Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/10/2007RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council December 10, 2007 Held Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher called the Monday, December 10, 2007 Regular Meeting of Dublin City Council to order at 7:15 p.m. at the Dublin Municipal Building. 1 Present were: Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, Vice Mayor Lecklider, Mrs. Boring, Mr. Keenan, Mr. Reiner, and Ms. Salay. Mr. McCash arrived at 7:35 p.m. Staff members present were: Ms. Brautigam, Mr. Smith, Ms. Grigsby, Chief Epperson, Mr. McDaniel, Mr. Harding, Ms. Crandall, Ms. Hoyle, Mr. Hammersmith, Mr. Hahn, Ms. Kennedy, Ms. Puskarcik, Mr. Earman, Ms. Ott, Ms. Willis, Mr. Langworthy, Mr. Combs, Mr. Goodwin, Ms. Adkins, and Ms. Husak. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mr. Keenan led the Pledge of Allegiance. APPROVAL OF MINUTES • Regular Meeting of November 5, 2007 Vice Mayor Lecklider moved approval of the minutes of November 5, 2007. Mr. Keenan seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mr. Reiner, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Vice Mayor Lecklider, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes. The Clerk reported that the minutes of November 19 and December 3 are not complete at this time. Consideration will be deferred until the January 2, 2008 Council meeting. 1 1 CORRESPONDENCE There was no correspondence requiring Council action. SPECIAL PRESENTATION/PROCLAMATIONS • Update from Dublin Convention & Visitors Bureau Joel Campbell, President, Board of DCVB noted that he was not able to attend the reception for Council Member McCash this evening, as he arrived minutes ago from Chicago. On behalf of the Board of the DCVB and personally, he expressed his appreciation for Mr. McCash's time, energy and commitment to the City of Dublin over 12 years of service as a Council Member. His own service on Council ended ten years ago, but it seems like yesterday. He is certain that Mr. McCash will do well in all his future endeavors. He reiterated the DCVB's mission to attract, service and retain overnight visitors to the City in order to increase hotel/motel tax revenues. The Bureau recently was awarded accreditation from the Destination Marketing Accreditation Program. Less than two percent of convention and visitors bureaus worldwide have achieved this accreditation, which reflects a significant measure of excellence in the industry. In Ohio, only Cleveland's bureau has achieved this designation. He credited Mr. Dring and staff for their diligence in pursuing it. On behalf of the DCVB Board, he thanked Council for all they do for the City of Dublin. Scott Dring, Executive Director. DCVB updated Council on the collaborative effort with the City to secure the Canadian-American Police & Fire Games in 2010. Word was received a couple of months ago that Dublin is a finalist for the event. Representatives from the games will be in Dublin January 10-12, and the visit will include a Mayor's dinner on the opening night. An invitation has been sent to all of Council. He also recognized the firm of Schottenstein, Zox and Dunn who has donated tickets to a Columbus Blue Jackets game for the group. The Can-Am games will have a $3.5 million economic impact on the community. It will be a week-long event in 2010 which will attract 2,500 firefighters and police officers from Canada and the U.S., who will participate in 50 events at venues across Central Ohio. The Board will convene following the site visit in Dublin, so the decision will be made quickly. He noted that, overall, business is good in Dublin. Occupancy levels are flat over last year, but the average daily rate has increased and thus the hotel/motel tax revenues are showing substantial growth. Through October, the revenues are up about 9 percent over last year. They anticipate the growth will slow somewhat in the next year. The branding campaign continues to gain momentum. Efforts are underway to have the local business community incorporate this branding so that visitors can experience this as RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of _ _ Dublin Ct~Council__ December 10, 2007 Page 2 1 1 1 Held well. They have created a "Living the `Irish Is an Attitude"' award, recognizing local businesses for incorporating the brand. This year's award winners were the City of Dublin and the Historic Dublin Business Association for the creation of Slainte Thursday; the Crowne Plaza who renamed their meeting rooms to Irish counties; the Dublin Village Tavern and TehKu who added Irish menu items; and Ha'penny Bridge Imports who are creating more of these Irish experiences. Also, a new video has been produced for trade show marketing of Dublin. The DCVB has added two new Board members - Cheryl Herbert, CEO of Dublin Methodist Hospital, and Eric Belfrage, VP of CB Richard Ellis. He thanked Council for their partnership, especially in regard to the Can-Am Games recruitment efforts. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher congratulated the DCVB on their marketing efforts and on the well deserved accreditation they have earned. She noted to Mr. Campbell that Mr. McCash acknowledged him at the reception as one of his mentors during his time on Council. CITIZEN COMMENTS Wallace Maurer, 7451 Dublin Road noted: 1. He is happy to see that the Council has moved away from using bottled water. Municipalities have taken the lead in green efforts in the nation. In Chicago, City Hall has a rooftop garden. Chicago, New York City, Washington, DC, San Francisco, Kansas City, and Phoenix have become involved in "green roof' efforts. Because it is not a new concept, the required technology is in place. There is an aerial photo of Dublin, likely taken by infrared camera, which shows heat escaping from the buildings. The greening of a roof decreases the heat loss from a building by 50 percent. A rooftop garden creates 53 degrees of heat in a floor 10-15 feet below. It also decreases the cost of air conditioning by 25 percent. It also offers employees the opportunity to take their breaks in a rooftop garden. 2. Recently, City Council sent back for reconsideration some aspects of the Stonehenge Project at the corner of Bridge and High streets. He has had issues with this plan, as it has not captured something quintessential about the City of Dublin. At some point it may be necessary to revise the City's building code to accommodate and encourage the greening of the City. It would be marvelous if the corner building of the project would have a green rooftop garden. It cannot occur on a peaked roof, which would capture hot air rather than pushing it downward. A roof top garden on that building would provide a signature piece for the project. He suggested a branding for that effort could be "Looking Up to Dublin," or "Sky High." 3. He further suggested that Ms. Crandall lead a committee for the greening of Dublin. He suggested that the students who presented a green project at a recent Council meeting could be involved, as they are already aware of the physics and cosmology of green efforts. Adding this element to that corner would bring recognition to Dublin. LEGISLATION TABLED ITEM Ordinance 67-07 (Amended) Rezoning Approximately 13.7 Acres Located on the North Side of Post Road, Adjacent to the M.L. "Red" Trabue Nature Preserve, from PUD, Planned Unit Development District, to PUD, Planned Unit Development District. (Morse Mast Plan -Senior Star Living - 6480 Post Road -Case No. 06-1382) Ms. Husak presented an overview of the project. This ordinance has been before Council on two earlier occasions prior to the second reading on November 5. This is a request for approval of a rezoning and preliminary development plan for an assisted living facility. The Planning and Zoning Commission approved the plan on July 12. She noted that the Convalarium is to the east of the site. Previously Council expressed concerns about the western side yard setback and, in general, how this project would fit in with the surrounding area. The proposed site plan is inlaid over an aerial photograph to give some concept of the site. At the November 5 Council meeting, Council discussed the potential relocation of the access drive into the Red Trabue Preserve, which is on the western side of this site. Planning, Engineering and Park staff have RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS December 10, 2007 Page 3 1 1 1 Held collaborated on the evaluation of this proposal and have determined that the relocation of the access drive is not a viable option at this point. There are concerns about the spacing of a driveway that is proposed to travel south in this general area. The intent was for a pastoral entrance to the park. Having this drive cut through that area would interfere with that intent. In response to Council's concerns, the applicant has reduced the size of the proposed building to 89,000 square feet, thereby increasing the side yard setback by an additional 15 feet. The total side yard setback would be 30 feet, 45 feet from the road pavement. Both the text and the plan have been updated to reflect the reduced building size and the increased side yard setback. Staff believes the revisions address Council's concerns and, therefore, recommends approval of Ordinance 67-07 (Amended) with the nine conditions recommended by the Planning and Zoning Commission. [Council member Tom McCash arrived at this point.] Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher invited citizen public testimony regarding the ordinance. Wallace Maurer, 7451 Dublin Road referred to page 4, item 4, of the revised development text, which addresses the mandated bikepath and sidewalk along the Post Road frontage. The text indicates that there will be paved private leisure paths inside this project. Is the inference that the residents of the facility would be encouraged to use the private leisure paths of the facility versus the potentially dangerous public bikepath and walkway? Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher responded that Mr. Hale could address that issue when he testifies. Lolly Clotts, Dublin Retirement Village, 6470 Post Road stated that she hopes that Council members never are in a position where their own or a relative's health deteriorates to a point where they must seek out a competent, efficiently run care facility. She assured Council that not only is the outside of the Senior Star facility well cared for; the inside is as well. The facility is managed efficiently, and it is a nice place to live. However, the facility next door is not well run. Residents of that facility tend to have limited stays, moving whenever possible. Her husband is currently there, but she will be moving him as soon as possible. They were told that it was going to be under new management and conditions would change, but the new management has quit. She requested that Council keep the senior citizens and their rights in mind. Bert Rishel, Dublin Retirement Center stated that he has been a resident of the facility for two years. The management truly cares about providing a quality operation. Every maintenance issue, no matter how minute, is addressed. He is a professional engineer and had his own business for 60 years. He is also a retired counselor for SCORE (Service Corps of Retired Executives) and has had many opportunities to observe management. They all refer to the need to observe the bottom line. That is necessary for any business, but it is how that is achieved that makes the difference. Dublin Retirement Center's overall program is geared to maximize the residents' productivity and their mental health. Their "brain fitness" program was written about in a recent news article. Dublin is fortunate to have a facility of this caliber. He recommended that Council approve the rezoning which would allow construction of the additional building. Ben Hale, 37 W. Broad Street, representative for the applicant stated in response to Council's concerns at their last meeting, that the applicant has reduced the size of the building and number of units. The revised plan requests only 12 units over what is contained in the existing zoning. The current facility is in remarkably good shape. The owner indicates that next year, they will have spent $650,000 on maintenance of that building. The owner has six of these facilities throughout the country, and next year they will spend $2.5 million on maintenance of those facilities. The owner is interested in providing the next level of care to these residents. It is traumatic for most of the patrons who give up homes to move to the facility. Once they are established, they do not want to be moved again if their health should deteriorate. This will enable the residents to remain in their apartments but receive a higher level of care, when needed. The architecture of the new building will be compatible with that of the existing facility -- four- sided architecture, stone on all sides. He asked Jim Burkhart to comment on the landscaping plan. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS _ _____ Dublin City Council_____ _ ___ ___ 1 ,~, 48 Held December 10, 2007 Page 4 Jim Burkhart, 5737 Lake Forest Way. Westerville stated that in addition to the side yard setback, the survival of the mature red oak trees on the site were an issue identified by Council. During the last discussion, he had alluded that the trees were worth saving. Since that time, he visited the site and evaluated the trees. They are all in very good health with a caliper of 6-8 inches and a canopy or crown of 16-20 feet. Typically, the root structure mirrors the canopy of the tree. In this case, 10 feet of the tree and its root system penetrates this property. The building will be set back 30 feet, which should provide 20 feet of area in which to construct the building. He has spoken to several contractors, and they believe 20 feet would be sufficient workable space. He would suggest installing a construction fence that would parallel the property line the entire distance to prevent any accidental penetration into the tree root line. He is confident that step would protect the trees. Mr. Hale stated that the current zoning refers to this land as Office District. The setback for that district is calculated differently -height of the building times the width of the building, divided by four. Therefore, the basic setback requirement for the building is 15 feet, and this project does exceed that amount. They have revised the plan to meet Council's expectations. They are committed to providing afirst-class project, and they hope that Council will permit them to construct this building. Mr. Reiner thanked Mr. Hale for reducing the size of the building and addressing the issues Council brought up at their last meeting. 1 Mr. McCash stated that this is a difficult site on which to achieve a balance between the need for a certain number of units and meeting the City's requirements. They have achieved the best plan possible under the circumstances. Mrs. Boring stated that there is a lot split on this property, and they are proposing future development. Ms. Husak responded that the lot split application was received simultaneously with the rezoning application, and it is for Subarea A and B. If the rezoning is approved tonight, it would allow this development to occur. Mr. Keenan stated that one of the conditions is that the applicant dedicates all right-of- way necessary to comply with the Thoroughfare Plan. Will that be swales, bar ditches, or curb and gutter? Is the applicant aware the amount of right-of-way could vary, depending on that factor? Ms. Husak responded that the City engineers have been involved in the process, and therefore the applicant is aware. Ms. Salay stated that she is disappointed that moving the driveway is not an option. She appreciates the fact that the developer and business worked with the neighborhood to the north to address their concerns and gain their support. She also appreciates the revision of the development plan to increase the setback and their plan to save the oak trees on the site. 1 Vice Mayor Lecklider inquired what would happen in the event one of the oak trees does not survive. Mr. Husak responded that inspections will occur during the construction period and for a full year following. If it is determined that a tree was damaged due to the construction, the applicant would be required to replace the tree. Vice Mayor Lecklider inquired if staff would review the setback and determine if they have the same conclusions as Mr. Burkhart. Ms. Husak responded that after the November Council meeting discussion, the City landscape inspector checked the proposed setback and the condition of the trees. The City's landscape inspector's assessment then was that if the construction were conducted carefully, the trees could survive. The additional 15 feet of the revised setback provides a greater assurance of their survivability. Vice Mayor Lecklider stated that the construction fence should be around the perimeter and not just around the trees in question. Ms. Husak indicated that it would be installed around the perimeter. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin Citv Council December 10, 2007 Page 5 20 ~ Vice Mayor Lecklider stated that he, too, is disappointed that the drive alignment could not be altered. The setback could not be at 10 or 15 feet for one building alone; it would be necessary for all three buildings. Mr. Hale concurred. Vice Mayor Lecklider stated that although there will now be 30 feet to work with, this is something outside the normal procedure. It has been inferred that Council members may not be overly familiar with nursing facilities, but he has two relatives in such j facilities. He does appreciate what this facility will offer the Dublin community. Mrs. Boring moved to amend the conditions to add that asemi-permanent fence be placed and maintained throughout the entire construction period to protect the trees on the western border. Ms. Salay seconded the motion. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher inquired if Mr. Hale would accept the additional condition. Mr. Hale indicated that he accepts the additional condition. Vote on the Ordinance as amended: Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Vice Mayor Lecklider, yes. POSTPONED ITEM Ordinance 58-07 Adopting the 2007 Community Plan. (2007 Dublin Community Plan -Case No. 07- 056ADM) Mr. Combs stated that there is no formal presentation tonight. A summary of all of the motions from the December 3 special meeting has been included in the meeting packets (attachment A). Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher invited public comment. Jane Swickard, 2755 Terrace Street, Millersport stated that she hopes all have had an opportunity to read her letter of December 4 regarding the new Community Plan and the proposed setbacks for the southwest corner of Avery and Woerner-Temple Roads. As stated previously, the setbacks would significantly affect the value of the property owned by her family -- a conservative estimate is 38 percent of usable land. Her family requests that Dublin's new Community Plan, which encompasses their property, be flexible in regard to setbacks and that any development proposals for this property be ~ considered on the merits of design and what will benefit the Dublin community. Wallace Maurer, 7451 Dublin Road, stated that he has 4 issues to address. • Preservation of the Holder-Wright works. This was addressed previously with respect to the Indian Mounds, and he expressed concern about their preservation. Previously, the City was awarded a $132,000 grant for the site which was canceled when the owner decided not to sell. Does this affect the preservation plans? Ms. Brautigam responded that Council adopted a policy of intent to preserve that property. The current property owner is aware of the City's desire to purchase the property, but is not yet ready to sell. They will contact the City when they are ready to do so. • Water towers. There is the possibility of making water towers visually palatable. Along I-270 between Dublin and Worthington, two waters towers are visible. Their structure is considerably modified from the typical water tower of the past, and they are painted a soft color combination that reduces the visual impact. This could be a future art project for the Dublin Arts Council - a large scale "Titration" type project. • Bike lanes. In Los Angeles, drivers are very respectful of the bike lanes. However, in the Los Angeles culture, pedestrians have the right of way. • Ponderosa Estates. He has many thoughts on this issue, and will commit himself publicly to sharing them, albeit it will be through the local newspapers. Claire Wolfe, 5521 Indian Hill Road, River Forest stated that she is here to speak about the Memorial Bridge issue. She is very disappointed with Council's decision to remove the bridge from the Community Plan. The bridge has been in the Plan for ten years, which is very foresighted. Removing it from the Plan is very shortsighted. Its presence in the Plan did not mean that it necessarily must be built in that location. Its proposed location was very close to her home, so she could not be accused of being one of the RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Held 1 1 1 Dublin City Council.. _ ________ _ Meeting ___ December 10, 2007 Page 6 "not in my backyard" citizens. The City needs to make provision for additional traffic across the river. Some of the remarks expressed in the local papers were somewhat inane, such as, "It is not our problem that the roads are so full" and "Much of the traffic is from the north and those communities should participate in the building of a bridge." That may be true, but Dublin recently rezoned a very large area between McKitrick and Brock roads. There is also Deer Run, Glacier Run and Glacier Ridge Park and the northern part of Muirfield road. The Cardinal Health new construction is anticipated to add an additional 600 cars to SR 745 and Emerald Parkway. Removing the provision for the bridge in Amberleigh where rights-of-way have already been identified seems shortsighted. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher requested that the Woerner-Temple/Avery Road area plan be displayed. Mr. Combs noted that the drawing could be found on page 85 of the Community Plan draft. Ms. Salay stated that originally she did not support amixed-use development in this location, nor did most of the neighbors. What made the concept palatable was the incorporation of the large setback that would preserve the pastoral feel along Woerner- Temple west and south on Avery Road. That may not be maximizing the value for the landowners, but that is not the standard by which Council makes its decisions. While she is sympathetic to the plight of the landowners, that is the risk of investment -- there is not a guaranteed return. Time and circumstances can affect it. However, the landowners will not lose; they will receive a fair return for their land. Long term, this is the best plan for the community. A Community Plan must reflect the overall interest of the community rather than the individual interests of the landowners. The right thing to do is to keep the setbacks as discussed previously. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher inquired if there were any other comments regarding the Community Plan. The staff memo included in the packet lists the changes that were made in the final draft as a result of Council's public hearing discussions and direction. Mr. Keenan stated that the Community Plan update has encompassed athree-year effort. He thanked everyone for their hard work on the project. Ms. Salay stated that she recently reviewed the Community Plan materials she has accumulated over course of the project and was struck by the overly optimistic goal of the initial timeline of 12 to 18 months; it has taken nearly four years. She was one of the original advocates of the need to update the Community Plan. A large portion of her ward was undeveloped, and the area was under-planned. Although it has been a long process, it has been very beneficial. Council has addressed many issues, many of which were unexpected. She thanked staff, particularly Planning, for the very long hours committed to this task. She is concerned, however, that in the end Council may have yielded to the political pressure of the year and not adopted the best long-term policy regarding a couple of issues. Dr. Wolfe, who spoke earlier, may be correct. If so, she apologizes to the future residents who may have to re-visit the bridge issue. Former Council Member Kranstuber, who mentored her when she first assumed her seat on Council, once said that during his years on Council, he observed that Council had not bowed to political pressure but had worked together to do what was best for Dublin. She had hoped that would also be the outcome of this effort. Nevertheless, Council must move on. She heartily supports the Community Plan update and is honored to have been part of the process. Vice Mayor Lecklider stated that he was also involved with the 1997 Community Plan update, and is not certain where that ended and the new one began. In Dublin, if Council errs, they err on the side of inclusion, including the opinions of more rather than fewer, and that ensures a better result. In addition to staff, he would like to recognize the various boards who had input and devoted time to this effort, particularly the Planning and Zoning Commission. Although there may be details that do not meet his expectations, the vast majority of it does. That is the result of a democratic process. The City and the community can be proud of the result. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS ___ Minutes of ____Dublin_City Council __ -- ---- Mee . -- NO. 10148 December 10, 2007 Page 7 Held li 1 1 Mrs. Boring stated it has been a long three years, and she will therefore make her comments brief. She thanked Mr. Combs and all the Planning staff for their work. Mr. McCash stated that this began as a simple update, but evolved into a complete re- write of the Community Plan, completed 10 years after the adoption of the previous version. The 1997 process was also lengthy, but probably not as trying as this process. He commended staff. This is probably some of their best work. Unfortunately, Council's subsequent work may not have been their best work. He has debated the proper action for himself tonight in view of the likelihood that future residents will confront a future Council about the need for an additional bridge over the river. He wants to be on the record for his position that Council's decision regarding the bridge may not have been the best. He trusts that in the future, an update or revision will reevaluate this issue. Mr. Reiner stated that he assumed a seat on Council at the time the 1997 Community Plan was being completed. It is not improbable that a future Council will be doing the same in another ten years. This Plan is based upon 10-15 year projections, and the community will likely change significantly during the next few years, resulting in the need for another review. He thanked Mr. Combs, the Planning staff and the City Manager for taking on the monumental task of a Community Plan re-write simultaneously with the already heavy workload dictated by the high volume of development in Dublin. He believes this is the best plan for the community at this time. A future community and Council will produce another plan, if needed. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher also thanked Mr. Combs and all staff who worked on the Community Plan. As she contemplated the point at which the project took a turn for the better, she believes it was when staff took charge of the project, following the early work by the consultants. That is something that needs to be remembered in the future. The staff, Council and citizens know what the community wants and what would be best for it. Consultants can play a role, but not a lead role, in shaping the Community Plan for the community. She commended Mr. Combs for "stepping up to the plate" and committing the extra time to accomplish the task. All Council members, with the exception of Mr. Keenan, were also involved with the 1997 Community Plan. That update was a very community-based effort, with hundreds of people involved. What it resulted in was a tremendous "buy in" of the community for many subsequent years. Many people in the areas that were later developed were involved in the development of that Community Plan and were able to shape what ultimately happened. She agrees that in the next ten years or less, the City will likely re-evaluate the 2007 Plan. She believes there is great value in the active participation of citizens in the process - in fact, they should lead the process. The outcome may or may not be different. The important thing is that it is really their Community Plan. Citizen investment in the application of the Community Plan is the reason Dublin enjoys such a beautiful community. She hopes this perspective is pulled from the archives at the time Dublin again considers changes to the Community Plan. Vote on the Ordinance: Ms. Salay, yes; Vice Mayor Lecklider, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. McCash, no; Mrs. Boring, yes. SECOND READING/PUBLIC HEARING -ORDINANCES Ordinance 87-07 Adopting the Annual Operating Budget for the Fiscal Year Ending December 31, 2008, and Declaring an Emergency. Ms. Brautigam stated that the information provided in this packet includes the updates made as a result of Council's budget work sessions in November. Mrs. Boring stated that she missed the second budget work session. She has some major concerns about some of the expenses that have been budgeted. She does not believe that Council has a sufficiently tight handle on the budget and that they should begin to look at certain things more closely. There are tasks that current staff is no longer able to do, so additional full-time staff is being added to do the work. She would like to have an understanding of the reasons for that. 20 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Held December 10, 2007 Page 8 1 17 __ Mcetin~ -- Mr. Keenan thanked staff, the Finance Committee and fellow Council members for their input. The proposed budget was reviewed by line item. There were some concerns about the addition of new staff positions. Staff's explanation was that there have been few new positions added over the last three to four years, and the current level of City services has created a need for additional personnel. As an employer, he is aware that if employees are overworked to a point of "burn out," the level of productivity is diminished. It is preferable to have adequate staffing. He believes that staff clearly communicated that the additional staff is necessary. He is satisfied with the proposed budget and has no issues with it. Ms. Salay stated that she concurs with Mr. Keenan's comments. She believes Council reviewed the proposed budget thoroughly. She thanked Ms. Grigsby, Ms. Hoyle and the staff who worked on the budget. The level of detail that they were able to provide was impressive. Vice Mayor Lecklider stated that he also believes the budget was comprehensively discussed. He is confident that staff has noted the concerns expressed and will be mindful of the concerns when preparing next year's budget. He is also comfortable with the proposed budget. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated she has shared with Ms. Brautigam that she continues to have the same concerns expressed in all of the budget work sessions, i.e., the addition of nine new positions, the Latshaw contract, and the City's capacity to manage those expenses in addition to the new compensation plan, the estimated cost of which is still not all inclusive. She does not understand why it is not possible to provide the total projected budget for an item. A visual total budget with breakdowns on an item should be provided on one page. Although all of the information is provided somewhere within the report, the total budget for a particular item is not provided visually in one place so that Council can evaluate it. She believes that adding nine new positions in addition to filling the outstanding vacancies will be difficult to manage. Council did question those proposals, and staff provided an explanation. Although the justification was provided, as is typical with any budget, it is not sufficient for Council to respond by simply accepting the changes. Amore deliberative and constructive process is required of Council, as a public entity working with the taxpayers' money. Although her concerns will not be reflected in her vote, she does want them on the record. As an elected body, probably the most important service that Council is providing to its constituents is in determining how the money that they are contributing to run the City is used. She believes the budget process has become too routine for Council. Council needs to re-think the future budget process to ensure that they have a more intensive dialogue about it, versus a budget list by line item. There is no prioritization discussion and an understanding of how that decision dictates future policy decisions. Mrs. Boring stated that she agrees with the Mayor's observation. Although Council asks questions about the budget proposals and receives responses, there is no real dialogue that takes place. Perhaps some Council members believe it is appropriate for them to accept the responses at face value, but she concurs with the Mayor. Mr. Reiner moved to for emergency passage in order to have the budget in effect by January 1, 2008. Mr. Keenan seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mrs. Boring, no; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Vice Mayor Lecklider, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes. Vote on the Ordinance: Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Vice Mayor Lecklider, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Mrs. Boring, no; Mr. Keenan, yes. Ordinance 88-07(Amended) Amending Sections 2 (Wage & Salary Structure/Administration), 12 (Vacation Leave), 14 (Longevity Pay), 16 (Tuition Reimbursement), 17 (Temporary Work Assignment), and 18 (Overtime/Compensatory Time) of Ordinance No. 73-06 ("Compensation Plan for Non-Union Personnel"), and Declaring an Emergency. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that in addition to the packet materials, new projections were provided in Council's folders tonight. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin C December 10, 2007 Page 9 Hel Ms. Brautigam stated that the new compensation plan would be implemented based on the 2008 budget. The compensation plan amendment includes some benefits that were provided in the new Steelworkers collective bargaining agreement, which are also recommended to be provided to non-union staff. Mrs. Boring inquired if the new compensation plan provides the same benefits as the union contract plus other items. Mr. Harding responded that this ordinance does not address the union contract. The contract was ratified separately. However, the new union contract contains some items which are recommended to be provided to non-union staff, including the revisions to the longevity pay and the vacation hours. The comparables reviewed during contract negotiations were so strong that it would compel the same increases in benefits be ~ made for the non union staff. Vice Mayor Lecklider moved for emergency passage. Mr. Keenan seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Vice Mayor Lecklider, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes. Vote on the Ordinance: Ms. Salay, yes; Vice Mayor Lecklider, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes. Ordinance 90-07 Amending Chapter 35 of the Codified Ordinances to Revise the Fee and Service Charge Revenue/Cost Comparison System and Establishing a Schedule of Fees and Service Charges for City of Dublin Services, and Declaring an Emergency. Ms. Salay introduced the ordinance. Ms. Brautigam stated that this item was reviewed by the Finance Committee. Annually, the City fees for services are re-evaluated. There are a number of services that are fee based and should not be supported by tax dollars, but by those who receive the services. The Finance Committee recommended some changes be made to the 2008 I Fee Schedule. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher inquired if the 4-5 changes listed in the cover memo were the only changes made to the 2007 Fee Schedule. Ms. Grigsby responded that there were other changes recommended by staff. The memo lists the additional changes made as a result of the Finance Committee review. The documentation provided in Council's packet materials included the spreadsheets that were distributed to the Finance Committee, which identify the proposed increases and the Finance Committee's recommendation regarding those increases. Mr. Keenan stated that most of the suggested increases related to the increased cost for the services. Those listed in the memo were ones the Committee more specifically addressed -- in particular, the outdoor pool passes. The Committee recommended limiting the number of non-resident pool passes in order to have capacity at the facilities to accommodate residents. ~ Ms. Salay inquired if the intent is to review the numbers again next year. Mr. Keenan responded that was his understanding. Mrs. Boring asked if the expenses and revenues for the outdoor pools indicate that the City is covering the costs. Ms. Grigsby responded that from an operating standpoint, this year will end with the City paying a $200,000 subsidy for their operations. Mrs. Boring requested clarification of the City's philosophy regarding funding of the outdoor pool operations. Ms. Grigsby responded that up to approximately three years ago, the City did break even on the direct operating costs, not considering capital or indirect costs. In the past couple of years, the City has made transfers from the General Fund to support the pool of between $200,000 - $300,000 per year. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin December 10, 2007 Page 10 Mrs. Boring stated that she is very disappointed that staff is recommending an increase in the outdoor pool fees. The City's stated philosophy is that this would be the City's gift to the citizens, and the City would subsidize the outdoor pool by 50 percent. Ms. Grigsby clarified that for recreational programming -the classes provided by City recreation staff -- the City's philosophy is to subsidize it by 50 percent. For the outdoor pools, the general philosophy has been to recover the majority of the direct operating costs. Up to a year before the South Pool opened, the City was recovering the direct costs for the outdoor pool; in some years, the revenues actually exceeded the expenditures. The outdoor pool fees have not increased for several years. The last rate increase was two years ago, when the cost of the daily pass was increased by $1.00. The outdoor pool pass fees have not increased. Mr. Keenan asked for confirmation that no additional fees have been allocated to cover capital costs. Ms. Grigsby responded that the City does not include capital costs in establishing the fees related to the Recreation Center or the outdoor pools. Mr. Keenan noted that if recovery of the actual cost of the land and buildings were considered, the fees would be much higher. Ms. Grigsby responded that the City looks at the rate structures in place by the surrounding communities to ensure Dublin is not undercharging and thereby encouraging non residents to use the Dublin facilities versus the facilities in their own communities. It is also important not to overcharge Dublin residents. Ensuring capacity for Dublin residents is also critical, and in the future, it may be necessary to restrict use by non residents. Mr. Keenan stated that the Committee focused on serving Dublin residents' needs first and foremost. Mrs. Boring responded that she appreciates the Committee reviewing the non resident usage. It would be difficult to implement restrictions such as residency requirements, but that may be necessary in the future given the growth of the community. In regard to the fee increase, it is not a significant increase, but she observes a pattern of increases. She recalls a previous increase in passes in the last 4 years. Ms. Salay responded that the season passes were increased previously. Vice Mayor Lecklider stated that the recommended increase was not dramatic, but in comparison to other communities, Dublin's rates appear very reasonable, particularly for the seniors of the community. Mrs. Boring stated that the staff memo provides a narrative, but it does not clearly state the current rate and the proposed rate. Ms. Grigsby responded that the changes are identified in the attached spreadsheets. At the end of the spreadsheets, the services are identified where modifications to the fees will be made. Ms. Salay stated that there are different designations made for residents and non residents in regard to the outdoor pool passes. However, the Recreation Center passes continue to be based upon three tiers. One of those is for school district residents, but the specific school district is not identified. The Recreation Center membership is held by many non residents, and there are at least two school districts within Dublin. At some point in the future, the Jonathan Alder School District will also have residents within the City. She is concerned that maintaining athree-tier membership will be difficult for the front desk employees, who must provide explanation of Council's justification. For purposes of clarity and understanding of the residents, she would be interested in utilizing only a resident and non resident designation for the Rec Center passes. Dublin residents would be accommodated as a first priority. Ms. Grigsby responded that there are increases proposed for the school district rate. There has been discussion regarding merging the different rates in recognition of the issue she has raised. The intent is to reduce certain discounts until, eventually, there will be only resident and non-resident rates. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that there is also a corporate pass rate. The corporate population is also increasing. When the City was smaller, the various distinctions made sense. However, the City must now focus on ensuring the benefits are available to the taxpayers of the community. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS He December 10, 2007 Page 11 20 L J 1 Mr. Keenan responded that is the eventual goal, but not to attempt to accomplish it all at once. The intent is not to have excess capacity and loss of revenue. There is a balancing effort. This will be re-evaluated over the next year or two. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted in regard to the Street and Utilities increases, the memo indicates a courtesy call was made to the townships and school districts. What was their response? Ms. Grigsby responded that they had no objections. They were advised that they would receive a formal notice following Council's second reading and formal adoption. She believes that both entities are pleased that they do not need to administer the program. Vice Mayor Lecklider moved for emergency passage. Mr. Reiner seconded the motion. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher clarified that emergency action is necessary to implement the new fee schedule on January 1, 2008. Vote on the motion: Mr. McCash, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Vice Mayor Lecklider, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes. Vote on the Ordinance: Mr. Reiner, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Vice Mayor Lecklider, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. McCash, yes. INTRODUCTION/FIRST READING -ORDINANCES Ordinance 92-07 (Annual Appropriations Ordinance) Establishing Appropriations Based on the 2008 Operating Budget of the City of Dublin, State of Ohio, for the Fiscal Year Ending December 31, 2008. Vice Mayor Lecklider introduced the ordinance. Ms. Salay moved to dispense with the second reading/public hearing. Mr. Reiner seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Vice Mayor Lecklider, yes. Vote on the Ordinance: Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Vice Mayor Lecklider, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. McCash, yes. Ordinance 93-07 Amending the Annual Appropriations for the Fiscal Year Ending December 31, 2007. Ms. Salay introduced the ordinance. Wallace Maurer, 7451 Dublin Road stated that there seems to be an error in the memo, as a sentence at the end of page 1 does not continue on page 2. Ms. Grigsby responded that it is. Actually, the last two lines of page 1 are repeated on page two. Mr. Keenan moved to dispense with the second reading/public hearing. Ms. Salay seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Vice Mayor Lecklider, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes. Vote on the Ordinance: Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Vice Mayor Lecklider, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes. Ordinance 94-07 Amending Chapters 51 and 52 of the Dublin Codified Ordinances Establishing User Fees and Capacity Charges for the Water and Sanitary Sewer Systems, and Declaring an Emergency. Ms. Salay introduced the ordinance. Ms. Brautigam stated that this matter was discussed during the August CIP hearings. Changes need to be made in these two enterprise funds, the Water Fund and the Sewer Fund. Although the Water Fund is meeting expectations, the Sewer Fund is not. Consequently, revenue from the Water Fund will be moved to the Sewer Fund. Ms. Salay inquired why the Sewer Fund is not meeting expectations. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS _- -- ~iat~LirLCit~~ounci --- - - ~, 48 _._. December 10, 2007 Held ~ _ -- 1 1 ---- ---~~tin~ - Page 12 20 Ms. Grigsby responded that there are primarily two reasons. The first is that the Sewer Fund covers payments on the debt for the Upper Scioto West Branch interceptor. The loan through the EPA is approximately $19 million. The City's annual debt service payments are approximately $1.4 million, and they will continue through the year 2018. Also, as is typical with most sanitary sewer systems, there are a significant number of repairs. Beginning in 2006, the City initiated an aggressive repair and realignment of the main sanitary sewer lines to reduce the inflow and infiltration and to ensure a reliable system. Sanitary sewer systems are generally more expensive to maintain than water systems. Ms. Salay stated that it was essential that the City undertake a thorough maintenance program to avoid future difficulties. Ms. Grigsby confirmed that is correct. Ms. Salay inquired if the extension of the Upper Scioto West Branch is what enabled Dublin to grow the last ten years. Ms. Grigsby responded that is correct. In 1990, sewer connection was prohibited due to the fact that the West Branch did not yet exist. The West Branch extension occurred in 1997, and payment of debt service began in 1998. Mr. Keenan stated that today's news includes a report that Congress is discussing a review of some of their mandates and/or providing funding for items such as this. Would Dublin or Columbus be in line for these types of items? Ms. Grigsby responded that she would be following up on that. The article focused on combined systems where the sanitary and storm sewers comprise one system. That is not the case in Dublin. However, staff will research the possibility of obtaining a low interest loan for repair and maintenance. Mr. Keenan responded that it could prove beneficial to lobby State representatives to ensure that Dublin receives some of the benefits passed down, as Dublin is part of the Columbus sewer and water system. Mr. McCash stated that it is unfortunate that Dublin had to deal with the infiltration issue with the EPA that necessitated the City paying additional public monies. Columbus has the same problem. Unfortunately, Dublin has no influence on Columbus City Council and no representation which would protect Dublin from taxation without representation. Therefore, Columbus can pass along any fee they choose to Dublin without input. Vice Mayor Lecklider asked for confirmation that the combined water/sewer increase to the consumer proposed in this ordinance would increase on a quarterly basis by a little more than $1.00/per year for the next two years. Ms. Grigsby responded that when reviewing the overall City consumption and the number of customers Dublin has, the average thousand cubic feet use is 1,100 per month. Using that number, the net average increase per year for water/sewer service would be $3.30. That amount reflects a decrease in water costs and increase in sanitary sewer costs. As part of the annual CIP process, those costs are reviewed and evaluated. Since 1996, there has been discussion concerning an eventual necessary increase in user fees. It is recommended that a user fee increase occur in 2008. Mrs. Boring stated that for public clarification purposes, it is important to note that water rates are being decreased and sanitary sewer rates are being increased. She suggested that the decrease in rates also be mentioned in the news releases. Ms. Grigsby stated that a press release has been prepared, which will also be distributed to the civic associations. That notice does clarify the decreased water rate. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher suggested the topic be utilized for an upcoming City Manager column. Vice Mayor Lecklider moved to dispense with the public hearing and for emergency passage. Mr. Keenan seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mayor Chinnici- Zuercher, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Vice Mayor Lecklider, yes; Ms. Salay, yes. Vote on the Ordinance: Mr. McCash, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Vice Mayor Lecklider, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS December 10, 2007 Page 13 i Held 20 Ordinance 95-07 Modifying Portions of the Zoning Code PUD Regulations for Administrative Approvals. (Case No. 07-118ADM) Ms. Salay introduced the ordinance. Mrs. Brautigam stated that over the past year, the Planning and Zoning Commission and ' staff have been working on certain amendments needed in the zoning code. In 2008, those proposed amendments will be coming before Council for review and approval. Mr. Langworthy thanked the Planning staff for the work they have done on facilitating the zoning code reviews and revisions. The Engineering staff contributed significantly to the effort as well. Mr. Langworthy noted that this particular Code amendment was pursued at the request of the Planning and Zoning Commission. The Commissioners indicated that it should ~ not be necessary for them to review certain minor issues. Consequently, staff proposed Code language revisions, which the Commissioners reviewed at their last work session. The Commissioners suggested some changes in regard to stormwater management Ili facilities and provision of landscaped mounds. Another change was made at the end ICI under "Other Modifications," which states: "Other modifications deemed by the Director ~ that do not alter the basic design or any specific conditions imposed as part of the ;I, original approval." They also added a provision that, "The Director shall report any i,l j modification to the Planning and Zoning Commission." They added the provision that ~ even if some of the modifications that were requested would fall on the modification list, I the Director would have the option of presenting those changes to the Planning and ~ Zoning Commission if there was a reason their review was deemed necessary. ~ '~ Mrs. Boring requested that in the future, Council be provided with redlined versions of proposed amendments to the Code. It would facilitate Council's review. There will be a second reading/public hearing at the January 2, 2008 Council meeting. Ordinance 96-07 Modifying Portions of the Zoning Code Addressing Swimming Pool Fences, Fitness Uses, Pet Care Services, and Park and Rides. (Case No. 07-110ADM) Ms. Salay introduced the ordinance. Mrs. Brautigam stated that this is another zoning code amendment forwarded by the Planning Commission. Ms. Husak stated that the proposed language relates to four