Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/19/2003 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of nllhlin C:ity C:ollnr.il Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC., FORM NO. 10148 ~ II May 19, 2003 I I Held 20 I !! Mayor McCash called the Dublin City Council meeting of Monday, May 19 to order at 7:00 p.m. in Council Chambers at the Dublin Municipal Building. Mrs. Boring led the Pledge of Allegiance. Roll Call Council members present were: Mayor McCash, Vice Mayor Boring, Ms. Chinnici- Zuercher, Mr. Kranstuber, Mr. Lecklider, Mr. Reiner and Ms. Salay. Staff members present were: Ms. Brautigaum, Mr. Smith, Mr. McDaniel, Mr. Ciarochi, Chief Epperson, Mr. Harding, Mr. Hammersmith, Mr. Hahn, Ms. Clarke, Ms. Crandall, Ms. Puskarcik, Ms. Hoyle and Ms. Gibson. Approval of Minutes of May 5,2003 Regular Meeting Ms. Salay moved approval of the minutes as submitted. Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Kranstuber, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mayor McCash, yes. Correspondence The Clerk reported that a Notice to Legislative Authority was sent to Council regarding the issuance of a D2 permit for the Golf Center at Sports Ohio, Inc., 6100 Dublin Park Drive. Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher asked a general question about the process regarding liquor permits - what discretion does City Council have in these matters? Mr. Smith stated that the process is governed by the State. The City does have the right to object to renewal of a permit if there are problems associated with a business. However, the state controls the quota of permits issued based upon population. Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher noted that the Sports Ohio location seems inappropriate for a liquor license in view of the large number of youth patrons at the facility. Mr. Lecklider commented that he is aware that they presently serve beer at the indoor soccer facility. He does not necessarily support this. There was no request for a hearing on this matter. CITIZEN COMMENTS Wallace Maurer. 7451 Dublin Road noted that at the last meeting, Council requested that he summarize his purpose in speaking before Council over the past year. The Mayor indicated his confusion about the intent of Mr. Maurer's comments. Approximately three years ago, a reporter wrote a story about the relationship between municipal government and the citizenry. The reporter contacted Mr. Maurer after a Council meeting and they engaged in a series of long conversations. In response to the reporter's question about his treatment by the City Council, Mr. Maurer stated that he had been treated fairly at all times. At the Council meeting of September 16, 2002 and since that time, he has debated whether to contact the press. He has not done so for two reasons: First, in terms of the firing of Mr. Kindra, he is not personally looking for or reviewing any legal procedures and he is not "out to get" anyone. His position is that the action has been arbitrary, irresponsible, improper and extreme and he felt it should be dealt with in house. Secondly, he has developed a great deal of affection and respect for the City officials and their work and desires to keep this issue within the City. During all of the time he has spoken about the Kindra firing before City Council, the newspapers in the City have not covered this issue. He has no doubt that the firing of Mr. Kindra was a mistake, and if the government would admit to the citizenry that this decision was a mistake, that admission would be unprecedented. He would give high praise to a government willing to do so. He noted that he would need two additional five-minute sessions before Council to complete his recitation of the case. If this case is not handled in a public way within the next couple of months, he will then go to print at the local, state and national level. After he has written up his comments, he will submit them to Council and management staff so that a session can be held on the matter. He will then go to the print media. LEGISLATION Ordinance 50-03 Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Real Estate Purchase Agreement with Stonehenge Company for Approximately 2.7 Acres of Property Located South of Rings Road, More Commonly Known as Tax Parcel #273-004518 in the City of Dublin, County of Franklin, Ohio, and Declaring an Emergency. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS --_._--_.__._~- Minutes of Duhlin City Council Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC., FORM NO. 10148 May 19, 2003 Page 2 Held 20 (The Acting Clerk noted a correction to the title - it should state 2.7 acres instead of 2.2 acres.) Ms. Salay introduced the ordinance. Mr. Ciarochi stated that this ordinance authorizes a land swap for approximately 2.7 acres located on the south side of Rings Road, east of Blazer and west of Frantz Road. He showed a slide indicating the land areas involved in the agreement. The land swap proposal was initiated by City staff. The Stonehenge property was proposed for development with six 10,560 square foot structures located on their six-acre parcel. There were floodplain and floodway considerations involved. In addition, there is a significant stand of trees located to the north side of the site. The configuration in the revised development proposal contains the six 10,560 square foot buildings plus one structure of up to 15,000 square feet. This agreement requires the City to initiate a rezoning of the total parcel. Currently, the Stonehenge property is located within an SO district, and the City property is located partially in an SO district and partially in an R district. In terms of density, the original proposal on six acres yields 10,560 square feet per acre; the current proposal on 6.1 acres yields about 12,846 square feet per acre. In summary, this is an exchange that provides the City with a linear park flow, retains property for construction of a second water tower, and maintains the frontage along Rings Road. Stonehenge gains additional square footage in development. Staff recommends approval of this ordinance that authorizes the Manager to execute the agreement. Staff also requests Council's direction for the City to initiate the rezoning petition for the properties involved. There will be deed restrictions that are agreeable to the developer in terms of building materials, density, landscaping, signage and other related items. Staff believes this is a win/win for both parties. The zoning will require expedited action in order to accommodate Mr. Dioun's need to close on this property. Staff requests that Council schedule a Special Meeting early next week in order to introduce a rezoning ordinance and refer it to Planning Commission for hearing on June 5th. Mrs. Boring asked if a copy of the agreement is available. Mr. Ciarochi noted that he has a copy of the latest draft and can provide this to Council. Mrs. Boring noted she has some concerns about approving this ordinance without reviewing the agreement. Mr. Kranstuber asked if