet, the proposed patio is too close to the adjacent properties and is not an
appropriate use at the proposed site. It would increase traffic by about 25% in evenings and weekends.
In 2006, the Planning and zoning commission denied a similar application at the same restaurant due to
failure to meet the same criteria above and continuing problems with the center. Mitigation for those
same criteria has not been provided in this application.
Name
Number & Street
Zig code
Si at
Date
�T
I
7D3d Ca ucdrf�
?6 , 0,
lotft, Ca v�xkr l C f
Y3�t7
w. C Tyl
7 /T��o
A- -olkl-n m (Mc
70 A) ��,,�1� �
V!b/ 2
71211D
& CUMAAJA
K C (604, A-
- 71)190— ��
If 301
JeS� +ta MAM(IhC
?v ( (u
3 6 ( 7,
V" 64 JJ LIVM
7 17 /1C
Ezk l 1 A 1es
Io U) idl t (4
4a, 17
x
7/7//,)
bay"
�ay i �� � 11
y
710 1 �I��
c,\A a-t- k G40
�,
6 TJ&
*P1)1ZxV1#T1qN1D
U
Page J of _
" �y
Correspondence Submitted for Adjacent Residents
By Tom McCash as Related to the Patio
OOL" . Ssa � �``X' 6 � c��H , a r�a X 11 1 13c, � � 7r1 7/7/1
Correspondence Submitted for Adjacent Residents
By Tom McCash as Related to the Patio
t.
Correspondence Submitted for Adjacent Residents
By Tom McCash as Related to the Shopping Center
Minutes of Meeting
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
July 8, 1986
Page Eighteen
Mr. Callahan had the followin o say, "I don't believe it' a non - issue.
Can I just interject what I ink you're going to find. think that you're
going to find that this b le is defined in the earl r documents as a
smaller acreage than it s now and that if you actu ly scale it out that
you will find that th a is probably a 300' setb there because that was
really what they we talking about, but you w 1 not find that in writin
You will not find t on a dimension map. .. a only maps that we have what
this is or what t should be is the origin preliminary development Ian.
There has nev been another map submit d on it, and the prelimi ry development
plan litera y has no fringe dimensio . They have acreages an such, and
densities and that kind of thing. d if you are going to re upon that map
that is our decision, but do not ely upon anybody coming with anything that
says n a map that there is a 3 foot setback line.
It 11 not exist. There has ever been such a map dr n.
. Grace seconded the motipfi.
The vote was 'as follows:/Mr. Reiner, no; Mr. Be in, yes; Mr. Amorose, no;
Mr. Geese, no; Mr. Cal han, no; Mr. Jezerinac no.
f- There was a short re-6ess.
.�F• 5. Rezoning Application Z86 -004 - Indian Run lieadow
Ms. Clarke said that the applicant was present to revise his preliminary plan
which is in fact a rezoning of the entire 199 acres, and had the following
additional information:
1. The majority of the parcel will still be devoted to single family use.
2. There will be some change in those uses which line the Boulevard, particularly
on the east side of Muirfield Drive.
3. Now where there is an area of predominantly single family use with a
commercial center there will be the addition of a seven acre office/
institutional site and to the north of that the park site will have moved
further-north and there will be a combined park and school site at the
intersection of the east /west connector and Muirfield Drive.
4. The only change on the west side of the Boulevard will be the designation
of a five acre church site on the northwest corner of Tara Hill Drive and
Muirfield Drive.
5. Overall the number of units for the project has come down. It was at 545
dwelling units; now it will be at 490.
6. The density on the residential acreage is exactly the same. The difference
comes when you subtract those acres which previously designated single
family and several of them are now designated office - five of them for
church and greater acreage for school and park sites.
7. The major street pattern is the same. Muirfield Drive extended will still
be constructed to the north property line under the same agreement as
before.
97 -083FDP
Indian Run Meadows
Retail Area
MnirfiiPM nrive.
Correspondence Submitted for Adjacent Residents
By Tom McCash as Related to the Shopping Center
Minutes of Meeting
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
July 8, 1986
Page Nineteen
8. The east /west streets are 60' of right -of -way with 36' of pavement,
one being Tara Mill and the yet to be named street (Mojave). These
will eventually link Lhrough to Coffman Road.
9. The area along Indian Run which was set aside for park and the pedestrian
and bike ways is unchanged by this particular plan. Additionally,
the mounding and landscaping proposals (the design guidelines) that went
along with this plan are unchanged.
10. The no build zone is also continued. There is-an exception, however;
right now it is provision of the design guidelines that the no build zone
also excludes fences.
11. The applicant wishes to use a consistent, absolutely one type split rail
fence with the possibility of welded wire on the back side. This would
be the only type of fence allowed within the subdivision. This is an
Issue which was discussed by the Commission several months ago. It was
not favorably received. Staff, however, is of the opinion that there a
growing number of residents in the subdivision who -are desirous of some
sort of fencing and staff is of the opinion that is a non -solid fence.
It should not obliterate the vistas that are to be preserved by the
zoning. Staff does not have a major objection to the fence as proposed.
irolvtte�,-_to, the -of f i eei °ims- vi'tut�i'dlia'i
. aril° �r- freraea�t�si�desso •f•�Mud�r- f�ize.l:d�ri�7re a �ri'oas��t�•��"n"'�"e��ar�:�
Beeause- t' ff# ji"br 'e K se_sxaFf&e r- ehat,Aogr
stir'u•�d�be^�'spec'�a'l rnnsiderat3,�,,2s,�p, laced,, �he�zoping ;�•,ll„e,� me�the�
atr.`e *bWTf gv;zoned ; (a�owt)e� that ►�i l r �b�a.t e;N;t uslc imat art P6 .
Staff made the following recommendations:
1. Clarification of the residential fence detail to eliminate what appears to
be chain link fencing;
2. Upgrading the plant materials in the Muirfield Boulevard Landscape Treatment
detail to better reflect, and therefore continue, the actual planting in
place;
3. Permitting a maximum of one full- service curb cut with median break for
combined use of Reserves C and D by rewording section; r
z
..1��4. - Dub;Fth -s paslcittg st "ar aids ark cure n l r being :C{e rat it gin; NO incorporate �f
pup tocfate. sfsucban requir-eaerrt. paTki�g beh�Ebmpince� with >Code
art the time. of development
S. Incorporation of language which will produce a single architectural
scheme or design package for each reserve;
6. Incorporation of language which clearly sets forth that utilization of maximum
and minimum standards spelled out is dependent upon demonstration of
compatibility with residential surroundings at the time of development of
non - residential tracts;
97 -083FDP
Indian Run Meadows
Retail Area
Miiirfli -ld nrivt-
Correspondence Submitted for Adjacent Residents
By Tom McCash as Related to the Shopping Center
Minutes of Meeting
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
July 8, 1986
Page Twenty
Ms. Clarke noted that there are standards being set for; for instance, 35
height district, 50' setbacks, parking regulations specified, and the intensity
of development also stipulated at 10,000 square feet per acre on both the
retail and the office /institutional pieces. The'10,00 s "iii e:feet.: acre
is . £n maii vreas, but per)taps`.noc n xt .t.o
aS a resi'den�ial 'eret
--; Y ... • ..
slime sbateraent t7tat; irou'hd tie: app64*1_.of `a .finii1' development plan to some
proof of compatibility at the time of submission of a final development plan.
7. Staff would like to see a redesigned landscape treatment for the multi-
family frontage on the boulevard. Staff has found in the field that the
proposed landscape treatment simply did not work in the front of the
site and would like to have a consistent treatment for everything except
the multi - family project, and would like to have a specific re- designed
treatment for that part of the site.
8. Wherever possible staff would like to see future buildings along Huirfield
Drive be constructed with a finished floor elevation that is in line with
the finished level of the street.
The buildings Which have been constructed on the lower level of Muirffeid
Drive extended are probably a good five feet above the street level,
reducing the effectiveness of the mound.
9. One of the documents for submission was a preliminary plat that shows
Reserve D as a commercial piece, and would like to see that corrected so
that the words office /institutional rather than commercial show up on
all of the documents which the Village maintains.
Hs. Clarke showed a slide (aerial) which showed how Indian. Run is developing.
There is difficulty with the landscaping on the site because the gas and sewer -
lines run very close to the street in the area where it was expected that the
mound would be constructed. If the mound is pushed up toward the building
there is less of a visual impact.
Ms. Clarke said that generally staff feels thaE his; -[eEon #figuration_ may be a
benefit: She did say that staff has some i reservataons about the #ngitns 'Ity of
the cHALn'' . ', about "U9 affi�e and �t fie t taCl "sites. f thbs ca i�be < >,
add =ea +Erd has plrob Em wi li the reyfs d `prelim nary plan.
Mr. Ben Hale, Jr. was present to represent the applicant. Regarding some back-
ground information, Hr. Hale had the following comments:
1. The eight acre commercial was done as part of the original zoning.
2. Five acres of the part now being called office /institutional was originally
a park.
3. The church part was in the original plan.
4. Were contacted about a year ago by the school system who said that they
would very much like to have a school in the area, and like to have it
on Huirfield Boulevard.
5. The site was reconfigured to put the school /park site in the northereast
corner of the site.
97 -N3FDP
Indian Run Meadows
Retail Area
Correspondence Submitted for Adjacent Residents
By Tom McCash as Related to the Shopping Center
Minutes of Meeting
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
July 8, 1986
Page Twenty One
Mr. Hale said that they have agreed with most of staff's recommendations. He
noted that the Landscaping was done in the field with staff with adjustments
made in the field with the addition of vegetation.
The text says that the commercial site be developed in conformance with the
community commercial zoning requirements, and there are no additional require-
ments on the site.
Staff asked, Mr. Hale said, and they have agreed to combine their curb cuts.
They have agreed in the text that there vill be a screen between the commercial
and the residential and that the vegetation that will be there will be put in
with the construction of Muirfield Boulevard. Have also agreed, as part of
this submission, that when Muirfield Boulevard is constructed that "these
areas" will be cleaned up, finished graded, and seeded. Mr. Hale said that
that they have also agreed that each of the sites witt.be developed in a
c omp atible form with compatible architecture.
Mr Hale said that n ,respoRSe to staff's= recommendations that there are two
items Wittr- Wie - t rey ha4e`scate'di>=ffculty that [tie commercial and d: fice/
institutional of ,a ottmaun3xy C SC �` %iS seer ii�e xhe surrounding properties not
tt�e�iet�>:ie'�llag �ub�i "r>�t ;�+� # {tee � arknQ snacES peF xhousand.
tt Mr - 'Hale -saia *that these uses mould be compatible with the surrounding uses -
a uniform treatment on the buildings, providing the setbacks that were talked
about, the landscaping,'and those types of things.
Mr. Hate said that the have provided an amended text, and would be glad to work
with Ms. Clarke on the language of the text.
Mr. Dan Smith and Mr. Ron Firestone were present, noting that they are
collaborating on the design of the school. They have been working with the
Parks and Recreation Department and Planning Staff and they are in agreement
on the site plan. The school is pushed back 150' back from.Mojave. He said
that they plan extensive landscaping along -the perimeter and the bike path
will continue along the south side of the property and extend along the north
property line and then have a service drive into the retention area. Mr.
Smith said that they have jointly hired the same landscape architect so that
it will be a compatible development.
It was noted that the building would be an elementary school - with sloped roofs,
with stone and stucco.
Mr. Hale said that they have "turned the corner" in these areas with the land-
scaping so that it is not only along Muirfield Boulevard.
Mr. Hale referred to the last page of the amended text which referred to the
style of architecture (brick stone, finished on all sides, etc.)
lie noted that he felt that they were substantially upgrading the treatment on
the commercial.
97 -083FDP
Indian Run Meadows
Retail Area
Muirfield Drive
Correspondence Submitted for Adjacent Residents
By Tom McCash as Related to the Shopping Center
Minutes of Meeting
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
July 8. 1986
Page Twenty Two
Mr. Hale said that they had, in the deed restrictions have a provision for a
civic association for all of Indian Run. He said that they had met with
residents who are presently living there and that they are in the process of
forming a legal civic association, a non - profit corporation, and that in the
areas that have been developed are turning over the "enforcement" of the deed
restrictions.
One thing, Mr. Hale said, was that the residents that are presently there have
expressed a strong desire for fencing.
A resident asked about storm water management on the school /park site.
Mr. Hale said that the detention basin had been designed as a dry retention basin
(that one north of the site), and there is an easement being prepared with
the approval of an adjacent property owner for a storm water outlet.
Mr. Hale said that the detention basin is not really a part of the park, and
would probably be deeded to the city.
Mr. Hale said that when the Parks and Recreation tells them where they want the
bikeway it will be constructed.
Mr. Hale also said that the detention basin will be in a wooded area and that
the school does intend to provide some additional landscaping.
He noted that the bikeway will extend all the way to the north and on up further.
Mr. Hale said that they felt that one or both of the interconnecting loops would
be accomplished next- year so quickly there will be a connection from Coffman
to Muirfield Boulevard and hopefully that will happen next year.
It was noted that the east /west street will be an unloaded street except for
the office, and that it will be probably fairly heavily traveled.
Mr. Bill Mitchell said that they have provided a sidewalk on the east side all
the way up to the school site (along Tara Hill).
Mr. Hale noted that one of the commitments was that the bikeway would be built
along with Muirfield Boulevard.
Mr. Jezerinac said that he thought it might be a good idea to have a bike path
at the rear of the commercial as well as in front of it.
Mr. Hale said that he would confer with the Parks and Recreation people and if
they thought that it would be a good idea, the applicant would do it.
Mr. Grace said that he had some problems with rezoning at this point, in addition
to some of the concerns that Ms. Clarke had mentioned.
tie noted that he had a concern with the fact that the Commission was given a
revised text at this meeting without time for staff or members of the Commission
to study it properly. lie also said that he felt that they needed more specificity
with regard to the use of the office /institutional.
97- 083FDP
Indian Run Meadows
Retail Area
Muirfield Drive
Correspondence Submitted for Adjacent Residents
By Tom McCash as Related to the Shopping Center
a
minutes of Meeting '
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
J+ily 8, 1986
Page Twenty Three
Mr. Berlin said that he had some concerns with the office /institution /commercial.
He said that it looks as if they were doubling the commercial segment, and said
that he did not think it proper.
Mr. Jezerinac asked if the applicant was in agreement with the six and one-half park-
ing spaces= pear acne thousand: square ;feet. �Yt
Hr. Hpie said ntt tfiat t;jey though it s hould be #ive parking spaces per l(!0 square
feet Oeceuse: of rh�`1 act ltat.:.i- fghbor�hood ePeeing
With regard to intensity, Mr. Hale said that in ad ition to the setbacks they have
provided that both the commercial and the office /institutional would not exceed
10,000 square feet per net acre.
Mr. Hale said, in response to a question from Mr. Jezerinac, that "that could be
:hopp shopping center as it is currently zoned ", "and it could be a strip
shopping center as we are proposing it ". Mr. Jezerinac said that he didn't know
if that is what the Village wants.
Mr. Hale, responding to a concern expressed by Mr. Hale, said that the 15 acres had
been graded and cleaned up.
Mr. Hale said that there is a commitment in the text to do the mounding and land-
scaping along the commercial property site.
Mr. Reiner suggested perhaps increasing the green spaces "so that when you firally i
get down to Muirfield Boulevard that there be some continuity between the two roads".
Mr. Hale said that they have agreed to calculate the amount of vegetation per lineal
foot and then will match *that amount of vegetation.
Mr. Reiner said that he thought that the mounding would be more appropriate.
Mr. Hale said that the deal with the school has to be contingent upon the plan E
amendment. E
Mr. Ron Firestone said that on June 9th the Board of Education approved the
schematic design phase for the project, authorized the firm to proceed with
further drawings. The timetable for that project called for the start of
site preparation work in August and the start of construction in Septe�rber. It
is their intent to pre -bid steel, etc. to try to facilitate a 10 and one -half
month construction period. In order for the school to be occupied in September of
1987, construction must begin in September of 1986.
Mr. Smith pointed out that the Code says office and institutional. Mr. Hale
said if the Commission wanted to say Suburban Office and Church that would be
all right. If they wanted institutional they could come back.
� � `� t 1+ f ) :"°*(s�a+�atfi�an moved to approve the revised preliminary plan with staff
:ecommenda- i
C 1�
Mr. Amorose seconded the motion. f
The vote was as follows: Mr. Jezerinac, yes; Mr. Grace, no; Mr. Reiner, no;
Mr. Amorose, yes; Hr. Callahan, yes; Mr. Berlin, no; Mr. Geese, yes.
6. Fina !a:vedtorapprovL e B oent Plan - Indian Meadow Section S /
Mr. Grace the fi development plan. Mr. A ose seconded the at t . 97 - 083FDP
Th vote was unanimous 1 vor.
Indian Run Meadows
Retail Area
Muirfield Drive
Correspondence Submitted for Adjacent Residents
By Tom McCash as Related to the Shopping Center
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes o/ Dublin Village Council Meetina
079
dl ed h ig
x.uo"I on pmq s carp. Cots_ O. r' "M No. loa.y�
Nerd ... ... July, 21,..1980
.... ..... . I .................. ry ...
The regularly eduled meeting of the Dub n Village Council was
X called too er by Mayor Michael Close a 7:30 P.M. on Monday, Ju 21,
1986.
Mr. ornton led the Pledge of A egiance.
. of Council present w e: Mr. Amorose, Mayor'C se, Hr. an
Ms. Maurer, Mr. Rozanski, nd Hr. Thornton.
Mr. Sutphen was absent.
Mr. Stephen J. Smit , Law Director, and Mr.
Manager were pres t as were Ms. Clarke, Hr
Ms. Prushing o the Village Staff.
Sheldon, Vill e
Ms. Jorda and
Mr. Amorose
go moved to approve the minu s of the July 7, 19 meeting of
the Dubl Village Council.
Mr. Ja owski seconded the motio
ZAm Theote was unanimous in favo
orose moved to appro a payment of the bil
Mr. Jankowski seconded a motion.
The vote was as follo ; Hr. Amorose, yes; ayor Close, abstain Hr.
Jankowski, yes; Ms. urer, yes; Mr. Roz ski, yes; Mr. Thorn n, yes.
Correspondence
There was no bjection to a reques for a D5A liquor pe it for the
Marriott rporation DBA as Cour and by Marriott at 75 Post Road,
Dublin, io.
Ordinance No. 33-86 - Rezone 199 Acres Bast Side of Avery Road, North of
Post Road. Public Hearing.
Mr. Ben Hale, Jr. signed as a proponent.
Mr. Robert Horr of 6775 Fallen Timber Drive signed in as an opponent.
Ms. Clarke presented background information.
She noted that this is a revision of the preliminary development plan so that
the zoning can actually take place.
I
Responding to a question from Mayor Close, Ms. Clarke said that a land-
scaping plan was one of the outstanding documents.
Mr. Thornton said that his main concern was the decrease in size of the
retention pond.
Mr. Hale said that the pond would be solely for the use of Indian Run;
that area north would not be drawing into it.
Hr. Rozanski said that he wondered if it had been engineered to hold
enough water so that problems would not occur as have been occurring
in other areas in the Village.
Ms. Clarke said that she had not seen engineering plans of that particular
facility.
Responding to a question from Mr. Reiner regarding the landscaping plan,
Mr. Hale said that what they have agreed to do is increase the intensity
along the single family portion (here) and to repeat that. He noted
that they had also been asked that 'yin this area here" that at the time
the boulevard is done that the school, park, single family situations
will be addressed - this year or early in the spring of next year.
Responding to a question from Mr. Rozanski, Hr_ Hale said that they will
have on file a fully developed landscape plan, not a sketch, so that there
will be no questions whatsoever as to what is being installed..
97 -083FDP gel Area
T...1 :.... D.... w JV.._ J.. -... .
Correspondence Submitted for Adjacent Residents
By Tom McCash as Related to the Shopping Center
RECORD OF PROCEEDiNPe 083
.11a11 of 6 -viin Village Council Meeting
,
Craphks cmv. Ca" re,w, me. tell -
~____..
lidd JutY.. Zl,.. 1.986
Page Two
Hr. Rozanski said that he would not vote for the project if he does not
have documents prior to a vote.
Hr. Hale said that the documents would be an file , toniorrow".
Mr. Hale said that they have also agreed on the Orr site to not only land - j
scape the front but also to, when Muirfield Boulevard goes in, to land-
scape the back of the lots where the single family lots abut as well as i
to seed this "entire area �.
Responding to a question /comment from Ms. Maurer, Hs. Clarke said that
In the design guidelines there are no -build zone guidelines which state
that there are no fences to be built in the no -build zones. The single- ,
family guidelines, she noted, have been amended to permit a single fence
(split rail, 3k feet in height maximum) to be permitted within the ,
subdivision.
Ms. Clarke said that the landscaping will be installed at the time that
HuLrfLeld Drive is extended. Other changes, she said, would have to do
with an updating of the materials.
SiTri 'tiaPfi�er'gzpcesaed's' con ern - that t61s $sing :a ;U6 c°Fiea g;
lif urioationrand�-. documents=-- weremot- �vaidabie== and•.thatJai�-not ^fAir co
the-,pub llc,
Ms. Clarke noted that the single - family guidelines have been amended to j
permit a single fence (split rail, 31i feet In height maximum) to be permitter
within the subdivision.
I Clarke also commented with regard
wire meshasapartt ofthesplit question
ail fence. Shesaidtthatgitdneedshto
be revised to say galvanized wire mesh on the split rail fence.
It was noted that presently fences would not be permissible under the
present plan.
It was also noted that some of those present felt that the wire mesh i
would not be visible from the sidewalk areas.
Mr. Harr. a resident of Indian Run Meadow, expressed a concern with
regard to the wire mesh as a part of the fence, suggesting that it would s
be less attractive than a plain split rail.
Mr. Hale said that an association would be forming in the Indian Run
Meadow Subdivision, noting that they had had several requests for fences.
He said that the enforcement bf the deed restrictions would be turned
over to the association (probably within the next month).
Hr. Hale noted that in order to change the deed restrictions (mentioning
fences) the residents would all have to agree to same.
Hr. Horr said that his deed restrictions do not restrict fences of any
kind except those approved by the Architectural Review'Committee.
Hr. J. Riedel, Superintendent of the Dublin Local Schools, reminded
members of Council that any delay would only put the construction of
the school in the subdivision a little further behind schedule,
mentioning that a period of 14 months would be required to build a school.
MaYor Close commented that he, as well as Board members, agreed that it
was in the best interest of all those involved that the situation should
be handled properly. 444
'Hays= Gi'ose said oE
thd�'the third ah�' final "'reading of [he 'dinance i+ ould?
b�' - eo August - 4, 1986!
' Mayor Close also requested that on that 'date that the Law Director be 97 -083FDP 11 (
able to advise Council whether or not the 'paFiogape;esiwa,id t as whether O r m notaCouncil a must d &bids by the regarding he fencing down by j�tail t Mf;ad
the Planning and toning Commission.
iU ";V -Spiti TIrlvP
Correspondence Submitted for Adjacent Residents
By Tom McCash as Related to the Shopping Ce
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 109
Minutes of Dnhlin Yillago rponel l Ke r1n g 'Weefin
-- -
wsawui CnoUln CorP.. COX.. O. Tuew No.IOH'd
Nekl ..
Au g u st-4 j . 1986 - _ — - - --- .. - 19 I
The regular scheduled meeting of a Dublin Village Council u called
to order Mayor Michael Close 7:30 P.H. on Monday, Augus 4, 1986.
MZ.T rnton l ed thgiance.
of Council . Amorose, Mayor C1 e, Hr. Jankowskis. Murer, Mr. Rozhornton. Hr. Sutphen was abs
Mr. Stephen S mit Law DirectoZ r e Mr. Bowman. Ms. Clarke r. Harding, Ms. Jor n, and
Ms. Prushin
Mr. Jank ski moved to approve the mt tea of the July 21, 86 meeting
v LI c as corrected. rose seconded the motion. e was unanimous in favo .
Mr. Rozanski moved to appr a payment of the bil
Mr. Amorose seconded the tion. i
The vote was 6-0 in fa
Third Reading
Ordinance Ho. 33 -86 - Rezone 199 Acres East Side of Avery Road, North of
Post Road. Third Reading.
Ms. Clarke presented the following information:
I. Indian Run Meadow is a PUD, which is a Planned Unit Development.
2. There are three stages to a PUD approval. The zoning actually takes
place at the preliminary plan stage, and this is the stage at which
the applicant is asking for a revision.
3. The applicant is requesting a different configuration of the various
parcels; those uses which will line the northern portion of the
boulevard. The commercial site will remain the same. Tb the north
of that the applicant is asking for a seven acre office site. To the
north of that is an eight acre school site and beyond that a five
acre park site plus a detention pond.
4. At the public hearing two weeks ago the applicant's documentation
was not quite complete. There were a few things that needed revision
or clarification. Ben Hale, who represented the applicants, promised
to have those documents submitted to staff for review by the Friday
afternoon of that same week, and he did that. They were as agreed.
S. It is only very recently that-additional revisions are being sought.
6. The neighborhood very recently got involved in the rezoning.
7. There was a meeting and the residents had some concerns about both
the land uses and the general development standards to be employed
within their neighborhood.
8• sl ificaer nWgbZ� A tiri ""`fha< <ie o'e g`" _.i as sk'efo a ``T.7. ec�lly were a ange " e9*itted uses�aodra-chan'ge' lft -tha
9 en - 048 --gree Lo eIALnate two poss.ble Land uses From t_e
comaeMI { xpY�etse�• fast Eo d andAdr Ve =in restaurants, 'and >i$ t$move
enter f!►lghtrc uh .dWee1all.9 type uees'.,... -
10. s ag a ence outlined, des-cr a ;- wh ich w6u1d
have been permitted in what is known as the no build zone behind
the houses. The residents seemed to have a strong preference for
leaving that portion of the zoning exactly as it is - that is to
leave it with no fencing in the no build zone.
The applicant has agreed to eliminate fencing in the no build zone.
The text that outlines those changes in permitted uses was distri-
buted to Council.
97- 083FDP
Indian Run Meadows
Retail Area
Muirfield Drive
Correspondence Submitted for Adjacent Residents
By Tom McCash as Related to the Shopping Center
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1
-1lint Dublin Village Council Meeting dlrc -tiny;
"BU-61 nnPht- taro- c ge.. o. Poem it. IM.g
11C41 August 4, 1986 l�
t
Page Two
Responding to a question from Ms. Maurer, Ms. Clarke said that the split
rail fence would be allowed in the some areas where one would be per-
mitted to build a residence - in the build zone on the lot.
Hs. Clarke also said that there is an architectural review committee to
review all applications in Indian Run Meadow. That group would have to
review and give approval on any exterior alterations.
She noted that 20 acres of single family would be deleted in the new plan.
The density of the single family is 3.22 dwelling units per acre.
Mr. Jankowski asked about the architectural review committee. Ms. Clarke
said that it exists in a preliminary form - two of the representatives,
right now, are employed by or associated with the developer's organization..
At some -point there will be representatives of the Indian Run Meadow
Civic Association when it is formed.
Mr. Harrison Smith, Jr. said that It was the intention of the architectural
review committee to use a single fence, even in the build zone.
Hr. Bowman said that the no build zone is at the rear of the property,
90 feet from the right -of -way, which would be 40 through 60 feet of no
build zone; 90 feet is build zone.
Mr. Smith said that they had revised the standard of landscaping on the
Boulevard. The mounds along the office and commercial parcels will be
put in as the Boulevard is constructed. He also said that their
obligation for the school, church and park sites is that when they begin
to use those premises they are obligated to come up with the same
standard, as regards the screening.
Hr. Smith told Hr. Amorose that on the commercial site there would be no
pole signs.
Mr. Bowman said that what would normally be required in a situation such
as this would be a joint identification sign - one that would identify the
center and then each individual tenant would get a wall sign. To do so
they would have to come in with a plan and all permits would be based
the plan.
He went on further to say that his interpretation of the text was that
each individual user would not have a pole sign.
With regard to the no build zone Mr. Smith said that the individual owners
are responsible for the maintenance of the property within their individual
lots. He also said that there is a maintenance covenant.
Hr. Amorose said that the proposed eastern white pine do not do well in
this area, and suggested that a more hardy pine or spruce be substituted.
They agreed to do that.
Hr. Rick Voellers of 6307 Valley Stream Drive expressed some concerns. He
did sSy that thg residents were pleased with regard to the fencing as well
as the proHib' t;I*n cf right eLubs, bars. fag`t #ood 'resta� raY�ts.. Mr,
Voellers listed eopcerbs v'E 'e .rlsidafts, afid -safel `tf�at many perAdiis
- .
would requestthac the resoiii6g e`ot'go forward until he residents have
time to otiganiza, and y the L "asue iii atore'de[h'
Rev. John Webb of 6271 Arapahoe Place spoke to the members of Council.
Rev. Webb said that some of the residents were questioning the need for
the change as far as the zoning is concerned. He said that they were
aware that there was going to be commercial but were not aware of the
fact that there was going to be an additional tract for more "industrial
commercial type of development ". He said that they are opposed to that,
at this time, for the following reasons:
97 -083FDP
Indian Run Meadows
Retail Area
Correspondence Submitted for Adjacent Residents
By Tom McCash as Related to the Shopping Center
R..ORD OF PROCEEDINGS 117
11i,,, r/ dle,.att,..
Natbed Geaphim Corp, Celt_ O. ream K116 3"7-w
..•• s - - - -- ___ ..... - - ______— max_.._ ..__.. -e - -e __
Held August -4, •1986 • .....
Page Three
rr.
1. Ic - represents the idea that without any kind of cpiisu ?ltet3on`wirh
tfie residents, they atc being asked to "Accept something different
than )tKiiiese:otigiria•11y tbt'd; end being asked to accept a
ee`rea`se in property values.
:residents have -not had tia ;e to�puc this :`alt £ogetKer ", not had
the. Cta,e torotga�iie theoselves ^''effect`�velq.
He said that they are
asking for that time.
Rev. Webb said that they would like Council to separate the school issue
from the other issues. He said that they want the school underway.
Rev. Webb also had two additional comments;
1. The slowness of the developer to get the work in place along Muirfield:
Drive.
2. The residents would like a minimum of 30 days to get themselves i
organized to study the commercial, but would not object to proceeding ;
with the school.
Mayor Close pointed out that if the Village would attempt to split out
and approve the school site, the developer has the right to reject doing
that if the Village does not do the whole thing at once.
Rev. Hebb said that they had had some commitments as far as the commercial,:
but do not know what it will look like. He also said that they would like
to have some idea as to what will be going in to the office /institutional
site.
Mr. Mike Lindamood of 6274 Ottawa said that they were not totally opposed
to what was being planned, but would have liked to have known the
original intent as regards the school site as well as the path to the
school.
Mayor Close asked Mr. Tony Hall how long it would take to get a bid and
get the school built from the time the ordinance is passed.
Mr. Hall said that the site bid package is out right now, and that they
will receive those bids at the end of the month. He said that they also
have the steel fabrication out for bids right now also.
Hr. Wall said that they need 12 to 14 months to build an elementary sthool.'
Ms. R. Fillman, 7001 Avery Road presented-her comments to members of
Council. She said that she had concerns with the landscaping -as well as
the commercial building.
Mayor Close told Ms. Fiiiman that as far as Council is concerned, the
monetary gain to the Village will not be considered.
Mr. Rozanaki said that one of the reasons for moving the school site was
to adjoin it to the five acre park site so that there would be a 13 acre
area for a school /park situation. If the school were moved down it would
be a seven plus acre site for Just a school.
Hr. Smith presented background information on the site.
Mr. Smith also said that with regard to the office /institutional site
that there is some interest in a small facility for the elderly. He
said that there has also been interest in a church on the site.
Mr. Smith suggested chat in the future there may be a need for doctors'
offices.
97 -083FDP
Indian Run Meadows
Retail Area
Muirfield Drive
Correspondence Submitted for Adjacent Residents
By Tom McCash as Related to the Shopping Center
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 119
. 1 1in u frstf Dublin Village Council Meeting
"Wont OraphWa Corp_ Cob, O term
Held August. A,. 1.986 .
19
t
i Page Four
t
Mayor Close said that in part this was part of the Cicy's doing. When
Dublin became aware that the schools wanted to put a site in there the
Village began discussions with the schools, and that in order to make
it a more attractive site that it would be best to put the school and
park site together - for two reasons:
a. it is more economical - the school did not have to buy as much land
because they can "spill over" Into the Village's park land;
b. when they are put together it-affords the opportunity for the Village
and the schools to do some type of joint maintenance /Joint type of
use.
He said that the difficulty was that in the original configuration the
school and park sites could not be placed next to each other. The logical
thing to do was to put the school site next to the park site in the
northern corner. As a result, there is a seven (7) acre site between the
retail (which was already there) and the school site, and the desirability
of making those single family lots is not quite as desirable since those
lots would be between two public type uses.
Another resident from the subdivision asked why the school should be
moved to the norther part of the subdivision when the single - family and
multi - family sites are in the south of the development.
Mr. Smith pointed out that the proposed school is not for gust the Indian
Run Meadow subdivision but that a larger drawing area would be from north
of the school.
Additional residents expressed concerns regarding the safety of children
walking to and from the school, having to walk along Muirfield Boulevard.
Mr. Roy Lovell of 4980 Dublin Road (for 31 years) spoke in support of
the residents who were expressing concerns, and urged Council to allow
the residents time to further study the issue and an opportunity to find
out exactly what is going to happen to their homes and the surrounding
portions of the development.
Mayor Close suggested.tabling the ordinance for two weeks to give the
reresidents an :opportunity to.get additional information and also suggested
that the residents, developers,-and staff adjourn to the basement meeting
room to continue discussions.
Ms. Maurer suggested that Mr. Wall attend alsn_
FWWft 'dk ' aLVe? t`o abte' -1W oc flf'a`liet^�until tt�a Cbur?L'ii'� �iagr
Alai 1+8�1�986P.
Mr. Thornton seconded the motion.
The vote was unanimous in favor.
Resolution 12-86 - Statement Services for a Propos Annexation.
Second R
The rd and final readin ayor Close said, will a at the Dublin
V age Council Meeting August 18, 1986.
Ordinance No. 56-86 Amend Codified Ordinanc Section 1105.18 uirin
Sidewalk. Secon eading.
Ms. Maurer c nted that the Village c not require develo rs in
previously oned developments that ar completed to build idr
It wour ave to be-the current re ants.
*so said that you would ave to do it by th ame ass: 97 -N3FDP
e as anything else. Indian Run Meadows
Retail Area
Muirfield Drive
Correspondence Submitted for Adjacent Residents
By Tom McCash as Related to the Shopping Center
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 153
111nates of Dublin Village Council Meeting 'Weeing
Nsua mi Gnneu, Coro.. cab. o. r— W.. bbpa ,
Kaki August 19, 3986
Page Four
I
f
Ordinance No. 55-86 - Amend Section 1189.08(a) Regarding Joint Identifica-
tion Signs. Public Hearing.
There were not registered proponents or opponents.
Mr. Bowman said that tiro Planning and toning Commission recommended approval.
The maximum allowable ground sign is being reduced from 150' to 80', which ,
{ is consistent with the signs that the Village now has in rhp ahopping
centers.
i The third reading of the Ordinance will be at the meeting of September 2nd.'
L Ordinance Bo. 33-86 - Rezone 199 Acres Sast Side of Avery Road, North of
Post Road. Tabled.
Mr. Sutphen moved to remove the Ordinance from the table.
Mr. Amorose seconded the motion.
The vote was 6-0 in favor.
Mr. Harrison Smith, Jr. made the following comments regarding changes
that had been made, after having met with residents. '
Muirfield Boulevard Incorporated the existing standard into the require -
ments for the rest of the road that is going to be built jointly.
To include mounding that will he partly on the right- cf-way and partly
I off of it.
If you recall, in the other part of the construction, the road was built,
then came the'bike parha, and then the mounding.
It ought to be done all at once, and in this way it becomes a function of ;
the applicant in the very first instance.
Landscaping. Bring the MuLrfield Boulevard mounding and vegetation !
around onto the side streets.
Uses. There is now apprific language in the text with reference to both
the office and the commercial that the Conditional uses in the referred
districts - certain uses are strictly prohibited.
There is language also tlu t basically limits the Oise of the largest
store in the commercial.
fir. Smith said that they would be agreeable to asking the association I
4f consent or approval before asking for any additional uses over and
Tabove those listed.
e said that he did not feel that a covenant would be appropriate because
Vi t3 to 20 years trom now if a use would come along that is not listed,
and a majority of persons would not object. if there were a covenant
the applicant would have to go to every single low owner and get their
approval.
Mr. Smith suggested the homeowners.form an association, they run a
covenant to them that says that they are not parmltted to seek an
amendment to the use limitations in the document without the consent
of that association.
Mr. John Webb, serving as spokesperson for the residents, and Mr. Greg
McCann, an attorney, presented their concerns to the members of council.
1. A stapring committee of five persona from the Indian Run Meadows
subdivision have been meeting, and have also met with the developer.
2. They were continuing to oppose the rezoning.
3. The developer is not moving in as good faith as he seems to illdlt;ate
In all of the drawings.
Correspondence Submitted for Adjacent Residents
By Tom McCash as Related to the Shopping Center
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes
Dublin Village Counc Meet
157
_ ...t-_. .._ _, _- ,.. _ -- _ y xeaoa l ononh. tern raft o. — u»,�
rlid Page d August la, 1996
Five I
I
P
4.
5.
Mr. Webb said that they had been advised that the school could get the
property they are interested in without this zoning taking place.
i
Mr. Hate said that with regard to Muirfield Boulevard that the plantings
that are presently there are at least twice tho number of what is
required as the current zoning on the property.
Mr. Webb said that be was not questioning the zoning but was questioning
what had been drawn on the plans and what was actually in place on the
site.
i Mr. McCann had some general comments as follows;
f
I. The residents have a concern with regard to how the existing
t commercial is going to be developed - that it whould be done in an
! aesthetic way, that it be done in a way that will be conducive to
the adjacent residential uses and to the proposed school site.
