HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/04/1986
Minutes of
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
109
Dub 1 in Vi 11 :Jf'}" . r:otlnr i 1 Mp('ti ng
~
Meeting
National Graphics Corp" Cols., 0, Form No. 1097 ~
Held
19_
AugU5~-4,n1986u
[
[
[
10.
The regularly scheduled meeting of the Dublin Village Council was called
to order by Mayor Michael Close at 7:30 P.M. on Monday, August 4, 1986.
Mr. Thornton led the Pledge of Allegiance.
Members of Council present were: Mr. Amorose, Mayor Close, Mr. Jankowski,
Ms. Maurer, Mr. Rozanski, and Mr. Thornton.
Mr. Sutphen was absent.
Mr. Stephen Smith, Law Director, and Mr. Sheldon, Village Manager were
also present as were Mr. Bowman, Ms. Clarke, Mr. Harding, Ms. Jordan, and
Ms. Prushing.
Mr. Jankowski moved to approve the minutes of the July 21, 1986 meeting
of Council as corrected.
Mr. Amorose seconded the motion.
The vote was unanimous in favor.
Mr. Rozanski moved to approve payment of the bills.
Mr. Amorose seconded the motion.
The vote was 6-0 in favor.
Third Reading
Ordinance No. 33-86 - Rezone 199 Acres East Side of Avery Road, North of
Post Road. Third Reading.
Ms. Clarke presented the following information:
1.
2.
Indian Run Meadow is a PUD, which is a Planned Unit Development.
There are three stages to a PUD approval. The zoning actually takes
place at the preliminary plan stage, and this is the stage at which
the applicant is asking for a revision.
The applicant is requesting a different configuration of the various
parcels; those uses which will line the northern portion of the
boulevard. The commercial site will remain the same. To the north
of that the applicant is asking for a seven acre office site. To the
north of that is an eight acre school site and beyond that a five
acre park site plus a detention pond.
At the public hearing two weeks ago the applicant's documentation
was not quite complete. There were a few things that needed revision
or clarification. Ben Hale, who represented the applicants, promised
to have those documents submitted to staff for review by the Friday
afternoon of that same week, and he did that. They were as agreed.
It is only very recently that additional revisions are being sought.
The neighborhood very recently got involved in the rezoning.
There was a meeting and the residents had some concerns about both
the land uses and the general development standards to be employed
within their neighborhood.
There were a number of things that the neighbors asked for and two
specifically were changes in permitted uses and a change in the
proposed fence detail.
The applicant has agreed to eliminate two possible land uses from the
commercial piece - fast food and drive-in restaurants, and to remove
entertainment (night club, dance hall) type uses.
There was a single fence outlined, described in detail, which would
have been permitted in what is known as the no build zone behind
the houses. The residents seemed to have a strong preference for
leaving that portion of the zoning exactly as it is - that is to
leave it with no fencing in the no build zone.
The applicant has agreed to eliminate fencing in the no build zone.
The text that outlines those changes in permitted uses was distri-
buted to Council.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1 1 3
Minutes of Dublin Village Council Meeting
-~
Meeting
National Graphics Corp" Cols,. 0, Form No. 1097 ~
H eldu u nAugUSL9._,m19_&u__n
n19
Page Two
o
Responding to a question from Ms. Maurer, Ms. Clarke said that the split
rail fence would be allowed in the same areas where one would be per-
mitted to build a residence - in the build zone on the lot.
Ms. Clarke also said that there is an architectural review committee to
review all applications in Indian Run Meadow. That group would have to
review and give approval on any exterior alterations.
She noted that 20 acres of single family would be deleted in the new plan.
The density of the single family is 3.22 dwelling units per acre.
Mr. Jankowski asked about the architectural review committee. Ms. Clarke
said that it exists in a preliminary form - two of the representatives,
right now, are employed by or associated with the developer's organization.
At some point there will be representatives of the Indian Run Meadow
Civic Association when it is formed.
c
Mr. Harrison Smith, Jr. said that it was the intention of the architectural
review committee to use a single fence, even in the build zone.
