[0:02] Good evening and welcome to the city of dublin planning and zoning commission.
[0:07] you can join the meeting in person at 5 5 5 5 perimeter drive and
[0:11] also access the meeting via the live stream on the city of dublin's website. We
[0:15] welcome public participation, including public comments on cases.
[0:19] please join me in the pledge of allegiance.
[0:24] I pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america,
[0:29] and two, the republic one, one nation under
[0:34] god in with liberty and justice for
[0:41] thank you, ms. Maxwell, would you please call the role? Yes. Mr. Alexander?
[0:45] here. Mr. Chinook? Here. Mr. Desler.
[0:50] here. Mr. Garvin is absent ms. Harder here.
[0:54] mr. We,
[0:59] here's at this time, we'll, uh, accept documents and approval of the minutes.
[1:03] I will accept the motion to accept the documents into the record and approve the minutes from
[1:07] the november 6th, 2025 special and regular meetings.
[1:11] so moved. Thank you. Second.
[1:16] thank you mr. Chen. Yes. Yes. Mr. We? Yes.
[1:20] ms. Harder? Yes. Mr. Alexander? Yes. And mr. Desler?
[1:25] yes. Thank you. Thank you. The planning and zoning commission
[1:29] is an advisory board to city council when rezoning and plotting a property under
[1:34] consideration. In such cases, city council receives recommendations from the
[1:38] commission. In other cases, the commission has the final decision making responsibility,
[1:43] the rules and regulations of the planning and zoning commission state that no agenda items
[1:48] are to be introduced. After 10:30 pm our
[1:52] procedures tonight, the applicant will present their case first, followed by
[1:56] the staff's analysis and recommendation. The commission will then ask questions of
[2:00] the applicant and staff, followed by public comment before deliberating
[2:04] on the case. Anyone wishing to make public comment will be invited to come
[2:08] forward. Under each application, please ensure that the green light
[2:13] is on the microphone and that you state your name and address for the record.
[2:17] we request that you keep your comments to three minutes or less tonight.
[2:24] for those in the audience, uh, please refrain from side conversations, applause,
[2:28] or other audible reactions to public comments or statements of
[2:32] commissioners, staff, or applicants. It's important that the commissioners can hear what is
[2:36] being said on the record and that all have a fair opportunity to be heard.
[2:41] this protects the process, which is for the benefit of all concerned.
[2:45] so at this point, I'd like to swear in, uh, witnesses tonight. Anyone intending to
[2:49] address the commission or provide public comment on any administrative cases
[2:54] must be sworn in. Please stand, raise your right hand
[2:58] and answer in the affirmative after I state the question, the statement,
[3:03] do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth in your testimony
[3:07] to the commission tonight? Thank you all very much.
[3:12] okay. Our first case tonight is case number 25 dash 0 9 9
[3:17] ccp emerald parkway mixed use concept plan
[3:22] req. It's a request for review and non biting feedback for the construction of a new mixed
[3:26] use development. The 16 acre site is currently zoned plan commercial
[3:30] district pcd thomas kohler, and is located at the northeast
[3:34] corner of the intersection of emerald parkway and warner temple road.
[3:38] we're gonna start, as I stated before with the applicant's presentation.
[3:54] good evening. Uh, phil raey, uh, executive vice president of antitrust
[3:58] real estate address is 9 5 5 yard street and anna brown,
[4:02] uh, who's the lead developer on this project for us.
[4:06] zach, you get it pulled up. Uh, so again, welcome commission
[4:10] members. Uh, thank you for having us. We're really excited to hear your feedback, um, on
[4:14] this project. We've, uh, we've owned this site for quite some time and we've gone
[4:19] through a lot of different iterations throughout the years, and, and we think we've probably settled on
[4:23] one that, um, we're really excited to share tonight. Um,
[4:28] I move this here. So just a little bit about van trusts. Uh, I think you're
[4:32] familiar with maybe some of our projects in the city. Uh, we're a family owned national developer
[4:37] headquartered in kansas city, and we have an office in columbus, jacksonville, dallas,
[4:42] phoenix, and salt lake city. Uh, primarily we got our start in office in industrial
[4:46] development, and we have done some mixed use projects, uh, throughout the country.
[4:50] one of the bigger ones we've done is, uh, the point at polaris, which is up at 71 and
[4:54] gemini parkway, mix of office, multifamily, retail and,
[4:58] and parking garage. So, um, as some
[5:02] of you may know, we bought the emerald parkway site and the parkwood land,
[5:06] uh, together from duke realty in 2016. We've,
[5:11] um, actually did a land swap of the city of dublin in 2022
[5:15] for the parkwood uh, piece. And then we ended up developing an industrial
[5:19] building on crosby court. That was a speculative building. Uh, it's the
[5:23] building that ineos has their office and lab in it. So again, we do a
[5:27] variety of property, uh, uses throughout the city. So
[5:32] over the nine years since we've owned this prop property, we've done, um,
[5:36] a lot of different concept plans. As you can imagine, I think we're into the twenties and thirties,
[5:41] uh, on our share file in the office, but we created one in 2024.
[5:45] we were gonna bring it in front of the commission, but we decided with the envision dublin plan,
[5:49] let's, let's hold off and wait and, and make sure that we create something that
[5:53] hopefully is responsive to that plan and that you've created.
[5:58] and, and honestly, I think from our standpoint, we think we've created
[6:02] a more thoughtful, um, plan in a variety of different uses
[6:06] based on that envision dublin plan. So we're really excited to hear,
[6:10] uh, your feedback tonight. Anna brown's gonna kind of dive into the details
[6:14] of our vision and happy to answer questions, uh, when we're done. Thank
[6:18] you. Thank you.
[6:25] um, so like phil mentioned, we initially submitted in early 2024
[6:29] to bring a plan before you, we decided to pull that plan back, let
[6:33] the envision dublin community plan be adopted, and then take
[6:37] a fresh look at our site plan and try to create something that hopefully mirrors
[6:42] what, um, the emerald corridor special area plan reflects.
[6:46] um, and so in doing that, we wanted to focus on a thoughtful mix of,
[6:50] uses, a variety of open spaces, walkability, and connectivity,
[6:55] and to really make sure we're not only creating a successful development,
[6:59] but really adding amenities that can support the office, the current
[7:03] office uses and future office uses in that area. Um,
[7:07] as you can see, we closely resemble the building layout of the plan. On the left here,
[7:12] you have the special area plan. On the right, you have our, um,
[7:16] site plan. Um, we closely resembled the building layout and the
[7:20] distribution of uses. We've also tried to match, um, the landscaping screening
[7:25] and the desire for street scaped private drives,
[7:29] connecting east to west throughout the site plan. Um,
[7:33] again, we really wanted to take a fresh set of eyes and make sure that we're being responsive to
[7:37] the plan that was most recently adopted within the city.
[7:43] um, so now to walk through our plan. So I'm gonna start on the north side, which is page left. So
[7:47] throughout the site plan, we have a variety of open spaces, um,
[7:51] included the largest being on this northern portion. So the
[7:55] goal of this is to preserve the george geary run tree
[7:59] line as it runs kind of east to west. Also, to provide
[8:04] a large open space that adds not only to this project, but to the area. You can see
[8:08] that we've included a large walking path, a large pond.
[8:12] um, we'll show some photos later in the presentation that kind of represents
[8:16] the feel we're trying to achieve here. Um, as discussed with staff,
[8:20] we'd be open to dedicating this as and donating it as a public park.
[8:24] um, but it's really meant to kind of establish the feel of what we're trying
[8:28] to accomplish here. Um, adjacent to that, you'll find the amenities for
[8:32] the residential uses. The clubhouse is designed to
[8:36] offer fitness, um, lounge and coworking space
[8:41] to the residences. We've also included a pool and, um, pickleball courts
[8:45] here. So moving down further south to the residential uses. So
[8:49] I'll start on the western boundary. On emerald parkway, we are showing three
[8:53] story town homes right here. Um, the special area plan called for
[8:57] one to two story commercial uses office uses here, um, at
[9:02] a three story residential building. We're actually only five to six feet higher
[9:06] than showing two story commercial office here. Um, the reason for deviating
[9:10] from the plan in this area is
[9:15] we all know the challenges with the office market today. And although the
[9:19] properties across the street, I believe are fairly successful, it is
[9:23] challenging to build new product to compete with that, where your rents are going to
[9:27] be significantly higher and to fill those when a tenant could happily
[9:31] go across the street. Um, so that's why we deviated there, but we wanted to
[9:35] be really thoughtful. In doing so, you'll see in the elevations that we've added really unique
[9:39] architectural characteristics here to add to the character along
[9:43] emerald parkway. Zach, you can say that last one for me. Um, also including
[9:48] a sidewalk and walkups to the ground level entrances to really again, establish
[9:52] that neighborhood feel. Um, and then working back towards the east,
[9:56] we're showing another variety of town home product here. This does not include
[10:00] the tuck under garages. Um, in total we're at 35 town homes.
[10:05] those are all ranging from two to three bedrooms. The middle town home product
[10:09] is meant to offer a variety of character and then also maybe achieve a
[10:13] different, um, price point for a similar use. And then continuing
[10:18] east, another place that we differ from the special area plan is
[10:22] the plan shows the existing tree line remaining that runs,
[10:26] um, in the northern middle portion of the site. We're showing
[10:30] a, a landscape sidewalk connecting the southern retail uses all the way up
[10:34] to the northern uses here, as opposed to keeping the tree line. Um,
[10:38] our initial review of the tree line is that due to the varying
[10:43] grades, it will be challenging to preserve those trees as you grade
[10:47] the site to bring it up to street level, um, and be consistent. We
[10:51] are conducting a tree study, um, to help us analyze this. And
[10:55] we're committing to committed to a tree replacement program to make sure that
[10:59] although we're taking away, we're, we're equally adding to the site, um,
[11:04] further east. So we show four story multifamily product
[11:08] here, um, three buildings. And the layout of this was really replicating
[11:12] the special area plan. Um, so we're showing about 210
[11:17] units in this four story product. The
[11:21] northern two buildings are roughly 80,000 square feet in total. And then the
[11:25] southern building being about 50, 55,000 square feet. Um,
[11:29] again, the character of each building is supposed to be different. So you're not looking at these
[11:33] big blocks of a commercial product. Um, it's supposed to be broken up by
[11:37] landscaping for this community feel. Um, like I mentioned, the main amenities
[11:42] are on the northern portion of the site, but you'll see we have other amenities sprinkled
[11:46] throughout. Um, this is for not only the benefit of the residents,
[11:50] but also to break up the buildings and, uh, break up the parking on site so
[11:54] you don't feel like you have these big chunks of parking because this is a surface parked project,
[11:59] um, for parking for ratios. So at a studio to one
[12:03] bed, we're showing one spot per unit at a two bed. We're at one and a half
[12:07] per unit. And then a town home, we're at two per unit, which brings
[12:11] you to just under 350 spaces for the residential uses.
[12:16] um, moving down further south. So you'll see, I guess
[12:20] I'll, I'll go back for one second. So you see we've added two private drives here, one
[12:24] through the center of the site, one kind of separating the main retail
[12:29] from the main residential area. Um, the addition of these were really
[12:34] through feedback from the staff that we wanted to create a very street
[12:38] scaped entrance on either side, um, of the project.
[12:42] think of it as though you have a front door on both the east and the west side. Um, we've added
[12:46] side sidewalks along those private drives. On the center one, you'll
[12:51] see that we've added parallel parking, um, and walk-ups to the ground
[12:55] floor units. Um, and then along parkwood, I know there was a
[12:59] desire, which we agree with to activate parkwood drive. And so
[13:03] we've designed these four story buildings to really have a front door on parkwood,
[13:08] although they'll also be accessed from the east. Again, you'll see parallel parking,
[13:12] landscaping sidewalks and walk-ups to the ground floor units.
[13:17] um, moving down to the retail, so the retail plan,
[13:21] although similar to the special area plan deviates slightly, and this is really due to
[13:25] market feedback. We've brought this in front of a handful of retail
[13:29] brokers in the area with the goal of how do we bring really quality
[13:33] tenants to this project that not only will serve the residents that are
[13:37] gonna live here, but also the surrounding office areas. Um, we've also met
[13:42] with a handful of office neighbors and they
[13:46] shared similar sentiment that we need to add amenities to this area. Their employees are
[13:50] looking for somewhere to go after work for lunch, things like that. Um,
[13:54] so that feedback drove not only the layout but also the size.
[13:59] the outlaw on the southeastern portion is about 3,500 square
[14:03] feet. That likely feels like it would be an elevated fast casual
[14:07] or coffee concept here. Um, in the middle you'll see an
[14:11] inline retail building that can serve retail office, daycare,
[14:16] medical uses, um, as it sees fit. And then on the
[14:20] southeastern portion, it's shown as about 3,500
[14:24] square feet. It could be expanded, and that's really meant to accommodate a restaurant use.
[14:28] you can see we've shown another pond here with outside seating to create
[14:32] a really cool destination for residents and neighbors in this area.
[14:36] um, you'll see here that we've also included two drive-throughs.
[14:41] and again, that was based on feedback we've received from the market that if you really
[14:45] wanna bring quality national credit tenants, tenants
[14:49] that are gonna enhance the area a drive-through is a necessity for those
[14:53] tenants. Um, again, we wanna be really thoughtful in how we curate
[14:57] a tenant mix here, that they can be impactful to not only this project, but
[15:01] also to the development as a whole. Um,
[15:06] I just wanna call out, we've touched on it slightly, the pedestrian connections that we've developed here.
[15:10] and so there's an existing, um, sidewalk loop around the
[15:14] project. We obviously intend to maintain that as well as add a handful
[15:18] of connections cutting through the project. This is designed, um,
[15:23] to really integrate the mix of uses from the south all the way to the north so that
[15:27] this area is not only accessed by car, but it can really be accessed by pedestrians
[15:31] as well. Um, it also calls out, uh, the handful of green spaces that
[15:36] we've included in the project. And then as
[15:40] I mentioned before, we've included a handful, um, of imagery references just
[15:44] to create, help create the field that we're trying to achieve here. Again, it's supposed
[15:48] to be very neighborhood friendly, walkable, um, and inviting to the community,
[15:53] not, you know, a a cold, harsh commercial use that kind of sticks
[15:57] out within the neighborhood in the area. And then we've
[16:01] included elevations, um, of each of the residential uses. So these are the tuck under town
[16:05] homes that we've included on emerald parkway. We're using natural, natural
[16:10] colored materials here. Um, again, the peak roofs we thought would
[16:14] be complimentary to the peak roofs across the street at the camden office product.
[16:18] um, we've added kind of those moon arches over the doors and a couple other
[16:22] interesting architectural features, again, to elevate the curb
[16:27] appeal along emerald parkway. And then next you'll see
[16:31] the additional, um, town
[16:35] home use. Yep, right there. Um, again, variety in
[16:39] terms of the, the residential buildings, again, very thoughtful in the details
[16:43] that we're including. It's supposed to kind of break up the site plan. And then
[16:47] the third one we've included is the four story, um,
[16:51] residential buildings, again, balconies. We're trying to both meet
[16:55] what the market is telling us that tenants want and create a product that's desirable and
[17:00] fits in with the area. And then we've also included, um,
[17:04] a retail image as well. Again, we're showing flat roofs here, natural,
[17:09] um, materials, a variety of materials used across the site that while they're
[17:13] different they still compliment each other. Um, and then I'll just close here with
[17:17] a handful of images. Again, trying to
[17:22] establish the type of feel that we'd like this product to be. Um,
[17:27] we want it to be very high quality, very inviting. It's worth
[17:31] mentioning. Um, we did conduct a market study when trying to design
[17:35] the residential and the rents we're trying to achieve here
[17:39] average about $2,000 per month. So ranging from studio
[17:43] to town home, it's about, our target is about 1300 to
[17:47] $3,000 a month. So we're trying to create a high quality product here.
[17:51] um, we hope that the community likes it. We hope it's well expected or well received
[17:55] and happy to answer questions.
[18:01] alright, thank you very much mr. Hounsell.
[18:11] great, thank you very much and good evening. Um, I will do my best to keep this brief,
[18:15] uh, as there was a great explanation of the project, uh, for the process. This
[18:19] is a concept plan that the applicant has brought forward. This is a first step in what would
[18:23] be a plan unit development process. Um, so the purpose of the concept
[18:27] plan is for the commission to provide non-binding feedback and guidance for
[18:32] the development. Really what's being considered tonight is alignment with the community
[18:36] plan and its recommendations, um, providing feedback on the general layout and
[18:40] the land uses densities, um, street scapes in
[18:44] the open space framework and just understanding how it integrates with the surrounding areas.
[18:48] so, uh, there's no determination tonight, but there is just a request for non-binding
[18:53] feedback. So this site is, uh, approximately 16 acres
[18:57] in size. It's highlighted in yellow. Uh, it is zoned thomas
[19:02] kohler, which is a planned development district. Uh, some of these surrounding
[19:06] contexts here, you have neighborhood office to the west. You have,
[19:10] uh, what will be, uh, an additional neighborhood office in the southwest
[19:14] corner at that intersection, which is that shiha law office that was approved.
[19:18] um, in previous years. You have the corporate office buildings to the, the
[19:22] east and northeast. And then you have a, uh, retail commercial
[19:27] center to the south of the site. Uh, there are some natural features
[19:31] existing on the site, which would be the glen gary ditched at the northern point of the
[19:35] site. And then the, uh, row of mature
[19:40] trees, which you can see
[19:44] maybe there we go. Um, on the images on the screen,
[19:49] uh, that are called out in the community plan recommendations.
[19:55] so the community plan does offer recommendations at a very broad
[19:59] level with the future land use plan. Again, the community plan was adopted last year,
[20:03] uh, and does provide recommendations throughout the city. For this site,
[20:07] it is recommended to be a mixed use neighborhood designation. The intent
[20:12] of this is for a neighborhood services located near existing and future residential neighborhoods
[20:16] that are walkable, auto accessible and scaled to neighborhoods.
[20:20] uh, generally the principal uses that are recommended within these districts are office
[20:24] commercial, uh, retail, eating and drinking with single family
[20:29] and multifamily residential as supporting uses. And then there are other,
[20:33] uh, development characteristics that you can see. Uh, now this is
[20:37] very broad in what it recommends is this is applicable to any
[20:41] property within the city dublin that is zone is designated for mixed
[20:45] use neighborhood. Um, the community plan also does have more
[20:50] specific recommendations within six special area plans. Uh, this site is located
[20:54] within the emerald corridor, which, uh, has more site
[20:58] specific recommendations that would be applicable, uh, to this site.
[21:03] and you can see that here on the screen with the image that's provided. Uh,
[21:07] the special area plan calls out the parkwood mixed use area,
[21:11] uh, and provides the concept that is shown on the screen. Some of the recommendations
[21:15] include a mix of uses such as uh, neighborhood scale, office, residential
[21:20] uses and supporting commercial. Typically, uh, what's
[21:24] expected here would be the buildings are fronting out on the street with shared parking to the rear
[21:29] of the buildings. Uh, the massing here is proposed or expected,
[21:33] recommended to be one to two stories along emerald parkway with a max of four stories
[21:37] along parkwood place. And the intent of that is to provide a transition from the
[21:42] existing neighborhood office that is located to the west of the site and then to the more corporate
[21:46] office and interstate sites that we have to the east. Additional
[21:51] recommendations are preserving the existing tree stand through the center of the site,
[21:55] maintaining the green character, uh, along emerald parkway, providing a gateway
[21:59] location at the route at the intersection of warner temple and emerald
[22:03] parkway and then activating parkwood place.
[22:08] so on the screen you'll see a comparison, uh, of the concept plan
[22:12] on the left that's being proposed by the applicant. And then the emerald corridor special
[22:16] area plan concept that's shown on the right now the special area
[22:20] plan recommendation. This is not intended to show exactly how this should
[22:24] develop. It is intended to show how the recommendations can be met for the site.
[22:29] so it can differ from this, but this is just an example, uh, to give more of a visual understanding
[22:33] of what these recommendations mean. Uh, I won't dive too much into the project
[22:38] as that has already been summarized, but focused more on what the discussion questions are
[22:42] tonight. Uh, the focus for the discussion questions would be around the massing
[22:46] shown along emerald parkway. As stated, these are three story townhomes,
[22:51] uh, that are shown along this frontage. Again, that does exceed what is
[22:55] recommended. Um, however, the commission should consider whether this type of
[22:59] massing is appropriate given the neighborhood office scale that's on the west side of
[23:04] the street. Additionally, having residential along emerald parkway is something
[23:08] the commission should provide their feedback on. Um, as within the concept,
[23:12] it does show neighborhood office, um, but within the text it does not state
[23:17] directly that it needs to be neighborhood office along along that frontage. So that is something
[23:21] that, uh, staff and the applicant are looking for feedback on. Uh, the open
[23:25] space framework, this is showing a new public park and the northern point
[23:29] and then there are smaller passive spaces spread throughout the site. So the applicant
[23:33] is looking for feedback on how they're showing open space. Um, and then the
[23:38] final discussion question is about the commercial space at the southern portion of
[23:42] the site. One of the recommendations is at the intersection that it'd be a gateway
[23:46] location currently that's shown as a drive-through. Um, so understanding
[23:51] where the commission stands with how this is being laid out with the commercial. Um,
[23:55] and then also whether drive-throughs are appropriate for the site and if they are,
[23:59] what's the appropriate location for them too.
[24:04] so with that, uh, those are our discussion questions tonight. More than happy to answer
[24:08] any questions. Thank you. So point of order,
[24:12] this is at the point where we can ask the applicant and staff questions before we go into
[24:16] comm. Thank you. Just clarifying. So at this point I'm gonna look to the
[24:20] commission for questions for the applicant or staff.
[24:25] mr. Chinook? Yes. You knew I was gonna call on you. I know, I know.
[24:29] uh, thank you, uh, for coming. Thank you for your presentation. Uh, couple
[24:34] questions. The, um, I mean this is for, I should start
[24:38] with staff. So, so there's along, I'm parkway there's three story town homes.
[24:42] obviously, you know, I know we talk about stories and height or very different things, but
[24:46] we're calling these three stories. And then the architecture showing a large peak, almost making 'em
[24:52] closer to four stories. , if you include attic space, is that, I mean, where
[24:56] is it? Where do we stand on that height?
[25:01] we would consider them three story similar to how a single story building the,
[25:06] the neighborhood office across the street. Those are one story buildings, but because of the
[25:10] roof type they do appear taller, so. Okay, thank you.
[25:14] um, then I guess a question for the, uh, applicant. One of the, um, and I'm trying to understand
[25:18] that the topography along erd parkway, there's, there's,
[25:23] um, existing mounting there now and it looks like I can kind of see the topo
[25:27] lines on this plan. Is that still the intent is to maintain the
[25:32] mounting along emerald parkway that's there today? The, from
[25:36] the grass, the grass mounting? Um, I don't believe the intent is
[25:40] to maintain the, the mounting. It's, it's to even the grade across,
[25:44] but we'll provide appropriate setbacks. Okay. And along those same lines, you
[25:48] talk a lot about um, connectivity, pedestrian connectivity, which is
[25:52] great. Mm-hmm . Um, when you think about, and I know this isn't necessarily in your realm here, but
[25:56] as you look at this plan where you've got the, the property to the
[26:00] east, significant part of the whole development connectivity to
[26:05] that. Can you speak a little bit about, I guess the east and west too? We've got
[26:09] all this co corporate office space across the street when you talked about having the
[26:13] opportunity for restaurant spaces to support that. Um, we're not showing
[26:17] a lot of connectivity between those two uh, properties.
[26:21] sure. I'll start with the east. So as seen in the special area plan, obviously the eastern
[26:26] side is intended to be an area of development. That's one of the main reasons
[26:30] why we made parkwood appear as though it's the front door. So you're not coming
[26:34] into the backside of a development to access it. Parkwood
[26:38] itself should be fully street scaped landscaped with entrances into the
[26:43] park. You can see the, the four curb cuts were showing on the
[26:47] eastern side of this with obviously sidewalks lining each of those.
[26:51] um, you could enter in between each individual building. And then that's also
[26:55] why we've shown the interior pedestrian connections to be able to
[26:59] walk about the site as well. And not just around it to where you feel
[27:03] like you're fighting with cars in the middle. Um, on the western side, again, we tried to
[27:08] line up or we did line up with the curb cuts on the other side of the building.
[27:12] you can see on the northern and southern boundary of the properties to the west, we're aligning
[27:16] the sidewalk connection point as well. So at some point, I guess
[27:20] the future plan would be, um, some sort of walkway across
[27:24] emerald parkway at that connection point? That would probably be desired, yes. Or some
[27:29] sort of. Okay. Thank you. And then can you talk
[27:33] a little bit about, as you, again, I know we're, you know, kinda using the envision dublin as a guide, which obviously
[27:37] appreciate, um, can you talk a little bit about the breakout of the
[27:41] space? 'cause you know, you've got the, to the plan south, you've got the, the four
[27:45] story multifamily building that's kind of out there on an island surrounded by this re re retail
[27:50] restaurant space. Um, can you talk about how that that site interacts and did you
[27:54] consider more of a pure mix of restaurant retail
[27:58] within the, within the residential as well as a
[28:03] opportunity? Sure. So the way we've designed it is a mix of uses
[28:07] versus within one building. Having first floor retail and then multifamily
[28:12] above. That's, it's more challenging to create. Um, that was one of
[28:16] the reasons why we put a smaller multifamily building down there to
[28:20] connect the two pieces. So you didn't feel like you had a clean break at that private drive
[28:24] entrance? I dunno if you wanna touch on the, yeah, and again, I think the other idea is just really
[28:28] to create a neighborhood mm-hmm . So again, we want people out of the units walking around interacting with, you
[28:32] know, the great park park system that the city has and the walkways and the
[28:37] jogging pass. Again, as anna mentioned on the property of the east,
[28:41] if and when that develops, we wanna be able to easily connect to that. Again, the city
[28:45] owns the parkwood site. We think that by activating this site it'll create a new energy
[28:49] for this area and help, you know, land a user that they want on
[28:54] that, on that highway ground there. And then thank, thank you. That's really helpful. And
[28:58] then as you look at how much residential is here versus the retail
[29:02] restaurant, you feel that the general public outside of the, the residents
[29:06] will feel comfortable coming onto the site and soliciting to different businesses here
[29:10] since it's so it is a very heavy residential development. Yeah, absolutely. And that was just another
[29:14] reason too, to separate the retail a little bit more where the general public could easily come
[29:19] and visit a restaurant or any of the retailers that are in the, the inline
[29:23] space was again just a, you want everybody be able to use it, not just the residents.
[29:27] okay. Sorry, one more and then, uh, one more question for the applicant along
[29:31] the arch on this standpoint of the architecture, uh, really, really nice design.
