102-95 Ordinance
. -'..'~....
RECORD OF ORDINANCES
Dayton Legal Blank Co. Form No. 30043
I
102-95
Ordinance No '-____nm__m__mu p assedmn_____nm___m_m_m__m____ --_______19 _n_____
AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR A CHANGE IN ZONING FOR
34.4 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED WEST OF BLAZER PARKWAY
",PP"",,-., AND NORTH OF TUTTLE CROSSING FROM: PCD, PLANNED
COMMERCE DISTRICT TO: PCD, PLANNED COMMERCE
DISTRICT (TUTTLE CROSSING SUBAREA A)
""*...",,",,..
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAIN~ by the Council of the City of
Dublin, state of Ohio, of the elected members
.
concurrl.ng:
Section 1. That the following described real estate (see
attached map marked Exhibit "A") situated in the City of
DUblin, State of Ohio, is hereby rezoned to PCD, Planned
Commerce District and shall be subject to regulations and
procedures contained in Ordinance No. 21-70 (Chapter Eleven of
the Codified Ordinances) the City of Dublin Zoning Code and
amendments thereto.
Section 2. That application, Exhibit "B", including the list
of contiguous and affected property owners, and the
recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Commission, Exhibit
"C", are all incorporated into and made an official part of
this Ordinance and made an official part of this Ordinance and
said real estate shall be developed and used in accordance
therewith.
dlf"1'"/~
Section 3. That this Ordinance shall take effect and be in
force from and after the earliest period allowed by law.
-- day of ~
Passed this /Ifh , 199I.
MaYO~~ Officer
Attest:
~t1-~ 'A~\\\
", ~ ~
Clerk of Council ~ ~o \,i~
Sponsor: Planning Division 6\(4\\\<'" \ fI. ~
~lj 0' 1~\:J;
. t\ e\ ~ ~,\.of.
~6' r..~\ vi\~
(.0(\;~~ '{ ~(..~~o('l.'
"e,e\)'l 1oX" \f.
\. \\~'
(;,\'1 0\
-
-
--~
(]
I
J
m
- a JlE2io Pl.i-- ~y
. "4 nORni
......
lrA.'J'1
,
llErRo Pl.4CE ~
. ~
\71
-- GRAN:
.
i I; T\.I
~ \
:T
..
!If
.
CREEK
CT.
,. ~tU)
"-' -.', , '. d.
~ ..',- ~..:~~" . .
..... '.' . r~gA:lication--'-N~"-:
· ~ . .. ( It
t'~'"..:,'.....,,; Z95-016
,." ~', . . ". - '.. Tuttle Crossing Subarea A
-.... Revised Development Text
1:V-, , -"~~-..!1'
~ R-I'!. .. ... ..\1--,...... ...'
, ~ If .L:: \ \\- . . i
~ PUt> .......-~, - ~ ..... . \~.
"LR ..-",.. - \ '. ~1\\ - ,>---' \
b R 4 << 0 ,\ j," . .
aV J' , pli r ~~"- C; R-f (
pu. l!.. ~ I,-r :.
~ ' ._ / . I-- p..
~ ' ~ I '~U 1U . I-If{ J
....U.. ' !-......., .' ~ ,,~. I ~~ . Jl;""-
r, 0 . I- ~ ~ i :'PLR ~. ___......... \ I ~ Y "' ~
) I /R-2........ ~ ,...::>.., \~ 1=1 i~,~ >~T ,-.,.,:
PUD I . "" .. pl.' ~,\ ~ . II,~ L
7/ ~ './.~' ..__~ F- R I
"".... I j Ie j'/R.4 . /'- Eo'R \ '- · -" !--.. E ~ .
~.. ~ R-2\f-_ ~ ~ I I ~ j?J ~/1 ~~
__ ~ ~. .." : If j PU 0 ;= \ -.-' - 0
~ -- .. ~...
I . o( R ~ ~o ~\l
.....I...J:-. L- -. Q.-\]l , -.:;;; 7 ~ ~~\
>.J~ r . I,
~ R-~~ _ .~ . ~ I D I
s: . so ~::.~. .... =--
~~ ~ I't.; ". ~~~"".. . ~ I
\ pCP o' mE! U Vi '\"
".... . t. -W ~ Y:~ . S4
~ ~ r~R-2 CB
Ll l so ('..
~ . _ \ \ ( 'C<; .'~ t IB
." . J I l~-( LT7'cc , :f--I -~ X .
\::::; _~. ~. \ \-11 / /('PUD " df..Ar'- ~. - ....co \
~I. pI.. '/' (( ~I~ '.
j tl. ~., I R J . lU: ~r I ~ ~ "'so 'l J
~ RI ,~--- " pu'~f ;;= T - ~Jl~'.l .' .
I . LI ~._ _ . ,\., :!::: *IJ \' LJ[
_... . '. ~" '. V 1--........ -. ::.- --. - ~ k\.c6. . ~ 41 I' I ~ ~
R1 ..,:. I ~~ ~ t--' I "--'.j f\
-;- I · r ~)fI :;. ~I · -
~.'.'.' I ~Rl ........ ,-J J' - 'i .
I ," 1 c:
l L 0 . ~../"'" ( R R-1A t: ;'1'.' i I ·
T: ~--1.-/ .. , . -
-=..J.. . ~ .. f\ ~R-1' \ --, OJ ~"Tl' I- i
{(_\~ 3.. ," t \~ j ~
. .~ ~_ ==-1. ~O . :J
___ . ""' l ~\ '" 1 . S 1 O\.R CC L. --' - . \ ., ",..- .
1 . ~ . J 9(" tr"~ ---1/ .
pun p'-R ~.".... 1," p<.O . \-,;~"'~' ,,. - -... ,,==?:. I
._ ~ 1(;. 'soJ ... c:>, ~~fj.t-~~ PUD/.-' .-
~-;~" 1" PLR 'l~~ . \. vJ'(,/ ~\J/;.-&~"-l._.j 2-~ ~ L- .
~ \t"\-" . 1 . \ .V1V J .yo-- . ~ -' ~ '
_~ ,!, \\. II' -'
\ , . ~\ .\ ,,0
~_ , n ;... R~"\ 2. ,,'.....r., \ ~\. ""\@'
_ n L/ ,J\' \!>>Ih R-I I'
._~..' . ~,r;vl..' -
::-,--.L--/ ~ '" "~ \ \. '. .'\-:" . ~~,\ ~\
Ii . ~~ ,\ ,--- ~ \ l\\
_ ~ ' _ \',.' _.- - . ......... .... / l--.o' .... ~ . -...
_ \.' ; ~~~. ~
- . ~ ~... :*.. .
. 1 1 /'~ ~.~. ~........... "
- . \.. .-
. _.._ r---. -- R .
. _ , _____ . ezomng Ap Ii .
_ _"_. -..r::. . ---\. Z95-016 P cation It
"" ...;:" -"\ ' t\ ..,'\- ----- .
_ 1.::- 0 ~ J ~, \ _t - . - --- TuU!" Crossing Subarea A
_ ~ .- ReVIsed D 1
~ eve opment Text
. ~. .
-y.- ~ -..' '., 1 . ....:o..-"
. ..... . . .. ..
. ... '"... . .. , ... .. .. C
.... .. .; '. .... .. ~- .., .. OO""~. .." : t
'. ! . · 0 .. .,.. .'. .- '---1 . -. .. . J I
.""".-..... .. .. :.~ .,. ,i........... "..:./.._ ..,,,~.'I..::"...." ..
. '. :---..:...... ','-~'1 ~ '~:.:-~'oC"o. . _ 'Co.: ...........,.~.. ..... .
.. .. .... -. .. .." .... .. . ~oo ..oo oo. _..
. .--- 0.-- I ,';,: ;.... '. .. ......j~.:;:..::'_.c~~-=-":
....i'. '"i.;,.t.. .)os.. .'".... ...-.:..t'*'7"='=' ~ r"oo .. <.' .. .. .. ...... .... ~~:. .... I. .-:_.___.
oo.. - I oooo,.. _. .. ,. ...,. .....-.. _ _.-
.. ...." e.1 -oo .. ___ .,.&:;-:,..r-~----".&.:. .
.. . ..~,. .. . .... ..... ~-6. ...~~!.~. .....r_.,-..."(--:::~
o. ..oo rJQ ...p.6 ~::.:.4'~r....l-:_.f. .~." .
. -. ~1 ....oo e..:- ~ .. ~
~ e .. .......- . .~..- ..' . .i.....". ...... .""!.;: "r:
70 . - . .....-i.- ~...;:::..t ., .1lI h.;,:'.. ~:"'- " i . 1
,. - . ..,-.- -' ...'- .. .-. .-.oo ,.
.. oo.. ...... .. ...
. . ~
. . - . . . . t.
. .~-;:. .... . . .
.
~ .. .. ..
. .. 4#-. ......
~oooo ......
- .. ~ .. .. .- : ' .J ., :.. .-
.. '. ..... .
- ".. / ". . . "
.. ...
~. .. . .
. \ g',' . .
o L . . i
\ Jg .
':-' . 1 ~ - ---."'--' .
.~.: :\\i '..' . ..I . ,
. . . ,
-
. . -'
6 .
.<)::. I
I !! ~--~-- "afJc:5, r
-: 0:.. .
.
.
. ~. ,
. . ~t .
'I O.
~-- .
. ..
, , . · i.
. . . . oo' e.
. . '. .
. .. . :
~"';'~~{f"'- .
. . ..00 '.
" ,. . .. .
. . .
' . . ' '.---0 .
w'
. . ..
. .. . ~.'.,.
. ." . Q
. . .-"..' .
~~ . . . .
. . . . f e.
p '- ! :'
, . ..
. . .
.
. .
'-'
',-
..... . .
. .
I . .
" .
... . " D
I . .~
. .
. . , . .
..,.....=;. . . .' .. '0
.:. . I .
. .
~ .
. .
. ..' .
. . .
..
\'"'
.
.
..
.
.
. . .
. . .
. . \
, .
. - .\;
. . \
. ,.
,.
, .... .
. Rezoning Application
Z9S-016 ~
Tuttle Crossing Subarea A
fIIll'!"'. Revised Development Text
~'-----
,r" . ~"1 \\ 13']
l. , ,
CITY OF DUBLIN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
AN APPLICATION FOR AMENDMENT FOR P&Z C Use Only
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN ZONING Application No:
DISTRICT MAP ZM
(Reclassification of Land) Date Filed: 9-7 -95
-- Fee Receipt No. :?tJCJ-SO
-
Received by: ~
~M
Please type or print information - Use additional sheets as necessary
TO THE HONORABLE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION:
The Applicant Duke Realty.Lim11edPBr~npr~h;p
being the owner(s),/lessee(s) of propert~ located within the area proposed for
. . 1-270 / Tuttle Crossing Boulevard ' requests that the following
described land to be placed in the Modification to the Zoning Text
.
A. DESCRIPTION'OF LAND TO BE RECLASSIFIED
1. General Description of Land (describe by one of the following):
a. Lot(s)/Reserve(s) of
- ,
a recorded plat, with an area of .
-
b. Beginning at a point along
(street or other)
and being feet in a N SEW
direction from the (specify) of
(Street or other), and thence having a dimension
of from the (specify) of
(street or other), and having an area of
.
c. The tract of land cont~ining Acres and bounded by:
(specify) on the N SEW (Circle)
(specify) on the N SEW (Circle)
(specify) on the N SEW (Circle)
JIIII'i'~'"""
(specify) on the N SEW (Circle)
d. Attached legal description: YES XX NO
-
Page 1 of.4
~,~~."~",~~""-,- '-' "'.....->
.. "
Map of Proposed Zoning District Boundaries
Two (2) copies of map accurately, drawn to an appropriate scale (to fill a sheet of
not less than 8\ x 11 inches and not more than 16 x 20 inches). The map shall be
identified and submitted in addition to the General Description of Land. The map
shall include all land in the proposed change and all land within five hundred (500)
feet beyond the limits of the proposed change.
To be shown on the map - all property lines, street right-of-way, easements and
- other information related to the location of the proposed'boundaries and shall be
fully dimensioned.
1iM-~
The map shall show the existing and proposed Zoning District or Special District
boundaries.
List all owners of property within and contiguous to and directly across the street
from such area proposed to be rezoned. The addresses of the owners shall be those
appearing on the County Auditor's current tax list or the Treasurer's mailing list.
NAME ADDRESS
-
See Attached
-
B. ARGUMENTS FOR RECLASSIFICATION OF THE DESCRIBED LAND
-
1. Proposed Use or Development of the Land: peD Subarea A - Midrise
Signature Office Building .
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ZONING DISTRICTS and SPECIAL DISTRICTS submission of
three (3) copies of a Development Plan and other documents and two (2)
copies shall be retained as a permanent public record if approved.
For othe~ Zoning Districts, such plans or otQer exhibits would be helpful
to the review of this application.
Plans and Exhibits submitted
Plot Plan _____; Building Plan _____; Development Plan _____; Sketch _____;
Photographs _____; Other (specify)
2. State briefly how the proposed zoning and development relates to the existing
and probably future land use character of the vicinity.
-
We feel that this project meets the intent of the peD Zoning text in every
- respect except the side yard setback. It was our original intent to own this
building, in which case. a side yard setback was not requirpd. During
negotiations with BMW Financial Services to lease the building. they decided
they wanted to purchase the building. Due to very specific requirements of
BMW, we are unable to provide the side yard setback and would like to amend the
text to allow us to move forward with this project.
Page 2 of 4
-"-_._------~----- ---
"
, " , ,
3. Has an application for rezoning of the property been denied by the City
Council within the last two (2) years?
YES
NO X
If Yes, state the basis of reconsideration
-
......
C. AFFIDAVIT
Before completing this application and executing the following affidavit, it is
recommended that this application be discussed with the Building Inspector to
insure completeness and accuracy. Present owner of property: .
APPLICANTS'S AFFIDAVIT
STATE OF OHIO
COUNTY OF FRANKLIN,
I ( we) Duke Realty Limited Partnership
being duly sworn, depose and say that I am/we are the owner(s)/1~~D~~(3) of being
duly sworn, depose and say that I am/we are the owner(s)}~5Bee(B) of land included
in the application and that the foregoing statement herein contained and attached,
and information or attached exhibits thoroughly to the best of my/our ability present
~ the arguments in behalf of the application herewith submitted and.that the statements
and attached exhibits above referred to are in all respects true and correct to the
-- best of my/our knowledge and belief. -~l{JI}
Donald J. Hunter
Vice President/General Manager
Duke Realty Limited Partnership
4700 Lakehurst et., Ste. 150, Dublin, OH
(Mailing address)
614/766-2121
(Phone)
me this 1-f{;v day of g~nt 151 A ) , 19q6:
pIYU~~
. (notary ublic)
- Person to be contacted for details, if other than above signatory:
~"'~ - 4100 ~iU* _-u>\Oi,u. ~-3l'~
- (Name (Address) (Telephone)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - "(Do iiot write below this -lIne)- - - - - - - - - - -.-- - -
D. ,_~':RECORD OF ACTION
1. Withdrawn Held to
(Date) (Date)
2. P&Z C: Date of Hearing
Approved Disapproved Modified
3. City Council: Date of Hearing
Approved Disapproved Modified
,..,~,......... ~-,,~ II
, ..',40-..__'." _.___,,,._._m_____
I
.'
, . , ' ..
I
The applicant/owner hereby acknowledges that approval of (his) (her) (its)
request for 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
lIIIP"ol(I services such as water and sewer facilities when needed by said applicant.
, The City of Dublin will make every effort to have .these services available
.....
as needed. However, the rapid growth of the City of Dublin and Northwest
Franklin County has stretched the City's capacity to provide these services
to the limit. As such, the City of Dublin may be unable to make all or part
of said facilities available to the applicant until some future date.
.'
The undersigned hereby acknowledges and understands the foregoing.
q-1 -q6 "
Date Signature of App icant or au orized
representative hereof.
Donald J. Hunter - Vice President/General Manager
On behalf of:
Duke Reaity Limited Partnership
~"'lI 4700 Lakehurst eourt, Ste. 150, Dublin, OH 4301
'- Applicant
-
-
Page 4 of 4
.
.
OllKe
Construction
5515 Park Center Circle
Adjoining neighbors as of July 5, 1995:
-
.. F. Stephen and Denise M. Pagura
5261 Rings Road
Dublin, Ohio 43017
Harvey R. Helmbright
5245 Rings Road
Dublin, Ohio 43017
Prudential Health Care Plan, Inc.
c/o The City of Dublin
6665 Coffman Road
Dublin, Ohio 43017
Multicon Builders
500 South Front Street
Columbus, Ohio 43215
. Duke Realty Limited Partnership
8888 Keystone Crossing, Suite 1200
Indianapolis, IN 46240
~
......
DukeConstruction 4700LakehurstCourt Suite 150 Dublln,Ohio430l7-3252 614,766,2121 FAX: 614.766,1211
...
e(
-- ---- - - -, "'-. ---. ..---...,..--. -- ---- -
. .
r '.' :~,', '."\ .
- . .. '.; ~~=>. I :
...". 0 . . f I ~I ;.01
'. ' . : I' :~ .
' .
. I
. , 1 ·
.:.. 'J. 'l ,. P-C-D .
..,...- .
If , _
oi1r. ". I .
. .
' . : -'.
. .
Ir .
. , . .
- . i
.. -
,
.;". f i
. . . -
,~. .
,
-- ,
',. .
I!'.., __-,_.,.".,...... .,
. q ..- ""-,.;u .
'. '. ;; ~.g..."",: ,
.~. I - :::J ,,~,;.:; 1
. r: .~~~-:'MI-i~ ,
· " ..: ~:t ~~)~t::: I
" , ..'<S~~
I . . :-=...., .., n~..b;~ i
' . . ..y C" "" I<='- I
: JL (.\:~f; ..,.c ~.:' I
.. t-. t": -..~ ~ ~ .
1 , ':\. '0 '~'" .. .::.~ ..~
" . ... . .. .'C4. '. t .
I ,'. _..._-4_, -..._ ~ ~.. ....\.. .~. ,..: .... ~~fff6
. '" ., ---. .-.,. .....U~ .
. ;. \,~ . !, '.to ~ ~ ~..~. .. .:'. I
. ~ . . .;:1> .. . .
. # ;. .' 0 '..:... ,. {_.:. .
· . 1 .."1
. \ . . .... ,.,.
o "'"'t. :. .:~. .)1'.111 .
· . f \1 ..~.' '.. .tl:.c..... .
. . '.\ \ .- ': .- . I. ., '. _ .
. · !..\.. :~.. ...... -: ~.t .:,J
' l.t '.. .... I '" .
. .... ., . '0".
