Ordinance 076-14RECORD OF ORDINANCES
Da�lon Le�.l Blank, Inc.
nrdin nre Nn_
Passed
Form No. 30043
_ —_ 2 0
AN ORDINANCE TO ESTABLISH A NEW BRIDGE STREET DISTRICT
ZONING DISTRICT (BSD SCIOTO RIVER NEIGHBORHOOD DISTRICT)
AND RELATED CODE AMENDMENTS FOR THE BSD SCIOTO RIVER
NEIGHBORHOOD DISTRICT TO SECTIONS 153.058, 153.059,
153.060,153.062,153.063, 153.065 OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
CODIFIED ORDINANCES (ZONING CODE). (CASE 14- 039ADMC)
WHEREAS, it is necessary from time to time to amend Dublin's Zoning Code to
protect the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of the City of Dublin, and
WHEREAS, Dublin City Council adopted the Bridge Street Corridor Vision Report on
October 25, 2010 and has since integrated the policy recommendations of the Vision
Report into the Dublin Community Plan as the Bridge Street District Plan, adopted on
July 1, 2013, and
WHEREAS, Dublin City Council adopted the Bridge Street Corridor Districts as part of
the City of Dublin Zoning Code, including Sections 153.057- 153.066, on March 26,
2012 and as amended in November 2013, to implement the five Vision Principles
identified in the Vision Report, and
WHEREAS, Section 153.066 of the City of Dublin Zoning Code states that the
Planning and Zoning Commission and the Architectural Review Board may evaluate
and monitor the application of the requirements and standards of Sections 153.057
through 153.066 and recommend to City Council any changes needed in the BSC
district standards and requirements to better implement the Bridge Street Corridor
Vision Report, and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed and discussed the
proposed amendments to Section 153.063 to establish a new Bridge Street District
zoning district and related Zoning Code amendments on June 5, 2014; and
recommended adoption of the amendments on July 10, 2014 because it serves to
improve the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of the City of Dublin,
THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Dublin,
of its elected members concurring, that:
Section 1• Sections 153.058(B)(10) — 153.058(B)(12) of the City of Dublin Zoning
Code are hereby amended and shall provide as follows:
§ 153.058 BSC Districts Scope and Intent
(B) Intent
(10) BSD Scioto River Neighborhood
76 -14 (Amended)
The standards of the BSD Scioto River Neighborhood are intended to
create an active, walkable destination through integration of a vibrant
mix of uses. Development in this district is oriented toward the Scioto
River and the public spaces along the riverfront, and includes
important vehicular and bicycle links to adjacent neighborhoods and
open spaces.
This district accommodates a wide variety of building types and
permitted uses, as listed in Table 153.059 -A. Development of the BSD
Scioto River Neighborhood area establishes a walkable, mixed -use
core as the center of the Bridge Street District. The district is subject
to the specific neighborhood standards defined in §153.063(17,
establishing open space patterns, location requirements for building
types, and permitting pedestrian- oriented, mixed -use shopping areas.
(11) BSC Vertical Mixed Use
RECORD OF ORDINANCES
Blank. I..
Forth No . 30043
76 -14 (Amended) Page 2 of 41
Ordinance No. _ Passed -20
The intent of this district is to allow a wide variety of mid -rise, mixed
use development, including vertical mixed use with ground floor retail,
and large format retail with liner buildings, as listed in Table 153.059 -
A. It is intended to be available for areas initially zoned into the BSC
Indian Run Neighborhood and BSC Sawmill Center Neighborhood
districts, once these areas are developed and the applicable
neighborhood standards are no longer needed to establish the
organization and hierarchy of places. The district may be applied to
areas initially zoned to the BSC Commercial District or elsewhere in the
Bridge Street Corridor as may be deemed appropriate when future
redevelopment to higher densities is desired. Accordingly, the district
is not intended to be mapped at the time the BSC districts are initially
adopted.
(12) BSC Public
This district applies to a variety of public spaces and facilities,
including but not limited to schools, parks, open spaces, and places
that accommodate more intensive recreation, such as outdoor
entertainment venues, as listed in Table 153.059 -A. It also applies to
lands in and adjacent to rivers and creeks on which development is
limited due to inclusion in a Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) designated floodplain as regulated by this Chapter, or lands
that have special cultural or environmental sensitivity.
Section 2. Section 153.059(B) of the City of Dublin Zoning Code is hereby
amended and shall provide as follows:
§ 153.059 Uses
(B) Use Table. Refer to Table 153.059 -A.
Table 153.059 -A: Permitted and Conditional Uses in BSC District,
Key
BSC District
P - Permitted
U - Permitted
Use
on upper
m
a
Specific
floor only
C Conditional
a
ards
Use
S- Size
a
I$
o
f
a
See
c
§153.- :
T Time
f
a
B
f
3
059 (C)
Limited
t
Z
R
C
_
=
x z
J.
PRI NCIPAL USES
R esidential
Dwelling, Single-
P
P
(1)(a)
Family
Dwelling, Two-
P
Family
Dwelling,
P
P
P
P
P
P
(1)(b)
Townhouse
Dwelling, Live-
C
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
(1)(c)
Work
Dwelling,
P
P
P
u
u
P
P
P
P
P
Multiple - Family
Public Institutional
Cemetery
P
Community
C
C
P
P
P
P
P
(2)(a)
Center
Community
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
(2)(b)
Garden
Day Care, Adult
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
(2)(c)
or Child
RECORD OF ORDINANCES
Day= Legal Blank, W,
76 -14 (Amended)
_ Folm No. 30043
Ordinance No.
Page 3 of 41
Passed
able 153.059 -A: Permitted and Conditional Uses in BSC Districts
Key
BSC Districts
P - Permitted
U - Permitted
on upper
floor only
a
Use
Specific
C - Conditional
Use
y
�p
ga
g$
4
$
Stand-
arils
S
$
c�
o�t
u
F- t
u$
a I
I
See
Lim=ited
T -Time
z
z
1
q
§153:
059 (C)
limited
_
_
i
:P1 JS Z
District Energy
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
(2)(d)
Plant
Educational
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
Facility
Elementary or
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
Middle School
Government
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
P
Services, Safety
High School
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
Hospital
C/ S
C/ S
Q S
Q S
C/S
C/S
C/ S
(2)(e)
Library, Museum,
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
(2)(f)
Gallery
Municipal Parking
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
Lot
Religious or
C/S
C/S
C/S
C/ S
C/ S
C/ S
C/S
C/S
C/ S
(2)(g)
Public Assembly
Parks and Open
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
Space
Transportation,
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
Park & Wile
Transportation,
C
C
�
I
P
P
C
C
C
Transit Station
Commerdal
Animal Care,
General Services,
Veterinary
Offices, and
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
(3)(a)
Veterinary Urgent
Care and Animal
Hospitals
Bank
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
Bed and
P
(3)(b)
Breakfast
Conference
C
C
C
C
C
C
Center
Eating and
C/S
P/S
P/ S
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
(3)(c)
Drinking
Entertainment/Re
creation,
P/S
P/S
P/ S
P/ S
P
P
P
P
C
(3)(d)
Indoor
Fueling /Service
C
(3)(e)
Station
Hotel
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
Office, General
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
U
P
Office, Medical
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
Parking, Structure
P/C
P/C
P/C
C
P/C
P/C
P/ C
P/ C
P/C
P/ C
(3)(f)
Parking, Surface
C
P
C
C
P
P
C
C
(3)(g)
Lot
RECORD OF ORDINANCES
Daywn Legal Blank, Inc.
Ordinance No.
76 -14 (Amended)
Page 4 of 41
Passed
Table 153.059 -A: Permitted and Conditional Uses in BSC Districts
Key
BSC Disbcts
P - Perm
U - Permitted
on upper
Use
Specific
floor only
C - Conditional
$$
Stand -
atds
Use
see
5 - Size
C
u
` Te
33
§153:
059 (C'
T
11.
Limited
_
S
Personal, Repair,
&Rental Services
C/S
P/ S
P/ S
P/ S
P/ S
P/ S
P
P
P/ S
P
(3)(h)
Research tk
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
U
P
Development
Retail, General
C/S
P/S
P/S
P
P/ S
P/ S
P
P
P
P
(3)(i)
Sexually Oriented
Business
C
(3)0)
i Establishment
Vehicle Sales,
Rental, and
C
C
(3)(k)
Repair
Wireless
Communications
Refer to Chapter 99 of Dublin Code of Ordinances
ACCESSORY
lw=mory uses are permitted only in connection with a permitted or approved conditional use
AND
3n the same property, and must be dearly subordinate and incidental to that use. No accessory
TEMPORARY
ise may be operated when a permitted or approved conditional use does not exist on the
USES
ropertV. Temporary uses are governed by time limits as provided by this Code.
ATM, Walk -Up
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
Bicycle Facilities
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
Community
Activity and
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
(4)(a)
Special Event
Construction
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
(4)(b)
Trailer /Office
Day Care, Adult
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
(2)(c)
or Child
Drive -in /Drive-
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
(4)(c)
through
Dwelling,
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
(4)(d)
Accessory
Dwelling
Administration,
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
(4)(e)
Rental, or Sales
Office
Eating ff Drinking
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
Essential Utility
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
Services
Exercise and
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
Fitness
Fanners Market
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
Helipad /Heliports
C
C
C
C
C
C
Home Occupation
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
(4)(f)
Outdoor Dining
P/C
P/C
P/C
P/C
P/C
P/C
P/C
P/C
P/C
P/C
P/C
(4)(g)
and Seating
Outdoor Display
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
(4)(h)
or Seasonal Sales
Fomr No. 30043
20
I
RECORD OF ORDINANCES
Font No 30
14 (Amended) Page 5 of 41
Pasmd . .. .20
able 153.059 -A: Permitted and Conditional Lim in BSC Districts
Key
BSC Districts
P - Permitted
U - Permitted
on upper
g
use
floor only
3
Spedflc
C - Conditional
Use
9
g
Stand -
ards
S- Size
QQ
See
Limited
c
T -Time
v
8
$
,�
pp
3 fa
3
059 C
( )
Limited
o
x
x x z
a
�i z
a
Parking, Structure
P/C
P/C
P/C
P/C
C
P/C
P/C
P/C
P/C
P/C
P/C
(3)(f)
Parking, Surface
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
(4)(i)
Lot
Renewable
Energy
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
(4)0)
Equipment
Renewable
Energy
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
(4)(k)
Equipment, Wind
Residential Model
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
(4)(I)
Home
Retail or Personal
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
Services
Swimming Pool
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
Transportation,
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
Transit Stop
Vehicle Charging
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
Station
Wireless
Communications
Refer to Chapter 99 of Dublin Code of Ordinances
Section 3. Section 153.059(C)(1) of the City of Dublin Zoning Code are hereby
amended and shall provide as follows:
§ 153.059 Uses
(C) Use Specific Standards
(1) Residential Uses
(a) Dwelling, Single - Family
1. No Development Plan or Site Plan application
shall contain more than 35 detached single -
family dwelling units.
2. No Development Plan or Site Plan application
containing detached single - family dwelling units
may be approved if any of the proposed units
would be located within 400 feet of any single -
family detached dwelling constructed or
approved within the BSC Residential district after
the effective date of this amendment.
3. No single - family detached dwelling unit may be
constructed within 500 feet of the I -270 right -of-
way.
(b) Dwelling, Townhouse
1. If single - family attached residential units are
located across the street from existing single-
Dayton Lzgal Blank, Inc.
RECORD OF ORDINANCES
Dayton Lega Blank Inc.
Ordinance No.
1.
76 -14 (Amended)
Passed
Form No 30043
Page 6 of 41
, zp
family detached dwellings, no more than eight
attached units may be permitted in a building.
2. Ground floor residential uses are not permitted
on Bridge Street in the BSC Historic Transition
Neighborhood District.
(c) Dwelling, Live -Work
1. No more than two non - resident employees are
permitted in addition to the resident(s) of the
dwelling. The required reviewing body may
permit additional employees.
2. The non - residential use must be operated by a
resident of the live -work dwelling unit.
Section 4. Section 153.059(C)(3)(h) -(i) of the City of Dublin Zoning Code are
hereby amended and shall provide as follows:
§ 153.059 Uses
(C) Use Specific Standards
(3) Commercial
(h) Personal, Repair, and Rental Services
1. Personal, repair, and rental service
establishments shall be limited to no more than
10,000 square feet for single tenant buildings in
the BSC Office, BSC Office Residential, and BSC
Residential districts. For multi- tenant buildings in
the same districts, the indoor gross floor area of
the personal, repair, and rental services shall be
limited to no more than 10,000 square feet or
20% of the gross floor area of the principal
structure, whichever is smaller.
2. Personal, repair, and rental service uses shall be
limited to no more than 25,000 square feet of
gross floor area in all other BSC districts except
the BSC Indian Run Neighborhood, BSC Sawmill
Center Neighborhood and BSD Scioto River
Neighborhood.
(i) Retail, General
General retail uses shall be limited to no more than
20,000 square feet of gross floor area in all BSC
districts except the BSC Indian Run Neighborhood, BSC
Sawmill Center Neighborhood, BSD Scioto River
Neighborhood, BSC Commercial, and BSC Vertical Mixed
Use districts.
Section 5. Section 153.059(C)(4)(c) of the City of Dublin Zoning Code is hereby
amended and shall provide as follows:
§ 153.059 Uses
(C) Use Specific Standards
(4) Accessory and Temporary Uses
(c) Drive -in /Drive- through
RECORD OF ORDINANCES
Dayton Legal Blank, Inc.
Ordinance No.
Form
Page 7 of 41
Passed
1. Drive -in /drive - throughs are permitted only as
accessories to banks in the BSC Vertical Mixed
Use and BSC Historic Transition Neighborhood
districts following approval of a Conditional Use
application by the Planning and Zoning
Commission.
2. Drive -in /drive- through vehicular stacking areas
and associated service locations shall not be on
the side of a building facing a principal frontage
street. Where drive -in /drive- through access
lanes are facing a non - principal frontage street,
a street wall at least three feet high shall be
placed between the access lanes and the street.
Refer to §153.065(E)(2) for street wall
requirements.
3. No menu boards, speakers, or service windows
shall be located between any facade of the
principal structure and a front or comer side
property line.
4. Drive -in /drive- through vehicle stacking spaces
shall be at least 20 feet long. Stacking spaces
may not impede on -site or off -site vehicular,
bicycle, or pedestrian circulation. Where five or
more stacking spaces are provided, the
individual stacking lanes shall be clearly
delineated. The number of stacking spaces and
a traffic and pedestrian circulation plan shall be
submitted by the applicant with the Conditional
Use application and approved by the Planning
and Zoning Commission.
5. Uses with drive -in /drive - th rough facilities shall
be buffered from adjacent properties as required
in §153.065(D)(5).
6. Audible electronic devices such as loudspeakers,
service order devices, and similar instruments
shall not be located within 25 feet of the lot line
of any residential district or use and shall be
subject to §132.03(A)(6).
7. Refer to §153.062(L) for vehicular canopy
location and design requirements.
8. Drive-in/d rive-th roughs shall not have frontage
on any shopping corridor.
Section 6. Section 153.060(C)(2)(a) -(b) of the City of Dublin Zoning Code is
hereby amended and shall provide as follows:
§ 153.060 Lots and Blocks
(C) General Block and Lot Layout
(2) Maximum Block Size
76 -14 (Amended)
(a) Required Subdivision
Developments meeting any of the following criteria shall
subdivide to meet the maximum block sizes as required
by Table 153.060 -A, Maximum Block Dimensions:
1. All developments within the BSC Sawmill Center
Neighborhood District, BSC Indian Run
RECORD OF ORDINANCES
Dayton Legal Blank, Inc.
Ordinance No.
Form N o. 30043
Page 8 of 41
20
Neighborhood District, or BSC Historic Transition
Neighborhood District;
2. Any developments requiring approval of a
Development Plan as required in §153.066(E).
(b) Measurement
1. Block length shall be the distance along one side
of a block measured between two parallel or
approximately parallel property lines on the
opposite sides of the block.
2. Block perimeter shall be the aggregate block
length along all sides of a block measured along
the property lines.
3. Alleys and service streets shall not be used to
measure block length.
Table 153.060 -A. Maximum Block Dimensions.
Table 153.060 -A. Maximum Block Dimensions
BSC Districts
Length
(ft.)
Perimeter
M)
Residential
500
1,750
Office Residential
500
1,750
Office
500
1,750
Commercial
500
1,750
Historic Residential
200
800
Historic Core
200
800
Historic Transition Neighborhood
300
1,000
Indian Run Neighborhood
500
1,750
Sawmill Center Neighborhood
500
1,750
Scioto River Neighborhood
500
1,750
Vertical Mixed Use
500
1,750
Public
300
1,000
Section 7. Section 153.062(B)(3)(a) of the City of Dublin Zoning Code is hereby
amended and shall provide as follows:
§ 153.062 Building Types
(B) General Building Type Requirements
(3) General Requirements
Every building, erected, altered or moved, shall be located on a
lot as defined herein, or as otherwise permitted by this
chapter. All building types shall meet the following
requirements.
(a) Zoning Districts
Each building type shall be constructed only within its
designated BSD zoning district. Table 153.062 -A,
Permitted Building Types in Each BSD Zoning District,
outlines which building types are permitted in which
76 -14 (Amended)
Passed
RECORD OF ORDINANCES
Dayton Legal Blank. Inc
76 -14 (Amended)
Ordinance No. Aissed
Form No. 30043
Page 9 of 41
._ —.. 20
BSD zoning districts. Refer to 153.058, BSD District
Scope and Intent, for a description of each district.
Table 153 .062 -A. Permitted Building Types In Each BSD Zoning District
BSD Districts ~
W
m
o
v p o
iu
$
'
E
a
G�
tY 'E
U
f
y
Pig
P3
�
�Z
Z
�
�z
=z
a
Single
Family
Detached
Single
Family
*
*
*
At
Attached
Apartment
*
*
*
*
*
At
Building
Loft
*
At
Building
Corridor
Building
Mixed Use
*
*
*
*
*
*
At
Building
Commercial
*
At
Center
Large
Format
Commercial
Building
Historic
Mixed Use
At
Building
Historic
Cottage
Commercial
Civic
*
At
*
*
At
tr
c
Building
Parking
*
*
*
*
At
Structure
p m
$
Podium
Apartment
a
Building
Section 8. Section 153.062(E)(1) of the City of Dublin Zoning Code is hereby
amended and shall provide as follows:
§ 153.062 Building Types
(E) Materials
(1) Facade Materials
(a) A minimum of 80% of each facade, exclusive of
windows and doors, shall be constructed of primary
materials.
(b) For individual facades over 1,000 square feet, exclusive
of windows and doors, a combination of primary
materials shall be used to meet the 80% requirement,
unless otherwise approved by the required reviewing
body.
(c) Permitted primary building materials shall be high
quality, durable, natural materials such as stone,
RECORD OF ORDINANCES
,ton Legal Blank, inc. Form No. 30043
^-a lance No.
76 -14 (Amended)
Page 10 of 41
Parsed . 20__
cultured stone, full depth brick and glass. Refer to
§153.062(0) for permitted primary building materials
for individual building types.
(d) Permitted secondary materials are limited to details and
accents and include gypsum reinforced fiber concrete,
wood or fiber cement siding, metal, and exterior
architectural metal panels and cladding. Exterior
insulated finishing system (EIFS) is permitted for trim
only, except as provided in 153.062(E)(1)(e). To
provide visual depth and strong shadow lines, clapboard
siding must have a minimum butt thickness of a quarter
of an inch.
(e) EIFS and architectural metal panels and cladding shall
not be utilized in the Historic Core district.
(f) Other high quality synthetic materials may be approved
during the Site Plan process by the required reviewing
body with examples of successful, high quality
installations in comparable climates.
Section 9. Sections 153.062(0)(1) — 153.062(0)(5) of the City of Dublin Zoning
Code are hereby amended and shall provide as follows:
§ 153.062 Building Types
(0) Building Types
(1) Single Family Detached
(a) Building Siting
1. Street Frontage
Multiple Principal Buildings
Not permitted
Front Property Line Coverage
Minimum 65%
Occupation of comer
Not required
Front RBZ
5-20 it
Comer Side RBZ
5 -15 ft
RBZ Treatment
Landscape; Porches are
permitted in the RBZ.
Right -of -Way Encroachment
None
2. Buildable Area
Minimum Setbacks
Side Yard
5 ft
Rear Yard
5 ft
Lot Width
Minimum
30 ft
Maximum
60 ft
Minimum Lot Depth
100 ft.
Maximum Building Length
Not applicable
Maximum Impervious Coverage
Additional Semi - Pervious Coverage
50%
20%
3. Parking Location& Access
Parking Location
Rear yard
Entry for Parking within Building
Rear'
RECORD OF ORDINANCES
Dayton Legal Blank, Inc..
Ordinance No.
i
I
76 -14 (Amended)
Fo_ No, 30043
Page 11 of 41
Passed 20
Access
Alley /service street only
(b) Height
Height
Minimum
1.5 stories
Ma>amum
3 stories
Story Height
Minimum
9 ft
Marimum
12 ft
Accessory Structure Height
2 stories maAmum'
Minimum Finished Ft Elevation
2.5 R. above the adjacent
sidewalk elevation
(c) Uses & Occupancy Requirements
Ground Story
No additional requirements
Upper Story
No additional requirements
Parking within Building
Permitted in the rear of the
first floor and fully in any
basement(s)
Occupied Space
Minimum 15 ft depth from
the front facade
(d) Facade Requirements
L Sheet Fbrada Transpoency
Transparency
Minimum 25%
Blank Wall Limitations
Required
2. Non -Street Facade Transparency
Transparency
Minimum 15%
Blank Wall Limitations
Required
3. Building Entrance
Principal Entrance Location
porches comer or side;
porches are required
Street Facades: Minimum Number of
Entrances
1 per unit
Parking Lot Facades: Minimum Number
of Entrances
Not applicable
Mid - Building Pedestrianway
Not required
4. Facade Divisions
Vertical Increments
None
Horizontal Facade Divisions
None
Required Change in Roof Plane or Type
None
S. Facade Materials
Permitted Primary Materials
Stone, Brick
6. Roof Types
RECORD OF ORDINANCES
Dayton Legal Blank, Inc.
Ordinance No.
_ Form No. 30043
76 -14 (Amended) Page 12 of 41
_._ Passed 20
Garage door height shall be no greater than 9 feet. No single door shall be wider than 18 feet
(2) Single Family Attached
(a) Building Siting
Pitched roof. Other types
Permitted Types
may be permitted with
Front Property Line Coverage
approval (refer to
Occupation of Comer
§153.062(D)
Tower
Permitted where
Comer Side RBZ
architecturally appropriate
Garage door height shall be no greater than 9 feet. No single door shall be wider than 18 feet
(2) Single Family Attached
(a) Building Siting
L meet Rai
Multiple Principal Buildings
Permitted'
Front Property Line Coverage
Minimum 75 %:
Occupation of Comer
Required
Front RBZ
5 -20 ft.
Comer Side RBZ
5 -15 ft.
RBZ Treatment
Landscape; Porches or stoops
are permitted in the RBZ
Right -of -Way Encroachment
None
2. Buildable Area
Minimum Setbacks
Side Yard
5 ft., minimum 10 ft between
buildings
Rear Yard
5 ft.
Lot Width
Minimum
16 ft per unit
Maximum
None
Maximum Length
None'
Maximum Impervious Coverage
Additional Semi - Pervious Coverage
70%
20%
3. Par ldng Location
Parking location
Rear yard or within building
(refer to (c) Uses)
Entry for Parking within Building
Rear or comer side facade'
(b) Height
Minimum Height
1.5 stories
Maldmum Height
4 stories
Story Height
Minimum
10 R
Maximum
12 R
Accessory Structure Height
2 stories maximum
Minimum Finished Floor Elevation
2 . 5 ft above the adjacent
sidewalk elevation
(c) Uses cub Occupancy Requirements
Ground Story
No additional requirements
RECORD OF ORDINANCES
Form No. 30043
76 -14 (Amended) Page 13 of 41
Passed _ 20 j
Upper Story
No additional requirements
Permitted in the rear of the
Parking within Building
first floor and fully in any
basement(s)
Occupied Space
Minimum 10 ft. depth from
the front facade
(d) Facade Requirements
Refer to §153.062(D) through §153.062(N) for design
requirements general to all buildings.
1. Street Facade Transparency
Transparency
Minimum 20%
Blank Wall Limitations
Required
2. Non - Street Fagade Transparency
Transparency
Minimum 15%
Blank Wall Limitations
Required
3. Building Entrance
Principal Entrance Location
Front, comer or side; porches
or stoops required
Street Farades: Minimum Number of
1 per unit
Entrances
Parking Lot Facades: Minimum Number
If parking lot or detailed
of Entrances
garage, 1 per unit
Mid - Building Pedestrianway
Not required
4. Facade Divisions
Vertical Increments
Every 2 units or every 40 ft.
max.
Horizontal Facade Divisions
None
None
Required Change in Roof Plane or Type
S. Facade Materials
Permitted Primary Materials
Stone, Brick
6. Roof Types
Parapet, pitched roof, flat
Permitted Types
roof. Other types may be
permitted with approval (refer
to §153.062(D)).
Permitted on facades only at
terminal vistas, comers at 2
Tower
principal frontage streets,
and /or adjacent to an open
space type.
One of every five principal buildings may front an open space type or a courtyard With
a minimum width of 30 feet.
' A landscaped courtyard, when enclosed by building on three sides, may contribute up
to 35% of the front property line coverage requirement.
I
Dayton Legal Blank, Inc.
RECORD OF ORDINANCES
76 -14 (Amended)
Passed
Form No. 3043
Page 14 of 41
20
If single- family attached residential units are located across the street from ebsdng
single- family detached dwellings, no more than eight attached units may be permitted
In a building.
Garage door height shall be no greater than 9 feet No single door shall be wider than
18 feet
(3) Apartment Building
(a) Building Siting
L Sheet Rnntage
Multiple Principal Buildings
Permitted
Front Property Line Coverage
Minimum 75 %'
occupation of Comer
Required
Front RBZ
5 -20 ft
Comer Side RBZ
5 -20 ft
RBZ Treatment
Landscape or less than 50%
Patio; porches, stoops, and
balconies are penmitted in
the RBZ
Right -of -Way Encroachment
None
2. Buildable Area
Minimum Side Yard Setback
5 R
Minimum Rear Yard Setback
5 ft.
Lot Width
Minimum
50 ft
Ma>amum
None
Ma>amum Impervious Coverage
Additional Semi- Pervious Coverage
70%
20%
3. Parking Location & Loading
Parking Location
Rear yard Z ; within building
(refer to (c) Uses &
Occupancy Requirements)
Loading Facility Location
Rear
Entry for Parking within Building
Rear & side facade
(b) Height
Minimum Height
2 stories
Ma>amum Height
4.5 stories
Story Height
Minimum
10 ft
Ma>omum
14 ft.
Minimum Finished Floor Elevation
2.5 ft above the adjacent
sidewalk elevation'
(c) Uses & Occupancy Requirements
Ground Story
No additional requirements
Dayton Legal Blank. Inc.
RECORD OF ORDINANCES
76 -14 (Amended)
Passed
Page 15 of 41
20
Upper Story
No additional requirements
Permitted in the rear of the
Parking within Building
first 3 floors and fully in any
basement(s)
Occupied Space
Minimum 20 R. depth for the
ground story facing sbeet(s)
(d) Facade Requirements
Refer to §1S3.062(D) through §153.062(N) for design requirements
general to all buildings.
1. Street Facade Transparency
Transparency
Minimum 20%
Blank Wall Limitations
Required
2. Non - Street Fagads Transparency
Transparency
Minimum 15%
Blank Wall Limitations
Required
3. Building Entrance
Principal Entrance Location
Primary street facade of
building
Street Facades: Minimum Number of
1 per 75 ft. of facade
Entrances
Parking Lot Facades: Minimum Number
Not required
of Entrances
Mid - Building Pedestrianway
1 required for buildings
longer than 250 ft
4. Facade DMsions
Vertical Increments
No greater than 40 ft
On buildings 3 stories or
Horizontal Facade Divisions
taller, required within 3 ft. of
the top of the ground story
Required Change in Roof Plane or Type
No greater than every 80 ft.
S. Fagade Materials
Permitted Primary Materials
Stone, Brick, Glass
6. Roof Types
Parapet, pitched roof, flat
Permitted Types
roof. Other types may be
permitted with approval
(refer to §153.062(D)).
Permitted on facades only at
terminal vistas, comers at 2
Tower
principal frontage streets,
and /or adjacent to an open
space type.
Inc. Form No. 30043
A landscaped courtyard, when enclosed by building on 3 sides, may contribute up to
35% of the front property line coverage requirement.
Basement level structured parking is permitted to extend between buildings, screened
from the street and covering a maximum of 30% of the length of the RBZ. Structured
RECORD OF ORDINANCES
Dayton Legal Blank, Inc.
76 -14 (Amended)
I [Ordinance No. _
_ Form No. 30043
Page 16 of 41 u l
Passed 20
parking visible between prinapal buildings must be set back a minimum of 15 feet from
the street facing fagades.
Where the principal building entrance is a lobby or other common space, the minimum
finished floor elevation is not required.
(4) Loft Building
(a) Building Siting
L Street Fi orr�ge
Multiple Principal Buildings
Permitted
Front Property Line Coverage
Minimum 75%
Occupation of Comer
Required
Front RBZ
0 -15 ft.
Comer Side RBZ
0-15 ft
Landscape, Patio, or
Streetscape. Along State
Route 161, Streetscape
RBZ Treatment
required; where residential
uses are located on the
ground floor, porches or
stoops are permitted in the
RBZ
Right -of -Way Encroachment
Awnings, canopies, eaves,
patios & projecting signs
2. Buildable Area
Minimum
Side Yard
5 ft.
Setbacks
Rear Yard
5 ft.
Minimum Lot Width
50 ft
Maximum Lot Width
None
Maximum Impervious Coverage
80%
Additional Semi - Pervious Coverage
10%
3. Parking Location ✓ii Loading
Rear yard; within building
Parking Location
(refer to (c) Uses &
Occupancy Requirements)
Loading Facility Location
Rear & side facade
Rear & side facade, comer
Entry for Parking within Building
side facade on non - principal
frontage streets.
(b) Height
Minimum
2 stories
Height
Maximum
4.5 stories
Ground Story
Minimum
12 ft
Maximum
16 ft
Height
Minimum
10 ft.
Upper Story Heights
Maximum
16 ft. r
Minimum Finished Floor Elevation
Where residential uses are
looted on the ground
RECORD OF ORDINANCES
Dayton Legal Blank, Inc..
76 -14 (Amended)
Ordinance No.
Fonn No. 30043
Page 17 of 41
Passed 20
floor, 2.5 ft. above the
adjacent sidewalk elevation
(c) Uses & Occupancy Requirements
Ground Story
No additional requirements
Upper Story
No additional requirements
Permitted in the rear of first
Parking within Building
3 floors and fully in any
basement(s)
Occupied Space
Minimum 30 R depth from
the front facade
(d) Facade Requirements
Refer to §353.062(D) through §353.062(N) for design
requirements general to all buildings.
1. street Facade Transparency
Where non - residential uses
Ground Story Street
are incorporated on the
Facing Transparency
ground floor, minimum
60% required; otherwise,
minimum 20%
Transparency
Minimum 20%
Blank Wall Limitations
Required
2. Non -Street Facade Transparency
Transparency
Minimum 20%
Blank Wall Limitations
Required
3. Building Entrance
Primary street facade of
building; where residential
Principal Entrance Location
u are located on the
ground floor, porches or
stoops are required at each
entrance
Where ground story
Street Facades: Minimum Number of
dwelling units or tenant
Entrances
spaces are incorporated, 1
per full 30 ft.; otherwise, 1
per 75 ft.
Parking Lot Facades: Minimum Number of
1 per 100 ft of facade
Entrances
Mid - Building Pedestrianway
Not required
4. Facade Divisions
Vertical Increments
No greater than 40 ft
On buildings 3 stories or
taller, required within 3 ft
of the top of the ground
story and any visible
Horizontal Facade Divisions
basement. When 14-16 -foot
upper stories are used,
horizontal divisions are
required between each
floor.
RECORD OF ORDINANCES
Dayton Legal Blank, Inc
76 - 1 4 (Amended)
Passed . 20 --
Form No. 30043
Page 18 of 41
Sixteen foot height in an upper floor counts as 1.5 stones.
Corridor Building
(a) Building Siting
No greater than every 80 ft.
d Change in Roof Plane or Type
for pitched roof type; none
Front Property Line Coverage
for other roof types.
ide Materials
.d Primary Materials
Stone, Brick, Glass
ITYpes
Comer Side RBZ
Parapet, pitched roof, flat
'd Types
roof. Other types may be
Right -of -Way Encroachment
permitted with approval
2. Buildable Area
(refer to §153.062(D)).
ide Yard
Permitted on facades only
ear Yard
at terminal vistas, comers
Lot Width
at 2 principal frontage
f
streets, and/or adjacent to
None
an open space type
Sixteen foot height in an upper floor counts as 1.5 stones.
Corridor Building
(a) Building Siting
1. Street Frontage
Multiple Principal Buildings
Permitted
Front Property Line Coverage
Minimum 75 %'
Occupation of Comer
Required
Front RBZ
0 -15 R.
Comer Side RBZ
0 -15 ft
RBZ Treatment
Landscape, Patio, or
Streetscape. Along State
Route 161, Streetscape
required.
Right -of -Way Encroachment
Awnings canopies eaves
patios & projecting signs
2. Buildable Area
Minimum Setbacks
ide Yard
5 ft
ear Yard
5 ft.