2. The area of non - residential has almost doubled since the residents
i moved in.
3. In discussions with Mr. Wall and•Mr. Rich, it was determined that
the schools have two alternatives to allow for development of the
school site - eminent domain or a "quick take" mechanism. The
residents view now being that the rezoning can be an isolated issue -
they do not have to look at it as a "tie -in" with the school.
4. The residents are united in their opposition to an additional seven
acres being rezoned to a non - residential use.
f r. Hale said that the contract with the School Board is contingent on
he zoning. He also noted that the developer is committed to build the
oad to the school site as well as extending the sewer and waterlines
o the site.
Mr. Harrison Smith said that it was his understanding that there is no
"quick take" provision in Ohio except for State highway jobs and national
emergencies.
With regard to eminent domain, Mr. Riedel said that they could stake
claim to whatever piece of property they destred and proceed to build
on Lt. He did note, however, that a arhnol in the middle of a cornfieLd
without roads or utilities would be of little use.
Mr. Stephen Smith pointed out that he would assume that it might be difficult
to get a building permit without roads or utilities to the site being
available.
Mr. Riedel also said that they do not have an interest in another site.
Examples. One of the proposals for Muirfield Drive showed a lo'
distance between the boulevard and the bike path. This proposal
shows that distance to be 6 Bikers will be travling 4 closer
to the road than was originally intended.
With regard to the right- of-way along Muirfield Boulevard. 'there
are certain things drawn and suggested in the plans pertaining to ,
the kinds of trees and so on that are supposed to be there (a
certain number of ornamentals, certain pines, a certain number of
ornamentals, etc.
What they have discovered is that the further north you an on the
Boulevard the fewer ornamentals and shades there are and the more !
pines.
Initially were told that the largest store would be 10,000 square fee 1.
The plans now show that the maximum could be 30,000 square feet.
Residents were under the impression that there would be two trees
planted per lot.
Correspondence Submitted for Adjacent Residents
By Tom McCash as Related to the Shopping Center
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 159
.Minu of Dublin Village Council Meeting Meeting
MUWW Onwma carp, CO... o. rose
Ilcld August 18, 1986
19.
Page Six i
f
Mr. Harrison Smith told Mr. Stephen Smith that they will provide the
amenities if the zoning is passed.
2ft . Harrison Smith said that they would be agreeable into entering an i
greement with an association whereby the developer cannot request a
hange In use without the association's permission and that they would
i t
Is willing to make that a contingency of the rezoning.
i
] Hr. McCann said that what they were attempting to do was co put develop —
ment criteria on the plat (signage, landscaping, etc.), and he also said i
that what they would like to do is restrict the development in terms of
density, aesthetics, etc.
Mr. H. Smith said that at the discussions with the residents those
issues were not presented; what was presented were discussions regarding
restrictive uses.
Hr. Rozanski asked Hr. Bowman to inform members of Council regarding the
recommendation of #I,a .,err and the Planning and Zoning Commission.
Mr. Bowman said that staff came to the conclusion chat it presented
an appropriate type of land use; negotiated as best they could with the
developer to build in as many standards as they could within the zoning
text.
He said that the Planning and Zoning Commission felt that, generally,
it was an appropriate land use and recommended approval.
Hr. Webb, responding to a question from Mr. Amoroso, said that the
' closest agreement that the residents were able to come to was that they
are opposed to the Office /Institutional zoning primarily because they
have no idea of what is going to go in there.
Mr. Webb referred to page 21 of the text which states;
"Intensity.
k
1. WlLlrin the commercial site the total square footage shall not
exceed 10,000 square feet per acre. No single store shall exceed
30,000 square feet and one —third of the total square footage shall
= be in stores which are less than 20,000 square feet in area."
Mr. Harrison Smith said that they had considered the wishes of the
residents. but came back with a statement of what they Eolt they could
do. He said that they never agreed to 10,000 square feet.
Mr. H. Smith said that the bike path is 6' away from the road. lie also
said chair he did not know why 10' turned into b'.
Mrs. Robyn Fillman of 7001 Avery Road bad a concern regarding the specific
uses of the Office /Institutional site, mentioning specifically that a
nursing home facility would require approximately 214 parking spaces,
and wondered what and how much traffic would be generated.
hr. H. Smith said chat he had told the residents that it they wanted a
church on five acres and an office on two acres that it might be something
that they would consider.
Mr. McCann said that the residents would like a little more time to work
with the developer to get more effective, binding restrictions on the
commercial and the Office /Institutional sites.
";.Mr. S. Smith said that he had been asked if Council could pass the
"''ordinance as an emergency, and said that according to the Village Charter
?,any resolution or ordinance passed by Council shall become effective
30 days after a signature by the Mayor. That, he said, was included
in the Charter so that at any time that an ordinance is passed under
certain circumstances the voters have an opportunity to seek a
referendum; that is a ballot issue to overturn an ordinance passed by
;Council.
Correspondence Submitted for Adjacent Residents
By Tom McCash as Related to the Shopping Center
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
161
lltnu tesaf Dublin Village Council Meeting Meeting
c,
r— A
T a eld august 18, 1986
Page Seven
At the request of the School Board, Mr. S. Smith said, that should Counciij
Pass the ordinance this evening and waive the 30 day waiting period, i
that it does not affect the rights of the residents whatsoever; they
stiLl have 30 days under the law to seek a referendum. What it does
do is given the School Board the opportunity to go out the next day,
open the bids, and put a shovel in the ground.
Mr. H. Smith said that he was perfectly wflling to continua conversatio
with the residents during the 30 day period.
Mr. Amoroso moved to approve Ordinance No. 33 -86, passing it as an ns
'
emergency. i
Mr. Thornton seconded the motion.
The vote was was as follows: Mr. Jankowski, no; Ns. Usurer, yesi Mr.
Thornton, yes; Mr. Roaanski, yes; Mr. Sutphen, yes; Mr. Amoroso, yes.
The vote on the ordinance was as follows: Hr. Amoroso, yes; Mr. Sutphen,
yes; Mr. Roaanski, yes; Mr. Thornton, yes; Ms. Maurer, yes; Mr.
Jankowski, no.
i Ordinance 80. 56-86 - Amend Codified Ordinances Section 1105.18 Regardin
81dewalks. Third Beading.
t
The vote on approval of the Ordinance was 6 -0 In favor.
Resolution No. 1286 - Statement of Services for a proposed Annexation.
Third Reading.
The voce on the Resolution was unanimous in favor.
Resolution Bo. 13-86 - Authorise Construction of a Cul- de.•Sac on Macbeth
Drive. Third Reading.
Mr. Amorose moved to table the Ordinance until the ViLlage Engineer
returns to his duties.
L Mr. Thornton seconded the motion.
The vote was 6 -0 in favor of tablin.
Ordinance No. 61-86 - Accept Quotation for Property Insurance. First
Beading.
i Mr. Amoroso introduced the ordinance.
Mr. Amoroso moved to do away with the three time reading rule, treat as
an emergency, and accept the recommendation of staff to award the
Did to Haughn & Associates in the amount of $8,256.00.
Mr. Sutphen seconded the motion.
The vote was 6-0 in favor of the motion.
The vote on the ordinance was unanimous in favor.
Ordinance No. 62-86 - Rezone 9.4 Acres Northwest Corner of Tuttle Road
and lrantt !toad. First Reading.
Mr. Amoroso Introduced the ordinance. s
Mr. Amoroso moved rn refer the ordinance to the planning and Zoning
Commission.
Mr. ROadnski seconded the motion.
The vote was 6 -0 in favor.
Ordinance No. 63-86 - Amending the
Reading. 1986 Annual Appropriations. First
Mr. Thornton introduced the ordinance.
Mr. Thornton moved to do away with the three time reading rule and treat
as an emergency.
Mr. Roaenski seconded the motion.
The vote was unanimous in favor of the motion.
Correspondence Submitted for Adjacent Residents
By Tom McCash as Related to the Shopping Center
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 163
6lblutes of Dublin Vil
Council Mee
-�.�,� � .'- . -.- _ �. � -.,-- _ � ._ . ■aeon,, cr+nbta. tom_ cds.. o. r ro. ian�y
Held A Sgp4t 18, 1986 _ _. 19 I
Page Eight
Ordinance No. 64-86 - Rezone 95.1 Acres Southwest Corner of Brand Road
and S.S. 745. First Reading.
Mr. Amoroso introduced the ordinance.
Mr. Amorose moved to refer the ordinance to the Planning and Zonina
Commission.
Mr. Jankowski seconded the motion.
The vote was 6 -0 in favor.
Ordinance No. 65-86 - Approve Contracting for Study for Manicipal Swim-
' Wing Pool. First Reading.
!� Mr. Jankowski introduced the ordinance.
Mr. Thornton said that. as a taxpayer. he does not think that the Village
is in any position to consider a municipal swimming facility in light 111
of the need for waterlines, sewers, etc.
Mr. Jankowski said that the cost or the study would be under $5,000.00.
He also said that the estimate was $2,000.00 to $3,000.00 for the
preliminary study; that the survey would be approximately $1,500.00; that
the soil boring tests may or may not be needed.
Mr. Sutphen said that he was not opposed to such a facility being built
in Dublin.
Mr. Rozanski pointed out that even if it were decided that the pool
,,. should not be built at this time, that the study, etc. would be able to
be used at a later date. i
Mr. Jankowski referred to his memorandum in which he recommended that 1
the Parks and Recreation Department and the Parks and Recreation Committee,
work with the architect to develop both a facility concept and a program '
concept.
He said that there will also be a recommendation regarding the placcmcnt
(location) of the pool.
Mr. Jankowski said that the study should be completed and a report back
to Council in about 45 to 60 days_
Mr. Sutphen moved to amend the ordinance to add the following to Section
I-, "with the total cost not to exceed $5,000.00., to do away with the
three time reading rule and treat as an emergency.
Mr. Amoroso seconded the motion.
The vote was as follows: Mr. Jankowski, yes; Ms. Maurer, yes; Mr. Thornton
no; Mr. Amorose, yes,, Mr. Sutphen, yes; Mr. RozanskL, yes.
The vote on the ordinance was as follows: Mr. Rozanski, yes; Mr. Sutphen,
yes; Mr. Amorose, yes; Mr. Thornton, no; Ms. Maurer. yes; Mr. Jankowski,
yes.
Mr. Thornton suggested looking into the last survey that was done re-
garding swimmi.ng pools to see if there wouldbo any usable information
from it that could be used.
Mr. Jankowski said that they had done that.
Resolution No. 14486 - Relative to an O'Shaughnessy Dam Proposal. First
Reading.
Mr. Rozanski introduced the resolution.
Mr. Amorose moved to refer the resolution to the Public Service Committee
for arudy, with input from the Planner.
Mr. Rozanski seconded the motion.
Mr. Bob McCoy said that this is really a resolution for cooperation, not
speaking to financing, etc. at the present time.
The vote was unanimous in favor of referring the resolution to the Public
Service Committee.
Correspondence Submitted for Adjacent Residents
By Tom McCash as Related to the Shopping Center
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
165
Ali,tutesof Dublin Vill age Council Meeting Meeting
xaumui rn imp. Cob a ra..a lee. ton
Hdd Au&,Ast 1g,..19.d6 l9
Page Nine
t
Resolution No. 15-86 - Vacating a Portion of a Detention Basin Easement.
First Reading. 1
I
the meeting.
Mr. Rozanski introduced the resolution.
Mr. Dick Rauh, representing Arcon Construction, was present at
Mr. Rauh said that the piece of property in question is in Phase 24 of
Muirfield, north of Click Road.
Ile said that they wanted permission to regrade the storm water retention
area, but still maintaining the same amount of storm water detention,
but by regrading will be vacating a section of the detention easement
which will allow ahem to enhance the loc and actually build on it
(the easement). He said that the storm eater detention area will be
the same size (volume -wise) but that they will change the shape of it
slightly.
It was noted that only the garage would be in the filled in area.
Mr. Rauh said that the house itself would be in the woods. rhp only
area that Would be out of the woods would be the garage and part of the
carport area.
Mr. Sutphen said that he had a tendency to be a little sensitive about
potential water problems within the Village of Dublin.
Mr. Rauh said that the basement is above the hill ypar flood line, the
first floor is 9' above that line. j
It was Council's recommendation that the proposed vacation, etc. be
reviewed by the Village Engineer prior to the second reading at the next
Council meeting. it was also agreed that if Mr. Warner was not available
that Council would request chat Mr. Wolfe appear before Council with his
recommendations.
Other
School Board Request for Waiver of Section 1105.07 of Codified Ordinances.
Mr. Tony Mall and Mr. Ron Firestone spoke before Council regarding their
request for a waiver under the provisions of Section 1105.07 of the
Codified Ordinances relative to a new elementary school to be built in
Indian Bun Meadows. ,
Mr. Firestone said that they had met with Mr. Warner, Mr. Bowman, and
Ms. Clarke discussing access to the site to Eacilttatc construction,
and he said that it was suggested that the general right -of -way of what
will be known as an extension of Mojave Street between Hopewell Court
and Muirfield Drive be utilized for the temporary construction access.
This will keep the activity away from the construction on Muirfield
Drive and avoid problems. Re noted that they have provided in the
specifications for acre development that the area be stripped, the top
soil be removed, and that there be a six inch crushed stone pavement
installed and maintained, and that the contractor will keep that pave-
ment as well as all other pavompnts free and clear of mud and will control
the dust.
Mr. Amorose moved to approve the request.
Mr. Sutphen seconded the motion.
The vote was unanimous in favor.
Approval of a Preliminary Plat for Metro Business Center on Post Road.
Mr. Bowman commented as followst
I. The subject site is an approximately 31 acre site located on the
South side of Post Road between Coffman and Wilcox Road.
Correspondence Submitted for Adjacent Residents
By Tom McCash as Related to the Shopping Center
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 171
Minutes of Dublin V i ll age Council Meeting meetbtg
xaumml amphto cam. Gh., o. rem no. =74181kr
HCld_ August 18, 1986 _ 19
Page Ten
2. The site is zoned Limited Industrial - 17 acre portion of this site
was zoned last fall.
3. The preliminary plat has been held up for some time pending a
general land use study of the entire area, as well as a traffic
study.
4. The major issues identified at the December meeting of the Planning
and Zoning Commission were as follows:
A. The feasibility of rerouting or eliminating the proposed
north /south street where it intersects at Post Road.
B. The proposed location of the planned east /west collector
through the site.
C. Waiting for the results of the unfinished traffic plan.
S. Since that time construction has started on the site (utilities and
road).
6. Construction approval was granted based upon applicable platting
requirements with regard to the street plans of the municipality.
7. Planning and Zoning Commission and Staff recommend approval with
the following conditions:
A. That the applicants deed the first 300 of the proposed
north /south road to the Village.
B. That the applicants' final plat commit the east /west road and
its right -of -way.
8. The applicant has agreed to do whatever the Village requires the
other developers in the area to do.
Mr. Amoroso moved to approve the preliminary plat - Metro Business Center
on Post Road.
Mr. Sutphen seconded the motion.
The vote was unanimous in favor of approval.
Discussion on the Low Pressure Water Problem.
Mr. Sheldon reviewed the report that was given to Council and summarized
as follows:
1. Talked with John Doutt of the Columbus Division of Water and on
August 11th held a meeting to discuss the water situation.
2. The people present were: John Doutt; Hr. Sofranko, Hr. Howard
Adams and Mr. Vincent Rakestraw, representing Muirfield; Mr, Dan
Booth, and independent water engineer hired by Muirfield; Mr.
Sheldon, Mr. Charles Wolfe, and Mr. David Harding of the Village staff.
3. The meeting was specifically called to inquire of Mir. Doutt what
needed to be done to address the problem and what order the
suggested improvements should be done.
4. Mr. Doutc stated that looping of the lines and creating a second feed
Into the Muirfield area was the most important thing that could be
done to alleviate the problem. He outlined a four step plan:
Step 1 . install a 12" waterline from Memorial Drive to Avery Road
and extending an 8 1, waterline off of —me to the current dead -and
of Davington Drive to eliminate said deadend and also extending the
12" line north along Avery Road to the school where a 12" water-
line crosses Avery Road thus forming a loop system. The develop-
ment plan for rho section of Muirfield from Memorial Drive to
Avery Road will be heard by the Planning and Zoning Commission
on September 3, 1986 and, if approved by said Commission, they
would start construction of the waterline at the earliest possible
date.
Stop 2. When the line from the Water Booster Station an Post Road
to the corner of Post and Coffman is completed, extend the water-
line where it crosses Brand Road into Brandon Village, westward
on Arand Road to connect to the 12 waterline that came up Avery
Road and thence east on Brand Road to Muirfield Drive thus looping
the entire system.
Correspondence Submitted for Adjacent Residents
By Tom McCash as Related to the Shopping Center
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 173
dlbWea
Dublin Village Council Mee
Weet ing
�4igU01 CiC{ C.o�.. '•. o. pCllO K0.•
Flcli( August 18,_ 1986 -
�_.. — -•� �'--
19 Page Eleven _...,��. -� _ -- _ _Y.. _. .. _. .. _ •�..__ --• a.
Step 3. Expedite the construction of the waterlin on S.R. 745
from the Dublin library to the line now at Donegal Cliffs to
provide a second main line teed to this entire nortbwest section
of the Village.
St_ ep 4. Mr. Doutt suggests that, after steps 1, 2, and 3 have been
completed, a water tower would be needed and a determination of
Its location, size, etc., should be made after these first three
(3) steps are done. incidentally, Mr. Doutt states that any tank
on the system should be of at least one million gallon capacity.
Mr. Doutt states that without some of these improvements being done
first, current pressures and demands would prohibit us from being
able to fill a water tower if It were step no. 1.
A two million gallon water cower will be constructed on Sunmitview
Road by Columbus, to be completed by early summer in 1987, and if
it would become necessary, the valve on the east side of the river
could be turned back on temporarily after this elevated tank is
placed in service.
The cost of step I. would primarily be the responsibility of
Mutrfield Ltd., on their property, and in addition, they would be
agreeable to funding the extesion up Avery Road to complete this
first Looping project and this n is conditional on PW approval on
Soptember 3, 1986.
The cost of step 2. would appear to be a project that could
j possibly be funded by utilizing available water funds or possibly
an assessment project. it is estimated that it is 4,380 feet
in length and would cost approximately $150,000.00.
The step 3, phase is on the current Dublin Village Capital Improve-
ment Plan to be designed in 1987 and tentatively scheduled for
construction in 1988. The engineer's current estimate, including
design, is approximately $750,000.00.
The step 4. phase, the water tower, would require a determination of
location and would probably cost $850,000.00 to a million dollars
for a one million gallon tank. If the location was determined to
be the same site currently set aside, I believe the current
agreement with Mutrfield Ltd., under Ordinance No. 50-79 should
prevail, with some modification, since said agreement specifically
states a one -half million gallon tank.
With regard to timing, Mr. Rak eaLraw said chat It cakes seven days to
get the pipe. If the Planning and Zoning Commission approves Phase 29
as submitted, they will begin the line at the school; the 12" line on
the east aide of Avery Road. They would proceed south on Avery to the
intersection of Memorial Drive with a 12 "Line, then would "flip back"
probably to the first part of Phase 29 which has already been approved.
Engineering would than have to be developed In the nest 30 days. They
would then go back to Avery and run the Davington extension, and then
would finish the center portion. He estimated that the time for
completion would be December 15, 1986 (taking LULU account weather, etc.).
Mr. Doutt said that the main problem is line loss, a water pressure
problem, not a lack of water.
Mr. Sutphen asked about the status of Step 4. (water tower).
Mr. Rakestraw said that essentially the contract does offer a lot of
voidability, In his opinion. lie said thdi Mr. Scherer indicated that
Nuirfield's obligation was to build a tower if the Village Engineer
said that it was needed.
He said that if Mr. Doutt would have set a Limit of 500,000 gallons for
the tower (Instead of one million) then that would have been Mulrfield's
obligation.
Correspondence Submitted for Adjacent Residents
By Tom McCash as Related to the Shopping Center
Please see red numbered
paragraphs regarding parking in 61
W
June 8, 2000 the back of the center. l !
Crrl OF 1)1
Division of flooding
5800 SIda-Rings Road
Wa,O1ao430161236 Patrick J. Kelley
Phone/*.614.761.6SSO Donald W. Kelley & Associates, Inc.
for 614.761.6566 250 East Broad St., Suite 1100
web skwvAk Columbus, OH 43215 -3721
Notice of Violation- Certified Mail 2336 548 862
Mr. Kelley,
Pursuant to direction received from the Public Services Committee of Dublin City
Council this week, this office is requiring that all outstanding issues associated with
the Shoppes at Athenry be corrected by no later than June 22, 2000. The outstanding
issues are as follows:
1) There continue to be weeds and trash located at north and south ends of the
residential side of the privacy fence. This area should be cleaned up and continually
maintained.
2) The roof top mechanicals for several tenants are not screened as required by City
Code. Appropriate screens need to be installed.
3) The temporary multi -tenant sign at the south entrance must be removed. Our
previous agreement was that it would be removed by January of 2000. - i f r>
4) The vent stacks and other protrusions through the roof need to be "painted out' to
match the shingle color as previously agreed.
1 5) A fire lane needs to be established, both painted and signed, as agreed during a
meeting with a Washington Township Fire official on April 24, 2000.
6) All parking at the rear of the center must be discontinued. Upon researching the
approved plans, it was found that this area was not designated or approved as a
parking area. The area may be used for service related issues only (pick -up, delivery,
and trash hauling). A commitment was made prior to construction that center
employees would park in the more remote (southeast) parking area, and employee
parking to the rear of the building should be discontinued immediately.
Correspondence Submitted for Adjacent Residents
By Tom McCash as Related to the Shopping Center
7) Satellite dish antenna must be relocated, as agreed in meeting of April 24, 2000.
8) The fence gate in fence must be properly secured to prevent public access to
residential area. This will require ongoing upkeep.
9) The light trespass from the center into the residential area exceeds City standards.
This must be addressed and corrected.
10) All pick -up, deliveries, trash hauling and other service activities need to be
conducted between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. only. A commitment to this
effect was made during the public hearing prior to construction of the center.
11) The outdoor speakers have not been approved and must be removed.
Many of these issues have been lingering for a very long time. City Council has
directed the staff to bring them to successful closure by June 22, 2000. Legal action
will need to be initiated by this office if timely compliance is not achieved. If you
have any questions concerning this matter, please contact me at 410 -4647.
Sincerely,
..Ilbk�� o---<D
Gregory Jones
Code Enforcement Officer
GJ /mo
Enclosures
cc: Balbir Kinds
Bobbie Clarke
Dave Marshall
Jennifer Readler
Steve Smith
r
Correspondence Submitted for Adjacent Residents
By Tom McCash as Related to the Shopping Center
MINUTES
Dublin City Council
PUBLIC SERVICES COMMITTEE
Monday, March 19, 2001, 5:30 p.m.
Attendine:
Ms. Chinnici- Zuercher, Chair
Mrs. Boring
Mr. McCash
Mr. Smith, Jr.
Ms. Readler
Mr. Jones
Ms. Clarke
Ms. Chinnici- Zuercher called the meeting to order. She stated that the first item on the agenda is
an update on the code violations of The Shoppes of Athenry.
Ms. Readler noted that a memo had been sent to Council March 5` providing them the status on
these issues.
Rooftop Mechanicals
Ms. Readler stated that the violation for screening of rooftop mechanicals is being tried tomorrow in
Mayor's Court. She asked Mr. Smith, prosecutor of the case, to report.
Mr. Smith reported that there have been numerous complaints due to the lack of screening for the
rooftop mechanicals. The Law Director's office has been working with City staff and the defendant
in an attempt to resolve the case. They expect to settle the case tomorrow.
Parking in Fire Lane
Mr. Smith stated that the Law Director received a call from Pat Kelley late last week, and he has
agreed to prohibit parking at the rear of the business. The Law Director will attempt to work out an
agreement that is attached to the deed for the land, so that it is enforceable now and in the future, if
the land should be sold.
Ms. Chinnici- Zuercher inquired if that would prohibit employee parking, as well as customers.
Mr. Smith responded that his understanding is that Mr. Kelley sent a memo to the businesses
informing them that employees were prohibited to park behind the building.
Mr. Jones reported that he has recently noticed a difference. This past weekend, only three vehicles
were parked behind the building as opposed to 20 -25 vehicles. Today, there was only one vehicle
parked there.
Farid Masri. 7061 Calvary Court stated that his understanding was that "No Parking" signs would
be installed. The police indicated that if no signs are posted, the restriction is not enforceable.
Mr. Smith responded that the agreement they are developing will include the installation of signs so
that the police can enforce the Code.
Ms. Clarke inquired if it is necessary to reference the Code section on the sign.
Correspondence Submitted for Adjacent Residents
By Tom McCash as Related to the Shopping Center
I Farid E Masri 08110/2001 12:01 PM
To: "Jennifer Readier" < jdutey@szd.com>
W.
Subject Re. Follow up D
Hello Jennifer,
Thank you forgetting back tome. Regarding the "no parking" signs issue, last time 1 spoke with Stephen
Smith Jr. he told to contact you. However, It seems that you have things sorted out so III contact him
again.
I have attached a pdfcopyofthe Indian run Commercial uses zoning text. The relevant section is part "H
Permitted uses ".
Best Regards,
Farid Masri
El
Mooning te co nmerdalo
"Jennifer Readier" <jdutey@szd.com >on 08/08/200103:13:31 PM
"Jennifer Readier" <jdutey@szd.com > on 08108/200103:13:31 PM
<a
To: Farid E Masri/LEMAJS @LEM
ac: "Stephen Smith (Son)" <SJSMITH @szd.com>
Subject Re: Follow up
Parid-
I have spoken to Stephen Smith, Jr. regarding the issues you raised in your email. Since
Stephen has addressed most of these issues in the past, he will continue to work on them
with you. You can contact Stephen directly at 462 -2308 or via email at sjsmith @szd.com.
As to the permitted use issue, it would be helpful if you could send me a copy of the
Indian Run text to which you refer. You can either mail it to me at the address below or
fax it to me at 462 -5135.
Jennifer Dutey Readler
Schottenstein, Zox & Dunn
The Huntington Center
Suite 2600
41 South High Street
Columbus, Ohio 43215
Confidentiality Notice
This e-mail message is intended by Schottenstein, Zox & Dunn Co., L.P.A. for use only by
the individual or entity to which it is addressed. This message may contain information
that is privileged or confidential. It is not intended for transmission to, or receipt
by, anyone other than the named addressee (or a person authorized to receive and deliver
Correspondence Submitted for Adjacent Residents
By Tom McCash as Related to the Shopping Center
it to the named addressee). If you have received this transmission in error, please
delete it from your system without copying or forwarding it, and notify the sender of the
error by reply e-mail or by calling (614) 462 2700 (collect). Thank you.
>>> <EEM @lem.com> 08/07/01 09:O1AM >>>
Hello Jennifer,
I just wanted to follow up on the parking issue behind the shops of Athenry. I
have not seen or heard anything regarding permanent "NO PARKING" signs behind
the center. Could you please give me an update on that.
Also, the trash pickup at night continues to occur regularly. The trucks sneak
in behind the center with their headlights turned off (as if that's going to
make a difference!!), bang the dumpsters around waking up half the neighborhood,
and then drive off at high speed. Most of the time, it happens between 4:30 and
5 AM Tuesday mornings. Calling the police is pretty useless, since most of the
time it takes them 20 -30 minutes to show up. Even when drivers where caught
before, it did not seem to deter them. Something needs to be done regarding
this matter. If the shop owners are not willing to take responsibility for
their subcontractors, then perhaps the city should. Can't anyone from the city
have a serious talk with Republic Waste?
Speaking of nuisances, it was brought to my attention lately that Marcos Pizza
is not a permitted use. Indeed, I checked the zoning text for Indian Run
commercial section and it states that only full line restaurants are allowed
and fast food restaurants are prohibited. Marcos Pizza is a franchised fast
food chain. In this case, I believe that Marcos Pizza cannot be allowed to
renew their lease. Seeing that they cause more than half of the nuisance
problems, this should help alleviate the situation.
Thank you for time and efforts in looking into the above matters.
Best Regards,
Earid Masri
Indian Run Civic Association
Correspondence Submitted for Adjacent Residents
By Tom McCash as Related to the Shopping Center
"Stephen Smith (Son)" <SJSMITH@szd.com> on 08114/2001 12:10:46 PM
To: Farid E Masri/LEANUS @LEM
cc
Subject Athenry Folow Up Issues
Farid,
I wanted to let you know I have talked to both Pat and Tim Kelley regarding the parking
issues and the signs. They are looking into it and I should hear back from them shortly.
I have also left a message for Greg Jones regarding the trash pickup issues and should
hear back from him soon.
I will keep you updated with any further progress.
Stephen J. Smith
Schottenstein, Zox & Dunn
41 South High Street, Suite 2600
Columbus, Ohio 43215
direct phone: (614) 462 -2308
fax: (614) 462 -5135
email: sjsmith @szd.com
website: http: / /www.szd.com
Confidentiality Notice
This e-mail message is intended by Schottenstein, Zox & Dunn Co., L.P.A. for use only by
the individual or entity to which it is addressed. This message may contain information
that is privileged or confidential. It is not intended for transmission to, or receipt
by, anyone other than the named addressee (or a person authorized to receive and deliver
it to the named addressee). If you have received this transmission in error, please
delete it from your system without copying or forwarding it, and notify the sender of the
error by reply e-mail or by calling (614) 462 -2700 (collect) Thank you.
Correspondence Submitted for Adjacent Residents
By Tom McCash as Related to the Shopping Center
7061 Cavalry Ct.
Dublin, OH 43017
July 19, 2002
Ms. Marsha Grigsby, Interim City Manager
5200 Emerald Parkway
Dublin, OH 43017
Dear Ms. Grigsby,
Thank you for sending me a copy of the update on Shoppes of Athenry provided by the
department of development and code enforcement. I would like to take this opportunity
to explain and clarify some of the items.
In regards to screening of mechanical units, it has been the understanding of the
residents, from the very beginning through the last public services committee
meeting in March of 2001, that all air conditioning units behind the center will be
screened. This understanding was brought about by city staff at a meeting with
the neighbors and developer prior to zoning approval of the center in 1997. The
Staff report for final development plans for the Shops of Athenry dated June 5,
1997, states that "All service structures must be screened ". Furthermore, why
shouldn't the ground mechanical units be screened? They are very visible form
the neighboring homes!
2. Trash pickup from the Shops of Athenry and Kinder Care frequently occur in the
middle of the night, especially on Thursdays. I tried talking to Kinder care about
it, and they refused to even consider the possibility that it was occurring.
Notifying the Shops of Athenry in the past was not a pleasant experience. We
have complained several times in the past to code enforcement and even to the
law director's office (see attached). Mr. Jones told us if we are willing to sign an
affidavit, he could take action against the haulers. We volunteered to do so, but
nothing happened We got tired of complaining and seeing nothing being done.
My neighbors and I have called the police so many times in the past, but got
increasingly tined of doing so, since they seldom showed up in a timely manner to
catch the haulers in the act. I do not understand why anyone in a position of
authority within the city cannot write a letter to Republic Waste, explaining city
ordinances. This issue should not take years to resolve.
3. Regarding the parking issue, during the Public Services Committee in March of
2001, it was agreed that the Law Director's office would work on having
permanent "NO Parking" signs installed behind the shopping center. The signs
Correspondence Submitted for Adjacent Residents
By Tom McCash as Related to the Shopping Center
would allow the police department to enforce the requirement than having to rely
on the zoning office. I emaded a request for follow-up to the law director's office
Last year (see attached), but nothing has been done since. The existing signs are
temporary cardboard ones posted by Mary Kelley's only.
The problem of parking in the back continues on an intermittent basis, mostly by
Marco's Pizza employees. Some days it's a car wash; on others it's a tune -up
garage, or just a place to hangout and blast music. Talldng to Marco's Pizza
management about it is like talking to a brick wall. Sometimes we are successful
in stopping parking for a few weeks, until shift managers change or new
employees are hired. Some employees listen, but others are belligerent.
Employees sometimes park by the fence late at night and drink alcohol, tossing
their empty cans and bottles near or behind the fence. During a recent incident,
when a group of three car; were told to leave the area, within minutes, 7 or 8
more cars showed up and started parading up and down the alley behind the
center in retaliation, squealing tires and honking their homs. This went on for a
while until the police showed up 25 minutes later. Unfortunately, the police were
a little too late in arriving.
y . 4. Marco's Pizza itself is a non-conforming use of the center. The zoning text of
Indian Run Meadows states that only full service restaurants are allowed and fast
food restaurants are strictly prohibited Pizza delivery is considered fast food by
many cities and does not meet criteria for full service restaurant. This information
was forwarded to the Law director's office last year —It was disregarded. I
forwarded the information to the Association's attorney to discuss with the law
directors office.
Just for the record, I also discussed the following items with the property manager, some
on more than one occasion:
A. The shield on a light post in the southwest comer of the lot had disappeared He
promised to have that fixed. That was months ago.
B. Some of the trees in the back still have thick nylon straps (seat belts) wrapped
around the trunks and root balls. If not removed, these straps will kill the trees as
they grow older. It would be to everyone's interest if the trees survive. I brought
this up two to the property manager years ago, and nothing was done. I finally
notified him that I will do it myself as soon as I get a chance.
C. Soil underneath the fence and around the stone pillars has eroded so much that
gaps measuring about a foot and half have developed and the stone pillars'
foundations are exposed. The zoning text requires that the fence be no higher
than 6 inches from the ground. This has been a problem since the beginning, due
to improper placement of the fence and lack of sod underneath. This issue seems
trivial, but a smaller gap will help slow down trash form blowing over into
Correspondence Submitted for Adjacent Residents
By Tom McCash as Related to the Shopping Center
neighboring yards, and stop kids and animals from crawling undemeath. Most
importantly, seeing how difficult it is to for the shop owners to comply with
anything, who will take care of this, as it gets worse in the following years?
In an unrelated issue to the Shoppes of Athenry, the assisted care facility has added some
ventilation stacks through the roof; one of which is much higher than the maximum
allowable roof height. The Civic Association received some complaints about the
appearance of the stacks from neighboring properties, and in one incident, the largest
stack caused glare as the sun as reflected of it in the afternoon and evening. None of the
stacks are painted as required by code. I forwarded the complaints to code enforcement
last year, but nothing has been done since.
Lastly, I just wanted to say that the burden of following -up, reporting, and code
compliance has so far been placed on the residents. The city has failed in many ways to
perform its duties properly and in a timely manner. What good are zoning requirements
and conditions placed during lengthy zoning hearings and meetings if no one follows up
to make sure that they are applied? Meetings between developers and residents are
frequently arranged by city staff pnor to final zoning approvals in order to work out
details and strike agreements. Residents place their trust in the city to protect their
interest and insure that everything will be completed according to codes and agreements.
What good are those meetings if they are ignored or the outcomes not enforced? It's a
breach of trust between the city and the residents. Unless things change, perhaps the city
should reconsider its zoning process and never promises something it cannot deliver
upon!
RespectBilly,
Farid Masri
CC: Dublin City Council
03/20/2003 11:22 FAX 814 484 2248
Correspondence Submitted for Adjacent Residents
By Tom McCash as Related to the Shopping Center
YSS &P COLS. 1002
vorys,
Sater, Seymour and Pease LLP
52 98000ySuelx . P= Mw Box 1008 . CtMtut>ti1t5 OM AU16.100S -10 ph0 W N1414064O 70 • Fha tlile (614146&050 8350 - GWc wms rm
.VMwa 1.%la'VR
hl W.11111>t•W1N1 hl lh•�ai.uul 4alhuhualM
41.V1•wulthul
UM.PVCi
114im 1. SUM. Vav 311M1 11n• 1 �vWL21111(Y11111 -hall. 11k111 . Alrualt WIS
2 -7 SultUt laiCJIh11.91w1 }141.11
y , �11u1
L4.)%ar Y
1-W-4
11 I.k aa1M111A1ww t 171 I.." K"VI15111 LI Ritin11 t1n3
Mtltc .1111
le1u. - h/ i.
W.PAN1)IW1a." .1.XCII -1401 13 acl.usl, iHiw) 141LS.17 .1 1W OHM lk= VAJU
.all :a IL 2331 a
- •'IMPOd1/r�'.OiaayalMM1__ _.___ __ ______�' _.� _. _— _ _ VhWhind. tMihl'XMSINYYb'tfr
- u 1
_�.. - -_
t ali 1V1u
1N1%%VW L. I�a:L5l•
Ca9a•IMYap id(th S- .* 1411 A•h•Itlww• 1111 1.Iw•11p it*Wruw• inwi its -44%411
11•k7Mraw• 11 14) x 1: +.fap1
18:.1 - lud 1
1 wa ailleW 1 N1 =111 NOVO 1 .w +ludh' 1 =1W 1:141114111 I +w 13) r&i AUX.
♦iadk' 1.1
huC�lnUlt
WNkirn u. mma. 1
ohm OW 19141 4Bl+J4.1A
1 Wft 141417110
E4U 11 • ` gPORCrbV
March 20, 2003
VIA FACSIMILE TRANSMISSION
Timothy M. Kelley, Esq.
250 East Broad Street —1 V Floor
Columbus, Ohio 43215
Re: Indian Run Meadows
Dear Tim:
Please see sections marked
by a red arrow.
FEM
I write you now to follow -up on our meeting with Farid on Thursday, February 6,
2003. I have set forth the various topics and status of our conversations as of February 6, 2003
below:
Screening of HVAC units at ground level behind the Center.
Status: Open
2. Additional screening of satellite dish.
Status: Certain trees have been planted around the dish. Tim indicated
that he would review the situation and work with the neighbors and landscapers to detemune if
more screening would be helpful and/or is necessary.
3. Trash pick -up.
Status: Tim informed us that the trash haulers have been notified that trash
pick -up could only occur between 7:00 a.m. through 7:00 p.m. Tim stated that if this was a
problem to let him know immediately.