Mr. Bowman said that the no build zone is at the rear of the property,
90 feet from the right-of-way, which would be 40 through 60 feet of no
build zone; 90 feet is build zone.
Mr. Smith said that they had revised the standard of landscaping on the
Boulevard. The mounds along the office and commercial parcels will be
put in as the Boulevard is constructed. He also said that their
obligation for the school, church and park sites is that when they begin
to use those premises they are obligated to come up with the same
standard, as regards the screening.
Mr. Smith told Mr. Amorose that on the commercial site there would be no
pole signs.
Mr. Bowman said that what would normally be required in a situation such
as this would be a joint identification sign - one that would identify the
center and then each individual tenant would get a wall sign. To do so
they would have to come in with a plan and all permits would be based on
the plan.
He went on further to say that his interpretation of the text was that
each individual user would not have a pole sign.
With regard to the no build zone Mr. Smith said that the individual owners
are responsible for the maintenance of the property within their individual
lots. He also said that there is a maintenance covenant.
[
Mr. Amorose said that the proposed eastern white pine do not do well in
this area, and suggested that a more hardy pine or spruce be substituted.
They agreed to do that.
Mr. Rick Voellers of 6307 Valley Stream Drive expressed some concerns. He
did say that the residents were pleased with regard to the fencing as well
as the prohibition of night clubs, bars, fast food restaurants. Mr.
Voellers listed concerns of the residents, and said that many persons
would request that the rezoning not go forward until the residents have
time to organize and study the issue in more depth.
Rev. John Webb of 6271 Arapahoe Place spoke to the members of Council.
Rev. Webb said that some of the residents were questioning the need for
the change as far as the zoning is concerned. He said that they were
aware that there was going to be commercial but were not aware of the
fact that there was going to be an additional tract for more "industrial
commercial type of development". He said that they are opposed to that,
at this time, for the following reasons:
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1 1 7
Minutes of
n11t> 1; 0 Vi 11 age C~'LC i 1_08
Meeting
National Graphics Corp,. Cols,. O. Form No. 1097....
Held m---Augusi:--4,.---FJ8u
__19_
Page Three
o
1.
It represents the idea that without any kind of consultation with
the residents, they are being asked to accept something different
than what they were originally told, and being asked to accept a
decrease in property values.
The residents have not had time "to put this all together", not had
the time to organize themselves effectively. He said that they are
asking for that time.
Rev. Webb said that they would like Council to separate the school issue
from the other issues. He said that they want the school underway.
2.
[
Rev. Webb also had two additional comments:
1. The slowness of the developer to get the work in place along Muirfield
Drive.
2. The residents would like a minimum of 30 days to get themselves
organized to study the commercial, but would not object to proceeding
with the school.
Mayor Close pointed out that if the Village would attempt to split out
and approve the school site, the developer has the right to reject doing
that if the Village does not do the whole thing at once.
Rev. Webb said that they had had some commitments as far as the commercial,
but do not know what it will look like. He also said that they would like
to have some idea as to what will be going in to the office/institutional
site.
Mr. Mike Lindamood of 6274 Ottawa said that they were not totally opposed
to what was being planned, but would have liked to have known the
original intent as regards the school site as well as the path to the
school.
Mayor Close asked Mr. Tony Wall how long it would take to get a bid and
get the school built from the time the ordinance is passed.
Mr. Wall said that the site bid package is out right now, and that they
will receive those bids at the end of the month. He said that they also
have the steel fabrication out for bids right now also.
Mr. Wall said that they need 12 to 14 months to build an elementary school.
Ms. R. Fillman, 7001 Avery Road presented her comments to members of
Council. She said that she had concerns with the landscaping as well as
the commercial building.
Mayor Close told Ms. Fillman that as far as Council is concerned, the
monetary gain to the Village will not be considered.
Mr. Rozanski said that one of the
to adjoin it to the five acre park
area for a school/park situation.
be a seven plus acre site for just
reasons for moving the school site was
site so that there would be a 13 acre
If the school were moved down it would
a school.
[
Mr. Smith presented background information on the site.
Mr. Smith also said that with regard to the office/institutional site
that there is some interest in a small facility for the elderly. He
said that there has also been interest in a church on the site.
