111-93 Ordinance
, RECORD OF ORDINANCES
Dayton Legal Blank Co, Form No, 30043
Ordinance No,_ _ll1.._93___(Amended) Passed_ ---'-- --~----- -- n19 nm+-=
I
I
r- AIl ORDINAlfCE PROVIDING FOR A CRANGE OF ZONING OF I
I
81.994 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST I
. CORNER OF AVERY ROAD AND BRAND ROAD, FROM: R-l,
..... I
RESTRICTED SUBURBAII RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT, TO: PUD, i
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT (for a sinqle- i
family development known as Shannon Glen). i
I
I
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAI~D by the council of the city of I
I
DUblin, state of Ohio, of the elected members
,
concurrl.ng: i
I
Section 1. That the following described real estate (see I
attached map marked Exhibit "A" ) situated in the City of I
Dublin, State of Ohio, is hereby rezoned to PUD, Planned Unit I
Development District and shall be subject to regulations and
procedures contained in Ordinance No. 21-70 (Chapter Eleven of I
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
r- therewith.
\..~ section 3. That this Ordinance shall take effect and be in
force from and after the earliest period ~llowed by law.
Passed this J-j-f/v day of ~ , 199.!L.
Mayor ~ Officer
Attest:
~(J (U~
Clerk of Council
Sponsor: Planning Division
, f t" Ord'r;m-e/.J1,.s 1 "UII were pflsfed in the
· r~l'J'es 0 ,~IS . '" '. , ..~ ~.~.
'd .. '1 So-t'O:1 731,25 of the (;',io RCV'5d Code,
~c{or (\nm \,' v.'"
~,~,.~
.--- '~':~~'-1. O~1~0
r
L
ll.,__.*,,".-.t "l~c~n_JifI"JU.!-f~MlI't.., '.~~ [ . n_ll \
~ ...,." - L, . 1l!S". .~, ."_<c
_.~."" Dublm Planmng and Lomng LommlsSlon
Meeting Minutes - February 10, 1994
Page 8
2, Rezoning Application Z93-026 - Preliminary Development Plan - Shannon Glen
Mary Newcomb presented this case and slides of the site area. The request is to rezone 81.994
acres on the northwest corner of Brand and A very Roads from R-l, Restricted Suburban
Residential District, to PUD, Planned Unit Development District. The plan is for a single-
family subdivision of 162 lots, 20.3 acres of open space, and a density of 1.98 dwelling units
per acre. An existing farmhouse and outbuildings will be demolished. Ms. Newcomb said this
application was tabled at the January 1994 meeting after failing to resolve issues of active park
space, floodplain, lot size and density,
There will be one entrance to the subdivision from Brand Road and one from A very Road. The
required parkland dedication is 10.6 acres. The proposed 20.3 acres of parkland includes the
stream corridor, a 200-foot setback along Brand Road and within some reserve areas. There is
to be a bikepath on the west side of A very Road and sidewalks within the subdivision.
.
Staff would like to see a bikepaths along the north side of Brand Road and through the site,
across the footbridge, and southward to connect to the Brand Road bikepath and to A very Park.
Ms. Newcomb said some of the revisions since the last plan include a larger park space next to
the stream, the "wishbone" park area has been reduced to a landscaped median and fewer lots
have flood hazard areas, Fourteen lots still have a portion of the floodway plus 20 zone. All
of the lots except four are 80 foot or greater in width. An access easement has been provided
to the park space at the south. Staff would like to see the removal of Lot # 10 1 to create a better
park access serving the majority of the residents who will be on the west side of the stream.
Ms. Newcomb said the development text needs to be revised to reflect the correct number of
lots, density, street width, and include a fence detail. Typically the preliminary development
plan also serves as a preliminary plat in a PUD process. In this application, Staff is
recommending that these items be separated. Staff believes it is necessary to complete the
hydraulic study of the stream prior to approval of the preliminary plat (street and lot layout), and
Staff cannot support approval of the preliminary plat. Staff is, however, recommending approval
of the preliminary development plan with the following 14 conditions:
1) That a hydraulic study of the stream be provided, addressing its current capacity and the
impact of this site on its future capacity, and that appropriate modifications be made to
the stream and to the FEMA maps, as required by Staff, before approval of the
Preliminary Plat;
2) That Lot #101 be eliminated to provide better access to the park;
3) That a revised Development Text be submitted prior to the Council public hearing;
4) That flood way and floodplain boundaries be accurately shown of all plat, planning,
building permit, and engineering documents and that all City codes be met regarding
floodways and floodplains;
5) That all "floodway plus 20" areas be included within the public space, to be
demonstrated on the preliminary plat;
-
J....,I'UUUJl .l la.JJUUJS ClJJU LUIJJlJb ,"-,VIUlIlJ..J..J1Vl.l
Meeting Minutes - February 10, 1994
Page 9 ,
6) That a bikepath be constructed along the north side of Brand Road and through the
subdivision to the streamside park, subject to Staff approval;
7) That storm water management conform to City of Dublin standards;
8) That the layout of the streets, including left turn stacking at the entrances, meet the
requirements of the City Engineer for traffic safety and emergency vehicular access;
9) That the applicant provide a tree survey for landmark trees within 30 days, submit
provisions for tree preservation, a plan for street trees, and entry feature landscape plan,
as approved by Staff;
10) That the open space along Brand Road, within the mini-greens, within the eyebrows and
cul-de-sacs be maintained by the homeowners association and indicated on the Final Plat; ~
11) That the revised Preliminary Plat and the Final Plat indicate no-parking zones, as
required by the City Engineer; .J
12) That the layout of all non-standard street components meet the approval of the City
Engineer and the Fire Chief before the Final Development Plan is considered by the
Planning Commission;
13) That it be demonstrated that questionable lots (Lots #41,42,43,44,45,88,90,91,100,
102, 108, 142, 141, 140, 138, 137, 127 and 126) are buildable; and
14) That the applicant provide streetlights at all entrances subject to Staff approval.
Rob Meyer represented the applicant, Midwest Land Fund, He recapped the history of this site
for the new Commission members. Council approved the Concept Plan in November 1993.
The Commission tabled the preliminary development plan in January.
Mr. Meyer asked the following clarification of the Staff Report conditions:
Condition #1: Mr, Meyer requested changing "before approval of the preliminary plat" to
before the final plat. They will abide by the hydraulic study regarding the developability of lots
within the floodplain area. He requested that this not be used to delay the preliminary plat.
They will not final plat any area that would be affected prior to the study. Mr. Meyer agreed
to Condition #1 with the deletion of the last phase and replacing it with "of final platting of any
lot within the affected area."
~
Condition #2: Mr. Meyer did not agree with the condition. Previously an easement was asked, J
and it was provided between Lots #101 and 102 for access to the park.
Condition #5: Mr, Meyer said they have provided no-build zones on lots which have floodway
or floodway plus 20, as previously requested. Eliminating this area from the lots themselves
IS unnecessary.
Condition #6: Mr. Meyer said they agreed to the bikepath on the north side of Brand Road as
long as it was understood that it would be in lieu of a sidewalk, (Staff agreed, that it is.)
Condition #9: Mr. Meyer said the 30 days for completing the tree survey was too short. They
requested that they be allowed 60 days after approval of the preliminary development plan. Ms.
Clarke said the tree survey was needed to determine if everything was being properly located,
preferably before approval by City Council. She said 60 days beyond City Council approval
-
-
lJubllI1 Planl11ng ana LOIllOg LOlllllllSSlon
Meeting Minutes - February 10, 1994
Page 10
could be allowed, but the applicant must remember the reason behind the tree survey and
preservation plan. Once done, it might force the relocation of some utilities or lot lines.
Mr. Meyer said the text included language that they would attempt to locate parts of the
development or infrastructure that would go around trees. He said landmark trees should not
present an issue because of their location.
Ms. Clarke said Staff did not object to deferring it as long as it was understood that things might
be required to change.
Dave Hussey, P.E, with EMH&T, showed a plat of lots in Brandon, Section 2 subdivision
which had been floodplain and were successfully filled eight years ago. Basements were
constructed without problems with flooding or water pressure against the walls. He said the
proposed lots needing to be filled in the edge of the flood fringe area will need only minor
filling. FEMA has issued a "letter of map revision" in several similar cases.
Miles Hebert of EMH&T, said a baseline hydraulic model had been prepared. A baseline
hydraulic model demonstrated both the flood way and the 100 year floodplain on the property
along its tributary. He said they will prepare a post-development hydraulic model that will
indicate the fill in the fringe area on the lots mentioned. A grading plan will be prepared
showing the fill, and they will apply to the City for a floodplain use permit, place the fill and
then apply to FEMA for an exclusion of that area from the floodplain. Once this occurs, the
development on those lots will be in accordance with City code and basements will be allowed.
They also intend to prepare a hydrologic study of the flood flows along that tributary and the
North Fork to the point where the confluence, to assess any potential downstream impact.
Ms. Clarke said Mr. Hussey was correct about Brandon. A very broad floodplain was filled,
and there was a FEMA letter of map revision. Many of the affected residents of Brandon
attended Planning Commission meetings regarding the Villas of Earlington. They would not
support any upstream fill in the floodplain, and they reported that their experience was a
#'" negative one. It does comply with FEMA regulations, but the residents involved were anxious.
Keith Myers said all lots are now 80 feet in width, except four on the eyebrows are 75 feet.
Mr. Myers recalled the Commission discussion of the Avery entry park (wishbone shaped) and
whether or not it constituted a desirable public space. The plan revision included broadening
out the streamside park to develop a neighborhood park space of about five acres. He showed
an illustration of how it could be developed. A median was left when the wishbone was pushed
together to create a pond and entry feature for the project.
Janet Jordan said she was satisfied that the parkland could be developed as an appropriate
neighborhood park that would not be flooded.
Mr. Ralph Paglieri of 8000 Avery Road supported the project with the conditions of the Staff
Report. He said he supported wet retention ponds on A very Road and wanted that clarified.
(All agreed, they will be wet.) Mr. Paglieri also asked that landscaping be sufficient along
-
I-'YVJ.J..I1 .... .1"""'.1""0 ..........._ _""'.,..~ __............_...........
Meeting Minutes - February 10, 1994
Page 11
Avery Road, especially since the lots were closer to the road. Mr. Meyers said the buffer would
be 50 feet from centerline.
Mr. Paglieri asked if the Master Plan would require that Avery Road be straightened out and
graded with open space or wet retention ponds at the present jog in the road.
Mr. Kranstuber asked if this development would hinder any future improvements to Avery Road.
Ms. Clarke said the Community Plan did indicate the eventual realignment of A very Road at
Brand Road. This will likely be done on the parcel to the south (Hawk's Nest) which is
pending. The straightening has always been contemplated south of Brand Road because it will ....
require no bridge construction. It is hoped to keep Avery Road rural in character.
Mr. Kranstuber felt Avery Park was a gateway to Dublin and should look good, very open, etc. J
Ms. Clarke said a larger setback would be necessary to do as he suggested,
Mr. Sutphen asked how many of the Osage Orange trees could be left to avoid planting new
trees. Ms. Jordan said they would preserve any significant sized trees. Mr. Sutphen wants the
area left natural except where the bikepath was constructed. Ms. Jordan said it was workable.
Kathy Humbert of 7509 Brand Road supported the proposed development. She asked if Brand
Road could be widened to the north. Randy Bowman responded that it was not known currently
which side would be most appropriate. This requires further study. Ms. Humbert said there
were two landmark trees in her front yard next to the road to preserve. Mr. Massa said the
widening would probably be done on the north side of the road since they control the land on
that side. Mr. Bowman said Staff would proceed with Ms. Humbert's comments in mind.
Ms. Clarke said it would be appropriate when reviewing the widening plans for the Staff to
contact Ms. Humbert to show her the proposal before the crews begin. One of the City's goals
is to protect landmark trees in the community and anything happening on Brand Road will affect
Ms. Humbert directly.
Mr. Massa said that 75 feet from centerline was the closest any residence or structure could be ~
built. Ms. Clarke said this setback was generally less than those in the area. Mr. Kranstuber -J
hesitated to require further modifications because the developer had been very responsive to
requests, but aesthetics define the community, He wanted a deep, green setback area. Ms.
Clarke said this had not previously been considered. Mr. Rauh felt it was important to the rest
of the community.
Randy Bowman said the woods near the southeastern corner of the site may have to be graded
as part of the requirements of Condition #1. Mr. Sutphen understood.
Mr, Sutphen made a motion to approve the preliminary development plan (and preliminary plat)
with 14 conditions, modified as follows. Most conditions were discussed briefly for
clarification:
-
- - .,>"- . <:1
.J...o"UlJ.L.J).L ...l. ~, ......1,:, ~..'-'l "--".......'i~..~ "-"......a.....~-'-'..........
Meeting Minutes - February 10, 1994
Page 12
I) That a hydraulic study of the stream be provided, addressing its current capacity and the
impact of this site on its future capacity, and that appropriate modifications be made to
the stream and to the FEMA maps, as required by Staff, before approval of the Final
Development Plan;
2) That a revised Development Text be submitted prior to the Council public hearing;
3) That flood way and floodplain boundaries be accurately shown of all plat, planning,
building permit, and engineering documents and that all City codes be met regarding
floodways and floodplains;
4) That all "floodway plus 20" areas be included within the public space, to be
demonstrated on the preliminary plat;
5) That a bikepath be constructed along the north side of Brand Road and through the
subdivision to the streamside park, subject to Staff approval;
6) That storm water management conform to City of Dublin standards;
7) That the layout of the streets, including left turn stacking at the entrances, meet the
requirements of the City Engineer for traffic safety and emergency vehicular access;
8) That the applicant provide a tree survey for landmark trees within 60 days of approval
of the Preliminary Development Plan, submit provisions for tree preservation, a plan for
street trees, and entry feature landscape plan, and Avery Road landscape plan as
approved by Staff;
9) That the open space along Brand Road, within the mini-greens, within the eyebrows and
cul-de-sacs be maintained by the homeowners association and indicated on the Final Plat;
10) That the revised Preliminary Plat and the Final Plat indicate no-parking zones, as
required by the City Engineer
11) That the layout of all non-standard street components meet the approval of the City
Engineer and the Fire Chief before the Final Development Plan is considered by the
Planning Commission;
12) That it be demonstrated that questionable lots (Lots #41,42,43,44,45,88,90,91,100,
102, 108, 142, 141, 140, 138, 137, 127 and 126) are buildable;
13) That the applicant provide streetlights at all entrances subject to Staff approval;
14) That the southeast corner of the development be left in a natural condition with no clear
~;4_ cutting except as necessary for bikepath or stream clearing;
15) That Brand Road be widened on the north side which may require ditch modification;
16) That storm water basins on A very Road be constructed as wet basins; and
17) That a no-build zone, 75 feet from centerline, be established along A very Road.
Mr. Kindra said Condition #16 may require the closing of the ditch in case it becomes too steep
to put all the widening on one side. Mr. Sutphen asked if it would be done at the developer's
expense. Mr. Kindra said yes. Mr. Massa agreed to the condition.
The Commission asked if a bikepath between two lots was adequate access into the park. Ms.
Jordan said it was adequate, but more would be better. She said the bikepath needed to have
a 15-foot wide easement. Mr. Massa said they were prepared to give that. Ms. Clarke said it
would be labeled.
Mr. Rauh seconded the motion.
.L.IUUJ.J.JI .I.. JUIU1J.JI:;,U,UU L-VIIJ.llb '-'VUJJIU~..HVII
Meeting Minutes - February 10, 1994
Page 13
Mr. Meyers said in respect to Condition #5, the lots in the floodway plus 20 zone, had
previously been adjusted to establish a no-build zone which was in response to the condition.
The condition has now changed to make it become openspace as opposed to a no-build zone
which presents a problem with those lots.
Ms. Clarke said this was an issue in which Staff felt most strongly, due to the depth of the lots,
Staff feels it is inappropriate to place the floodway plus 20 in a backyard.
Mr. Massa said that along with the Final Development Plan, the landscape plan could be
submitted subject to Staff's approval. ~
Mr. Kranstuber asked if a no-build zone should be placed on Avery Road. He said the ...;
developer should be very sensitive to the character along Avery Road.
Ms. Clarke asked if the Commission were separating the vote into two items, the Preliminary
Development Plan and the Preliminary Plat, because of the hydraulic study necessary. Mr.
Kranstuber said the developer could not build on anything FEMA did not approve and did not
support any further review.
Ms. Clarke said of number of lots in this layout appear to be contrived to fit in the plan. The
ones at the entrance to the park had the corners angled back to make a wider park entrance--but
were much lower quality lots. Elimination of the floodway plus 20 area from the lots and
resolving other issues may require redesigning the street system, placing it further away from
the creek. Typically, at a rezoning, a developer gets approval of several very tangible elements:
density, number of lots, development standards, and layout. Approval is not a portion of the
preliminary plat because some of the lots may need to be re-configured or eliminated.
Mr. Massa said if some lots are determined to be unbuildable, they will be added to the park.