In this regard, I notified Tim that street cleaning had occurred in the middle of the
night several weeks ago. He indicated that this was possible and that his manager had notified
Correspondence Submitted for Adjacent Residents
By Tom McCash as Related to the Shopping Center
03/2p/2003 11:22 FAX 814 484 2248 VSS&P COLS, 0003
Wry.% %wr. Seyrnow wW Pews u.r
March 20, 2003
Page 2
the vendor that this was inappropriate and should not commence before 7:00 am. See attached
- -- 1 date�`1GIaro�4, 20U _ - - -- _
- — 4. Parking behind the Center.
Status: There was agreement that the owner would eliminate parking
behind the center with the exception of two spaces reserved for the manager and assistant
manager of Mary Kelley's. It was also discussed that the Center would agree to the posting of
"Parking" signs and "No Loitering signs," assuming the appropriate resolutions and/or
ordinances were passed by the City of Dublin authorizing the posting of such signs. There was
also discussion about abolishing the parking lot striping in the northeast corner of the parking lot,.
Tim indicated that he would check the City of Dublin's Certified Final Development Plans to see
if this created any issues, but generally was not opposed to the elimination of the striping.
5. Marco's Pizza.
Status: Tim informed us that a new owner was in place by virtue of an
assignment of the lease. Tim indicated that the owner was reviewing the lease to see if leverage
existed, perhaps within the general language of the lease, to compel Marco's Pizza to comply the
No Parking, No Loitering signs and to refrain from the various activities that have been
concerning to the neighbors, e.g. drinking, noise, trash, car repairs, etc.
6. Shielding of the light post on the southwest comer of the lot.
Status: Resolved.
7. Removal of nylon straps from trees.
Status: Tim indicated that he would check with his landscaper to confirm
that these straps should be removed for the protection of the trees.
Run.
8. Soil erosion around the fence and stone pillars between center and Indian
Status: Tim indicated that he would look into this and ask his landsaaper
to provide the appropriate grading/back filling and general maintenance.
9. Parking lot lights.
Status: Tim agreed that lights are to be turned off by 2:00 a.m. at the
latest. See email response from Tim Kelley with respect to report of incident of light being on
all night.
10. Reduction of grease omissions and odor from deep flyers at Mary
Kelley's.
Correspondence Submitted for Adjacent Residents
By Tom McCash as Related to the Shopping Center
03/20/2003 11:22 PAZ 614 464 2248 VSS&P COLS. Q004
vMM Sayer, 5oYmMN and Faso ur
March 20, 2003
Page 3
Status: Open. Tim agreed to look into this and to evaluate health concerns
versus cost of remedy.
11. Outlot development.
Status: Tim stated that the owner had no current plans but was exploring
possible low intensity uses such as a bank. Tim indicated that because of the neighbors'
concerns and parking restrictions, high intensity uses such as a restaurant were not a likely
candidate for the oudot.
12. Settlement Agreement
Status: The Neighborhood Association was concerned about paragraph 2
of the Settlement Agreement which states that the patio is enjoined from use as an "outdoor
service facility," unless and until any of the real property which Includes the patio area is
rezoned to permit such use or conMenal use approved specUkaUy permitting such use k
obtained from Dublin. As we discussed, the neighbors would prefer the Settlement Agreement
simply enjoin the owners fiom using the patio area as an outdoor service facility.
Please give me a call if you wish to discuss my recitation of the outcome of our
megdng as well as the status of the open items referenced above. i look forward to hearing from
you and appreciate your consideration and cooperation.
Very truly yours,
William G. Porter, H
cc: Stephen J. Smith, N. (via Facsimile)
Mitchell Banchef % &q. (via facsimile)
Philip K Hartmann, Eaq. (via facsimile)
Gordon P. Shuler, Esq. (via facsimile)
Farad Mam (via facsimile)
09f20MM - 0213629
Correspondence Submitted for Adjacent Residents
By Tom McCash as Related to the Shopgo IC@ptpr
RE: Request update on Shoppes of Athenry
From Michael Keenan (mkeenan @shkins.com) a
Sent: Fri 7/18/08 4:24 PM
To: Fadd Masri (farid_masri @hotmail.com)
By way of this reply to you I am asking our City Manager for a timely follow up to the questions you have
posed.
Respectfully,
See pages 3 and 4
No response yet to date 4 -10 -2012
FEM
Michael H. Keenan
Dublin City Councilman
7103 Coventry Woods Dr.
Dublin, OH 43017
Office: 614 -764 -7000
Fax: 614 - 7647227
Cell: 614738 -0727
Website: www.dublin.oh.us.q
Farid Masri [mailto:farid_masri @hotmaii.com]
Sent: Friday, July 18, 2008 1:29 PM
To: jbrautigam @dublin.oh.us; slangworthy @dublin.oh.us, Greg Jones; mzuercher@dublin.oh.us;
cboring @dublin.oh.us; Rids Gerber; Tim Lecklider, Amy Salay; mkeenan @dublin.oh.us;
jreiner @dublin.oh.us; tzimmerman @dublin.oh.us
Cc: Laura Sufferer
Subject: Request update on Shoppes of Athenry
I am writing this email to everyone since I don't know whom to ask anymore, and frankly I am
tired of asking.
This past January and March, Mr. Greg Jones asked the Law directors office to give an update
on Marco's Pizza
parking and delivery from the back of the Shoppes of Athenry Center. I also requested an
update myself twice.
4/10/2012
Correspondence Submitted for Adjacent Residents
By Tom McCash as Related to the ShoF fW4r
I have not heard a response yet. I also contacted the property management (Holly Ellis at
Oakwood management)
and the owner, Pat Kelley. While I was promised that something would be done, as usual, as of
last week,
nothing had been done.
Look, I know you are tired of hearing about this, and I am tired of dealing with it. I know this
is small compared to
other important city matters, but it is important to my neighbors and me. When these jokers at
Marco's wake up my toddler,
he keeps me up. And when I am up and upset about this issue I cannot sleep. Lack of sleep at
my work not negatively affects
my performance, but it can be downright deadly!
As a reminder, during a 2002 public services committee meeting with the neighbors, Steve
Smith Jr. promised to make
sure that parking behind the center will be police enforceable. We were asked to compromise
on the screening of
mechanical issue and in exchange the city dropped its lawsuit against the center in that regards
and promised that they
would take care of the parking. This has not been done yet and every year we ask about. The
management company refuses
to do anything about it either except occasionally for a few weeks at a time when there is an
application pending. We held our
end of the bargain, but we are still waiting in something to be done.
Annoyance is not the only factor. However. Marco's Pizza should not be there in the first
place. As I mentioned before,
the zoning text for Indian Run Meadows commercial section only Allows "full service
restaurants" and prohibits "fast food ".
This is fast food and is definitely not full service. How it continues to be allowed to operate is a
mystery. Not only that,
4/10/2012
Correspondence Submitted for Adjacent Residents
By Tom McCash as Related to the Shokp: gBpWr
but a second pizza joint was added last year, and some of you recall the headaches we
encountered with 2am truck deliveries.
By the way, drove behind the Kroger several times in the evening, and often I did not see a
single car parked behind the center.
One time last week I saw single car parked behind Cold Stone Ice - cream. Also, my work is
located at an office /industrial park
in Grove City, with dozens, even perhaps a hundred different businesses. I can tell you for sure
that it is cleaner, better maintained
and even quieter that this shopping center.
So in summary here are my questions:
i - What is the status of the enforcing the no parking and no deliveries and service hours for the
Shoppes, and what is the status
of making that police enforceable, since obviously nothing else has worked so far?
2- Does any one review the zoning text before providing occupancy permit, or what ever permit
is required to open a business? If so, who is it?
3- What would it take to get answers and clean up this mess this site (trash, landscape and
operational issues)? A simple request...
a daily reminder... a letter to the editor ... a full page add... a news crew ... a lawsuit? You tell
me. Please do not give me an answer
like'we looked at yesterday and it was fine' and dropping the matter until the next year. I am
looking for a solution so that we don't have to keep dealing with it.
Finally, I attached a few photos of the trash in the landscape and Marco's Pizza delivery cars. 1
know there a few, but it shows the
variety of cars that are there (the times and dates of pictures taken is imbedded in the
photographs.) FYI: The landscape picture is typical
of what over and over again. Every year, we have to call and complain to the
management company and the city before anything is
4/10/2012
Correspondence Submitted for Adjacent Residents
By Tom McCash as Related to the ShopRoq"ptf r
done. And every year, the management company swears that they clean up and mow (including
spring and fall cleanups) and that they treat the
landscape for weeds and mulch the trees. That never happens. This year I called Pat Kelly.
The management company sent one person
out with no equipment. He cleaned up the trash, but left piles of landscape debris on the site for
months. That was before one of the neighbors
complained and the city sent out one of its crews (thanks Mike Keenan, TimLecklider and Greg
Jones) to finish cleaning up and mowing. So much for the promise
of four sided architecture!
Respectfully,
Farid Masri
7061 Cavalry Ct.
614- 975 -5806
Use video conversation to talk face- to-face with Windows Live Messenger. Get started.
4/10/2012
Correspondence Submitted for Adjacent Residents
By Tom McCash as Related to the Shoftg® C%ftr
Athenry
From. Czmarilee (czmarilee @aol.com)
Sent: Fri 7/25/0811:05 AM
To: farid_masri@hotmail.com
Cc: ssmith@szd.com;jbrautigam@dublin.oh.us
Farid,
I am so glad to hear you are still around. I think of you often and wonder how you are doing.
I am thoroughly embarrassed that we continue to only meet over the discussion regarding Athenry. I
have discussed the situation with Steve Smith and we are continuing to work on the issues that you
present.
I hope to get back to you within a couple weeks with how the City has been able to resolve the
continued problems as you outlined them.
Marilee Chinnici - Zuercher
The Famous, the Infamous, the Lame - in your browser. Get the TMZ Toolbar Now
4/10/2012
Correspondence Submitted for Adjacent Residents
By Tom McCash as Related to the Shopping Center
Sample of Photos sent by F Masri via email to Patrick Kelley, Holly Hedden and Tim Lecklider on 3 -21 -2012 and
4/02/2012
Photos below are from 3 -22 -2012
Athenry Shopping Center sample photos back Page 1 of 7
Correspondence Submitted for Adjacent Residents
By Tom McCash as Related to the Shopping Center
temple of Photos sent by F Masri via email to Patrick Kelley, Holly Redden and Tim Lecdider on 3-21 -2012 and
4/02/2012
Athenry Shopping Oanter sample photos back Page 2 of 7
Correspondence Submitted for Adjacent Residents
By Tom McCash as Related to the Shopping Center
,nple of Photossent by FMasd via email to Patrick Kelley, Holly Hedden and Tim Leddider on 3-21 -2012 and
4/02/2012
Athenry 8iopping Center sample photos back Fbge 3 of 7
Correspondence Submitted for Adjacent Residents
By Tom McCash as Related to the Shopping Center
V � 4
Sample of Photos sent by F Masri via email to Fbtridk Kelley, Holly Redden and Tim Leddider on 3-21 -2012 and
4/02/2012
Athenry Shopping Canter sample photos back Fbge 4 of 7
t uo& . t*6 Art 21ME k� 9 9- 989.9
Correspondence Submitted for Adjacent Residents
By Tom McCash as Related to the Shopping Center
temple of Fhotossent by FMasri via email to Patrick Kelley, Holly Hedden and Tim Leddider on 3-21 -2012 and
4/02/2012
Athenry Shopping Center sample photos back Page s of 7
Correspondence Submitted for Adjacent Residents
By Tom McCash as Related to the Shopping Center
Gample of Photos sent by F Masri via email to Patrick Kelley, Holly Hedden and Tim Leddider on 3-21 =2012 and
4/02/2012
t Kn& LA@6 Ad we -9$99
Athenry Shopping Center sample photos back Flage 6 of 7
Correspondence Submitted for Adjacent Residents
By Tom McCash as Related to the Shopping Center
Sample of Photos sent by F Masri via email to Patrick Kelley, Holly Hedden and Tim Lecdider on 3-21 -2012 and
4/02/2012
t Whe ' d CIS c9'$:' -9 99
Athenry Shopping Center sample photos back Page 7 of 7
City of Dublin City of Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Land Use and Long
Range Planning planning Report
5800 Shier Rings Road
Dublin, Ohio 43016 -1236
phone 614.410.4600 Thursday, April 12, 2012
fax 614.410.4747
www.dublinohiousa.gov
Indian Run Meadows Planned District
Shoppes at Athenry - Mary Kelley's Patio
Case Summary
Agenda Item 1
Case Number 12- 017Z /PDP /FDP
Site Location 7148 Muirfield Drive
On the east side of Avery- Muirfield Drive approximately 500 feet north of the
intersection with Tara Hill Drive.
Proposal A revision within the development text to permit up to 1,680 square feet of outdoor
patio area in front of an existing restaurant within the Shoppes at Athenry shopping
center. The application also includes all final design details of the proposed patio. The
site is located within the Indian Run Meadows Planned Unit Development.
Requests 1) Review and recommendation to City Council under the Planned District provisions
of Zoning Code Section 153.050 for a rezoning with preliminary development
plan.
2) Review and approval of a final development plan under the Planned District
provisions of Zoning Code Section 153.050.
Owner Pat Kelley.
Representative Jill Tangeman, Esq.
Case Manager Claudia D. Husak, AICP Planner II (614) 410 -4675 1 chusak @dublin.oh.us
Planning
Recommendation It is Planning's analysis the proposal complies with all applicable review criteria and the
existing and anticipated development standards. Planning recommends:
1) Approval to City Council of the rezoning with preliminary development plan
without conditions.
2) Approval of the final development plan with two conditions.
Conditions Final Development Plan
1) That gates be installed for both patio areas; and
2) That all outdoor furniture be stored out of sight from November l it to April l
and that the patio fence be removed if the restaurant discontinues use of the
space.
City of Dublin I Planning and Zoning Commission
Case 12 -017Z /PDP /FDPI Indian Run Meadows
Mary Kelley's Patio
Thursday, April 12, 2012 1 Page 2 of 11
12 -017Z /PDP /FDP N
City of Dublin Rezoning /Preliminary & Final Development Plan A
Land Use and Shoppes at Athenry - Mary Kelley's Patio
Long Range Planning 7148 Muirield Drive Feet
0 200 400
City of Dublin I Planning and Zoning Commission
Case 12- 017Z /PDP /FDPI Indian Run Meadows
Mary Kelley's Patio
Thursday, April 12, 2012 1 Page 3 of 11
Facts
Site Area 4.91 -acre site, 26,400- square -foot shopping center.
Zoning PUD, Planned Unit Development (Indian Run Meadows plan).
Surrounding Zoning
Site Features
Development
Background
North: PUD; Emerald Crossings Retirement Home in the Indian Run Meadows
PUD
South: PUD; Outparcels within The Shoppes of Athenry including United Dairy
Farmers and Kinder Care.
East: PUD; Single Family homes in the Indian Run Meadows PUD.
West: PUD; St. Patrick's Episcopal Fellowship in the Indian Run Meadows PUD.
• No significant topography.
• Developed with a shopping center and associated parking.
Indian Run Meadows subdivision.
• Mary Kelley's occupies approximately 7,550 square feet of the north building,
immediately adjacent to a 1,800- square -foot patio area, which is not intended
to be used for a patio due to its location near residential lots.
The Shoppes of Athenry
• The Shoppes of Athenry are two buildings forming an L -shape that are
connected by open space initially intended for an outdoor dining patio. The
shopping center building is in the northeastern portion of the site and parking
is in front of the shops. The center has two shared curb cuts along Muirfield
Drive. A service drive provides access to the service area to the rear of the
buildings.
• The overall site has 469 feet of frontage on Muirfield Drive, and the rear
boundary line abuts single - family lots on Wichita Court and Cavalry Court in the
Planning and Zoning Commission
• 1978 PUD zoning approved
• 1984 revised preliminary development plan approved
• 1986 revised preliminary development plan approved
• June 5, 1997: final development plan for a 26,400- square -foot shopping center
was approved
• April 15, 1999: conditional use for a patio was tabled (Case 99- 026CU)
• September 16, 1999: conditional use for a patio was withdrawn by applicant
after a short discussion by the Commission (Case 99- 026CU)
• November 10, 2005: conditional use for a patio tabled (Case 05- 154CU)
• Ocotber 11, 2007: amended final development plan for a 2,400- square -foot
outparcel was denied (Case 07- 029AFDP)
• January 19, 2006: conditional use for a patio denied (Case 05- 154CU)
• July 8, 2012: informal review of patio plan in front of the restaurant (Case 10-
025INF)
City of Dublin I Planning and Zoning Commission
Case 12- 017Z /PDP /FDPI Indian Run Meadows
Mary Kelley's Patio
Thursday, April 12, 2012 1 Page 4 of 11
Details Rezoning with Preliminary Development Plan
Overview Rezoning to a Planned Unit Development requires approval of a development text
to serve as the zoning regulation for the development requirements noted; the
Zoning Code covers all other requirements. The development text typically
addresses permitted and conditional uses, setbacks, parking, landscaping, signs
and architecture, among other subjects.
Development Text This proposed development text revises the permitted uses section of the Indian
Run Meadows Commercial Uses text. The proposed text allows up to 1,680 square
feet of outdoor dining patio area in front of Mary Kelley's which may be
constructed in two phases. The text requires high quality patio amenities and
restricts outdoor amplifiers or music and lighting (other than allowed building
lighting) shall be permitted in the patio area. Any other patio areas will be
required to be approved through the rezoning or conditional use process. The text
continues to state that the conditional uses allowed by the Neighborhood
Commercial District of the Zoning Code are prohibited, unless otherwise
referenced within the text. The text has also been updated to accurately reference
Zonin Cod sections. All o ther language in th e text remains the same.
Analysis Rezoning with Preliminary Development Plan
Process
1) Consistency with
Dublin Zoning
Code
2) Conformance with
adopted Plans
3) Advancement of
general welfare &
orderly
development
4) Effects on
adjacent uses
Section 153.050 of the Zoning Code identifies criteria for the review and approval
for a rezoning /preliminary development plan (full text of criteria attached).
Following is an analysis by Planning based on those criteria.
Criterion met: The proposed development text modifications address the unique
needs of the site. The maximum patio area will not require additional parking and
is consistent with the Zoning Code.
Criterion met: No changes in land use are proposed. An outdoor dining patio
associated with a restaurant is typically found in commercial areas. While
neighboring residents have previously shared concerns regarding noise, the
location of the patio will be buffered by the building.
Criterion met: The preliminary development plan requires high quality patio
amenities and regulates a location for the patio that is sensitive to the surrounding
area.
Criterion met: The proposed development text recognizes previous concerns from
adjacent residents. The patio location and operational details will minimize noise
and light from disturbing the neighborhood.
5) Adequacy of Not applicable. —
open space for
residential
6) Protection of Criterion met: At the second phase, the proposal will require the removal of
natural features existing landscape beds. These beds were installed after the approval of the final
and resources development plan and are not required by Code. Planters and flower boxes will be
installed in the patio area.
City of Dublin I Planning and Zoning Commission
Case 12- 017Z /PDP /FDPI Indian Run Meadows
Mary Kelley's Patio
Thursday, April 12, 2012 1 Page 5 of 11
Analysis
kazoining VAM Wrot [bevel„
7) Adequate
Criterion met: All required public infrastructure is in place.
infrastructure
8) Traffic and
Criterion met: The development text and preliminary development plan locate the
pedestrian safety
patio so as to not interfere with pedestrian activity within the shopping center.
9) Coordination &
Criterion met: The proposal provides for a coordinated and integrated patio area
integration of
consistent with the high quality standards expected in Dublin.
bui lding & site
relationships
10) Development
Criterion met: The proposal meets lot coverage requirements, has adequate
layout and
parking and circulation. The layout is appropriate in relation to the existing
intensity
building.
11) Stormwater
Criterion met: The patio area is not creating impervious surface of a size that
management
would require additional stormwater management.
12) Community
Criterion met: The proposal provides an additional amenity to the community,
benefit
which has long been desired by the restaurant owners and patrons. Care has been
taken to create an outdoor dining patio area and amenities sensitive to the
concerns of nearby residents.
13) Design and
Criterion met: The proposed development plan requires the use of high quality
appearance
amenities.
14) Development
Criterion met: The development is proposed to be constructed in a two phases.
phasing
Phase 1 consists of 1,000 square feet of patio space with 44 seats and Phase 2 will
15) Adequacy of Criterion met: There are adequate services for the proposed use.
public services � I
16) Infrastructure Criterion met: No public infrastructure contributions are required.
contributions
Recommendation
Approval
_ Rezoning with Preliminary Development Plan
Based on Planning's analysis, this proposal complies with the rezoning /preliminary
development plan criteria, provides the opportunity for an additional amenity
within the existing shopping center and requires an appropriate location and high
quality patio amenities. Approval is recommended.
City of Dublin I Planning and Zoning Commission
Case 12- 017Z /PDP /FDPI Indian Run Meadows
Mary Kelley's Patio
Thursday, April 12, 2012 1 Page 6 of 11
II Details
Proposal
Final Development Plan
The proposal includes:
• The applicant is seeking approval of the patio at build -out of 1,680 square feet
• The patio space divided into two sections on either side of the main entry of
the restaurant;
• Enclosed by a 3.6 -foot tall, black aluminum fence;
• Eight tables seating a total of 27 patrons to the left of the restaurant entrance
and 11 tables seating a total of 40 patrons to the right of the main entry;
• Modifications to the landscape area in front of the restaurant to accommodate
the patio at build -out;
• Service to the patio will be through the main entry door;
• Black aluminum patio chairs; 3 -foot square, tan - topped tables with a black
base, and green market -style umbrellas;
• Further enclosure of the existing open space by metal gates;
• Food service for the patio service will end at 10:30 p.m. and the patio will
close at 11 p.m.
• No music, other amplification, or lighting is permitted or proposed
• Flower boxes and planters are proposed for the patio area
Patio Details Patio furniture in the City of Dublin is commonly high - quality, black, wrought -iron
tables and chairs or an equivalent with market - style, fade - resistant umbrellas.
The applicant is proposing to use a black aluminum chair, a style which is used
on other patios within the city. The tables will have a tan - colored square table
top and a column style, black metal base. Umbrellas will be market -style with
dark green fabric. A fence in the same style as used at the Matt the Miller's
restaurant will enclose both patio areas. It is typical in Dublin that outdoor dining
patios are fully enclosed with a fence and accessed with a gate. Planning
recommends that gates be installed for both patio areas.
Planning further recommends that all outdoor furniture be stored out of sight
from November li to April li and that the patio fence be removed if the
restaurant discontinues use of the space.
Existing Patio Area South of the Mary Kelley's tenant space is a 1,680- square -foot open space,
which was originally approved as a patio with the final development plan for the
shopping center. Its use as an outdoor dining patio, however, required a
conditional use, which has most recently been denied by the Planning and
Zoning Commission in 2006 due to concerns by adjacent neighbors regarding
noise, trash, light trespass and other issues. The space has a three -foot tall
stone wall along the front separating it from the pedestrian area, and an eight -
foot screening wall along the rear.
To ensure that access to this space is not available to patrons, the applicant will
install black aluminum gates between the buildings and the stone wall. The gates
will have signs indicating that the area is not for patrons. Any modification or use
of this space would, at a minimum, require review and approval by the Planning
and Zoning Commission.
City of Dublin I Planning and Zoning Commission
Case 12- 017Z /PDP /FDPI Indian Run Meadows
Mary Kelley's Patio
Thursday, April 12, 2012 1 Page 7 of 11
Details
Parking
Landscaping
Final Development Plan
Required parking is 189 spaces based on the one space per 150 square feet of
gross floor area for a shopping center. There are currently 196 spaces. The
calculations for required parking included the retail buildings (26,400 square
feet), and the original outdoor seating patio (1,800 square feet). Since the
1,680- square -foot proposed patio is exactly the same size as the existing area,
parking requirements are met. Any changes to the former patio location must be
approved by the Commission and parking will have to be provided for any
intended use.
The landscaping in front of the tenant space was not
landscaping requirements of the final development plan
the second phase of construction, landscape beds along
restaurant are proposed to be replaced with concrete
space of the proposed patio sections. The applicant will
to the patio fence and the patio area. The patio areas wil
existing9 trees.
required as part of the
or the Zoning Code. In
the front fagade of the
to increase the usable
be adding flower boxes
I be created around two
Analysis F inal Development Plan
r cess F 153.050 of the Zoning Code identifies criteria for the review and approval
for a final development plan (full text of criteria attached). Following is an
analysis by Planning based on those criteria.
1) Consistency with the Criterion met with conditions: It is typical in Dublin that outdoor dining
preliminary patios are fully enclosed with a fence and accessed with a gate. Planning
developmentplan, recommends that gates be installed for both patio areas.
Conditions 1 & 2 Planning also recommends that all outdoor furniture be stored out of sight from
November lst to April lst and that the patio fence be removed if the restaurant
discontinues use of the space.
2) Traffic and Criterion met: The design of the patio retains adequate space for pedestrian
pedestrian safety activity.
t C riterion Adequate public met: The site has adequate public services.
services and open is required.
space
t 4) Protection of Criterion met: Landscape beds will be removed as part of Phase 2 of the patio
natural features [ i r r eas. They are not required by Code. Planters and flower boxes will be installed
and resources t he patio area.
Adequacy of ��Criterion met: No additional lighting is proposed.
lighting
Signs consistent Criterion met: No additional signs are proposed.
with preliminary
development plan
No open space dedication
City of Dublin I Planning and Zoning Commission
Case 12- 017Z /PDP /FDPI Indian Run Meadows
Mary Kelley's Patio
Thursday, April 12, 2012 1 Page 8 of 11
Analysis
7) Appropriate
landscaping to
enhance, buffer,
& soften the
building and site.
8) Compliant
stormwater
management
9) All phases comply
with the previous
L . crlterla.
C o) Compliance with
other laws &
regulations.
_ _Final Development Plan
Criterion met: Planters and flower boxes will be installed in the patio area.
Criterion met: The addition of impervious area through the installation of Phase
2 is not significant enough to require additional stormwater management.
Criterion met: Phase 2 meets all requirements of the text as well as Phase 1.
Criterion met: The proposal complies with all other known applicable local,
state, and federal laws and regulations.
r Recommendation
Approval In Planning's analysis, this proposal
and preliminary development plan,
development in the area. Planning
conditions.
Final Development Plan
complies with the proposed development text
the final development plan criteria and existing
recommends approval of this request with two
Conditions 1) That gates be installed for both patio areas; and
2) That all outdoor furniture be stored out of sight from November li to April ls
and that the patio fence be removed if the restaurant discontinues use of the
space.
City of Dublin I Planning and Zoning Commission
Case 12- 017Z /PDP /FDPI Indian Run Meadows
Mary Kelley's Patio
Thursday, April 12, 2012 1 Page 9 of 11
REZONING /PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN CRITERIA
The purpose of the PUD process is to encourage imaginative architectural design and proper site planning
in a coordinated and comprehensive manner, consistent with accepted land planning, landscape
architecture, and engineering principles. The PUD process can consist of up to three basic stages:
1) Concept Plan (Staff, Commission, and /or City Council review and comment);
2) Zoning Amendment Request (Preliminary Development Plan; Commission
recommends and City Council approves /denies); and
3) Final Development Plan (Commission approves /denies).
The general intent of the preliminary development plan (rezoning) stage is to determine the general
layout and specific zoning standards that will guide development. The Planning and Zoning Commission
must review and make a recommendation on this preliminary development plan (rezoning) request. The
application will then be forwarded to City Council for a first reading /introduction and a second
reading /public hearing for a final vote. A two- thirds vote of City Council is required to override a negative
recommendation by the Commission. If approved, the rezoning will become effective 30 days following
the Council vote. Additionally, all portions of the development will require final development plan
approval by the Commission prior to construction. In the case of a combined rezoning /preliminary
development plan and final development plan, the final development plan is not valid unless the
rezoning /preliminary development plan is approved by Council.
Review Criteria
Section 153.050 of the Zoning Code identifies criteria for the review and approval for a
Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan. In accordance with Section 153.055(A) Plan Approval Criteria,
Code sets out the following criteria of approval for a preliminary development plan (rezoning):
1) The proposed development is consistent with the purpose, intent and applicable standards of the
Dublin Zoning Code;
2) The proposed development is in conformity with the Community Plan, Thoroughfare Plan,
Bikeway Plan and other adopted plans or portions thereof as they may apply and will not
unreasonably burden the existing street network;
3) The proposed development advances the general welfare of the City and immediate vicinity and
will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding areas;
4) The proposed uses are appropriately located in the City so that the use and value of property
within and adjacent to the area will be safeguarded;
5) Proposed residential development will have sufficient open space areas that meet the objectives
of the Community Plan;
6) The proposed development respects the unique characteristic of the natural features and
protects the natural resources of the site;
7) Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage, retention and /or necessary facilities have been or are
being provided;
8) Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress and egress designed to
minimize traffic congestion on the surrounding public streets and to maximize public safety and
to accommodate adequate pedestrian and bike circulation systems so that the proposed
development provides for a safe, convenient and non - conflicting circulation system for motorists,
bicyclists and pedestrians;
9) The relationship of buildings and structures to each other and to such other facilities provides for
the coordination and integration of this development within the PD and the larger community and
maintains the image of Dublin as a quality community;
10) The density, building gross floor area, building heights, setbacks, distances between buildings
and structures, yard space, design and layout of open space systems and parking areas, traffic
accessibility and other elements having a bearing on the overall acceptability of the development
plan's contribution to the orderly development of land within the City;
City of Dublin I Planning and Zoning Commission
Case 12- 017Z /PDP /FDPI Indian Run Meadows
Mary Kelley's Patio
Thursday, April 12, 2012 1 Page 10 of 11
11) Adequate provision is made for storm drainage within and through the site so as to maintain, as
far as practicable, usual and normal swales, water courses and drainage areas;
12) The design, site arrangement, and anticipated benefits of the proposed development justify any
deviation from the standard development regulations included in the Dublin Zoning Code or
Subdivision Regulation, and that any such deviations are consistent with the intent of the Planned
Development District regulations;
13) The proposed building design meets or exceeds the quality of the building designs in the
surrounding area and all applicable appearance standards of the City;
14) The proposed phasing of development is appropriate for the existing and proposed infrastructure
and is sufficiently coordinated among the various phases to ultimately yield the intended overall
development;
15) The proposed development can be adequately serviced by existing or planned public
improvements and not impair the existing public service system for the area; and
16) The applicant's contributions to the public infrastructure are consistent with the Thoroughfare
Plan and are sufficient to service the new development.
The purpose of the Planned Unit Development process is to encourage imaginative architectural design
and proper site planning in a coordinated and comprehensive manner, consistent with accepted land
planning, landscape architecture, and engineering principles. The PUD process consists of up to three
stages:
1) Concept Plan (Staff, Commission, and /or City Council review and comment);
2) Zoning Amendment Request (Preliminary Development Plan; Commission recommends and City
Council approves /denies); and
3) Final Development Plan (Commission approves /denies).
The intent of the final development plan is to show conformance with and provide a detailed refinement
of the total aspects of the approved preliminary development plan (rezoning). The final development plan
includes all of the final details of the proposed development and is the final stage of the PUD process.
The Commission may approve as submitted, approve with modifications agreed to by the applicant, or
disapprove and terminate the process. If the application is disapproved, the applicant may respond to
Planning and Zoning Commission's concerns and resubmit the plan. This action will be considered a new
application for review in all respects, including payment of the application fee. Appeal of any action taken
by the Commission shall be to the Court of Common Pleas in the appropriate jurisdiction. Following
approval by the Commission, the applicant may proceed with the building permit process. In the event
that updated citywide standards are applicable, all subsequently approved final development plans shall
comply with the updated standards if the Planning and Zoning Commission determines that the updated
standards would not cause undue hardship.
Review Criteria
In accordance with Section 153.055(6) Plan Approval Criteria, the Code sets out the following criteria of
approval for a final development plan:
1) The plan conforms in all pertinent respects to the approved preliminary development plan
provided, however, that the Planning and Zoning Commission may authorize plans as specified in
§153.053(E)(4);
2) Adequate provision is made for safe and efficient pedestrian and vehicular circulation within the
site and to adjacent property;
3) The development has adequate public services and open spaces;
4) The development preserves and is sensitive to the natural characteristics of the site in a manner
that complies with the applicable regulations set forth in this Code;
City of Dublin I Planning and Zoning Commission
Case 12- 017Z /PDP /FDPI Indian Run Meadows
Mary Kelley's Patio
Thursday, April 12, 2012 1 Page 11 of 11
5) The development provides adequate lighting for safe and convenient use of the streets,
walkways, driveways, and parking areas without unnecessarily spilling or emitting light onto
adjacent properties or the general vicinity;
6) The proposed signs, as indicated on the submitted sign plan, will be coordinated within the
Planned Unit Development and with adjacent development; are of an appropriate size, scale, and
design in relationship with the principal building, site, and surroundings; and are located so as to
maintain safe and orderly pedestrian and vehicular circulation;
7) The landscape plan will adequately enhance the principal building and site; maintain existing
trees to the extent possible; buffer adjacent incompatible uses; break up large expanses of
pavement with natural material; and provide appropriate plant materials for the buildings, site,
and climate;
8) Adequate provision is made for storm drainage within and through the site which complies with
the applicable regulations in this Code and any other design criteria established by the City or
any other governmental entity which may have jurisdiction over such matters;
9) If the project is to be carried out in progressive stages, each stage shall be so planned that the
foregoing conditions are complied with at the completion of each stage; and
10) The Commission believes the project to be in compliance with all other local, state, and federal
laws and regulations.
12- 017Z /PDP /FDP N
City of Dublin Rezoning /Preliminary & Final Development Plan A
Land Use and Shoppes at Athenry - Mary Kelley's Patio
Long Range Planning 7148 Muirfeld Drive Feet
0 200 400
Proposed Site Plan - Phase I
I >
-41 MIN
I
N
Proposed Site Plan Phase II
i i ►� i►
6MME
ME
Proposed Patio Furniture
Patio Table Details:
36" Square Solo Tabletop
Belmar 4 Tablebase
Planting Material Details:
t
Fiberglass Box Planter
Wrought Iron Cafe Chair
Fence Style Railing Planter
Fence Details: Umbrella Details:
Market Style Umbrella
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT
As submitted to PZC 4 -12 -12
INDIAN RUN MEADOWS
COMMERCIAL USES
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
A. Yard Requirements
1. Front Yard setback: For structures and parking 50'.
2. Side and rear yard setback adjacent to residential uses: All structures 50', all
parking, service and loading areas 30': for non - residential uses, 25' setback for
structures and 15' for parking, loading and services areas.
B- Building Area Development Standards
1. Maximum building height: Shall not exceed thirty five (35) feet.
C. Parking Standards
1. Off street parking shall be provided at one space per 150 square feet in area or
at the rate required under the Dublin Zoning Code as it applies to commercial
uses, whichever is less.
D. Lighting Standards
1. All lighting in the area shall be cut -off type fixtures (down lighting) maximum
height of fixtures will not exceed 35'.
2. All external outdoor lighting fixtures to be used within a given development shall
be from the same family, or similar manufacturer's type, to insure aesthetic
compatibility. All light poles and standards shall be of wood or metal painted
black, brown, or bronze.
E Signage and Graphics Standards
1 All signing shall be of ground type (no pole signs) and shall be of a standard
shape and frame. All sign frames shall be of natural wood, stone or metal painted
black, brown or bronze. Internally illuminated graphics with opaque background
shall be permitted, as well as externally lighted signs that do not interfere with
safe vehicular movement.
2. Types of signs prohibited include signs with flashing lights or changeable copy,
projecting signs, roof signs, billboards, co -ops signs, rotating signs, and trailer
type signs. Any directory signs shall be more than 30 feet from the right -of -way.
Page 1 of 4
12- 0172 /PDP /FDP
ezornng /Preliminary & Final Development Plan
oppe at Athenry Mary Kelly s Patio
1 A &A f.. .Id n. ...
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT
As submitted to PZC 4 -12 -12
3. Individual store graphics shall be integrated within the architectural design of the
facia, and the background shall be of the same family and color.
F. Additional Development Standards
1. Curbcut locations: One full service curbcut and median cut into Muirfield Drive
will be provided to jointly service the commercial and institutional parcels to be
located on the common property line. There shall be only one full service cut into
the southerly right -of -way. One (1) right turn in- and -out curbcut shall be permitted
onto Muirfield Drive but have no median break. The Dublin Planning and Zoning
Commission may determine that an additional break or separate median breaks
for each use are more appropriate based on a Final Development Plan,
2 Landscape Buffer
a. Where commercial development abuts residential development, a
landscape buffer will be installed containing a board -on -board fence as
detailed on page 9 and a landscape buffer of both deciduous shade,
ornamental, and evergreen trees. Minimum size at installation shall be 2-
1.2" cal for deciduous shade trees, 1 -1/2" cal for ornamental trees, and 6'-
8' on evergreen. Landscape plant material will be placed on the
residential side of the fence at a spacing of 1 tree per 15 linear feet of
property line. Landscape buffer will be installed prior to the beginning of
any construction on the sites. With the installation of Muirfield Drive, the
site will be graded and seeded. The developer or his successor shall mow
and properly maintain the site until it is developed.
b The Muirfield Drive frontage of the multi - family site, commercial site,
office institutional site, church site, undeveloped single - family site, school
site, and park site shall be landscaped with plant material at least of a
size, quantity and quality that currently exists on the east side of Muirfield
Drive south of Tara Hill. The landscaping and mounding shall be in
conformity with the drawing contained in the Indian Run Meadows single -
family design guidelines. Weather permitting, landscaping and mounding
shall be installed contemporaneously with the construction of Muirfield
Drive. Mounding along both sides of Muirfield Drive and within the median
strip shall be sodded. All other parcels shall be landscaped prior to
occupancy of any building on such parcel.
Landscape Frontage Treatment on Side Streets
Page 2 of 4
12- 017Z /PDP /FDP
Rezoning /Pielim nary & Final Development Plan
Shoppes at Athenry Mary KolhJc Dnti—
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT
As submitted to PZC 4 -12 -12
A landscaped earth mound shall be installed where the commercial,
church, school, multi - family and office /institutional parcels front the side
streets.
