031-92 Ordinance
.
RECORD OF ORDINANCES
Dayton Legal Blank Co, Form No, 30043
II ,-------
I Ordinance No. mm_~_~_~,_~ Passed____ _mnnmmmmmm__ mmmm19__ .-
;.- ._.Hm
......
.............. AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR A CHANGE OF
ZONING OF 41.374 ACRES, LOCATED ON THE
EAST SIDE OF AVERY ROAD, 3000' SOUTH OF
BRAND ROAD, TO BE REZONED FROM: R-1,
RESTRICTED SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT
TO: PLR, PLANNED LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
DISTRICT.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAIN(j by the Council of the City of
Dublin, state of Ohio, of the elected members
I
I! concurr 1ng :
II section 1. That the following described real estate (see
1'1 attached map marked Exhibit "A") situated in the city of
II DUblin, state of Ohio, is hereby rezoned to PLR, Planned Low
Density Residential District, and shall be subject to
II regulations and procedures contained in Ordinance No. 21-70
I (Chapter Eleven of the Codified Ordinances) the City of Dublin
Zoning Code and amendments thereto.
section 2. That application, Exhibit "B", including the list
r- of contiguous and affected property owners, and the
, recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Commission, Exhibit
~ "C", are all incorporated into and made an official part of
this Ordinance and made an official part of this Ordinance and
said real estate shall be developed and used in accordance
therewith.
section 3. That this Ordinance shall take effect and be in 1
: force from and after the earliest period allowed by law. i
II Passed this /S-rJ." day of r ,1992. .
'I~~
II - r- - presi -g Office~
I Attest:
,
I
I ~(l. ~~
, .
I Clerk of Counc11
II
II Sponsor: Planning Division
'I
II
~ II
I I: ....,. . l
....... ! nrfify "'at (optes of thIS OrdinOnteAfes r~,ih-wt I
I Gfy If Dublin in oc(ordonce with Section 73' 25 vf th . re ~sted In the i
I . 0 e ()f"o ReVIsed Code. I
II ~. (' C2t' _.L ~ I
II Clerk of CQund/, Dublin, Ohio I
I '
I !
! I
I '
I
I
I
,
i
I
!
... _.' jj .. __~....,. ...,.-~.,...-.,,--'__, ,_J......,,'
...._.-......~.. .~,.,,','- - -" -~_.~~.~ ~ " . r "~ ll"
OS/2i/92 10:00 '5'614 228 1098 DO~ALD W. KELLEY ~003
OVc(,.31 - '12-
DEVELOPl!mN'T STANDARDS
Planned Low Density Residential District
41.374 acre tract
Ordinance No. :n_-9~
I"""'- (References to "Platll are to, the Preliminary Plat for
DUb~inshire Section 4 Dated 5-14-92)
,
Number of Lots: See Plat
Mini'mu:m Lot Area.: 9300 sq. ft.
Minimwn. Lot Width: 70 feet at bu.Uding line
MiniJInnn. Setbacks:
F'ront: 25 ' ,
Side (Total): 14'
Each Side: 6'
~: 25'
May; 'mum Beiaht: 35'
-,
"'t~'" -:
.... ... .. .... .... .. . ,. .. ..... .
,....,
~=
1".1 .ff
OV01l92 16:32 'a'61~ 228 1098 DONALD IV. KELLEY ~002
.
-
. - ..
'1/.37'1 04'C
'i/; ~/-"3
CITY OF DUBLIN p~nrrNG AND ZONING CO~~SION
AN APPLlCATlON FOR' AHEHDt:l!N'r FOB. P&% C trse Only
OF TIlE CI'J:Y OF DUBLIN ZONING Applicat10n No:
DISTRICT MAP Z!i i!'I2.- 00'
(B.eclassifica~lon of Land) Da~e Filed: "3.e'1.~
:&'... Receipt. No.
,Received by:€. it__t.-dr
Plea5e type or print information - trse additionaL sheets as necessary
TO THE HONORABLE PLANNING AND ZONING CO~SSION:
The Applicant Rold~~ Corporation of Ohio
(Have property in contract)
being the owner(s),/lessee(s) of property located vithin the area proposed for
r.eclassification of land . , requests that the followi
described land'to be placed in the Planned Lov Densitv F~s;d~nri~l ni~trirt
.
A. DESCRIPTION OF LAND TO BE RECLASSIFIED
I. GeneraL Description of Land (describe by ~ne of the' following):
a. Lot(s)/Reserve(s)
I
a recorded plat, with an area of
b. Beginning at a poiot along
(5tree~ or other)
and beins feet in a N S E
direction fro~ the (specify) of
(Sr:r:eet or other), and thence having a dimeo,
of from the (specify) of
(stree~ or other), and having an area of
.
'-.:!.li,!/!, .
c. The I:ract of land containing Acres and bounded by.
(spec:ify) aD the N SEW' (Circle
(speei~) on tbe N 5 E V (Circle
(specify) on the N S E V (Circle
(specir,yJ on the N 5 E V (Circle
\.
d. Attached legal description: YES X . NO
(See a.ttached Exhibit nAn)
Page 1 of 3
. .. ... ... .. - -.. _. ... , .., -
~"
OJ/0l/02 16:33 '25'6U 228 1008 DONALD W, KELLEY 12I 003
.
. ;
. .
:
Map Qf Proposed 20ning District Boundaries
Two (2) copies of map accurately drawn to an 'appropriate scale (to fill a .sheet of r
not less than 8\ x 11 inches and not more than 16 X 20 inches). The map shall be
identified and submitted in addition to the General Description of Land. The map
shall include all land in the proposed change and all land within five hundred (500)
feet beyond the limits of the proposed change.
To be shoYn on the map - all property lines, 'street rIght-of-way, easements and
other information related to the locatIon of the proposed boundaries and shall be
fully dl=ensioned.
The map shall show the existing and proposed Zoning District or Special District ~
bO~lDdaries.
List all owners of property githin and contiguous to and directly across the street "'"'
from such area proposed to be rezoned. The addresses of the owners shall be t90se
appearing on the County Auditor's current tax list or the Treasurer's mailing list.
NAME AnDRESS
. .
(See attached Exhibit "B")
B. ARGllMVITS FOR RECLASSIFICATION OF THE ,DESCRIBED LAND
1. Proposed Use or Development of the Lands residential
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ZONING DlsmC!S and SPECIAL DISTRIctS submission of
three (3) copies of a Development Plan and other cocuments and two (2)
copies shall be retained 8S a permanent public record if approved.
For other Zoning Districts', such plans or other exhibits would be he.lpful ~
to the review of this application., ,. J
Plans and Exhibits submitted
Plot Plall ______J Building Plan~; Development Plan _____ ; Sketch -;..
Photograpbs -,--J Other (specify)
.
2. State briefly hov the proposed zoning and development relates to the existu
and probably future land use character of the viciRity.
Pro!)osed use is c:ons1ste.nt v.l.th $urround'inr Te!sirlA-':;~1Rl land 'H;A~ ",n,; \.
c:onforms with the Commu~1tv ~lanrs Land Use El~mpnt.
Page 2 of 3 pages
,
.' ... .. .. -._. ... -.. . ..... - . ... .. .. ..
""'\
^ _",,""'~<,_..~'__r" "_"T_.._" ~.,.,~~...........~~"~-
.
J. "as an application for rezoning of the property been denied by the City
Council within the last two (2) years?
YES X
NO
If Yes, state the basis of reconsideration
New owner and new proposed classification
"..... C. AFFIDAVIT
Before completing this application and executing the following affidavit, it is
recommended that this application be discussed with the Building Inspector to
insure completeness and accuracy. Present owner of property:
APPLICANTS'S AFFIDAVIT
STATE OF 01110
COUNTY OF FRANKLIN,
I (we) Holding Corporation of Ohio
being duly sworn, depose and say that I am/we are the owner(s)/lessee(s) of being
duly sworn, depose and say that I am/we are the owner(s)/lessee(s) of land included
in the application and that the foregoing statement herein contained and attached,
and information or attached exhibits thoroughly to the best of my/our ability present
the arguments in behalf of the application herewith submitted and,that the statements
and attached exhibits above referred to are in all respects true and correct to the
best of my/our knowledge and belief.
Holding Corporation of Ohio
'j / <C'~I /
By: /1///1 / -., ////
(signatur
Robert E. Albright, Secretary
-
600 S. Hiqh Street
(Mailing address)
,...,.'Jjii/;
614-228-5711
(Phone)
Subscribed and sworn to before me this j of fA- day of ~ {'~'Z-
,~.