Lot Width
inimum
50 ft
aximum
None
Maximum Impervious Coverage
Additional Semi - Pervious Coverage
80%
10%
3. Parking Location & Loading
Parking Location
Rear yard 2 ; within building
(refer to (c) Uses &
Occupancy Requirements)
Loading Facility Location
Rear & side facade
Entry for Parking within Building
Rear & side facade; comer
side facade on non - principal
frontage streets
(b) Height
Minimum Height
3 stones
Maximum Height
6 stories.
Ground Story Iminimum
12 R.
Dayton Legal Blank, Inc.
Ordinance No.
I
�I
ii
RECORD OF ORDINANCES
Foun No. 30643
76 -14 (Amended) Page 19 of 41
Passed 20
Height
a)dm um
16 ft
inimum
10 ft
Story Height
a>amum
14 R
(c) Uses & Occupancy Requirements
Residential and general office
Ground Story
uses are prohibited in
shopping corridors
Upper Story
No additional requirements
Permitted in the rear of the
Parking within Building
first 3 floors and fully in any
basement(s)
Occupied Space
Minimum 30 ft depth facing
streets) 2
(d) Facade Requirements
Refer to §153.062(D) through §153.062(N) for design
requirements general to all buildings.
1. Street Facade Transparency
Ground Story Street
Facing Transparency
Minimum 60%
Transparency
Minimum 30%
Blank Wall Limitations
Required
2. Non -Street Facade Transparency
Transparency
Minimum 15%
Blank Wall Limitations
Required
3. Building Entrance
Principal Entrance location
Oman' street facade of
building
Street Facades: Minimum Number of
1 per 75 ft of facade
Entrances
Parking Lot Facades: Minimum Number
1 per 100 ft of facade
of Entrances
In shopping corridors,
Mid - Building Pedestrianway
required for buildings greater
than 250 ft in length
4. Facade Divisions
Vertical Increments
No greater than 45 ft
On buildings 3 stories or
taller, required within 3 ft of
Horizontal Facade Divisions
the top of the ground story.
Required at any building
step -back.
Required Change in Roof Plane or Type
None
5. Facade Materials
Permitted Primary Materials
tone, Brick, Glass
6. Roof Types
Parapet, pitched roof, flat
Permitted Types
roof. Other types may be
permitted with approval
(refer to §153.062(D)).
4
Permitted on facades only at
terminal vistas, comers at 2
Tower
principal frontage streets,
and /or adjacent to an open
space type
RECORD OF ORDINANCES
ron Legal Blank, Inc. _ _ Form N o 30043 _
76 -14 (Amended) Page 20 of 41
Ordinance No. Passed 20
' A courtyard covering up to 35% of the front or comer RBZ is permitted. The courtyard,
when enclosed by building on three sides, may contribute to the front property line
coverage.
2 Parking decks are permitted to extend between buildings, screened from street and
covering a maximum of 10% of the length of the RBZ. Parking decks visible between
principal buildings must be set back a minimum of 15 feet from the street facing
facades.
Section 10. Sections 153.062(0)(7) — 153.062(0)(10) of the City of Dublin Zoning
Code are hereby amended and shall provide as follows:
§ 153.062 Building Types
(0) Building Types
(7) Commercial Center
(a) Building Siting
1. sl - Rvrmge
Multiple Principal Buildings
Permitted'
Front Property Line Coverage
Minimum 45%
Occupation of Comer
Required
Front RBZ
5 -25 ft
Comer Side RBZ
5 -25 ft
RBZ Treatment
Landscape, Patio, or
Streetscape
Right -of -Way Encroachment
None
2. Buildable Area
Side Yard
5 ft.
Minimum Setbacks
Rear Yard
5 ft.
Minimum
50 ft.
Lot Width
Maximum
None
Maximum Impervious Coverage
75%
Additional Semi - Pervious Coverage
15%
3. Parking Location ✓$ Loading
Rear & side yard; within
building (refer to (c) Uses &
Occupancy Requirements).
Parking may be forward of
Parking Location
principal buildings provided
the minimum front property
line coverage and RBZ
treatment requirements are
met by other principal
buildings.
Loading Facility Location
Rear
Side, rear, or comer side
Entry for Parking within Building
facades on non - principal
frontage streets
(b) Height
inimum
1 story
Height
Maximum
3 stories
RECORD OF ORDINANCES
Form No. 30043 _
Jed) Page 21 of 41
Passed 20
Ground Story
Height
inimum
12 ft.
aximum
18 ft.
Upper Story
Height
inimum
10 ft.
aximum
14 ft.
(c) Uses & Occupancy Requirements
Ground Story
Residential uses prohibited
Upper Story
No additional requirements
Parking within Building
Permitted in the rear of the
first floor and fully in any
basement(s)
Occupied Space
Minimum 30 ft. depth from
the front and /or comer side
elevations If the side is a
principal frontage street
(d) FaSade Requirements
Refer to §153.062(D) through §153.062(N) for design requirements
general to all buildings.
1. Street Facade Transparency
Ground Story Street
Facing Transparency
Storefront with minimum
65%
Upper Story Transparency
Minimum 20%
Blank Wall Limitations
Required
2. Non - Street Facade Transparency
Parking Lot Ground Story Transparency
Storefront with minimum
50%
Transparency
Minimum 15%
Blank Wall Limitations
Required on parking lot
facing Mpdes; Not required
on other facades
3. Building Entrance
Principal Entrance Location
Not applicable
Street FaSades: Minimum Number of
Entrances
1 per 75 ft of principal
frontage street fagade
Parking Lot Facades: Minimum Number
of Entrances
1 per 100 ft of facade
Mid - Building Pedestrianway
Not required
4. Facade Divisions
Vertical Increments
No greater than 45 ft
Horizontal Facade Divisions
On 3 -story buildings,
required within 3 ft. of the
top of the ground story.
Required Change in Roof Plane or Type
None
S. Facade Materials
Permitted Primary Materials
Stone, Bride, Glass
6. Roof Types
RECORD OF ORDINANCES
Dayton Legal Blank, Inc-
_ — {
Ordinance No.
Form No 30013
76 -14 (Amended) Page 22 of 41
Passed . 20
' Minimum front property line coverage shall be met, but not all principal buildings must
be located within a Required Building Zone.
(8) Large Format Commercial
(a) Building Siting
L meet Rorrage
Parapet, pitched roof, fiat
Permitted Types
roof. Other types may be
Minimum 95%
permitted with approval
Required
(refer to §153.062(D)).
0 -10 fL with up to 25% of
the front faSade permitted
between 10 -20 ft.
Permitted on fagades only at
0 -10 ft
terminal vistas, comers at
Tower
two principal frontage
Projecting signs, eaves,
awnings, patios, &
canopies
streets, and /or adjacent to
Minimum Setbacks
an open space type
' Minimum front property line coverage shall be met, but not all principal buildings must
be located within a Required Building Zone.
(8) Large Format Commercial
(a) Building Siting
L meet Rorrage
Multiple Prindpal Buildings
Permitted
Front Property Line Coverage
Minimum 95%
Occupation of comer
Required
Front RBZ
0 -10 fL with up to 25% of
the front faSade permitted
between 10 -20 ft.
Comer Side RBZ
0 -10 ft
RBZ Treatment
Patio or Streetscape
Right -of -Way Encroachment
Projecting signs, eaves,
awnings, patios, &
canopies
2. Buildable Area
Minimum Setbacks
Side Yard
0 ft.
Rear Yard
5 ft
Lot Width
Minimum
250 ft.
Maximum
None
Maximum Impervious Coverage
Additional Semi- Pervious Coverage
85%
30%
3. Parking Location & Loading
Parking Location
Rear yard; within building
(refer to (c) Uses &
Occupancy Requirements)
Loading Facility Location
Rear
Entry for Parking within Building
Rear, side, or comer side
fagades on non - principal
frontage streets
(b) Height
Height
Minimum
2 stories'
Maximum
5 stories
Ground Story:
Minimum
15 R
RECORD OF ORDINANCES
Ordinance Na.
76 -14 (Amended)
Far No. 30043
Passed
Page 23 of 41
Height
24 ft '; Additional height
may be permitted with
MaAmum
Site Plan approval for
theaters and other special
indoor entertainment/
recreation uses
Upper Stories
Minimum
10 ft
Ma)dmum
14 ft
Height
(c) Uses & Occupancy Requirements
Residential uses
prohibited; Residential and
Ground Story
general office uses
prohibited in shopping
corridors
Upper Story
No additional
requirements
Permitted in the rear of all
Parking within Building
floors and fully in any
basement
Minimum 30 ft depth
Occupied Space
from the front and /or
comer side facades
(d) Facade Requirements
Refer to §153.062(D) through §153.062(N) for design requirements
general to all buildings.
1. Street Facade Transparency
Storefront with minimum
Ground Story Street
65 %; comer side facade
Facing Transparency
on non- pdndpal frontage
street: minimum 30%
Upper Story Transparency
Minimum 20%
Blank Wall Limitations
Required
2. Non - Street Fagade Transparency
Transparency
Minimum 15%
Blank Wall Limitations
Required
3. Building Entrance
Principal Entrance Location
Principal frontage street
facade of building
Street Facades: Minimum Number of
Minimum of 1 per 75 ft of
Entrances
facade
Parking Lot Facades: Minimum Number of
Minimum of 1 per 150 ft
Entrances
Mid - Building Pedestrianway
Not required
4. Facade Divisions
Vertical Increments
No greater than 45 ft
On buildings 3 stories or
taller or where the
Horizontal Facade Divisions
ns
ximum ground floor
height is used, required
within 3 R. of the top of
the ground story
20
Dayton Leval Blank Inc.
Ordinance No.
RECORD OF ORDINANCES
76 -14 (Amended) Page 24
Passed
Required Change In Roof Plane or Type
No greater than every 80
Multiple Principal Buildings
ft.
5. Facade Materials
Permitted Primary Materials
Brick, Stane, Glass
6. Roof Types
Front RBZ
Parapet, pitched roof, flat
Permitted Types
roof. other types may be
RBZ Treatment
permitted with approval
Right -of -Way Encroachment
(refer to §153.062(D)).
2. Buildable Area
Permitted on fapdes only
Side Yard
at terminal vistas, comers
Tower
at 2 principal frontage
0 ft.
streets, adjacent to an
Minimum
open space type, and /or
Maximum
with a theater use.
Any ground story height of 20 feet or taller counts as 2 stories.
(9) Historic Mixed Use
(a) Building Siting
L meet Rar,bsge
Multiple Principal Buildings
Permitted
Front Property line Coverage
Minimum 80%
occupation of Comer
Required
Front RBZ
0-20 ft.'
Comer Side RBZ
0-10 ft.'
RBZ Treatment
Patio or Streetscape;
Porches, stoops, and
balconies are permitted in
the RBZ
Right -of -Way Encroachment
Projecting signs, awnings,
eaves, patios & canopies
2. Buildable Area
Side Yard
0 ft.
Minimum Setbacks
Rear Yard
0 ft.
Lot Width
Minimum
30 R
Maximum
None
Maximum Impervious Coverage
85%
Additional Semi - Pervious Coverage
5%
3. Parking Location & Loading
Parking Location
Rear
Loading Facility Location
Not applicable
Entry for Parking within Building
Not applicable
(b) Height
Height
Minimum
1.5 stories
Maximum
2.5 stories
Form No. 30043
RECORD OF ORDINANCES
Dayt Legal Blank, Inc..
Ordinance No. 76 -14 (Amended)
Ground Story
Height
Minimum
10 ft
Maximum
12 It
Upper Stories
Height
Minimum
9 ft.
Maximum
12 ft.
(c) Uses & Occupancy Requirements
Ground Story
Residential uses prohibited
Upper Story
No additional requirements
Parking within Building
Not permitted
Occupied Space
Not applicable
(d) Facade Requirements
Refer to §153.062(D) through §153.062(N) for design requirements
general to all buildings.
L Sheet Facade Traropatency
Ground Story
Street Facing Transparency
Storefront with minimum
40%
Upper Story Transparency
Minimum 20%
Blank Wall limitations
Required
2. Non - Street Facade Transparency
Transparency
Minimum 15%
Blank Wall Limitations
Required
3. Building Entrance
Principal Entrance Location
Principal frontage street
facade of building
Street Facades: Minimum Number of
Entrances
1 per 40 ft of facade for
buildings over 60 ft.
Parking Lot Facades: Minimum Number
of Entrances
Minimum of 1
Mid - Building Pedesbianway
1 required for buildings
greater than 150 ft. in length
4. Facade Divisions
Vertical Increments
No greater than 30 ft
Horizontal Facade Divisions
Required within 3 ft of the
top of the ground story.
Required Change in Roof Plane or Type
At every vertical division
S. Facade Materials
Permitted Primary Materials
Stone, Brick, Wood Siding
6. Roof Types
Permitted Types
Pitched roof. Other types
may be permitted with
approval (refer to
§153.062(D)).
Tower
Permitted on facades only at
terminal vistas, comers at 2
principal frontage streets,
Form No. 30043
Page 25 of 41
Passed , 20
RECORD OF ORDINANCES
_ Form No. 30043
76 -14 (Amended) Page 26 of 41
Passed 20
ad jacent to an open pace type.
hen any front or comer property line is within 5 feet or less of the back of curb, the RBZ shall
gin 5 feet off the back of curb to allow for adequate sidewalk width.
LO) Historic Cottage Commercial
(a) Building Siting
L Rag
Multiple Principal Buildings
Permitted
Front Property Une Coverage
Minimum 50%
Occupation of Comer
Required
Front RBZ
0-25 ft.'
Comer Side RBZ
0 -15 ft.l
RBZ Treatment
Landscape, Patio, or
Streetsmpe
Right -of -Way Encroachment
Projecting signs, eaves,
awnings, patios & canopies
2. Buildable Area
Minimum
Setbacks
Side Yard
3 ft.
Rear Yard
5 ft.
Lot Width
Minimum
30 ft.
Maximum
None
Maxmum Building Length or Depth
70 ft.
Maximum Impervious Coverage
75%
Additional Semi - Pervious Coverage
10%
3. Parking Location & Loading
Parking Location
Rear or side, provided the
minimum front property line
coverage is met
Loading Facility Location
Not applicable
Entry for Parking within Building
Not applicable
(b) Height
Height
Minimum
1 story
Maximum
2 stories
Ground Story
Height
Minimum
8 ft
Maximum
11 ft.
Upper Stories
Height
Minimum
7.5 ft.
Maximum
11 R
(c) Uses & Occupancy Requirements
Ground Story
Residential uses prohibited
Upper Story
No additional requirements
Parking within Building
Not permitted
Occupied Space
Not applicable
RECORD OF ORDINANCES
Dayton Legal Blank Inc.
Ordinance No.
F orm N. 30043
76 -14 (Amended) Page 27 of 41
Passed _ _ . 20
(d) Facade Requirements
Refer to §153.062(D) through §353.062(N) for design requirements
general to all buildings.
1. Street Facade Transparency
Transparency
Minimum 25%
Blank Wall Limitations
Required on ground story
only
2. Non -Street Facade Transparency
Transparency
Minimum 15%
Blank Wall Limitations
Not required
3. Building Entrance
Principal Entrance Location
Principal frontage street
facade of building
Street Facades: Minimum Number of
Entrances
1 per every 30 ft for
buildings over 50 it
Parking Lot Facades: Minimum Number
of Entrances
Not applicable
4. Facade Divisions
Vertical Increments
No greater than 30 ft.
Horizontal Facade Divisions
Required within 3 ft. of the
top of the ground story
Required Change in Roof Plane or Type
At every vertical division
S. Facade Materials
Permitted Primary Materials
Stone, Bride, Wood Siding
6. Roof Types
Permitted Types
Pitched roof. Other types may
be permitted with approval
(refer to §153.062(D))
Tower
Not permitted
When any front or comer property line is within 5 feet or less of the back of curb, the RBZ shall
begin 5 feet off the back of curb to allow for adequate sidewalk width.
Section 11. Section 153.062(0)(12) of the City of Dublin Zoning Code is hereby
amended and shall provide as follows:
§ 153.062 Building Types
(0) Building Types
(12) Podium Apartment Building
(a) Building Siting
L meet Rag
Multiple Principal Buildings
Permitted
Front Property Line Coverage
Minimum 75%'
Occupation of Comer
Required
Front RBZ
5 -20 ft
Comer Side RBZ
5 -20 ft
RECORD OF ORDINANCES
_ Day ton Legal Blnnk Inc
Ordinance No.
76 -14 (Amended)
Passed
FOM No. 3OW3
Page 28 of 41
_ .20
Landscape or less than 50%
RBZ Treatment
Patio; porches, stoops, and
balconies are permitted in
the RBZ'
Right -of -Way Encroachment
None
2. Buildable Area
Minimum Side Yard Setback
5 f
Minimum Rear Yard Setback
5 ft
Minimum
50 ft
Lot Width
Ma>amum
None
Maximum Impervious Coverage
70%
Additional Semi - Pervious Coverage
20%
3. Parking Location & Loading
Ground story or basement of
Parking Location
residential building (subject
to applicable screening
requirements)'
Loading Facility Location
Rear
Entry for Parking within Building
Rear & side facade
(b) Height
Minimum Height
3 stories
Maximum Height
4.5 stories
Minimum
10 ft.
Story Height
Maximum
14 ft.
Minimum Rnished Floor Elevation
2 . 5 ft. above the adjacent
sidewalk elevation'
(c) Uses & Occupancy Requirements
Ground Story
No additional requirements
Upper Story
No additional requirements
Required; Podium Garage
Parking shall be screened to
at least 90% opacity through
Parking within Building
the use of building materials
that are compatible with and
Integrated in to the design of
the facade above the parking
area.
Occupied Space
None required in ground
story
(d) Fagade Requirements
Refer to §353.062(D) through §153.062(N) for design
requirements general to all buildings.
1. Street Facade Transparency°
Minimum 90% opacity on
portion of ground floor or
exposed portions of
basement occupied by
Transparency
Podium Garage Parking;
minimum 20% transparency
otherwise and for all other
portions of the building
facing a principle frontage
street
RECORD OF ORDINANCES
Dayton Legal Blank, Inc.
76 -14 (Amended)
Ordinance No. Passed
Fofm No. 30043
rage t,y or 41
20
Blank Wall Limitations
Required
2. Non - Street Facade Transparencys
Minimum 90% opacity on
portion of ground floor or
visible portions of basement
Transparency
occupied by Podium Garage
Parking; minimum 15%
transparency otherwise and
for all other portions of the
building.
Blank Wall Limitations
Required
3. Building Entrance
Principal Entrance Location
Primary street facade of
building
Street Facades: Minimum Number of
1 per 75 ft of facadeb
Entrances
Parking Lot Facades: Minimum Number
at required
N
of Entrances
1 required for buildings
Mid - Building Pedesbianway
longer than 250 ft., except
as provided in §153.063,
Neighborhood Standards.
4. Facade Divisions
Vertical Increments
No greater than 40 ft.
On buildings 3 stories or
Horizontal Facade Divisions
taller, required within 3 ft of
the top of the ground story
Required Change in Roof Plane or Type
No greater than every 80 ft.
S. Facade Materials
Permitted Primary Materials
Stone, Bride, Glass'
6. Roof Types
Parapet, pitched roof, flat
Permitted Types
roof. Other types may be
permitted with approval
(refer to §153.062(D)).
Permitted on facades only at
terminal vistas, comers at 2
Tower
principal frontage streets,
and /or adjacent to an open
space type.
' A landscaped courtyard, when enclosed by building on 3 sides, may contribute up to
35% of the front property line coverage requirement.
a A landscape buffer a minimum of five feet in width as measured from the base of the
building is required. In addition to the foundation planting requirements of
§153.065(D)(7), the required reviewing body may require enhanced foundation
plantings, including but not limited to vertical landscape materials to add visual interest
to the ground floor or visible basement level parking facade.
Basement level structured parking is permitted to extend between buildings, screened
from the street and covering a maximum of 10% of the length of the RBZ. Structured
parking visible between principal buildings must be set back a minimum of 15 feet from
the street facing facades.
4 Where the principal building entrance is a lobby or other common space, the minimum
finished floor elevation is not required.
s In lieu of transparency requirements, the ground story or visible basement facade shall
incorporate architectural elements equal to the degree of detailing used on the stories
above the parking level. Blank wall limitations may be met using these architectural
enhancements, as determined by the required reviewing body.
RECORD OF ORDINANCES
Dayton LeSW Blank, Inc. Form No. 30043
76 -14 (Amended) Page 30 of 41
Ordinance No. Passed 20
I�
e The required reviewing body may reduce the number of entrances along street facades
as functionally appropriate to the apartment building with partdng fully or partially
below grade, provided the building has an adequate number and frequency of
entrances to be convenient for residents and visitors and the entrances are conducive
to establishing a safe and attractive pedestrian realm.
Masonry is required as the primary building material on ground stories and the visible
portions of basements where parking Is located.
Section 12, Section 153.063(A) of the City of Dublin Zoning Code is hereby
amended and shall provide as follows:
§153.063 Neighborhood Standards
(A) Intent
Certain Bridge Street District zoning districts require special attention
to locations and character of buildings, streets, and open spaces to
accommodate larger scale, coordinated development and
redevelopment to permit a wide variety of uses. The intent of
§153.063 is to establish requirements for the creation of signature
places in the city consistent with the Community Plan (Bridge Street
District Area Plan)by incorporating long -term phasing plans,
transitional development conditions, and adaptability to future market
needs. The neighborhood standards guide the development of streets,
open spaces, buildings, and other placemaking elements over time.
They are not intended to designate the precise locations for approved
street types, use areas, open spaces or other required elements of this
Code; actual locations and specific development requirements will be
determined through the Development Plan and Site Plan Reviews as
required in §153.066 for individual neighborhoods. However, wherever
conflicts with other sections of the zoning regulations applicable to the
Bridge Street District exist, the provisions of §153.063 shall apply.
(1) The BSC Historic Residential District is a singularly unique
residential neighborhood with a historic development pattern.
The requirements for the BSC Historic Residential District
ensure that the scale and placement of new or modified
buildings are compatible with the historic character of the
existing residential uses and streets.
(2) The BSC Sawmill Center Neighborhood and BSC Indian Run
Neighborhood districts anchor the Bridge Street Corridor
through the creation of mixed use neighborhoods with
signature development characters. Each neighborhood is
intended to be anchored by a critical mass of commercial uses
located in highly walkable shopping corridors with streets,
blocks, buildings and open spaces designed to encourage park -
once visits, window shopping, impromptu public gatherings and
sidewalk activity.
(3) The BSC Historic Transition Neighborhood District serves as a
bridge between the existing historic scale of the BSC Historic
Core District and the more contemporary, larger scale of the
BSC Indian Run Neighborhood District.
(4) The standards of the BSD Scioto River Neighborhood are
intended to create an active, walkable destination through
integration of a vibrant mix of uses. Development in this district
is oriented toward the Scioto River and the public spaces along
the riverfront, and includes important vehicular and bicycle
links to adjacent neighborhoods and open spaces.
RECORD OF ORDINANCES
Inc.
Ordinance No
76 -14 (Amended)
Passed
Forth No. 30043
Page 31 of 41
20
Section 13. Section 153.063(C)(4)(a) of the City of Dublin Zoning Code is hereby
amended and shall provide as follows:
§153.063 Neighborhood Standards
(C) BSC Sawmill Center Neighborhood District
(4) Building Types. Refer to §153.062.
(a) Permitted Building Types
Refer to §153.062(B)(3)(a) for permitted building types
in the BSD Sawmill Center Neighborhood District.
Section 14. Section 153.063(C)(5) of the City of Dublin Zoning Code is hereby
amended and shall provide as follows:
§153.063 Neighborhood Standards
(C) BSC Sawmill Center Neighborhood District
(5) Placemaking Elements
(a) Shopping Corridor
1. The intent for designated shopping corridors in
the BSD neighborhood districts is to provide
continuous mixed -use street frontages with
retail uses and eating and drinking facilities
occupying the ground floor of buildings located
on streets that have a well- defined and detailed
pedestrian realm. Buildings with frontage on
designated shopping corridors should be sited to
accommodate a mix of outdoor activities, such
as patios, seating areas, pocket plazas and
spacious walkways.
j 2. At least one continuous shopping corridor is
required and shall be located along at least one
principal frontage street in the approximate
location shown on Figure 153.063 -A.
3. The minimum required length of the required
shopping corridor shall be measured as the
aggregate length of the block faces along both
sides of the principal frontage street. The
required length shall be based on the total area
of the development site as noted in Table
153.063 -B.
TABLE 153.063 4
Shopping Corridor Length - BSD Sawmill Center
Nei hborhood District
Development Area Required Shopping Corridor Lert
Less than 5 acres No minimum
5 to 20 acres 600 linear feet minimum
Over 20 acres 1200 linear feet minimum
4. Any block exceeding 300 feet within a shopping
corridor shall provide a mid -block pedestrianway
meeting the requirements of §153.060(C)(6).
5. The required shopping corridor is permitted to
turn the comer of a block provided the minimum
required length of the shopping corridor is
located along the principal frontage street.
RECORD OF ORDINANCES
76 -14 (Amended)
(b) Sign Plans
Passed
Form No. 30043
— — -
Page 32 of 41
__
1. The BSC Sawmill Center Neighborhood District is
intended to accommodate a wide variety of
building types and uses to create vibrant, mixed
use shopping and entertainment districts. The
sign and graphic standards shall contribute to
the vibrancy of the district and the creation of a
high quality environment with effective graphics
intended for navigation, information, and
identification primarily for pedestrians and
secondarily for vehicles.
2. The Planning and Zoning Commission shall
review master sign plans that depart from the
requirements of §153.065(H). The approved
master sign plan may include alternative sign
types, number, size, heights, locations, colors,
and lighting, provided the purpose and intent of
the sign and graphic standards for the BSC
Sawmill Center Neighborhood District are
maintained.
(c) Street Terminations
Refer to §153.062(3) for Treatments at Terminal Vistas.
(d) Gateways
1. Gateways shall be provided in the approximate
locations shown in Figure 153.063 -A. Gateway
designs shall be approved with the Site Plan
Review, but locations shall be identified with the
Development Plan Review and shall be
coordinated with the street network.
2. Gateways are points of identification that
provide a sense of arrival to the area. Gateway
designs shall be pedestrian- oriented in scale and
shall include a combination of architectural
elements, landscape features, and /or public
open spaces. Gateway elements should enhance
the character of the public realm consistent with
the Principles of Walkable Urbanism of
§153.057(D) and should be coordinated with the
design of the nearby streetscape, open spaces
and architecture as may be applicable.
Section 15. Section 153.063(D)(4)(a) of the City of Dublin Zoning Code is hereby
amended and shall provide as follows:
§153.063 Neighborhood Standards
(D) BSC Historic Transition Neighborhood District
(4) Building Types. Refer to §153.062.
(a) Permitted Building Types
Refer to §153.062(B)(3)(a) for permitted building types
in the BSD Historic Transition Neighborhood District.
Section 16. Section 153.063(D)(5)(c) of the City of Dublin Zoning Code is hereby
amended and shall provide as follows:
RECORD OF ORDINANCES
Form No. 30043
76 -14 (Amended) Page 33 of 41
Passed
163 Neighborhood Standards
BSC Historic Transition Neighborhood District
(5) Placemaking Elements
(c) Gateways
1. Gateways shall be provided in the approximate
locations shown in Figure 153.063 -B. Gateway
designs shall be approved with the Site Plan
Review, but locations shall be identified with the
Development Plan Review and shall be
coordinated with the street network.
2. Gateways are points of identification that
provide a sense of arrival to the area. Gateway
designs shall be pedestrian- oriented in scale and
shall include a combination of architectural
elements, landscape features and /or public open
spaces. Gateway elements should enhance the
character of the public realm and should be
coordinated with the design of the nearby
streetscape, open spaces and architecture as
may be applicable.
Section 17. Section 153.063(E)(5)(a) of the City of Dublin Zoning Code is hereby
amended and shall provide as follows:
f' §153.063 Neighborhood Standards
(E) BSC Indian Run Neighborhood District
(5) Building Types. Refer to §153.062.
(a) Permitted Building Types
Refer to §153.062(B)(3)(a) for permitted building types
in the BSD Indian Run Neighborhood District.
I�
Section 18. Section 153.063(C)(6) of the City of Dublin Zoning Code is hereby
amended and shall provide as follows:
§153.063 Neighborhood Standards
(E) BSC Indian Run Neighborhood District
(6) Placemaking Elements
I (a) Shopping Corridor
1. The intent for designated shopping corridors in
the BSD neighborhood districts is to provide
continuous mixed -use street frontages with
retail uses and eating and drinking facilities
occupying the ground floor of buildings located
on streets that have a well - defined and detailed
pedestrian realm. Buildings with frontage on
designated shopping corridors should be sited to
accommodate a mix of outdoor activities, such
as patios, seating areas, pocket plazas and
spacious walkways.
2. At least one continuous shopping corridor is
required and shall be located along at least one
principal frontage street in the approximate
location shown on Figure 153.063 -C.
RECORD OF ORDINANCES
D ayton Legal Blan Inc. _ Form No. 30043 _
76 -14 (Amended) Page 34 of 41
Ordinance No. Passed _ -- 20
3. The minimum required length of the required
shopping corridor shall be measured as the
aggregate length of the block faces along both
sides of the principal frontage street. The
required length shall be based on the total area
of the development site as noted in Table
153.063 -C.
TABLE 153.063 -C
Shopping Corridor Length - BSC Indian Run Neighborhood
_ District
Development Area
Required Shopping Corridor Len
Less than 5 acres
No minimum
5 to 20 acres
600 linear feet minimum
Over 20 acres
1200 linear feet minimum
4. Any block exceeding 300 feet within a shopping
corridor shall provide a mid -block pedestrianway
meeting the requirements of §153.060(C)(6).
5. The required shopping corridor is permitted to
turn the comer of a block provided the minimum
required length of the shopping corridor is
located along the principal frontage street.
(b) Indian Run Frontage
1. If buildings are fronted directly along the Indian
Run greenway, ground floor fagades shall be
treated the same as front fagades on principal
frontage streets. Parking lots, parking
structures, garages, and loading facilities are not
permitted in the rear yards of lots with frontage
along the Indian Run greenway.
2. Eating and drinking establishments are
encouraged along the Indian Run greenway,
with an additional 10% semi- pervious area
permitted for outdoor dining and seating where
the outdoor dining area is within 20 feet of the
principal structure.
(c) Street Terminations
Refer to §153.062(3) for Treatments at Terminal Vistas.
(d) Gateways
1. Gateways shall be provided in the approximate
locations shown in Figure 153.063 -C. Gateway
designs shall be approved by the required
reviewing body, but locations shall be identified
with the Development Plan Review and shall be
coordinated with the street network.
2. Gateways are points of identification that
provide a sense of arrival to the area. Gateway
designs shall be pedestrian- oriented in scale and
shall include a combination of architectural
elements, landscape features, and /or public
open spaces. Gateway elements should enhance
the character of the public realm consistent with
the Principles of Walkable Urbanism of
§153.057(D) and should be coordinated with the
design of the nearby streetscape, open spaces
and architecture as may be applicable.
RECORD OF ORDINANCES
Dayton Le Blank, Inc. Porn No. 30043
76 -14 (Amended) Page 35 of 41
Ordinance No Passed 20
it -- - - - -- _
(e) Sign Plans
I�
1. The BSC Indian Run Neighborhood District is
intended to accommodate a wide variety of
building types and uses to create vibrant, mixed
use shopping and entertainment districts. The
sign and graphic standards shall contribute to
the vibrancy of the district and the creation of a
high quality environment with effective graphics
intended for navigation, information, and
identification primarily for pedestrians and
secondarily for vehicles.
2. The Planning and Zoning Commission shall
review master sign plans that depart from the
requirements of §153.065(H) for development
sites. The approved master sign plan may
include alternative sign types, number, size,
heights, locations, colors, and lighting, provided
the purpose and intent of the sign and graphic
a standards for the BSC Indian Run Neighborhood
District are maintained.
Section 19. Section 153.063(E) of the City of Dublin Zoning Code is hereby
amended and shall provide as follows:
§153.063 Neighborhood Standards
(F) BSD Scioto River Neighborhood District
(1) Development Intent
The BSD Scioto River Neighborhood District provides a
significant opportunity for a well - planned and designed
neighborhood with a balanced mix of land uses. Predominant
land uses include a residential presence to complement and
support a strong mix of uses, with office employment and
supporting service and commercial uses. A comfortable,
walkable street network is intended to convey a strong sense
of connection between each of these diverse but
complementary land uses.
(2) Refer to §153.058 for the BSD Scioto River Neighborhood
District intent, and refer to the revised Zoning Map for the
actual limits of the BSD Scioto River Neighborhood District.
Refer to Figure 153.063 -D for an illustration of a conceptual
development pattern desired for this district.
(3) Block, Access, and Street Layout
(a) Refer to §153.060 for Lots and Blocks; refer to
§153.061 for Street Types; refer to §153.062(0) for
access permitted for specific building types.
(b) Block Length
1. Refer to Table 153.060 -A, Maximum Block
Dimensions, for block length requirements.
2. Blocks with frontage on Riverside Drive /State
Route 161 facing the roundabout (conceptually
shown on Figure 153.063 -D) may exceed the
maximum block length, but shall be required to
provide mid -block pedestrianways in accordance
with §153.060(C)(6).
RECORD OF ORDINANCES
Ordinance No.
76 -14 (Amended)
Fom No 3ON3
Page 36 of 41
Passed 20
3. For the purposes of measuring block length, the
limits of private street sections designed and
constructed to public street standards and
defined on the Development Plan shall be used
in lieu of right -of -way.
(c) Access
Refer to § §153.060 and 153.061 for existing and
potential principal frontage streets within the BSD
Scioto River Neighborhood District and acceptable block
access configurations.
(d) Street Types
Refer to §153.061 for existing and planned streets and
street family designations within the BSC Scioto River
Neighborhood District.