The mound shall have a minimum height of 4 feet above top of curb and shall be
noncontinuous in height.
The same landscaping standards as shown on page 10, " Muirfield Boulevard
Landscape Edge Treatment" shall be the standards applied to the frontage
treatment on side streets.
3. Dumpster Enclosures
All dumpsters shall be enclosed with a 4 sided enclosure of wood, stone, brick or
stucco. All enclosures will be of the same architectural materials as the main
structure and will conform to all building setback requirements.
4. Street Grade
The street grade for the single - family street west of Muirfield Drive shall be at the
same or less grade than Muirfield Drive.
The foundation of any house located on any lot abutting Muirfield Drive shall not
be higher than three (3) feet above the street grade of the abutting street.
G. Architectural Standards
1. In keeping with the residential framework of the area, all architecture will be of a
residential character and constructed of natural materials being stone, brick,
wood and stucco. All buildings will be of the same finished quality on all 4 sides.
Stone accent will be integrated into all buildings.
H. Permitted Uses
Those permitted uses shall be those listed in Chapter 153.027, Neighborhood
Commercial District except "Eating and drinking places" shall include full line
restaurants and shall not include fast food or drive -in restaurants or places
primarily designed for entertainment or dancing and referred to by various names
such as dance hall, cabaret, and night club and the following uses listed in
Section 153.028, Community Commercial District.
Mens and boys clothing and furnishings stores
Womens accessory and specialty stores
Page 3 of 4
1 2- 017Z /PDP /FDP
Rezoning /Preliminary & Final Development Plan
Shoppes at Athenry Mary Kellv's Pare
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT
As submitted to PZC 4 12 -12
Womens ready to wear stores
Shoe stores
Custom tailors
Furriers and fur shops
Book and stationery stores
Jewelry stores
Camera and photographic supply stores
Optical goods stores
2. A maximum of 1,680 square feet of outdoor dining patio area located in front of
the restaurant operating at 7148 Muirfield Drive at the time of approval of this development text.
This patio shall be constructed only in the location shown on the preliminary development plan.
The patio shall use amenities (such as tables, chairs, fence, umbrellas, flower boxes) that are of
high quality. Patio chairs shall be black in color. Table tops may use a different color. Umbrellas
shall be market - style. No outdoor amplifiers or music shall be permitted in the patio area. No
addition lighting (other than allowed building lighting) shall be permitted in the patio area. The
food service for this patio shall end at 10:30 p.m. and the patio operations shall seize at 11 p.m.
Any other patio areas may be permitted through the approval of a conditional use by the
Planning and Zoning Commission according to the Zoning Code.
Other than as set forth in the foregoing paragraph, the conditional uses contained in Section
(Section 153.027(B)) are hereby prohibited.
Intensity
Within the commercial site the total square footage shall not exceed 10,000
square feet per acre. No single store shall exceed 30,000 sq. ft. and one -third of
the total square footage shall be in stores which are less than 20,000 square feet
in area.
Other than the standards listed above, all remaining development standards shall be as listed
and applicable under Section 153 of the Dublin Code.
Page 4 of 4
12- 017Z /PDP /FDP
oning /Preliminary & Final Development Plan
r_ ppps at Athenry Mary Kelly's Patio
0
APPROVED DEVELOPMENT TEXT
INDIAN RUN MEADOWS
COMMERCIAL USES
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
A. Yard Requirements
1. Front yard set back: For structures and parking 50'.
2. Side and rear yard set back adjacent to residential
uses: All structures 50 all parking, service and
loading areas 30 for non - residential uses, 25' set
back for structures, and 15' for parking, loading and
service areas. - -
B. Building Area Development Standards
1. Maximum building height: Shall not exceed thirty five
(35) feet.
C. Parking Standards
1. Off street parking shall be provided at one space per
150 square feet in area or at the rate required under
the Dublin Zoning Code as it applies to commercial uses,
whichever is less.
D. Lighting Standards
1. All lighting in the area shall be cut -off type fixtures
(down lighting) maximum height of fixtures will
not exceed 35'.
2. All external outdoor lighting fixtures to be used within
a given development shall be from the same family, or
similar manufacturer's type, to insure aesthetic
compatability. All light poles and standards shall be
of wood or metal painted black, brown, or bronze.
E. Signage and Graphics Standards
1. All Signage shall be of gr type (no pole signs) and
shall be of a standard shape and - frame. All sign frames
shall be of natu wood, stone or metal painted black,
brown or brofiz Internally illuminated graphics with
opaque background shall be permitted, as well as
externally lighted signs that do not interfer with safe
vehicular movement.
2. Types. of signs prohibited include signs with flashing
lights or changeable copy, projecting signs; roof- :signs,
billboards, co -op signs, rotating signs, and trailer
type signs. Any directory signs shall be more than 30
feet from the right -of -way.
12- 0172 /PDP /FDP
P , ezoning /Prehmmary & Final Development Plan
t
Shoppes at Athenry - Mary Kelly's Patio
7 tnQ nn, irr; w n....,.
3. Individual store graphics shall be integrated Within the
architectural design of the facia, and the background
shall be of the same family and color.
F. Additional Development Standards
I. Curbcut locations: One full service curbcut and median
cut into Muirfield Drive will be provided to jointly
service the commercial and institutional parcels to be
located on the common property line. There,shall be
only one full service cut onto the .southerly
rightof xay. One (1) right turn iin =an "d =out curbcut
shall be permitted onto Muirfield Drive but have no
median break. The Dublin Planning and'Zoning Commission
may determine that an additional break or separate
median breaks for each use are more appropriate based on
a Final Development Plan.
a. Where commercial development abuts residential
development, a landscape buffer will be installed
containing a board -on -board fence as detailed on
page 9 and a landscape buffer of both deciduous
shade, ornamental, and evergreen trees. Minimum
size at installation shall be 2 -1/2" cal for
deciduous shade trees, 1 -1/2" cal for ornamental
trees, and V-8' on evergreen. Landscape plant
material will be placed on the residential side of
the fence at a spacing of 1 tree per 15 linear feet
of property line. Landscape buffer will be
installed prior to the beginning of any
construction on the sites. With the installation
of Muirfield Drive, the site will be graded and
seeded. The developer or his successor shall mow
and properly maintain the site until it is
developed.
b. The Muirfield Drive frontage of the multi- family
site, commercial site, office institutional site,
church site; undeveloped single - family site, school
site, and park site shall be landscaped with plant
material at least of a size, quantity and quality
that currently exists on the east side.of Muirfield
Drive south of Tara Hill. The and
mounding shall be in conformity with the drawing
contained in the Indian Run Meadows single - family
design guidelines. Weather permitting,'•landscaping
and mounding shall be installed contemporaneously
with the construction of Muirfield Drive. Mounding
along both sides of Muirfield Drive and within the
median strip shall be sodded. All other parcels
shall be landscaped prior to occupancy of any
building on such parcel.
12- 0172 /PDP /FDP
Rezoning /Preliminary & Final Development P an
2 Shoppes at Athenry — Mary Kelly's Patio
7 14Q AAu{rr, -1A n. . _
b. A landscaped earth mound shall be installed
where the commercial, church, school,
multi - family and office /institutional parcels
front the side streets.
The mound shall have a minimum height of 4 felt
above top of curb and shall be noncontinuous in
height.
The same landscaping standards as shown on page 10,
'Muirfield Boulevard Landscape Edge Treatment"
shall be the standards applied to the frontage
treatment on side streets.
All dumpsters shall be enclosed within a 4 sided
enclosure of wood, stone, brick or stucco. All
enclosures will be of the same architectural materials
as the main structure'and will conform to all building
setback requirements.
4. i gt reet Grade
The street grade for the single— family street west of
Muirfield Drive shall be at the same or less grade than
Muirfield Drive.
The foundation of any house located on any lot abutting
Muirfield Drive shall not be higher than three (3) feet
above the street grade of the abutting street.
G. Architectural Standards
1. In keeping with the residential framework of the area,
all architecture will be of a residential character and
constructed of natural materials being stone, brick,
wood and stucco. All buildings will be of the same
finished quality on all 4 sides. Stone accent'will be
integrated into all buildings.
H. Permitted Uses
1. Those permitted uses shall be those listed in Chapter
1161, Neighborhood Commercial District except "Eating
and drinking places" shall include full line restaurants
and shall not include fast food or drive -in restaurants
or places primarily designed for entertainment or
dancing and referred to by various names such as dance
hall;'cabaret, and "night club and the following uses -
listed in Chapter 1163, Community Commercial District.
12- 017Z /PDP /FDP
Rezoning /Preliminary & Final Development Plan
Shoppes at Athenry Mary Kelly s Patio
Men's and boys' clothing and furnishings stores
Women's accessory and specialty stores
Women's ready -to -wear stores
Shoe stores
Custom tailors
Furriers and fur shops
Book and stationery stores
Jewelry stores
Camera and photographic supply stores
Optical goods stores
The conditional uses contained in Section 1161.02 are hereby
specifically prohibited.
I. Intensity
1. Within the commercial site the total square footage
shall not exceed 10,000 square feet per acre. No single
store shall exceed 30,000 s.q, ft. and one -third
of the total square footage shall be in stores which are
less than 20,000 square feet in area.
Other than the standards listed above, all remaining
development standards shall be as listed and applicable under
Chapter 1161 of the Dublin Code.
INDIAN2.TXT
114, 8/15/86
12- 0172 /PDP /FDP
Rezoning /Preliminary & Final Development Plan
Shoppes at Athenry Mary Kelly's Patio
7148 Muirfield Drive
4
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
CITY OF DUBLIN_ RECORD OF DISCUSSION
Lang few JULY 8, 2010
5800 Shim-Rings Road
Dublin. Ohio 4MI&1236
Phone/TOO 61 4-410-4600
Fox. 614. 4144747
Web Site:w - dub6n.oh.us
Creating a Legacy
The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action at this meeting:
2. Indian Run Meadows PUD — Shoppes at Athenry — Mary Kelley's Patio
10- 0251NF 7148 Muirfield Drive
30- Minute Time Limit Informal Review
Proposal: A 1,278- square -foot outdoor dining patio accommodating 10 tables
in the front of an existing restaurant within the Shoppes at Athenry
shopping center located east side of Muirfield Drive,
approximately 500 feet north of the intersection with Tara Hill
Drive.
Request: Informal review and feedback on this proposal.
Applicant: Athenry Shoppes Limited, property owner; represented by Gregory
Finnerty, Attorney.
Planning Contact: Claudia D. Husak, AICP, Planner II.
Contact Information: (614) 410 -4675, chusak @dublin.oh.us
RESULT: The Commission heard input from neighborhood and area residents and business
owners regarding a proposal for a patio in the front of an existing restaurant within the Shoppes
at Athenry. Proponents of the proposal cited the restaurant as family - friendly and its owners as
very involved in the community. They also felt as though a patio would be an asset to the
restaurant. Opponents cited, among other issues, the long history of nuisance violations from the
shopping center, the process being used for consideration of the patio, and general concerns such
as potential noise from conversations and smoking being allowed on the patio.
The Commissioners expressed their general comments, including the belief that a patio located in
front of the restaurant rather than in the previously designated patio space may alleviate many of
the concerns. Some Commissioners preferred that any patio approval be permitted solely for the
Mary Kelley's restaurant and that any other restaurant moving into this location should be
required to pursue a conditional use application for a patio. Some Commissioners were
concerned about the future of the previously designated patio space and its potential use in the
future.
STAFF CERTIFICATION
,& M ae"D Lv L ,,jaj-
Claudia D. Husak, AICP
Planner II
12- 017Z /PDP /FDP
Rezoning /Preliminary & Final Development Plan
5hoppes at Athenry - Mary Kelly's Patio
7148 Muirfield Drive
Dublin Planning and 'Zoning Commission
July 8, 2010 — Minutes
Page 3 of 37
2. Indian Run Meadows PUD — Shoppes at Athenry — Mary Kelley's Patio
10- 025INF 7148 Muirfield Drive
30- Minute Time Limit Informal Review
Chris Amorose Groomes introduced this application for an Informal Review of a proposed
1,278 - square -foot outdoor dining patio accommodating ten tables in the front of an existing
restaurant. She said Informal Reviews are typically limited to 30 minutes, but the rule will be
waived due to the large number of possible public comments.
John Hardt recused himself from this case and left the room.
Jennifer Readler explained that the City was currently engaged in litigation with the owner of the
Shoppes of Athenry which involves the Planning and Zoning Commission's denial of a building
on the outparcel. She said as part of the settlement negotiations by both parties, a potential
outdoor patio at Mary Kelley's restaurant was raised. She clarified that there was a potential for
settlement, but that no final decisions have been made with regard to this patio. She said that
City Council thought given the history of the relationship between the Shoppes at Athenry and
the nearby residents, it was very important that the Commission's and public comments be given
consideration in including an outdoor patio as any component to that potential settlement.
Ms. Readler said this is being presented to the Commission as an informal application and the
typical informal review procedures will be followed. She said that City Council would consider
all of the comments before deciding to continue in any further settlement negotiations and in
considering whether or not to include the outdoor patio as a component of that settlement.
Claudia Husak presented this request for an Informal Review and feedback for a patio proposed
for the Mary Kelley's restaurant within the Shoppes of Athenry shopping center. She presented
aerial views of the site and surrounding area. She described the shopping center components.
She presented a graphic showing where the proposed patio would be located in front of the
restaurant on either side of the brick walkway.
Ms. Husak explained that when the shopping center was approved in the late 1990s, it included a
formal patio space, which had been the subject of a couple of Commission reviews for use as an
outdoor dining patio for the restaurant which included an eight -foot tall wall toward the rear.
She said it was either tabled, denied, or withdrawn by the applicant previously due to conceims
raised by the neighbors regarding operational details of the shopping center itself, potential
noise, and the disturbances from the patio and the shopping center.
Ms. Husak said the applicant is now requesting feedback on a proposed patio relocated from the
original area, to the front of the restaurant, which is divided into two spaces on either side of the
walkway. She presented a three dimensional view prepared by the applicant. She said this
proposal is for four tables on the west side and six tables on the east side of the patio, surrounded
by a 3 '/2 -foot tall black aluminum fence with gates toward the brick walkway. She said the patio
is to be served through the front door where the wait staff would come in and out and use the
gates to serve the patrons. Ms. Husak said the service is to be from 11 a.m. until 10 p.m. all
week long. Ms. Husak said two gates are proposed to block access to the existing patio space to
discourage patrons from going there to smoke or use the space. She said signs will be posted to
indicate that entry is prohibited in that area. Ms. Husak said included in the application materials
12- 017Z /PDP /FDP
Rezoning /Preliminary & Final Development Plan
Shoppes at Athenry Mary Kelly's Patio
71 A Nluirficlrl r)riva
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
July 8, 2010 Minutes
Page 4 of 37
are the patio table, chair, and umbrella details, but the photo of the chair design is darker brown
than what is proposed.
Ms. Husak explained that Planning had conversations with the applicant about the proposed patio
furniture used temporarily during the Memorial Tournament not being adequate as a permanent
solution. She said high- quality patio furniture typically seen in the City of Dublin was
suggested.
Ms. Husak said that Planning is requesting feedback regarding the location of the patio in front
of the restaurant, the patio furniture, and the operational details.
Gregory Finnerty, an attorney representing the applicant, Athenry Shoppes, Ltd., introduced
Dick Hammond, the owner of Mary Kelley's Restaurant and Mr. Imondi, the landscape architect
for this project. Mr. Finnerty said that moving the patio to the front of the building and using the
building as a noise buffer would solve one of the biggest problems from past applications. He
said they are considering a total seating capacity of 60, and the patio furniture will comply with
any standards imposed and required by the City.
Mr. Finnerty said access to the existing patio space will be prohibited. He said they had Kinetics
Noise Control conduct a study of how noise would emanate fi•om this building. He began to
hand the Commissioners a packet of information that addressed all of these points.
Ms. Amorose Groomes explained that so all information submitted has to be public, it must flow
through the proper channels. She said the Commissioners already had the Kinetics Noise
Control study.
Mr. Finnerty said the information they have from Kinetics Noise Control is that the noise will
not be a concern. He said they were limiting smoking to the left side of the entrance farthest
away from the neighbors. He said that in the studies they have provided, it is reported that smoke
dissipates at about 20 or 25 feet. He said they believe that the front patio design will minimize
the concerns of smoke bothering the neighbors to the back.
Mr. Finnerty said regarding property values, Dublin ReMax Realty put out a study recently that
said that increased home values are on the waterfront, on a golf course, or on a greenbelt area
and the biggest deflator of home value is actually vacant property. He said there are already four
vacant spaces in the center. Mr. Finnerty said he would hate to see the flagship entity be vacant
because the owners had to look at other options to provide patio service to their loyal customers
that are asking for it. He said he has tried to make opponents realize that Mary Kelley's could be
the best to further home values. He said materials available on the Franklin County Auditors
website show the most affected areas would be Cavalry Court and Wichita Court, and that study
show an increase on average of over $47,000 in value or 35 percent with the average time of
homes in the last 12 years. He said he lived on Round Tower Lane and the study of 19 homes on
Round Tower Lane, showed the average increase was $22,500 or 12 percent in value over nine
years. He said he thought that shows that being near this center has not affected their property
value and they think a strong and vibrant center will strengthen and increase the value of their
property.
Amy Kramb asked if this was kind of a conditional use for the patio that goes just with Mary
Kelley's and if Mary Kelley's was not there, it would go away like a normal conditional use.
12- 017Z /PDP /FDP
Rezoning /Preliminary & Final Development Plan
Shoppes at Athenry Mary Kelly's Patio
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
July 8, 2010 — Minutes
Page 5 of 37
Jennifer Readler explained that as contemplated, it would be part of a settlement agreement, so
the conditional use criteria can still be used to help in analyzing the potential inquiries as to the
operation of the patio, but the City has an agreed entry that was previously entered into with the
shopping center owner, so any future patio use would require conditional use approval.
Ms. Kramb asked if settled in court, would the conditional use only be for Mary Kelley's and if
the restaurant went away, would it come through like a regular conditional use.
Ms. Readler said it depended on how the settlement agreement read. She said she thought that
the center owner had been resistant to limiting this patio use to Mary Kelley's, but in the
settlement agreement that is something that could be discussed.
Ms. Amorose Groomes noted that many people had signed to speak this evening, and she said
the Commission had asked that comments be kept to a maximum of five minutes, but they will
listen as long as the speaker wants to talk. Ms. Amorose Groomes called people who wished to
speak in the order they signed the sheet. She said if someone felt that their comments had
already been expressed, the Commission encouraged them to condense some comments for the
sake of time. She reiterated that if they would like to speak, the Commission was here to listen.
Nancy Cowen, 6182 Enke Court, said they all know that the property was zoned commercial.
She said in 1998, the development began and construction started on the Shoppes of Athenry.
Ms. Cowen said that Mary Kelley's opened as a tenant in November 1998.
Ms. Cowen said Mary Kelley's employs an average of 65 people, and they pay taxes that help
Dublin. She said when more people dine at Mary Kelley's, more taxes will be collected and that
helps Dublin and helps keep people working. She said Mary Kelley's is a very good member of
the community and in 2009, they raised nearly $5,000 for charities, including the Autism
Foundation, the Miracle League and many others. She said they are working with two area
churches to donate a portion of the parishioners' guest checks back to the churches. She said
every year they host St. Brigid's of Kildare's graduating class luncheon. She said the Dublin
Coffman Quarterback Club has met there for the last 11 years. She said many homeowners
associations have used their private meeting rooms at no charge. She said they actively
participate and support Dublin's Irish Festival. Ms. Cowen said the patrons at Mary Kelley's are
locals, families with children, empty - nesters, and good citizens of Dublin. She said it is a
comfortable bar for dining and for meeting with friends with great food and warm hospitality.
Ms. Cowen said we all know the economy is bad, and 30 percent of the storefronts in this center
are now vacant. She said losing more tenants is bad for the neighborhood because the shopping
center may or may not continue to be well maintained. She listed the struggling centers in the
Dublin area: Dublin Village Center, New Market Mall, and the corner of both sides of the street
at SR 161 and US 33. She pointed out that there are also empty storefronts in the Giant Eagle
shopping area. She said the current zoning of the Shoppes of Athenry allow for a liquor store,
eating and drinking establishments, self service laundry, a meat and sea food shop, a grocery,
and others
Ms. Cowen said we know what we have with Mary Kelley's, but do not know what other
businesses or problems could arise if they should opt to leave. She said that Mary Kelley's
12- 017Z /PDP /FDP
Rezoning /Preliminary & Fin +I Development Plan
Shoppes at Athenry Mary Kelly's Patio
7148 Muirfield Drive
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
July 8, 2010 — Minutes
Page 6 of 37
wants to stay in business, and outside seating can help keep diners in Dublin and that helps keep
65 people working and paying taxes to Dublin.
Ms. Cowen said there have been concerns about the patio and what's out there now. She said it
appears that Mary Kelley's has been very vigilant in keeping patrons off the current patio.
Ms. Cowen said the homeowners at Indian Run are very good people, who want to protect their
property values and quality of life. She said she was hoping this long overdue issue can be
amicably and quickly resolved for everyone's benefit. She said her trust is in Dublin to make the
right decision.
Lori Finnerty, 6013 Round Tower Lane, a Sheffield Meadows resident, said Dublin was the best
of all suburbs she had lived in within Columbus. Ms. Finnerty said she commended the Dublin
City Council and particularly the Zoning Commission because they do a great job of making
Dublin a great place both to work and to live. She disclosed she was Greg Finnerty's wife, and
separately, was a proponent of Mary Kelley's and of the outdoor patio. She said she would hate
to have the center lose Mary Kelley's because she sees it as the flagship. She said she thought
that most of the accommodations from all of the input from the local residents have been taken
into consideration, and as a resident, she supported this outdoor patio for Mary Kelley's.
Larry Adams, 7745 Brandonway Drive, a Dublin resident for about 16 years, said he frequented
Mary Kelley's often. He said his family enjoys eating there, and he was here in support of Mary
Kelley's application for the patio. He said he thought enough had been said in terms of the
detail, but he would hope and encourage the Commission to give it a favorable consideration.
Jan Krukowski, 6091 Wismer Circle, said in 2006, when the initial application went before the
Planning and Zoning Commission for a conditional use of the patio at Mary Kelley's, when the
final decision was denial of the patio, she was really upset and could not understand what had
happened that night. She said a lot of people that he had spoken to questioned why Mary
Kelley's could not have outdoor seating. She said that she walked the neighborhoods around
Mary Kelley's and Indian Run Meadows in 2008 and obtained a lot of signatures from people
that were for it. She said probably 75 percent of the people on Muirfield Drive want a patio.
She said she came here to speak for the people that were not able to come tonight. She said there
are a lot of signatures, within the neighborhood of Indian Run Meadows within close vicinity of
Mary Kelley's and there is also a large number of signatures of people in general in Dublin that
want this patio for Maly Kelley's.
Gordon Johns, 7139 Wellington Court, Wexford Woods Homeowners Association, and a
resident of Dublin for about 20 years, said he was at this meeting to voice his support for the
outdoor dining area being proposed by Mary Kelley's. He pointed out that the restaurant
business is very competitive and many restaurants have outdoor areas to take advantage of the
weather. He said not having this opportunity is causing this establishment to lose revenues which
can ultimately cause lower profits and lower tax revenues to the City. He said he felt this is an
unnecessary cost to be absorbed by Mary Kelley's, but they are being proactive and are willing
to make a substantial investment for the long term success of their business.
Michael J. Hufford, 6303 Payton Street, said Dick Hammond was his client at Emerald Bank,
which was initially located in the center. He suggested that the City of Dublin owned a couple of
restaurant in Dublin that compete with him that have patios. He said he was always concerned
12- 017Z /PDP /FDP
Rezoning /Preliminary & Final Development Plan
Shoppes at Athenry Mary Kelly's Patio
—AO RA....f.olri flnva
Dublin Planning and :Coning Commission
July 8, 2010 - Minutes
Page 7 of 37
why Mary Kelley's was not allowed to use the existing patio. He said he thought of all the patio
locations in the whole City, Mary Kelley's existing one was the safest and best thought out.
Mr. Hufford said the alternative that they are proposing is okay, but it is a tremendous amount of
extra cost. He said with ten tables and an average ticket around $10 to $14, if there are two
meals a day served, Mr. Hammond is losing $1,000 a day, or $85,000 to $100,000 per year since
the patio was built. He said given the increasing competition with other Dublin restaurants he
was surprised Mary Kelley's is still standing. He said the reason is because Mr. Hammond is a
good man, they have a good product, and people return. Mr. Hufford said Mr. and Mrs.
Hammond are very generous and very supportive of the community. Mr. I-Iufford said by word
of mouth and its product Mary Kelley's is still standing in spite of not having a patio.
Ms. Amorose Groomes and Steve Langworthy clarified that the City of Dublin did not own any
restaurants. Mr. Langworthy said the City only owned the buildings or the land.
Brenda Belisle, 1126 Rockport Lane, Columbus, the owner of Spuds Bar and Grille on
Henderson Road, said when the smoking ban was passed, her business went down 30 percent or
more. She said 3 %Z months later, the shopping center allowed her to put a patio on front of her
building, and in the next two months, business went up 30 percent, plus 19 percent because there
was no more smoking inside and people liked that, but they could also relax and enjoy their
dinner outside and smoke. She said that Mr. and Mrs. Hammond have a wonderful business,
they are very nice people, and they support everybody. She said it would only help the City of
Dublin with their tax rate. Ms. Belisle said that they have had no trouble or problems with their
patio in the past three years. She said it was a win -win situation. She said they are open until
2:30 a.m, and there are no noise problems. She said the Mary Kelley's crowd was a little `older'
and not the rowdy noise - making kind of people. She said she thought they deserved a patio.
Lindy Baumgartner, 7010 Cavalry Court, said she was an original owner on the street which
backs up to the Shoppes at Athenry. She said they had raised three kids there, and would love to
have a patio at Mary Kelley's. She said they have enjoyed going there over the years, and meet a
lot of family and fi7ends there. Ms. Baumgartner said they believe that having the patio in the
front of the building is an excellent compromise. She said it mitigates a lot of the issues that
have been raised by the neighbors over the years as to noise and lighting. She said their objective
is to keep the shopping center strong and this is the anchor to that center. Ms. Baumgartner said
her worst fear is that the center will end up empty. She said we need to remember that this is a
commercial center, it has been zoned commercial for a long time, it is not a library, and it is not a
monastery. She said people cannot be expected to go there and not make any noise or not use
their car lights. Ms. Baumgartner said it was a commercial center and they need to keep it strong
to keep the neighborhood strong. She said they feel that a patio would be a great asset to their
neighborhood.
Ben Cusumano, 7082 Cavalry Court, who lives right behind Mary Kelley's, said he and his wife
came to Dublin over 20 years ago from New York, just to live in a suburb. He said in 1989,
from the bedroom window they loved to hear children play and birds sing, and now, he hears
delivery, garbage and dump trucks instead. He said he could tell when Mary Kelley's has a good
night by the number of bottles he hears being thrown away late at night. He asked the
Commission not to let this happen because of the noises it is going to generate. He noted that
there were a lot of patio tables proposed with very little space. He asked that it be checked that
12- 017Z /PDP /FDP
Rezoning /Preliminary & Final Development Plan
Shoppes at Athenry Mary Kelly's Patio
7148 Muirfield Drive
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
July 8, 2010 — Minutes
Page 8 of 37
he could use his wheelchair to go from one end of the shopping center to the other without
having to go into the street to get around the patio.
Kathleen Plesich, 6274 Ottawa Place, representing the Indian Run Meadows Board, said that
that they have no official position on the merits of the application. She said they feel that they
have not had sufficient time to review the complete scope of the various issues involved. She
said they would like to be able to hear more from their residents to come up with an official
position.
Susan Neely, 8393 Gilmerton Court, a Dublin resident for approximately 16 years, said she was
also a Dublin City schoolteacher and coach. She said she supported Mary Kelley's proposal and
she thought that this procedure should continue and decisions be made sooner than later.
Glen Aidt, 5912 Roundstone Place, said he moved to Dublin about six years ago to start Emerald
Bank next to Mary Kelley's. He said he goes there very often and attends business meetings
there and his wife, the president of the Columbus Symphony Orchestra League, holds their
meeting there. Mr. Aidt pointed out that the City of Dublin owns the Golf Course of Dublin
building which has a patio. He said he thought it would be unfair for this body not to provide a
patio to Mary Kelley's mainly because of all the other restaurants in town, including at least two
that the buildings or land are owned by the City of Dublin that have patios that make noise and
have traffic. He said he supported Mary Kelley's.
Holly Hedden, 6925 Kinston Drive, representing Oakland Management, said for any issues
brought to her attention, they have acted promptly and corresponded with the tenants. She said
they have always done everything they can to resolve any issues that have been brought to their
attention, and the majority of the few problems that are brought to her attention do not have
anything to do with Mary Kelley's. Ms. Hedden said there have been issues with some trash
from children loitering in their parking lots or unscheduled deliveries, and they have dealt with
that. She said that Mary Kelley's is not a source of grief for her as a management company.
Steven Plogsted, 7694 Cashel Court, said he was a frequent patron of the restaurant. He said they
are great people and a great service to the community. He said he lived close to the outdoor pool
where there were about 1,000 kids making noise and just a couple of streets over with the
buildings that are there, the noise dissipates quickly. He said he did not believe the patio noise is
goirig to be a problem for anybody in the neighborhood in the current location they are planning.
He said he supported May Kelley's outdoor patio.
Tom McCash, attorney, 55 South High Street, said he was representing 29 adjacent residents.
He said he was a confused on exactly who the applicant is, because the application that is filed
with the City is for Athenry Shoppes, but the presentation and everything else they have this
evening is from Mr. Finnerty who says is he is representing Mary Kelley's, not necessarily the
Shoppes at Athenry.
Ms. Husak explained materials are required to be filed with the landowner /property owner
signing the application, but the landowner can appoint an applicant and a representative of the
applicant to speak on their behalf. She said the property owner is the Athenry Shoppes LLC,
who owns the land, the applicant is the Mary Kelley's Restaurant and Dick Hammond, is the
owner of the restaurant, and Mr. Finnerty is the representative of Mr. Hammond.
12- 0172 /PDP /FDP
Rezoning /Preliminary & Final Development Plan
Shoppes at Athenry Mary Kelly's Patio
7148 Muirfield Drive
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
July 8, 2010 Minutes
Page 9 of 37
Mr. McCash said the application he saw did not have Mary Kelley's listed on it, and also, Pat
Kelley did not appoint Mr. Finnerty as the representative on the application. He said he just
wanted to make a note for the record.
Ms. Readier said this is not a perfect procedure, this is something that we have tried to fit into a
procedural context, but ultimately, the settlement is with the owner and it is through the
settlement negotiations with the owner that Mary Kelley's is here. She said because City
Council is soliciting input on the outdoor seating component, that is why Mary Kelley's is
participating.
Mr. McCash said he understood the hybridized approach that is being done. He said the
Commission has heard from residents in support of Mary Kelley's, and they had the presentation
at Mary Kelley's last Thursday night. He said Mr. Finnerty wanted to make the kind of
discussion that we needed to separate out Mary Kelley's and the Shoppes at Athenry. He said as
Ms. Readier indicated they are tied together. He pointed out that there is a pending litigation
over an outparcel that was denied in 2007, and they are dealing with a settlement agreement on
the outparcel. He said now they are going to bring in outdoor seating which was not even part of
the discussion at that outparcel hearing. Mr. McCash said the outparcel is one separate matter
dealing with the shopping center. He said the residents actually were not in opposition to the
outparcel itself, they were concerned with how the center was being run and its lack of
compliance with the trash, the deliveries, and the various noise components.
Mr. McCash said they expressed that concern to the Planning and Zoning Commission and the
Commission decided not to add to the problem by having another outparcel. He said this matter
was appealed to the Court and Judge Hale reversed it, did not use the correct legal standard, and
the City appealed that to the 10' District Court of Appeals, who then remanded it back down to
Judge Hale to issue a ruling consistent with a proper standard. He said that was remanded back
to the Planning and Zoning Commission for an additional hearing. Mr. McCash pointed out that
case has never come before the Commission.
Mr. McCash said this site has a very long history of issues not with Mary Kelley's but with Pat
and Tim Kelley, the owners of the center on their lack of compliance with zoning requirements,
their lack of compliance with commitments, specifically with building Muirfield Drive.
Mr. McCash said these have been continuing problems from the original zoning and someone
made the comment that it was zoned in 1970. He said the issue before the Commission that is
dealing with this thing is a 1986 rezoning that changed the zoning provisions for the site that
Mary Kelley's is on, the site that currently houses the Sells Middle School, and the site that
currently has the elderly housing and the office building next to it. He said all that switched
around in 1986. He said during that time period, there were discussions with the neighbors of
Indian Run Meadows who started constructing there, and there were concerns that were brought
up during that rezoning process in 1986. He said at those hearings, the Kelleys were represented
by Harrison Smith of the Smith and Hale law firm.
Mr. McCash said in the July 1986 Planning and Zoning meeting minutes, staff had reservations
dealing with this 15 acres, and specifically stated that because they are surrounded by single -
family uses, staff felt that there should be special considerations placed in the zoning text at the
time they are being zoned that will relate to the ultimate development. He said staff further
recommended that there be incorporation of language which clearly set forth that the utilization
12- 017Z /PDP /FDP
Rezoning /Preliminary & Final Development Plan
Shoppes at Athenry Mary Kelly's Patio
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
July 8, 2010 — Minutes
Page 10 of 37
of the maximum and minimum standards spelled out was dependent upon demonstration of
compatibility with residential surroundings at the time of development of the non - residential
tracts. He said that was included in the zoning provisions.
Mr. McCash said as it went through the City Council meetings and the City Council process,
they added language to the zoning text which took out conditional uses that were in the
neighborhood commercial development, and specifically, those conditional uses are prohibited.
He said `prohibited' meant you can not have them. He said any of the other outdoor patio areas
in Dublin are conditional uses and they are not prohibited on those sites. He said they are
permitted, subject to complying with the conditional use provisions of Dublin's Code. Mr.
McCash said there is a very distinct difference to the underlying Indian Run Meadows zoning
text and the other patios in Dublin that the Commission has heard comments on this evening. He
said in that zoning text, on August 18, Harrison Smith represented to City Council that those
conditional uses were strictly prohibited. He said the language of the text does not say strictly
prohibited, it says prohibited, but in his comments to Council he said strictly prohibited to which
was a little more forceful to that component.
Mr. McCash said he also indicated that he was agreeable to asking the Indian Run Meadows
Association for consent or approval before asking for any additional uses. He said Mr. Smith
again stated later on in that hearing before Council, that he was agreeable to entering into an
agreement with an association whereby the developer cannot request a change in use without the
association's permission, and that they would be willing to make that a condition of the rezoning.
Mr. McCash said there were Council members hearing these promises and commitments from
Mr. Smith, seeing a development text that prohibits particular uses completely out of the zoning
text, and that commitment to go back to the association if they wanted to change it.
Mr. McCash said at the time, Mayor Close asked if the 30-day provision for the adoption of the
rezoning could be waived so that they could begin immediately. Mr. McCash explained that this
was primarily dealing with the construction of Sells Middle School. He said the Law Director, at
that hearing, did say that they could waive that provision and that it would still allow the
residents the opportunity for a referendum. Mr. McCash said that actually was not the case
because passage of emergency legislation cuts off referendum rights and that is why it is not
done very often. He said that at that hearing the rezoning was passed by emergency with no
right for referendum from the Indian Run residents or anybody that had concerns over the
particular application. He said they lost their right on that, but they did gain in the zoning text,
the fact that those conditional uses were not permitted.
Mr. McCash said the center came in 1997, and as part of that application for that final
development plan, the applicant actually showed a drive -thru on the end where Pacific Fusion
currently exists which was not a permitted component. He said John Talentino, in the staff
report, indicated that was a conditional use and also indicated that outdoor seating was a
conditional use. Mr. McCash said the problem is that Mr. Talentino did not read the underlying
zoning text, so he missed the zoning text saying that they were prohibited. He said staff
recommended approval with 13 conditions, one of them being that conditional use approval for
outdoor seating and drive -in facilities be obtained. Mr. McCash said that was a second `City
mistake.' He said there is the referendum issue and the final development plan approval that had
a condition for that outdoor seating.
Mr. McCash said a patio is a patio, not an outdoor service facility. 12- 017Z /PDP /FDP
Rezoning /Preliminary & Final Development Plan
Shoppes at Athenry Mary Kelly's Patio
7148 Muirfield Drive
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
July 8, 2010 -Minutes
Page 1 l of 37
Ms. Amorose Groomes apologized for the audience interrupting Mr. McCash. She explained
that the Commission recently forwarded their bylaws to City Council which asked for a five -
minute limitation on comments. She said that Council overruled their request for that and as it
stands, the Commission bylaws read that they will listen as long as someone talks. She said the
five minutes is certainly a strong suggestion, but it is not in the Commission bylaws. She asked
Mr. McCash to continue.
Mr. McCash said during that presentation for the center itself, their architect, Bill Andrews made
several presentations. He said one of those commitments was to agree to limit trash and
deliveries to 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. He said that has never been complied with whether it be Mary
Kelley's in the past, Papa John's which recently did it two or three days ago at 5:15 a.m.,
Marco's Pizza, or several others. Mr. McCash said that Pat Kelley just happened to be at that
meeting representing the Brand Road Investment Company, so he was well aware of the original
underlying zoning and what those commitments were that were made by Harrison Smith, but he
did not correct any of that stuff during the final development plan.
Mr. McCash said Pat Kelley, Robert Weiler, and several other people own approximately 30
percent of Mary Kelley's. He said it was not a Dick Hammond ownership. He said Mary
Kelley's is owned by several big owners of the center itself, which is why you cannot necessarily
split these pieces up and how this settlement agreement is coming through.
Mr. McCash said in 1999 they asked for a patio at Mary Kelley's and filed for a conditional use.