A discussion of defining "buildable" ensued,
Mr. Sutphen restated Condition #13 as above. Mr. Kranstuber said if Lots #137,138, and 127 ~
were unbuildable, the City park would be strange. Ms. Clarke said the lots would be
reconfigured to make it make sense, -J
Mr. Massa agreed to all the conditions.
The vote was as follows: Mr. Fishman, yes; Mr. Ferrara, yes; Mr. Peplow, yes; Mr. Sutphen,
yes; Mr. Rauh, yes; Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; and Mr. Kranstuber, yes. (Approved 7-0.)
3. Discussion - Master Plan - Cosgray Park
Bobbie Clarke introduced this discussion. The Cosgray Park 63-acre site is located outside the
Dublin city limits, just north of Shier-Rings Road on the west side of Cosgray Road. It is
subject to Washington Township zoning and State of Ohio for building permits, not to this
-
- ...... .......-............ .
~ ~~.... ~ .~......'O ~.'- ---'....0
Staff Report - February 10, 1994
Page 6
CASE 2: Rezoning Application Z93-026 - Preliminary Development Plan - Shannon Glen
APPLICANT: Massa Realty and Development, c/o Bruce Massa, 42 East Gay Street, 6th
Floor, Columbus, OR 43215,
REQUEST: To rezone 81.994 acres located on the northwest comer of Brand and Avery
Roads from R-1, Restricted Suburban Residential District to PUD, Planned Unit
Development District for a single-family subdivision of 162 lots and 20.3 acres
of open space. The request is for review and approval of a Preliminary
Development Plan under the provisions of Section 1181.07
BACKGROlThi'D:
The Shannon Glen Concept Plan was approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission on
October 7, 1993 and by City Council on November 1, 1993. The Preliminary Development
Plan was tabled at the January 6, 1994, Planning Commission meeting after discussion of active
space, floodplain, lot size and density issues.
.
The applicant has submitted a revised Preliminary Development Plan, The number of lots has
been decreased from 163 to 162 lots. All except four lots are at least 80 feet in width at the
building line. The dedicated open space has been increased from 18.91 acres to 20.3 acres.
The wishbone-shaped park at the A very Road entry will have no storm water pond and has been
downsized to a landscape median. Additional open space is provided adjacent to the stream.
A central neighborhood park of 4.66 acres is created. About 33 percent (1.52 acres) is located
outside of the floodplain. This park area is secluded from traffic. Access to the open space is
provided between lots 1011102 and lots 141/142.
This application is a rezoning request which includes the Preliminary Development Plan, and
it delineates land use, lot size, development standards, design guidelines, density, park area, and
road configuration, and effectively serves as the preliminary plat. Following a recommendation
by the Commission, a public hearing will be held at City Council, and later a vote will be taken
by Council to approve or deny the rezoning petition. A two-thirds vote of Council will be
required to overturn the Planning Commission recommendation. Upon approval of the rezoning,
"'~,-I the applicant will need to submit a Final Development plan for at least 20 percent of the property
within 240 days. Each phase will be subject to Commission approval prior to construction under
the Final Development regulations. The process is governed by Section 1181.07 of the Planning
and Zoning Code.
CONSIDERA TIONS:
0 Shannon Glen is 81.994 acres located on the northwest corner of Brand and Avery Road.
This revised proposal for Shannon Glen includes 162 single-family dwelling units and 20.3
acres of dedicated open space.
0 The property is currently zoned R-1, Restricted Suburban Residential District. The site is
extremely flat and open with existing vegetation generally occurring along the waterways
and in fencerows along property lines. The site has an existing farmhouse, barn, and
outbuildings which will be demolished. Several landmark trees (24-inches in caliper or
greater) are located in the southeastern portion of the site. There are some fairly large trees
..-.
LJUOllIl n<1IlI1IlIg <1I1U LUlIIllg LudlllllsSlUh
Staff Report - February 10, 1994
Page 7
located around the existing homestead. No tree survey has been submitted although it has
been requested, A tributary of the North Fork of the Indian Run flows in a southerly
direction through the site and joins the North Fork near the Brand Avery intersection.
0 To the north and west of the site is undeveloped land which has received Concept Plan
approval for a single-family, multi-family, and golf course project called Erwin West. To
the east are several estate-type lots and the proposed Lochmuir development. To the south
across Brand Road is agricultural land zoned R-1, Restricted Suburban Residential District,
and the Indian Run Methodist Church. To the southeast is undeveloped R-l land which has
a pending development request for 222 single-family lots (Hawk's Nest).
0 The lots are typically 80 feet by 120 - 130 feet (9600 - 10,400 square feet). The gross ~
density of the Shannon Glen site is 1.98 dwelling units per acre, The Dublin Community
Plan indicates the development to the west of A very Road is to be residential with a density J
of between one and two dwelling units per acre. The lots are laid out along a number of
short cul-de-sacs. Several lots adjacent to the park have clipped corners. Fences will be
permitted; a fence detail is missing from the development text.
0 Due to the stream running diagonally through the site, the development will function as two
independent neighborhoods, united only by the central park area. 108 lots will have access
from Brand Road and 54 lots from Avery Road. Two road stubs, one heading west and one
heading north, will tie into future neighborhoods. No lots will have direct access from
Brand or A very Roads.
0 The required parkland dedication for Shannon Glen is 10.60 acres, and the proposed open
space dedication is 20.3 acres. Dedicated open space is proposed for the interior of the site
along the stream C:t16.0 acres, Reserve E), in two retention areas (+0,6 acres, Reserve A
and +0.4 acres, Reserve B), and in a 200-foot band along Brand Road C:t3,3 acres,
Reserves C,D, and E), The proposed open space along the stream is somewhat wooded
with secondary growth, and much of it is located within the floodplain C:t13.4 acres out of
16.0). Wet ponds are located in Reserves A, B, and E. A footbridge will be constructed
by the developer to link the park areas on either side of the stream. A conceptual detail of
the developed neighborhood park space has been submitted solely for scale purposes. Staff
believes that eliminating lot 10 1 would provide better park access than an easement between
lots. ~
0 The 100 year floodplain, the floodway, and the flood way plus 20-foot zone are shown on
the plan. Filling within the floodplain will require an engineering study approved by the J
City on the effects on the tributary boundary and downstream area. Fourteen lots include
the flood way plus 20 zone on part of the lot (lots 43, 44, 45, 88, 90, 91, 102, 106, 107,
108, 142, 141, 140 and 139). This is an area which cannot be impacted by filling, grading,
or construction. No Build Zones have been designated at the rear of the lots, contiguous
with "floodway plus 20 zone". There are also a number of lots located in the I 00 year
floodplain: Lots 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 88, 90, 91, 100, 101, 102, 108, 126, 127, 128,
137, 138, 139, 140, 141 and 142. It will have to be demonstrated that these lots are
buildable. Lots which have significant portions in the floodplain should be eliminated to
reduce the negative impacts on the site from filling. Basements may need to be prohibited
on these lots.
0 Due to the relative flatness of the site, particular attention must be paid to the storm sewer
design. Four retention ponds are indicated on the plan as follows:
I. Adjacent to the A very Road entrance;
--
---,,---,,---..---..-
LlUUllll 1 luJllllll':; aJlU L...U111115 '-'Ulllllll.).)lUll
Staff Report - February 10, 1994
Page 8
2. Adjacent to lots and 84 and 87;
3, Adjacent to the west side of the stream; and
4, Adjacent to the east side of the stream.
0 There is a large amount of sedimentation in the stream. The entire length of the stream
through the development should be improved with re-channelization and/or erosion
protection. As part of the improvements, a hydraulic study should be performed on the
stream, evaluating its performance and addressing the need for additional improvements.
If the floodplain boundaries are changed with any improvements, the developer must
conduct a floodplain map revision through FEMA.
0 An internal boulevard is located near the A very Road entrance to the subdivision, The
applicant is proposing 28-foot (back of curb to back of curb) wide streets, Minimum street
width for a two-way street is 32 feet. The City Engineer has recommended that two-way
streets be no less than 28 feet with no parking zones indicated on one side of the street.
0 The proximity of the east-west street north of Brand Road between the two entrances is
questionable. Maintaining sufficient distance between intersections allows motorists to see
and react to vehicle turning movements. The close proximity of the street intersections,
particularly at the west entran'ce may not allow sufficient reaction time,
0 It is standard policy for the City to require left turn stacking for new developments on
collectors and arterial streets. Left turn stacking should be provided at the entrances on
Brand and A very Roads. Standard street lighting should also be installed by the developer
at the entry intersections.
0 Details of the eyebrows and the mini-greens have been submitted. The mini-greens and
eyebrows will provide more greenspace for the development than the standard cul-de-sac
design.
0 Sanitary sewer is currently unavailable to the site. Sanitary sewer service must be provided
from an extension of an existing 24-inch sanitary trunk located on the north side of
Dublinshire Drive approximately 500 feet east of Muirfield Drive. Preliminary plans for
the sewer extension were recently submitted and are currently under review.
0 Water service will have to be provided to the western portion of the site by extending a 12-
inch line along Brand Road from A very Road.
0 Sidewalks will be required on all streets. Instead of a sidewalk along the north side of
Brand Road, Staff would prefer a bikepath. This bikepath will provide a link to a future
A very Road Park bikepath connection. A bikepath is proposed along the west side of A very
Road. Three bikepath connections are proposed from the bulbs of the cul-de-sacs adjacent
to A very Road. Staff also believes a bikepath connection should be provided through the
subdivision from the A very Road entrance across the footbridge and along the east side of
the north-south road to Brand Road.
0 A landscape buffer with a mixture of deciduous and evergreen trees is proposed for sections
of Brand Road and A very Road where either the rear or side of houses will be facing the
road. The mini-greens and Brand Road setback will be maintained by a homeowner's
association. Street trees will be required on all streets including Brand and Avery Roads.
0 A 200-foot setback (except for Lots #61 and 62) is shown adjacent to Brand Road. This is
consistent with other developments along this scenic collector. This would allow for a
symmetrical setback along the crescent street. The building setback would be + 175 feet
for Lot #61 and + 180 feet for Lot #62. Staff can support the reduced setback for these two
lots only.
..-
.1.JUUJIJI ~ JauuuJ5 auu L...UJlUI5 '-"UJIIIIIJ.J,JIVU ._-
Staff Report - February 10, 1994
Page 9
0 The development text needs to be revised to reflect the correct number of lots, density,
street width, and include a fence detail.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Typically, the Preliminary Development Plan also serves as the Preliminary Plat in the PUD
process. With this application, Staff is recommending that these items be separated. Staff
believes that it is necessary to complete the hydraulic study of the stream prior to approval of
the Preliminary Plat. Staff cannot support approval of the Preliminary Plat at this time.
Staff is recommending approval of the Preliminary Development Plan with the following 13
conditions:
Conditions:
1) That a hydraulic study of the stream be provided, addressing its current capacity and
the impact of this site on its future capacity, and that appropriate modifications be
made to the stream and to the FEMA maps, as required by Staff, before approval of
the Preliminary Plat; .
2) That lot 101 be eliminated to provide better access to the park;
3) That a revised Development Text be submitted prior to the Council public hearing;
4) That flood way and floodplain boundaries be accurately shown of all plat, planning,
building permit, and engineering documents and that all City codes be met regarding
flood ways and floodplains;
5) That all "floodway plus 20" areas be included within the public space, to be
demon stated on the preliminary plat;
6) That a bikepath be constructed along the north side of Brand Road and through the
subdivision to the streamside park, subject to Staff approval;
7) That storm water management conform to City of Dublin standards;
8) That the layout of the streets, including left turn stacking at the entrances, meet the
requirements of the City Engineer for traffic safety and emergency vehicular access;
9) That the applicant provide a tree survey for landmark trees within 30 days, submit
provisions for tree preservation, a plan for street trees, and entry feature landscape ~
plan, as approved by Staff; y
10) That the open space along Brand Road, within the mini-greens, within the eyebrows
and cul-de-sacs be maintained by the homeowners association and indicated on the
Final Plat;
11) That the revised Preliminary Plat and the Final Plat indicate no-parking zones, as
required by the City Engineer
12) That the layout of all non-standard street components meet the approval of the City
Engineer and the Fire Chief before the Final Development Plan is considered by the
Planning Commission;
13) That it be demonstrated that questionable lots (lots 41,42,43,44, 45, 88, 90, 91,
100, 102, 108, 142, 141, 140, 138, 137, 127 and 126) are buildable; and
14) That the applicant provide streetlights at all entrances subject to Staff approval.
-
_v,_
lJUD"n .t'lanmng ana LOIL"5 \...-,,,,'lllllll::>SlOn
Staff Report - February 10, 1994
Page 10
Bases:
I) The Community Plan identifies this area as appropriate for single-family development
with a density between one and two dwelling units per acre, and this plan conforms
to that scheme.
2) The style of residential development will be compatible with the existing development.
3) The plan furthers openspace goals.
4) The plan preserves Brand Road as a "scenic collector".
ADDITIONAL INFOR\lA TION: '
Before the Final Development Plan should be considered by the Commission, consent must be
reached with the City Engineer on all non-standard street components,
.
~,
,
""-
.-
>-
.-
>- z ~HA\JNEE HILLS
.- :::>
z 0
::J U
0
U
Z
0
......
z
:::>
C'
--
t:
BIRCHlil -:
~ .~
,
,
,
,
, ,
,
,
,
,-. ,-
. '
, , ~.
'.' ~~..l.n.
. "
. - ....,
-
.....
un
.#.-
/"
::)
0
<.)
-
PLR
.~.
-
Z
::)
R-4
\
l
..~--
\ R
Rr : Rezoning A . ...-
\ ~ Z93-026 pphcation
_. n
or 11 PCp Preliminary D ,
,
. Shannon Glen evelopment Plan ~
-
.-.. ' ..
--- - ---
100 Year Flood
.. ' --
~
G I en -I
\
1
I
, -
I .
500 Year,Flood Boundary
--
_J . -- ..---..... .
\
... -
I
I
I Shannon Glen N
\ Floodway Map
" Scale lit = 400'
.....
_.'--'-'------
,---
----..---
-------- - -----------,------------
\ .
~i
\\
Year 'FIOod\~oundarY
r'
\
"
Flood
-
\
"- . Shannon G I en Sit e
Shannon Glen J
io::;, ZONE B Flood Insurance Map
'- Scale 1" = 400'
.......,.,
RECORD OF ACTION
DUBLIN PLANNING AND ZONING COMl\lISSION
JAT\ruARY 6, 1994
(lTY (Ii: Dl'Bli\
The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action in the application below at its ~
regular meeting:
6, Rezoning Application Z93-026 - Preliminary Development Plan - Shannon Glen ....,.,
Location: 82.58 acres located on the northwest corner of Avery Road and Brand Road.
Existing Zoning: R-l, Restricted Suburban Residential District.
Request: PUD, Planned Unit Development District, review and approval of Preliminary
Development Plan under the Planned Unit Development provisions of Section 1181.07.
Proposed Use: A single-family subdivision of 163 lots and 18.910 acres of open space.
Applicant: :Massa Realty and Development, c/o Robert A. Meyer, Jr" Porter, Wright, Morris,
and Arthur, 41 South High Street, Columbus, OH 43215-6194.
1\10TION: To approve this rezoning application with the following 15 conditions:
1) That flood way and floodplain boundaries be accurately shown of all plat, planning,
building permit, and engineering documents and that all City codes be met regarding
floodways and floodplains;
2) That a hydraulic study of the stream be provided, addressing its current capacity and the
impact of this site on its future capacity, and that appropriate modifications be made to the
stream and to the FEMA maps, as required by Staff;
3) That right-of-way along Avery Road (30 feet from centerline) and Brand Road (40 feet from
centerline) be dedicated to comply with the Community Plan;
4) That storm water management conform to City of Dublin standards; ...
5) That the layout of the streets, including left turn stacking at the entrances, meet the
requirements of the City Engineer and the Fire Chief for traffic safety and emergency ...J
vehicular access;
6) That the applicant provide a tree survey for Landmark Trees, submit provisions for tree
preservation, a plan for street trees, and entry feature landscape plan, as approved by Staff;
7) That the open space along Brand Road, within the mini-greens, within the eyebrows and
cul-de-sacs be maintained by the homeowners association and indicated on the Final Plat;
8) That the pond be removed from Reserve B;
9) That the revised Preliminary Plat and the Final Plat indicate no-parking zones, as required
by the City Engineer;
10) That the layout of all non-standard street components meet the approval of the City
Engineer and the Fire Chief before the Final Development Plan is considered by the
Planning Commission;
Page 1 of 2 Rezoning Application
Z93-026
Shannon Glen
History
....
_~ _._'._"'~_~_2~_"""""",-~'._.____.__~""'
"'Y
.
RECORD OF ACTION
DUBLIN PLA1\:'rNlNG AJ\rn ZO:N1NG CO~1l\nSSION
JA~lJARY 6, 1994
Rezoning Application Z93-026 - Preliminary Development Plan - Shannon Glen (Cant.)