.. :-"'i l- f 7:,t': -;~.... lIT~".I' .
I 'I' .... .~ ""'l ~.
~ l t'~'~' 'G ..:~~ . ta..<; : :1;' !
. .' E . .:~ r.:.':~ "t,. ,'. ,...... j
'. ~ .f" t!..~. " . .
. !~ -. ~I'" Q',~. ';"'. ~.O'^ f. .
. ~ n (: . v,. ~. .
. t':'1 '.. ~ - :r
. f · ---... . . ~i. ti ,I\..~ ,o..~ ;
.'. . I ~<.:"~,:~. .:- '~r~'O"*v' ~
. -~ I 0.0. .
I c ,.~_... ~"'""' J
.' . ,.c.e=~,,\ 8' ~"', ~
t ., oJ'" c::,;'~ . ..
.. · -. . . . . I .I - .. ~.,<'. ~~; ':l:\.-~r.:i"",~ :
~ . , Iii, "., ~t::ioJC. v.... - :
.' ...... C I .,,, r; <' "'Ill> ,
. I ,:Jto~":' .~~t>_~__ l~ :
to..... ~ ~ "_"_'~__
. I ~""'~.r" ot'e::l""l:"o'~~,t) .
..! -v.. . COI.e--,
, -.' . . . ..~ ~:ll~C.{j~1.!>=
. ,.... I 4": r~-- -.,.- """"""i?"; .
. . . - , .! ...- o.
. . J .. 'Q co~c; I '. :
. j .,J;. ... -;:.
.. ...j,. , 8./tJ:. ~..~st. . I
"1:. '. ~ =. I
. .' . . . =7. '. ." _;
~ TUTn.E CRQSSING. -..0_....... ~.
ffi --....
......_~ -
. -- .
AT..no A~ 1\n'n.t 110411 . lh.No 1-.1 c..- _'= ::::._
~ ..
-.-
~!~i-P:;,,:1'>:";:~;:;Y_:''f~~~~:':t'': _-_C.:'
.
.
-
.. . ..
..
. . C!J ~
. .
. 6-e <
;
(I) c: ... . .
(/)=c
:s -
: 0'" ::
. . .z ><
. 0: ....LII
- .' ~
,. . ()~
.
.. , - :z: .
.. W:s
' . . ~ ~ I''f'
~~ J] k; U
8 It I
. ... . .
.
..
.
- -
.
, .
0
,
. .
. .
.
.
.
.
. .'
,
-
.
. . . . ..
- ...
'.
. .
. .. I'
. I- .
. . I
I
-
I
I
I
I. -
I
0, I
I
kl -.~ .
' I -
, . '-'---.-
. --- -- I in'v'd, . . ~,
o \~ .__, Z'(18 ~
' .' " , , ,- ~3 ,
. \ ~ . .
- ~ -tiSJ~~d- r- . :
_);;'f. .
- - ~, ' '
~__o".-~.,~._.".,__._~,<_____._,__,-,~_,._.~~___ -~,~~
.~~~?~ RIGHT-IN,/RJGHT-OUT
, ~ ~.;: ~ t::J LOCA TED ~ THIN THIS AR
: ~5~~ga . ..
.,'} \0 S!! ..-.
, ''''''''0-
"...u...._"'"
:O>Q N;:o....e;")
~8~~ ,
.... - ~
f5 PAUL: RfH lJ
t-- ----- I P-
I Nl0':;S"lS.W :::a
, 95.27' ---I
o~ - ---of 0
:.. ~ - !)N 1 )l~'9' d -'___
2 (') ~ [> I I CII ~ )f:)V8l3S - ----aS -,...,
n OJ II II ~ ~ - 0110S, . 1
~ II ~ (Q I). )f:)V8l3S Df'l1
IO:C:~O I I n~
"""Jr~ 0 0 , I · r-
~<..i 0 0 I 0
In 0 ,
-..: . I
~ , (I): . --I
~ ,~
. ~ -,
- \'oJ --
~ I ~
c: I . ~ ~. 0
- -i ~ ~ to .~~
~,~ :~ Co .....,
, ~~C
0, OJ-i--'
::tJ ( . . ......~. '~..
o ~~ r-:-J.
~ ___ i~~::::! f"l")r--'
- , - :0 '\01 r-r-.
~ I ~~~- 0'"
C) ~ ~ )0; ~ ""0 ::0
, g ~~ ~ 0 ()
OJ.~ ...... (J) -,-,
r- ;;t . V) "'\J
~ . *' ~--
~ ~ . . ~ 0:2:0 .
I ~ . ~ 0G)U)
I :. U)
I '. ;lit ~ . Z
~ ~ '~
, ~~' ~J
\-. I - " I: m1 ~ <
" I ., L :dt ~l. ~ 0
I~"!. ". ~' 8UlLDING SE.1BACK :. ~'-'-'
'!"II'. . I "'\J
~. I I. L 25' PAFIK1NG SOSACl< I __ :-I
I ii1~~ StO.SS'tS-E 257.22' : I ____. ::t
, i - -' --L....L fi1
L _ _ EX.rt.R~./ _ _ M)()I~ ~~ R~ :' --~.-1y )>
I BRADEN TON lAVE. P.B. 74, Pc. 72 ,_ . - - -I:. . <.n
, on:o[) - - - 1.::. - - I -1---1
I::X:CI)I. .
..~~ - nn
~ CI) S.1I 0 FUU ACCESS OPDlING :c a;, ::0 t> :9....",
~ ~ ~ 8 g .tOCA TED VtfTHIN THIS AREA. ~ ~ & ~
~ 01\) ~ . NO."
" .. ~ . 0)0"': .
~ ,~ ~ .~..:o~ - 3~'~
'S ~. . ~ c ~ ,0 ~
.. ~ CJi. 8..
-
-- ;t",,';J<:'.~Jf'f,Th~''t.-r~:~fr'H';'r''$:'\'::s't'--i$(.l~~~~~~,~' .__."._,--_._-_._,."~---,~-~~-~,~, ,."...,-,.,....~"-,,_.,--_. .
..-
3: . . .0 rJ ODD 0 ( ( ~ ~~
1 .
I } .
I ~ !
- _t.
- ...
-- .:. -
---
-....~ ..
1:
. ~t11 .. .
0
"""" ~ ~. . . ~ .
,
i ~~ ~~
......
~ ~-~ ' 0
. .
F. ~. ~ --:- - II
~.~ ~~.
~]~~ . -
~~. . SS
~~ · 10 .
~ ~ ~ 0 _0_
. ~. .
. ,
0 .. .
\.n
. N
0
. 0 .
0 \
0 , .
.
.
- ~
.
.
. . .
. I ~
:c ~ -. .
l- .' .;.
~ -
. .. .
Cl..
. ~ -
Z .
sr ~
. -
~ a:
I-
en ' ,
W. '. ,
..
. (1\ Q
W
- - a..
. . . ~
..
~ Z
- 0 0
0 - Ul
- I ~ I-
.0 r
t w t
- -
,,... ,
-~-~~~ "
~.
.
~"
- -, Cl)1 ~..
- -
.- --- a:
::) rn;::;,,~
I~t.~.
" '-~. "~5~~
~~~iI
~~~~
I "~:::3
rn.
I !5~
~
~
i
i
(!J
Z
,..... -
i -en
wen
....10
Uo:
I o:u
-
....I
O:t-
Wt-
~ t- ~
~ Z t-
w W
~
Ci5 U t-
~<
c:
<:Ii
c.~
-
I
!
i
G>j
~~~
.'::I~
Ci
, _..--..,----------'---~._---
. '", P.02/03
06-22-1995 09:19 1 614 43.39513 CEA
\'- I
.-
13 ~ ! I CIVIL ENGINEERING I ~015
Antare. Avenue
Columbu., Ohio 43240
ASSOCIATESI Tel e 14.433.901 :5
,J_ taM 614.433.9513
.c.089 Acres
-
Situated in the State ofObio, County of Franklin, City of Dublin. Vlfginia Military Survey 2419 being
- a 4.089 acre tract of land aU out of a 22.030 acre tract as conveyed to Duke Realty Limited
Partnership as recorded in Deed Book , Page , (all references refer to the records of the
Recorder's Office, Franklin County, Ohio) and described as follows:
Beginning at an iron pin found at the northeasterly corner of said 22.030 acre tract, in the ,western
right of way line of Paul Blazer Parkway II delineated in Plat Book 71, Page 100;
Thence with said westerly right-of-way the folJowj.ng three courses:
1) South 06024106" East, a distance of260.47 feet, to an iron pin set at a point of curvature;
2) With a curve to the right having a central angle of26021'45" a radius of836.46 feet whose
chord bears South 06046146" West. a chord distance of381.48 feet (0 an iron pin set at a
point of tangency;
3) Thence South 19057139" West, a distance of 12.71 feet to an iron pin set at a point of
curvature in the northerly right-of-way line of Parkcenter Circle as delineated in the
"Dedication of Park center Circle" of record in Plat Book 74, Page 104;
- Thence with said northerly right-of-way line the following two courses:
t
l 1) With a curve to the right having a central angle of 90000'00" a radius of20.00 feet whose
chord bears South 64 0 57'39" West, a chord distance of28,28 feet, to an iron pin set at a point
of reverse curvature;
2) With a curve to the left having a central angle of 070 10'23" a radius of 1557.88 feet whose
chord bears North 73037'33" West. a chord distance of 194.91 feet, to an iron pin set;
. Thence North Or38tQ6" West with a new division line across said 22.030 acre tract a distance of
570.30 feet to an iron pin set at a point in the northern line of said 22.030 acre tract and in the
southern line of a 5.089 acre tract as conveyed to F. Stephen and Denise Pagura of record in
OR V27825B 16;
Thence North 82021'54" Eait with the nortbcm line of said 22.030 acre tract, partly with the southern
line of said 5.089 acre tract, and partly with the southern line of a 5,00 acre tract as conveyed to
Harvey R Hembright of record in OR V17923F 12, a (iistance of 311. 50 feet, to the point of beginning
and containing 4.089 acres ofland more or less.
Thia description was prepared by Civil Engineering Associates, Inc., Columbus, Ohio from an actual
field survey. The basis of bearings arc the same as that of "Tuttle Crossing" of record in Plat Book
.... 71, Page 100, and aU other bearings calculated from this meridian.
lOOt" k~/l;;;9 ~/..z~/,.s-
,- .
Prepared: June 22, 1995
, .----~<-~~.._-"'-----"
06-22-1995 09:21 1 614 4339513 CEA P.03/03
, .
'. r.
13 ~ iJ CIVIL ENGINEERING I 901S
Antare. Avenue
Columbue. Ohio .....32....0
A S S 0 C 1 A T E S , Tel. 1S1 ~.433.g01 ~
.J Fax 614.4.33.tiI~1.3
4.089 Acre Lot Split
- ~~ -V
-
SCALE: 1" = 200'
..... I J J1 ,
0 100 200 400
Chakerea land C~
RUlrvl "A" of Tuttla Croulng D,B,J2l1U. Pg,:!'lO
11,,11'. At.
P ,8, 71. Pallll 100
.' j:l9.J.51 AI:,]
~ --- Ka"nath WllI;on 1.
DukCl RCloL1Y----,
"\ .-,._~-"'ifn.''''~ Dorothy 1..1, Whllatley
0.11.:1537. I' g,:!811
\ 22.030 Acroa 2.622 Ar-,
\ \ EVlrett G. J, Evelyn
\ I-Ial Pur-leaU
Dulll Realty D,II.191!i. I'g,;!!!!
Limltali Partner..hlp 2,622 Ac,
DRV 25277 E15
11.138 Acral;
Parkcenter F Stephen I Oenln P"llurll
- P.B. 7-., Po 10-. DRV 27112511111
i S,OSlI At,
......
A. n 0'23-
R · 1~~7:ea' %
Ch- N 7.3"037',33. Vi v ~ Harvey R. Hambright
Dlll- 'O+,{l" 4,089 ~CRES ~ t:::l 0,11, 33U2. PO, 50',
g'i 5.000 Ar..
.
A- ~'OO. ~
R - 20.00'
Ch- S 6....:\7.3i. W - -
-'
Dlat- 28.28' -, - . 260,47
S 6"246 E
azer PkWY.
6.. 26"'21'45. p.B, 71, PO.100
R - 83&...a'
Ch- S 08'046'046. W.
DI.l- 381.48'
-
-
This drQwln~ was prepared from on actual t'-Id 8urw}-
by Civil Eng Hf'1n~ A.soc., Inc. The baa'. ot bearing
JERRY L ore tho IOmo aa hat of Tuttlo Croaslng" of record In
.. - R.R. Spk. fnd. Plot Book 71, Page 100.
A - RR Spk. s.t ?r L ~~
. - I.P. fnd.
o - J.P. s.t ,s;:~z/~
I,P. Set ara J/.. 0.0. Iron PIn ' I
30- lonQ w/r.ap InKl'lbld CfA. tf Mry L Ryser. P.S.I7!S9g Date
CIvil Engln..,1n9 A.soclat... Inc.
._-.'---'_"'_-'_~-~--~---'_',-,,--,,,,--,-',,- ..
.
.
,
MEMORANDUM
....... TO: City Council
- FROM: Timothy C. Hansley
DATE: December 14, 1995
SUBJECT: Ordinance 102-95 - Tuttle Crossing Rezoning - Text Amendment
Initiated by: the Planning Division
The attached text has been resubmitted for review for the third reading. There are no changes
to the text. Additional information includes a site plan indicating proposed landscape treatment
for zero setback.
-
--
"......
-,----,------------..'~"~._.. ...,"'--~""'~,,-----
,. <
.
OllKe
Construction
September 7, 1995
,.... Ms, Barbara Clark VIA HAND DELIVERY
The City of Dublin
...... 5800 Shier Rings Road
Dublin, Ohio 43017
RE: Tuttle Crossing PCD Text Change
5515 Parkcenter Circle
Dear Bobby:
Below is our proposed text change to accomidate the zero side yard set back for 5515 Parkcenter
Circle,
Subarea A - Interchange & Freeway Related
Yard and Setback Requirements
Line 3: Adding a zero side yard set back may be allowed in cases where lots within the same
subarea share the same side yard property line, provided a common access drive exists along
and adjacent to the property line, and this access drive connects to a city street or traffic
carrying private road which facilitates entry into both properties, To compensate the lost
greenspace, additional interior parking lot islands will be provided.
"... We would like to formally submit this for City Council approval and adoption. Please call us
... with your comments and suggestions.
Sincerely
!
Mark A. Marsh
Preconstruction Services
Ircs
Encl.
cc: Don Hunter
Bill DeBoer
File
DukeConstructlon 4700LakehurstCourt Suite 150 Dublin, Ohio 43017-3252 614.766.2121 FAX: 614.766.1211
-
"""~ n .;~ ..~ u..""-"--....~.:.~....c_,~~.-C,"~. ~.,'"..> ~.,.~"''''''''"_;~..~,;
,
1-270rrUTILE ROAD
SUBAREA DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
AUGUST 9, 1988
REVISED AUGUST 30, 1988
REVISED OCTOBER 31, 1988
REVISED NOVEMBER 10, 1988
REVISED OCTOBER 22, 1993
REVISED DECEMBER 11, 1995
- The following Subarea Descriptions and Development Standards by subarea shall be made part of the
Concept Plan and are further discussed and illustrated in the Subarea Plan.
-
Subarea Descriptions
Subarea A Interchan~e & Freeway Related:
Because of the site's location along the eastern edge of the 1-270 outerbelt and adjacent to a major proposed
interchange with Tuttle Road, Subarea A may contain freeway-oriented office uses similar to those found
further north and bordering 1-270. These uses may include, but are not limited to, hotels/motels, general
office uses, corporate headquarters office or major institutional uses. High to mid-rise signature office
buildings with parking structures will be promoted within Subarea A.
Subarea AI Services Zones:
Typically found adjacent to a major interchange and the first at grade intersection, these two subareas
contain free-standing uses on individual lots that require:
· A highly visible location
· Immediate access
· Arterial roadway frontage
Although available to the general community, these uses are also designed to serve the needs of the
immediate neighborhood including the adjacent office uses.
- Subarea A., Northern Interchange and Freeway Related:
Because of the site's location alon~ the eastern ed~e of the 1-270 outerbelt and adiacent to a maior proposed
.... interchange with Tuttle Road. Subarea A., may contain freeway-oriented office uses similar to those found
further north and borderinlZ 1-270. These uses may include. but are not limited to. hotels/motels, general
office uses. cOl:porate headquarters office or maior institutional uses. Hi~h to mid-rise si~nature office
buildings with parking structures will be promoted within Subarea A~:
Subarea B Internally Related Uses:
This subarea transitions from the larger scale signature office located along the freeway to the smaller, low
scale structures associated along Frantz Road. Subarea B will be characterized by medium scale multistory
suburban office uses.
Subarea C Smaller Office Uses:
T~~j~Gbaract<1?ze~ by its relationship with the adjacent office uses along Frantz Road and the overall
,dn~ntJ.1m\\0 'tJo!ilPliment the small scale, low rise structures.
\~ :.~,}~...__~~J~ :,. ,
:::G \ A_ ~ "..
AS SUBMITTED TO COUNCIL
,._-;:--;~\~' ~'T~' ., E)lLj(qr FORMEEl1NGON ~U~L~
~"'{ r' . "t.'
~ if' ,," ~~ ~~~ ,..!.'. ':,,~. .
- I -
-
.
Subarea Development Standards
General
1. It is the intent of the developer to create a unified, high quality office park development.
Mid-rise signature type offices with parking structures will be promoted along freeway frontage. Office
structures will transition to smaller scale owner-occupied type offices along Frantz Road.
Detailed architectural standards will be set forth in deed restrictions providing for coordinated use of
materials and architectural character throughout the development. ..,
i
The use of extensive landscape treatment will be promoted throughout the development. A major ....
landscaped boulevard will be created from Tuttle to Rings Road.
It is the intent of the developer to work clearly with ODOT and the City of Columbus to extensively
landscape the proposed interchange and Tuttle Road.
A major entry feature structure is proposed for the intersection of Tuttle Road and Tuttle Parkway.
The same palette of landscape materials will be utilized in a similar design manner throughout the
development to create a unified theme. The proposed developments will be focused around major water
features utilized for detention and aesthetic quality, Wells will be utilized in some cases to control
levels.
Signage, shape, size, color and style will be controlled in signage standards set forth the entire
development with the deed restrictions. All site planning will be done in a manner consistent with
prudent planning principles and practice.
2. If these standards conflict in any way with the City of Dublin Codified Ordinances, then the Planned
Commerce District shall prevail. Standards in the Dublin Zoning Code applicable to matters not covered
in this document shall apply to each of the subareas in the Planned Commerce District.
