HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/19/1981
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of
VILLAGE OF DUBLIN
- national
graoo!$::S
,\Jeetillg
National Graphics Corp., Cols., O. Fonn No. 1097 "'t~
Held
October 19, 1981
19
The regular meeting of Council was called to order by Mayor Headlee at 7:30 P.M
with the following members present: Chambers, Geese, Headlee, Lewis, Maurer
(arrived 7:40 P.M.) and Shawano Mr. Mand was absent from the meeting. Also
present were Mr. Sheldon, Village Manager, Mr. Smith, Law Director, Mr. Gunner,
Assistant Law Director, and Mr. Wolfe, Village Engineer.
Mr. Shawan moved approval of the October 5, 1981 minutes, seconded by Mr. Lewis
and all those present voted in favor of the motion. Mr. Chambers questioned
the property tax for the 53 acres on Avery Road and moved, seconded by Mr.
Shawan, to omit this from the October 19th bill listing (attached) until Mr.
Smith checks the tax exempt status of said real estate. Vote in favor of the
motion and approval of the bill listing, as amended, was unanimous.
The Clerk read a notice from the Ohio Department of Liquor Control in which
Dublin Cardinal "Supermarket, DBA as Dublin Food Gallery, requested a permit of
CI, C2, D6, be changed to Dublin Cardinal Supermarket, Inc., DBA Dublin Cardina
Food Gallery. Mr. Chambers moved, seconded by Mr. Shawan, to not object to the
request and all those present voted in favor of the motion.
Ordinance No. 44-81
Said ordinance dealing with a proposed rezoning of Frantz and Pinney Roads was
read for the third time. Mr. Lavinsky, representing the Enslow and Holdrieth
Company, was present. Mr. Gunner explained to Council that at the October 6th
meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission it was recommended said rezoning
be approved subject to the applicant agreeing to provide an additional 30 feet
to the existing 50 foot right-of-way and agreeing that they be allowed only one
curb cut with the possibility that that curb cut may be moved in the future.
Mr. Gunner said the agreement will be attached to the rezoning application and
become effective at the time the title is transferred to the new owner. Vote
on the approval of the ordinance was as follows: 5 Yeas - Geese, Headlee, Lewi~,
Shawan, Chambers; I abstention - Maurer.
Ordinance No. 51-81
Said ordinance, dealing with amending the Zoning Code concerning procedures to
determine uses, was introduced by Mr. Geese and read for the first time. Mr.
Gunner explained that the purpose of the ordinance is to alleviate the problem
of an applicant filing his application and then finding out there is no such
category in the Zoning Code.
Resolution No. 44-81
Said resolution, dealing with setting a Public Hearing date, December 7, 1981,
at 7:30 P.M., for the proposed amendment of the Zoning Code, was introduced by
Mrs. Maurer and read for the first time. Mr. Lewis moved, seconded by Mr.
Shawan, to dispense with the three-time reading rule and vote on the motion and
the resolution was unanimous for approval.
Resolution No. 45-81
Said resolution, dealing with the endorsement for passage of a I 6/10 levy for
the Franklin County Children Services, was introduced by Mayor Headlee and read
the first time. Mr. Ed Sparks was present representing said Services. Mrs.
Maurer moved, seconded by Mr. Shawan, to dispense with the three-time reading
rule and pass as an emergency and vote on the motion and resolution was unani-
mous for approval.
Discussion of Billingsley Ditch - East of the River (8:00 - 8:50)
Mr. Ron Jezerinac was present representing the residents whose property is be-
ing affected by the increased water flow of Billingsley Ditch. He presented a
sequence of photographs showing the water level at the time of a recent heavy
rain fall and said the problem had increased in the last two years. A resident
also showed several slides of the water on Bright Road. The main concern was
Bill Listing - October 19, 1981
Bohm-NBBJ
R.P.M. Maintenance
Sears Heating Company
Polar Water Co.