[29:36] and you mentioned you feel, can you talk a little bit more how you feel it fits? 'cause it looks
[29:41] judging by what's going on in the area. I would say it looks a little bit foreign to
[29:45] what's happening there now, but I want, I wanna hear your perspective on how you feel it fits with
[29:49] the design style. I mean the, the residential residential
[29:54] specific. I feel like I, sure, I hear what you're saying on the, the retail space 'cause it does fit, but
[29:58] along the residential site, can you talk a little bit more about the architecture? Sure. I think the intent behind
[30:02] it was, although you're creating a new product, we wanted to take anything
[30:07] ultramodern out of the inspiration of it. I feel like you see a lot of, whether it be
[30:11] downtown or suburban new residential product is very, very modern. We did not want
[30:15] that to be the case in this area. Um, we try to stay away,
[30:20] although we're showing a darker product on the eastern side, we try to stay away from very
[30:24] harsh materials and harsh colors, that kind of contrast. Um, again,
[30:28] incorporating natural materials. And again, I think what
[30:32] we will add to the area, although it doesn't exactly replicate, is using different
[30:37] materials and having a different look for each building will make it integrate with the
[30:41] neighborhood as opposed to standing out as a, a chunk on its own.
[30:46] thank you
[30:51] ms. Arger. Thank you. Thank you for being here and thank you for
[30:55] meeting with the businesses around the area. I think that's, uh, a good,
[30:59] um, perspective to kind of get about where we're going with this as well too.
[31:03] um, when you think about the amenities, I see where they're gonna be able to do some
[31:07] walking, things like that and, uh, I would think they wouldn't be able to use the pool.
[31:12] um, correct that, but, uh, is, would the pickleball
[31:16] be open to the public? We've debated
[31:20] on the appropriate way to make it available to the prob to the public. It's intended
[31:24] to be for the private residential use. I know other, other
[31:29] projects in the area or ohio region have figured out the right way where it is
[31:33] for the residents, but you can reserve it via a public link that allows
[31:37] others to access. We haven't quite figured out the right way to do that, but it is something we're
[31:41] looking into. Once you figure that out, do you think you'll be, um, whichever
[31:45] way you go, the landscaping would change with that too, is have you thought
[31:49] a little bit about that because you don't want, you know, the public to go fall
[31:53] into the, you know, say I'm gonna go swimming today and then they can't. Sure, sure. That's fair.
[31:57] no, you, it's a well taken point. You would appropriately landscape and fence it so that you
[32:02] understood the break in public to private area.
[32:06] and then, um, I guess I've got a couple questions. Um, thinking about,
[32:11] um, the, um,
[32:16] oops, I'm sorry, one second here. Um, parking
[32:20] with the townhomes. So if I understand correctly, you can
[32:24] park, there's a garage with it, is that correct? Just on the five
[32:28] smaller buildings on the western boundary and then there's one slightly,
[32:33] uh, southeast of those. Okay. And then, then there would be, um, a place like
[32:38] that you could park another car. So that would be two cars, is that correct? So the
[32:42] one would go in a garage and then there would be a, a allocated parking spaces
[32:46] that you could park elsewhere, a pavement, a pavement that you could park your second
[32:50] car. Is that correct? Yes. It wouldn't, I wouldn't imagine that it's designated
[32:55] to that area, but it's accounted for within the mix of the parking
[32:59] available to the project. Okay. It's hard for me to, to see that. 'cause I would think that
[33:03] I would drive into my garage and then behind me would be another spot that
[33:07] I could park my other car. Yeah. If I, you know, is that true
[33:12] or you're figuring that out? I think figuring that out. Okay. Okay. Yeah, so, so then
[33:16] I get to the number of parking that's there 'cause it still looks
[33:21] a lot of parking and so, um, is that something
[33:25] you're taking into effect the number that may be parked in a garage or
[33:29] parked on a slab? Is that, so in the ratios
[33:33] that we provided at studio and one bedrooms, one per unit, two bedrooms,
[33:37] one and a half, and then town homes two per unit, that's all those ratios are
[33:41] included in the 340 spaces. And the three 40 is reflective of
[33:45] the 50 town home spaces as well as the surface parking. So do you count the one in the garage
[33:50] as a parking spot? Yes. Like that's counted? Yes. Okay. Just clarifying, just
[33:54] making sure I'm on the right track with that. And then the sidewalks, will they
[33:58] be widened to what, you know, envision dublin's leaning
[34:02] towards and so forth? They're, they're right now, if you go out there now it's, it's,
[34:06] you know, the three I guess feet or something of that sort smaller,
[34:10] but it's something we could explore. We haven't heard that detail. Yes. Yeah. So that like
[34:15] if you're with a stroller, you can walk by it. Yeah. Yeah. Sounds good. Okay. And
[34:19] then, um, are the, are the town homes that are in the middle
[34:23] that, that change up a little bit? Um, do they have balconies or are those the
[34:27] juliet those are shown with balconies, interior balconies,
[34:31] correct. You can pardon me. Uh, with within, not on the corner. So it's
[34:35] not as though the, the edges are flanked with balconies, but on the front of the building
[34:40] you can see, um, on the elevation we have included balconies. And you're saying I can walk out on it?
[34:44] uh, yes, the, the, uh, grade level ones are designed that you could walk out.
[34:48] okay. Okay. Put some furniture out there. Yes. Okay. .
[34:53] and then, um, a couple things, let me get my question here. Right.
[34:57] um, so concerning
[35:01] the drive-throughs, um, I guess I'm understanding
[35:05] that you looked and, and in the scheme
[35:10] of things, it sounds like drive-throughs are in and that will bring some
[35:14] more people to the area. Um, have
[35:18] you looked at or thinking about how many cars
[35:22] stacks and would you need to know what type of product they
[35:26] would be selling to know if cars could be stacked and if
[35:30] there's prob problematic problems with that?
[35:35] yes, you would need to know that and you would look into that as we got smarter on the use or
[35:39] the tenant that we're able to bring to the project. But today you're asking for two, if
[35:43] I'm hearing that correct? Yes. So, uh, a city question, um, would they need
[35:47] to come back to this body to discuss? Um,
[35:52] yeah, if they were doing that? Yeah, thank you. So because
[35:56] this would be a part of a plan unit, development district, the next step would
[36:00] be the preliminary development plan and rezoning, which includes the development text.
[36:04] so that's where we would find and figure out what is appropriate for
[36:09] the site, whether it's, you know, whether it is drive-throughs and
[36:13] how many, um, where those would be located. That's, that would all be handled at, at
[36:17] a next step. Okay. And at that point we may not know what, who
[36:21] may be, um, you know, partaking in it, you know,
[36:25] what business is there. Correct. But we would, we would
[36:29] be outlining requirements for stacking at that point. Okay. And then
[36:33] I had one question also, I I couldn't find if there was some busing around
[36:37] there too. Um, bus that's on like parkwood or something of
[36:42] that sort? So there's actually a spot on the site. Um,
[36:46] it's where that southern curb cut is, um, I'm trying
[36:50] to highlight it on the screen. Um, that is dedicated space for a bus
[36:54] pull off, but I do not believe we have a bus route
[36:58] there today. Tina, you wanna chime in on this?
[37:03] I think that's right, but I think coda is actually looking at adding a line line 30, um, that could potentially
[37:07] use that space. Okay, great. Thank you.
[37:11] thank you. Thank you mr. Alexander.
[37:16] zach, a couple questions about terminology. Um, all the
[37:21] documents refer to the residential as a supporting use.
[37:25] there are a lot of implications. Does that mean secondary
[37:30] to the other uses on the site?
[37:34] so within the, the parkwood mixed use
[37:39] recommendations, so there's a page within the community plan that talks
[37:44] specifically to this site. It talks about a mix of neighborhood
[37:48] office, residential and supporting commercial.
[37:53] so in that sense it does not talk about it being a supporting use. Now
[37:57] in our, um, the example that we have on the screen,
[38:01] again that looks at more than just this site. It looks as you
[38:05] go along two 70 and then further to the north. So residential
[38:09] is something that is contemplated, um, within this, this area.
[38:14] I see. So it's broader. Um, another question. Can I, can I piggy back off of that? So the
[38:18] community plan though, speaking of this as a mixed use neighborhood site,
[38:24] the future land use yes. Yes. Speaks to it being a secondary use.
[38:29] it does, but the more specific site recommendations for the special
[38:33] area plan call out that this is not, it would not be
[38:37] supporting that it is considered as a principle use. I think you I
[38:41] recommended as one. Yes. I just wanted to clarify that between the two documents. Thank you.
[38:46] alright, second question about terminology. Terminology shared parking
[38:50] means different things. Now what the applicant
[38:54] has done is done a strict parking count based on uses. But does the
[38:58] community, the city ever allow for those
[39:02] uses that are complimentary, sharing the same spaces?
[39:07] we have done that, yes. And that's certainly something that could be contemplated here. I believe
[39:11] that what the applicant had done with this is take their units and
[39:15] provide a standard, uh, amount of parking that they would need. And
[39:19] then I think the same with the commercial. So I think that's on, just based on what is out there.
[39:23] it's not based on opportunity to share, it's just in shared locations. Okay,
[39:27] thank you. 'cause that could have a lot of benefits. Um, a couple
[39:32] questions for the applicant. How are you? Well, our, our neighborhood
[39:38] plan, the, um, one of the plans calls out for a hundred feet right
[39:42] away along, um, emerald parkway. Now
[39:46] tell me why you've chosen to depart from that. So we, based
[39:50] on the 30 foot setback that's shown in the special area plan.
[39:56] okay. So since we have contradictory plans, you chose the one most beneficial?
[40:00] yes, . Okay. Alright, fair enough. Um, how'd you come up with a number units
[40:04] on the site?
[40:08] ? That's a great question. As a developer, we always want more density, but again, we're trying
[40:12] to be respectful of the community plan, not do something that's gonna be overwhelming
[40:17] for the, for the neighborhood. Um, still hopefully make the project feasible
[40:21] and it's, it's certainly a, an art to get that to happen. But, um, again,
[40:26] I think breaking up the residential buildings and creating, trying to create a neighborhood
[40:30] there, there was just kind of a, a hope to get close to 200 units or just
[40:34] above that. And, and last question, how are you addressing
[40:38] the scale? I know jamie asked a question about the materials of those buildings
[40:43] that are across the street. How are you addressing the scale of those
[40:47] buildings? So we've started, and, and zach and I have had a lot of
[40:51] conversations about the desire to step up as you move towards the east towards
[40:55] two 70. That's why we've shown the tallest buildings of four story on
[40:59] the eastern side. As you look across the site, you step up in height, understanding
[41:04] that the, the camden buildings on the western side are at a lower height
[41:09] in the town homes that we're showing. We're hoping by not only stepping up height
[41:13] on our site, but by showing the different product types within the residential
[41:17] realm, that it also helps with that massing effect again, so you don't feel like you're staring
[41:21] at one very large building. Okay. Thank you. Thank you
[41:27] mr. Disher.
[41:32] thanks kim. Hey zach, I wanna go back on the, the question that gary asked and,
[41:36] uh, kim followed up on about the, the, uh,
[41:41] special area plan, right? And then the envision dublin
[41:46] because they're, they're a little contradictory relative to primary and secondary
[41:50] uses. That's, that's fair, right? Yes. Okay. So
[41:54] what is the city's preference? So
[41:58] the future land use is kind of your 40,000
[42:03] foot high view and that's, that's part of the distinction in
[42:08] what is recommended here is kind of a catchall for
[42:12] any property in the city that has the mixed use neighborhood designation.
[42:17] when it comes to the special area plans, these are not applicable throughout the entire city,
[42:21] but just to key locations where
[42:26] we have more specific recommendations that we want to take into consideration. So
[42:30] I would say that the emerald corridor or special area plan is more specific
[42:35] in what is recommended and expected in these areas. So that's why we
[42:39] probably, we would consider the mixed use neighborhood in terms
[42:43] of its intent. But the emerald corridor or special area plan recommendations
[42:48] are more specific to this site. So that's where we're, there's a, there's a balancing
[42:52] act between those, those two that, um, you know,
[42:56] there are elements of it, but this is more specific and has those recommendations that do defer,
[43:01] um, a little bit from the future land use plan.
[43:05] right. Because here there's essentially zero office.
[43:10] let's, and that would be in
[43:15] violation of which one? Which one of the plans? I can't remember. Can't keep track of them. There's too many,
[43:19] but it's essentially it was it the city's expectation
[43:23] to have some type of office
[43:27] use at this site based on how we show the
[43:31] concept on the screen. It contemplates neighborhood, commercial, neighborhood office,
[43:35] suburban office, and mixed use residential. So a lot of horizontal
[43:40] mixed use rather than vertical mixed use here. I'm with you. Okay, thanks. I appreciate it.
[43:46] okay, a couple questions for the applicant. The, you had mentioned
[43:50] the, that tree line that was down the middle of
[43:54] the, that'd be difficult to kind of navigate, uh, with,
[43:58] with the design that you had, how, how much time did you spend
[44:02] evaluating potentially saving some of the components of that mature
[44:06] tree line? Our tree study is still underway, so we are in the
[44:10] early stages of that. Okay. The,
[44:16] gary had the question on the setback for, for, would you consider, how much evaluation
[44:21] did you do on some of that? Uh, the, that the
[44:25] retail component that fronts warner temple and,
[44:29] and, and emerald parkway? 'cause it feels like it's
[44:34] not, not in a bad way just kind of thrown down and I didn't know if there was any kind of
[44:38] other consideration about incorporating, you know, entering emeral parkway
[44:42] from, um, from tuttle incorporating some of
[44:47] some different architecture of those retail buildings.
[44:52] yeah, so we, we've started with kind of your standard setback and then that was
[44:56] one of the reasons we've also included abundant green space around it. Thinking
[45:00] that you could utilize that green space to add more interesting features,
[45:04] um, to both highlight the retail but then also add to
[45:08] the area some type of gateway feature or something like
[45:12] that. Sure. Consider that. It feels, I don't
[45:17] know, 'cause you know, that whole street, if you're, if you're continuing down there, there's a lot of like
[45:23] drive-throughs. I think I know the old steak and chick, I can't remember they're there. It just, it feels
[45:28] kind of not appropriate for that site. W would you, would
[45:32] you consider removing the drive-throughs and doing some other
[45:36] type of resident or retail in those in those areas?
[45:41] I think what's challenging is what we've heard from the market is that if you eliminate
[45:45] the drive-throughs, you're gonna be challenged to bring quality tenants to
[45:49] those buildings to fill those buildings and actually add amenities to the area.
[45:56] okay. What type of evaluation
[46:01] have you done relative to the open spaces? Because
[46:05] you know this, it's, it's fairly dense what you're proposing and it doesn't seem
[46:09] like certain of these apartments are
[46:13] gonna have a lot of green space to the extent they contemplate
[46:17] children being around. So what we've tried to do,
[46:22] while as phil mentioned, obviously as a developer you like to meet a certain density
[46:26] for the project. But so what we tried to do is you have this main park
[46:30] feature that's accessible from any residential building on the
[46:34] site, but then you have those different pockets. We're showing a dog park
[46:38] on kind of, I'll call it the, the southwestern corner of the residential. Um,
[46:42] each of the other, so the furthest north four story building
[46:46] and products would likely access the main amenity area.
[46:50] and then the, the buildings on the center, center and southern portion
[46:55] of the site, each of those have included a
[46:59] patio grill, lounge area, outdoor area that could be specific
[47:03] to that building. So that was something we tried to be thoughtful for that. If you feel
[47:07] like, hey, I, I leased the furthest southern, um,
[47:11] building on the site, I'm really disconnected from any sort of amenity area.
[47:17] okay. In addition, that's also why we included that center
[47:22] sidewalk, that that is straight from the northern to the southern portion, not obstructed
[47:26] or turning so that you feel as though I, I could enjoyably
[47:30] walk from one side to the other and access the main amenities in green space.
[47:37] and you, you had mentioned it earlier, I think there's potential contemplating, contemplating
[47:42] giving some of that land back to the city to run the park. Uh, that walking
[47:46] loop or, because I feel if you're, if you're, if you're thinking about this,
[47:52] I'm gonna let my kid go to a park that the may public could be there, it feels
[47:57] unsafe potentially. And that's what I was trying to get at it. Some of these buildings
[48:02] don't allow a contemplation of of um, I guess kids
[48:07] in a, in a small contained area. I understand it's from a apartment complex, but
[48:11] just having that, you know, ability to
[48:15] not be worried about something happening. And if you give the park up public, there's gonna be public walking
[48:19] around there. Um, and I'll tell you the pickleball thing is gonna be an interesting piece.
[48:24] if you, if you don't have it locked down, people will yeah.
[48:28] gravitate yep. To it. Um, real quick, and this is kinda
[48:32] my last que last question, the three story townhome piece along
[48:37] emerald. Was there any other consideration for, and I know that probably gonna talk
[48:41] about the lack of office, but from, if you're contemplating residential
[48:45] there, did you think of anything else on that frontage? 'cause
[48:49] it feels when you're, you know, you go out there, it doesn't really make sense
[48:53] with what's what across the street. Sure. So what we were trying to achieve
[48:58] there is shown on the special area plan is smaller office product
[49:02] likely designed to mirror the condo office across the street.
[49:06] so instead of putting a large block of a residential building, we
[49:11] tried to break up the massing so that the massing was similar, although the use was
[49:15] different. And then we tried to, we added the peaked
[49:19] roofs again to try to compliment the, the peaked roofs across the street. So
[49:23] maybe, maybe our intentions aren't deriving the correct
[49:27] product there, but we were trying to meet the desired massing along
[49:31] that street. I understand.
[49:36] I appreciate it. Thank you. I think I'm good, kim. Thank
[49:40] you. Um, I have a few questions. Um, I'd like to start
[49:45] first with the, with emerald parkway, miss waskowitz
[49:49] . Um, there, there's the two new proposed streets
[49:54] and then we have a relationship to the existing media in emerald parkway.
[50:00] how is raf, I mean, there's already turn lanes for
[50:04] the existing uses. How would this function to support this development?
[50:08] the how would the, how would the median be? Mm-hmm . The median could be maintained
[50:12] in that, um, center. What I'm picturing is their main
[50:17] entrance on emerald parkway there in the middle of the site. That's correct. Um,
[50:21] there's already a, a full median break for the development on
[50:25] the west side. So that would, um, be modified to create
[50:29] that left turn bay for, uh, this
[50:33] proposed development. Um, and we would continue to work with them through the
[50:38] pdp and the traffic impact study to make sure that everything was functioning. So
[50:42] you could, you would add a left turn lane into the development at that point? It would be part of the
[50:46] applicant's responsibility. Yeah. Right. But it have to be, you'd have to alter what's there now to create the correct.
[50:50] right. Changing the existing median. Thank you. And can you, can you make
[50:54] a left turn in on the south drive? It's, there's
[50:58] already a . I would have concerns about that. I believe that would
[51:03] be contemplated as a write in, write out. I'm also concerned about it in relationship
[51:07] to the potential bus stop area. So I think those are details to work through in the next, um,
[51:11] submissions. The, the, the graphic that's up on the street is pen
[51:15] altered to look like the median is broken there, but it's not broken. Right? It is
[51:19] not, it narrows, um, for the turn lanes at the warner temple intersection, but
[51:23] there's a raised curb there. Okay. I, and again, we're getting into details
[51:27] yeah. Be honest. But I just wanna to understand establishing this roads system
[51:31] is dependent on those types of things. Um, second question
[51:36] for the applicant, I assume that the two ponds are meeting
[51:40] your stormwater management need? Correct. Or is there some other need you have under underground
[51:44] tanks or anything to offset that? Correct. Those are intended to be detention as well.
[51:48] okay. So, um, had you considered the, the northern
[51:52] corner to be something other than a park a
[51:57] like the, the, um, plan shows, the city plan shows that as
[52:01] a developed corner. Had you ever considered that as an option
[52:05] or because you needed a place to put stormwater management that was the logical place because
[52:09] of grades or whatever? And so that's, I'm trying to figure out if that's a logical place for
[52:13] storm under management or is it still a good development site?
[52:18] sure. So what's really driving the northern portion being
[52:22] a green place, which also serves as our detention, is a preservation of the george geary
[52:26] run and the natural tree line right there. Mm-hmm . We're trying to leave that portion as natural
[52:30] as possible, understanding that we can't necessarily achieve maintaining the
[52:34] natural, um, tree line within the center of the site. So that's
[52:39] what's driving, putting the pond up there. Um, we, we did look at other concepts
[52:43] as well, um, similar to the discussions we've had
[52:47] about feeling disconnected within a mixed use product. Um, I
[52:51] think if you were to put either residential or office up
[52:56] there, those tenants might feel slightly disconnected from the rest of the park.
[53:01] and, and again, I think you're hearing some comments, questions from the commission that, you know,
[53:05] open space in one corner versus more in integrated into the, into the neighborhood
[53:10] is what I think the, the focus of their questions has been. I'm
[53:14] gonna add, add, add that kim. Yeah. One of when I looked at your plan and
[53:18] one of the, and this also follows up on jason's point,
[53:22] there's no surveillance of these, these spaces, these passive play
[53:26] spaces. They're kind of residuals left over from
[53:30] moving the buildings and the parking around the site. And then we have a little space at the side of the building,
[53:35] but the buildings don't really define. Um, and that's one of the ways to integrate
[53:39] the green space. Now you've, you've made squares outta your parking,
[53:43] so it'll be interesting to see how long those trees last in
[53:47] those parking lots. But, um, I just, I think the point
[53:52] both that you're hearing from a couple people here on the board is those play spaces
[53:56] need to be better integrated into the arrangement of the buildings. Sure.
[54:02] thank you. And I kind of follow onto that. I was gonna ask you about the dog park
[54:06] and the location of why you chose that. I mean, it's kind of a key corner
[54:11] coming into the development. Um, it does open up kind of
[54:15] a view corner into the parking behind which we, which we want to probably screen.
[54:20] and so just, and again, it's out on a busy road, so thinking of
[54:24] dogs escaping and all of a sudden they're on emeral parkway, . Sure. So
[54:28] the the private amenity areas would be
[54:33] just that they would be private and secure within the residential
[54:37] project. Um, although we're showing in this corner the dog
[54:41] park expanding throughout the entire green space, that corner upon entry would
[54:45] serve as a great place for a monument sign or a feature to enter the project.
[54:50] and then you could screen any amenity use for the residential
[54:54] behind that so it could serve multipurpose. Thank
[54:58] you. And, uh, shifting over to the south,
[55:03] again, I think there was some discussion around the, the drive-throughs
[55:07] and the, and the restaurants. Um,
[55:12] so those, the location of those two buildings are such that the one
[55:16] on emerald parkway only has two sides you can access.
[55:20] and the one that's on warner temple only has one side that you can access. And so I'm thinking of service
[55:25] and trash and all that stuff of had you thought through about how those
[55:29] buildings would be serviced? It, it's a fair comment, especially on the southeastern
[55:33] corner. What drove the placement of it was
[55:37] the outlaw on the southwest corner that probably wants to be a coffee user,
[55:41] an elevated fast casual. They have a desire to be on a hard corner. That's
[55:46] what's attractive to, um, tenants that would occupy that. And then
[55:50] similar for the inline um, building, they
[55:55] want strong frontage as well on a main road, which is why we've placed it
[55:59] up against warner temple road. And then the, the goal
[56:03] of placing the building in the southeast corner was to create a cool
[56:07] outdoor seating patio environment that could be really attractive to
[56:11] a use. But your point is well taken on circulation and I'm sure, I'm sure we'll come
[56:15] back to that in future applications. Yes. Um, that's all the questions I had
[56:19] right now. I'm gonna look to the commission if there's any follow up questions. Yes.
[56:23] I'm sorry, I just had a quick question about two 70 driving
[56:28] on parkwood. I didn't really see it, but do you think that from
[56:32] their, um, town homes and so forth up, is there any way
[56:36] either, um, they're seeing two 70 or if
[56:41] if, if you're driving by and you're seeing this project?
[56:47] I would say the, the goal in the future is that when the
[56:51] space between this parcel and two 70 develop,
[56:55] that is ideally going to have taller corporate office buildings, like what's
[57:00] existing out there that help break up any view
[57:04] corridor into the site. So at, at this point
[57:08] we do not have concerns about that because we've made, we're trying to make that distinction,
[57:13] uh, between what's should be corporate office and what should be, uh,
[57:17] multifamily. Any
[57:21] other questions? All right. I will now
[57:26] open up for public comment. Thank you, uh, applicant for thank
[57:30] you. Um, does anybody would like to, uh, talk to this application
[57:34] from the audience, from the public?
[57:39] hmm. Okay. I assume you're here for other cases. .
[57:43] alright. Um, if nobody has any comments, I'm going to close
[57:47] the public comment period and we're now gonna go into commission deliberation.
[57:52] so we have a number of questions that are on the screen now. Uh, mr.
[57:56] chinook, you always like to go first. I'd love going first.
[58:01] uh, again, thank you for, for coming and I, I think, um,
[58:06] appreciate the presentation and I think there's a lot that are, that's kind of well, well, well
[58:10] thought out. Here, uh, and we brought up in questions. I think everybody's kind
[58:14] of hinting at it. There's, there's definitely, I have a, a concern regarding the,
[58:18] the mix that it's very heavy residential.
[58:22] um, you know, where it deviates a little bit from our, from our envision plan.
[58:27] and then that gets to you, you, you spoke of walkability
[58:31] and pedestrian access and trying to create this opportunity to have
[58:36] the residential or the retail supporting the, whether it's,
[58:40] you know, coffee shops, whatever, supporting it and trying to, trying to create a pedestrian
[58:44] environment. But it doesn't seem like it's kind of laid out to support that as much as
[58:48] it sounds, especially it relates to the drive-through. So I have a, I have a problem with the drive
[58:52] throughs as part of this. Again, trying
[58:56] to less reli on automotive traffic, and I appreciate what your potential tenants
[59:01] are saying, but it just doesn't seem to fit as it is in this current layout
[59:05] that we're looking at. And I think we alluded to the general,
[59:10] you know, green spaces and having it feel a little bit more truly mixed.
[59:14] um, but, but again, I go back to, I think it's, it's, it's definitely heavy,
[59:19] a little heavily weighed residential and, and, and as we,
[59:23] as we look at it compared to kind of our, our, our vision for the space
[59:27] and I add to whatever we can do to preserve the existing trees, I think we can maybe
[59:31] try a little harder there. Um, it's not, I mean, it's a big part of our, our
[59:35] vision too is to try to, you know, that that type of preservation, we appreciate what you've
[59:39] done, um, uh, thus far. But I think we can take a little bit further and
[59:44] try to work a little harder to preserve the other, the other trees on site. I'd go back
[59:48] to the, I'd love when you come back, I'd love to see a, a, a kind of a,
[59:52] a height study looking at what's going on in the buildings across berland parkway
[59:56] as you get to the proposed whatever it is, the, the, if it's town homes
[1:00:01] right around number parkway as we, as we go east or west, east
[1:00:05] across the site. And look at how the four story multifamily buildings kind
[1:00:09] of fit within the whole height. Because I, I do think, and the commission brought up several concerns about the height
[1:00:13] and the scale of, of what's going on in the area and making sure, so a height
[1:00:17] study or looking at the heights, I think would, would, would feel very appropriate and help us kind of understand,
[1:00:22] um, how it's all going to mesh together and gel. And
[1:00:26] then going back to the, the drive-throughs for a moment, the, the corner at emerald parkway
[1:00:30] in warner temple is obviously a really key corner. And having, right now we have a drive-through as our feature,
[1:00:35] uh, the drive through stack, I should say, as the feature I think we really need to consider, you've
[1:00:39] started to deviate a little bit from the envision dublin plan with start
[1:00:44] taking that, that, that retail space and bringing it front, hiding, parking,
[1:00:48] whatever we can do to hide parking and create more of a, of a, of that type of street
[1:00:52] scape and focus. You mentioned it, focus on some of these feature focal
[1:00:56] features. Uh, some from, from some of those key areas on
[1:01:00] the site, uh, would be something we definitely wanna consider and, and think about, um,
[1:01:04] as we come back. And I'd say, again, I mentioned a mounting too. I think the mountings
[1:01:08] kind of an important piece of that. I think it helps kind of, especially if we are gonna do residential,
[1:01:13] I think we just want to kind of consider more how that's landscaped and, and maybe bring some of that
[1:01:17] back. But generally, um, um, answer. I didn't really answer any of the questions directly, but
[1:01:22] overall, I think it's okay. I think we have a little bit of work to do,
[1:01:27] um, to, to be fully supportive of it. Um, but again, I think a lot, there's
[1:01:31] a lot of really good thought. I like, you know, there's a lot of nice things about the architecture. I think we brought up some of the
[1:01:35] little more, um, I, I appreciate the different materiality in trying to do something,
[1:01:40] um, a little bit more, a little bit different. But I, I, I think we need to just, again, with the height and
[1:01:44] everything else, we need to make sure it, it actually can fit within the, the, the surrounding
[1:01:48] environment. 'cause there's a lot going on, um, around the site. But again, thank
[1:01:52] you for, for being here. Thank you, ms. Har.