Mr. Smith suggested that in the future there may be a need for doctors'
offices.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1 1 9
Minutes of
Meeting
Dublin Village Council Meeting
~
National Graphics Corp., Cols,. O. Form No. 1097 ~
Held . mnAtlZtl$_tn~~__t2a6_
19n
o
[
[
Page Four
Mayor Close said that in part this was part of the City's doing. When
Dublin became aware that the schools wanted to put a site in there the
Village began discussions with the schools, and that in order to make
it a more attractive site that it would be best to put the school and
park site together - for two reasons:
a. it is more economical - the school did not have to buy as much land
because they can "spill over" into the Village's park land;
b. when they are put together it affords the opportunity for the Village
and the schools to do some type of joint maintenance/joint type of
use.
He said that the difficulty was that in the original configuration the
school and park sites could not be placed next to each other. The logical
thing to do was to put the school site next to the park site in the
northern corner. As a result, there is a seven (7) acre site between the
retail (which was already there) and the school site, and the desirability
of making those single family lots is not quite as desirable since those
lots would be between two public type uses.
Another resident from the subdivision asked why the school should be
moved to the norther part of the subdivision when the single-family and
multi-family sites are in the south of the development.
Mr. Smith pointed out that the proposed school is not for just the Indian
Run Meadow subdivision but that a larger drawing area would be from north
of the school.
Additional residents expressed concerns regarding the safety of children
walking to and from the school, having to walk along Muirfield Boulevard.
Mr. Roy Lovell of 4980 Dublin Road (for 31 years) spoke in support of
the residents who were expressing concerns, and urged Council to allow
the residents time to further study the issue and an opportunity to find
out exactly what is going to happen to their homes and the surrounding
portions of the development.
Mayor Close suggested tabling the ordinance for two weeks to give the
reresidents an opportunity to get additional information and also suggested
that the residents, developers, and staff adjourn to the basement meeting
room to continue discussions.
Ms. Maurer suggested that Mr. Wall attend also.
Mr. Jankowski moved to table the ordinance until the Council meeting of
August 18, 1986.
Mr. Thornton seconded the motion.
The vote was unanimous in favor.
I
II
II
II
Ii
I'
Ii
I,
I'
II
,I
II
I
II
Ii
it
Resolution No. 12-86
Second Reading.
The third and final reading, Mayor Close said, will be at the Dublin
Village Council Meeting on August 18, 1986.
Statement of Services for a Proposed Annexation.
Ordinance No. 56-86 - Amend Codified Ordinance Section 1105.18 Requiring
Sidewalk. Second Reading.
Ms. Maurer commented that the Village cannot require developers in
previously zoned developments that are completed to build sidewalks.
It would have to be the current residents.
Mayor Close said that you would have to do it by the same assessment
procedure as anything else.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
125
Minutes of
nllhl in Vj] lage r.QJ1"lCj ~inB
Meeting
National Graphics Corp" Cols., 0, Form No. 1097 ~
Held
uA1Jg1J_st_ A_'u_L9B_6u
uuu19_
Page Five
[
Mr. Thornton said that he had surveyed the sidewalk situation in the
Village and that it is really a "hodge podge", noting specific instances
where there was a lack of cODtinuation of same in many areas. He also
said that the purpose of the Ordinance is to require any future develop-
ments within the Village to have sidewalks.
Mr. Thornton also said that the goal is to have any future construction
within the Village of Dublin to have sidewalks, and then the Village can
go back on a piece-by-piece basis and legislate sidewalks where they are
necessary (for safety reasons, for example).
Ms. Maurer pointed out the situation on CoFfm~n R~ad And asked if it would
be fair to assess the residents that live adjacent to Coffman Road for
sidewalks. She also asked if there would be other ways to get those side-
walks built.
[
Mayor Close said that State law reauires the Village to "pick up" a portion
of the cost, and that the Village can adjust that portion of the cost
which it is willing to pay, and if the Village does not pay the entire
cost that State law requires that the balance be paid for by the adjacent
property owners.
