Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOrdinance 47-12RECORD OF ORDINANCES Inc. Ordinance No. 47 -12 Passed 1 20 AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING AN ANNEXATION OF 3.4 ACRES, MORE OR LESS, IN WASHINGTON TOWNSHIP, FRANKLIN COUNTY, TO THE CITY OF DUBLIN (PETITIONERS: HARVEY AND ALEX VESHA, 7094 DUBLIN ROAD) WHEREAS, on May 1, 2012, the Franklin County Commissioners approved the Expedited Type 2 annexation petition for 3.4 acres, more or less, from Washington Township, Franklin County to the City of Dublin, as filed on April 4, 2012 by Daniel F. Hoy, Agent for Petitioners Harvey and Alex Vesha; and WHEREAS, the area proposed for annexation lies within Dublin's exclusive water and sewer service extension area, as provided under the agreements with the City of Columbus; and WHEREAS, the proposed annexation is consistent with the City of Dublin Community Plan, adopted by Council on December 10, 2007. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Dublin, State of Ohio, I of the elected members concurring that: Section 1. The petition for the annexation of 3.4 acres, more or less (see attached legal description, Exhibit "A ") to the City of Dublin, Ohio is hereby accepted. Section 2. This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force from and after the earliest date allowed by law. Passed this day of 2012. Mayor - Pr si ng Officer Attest: Clerk of Council Office of the City Manager 5200 Emerald Parkway • Dublin, OH 43017 -1090 City of Dublin Phone: 614- 410 -4400 • Fax: 614 -410 -4490 Memo To: Members of Dublin City Council From: Marsha I. Grigsby, City Manager ` �L Date: August 16, 2012 Initiated By: Steve Langworthy, Director of Land Use and Long Range Planning Gary P. Gunderman, Planning Manager Re: Ordinance 47 -12 - Accepting Annexation of 3.4 acres more or less in Washington Township Franklin County to the City of Dublin (Petitioner: Daniel F. Hoy, Kevin Knight & Co., 70 West Olentangy Street, Powell, Ohio 43065 , agent for Alexander and Harvey Vesha, 7094 Dublin Road, Dublin Ohio 43016) (Case No. 12 -024 ANNEX) Summary As noted in the memo for first reading, attorneys representing the adjacent property owner filed an objection to this petition when the annexation petition went before the Franklin County Commissioners. As a courtesy, Planning and the Law Director facilitated a meeting with the applicant and adjacent property owner to attempt to reach an agreement by the time of the second reading. It appears that no agreement has been reached and the setback issues previously raised are still at issue. The attorney representing the adjacent property owners will likely attend the Council meeting to raise an objection at the second reading on this petition. The attorneys representing the adjacent property owners requested that a copy of the recent e -mail correspondence between the representatives be attached to the City Council packet. (See attached material.) One of the main reasons for the objection is that the current Washington Township zoning provides for a minimum spacing of 50 feet between structures on adjacent lots and total side yards of 50 feet with a minimum 10 feet on one side. Annexation into the City places the property into the R -Rural zoning district. The Rural District provides for total side yards of 25 feet with a minimum 8 feet on one side. The adjacent property owner is concerned with the potential of the adjacent setback being as small as 8 feet, with no minimum distance between structures as provided in the Washington Township zoning. There are also issues concerning driveway location and an agreement between the property owners will be needed to resolve these issues. Recommendation Staff recommends approval of Ordinance 47 -12, accepting the annexation of 3.4 acres in Washington Township, Franklin County, to the City of Dublin at the August 20, 2012 City Council meeting. Memo re. Ord. 47 -12 — Vesha annexation August 16, 2012 Page 2 of 3 Hello Mr. Gunderman To update you with regard to the above referenced matter, the discussions between the Carpenters and the Veshas unfortunately have not borne any fruit. The Carpenters, as requested, did put forth the proposal noted below, which was in -line with the concepts discussed between the parties, yourself and Jennifer Readier. The proposal has been rejected by the Veshas without explanation or counter proposal. Thank you, Scott - - - -- Original Message---- - From: Scott Benjamin Birrer fmailto :scott(cbsbeniaminlaw.comj Sent: Friday, August 10, 2012 3:40 PM To: nicholas(d)dublinlawyer.com Cc: scott(o)sbeniaminlaw.com Subject: Re: Carpenter proposal They can't make the 90 into their garage. Right now it's straight in. If it moves, the access in is changed. Scott Benjamin Birrer, Esq. - - - - -- Original Message----- - From: Nicholas Vesha < nicholas(a)dublinlawyer.com > To: "Scott Birrer" < scott(a)sbeniaminlaw.com > Date: Friday, August 10, 2012 3:16:57 PM GMT -4 Subject: Re: Carpenter proposal Scott, My clients are not in agreement with that proposal. Why is it the Carpenters' position that the new driveway not be on their own property? Thanks, Nick Nicholas C. Vesha, JD Vesha Law Firm LLC 38 S High Street I Dublin, Ohio 43017 614.782.1010 o 1614.595.5514 c 1614.46763807 f www.dublinlawyer.com On Aug 9, 2012, at 5:13 PM, Scott Birrer wrote: Hello Nick: Will you please provide me with an update as to where you are in reviewing the Carpenter proposal Thank you, Scott From: Scott Birrer fmailto:scott@sbeniaminlaw.coml Sent: Friday, August 03, 2012 12:08 PM To: nicholas(@dublinlawyer.com Cc: iennifer . read ler(a)icemiller.com ggunderman(d )dublin.oh.us ' dhov(@rrcol.com '; iencramerl(cDyahoo.com Subject: Carpenter proposal Memo re. Ord. 47-12 — Vesha annexation August 16, 2012 Page 3 of 3 Nick: After some conversation with the Carpenters, the below outlines the parameters to what they will agree The Carpenters will drop their annexation objection and will consent to the relocation of both the Ingress / egress easement and electrical easement under the following terms: 1. Veshas agree to a 35 foot structural separation (No -Build Area) as measured from the Carpenters' garage, and running along the length of the Carpenters' house as shown on the attached drawing. This equates to a 15 foot side yard setback as measured from the property line. 2. The new driveway may be located as shown on the attached drawing so long as it is fully located on the Vesha side of the property line and is 13 feet wide as measured from the property line. Please note that this width was carefully measured and calculated to allow for proper turning and backing radius. 3. The underground electric line may be relocated as necessary based upon the location of the Vesha house. The Carpenters however will want the location specifically identified prior to full resolution of this matter. If these terms are acceptable, I will memorialize them in a Declaration of Easements and Restrictions to be recorded as an encumbrance on the Vesha lot. Gary and Dan: As the engineering experts, please let us know as soon as possible if there is anything technically wrong with this proposal. Thank you, Scot With Best Regards, Scott Benjamin Birrer, Esq. S.Benjamin Law Practice 655 Metro Place South, Suite 600 Dublin, Ohio 43017 Ph: (614) 572 -6722 scottasben iami n law.com This transmission may contain information that is privileged, confidential and /or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the information contained herein (including any reliance thereon) is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you received this transmission in error, please immediately contact the sender and destroy the material in its entirety. Thank you. Office of the City Manager Emerald Prkway* City of Dublin Pho 614 - 410.4400 • Fax: --410 4490 43017 - 1090 To: Members of Dublin City Council From: Marsha I. Grigsby, City Managerll�,� Date: August 2, 2012 Initiated By: Gary Gunderman, Planning Manager Steve Langworthy, Director of Land Use & Long Range Planning 9 Re: Ordinance 47 -12 — Annexation of 3.4 Acres, More or Less, from Washington Township (Harvey and Alex Vesha, Petitioners, 7094 Dublin Road) Summary This proposed annexation is for 3.4 acres, more or less, and includes right -of -way on Dublin Road. The Ohio Revised Code for annexations requires the City of Dublin to provide resolutions stating what services the municipality has the ability to provide upon annexation. The City must also require a buffer to separate the use of the annexed property, if it is incompatible with the uses permitted under the township zoning on the adjacent unincorporated land. Resolutions 24 -12 and 25 -12 were approved by City Council on April 23, 2012. Copies of the resolutions and the informational memo are attached for reference. These resolutions were forwarded to the Franklin County Commissioners for the hearing on May 1, 2012 and the Commissioners approved the annexation. A copy of Franklin County Commissioners Resolution 0339 -12 is attached. During earlier discussion regarding this proposed annexation, Council Members asked questions related to access to the Scioto River. The Law Director has prepared a memorandum on this issue, which is attached. At the Franklin County hearing, an