Avery Road Lawnmower
Bee Line Aligning
Fifth Avenue Lumber
Elder & Elder Truck Tire
Armstrong & Okey
New Albany Mill
Central Ohio Welding
B. F. Goodrich
Bob's Sunoco
Moody's
Columbia Gas
Wilt Auto Parts
Roush Hardware
C&SOE
Franklin Co. Engineer
Columbus City Prosecutors
City of Columbus
Harry L. Greene, Surveyor
Key Blue Prints
Hutchinson Oil
Photographic Perspectives
Bates & Rogers
Leo Meyers
161 Company Car Wash
Charles Headlee
Sandy, Inc.
Suburbia News
The Dublin Forum
Dublin Auto Parts
Franklin Co. Sheriff
Frank:tt1T Co. TreasuI'-el'------
Medusa Aggregates
Banks-Baldwin
Checkwriter Insurance Agency
Riebel Equipment Co.
Ohio Peace Officer's Training
Midwest Chemical
D & M Distributors
Xerox Corporation
Police Pension Fund
Bobby Layman
Hockaden Associates
Full-time employees
Part-time :employees
Part-time employees
TOTAL
983.78
400.00
98.50
1.80
2.95
60.70
197.60
289.84
31.50
55.50
14.40
316.40
157.73
102.45
21.52
429.58
99.40
2585.81
802.60
62.50
5259.87
600.00
37.44
2140.11
7.66
22,144.76
29.00
4.95
22.83
102.00
12.00
22.60
8.57
240.00
483.90
21.95
II. 00
96.40
106.28
90.00
169.53
61.44
56.13
6618.06
94.57
3796.00
16,645.97
352.50
203.50
$66,153.58
Consulting Fees
Janitorial Services at Muni. Bldg.
Repair furnace at 129 S. High
Water cooler at Maintenance Bldg.
Oil for backhoe
Align 1975 Pickup truck
Lumber for police property room and
horseshoe pits at Coffman Park
Replace tires on Car #13
Record hearing on Lamp vs. Village
Drainage tile for ditch repairs
Acetylene cylinders for Maint. Bldg.
Tires for cruisers #10 & 13
Replace Muffler on 1975 Pickup
Paper for copier
Gas at 129 S. High St.
Parts for cruisers and pickups; Misc.
tools
Miscellaneous tools and maint. supplies
Electric service to maint. bldg.;
traffic controls and street lights
Street line marking; signs
Prosecute Dublin cases (August fees)
Columbus Sewer Capacity Rebates -
3rd quarter
Services for O.C.L.C. Sewerline,
Trails End Dr., & 161 tank site
Two steel measuring tapes for engineers
Fuel Oil for Maint. Bldg.; gasoline
for vehicles
Film & prints for police dept.
Estimate #2 - Glick Rd. Bridge
Raincover for new officer
Cruiser wash
Office Supplies
Crushed stone for road repairs
B.Z.A. Meeting notice
B.Z.A. Meeting notice
Misc. parts for cruiser
Prisoner boarding fees for Sept.
Property taxes on 53 acres-at
fuLer.y.-RGad--(last hal f of 1980)
Stone for raod repairs
Update Building Code
Maintenance agreement on checksigner
Parts & oil for John Deere Backhoe
Training seminars for two officers
Janitorial supplies
Bulbs for cruiser light bars
Maintenance Agreement for copier
Employer's portion - 3rd qtr.
Repair brakes on cruiser #13
Spec. Details for Adria Waterline
Employee gross salaries
Recreation employees
Park Maintenance employee
.
TO: DUBLIN VILLAGE COUNCIL
FROM: SMITH & GUNNER, LAW DIRECTORS
SUBJECT: BILLINGSLEY DITCH - INJUNCTION, ETC.
DATE: OCTOBER 8, 1981
We have been asked to research and prepare a memo as to
the various issues involved in the matter of the drainage of
I
I
I
I
I
,
I
I
I
II
I
I
,
Billingsley Ditch as it relates to the Olde Sawmill Subdivision
and lower land owners within the Village of Dublin.