He said it was taken in by staff. He said on April 15, it was tabled due to various issues
including questions on the outdoor service facility. He said Dublin did not have a definition of
that term in our Code at the time, even though the staff was consistently applying outdoor
service facility to outdoor seating. Mr. McCash said the Planning and Zoning Commission
tabled the application, and requested an opinion from the Law Director, researching outdoor
service facilities. He said counsel for Mary Kelley's decided to state that it was a permitted use.
He said the Law Director concluded that it was a conditional use in his May 18 letter and that as
a conditional use, it had to go back through the conditional use application process. Mr. McCash
said there were some questions on exactly what they were interpreting as a conditional use. He
said again, staff did not know, and did not look at the underlying zoning. He said he happened to
be on the Commission during that time period, so he looked at the zoning provision and saw that,
informed Bobbie Clarke of it, and then that application was tabled. He said the application was
withdrawn.
Mr. McCash said in 2002, Mary Kelley's opened a patio without applying for a Building Permit
or a conditional use, and the City filed suit. He said that is where the settlement agreement
comes into place. Mr. McCash said in that settlement agreement they specifically agreed that
the patio, being that portion between the two buildings behind the small fence, is the patio
described in that settlement agreement that shall not be used for outdoor seating unless they
rezone the parcel, or the obtain a conditional use approval, only dealing with that particular patio.
He said that settlement agreement further went on to say, in paragraph 3, That the agreement
provided that the prohibition in the zoning text is not to be construed to prohibit the patio space
between the buildings to be used as an outdoor service facility, provided that a conditional use
approval is granted. Mr. McCash said the neighbors got shortchanged again through the
settlement agreement because the underlying zoning did not permit it, but now they got it
through the settlement agreement on just the patio piece between the buildings.
12- 017Z /PDP /FDP
Rezoning /Preliminary & Final Development P ai
Shoppes at Athenry — Mary Kelly's Patio
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
July 8, 2010 — Minutes
Page 12 of 37
Mr. McCash said they applied for it in 2005 and went through the conditional use hearing, it was
voted on and denied, but they did not appeal it. He said then they came in with the 2007
outparcel and they have gone through that particular scenario here.
Mr. McCash said this is a new application for an outdoor service facility on the sidewalk that is
outside of Matt' Kelley's. He said that was not part of the original settlement agreement. He
said under the way that the underlying zoning text is and the way that the settlement agreement
was written, this outdoor patio service facility location outside of Mary Kelley's is not permitted,
and it was not agreed in the settlement agreement that it could come in before the PZC on a
conditional use application.
Mr. McCash said it should be denied entirely because it does not comply with the underlying
zoning provision at this location. He said if they want to file one for the patio in between, that is
what that settlement agreement stands for and they could file that application and go through the
hearing process on it.
Mr. McCash said they have talked to the Law Director and had discussions dealing with this
potential for a settlement. He said as he had indicated, Harrison Smith said he would be willing
to enter into an agreement with the association for any of those future uses. He said they
proposed that if they want this to be part of the settlement agreement that this apply only to Mary
Kelley's, and that if BW3 or Old Bag of Nails, or Rusty Bucket, or somebody else buys this
restaurant, they would have to go through the conditional use application in order to continue to
use it, or it would not apply at all. He said the residents have not received any response other
than a general, `we'd like to be able to sell it and send those rights on'. Mr. McCash said this is
the settlement agreement the way it has been presented right now, without that kind of limitation.
It provides the outdoor seating for Mary Kelley's through this proposed settlement agreement,
but then what is the Commission going to do with Pacific Fusion or whatever restaurant that goes
in there when they come in and say, `Mary Kelley's has outdoor seating'. Mr. McCash said that
staff and the Law Department have not addressed how that would be proposed through that
process.
Mr. McCash said he and his clients did not have a problem with Mary Kelley's as an operation,
but the precedent that gets set through this process and what happens if Mary Kelley's leaves or
if Mary Kelley's sells to someone else. He said property values go up because of our zoning
provisions, because of our signage, because of our landscaping, and those things have made
Dublin what it is today and make it great.
Mr. McCash said zoning requires a balancing. Immediate adjacent property owners get impacted
on a commercial -type development like this, greater than somebody that lives on Round Tower
or Catrell Court. Mr. McCash said that they are asking for provisions, if they are going to have
to take a deal with the settlement agreement ending up with outdoor seating. He said the center
has not complied with zoning provisions and Oakwood Management worked out a deal with the
residents. Mr. McCash said they believe that Mary Kelley's is great place that seems to be doing
a good business without the outdoor patio.
Anita Cusumano, 7082 Calvary Court, said the Athenry center and Mary Kelley's since their
conception have constantly disregarded the bylaws and have tried to get around them. She said
Mary Kelley's was told outdoor patio seating was not allowed on the side of their restaurant, so
12- 017Z /PDP /FDP
Rezoning /Preliminary & Final Development
Shoppes at Athenry Mary Kelly's Patio
7148 Muirfield Drive
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
July 8, 2010 — Minutes
Page 13 of 37
now they have decided to try for the front of the building with seating for up to 60 people. She
said when a group of people leave Mary Kelley's and are speaking outside, her family can hear
them on their deck, in their family room, and even in their bedroom which faces the restaurant.
She said trucks, deliveries, and garbage pickups are supposed to be limited to from 7 a.m. until 7
p.m. She said the center has difficulty getting garbage and delivery trucks and others to comply
with these hours. She said she did not trust the center to get Maly Kelley's to comply with the
standards set. She said they hoped that the City can come to some settlement on this manner and
maintain the quality of their lives and the value of their homes.
Farid Masn, 7061 Calvary Court recalled that Mr. McCash called out several past mistakes that
staff had made and he noted that there was a mistake in tonight's report also under the section
about development standards and uses, Permitted uses within the proposed development text
include all uses permitted in a Community Commercial District. He said the zoning text states
that uses permitted are under the Neighborhood Commercial District, which are different than
the Community Commercial District. He said there is another mistake of the center's record that
we could be fighting over for the next ten years.
Ms. Amorose Groomes interrupted, and said they are not going to refute things that other people
have said. She said the Commission just wanted to get the residents' perspectives.
Mr. Masri said he wanted to mention that he had collected a pile of emails regarding trash pickup
and the Papa John's deliveries. He said that Mr. Hammond had also complained about the Papa
John's semi truck deliveries that came at 2 a.m. and parked behind the center. He said now the
deliveries are at 5 a.m., Tuesdays. Ile said they have complained about the late deliveries and 3
or 4 a.m. trash pickups for years. He said they used to call the police who would sometimes cite
the drivers, but next time there would be another driver. He said the police department cannot
cite the drivers unless they catch them twice. He said most of the time the police do not come
until the truck has left. He said they eventually stopped calling the police.
Mr. Masri said there were piles and piles of code enforcement complaints and he stopped calling
because they got no response from enforcement. He said snow plows and street sweepers are in
the parking lot at 4 a.m. He said you cannot open the windows at night and enjoy a nice cool
evening or sleep at night because you hear the noise from trucks. He said late at night, you get
employees and patrons leaving at 11 or 12 o'clock at night. He said now there are additional
restaurants like Pacific Fusion and he has to keep his windows shut because of the horrible
smells. He said they cannot even sit outside without smelling the odors. I-Ie said every year,
they have to call Code Enforcement so that at least, the grass gets mowed behind the fence. He
said the shopping center owns 15 feet behind the fence. He said that in 2008, the City had to cut
the grass. He said since 1999, they went to many Public Service Committee, Special Council
Meeting committee and patio hearings to settle arguments. I-Ie said some of the zoning members
and Council members have brought these issues up and they keep repeating.
Mr. Masri said they can already smell the smoke from their homes. Mr. Masri said that Mr.
Finnerty said they would control and stop that. He said the nearest lot from this will be 114 feet
from the edge of the patio to the lot. He said they were concerned about the smoking and service
hours which were indicated to be about 10:30 or 11:00 P.M. He said he would like to see less
service at 9 p.m. with everybody out at 10 p.m. Mr. Masri said they were told by Mr. Finnerty
that the application will be for a one -year conditional use. He said that Mr. Finnerty indicated
that they would take their considerations and revise the plan and work with their landscape
12- 017Z /PDP /FDP
Rezoning /Preliminary & Final Development Pla
Shoppes at Athenry Mary Kelly's Patio
7148 Muirfield Drive
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
July 8, 2010— Minutes
Page 14 of 37
architect, hold another meeting with them and give them notes to take back to the residents to
discuss, have another meeting, and then they would go the PZC.
Mr. Masri said they found out that this is actually a settlement agreement that would bypass the
law of the PZC, that it would not be a conditional use at all, that it will go with the land, and they
would have no control.
Mr. Masri said over the years they have sacrificed and compromised. In 2001, there was a case
pending litigation, 174 violations, and $30,000 worth of fines. They compromised on those, in
the trust that things would be taken care of like the parking, the trash trucks, deliveries and those
things never went away. He said they had photos of cars parked behind Mary Kelley's several
weeks ago with employees smoking there.
Mr. Masri said the residents were told to accept something in the settlement that is going to be a
big compromise on their part. He said they were told after they accepted the settlement, some of
the other things will be taken care of, however the settlement will be behind closed doors, so
they will not know what they are going to get. He said he would like to see the City and the
shopping center owners take concrete steps and actions to resolve and control some of the issues,
and then come to the Commission and ask to put something in that is going to be a big
compromise for them, not do the reverse. Mr. Masri said they should not be asked to give
something up and then expect to get resolution of their problems that have not been resolved for
12 years.
Mr. Masri said in 2007, when the outparcel application came about, the residents did not object
to it at the preliminary hearings. He said they indicated that they would like to see some
resolution for the parking, there were to be gates installed behind the center to take care of some
of the issues, and the landscaping was to be cleaned up, but several months passed and when the
case came to the Commission for a vote, many of the things were not taken care of at all. He
said they had to call Code Enforcement to get the grass cut and the landscaping maintained. He
said the landscaping is never maintained properly. Mr. Masri said it had been mulched only
three times in the last 12 years, and each time was prior to a Planning and Zoning Commission
meeting. He said it was mulched two weeks ago and the trees were edged around and behind the
fence for the first time ever. He said he had photographs if the Commission would like to see
them. He said they objected to the outparcel building because nothing had been done to that
point. He said they did not object to the building, they objected to the operation of the center.
Mr. Masri said he hoped that the Commission could take their concerns into consideration. He
reiterated that he objected to how the settlement is being done. He said he thought any outdoor
seating should go through the normal Planning and Zoning processes and should not attempt to
bypass the standard process and enter through a back door way.
Mary Leonard, 6893 Blackhawk Court, an Indian Run Meadows resident for 17 years, said there
were five different streets within Indian Run Meadows, 13 culs -de -sac all together, and more
than 25 percent of those streets were represented tonight. She said the City should stick to the
way they are supposed to be operating and do what they are supposed to do, and when they are
asked. She said unfortunately, this Commission has been asked to do this unique thing, and she
thanked the Commission for their service on that. She apologized that it had to be that way. She
said it was the Commission's opportunity to say, "No thank you, City Council. We don't want to
be a part of this."
12- 017Z /PDP /FDP
Rezoning /Preliminary & Final Development Plan
Shoppes at Athenry - Mary Kelly's Patio
7148 Muirfield Drive
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
July 8, 2010 — Minutes
Page 15 of 37
Ms. Leonard said if this ends up being settled in this fashion, her questions would be how
enforcement would be done and what recourse the residents would have. She asked if they
would come back to the Commission, go to City Council, or worse, would they have to hire their
own attorneys and go to the court where it is being settled. She said that would be much worse
than the history that has been dealt to their residents.
Donald Seeger, 6894 Foresthaven Loop, a Dublin resident of 20 years, said he was a proponent
of Mary Kelley's. He asked why they were holding them hostage because of something that the
developer did in 1986. He said he was a non - smoker that liked to eat outside and would use the
patio. He said with the recession, the patio will help business. He asked everybody to raise their
hands if they were for Mary Kelley's that previously passed.
Ms. Amorose Groomes said that the Commission was not going to take a survey, they were just
collecting comments.
Mr. Seeger explained that he was a realtor, and when he sells property, he finds out what the
zoning is behind the single - family homes. He guessed that the lots were purchased for less
money because they backed up to commercial.
Dr. Jim Nichols, 4760 McGreevy Court, said he had lived in Dublin many years and was a past
president of the Hemingway Civic Association. He said that Mary Kelley's is nothing but an
additive to this community and that is all it has ever been. He said there are communities that
would bend over backwards to make sure that Mary Kelley's got into their community. He said
debating whether to keep them in Dublin is really wrong. He said he was at the Mary Kelley's
meeting two weeks ago, and after the meeting 20 -30 people stood outside of the restaurant
talking. He said he went out the back way and stood and he could not hear anything. He said
there was absolutely no noise at all and when he told the people in the front, he was told they
were whispering. Mr. Nichols said home values were established when the lots were purchased
adjacent to a commercial center. He said that Mary Kelley's benefits Dublin and the home
values of the residents because if Mary Kelley's leaves and the center becomes vacant and the
center's property values go down, the residents' property values will go down. He said they
need to do what is best for Dublin and the residents and approve this patio which is not hurting
anybody.
Emily Hoy, 5304 Erin Isles Court, a proponent of the Mary Kelley's patio, said the restaurant
had provided her family many wonderful experiences. She said her parents moved to Dublin 29
years ago, and the realtor told them that it was a growing community. She recommended that
when looking for a house, you should ask if it was a growing community. She said if residents
feel it has grown too rapidly, perhaps it was time to move to Plain City. Ms. Hoy said she did
not think adding a patio to Mary Kelley's is going to do anything negative to residential property
values in that area.
Paul Williams, 7128 Wellington Court, said he previously lived at 6829 Falling Timbers. He
said he was in favor of the Commission approving the Mary Kelley's patio. He said birds will
sing, apparently trash companies will come at all hours of the night no matter where you live,
and he did not think many of the things said tonight actually have merit relative to what is in
front of the Commission and what they have to decide. Mr. Williams said he hoped that the
12- 017Z /PDP /FDP
Rezoning /Preliminary & Final Development Plan
Shoppes at Athenry Mary Kelly's Patio
7148 Muirfield Driv,
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
July 8, 2010 — Minutes
Page 16 of 37
Commission can distinguish between the emotional part of what the residents of Indian Run
Meadows feel, and what really is reality here.
Raj Hora, 6239 Inverurie Drive West, the owner of Tutto Vino Wine Shop and Bistro in the
center, said last week he laid off a general manager and staff member because his business has
not been that great. He said this patio will add some excitement and bring people to the center as
a destination. He said it will be advertised and there will be walking traffic. He said without
that, he knew that he would go out of business and move out of the center, perhaps going to
another community that actually wants him there and has a patio to offer to him. He said he was
a proponent of the patio.
Tammy Smith, 5472 Old Pond Drive, said she had lived there for 25 years. She said as a
resident of Dublin, she wanted to apologize to Mary Kelley's for them, as Dublin, dragging their
feet for the past 12 years and them loosing income. She said for what they were giving to the
community, we should offer them whatever can be done to get them to stay in our community.
Gayle Reynolds, 7079 Cavalry Court, said her home for 21 years backed up to the Shoppes of
Athenry. She said they knew that the property behind them was zoned Neighborhood
Commercial and they did look into the text and restrictions. Ms. Reynolds said they knew that
Dublin as a community was one in which they had very high standards and would protect them
because they were known for them. She said they had a lot of faith that the City of Dublin would
ensure that the rules and regulations would be followed in the zoning text for that. Ms. Reynolds
said Dublin has failed them. She said she was very disgruntled in the fact that this lawsuit has
nothing to do with the patio — it is all about the outbuilding. She asked why we are not settling
and giving them the outbuilding which is what the lawsuit is about. She asked why the City
would give them something that the Commission has disapproved over and over again. She
asked why the City was protecting them. She said it was prohibited and they have been fighting
that over and over again. Ms. Reynolds said there is no recourse for them. She asked if there
were restrictions if Mary Kelley's wanted bands, loud music, or parries on the patio. Ms.
Reynolds said the only plus side of having Mary Kelley's come to the Commission was that
landscaping gets taken care of on the residents' side. She said there are photographs showing
that over the years the landscaping has never changed or been improved except two weeks ago,
when they mulched and pruned the trees.
Ms. Reynolds said this does not meet Conditional Use Criteria 4, 7, or 9 which were reasons why
this was disapproved in the past. She said she would want the patio, if it was not in her backyard
and she believed that no one else would want this in their backyard.
Judi Masri, 7061 Calvary Court said this is a very important issue for the people that live behind
the Shoppes of Athenry. She agreed it was an emotional issue, but said one of the reasons was
that from looking at the Codes when buying their house, they thought they were protected. She
begged the Commission to look at those Codes. Ms. Masri said this does not meet the standards
and it is an issue of law. She said they could see time and again how the City of Dublin is a
fantastic community, protecting its residents. Ms. Masri asked the Commission uphold those
standards.
Ms. Masri said in regards to the property values and why she has not moved, in the 17 years she
has lived there, she loved her home, her husband has worked hard on the home, they have raised
a child there, they have lovely neighbors, and they were there first when it was zoned Low Use
12- 017Z /PDP /FDP
Rezoning /Preliminary & Final Development Plan
Shoppes at Athenry Mary Kelly's Patio
11 A0 f. A..:-l:.. I n —
Dublin Planning and 7oning Commission
July 8,20 10 — Minutes
Page 17 of 37
Commercial. She asked who would have thought that a patio could be added. She begged the
Commission to look at past problems in the center and the current problems. She said they
wanted the neighbors to be proactive, good neighbors, but yet again, on the screen tonight with
the patio proposed, lovely flimsy furniture is shown. Ms. Masri said she did not understand why
the City continues to allow it and then try to divert the residents in a closed door session when it
is not even about the patio for the settlement. She begged the Commission to look at this
proposal tonight and even a small thing like the furniture. She said she would like to have a
good neighbor with the shopping center and it could be a good relationship, but because of all of
their past and continuing current problems, she begged the Council to consider in the
neighborhood's interest, especially those butting up against the center, as they have been very
good long time residents of the City of Dublin and taxpayers.
Stephen Cianca, 5925 Muncie Court said he thought this was not really about Mary Kelley's or
the Hammonds. He said it was about the process. Mr. Cianca said it disturbed him that there are
no built -in protections. He said it appears to be a permanent change, not a conditional use. He
said this proposal is an improvement over what was proposed in the past, and he was willing to
try it out to see how that works as a conditional use, but not as a permanent zoning change that
left the residents no leverage whatsoever. He said he could trust that Mary Kelley's will keep an
eye on things and maintain good relations in terms of how their patrons behave and so forth, but
asked what if they decide they do not want this location any more. He said the residents have no
protections for who comes in next. He said it is about the precedent that is being established.
He reiterated that he was willing to give Mary Kelley's patio a chance to see how it works, but
he was not in favor of it being a permanent zone change.
Mr. Cianca said he also objected to the fact that this is going to be decided behind closed doors
and there is no accountability as to how the Council members individually are voting and why.
He said this is a residential neighborhood and the Shoppes of Athenry are going to have more
limits than someone in Old Dublin or Perimeter Center and they should have understood that
when they came in there, and if they wanted changes, they would have to go through the process.
He said he was concerned that this is short- circuiting the process. Mr. Cianca said those not
living in this area cannot understand what the residents are talking about and it was interesting
that only one person in the immediate area supported this. He reiterated that he was willing to
try this if it was not a permanent zoning change.
Ms. Amorose Groomes invited those who had not signed the list and wanted to speak to come
forward to address the Commission.
Dave Fill, 9353 Pratolino Villa Drive, formerly a Windy Trail Drive resident for 23 years, said
when they built on Windy Trail Drive, they made a conscious choice not to build on Indian Run
Meadows Drive, because they knew there was to be a commercial establishment there. He said
he was a business analyst by profession and he knew what the economy was like. He said if the
Hammonds are struggling as bad as other businesses, he thought from a Dublin perspective, we
should be doing everything possible we can to promote business to provide jobs and try to keep
people here as much as possible. He said when they moved to Tartan West, they moved towards
a commercial development because that was the lifestyle that they chose and Corazon has closed
because of financial problems due to the economy. Mr. Fill said as a result of that, the real estate
in Tartan West is horrible and as a result they have an idle building and people cannot start a new
business. He said if this center goes empty because of businesses being forced out, it is only
12- 017Z /PDP /FDP
Rezoning /Preliminary & Final Developmet t Plan
Shoppes at Athenry Mary Kelly's Patio
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
July 8, 2010 — Minutes
Page 18 of 37
going to get worse. Mr. Fill said he and his wife fully supported this proposal for the reasons he
stated.
Ms. Amorose Groomes reminded the Commissioners that they have been asked to make a
recommendation to City Council based on the things they have heard tonight. She said they
would not be voting on this issue tonight. Ms. Amorose Groomes said Council did not ask for
them to vote, but to listen and give the Commission's recommendations from all the things they
have heard to go forward to them as they proceed through the process. She asked that the
summary be forwarded to Council so that they can do with it what they have the power to do.
She reiterated that the Commission has solely been asked by Council to take public comment,
weigh those issues, and forward the Commission's thoughts onto them. She said the Commission
would forward their thoughts from a summary of things they heard tonight and their previous
experiences.
Todd Zimmerman made comments on the discussion points listed in the Planning Report, the
patio location, patio amenities, and the operational details. He said this was the best patio
location Mary Kelley's had to offer. He said the proposed I I a.m. until 10 p.m. operating hours
were the average hours of other areas. He said no music, amplification, or lighting, were
standard. He said new patio fuu-niture was needed and it would need to be stored off site from
November 1 until April 1. Mr. 'Zimmerman said if the restaurant would discontinue the use of
the space, the proposed fence would have to be removed. He said patio umbrellas make it
difficult to read at night, so they might want to consider if a candle on the table would be
considered lighting before they cut all lighting.
Warren Fishman echoed Mr. Zimmerman's comments. He said the Commission had been asked
explicitly to comment on the patio, not on the legal issues that Mr. McCash brought forward,
which he believed were between the City and the courts. He said he was sure that Dublin's
Assistant Law Director, Jennifer Readler had heard the comments from both sides tonight. Mr.
Fishman said he thought that the patio location was the best they could possibly have. He said
he also thought there was a restaurant there, and he saw no reason not to have the patio in that
location. He said if the court sees fit to do what they do and Mary Kelley's gets a patio, he
thought it was a great location and an amenity of which he would be enthusiastically in favor.
He said both sides had excellent points. Mr. Fishman commented that he thought Mary Kelley's
needed to be separated from the shopping center. He said that Mr. McCash brought up points
about enforcement and he thought the City had to deal with those things because the
Commission did not have any power to deal with those. Mr. Fishman said he was
enthusiastically in favor of the patio location if that is what the powers to be set forth.
Amy Kramb said she realized this was through negotiation and all different types of ideas come
up and whether it starts with the original issue or not, the patio is now on the table during the
settlement. She highly encouraged the City to remember all the other issues too, that have been
brought up tonight such as maintenance, operation, and all the other issues. She said regarding
the patio itself, she highly encouraged it to be a conditional use specifically to Mary Kelley's.
She did not want it to run with the center because it is unknown what would happen with a new
tenant. She highly encouraged the patio to be treated as a conditional use to include all the
general conditions that are always placed on patios. Ms. Kramb said that Mary Kelley's needs to
consider where patrons will stand while waiting for a table. She agreed that the patio furniture
should be the usual black wrought iron, as is usually seen in Dublin. Ms. Kramb suggested that
patio seating be stopped at 9 p.m. to get the patrons out by 10 p.m. She suggested that if the old
12- 0172 /PDP /FDP
Rezoning /Preliminary & Final Development Plan
Shoppes at Athenry Mary Kelly's Patio
7148 Muirfield Drive
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
July 8, 2010 —Minutes
Page 19 of 37
patio space is not going to be used, that the concrete be removed to make a green space with
grass and trees in a park -like setting.
Mr. Fishman expressed concern that the 2,000 - square -foot old patio might become another
building. He said because of the congestion, parking, and closeness to the residential area that it
should be scrutinized highly by the Commission and City Council. He said dedicating the area
to the City as a park would be a great idea.
Kevin Walter qualified his comments by saying they were made as if there were no other issues
on the table and as they would any other patio. He said he agreed that it was appropriate that a
patio be located where it is proposed, but he was concerned about the size of it. He said if this
application came forward normally, the Commission would not see a dual patio situation. Mr.
Walter encouraged City Council to consider eliminating the western patio so that only six tables
were on the eastern edge which would provide for an access door. He said he was concerned
with access through the main door with all the service when entering the restaurant. He said he
thought it would deter from the atmosphere when entering the front of the restaurant. He
encouraged Council to look at just an eastern patio.
Mr. Walter said he was also concerned that the resolution with the existing open area is not
sufficient and he did not think putting a small fence in fiont of it would really answer what they
are trying to get done there. He encouraged the City to look at a more long term position with
the applicant. He said if it is to develop that, he thought the City should do it right now by
enclosing the space and try to move forward with that. He said perhaps that would be a better
option. Mr. Walter said there was not sufficient lighting in the patio area and a solution was
needed. He said he did not find lighting in the center to be sufficient. He said he understood
why the center was dark, given the proximity to the neighborhood, but he thought low lighting
on the tables was appropriate. Mr. Walter noted that there was no consideration for planters on
or around the fence and he thought that was something that the Commission had asked other
patios to have. He said the patio furniture needs to be more consistent with other patios in the
area.
Mr. Walter asked where the smoking area was to be located. He said he thought there would be
an overlapping of uses with people eating, smoking, entering and leaving the building, and
service people. He said requirements placed on patios regarding amplification, music, etc. need
to be included here as the Commission did with the Montgomery Inn. Mr. Walter highly
recommended that the City have this application only reside with the current occupant. He said
it served the City's best interest, that should this applicant vacate the premises, the use would
revert. He said he empathized with the residents over the pickup and delivery times and the
noise that goes on behind the center. He recalled that the last time this case came before the
Commission, they discussed an automated timed gate to go through the back of the facility to try
to reduce that time. He encouraged the City to make that a part of the recommendation as well.
He said that would go a long way to bring the community and this restaurant together again.
Richard Taylor said the patio location was fine. He said it was similar to many other Dublin
patios, but it was not perfect because it was split by the entry. He said he was surprised that the
proposal is to access the kitchen and patio through the front door. He said he thought it would be
a bottleneck. He said he also was surprised not to hear the suggestion that the access come
through the eastern side and the bar area, but he understood the objection to that. Mr. Taylor
said this is probably the best overall solution. He said he understood that the applicant has
12- 0172 /PDP /FDP
Rezoning /Preliminary & Final Development Plan
Shoppes at Athenry Mary Kelly's Patio
II n0 nA....f.0 l rl nrn a
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
July 8, 2010 — Minutes
Page 20 of 37
agreed with Planning to bring the amenities up to match what was seen elsewhere, and that was
fine as to tables and chairs. He said he would not like to see additional overhead lighting, but
perhaps a low light on tables would be appropriate. He noted that the applicant has agreed to
eliminate completely the amplification of music.
Mr. Taylor said the proposed operational hours seemed to be consistent with everything that the
Commission has approved recently in these areas. Mr. 'Taylor commented to City Council
directly that he was in favor of this patio being restricted to the current business exclusively and
that it not go with the center. He said he would like the City to somehow make a part of this
solution a permanent solution to the existing open area between the buildings, and not leave it in
limbo as it is now.
Ms. Amorose Groomes thanked everyone for their comments. She said it was always good when
she felt there was a lot of unity. She said she had not heard anyone contradict what someone else
had said. She said it seemed that there was general consensus that it is appropriate that there be a
patio here. She said that she thought Mr. Walter's comments were worth some weight of
eliminating the western portion and maybe doing something with the eastern portion that would
Possibly provide service doors through the restaurant, and exploring those kinds of options. Ms.
Amorose Groomes said she visited Mary Kelley's many times before she was on the
Commission, and had always looked at the area next to it and wondered why there was not a
patio there because she would have liked to sit outside. She said this certainly is a compromise.
Ms. Amorose Groomes said she would like to see this use tied with the current occupant or
business, Mary Kelley's, to help protect the neighbors from things that could happen that may or
may not benefit them. She said she believed it was important to help Dublin's corporate citizens
and residential citizens in any way possible. Ms. Amorose Groomes agreed that all amplification
issues should go along with the standard that the Commission has done, particularly in sensitive
areas much like that of Montgomery Inn. She said she also was in favor of requiring a gate to be
installed to do all that can be done to help the residents with the regulation of that. She
was very much in support of the presence of a patio at this restaurant. said she
Ms. Amorose Groomes concluded and said these were the thoughts that the Commission would
like to pass forward to City Council. She requested that the audio tape of this case be sent
forward to City Council and not just the minutes because she believed much gets lost when they
communicate via minutes. [Verbatim transcript is available.] Ms. Amorose Groomes thanked
the residents and audience for attending and speaking at this meeting.
Ms. Amorose Groomes called a short break before continuing the meeting.
3. Ri rside PCD, Subare B and BI
ery Square Shoppi 68,50 — 71 Hospital Drive
g Center 6315 — 6 5 Perimeter Drive
10- 0012 /PDP /FDP/ /Reni with Prelimin Development Play'
al Developm t Plan /Conditional V
Chris Amorose Groo es introduced this ap ication regarding a Planned Unit Deve pment
or 28/Distr* 42 Gres currently local in Subareas B
District f an B 1 of the Riversi Planned
Commerc She said the propo 1 was intended to fa ' itate the future devel ment of an
outparcel, truction of a fu station for the gro ry store as a condi ' nal use, and
accommoe intersection d access improveme s. She said the appli tion consists of
12 -017Z /PDP /FDP
Rezoning /Preliminary & Final Development Plan
Shoppes at Athenry Mary Kelly's Patio
71AS2 MuirfiolA nr6,..
f +
11 I)t III 11
land Use and
Long Range Planning
5800 Shier -Rings Road
Dublin Ohio 430161236
Phone 614 410.4600
Fox. 6 4 410.4747
Web Site. www dublin.oh us
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
RECORD OF ACTION
October 11, 2007
The Planning and Zoning Commission took the Following action at this meeting
1• Shoppes at Athenry Outparcel
07- 029AFDP 7090 Muirfield Drive
Amended Final Development Plan
Proposal: A 2 ,400- square -foot commercial building for the Shoppes at
Athenry within the Indian Run Meadows Planned District, located
on the east side of Muirfield Drive, approximately 250 feet north
of the intersection with Tara Hill Drive.
Request: Review and approval of an amended final development plan under
the Planned District provisions of Code Section 153.050.
Applicant: Stephen Andrews, Andrews Architects.
Planning Contact: Abby Scott, Planner.
Contact Information: (614) 410 -4654, ascott @dublin.oh.us
MOTION: To deny this Amended Final Development Plan because it meets none of the ten
review criteria set torth in Section 153.055 (B), specifically the proposal does not provide for
pedestrian and vehicular safety, is not integrated or sensitive to the characteristics of surrounding
sites, and is not properly maintained in accordance with Code and development text
requirements.
VOTE: 6 0.
RESULT: This Amcnded Final Development Plan was denied.
STAFF CERTIFICATION
OIL
_
Abby Sc
Planner
12- 017Z /PDP /FDP
Rezoning /Preliminary & Final Development Plan
Shoppes at Athenry -- Mary Kelly's Patio
7148 Muirfield Drive
Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes October 11, 2007
Page 2 of 14
Mr. Gerber suggested t a meeting on July 3r may be problematic fo umerous reasons.
Mr. Gunden said a new Code had een sent tribut d to
the Code avail d e ex online. He
for those o needed them. He s the Code dts
clan that the online Code rsion lags the hard co
Administrative Re t
Z were y Council, Architectu Review Board, or B rd of Zoning Appeal ports
nced the rder of the cases to heard would be Cas , 1, and 3 . [The
ord f the advertised age
7090 Muirfield Drive
1, Shoppes at Athenry Outparcel Amended Final Development Plan
07- 029AFDP
Rick Gerber swore in those who intended to testify in regards to this case.
Abby Scott gave a short presentation to highlight chf ogee mmercial building writhtassociat this
amended final development plan for a 2,400 square
site improvements, located within the Indian Run Meadows Planned District. She said this case
was tabled at the June 7, 2007 Commission meeting s raised by the commission at could t the
to reflect comments from that meeting. Ms. Scott s aid Conner
June meeting included the building location, dumpster location, and parking and vehicular
circulation.
Ms. Scott presented a slide of the revised site plan which showed the proposed development in
the southwest corner of the property. She said the building location remains unchanged, but the
size of the building is reduced to allow for a greater setback from the internal drive. She said the
revised plans indicate the dumpster is located outside of the required 25 -foot building setback.
Ms. Scott said because of the new location of the dumpster, one of the parking spaces previously
shown was eliminated. She said that the shopping center still meets the parking requirements,
however, the Commission had expressed concerns regarding parking and requested more project which
information. She said the Shoppes at Athenry is included Planning is ge ally av Table
studies parking needs in the City. She said the study indicates that parking
throughout the day.
Ms. Scott said at the last meeting, the applicant proposed installing vehicle barrier gates behind
normal
the shopping center to prevent service vehicles frorevsed accessing this
She also said changes ges
operating hours and they are included as part of this p lan.
include a sidewalk connection from the proposed building
said the revised landscape plan
entrances from the east side of the building to the north side.
ing
met Code. She presented a slide of revised elevations. MsScott said h a hip proposed w with
would be similar to those in the existing shopping cent it incorporates
cross gables.
12- 0172 /PDP /FDP
Rezoning /Preliminary & Final Developmer
Shoppes at Athenry Mary Kelly s Patio
7148 Muirfield Drive
Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes —October 11, 2007
Page 3 of 14
Ms. Scott said in Planning's opinion, the proposal complies with the amended final development
plan criteria set forth in the Zoning Code and the existing development standards within the
planned district. She said Planning is recommending approval with no conditions.
Farid Masri, 7061 Cavalry Court, said at the June Commission meeting, he expressed that he was
not opposed to this building, however he was concerned with the type of potential uses and also
about existing operational problems. He said that he has since changed his mind because for the
past four months nothing was done to correct any existing problems with the parking and
deliveries until about two weeks ago. He said that it was the same pattern seen over the years
whenever the patio came before the Commission. Mr. Masri said that showed the effort by the
management company to please the Commission, but not a sincere effort to solve the problems.
Mr. Masri said his second concern was still the type of uses that could be in the building. He
said the uses could add to the intensity, traffic, parking, smell, and noise from deliveries. Mr.
Masri said several years ago, Tim Kelley agreed that Marco's Pizza should not be there because
only full service restaurants are allowed in the facility. He said now there is a second pizza
place.
Mr. Masri said he hoped that the gates are implemented, but did not believe the gates would
solve the tenant and employee parking problems. He noted that the parking report does not show
the parking in the lot after 4 p.m. and oftentimes, the parking lot at 6 or 7 p.m. on Thursday,
Friday, and Saturday nights is overflowing.
Todd Zimmerman commented that fast food is not a permitted use in the development text but he
considers the two pizza places to be fast food. He said even on a Wednesday evening, the
parking lot was pretty full. Mr. Zimmerman said the parking lot is now at capacity.
Warren Fishman asked if the uses of the proposed building were known. Bill Andrews, Andrews
Architects, the applicant said there were coffee shop type users interested, but he could not
definitively promise what kind of user there will be.
Mr. Gerber noted the traffic and parking studies were completed during the day until about 4
p.m. He asked if Planning had visited the site at 7 p.m. or on a weekend to assess the parking
situation. Mr. Gerber wondered if in an area filled with retail, restaurants, wine shops, and dry
cleaners with drop-offs and pick ups before or after work, the study could capture those activities
accurately. Steve Langworthy clarified that the purpose of the traffic study was to study parking
patterns, not parking numbers. He said the study is looking at where people park in relation to
individual uses and then the utilization of parking at different times of day. He said the applicant
will have to address the concern of pedestrian and vehicular traffic flow.
Mr. Andrews said he has never noted a stress on parking at the Shoppes of Athenry, even in its
busiest moments, and there is always a parking space. He said this was a neighborhood
convenience center, in some respects supported by neighbors walking or biking to the center. He
said he thought part of the parking study was to determine what some of the parking trends are.
Mr. Gerber said some of that might be true, but he thought that it is part of the Commission's
task and part of the Code criteria to ensure that there is safety with respect to vehicles and
pedestrians. He said if there is a full lot already and another use is added, then he has to look at
12- 017Z /PDP /FDP
Rezoning /Preliminary & Final Development P an
Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes —October 11, 2007
Page 4 of 14
the Code and ask the question, does this fit and not add to a problem that he already perceived
present.
Mr. Gerber said part of the review criteria is to make certain that a proposal conforms to the
surrounding area, that it is safe, and that it does not create such an intense use that it puts things
askew. He said as he read through this report and heard testimony tonight, he still concluded that
the criteria is not sufficient or the burden has not been met with respect to the intensity of use.
He said he did not see enough calming of those uses to say it was a safe place to put this because
of vehicles and pedestrians. He said there has been a lot of trouble in that area with respect to
odors and noises at night inconveniencing the neighbors, and he saw nothing tonight that will
help that situation. Mr. Gerber said it was only going to compound those problems.
Mr. Andrews said some of the neighbors' concerns about deliveries at odd hours will be
addressed. He said the gates are proposed to drop at 7 p.m. and not lift until 7 a.m. which will
prohibit deliveries during that time. He indicated on the site plan the existing "S -curve entry" to
the north , the existing bikeway connector, and the drive aisle within the parking lot. He said this
is identical to the proposal to the south. He said they modified the proposed plan by putting the
entrances on the north side of the building, so pedestrians step out similar to the other side and
then cross the drive aisle into the parking. Mr. Andrews said the existing situation had been
there for nine years or more and has been demonstrated as a safe opportunity for people to park
vehicles to access the shops, not unlike what is being proposed this evening.