categories. Three are use related and one relates to swimming pool fences. • Planning staff have received many inquiries from prospective business owners regarding pet care services, such as grooming or dog day care services, which the City's zoning code does not currently address. The proposed language addition categorizes pet care services into two categories: (1) grooming, boarding and training, and (2) outdoor areas. • The zoning code also does not currently address fitness-related uses and recreational sports uses. It is recommended that those uses be permitted in certain zoning districts. • The proposed language would also permit parking facilities at the urban fringe intended to facilitate transit and rideshare use. Staff have been working with COTA to determine appropriate sites, but there are certain districts that would lend themselves to having a park and ride as a permitted use. • Proposed parking requirements for the pet care and fitness uses are included. • Finally, the proposed Code modification allows swimming pools that are non- conforming in location and setback to be enclosed by a fence no more than four feet high. The proposed language states that this fence may be in addition to any other fence already located on the property. Ms. Salay requested clarification that the uses were legally non-conforming fences, or grandfathered. Ms. Husak responded that the fences were permitted at the time they were installed. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS December 10, 2007 Page 14 He Mrs. Boring stated that the definition of "park and ride" needs some clarification. In the past, she considered that use to be limited to park and rides themselves, but when accessory structures are included, such as bus passenger shelters, terminals and transfer stations, it becomes more of a bus station than a park and ride. That use could have implications for the surrounding properties. Ms. Husak responded that there have been instances when a building was proposed and language was added to the permitted use section that would require that the architecture of any such structure be harmonious with the surrounding area to potentially counteract such a situation. Mrs. Boring asked why it is not instead defined as a bus station or a bus transfer area. Ms. Claudia responded that it could be removed from the park and ride category if that is Council's desire. Mrs. Boring stated that she would prefer that terminals and transfer stations be identified as something other than a park and ride. When dealing with that, the design should definitely be included. Ms. Husak stated that it could also be considered a conditional use in those districts, which would trigger an extra review step. Mr. Keenan stated that he recently was confronted with this issue at their office building, and the residents of Lowell Trace were not pleased. He was surprised at the strong outcry from many of the tenants in their building in opposition to the proposed park and ride. They objected to the basic Plexiglas structure. Comments have also been made that it would ruin the view and create issues about who was using the structure and how it was being used. The proposed use at the Post Road location has been met with a great deal of resistance. Mrs. Boring asked when this occurred. Mr. Keenan responded that it may be a pending Planning Commission case. Ms. Husak responded that there is an application on file for the Northwest Presbyterian Church on Post Road. There are issues with the current PUD which would house the site and the property owner sign off. The applicant is most likely withdrawing their application because of the neighborhood concern. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher inquired if the application was from COTA. Ms. Husak responded that is correct. Mr. Keenan stated that it was his understanding the applicant was a church. Ms. Husak responded that is true. Ms. Salay stated that she does not understand the problem, other than the aesthetics of the shelter, which could either be mitigated or the shelter could be eliminated. Individuals could remain in their vehicle until the bus arrived. Dublin is focusing on becoming a green community and trying to encourage COTA to invest in the community with more routes. The convenience of more routes increases rider ship and, consequently, results in fewer vehicles on the roads. This situation seems contradictory and is disappointing. Mr. Keenan stated that the applicant approached Kroger at the outset, which has a significant amount of parking space in the exterior perimeter that is not being utilized. In addition, the location would be immediately adjacent to the new hospital. The shelter would definitely be used, and it would probably be good for Kroger and the other retail in the vicinity. However, Kroger was not interested, and therefore COTA selected the Post Road site. Interestingly, the section that had been proposed for the park and ride was the 80-90 spots on the corner that are immediately adjacent to Post Road. Perhaps in the future, when an area is zoned that will have a large parking facility, a park and ride could be incorporated. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that this issue is particularly important due to the hospital. This need was identified early in discussions with the hospital. It would be beneficial for the community to become more accustomed to buses being in the community and to have a less negative view of the service. Mr. Keenan stated that he understood that the reason for Kroger's opposition to the bus stop was that Kroger intended to use that site in the future for gas pumps. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of ___ __ Dublin City Council___ December 10, 2007 Hel C Page 15 Mrs. Boring stated that she is not objecting to a park and ride. Her objection is to creating more than a park and ride -- creating a bus terminal with restrooms, etc. In that case, the neighborhood's concerns are valid. The park and rides are acceptable, but she would like to see the bus terminal and transfer station removed and dealt with separately. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher inquired if Ms. Husak had indicated that could be done. Ms. Husak responded affirmatively. Vice Mayor Lecklider asked for confirmation that the typical passenger shelter used by COTA would not be eliminated. Mrs. Boring stated that she would support including such a passenger shelter. 1 Mr. McCash stated that each use throughout the City's zoning code has an SIC code attached to it. The changes on pet grooming, pet sitting services and fitness do not have an SIC code. He is concerned that there could be a situation where a gymnasium would be considered a conditional use in the Community Commercial District at the same time a fitness center would be a permitted use. Would a recreational center be a physical fitness center, an exercise center, or a health club facility? Also, what constitutes a gymnasium? Would it be the basketball court that is inside the City's recreation center? Would an applicant not be permitted now to build a recreation center with a basketball court, a gymnasium component? The uses are so intertwined that they need a definition, particularly if an SIC code is not used. He is not advocating the use of SIC codes; there are issues with those. The federal government could make changes in the City's zoning without the City's awareness. It is important, however, to include clear, distinct definitions of the uses, and what is intended to be part of it, such as a maximum size or square footage. The same applies to the pet care services. Does this address pet hotels, where everything is internal? Ms. Salay requested clarification of pet day care service versus a kennel. Ms. Husak responded that it was not contemplated that overnight boarding would be provided by a day care service facility. Ms. Salay stated that there would not be an outdoor recreation component, but obviously the employees would be permitted to walk their charges somewhere. There could be issues regarding an outdoor recreational area versus not having an area in which to exercise the pets. Mr. McCash stated that it would be desirable to clarify the definitions prior to the second reading of the legislation. Ms. Husak agreed to do so. The second reading/public hearing of Ordinance 96-07 will be held on January 2, 2008. ~i INTRODUCTION/PUBLIC HEARING -RESOLUTIONS Resolution 72-07 Requesting the Delaware and Franklin County Auditors to Draw and the Delaware and Franklin County Treasurers to Issue a Draft to the Director of Finance of the City of Dublin for any Money that May Be in the County Treasury to the Account of the City of Dublin. Ms. Salay introduced the resolution. Ms. Grigsby stated that the Ohio Revised Code has a provision allowing municipalities to do this. Vote on the Resolution: Vice Mayor Lecklider, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. McCash, yes. Resolution 73-07 Declaring Certain City-Owned Property as Surplus and Authorizing the City Manager to Dispose of Said Property in Accordance with Section 37.08 of the Dublin Codified Ordinances Vice Mayor Lecklider introduced the resolution. Ms. Brautigam stated that this provides for the City to submit for Internet auction through GovDeals certain vehicles that are considered to be surplus. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS December 10, 2007 Page 16 1 1 Held 20 Vote on the Resolution: Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Vice Mayor Lecklider, yes. COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS/COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE Mr. Reiner thanked Council Member McCash for his service on City Council and wished him the best in his new endeavors. Mrs. Boring stated that: (1) At the last meeting she failed to give credit to Mr. Harding for submitting a Dublin program to the National League of Cities. The City of Dublin's Healthy by Choice initiative was selected from the many applications submitted. Several people commented to her that they had visited Dublin's booth at the NLC exposition. (2) She is concerned about the role of the Architecture Review Board in regard to the Community Plan as well as the review of projects in the Historic District. Should ARB input be solicited early in the process prior to the time projects come before Council? Ms. Ott has suggested that Council schedule a study session early in 2008 to discuss Council's expectations. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher responded that she and Mr. Smith, Ms. Readier, Ms. Brautigam and Mr. Gerber met earlier today to discuss the COIC process. In the course of that discussion, Mr. Smith shared some suggestions. She suggested the subject be included on the Council retreat agenda. (3) Her Council seat has been located next to Mr. McCash for many years, She will miss hearing his comments and Council will miss his expertise, such as those he shared tonight on the zoning issue. She wished him well in his new business endeavors. Mr. Keenan stated that he has also appreciated Mr. McCash's expertise in the planning and zoning process. Personally, he has the least amount of experience in that area, and has therefore relied on Mr. McCash and benefited from his mentoring. He wished him luck in his new professional position. Ms. Salay told of her first encounter with Mr. McCash many years ago. She was a new mother and only beginning to become aware of the development in the southwest area of the community. Mr. McCash was collecting petition signatures to run for City Council. He was very knowledgeable about what was going on in the community, and so she signed his petition and became involved in his campaign. She has enjoyed his friendship since that time. On one occasion in the early years, he called her to discuss an issue after 9:30 pm. She learned then that he worked into the early hours of the morning, seeming to require a minimum amount of sleep. This explains how he was able to be an architect, an attorney, and still be actively involved in his community. The community will miss his friendship, his willingness to listen to and consider their concerns, and his advocacy on many issues. Council will miss his presence and his expertise, but she hopes Mr. McCash will not disappear from Dublin public life. She would enjoy continuing to hear his opinions in the future. Vice Mayor Lecklider stated that he echoes all the sentiments expressed. He appreciates all of Mr. McCash's service to the community spanning many years. Several years ago, he and Mr. McCash served together on the Planning and Zoning Commission; later on City Council. He has always enjoyed having Mr. McCash's architectural perspective. Mr. McCash's guidance has been a benefit to his colleagues and to the community. He is aware that Council has relied upon the special expertise that Mr. McCash possessed, so there will be a void after his departure. He trusts Mr. McCash will continue to provide his insight to the Council where he believes Council might benefit from receiving it. He wishes him the best of luck in all that he plans to do. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that she will not repeat all of the comments she shared at the earlier reception for Mr. McCash, but can identify three things that she and Mr. McCash have in common. They both love traveling and have enjoyed sharing stories about travels. Neither she nor Mr. McCash require much sleep, so they enjoy longer lives than many! Unfortunately, they have also sent emails to their colleagues in the middle of the night. And finally, involvement with their children, respectively. His daughters have a tremendous degree of activity and skill in their respective interests, and Mr. McCash and his wife, Vicki have been very involved in their children's lives. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS December 10, 2007 20 1 1 1 Page 17 She and her husband, Bob had also been very involved with their son, Brian, in his school and lacrosse activities. That parental interest and involvement is understood by all of Council who have also experienced this. Beyond the public service that all of Council has shared with him, there are many other ways Council members have shared their lives with Mr. McCash. She thanked him for the many ways he has benefited each Council member individually and the community as a whole. Mr. McCash stated that the past year has been difficult with his change of jobs. Serving on Council takes much more time than many people realize. The travel requirements of his job in the past year have. made meeting his Council commitment very difficult. The responsibilities of a new staff and developing a new business demanded much of his time. All that commitment was taking a toll on his family. When he assumed his Council seat, his daughters were nine years old. The girls are now away at college, and he and Vicki are "empty nesters." The girls will graduate from OSU this year and will soon be moving on in their lives. He will miss Council members and the very dedicated staff of the City. He will leave some things unfinished, but he will still be around. Council may continue to receive emails from him late at night, perhaps on different options for ordinances. He pointed out that for 12 years, he has tried to have Dublin lighting guidelines codified. There are many things he believes Council should pursue, including the green initiative and green buildings. He is involved with some work related to the green effort now and continues to collect information. With Dublin's name and the message that, "It's Greener in Dublin," Dublin needs to be a leader in the green effort, not a follower. He hopes it does not take too long to have such legislation passed and that the City can move forward. He will miss working with everyone. It has been a distinct honor that the voters and residents of Dublin gave him to serve on Council for 12 years and try to do the right thing for the community. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher thanked Mr. McCash for his comments. She noted that today the Franklin County Board of Elections certified Mr. Gerber's election as a Council Member at Large. His election creates the need to fill his now vacated Planning and Zoning Commission position. She has asked the Clerk to proceed with advertising the position and accepting applications through the end of December. An effort will be made to fill that position as quickly as possible. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that she attended a Founders' Event at Dublin Methodist Hospital last Thursday. Their goal was to raise $4 million by the hospital's opening date of January 8, and they had reached $3.8 million at that point. The hospital is a beautiful facility. There will be a community open house and tour on January 5, and she urged interested citizens to attend. EXECUTIVE SESSION Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher moved to adjourn to executive session at 9:40 p.m. to consider the purchase of property for public purposes and to consider the appointment, employment, dismissal, discipline, promotion, demotion, or compensation of a public employee or official. Vice Mayor Lecklider seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mr. Reiner, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Vice Mayor Lecklider, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was reconvened and adjourned at 10:45 p.m. Mayor -Presiding Officer ~ ~~~ .~~- Clerk of Council