First, it should be pointed out that any injunction action
puts the burden of proof on the party seeking the action to
show the cause - effect relationship necessary to entitle the
party to an injunction. In the instant case part or all of the
lower owner's flood problems are caused by various obstructions
in the ditch channel where it passes private owner's property.
The law of Ohio is that each owner upon whose property the
obstruction exists has the obligation of removing the
obstruction to keep the flow across his property free and clear.
l8A.. ~ur. 2d Drain~~, Section 173. If the owner fails to
maintain and remove obstructions, the work may be done by public
authorities and cost thereof assessed against the property
II
181\ O. .Jllr. 2d, Drain<.li'c, Scction 195.
_______ :.J
See
owner".
With this
in mind it is clear that all potential causes of downstream
flooding other than the Olde Sawmill development would have
to be eliminated to make the right to injunctive relief clear
and before the courts are going to grant injunctive, if at all.
Secondly, there are certain requirements that parties
seeking injunctive relief must meet before they are entitled
t.,) d \ I 111 j \ I L' t J \ ) II :
, ..;'
Ii
II
I
I
I
I
II
I'
II
I'
i,
'I
II
11
1. There must be damage or irreparable harm. An individ
landowner who claims flooding or a group of landowners who
are flooded may have the necessary damages to sustain an injunc
A municipality which is not a landowner da~~~~d would not be
able to:l'rosecute and obtain injunctive ~).~~~~for its citizen
property owners if it did not sustain damage itself.
,.
II
Ii
II
!i
PAGE TWO OF THREE
2. There must be no other adequate remedy at law such as
the possibility of a lawsuit other than an injunction and appeal
routes must have been exhausted.
(i.e. from the original zoning
and approval thereof by the City of Columbus, Mid Ohio Regional
Planning, etc.).
\
(
I
II
ii
Ii
I'
11
II
Ii
II
Ii
II
I
3. There mus L alHo h<..~ 11 Hhow:Lnr~ () r II cl {'Ilf' f'i "/f! t I (J('~' J I ~ f
or the likelihood that the PlainLi[[ wil.l prevail on the meritH
of the lawsuit before the Court will even consider the granting
of a temporary injunction. In the instant case, the facts preva 1
against the likelihood of success on the merits since the
injunction would be attempting to prevent any construction or
development on the site which would increase the runoff of
surface waters into Billingsley Ditch. The Ohio Supreme Court,
as we have demonstrated to Council in our memorandums in the
Rog~V. Karrer case, now uses the balancing test: The Court
and use hisl
\
I
property owner. Obviously, if the dmnages are not severe or if I
i
I
I
obstructions in the stream or even where the owners have built I
in an obvious flood plain area the Court will deny the injunctioh
I
and claims for damages. It is our opinion that Council ought tol
fully consider this and the above two points about the likelihoo~
I
balances the right of the upstream owner to develop
property against the severity of the damages to the downstream
the downstream owners are contributing to their own damage
by failing to clear obstructions in the stream or by building
of success of any injuction action.
In addition, the developers have complied, according to
their engineering data, with Mid Ohio guidelines on adding to t e
\vntcrsh0d prohlclll by installing smaller drains on the asphalt
to allow runoff LO escape morc slowly. ThiH [actor would mil itlJ!l:c
in their favor against injunctive action since they have been
through the Columbus zoning process and have obtained necessary
permits and approval.
~
,
PAGE THREE OF THREE
Additionally, the anticipated additional runoff is speculat've
III
at this point, the existing problem having allegedly been caused
II
i by the Olde Sawmill Subdivision which has been platted and
I
i approved for more than four (4) years. Courts do not look
favorably upon parties who wait four (4) years after the fact tv
do anything about it. The legal doctrine of laches way bar
II
I
I
II
II
I
I
recovery or injunctive relief.
In summary, it is our legal position that:
1.