(4) Building Types & Uses. Refer to §153.062.
(a) Permitted Building Types
Refer to §153.062(B)(3)(a) for permitted building types
in the BSD Scioto River Neighborhood District.
(b) Vehicular Canopies
In addition to the requirements of §153.062(L),
canopies shall be located per Figure 153.062 -3, and are
permitted on the side of a building located on a comer
lot, provided the vehicular use area is screened from
any principal frontage streets and shopping corridors in
accordance with §153.059(C)(4)(c).
(c) Ground Story Use & Occupancy Requirements.
Residential, Office and all related support spaces
including lobbies, common areas, mechanical and
service uses are permitted on the ground floor.
Mechanical rooms, service uses, and other related areas
shall not front a shopping corridor.
(5) Placemaking Elements
(a) Shopping Corridor
1. The intent for designated shopping corridors in
the BSD neighborhood districts is to provide
continuous mixed -use street frontages with
retail uses and eating and drinking facilities
occupying the ground floor of buildings located
on streets that have a well - defined and detailed
pedestrian realm. Buildings with frontage on
designated shopping corridors should be sited to
accommodate a mix of outdoor activities, such
as patios, seating areas, pocket plazas and
spacious walkways.
2. At least one continuous shopping corridor is
required and shall be located on and
perpendicular to a principal frontage street in
the approximate location shown on Figure
153.063 -D.
3. The minimum required length of the required
shopping corridor shall be measured as the
aggregate length of the block faces along both
sides of the principal frontage street, except
RECORD OF ORDINANCES
Damn Legal Blank Ina
76 -14 (Amended)
Ordinance No.
Forth No, 30043
Page 37 of 41
Passed _ , J 20
where portions of the shopping corridor have
frontage along Riverside Drive. The required
length shall be based on the total area of the
development site as noted in Table 153.063 -D.
TABLE 153.063 -D
Shopping Corridor Length - BSD Scioto River
Neighborhood District
Development Area
Regulred Shopping Corridor Len
Less than 5 acres
No minimum
5 to 20 acres
600 linear feet minimum
Over 20 awes
1 linear feet minimum
4. Any block exceeding 300 feet within a shopping
corridor shall provide a mid -block pedestrianway
meeting the requirements of §153.060(C)(6).
5. The required shopping corridor is permitted to
turn the comer of a block provided the minimum
required length of the shopping corridor is
located along the principal frontage street.
(b) John Shields Parkway Frontage
If buildings are fronted directly along the John Shields
Parkway greenway, ground floor fagades shall be
treated the same as front fagades on principal frontage
streets.
(c) Pedestrian- Oriented Streetscape
A minimum of 12 feet of clear sidewalk width shall be
provided along designated shopping corridors through
the combination of public right -of -way and required
building zone area with public access easements.
Outdoor dining and seating areas shall not be permitted
within this clear area.
(d) Street Terminations
Refer to §153.062(]) for Treatments at Terminal Vistas.
(e) Gateways
1. Gateways are points of identification that
provide a sense of arrival to the area. Gateway
designs shall be pedestrian- oriented in scale and
shall include a combination of architectural
elements, landscape features, and /or public
open spaces. Gateway elements should enhance
the character of the public realm consistent with
the Principles of Walkable Urbanism of
§153.057(D) and should be coordinated with the
design of the nearby streetscape, open spaces
and architecture as may be applicable.
2. Gateways shall be provided in the approximate
locations shown in Figure 153.063 -D. Gateway
designs shall be approved with the Site Plan
Review, but locations shall be identified with the
Development Plan Review and shall be
coordinated with the street network.
(f) Sign Plans
The BSD Scioto River Neighborhood District is
intended to accommodate a wide variety of
RECORD OF ORDINANCES
Dayton Legal Blan 1—
�1 76-14 (Amended)
Ordinance No.
_ Fonn Na. 300
Page 38 of 41
Passed _ — 20
building types and uses to create vibrant, mixed
use shopping and entertainment districts. The
sign and graphic standards shall contribute to
the vibrancy of the district and the creation of a
high quality environment with effective graphics
intended for navigation, information, and
identification primarily for pedestrians and
secondarily for vehicles.
2. A master sign plan shall be submitted for
designated shopping corridors and as required
by §153.065(H) and §153.066(L)(8). The
approved master sign plan may include
alternative sign types, number, size, heights,
locations, colors, and lighting, provided the
purpose and intent of the sign and graphic
standards for the BSD Scioto River
Neighborhood District are maintained.
(6) Open Spaces. Refer to §153.064.
(a) Open Space Character
1. The BSD Scioto River Neighborhood District is
intended to accommodate a wide variety of
building types and uses to create vibrant, mixed
use shopping and employment districts accented
by a high quality open space network that
balances a variety of stunning natural
greenways and hardscape areas designed to
provide intimate gathering spaces appropriate
for an urban setting.
2. A pedestrian bridge will connect the BSD Scioto
River Neighborhood District with the Historic
District and BSD Historic Transition
Neighborhood, establishing an iconic focal point
and a key pedestrian and bicycle connection
linking the two sides of the Scioto River.
3. A greenway connecting the BSD Scioto River
Neighborhood District with the BSC Sawmill
Center Neighborhood District to the east is
intended to create pedestrian and bicycle
connections and natural corridors from this
mixed use activity center to the Sawmill Center'
and throughout the Bridge Street District.
(b) Required Open Space
Open space shall be provided in accordance with the
requirements of §153.064(C). All open spaces fulfilling
this requirement shall meet the intent and design
requirements of an open space type permitted in the
BSD Scioto River Neighborhood District as described in
§153.064(G). Required open spaces shall be publicly
accessible and accommodate community activity and
gathering spaces.
(c) Permitted Open Space Types
All open space types are permitted.
(d) Open Space Network
1. Open spaces within the BSD Scioto River
Neighborhood District shall be organized as a
RECORD OF ORDINANCES
. _ Form N.. 30043
76 -14 (Amended) Page 39 of 41
Passed _ -
series of interconnected nodes and corridors
appropriate to the scale and character of
surrounding streets, buildings and land uses.
The purpose of this requirement is to create
highly accessible public gathering spaces and
activity areas along a continuous open space
network weaving through and around the edges
of this urban neighborhood.
2. The open space network shall be provided, at a
minimum, in the approximate locations shown in
Figure 153.063 -D. Open space locations shall be
approved with the Site Plan Review, but
locations and types shall be identified with the
Development Plan Review and shall meet the
following criteria:
A. Open space corridors and nodes shall be
coordinated with the street network, and
with gateways where applicable.
B. A greenway is required along John
Shields Parkway and shall be designed to
facilitate pedestrian and bicycle travel.
C. Open space nodes shall be provided at
prominent street intersections, such as
those serving as entrances to a
designated shopping corridor, the open
spaces associated with the pedestrian
bridge landing, and other gateway
locations, with other appropriately scaled
open space types integrated along the
corridor as appropriate to the character
of the street.
D. Where a conference center use is
present, an adjacent plaza or square
shall be provided to serve as a required
open space.
action 153.065(B)(5)(c) of the City of Dublin Zoning Code is hereby
all provide as follows:
§153.065 Site Development Standards
(B) Parking and Loading
(5) Parking Structure Design
Parking structures shall be designed in accordance with the
minimum requirements of this section. Refer to the building
type requirements for Parking Structures in §153.062(0) for
additional information.
(c) Interior Circulation
1. Maximum aisle length shall not exceed 400 feet
without providing a cross- aisle.
2. Cross aisles shall be a minimum of 18 feet and
no greater than 24 feet in width.
3. A minimum ceiling clearance height of 12 feet is
required where the parking structure has street
frontage, excluding the driveway opening, and
RECORD OF ORDINANCES
Dayton Legal Blank, Inc.
Ordinance No.
76 -14 (Amended)
Passed
Form No. 30043
Page 40 of 41
_,20
the parking structure shall be designed and
constructed to allow potential occupancy of the
first 20 feet of building depth by a commercial
or a civic /public /institutional use permitted by
§153.059(8).
4. Design of all other parking structures and upper
levels shall include a minimum ceiling clearance
height of eight and one half feet.
5. Below -grade parking structure levels shall
provide minimum clear heights as required by
the Ohio Building Code and the Americans with
Disabilities Act.
Section 21. Section 153.0650(4) of the City of Dublin Zoning Code is hereby
amended and shall provide as follows:
§153.065 Site Development Standards
(F) Exterior Lighting
(4) Fixture Power and Efficiency
All light fixtures shall meet the standards in Table 153.065 -H
for power and efficiency.
TABLE 153.065 -H: FIXTURE POWER AND EFFICIENCY
BSD Indian Run, BSD
Sawmill Center, BSD
All other BSC
Scioto River
Districts
Neighborhood
Districts
Maximum permitted initial lamp
lumens per sq. ft.
13.9 lumens /sq. ft.
9.7 lumens /sq. ft.
Maximum lamp allowance
60,000 lumens
44,000 lumens
Minimum lumens per watt or
energy consumed (as
documented by manufacturers
80 lumens /watt
80 lumens /watt
specifications or results of an
independent testing laboratory)
Section 22. Section 153.065(H)(1)(c) of the City of Dublin Zoning Code is hereby
amended and shall provide as follows:
§153.065 Site Development Standards
(H) Signs
(1) Intent and General Purpose
(c) BSC Indian Run Neighborhood, Sawmill Center
Neighborhood, Scioto River Neighborhood and Vertical
Mixed Use District Signs
The purpose of signs in these districts is to
accommodate a wide variety of building types and uses
to create vibrant, mixed use shopping and
entertainment districts. Sign and graphic standards shall
contribute to the vibrancy of the districts and the
creation of high quality environments with effective
graphics intended for navigation, information, and
RECORD OF ORDINANCES
Dayton Leda] ank, Inc
Ordinance No.
76 -14 (Amended)
Form No. 30043
Page 41 of 41
Passed
20
identification primarily for pedestrians and secondarily
for vehicles.
Section 23. Section 153.065(H)(3)(b) of the City of Dublin Zoning Code is hereby
amended and shall provide as follows:
§153.065 Site Development Standards
(H) Signs
(3) BSC Districts with Special Sign Provisions
(b) BSC Indian Run Neighborhood, Sawmill Center
Neighborhood, Scioto River Neighborhood and Vertical
Mixed Use Districts
1. Signs in these districts shall be subject to the
requirements of §153.065(H)(6) through (7) as
applicable, unless a master sign plan is
approved by the Planning and Zoning
Commission (refer to §153.065(H)(2)(b)6)).
2. A master sign plan is required for a planned
shopping corridor. The master sign plan shall be
submitted prior to or concurrent with a Site Plan
Review in a shopping corridor.
Section 24 . This ordinance shall be effective on the earliest date permitted by law.
Passed this 495 A , day of 2014.
ayor - Presiding Officer
ATTEST:
OA' -0
Clerk of Council
Offce of the City Manager
5200 Emerald - Dulin, OH
City of Dublin Phone: 614 410 - 4400y Fax b614 - 410 - 4490 43017 - 1090 Memo
To: Members of Dublin City Council
From: Marsha I. Grigsby, City Manager �G
(Date: August 21, 2014
Initiated By: Steve Langworthy, Director of Land Use and Long Range Planning
Re: Ordinance 76 -14 (Amended) — Establishing a new Bridge Street District
Zoning District (BSD Scioto River Neighborhood District) and related Code
Amendments for the BSD Scioto River Neighborhood to Sections 153.058,
153.059, 153.060, 153.062, 153.063, 153.065 of the City of Dublin Codified
Ordinances (Zoning Code). (Case 14- 039ADMC)
Summary
This is a request to amend portions of the Zoning Code to establish development regulations for
a new Bridge Street District zoning district. These regulations will provide specific development
standards for the Scioto River corridor area of the Bridge Street District (east of the river) that
are consistent with the 2010 Bridge Street Corridor Vision Report as incorporated into the
Dublin Community Plan (Bridge Street District Area Plan) in July 2013.
Planning presented the proposed amendments at Council's first reading on August 11"'. At that
meeting, Council members requested modifications allowing greater flexibility for drive -through
uses (designed for urban environments) and increasing the minimum required story height for
certain Bridge Street District building types.
Summary of Modifications
The proposed Zoning Code amendments, including those requested by City Council at their
meeting on August 11 are intended to produce the type of high - quality development pattern
envisioned for the Bridge Street District and emphasize the importance of the development
character along the Scioto River Corridor with the aim of establishing another special "Place" at
the heart of the Bridge Street District. The following amendments include the creation of a new
Neighborhood zoning district (BSD Scioto River Neighborhood District) and other related
modifications.
A_ _m_ endmgnts Requested By City Council (1s' Reading)
• 153.059, Uses — Allowing drive -in /drive- through uses as conditional uses in the BSC
Office and BSC Scioto River Neighborhood Districts.
153.062, Building Types — Increasing the minimum required story height for the
Apartment Building, Loft Building, Corridor Building, Commerdal Center Building, Large
Format Commerr Jal Build/ng, and Podium Apartment Building from a minimum of 9 feet
per story to a minimum of 10 feet per story.
Memo re. Ord. 76-14 (Amended)
August 21, 2014
Page 2 of 2
Previous Amendments
153.063 1 New BSD Scioto River Neighborhood District
• Adding an intent statement for the new BSD Scioto River Neighborhood District.
• Adding development standards (mirroring the existing BSC Sawmill Center and BSC
Indian Run Neighborhood Districts).
• Providing a conceptual graphic that coordinates with the recommended zoning for the
Scioto River Neighborhood District. The graphic depicts major street network
connections, demonstrates how the open space network complements desired
development and respects existing natural features, identifies opportunities to establish
gateways, and Illustrates generally where the key mixed -use center ("shopping
corridor") is desired and could be extended.
Related Amendments
• 153.059, Uses — Allowing Transportation, Transit Stations and Conference Centers as
Conditional Uses in all Neighborhood Districts.
• 153.060, Lots and Blocks - aarification of block size measurement.
• 153.062, Building Types — Establishing a maximum story height for Corridor Buildings.
• 153.065(6), Site Development Standards, Parking and Loading — Clarifying parking
structure design requirements.
Related Mod /flcatlons
• 153.058, BSC Districts Scope & Intent — Adding the new BSD Scioto River Neighborhood
District with a description of district intent.
• 153.059 - A, Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses - Add appropriate uses to the BSD
Scioto River Neighborhood District, including modifications to Use Specific Standards
with special provisions for Neighborhood Districts.
• 153.060, Table of Maximum Block Dimensions - Add the BSD Riverside Neighborhood
District.
• 153.065(F), Table of Fixture Power and Efficiency - Add the BSD Riverside Neighborhood
District.
• 153.065(H), Signs — Modify various sections and intent statements with special
provisions for Neighborhood Districts.
Other Modifications
• 153.059 - A, Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses - Eliminate "Group Homes" as a
use category at the recommendation of the Law Director.
Recommendation
Staff recommends City Council approval of Ordinance 76 -14 (Amended) at the second
reading /public hearing on August 25, 2014.
F
L
Of ee of the Ci iMa nager
5200 ErneraW Parkway e Dulin, OH 43017-
City of Dublin Phone: 614 - 410-4400 • Fax: 614-410 -4490 1
To: Members of Dublin City Council
From: Marsha I. Grigsby, City Manager
Dale: August 7, 2014
lnkkftd By: Steve Langworthy, Director of Land Use and Long Range Planning
Memo
Re: Ordinance 76 -14 — Establishing a new Bridge Street District Zoning District
(BSD Scioto River Neighborhood District) and related Code Amendments for
the BSD Scioto River Neighborhood to Sections 153.058, 153.059, 153.060,
153.062, 153.063, 153.065 of the City of Dublin Codified Ordinances (Zoning
Code). (Case 14- 039ADMC)
Summary
This is a request to amend portions of the Zoning Code to establish development regulations for
a new Bridge Street District zoning district. These regulations will provide spedflc development
standards for the Scioto River corridor area of the Bridge Stmt District (east of the river) that
are consistent with the 2010 Bridge Street Corridor Vision Report as incorporated into the
Dublin Community Plan (Bridge Street District Area Plan) in July 2013.
Summary of ModiftWons
The proposed Zoning Code amendments are intended to produce the type of high -quality
development patbem envisioned for the Bridge Stmt District and emphasize the importance of
the development character along the Scioto River Corridor with the aim of establishing another
special "Place" at the heart of the Bridge Street District The following amendments include the
creation of a new Neighborhood zoning district (BSD Scioto River Neighborhood District) and
other related modifications.
153.0631 New BSD Saoto River Neighborhood D"ct
• Adding an intent statement for the new BSD Scioto River Neighborhood District.
• Adding development standards (mirroring the existing BSC Sawmill Center and BSC
Indian Run Neighborhood Districts).
• Providing a conceptual graphic that coordinates with the recommended zoning for the
Scioto River Neighborhood District The graphic depicts major street network
connections, demonstrates how the open space network complements desired
development and respects existing natural features, Identifies opportunities to establish
gateways, and illustrates generally where the key mixed -use center Cshopping
corridor'l is desired and could be extended.
Related Amendments
• 153.059, Uses — Allowing Transportation, Transit Stations and Conference Centers as
Conditional Uses in all Neighborhood Districts.
• 153.060, Lots and Blocks - Clarification of block size measurement.
Memo re. Ordinance 76-14 — Establishing a new Bridge Street Disbict Zoning District (BSD Scioto River Neighborhood
DWrkt) and related Code Amendments
August 7, 2014
Page 2 of 3
• 153.062, Building Types — Establishing a maximum story height for Corridor Buildings.
• 153.065(6), Site Development Standards, Parking and Loading — Clarifying parking
structure design requirements.
Related Mod1flcatfons
153.058, BSC Districts Scope & Intent — Adding the new BSD Scioto River Neighborhood
District with a description of district intent.
153.059 - A, Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses - Add appropriate uses to the BSD
Scioto River Neighborhood District;, including modifications to Use Specific Standards
with special provisions for Neighborhood Districts.
153.060, Table of Maximum Block Dimensions - Add the BSD Riverside Neighborhood
District.
• 153.065(17, Table of Fixture Power and Efficiency - Add the BSD Riverside Neighborhood
District.
• 153.065(H), Signs — Modify various sections and intent statements with special
provisions for Neighborhood Districts.
Other Modiflcatfons
• 153.059 - A, Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses - Eliminate "Group Homes" as a
use category at the recommendation of the Law Director.
Planning and Zoning Commission Review
On May 29, 2014, the Administrative Review Team (ART) reviewed and recommended the
proposed Zoning Code amendments to the Planning and Zoning Commission for consideration
at their June 5, 2014 meeting. At that meeting, the Commission agreed with the intent to
establish a neighborhood zoning district for the Scioto River corridor area, and discussed the
importance of consistency with the provisions of the other neighbor zoning districts. The
Commission wanted to avoid establishing special provisions that would target any specific
project that had not yet been reviewed for consistency with the objectives of the Bridge Street
District
The Commission had similar concerns with some of the proposed Zoning Code amendments to
the building type requirements and parking requirements that would apply to all properties
throughout the Bridge Street District. These provisions were generally eliminated from the final
version recommended to City Council.
At the June P meeting, the Commission discussed potentially eliminating fiber cement siding as
a permitted primary building material, in addition to limiting the maximum height of buildings in
all Bridge Street District zoning districts to 5.5 stories (instead of up to 7.5 stories in limited
areas).
Written comment was submitted to City Council and forwarded to the Commission from three
parties with development interests in the Bridge Street District, expressing concems with these
proposed amendments, Indicating that these changes would significantly change the course and
feasibility of projects currently under development. At their July W meeting, the
Memo re. Ordinance 76-14 — Establishing a new Bridge Street District Zoning District (BSD Scioto River Neighborhood
District) and related Code Amendments
August 7, 2014
Page 3 of 3
Commissioners reconsidered these modifications and determined that the existing Code
language should remain until further consideration with the pending update to the overall
Bridge Street District zoning regulations. Similarly, the Commission also elected to clarify the
maximum permitted height for certain buildings, allowing up to six stories, with increased
height to be considered through Waivers requested for specific applications.
The Commission also discussed the description of intent for the proposed zoning district,
ensuring that the desire for a balanced mix of land uses is clear.
On July 10, 2014, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval to City Coundi
of the proposed Zoning Code amendments for the BSD Scioto River Neighborhood District with
modifications noted on the Record of Action.
The Bridge Street District zoning regulations are unique, innovative, and tailored to address the
special development conditions present in the Bridge Street District The regulations crafted for
this special area require development that is vibrant, high - quality, pedestrian- oriented, and
consistent with the Vision Principles stated in the Bridge Street Corridor Vision Report and
adopted by Dublin City Council in July 2013 as part of the Bridge Street District Area Plan In the
Dublin Community Plan.
The proposed Zoning Code amendments for the BSD Scioto River NeighborFrood District align
with the planning themes and objectives for the Bridge Street District and ensure that
development is coordinated with the expected street network and infrastructure planned for the
District as a whole. Further, the proposed Code amendments bring the SclotD River Corridor
area into alignment with other similar areas of the BSD and the general recommendations
outlined in the Bridge Street Corridor Vision Report.
Planning recommends City Council approval of Ordinance 76-14 at the second reading/public
hearing on August 2P, 2014.
Proposed BSD Scioto River Neighborhood
District Graphic I Figure 153.063 -D
Case 14- 039ADMC — Zoning Code Amendment — BSD Scioto River Neighborhood District and
Related Zoning Code Amendments
As Recommended By PZC to CC: July 10, 2014
With CC Recommended Changes: Aug. 11, 2014
�je'vV Test _
§153.063 Neighborhood Standards
(A) Intent
Certain Bridge Street District zoning district require special attention to locations and
character of buildings, streets, and open spaces to accommodate larger scale, coordinated development
and redevelopment to permit a wide variety of uses. The intent of § 153.063 is to establish requirements
for the creation of signature places in the city consistent with the Community Plan (Bridge Street
District Area Plan ),R—vidge- Stfeet _ r, ' epeft by incorporating long -term phasing plans,
transitional development conditions, and adaptability to future market needs. The neighborhood
standards guide the development of streets, open spaces, buildings, and other placemaking elements over
time. They are not intended to designate the precise locations for approved street types, use areas, open
spaces or other required elements of this Code; actual locations and specific development requirements
will be determined through the Development Plan and Site Plan Reviews as required in §153.066 for
individual neighborhoods. However, wherever conflicts with other sections of the zoning regulations
Uplicable to _the _Bridge Street District exist, the provisions of § 153.063 shall apply.
[Sections 153.063(A)(1) — (3) omitted]
(41 The standards of the BSD Scioto River Neighborhood are intended to create an active, walkable
destination throu h irate ration of a vibrant mix of uses. Development in this district is oriented
toward the Scioto River and the public spaces along the riverfront, and includes i nnortant
vehicular and bicycle links to adjacent neighborhoods and open spaces.
[Sections 153.063(B) — 153.063(C)(3)(e) omitted]
(C) BSC Sawmill Center Neighborhood District
[Sections 153.063(C)(1)- (3)(e) omitted]
(4) Building Types. Refer to § 153.062.
(a) Permitted Building Types
Refer to153.062(B) {3)(a} for permitted building types in the BSD Sawmill Center
Neighborhood District.
a7:R�!RP.T.l�l�7S"P.hwR - ON M -7f"F_
4111,41,111191 1
..v.
[Sections 153.063(C)(4)(b) -(c) omitted]
(5) Placemaking Elements
(a) Shopping Corridor
The intent for desigLiated shopj2ing corridors in the BSD neighborhood districts is
to provide continuous mixed -use street frontages will} retail uses and eating and
Page 1 of 39
Case 14- 039ADMC — Zoning Code Amendment — BSD Scioto River Neighborhood District and
Related Zoning Code Amendments
As Recommended By PZC to CC: July 10, 2014
With CC Recommended Changes: Aug. 11, 2014
drinking facilities occMVyjq& the ground floor of buildings located on streets that
have a well - defined and detailed pedestrian realm Buildings with frontage on
desi gated shonpiMcorridors should be sited to accommodate a mix of outdoor
activities, such as patios, seating areas, pockaplazas and spacious walkways.
2. At least one continuous shopping corridor is required and shall be located along at
least one principal frontage street in the approximate location shown on Figure
153.063 -A.
? . The minimum required length of the required shopping corridor shall be measured
as the aggregate length of the block faces along both sides of the principal
frontage street. The required length shall be based on the total area of the
development site as noted in Table 153.063 -B.
TABLE 153.063 -B
Shopping Corridor Len h - BSD Sawmill Center Nei hborhood District
Development Area
Re uired Shopping Corridor Length
Less than 5 acres
No minimum
5 to 20 acres
600 linear feet minimum
Over 20 acres
1200 linear feet minimum
Any block exceeding 300 feet within a shopping corridor e3ie e dif ig � 0 -eef shall
provide a mid -block pedestrianway meeting the requirements of § 153.060(C)(6).
-w ±. The required shopping corridor is permitted to turn the corner of a block provided
the minim required length of the shopping corridor is located along the
principal frontage street.
[Sections 153.063(C)(5)(b) -(c) omitted]
(d) Gateways
1. Gateways shall be provided in the approximate locations shown in Figure
153.063 -A. Gateway designs shall be approved with the Site Plan Review, but
locations shall be identified with the Development Plan Review and shall be
coordinated with the street network.
2. Gateways are points of identification that provide a sense of arrival to the area.
Gateway designs shall be pedestrian- oriented in scale and shall include a
combination of architectural elements, landscape features, and/or public open
spaces.
Gateway elements should enhance the character of the public realm consistent
with the Principles of Walkable Urbanism of � 153.057(D) and should be
coordinated with the design of the nearby streetscape, open spaces and
architecture as may be applicable.
[Section 153.063(C)(6) omitted]
(D) BSC Historic Transition Neighborhood District
Page 2 of 39
Case 14- 039ADMC — Zoning Code Amendment — BSD Scioto River Neighborhood District and
Related Zoning Code Amendments
As Recommended By PZC to CC: July 10, 2014
With CC Recommended Changes: Aug. 11, 2014
New Ted I °met
[Sections 153.063(D)(1)- (3)(e) omitted]
(4) Building Types. Refer to § 153.062.
(a) Permitted Building Types
Refer to §153.062(B)(3)(a) for permitted building types in the BSD Historic Transition
Neighborhood District.
[Sections 153.063(D)(4)(b) — 153.063(D)(5)(b) omitted]
(5) Placemaking Elements
(c) Gateways
1. Gateways shall be provided in the approximate locations shown in Figure
153.063 -B. Gateway designs shall be approved with the Site Plan Review, but
locations shall be identified with the Development Plan Review and shall be
coordinated with the street network.
2. Gateways are points of identification that provide a sense of arrival to the area.
Gateway designs shall be pedestrian - oriented in scale and shall include a
combination of architectural elements, landscape features and/or public open
spaces. Gateway elements should enhance the character of the „public realm and
should be coordinated with the design of the nearby streetscape, open spaces and
architecture as may be applicable.
[Sections 153.063(D)(6) — 153.063(E)(4)(e)2 omitted]
(E) BSC Indian Run Neighborhood District
(5) Building Types. Refer to § 153.062.
(a) Permitted Building Types
Refer to § 153.062 B 3 a for permitted building types in the BSD Indian Run
Neighborhood District.
[Sections 153.063(E)(5)(b) -(c) omitted]
(6) Placemaking Elements
(a) Shopping Corridor
The intent for designated shopl2jag corridors in the BSD neighborhood districts is
to provide continuous mixed -use street frontages with retail uses and eating and
Page 3 of 39
Case 14- 039ADMC - Zoning Code Amendment - BSD Scioto River Neighborhood District and
Related Zoning Code Amendments
As Recommended By PZC to CC: July 10, 2014
With CC Recommended Changes: Aug. 1i, 2014
New Text I 9el eted ;--e
dri&
Lng the &Lqund floor of buildings located on streets that
havf, a well - defined and detailed pedestrian realm. Buildings with frontage on
designated shopping corridors should be sited to accommodate a mix of outdoor
activities such as patios, seating-areas pocket plazas andspacious walkways.
2 At least one continuous shopping corridor is required and shall be located along at
least one principal frontage street in the approximate location shown on Figure
153.063 -C.
The minimum required length of the required shopping corridor shall be measured
as the aggregate length of the block faces along both sides of the principal
frontage street. The required length shall be based on the total area of the
development site as noted in Table 153.063 -C.
TABLE 153.063 -C
- Shopping Corridor Len th - BSC Indian Run Neighborhood District
Development Area
R equired Shopping Corridor Length
No minimum
Less than 5 acres
5 to 20 acres
600 linear feet minimum
Over 20 acres
1200 linear feet minimum
-14. Any block exceeding 300 feet within a shopping corridor exeeeciiag -4004ee-i-shall
provide a mid -block pedestrianway meeting the requirements of § 153.060(C)(6).
4 The required shopping corridor is permitted to turn the corner of a block provided
the minim required length of the shopping corridor is located along the
principal frontage street.
[Sections 153.063(E)(6)(b) -(c) omitted]
(d) Gateways
1. Gateways shall be provided in the approximate locations shown in Figure
153.063 -C. Gateway designs shall be approved by the required reviewing body,
but locations shall be identified with the Development Plan Review and shall be
coordinated with the street network.
2. Gateways are points of identification that provide a sense of arrival to the area.
Gateway designs shall be pedestrian - oriented in scale and shall include a
combination of architectural elements, landscape features, and/or public open
spaces.
Gateway elements should enhance the character of the public realm consistent
with the Principles of Walkable Urbanism of §153.057(D) and should be
coordinated with the design of the nearby streetscape, open spaces and
architecture as may be applicable.
[Section 153.063(C)(6)(e) - 153.063(C)(7) omitted]
i 1 __ BSD Scioto River Neighborhood District
Page 4 of 39
Case 14- 039ADMC — Zoning Code Amendment — BSD Scioto River Neighborhood District and
Related Zoning Code Amendments
AS Recommended BY PZC to CC: July 10, 2014
With CC Recommended Changes: Aug. 11, 2014
New Text I De' eted e
1 Development Intent
The BSD Scioto River Neighborhood District provides a significant opportunity for a well -
planned and designed neighborhood with a balanced mix of land uses. Predominant land uses
include a residential pLesence to com lement and _ M port a strong mix of uses with office
employment and sgMr service and commercial uses. A comfortable walkable - street
network is intended to convey a strong sense of connection between_ each of these diverse but
complementary land uses.
2 Refer to 153.058 f r the BSD Scioto River Nei borhood District intent and refer to th
revised Zonin M4R for the actual limits of the BSD Scioto River NeigjLborhood District. Refer
to Fi ure 153.063 -D for an illustration of a conceptual development pattem desired for this
district.
(3) Block, Access, and Street Layout
(a) Refer to A 153.060 for Lots and Blocks, refer to &153.061 for Street Types: refer to
§ 153.062(0) for access permitted for specific building Mes.
(b) Block Length
1. Refer to Table 153.060 -A. Maximum Block Dimensions, for block leneth
requirements.
2. Blocks with frontage on Riverside Drive/State Route 161 facing the roundabout
(conceptually shown-on Figure 153.063 -D) may exceed -the maximum block
length, but shall be re uired to provide mid -block edestrianwa s in accordance
with § 153.060(C)(6).
3. For the pWoses of measuring block len th the limits of rivate street sections
designed and constructed to public street standard_ s and _- defined on the
Development Plan shall be used in lieu of riaht -of -way.
(c) Access
Refer to §§153.060 and 153.061 for existing potential principal frontage streets
within the BSD Scioto River Neighborhood District and acceptable block access
configurations.
d Street T es
Refer to §153.061 for existing and planned streets and street family designations within
the BSC Scioto River Neighborhood District.
(4) Building, Tyl2es & Uses. Refer to § 153.062.
(a)_ Permitted Building Types
Refer to &153.062(B)(3)(a) for permitted building types in the BSD Scioto River
Neighborhood District.
(b) Vehicular Canopies
In addition to the requirements of § 153.062Q, canopies shall be located per Figure
153.062 -J, and are permitted on the side of a building located on a corner lot, provided
Page 5 of 39
Case 14- 039ADMC – Zoning Code Amendment – BSD Scioto River Neighborhood District and
Related Zoning Code Amendments
As Recommended By PZC to CC: July 10, 2014
With CC Recommended Changes: Aug. 11, 2014
New Text I Del eted &(
the vehicular use area is screened from any principal frontage streets and shopping
corridors in accordance with §153.059JC)(4 )(c).
JO Ground Story Use & Occupancy Requirements.
Residential, Office and all related support spaces including lobbies, common areas,
mechanical and service uses are permitted on the ground floor. Mechanical rooms,
service uses, and other related areas shall not front a shopping corridor.
5- _ Placemaking Elements
(a) Shopping Corridor
1. The intent for designated shop ping corridors in the BSD neighborhood districts is
to provide continuous mixed use street frontages with retail uses and eating and
drinldng, facilities occupying, the ground floor of buildings located on streets that
have a well - defined and detailed_ pedestrian realm. Buildings with frontage on
designated shopping - corridors should be sited to accommodate -a mix of outdoor
activities, such as patios, seating areas, reas, pocket plazas and spacious walkways.
2. At least one continuous shopping corridor is required and shall be located on and
perpendicular to a principal frontage street in the approximate location shown on
Figure 153.063 -D.
3. The minimum required length of the required shopping corridor shall be measured
as the aggregate length of the block faces along both sides of the principal
frontage street. except where portions of the shopping corridor have frontage
along Riverside Drive. The required length shall be based on the total area _of the
development site as noted in Table 153.063 -D.
TABLE 153.063 -D
ShopRing Corridor L n h- BS S oto ive [ tigiabborbood QAtri
Development Ar
Recuired Shopoina Corridor Length
Less than 5 acres
No minimum
5 to 20 acres
600 linear feet minimum
Over 20 acres
1,200 linear feet minimum
4. Any block exceeding 300 feet within a sho in corridor shall rovide amid -
block ggdestrianwgy Mggtin
L the reguirements of �153.060(C )i6)
5. The required shopping corridor is p'e„rmitted to turn the corner of a block provided
the minimum required length of the shopping corridor is located along the
principal frontage street.
(b) John Shields Parkway Frontage
If buildin s are fronted directly along the John Shields Parkway reenway floor
facades shall be treated the same as front facades on principal frontage streets.
(c) Pedestrian- Oriented Streetscee
A minimum of 12 feet of clear sidewalk width shall be - provided alon g desi ated
shopping corridors through the combination of public right -of -why and rgquired building
Page 6 of 39
Case 14- 039ADMC — Zoning Code Amendment — BSD Scioto River Neighborhood District and
Related Zoning Code Amendments
As Recommended By PZC to CC: July 10, 2014
With CC Recommended Changes: Aug. 11, 2014
New Text I D Te
zone area with public access easements. Outdoor dining and seatin areas shall not be
permitted within this clear area.
id_} Street Terminations
Refer to § 153.062(J) for Treatments at Terminal Vistas.
{e} Gateways
1. Gateways are points of identification that provide a sense of arrival to the area.
Gateway designs shall be eedestrian- oriented in scale and shall include a
combination of architectural elements landscape features and/or - public _ open
spaces Gateway elements should enhance the _character of the public realm
consistent with the Principles of Walkable Urbanism of §153.057(D) and should
be coordinated . with the design of the nearby streetscape, open spaces and
architecture as may be applicable.
2. Gatewa s shall be provided in the - gRproximate locations shown in Fi ure
153.063 -D. Gateway desi s shall be approved with the Site Plan Review but
locations shall be identified with the Development Plan Review and shall be
coordinated with the street network.
(f) Sign Plans
1. The BSD Scioto River Neiahborhood District is intended to accommodate a wide
vari= of building Wes and uses to create vibrant, mixed use shopping
entertainment districts. The sign and gra - phic standards shall contribute to the
vibrancy_ of the district and the creation of a high quality environment with
effective graphics intended for navigation, information, and , identification
primarily for pedestrians and secondarily for vehicles.
2. A master sign plan shall be submitted for designated shoi2pin& corridors and as
required by 153.065(H) and 153.066(L)(8). T e approved master sin plan ma
include alternative sign types, number, size, heights locations, colors, and
lighting, provided the purpose and intent of the sign and graphic standards for the
BSD Scioto River Neighborhood District are maintained.
(6) Open Spaces. Refer to X153.064.
(a) Open Space Character
l._ BSD Scioto River Neighborhood District is intended to accommodate a wide
variety of build U =ees and uses to create vibrant, mixed use shopping and
employment districts accented by a high quality open space network that balances
a variety of stunning natural greenways and hardscape areas designed to p rovide
intimate eathering spaces appropriate for an urban setting
2. A pedestrian bridge will connect the BSD Scioto River Neighborhood District
with the Historic District and BSD Historic Transition Neighborhood, establishing
an iconic focal point and a key pedestrian and bicycle connection linking the two
sides of the Scioto River.
Page 7 of 39
Case 14- 039ADMC — Zoning Code Amendment — BSD Scioto River Neighborhood District and
Related Zoning Code Amendments
As Recommended By PZC to CC: July 10, 2014
With CC Recommended Changes: Aug. 11, 2014
New Text I 9ele T_
3. A greenwav connecting the BSD Scioto River Neighborhood District with the
BSC Sawmill Center Neighborhood District to the east is intended to create
pedestrian and bicycle connections and natural _corridors from this mixed use
activity center to-the Sawmill Center and throughout the_Bridge Street District.
(b) Required Open Space
ens ace shall be provided in accordance with the r uirements of § 153.064 C . All
oven spaces fulfilling this requirement shall meet the intent and design requirements of
an open s ace Me permitied in the BSD Scioto River Nei hborhood District as
described in U 53.064(G). RNuired open spaces shall be publicly accessible and
accommodate community activity and agtherinq Maces.
(c) Permitted Open Space Types
All open space types are_permitted.
(d) Open .„_pace Network
1. Open spaces within the BSD Scioto River Neighborhood District shall be
organized as a series of interconnected nodes and corridors �pa gropriate to the
scale and character of surrounding streets buildings and land uses. The
of this requirement is to create highly accessible public gatherin_g_spaces and
activity areas along a continuous open space network weaving, throu
around the edges of this urban neighborhood.
2. The open space network shall be provided, at a minimum, in the approximate
locations shown in Figure 153.063 -D. Open space locations shall be approved
with the Site Plan Review, but locations and types shall be identified with the
Development Plan Review and shall meet the following criteria:
A. Open space corridors and nodes shall be coordinated with the street
network, and with gateways where applicable.
B. A greenway is required along John Shields Parkway and shall be designed
to facilitate pedestrian and bicycle travel.
C. Open space nodes shall be provided at prominent street intersections, such
as those serving as entrances to a designated shopping corridor, the open
maces associated with the pedestrian bridge landing, and other gateway
locations with other _ gRgEgVnately scaled open s ace es inte rated
along the corridor as appropriate to the character of the street.
D. Where a conference center use is present an adj acent plaza ors uare shall
be provided to serve as a required open space.
§ 153.058 BSC Districts Scope and Intent
[Sections 153.058(A) — 153.058(B)(9) omitted]
(10) BSD Scioto River Neighborhood
Page 8 of 39
Case 14- 039ADMC — Zoning Code Amendment — BSD Scioto River Neighborhood District and
Related Zoning Code Amendments
As Recommended By PZC to CC: July 10, 2014
With CC Recommended Changes: Aug. 11, 2014
New Text I De l eted e
The stand rds of the BSD Scioto River Neighborhood are intended to create an active walkable
destination throuiah integration of a vibrant mix of uses. Development in this district is oriented
toward the Scioto River and the public spaces along, the riverfront, and includes important
vehicular and bicycle links to adjacent neighborhoods and open spaces.
This district accommodates a wide variely of building es and 2ennitted uses as listed in Table
153.059 -A. Develo went of the BSD Scioto River Neighborhood area establishes a walkable
mixed- se core as the cent r of the Bride Street District. The district is subject to the s ecific
neighborhood standards defined in S 153.063(F), establishing oven space 2atterns. location
requirements for building Mes, and permitting Mdestrian- oriented, mixed -use shooing areas.
reas.
(9 °� BSC Vertical Mixed Use
The intent of this district is to allow a wide variety of mid -rise, mixed use development,
including vertical mixed use with ground floor retail, and large format retail with liner buildings,
as listed in Table 153.059 -A. It is intended to be available for areas initially zoned into the BSC
Indian Run Neighborhood and BSC Sawmill Center Neighborhood districts, once these areas are
developed and the applicable neighborhood standards are no longer needed to establish the
organization and hierarchy of places. The district may be applied to areas initially zoned to the
BSC Commercial District or elsewhere in the Bridge Street Corridor as may be deemed
appropriate when future redevelopment to higher densities is desired. Accordingly, the district is
not intended to be mapped at the time the BSC districts are initially adopted.
(? 12) BSC Public
This district applies to a variety of public spaces and facilities, including but not limited to
schools, parks, open spaces, and places that accommodate more intensive recreation, such as
outdoor entertainment venues, as listed in Table 153.059 -A. It also applies to lands in and
adjacent to rivers and creeks on which development is limited due to inclusion in a Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) designated floodplain as regulated by this Chapter, or
lands that have special cultural or environmental sensitivity.
§ 153.059 Uses
[Section 153.059(A) omitted]
(B) Use Table
Refer to Table 153.059 -A.
: Permitted and Conditional Uses in BSC Districts
P PeFmitie'd
U F A GOF
0* BSC Districts
C Conditiona I 'an
S Size Limited
T
'Y T Tin a ; T.i I"d
Page 9 of 39
Case 14- 039ADMC — Zoning Code Amendment — BSD Scioto River Neighborhood District and
Related Zoning Code Amendments
As Recommended BY PZC to CC: July 10, 2014
With CC Recommended Changes: Aug. 11, 2014
De l eted e 4
P Permitted
U Permitted on ugmer floor
only
C Conditional Use
Size Limited
Time Limited
10
A
®
W
8
R
E
(
E
v
z
°
o
_
10
c
o B
_ _
o-E
-c a $
o r
_ P z
S.
c
3 u f
°C
`�
S z
r
•
»
m
is f
c .n
o=
US z
g
d
Use Specific
Standards
See §153.059
(C)
PRINCIPAL USES
Residential
Dwelling, Single - Family
P
P
(1)(a)
Dwelling, Two - Family
P
Dwelling, Townhouse
P
P
P
P
P
P
(1)(b)
Dwelling, Live -Work
C
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
(1 xc)
Dwelling, Multiple - Family
P
P
P
U
U
P
P
P
P
P
GFOup- Reside ese
R
( 3
C ivic/Public/institutional
Cemetery
P
Community Center
C
C
P
P
P
P
P
(2)(a)
Community Garden
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
(2)(b)
Day Care, Adult or Child
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
(2xc)
District Energy Plant
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
(2)(d)
Educational Facility
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
Elementary or Middle School
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
Government Services, Safety
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
P
High School
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
Hospital
C/
S
C/
S
C/
S
C/
S
C/S
C/S
C/
S
(2)(e)
Library, Museum, Gallery
p
p
p
p
p
p
p
p
p
P
p
(2)(1)
Municipal Parking Lot
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
Religious or Public Assembly
C/
S
C/
S
C/
S
C/
S
C/
S
C/
S
C/S
C/S
C/
S
(2)(g)
Parks and Open Space
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
Transportation, Park & Ride
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
Transportation, Transit Station
C
C
P
P
C
C
C
C ommercial
Animal Care, General Services,
Veterinary Offices, and
p
p
P
�
P
P
P
�
P
P
(3)(a)
I
Page 10 of 39
Case 14- 039ADMC — Zoning Code Amendment — BSD Scioto River Neighborhood District and
Related Zoning Code Amendments
As Recommended By PZC to CC: July 10, 2014
With CC Recommended Changes: Aug. 11, 2014
Ne T I Deg.
T able 153.059 -A: Permitted and Conditional Uses in BSC Districts
Ca P Peraaitted
U Permitted UPPOF ROW
OR
efdy BSC Districts
9 Size Limited
T Time f imite.1
P Permitted
U Permitted on u er floor
Use Specific
R
c
_
m
only
w
w
0
10
f;
f
a
z f
Standards
C Conditional Use
m
:
A `�
- A
o.0
0
See §153.059
Size Limited
°
°
8
£
o
o
o 1-
C
f
o
a
(C)
Time Limited
]
v
=
_
i
z 5_
vs z
>>
oz
d
Veterinary Urgent Care and
Animal Hospitals
Bank
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
Bed and Breakfast
P
(3)(b)
Conference Center
C
"�C
PC
PC
LAC
C
Eating and Drinking
C/S
P/S
S
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
(3xc)
Entertainment/Recreation,
P/S
P/S
P/
P/
P
P
P
P
C
(3)(d)
Indoor
S
S
Fueling/Service Station
C
(3xe)
Hotel
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
Office, General
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
U
P
Office, Medical
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
Parking, Structure
P/
C
P/
C
P/
C
C
P/
C
P/
C
P/
C
P/
C
P/C
P/
C
(3)(f)
Parking, Surface Lot
C
P
C
C
P
P
C
C
(3)(g)
Personal, Repair, & Rental
C/S
P/
P/
P/
P/
P/
P
P
P/
P
(3)(h)
Services
S
S
S
S
S
S
Research & Development
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
U
P
Retail, General
C/S
P/S
P/S
P
S
S
P
P
P
P
(3)(1)
Sexually Oriented Business
C
(3)0)
Establishment
Vehicle Sales, Rental, and
C
C
(3)(k)
Repair
Wireless Communications
Refer to Chapter 99 of Dublin Code of Ordinances
ACCESSORY AND
ccessory uses are permitted only in connection with a permitted or approved
Page 11 of 39
Case 14- 039ADMC — Zoning Code Amendment — BSD Scioto River Neighborhood District and
Related Zoning Code Amendments
As Recommended By PZC to CC: July 10, 2014
With CC Recommended Changes: Aug. 11, 2014
Fv�' hex
T able 153.059 -A: Permitted and Conditional Uses In BSC Districts
�(p F P Owra. d I14e
. �., . � rvrrrr'arav
11 Permitted UPPOF AGW
OR
0* BSC Districts
T T Lim
P Permi
Permitted on u fl22r
Use Specific
only
a
°
0
1°
c f
5 f
z f
S
Co nditional Use
o
m
= i
z a ,c
t
_ A
E
�
19 � °
See §153.
S Limi
Time Limited
°
°
o
0 0
0
E
w
c o
f
m
c
m
(C)
0'
1%
V
_
_
= H Z
W Z
»
d1 Z
d
TEMPORARY USES
=dItional use on the same property, and must be clearly subordinate and incidental
o that use. No accessory use may be operated when a permitted or approved
nditional use does not exist on the property. Temporary uses are governed by tim
imits as provided by this Code.
P P P P P P P P P P
ATM, Walk -Up
Bicycle Facilities
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
Community Activity and Special
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
(4)(a)
Event
Construction Trailer /Office
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
(4)(b)
Day Care, Adult or Child
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
(2)(c)
Drive- in/Drive- through
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
(4)(c)
Dwelling, Accessory
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
(4)(d)
Dwelling Administration, Rental,
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
(4)(e)
or Sales Office
Eating & Drinking
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
Essential Utility Services
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
Exercise and Fitness
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
Farmers Market
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
Helipad /Heliports
C
C
C
C
C
C
Home Occupation
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
(4)(0
Outdoor Dining and Seating
P/C
P/C
P/C
P/C
P/C
P/C
P/C
P/C
P/C
P/C
P/C
(4)(g)
Outdoor Display or Seasonal
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
(4)(h)
Sales
Parking, Structure
P/C
P/C
P/C
P/C
C
P/C
P/C
P/C
P/C
P/C
P/C
(3)(0
Page 12 of 39
Case 14- 039ADMC — Zoning Code Amendment — BSD Scioto River Neighborhood District and
Related Zoning Code Amendments
As Recommended BY PZC to CC: July 10, 2014
With CC Recommended Changes: Aug. 11, 2014
IN!t Text I Rei
T able 153.059 -A: Permitted and Conditional Uses in BSC Districts
P PaFmIfted
S Size Lamed
BSC Districts
P Pe itted
Permitted on upper floor
_
_
w
i°
X
m
Use Specific
only
a
10
m
c
_
10
`o f
;
o f
JE
f
Standards
Conditional Use
°
'°
•
.0
E 20
3
2
See §153.059
Size Limited
Time Limited
0
c�
g
E
o
i
o
s i
o .
z
a
9
f
c t
3
(C)
v
i
i
>>
C z
d
Parking, Surface Lot
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
(4)(i)
Renewable Energy Equipment
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
(4)0)
Renewable Energy Equipment,
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
(4)(k)
Wind
Residential Model Home
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
(4)(1)
Retail or Personal Services
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
Swimming Pool
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
Transportation, Transit Stop
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
Vehicle Charging Station
P
P
P
P
P
P
P I
P
I P
P
P
Wireless Communications
Refer to Chapter 99 of Dublin Code of Ordinances
(C) Use Specific Standards
(1) Residential Uses
[Sections 153.059(C)(1)(a) -(c) omitted]
[Sections 153.059(C) (2) — 153.059(C) (3) (g) omitted]
(3) Commercial
(h) Personal, Repair, and Rental Services
1. Personal, repair, and rental service establishments shall be limited to no more than
10,000 square feet for single tenant buildings in the BSC Office, BSC Office
Residential, and BSC Residential districts. For multi- tenant buildings in the same
districts, the indoor gross floor area of the personal, repair, and rental services
Page 13 of 39
Case 14- 039ADMC — Zoning Code Amendment — BSD Scioto River Neighborhood District and
Related Zoning Code Amendments
As Recommended By PZC to CC: July 10, 2014
With CC Recommended Changes: Aug. 11, 2014
i^Jew, Text I D..l�
shall be limited to no more than 10,000 square feet or 20% of the gross floor area
of the principal structure, whichever is smaller.
2. Personal, repair, and rental service uses shall be limited to no more than 25,000
square feet of gross floor area in all other BSC districts except the BSC Indian
Run Neighborhood, 9"4-BSC Sawmill Center Neighborhood and BSD Scioto
River Neighborhood
(i) Retail, General
General retail uses shall be limited to no more than 20,000 square feet of gross floor area
in all BSC districts except the BSC Indian Run Neighborhood, BSC Sawmill Center
Neighborhood, BSD Scioto River Neighborhood. BSC Commercial, and BSC Vertical
Mixed Use districts.
[Sections 153.059(C)(3)6F) — 153.059(C)(4)(b) omitted]
(4) Accessory and Temporary Uses
(c) Drive- in/Drive- through
1. Drive- in/drive- throughs are °^ permitted only as accessories to #ice
banks in the BSC Af€ee— Vertical Mixed Use- and BSC Historic Transition
Neighborhood districts following approval of a Conditional Useanplication by
the Planning and Zoning Commission
2. Drive - in/drive- through vehicular stacking areas and associated service locations
shall not be on the side of a building facing a principal frontage street. Where
drive - in/drive- through access lanes are facing a non - principal frontage street, a
street wall at least three feet high shall be placed between the access lanes and the
street. Refer to § 153.065(E)(2) for street wall requirements.
3. No menu boards, speakers, or service windows shall be located between any
facade of the principal structure and a front or comer side property line.
4. Drive- in/drive- through vehicle stacking spaces shall be at least 20 feet long.
Stacking spaces may not impede on -site or off -site vehicular, bicycle, or
pedestrian circulation. Where five or more stacking spaces are provided, the
individual stacking lanes shall be clearly delineated. The number of stacking
spaces and a traffic and pedestrian circulation plan shall be submitted by the
applicant with the Conditional Use application and approved by the Planning and
Zoning Commission.
5. Uses with drive - in/drive- through facilities shall be buffered from adjacent
properties as required in § 153.065(D)(5).
6. Audible electronic devices such as loudspeakers, service order devices, and
similar instruments shall not be located within 25 feet of the lot line of any
residential district or use and shall be subject to §132.03(A)(6).
7. Refer to § 153.062(L) for vehicular canopy location and design requirements.
8. Drive - in/drive - throughs shall not have frontage on any shopping corridor.
Page 14 of 39
Case 14- 039ADMC — Zoning Code Amendment — BSD Scioto River Neighborhood District and
Related Zoning Code Amendments
As Recommended By PZC to CC: July 10, 2014
With CC Recommended Changes: Aug. 11, 2014
New Text I Dei
[Sections 153.059(C)(4)(d) — 153.059(C)(4)(1) omitted]
§ 153.060 Lots and Blocks
[Sections 153.060(A) — 153.060(C)(1)(1) omitted]
(C) General Block and Lot Layout
(2) Maximum Block Size
(a) Required Subdivision
Developments meeting any of the following criteria shall subdivide to meet the maximum
block sizes as required by Table 153.060 -A, Maximum Block Dimensions:
All developments within the BSC Sawmill Center Neighborhood District, BSC
Indian Run Neighborhood District, or BSC Historic Transition Neighborhood
District;
2. Any developments requiring approval of a Development Plan as required in
§ 153.066(E).
(b) Measurement
1. Block length shall be the distance along one side of a block measured between
two parallel or approximately parallel property lines on the opposite sides of the
block.
2. Block perimeter shall be the aggregate block length along all sides of a block
measured along the property lines.
2. 3. Alleys and service streets shall not be used to measure block length.
Table 153.060 -A. Maximum Block Dimensions.
Table 153.060 -A. Maximum Block Dimensions
BSC Districts
length (ft.)
Perimeter (ft.)
Residential
500
1,750
Office Residential
500
1,750
Office
500
1,750
Commercial
500
1,750
Historic Residential
200
800
Historic Core
200
800
Page 15 of 39
Case 14- 039ADMC - Zoning Code Amendment - BSD Scioto River Neighborhood District and
Related Zoning Code Amendments
As Recommended By PZC to CC: July 10, 2014
With CC Recommended Changes: Aug. 11, 2014
um I Deleted T-e
Table 153.060 -A. Maximum Block Dimensions
BSC Districts
Length (ft.)
Perimeter (ft.)
Historic Transition Neighborhood
300
1,000
Indian Run Neighborhood
500
1,750
Sawmill Center Neighborhood
500
1,750
Scioto River Neighborhood
500
1,750
Vertical Mixed Use
500
1,750
Public
300
1,000
[Sections 153.060(C)(2)(c) - 153.060(C)(9)(1)3 omitted]
§ 153.062 BUILDING TYPES
[Sections 153.062(A) - 153.062(B)(2)(g) omitted]
(B) General Building Type Requirements
(3) General Requirements
Every building, erected, altered or moved, shall be located on a lot as defined herein or as
otherwise permitted by this chapter. All building types shall meet the following requirements.
(a) Zoning Districts
Each building type shall be constructed only within its designated B BSD zoning
district. Table 153.062 -A, Permitted Building Types in Each B BSD Zoning District,
outlines which building types are permitted in which BSC- BSD zoning districts. Refer to
153.058, tkl- District: Scope and Intent, for a description of each district.
Table 153.062 -A. Permitted Building Types in Each B6G Zoning District
BS6 - BSD Districts
'E X
p
C
37
C
i
N
U
C f
1
'I:
U '1=
- a
N -
U ._
N
U
_U
.
O
t7
_U
.L oft
O C
��
f0 L
v�
• E L
3�
O
0
°W
U
.L N
O
0W
O
L
=
x�Z
S Z
c`� Z
`�iZ
»
a
=cc
Single
Family
c
Detached
•�
Single
m
Family
—
Page 16 of 39
Case 14- 039ADMC — Zoning Code Amendment — BSD Scioto River Neighborhood District and
Related Zoning Code Amendments
As Recommended By PZC to CC: July 10, 2014
With CC Recommended Changes: Aug. 11, 2014
New Text I °e'er `;
Table 153.062 -A. Permitted Building Types in Each BSG Zoning District
M—Districts
-
v
Qp
C)
c-
°$
- E
>
f
v�
U
E
E
O
O
��
EL
3�
O-
o.�
`c�iz
U
pU
z
c`�z
»
a
=oc
Attached
Apartment
Building
Loft Building
Corridor
Building
—
Mixed Use
Building
—
Commercial
Center
Large
Format
Commercial
--
Building
Historic
Mixed Use
Building
Historic
Cottage
Commercial
Civic
Building
--
Parking
*
Structure
Podium
Apartment
Building
[Sections 153.062(B)(3)(b) — 153.062(0)(1) omitted]
(0) Building Types
Page 17 of 39
Case 14- 039ADMC — Zoning Code Amendment — BSD Scioto River Neighborhood District and
Related Zoning Code Amendments
AS Recommended BY PZC to CC: July 10, 2014
With CC Recommended C Aug. ,, 11, 2014
New Text 19e�e
(2) Single Family Attached
(a) Building Siting
1. Street Frontage
Multiple Principal Buildings
Permitted'
Front Property Line Coverage
Minimum 75% 2
Occupation of Comer
Required
Front RBZ
5-20 ft.
Comer Side RBZ
5-15 ft.
RBZ Treatment
Landscape; Porches or
stoops are permitted in the
RBZ
Right -of -Way Encroachment
None
2. Buildable Area
Minimum
Setbacks
Side Yard
5 ft., minimum 10 ft.
between buildings
Rear Yard
5 ft.
Lot Width
Minimum
16 ft. per unit
Maximum
None
Maximum Length
None
Maximum Impervious Coverage
Additional Semi - Pervious
Coverage
70%
20%
3. Parking Location
Parking Location
Rear yard or within
building (refer to (c) Uses)
Entry for Parking within Building
Rear or comer side
facade4
(b) Height
Minimum Height
1.5 stories
Maximum Height
4 stories
Story Height
Minimum
Page 18 of 39
Case 14- 039ADMC — Zoning Code Amendment — BSD Scioto River Neighborhood District and
Related Zoning Code Amendments
As Recommended BY PZC to CC: July 10, 2014
With CC Recommended Changes: Aug. 11, 2014
New Text
Page 19 of 39
Maximum
12 ft.
Accessory Structure Height
2 stories maximum
Minimum Finished Floor Elevation
2.5 ft. above the adjacent
sidewalk elevation
(c) Uses & Occupancy Requirements
Ground Story
No additional
requirements
Upper Story
No additional
requirements
Permitted in the rear of the
Parking within Building
first floor and fully in any
basements)
Occupied Space
Minimum 10 ft. depth from
the front facade
(d) Facade Requirements
Refer to §153.062(D) through §153.062(N) for design
requirements general to all buildings.
1. Street Facade Transparency
Transparency
Minimum 20%
Blank Wall Limitations
Required
2. Non - Street Facade Transparency
Transparency
Minimum 15%
Blank Wall Limitations
Required
3. Building Entrance
Front, comer or side;
Principal Entrance Location
porches or stoops
required
Street Facades: Minimum Number
1 per unit
of Entrances
Parking Lot Facades: Minimum
If parking lot or detached
Number of Entrances
garage, 1 per unit
Mid - Building Pedestrianway
Not required
4. Facade Divisions
Vertical Increments
Every 2 units or every 40
ft. max.
Page 19 of 39
Case 14- 039ADMC — Zoning Code Amendment — BSD Scioto River Neighborhood District and
Related Zoning Code Amendments
As Recommended BY PZC to CC: July 10, 2014
With CC Recommended Changes: Aug. 11, 2014
New Te , I Deleted Tex
Horizontal Fagade Divisions
None
Required Change in Roof Plane or
None
Type
Minimum 75 %
5. Facade Materials
Permitted Primary Materials
Stone, Brick, Wood and
Fiber Cement Siding
6. Roof Types
Comer Side RBZ
Parapet, pitched roof, flat
Permitted Types
roof. Other types may be
permitted with approval
(refer to §153.062(D)).
Permitted on facades only
at terminal vistas, comers
Tower
at 2 principal frontage
streets, and /or adjacent to
an open space type.
1 One of every five principal buildings may front an open space type or a courtyard with a
minimum width of 30 feet.
2 A landscaped courtyard, when enclosed by building on three sides, may contribute up to 35% of
the front property line coverage requirement.
3 If single- family attached residential units are located across the street from existing single - family
detached dwellings, no more than eight attached units may be permitted in a building.
4 Garage door height shall be no greater than 9 feet. No single door shall be wider than 18 feet.
(3) Apartment Building
(a) Building Siting
1. Street Frontage
Multiple Principal Buildings
Permitted
Front Property Line Coverage
Minimum 75 %
Occupation of Comer
Required
Front RBZ
5-20 ft.
Comer Side RBZ
5-20 ft.
RBZ Treatment
Landscape or less than
Page 20 of 39
Case 14- 039ADMC — Zoning Code Amendment — BSD Scioto River Neighborhood District and
Related Zoning Code Amendments
As Recommended By PZC to CC: July 10, 2014
With CC Recommended Changes: Aug. 11, 2014
New Text I Deleted Te
Page 21 of 39
50% Patio; porches,
stoops, and balconies are
permitted in the RBZ
Right -of -Way Encroachment
None
2. Buildable Area
Minimum Side Yard Setback
5 ft.
5 ft.
Minimum Rear Yard Setback
50 ft.
Minimum
Lot Width
Maximum
None
Maximum Impervious Coverage
70%
Additional Semi - Pervious
20%
Coverage
3. Parking Location & Loading
Rear yard 1 ; within
building (refer to (c) Uses
Parking Location
& Occupancy
Requirements)
Loading Facility Location
Rear
Entry for Parking within Building
Rear & side facade
(b) Height
Minimum Height
2 stories
Maximum Height
4.5 stories
Minimum
10 ft.
Story Height
Maximum
14 ft.
Minimum Finished Floor Elevation
2.5 ft. above the adjacent
sidewalk elevation
(c) Uses & Occupancy Requirements
Ground Story
G
No additional
requirements
Upper Story
No additional
requirements
Permitted in the rear of
Parking within Building
the first 3 floors and fully
in any basement(s)
Page 21 of 39
Case 14- 039ADMC — Zoning Code Amendment —13SD Scioto River Neighborhood District and
Related Zoning Code Amendments
AS Recommended BY PZC to CC: July 10, 2014
With CC Recommended Changes: Aug. 11, 2014
New Text 1 9e
Occupied Space
Minimum 20 ft. depth for
the ground stork facing
street(s)
(d) Fagade Requirements
Refer to §153.062(D) through §153.062(N) for design
requirements general to all buildings.
1. Street Facade Transparency
Transparency
Minimum 20%
Blank Wall Limitations
Required
2. Non -Street Fagade Transparency
Transparency
Minimum 15%
Blank Wall Limitations
Required
3. Building Entrance
Principal Entrance Location
Primary street fagade of
building
Street Fagades: Minimum Number
of Entrances
1 per 75 ft. of fagade
Parking Lot Fagades: Minimum
Number of Entrances
Not required
Mid - Building Pedestrianway
1 required for buildings
longer than 250 ft.
4. Fagade Divisions
Vertical Increments
No greater than 40 ft.
Horizontal Facade Divisions
On buildings 3 stories or
taller, required within 3 ft.
of the top of the ground
story
Required Change in Roof Plane or
Type
No greater than every 80
ft•
5. Fagade Materials
Permitted Primary Materials
Stone, Brick, Glass, Wood
and Fiber Cement Siding
6. Roof Types
Permitted Types
Parapet, pitched roof, flat
roof. Other types may be
permitted with approval
Page 22 of 39
Case 14- 039ADMC — Zoning Code Amendment — BSD Scioto River Neighborhood District and
Related Zoning Code Amendments
As Recommended BY PZC to CC: July 10, 2014
With CC Recommended Changes: Aug. 11, 2014
New Text I Giei T
(4)
A landscaped courtyard, when enclosed by building on 3 sides, may contribute up to 35% of the
front property line coverage requirement.
Basement level structured parking is permitted to extend between buildings, screened from the
street and covering a maximum of 10% of the length of the RBZ. Structured parking visible
between principal buildings must be set back a minimum of 15 feet from the street facing
facades.
Where the principal building entrance is a lobby or other common space, the minimum finished
floor elevation is not required.
Loft Building
(a) Building Siting
(refer to §153.062(D)).
Multiple Principal Buildings
Permitted on fagades only
Front Property Line Coverage
at terminal vistas, comers
Tower
at 2 principal frontage
Front RBZ
streets, and/or adjacent to
Comer Side RBZ
an open space type.
A landscaped courtyard, when enclosed by building on 3 sides, may contribute up to 35% of the
front property line coverage requirement.
Basement level structured parking is permitted to extend between buildings, screened from the
street and covering a maximum of 10% of the length of the RBZ. Structured parking visible
between principal buildings must be set back a minimum of 15 feet from the street facing
facades.
Where the principal building entrance is a lobby or other common space, the minimum finished
floor elevation is not required.
Loft Building
(a) Building Siting
1. Street Frontage
Multiple Principal Buildings
Permitted
Front Property Line Coverage
Minimum 75%
Occupation of Comer
Required
Front RBZ
0-15 ft.
Comer Side RBZ
0-15 ft.
Landscape, Patio, or
Streetscape. Along State
Route 161, Streetscape
required; where residential
RBZ Treatment
uses are located on the
ground floor, porches or
stoops are permitted in the
RBZ
Right -of -Way Encroachment
Awnings, canopies, eaves,
patios & projecting signs
2. Buildable Area
Minimum
Side Yard
5 ft.
Setbacks
Rear Yard
5 ft.
Minimum Lot Width
50 ft.
Page 23 of 39
Case 14- 039ADMC — Zoning Code Amendment — BSD Scioto River Neighborhood District and
Related Zoning Code Amendments
As Recommended By PZC to CC: July 10, 2014
With CC Recommended Changes: Aug. 11, 2014
New T I Deleted Te
Maximum Lot Width
None
Maximum Impervious Coverage
80%
Additional Semi - Pervious
10%
Coverage
3. Parking Location & Loading
Rear yard; within building
Parking Location
(refer to (c) Uses &
Occupancy Requirements)
Loading Facility Location
Rear & side fagade
Rear & side fagade, comer
Entry for Parking within Building
side fagade on non-
principal frontage streets.
(b) Height
Minimum
2 stories
Height
Maximum
4.5 stories
Ground Story
Minimum
12 ft.
Maximum
16 ft.
Height
Upper Story
Minimum
loft.
Maximum
16 ft.'
Heights
Where residential uses
are located on the
Minimum Finished Floor Elevation
ground floor, 2.5 ft.
above the adjacent
sidewalk elevation
(c) Uses & Occupancy Requirements
Ground Story
No additional
requirements
Upper Story
No additional
requirements
Permitted in the rear of
Parking within Building
first 3 floors and fully in
any basement(s)
Occupied Space
Minimum 30 ft. depth
from the front fagade
(d) Facade Requirements
Refer to §153.062(D) through §153.062(N) for design
requirements general to all buildings.
1. Street Fagade Transparency
Page 24 of 39
Case 14- 039ADMC — Zoning Code Amendment — BSD Scioto River Neighborhood District and
Related Zoning Code Amendments
As Recommended By PZC to CC: July 10, 2014
With CC Recommended Changes: Aug. 11, 2014
New Test
Page 25 of 39
Where non - residential
uses are incorporated on
Ground Story Street
the ground floor,
Facing Transparency
minimum 60% required;
otherwise, minimum
20%
Transparency
Minimum 20%
Blank Wall Limitations
Required
2. Non - Street Facade Transparency
Transparency
Minimum 20%
Blank Wall Limitations
Required
3. Building Entrance
Primary street facade of
building; where
residential uses are
Principal Entrance Location
located on the ground
floor, porches or stoops
are required at each
entrance
Where ground story
Street Facades: Minimum Number of
dwelling units or tenant
spaces are incorporated,
Entrances
1 per full 30 ft.;
otherwise, 1 per 75 ft.
Parking Lot Facades: Minimum
1 per 100 ft. of facade
Number of Entrances
Mid - Building Pedestrianway
Not required
4. Facade Divisions
Vertical Increments
No greater than 40 ft.
On buildings 3 stories or
taller, required within 3
ft. of the top of the
ground story and any
Horizontal Facade Divisions
visible basement. When
14-16 -foot upper stories
are used, horizontal
divisions are required
between each floor.
No greater than every 80
Required Change in Roof Plane or
ft. for pitched roof type;
Type
none for other roof
types.
5. Facade Materials
Page 25 of 39
Case 14- O39ADMC — Zoning Code Amendment — BSD Scioto River Neighborhood District and
Related Zoning Code Amendments
As Recommended By PZC to CC: July 10, 2014
With CC Recommended Changes: Aug. 11, 2014
New Text I Del eted Te
Permitted Primary Materials
Stone, Brick, Glass
6. Roof Types
Permitted
Parapet, pitched roof,
Minimum 75% 1
flat roof. Other types
Permitted Types
may be permitted with
0 -15 ft.
approval (refer to
0 -15 ft.
§153.062(D)).
Landscape, Patio, or
Streetscape. Along State
Route 161, Streetscape
required.
Permitted on fagades
Awnings, canopies,
eaves, patios & projecting
signs
only at terminal vistas,
Tower
comers at 2 principal
5 ft.
frontage streets, and/or
5 ft.
adjacent to an open
Minimum
space type
Notes
1 Sixteen foot height in an upper floor counts as 1.5 stories.
Corridor Building
(a) Building Siting
1. Street Frontage
Multiple Principal Buildings
Permitted
Front Property Line Coverage
Minimum 75% 1
Occupation of Comer
Required
Front RBZ
0 -15 ft.
Comer Side RBZ
0 -15 ft.
RBZ Treatment
Landscape, Patio, or
Streetscape. Along State
Route 161, Streetscape
required.
Right -of -Way Encroachment
Awnings, canopies,
eaves, patios & projecting
signs
2. Buildable Area
Minimum
Setbacks
Side Yard
5 ft.
Rear Yard
5 ft.
Lot Width
Minimum
50 ft.
Maximum
None
Maximum Impervious Coverage
Additional Semi - Pervious Coverage
80%
10%
3. Parking Location & Loading
Page 26 of 39
Case 14- 039ADMC — Zoning Code Amendment — BSD Scioto River Neighborhood District and
Related Zoning Code Amendments
As Recommended BY PZC to CC: July 10, 2014
With CC Recommended Changes: Aug. 11, 2014
New I I
Page 27 of 39
Rear yard Z ; within
building (refer to (c) Uses
Parking Location
& Occupancy
Requirements)
Loading Facility Location
Rear & side facade
Rear & side facade;
Entry for Parking within Building
comer side facade on
non - principal frontage
streets
(b) Height
Minimum Height
3 stories
�E stories. Per Ouild Fig
Maximum Height
609 a ..E " - 1_276 _...ht
,. OF Ier ....:u..d . .:tA
a tr+[ri
the Erne faade
Ground Story
Minimum
12 ft.
Maximum
16 ft.
Height
M inimum
IQ9 ft.
Story Height
Maximum
14 ft.
(c) Uses & Occupancy Requirements
Residential and general
Ground Story
office uses are prohibited
in shopping corridors
No additional
Upper Story
requirements
Permitted in the rear of
Parking within Building
the first 3 floors and fully
in any basement(s)
Minimum 30 ft. depth
Occupied Space
facing street(s)
(d) Facade Requirements
Refer to §153.062(D) through §153.062(N) for design
requirements general to all buildings.
1. Street Facade Transparency
Ground Story Street
Minimum 60%
Facing Transparency
Page 27 of 39
Case 14- O39ADMC — Zoning Code Amendment — BSD Scioto River Neighborhood District and
Related Zoning Code Amendments
As Recommended By PZC to CC: July 10, 2014
With CC Recommended Changes: Aug. 11, 2014
New Text I Del eted �
Transparency
Minimum 30%
Blank Wall Limitations
Required
2. Non - Street Facade Transparency
Transparency
Minimum 15%
Blank Wall Limitations
Required
3. Building Entrance
Principal Entrance Location
Primary street facade of
building
Street Facades: Minimum Number
1 per 75 ft. of facade
of Entrances
Parking Lot Facades: Minimum
1 per 100 ft. of facade
Number of Entrances
In shopping corridors,
Mid - Building Pedestrianway
required for buildings
greater than 250 ft. in
length
4. Facade Divisions
Vertical Increments
No greater than 45 ft.
On buildings 3 stories or
taller, required within 3 ft.
Horizontal Facade Divisions
of the top of the ground
story. Required at any
building step -back.
Required Change in Roof Plane or
None
Type
S. Facade Materials
Permitted Primary Materials
tone, Brick, Glass
6. Roof Types
Parapet, pitched roof, flat
Permitted Types
roof. Other types may be
permitted with approval
(refer to §153.062(D)).
Permitted on facades only
at terminal vistas, corners
Tower
at 2 principal frontage
streets, and /or adjacent
to an open space type
A courtyard covering up to 35% of the front or corner RBZ is permitted. The courtyard, when
enclosed by building on three sides, may contribute to the front property line coverage.
Page 28 of 39
Case 14- 039ADMC — Zoning Code Amendment — BSD Scioto River Neighborhood District and
Related Zoning Code Amendments
As Recommended By PZC to CC: July 10, 2014
With CC Recommended Changes: Aug. 11, 2014
N.ew Text 1 99,
Parking decks are permitted to extend between buildings, screened from street and covering a
maximum of 10% of the length of the RBZ. Parking decks visible between principal buildings
must be set back a minimum of 15 feet from the street facing facades.
[Sections 153.062(0)(6) omitted]
(0)Building Types
(
Commercial Center
(a) Building Siting
1. Street Frontage
Multiple Principal Buildings
Permitted'
Front Property Line Coverage
Minimum 45%
Occupation of Comer
Required
Front RBZ
5-25 ft.
Comer Side RBZ
5-25 ft.
RBZ Treatment
Landscape, Patio, or
Streetscape
Right -of -Way Encroachment
None
2. Buildable Area
Minimum
Side Yard
5 ft.
Setbacks
Rear Yard
5 ft.
Minimum
50 ft.
Lot Width
Maximum
None
Maximum Impervious Coverage
75%
Additional Semi - Pervious
15%
Coverage
3. Parking Location & Loading
Rear & side yard; within
building (refer to (c) Uses
& Occupancy
Requirements). Parking
may be forward of
Parking Location
principal buildings
provided the minimum
front property line
coverage and RBZ
treatment requirements
are met by other principal
buildings.
Page 29 of 39
Case 14- 039ADMC — Zoning Code Amendment — BSD Scioto River Neighborhood District and
Related Zoning Code Amendments
As Recommended By PZC to CC: July 10, 2014
With CC Recommended Changes: Aug. 11, 2014
N Text I 9-le e
Loading Facility Location
Rear
Side, rear, or corner side
Entry for Parking within Building
facades on non - principal
frontage streets
(b) Height
Minimum
1 story
Height
Maximum
3 stories
Ground Story
Minimum
12 ft.
Height
Maximum
18 ft.
Upper Story
inimum
_�, ft.
Maximum
14 ft.
Height
(c) Uses & Occupancy Requirements
Ground Story
Residential uses
prohibited
Upper Story
No additional
requirements
Permitted in the rear of
Parting within Building
the first floor and fully in
any basement(s)
Minimum 30 ft. depth
from the front and/or
Occupied Space
comer side elevations if
the side is a principal
frontage street
(d) Fagade Requirements
Refer to §153.062(D) through §153.062(N) for design
requirements general to all buildings.
1. Street Facade Transparency
Ground Story Street
Storefront with minimum
Facing Transparency
65%
Upper Story Transparency
Minimum 20%
Blank Wall Limitations
Required
2. Non -Street Facade Transparency
Panting Lot Ground Story
Storefront with minimum
Transparency
50%
Transparency
Minimum 15%
Blank Wall Limitations
Required on parking lot
facing facades; Not
Page 30 of 39
Case 14- O39ADMC — Zoning Code Amendment — BSD Sdoto River Neighborhood District and
Related Zoning Code Amendments
As Recommended By PZC to CC: July 10, 2014
With CC Recommended Changes: Aug. 11, 2014
New Text I h.J 4e Te7C
Minimum front property line coverage shall be met, but not all principal buildings must be
located within a Required Building Zone.
(8) Large Format Commercial
(a) Building Siting
required on other facades
3. Building Entrance
Principal Entrance Location
Not applicable
Street Fagades: Minimum Number
1 per 75 ft. of principal
of Entrances
frontage street facade
Parking Lot Fagades: Minimum
1 per 100 ft. of facade
Number of Entrances
Mid - Building Pedestrianway
Not required
4. Facade Divisions
Vertical Increments
No greater than 45 ft.
On 3 -story buildings,
Horizontal Facade Divisions
required within 3 ft. of the
top of the ground story.
Required Change in Roof Plane or
None
Type
5. Facade Materials
Permitted Primary Materials
Stone, Brick, Glass
6. Roof Types
Parapet, pitched roof, flat
Permitted Types
roof. Other types may be
permitted with approval
(refer to §153.062(D)).
Permitted on facades only
at terminal vistas, comers
Tower
at two principal frontage
streets, and/or adjacent to
an open space type
Minimum front property line coverage shall be met, but not all principal buildings must be
located within a Required Building Zone.
(8) Large Format Commercial
(a) Building Siting
1. Street Frontage
Multiple Principal Buildings
Permitted
Front Property Line Coverage
Minimum 95%
Occupation of Comer
Required
Page 31 of 39
Case 14- 039ADMC — Zoning Code Amendment — BSD Scioto River Neighborhood District and
Related Zoning Code Amendments
As Recommended By PZC to CC: July 10, 2014
With CC Recommended Changes: Aug. 11, 2014
New Text I Del
Page 32 of 39
0-10 ft. with up to 25%
Front RBZ
of the front fagade
permitted between 10-
20 ft.
Comer Side RBZ
0-10 ft.
RBZ Treatment
Patio or Streetscape
Projecting signs, eaves,
Right -of -Way Encroachment
awnings, patios, &
canopies
2. Buildable Area
Minimum
Side Yard
0 ft.
Setbacks
Rear Yard
5 ft.
Minimum
250 ft.
Lot Width
Maximum
None
Maximum Impervious Coverage
85%
Additional Semi - Pervious Coverage
10%
3. Parking Location & Loading
Rear yard; within
Parking Location
building (refer to (c)
Uses & Occupancy
Requirements)
Loading Facility Location
Rear
Rear, side, or comer
Entry for Parking within Building
side fagades on non-
principal frontage
streets
(b) Height
Minimum
2 stories'
Height
Maximum
5 stories
Minimum
15 ft.
24 ft.'; Additional
Ground Story:
height may be
Height
permitted with Site Plan
Maximum
approval for theaters
and other special
indoor entertainment/
recreation uses
Upper Stories
Minimum
Maximum
14 ft.
Height
(c) Uses & Occupancy Requirements
Page 32 of 39
Case 14- 039ADMC — Zoning Code Amendment — BSD Scioto River Neighborhood District and
Related Zoning Code Amendments
As Recommended By PZC to CC: July 10, 2014
With CC Recommended Changes: Aug. 11, 2014
N p.w I De leted Te
Page 33 of 39
Residential uses
prohibited; Residential
Ground Story
and general office uses
prohibited in shopping
corridors
Upper Story
- No additional
requirements
Permitted in the rear of
Parking within Building
all floors and fully in
any basement
Minimum 30 ft. depth
Occupied Space
from the front and/or
comer side facades
(d) Fagade Requirements
Refer to §153.062(D) through §153.062(N) for design
requirements general to all buildings.
1. Street Fagade Transparency
Storefront with
Ground Story Street
minimum 65 %; comer
Facing Transparency
side facade on non-
principal frontage
street: minimum 30%
Upper Story Transparency
Minimum 20%
Blank Wall Limitations
Required
2. Non - Street Fagade Transparency
Transparency
Minimum 15%
Blank Wall Limitations
Required
3. Building Entrance
Principal Entrance Location
Principal frontage street
facade of building
Street Facades: Minimum Number of
Minimum of 1 per 75 ft.
Entrances
of facade
Parking Lot Facades: Minimum
Minimum of 1 per 150
Number of Entrances
ft.
Mid - Building Pedestrianway
Not required
4. Facade Divisions
Vertical Increments
No greater than 45 ft.
Horizontal Fagade Divisions
On buildings 3 stories
Page 33 of 39
Case 14- 039ADMC — Zoning Code Amendment — BSD Scioto River Neighborhood District and
Related Zoning Code Amendments
As Recommended By PZC to CC: July 10, 2014
With CC Recommended Changes: Aug. 11, 2014
New Ted I Del eted
Any ground story height of 20 feet or taller counts as 2 stories.
[Sections 153.062(0)(9) — 153.062(0)(12) omitted]
(0)Building Types
(12) Podium Apartment Building
(a) Building Siting
or taller or where the
Multiple Principal Buildings
maximum ground floor
Front Property Line Coverage
height is used, required
Occupation of Comer
within 3 ft. of the top of
Front RBZ
the ground story
Required Change in Roof Plane or
No greater than every
Type
80 ft.
5. Facade Materials
Permitted Primary Materials
Brick, Stone, Glass
6. Roof Types
Parapet, pitched roof,
flat roof. Other types
Permitted Types
may be permitted with
approval (refer to
§153.062(D)).
Permitted on facades
only at terminal vistas,
comers at 2 principal
Tower
frontage streets,
adjacent to an open
space type, and/or with
a theater use.
Any ground story height of 20 feet or taller counts as 2 stories.
[Sections 153.062(0)(9) — 153.062(0)(12) omitted]
(0)Building Types
(12) Podium Apartment Building
(a) Building Siting
1. Street Frontage
Multiple Principal Buildings
Permitted
Front Property Line Coverage
Minimum 75 %'
Occupation of Comer
Required
Front RBZ
5 -20 ft.
Comer Side RBZ
5-20 ft.
RBZ Treatment
Landscape or less than
50% Patio; porches,
stoops, and balconies are
permitted in the RBf
Right -of -Way Encroachment
None
Page 34 of 39
Case 14- 039ADMC — Zoning Code Amendment — BSD Scioto River Neighborhood District and
Related Zoning Code Amendments
As Recommended By PZC to CC: July 10, 2014
With CC Recommended Changes: Aug. 11, 2014
New Text 1 9eleted:Fe
2. Buildable Area
Minimum Side Yard Setback
5 ft.
Minimum Rear Yard Setback
5 ft.
Minimum
50 ft.
Lot Width
Maximum
None
Maximum Impervious Coverage
70%
Additional Semi - Pervious
20%
Coverage
3. Parking Location & Loading
Ground story or
basement of residential
Parking Location
building (subject to
applicable screening
requirements) 3
Loading Facility Location
Rear
Entry for Parking within Building
Rear & side facade
(b) Height
Minimum Height
3 stories
Maximum Height
4.5 stories
Minimum
10 °r ft.
e
Story Height
Maximum
14 ft.
Minimum Finished Floor Elevation
2.5 ft. above the adjac
sidewalk elevation
(c) Uses & Occupancy Requirements
Ground Story
No additional
requirements
Upper Story
No additional
requirements
Required; Podium
Garage Parking shall be
screened to at least 90%
opacity through the use of
Parking within Building
building materials that are
compatible with and
integrated in to the design
of the facade above the
parking area.
Occupied Space
None required in ground
story
(d) Facade Requirements
Page 35 of 39
Case 14- 039ADMC — Zoning Code Amendment — BSD Scioto River Neighborhood District and
Related Zoning Code Amendments
As Recommended By PZC to CC: July 10, 2014
With CC Recommended Changes: Aug. 11, 2014
Ngw Text I R Te
Refer to §153.062(D) through §153.062(N) for
design requirements general to all buildings.
1. Street Facade Transparenw
Minimum 90% opacity on
portion of ground floor or
exposed portions of
basement occupied by
Transparency
Podium Garage Parking;
minimum 20%
transparency otherwise
and for all other portions
of the building facing a
principle frontage street.
Blank Wall Limitations
Required
2. Non -Street Facade TransparencY
Minimum 90% opacity on
portion of ground floor or
visible portions of
basement occupied by
Transparency
Podium Garage Parking;
minimum 15%
transparency otherwise
and for all other portions
of the building.
Blank Wall Limitations
Required
3. Building Entrance
Principal Entrance Location
Primary street facade of
building
Street Fagades: Minimum Number
1 per 75 ft. of facade
of Entrances
Parking Lot Fagades: Minimum
Not required
Number of Entrances
1 required for buildings
Mid- Building Pedestrianway
longer than 250 ft., except
as provided in §153.063,
Neighborhood Standards.
4. Facade Divisions
Vertical Increments
No greater than 40 ft.
On buildings 3 stories or
Horizontal Facade Divisions
taller, required within 3 ft.
of the top of the ground
story
Required Change in Roof Plane or
No greater than every 80
Type
ft.
5. Facade Materials
Page 36 of 39
Case 14- 039ADMC — Zoning Code Amendment — BSD Scioto River Neighborhood District and
Related Zoning Code Amendments
As Recommended By PZC to CC: July 10, 2014
With CC Recommended Change Aug. 11, 2014
Ngw j
Permitted Primary Materials
Stone, Bride, Glass, Wood
and Fiber Cement Siding
6. Roof Types
Parapet, pitched roof, flat
Permitted Types
roof. Other types may be
permitted with approval
(refer to §153.062(D)).
Permitted on facades only
at terminal vistas, comers
Tower
at 2 principal frontage
streets, and/or adjacent to
an open space type.
1 A landscaped courtyard, when enclosed by building on 3 sides, may contribute up to 35% of the
front property line coverage requirement.
2 A landscape buffer a minim of five feet in width as measured from the base of the building is
required. In addition to the foundation planting requirements of § 153.065(D)(7), the required
reviewing body may require enhanced foundation plantings, including but not limited to vertical
landscape materials to add visual interest to the ground floor or visible basement level parking
facade.
3 Basement level structured parking is permitted to extend between buildings, screened from the
street and covering a maximum of 10% of the length of the RBZ. Structured parking visible
between principal buildings must be set back a minim of 15 feet from the street facing
facades.
4 Where the principal building entrance is a lobby or other common space, the minimum finished
floor elevation is not required.
5 In lieu of transparency requirements, the ground story or visible basement facade shall
incorporate architectural elements equal to the degree of detailing used on the stories above the
parking level. Blank wall limitations may be met using these architectural enhancements, as
determined by the required reviewing body.
6 The required reviewing body may reduce the number of entrances along street facades as
functionally appropriate to the apartment building with parking fully or partially below grade,
provided the building has an adequate number and frequency of entrances to be convenient for
residents and visitors and the entrances are conducive to establishing a safe and attractive
pedestrian realm.
7 Masonry is required as the primary building material on ground stories and the visible portions
of basements where parking is located.
§ 153.065 SITE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Page 37 of 39
Case 14- 039ADMC — Zoning Code Amendment — BSD Scloto River Neighborhood District and
Related Zoning Code Amendments
As Recommended By PZC to CC: July 10, 2014
With CC Recommended Changes: Aug. 11, 2014
N Del
[Sections 153.065(A) — 153.065(B)(4) omitted]
(B) Parking and Loading
(5) Parking Structure Design
Parking structures shall be designed in accordance with the minim requirements of this
section. Refer to the building type requirements for Parking Structures in §153.062(0) for
additional information.
(c) Interior Circulation
3. A minimum ceiling clearance height of 12 feet is required where the parking
structure has street frontage, excluding the driveway opening, and the parking
structure shall be designed and constructed to allow potential occupancy of the
first 20 feet of building depth by a commercial or a civic /public /institutional use
permitted by § 153.059(B).
4. Design of all other parking structures and upper levels shall include a minimum
ceiling clearance height of eight and one half feet.
5. Below- rgrade parking structure levels shall provide minimum clear heights as
re uired by the Ohio Building Code and the Americans with Disabiliti s Act.
[Sections 153.065(B) (5) (d) — 153.065(F) (3) (c) omitted]
§ 153.065 SITE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
(F) Exterior Lighting
(4) Fixture Power and Efficiency
All light fixtures shall meet the standards in Table 153.065 -H for power and efficiency.
TABLE 153.065 -H: FIXTURE POWER AND EFFICIENCY
BSDC Indian Run, a"
BSDC Sawmill Center,
All other BSC Districts
NR191112202od Districts
Maximum permitted initial lamp
13.9 lumens /sq. ft.
9.7 lumens/sq. ft.
lumens per sq. ft.
Maximum lamp allowance
60,000 lumens
44,000 lumens
Minimum lumens per watt or
energy consumed (as documented
by manufacturers specifications or
80 lumens /watt
80 lumens/watt
results of an independent testing
laboratory)
Page 38 of 39
Case 14- 039ADMC — Zoning Code Amendment — BSD Scioto River Neighborhood District and
Related Zoning Code Amendments
As Recommended By PZC to CC: July 10, 2014
With CC Recommended Changes: Aug. 11, 2014
New Tea l
[Sections 153.065(F)(5) — 153.065(ID(1)(b) omitted]
§ 153.065 SITE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
(I) SIGNS
(1) Intent and General Purpose
(c) BSC Indian Run Neighborhood, Sawmill Center Neighborhood, Scioto} Riv er
Neighborhood and Vertical Mixed Use District Signs
The purpose of signs in these districts is to accommodate a wide variety of building types
and uses to create vibrant, mixed use shopping and entertainment districts. Sign and
graphic standards shall contribute to the vibrancy of the districts and the creation of high
quality environments with effective graphics intended for navigation, information, and
identification primarily for pedestrians and secondarily for vehicles.
[Sections 153 .065(I1)(1)(d) — 153.065(H)(3)(a) omitted]
(3) BSC Districts with Special Sign Provisions
(b) BSC Indian Run Neighborhood, Sawmill Center Neighborhood, Scioto River
Neighborhood and Vertical Mixed Use Districts
1. Signs in these districts shall be subject to the requirements of §153.065(H)(6)
through (7) as applicable, unless a master sign plan is approved by the Planning
and Zoning Commission (refer to § 153.065(H)(2)(b)6)).
2. A master sign plan is required for a planned shopping corridor. The master sign
plan shall be submitted prior to or concurrent with a Site Plan Review in a
shopping corridor.
[Sections 153.065(M(3)(c) — 153.065(H)(7)(d) omitted]
Page 39 of 39
ici ofoLiblin
Land Use and Long
Range Planning
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
5800 Shier Rings Road
Dublin, Ohio 43016 -1236
RECORD OF ACTION
phone 614.410.4600
fax 614.410.4747
www.dublinohiousa.gov
3ULY 10, 2014
The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action at this meeting:
1. Zoning Code Amendment — Bridge Street District — Scioto River Neighborhood District
14- 039ADMC Zoning Code Amendment
Proposal: An amendment to the Zoning Code to establish a new Bridge Street
District zoning district and related Code amendments for the Scioto
Riverside Neighborhood District.
Request: Review and recommendation to City Council regarding proposed Zoning
Code amendments under the provisions of Zoning Code Sections
153.232 and 153.234.
Applicant: Marsha I. Grigsby, City Manager, City of Dublin.
Planning Contact: Rachel S. Ray, AICP, Planner II and Claudia D. Husak, AICP, Planner II.
Contact Information: (614) 410 -4600, rray@dublin.oh.us and chusak@dublin.oh.us.
MOTION: Richard Taylor moved, John Hardt seconded, to recommend approval to City Council for
the Zoning Code Amendment to establish a new Bridge Street District zoning district and related Code
amendments for the BSD Scioto Riverside Neighborhood District; changing the maximum corridor building
height to six stories and eliminating the exceptions in 153.062(0)(5); eliminating "Group Residences"
from Table 153.059 -A and the associated Use Specific Standards; ensuring the consistency of the
District Intent statements of 153.058 and 153.063 and addressing the references to the mix of land uses
in 153.063(F)(1); removing the references to the Principles of Walkable Urbanism of 153.065(I); and
eliminating the changes to 153.062(E) and (I).
VOTE: 6-0.
RESULT: The Zoning Code Amendment was recommended for approval to City Council.
RECORDED VOTES:
Chris Amorose Groomes Yes
Richard Taylor Yes
Amy Kramb Yes
John Hardt Yes
Todd Zimmerman Yes
Victoria Newell Yes
Amy Salay Absent
STAFF CERTIFICA70N
Rachel S. Ray, AICP
Planner iI i -'
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
July 10, 2014 — Meeting Minutes
Page 3 of 13
Ms. Amorose Groomes thanked Mr. Yoder for the presentation.
1. Zoning Code Amendment - Bridge Street District Scioto River Neighborhood District
14- 039ADMC Zoning Code Amendment
and
2. Zoning Map Amendment /Area Rezoning- Bridge Street District
14 -04OZ Scioto River Neighborhood District
Zoning Map Amendment
Chris Amorose Groomes said the following two cases were previously tabled and will be heard together
but will require separate actions. She said the following applications are requests for review and
recommendation to City Council for modifications to the Zoning Code to establish a new Bridge Street
District zoning district and related Code amendments for the BSD Scioto River Neighborhood District and
for an area rezoning of 23 parcels for the BSD Scioto River Neighborhood and BSC Public Districts in the
Bridge Street District
Rachel Ray said this case was tabled at the June 5 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. She said
Planning has modified the name of the district from "BSD Riverside Neighborhood District" to the "BSD
Scioto River Neighborhood District" in response to the Commission's comments from the last review.
Ms. Ray said the majority of the Zoning Code amendments involve the Neighborhood Standards, which
includes the new standards for the Scioto River Neighborhood, in addition to related Code amendments
to some of the other main sections of the Bridge Street District zoning regulations.
Ms. Ray said the text follows the same general format and outline as the other neighborhood districts.
She explained the history for the creation of the neighborhood districts, and noted that the components
had been drafted in coordination with the developers and land owners who were working on plans for the
Indian Run and Sawmill Center neighborhood districts at the time. She said the general locations for the
shopping corridors, street network framework, open space network, and other elements that the
developers were contemplating had been incorporated into the draft regulations and the associated
graphics.
Ms. Ray referred to the updated Riverside Neighborhood District graphic and noted the updates, including
an arrow at the east end of the shopping corridor for a mixed use activity node, a designation on the
graphic indicating limited vehicular access adjacent to the roundabout at the intersection of Riverside
Drive and State Route 161, and modifications to the boundaries of this district consistent with the
modifications to the zoning map.
Ms. Ray said the modification to the proposed zoning text included the District Scope and Intent to
emphasize the importance of a balance of land uses, in addition to a modification to the use table to
require conditional use review for transit stations and conference centers. She said the Law Director's
office requested that the reference of the "Group Residences" be eliminated from the use table entirely.
She said the most significant modification is related to the Building Types. She stated that at the June 5 th
meeting, the Commission requested the elimination of wood and fiber cement siding as a permitted
primary material and also to reduce the maximum permitted height for corridor buildings from 7.5 down
to 5.5 stories in all Bridge Street District zoning districts. She said they have received three letters from
potential developers in the Bridge Street District with some concerns about those two provisions, along
with the fact that drive - through uses are prohibited other than for banks in certain BSD zoning districts.
She said that the letters had been provided to the Commission prior to the meeting.
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
July 10, 2014 — Meeting Minutes
Page 4 of 13
Ms. Ray referred to the building types requirements related to permitted primary facade materials. She
explained that the Code requires permitted primary materials to be used on a minimum of 80 percent of
each facade, and that can be through a combination of any of the permitted primary materials which
include stone, cultured stone, brick, glass, wood, and fiber cement siding, as well as other high quality
durable, natural materials. She said wood and fiber cement siding are only permitted to be used as
primary building materials mainly for the more residential -scale building types or those used in the
Historic District. She said the reason for listing the range of permitted primary building materials has to
do with the diversity requirements in the Code and the intent to maintain an interesting mix of building
types and building characters. She said fiber cement siding could provide an interesting mix of colors,
textures, with a variety of applications such as flat or vertical panels or lap siding.
Ms. Ray said the reduction in the permitted building height from a maximum of 7.5 stories down to 5.5
stories is inconsistent with the objectives for the Bridge Street District. She said the mixes of land use,
the building height, and massing are the most significant elements that contribute to the diversity of
building types and development character throughout the Bridge Street District. She said when the
regulations were initially drafted it was acknowledged that height limitations are appropriate around the
Historic District as the development transitions in scale farther south to the residential neighborhoods
south of the Bridge Street District, but in some areas around I -270 or closer to Sawmill Road there are
opportunities to be taken advantage of for some higher building heights. She said the building heights
are important to establish the density of employment as well as residential development to support the
commercial uses that are anticipated throughout the Bridge Street District.
Ms. Ray summarized the recommendation of approval to City Council for this request for an amendment
to the Zoning Code to establish a new Bridge Street District and related Code Amendments for the BSD
Scioto River Neighborhood District, maintaining the existing maximum corridor building height provisions
of the Zoning Code as well as eliminating the group residences use from Table 153.059A and related use
specific standards.
Ms. Ray said the Zoning Map amendment showed the areas included in the area rezoning that recognizes
the future right -of -way for the relocated Riverside Drive and the roundabout. She said they are
recommending that the four parcels totaling 11 acres on the west side of the relocated Riverside Drive be
rezoned to the Bridge Street Corridor Public District, which is consistent with the zoning for other public
spaces within the Bridge Street District. She said the new Scioto River Neighborhood District land consists
of the land on the east side of the relocated Riverside Drive including the existing Bridge Pointe shopping
center, the former driving range, and the area north of the John Shields Parkway. She said a modification
since the June 5"' meeting included three other parcels that include two existing car dealerships and a
daycare facility, based on the Commission's desire to see consistent zoning for land on both sides of Dale
Drive.
Ms. Ray stated that approval to City Council is recommended for the proposed Zoning Map Amendment
for the 23 parcels.
David Brown, Stockamp Brown, Attorneys at Law, representing Acura of Columbus, said two years ago
they went through the process with the current businesses along SR161 including the Acura Dealership.
He said at that time, the land was proposed to be zoned BSC Office, and with the support of the
dealership, the zoning was changed to BSC Commercial. He said the dealership would like to remain BSC
Commercial because the investment they have made in the property to remain a commercial parcel.
Ms. Amorose Groomes asked if, with this rezoning, the dealership could continue to operate the business
that they have until whatever time they decided to no longer operate that business.
Jennifer Readier said there were extensive discussions on this at the time of the original rezoning, and as
a result, a significant effort was made to draft provisions that would allow the existing businesses
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
July 10, 2014 — Meeting Minutes
Page 5 of 13
protections to expand, improve, and continue their businesses. She said the main difference between the
BSC Commercial designation and the proposed zoning district is that Vehide Sa les, Rental and Repair is
currently a conditional use, which would be eliminated with the proposed rezoning.
Ms. Amorose Groomes confirmed that regardless of the proposed rezoning, that the car dealerships
would be able to continue to do business.
Ms. Readler said they are protected under the Existing Uses provisions. She explained that if they
abandoned the use, they would still have the opportunity to come forward with a conditional use request
with the existing zoning. She said under the new district, if they abandoned the use under the definition
of "abandonment," they would not be able to come back with any vehicle - related use on the parcel.
Ms. Ray said the abandonment provisions are extensive and would require the business to abandon the
use for over a year, including turning off utilities, taking down signs, etc. She said they are considered a
conforming use. She stated that the title "BSC Commercial District' is a misnomer because the "BSD
Scioto River Neighborhood District" is also a commercial zoning designation.
Ms. Amorose Groomes asked if the Acura Dealership understood the rights they enjoy related to the
changes.
Mr. Brown said they understand that continued use of that property will never change unless they
discontinue the use, but they are concerned that the highest and best use for that property may always
be a retail automotive dealership, and preferred that if they do decide to discontinue the use, they could
still revert back to that use if another dealership would like to be situated there. He said with the new
zoning, once the use was abandoned, they would no longer have the opportunity to entertain the
business of a vehicular retail sales, leasing, rental, or service facility.
Ms. Ray said the overall range of vehicular uses is minimized and is not the desired direction moving
forward for this area.
Mr. Langworthy said the only disadvantage from the dealership's point of view, is if they wanted to
expand beyond the allowance of the Existing Structure provisions; however, they could come in for a
conditional use to verify the use and allow the use to expand beyond the limits of the allowed 50 percent.
Amy Kramb said the new zoning opens up the possibilities to even more building types than the existing
zoning, which would make the land more valuable.
Ms. Amorose Groomes asked if anyone else wanted to speak with respect to this application. [Hearing
none.]
Ms. Kramb referred to the Zoning Code amendment related to permitted primary materials, and said she
is okay with wood siding being a permitted material for building types. She said that although she is
concerned with the overall height of buildings, she is not necessarily concerned with the overall number
of stories of buildings.
Mr. Taylor referred to the Code modifications related to the corridor building height, and said if they are
going to not do what was discussed on June Y h , then they should default back to the Code as written
and leave it alone, which will solve the problems because it allows the additional 2 stories under certain
circumstances.
Mr. Hardt asked Mr. Yoder if that would address his concern for his project
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
July 10, 2014 — Meeting Minutes
Page 6 of 13
Mr. Yoder said allowing six -story buildings would accommodate what is needed throughout the Scioto
River Neighborhood District
Mr. Hardt said it was his intention not to allow to / /er buildings for the entire Bridge Street District area
without first seeing the buildings, but it was also not his intention to lower the allowable height of
buildings from what Code currently allows. He said he agreed with Mr. Yoder's earlier statement that a
half story does not make any sense for buildings in this District. He said he would support changing the
permitted story height to six stories for corridor buildings.