adjacent property owner not included in the annexation petition filed an objection and requested that the County Commissioners deny the petition or impose conditions regarding future development. The adjacent property owner has concerns related to the smaller sideyard setbacks and distance between structures allowed under City zoning versus the township zoning. This would result in the structure to be built on the Vesha property being closer to the adjacent property owner's existing home. The County Commissioners noted that this issue was not appropriate in an annexation process and proceeded to approve the petition. In an attempt to resolve this issue, Planning staff and the Law Director met with the applicant and the adjacent property owner. The applicants for this petition did not know the details of any potential home construction. Therefore, the neighbors' concerns were not able to be addressed. Both sides did agree to continue their discussion privately and attempt to have a resolution prior to the August 20th City Council public hearing on this matter. A copy of their objections raised at the county hearing is attached. The Ohio Revised Code requires that the transcript of the County Commissioners' hearing be forwarded to the Dublin City Clerk. The Clerk is required to hold the transcript for 60 days, after Memo re. Ordinance 47 -12 — Vesha annexation August 2, 2012 Page 2 of 2 The Council must then accept or reject the petition for annexation within 120 days after the first reading of the ordinance. If approved at the second reading /public hearing, Ordinance 47 -12 will be effective 30 days after passage and the property will be incorporated into the City of Dublin. Recommendation Staff recommends approval of Ordinance 47 -12 at the second reading /public hearing on August 20, 2012. APR U Wit •:;rkn:t Cvint(y �na�tt�ur .scant;. s2at31� „ti „ ?a. morn IDANNILYATTON OF3A+ACRSS FROM WAS90@GTON TOWNMP TOTHKC(TY07 DUBLIN ANNEXATION PLxr& DFCRIPTTON AC'C hVrABLF DEAN G RING14 PF., P.S. FIdANKLW COUNTY ENG(NEL•'R Simoe it the Stan dOhio, County dFmddl4To PofWah pq lyint inYitgtaa Idilitasy Survey 2543, heist aR of Lot 5 of WMO SHORES. d mmd iaPlu Book it, Pigs 37, owned by Alaader and Hasvey Vale (patcd Nuosbot 270.000760), pan OfD ebbs Road ad PW of the Stun Rives. aodbetatbounded and see patiadsrlydaacribed a, folbwz Burnt tha wetwly oommon Cants d Lou 3 ad4 daW SCIOTO SHORES. ba@q in U uo*dy righaofway lion of Dublin Road (60 feet wide) end's the eaistiotCity of Dobbs Cwpmalios Lmy a orlon ichd by of Number 61-80 and re,,,&d inOfli"Record 504AI9, said La 4 ownedbY Sbaws Q- Crlemer (Pmcd Nmsb w 270A00t69); Than” Scaxhdy, a thanes of appsosimosly 100 fat. 31009 the anowdytig6FOf-way tine of said Dublin Road and the watmly line of $aid L 4- b the weakly oommon toner dsaid Las 4 and 5; Thrace Enemy, a,bmmc*Of.W imWly796 lion aloof ere �ounnoonb said Lan 5 ad 4, and tho emterly extension of aid LOU, b a pow m The Sciom Rim beet as utnracbm,f the eaoerty exhales Of said Lae 5 and 4 and the c6811019 City of Dublin CmPmzdm Liao, a atab7isDedDyOrd 'mmce2•Fanbe<3 -74 and receded in Mua Record 161. Page 354; Theo” Somberly. a dour+" of appost+masdy9 foes. aloof the Scow River and aasaid cxiaint Ciq of Dublin Cmporafonims. b 0, inew,,lian of and ninon& City of Dublin Corpaanan Liar and the naarlY exteu10n of the sooady Dee of aid Loc 5 and ere swraerh' line Of Lot 6 of said SMTO SHORES, sad Lot 6 oarodby Doom X St&mff (Porcal Number 270400171k TDenoe Weuerly, a din motof 21)"imatdy 769 fees, atost the noalyaxsasion of *0 tine nommoe to said LAM 5 and 6 and said La, 5 and 6 WA in tbaeaoaalongWdf fine wa y� n D o sel Lots and 6, bas wean Yeo�eoma TDmoe.lM the aaoatY 4b,,f - -cosy Use of sad Dublin R04 and err wesedy Wes of Lou 6.15, isahtave, of saW SCWM SHORES, the kaowmt tbm ( co'ona and di"Icso 1) Soaaaty, a dins" of approxis nidy 556 feat, to aPoisK 2) Souaerly,adistance of approximately 254 feat, b a Polar; 3) Soiuhdy,adino. ofWpsoxirsudy 186 Sa to the wasaboommon tier ofsaidi 16 laid SCIOTO SNORES. and the m wcfionoftba wkrtY r�h"way Dobbs Rind ad ere neaetly rightofway lion of merdd Parkway, bring in ere ex isting City of Dublin Cotpmauon Lea, ere anablishW by OrdDsm"Nnmba 12"1 and recorded in Wwamaa Number 200112190293957; ely, adistm" a VV xima TDas" Wee tdy 61 fee% aam aid Dubin, Road and along said 119 City of Dublin Co po"bon Lana (Osd. #128-01), to a point in ere we needy r*"f Hoe Ofs aid Dublin Road ad at the aaacdy almm cocoon Of lm 10 end of KMLME SECTION 1. drecord i pla H 91. Pap 1165 and in mpsusty tine des miakng City of Dobbs COtp 5609 Liesk aeosblisbod by recorded in MW. Record 139, Page 282; These aim the wesbarly Tjm ofway line dead Dobbs Road, ad the enowly Does of Lots 1, 3.9, ixburca. and 20 o f said KO t n as SECTION 1, and i s 43 d rIr Ra SECTION 2, of monad inPW Book 93 page 9l, ad aid atietiog City of DuMm Corporation Lora (Ord' #13.65), the 6AW.ing throo (3) owma and diannca: I) NottIIaty.adistance of appmxmately 175 feet, b a 09 2) Nead7. a dimocaofapProxiurdy 250 Fes o ' a 3) Naaaly, a disuoce of apprmtmndy 771 fact, co m angts pose in aid costing Cny of Dublin Corporation Lion lot& #61.80), Theca Eemedy. adogsuord b apprexina 62 feet. eons, aid Dublin Road and aosg aid cxisusg City of Dublin Commence, t .ion(Otd#61.80), me, Pdrt dMonk& W iaft 3.49 eaa. "I Off tea. The abore daor*602 w i sepnod $om ta"d iufeart sud is for asmaoim papososody A fttd smvo9Y is net rtquked Ce emexatioo a?!.. CEIVI D APR _ 4 2W2 Franklin County 7".4 °gin {r8i 'vartm'nt Franclln �ufo!• 'W OF O y..,. SCOTT >c p t -p GRUNOEI K 5.0047 'OfdAL 13 GROUP, INC. R.rpered sw,,ymNo. 8047 1 TOWNSW OF •ASMOTON. lN` S ue O® COUNTY QY PIAN11111 � us s Y a � cost a.yMwl t.n SCK[ s -I S L L Y�100' S mow ili r••�N� q '� k rws ti .te��' == Coi Lor oT r0 „ a ^'qa= =mow re Hi6lOI{P�44f.'071fOY7AYE9D 1 pi � nsn =oearaw OSjl LOT COUwY O T � • �i k �� 0 nr� � �T a / y -. for I, Lor . w 4MIr�. aew �nM y O 1 $y: �A m o tore �3 L OT S LOT 9 O L07 D A J yr CC kwft `r' raw t LOT 7 M >� s LOT fy � �t LOT !R6lOIY � OF FWM mWNSW Or wes»cmx LoT 9 TO 'TBB C[!Y OF DUBLIN VMGHQA MHARY SDRM NO 2617 4< w LOT r TOWNSW OF •ASMOTON. lN` S COUNTY QY PIAN11111 'V STATIC OF OM q '� k l ti .te��' == Coi ®i2BIDP9ARKSUHVL=7 oT r0 „ a ^'qa= =mow re Hi6lOI{P�44f.'071fOY7AYE9D 1 N� ►� ]F= � �•.�.�t wMUI s utla .� ON wF1r x• dM.wwae WERAMI PARKWAY a an v wRw Nw OR ✓ O yi O 611 ML No. _— OWL NO. 1101! • I d l SCOTT IIY RLVU MV=IIW * ( OB i 1 }} M GOw/ M I.VAO GN11 9-0617 - 0 S1iG,STEP son 0.104 •s n.= ONALS DAM IpwlgY fnlOO• IL W CE M I L LERLLP LEGAL COUNSEL MEMORANDUM TO: Marsha Grigsby, City Manager Dublin City Council FROM: Stephen Smith Jennifer Readier DATE: June 28, 2012 RE: Water Rights of Abutting Property Owners /Client Matter- 42783.0009/ City of Dublin ISSUE What are the rights of landowners who own properties that abut water? Overview of Riparian Rights Riparian rights refer to the laws governing the use and ownership of water in Ohio.' Specifically, these laws outline the rights of property owners that contain or border a watercourse. Typically, the word "watercourse" refers to a lake, a river, or a stream, 2 but is used to define any body of water .3 Riparian rights, then, encompass those rights associated with a property that is located next to a body of water, and define who is allowed to use the water, the shores near the water, and the land on which the water sits. Riparian rights are not found in any particular statute or even the Constitution of Ohio; rather, riparian rights are governed by common law doctrine, or law that has been decided by and interpreted by Ohio courts. Rights of General Public to Utilize Watercourses The law governing water is complex because it must consider the competing interests of property owners, the public, and past precedent 6 To address these competing interests, Ohio courts have ROBERTS M. CURRY & JAMES GEOFFREY DURHAM , OHIO REAL PROPERTY LAW AND PRACTICE. § 13 -1; § 13 -3(a). (5th ed. 1996). Z WEBSTER'S ONLINE DICTIONARY, available at ht tp:// dictionary. reference .com /browsetwatercourse ?s=t. 3 ROBERTS M. CURRY & JAMES GEOFFREY DURHAM, supra note 1, §13 -1; §13 -3(a). 4 ROBIN K CRAIG, Principals of Water, in FROM THE SELECTED WORKS OF ROBIN K CRAIG, 10, available at htt p:// works.bepress.com/robin_craig/1 (explaining that "under this doctrine rights to use stream water are a part of the ownership of the lands through which the stream flows; and such rights, in very large part, are confined to those who own such land."). 