3. Street plan alignments shown on the plan give a general indication of how they will be platted and
constructed. They are not, however, intended to be precise, and while the functional system will be .,
produced, its precise location may vary from that shown so long as the functional objectives continue toJ
be attained.
4. Initial development will begin with Subarea C, Subarea A will not begin development until proposed
interchange construction has begun. The pace and ultimate time frame of development will vary
depending on market conditions.
5. Signage and Graphics
Except as otherwise herein stated:
a. All signage and graphics shall conform to the Dublin Sign Code Chapter 1189.
b. All signage shall be subject to applicable signage setbacks of Chapter 1189, Signs.
c. All uses within Subarea Al shall have signage of consistent, proportion and materials. Ground
mounted "monument" signs, sign base, and landscaping shall conform to the standard signage design
detail as shown in Exhibit "A" and shall be either internally or externally luminated. Wall mounted
signs shall consist of only single block letters and shall either internally or externally illuminated.
- 2 -
..
d. Other than uses within Subarea Al no sign shall be painted or posted directly on the surface of any
building, wall or fence. No wall murals shall be allowed.
e. Other than uses within Subarea Al no signs shall be applied to windows for the purpose of outdoor or
exterior advertising.
f. No roof signs shall be permitted. Nor should a sign extend higher than the building.
cr No flashing, traveling, animated or intermittently illuminated signs may be used.
of"""""'" O'
h. No billboards, or electrical or other advertising signs shall be allowed other than a sign carrying the
~ name of the business occupying the site.
1. Each freestanding use fronting on Tuttle Crossing Boulevard within Subarea Al shall be entitled to
two identification signs. One shall be oriented to Tuttle Crossing Boulevard and the second shall be
oriented to Blazer Parkway or Crossing Boulevard and the second shall be oriented to Blazer
Parkway or Bradenton A venue or to the north service road as applicable. In no case shall any
freestanding use be allowed more than two (2) building identification signs. The building
identification sign along Tuttle Crossing Blvd. shall be either a ground mounted "monument" sign
or a wall mounted sign. The building identification sign along Blazer Parkway and Bradenton Road
shall be either a ground mounted "monument" sign or a wall mounted sign. The Building
identification sign along the service road shall be a wall mounted sign.
The freestanding "monument" sign shall be a maximum of 6 feet in height and contain a maximum
area of 50 per sign face. The wall mounted sign shall be a maximum height of 15' and equal to one
square foot of sign area for each lineal foot of width of the building face to which the sign is
attached, but shall not exceed the maximum size of 80 square feet. The combined area of all wall
ground mounted monument, and window signs shall in no case exceed 90 square feet.
J. Each use within Subarea Al shall be permitted (1) window sign. It may not exceed 10 square feet
and shall be included in the maximum area calculation per site as outlined above.
~
k. A project identification ground sign will be allowed in Subarea A adjacent to a site no more than 25'
..... from the 1-270 right-of-way, and shall be no higher than 20', The sign shall be internally illuminated
and two-sided and not exceed 300 square feet in area per sign face.
6. Lighting:
Except as otherwise herein stated:
a. External lighting within all subareas shall be cut off type fixtures.
b. All types of parking, pedestrian and other exterior lighting shall be on poles or wall mounted cutoff
fixture and shall be from the same type and style.
c. All light poles and standards shall be dark in color and shall either be constructed of dark wood, dark
brown, black or bronze metal.
d. Parking lot lighting shall be no higher than 28'.
e. Cutoff type landscape and building up lighting shall be permitted.
- - 3 -
,--,----- -"--
f. Alllights shall be arranged to reflect light away from any street or adjacent property.
g. Direct or indirect glare into the eyes of motorists or pedestrians shall be avoided.
h. All building illuminations shall be from concealed sources.
\. No colored lights shall be used to light the exterior of buildings,
J. Landscape lighting along Tuttle Road shall be ground mounted with a low level of illumination.
7. Landscaping: ,
a. As many existing trees as possible shall be preserved.
""'"
b. Any portion of a lot upon which a building parking area is not constructed shall be landscaped.
c. Street trees on each side of an entry drive shall be set back twenty (20) feet from the curb to
accentuate the entry/exit points.
d. A minimum greenbelt of ten (10) feet shall be maintained between adjoining property line.
e. Site unity can be maintained by specifying the same species of major landscape elements (shade
trees, evergreen trees and ornamental trees.) New compatible species of shrubs and ground cover
will be introduced to the plant palette as needed to provide interest, focal points and screening
around new development.
Fences/W aIls:
a. No chain link or wire fending shall be permitted.
8. Sidewalks shall be a minimum of five feet wide, paving material to be concrete. Sidewalks shall be
located as shown on the approved pedestrian circulation plan (See Exhibit B.)
Subarea A - Interchanl!e & Freewav Related
Permitted Uses "
The following uses shall be permitted within Subarea A: I
...
a) Those uses listed in Section 1159.01 and 1175.01 of the Zoning Code,
b) Corporate offices.
c) Hotel and Motel.
d) Institutional uses.
e) Ancillary commercial or restaurant uses within a structure primarily devoted to office or hotel uses.
Permitted Density:
In an effort to promote large scale signature type office buildings with integrated parking structures, the
maximum density within Subarea A will be 18,000 SF/Ac. The higher density will offset cost needed to
create parking structures, therefore, promoting open space other than parking lots.
-4-
.-.
-. . -' . --"._..~--~----~_-.--~-----~~--_._,~~----<~-- _~"'''~''~O''''''_""_.~~~,,".~'~~C'~.~--''''''_'~,",''
Yard and Setback Requirements:
1. Setback on Blazer Parkway shall be 30' for all pavement areas, 50' for buildings.
2. Setback along 1-270 shall be 50' for all parking areas and 75' for buildings.
3. Side yards shall be 25' for pavement and buildings.
4. Rear yards shall be 25' for pavement and buildings.
~ 5. All other publicly dedicated local streets shall have a 25' pavement setback and 50' building setback.
~ 6. Total ground covered by all buildings shall not exceed 25% of the total lot area. However, parking
garages and buildings shall cover no more than 75% of the total lot area.
Height Requirements:
1. The maximum height for structures in Subarea A shall be measured per the Dublin Zoning Code and
have a maximum height limitation of 100'. The maximum height may be extended if the structure
is setback from both the Main Drive and 1-270 right-of-way an additional 2' beyond the required
setback for every l' of height above the 100' maximum. A minimum height of two stories shall be
required for all primary structures.
Parking and Loading:
1. Sizes, ratio, and type of parking and loading and other facilities shall be regulated by Dublin Code
Chapter 1193.
2. Bank drive-thru requirements as per the Columbus Zoning Code.
Circulations:
1. Blazer_ Parkway shall have a 100' right-of-way and a 56' pavement width. All other local public
l!I"""'" access streets shall have a 60' right-of-way, and a 32' pavement width.
2. Curb cuts on Blazer Parkway shall be spaced a minimum of 200' (as measured from the driveway's
- centerline) with opposing cuts offset no less than 100' or directly aligned wherever possible
consistent with prudent traffic engineering principles and practice.
Waste and Refuse:
1. All waste and refuse shall be containerized and fully screened from view by a solid wall or fence.
Storage and Equipment:
1. No materials, supplies, equipment or products shall be stored or permitted to remain on any portion
of the parcel outside the permitted structure. Mechanical equipment or other utility hardware on
roof, ground, or buildings shall be screened from public view with materials harmonious with the
building.
Landscaping:
1. All landscaping shall be according to the Dublin Landscape Code Chapter 1187.
- - 5 -
-
2. Within the setback area along Blazer Parkway and Tuttle Crossing Boulevard, a 3' average height
continuous earth mound shall be installed as well as one tree per 40' of frontage or fraction thereof.
Trees have to be equally spaced, as possible.
3. A continuous landscape treatment shall be provided along the 1-270 frontage containing a mixture of
deciduous and evergreen trees planted in a decorative manner.
4. (Deleted)
Subarea Al . Services Zones ~
Permitted Uses ('
-
The following uses shall be permitted within Subarea AI:
a) Those uses listed in Section 1159.01 and 1175.01 of the Zoning Code.
b) Eating and drinking establishments.
c) Day Care
d) Ancillary commercial uses within a structure primarily devoted to office uses.
Conditional Uses
1) Drive-thru facilities developed in association with a permitted use.
Permitted Density:
Subarea Al shall have a density no greater than 10,000 SF/AC.
General
Buildings will have a common architectural theme with good aesthetic quality, the same or compatible
building materials and a common lighting, signage and landscaping ethic "Exhibit A." Within this mold, all ~
faces may identify the separate users and their products with appropriate expressions of individuality, tv
Structures, be they buildings or walls; roof lines and types; building spacing; signage, lighting and ."""
landscaping should present a conservative commercial approach with low level signage employed solely to
identify users with structures and landscaping effectively shielding the street from the impact of activity on
the site. The following additional standards are deemed appropriate to produce such a function.
Yard and Setback Requirements:
1. Along Tuttle Crossing Boulevard, pavement setbacks shall be equal to 30' , building setback equal to
80'. Signage setback shall meet Dublin Zoning Code.
2. Along Blazer Parkway, pavement setbacks shall be equal to 30' buildings setbacks equal to 50'.
3. Along the private access drive, pavement setbacks from the curb of the access drive shall be equal to
25;, building setbacks equal to 40'.:.
4, All other local street pavement setbacks shall be 25', building setback 50'.
- 6-
..
_.~.-=-,="..",~,,,,,,-......,......,...~....,.. ".~. ,........ "." -'-...
.
5. Total ground covered by all buildings, excluding parking garages, shall not exceed 30% of the total
lot area.
Utilities
1. All utility lines including water supply, sanitary sewer service, electricity, telephone and gas, and
their connections or feeder lines should be placed underground. Meters, transformers, etc. may be
placed above ground, but should be screened from view.
......... 2. All utility connections should be out of view or screened.
3. All mechanical equipment and related structures should be effectively screened from grade level
..... view by a fence, vegetation or wall of harmonious architectural material and character.
4. Mechanical equipment or other utility hardware on roof, ground, or buildings shall be screened from
public view with materials harmonious with the building.
Circulation
1. Blazer Parkway shall have a 100' right-of-way, and a.:!: 56' pavement width.
2. No full service curb cut shall be allowed from Tuttle Crossing Boulevard. One right-in/right-out
curb cut shall be allowed on Tuttle Crossing Boulevard: one right-inlright-out curb cut shall be
allowed on Blazer Parkway: one full service curb shall be allowed on Bradenton: one full service
curb cut shall be allowed for each free standing use on the private access road.
Paving
1. Asphalt paving for roads and parking areas.
2. Concrete curb and gutter.
3. Concrete road paving as needed in service area.
.'""""l 4. Sidewalks should be minimum 5' -0" wide; paving material to be concrete, and located as shown on
the approved pedestrian circulation plan for the Tuttle Crossing area (See Exhibit B).
-
Parking
In addition to meeting the current City of Dublin code requirements, the following guidelines should be
followed in the design of parking facilities.
1. All parking and loading shall be regulated by the Dublin Code Chapter 1193.
2. Drive-thru stacking areas for fast food restaurants shall accommodate a minimum of eight spaces per
exchange window.
3. Bank drive-thru stacking requirements as per the Columbus Zoning Code.
Waste and Refuse
1. All waste and refuse shall be containerized and fully screened from view by a solid wall or fence,
-- - 7 -
'--~_.- -"._"
.
Service
1. All refuse, trash and garbage collection shall be enclosed or not visible from the street or adjoining
property.
2. No noises, smoke, odors, vibrations or other nuisances shall be permitted.
3. No area of the site will be used for outdoor storage.
4. Service courts and loading docks shall be screened from tall streets or adjacent buildings by
landscaping, mounding or walls. ..
5. All waste and refuse shall be containerized and fully screened from view by a solid wall or fence. .....
6, No materials, supplies, equipment or products shall be stored or permitted to remain on any portion
of the parcel outside the permitted structure.
Landscaping
1. Within the setback area along Blazer Parkway, Tuttle Crossing Boulevard, Bradenton Road, and the
pri vate access road a three foot average height continuous earth mound shall be installed as well as
one tree per 40' of frontage or fraction thereof.
2. Common landscape theme and plan (see attached Exhibit "B") shall be adhered to by all property
owners within Subarea AI.
All landscaping shall be according to the Dublin Landscape Code Chapter 1187 and follow the Subarea
Development standards established under Subarea Al - Service Zones under landscaping.
Signs and Graphics
Building Identification Signage (Refer to the General Section of this Zoning Text):
A. All building identification signage shall have only the company name and logo. No brand names or
products shall be listed on the sign. J
B. Where more than one tenant occupies the building, there should be one sign identifying the name of . '
the building only.
C. All building identification signs shall be freestanding, ground mounted, double-faced and set
perpendicular to the street frontage, or wall mounted single block letters.
D, No temporary product adyertising signage shall be attached to the building.
E. All traffic and directional signs shall conform to the Dublin sign code, Chapter 1189.
F. All window signage shall conform to the Dublin sign code, Chapter 1189.
Architectural
Height:
A. No out parcel structure shall be more than 28' in height. For structures with pitched roofs, this
height limit will be measured to the roof peak.
- 8 -
..
~,"-....-.--,- -.."--...---....,,.,....
.
B. Maximum height for office structures shall be 65'.
Color Palette:
-
A. Earth tones, muted and natural tones are preferred. Accent colors in brighter hues are permitted for
building accent features only such as awnings, doors, limited trim, etc. A mixed palette on a single
building should be carefully selected so all colors harmonize with each other.
........ Materials:
A. Warm-tone brick (predominant material).
.....
B. Stone veneer with limestone trim. (Limestone rubble in a coarse ashlar pattern.)
C. On pitched roofs, standing seams cedar shakes, or shingles with no less than 325 lb, per square
weight shall be used.
D. Wood, stucco, tile, decorative concrete block, and other similar materials maybe used as and accent
with brick and stone.
Roof:
A. Pitched roofs with gabled or hipped ends are required with a slop equal to 6/12 or greater.
B. Minimum 8" overhangs are required.
C. Glass roofs are acceptable in portions of a structure.
D. Mansard roofs are not permitted.
E. Flat roofs are permitted, provided they are proportionately integrated with a sloped roof system that
adequately screens mechanical roof top equipment an/or other penetrations.
III!IIiiooo Scale:
..... A. Structures should be designed to harmonize with the landscape.
B. The scale of each building can be aided through the use of articulated building elements, such as
porticoes, dormers, recesses, awnings and other such elements which help break up the building
mass.
Wall ArticulationlFenestration:
A. In addition to using building elements to articulate the building mass, individual walls must be
articulated with fenestration, pattern, or structural expression equally on all sides of each structure.
B. Blank facades on the "rear" of the building will not be permitted, however, articulating such facades
with recesses, fenestration, fences, pilasters, etc. is encouraged.
C. The amount of fenestration should be balanced with the amount of solid facade.
D. With the exception of enclosed service corridors, the buildings shall have the same degree of exterior
finish on all sides.
..... - 9 -
.
Subarea A1 - Northern Intercham~e and Freewav Related
Permitted Uses
The following uses shall be permitted within Subarea A2~
a. Those uses listed in Section 1159.01 and 1175.01 of the Zoning Code.
b. Corporate offices.
c. Hotel and Motel. ...
-1!
d. Institutional uses. !
....
e. Ancillary commercial or restaurant uses within a structure primarily devoted to office or hotel uses.
Permitted Density:
In an effort to oromote large scale signature type office buildings with integrated parking structures, the
maximum density within Subarea A2 will be 18,000 SF/Ac. The higher density will offset cost needed to
create parking structures, therefore. oromoting open soace other than oarking lots.
Yard and Setback Requirements:
1. Setback on Blazer Parkway shall be 30' for all oavement areas, 50' for buildings.
2. Setback along 1-270 shall be 50' for all parking areas and 75' for buildings.
3. Side yards shall be 25' for pavement and buildings. A Zero sideyard may be allowed in cases where
lots within the same subarea share the same property line, provided that a common access drive
exists along and adiacent to the property line, the lots function as a single oarking lot. and this access
drive connects to a city street or traffic carrying orivate road which facilitates entry into both
properties. To compensate for lost greensoace, additional interior oarking lot islands with a
minimum width of 18 feet. as measured from face of curb to face of curb, and planted with a
minimum of two 3.5-inch caliper trees per island will be required along both sides of the access ...,
drive. :1
.....
4. Rear yards shall be 25' for oavement and buildings.
5. All other oublicly dedicated local streets shall haye a 25' oavement setback and 50' building setback.
6. Total ground covered by all buildings shall not exceed 25% of the total lot area. However, parking
garages and buildings shall cover no more than 75% of the total area.
Heh~:ht Requirements:
1. The maximum height for structures in Subarea A?. shall be measured per the Dublin Zoning Code
and have a minimum height limitation of 100'. The maximum height may be extended if the
structure is setback from both the Main Drive and 1-270 right-of-way and additional 2' beyond the
required setback for every l' of height above the 100' maximum. A minimum height of two stories
shall be required for all orimary structures.
- 10-
,.
.'!O!! ,'. . "~ '''it - . . ........,..-"'..,-...........~"-"'"""'~--",.,,~,~'--"'-".~.,~,-...".,"~,~.~._.-..-..- "- ,.,
Parkin!! and Loadin!!:
1. Sizes, ratio, and type of parking and loading and other facilities shall be regulated by Dublin Code
Chapter 1193.
2. Bank drive-thru requirements as per the Columbus Zoning Code.
Circulations:
.."..... 1. Blazer Parkway shall have a 100' right-of-way and a 56' pavement width. All other local public
access streets,shall have a 60' right-of-way, and a 32' pavement width.
... 2. Curb cuts on Blazer Parkway shall be spaced a minimum of 200' (as measured from the driveway's
centerline) with opposing cuts offset no less than 100' or directly aligned wherever possible
consistent with prudent traffic engineering principles and practice.
Waste and Refuse:
l. All waste and refuse shall be containerized and fully screened from view by a solid wall or fence.
Stora!!e and Eouioment:
1. No materials, supplies, equipment or products shall be stored or permitted to remain on any portion
of the parcel outside the permitted structure. Mechanical equipment or other utility hardware on
roof. !?found, or buildings shall be screened from public view with materials harmonious with the
building.
Landscaoin!!:
l. All landscaping shall be according to the Dublin Landscape Code Chapter 1187.
2. Within the setback area along Blazer Parkway and Tuttle Crossing Boulevard, a 3' average height
continuous earth mound shall be installed as well as one tree per 40' of frontage or fraction thereof.
- Trees have to be eaually spaced, as possible.