Mr. Smith said that with regard to commercial areas, i.e., the Post Office
or Frantz Road, the areas where there is not residential use, that
perhaps the Planner may be required to make recommendations as to assessing
and requiring sidewalks to be put in. Mr. Smith also said that in
residential areas where sidewalks were not put in, it might be difficult
to require them to be bllilt now.
Mayor Close said that the Ordinance would be heard for a third and final
reading on August 18th at 7:30 P.M.
Resolution No. 13-86 - Authorize Construction of a Cul-de-Sac on Macbeth
Drive. Second Reading.
Mr. Amorose said that he had met with the engineer on the project, but
that he would prefer to wait until Mr. Warner returns, and hold the
Resolution over for a third reading on August 18, 1986.
Ordinance No. 57-86 - Approve Scope of Services for Two (2) Traffic
Signals. First Reading.
Mr Amorose introduced the Ordinance, and to include the recommendation
of the Village Manager (to accept the bid of Clyde E. Williams and
Associates in the amount of $11,700.00).
Mr. Rozanski seconded the motion
The vote was unanimous in favor.
[
Ms. Maurer moved to do away with the three time reading rule and treat
as an emergency.
Mr. Thornton seconded the motion.
The vote was 6-0 in favor.
The vote on the Ordinance was unanimous in favor.
Ordinance No. 58-86 - Requirements for Land Dedication in Residential
Subdivisions or PUDs or a Fee in Lieu Thereof. First Reading.
Mayor Close said that he felt that Mr. Smith, Mr. Rich, and Mr. Burkholder
should have an opportunity to meet, and as a result said that this
ordinance would be held over for a public hearing at the first meeting
of Council in September (September 2, 1986).
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
127
Minutes of
O,,}, 1 in Vi 11 ag(;? C'4Wt:1C i 1_in8
Meeting
National Graphics Corp,. Cols., 0, Form No. 1097 ~
H eldu
nnAtlgtlsJ:n~~n198fL
19n
Page Six
(
Ordinance No. 59-86 - Renewal of Shier-Rings Waterline Notes. First
Reading.
Mr. Jankowski introduced the ordinance.
Mr. Thornton moved to do away with the three time reading rule and treat
as an emergency.
Ms. Maur~r s~copded the motion.
The vote was unanimous in favor of the motion.
The vote on approval of the ordinance was 6-0 in favor.
Ordinance No. 60-86 - Amend the 1986 Annual Appropriations. First Reading.
Mr. Thornton introduced the ordinance.
Ms. Prushing said that the reasons for the amendments are listed within
each section of the Ordinance - most of them are change orders that have
already been approved on outstanding contracts. She noted that the only
additional one was a request from the Parks and Recreation Director for
additional monies for rents or leases or professional services and the
money has already been collected, or the Village anticipates collecting
money for those programs.
She also noted that the final one on Section 5 is for the note renewal.
[
Ms. Maurer moved to waive the three time reading rule and treat as an
emergency.
Mr. Amorose seconded the motion.
The vote was unanimous in favor of the motion.
The vote on the Ordinance was 6-0 in favor.
Other
School Board Request for Waiver of Section 1105.07 of Codified Ordinances
Mr. Jankowski moved to allow the School Board the waiver as requested.
Mr. Thornton seconded the motion.
[. i
, I
That section of the Codified Ordinances says that construction of buildings
shall not be permitted until all improvements leading to that site are
completed and accepted by the Municipality.
It was noted that Mr. Warner, Village Engineer, had no objection to this
request.
Mayor Close said that what the School Board is requesting is that from the
intersection which is the northernmost terminus of Muirfield Drive at this
time the school is asking that they be able to build a haul road to get
to the school site; said road would then be completed, blacktopped, and
paved some time after the actual construction had begun. Hp also said
that obviously the waiver would only apply at the point the plat is
approved, and that the school owns the land.
Mayor Close recommended holding the request for two weeks until specifica-
tions are on file with the Village Engineer, similar to those specification
that were on file for the Earlington Parade of Homes.
Mr. Wall said that Mr. Warner has those specifications.
Mr. Amorose said that there needs to be a daily mud cleanup of that road.