11) That No Build Zones be indicated on all plans and plats for lots which are located within
the floodway or floodway plus 20 zone;
12) That it be demonstrated that questionable lots (Lots #150, 151, 152, 155, 156, 159, 160,
161, 162, 163, 109, 100, 101-, 90, 88, 45, 44, 43, 42, and 41 are buildable;
13) That additional park access be provided between LDts #101 and 102;
14) That a revised legal description be submitted; and
15) That applicant provide streetlights at all entrances subject to Staff approval.
*The applicant agreed to the above conditions.
RESULT: No action. This motion was not seconded.
:MOTION #2: To table this rezoning application.
VOTE: 5-0.
RESULT: This rezoning application was tabled to allow the applicant to address the unresolved
issues.
STAFF CERTIFICATION
~~w~lMb
Graduate Landscape Architect
Rezoning Application
Z93-026
Shannon Glen
Page 2 of 2 History
-"
!vleetIng MInutes - Janu2fY b, 1~)J4 ~--,-
Page 16
said the notice period for public hearings had ready passed, and the first date possible at
Council would be February 7th. Mr. Rake aw asked if there were any reasons why it could
not be heard at the next Planning and ning Commission (February 10.) Ms. Clarke said
Council would not have voted by tha me and Mr. McSwain would be proceeding at his own
risk. Additionally, complete pI had not yet been prepared for submission. Staff will
cooperate as much as possible expedite the hearing process.
Mr. Kranstuber said the ommission sets their own agenda, and he wanted it on e February
agenda unless it woul e illegal to do so. Ms. Clarke felt there was no legal ohibition. The
cut-off date was j passed for February, and Staff needed time for rev' and staff report.
Mr. Kranst er made a motion to waive the deadline rule and ha' the Final Development Plan ~
for this e placed on the February agenda. Mr. Fishman sec Qed the motion and the vote was .J
as ~ ows: Mr. Kranstuber, yes; Mr. Peplow, yes; Mr. anus, yes; Mr. Geese, yes; and Mr.
man, yes. (Approved 5-0.)
Mr. Geese moved that this rezoning be appr ed subject to the following five conditions:
1) That 56 feet of right-of-way fro e centerline of S.R. 161 be dedicated by deed of plat,
consistent with the Commu . y Plan;
2) That a utility plan be ovided indicating the existing and proposed water lines and fire
hydrants;
3) That a new de opment text be submitted before this application is sent to Council;
4) That sign , landscaping and lighting be in compliance with Code; and
5) That mechanicals be screened subject to Staff approval.
M . Geese asked if Mr. Rakestraw agreed to the five conditions.
Ms. Clarke asked for a clarification of Condition #5. The Commission has e right to waive
requirements in the PUD, and screening mechanicals would not be subj to deviation.
Mr. Kranstuber seconded the motion. The vote was as follows: r. Fishman, yes; Mr. Manus, ~
yes; Mr. Peplow, yes; Mr. Geese, yes; and Mr. Kranstube yes. (Approved 5-0.)
....)
~ 6. Rezoning Application Z93-026 - Preliminary Development Plan - Shannon Glen
Mary Newcomb presented request to rezone 81.994 acres located on the northwest corner of
Brand Road and A very Road. The proposal is to rezone the land from R-1, Restricted Suburban
Residential District, to PUD, Planned Unit Development District for 163 lots and 18.91 acres
of open space. The Concept Plan for Shannon Glen was approved by the Planning Commission
in October and was approved by City Council on November 1, 1993.
The site is flat and open with existing vegetation only occurring along property lines and along
the tributary to the North Fork of the Indian Run that bisects the site. The existing buildings
on the site are to be demolished with this proposal. Several large landmark trees are on the site
Rezoning Application
Z93-026
Shannon Glen
History
-
..., .~"_"_'_"'_,'_,"'-'"~~"_'-,"_p<.~
"' '
Page 17
located in the southeastern portion of the site and also around the existing home. To the north
and west of the site is undeveloped land which has received Concept Plan approval for a single-
family/multi-family/golf course development (Erwin West). To the east are several estate-type
lots along A very Road and the proposed LDchmuir development. To the south across Brand
Road is agricultural land, and the Indian Run United Methodist Church.
The proposed lots average 80 feet by 120 feet, and the gross density is 1.99 dwelling units per
acre. The Community Plan recommends development to the west of Avery Road to be
residential with between one and two. dwelling units per acre. Half the lots have access from
Brand Road and half of the lots access from A very Road. The development will function as two
independent neighborhoods, united by the central park area running along the stream. There will
be a pedestrian bridge over the stream to connect the two areas. There are two road stubs
shown, one heading east and one heading north, that will tie into future neighborhoods. No lots
will have direct access from Brand Road or Avery Road.
Ms. Newcomb said the required parkland for this site is 10.6 acres. The proposed open space
dedication is 18.9 acres. The open space is proposed for the interior of the site along the stream
and two centrally located park areas. . One will be located near the entrance off A very Road and
another further west. Open space is also proposed in a 200-foot band along Brand Road. Staff
believes the wet pond shown in Reserve "B" does not meet the intent or spirit of the parkland
requirement. Staff would also like to see an additional park access from the neighborhood.
Ms. Newcomb distributed a color-coded map showing the 100-year flood plain, the flood way ,
and the floodway plus 20-foot zone. Building within the floodplain will require an engineering
study approved by the City on the affects of the tributary boundary and downstream area. Lots
#151, 152, 154, 155, 156, 157, 161, 162, 163, 109, 108,107, 106, 105, 102,91,90,88,45,
44, 43, and 42 all have portions of their rear yards located in this floodway-plus 20-foot zone.
This area cannot be impacted by filling, grading or construction. Staff is recommending a "no-
build" zone along that floodway-plus 20-foot zone. There are also a number of lots located in
the 100-year flood plain that will have to be demonstrated as buildable. Basements may need
to be prohibited on these lots. A large amount of sedimentation is present in the stream
currently. The entire length of the stream should be examined in terms of improvement with
re-channelization and erosion protection. As part of these improvements, a hydraulic study
should be performed on the stream evaluating its performance and addressing the need for
additional improvements. The developer will pursue a flood plain map revision through FEMA.
Ms. Newcomb said the applicant is proposing 28-foot wide streets, and the City Engineer
requests no parking on one side. There is an 18-foot wide one-way street that is proposed
around Reserve "B" off of A very Road. It is City policy to require left-turn stacking lanes for
residential entries on Brand Road and Avery Roads. Sidewalks will be required on all the streets
within the subdivision including Brand Road. There is a bikepath proposed along the west side
of Avery Road with three bikepath connections through cul-de-sacs. A landscape buffer is
proposed for sections of Brand and A very Roads. Street trees will be required on all streets
including Brand and A very Roads.
Rezoning Application
Z93-026
Shannon Glen
History
.",.,...
Meetmg .l\lInutes - January 0, l~~'+ --"'-,"
Page 18
Ms. Newcomb said a 200-foot setback except for on LDts #61 and 62 is shown adjacent to Brand
Road. This is consistent with other developments along the scenic collector. The exception for
Lots #61 and 62 would allow for a symmetrical setback along that crescent street and Staff
supports the reduced setback for these two lots.
Staff is recommending approval of the Preliminary Development Plan with the following 14
conditions:
1) That flood way and floodplain boundaries be accurately shown of all plat, planning, building
permit, and engineering documents and that all City codes be met regarding flood ways and
floodplains; ~
2) That a hydraulic study of the stream be provided, addressing its current capacity and the
impact of this site on its future capacity, and that appropriate modifications be made to the -J
stream and to the FEMA maps, as required by Staff;
3) That right-of-way along A very Road (30 feet from centerline) and Brand Road (40 feet from
centerline) be dedicated to comply with the Community Plan;
4) That stormwater management c.onform to City of Dublin standards;
5) That the layout of the streets, including left turn stacking at the entrances, meet the
requirements of the City Engineer and the Fire Chief for traffic safety and emergency
vehicular access;
6) That the applicant provide a tree survey for Landmark Trees, submit provisions for tree
preservation, a plan for street trees, and entry feature landscape plan, as approved by Staff;
7) That the open space along Brand Road, within the mini-greens, within the eyebrows and cul-
de-sacs be maintained by the homeowners association and indicated on the Final Plat;
8) That the pond be removed from Reserve B;
9) That the revised Preliminary Plat and the Final Plat indicate no-parking zones, as required
by the City Engineer;
10) That the layout of all non-standard street components meet the approval of the City Engineer
and the Fire Chief before the Final Development Plan is considered by the Planning
Commission;
11) That No Build Zones be indicated on all plans and plats for lots which are located within
the flood way or flood way plus 20 zone; ~
12) That it be demonstrated that questionable lots (Lots #150, 151, 152, 155, 156, 159, 160,
161, 162, 163, 109, 100, 101, 90, 88, 45, 44, 43, 42, and 41 are buildable; J
13) That additional park access be provided between LDts #101 and 102; and
14) That a revised legal description be submitted based on a new survey.
Rob Meyer represented the applicant, Midwest Land Fund, Inc. This case was originally before
the Commission in August with 140 acres collectively on both sides of Avery Road. At that
time the development was split into Lochmuir and Shannon Glen. This Preliminary
Development Plan is very consistent with the approved Concept Plan. Mr. Meyer said there
were 163 lots on the Concept Plan, and the Staff Report was in error in stating 161 lots. The
density is less than 2 units per acre. The open space is nearly 19 acres, considerably in excess
of the requirement. The layout is consistent with the Concept Plan, which given the engineering
difficulty driven by the flatness of the site, is remarkable. The layout continues to include
Rezoning Application
Z93-026
Shannon Glen
History
......
-'- "---".,- - ~.~~..,..~,-~,---'
Page 19
.
particularly attractive features, desirable features: the mini-greens, and the crescent approach to
the generous setback along Brand Road.
Mr. Meyer agreed to the above conditions with the exception of Condition #8, which addressed
the pond in the park area at the A very entrance. It is a wet pond with an important storm water
function.
Keith Myers of Myers-Schmalenberger and Associates said the plan was true to the original
conceptual plan approved with a couple of engineering modifications. The square has created
another open space amenity. The lots will be restricted so that they face out onto the pond and
out towards the public side of the street. The lots in the crescent area will impinge slightly onto
the 200-foot setback required along Brand Road. This allowed this portion of the site to be
treated in a symmetrical fashion.
Janet Jordan asked how large Reserve "B" was. Ms. Newcomb said it was about 1.3 acres.
Mr. Myers said the pond creates a significant feature at the entrance from Avery Road. The
size of the pond can be smaller. Ms. Jordan said the stream made a nice feature in the park,
but this neighborhood needs a neighborhood park for open play. She was concerned that half
of the parkland as shown was water. Ms. Jordan asked if Mr. Myers would look at other
openings where perhaps there could be a stream crossing.
Mr. Kranstuber asked about the narrow lot depth along the stream. He agreed that there was
not enough park space for the number of homes. Ms. Newcomb said the requirement for
parkland was 10.6 acres. The plan shows 18.9 acres, (13.4 acres along the stream, 1.3 acres
for Reserve "B", .5 acre for Reserve "A", and 3.6 acres in the 200-foot setback along Brand
Road. About 11 acres is located within the floodplain.
11s. Jordan suggested widening the park near Lots #155, 156, and 157 and across the stream
or perhaps down to Brand Road in the area of Lots #105, 106, 107, and 108.
Mr. Kranstuber felt the active play space was way too small, smaller than Monterey Park.
There may be 200-300 neighborhood children. Ms. Jordan said it may be comparable to Indian
Run Meadow where there is a long linear greenbelt that widens by the pond, and gets
tremendous use.
Rob Myer said public access to the park area could be accessed at several locations along the
stream. Keith Meyers said several years ago a park was developed by his company behind the
Indian Run. The park was linear with no access to it. Their design was for the least expensive
park Dublin has developed. It is now one of the most heavily used parks in the city. To totally
discount the value of a linear park is not fair. He modeled it on a successful park in
Worthington, Selby Park. The park is designed to be the heart of the community.
Mr. Geese was concerned about lighting at each of the intersections. He was concerned that the
wet pond adjacent to the bridge was unsafe so close to the side of the road. He asked about
guardrails.
Rezoning Application
Z93-026
Shannon Glen
History
~
l\leenng 1\,1Jnmes - Ja.nuary 0, 1:;1)1'+
Page 20
Mr. Bowman said when wet ponds were close to the road, the clear zone (the area outside the
actual roadway surface in the right-of-way) needs to be evaluated. The ditch slopes on the north
side of Brand Road adjacent to the ponds are, according to the ODOT definitions, recoverable
ditch slopes. Mr. Bowman said smoothing out the ditch section along Avery Road and Brand
Road would be looked at during the design.
Mr. Geese said there should be a designated wa1J.,.'Way if there were to be Reserve B and A.
Dave Hussey, an engineer with EMH&T, said there would be a footbridge across creek.
Ms. Newcomb said a five-foot sidewalk is requested along the north side of Brand Road. Mr.
Geese asked if Lots #105, 106, 107, and 108 were buildable. ~.
Mr. Meyer questioned the sidewalk. Ms. Newcomb responded sidewalks are required for
existing and proposed streets. She suggested the Brand Road sidewalk might meander. Mr.
Meyers asked if there were sidewalks along Brand Road or a bikepath as in the
Wellington/Sheffield Place subdivision.
Mr. Kranstuber asked Mr. Meyer if he agreed to place streetlights at the intersections. Mr.
Geese likes those in River Forest subdivision. Mr. Meyer agreed to install similar streetlights.
Balbir Kindra mentioned that streetlights should meet Dublin specifications. Not all solutions
are satisfactory.
Mr. Kranstuber noted the average lot had a 75 or 80-foot frontage. Mr. Fishman recalled that
the commitment for the development was a minimum of 80-foot wide lots and he would like to
see that upheld. Mr. Meyer said only ten percent of the lots were less than 80 feet wide, and
this is a better layout.
Mr. Kranstuber said when looking at a density of 1.9 dwelling units per acre, one thinks of
Muirfield Drive. However this will look similar to the density of Hemingway Village. He felt
the reserves should be eliminated from the parkland requirement formula. He suggested that
Lots #155 through #157 be eliminated to make the park larger. He wanted the parkland to be
appropriate before he voted in favor of this plan. '"'"
Mr. Myer said if the subdivision looked like Hemingway Village, he would have failed because ...)
the desire was to design something different from that. He felt the stream and linear park were
the greatest assets of the development.
Mr. Geese asked how to determine if a lot were buildable. Dave Hussey said the lots numbered
were partially in the floodplain. They intend to fill all the building sites on every lot above the
floodplain in accordance with FEMA regulations. In addition, all fill would be in the flood
fringe area, not within 20 feet of the floodway. Staff has requested that the developer work with
them to deepen and widen the channel in areas to improve the stream's flow. Mr. Massa has
agreed to do this. These things should make all the lots buildable.
Rezoning Application
Z93-026 .
Shannon Glen
History
.A
- '--"-"~'=.~~----=-"""'-'''''''''''
Page 21
.
Mr. Kranstuber asked what effect filling of the floodplain and improving the stream bed would
have on downstream residents. Mr. Hussey did not feel there would be any significant effect.
Ms. Clarke said the area west of Avery Road in the Community Plan shows a density between
one and two dwelling units per acre. The density here is 1.97 dulac, which is consistent with
other development along A very Road. She said that in a number of other subdivisions, Staff has
tried to get a variation in lot size so that every lot is not identical. Along Brand Road, the City
has requested a 200-foot setback. It has been done several ways. In the Lochmuir subdivision
(a proposed new section of Muirfi.eld Village), the setback is a reserve which includes
landscaping, detention pond, and a service drive or a lane on which the houses will be located.
In Muirfield Village, one of the holes of the golf course is within the 200-foot setback. East of
Muirfield Drive there is the project called Muirfield Green which has not been completed and
has a wide reserve. Within Brandon and Bristol Commons subdivisions, Ms. Clarke said
everything between Brand Road and the north edge of the North Fork of the Indian Run is
public park, owned and maintained by the City. On the south side of the street, Earlington
Village was set aside as a no build zone.
Ms. Clarke felt it was an asset te get the stream corridor as a central focus for the two
neighborhoods.
Mr. Massa said that Dave Hussey would work with the engineers, FEMA and the City to fill
the floodplain on the necessary lots. If the lots are not buildable, they would not build on them.
Their intention is to not hinder downstream property.
Mr. Fishman asked that ifFEMA determined the lots to be unbuildable would the developer turn
them over to the City as parklan9. Mr. Massa agreed.
Mr. Banchefsky advised Mr. Meyer that to receive a favorable recommendation, the application
would need four affirmative votes. Mr. Banchefsky said the applicant could request the
application to be tabled. Ms. Clarke clarified that four votes were required for any
recommendation to Council.