5 PAUL L. WRIGHT, WATER RIGHTS IN OHIO, available at, rightlaw. net / publications /... /10_WATER_RIGHTS_IN_OHIO.pdf. 6 id. 4123006v2 ICEMILLERLLP LEGAL COUNSEL developed the principle of navigability to determine if, and when, a member of the public has the right to use a lake, stream, or river. The principle of navigability states that a person has the right to use water if the water is "navigable in fact." In determining whether water is "navigable in fact," courts will look at the past use of the water and the current use of the water to decide if that river, stream, or lake could be used for commercial purposes, and, by extension, recreational purposes . For example, if a body of water is deep, wide, and slow enough for a vessel to travel on, that body of water is considered "navigable in fact," and thus, members of the public can use it. Navigability depends on context. A classic example of navigable waters is a canal that is used to transport goods from one city to another. An example of non - navigable water would be a dam or a reservoir. Certainly, a person may want to swim in these waters, and it could be used to transport goods from one side to another, but generally, dams and reservoirs are considered too unstable and dangerous to use for recreation or commerce. Determining whether or not a body of water is navigable is the key determinant for whether that water is available for public use. If a body of water is deemed "navigable," then a public water right is created, and people receive a limited easement (or right) to use the water. It does not matter if the water was made navigable by man or by nature.I I If the water is considered non - navigable, then no public trust exists and people do not have the right to use the body of water if it is on private property. 12 Abuttine Landowner's Ri hts to Utilize Watercourse: The Reasonable Use Doctrine An abutting landowner's right to use water is governed by the reasonable use doctrine. The reasonable use doctrine states that a landowner does not have an unqualified privilege to use the water on his property. 14 The doctrine further states that a landowner cannot interfere with the natural flow of water in any way. ' ROBIN K CRAIG, supra note 4, at 57. 8 Id. 9 Id. 1p PAUL L. WRIGHT, supra note 5, at 2. ROBIN K CRAIG, supra note 4, at 24. 12 CHARLES C. CALLAHAN, PRINCIPLE OF WATER RIGHTS LAW IN OHIO, Division of Water Ohio Department of Natural Resources: 1979, 52. 13 LEONARD P. BLACK, WATER AND WATER RIGHTs 6, (Ohio Department of Natural Resources, Division of Water: 2006), 893. 14 O.R.C. § 1506.31; O.R.C. § 15.21.17(A) (explaining that the reasonableness of an act `depends upon the consideration of the interest of the person making the use, of any person hared by the use, and the society as a whole."). "LEONARD P. BLACK, Who Owns Ohio Streams? And Other Frequently Asked But Seldom Answered Questions About Water Rights, OHIO STREAM MANAGEMENT GUIDE, No. 14, ODNR, 1997. 2 4123006x2 I CE M I L LE'RLLp LEGAL COO N5 EL The reasonable use doctrine states that riparian owners are entitled to use water so long as their use is "reasonable in all circumstances." 6 The reasonable use doctrine looks at the harm that results from an act and balances it with the possible utility that results from performing that act. If the harm outweighs the utility, the act is deemed unreasonable. If the utility outweighs the harm, the use is reasonable and the courts will allow it. 17 Courts examine the following factors to determine if a use is reasonable: 1) purpose; 2) the suitability; 3) economic value; 4) social value; 5) the extent of harm ; 6) practicality of avoiding harm; 7) practicality of adjusting water use by person; 8) protection of investments; 9) just cause for allowing a remedy. These factors are weighed against the following consequences: 1) unreasonably causing harm to another by performing an act that lowers the water table or reduces artesian pressure (the pressure that allows water to come up from a well); 2) exceeding the landowner's reasonable share of the annual supply or total store of ground water; 3) directly and substantially effecting a watercourse. Rivers and Streams: Abutting Landowner's Ownership Rights and Right to Restrict the General Public Deeds describe the property a person owns. If a deed illustrates that a landowner owns a certain section of the river, then that landowner has the right to restrict who can use the land described in the deed. There are two components to a river or a stream, the water flowing in it and the land beneath it 20 A person cannot exercise control over water itself. This makes water a public good that can be used by anyone. 21 A person who owns land adjacent to a river or stream does not own the actual water, but the right to use the water so long as it is reasonable. 22 While a landowner cannot stop someone who floats down a navigable river on a boat, he does have the right to exclude the boater from coming ashore or to keep him from dropping an anchor in the water. This is because common law states that the owner of a portion of the watercourse owns the bed and banks that go along with it. Landowners are allowed to restrict people from entering their property, but the public has an easement to use navigable waters. So, the public can only access rivers and streams in a certain way. The public must enter through a public access point, a place on the river not privately owned. If someone enters from a public access point, they have the right to flow down the river and use it for reasonable recreational activities. However, they are not allowed to enter onto the banks of a river or stream that is owned by a private person. This requires the landowner's percussion. " CHARLES C. CALLAHAN, supra note 12, at 35 (quotations added). 17 LEONARD P. BLACK, supra note 13, at 893. (emphasis added). 18 O.R.C. § 1521.17(B). ' A CURRY & JAMES GEOFFREY DURHAM, supra note 1, ,¢13 -5(a). " LEONARD P. BLACK, supra note 15. 21 ROBIN K CRAIG, supra note 4, at 57. 12 CHARLES C. CALLAHAN, supra note 12, at 12 3 4123006v2 ICEM I LLERLLP L EeAL COUNSEL If two people own property on opposite sides of the river, riparian rights g to "the middle of the stream," unless stated otherwise in the legal description of the property. This means that each landowner is able to use the land on his side of the banks if it is reasonable, and restrict people from entering on his private property. However, neither landowner can restrict a citizen's use of the water if that citizen enters the river or stream through a public access point. The boundary of a piece of land is typically set forth in a deed. In some cases, a river or stream that borders a property meanders, meaning it does not flow in a straight line. In such circumstances, the boundary of the property follows the curves of the river up to the required distance as if that river or stream bed were reduced to a straight line 2 4 For example, if there is a winding river on the edge of the property, and a landowner is supposed to own 200 feet of that river, then 200 feet is measured in a straight line and the property owner has rights to the river up until that straight line ends. Lakes and Ponds: Abutting Landowner's Ownershin Rights and Right to Restrict the General Public Riparian rights for lakes and ponds are similar to those for rivers and streams. A landowner owns the banks and the lake bed as listed in the legal description of the property. Property that abuts a lake or pond that is connected to an outlet channel (a waterway that connects the lake to a larger, navigable body of water) is considered to be riparian land. This means that the owner of the property that is near the lake is entitled to use the lake for reasonable, domestic purposes even if the titles do not extend beyond the edge of the water. 25 Generally, a landowner has ownership to the middle of the lake. If more than one person owns property on the lake, that property is divided by the legal description on the deed .27 However, all property owners would have title to the reasonable use of any part of the lake so long as that does not interfere with the title or another landowner's use of that lake 2 8 If a lake or a pond is on the property of a single owner, but it feeds into a watercourse, then the landowner's rights must adhere to the reasonable use doctrine . However, if the lake does not feed into a watercourse, then the owner has exclusive right to use the lake as he sees fit 30 Water, Use. and Damage to Another's Property 23 Id. at 53. 24 FERDINAND S. TiNio, OHIO JURISPRUDENCE 2 §56 (3d ed. 2012). u LEONARD P. BLACK, supra note 15, zb Id. (explaining that the title of the purchaser "will extend to the center of the lake."). n PHILIP RICE, A Primer on Riparian Rights, TITLE ISSUES 4, (July /August 1998). available at, cmetro.etic.com /Titlelssues/v7n4.pdf z LEONARD P. BLACK, supra note 13, at 894. zs Id. 30 Id. 4 4I23006v2 ICEM I LLERLLP LEGAL COUNSEL Ohio common law states that a person has the right to use a navigable river or lake. However, it is unclear from the text of the law, what happens if one person's use damages the property of another. Courts have historically looked to drainage disputes to find the answer. property reasonableness standard, in these cases, states that use is permissible so long as it does not harm another. It would seem, then, that a person developing land is allowed to disturb a waterway so long as that disturbance is not linked to tangible harm on another's property. However, more recent decisions state that the court must look into the reasonableness of the conduct and balance the relevant factors discussed above. 32 For example, if someone choses to dam their river or stream to derive certain benefits from it, this action may be reasonable and well within their right. However, if the water backs up onto another person's property, then the landowner who created the dam would be held liable for the damage he caused 33 If the damage to another's property had occurred from natural occurrences, such as the overflow of a watercourse from an upper landowner's property to a lower landowner's property, the upper landowner would not be liable. If a city does the damage, this would result in a taking and the city would have to compensate the owner for the damage. 