Ms. Newell said there is no perceived difference from a five story to a seven story building when you're a
pedestrian standing next to one. She said she would be supportive of six story buildings. She said she
has seen buildings that are eight stories and is comfortable with them in business settings.
Ms. Kramb noted that since building height is based on number of stories, she asked how that would
translate to maximum height in feet.
Ms. Ray said the maximum ground floor height for corridor buildings is 16 feet, with a maximum upper
story height of 14 feet.
Ms. Newell said those are appropriate floor heights and suggested that the Code stay the way it was
written.
Mr. Taylor said he wants developers to have the ability to have taller buildings, but he wants the
Commission to be able to decide when they are too tall with the ability to negotiate where appropriate.
Ms. Amorose Groomes said that Waiver requests are encouraged and welcomed when appropriate. She
said the Commission does not pretend to have written the perfect Code, and she encouraged developers
to come forward with their greatest ideas to achieve their goals for the Bridge Street District, regardless
of whether Waivers are required for the architecture.
Mr. Hardt said he would advocate for six stories across the board for the corridor buildings within
neighborhood districts. Mr. Hardt asked if the hotel proposed is going to be six stories.
Mr. Yoder said it would be four stories over a ground floor, with a rooftop amenity which may be
considered as a story, so that would make it six stories. He said they have a hard time working around a
half story when implementing contemporary building designs.
Mr. Hardt said he agrees that the half stories do not make any sense and suggested leaving the text the
way it is written but changing the numerals to "6" and "7," respectively.
Mr. Taylor agreed that the text should remain the same and if the developers want a taller building they
should come back for a Waiver.
Ms. Amorose Groomes said she was concerned about keeping the Neighborhood Districts as similar as
possible, and the changes made in this district would have a direct impact on the other Neighborhood
Districts.
Mr. Hardt said that is why he is supportive of changing the height to six stories.
Mr. Taylor said he had a few other comments on the proposed Zoning Code amendment. He referred to
the General Intent Statement for the districts and said they should be the same throughout the Code. He
said he wants to keep the "Principles of Walkable Urbanism" in the beginning of the Code so they stay
subjective and overriding principals for the district and are not intermingled with actual regulations, so
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
July 10, 2014 — Meeting Minutes
Page 7of13
where referenced, the new "Section 153.065(I)" should be eliminated, removing the references to the
Walkability Standards.
Mr. Taylor said referred to page 4 under (F), which states "predominant land uses are intended to be"
and should say "predominant land uses include residential, office employment and supporting services
commercial uses."
Mr. Taylor said to eliminate the word "natural" from the "durable, natural materials" under the permitted
materials section because he could not think of a material that is not natural that is inappropriate.
Mr. Taylor said there was a reference in one of the letters received to not allow some of the fiber cement
materials which would eliminate some of the panel options. He clarified the Commission's objection to
fiber cement was related only to cementitious lap siding and he did not think there was any issue with
large panels on the walls in some places where appropriate.
Mr. Hardt agreed that they were presuming lap siding. He said fiber cement materials were part of the
primary permitted materials and thought the appropriate use of the materials is tied directly to the scale
and height of the building.
Ms. Amorose Groomes said one of the letters talked about using different materials on higher levels of
buildings because people wouldn't experience them in person at that height. She said that is the reason
why they should not be used. She stated that all materials should be durable and of high quality.
Ms. Ray agreed that developers would be required to use a variety of materials, and they could not just
have a building constructed entirely of fiber cement.
Ms. Amorose Groomes stated she thought they are going to have to go back to the Waiver option for
materials because she was concerned that the proposed amendment is a reaction to a specific developer
and she is uncomfortable with writing Code language that would apply across the Bridge Street District
for buildings a particular developer wants to build and the Commission hasnt yet seen.
Mr. Hardt said he agrees that they are playing "what if" games, and that for every building that is
proposed in this area the Commission will have an opportunity to review, under provisions in the Code
that require a high level of architectural quality and variety. He said he thought the Code text should be
left alone as it was originally written.
Ms. Kramb agreed.
Ms. Ray summarized that the Commission decided to eliminate all proposed changes to Sections (f) and
(I) under 153.062, Building Types.
Ms. Kramb suggested the same thing for the height and not add anything new, specific or different about
the height of corridor buildings within the Scioto River District, allowing it to default to what it has been
in all the other existing districts.
Ms. Amorose Groomes said the only issue is that they were weak in allowing as much fiber cement siding
as they did, because they are giving away a tremendous amount of density in these areas and in return
expect to have the highest quality architecture.
Mr. Hardt agreed and said he is still comfortable with the Code language as approved two years ago.
Mr. Yoder said the developers have been moving forward with the existing regulations and they will be
submitting detailed building elevations for review and feedback. He said there are key things in the Code
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
July 10, 2014 — Meeting Minutes
Page 8 of 13
that give flexibility to keep the process moving and get the project in the ground when expected. He said
he would like to lobby for the Commission's support on both of the proposals.
Mr. Taylor said his concern was that this neighborhood district was being created for a project that was
substantially designed and the Commission had not seen any details in eight months. He said his
hesitation had to do with not knowing what was in this District that is in direct response to the designs of
elements in this development. He said usually, we write Code and the developer responds to the Code,
and it seems to be the other way around here. He said he believes they are all on the right track and is
more comfortable knowing the proposed project will be their best efforts. He said it would help
tremendously if they would communicate to the Commission through staff more often, knowing that the
next steps will come through for review very quickly. He said he would have been more comfortable with
this project had they been involved as it progressed instead of going from November to July with no
communication.
Ms. Amorose Groomes said no one on the Commission has any interest in slowing down the project, and
reiterated that any applicant should not hesitate to bring forward Waiver requests. She said it is difficult
writing Code text for a project that exists, yet has not been officially reviewed.
Mr. Hardt said the neighborhood district unified the regulations across the project with a chunk of the site
not allowing corridor buildings that are being proposed. He said he does not mind creating a new zoning
district to make sure the right elements of the project are accommodated.
Ms. Kramb said the draft Code language the Commission reviewed in June was almost identical to the
existing neighborhood districts, and she felt the few changes were too developer - specific. She said those
elements were struck from the text, having asked that they remain similar to the other districts. She said
the current version has two major differences, which are changes that the Commission requested. She
said she feels that it should be restored to the original text and as it currently applies to other districts.
Mr. Hardt said he agrees but recommends changing the 5.5 stories to 6.
Ms. Kramb said she agrees with 6 stories, but thought it should be included in the overall Code update,
rather than with this Code amendment for the new zoning district. She said she was ok with the revised
Zoning Map with the revisions that show consistent zoning on both sides of Dale Drive.
Ms. Ray summarized the proposed changes associated with the Zoning Code amendment: maintaining
the existing maximum corridor building height and returning to status quo; ensuring the consistency of
the District Intent Statements between 153.058 and 153.063 "; correcting the references to the Principals
of Walkable Urbanism; and eliminating the changes to 153.062 regarding materials and balconies.
Mr. Hardt requested that a copy of the updated Code language be sent to the Commission, showing all of
the final revisions.
Ms. Amorose Groomes asked if there were any other comments. [There were none.]
Motion and Vote
Richard Taylor moved to recommend approval to City Council for the Zoning Code Amendment to
establish a new Bridge Street District zoning district and related Code amendments for the BSD Scioto
Riverside Neighborhood District; changing the maximum corridor building height to six stories and
eliminating the exceptions in 153.062(0)(5); eliminating "Group Residences" from Table 153.059 -A and
the associated Use Specific Standards; ensuring the consistency of the District Intent statements of
153.058 and 153.063 and addressing the references to the mix of land uses in 153.063(F)(1); removing
the references to the Principles of Walkable Urbanism of 153.065(I); and eliminating the changes to
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
July 10, 2014 — Meeting Minutes
Page 9 of 13
153.062(E) and (i). Mr. Hardt seconded. The vote was as follows: Ms. Newell, yes; Mr. Zimmerman, yes;
Ms. Kramb, yes; Ms. Amorose Groomes, yes; Mr. Hardt, yes; and Mr. Taylor, yes. (Approved 6 — 0.)
Motion and Vote
John Hardt moved to recommend approval to City Council for this request for a Zoning Map Amendment
(area rezoning) of 23 parcels (approx. 66.97 acres) to the BSD Scioto River Neighborhood and BSC Public
Districts in the Bridge Street District. Ms. Kramb seconded. The vote was as follows: Mr. Taylor, yes; Mr.
Zimmerman, yes; Ms. Newell, yes; Ms. Amorose Groomes, yes; Ms. Kramb, yes, and Mr. Hardt, yes.
(Approved 6 — 0.)
3. Zoning Code Amendment - Bridge Street District
13- 095ADMC Zoning Code Amendment
(WORKSESSION)
Chris Amorose Groomes said the following is an informal review and discussion prior to a future
recommendation to City Council regarding proposed Zoning Code Amendments to the Bridge Street
District Zoning Code focusing on Code Sections 153.057 through 153.062.
Ms. Ray said she did not prepare a presentation, but would be happy to provide the Commission with an
overview if they would like. She said she had provided a memo explaining the primary discussion items,
which she hoped was helpful for the Commission's review.
Ms. Amorose Groomes stated that she did not believe a presentation was necessary. She began the
review on page 1 at Section 153.057 -058. She confirmed no changes on page 1 were necessary.
Johyn Hardt said all the strikeouts on page 2 extending onto page 3 for the Principles of Walkable
Urbanism should be un- struck and remain in 153.057, General Purpose, based on the Commission's
earlier discussion.
Amy Kramb referred to page 3, Code Section 153.058(6)(1), the intent statement for the BSD Residential
District. She asked the Commissioners about the intent statement, and whether they agreed that it
should refer to more mixes of uses. She noted that the Commission had discussed the topic of purely
residential projects at great length recently, which as currently written in this Code Section, would allow
such projects.
Richard Taylor said the mixing of uses would not requiredby the Principles of Walkability; however, there
are a lot of other elements that could allow a greater mix of uses to be required when appropriate.
Victoria Newell stated that the Commission could not enforce a requirement for a mix of uses.
Ms. Amorose Groomes suggested changing the language to "residential with small scale commercial uses
when appropriate."
Mr. Taylor said he thought the statement "uses are generally limited to residential and small -scale
residential support uses" covered the desired intent.
Ms. Kramb said the commercial uses that are permitted in the BSC Residential District are conditional
uses.
Mr. Hardt said he recalled the Commission's discussion that the uses should be conditional, because they
needed to be sited carefully in this district in particular.
cASTo
Mayor Mike Keenan
City of Dublin
5200 Emerald Parkway
Dublin, Ohio 43017
Mayor Keenan:
Last week, Casto received word second -hand that there is the possibility of a Bridge Street
Zoning Code amendment that would limit the use of hardi- siding to a maximum of 20% of
exterior building facades. At that time, our concerns were provided by e-mail to Terry Foegler
and Marsha Grigsby. It now appears that this proposed amendment is to be considered in the
context of a larger amendment of the code at this week's Planning and Zoning Commission
meeting. This letter is to urge the City not to pursue this amendment.
Casto has been through many iterations of its architecture over the last nine months, all of which
have included cementitious siding as an important element of the architecture. The cementitious
siding is a way to add variety and color, not as perceived, a cost saving decision. A 20%
maximum would cause the need to revisit the architectural design once again. This would be a
major set -back at a time when very positive momentum has been gained with respect to the
City's views on Casto's proposed architecture and its project overall. In light of this history, the
need for another major overhaul of the design will be insurmountable for Casto. Architecture
cannot be judged merely by the percentage of siding or brick; we believe it should be evaluated
on a case -by -case basis.
The economic ramifications of this new restriction, if approved, would be immense. The
restriction could mean the end of Casto's project which, like nearly every other project in the
Bridge Street area, already needs a strong financial commitment from the City in order to
construct Bridge Street's required infrastructure. It is likely that this proposed code revision will
deal a significant blow to many other projects within the Bridge Street District. The
combination of the required infrastructure that the code requires, land prices in the area, and
requirements for exterior materials that drive costs even higher will .give many developers great
pause.
We at Casto strongly urge Dublin City Council to not allow the proposed code change to become
law. It would be appreciated if you could forward this correspondence to your fellow City
Council members and to members of the Planning and Zoning Commission. Thank you for your
consideration.
Sinter y,
William J. RAt
Partner
250 1 ,1 4 >11ie, OrIve 5slile 1',Q1I p f ollimi;l,r, ( - )III I Columbus I Sarasota I Raleigh ( Charlotte I Cincinnati I Chicago
P
• CRAWFORD HOPING
AA 0 development
7/1/2014
TO: City of Dublin
RE: Response to proposed modifications to Bridge Street District Zoning Code &
Amendments
Background
Crawford Hoying Development Partners fully supports the City of Dublin's effort to create a new
Scioto River Neighborhood District. Our planning and architecture consultant Elkus Manfredi
created the initial draft of the new District text by closely mirroring the two existing neighborhood
district requirements, and made only minor modifications that were geared towards:
- characteristics unique to this site such as the roundabout and park;
- bringing the code into line with building code and constructability requirements (e.g.
parking garage clear heights);
- facilitating characteristics of the dense project design that had been vetted through
months of planning, market testing, input from the public, staff, city consultants, private
consultants, focus groups, and financial institutions.
Some of the recently proposed modifications to the text would inadvertently cause
detrimental impact to all projects, including Bridge Park and others already in the pipeline.
Although the concept of implementing the new neighborhood district and "cleaning up" the overall
code is excellent, some of the recently proposed changes to the Scioto River Neighborhood District
and the Bridge Street Code will undermine the feasibility of projects to move forward, particularly:
1. Limiting the h,_ a height of buildings to 5 1 h stories. The Bridge Park project is not economically
feasible with this proposed height limit in place. At least 6 stories and up to 7 stories in
some locations accomplishes the following:
a. Creates a convenient and synergistic critical mass of uses in close proximity to the
park and other amenities that is an absolute necessity to achieving rent rates to are
high enough to justify (and secure financing approval) for high development costs.
b. Generates adequate revenue to fund the parking required for office and a high
concentration of ground floor restaurant users.
c. Allows us to create financeable vertically- integrated mixed use structures.
d. Addresses urban planning principles supported by our consultants, the city
consultants throughout the course of the past two years including "holding the
edge" of the larger roadways and park and creating a walkable core.
Implementing a 5 viz story limit and relying on waivers to be granted at a later point for this
issue is not an acceptable risk for us to accept due to the major impacts on project
feasibility; especially when the body responsible for granting the waivers is the same one
that has suggested a reduction in allowable building height. "Half stories" are also nearly
impossible to execute in a tall contemporary buildings with flat roofs and we respectfully
suggest that references to them not be utilized in the revised text.
SSS Metro Place North I Suite 600 1 Dublin, Ohio 43017 1 phone (614) 33S -2020 I fax (614) 850 -9191 I www.crawfordhoyine,com
2. Imposing a new limit on the use of fiber cement (aka hardie panel or hardie plank), to no
more than 20% of any structure's exterior in the entire Bridge Street District. including the
Scioto River Neighborhood District. Although we certainly support the use of brick and
stone where economics allow, particularly at lower elevations where buildings are closely
seen and touched, a broad brush ban on this quality material represents a dramatic change
to a key cost driver. Implementing this change will have massive impacts on the financial
feasibility of projects across the Bridge Street District. Existing "model" projects in the
district such as Bri-Hi would fall far short of meeting this new rule, but these projects and
many others in the region demonstrate that this material can be effectively utilized to create
beautiful, durable buildings that add aesthetic variety and offer a counterpoint to the
masonry materials when used appropriately. Requiring full depth stone and brick as the
primary material on all buildings in Bridge Street - especially on upper floors where it is
even more expensive to carry - will price living units out of reach for the many of the young
professionals and empty nesters that the Bridge Street projects are geared to attract and
retain. For the same reasons as above, implementing this new code change now and then
relying on future waivers to be granted in order obtain the current standard is also an
unacceptable risk due to its impact on project feasibility.
3. Forbidding all coffee. D -harmacv._or food uses on the ero
re uirements. Drive thrus are key to attracting certain desirable tenants such as Panera
and Starbucks to this site. We believe there are very few appropriate locations in the
Bridge Park project where a drive through would be acceptable, but they do exist - and the
flexibility to approve these few locations on a conditional use basis is a must We
successfully identified one drive through location through a several week process in
October - November 2013. The location, on Jane Avenue at the rear of building B3 which
faces the service area of a parking structure met engineering's concerns about circulation,
stacking, and access, and was not visible from any Primary Street. This drive thru has been
shown on all plans since last November, including those shared at the public forum and with
planning commission last November. Creative integration in the urban environment will
not result in a suburbanization or sprawl effect within this dense mixed use project; in fact
it will have the opposite effect of allowing the project to attract services that will make this
an even more desirable, walkable place to live, work, and play. We would support making
drive thrus a conditional use so the Planning Commission and Staff would have an
opportunity to approve a location based upon meeting the criteria above.
Conclusion
We sincerely appreciate the massive efforts of the Council, Staff and appointed Commissions, and
hope that this letter is received in the spirit in which it is intended. The City and Crawford Hoying
Development Partners share a common goal of creating a thriving district that will stand the test of
time and greatly enhance the quality of life in our community for many years to come. Both parties
have invested significant time and resources, and reconsideration of the recently proposed changes
would to equip us and others to see district projects through to a successful start and completion.
Best Regards,
Crawford Hoying Development Partners
555 Metro Place North I Suite 600 1 Dublin, Ohio 43017 1 phone (614) 335 -2020 1 fax (614) 850 -9191
Ll P,
� CRAWFORD HOYING
�1 d
7/1/2014
TO: City of Dublin
RE: Response to proposed modifications to Bridge Street District Zoning Code &
Amendments
Background
Crawford Hoying Development Partners fully supports the City of Dublin's effort to create a new
Scioto River Neighborhood District. Our planning and architecture consultant Elkus Manfredi
created the initial draft of the new District text by closely mirroring the two existing neighborhood
district requirements, and made only minor modifications that were geared towards:
- characteristics unique to this site such as the roundabout and park;
- bringing the code into line with building code and constructability requirements (e.g.
parking garage clear heights);
- facilitating characteristics of the dense project design that had been vetted through
months of planning, market testing, input from the public, staff, city consultants, private
consultants, focus groups, and financial institutions.
Some of the recently proposed modifications to the text would inadvertently cause
detrimental impact to all projects, including Bridge Park and others already in the pipeline.
Although the concept of implementing the new neighborhood district and "cleaning up" the overall
code is excellent, some of the recently proposed changes to the Scioto River Neighborhood District
and the Bridge Street Code will undermine the feasibility of projects to move forward, particularly:
1. Limiting the height of buildings to 5 1 h stories. The Bridge Park project is not economically
feasible with this proposed height limit in place. At least 6 stories and up to 7 stories in
some locations accomplishes the following:
a. Creates a convenient and synergistic critical mass of uses in close proximity to the
park and other amenities that is an absolute necessity to achieving rent rates to are
high enough to justify (and secure financing approval) for high development costs.
b. Generates adequate revenue to fund the parking required for office and a high
concentration of ground floor restaurant users.
c. Allows us to create financeable vertically- integrated mixed use structures.
d. Addresses urban planning principles supported by our consultants, the city
consultants throughout the course of the past two years including "holding the
edge" of the larger roadways and park and creating a walkable core.
Implementing a 5 Y2 story limit and relying on waivers to be granted at a later point for this
issue is not an acceptable risk for us to accept due to the major impacts on project
feasibility; especially when the body responsible for granting the waivers is the same one
that has suggested a reduction in allowable building height. "Half stories" are also nearly
impossible to execute in a tall contemporary buildings with flat roofs and we respectfully
suggest that references to them not be utilized in the revised text.
555 Metro Place North ( Suite 600 1 Dublin, Ohio 43017 1 phone (614) 335 -2020 1 fax (614) 850 -9191 1 Aww.crawfordhoong.cqM
2. Imposing a new limit on the use of fiber cement (aka hardie panel or hardie nlankl to no
More than 20% of any structure's exterior in the entire Bridge Street District. including the
Scioto River Neighborhood District. Although we certainly support the use of brick and
stone where economics allow, particularly at lower elevations where buildings are closely
seen and touched, a broad brush ban on this quality material represents a dramatic change
to a key cost driver. Implementing this change will have massive impacts on the financial
feasibility of .projects across the Bridge Street District. Existing "model' projects in the
district such as Bri -Hi would fall far short of meeting this new rule, but these projects and
many others in the region demonstrate that this material can be effectively utilized to create
beautiful, durable buildings that add aesthetic variety and offer a counterpoint to the
masonry materials when used appropriately. Requiring full depth stone and brick as the
primary material on all buildings in Bridge Street - especially on upper floors where it is
even more expensive to carry - will price living units out of reach for the many of the young
professionals and empty nesters that the Bridge Street projects are geared to attract and
retain. For the same reasons as above, implementing this new code change now and then
relying on future waivers to be granted in order obtain the current standard is also an
unacceptable risk due to its impact on project feasibility.
3. Forbiddi
requirements. Drive thrus are key to attracting certain desirable tenants such as Panera
and Starbucks to this site. We believe there are very few appropriate locations in the
Bridge Park project where a drive through would be acceptable, but they do exist - and the
flexibility to approve these few locations on a conditional use basis is a must. We
successfully identified one drive through location through a several week process in
October - November 2013. The location, on Jane Avenue at the rear of building B3 which
faces the service area of a parking structure met engineering's concerns about circulation,
stacking, and access, and was not visible from any Primary Street. This drive thru has been
shown on all plans since last November, including those shared at the public forum and with
planning commission last November. Creative integration in the urban environment will
not result in a suburbanization or sprawl effect within this dense mixed use project; in fact
it will have the opposite effect of allowing the project to attract services that will make this
an even more desirable, walkable place to live, work, and play. We would support making
drive thrus a conditional use so the Planning Commission and Staff would have an
opportunity to approve a location based upon meeting the criteria above.
Conclusion
We sincerely appreciate the massive efforts of the Council, Staff and appointed Commissions, and
hope that this letter is received in the spirit in which it is intended. The City and Crawford Hoying
Development Partners share a common goal of creating a thriving district that will stand the test of
time and greatly enhance the quality of life in our community for many years to come. Both parties
have invested significant time and resources, and reconsideration of the recently proposed changes
would to equip us and others to see district projects through to a successful start and completion.
Best Regards,
Crawford Hoying Development Partners
555 Metro Place North I Suite 600 1 Dublin, Ohio 43017 1 phone (614) 335 -2020 1 fax (614) 850 -9191 1 www.crawiordhovirig.coni
P
& CRA'IIVVFORD HOYING
''1 development
AJ
7/1/2014
TO: City of Dublin
RE: Response to proposed modifications to Bridge Street District Zoning Code &
Amendments
Background
Crawford Hoying Development Partners fully supports the City of Dublin's effort to create a new
Scioto River Neighborhood District. Our planning and architecture consultant Elkus Manfredi
created the initial draft of the new District text by closely mirroring the two existing neighborhood
district requirements, and made only minor modifications that were geared towards:
- characteristics unique to this site such as the roundabout and park;
- bringing the code into line with building code and constructability requirements (e.g.
parking garage clear heights);
- facilitating characteristics of the dense project design that had been vetted through
months of planning, market testing, input from the public, staff, city consultants, private
consultants, focus groups, and financial institutions.
Some of the recently proposed modifications to the text would inadvertently cause
detrimental impact to all projects, including Bridge Park and others already in the pipeline.
Although the concept of implementing the new neighborhood district and "cleaning up" the overall
code is excellent, some of the recently proposed changes to the Scioto River Neighborhood District
and the Bridge Street Code will undermine the feasibility of projects to move forward, particularly:
1. Limiting the height of buildings to 5 % stories. The Bridge Park project is not economically
feasible with this proposed height limit in place. At least 6 stories and up to 7 stories in
some locations accomplishes the following:
a. Creates a convenient and synergistic critical mass of uses in close proximity to the
park and other amenities that is an absolute necessity to achieving rent rates to are
high enough to justify (and secure financing approval) for high development costs.
b. Generates adequate revenue to fund the parking required for office and a high
concentration of ground floor restaurant users.
c. Allows us to create financeable vertically - integrated mixed use structures.
d. Addresses urban planning principles supported by our consultants, the city
consultants throughout the course of the past two years including "holding the
edge" of the larger roadways and park and creating a walkable core.
Implementing a 5 Y2 story limit and relying on waivers to be granted at a later point for this
issue is not an acceptable risk for us to accept due to the major impacts on project
feasibility; especially when the body responsible for granting the waivers is the same one
that has suggested a reduction in allowable building height. "Half stories" are also nearly
impossible to execute in a tall contemporary buildings with flat roofs and we respectfully
suggest that references to them not be utilized in the revised text.
555 Metro Place North I Suite 600 1 Dublin, Ohio 43017 1 phone (614) 335 -2020 1 fax (614) 850 -9191 1 www.crawfordhQyina.com
2. Imposing a new limit on the use of fiber cement (aka hardie panel or hardie plankl to no
more than 20% of any structure's exterior in the entire Bridge Street District including the
Scioto River Neighborhood District. Although we certainly support the use of brick and
stone where economics allow, particularly at lower elevations where buildings are closely
seen and touched, a broad brush ban on this quality material represents a dramatic change
to a key cost driver. Implementing this change will have massive impacts on the financial
feasibility of projects across the Bridge Street District. Existing "model" projects in the
district such as Bri-Hi would fall far short of meeting this new rule, but these projects and
many others in the region demonstrate that this material can be effectively utilized to create
beautiful, durable buildings that add aesthetic variety and offer a counterpoint to the
masonry materials when used appropriately. Requiring full depth stone and brick as the
primary material on all buildings in Bridge Street - especially on upper floors where it is
even more expensive to carry - will price living units out of reach for the many of the young
professionals and empty nesters that the Bridge Street projects are geared to attract and
retain. For the same reasons as above, implementing this new code change now and then
relying on future waivers to be granted in order obtain the current standard is also an
unacceptable risk due to its impact on project feasibility.
3. Forbidding all coffee. pharmacy, or food uses on th -eround floor of buildi
requirements. Drive thrus are key to attracting certain desirable tenants such as Panera
and Starbucks to this site. We believe there are very few appropriate locations in the
Bridge Park project where a drive through would be acceptable, but they do exist - and the
flexibility to approve these few locations on a conditional use basis is a must. We
successfully identified one drive through location through a several week process in
October - November 2013. The location, on Jane Avenue at the rear of building B3 which
faces the service area of a parking structure met engineering's concerns about circulation,
stacking, and access, and was not visible from any Primary Street. This drive thru has been
shown on all plans since last November, including those shared at the public forum and with
planning commission last November. Creative integration in the urban environment will
not result in a suburbanization or sprawl effect within this dense mixed use project, in fact
it will have the opposite effect of allowing the project to attract services that will make this
an even more desirable, walkable place to live, work, and play. We would support making
drive thrus a conditional use so the Planning Commission and Staff would have an
opportunity to approve a location based upon meeting the criteria above.
Conclusion
We sincerely appreciate the massive efforts of the Council, Staff and appointed Commissions, and
hope that this letter is received in the spirit in which it is intended. The City and Crawford Hoying
Development Partners share a common goal of creating a thriving district that will stand the test of
time and greatly enhance the quality of life in our community for many years to come. Both parties
have invested significant time and resources, and reconsideration of the recently proposed changes
would to equip us and others to see district projects through to a successful start and completion.
Best Regards,
Crawford Hoying Development Partners
555 Metro Place North I Suite 600 1 Dublin, Ohio 43017 1 phone (614) 335 -2020 1 fax (614) 850 -9191 1 www.crawfordhoying cone
►1 P ,
& CRAWFORD HOYING
�', development
7/1/2014
TO: City of Dublin
RE: Response to proposed modifications to Bridge Street District Zoning Code &
Amendments
Background
Crawford Hoying Development Partners fully supports the City of Dublin's effort to create a new
Scioto River Neighborhood District. Our planning and architecture consultant Elkus Manfredi
created the initial draft of the new District text by closely mirroring the two existing neighborhood
district requirements, and made only minor modifications that were geared towards:
characteristics unique to this site such as the roundabout and park;
- bringing the code into line with building code and constructability requirements (e.g.
parking garage clear heights);
- facilitating characteristics of the dense project design that had been vetted through
months of planning, market testing, input from the public, staff, city consultants, private
consultants, focus groups, and financial institutions.
Some of the recently proposed modifications to the text would inadvertently cause
detrimental impact to all projects, including Bridge Park and others already in the pipeline.
Although the concept of implementing the new neighborhood district and "cleaning up" the overall
code is excellent, some of the recently proposed changes to the Scioto River Neighborhood District
and the Bridge Street Code will undermine the feasibility of projects to move forward, particularly:
1. Limiting the height of buildings to 5 % stories The Bridge Park project is not economically
feasible with this proposed height limit in place. At least 6 stories and up to 7 stories in
some locations accomplishes the following:
a. Creates a convenient and synergistic critical mass of uses in close proximity to the
park and other amenities that is an absolute necessity to achieving rent rates to are
high enough to justify (and secure financing approval) for high development costs.
b. Generates adequate revenue to fund the parking required for office and a high
concentration of ground floor restaurant users.
c. Allows us to create financeable vertically- integrated mixed use structures.
d. Addresses urban planning principles supported by our consultants, the city
consultants throughout the course of the past two years including "holding the
edge" of the larger roadways and park and creating a walkable core.
Implementing a 5 Yz story limit and relying on waivers to be granted at a later point for this
issue is not an acceptable risk for us to accept due to the major impacts on project
feasibility; especially when the body responsible for granting the waivers is the same one
that has suggested a reduction in allowable building height. "Half stories" are also nearly
impossible to execute in a tall contemporary buildings with flat roofs and we respectfully
suggest that references to them not be utilized in the revised text.
555 Metro Place North I Suite 600 1 Dublin, Ohio 43017 1 phone (614) 335 -2020 1 fax (614) 850 -9191 1 www.crawfordh2yin-e.com
2. Imposing a new limit on the use of fiber cement Caka hardie panel or hardie plank). to no
more than 20% of any structure's exterior in the entire Bridge Street District. including
Scioto River Neighborhood District. Although we certainly support the use of brick and
stone where economics allow, particularly at lower elevations where buildings are closely
seen and touched, a broad brush ban on this quality material represents a dramatic change
to a key cost driver. Implementing this change will have massive impacts on the financial
feasibility of projects across the Bridge Street District. Existing "model" projects in the
district such as Bri -Hi would fall far short of meeting this new rule, but these projects and
many others in the region demonstrate that this material can be effectively utilized to create
beautiful, durable buildings that add aesthetic variety and offer a counterpoint to the
masonry materials when used appropriately. Requiring full depth stone and brick as the
primary material on all buildings in Bridge Street - especially on upper floors where it is
even more expensive to carry - will price living units out of reach for the many of the young
professionals and empty nesters that the Bridge Street projects are geared to attract and
retain. For the same reasons as above, implementing this new code change now and then
relying on future waivers to be granted in order obtain the current standard is also an
unacceptable risk due to its impact on project feasibility.
3. Forbidding all coffee, pharmacy. or fo osl_uses on the around floor of
requirements. Drive thrus are key to attracting certain desirable tenants such as Panera
and Starbucks to this site. We believe there are very few appropriate locations in the
Bridge Park project where a drive through would be acceptable, but they do exist - and the
flexibility to approve these few locations on a conditional use basis is a must We
successfully identified one drive through location through a several week process in
October - November 2013. The location, on Jane Avenue at the rear of building B3 which
faces the service area of a parking structure met engineering's concerns about circulation,
stacking, and access, and was not visible from any Primary Street. This drive thru has been
shown on all plans since last November, including those shared at the public forum and with
planning commission last November. Creative integration in the urban environment will
not result in a suburbanization or sprawl effect within this dense mixed use project; in fact
it will have the opposite effect of allowing the project to attract services that will make this
an even more desirable, walkable place to live, work, and play. We would support making
drive. thrus a conditional use so the Planning Commission and Staff would have an
opportunity to approve a location based upon meeting the criteria above.
Conclusion
We sincerely appreciate the massive efforts of the Council, Staff and appointed Commissions, and
hope that this letter is received in the spirit in which it is intended. The City and Crawford Hoying
Development Partners share a common goal of creating a thriving district that will stand the test of
time and greatly enhance the quality of life in our community for many years to come. Both parties
have invested significant time and resources, and reconsideration of the recently proposed changes
would to equip us and others to see district projects through to a successful start and completion.
Best Regards,
Crawford Hoying Development Partners
555 Metro Place North I Suite 600 1 Dublin, Ohio 43017 1 phone (614) 335 -2020 1 fax (614) 850 -9191 1 :hlw. craw Iordhoying.corn
dt° 1111
wagenbrenner
July 9, 2014 DEVELOPMENT
Mayor Mike Keenan
City of Dublin
5200 Emerald Parkway
Dublin, Ohio 43017
Mayor Keenan:
As you know, Wagenbrenner Development has been actively involved in development opportunities in the Bridge
Street corridor and we are currently working on a potential urban mixed use project on Bridge Street. We are very
encouraged by the planning efforts to date and the welcoming development environment Dublin is trying to create
in this district.
It is with that spirit of cooperation in mind that we send you this letter. It has been brought to our attention that
an amendment to the Bridge St Zoning code is being considered that would potentially have a very negative
economic impact on the exact type of projects the code was meant to encourage.
We are aware of three key areas of concern:
1. Maximum of 20% of cementitious (Hardi) siding on all exterior building facades - It is our opinion, and that
of architects we work with, that there are many fiber cement board products that are extremely hard,
durable and look much like stone panels. If used properly, these types of products can add very positive
architectural elements and are much more cost effective than typical brick or natural stone. The creative
use of these types of materials will allow for more reasonable constructions costs, which will equate to
more competitive rents and opportunities for enhanced landscaping and other site related amenities.