\ Mr. Manus made the motion to approve this Preliminary Development Plan with the following
15 conditions:
1) That floodway and floodplain boundaries be accurately shown of all plat, planning, building
permit, and engineering documents and that all City codes be met regarding floodways and
floodplains;
2) That a hydraulic study of the stream be provided, addressing its current capacity and the
impact of this site on its future capacity, and that appropriate modifications be made to the
stream and to the FEMA maps, as required by Staff;
3) That right-of-way along Avery Road (30 feet from centerline) and Brand Road (40 feet from
centerline) be dedicated to comply with the Community Plan;
4) That stormwater management conform to City of Dublin standards;
Rezoning Application
Z93-026
Shannon Glen
History
Meeting Minutes - January 6, lYY4 -------------~----------_.._.
Page 22
5) That the layout of the streets, including left turn stacking at the entrances, meet the
requirements of the City Engineer and the Fire Chief for traffic safety and emergency
vehicular access;
6) That the applicant provide a tree survey for Landmark Trees, submit provisions for tree
preservation, a plan for street trees, and entry feature landscape plan, as approved by Staff;
7) That the open space along Brand Road, within the mini-greens, within the eyebrows and cul-
de-sacs be maintained by the homeowners association and indicated on the Final Plat;
8) That the pond be removed from Reserve B;
9) That the revised Preliminary Plat" and the Final Plat indicate no-parking zones, as required
by the City Engineer;
10) That the layout of all non-standard street components meet the approval of the City Engineer .~
and the Fire Chief before the Final Development Plan is considered by the Planning
Commission; J
11) That No Build Zones be indicated on all plans and plats for lots which are located within
the flood way or tloodway plus 20 zone;
12) That it be demonstrated that questionable lots (Lots #150, 151, 152, 155, 156, 159, 160,
161, 162, 163, 109, 100, 101,9.0,88,45,44,43,42, and 41 are buildable;
13) That additional park access be provided between Lots #101 and 102;
14) That a revised legal description be submitted based on a new survey; and
15) That lighting approved by the City Engineer be installed at the intersections.
The motion did not receive a second motion. No vote was taken.
Mr. Meyer requested that this application be tabled.
Mr. Fishman moved that the application be tabled as requested by the applicant. Mr. Geese
seconded the motion. The vote was as follows: Mr. Kranstuber, yes; Mr. Peplow, yes; Mr.
Manus, yes; Mr. Geese, yes; and Mr. Fishman, yes. (Tabled 5-0.)
7. Rezoning Application Z93-024 - Revised prel7 Development PIan-
6365 Riverside Drive - at Nests ~
Lisa Fierce presente this case and site slid . The site is zoned PUD, Planz Unit ...)
Development Dist . t for office use. The site s a number of large trees with a significant drop
off in topogra y toward the river. Th' proposal is for a 2,000 square fo;('ret.ai1 store
specializino' wild bird supplies inclu . g a display area from which birds i1y{ natural habitat
can be vi ed. The proposed one-s ry building will have a residential sca,le-; natural stone and
wood ding. Along the south a west sides of the site, closer tz there are to be large
ex ses of glass to allow vi . ility of birds.
Ms. Fierce said two par ng options had been proposed. Optio~ includes eight parking spaces
located south of the ilding, entirely on this site. OptionYincludes only two parking spaces
south of the build' g and an additional 11 parking spaces 0 the west of the building within a 50-
foot wide strip land currently owned by the City of olumbus. The applicant is working with
the City of olumbus to enter into a lease agreeme9- which would allow a parking improvement
Rezoning Application
Z93-026
Shannon Glen
History
-
-,~,.-~--'~'-~""~~
.
DUBLIN PLANING Ai'']) ZOl\TJNG COMMISSION
RECORD OF ACTION
OCTOBER 7, 1993
CITY OF Dl"BLI:\ .. k th fi . .. th ]'. b . I
The Planning and Zoning CODUTIlSsJOn too e ollowmg actIon In e app lcatlon elow at Its regu 2I'
meeting:
6. Concept Plan - Shannon Glen
Location: .:t.82 acres located on the nonhwest corner of Avery and Brand Roads.
Existing Zoning: R-I, Restricted Suburban Residential District.
Request: Review and approval of Concept Plan under the PUD provisions of Section 1181.07.
Proposed Use: A single-family subdivision of 163 single-f2IDily lots and 19 acres of open
space. .
Applicant: Midwest Land Fund, Inc. c/o Robert A. Meyer, Jr., Porter, Wright, Morris and
Arthur, 41 South High Street, Columbus, OH 43215-3406, and Erwin and Erwin c/o Anna M.
Erwin, 100 Founh Street h"\V, PO Box 328, Catawba, NC 28609.
MOTION: To approve this Concept Plan with the following issues left to be addressed with
the Preliminary Development Plan.
1) That floodway and floodplain boundaries be accurately shown on all plat, planning,
building permit, and engineering documents and that all City codes be met regarding
floodways and floodplains;
2) That additional sedimentation and erosion control measures be taken along the stream and
that the stream and that its banks be improved as approved by Staff.
3) That right-of-way along Avery Road (30 feet from centerline) and Brand Road (40 feet
from centerline) be dedicated to comply with the Community Plan;
4) That stormwater management conform to City of Dublin standards;
ft'I"'>> 5) That traffic study issues be addressed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer;
6) That all utilities, street intersections, and cul-de-sacs, be designed and installed as
approved by the City Engineer;
7) That the applicant submit provisions for tree preservation, a plan for street trees, and
entry feature landscape plan, as approved by Staff;
8) That the open space along Brand Road and within the eyebrows be maintained by the
homeowners association and indicated on the Final Plat;
9) That an additional pedestrian access to open space be provided;
10) That information be provided with regards to the minimum lot area; and
11) That streets be extended to the property lines to provide for better neighborhood
connections as adjacent areas develop.
VOTE: 7.1J.
RESULT: This Concept Plan was approved and will be scheduled for review by City Council.
SfAFF CERTIFIC~TT()N'
~ -H- 0'0 Rezoning Application
. Z93-026
Mary H. Newcomb
Graduate Landscape Shannon Glen
History
~
DublIn Planmng and Zonmg LommlsSlOn --
Meeting Minutes - October 7, 1993
Page 11
6. Concept Plan - Shannon Glen
Mr. Geese moved that this Concept Plan be removed from the table. Mr. Rauh seconded the
motion. All voted in favor.
Mary Newcomb presented this Concept Plan and slides of the site area. The 81.99 acre site is
located on the northwest corner of Brand Road and A very Road. This Concept Plan includes
163 single-family dwelling units and 19 acres of parkland. The first .Concept Plan for Shannon ~
Glen was tabled by the Planning Commission on August 5, 1993 and at that time was considered
in conjunction with the Lochmuir Concept Plan. Issues discussed at the August meeting included J
potential flooding, effect on downstream property owners, density, and the size of the lots. By
removing 25 lots, the density has been reduced from 2.29 to 1.98 dwelling units per acre. The
typical lot width has been increased from 75 feet to 80 feet. Open space has been increased
from 14.2 acres to 19 acres. The b,.uilding setback along Brand Road has been increased from
100 feet to 200 feet. Square cul de sacs have been replaced with more typical round cuI de sacs.
The property is currently zoned R-1, Restricted Suburban Residential District. A tributary of
the North Fork of Indian Run runs in a southernly direction through the site. The floodplain has
been delineated, but the flood way information needed on the plan will require further study.
The proposed lots are 80 feet wide by 125 to 130 feet deep.
The Dublin Community Plan indicates that development to the west of A very Road is to be
residential with a density of between one and two dwelling units per acre. The lots are laid out
in a modified grid pattern along a number of short cul de sacs. Approximately half of the lots
have access from Brand Road and the other half have access from A very Road. Due to the
stream running through the site, the development functions as two independent neighborhoods.
No lot will have direct access onto Brand or A very Roads. The required parkland dedication
for Shannon Glen is 10.6 acres and the proposed open space dedication is 19.0 acres including
a neighborhood park of 1.6 acres and in a 200-foot band along Brand Road. The proposed open
space is somewhat wooded and much of it is located within the floodplain. Pedestrian access ~
is limited and should be increased. The Parks and Recreation Committee reviewed this proposal
at their August 11th meeting and some of the issues they were concerned with included the J
stream bank's stability, the stormwater detention pond location, and park accessibility. The
applicant is proposing 26-foot wide streets. The minimum street width allowed by Code is 32
feet. A waiver of street width should be addressed to the City Engineer with the Preliminary
Development Plan. The street labeled "The Crescent" is located approximately 80 feet from
adjacent intersections. The City Engineer recommends that street intersections be spaced at least
300 feet apart.
Currently there is no sanitary sewer available to the site. It must be provided from an extension
of an existing 24-inch sanitary trunk located on the north side of Dublinshire Drive. The
developer should identify its location, design, and cost sharing issues at the time of the
Preliminary Development plan. The necessity for left turn lanes on all legs of the intersections
into the site with Brand and Avery Roads will need to be addressed. The locations of these new
intersections should be coordinated to maximize traffic safety, both onto :Bran.d and Avery
Rezoning Application
Z93-026
Shannon Glen
Historv
.-
Dublin Planning ana Zoning Commission
A Meeting Minutes - October 7, 1993
Page 12
Roads. Sidewalks will be required on all streets including Brand Road. A bikepath is proposed
along the west side of Avery Road. Street trees will be required on all streets including BrAl1d
and A very Roads. Stormwater management should conform to the City of Dublin standards and
should include coordination with adjacent developments. Areas for stormwater management will
need to be identified.
Staff is recommending approval of the Concept Plan and that the following eleven issues be
addressed with the Preliminary Development Plan:
1) That flood way and floodplain boundaries be accurately sho:wn on all plat, planning,
building permit, and engineering documents and that all City codes be met regarding
floodways and floodplains;
2) That additional sedimentation and erosion control measures be taken along the stream and
that the stream and its banks be improved as approved by Staff.
3) That right-of-way along Avery Road (30 feet from centerline) and Brand Road (40 feet
from centerline) be dedicateQ to comply with the Community Plan;
4) That stormwater management conform to City of Dublin standards;
5) That traffic study issues be addressed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; .
6) That all utilities, street intersections, and cul-de-sacs be designed and installed as
approved by the City Engineer;
7) That the applicant submit provisions for tree preservation, a plan for street trees, and
entry feature landscape plan, as approved by Staff;
8) That the open space along Brand Road and within the eyebrows be maintained by the
homeowners association and indicated on the Final Plat;
f 9) That an additional pedestrian access to open space be provided;
10) That information be provided with regards to the minimum lot area; and
11) That streets be extended to the property lines to provide for better neighborhood
connections as adjacent areas develop.
Robert A. Meyer, Jr., of Porter, Wright, Morris, and Arthur, 41 South High Street, represented
.1'" Midwest Land Fund, Inc., and Erwin and Erwin.. He introduced Mr. Bruce Massa, a principal
. with the applicant and Keith Myers, Planner and author of the plan. Mr. Meyer clarified that
property owners for this particular application are only the Erwins as listed. The others listed
are owners of the Lochmuir site. The submittal made a number of changes in response to
various comments made at the August Planning and Zoning Meeting as well as in response to
discussions with Staff. Some of the main cha.iges were reductions of lots by 25 feet, density
ofless than 2 units per acre, and open space shown as 19 acres which is about 180% of the open
space requirement (a mix of passive natural area along the tributary of Indian Run with some
active space setback along Brand Road).
Mr. Manus asked if Mr. Meyer agreed with the eleven issues raised by Staff and he did.
Keith Myers, of Myers and Schmalenberger 523 North Park Street, Columbus, Ohio, pointed
out the changes made from the previous plan to the Commission and audience. He said 25 lots
were removed, and the open space increased to 19 acres. It also allowed a small neighborhood
./ park to be created to act as the heart of both neighborhoods. The intent is to develop them as
Rezoning Application
Z93-026
Shannon Glen
Historv
.........
lJublm Plannmg ana LOnJng LomnllSSlOn
Meeting Minutes - October 7, 1993
Page 13
separate neighborhoods. The houses will front on the park and the park will be very visible.
Eyebrows and a mini-green create a focal point. The right-of-way is large enough to eliminate
the cui de sac if necessary. The purpose of "The Crescent" allows the houses to front onto
Brand Road by a single-loaded public street. They do not want to back the houses up onto
Brand Road. He recognized that the intersections are close to the entrance, but would like to
work through them with the City Engineer. The square cul de sacs have been deleted on this
plan. The rights-of-way are still square with the purpose to get the housing so that it creates a
space and identity for those cui de sacs.
Mr. Myers said he was asked by Staff to extend the roads to the edges of the property. Mr. ,
Fishman noted the number of trees indicated on the plan and asked if that number would be
planted. Mr. Myers said they were illustrative only and that number would not be planted. -l
They will meet the Dublin standards.
Mr. Sutphen asked about the resident on the eastern entrance on Brand Road and what her
previous request was. Ms. Newcom.b said Mrs. Kathryn Humbert wanted the drive that accessed
directly across from her house moved. Mr. Myers said he would work with Mrs. Humbert.
Ms. Newcomb said the resident was unable to attend this meeting but had called and indicated
that she was pleased with the reduction in density and the setback along Brand Road, but she
would like to discuss the entrance drive.
Mr. Geese asked where the storm water ponds were to be located and would they be dry or wet.
Mr. Myers said the engineers were working on the details and if in open space, they would be
dedicated to the City of Dublin. Criteria is needed from the Parks Department. Mr. Sutphen
mentioned the flooding experienced and that dry retention ponds hold more capacity of water.
He asked if it could be designed to absorb more water and function better to make floods less
frequent.
Mr. Kindra said the detention/retention pond had not been developed at that time. Mr. Kindra
said wet or dry ponds hold the same amount of water.
Mrs. Stillwell noted that cuI de sacs on the plan looked square. Mr. Meyer said the pavement ~
was round. He said it was the right of way line and the square would not be visible. It would ...J
look like any other cul de sac in Dublin. It would look like Indian Run Meadows where the
houses are boxed around the cui de sacs.' Mrs. Stillwell thought rounding was gentler than the
square. She also liked the mini-green concept.
Mr. Geese asked if the open space was dedicated to the City, would the debris, etc. be cleaned
up by the developer or the Parks and Recreation Department. Mr. Meyers said it needed to be
discussed. Mr. Fishman wanted the area cleaned up without removing trees. He said there was
real trash there.
Mr. Rauh asked if engineering approved of the cul de sacs coming off Avery Road. Mr. Kindra
said these still needed to be resolved including the length of the cui de sac. An ordinance was
passed by City Council recently that cui de sacs should not exceed 1,000 feet in length.
-
. .'
Rezoning Application
Z93-026
Shannon Glen
History
--
- ~--= ~ . ---"'''A'''''''~ '..... .Ol:' p......' r~
J..,..fVI,.lJ.J.ll. Jr.. ~-.-i.uJ.J."~5 (..o..IP,.~ L-.........;.d6 '-v';;.....L~-J.LVJ.I.
Meeting Minutes - October 7, 1993
. Page 14
Mr. Fishman liked the plan and commended the applicant for improving it as requested.
Mrs. Stillwell was concerned about the sideways houses.
Mr. Sutphen made the motion to approve this Concept Plan. Mr. Fishman seconded the motion.
The vote was as follows: Mr. Geese, yes; Mr. Manus, yes; Mr. Peplow, yes; Mrs. Stillwell,
yes; Mr. Rauh, yes; Mr. Sutphen, yes; and Mr. Fishman, yes. <Approved 7-0.)
-.- 7. Informal Review of Chapter 733, l\fe anical Amusement Devices, (Gamerooms) of the
Dublin Codified Ordinances
Bobbie Clarke introduced this eview. In 1982, Dublin adopted regulations to restrict
amusement devices (gamero s). The Dublin regulations are so restrictive that arcades are not
allowed at all. No mor an three game machines can be installed at anyone site. . Anum
of video arcades hav een proposed recently for this community and she believes vid cades
have proven to compatible. City Council is considering relaxation of the r rements to
permit stand- one video arcades. The Law Director's office drafted the osal distributed
to the Co mission as the proposed Ordinance 74-93. When introduc Council for the first
readi , the City Council referred it to the Planning Commissio . The first legislation was
ted by a sub-committee of the Planning Commission. Th urrent requirements are in the
business regulation section of the Codified Ordinances of lin and not at all related to zoning.
Several Commission members said that it is a land us sue. There may be characteristics that
are appropriate in entertainment settings and it . probably preferable to set up criteria for
approval, rather than to permit them everywh . It was suggested at that time that these should
be treated in a manner similar to a theatre at is as a Conditional Use, and the appropriate step
would be to devise standards by whic hey would be judged.
Mr. Banchefsky said he was g n the task to liberalize the video game ordinance. He is unsure
of Council's or the Comm' lon's pleasure. The ordinance was not a model of drafting and it
is wide open for chan . It is agreed that it should be under the zoning code as opposed to the
business regulatio hich is why it is suggested it come before the Planning Commission for
review.
Mr. Fi man felt the new ordinance was very. liberal compared to the existing one r.