[1:01:56] good points. Um, thank you for being here and bringing this project forward
[1:02:01] and, um, sounds like you've been working with the city for a long time
[1:02:05] and I, we appreciate that a lot. Um, talking
[1:02:09] about, um, uh, where I am today on
[1:02:13] it, it, it feels heavy. Uh, you heard that from everyone
[1:02:17] about, um, that, that kind of feeling. So to me, the setback
[1:02:22] is very important. If it's a hundred feet. It's also mimicking
[1:02:26] the other side too, where they have the mound and they
[1:02:30] have the trees and the grasses and the pine. There's, um,
[1:02:34] we can see that that is just a nice cultivating area that, um,
[1:02:38] that we can all grow from, from that. Um, also,
[1:02:43] I like thinking about, um, the retail that you wanna bring forward.
[1:02:47] I, um, and I think that's a good idea. I love that you reached out to,
[1:02:51] um, uh, the people from the offices and around. That's very important to
[1:02:55] get their thoughts. Um, but there's that emerald
[1:02:59] town center that's across, across the street on warner.
[1:03:04] um, they develop theirs inward. So when you, you've
[1:03:08] gotta go in and that's where the parking is inward. And, uh,
[1:03:12] they have a, a great businesses in there. Uh, there's a bakery and
[1:03:16] different food places, pizza, veterinarian and so forth.
[1:03:20] but what I think is positive on this end is you we're going face
[1:03:24] forward on this. And I think that that then brings us closer
[1:03:28] to them. Um, and that brings the kind of the businesses together
[1:03:33] and people, um, a more walkable community with that.
[1:03:38] on top of that, if you're standing over there, you can kinda look to your left and you see
[1:03:42] the post office. So if we can get people walking from a residential
[1:03:46] area to a commercial area to then across the street
[1:03:50] safely, and then, oh, I can kind of keep going. It
[1:03:54] just really brings us to that, um, walkability. Um,
[1:03:59] and, um, and, and again, it's all of these corners already
[1:04:03] have, um, where they've worked to build them. So when you're turning
[1:04:07] a corner, um, even on park parkwood, I
[1:04:12] believe, um, you know, it's, it's a, it's a nice experience. It's, it's
[1:04:16] pretty that way. Um, and so forth. So if I'm
[1:04:20] thinking about, um, you know, number two also,
[1:04:24] uh, the, just the town homes and things like that, I like the idea
[1:04:28] of the garages. I think reworking some parking issues,
[1:04:33] if, and if you can share some park parking or if it,
[1:04:37] if you're kind of bringing the town homes closer together, then it
[1:04:41] feels like a, a a more of a community. Um, and, um,
[1:04:45] you know, in that, that regard there too. So, um,
[1:04:50] and let's see. Um, I'm, I'm good about the architecture.
[1:04:55] I think I like the, the townhome especially, uh,
[1:04:59] along the street. I think they look very nice. Again, I,
[1:05:03] it's really gonna matter to have that space, um, between the,
[1:05:08] between, um, the streets and then, and then to the townhomes.
[1:05:12] and if it's a hundred feet, it should be a hundred feet with that too. Um,
[1:05:16] but you did do a nice job with, I like the roundness of the doors.
[1:05:20] I like, um, the, the different balconies and things like that.
[1:05:24] um, when, when I get to the, the, the apartments in the back,
[1:05:29] I, I think you should take a little look at those and see if there's some other,
[1:05:33] uh, thoughts and so forth. I, I would be looking for. But
[1:05:38] when we're talking about the town homes too, or, um, is there anything, solar ideas
[1:05:42] or are there any, 'cause we've, we have a program on that. And then, um, any
[1:05:46] kind of rooftop features as well too, if that's, if that's something, if that's sort
[1:05:50] too. So, um, and
[1:05:55] then I go to, um, the emerald parkway,
[1:05:59] it's a corridor. If you go a little further down, you can see they have
[1:06:03] benches on the corners, um, as well as like a,
[1:06:07] a little, you know, it's a, a structure that you can sit in and things like that.
[1:06:12] so it's, again, I encourage you to think outside the box,
[1:06:16] um, and, uh, and, and, and moving in that direction.
[1:06:20] but, um, overall, um, you know,
[1:06:24] I, I get to the point where, um, I'm sensitive for
[1:06:28] the number that bringing and that, um,
[1:06:32] there's no office. Um, and that's, that's a concern. Alright,
[1:06:36] thank you. Thank you, ms. Harder, mr. Alexander.
[1:06:42] I'm, um, my one reservation about the plan has to do with emerald
[1:06:46] parkway because if you read our documents, the a hundred foot right of
[1:06:50] way, granted there's something that contradicts that, but also the fact that the,
[1:06:55] a couple of the documents say one to two story buildings. So the approach is,
[1:06:59] the implication of those two things is that the scale on emerald parkway
[1:07:03] should be pretty minimal. It should not be as massive as you have.
[1:07:08] and, and, and I think the scale is compounded by how far you bring them out.
[1:07:12] however, across the street is not a good solution because if
[1:07:16] you accommodated the a hundred foot setback and put parking in the front, that would be
[1:07:20] much less desirable than buildings closer. So I would be, I would feel
[1:07:24] more comfortable with yamal parkway treatment if the buildings were smaller
[1:07:28] and I could give on the, the setback there. I, um,
[1:07:33] I think this is gonna bring residential to an area where there's no residential or very little,
[1:07:38] so it's gonna be very, very different. But I think it's needed there. So
[1:07:42] I, I think I'm, and so I'm comfortable with the heavily
[1:07:46] weighted residential use. Um,
[1:07:51] one thing I, I brought up the parking before because if you thought more of the shared parking,
[1:07:56] then, then you could reduce the size of the lots. You reduce
[1:08:00] the heat island effect, you reduce your need for storm water. And
[1:08:04] would asking for some of these green spaces to be more integrated, whether it's
[1:08:08] the maintaining the existing trees and creating a, a more prominent path through
[1:08:12] there, I would at least like you to explore that. But
[1:08:16] generally I would be with, with reservations about emerald. I, I,
[1:08:20] I, I would be supportive of the project. Thank you mr.
[1:08:24] desler. Thanks, kim.
[1:08:29] I echo my fellow commissioner's comments.
[1:08:33] the space definitely needs something. I don't want to try to be too
[1:08:37] repetitive here. I think you have an opportunity to incorporate hopefully some of the
[1:08:41] existing mature trees rethinking the, the green space.
[1:08:47] one thing is, it feels like the, the clubhouse
[1:08:52] and recreation area was a little bit of an,
[1:08:56] a little bit of an afterthought. And I was like, oh, we're just gonna stick it over here. I, if you're trying to make
[1:09:00] a more centralized and dense residential area, maybe
[1:09:04] the clubhouse should be centralized with a green space
[1:09:09] that can run throughout a a center corridor. Um,
[1:09:16] I feel the somehow there needs to incorporate some office,
[1:09:20] but I, I do understand the difficulties now with, with that.
[1:09:24] um, that's why you're the designers and developers to come up with something.
[1:09:28] maybe that could incorporate some office component, but
[1:09:33] I'd be, uh, somewhat a gary, I think I'd be okay with a more heavily weighted
[1:09:38] residential piece. I would like to see some of the commercial and
[1:09:42] retail, uh, this space is, is dying for it. And I think
[1:09:46] across the street it could, it could be a little,
[1:09:51] you have an opportunity. Let's just, let's just say, um, you heard my
[1:09:55] reservations already about a drive through. Uh, doesn't necessarily mean I would
[1:09:59] be completely against it, but there's gonna have to be something that's gonna make this pop out
[1:10:03] a little better. Uh, because we don't want this to end up as, as portions of tu are,
[1:10:07] which are, which are more of a, a thoroughfare, which is what's expected at that area.
[1:10:15] the initial drawings relative to the, the
[1:10:19] building massing, I think are, are appropriate. Um, it, it brings
[1:10:23] a new wave of some architecture there, which I think is okay, but rethinking
[1:10:28] how the, the, the town homes fit at that,
[1:10:32] uh, along emerald maine may need to be again, reevaluated
[1:10:36] I think for the, the use here. So lemme just check
[1:10:40] my notes. Uh,
[1:10:48] okay, I'm set. Thanks. Thank you.
[1:10:52] is zach, can you pull up the, the graphic that shows the, the two plans side by
[1:10:56] side, the area plan and the, I just want to make
[1:11:01] a point, we've had discussion about two plans being different.
[1:11:05] um, when I look at the, the one on the right, I
[1:11:09] see blue and orange, that's probably more than it is the purple.
[1:11:13] again, not knowing square footage is right or how tall buildings are, but I think both
[1:11:17] plans are really speaking to this being mixed use and being
[1:11:21] a balance of, of office, commercial and residential. So I don't
[1:11:25] think the two plans are in conflict. I think they're actually quite well aligned and it, you know,
[1:11:30] you could debate, you know, 60, 40, 40 60. But again, I
[1:11:34] think there's a balance of uses and I think, um, one
[1:11:38] of the things that this commission has been struggling with is this new definition of mixed
[1:11:42] use and what does that really mean? And I think as we look at these cases, we're gonna
[1:11:47] continue to, to discuss it. But, um, I think,
[1:11:51] and you can go back to the question now, zach, I'm sorry. Um, I think the,
[1:11:55] the mix of uses here is, is, is, is out of balance right now. And
[1:11:59] I, again, I don't want to debate office or not office, but something else.
[1:12:04] and I think mr. Alexander raised the issue of the emerald
[1:12:08] parkway edge. And you know, when you drive up and down emerald parkway,
[1:12:12] it's a commercial business address and all of a sudden to see residential fronting
[1:12:16] onto it that it's not even an apartment that has kind of an edge,
[1:12:21] it's townhouses that have a front door and walkways and, and all of a sudden you feel
[1:12:25] that feels outta place to me in this corridor. So, um,
[1:12:29] in terms of the layout, I think, you know, following the area plan, you've got the grid
[1:12:33] right. Um, I think the uses are not quite in the right place.
[1:12:38] I'd like to see something up else up against ammo parkway and, and
[1:12:42] I, I don't want to say it has to be office, but it should be something other than
[1:12:46] residential in my mind. Um, I think you heard a lot of talk about open
[1:12:50] space and I feel like the open space is kind of being pushed to the
[1:12:54] edges and when you want open space to be integrated into the development
[1:12:58] and, and into the buildings that are make up the development. And I think
[1:13:02] that, um, they don't have to be heroic open spaces.
[1:13:07] they could be pocket parks and plazas that are intertwined and maybe the
[1:13:11] dog park fits into that category. I still think that's in the wrong place.
[1:13:15] um, but it's part of the open space network. And again, I agree
[1:13:19] that this, again, the great, um,
[1:13:23] effort to save the ex the existing, uh, linear
[1:13:27] riparian open space. But I think this other one that you said you're
[1:13:32] studying, I think that's something that could be studied harder. And I think in
[1:13:36] studying that you might find that that's the solution to integrating the open space more,
[1:13:40] uh, into the development. Um, so again,
[1:13:44] I think you've got the basic, um, structure to the development. I
[1:13:48] think you need to look at the uses. Um, and again, the,
[1:13:52] the corner of emerald parkway and warner temple, um, they did
[1:13:56] such a good job on the other side, again, it's a one story,
[1:14:00] uh, commercial complex, but you know, that's been there for years and I've always
[1:14:05] been amazed at how well that anchors that corner. And I would hate
[1:14:09] to see the other corner on the other side not treated in the same way.
[1:14:13] and so this idea of putting a drive through on that corner, um,
[1:14:17] you know, and, and, and losing that as a gateway location, I think is
[1:14:22] a, a lost opportunity. And I think the whole warner temple edge should
[1:14:26] be, you know, considered as how does that edge contribute
[1:14:30] to the experience of driving along warner temple. So, um, I
[1:14:34] would like to see some more efforts in terms of distribution of uses. I think the general
[1:14:38] layout is, is roughly there. Um, I think that the
[1:14:43] architectural concepts appear to be aligned with what is out
[1:14:47] there now. If you look at the buildings that are along emerald parkway and warner temple,
[1:14:51] they have a character and I think fitting into that character is the right
[1:14:55] direction. I think you're generally headed in that direction. And again, I've
[1:14:59] already made the comment about the open space about distribution. So, um, those
[1:15:04] would be my comments to the concept plan. I want to open it back
[1:15:08] up to the commission. Do you guys all have any other comments? Which can I ask, do you ask your
[1:15:12] perspective on the drive-throughs? I'm sorry, say that again? Can I ask your perspective on the drive-through?
[1:15:17] um, I'm not a proponent of drive-throughs , but if they're at the right
[1:15:21] location of the site and they're out of sight, they're not like front and center.
[1:15:26] I would, I be, I could be supportive of them, but they,
[1:15:30] if not done well, they can be a real detriment to a site plan into a urban
[1:15:34] design field. Any other comments?
[1:15:40] alright, um, advocate, have you heard enough from us and got enough
[1:15:44] feedback? Well, we, we appreciate you coming in and, um,
[1:15:49] we hope to see you again in the near future.
[1:15:56] all right, we're gonna move on now to case number
[1:16:00] 25 dash 1 0 8 cp
[1:16:04] avery crossing concept plan, a request to review
[1:16:08] a non biting feedback for a mixed use development comprised of residential, commercial,
[1:16:12] and open space. The 127 acre site is zoned r
[1:16:17] rural and located southwest of the rings road and avery road intersection
[1:16:21] and contains the ponderosa mobile home states.
[1:16:25] so invite our applicant to come up now and make their presentation.
[1:16:30] kim, am I good to step out? Uh, yes, thank
[1:16:34] you. We will call you back in when, appreciate it. We move to the next case.
[1:16:42] if you would, uh, turn the microphone on and state your name and address. Appreciate
[1:16:46] it. Uh, good evening. Uh,
[1:16:50] my name's gary o rocky, uh, dit architects, 1 4 7 2 5
[1:16:55] detroit avenue, lakewood, ohio 4 4 1 0 7.
[1:17:02] uh, well thanks for, uh, thanks for having us here tonight. Um, we were last here
[1:17:06] in april, and, uh, we've got some great feedback and we're
[1:17:10] back here again to show you, uh, some refinements that we made to the plan.
[1:17:19] uh, just to, just to recap, this is just a, a plan to show where
[1:17:24] the, uh, the site is in, uh, city of dublin near,
[1:17:28] uh, avery road and tu crossing the future tunnel crossing road.
[1:17:33] if the advancer isn't working, just look to me and I can advance the slide for you.
[1:17:38] I'm sorry if that advancer is not working, just look to me and I can advance the
[1:17:42] slide for you. Oh, okay. Okay. Yeah. Okay. Uh, next slide.
[1:17:47] uh, and here again, it we're just showing, uh, the location of the site
[1:17:52] and, uh, and everything that we're doing is sort of, uh, in line with the, with
[1:17:56] the master plan for dublin. Again,
[1:18:00] this is the existing condition. So you can see the outline of the site, and in
[1:18:04] the middle of the site is an existing mobile home park, uh, that will remain,
[1:18:10] uh, existing conditions of just some of the, uh, photographs down
[1:18:14] avery. And, uh, you can kind of see in the key plan in the upper right hand corner
[1:18:18] where the views are taken from. Uh, it's basically a
[1:18:22] kind of a flat farm, uh, old farm site.
[1:18:27] uh, so you can see this, this is sort of describes some of
[1:18:32] the, uh, the purple, uh, line that goes through is
[1:18:36] the future extension of tuttle. And, uh,
[1:18:40] we work with the city to kind of come up with a val linear form that, uh, meets with
[1:18:44] the, uh, desires of the envision master plan for
[1:18:48] quadrants. Basically, if you can see, quadrant f will be mostly residential
[1:18:53] project or quadrant. K is, uh, a commercial,
[1:18:58] h is the, uh, existing mobile home park, and I would be multifamily.
[1:19:04] uh, again, this just sort of, uh, further clarifies the quadrants, how we've
[1:19:09] subdivided them. And as you can kind of see to the north, there's more single family homes
[1:19:13] in dublin and to the south of the plan, uh, there is some
[1:19:17] existing multifamily. Uh, so
[1:19:21] this is the new plan that we have, and it's, it's very similar to the old plan.
[1:19:25] uh, some of the refinements. I think the biggest refinements that
[1:19:30] we've made are, uh, and based on comments that we received
[1:19:34] were in regards to the open spaces. So, uh, the open spaces
[1:19:39] have increased and there's also, uh, all the blue, uh,
[1:19:43] water features that you see there are for, uh, storm water retention.
[1:19:47] and we're trying to, uh, take advantage of those to make those not only
[1:19:51] for stormwater for tension, but for amenities as well. Uh,
[1:19:56] I think another comment that, uh, we did respond to was to reduce the
[1:20:00] density by one unit per acre in the, uh,
[1:20:04] southern part where the multifamily is, uh, in the upper right hand corner.
[1:20:08] just to recap, you can see that's the commercial zone. The three orange
[1:20:13] buildings are retail. The blue buildings are, uh, retail
[1:20:17] slash restaurant. In the upper left hand corner, uh, there's
[1:20:21] a mixture of townhouses, single family homes, cluster homes, and
[1:20:25] duplexes. And then to the south are, uh, envisioned to
[1:20:29] be three story, uh, multifamily units. And there's also a, a clubhouse
[1:20:34] in the lower right hand corner, you can see kinda where the pool is. And it, uh,
[1:20:38] borders on that, uh, water feature.
[1:20:43] uh, again, this, this hasn't really changed, but this just shows the hierarchy
[1:20:48] of, uh, roads and avenues and the potential, uh, connections
[1:20:52] across tunnel parkway. Uh, and then, you know, we've been working with
[1:20:56] the city for, for quite some time now to, uh, make sure that we're consistent
[1:21:00] with, uh, what's envisioned for the area in terms of the master plan.
[1:21:06] uh, and at this point I'm gonna turn it over to drew, uh,
[1:21:10] from edge and he's gonna talk about, uh, some refinements that we made to the open
[1:21:14] area plans.
[1:21:19] thanks, gary. Thank you, commissioners. My name is drew russell.
[1:21:23] I'm in the landscape archetype with edge three 30 west spring street,
[1:21:27] columbus, ohio. Um, thank you for your time tonight. I'll be brief as
[1:21:31] I talk through some of the changes that we've, we've made to our concept plan based
[1:21:35] on the open space here. I know that mr. Will is gonna be going through quite a few of these as
[1:21:40] well, um, when he speaks. So since the last concept plan submission
[1:21:44] in april, we spent time further defining the open space areas
[1:21:48] in an effort to provide a concept plan that responds to the comments we received
[1:21:52] at that time and brings our plan closer in alignment with the envision dublin
[1:21:56] community plan. Um, the exhibits provided in the submission were included to
[1:22:01] communicate the overall open space concept and provide kind of that step-by-step
[1:22:06] process that we went through to get to the open space framework plan. That that is part
[1:22:10] of the submission as well. Um, this included establishing an open space theme
[1:22:14] and some of the guiding principles we intend to use along the way. Um, taking
[1:22:19] a step back and looking at the existing open space features and destinations
[1:22:23] adjacent to our site so we can activate our parks and open space areas appropriately.
[1:22:28] establishing a path and connectivity p plan that is consistent with the
[1:22:33] envision dublin plan and will allow pedestrians to get to these destinations
[1:22:37] and tie into the larger trail system. And lastly, we've provided
[1:22:41] a series of enlargement plans to provide more details on some of the specific open space
[1:22:45] areas shown on the plan.
[1:22:49] um, in response to the envision dublin community plan, um,
[1:22:54] we, we started by developing an open space theme.
[1:22:58] um, what, what we wanted to base our entire concept around, and that theme was
[1:23:03] to integrate our open space system into the larger network.
[1:23:08] you can do that in many ways. You can do that physically through open, uh, through pathways
[1:23:12] and trail connectivity. You can do it by locating
[1:23:16] open space areas on our site, close to adjacent open space
[1:23:20] areas on surrounding sites. And you can do that as you can see on
[1:23:24] the imagery that we've provided through providing an aesthetic
[1:23:28] and kind of the traditional dublin character that you see elsewhere around
[1:23:33] the open space areas of the community.
[1:23:38] um, in an effort to provide appropriate open space destinations
[1:23:42] and better aligned with the greater community. We, we zoomed out a bit, um,
[1:23:46] and first took a look at what already exists in other areas close by.
[1:23:50] so we have two large parks, delmore and ted colton back parks,
[1:23:55] both within walking distance there, you see it on the map, one's kind of to the north
[1:23:59] there. And ted colton back park is, uh, to the east, um,
[1:24:04] each with their own amenities. So using this information, we looked to see if there were any missing
[1:24:08] pieces there that might make sense to locate within our open space areas.
[1:24:12] and that helped us define the seven unique park spaces that we have on our site.
[1:24:17] in addition, we've also started to identify potential areas for public art. As you
[1:24:21] can see on there, um, opportunities shown in red.
[1:24:27] an open space linkages plan was also provided to define a hierarchy
[1:24:32] of pathway systems consistent with the envisioned dublin community plan, and
[1:24:36] show how pedestrians will be able to get to the various destinations
[1:24:40] within our site and connect to the larger regional network. Our goal here
[1:24:44] is to create a, a walkable community. The commuter route shown
[1:24:48] in the deep red color along tuttle crossing boulevard is intended more for
[1:24:53] regional movement adjacent to the main thoroughfares, and it also extends up along
[1:24:57] avery road. A connector route provides a convenient north south connection
[1:25:02] through the site north, north and south there kind of through the mid
[1:25:06] midpoint of the site. And, uh, a network of local route paths
[1:25:10] also allow pedestrians to get to all of the internal park and open space
[1:25:14] areas. We've also provided a
[1:25:18] series of enlargements to give further detail on some of the individual open space areas.
[1:25:22] the first shows a typical section conceptual section of what
[1:25:26] tutter crossing boulevard greenway might look like. Um, we're intending
[1:25:31] that this would be a variable with planted median and includes a lot of that
[1:25:35] naturalized grasses, plenty of tree canopy meandering
[1:25:39] paths for the local trails, a straight commuter route. On the other side,
[1:25:45] we've included an enlargement of the central park area, showing gathering spaces,
[1:25:50] a playground, a large lawn, and a pond with enhanced edge
[1:25:54] treat edge treatments.
[1:26:00] the corner of rings and, and avery road provides an opportunity
[1:26:04] for community branding and gathering at the intersection of two major thoroughfares
[1:26:09] and adjacent pathways. We see this park as a potential location for a
[1:26:13] bike hub and gateway into the commercial portion of the site.
[1:26:18] and lastly, the corner of tuttle crossing boulevard and avery on the southeast corner of the
[1:26:22] site provides an opportunity for open space activation given
[1:26:26] the proposed path tunnel under avery road and the large pond
[1:26:30] adjacent to the commercial use areas. This could provide waterfront dining opportunities on the
[1:26:34] upper pond side and a unique pocket park created by the pathway mirroring back
[1:26:38] up to this street elevation. And we've included imagery
[1:26:43] supporting that, showing some of the character that we plan to, to
[1:26:47] try to implement. So with that, I'll turn it over and thank you for
[1:26:51] your time. Thank you.
[1:26:55] are you, are you finished?
[1:27:01] there's just a few more slides. So, uh, so this is the, uh, uh,
[1:27:05] sort of, uh, look and feel of the, uh, uh,
[1:27:09] buildings that we were thinking of for some, some of the residential buildings, uh, a
[1:27:13] vernacular, uh, to be contextual kind of with what's here in dublin and
[1:27:18] central ohio. So these are the images that we had last time. I think
[1:27:22] we did have, uh, uh, a couple more contemporary images that we, that
[1:27:26] we took out, uh, based on the, uh, panel's, uh, feedback.
[1:27:30] and so this is sort of what we're thinking at a very high level, uh, for look and feel. The
[1:27:35] buildings, uh, you can kind of see the different, uh,
[1:27:39] residential product types. Uh, again, just a generic
[1:27:43] sort of spirit of place, sort of what, what they might feel like.
[1:27:48] uh, again, some, some more of the townhouses and some of the, uh,
[1:27:52] the, the commercial buildings were, are envisioned to be one story. And,
[1:27:56] uh, and you can kind of see some examples there.
[1:28:03] and, uh, I think, I think that's it. Uh, thank you very much. Okay. Thank you
[1:28:08] mr. Will
[1:28:14] thank you and good evening. Um, like the last case, this
[1:28:19] is a concept plan review, so no determination is made. Um, if
[1:28:23] the project proceeds future review and approval by both the commission
[1:28:27] and city council would be required. Um,
[1:28:31] the 127 acre site outlined in yellow is located southwest
[1:28:36] of the intersection of avery and rings road and is zoned rule.
[1:28:40] the site contains the existing 170 lot ponderosa
[1:28:44] mobile home estates. Um, several tree rows, uh, large preserved
[1:28:48] woodlot to the southwest, um, in avondale woods.
[1:28:52] um, and the south, or the site, as you can see, is surrounded by existing single family
[1:28:56] residential neighborhoods to the north, including balance tray and kramer's
[1:29:01] crossing. Um, and the areas to the southeast of the city are within the city of
[1:29:05] columbus and include single family homes, apartments, and some commercial uses.
[1:29:11] um, the site is not presently served by water or sanitary sewer. Utilities
[1:29:15] are designed to be extended with the extension of tu crossing boulevard,
[1:29:19] which is presently not here, as
[1:29:23] the applicant mentioned. Um, they have been in front of the planning and zoning commission,
[1:29:28] uh, most recently in april of 2025. Um,
[1:29:33] the commission was generally supportive of the changes that they'd made since the 2023
[1:29:37] proposal, um, but recommended they further refine residential
[1:29:41] densities and transitions between residential types, improve connections
[1:29:46] between residential areas and propo proposed commercial development,
[1:29:50] um, make stormwater or make sure that stormwater areas are more usable and better connected
[1:29:54] as amenities and open spaces. Um, and that that continue or
[1:29:58] the commission highlighted the necessity of transportation improvements in
[1:30:02] the southwest area if future developments to occur. And then that
[1:30:06] the applicant should continue to work with the neighbors in the area.