Kevin Walter said his concern was that the alignment of the building in the southwest corner is
too close to the drive aisle. He said he thought there was a safety issue with respect to how close
the building is to that drive aisle. He said speed happens as vehicles drive in and work through
the center. Mr. Walter reiterated that he was concerned about the vehicular, pedestrian, and bike
flow in the center. He recalled that at the last meeting, the applicant was encouraged to look at a
different location for this building where the conflicts could be eliminated. He said the
northwest corner might be a better location for this building. Mr. Walter said he thought the
proposed location was too tight and unsafe.
Mr. Fishman commented that Mary Kelley's parking lot is often very full. He said it is
dangerous to navigate through the shopping center on a bike. He said the two pizza shops have
exacerbated the problem because people park illegally in front of the shops to pick up pizzas. He
agreed with Mr. Walter that it was too dense. Mr. Fishman said he confirmed the neighbors'
complaints by visiting the area behind the Shoppes, and every time he looked at the area, there
were crates and pallets that are not scenic for the neighbors. He repeated that this shopping
center was too dense for another building. Mr. Fishman said it was a concern not knowing the
use for the building.
Mr. McCash the building sticks out in front of all the existing buildings. He suggested lining it
up with UDF to the south, infilling next to Mary Kelley's, or adding to the end of the existing
building, with lost parking added in the front. He said the proposed building seems out of place
at this location in context to the rest of the development.
Mr. Andrews said in their first review with Planning several months ago, they actually had the
building back in line with UDF with parking in the front, but when the layout was done, it
created a dangerous situation unlike UDF, which is a self - contained corner with access into the
12- 017Z /PDP /FDP
Rezoning /Preliminary & Final Development Plan
Shoppes at Athenry Mary Kelly's Patio
Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes —October 11, 2007
Page 5 of 14
site. He said they all agreed that it was unsafe for vehicles backing out. He said that the
proposed building is 400 square feet smaller and the corner is opened up more than on the
previous plan. Mr. Andrews said that this center had operated for years with the drive and
parking with everyone walking across the drive aisle, and it has worked to date.
Mr. McCash suggested that to help some of the safety concerns, the drive aisle could be
continued back to the parking at the existing office building and loop around, then the front drive
could become green space to help the impact of it being so close to that space. He said that
would help some of the safety concerns. Mr. Andrews responded that was considered, but they
wanted to keep the familiar entrance.
Mr. Gerber said turning in the current entrance is a challenge now, and this proposal adds to it.
He said it may somehow technically fit with the requirements, but it does not fit overall with the
spirit and intent of the Code. He said it was not going to work, and he was not inclined to help
redesign this plan.
Chris Amorose Groomes said she agreed that this was the wrong location.
Mr. Walter said plan approval criteria 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 listed in the Code have not been met by
this proposal. Specifically, the reasons include pedestrian and vehicular safety and sensitivity to
the characteristics of the site.
Mr. McCash said that because of continued issues with deliveries and trash pick -up outside of
approved hours, the parking area being improperly maintained, and the continued parking behind
the center, this project does not conform with the applicable zoning text and the Code
requirements. He said he does not see how it meets criteria 1, 3, 9, and 10 because of the non-
conformities.
Motion and Vote
Mr. Walter made a on to deny this Ame d Final Development an because it meets n e
of the ten revie criteria set forth in S ron 153.055 (B), spe ' cally the proposal snot
provide for estrian and vehicular ety, is not integrated sensitive to the chPopment , stic of
surroun g sites, and is not pro rly maintained in acco ance with Code and text
req ' ements.
Mr. Gerber secon the motion to deny, a vote was as foll s: Mr. Fishman, yes- S.
Arose Gro es, yes; Mr. McCas es; Mr. Zimmerm es; Mr. Gerber, yes nd Mr.
Walter, ye . (Disapproved 6 — 0.)
2 5800 — 5904 Post ad 5800, 5868, 6, 5904 Post Road
07 -0942 Rezon'
Rick Gerber not at there were no con ' tons or comments to ade on this case.
Motiun Vote
To Zimmerman made t motion to approve t ' ezoning/Prelimina evelopment Plan
ecause it is in keepin ith previous intentio o expand Coffman P under the guidance o
the Coffman Park aster Plan and is com able with the develr ent pattern in the are r.
Gerber second the motion, and the a was as follows: M ` 12- 0172 /PDP /FDP
Rezoning /Preliminary & Final Development Plan
Shoppes at Athenry — Mary Kelly's Patio
71AR BAnirfiolrl rlr6,-
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
71 RECORD OF ACTION
JUNE 7, 2007
I rN or nuIM\
.and Use and
Long Range Planning
5800 Shier Rings Road
Dubin Ohio 43016 -1236
Phone 614 410.4600
Fox 614 410 4741
Web Sue www dublin oh us
The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action at this meeting:
5. Shoppes At Athenry Outparcel 7090 Muirfield Drive
07- 029AFDP Amended Final Development Plan
Proposal: A 2,800- square -foot commercial building for the Shoppes at
Athenry within the Indian Run Meadows Planned District, located
on the east side of Muirfield Drive, approximately 600 feet north
of the intersection with Tara Hill Drive.
Request: Review and approval of an amended final development plan under
the Planned District provisions of Code Section 153.050.
Applicant: Stephen Andrews, Andrews Architects.
Planning Contacts: Jennifer M. Rauch, AICP, Planner and Abby Scott, Planner.
MOTION: To table this Amended Final Development Plan at the request of the applicant.
VOTE: 3-2.
RESULT: This Amended Final Development Plan was tabled.
STAFF CERTIFICATION
4 n - r Rauch, AICP
Planner
12- 017Z /PDP /FDP
Rezoning /Preliminary & Final Development Plan
Shoppes at Athenry Mary Kelly's Patio
7148 Muirfield Drive
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
June 7, 2007 — Meeting Minutes
Page 8 of 14
Motion and Vote
Mr. Gerber made motion to reco end to City Co cil that the mod' ation to Code ction
153.021(A) Per utted Use be ad ted. Mr. Zimm an seconded tl motion. The vo was as
follows: Ms Amorose Groo ,yes; Mr. Walt , yes; Mr. McCa , yes; Mr. Zi rman, yes;
and Mr. G ber, yes. (Appr ed 5 — 0.)
4. /inner I -270 R -2 esidential Are ezoning
07 -0402
Tammy Noble- ading presente his area rezoni She said this roject is part o the area
rezoning pro ss to rezone pro rties that either tain a township ning classificati , or do not
have suff ent documentat' n to justify the ublin zoning c sification. Sh said the four
parcels ' cluded in this a lication were s ented into an plication based n their land use
spec' cally, two -fami dwellings. M Noble- Flading id Planning su orts this rezon' g
pr ess because it p vides consisten egulatory stand s for all the pr erties within th ity
oundaries and eserves indivi I property rig to the extent ossible by i�� fyi ng
equivalent zon' g classifications r the properties
/in lading said thi rezoning will pr ide appropriate ning classificat' ns for the City
Of d Plannin J elieves it will event any typt Code Enforce nt issues arisin
stering to nshi/ase
fications. She aid the primary rinciple behind s
hat it ill allo uses to be iaintained and t impose any t e of
ops nt as far ular rez mg applicatio She said PI ing is
recommendin approval for d o he fact that the elieve it is con 'tent with
p olicies wi in the City bf D
Chris pher Cline, the otney representi t/nhe who owns two oubles at 50 an
74 arion Street (P cels 161 and 1 saat approval o the R -2 Distn Is
r commended to ' y Counc/sa e no orezoning.
Phil Mone ny, attorney, lient's e t wi and asked if t verbiage
requiring 0 feet of frontage ect heraid i would not.
Mot' n and Vote
/immerman Gerber made the ot ion to recom nd approval of t 's Area Rezonin o City Council. r. secon d. The vote w as follows: Mr. alter, yes; Ms. morose Groom
yes;
Mr. McCash, yes r. Zimmer n , yes; and Mr. Ge er, yes. (Appro d 6 — 0.)
Mr. Gerber g6ed a short recess at 7:31 p.m.
5. Shoppes at Athenry Outpareel - 7090 Muirlield Drive
07- 029AFDP - Amended Final Development Plan
Mr. Gerber swore in those who intended to testify in regards to this case. He said this was a
proposal for a 2,800- square -foot commercial building within the Indian Run Meadows PUD,
located on the east side of Mtsirfseld Drive, approximately 600 feet north of the intersection of
Tara Hill Drive.
Jennifer Rauch presented this case and slides. She said the site and all surrounding properties are
zoned PUD, as part of Indian Run Meadows. She said to the north is the Emerald Crossing
12- 017Z /PDP /FDP
Rezoning /Preliminary & Final Development Plan
Shoppes at Athenry Mary Kelly's Patio
71AQ PA .... F.. 1,4 M- -
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
June 7, 2007 — Meeting Minutes
Page 9 of 14
Retirement Community, to the west across Muirfield Drive is St. Patrick's Church and single -
family homes, to the south is United Dairy Farmers (UDF), and to the east are single- family
houses iri Section 5 of Indian Run Meadows. She said the applicant has met with the Indian Run
Meadows neighbors and can speak to the results of this meeting. Ms. Rauch said the proposed
new commercial building is located in the southwest comer of the property. She said the
proposed building entrance and six additional parking spaces are located on the east side. She
said there is no pedestrian access on the western side adjacent to the drive aisle. She said the
building was sited to focus vehicular activities and parking behind the building to reduce
vehicular conflicts with UDF activities. She said a dumpster will be located southeast of the
building, adjacent to the parking spaces and is appropriately screened with an enclosure and
landscaping. Ms. Rauch said the proposal including the number of parking spaces, the dumpster
location and enclosure, and the stonnwater requirements meet the approved development text.
Ms. Rauch said the proposed building will require the replacement of 28 caliper inches of trees.
She said the replacement inches are included with the 16 trees proposed along the western edge
of the property. She said Planning has conditioned that the trees be replaced at 40 feet on center
to allow for proper development. Ms. Rauch said Planning has also conditioned the installation
of a vehicle return adjacent to the dumpster to allow for proper vehicle access to the parking
spaces. She said the proposed elevations are similar to the existing shopping center and they
incorporate a hip roof with two cross gables. She said storefront windows are proposed on the
east and west elevations. Ms. Rauch said the proposed building materials are Hardiplank siding,
a cultured stone water table, and stone accent walls. She said black standing seam awnings are
proposed over the storefront windows to coordinate with the existing shopping center.
Ms. Ranch said the approved text permits one sign per tenant space. She said the applicant is
proposing two 12- square -foot tenant signs. She said the proposed rectangular sign panel will
match the approved sign plan colors, matching the black or green background with white letters
which meets the approved sign plan.
Ms. Rauch said in Planning's opinion, the proposal complies with the amended final
development plan criteria set forth in the Zoning Code and the existing development standards
within the planned district. She said Planning recommends approval with two conditions related
to the vehicle return and replacement of the trees as listed in the Planning Report.
Bill Andrews, the applicant, said they were in agreement with the two conditions as listed in the
staff report. He said they met with the neighbors, who expressed continued frustration with the
maintenance and uses within the retail center. He said they would like to offer a third condition,
to include the addition of two security gates located at the rear of the existing retail center. He
said the gates would be on a timer and restrict traffic to the rear service area after 7 p.m. until 7
a.m.
Farid Masri, 7061 Calvary Court, said he lived directly behind the center. He said for the record,
as stated in the Planning Report, that Mr. Mack did not actually represent the neighborhood. Mr.
Masri said one of the concerns brought up at the meeting regarding this new development was
regarding the rooftop mechanicals and how they will look. He said their major concern was
about what type of uses the new addition will have and the intensity of the use. He said uses that
generated a lot of traffic and odor would be devastating to their neighborhood and he asked for
the Commission's input to limit those uses. Mr. Masri said they would welcome any type of use
that would service the neighborhood and be low intensity. He pointed out that the amount of
traffic using the Tara Hill entry /exit was already high.
12- 0172 /PDP /FDP
Rezoning /Preliminary Mary l Development
Patio
Plat
Shoppes at Athenry
-» nst mi irfield Drive
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
June 7, 2007 — Meeting Minutes
Page 10 of 14
Mr. Masri said there have been many neighborhood grievances and problems with the existing
center such as parking in the rear and delivery trucks at 2 or 5 a.m. He said the gates will help.
He said the landscaping in front of the center was mowed and pruned weekly. He said in the
rear, it was mowed every third or fourth time and the trees were never pruned and root balls were
exposed. He provided photos of the rear area. Mr. Masri said when Mr. Andrews presented this
center in 1997 to the Commission, it was to be a four -sided design. He requested that a
condition be added to ensure that all the landscaping for the retail center is held to the same
maintenance standard. He said it was important for the tenants of the shopping center to realize
they are in the middle of a residential neighborhood and should be treated as such.
Mr. Walter referred to Mr. Masri's issue regarding the intensity of use of this property. He said
two corners on the northwest side of the building are 2 foot 7 inches and 2 foot 9 inches from the
drive aisle which he did not see as safe. He said the building was too tight and the use is too
intense
Mr. Gerber said this was a highly utilized center and every time he drove by the parking lot was
full and maneuverability is already difficult. Mr. Gerber said he agreed that the center was
already an intense use. He said he did not agree with Planning's conclusion in the report that
maneuverability is safe through that area. He said it would exasperate problems that already
exist. Mr. Zimmerman agreed.
Mr. McCash agreed that the size of the proposed building in this area was too close to the
existing curbs. He said there is not enough room for landscaping or setbacks. He said the trash
dumpster does not comply with the development text requirement states that all enclosures will
be of the same architectural materials as the main structures, and will conform to all building
setback requirements. Ms. Rauch said within the commercial section of the approved text
included in the packet, non - residential uses must be setback 15 feet for parking, loading and
services. Ms. Ranch said Planning considered the dumpster a service area. Mr. McCash said he
considered a dumpster a stricture and that the text states that the building setback is 25 feet. Mr.
Gerber noted it does not fit.
Mr. McCash said he appreciated the attempt to try to restrict traffic behind the center, but he
expected the gates would not survive a weekend.
Mr. Gerber said the Commission was continually made aware of the ongoing problems with the
retail center. He recalled the last time the Commission looked at the center Mr. Masri presented
several police reports of complaints, and he wondered if the reports had continued. Mr.
Gunderman said a number of complaints to the Police are regarding late night activities, but
unfortunately by the time the Police arrive no one is there. He said to some extent, over time
some of the residents have quit trying to contact the Police. Mr. McCash recalled a month ago
the Law Director's office received a complaint, because the neighbors were frustrated about the
continued problems and nothing was done about this complaint.
Mr. Walter asked where service deliveries would take place. Ms. Rauch said the applicant or
owner would coordinate the deliveries with the hours of operation. Mr. Walter said this could
cause a mismatch of service deliveries with the adjacent office building use.
Ms. Amorose agreed with the other Commissioners and she saw nothing proposed that she
would felt good about approving. Mr. Zimmerman concurred.
12- 0172 /PDP /FDP
Rezoning /Preliminary & Final Development Plan
Shoppes at Athenry Mary Kelly's Patio
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
June 7, 2007 — Meeting Minutes
Page 11 of 14
Mr. McCash asked about the ice chest in the photographs. He said there had been continual
problems with zoning issues, compliance with delivery times in this center, and with the quality
of the landscaping maintenance. He said additional development on this piece of property would
add to the problems.
Mr. Gerber said he had heard the other Commissioners that it is a intense use and it does not fit
in their opinion. He said he would make a motion to disapprove the case unless the applicant
wanted to do something different.
Mr. Andrews clarified that Planning believed this application, with two conditions met the
zoning requirements and the Commission was suggesting it was too intense of a use. Mr. Gerber
said Planning was well - qualified and capable, but as part of the process, they make
recommendations to the Commission. He said it was ultimately within the Commission's prevue
to review the plans, facts, the surrounding neighborhood, and make the decision to approve or
disapprove a case.
Mr. McCash said there was not enough parking in the center. He asked how this proposal met
Parking Code requirements with the available uses which could include a restaurant in every
space. Ms. Rauch said the parking is provided at one space per 150 square feet of retail space,
which meets the approved development text. Mr. McCash pointed out that the text was
developed in 1986. He said with the demonstrated actual use, there is not enough parking. Ms.
Rauch said it was the minimum standard required. Mr. McCash clarified that a sidewalk
connects from site to the bike path along Avery- MuirFeld Drive.
Ms. Amorose Groomes said the building makes this corner a blind corner and unsafe visually
because it is located too. close to the curb in this active pedestrian area.
Mr. McCash suggested reconfiguring the building to the middle of the center and replacing the
parking where the building was proposed to be located so that the traffic pattern works better.
Mr. Gerber pointed out that there would still be a parking issue with this intense type of use.
Mr. Andrews said the center encourages residents to walk or bicycle to the Shoppes. He
confirmed that the intensity seemed to be focused on that corner. Mr. McCash said there were a
lot of safety and visibility issues and the proposed building is too close. Mr. Gerber said he
thought that was the major concern of the Commissioners.
discouraging that the location did not work Mr. Andrews said it was
from the neighborhood. . He said it was chosen because it was the furthest
Mr. Gerber asked Mr. Andrews if he wanted to request a tabling in order to work with staff
consistent with the thoughts the Commission had raised.
Mr. Gerber said there might be a better chance if Mr. Andrews came up with an idea on the
northwestern portion of the site and there would be safer circulation for pedestrian and vehicular
traffic as Mr. McCash suggested. However, if it is a restaurant use, there are going to be
challenges with the location of mechanicals and odors.
Motion and Vote
Mr. Andrews requested a tabling of the application. Mr. Gerber made a motion to table this
Amended Final Development Plan as requested by the applicant. Mr. Zimmerman seconded.
12- 017Z /PDP /FDP
Rezoning /Preliminary & Final Development Plan
Shoppes at Athenry Mary Kelly's Patio
Dublin Planning and Zoning Conunission
June 7, 2007 — Meeting Minutes
Page 12 of 14
The vote was as follows: Mr. McCash, yes; Ms. Amorose Groomes, no; Mr. Walter, yes; Mr.
Zimmerman, yes; and Mr. Gerber, no. (Tabled 3 — 2.)
6. Shamrock Cro!pfing South Right -O ay previously kn n as Stoneridge e
07- 031FDP/ - Final Develop t Plan /Final Plat
Mr. Gerber i icated this case co d be taken as a Co ent item. He swo in the applicant's
represent• ' e, Ed Miller, EM T, who in turn a ed to the three co itions as listed in
staff r ort:
That the applica pay the tree replac ent fee at the time uilding permit iss ce;
2) That the ap ' ant remove the si and rear setbacks wn on the propos plat for Lot 2
prior to ' y Council submitta - nd tI/
3) That y minor technical a ' stment to the platmade prior to City ouncil submittal.
iVflon and Vote r
r. Gerber made X tion to approv this Final Develo ent Plan/Final Pl because it
complies with t ina l development n criteria and the fi plat criteria set fo in the Dublin
Zoning Cod nd the existing de opment standards ' hin the area with a three conditions
listed A e. Mr. Zimmerma econded the motion he vote was as fo ws: Mr. Walter, y ,
Ms. orose Groomes, ye , r. Zimmerman, y , and Mr. Gerber, y (Approved 4 — 0.
7. Banker Dri Right -of -Way - Ba er Drive
07 -032F /FP - Final Develo ent Plan /FinXonsent
Mr. Ger r indicated this case ould be taken as itemXHeore he applicar repre ntative, Ed Miller, E &T, who in turn eed to the two ted in th t
r° rt:
2) That any gxfnor technical adjuolent to the plat be it de pnor to c ity (o ticil submittal.
Motio nd Vote
Mr erber made a ion to approve t ' Final Developme Plan/Final Plat ause it
rnplies with the fi development plan teria and the final at criteria set forth ' the Dublin
Zoning Code an the existing devel ment standards wi n the area with th o conditions
listed above. r. Zimmerman sec ded the motion. T vote was as follo : Mr. Walter, yes;
Ms. Arno a Groomes, yes; Zimmerman, yes; d Mr. Gerber, yes. pproved 4 — 0.)
Germain Servi Center - Shamroc • oulevard
07- 035FDP/ D - Final Develo ent Plan /Corrido evelopment Dist ' t Review
Mr. Gerber firmed that only emotion was nee on this case. He wore in those who
in testify in regards this case. He ex ined that he had ed this case from e
C opse agenda because concerns about t s, balloons, sire rs, etc. but he di not a
pr entation on this m er. Mr. Hale indi ed that he had bro t this item to the plicant's
ttention and they uld be agreeable to condition prohibiti such items.
Ms. Amoro Groomes said she d not appreciate t creativity of impo ' g a landscape �.
buildingAevation that is no consistent with thexandscape drawing with only the foo on to
12- 0172 /PDP /FDP
Rezoning /Preliminary & Final Development Plan
Shoppes at Athenry Mary Kelly's Patio
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
RECORD OF ACTION
JANUARY 19, 2006
CITY OF DUBLIN.
Land Use and
tong Range Planahtg
5800 Sher -Wr Road
Oablin, Ohio 43016.1236
Mae. 614.410.4600
fox: 614.410-4141
With Site: vm.duhlio oh.%
The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action at this meeting:
4. Conditional Use — 05 -154CU — Athenry Shoppes — Mary Kelley's Patio — 7142
Muirfield Drive
Location: 4.91 acres located on the east side of Avery- Muirfield Drive, approximately
650 feet north of Tara Hill Drive.
Existing Zoning: PUD, Planned Unit Development District (Indian Run Meadow plan).
Request: Review and approval of an outdoor dining patio under the provisions of
Section 153.027.
Proposed Use: A 2,000 - square -foot outdoor dining patio for an existing restaurant.
Applicant: Athenry Shoppes Limited, 250 East Broad Street, Columbus, Ohio 43215;
represented by Michael L. Close, 300 Spruce Street, First Floor, Columbus, Ohio 43215.
Staff Contact: Claudia Husak, Planner.
Contact Information: (614) 410- 4675/Email: chusak @dublin.oh.us.
MOTION: To deny this Conditional Use application because the applicant was unable to
meet and satisfy the Conditional Use review criteria 1, 3, 4, 7, and 9 and noting that no sound
mitigation evidence was presented.
VOTE: 6-1.
RESULT: This conditional use application was denied.
STAFF CERTIFICATION
Claudia Husak, Planner
Land Use and Long Range Planning
12- 017Z /PDP /FDP
Rezoning /Preliminary & Final Development Plan
Shoppes at Athenry Mary Kelly s Patio
7148 Muirfield Drive
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Meeting Minutes — January 19, 2006
Page 8 of 23
Mr ugger said they are ling to work with s on a redesign withi he parameters of
scussion and request to table this applicati .
Z
Ms. Boring said ' the text that service urts and loading do c shall be screened fro all sides
by landscapi mounding or walls, internal pedestrian kways shall provid a necessary
access po' from parking areas the stores and bicy racks will be provi in front of the
stores he continut,rla tt text states all co rcial vehicles associ d with businesses
op ting within the e ust be parked withi fully screened loadi zone and she dcesn'
e that it is happenin n this plan. Mr. G erman said the area ' consistent with wha as
approved with the al develCeba'si en pla or the project and ' presents some diff ty in
screening the ar effectively. esign has done a go job here in that the 1 ding area
has a wall a landscaping which to comply with th spirit of the text, bu ey need to
maintain cess to the rear area.
2an oring th the screen' is
is said she is b ed here because so ng is established " the anything. Mr. derman said from a aff perspective th ign with but it doesn'
doing what was int ded in the text. He id that there is an o ing for service vet and
they have move ld storage area into a building, which h eliminated the scree ' g issues.
He said the rte plan was approv for both of the buildings with the ame design
arrangern , this could have pr ided additional scre ng using a wall and ey could use a
gate ,which would also t the screening requ" ment.
S. Boring said scree " g needs to be expl d. Mr. Gunderman d they will give i/se
attention. Mr. Dug r said he doesn't kno a relevance to this lication.
Mr. Gerber s ' he thinks they are 'ng into an interpre n of text versus wha ' on the plan
and he d like staff to review s with the applicant d get back to the Co fission.
Mr Gerber made a mo " n to table the ame ed final developme plan/cond/,yes;
plication to investi options for the pati ocation and screenin . Ms. Reiss se
motion and the vot were as follows: M ones, yes; Mr. Sane tz, yes; Mr. Mes Mr. Zimmerm es; Ms. Boring, yes; s. Reiss, yes; and Mr. erber, yes. (Tabled
4. Conditional Use — 05 -154CU — Athenry Shoppes — Mary Kelley's Patio — 7142 Muirfield
Drive
Mr. Gerber swore in those who intended to testify in regards to this case.
Claudia Husak presented this case. She said this was tabled at the request of the applicant at the
November 10, 2005 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. This case is a request for a
conditional use of an existing 2,000 square foot patio as an outdoor seating area servicing Mary
Kelley's Restaurant. The existing patio was approved as part of the final development plan for
the shopping center and is located between two tenant spaces. The patio has a three -foot
stonewall separating the space from the front pedestrian walkway and an 8 -foot wall screening
the patio from the service drive to the rear.
12- 017Z /PDP /FDP
Rezoning /Preliminary & Final Development Plan
Shoppes at Athenry Mary Kelly , Patio
7148 Muirfield Drive
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Meeting Minutes — January 19, 2006
Page 9 of 23
Ms. Husak said conditional uses may have greater impact on the surrounding area and staff has
received correspondence from adjacent property owners objecting to the patio use. The residents
expect noises and smoke from patrons using the patio and that in general the Shoppes of Athenry
are perceived not to be good neighbors.
She said that staff believes that the Shoppes of Athenry and the Mary Kelley's Restaurant are not
solely to blame for improper conduct and has thoroughly reviewed this application as well as the
communication from the neighbors and finds that while the residents contend that certain review
criteria of approval are not met, the applicant could potentially make modification to the site that
could counteract any perceived conflict for this patio use. Given the information that staff has
reviewed staff cannot recommend approval at this time. Ms. Husak added that staff has listed
potential conditions if the Commission decides to grant the conditional use.
Mike Close, representing the applicant, said that Mary Kelley's would not be applying for a
conditional use for the patio if it were not for the passing of the no- smoking ordinance. This has
been a very successful restaurant in this town for a number of years and that viability is in
danger. Mr. Close said this is an existing patio that was on the drawings when originally
approved.
Mr. Close said that the applicant agrees with the nine potential conditions listed by staff and
suggested that they are granted a one year conditional use to observe their conduct and return to
the Commission to renew. The applicant has explored soundproofing and have gotten several
options. Mr. Close said the second issue he questioned is the access gates behind the building to
restrict garbage truck access before 7 a.m. The applicant does not control that and he does not
know what the management company wants to do with that.
Mr. Close said that he has seen the contracts with the trash company and they are not supposed
to be there until 7 am. as per the City's noise. If the problem is really access prior to 7 a.m.,
then he suggests that the proper response be to call the police department and have them issue a
citation. The staff report does indicate that it is not Mary Kelley's that creates the noise and
mess that comes from this area. His observation is that most of problem has been not with Mary
Kelley's, but with a couple of the other tenants. It would be unfortunate if Mary Kelley's were
not able to use what has always been an intended use for that patio simply because there are
other people in this project that don't necessarily play by the rules.
Mr. Close said he thinks in the last year and a half since Oakwood Management has had Holly
Ellis running the program that the complaints have been much less. There is a staff report and he
reminded the Commissioners that it does not recommend disapproval. Mr. Close said that when
they attempted to use the patio before without getting a conditional use, the matter was resolved
by an agreed entry by the City and the owners of the project saying that they will go back for a
conditional use before they use the patio.
Mr. Close said that this is a valid conditional use for this project, Mary Kelley's meets all the
requirements that they are required to be met. Mary Kelley's needs to expand this business
during the summer hours in order to remain viable here in Dublin. Thev have been a eood
12- 017Z /PDP /FDP
Rezoning /Preliminary & Final Development Plan
Shoppes at Athenry Mary Kelly's Patio
7148 Muirfield Drive
Publin Planning and Zoning Commission
Meeting Minutes — January 19, 2006
Page 10 of 23
Dublin resident and the fact that the City has decided to pass a smoking ban, should not mean
that they need to go out of existence.
Mr. Close said if they look at the requirements of the Code for a conditional use, in every regard
they meet those requirements. He said if the Commission disagrees he would request that they
be honest for their reasons for voting no and state those reasons, because that would be subject to
a legal determination. He said this is appropriate for conditional use and there is nothing that
Mary Kelley's has done or plans to do that is going to violate any of the reasons that which they
should be allowed to grant this as a conditional use.
Kristy Kuhn, representing the Indian Run Meadows Civic Association, said there are a number
of people from the community that would like to speak as well. She said they are here to object
to the conditional use being approved for Mary Kelley's. They have not met any of the review
criteria they are required to meet by Code. There are 10 requirements and they should meet all
of the requirements in order to be approved by this Commission. There were specific questions
about the patio with the original hearing and it was indicated at that time that the owner of the
pub had no plans for the patio to be used for any outdoor seating. The Planning Commission
expressed concern as to whether or not the patio would be used at a future time. Because it was
stated that there was not going to be any intended use of the patio for outdoor seating, only to
address fire code issues was the patio approved originally. There are a number of other
establishments that have been granted conditional uses and the staff report has a chart describing
them. Specifically, BW3s was granted a conditional use, and they are located 2,200 feet away
from the closest residences, and there are several other uses between the residences and the patio.
In this case, there is a patio within 50 feet of an adjacent property. A lot of the statements say it
is 140 feet to the closest residence, which is to the actual building. It is 50 feet to the property
line, and by law they cannot interfere with adjacent property or the quiet enjoyment of that entire
property.
Ms. Kuhn said this is primarily a single family dwelling area, not only do the people that live in
the community right behind the patio are having issues, people on the street across Tara Hill and
Muirfield Drive also have heard noise. There was a special event last summer where they were
allowed to put up a tent and this was a prime example of whether or not Mary Kelley's was able
to control their customers and employees, which did not occur.
Mr. Gerber asked if there were police reports.
Ms. Kuhn said it was a situation where the residents called Council members and they were told
it was okay.
Mr. Gerber said the Commission is in quasi-judicial mode here and they have to support
testimony with facts.
Ms. Kuhn said she is explaining why it is that the residents do not want the patio and that they
have had past experiences that have not worked. She said the neighbors have made police
reports that they have been awoken in the middle of the night, they have found beer bottles in
12- 017Z /PDP /FDP
Rezoning /Preliminary & Final Development Plan
Shoppes at Athenry Mary Kelly s Patio
7148 Muirfield Drive
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Meeting Minutes — January 19, 2006
Page 11 of 23
their neighborhood and yards. They have children that live in the neighborhoods and these
children are being woken up in the middle of the night as well.
Mr. Gerber asked if the noise was coming specifically from this applicant.
Ms. Kuhn said it is coming from both the shopping center and Mary Kelley's. When Mary
Kelley's had the tent, the neighbors all across the entire area were hearing sounds and they had
issues with that. Ms. Kuhn passed around pictures of the closest neighbors.
Ms. Kuhn said that review criteria 4, 6, and 9 of the conditional use would be affected.
Neighbors will testify that their property values will be devaluated if this is approved. Neighbors
will be moving if this is approved, because they believe they can no longer live in this residence.
They have lived here since before the shopping center was built and it is important to understand
that these people have been long time residents of Dublin and they bought these properties
expecting to live in a quiet nice neighborhood and that has not happened here.
Ms. Kuhn said review criteria 5 regarding services, there have been past issues with
performance, whether or not Code violations can be addressed, and the neighbors have had
mixed results with contacting the police. It is very frustrating situation, the neighbors are to the
point to where they can not call anymore because nothing gets done and they are chasing their
tails.
Ms. Kuhn said regarding review criteria 7, the proposed hours of operation of this facility are
going to be past the bedtime hours of school aged children. They are concerned that in the
summertime when the hours will be extended they will impact the neighbors negatively. They
are current issues with noise and traffic and they believe the past performance is not going to be
any indication as to how things will go forward in the future. They have noticed that patrons
have been served drinks on the patio at this point while there is smoking occurring because of the
smoking band. They are concerned that the smoking and the noise is louder as the night goes on
and that customers are not going to be respectful to the neighbors.
Ms. Kuhn said this is primarily a residential area and it will impede the residential growth in the
community if the citizens in this neighborhood believe that they cannot continue to live in their
homes and be treated as if they would want their neighbors to treat them. She asked that the
Commission please consider the impact of this application on the neighbors and look at the
conditional use review criteria and vote against the approval of the conditional use.
Kimberly O'Brien, 6097 Tara Hill Drive, said she served on the Tara Hill task force with the
primary consideration of lowering the volume of traffic and the speed in their neighborhood.
Allowing the outdoor patio is going to increase the volume of traffic in the neighborhood. The
City of Dublin respected the fact that they have too many cars already and allowing the patio
goes against trying to calm traffic on that street. There are intoxicated people that leave Mary
Kelley's, she has seen them while walking her dog, and she has seen them run curbs. They are
putting more people into her neighborhood that are potentially intoxicated. She doesn't
appreciate that and doesn't appreciate allowing more of this to happen. The outdoor patio use is
going to be next to the bar and is going to be more accessible to drink and party, that is the
12- 017Z /PDP /FDP
Rezoning /Preliminary & Final Development Plan
Shoppes at Athenry Mary Kelly s Patio
7148 Muirfield Drive
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Meeting Minutes — January 19, 2006
Page 12 of 23
purpose, which is fine except that is in her neighborhood and it is not fair, unless they want to get
rid of the one entrance. She can hear Friday night football, the band over a mile from her house,
she doesn't want to hear somebody partying across the street and hear the music. If this is a
neighborhood restaurant serving her neighborhood then they need to be good neighbors and
opening the patio is not in the best interest of the neighborhood.
Nancy Cowan, resident of Hawks Nest, said she is a regular patron of Mary Kelley's two to three
times a week. She finds it to be a very good family restaurant and has no problem with adding
seating on the patio and it would add to their experience. They are not alcoholics and do not
drive over curbs and are very kind to neighbors and they used to live in the neighborhood and
supports passage of this conditional use application.
Eric Hintchel, 5525 Brand Road, said he is a patron of Mary Kelley's since they have opened.
He said that the arguments tend to be about a particular week when the tent is up and that would
be the Memorial Tournament, and if they are going to judge an establishment on that, then they
need to shut down football Friday night and the Irish Festival too. It is not about what takes
place at a special event and they know there will be issues at a special event. It is what will
normally take place. Everybody here is a customer at Mary Kelley's, they are not there to fight
and they doubt that the patronage will change just because of the patio. He said it would
increase business but it won't double the business. The beer bottles are not from Mary Kelley's
customers, they are not leaving with beer in their hands and do not walk home and dump in the
lawns of the neighbors. The point is that they have been here for seven years and have been a
good corporate citizen. There have been issues but only during special isolated events. He
would bet that all the sound coming from the patio would be drowned out by air conditioning
units coming from the subdivision. He respects the people that live there and what they want and
respects taking a look at it and he respects someone wanting to expand their business and is
looking to do it by making sure they are done by 10:00 p.m. and no music will be playing and by
trying to work with the community and they deserve the opportunity to prove it.
Rick Fitch, 7096 Wichita Court, said his property does not adjoin this property, but unfortunately
the side of his house where his bedroom is does point directly to the back of Mary Kelley's, so in
the evening when the workers come out to take the garbage out, they are talking and it sounds
like they are in his room. There is a blank wall and it was at nighttime and it was about 50
decimals and at night it raises to about 80 decimals and each 10 decimals is a doubling of noise.
In a quiet evening and sitting outside on your deck you hear the birds and with people just
conversing and you can hear them. They enjoy going outside and sitting on a patio at a
restaurant and unfortunately when in a neighborhood you can hear all noises. Noise is sound that
is unwanted and when they are taking the garbage out at 11:00 p.m. he can hear them in his
bedroom then it is noise. The community plan talks about the quality of life and they want to
maintain what they currently have.
Jim Hamilton, 6934 Lamen Drive, said he frequents Mary Kelley's and said has lived in this
neighborhood for nine years and he considers it a plus whenever they put in the Athenry
shopping center. It is minutes from his house, he can walk there, and he can take his family
there. He frequents Mary Kelley's with his family and it is a very respectful establishment and
everyone will know that it is family oriented and on Friday and Saturday nights there are
12- 017Z /PDP /FDP
Rezoning /Preliminary & Final Development Plan
Shoppes at Athenry Mary Kelly s Patio
7148 Muirfield Drive
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Meeting Minutes — January 19, 2006
Page 13 of 23
children, grandparents and mothers and fathers with babies in arms in that establishment and he
brings many visitors from overseas to this restaurant and he has business meetings there. He said
that the owners are upstanding people and good citizens and have served the community well
and they should be given a shot to see how it goes. He would be the first person to say if they
have not done well then it should not be renewed.
Steve Pagreera, 6135 Abbots Fair Drive, said he has lived here 22 years and goes to Mary
Kelley's eight to ten times a month for lunch and dinner and always finds that it is a pleasant
place to eat. Nice food and friendly atmosphere, quiet in terms of a restaurant and by no means a
bar. He considers it a family spot and the owners are respectable people and would respect all of
their wishes and be good neighbors. He does not see this to be a large problem. Most of the
time he is in there they are rolling the place up by 9 p.m. and he doesn't see this becoming a big
outdoor Bogey Inn type atmosphere.
Farid Masri, 7061 Cavalry Court, said he lives behind the shopping center and is a previous
Homeowners Association president and vice president of Indian Run Meadows. He said he has
followed this case from day one. He is very familiar with the history and on his way to the
hearing he picked up a partial list of complaints regarding the shopping center and Mary Kelley's
from the Police Department. He has witness employees come from work and get into their cars
and drink beer and throw the bottles in his yard and it happens daily during the summer time.
There is trash pick up two or three times a week at 3, 4 or 5 in the morning. He has had police
officers standing in his hallway at 4:00 in the morning talking about it after calling them. He
said the police stopped responding. They cannot catch the drivers, when they do they have to
give them a warning and the next time there is a different driver and they give them a warning
and then there is a different driver. He said he knows that the applicants are trying to separate
themselves from the shopping center and the applicant is Athenry Limited, not Mary Kelley's.