Mr. Rozanski said that the contractor should also be aware that the road
should be "wet down" during the dry periods of construction.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
129
Minutes of
Dublin Village Council Meeting
-"Ns
Meeting
National Graphics Corp" Cols., 0, Form No. 1097 ~
Held
_1\tlgtl~t:~~__19~(L
19
Page Seven
[
Report of Swimming Facility Study Committee
Mr. Jankowski gave the following background information:
1. There was a needs assessment survey done by the Parks and Recreation
Committee.
2. It was determined that there were five alternatives that could be
pursued:
A. Construction of an indoor/outdoor facility. A pool with a cover
of some sort that can be used year-round.
B. Construction of an outdoor facility as a first phase of an indoor
outdoor facility.
C. Joint venture with a non-profit corporation (for funding if it
was needed).
D. Providing assistance to non-profit corporations (perhaps by
leasing land).
E. Do absolutely nothing.
[......
i
II
II
I!
A swimming pool feasibility committee was formed - Mr. Jankowski, Mr.
Bill Andrews of the Parks and Recreation Committee were members as well
as 10 private citizens.
Several alternatives were suggested:
Alternative 1. The indoor/outdoor facility. The committee basically felt
that it was not feasible for Dublin at this time. It was determined that
such a facility would cost approximately a million dollars to build, and
approximately $150,000.00 per year to maintain. The committee looked at
such a facility in Kettering, Ohio, which during 1985 had 86,000 admissions
with approximately 40% occuring in the three summer months. Such facilitie ,
he noted, typically do not have features such as baby pools, slides,
separate diving or wading areas. The committee, therefore, ruled out the
feasibility of such a facility.
Alternative 2. Start with an outdoor pool and perhaps later convert it to
a year-round facility. They were unable to find anyplace in Central Ohio
where it has been done successfully. The committee did look at the
alternative of a basic outdoor pool, and determined the following _
A. Enough usage of the pool so that the Village would break even.
B. Studied about 10 such facilities in the Central Ohio area.
C. A pool of about 6,000 square feet would be adequate for the Village's
requirements at the present time.
D. It would take approximately 5 acres of land to construct the pool.
E. The cost would be approximately $415,000.00; said figure being
broken down into the pool, the parking, the amenities, the landscaping
the buildings, etc.
F. The annual estimated maintenance cost would be $60,000.00. The
rough equation being for determination of the maintenance to be
$10.00 per square foot.
It was felt that the number of family memberships needed to support same
would be about 350, paying approximately $150.00 per year for a family
membership.
G. Mr. Jankowski said that with those numbers they felt that the pool
could be constructed and maintained on a "break even" basis.
[
Alternative 3. A joint project - 50% participation on the part of the
Village; 50% on the part of a non-profit group.
This situation would require 400 memberships with an initial cost of
$500.00, with an annual membership cost of $125.00.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1 3 1
Minutes of
Dublin Village Council Meeting
-~
Meeting
National Graphics Corp" Cols" 0, Form No. 1097 ~
H elel
August 4, 1986
__19
Page Eight
[
Alternative 4. Mr. Jankowski noted that it would be unlikely that a
private group of citizens could raise the capital to acquire the land
and construct a basic swimming facility.
Alternative 5. The do nothing approach.
[
Mr. Bill Andrews, Chairman of the Parks and Recreation Committee, spoke
as a private resident to emphasize his feeling that a pool in Dublin
would be "a real plus". He encouraged private citizens who were in favor
of such a facility to make their wishes known to members of Council. He
also said that additional pools could be constructed at different sites
throughout the Village as the need would arise.
Mr. Jankowski reported that the following three negative responses were
often cited in response to the question most often asked,"why can't we
have a pool?"
1. We can't afford it.
The fiscal analysis shows that if the Village were to finance the
$415,000.00 pool with a 10 year note, that the debt service would
start off at $74,000.00 and gradually increase (8~% rate),
representing about 11% of the Village's total debt service for the
year (not the total budget) and would decrease each year.
Mr. Jankowski said that he thought that the Village could handle the
project without a great deal of difficulty financially, even con-
sidering the "must" and "wish" portions of the capital improvements.