- 3. A continuous landscape treatment shall be provided along the 1-270 fronta!!e containin!! a mixture of
deciduous and evergreen trees planted in a decorative manner.
Subarea B - Internally Related Uses
Permitted Uses
The following uses shall be permitted within Subarea B:
a) Those uses listed in Section 1159.01 and 1175.01 of the Zoning Code.
b) Day Care Center.
Conditional Uses
a) Driye-in facilities developed in association with a permitted use.
-
- 11 -
--_.~~",-",.-".~<~~.
Permitted Density
14,000 square feet per acre.
--
Yard and Setback Requirements:
1. Side yards shall be 25' for pavement and buildings_
2. Rear yards shall be 25' for pavement and buildings.
3. Setback from Blazer Parkway and Park Center Avenue shall be 30' for all pavement areas and 50' ......
for all buildings~
....,
4. Front yard parking setback for Bradenton and all publicly dedicated local access streets shall be 25'
for pavement and 50' for buildings.
5. Total ground covered by all buildings shall not exceed 25% of the total lot area. However, parking
garages and buildings shall cover no more than 75% of the total lot area.
Height Requirements
1. Maximum height for structures within Subarea B shall be 65' as measured per Dublin Zoning Code.
Parking and Loadings
1. Size, ratio and type of parking and loading facility shall be regulated by Dublin Code Chapter 1193.
2. Bank drive-thru stacking requirements as per the Columbus Zoning Code.
Circulation
1. Blazer Parkway shall have a 100' right-of-way and a:t 56' pavement width.
2. Park Center A venue shall haye a 60' right-of-way and a 36' pavement width.
Waste and Refuse ..,
I
.J
1. All waste and refuse shall be containerized and fully screened from view by a solid wall or fence.
Storage and Equipment
1. No materials, supplies, equipment or products shall be stored or permitted to remain on any portion
of a parcel outside a permitted structure. Mechanical equipment or other utility hardware on roof,
ground, or buildings shall be screened from public view with materials harmonious with the
building.
Landscaping
1. Landscaping shall be according to the Dublin Landscape Code Chapter 1187
- 12- .."
_~__C~~O'"__"".~,_________"_'.m__"__
Subarea C - Smaller Office Sites
Permitted Density
In an effort to step the scale, a density from higher along the freeway to smaller, lower density office that
would blend in with existing Frantz Road office, Subarea C will have a maximum density of 11,000 SF/AC.
Permitted Uses:
The following uses shall be permitted within Subarea C:
~
a) Those uses li$ted in Section 1159.01 and 1175.01 of the Zoning Code.
... b) Day Care Center.
Yard and Setback Requirements:
1. Side yards shall be 12.5' for pavement and 25' for building.
2. Rear yards shall be 12,5' for pavement and 25' for building.
3. Setback from Park Center Avenue shall be 30' for all pavement areas and 50' for all buildings.
4. Setback from Tuttle Road shall be 30' for pavement and 50' for buildings.
5. Front yard parking setback for Bradenton and all publicly dedicated local access streets shall be 25'
for pavement and 50' for buildings.
6. Total ground covered by all buildings shall not exceed 25% of the total lot area. However, parking
garages and buildings shall cover no more than 70% of the total lot area.
Height Requirements:
1. Maximum height structures within Subarea B shall be 65' as measured per Dublin Zoning Code.
- Parking and Loading:
i
I
I 1. Size, ratio and type of parking and loading facility shall be regulated by Dublin Code Chapter 1193.
-
2. Bank drive-thru stacking requirements as per the Columbus Zoning Code.
Circulation:
1. Park Center Avenue shall have a 60' right-of-way and a 36' pavement width.
2. All other local public access streets including the Bradenton Road shall haye a 60' right-of-way, 36'
pavement width.
Waste and Refuse:
1. All waste and refuse shall be containerized and fully screened from view by a solid wall or fence.
....~.. - 13 -
- --------
Storage and Equipment:
1. No materials, supplies, equipment or products shall be stored or permitted to remain on any portion
of a parcel outside a permitted structure. Mechanical equipment or other utility hardware on roof,
ground, or buildings shall be screened form public view with materials harmonious with the
building.
Landscaping:
1. Landscaping shall be according to the Dublin Landscape Code Chapter 1187. ,
2. Within the setback area along Park Center A venue a 3' average height continuous earth mound shall
be installed as well as one tree per 40' of frontage or fraction thereof. Trees have to be equally ....
spaced, as possible.
J
- 14- ..
1
j
-'~',~""-,~".'''".'''~''.' _---.-"
DUBLIN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
RECORD OF ACTION
OCTOBER 5, 1995
CITY OF DUBLIN
"""5800 Shier Rings Road
! lJbtm, OH 43016-1236
~D: 614/161-6550
Fax: 614/161-6506
The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action in the application below at its
regularly scheduled meeting:
2. Rezoning Application Z95-016 - Tuttle Crossing Subarea' A - Revised Development
Text
Location: 34.4 acres (Subarea A) located west of Blazer Parkway and north of Tuttle
Crossing.
Existing Zoning: PCD, Planned Commerce District.
Request: PCD, Planned Commerce District, with a text revision that reduces
landscaping requirement at lot perimeters for combined or cross-access parking lots.
Proposed Use: Permitted uses under the Tuttle Crossing development text including
corporate offices, hotel/motel, and general office uses.
Applicant: Duke Realty Limited Partnership, c/o Mark Marsh, Construction Manager,
Suite 150, 4700 Lakehurst Court, Dublin, Ohio 43017.
Staff Contact: Mary H. Newcomb, Landscape Planner
MOTION: To approve this rezoning application because the text revision, provides for
- additional landscaping consistent with code requirements and is consistent with
\ the Tuttle Crossing development with the following three conditions:
...
1) That the proposed text be amended,' prior to scheduling the public hearing at City
Council, to include lots to function as a single parking area in combination with a
common access drive and the specific landscape requirements, subject to staff approval;
2) That the 25 foot side yard requirement not be deleted; and
3) That Subarea C, yard and setback requirements of the Tuttle development text, be
amended to read "Side yards shall be 12.5 feet for pavement and 25 feet for buildings
and rear yards shall be 12.5 feet for pavement and 25 feet for buildings".
Mark Marsh agreed to the above conditions.
VOTE: 6-0. STAFF CERTIFICATION
RESULT: This rezoning application was approved. M~ H. ~b
Mary H. Newcomb
Graduate Landscape Architect
-
_.,-----.'" e-...__..~_. ._'_.~,_"'--~~
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Staff Report - October 5, 1995
Page 5
CASE 2: ~ezoning Application Z9S-016 - Tuttle Crossing Subarea A - Revised
Development Text
APPLICANT: Duke Realty Limited Partnership, c/o Mark Marsh, Construction Manager,
Suite 150, 4700 Lakehurst Court, Dublin, Ohio 43016
REQUEST: Review and approval of a ~zoning within Tuttle Crossing by the revision of the
adopted Tuttle Crossing development standards text of the approved PCD, ...
Planned Commerce District, to reduce the sideyard requirement and landscaping
I
requirement at lot perimeters in some cases, for 34.4 acres (Subarea A). ......
STAFF CONTACT: Mary H. Newcomb, Landscape Planner
BACKGROUND:
The development text for Tuttle Crossing was approved in 1989 as part of a major 400 acre
office/commercial park being developed at a new 1-270 interchange. About 110 acres of the
development's northeast quadrant is located in Dublin, and the predominant uses are office and
hotel. The adopted Tuttle Crossing development standards for Subarea A require a side yard
of 25 feet for pavement and buildings. The applicant would like to revise the text so that in
specific,cases the side yard is zero feet. Specific requirements as to signage, landscaping, and
architectural character and uniformity are also contained in the exi~ting text by the developer at
the time of rezoning.
Following a recommendation by the Planning Commission, the application will be referred to
City Council for scheduling of a public hearing. Subsequent to that, City Council will vote on
the rezoning proposal. A two-thirds vote will be required to override the Planning
Commission's recommendation.
CONSIDERATIONS:
0 The subject site is located between Blazer Parkway and 1-270, approximately 600 feet
north of Tuttle Crossing Boulevard in an area set aside for corporate offices, ~
hotels/motels, general office uses, and institutional uses. To the east is Subarea B, which ......
includes the recently constructed Prudential Health Care facility. To the north are the
Wheatley/Puckett andChakeres parcels which were recently rezoned to PCD, Planned
Commercial District. To the south is Subarea 1 (hotel, retail, and restaurant uses)
located within the City of Columbus.
0 Development plans were recently approved by the Planning Commission for the Atrium
at Tuttle Crossing and BMW. These developments are situated on a single parcel and
they share a common access and parking within a single lot. The applicant is in the
process of splitting the lot into two parcels. The lot split will result in two lots which
have zero setbacks instead of the required 25 feet. Screening for parking lots typically
is located in side yards. Reducing the set back to zero, effectively eliminates the
landscape area.
0 Previously approved revisions to the Tuttle Crossing Development Text include reducing
the side and rear yards for pavement in Subarea C and reorienting the buildings within
Subarea Al (refer to attached records of action). With the last text revision, an error
..
-~.-
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Staff Report - October 5, 1995
Page 6
was made and the side yard of 12.5 feet is lislOO for both buildings and pavement. Staff
would like this error corrected with this text revision.
0 The applicant is proposing the following revision to Subarea A - Yard and Setback
Requirements #3: Adding a zero side yard may be allowed in cases where lots within
the same subarea share the same property line, provided a common access drive exists
along and adjacent to the property line, and this access drive connects to a city street or
traffic carrying private road which facilitates entry into both properties. To compensate
.... the lost greenspace, additional interior parking lot islands will be provided.
0 The Atrium at Tuttle Crossing and BMW sites share more than a common access drive,
.... their parking lots essentially function as one single parking lot. Staffbelieves that shared
parking should be included as a requirement for allowing the reduced setback.
0 Staff feels that the existing requirement for a 25 foot setback should not be eliminated
from the text. The 25 foot side yard should remain the standard, not the exception.
0 Staff also recommends rewording the proposed revision so that ,the language regarding
the interior parking islands is more specific. Staff recommends that the last sentence of
the revision..read as follows: To compensate for the lost greenspace, additional interior
parking lot islands with a minimum width of 18 feet, as measured from face of curb to
face of curb, and planted with a minimum of two 3.5-inch caliper trees (large or medium
sized trees as defined in the Dublin Landscape Code) will be required along both sides
of the access drive.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the development standards text be amended to provide for a reduction in
side yards under specific circumstances in Subarea A with the following three conditions:
Conditions:
1) That the proposed text be amended, prior to scheduling the public hearing at City
Council, to include shared parking in combination with a common access drive
[ and the specific landscape requirements, subject to staff approval;
2) That the 25 foot side yard requirement not be deleted; and
3) That Subarea C, yard and setback requirements of the Tuttle development text,
be amended to read .Side yards shall be 12.5 feet for pavement and 25, feet for
buildings and rear yards shall be 12.5 feet for pavement and 25 feet for buildings.
Bases:
1) The text revision, as modified, provides for additional landscaping consistent with
code requirements.
2) The text revision is consistent with the Tuttle Crossing development.
.....
,
-----,--_._----,.. ..,--.-.__..----~--~~~~~~_.
tI
{t'"
I
J
RD
-
,
~. ll!:'rao Pl.4CE ~
. ~
VI
1\\' ~~~ GRAN:
--
.
I I
t - , r\.l
I
.
cr
?
\.&
0 ~
CIWfER '
CREEK
CT.o
rill' -
D, "
'. "'~
-
t4
,
, ",; <'?J.:~:;", < :.,.", _
.....:: ~.;;. 'rR=ning:~~cation---~-'
,,',' , ' , Z95-016
~ ~~.'" ..
" ::: ,< ," ,: ,- Tuttle Crossing Subarea A ....
~ '. . ...; : ~.; . -, .. .. Revised Development Text
. ".,. :\ n'
^ "~~-~
"VT
n , , - - -\\, j
.!J.._ ,"\V' II "
11' ~ /'i~--'r. --' \. \~. \
......- . R-!.! L~ _ . ,\'\ _ ' ,
~ put? ,./' [/,. - N' \ " .~-' \0; -r-" -', c; R-1; (
.,. R4 ~ . 1 ' '\ ~L-t- - ,
. PLR -"~!:l' \ ~. PI-I ~ / IL,:_-. ,. -lilT ~~
pu, I _'- 'j , __
1 " , "', :"..... U \UI- l' ~ \ 1 == TT '--~L: ' _
",/. · ~ ..\ \ \ I 'iil.R \~ \ ~ i.,';""', II
:v V '1% 0 ~\\: r;.:\L ' ::. L::
~ ,. ,R-li! " ..". , E R-I
L- lJ ,~ ~...;::
: -:::!.. I_=~~. I ~ I ~..,
PUD, LJV r \ ..-:~ \ \~ Mv"1 ~~
Ie R-4, :0' R I ~ _ _ .
j - =. ~\ ,... ~
.,' R-2 - PUD
~., .~, '\. ~u= I t. :::;-::' ~I
1. ~ ~ ' · ~. ,.\ 11__ ~~R J. '.~)
,- --= - '~~~ D I:
-~ ~ ~" ~r\ r\ PUD ~ ' _II
,- F -,'Jl-~~.L -. ~ '.' ':...,' ,
. So ~ ~ PIlO ~ , u
K~ 'PC:_ ' ~:' ~~t['l:-2
\ \ . ~'l cc~, ~ \1
~ \' (." ~ ~ p- I~ :!:YI= ,\
. ( -7 cc cO \
' 1 \~"~^,/ "~_, I' '
-T JJ \ Rl \ L \ P., t,.-f'PUD '-= ~,~ "\~ .
- ~ -<r_ '! ,"F'-L..,ll/ \C ~ ;~D l> 1 ~ 1\H 1I['
- ~:I'~" f RII-~-'fl ~J:;:~ 0, 1= J~" I~, ~
::L;:J RI '. ,,-: ~I .-'=:: ~ - "',' ':'1!!!.~o A -l' 'If rr
-- ..:.:. .0- :. .~~ ~;Ji ;; f'
RX, 1 'J f(. - J '. j
~ c~ ,
- - ,.~ 1--' I ~ R-1 A t: ~j ,t:: 1
- ,'~ / i R -. I
.ilJwt " \\..~ ~ \ ~\\ ..~\rT 1 ~~;
"'Lo.--"l..../" \ II \ R -1' ' b5' " . .
=,'l\.~' . , ,\ - ::\ M-o~" CC 1~/ - " ' =..l~
:J...Jl ..ll k J ~~ l \ ~ , _._
~ ,'~. .~ ,
---- --, , ~' 4 ,,\ pc.O \. . ,7' D . --- ~
pUD \ p'-R~o' ~.:.:J' ,l,,,..., \ 1 !;;1,.Q~"~ pu/ \ \ ~,
~, 'so \. \~. LJ ft.~~nl._ _. 'i. 1\ '
? \'L \ 1 YOJ ,..J \
- ~ PLR ill' . . \' ~" /If ...,.--, " i.. . ~ \ , .
- \ 1 ~-1 e - 1. · '\,''''' \ " , __ 'R-' B:
\_2\rt ~ R'" '\ 2 R-'~' ,:. \ \\ . ~, ,\ ?U~ ~ \ t~\
.U.....-;; . . . '~ .......,. -\ \ \ \ \'
:..- ~ k " --..6', " ~~ I'\" .... _
- ~ ',<\of..., . . _~~
~ =,", \ . ----........ .,...." ~ "r-
o'- , " , ',/ ..'. & ,e
j;:'i -- \ . · /- . Y;l 'h~ '
' - '\ '. . lL.. ,~. Y'"' I
· ~11.- \ , \, ~, A Ii ti' It
- ~ -:/"'- . Rezomng pp ca on
. 1 ..- >..-. ' Z9S-016
'-.:X /. Tuttle Crossing Subarea A
-- -'-- - '\ l - '- ---, .- _ -::: Revised Develnnmpnt Tpyt
.-lo ~\~ _J ..." --l
.^.-.- -~--_.-"-~~~~ .
on. ·
-----~ - . . .! ... '1 . .. . .~_. .
~' . o. 0 '.. .
.\. . . 0 .. '0 '0' . 0 0 .
. ~. I. .r '. .. ._ .., .. ..... . .
-, . . · 0 .0 .. 00 ....... .--..to. .0 0 0 J
.....--.-_.. ... ~.~ . 6- ,l. ... .. ". 'fl... :-/-._ . ::,,-:.-.al '::'" .... .' .. .
-.. :--.........:....:.:. ., --7: I ~ :11' .:. =:-:-:<-,c .._ - . . ... ~.: a.. ..... ~ .. ,.,: . . ..~. .. .
-. . 0-- · t.:.: .. . . :..'tj.,,:;;....,...a.;.;, .c.-_
. :-.~: .i~::.~I., ....,. .";.~.,~;''''=' ~r:-. ._ 1'.._. . .. ........ -2-~=. .... I. . ~-:.=-..:---- _
. . -.a.. _ " ~. ..., - ..--:- -.-- -: L':
.. .. --
... . I. . .. .......,.... __..,.&:n-r-~--......,...~
... ... . , .r~:"'t,""1 ,,'w,..... .. ._r."",_~~-~~
. o. .. rlllt~.. ...:.:.,~" . -. . . ~ . .
... ~_.. ._. .r.-r . . .,
.. . . --. - . -... ... I" ..,. ....- ...,... . ~
.. . - . -..- -. -.-.. .. .
,II ,. . ......~-: .....~rl -I .A_..,.. :..c:,..- :. . -1
.... ..,...- -' ....... .... .-. . I
'- ....... \
.. - .
.. . . . . -.. \
. -- .. .: . r
. 0 ~... . 0 ..
.. ..~. .
. . -...... . . .. .
~.. . ... . .
. . . ,,~ .. ..: ' ..1, :-: ..
_. '0 /'. . .. .
~o , . 0 . . o. .0
., .. .. "'
. \ go,' . .
\~ L 0 . ;
- .
z ,
. Q .
'. \ . - :--:-....-~1 . . .., .. "_
'III, · -'
.. ... . . , .
. . . ~ .
I ~ 0 .. .:'OG.S5,
~ f--.----- -- 0 0 I
.J. :..
, · 0: ~
'I
~-_ 0 .
- , . .
... " -...
. . .. .
. .'
. o~"';''''m:''. \j==:-- -
. o. 0 .
. . '. .
a . . . . ..;
... .. t.. ~
..
.. : 0 00.
. D . . .
. .... .. t-
. .s.a", ..f .. .
0- ' .,..
. ... . .
. .. 0
..0 . . ..
. .
.
.
. . . .
. . : .
. .. .
· 0 CI
.. / . .~
. , ..