2. Llmiting building heights to 5'/: stories — Although our site plan does not current contemplate a scale of
this height, a 5 % story height limit may not be appropriate for projects fronting major streets in this area,
especially Bridge St, which has a very wide right of way. To create a truly urban environment along Bridge
St., we believe at least some buildings could and potentially should be higher (certainly 6 or 7 stories) in
order to help define the street edge and create a visual relationship from one side to the other. Building
heights such as this have created some of this country's most successful urban neighborhoods and should
continue to be considered on a case by case basis.
3. Not allowing any creative retail drive thru locations in the Bridge St olanning area - Although drive thru
uses can be challenging in urban environments, we feel the door should be left open for solutions that are
creative and minimally disruptive (i.e. drive thru not visible from front facade, where traffic patterns and
stacking has been accommodated).
Wagenbrenner Development is primary an "urban" developer and therefore we were attracted by the efforts
made in the Bridge St planning process to stimulate quality urban design. We feel these recent amendments are
not consistent with current urban design principals and could potentially create devastating effects on the
feasibility of our (and other) development projects in this district. We look forward to working with the City of
Dublin Staff, Planning Commission and City Council on future projects and we appreciate your consideration of
these concerns.
SArkW a a genbren
President
575 W. Flt t Avenue Suite 100 Columbus, OH 43215 614.545.9247
i c 4 ityof Dublin
LAND USE & LONG
RANGE PLANNING
July 10, 2014
Zoning Code Amendment
14 -039AD C
Bridge street District — ';rinto Fiver Neighhnrhno
Dist
This is a request for an amendment to the Zoning Code to establish a new Bridge Street District
zoning district and related Code amendments for the BSD Scioto River Neighborhood District. This
request for review and recommendation regarding proposed Zoning Code amendments is proposed in
accordance with Zoning Code Sections 153.232 and 153.234.
Date of Application Acceptance
Monday, April 28, 2014
Date of ART Recommendation to the Planning and Zoning Commission
Thursday, May 29, 2014
Case Managers
Rachel S. Ray, AICP, Planner II (614) 410 -4656 1 rray @dublin.oh.us
Claudia D. Husak, AICP, Planner II (614) 410 -4675 1 chusak @dublin.oh.us
Planning & Zoning Commission I Thursday, July 10, 2014
14- 039ADMC — Zoning Code Amendment —
Bridge Street District — Scioto River Neighborhood District
Page 2 of 8
Review Type Zoning Code Amendment
Proposal Modifications to Chapter 153 of the Dublin Code of Ordinances (Zoning Code) to
establish a new Bridge Street District zoning district and related Code
amendments.
Applicant Marsha I. Grigsby, City Manager, City of Dublin
Case Managers Rachel S. Ray, AICP, Planner II 1 (614) 410 -4656 1 rray @dublin.oh.us
Claudia D. Husak, AICP, Planner II 1 (614) 410 -4675 1 chusak @dublin.oh.us
Application Review Procedure: Zoning Code Amendment
Process
The Review and Approval Procedures and Criteria for the Bridge Street District state that the amendment
procedures of Zoning Code Section 153.234 shall apply in the Bridge Street District zoning districts for Zoning
Map and Zoning Text amendments. As part of the review process, the ART shall make a recommendation to
the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council for their consideration and determination.
Zoning Code Section 153.232(6)(9) provides the Planning and Zoning Commission with "other powers and
duties" which includes making recommendations to City Council for amendments to the Zoning Code. The
Commission should review the modifications, provide input, and vote on the changes. The proposed
amendment and City- sponsored area rezoning within the Bridge Street District will be forwarded to City
Council for its consideration and determination.
Application Contents and Overview
Summary
This is a request for review and recommendation of approval to City Council to amend portions of the Zoning
Code to establish development regulations for a new Bridge Street District zoning district. These regulations
will provide specific development standards for high - quality development in the Scioto River corridor area of
the Bridge Street District (east of the river) that are consistent with the 2010 Bridge Street Corridor Vision
Report as incorporated into the Dublin Community Plan (Bridge Street District Area Plan) in July 2013.
The proposed amendments to the Bridge Street District zoning regulations (Zoning Code Sections 153.057 —
153.066) include the following (detailed descriptions are provided in subsequent sections of this report):
Underlined items requested by PZC on June 5, 2014
153.058 ( BSC Districts Adding the new BSD Scioto River Neighborhood Districtwith a description of
Scop & Intent inte fo r the d istrict.
Amending the Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses in the BSC Districts to
add appropriate uses to the BSD Scioto River Neighborhood District.
153.059 ( Uses ° Modifications to Use Specific Standards with special provisions for
Neighborhood Districts.
. Making Transportation, Transit Stations and Conference Centers Conditional
Planning & Zoning Commission I Thursday, July 10, 2014
14- 039ADMC — Zoning Code Amendment —
Bridge Street District — Scioto River Neighborhood District
Page 3 of 8
ZO
Districts,
• Adding Group Homes as Permitted Uses where residential uses are permitted.
• Clarification of block size measurement.
153.059 Lots & Blocks
• Amending the Table of Maximum Block Dimensions to add the BSD Riverside
Neighborhood District.
m atepials. Eliminated.
153.062 Building
• Allowing wood and /or fiber cement siding only as a secondary material.
Types
• Clarification of the measurement of Juliet balconies.
• Reducing Corridor building types to a maximum of 5.5 stories (instead of into
7.5 stories), regardless of location.
• Adding a description of intent for the new BSD Scioto River Neighborhood
District, and eliminating references to a "substantial residential presence."
• Adding development standards for the new zoning district (mirroring the BSC
Sawmill Center and BSC Indian Run Neighborhood Districts).
153.0631
Neighborhood Standards
' Referencing 153.062(B) for permitted building types,
• Clarifying the desired intent for shopRin_g corridors.
. De- emphasizing gateways as private development signs and encouraging their
use to enhance the public realm, assist with wayfinding, etc.
• Making similar changes to the other Neighborhood Districts.
153.065(B) I Site
Development Standards
Medifying Clarifying the parking structure design requirements.
— Parking & Loading
153.065(F) I Site
Amending the Table of Fixture Power and Efficiency to add the SSD Riverside
Development Standards
Neighborhood District.
— Exterior Lighting
153.065(H) I Site
Modifications to various sections and intent statements with special provisions
Development Standards
for Neighborhood Districts.
— Signs
Primary Zoning Code Amendment: 153.063 1 Neighborhood Standards
Overview
The Neighborhood Districts have some of the more exciting characteristics of the Bridge Street District
provisions. These special districts require particular attention to locations and characters of buildings, streets,
and open spaces to accommodate larger scale, coordinated development and redevelopment to permit a wide
variety of uses and establish signature places in Dublin. The Bridge Street District is currently anchored by the
Sawmill Center Neighborhood District on the east and the Indian Run Neighborhood District on the west. The
Neighborhoods are applied to large development sites under consolidated ownership that have the potential to
create special, memorable "Places."
The Neighborhood Standards section describes the intent of each district as it relates to creating those special
places in the Bridge Street District, providing development standards that encourage placemaking elements,
such as provisions to encourage signs that relate directly to the style and character of development, gateway
Planning & Zoning Commission I Thursday, July 10, 2014
14- 039ADMC — Zoning Code Amendment —
Bridge Street District — Scioto River Neighborhood District
Page 4 of 8
features to announce prominent entries to these areas, open space networks that link the Neighborhoods to
the rest of the Bridge Street District and the city, and other design character considerations. The
Neighborhood Standards also recognize the reality that development over such large areas may be expected
to develop overtime in multiple phases by multiple applicants, and the standards therefore provide a means of
guiding well - coordinated development consistent with the goals for the District.
Since late 2012, the City has focused its Bridge Street District planning efforts mainly on the Scioto River
Corridor. The significant land assemblage by development interests with a vision that is generally consistent
with that of the Bridge Street District and the advanced planning for a substantial portion of the developable
properties in this area have resulted in an opportunity to create a new neighborhood district similar to those
already existing.
Summary of Provisions
The proposed Zoning Code amendments are intended to produce the type of high - quality development pattern
envisioned for the Bridge Street District and emphasize the importance of the development character along the
Scioto River Corridor with the aim of establishing another special "Place" at the heart of the Bridge Street
District.
The regulations are outlined in a manner that is very similar to the other two major Neighborhood Districts
(Sawmill Center and Indian Run), including the following main subsections:
(1) Development Intent
(2) Reference to the Zoning Map for district boundaries
(3) Special provisions for Block, Access, and Street Layout
(4) Special provisions for Building Types
(5) Placemaking Elements, including Shopping Corridors, sign plans, gateways, street frontage
considerations, etc.; and
(6) Special provisions for Open Spaces.
Consistent with the approach taken for the other neighborhood districts where special conditions or
preliminary development concepts helped inform certain elements of the zoning provisions, the proposed BSD
Riverside Neighborhood District provisions differ in terms of the following (updates since the June 5, 2014 PZC
meeting are underlined
153.063(F)(3)(b) — Block Length: Given the advanced degree of planning for this area, Planning is
aware that certain areas of this Neighborhood District will be unable to meet the specific block length
requirements due to the unique configuration of the roundabout at Riverside Drive and SR 161. As
such, a special provision is included to address this physical constraint, but requires mid -block
pedestrianways to achieve the intent of the block length requirement to allow for convenient pedestrian
connectivity. The accomonyina graphic for the BSD Scioto River Neighborhood District has bin
modified to identify the area that this provision is intended to apply.
In addition, the below grade structured parking proposed in this area will cause some of the roads
installed over the parking structures to be private streets, but designed to public street standards. The
proposed provisions allow these private streets to be counted as public for the purposes of measuring
block length. Since the Commission's discussion on June 5"', this provision has been clarified to indicate
that the "typical sections" of these private streets as identified on the Development Plan should be
used in lieu of right -of -way limits.
Planning & Zoning commission I Thursday, July 10, 2014
14-039ADMC — Zoning Code Amendment —
eridge Street District — Scioto River Neighborhood District
Page 5 of 8
153.063(F)(4)(a) — Permitted Building Types;
. This provision has
been eliminated at the Commisslon's request, allowing applicants to regye to be considered
by the Planning and Zoning CoMm[asiW an a case -by -case basis This Sectign now references
153.0+62(B)(3)(a) for the permiMed buildii3g_types. rather than listing them.
153.063(F)(4)(b) — Building Type Layout and Relationships:
r" "'r°"' `r v ... ...., �... .�.......�, ,,.... w ... v ..rr.e r. ...r, �..•rra.er rJ,,r.. s.. rsc- wvr r.�cr a..c1..0 rr rrrrr�a,ruicrr p<r pa_7
F
This provision has been eliminated at the Corpmis� ion's request. allowing appl n s Q fE3guest iNaiyers
to be considered by the Planning and Zoning Qmmission on a case -by -case basis,
153.063(F)(4)(c) & (d) — Vehicular Canopies and Ground Story Use & Occupancy
Requirements: Appropriate provisions are included for these uses and architectural elements.
• 153.063(F)(5)(b) — John Shields Parkway Frontage: Special architectural requirements are
provided for buildings fronting John Shields Parkway, given the prominence of this roadway and the
adjacent greenway.
153.063(F)(5)(a) & (c) — Shopping Corridor and Pedestrian- Oriented Streetscape: The
public realm along the designated shopping corridors and Riverside Drive should be designed to
accommodate a significant amount of pedestrian activity. Therefore, a special provision is
recommended to ensure that a minimum of 12 feet of clear sidewalk
area is provided on these streets, including walkways both within the
public right -of -way and on private property. This area should be free of
outdoor dining and seating areas, or any other obstructions. Intent
language for the design of shopping corridors and siting of buildings in
these areas has been added to ensure that,huildings are placed in a
manner that will not preclude future outdoor activities (such as
outdoor dining and seating) from occurring in front of buildings in
shopping corridors.
Graphic
Like the other neighborhood districts, a
conceptual graphic is provided that
coordinates with the recommended zoning for
the Riverside Neighborhood District. The
graphic depicts the major street network
connections in this area, demonstrates how
the open space network is intended to
Legend
conceptual
Street Network
Ina+
Shopping
Open Space
Corridor
River a Dr./
Corridor
SR 161 Frontage
Potential
Open
potential
Gateway
Spam Node
Shopping Conidor
Planning & Zoning Commission I Thursday, July 10, 2014
14 -039ADMC — Zoning Code Amendment —
Bridge Street District — Scioto River Neighborhood District
Page 6 of 8
complement desired development and respect existing natural features, identifies opportunities to establish
gateways announcing arrivals into this area, and illustrates generally where the key mixed -use center
("shopping corridor') is desired and could be extended along Riverside Drive. The graphic has also been
modified since the June 5 PZC meeting to show the intent o allow the shopping Corridor to eyNnnd to the
east in the future; to clarify the area where the s "d JgCL t rovisions a pply, and to coincide with the
proposed zoning district boundaries recommended by theommission.
Related Zoning Code Amendments
153.0581 BSC Districts Scope & Intent
The proposed district intent statement recognizes the importance of a balanced mix of land uses (modipi
since the June 5"' PZC meeting The intent also states that the district provides vibrant public spaces and
development oriented toward the Scioto River with critical bicycle and pedestrian links.
153.0591 Uses
The mix of uses proposed for the BSD Scioto River District are identical to the mix of uses permitted in the
other BSC Neighborhood Districts, including a wide range of residential, civic /public /institutional, commercial,
and accessory uses. Single- and two- family residences are not permitted to ensure a sufficient density of
residential development, and fueling /service stations are not permitted as an inappropriately auto - oriented use
in what is envisioned to be a highly pedestrian - oriented environment. The use specific standards for Personal,
Repair, and Rental Services and General Retail have been modified to exclude the proposed BSD Riverside
Neighborhood District from the size limitations on these uses, similar to the other neighborhood districts. The
Commission requested that the Transportation Transit Station and Conference Centers be made conditional
ses 1p ensure that their operations are cond rive to the highly edestrian- oriented environment envisioned
for this district.
153.0601 Lots and BlocAs
The general Zoning Code amendment proposed for this section clarifies that alleys and service streets shall not
be used to measure block length. These block divisions may serve as mid -block pedestrianways, but shall not
be used to meet the block size requirements. The purpose of this amendment is to clarify the intent of this
Code Section, as well as to distinguish it from the special provisions for measuring private streets designed to
public standards noted for the BSD Scioto River Neighborhood District. This proposed amendment had also
been identified as a potential Code amendment prior to this application having been submitted.
This section also adds the BSD Scioto River Neighborhood District to Table 153.060 -A, Maximum Block
Dimensions.
153.0621 Building Types
The following modifications are proposed to the Building Types section:
This provision has been eliminated at the
Commission's request, allowing applicants to request Waivers to be considered by the Planning: and
Z oning Commission on a case-by-case basis godZor to re ue "o ther high-guality Unthetic materlqI5 "
Planning & Zoning Commission I Thursday, July 10, 2014
14- 039ADMC — Zoning Code Amendment —
Bridge Street District — Scioto River Neighborhood District
Page 7 of 8
afteLdeMonstrating their success i of a om I ins al a ions Iii i io wo ang& fib
cement sidinghas been elftinated as a permitted_P ima_iy material, and relocated as a perrrlitted
secondary ma
2. Modifications to the requirements for Juliet Balconies are recommended to clarify the dimensional
requirements when these balconies are proposed in association with double doors, or with windows
adjacent to doors. The proposed modification limits the width to not more than six inches past the
fenestration, rather than an absolute width of up to five feet.
IF I
• �� •• • • • •-- a � '• • • • •3?r 1 '�
F wl• • . ll•2il I • •0-1 -•. -6 r 6r. all a 11! �1 •1 E RMT M !- 11. -• -� 1 - 1OW 1. •'t% • • • - .• 11 •l •1
•r;
Of all the changes requested by the Commission, the reduction in permitted building height from up to
a maximum of 7.5 stories in limited areas of the Bridge Street District down to 5.5 stories is, in
Planning's opinion, inconsistent with the objectives for the District.
In addition to land use, building height and massing are the most significant elements that result in the
diversity in development character desired throughout the Bridge Street District. When the zoning
regulations were originally drafted, it was acknowledged that height limitations were appropriate,
particularly in the areas adjacent to the Historic District. Similarly, in limited areas, such as those in
proximity to I -270 and the major regional thoroughfares, slightly higher building heights were
recommended to ensure that sufficient densities are created, in terms of employment and residential
units, to be capable of supporting the commercial uses.
Since the 7.5 -story buildings have been limited to the perimeter of the Bridge Street District near I -270,
and therefore will not overwhelm the district with large numbers of 7.5 -story buildings, Planning
recommends that the Commission reconsider the modification to the Corridor building (the only type
permitted up to 7.5 stories) and maintain the intent for this provision of the BSD zoning regulations.
Amendments to 153.065, Site Development Standards
Refer to the Summary of Proposed Amendments table on page 3.
PART U.- Administrative Review Team Comments Based on the May 29, 2014 Draft
Zoning Regulations
Planning
The Bridge Street District zoning regulations are unique, innovative, and tailored to address the special
development conditions present in the Bridge Street District. The regulations crafted for this special area
require development that is vibrant, high - quality, pedestrian- oriented, and consistent with the Vision Principles
stated in the Bridge Street Corridor Vision Report and adopted by Dublin City Council in July 2013 as part of
the Bridge Street District Area Plan in the Dublin Community Plan.
The proposed Zoning Code amendments for the BSD Scioto River Neighborhood District align with the
planning themes and objectives for the Bridge Street District and ensure that development is coordinated with
the expected street network and infrastructure planned for the District as a whole. Further, the proposed Code
Planning & Zoning Commission I Thursday, July 10, 2014
14-039ADMC — Zoning Code Amendment —
Bridge Street District — Scioto River Neighborhood District
Page 8 of 8
amendments bring the Scioto River Corridor area into alignment with other similar areas of the BSD and the
general recommendations outlined in the Bridge Street Corridor Vision Report.
Engineering, Building Standards, Parks & Open Space, Economic Development, Fire and Police
No comments
PART III: ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW TEAM RECOMMENDATION
Zoning Code Amendment
Recommendation of approval to City Council of this request for an amendment to the Zoning Code to
establish a new Bridge Street District zoning district and related Code amendments for the BSD Scioto River
Neighborhood District, and maintaining the existing maximum corridor building height provisions of the Zoning
Code.
l cityof Dublin
Yes
Land Use and long
Yes
Range Planning
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
5800 Shier Rings Road
Yes
Dublin, Ohio 43016.1236
Yes
phone 614.410.4600
RECORD OF A CTIO N
faX 614.410.4747
www.dubllnohiousa gov
JUNE 5, 2014
The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action at this meeting:
4. Zoning Code Amendment- Bridge Street District - Riverside Neighborhood District
14- 039ADMC Zoning Code Amendment
Proposal: An amendment to the Zoning Code to establish a new Bridge
Street District zoning district and related Code amendments for
the Riverside Neighborhood District.
Request: Review and recommendation to City Council regarding proposed
Zoning Code amendments under the provisions of Zoning Code
Sections 153.232 and 153.234.
Applicant: Marsha I. Grigsby, City Manager, City of Dublin.
Planning Contact: Rachel Ray, AICP, Planner II and Claudia Husak, AICP, Planner II.
Contact Information: (614) 410 -4600, +ray @dublin.oh.us and chusak @dublin.oh.us
MORON: Richard Taylor moved to table this Zoning Code Amendment John Hardt seconded the
motion.
VOTE: 7-0.
RESULT: This Zoning Code Amendment was tabled.
RECORDED VOTES:
Chris Amorose Groomes Yes
Richard Taylor
Yes
Amy Kramb
Yes
John Hardt
Yes
Joseph Budde
Yes
Victoria Newell
Yes
Amy Salay
Yes
STAFF CERIWFICATION
Rachel S. Ray, AICP
Planner Il 1 �-)t
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
June 5, 2014 — Meeting Minutes
Page 12 of 20
yes; Ms. Kramb, yes, Mr. Budde, yes; Ms. Newell, yes; Ms. Amorose Groomes, yes; Mr. Hardt, yes; and
Ms. Salay, yes. (Tabled 7 — 0.)
4. Zoning Code Amendment - Bridge Street District - Riverside Neighborhood District
14- 039ADMC Zoning Code Amendment
and
5. Zoning Map Amendment /Area Rezoning- Bridge Street District - Riverside
Neighborhood District Zoning Map Amendment
14 -04OZ
Ms. Amorose Groomes said the following two cases will be heard together as they are related to one
another but will require separate actions. She said the following applications are requests for review and
recommendation of approval to City Council for modifications to the Zoning Code to establish a new
Bridge Street District zoning district and related Code amendments for the Riverside Neighborhood
District and for an area rezoning of 20 parcels for the BSD Riverside Neighborhood and BSC Public
Districts in the Bridge Street District
Rachel Ray said wanted to begin her presentation by briefly explaining how the zoning districts for the
entire Bridge Street district were established. She said that Planning originally used the character districts
included in the Vision Report for the Bridge Street District to generalize the land use character envisioned
in different portions of the district. She said they envisioned from a form perspective the different types
of building heights, massing and types of uses, which informed the proposed zoning districts. She
explained once the zoning districts were created, Planning assigned zoning district designations to
individual parcels throughout the entire Bridge Street District achieve the intent and overall objectives of
the Bridge Street District Vision.
Ms. Ray said some of the zoning districts are special, such as the neighborhood districts. She referred to
the Historic Residential Neighborhood, which was intended to carry over the existing zoning standards in
effect prior to the Bridge Street District zoning, because there was no need to make any changes to the
zoning regulations applicable to the residential properties in the Historic District. She pointed out the
Historic Transition Neighborhood, which has some degree of consolidated property ownership. She stated
that this area is important because of the transition into the Historic District.
Ms. Ray referred to the two neighborhood districts at each end of the District, which have the most
significant opportunities for transformational placemaldng for the Bridge Street District as the major
mixed use centers of activity. She said the Neighborhood District graphics were created to guide the
placemaldng elements for each of these special zoning districts because there was an expectation that
these properties would develop over time.
Ms. Ray said after the Area Rezoning and the Zoning Code Amendment was approved in 2012, the City
began to focus at City Council's direction on the Scioto River Corridor toward the end of 2012. She said it
began with the acquisition of key properties for the implementation of some key public improvements
such as the planned roundabout at SR161 and Riverside Drive, and the relocation of Riverside Drive to
create the riverfront park. She explained that around the same time, a development entity came forward
that began to consolidate many of the properties within the Scioto River Corridor area which was a
significant change from the property ownership pattern at the time of the area rezoning. She said that
when the Area Rezoning initially went forward the property ownership was highly fragmented. She said
the owners at the time were less interested in the significant mixed use development opportunities along
the riverfront and that is why the existing zoning of BSC Office Residential and BSC Commercial was
recommended at that time.
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
June 5, 2014 — Meeting Minutes
Page 13 of 20
Ms. Ray summarized that clearly, circumstances have changed and given the new property owners for a
lot of the land in this area and the opportunities to open up and expand access to and engage the
riverfront, there is an opportunity to take another look at the zoning for this area.
Ms. Ray said creating the new Riverside Neighborhood District allows the Bridge Street Zoning
Regulations to better fit the intent of the larger unified development anticipated for the Scioto River
Corridor area. She said the new zoning is largely a combination of the regulations that apply across the
other neighborhood districts in addition to the provisions for placemaking elements including the
"shopping corridor," which is a highly mixed use node within each Neighborhood District. She outlined the
requirements for building types, comprehensive sign plans, and lot and block requirements. She said this
also facilitates the review process by allowing these elements to be addressed more comprehensively and
in a coordinated fashion rather than based on the separate zoning districts that apply to the individual
parcels in this area.
Ms. Ray said the related Code amendments involve a series of technical amendments as well as a few
more substantive amendments. She said the Riverside District is structured nearly identical to the
structures of the other Neighborhood Districts. She said the graphic is intended to show conceptual
alignments for the street network, as well as open space corridors, gateways, and the location of the
shopping corridor.
Ms. Ray said this Neighborhood District does include a few differences intended to mitigate the need for
future waivers or Code amendments when developments come forward based on unique site conditions.
She said the first of which is block length, given the unique frontage configuration along the roundabout.
She explained that whatever happens in the area, it is likely the block sizes will exceed the maximum
block length requirement, but the proposed amendment still requires the mid -block pedestrian ways to
ensure connectivity and that the development is broken down into smaller project elements. She said
they included the provision that requires a minimum of 12 feet of dear sidewalk area along the shopping
corridors free from any patios, bike facilities, street trees or any other furnishings to make sure there is
plenty of room for the anticipated degree of pedestrian activity in this area.
Ms. Ray said the City is sponsoring the application for an Area Rezoning for 20 parcels, which includes a
combination of three zoning districts, the BSC Residential, Office Residential, and Commercial Districts.
She said these were designed to reflect the character districts within the Vision Plan and intended to have
more of a single use focus to support the more mixed -use nodes that are envisioned elsewhere. She said
this zoning had much to do with the fragmented land ownership at the time of the original zoning in
2012. She said many property owners were concerned about their existing uses, and were concerned
with the names of the zoning districts, and wanted to make sure their existing properties would not be
impacted by the new zoning.
Ms. Ray said the new Riverside Neighborhood District will be applied to the land along the east side of
the relocated Riverside Drive including the driving range, the Bridge Point Shopping Center, properties
along Dale Drive and the former Wendy's restaurant site. She said on the west side of the relocated
Riverside Drive right -of -way, the BSC Public District is recommended, which is the same zoning district
applied to the other parks and other publicly owned and operated uses throughout the Bridge Street
District.
Ms. Ray said the proposed Zoning Code and subsequent Zoning Map amendments bring this area into
alignments with the overall vision and planning for the Scioto River corridor area and generally are
consistent with City's policy for establishing as must clarity and predictability for developers as possible
for the City's plans and expectations for development within the Bridge Street District. She said the
amendments are a prerequisite for any redevelopment of the Scioto River Corridor of this scale and
magnitude. She concluded that approval to City Council for the proposed Zoning Code Amendments to
create the new Zoning District and a related Code Amendments has been recommended by the
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
June 5, 2014 — Meeting Minutes
Page 14 of 20
Administrative Review Team. She stated that the Administrative Review Team also recommended
approval to City Council for the Area Rezoning of 20 parcels to the BSD Riverside Neighborhood District
and the BSC Public District.
Ms. Amorose Groomes asked if there was anyone from the general public that would like to speak to this
application. [There was none.]
Amy Kramb said she read through all the other Neighborhood District texts to compare them with the
proposed text and realized that it is almost identical, with only a handful of sentences that are different.
She referred to the description of the district and noted that the phrase "substantial residential presence"
should not be used because it implies there is a ton of residential development. She said this is too strong
and suggested that it be changed to "residential base to complement a strong mixed - use..." She said she
would like to see the land uses balanced.
Ms. Kramb referred to (F)(4)(a)2 referring to corridor buildings with residential, hotel or office uses
located on a parcel within 600 feet of SR161. She suggested eliminating the word "parcel" because a
parcel could be a huge piece of land and should be changed to say "the corridor building [itself] should
be within 600 feet of West Dublin - Granville Road." She said they should go off the building itself and not
the parcel because she never wants to see a 7.5 -story building.
Ms. Kramb asked for clarification of the intent of (F)(4)(b)1.
Ms. Ray referred to page 26 of the Bridge Street District Code. She said in 153.062, there is a table to
address building type incompatibilities. She pointed to the list of existing building types and said that if
one of those building types exists, such as an existing single- family detached building, and a developer
wants to build a corridor building, they couldn't do it next to a single - family detached given the scale
difference. She said the reason why this was noted as a potential amendment is that, as the City has
been working with Crawford Hoying, they have indicated that for a portion of their development, they
would like to build townhomes first (which is a single - family attached type of product), and then build a
corridor building across the street in one area as part of a later phase. She said this could create a
conflict with the building type incompatibility table, and that is why Crawford Hoying requested that the
amendment be included.
Ms. Kramb said she was concerned with making an overall Zoning Code amendment as an exception for
a single developer with an isolated issue.
Victoria Newell agreed with Ms. Kramb and pointed out that was the purpose of the Waiver process. She
thought a Waiver would be a much better solution in this instance.
Ms. Ray said the amendment could be eliminated.
Ms. Kramb agreed. She asked why conference centers could not be on the first floor of buildings, and if
the restriction no longer applies, then the amendment should apply to all the districts and not just this
Neighborhood District.
Ms. Amorose Groomes said the nature of conference centers is that people are inside all day with no
engagement with the street. She said this was counterproductive to the objectives of the Bridge Street
District, because we want the street to be active. She recalled a lot of discussion on this topic when the
Bridge Street Code was initially drafted, and she was concerned with the potential negative impact on the
streetscape as a result.
Ms. Ray said this Code Section just states that conference centers are permitted to be within one story
buildings, not saying that they cannot be on the ground floor.
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
June 5, 2014 — Meeting Minutes
Page 15 of 20
Ms. Kramb said in the other zoning districts, conference centers are not permitted on the first floor.
Ms. Amorose Groomes agreed that regulations pertaining to conference centers should either apply to all
the districts the same way, or applicants should request Waivers for something different.
John Hardt said he is supportive of modifying the text to address fundamental structural issues in the
Code that prohibit the present developer from doing what they are trying to do. He said he is not
comfortable with changes in the Code that deal with one particular building or one instance that should
be dealt with on a case -by -case basis, which is the reason why the Waiver process was conceived.
Ms. Amorose Groomes reiterated that Waivers should not be perceived as an obstacle. She said they
should be encouraged in the sense that they are really an invitation to excellence.
Ms. Kramb referred to the block length requirements along the roundabout ff)(3)(b)2). She asked if
there was a better way to identify "blocks with frontage."
Ms. Ray said the City is certain that there cannot be a new street with full access that would intersect
Riverside Drive south of Dale Drive/ "Park Avenue" to meet the block requirements due to the
roundabout right -of -way, so that is the reason, regardless of who comes forward with a development
project, that this provision is recommended.
Ms. Amorose Groomes said the area of influence for the roundabout should be defined.
Richard Taylor referred to the Riverside Neighborhood District graphic. He said previously, they had
discussed extending the shopping corridor farther to the east to at least to the intersection with the
Dale/Tuller connector road. He said he hoped there would be accommodations made to allow for a great
deal more activity that would allow the shopping corridor to extend all the way along that roadway east
toward Sawmill road. He said if that is correct, he would like to see the shopping corridor extended to the
east limit of this district.
Ms. Ray noted that mixed -use development has to be fairly concentrated to be successful, and said that
we would not want to detract from the success of commercial areas along Riverside Drive or the other
Neighborhood Districts in lieu of what could potentially happen farther to the interior of the Bridge Street
District. She pointed out that all of the zoning districts allow for a mix of uses and suggested that an
arrow be drawn to the end of the shopping corridor diagram.
Mr. Hardt said he agrees with the desire for a concentration of mixed -use development along Riverside
Drive. He said he wanted to make sure whatever infrastructure is in place, between the streetscape
design and the distance of buildings setback off the street, he would not want to do anything in the
easternmost block that would result in a choke point that prohibits the shopping district from going
farther east. He said if this is wildly successful as he envisions, the shopping district could someday
connect up the hill to Dublin Village Center.
Mr. Taylor said the parking garage height is also something of a concern.
Mr. Taylor referred to page 5 in the district intent, he is not in favor of the statement that "this
development within the district will include a strong residential presence." He said he doesn't think that
by not including the statement they are denying residential uses in this area, but they are also not
encouraging it in specific areas. He said the mix of uses needs to be looked at holistically. He said he
would like to eliminate any reference to the "strong residential presence" and that will bring it more in
line with the other two Neighborhood Districts that refer back to the charts and tables.
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
June 5, 2014 — Meeting Minutes
Page 16 of 20
Mr. Taylor referred to page 5, the BSD Riverside Neighborhood District Intent, and asked what was
meant by "complementing the Historic District."
Ms. Ray said the intent is the types and scale of uses that are possible in the Riverside Neighborhood
District can help support the smaller scale businesses and uses within the Historic District.
Mr. Taylor said he is worried that instead, we may end up creating two separate districts with a neat
bridge between them. He said he is concerned that they are suggesting that they are "complementing"
the Historic District on the west side of the river and he does not see anything that accomplishes a real
connection between the two.
Mr. Langworthy said the idea was to have strong attractions on both sides of the bridge. He said they
may need to reword the statement to "coordinate with."
Mr. Taylor referred to the list of permitted building types on page two and asked that this refer to the
chart in Code Section 153.062 instead.
Mr. Taylor said with respect to the building height provision referenced earlier, buildings exceeding 5.5
stories should be approved on an individual basis through Waivers, so that eliminates provision 2 under
Building Types.
Ms. Kramb pointed out that the other Neighborhood Districts have similar wording.
Amy Salay confirmed that there is a provision within the Bridge Street District that allows up to 7.5 -story
buildings. She said that height should not be permitted by right, but if there is a reason to allow that
height, then it can be allowed as a Waiver. She said 7.5 stories is a large building, and that scale would
dwarf everything around it.
Ms. Ray clarified that Code allows for buildings with a maximum of 5.5 stories, but in certain areas, an
additional two stories with a "step back" from the front facade of a minimum of eight feet could be
permitted. She said the buildings with additional height are intended to be within proximity to I -270, so
that if there is a taller building, it is in a more appropriate location for taller heights.
Mr. Taylor said they have talked about larger and taller buildings and did not realize it was already in the
other districts.
Ms. Amorose Groomes said the height issue needs to be addressed now. She said 5.5 stories should be
the maximum without a Waiver.
Mr. Taylor asked for clarification on the sidewalk requirement of 12 feet.
Ms. Ray said the intent was to have 12 feet of dear sidewalk space free of any planters, cycle tracks, or
patios, to ensure a highly walkable area within the shopping corridor.