That the Village needs an election.
2.
I
['
i/
I.
I
I
There is no necessity to have an election; it does not affect the
Village's ability to issue debt very much at all (.3 of 1% inside
millage) .
3. Do we really have enough people to support such a facility?
Mr. Jankowski said that he felt that there are ways to determine that
factor very expeditiously.
Mr. Jankowski proposed the following for Council's consideration:
1. Council must decide whether or not they want the swimming facility,
and if they do, what kind it shall be.
2. If the decision is that Council does want a pool, then they should
decide to authorize an architect or a preliminary study so that
Council can have appropriate information for study.
3. Finally, go to the citizens and ask whether or not they would support
such a facility.
Mr. Jankowski said that he thought that realistically the Village is
talking in terms of having a pool by 1988.
Mr. Jankowski suggested another alternative. He said that the Vice-
President of the Jaycees said that their organization was interested in
assisting the Village in any way possible. He noted that with the
assistance of the Jaycees and other neighborhood civic organizations that
a flyer could be delivered to every household in Dublin.
Mayor Close mentioned that the Village has a large number of projects
pending on which the Village has to determine funding (Tuller Road,
West Branch Sewer, etc.).
Mr. Jankowski said that he would have a report summarized for the next
meeting of Council. He said that he will also have an ordinance prepared
for the purpose of authorizing an architectural study for the pool.
[
Minutes of
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
133
Dublin Village Council Meeting
-~
AJeeting
National Graphics Corp" Cols., 0, Form No. 1097.....
Held . nnn1\ugt1SL~-'nl <)M)
19_
[
[
6.
[ 7.
8.
II
I
I
I Mr.
May
I and
I
I'
,/
II
i!
Ii
,I
Page Nine
Date of First Meeting of Council in September
Because Labor Day will be celebrated on the first Monday of the month in
September, Council will meet on Tuesday, September 2, 1986.
Comments from Staff
Comments from Citizens
Mayor Close said that there has been, since May, a serious water pressure
problem in the northern portion of Muirfield, culminating in a problem
during the previous weekend of two days without any water at all during a
portion of the day, and low pressure during the remainder of the day.
He noted that the problem is more severe after 5:00 P.M. and on the
weekends.
Mayor Close apologized for not having the opportunity to answer all the
calls and letters he had received during the week regarding several
different concerns expressed by the citizens of the Village of Dublin.
Mr. Sheldon commented as follows:
1.
The basic problem area is in the northwest corner of the Village,
which also turns out to be the highest spot in the Village.
He called the City of Columbus water monitoring station, which is a
computer system which can be visually seen; which can also determine i
there are breaks in the line, and it was determined that there were
no breaks. It was also determined that the equipment was functioning
properly; however, there was a loss in pressure.
On Monday morning he contacted Mr. John Doutt, who is the head of
the Division of Water for the City of Columbus and he commented as
follows: "Because of the lack of rain and sprinkler demand on
weekends, it makes the line fall so great that those on the 'tail
end' of the waterline experienced rather drastic pressure drops
during peak hours."
He said that he found out today that at the end of the Memorial
Tournament last year that the line across the river from the Summit-
view station no longer supplies the Dublin area on the west side of
the river. The problem that they ran into was that the demand on
the east side of the River is so great that the people in the
Sawmill area were having very low water pressure.
Mr. Doutt said that he thinks that there are three possibilities that
would improve the situation:
A. A water tower in the general area.
B. Run a line from Glick Road or Deer Run Elementary School to
Brand Road.
C. The fact that the Village is about ready to make a connection
from the booster station (near the counseling center).
Pointed out that there is no connection that goes all the way to
Brand Road and meets that connection where it crosses Brand Road.
Earlington and Brandon will need to be developed.
He had called Muirfield, talked to Mr. Howard Adams, and informed him
(and asked him to inform Mr. Scherer - the new owner of Muirfield)
that he would like to talk with him and indicate that the new tower
needs to be built as soon as possible.
He commented that a resolution was passed by the Dublin Village Counci
which requires Muirfield to build a water tower upon a need determi-
nation of the Village Engineer.