[1:30:12] uh, since the april, 2025 commission meeting, the applicant
[1:30:16] has hosted a virtual meeting, um, with some of the neighborhood surrounding
[1:30:20] neighborhood associations, um, and properties as well as
[1:30:25] their residents at ponderosa. Um, there have been public comments
[1:30:29] submitted for this case, which were provided to the commission ahead of the meeting.
[1:30:35] um, the community plan, um, is the document the city looks towards
[1:30:40] when considering rezoning. The site, as I mentioned, is zoo zoned
[1:30:44] rural. Presently the applicant is proposing, um, more
[1:30:48] development. The two future land uses recommended are mixed use neighborhood
[1:30:52] along avery road with residential mixed density,
[1:30:56] um, recommended for the balance of the site. Similar
[1:31:01] to the last case, this mixed use neighborhood is meant to be neighborhood
[1:31:05] services located near existing and future residential areas,
[1:31:09] um, with principal uses being more commercial and supporting
[1:31:13] uses being residential. Um, I think to add upon,
[1:31:17] um, what zach mentioned for this as supporting versus principal
[1:31:22] is not only from a use standpoint, but the community plan makes recommendation
[1:31:26] on character of the built environment. So residential areas in this mixed
[1:31:30] use neighborhood could be used to help create more of that village or walkable
[1:31:34] sense of place. So whether one or two commercial buildings might not be able to
[1:31:38] do that, if you add residential buildings with that to help create enclosure
[1:31:43] or a village feel, um, or something walkable, that that's how they can be also
[1:31:47] be considered supporting. And
[1:31:51] then the residential mixed density again is intended to provide
[1:31:55] a mix of residential products between three and 12 dwelling per
[1:31:59] acre, more residential and scaled one to three stories.
[1:32:04] in addition to the future land use, this area is within the southwest
[1:32:09] special area plan. Um, as mentioned,
[1:32:13] um, with the future land use, there is a propo or a recommended,
[1:32:17] uh, mixed use neighborhood node along avery,
[1:32:21] um, organizing buildings to kind of create that sense of, um,
[1:32:25] place the residential densities three to 12
[1:32:30] that are proposed or recommended in the future land use. The southwest area plan
[1:32:34] helps convey that it's not all intended to be 12 and that you should transition
[1:32:38] from lower inten or lower density areas specifically to the north,
[1:32:43] uh, the neighborhood neighborhoods along rings road and the residential,
[1:32:47] um, properties on rings to more intense as you move, uh,
[1:32:51] south into the southeast where the city of columbus has already built,
[1:32:55] um, more intense residential products. Um, the special area plan also
[1:33:00] highlights the existing natural features of the site and how to think about incorporating those
[1:33:04] into the development. Other places in dublin, you will see, um, incorporate
[1:33:09] those into true rows in the backyards or in front yards or into park features
[1:33:13] or into the public realm. And then the special
[1:33:17] area plan also mentions the, um, preserved open space in
[1:33:21] aans woods. It's a large wood woodlot that that could become kind of a
[1:33:25] backdrop for open space or park space. And then of course, the extension of total
[1:33:29] crossing, which is intended to be similar like muirfield parkway, one
[1:33:34] of our great street scapes with a lot of green in the roadway.
[1:33:40] um, in envision dublin. The multimodal plan, uh,
[1:33:44] thoroughfare plan rather also makes recommendations for future transportation,
[1:33:48] um, improvements that are needed. Uh, total crossing boulevard as a corridor. Significance,
[1:33:53] as I mentioned, um, a wider right of way to allow undulating
[1:33:57] lanes more character. A very green, uh, parkway like aesthetic
[1:34:01] rings road is intended to remain a two-lane collector, a rural character,
[1:34:06] um, with future roads total crossing expansion of avery road.
[1:34:10] it's intended that those roads handle more of, um, the traffic and that
[1:34:15] street can maintain its rural character. Avery is, um, recommended
[1:34:19] to be widened to four lanes. A recent roundabout improvement was made at rings and
[1:34:23] avery. Um, future improvements might be needed there as well as a roundabout
[1:34:28] with avery and the future extension of total crossing boulevard.
[1:34:32] um, the city also has planned a bike tunnel under avery as part of that
[1:34:36] intersection improvement
[1:34:40] going through, uh, the proposed sub areas, 1, 2, 3, 4.
[1:34:45] you'll see in the applicant's drawing that three and four were switched. Um, and a few of their
[1:34:49] drawings. So we just picked one of them that they called four and one of 'em that they called three.
[1:34:54] so four is the, uh, multifamily one in the south. Three is the mixed use
[1:34:58] node. Um, sub area one contains 53 acres of single family
[1:35:02] residential. Uh, two contains, um, the
[1:35:06] existing ponderosa three as I mentioned, the mixed use and four, the multifamily.
[1:35:11] um, so and sub area one, um, is the
[1:35:15] single family. They have modified the street and open space network,
[1:35:19] um, slightly to accommodate additional stormwater ponds.
[1:35:24] the less area is shown as residential and more as open space
[1:35:28] there. Um, dwelling units per acre remain the same in their proposal.
[1:35:34] um, shown here as the applicant showed are some residential, um, character images.
[1:35:39] um, this also highlights, um, the neighborhood design guidelines which are applicable
[1:35:43] to sub sub area one, so single family, um, residential, both
[1:35:48] detach and attach. This applies to the intent of the guidelines is to
[1:35:52] foster character and sense of place in future single family neighborhoods
[1:35:56] and make sure that landscape architecture and open space are thoughtfully designed.
[1:36:02] sub area two is the existing ponderosa neighborhood. They
[1:36:06] are not, or the applicant is not proposing any change or, um, major changes
[1:36:11] with this, uh, application sub
[1:36:15] area three is the mixed juice area, oops, sorry, neighborhood area.
[1:36:19] um, similar to the last uh, proposal, some additional area
[1:36:24] is shown for storm water, um, which seems to move some
[1:36:28] of the development and open space areas around.
[1:36:32] um, this, um, sub area is consistent
[1:36:36] kind of with a mixed use, um, neighborhood recommended by the southwest
[1:36:41] area plan and creating a character of in walkable area,
[1:36:46] um, sub area four. Uh, for the multifamily, the applicant
[1:36:50] has decreased the dwelling units per acre, sorry, zc should be
[1:36:55] ac from 13 to 12 units. That 12 is the maximum recommended
[1:36:59] by the future of land use. Um, they've also updated some of the stormwater ponds
[1:37:03] and clubhouse near avery road. Um,
[1:37:08] the applicant as they mentioned, have made changes to the open space. They
[1:37:12] have, um, increased the amount of open space. However,
[1:37:17] a number of this open space has included an increase in stormwater ponds, which
[1:37:21] is something we just or the commission discussed at the last meeting to make sure that storm
[1:37:25] water is being, um, used properly in ponds or that areas,
[1:37:30] um, are more thoughtfully amenitized if we include ponds in those open
[1:37:34] spaces. Uh,
[1:37:38] a few changes to the street network, but still providing a, um,
[1:37:43] for the extension of total crossing and additional neighborhood boulevards and local streets.
[1:37:48] um, they have added the bike tunnel, um, at the roundabout or
[1:37:52] future roundabout of avery road and rings road. Um, so
[1:37:56] discussions are framed for the commission to facilitate non-binding feedback to the
[1:38:00] applicant based on the commission's prior feedback in april. Um,
[1:38:06] I'm happy to answer any questions. Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Will,
[1:38:10] uh, open up to the commission now for questions for the applicant and staff.
[1:38:15] gary, why don't you start us off? Um, just a couple. Um, chris
[1:38:19] is is accurate that as a part of this development, they will actually build
[1:38:23] the tell road extension to the end of their property. Thank you for
[1:38:27] asking that. Um, at this stage we're looking for,
[1:38:32] um, compliance with the community plan at the pdp
[1:38:36] and rezoning. The applicant would be required to do a traffic impact study
[1:38:41] that would determine which improvements are needed. Um,
[1:38:45] as this is in the southwest area, it's not served yet by utilities
[1:38:49] and we expect utilities to be extended with the street.
[1:38:54] um, that is typical in dublin. The tis though will identify
[1:38:58] what improvements that are need to be made onsite. There's no development
[1:39:02] really, but offsite as well, and that will identify what those are at that stage.
[1:39:06] so, okay. You answered my second question with the traffic study coming.
[1:39:11] okay, thank, thank you. Um, I have a question for the
[1:39:15] applicant. Um, is there
[1:39:19] gonna be the mixed use, the way you've you've interpreted it
[1:39:23] is, is separate individual buildings without any
[1:39:28] integration within the buildings of two different uses. Is that accurate?
[1:39:32] that's correct. Okay. So did, did you ever consider any residential
[1:39:37] smaller units above the commercial? Um,
[1:39:41] not at, not at that scale. And I think in the presentation it was
[1:39:45] the, the orange buildings that are to the west and that mixed use are the residential
[1:39:49] and then the blue are the commercial. Um, at, at that scale might
[1:39:53] be a little bit challenging, um, to, to
[1:39:57] incorporate residential onto a a second story, uh, on
[1:40:01] that footprint of commercial. Um, we haven't considered it, not to
[1:40:06] say that we wouldn't look at it, but something we haven't, uh, rolled up
[1:40:10] our sleeves on. Those are the only questions I had. Thank you. Thank you, ms. Harder.
[1:40:15] thank you. Thank you for being here. Appreciate it. Um, I've got a few
[1:40:20] questions just about, um, meeting with the neighbors. Um, there was a
[1:40:24] a, a zoom call or something. Are you planning on doing that
[1:40:28] again or would there be in person and was the city
[1:40:32] invited as well? Um, I, for our zoom call, we
[1:40:36] met with the, um, designated hoa representatives.
[1:40:41] um, I think if we were to move forward to the next stage, we probably would have more of an
[1:40:45] open house forum in a larger setting where everybody could come. Um,
[1:40:49] the city, I don't re, I don't think the city was invited to the, the zoom
[1:40:54] meeting, um, but I, we tried to hit all of the, the hoas
[1:40:58] that the property touches, um, and had a, had a decent turnout for
[1:41:02] that. Okay. Um, so then in the future, uh,
[1:41:07] bringing all parties together, is that your plan moving forward? Yeah, I think it,
[1:41:11] um, it's, it's a bit of a coordination effort with the amount of communities around there, but, um,
[1:41:15] I think we, we, we did that for the first concept plan at, uh, open house
[1:41:19] and I think we do that again at, at the next step. Okay, thank you.
[1:41:23] um, okay, so I'm thinking of ponderosa and thank you for
[1:41:28] integrating it and having it there. Um, uh, we all see the importance
[1:41:32] of that. Um, once, um, so
[1:41:36] thinking about them, does that open up for some changes
[1:41:41] for them? Meaning, um, uh, a different entrance
[1:41:45] or, um, uh, sidewalks? Um,
[1:41:49] I was also, uh, noticing, um, like their trash dumpster,
[1:41:53] you know, regulations that are here. Does this move them? I guess it also,
[1:41:58] I have that question for you and then I have the city question is, does
[1:42:02] this change things for them? Does this become more of a neighborhood neighborhood?
[1:42:06] but that's, yeah. What are your thoughts about new changes in,
[1:42:10] in that area? Yeah, and I, I think our intent would be to, to
[1:42:14] have them incorporated but also at the same time respect that they, they've been there and
[1:42:18] have been a community on their own for a while. So, uh, to kind of have them
[1:42:23] incorporated into the plant, but since sensitively, um,
[1:42:27] you know, have ways of screening them so that they can still maintain their identity,
[1:42:31] uh, that they have been in that setting for, for some time. Um, from
[1:42:35] an improvement standpoint, I think the biggest thing would be the, the extension of public utilities. Mm-hmm
[1:42:40] . That, that aren't there now. Um, so there's some private utility, um,
[1:42:44] plants that are operating for the ponderosa facility that, uh, that opportunity
[1:42:48] certainly would probably be the biggest one that would come along with this change. With
[1:42:52] this project, do you, um, is it, is there road,
[1:42:56] um, would that be provided by you all or is that from the city? The
[1:43:00] current roads? Yeah, there, there, everything that's shown there is existing. There's just
[1:43:05] the one connection from the west okay. That we would be providing as part of
[1:43:09] the project. And then there are some trees that are on, seems to be that, that area.
[1:43:13] would they stay or, um, yeah, similar to the last case, I think we,
[1:43:17] we would do a tree survey and, and identify what, um, is worth
[1:43:21] saving and what we could incorporate into the overall master
[1:43:25] plan. Just a city question on that too. Would they expect any changes,
[1:43:29] um, taking over ponderosa that haven't been? Uh, uh,
[1:43:34] I know it's like the, the dumpster isn't, you know, covered and so forth. It's
[1:43:38] just open. I mean, the app or the city wouldn't be taking over
[1:43:42] ponderosa, it's a privately owned now and the streets are privately owned.
[1:43:46] it's not been discussed if those streets would change from private
[1:43:51] to public, um, at this point.
[1:43:56] and then, um, the structures that are in that area that seems like,
[1:44:01] um, cinder block and so forth, would those be removed or were those used
[1:44:05] for any purpose at one point? Um, so one, one is the
[1:44:09] water plant, another one is the sewage plant. Oh. So those have to remain operational
[1:44:13] until the point they would be switched over to a, a public, um,
[1:44:18] utility. Okay. Thank you. From, there might be a third one that might be used as,
[1:44:22] as storage relief. I think there's a post office there too. Yeah, you said that. Yeah, that's
[1:44:26] right. And then, um, the, one of
[1:44:30] the questions I have too is the numbers have changed quite a
[1:44:34] bit. There was 719 I was reading and then, uh, 8 0 7,
[1:44:39] um, for residential units. What is the number today
[1:44:44] for, for total units? Yeah. Uh, I was just asking drew, I don't know if he
[1:44:48] . So based on the, on the densities
[1:44:59] for three, so six area, so about 600 plus sub area three,
[1:45:04] it sounds like we're probably, uh, somewhere between 600 and and
[1:45:08] six 60. Yeah. Yeah. 300. Yeah. 300, 360.
[1:45:13] yep. So this is the lowest number you've had since the
[1:45:17] proposals that have come forward? That correct. Okay.
[1:45:22] sorry, can I follow up to that? What, what was the pre prior proposal? How much did you reduce
[1:45:26] it? Um, I, I don't have that off, off the top of my head. I have 8 0 7,
[1:45:32] that was the last one. And really the seven 19 was the, the unit count. And I, and
[1:45:36] I, I think we've mentioned this in the, especially in the larger sub area, um,
[1:45:40] the, the intent was to show a a a max density there.
[1:45:44] um, we are showing different types of housing types that could be accommodated.
[1:45:49] um, we're not proposing this as a, a final layout per se.
[1:45:54] so, uh, we just kind of wanted to establish a density ceiling that could
[1:45:58] be established for that district so that when we came back for the next step, we could
[1:46:02] further finalize kind of what that development standard would be. And for
[1:46:06] us, the, the unit count has been more a function of, uh,
[1:46:11] two things along the process. One was getting the alignment of tele crossing boulevard extension
[1:46:15] set, and then the second big thing was the storm water. It's extremely flat site
[1:46:19] storm water is challenging to accommodate. Um, and it, as we have
[1:46:24] rolled up our sleeves on that effort, as you can see, it's starting to eat up more and more space,
[1:46:28] which is required. Um, so that's kind of been more of a function of the
[1:46:33] shifting of the, of the unit count, um, as we've progressed through
[1:46:37] the studies and a good thing. Okay. And then, um,
[1:46:42] I think my last question is, um, how close,
[1:46:46] uh, are, how sensitive are you about the, about the apartments
[1:46:51] that are near the single family places?
[1:46:55] um, what kind of opportunities are you separating or,
[1:46:59] uh, you know, in that, that I, I think, you know, in our
[1:47:03] opinion and as vibrancy, we, we have a lot of mixed use unfill projects where you've
[1:47:08] got higher density against single family and you've got introduced commercial and,
[1:47:12] uh, it, it adds, uh, the character to, to the neighborhood. It
[1:47:16] adds the walkability that I think is desired. Um, you know, we, we work
[1:47:20] to work the density from, from lower, uh, rings road to, to
[1:47:24] higher to the south and and respect kind of the existing single family residential
[1:47:28] to the north. Um, so that was all kind of thought out as we
[1:47:33] laid out that, that larger sub area, one with the, with the mix of residential
[1:47:37] components. Okay. And then, um,
[1:47:42] I guess on that note, um, office space too, uh, it
[1:47:46] seems like that has reduced a bit. It, I think
[1:47:50] the, um, you know, I don't know that we've, at least since
[1:47:54] I've been on, on, on working on this, I don't know that we've ever thought of that space as, as office space.
[1:47:59] it's probably more commercial space. Um, it's probably more similar
[1:48:03] to the inline retail and, and and services, neighborhood services
[1:48:07] that, um, you, that you've seen in, in the previous submittal as well.
[1:48:11] um, you know, I think there's definitely a need in this area, uh, for those communities
[1:48:15] to have those local neighborhood amenities and services. I, I
[1:48:20] don't foresee this as a large office component. That's not to say there might not, there
[1:48:24] could be a a, a smaller medical office component that made sense that that services
[1:48:28] the neighborhoods, but certainly not a, a corporate office setting.
[1:48:33] lastly, the ponds too. Um, it, can someone
[1:48:37] go fishing or is there other amenities? It seems
[1:48:41] like there's a lot of them now that we've incorporated that you've incorporated into
[1:48:45] it. Yeah, I think we'd, we'd wanna, and, and I think we'd wanna work with staff about what,
[1:48:49] what's the right kind of balance there of having the, the, the programmed amenity
[1:48:54] on, on the, on the basins to have them incorporated into
[1:48:58] our open space. But, um, not to be careful
[1:49:02] not to detract from that by kind of stuffing too much into 'em as well.
[1:49:06] so I certainly, I think that's all on the table. Um, and as
[1:49:10] we, as you can see, we've kind of progressed our thoughts and our programming on those, but,
[1:49:15] um, by no means are they, are they final? Thank you,
[1:49:19] mr. Chair. Yes. Can we please get a name and address for the most recent speaker?
[1:49:23] oh, sorry, . Thank you. Uh, colby turnock, casto two 50 civic center
[1:49:27] drive, columbus, ohio. Thank you. Sorry
[1:49:32] mr. Chinook, thank you again for being here. So
[1:49:36] the, the, I think it's important delineation. I mean, that's a significant reduction in units
[1:49:41] and a significant add in green space. So I don't want to, don't wanna just gloss
[1:49:45] it over 'cause it's a, it's a pretty big change to this plan, which is I think a positive. Sorry,
[1:49:49] we're not delineation. This is a question. Um, can we, I dunno if you can call up the
[1:49:53] slide, but can you just, just to so everyone understands, can we run through the building
[1:49:57] heights again just briefly, if you don't mind? Sure. And and I believe they haven't
[1:50:01] changed since last time, correct? That's correct.
[1:50:13] so yeah, can you just go through 'em briefly? Do you mind? Yeah. So if we work our way north to south, the single family
[1:50:18] homes are just your standard single family home. And I don't know if that's
[1:50:22] a 35 foot height district or, or what establishes that height.
[1:50:26] um, the, the commercial buildings right now are shown as, as one story. I think some of
[1:50:30] the inspirational images is more of a architectural effect, uh, to have
[1:50:34] a one and a half or two story look to them. Um, but they would be one story
[1:50:38] and function. Uh, the residential behind those would be two story.
[1:50:44] and then the, the mix of, uh, residential components,
[1:50:49] uh, in the larger sub area. One, uh, the
[1:50:54] duplex triplex, um, town homes, those,
[1:50:58] um, I think we are showing as two or three story.
[1:51:03] I don't know that we have, um, a, a preference on that.
[1:51:07] some of that could ultimately be. Um, and then,
[1:51:11] you know, I'm thinking of the three story product that, uh, pulte is building and,
[1:51:15] and bridge street district that the town home products. So some of that product is
[1:51:19] suitable to three, some of it's better at two, that the, the triplex that we're
[1:51:24] showing is actually a two story product, um, that almost has a little bit of a
[1:51:28] ranch feel that, uh, the architects have done in another location. So it's a, it's
[1:51:32] kind of a mix in that area. And then to the south, the,
[1:51:36] the, uh, multifamily component would be three story. Thank
[1:51:40] you. And then one final question. I know we're not supposed to get
[1:51:44] into the details, but we inevitably always do the main fur
[1:51:49] thoroughfare, I guess called a boulevard. It seemed it's moved to be, you got like
[1:51:53] a green median in there now. Um, and the prior, prior plan, which,
[1:51:57] which again is I think is a positive. The prior plan had a lot of, uh, land
[1:52:01] like trees, street scape, um, significant amount more trees along there. Again,
[1:52:05] um, you know, we're, you're adding a ton of green space, but I'm just asking like
[1:52:10] that, that's, that's still similar, right? That would be a, the streetscape, but that's correct. I,
[1:52:14] I think this rendered site plan just didn't pick up all, all of the landscape elements
[1:52:18] on it. Um, but you can start to see that in the, in the cross section of
[1:52:22] the tunnel crossing extension. You can kind of see how that green space,
[1:52:27] as drew mentioned, we kind of envision that being programmed. Perfect.
[1:52:31] thank you. Thank you. Um, chris,
[1:52:35] could you pull up the, it's labeled, um,
[1:52:40] site analysis. I think I read somewhere
[1:52:45] that one. Yes. Um, I'm just curious
[1:52:49] in, in this, this, this analysis, um, it, you
[1:52:53] have a g and an l kind of a, it looks like a tree line,
[1:52:58] um, that doesn't seem to be reflected in the new
[1:53:02] plan. I just wondered, you've highlighted it on the analysis, but
[1:53:06] you haven't reflected it in the plan. I think that's something we want to study and it's, we talked
[1:53:10] about it a little bit before, but how, how do we provide ponderosa the appropriate kind of separation?
[1:53:15] um, but also include them kind of in, in the programming in the network.
[1:53:20] um, so I think that's kind of a, a little bit of a, to be determined okay. And working
[1:53:24] with those residents and, and, and you guys and staff to figure out what the right treatment
[1:53:28] would be there. Okay. Um, and kind of building
[1:53:32] on that, the interesting thing that to me that, that that
[1:53:36] pattern establishes is there's this, um, north, south
[1:53:40] kind of green way that it starts a rhythm
[1:53:44] and then you have the hedge row that's in the middle of f which
[1:53:49] you haven't highlighted, but, and it isn't reflected. And again, again, back to this,
[1:53:53] the comment somebody made earlier about the existing trees on the site mm-hmm . Um,
[1:53:57] that would give you another kind of north south greenway. Yeah.
[1:54:02] and it, it also, um, I I I guess I'm just asking,
[1:54:06] I I think your answer to my question was we're studying it still. Right? But yeah.
[1:54:11] okay. But those are still considerations that you're trying to integrate? Absolutely. Yep.
[1:54:16] um, okay.
[1:54:22] I think, oh, um, yeah, I think that's it actually. Oh, oh
[1:54:26] no, I want to make the comment about, um, so again, I, I appreciate
[1:54:30] the reduction in density and I, I wanted
[1:54:35] to make, uh, and it's really great that you've added this more open space in and,
[1:54:39] and it kind of dovetails off of this idea of are there some other north south
[1:54:43] greenways that we be part of that plan, but, um,
[1:54:48] the exist, the, the, the unit layout still was quite
[1:54:52] intense. And so had you thought about how you might,
[1:54:56] um, kind of softened that intensity
[1:55:02] wi within sub area one? Are you referencing or
[1:55:06] just a yeah, help me with num. Yes, that's one, right? Yeah.
[1:55:10] yeah. Yeah. I, I think, you know, it was a, it was a little bit of a balance.
[1:55:15] um, I think previously we probably had not
[1:55:19] as large of a central green area and we had a
[1:55:23] little bit more of a pocket kind of opportunity right. Which helped
[1:55:28] spread that intensity. And then when we kind of shifted to a larger
[1:55:33] community component, it kind of brought that. So yeah, I mean, I think
[1:55:37] there's areas we could probably look at and maybe reintroducing some of those elements.
[1:55:42] um, but yeah, kind of when we, when we went down that path, it tightened
[1:55:46] kind of the, the plan up, uh, from the residual land that was left, so.
[1:55:50] right. Okay. Um, and I did have another question.
[1:55:54] um, the apartments. Yes. Um,
[1:55:59] tuttle crossing in its proposed alignment sets
[1:56:03] a very kind of soft curve, linear kind of feel.
[1:56:07] mm-hmm . That seems to be reflected somewhat in the northern part,
[1:56:11] but the apartments seem to be extremely rigid and it's, and
[1:56:16] I I said you look at trying to create
[1:56:20] more, you know, maybe some play of those units so that they more relate
[1:56:24] to the parkway in a positive way as opposed to kind
[1:56:28] of confronting it in a very angular way. Yeah, no, that's, that's
[1:56:32] a good point. I see what you're saying. Yeah. Um, no, yeah, we certainly can, can look at that.
[1:56:37] okay. Great. That is all the
[1:56:41] questions I had. Any more questions from the commission? All right. So now
[1:56:45] let's go into public comment. Thank you, uh, gentlemen for your
[1:56:49] presentation. Um, is anybody here
[1:56:53] to speak to this development? If you could, I'll let you fight
[1:56:57] between yourselves about who comes up first, but I think you won . If you could
[1:57:02] approach the, the mic is on. If you could state your name and address,
[1:57:06] we'd appreciate it. My name is barbara wright. My address is 6 2 4 4
[1:57:11] cartwright lane north. Um,
[1:57:15] I have a question about the property behind my house.
[1:57:20] um, if we could get a map up, that would be great.
[1:57:29] that's not really the one I wanted, but that's okay. Just there is
[1:57:33] a house behind me right now and I live on the outside
[1:57:37] edge up there. And,
[1:57:41] uh, I wanted to know what was happening with that house and if it,
[1:57:45] uh, I've seen a couple designs.
[1:57:50] and don't ask me where I saw them because I can't remember, but,
[1:57:54] uh, it looked like there was a picnic area in that spot
[1:57:59] and I wondered if that was the case or was it all the
[1:58:03] house gonna go away? Is there green space? 'cause I have a problem
[1:58:07] if there's a picnic area right behind my house.
[1:58:14] I can't answer that question, but we will. I think that's an issue that you could
[1:58:18] work with staff on and that you can point to the map exactly with what you're
[1:58:22] talking about. But I'm not quite sure. Okay. Unless staff
[1:58:26] has a,
[1:58:32] we can follow up with you after. But if you also wanna make a comment or
[1:58:37] phrase your question in terms of a comment. 'cause it seems like it is a
[1:58:41] comment that you can make now and we can still follow up later. Okay. My, my question is, what's
[1:58:45] going to be, uh, behind me towards
[1:58:49] the road? Is it gonna be green space? Is the house gonna stay there?
[1:58:55] or, uh, in
[1:58:59] terms of a comment, what would you like to see behind your house? Green
[1:59:03] space. If I had to, if I had to have something green space.
[1:59:07] okay. That's great. Appreciate that. And again, mr. Will said
[1:59:11] he'd be willing to work with you to answer that question in more detail. Okay. Thank you. Thank
[1:59:16] you.