. '
. . ,- ... . 0
'. .
I . .. ;.
.. .
-' .
. . .- .
,
. \...
.
. \ .
.
..
.
_.
. . .
.
. .
.
. .,.
. - ...
.'r'
,
........ .
. Rezoning Application
. Z9S-016 ~
Tuttle Crossing Subarea A
Rpv;~ npvplnnmpnt Tpyt ....
" ~~n~ ".==---~-"""'""=%-",".,,,,,,"",""...~,,,-,,,,-.....<,",==,~_.~-=~,,.~...~.-.,......-.......
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Meeting Minutes - October 5, 1995
Page 7
Mr. Rauh emphasized that the Commis . on wanted to be developer friendly. e said they, staff,
and the residents felt this would be amenity. Residents now have bra t forth many viable
things. Mr. Rauh said he would e the staff and the developer to I at other internal sites
for this, and perhaps the par . lot could be shared. He read fro the staff report "all new
development on the ground ust be directly associated with the olf club to comply with the
approved preliminary de opment plan." He did not feel context being proposed was
directly associated wi e golf club.
-
Ms. Chinnici-Zue er did not support the suggestion t the Saturdays hours be
..... mornings. M out of town visitors would only be Ie to visit on weekends.
Mr. Maher equested a few minutes to confer
minute s.
Mr. Maher, on behalf of the developer,
consider issues raised at the meeting.
Mr. Peplow asked if the subcom . issue needed to be add~ Sed at that time.
Mr. Zawaly made the motion t table this case and Mr. S hen seconded it. The vote was as
follows: Mr. Fishman, yes; Mr. Peplow, yes; Mr. Su n, yes; Mr. Rauh, yes; Ms. Chinnici-
Zuercher, yes; and Mr. Zawaly, yes. (Tabled 6-0.)
* 2. Rezoning Application Z9S-016 - Tuttle Crossing Subarea A - Revised Development Text
Mary Newcomb said this is a rezoning within Tuttle Crossing by revising the adopted Tuttle
Crossing development text. It will reduce the sideyard and landscaping requirement at Perimeter
."'~4 in some case for the 34.4 acres within Subarea A. The development text was approved in 1989
as part of a 110 acre office/commercial park. The adopted development text for Subarea A
- requires a sideyard of 25 feet for both pavement and buildings. The applicant is requesting to
revise the text so that in certain specific cases, the sideyard is reduced to zero feet.
Mr. Newcomb said Subarea A is located between Blazer Parkway and 1-270. The BMW and
Atrium sites are under construction within Subarea A.
Ms. Newcomb said the applicant was requesting the sideyards be eliminated where there was
a common drive and cross access between two sites, such as the BMW and Atrium sites. The
sites were originally developed on one parcel, and the applicant would like to split the parcel
into two. The landscaped sideyard is then triggered along the new property line. Additional
landscaping be provided on either side of the access in such cases.
Staff believes that the language needs to be reworked. The applicant has not included in the
proposed revisions has not included the 25-foot setback for parking. It should be maintained as
a standard, rather than the exception. Staff believes that this should apply when be the case also
when there is parking that functions as one lot. Ms. Newcomb said there may be a circumstance
-
- ~~,~-
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Meeting Minutes - October 5, 1995
Page 8
where there is a common access drive, but split and there would be no reason not to provide the
25-foot setback. Staff is also requesting that the applicant provide more specific language
regarding the landscaping. On these sites they are providing wider islands with at least two,
3.5 inch caliper trees.
Ms. Newcomb said there had been a couple of other text changes within Tuttle Crossing over
the years. One was in Subarea AI, which concerned the orientation of buildings. Another text
change was for a sideyard setback within Subarea C which changes the sideyard for pavement
from 25 feet to 12.5 feet. She said there was an error in the text stating that 12.5 feet was ~
included for both parking and for buildings. Staff would like to correct it so that the text reflects
what was actually approved. ...
Staff is recommending that the development standards text be amended to provide for the
reduction in sideyards under the specific circumstances mentioned in Subarea A with the
following three conditions:
1) That the proposed text be amended, prior to scheduling the public hearing at City
Council, to include shared parking in combination with a common access drive and the
specific landscape requirements, subject to staff approval;
2) That the 25 foot side yard requirement not be deleted; and
3) That Subarea C, sideyard and setback requirements of the Tuttle development text, be
amended to read "Side yards shall be 12.5 feet for pavement and 25 feet for buildings
and rear yards shall be 12.5 feet for pavement and 25 feet for buildings. "
Mr. Peplow asked if staff had an amended text. Ms. Newcomb said the text amendment was
included in the staff report. Staff proposes to compensate for the lost greenspace by additional
interior parking lot islands with a minimum width of 18 feet, as measured face of curb to face
of curb, and planted with a minimum of two, 3.5 inch caliper shade trees along both sides of
the access drive. Staff was not requiring the two buildings to share the parking lot, but the
parking lots function as one. ,....
,
I
I
Mark Marsh, Duke Realty Investments, agreed to the above conditions. He said however, they .....
did not want to promote " shared" parking in this situation. They proposed that each building
have adequate parking independently. He suggested to reword the text to state that the parking
lots would function as a single/common parking lot. Mr. Marsh said Subarea A was 34 acres.
The Atrium and BMW projects are 22 acres, the Xerox building is 7 acres (total 29 acres), and
5 acres remaining to be developed. Mr. Fishman asked if the five acres ,could be developed
another office building. Mr. Marsh said yes.
Mr. Rauh asked if it would be legal to apply the amendment to only to the 85 percent of Subarea
A that is already developed. Mary Newcomb said the subarea would need to be broken down
into smaller subareas with separate standards.
Regarding condition 1, Mr. Marsh proposed "lots to function as a single parking area" instead
of "shared parking. Ms. Clarke agreed. She said each building would provide enough parking
for its occupancy, and when they function as one parking lot, this provision would apply.
..
rm,.iir'.'ii!D....."""":__""
.
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Meeting Minutes - October 5, 1995
Page 9
Ruth Reiss, 4193 Hitching Post, said because some of this subarea is undeveloped, she opposed
this zoning text amendment. She suggested obtaining a variance for the BMW and Atrium
buildings. She asked how many additional landscaped islands in the parking lot would be added
to compensate for the loss of green side yard, Ms. Reiss said there was still undeveloped land,
and it would set a precedent. Dublin prides itself on its greenspace and trees. Allowing a zero
side yard eliminates some of the greenspace that commercial developers normally provide. She
said the Tuttle Crossing text requires continuous landscaped treatment along 1-270 of deciduous
- and evergreen trees. She did not notice many trees in front of the Xerox building. She felt that
reducing sideyards in Tuttle Crossing is inconsistent with the text that promotes the "extensive
..... landscape treatment" throughout the development. The text also requires major water features
as focal points, but there was no water feature on the BMW site.
Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher asked if the developer had been held accountable to the text. Ms.
Newcomb said the Xerox 1-270 landscape plan had been approved with a mixture of plantings,
but no landscape inspection has been done. Landscape treatment with mounding is required for
both the Xerox and Atrium sites along surface streets. There were no water features.
Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher was in favor applying this exception only to developed sites. She
understood that staff wanted the 25 foot setback to be the rule, not the exception.
George Peplow did not want the exception to apply to projects yet unseen. He supported the
variance mechanism. Ms. Clarke said there absolutely no hardship on a flat, zoned, serviced
undeveloped site. She said the text change was a condition on the AtriumlBMW projects if the
owner were to pursue a lot split. As approved, they are two buildings on one site with a
connected expanse of parking and without a property line between them. This completely
complies with Code. The staff believes that by creating a property line between them, no harm
is done to the community. And, if it is appropriate here, it should be appropriate for all others
within the entire subarea. Ms. Clarke said the PCD, Planned Commerce District, standards are
.1fiiI~ '", very straight-forward and definable. It is the job of the Planning Commission to determine if
all the development text requirements are met. The Planning Commission does not have the
power to grant a variance---only the Board of Zoning Appeals does, and only when there is a
~."... hardship. The plan examined was thought acceptable by the Commission.
Mr. Peplow agreed the AtriumlBMW development was fme, but the undeveloped five acres in
the subarea should be prevented from having zero sideyards.
Ms. Clarke said staff believes that a landscaped perimeter sideyard generally makes sense.
Creating a landscape sector in the midst of what functioned as one parking lot made no sense.
Staff discussed this with the applicant before the buildings were approved, and he is fulfilling
a condition of approval by making this application. She said staff was open to alternative
mechanisms. Ms. Clarke expected this to be the exception because most developers or users do
not want a combined parking lot.
Peter Zawaly was concerned about policing issues and asked staff to follow-up.
-
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission .
Meeting Minutes - October 5, 1995
Page 10
Warren Fishman said the developer at the last hearing, made several concessions including extra
landscaping, islands, and more, bigger trees. He said this developer made a commitment to
have water features on the west side of 1-270 Thomas/Kohler rezoning).
Mr. Sutphen made a motion to approve the text amendment with the following three conditions:
1) That the proposed text be amended, prior to scheduling the public hearing at City
Council, to include lots that function as a single parking area, in combination with a
common access drive and the specific landscape requirements, subject to staff approval; --
2) That the 25 foot side yard requirement not be deleted; and
3) That Subarea C, yard and setback requirements of the Tuttle development text, be ....
amended to read "Side yards shall be 12.5 feet for pavement and 25 feet for buildings
and rear yards shall be 12.5 feet for pavement and 25 feet for buildings. "
Mr. Fishman seconded the motion and the vote was as follows: Mr. Peplow, yes; Ms. Chinnici-
Zuercher, yes; Mr. Rauh, yes; Mr. Zawaly, yes; Mr. Sutphen, yes; and Mr. Fishman, yes.
(Approved 6-0.)
Administrative Business
Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher expressed concern about Ms. Reiss' remarks. She asked that Mr.
Zawaly's statement about "policing" formally be addressed. She said it was important that
Commission actions, conditions, etc. be enforced by in the field. She said the volume of the
Commission's work makes it impossible to remember the specific landscape conditions for each
case. She said sufficient staffing was necessary to inspect and maintain records of compliance
with conditions imposed by the Commission or any other board. She asked if it would be
appropriate to send the recommendation to Council. Mr. Zawaly said the Chair could direct a
letter to Council with comments from the record included. Mr. Rauh asked that a memorandum
be sent to Council.
....
3. Zoning C e Amendment - Dri ways ltIIIii
tabled without discu on at the request of staff.
4.
T Rubey said the Co mission gave no comments n this amendment to Chapter 1189 on
eptember 21 because f the late hour. A formal mmendation vote was being requested.
He said a new si code was approved in J an 1995. Since then, the need for additional
clarification ha een discovered for several e sections.
....
,
~-~~,'-,~~
.
DUBLIN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
RECORD OF ACTION
AUGUST 17, 1995
CITY OF DUBLIN
-
: 100 Shier Rings Road
i tm, OH 43016-1236
Phi...TDD:614/761-6550
Fax: 614/761-6506
The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action at its regular meeting:
1. Development Plan - Tuttle Crossing - SSlS Parkcenter Circle
Location: 4.089 acres located at the northwest comer of Paul Blazer Parkway and
Parkcenter Circle.
Existing Zoning: PCD, Planned Commerce'District (I'uttle Crossing)
Request: Review and approval of a development plan under the provisions of Section
1181.09 of the Planning and Zoning Code.
Proposed Use: A 63,070 square foot, three-story office building.
AppUcant: Duke Realty Limited Partnership, c/o Mark A. Marsh, Suite 150, 4700
Lakehurst Court, Dublin, Ohio 43016.
. .
MOTION: To rescind the August 3, 1995 approval and reapprove this development plan with
the following thirteen conditions:
1) That the landscaped islands adjacent to the access drive (western portion of this site and
eastern portion of the Atrium site) be increased in width and planted with 3.5-inch caliper
- trees (two per island) and that trees on the entire site be upgraded to 3.5-inch caliper;
2) That the landscape plan meet Code, subject to staff approval;
- 3) That a curb cut be added along Blazer Parkway to utilize the median break or that'the
existing left turn stacking lanes be replaced with a grassed median, subject to staff
approval;
4) That all mechanical units be screened per Code;
5) That the Tuttle Crossing text be approved by Council with regard to the parking setback
prior to approval of a lot split, should one be desired;
6) That lighting conform to the Dublin Lighting Guidelines;
7) That signage conform to Code;
8) That a tree preservation plan providing for protection of the northern treeline be
submitted pnor to issuance of a building permit, subject to staff approval;
9) That a copy of the recorded access agreement between the Atrium at Tuttle Crossing site
,and this site be submitted to the City Engineer's office before the approval of the lot
split;
10) That stormwater management meet the approval of the City Engineer;
11) That a five-foot wide concrete sidewalk be provided along the west side of Blazer
Parkway on this site;
Page 1 of2 Rezoning Application
Z9S-016
- Tuttle Crossing Subar~ A.
_..,--~_.~,-~._--,-,--, __ u, _..__._~~__
.
DUBLIN PLANNING AND WNlNG COMMISSION
RECORD OF ACTION
AUGUST 17, 1995
1. Development Plan - Tuttle Crossing - 5515 Parkcenter Circle (Cont.)
12) That up to 40 additional parking spaces be allowed subject to Staff approval; and ..,
13) That four handicap parking spaces currently located southwest of the building entrance,
be moved to be more directly in front of the building entrance. j
* Mark Marsh agreed to the above conditions.
VOTE: 6-0.
RESULT: This development plan was approved.
STAFF CERTIFICATION
~~~;,~(~~
Graduate Landscape Architect
,
....
......
Rezoning Application
Z9S-016
Page 2 of2 Tuttle Crossing Subarea A
Revised Development Text
....
. '----.. ,~,""-~,-<=~~,,,,-..",,--~.....~~-^- -"
DUBLIN PLANNING AND WNING COMMISSION
SPECIAL MEETING
MINUTES
AUGUST 17, 1995
CITY OF DUBLIN
-
800 Shier Rings Road
b1in, OH 430 16-1236
~D: 614/161-6550
fax: 614/161-6506
1. Development ~Ian - Tuttle Crossing - 5515 Parkcenter Circle (Modified previous
approval 6-0)
2. Infonnal Discussion - Rezoning Application Z95-003 - Corporate Park of Dublin -
(Additional recommendation to Counell 6-0)
The meeting was called to order by Chairman Dick Raub at 6:30 p.m. Other commission
members present were: Marilee Chinnici-Zuercher, John Ferrara, Warren Fishman, George
Peplow, and Peter Zawaly. Dan Sutphen was absent. Staff members present were: Bobbie
Clarke, Tom Rubey, Mary Newcomb, Mary Bearden, Steve Smith, and Libby Farley.
Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher accepted all documents presented into the record and Mr. Ferrara
seconded the motion. The vote was as follows: Mr. Fishman, yes; Mr. Peplow, yes; Mr.
Rauh, yes; Mr. Zawaly, yes; Mr. Ferrara, yes; and Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher, yes. (Approved
6-0.)
1. Development Plan - Tuttle Crossing - 5515 Park Center Circle
-
Mary Newcomb presented this development plan ,which was approved with several exceptions
...... by the Commission on August 3, 1995, for a 63,000 square foot office building. The building
elevation, landscaping, building materials and color palette, including the window glass are
under consideration at this special meeting. She said changes include eliminating the glass,
similar to that on Sterling Software, and adding glass to the east elevation. A combined
landscape plan for the Atrium site and this site was submitted, the Atrium landscaping reflects
an out of date plan. Ms. Newcomb showed a more recent landscape plan to the Commission.
Ms. Newcomb said the site is approximately four acres located on the northwest comer of Blazer
Parkway and Park Center Circle. The three-story building is to be precast concrete with glass.
The applicant Is proposing to double the . landscaped islands along the access drive.
Mr. Ferrara asked if the additional trees shown up to the Atrium building are included. Ms.
Newcomb said they were included on the Atrium plan submitted for a building permit. She said
the plan in the Commission packets did not show all the interior landscaping. Mr. Ferrara asked
about water retention. Ms. Newcomb said no wet ponds were proposed.
Rezoning Application
Z9S-016
- Tllttlp. ~l"O~Sin2 Subarea A
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Special Meeting Minutes - August 17, 1995
Page 2
Mr. Ferrara asked if the City had any plans to include wet ponds on any area here. Staff was
unaware of any.
Mr. Zawaly said all of the Commissioners had received telephone calls from a citizen who raised
the storm water retention question. There is a massive amount of parking lot and part of the
storm water retention concern is the water run-off into Cramer Creek. Ms. Newcomb said the
storm water calculations were approved by the City Engineer. The water is being retained
within the parking lot, and a detention area is proposed along Blazer Parkway. ...
Mr. Zawaly asked if the added green space had been adequately addressed. Ms. Newcomb said U
yes, the zero set back concern had been addressed adding wider islands and trees. The
landscaping must comply with Code.
Mr. Zawaly asked about the square footage of the building as it related to the parking lot
landscaping. Ms. Newcomb said the development text permitted up to 18,000 square feet per
acre, and this was 15,424 square feet per acre, well within the requirements.
Mr. Raub asked if the handicap parking spaces were appropriately located for access to the main
entry. Mr. Newcomb said typically, staff likes to see them as close to the entrance as possible.
Mr. Raub said ADA stressed handicap parking as close to the main entrance as possible.
Mark Marsh, preconstruction services manager for Duke Construction, Columbus office agreed
to the following ten conditions:
1) That the landscaped islands on this site and the Atrium site be increased in width and
planted with larger caliper shade trees, subject to staff approval;
2) That the landscape plan meet Code, subject to staff approval;
3) That a curb cut be added along Blazer Parkway to utilize the median break or that the
existing left turn stacking lanes be replaced with a grassed median, subject to staff ....
approval;
,
4) That all mechanical units be screened per Code; i "j
....
5) That the Tuttle Crossing text be approved by Council with regard to the parking setback
prior to approval of a lot split, should one be desired;
6) That lighting conform to the Dublin Lighting Guidelines;
7) That signage conform to Code;
8) That a tree preservation plan providing for protection of the northern treeline be
submitted prior to issuance of a building permit, subject to staff approval;
9) That a copy of the recorded access agreement between this site and the Atrium at Tuttle
Crossing be submitted to the City Engineer's office before the issuance of a building
permit; and
10) That stormwater management meet the approval of the City Engineer.
Mr. Marsh apologized for the computer mix-up on the landscape drawings. He said this
building represented only a 63 percent lot coverage.
Rezoning Application
Z9S-016
Tuttle Crossing Subarea A
Revised Develooment Text -
P'lr,-1 1i -,-
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Special Meeting Minutes - August 17, 1995
Page 3
Peplow asked how far the sidewalk would be from the curb. Ms. NewComb said the sidewalk
is typically one foot in from the right-of-way with adequate room for trees to be planted between
the sidewalk and the curb.
