Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/06/2009RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin Cty_Council Meeting April 6, 2009 Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher called the Monday, April 6, 2009 Regular Meeting of Dublin City Council to order at 7:00 p.m. at the Dublin Municipal Building. Present were Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, Vice Mayor Boring, Mr. Gerber, Mr. Keenan, Mr. Reiner and Ms. Salay. Mr. Lecklider was absent (excused). Staff members present were: Mr. Foegler, Ms. Grigsby, Mr. Smith, Mr. McDaniel, Chief Epperson, Mr. Harding, Mr. Hammersmith, Ms. Ott, Mr. Hahn, Mr. Earman, Ms. Crandall, Ms. Puskarcik, Mr. Thurman, Mr. Tyler, Mr. Phillabaum, Ms. Worstall, Ms. Adkins, Ms. Swisher, Ms. Yorko, Lt. vonEckartsberg and Mr. Gunderman. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mr. Keenan led the Pledge of Allegiance. APPROVAL OF MINUTES • Regular Meeting of March 2, 2009 Mr. Gerber moved approval of the minutes of the March 2, 2009 Regular Council meeting. Mr. Reiner seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mr. Keenan, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Vice Mayor Boring, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes. • Regular Meeting of March 16, 2009 Mr. Gerber moved approval of the minutes of the March16, 2009 Regular Council meeting. Ms. Salay seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mr. Keenan, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Vice Mayor Boring, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes. SPECIAL PRESENTATION/PROCLAMATION Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that State Representative Carney was scheduled to attend tonight's meeting, but his father passed away this morning. She extended the City's condolences to Rep. Carney and his family, noting that he will attend a future meeting to provide an update on the state budget process. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher presented a proclamation in recognition of April as Occupational Therapy Month to occupational therapists Marcia Strall, ElderLife Solutions; Jennie Brown, Riverside Hospital; Laura Cahill, Dodd Hall, OSU Hospital; and Amanda Haught, Dublin resident. They thanked the Council for this recognition. CORRESPONDENCE There was no correspondence requiring Council action. CITIZEN COMMENTS Tim Picciano, Past President, Historic Dublin Business Association, 27 S. High Street stated that in follow-up to discussion at the March 16 Council meeting, the Mayor invited him to attend tonight's meeting. There is apparent confusion regarding the use of the terms "BriHi Square" and "BriHi District." He sent an e-mail to all of Council regarding the history and use of this term. The use of the term "BriHi District" began in 2007. The HDBA had the name registered with the Secretary of State. The intent of the name was to provide something new and different, with energy, adestination - to refer to the business district within Historic Dublin. It is not intended to replace/rename Historic Dublin. The slogan is now, "BriHi District -the Heart of Historic Dublin." The HDBA looked at other destination areas such as the Short North, Arena District, Brewery District, SoHo District in New York, and the Oregon District in Dayton to gain insight about recreating excitement and interest in Historic Dublin. They felt this type of branding was needed for the Historic Dublin businesses. From the discussion and brainstorming, they derived the term "BriHi" - Bridge and High Streets -and began a grassroots campaign to implement and use the brand. It has become a very successful campaign to date, with the brand fairly well known to much of Dublin in just over a year. The local papers have covered it and used the name since introduced. The names BriHi Square and BriHi District were used in the speeches for the groundbreaking of the Stonehenge project in May of 2008. They were pleased that Stonehenge selected the name BriHi Square, as it furthers the brand. The name was presented in the HDBA bed tax grant application for 2009, and last year's December holiday celebration and tree lighting, done in conjunction with the City, was RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting April 6, 2009 Page 2 called and advertised as "BriHi Holiday." The HDBA website is BriHi District.org. Most importantly, the public now recognizes the name, which achieves its purpose. The traffic to the website confirms that BriHi has been an effective tool in drawing people to the website, with 54 percent of key word searches using BriHi. The businesses in the Historic District have much invested in this name and it has taken hold and established roots. Abandoning the brand at this point would be a huge step backwards. The businesses in the district need all the help available, and this kind of progressive form of marketing and branding is not only effective as evidenced by key word searches, but is also inexpensive. The HDBA asks Council to join in promoting the brand. They hope and request that the BriHi District sign on I-270 remain for the reasons expressed tonight. They expect "BriHi District -the Heart of Historic Dublin" to continue to succeed in bringing attention and interest to the businesses and events for Historic Dublin. He offered to respond to questions. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher thanked him for sharing the history of this name with Council and the public. Council was not familiar with the process used to create this name. The conclusion seems that it was a communication process that had broken down, with Council not aware this brand was being created over a couple of years. She invited Council Members to comment. Vice Mayor Boring stated that it was unfortunate that Council did not understand how this had occurred. She is concerned, however, with renaming the holiday event to "BriHi Holidays" because the holidays are for the entire community. This implies limiting it to the BriHi area. As stakeholders in the partnerships in Historic Dublin, Council was not aware of this branding effort. A community name is important for acommunity-wide event such as "Holly Days." Ms. Puskarcik responded that the holiday events were relocated from the Rec Center to Historic Dublin a couple of years ago. Having the tree lighting in the Historic area versus the Rec Center was part of the effort to engage the community in events -and the HDBA did indicate their willingness to assist with the event. At this time, the only part of the event the City handles is the tree lighting. HDBA has taken on all other elements of that event, including the photos with Santa and promotions in the district for the holiday season kick-off that weekend. Ms. Salay added that the merchants have events in their shops and a chili cook-off is held. It is all centered in Historic Dublin or the BriHi District. Vice Mayor Boring stated that promotion of the district for the holiday is appropriate. She appreciates the history, but it is unfortunate that Council was not aware of the branding effort. Ms. Salay thanked HDBA for all they do for the community. The historic district is vital, growing and thriving -due to the efforts of HDBA and all of the business owners. Mr. Picciano noted that HDBA will plan to use this venue once per quarter to update Council on things they are working on. It will provide a useful exchange of information. Wallace Maurer, 7451 Dublin Road: 1. Noted a correction to the minutes of March 16, page 3, under his comments, where the term `merit' should be `narrative.' 2. State that it has been 2-1/2 years since Council passed an unconstitutional motion to bar a citizen from speaking on any item not in Council's pleasure during the five- minute citizen sequence of the meeting. He has spoken at 60 consecutive sessions, and is now looking to the future. He has plans to speak at 60 more sessions, if necessary, unless Council has any proposals relative to this matter. Mr. Gerber stated that he did not serve on Council until 2008. However, in Dublin, resident involvement is encouraged and residents are invited to speak their mind in the time provided at the meetings. Any rule that thwarts or takes away from that is not fair. While he may not always agree with Mr. Maurer, he believes he has the right to speak. is Council's obligation to listen. He moved to abolish the previous resolution of Council. Vice Mayor Boring seconded the motion. u RECORD OF PROCEEDf NGS Minutes ~f Dublin City Council Meeting April 6, 2009 Page 3 In response to the Mayor, Mr. Smith clarified that Council approved a motion in October 2006 which effectively amended the rules of Council, putting a limit on time, place and manner. In that instance, it was directed toward the discussion of one item. The previous action can be rescinded with another motion. Mr. Gerber moved to rescind the motion of October 2006 in regard to this matter. Vice Mayor Boring seconded the motion. Mr. Keenan pointed out that the motion at the time was prompted by Mr. Maurer speaking about the topic for a period of six years -related to an employment matter of a former Dublin employee. Hearing this testimony time and again was tedious. However, he concurs with Mr. Gerber. If Mr. Maurer wants to continue to speak about something which occurred 7-8 years ago, that is acceptable. Vice Mayor Boring commented that restricting all public comment is one matter. However, in terms of free speech, restricting one person's speech and not everyone's is not consistent. She has reconsidered her previous support of the motion from 2006, and believes it should be changed. Mr. Reiner agreed that if Mr. Maurer wants to continue to speak on the same topic, that is certainly acceptable. It is his constitutional right, and Council will listen. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that the vote on this motion in 2006 was one she should have not made. She and all Council Members have always believed strongly in citizen participation. Many residents have taken note of Mr. Maurer's faithful attendance and comments at Council meetings. Because of this, it is important that all messages - citizens as well as Council Members -- are thoughtful, as they influence other's opinions. Vote on the motion: Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Vice Mayor Boring, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes. LEGISLATION SECOND READING/PUBLIC HEARING -ORDINANCES Ordinance 12-09 Authorizing the City Manager to Enter into an Access Easement Agreement with Swickard Enterprises, Inc. Granting Rights of Access to Swickard and the City of Dublin over Certain Properties Owned by Each of the Parties Near the Intersection of Avery Road and Woerner-Temple Road. Mr. Hammersmith noted that staff has prepared an additional report in the packet in regard to questions about the shared access for these properties. He offered to respond to questions. Ms. Salay noted that everyone recognizes that the access to this property is problematic for the reasons outlined in the report. The issue for the future is that if there is an opportunity to relocate access, it will be done -hopefully to the south. The entrance to the municipal pool should not be mixed with an entrance to commercial property, as there is a tremendous amount of pedestrian and bicycle traffic. Commercial traffic will not be compatible with the type of traffic accessing the pool. When the entrance to the pool was determined, had she been aware of the potential shared driveway, she would have pushed to have access to the pool at another location. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher suggested that during the months when the pool is open, signage could be added to help ensure safety. Mr. Hammersmith responded that staff could evaluate this. Typically, signage is effective when it has a purpose, and the message would need to be carefully crafted to be effective. It is the long-term intent to have access to the south with Avery Road, as other properties develop. Vote on the Ordinance: Mr. Gerber, yes; Vice Mayor Boring, yes; Mayor Chinnici- Zuercher, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr_ Keenan, yes; Ms. Salay, yes. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin Citv Council April 6, 2009 Page 4 Ordinance 13-09 Rezoning of Approximately 19.62 Acres, More or Less, Located on the West Side of Avery Road, Approximately 4,000 Feet South of Rings Road, from R, Rural District, to PUD, Planned Unit Development District. (National Church Residences at Avondale Woods -Case 09-0072) Ms. Swisher stated that at the hearing on March 16, Council requested clarification regarding the project's compliance with the Community Plan. The Homewood Corporation, owner of the 140 acres of which the 20-acre site is a part of, raised concerns about the development potential of the remaining 120 acres. Homewood has requested that Council consider the residual 120 acres at the Community Plan's maximum recommended density of three dwelling units per acre. As outlined in the staff report, at the Plan's recommended density of three dwelling units per acre, this would result in a total of 420 dwelling units over the entire parcel. Excluding the NCR development site results in 360 dwelling units on that residual 120 acres. The effect of the three dwelling units per acre is that there are an additional 20 acres at three units per acre, resulting in a total of 60 dwelling units net increase. The impact of this requested density brings the density of the overall 140 acre parcel to four dwelling units per acre. While the NCR project density would not separately comply with the Plan at its proposed density, Planning believes there are unique characteristics associated with this development that justify this deviation: • The Southwest Area Plan, as displayed, shows that it meets the general intent of the Plan, with greater density shown in the southeastern quadrant -the location of the NCR development. • The Southwest Area Plan also includes a general note that additional senior housing options and alternatives are recommended in appropriate locations. • Senior housing typically generates lower volumes of traffic than typical multi-family or single-family developments. • Planning believes that this proposed land use would serve as a suitable land use buffer between Avery Road and the development on the remainder of that parcel. Planning therefore supports Council's consideration of maintaining the Community Plan's maximum recommended density of three dwelling units per acre over the residual of that acreage. However, because that acreage is not part of this or any other rezoning proposal at this time, any future development would be evaluated on its merits, guided in part by the Community Plan. Any action Council takes tonight regarding the NCR development would be specific to that development. Approval does not commit or limit a future Commission to a specific zoning action on the remainder of that parcel. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that at the last meeting, it was reported that Homewood Corporation would not sell the property to NCR, if the City did not agree to this pre-zoning density issue. What is the status of the sale of the property? Ms. Swisher's responded that she understands that NCR has moved forward with obtaining a land option from the owner. This has apparently been worked out between the parties. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher clarified that before Council tonight for rezoning is only the acreage related to the NCR development -not the entire parcel owned by Homewood. Ms. Swisher responded that is correct. Mr. Foegler added that the one item Homewood wanted clarification about was that by approval of this rezoning, Council was not as a matter of policy incorporating an offset and therefore a net reduction in the residual amount of housing left on the property. This has been addressed in the staff report. Vice Mayor Boring added that on the reverse side, approval of the NCR rezoning application does not indicate to Homewood that the City is going to approve amending the Community Plan to four dwelling units per acre density for this property. Ms. Swisher confirmed that is correct. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked Ms. Swisher to review the NCR proposal for the site. She reviewed the details of the development, as shared at the meeting of March 16. • The 20-acre site is part of a 140-acre parcel, as previously described. The site is located 4,000 feet south of Rings Road, in the southernmost portion of the City. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting April 6, 2009 Page 5 The City's corporation limits run along the site's eastern and southern boundaries, with frontage on Avery Road. There are parcels within Washington Township as well as the City of Columbus to the south and east of that development. • The Community Plan specifies the overall parcel as mixed residential, low density -three dwelling units over that entire 140 acre parcel, with objectives of providing a mix of housing options and greater housing choices. • There are a number of near future transportation improvements planned in this area, including the widening of Avery Road, extension of Tuttle Crossing, and a Britton/Cosgray connector, currently under construction by the City of Columbus, which will pass immediately to the south of this site. • The Southwest Area Plan showed different densities of housing recommended for the overall 140 acres. • The proposed preliminary development plan includes asingle-story community center in the center of the site, fronted by two three-story residential buildings - containing a total of 100 dwelling units. • To the south of the main building is a 3/4 acre outdoor recreational area with a variety of amenities. • Around the perimeter of the site are 30 single-story cottage units, containing from 3-4 dwelling units each. They are intended to act as a buffer to the three-story building from future lower density residential developments to the north and west. • She shared the proposed north and south elevations of the three-story buildings, constructed primarily of brick and stone with some architectural detail and changes to the roof and chimney lines. She also shared east and west elevations of the same building as viewed from Avery Road. There are three different styles of cottages -all intended to coordinate with the three-story buildings -- and utilizing brick and stone materials. • The applicant has submitted a traffic impact study which has recently been approved by the City of Columbus, as this portion of Avery Road is within their jurisdiction as well as the City of Dublin's. It shows that turn lanes will be necessary from both northbound and southbound directions. • Access to the site is provided by a proposed connector roadway along the northern boundary of the development. It consists of three lanes, tapering down to two, with two access points into the development off of the roadway. An internal roadway circulates throughout the site around athree-story building, with groups of parking spaces located in offset groups for safety and maneuverability by the residents. • The Community Plan recommends a Dublin model roadway character, which is typical of mounding and varying bikepaths along that frontage. The applicant also shows a dry creek bed detention system along that frontage, which will be more naturalized. • The applicant has provided approximately 3.85 acres of open space, counting the 3/4 acre outdoor recreation area and the walking path and bikepath systems that circulate throughout the site. • This project is to develop within two phases, approximately within a year of each other, depending upon funding. The eastern halves of the three-story buildings, the community center and 15 northern cottages will be in Phase 1; the western three-story buildings and remaining single-story buildings will be developed with Phase 2. Planning has evaluated this request based upon review criteria for a rezoning and preliminary development plan. Approval with four conditions, as outlined in the report is recommended. Ms. Salay noted that in reviewing the minutes, she has questions about the group of five parking spaces being eliminated. This parking would serve residents from the north side who picnic in that area. Why did Planning Commission feel it was important to eliminate this parking? Ms. Swisher responded that it was actually staff's suggestion, because all of the other parking spaces are located off the main roadway throughout the development. That creates a safer area for them in terms of backing out of spaces. With 60 spaces on the north side, staff felt the five in this location could be eliminated. Ms. Salay asked if there was a specific reason for the developer proposing the parking in this location. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS _ Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting April 6, 2009 Page 6 Ms. Swisher responded that they desired more parking spaces closer to the outdoor recreation area. Ms. Salay stated that a Commissioner talked of putting trees and a tree canopy in the 20 feet of utility easement. In view of the City's Right Tree, Right Place program, she wants to ensure that the developer selects the proper planting material for this location. Ms. Swisher stated that staff made it clear that coordination with the utility company would be important to ensure there would not be conflicts in the future. Ms. Salay noted that the perimeter walking paths are a great addition. Will those be built with Phase 1 ? Ms. Swisher responded that the applicant has indicated that all of the outdoor amenities will be constructed with Phase 1. Ms. Salay pointed out that Council needs to make an effort to meet regularly with Planning & Zoning Commission. There was much discussion about this project not meeting density, and the Commission felt it was problematic for the site. In a Council study session, however, Council indicated their support of this project at a higher density than a typical Dublin project because of the affordable senior housing it offered. For those reason, Council felt it was appropriate to deviate from the Community Plan. Ms. Salay asked how the Britton-Cosgray connector will cross the railroad tracks. Ms. Swisher responded that it was originally to have been an overpass, but staff understands that it is now to be an underpass. Ms. Salay stated that this will be more aesthetically pleasing than an overpass. Mr. Reiner noted that the information identified as "Supplemental Information regarding Proposed Uses" is not part of the proposed text. Is there any reason for this? Ms. Swisher responded that staff merely wanted to include the information. The applicant had submitted the information to staff as part of the text, but staff felt it did not fit in the zoning text. Staff felt it would be helpful for P&Z and Council to have the information to explain how NCR plans to operate. Mr. Reiner thanked the applicant, staff, and the P&Z Commission for working together to create a beautiful project. Is there any other information to share about how the facility will operate? Is there any food service offered in the facility? Ms. Swisher responded that there is not a commercial kitchen involved. The applicant can expand on this. Jim Baugh and Matt McClure, National Church Residences addressed Council. Mr. Baugh indicated that the property is operated as independent living, multi-family apartments with an affordability component and restricted to seniors 62 and over. There are no meal services provided. Typically, their properties are served by Meals on Wheels or food brought in by other volunteer groups. The community center has two components, serving as a center for the residents and an adult daycare for the community at large. Mr. Reiner asked how applicants are selected for admittance to the facility. Mr. Baugh responded that in the first phase, 80 of the 100 units are income restricted. The restrictions are prescribed by the low income housing tax credit program. The restrictions are both income and rent restricted. Atypical set aside for income would be 60 percent of the area median income. That would be the primary screening mechanism. This level would vary by community. The tax credit program is the primary funding mechanism. It is an equity program, administered by the IRS and promulgated by the state. The Ohio Housing Finance Agency administers the program in Ohio. Mr. Reiner asked if there is any set aside for Dublin residents or for military veterans. Mr. Baugh responded there is not such a set aside at this property. Ms. Salay stated that when the City group toured other NCR projects in relation to the potential Dublin project, they talked of how the advertising is done in the community. They cannot set aside properties for Dublin residents, but they advertise the opening within the area at senior centers within this geographic area. Typically, a high percentage of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting April 6, 2009 Page 7 residents moving into these neighborhoods are from the immediate area, close to their own homes. Mr. Baugh responded that they have found that most seniors don't want to live more than five miles away from their current residence for reasons of proximity to doctors, family, places of business. NCR wants to lease the property as quickly as possible, and will advertise in the local area. Mr. Reiner asked what the estimated rents for this property will be, based upon the median income in the area. Mr. McClure stated the two-bedroom units will be in the $900 range for the market rent. The tax credit rent is close to that as well. Mr. Gerber added that this is a fantastic project. Several proposed developments have been submitted for this site previously. This is a needed product in Dublin. He is aware that there is a group in that area very interested in this project, and he is hopeful that any applications they submit will be given full consideration. Wallace Maurer, 7451 Dublin Road asked if there are any "greening" principles or mandates applicable to an enterprise of this type. He understands the City is gearing up to implementing such greening initiatives into the Code. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher responded that there are other projects, such as IGS, where staff is working with the developer to ensure LEED certification. In general, the focus is more on commercial projects to become LEED certified. Such certification generally increases costs for the developer. For this type of housing product, Council would support reasonable efforts toward this goal which would not substantially increase the costs. Ms. Salay added that there has not been discussion of the City requiring buildings to be LEED certified, but developers are encouraged to do so. Vote on the Ordinance: Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Vice Mayor Boring, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr_ Gerber, yes; Ms. Salay, yes. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that Council is looking forward to working with NCR as they develop this project in Dublin. Ordinance 14-09 Changing the Name of Wichita Street to Wichita Drive in the City of Dublin, Ohio. Mr. Hammersmith reported that there is no additional information to share regarding this proposed change. Staff recommends approval. Wallace Maurer, 7451 Dublin Road asked how the name "Wichita" was selected. Ms. Salay responded that the street is part of the Indian Run Meadows subdivision, where there are many native American street names. Vote on the Ordinance: Ms. Salay, yes; Reiner, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mayor Chinnici- Zuercher, yes; Vice Mayor Boring, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes. Ordinance 15-09 Changing the Name of Darby Street to North Street Beginning at High Street and Terminating at a Point Approximately 245 Feet West of High Street in the City of Dublin, Ohio. Mr. Hammersmith stated that staff recommends adoption at this time. Vote on the Ordinance: Vice Mayor Boring, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes. INTRODUCTION/FIRST READING -ORDINANCES Ordinance 18-09 Petitioning the Board of County Commissioners of Franklin County, Ohio to Adjust the Boundary Lines of Perry Township in order to Exclude That Territory Which, as a Result of Annexation, Now Lies within the Corporate Boundaries of the City of Dublin, and Declaring an Emergency. (Request to dispense with public hearing) Mr. Keenan introduced the ordinance. Mr. Smith stated that this provides for an adjustment of the township boundary in order to place this property in Washington Township. This is a follow-up to the annexation approved by Council on February 16. The intent is to have service provided by RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting April 6, 2009 Page 8 Washington Township fire and EMS throughout the City of Dublin. Once the petition is brought to the county commissioners, they must grant the boundary adjustment petition in accordance with a Supreme Court case brought forward by Dublin in 1990. Ms. Salay asked why this is proposed as emergency legislation. Mr. Smith responded that in the pre-annexation agreement, the City agreed that once the annexation was accepted, this boundary adjustment would be done expeditiously. The desire is to have Washington Township provide the services in this location. Currently, those services are provided by Perry Township. Mr. Keenan asked if the reparations will be paid by the applicant to Perry Township. Mr. Smith responded that per the pre-annexation agreement, the applicant will pay any reparations due. Vice Mayor Boring stated that she contacted Mr. Langworthy about the status of the site work on this property. It is incomplete. Is there an ordinance regarding the timeframe for completion after a project is initiated? Mr. Smith responded that he is not aware of these problems. He will check with the Building division on this. Mr. Tyler responded that because the property is currently not in the City of Dublin, the City's building code cannot be applied to the project. The project is being built under permits from the State of Ohio and inspection by the State as well. Vice Mayor Boring responded that in the pre-annexation agreement, the applicant agreed to be subject to City rules and regulations as much as possible in terms of landscaping and other items. In fact, once the building is completed, they need to have signage in compliance with Dublin Code. She has not observed any effort by the applicant to do this. Vice Mayor Boring asked about the extraneous building materials in the right-of-way. Mr. Tyler responded that staff will look at this, and will work with Engineering on any actions the City can take. If the materials are on private property, it is difficult for the City to address it. Mr. Smith added that because of the State Building Department's involvement, the City cannot interfere with the building process or inspections. He was not aware of any issues, and he will call their representative on the status and report back in two weeks. Mr. Keenan moved to dispense with the public hearing and treat this as emergency legislation. Mr. Gerber seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes; Vice Mayor Boring, no. Vote on the Ordinance: Ms. Salay, yes; Mr_ Gerber, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Vice Mayor Boring, no; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes. Ordinance 19-09 Rezoning of Approximately 0.18 Acre, More or Less, Located on the East Side of South High Street, Approximately 70 Feet South of Spring Hill, from CB, Central Business District, to HB, Historic Business District. (54 South High -Case 08-0192) (Second reading/public hearing April 20 Council meeting) Ms. Salay introduced the ordinance Ms. Husak noted the following: • The site is located on the east side of S. High Street and is surrounded by other properties zoned Central Business District. The property currently contains a building that fronts onto S. High Street and has access from Blacksmith Lane. It includes an event planning business. • In January of 2009, the Architectural Review Board approved a proposal on this site that includes a 2,500 square foot addition to the existing building and a 1,600 square foot carriage house building to the rear of the property. The slides reflect the site and the architectural elevations approved by the ARB. • The Planning & Zoning Commission reviewed this rezoning in March and recommended approval to Council. The slide summarizes the highlights of the Central Business District's restrictions in the zoning code, compared with the Historic Business (HB) District zoning code- RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meet~nz April 6, 2009 Page 9 • The HB District was established in 2003 to allow development patterns in the Historic District that are more in line with the existing businesses and the uses envisioned in the District. The main difference in this case is that residences -- in conjunction with structures containing permitted uses in the Historic Business District -- are permitted, which is the central point of the proposal that ARB approved. Planning staff and the Planning & Zoning Commission have reviewed the proposal, based upon the criteria, the future land use in the Community Plan and the Historic District Area Plan and recommend approval of the ordinance at the April 20 Council meeting. Mr. Reiner asked if the parking is adequate for the change of structures on the site. Ms. Husak responded that each of the two structures has parking spaces designated for the residences within the building, and there are parking spaces on the lot to serve the business. Mr. Reiner noted that the site is filled out with this development. Is staff confident that the parking is sufficient? Ms. Husak responded that there is also on street parking available on High Street. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher and Mr. Reiner noted that the on street parking cannot be relied upon to serve this property. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked how much parking on the site will be lost to this build out. Ms. Husak responded that one parking spot will be eliminated on the site. The site does not currently have designated parking spaces, as it is a gravel lot. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked how many cars generally park on the lot at this time. Ms. Husak responded there are four spots used on the site. She asked Mr. Phillabaum to comment further, as he reviewed the proposal with ARB. Mr. Phillabaum noted that there is actually a variance in place for the property. They are required to maintain four commercial parking spaces. Currently, there is a gravel lot accommodating four spaces. This proposal maintains those spaces. Mr. Reiner asked where the garages are located -off Blacksmith Alley? Ms. Husak responded there is access from Blacksmith Alley or Blacksmith Lane, in back of the carriage building. Mr. Reiner noted that the proposal will constitute an architectural improvement to the area, assuming only one parking space is lost. Ms. Husak clarified that it actually retains the space under the canopy. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked about the use of the new building. Ms. Husak responded that it is residential. Ms. Salay noted that the site plan was difficult to read. She did not receive in her packet the elevations and renderings shown tonight. Ms. Husak responded that Council received the same packet that was provided to the P&Z Commission. Since the ARB is the reviewing body for those details, Council did not receive a detailed set of those plans. Ms. Salay stated that she understands that ARB is the reviewing body, but understood that they recommended approval to Council, and it was ultimately Council's decision. Ms. Husak noted that there are two processes working simultaneously. One is the development proposal, which lies under the jurisdiction of the ARB. They have approved it. However, the development could not occur if that site was not rezoned to the Historic Business District to actually allow those different uses and the development pattern of this site with the setbacks. The responsibility of P&Z was to review the land use. This same packet was provided to P&Z and to Council. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that the information on the site plans was not legible, and she does not believe that Council and P&Z should receive plans of such poor quality. She believes that the information for all three bodies should be the same, so that decisions are made, based on the same information. Even if two bodies only need to know this piece of the development which is under their jurisdiction, they still need to review that in the context of the whole. Council certainly needs to know all of the information and not only a portion of it. She asked that when Council next reviews this in two weeks, they be given legible copies of all information related to this development proposal. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting April 6, 2009 Page 10 Mr. Reiner asked if the material used on the elevations is HardiPlank. What determination did ARB make about cladding? Ms. Husak responded that it is HardiPlank siding. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked that a sample of this material be provided for the next meeting. There will be a second reading/public hearing of the ordinance at the April 20 Council meeting. INTRODUCTION/PUBLIC HEARING -RESOLUTIONS Resolution 13-09 Authorizing the Regulation of Traffic on Muirfield Drive and Other Roads in Muirfield Village and Waiving Certain Provisions of the Dublin Sign Code and Noise Ordinance in Conjunction with the Annual Memorial Tournament. Mr. Keenan introduced the resolution. Lt. vonEckartsberg noted that this legislation allows the City to restrict traffic and parking in Muirfield during Tournament week and allows waiving of the provision of the noise ordinance for four specific locations to allow for trash pick-up. Vote on the Resolution: Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Vice Mayor Boring, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes. Resolution 14-09 Appointing a Member to the Architectural Review Board. Vice Mayor Boring introduced the resolution and moved to appoint Denise Franz King to the unexpired term of Clay Bryan on the Architectural Review Board. Mr. Gerber seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Vice Mayor Boring, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes; Ms. Salay, yes. Resolution 15-09 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. Mr. Gerber introduced the resolution. Mr. Thurman stated that Dublin Code requires Council approval for disposal of all motorized vehicles. Resolution 15-09 requests approval to sell seven vehicles on the govdeals auction site as soon as practicable. Of the seven vehicles, four have already been replaced; two are old D.A.R.E. vehicles no longer in service; and a confiscated vehicle will be auctioned on govdeals as well. Staff is recommending approval of the resolution. Mr. Reiner asked if the Jeep Cherokee was a D.A.R.E. vehicle. Mr. Thurman responded that the Cherokee was in the police fleet and was replaced sometime ago. In the inventory of fleet, it was determined that it was no longer needed. The D.A.R.E. vehicles include a 1992 Honda wagon, and a 1999 Ford Escort wagon. Mr. Keenan asked if there is a minimum bid set for the vehicles. Mr. Thurman responded that at the time of evaluation, a vehicle's value is determined and a minimum bid established. Mr. Keenan noted that the mileage on some vehicles is fairly low. Mr. Thurman responded that a full evaluation of vehicles and their mileage will be done this year as part of the CIP process. Vote on the Resolution: Mr. Gerber, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Vice Mayor Boring, yes; Ms. Salay, yes. Resolution 16-09 Authorizing the City Manager to Enter into Agreements with the Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT) for US 33 over I-270 Bridge Rehabilitation. Mr. Gerber introduced the resolution. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting April 6, 2009 Page 11 Mr. Hammersmith stated that this is consent legislation to allow ODOT to do a concrete overlay in 2012 on US 33/SR 161 bridges over I-270. The work will also include some repair of parapets, expansion joints, and patching of abutments and piers as necessary. This work will be completed as weekend work -late Friday night to early Monday morning. Two-way traffic will be maintained across one bridge. The total project cost is estimated at $1.25 million. Staff recommends approval. Vice Mayor Boring asked staff to ensure that the work does not take place over the Tournament weekend in 2012. Mr. Keenan asked Engineering staff to communicate with Police and Fire departments about these traffic changes. Mr. Hammersmith added that this project is funded 100 percent by ODOT. There will be no costs to the City, unless the City requests an addition beyond the scope of ODOT's proposed work. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked about the timeframe for the project in view of the July 4cn activities in the City. Mr. Hammersmith responded that staff will inform them of the various City summer activities, including the Tournament, July 4th and the Irish Festival. They estimate the project will be completed over four weekends. Vote on the Resolution: Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Vice Mayor Boring, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes. OTHER • National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit Information Mr. Hammersmith stated that Ms. Yorko, Civil Engineer, Development will present this information. This relates to the City's stormwater maintenance program, and provides an opportunity for public education through DTV about the permit. Ms. Yorko noted that this permit system is initiated by the US EPA and regulated by Ohio EPA. She noted the following: • stormwater includes stormwater runoff, snow melt runoff, surface runoff and drainage. This means, in essence, only rain should be in the drain. • Contamination is anything picked up by the rainwater as it moves along to the river, via the storm sewers, creeks and streams. It consists of oils and grease from parking lots; herbicides and pesticides used on lawns; pet waste; and soil and grass clippings. • The goal of all of this management is to protect the environment; support the City's green initiatives and City Council goals; reduce pollution; preserve green space; reduce erosion; and maintain compliance with state and federal regulations. • The stormwater management program elements include having a Master Plan; maintenance; capital improvement projects; adoption of Chapter 151, Floodplain Regulations; adoption of Chapter 53, stormwater Regulations; and finally, NPDES Permit Compliance. • She shared statistics on compliance. Dublin is considered a Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4). The original NPDES permit was issued in 2002 and expired at the end of 2007. Anew permit was issued on January 30, 2009, and the next report is due April 1, 2010. All MS4 systems are required to meet the minimum control measures established by the Ohio Administrative Code. • The minimum control measures required include public education and outreach on storm water impacts; public involvement/participation; illicit discharge detection and elimination; Pollution Prevention Good Housekeeping for Municipal Operations; Post Construction Storm Water Management in New Development and Redevelopment; and Construction Site Storm Water Runoff Control. She summarized that the City has plans and funding in place to maintain compliance with the regulations. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher thanked Ms. Yorko for the informative presentation. She is pleased that the City is working in partnership with Franklin County. Ms. Yorko added that the City is trying to partner with MORPC and all of Central Ohio regarding the "only rain in the drain" campaign. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes pf Dublin City Council Meetintr April 6, 2009 Page 12 Mr. Reiner noted that he would like to track in the future how well the City engages the citizens in using organic compounds for lawn treatment. In Canada, they have banned many pesticides through their court system, due to the toxic nature of the ingredients. All lawn companies now have organic products available. A good objective for the Dublin community, as a water shed area for the Scioto River would be to assess the citizen involvement over the next 10-20 years in these efforts. He is interested in having the citizens use safe chemicals on their lawns. Ms. Salay agreed, noting that she is hopeful that local lawn care companies and nurseries will educate citizens on what is available; the expectations of the lawn appearance using organic treatment; and the benefits for the environment and health. Her question relates to the storm water gutters. Is it the responsibility of the resident to keep their storm water gutter in front of their home clean and free of debris? Ms. Yorko responded that it is not necessarily their responsibility, but the City seeks their assistance in keeping these storm drains clear. The City asks that the residents not store lawn clippings or yard waste in the street. Mr. Hammersmith added that, typically, such downspouts -from the house to the street -- are the responsibility of the property owner. Ms. Salay asked specifically about the gutter in the street. Mr. Hammersmith responded that any assistance of the residents is helpful. The street sweeping program does remove debris on a periodic basis. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that the City's mailings to the homeowner associations could ask for their assistance in keeping these drains clear. • Cramer's Crossing Storm Water Retention Basin Maintenance Mr. Hahn stated that the staff report provides information about the conditions of the pond located in the public space of the condominium development and the single-family home areas. What appears to be two ponds is actually one body of water and must be treated as such. Therefore, staff is recommending the City assume responsibility for the storm water retention basin water located within Reserve H, which is currently maintained by the Cramer's Crossing Village Condominium Association. The annual cost is $400 and relates to materials. He noted that there is a pending request for relief from maintenance responsibilities from the Cramer's Crossing Village Condominium Association, which is under consideration by CSAC. Tonight's request is a separate item. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that the information indicates that the scope of review was requested of CSAC due to the fact that the Association's request included things beyond anything considered previously. What did the request include? Mr. Hahn responded that their original request included things such as muskrat removal, landscaping bed restoration, irrigation repairs, etc. Some of these costs could be considered atypical. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked him to explain the significant difference in costs for the Association versus the City to do this retention basin water treatment. Mr. Hahn responded that the City's cost contemplates the fact that the laborers are already on site to treat the other portion of this pond, and all that is needed is additional chemicals. The City's cost for treatment of an average size pond is about $1,200-$1,300 per year. This figure includes what the City believes is an appropriate scope of services- Mr. Reiner asked if the Association will be billed for the $400 cost for this maintenance, in view of the substantial savings it represents for them. Mr. Hahn responded staff is not proposing this, but could if Council directs staff to do so. Mr. Reiner stated that this is an enormous savings for the residents, and doesn't seem an excessive amount per household. Mr. Hahn responded that the costs provided by the Association are from 2008, and were based on their expenditures in 2007. Mr. Reiner emphasized that he does not want to initiate having the City pay for these costs related to maintenance of common property. He likes the idea of saving the Association money by having the City contract include this portion of the pond, but believes everyone should bear their fair share. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of publin City Council Meeting April 6, 2009 Page 13 Ms. Salay stated that she is confused with what is being requested tonight. Mr. Hahn responded that by dumping chemicals to treat one side of the pond, they disperse throughout the entire body of water. It is not possible to treat half of the pond. Ms. Salay noted that this does not involve taking over pond maintenance, but only this chemical application. Mr. Hahn clarified that the $400 represents the additional chemical costs to treat the additional portion of this pond for one year. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that the condo association is currently paying $2,800 per year to do this. Mr. Hahn stated that is correct. It includes the chemicals and the labor for the application. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that Mr. Reiner suggests an interesting model that has not been discussed previously. Another model is that the City would perform this maintenance, but the Association would be billed by the City for these costs. It would still bring a substantial savings to the Association. Mr. Foegler stated that staff met on this issue in preparation for CSAC's review, and those kinds of options are being considered. In this particular case, due to the connection of the two ponds, and the fact that the City is picking up the costs of the adjacent pond, the incremental cost for this is low. In balancing the treatment of both ponds, staff is recommending an exception in this case. In terms of a citywide policy, staff does not believe it establishes a precedent. Staff is very sensitive to the precedent-setting nature of what will be recommended to CSAC as a more general policy. Mr. Reiner recommends that the City take over the care of these ponds, but that the City bill the Association for the cost. Vice Mayor Boring stated that this is a good concept. However, how can the City bill residents for one half of the pond and not for the other half? Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted it is not possible in this case. However, staff is looking at other options for CSAC to consider in their deliberations. She does believe the motion must be clear that Council is approving only this element of their request, as the Association's previous request to Council was much more comprehensive. This recommendation relates to only a particular piece of the pond maintenance. Ms. Salay asked when CSAC will finalize their recommendations for the remainder of this request. Mr. Hahn responded that it is an agenda item for April 14th. Ms. Salay emphasized that it would be important to notify interested associations who would have input on this matter. In the case of the Cramer's Crossing Homeowners Association, the City agreed to take over maintenance of the pond. She recalls that the discussion focused on the fact that these ponds are part of the stormwater utility, and staff felt it was appropriate for the City to assume responsibility for pond maintenance for this reason. Mr. Hahn responded that at least certain aspects of the system should be maintained by the City - at a minimum, the stormwater structure. The City may find it has responsibility at a minimum to report what goes into stormwater systems, which could lead to a City responsibility -whether the ponds are public or private -for reporting to the state what chemicals go into them. There is an ongoing inventory in the City to detail the stormwater structures themselves -both public and privately owned -- in terms of deficiencies. CSAC will resume discussion on this big picture policy issue on April 14'h. Regarding the stormwater discussion, however, there could be information not presently available and which may be needed for CSAC to make an informed recommendation. Ms. Salay asked if staff may recommend to CSAC that they separate pond maintenance from the other items. Mr. Hahn responded affirmatively. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that this would have been a good topic for the homeowners association meeting versus CSAC having a small group meeting such a short time later. This will impact all homeowner associations. Mr. Foegler noted that as part of the staff analysis, there is a need to identify all of the conditions that exist with regard to these kinds of basins -which are City-owned, privately RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeti_nQ April 6, 2009 Page 14 maintained and which are privately-owned and privately maintained - in order to understand fully the cost implications of a policy recommendation made to Council. The cost information is being assembled. As the regulatory environment for stormwater management grows, the City will need to consider that in the context of such a policy, to be aware of the future cost implications, given the permitting requirements presented tonight in preliminary form. Ms. Salay asked how the City will know what is used to treat privately maintained ponds. From a regulatory standpoint, it may be problematic for the City to allow this private maintenance into the future. Mr. Foegler responded that this type of issue will be framed into the analysis presented to CSAC, who will then recommend to Council. The obligation for the City to manage that is growing. Discussions occurred in the past about the implications of forming a stormwater utility. To the extent that the City takes on more comprehensive management obligations on with regard to that, and has more legal obligation to manage that, the case for that will likely grow with time. Before recommending a policy direction, staff wants Council to be fully aware of those implications. Vice Mayor Boring stated that suggesting a stormwater utility would result in charges to the users. Mr. Foegler responded that stormwater utilities must determine an equitable user charge basis, which typically relates to the amount of paved surface on a property. Vice Mayor Boring stated that she understands the homeowner associations were not receptive to the idea of forming a consortium to reduce their maintenance costs. Ms. Crandall responded that the meeting overall was successful in terms of information exchange of landscaping specs. There was some discussion about the Associations forming smaller groups for RFPs. But the idea of a large consortium brought concerns about the difficulty of forming such a legal entity. Mr. Gerber stated that perhaps CSAC can look into this possibility as well. Joint ventures are a possibility, and the two legal entities can remain separate and apart. Ms. Salay moved to have the City assume maintenance responsibility for the stormwater retention basin water located within Reserve H, which is currently maintained by Cramer's Crossing Village Condominium Association. Mr. Reiner asked for clarification of whether the homeowners would be billed for this service under this proposed motion. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher responded that the motion is based upon Mr. Foegler's indication that such a policy would be considered in a broader-based discussion with CSAC. Vice Mayor Boring asked for clarification that the motion does not include any other maintenance for this Association, as requested and under review by CSAC. Ms. Salay agreed to amend her motion to include this clarification. Vice Mayor Boring seconded the motion as clarified. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher invited public testimony. Ken Thomas, 6285 Hampton Green Place stated that he serves on the board of the Cramer's Crossing condominium association. He is confused about what is being considered and acted upon by Council tonight. He understood the motion relates strictly to the City assuming maintenance for the chemical treatment of the water. CSAC has been discussing the concept of the City taking on more of the pond maintenance than just this aspect. Has that changed? Mr. Foegler responded that given the large number of retention basins and ponds that exist with the City -with different types of ownership and maintenance obligations - CSAC is studying what the City's policy should be with regard to participating in or contributing to that maintenance. The City must first scope out the extent of the problem, the estimated costs, the public versus private interests, and staff will then make a recommendation to CSAC based upon that. Mr. Thomas stated that at the CSAC meeting of October, when their request was discussed, he was under the impression that there were few such ponds that the City was not already maintaining. It was indicated that having the condo association maintain the pond was not customary. He had understood there would be a fairly expeditious RECORD OF PROCEED[NGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting April 6, 2009 Page 15 movement for the City to take over a much larger scope of maintenance for the pond. Now, he senses that the matter is much more complicated. Mr. Foegler responded that when the inventories were completed citywide, it was a determined to be a much more widespread condition than anticipated at that meeting. Mr. Thomas asked about the timeframe for any decision of providing the association additional help with maintenance items. Mr. Foegler responded that CSAC next meets on April 14. Mr. Hahn added that they will resume their discussion, but he is not certain of when they will have a recommendation for Council Vote on the motion: Mr. Reiner, no; Vice Mayor Boring, yes; Mr. Gerber, no; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; • Update re Sustainability Initiatives Ms. Adkins noted that staff has been working the past couple of years to achieve Council's goal of being a green community through a wide variety of initiatives. This effort covers nearly every aspect of the municipal system -- from educational efforts, to energy use, to land development regulations. Staff has had great success in all of the initiatives, and especially with EcoDublin which is scheduled on Saturday from 9 a.m. to noon. It is a good opportunity for the City to engage the community and offer information on efforts the City has undertaken, as well as outside groups and organizations. The City has also completed an energy audit of city facilities, which is a big step toward understanding the impact of energy use and monitoring progress over time. The NLC Green Cities conference will take place this month, and several staff members, Vice Mayor Boring and Mr. Reiner will be attending. It will be held in Portland, Oregon and staff hopes to gain new insights on continuing to achieve Council's goals efficiently and effectively. Staff will prepare a summary of what has been learned at the conference and how the lessons can be applied to the Dublin initiatives for review at Council's goal setting. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that the memo indicates that staff will prepare a suggested goal for Council to consider at goal setting in May. Wallace Maurer, 7451 Dublin Road stated that if ever a City was poised to "soak up" everything happening at a conference, Dublin is it. He suggested that the enthusiastic young scientists and entrepreneurs who have recently visited Council meetings would be good to take along! STAFF COMMENTS • Request to Schedule Hearing of Postponed Ordinance 74-08(Amended) Related to Conditional Uses in the Community Commercial District (Case No. 08-075ADM) Mr. Langworthy stated that staff forwarded a memo requesting Council take this item off the table and schedule for consideration at the April 20 Council meeting. It was brought forward several months ago with a range of uses -entertainment, commercial daycare, and tutoring services. Council asked staff to undertake research in regard to the entertainment portion. The research has been done, but there are no significant findings to report. In lieu of that, staff has dropped the entertainment uses from the proposal and recommends Council move forward with the commercial daycare and tutoring services. There have been many requests and inquiries about this use during the past year, and there are not many locations in the zoning code where this is permitted. Staff is therefore recommending Council take this amended ordinance from the table and schedule for hearing on April 20th Mr. Gerber stated that he has no objection to moving forward with this on April 20tH Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that she is pleased that the entertainment uses have been removed from the ordinance, as they were quite controversial. In terms of tutoring, does this include a business such as the Kumon Center at the Riverside shopping center? Mr. Langworthy responded affirmatively. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher commented that along I-270 and 33/Avery Road, there is a daycare facility located in what was previously used by Columbus State Community College. The windows have written in large letters "Daycare Center" and have an arrow and phone number. She would not want to see this repeated across the community, as it certainly is in violation of sign codes. She is hopeful that these Districts as requested will RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeti_n.Q April 6, 2009 Page 16 apply and maintain the strict standards of the City. She is supportive of the function and need for the facilities, but wants to ensure the appearance is appropriate. Vice Mayor Boring moved to take the ordinance from the table, and schedule it for second reading/public hearing at the April 20 Council meeting. Mr. Gerber seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mr. Reiner, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Vice Mayor Boring, yes. • Zoning Code Update Process Mr. Langworthy noted that the memo in the packet outlines the process for the proposed zoning code update. Council had requested this after the previous discussion. He provided an overview of the process and rationale. The approach Council has agreed to take is the incremental update, where the zoning code would be updated in segments. The major steps are divided into four elements which include: preparation of Code Objectives; method of public participation; drafting of zoning code components; and project timeline. 