The owners of Athenry Limited are part owners of Mary Kelley's and vice - versa. He respects
the owners of Mary Kelley's, but they cannot control their employees. There have been a
number of instances where they have opened the patio for special events and they have had a
taste of what will happen if they give them a one -year conditional use. In 1986 when this
property was rezoned the residents stated that they do not want any outdoor services. During the
zoning hearings in 1986 those concerns where expressed and Mr. Hale responded that the
commercial and office uses where of community scale to serve the surrounding properties and
not the entire village. In 1997, during the final development hearing Mr. Andrews representing
the development said that a restaurant pub or small operation to service the neighborhood would
be here. He thinks it is apparent that the neighborhood does not want it. They do not object to
the restaurant but to the use of the patio. Mr. Andrews denied that the patio was for a patio use
during the development meetings and he said it was just a separation of space. In 2001, there
was a memo from the legal department talking about 174 violations mostly from Mary Kelley's
and there was over 30,000 dollars of fines. There also were two court cases. They were asked to
compromise on the screening and in exchange things would get better. He said things did get
better temporarily and then they got worst again. For years they have been going through this
and there has not been any resolution. There have been eight years worth of trail periods and
still there is not any peace and quiet. He said that it takes one incident to ruin your whole
evening or your whole weekend or whole week. He gets awoken several times at night because
12- 0172 /PDP /FDP
Rezoning /Preliminary & Final Development Plan
Shoppes at Athenry Mary Kelly's Patio
7148 Muirfield Drive
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Meeting Minutes — January 19, 2006
Page 14 of 23
of the conduct of shopping center employees. He urged the Commission to deny this application
and help them preserve at least a little bit peace and quiet and let them enjoy their property.
Pat Kelley, representing Athenry Limited, said they are hearing a lot of problems about the
shopping center and they have not had one phone call about these problems in the last year or
year and a half. He said their management company has a sign up in front of the patio with their
phone number and they have not had one call in the past year and a half from any residents.
They take a lot of pride in Athenry, and they are hearing stories that it was not intended to be a
patio and he was involved from day one and worked with Bill Andrews, this was always
designed to be a patio next to a restaurant and they knew Mary Kelley's was going to be there
and they would not have built the center if Mary Kelley's was not going to be there. He said that
he hopes the Commission looks at the facts and not the emotional issues that are being thrown
out and he understands conflict between commercial and residential, but the facts are that this
property was zoned commercial when the residents bought their homes. He said they strive to be
a good neighbor and they will continue to do so. He said that there were issues in the past with
the prior manager and he heard regularly from the Code Enforcement Supervisor. He has not
heard anything from them in over a year and half and the current manager does a great job
managing this center.
Mr. Masri said he had spoken and issued correspondence to Holly Ellis and has spoken to Tim
Kelley and the resident just stopped calling because they do not get anywhere calling the police,
Code Enforcement or the management company. He said some things have improved since Ms.
Ellis took over but the things that disturb them on a week-by-week basis have never been
corrected.
Ms. Boring said it has been reported in the minutes and several places that Mr. Andrews said that
the pub owner have no plans for any outdoor seating and Mr. Kelley said it has always been that
way then why hasn't that been part of the plan. Mr. Kelley said it has always been planned as a
patio when the restaurant opened and there was no intention to open up seating out there, but that
is not to say that it was never intended that there would be seating. It was always envisioned as a
nice outdoor spot for the center and the fact that it is right next to the restaurant is because they
always knew that the restaurant was going to be there if they didn't have the restaurant that patio
would not be there if this was all traditional retail shops. He said his firm has developed in the
City of Dublin since 1980 and they developed the subdivisions surrounding here, Shannon
Village, Hemmingway Village, Earlington Park and Dublin Shier and they take pride in the
neighborhoods that they have developed. Secondly, they are located in downtown Columbus
and are local people for the last 50 years and are very accessible people and their phone numbers
are in the book and they try to be good neighbors and he thinks they can work this out with the
neighbors.
Jan Kurkowski, a resident, said she has been going to Mary Kelley's for about 5 years and it is a
very nice establishment, it is a family oriented with good food, and she has never seen any kind
of obnoxious behavior. She said she lives behind a church and she is kind of confused when
people talk about the garbage trucks and whatever noise they hear. The garbage is controlled by
the City. Her house is directly behind St. Bridget's Catholic Church and garbage trucks come
three times a week and they usually come after 8 a.m. She is a nurse and she works nights and
12- 0172 /PDP /FDP
Rezoning /Preliminary & Final Development Plan
Shoppes at Athenry — Mary Kelly's Patio
7148 Muirfield Drive
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Meeting Minutes — January 19, 2006
Page 15 of 23
all throughout the year the children have recess and they make noise and there is noise
everywhere in the community and unless you live out in the country here is always going to be
some kind of noise in the community that you live in. She said Mary Kelley's is a very good
establishment and considered it as a home away from home.
Hank Martinson, owner of a building at 200 West Bridge Street, said he has had his business
here for the last 25 years. He said he has gone to Mary Kelley's now since the time they opened
and he thinks it is important to distinguish between a bar and a restaurant. By no sense can you
call Mary Kelley's a bar as it is primarily a family restaurant. The smoking band did not help
many other small businesses and they will continue to survive and this will make survival in
Dublin possible. When somebody says that the owners cannot control the people that work in
their establishment then that is false. He knows most of the people that work there and they are
good people and he does know that the owners will stand up to any problems and they would be
glad to talk to any of the residents to try and make this a better place. He said for the better good
of the community of Dublin is why they want to use this patio.
John Jung, 5997 Tara Hill Drive, said he is the president of Indian Run Meadows Homeowners
Association. He said they held a special meeting of the association to discuss the proposed
expansion of Mary Kelley's restaurant on December 14, 2005 and, as a result of that meeting, a
vote was taken and he is here to speak in opposition to the proposed expansion of the restaurant
to include the patio. There are many issues that the homeowners have with this application and
he concurred that the owners have consistently failed to abide by Dublin Ordinances. He
recounted the citations issued by the City of Dublin to the Shoppes of Athenry in the past and the
developments inability to rectify the situation. Again, it is apparent that attention to detail is not
important to the Shoppes of Athenry. He City ordinances clearly state that the loading and
unloading of commercial waste containers may take place only between 7 a.m. and 9 p.m. if the
container is located within 500 feet of a residential area. There are other issues that have
occurred during special use of the patio which are well outside the acceptable practices and he
believes that Farid alluded to a few of those. During their meeting with Michael Close at Mary
Kelley's to discuss this application, Mary Kelley's was allowing at that time allowing patrons to
use the patio, although they were not seated they were allowed outside with drinks and
congregated and milled around. If they disregard the law and allow this to happen now, what
will happen when it becomes legal and they have the patio.
Joe Sullivan, a resident of the community, said he is in support of Mary Kelley's. He echoed
earlier statements that Mary Kelley's he restaurant family
pen fast ld often ta out of town guests
there and he has never observed
Gayle Mowery- Reynolds said she lives directly behind Shoppes of Athenry and is the closest
homeowner to the shopping center and she has lived there 16 and half years. She stated that one
of the reasons they came to Dublin was the quality of life and while they were aware of the
possible shopping center location they did not expect the kind of conduct that has been described
by previous residents. She agreed with Mr. Masri that they have been involved in this issue for
the past eight years. She stated that the residents who spoke in support of this application do not
live as close to Mary Kelley's as she and the other residents do. Ms. Mowery- Reynolds stated
that he her property is 50 feet from that patio and in her bedroom she can hear shopping center
12- 017Z /PDP /FDP
Rezoning /Preliminary & Final Development Plan
Shoppes at Athenry Mary Kelly's Patio
7148 Muirfield Drive
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Meeting Minutes — January 19, 2006
Page 16 of 23
employees creating noise behind the building. She said the Civic Association unanimously voted
against it and pointed out that the Commission has received a petition signed by all the people
that live there. She was concerned about the value of her property if this application is granted
as the existing noise is already too much. She also stated that a solution to counteract the
smoking ban cannot be that people are allowed to use a patio 50 feet from her roe She
stated that she has been in close contact with Code Enforcement but that they can only do so
much and she asked the Commission to protect the residents and their quality of life. She said
this has a negative impact and will continue to have a negative impact and it will have an
extreme negative impact if they approve this patio.
Ben Cusumano, 7082 Cavalry Court, said he lives directly behind Mary Kelley's and while he
knew that the site was zoned commercial, he did not expect a bar and gill would locate there. He
agreed with the previous comments regarding the diminished quality of life should this use be
allowed. He also agreed with remarks regarding excessive noise, the proximity of the patio to
nearby residential properties, and the limitations of contacting Code Enforcement or the Police.
John Cansearo, 7219 Sundown Court, agreed with the previous comments about the noise
created by the shopping center. He disagreed with Mr. Close that the provisions with respect to
the review criteria, specifically criteria 7 and 9. He said that criteria 7 specifically states that
not
proposed use will not involve uses or activities, processes, materials, equipment,
of operations including and limited to hours of operations that will be detrimental to any persons
property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke fumes
odor or other characteristics permitted within the zoning district, this is not his requirements, this
is the requirements that Dublin has imposed. Criteria 9 states that the proposed use will not be
detrimental to property values in the immediate vicinity. He stated that it would detrimentally
impact property values not only to the people on Calvary Court, but people on Sundown Court
across Muirfield Drive. He asked that they comply with the recommendations of staff and deny
this conditional use application.
Mr. Close said that the final zoning text was approved stating that a separate conditional use as
applicable for all outdoor seating and drive in facilities is required. He said in 1997 Mr. Kelley
did not agree and it ended up in a lawsuit. He said that the police reports Mr. Masri handed in
are reports he himself had made and included things like snowball fights and snow plowing.
Ms. Readler said there has been a lot of discussion regarding the procedural issues. She said this
all did begin in 1999 and the issue was what type of approval did this outdoor seating require, it
is true that in the text for the development states that the uses set forth in a certain section are
prohibited, now that section refers to drive in and outdoor service facilities. She said when they
first reviewed this case, they started researching what exactly a drive in or outdoor service
facility was and it was the position of the applicant at the time that this was not prohibited that it
was a permitted use and of course when they did the investigation it appeared to them that the
language drive in or outdoor service facility applied more to a drive thru restaurant or to an
automotive type use. They did not believe that this phrase includes outdoor patio seating and as
a result it was their interpretation that outdoor seating was not prohibited by the text for the
shopping center development. She said that they did believe that the outdoor seating became a
conditional use through addition of condition 12 of the Final Development Plan approval that
12- 017Z /PDP /FDP
Rezoning /Preliminary & Final Development Plan
Shoppes at Athenry — Mary Kelly's Patio
7148 Muirfield Drive
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Meeting Minutes —January 19, 2006
Page 17 of 23
required that conditional use approval for all outdoor seating be obtained. She said they
continued to have disagreements over the interpretation, so the City of Dublin did file a lawsuit
with the environmental court in Franklin County, and as a result of that we came to an agreed
entry signed by a judge that said that the parties agreed that the user would come to the Planning
and Zoning Commission for conditional use approval or rezoning. She said procedurally the
case is properly before the Commission now and it has been reviewed by a court so they are
bound to follow that and it is up to the Commission to review the conditional use criteria and
determine whether or not it is allowable, but procedurally it is the Law Director's position that it
is properly before the Commission.
Mr. Gerber said that conditional uses are sometimes very difficult cases. He said that he was out
on the patio on Saturday and he stood out there and he found there was an echo and his thought
was that adding a lot more people to this space late at night that it could get very noisy. He
would like to hear how the applicant intends to abate the noise.
Mr. Close said some noises will be abated by the bodies on the patio. They have talked to the
Kinetics Noise Control and they have proposed installing on the east wall a 35 inch cantilevered
wall that will provide 92- square feet of sound absorbing surface.
Mr. Gerber said they have had noise issues here in the last year with other applications and staff
an opportunity to review these plans and they have had field trips to listen to these things and
they do not have that before them right now.
Mr. Close said one of the things that bothers him about this case is although they have been
willing to talk from the beginning, and if they look at the nine potential conditions staff has
added, he thinks the staff would be the first to tell them that many of those items have been his
suggestion. He asked how far does he have to go in the face of people that are going to say that
there is nothing you can do that will satisfy us. He said he has no problem with giving the
Kinetic report to staff and he has talked about this to staff, but the applicant is not going to
continue to make concessions without any movement on the other side.
Mr. Gerber said the criteria that he is looking at with a conditional use are whether this is
something that is permissible and if there are problems with it, with respect to noise, then they
have to look at litigation. He said it is always ideal that they get 100 percent agreement from
everybody and that rarely happens. He said the review criteria are very clear, they have to look
toward mitigation of noise and things of that nature and that is the applicant's burden, although it
would be ideal to have all the residents support that, he does not think they have heard that
mitigation argument either. He said hopefully as this process continues maybe they will listen to
that, maybe through some testing they can see what is going on.
Mr. Close said no matter what he does in the way of the noise abatement, the people that are
protesting this tonight are not going to be satisfied. He said that he is more than willing to give
their report to staff and he is willing to come back another night if that is what it takes to get this
done.
12.017Z /PDP /FDP
Rezoning /Preliminary & Final Development Plan
Shoppes at Athenry — Mary Kelly's Patio
7148 Mu'rfield Drve
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Meeting Minutes — January 19, 2006
Page 18 of 23
Mr. Gerber said if the applicant wants to have a chance and to have full and proper review he
thinks they need to see what mitigation they are going to offer and he thinks that needs to
happen, that is not to say at the same time that will be a slam dunk with the Commission, but it is
part of the criteria and he thinks they need to have that part here to build the record.
Mr. Close said he has no trouble to provide that information, he understands to provide that
information does not guarantee a 7 — 0 vote.
Mr. Gerber said that from listening to the residents it is loud and clear that they have a noise
problem and they have to address that and they have to also give this applicant opportunity to
mitigate.
Mr. Close said what they have heard about noise tonight is not the kind of noise they are going to
hear from a patio.
Mr. Gerber said he understands the distinction between what is going between a trash bin and
what would possibly happen on the premises of this application and what he is focusing on is the
application not for the entire area but for this patio concrete slab out there and he is concerned
about that noise and what mitigation can the applicant offer the Commission so that they can
make a thorough finding and recommendation.
Mr. Close said he is willing to submit that mitigation and table the case.
Mr. Gerber said they are going to have to go out there and listen to it themselves and invite every
resident to hear as well as part of the continuing record of this case.
Mr. Close asked that they table for a month.
Mr. Saneholtz said he would like to deal with this case tonight and as much as the applicant can
bring this additional evidence forward about the mitigation of the noise, he does not believe that
is the only issue that they have yet to overcome. He said he does not believe that they meet a
number of the review criteria for a conditional use, regardless of whether or not they can mitigate
their noise problem. He said the center did not go in with a patio in mind that was clear from the
minutes that he read from the 1997 final development plan. He quoted from the June 5, 1997
minutes, that Mr. Lecklider felt it was appropriate to review the outdoor seating and drive thru
at this time to get feedback even though it was not being considered now, Mr. Andrews said
presently the pub owner had no plans for any outdoor seating. He said he has heard testimony
tonight that contradicts that, he heard testimony from the applicant that contradicts that statement
and this is the only written evidence that he has to go by, the rest in his mind is hearsay, so he
would submit to the group that the written evidence states that no outdoor seating was ever
contemplated at the time of zoning and that is the only time it has been brought to this group for
a vote. He said on the other occasions it has been tabled and much like this evening it has been
tabled time and time again. He said by looking at the review criteria he finds that the proposed
use is not harmonious with and accordance with the general or any specific objectives or
appropriateness of the Zoning Code and/or the Community Plan.
12- 0172 /PDP /FDP
Rezoning /Preliminary & Fi , al Development Plan
Shoppes at Athenry — Mary Kelly's Patio
7148 Muirfield Drive
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Meeting Minutes — January 19, 2006
Page 19 of 23
Mr. Gerber asked Mr. Saneholtz to explain the facts that brought him to that conclusion.
Mr. Saneholtz said that when looking at the minutes for the final development plan specifically
page 17, outdoor use seating was never anticipated for this site, if it had been at that time he is
not certain that the center would have been approved as presently designed.
Mr. Close asked if that includes the additional condition 12 that was included by the Commission
which said that a separate conditional use approval is applicable for all outdoor seating or drive
in facilities.
Mr. Saneholtz said that he is referring to page 19 that says that Mr. Andrews said the center
limited hours and services and that they have no potential user and are not discussing outdoor
seating at this time. He said this is the first time the Commission has had an opportunity to vote
on whether or not outdoor seating should be permitted here and he believes that he has heard
plenty of evidence tonight to believe that the applicant regardless of mitigation of the noise can
not meet review criteria number one, three, four, seven or nine. He stated that he does not
believe that under item three that the use of outdoor seating and/or outdoor patio that the
proposed use would be harmonious in anyway with the existing or intended character of the
general vicinity and he believes the general vicinity includes these personal residences. He said
he believes that it is quite clear by the facts that this particular use is within 50 feet of someone's
yard and the peaceful use of his backyard is just as important to him as a homeowner and as to
whether or not he can live inside his house with the windows shut tight with the TV blaring and
possibly not hear the people on that patio. He said the use would not be hazardous or have
negative impact on the existing or future surrounding uses, it is not going to help matters for the
existing or future surrounding uses to have outdoor patio use here. The proposed use will not be
detrimental to the property values in the immediate vicinity, he said he does not know what
evidence that they could possibly produce other than personal opinion and after the fact evidence
to support number nine, but he would not buy a home whose back yard is 50 feet from an active
patio off of a restaurant and it has been the practice of the Commission that they are incredibly
sensitive to the neighborhoods of which new outdoor patio seating is being introduced and in fact
there is one case that had already been passed over in the Kroger Center and they made an issue
of which side their outdoor seating was positioned and that particular patio that was approved is
light years away well beyond 50 feet of one of the parameters of this case. He said within 50
feet is inappropriate to allow outdoor seating at this facility regardless of resident opinion and he
said Mary Kelley's is a wonderful establishment, with wonderful food and great family dining
facility and he is not opposed to that, he is not trying to encourage them to fail as a business and
not objecting in any way their continued success. He said the smoking ordinance if that is what
prompted this application he is sorry for all the restaurant whose businesses are being hurt by
that ordinance, but that is not a fact in this case tonight in his opinion.
Ms. Reiss said she agrees with Mr. Saneholtz on the review criteria the particular numbers sited
and she sees the same issues with the residential uses are not harmonious with this outdoor
seating area because outdoor dining services will lead to additional litter which indoor service
would not and she does not believe the level of noise could be abated to a level no higher than
the level of noise that they are dealing with today.
12- 017Z /PDP /FDP
Rezoning /Preliminary & Final Development Plan
Shoppes at Athenry Mary Kelly's Patio
7148 Muirfield Drive
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Meeting Minutes — January 19, 2006
Page 20 of 23
Mr. Gerber said he is trying to build a record because if this is appealed he wants to make sure
this is successful and if not the court rules otherwise, they have lost all control over the
development of it and he thinks it is important the close proximity, noise and he believes they
have to offer an opportunity to the applicant to mitigate.
Ms. Readier said she thinks that the conditional use criteria speak to the adverse impacts, so one
of the things they are looking at is what kind of impact this use is going to have on nearby
facilities and if there is a way they can mitigate that impact, then they can consider, whether or
not to table to get additional evidence.
Mr. Gerber said he is not suggesting that they table it, he is asking that they have been told by the
law department for a number of years that it is their responsibility to examine the mitigation
aspect as well.
Ms. Readier said the hearing is here tonight and whether or not to table this is up to the
Commission.
Mr. Saneholtz asked whether parking sufficient to absorb the additional seating capacity.
Ms. Husak confirmed parking is sufficient.
Ms. Boring said that it is sad that this has come to this because she believes that former
Commissioners tried to tackle this many times and she will congratulate the residents in the fact
that they did ask for an attorney to summarize everything for them. She believes that Ms. Kuhn
has addressed the negative impact and why this should not be approved. She said it is up to the
Commission to decide what is harmonious for this particular area and neighborhood and she
believes that Mary Kelley's will still be a family place. She said it is up to the Commission to
decide what is harmonious in a general practices with the Zoning Code and the Community Plan
and they know that best and they can tell that what is harmonious is not a lot of outdoor activity
within 50 feet property line. She said the development standards at this time would not allow
that kind of activity for a new neighborhood. She is no longer interested in tabling this. She
finds there are several reasons and Ms. Kuhn will help the Commissioners out and re- iterate the
reasons that the review criteria are not met.
Mr. Saneholtz said even if the applicant can mitigate the noise, there are litter issues, smoking
within 50 feet of someone's property with a large number of individuals and he could not in
good conscience support that kind of activity.
Ms. Kuhn said she agrees with the comments of the Commission and that Mary Kelley's is a
very fine establishment and she understands the people that spoke in favor of the restaurant.
However, when she looks at the proximity of this use to the homes it seems too close to the
homes and it would impact the ability to enjoy their homes and property. She said it is a great
use but in the wrong location and she does not see how this use can comply with the review
criteria considering it does not meet the first three objectives. She said a lot of the neighborhood
comments reflected not just customer behavior but the employee behavior of different employees
12- 0172 /PDP /FDP
Rezoning /Preliminary & Final Development P an
Shoppes at Athenry — Mary elly s Patio
7148 Muirfield Drive
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Meeting Minutes — January 19, 2006
Page 21 of 23
of the different businesses, she thinks they could do better when she hears some of the behavior
that was described.
Mr. Messenio said the applicants p�opVelldas use does not criteria nine. o He said he would l of the
components of one through would not be able to
support it.
Mr. Zimmerman said he thinks the applicant has a right in his opinion to table this and go back
and for them to hear mitigation on the sound as what they have asked for and that is what he
feels is on the table.
Mr. Close said he withdraws his request to table and requests the Commission to take their vote
when they are ready.
Mr. Gerber said they have heard from the residents and it is very clear that there are problems in
this area and in listening to the fellow Commi he hasish n o
'f they have fulfilled their duty as
application at this time and
Commission members as it relates to the mitigation issue.
Ms. Readier said the applicant filed a complete application and it is before the Commission
today, they have discussed mitigation but there is nothing to hat effect submitted in the
application and it is up to Commissioners whether or not to table. Ms. Readier said they believe
that the application was properly before them and they can consider it tonight.
Mr. Saneholtz said when he looks at criteria number one, harmonious goes well beyond noise
and has to do with the type activity that is occurring near a residence and the ability to control
the patron activities and behavior that close to a personal residence and it also has to do with the
increased traffic, they have heard that evidence tonight and the resident expressed concern about
the increasing the amount of traffic within their neighborhood due to the additional use being
granted to this applicant if they granted it and they mentioned that there is alcohol involved in
this particular establishment and he believes that it is a very valid point to note that when you
take capacity in a drinking establishment and you increase the number of potential patrons that
does in fact has detrimental impact upon the immediate neighborhood and that is why there is
liquor license permits and everyone needs to go through that process and it is hard for any of
them to know how serious that impact would have on the immediate neighborhood, he just
knows without doubt that the impact would be negative.
Ms. Jones agreed with Mr. Saneholtz that the use of the patio in close proximity of the residences
would not be harmonious. This Commission has not previously approved such a use within just
50 feet of a residential property and the comments that were heard tonight did nothing to
convince her that allowing this patio to operate would be good for the community. She believes
that we can do better than this.
Ms. Kuhn said it is not harmonious by having the patio there and the neighbors have all spoken
and there have been people that testified who believe that the place would be a good positive
atmosphere, but the residents she is representing in close proximity to the proposed patio do not
12- 017Z /PDP /FDP
Rezoning /Preliminary & Final Development P an
Shoppes at Athenry — Mary Kelly's Patio
7148 Muirfield Drive
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Meeting Minutes — January 19, 2006
Page 22 of 23
believe this use is harmonious or positive for the impact on the community both directly to the
neighbors right behind, but also across the street and over in the neighborhood across Muirfield
Drive. The impact on the property value may not be known today but clearly if people feel they
need to sell their homes if this is approved that is going to cause an impact.
Mr. Saneholtz made a motion to deny of this conditional use 05 -154CU The Shoppes Athenry —
Mary Kelley's Patio — 7142 Muirfield Drive based on the applicant inability to meet and satisfy
the Commissions review criteria number 1, 3, 4, 7, and 9 at a minimum and perhaps review
criteria 2, 5 and 6, with no mitigation evidence presented.
Ms. Jones seconded the motion and the votes were as follows; Ms. Reiss, yes; Ms. Boring, yes;
Mr. Messineo, yes; Mr. Zimmerman, no; Mr. Gerber, yes; Ms. Jones, yes; and Mr. Saneholtz,
yes. (Disapproved 6 —1.)
GerbZealleda rece/9:25 Geromm the sign lette and the developme code/revision
task forcey t the first the next meeting if there are any
question Mr.
Z Grbr ee said asp f the Director's R rt XntHe 'tten a letter to .Bird
ng for a motion reconsider the Rite g applibefore the Commi >ton at the
last meeting. He 'd by their rules th' ould be thhat and also the iteria is that
there are new cts or fa ctors that lead to a dife said also eir rules require
that the re est comes from so ody who voted in . /
M ong sa id she wan awmill Road to to differently on the lin side and exte y lit
s is the dir on in sign packs and was wonder' if that was appr ate for
Sawmill Road b use of the other s' a of the Road. S said the Rite R sign looks
appropriate as ' now exists and she ould like to have S 161 change and ge line with the
community t she is fearful if y don't look at the ' sue, they may get externally lit sign
that is o oxious.
. Gerber asked if s based he ad re
at cons de as in sp al ci
entire street as op ed to the s
~- AneMemnitinn_ s . Readier said it up t0 the commiss'
Mr. Ger said he remem
Compession. The first on
a)d the second was re ei
nnlicant to return f eonsi
� only two motions
uggested new facts
to different mat als
Ms. Boring s*6 s '6 the new facts are
She felt Sawmill Road sho
them a the way into Dubli
Oe"reconsiderations
i the commission
and they did r on
Ong his time on the
't support the requ
er and asked f the
x hey do not have regulations over ext ally lit signs.
be looked at differ tly from SR 161, be se SR 161 takes
12- 017Z /PDP /FDP
Rezoning /Preliminary & Final Development Plan
shoppes at Athenry - Mary Kelly s Patio
7148 Muirfield Drive
CITY OF DUBLIN_
Land Use and
Long Range Planning
5800 Shier-Rings Road
Dublin, We 43016.1236
Phone: 614410.4600
Fox: 614.410.4141
Web Site: www.dubfin.oh.us
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
RECORD OF ACTION
NOVEMBER 10, 2005
The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action at this meeting:
3. Conditional Use — 05 -154CU — The Shoppes of Athenry — Mary Kelley's Patio — 7142
Muirfiield Drive
Location: 4.91 acres located on the east side of Avery- Muirfield Drive, approximately
650 feet north of Tara Hill Drive.
Existing Zoning: PUD, Planned Unit Development District (Indian Run Meadow plan).
Request: Review and approval of an outdoor dining patio under the provisions of
Section 153.027.
Proposed Use: A 2,000 - square -foot outdoor dining patio for an existing restaurant.
Applicant: Athenry Shoppes Limited, 250 East Broad Street, Columbus, Ohio 43215;
represented by Michael L. Close, 300 Spruce Street, First Floor, Columbus, Ohio 43215.
Staff Contact: Claudia Husak, Planner.
Contact Information: (614) 4104675/Email: chusak@dublin.oh.us.
MOTION: To table this Conditional Use application.
*Michael Close agreed to the tabling.
VOTE: 6-0.
RESULT: This Conditional Use was tabled.
STAFF
Gary OuMerman, Assistant Director
Land Use and Long Range Planning
12- 017Z /PDP /FDP
Rezoning /Preliminary & Final Development Plan
Shoppes at Athenry — Mary Kelly's Patio
7148 Muirfield Drive
Page 1 of 1
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes — November 10, 2005
Page 12 of 23
Ms. eiss asked if the pr e to the south of
ntly vacant.
Mr. Driscoll said' was vacant.
Ms. Reiss oted that they would have to obtain an
new street near J Waronscourt Way was
with that vroveO owner.
M riscoll said he is the perty owner.
Mr. Gerber said he as agreeing with Mr immerman that the eed a tabling to look the
issues discussed d return to the Co ssion quickly. He fel is was part of what talked
about at the ncept Plan, and he strated with it, ho ' g to see a little more this.
Mr. a said they sat down reviewed all the opt' s and thought this w est.
s. Boring asked ab the homeowner's a ciation, and whether ey will be blended i
Ballantrae, or have eir own.
Mr. Driscol aid he thought it woul a part of Ballantrae's meowner's associatio .
Ms. ring asked that it be ected in the propose xt that this develo p t will be merged
i Ballantrae's homeo is association.
Mr. Zimmerman oved that the Comm' ion table this rezon' application to allo the
applicant to ad ss traffic calming wit a adjacent property ers and all relevant ntracts
and agreem is with surrounding p erty owners regardi any screening plans headlight
1e .Jones seconded the m of
Mr. Hale agreed to a tabling.
The vote wa follows: Mr.
Ms. Jone , yes; and Mr. Zimin
M . erber called for a fivestn:
06, yes; Mrs. Boring, ; Ms. Rei
z, yes. (Tabled 5 -1.)
recess.
3. Conditional Use — 05 -154CU — The Shoppes of Athenry — Mary Kelley's Patio -- 7142
Muirfield Drive
Mr. Gunderman said he understood from talking with the applicant and an additional attorney
who contacted him today, that there is a potential that some of the representation by the
neighborhood, and the applicant, would prefer to have this case tabled. He said he was told that
there is a chance that they can negotiate the issues.
12- 017Z /PDP /FDP
Rezoning /Preliminary & Final Development Plan
Shoppes at Athenry — Mary Kelly's Patio
7148 Muirfield Drive
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes — November 10, 2005
Page 13 of 23
Mr. Gerber clarified that the residents are now represented by legal counsel. He indicated that he
had no objection to a tabling if the purpose is to try to work something out. He also wanted
everybody to have a chance to speak.
Mike Close, representing the applicants, indicated that Mr. Gunderman initiated this tabling
when he called last week stating they did not have enough information, and suggesting a tabling
in the Staff Report. Mr. Close said he had no problem with the tabling, and requested a tabling
until the January meeting. He indicated that attorney Kristie Kuhn has informed him that she is
representing some of the neighboring landowners, but not all of them. He said he did not feel he
would be able to satisfy everybody, but it would certainly be productive to frame the issues and
perhaps move toward resolution of the problem. On behalf of his client, he requested the
application be tabled.
Kristie Kuhn, (Britt, Campbell, Nagel & Sproat, LLP), stated she was here on behalf of the
Indian Run Meadows Homeowners' Association. She indicated that there were neighbors
present that live as close as 50 feet to the property line which is Mary Kelley's patio. She had
petitions signed by residents. She. said she discussed with Mr. Close that additional time is
needed to address some of the issues, and he agreed. She said there is a question as to whether a
Conditional Use can even exist at this potential area due to the initial plans that were submitted
for the Indian Run Meadows area.
Mr. Gerber noted for the record, that an agreed judgment entry, settlement and order of dismissal
filed in Franklin County August 18, 2003 had been submitted. He read paragraph 2: That
defendants shall forever enjoin from using the patio unless or until there is an approved
Conditional Use, so it appeared the application was appropriate.
Ms. Kuhn said she supported the tabling.
Mr. Gerber asked if all the residents were being included in the process. He stated he did not
know how many residents Ms. Kuhn represented. He said he wanted to make sure everybody in
the room understood the action and to make sure all parties were represented.
Ms. Kuhn asked if she could submit the petitions at this time.
Two Commissioners spoke saying they received copies of the petitions late today.
Ms. Kuhn indicated that a few additional people had signed copies of the petition.
Mr. Gerber asked her to leave the petitions with the Commission secretary. He said he had been
fully prepared to move forward and take testimony until this new development. He asked if
everybody understood the process and what is going on at this point. He noted that if they were
not going to join with counsel and the homeowner's association, he would encourage them to
leave their name with staff; and encourage both attorneys to get a copy of those individuals'
names and addresses, and keep them involved in this process. He indicated that it is important
that every resident is represented and has a chance to be heard in this process.
2- 017Z /PDP /FDP
Rezoning /Preliminary & Final Development Plan
Shoppes at Athenry — Mary Kel Vs Pat o
7148 Muirfiek. Drive
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes — November 10, 2005
Page 14 of 23
Mr. Gerber moved that this Conditional Use application be tabled.
Mr. Zimmerman seconded the motion.
Mr. Close requested it be scheduled for the January 12 meeting.
After discussion on actual meeting dates in January, Mr. Gerber agreed, and amended his motion
to include "...to January 5, 2006."
Ms. Reiss asked for clarification as to who the residents not a part of this group should leave
their name.
Mr. Gerber again requested that anyone present who is not part o£, or feels will be represented by
the homeowner's association counsel, leave their name with Mr. Gunderman. He said each
lawyer will have a chance to get names, addresses and phone numbers. He said in January, he
did not want to find out there was no meeting held.
Mr. Gunderman suggested instead that the names and addresses did not have to be left with him
tonight. He said he could be contacted by phone at 410 -4682.
Ms. Boring said those interested in the case did not have to be neighborhood residents to attend
meetings.
Mr. Gerber repeated that it is important that every resident is heard on this and if there is some
sort of global settlement or workout, that everybody be included in the process.
Mr. Messineo said he had received a number of letters from the residents.
Mr. Gerber said that if residents want to send letters, they should send them to staff, not
Commissioners' offices.
Mr. Bird suggested the letters be sent to the Planning Department, and he would see that the
Commissioners got a copy.
The vote on the motion to table was as follows: Ms. Reiss, yes; Ms. Jones, yes; Mr. Messineo,
yes; Ms. Boring, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes; Mr. Zimmerman, yes. (Tabled 6 -0.)
Ms. Boring asked if the Commissioners should keep the letters and documents received for the
January meeting.
Mr. Gunderman replied that new packets would be prepared as there may be more information
by the time of the next meeting.
X., Administrativ eview 05 -135AD — Historic Dub)' Revitalization / one
Mr. Gerber not that due to the siz f the Historic Dub n Revitalization Porkshop may
be needed. expressed conce that they would to review the pl in night, and ;e
12- 0172 /PDP /FDP
Rezoning /Preliminary & Final Developm� nt Plan
Shoppes at Athenry Mary Kelly s Patio
7148 Wirfield Drive
DUBLIN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
RECORD OF ACTION
September 16, 1999
CITY OF DURU!
twat
swwwavlw
Ouk Ohio 43016.1236
' w*ADO:614- 7614550
Fax 614- 7646566
Web Sk "vAillkAus
The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action at this meeting:
2. Conditional Use 99 -026CU - Indian Run Meadow - Mary Kelley's Restaurant -
7142 Muirfield Drive
Location: 4.91 acres located on the east side of Muirfield Drive, approximately 345
feet north of Tara Hill Drive.
Existing Zoning: PUD, Planned Unit Development District (Indian Run Meadow
Plan).
Request: Approval of a conditional use under the provisions of Section 153.236.
Proposed Use: A 2,000 square foot restaurant patio.
Applicant /Owner: Athenry Limited c/o Patrick J. Kelley, 250 Lust Broad Street,
Suite 1100, Columbus, Ohio 43215.
RESULT: There was much discussion regarding outdoor seating. The Planning Commission
considered outdoor seating to be a conditional use. Tim Kelley, representing the applicant,
withdrew this application because lie believes that outdoor seating is a permitted use and not
subject to a conditional use review. The Cotrunission expressed the expectation that the
applicant will bring a conditional use application to the Commission for review and approval
before using the outdoor seating as agreed to in the July 1997 approved final development
plan. There was no vote taken.
STAFF CERTIFICATION
in D. Talentino
Planner
12- 017Z /PDP /FDP
Rezoning /Preliminary & Final Development Plan
shoppes at Athenry — Mary Kelly's Patio
7148 Muirfield Drive
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes - September 16, 1999
Page 4
Mr Fishman as ed if all na ral materi
ap roved requir s all natural onts.
r. McCash de a motion o approve v
That th Reserve and F be fit
r ording of th final plat;
2) Tha o -build zon (20 feet) be
would be uskd. Mr. KeVey said the drevi
seven
graded and Deeded and d9iicated to thgCity prior
ng the rear
3) Thz the Avery oad reallg nt at Bran Road be s
Eastep seeded, and the
gue, yes; . Lecklider, j
r prior to pancy pern
s Nest Sects 2, Phase 3;
i are sold in mass to one
,subject t staff approv
established tween Lots o
t side yard jacent to th e pi
be labeled bikepath" e
Lots 153 -1 ;
;tantially u erway to
being issIan for more
to builde architec
L and 202 I d d a note be
th;
nests ins of "vede
and plans revised prio to this cas being
was as slows: Mr. arian, yes; r. Fist.
Mr. Eas p, yes; and r. McCash, es. (Ap
for
yes; Mr.
16-0)
2. Conditional Use 99 -026CU - Indian Run Meadow - Mary Kelley's Restaurant -
7142 Muirfield Drive
John Talentino said the applicant intends to request tabling.
Mr. Lecklider said there are a couple of legal issues involved. The Commission has received
several conflicting legal opinions. He noted there have been a number of calls and a letter
from the nearby residents. He asked if the Commissioners wished to table this case.
Mr. Talentino said the Commission previously suggested bringing everything into compliance
prior to the conditional use hearing. lie said staff has been working with the applicant on the
issues and the applicant prefers to comply before this application is considered.
Mr. Fishman said one dumpster enclosure door was open today, and the mechanicals have not
been screened. It appears they have attempted to clean up the landscaping on the other side of
the fence. He could support a tabling request.
Mr. Sprague said the applicant has had five months to get everything in order. His visits to the
site reveal the mechanicals are still not screened, and there are many cars in the back. The
issues of noise and middle -of- the - night trash pick -up are still problems. He opposed tabling.