34 Some examples of reasonable uses: • Kayaking, boating, sailing • Fishing • Water sports • Swimming Some examples of possible unreasonable uses: • D ammin g a portion of the river • Diverting water upstream for irrigation • Drilling This is the law as it stands now, but since this is common law, it may continue to evolve. This memorandum should be updated periodically as the laws governing water rights in Ohio are complex and ever - changing. 31 LEONARD P. BLACK, supra note 15. 32 § 1521.17(B) 33 PAUL L. WRIGHT, supra note 5. 34 Peggy K. Hall, Understanding Water Rights in Ohio. L4 NOTES. OSU Agricultural & Resource Law Program, available at, htt p : / /aede.osu.edu/programs/aglaw. 4123006x2 CITY Of DUBLIN.. May 7, 2012 owin 484 Cwt SY00 rma W 4akw°r 0°6Yn, OM043011 -1040 Lee Brown Ph°n= 614.410-4400 Planning Administrator F: 614.76145" Wob She: ww AALChz Franklin County Development Department 150 South Front Street — FSL Suite 10 T°m *y a Le&W Columbus, OH 43215 -6304 "s6y RE. 3.4 +/- Acre Exp 2 annexation petition from Washington � yJ . salwy ' J Township to the City of Dublin from Daniel F. Hoy, Agent for Harvey and Alex Vesha . Zw WWII S. Galin IA" K. Yams Dear Mr. Brown: Jdm G. Y°i°n Mrk of (mg On May 7, 2012 we received the transcript of the County Commissioners' kaCaake hearing of May 1, 2012 regarding the above- referenced annexation. Per state statute, following the expiration of 60 days after receipt of the transcript, this annexation will be scheduled for first reading at the next regular Council meeting, which takes place on Wednesday, August 8, 2012. Please contact me if you need additional information. Sincerely, Anne C. Clarke Clerk of Council c: Daniel F. Hoy, Agent for Petitioners Gary Gunderman, Planning Manager, City of Dublin Barb Cox, Engineering Manager, City of Dublin Jennifer Readier, Asst. Law Director, City of Dublin Resolution No. 0339 -12 May 01, 2012 Review of Petition to Annex 3.4 +/- acres from Washington Township to the city of Dublin by Daniel F. Hoy. Case #ANX -EXP2- 08-12 (ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT & PLANNING) WHEREAS, the Commissioners of Franklin County, State of Ohio, proceeded to journalize the petition that Daniel F. Hoy filed on behalf of Harvey and Alex Vesha on April 4, 2012 and solicited to and /or been heard by all persons desiring to be reviewed for or against the granting of the Expedited Type 2 petition, and having considered all the facts with reference thereto, being fully advised, and WHEREAS, the Commissioners make the following findings based upon the exhibits and testimony presented at the review of this matter: 1. The petition does meet all the requirements set forth in, and was filed in the manner provided in, section 709.021 of the Revised Code. 2. The persons who signed the petition are owners of the real estate located in the territory proposed for annexation and constitute all of the owners of real estate in that territory. 3. The territory proposed for annexation does not exceed five hundred acres. 4. The territory proposed for annexation shares a contiguous boundary with the municipal corporation to which annexation is proposed for a continuous length of at least five percent of the perimeter of the territory proposed for annexation. S. The annexation will not create an unincorporated area of the township that is completely surrounded by the territory proposed for annexation. 6. The municipal corporation to which annexation is proposed has agreed to provide to the territory proposed for annexation the services specified in the relevant service ordinance #24 -12, passed on April 23, 2012 by the city of Dublin. C TRUE C �z v Ffm4dln Depo"t Resolution No. 0339 -12 May 01, 2012 Review of Petition to Annex 3.4 +/- acres from Washington Township to the city of Dublin by Daniel F. Hoy. Case #ANX -EXP2- 08-12 (ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT & PLANNING) BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF FRANKLIN COUNTY, OHIO: That, in accordance with the findings made in the preamble, which are incorporated herein, the prayer of the Petition be approved, and the territory sought to be annexed by the petition filed herein shall be annexed to the city of Dublin, Ohio, in accordance with the law; that the orders and proceedings of this board relating to the Petition, and map and description attached thereto, and all papers on file relating to this matter be delivered forthwith to the Clerk of Council, city of Dublin, Ohio. Prepared by: R. Lee Brown C: Economic Development & Planning Department Y903 3UAT 03191TA33 :qw : Not goiwea *knormill 0141 ribliwa Film a SIGNATURE PAGE FOLLOWS SIGNATURE SHEET Resolution No. 0339 -12 May 01, 2012 REVIEW OF PETITION TO ANNEX 3.4 +/- ACRES FROM WASHINGTON TOWNSHIP TO THE CITY OF DUBLIN BY DANIEL F. HOY. CASE *ANX- EXP2 -08 -12 (Economic Development and Planning) upon the motion of Commissioner John O'Grady, seconded by Commissioner Marilyn Brown: Voting: Marilyn Brown Aye John O'Grady Aye Board of County Commissioners Franklin County, Ohio CERTIFICATE OF CLERK IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED that the foregoing is a true and correct transcript of a resolution acted upon by the Board of County Commissioners, Franklin County, Ohio on the date noted above. Debra A Willaman, Clerk Board of County Commissioners Franklin County, Ohio NFranklinCounty Where Government Works Commissioner Paula Brooks - Commissioner Marilyn Brown - Commissioner John O'Grady President Economic Development & Planning Department James Schimmer, Director MEMO JOURNALIZATION TO: Debbie Wiilaman, County Clerk Franklin County Commissioners Office FROM: R. Lee Brown, Planning Administrator Franklin County Economic Development & Planning Department CC: James Schimmer, Director Franklin County Economic Development & Planning Department RE: Description of Expedited Type 2 annexation case to be journalized on the April 10, 2012 General Session Agenda for a hearing on May 1, 2012. Case #ANX - EXP2- 08 -12 An Expedited Type 2 annexation ANX- EXP2 -08- 12 was filed in our office on April 4, 2012. The petition is requesting to annex 3.4 +/- acres from Washington Township to the city of Dublin. The applicant is Daniel F. Hoy. Site: 7094 Dublin Road (270- 000760) 150 South Front Street, FSL Suite 10 Columbus, Ohio 43215 -7104 Tel: 614 - 525.3044 Fax: 614 - 525 -7155 www.FranklinCountyOhio.gov Franklin County Where Government Works Commissioner Paula Brooks - commissioner Marilyn Brown - commissioner John O'Grady President Economic Development & Planning Department James Schimmer, Director RESOLUTION SUMMARY REVIEW OF PETITION TO ANNEX 3.4 +/- ACRES FROM WASHINGTON TOWNSHIP TO THE CITY OF DUBLIN BY DANIEL F. HOY Description: Attached is a resolution to consider the annexation of 3.4- acres, more or less, from Washington Township to the city of Dublin. The petition case number is ANX -EXP2- 08-12. Applicants: Harvey & Alex Vesha Site: 7094 Dublin Road (Parcel #270 - 000760) Additional Information: The site is contiguous to the city of Dublin on two sides. Analysis: The applicant has met all statutory requirements outlined in Section 709.21 of the Ohio Revised Code. The applicant has provided proof of notification, and timeline and his provided a service ordinance from the city of Dublin stating the services that will be provided once the annexation has been approved. The city of Dublin has agreed to provide the territory proposed for annexation the services specified in the relevant service ordinance #24 -12 passed April 23, 2012. Recommendation: of this annexation. Pending any questions, staff would request your dpnrovat 150 South Front Street, FSL Suite 10 Columbus, Ohio 43215 -7104 Tel: 614 -525 -3 Fax: 614 - 525 -7155 www.FranklinCountyOhio.gov APR 2:? 2012 BEFORE THE BOARD OF THE FRANKLIN COUNTY COMMISSIONLfR3ktin County Planning Department Franklin County, Ohio In Re: Annexation of 7014 Dublin Road, Washington Township, Franklin County, Dublin, Ohio; PID No. 270- 000760 ( "Annexed Lot") from Washington Township to the City of Dublin. Case No. ANX -EXP2; 08 -12. NOW COMES, Shawn Q. Carpenter ( "Objecting Owner "), the fee owner of that certain parcel of real estate identified as 7016 Dublin Road, Washington Township, Franklin County, Dublin, Ohio; PID No. 270. 