Ban efsky said the new one almost totally deregulated arcades. Mr. Fishman felt question
s whether video arcades were desired in Dublin or not. Mr. Banchefsky Council had
requested a recommendation from the Commission in terms of how.
Mr. Manus said the Commission felt video games were appropri - under certain circumstances
in certain areas. Council wants a recommendation as to wh ehicle will be used to determine
the appropriate circumstances.
Mrs. Stillwell agreed video arcades may be a ropriate in certain locations. The ordinance
presently requires that games are 50 yards art, which is very unrealistic in some cases. She
- --
Rezoning Application
Z93-026
Shannon Glen
History
~
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS . .
Minutes of Dublin City Council Me~ling Page .1 ~ r :
-,___ __. _ ___ _ ___ _ _ ____.:::.~etJn~ ':""
- ~::!o..,rc.... 1Il,......(",.c;!W-~"'~~I..~.----._.. ---....-- ------- ___________
T Helli Novemher I, J~~'---~----'- ---.--- ----._19-=--r~--.- .
,. --j-----------.--.=.""-' =..... '-',:. =-=- :..0....:....:. =. ,-,. = ,. :.: ,= ~-=.. =: = ===;=;=II=~ =.
Ordinance No. 94-93 - An In:InCC III Adop( lhe Prnpnwd Oper:llin~ nud::d and Cash ! ,
Capillll nud::et for (he cll Yfllr Endin:: Ol'('emhcr 31, 1994. i
Mr. Amorose intro ed the ordin:mce. I
that the nudget revielV schedule has heen revised per the memorandum faxed to I
Council to The meetin::s are scheduled he::innin:: November S :Ind conti throu~h I
.r 29 10 enable adoplion of Ihe buu:,:et hdore year.end. II
;1
11 ' r. Strip staled that staff has done an excellent j"h in preparing the "u,'=~t. H~ is bopef"ullhat the "
::
process will he smooth. i! .~
I Mr. Hansley also noted that the budget is in halan.:e with nn' ditional rcvenue enh::neements or tax !I .-J
I increases. It does not prC1j\ose any major eh3n::es olher ! .an some st::f(in:: :Iuditions. !I
, ,;
I !I
I ' "
I Other I!
.. :1
I ConceN Pt~n - Shannon Glen (Applicant: Midwest L~nd r-und, Inc., c/o Rohen A. Mc)'cr, Jr.,
i PaMer, Wri~ht, Morris :l::J Anhur, 41 South Hi;;h Slr.eet, Col1:mbus. Ohio 432]5-3':06 and Erwin l!
II
J and Er.....in c/o Anna M. Erwin, 100 r-~urth Stred t\W, PO Box 328,.C~t:I\\'ha, NC 28609) II
:!
I Ms. Clarke stated that the site consist.~ of 1\2 :lcres located on the northwest eorncr of I3r:lOd :>nd j:
.!
I Avery Roads. She showed an aerial slide of the suhject site :md descrihed the are:!. She noted Ih:ll 1;
I a concept plan is a non-hinding re\'iew hy both Planning Commission :ind Council. Planning Ii
Commission reviewed this plan at their O~tllher meeting :lnd recommended appro\'al. If Council :,
i'
also recommends approval, that is ~uthnriz:ltion under the Cthle for the :Ipp!ic:mt to procecd and file .'
a preliminary development pl:ln or rezoning :Ipplicatinn. The l~nd is currcntly zoned R.I, Restricted i:
Suburban Residential which requires 40,000 square feet for Ihe cst:lhlishment of a sin~!e-family i:
I:
I home. The request is a concept plan under Ihe PlJD 7.0ne and the propos:11 is for 163 single-f;amily i:
homes and 19 aCres of open space. A I:1r!:e ponion of the open space incllllle5 Ihe trihut:lry to the _ I:
Indian Run. She nOled th:lt the rcquire.1 llm.lunt of open sp~ce under the Code is JO.6 acres. The r
lots are typically about 80 hy ] 25 Ilr DO fcet in deplh, and lhe dcnsity is 1.98 dwellin;: units pcr !;
acre. The existing Communily PI:m estllhlished th3t :lre:lS wcst uf Avery ROlld l.hould he developed !:
at a maximum density of 2 units per itcrc. The dcvelopm..:nt of this prnpns:11 will requirc Lie I:
extension of a sanitary sewer from Duhlinshire Drive. :'i00 r,'ct C:ISt of Muirfichl Drive. St:lfr is Ii
recommending approval oflhe cnncepfplan. The iss\lcs outlined in the n:Cllrd of action rrom p,~z.
are those 10 he addressed at the prelimin:lry develC\pml'nt stllge. Staff and Pbiming Commission Ii
believe that the land use :md dell.~ity arc appropriate and thus recommcnd approval without I; ..
conditions.
Mr. Kranstuher asked :lhmll Ihe cllst-west rl\ad on' the Idt side of Ihe tlev~lopment where it notes Ii ~
.future connection.. II . 'J
Ms. Clarke siated that an adjoining site e(lne,'pt pEm for 11!:,)lf course is suhject 10 Ihe condition Ihat I
.1 I
it provide for stub streets intn the surrounding propl'nic.~. . . I
I Mayor Rozanski staled Ihat approv:ll of lhe Shannon Glen concept plan will dictate Ihe 1:I)'out of the I
:olf course for the adjoining devclopm('nt. It is i:npon:mt tn hrlng tlw dcvclt'p.'rs Ingether 10 wnrk .-
- I with the city 10 atldres!; iSSUe!;. I
I Ms. Clarke responded that slafr wiil sch..:Jnle a n1~~I;Il:: wilh thc developers a.~ soon ~s :1 rezonin:: ,
application is filed in order 10 work out iss\l~. ,
!
Roh Mever. 41 S. Hi!?h Street. renre~enlin" :'Dnlic:mt. MiJwc~t 'l:md r-Ilnll stitted that he is i
accompanied hy princip:11 Bruce Ma~s:t :ll'ld hy Kcith Mycrs ami M:lrk JaJuca from Myers I
Schmalenll.er:er who prepared thc pl:lO. Hc ~t:lted thatlhC" concept plan was liIet! in th\! summer and_ I
approved unanimously at the last PIllnning & Zoning m('cling. He nOled that the open space of ]9 I
acres is ISO percent of thc required opcn splice :mt! consists of a mix hClwcen llclive p:lrk: space I
along the creele and passive space up :md down Ihe trihut:lry of Indi:lO nun. There is a large selh:lck i
of 200 feet from the cenler of Br:lOd ROlld, :md the applicJnt :1J:rees with the conditions listed' which I
will he followed up at the prelimin~ry development pl:m stage. .
.
Keith MYers. Mven Schm:'ll('nher~er, 523 North P:lrk Street :~ve a hrief presentation to Council Rezoning Application
ahout the plan. He nOled Ih:lt the site presented somc initial prohlcms due tn thc need 10 \Vork with
the developer of the concept plan for Ihe I..shapc.d propllr1y surrounding Ihis piecc as well a.~ Ihe Z93-026
plan for Lochmuir., The pl:ln acnlally crcales two sep:lr:lte ncil,;hhorhl1ods with the Oood plain anti Shannon Glen
wooded area separ:lling thc two. Thc tlcvclop,'r l'urptls..:Iy m:ltle a decision not 10 vchicul:lrly
connect the nci!:hhorhoolls hnt iriSlI::I~ "ph"r Ii'r :1 p,'''.:~tl ian rllnn.'eli"n. '111c Ik\'l'llIpCr ;,lh'mpte,1 History
.....
"
-<~..~,^-'~~....,-
_ _~,"."-,~~""""""",~~.,,,~,''''w"~',~.,_
..
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
~.. t f Duhlin City Council Meeling Page 5 U t'
J...mu es 0 mCC mrr
- ---.--..-.. -" ...-'- - - .-'" ..., ..-' .- -..- -" .. .'--
'~~r_:-t.,.;~;;:\i',oc",),,,)"'o-='n..w ,", ....= ....: = '-= - ._- =- :0": = :=:-. .r:. =.
..L.H'ld_":;::mh'''' ~93 _._.~_._ ... ..... l~-=- 1___
.
to minimize the numher of houscs l">acl:ing nnto Brand with ;\ crescent r(lad uesi:;n. They will work
with Engineering to resolve any cngineering prohlems re.~lIlting from the design. M;my of the details :
are similar to what was presentcd in the Trinity [':lrk pbn, i.e. .c).enrow' det:lils. A new fcature i
11 of this plan are 'mini-grecns. which 3re slightly larger than :1 stamt:lrd cul.de's~c. Lot si7.es are SO !
I foot wide throughout the plan. Open space is close ltl douhle the requirement.
_" 11 \lr K'a~s...L.r:s not .~'''''''I.<i;c ..h""t 11,.. cre<....nt ro"" 11..<i~n 'I
.('_',.... 'I .'1. ' 10 u..~1..... ........... __". ... .... . '" . "'.. . U I..::>.
il Mr. Myers responded that the crescent roaJ desi:;n will en~hle front ele\':ltions ltl face Brand. :1 i
11 more aesthetically appealing view, :
.,_ L ~~r. ~{'..ers 3dd~ t.1;3tt~e\' arc ,\"!l!!~~ 10 wl1rl: wilh t!1e n,'id',l,(\dl1~ de,,~l(\l',>r on 3dil!~ting the rnacs'
~ for the" preliminary development pl3~. - - . '\
II Mr. Kranstuher added that h~ likes the mini'J:re~n cul-J~'~3':s.
i Mrs. King asked if the develnper pl:m~ to h:lve detcntion in Ihe :;reen space along the creek. 'j
: ~~r. Myers responded that they pl3n to h2\'e detent inn ill the lewer are:ls ,1f green sp:lce along the
I creek.
'I Mrs. King asl:ed staff if there are plans 1lI straighten 0\11 ^v~ry Road in view of lhe development I
currently proposed in the are:!. .;
I' Ms. C]arh stated that staff h:Sn0t I 0(\1: ecJ :It this !~~ue "ut5k!e the cnnlext of the Cnmmunity Pl~.n- .:
. which was adopted 5 years ago. The Community Plan opled for lining IIjl the road on the sO:Jth side I
I of the intersection.
I Mrs. King added that she is not adv("\c:lling lining thc rll2u up nonh of the intersection uue to the
;1 loss of a significant wooded area along with the sllbst:mti:ll cost of a hrid:;e. However. it is
j appropriate to address this issue wi:h thc rezoning (If th~ p3r:e1s in the arc:!.
I Ms. Clarke stated that the developer of Hawk's N~t h:\.~ not sh(lwn the straightening of Avery Road,
I and this issue has delayed the Hawk's Ncst plan review.
I Mrs. .Kin:: added that she likes the mini-gre~ns. She :lSkeJ who will m:lint:lin them.
i Mr. Myers responded th:!t the homeowncrs' assoCiation willlil:el)' m:lint:lin them. ..
I
I
I Mr. Camphell commented that he likes the I'l:In - it is inno\';lli"e, the densilY is appropriate for the
i area, and he is intrigucd hy the crc~.:ent are:! whkh will re~lIlt in less <lIrh ctllS while maintainin~
I
\ the setbacks. .,
I Mayor Ro:unski noted Ih:lt the crcscent design is :I helll'r :lltcrn:ltivc th:1O Trinity !';Irk whcre curn ..
j euts are made on Rings Road. O\'crall, the projl'ct looks gO'I(!.
\ Mr. Sutphen moved to approve the concept plan for Shannon Glen. . .
Mr. Kranstuber seconded the motion. .. '
Vote on the motion _ Mr. Sutphen, )'es; Mr. Ar:lorose. ycs; ~lr. C:lml'hell. yes; Mrs. Kin:. yes;
.Mayor Rozanski, yes; Mr. Strip. ye.~; !vir. Kransnsher, yes. ;i ..
Mr. Strip noted that it would be helpful if ucve]opers wOllld'nring duplicatc sets of disp]:t)'s 'so that
the audience could see the plans at the samc time ~,s Council. "
Discussion followed ahout improving the visibility of present:ltions to the :ludiencc. Ms. Clarke
'suggested that staff shoot slides 'l,f Clllnr-codl'd llrawin~s an~ h:I\'1: them J;hown lluring tile
presentation. .
.\ Staff will in--:estigate this prior to the ncxt Council meeting. .'
Mr. Strip, in" ommitte' reponed that he received :l call late today from Jim B:lll, reprcsenting ;
the Dublin resting C]uh. Council h:ld previou~ly allocated $2,500 III the c with sevcral ;'
restric' s, including \Ising the funds for chy service~. :,
trip moved the approval of the ch:lnge of rcstrictions, noting th:ltthe uh h:ls :Igrellllthat the i
funds would he used only for j;ener:lI c1l1h purpnses; that Ihe funds \. Id not he lI~ed tll employ ,
professionals; and the funds would he \lsed solely for wrcstling m;llt~rs not a.~soci:tted with
school functions. * i.
Mr. Amorose suonded the motinn. -'
Vote on the ~otion' Mr. Kransnlher. )'CS; M:lyor Ro' ski, yes; Mr. Sotphen. yes; Mr. Campbcll . .'
yes; Mr. Stnp, yes; Mr. ^morose. ye.~; Mr~. Ki ,yes. . ReZOnIng Appl1catlon
. Z93-026
Mr. Strip also reponed Ih:lt the Committ' I:t.~ rc\'iewed the fnur pcnlling hl'dt:lx :Ipplic:'tions, :m Sh G
1 recommendations will he made tn (', ll.'il in lhe nexlt\\,,1 tn fnur \\'cl'h. annon len
I'~"" History
d '~'"'""~,,.,"..I."""""- __ __"",~",'~'_,'_"",,,,,,,_","',,,",",",,_'~O''"-""-'-'.'_ ..
- ,
TEXT FOR PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN
SHANNON GLEN PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
A Preliminary Development Plan, consisting of this text and
the attached plan drawings, is proposed and submitted for approval
,~ under Planned Unit Development (PUD) District regulations for 81.99I
acres located at the northwest corner of Brand and Avery Roads. It
provides for single family residential development at less than 2.0
-., dwelling units per acre and open space in excess of Code
requirements. This submittal is consistent with the concept plan
approved for this development by the Planning and Zoning Commission
on October 7, 1993 and by City Council on November I, 1993. The
format of this text follows the Preliminary Development Plan content
requirements of Section 1181.07(g)(2) with the Dublin Planning and
Zoning Code.
A. Northpoint and Scale:
Please see Preliminary Development Plan drawing.
B. Proposed Location and Size of Areas of Residential
Use, Indicating Dwelling Unit Densities, Dwelling Unit
Types and Total Number of Dwelling Units for Each
Density Area and the Total Number of Dwelling Units
Proposed in the Development Plan:
There will be 161 single family lots. The typical lot
size is 80 feet wide and 120 feet deep; dimensions of individual
,.... lots are shown on the Preliminary Development Plan drawing. The
location and configuration of the lots and internal street system
serving the lots are shown on the Preliminary Development Plan
......... drawing. The overall density is approximately 1.96 units per acre.
Development will meet the following standards:
Minimum front yard 25 feet
Minimum rear yard 25 feet
Minimum side yard 7 feet
Minimum side yard (combined) 15 feet
There shall be no metal or chain link fencing. Fencing adjacent to
public rights-of-way shall be in accordance with the attached fence
~
- =>
.
. ,
detail. Fencing shall not be located closer to the lot line than
any platted building line, and shall not be located closer than
7 feet to any side or rear lot line.
C. The Proposed Size, Location and Use of Non-residential
Portions of the Tract, Including Usable Open Areas,
Parks, Playgrounds, School Sites and Other Public
Areas and Open Spaces with the Suggested Ownership of
Such Areas:
~
Open space is shown on the Preliminary Development
"'""" Plan drawing. A bikepath would be constructed in locations as
shown. In addition, a building setback would be established in the
area along Brand Road at a distance of 200 feet from centerline
(except for three lots to accommodate the arch street adjacent to
Brand Road, as shown on the plan). The open space consists of
active and passive park area along the tributary to Indian Run that
flows through the site, a neighborhood park, two minigreens, and
open space within the Brand Road setback. The park areas would be
dedicated to the City; the minigreens and Brand Road setback areas
would be set aside as reserves and maintained by a homeowners'
association to be established as part of the development. A
footbridge would be constructed to link the park areas on either
side of the creek.
D. The Proposed provision of Water, Sanitary Sewer and
Surface Drainage Facilities, Including Engineering
Feasibility Studies or Other Evidence of
Reasonableness:
Please see attached engineering plans. Stormwater
retention ponds within the park areas will be dedicated to the
t",'It>\ City. Standard engineering practices for controlling stormwater
runoff and sedementation during construction will be employed.
E. The Proposed Traffic Circulation Patterns, Including
Public and Private Streets and Parking Areas
Indicating Evidence of Reasonableness:
The Preliminary Development Plan indicates the street
pattern proposed for the Shannon Glen development. The Applicant
proposes a general street pavement width of 26 feet for two-way
streets, 20 feet for one-way streets, and a 110 foot right-of-way
for all cul-de-sac bulbs. Cul-de-sac and minigreen configurations
are as shown on the Preliminary Development Plan. Right-of-way at
30 feet from centerline will be dedicated along Avery Road, and at
40 feet from centerline along Brand Road.