The Village of Dublin is not a proper party to seek
,
I
i
2. Both the facts and the law indicate against a favorabll
result in any injunctive action which may be brought herein.
injunctive relief in this matter.
Stephen J. Smith
Law Director
""--;> p"
--:-- /~
~" u_ / '---
~.-. ~.,,~ )(~. ,~/ .,-.,.. . ~
-----"; . j
./
II
,I
1\
II
Ii
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
I
,
I
I
./
,
PETITION
As resident of Dublin residing east of the Scioto River and west of
Sawmill Road, we are concerned about the increasing flooding problems in
our area over the last several years. Although we realize this past
spring was a period of excessive rainfall, it is obvious that the problem
is a result of the water flowing from the east side of Sawmill Road.
Even light rains have produced sudden flooding which has damaged
property and created potentially hazardous conditions for the neighborhood
children. Most of the year the creek beds in our neighborhood are dry,
however, after a spring rain the water now forms a raging river which
cannot possibly be handled by the creek and culverts in our neighborhood.
We urge Village Council to:
1. Direct the Village Solicitor to file an injunction
against further construction which increases the
water flow to the west of Sawmill Road to our
streams which are already beyond capacity. We believe
an injunction is warranted because the increased
volume of water in our streams will create an even
greater hardship and cause abnormally dangerous condi-
tions. We believe an injunction is necessary to
minimize additional damage to our property from an
already intolerable situation.
2. Agree to support and assist the residents of our
neighborhood in any legal or administrative actions
relating to the above described problem.
3. Agree to oppose the installation of an additional tile
or larger tiles under Sawmill Road by the City of
Columbus or Franklin County. We are aware of proposed
plans to install another 54 inch tile under Sawmill
Road and this will only further compound our problems.
It is our position that the City of Columbus and developers east
of Sawmill Road should be providing for their own retention of water or
be providing adequate storm sewers which do not drain into our streams
which are already beyond their natural capacity as a result of previous
recent construction immediately west of Sawmill Road.
(" . J - -:t 4' :j i-,
(
~)"
~r
Pae:e 1 of Two
..
~',.. '- -l.,. I /l.~../~.(:....)// .
!// , C.> . -;.. ''''."'-'''~t'.-~--.::'t'..L..c_ ~
7/ 07) ,f!:J/t-?~.k. (!ll'
flU
;.
(
Z//~ .
Pr
Pae:e 2 of Two
!if/ 1
PETITION
As resident of Dublin residing east of the Scioto River and west of
Sawmill Road, we are concerned about the increasing flooding problems in
our area over the last several years. Although we realize this past
spring was a period of excessive rainfall, it is obvious that the problem
is a result of the water flowing from the east side of Sawmill Road.
Even light rains have produced sudden flooding which has damaged
property and created potentially hazardous conditions for the neighborhood
children. Most of the year the creek beds in our neighborhood are dry,
however, after a spring rain the water now forms a raging river which
cannot possibly be handled by the creek and culverts in our neighborhood.
We urge Village Council to:
1. Direct the Village Solicitor to file an injunction
against further construction which increases the
water flow to the west of Sawmill Road to our
streams which are already beyond capacity. We bel ieve
an injunction is warranted because the increased
volume of water in our streams will create an even
greater hardship and cause abnormally dangerous condi-
tions. We believe an injunction is necessary to
minimize additional damage to our property from an
already intolerable situation.
2. Agree to support and assist the residents of our
neighborhood in any legal or administrative actions
relating to the above described problem.
3. Agree to oppose the installation of an additional tile
or larger tiles under Sa~mill Road by the City of
Columbus or Franklin County. We are aware of proposed
pI ans to inst all another 54 inch tile under Sawmi 11
Road and this will only further compound our problems.
It is our position that the City of Columbus and developers 88St
of Sawmill Road should be providing for their own retention of water or
be providing adequate storm sewers which do not drain into our streams
which are already beyond their natural capacity as a result of previous
recent construction immediately wes;; of Sawmill Road.