000169, such parcel being a part of the same subdivision as, and contiguous to the north boundary of the Annexed Lot (please see the Site Plan attached hereto as Exhibit A), who respectfully requests that this Board deny the above referenced Annexation Petition, or in the alternative, if the Board should deem it appropriate to grant the Annexation, that such grant be conditioned on the obligation that any future development of the Annexed Lot be prosecuted in conformance with the Washington Township standards, codes and ordinances which applies to all other developed lots in the particular subdivision. MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT Since its creation in 1925, the Scioto Shores Subdivision ( "Subdivision'l, and the development thereof, has been located in, and governed by Washington Township, all the while the City of Dublin grew and expanded around it. The Subdivision's location in Washington Township did make it subject to a set of zoning codes and regulations different than those applicable to property located within the Dublin corporate limits, and over the years, the lots located within the Subdivision have been developed in accordance with the applicable Washington Township standards. The differences between the Washington Township and Dublin codes are significant, especially when considering issues pertaining to side yard setback and the distance between structures. Section 302.043 of Washington Township's Suburban Residential District zoning, the ordinance which currently applies to both the Objecting Owner's lot and the Annexed Lot specifically states with regard to the side yard setback requirement: 11 302.043 Side Yard. For dwellings or associated accessory buildings, there shall be a total of side yards of fifty (50) feet or more with a minimum ten (10) feet on one (1) side, and where a side yard is less than twenty -five (25) feet, no structure shall be constructed closer to an existing structure on an adjoining lot or parcel than fifty (50) feet." Section 153.019 of the City of Dublin's Rural District zoning, the zoning approved for the Annexed Lot upon being admitted into the City of Dublin, specifically states with regard to the side yard setback requirement: "Sec (3) Side yard. For dwellings or associated accessory buildings there shall be a total of side yards of 25 feet or more with a minimum of eight (8) feet on one side:' The difference in these development standards results in the creation of a rural riverside oasis in the midst of a growing city, the explicit reason why the property owners in the Subdivision purchased their respective lots. Although the owners of the Annexed Lot understandably seek to be availed of the City of Dublin's water and sewer services, the unintended consequence of such, if the Board were to approve this Annexation Petition, would be the creation of an "outlier" lot in the middle of the developed Subdivision which would be subject to a different set of development standards. If the Annexed Lot were developed in accordance with the less restrictive Dublin standards regarding side yard setback, such would significantly change the existing nature and character of the Subdivision which the owners, including the Objecting Owner, are entitled to preserve. Additionally, the creation of this outlier Annexed Lot would have the effect of turning the Objecting Owner's lot (as well as the lot on the south side of the Annexed Lot) into a "legal non- conforming use" as conformance with Dublin's standards with regard to development of the Annexed Lot would necessarily result in a setback violation on the Objecting Owner's lot, still subject to Washington Township's standards. The end result of this would inequitably impact the Objecting Owner in that if there would ever a casualty to his residence, the Objecting Owner, subject to the more restrictive Washington Township standards, would have to either seek a variance to rebuild his residence in its original location, or the residence would have to be moved from its original location to meet the more restrictive standard, a patently unfair result if the Annexation were granted, or not otherwise conditioned. Finally, although only tangentially related to the issues raised herein, the Annexed Lot is burdened by both an Ingress ( Egress easement and an electrical easement for the benefit of the Objecting Owner's lot (see Exhibit A), whose rights may not at any time be reduced, cut off or otherwise impeded during or as a result of any construction on the Annexed Lot. If the Board were to approve this Annexation, the less restrictive Dublin standards could conflict with the obligations of owners of the Annexed Lot as provided by the easements. Granted, the easements would take precedence, but again unintended consequences may be lurking. The owners of the Annexed Lot fully understood the development restrictions, obligations and standards to which they would be subjected when they elected to purchase their lot. These standards are no different than the standards with which all owners in the Subdivision were required to comply. A change to the development standards to suit the desires of a single owner in a developed subdivision should not be the consequence of a grant of this Annexation Petition. Respectfully Submitted: it . irrer, Esq. (0062843) S njamin Law Practice 655 Metro Place South, Suite 600 Dublin, Ohio 43017 (614) 572 -6722 scou0sbenominlaw.co m Counsel for Shawn O. Carpenter Ctarenc® E. Mingo, p FionkNn County Auditor ParW; ID hkv Rut" NO CWd NO l9G'AI:M 273- m1795-00 273411051 -002.00 1 7114 DUSUN RD NF Where Government Works Commfsslonera Marl" &o", Pre dent Paula Brooks John O'Grady Ecorto ntc Development & Planning Department L Schimmer, Director Application for Annexation Petition Property Information Nmno Sko Address c° X13 L- t is t2 c,P. l7. `�3t -t N t 6 -•� � t (� t`�' Pared liksl Tdrs Acrsaga Small E S * 1 . •l_ • ES A C. Cam From Tow P To MenMpaW WA 6l•,tNL ti 'J viZj`tts Property Owner information Nmno Address 6oJTStCU L=t2 c `�3t -t N t 6 -•� � t (� t`�' Phone Gr �t LL a Z 7z t PasS Small E S * 1 . •l_ • ES A C. Cam Attomay /Agent information Name .,. �f\? j I F. ::�f C`Gei • Pt V— t \ Cis.t rit • C�'a Address _ �v WoSj GLtGN \/ ( btu CzJ S \. PInMS t (LU —s i Errak • p � i2t�Cut , Ut�M I • f•r. • i f... a -..='. Document Submission The tol&V N docunerds most aowmpeny mb application OOn., l d a V x It- par. pe t_J,/LL at desorphmi of property L�'i�M:plplat of property U� Lai ofa4>arem properties WHOEVER SIGNS THIS PETITION EXPRESSLY WAIVES THEIR RIGHT TO APPEAL IN LAW OR EQUITY FROM THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' ENTRY OF ANY RESOLUTION PERTAINING TO THIS SPECIAL ANNEXATION PROCEDURE, ALTHOUGH A WRIT OF MANDAMUS MAY BE SOUGHT TO COMPEL THE BOARD TO PERFORM ITS DUTIES REQUIRED BY LAW FOR THIS SPECIAL ANNEXATION PROCEDURE. Date Properly owner Date 3 14) Z Date Property Owner Date ISD South Front Street, FSL Suite 10, Columbus, Ohio 43215- 7104 Tel: 614-525 -3094 Fax: 614 -525 -7155 ww .FrankertCountyOhlo.gov AF R U WIZ i'�r �IiriliR G'�(1L111�t'�Rr�I}}vGP PROPOSED ANNEXATION OF3.dsr ACRES FROM WASHINGTON TOWNSHIP TOTHE CITY OV DUBLIN ANNEXATION PLAT & DECR1PTION ACCEPTABLE: DEAN C. R1NGI.E, P.E.. P.S. PIZANKUN COUNTY ENGBdHI- Situate in the State of Ohio, County of Franidb% Towasbip of Wwhkwbm lying in Virginia Military Survey 2543, being all of La 5 of SCIOTO SHORES, ofrecad in Plat Book 18, Page 37, owned by Alexander and Hsvey Vesba (Pascal Number 270. 000760). pat OfDubhn Road and part of dm Scioto River, wA being bounded and copra padiadariy described a follows Beghm&g at the westerlycommoa comer of Los 3 and 4 of said SCIOTO SHORES, being in the easterly ri&.Of.way lime of Dublin Road (60 feet wide) and in the existing City of Dublin Corporation Line, as esabished by Ordinance Number 6140 and recorded in Official Record 504AI9, said La 4 owned by Shawn Q- Carpenter (Parcel Number 2704MI69X Thence Southerly, a distance of approxmately 100 feet, along the uhmady right -of- -way has of said Dublin Road and the: westerly time of said La 4, to the westerly eemmm coma of mid LOS 4 and 5; Thrum Easledy, a distance of approximately 7% fact, along tha hue common so said Los 5 and 4, and the easterly extension of said Lots, to a point in the Scioto Rim, being the Wersectim of the easterly extension of said Las 5 and 4 and the existing City of Dublin Corporatoa Line, as established by OrdinanceNumba 3.74 and recorded i Nrm. Revd 161, Page 354; Thence Southerly. a dinauce of appoximately % feet, along the Scioto River and the said existing City of Dublin Corporation Liam to the i n t ersec ti on of said asiauag City of Dublin Corporation Lime and the easterly extension of the smebaiy lira of aid La 5 and the northerly line of Lot 6 of said SCIOTO SHORES, said Lot 6 owned by DesimW. Stavmff(Pmcel Number 270-000171): Thence Wesedy, a distance of approximately 769 feet, along the easterly WCWim of the line comnme to said Los 5 and 6 and continuing along said line common to said Lots 5 and 6, w &a Westerly commonco[mr of said Lots 5 and 6 ad in the easterly ri*h &Way line of Dublin Road; Thence along the easterly right -of -Way line of said Dublin Road, and the Westerly tine of iota 6.15, inclusive, of said SCIOTO SHORES, the following three (3) course and distances: 1) Southerly, a distance of approximately 556 feet, to a point; 2) Southedy, a distance of appmximsely 254 fat, to a point; 3) Southerly, a distance of approximately 186 fat. to the westerly conmon comer of Los 15 and 16 of said SCIOTO SHORES. and the inamwtionof the easterly rObtof-way live of said Dublin Road and the aortimly riot-of-way lira of Emerald Parkway, being ion the existing City of Dublin Corporation Line, as established by Ordinance Number 128-01 and recorded in Instrument Number 200112190295957; Therxe W44lody, Adistance of apptoximaey 61 fat, across said Dublin Road and along said