- 2 -
~,""'-
_.~~-,._~--- ,-~.~~~~._~--
. ~
F. The Proposed Schedule of Site Development,
Construction of Structures, and Associated
Facilities. Such Schedules Shall Include Proposed Use
or Reuse of Existing Features Such as Topography,
Structures, Streets, Easements and Natural Areas:
The site is within the area designed to be served by a
24 inch sanitary trunk currently requiring extension from a location
east of Muirfield Drive. The mechanics of the extension of that
sewer will determine the scheduled start for development of this
,I"""- site.
G. The Relationship for the Proposed Development to
Existing and Future Land Use in the Surrounding Area,
the Street System, Community Facilities, Surfaces and
Other Public Improvements:
The development proposed is consistent with
development in the area and the Dublin Community Plan. Its low
density and provision of open space well beyond base requirements
yield an overall minimal impact on community facilities and public
improvements.
with respect to tree preservation, most of the trees
on the site exist in the southeast corner of the site and along the
creek. Builders will be required to install temporary construction
fence adjacent to wooded areas. Within the delineated open space,
existing trees larger than 6 inches in diameter will not be removed
except to the extent necessary for the installation of storm
detention, bikepaths and utilities, or except in accordance with
accepted forestry management practices. Street trees will be
installed in accordance with Dublin requirements.
,.,.. H. Space for Appropriate Council Ordinance Number
1
Approving Preliminary Development Plan:
Please see Preliminary Development Plan drawing.
MEYER/1747
- 3 -
<'~"_.~~'-'_O__~~_'~_ , > -"",.~:~""'-'", ,
.
t ..
PORTER, WRIGHT,
MORRIS & ARTHUR
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
ROBERT A. MEYER, JR. 41 SOUTH HIGH STREET, COLUMBUS, OHIO 43215-6194 OTHER FIRM LOCATIONS,
COLUMBt:S, OHIO TELECOPIER: (614) 227-2100 C1NCIl'-"1\ATI. OHIO
TELEX: 6503213584 -
CLE\'ELA.'m, OHIO
(614) 227-2242 -
DAYTON. OHIO
-
NAPLES. FLORIDA
-
WASHINGTON, D.C
1""'" November 30, 1993
Mary H. Newcomb
City of Dublin
Planning Division
5131 Post Road
Dublin, OH 43017
Re: Shannon Glen
Dear Mary:
This letter is to recap the meeting that Bruce Massa, Keith
Myers, Dave Hussey, and I had with you and Randy Bowman on Shannon
Glen on November 24, 1993. This meeting was to review various
issues in advance of our Preliminary Development Plan filing, which
we plan to make on Tuesday, November 30, 1993.
The meeting began with a study of various road detail
issues. Keith reviewed the minigreen details with Randy, and
suggested he look at examples in New Albany and the Green Pastures
development in Marysville. Randy indicated he would need to apply
#".. templates to the scale drawings. Keith also stated our intent to
ask for 110 foot widths on all cul-de-sac bulbs, notwithstanding the
Code's requirement for 120 foot bulbs on cul-de-sacs greater than
300 feet. Keith explained that the right-of-way width of a
cul-de-sac is driven by the size of emergency vehicles, which should
not differ based on the length of the cul-de-sacs to which they are
dispatched. Keith also explained that our reason for seeking
narrower cul-de-sacs and street pavement widths is to maintain the
scale of the development. Keith indicated all rights-of-way would
be 60 feet. Randy indicated he did not need street cross sections.
We then discussed various aspects of the plan. Keith
explained that, subject to discussions with Janet Jordan, the
existing farmhouse might remain in the neighborhood park area. He
also explained that the Brand Road entrances had been moved away
from the nearby house on the south side, and that the buildings
shown on the south side of Brand are barns or farm structures.
#,;{+>",
,~,_.',
.
.. ,
Mary H. Newcomb
November 30, 1993
Page 2
Randy asked that property lines on the south side of Brand also be
shown. Keith explained that the arc approach to the interior single
loaded street parallel to Brand Road might have to be abandoned
because it would need to encroach into the 200 foot from centerline
setback. After some discussion, it was agreed that Keith would
prepare and submit several options for this part of the plan. We
discussed the possibility of adding bikepath connections from
cul-de-sac bulbs near Avery Road to the Avery Road bikepath. We ~
also discussed the possibility of agreeing to particular development
standards for the sides of structures that might face Avery Road. .....P
We discussed the possibility of making the roads on the north and
south of the neighborhood park at the Avery Road entrance one way.
With respect to engineering issues, Dave Hussey emphasized
the engineering challenge of draining the site. Randy Bowman made
several suggestions. The approach to draining the site is currently
undergoing thorough review. Randy Bowman also indicated a need for
a left turn lane at a Brand Road entrance. Bruce mentioned the
appropriateness of working with the potential developers of property
to the south. In response to questions concerning the status of the
sanitary sewer, Bruce stated that he has been told that engineering
work and the preparation of descriptions for crossing Muirfield
Drive is underway, and that ultimately the sewer would head westward
along the south side of Brand to a point west of Indian Run, and
then would connect northward. A north connection to Lochmuir would
also occur.
We agreed it would be appropriate to have as complete a
submittal as possible by November 30 in order to optimize review
time leading up to the January 6, 1994 Planning and Zoning
Commission meeting. Thanks again for your cooperation. Let me know
if anything I have stated is inaccurate.
~
Very truly yours, J
~ Q. J/1~tVt-/~./~
Robert A. Meyer, Jr.
RAM:ded/1746
,,,- Randy Bowman
cc:
Bruce F. Massa
Keith A. Myers
David A. Hussey, P.E.
.....
__,"",..~'~~~"""_~"-----o.- ~.',,-~~~.. .:o,'~.~_
~ ~~
...
CITY OF DUBLIN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
AN APPLICATION FOR AMENDMENT
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN ZONING
DISTRICT HAP
(Reclassification of Land) -
ex>
Please type or print information - Use additional sheets as necessary
TO THE HONORABLE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION: )S
~f\..W I /J..,.. fR..w ( IJ ) 0-/0 A tUNA Rw/ fl)
The Applicant MidWl"5t b"Ad-~. ,
(Have property in contract)
being the owner(s),X~~XX~~~X~ of property located within the area proposed for
.re-zoning (preliminary Development plan) , requests that the following
described land to be placed in the PUD District
.
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
1""" (street or other), and having an area of
.
c. The tract of land containing Acres and bounded by:
(specify) on the N SEW (Circle)
(specify) on the N S ! W (Circle)
(specify) on the N S ! W (Circle)
(specify) on the N SEW (Circle)
d. Attached legal description: YES XX NO
ri~~ i~ !r; f/: fi :In p -r:..,
\:' P",
;' --'. :"
Page 1 of 3 _ v
1; \'
1'"'''''
-
~
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.
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. I
...,II
NAME ADDRESS
See Exhibit "A" attached hereto.
B. ARGUMENTS FOR RECLASSIFICATION OF THE DESCRIBED LAND
1. Proposed Use or Development of the Land: Single family residences and
open space. .
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 other Zoning Districts, such plans or other exhibits would be helpful .~
to the review of this application.
Plans and Exhibits submitted ...J
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.
DeveloDment as consistent with surrounding development and Dublin
rnri1mllnity Plan (c;ee 10/07/93 Staff Report on Concept FHan).
Page 2 of 3 pages
...
, "-
J. Has an application for rezoning of the property been denied by the City
Council within the last two (2) years?
~S
NO XX
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 ~) Robert A. Meyer, Jr. Attorney for Midwest Land Fund, Inc.
being duly sworn, depose and say that I am~A~6 th~~~\~~~~~
~~XjX~*i~~~X~i~i~iXj~.X~jjX<<~j<<X~X~l.~xr~~XrK~XM~~~~~l~~~~~~ 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~~ 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~<<~M knowledge and belief.
**attorney for the applicant ~,~:/J--
Robert A. Meyer. Jr., Esq.
PORTER, WRIGHT,MORRIS & ARTHUR
41 South Hi gh Street
Columbus; Ohio 43215
(Mailing address)
(614)224-2242
(Phone)
Subscribed and sworn to before me this 30-t day of November , 1993.
MARY A. ROSSI ~41Z-,'
notar Public)
Person to for details, if other than above signatory:
. .-
(Name (Address) (Telephone)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - rOo not WrIte beioii thIs-lIne)- - - - - - - - - - _.- - -
D. ..RECORD OF ACTION
1. Withdrawn Held to
(Date) (Date)
2. P&Z C: Date of Hearing
Approved Disapproved Modified
J. City Council: Date of Hearing
Approved Disapproved Hodified
p~~~ , nf 1 Pnnp~
S~~T BY:5142272100 ;12-10-93 ; 9:37A~ ; PWMA*Cen tr a I Servlce~ 614 761 6566;# 2/ 2
.I .
&~Jf1{lL' ·
! ... ; 11t',,.., - 9
. L..V
j
. ~-r:-,,' ~'-'. '..~..
I i ~ /.t ~/
July 19, lit3 . ~
....",.,,1
To Who. I~ May Concern:
I/We acknowled98thatw. currently own the 81 acre.
of land at the northwest corner ot Avary and Brand
Roads. We acknowledge that Midwest Land. PW\d, Inc.
(Hidw..t) ba. fil8d for c:oncept plan approvall
zon1ncz with the City of Dublin. w. turther
acknowled.ge that we have qiven Mi~west parmi..ion
to take .uch stepa .s nece.sary to tile ..nc1
complete the a~proval prooes. required by the city
of Dublin.
Respectfully,
,
.
~
..,J
.
~ '.
MASSA
REALTY"
DEVelOPMENT
421. ~\'~..
Sllit. 600t
(oIvmblll, Ohio 432U ~ IncIMduII NtnI~ III fie SOCIETY oF INbUS1'fllIAl, encf
"4.271.7177 -:T OFFlCEA&:.4l.~
...
- '- ':t..~j .00::;.0
~_n_~'"
" ~~"'~.,"-~'-'- -,,~,,~,--,'~'-~~"'~-~'" SIvt.~ ~
"
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
~ Situated in the Counties of Franklin and Union in the State of Ohio
and in the Townships of Washington and Jerou and bounded and described as
follows:
Bein art of Survey Nos. 5162 and 2544 .i n the Virginia Military District.
B'.i~nfn. in the '.nt.r of the S'ioto Riv.r, Union .nd D.lawar. Coont~.. F~~.
Turn ike at a stone in the center of uid Turnpike at the point were e
Dalaeara Coonty hr.n'h of a.id Tornpik. intara.'t. tho '.in tornpik. at or v.r!
near the Southeast corner of the Joseph McCampbell farm, so calle~j then~e Nort
840 30' W, 230.80 poles to a stone in the Southwest corner of sa~d farm1 thenc~
North 40 30' W, 101.60 poles to a stone in the Northwest corner of sa d farm,
thence North 720 40' E, 193 poles to a stone in the center of the Frankfort
Road now forming the Delaware Count.l Branch of the above designated free
turnpikej thence with the center of sa d Frankfort Road, known as the D~la~are
County Branch of said turnpike South 160 15' E, 189.68 poles to the beg~~n~nQ,
contuning 186.90 acres, 30.33 acres of the west ,side of sa~d farm bung ~n 5'1
Jaro.. Tow", hip, Union Coon ty, Ohio, and tho r.munder of . ud t raot. 156.57 1'5'. (, ".;,i)
acres, being in Washington Township, Franklin County, Ohio. _ 1,.11'
EXCEPTING HOWEVER, the following described tract situated in the Townshi~ of BZ.?~
''11~' Washington, Franklin County, Ohio, and being a part of Survey No. 5162, Virg~nia ~
Military Lands, bounded and described as follows:
Beginnin~ at a iron pin in the centerline of Avery Road at the Northeast cor~er
of the a oresaid 186.90 acre tract, thence South 160 1~' E, along the centerl~ne
of said road 615 feet to a spike in the center of sa~d road; thence Sout~ 72~
51~. W, 354.19 feet to a stake (passing ~ stake at 30 feet)j thence North 16 15.
W 615 feet to a stake in the North l~ne of the aforesaid 186.90 acre tract,
thence North 720 51' E. along said North line 354.19 f ~et to the place of
beginninf (passing a stake at 324.19 feet) and containing f~ve (5) acres of land
1II0re or ess.
^ND FURTHER EXCEPTING THEREFROM:
Parcell: Situated in the State of Ohio, County of Franklin, City of Dublin,
being in Virginia Military Survey No. 5162 (6152), containing 68.714 acres of
land, more or lessp said 68.714 acres bei~ out of that 186.90 acre tract of
land d",ribed on ag.. of E.hibit 'A' 0 the D..d. to Erwin amd Erwinl of
record in Official Records Volume 10072, PaQe 114 and Official Records Vo ume
10072, Page 120, Recorder's Office, Frankl~n County, Ohio, said 186.90 acre
tract also being described on Paae 4 of Exhibit 'A. of the Deeds to Erwin and
Erwin, of record in Deed Book 03, Page 511 and Deed Book 303, Page 518,
Recorder's Office, Union County, Ohio, said 68.714 acres of land being more
particularly described as follows:
Beginning, for reference, at a railroad spike at the centerline intersection of
Brand Road and Avery Road (Avery Road North of Brand Road), the same being the
Southeasterly corner of said 186.90 acre tracth thence North 820 54' 00. W. with
the centerline of said Brand Road and with t e Southerly line of said 186.90
aCre tract, crossing a railroad spike at the centerline intersection of Brand
Road and Avery Road (Avery Road South of Brand Road) at a distance of 392.62
feet, a total distance of 2,474.79 feet to a railroad spike at the true point
of beginning;
Thence from said true point of beginning North 820 54' 00. W, with the
center!ine of said Brand Road and with the Southerly line of said 186.90 acre
tr~~t, a distance of 654.02 feet to a railroad Spike;
Thence North 00 19' 52. E, ~arallel with and 74.49 feet Easterly from, as
measured at right angles, bot a Westerly line of said Franklin County and an
Easterly line of Union County, crossing said 186.90 acre tract and crossing a
3/4 inch (J.D.) iron pipe at a distance of 30.21 feet, a total distance of
1,983.19 feet to a 3/4 inch (J.D.) iron pipe in the Northerly line of said
186.90 acre tract the same being in the Southerly line of that 56 acre tract
of land de~ignated as the FIFTH PARCEL in the Deed to the American Italian Golf
Club Assoc~ation, of record in Deed Book 2600, Page 393 Recorder's Office
Franklin County, Ohio, and in Deed Book 216, Page 68, Recdrder'S Office Unio~
County, Ohio, and in Deed Book 315, Page 64, Recorder's Office Delaware County
Ohio; "
Thence North 740 01' 58' E, with the Northerly line of said 186 90 acre tract
with the Southerly line of said 56 acre tract and with the So~therly line of
that 40 acre tract of land designated as the FOURTH PARCEL in said Deeds to the
~erican Ita~ian G?lf Club Association, a distance of 2,021.05 feet to a 3/4
~nch (1.0.) ~ron p~pe at the Northwesterly corner of that 5 acre tract of land
described in the deed to Carl W. Hansel and Enid P. Hansel, of record in Deed
Book 1446, Page 413, Recorder's Office, Franklin County, Ohio;
T~ence South 140 59' 39' E, with the Westerly line of said 5 acre tract, a
d~stance of ~15.00 feet to a 3/4 inch (I.D.) iron pipe at the Southwesterly
Corner of sa~d 5 acre tract;
~Thence North 740 01' 58' E, with the Southerly line of said 5 acre tract
crossing a 3/4 inch (I.D.) iron pipe at a distance of 324.19 feet, a total "".
distance of 354.19 feet to a railroad spike in the centerline of said Avery Road
at the Southeasterly corner of said 5 acre tract, the same being in the Easterly
line of said 186.90 acre tract;
Thence South 140 59' 39' E, with the centerline of Avery Road and with the
Easterly line of said 186.90 acre tract, a distance of 385.14 feet to a railroad
spike;
Thence South 740 01' 58" W parallel with and 1,000.00 feet Southerly from, as
measured at right angles, the Northerly line of said 186.90 acre tract, crossing
a 3/4 inch (I.O.) iron pipe at 30.00 feet, a total distance of 1,973.99 feet to
a 3/4 inch (I.O.) iron pipe;
Thence South 00 19' 52' W, parallel with and 723.94 feet Easterly from, as
measured at right angles, both a Westerly line of said Franklin County and an
easterly line of said Union County, crossing a 3/4 inch (I.D.) iron pipe at a
di,t.n,e of 1,178.08 feet, . tot.1 di.t.n,e of 1,208.29 feet to the true point ~
of beginning and containing 68.714 acres of land, more or less.
Subject to all riphts-of-way, easements and restrictions, if any, of previous ~
record. Also subject to all legal highways.
The foregoing description was prepare~ from information obtained from various
field surveys conducted by Bauer! Dav~dson & MerChant, Inc. beginning in March
of 1977 and extending through Ju y of 1988.
All of the survey markers noted in the foregoing description were in place in
July of 1988.
The bearings given in the foregoing description correspond to the bearings shown
on the recorded plat of Muirf~eld Village Phase 30, of record in Plat Book 66,
Pages 55, 56 and 57, Recorder's Office, Franklin County, Ohio.
--.---.-.
Parcel 2:
Situated in the State of Ohio, Franklin County, Washington TownShip,
being part of Survey No. 6152/5162 and 2544, Virginia Military Lands, also being
part of a 81.994 acre parcel of land lying on the North side of Brand Road
(County Road 44) as conveyed to the Grantor and described in Official Records
Volume 10072, Page 114 to J06 (118 and C05) of the records of said County, .ore
particularly described as follows:
Beginning for reference at a Franklin County monument box found at the Grantor's
Southeasterly corner, said box also being on the intersection of the centerline
of Avery Road (County Road 3) and Brand Road (County Road 44); thence with the
centerline of Brand Road, North 820 53' 25" W, a distance of 392.73 feet to a
Franklin County monument box found at the intersection of the centerline of
Avery Road (County Road 3) and Brand Road (County Road 44), said box also being
on the Gr'ntor'. Southerly line and alao being tha Northea.tarly ,orner to the ~
Indian Run United MethodlSt Church of DUblin, Inc. (OR 03691, E01) 6.9 acre I
tract and also being the Northwesterly corner to the Muirfield Development
Company'. (OR 13778, CDS to C19) 83.37. "re tr"t, 011 fro. the r.,ord. of .dd -'
County, said point being the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING for the parcel herein
intended to be described.
Thence with the Grantor's Southerly line, the centerline of Brand Road and the
Northerly line of the said Indian Run United Methodist Church Of DUblin, Inc.
(OR 03691, E01) 6.9 acre tract, North 820 53" 25' W, a distance of 212.54 feet
to a pointj
Thence across the Grantor's tract North 070 06' 35" E, a distance of 40.00 feet
to a point;
Thence continuing across the Grantor's tract South 820 53' 25" E, parallel to
the centerline of said Brand Road a distance of 300.00 feet to a pointj
Thence continuing across the Grantor's tract South 070 06' 35" W, a distance of
40.00 feet to the centerline of Brand Road and the Northerly line of the said
MUirfield Development Company's (OR 13778, C05 to C19) 83.376 acre tractj
Thence with Grantor's Southerly line and the Northerly line of the said
Muirfield Development Company's (OR 13778, C05 to C19) 83.376 acre tract, North
820 53' 25' W, a distance of 87.46 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNINGj
The above parcel contains 0.276 acre more or less which the present road
OCCupies (P.R.O.) 0.138 acre more or less.
The Grantor reserves the right of ingress and egress to and fro~ the residual
area.
The above description was prepared by Owen B. Daniel, Registered Surveyor No.
6145, on Uarch 19, 1990 fro~ H~ghway Construction Plans prepared by the Franklin
County Engineering Department. Bearings were established from a survey of the
Indian Run United Methodist Church Of Dublin, Inc. Official Record 03691, Page
E01. ~
~~~~'---- ~"".-"..,,, "_J~~_ '--"'~~,~~,--,--".
.
, ... Prooerty Owners of Continauous Pareels
(-all mailing addresses same as site
addresses unless otherwise noted)
~ Prooerty Address MailinG Address of ProDerty Owner-
The Shawnee Hills land Co. Acreage/Avery & Brand Roads c/o Scherer Co.
ATTN: K. Kerr
5131 Post Road
Dublin, Ohio 43017
Walter l. Starkey 7041 Brand Road 6503 Cook Road
Powell, Ohi 0 43065
":i:..... 1t Erwin & Erwin Acreage/Brand Road 7805 Dubli n Road
C/o ~\Nr#\ f.Q..W \ U Dublin. Ohio 43017
John E. Jr., and Kathryn J. Humbert 7509 Brand Road
Dubli n. Ohi 0 43017
Indian Run United Methodist 7707 Avery Road 6300 Post Road
Church of Dubli n, Inc. Dublin, Ohio 43017
Virgil & Marsha A. Temple 7400 Brand Road
Dublin, Ohio 43017
Ralph F. & Inez H. pagl;eri 8000 Avery Road
Dublin, Ohio 43017
Jennings J. & Barbara J. Allen B040 Avery Road
Dublin. Ohio 43017
William R. & Charlotte M. Miller 8050 Ave ry Road
Dublin, Ohio 43017
R;chwood Homes. Inc. & Mulrloch Acreage/Avery Road 61B9 Memorial Drive
Realty, Inc. Dublin, Ohio 43017
ROS121B9
"213 -OZb
.
.
.., ,
The applicant~~ hereby acknowledges that approval of ~KIX~X~K~*~ (its)
request for re-zoniriQ.' by the Dublin Planning and
Zoning Commission and/or Dublin City Council does not constitute a guarantee
or binding commitment that the City of Dublin will be able to provide essential
services such as water and sewer facilities when needed by said applicant.
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.
1/ h~/f-3 ".
, ,
Date
On behalf of:
Mi nwpe;t I lIOn Flinn Tnr
Applicant
.~
:1
.....v
_. . .....-
~
"-"- ~ '~~ ._".-....'._.._..~,.._~' --,- .....' ,-'...,~ .--~" ~~,~.__.",-"-,,,-'--',~"'- -"""-"~-"'~'''~---"''''"'''"''-~'''-
-
TEXT FOR PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN
SHANNON GLEN PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
A Preliminary Development Plan, consisting of this text and
the attached plan drawings, is proposed and submitted for approval
under Planned Unit Development (PUD) District regulations for 8l.99~
acres located at the northwest corner of Brand and Avery Roads. It
provides for single family residential development at less than 2.0
dwelling units per acre and open space in excess of Code
"~' requirements. This submittal is consistent with the concept plan
approved for this development by the Planning and Zoning Commission
on October 7, 1993 and by City Council on November I, 1993. The
format of this text follows the Preliminary Development Plan content
requirements of Section l18l.07(g)(2) with the Dublin Planning and
Zoning Code.
A. Northpoint and Scale:
Please see Preliminary Development Plan drawing.
B. Proposed Location and Size of Areas of Residential
Use, Indicating Dwelling Unit Densities, Dwelling Unit
Types and Total Num0er of Dwelling Units for Each
Density Area and the Total Number of Dwelling Units
Proposed in the Development Plan:
There will be 161 single family lots. The typical lot
size is 80 feet wide and 120 feet deep; dimensions of individual
lots are shown on the Preliminary Development Plan drawing. The
location and configuration of the lots and internal street system
serving the lots are shown on the Preliminary Development Plan
drawing. The overall density is approximately 1.96 units per acre.
Development will meet the following standards:
Minimum front yard 25 feet
Minimum rear yard 25 feet
Minimum side yard 7 feet
Minimum side yard (combined) 15 feet
There shall be no metal or chain link fencing. Fencing adjacent to
public rights-of-way shall be in accordance with the attached fence
- ~
detail. Fencing shall not be located closer to the lot line than
any platted building line, and shall not be located closer than
7 feet to any side or rear lot line.
C. The Proposed Size, Location and Use of Non-residential
Portions of the Tract, Including Usable Open Areas,
Parks, Playgrounds, School Sites and Other Public
Areas and Open Spaces with the Suggested Ownership of
Such Areas:
Open space is shown on the Preliminary Development ~
Plan drawing. A bikepath would b- constructed in locations as
shown. In addition, a building setback would be established in the
area along Brand Road at a distance of 200 feet from centerline
(except for three lots to accommodate the arch street adjacent to
Brand Road, as shown on the plan). The open space consists of
active and passive park area along the tributary to Indian Run that
flows through the site, a neighborhood park, two minigreens, and
open space within the Brand Road setback. The park areas would be
dedicated to the City; the minigreens and Brand Road setback areas
would be set aside as reserves and maintained by a homeowners'
association to be established as part of the development. A
footbridge would be constructed to link the park areas on either
side of the creek.
D. The Proposed provision of Water, Sanitary Sewer and
Surface Drainage Facilities, Including Engineering
Feasibility Studies or Other Evidence of
Reasonableness:
Please see attached engineering plans. Stormwater
retention ponds within the park areas will be dedicated to the
City. Standard engineering practices for controlling stormwater
runoff and sedementation during construction will be employed.
~
E. The Proposed Traffic Circulation Patterns, Including ~
Public and Private Streets and Parking Areas
Indicating Evidence of Reasonableness:
The Preliminary Development Plan indicates the street
pattern proposed for the Shannon Glen development. The Applicant
proposes a general street pavement width of 26 feet for two-way
streets, 20 feet for one-way streets, and a 110 foot right-of-way
for all cul-de-sac bulbs. Cul-de-sac and minigreen configurations
are as shown on the Preliminary Development Plan. Right-of-way at
30 feet from centerline will be dedicated along Avery Road, and at
40 feet from centerline along Brand Road.
- 2 -
~
="-,"".;'. ~.~ ~_.,-"^'^".'-.-~."
.. . ~
F. The Proposed Schedule of Site Development,
Construction of Structures, and Associated
Facilities. Such Schedules Shall Include Proposed Use
or Reuse of Existing Features Such as Topography,
structures, streets, Easements and Natural Areas:
The site is within the area designed to be served by a
24 inch sanitary trunk currently requiring extension from a location
east of Muirfield Drive. The mechanics of the extension of that
sewer will determine the scheduled start for development of this
~"~ site.
G. The Relationship for the Proposed Development to
Existing and Future Land Use in the Surrounding Area,
the Street System, Community Facilities, Surfaces and
Other Public Improvements:
The development proposed is consistent with
development in the area and the Dublin Community Plan. Its low
density and provision of open space well beyond base requirements
yield an overall minimal impact on community facilities and public
improvements.
With respect to tree preservation, most of the trees
on the site exist in the southeast corner of the site and along the
creek. Builders will be required to install temporary construction
fence adjacent to wooded areas. Within the delineated open space,
existing trees larger than 6 inches in diameter will not be removed
except to the extent necessary for the installation of storm
detention, bikepaths and utilities, or except in accordance with
accepted forestry management pra~tices. Street trees will be
installed in accordance with Dublin requirements.
H. Space for Appropriate Council Ordinance Number
Approving Preliminary Development Plan:
Please see Preliminary Development Plan drawing.
MEYER/1747
- 3 -
""'."'~' ,",,~,~-----~ ,
....
RECORD OF ACTION
DUBLIN PLA1'I"NlNG AND ZONING COl\11\1lSSION
February 10, 1994
CITY OF DtBLl~
~ The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action in the application below at its
~-", regular meeting:
'"""".,. 2. Rezoning Application Z93-026 - Preliminary Deyelopment Plan - Shannon Glen
Location: 81.994 acres located on the northwest corner of Avery Road and Brand Road.
Existing Zoning: R-l, Restricted Suburban Residential District.
Request: PUD, Planned Unit Development District, review and approval of Preliminary
Development Plan under the Planned Unit Development provisions of Section 1181.07.
Proposed Use: A single-family subdivision of 162 lots and 20.3 acres of open space.
Applicant: Massa Realty and Development, c/o Bruce Massa, 42 East Gay Street, 6th
Floor, Columbus, OH 43215.
~10TIO~: To approve this Preliminary Development Plan with the following 17 conditions:
1) That a hydraulic study of the stream be provided, addressing its current capacity and the
impact of this site on its future capacity, and that appropriate modifications be made to the
stream and to the FEMA maps, as required by Staff, before approval of the Final
Development Plat;
2) That a revised Development Text be submitted prior to the Council public hearing;
3) That floodway and floodplain boundaries be accurately shown of all plat, planning, building
permit, and engineering documents and that all City codes be met regarding floodways and
floodplains;
l 4) That all "floodway plus 20" areas be included within the public space, to be demonstrated
on the preliminary plat;
5) That a bikepath be constructed along the north side of Brand Road in lieu of a sidewalk and
""" through the subdivision to the streamside park, subject to Staff approval;
6) That storm water management conform to City of Dublin standards;
7) That the layout of the streets, including left turn stacking at the entrances, meet the
requirements of the City Engineer for traffic safety and emergency vehicular access;
8) That the applicant provide a tree survey for landmark trees within 60 days of approval of
the Preliminary Development Plan, submit provisions for tree preservation, a plan for street
trees, and entry feature landscape plan, and Avery Road landscape plan as approved by
Staff;
9) That the open space along Brand Road, within the mini-greens, within the eyebrows and cul-
de-sacs be maintained by the homeowners association and indicated on the Final Plat;
10) That the revised Preliminary Plat and the Final Plat indicate no-parking zones, as required
by the City Engineer;
Page 1 of 2
AS SUBMITTED TO COUNCIL
3//7/f~ FORMEEnNGON 3/Z,/Qi
"""
I
...
RECORD OF ACTION
DUBLIN PLA.J."'~lNG Al\"D ZO~TJNG COM:MISSION
February 10, 1994
Rezoning Application Z93-026 - Preliminary Deyelopment Plan - Shannon Glen (Conditions-
Cont.)
~
11) That the layout of all non-standard street components meet the approval of the City Engineer ~
and the Fire Chief before the Final Development Plan is considered by the Planning -J
Commission;
12) That Staff and the developer will determine if all lots are buildable, and those that are not
will become parkland;
13) That the applicant provide streetlights at all entrances subject to Staff approval;
14) That the southeast corner of the development be left in a natural condition with no clear
cutting except as necessary for bikepath or stream clearing;
15) That Brand Road be widened on the north side which may require ditch modification;
16) That storm water basins on A very Road be constructed as wet basins; and
17) That a No-Build Zone, 75 feet from centerline, be established along Avery Road.
Robert Meyer agreed to the above conditions.
VOTE: 7-0.
RESULT: This Preliminary Development Plan was approved.
STAFF CERTIDCATION:
~f~b ,\
,
,.J
Graduate Landscape Architect
Page 2 of 2
.....
.'~"_"__'~'_'__"_'_'" 1 l"t .---.-..--'-------'-
1
, "
.
I ...
TEXT FOR PRELIHIBARY DBVBLOPHEIrl PLAlI
SIIAJIROR GLER PLABBED OBIT DEVELOPIIEBT
A Preliminary Development Plan, consisting of this text and
.~, the attached plan drawings, is proposed and submitted for approval
under Planned Unit Development (PUD) District regulations for 81.99~
I acres looated at the northwest corner of Brand and Avery Roads. It
~~ provides for single family residential development at less than 2.0
dwelling units per acre and open space in excess of Code
requirements. This submittal is consistent with the concept plan
approved for this development by the Planning and Zoning Commission
on October 7, 1993 and by City Council on November 1, 1993. The
format of this text follows the Preliminary Development Plan content
requirements of Section 1181.07(g)(2) with the Dublin planning and
Zoning Code. '
A. Northpoint and Scale:
Please see Preliminary Development Plan drawing.
B. Proposed Location and Size of Areas of Residential
Use, Indicating Dwelling Unit Densities, Dwelling Unit
Types and Total Number of Dwelling Units for Each
Density Area and the Total Number of Dwelling Units
Proposed in the Development Plan:
There will be 162 single family lots. The typical lot
size is 80 feet wide and 120-130 feet deep; dimensions of individual
lots are shown on the Preliminary Development Plan drawing. The
location and configuration of the lots and internal street system
serving the lots are shown on the Preliminary Development Plan
drawing. The overall density is approximately 1.98 units per acre.
Development will meet the following standards:
Minimum front yard 25 feet
Minimum rear yard 25 feet
Minimum side yard 7 feet
Minimum side yard (COmbined) 15 feet
There shall be no metal or chain link fencing. Fencing adjacent to
public rights-of-way shall be in accordance with the attached fence
3{17/1'1 Tn r'r)lJNCfl.. .
, ON .!Lzt / 1!:J b
,--~'........... -,,~-
, ~
.
, ..
detail. Fencing shall not be located closer to the lot line than
any platted building line, and shall not be located closer than
7 feet to any side or rear lot line.
C. The Proposed Size, Location and Use of Non-residential
Portions of the Tract, Including Usable Open Areas.
Parks, Playgrounds, School Sites and Other Public
Areas and Open Spaces with the Suggested Ownership of
Such Areas:
Open space is shown on the Preliminary Development
Plan drawing. A bikepath would be constructed in locations as
shown. In addition, a building setback would be established in the
area along Brand Road at a distance of 200 feet from centerline
(except for two lots to accommodate the arch street adjacent to
Brand Road, as shown on the plan). The open space consists of
active and passive park area along the tributary to Indian Run that
flows through the site, a neighborhood park, two minigreens, a nil
open space within the Brand Road setback. The park areas would be
dedicated to the City; the minigreens and Brand Road setback areas
would be set aside as reserves and maintained by a homeowners'
association to be established as part of the development. A
footbridge would be constructed to link the park areas on'either
side of the creek.
D. The Proposed Provision of Water, Sanitary Sewer and
Surface Drainage Facilities, Including Engineering
Feasibility Studies or Other Evidence of
Reasonableness:
Please see attached engineering plans. Stormwater
retention ponds within the park areas will be dedicated to the
City. Standard engineering practices for controlling stormwater
runoff and sedementation during construction will be employed.
E. The Proposed Traffic Circulation Patterns, InCluding
Public and Private Streets and Parking Areas
Indicating Evidence of Reasonableness:
The Preliminary Development Plan indicates the street
pattern proposed for the Shannon Glen development. The Applicant
proposes a general street pavement width of 28 feet for two-way
streets, 20 fe~t for one-way streets, and a 110 foot right-of-way
for all cul-de-sac bulbs. Cul-de-sac and minigreen configurations
are as shown on the Preliminary Development Plan. Right-of-way at
30 feet from centerline will be dedicated along Avery Road, and at
40 feet from centerline along Brand Road.
- 2 -
""""'"
..'.0.'..--"'_ ,- ~' - rra--.n"
I
.
. '...
F. The Proposed Schedule of Site Development,
Construction of Structures, and Associated
Facilities. Such Schedules Shall Include Proposed Use
or Reuse of Existing Features Such as Topography,
Structures, Streets, Easements and Natural Areas:
The site is within the area designed to be served by a
24 inch sanitary trunk currently requiring extension from 8 location
east of Muirfield Drive. The mechanics of the extension of that
sewer will determine the scheduled start for development of this
site.
G. The Relationship fpr the Proposed Development to
EKisting and Future Land Use in the Surrounding Area,
the Street System, community Facilities, Surfaces and
Other Public Improvements:
The development p~oposed is consistent with
development in the area and the Dublin Community Plan. Its low
density and provision of open space well beyond base requirements
yield an overall minimal impact on community facilities and public
improvements.
with respect to tree preservation, most of the trees
on the site exist in the southeast corner of the site and along the
creek. Builders will be required to install temporary construction
fence adjacent to wooded areas. Within the delineated open space,
existing trees larger than 6 inches in diameter will not be removed
except to the extent necessary for the installation of storm
detention, bikepaths and utilities, or except in accordance with
accepted forestry management practices. Street trees will be
installed in accordance with Dublin requirements.
H. Space for Appropriate Council Ordinance Number
Approving Preliminary Development Plan:
Please see Preliminary Development Plan drawing.
MEYER/l747
- 3 -
~ ~~~~-
"^ --~~.~
~....'~.-..,.-
t ~ '""""
.
...
.~,.
,
'!;~,,' "':~ :",' ...... ......
.
c'
l 1 z
. ! ~.. a\ 0
~ J:
~ -t 1 u
...
~ ~ en
~
.
-
.
-..
'.
-
.'.~. ..... '.
-
__'_"4
- :- J
. )
_~ I - .....
~ j~ ,
t" ~t
-{ ~~ .-- ~=~:= ~ I
I ~~ i 1
,I t\. I ....J
( .f~ .
-
L< ~
LU
-...- . -. 0
.,
-
- -
LU
".0-, ~. U
Z
nl.-!
,
u.J
,U-
-----
/""'"'
i
'i'<' -
,1' ""
--
, !
.. .~ !
'. III
: 111
~j
-
Z ~ .
~~ -
...,
~
(j~ .& .
Z~ ~
09
~ ~
~
! ~ II I l.t:l<
uo...
Zo~ ~
<0"
~ -
......0 -
~ , J! z:r: l.tl
l.t:l~ 0
CJ:) 0... [ij il" ~f J og <
!-<
o ,,- ~ j <:r: z~
00 0'-
~iiiz ~-
>-<zj u.
~o~ 0
~. - l.t:l - <
. :>z~
0
r"""- <<~ ~z
oj
"'. ..,.- Z'"
. r <~
~...
.--.""'" co:;
~ """'"
.
.-
,.
r."'" -"'.,""..,,
'....,' - ,WI'
"'"
.
.q
(lI')
u;
'-J ...~.___,J".~--' ':
----1---m [ .__::~t~~:~ -.,
~' I . ; '.: J . ....
'.. :A ~
, .~. ~
~ I .'. -./ ,iJ( ·
Z
<
..J
~
Z
~
~
t:I::
l?
~.
. - I
~ ---
JJ.l i I
I IIi j----'
, I
~.. '. ..~ ----- j H
L ' I'~ f!
"_ ': '- 5 11.
I t:I:: JI'
I ~" if:
)-t~ ~ '
. ~:.. I
i
Ig ~\
ill
jd --
Z'
~~ ~
....:I.... '-U
C)~ I "'
z ".
Z ~ ;':~
~ z.
09 0
Z !:! . :::
"' . . 0
Z 0 6
r ~ ~ <'
.......-4 '~~ 3 II ;! ~ ~ . , a1 ~
. -..... ~, , r.... "' >
::c"' d 01 J t:I:: t:I::>-
.... < . ~ "'" ,,"
. ~ E-< ~!";! >~' ~
,r.J) p., ~ ~l ~olIf j <0 z:;:"
. ~" -..
. , ~'..
""'.. ~
,
-- - --
I
I I '
I
I
// I
/
/
__----I \ I
-- --------
\ \ \
\
c:
..
e
0..
..9
~
~
..
1>
u
~
0
-;;
:
c
8
..
~
..:
~
~ Q)
c
'; U
::; ~
:; I-<
0 ~
-;; ~
~
8 ~
l':l
eX
~
I-< I
~
Z
~ z ~
.....J <r: -
...J -0.
CJ ~ N
~ ~
z ;'l
ZIlJ ;
:2 -
~
03
Z~
~ -
Z" · i
t:X: ~ &.
~o.. t ,g
<r: z Vl t!'i !I
.... c:: 1:~ d
::c::!. i '
@ ~ II J:
.CfJ g: ~ !!i.n ~
~ f ~l j
. . I
I I
. . I
I
"~
.
,. ",",
I
"",-
, '
; ...'"t..r1o ~
--.II
~-,i ! r
--, ,
/ '=1 '
/ "",,/ ..,
/ ~ ~ ~ _ \ '?~Ji !C\.J.. a
/ ~ ~ ~ --I -~ , ';
___ ___ ----r- \ ."-"'1" ~ ~
--- --- \ \ ---., <
-~ \ \ ,\ -' ~
\ \ \
\ \ \
\ \
\
,/' \ \
~ f \ \
c
~
Do
.5!
~
!!
l 0
, U
J!I
::l
u
;;
J
~
.lIl
:;
n. OJ
~ ~
J!I J.<
B ~
.. ~
J ~
~
I ~
J.<
!I:l
P-4
Z'
~ z l
_ 1 ~ -
t--l ~ ..:
l? ~ i
ZLtl !
~
O~
Z~ -
o ~
~~ !afl i
:r: OJ 8-9' 1
rl'\~ ~I I Jf
~. ~~ If U J
- -
.
.
. - - -
"
, -
.. . ' - -- ------
~".
.J
~
-
,...--
--
---- ---
? '
\ '
I
---
---
---
I" .
I '
~ ~~ ..
;s ~ .; 'l ' . -
~ ~ < I
~~. I
<:~ ~ 0 : $'
~ ;> ... ~ '
'- _' ,,<l =' oct
~. ~
"I- Q:' Ol- ~ ~ '" I'l'!l ~
,.,'._ '. 't It. I ~ ~ ... · (j. I ~
,.-" . --" .
. _ '"~ '". " , I . ~ ~ "< "< t/: : eEl
CJ ~ .......... vp_ V .,....~~ ~ I ~Vi U " '" ~ '" .., ~ ' :g ~....,. II ~
,,' ~ -"'-' . .~ ~
. . C'\ . , llj '" _ ..: 2 <:> . '" '" -...;; , r=.
:-.J ,; ,) :>- -,;: ~" i::::: . '" ll.. < '- >- '. cO'
I .~ <:; ;> h. ..... ~ 0 0 .. 15
~ '. '_ <J V) · ..,. '"'~'"
--'>. Q: ,,:;..: I '" "- (~ i' ~' . . ~ a: "
lJ.J fi: ~ ~ (- ..) It. ' ~ t-::: (Ol ,". ~ (j . - - ,. - , ~'-- , ct ;2: '" '" ~
~ ...: ~ ,,) <J I '" ~ Ie' '" :-<-J " ~ - 0 ;::) ~ l'-' '" M =
2'i ~ '-.) I . : ~ ~ t5 S t ~ ~ :-> :: " -- .~ .~ -~ ~uj 1I111111m ~ =
" '" --J ~ 1_ v J ;<<.. OJ '" ... '-.J .' ~ . --,~.,' .. - .
.>--. ...., CI) -,.' ,<:> '" - '" lj Cj -.,. b:, <l ~ "<l" ~ '
Q: -...! ~ ~ I '" I .. ~ '" ~ i'1' i'1' <... '. 'l ~ - l<j !::l >.. ~ 'i: ' . 111111; :: ~ ~ . -..I
:>- -.J CI)" :-<-J "< eJ OJ OJ '-' ' . < < Q:' >- f':' C> = :;;;; .., ~ · .
~ Q:. ~ ~ t::: ~ ~!;J i< i< ~ ,'" ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ OJ OJ' ~ Imlllum;; :::o_=; ~ ~ ~ ~ l
~ ~ I::l 8 Vi 2 ~ ~ It' It' ~ ~'~;!l (:j --..] 'l: ~ ~ 111111111111 = ii== ~ ~ ~ v~
~ 'i ~ ~ C> C> '" c E: S 9:: '" <21 :'i I : =::- .,0...., ::2 ".
Cj ~ ~ I h ; ~ t;) ~~8 ' 11111,1111, - -~ ~ i~~
9::: ~~ " · ~~ (^ "
C'\ <': ' '" ~ ::s: ,,' ':' J
~ '" (.3 ' '.. I (\.;.
\..:l L' r-- ~
Cl:: ~ '. . ;::::! I ~
~ <:> ~, ~ ~
...>. i< , '< ; ~
I
I
I
\ '
- ,\ ~ \
\ .; / I
~ /
'>: rh ,.
t,.! Co; r. ~ ........ ....., ,., 1/,' ,
t;: ;:;1 ill '" i,~?i Rid"; !~"&J:F";~!::.-"- :.'
'0'1' \ ~ .." ... . '. ) . - .."... ....
1~ ..." ".:1 .. ..:" \ ' :
. ";" ...., \ c, r.r-
~ ~ \ ~.". ~!;:~ '
,;. ~r'~ .,,;:
.., .;" '" \ ~
" ....' '.
... ".,
i] . '
O! ~ ~:
GI · I
l:::: IL ~ \ '
~I ~ -
" . ' ~
'" ____ _ :s:'
2"" - '.." !5 ':
. ~ '^
~ .- ~!
~ <: ~
_ ~_ fiI... ti)...... n;;: J
_/ :.;: .~' ~ I
... - .. . ;,; ... '" \ :
...- ' ., '
. \ ... ' I
~ i
~o ~ I
...' ~
~
- ...
~ ~ '
... ....
... ' .
n'
:r
~
<;::)
~
- ,OF'
~ ~
f""'( ..,
..... (
~ ~ '
(i~.
..." , .' '" .
~ I ~0'~
. . ~:~ r.rt
I .t; :-:) ;:;,
I / :~,:j::"
I .... j'"
< ' ,.., .."
, ., '" .,:, ('
I '" ..... .J
. .... I .. ',::
~ r.l"" I !,:;
, ., ..... ~ , ,..:0
, ... ~ ...>
. ,," .O~ ., ..;,
\' ~. L .1, ,"
. ~ ~, .- .. ~I ' ~
<:>..... ~ \
" ... ' Lu
\ ::s:
, . ~
~ ~ ~
~ r- W
~ 0 ~6' .on I
, 6
,,7' I . In........ I t ~
~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ 0) ~ I
Q) 0, I I
.., I' I
.~ ----
.06 " ----
. ~ ,OZI I I ,i ---
~ IQ --
. ._ . - ' ~ I&) . ~. I
.06 ~. .- Cl) ~"'i,~ I ~,
.S ,.., ~ -~ ., ,
--- - ,;
. '
.. I .
., ' ,..
..... .0< '"
.., Q.i',
... ~ ' ,,~
I I :~!~
~. ~
I . .W ."".
~ ~ ,.-.. ,... ,~";"
.. ' ... _ "'J "
~. .m' .' . . ..
., ,~ ".
/ .".' I ~. ~ ' ;(J?
. I \0 ~ r-r;
~ ~ I ,,,., ':;'
, I I ,.m';~
o : ~ ,m I ':....... ~ ':' b I .
",l 'to I ~ . Q) ~ 1
'" "- ,:;:: ~... ~ I(j'-
... '"' .' 'OJ
;;; '" "'i " ' .m ~ i ~ ,.m
, ~Q . .. ': .m
'" Cl I Ii.m" ,-'
.,. "" "" I&) ~ · ~ ' ----
'" "" ~ . "
:.~: -.-J .or, ~ . ~ IQ li l() I ----
"i .... Y , ~ ~. \0 ----
:? / ~ . .
.', .".' "" ......
'" . -. "''' , .:-<
.., .". . ... .." .
'" ~ ~
:', .oco I ".... IS ~
, '.. .... ,.....
"'" ,.. ~ ...
"., ~ !)) , " ' . "" n... I
, ..... . .... .0" ~
. " ~,..... . .~' ,.. ,
I II) ~ ,J2' Yl
.W ,0'" ..,. ~
.W .or, "~. tl: . ~ ~
I ~ ~ ,,' ~ ~ l()~" !"l
~ ~ '~ ~,Ii) "K ~ ~ ~ CO I
; 1 "i"" K
.Oli
__~ / .or,'OB
.r,r---- ' .g -
II ' .., ~ .''''
Ii I() I ~ ... . ....OF ~ I :;-
~ 1 "') Itj It) ~ l()" ~ I(j ':':
, . 11)" I~" ~ .... ;.
. ~ ., " . "" :'
r I I . ... . 11):. 11); !))" .... ""i
1 I' r.m . It), ~ .<g,
/ ,1'1'. ~ I \' . . 'OJ ..,
/' -- ...
, - - ..."
. - "
, " \ _ -- ,., ~ ,'"
. . _ _ _. os' , .....
:... / l() ~ .' _ _ AI .. . . . .-. ,,,g . · f~
ff "').-.- ~- '.- .;,J~ - ,_..no ".!
/ " "," "'I '0 ..
I, '. .<9 . ....,.. ~ - . . . .
r ,v, .' . ..
, '. ,<' '''' .. ..
~ ~ ~ ~' ~ ~ I~ o' · . '
. , "') ~ -... .,''''' ~ "
., ... - '" .
~ ._ J "" "'. "" I
~ ~ ..... ~ ...... t,
.,,, ... .... ~ "
.m ... ~ I, I ~ ... ., ~-...ft ,",0",
.09 ' ' )(:;- - ,ooi?)
Sg . '. ' ' · -dGs 'n--
..... ,<g' _~.' ""'78
~" , ..." . _ ' .. ' · (]a
~ ,----
~ .. , ' .w,
, ... ~ ~ "" ' .... ' . .0<,
.r.. ' ... ~ ;:" . ~ C'II ,Cl) ; f, ~
~ ., _ " ..... : ' i '. "
c>I _ " · ,"~' C'II " I - ---- I
I ""l' - '...... -- -
? . . . . I I~ I' . ..1. .t;;r-< --:
.<9 I ' ..... . \
,. .,g ,,", " , , ., , U '
.. ,..' .<L " ~ .... I , ·
. AI, ,,,,,' .
_ ., '. .' . ,.. t
.. c: -.-.." tr)
- . . . ~ '
o CD . · ."
:u ~ l::) , _._ . _ .. ., ." . · ~ i
~ '" .... -r .' ->0 I
In "I . , ...".s":'" I !l::
'" ftI . ." ," -. ""l' .d' - '''' I
::3 <> ... · ...:. I'" '" ~
i!i cJ '''. ~ ,: .., , . · , .. ,? ~ ~'II J! I
o n Cl) . ~., ...' ' . II. :;--T -- - \ -.. f'\,; (""
:z 0 ...., :; ....~" ." 0 .~ ' .. .;-;-- '--1' ..... ..... I .'.'
~ c: " " C'II 'OJ' I~ ' " ,'<
'" :z C'II .. it!" :. ..; / ,I.. ; 'I I I ~~
In- . '.. - " ' , ' . ' .
". - _' '" ' I ' ;;
, v'" - I C'\. I ,'J 1
.. .. ' -, / ~ ' '
I ':t 1 11),' I'
l ,,,' I ' ' I I ).
I ~.'
-,--
_ " '0' I '.,
_, -;-___ ' I .~
- ,I ' ..
...- " ., '
. _n"-~ J- I I
-- .
_ -1 _.... I'
--' '
__ __ . I
".-- .~. ..---- -- --' :
_.__. . _._ __........_ I
I ----
-- -
.. - ~ - - -....
I - - -
I
] , /