the ordinance could be held over until later on the agenda so that copies can be provided to Council for review. Mayor McCash noted that rezoning the three parcels to a straight SO district may raise some concerns about ensuring that the agreement covers the issues. Mr. Ciarochi stated that there are some easements areas still being worked out, but for the most part, Mr. Dioun has agreed to the density limitations and the building materials for the entire site. Mayor McCash asked if those items are included in the agreement being authorized, or whether they are follow-up items. Mr. Ciarochi responded that the agreement provides that there will be deed restrictions on density and materials. The actual deed restrictions cannot be executed until the zoning is in place and the property is transferred. Mayor McCash asked for a copy of the deed restrictions as drafted. Mr. Smith responded that the real estate purchase contract provides the authority for the land swap; Council must then vote on the rezoning. The deed restrictions will be executed at the time of transfer. Such deed restrictions will address the density, the materials and the landscaping. The issues of access will not be addressed until the survey work is completed. Mayor McCash commented that he understands the desire to expedite the process, but he wants to ensure the comfort level for Council Members with this entire concept. His understanding is that tonight's action authorizes the land swap; the other items will follow and will be addressed as part of the rezoning. Mr. Ciarochi then read some specific items contained in the agreement that relate to density and materials. Mr. Reiner suggested that Council move forward with this ordinance, understanding that further review will follow at Planning Commission and at the public hearing before Council. He is confident that staff can work out the details. Mayor McCash and Ms. Salay stated that they are comfortable with tonight's action, understanding that the deed restrictions will be dealt with at the rezoning stage. Mrs. Boring noted that she has other concerns and asked that this item be postponed until later in the meeting so that a copy of the materials can be provided to Council. Mrs. Boring asked if any guarantees are made in the agreement regarding the outcome of the rezoning process. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meetin~_____ DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC, FORM NO, 10148 II May 19, 2003 Page 3 I Held 20 Ms. Brautigam stated that there is nothing in the agreement indicating that the City will approve the rezoning. Mr. Ciarochi stated that the rezoning would undergo the normal process of referral to P&Z, recommendation to Council, and public hearing and vote at City Council. Mr. Smith added that if the land for any reason is not rezoned, there will be no swap and the previous plan will be developed instead. Staff hopes to have more detail based on the legal surveys for the P&Z meeting. He estimates it will be back to Council at the June 23 meeting. Mayor McCash noted that in deference to some members who would like more information, he would postpone this item until later in the meeting. Ordinance 51-03 Accepting The Lowest/Best Bid for the Dublin Service Department Site Improvements, Appropriating Funds Therefor, and Declaring An Emergency. Mr. Lecklider introduced the ordinance. Ms. Brautigam stated that this project was bid earlier in the winter, but favorable bids were not received at that time. At this point, more favorable bids have been received. Staff is recommending approval of the base bid and alternate #1 from C&N Construction in the amount of $550,600. Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher asked about the total amount budgeted in 2002 and 2003 for this project. Mr. McDaniel stated that there was $480,000 in the 2003 CIP. There was additional funding programmed in 2002 that was carried over to repair the existing salt shed and to build the new one. Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher asked if the project is within budget. Mr. McDaniel responded affirmatively. Mayor McCash asked for clarification about the $80,000 from the CIP Tax Fund listed in Section 3. Mr. McDaniel stated that these are unencumbered dollars from last year that are being reappropriated for this project. Mr. Kranstuber moved to dispense with the public hearing and treat this as emergency legislation. Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Kranstuber, yes; Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mayor McCash, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes. Vote on the Ordinance: Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Kranstuber, yes; Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mayor McCash, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Ms. Salay, yes. Ms. Salay asked about bid alternate #8 relating to storm sewer on the north and south side of the storage yard. How is this stormwater being handled at the present time? Mr. McDaniel responded that the CIP is being realigned to accommodate these site improvements next year in the five-year CIP. Ms. Salay stated that she was contacted by a resident regarding the activity in the Service yard. Has there been resolution of his issues? Mr. McDaniel stated that he has responded to this resident, but no resolution of the issues has been obtained. The long-term plan includes items that will address several of his concerns. Ms. Salay asked for an updated site plan of the Service Center so that she can understand its relation to the adjoining neighborhoods. Ordinance 52-03 Providing for a Change in Zoning for 40 Acres Located on the Northwest Corner of Sawmill and Hard Roads, from: PUD, Planned Unit Development District, to: PUD, Planned Unit Development District. (Case No. 03-045Z - NE Quad PUD, Subareas 5A, and 5B - Kroger Center. Sawmill Road) Ms. Salay introduced the ordinance and moved referral to Planning & Zoning Commission. Mr. Reiner seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Kranstuber, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mayor McCash, yes. Mayor McCash asked the Clerk to read the titles of Ordinances 53-03 through 57-03. i j RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS ~-----_._.-_._-- Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting ------.---.--- DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC., FORM NO. 10148 May 19, 2003 Page 4 -11- Held 20 Ordinance 53-03 Amending Portions of the Zoning Code to Establish the Historic Business (HB) District and the Historic Residential (HR) District (Case No. 01-113ADM - Historic District Code Amendment) Ordinance 54-03 Rezoning Approximately 83 Parcels Comprising an Area of Approximately 72.7 Acres in Historic Dublin and Vicinity, To: HR, Historic Residential District (Case No. 01-114Z - Historic Development District Rezoning I). Ordinance 55-03 Rezoning Approximately 74 Parcels Comprising an Area of Approximately 28.11 Acres in Historic Dublin and Vicinity, From: CCC, Central Community Commercial District and CB, Central Business District, To: HB, Historic Business District (Case No. 01-114Z- Historic Development District Rezoning II). Ordinance 56-03 Amending Portions of the Zoning Code to Establish the "Architectural Review District" and to Re-Organize the Architectural Review Board (ARB) and Repealing Sections 153.170 through 153.187 (Case No.03-049ADM - Architectural Review District and Architectural Review Board Procedures). Ordinance 57-03 Adopting the Old Dublin Design Guidelines (Case No. 00-118ADM). Mr. Kranstuber moved to introduce Ordinances 53-03 through 57-03 and to refer them to the Planning & Zoning Commission. Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Kranstuber, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mayor McCash, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes. Ms. Salay asked for an estimated hearing date at P&Z. Ms. Clarke responded that the HB and HR districts must first be established before any properties can be rezoned to those districts. The architectural guidelines have been in use for about five years, and this formally adopts the guidelines. The reorganization of the ARB would then follow, and finally the rezoning of the parcels identified. She expects the process to begin in June and continue through Labor Day. Mayor Kranstuber asked that the titles of Ordinances 58-03 and 59-03 be read together, as they both relate to the appearance code. Ordinance 58-03 Amending Ordinance 123-97, by Adopting Modifications to the City of Dublin Community Plan to Incorporate Findings, Policies, Issues and Strategies Relating to Community Character and Residential Neighborhood Development. (Case No. 03- 050ADM - Community Plan modifications) Ordinance 59-03 Amending Portions of the Zoning Code by Amending Section 153.133 (Minimum Landscape Requirements), Section 153.134 (Street Tree and Public Tree Requirements), and Adopting Section 153.190, Residential Appearance Standards. (Case No. 03-014 ADM - Landscape Code Amendment and Adopting Residential Appearance Standards) Mr. Kranstuber introduced Ordinances 58-03 and 59-03. Ms. Brautigam noted that at the last study session, the recommendations of the Appearance Code Committee were presented in part. Tonight's presentation includes the remainder of the recommendations. Mr. Harvey presented the recommendations to Council. Vinvl SidinQ The first recommendation relates to vinyl siding and the question of the proper thickness of the material. (He showed slides of the various examples of installation of vinyl siding in communities around the Greater Columbus area.) The Vinyl Institute recommends the 44 mills as a desirable standard. Some of the upper-end housing developers use 50 mills. The durability of 44 and 50 mills is expected to be 40 years. The cost differences between 44 to 50 mills is not substantial - for a 2,500 square foot home of 44 mills, the material cost is $3,600. At 40 mills, the savings is $900. Taking it from 44 to 50 mills brings an increase of $1,100. The Village of Highland Lakes houses shown in the slides use 50 mills, and the same developer building now at the Reserve at Ballantrae uses 50 mills. The restricted covenants for the original part of Ballantrae require 44 mills as a minimum. He added that proper installation is required to prevent warping and RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC., FORM NO. 10148 Held 20 separation of vinyl siding. Some municipalities have prohibited pneumatic nailers, but the newer equipment sets the nail properly on the siding. Mr. Kranstuber commented that many existing homes in Dublin have 36 mill siding, so this will establish a standard. The Committee tried to be sensitive to the issues of affordable housing, and endorses a midline standard focusing on durability. Mayor McCash commented that the 50-mill siding is produced by only a few suppliers in Central Ohio, and would be available in fewer colors. From a diversity of color standpoint, the higher standard may reduce the options. Mr. Harvey responded that several manufacturers provide 46 and/or 48 mill vinyl siding. Mr. Reiner commented that he endorses a higher standard so that the product will endure - perhaps a standard of 46 to 48 to minimize City inspections in the future. Mayor McCash responded that the thickness would not affect the fading from ultraviolet light. Mr. Reiner stated that he believes that the higher quality product has a superior appearance. Mayor McCash noted that much of the look relates to the installation. Mr. Kranstuber stated that banning vinyl siding has been considered by some groups in the past, or limiting the percentage of homes with vinyl siding. Upon closer examination of examples throughout the area, the Committee decided to focus on quality of the product. Mr. Reiner noted that another consideration is the City inspection of installed siding - are there times when the builder is required to remove poorly installed vinyl siding? If the only control the City has is over the material, and not the installation, he would support a higher quality material. Mr. Kranstuber emphasized that the desire is to establish a standard, as none exists at this time. The concern is with not making the standard so high that housing becomes unaffordable. Mr. Lecklider asked if the difference between 44 and 46 mills is noticeable? Mr. Harvey responded that it is not visibly different, but theoretically it would be proportionately stronger, last longer and would resist high temperature changes. Therefore, it would separate less over a period of time. Mr. Harvey then described the vinyl accessories that can improve the appearance of a home at an economical price. He showed slides of the various items available, Le., door surrounds, mantel systems above windows, shutters, fascia boards, molding, trim boards, accent panels. He summarized that the recommendation of the Committee is for a minimum thickness of 44 mills, that it must be applied to the OSB or plywood, that it must have a low gloss finish, and that it must be properly installed to prevent warping or separation. Mr. Reiner asked about the dimensional thickness for the plywood. Mayor McCash stated it should be a minimum of W' due to the structural load. However, this is a building code issue and not related to the appearance code. Mayor McCash suggested as a follow-up, that the Building division staff should devise some proposed language to address these items. Mr. Harvey agreed that staff would research the thickness of the underlayment as suggested. Additional Reauirements for Predominantlv Vinvl SidinQ Homes Mr. Harvey stated that the Committee recommends that every predominantly vinyl home should be vinyl on the entry side. Where there is a vinyl sided elevation, a minimum 6" fascia board should be required. In addition, two other options - such as shutters, mantels, cornices, etc. - would be required. Mr. Lecklider suggested that P&Z also consider the windowpane look for other than front elevations. These are done with inserts in the windows. Mr. Kranstuber stated that