existing City of Dublin Corporation Lax (Ord. #128A1), to a point in the westedY right -o6way line ofsaid Dublin Red and at the easterly commoacorner of Las 10 and 9 of KILI3IEA SECTION 1, of record in Plat Book 87, Page 7, being in an easterly line of eke existing City of Dublin Coxpotasiea Lim as established by Ordinance Number 13-65 and recorded in Miss. Record 139, Page 282; Theta aim the westerly rfg "- -Way line of said Dublin Road, and de easterly lines of Lou 1, 3.9, Inclusive, and 20 of said KILL n as SECTION 1, and La 43 of RIL SECTION 2, of record in Fiat 800k93, Page 91, and said existing City of Dublin Corporation L"mc (Ord. #13-65). the following three (3) 0002344 and ds>ncev 1) Northerly, a distance of appro uumlY 175 fax, to a Point; 2) Northerly. a distance of approximately 250 feet, to a Poid 3) Northerly, a distance of approximu*771 feet, to an aegk point ion said existing City of DobW Coxpossum Line (Ord 061 -80); Thence Fiuedy, a distance of apposwundy 62 feet, awe said Dublin Road and along said toasting City of Dublin Corporation Lim ( Ord. #61 -g0), to the Pelt of Beonehg, containing 3.43 acres, mere a less. The above 4,,,ption Wea pcepsed from record information, and is for arAmanm purposes only. A field aurvey is cot eagYied for mueseunspa <... ` -OF p LANDMARK SURVEY GROUP, B'1C. p GRUNDL-I APR 4 261 71 S -8047 tt' Scott D . dSwvl.P.No. 8047 D �: 1 0 Re�oaed Saveyor Frri:lin County air- ° " +.i Ri i:e[antmenf " - Fran: -gym rrxro +.• W `S`Sy \'AL `� ANA' 1:4 Z- 9 g $YO S OT 4 v LOT 4 �a w �fnfp�to LOT 3 LO T 6 W � LO T >. j f s LOT Q 9 al, _ uw rxnn"x ao"°grw °ia xxo Hxxo i� y >aq � ,4 zlft � x>o. LOT To 0 100' 150' 2OW LEGEND w Gi11 mw CCMONIYYI IdIC SCALE M FEET 6A?6DRAARK SEBR�L°tl SCALE I' -x00' • xs Si&�16P, R3Q:mWP0WRYEO' N[l W t Y11�Tfp� _ LOT 3 YMYI�IM 1bf mYKWWH s7KEh'ALDt APR - 4 202 LOT 4 LOr 6 LO T_> a N m O 02 LOT a m 1pr D O O � A I A g lI a r� I A t LOT T2 eROravm ARROUtM OF 8.4t ACBBS FROM TOWNSHIP OF WASHINGTON TO TER CITY OF DUBLIN LOT 4 VIRGM. UWART SURM NO. 2542 J TORNSW OF RASIUMCSON. COONTY OF FRANn= STATE of OMO V I - yaxom,„y w LOT To oe�ra "� nO oi i L a or 6A?6DRAARK SEBR�L°tl cx* • xs Si&�16P, R3Q:mWP0WRYEO' ,_ YMYI�IM 1bf mYKWWH s7KEh'ALDt PARMY a Lor an o owu. y ,..... , "` °• am OF r .t' ... x ua O mom scow'. , * O. IN oore.e;MV g rmn uOOAO IMWAR K Aa a".eeCwnr I.Alox6 CKT. i V ; GCUNDEI w p ; �IdU �/. //l �(.V✓dP.r / O .P p; y r � L. soo0 n wnn �s me ``. S /ONAI SV�f A 9slrlY0lr DA M OW TE: W rF? t CITY OF DUBLIN_ r Olw 43617 -IM PWWI66: 61441"M For 614 - 76144" Wdt Sdcv de6im*us rmd y 6. Loa& Vko Ww AwTL W* CAy k Bung ft6 ai"d -lMdor W945. WN Midod 6. rem IoM+G. R#iW CA d Cmd km C 0016 <. ?ED APR <t- 2012 April 24, 2012 Lee Brown Planning Administrator Franklin County Development Department 150 South Front Street - FSL Suite 10 Columbus, OH 43215 Franklin County ?larmina Department Franklin County, OH RE: Resolution 24.12 Adopting a Statement of Services for a Proposed Annexation of 3.4 Acres, More or Less, from Washington Township, Franklin County, to the City of Dublin. (Petitioners: Harvey R. and Alexandra Vesha; property address, 7094 Dublin Road) Resolution 25-12 Adopting a Statement Regarding Possible Incompatible Land Uses and Zoning Buffer for a Proposed Annexation of 3.4, More or Less, from Washington Township, Franklin County, to the City of Dublin, Ohio as Required by Section 709.023(C) of the Ohio Revised Code. (Petitioners: Harvey R. and Alexandra Vesha; property address, 7094 Dublin Road) Dear Mr. Brown: Enclosed are certified copies of the above - referenced resolutions as approved by City Council on April 23, 2012. I understand that a hearing date on this petition has been set by the Franklin County Commissioners for May 1, 2012 at 9:00 a.m. Please let me know if you need additional information. Sincerely, Anne C. Clarke Clerk of Council Enclosures c-. Daniel F. Hoy, Agent for Petitioner Jennifer Readier, Law Department, City of Dublin RECORD OF RESOLUTIONS KSH A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A STATEMENT OF SERVICES FOR A PROPOSED AMMTION OF 3.4 ACRES, MORE OR LESS, FROM WASHf 466 TOWNSHIP, FRANKLIN COUNTY, TO THE Cliff OF DUKM za WHEREAS, an Expedited Type A amen petition for 3.4 acre more or less of land from Washington Township, Franklin C:ounry to the City of Dublin was fled m the offices of the Franklin Canty Commissioners on April 4, 2012 by Daniel F. Noy, agent for POUWWs Atexaeedei and Harvey Vesta, 4796 bftheer Cart, Dublin, Ohio 43017; and WHEREAS, Section 709.023(C) of the Ohio Revised Code requires der, prior to the hearing of the annexation petition, the legislative authority shat adopt a statement indicating what services the murwMal corporation will provide to the territory proposed for annexation and an aipowdnnate dale by which lt will provide services to the territory proposed for amtexatfo ;, upon annexation; and WHEREAS, the area proposed for annexation No wit Dublin's exclusive water and sewer service extension area, as provided wxW the agreements with the fay of Columbus, and WHEREAS, the proposed annexation is in conformance with the annexation expectations of the City Community Plan. NOW�THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Gty of Dublin, of itits elected members ca rg, that Section 1. The City of Dublin will provide the Mow" municipal wAoes for the 3.4 acres, more or less to WashitrpWn Tomst* Franklin County munediately upon the annexation of the area to rice City of Dublin, Ohio: 3 C p y �'s B&& The City of Dublin has five pole districts and deploys a minimuin of five ? M, e awsers. The subject annexation Fs located approximately two driving rapes from the a —M 3ustice Center, the Division of Police headquarters. The animmotbn area wE be fly a re served with police and common cationu services at the same or similar tvel now m i n being provided to ot areas of the City with similar lard use and population. am m Fire and EMS. The City of Dublin will provide, nose to provide, or contract with m . Washington Township to provide flea protection and Et4S services to this aces of ra A_ s' ry Dublin at the same or slailar level now being provided to ot areas of the City with land Washington Township fare Station #92 M 4497 Hard A similar use and population. Road and Station #93 at SM (rand Road are each located 1.2 drW4 miles away from the proposed annexation site. C Reside tlal refuse culecdonn services are Contracted by the City and are currently provided at no additional charge. m Street Mal�enance, The City's Streets and Udilti s Division provides excdle t service ? A in the area of street and road nuintermince. The City already maintains right-of-way p re i ^' g new this annexation for stow and ice removal and will fondue to do so at the same tevets in the City. as other similar streets _ 2 S The City has water and Sartimry Sewer Sevin Agreements with the City .� of Cd mbus, and the snbjed property is within the exdusfve service area of ibe &Weemerft Conditioned upon fie ability of the Cily of Cdrnubus to provide water m supply and to provide sufficient sanrtuy sewrerage disposal capacity , sufficient public water distribution and sanitary sewer election systems exist in Oft area to serve On p Mety. Water distribution, sanitary seer and wastewater collection are available to this location at the present time. RECORD OF RESOLUTIONS 24-12 Page 2 of 2 i Rew aon No. Penn 20 sactlk It 3. This resolution stall be effective immediately upon passage In accordance with Section 4.04(a) of the Revised Charter. Passed this �f(,�, day of __, 2012. I�,� Mayor - P ding Officer AMST: t x-� a- 0_ Qerk of Council RECORD OF RESOLUTIONS g o CL n on grid R z oo� is 25 -12 Reww"NO. Paul 20__ A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A STATEMENT REGARDING POSSIBLE INCOMPATIBLE LAND USES AND ZONING BUFFER FOR A PROPOSED ANNEXATION OF 3.4 ACRE$ MORE OR LESS, FROM WASHINGTON TOWNSHIP, FRANKLM COUNTY TO THE CITY OF DUBLIN, OHIO AS REQUIRED BY SEMON 709.023(C) OF THE OHIO REVISED CODE WHEREAS, a petition for an Expedited II method of annomdon of 14 acres, more or less, from Washington Township, Frmddin County was Ned in the onkea of the Board of County Commissioners of RankAn County, Ohio an Aprt 4, 2012 by Duel F. Hoy, agent for Petitioners Alexander and Harvey Vesta, 7796 Wsheer Cart, Dublin, OH 43017, and WHEREAS, the 6rpedted 11 method of annexation, purswnt to Section 709.023(C) of the Ohio Revised Code, requires that within 20 days of the petition being Bled, the marsapaMy to which ann exation is proposed mi adopt an or dnance o r r esoNRiat relatmV to land uses and buffiers if the Wrfty proposed to be arumed is currently Subject to ether county zw&4 putsuaM taChapter 303 of the Obict ReAsedCade or township zoning pursuant to Chapter 519 of the Ohio Revised Code; and WHEREAS, the territory proposed for MWAtiore is currently Subjat M township zon" purwam to Chapter 519 of the Ohio Revised Code; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 709.023(C) of the Ohio Revised Code, ft resolution must state Cent Should (a) Cue territory be annexed and (b) subsequenty becomes subject to municipal zoning, and (c) the municipal coning perrnRS uses kh the annexed territory that the municipal corporation determines are deanty