1. The Code Update objectives document will be brought forward, and will include planning and development objectives and technical objectives. This objectives document would be prepared for P&Z and Council review and approval prior to proceeding with the overall Code drafting. 2. The public participation process will build on the Community Plan input process, reviewing the comments from previous public meetings, a number of which dealt with zoning issues. The process will utilize the land use principals and design recommendations of the Community Plan, as well as the objectives and strategies. For methodology, staff will use focus groups, identifying those groups specific to various components, and focusing on issues that deal with those components. This will take place prior to drafting the language, to use the groups as a sounding board for issues -not Code language. 3. Planning recommends the Code Update be divided into four components, includinc zoning districts, site development requirements, development applications and review procedures, and administration. He summarized each of these components, as outlined in the staff report. 4. In terms of the timeline, the focus groups sessions will take place first- The language will then be drafted, and portions specific to ARB and BZA will be reviewed by these bodies. As language is completed for each component, it will be brought forward for P&Z review and Council review. The process will keep moving, with simultaneous and overlapping reviews taking place. The goal is to complete the process within aten-month time period. Staff recognizes that some of the components will require more review time than others. Staff is recommending that this process be adopted for completion of the zoning code update. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that after each component, it indicates Council review. Does that contemplate review and approval, so that that topic is completed? Mr. Langworthy responded that there is a difference between the approval and adoption. Staff will not be asking for adoption of the language, because that would occur with the overall Code adoption. Staff will be seeking approval of the language so that the review can move forward to the next section. This will eliminate as much backtracking as possible. The request will be to review the language and generally approve it as submitted. At the end, it will all be assembled, changes made during the process will be identified, and the complete document will be brought to Council. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher summarized that the code update would then not be completed for a year. Mr. Langworthy stated that is accurate. The drafting will be completed within a year, but the adoption process will depend on Council's desires for additional public participation or other options. That will be discussed with Council when the drafting is completed. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that the City has been dealing with this for nearly 12 years, as the Code update was needed after the 1997 Community Plan was completed. Given the fact that the development activity has slowed due to the general economy, this seems an opportune time to do this update and complete it within a 12-month timeframe. By that point, hopefully, the economy will rebound as well as the development activity. When the RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting April 6, 2009 Page 17 timeframe is too long, people lose interest in the project -both staff and the public. New ideas are sometimes brought forward before the update is even completed. It would be optimal to have the zoning code update completed in a timely manner, put it in place, and then use it. Mr. Gerber agreed, noting that this is the third code update he has been involved with. Generally, momentum is lost if the process continues over a long period of time. While there are some clean-up items and inconsistencies in the Code to be addressed, he believes the City has had much success using the planned development concept. Many communities throughout the country are trying to model Dublin's success through these PUDs. Is staff suggesting that the direction is to move to straight zoning, and not using planned districts? Mr. Langworthy responded that this is not the recommendation. Rather, staff is suggesting the updated zoning code build on the success the City has had with planned districts. Mr. Reiner agreed, noting that the hallmark of Dublin's success has been negotiating for higher quality standards in subdivisions. Anything that would diminish that he could not support. Mr. Gerber added that there are some districts which do not work for the City, and therefore he could support changes to those portions. Ms. Salay stated that Council has been pleased with the results of the planned district process, which involves negotiation of higher standards- Her expectation is that the Code update would attempt to codify the desired elements currently achieved in the planned districts. Ms. Salay moved to approve the process as outlined in the staff report. Mr. Reiner seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes; Vice Mayor Boring, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes. • Update re Federal Stimulus Funds Mr. McDaniel noted that a citywide work group has been formed to review the applicability of various City programs to federal stimulus monies. Most of the focus has been on transportation funding, but Dublin was not successful in securing the funding sought for projects. What funding Dublin may obtain is through MORPC, which was given $28 million from the federal government to spend on transportation projects for the four-county region. As it now stands, Dublin would receive $1 million toward the Industrial Parkway realignment/SR 161 improvements and $317,000 in monies toward resurfacing of eligible roadways. In addition, it appears that Dublin will receive $11,300 from a Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) program, in a proportional allocation to cities based on crime rate and population. A proposal for use of these funds is in process. Dublin is also expecting to receive an Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant of $184,000, which is designed to reduce fossil fuels, total energy use and improve energy efficiency in transportation, building and other sectors. Staff is working on recommendations for use of this grant. In the future, staff will continue to seek funding sources such as 629 funds and OPWC funds. Mr. Foegler added that staff has been advised to stand ready to submit eligible projects, as there is an expectation that some of the selected projects won't meet the time requirements for construction performance and design. Some are not as 'shovel ready' as Dublin's projects. Staff will continue to be positioned to stay in a competitive position for these and future opportunities. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that at the MORPC meeting, there was significant discussion about the aspect of a project being "shovel ready" -which all of Dublin's projects were. Yet Dublin's projects were not included on the ODOT list. She would like to have a clearer understanding of what happened. Mr. Foegler indicated that no one has a good sense of what took place internally at the Governor's office. Staff has reason to believe that Dublin's projects were at or near the top of the projects recommended for ODOT District 6. However, the Dublin projects were RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes_of Dublin City Council Meeting April 6, 2009 Page 18 not funded when the list was released by the Governor's office. There is some perception that aneed-based consideration came into play, and within the legislation itself, there was also consideration of projects targeted more toward distressed communities. However, staff has not received complete information about what did occur. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that she has not read anywhere or heard in any public meetings that these criteria were considered. MORPC had indicated the original reason for exclusion of Dublin was because ODOT was going to include Dublin. Unfortunately, that did not materialize. It suggests the need to continually develop partnerships and relationships on a regular basis, bringing state officials to Dublin events and sharing with them Dublin's progress to date and plans for the future. Mr. Keenan noted that he was disappointed to read the messaging in the newspaper regarding Dublin receiving the energy grant. He is not certain of how the information was relayed to the newspaper. The story indicated that Dublin was notified they would receive the money, but did not know what they would do with the funds. From a taxpayer perspective, it was not a good story to read about Dublin. Mr. McDaniel responded that Dublin did apply for projects under that grant program, such as solar projects for City buildings. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher added that a quote from Dublin's staff is what was included in the newspapers. Mr. Keenan added that his point is that when the City determines what the grant funding will be used for, that message needs to be sent to the community so the citizens know the grant will be spent responsibly. Mr. Foegler noted that some of the challenge and frustration has been that some of the funding has come through county entities and the City is not aware of the award. There was not a competitive process involved where the City submitted specific initiatives. But he agrees that the messaging should have been handled much better. • Business Week Recognition Mr. McDaniel reported that last week, the City of Dublin was named "Best Small Town in Ohio to Start a Small Business" in Business Week online. A city was selected in all 50 states, and Dublin received this recognition. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher congratulated staff on this well-deserved recognition. The Dublin Entrepreneurial Center event demonstrated this, and much positive feedback has been received. COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS • Finance Committee recommendation re hotel/motel tax grants Mr. Keenan, Chairperson noted that the Committee met tonight to hear a bed tax grant application from the City for a bicentennial videography project. The purpose is to gather video footage of Dublin's long-time residents, which may be used for historical documentation purposes as well as to support video footage for the Dublin bicentennial. The Committee recommends a grant of $10,000. Vice Mayor Boring moved approval of the grant as outlined. Mr. Gerber seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Vice Mayor Boring, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Ms. Salay, yes. Mr. Keenan noted that further discussion occurred regarding additional funding to be made available for other bed tax grants related to the bicentennial. The recommendation of the Committee is to provide $25,000 -the balance of the 2009 hotel tax funds -for that purpose, and to allocate an additional $25,000 from 2010 bed tax funds to create a total of $50,000 in funds available for bed tax grants for bicentennial projects. The applications will be considered by the Committee in the May/June timeframe and recommendations made to Council. Mr. Gerber moved to adopt the Committee's recommendation as outlined by Mr. Keenan. Vice Mayor Boring seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Vice Mayor Boring, yes. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin. City Council Meeting April 6, 2009 Page 19 Mr. Keenan added that staff will provide information in the next couple of weeks about how this bicentennial grant process will be communicated to the public. COUNCIL ROUND TABLE Mr. Keenan reported that the Veterans Committee met on Friday, April 3. The construction on the Memory Wall for the Grounds of Remembrance is 80 percent complete; the dedication wall with the bunker logos and flagpole is to be installed shortly; the loggia is ready for copper cladding; the brass rails will be installed beginning on Thursday; the landscaping material has been received; and the MIA/KIA plaque is under production. The pavers are being placed for the project and are being engraved. The dedication is scheduled on Monday, May 25. Vice Mayor Boring asked if the student artist selected for the MIA/KIA portion was announced by the Committee. Mr. Keenan responded there was a newspaper article about this. Mr. Hahn added that at the ceremony, the student artist will be recognized. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked staff to make sure this information is on the website for the project. Ms. Puskarcik added that there is a plan in place to announce the student artist and the piece. Ms. Salay noted that with all of the EarthWeek activities scheduled and EcoDublin, a neighbor asked where someone can dispose of old computers. She asked that staff send her an e-mail with this information. Ms. Crandall noted that she will send this information out, and can share it with homeowner associations as well. Mr. Gerber: 1. Noted he appreciates the memo regarding the status of code enforcement at the Shoppes at Athenry. Perhaps the City is in need of more code enforcement, but the wall and window permit issue exists throughout the City and has for years. Maybe it is an issue of education, as some shop owners are apparently not aware of the need for such permits. In any case, education and enforcement efforts need to be stepped up. Mr. Foegler responded that staff will review this and make recommendation to Council. 2. Stated that the Building Industry Association (BIA) Parade of Homes will take place in Dublin this year. This is a wonderful opportunity to showcase Dublin as a great place to live and work, and can help local realtors and those homeowners trying to sell homes as well. 3. Noted that he will not be at the Monday, June 15 meeting, and he is aware that another Council member cannot attend the meeting that night. He suggested that consideration be given to adjusting this date -perhaps moving this Regular meeting to the June 8 study session date. Vice Mayor Boring noted that she has a conflict on June 8 due to a family member's birthday. Mr. Keenan suggested moving the June 15`h meeting to June 22"d Vice Mayor Boring stated that she will be out of town on June 22"d Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted she will be out of town as well. There was no further discussion of a meeting date change. Vice Mayor Boring: 1. Noted she supports increasing code enforcement efforts -- especially on the weekends -- as spring events bring violations related to signage and balloons, etc. 2. Reported that she attended the Homeowners Association Presidents' meeting this week and heard positive feedback regarding Mr. Hahn. It related to sidewalk replacement in the Woods of Dublin where numerous street trees were scheduled to be taken down. Mr. Hahn brought to Council a pilot program related to assessing the tree root loss, which was approved. The resident reported that during the fall Hurricane Ike windstorm, they experienced no loss of trees or limbs. They are very pleased with the results of the pilot program. Mr. Hahn added that a professor at OSU and two other schools have signed off on a formula-based evaluation process of tree root loss for sidewalk replacement. It has RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting April 6, 2009 Page 20 opened the door to further study on tree root loss as it relates to projects such as sidewalk replacement. 3. Reminded Council of the Committee of the Whole meeting on Monday, April 13 regarding campaign finance legislation. To date, Council has not submitted comments to Ms. Readler. She asked that Council Members submit any questions to Ms. Readler in order to facilitate the meeting discussion. 4. Suggested that Council have a brief discussion at some point about the pros and cons of a float versus individual cars for Council for the Independence Day parade. She would like to hear the opinions of others in a group discussion. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that this item should be placed on the April 20th agenda, and the appropriate staff should be present for the discussion. Manor Chinnici-Zuercher: 1. Noted that there were three events last week that were well attended and well received by the community: • The Women's Fund of Central Ohio held a meeting on Tuesday evening at the DCRC to discuss the state of women and girls in the Franklin County metro region. She and Vice Mayor Boring attended, along with guidance counselors from the school district. Hopefully, the school will take some ideas and develop programs for middle school girls. • A successful board and commission training program was held on Monday, March 30. She thanked Ms. Ott for working with Vice Mayor Boring on the agenda and the materials. There was a great turnout and she heard positive feedback. She looks forward to continuing to build on that agenda for future training. • The Dublin Arts Council held their annual Garden Party at OCLC on Friday evening. It was well attended, and she thanked Jay Jordan and Rick Schweiterman of OCLC for attending and hosting this enjoyable event. 2. Agreed with Mr. Gerber that the reports regarding code enforcement do suggest that the City is lacking in education and communication with these strip mall owners. And if the owners are aware, they are not sharing that information with their tenants. Mr. Langworthy responded that the only reason these matters are sent to the Legal department is because the business owners do not complete the City's process. They are notified by the City. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that everyone across the City has responded in the same way, which supports her belief. Mr. Langworthy responded that the City has documentation of the numerous notices sent. Mr. Gerber stated that there are wall and window signs throughout strip centers in Dublin. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher summarized that there needs to be a partnership effort, as the City wants businesses to be successful, but also desires a higher standard of appearance than that of some other communities. These businesses are in competition with each other for customers, and if one is permitted to have such signs, they all will do it. There have been occasions of selective enforcement, where one business in a center with illegal wall and window signs receives a notice and yet the others do not. Consistency is important, and the goal is 100 percent compliance. Currently, the system is complaint driven, so the enforcement is inconsistent. A partnership is needed between the City and the retail businesses to address the problems. Mr. Reiner asked about the research staff has done about the possibility of outdoor dining in shopping centers with excessive parking not in use, and the limitations of the zoning. Mr. Langworthy responded that staff investigated several areas. In the shopping center Mr. Reiner asked about, there would be an issue of lot coverage. Any impervious area added behind a building would require some offset of replacing pavement with green space. In some others, there are specific prohibitions in the development text. Therefore, a rezoning would be required for the PUD to have this potential. Staff is looking at this within the zoning code update to see if there would be any smoother process available. Mr. Reiner noted that he also mentioned the large parking lots that seem never to be full. Is staff investigating this as well? Mr. Langworthy responded that staff is reviewing parking requirements in particular. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes ~f Dublin City Council Meeting April 6, 2009 Page 21 Ms. Salay recalled that a former Planning Director told her that the options are either having outparcels or a large parking lot. The tradeoff was having excess parking in lieu of having outparcels. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher reminded everyone to complete their July 4th table reservation form and return it to staff. ADJOURNMENT TO EXECUTIVE SESSION Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher moved to adjourn to executive session for legal matters (to confer with an attorney for the public body concerning disputes involving the public body that are the subject of pending or imminent court action), land acquisition matters (to consider the purchase of property for public purposes) and personnel matters (to consider the appointment, employment, dismissal, discipline, promotion, demotion, or compensation of a public employee or official). Ms. Salay seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mr. Gerber, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Vice Mayor Boring, yes. The meeting was reconvened and formally adjourned at 10:55 p.m. Mayor -Presiding Officer Clerk of Council