these are a nuisance when cleaning the windows. Mrs. Boring commented that these types of inserts are not compatible with certain house designs. I i RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK. INC.. FORM NO. 10148 Held 20 Discussion followed about requiring mantels on other than the front of the house. Ms. Brautigam suggested that Council forward a detailed transcript of tonight's suggestions to the Planning Commission for their review, and that revisions not be made tonight to the draft Appearance Code. In this way, the Commission can consider all of the Committee's proposal as well as the concerns of Council. Four Sided Architecture Mr. Harvey noted that this is a trend in the industry, and it helps to achieve a sense of place or neighborhood. The Committee originally considered requiring three design elements somewhere on each elevation. The Committee then focused efforts on the dispersal of design elements to avoid having blank walls. The Committee recommends at least two design elements in any elevation wherever it faces, with a little more treatment for the street facing elevation. The Committee recommends this formula: Each elevation must contain at least two design elements, and each street facing elevation must contain three design elements. Further, in all cases, there must exist at least one design element in each one-half of the elevation. At least one design element should occur on the first floor, and should there be a large upper wall area that would otherwise be blank, then at least one design element would have to be located in the upper wall area. He then detailed the various examples of design elements that would meet these requirements. Discussion followed. Mr. Reiner noted that using the chimney as an architectural element may be problematic, and asked that P&Z look at this closely. Discussion followed about the type of materials allowed for a chimney. Mr. Harvey noted that the Committee is also recommending a set of definitions with illustrations. These are included in the draft Appearance Code. Another recommendation is to limit types of materials to be used on the exterior to wood, brick, stone (natural or cultured), products of siding that are typical of the manufacturer, hardy plank, stucco, glass block or vinyl siding. In the elevations, no more than three materials can be used. (He showed an example of a house and the various requirements.) Foundations must be faced with either brick, natural or cultured stone, split block, or the exterior siding material must be brought down over the foundation to within 12 inches of the finish grade. Mr. Reiner noted that the split block would not be an improvement over what is presently allowed. Mr. Harvey stated that the split block is becoming more of a common practice and it does break up the gray concrete block appearance. The Committee felt it could be an acceptable alternative. Mr. Kranstuber commented that the only consideration was bringing the foundation cover down as much as possible while still allowing for mounding and landscaping. It was not a cost issue. Mr. Reiner objected to the split block - it is not a strong design element. He also suggested that the City consider an ordinance that requires that the topsoil from a lot is stored and then redistributed on the site after the house is built. He also endorses stone or brick to cover the foundation. Having concrete block or split block around the base of the house is very unattractive, and homebuyers then purchase foundation plantings to hide this block. Mr. Kranstuber clarified that what the Committee is recommending is bringing the cedar, the stone or whatever material down to 12 inches from the ground. Mr. Reiner clarified that he is suggesting that the bottom 12 inches of base be brick or stone. Mr. Lecklider stated that he believes all of the builders will opt for the split block if allowed. He would recommend the brick or stone base instead. Mr. Kranstuber summarized that perhaps staff could propose some alternative language for P&Z to consider, based on these concerns. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS --~--~ Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK. INC., FORM NO. 10148 May 19, 2003 Page 7 Held 20 Application Mr. Harvey stated that the appearance code standards would apply to all new construction and for existing construction when there is an expansion of 25 percent livable area or significant exterior alteration. Only the portion being changed must meet the new standards. In terms of existing planned districts, the Committee is recommending a period of transition of six months. After that exemption period, any new building permit must comply with the new standards. For new planned districts, they would have to meet these standards at a minimum. For exemptions, all of the properties covered under the Architectural Review District would be exempt. Any interior alteration is exempt if not affecting the outside appearance of the house. Any building permit already submitted would also be exempt. Discussion followed about the role of the subdivision architectural review committee for a planned district versus the appearance code requirements and their application. Mr. Kranstuber stated that the appearance code would establish the minimum standards that all development must meet. In cases where the subdivisions review committee requires less, the appearance code would govern. Mayor McCash stated that the way it is drafted, some people will be required to have the City review architectural styles, but others will be reviewed by their neighbors. It seems it should be applied equally to all neighborhoods - whether or not a neighborhood has an architectural review committee. Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher summarized that she is hopeful that P&Z understands that Council desires that the appearance code be approved this year. Much of the work has already been done at the Committee level where P&Z was represented. P&Z's role should be to improve what already exists in the draft document. Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher moved to refer Ordinances 58-03 and 59-03 to the Planning & Zoning Commission. Ms. Salay seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Ms. Salay, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mayor McCash, yes; Mr. Kranstuber, yes; Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher, yes. INTRODUCTION & PUBLIC HEARING - RESOLUTIONS Resolution 26-03 Authorizing the City Manager to Enter into a One-Year Contract for Legal Services with the Law Director. Ms. Salay introduced the resolution. Ms. Brautigam stated that at the time she joined the City, several Council Members expressed concern about the legal fees and their hope for improved monitoring and control in the future. She has discussed with Mr. Smith the various ways the legal fees could be reduced, and much of any litigation the City is involved in has been resolved. In addition, a review was done of the average costs for the last three years and consideration has been given to implementing a retainer system. After reviewing the material, she believes that a retainer system, as recommended in the report, would be a good opportunity for the City. She believes that the City will save approximately $200,000 over the next year, based on the amount of previous billings. She has also worked with members of staff to ensure that requests for legal services are closely reviewed. Routine, non-legal matters previously referred to Legal staff are now handled in house. The primary changes are as follows: 1) Presently, the City pays $6,000 per month for Mayor's Court legal fees. In the past year, the law firm has tracked the actual monthly costs for the Mayor's Court at the previous hourly rate and it averages $9,800 a month for a service for which the City pays $6,000 per month. This is too large a loss for the law firm to bear, in her view, and therefore she proposes increasing the fixed rate for Mayor's Court to $9,000 per month. They will still experience a slight loss for this work, but it does serve as a training ground for new attorneys in municipal law. 2) The City will no longer have an hourly rate for general legal services. Instead of $120 per hour, which likely would have increased by ten percent this year, staff is recommending a $60,000 per month retainer which will cover general legal matters, civil real estate matters including negotiations with property owners over right-of-way, and general litigation such as appeals from the Board of Zoning Appeals. The next level of complex real estate matters and litigation, involving numerous court appearances and discovery, will be charged at the hourly billing I I RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC., FORM NO. 10148 ~ Held May 19, 2003 Page 8 11-- 20 II I! rate of the attorney assigned, based upon Mr. Smith's negotiations with the City Manager. As an example, the recent work done regarding the land swap was a complicated real estate matter requiring numerous revisions and hours of legal review. Staff agreed to a blended rate on this, which was less than what is normally charged. Mr. Smith offered that as much of the work as possible would be performed by a paralegal, and the rates were blended. 3) All legal services will require approval by the City Manager before the hourly rate is determined. She will not bring these to Council for review, but will use her good judgment to determine the appropriate rates. 4) She added that lobbying efforts and telecommunications work requires complicated legal skills and will be billed at the attorney's current hourly rate. 5) Staff is requesting a contract term of May 1, 2003 through April 30, 2004. She will closely monitor the legal expenses to ensure that the system is working in the City's favor. If she finds any need for adjustment, she will bring this to Council's attention. Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher asked for clarification of the minimum and maximum legal funding authorized with this contract. At a minimum, the monthly retainer plus the Mayor's Court totals $820,000. This does not include litigation or other special work. In that respect, the contract is somewhat open-ended. She noted that Council was not given a copy of the contract. Ms. Brautigam responded that there was not a contract provided. In the past, there was a simple written contract which authorized Mr. Smith to provide legal services at a certain rate. The legal fees will now be determined based upon the memo provided to Council, as she has described to Council tonight. Mr. Smith added that the City of Dublin spent $1.4 million in legal fees in 2002, $1.3 million in 2001, and $1.28 million in 2000. Since the time the new Manager assumed office, the legal fees have averaged $30,000 less per month. Items previously handled by legal staff are now being handled in house. The City Manager must authorize any legal work, so the contract is not "open-ended." Itemized bills will be provided to the Manager. Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher stated that in her mind, the open-ended nature of this is the fact that it does not include a maximum amount. In follow up to the information regarding delinquent tax collections, what is the anticipated savings in legal fees? Ms. Brautigam stated that the Income Tax division will begin doing the collection work next month and based upon the analysis done by the Finance staff, she anticipates a substantial savings. Brief discussion followed about the history of these collections. Vote on the Resolution: Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. Kranstuber, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mayor McCash, yes. Ordinance 50-03 Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Real Estate Purchase Agreement with Stonehenge Company for Approximately 2.7 Acres of Property Located South of Rings Road, More Commonly Known as Tax Parcel #273-004518 in the City of Dublin, County of Franklin, Ohio, and Declaring an Emergency. Mayor McCash noted that a copy of the agreement was provided to Council earlier this evening. He invited questions from Council. Mrs. Boring asked whether deed restrictions are permanent. Mr. Smith responded that they are permanent and run with the land. Mrs. Boring stated that for the deed restrictions placed on the Stonehenge property by the City on the front piece, she is concerned about the permanent restriction regarding passive recreational uses. Mr. Smith responded that the request was made to prohibit an active park on the 2.7 acres because of the office buildings to be located behind the frontage. Mrs. Boring's concern is with limiting options for future City Councils. Mr. Smith noted that when the City acquired the property along Rings Road just to the west, there was also a passive parkland restriction. Mr. Lecklider noted that there was earlier discussion about item #8 on page 5. Is the language consistent with the discussion? Mayor McCash stated that it is consistent. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting. --~ DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC.. FORM NO. 10148 May 19, 2003 Page 9 Held 20 Mayor McCash noted that Mr. Rako and Mr. Dioun are present and are invited to testify if they wish. They indicated no desire to testify at this time. Mayor McCash moved to dispense with the public hearing and treat this as emergency legislation. Ms. Salay seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Kranstuber, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Ms. Chinnici- Zuercher, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mayor McCash, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes. Vote on the Ordinance: Mr. Kranstuber, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mayor McCash, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes. Discussion followed about a date and time for a Special Meeting to introduce and refer a rezoning ordinance to Planning & Zoning Commission. Ii It was the consensus of Council to meet on Tuesday, May 27 at 5:15 p.m. in Council !I Chambers. OTHER . Code Enforcement Issues Ms. Brautigam stated that this issue was brought up at the Council Goal Setting. Mr. Ciarochi stated that a memo was provided to Council that outlines what similar communities in Ohio are doing in terms of code enforcement. The survey reflects staffing levels and whether the work is complaint driven or proactive. Kettering is the only suburban community with a similar staff component. Two of the fulltime staff involved in their code enforcement are planners; in addition, Kettering funds some of this with a Community Block Grant. They also explored some novel approaches undertaken by other communities. Most of the communities surveyed are complaint driven and indicated they would like to be more proactive. Based upon Council's !