incompatible with dw uses permitted wrier Omni corky or township zating kh One adjacent land rema" bt the township from which the territory was annexed, than the Dubai City Council wig require, i the zoning ordiranco permitting the Incompatible uses, the owner of tha annexed tern" to provide a tuner Separating the use of the amend territory and the adjacent land remaining within the township: and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 709.021(() of the Olio Revised Code, "buffer kidudes open space, IanrHCaping, fences wa, and other structured red else streets and street dghtp-d way; and bicycle and pedant pantos and sidewa0cs and WHEREAS, Section 151004(D) of the Dublin Cotfled Ordinances requires that upon annexation, the annexed territory be atRanatca0y rezoned to R Rural District subject to regulations and procedures contained in the Qty of Dublin Zoning Code and amendments, and WHEREAS, the territory proposed for annexation IS adjacent to the CRY of &A& to the west; adjacent areas to the north and South are unincorporated Washington Township territory. THEREFORE, BE 1T RESOLVED by to Coura of the City of mw of its elected members mnarrkg, Cat Sectign j, The Qty of Dublin adopts Cue Mmvbhg statement for the 3.4 acres, more or Mss, of land in Washington Township, Franklin County: Strrdd the terr" (a) be annexed and (b) sub luefttly becom Subject to zoning pursuant to the Dublin Codified Ordnhances and (c) the mmkipal m u ng permits uses in the amexed to bory t Dublin City Couxd determines are dearly incompatible with the uses pen fitted udw anent cooky or township zoning hm the adjacent land remaking an the township from which the territory was armed, dm Ca Dublin City Canal will require, in the coning ordnance p n t&q the mcompatble use, ate oweter of the annexed territory to provide a butler separating the use of t annexed territory and the adjacent land rer ahktg within the township should land adjacent to are territory be determined to be unincorporated teritoy. RECORD OF RESOLUTIONS 25-72 Page 2 of 2 ReroluNart No. Psrud 20_ cctl m 2, 'this resolution shall be effective immediately upon passage in accordance with Section 4.04(a) of the Revised Charter. Passed this day of 2012. ATTEST: r/ i Dublin office of the City Ma nager 5200 rald Parkway * Dublin, OH Cjt' ®f Dubs Phone: 614.410 -4400 • Fax: 614-410-4490 16 To: Members of Dublin City Council From: Marsha I. Grigsby, City Manager l lk� Date: April 19, 2012 Initiated t3y: Steve Langworthy, Director Land Use and Long Range Planning Paul Hammersmith, P.E., Director of Engineering/City Engineer Gary Gunderman, Planning} Manage' Barbara Cox, P.E., Engineering Manager — Development Re: Resolution 24-12 - A Resolution Adopting a Statement of Services for a Proposed Annexation of 3.4 Acres, More or Less, from Washington Township, Franklin County (Petitioner: Darnel F. Hoy Kevin Knight & Co., 70 West Olentangy Street, Powell, Ohio 43065, agent for Alexander and Harvey Vesha, 4796 Irusheer Corot, Dubin, OH 43017) (Case No. 12-024 ANNEX). Resolution 25-12 - A Resolution Adopting a Statement Regarding Possible incompatible Land Uses and Zoning Buffer for a Proposed Annexation of 3.4 Acres, More or tress, from Washington Township, Franklin County to the City of Dublin, Ohio as Required by Section 709.023(C) of the Ohio Revised Code. Request for Fee Waiver summary On April 4, 2012, agent Daniel Hoy filed an annexation petition on behalf of Alexander and Harvey Vesha. The petition is for 3.4 acres, more or less, of land located on the east side of Dublin Road in Washington Township. The petition was fled pursuant to R.C. 709.023, the "Expedited r annexation method. Under this process, the City must adopt an ordinance or resolution relating to municipal services within twenty days after the petition is filed. in the same time period, the City must adopt an ordinance or resolution relating to land uses and mining buffers, if the territory proposed to be annexed is currently subject to either county or township zoning. Resolutions 24.12 and 25-12 have been prepared far these purposes and for your consideration. The Franklin County Commissioners will grant the proposed annexation, without a hearing, if neither the municipality nor the township object to the annexation by ordinance or resolution within twenty -five days of the petition being filed. if neither the municipality nor the township object, the Commissioners must grant the proposed annexation without a hearing, if certain criteria in R.C. 709.023 have been established. This proposed annexation is for 3.4 acres, more or less, and Includes a substantial rigt*of= =way of Dublin Road. Memo re. Resolutions 24-12 and 2512— Annexation Pefitiai - Vesha April 19, 2012 Page 2 03 Feee Waiver The applicant has requested that the City waive the annexation fees of $3,700. Staff supports this request in keeping with some previous City annexations where properties in township "'islands were proposed for annexation. Background Zoning The current Washington Township zoning classification for this property is 111A - Suburban Residential DLsbict, which allows for single family housing on larger lots. Upon annexation, the property will be automatically zoned R Rural District, under the Zoning Code of the City of Dublin. This would allow a single family residence on this property, along with other associated uses. The adjacent properties are similar parcels of large lots stretching from Dublin Road to the Scioto River — some vacant parcels and some with single family homes. Future moment aid Community Plan The Community Plan contemplated annexation of this area. The adopted Future land Use Map calls for Residential lox Density development for this area. This site is currently undeveloped. arvice Assessr►rent POLICE PROTECTION The City of Dublin has five police districts and deploys a minimum of five cruisers. The subject annexation is located 2 driving miles from the Justice Center, the Division of Police headquarters. The City of Dublin provides police and communications services on a 24hour basis and has mutual aid agreements with other jurisdictions. The annexation area will be fully served with police and communications services at the same or similar level now being provided to other areas of the City with similar land use and population. FIRE PROTECTION AND EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICE (EMS) to this area of Dublin and The Washington Township Fire Department provides fire protecti already provides service to the subject Property. Station 92 located at 4497 Hard Road and Station 93 located at 5825 Brand Road are each located approximately 1.2 miles from the Fire and EMS at the same proposed annexation site The annexati to b a� of the l City y with sun�ilarr land use and population. or similar level now being provided SOLID WASTE COLLECTION The City of Dubin provides residential solid waste collection at no additional fee. WATER DISTRIBUTION The property is located within Dublin's exclusive annexation area of the Water Service Agreement with the City of Columbus. The existing 24 -inch waterline, located on the west side of Dublin Road will provide water service to this property. SANITARY SEWER (WASTEWATER) COLLECTION The property is located within Dublin's exclusive annexation area with the S of Se rvi c e Agreement with City of Columbus. This Property as located _ the t rib ut a r y Deer Memo re. Resolutions 24 -12 and 25 -12— Annexation Petition - Vesha April 19, 2012 Page 3 of 3 Run trunk sewer. Service to this properly will be provided by the 36 -inch trunk sewer located within an easement on the property. STORMWATER MANAGEMENT AND FLOODPL41N This properly is located in an area that drains directly into the Scioto River. The property has significant topography change from west to east The west side of the property at Dublin Road is at an approximate elevation of 838 and drops to an approximate elevation of 764 along the river frontage — a change of 74 feet. Any proposed development of this property will need to be in compliance with Chapter 53, Stormwater Regulations. A portion of this property is located within the FEMA designated floodplain for the Scioto River. ROADS AND STREETS The primary road serving this acreage is Dublin Road. It is classified as a mirw arterial on the Thoroughfare Plan, which indicates Dublin Road with 804eet of right -of -way. If development occurs on this property, additional right- of-way will need to be dedicated to the City. Dublin Road, along the frontage of this property, is currently within the jurisdiction of Franklin County for management and maintenance purposes. This annexation proposes to annex a portion of Dublin Road into the City. This will provide an appropriate consolidation of services in this area. Any new roads or streets within a proposed development, which would be dedicated to the City, would be maintained to the same degree and extent that these public facilities are maintained in areas with similar land use and population. This annexation includes the full width of right- of-way for Dublin Road immediately in front of the annexation parcel and a considerable distance north and south of the parcel. This section of right- of-way is currently one of only two gaps in the City jurisdiction of Dublin Road between the 1-270 bridge location and Shawnee Hills. The City already maintains this area and annexation will provide the police with a more consistent enforcement boundary. Recorrrmendation This property was identified within the proposed annexation areas of the Community Plant and is located within the exclusive Dublin service area as defined in the Water and Sewer Agreements with the City of Columbus. Staff recommends approval of Resolutions 24.12 and 25-12. Upon City Council's approval, these resolutions will be forwarded to the Franklin County Commissioners for their consideration regarding the proposed annexation. In addition, staff recommends approval of the fee waroer as requested by the applicant. ■ KEVIN KNIGHT & COMPANY 0111 /1(t S.111l /Rf 70 West OkRtM Y SMW Powall, Ohio 43065 Phmc 614.3851AW FAX 614.885.1610 April 9, 2012 Members of Dublin City Council 5200 Emerald Parkway Dublin, OH 43017 RE. Expedited 2 Annexation Petition for 3.4 Acres Located at 7094 Dublin Road is Washington Township to the City of Dublin Property Owners — Harvey R. and Alexander Vesha Dear Council Members, I am tha agent for the owners of property located at 7094 Dublin Road and have filed an Expedited 2 annexation petition with Franklin County Commissioners on April 4, 2012. 