Mr. Peplow liked the change made in the appearance of the rear of the building on Blazer
Parkway with the panels removed.
-
Mr. Marsh showed the Commission samples of the glass and precast concrete proposed.
......
Mr. Zawaly asked if all the documents would be plotted correctly to identify everything entered
into the record as being represented as part of this application. He wanted a document for the
record that indicated everything.
Ms. Newcomb said the applicant had tried to respond to conditions from the previous meeting,
and conditions must be met before the issuance of a building permit. She said however, there
was no record plan as such for this meeting. Ms. Clarke said as long as there were conditions
of approval, the Commission never received a truly final plan.
Mr. Zawaly said documents represented before the commission should include the sidewalk, etc.
be shown on a plan. He asked that it be provided as part of the-record. Mr. Marsh said a
building permit would not be approved until the conditions were met.
Mr. Zawaly asked if a wet pond would be possible. Mr. Marsh said Randy Bowman had said
at the last meeting that a wet pond there could not meet Dublin design criteria.
Mr. Fishman was disappointed there was no water feature. Mr. Marsh said the 50 x 300 foot
long narrow area on the east face of the building along Blazer Parkway would be the primary
~ detention area.
,
I Mr. Fishman asked if every tree on the inside of the landscape plan was 3.5 inches in caliper
_t~
except for the rim trees. Mr. Marsh said yes. Ms. Clarke said the condition based on the
August 3 approval had been written to exclude the perimeter of the parking lot, not the perimeter
of the site. Mr. Fishman said this was wrong.
After a discussion, Mr. Fishman said it was street trees that did not have to be 3.5 inches in
caliper. Mr. Marsh expressed concern about larger trees immediately adjacent to the smaller
trees provided under the Atrium approval. He said on the property line along the west side of
the 5515 site the islands would be doubled in size, an additional tree would be added, and the
caliper of all of those trees would be 3.5 inches in caliper. 'It was finally agreed that all trees
on the 5515 site would be upgraded to 3.5 inches except the trees along Park Center Circle, on
the south border, along Blazer Parkway, on the east border, or on the north border where they
blend into the trees provided under contract for the Atrium building.
Mr. Fishman asked what caliper they would be at the Atrium. Ms. Newcomb said they were
2.5 inches in caliper. She said the condition presently read that the street trees would be 3.5
inches in caliper. Mr. Fishman said that was his intention.
Rezoning Application
Z9S-016
- """"'_.L.Lt _ ,,__ __~_ _ ~__t..____ A
..-----, _.,-----~-~
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Special Meeting Minutes - August 17, 1995
Page 4
After more discussion, Mr. Marsh agreed to make all the trees 3.5 inches in caliper.
Mr. Fishman again expressed disappointment that there was no water feature, not even a
fountain. Mr. Marsh said even a fountain requires concrete enclosures.
Mr. Rauh understood, but felt a water feature was needed. He said the building had been
previously approved and the Commission was only to review exterior elevations now. Mr.
Ferrara agreed. ....
,
I
Mr. Marsh has requested from his company that on the next 113 acres, north of Rings Road, .....
a water feature be provided, and two are planned to accommodate a combination of
attractiveness and detention. Mr. Marsh guaranteed that there would be a wet centralized
retention pond to accommodate the entire development.
, Mr. Ferrara asked if the reflective glass was exactly as used on the Sterling Software building.
Mr. Marsh said yes and that the same type of precast concrete but in a different color. Mr ~
Ferrara asked if a lot of white had been eliminated on the east elevation. Mr. Marsh said yes.
Mr. Marsh announced that the BMW North American financial headquarters would be the tenant
of this building. The facilities from Hilliard and Upper Arlington would be combined here with
+ 300 employees.
Mr. Rauh said this presentation was much better than at the last meeting. He asked that the
handicap parking be relocated closer to the front entry of the building. Mr. Marsh agreed and
proposed to relocate four spaces currently on the west elevation and shift them to the center
position in front of the main entry to the building.
Mr. Ferrara asked that the Engineering staff be advised about the promise that there will be two
water features upon the development of the next Tuttle Crossing project. ...
Mr. Zawaly congratulated Duke Realty Investments for bringing a fine project to Dublin. I
.....
Ms. Clarke said the August 3 action needed to be rescinded to define the landscape condition
better, and a handicap parking space relocation condition should be drafted.
Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher made the motion to rescind the August 3, 1995 approval and reapprove
this development plan with the following 13 conditions:
1) That the landscaped islands adjacent to the access drive (western portion of this site and
eastern portion of the Atrium site) be increased in width and planted with 3.5-inch caliper
trees (two per island) and that trees on this entire site be upgraded to 3.5-inch caliper;
2) That the landscape plan meet Code, subject to staff approval;
3) That a curb cut be added along Blazer Parkway to utilize the median break or that the
existing left turn stacking lanes be replaced with a grassed median, subject to staff
approval;
4) That all mechanical units be screened per Code; Rezoning Application
Z9S-016
Tuttle Crossing Subarea A
Revised Development Text
....
~._~" """",~~"~~""''--",--,,-~.,
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Special Meeting Minutes - August 17, 1995
Page 5
5) That the Tuttle Crossing text be approved by Council with regard to the parking setback
prior to approval of a lot split, should one be desired;
6) That lighting conform to the Dublin Lighting Guidelines;
7) That signage conform to Code;
8) That a tree preservation plan providing for protection of the northern treeline be
submitted prior to issuance of a building permit, subject to staff approval;
....... 9) That a copy of the recorded access agreement between the Atrium at Tuttle Crossing site
and this site be submitted to the City Engineer's office before the approval of the lot
split;
... 10) That stormwater management meet the approval of the City Engineer;
11) That a five-foot wide concrete sidewalk be provided along the west side of Blazer
Parkway on this site;
12) That up to 40 additional parking spaces be allowed subject to Staff approval; and
13) That four handicap parking spaces currently located southwest of the building entrance,
be moved to be more directly in front of the building entrance.
Mr. Zawaly seconded the motion and the vote was as follows: Mr. Fishman, yes; Mr. Ferrara,
yes; Mr. Peplow, yes; Mr. Rauh, yes; Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; and Mr. Zawaly, yes.
(Approved 6-0, [NOTE: This action overrides the approval granted on August 3, 1995.J
2. Rezoning A ~Z9S-003 Co
r--
,
I
.....
. Fishman thought' was agreed that e whole project would
. Realty, is the leasing ent, and she stated at t time
tion on behalf of the a . cant. The condition w that the
compliance when it i 00 percent leased or by ext spring,
roperty owner did not gree to this, and it will orce an open
Ms. Clarke said the Q dect has never been mo than 60 percent leased s. construction.
property owners . they do not have the oney to bring the project' to compliance.
ted a plan showing e site. He said a three-fi
ge and one tree eve 40 feet was required b~
Rezoning Application
Z9S-016
Tuttle Crossing Subarea A
- - - - - -
...,----- ----.--...- ~... - -,_.._~_.._....~.._~-~-
~ .' '.
}
DUBLIN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
RECORD OF ACTION
AUGUST 3, 1995
ITY OF DUBLIN ~ ~ O'l1J ~ ~"5Si ~a..c11bY'- m-... ~tn (1S
...
The Planning and ,Zoning Cominission took the following action at its regular meeting: .',.~ -
5. Development Plan - Tuttle CrOssing - 5515 Parkcenter. Circle
Location: .4.089 acres located at the northwest corrier of Paul Blazer Parkway and
Parkcenter Circle.
. Existing Zo~: PCD, Planned Commerce District (Tuttle Crossing)
Request: Review and approval of a development plan under the provisions of Section
1181.09 of the Planning and Zoning Code.
Proposed Use:. A 63,070 square foot, three-story office building. -...
Applicant: Duke Realty limited Partnership, clo Mark A. Marsh, Suite 150, 4700
Lakehurst Court, Dublin, Ohio 43016.
MOTION: To approve this development plan with the following thirteen conditions:
1) That the landscaped islands adjacent to the access drive (western portion of this site and
eastern portion of the Atrium site) be increased in width and planted with 3.5-inch caliper
trees (two per island), that the trees on this site be upgraded to 3.5-inch caliper,
excepting the parking lot perimeter trees, subject to staff approval;
2) That the landscape plan meet Code, subject to staff approval;
3) That a curb cut be added along Blazer Parkway to utilize the median break or that the .,
existing left turn stacking ~es be' replaced with a grassed median, subject to staff 1
approval; . ..
4) 'That all mechanical units be screened per Code; " .
5) That the Tuttle Crossing text beapprovea by Council with regard to the parking setback
prior to approval of a lot split, should one,be desired;
6) That lighting conform to the Dublin lighting Guidelines;
7) That signage .conform to Code;
8) That a 'tree preservation plan providing for protection of the northern treeline be
submitted prior to issuance of a building permit, subject to staff approval;
9) That a copy of the recorded access agreement between the Atrium at Tuttle Crossing site
and this site be submitted to the City Engineer's office before the approval of the lot
, split;
Page 1 of2
Rezoning Application
Z95-016
Tuttle Crossing Subarea A
Revised Development Text _
- -,----~_..--_.- ""~,._,,,,,,,,....,,,..,,,,,,,>.,.,,,.,,,;,,,,,-"-';
) .'
DUBLIN PLANNING .AND ZONING COMMISSION
RECORD OF' ACTION
AUGUST 3, 1995
5. Development Plan - Tuttle Crossing - 55lS Parkcenter Circle (Cont.)
...... '!batstormwater lp8Ilagement meet the approval of the City Engineer;
10)
" ,
11) '!bat a five-foot, wide concrete sidewalk J>e provided along the west side of Blazer
..... Parkway on this ~te; , ,
12) '!bat up to 40 additional parking spaces be,allowed subject to Staff approval; and
13) '!bat the application be reheard by the Commkg,on at a'special meeting on August 17 for
consideration of the building elevations, materials, glass color, and landscaping.
.. ' * Mark Marsh agreed to the above conditions.
.
VOTE: 5-0,
RESULT: 'lbisdevelopment plan was approved with the exception of the building elevations,
landscaping, materials, and color palette, including the glass. The remainder is to be submitted
to the Planning and Zoning Commission on August 17, 1995 for approval.
STAFF CERTIFICATION
~ii . fvGwOJw,J.
Mary K Newcomb
- Graduate Landscape Architect
-
Page 2 of2
Rezoning Application
Z95-016
Tuttle Crossing Subarea A
- VP,"~n Develooment Text
, Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes - August 3, 1995
Page 8
As the stewards 0 vur community. shall continue 0 assess' and deft our
fundamental . !pIes and polici . thereby ensuri the high quality 0 ife we
enjoy. 0 collective efforts . create a sense identity and of pl . clearly
co cating the essence the City of Dub . .
r said this process compiled fro number of meetings d workshops over tb
He di not realize how . cult it would be to 15 adults to agree n
.....
Mr, Rauh
....
e a motion that
endation of approval.
I
S. Development Plan - Tuttle Crossing - 5515 Parkcenter Circle
..
Mary Newcomb presented this development plan for Subarea A of the Tuttle Crossing PCD,
Planned Commerce District. A 63,000 square foot, three-story office building is proposed on
4.089 acres at the northwest comer of Park Center Circle and Blazer Parkway. The Atrium
office building which was approved in June is immediately to the west, on the same parcel. The
Prudential site is across Blazer Parkway, and to the north are a single-family home and a non-
conforming landscape business, both zoned R-IA. Most of the area is zoned for an office park.
A pond located on the site is being filled, and the existing fencerow bas landmark trees running
along the north property line.
Ms. Newcomb said when the Prudential site was approved, a median break was also approved ~
with left turn stacking from Blazer Parkway into this site. Only one access off of Park,Center '.1
Circle is proposed, none from Blazer Parkway. The proposed building is modeled after the .....
Sterling Software building, except for colors. If this lot ~ split, a sideyard setback of 25 feet
is required by the text, along the Atrium site, which will not be possible on either side of the
new property line. Staff is supportive of a zero setback if the width of the landscaped islands
on both sides of this aisle are doubled and planted with two deciduous shade trees, 3 to 3.5
inches in caliper. The proposed plan bas 263 parking spaces, and the requirement is 253 spaces.
Future expansion of the parking is probable along Parkcenter Circle. Ms. Newcomb said the
mounding needs to be shown on the grading plan. Abutting the north property line, a continuous
six-foot mound with evergreens and a deciduous tree every 40 feet is needed. Because of the
tree row, staff recommends additional evergreen planting but no mounding in that area. Some
species should be replaced with hardier varieties of plants, and crabapples in the parking lot
should be replaced with larger and higher canopy trees.
A five-foot sidewalk: will be constructed on the north side of Park Center Circle. The 40-foot
building is to be constructed of white pre-cast concrete with green glass windows. The rooftop
Rezoning Application
Z9S-016
Tuttle Crossing Subarea A
TO , T"Oo ~1_.___~___" .......___.. ..
.:/~~" -".--....,. ~~,-_.,
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes - August 3, 1995
Page 9
mechanicals have a parapet screen. A single tenant with 250-300 employees is to occupy the
building. Ms. Newcomb said the Subarea A text permits a building to land ratio of up to 18,000
- square feet per acre; 13,424 square feet and lot coverage of 65 percent are proposed.
Staff is recommending approval of this development plan with the following ten conditions:
-
1) That the landscaped islands on this site and the Atrium site be increased in width and
planted with larger caliper shade trees, subject to staff approval;'
2) That the landscape plan meet code, subject to staff approval;
3) That a curb cut be added along Blazer Parkway to utilize the median break or that the
existing left turn stacking lanes be replaced with a grassed median, subject to staff
approval;
4) That all mechanical units be screened per code;
5) That the Tuttle Crossing text be approved by Council with regard to the parking setback
. prior to approval of a lot split, should one be desired;
6) That lighting conform to the Dublin Lighting Guidelines; -,
7) That signage conform to code;
8) That a tree preservation plan providing for protection of the northern treeline be
submitted prior to issuance of a building permit, subject to staff approval;
9) That a copy of the recorded access agreement between this site and the Atrium at Tuttle
Crossing be submitted to the City Engineer's office before the issuance of a building
permit; and
10) That stormwater management meet the approval of the City Engineer.
- Mr. Peplow asked why there is no access from Blazer Parkway. Ms. Newcomb said the
I
I applicant was concerned that the Atrium traffic will cut through this office site. Mr. Peplow
- asked if that was the left-turn stacking lane addressed in the conditions. Ms. Newcomb said yes,
the Prudential site approval included locating the median break, which was to serve both sides
of the street. It has a left turn stacking lane constructed by Prudential for this site also. H there
is not access utilizing it, that the north bound stacking lane should be removed and reconstructed
as a grass median.
Mr. Sutphen said a bikepath should be included as a condition of approval along Blazer
Parkway. There is a beautiful bikepath to which it could connect. Ms. Newcomb said the
Tuttle Crossing pedestrian plan showed specific locations for sidewalks and bikepaths, but
nothing on the west side of Blazer Parkway. Mr. Sutphen said Dublin had landscaped and
installed a bikepath along Blazer Parkway near Ashland Chemical. He rea li7',ed there was
property between the sites, but a bikepath is needed here, especially with two restaurants and
a mall in the area. Ms. Newcomb said a bikepath was on the east side of Blazer Parkway,
across from this site. Mr. Sutphen said curbs, gutters, and sidewalks should be required.
Rezoning Application
Z9S-016
Tuttle Crossing Subarea A
- Rp.vi!ilP.lf npvptnnn"lOnt Tpvt
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes - August 3, 1995
Page 10
Mr. Fishman asked if other office buildings used green glass in the area. Ms. Newcomb did
not know of any, but Xerox has a green roof. Mr. Fishman said the green glass would not
blend well with the other buildings.
Mr. Ferrara asked if the tenant changed, could the curb cut be reopened. Ms. Newcomb said
it would be a future possibility.
Mark Marsh, the applicant, presented samples of the green glass and white pre-cast concrete for ....
review. Mr. Sutphen said the glass was good looking on buildings he had seen.
......
Mr. Marsh agreed to all the conditions as stated above.
Mr. Raub asked if Mr. Marsh had slides of other buildings with green glass windows and white
pre-cast concrete. Mr. Raub said it might be very attractive, but examples would assist the
Commission. Mr. Marsh had no examples. He said a Dayton building has level three
reflectivity, and the glass proposed for this building had a level one (less) reflectivity.
Mr. Ferrara asked if the building entrance was on the west side of the parking lot. Mr. Marsh
said yes. Mr. Ferrara asked if there was a rendering of the Blazer Parkway elevation. Mr.
Marsh said no; it was similar but with less glass than the elevation submitted.' Mr. Ferrara
asked about the view of this building from 1-270 past the Atrium. He would like to see a
perspective of the two together. Mr. Marsh said from the interstate, it would be about the same
grade across, so only glimpses would be seen. It would be seen from the elevated Rings Road
overpass.
Mr. Ferrara asked about the massive plantings at the northern property line if the parking is
enlarged. Mr. Marsh said this tenant is a -people intense- employer and parking for 300 was
desired. The plan has been designed to add another row of parking spaces around the plantings
near the comer. The landscape has been designed to be preserved with the lot expansion. .....,
Mr. Marsh said his client might want the curb cut, but if not, they agreed to return the . median I
to its original condition. ......
Mr. Raub asked what the lot coverage percentage would be if the parking lot were increased.
Ms. Newcomb did not know, but said it would have to conform to the development text.
Mr. Marsh asked if it could be approved subject to verification of lot coverage to conformance
with the text. Mr. Banchefsky said yes. Mr. Sutphen asked about the sidewalk along Blazer
Parkway. Mr. Marsh agreed to the sidewalk.
Mr. Fishman asked if more trees could be added to the parking lot to reduce the mass of
vehicles without sacrificing parking spaces by adding diamond-shaped planting areas. Mr.
Marsh said they agreed to double the number trees shown and increase their caliper to 3-3.5
inches. Staff felt it necessary to place more greenspace along the property lines between this
and the Atrium building since the setbacks were zero. Ms. Newcomb said if the island size
were reduced, the trees would not survive. She said the plan still needed 200 square feet of
Rezoning Application
Z9S-016
Tuttle Crossing Subarea A
.... . . - . , - -
"'~". '_.'--~' ","'_e_;c,,"~~.__"'~~.'~~ ......,
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes - August 3, 1995
Page 11
interior landscaping. Mr. Marsh suggested that the two islands which are not aligned with the
others be left as single islands or be relocated within the parking lot. Ms. Newcomb said that
might be possible. Mr. Ferrara wanted to see the landscape plans for both buildings, side by
side. Mr. Marsh agreed to increase the caliper of all the trees throughout the interior islands
to a minimum 3 1/2 inch caliper. Ms. Clarke asked for trees every third or fourth parking space
down the center island running perpendicular to the building. Mr. Marsh agreed.