~IllWI discussion, some of the building inspection staff or planners could be mobilized to assist with surveys of code enforcement needed. This, however, takes them away from their ',....... normal work duties. He has suggested a continued dialogue with Council about the issues and their expectations of key areas to focus on. Increased staffing levels would be required for extensive additional code enforcement. Code enforcement staff is also responsible for parking enforcement in Old Dublin, and he is not certain of the time required for this special assignment. He would like to further define Council's expectations so that staff can better assess the needs. Ms. Salay stated that from her service on BZA, she learned how to identify code violations in the City. Perhaps those staff members in the field on a daily basis could be trained to understand some of the fine points of the Dublin codes and help to enforce them. After all of the attention given during the development review, it is frustrating to see that standards are not upheld over the years. Due to last year's drought, there is a lot of dead landscaping material throughout the City. There is a need to ensure that proper watering is done so that the plants and trees will survive and grow. She would like to see the plantings in the right-of-way replaced where needed. Providing a means of communication for the field staff with the Code enforcement staff would be helpful. Mayor McCash commented that concerns have been expressed by citizens about code violations and the length of time it requires to address them. The goal setting discussion focused on addressing items in a timely manner. It is a staffing issue as well as use of the resources. He agrees that field staff could be cross-trained to provide assistance. The City should be more aggressive and consistent in enforcement, while doing this in a customer-friendly way. Dividing the city into quadrants would lead to the expectation of inspection only once every four years. He appreciates the information provided about other cities, but he doesn't believe Dublin's quality of life compares to them. Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher noted that consistency is a key factor. She is completely opposed to contracting this work out versus having it done by City staff. Personally, she agrees with having field staff communicate with Code enforcement regarding violations observed. Much of what she observes in non-compliance with landscaping is on City property, Le., the Brand Road tunnel. The trees have died and have not been replaced. The City holds others accountable, but not itself. Dublin holds itself to a high standard, but maintaining the standards is critical. Complaint driven code enforcement will not result in a quality level community. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC., FORM NO. 10148 May 19, 2003 Page 1 0 II Held 20 Mrs. Boring noted that the information states that the City of Hudson uses palm pilots and spread sheets to document inspections. It also notes that Oakwood does a pre- sale inspection prior to closing. What does this entail? Mr. Ciarochi stated that this is a transfer inspection done prior to real estate closing. Mrs. Boring suggested that perhaps this be done for commercial properties. Mr. Ciarochi will check with Oakwood on their ordinances and enforcement process. . Ms. Salay noted that she would support the rental property inspection as listed on the survey. Mr. Lecklider concurred with Ms. Salay and Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher's comments. His focus would be with the commercial side of code enforcement. But in view of the time spent on issues during the planning stages, it is important to maintain these high standards. . Cemetery Fee Waiver - Medline Family Mayor McCash stated that the details are outlined in the memo. Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher moved approval of the waiver. Mr. Kranstuber seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Kranstuber, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mayor McCash, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes. . Facility Use Waiver - Dublin Coffman High School Theater Boosters Mr. Kranstuber moved approval of the waiver. Mrs. Boring seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mr. Kranstuber, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mayor McCash, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes. STAFF COMMENTS !P Council Discussion . Memo re Potential Sign Code Modifications ....'.....,'~" Mr. Kranstuber moved to schedule a joint session with Planning & Zoning Commission to devise a list of areas for possible modification. Mrs. Boring seconded the motion. Ms. Salay clarified that Council has already held a meeting with P&Z to devise such a list. The memo presented tonight is staffs response. Ms. Brautigam stated that staff is now requesting feedback on the proposed list from City Council prior to preparation of an ordinance. Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher suggested that Council postpone discussion on this item until the June 9 meeting. Mr. Kranstuber withdrew his motion. Ms. Salay noted that the new building at Martin Road and Sawmill on the Meijer's outlot is very nice looking, however the four separate signs in place for the various tenants greatly detract from the appearance. For the future, she would suggest that the Code require a cohesive color palette and look for a shopping center or retail center's signage, similar to the standards set at Avery Square and Perimeter shopping centers. Ms. Clarke suggested that Council members who support this concept relay this to the Planning Commission. Staff was very surprised that there was no requirement by P&Z for coordinated signage at that building. Staff had recommended such signage, but the applicant balked and Planning Commission did not append such a condition. Mrs. Boring noted that in the case mentioned, there were four different tenants and four different logos. This is strictly a retail area and she does not find it offensive. The identifying signage helps customers to locate the businesses. Mayor McCash stated that this item could be included in the June 9 discussion. He asked that staff check on the new UPS store