1 am requesting that Couucil waive the $3,700 am matiOu fee based on the fact that this is a,pordonof a pocket of township land within the City of Dublin and that Council has previously waived annustiou fees for Mich paresis. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Denial F. Hoy, Agent for Petitioners Kevin Knight & Co. 70 Weal OleatanV Street Powell, OH 4306005 c Barb Cox, Engineering Stave Laagworthy, Land Use & Long Range Pbrnnng L1e,y G Land Use & Long Range PIWAiug i T, (A KEVIN KNIGHT & COMPANY BEStt IFt S•t 811I41i 70 West Olentangy Street Powell, Ohio 43065 Phone: 614.885.2400 FAX 614.885.1610 Re: Notification of Petition for Annexation from Franklin County to City of Dublin Adjacent property owner. This is tan0tify.you of a pending annexation from Washington Township, Franklin County to the City of Dublin for Lot 5, Scioto Shores Subdivision, the Alexander & Harvey Vesha property. In addition the City of Dublin requests that we attach the said lot with the section of Dublin Road that is currently in Washington Township, Franklin County to the Vesha property annexation. This notification is pursuant of the notification requirements required by Franklin County, Economic Development & Planning Department. Daniel F. Hoy Agent for Alexander & Harvey Vesha Kevin Knight & Co. 70 West Olentangy street Powell, Ohio 43065 Encl: Franklin County Annexation Petition application Legal Description of the proposed annexation Map of the proposed annexation List of adjacent property owners to the annexation lrranklmCot/ ~. Oov.m q.M W"k. n,ul. Areakt IaAn O'6R6T nrw.i. pavafeFWams Me,u.W PaaaMmtl laar sewu.v, 6rar AWicadon W Annexation Petition ihMaM IRtamatbn - -� S3aabYar m'n aAAOtaapu ��pO07G8 •'�. At C't �..e�lanla . 6k, (!1 w= •.-> eMa+Spde, V ii °t.lN PTUPoMT OWOM IRfam 0m v m'n AMOmwoAV MaMoHEMU —. —_� •tlawT �(u VJ G$1 Gt.2 Ni/1A.�.= a _ter APR .•. -1 2012 'rankikl dune,. e' . , , c:•:rtt.•oent FSnkP W SHM TMISPEnMU EXPRESSLY WANES THEIR RIGHT TO APPM IN LAW OR MMYFROM THE MM COM BM SW ENTRY OF ANY RES OLUTIO N PERT TO THIS SPBCIAL ANNEXATM IR OSO PERFORM REGURED BY LAW FOR FOR THS SPE AANEXATNH/ PROCEDURE. I � oa. �oxlr o.�w Dam a.� o.. w ow Proppy Cwwr 1S96CUn Flats 5tr F5L wa m Calm - -93355 II64 Tap 61M53T- Far. 61�szI ?1 >w, &.Wk Cwmlwft-0OV r 1 Meraxsa !EO@B✓n E O o mv row 1w Mw v re "'' - ���' a �n , �'��m, r tot for r � sent w FECT 2 >_ < � Po 7��,,�•'�.• sCµt; 1••snw aiomz0.pq�- f,.P,'7 -.TZZ} ~ : � � ° " 04 717 ••�.,,��• br s . LOr P r • r „e u g a" ••`•�_• APR - 1 2012 ` �•�„ ° To THE CrrY OF DMW �TITTi�,._ for l sueuen 1•.�rrantlrr �vv ON �til ��J10.ra rs -�- LOr 6 Lor 1 l--} for for �+ab tv rn �y 4 Ary �N °R�rab+ALbrr 9 N � 8 � °rl la��aap �'Wnen m O Oy COT g§ o o a �Q ua 'ua ayy r� ua4 n / Q to., for 9 j v re "'' - ���' a �n , �'��m, r tot for r � rug 2 >_ < LOT 12 ~ : r1m m Y.tV . LOr FRWO 1m A M UM 07 ?ee *1 9.4t ACRES MV TOWNSEP OF WASHMTON To THE CrrY OF DMW L°r 9 4 VUtMM MWA87 =a... N0. 2W tea. COr r4 20ANSW O► •A9SMNG ON. STATI Of OM M r0 for ro at. ft rr. for rs ,INCORPCNAtNO RiYBItALD' PARM J for ••�`. ° •y ' .s s„rw aaR wt _ +i liar ra py.�pt O! i'i 0 `L ANNBL N0. ONO. N0. NOIQ - xcur 1 - ,af mMf W /IMYm war 1� waarma r�.QJhDfli } Ni a wa Iar0alal MldO au: p S ! � r -.�Of7 T« � .r !� • �Fy. i J �a Ao6AO � xn Wf ",•�••' RE APR U 4 ZUIZ rrdlol) Uouny ttig9tPaar Dow C. °irtoa, P.M, P.S. PROPOSED ANNEXATION OP 3A* ACM PROM WACI IGrON TOWNSHIP TOTH aryoBDUBt N SBttan is the Snmot tmm, t,omry �• r........, •_-� -' - —° Survey 2543, peeing aB of Lot 5 ofSC10TO SHORE$ ofacard in Plat Book 18. Harvey Veda (Pemel Nun bW 2711-000760). pertof IAbliaMd ad Pert of the WA described ee MOWW ANNEXATION PLAT & DECRiPMN ACCEPTABLE DEAN C. RWGLIL RE. P.S. FUNKL1N COUNTY WG��B��'7R- Beglaala& es th e w cummm ooraer of Ion 3 end of said SCIOTO SHORES. being intha easledY C Uses, as established ,i& a o f Dublin RNA Ordiaada Number61.80and Wdad'in offltd Rewd 50 4 o C MPWW (parcel Nwnba 270}000169); Thence SoutharkY. s d'uueoe ofoximafaty 100 fat along t h e aurrlY rigbtot -way rue of aridDabtin Road end d, ,U iy line of aid Lot 4, m the wmddy GOI moaeomaofsaid Lam 4and S; Thmes EasndY, aditnson of afpmximtWy 796 fat SIM the line cootmm m said Lou 5 end 4, aadthe eaamrly extenaim of aid Lots, to a point in the Seiow River, being the ntta WAM of the oeamdY aatmeionofMid Lou 5 and 4 and the existing City of Dublin Casponnon Lew, a aublirhadby OtdmsucaNumba 3.74 and recorded inbduo. Record 161, Page 354'. ThanSmthmly.a dutawofeppmximaulY %fae; alou&the Seim Rival Lm and catedy of C au" m of d, oa &,i y line a n d 66 maharly Ctry tae of Lot 6'ofaidas" L,rg6 I i o b n y o pa NStmoff(Pmui Number 70-0OO Them, Westerty, a411aaw of al> mIlltusaty 769 fat aim& the aasterLY atotuim of due Im00"AMOneo aid Lon 5 and6 sad of dm l con rylca'meeon m d Lots ts 5 and 6. m the wamadyaa�e cancer of Of the Following throe (3) csutaa adder t) Southerly. a &gwA of apptoximan1Y 556 fbat to a poi 2) Southerly. adi raurA of aypmt -tidy 254 fat. to a poiaC 3) SoutbOdy adiasaan Ofappwtmnffiy 186 fat to the westerly wo>monoornxofLo* 15 end 16 said Dublin of said SCLOTO SLL01M end the unrsaedOa of timcennerly righ0of- dteexiada& City of Dublin d d a the aarharlY dgbro(wey line of Emerald PakwaY. being' Corporation Line, m eaabb bedby0ddiaaere Humana 128-01 ad rermdad is Iamtmsat Number 20011219029595 T'heoce Weaterty, a diwsce ofappmxtmauly 61 fat aema said Dublin Bond ad a M midaxircog COY Of DublinCOReradeO Liao (Ord, 0128 -0 1). b a Point in the weswrlY rfghtof way tins of said Dublin Rod WA tla unwary OOmmmconcaof Lou l0 end9 oEKILLiLEA ON ' °f �Numba 13-65 ad to a easterly rim of t h e exiati� City of Dublin Coryaanoa recorded in VW- Record 139, Page 282; The cen along rbs wamtlY ttgblvf wsy Wee li of said Dublin Road. an d the moody tines of Lon 1.3.9, iaclaive.ad20 of said KHX.ILEA SE TIM 1. ad Lot 43 ofKB.LH.pA SE aunnee2.ofmarltrses Book 93, page 91. end said existing City of Dublin CorporWOU Lien (OOL 61345). We follewieg IWes (3) catwaad distaarm: t) NortheriY. a diwascs ofVFOXi VAdY 175 fat to a poivX 2) MaWaty, a dItmee ofWin0crtmatdY 250 ft; ma Point: 3) N datXadW. Woof apptodmanlY77tfatmsn+a&lapoiffi in aidexfstie&Ciry ofDablin Corpotaum Lim (Ord. g6140Y, ofDtWinCoorpomum Liae(O"L#6t 80a�mtaPnMpabcofaegimta4con 34& City The above deaetiptioa wan papard @om record mfotmedm. cad u fa eane2atioa pnrpoea only. Afield survaY u ea requicud for atamsti" . RE: iV)' APR -4 2012 (i3n61iM Caunp Wlat tro ... ,e.c +::. rrLni;Rr ia; a• r �. =,; A L,4fiDMARK SORVHY OROttP.1NC. SCvi � .f/IZtfr✓t - GPUN0E3 ' ScdtD. Grinds). P3. 3.1047 a � Regiwred Swvreyor No. 9041 w AW 01' 2- Kenneth h Jr & Jane E Mitchell 6866 Bryn Ct Dublin Ohio 43017 Craig p Cowman 6851 Killilea Drive Dublin Ohio 43017 Irene 8 Mathews Tr 6844 KRiilea Drive Dublin Ohio 43017 James E Tr & Geraldine Tr Nicholls 4760 McGreevy Court Dublin Ohio 43017 Domonic F. 0miniilo 4752 McGreevy Court Dublin Ohio 43017 Nadia Osman 4744 McGreevy Court Dublin Ohio 43017 Andrew P Pschesang 4736 McGreeW Court Dublin Ohio 43017 Ali A & Tahany S Gawish 4728 McGreevy Court Dubin Ohio 43017 Steven S & Denise L Gahman 4720 McGreevy Court Dublin Ohio 43017 Bruce R Hamed 4712 McGreevy Court Dublin Ohio 43017 Stephen W & Steven G Meagher 6992 Dubin Road Dublin Ohio 43017 Lawrence W Tr & Karen A Tr Noll 7416 Dublin Road Dublin Ohio 43017 Mark D & Kathleen M Vogel 7044 Dublin Road Dublin Ohio 43017 Bernardi & Lynn G Hodapp 7050 Dubin Road Dublin Ohio 43017 Desiree N Stavraff 7078 Dublin Road Dublin Ohio 43017 Shawn 4 Carpenter 7106 Dubin Roil Dublin Ohio 43017 RECEIVED APR - 5 2012 Franklin County Planning D"a&' nt Franklin County, OH RECEIPT The person who has signed below states that he/she has received the Petition for Annexation and related documentation for the Vesha Property. This is done to meet the requirements of the Franklin County Economic Development and Planning Department- Date RECEIVED .I:0-3 ^ d&-- APR 0 5 2012 CF]'YCi''r: '1