TIMOTHY M. KELUY t=:.. ~ ~
Attorney allaw , (r1 , ;
!'lQlary Public, Sla'e 01 OhiO (nota ry Pub lie)
LlIellme Ceftlmlulon
Person to be contacted for details, if other than above signatory:
1I'Moliy f'f. {(d(tA; JSD t. (lAIQd Sf. ~11J""bt/.s., Olrio <(:J~/) I.
cl().'t'S77>
(Name (Address) , (Telephone)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - rOo not wrIte below thIs-IIne)- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
D. RECORD OF ACTION
1. Withdrawn lIeld to
(Date) (Date)
2. P&Z C: Date of Hearing
Approved Disapproved Hodified
3. City Council: Date of lIearing
,.... Approved __________ OJ s:lpproved __u__~_, __ ___Hodi f ied __,_ ___,
EXHIBIT "A"
41.374 ACRE PARCEL
Situated in the state of Ohio, County of Franklin, City of
DublinJ located in Virqinia Military Survey No. 3010 and being
41.374 acres of that tract as conveyed to Holding Corporation
of Ohio by deed of reoord in Offioial Reoord 14447G19, all
referenoes being to those of reoord in the Reoorder's Office, ..,
Franklin county, Ohio, said 41.374 acres being more
particularly bounded and described as follows:
Beginning at the point in the centerline of Avery Road
markin; the southwesterly corner of said Holding Corporation of
Ohio tract and also marking the northwesterly corner of that 5
acre tract as conveyed to Robert L. Harrison and carolyn J.
Harrison by deed of record in Offioial Reoord 12873F15;
thence North 100 32' 2811 East, along said centerline, a
distance of 1098.16 feet to an angle pointl
thence North 14' 51' 41 II West, continuing alon; the
centerline of Avery Road, a distance of 17.10 feet to the point
marking the southwesterly corner of that 2.133 acre traot as
conveyed to Ruslell and Mary Joan Smith by deed of record in
Deed Book 3247, Page 351)
thence leaving, said centerline, North 730 52' 24" East,
along the south~rly line of said Smith tract and also along the
northerly line of Holding Corporation of Ohio tract, a distance
of 1004.79 feet to the point marking the northwesterly corner
of that 17.1 S2 aore traot a8 oonveyed to Dunmere Associates, &
Limited Partnership, by deed of record in Official Reoord
128S6A14; ~
t.hence South 150 27' 2211 East., along the westerly line of 1:
."
said 17.152 acre tract, a distance of 621.98 feet to the point
marking the southwesterly corner of said tract;
thence North 740 35' 51" East, along the southerly line of
said tract,& distance of 366.12 feet in the westerly right-of-
way line of proposed Mu1rfield Drive;
thence along said proposed westerly right-of...way line, the
following coursee and distanoes:
south go 34' 20" East, a distanoe ot 293.48 feet to a point
of curvature to the right; AND
South ,0 4S' 3111 East, alon'j' the arc of said curve (Radius
= 1500.00 feet, Delta . 15 31137")', II. ohord distance of
405.26 feet to a point in the southerly line of said Holding
Corporation of Ohio tract and also being in the northerly line
of that tract as conveyed to Ohio Holding Company by deed of
record in Official Record 14447B03i
~
_..,~ ...'- ,.....~, " , - 1I""'i
. EXHIBIT "A"
41.374 ACRE PARCEL
- Page 2 -
thence leaving laid proposed westerly right-of-way line,
South 76' 01' '08" West, alone; the northerly line of said Ohio
Holdinq Company tract, a distance of 1194.73 feet to the point
marking a northw.sterly corner of said tract and also marking
the northeasterly corner of the aforamentioned Robert t.
Harrison and Carolyn J. Harrison,S acre tract;
thence North 790 181 02'1 West, along the northerly line of
said 5 acre: traot., a distance of 593.07 feet. to the place of
beginning and,containing 41.374 Acres, more or less.
I
Subject, : however, to all legal right8-of-way and/or
easements, if:any, of previous record.
I
The above description was prepared for rezoning purposes
only and does:not represent a survey by this firm.
~
."....
;'
.
EXHIBIT "B"
Owners of property within and contiguous to and directly across
the street from area proposed to be rezoned.
Robert L. & Carolyn J. Harrison
7240 Avery Road, Dublin, Ohio 43017
Leslie D. Harrison ~
7210 Avery Road, DUblin, Ohio 43017
.....,;'
Ohio Holding Company
c/o Bob Albright
600 s. High street, Columbus, Ohio 43215
Dunmere Associates
c/o Falco smith & Kelley
250 East Broad street, Columbus, Ohio 43215
Brand Road Investment Company, Ltd.
c/o Falco smith & Kelley
250 East Broad street, Columbus, Ohio 43215
Russell T. & Mary J. smith
7400 Avery Road, DUblin, Ohio 43017
Allan J. & Linda M. Schmidt
7422 Avery Road, DUblin, Ohio 43017
Jefferson Savings Bank
5131 Post Road, DUblin, Ohio 43017
City of Dublin
6665 Coffman Road, DUblin, Ohio 43017 ~
James A. Griffin, Bishop j
---
Roman Diocese of Columbus
198 East Broad street, Columbus, Ohio 43215
Karen L. Matusoff
5608 Caplestone Lane, Dublin, Ohio 43017
Robert J. & Maxine Silverman
5604 Caplestone Lane, DUblin, Ohio 43017
Stanley o. Nollenberger
5600 Caplestone Lane, DUblin, Ohio 43017
Stratford Homes & Realty, Inc.
5890 Sawmill Road, DUblin, Ohio 43017
....
__ ~'n_ .--'-- -".~''-~
Of
,
EXHIBIT "B"
Page Two
Turnbury Owners Association
5890 Sawmill Road, DUblin, Ohio 43017
Borror Corp.
5501 Frantz Road, DUblin, Ohio 43017
James P. & Debra C. L. Ankrom
8087 Simfield Road, Dublin, Ohio 43017
TransOhio Title, Trustee
c/o Smith & Hale
37 West Broad Street, Columbus, Ohio 43215
-
.
~ .
I . .
I : ~
... ..
.. .
.. ^ . .
I "h. .~
l ;;~ '1 lii ') [I ~ ,.
- Ii" '" . . . · ".. ^
~ '" . '.. .', I f
- ~l'" '" , '.
.! ~ ., ~, I ..:
I .~. . z.
". I , ,. '. . 1 I
. . ~ ~ , " i!..
!l~ .I .1 "I ii-.. :.~
.,. - ~, .... . ,
. ~. .., .., '1 _
". ~l z
t' e"" ,z <
^ ". ..
' . "'
... "
I 'i' """'l
;> ,
~.
"!
. -"
I '.'
.'
z
01, :
~ > I .
M Z " ~
o :' ,
.., :, ,
- ~a I
o "I . .
z. '.
' .. . ".
. .
. .. " 1
.. ,
.. . .. . .
. . . ".
o .,".;,.~ <. !
.. . :~ !' . .
.. 'f I
. 'A' . = (.
. -. ,
~ ~.
-.. % .
"~ 0
.. JIG ~ :.,
- z \J'I
;:: .- .. ..
1'1 . ..... . n _
'" ~ , . ~ . g.... "-
O , . '"
\ g ~ ., l\
'. . . -
~" ". "
~ . -, -
. '. . . - ,,, ...
'" ..: <; %. . ~: r=
o. -. . , WQU' j
· ~ '.. · < :; c __
,'. g " '" z z
. %. " 0 _
00, ^",
o · , n ""~ >
.. 0 .. . ..; ~;
,.... .: . 'g c:':.' ...~..
'. ". - ~ "
-. ...~" " :;;
- ,., .
.-.' . ." "; ~ . ,.
-"'. . ~
'" ,.
, ., ~
. "
' . .
. .
'. . '. . ,
. . .." . .
. " .... . ....., .
e.. .. ! ". .
. . . "
' .. .. ~ , .
co z
",. . .
r" :' .. 8
'" ,
~ - .
'" , . g~1 .
~ ''''... ,
..: !:::! . '. '
' N . ""', ". ,.
.. · . ~l ~
- .... ,". ,
'" . -
(I .,Q
8 rJ
o.
~ .....~... ~.~~ ......."
- .
. -
C I T Y 0 F D U 8 L I N
RECORD OF ACTION Department of Planning & Development
DUBLIN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
MAY 7, 1992
The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action in the application
below at its regular meeting:
-
5a. Rezoning Application Z92-002 - Holding Corporation of Ohio
Location: 41.:!:.. acres located on the west side of Muirfield Drive at the
proposed Dublinshire Drive intersection and extending to Avery Road.
Existina Zonina: R-1, Restricted Suburban Residential District.
Reauest: PLR, Planned Low Density Residential District.
Prooosed Use: Single-family subdivision.
Aoolicant: Holding Corporation of Ohio, Robert Albright, Secretary,
600 S. High Street, Columbus, OH 43215, c/o Timothy Kelley, 250 E.
Broad Street, Columbus, OH 43215.
MOTION: To approve this application and make the following modifications at the
Preliminary Plat:
1. Redesign layout to provide stub street to north for additional single-family
development; if high school site, to provide easement;
2. Provision of landscape/mounding program for Avery and Muirfield frontages;
3. Establishment of no-build zone along all park;
4. Dedication of park south of the property line to the center line of Bear Run with
credit for excess parkland will be carried forward;
5. Dedication of right-of-way on Avery Road 30' from centerline;
.'-- 6. Reconfiguration of park at southwest corner;
7. Construction of a bikepath along north side of Dublinshire Drive and Wynford
Drive;
8. Supplying additional park access through subdivision, one lot plus adequate
easements.
VOTE: 6-1
RESULT: The applicant agreed to these conditions. This rezoning application was
approved. It will be scheduled for a Public Hearing at City Council with a
positive recommendation from Planning Commission.