12- 017Z /PDP /FDP
Rezoning /Prelim nary & Final Development Plan
Shoppes at Athenry Mary Kelly's Patio
7148 Muirfield Drive
sat' faction of th City Ell
50 rcent of th lots in l
4)
at if the lots in this st
versity stan rd be estal
5)
ab:plat bike pa easement
o re firing a 10-
6)
That all bik path locatio
easements; d
7)
That all co ditions be n
review by ity Council.
Eastep seeded, and the
gue, yes; . Lecklider, j
r prior to pancy pern
s Nest Sects 2, Phase 3;
i are sold in mass to one
,subject t staff approv
established tween Lots o
t side yard jacent to th e pi
be labeled bikepath" e
Lots 153 -1 ;
;tantially u erway to
being issIan for more
to builde architec
L and 202 I d d a note be
th;
nests ins of "vede
and plans revised prio to this cas being
was as slows: Mr. arian, yes; r. Fist.
Mr. Eas p, yes; and r. McCash, es. (Ap
for
yes; Mr.
16-0)
2. Conditional Use 99 -026CU - Indian Run Meadow - Mary Kelley's Restaurant -
7142 Muirfield Drive
John Talentino said the applicant intends to request tabling.
Mr. Lecklider said there are a couple of legal issues involved. The Commission has received
several conflicting legal opinions. He noted there have been a number of calls and a letter
from the nearby residents. He asked if the Commissioners wished to table this case.
Mr. Talentino said the Commission previously suggested bringing everything into compliance
prior to the conditional use hearing. lie said staff has been working with the applicant on the
issues and the applicant prefers to comply before this application is considered.
Mr. Fishman said one dumpster enclosure door was open today, and the mechanicals have not
been screened. It appears they have attempted to clean up the landscaping on the other side of
the fence. He could support a tabling request.
Mr. Sprague said the applicant has had five months to get everything in order. His visits to the
site reveal the mechanicals are still not screened, and there are many cars in the back. The
issues of noise and middle -of- the - night trash pick -up are still problems. He opposed tabling.
12- 017Z /PDP /FDP
Rezoning /Prelim nary & Final Development Plan
Shoppes at Athenry Mary Kelly's Patio
7148 Muirfield Drive
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes - September 16, 1999
Page 5
Mr. McCash could not support tabling. Since the April hearing, the problems were not fixed.
Staff recommends limiting the conditional use to two years, but there is no leverage to get
issues resolved. Mr. Harian agreed.
Mr. Lecklider noted the Commission typically agrees to tabling. lie said this matter is a great
concern to the residents of the area.
Tim Kelley said there are several legal opinions in this case, but everyone agrees the zoning
record is not very clear. His legal opinion is that outdoor seating is not a conditional use. Mr.
Kelley said they agree conditional uses on this site are prohibited by the original zoning. Their
legal opinion is that this Commission does not have jurisdiction to decide whether or not
outdoor seating is a conditional use.
Mr. Kelley said this is a request for a hearing to clarify the record and they were prepared to
consider outdoor seating conditions now. He said they had planned to request a tabling, but in
order to preserve their legal rights, he is revoking his request for a hearing. He said they do
not believe this Commission has jurisdiction.
Mr. Lecklider said the minutes from June 5, 1997, reflect that Mr. Andrews responded to
questions about outdoor uses. There was no potential user for the outdoor seating at that time,
and he said they would return for a conditional use permit when there was a user.
Mr. Kelley suggested that all parties were laboring under the mistaken impression that outdoor
seating was a conditional use - -and could be permitted -- during the final development plan
hearing. The zoning text says no conditional uses are permitted, and the final development
plan does not change that.
Mr. Ucklider said his recommendation would not have been positive for the patio area if there
would be no opportunity for this Commission to review it later.
Mr. Sprague said the City's official position is that the Commission has jurisdiction to consider
that matter.
Ms. Dutey said if the applicant withdraws the application, the Commission should cease
discussion.
Mr. McCash said the record clearly indicates that Mr. Andrews, representing the applicant,
agreed that this would be reviewed as a conditional use application. Mr. Kelley disagreed.
Mr. Fishman made a motion to go into executive session to discuss the issue. Mr. Eastep
seconded, and the vote was as follows: Mr. Sprague, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. McCash,
yes; Mr. Harian, yes; Mr. Eastep, yes; and Mr. Fishman, yes. (Approved 6 -0.)
12- 017Z /PDP /FDP
Rezoning /Preliminary & Fina Development Plan
Shoppes at Athenry Mary Kelly's Patio
7148 Muirfield Drive
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes - September 16, 1999
Page 6
Mr. Kelley said since it has been determined that outdoor seating is not a conditional use, they
would like to withdraw their conditional use application.
Mr. Lecklider stated that it is the Commission's expectation, based upon its legal counsel's
opinion, that outdoor seating requires a conditional use application. He said Mr. Kelley is free
to withdraw the application, but if outdoor services were contemplated here, the City expects
them to refile a conditional use application for future consideration.
Mr. McCash said as agreed, as a condition 'of the final development approval on July 15,
1997, outdoor seating is to be reviewed as a conditional use. It will require approval from this
Commission. Mr. Lecklider said there is no vote necessary to withdrawn an application.
Residents' comments are inappropriate at this time..
3. Final PI 99 -075FP Kendall T
John Talent o said the K ndall Ridy at was appro ed for 104 l and 8.7 ac s
of park. a said Secti 3 of Ken 11 Ridge co twins 48 lots with 4.5 ac r of park. le
showed so a slides.
Mr. Tale mo said 25 eplacement tees, totaling 62.5 caliper ches will planted for ose
in poor c ndition alo the fencer The no- uild zone s uld be exte ed along th full
rear pro rty line of t 103, adia nt to the pa . The other condition re rences creati g an
easemen for a bikep h between t o lots to fos r connect' and expand' g parks as t area
develop westward.
He sai this confo to the p eliminary p t, and staff recommend approval w' nine
condit ns:
1) That the de eloper contr bute at leas 75 percent f the cost of the construe on of a
hammerhe turnaround on Dan -She ri Avenue o $10,000, ichever is I wer, by
bond or le ter of credit as part of a Kendall Ri ge Section- public imp vements,
subject to a approval f the Law D ector;*
2) That an 1- foot -wide idewalk eas ment with a five- foot -wi a sidewalk installed
between is 59 and 0 with stree constructio and that a ote be add to the plat
requirin the maxima side yard t be placed a acent to the dewalk;
3) That a 2 -foot no -bui zone be pr vide along t entire rear roperty line f Lot 103;
4 That th re be no c traction tr ffic on exis g Dan -She ri Avenue a part of the
subdivi ion construe on;*
That eserve "B" a fine gra ed and seed d and dedi ted to the ity with th
recor ng of the fin I plat;
6) That ees (one per 0 feet) and r1 optional s 1pted mown (maximum feet in heigh
and 5 feet in wid , with a ma imum four t one slope) installed al g the easte
bou ary line of eserve "B ", nstead of a f nce, to give visual Brea between pub c
and rivate prope ty, subject t staff approv 1;
12- 017Z /PDP /FDP
Rezoning /Preliminary & Final Development Plan
Shoppes at Athenry — Mary Kelly's Patio
7148 Muirfield Drive
WY OF DUBLIN
ti vww of Pladrp
5000 Shilw4imp tooa
Fling, 01k 13016.1236
oe AW- 6H- 7614550
Fax 6114614566
dskwwrdubl' Avs
DUBLIN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
RECORD OF ACTION
April 15, 1999
The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action at this meeting:
S. Conditional Use 99 -026CU - Indian Run Meadow - The Shoppes at Athenry —
Mary Kelley's Restaurant - 7142 Muirfield Drive
Location: 4.91 acres located on the east side of Muirfield Drive, approximately 345
feet north of Tara Hill Drive.
Eausting Zoning: PUD, Planned Unit Development District (Indian Run Meadow
Plan).
Request: Approval of a conditional use under the provisions of Section 153.236.
Proposed Use: A 2,000 square foot restaurant patio.
Applicant: Athenry Limited c/o Patrick J. Kelley, 250 East Broad Street, Suite 1100,
Columbus, Ohio 43215.
MOTION: To table this application as requested by the applicant.
VOTE: 7 -0.
RESULT: After some discussion, the Commission tabled this application for at least 60 days.
The Commission was concerned about existing violations including the screening of dumpsters,
deliveries and pickups (mcluding trash) outside the authorized hours, the use of outdoor
speakers, and landscaping maintenance. The Commission directed the applicant to bring the
center into compliance with Code prior to being rescheduled on the agenda.
STAFF CERTIFICA'T'ION
Qpl" - ---
Talentino
Planner
NOTE: The Law Director is to research the legality of outdoor seating at this site.
12- 017Z /PDP /FDP
Rezon'ng /Preliminary & Final Development Plan
Shoppes at Athenry Mary . y' Pat o
7148 Muirfield Drive
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes - April 15, 1999
Page 8
12)
13)
14)
15)
16)
17)
18)
That st tmwater manag ent design c
storm ter plan and the rovisions of the
That te car wash esca Lane be reduced
applicant prov de a revised stakii
That
the satellite dis be ground moo
T at there be no
the sign nu
ra'
ne base and o
That the appliea
9, 12 13, 14,/
applying foring for b
D t window dish
the design for
imn, subject to i
schedule a pre-
1 17 have 7 rig permits.
lies with the
y's Stormwater
width to 13 feet;
plan, acceptable
i and nroverly
existing BP sign
approval; and
bmittal meeting
resolved to the a
Center
o staff, within 20
screened, subject'
A
With
Conditions 3,t, 5, 6, 7, 8,
action of staf and prior to
Sherry agreed ith the above nditions. Mr. tep seconded the otion. The vote
s as follows: . Fishman, yes; r. Harian, yes; r. Peplow, yes; . Lecklider, yes;
. Sprague, yes* . Eastep, Yes• and Mr. McCash, es. {Approved 7 .)
5. Conditional Use 99 -026CU - Indian Run Meadow - Mary Kelley's Restaurant - 7142
Muirfield Drive
There was no staff presentation. Tim Kelley, representing the applicant, requested a tabling
of this case because there is a legal issue that must be addressed. Mr. Banchefsky needed
more time to evaluate it as to what is appropriate under the approved zoning.
Mr. Lecklider said there was a lot of interest regarding this case. He thought it would be
valuable to hear concerns of the audience. He asked that comments be kept precise and
short.
John Canazaro, 7219 Sundown Court, said the Indian Run Meadows Civic Association
wanted this tabled for at least 60 days. He thanked the Commission for hearing this case out
of order.
Mr. Kelley thought it should be tabled until the Law Director's office researched the issue.
The timing was important because the outdoor season was rapidly approaching.
Mr. Harian supported tabling and wanted the case to return for review quickly.
Mr. Fishman said he has gotten a lot of correspondence regarding this site being out of
compliance. The site should be brought into compliance before this application is
rescheduled. He said the dumpsters are not enclosed and the dumpster containers are wide
open. Because there are piles of wood and trash in one of the containers, there is not enough
room for the dumpster. Trees and landscaping are dead. Lumber is piled against the
building. The site is shameful where it backs up to the neighborhood.
12- 0172 /PDP /FDP
Rezoning /Pre im:n, y & Final Development Plan
Shoppes at Athenry Mary K •lly s Patio
7148 Muirfield Drive
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes - April 15, 1999
Page 9
Mr. Fishman said he received letters saying that the dumpsters are emptied at 2:30 a.m. and
trucks deliver early in the morning. He asked if there was a noise ordinance. Mr.
Banchefsky said conditions in the zoning text limited the service truck traffic.
Mr. McCash visited the site and surrounding area, any many of the violations are valid issues.
Previous conditions of the zoning have not been met. He said part of the landscape mound
was tom up and never repaired and areas of the fence have not been repaired. The residents'
side of the landscape mound in the fence area has more weeds than grass. The durnpster
enclosures were poorly designed and cannot hold the dumpsters. Mr. McCash said a lot of
trash blows out of the containers because the lids are not closed. A reliable method of
maintaining the property on the east side of the fence is needed.
Mr. Sprague also has received a lot of resident complaints. He also visited the site. There
were trash and building materials everywhere. The unenclosed dumpsters smelled. There
were weeds. He suspected cars were parked in the fire lanes. He said at 2:31 a.m. and 3:05
a.m. last Sunday he was personally awakened by trash haulers.
Mr. Sprague said from the beginning, there were dump trucks at 1:30 a.m. keeping people
awake. It was reported and they were told it would be taken care of properly. The
immediate residents felt there was a bad faith on the part of Mary Kelley's. The applicant is
on notice to resolve these problems before returning to the Commission with a conditional
use. He would like to see a significantly scaled down application without outdoor sound,
quality furniture, no hostess/host stand on the patio, etc.
Mr. Peplow felt tabling for 60 days was reasonable. He visited the site on Sunday morning
and saw the problems mentioned. Regardless of what happens on the application, the code
violations must be corrected.
Mr. Eastep said this was a proposal to be a neighborhood-eating place. This business has not
been neighborly to this point and he is worried about the future. He said 100 percent
compliance on this site was necessary.
Mr. Lecklider was in favor of the tabling under the circumstances. He said he especially
appreciated Mr. Kelley listening to the comments made. He was embarrassed about the
condition of this center. The negative impact on the residents today is very disappointing. He
visited the restaurant in the winter, just after it opened, and heard the speakers playing music
outside. He was extremely disappointed about the trash pickup and deliveries outside the
approved hours. The employee parking in the rear is unacceptable and probably in violation
of Fire Code regulations. He wants the Code violations to be addressed promptly.
Mr. Harian agreed with the other Commissioner's comments above.
Mr. Kelley said he appreciated the expression of compassion given by Mr. Lecklider. He
said there was no reason for them not to be in compliance. He apologized to the neighbors.
12- 017Z /PDP /FDP
Rezoning /Preliminary & Final Development Plan
Shoppes at Athenry — Mary Kelly's Patio
7148 Muirfield Drive
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes - April 15, 1999
Page 10
Mr. McCash suggested that Mr. Kelley contact Mr. Canazaro to address the concerns of the
Indian Run Meadow Civic Association.
Mr. McCash made the motion to table this case for 60 days. Mr. Fishman seconded the
motion, and the vote was as follows: Mr. Eastep, yes; Mr. Harian, yes; Mr. Peplow, yes;
Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. Sprague, yes; Mr. Fishman, yes; and Mr. McCash, yes. (Tabled 7-
0.)
2. Rezoning Ap lication 98-MZ/ Coffman Park Park Expansion /
3. Final Devel ent Plan 99-0 FDP - Coffman ark - Parking � Expansion
Lisa Fierce prese this proposal showed seve ink in slides. A missing the park
was acquired een %outh S k of the Indian by buying the r of the Nyrop
the entire Farrel prop. She d this is a comb' application for zoning and the
development p for some new P1, ing.
There are fo houses that fr
parkland ext from the Uni
east. The s' is zoned R -1,
Park PUD. A park is permi
PUD. Sh said the Farrell re
manicin offices- Ash an
on Post Road
Id the purpose
l in the R-1 Di
idence is slig
outbuildings
The fin 1 development pan involves the
new p king area Incl. es 110 spaces.
everg n and deciduo plants will be
Lieh na will be torsi tent with the fix tyl,
J nding the pa
oved by the (
mally at the
ed for the ugh the par .
The plan also c
would only by 'n
uth, of the to
line at the west
to add the new 1
ict, but this requ
over 3,000 sq
also on the pro
kpansion of the
A three -foot m
;tailed across th
; currently used)
lot was a requftement of the
ission in mid 998. The exp
mber 1998 Commission men
A sidewalk
vs an area c
alled based
Ms. Fierce slfiid the 110
There are t series of ca
for snow encing during
on the t -acre site are s
Ms. Fii6rce said staff
o . The plan at
link the parking
grated for poten
demonstrated nj
should be
�re park expansio The
d to Coffman Roa at the
k acreage to the ffman
is to make it a of the
feet and may used for
reation center
d with plant r
entire northern
secfind phase of the
insion of the parking
A* g. She said 100
includes the exten
t to the entrance of
I future parking ex
after public rev .
in August, in
Ens associated wi the final devel
stages of cons Lion to preserve
xt to review an approval by the t
of this rezoning
bg lot. The
al including
as a buffer.
feation center, as
was discussed
more spaces are
t of the biikepa
recreation cent
)n. Those sna s
for the Irish Festival.
t plan, including Pe need
Future changes Inywhere
without
12- 0172 /PDP /FDP
Rezoning /Pre iminary & Final Development Plan
Shoppes at Athenry Mary Kelly's Patio
7148 Muirheld Drive
MY Of DtIBLIN
SE00 Sider Rips Rood
8obk 0H 13016 -7295
F F=00614506
DUBLIN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
RECORD OF ACTION
June 5, 1997
The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action.at•this:meeting:
4. Final Development Plan 97 -W3FDP - Indian Run Meadows - Retail Area - Muirfield
Drive
Location: 4.914 acres located on the east side of Muirfield Drive, approximately 345 feet
north of Tam Hill Drive.
Edsting Zoning: pUD, Planned Unit Development District (Indian Run Meadows Plan).
Request: Review and approval of a final development plan under the provisions of Section
153.056.
proposed Use: A retail shopping center of 26,400 square feet, including a 6,000 square foot
restaurant.
Applicant: William C. Andrews, William Andrews Architects, 6631 Commerce Parkway,
Studio B, Dublin, Ohio 43017.
MOUON: To approve this final development plan because the architecture exceeds the zoning
requirements, the plan provides appropriate fencing and landscape buffering and is in beeping with
the residential character of the area, with 14 conditions:
1) That a maximum of two curb cuts be permitted on Muirfield Drive and that the
proposed accesses, site geometries, --and modifications to the median break be
designed to the approval of staff;
2) That copies of recorded cross - access easements between the subject site and
neighboring office and commercial sites be submitted prior to the issuance of
building permits;
3) That additional brick and stone be provided on the rear building elevations to
ensure the same finished quality on all elevations, and be approved by staff;
4) That a coordinated tenant sign package be submitted with design, color, font, and
lighting controls, consistent with the text;
5) That details for the pedestrian plaza in front of the center be provided to indicate
locations of pedestrian crosswalks, benches, trees boxes, light poles, etc.;
6) :'hat complete awning details be provided to the satisfaction of staff;
12- 017Z /PDP /FDP
Page 1 of 2 Rezoning /Pre'iminary & Final Development Plan
Shoppes at Athenry — Mary Kelly s Patio
7148 Muirfield Drive
DUBLIN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
RECORD OF ACTION
June 5,1997
4. Final Development Plan 97 -083FDP - Indian Run Meadows - Retail Area - Muirfield
Drive (Continued)
7) That all site lighting meet the requirements of the development plan text and
Dublin lighting Guidelines, and be approved by staff;
8) That rear doors be painted to blend with the surrounding materials;
9) That the 15foot.minimum side yard parking setback be met on the south side, and
that a revised paddng plan be submitted to the satisfaction of staff;
10) Than a revised landscape plan be submitted that meets -dw new landscaping code to
the satisfaction of staff;
11) That all Engineering Division requirements'be metaon design ;of public roads,
private drives, parking areas, public and private utilities, grading and stormwater
management;
12) That separate conditional use approval, as applicable, for all outdoor seating and
drive-in facilities be obtained;
13) That all signage meet Code; and
14) That all of the changes required above be submitted to staff within 30 days.
* William C. Andrews agreed to the above conditions.
VOTE: 6-0.
RESUTLT: This application was approved.
STAFF CERTIFICATION
AA
l /—
J n D. Talentino
Planner
12- 0172 /PDP /FDP
Page 2 of 2 Rezoning /Preliminary & Final Development Plan
Shoppes at Athenry — Mary Kelly's Patio
7148 Muirfield Drive
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes - June 5, 1997
Page 13
Mr. Ferrara wanted is site to be develo to support the long
made in Dublin. said other I m Ho n stores in Dublin I
"corporate" look. a said they should be exible in future prop
Mr. Sprague said a dryvit in this part ar situation appeared (
Mr. Harian mov for approval becaus it will. be in keeping wiJ
and physical dev pment potential, will' crease the open space a
traffic flow and ccessibility is not bei altered, seven conditio
1) That new a consist.of refac' existing ground sign
(an opaqu background, and ndary image not to ex
permitted area), raising the he' of the lower panel
directio -signs with generic co ; and installing a menu
2) That the ood fence, roof Ladd and electric.. panels be p t
subject staff approval;
3) That th dryvit color be eoord' with the wood siding for
to s approval;
4) That a elevations be revised o eliminate the referees
5) That a proposed dumpster en osure be architecturally
its 1 lion and design be su ect to staff approval;*
6) Tha all mechanical units an service structures be ful
7) all exterior lighting co form with the Dublin Li
** Co dition carried over fro previous approval of A
Mr. Agave seconded the
-Boring was still very a
dryvit was now being
vote was as follows:
and Mr. Harian, ye
that dryvit did not
1 to replace the del
I
[s. Boring, no; Mr.
(Approved 4 -1.)
investment Wendy's
:ed to reflect less of
the area's land use
landscaping on the
ith faces that conform to ode
d 20 percent of them mum
the ground sign, refac' g the
and that conforms to C e;*
�-to match- the buUdin color,
of the shopping Cent C4 subject
to the red accent color; *�
.tezrated with the buildin , and that
screened to Code;*
ing Guidelines.
10, 1997,
the proper
ited wood.
yes; Mr. Lecklider,
Mr. Ferrara
; Mr. Sprague,
4. Final Development Plan 97- 083F'DP - Indian Run Meadows - Retail Area - Muirfield
Drive
John Talentino presented this final development plan for a retail shopping center of 26,400 square
feet on five acres zoned for neighborhood -type uses. He said the drive -in canopy on the south end
of the building would require Conditional Use approval by the Commission at a later time. The
applicant is planning to relocate the existing Muirfield Drive curbcut at United Dairy Farmers
(UDF) approximately ten feet north. The combined access on the property line between this site
and Liberty Health Care will be the other access from Muirfield Drive. A cross access casement
is provided to Tara Hill Drive through the daycare center and other commercial sites to the south.
The development text requires that the building be of the same finished quality on all four sides.
Mr. Talentino said the rear elevation will require additional brick and stone. 236 parking spaces
12- 0172 /PDP /FDP
Rezoning /Preliminary & Final Development Plan
Shoppes at Athenry Mary Kelly s Patio
7148 Muirfield Drive
Dublin Planning and Zonin �mmission
.
Minutes - June 5, 1997
Page 14
are shown on the site plan, but the applicant would like to have only 200 spaces, which is in
excess of the text requirements. Staff supports the reduction of the number of parking spaces,
provided all the requirements of the text are met. The sign package consists of a wall sign on a
dry laid stone wall at the northern entry, an identification sign, and tenant signage. Gooseneck
lighting fixtures are proposed with treatments to individual signs similar to that at Perimeter
Center. Staff feels that control is needed to ensure that signs are consistent and would be willing
to work with the applicant. The landscape plan meets the text requirements for interior
landscaping.- With the reduction of -the number of parking spaces, there should. be no problem
with the required 15 -foot landscaped sideyard between this site and the daycare center. The
fencing• and landscaping buffer. that Liberty Health Care began will be continued along the
.residential properties to -the east. A gate is lacking in the plan which staff feels should be used
for maintetmee access.
'Mr. laknfmo said the concept being proposed maintains the areas residential and it far
exceeds designs normally seen for retail centers. The Perimeter: Center theme is being dried
over to this site.
Staff is recommending approval with the following 13 conditions:
1) That -armaximum of 'two curb cuts be permitted on Muirfield Drive - and that the proposed
accesses, site geometrics, and modifications to the median break. be designed to the approval
of staff,
2) That copies of recorded cross - access casements between the subject site and neighboring
office and commercial sites be submitted prior to the issuance of building permits;
3) That additional brick and stone be provided on the rear building elevations to ensure the
same finished quality on all elevations, and be approved by staff;
4) That a coordinated .tenant sign package be submitted with design, color, font, and lighting
controls, consistent with the text;
5) That details for the pedestrian plaza in front of the center be provided to indicate locations
of pedestrian crosswalks, benches, trees boxes, light poles, etc.;
6) That complete awning details be provided to the satisfaction of staff;
7) That all site lighting meet the requirements of the development text and Dublin Lighting
Guidelines, and be approved by staff;
8) That rear doors be painted to blend with the surrounding.
9) That the 15 -foot minimum side yard parking setback be met on the south side, and that a
revised parking plan be submitted to the satisfaction of staff,
10) That a revised landscape plan be submitted that meets the new landscaping code to the
satisfaction of staff;
•11) That all Engineering Division requirements be met on design of public roads, private drives,
parking areas, public and private utilities, grading and stormwater management;
12) That conditional use approval for all outdoor seating and drive -in facilities be obtained; and
13) That all of the changes required above be submitted to staff within two weeks.
Mr. Sprague was concerned that the center would have two curbcuts at UDF and at the rear
entrance. He thought it would be disruptive to the traffic flow and might be a safety problem
12- 017Z /PDP /FDP
Rezoning /Preliminary & Final Development Plan
Shoppes at Athenry — Mary Kelly's Patio
7148 Muirfield Drive
Dublin Planning and Zoninj )mmission
• Minutes - June 5, 1997
Page 15
because they are too close. Mr. Talentino said the curbcuts were established at the time of the
rezoning and were to be on the property line. The curbcut to the north is corrected and the
second meets the text requirement. In the interest of a better design, for traffic circulation from
this center, it was suggested that the UDF curbcut be moved. UDF has not yet agreed to move
it.
Randy Bowman said the engineering department had explored the access issues throughly and
-consulted with a third party consultant. They saw no issues with the proposed-curbcut locations.
Mr. Sprague asked if the Memorial Tournament had a disruptive impact on the Muirfield Drive
traffic. Randy Bowman said traffic impact studies were not based upon unique events, but
average daily travel.
Mr: asked why the Sign Code should not-apply to ft'49 foot-high restaurant/pub sign.
Mr. .Talentino said in this center, a 15 -foot signmas: permitted, but.because -of the building
elevation and the roofline, staff feels it is in scale and appropriate in this planned district. It will
be the only sign at that height.
Mr. °Ferrara had stormwater•==rns. All the drainage went towards the residences and there was
one, 21 -inch pipe to handle it. Randy Bowman said when this section of Indian Run Meadows.
was designed, major flood muting was designed to head in a southeast direction. Mr. Ferrara
asked if the retention area was the parking lot. Randy Bowman said yes. Mr. Ferrara said water
during a heavy downpour would build up and cascade down into the well established
neighborhood. He asked if a study was in process for Dublin water drainage problems. Randy
Bowman said yes. Mr. Ferrara said the drainage studies are based upon studies which predated
the 100 -year floods we have had in the last five to six years. Randy Bowman said that was
..somewhat true, however engineers in designing subdivisions account for major flood routing areas
as required by MORPC.
Ms. Boring was also concerned about the water ponding in the rear of this site because of all the
added pavement. She asked where the dumpsters were located. Mr. Taleatino said five
dumpsters were in the back, adjacent to the building.
Ms. Boring urged that the number of colors in the tenant sign package be specified and limited.
Ms. Boring was not in favor of the 19 -foot high sign for any reason in a neighborhood shopping
area. She said it would look out of place.
Ms. goring asked if the pavement came within five feet of the daycare center. Mr. Talentino said
it was five feet from the property line.
Ms. goring asked if the applicant had agreed to make the fencing and buffering consistent with
the Liberty Health Care facility. Mr. Talentuto said yes.
12- 017Z /PDP /FDP
Rezoning/Preliminary & Final Development Plan
Shoppes at Athenry Mary Kelly', Patio
7148 Muirfield Drive
Dublin Planning and Zonin, )mmission
• Minutes - June 5, 1997
Page 16
Ms. Boring asked if the rear elevation had been modified to look more appealing to the
neighborhood. Mr. Talentino said no, but it was a recommended condition.
Ms. Boring asked if there were any necessity to provide pedestrian access. (Neighbors in the
audience indicated they did not wa u any pedestrian access ftom the rear.)
Mr. Harian asked if the existing landscaped mound on Muirfield Drive would remain. Mr.
Talentino said it would remain with additional plantings as required by the text.
Mr. Lecklider asked if the pub sign would be illuminated. Mr. Talentino said the sign package
had not yet been submitted. He assumed it would be illuminated with gooseneck fixtures.
-Mr. I"J&der asked if dimensional shingles similar:to - that at Liberty Realth. Care would be used. -
W. Talentino said yes, but he was not sure of the weight to be used.
Bill Andrews, architect, representing the applicant, agreed to all the conditions above except
Condition 13. He requested that they be given 30 days to submit changes required instead of two
weeks.
Mr. Andrews said the curbcut at the north end of this parcel was in concert with that otLiberty
Health Care. An identical fence will be located at the rear, matching the landscaping-with that
project, Architecturally, they plan to have a small village center using materials consistent with
the neighborhood. The Ohio limestone stonework proposed has an aged look to provide the
character of an older center. The roof shingle is 250 pounds and dimensional. They wanted a
center that had the kind of character that Perimeter Center had, but in amore pedestrian scale.
With the exception of the two-story effect given in the pub, the balance of the center is primarily
one story in height, incompliance with the maximum height allowed in the neighborhood. The
color pallette is limited to dark forest green, black, and slate gray for the storefronts. Tenants
which include a family restaurant/pub and a dry cleaner, are small operations to service the
neighborhood. He said it was slightly smaller in size than the center at Glick Road and 5R 745.
Mr. Andrews said the pub sign would be integrated into the stone.
Ms. Chinnici- Zuercher asked how tall the two story building would be in relationship to the
surrounding residences. Mr. Andrew said the two story building was 33-feet. tall.
Ms. Chinniri- Zuercher asked if the landscaping on the neighborhood side of the fence in the
renderings existed there now. Mr. Andrew said no, but they were required.
Mr. Lecklider asked if the applicant agreed to add additional brick and stone to the rear elevation.
Mr. Andrews said they would work it out with staff.
Mr. Lecklider asked if the 19 -foot high sign would be illuminated. Mr. Andrews said it would
be illuminated with gooseneck lamps similar to those at Perimeter Center.
12- 0172 /PDP /FDP
Rezoning /Preliminary & Final Development Plan
Shoppes at Athenry — Mary Kelly's Patio
7148 Muirfield Drive
Dublin Planning and Zonint immission
Minutes - June 5, 1997
Page 17
Mr. Lecklider asked if the parking area at the southeast corner would be used for employee
parldng. Mr. Andrews said yes.
Mr. Lecklider was concerned, since this was so close to the residential area, about trash pickup.
Mr. Andrews agreed to limit deliveries and pickups including trash between 7 a.m. to 7 p.m.
Mr. Lecklider felt it was appropriate to review the outdoor seating and drive -thru at this time to
get feedback though it was •not being. considered -now. - Mr. -Andrews said presently; - the pub
owner had no plans for.any outdoor seating. Mr. -Lecklider asked if the drive -thru would be
entered from the west. -Mr. Andrews said the dry cleaners will address it when they apply for
approval. Mr. Leeldider was concerned about stacking at the drive-thru.
Mr. Harian asked about the sign - color to be used. rMr. -Andrews,said.it was:a Ight beige with
individual relief letters placed on a wooden panel.
Mr. Harlan said the Liberty Health Care and UDF buildings had true dimensional shingles and
this proposal had diflemnt shingles which-were not dimensional.: He asked if dimensional shingles
could be considered to match those buildings. Mr. Andrews said they were trying to achieve a
slato4ilw look, but he would - consider - it, ,even though -he -not °want to repeat a look he did not
Bloc.
Mr. Sprague said this was a special project and he liked many aspects of it. He asked about
moving the UDF curbcut 110 feet. it seemed close to the other eurbcut. Mr. Andrews said if
UDF Cooperates, it would be a safe area entrance to the center because drivers will have a straight
entryway. He was concerned for pedestrian safety along Muirfield Drive.
Mr. Andrews said the parking lot will be the high point in the site, it will drain -into catch basins
and be carried off in a 21 -inch pipe. It would take a very heavy rain to flood the neighbors.
Mr. Sprague aslmd if the pub sign would comply with the Code requirements. Mr. Andrews said
it was 350 feet from Muirfield Drive and the sign cannot be-read-at
Mike Reynolds, 7079 Calvary Court, said the issue• was - area was part of
the architecture. Hours of operation have not been discussed, including the pub. Noise will occur
but it has not been addressed.
Farid Masri, 7061 Calvary Court, was also concerned about the stormwater runoff after it entered
the 21 -inch sewer pipe. He said at the lowest point of his yard.there was a stormwater sewer
catch basin. Under heavy rain, water will shoot nut of it like a fountain.
Mr. Masri said at a neighborhood meeting the applicant, agreed that landscaping, maintenance
and mowing would take place between 7 a. m. and 7 p. m. He said the applicant had repeated the
same landscaping plan as the assisted care facility. He asked for more plant material on the
applicant's side of the fence to help block the noise and traffic. He understood the restaurant
12- 017Z /PDP /FDP
Rezoning /Preliminary & Final Development Plan
Shoppes at Athenry — Mary Kelly's Patio
7148 Muirfield Drive
Dublin Planning and Zoning :mmission
. Minutes - June 5, 1997
Page 18
would seat approximately 180 customers. It will require a large HVAC system which would
require more samening for noise. Mr. Masri said the daycare had a 20 -foot strip of land between
it and this new proposed development and.asked whose responsibility it was to maintain. The
dryoiea m will produce stacking and noise he did not want. Mr. Masri said traffic heading south
on Muirfield Drive will tend to exit onto Tara Hill Drive and asked that City Council consider
adding a traffic light at that intersection soon.
.John Cannizzaro, 7219 Sundown Court, said when Muirfield Drive-was - constructed; the-Indian
Run Meadows subdivision was assured that traffic signals would be installed at Sells Mill and Tara
Sill Drives along Muirfield Drive. Nothing has been done. He said traffic on Muirfield Drive
-. was out : -of control;and : strongly recommended -that any development include at
least one traffic signal. The residents and police are frustrated by the traffic speed. He
.recommended that the inside lines of Muirfreld Drive at Sells.Mill� .made�left tun► lanes only
and the street studded to prevent drivers f om.speeding through those -left.
.Randy Bowman said neither traffic signal is currently funded. The administration is preparing a
. capital improvement plans and this would be addressed. He was not aware of any commitments
made by Dublin regarding traffic lights.
Ms. Clarke reco previous traffic discussions. Her understanding is that those traffic signals
would beinstalled'vvhen they meet state "Warrants ". In order to meet the State Warrants, there
are a series of different criteria. Twenty -four hour and peak hour counts are done . Term
volumes, accidents, and speeds are also considered. Randy Bowman said wait time and
inconvenience are also a. factor. He said 11 intersections were studied last year.
Ms. Cbim ci zu=1wr suggested that Dublin keep the Indian Run Meadows neighbors informed.
Mr. Hdwig said there were two CIP•work sessions scheduled in July which would be advertised
as public meetings: He said the eleven intersections were included in the recommended five year
plan. Ms. Boring said a report was available to the public.
Randy Bowman said the catch basins were designed as part of the•overali master plan for Indian
Run Meadows. This developer will comply with theinasterq ?lanland
Mr. Ferrara suggested because this is a mature neighborhood, that it would be the responsibility
of the City to make sure the catch basin is clean and not obstructed. He said the sewers could not
handle the capacity if they are clogged. Leaves and natural vegetation, may have blocked it.
With the anticipated runoff, he strongly suggested that the City, in conjunction with construction,
clean them. Randy Bowman said it was municipal responsibility.
Ms. Boring asked where the drainage would go. Randy Bowman said to the southeast.
I& 1WWtino said the code enforcement officer was aware of the 20 -foot gap in the fence by the
daycare. He suggested that the daycare and this applicant work together to close the gap. Ms.
12- 017Z /PDP /FDP
Rezoning /Preliminary & Final Development Plan
Shoppes at Athenry — Mary Kelly's Patio
7148 Muirfield Drive
Dublin Planning-and Zonin1 'mmission
. b iitwtes • June 5, 1997
Page 19
Chinnici-Zuearcher said the fence should be completed at the same time as the previous case is
constructing their fence to make it consistent.
Mr. Andrews said the center will limit its hours to 6 a.m. to 1 a.m. daily. Services such as
deliveries, waste hauling, maintenance, and yard care are limited to 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. They have
no potential user discussing the outdoor seating gis t alcohol If a user ppp they will return
for a conditional use permit. At present,
Mr. Andrews agreed to enhance the landscaping in a crescent shape around the corner of their
property which will screen the users of the center and help provide depth. Mr. Masri, suggested
that the trees and small plantings be alternated to provide a double row effect.
Pat Kdiley; Brand Road Investment Company, said -it is designed >to,lookdikle� 211 - Irish Village.
The signage on the two-story part of the building is meant to be,the-focal°point of-the center which
Will have an Irish name.
Judy Masri, said the fence to fill the gap should match the existing fence.
rim Gabriel, -Civil Engineering Associates, said the stormwater flowed southeast. Ms. Boring
asked what would happen if the pipe was too .small and�it� designed afive year storm. Gab riel
said there was no assurance. The storm sewer system g ned for
Mr. Perrara asked if more wager could be retained on this site by choking down the pipes. Mr.
Gabriel said the water on this site wo stin condition onra a 25 storm one -year storm would be the on
one-year before development. _The existing
a 25 year storm, A 25 year storm yields approximately 5 inches of rain in 24 hours. Randy
.Bowmwsaid there were standard model storm types that are followed and dictated in the MORK
stormwater regulations.
Ms. goring said the project looked good. She encouraged Mr. Andrews to add additional plant
material at the rear of the pub. ,
Tb&-s o� f �S i si oe nex eeting
wer syste7e ed to be c ecked and cl a nice loo oject. H was only co
l this would Via the last
the late hou .
A if neces by Dub'
d about a gap in the,
zttg ho that a sewer aintenance PI was forth ming. She
the trafff impact of a evelopment considered ' deciding to
it sho be consid in the fu re. She sat a 19400t I
many coin untwb
sipdiza ' n. She
was too I#gh for a
12- 0172 /PDP /FDP
Rezoning /Preliminary & Final Development Plan
Shoppes at Athenry Mary Kelly' � Patio
7148 Muirfield Drive