~~7{ ~1",1 / 1 ) 1 ? ~(~~~c ;)~-: lh-&t {, ,{~. (, / !
~ T . -
lJ . ? :] 7 / -.5~vINh;'J!I tCJ: /lJj.:.. (JA~ '( J 0 I ?
~:;~O ~ td ~ {} 1-30/7
.) 14~?{)17
t;.d 3', /2
MUJ}-tL~u / rf), 4-:.3(J /7
'r(': -I' ~ .', . '7
c '-- ~ ._(,~C H_
P-.JI~l.J~ 0
i-scu
. 6 //:7 //7 ,
, ,/ :> C' (r
'/J il,,- 7
/ 1\ /--r,.,) 1>/
//
)zr;,
?q
(/,
~.
~. d...-.I....'
fJO
\
);
'\ ..' / i1 ,./ .
V" ;/' / L--( /7..,-1.. { ~
J;'-'
/11,(,
/
v
i
..r,
"~
..
o
--'-
..
1
\
--1 ~. .
. -~~":f--'
-. ~ -
.." -'. - .
~ . ~ 4
~ -
_~...-:-______~_____~____~~_. .-- ,---.--- - -'"'T
PETITION
As resident of Dublin residing east of the Scioto River and west of
Sawmill Road, we are concerned about the incre~sing flooding problems in
our area over the last several years. Although we realize this past
spring was a period of excessive rainfall, it is obvious that the problem
is a result of the water flowing from the east side of Sawmill Road.
Even light rains have produced sudden flooding which has damaged
property and created potentially hazardous conditions for the neighborhood
children. Most of the year the creek beds in our neighborhood are dry,
however, after a spring rain the water now forms a raging river which
cannot possibly be handled by the creek and culverts in our neighborhood.
We urge Village Council to:
1. Direct the Village Solicitor to file an injunction
against further construction which increases the
water flow to the west of Sawmill Road to our
streams which are already beyond capacity. We believe
an injunction is warranted because the increased
volume of water in our streams will create an even
greater hardship and cause abnormally dangerous condi-
tions. We believe an injunction is necessary to
minimize additional damage to our property from an
already intolerable situation.
2. Agree to support and assist the residents of our
neighborhood in any legal or administrative actions
relating to the above described problem.
3. Agree to oppose the installation of an additional tile
or larger tiles under Sa~will Road by the City of
Columbus or Franklin County. We are aware of proposed
plans to install another 54 inch tile under Sa\\will
Road and this will only further compound our problems.
It is our position that the City of Columbus and developers east
of Sawmill Road should be providing for their own retention of water or
be providing adequate storm sewers which do not drain into our streams
which are already beyond their natural capacity as a result of preViO\lS
recent construction '~dediatelY west of Sa~will Road.
t:4 ~Z;{ LJ/l, / f}~/_d/
B .. / J>~ (j\~
tJ~ ~~.
~U R~. ~~ ~~
~ tv,< /'Zq",?CJ~ (/7~'
---
QN ~I PI.J>>I~' OAln
b M ~{)t
c~~ - /(}L.
~X ~.\~ '7-/(,,3 ~vhP,9.~~ e-t
(,~AT~=4- ~/"3 ~R&~Jt::~
~.~-_._.-:!;.,-~:t~~_._,.
1: ~ -~----~~--~/..-
1fkZ~~ i!ctl5 t:::lli'if 40L~Ujl!p.
~_~__ ~ 39'0 ~[t/ ~d~
~ r/f~~
~~/! ~.,~
~~.~
a~
4~zl
<,? .$ z,..1
rJ&&Z [,p;J;uJ
~
~..3 CJ 6 E~pl
~JY~.
/j:Z80 ,$<>c,., '[,1, /
...
-----..,.
"
i
"
J<.
-'-
'. "
~ ,. .
\---. j-F~- ~ .
\ .I -,.
,J
.
1
~ :
----~.._,_.~.._._------ - --------,----
.
.
.