Mr. Taylor said his biggest concern is that this provision and many of the others appear to be supporting
the needs of a particular developer and they are being asked to make specific Code changes and to
rezone an entire area without seeing what they are voting on. He said this might be the best approach
given the situation but he is reluctant to take this much further without seeing any development
proposals. He said the Commission is aware that there is already something that has been conceptually
designed and presented informally months ago, although the plans may have changed. He said the
Commission deserves to see the buildings and what they are voting on before they vote on the Code
amendment.
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
June 5, 2014 — Meeting Minutes
Page 17 of 20
Mr. Hardt said he agrees with Mr. Taylor and requested an informal presentation with an update on the
developer's current plans informing the proposed Code amendments.
Mr. Hardt said he agreed with Ms. Kramb's earlier comments related to the Riverside Drive frontage and
the first block dose to the roundabout. He said with respect to the comments on building height, he is
willing to consider 7.5 -story buildings on a case by case basis. He said he thought he recalled a
discussion about parking structures not being permitted across the street from each other because they
create dead streetscapes with no activity and no commercial uses, and the Commission didn't want them
dominating a block.
Ms. Ray agreed and said a provision to that effect was discussed with a potential update of the Code. She
said it was a lengthy discussion and Planning intended to bring those amendments forward.
Mr. Hardt said when they were having that discussion, he was envisioning above - ground parking
structures. He said he could support the need to tweak those provisions to address below -ground parking
structures, since that is a very different situation. He said he was expelling to see parking garages be the
basis of the issue with building type incompatibilities because the proposed development has spots where
there are multiple parking garages planned, which would potentially be fine because they are
underground. He said from a Code perspective, there may be an issue.
Mr. Hardt said he is not in support of gateways because they become monuments for developers to put
their individual stamps out front indicating where their development starts and ends. He said he thought
the intent is to have a cohesive district, from Sawmill Road to the I- 270/33 interchange.
Ms. Ray said staff had talked about the intent of "gateways" as well. She said this is going to be a very
public area with plaza spaces and open spaces and water features, and so on. She said the intent is that
those areas have a higher degree of design to make a statement about entering a place and that is why
they are along Riverside Drive and not at the edges of the development where the transition should be
more seamless. .
Ms. Amorose Groomes said she thought that a major statement would be made with the use of granite
curbs and paver streets, not with huge signs. She said there is nothing less attractive than a sign across
I -270 with a development name on it. She said she thought the intent was to create a place that was
identified by the overall sense of place.
Ms. Newell said she thinks the gateway text is appropriate but the problem is with the way it is written,
because it states that signs are specifically permitted. She suggested eliminating the reference to the sign
provisions altogether, which presents an opportunity to review signs if they are presented as part of a
gateway, or reject signs that are not appropriate.
Ms. Ray suggested that in addition, the public function of the gateways could be emphasized.
Mr. Langworthy said Council has asked that they develop a City-wide wayfinding system that includes
gateway designs, and part of the presentation that the consultant team with Kolar Design will make will
include examples of gateway designs based on location.
Ms. Kramb pointed out that reference to signs in the gateway provisions is also in the other
Neighborhood Districts, so the change will need to be made across the board.
Mr. Hardt asked how the use table reflected the uses proposed by the developer.
Ms. Ray said the use table is a mirror of the other Neighborhood Districts, with no differences. She said
the developer asked for a potential for a drive -thru for restaurants, and staff was not supportive of that
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
June 5, 2014 — Meeting Minutes
Page 18 of 20
use. She said that use would then have to be addressed separately. She said when the Commission went
through the Code a few months ago, they noted other desired changes to the table and Planning
intended to bring those back, but for this short term they wanted to keep it consistent with the other
districts.
Ms. Kramb said under the current zoning it is BSC Office and up to the north is BSC Office Residential, so
comparing the office zoning districts, conference centers as zoned were conditional uses and in the
proposed rezoning allows it to be a permitted use. She said religious institutions under the existing
would be conditional and they had some specifics added to the condition and they are now permitted.
She said transit stations are conditional uses under office and now would be permitted, and surface lots
were permitted and now they are conditional uses under the new district.
Ms. Ray said there are some other size limitations to retail, entertainment and personal service uses, and
with the new zoning there would no longer be size restrictions.
Mr. Hardt said if transit stations are conditional in other districts they should be in this district as well
because they have a potential for significant impacts on the properties that abut them and need to be
located in the right spot.
Mr. Hardt refer to the "Materials" section in the Building Types Code Section, and stated the provisions
should be kept the same. He said other high quality materials could be considered, but are subject to the
reviewing body.
Ms. Amorose Groomes said the use of special materials should be an earned waiver and not codified as a
right.
Mr. Hardt said he would happy to approve a modification that gives relief to the dimensional
requirements for below grade parking but would be inclined to keep them in place for parking above
ground. He said it does not make sense to put something in Code that requires compliance, and if the
intent is to say that the minimum clear heights as required in the Ohio Building Code is acceptable then
the correct approach is to delete the paragraph altogether because they have to comply with that
anyway. He said to modify the text so that the minimum clearances they had in the Code remain in
effect but clarify that they only apply to above ground parking.
Mr. Hardt said he is concerned that they are being asked to rezone a chunk of the City that is arguably
the most critical and most precious piece of land in the City and the map they have drawn conveniently
coincides with the ownership of one particular party. He said the proposed Zoning District boundaries
should be in the best interest of the community, and not just a particular property owner.
Ms. Ray pointed out that the potential developer of much of the land does not actually control all of the
land proposed for rezoning to the BSD Riverside Neighborhood District. She asked for clarification how
the Commission recommended that the boundary be drawn.
Mr. Hardt said they should include the additional parcels to the east of Dale Drive, or they cut it off at
Dale Drive. He said either would make sense to him from a planning standpoint and understood that
there may be different opinions.
Ms. Ray said they want to make sure whatever happens on both side of Dale Drive has a relationship to
each other.
Mr. Taylor said it would be more appropriate to have the Riverside Neighborhood District turn that comer
than to have the corner itself be the intersection of two different districts.
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
June 5, 2014 — Meeting Minutes
Page 19 of 20
Ms. Salay commented that with respect to conference centers, Council had been informed that such
facilities would be studied to determine where should be located in the city. She said in terms of the
Code amendment and area rezoning, she wanted to make sure they are working for Dublin and not just
the property owner, and that we are doing what is best for the Bridge Street District. She said that the
conference center use should be moved back to a conditional use so that it can be determined if the
location is appropriate.
Ms. Salay said the Crawford Haying project proposal had a lot of siding shown on some of the buildings.
She said the materials provisions in the Code needed to involve less siding.
Ms. Newell said her comments have been addressed by the other Commissioners and her biggest concern
was related to spot zoning this particular area. She said she saw merit in creating a Neighborhood District
along Riverside Drive but the district needs to follow along Dale Drive and /or include the properties
leading up to it.
Ms. Amorose Groomes said she agrees with the comments of the Commission. She said her biggest
concern is the importance of getting the residential component right. She said the potential for a 7.5-
story building was alarming because it allows residential uses. She said she knows that everyone wants
to build residential development, because that is where the money is, but she would like to make sure
great care is taken with the type of development that is approved and the mix of land uses. She said this
is the crown jewel property in the entire Bridge Street District and it should be remain the crown jewel
particularly given its prominence along the riverfront.
Ms. Amorose Groomes said she dislikes the name `Park Avenue" and that it does not represent who they
are as a city. She pointed out that the street is labeled as such on the drawings and to her knowledge the
names of the streets have not been approved. She said she does not like the name "Riverside
Neighborhood District" because they have a community called Riverside.
Mr. Hardt and Ms. Kramb agreed.
Ms. Amorose Groomes commented on the importance of balance in the Bridge Street District and agreed
with the removal of the language specific to creating a "strong presence of residential." She said she was
hopeful that in no district is the residential presence stronger than other uses; if so, then by nature they
have defeated the mixed use component of the mixed use walkable urban district. She said whatever
they are codifying they are codifying the encouragement of a balanced district with as many jobs created
as there are residential units created because there has to be a relationship to balance the uses.
Ms. Amorose Groomes said she appreciates the number of hours that the Commissioners have dedicated
to review the Code. She thought the changes are good and would like to see this come back along with
the other residential neighborhood districts with the problems fixed that were revealed through this
review so that they are all three amended at the same time.
Ms. Amorose Groomes said they would like to see the project details that have been presented to other
the other reviewing bodies, because it would be more helpful for the Commission to become comfortable
with the Code amendments. She reiterated that Waivers should not be perceived as a bad thing if the
result is a better project.
Ms. Ray requested that these applications be tabled.
Motion and Vote
Richard Taylor moved to table this amendment to the Zoning Code to allow staff to revise the proposed
zoning regulations in accordance with the Commission's discussion. Mr. Hardt seconded. The vote was as
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
June 5, 2014 — Meeting Minutes
Page 20 of 20
follows: Ms. Salay, yes; Ms. Amorose Groomes, yes; Ms. Newell, yes; Ms. Kramb, yes; Mr. Budde, yes;
Mr. Hardt, yes; and Mr. Taylor, yes. (Tabled 7 — 0.)
Motion and Vote
Ms. Newell move to table this request for a Zoning Map Amendment. Mr. Hardt seconded. The vote was
as follows: Mr. Taylor, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Ms. Amorose Groomes, yes; Mr. Budde, yes; Ms. Kramb, yes;
Mr. Hardt, yes; and Ms. Newell, yes. (Tabled 7 — 0.)
Communications
Ms. Husak introduced four new planning assistants, Logan Stang, Jonathan Staker, Katie Ashbaugh, and
Nicki Martin.
Roundtable
Mr. Taylor said the issue with ARB and the Planning and Zoning Commission and the review of the Bridge
Street Corridor major projects that are occurring in the architectural review district which was part of a
presentation to Council on Monday and there was some discussion and voted on that regard. He said he
still thinks it is an issue that they should look at. He said he attended the last ARB meeting where they
looked at the Bridge Park West project and it was an informal and the first time they had seen the project
and it was the first time he had seen it. He said he saw that body address the issues that they typically
address within the Historic District and do that very well, what he did not see them do was address issues
that were extremely problematic and major. He said he doesn't want to say that this particular group or
commission is more qualified than the people on the ARB to review projects, but he thought the
Commissions intense involvement in the process from day one and their long history of reviewing
projects of that scale and knowing what questions to ask does make the Commission more qualified and
more appropriate to review projects like that to maintain a consistency between the reviews of the both
sides of the river and wanted to have this discussion continued and bring it up again at a later date.
Ms. Amorose Groomes said that their review of the Code tonight says to the difficulty of understanding
this Code and how it interplays together in these districts and she knows that it was presented to Council
that the Administrative Review Team was involved and familiar with the Code and all the issues, but she
suspects that they were to have a conversation about this particular piece of legislation this evening that
the ART comments would be far different than those of the Commission. She said she did not think it
was a well representation to say that the ART is as well versed with the districts and Code and the
implementation of such.
Ms. Amorose Groomes adjourned the meeting at 10:33 p.m.
As approved by Planning and Zoning Commission on July 17, 2014.
city of Dublin
Land Lfto and Long
Nanga Planning
M Shm Rise Wma
DLbin, ti7HP44D3p•1238
Vw* elA.410,4601)
�LK 61A.918.41V
1WK^ iunhnehr®uza 4rrr
ADMINtCTR TWE REVIEW TEAM
RECORD OF
MAY 29, 2014
The Administrative Reyimty Team made the fallowing deberminadon alt t h1s rnWbng:
L. ZmIng Code Amendment— Bddge meat oi9llti[�
Rivemide Nel+ghborhood Dlsbk:t
U- D39AONC Zoning Code Amendment
Proposal: An amendment by the ZonkV Cade W establish a new Bridge Strea
Dish ft zoning district and related Code amendments for the
Riverside Neighborihmd Dish i�et
Roquest: Review and ne=rnendat o rggalding prgmsed Zoning Cock
amendmento under fire provisions of Zoning Code SmIans i 5 =2
and 153.234.
ApplkAnt: Marsha I. Grigsby, City Manager, City of Dublin
Planning pct: Rachel S. Aayr AICP, Planner II
Cbntx± InF+x,, on: (614) 410 - 465+6; rray @dublll Ah. us
DETERMINIATIONr Ilemawnendatlon of approval to the Planning errd Zoning Commiasion FW the
request for a Zoning Code Aomndmwlr to establish a new brldge Street DWc:t avning &Ir t and
relaWd code amendments for the BSD RNerside Ndghborhoc d District.
RESULT: This application was farwarded to the Planning and Zgning Comrnlsslon with a
lecommendatlDn of approval.
STAFF CERTIFICA110N
gin: Lain7voriftr Di or of Plann
la of Dublin
ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW TEAM
Land Use and Long
Range Planning MEETING MINUTES
5800 Shier Rings Road
Dublin, Ohio 43016 -1236 MAY 29, 2014
phone 614.410.4600
fax 614.410.4747
www.dub0noh1ousa. gov
ART Members and Designees: Rachel Ray, Planner II; Ray Harpham, Commercial Plans Examiner;
Alan Perkins, Fire Marshal; Laura Ball, Landscape Architect; Barb Cox, Engineering Manager; Dave
Marshall, Review Services Analyst; Colleen Gilger, Economic Development Director, and Jeff Tyler,
Building Standards Director.
Other Staff: Claudia Husak, Planner II; Andrew Crozier, Planning Assistant; Logan Stang, Planning
Assistant; Katie Ashbaugh, Planning Assistant; Jonathan Staker, Planning Assistant; and Laurie Wright,
Staff Assistant.
Applicants: Ross Sanford, Lincoln Construction; Gayle Zimmerman, Ford & Associates Architects; Todd
Faris, Faris Design & Planning; Tom Warner, Advanced Civil Design; and Matt Booms, State Bank (Case
3).
Rachel Ray called the meeting to order. She asked if there were any amendments to the May 22, 2014,
meeting minutes. [There were none.] The minutes were accepted into the record as presented.
DETERMINATIONS
1. Zoning Code Amendment — Bridge Street District — Riverside Neighborhood District
14- 039ADMC Zoning Code Amendment
Rachel Ray said this is a request for an amendment to the Zoning Code to establish a new Bridge Street
District zoning district and related Code amendments for the Riverside Neighborhood District. She said
this is a request for review and recommendation regarding proposed Zoning Code amendments under the
provisions of Zoning Code Sections 153.232 and 153.234.
Ms. Ray said the Planning Report highlights the differences between the Riverside Neighborhood District
and other neighborhood districts for 1) Block Length; 2) Permitted Building Types; 3) Building Type
Layout and Relationships; 4) Vehicular Canopies and Ground Story Use & Occupancy Requirements; 5)
John Shields Parkway Frontage; and 6) Pedestrian- Oriented Streetscape.
Ms. Ray said a graphic was prepared to match the graphics for the other neighborhood districts that
show the planned street network and street connections in this area; the potential shopping corridor
along the new mixed -use street and Riverside Drive; open space nodes and corridors; and potential
gateways announcing arrivals to this area.
Ray Harpham asked if the regulations were prepared in response to what is anticipated from Crawford
Hoying and Ms. Ray said yes, to some extent, since the City has been working with the major land owner
in this area. She explained that the majority of the Code regulations are very consistent among the other
neighborhood districts, but there are a few unique elements, which she highlighted earlier. She explained
that a neighborhood district would have been applied to this site when the Code was originally drafted,
but there were different property owners at that time that had less interest in the significant mixed -use
Administrative Review Team Meeting Minutes
Thursday, May 29, 2014
Page 2 of 6
development envisioned for each of the neighborhood districts. She stated that since the circumstances
have changed, the neighborhood district is now being prepared.
Ms. Ray asked if the Administrative Review Team members had any further comments regarding this
proposal [There were none.] She confirmed the ART's recommendation of approval of this application to
the Planning and Zoning Commission.
2. Area Rezoning — Bridge Street District — Riverside Neighborhood District
14 -04OZ Zoning Map Amendment
Rachel Ray said this is a request for an area rezoning of 20 parcels for the Riverside Neighborhood
District in the Bridge Street District. She said this is a request for review and recommendation regarding
proposed land use map amendments under the provisions of Zoning Code Sections 153.232 and 153.234.
Ms. Ray said the overall area covers approximately 57.75 acres of land along the east side of the
proposed relocation of Riverside Drive, including the existing Bridge Pointe shopping center, the former
Wendy's restaurant site at the southeast comer of Riverside Drive/SR 161 intersection, properties along
Dale Drive, the former driving range and "Digger and Finch" restaurant site, and land along the north
side of John Shields Parkway. She explained the existing Acura car dealership at the northwest comer of
Dale Drive /SR 161 will remain BSC Commercial District until the property owner chooses to redevelop the
land, at which time it would be eligible for be rezoned to the BSD Riverside Neighborhood District.
Ms. Ray stated the future riverfront park land is recommended to be zoned BSC Public District, which is
an existing zoning district that applies to other public areas throughout the BSC, including the Dublin
Schools property, the cemetery, Sycamore Ridge Park, and the AEP substation on Banker Drive.
Ms. Ray said a Proposed BSD Zoning Map and Existing BSD Zoning Map are found in the Planning Report
for comparison.
Ms. Ray asked if the Administrative Review Team members had any further comments regarding this
proposal [There were none.] She confirmed the ART's recommendation of approval of this application to
the Planning and Zoning Commission.
CASE REVIEWS
3. BSC Office District - State Bank West Dublin - Granville Road
14- 0478SC- SP /PP /FP Site Plan Review /Preliminary Plat /Final Plat
Rachel Ray said this is a request for an 11,500 - square -foot Loft building for State Bank with a retail
banking facility, a drive -through kiosk and all associated site improvements. She said this proposal also
includes the subdivision of one 2.8 -acre lot into two lots. She said this is a request for review and
recommendation of approval to the Planning and Zoning Commission for a Bridge Street District Site Plan
Review under the provisions of Zoning Code Section 153.066. She said this is also a request for review
and recommendation of approval to City Council for a preliminary and final plat under the provisions of
the Subdivision Regulations.
Ms. Ray stated that Gary Gunderman introduced this case last week. She said Gary was out of town but
had provided a preliminary analysis of the proposal. Ms. Ray said a recommendation of approval to
forward the case on to the PZC is anticipated at the June 5"' ART meeting.
Ms. Ray inquired about the height dimensions of the parapet from the roof deck.
Administrative Review Team Meeting Minutes
Thursday, May 22, 2014
Page 2 of 5
Steve Langworthy asked the applicant if he agreed with the five conditions. John Gavin said yes. He
asked if he could provide the footcandle lighting level measurements once the structure is built. The ART
members agreed that was acceptable.
Mr. Harpham asked to clarify that the dimmer switch needed to be installed to adjust lighting if need be,
once the canopy is completed.
Dave Marshall asked Mr. Harpham what level of footcandle is acceptable. Mr. Langworthy stipulated that
the readings are for ground level. Mr. Harpham said one or two footcandles at ground level should be
sufficient. Mr. Gavin agreed. Mr. Marshall confirmed that a photometric reading would be taken at the
time of the canopy's installation, and then the approved lighting levels would be set and kept on file. He
suggested that Code Enforcement be notified of the approved lighting levels so they could check
periodically to ensure the canopy does not become too bright.
Mr. Langworthy asked if there were any further comments with respect to this case. [There were none.]
He confirmed the ARTS approval of this request for Minor Project Review with five conditions.
CASE REVIEWS
2. Zoning Code Amendment — Bridge Street District — Riverside Neighborhood District
14- 039ADMC Zoning Code Amendment
Rachel Ray said this is a request for an amendment to the Zoning Code to establish a new Bridge Street
District zoning district and related Code amendments for the Riverside Neighborhood District. She said
this is a request for review and recommendation regarding proposed Zoning Code amendments under the
provisions of Zoning Code Sections 153.232 and 153.234.
Ms. Ray said Dan Phillabaum created the draft Neighborhood District graphic noted in the Code, which
she presented, consistent with the other neighborhood district graphics to guide the piacemaking efforts
in the neighborhood districts. She explained the graphic and how projects will need to coordinate as
areas are redeveloped. She noted the open space corridors, bikeway, greenways, cycetrack connection,
and connections to the proposed pedestrian bridge. She explained that the future riverfront parkland is
proposed to be rezoned to the BSC Public District. She pointed out the open space nodes distributed
throughout the neighborhood district and conceptual gateway locations.
Ms. Ray said the Zoning Code amendment and the Zoning Map amendment will require a
recommendation from the ART at next week's meeting. She explained that the applications are expected
to move forward to the Planning and Zoning Commission for their meeting on June 5.
Fred Hahn inquired about permitted uses in the BSC Public District, like food trucks and food cart
vendors.
Steve Langworthy said food trucks are be a separate topic, and he is currently working on an Ordinance
to address their operation, which will not be part of the Zoning Code
Mr. Hahn said his intent was to ensure that commercial enterprise will not be prohibited in the park.
Ms. Ray asked what type of permanent structures intended for food or retail sales were anticipated for
the riverfront park at this time, if any.
Mr. Hahn responded that the food vendors would be temporary and no permanent structures were
contemplated. Mr. Langworthy asked if food vendors were permitted in the City's other parks.
Administrative Review Team Meeting Minutes
Thursday, May 22, 2014
Page 3 of 5
Mr. Hahn suggested that the operations for food vendors should be managed more like a licensing
process, as the City handles Solicitors /Peddlers.
Mr. Hahn inquired about renewable energy equipment and who puts the controls on that. Ms. Ray
answered that they were addressed through the Use Specific Standards and approved by the required
reviewing body.
Mr. Langworthy asked if there were any further questions or comments on the proposed Zoning Code
amendment at this time. [There were none.] He concluded the ART is expected to make a
recommendation to the Planning and Zoning Commission at next week's ART meeting.
3. Area Rezoning — Bridge Street District — Riverside Neighborhood District
14 -04OZ Zoning Map Amendment
Rachel Ray said this is a request for an area rezoning of 20 parcels for the Riverside Neighborhood
District in the Bridge Street District. She said this is a request for review and recommendation regarding
proposed land use map amendments under the provisions of Zoning Code Sections 153.232 and 153.234.
Ms. Ray said the conversation for the Zoning Amendment application above applies here as well.
INTRODUCTIONS
4. BSC Office District - State Bank West Dublin - Granville Road
14- 047BSC- SP /PP /FP Site Plan Review /Preliminary Plat /Final Plat
Gary Gunderman said this is a request for an 11,500- square -foot Loft building for State Bank with a retail
banking facility, a drive -through kiosk and all associated site improvements. He said this proposal also
includes the subdivision of one 2.8 -acre lot into two lots. He said this is a request for review and
recommendation of approval to the Planning and Zoning Commission for a Bridge Street District Site Plan
Review under the provisions of Zoning Code Section 153.066. He said this is also a request for review
and recommendation of approval to City Council for a preliminary and final plat under the provisions of
the Subdivision Regulations.
Mr. Gunderman reported that this proposal had been reviewed by the Planning and Zoning Commission
for their Basic Site Plan Review in February 2014. Mr. Gunderman provided an overview of the comments
made by the Commission and how the applicant had addressed the comments. He pointed out that the
applicant had relocated all of the previously ground - mounted HVAC units to the roof. He noted that the
Commission had concerns with the mid -block pedestrianway and the pocket plaza, and suggested that
they be added when the adjacent property was developed to ensure that they are appropriately designed
for the two sites.
Mr. Gunderman pointed out that the Code requires developments to provide their required open space,
and therefore the applicant has provided the pocket plaza open space at the southwest corner as
originally presented, and explained that the applicant had provided a conceptual site plan showing how
the plaza space could be expanded with conceptual future development. He said with the exception of a
few site details, the Site Plan is very similar to the Basic Plan. Mr. Gunderman said the applicant will need
ART'S recommendation to proceed to the Planning and Zoning Commission for a determination at their
meeting on June 19.
Ross Sanford, Lincoln Construction, added that the building had also been pushed farther back from the
SR 161 right -of -way to allow for future development flexibility, which was another of the Commission's
concerns. He explained that there are also easements in this area that they are trying to avoid with the
building. He said that as a result, the proposed building is one foot behind the maximum Required
Administrative Review Team Meeting Minutes
Thursday, May 15, 2014
Page 4 of 7
3) That the proposed body and trim colors be modified to incorporate a lighter color for the main
structure with a darker, compatible color for the trim to meet the GuibWlnes.
Ms. Rauch suggested options for next steps.
Ms. Thomas inquired about the proposed sign colors and asked if the blue could be used for the right
side and the reddish brown used for the left side. She also asked if a rich brown color would be
appropriate for the shutters.
Ms. Rauch said the colors all need to coordinate. She said they met the Code requirements for the
location of the sign but requested a revised detailed design for the sign showing all dimensions.
Ms. Rauch asked if the ART could recommend this application to the ARB with conditions or if this should
be resolved next week.
Steve Langworthy said the applicant needs to determine their proposed color scheme before the ART
could make a recommendation to the ARB. Mr. Tyler said he did not want to decide the colors for the
clients and suggested Ms. Thomas discuss the options with her dients to see what they would prefer.
Ms. Rauch said this application could be postponed and reviewed by the ARB at their next meeting in
June. Ms. Thomas said her dients want a sign as soon as possible and they are unavailable currently. She
said she was not comfortable with making a selection without consulting with her clients first. She
requested a time extension for this application.
CASE REVIEWS
3. Zoning Code Amendment — Bridge Street District — Riverside Neighborhood District
14- O39ADMC Zoning Code Amendment
Rachel Ray said this is a request for an amendment to the Zoning Code to establish a new Bridge Street
District zoning district and related Code amendments for the Riverside Neighborhood District. She said
this is a request for review and recommendation regarding proposed Zoning Code amendments under the
provisions of Zoning Code Sections 153.232 and 153.234.
Ms. Ray said Dan Phiilabaum is in the process of creating the draft Neighborhood District graphic for this
district, consistent with the other neighborhood district graphics. She said at this stage, the Zoning Code
amendment and Zoning Map amendment are expected to move forward to the Planning and Zoning
Commission for their meeting on June 5.
Barb Cox reported she had read through the Code and had some questions like how the lots and blocks
would be measured.
Ms. Ray explained that one of the associated Code amendments is a modification to the Lots and Blocks
section clarifying that alleys cannot be used to measure block size, although private streets that are
designed to look like public streets could be, given the special circumstances expected for the
Neighborhood District. She added that a specific requirement of a minimum of 12 feet of dear sidewalk
area will be added to the Code to ensure adequate space for pedestrian activity.
Mr. Langworthy asked if there were any further questions or comments on the proposed Zoning Code
amendment at this time. [There were none.]
Administrative Review Team Meeting Minutes
Thursday, May 8, 2014
Page 4 of 5
CASE REVIEWS
3. Zoning Code Amendment — Bridge Street District — Riverside Neighborhood District
14- O39ADMC Zoning Code Amendment
Claudia Husak said this is a request for an amendment to the Zoning Code to establish a new Bridge
Street District zoning district and related Code amendments for the Riverside Neighborhood District. She
said this is a request for review and recommendation regarding proposed Zoning Code amendments
under the provisions of Zoning Code Sections 153.232 and 153.234.
Steve Langworthy said a determination was contemplated to take the Riverside Park out of the
neighborhood and put it in the Public designation.
Ms. Husak said City Council is hearing about the proposed amendments at their work session on Monday
and the Planning and Zoning Commission is invited.
Barb Cox asked if a time extension was possible and Ms. Husak replied yes but said it depends on how
the meeting goes on Monday night. Ms. Husak said this is scheduled to go to PZC on June 5 so the ART
needs to make a recommendation prior.
Ray Harpham concluded that these amendments need to be resolved before Crawford Haying can move
forward.
Ms. Husak inquired about the application submittal timing.
Mr. Harpham asked if the west side of Riverside Drive still had FEMA issues. Ms. Husak responded
affirmatively.
Ms. Cox said the new roadway configuration has not been completely resolved. She inquired about a 3-
dimensional model. Mr. Hahn said it will be produced.
Mr. Langworthy encouraged the ART to read through the text and submit comments to.Ms. Ray.
Mr. Hahn inquired about the proceedings for Monday night's meeting. Mr. Langworthy said City Council
will be introduced to the process, provided reasons for the Riverside Neighborhood District, and then
Crawford Haying will give a presentation.
Mr. Langworthy asked if there were any further questions or comments. [There were none.] He
concluded that a determination on this application would be anticipated for the upcoming ART meeting
agenda.
4. Area Rezoning — Bridge Street District — Riverside Neighborhood District
14 -O4OZ Zoning Map Amendment
Claudia Husak said this is a request for an area rezoning of 19 parcels for the Riverside Neighborhood
District in the Bridge Street District. She said this is a request for review and recommendation regarding
proposed land use map amendments under the provisions of Zoning Code Sections 153.232 and 153.234.
Ms. Husak said the conversation for the Zoning Amendment application above applies here as well.
Administrative Review Team Meeting Minutes
Thursday, May 1, 2014
Page 7 of 8
Ms. Ray restated the options for next steps. Mr. Gavin said he would speak with the customer and
confirm how they would like to proceed by Monday.
5. Zoning Code Amendment — Bridge Street District — Riverside Neighborhood District
14- O39ADMC Zoning Code Amendment
Rachel Ray said this is a request for an amendment to the Zoning Code to establish a new Bridge Street
District zoning district and related Code amendments for the Riverside Neighborhood District. She said
this is a request for review and recommendation regarding proposed Zoning Code amendments under the
provisions of Zoning Code Sections 153.232 and 153.234.
Ms. Ray said this application is a result of a development proposal submitted by Crawford Hoying for the
mixed -use development project proposed along Riverside Drive. She presented the area this covers,
which is for the land on the east side of the river only, and includes the driving range site.
Ms. Ray said the proposed new zoning district is a "neighborhood district," which is a special zoning
district for the major parts of the Bridge Stmt District with consolidated land ownership and the
opportunity to establish a major critical mass of mixed use activity. She said the proposed zoning district
regulations have been drafted to be very similar to the other neighborhood districts that were created for
the Indian Run Neighborhood, Sawmill Center Neighborhood, and Historic Transition Neighborhood.
Steve Langworthy pointed out that if the City would have had property owners with an interest in this
type of development back when the Code was originally written and the land was zoned, we may have
proceeded differently and created a special neighborhood district for this area originally.
Ms. Ray said this land will develop in phases, but the neighborhood districts were set up to address the
need to review larger developments to ensure that each phase would achieve the overall goal for the
district. She agreed that when this area was originally zoned into the Bridge Street District zoning district,
the previous land owners had wanted to retain their existing zoning as much as possible, and were not
interested in this type of zoning district. She said that the zoning district must be changed to
accommodate the type of mixed use development envisioned for this part of the Bridge Street District.
Ms. Ray said after a conference call with the City's Law Director this afternoon, they determined that the
City should be the sole applicant on both the Zoning Code amendment and the Zoning Map Amendment,
consistent with the process originally initiated for the Bridge Street District. She said next Thursday the
ART can recommend these cases to go forward to the Planning and Zoning Commission.
Ms. Ray said the Zoning Code amendments have to happen before the area rezoning. She suggested that
the text changes be viewed in the report that will show the "Track Changes" which will be placed in the
Drop Box.
Mr. Langworthy asked Nelson Yoder, Crawford Hoying Development Partners, if he had anything else to
add.
Mr. Yoder said he is comfortable with the proposed text and introduced Matt Starr, who was recently
hired by Crawford Hoying to help with this project.
Mr. Langworthy reiterated that this is the introduction phase that provides an opportunity to ask
questions.
Administrative Review Team Meeting Minutes
Thursday, May 1, 2014
Page 8 of 8
Jeff Tyler asked what the downside might be to the proposed Zoning Code amendment and area
rezoning.
Ms. Ray said the change in text is pretty straightforward; they plan to clarify the drive- through uses as it
is currently prohibited except for banks.
Mr. Yoder said he was fine with the conditional use. He said they hope to add a coffee shop -type of
restaurant with a drive -through that would not be visible from the shopping corridor. He said the drive -
through would have alley access and not be accessible or have frontage from the main roadway.
Ms. Ray said with the City as the applicant, an eating/drinking drive -through use would need to be added
to the Code.
Ms. Ray said she had discussed the types of building materials with Crawford Hoying as part of the
potential Zoning Code amendment. She said at this point, only minimal modifications were recommended
to the Building Types. She said any Code modifications to other parts of the Code other than the
neighborhood district will apply across the board.
Mr. Langworthy asked if the riverside park was included in the rezoning or if it was going to be placed in
the Public District. Fred Hahn inquired about the standards and permitted uses.
Mr. Langworthy asked if there were any further questions or comments.
Colleen Gilger said she would approve of a drive -through for an eating /drinking use.
Mr. Langworthy explained these cannot sprout up anywhere as they need to keep the pedestrian- oriented
character of this neighborhood and Ms. Ray reiterated that the drive - throughs will need to be placed on
the back side of the buildings, where any are located.
Mr. Hahn inquired about block size, parks, and connectivity. Mr. Langworthy said parks could be in the
Public zoning district.
Ms. Ray asked if there were any further comments. [There were none.] Mr. Langworthy reiterated that
Ms. Ray's report will highlight all the differences being proposed.
6. Area Rezoning — Bridge Street District — Riverside Neighborhood District
14 -0402 Zoning Map Amendment
Rachel Ray said this is a request for an area rezoning of 19 parcels for the Riverside Neighborhood
District in the Bridge Street District. She said this is a request for review and recommendation regarding
proposed land use map amendments under the provisions of Zoning Code Sections 153.232 and 153.234.
Ms. Ray said the conversation for the Zoning Amendment application above would apply here as well.
She presented a map showing the proposed change in zoning districts.
Ms. Ray asked if there were any further comments. [There were none.]
ADMINISTRATIVE
Mr. Langworthy asked if there were any administrative issues or other items for discussion. [There were
none.] The meeting was adjourned at 3:19 pm.