at the Perimeter Center, as their signage is different from all of the other standard signage in the Center. . Memo re Definitions of Minor Plan Revision Ms. Clarke noted that in review of other cities' codes, most do not have a definition of minor plan amendment. In talking with staff from those cities, the most common way this is accomplished does not fit the Dublin example. Staff has devised Definition #1 which they believe is more tailored to Dublin. Much of what is done at the Planning Commission level relates to traffic generation and the Community Plan, and staff felt that a minor plan modification should be tied to those items. I I I I RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting ~~- DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC.. FORM NO. 10148 May 19, 2003 Page 11 Ii I Held 20 I Mr. Lecklider noted some discomfort with the term "deviation" without qualification. Could it be qualified by saying, "nominal deviation"? Ms. Clarke stated that if this increases Council's comfort level, that is acceptable. Mr. Lecklider stated that he believes Definition #1 is quite broad in terms of the discretion being granted to P&Z without an opportunity for Council to later review it. Mayor McCash stated that P&Z also would have the ability to determine whether it is a minor revision or needs further review. The language which follows in Definition #1, "provided the proposal otherwise remains consistent with the original design, land use I intent and developer commitment" serves to narrow the term "deviation." Ms. Clarke stated that staff would reorder the words to ensure that the consistency is there, and if so, the Commission would then have the power to grant a deviation or clarification. Ms. Clarke stated that a question remains of whether or not a report must be made back to City Council after P&Z grants such a deviation from the adopted plan. Mayor McCash stated that there are many items tweaked in a final development plan which are not later reported back to Council. He would see this as an unnecessary step for a minor plan modification. The minutes of P&Z should suffice. It was the consensus of Council that the minutes of P&Z will suffice to report these items. . Memo re Pedestrian Tunnels and Dublin Road Bikepath Safety Concerns Mr. Hammersmith stated that information has been provided in response to concerns discussed at the last Council meeting. Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher stated that the City developed the bikepath concept and it was apparently shortsighted in view of the many access issues being raised at this time. These major items should have been programmed in the CIP for the future. The opening of the new Dublin Jerome High School will increase traffic on Brand Road and I the residents' safety concerns with crossing Brand to access the park and school. '","", 'M,''''.'.'';. Ms. Salay asked about the Bristol Parkway/Brand Road area, where a bikepath tunnel has been requested. What are the future plans for a bikepath along Brand Road? Mr. Hammersmith stated that this was discussed at a recent staff CIP review meeting. Staff is reviewing ways that the gaps can be filled along Brand Road to provide connectivity to existing pathways. Ms. Salay stated that if a tunnel were to be considered along Brand Road, it would be important to place such a tunnel at the optimum location to serve all of the area. Another consideration is that a neighborhood may lose their school busing if they have walking access to a school. Some parents may have concerns with this. In view of the 35 mph speed limit which is not adhered to in this area, would it be possible to lower the speed to 25 mph and install a raised crosswalk as was done on Avery Road near St. Brigid's School? The tunnels are very costly and there are some safety concerns with the fact that tunnels provide a place for people to loiter, posing a threat to children. Mr. Hammersmith stated that in terms of the concern of providing safe pedestrian crossing for a major arterial in the network, a road of 36 to 40 feet wide with a left hand turn lane, with a volume of 8,000 vehicles in 2001 - a raised crosswalk would not meet the need. Lowering the speed to 25 mph on a road which carries a high volume of traffic is not desirable in terms of moving traffic. Installing such raised crosswalks will decrease the efficiency of the transportation network, penalizing those who do adhere to the speed limits. Ms. Salay noted that she views this differently - slowing to 25 mph is not a major change. The raised crosswalk on Avery seems to be effective in addressing the safety concerns. Mr. Hammersmith stated that it works well in that location due to the road width and the fairly low volume of traffic. In regard to Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher's concerns about CIP planning, there are other considerations for tunnels which have been discussed. As the bikepath network is evaluated, connectivity and the expense must be considered. He cannot address what has happened in the past, but these considerations will be important for the future. Mr. Kranstuber asked if staff has a recommendation about including such a tunnel in the CIP? Mr. Hammersmith responded that in view of the volume of traffic, the fact that it is a major arterial, that there is a park, school and community pool located across from the neighborhood, the fact that there is significant pedestrian traffic of young people, and in view of the width of the road at 36 feet and site visibility constraints on Brand, this is I I RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC., FORM NO.1 0148 T----- ...._-11 May 19, 2003 Page 12 I Held 20 I a good candidate for a pedestrian tunnel. Council will need to determine its priority in relation to the other improvements needed for the community in the CIP. Mr. Kranstuber stated that, assuming Council does not want to fund a tunnel at $.5 million in this location, are there other bikepath connections that could assist the residents? Mr. Hammersmith stated that a connection could be made, but it would likely require going back through the neighborhood. There is not an efficient way for this neighborhood to connect to the desirable destinations of school, park and community pool. Mrs. Boring noted that it would be important to analyze the area to determine the best location for a tunnel to serve the neighborhoods, if a decision is made to fund such a tunnel in the CIP. Discussion followed about the potential need to build a bikepath along the other side of Dublin Road to serve neighborhoods such as River Forest. Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher stated that she was surprised to learn of the cost for such a bikepath along Dublin Road. Mr. Hammersmith stated that the costs include the land acquisition, the embankments, the retaining walls, and the landscaping. The asphalt is the least of the expense of such a bikepath. In the section where safety concerns have been raised due to the proximity of the bikepath to the road, there were trees, utility poles and embankments which to some degree dictated the alignment. Mayor McCash noted that he has observed in other communities a signal that activates a crosswalk for pedestrians. It is activated manually by a pedestrian. Could this be considered? Mr. Hammersmith responded that the concern would be with the driver's expectation of a green light - it could create an unsafe condition for a pedestrian. For a lower volume roadway, it may be applicable, but he does not believe it would be a good application for Brand or Dublin Roads. Mr. Reiner stated that he agrees with the Brand Road analysis - this is obviously a good location for a tunnel. Mayor McCash noted that his recollection from the past is that staff's evaluation indicated there were floodplain issues related to a Bristol Commons/Brand Road tunnel. Mr. Hammersmith stated that this would have to be addressed at the detailed design phase. Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher asked if the City has any participation in the school redistricting discussions. The Schools need to be aware of other considerations in their decision- making, Le., traffic, pedestrian access, safety concerns for students. Ms. Salay stated that she agrees. A similar situation occurs with Indian Run Elementary where the Waterford Village children must cross SR 161 to access the school. Many are crossing through the cemetery. Another concern is that all of the neighborhoods on the western side of 1-270 will be in the Dublin-Jerome High School district, requiring a long commute for those students. The Schools are essentially determining the future traffic patterns without input from the City. . Memo re Special Event Permits Granted to Oscar's and The Rusty Bucket Mayor McCash noted that the permit granted to The Rusty Bucket includes live music. He had understood there was a provision that if a business were within a certain distance of a residential property and the business secured a special event permit for more than one day, that they were not allowed to have live music. The Rusty Bucket is adjacent to a residential apartment complex. Ms. Puskarcik stated that letters were sent to the residents of that area regarding the special event permit for The Rusty Bucket, inviting them to share any concerns with ~. the City. They were assured that the City would monitor this situation in the event there were complaints. COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS/COUNCIL ROUND TABLE Mr. Lecklider asked Chief Epperson about the use of video cameras in cruisers patrolling traffic. Chief Epperson responded that video cameras are located in every cruiser. Most officers record at all times, but the policy requires that when they turn their flashing lights on, recording is done. Mr. Lecklider asked if the video cameras are used in the patrol cars on the 33/161 overpass in conjunction with motorcycle enforcement. I I RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting. DAYTON LEGAL BLANK. INC.. FORM NO. 10148 ~. May 19, 2003 Page 13 Held 20 Chief Epperson responded that at Avery/Muirfield and US 33, a cruiser and motorcyle are both used in enforcement activity. Discussion followed. Ms. Salay noted that the Columbus rezoning of the 400 plus acres in the Hayden Run corridor was tabled. She asked staff for an update on the impact the City and township's testimony has had on this development proposal. Mr. Hammersmith responded that he believes that the City and township's efforts to make the Columbus Development Commission aware of the many concerns related to this proposal have been effective. The traffic study needs to be done prior to any further action on this. The case is rescheduled for the Development Commission on June 12, but this hearing is contingent upon the traffic study being completed by May 27. Mayor McCash noted that an e-mail was sent to Dublin City Council by Columbus City Council Member Sensenbrenner in regard to this development. Mrs. Borinq asked that Council Members respond to her in regard to which outgoing board or commission members they would like to speak about at the dinner event. Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher: 1 ) Asked staff to report on the development taking place in the property adjacent to the Waterbeds store on Sawmill. 2) Noted that between LaScala and Stoneridge Medical Center, there is overgrown grass and a garage housing many cars. Could staff check on this? 3) Commented that the pedestrian crossing signal near Oscar's in Old Dublin is seldom used. She has observed someone using the signal, however the cars did not stop. 4) Reported that the Development Code Revision Task Force meets on Wednesday. The plan is to have a document for review at the second June Council meeting. .. Mrs. Boring asked whether the issues related to conditional uses, as outlined by the Planning Commission would be addressed in this document. Following brief discussion, Ms. Brautigam stated that Legal staff would draft an ordinance for review by staff. It will then be brought to Council. Mr. Kranstuber: 1) Commented that e-mails continue to be sent by Mr. McMahon regarding the soccer issues. Mr. Kranstuber noted that he has briefed Ed Ostrowski regarding the issues that will be discussed at the June study session. Ms. Brautigam noted that Mr. McDaniel has sent an e-mail to Council regarding the issues. A comprehensive presentation is being prepared regarding the soccer programs for the June study session. She urged Council to refrain from sending further e-mails on this topic until after the study session. Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher requested that the staff presentation also include information about the City's tax dollars that have been invested in these programs - whether it is fields, tournaments, equipment, etc. All of this information is important for the public to understand. 2) Noted that he has a family obligation which conflicts with the Administrative Committee meeting scheduled for tomorrow evening. Based on the preferences of the other Committee members, the meeting can proceed or it can be rescheduled. Ms. Brautigam stated that the direction Council gave during the budget process was for the Administrative Committee to review the issues for report back to Council on June 9. She suggested that this report be rescheduled for the June 23 meeting. Mayor McCash suggested that, in view of the late hour, the Committee discuss among themselves a preferred date for the rescheduled meeting. Adiournment to Executive Session Mayor McCash moved to adjourn to executive session at 11 :00 p.m. for legal matters. The meeting will be reconvened only to formally adjourn. Ms. Salay seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mrs. Boring, yes; Mayor McCash, yes; Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Kranstuber, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes. I I RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC., FORM NO. 10148 May 19, 2003 Page 14 I Held 20 II I I I ~II~~ Ac ng Clerk f Cou il '1If{r:;:"4,J ~"".,.,a