- Mr., Peplow asked if the footprint and materials of this building were the same as for Sterling
Software. Mr. Marsh said Sterling was 10-15 feet shorter and has grey pre-cast concrete with
...... silver glass. Mr. Marsh said the windows were mostly grey, silver, and black on that side of
the interstate. He said the Fanning-Howey building on Frantz Road and Cincinnati Bell had
green glass windows.
It was agreed there would be no time limitation on the parking lot expansion. Mr. Marsh said
the trees would be planted immediately.
Mr. Marsh said if there was no lot split, the access easement would not be recorded. As long
as there was one ownership, it was not required. Ms. Clarke agreed. It was agreed to tie this
to the lot split rather the issuance of a building permit.
-
Ms. Newcomb agreed. Ms. Clarke said the County Recorder's office issued lot splits, not the
City .
Mike Baker, Brighton Park resident, said the traffic at the entrance of his subdivision was
terrible. This office development will increase the traffic in his area by 300 more cars and the
new mall will increase it even more. The traffic on Tuttle Crossing is already bad. He was
surprised that the water feature on this site was being eliminated. Ms. Clarke said the pond on
the site was a borrow pit, and was not part of the stormwater management program. Mr. Baker
- said the bikepath near this project went nowhere. He said the Prudential building was
,
I I redesigned because of the Commission's concern. He said if this project were in Perimeter
... Center, the parking lot configuration would not be approved.
Mr. Sutphen said the traffic problems would be resolved soon with the CIP projects proposed
to route the traffic to new roadways.
Mr. Baker asked if the parking requirement was one space per 250 square feet. Ms. Clarke said
yes. Mr. Baker asked what the maximum parking was. Ms. Clarke said the Commission would
determine this, but if a parking garage were built, 400-plus spaces might be approved.
Mr. Ferrara said this was an office building and not comparable to Perimeter Center. On the
weekends, the office traffic would not be present.
Mr. Fishman agreed with the traffic issue but stated the site was already zoned.
Rezoning Application
Z9S-016
Tuttle Crossing Subarea A
...... Revised Development Text
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes - August 3, 1995
Page 12
Mr. Peplow said traffic was out of control and would like to see Tuttle Road extended to Avery
Road and the Woemer- Temple extension built. He agreed that a sidewalk was needed but that
this projeCt fit well into the entire development.
Mr. Rauh said he felt the building would be attractive, but not enough evidence was provided
in the way of photographs. He was uneasy about approving the building at this time.
Mr. Sutphen liked the colors proposed for the building materials. He sympathized with Mr. ...
Baker about the traffic problems, but said they would improve in the future.
Mr. Fishman appreciated Mr. Baker's frustration regarding the elimination of the water, but was ....
told by staff that it was not required. He said he was assured by staff that the two bridges and
connector road would be completed with, the Cardinal project in the next five years. He was
worried about the greenspace visible from 1-270. He would prefer water features and a smaller
building, but it was not feasible.
Mr. Marsh said he would provide a photo study of green glass buildings at another meeting if
the building could be approved at this meeting.
Mr. Marsh agreed to all the conditions as discussed.
Mr. Ferrara said landscaping hel~ to make colored glass work. He was concerned about the
reflection of the surrounding area in the glass.
Mr. Marsh said his delivery schedule for this tenant did not allow any delays. Mr. Rauh said
it would be thirty days until the next scheduled meeting. Mr. Marsh asked if the building
elevations could be approved and then the colored glass study and slides be presented to the
Commission later. Mr. Rauh asked if the building could be approved as a footprint only. He
asked if a foundation permit could be obtained and then the materials approved later. Mr. 11
Banchefsky said administratively, yes, however the applicant was at some risk. Mr. Marsh said
he wanted to do it that way. 0
.....
Mr. Ferrara asked'if only the exterior of the building was needed. Mr. Rauh said all sides of
the structure need to be better rendered.
Mr. Fishman said there was a risk associated with starting the building prior to final approval.
Mr. Marsh said he has a problem with the lead time for delivery on the structural steel. He
asked if there would be an interim meeting, before 30 days.
Several Commissioners asked about notice requirements. Ms. Clarke stated that the staff had
presented a schedule including two monthly meeting dates for all of 1996. These second
meeting dates are used to cover a large monthly case load, etc. The second August date is the
17th. The Commission may set special meetings, with public notice, whenever required. She
said a quorum has been established for the 17th, because several large cases that were
anticipated for hearing in August have been postponed until September.
Rezoning Application
Z95-016
Tuttle Crossing Subarea A
-
.~
.
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes - August 3, 1995
Page 13
Mr. Marsh said he would be prepared for the 17th.
Mr. RaOO said in order to be developer friendly, a half-hour meeting could be held on August
17 to consider the elevations. He cautioned Mr. Marsh that the meeting would be longer is the
elevations were not high quality.
Mr. Fishman was sorry that not enough information had been provided to finalize the approval.
- He said he thought it needed many more trees, and the problem was the vast blacktop area.
.
- Mr. Ferrara said the reflective nature of the glass and its color concern him. Mr. Ferrara said
in some places the reflection was striking with proper landscaping.
Mr. Sutphen said it looked similar to the Xerox building and he liked it.
Several members agreed that they could, not make the decision. tonight. Mr. RaOO asked for a
motion to continue the case until the 17th.
Mr. Sutphen made a motion to approve this development plan with the following thirteen
conditions:
1) That the landscaped islands adjacent to the access drive (western portion of this site and
eaStern portion of the Atrium site) be increased in width and planted with 3.5-inch caliper
trees (two per island); and that trees on this site be planted on this site be upgraded to
3.5-inch caliper, excepting the parking lot perimeter trees, subject to staff approval;
2) That the landscape plan meet Code, subject to staff approval;
3) That a curb cut be added along Blazer Parkway to utilize the median break or that the
existing left turn stacking lanes be replaced with a grassed median, subject to staff
approval;
4) That all mechanical, units be screened per Code;
.... '5) That the Tuttle Crossing text be approved by Council with regard to the parking setback
prior to approval of a lot split, should one be desired;
- 6) That lighting conform to the Dublin Lighting Guidelines;
7) That sienage conform to Code;
8) That a tree preservation plan providing for' protection of the northern treeline be
submitted prior to issuance of a building permit, subject to staff approval;
9) That a copy of the recorded access agreement between the Atrium at Tuttle Crossing site
and this site be submitted to the City Engineer's office before the approval of the lot
split;
10) That stormwater management meet the approval of the City Engineer;
11) That a five-foot wide concrete sidewalk be provided along the west side of Blazer
Parkway on this site;
12) That up to 40 additional parking spaces be allowed subject to Staff approval; and
13) That the application be reheard by the Commission at a special meeting on August 17 for
consideration of the building elevations, materials, glass color, and landscaping.
Mr. Marsh said he thought the issue was the color of glass to be used. Mr. Fishman clarified
that the issue is what the building looks like as a whole on all four sides, the arrangement of the
Rezoning Application
Z9S-016
.... Tuttle Crossinp ~nh~rp~ A
.
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes - August 3, 1995
Page 14
glass, etc. If there are many trees reflected in the glass, it may be quite attractive, as the one
in Cincinnati.
Mr. Ferrara asked if this was an issue involving the number of stories, and square footage of
the footprint.
Mr. Marsh said he would have the building rendered in true colors, all four sides, with the
landscaping. He will also present pictures of other buildings as examples that used green glass. ....
Mr. Fishman said he thought a water feature would be appropriate and asked if the dry storm -
water facility could be redesigned as a wet pond. Randy Bowman responded that it would be
very difficult to design one that meets all MORPC standards' within the given area, and alternate
designs were possible, but not preferred.
Mr. Banchefsky said it was important to be clear exactly what is being approved at this time,
if a foundation permit is being authorized without full approval. Mr. Sutphen responded that
the approval included the foundation, footprint, utilities, but not exterior elevations and,
materials. He reiterated that the Commission needed elevations of all sides of the building,
including landscaping, for consideration on August 17.
Mr. Ferrara seconded the motion.
Ms. Clarke asked for clarification on condition 1. It was agreed that the only landscaped islands
on the Atrium site affected are located adjacent to the east driveway. Ms. Clarke also asked for
clarification On condition 12. Mr. Sutphen said that this site plan can have up to 40 more
uparking 'spaces provided the parking lot meets setback, landscaping and other requirements,
subject to staff approval.
Mr. Banchefsky asked for a clarification on condition 13. He wanted it to be clear that the ~
Commission's approval of utilities did not override the City Engineer as to storm water facility
design, etc. Mr. Sutphen agreed it did not. I
....
Mr. Ferrara seconded,the motion and the vote was as follows: Mr.F.ishman, yes;. Mr. ,Peplow,
yes; Mr. Rauh, yes; Mr. Ferrara, yes; and Mr. Sutphen, yes. (Approved in part, 5-0.)
Mr. Rauh called a five-minute recess at 8:55 p.m.
~....--
Rezoning Application
Z9S-016
Tuttle Crossing Subarea A
Revised Develooment Text -
~_,."",,,,",,,",",,,,,".'..l
DUBLIN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
RECORD OF ACTION
JUNE 15, 1995
,~ OF DUBLIN
....
iller Rings load
, H 43016-1236
14/161-6550
Fax: 614/161-6506
'!be Jllannine and Zoning Commis.~on took the following action in the application below at its
special meeting:
-
S. Development Plan - Tuttle Crossing - The Atrium at Tuttle Crossing - SS2S Park
Center Circle
Location: 18.33 acres located on the north side of Park Center Drive, approximately
300 feet west of Paul Blazer Parkway ~ along 1-270. '
Existing Zoning: PCD, Planned Commerce District (Tuttle Crossing plan).
Request: Review and approval of a development plan under the provisions of Section
1181.09 of the Planning and Zoning Code.
Proposed Use: Two five-story office buildings with an atrium connector, totaling
approximately 325,000 square feet.
Appllcant: Duke Constru~tion, clo Mark A. Marsh, Suite 150, 4700 Lakehurst Court,
Dublin, Ohio 43017.
. MOTION: To approve this Development Plan because it is consistent with the Mt. Auburn
- study density recommendations, is compatible with adjacent and proposed
! development within the area, is consistent with the Community Plan, and
I
-.. conforms to the Tuttle Crossing Plan and Development Text, with. the following
eight conditions:
1) That the site be landscaped to preserve openspace and break up parking areas, in
accordance with the Development Text and Code;
2) That the landscape plan comply with Code;
3) That all mechanica1s units including rooftop units, cooling tower(s), transformers,
dumpsters, and utility meters be screened to Code;
4) That the east edge of the parking lot be screened per Code within 36 months of
occupancy unless the adjacent site is developed;
5) That stormwater meet the requirements of the City Engineer;
6) That lighting conform to the Dublin Lighting Guidelines;
7) That a tree preservation plan providing for protection of the northern treeline be
submitted prior to issuance of a building permit, subject to Staff approval; and
Rezoning Application
Page 1 of 2 Z9S-016
Tuttle Crossing Subarea A
- Revised Develooment Text
DUBLIN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
RECORD OF ACTION
JUNE 15, 1995
5. Development Plan - Tuttle Crossing - The Atrium at Tuttle Crossing - 5525 Park
Center Circle (Cont.)
8) That a right-of-way permit be obtained from the Division of Engineering to abandon ]
existing storm sewer lines and that the abandoned pipes be grouted.
* Mark Marsh agreed to the above conditions.
VOTE: 6-0.
RESULT: This Development Plan was approved.
STAFF CERTIFICATION
~
j
.....
Page 2 of2
Rezoning Application
Z9S-016
Tuttle Crossing Subarea A
'D~~,:,.._A "".........._1_____.... ".,___.... ..
... ~~""",~~-,~",. ~."'....'~," , " ~.".~..._' '~~~ .
,
Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes - June 15, 1995
Page 9
4. Conditional Use/Corridor elopment D. . Application CU95-00SICD 1-
Butts Property
Tom Rubey presented s case to permit outdoor display of storage sh on 0.665 acres
- on the southwest er of SR 161 and wmill Road. The applicant poses eight parking
spaces and di y of 12 storage sh . The proposal includes main . g existing curb cuts
on SR 161 (f the one on Saw . oad and blocking off one e . g curb cut with concrete
- wheel s s. The City of Colu us is in the process of widenin e intersection of SR 161 and
Sa Road. 112 feet ri t-of-way is required for bo roads, which 111alcP.s the actual
Ie area on this site small. According to the p sed plans, the storage sheds would
encroach that right-o way. He said the sheds need either a foundation or
tethering/stabilizing.
Mr. Rubey said
Tree and Lan pe Commission were dis . ted to Commission members prio
All reco d disapproval. He noted Tree and Landscape Commissi
this co set up as a gateway to D . , as shown in the Communi Ian. Other bases for
reco ending disapproval are the elopment standards of the Co (for Development District
(C ) are not met, the display y have a negative impact on ounding properties, d the
Mr. Rubey said ab oned underground tanks n to be removed. He said tudies were done
in 1993 which . cated soil contamination.
Jeff Hako Manager of II Industries, 5079 Columb . , Lewis Center, said
,.... this is a 00d location for his 0 on. He said the placement f buildings on the site was
I
m a drawing giv~ . by Mr. Butts, but he can o the drawings to see if the
- b . mngs will still fit on the . . He asked to be given time talk further with Staff and have
the application heard at ter date.
The applicant, Mr utts, was not present. Mr.
use/Corridor elopment District application use the applicant was not
Sutphen seco ed the motion. The vote was follows: Mr. Fishman, yes; . Ferrara, yes;
Mr.P , yes; Mr. Rauh, yes; Mr. Su en, yes; Mr. Zawaly, yes. (D' missed 6-0.)
S. Development Plan - Tuttle, Crossing - The Atrium at Tuttle Crossing - 5525 Park
Center Circle
Mary Newcomb presented this case and slides. It is a review of a Development PIan under the
PCD, Planned Commerce District, regulations to permit a 330,040 square-foot, five-story office
building with an atrium. The site is 18.33 acres located on the north side of Park Center Circle
within Subarea A of the Tuttle Crossing development. The area permits large scale multi-story
Rezoning Application
Z9S-016
- '"I'\...u1...... r"...-......:_,.. ~'I'I"..,.,~ A
--<'-""-~_."~----'~'-'-"--- ,_-....
Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes - Iune 15, 1995
Page 10
signature office buildings with densities up to 18,000 square feet per acre. This proposal is for
18,005 square feet per acre, and no parking structure is proposed.
Ms. Newcomb said the site will be developed in two phases, with a first tower of about 162,000
square feet to be constructed with parking for about 850 vehicles. The southern tower would
be developed as Phase Two, with additional parking along 1-270. Three access points are
proposed, one of which is a boulevard entrance. An updated landscape plan was distr,ibuted
before the meeting, which attempts to address concerns of breaking up the parking lot and ...
provides additional plantings around the perimeter., The building is to be constructed of precast
buff-colored concrete panels with a glass framing system. The roof mechanicals will be .......
screened with parapets and there are proposed service areas on the south and north sides of the
building which are to be screened.
-
Ms. Newcomb said the stormwater on the site is to be detained within the parking lot and will
have to meet the requirements of the City Engineer. There will be a sidewalk: located on the
north side of Park Center Circle, which is consistent with the pedestrian plan of Tuttle Crossing.
The proposed lighting plan is currently under review. No information has been submitted
concerning signage. This site is eligible for a 300 square-foot building-mounted sign facing 1-
270. It will also maintain the standards that have been established on other large scale office
buildings within the City and enhance the 1-270 architecture.
Staff recommends approval of the Development Plan subject to the following seven conditions:
1) That the site be landscaped to preserve openspace and break up parking areas, in
accordance with the Development Text and Code;
2) That the landscape plan comply with Code;
3) That all mechanicals units including rooftop units, cooling tower(s), transformers,
dumpsters, and utility meters be screened to Code;
4) That the east edge of the parking lot be screened per Code within 36 months of ..
occupancy unless the adjacent site is developed;
I
5) Thatstormwater meet the requirements of the City Engineer; ,
6) That'lighting conform to the Dublin lighting Guidelines; and .....
7) That a tree preservation plan providing for protection of the northern treeline be
submitted prior to issuance of a building permit, subject to Staff approval.
Mr. Peplow asked for clarification of stormwater detention on the parking lot. Ms. Newcomb
said the MORPC stormwater manual permits ponding within the parking lot up to six inches.
. The applicant may be requesting up to twelve inches. Randy Bowman said there have been two
reviews of the stormwater calculations. Because of the topography of the site, the six-inch limit
cannot be met. A compromise of nine inches of storage was reached and revised calculations
have been submitted. The average depth of storage on a new submission is seven inches.
Mr. Zawaly suggested that the requirement for screening of mechanicals is inconsistent, and,
asked if language could be formulated to apply to future applications. His recommendation was
-That all mechanical units, utility meters, and waste receptacles be fully screened per Code. II
He said the way Con~ition #3 is written, it is questionable as to whether dumpsters and utility
Rezoning Application
Z9S-016
Tuttle Crossing Subarea A -
..' '"-'''.,..~=_. . ;;,....... ';1" L l .~
.--- DUBLIN PLANING AND ZONING COMMISSION
RECORD OF ACTION
fr Of nl'BLI\ OCTOBER 7, 1993
-..
The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action in the application below at its
regular meeting:
4. Rezoning Application Z93-013/Revlsed Composite Plan - Tuttle Crossing - Subarea
Al - Service ZQne
Location: .:1:.5.1 acres located on the northeast corner of Tuttle Crossing Boulevard and
Blazer Parkway. (Subarea AI)
,Existing Zoning: PCD,. Planned Commerce District.
Request: Approval of a revision of the adopted Tuttle Crossing development standards
for Subarea AI.
Proposed Use: Permitted uses under the Tuttle Crossing Development text including
restaurant, daycare, and office.
Applicant: Tuttle Road Limited Partnership, c/o William G. Ebbing, The Edwards Land
Company, 500 South Front Street, Suite 770, Columbus, Ohio 43215.
MOTION: To approve this Rezoning Application/Revised Composite Plan with the following
four conditions:
....
1) That the composite plan be amended to reflect the actual acreage in accordance
with the appropriate legal description' to, be submitted by the applicant;
- 2) That the entire development text be revised to remove all existing errors,
inconsistencies, outdated information;
3) That the text include the 'appropriate level of detail regarding architecture,
signage, landscaping and traffic circulation coordination for the Subarea AI; and
4) That Stafr further refine all plans and text with the developer before scheduling
at City Council and that the Commission should receive copies of the agreed upon
text prior to the public hearing.