[1:59:28] christian cooney 58 35 barron's court way.
[1:59:32] um, I appreciate the, the changes that have been made to the plan,
[1:59:36] uh, but there's still four major points that haven't been addressed.
[1:59:40] uh, the first is the country lane feel of rings road. Uh,
[1:59:45] across the road there are two major hoas. One is kramer cross
[1:59:49] and the other is balance tree. The distance, there's a really beautiful
[1:59:53] wooded pathway, um, that is
[1:59:58] from across from kramer crossing. Um, there is
[2:00:02] a hundred feet of wooded pathway from rings
[2:00:06] road to the frontage of the road that
[2:00:11] then the residents of, of, uh, kramer crossing go onto
[2:00:15] in balance tray. That distance is 50 feet. Um,
[2:00:20] this proposal of people's backyards backing into
[2:00:24] the, uh, into rings road, uh, seems lackluster
[2:00:29] and out of character to the intent of maintaining that country lane
[2:00:33] feel. So something along that line should be addressed. A wooded pathway,
[2:00:37] at least, at least the same distance as as balance tree with that
[2:00:41] 50, with the 50 feet to a roadway. And then homes facing
[2:00:46] rings road instead of their backyards. The second piece is the density.
[2:00:51] um, the envision dublin plan, when everyone saw it, you, I,
[2:00:55] I know balance rate got pretty excited about the west innovation
[2:00:59] district, but when we looked to the south, we saw
[2:01:03] this, this plan and it looked reasonable. One to three homes per
[2:01:07] acre. Um, then butting up to four to six,
[2:01:12] and then another then far almost to the, to where they have it now,
[2:01:16] then it went to seven to nine, and then the, and then the 10
[2:01:20] to 12. This pushes one to six
[2:01:24] all the way to the western part of the property, which is then gonna influence
[2:01:29] wick. Its developed to the west. I think that it, that having
[2:01:33] a greater fidelity to the envision dublin plan on density would be very
[2:01:37] good. The third piece is a traffic flow, particularly
[2:01:42] under rings road. The, this project really feels like three
[2:01:46] separate projects that have been conglomerated into one.
[2:01:51] you have the residential of one to three, one to six, which drain
[2:01:55] onto rings road. You then have the avery,
[2:01:59] you know, commercial area, um, which I think was
[2:02:03] intended as a mixed use, not as sort of apartment buildings backing onto
[2:02:08] commercial, which seemed really strange. Um, and then you had the
[2:02:12] apartment complex that drained onto, um, onto
[2:02:16] tuttle crossing. If you have the tuttle crossing traffic draining
[2:02:21] up to rings road, rings road is gonna become a nightmare.
[2:02:25] it's, I I, I would, I would think that a better solution is that there is no connection
[2:02:30] between the apartment buildings to rings road, that
[2:02:34] they'd have to go through avery or crown tuttle up to cos gray or beyond.
[2:02:39] but having the north south corridor in that area just seems like it's
[2:02:43] inviting tremendous problems to it. Um, the fourth,
[2:02:47] the fourth piece is the park in the southwest corner of the property.
[2:02:51] um, envision dublin called for
[2:02:56] it. It recognized there was a lack of amenities in southwest dublin
[2:03:00] and one of the, one of their big solutions to that was to use a large
[2:03:04] part of that property, um, as a
[2:03:09] major park. So parking, it would be a destination park that
[2:03:13] would then lead into the wooded area that is north of
[2:03:17] avondale. Um, and at this point, I don't see anything
[2:03:21] being thought through on that. Um, half of that of that park
[2:03:25] has been cut in half and two more apartment complexes have been put in
[2:03:29] it versus what was suggested envisioned in envision dublin. So the
[2:03:33] city and the developer really needs to address what that park is gonna look like
[2:03:38] and how that becomes a destination park. The only destination park in southwest
[2:03:42] dublin is, uh, the balance tree park splash pad,
[2:03:46] and it's packed in the summer. Um, so that being addressed would
[2:03:50] be, would be very important. Thank you. So those are the four concerns. Thank you. The, the country
[2:03:55] lane feel, the density, uh, the traffic flow to
[2:03:59] rings road and the park. Thank you. Thank you.
[2:04:04] remind everyone that we do have a three minute limit and the red light will flash when your
[2:04:09] time is up.
[2:04:14] hi, my name's kathy gates. I live at 5 7 3 3 stockton
[2:04:18] way in kramer's crossing. And, um, I tend to agree
[2:04:22] with the gentleman that just spoke about his comments about rings road, but
[2:04:26] also I'm just concerned about the density and the traffic
[2:04:31] on avery road. Even though it's gonna be expanded, even though we've added
[2:04:35] a roundabout, it's still difficult at times to get outta kramer crossing onto
[2:04:39] avery ings road to access other areas, which then forces
[2:04:44] a lot of my neighbors and myself to go down and go through balance tray. So
[2:04:48] you're creating another different kind of traffic flow and possible traffic issue.
[2:04:53] but, um, and I'm gonna apologize because this is my first time I've been able
[2:04:57] to join this conversation and um, I'm not very versed
[2:05:01] on a lot of the information that they've shared in the past, but I'm really concerned
[2:05:05] about the impact this community in this area is gonna have on the
[2:05:09] area, not just on the avery road, but cos gray
[2:05:14] too, because there's a lot of traffic on cos gray and there's more
[2:05:18] discussion about building on cos gray where the area between
[2:05:23] dari fields and down towards, uh, hay and run. So there's
[2:05:27] a lot of interest there. So I'm really concerned about the impact on
[2:05:31] my neighbors. I'm concerned about the impact on ponderosa because
[2:05:36] when we moved into kramer's crossing, or actually the whole time I've lived in dublin,
[2:05:41] ponderosa was designated as an affordable area for elder
[2:05:45] residents. And what kind of impact is this gonna have on them?
[2:05:50] is there, are there property prices gonna go up? I mean, is it gonna impact their taxes?
[2:05:54] what is it gonna do to them? And is it still gonna be affordable to live there?
[2:05:59] um, so I'm concerned about that. I'm concerned about my
[2:06:03] neighbors. A lot of families in my neighborhood have children. How's it gonna impact the school
[2:06:07] systems? So, um, I really just came
[2:06:12] to kind of lured myself what was going on and I didn't have access to all the maps.
[2:06:16] so I'm, I'm not really versed on where everything is, but I just
[2:06:20] ask everyone to really study the impact, you know,
[2:06:24] about how it's gonna affect the neighborhoods and how it's gonna
[2:06:29] affect the other residents. You know, we have a lot of buildings south of us
[2:06:33] on avery road down on riggins road, where there's a huge, huge
[2:06:37] apartment community going in right now, and that traffic
[2:06:41] comes down our way as well. Um, also too,
[2:06:45] when you get involved with retail, what retail, what services
[2:06:49] could possibly, possibly need that we don't already have within a three
[2:06:54] to five mile radius. I mean, it doesn't take me very long to get to a post office,
[2:06:58] to get to a, a grocery store, to go down to starbucks.
[2:07:02] I mean, what kind of retail would be necessary in
[2:07:06] an area like that? So those are my concerns and I really thank you for listening
[2:07:11] to me and I would appreciate that you take these concerns under
[2:07:15] consideration. Also to, one last thing. My property backs up to
[2:07:19] the dublin south pool. So in regards to dog parks,
[2:07:23] in the last conversation we had a dog, uh, illegal dog park in
[2:07:28] our backyard. And it's not pleasant. So when you
[2:07:32] consider adding dog parks, please don't put it beside some behind somebody's residence
[2:07:36] and also even the picnicking area. Make sure you have enough space so that
[2:07:40] it's not infringing on the property owner. Thank you. Thank you.
[2:07:45] mr. Will, just for clarification, this project will require a traffic impact study.
[2:07:50] nothing is required with the concept plan 'cause no determination is made. If it
[2:07:54] would take a step towards the preliminary development plan, every zoning
[2:07:59] a traffic impact study would be required and it would document all improvements.
[2:08:04] thank you. Yes, sir. Uh, hello. My name is kevin griffin.
[2:08:08] my address is 55 59 var lane. Um,
[2:08:12] I'm really, uh, more here to address the property west
[2:08:16] of ponderosa, the residential area. Uh, if you'll excuse, excuse,
[2:08:21] uh, my bluntness for a moment. Um, I think this plan sucks.
[2:08:25] um, it's too much. It's, uh, too congested.
[2:08:30] there's too many units. Most importantly, this
[2:08:34] is not at all like the neighborhoods on the opposite
[2:08:38] side of rings road. When, uh, my wife and I, we
[2:08:42] built our house 22 years ago. And now when I go down to that
[2:08:46] bike path on rings road, and I look to the south and
[2:08:51] I see that tree line, it's really not very far from
[2:08:55] where I'm standing. And I'm looking at that tree line and I'm going,
[2:08:59] there's gonna be a row of apartments, tunnel crossing,
[2:09:03] a row of cluster homes, a little bit of green space,
[2:09:07] four to six rows of town homes, and then
[2:09:12] a single row of single family homes. It makes my stomach
[2:09:16] turn. This is not the dublin that I wanted to live in.
[2:09:21] um, when you look at, when I looked at google maps zoomed
[2:09:25] out a little bit more, you guys had some pictures that were very similar to this.
[2:09:29] if you look at the highlands of balance tray directly across the street,
[2:09:34] you rotate that 90 degrees. You're looking at roughly the
[2:09:38] same number of acreage, roughly the same acreage. Uh, as all of this that's
[2:09:42] being proposed, there are 88 single family
[2:09:47] homes in the highlands of entre. And in roughly that
[2:09:51] same acreage, this proposal calls for 170
[2:09:55] town homes, 16 cluster homes, 23 duplexes,
[2:09:59] and 14 single family homes in the same acreage
[2:10:04] as 88. It's just too much.
[2:10:09] avery crossing should compliment our neighborhoods. It should feel like we
[2:10:13] have an extension of our neighborhoods. It should not be a
[2:10:17] transition to riggins road. Thank you for your time, I appreciate it.
[2:10:21] thank you.
[2:10:36] good evening. My name is victoria mcdonald. I live at 5 6 4 2 time
[2:10:40] castle loop, which I wanna thank you for your time and listening
[2:10:44] to all of us tonight. Thank you for your presentation. I'm here to voice
[2:10:48] my concerns regarding the proposed development plan. I'm concerned about the impact
[2:10:52] of the high density development as shown in the current site plan. It
[2:10:57] does not preserve the rural character of the established community and does not respect
[2:11:01] the quality of life that current residents are accustomed to. Particularly the
[2:11:05] senior residents in the ponderosa mobile home park.
[2:11:09] residents in this area value, peace, privacy, and connection to nature.
[2:11:13] high density development will threaten to diminish these values as it will introduce
[2:11:18] traffic noise and light pollution. The current
[2:11:22] rural character of the area promotes open space, farmland and natural scenery.
[2:11:27] high density housing will undermine these assets by replacing them with crowded housing units,
[2:11:32] introducing noise, traffic, and pollution that will greatly impact
[2:11:37] our quality of life. If we look at the 2023
[2:11:41] plan, even casto acknowledged the single family detached homes were the most
[2:11:45] responsive and sympathetic in response to maintaining the character of the mobile
[2:11:49] home park. Yet the current plans that those buffers, the
[2:11:53] current plan, shows that those buffers have been reduced completely engulfing the mobile
[2:11:57] home park and not allowing them distance and space from the
[2:12:01] proposed development. As I've had to sit in on many opportunities
[2:12:06] of council meetings over the past year, it's become evident that the thoughtful
[2:12:10] process of planning does not often align with the values of the residents and
[2:12:14] community neighbors that will have the greatest impact. I was just here
[2:12:18] on monday and listened to residents that were from martin road. They're facing similar
[2:12:22] concerns and express their concerns about development.
[2:12:26] I'm here to urge casto planning and zoning members to respect
[2:12:30] the identity of our community and pursue development plans that align with
[2:12:34] the scale and character of the existing landscape. Low
[2:12:39] density, sustainable growth will preserve the integrity of our community.
[2:12:43] thank you. Thank you.
[2:12:52] uh, hello. I'm tim myers. I live at, uh, 58 45 glen
[2:12:56] daven court. I'm here, uh, mainly, uh, uh, as
[2:13:00] a balancer resident with the concerns with the, uh, rings road traffic, and then of
[2:13:05] course, the density of the proposed development. Uh, listening to the
[2:13:09] emerald parkway presentation and the avery crossing res, uh,
[2:13:13] presentation, I, I felt there was a lot more depth and thought put into
[2:13:17] the emerald development than what I heard from the avery crossing.
[2:13:21] um, I think the response to more green space, um, seemed
[2:13:26] rather transactional. We just sort of dropped some things in corners here and there to satisfy your
[2:13:30] request for more green space. Um, I, I would think that
[2:13:34] it could have been a little more thoughtful. Um, and, and honestly, when
[2:13:38] I look at the sketches, it doesn't feel like dublin. It feels like columbus, and maybe that's
[2:13:42] okay, but it's hard to really go there and say,
[2:13:47] well, that's dublin. Um, it
[2:13:51] maybe it was clear to you guys. It wasn't clear to me how much the density actually reduced,
[2:13:55] but the only thing that stands out in my mind is this huge cluster of homes right in the middle of the
[2:13:59] park and the density and the traffic and the congestion that's gonna come of
[2:14:03] that. You know, I mentioned, uh, you know, being able to go over to balance trade,
[2:14:07] but I, I would fear walking across rings road. And I also
[2:14:12] fear, as another member mentioned, uh, rings road will be a cut through
[2:14:16] when traffic on auto crossing gets too much. And
[2:14:20] to maintain that country's cha the road's character as a country road,
[2:14:26] I think it's gonna be difficult. And then we're gonna force be forced to widen that road to handle all
[2:14:30] the additional traffic, not just for avery crossing, but the whole western innovation
[2:14:35] district. So the traffic and the congestion is gonna explode in that area
[2:14:39] as well as this high density. So, um,
[2:14:43] so I, I think a traffic study would make sense. I really worry what the,
[2:14:48] how much the developer really engage with the ponderosa residents.
[2:14:52] um, I I would think they should be a key stakeholder in this
[2:14:56] and, um, I, I understand the need for our economic development, but I feel
[2:15:00] dublin could do better than what was presented tonight. Thank you.
[2:15:04] thank you.
[2:15:16] hi, my name is tamara kane and I live at 5 4 5 6 desert lane
[2:15:21] in the ponderosa mobile home park. I am very concerned that,
[2:15:25] um, we are a 55 and older community.
[2:15:30] we have no crime. You're gonna
[2:15:34] put all this stuff around us and there comes
[2:15:38] the crime. Then we have to worry about our 90-year-old
[2:15:42] neighbors and our people that, you know, are
[2:15:46] not able to get around and take care of theirselves. So
[2:15:51] I'm really concerned about all this going around us when
[2:15:55] that is one reason why my husband and I moved there.
[2:16:00] another thing is, um,
[2:16:07] there was not supposed to be any type of entrance
[2:16:12] from these apartments, homes, whatever, into
[2:16:16] the ponderosa. And I noticed on one of the slides that
[2:16:20] there are, so there that's telling me that
[2:16:25] the apartment buildings or homes are going to come through our
[2:16:29] neighborhood and we have a 10 mile
[2:16:33] an hour speed limit because we're all old , you know,
[2:16:38] and people are not gonna abide by that.
[2:16:43] um, I do believe that there is an eight inch hype
[2:16:47] main pressure gas line coming from
[2:16:51] tuttle across that field to avery. That is
[2:16:55] another thing that I would like to be addressed to see what they're gonna do about
[2:17:00] that. Um, right
[2:17:04] now we have very low
[2:17:08] water pressure and 90% of us do not
[2:17:12] drink that water. We either have a water softener or we bottle
[2:17:16] water and, you know, what's that
[2:17:20] going to do to us? I mean, we're already having trouble with
[2:17:25] our water. You know, we have more people, we're gonna have more water problems.
[2:17:30] um, property taxes will go up our
[2:17:34] lot in fee. Uh, lot fees have definitely increased,
[2:17:39] um, to the point of $85 this year for
[2:17:43] the year of 2026. It has never, in the nine years that I have
[2:17:47] lived there increased that much.
[2:17:51] and so I would like to know, and I know that's more addressed to the ponderosa
[2:17:56] of why such a large increase,
[2:18:00] what's going on with that money, that extra
[2:18:04] money, that extra $85 that's coming out of our pockets that
[2:18:09] people don't have because we are over 55 and older
[2:18:13] and 90% of us are retired and living on social security.
[2:18:19] so there's a lot of things that, that play into this that the
[2:18:23] people in our neighborhood are not liking.
[2:18:28] and I think we need some answers going both ways on
[2:18:33] how to keep us safe and
[2:18:37] how to keep our taxes, our stuff low
[2:18:41] so that we can afford to, to live there. Because if
[2:18:46] not, if it continues to go up, we'll find somewhere else to have to go.
[2:18:51] thank you. Thank you.
[2:19:02] good evening commissioners. My name is sandy mcintosh. I live at 5 7 9 2 traf
[2:19:06] fogger lane in the balance trade neighborhood. Uh, first I'd like to thank castow development
[2:19:10] for reaching out to us and including us in review of this plan prior to this evening.
[2:19:14] and I appreciate the commitment to continued engagement in that regard.
[2:19:19] a second, I can say with certainty, I could never be a developer. I would never have looked at
[2:19:23] a 55 and over mobile home community and said, do you know what we should do? We should
[2:19:27] surround them with apartments and duplexes and triplexes and some commercial development
[2:19:31] and cluster homes, whatever those are. Talk about completely
[2:19:36] changing the character of that neighborhood. Turning to what I hope are
[2:19:40] some constructive comments. The city's southwest area plan notes the rural
[2:19:44] character of rings. Roads should be preserved with new development to the south,
[2:19:48] mimicking the established character along the north side of the road.
[2:19:53] I'm not opposed to residential development in this area, but this plan does
[2:19:57] not mimic the established character along the north side of the road and either density
[2:20:01] or design. The special area
[2:20:05] plans, states residential development should consider incorporating traditional single
[2:20:10] family attached single family missing middle is what
[2:20:14] it's called, housing stock. It says nothing about apartments. There are plenty
[2:20:18] of apartments that have been built or in the process of being built in columbus,
[2:20:22] just south of this area. We don't need them and they are not part of the special
[2:20:26] area plan. What is needed, according to the envision
[2:20:30] dublin plan, is housing for people as they age. In addition
[2:20:34] to single family homes, patio homes slash condominiums like
[2:20:38] the glens, the lakes, the woodlands and balance tray fill this need. They're consistent
[2:20:43] with the special area plan and the greater envision dublin plan. And
[2:20:47] they're in keeping with the established character along the north side of the road.
[2:20:52] in addition to these density and designs concerns, I'm also very concerned
[2:20:56] about the increased traffic associated with this plan. My understanding is that
[2:21:00] the total extension is not in the city's capital improvement plan
[2:21:05] for at least the next five years. And to respond to the commissioner's question
[2:21:09] earlier regarding who will pay for that, casto indicated at our community meeting
[2:21:13] that they were not prepared to foot the bill for that as part of this project. That
[2:21:17] means that access in and out of this new development is primarily on rings road,
[2:21:21] a two lane road that is not going to be widened even for a turn lane.
[2:21:27] staff referenced tonight that avery would be widened to four lanes and would handle
[2:21:31] the traffic. But my understanding from our meeting with casta was that traffic would
[2:21:35] be right turn in and right turnout only onto avery road. So anyone from this
[2:21:39] development who wants to go north on avery has to use rings road to exit.
[2:21:45] the special area plan states that substantial care must be taken
[2:21:49] to properly manage area development and minimize traffic impacts to
[2:21:53] existing residential development in the areas like balance tray. I don't see any
[2:21:57] evidence of that in this plan. In addition to causing traffic
[2:22:01] backups, the area plan notes that young children who live there will attend washington
[2:22:06] elementary, the plan states that there should be an
[2:22:10] effort to provide safe, efficient, and effective pedestrian facilities providing
[2:22:14] direct access to the school. I don't see that in this plan and I worry about the safety
[2:22:18] of children from that development trying to go to school. Thank you.
[2:22:22] thank you.
[2:22:32] hi, um, dawn, this is dawn. I'm anisa davis. We live
[2:22:36] at 65 27 royal dublin court. We built
[2:22:41] our home and have been there for 23 years. 23,
[2:22:45] and we've been very blessed to have a nice farm field across the street.
[2:22:49] um, when we purchased our home, we, the property across
[2:22:53] the street was owned by edwards, who developed entre. We
[2:22:58] were told it would be single family homes. Um, when
[2:23:02] multiple housing comes to mind, I would think of condos like the
[2:23:06] avalon, not the, um,
[2:23:10] town homes that currently occupy hay and run and cosgrave behind
[2:23:15] giant eagle, those ginormous concrete jungle. Um,
[2:23:19] so from 23, from the original plan, from 23 to
[2:23:24] 25, looks like there were maybe 16 units
[2:23:28] removed. And all of the multiple story town
[2:23:32] homes are still there in that, um, f1
[2:23:36] area right off of rings. And, um,
[2:23:41] royal dublin court, which royal dublin court looks like it extends right
[2:23:45] into those town homes. My concern for the ponderosa
[2:23:49] is that with those town homes, there's nothing but parking.
[2:23:54] the neighbors will then go into their backyards and
[2:23:59] encroach on them looking for green space. Avery road floods
[2:24:03] all the time, so we're adding more ponds and more water.
[2:24:08] um, the new roundabout, it's difficult
[2:24:12] to get out of there right now, and it's brand new and
[2:24:17] just opened when cos gray was closed. Rings rode, backed
[2:24:21] up all the way past iman. So if you
[2:24:25] add extra traffic, and if you look at where
[2:24:29] rings road is and they wanna put 13 homes with the
[2:24:34] backyards backing up to rings, we have cars
[2:24:38] that drive 50, 60 miles an hour down that road.
[2:24:42] so heaven forbid there's an accident, it's gonna end
[2:24:46] up in those 13 backyards. There's been two people
[2:24:50] killed on avery road, um, two years ago. One
[2:24:55] was near the new new roundabout, now the other one was on
[2:24:59] corporate boulevard with a jogger. It's like that area.
[2:25:03] we're not walkable. I know dublin's trying with the sidewalks,
[2:25:08] but it's not walkable. Wanna say? Sure. Um,
[2:25:12] so I'm gonna try to be respectful for the time since we came up together, but,
[2:25:17] um, my name's donald davis at that residence. Um, listen, there was a lot
[2:25:21] said, and I violently agree with a lot of what other people said, so I'm not gonna get into
[2:25:25] a lot of reiterating what was said. But the points I guess I would like
[2:25:29] to leave the committee with is what a lot of us are expressing
[2:25:33] the concern about is the change that this wouldn't happen
[2:25:38] and impact everybody that is around this area.
[2:25:43] um, I, I can't speak personally for the folks in the ponderosa. I don't live there,
[2:25:47] but if I was there, I would feel like I was getting invaded upon.
[2:25:51] it's just squeezing me. And they have a right to not have
[2:25:55] that. They've been there a long time. They have every right not to have that. I live across the
[2:25:59] street on the other side of avery and the, um, the balance tray area.
[2:26:04] um, one of the prior speakers said it perfectly. This is not consistent
[2:26:09] at all with the surrounding areas. This is the
[2:26:13] density of this is kind of ridiculous. And
[2:26:17] so that's the biggest concern that I have, is this changes
[2:26:21] the whole vibe of the area, changes the whole living experience
[2:26:25] of the area, and was totally unexpected by any of us that
[2:26:29] came into that area. The traffic is the other big part for me. It's
[2:26:33] gonna be a disaster. Um, there, there's no, no two ways
[2:26:37] around it that many people in that space, regardless of
[2:26:42] what you do with tuttle, the spillover is gonna be a big problem. You can do
[2:26:46] all the studies you want, just go and experience it for yourselves and you'll understand.
[2:26:51] thank you for listening to us. Appreciate the opportunity. Thank you for taking
[2:26:56] some consideration to reduce the density. It's not nearly enough.
[2:27:00] my my final thought would be where else in dublin has
[2:27:04] this density? And please keep us consistent with
[2:27:08] the rest of dublin. Thank you. Thanks. Thank you.
[2:27:22] hi, my name is tara rowe. I'm at 57 49 trafalgar lane. I just
[2:27:26] have a brief comments. I agree with the concerns that my neighbors have expressed around traffic,
[2:27:31] uh, density and community character. So I won't belabor that. But
[2:27:35] additionally, I think one critical piece of information we're missing is, um, what
[2:27:39] the price point would be for this proposed housing from the range of apartments through,
[2:27:43] just to give comparison to what was shared in the previous one and give us an
[2:27:47] estimation for how it compares to our own real estate. Thank you. Thank you.
[2:28:00] hello, my name is martin lynch. I live at 5 5 0 9 tayside circle
[2:28:05] in entre. Um, I completely
[2:28:09] agree with everything that everyone said. Um,
[2:28:15] I think the gentleman over here said that the intent
[2:28:19] of the apartments is to blend into columbus.
[2:28:23] we live in dublin, we don't live in columbus. We don't want to live
[2:28:27] in columbus. Our children go to washington.
[2:28:34] it's imperative that we provide safe
[2:28:39] avenue and safe ways and safe schools for our children.
[2:28:43] that's been very safe for the nearly 20 years
[2:28:47] I lived in the area. Um, I
[2:28:51] really implore you. No, we're not an apartment
[2:28:56] neighborhood. No, we're single family homes. We need to keep
[2:29:00] it to keep the culture of the balance. Tray kramer's
[2:29:05] crossing posa neighborhood. The
[2:29:09] other point is the northern, um, throughway.
[2:29:14] it looks like it's going to connect right into royal dublin.
[2:29:18] and once that happens, it's going to be a nightmare for traffic.
[2:29:23] it's going to cause not only
[2:29:28] the single family homes, the town homes, the apartments
[2:29:32] that come north into rings road and into the bell and trade neighborhoods,
[2:29:38] no ball trade for being all single
[2:29:42] family homes and how it has grown and evolved over the years.
[2:29:47] it's already busy. When we start having the neighborhood
[2:29:51] to the south dow cross over rings to go to,
[2:29:55] whether it's going up to warner temple or going to
[2:29:59] the splash park or using any of the other ways to get
[2:30:04] around and access dublin. Um, it's gonna be a
[2:30:08] nightmare for traffic and it's gonna be a danger for our children.
[2:30:12] we really need to be thoughtful and considerate
[2:30:16] to the neighborhoods in the area and not just look
[2:30:21] how we can get more density out of some of the remaining space
[2:30:25] in the dublin area. Thank you. Thank you.
[2:30:36] uh, good evening. Uh, wayne wu, 55 89
[2:30:41] tayside circle entre. Uh, I'm gonna, I'm not gonna, I echo
[2:30:45] a lot of the comments that my fellow residents, the surrounding areas have already
[2:30:49] said. I'm gonna say a couple of things I think that hasn't been said that enter my brain. This is
[2:30:53] my first meeting. I've never been here, but I'm glad I'm here. I came to listen. I
[2:30:57] didn't plan to speak, but thoughts entered my brain when everybody else was talking. So
[2:31:01] the first thing I wanna bring up is, I think, and I hope everybody's looking at the
[2:31:06] collective areas and all of the development going on. I think someone talked about that
[2:31:10] earlier. I mean, let's just look at, I didn't even know the parkwood
[2:31:14] thing existed till I came to this meeting tonight, let's say that gets approved, which isn't
[2:31:18] too far from what we're talking about with this avery crossing development. Someone
[2:31:22] referenced all the development that's going down, albeit outside the city of dublin, but
[2:31:26] down in the riggins road, um, avery area.