STAFF CERTIFICATION:
~~~Yl1 c~~
Barbara M. Clarke
Acting Planning Director
5131 Post Rd. Suite 1/702 Dublin, Ohio 43017 614.761,6553 FAX 761.6566
r
_."'_.~;~"-~"'"""""'"'-..-;.~,,_. ".'._,; ..,""....."..- - > '~ ., ',Y' '1 L' Ul..... T
I
. ,..
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Staff Report - May 7, 1992
Page 10
CASE 5: Rezoning Applications - Z92-002/Z92-005 -Holding Corporation of Ohio
APPLICANT: Holding Corporation of Ohio, Robert Albright, Secretary, 600 S. High
Street, Columbus, Ohio 43215, c/O Timothy Kelley, 250 E. Broad
Street, Columbus, Ohio 43215
-
, REQUEST: Review and approval of two related rezoning applications for 51.8
acres located on the east and west sides of Muirfield Drive at the proposed
Dublinshire Drive intersection to be rezoned from R-1 , Restricted Suburban Residential
District to PLR, Planned Low Density Residential District.
BACKGROUND:
There are actually two separate rezoning applications under consideration here.
application Z92-002 involves 41.374 acres located between Avery Road and the new
section of Muirfield Drive. This application was heard at the March 5, 1992 Planning
commission meeting as a request to rezone from R-1 to R-4. The Commission
recommended disapproval, and the application has been revised since then to request
a planned district, the PLR, Planned Low Density Residential District. The second
rezoning application Z92-005 involves 60 acres located somewhat to the east of
Muirfield Drive on the south side of Dublinshire Drive (proposed), immediately to the
west of the Woods of Dublinshire subdivision, formerly Turnbury. One PLR plan has
been submitted which proposes a single-family layout for both of these sites, the
remaining Earlington Village panhandle area and some additional R-1 property. All of
this property, and a good deal more, was under consideration during 1987-1989 for
a mixed use proposal call Dunmere.
".. As these two rezoning applications are requesting the PLR zone, the general street
layout, access points to existing streets, conceptual utilities, park areas, bike paths,
;,j,~, and lot sizes are submitted for review and approval. The Planning Commission may
approve, approve with modifications or disapprove the application and then refer it
back to the City Council for a public hearing and final disposition. A two-thirds vote
of Council is required to override the recommendation of the Planning Commission.
CONSIDERATION:
0 To the west across Avery Road from the 41 acre tract is the northern
section of the Wyndham Village subdivision. It is zoned PLR, Planned
Low Density Residential District for a single-family residential
development. To the north and south of the site are pairs of existing
single-family homes on estate-size lots which front on Avery Road, they
are zoned R-1, Restricted Suburban Residential District. The balance of
the adjacent property is undeveloped and zoned R-1.
0 The smaller site is bounded to the north by the Earlington Village
-
,~,~,_.,-,,~,~-
,
... .
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Staff Report - May 7, 1992
Page 11
panhandle and to the east by Woods of Dublinshire, formerly Turnbury.
Both are zoned PUD for single-family/cluster at six units per acre. To the
south is the drainage ditch called Bear Run and to the west is a vacant
parcel separating the site from Muirfield Drive. Both are zoned R-1. The
legal description and the plat do not match and need to be reconciled.
0 To the north of the 41 acre site is a parcel owned by Jefferson Savings ~
Bank. The proposed high school is to be located there. This major use J
will need to be considered in the layout. At a minimum a convenient and
logical connection will be needed from the neighborhood.
0 The new Wyndham Village subdivision caused the sanitary sewer to be
extended west of Avery Road. A major water line is located along Avery
Road. With a minor extension of Dublinshire Drive and its utilities, the
smaller site can be serviced. The utilities will be available and adequate
to service this overall proposed development.
0 The Bear Run is a drainage tributary which runs from west to east
through the southern part of the site. The stream bed was lowered and
straightened last year in order to provide better drainage within this
portion of the Avery Road corridor. This is shown as open space, but
the Bear Run is actually located off-site.
0 The northern entrance to Wyndham Village is located across from the
site. The extension of Dublinshire Drive willalign with Wynford Drive and
runs through this site.
0 One single-family layout has been submitted for the Earlington Village
panhandle and these two sites. The plan includes a total of 6.96 acres
of open space or parkland. The park is very linear in form and includes
buffer areas along Muirfield Drive, the detention facilities and a strip
parallel to the Indian Run. ""
0 The park dedication requirement for the Earlington Village panhandle was
completely met years ago. Additionally, a park credit for 1.6 acres is ...J
due to the developer in connection with widening the Earlington Park
next to Dublinshire Section 3. This particular park plan cannot stand
alone. Both the layout of the property to the south which actually
contains the Bear Run and the continuation of the bikepath over to Avery
Road need to be considered. It appears that the new dedication
requirement is 6.2 acres 7.85 acres minus 1.6 acre credit).
0 A landscape treatment along Avery Road and Muirfield Drive should be
developed.
0 The lots proposed, approximately 124 new lots, are almost all 70 feet
in width. No lot variation in terms of size has been presented.
Additionally, the lots at the Avery Road entry (Lots 49 and 91) are
particularly problematic. The corner lots generally could be widened for
a more attractive neighborhood.
.....
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Staff Report - May 7, 1992
Page 12
0 There are two parcels shown as "unzoned" at the northeast and
southeast corners of Dublinshire Drive and Muirfield Drive. An
appropriate layout for these will have to be submitted to show that these
are also viable for single-family development.
(
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends tabling to resolve the coordination of parkland, extension of
bikepath, mix of lot sizes, disposition of "unzoned" parcels, and the layout and access
within the panhandle. The PLR district can be utilized to zone the property for single-
family use. Most importantly, single-family use is the preferred use for the site. While
there are several issues to resolve, Staff does not wish to discourage the applicant in
this endeavor.
,..
\-'
-.
>
:,N+
)
1~
t-I
..
J~~
.- ' I
ruo:: I
I
-,
, .
. ' ....,:(
R ...., peo.,
- .
- '
, . . .
,
R1
--
~\(;~ D~.~
[ IT
..~,""."""'><.C~_~~'~""'"'. "_ _____.....
I
,.. -'-:.
...
I r";
'- ~ -.... 1'1
- .-- '"7
T ~r.r l,fIUG[ GtOS:S tlorsln ( -:.~ ~ ,.:"',
-cltl rOl1H1 II.nICU;.J.1 ......, _ ,-...:.., ,.._~
' ~, - -,', _ ,.r \J
~..~- ~ ...
~
r~-- ......<';:
'-,
r''''/'
,---' <::;
;;m~jAL
,~lAL
:tti1JAL
I'f. - .'~ ..-;; ,.'
~ - ---
~ -' ^, " ,;-,,:::-,,
~~~ - ~
~ , ~ :
." l
,.;.'-.) R-' :, ...
. '
-- II
S4h~ed- 1
I
S\te..5 .
R-'
..j
~'~
: L- 'l ~
, \-~-~-~:-:\ .
-1 ' \ ~ ,;-.. \ ~
'~: \"1' ~~,.."
] : -~ OJ, 'I \,~-"-'-
--' :"J' .' ,
,'--'" ...,o~
~ ._,--" .." ~---- S'
,-,-" _=~,,::r::-.:;"',,~'\ '~: ~
~=-r=-7, ~ .{. \ \ '. ,
-----~: -. \.~~ \ ! . ~ -. -
-- ":'1\ .
____I \'t" ~t) /} rrY?
-- "; -J~-VL/~
~,~~ ,; q '2. - oo'!"
~-=:_~,~~ fUDIN~ C(1l...f. OF
. ,- , - r ' r---u... 0
! ~., - '\ . VorJ I
1 ~_ ....
II ,~ :
~a . - COHI.WNIT'( Pc.nJ
~: ,---.,..- \ ~ - --~ \ F IG': 8. ']..
, ~n~, ' - ~I '
" '~\~ .,;~, :;, \ " LAND V% ~~
r"_ __-'" : !' II ' ' , .
L - .--' -"I' , \ \
:-~.,.. -"="" - .~. -,. ; \
, " 0'
:-:i'~,~.,,;
.., ". .. - -..
1,._-~, , ,I -:_'_,
' - ::..--:::i \ - \ ,
.. ,...:::::::--"II . ~
-....-.....-.,..--....--.-..-
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Meeting Minutes - March 5, 1992
Page 12
I
Mr. Leffler asked if the building will be lit. Mr. Schneider said there wil
change in the exterior lighting.
Ms. Stillwell asked about handicapped parking spaces.
Code.
Mrs. Stillwell made a motion to approve this applicatio ~
conditions: J
1 ) Architectural and color coordination with e shopping center and Fifth-Third
Bank to be approved by staff before g . g forward, with four accent colors
(two grey, red and green) to be use ore sparingly than initially proposed;
2) Screening of rooftop mechanicals om Dale Drive and screening of service
area with landscaping or fencin , and
3) Landscaping must meet Code equirements.
"-../
Mr. Schneider accepted all of e above conditions.
Mr. Fishman seconded the otion. The vote was as follows: Mr. Rauh, yes; Mr.
Leffler, yes; Mr. Geese, es; Mr. Campbell, yes; Mrs. Stillwell, yes; and Mr.
Fishman, yes. (Appro d 6-0.)
Mr. Campbell mad a motion to recommend to the Board of Zoning Appeals that a
variance be gran d, if needed, for the height of the new sign to be no greater than
the previous si
conded the motion. The vote was as follows: Mr. Leffler, yes; Mrs. ~
Stillwell, s; Mr. Fishman, yes; Mr. Rauh, yes; Mr. Campbell, yes; and Mr. Geese, ..J
yes. (A proved 6-0.)
5. Rezoning Application Z92-002 - Holding Corporation of Ohio
Ms. Clarke showed slides of the site and presented the staff report. This is a
rezoning application, the land is currently zoned R-1, and the request is for R-4.
The site was included in 1987 through 1989 in the Dunmere Plan. That Concept
Plan, after many hearings and revisions, was approved by both the Planning
Commission and City Council. That application was not pursued after 1989, and
this is the first rezoning request. R-4 is not a planned district, and the usual type
of background documentation received is not required of the unplanned districts.
R-4 permits single-family houses and 75 foot wide lots, with a minimum lot area of
1J..\~~'j 2.CJZ-~~
~ -5 -Cfz..t\t~\\."",~
, , "S'""
....
.' ,,,',.,"- - ~
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Meeting Minutes - March 5, 1992
Page 13
10,000 square feet. R-4 also permits multi-family dwellings (two to eight units per
building) with a maximum density of five units per acre. Child care is also a
conditional use in this district. The street layout, lot size, and park designation will
come in through the platting process which takes place after the rezoning has
become final. Bear Run is the drainage ditch which runs from west to the east and
~, is located on the site immediately to the south of this. With the construction of
Wyndham Village subdivision, the sanitary sewer has been extended to the west of
Avery Road and is available to service this site. The waterline is available in the
area. The land abuts the Earlington panhandle. The staff report states that the
Earlington Village text requires the panhandle to be coordinated with surrounding
development. Actually, this is not written in the text. However, this was openly
represented during the 1984 zoning hearings by the applicant. Staff feels that this
requested zoning designation is inappropriate in this area. The density is much
higher than is seen on the surrounding developments. The one that is not shown
on the insert from the Community Plan in the staff report is Wyndham Village.
Wyndham Village was zoned for 239 units with a gross density of 1,85 dwelling
units per acre. If the school acreage is disallowed, the density is 2.36. Staff has
always calculated it based on gross acreage. Staff recommends disapproval of this
application as submitted on the following bases:
1 ) The blanket R-4 zone permits the construction of multi-family housing for up
to eight family structures. Such uses would be inappropriate and
incompatible with adjacent land uses unless developed as part of a
coordinated plan for the area;
2) The maximum permitted R-4 density exceeds the density of other
developments within the area;
3) The Earlington Village commitments included that the panhandle area would
".. be incorporated for planning purposes with this piece and the other abutting
,
I pieces; and
4) The proposed rezoning fails to show compatibility with existing development
and long-term plans.
Staff believes that this is an appropriate site for single-family housing, and the
developer states that this is his intention. It is hoped that some alternate
arrangement can be formulated.
Mr. Tim Kelley, representative of the applicant, said he intends to have single-
family development on this site. The multi-family is not an issue. The
requirements for single-family development in an R-4 zoning are minimum 75-foot
lots, and minimum square footage of 10,000 square feet, which is a depth of
approximately 133 feet. Those standards reflect all of Earlington, Dublinshire, and
\J.\ ~~~
"i!.. q'2. - OO~
~. 45'.q1. M~~
-z.. '''5'"
""'- ~..."---~--'''I--
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Meeting Minutes - March 5, 1992
Page 14
exceed Indian Run to the south. Within the context of the R-4 standard, if multi-
family was desired, a development plan would be brought before the Commission
to address such issues as buffers, etc. He wants to move ahead tonight with this
application because the current owner and his predecessor have owned it since
1987. According to the staff report, when the Dunmere plan went through the
zoning process, the concept plan was finally approved by both the Planning and ~
Zoning Commission and City Council in 1989 after numerous modifications and
lengthy debate. This is inaccurate and doesn't tell the whole story. Also, it was .....",.
also stated that since that time, the land was taken through appropriation and
Muirfield Drive was put in. Mr. Kelley said this is not his road and it actually is a
detriment. Another reason for moving ahead is that the City imposed assessment
to pay for the cost of Muirfield Drive. This property has in excess of $200,000 of
road assessments against it. The density question goes away when multi-family is
not built. When lots are developed with 75-foot frontage and 10,000 square foot
minimum, there might be 2.8 lots per acre maximum.
Mr. Geese asked what the density is for Earlington and Dublinshire. Ms. Clarke
said the density for Dublinshire is correctly shown on the Community Plan at 2.56.
Mr. Fishman asked how wide the lots are. Ms. Clarke said the Hemingway lots are
80-foot lots and the Indian Run Meadow lots are narrower. On average, the
Dublinshire lots are less than 80 feet. The eastern half has 80-foot lots and the
western half is lower. Mr. Kelley said the average Dublinshire lot is 75 feet in
width.
Mr. Campbell asked when the assessment will be finalized. Mr. Banchefsky said
after Council certifies the final cost. Until the appropriation cases are finalized, ...,
there will not be a final cost figure, at least several months.
Mr. Campbell asked, if this is a straight zoning type of application, if this could be .J
an R-3 instead of an R-4 and still follow the same process. Mr. Kelley said this
was considered. R-3 is fairly close with its 80-foot minimum lot width and 10,000
square foot minimum lot size. The flexibility of going to 75 feet makes it
worthwhile to go to R-4. The adjacent subdivisions reflect an average of 70-80
foot lots.
Mr. Leffler asked why this is not a PUD. Mr. Kelley said most of the adjoining
developments were developed as large acreages. When Earlington was developed,
there were 200 acres of mixed use and Asherton was part of it. PUD requires the
applicant to justify a deviation from the standard zoning classifications. This
application will be only single-family. ~.~+o~~
z. q 2.00z.
~.'5 .ct!. M:~s
~ I '5""
~
.' ... . - "". ~~.~~.'~ =~,~
.
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Meeting Minutes - March 5, 1992
Page 15
Mr. Leffler asked if this rezoning passes, does the plat indeed come back to this
Commission? Mr. Banchefsky said yes. In the platting, the roadway, utilities and
parks, etc. will be reviewed. He said the Code does not provide for legally limiting
this to single-family. If a portion of this is sold with the zoning being R-4, it could
,- be multi-family. Mr. Kelley said if a developer comes in and wants to develop
multi-family (five units to the acre), the Commission then has the opportunity to
'-' tell him how the open space and buffering will work. There is a minimum
requirement of 8,500 square feet per dwelling unit. From a planning aspect, it is a
good opportunity to create open space. He said he will work with Mr. Banchefsky
to come up with an acceptable way for the City to legally enforce his commitment
about single-family. Mr. Banchefsky said if the zoning and land use is approved
and the multi-family is requested, it does have to come back for a development
plan. The Commission would have much less discretion if a multi-family proposal
were submitted.
Mr. Geese asked about bases #3 of the staff report regarding the Earlington Village
panhandle area and why the plat does not include it. Mr. Kelley said this zoning
allows six units to the acre as stated in the staff report. If the City is willing, the
applicant is willing to work out an arrangement with the Dunmere property to
develop it all single-family provided that the excess density would be applied as a
credit toward parkland. The property which is already zoned has had its parkland
given to the City. Mr. Geese asked if the Holding Corporation of Ohio and the
Ohio Holding Corporation different entities with different owners. Mr. Kelley said
yes, but they are both controlled by Don Kelley and Bob Weiler. Mr. Kelley
referred to the east line on the plan and said that is Muirfield Drive. He said the
land farther to the east is R- 1. Ms. Clarke referred to moving density credits or
".. parkland credits from one parcel to another. She said this has been done
repeatedly as the development of the area has evolved. It has yielded Dublin
"- better plans time after time.
Mr. Kelley said if the Commission feels this is acceptable as a single-family
development, possibly a recommendation could be made to City Council that this
Commission recommends this rezoning based upon the commitment made by this
applicant.
Mr. Fishman said that over the years, the land has changed hands numerous times.
He fears that the land could be sold and the new owner would build multi-family
units there. He said he would be more comfortable with a PUD zoning. Mr. Kelley
said that 75-foot lots are appropriate in this area and that it is unfair to expect
Muirfield-type development. He suggested that a condition could be placed on this
approval/recommendation for single-family only. l..l1~
~
Z:-cr 2. . bO 'Z..
3. ~ .,2.. M;""""~5
4-fs
~
If
-
,'-"""" ~.. ~~
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Meeting Minutes - March 5, 1992
Page 16
Mr. Campbell made a motion to disapprove this rezoning application Z92-002
consistent with the bases of the staff report of March 5, 1992 which are:
1 ) The blanket R-4 zone permits the construction of multi-family housing for up
to eight family structures. Such uses would be inappropriate and
incompatible with adjacent land uses unless developed as part of a
coordinated plan for the area;
2) The maximum permitted R-4 density exceeds the density of other
developments within the area; ~
3) The Earlington Village panhandle area should be incorporated into the -J
planning for this piece, as required by the Earlington Village approved
Preliminary Development Plan; and
4) The proposed rezoning fails to show compatibility with existing development
and long-term plans.
Mr. Fishman seconded the motion. The vote was as follows: Mrs. Stillwell, yes;
Mr. Leffler, yes; Mr. Geese, yes; Mr. Rauh, yes; Mr. Fishman, yes; and
Mr. Campbell, yes. (Disapproved 6-0,)
Mr. Foegler expressed a strong willingness to work with the applicant on any
potential text change or other way to accomplish some type of zoning that would
address these concerns.
Other Business:
Mrs. Stillwell mentioned the tentative, joint City Council/Plannin miSSion
meeting set for Saturday, March 21. [It was later set for M ay, March 23.] Mr.
Campbell said he mentioned it at the Council meeting onth ago and circulated
Mrs. Stillwell's memo. ...
Mrs. Stillwell suggested that extra meeti be scheduled to discuss planning .)
issues. She said a sub-committee co be formed to accomplish this. Mr. Foegler
said that staff would be happy to rovide whatever support is needed. Mr.
Campbell said staff can let u now what they are expecting in the way of new
development, and the su ommittee could discuss them.
Mr. Foegler said h ill bring up the joint session meeting at the next Council
meeting to firm p a date. Mrs. Stillwell suggested having a few P&Z members
and a few C ncil members make up an agenda of discussion items.
rng no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 10:00 p.m.
I4i S\-o...~
:z... 9~ -00:L
3.5.9'2. M~ r\u..~s
51s
~
,.,.~ "_..,._.......u.,.._.," .....,. - , ri
. .
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Meeting Minutes - May 7, 1992
Page 14
5a. Rezoning Application Z92-002 - Holding Corporation of Ohio
5b. Rezoning Application Z92-005 - Holding Corporation of Ohio
Ms. Clarke said staff recommends that application Z92-005, which is 5 1/2 acres
- of ground located to the east of Muirfield Drive, be tabled. Staff is recommending
approval with conditions, of a larger rezoning application which is Z92-002, which
involves 41.374 acres. Staff also recommends the tabling of items 6 and 7 of the
agenda. Item #6 is the Final Development Plan for Earlington Village and
Dublinshire 4. Staff is in support of the informal application (#7 of agenda) which
has to do with the Earlington Village panhandle.
Ms. Clarke showed slides and presented the staff report. This application is for
two rezonings for 51.8 acres located on the east and west sides of Muirfield Drive.
There is a carryover for the developer of 1.6 acres of parkland from Earlington
Village. Both sites are zoned R-1 currently and the applicant is proposing that they
be rezoned PLR classification. The utilities are available to the site with the
extension of Dublinshire Drive. The applicant has agreed to extend Dublinshire
Drive during this building season westward to Avery Road. She said single-family
use is the preferred use for this site. The applicant was strongly encouraged to
use a planned development district.
The park meets requirements and staff would like to see the following
requirements met in the Preliminary Plat submission for the acreage:
1. Redesign layout to provide stub street to north for additional single-family
.,.. development; if high school site, to provide easement;
\ 2. Provision of landscape/mounding program for Avery and Muirfield frontages;
I
3. Establishment of no-build zone along all park;
4. Dedication of park south of the property line to the center line of Bear Run with
any credit for excess parkland will be carried forward;
5. Dedication of right-of-way on Avery Road 30' from centerline;
6. Reconfiguration of park at southwest corner;
7. Construction of a bikepath along north side of Dublinshire Drive and Wynford
Drive;
8. Supplying additional park access through subdivision, at least one lot plus
adequate easements.
Ms. Clarke said it was decided that the applicant should make a commitment that
the area to the north of the stream be dedicated as parkland as part of his
application. Whatever the cumulative park credit, this would be carried over to the
-
i
. ,
.
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Meeting Minutes - May 7, 1992
Page 15
next application that the developer brings in.
Staff recommends approval of this as a rezoning application, with the
understanding that these conditions can be resolved in the preliminary plat. In
regard to the second application which is Z92-005, it is felt that the layouts as
proposed are not optimal for the area and staff would like to see the applicant ~
investigate alternate layouts. Staff wants to ensure that the best layouts possible
for the area are obtained onto the east of Muirfield Drive. The interface shown
here between the west end of the Earlington panhandle and the rezoning
application Z92-002 is very good. They work together as two adjacent pieces of
property should. There are four applications. Staff is recommending approval with
conditions with Z92-002 and approval of the informal request which is case #7 -
Informal - Final Development Plan - Earlington Village Panhandle. Staff
recommends tabling the second half of case #5 - Z92-005 and also case #6 - Final
Development Plan - Earlington Village - Dublinshire 4.
Mr. Olausen said he has no comments because his firm was involved with the
design.
Mr. Timothy Kelley, applicant, said the 41-acre tract, which is Z92-002, is on the
west side of Muirfield Drive. Also on the west side of Muirfield Drive is the
western portion of the panhandle, which is informal and is a final development plan
for Earlington Village. The property owned by Holding Corporation of Ohio on the
east side of Muirfield Drive, which is stated as 60 acres in the staff report, is
actually 6 acres. This is case number Z92-005.
Rezoning Z92-002 ~
Ms. Clarke said this application will give a lot of benefits the City has been looking -J
for. It will extend Dublinshire Drive from Muirfield Drive over to Avery Road and
will align with Wyndford Drive in the Wyndham subdivision. Staff wants to see
modifications at the preliminary plat. They include extending a stub street to the
north, stubbing into the Jefferson Savings parcel to permit either a neighborhood
to neighborhood connection if that develops residentially, or to transfer that to
some sort of an easement for access to the high school. If access easements are
provided, people will use them, if not, they will create their own. Park space along
Bear Run is desired. Don Kelley has submitted a letter along with the map that
talks about dedicating parkland. As has always been the City's policy, we will
keep track of how many acres get dedicated. Staff feels that if the area along
Bear Run is actually dedicated at this point, there will be a substantial credit to this
developer which he will then be able to transfer to some related piece of property.
Those computations have not been made. The area along Bear Run, to the south
"'"
~~~~,.,..._.~~ ~~.. w ~h _."..""....".,_. .'
. .
.
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Meeting Minutes - May 7, 1992
Page 16
of the cul-de-sac, called Conleth Circle, gets very tight just to the south end. Staff
either wants to see the area along Avery Road eliminated as part of the park or
that cul-de-sac shortened up some so the park space can be widened out. A
landscaping and mounding program for both the east and west flanks along those
two arterial streets is an important thing to add. The Parks Director would like to
see a no-build zone established along the edges of the park so there is no stockade
.. fence line. A dedication of right-of-way along Avery Road consistent with the
Community Plan and the bikepath to be continued along the north side of
Dublinshire Drive are requested. Additional access is needed within the subdivision
to this linear park that is being created along Bear Run. Staff wants to see one of
the lots become an access to this. A tot lot will likely be developed on the west
side of Muirfield Drive, north of the stream, and more direct access from the
subdivision into this area is preferred. Additional access through the subdivision
farther to the west is also desired. A lot will depend upon how the cul-de-sac is
redesigned. Ms. Clarke feels the applicant will come to terms with most of the
above items. With the above conditions, staff recommends appoval of this
application.
Mr. Kelley said this parcel has been before the Planning Commission and Council
before and it included commercial and office/institutional offices. This piece
connects with the existing intersection seen from new Muirfield Drive. It picks up
on the east at that point and carries Dublinshire Drive over to Wynford Drive. He
said he agrees with the conditions. He hoped this would be considered as both a
preliminary plat and a PLR rezoning so all of the above conditions will be
implemented when Council see this. This would cut out a stage of the process
and enable them to develop a portion of the lots this building season. He said Lots
#~ #22 or #21 would be made a roadway only if the high school site is not developed
to the north. If it is not a school site, the expectation is that this property will
.""-, likely become single-family residential. If so, it makes sense to connect the
neighborhoods together to enable the traffic flow to occur. If it is a school site,
they do not want a street access up to the school site because with that intensive
a use, people should use Muirfield Drive or some of the existing bigger roads. Ms.
Clarke said staff wants to see a neighborhood street connection if it becomes a
subdivision to the north and a pedestrian or bikepath easement if it does become a
high school site.
Mr. John Hubley, 8701 Craigston Court, said there is a great deal of discussion
about this project but the lot sizes are not consistent with what Dublin is seeking.
Ms. Jean Nippa, 7262 Hopewell Court, said she represents many residents of
Hopewell and Pueblo Courts, and said that they are happy to hear that single-
family homes are planned for the area north of their residences, but she thought
"->t,~
. .
.
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Meeting Minutes - May 7, 1992
Page 17
there would be discussion tonight about the Avery and Muirfield Drive area
immediately next to Indian Run Meadow. Ms. Clarke said there is another rezoning
for the property to the south of this which will actually abut Indian Run Meadow.
This case will be brought before this Commission at a later date. Ms. Nippa said
the people in the neighborhood feel there is plenty of commercial along Muirfield 'AI\
Drive and with the Perimeter Mall going in, this will take care of any commercial I
development. She asked to be added to the list of property owners notified for .J
these cases.
Ms. Stillwell asked about the density. Ms. Clarke said the density for the 41-acre
tract is 110 units with 2.65 dwelling units per acre. The panhandle as part of
Earlington Village is already zoned for cluster at a density of 2.9 units per acre.
Mr. Kelley said the average lot size is 80 feet. There are 45 lots over 80 feet and
51 lots that are 70-75 feet in width, 22 lots that are about 75 feet and 7 from 75-
80 feet. These lots are significantly greater in width than the lots in Indian Run
which are mostly 65-foot lots.
Ms. Stillwell asked why the PLR zoning was chosen. Mr. Kelley said he tried to do
a straight classification and was not supported by staff or the Commission. Ms.
Clarke said the PUD vests a lot of discretion with the Commission and the PLR
relies more on the regular platting procedures.
Mr. Leffler said with the conditions discussed by staff, he supports this plan.
Mr. Manus said he supports the plan due to the things the City will realize out of
this, however, he feels this plan is very dense. Mr. Kelley said the master plan
states that this area is appropriate for 2-4 units per acre. ~
Mr. Geese said there is no imagination with this plan. The only real gain for the ..J
community is the bikeway. Mr. Kelley said his company has spent five years on
this project. He said the presence of Muirfield Drive hinders a single-family
development along it. Avery Road is limiting along the west side. There is not one
curb cut on Avery Road or Muirfield Drive for the development. The third difficult
limiting condition is that Dublinshire Drive is a requirement of the City. To connect
Dublinshire Drive from Muirfield Drive to Avery Road doesn't help the layout at all.
They are limited by property lines to the north and by Bear Run to the south.
Mr. Campbell said he supports the plan, but said it is quite dense. He suggested
adding width to some of the lots so none are less than 70-75 feet wide. Ms.
Jordan said she would like to bring the park out to the street so it is visible. She
would like to see a more sizeable park entry than a 12-15 foot easement. Mr.
Kelley said the typical way of measuring lot width is at the building line. If these
~
"- - -,. "---_._._.~..._..~.,-..""-, --="~-,~~--..._. .."-- ~,~"'''",",,,"~''''''~-''. ., .._.".......,..~,'-'-,.~.,,-~~.~,-~~~.~
. .
.
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Meeting Minutes - May 7, 1992
Page 18
lots are measured at the building line, there is no lot under 70 feet. He said the
measurements given are at the building line. Mr. Campbell asked if there is not a
necessity for sidewalks in the subdivision. He asked why a bikepath would exist
on a road where there sidewalks. He suggested that the proposed bikepath be
"..., rerouted through the park. Ms. Clarke said the staff doesn't want that. The major
bike traffic is headed from the swimming pool to Avery Park, and those people will
... not take the long way around. She said there is to be a sidewalk along the south
side of Dublinshire and a bike path along the north side.
Mr. Fishman said he approves of the concept for single-family but feels that this
development should be less dense. The City services are already overtaxed.
Mr. Rauh referred to the letter from Mr. Harrison regarding mounding and trees.
Mr. Kelley said the existing treeline on the east and south will not be touched. He
said he will mound along the rear of the lots to separate them from the parkland.
The park will be an additional buffer from his residence. He said he will not totally
screen his property but he will put in mounding and trees.
Mr. Geese asked if the detention basins will be dry and ugly like the one behind the
Scottish Corner School in Indian Run Meadows. Ms. Jordan said the area of the
detention basin is not counted as part of the parkland, but because stream
corridors and/or woods are desirable to a private parkland, the detention basin
becomes necessary. If the detention basin is an acre in size, that much more
parkland is needed.
Mr. Campbell made a motion to approve this application Z92-002 and make the
,,,.. following modifications at the Preliminary Plat.
1. Redesign layout to provide stub street to north for additional single-family
development; if high school site, to provide easement;
2. Provision of landscape/mounding program for Avery and Muirfield frontages;
3. Establishment of no-build zone along all park;
4. Dedication of park south of the property line to the center line of Bear Run with
credit for excess parkland will be carried forward;
5. Dedication of right-of-way on Avery Road 30' from centerline;
6. Reconfiguration of park at southwest corner;
7. Construction of a bike path along north side of Dublinshire Drive and Wynford
Drive;
8. Supplying additional park access through subdivision, one lot plus adequate
easements.
"..-
. ......
, .
.
.
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Meeting Minutes - May 7, 1992
Page 19
Mr. Leffler seconded the motion. The vote was as follows: Mr. Fishman, yes; Mr.
Manus, yes; Mr. Rauh, yes; Mr. Geese, no; Mrs. Stillwell, yes; Mr. Campbell, yes;
Mr. Leffler, yes. (Approved 6-1: 6-yes, 1-no.)
~
,
,
""""
.~
.J
.-
lI,jOltj"'"
~._~-~.'^,.~~-"-~'''~
Q5/28/92 09:25 '5'614 228 1098 DONALD W. KELLEY 1lJ002
. '[:~~ ~~
. ! ! i') ! . rn @ rn n If) rn 1 ~ i;
r ' I,~ II
! HAY 2 8 1992' !
'/1
,
Development Plan Text. - ._~ .." ..........--.-...-.--.--...
~., -.. - '--
"
A. The proposed location and size of areas ot residentia~'use,
indicating dwelling unit densities, dwelling unit types,
the total numbar of dwelling units for each density area
and the total n~er of dwelling units proposed in the
development plan.
-"
See Preliminary Plat for Dublinshire Section 4 dated,
5-14-92 (the "Plat").
...
B. The proposed size, location and use of nonresidential
portions of the tract, including usable open areas, parks,
playgrounds, school. sites and other areas and spaces with
the suggested ownership of such areas and spaces.
See Plat for parkland location and size. The Applicant
has secured the agreement of the property owner to the
south of me ~ubject tract to 'dedicate the parkland
cross hatohed on the Plat and. noted on the Plat as "By
Othersn (see attached. letter). All parkland will be
owned by the City of Dublin. '!'he parkland along
Muirfield Drive provides important visual open space
which enhances the parkway character of Muirfie~d
Drive. The parkland alonq Bear Run provides for a
passive, 1inear park which will protect the natural
area around the stream for wildlife and pedestrian use
while providing sufficient width for a neighborhood tot
lot and. larqe windoW's into the parkland at Avery Road
and Muirfield Drive.
c. The proposed provision of water, sanitary sewer and surface
drainage facilities, including engineering feasibility
t'J.'P~~, studies or other evidence of reasonableness.
See Plat.
~~jI#i'
D. The proposed trafric circulation patterns, including public
and. private streets, parkinq areas, walks and. other
accessways, indicating their relationship to topography,
existing streets or showing other evidence ot
reasonableness.
Dublinshire Drive and Wyn~ord Drive will provide an
east-west collector street to carry vehicular traffic
between Avery Road and Muirfield Drive. A bike. path
wil.l be instalI.ed.. along the. north side of these roads'
as shown on the P1at to allow for biCYCle traffic to
access 'the existing und.e.rpass at Muirfield Drive from
Avery Road. Access to the parkland along the southern
portion o~ the tract for pedestrian traffic will be
provided as shown on the Plat.
e" . . ... . .. . .... .. ....... ......... ,.
. '. ... ....
-..- ~ "'- .... ~ M~';""~,,,,-==:,:~~~__,:..,:.~ ==~-. ....~ ....J ~ ~.. .... 0:"'. ...
OS/28/92 09:25 '5'614 228 1098 DONALD W. KELLEY III 0€3 .
.
.
E. The proposed schedule of ' site development, construction of
structures and associated facilities, including sketches
and other materials indicating design principles and
concepts to be followed in site development, oonstruction,
landscaping- and other features. Suoh schedule shall
include the proposed use or reuse of existing features such
as topography, structures, streets and easements.
The site development will likely oocur in three ~
phases. The first phase will include the completion of
DUblinshire Drive and Wynford Drive from Avery Road to }
Dublinshire Drive. Entrance features at Wynford Drive ..",
and Avery Road and Dublinshire Drive at Muirfield Drive
will include "dry laidtl stone walls and landscaping.
F. The relationship'of the proposed development to existing
and future land use in the surrOunding area, the street
system, community facilities, services and other public
improvements.
The proposed development pro~ides for an important
east-west connection between Avery Road and Muirfield
Drive without compromising the character of the single
family land use. It provides a single family
sUbdivision which is oriented "within" with a ~inin1um
of visual or physical interrerence with Muirfield Drive
or Avery Road. The single family use, lot size
characteristics and density are consistent with
surroundinq land uses and the C01D1Dunity Plan.
G. Evidence that the applicant has sufficient control over the
land to effectuate the proposed devel.opment plan. Evidence
of control. includes property rights and the engineering
feasibility data which may be necessary.
The Appli.cant owns the sUbject tract and the Plat ~
demonstrates the engineering feasibility. The
Applicant has secured the coJIUlli t::ment from the adj acent .J
property owner regarding the off-site parkland
dedication as described in Item B above.
, ... . , -. , ....-.-.. . . _ _w. .0 . ...................... ---. .-..
~
"_.,~,_..- . ."-"'~<"~ .~,_.- .,..~..~- " ~~,.,~~-
, "_,~,'_"~".,,,.......~.~..,~,_...,~.o~._~~
~5/28/92 09:26 '5'614 228 1098 DONALD W. KELLEY 14I 004
.
,
~
Donald W. Kelley & Associates, Inc.
Reel Estate Consultants at Developers
Dclneld w, Kelley, MAl, CAE 250 East Broad Street. Suite 1100 . Columbus. Ohio 43215-3721
11mQlhy M. Kelley (614) 228-5i75 . Fax (614) ~~7a
Terrence P. K8lIey
f'a.'rick J, Kelley
Margaret M. Kelley
Ray Booty
Sally J. McGlmy
Hay 28, 1992
The City of Dublin
Attn: Bobbie Clarke
'....... 5131. Post Road
Dublin, Ohio 4301.7
Re: Parkland dedication along
Bear RUn
Dear Ms. Clarke:
I a.JIl writinq as the duly authorized agent of Ohio Hl:)lding ,
Company, who owns the property located north of Indian Run
sections 5 and 6 and south of tha property owned by' the Holding
Corporation of Ohio west of Muixfield Drive (the "Propert.yh).
The undersigned hareby co~fir.ms the following:
1.. In connection with the deVelop1D.ent of the Property by
the undersigned for residential purposes, it will dedicate
parkland to the city of Dublin located north of Bear Run and in
the COnfiguration shown on the attached. Exhibit nA a . Such
dedication will be :lIlade as part. of the requ.iJ::ed parkland
dedication for the Property. The undersigned recognizes that
this dedication of p?J,rk1and compliments the dedication of
parkland proposed in connection with the plan o~ Holding
Corporation of Ohio in Rezoning Applications Z92-002/Z92-005 for
its property and prov::ides an appropriate parkland area for all
concerned.
2 - The intention of the undersigned to dedicate the
parkland will be :madS in such form. as requested by the city of
DulJlin and in accordance with the timing requested. by the City
of Dublin. Such dedication shall be irrespective of the
undersigned I s proposed use of the Property so that if the use on
the Property changes for whatever reason to other than
residential, the commitment to make the parkland dedication will
.
rema:Ln.
This letter supercedes my letter to you dated May 7, 1992.
Yours truly"
Ohio Holding,Company
By: J~1If1~~{/
Donald W.: 11 ,
authorizedaqent
cc: Robert E. Albright
, .
~~~""
-
. - . .
u___ i ,~r ItlJfa~o Ali;fl
...". ...
, -
---
IIJ~~ID ~ I . ... -_1..-
lOSSY fJ'"1":""(l r: ' 1661 1 ---..;...
_.......~ '~rJ i I; , 9 l AVH
l l' I .......-- . .
, . .
--
--.-.'
\ Il\ ~" !
1 ' '-..:
, '
~
-..J
J
!.
sf
l~J
id
El I
\ "
I \
\
\ .'
, iUri
..~ J
"II
:NP. -
IIIU'
I ~
, ..J
( ~ ~..,'? t;
~,~ Ol~"
'YoVQ l'V~1'=lJ~ ~Q~ ~ 1.,~lp~ ~q of --_..-.----
, r ~~J'o 'PO'
"P~",~. S4OJ;7 )
.. v.. ..11 g ) ~)(-:r
-' .
~oo III "
.\3T1 ,. ,
3)1 .II tnvNoa " ,
9601 9i:i: t "
19Q. 9i: ': 60' .;' - '
i:619ii~6 -.- ,-
.-.
PUBLIC HEARING
DATE: June 1, 1992
- REGARDING: Ordinance 31-92
An Ordinance Providing for a Change of Zoning of
41.374 Acres, Located on the East Side of Avery
Road, 3000' South of Brand Road, to be Rezoned
from: R-1, Restricted Suburban Residential
District to: PLR, Planned Low Density Residential
District.
PRO P 0 N E N T S
NAME ADDRESS
~'.s 111 ",., ~
PUBLIC HEARING
DATE: June 1, 1992
REGARDING: Ordinance 31-92
I
An Ordinance Providing for a Change of Zoning of
41.374 Acres, Located on the East Side of Avery
Road, 3000' South of Brand Road, to be Rezoned
from: R-1, Restricted Suburban Residential
District to: PLR, Planned, Low Density Residential
District.
o P P 0 N E N T S
NAME ADDRESS .
.W'.._'"_ '.__.",""~~"~~;O"".~'~'_'"~~~~.=_ -=.-..,-,"" 1. jLI"r'~ .:1 . .~ .
TIMOTHY M. KELLEY
ATTORNEY AT LAW
250 EAST BROAD STREET
COLUMBUS, OHIO 43215
-
(614) 228-5775
FAX (614) 228-1098
Ii""'"
~
June 5, 1992
Anne C. Clarke
Clerk of Council
City of Dublin
6665 Coffman Road
Dublin, Ohio 43017
Re: Rezoning Ordinance No.
31-92 (41.4 acre tract
located between Muirfield
Drive and Avery Road)
Dear Anne:
At the City Council Hearing on Monday, June 1, 1992 for the
above referenced matter, Councilman Charles Kranstuber requested
a copy of the Deed Restrictions which we have used in our
developments in Dublinshire, Earlington Village and Hemmingway
and plan to use on the property which is the subject of the
rezoning. Enclosed is a copy of a preliminary draft of the Deed
I"" Restrictions which we expect to use on the subject project. The
final version may have some variations and/or additional
I provisions but in substance the enclosed represents what will be
'-' recorded against the property.
In order to save you time, I am taking the liberty of sending a
copy of the enclosed Deed Restrictions directly to Mr.
Kranstuber. Please let me know if you have any questions.
Thank you.
Yours truly,
T:~Y ~ ';J~
cc: Charles W. Kranstuber ( encl. )
375 GlenMeadow Court
Dublin, Ohio 43017
/lc
-
_,...4,.,......_......,..0<"'.. _~,~~,_'...~=,,~-=._.__,"".~~,__.,""_.'u...,.,<__~.,~., .,',..,....".. "
. -
[ij)OO& ~ V
DECLARATION OF RESTRICTIONS
THIS DECLARATION is made on the date hereinafter set forth
~ by , hereinafter referred to
as "Declarant."
.~ WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, Declarant is the owner of certain real property
situated in the County of Franklin, the State of Ohio, and in the
City of DUblin, and bounded and described as follows:
Being Lots Numbered
both inclusive, of
as the same are_numbered and delineated upon the
recorded plat_thereof, of record in Plat Book
-, Page _, Recorder's Office, Franklin County, Ohio.
LAST TRANSFER OF RECORD: Official Record Vol.____,
Page .
NOW THEREFORE, In pursuance of a general plan for the
protection, benefit and mutual advantage of all the lots in the
aforementioned subdivision (hereinafter referred to as "Lots"),
~, and of the persons who are now or may hereafter become owners of
any of the Lots or parts thereof, Declarant hereby declares that
all of the Lots shall be held, sold, and conveyed subject to the
following easements, restrictions, covenants and conditions
(hereinafter referred to as "Restrictions"), which are for the
mutual benefit and protection of, and shall be enforceable by, all
and any of the present and future owners of any of the Lots.
Declarant may, at Declarant's discretion, provide that the
Restrictions are enforceable by the owners of lots in adjacent
subdivisions hereafter developed, provided that restrictions are
imposed on such adjacent subdivisions which are sUbstantially
similar to these Restrictions and provided further that the owners
of the Lots shall be entitled to enforce the restrictions
applicable to such adjacent subdivision(s). These Restrictions
shall run with the land and shall be binding for a period of forty
(40) years from the date hereof and shall be automatically
extended for successive periods of ten (10) years each unless and
until an instrument signed by at least the majority of the then
owners of Lots has been recorded, which instrument shall provide
for a change in said Restrictions either in whole or in part.
1. No dwelling, garage or any addition thereto or any
alterations thereof shall be erected, reconstructed, placed or
suffered to remain upon said premises unless or until the size,
location, type, style of architecture, use, the materials of
construction thereof, the color scheme therefor, grading plan of
\.r the lot, including the grade elevation of said dwelling, the plot
plan showing the proposed location of said dwelling upon said
premises (and the landscape plan and type of fencing) and the
plans, specifications and details of said dwelling shall have been
submitted in writing to Declarant, its successors or assigns, and
until such plans and specifications shall have been approved in
writing by Declarant. Declarant's approval of said plans and
specifications shall be based upon compliance with the specific
provisions of these Restrictions and otherwise upon Declarant's
....._"""'C_"~"'~.........."._,_~____.......~,_._._.,_
reasonable satisfaction that the specific elements of said plans
and specifications set forth in the preceding sentence are
harmonious and in keeping with the general plan for the
subdivision and generally are architecturally harmonious with the
other structures in the subdivision.
If Declarant fails to approve or disapprove such plans and
specifications within thirty (30) days after the submission
thereof in writing to Declarant, such plans and specifications as
have been submitted in accordance with the terms hereof shall be
i deemed to have been approved. Failure of Declarant to object
within six months after completion of construction of a dwelling
shall be deemed an approval of the plans and specifications
pursuant to this Section 1.