The applicant agreed to the above conditions.
VOTE: 7-0.
RFSULT: This Rezoning Application/Revised Composite Plan was approved.
STAFF CERTIFICATION
M~+l.~b
. Mary H. Newcomt Rezoning Application
Graduate Landscape Z95-016
- Tuttle Crossing Subarea A
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Meeting Minutes - October 7, 1993
Page 5
3. Revised Final Development Plan - Muirfield Village Golf Club - Clubhouse Addition
Tom Rubey presented this Final Development Plan for an expansion of the clubhouse at the
Muirfield Village Golf Club, located on 220 acres on the north side of Memorial Drive. The
site has parking for 295 vehicles. The clubhouse is 1,000 feet from the nearest single-family
house. None of the additions or changes will be visible from adjacent properties.
The site is zoned PUD, Planned Unit Development, and is part of the original plan for Muirfield .,
'];
Village. The main clubhouse is 23,785 square feet, and the addition is 13,850 square feet for ....
additional locker room, storage, and a grill. The addition is two separate wings along the north
and east elevations of the clubhouse. It will be architeCturally integrated with the existing
clubhouse and all the surrounding structures. A landscaped plaza is to be located between the
two wings. A driveway loop will extend northwest from the'existing parking lot to connect the
parking for the clubhouse to the existing access to the clubhouse.
Staff is recommending approval of this Revised Final Development Plan with two conditions:
1) That the applicant submit a landscape plan to Staff, that is subject to Staff review and
approval; and
2) The applicant erect and maintain proper sedimentation and erosion controls for the
duration of the construction, as approved by the City Engineer.
Iim Bean, representing Muirfield Village Golf Club, said these additions need to be complete
by the Memorial Tournament. Landscaping, trees, and the utility services have already begun
to be moved. The addition is being added to afford additional room inside as well as to improve
the new outdoor plaza for staging outside functions. Caddies, carts, clubs, etc. will come to that
staging area to the practice range and onto the golf course. On the main level there will be a
card room, a locker room addition, steam bath and whirlpool. On the upper level will be more .....
lockers and an exercise facility. The lower level will house the pro shop and storage area, the !
Ii:
caddy room, and a club repair and bag area. ...
Mr. Bean accepted the two conditions presented in . the Staff Report. He said landscape plans
were being prepared and erosion control will be handled with sensitivity to the surroundings.
Mr. Geese moved for approval of the Revised Final Development Plan with the two conditions
of the Staff Report. Mr. Fishman seconded the motion. The vote was as follows: Mr. Manus,
yes; Mr. Peplow, yes; Mr. Rauh, yes; Mrs. Stillwell, yes; Mr. Sutphen, yes; Mr. Geese, yes;
and Mr. Fishman, yes. (Approved 7-0.)
4. Rezoning Application Z93-0t3/Revised Composite Plan - Tuttle Crossing - Subarea At -
Service Zone
Mary Newcomb presented this rezoning application and Revised Composite Plan for .:i:.5.07
acres located on the north side of Tuttle Crossing Boulevard between Paul Blazer Parkway and
Rezoning Application
Z9S-016
~~e Crossing Subarea A ..
~ -,",',^,-,."~"--"""""""'''',..-..,..---'<'''''''''' --~"^,,, h'>.~_.-,,-,'~," ,
.
.
Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes - June 15, 1995
Page 11
meters are included as mechanical units. Ms. Clarke read from the Code to clarify the need for
screening dumpsters, etc. She said the conditions are specifically written for the details of each
case.
Mr. Fishman asked whether the greenspace in the parking lot meets Code. Ms. Newcomb said
the original submittal did not, and the most recent one is still under review. She said subs~tial
",..".. amounts of landscaping have been added and is fairly certain it does meet Code.
....... Mark Marsh, Duke Realty Investments, said he agrees with all seven conditions as listed in the
Staff Report. Additional trees have been added along the south and north property lines, and
islands have been added in the parking lot. A tree preservation plan is currently being
formulated. Negotiations are in progress with a 200,000 square-foot user that would bring 800
new jobs to the community.
Mr. Ferrara asked if the landscaping was bare minimum. 'Mr. Marsh said he believes they
exceed landscaping requirements.
Mr. Ferrara asked whether the future site of the south tower would be well manicured prior to
construction. Mr. Marsh said if the lease previously mentioned is entered into, both phases will
, be done simultaneously. H not, all perimeter landscaping and tree plantings, mass earthwork
for the parking lot, The Atrium, and the building pad to the south, and graSs would be planted.
Mr. Zawalyand Mr. Raub complimented the developer on the project.
Randy Bowman said the two ponds being filled by the developer are linked by a storm sewer
eqn"li7'.eI' pipe. The ponds serve no stormwater management function,but the storm sewer pipe
being abandoned needs to be filled with cement grout to avoid roadway failure. He asked that
the developer apply for a right-of-way permit.
",....
I Mr. Raub said it could be added as Condition #8. Mr. Marsh said he would get a permit.
--
Mr. Zawaly made a motion to approve this Development Plan because it is consistent with the
Mt. Auburn study density recommendations, is compatible with adjacent and proposed
development within the area, is consistent with the Community Plan, and conforms to the Tuttle
Crossing Plan and Development Text, with the following eight conditions:
1) That the site be landscaped to preserve openspace and break up parking areas, in
accordance with the Development Text and Code;
2) That the landscape plan comply with Code;
3) That all mechanicals units including rooftop units, cooling tower(s), transformers,
dumpsters, and utility meters be screened to Code;
4) That the east edge of the parking lot be screened per Code within 36 months of
occupancy unless the adjacent site is developed;
5) That stormwater meet the requirements of the City Engineer;
6) That lighting conform to the Dublin Lighting Guidelines;
Rezoning Application
Z9S-016
- Tuttle Crossing Subarea A
- . ..- . -
""'''''-'-
.
Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes - June 15, 1995
Page 12
7) That a tree preservation plan providing for protection of the northern treeline be
submitted prior to issuance of a building permit, subject to Staff approval; and
8) That a right-of-way permit be obtained from the Division of Engineering to abandon
existing storm sewer lines and that the abandoned pipes be grouted.
Mr. Fishman seconded the motion. The vote was as follows: Mr. Ferrara, yes; Mr. Peplow,
yes; Mr. Sutphen, yes; Mr. Raub, yes; Mr. Fishman, yes; Mr~.Zawaly, yes. (Approved 6-0.)
...
6. Development Plan -
Crossing Boulev ......
.
,
j
.....
1) which shows a co Ie
building.
2) or that appropria landscape
~)
5)
6)
7)
8)
Rezoning Application
Z9S-016
Tuttle Crossing Subarea A
Revised Development Text -
. .., '__~M' .'<__"'___'''_''__''..'~,,"',__~..~~'"",~~ '.-...-.... ^,.'~~ " ." .
. .
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Meeting Minutes - October 7, 1993
Page 6
Bradenton Avenue (Subarea A-I). The development text (part of composite plan) for Tuttle
Crossing was approved in 1989. It is part of the Planned Commerce District for Dublin's 110
acres of the 400-acre development. The predominate uses are office and hotel. The adopted
Tuttle Crossing Development Standards for Subarea Al require that the buildings be oriented
to the north toward the office uses. The developer would like to permit buildings being oriented
to the south, fronting Tuttle Crossing Boulevard. Specific signage, landscaping, and
- architectural character and uniformity requirements are also contained in the existing Tuttle
Crossing PCD text. To the south of the site are Wendy's, United Dairy Farmers, and BP station
..... located in Columbus. To the east of the site is the IDI Building.
Mr. Manus stated that the revised text was just being distributed and had not been reviewed.
Ms. Newcomb noted that signage in the text for the subarea would now allow up to five signs
for one of the outparcels. Minimum greenbelt between adjoining sites has been reduced to 10
feet if it is irrigated. A new section was added and sidewalks are to be asphalt and a minimum
of five feet wide. The building orientation is changed. A single row (instead of double) row
of trees will be planted along Tuttle Crossing Boulevard and Blazer Parkway. .. Sites will have
a common landscape theme. Building materials include wood, stucco, or decorative block used
as an accent with brick and stone.
Staff supports a revision of the development standards to Subarea 1A. The initial standards may
have been unrealistically restrictive and should be reexamined in light of the heavier retail focus
, of the overall Tuttle Crossing development. Staff still feels unresolved issues remain before
approval can be recommended. These issues include signage, cross-access easement, and the
road widening for Bradenton. Staff is recommending tabling to resolve these.
Ms. Stillwell agreed with tabling because of difficulty in comparing the various texts.
- The Commission concurred. Mr. Sutphen did say that they were on the right track.
William Fbbing, the Edwards Land Company, offered to clarify any areas to resolve them at
.... this meeting. The original idea was that the.outparcels would face the offices to the north and
that the curb cuts coming off to the service drive would be the main access to those 'outparcels.
Various retail users have rejected having the. back' of their buildings ,face Tuttle Crossing
Boulevard, and it does not work for the circulation in the individual sites. In elevation studies
they did not like the back of the buildings facing Tuttle Boulevard either. The landscaping and
criteria given in the overall interchange development did not benefit. It was encouraged that
unification strategies be made to tie the sites together, not just through building materials, but
also through landscaping.
Mr. Fbbing asked that the signage issue be resolved at this meeting to give direction to Boston
Chicken.
Mr. Geese asked if the new text had been reviewed by Staff. Ms. Clarke said it was submitted
just prior to the meeting and it had not been examined thoroughly. Mr. Geese liked the new
text, but would not proceed without a Staff recommendation.
Rezoning Application
Z95-016
Tuttle Crossing Subarea A
-- Revised Development Text
-,-"~~,-
. .
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Meeting Minutes - October 7, 1993
Page 7
Ms. Clarke suggested that some issues could be resolved at this meeting because of the
applicant's time constraints. Staff agrees that most of the text issues can be resolved with the
applicant. Mr. Ebbing said if Staff recommended concrete sidewalks they would install them.
He asked that signage be addressed so that the new text could be presented to Council.
Mr. Sutphen wanted to recommend approval to Council but did not like' five signs. Mr. Ebbing
agreed. He said the original text for Subarea Al did not allow any building signs. ,
Ms. Clarke said the request was for four outparcels-four similar ground signs along Tuttle Road ....,
and some type of wall sign facing the entrance of each building would be supportable.
Mr. Ebbing said the service road in the back did not adequately identify the sites. They would
like to include company identification on the directional signs and signs on the rear of the
buildings. After discussion, Mr. Ebbing agreed to eliminate any company ' sign on the directional
signage.
Mr. Ebbing said the landscape plan is consistent for the sites. The previous zoning text allowed
either a mound or a fence and some shrubs for the three-foot buffer. They prefer the mounding
to keep it consistent. Brick has been recommended for the Boston-Chicken building.
Ms. Clarke asked for more input from the Commission regarding the reorientation of the
buildings permitting flat roofs on the buildings, etc. Staff and the developer could work out a
set of revisions to the text that are likely to be acceptable. Staff has a good working relationship
with the developer, and if given direction by the Commission, will address the issues. If the
Commission wants a report before it goes to Council, it can be done. She did not think the City
wanted to lose a land deal because of a lack of prompt action on the text, but that more than one
working day was needed by Staff to respond.
Mr. Manus had confidence that Staff and the developer could work through the text. Mrs. J
Stillwell felt some of the roadway issues needed to be addressed. ,She was alsoconcemed about
flat roofs all through the development. She said it was the .responsibility of the Planning
Commission to review the text and forward it to Council in a timely fashion.
Mr. Ebbing said he would rewrite the text to permit flat roofs with parapets to cover all
mechanical roof units.
Ms. Clarke said she believed flat roofs were initially prohibited because the development was
originally expected to be a high-rise office park. The object was to put in all enclosed pitch
roofs to hide all the mechanicals from office views above. The code examines the building in
elevation, not above. This area will have more of a retail flavor than what was expected several
years ago.
Mr. Rauh said Section "E" might be reworded so that flat roofs are permitted in conjunction
with sloped roofs as long as there is a proportion limit and they are part of a sloped roof system.
He recommended that a flat roof alone should not be permitted.
Rezoning Application
Z9S-016
Tuttle Crossing Subarea A
1)"";",,,.1 n"""lnnfTl"nt T"vt -
"",_....... ,l.",~"" ij'n :~( , 'Iii
. .
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Meeting Minutes - October 7, 1993
Page 8
Mr.' Fishman did not like to see the slope only on three sides with an open back. Mr. Ebbing
said it would a be continuous roof. The text requires the same consistency of finishes on all
four sides of the buildings.
The Commission concurred that this type of roof should be made permissible by the text.
~ Mr. Ebbing said the Boston Chicken building was brick up to the mechanical level where it was
stucco. Mr. Fishman asked about block being used. Mr. Ebbing said it was an accent only.
- Mr. Sutphen felt Staff could work out with the developer on the text and that the Commission
should be more pro-business. There would be no special treatment however.
.
Mr. Ebbing said there was an issue on the November ballot regarding liquor and there are
concerns which involved a potential buyer.
Mrs. Stillwell asked about road issues. Ms. Newcomb. said Bradenton A venue was proposed
to be widened and there needed to be an additional. right-of-way and setback to accommodate
it along with sidewalks and street trees.
Mr. Ebbing said that the road widening required would take up the majority of the right-of-way.
The street trees could be on the properties of the individual owners so that they maintain them
with the irrigation system. There is more control for the quality of maintenance. There was
never a sidewalk called for in the original text for Bradenton, but if it is needed the building on
this site is actually setback 60 feet instead of 50 feet in preparation of additional right-of-way
if needed. They are willing to do it through an easement or right-of-way if necessary.
Mr. Sutphen made a motion to approve this Rezoning Application/Revised Composite Plan with
fIiII";'''''' the following four conditions:
1) That the composite plan be amended to' reflect the actual acreage in accordance with the
r- appropriate legal description to be' submitted by the applicant;
2) That the entire development text be revised to 'remove all existing errors, .inconsistencies,
outdated information;
3) That the text include the appropriate level of detail regarding architecture, signage,
landscaping and traffic circulation coordination for the Subarea A1; and
4) That Staff further refine all plans and text with. the developer before scheduling at City
Council and that the Commission should receive copies of the agreed upon text prior to
the public hearing.
Mrs. Stillwell asked for a definition of "appropriate level". Ms. Clarke said if it was not usual
and customary that it is specifically designed for the conditions at this site.
Mr. Rauh seconded the motion. The vote was as follows: Mr. Fishman, yes; Mr. Geese, yes;
Mr. Manus, yes; Mr. Peplow, yes; Mrs. Stillwell, yes; Mr. Rauh, yes; and Mr. Sutphen, yes.
(Approved 7-0.)
Rezoning Application
Z9S-016
Tuttle Crossing Subarea A
... Revised Development Text
- -~------'--"-'"
. .
C I T Y 0 F D U B L I N
Department of Planning & Development
..,
1
IIIIIIlli
RECORD OF ACTION
DUBLIN PLANNING AND ZONING COMHISSION
OCTOBER 10, 1991
The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action in the
Revised Composite Plan below at its regular meeting:
3. Revised composite Plan - Tuttle Crossing
Location: 102 acres located in the northeast quadrant of the
1-270 interchange at Tuttle Crossing Boulevard.
Existina Zoninq: PCD, Planned Commerce District
Request: Revision to Subarea Development Standards for
Subarea C.
Proposed Use: Office park.
ApPlicant: Tuttle Road Limited Partnership, c/o Charles
Driscoll, 500 South Front Street, Columbus, Ohio 43215.
HOTION: To approve the Revised Composite Plan with the following
Subarea C standards:
1) That the sideyard and rear yards for pavement be 1
reduced to 12.5 feet; and ~
2) The parking will comply with Code unless otherwise
approved by the Planning and Zoning commission.
VOTE: 7-0
RESULT: This application was approved.
STAFF CERTIFICATION:
~. :0'1 ~ ~
- u.J:-a....z.A- 'l. ~,( ~,I,-
Barbara H. Clarke
Zoning Administrator
Rezoning Application
Z9S-016
5131 Post Rd. Suite 11102 Dublin, Ohio 43017 614.761.65t Tuttle Crossing Subarea A
Revised Development Text -
,__ _ _'_'_'_n____'.._ "."___...'..'_'____.__~~~,~'_~_',_M~"_ """""-''"''''''''"'-,-'~
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Meeting Minutes - October 10, 1991
Page 15
3. Revised Composite Plan - Tuttle Crossing
Ms. Clarke showed an aerial slide of the site and presented the staff report. She
..... said that at the time these standards were drafted, the interchange at Tuttle
Crossing was still a proposal. There was great care in drafting the standards for
.... the property along the freeway and many of those standards were copied in
Subareas Band C. With the smaller lots in Subarea C, the 25-foot sideyard
standard becomes prohibitive. Staff recommends approval of the proposed text
change which would reduce the sideyardfor pavement to 12 1/2 feet. The rear
yard for pavement would also be reduced to 12 1/2 feet. The PCD is a district
that was specifically designed to vest less discretion in this Commission. It was a
district designed to have explicit development standards and then for the Planning
Commission to approve those things which met the standards. Staff is
recommending that a second change be made to the text so that all Code parking
be provided unless the Planning and Zoning Commission specifically approves a
reduced ratio of parking and/or loading spaces.
Mr. Geese asked if the staff and applicant are in agreement. Mr. Ebbing, Edwards
Co., said he concurs with staff that these changes be made.
Mrs. Stillwell made a motion to approve this application with the following
conditions:
That the development standards text be amended to provide for a reduction in
- sideyards and rear yards for parking to 12.5 feet in Subarea C and that parking
i shall comply with the Code unless otherwise aooroved by the Planning and Zoning
..,... Commission. This language will be added to the text and typos corrected.
Mr. Kranstuber seconded the motion and the vote was as follows: Mr. Leffler,
yes; Mr. Fishman, yes; Mr. Manus, yes; Mr. Geese, yes; Mr. Campbell, yes; Mr.
Kranstuber, yes; Mrs. Stillwell, yes. (Approved 7-0).
4. Development Plan - Tuttle Crossing - 5555 Parkcenter Circle
Ms. Clarke presented the staff report for a three-story office structure of 85,000
square feet. This is located along 1-270 on a section of road called Parkcenter
Circle that will be under construction soon. The site plan contains three curb cuts
and the plan distributed to the Commission also contains three curb cuts. The
staff has received revised plans that modify that to two curb cuts in compliance.
Don Hunter, Duke Associates, said he is in agreement with the 12 conditions of
the staff report.
Rezoning Application
Z95-016
Tuttle Crossing Subarea A
... Revised Development Text