[2:31:31] all of that is, should be considered because that's in a same mileage
[2:31:35] radius that would impact traffic patterns,
[2:31:39] uh, influx of residents. And albeit again, I do agree,
[2:31:45] I think that area that they're talking about developing was not designed for apartments and should not
[2:31:49] be. Right. And there's plenty of apartments down avery road that anybody can move to that are probably
[2:31:53] still vacant in there now. Right. So I think someone should look at hopefully the
[2:31:57] collective and all the influx in that mile radius or whatever that radius is,
[2:32:01] all the way down to the parkwood down avery road, even though that's outside the city of dublin.
[2:32:07] excuse me. The last thing I wanna bring up is something really nobody ever thinks about, but my wife
[2:32:11] and I think, and I hope others think about, is if you look at the area, they're talking about development,
[2:32:16] it's really a very large natural habitat for
[2:32:20] wildlife and what have you. Right? And if you eliminate that,
[2:32:25] what does that leave again? Unfortunately that wildlife and whatever.
[2:32:29] and we can't just, that goes back to the density conversation, I guess, right? How dense
[2:32:33] can you make everything in a small pocket of
[2:32:38] dublin? I'll also agree, and I think it's, and I hope this isn't the case.
[2:32:42] I think there are some perceptions that the southwest
[2:32:46] part of dublin is sometimes treated differently from the rest of dublin. And I hope that's taken into
[2:32:50] consideration as well. Thank you for your time. Thank you.
[2:32:56] do we have anybody else that would like to thank you? Please come up to the microphone.
[2:33:06] fred steele, six two five zero cartwright lane north, the ponderosa.
[2:33:12] uh, could you bring up the, uh, diagram with the latest street
[2:33:16] proposal please?
[2:33:26] uh, yes, that'll work. Thank you.
[2:33:32] okay. Uh, I hate to sound like broken record, but I have this article again from the
[2:33:36] dispatch batch of october 5th, 2023.
[2:33:42] it talks about casto buying the ponderosa
[2:33:46] and, uh, what they intended to do. And a representative
[2:33:50] also stated the project will maintain the existing ponderosa
[2:33:55] mobile home park 107 space community that offers
[2:33:59] a unique affordable housing option for the area.
[2:34:03] okay, that's fine. I'm glad. I had a mother and father that
[2:34:07] taught me to mean what I say
[2:34:13] as of january 1st for raising our rent for
[2:34:17] the lot $20. That's not too bad, but they're also
[2:34:21] having a new charge of $65 a month for water
[2:34:25] and trash, which was always included in the lot rent before.
[2:34:29] so really I think they're trying to price the residents of ponderosa out.
[2:34:35] uh, and um, the diagram here, it shows
[2:34:40] a connector street off of the main entrance to the ponderosa
[2:34:44] going west and then down to the southwest corner. It shows another connector
[2:34:49] street from the ponderosa. And the ponderosa
[2:34:53] doesn't have any sidewalks and there are walkers that do
[2:34:57] walking for physical activity. I I just
[2:35:01] think it's gonna be a racetrack with those connector
[2:35:06] streets. Um,
[2:35:13] I guess that's about all I have. Thank you for giving the time to speak and thank you
[2:35:17] ms. Kathy for speaking up. Thanks. Thank you.
[2:35:26] hello, my name is cheryl cook and I live in the ponderosa
[2:35:30] at 54 83 bonanza lane. And
[2:35:34] in private, my husband and I have talked about how we're being forced out,
[2:35:38] um, of our home. My son bought us this
[2:35:43] mobile home in that park 'cause he thought we'd be safe. One of the things I asked
[2:35:47] for for christmas is cameras for the outside, because I know
[2:35:52] all these people are gonna be around. Um, we live in a
[2:35:56] very quiet community. You can walk you almost
[2:36:00] any time of the day or night. It's very safe there, but we're
[2:36:04] not gonna be safe anymore. And my son did
[2:36:09] call casto, um, who we pay our
[2:36:13] lot rent too, and said, do you feel good about raising my parents'
[2:36:17] rent? 44% in two years? Um,
[2:36:21] we are being forced out. It's not gonna be a quiet place anymore.
[2:36:26] um, that's way too much building. And as
[2:36:30] far as retail goes, we can go right down the street for
[2:36:34] anything we need. And that's all I have to say. Thank you. Thank
[2:36:39] you.
[2:36:48] hello, molly. Kay. 6, 2, 3, 6 rings road. I live actually
[2:36:52] across the, in the plans from the big tall tower that will
[2:36:57] maybe not look into my home and all my neighbors because it's a ranch home.
[2:37:01] so I do appreciate the updates to the plans.
[2:37:05] um, I see all the green space. I concur with all my neighbors, with
[2:37:09] all the concerns that I have addressed two times prior
[2:37:13] to this already with the commissioners. Um, I
[2:37:17] do consider the pre and think about the preservation when I look on the
[2:37:22] original maps of dublin, that that green space will be gone. And
[2:37:26] I wonder is, is that allowed? I don't even know, like what happens to all
[2:37:30] the animals there too. Um, one of, and
[2:37:34] one of my concerns I don't think the neighbors spoke to
[2:37:38] yet, was that if you look at riggins road, which
[2:37:42] is like a mile away from us, where the new roundabout and avery's built, and you look at
[2:37:47] the current developments, there's like a mcdonald's, and then behind that are all
[2:37:51] the apartments in retail space underneath it, similar to the plans that they're proposing.
[2:37:56] it looks pretty much identical, but you just change the facade and
[2:38:00] that's what you have in the commercial space there. Um, and what's
[2:38:04] really interesting is I did appreciate the, um, the, the
[2:38:08] other plans for the emerald parkway because it showed a different kind of concept.
[2:38:13] and so I feel like, you know, I appreciate them reaching out to us and
[2:38:17] having the conversation through zoom. Um, but I,
[2:38:21] I feel like we also weren't very that involved with the
[2:38:26] planning committee, with our comments. There are so many conversations that
[2:38:30] occur. Um, I'm so involved with the elementary school. My daughter's five. She
[2:38:34] goes, there's my son is a middle schooler. We've been here for 10 years.
[2:38:38] I wanna build more on the property and build and grow for my parents to live with me,
[2:38:42] um, because we feel safe. And I mean, I can jog
[2:38:47] and 5:00 am in the morning and, and feel safe there.
[2:38:51] so, um, like my other neighbor, I started putting cameras around once the roundabout
[2:38:55] was built because there has been more traffic and there has been, um, one of those
[2:39:00] speed re speed signs that shows you how fast you're going. Um, because so
[2:39:04] many people have started speed speeding since then. It's only been a few months, right?
[2:39:09] um, so some of those things to consider, but there's a lot of
[2:39:13] conversation going on, um, in social media about what's happening.
[2:39:17] and what I don't like that people ask me all the time is that they're asking me,
[2:39:21] the first question is, so with the plans going on, not just in your area,
[2:39:25] but everywhere you see like a whole roll of all these apartments and town homes, are
[2:39:29] you gonna move out? Are you gonna move away? I don't wanna move away.
[2:39:33] I moved here because I love dublin and I, I love that I feel safe.
[2:39:38] I love our police officers, I love my neighbors. I just,
[2:39:43] but I feel like we're kind of in that we're stuck in the neighborhood
[2:39:47] where we we're, we're fighting back and wanting to preserve what we're
[2:39:51] seeing. So thank you everyone for listening and, and I think that's
[2:39:55] my time. Thank you so much. Anyone else
[2:40:00] out there would like to comment?
[2:40:06] going once, going twice. Okay. We're gonna close
[2:40:10] the comment period now, and we're gonna turn it back to the commission for deliberation.
[2:40:15] and I'm gonna turn to my right. And
[2:40:19] mr. Chinook, thank you again. We can't,
[2:40:23] we can't thank you enough for the public comments and everybody coming out and showing the concern. Concern
[2:40:27] for the area. I will say, when we talk
[2:40:31] about this process, when we, I think it was shown at some point tonight where
[2:40:36] the first plan we saw back in, I think it was 23, how
[2:40:40] much it's improved. And that shows, it shows us that
[2:40:44] we're, listen, you know, the process is working. We're listening to, we're listening to comments, we're listening to the
[2:40:48] public applicants, listening to us, working with staff. So the, the process
[2:40:52] for sure is working. So I think that said,
[2:40:57] we're getting there. Uh, we, we've got, you know, we've, we've reduced the number of, of
[2:41:01] units, increased green space. I think you, you know, we're
[2:41:05] starting to see some uniqueness in, in the navigation around the site.
[2:41:11] again, I think we're getting there and I think that, you know, all the, and we know
[2:41:15] the applicant 'cause they have in the past, they're gonna take, take, hear, hear all
[2:41:19] the comments that we've made, and then that, that the public has made and they'll, they'll come back the
[2:41:23] next round with, with some additional improvements. And we look forward to seeing that.
[2:41:28] thanks ms. Har,
[2:41:33] thank you for being here and, um, giving your, um,
[2:41:37] program and how things are going and so forth. And I'm glad to hear from,
[2:41:42] um, the neighborhoods and so forth. And I think that's very important.
[2:41:46] um, from the beginning, I have not been, um, certain
[2:41:51] about if this is the right place or not. It, um, it's,
[2:41:55] it's, uh, it doesn't quite fit. It
[2:41:59] hasn't been fitting and we're still almost the same space, even though
[2:42:03] we have spent a lot of time reducing things. It still brings
[2:42:08] on that, um, density that's very difficult.
[2:42:12] I still don't, I'm still not comfortable with the idea of there's a homeowner
[2:42:17] who's looking at apartment complexes and where, and
[2:42:21] I didn't hear a good answer on how we're going to, uh,
[2:42:26] minimize that and that it's its own little section and so forth. It's a small section
[2:42:30] now. And I, I do think it's a, a great area for, um,
[2:42:35] more, uh, homes I think and different types of homes. I'm not even
[2:42:39] opposed to duplex. We, we've had this city meeting a few years
[2:42:43] ago talking about how families may wanna venture living together.
[2:42:47] so you may have that three try kind of home that, um,
[2:42:51] you live with your family and so forth. So, but I don't see any of that
[2:42:55] happening with this. And, uh, the space, you know, you go to the neighborhood
[2:42:59] across the street and you're in there, it's almost like a half
[2:43:04] football field before you even get to the road. And then there's the sidewalk,
[2:43:08] which really that space sets that house back quite a ways.
[2:43:12] I'm not, I'm not feeling that's gonna happen on the other side. And that concerns
[2:43:17] me too, because that precedent is there when you're driving down
[2:43:21] that road and you're feeling like what's on each side. And, and that is
[2:43:25] going to be, um, important to me. There are things you're putting
[2:43:29] in, which I think, you know, when coming back and so forth, um,
[2:43:33] that I'm gonna listen to and be in interested in. Um, you know, like with all
[2:43:37] the storm water, what do you wanna do with all the new ponds you're putting in there?
[2:43:42] and is it gonna be an opportunity to bring in groups and things like that with that
[2:43:46] storm water gardens and things of that sort. Um, but,
[2:43:50] um, you know, those, those are the, the, the main
[2:43:54] thing there with question two, it kind of gets to the pedestrians and
[2:43:58] bikes and so forth. I don't think we've hit it yet on that either. Um,
[2:44:02] it's not a walkable area. I don't see people coming across to,
[2:44:07] to, um, engage in some of the, the water areas. If
[2:44:11] so, it's gotta be safer to do that. Um, but it is, people
[2:44:15] get in their cars in that area where other parts of dublin, they're walking a bit more.
[2:44:19] um, and, and, and there's not as many sidewalks. So I think that's one of the reasons why
[2:44:24] that way. So, um, I think that, you know, that part
[2:44:28] hits me as well too. I, I'm thinking about, um,
[2:44:32] uh, question number three, which is the density. And again,
[2:44:36] I just think, um, not considering, you know, thinking about buffers or
[2:44:40] thinking about how, how you're gonna, um, move one place into
[2:44:44] another. Um, and, um, just not
[2:44:48] in favor of how this is sitting yet. And it just, for how long,
[2:44:52] how long we've been working on this. I'm not, I I haven't really
[2:44:57] moved the needle on it. Thank you. Thank you, mr. Alexander.
[2:45:03] I'm very, I'm very sympathetic to the concerns of the neighbors.
[2:45:07] 'cause this will be a change. However, I don't know how you cannot support
[2:45:11] this because it corresponds to all of our plans. That's the issue. And these are not plans that
[2:45:15] we adopted. These are plans that city council adopted. So if you look at the future land
[2:45:20] use plan, mixed use, neighborhood fronting, avery residential, various densities,
[2:45:24] walkable neighborhood, the mixed use makes this a walkable neighborhood.
[2:45:29] mobility and transportation plan. Dublin character avery a hundred face setback, avery
[2:45:33] ponds, water features mounting housing and neighbor diversity of
[2:45:37] housing types. Now that's not just the, the plan
[2:45:41] that's an issue in the whole community. So this is solving a problem that the community
[2:45:46] has. We don't have enough variety of housing types, so
[2:45:50] that's one of the things that we've been called to address. And
[2:45:54] this project does that, um, ,
[2:45:58] you know, increase the housing variety and stock.
[2:46:03] that reinforces what I just said. That comes from the southwest area plan, create
[2:46:07] regional greenways. So for me, I, I think it's
[2:46:11] an extremely logical distribution of the, of the house types across
[2:46:16] the lot. It's very clear what what's going on there. So, um,
[2:46:21] I, I do, I'm a little concerned about the buffering for the people at
[2:46:25] ponderosa. I think if, if that could, if the buffers could be more
[2:46:29] dense and more prominent, it would help those people who are probably most affected.
[2:46:33] uh, ultimately it'll probably be the transportation plan that, that moves
[2:46:38] me because I see great potential for the tunnel
[2:46:42] extension to take so much traffic out to two 70.
[2:46:47] and, and I think that if something like that is done,
[2:46:51] some of the concerns about traffic, not all can be mitigated. So
[2:46:55] those are, those are my comments. Thank you mr. Alexander.
[2:47:00] again, I share similar comments to my fellow commissioners.
[2:47:04] um, you know, I think the, the reason that this site has been looked
[2:47:08] at the way it is is because of the tunnel crossing boulevard extension going
[2:47:13] out to the west. And I think the, the general feeling is that's
[2:47:17] gonna change the character of this site. And because of its capacity, as mr. Alexander
[2:47:22] said, to potentially handle traffic, it's where you can put a little bit
[2:47:26] more density to help, um, again, create that mix of uses in the
[2:47:30] community. So I think as the city has planned the site
[2:47:34] over the last couple years, coming to the community plan and the area plan,
[2:47:38] I think the uses that are, um,
[2:47:43] proposed here are consistent with that comm the community plan and the area plan.
[2:47:48] however, I do think that the plan has evolved
[2:47:52] from the first iteration. This is the third, third time that we've seen it.
[2:47:56] and I think there are some good moves and perhaps some moves that maybe
[2:48:00] are going in the wrong direction. And I think the, the addition of
[2:48:04] additional open space is really positive, but maybe
[2:48:09] in a development like this, you don't wanna put all open space in one place. And the idea
[2:48:13] of using open space to weave through the development and start to scale
[2:48:17] it down so it does start to reflect more the character of this area
[2:48:22] would be appropriate. And I think in the question and answer period, we talked about
[2:48:26] north south greenways that start to break down the scale.
[2:48:31] um, I also think the transition from the single family
[2:48:35] residential, um, along rings, which is obviously the
[2:48:40] right thing to do, maybe it's not quite right yet the way that's been done.
[2:48:44] but in the neighborhood design guidelines, we have a category called estate lots
[2:48:48] that have a way to handle garages and all that stuff that might be really
[2:48:52] appropriate. And, you know, I think the, the applicant could
[2:48:56] look at, you know, the, the nor the other side of rings, and
[2:49:01] can we mimic that with the frontage road and the units facing,
[2:49:05] uh, rings as opposed to backing to it. Because, you know, that is something the commission's
[2:49:09] been working on is getting, uh, houses, not backing discretes, but getting fronts,
[2:49:13] facing streets like the old days. Um, and then the
[2:49:18] transition from single family to townhouses, I
[2:49:22] feel is abrupt and the intensity of the townhouses
[2:49:26] is making it feel dense. And I, so it's,
[2:49:30] I think there's room to do some better transitions and
[2:49:34] maybe through this weaving of open space, you can reduce the intensity
[2:49:39] of the townhouse product. Or maybe there's another product that again,
[2:49:43] transitions from single family to maybe there's duplexes there
[2:49:47] on the north side and then it transitions to towns. I just think that's something that could be looked at
[2:49:51] in more detail. And I, I think it's, you know, the, the angst of the, of the
[2:49:55] neighborhood is the, they're looking at this in the intensity of it. And so if we could
[2:50:00] cool it down a little bit and make it less intense, and maybe that doesn't
[2:50:04] mean it's less dense, but it's less intense and really use open space to do that in
[2:50:08] a, in a very creative way, I think could really help to mitigate
[2:50:12] a lot of the concerns that, uh, people have voiced. But again, um,
[2:50:16] I kind of just say that the community plan is our guide and,
[2:50:20] um, the, the uses that are shown here,
[2:50:24] and mostly the organization of those uses on the site is consistent
[2:50:29] with the community plan. So those would be the, the comments that I would offer,
[2:50:33] and I'd open it up to the commission for additional comments. Your
[2:50:38] comments really made me think about a few things. It, it is a tense intensity of
[2:50:42] how this development is, and not hearing that tonight didn't
[2:50:46] help. But, um, you know, the things that are on rings road,
[2:50:50] you know how tall those stones are and the grasses they use
[2:50:55] and things of that sort, even if they added in a few more single
[2:50:59] family homes that kind of made it look like it was
[2:51:03] having its way and that then, um, it softened to
[2:51:07] the town homes, which that's a difficult part for me. So,
[2:51:12] um, I really, I, I appreciate hearing that and I hope that you all hear
[2:51:16] that about too, about what that road is like for everyone driving there. Yeah. Thank
[2:51:20] you jamie. You okay. So
[2:51:24] I'll turn to the applicant. Um, you've heard our comments, you've heard the comments from the community,
[2:51:29] uh, we all have and I think if you have any questions for us.
[2:51:34] okay. Well thank you very much for coming in.
[2:51:40] and as pardon, okay. Um, as you leave, if you could
[2:51:44] all move into the, into the lobby and move down because the noise travels back in, but
[2:51:48] we are gonna take a brief recess at this
[2:51:52] point. So fi five, how much time do you need here?
[2:51:57] 10 minutes, 10 minutes, minutes. Okay.
[2:52:02] okay, all we're gonna get started. All the side
[2:52:06] conversations done now. Right. Okay. So we're
[2:52:10] gonna address case number 25 dash 11
[2:52:15] inf, uh, se century senior informal review,
[2:52:19] request for review and non-binding feedback for construction of a continuum
[2:52:23] of care facility, a medical office building, and associated
[2:52:27] site improvements. The 18 acre site is zoned r one, restricted
[2:52:32] suburban residential district, and it's located at the southwest corner of bright road
[2:52:36] and emerald parkway. So we'd like to invite the applicant up now
[2:52:40] to make their presentation.
[2:52:49] uh, good evening. My name's jordan dorsey. I'm the owner of century land company. Uh, my address
[2:52:53] is 8 6 2 0 neely lane in edwardsville, illinois.
[2:53:01] so we're here today. Uh, I really appreciate this opportunity for early feedback in
[2:53:05] the process. Um, we have, um, are proposing
[2:53:10] a seniors housing development at the corner of emerald parkway and bright road.
[2:53:15] um, and I do have some slides, I believe they're in your packet that, that address seniors housing demand.
[2:53:20] uh, due to the time of night, I'll, I'll skip right through that. But, um, you know, generally
[2:53:24] speaking, uh, we believe dublin is, um, you know, experiencing a,
[2:53:28] a rapid growth in the aging population here. Um, you know, dublin's
[2:53:33] own housing study, um, indicated we need 2000 or a little over a thousand units
[2:53:37] by 2030. Um, so that's what we do. We build seniors housing across
[2:53:41] the midwest. It's a, it's a very high end product. It's a full continuum of
[2:53:45] care. Um, I'll jump to a slide here.
[2:53:49] um,
[2:53:54] you go to slide six, you're yeah, sarah, you're going to run the slides. Yeah.
[2:53:59] so the proposed project would be a full continuum of care, um, anchored by, um,
[2:54:03] what's called independent living, which is a little bit of a lower acuity setting. Um, those
[2:54:07] residents would still receive a full suite of services including full service, dining
[2:54:12] wellness programs, uh, indoor pool, um, and in-house therapy.
[2:54:17] um, in addition to that, we would have assisted living and memory care within the, the same
[2:54:21] structure. And then, um, we're also proposing a number of
[2:54:25] independent living villas, um, to a company. Those residents would receive
[2:54:29] the same level of amenity within the, the main structure of the project.
[2:54:35] so if we just wanna go straight to the, uh, site plan, uh,
[2:54:41] so this is the initial co, uh, concept plan. I would really categorize this as
[2:54:45] sort of a test fit at this stage. Um, we're really trying to understand, um,
[2:54:49] you know, how can an existing building, and so this is the building that
[2:54:53] you're seeing on this plan is, is a project that, um, we're under construction right now in a
[2:54:57] community called zionsville indiana. Uh, very similar make up to dublin.
[2:55:02] and so we're trying to understand how that, how that building fits on this site and how we might,
[2:55:06] um, you know, the relationship between the independent living, assisted
[2:55:10] living and the villas. Um, so what you're seeing here, um,
[2:55:14] the main structure, which is in the northeast corner that is, uh,
[2:55:18] the primary building. We've tried to transition the four story
[2:55:22] portion of the project, which is on the south end of that building, which is independent
[2:55:27] living, um, to a two story product at the northern side that abuts
[2:55:31] the residential, uh, that would be assisted living in memory care.
[2:55:35] uh, the amenities for the project, which include the full service dining, the
[2:55:39] bistros, the wine bar, the pool, uh, the therapy center
[2:55:44] is, um, typically placed within that core of the building so that all of the residents of
[2:55:48] the building can enjoy those same amenities. Um, to the left,
[2:55:52] uh, on the western boundary, you can see a number of villas. So we've plugged in, plugged in approximately
[2:55:56] 30 single story, um, independent living villa. So they
[2:56:00] would be age restricted. Um, those residents would, um, you
[2:56:04] know, pay a monthly rental just like the rest of the residents and receive the lame, same level of
[2:56:08] service, um, of the amenities that exist in the, uh, the primary structure.
[2:56:14] uh, the primary access point for, uh, this proposal is off of the
[2:56:18] new roundabout, um, adjacent to the hospital. Um, on bright
[2:56:22] road, we are proposing we would limit access, um, with a gate at that
[2:56:26] location. Um, that would be emergency access only and potentially, um,
[2:56:31] you know, just for residents in the villas, they would have access to that gate.
[2:56:35] um, to the south of the site. You'll also see what we're calling phase
[2:56:39] two. Um, this is a proposed medical office building. Um, it
[2:56:43] is conceptual at this point, but we are, you know, we would be willing to reserve that portion of
[2:56:47] the site, uh, to align with the city's plans. And,
[2:56:51] um, we, we do understand that, uh, there are, you know, potential
[2:56:56] plans for the future overpass over two 70 that would intersect right in front of
[2:57:00] that medical office building. Uh, the medical office building component, if you
[2:57:04] go to the very last slide. Um,
[2:57:13] so we, we are, uh, really, um, would enjoy your feedback on what the city
[2:57:17] would like to see in terms of medical office and retail at that location.
[2:57:21] um, we've included some concept images that are one story multi-tenant
[2:57:26] retail and medical office. Um, we've also included, if you wanna go to the next slides
[2:57:30] here, thank you. Um, on the left would be, you know, your, your your
[2:57:34] typical office, uh, medical office. And we, we would like to discuss,
[2:57:38] you know, keeping that, uh, general office, it's most likely gonna be a medical user that
[2:57:42] is ancillary to seniors housing. Um, but we've had some of the neighborhood
[2:57:46] feedback that they would really like to see, um, you know, like a coffee shop or something that would
[2:57:51] draw a little bit of traffic that, um, you know, would service both the seniors housing and the additional
[2:57:55] density that's, um, going to be, you know, coming to that particular area.
[2:58:01] um, actually sarah, if you wanna go back to the, that concept rendering,
[2:58:05] um, slide number eight, please.
[2:58:11] uh, next slide please. Um, so
[2:58:15] this is a concept image. Um, this building's actually being built in franklin, tennessee.
[2:58:20] um, I'm providing this just to, um, try to understand, you know, from the
[2:58:24] city's perspective what sort of architecture they'd like to see at this location.
[2:58:29] um, you know, in this particular project it's, it's natural stone. It's, uh,
[2:58:33] wood look siding, it's, uh, lots of masonry and,
[2:58:37] um, hardy plank, uh, pitch to roof. So we
[2:58:41] really, you know, in most of these communities, we really want, uh, this building to present
[2:58:45] as residential rather than institutional. And we really want it to blend with within
[2:58:49] the community. So, um, this is what we would propose, uh, for this
[2:58:54] location. And four, or, uh, for the independent living would be four story. The
[2:58:58] assisted living would be, uh, and memory care would be two story.
[2:59:04] um,
[2:59:08] sarah, if you don't mind going to, uh, slide number 14.
[2:59:14] um, let's go, uh, one more please. Can,
[2:59:19] can you tell I don't have numbers on the slides? Oh, I'm sorry. Um, go, keep
[2:59:23] going, please. Uh, this right here, uh, this is an alternative architecture.
[2:59:27] this is, uh, under construction in zionsville, indiana. This is a much more traditional look,
[2:59:32] um, you know, at this early stage, uh, we have the ability to really tailor
[2:59:37] the look and feel of the building to the surrounding area. So, um, looking for, um,
[2:59:41] any additional feedback that the city might have on, you know, how they would like this project to,
[2:59:45] to blend into the community.
[2:59:50] um, and then sarah, if you could go back
[2:59:54] to the, the table that discusses the distinctions between the beacon.
[2:59:59] um, yeah, this one here, um, we're just providing this because I did have a
[3:00:03] few questions on how does this, uh, how is this differentiated from, uh,
[3:00:07] the beacon that was recently approved, um, earlier this year. Um, and I
[3:00:11] will fully disclose like the commu the information on the west, or the left side of the screen
[3:00:15] is based on public record, so I'm not gonna pretend to know all the ins and outs of that development. But,
[3:00:20] um, as we understand it, um, you know, our product is, is a month to month rental,
[3:00:24] no buy-in. Um, so, you know, residents of this community will be able
[3:00:28] to, um, sign a lease and have short-term commitment. Um, so it's
[3:00:32] just a much more flexible, um, arrangement. Um, this would all be done in terms
[3:00:36] of the senior living component in a single phase. So, you know, we're adding
[3:00:40] the, potentially the 160 to 170 units of assisted living,
[3:00:44] memory care, and independent living plus the villas, um, all in one phase
[3:00:49] over around a two year period.
[3:00:54] so with that, I will, uh, I would love to, you know, take any feedback at the end. Thank you.
[3:00:58] great. We'll come back to that after the staff presentation. Thank you.
[3:01:15] good evening commissioners. Uh, this indeed is century
[3:01:19] senior and it is an informal request. This
[3:01:23] is an optional step in the planned unit development process.
[3:01:28] and as we've seen with the concept plan a, the
[3:01:32] applicant is seeking non-binding feedback to specific questions.
[3:01:37] and generally we're looking at the appropriateness of the proposal
[3:01:41] relative to envision dublin and the, um, special
[3:01:45] area plan. And we're also looking at use and density
[3:01:50] site layout, the open space framework. And as
[3:01:54] the applicant has mentioned, they would appreciate some feedback on the architecture.
[3:02:01] the site is in yellow as outlined on the map. It's at the southwest
[3:02:05] corner of emerald parkway and bright road. Currently
[3:02:09] it is zoned r one, restricted suburban residential, and
[3:02:13] it's surrounded mostly by the same except for the mount
[3:02:17] carmel, pud and the newly approved beacon,
[3:02:22] pud. Our discussion
[3:02:26] as, um, previously done tonight is gonna start with the broadest
[3:02:30] concepts and then move to more specific concepts. The
[3:02:35] future land use is part of envision dublin, and this particular
[3:02:39] site is noted as neighborhood office, which, um,
[3:02:44] principal uses include office, medical office, and institutional
[3:02:49] office with assisted living as a supporting use.
[3:02:54] so neighborhood office envisions one to two story buildings
[3:02:58] up to 9,500 square feet per acre with residential
[3:03:03] character and that low lot coverage
[3:03:09] here, the site is overlaying on the special area plan, which
[3:03:13] is more specific than our future land use. Map items
[3:03:18] to point out include number 11, which is the
[3:03:22] general location of that I two 70 bridge and the roundabout,
[3:03:27] the green stream and open space connection with
[3:03:32] termini that goes through the middle of this
[3:03:36] property. That's the dashed black line, a
[3:03:40] tree road to be preserved on the west side, and then special landscape
[3:03:45] treatment along emerald parkway. So key
[3:03:49] concepts include preservation of that emerald parkway
[3:03:53] character transition to single family residential
[3:03:58] on both the north and the west. The incorporation
[3:04:02] of tree stands or rows into the design
[3:04:06] protection of the stream corridors, a 100
[3:04:11] foot minimum setback along emerald parkway
[3:04:15] parking to the rear and side of buildings. And then
[3:04:19] again, that target density of a 9,500 square
[3:04:23] feet per acre. An alternative factor
[3:04:28] that you may consider during tonight's discussion is the
[3:04:32] fact that this specific location
[3:04:36] and the surrounding development has changed in in
[3:04:40] recent months, and we now have the mount carmel hospital,
[3:04:45] um, directly east to this site, and then the beacon
[3:04:50] kind of cattycorner to the northeast. And you might
[3:04:54] consider if, if there are these special mitigating circumstances
[3:04:58] that that may adjust what the community
[3:05:03] plan is considering. Here
[3:05:07] the site is overlaying on the character character map.
[3:05:11] this is part of the transportation and mobility element of envision
[3:05:16] dublin. And here emerald parkway is noted as
[3:05:20] a commuter boulevard with a traditional character.
[3:05:24] it is also a corridor of significance where we amplify
[3:05:28] the features that are mentioned here,
[3:05:33] um, including those 100 foot setbacks to help blend with
[3:05:37] adjacent uses. The formal maintained landscape,
[3:05:42] a focus on ponds and water features. And then variable
[3:05:46] bering bright road, on the other hand, is
[3:05:50] a river character corridor, and this has 60
[3:05:54] to 100 foot setbacks and a natural character
[3:05:58] with woodland plantings. The integration of stone walls
[3:06:03] and wood fences and more informal water
[3:06:07] swale and berm features.
[3:06:12] these are photos of the existing site and as you saw, it's
[3:06:16] a a vacant site at the moment, and these particular views are from
[3:06:21] emerald parkway. These photos
[3:06:25] show the residential context along bright road.
[3:06:33] this commission has seen some previous proposals, including
[3:06:37] case 19 1 15, which was a concept plan
[3:06:41] where the beacon actually came over onto
[3:06:46] this site and obviously that
[3:06:50] has since been removed. Um, an informal proposal
[3:06:54] was made in 2023 for residential on
[3:06:59] a portion of the property. Uh, the commission noted at that time
[3:07:03] that residential was not appropriate. It's
[3:07:07] also important to note that both of these proposals were
[3:07:11] made under the previous community plan and that community
[3:07:16] plan allowed up to 12,500 square feet
[3:07:20] per acre. So looking
[3:07:24] at tonight's plan, uh, the applicant went through some
[3:07:28] of the details and I'm just gonna highlight very quickly some items.
[3:07:33] the main entry is shown at the mount carmel roundabout.
[3:07:38] a right in right out is shown pretty much consistent
[3:07:42] with that future, um, I two 70 bridge and
[3:07:46] that roundabout, this conflict will need to be addressed if the
[3:07:50] project progresses. The approximate location
[3:07:55] of the drainage is shown here, which is different than
[3:07:59] the storm water features that are shown. Um, because this
[3:08:03] is such an emphasized feature in the special area plan,
[3:08:08] the city's expecting some public access, some, some real
[3:08:12] enhancement of that feature.
[3:08:19] the two to four story main building is shown here.
[3:08:24] and please note the size and the massing
[3:08:28] of that building adjacent to existing residential, even though
[3:08:32] it's two stories, it is a large building. There's also
[3:08:37] parking on three sides of that building, including along
[3:08:41] emerald parkway. The future phase
[3:08:45] noted here is somewhere between one and four stories, depending on
[3:08:49] the information. Um, it could be medical or retail.
[3:08:53] as the applicant has noted, there is parking around the entire
[3:08:58] building, which kind of gives more of a strip center feel
[3:09:02] to it. Um, and I would note that retail is not
[3:09:06] supported in envision. Dublin staff
[3:09:10] also feels that this particular location has some real
[3:09:14] potential for enhanced architecture and
[3:09:19] excellent site design because it will be a focal point or a terminus
[3:09:24] for that bridge and that roundabout, this is something that could really
[3:09:28] be leveraged. The one story
[3:09:32] villas are on the west edge, and this is
[3:09:37] to buffer the adjacent residential, but staff feels
[3:09:41] that this should really wrap around the north side to buffer bright road as well.
[3:09:46] um, and again, as previously mentioned, the commission did have
[3:09:50] concerns about residential development,
[3:09:55] so you may wanna consider that as part of your discussion.
[3:10:01] we will have questions for the commission regarding the uses in the massing.
[3:10:05] what's shown here is approximately 18,900 square
[3:10:10] feet per acre, and we're asking, you know,
[3:10:14] is this situation mitigated by adjacent uses?
[3:10:21] the architectural examples were provided by the applicant, um,
[3:10:26] and the materials were gone over. And again, were requesting
[3:10:30] some feedback on that architecture.
[3:10:35] and this, uh, is the architecture for the future phase
[3:10:39] on that south side. And again, staff
[3:10:44] has concern about kind of the strip center nature of
[3:10:49] the images, the medical building is shown on the right.
[3:10:54] we note the variety of building height and materials,
[3:10:59] and we're also noting that this is not in keeping with that special
[3:11:03] area plan vision and the unique site location.
[3:11:07] um, and then retail is not so much envisioned
[3:11:11] here. So our proposed questions
[3:11:15] range from the broad to the specific. And with that, I'm happy to answer
[3:11:20] any questions. Thank you, ms. Holt. So turning to
[3:11:24] the commission for questions. Mr. Desler, you've had a bit nice break back there. So
[3:11:28] why don't we start with you . I was fully expecting
[3:11:32] that, by the way, . It's okay. Hey, real quick. I
[3:11:36] ju I know we, we had it. What, uh, sarah, what was the, um,
[3:11:42] the beacon was the catty-cornered and
[3:11:46] there's a pud now for that. Was it through a, um,
[3:11:51] preliminary development plan? Is that what it's for? That's right. That was, yes.
[3:11:55] yeah, that was approved. Right. And the rezonings has been completed. Okay. Mm-hmm . That's
[3:11:59] what I thought. Um, so
[3:12:06] sarah, a question for you then. I'm probably gonna ask the applicant the same thing potentially. Uh,
[3:12:11] what were the conversations that were had with the applicant?
[3:12:15] because just
[3:12:19] speaking honestly here, I find it a little obscure that we're going to maybe consider
[3:12:24] a similar community, retirement community, uh, assisted living
[3:12:28] caddy cornered, and this one doesn't really meet any of the
[3:12:33] envision doubling criteria or the specific area plan requirements. So mm-hmm
[3:12:37] . Can you give me an idea of what conversations you had with the applicant about,
[3:12:41] uh, what I would consider failures to meet the certain expectations
[3:12:47] the applicant approach staff through the office hours,
[3:12:51] um, opportunity that we have, and
[3:12:56] I did not attend that office hours, but my understanding is that
[3:13:00] in vision dublin, the special area plan, um,
[3:13:05] these details were brought up and concerns were
[3:13:09] raised. So, um, the concerns
[3:13:13] that we're raising here are very consistent with the message that
[3:13:17] has been provided previously. Okay.
[3:13:23] do you mind coming up to the podium and sort of the same questions, you know, when you approached
[3:13:27] the city, what, what conversations did you have? What was obviously their
[3:13:31] response, and then how did you plan on addressing those, those concerns
[3:13:36] that they expressed? Yeah, I think, you know, multiple conversations. We,
[3:13:40] we also engaged with the, um, east dublin civic association and
[3:13:44] a council member. Um, you know, what we looked at was the
[3:13:48] rezoning that occurred with the beacon was a very similar situation. Um,
[3:13:52] through that rezoning, you know, that's a four story product. The use was
[3:13:56] deemed acceptable within the same parameters of what we're considering here.
[3:14:01] um, from our perspective, we, we really think this is sort of
[3:14:05] a textbook location for this type of transitionary housing when
[3:14:09] a community really needs it. Um, you've got healthcare adjacent to the,
[3:14:13] um, directly to the east, and then knowing that this is a residential product
[3:14:18] that also employs 80 people and provides healthcare. So it really fits within the narrative
[3:14:22] of that medical use. Um, and then we had discussions
[3:14:27] about, you know, the, the expectation for medical office in
[3:14:31] this corridor as well. And so we were willing to, you know, sort of make
[3:14:35] that more manageable, um, by allocating a portion of this project
[3:14:40] for, uh, future of medical office development.
[3:14:44] thank you. Did, what other considerations did you put in for
[3:14:48] this property? You know, as been discussed,
[3:14:52] the, the plan has talked about some different kind of, uh, you know, medical offices. Obviously
[3:14:57] I know you're proposing a large office building, but what other type
[3:15:01] of design did you have? Because in,
[3:15:05] in reality here and I, and, and, um,
[3:15:09] it, it, it feels again, feels very similar to what's, what's
[3:15:13] cattycorner and this is more of a, a primary use, um,
[3:15:19] with regard to the assisted living facility and then the, the where the office
[3:15:23] is secondary. So I'll rephrase. What other type of
[3:15:28] buildings did you consider instead of, uh, primarily the assisted
[3:15:32] living components that you've presented? Yeah, I mean, um, frankly we viewed it
[3:15:36] very similarly. So the way I understood the beacon being presented with a phased
[3:15:40] plan, uh, first phase being independent living and
[3:15:44] slash assisted living. Um, our higher acuity setting, which
[3:15:49] is more of a healthcare environment, was, will be part of the, you know, phase
[3:15:53] one. It'd be, it'd be built altogether. So in terms of the product,
[3:15:57] um, and, you know, the, the massing and the, the, the
[3:16:01] building height was, we really took those cues from, you know, the city's response
[3:16:06] to feeling that the beacon was appropriate within this corridor based
[3:16:10] on, you know, the developments that have been happening in the last several months there. So
[3:16:14] we feel it's very similar.
[3:16:19] did you do any analysis, um,
[3:16:23] with some of the other retirement and assisted living communities in dublin?
[3:16:28] yeah, sure. Okay. Your plan
[3:16:32] is completely opposite to what friendship village is.
[3:16:37] are you aware of that? Did you do any analysis of that community? You mean in terms of
[3:16:41] like where there's the o the ownership getting in line?
[3:16:46] for sure. Yeah. What, what type of, in your analysis, what,
[3:16:50] what did you come up with with how that, uh, that
[3:16:54] your product that you're proposing here compares to
[3:16:58] what my understanding is, is an extremely successful, uh, design
[3:17:03] and program that they have at friendship village? Yeah, that's a good question. So I can only
[3:17:07] speak from my experience. Um, I've been doing this for about 15 years,
[3:17:11] um, you know, friendship village being a nonprofit, so very
[3:17:15] common all over the country. You see continuum care re retirement communities, it
[3:17:19] is typically a nonprofit scenario where you have the buy-in model
[3:17:24] and that's that upfront fee, and then they pay service fees. Um, what we're
[3:17:28] proposing is a, a monthly rental model. So this is not a non-profit,
[3:17:32] it's a for-profit. I frankly never seen, I have not seen personally
[3:17:37] a for-profit model that had the buy-in model. Um, and so I
[3:17:41] can only speculate that that doesn't work or my, you know, I'm not that I've
[3:17:45] never done it before, I've not seen it. Um, and so what we are proposing
[3:17:49] here, we know works and these types of communities all across the country are,
[3:17:53] are filling and there's a huge need for them. Um, we're leasing
[3:17:58] a very similar product zionsville right now, and the demand is off the
[3:18:02] charts. Um, the amount of leads that we're tracking on that particular project is something
[3:18:06] I've never seen before. And so it does track the demographics. Um,
[3:18:10] but I think that's, that's also why I included the, the distinction because
[3:18:14] what we're proposing here, we know works. It's very successful in very similar
[3:18:19] communities all over the midwest, and it is a housing type that is really needed.
[3:18:23] um, and the whole concept is very similar to, uh, friendship village in
[3:18:27] the sense that we provide the exact same amenities, the same levels of care, the same
[3:18:31] types of housing that ranges from lower acuity to higher acuity,
[3:18:36] but the financial side is much simpler. Um, you know, residents are paying a monthly
[3:18:41] fee and with care fees on top of that, so there's no buy-in com
[3:18:45] component. Okay. Thank you. Yep.
[3:18:50] mr. Alexander, sarah, before the
[3:18:54] beacon was rezoned, were the same parameters
[3:18:59] on that site that are on this site, such as the density
[3:19:03] of 9,500 per square foot? What
[3:19:07] was the timing of that? Yeah, I, I can maybe weigh in on that.
[3:19:11] it's the same future land use designation, uh, same parameters.
[3:19:17] the beacon started in 2019, so it evolved over time and
[3:19:21] I think, um, obviously started under the previous, um, uh,
[3:19:25] community plan, but by the time it went through the final approvals for
[3:19:29] the preliminary development plan and rezoning, uh, and vision dublin was
[3:19:33] adopted, uh, it went through a lot of discussions, obviously over
[3:19:37] those years. And I think the commission in that case, and
[3:19:41] ultimately city council, um, accepted the fact that given
[3:19:46] the, uh, medical office that's happening with, or the, the,
[3:19:50] uh, mount carmel use that was in the planning stages at the time,
[3:19:54] the lifetime fitness to the north, and some of the a adjacent
[3:19:58] uses that the synergy of those uses made some sense.
[3:20:03] and in terms of the density, I even though it exceeded
[3:20:07] the, uh, density mm-hmm . And even the envision dublin plan,
[3:20:11] the actual intensity, we talked about density and intensity being
[3:20:15] a more residential use gear towards senior citizens that,
[3:20:20] uh, the, even though it exceeded the, uh, square footage
[3:20:25] per acre, the intensity was acceptable. Um,
[3:20:29] I would point out the difference though, in terms of the luxury that
[3:20:33] the beacon had is the distance between the larger buildings
[3:20:38] and the adjacent neighbors and the streets. So in that case, the
[3:20:42] taller buildings were to the north, closer to lifetime fitness and a
[3:20:46] and a stream in there. And the one story building
[3:20:50] is along the bright road front. It's, uh, that, that's the one distinction between
[3:20:55] the two. Okay. I have sarah, I have one additional question. Um,
[3:20:59] the drainage feature, and you staff report mentions you
[3:21:03] want that to be a part of open to the public. Do you see the
[3:21:08] shared use path that that actually comes down along there
[3:21:12] and it ties into the shared use path? Or how do you see that?
[3:21:18] I might defer to transportation and mobility on that. Okay.
[3:21:23] but I can, we can see,
[3:21:28] um, let me go back to, let me go back to this
[3:21:32] map. Um,
[3:21:39] there is a focal node, you can't see my
[3:21:43] cursor of course, but there's a focal point in
[3:21:47] front of mount carmel hospital and then it
[3:21:52] traverses mm-hmm . To the west, um,
[3:21:56] leading up to the school and,
[3:22:00] um, a a stand of trees and
[3:22:04] a much more defined drainage way. So it would be
[3:22:08] wonderful to take advantage of that, especially,
[3:22:13] um, as a community where
[3:22:18] maybe that becomes a focal point that you could organize the build
[3:22:22] buildings around.
[3:22:26] yeah. I, I, I think sarah said that. Well, and we would certainly encourage pedestrian
[3:22:30] connectivity to and through the site. Okay. A question for
[3:22:34] the applicant. Did, did this, were you aware of this as you were putting your plan
[3:22:38] together? Or is this something that was brought to your attention after you had your plan? Uh, the proposed
[3:22:43] riverway that we're talking about? Yeah. The location of that is new to me. When we had our,
[3:22:47] like informal review with, I think it was public works, we looked at general
[3:22:51] locations of the ponds on the concept plan, and those were indicated
[3:22:56] to be in generally the right location. But, um, certainly engineering's not been done yet.
[3:23:01] 'cause this looks like it would go right through your parking lot. It, it is a little bit further north than
[3:23:05] what we had anticipated based on the way the site currently currently drains
[3:23:09] out there. Yeah. Do you think you could incorporate it and are there issues with public
[3:23:14] coming through your site? Um, yeah, I think the,
[3:23:18] the, the challenge would be, which we're, we know we're willing to take a look at is,
[3:23:22] um, by the time you move villas to bright road, to transition one story to
[3:23:26] the residential and push the primary structure a little bit further south,
[3:23:30] um, we'd, we'd have to look at that, but okay. Yeah, it's possible. And it, I think that's
[3:23:34] a, actually could be a really nice feature for the site to have sort
[3:23:38] of that natural riverway running through there with some benches and pathways and that sort of thing. Okay.
[3:23:43] good. Thank you. Yeah, that's all. Thank you ms. Hart.
[3:23:47] thank you for being here, uh, this whole evening. We appreciate it, , in
[3:23:51] your presentation. Um, first of all, um, how was your conversation
[3:23:55] with the east dublin civic association? Um,
[3:24:00] yeah, so our initial interactions, um, so we are communicating through the
[3:24:04] president of that association. Um, initial feedback was
[3:24:08] very minimal. Actually. We had one positive comment that they thought this type
[3:24:12] of use, which is a transitionary use from more commercial hospital to the residential
[3:24:16] was appropriate. Um, I think we also have received a few more comments since
[3:24:21] then that are incorporated into the staff's report. Uh, all the same things that,
[3:24:25] um, have been raised already tonight, which we respect and acknowledge and will address
[3:24:29] is, uh, typically it's building height. Um, I think the
[3:24:33] one thing they seem to be appreciative of is like limiting access onto bright road.
[3:24:37] so, and we're already a very low traffic use anyway, um, but
[3:24:42] limiting access off to bright road and then taking another look at how we're transitioning
[3:24:46] that building height from, you know, lower towards bright road as we
[3:24:50] en encounter the residential. Thank you. I can't remember if a traffic study
[3:24:54] is needed or not. Um, this would be a rezoning,
[3:24:58] so yes, it would be necessary. Okay. Thank you. And then,
[3:25:02] um, the villas, um, they set back
[3:25:06] towards residential. Is there, um, like
[3:25:10] have you thought about, um, the residential if facing
[3:25:15] 'em a different way or moving 'em up a little bit? Um, and if
[3:25:19] I can, mr. Desler was mentioning also, um, the difference
[3:25:23] is I don't believe the beacon has villas. Um,
[3:25:27] and so that's a, a residential like independent
[3:25:31] kind of thing. Yeah. Right. Yeah, correct. That's my understanding as well that they don't, they do not have villas.
[3:25:36] um, our personal experience is that the villas in conjunction with the apartment
[3:25:40] style living are highly desirable, um, when you can amenitize them with
[3:25:44] the pool and with the dining program. Um, so a number of
[3:25:49] villas on as part of this project, we think is something that really sets this apart
[3:25:53] that really does go back. You know, back to the friendship village conversation, they
[3:25:57] have a handful of villas, extremely high demand. If you look at any other
[3:26:01] seniors housing within dublin or powell or surrounding communities, um, it's
[3:26:05] typically just an apartment style structure. It's a large building, um,
[3:26:09] with, without that community feel. And what we're really trying to create here is that walkability,
[3:26:13] lots of green space, um, amenitize, all the different components
[3:26:18] of the residential. Um, and that villas, those villas play a, a
[3:26:22] pretty critical component to that. Is there enough of a buffer with the residents
[3:26:26] and so forth with where you're putting the, um, villas?
[3:26:33] um, do you mean with respect to, I thought there was residential on the
[3:26:37] other side of the villas. I thought you were saying that earlier.
[3:26:41] um, you mean off adjacent? There's a, there's a home there. Yeah,
[3:26:45] there's a home, a single family home that, okay. Yeah. The, the home that's to the west of
[3:26:49] us is, uh, vacant. It's boarded up currently. Oh, yeah. Okay. Um, there are,
[3:26:53] I know what you're talking about. Yeah. I was just thinking, sorry, I
[3:26:57] thought you were mentioning that with the villas being close to private
[3:27:02] or that area that way. So, and then would you need to be affiliated
[3:27:06] with a hospital at all, or is that something that you would
[3:27:10] work with since you're across the street from mount carmel? Yeah, so we
[3:27:15] actually have in-house therapy. Um, so, uh, we actually own
[3:27:19] a, a therapy company that's one of the largest in the country that offices out
[3:27:23] of this building. So they provide pt, um, ot, speech therapy, full wellness program.
[3:27:28] they do resident engagement, um, as well. Um, but there typically is
[3:27:32] a relationship with a hospital. So there will be a resident physician that has an affiliation,
[3:27:37] um, and will come to the building to, you know, do medical appointments within the, the,
[3:27:41] within our building, but from mount carmel. Okay. It could be mount carmel. Yes.
[3:27:45] uh, but that would be set up separately. Yeah. I, I guess
[3:27:49] the last thing I was just thinking about too is, um, your
[3:27:53] parking seems minimal, which is, is it that you don't need as
[3:27:57] much or is it just not showing? Yeah. Um, what's
[3:28:02] on the plan is, is conceptual in nature. Typically, for a project like this, we'd have about 0.9
[3:28:06] spaces okay. For the, uh, main building. And then each of the villas would have
[3:28:10] their own, you know, one and a half to two, two car garage in the medical
[3:28:14] building. You are, um, putting that aside, that's not gonna be, it's down
[3:28:18] the road. Uh, but you want us to comment on it or,
[3:28:23] um, yeah, I think what we're willing to do at this point is, is set that
[3:28:27] land aside, um, we would work with a partner to develop that. Um,
[3:28:31] and, you know, I don't do medical office development. Um, so we would bring in
[3:28:35] somebody else that has more expertise around that. We would speak with, you know, the brokerage
[3:28:39] community with, uh, within this area to identify what is appropriate.
[3:28:44] um, but I think at this point, you know, we're willing to set that aside and, and make that commitment
[3:28:48] that, you know, doing something really nice for the city, knowing that the,
[3:28:52] that overpass is gonna happen right at that intersection. We understand that's really important.
[3:28:57] we're willing to have all those discussions and make those commitments and do something really neat
[3:29:01] there. Thank you,
[3:29:05] mr. Chinook. Yes. Again, thank you for the, the
[3:29:09] being here in the presentation. I, I don't, I know we're trying to make a determination kind of bigger picture
[3:29:14] on if this type of facility makes sense. So I'll try not to get down in the weeds
[3:29:18] too much, but I'm going to for a second so we can kinda understand your vision.
[3:29:22] the, the, does this work, if
[3:29:27] the independent living is not four stories, is
[3:29:31] it, is it two stories? Could it be, could you reduce the heights of the building?
[3:29:36] um, we have done the independent living in three stories before. Um, we'll
[3:29:40] definitely look at that. I think, you know, this plan based on, especially the conversation about this riverway,
[3:29:45] um, is gonna impact the way that the site lays out. Sure. Um, I think the implication
[3:29:50] of that, um, will be that we, we probably need
[3:29:54] the four stories in order to make sure that we're able to accommodate the extra green space around the
[3:29:58] site. Um, but we can certainly, we can certainly look at that. Okay.
[3:30:02] and then I think kind of alluded to it several times now, because it, and I'm really glad
[3:30:06] you said this was another project you did that you put on the site because it feels like it's something that's
[3:30:10] not . The just it needs to be, there's a lot of work that
[3:30:15] needs to be done. I assume you, you, like, for instance, like the main entry is,
[3:30:19] seems to be off. So there's, you're obviously willing to work and, and
[3:30:23] cite it much better than it again, I know, I, I understand what you did, why you did, I
[3:30:27] just, that you're, that you would come back with a better site
[3:30:31] scenario. My question also is part of how does the,
[3:30:36] again, I know it's highly conceptual, I hate to get down, but how did the, you said the villas
[3:30:40] have the, the same amenities as the main building, the dining and everything else.
[3:30:45] I assume there'd be walking paths and little, I mean, what you're showing here doesn't have
[3:30:49] that much connectivity, but you would assume would have more connectivity and more pedestrian
[3:30:54] access to the main building. Yeah, absolutely. Yeah. We want this to feel like
[3:30:58] one cohesive, walkable neighborhood for, for our residents.
[3:31:02] um, and one thing we would likely do once we reconfigure the building is, you
[3:31:07] know, on the end of the building that's adjacent to the, the villas, um, we typically
[3:31:11] integrate a, like a clubhouse of, of sorts, um, where we do some additional
[3:31:15] amenities in there, like a bistro and, um, an additional dining space
[3:31:19] so that that will be directly adjacent to the villas. And so that it does integrate a lot
[3:31:23] better than, than this. And you're a hundred percent correct. Uh, that's why I indicated it's
[3:31:27] kind of a test fit. Sure. But I totally agree with you. Um, when we reconfigure the site,
[3:31:31] assuming that, you know, the, the city feels the use is appropriate, that we would,
[3:31:35] you know, take all this feedback and come up with a, a site plan that fits the, fits the
[3:31:39] site much better. Perfect. Thank you. Yep. Thank
[3:31:44] you mr. Chinook. Um, ms. Waskowitz, ,
[3:31:48] I have a couple questions for you. I,
[3:31:52] top to bottom, so on this plan, there's
[3:31:56] a, the property line in bright road are not matching up with me. That looks like the,
[3:32:00] the property line's on the center line of the road, so we wouldn't be putting trees.
[3:32:05] where we're I, I'm just curious about the site plan and I maybe
[3:32:09] your question was about the right of way of bright road is how, is,
[3:32:13] how is that, is this depicted accurately on this plan? So my
[3:32:17] guess is that this is an old county parcel that probably
[3:32:21] actually did extend to bright road or even into the pavement
[3:32:26] with a pro or a present road occupied easement over it that would
[3:32:30] be cleaned up as this process, um, continued. So would it be,
[3:32:34] could we assume that the, where the property line is shown where it says bright road,
[3:32:38] that that would basically extend along and that part
[3:32:43] yeah. Yeah. There would be a dedicated okay. Public right of way there. Correct. Yeah.
[3:32:47] so I'm just, again, just to comment that that's looks a little weird right
[3:32:51] now, , but so I understand, I understand how it evolved though. Yeah. So I, but that's
[3:32:55] something that needs to be fixed. Um, the
[3:33:00] access from the roundabout obviously would be the primary access to this site.
[3:33:05] um, and I know this is getting specifics that needs to be worked out, but they
[3:33:09] show a roundabout right after the roundabout, that wouldn't happen probably like
[3:33:13] that. Not with the spacing that's currently shown. Correct. Yeah.
[3:33:17] so again, something to be worked out and then where the
[3:33:21] bridge comes across and intersects with emerald parkway,
[3:33:26] would that be a roundabout at that intersection? That's what we're anticipating
[3:33:30] now. Um, obviously more work needs to be done through that public
[3:33:34] project, but, uh, we are showing a, a roundabout footprint as
[3:33:38] a preferred intersection with emerald parkway, which would lead one to believe that
[3:33:42] that would be another major access into the site. And so that would
[3:33:47] really change the way that a lot of this you would look at, because then you have,
[3:33:51] you come in and then you have to figure out circulation to that roundabout. And
[3:33:56] that would, I think, alter the, the framework that's been established here.
[3:34:00] we would have the applicant perform a traffic impact study for the
[3:34:04] pdp submission as, as we've talked about earlier tonight as well, and determine if
[3:34:08] access would be considered on that public right away.
[3:34:13] um, there's gonna be a lot happening right there , so we would work through that, through the tis.
[3:34:18] yeah, it's, I just thinking about all that would have just a huge impact on this
[3:34:22] plan. Um, thank you. Thanks. Um, sarah,
[3:34:27] um, the riparian corridor, um,
[3:34:31] right now this is, uh, is this a farm field? Is this used for
[3:34:35] crops still? It's vacant, right? It is vacant. Okay. But,
[3:34:40] but it's been agricultural over time and it appears to have been, yes.
[3:34:45] so, so in that process, did the, that rip repairing corridor kind of get filled in
[3:34:49] and kind of, it doesn't, I mean there's no trees there that define it. Right.
[3:34:54] and I'm just trying, is there, is the, does the grading
[3:34:58] imply that that's a drainage area through there, or are I'm trying to establish
[3:35:03] that. I, I think it's great to identify that corridor, but
[3:35:07] it, it's not there right now. We're gonna create it. That's
[3:35:11] right. So it could have some flexibility exactly where it is. It
[3:35:16] could indeed. Right. But we do have, my understanding is that
[3:35:20] the storm water from mount carmel
[3:35:24] comes out just north of that roundabout
[3:35:29] for the main entry, and then it, it kind of
[3:35:34] feeds into that drainage. So it's overland and it's not
[3:35:38] piped. Correct. I was gonna, that was my next question. Correct.
[3:35:42] and if you go to the parcel, just to the west, you can
[3:35:46] see that square of trees and then the
[3:35:50] line of trees that kind of comes up a little bit, kind of wiggles through there. Yeah.
[3:35:55] and that is the drainage that, that keeps sort of coming
[3:35:59] across this whole way and eventually ends up
[3:36:03] down in the scioto river and through the park.
[3:36:08] great. Perfect. Yes. Thank you. Yes. Um, applicant.
[3:36:12] um, so so you've done a test fit
[3:36:17] using a model, uh, for a facility that you've built elsewhere.
[3:36:22] are there other models that you have that have a different configuration that
[3:36:27] might be more amenable to this site and the limitations that it
[3:36:31] has that yeah. Yeah. And good question. And absolutely just, I wanna be a hundred percent clear on that,
[3:36:35] that, um, should this move forward, we would do a specific
[3:36:39] building for this site, uh, approximately same unit count. So the
[3:36:43] reason that that building was used, because is 'cause about the same size, um,
[3:36:48] based on the engineering and all the circumstances that are unique to this site, we would develop
[3:36:52] a concept that that addresses all of the discussion that
[3:36:56] we've had tonight. For sure. So again, I was just trying to establish how much
[3:37:01] as we give you comments, how much flexibility do you have in morphing
[3:37:05] that shape into something that might be different than what you have now? We have a ton of flexibility
[3:37:09] and we can make it whatever, um, the city feels is appropriate. And,
[3:37:14] um, I think the big thing is, is the land use, the continuum of care, the types
[3:37:18] of uses within the building, um, and the approximate unit counts is really what,
[3:37:23] and then at that point we can take that feedback and we can adapt a building to the site that,
[3:37:27] that really sort of is cohesive around the access around the roundabout
[3:37:31] and this riverway and some of the ar uh, the civil items. Great.
[3:37:36] um, and I, and this is not necessarily a question, but have you, have you
[3:37:40] actually like driven up to mount carmel the hospital and
[3:37:44] kind of experience that? Yeah, it's nice. Yeah. So you appreciate the amount of
[3:37:49] design effort it went into establishing that. Yep. Kind of. And, and
[3:37:53] I think that's something that I, you know, that's the character that
[3:37:57] we would want to see extend. I think that's the, anyway. Yep. No, I think that's great. Yeah. And, and
[3:38:01] even the roundabouts, the amount of landscaping, the, the infrastructure that's been put in is exactly
[3:38:05] why we think this site is so great. Um, and we would mimic that throughout
[3:38:10] our development as well. Great. That is all the questions
[3:38:14] I had turning back to the commission. Any additional questions?
[3:38:19] okay. So I'd like to open it up for public comment now
[3:38:23] and thank thank you applicant. Yeah, will come. Thank you. Come back.
[3:38:28] the microphone is on, so you just need to state your name and address. Well,
[3:38:32] thank you mr. Way. And commissioners, it's getting late. I'll be brief.
[3:38:36] I'm randy roth, uh, 6 9 8 7 grande cliffs drive.
[3:38:40] um, I'm vice president of the, uh, east dublin civic association.
[3:38:46] I've been an officer since its founding in 1988. I'm getting old.
[3:38:50] um, and I wanted to set to thank the applicant, uh, for contacting
[3:38:55] our president, amy cram. Amy hasn't had a chance to set up
[3:38:59] a meeting with you, and so we haven't, I can't really speak to, you
[3:39:03] know, what we're going to eventually say about this is a civic association,
[3:39:08] but certainly what we've heard from amy and I have heard so far
[3:39:12] is that people would like to stay close to the community
[3:39:17] plan and that this seems to deviate quite a bit from that plan.
[3:39:22] um, we have never been opposed to height, you know, our association,
[3:39:26] we've supported bright, uh, bridge street. We were even willing
[3:39:30] in the past to go higher than the mount carmel buildings down there, you know, in the
[3:39:34] along, uh, sawmill road. We supported the four story building there
[3:39:39] on the assisted living rehab center, which is north of bright
[3:39:43] road. But notice that that steps down. You approve four stories
[3:39:48] closest to sawmill and then it's already stepping down
[3:39:52] as we get towards emerald parkway. And so we really would
[3:39:56] like to, I I'm sure that my, my neighbors would like to stick
[3:40:00] close to the two stories, um, for the maximum height
[3:40:04] in this area. Um, and the density of this is really twice
[3:40:08] what we had envisioned in terms of, you know, the square footage
[3:40:13] per acre. Um, the other concerns are really about,
[3:40:17] one of 'em is about traffic circulation. Um, I was involved in, when
[3:40:21] we first were thinking about this site as members of the community plant steering committee years
[3:40:26] ago, and we wanted to somehow find a way
[3:40:30] to en ensure that this 18 acres and the 20 acres to the west
[3:40:34] would have internal circulation, right? So that although, and we
[3:40:38] would have one curb cut onto bright road and the
[3:40:42] way this is drawn, that next parcel can't get to that curb
[3:40:46] cut on bright road if you look at how it's done. So there's no way to get
[3:40:51] there. You'd have to do more curb cuts and there's no way
[3:40:55] to do that internal circulation the way this is driven. There's no east
[3:40:59] west connector or stub there that could be
[3:41:04] used to do that. So that's something in terms of a traffic point
[3:41:08] of view, have as much internal circulation as you can possibly have with this
[3:41:13] assisted living medical office business park, which I think would be
[3:41:18] the best way to go. And finally, really, um,
[3:41:22] to preserve what we want to preserve the rural character of bright road.
[3:41:27] and if you look at the northern end of that, you know, it's essentially a street with a
[3:41:31] thin, um, thin screening of trees. Um,
[3:41:35] uh, there's a nice setback along emerald parkway, but really not much to
[3:41:40] preserve the rural character of bright road. And so those are three
[3:41:44] things that come to mind from me and from what I've heard so far from my
[3:41:48] neighbors. But again, we're not really ready yet and we we're willing to talk
[3:41:53] with the applicant about this, uh, and see where we come
[3:41:57] down so I can actually speak for the association. Thanks so much
[3:42:01] mr. Way and commissioners. Thank you.
[3:42:05] anybody else? Okay, 1, 2, 3.
[3:42:10] public comment is closed and we'd now like to go into deliberations.
[3:42:15] sarah, if you'd pull up the questions.
[3:42:21] jamie . He did it last time.
[3:42:25] . Go ahead mr. Chinook. Yeah, I guess, uh,
[3:42:29] again, I think the, the, a lot of the appreciate being here, the, a lot of the
[3:42:33] questions brought up on the site, I think we're still a ways away. Um, in terms of
[3:42:37] site development. I, I guess in terms of the spirit of envision de, and I'm
[3:42:42] not necessarily in favor of this use 'cause it deviates significantly, well,
[3:42:46] it deviates from, from what our, uh, envision dublin
[3:42:50] has intended for this site. Um, but again, if we move forward,
[3:42:55] there's a lot of, as we brought up tonight, a lot of um,
[3:42:59] uh, I guess ancillary items that are gonna affect the, the overall layout
[3:43:03] and the uh, uh, positioning on the site. I know you asked for some
[3:43:08] feedback on the architecture or character. I did want to comment on that. I do think
[3:43:12] that as you, you, you mentioned that you've seen the mount carmel building. It's,
[3:43:16] it's very prominent, very modern. So I would think that we would try to kind of maybe
[3:43:20] blend a little bit of that modernization of what's happening there with
[3:43:24] some of the residential aspects of it too. So some of the stuff that you had
[3:43:28] have showed shared so far, a little more traditional, um, in nature
[3:43:33] residentially. But I, I think there's a nice, it could be a nice blend of that modernization of what's kind of happening
[3:43:37] and the idea of that area. Again, blend with the, the, the residential.
[3:43:42] but generally speaking, I, I do have some concerns that were deviating a little bit
[3:43:46] beyond what the envision dublin has approved for the site.
[3:43:51] ms. Harger, um, I would also agree, I think it does, um,
[3:43:55] deviate us and, um, in the wrong direction of what we're thinking about also,
[3:44:00] um, just the density of it and uh, um,
[3:44:04] the villas probably to me aren't fitting in that area as well
[3:44:08] too. So, um, a couple of the different areas just doesn't, um,
[3:44:12] seem to be working. Um, but you know, like the traffic study
[3:44:16] would be important, um, to make a difference in, in how that all that
[3:44:21] area's gonna go. But, um, the, and for us
[3:44:25] to, you know, we wouldn't know when you would do the medical office
[3:44:29] and it, and then if it didn't work out, then we've got that space. And
[3:44:33] in the past we've all been very concerned about that kind of issue. Thank you.
[3:44:39] thank you mr. Alexander. When I
[3:44:43] see the envision dublin plan, isn't it call for neighborhood office, office
[3:44:48] medical, we supporting uses of institutional and assisted living?
[3:44:53] that's what we have. So it does comply with the plan in, in one
[3:44:57] sense buildings to be one to two stories that, that
[3:45:02] it does not comply. But I do think the proposed use
[3:45:06] complies. Um, so I, I, you
[3:45:10] know, I generally am supportive because I think it is responsive.
[3:45:15] I also don't think it's fair. I know the code changed,
[3:45:19] but we have one standard for beacon and then we impose another standard
[3:45:23] on this applicant. And in fact their density is less than beacons.
[3:45:27] so, I mean, I would be supportive of the density, um, that
[3:45:31] there, I realized the code changed, but, um, I'd be
[3:45:35] supportive of the density, particularly in this location. Um,
[3:45:41] the four story building acts is kind of a landmark. When
[3:45:45] you come, you come down bright road and you have that roundabout there, it
[3:45:49] acts marks that point. I mean, I could, I could be convinced that
[3:45:53] that building could be four stories. I, I think I agree with
[3:45:57] the staff about the natural features. I think the architectural character,
[3:46:01] one of the important things your two images show, you show one with stone
[3:46:06] and one with brick. You're probably not aware how important stone is to this
[3:46:10] community. There were a series of quarries along the river. Anytime you build, there's
[3:46:14] tons of stone, stone walls that you see. So I think your image
[3:46:18] with the stone is, um, begins to respond
[3:46:22] to the character of the community. So
[3:46:28] thank you mr. Dressler.
[3:46:35] you, you can disagree. I, I may
[3:46:39] I I want clarity though. I think you brought up a good point over to
[3:46:43] the city, maybe that on this one. Okay, so we have, this kind of came up in the
[3:46:47] first case today. We had the principal use right in the secondary use.
[3:46:53] well, what controls, if the principle use is the entire or the, if the secondary use
[3:46:57] is the entirety of the land, that would be a principle use.
[3:47:01] am I thinking of that correctly or is the secondary use
[3:47:06] meaning it's something smaller, complimentary. Some, some
[3:47:10] something of, of that nature. It's supporting too, which I think is a right, it's
[3:47:15] a supporting use as opposed to secondary thing. It's a little bit different putting the primary use. Right, right.
[3:47:20] yeah, I I think that that's a fair way of categorizing that. Okay. Distinction.
[3:47:26] so, I mean, I want to,
[3:47:31] I, I do want to address, 'cause I don't think we can get to three, four, and five and six
[3:47:35] even, uh, considering here, based on the, the phrasing,
[3:47:39] I want to be clear because I want to give the applicant direction. I think it's fair at
[3:47:43] this point. There's five of us. I know we're missing two.
[3:47:49] I mean, I'm not in favor of having a, an assisted living facility
[3:47:53] of this magnitude taking up a primary use on this land.
[3:47:58] I kind of wanna throw that out to everybody else. We know where gary stands.
[3:48:03] kim, we haven't heard from you yet. That's fine. Um,
[3:48:08] jamie and kathy, I don't wanna put words in your mouth, but it kind of sounded like that you were
[3:48:12] also not in favor of having the assisted living
[3:48:17] facility as currently proposed, be the primary principal use on this land.
[3:48:22] that fair? Okay. I think, and I'll,
[3:48:27] I'll let you can speak. I'm not taking it away. So just real quick, I,
[3:48:31] I understand. I think the area does need, uh, assisted living
[3:48:35] facilities, this magnitude. I think there's a want for that. I think there's a need for that.
[3:48:39] you've certainly diagnosed that the community would support it. Unfortunately,
[3:48:43] in this location, based on what we previously
[3:48:48] approved, it's like first to market almost. They spent a long time
[3:48:53] the proposal, it's different being on sell mill road and the, the nature of how
[3:48:57] that land, it's, it's just different. This, the exposure on this
[3:49:02] property is so much more visible from
[3:49:07] city access and people coming into the city that based
[3:49:11] on the envision dublin pan and the, those standards
[3:49:15] that we've evaluated and discussed this evening, I'm just not certain that
[3:49:19] it meets that. Now could there be a memory care building
[3:49:23] perhaps, or some component thereof related to,
[3:49:28] you know, one to two story offices that are prescribed in the envision
[3:49:32] dublin plan? Certainly, uh, with reduced density as requested by
[3:49:36] the city and based on some of the civic association comments, I think that would potentially be
[3:49:40] supportive. Um, but I don't
[3:49:45] think we get to 3, 4, 5, and six on this because it does not meet the
[3:49:51] proposed use of the land, uh, based on the envision dublin plan.
[3:49:56] thank you. Can I go now? ? So
[3:50:00] I, I tend to agree with the sympathy here.
[3:50:04] um, you know, emerald parkway was designed to be a major business
[3:50:08] address in the city. And so land on each side of it is highly valued
[3:50:13] land for office, major institutional uses. And so
[3:50:17] again, this site is, because it's on the other side, not the highway side,
[3:50:21] still designated as a, as a office use, um,
[3:50:27] I think has been further reinforced by the fact that a new hospital's
[3:50:31] been built next to it, which makes this a prime site for medical office,
[3:50:35] which would be, again, very consistent with what the city has been always
[3:50:39] projecting for this area, um, as a primary
[3:50:44] use. So I think the, im, the important
[3:50:48] kind of frontage for that type of use is emerald parkway. So I could
[3:50:52] see additional medical office along emerald parkway,
[3:50:56] but the question is, could you integrate something else behind it
[3:51:01] that would be more sympathetic to what you want to do? And that's why I was asking you
[3:51:05] about configuration. So could there be a linear building that that
[3:51:09] faces to the vacant side site to the west and that you had office
[3:51:13] then fronting onto the street and that would then give the character
[3:51:18] that I think the city envisions for emerald parkway with a hundred foot buffer, the landscape
[3:51:22] parking behind all of those things. And then the riparian quarter,
[3:51:26] dividing it. So there's the possibility that something could
[3:51:31] be integrated in here that allows for the assisted living to be
[3:51:35] a supporting use to a medical office, um,
[3:51:39] setting where people are coming from medical care and including pa people
[3:51:43] that are in the assisted living building. So it's a, it's, there's a kind of
[3:51:47] a synergy. And so again, is there something that could happen there?
[3:51:52] I think right now the assisted living is the primary use and I, I agree that that isn't
[3:51:56] the appropriate direction, but could you accomplish something that's
[3:52:00] a balance, more of a balance with a push towards medical office?
[3:52:04] so that would be my, my, um, take
[3:52:08] on. And at the same time, I think the, with
[3:52:12] the bridge, the new bridge coming over and intersecting, then we'll parkway, there's a major gateway
[3:52:17] opportunity, landmark opportunity, something really special
[3:52:21] for the city. And so I don't, I don't wanna lose that opportunity by
[3:52:25] putting something secondary in that location. So those would be my
[3:52:29] comments. I, I wanna add too, to ja 'cause I wanna add jason's comment too. I, I
[3:52:33] do think I do wanna compliment you 'cause I do think the building, the architecture is very nice and you've
[3:52:37] obviously got a really nice facility. I do like the villas, I like the variation in
[3:52:42] living type, but I adjacent, maybe it's just not in this site there, I can see it definitely
[3:52:46] going somewhere else in, in the city that fits a little bit more with what we're
[3:52:50] trying to do. And then part of the vision double, but I don't wanna you to leave here at the fact I, I still wanna
[3:52:54] compliment in a really nice building, nice design and a nice, nice concept here.
[3:52:58] just not on this particular site is where my stand is.
[3:53:03] and jamie, I I also had that, you know, same feeling like is there another
[3:53:07] site, I mean obviously we have a need in this community. There is an aging,
[3:53:11] uh, population and so we have facilities like this distributed
[3:53:16] around the city and instead of two facilities
[3:53:20] right next to each other, is there a place again where we can spread it out, make it more accessible
[3:53:24] to the wider population? So I think, you know, supporting your,
[3:53:29] your initiative to reach out to dublin, but is there a another
[3:53:33] site that accommodate the program that you want to build more appropriately?
[3:53:40] I have a question for you. So
[3:53:44] planning's very different than building and building's
[3:53:49] kind of market driven, very market driven. So if someone develops
[3:53:53] a plan that shows office buildings along there,
[3:53:58] but it takes a lot longer for those to develop because now they have demand
[3:54:02] for what they wanna do right now. So how does that fit in your thinking?
[3:54:07] that's why we have development agreements and deal that deal with phasing and
[3:54:11] what gets built and when and all of that. So I mean that to me is part of
[3:54:16] ensuring that you don't cherry pick and get the best, the
[3:54:20] use you want and everything else never happens. There'd have to be an agreement that,
[3:54:25] that the rest of the development was phased appropriately and come, come online.
[3:54:30] I think there's a market for medical office, but I'm not an expert.
[3:54:37] any other comments from the commission turn to the applicant?
[3:54:41] have you heard what you needed to hear from us? And do you have any, you know,
[3:54:45] have any other questions for us? Uh, no. Very comprehensive.
[3:54:50] okay. Well thank you for coming in and again, uh,
[3:54:55] we'd certainly like to have you in the city. Thank you.
[3:55:00] okay, thank you everyone. We're almost there.
[3:55:04] um, communications, mr. Bot, I, I have a few quick
[3:55:08] items, but the main one that we'd like you to consider tonight is the,
[3:55:12] uh, adoption of the meeting dates for 2026. Uh,
[3:55:17] I believe we provided those, some of you provided comments back to us.
[3:55:21] uh, I think there may be a couple meetings where one of you
[3:55:25] or the other is missing, but we didn't see anything where there was,
[3:55:29] um, a concern about too many people missing. So,
[3:55:34] um, obviously it's a little challenging to set those meeting dates, uh,
[3:55:38] around many other events and meetings. And so ideally
[3:55:43] we would go with what we presented to you, but we're willing to listen.
[3:55:49] two things. One, I think I need to re-look at it.
[3:55:54] two, we have a new member, right, that they got approved on monday.
[3:55:59] that was gonna be one of the other rest the next, I just don't let jump in the .
[3:56:04] I did, did did dan respond with relative to the dates? Do we know? Was
[3:56:08] he one of the ones that responded? I, I believe so. Okay.
[3:56:13] I will take a look and I will respond so we can make sure. 'cause I'm, I'm fairly certain when I initially looked
[3:56:17] at it, I may may have to miss one or two. I think we, you were looking for do we have to vote
[3:56:22] to approve that? We were hoping that we would vote because we are, lemme look at the dates
[3:56:26] behind on jason. Take a look real quick. Up. , have they, have they
[3:56:30] changed? Like I know you put 'em out since, since the initial when you didn't revise 'em based on feedback, right?
[3:56:34] so there's still this based on the feedback we've gotten. So, uh,
[3:56:39] again, there are a couple of you that are gonna be, uh, absent certain
[3:56:44] times, but we haven't changed anything based on just a, the majority
[3:56:48] is still okay to this point. Jason, I just wanted to communicate.
[3:56:52] sorry, I just wanna communicate that I am gone august 20th just
[3:56:56] so I yeah, I, I,
[3:57:00] again, the assumption is that there are gonna be meetings that
[3:57:05] certain commissioners have to miss. I mean, we're trying to get a consensus around
[3:57:10] a meeting schedule so that everybody else can do the planning they need to do.
[3:57:18] lemme look. Okay. Gary's fine. Hang on. Kathy's fine.
[3:57:23] I'm fine. I think by uh, consensus
[3:57:27] we're fine. You need to make a motion. I would like to make a
[3:57:31] motion to approve the meeting schedule for the x
[3:57:36] calendar for 2006.
[3:57:41] there's definitely a couple dates that are, I'm gonna be out for, um,
[3:57:45] just looking at it. Okay, that's fine. So
[3:57:49] I, it usually happens anyway. There's a couple I second motion has been seconded.
[3:57:54] great. Ms. Harder? Yes. Mr. Desler?
[3:57:59] yes. Mr. Alexander? Yes. Mr. Chinook? Yes.
[3:58:03] mr. We yes. Thank you.
[3:58:07] thank you. Um, wanted to also introduce, uh,
[3:58:11] tory brubaker, uh, our new planner with our office started
[3:58:16] maybe a month ago now, or close to it a month. Almost
[3:58:20] a month. So, so you'll be presenting at the next, uh, commission meeting?
[3:58:24] know, not we, we were gonna
[3:58:29] have her handle all three applications tonight, but uh, we thought we'd distribute
[3:58:33] the wealth, so. Oh, welcome. It's a fun, it's
[3:58:37] a fun group. . Um,
[3:58:42] somebody mentioned a new member, hillary damer, uh, who served
[3:58:46] for a long time on the architectural review board is gonna be joining us as
[3:58:50] the newest member of this commission, which for those of us
[3:58:55] who have worked with her, we think this is a great addition to this commission.
[3:58:59] um, lost for the architectural review board. Uh, she was here
[3:59:03] for the first two applications, so she was listening in as well
[3:59:08] and she'd be joining us in january.
[3:59:12] yeah, excellent. Another attorney. Yeah.
[3:59:17] great. Then I, some of you may have gotten, or
[3:59:21] I know you have gotten some emails from, uh, folks in the bridge
[3:59:25] park area about building heights and so forth and just wanted
[3:59:29] to make you aware that the city manager and jenny are gonna be meeting
[3:59:34] with the residents next week to address those questions. So,
[3:59:38] uh, you don't need to respond separately, but we are gonna provide some additional
[3:59:43] information to the commission. Um, bridge park or bridge street
[3:59:47] district is a little bit different in terms of how we measure height and I think that's
[3:59:51] been causing some confusion. So we'll, we'll provide some literature also
[3:59:55] to clarify that. And so, uh,
[3:59:59] that's happening on the 18th is the meeting with the city manager and jenny
[4:00:04] and there's no indication of when that application might come back before us. Not
[4:00:08] yet. We are working with them on several aspects of that application.
[4:00:12] so we've got some time to work through all that stuff. Yeah. Yep. Great.
[4:00:17] and then the last thing I wanted to mention is the public comment process
[4:00:21] because we had, actually, speaking of that application, we had some comments
[4:00:25] that came in last month, literally just before the meeting started.
[4:00:30] and it's, uh, not fair to the public, uh, and not
[4:00:34] fair to you to be able to look at that
[4:00:38] literally before the meeting, uh, get started. So we
[4:00:42] are establishing a new policy and we've started, uh, some
[4:00:47] language on the city's website under the public comment that
[4:00:51] first of all, we accept comments up to 48 hours before the
[4:00:55] meeting so that there is a cutoff and we can get you all of
[4:00:59] that information and time for you to read it and
[4:01:03] that there would be no expectation for those comments to be
[4:01:08] read at the meeting. Uh, if somebody wants to vocalize their
[4:01:12] comments, they would need to be here in person and, and do it
[4:01:16] under sworn testimony. Uh, one glitch that we ran into,
[4:01:21] we, we experiment, experimented with it for this month
[4:01:26] and the public comment button did not go off. And so we
[4:01:30] were still getting those, uh, we are working through that. We, we are hoping that
[4:01:34] 2026 will be the official start of that process.
[4:01:41] right. And those came in in a different way. So we are, we are gonna try
[4:01:45] to address that as well. Okay. That's
[4:01:49] it. Great. Thank you. Alright, we are adjourned.