If Declarant ceases to exist as an entity, and this right of
approval shall not have been specifically assigned to a successor
in interest, (which may include a homeowners' association whose
members consist of the owners of not less than fifty-one percent
of the Lots), then the approval of plans and specifications as set
forth hereinabove shall not be necessary and the provisions of
this paragraph shall be inoperative. Said assignment by Declarant
of this right of approval shall be in writing and filed with the
Recorder of Franklin County, Ohio.
All construction work commenced on said premises shall be
completed within one year after the start of construction thereof
in accordance with the plans and specifications so approved by
Declarant and Declarant shall have the right to inspect all such
construction work at all reasonable times to ensure the compliance
with such plans and specifications.
2. Each of the Lots shall be used and occupied solely and
~ exclusively for private-residence purposes by a single family, and
no other than a one single-family, private residence purpose
building shall be erected, reconstructed, placed or suffered to
remain thereon, which building shall include an attached garage of
a size reasonably intended to contain at least two automobiles.
3. No noxious or offensive trade or activity shall be
carried on upon any of the Lots; nor shall anything be done on any
of the Lots which may be or may become an annoyance or nuisance to
any of the other Lots or of the owners thereof.
4. No structure of a temporary character, trailer, mobile
home, tent, shack, garage, barn or other outbuilding shall be used
on any of the Lots at any time as a residence, either temporarily
or permanently, and no structure of a temporary character,
detached from the residence, shall be used for storage purposes.
5. No spiritous, vinous or fermented liquors of any kind
shall be manufactured or sold, either wholesale or retail, upon
said premises, and no industry, business, trade, occupation or
profession of any kind shall be conducted, maintained or permitted
upon said premises. No well for gas, water, oil or other
substance shall at any time, whether intended for temporary or
permanent purposes, be erected, placed or suffered to remain upon
said premises, nor shall the premises be used in any way or for
any purpose which may endanger the health or unreasonably disturb
, the quiet of the owner or owners of any of the Lots.
-....
6. No animals, rabbits, or poultry of any kind and no
species of fowl, livestock, birds or insects shall be kept upon or
maintained on any part of any of the Lots except domestic dogs,
cats, or other household pets which are kept for domestic purposes
only, and are not kept, bred, or maintained for any commercial
purpose.
-,...".- ....,~-~...,-,~
7. No trucks, commercial vehicles, boats, trailers, campers
or mobile homes shall be parked or stored on the premises unless
the same are in a garage or at the rear of the dwelling and out of
view from the curb in front of the dwelling, provided, however,
that nothing herein contained shall prohibit the reasonable use of
such vehicles as may be necessary during construction of the homes
to be constructed on the Lots.
- 8. No Lot shall be used or maintained as a dumping ground
for rubbish. Trash, garbage or other waste shall not be kept
except in sanitary containers. All incinerators or other
""'- equipment for the storage or disposal of such materials shall be
kept in a clean and sanitary condition.
9. No dish antennas shall be used or erected on any Lot
unless located within the dwelling constructed on such Lot. No
seperate tower for any radio, TV, CB or any such antenna shall be
erected.
10. No portion of any Lot nearer to any street than the
building setback lines as shown upon the recorded plat of the
subdivision shall be used for any purposes other than that of a
lawn, nor shall any fence or wall of any kind, for any purpose, be
erected, placed or suffered to remain on any lot nearer to any
street now existing, or any hereafter created, than the front
building line of the actual building, excepting ornamental
railings, walls, or fences not exceeding three (3) feet in height
located on or adjacent to entrance, platforms or steps.
No fences, walls or structures of any kind shall be permitted
within the "no build zones" on the recorded plat of the
subdivision.
.",.,.. Nothing contained in this section 10 shall be construed as
preventing the use of any portion of any Lot for walks, drives (if
otherwise permitted), planting of trees or shrubbery, growing of
flowers or other ornamental plants, or for small statuary
entranceways, fountains or similar ornamentations for the purpose
of beautifying the lot provided that no unsightly objects shall be
allowed to be placed or suffered to remain anywhere thereon.
11. No garage or any addition thereto or alteration thereof
shall be erected, reconstructed, placed or suffered to remain upon
any of the Lots unless the same is for the exclusive use of the
family occupying said dwelling, and unless such garage be an
integral part of said dwelling and unless and until the size,
location, type, style of architecture, cost, materials, color and
grade shall have first been approved in writing as required of all
other construction as set forth in Section 1 hereinabove. No such
proposed garage shall be approved unless such proposed garage
shall be of a size reasonably intended to accommodate at least two
automobiles.
12. No sign of any kind shall be displayed to the public
view on any of the aforementioned lots except one professional
sign of not more than one square feet may be attached to the front
of a residence, and one sign of not more than five square feet
advertising the premises for sale or for rent, and except those
other signs as may be approved by Declarant intended to be used by
a builder to advertise the premises during the construction and
.... sales period. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Declarant
reserves the right to establish standards for uniform signage and
the total number of signs to be used by each builder and realtor
during the construction and sales period as to all of the Lots.
13. The location of any and all driveways shall be and shall
remain as established upon each of the Lots pursuant to the plans
and specifications referred to hereinabove. No driveway shall be
located, relocated, or suffered to remain upon any of the Lots
except as approved by Declarant in writing.
~.
.
14. No Lot owner shall subdivide or convey less than the
whole of any of the Lots without first obtaining the written
consent of the Declarant.
15. The Declarant reserves unto itself, its successors and
assigns, a perpetual easement in, through, under and/or over those
portions of the rear and sides of each of the Lots as shown on the
plat thereof, designed as utility rights-of-way, for the
"""... construction, operation and maintenance of electrical and
telephone utilities, lines and conduits and water, gas and sewer
lines and conduits, cable T.V. or any other public utility
'~~("'" facilities, together with the necessary or proper incidents and
appurtenances; and no building or other structure, or any part
thereof, shall be erected or maintained upon any part of the Lots
over or upon which easements for the installation and maintenance
of such public utilities and sewer lines will be or have been
granted.
16. No dwelling shall be erected, reconstructed, placed or
suffered to remain upon any of the Lots without having the
following minimum square feet of livable area, exclusive of
porches, basements, garages, and other unfinished space:
A. One-story dwellings shall have a minimum of 1800 square
feet.
B. 1-1/2-story dwellings shall have a minimum living space
on the first floor of 1400 square feet with the second
floor finished in its entirety.
c. Two-story dwellings shall have a minimum of 1900 square
feet, with a minimum of 950 square feet being on each
story.
~'
No split-level or bi-Ievel dwellings shall be permitted on
any of the Lots.
17. In connection with the Restrictions contained herein, it
is hereby provided that if, in the sole opinion of the Declarant,
the enforcement of the provisions hereof would work an undue
hardship by reason of the shape, dimensions or topography of any
of the Lots or by reason of the shape, dimensions or type of
dwelling proposed to be erected on any of the Lots, Declarant may,
in its sole discretion, permit variations in size, type, location
or otherwise that will not, in its sole discretion, do material
damage to any abutting or adjacent property.
18. The foregoing Restrictions, and each and everyone of
them, shall be held and considered as running with the land hereby
conveyed, and with each and every part of such land, and shall be
construed toward their strict enforcement whenever reasonably
necessary to ensure uniformity and harmony of plan, development
and use of said subdivision, and if necessary, they shall be so
extended and enlarged by reasonable implication so as to make them
fully effective to accomplish such purposes. The reasonable
construction placed upon them by the Declarant in good faith shall
be final and binding as to all persons and property benefitted or
bound thereby. The invalidity of any of these Restrictions or any
part thereof shall not affect those remaining Restrictions or
parts thereof, nor shall any failure by Declarant, however long
"- continued (except in case of a specific waiver thereof) to object
to any breach of or to enforce any provisions whatsoever which are
contained herein, be deemed as a waiver of the right to do so
thereafter, as to the same breach, or as to one occurring prior or
subsequent thereto.
.
.~~_....-_......~,"~~~ "'~'~.~'-"'" .....~-
~
, .
19. The Declarant reserves the right in case of any
violation or breach of any of the foregoing Restrictions to enter
the property upon which or as to which such violation or breach
exists, and to summarily abate and remove, at the expense of the
owner thereof, any structure, thing or condition that may be or
exist thereon contrary to the intent and meaning of the provision
hereof as interpreted by the Declarant; and the said Declarant
shall not, by reason thereof, be deemed guilty of any manner of
,....~ trespass for such entry, abatement or removal. Further, the
Declarant may enjoin, abate or remedy by appropriate legal
proceedings, either in law or in equity, the continuance of any
breach of these Restrictions.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the said Declarant has caused this
Declaration of Restrictions to be subscribed by its duly
authorized officers (or partners) this _ day of . 199 - .
Signed and acknowledged
in the presence of: (Declarant)
By:
STATE OF
COUNTY OF , 5S:
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ___
day of , 19_, by
","'" Notary Public
This instrument prepared by:
Timothy M. Kelley, Attorney at Law
250 E. Broad st., Columbus, Ohio 43215
......