Sheldon referred to a letter written by the Village Engineer on
13, 1986, to Muirfield Ltd. indicating the need for a water tower,
said that to date no response had been received.
2.
3.
4.
5.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
135
Minutes of
Dublin Village Council Meeting
-~
Meeting
National Graphics Corp" Cols., 0, Form No. 1097 ~
Held .mAllgJl!'LL.4_~_t213f>
-- ----- ---- ~---_._- ~---- --------.----.- ----. -- - -- ----- ------
19u
[
[
[
Page Ten
Mayor Close expressed shock with regard to the fact that the Summitview
loop was shut down shortly after the Tournament without Village of Dublin
officials being notified.
Mr. Thornton suggested an ordinance to, as an emergency measure, propose
alternate sprinkling days or some other alternative measures to assist
in increasing water pressure.
Several residents of the Davington, Finlarig area (Mr. Kalish, Mr.
O'Leary, Mr. Miller, Mrs. Davis, Mrs. King, etc) spoke to Council of
their individual problems with regard to the water pressure, or lack
thereof.
Mr. Rozanski reported that in May when there was a water pressure problem
and the City of Columbus was contacted, that the Village was led to believe
that an equipment problem had been resolved. The Village, he said, was
not aware that the Summitview loop had been shut off.
Mayor Close commented that the Village Manager has the authority to issue
an Executive Order limiting the use of water.
It was noted that the golf course irrigation is from the lakes and several
wells.
Mr. Amorose noted that the Fire Departments should be notified of the
water pressure problem.
Mr. Bates, a resident, suggested putting a moratorium on building permits.
Mayor Close said that the water tower could be completed by next spring.
Mr. Thornton commented that there will also be a connecting line from
approximately the location of the library to the Donegal Cliffs area
(a 24" line).
Mr. Rozanski mentioned the safety hazard when children will be back in
school in three weeks.
Ms. Maurer noted that there are many persons in Dublin who are not on the
waterline, but have their own wells.
Mayor Close said that an Executive Order would be prepared, restricting
water usage to see if that helps the situation.
Mr. Sheldon said that the completion of Davington Drive would help. It
was also noted that the platting of that area had not been done.
I
"
ii
Ii
"
,I
"
I
,I
.,
II
I)
II
II
Ii
"
.,
Mr. George Richter of 3191 Martin Road asked for an update on the Martin
Road drainage situation.
Mayor Close said that apparently there had been a determination made as
to the problem and some recommendations made by the engineering and
architectural firms working on the Meijer project, but as of this date,
they have not elected to share that information with the Village.
Mr. Thornton said that he could not conceive how it could take over eight
weeks to find out what the problem is. He noted that the retention system
that was put in was inadequate for the runoff that was created.
Mr. Thornton recommended "laying down the law", and getting the Law
Department to get that report so that there will not be any further
damage to the property of the residents along Martin Road.
Mr. Richter said that there had been some "cosmetic fixing", to Mrs.
Holt's ditch, but that his ditch and Mr. Reinkings had not been repaired.
Mr. Rozanski told the Village Manager to have the Maintenance Department
clean the ditches along Martin Road.
Mayor Close directed Mr. Sheldon to do whatever is necessary to get a
copy of that report.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
137
Minutes of
Dublin Village Council Meeting
-~
Meeting
National Graphics Corp" Cols., O. Form No. 1097 ~
Held
August 4, 1986
19_
Page Eleven
r
~
Council Roundtable Discussion
Mr. Thornton
1. West Branch Sewer. The engineering report listed three possible
routes that could be followed; nothing has been decided.
The Village has been informed by the City of Columbus that by 1990
the East Bank Sewer will be at its capacity.
Dublin's pump station will also be at capacity at about the same time.
Suggested giving written notice to anyone planning to build in Dublin
that "down the road" there is a potential sewer moratorium.
Dublin should also consider the possibility that the Village will
have to continue to pump its sewerage across the river or down the
river and consider where the Village is going to locate an additional
pumping capacity.
Mr. Jankowski
1. A resident had noted deep apertures in the Indian Run Meadow Sub-
division which need to be covered.
2. A report from Mr. Bowman regarding looking into the question of a bike
path down Coffman Road.
r
l
Mr. Rozanski
1. Suggested people practice caution around the Frantz Road median.
Ms. Maurer
1. Referred to her memorandum regarding the fact that Dr. Randy Smith,
a professor at The Ohio State University, has volunteered his
services to the Village of Dublin. She noted that Dr. Smith is an
expert on population, census-taking, and wondered if the Village
would like to gather information about our growing population in
order to plan better for the future.
2. Reported that it was the desire of the Land Use and Planning Sub-
committee that the Design Review Committee, with its chairman, Mr.
Torn Grace, recommend some broad policy to Council; what should a
design review ordinance do, how it should be done, but not to write it
She said that it had also been noted that the landscape ordinance
should also probably be updated.
Ms. Maurer moved to name the following to the Design Review and
Landscape Committee:
[
Mr. Torn Grace
Ms. Barbara Maurer
Mr. Bill Callahan
Mr. Roger Berlin
Mr. Richard Carpenter
Mrs. Donna Schenk
Mrs. Pam Rozanski
Ms. Debbie Georg
Mr. Amorose seconded the motion.
The motion was to appoint a Design Review and Landscape Committee to
make proposals to Council as to an approach that could be made by
an ordinance on design review and to update the landscape ordinance.
Mayor Close said that he felt that he would prefer to study the issue
further before voting on the establishment of such a committee.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
139
Minutes of
Dublin Village Council Meeting
~
Meeting
National Graphics Corp" Cols., 0, Form No. 1097 ~
Held
nAtlgtl_SL '+-1nJ<L8(j_.
_mnm19u
Page Twelve
(
Mr. Thornton moved to table until the next meeting of Council.
There was no objection to tabling.
Mayor Close
1. Mayor Close said that the School Board had asked about the possibility
of their using the Council chambers for their meetings on the second
and fourth Mondays of the month.
There were no objections.
Mr. Thornton
(
1. Mr. Thornton reported that the Police Department had approached the
Safety Committee and stated that they want to be heard by Council.
Mr. Smith said that if it is to discuss wages, benefits, and
employee-type things, it should be an executive session of Council.
He also said that he will be rendering an opinion on what type of
meeting it should be and would be passing along that information to
Council members shortly.
Mayor Close said that he had no objection to meeting with the patrol-
men, but that he could foresee a potential problem with regard to the
pending issue - FOP and SERB.
He said that if that Board should find that the Village should come
under the auspices of the collective bargaining act and have met as
a Council to discuss various issues, Council could have a problem as
far as those kinds of things that Council might have deemed to have
waived as items that Council would have to negotiate with the Police.
The Village is limited and protected even if it comes under the
collective bargaining act as to those items that they have to deal
with them with. As a result, he said, that until the Law Director
gives an opinion he would be reluctant to sit down and meet w!~h
them.
[
Ms. Maurer said that when the standing committees of Council were
formed it was definitely stated that Council would not interfere with
the administration of the Village. She also said that in reading
the minutes of the Safety Committee meetings that the expectations of
the Police Department may have been raised that Council might act
in lieu of the administration. Ms. Maurer said that she is willing to
inform herself and educate herself about that particular situation,
and that perhaps those issues could be discussed as part of the
goal setting process, perhaps instituting some broad policies that
would provide guidelines for the administration.
Mr. Thornton said that it was agreed that the Police patrolmen would
approach the Police Chief and the members of Council on the Safety
Committee would approach the Village Administration and ask their
permission for such a meeting. Neither one, he said, had any
objection.
The purpose of the meeting would be that the Police Department felt
that they would like to have some input in the review process.
Ms. Maurer said that she would be willing to meet with them for a very
limited purpose only - to educate and learn about the situation.
Mr. Smith suggested waiting until he has an opportunity to render a
written opinion.
Mr. Smith will also prepare legislation regarding the O'Shaughnessy
Bridge situation for the August 18, 1986 meeting.
~r=s ;t~:b::-Yor
ayor - Presiding Officer
Close at 10:56 P.M.
~~~
Clerk of Co ncil
:
