Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/17/2005 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting _ DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC., FORM NO. 1014H October 17, 2005 Held 20 Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher called the regular meeting of Dublin City Council to order at 7:00 p.m. on Monday, October 17, 2005 at the Dublin Municipal Building. - PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Boy Scouts from Pack 210, Scottish Corners led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL Present were: Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, Mrs. Boring, Mr. Keenan, Mr. Lecklider, Mr. Reiner and Mr. McCash. Ms. Salay arrived at 8:10 p.m. due to a family commitment. Staff members present were: Ms. Brautigam, Ms. Grigsby, Mr. Smith, Chief Epperson, Mr. Hammersmith, Ms. Puskarcik, Ms. Ott, Ms. Crandall, Ms. Hoyle, Mr. Hahn, Ms. Ruwette, Ms. Gilger, Mr. Bird, and Mr. Sommerville. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Mr. Lecklider moved approval of the minutes of the meeting of October 3, 2005. Mr. Reiner seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mr. McCash, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes. CORRESPONDENCE The Clerk reported that a Notice to Legislative Authority was sent to Council regarding new D1, D2 and D3 permits for Calimira LLC dba Rusty Bucket at Perimeter Loop. Mr. Lecklider asked about the status of their existing permits, as they are already operating at this location. Mr. Smith responded that he would check on this and advise Council by memo. y There was no objection to the issuance of the new permits. SPECIAL PRESENTATION • Miracle League of Central Ohio -presentation of commemorative item to Council Members Terry Lyden, 6347 Memorial Drive. Dublin thanked Council and Fred Hahn for their support in making the project a reality. There were 117 participants in the Miracle League in its inaugural season, which is 35 percent higher than usually experienced in the first year of operation. They hope to have 200-250 participants next season. All who have been involved as buddies or volunteers have agreed it has been a life changing experience for them. He thanked the City Council and presented a commemorative gift to them and to Mr. Hahn for their role in the project. He acknowledged the support of Duke Realty, as well as the many private contributors and volunteers. Present with him tonight from Duke are Mike Whitman and Mark Gialluca. His experience in working with the City on a public/private partnership has been an excellent one. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher thanked Mr. Lyden and Duke Realty for their leadership role in this endeavor. She encouraged everyone to sign up as a volunteer for the next season and to tell others about this opportunity available in Dublin for special needs children. PROCLAMATION • Make a Difference Day -October 22, 2005 Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher read a proclamation naming Saturday, October 22 as "Make a Difference Day" in Dublin. The Points of Light Foundation, USA Weekend and the Paul Newman Foundation have sponsored this event for over 10 years. Ohio is one of the few states that encourage communities and non-profit organizations to participate at the local level. In Dublin, Scottish Corner Scout Pack 210 and City volunteer Betsy McCollum were instrumental in initiating the project of collecting used athletic shoes for recycling into playground equipment. The collection will take place on Saturday, October 22 at the Rec Center. • Acknowledgment of Dublin News reporter Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that Nikki Bornhorst, Dublin News reporter has taken a new position as editor with SNP. She thanked her for her work with Dublin over the past years and gave her a small gift from the City in appreciation of her service. Nikki Bornhorst introduced her replacement, Linsly Rice who will be covering the Dublin City Council meetings. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC., FORM NO. 10148 c o er age Held 20 CITIZEN COMMENTS FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA Chief Allan Woo Washington Township Fire Department thanked the City Council, the City administration and the citizens for their support of the Fire Department. While he is aware that City Council does not endorse tax levies, he is present tonight to speak about the importance of Issue 74, a 7.25 mill replacement levy, which will be used to fund the continued operations of the Fire Department. Washington Township Fire Department is the sole provider to the City of Dublin of fire suppression services, emergency medical services, fire education and safety programs. The City and township have a long, excellent working relationship and have cooperated on several projects, including the construction of Station 95 on Blazer Parkway, a joint fire and police substation at Station 92 at Hard Road/Riverside Drive, installation of a pre-emption system along the Avery Road/SR 33 corridor, a joint police and fire communications division, and operations at special events including the Dublin Irish Festival, July Fourth celebration and Memorial Tournament. The excellent City services provided to the residents make Dublin an attractive place to live and work. As one of the City service providers, the Washington Township Fire Department has been fortunate to be able to keep pace with the increased demand for fire and EMS services as the City has grown. In addition to responding to over 4,200 emergency calls last year, the Department certified more than 1,000 people in CPR, fitted and checked over 300 child car seats, and presented fire education programs to over 5,800 members of the community. Each year, the Department maintains fire hydrants, conducts building inspections and offers emergency services at City events. They are very proud that the township's emergency medical services remain a non fee-based service - one of the few in the area. These and other services have been made possible by the support from residents through the passage of operating levies. Nearly 75 percent of the current budget is generated by the 7.25 temporary levy that expires December 31, 2005. Issue 74 seeks replacement of this levy for the same amount for five years. Passage will enable the Department to keep pace with the growth and changes Dublin anticipates and will continue to allow them to provide the quality services Dublin residents value. The Dublin Area Chamber of Commerce has endorsed the levy. He thanked Council for their continued support. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher acknowledged that the Washington Township Fire Department has an excellent reputation throughout the country. While Council does not take formal positions on tax levies, Council certainly supports passage of this levy. LEGISLATION SECOND READING/PUBLIC HEARING -ORDINANCES ANNEXATION PETITION Ordinance 56-05 Accepting an Annexation of 65.5 acres from Washington Township to the City of Dublin. (Petitioners Floyd and Joyce Miller, 5274 Cosgray Road) Mr. Smith stated that this accepts the annexation of 65.5 acres from Washington Township to the City of Dublin. It is within the exclusive service area for Dublin and complies with the Community Plan. Vote on the Ordinance: Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes. REZONING Ordinance 57-05 Rezoning Approximately 21.092 Acres, Generally on the Southwest Corner of Hard and Sawmill Roads, From PUD, Planned Unit Development District To PUD, Planned Unit Development District. (Rezoning -Preliminary Development Plan - 05-0912 - LifeTime Fitness PUD -LifeTime Fitness Facility -Hard Road -Case No. 05-091 Z). Mr. Bird stated that this is a rezoning of 21 plus acres located at the corner of Hard and Sawmill Roads in the northeast portion of Dublin. The property is currently vacant with significant vegetation, especially along Hard Road. The purpose of the rezoning is to establish a LifeTime Fitness center of 10,000 square feet with an adjacent parcel for a smaller development. The adjacent property is zoned for PUD, and across the street is the Kroger development. On the west side of the facility is the extension of Emerald Parkway. The facility will therefore have frontage on three streets -Hard, Sawmill and Emerald Parkway. The site plan indicates the location of the facility, and special attention has been given to maintaining the significant vegetation along Hard Road. The facility will include outdoor and indoor pools and recreational facilities. The expectation is that the tree stand RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC., FORM NO. 10148 _ c o er age Held 20 along Hard Road will be maintained. The architecture is a two-story building and compatible with the neighborhood -brick, stone and glass. The main elevation will front on Hard Road. Relative to signing, because it has frontage on three streets, the Planning Commission recommended monument signs on three streets. The structure itself is 96 square feet and the sign is about 33 square feet. The Commission recommended approval with 12 conditions. He offered to respond to questions. Mrs. Boring stated that the Commission had indicated a desire that the parking be moved away from Hard Road with a larger setback. Was this change made? Mr. Bird responded that this is to be considered within the final development plan. The parking lot would be constructed in phases so that the last phase would be in that area. The developer could comment on the status of this. Glen Dugger, Smith & Hale, 37 W. Broad Street stated that this property was previously purchased by Ohio Health for a facility on Hard Road. It was contemplated to be a fairly intense hospital and health use, including skilled nursing. That use has now been moved to the Ohio Health hospital to be constructed at Perimeter. The applicant believes that the present rezoning application is a less intense use than what was previously contemplated. The previous zoning had more impact on the tree stand versus the current configuration. In regard to Mrs. Boring's question, the discussion at Planning Commission related to phasing some of the parking. The applicant wanted to work this out with staff through the final development plan. The issue was originally brought forward by Mr. Parkhill, who is present tonight. They have made a proposal and have the concurrence of Mr. Parkhill about the parking plans. They do not want to be constrained by a condition requiring phasing of parking. The representatives from LifeTime Fitness are present to respond to questions. They hope that Council will agree that this is a significant improvement over the present zoning. Staff has worked diligently with the applicant over the past 8-9 months and the tree preservation is far more than ever anticipated. d. Mack Parkhill 7879 Riverside Drive. Trustee and Immediate Past President of the East Dublin Civic Association thanked the LifeTime representatives for their cooperation and communication efforts. In concept, the Association believes this is a good use for the property and an appropriate addition for the neighborhood and the City. Their major concerns relate to the tree area. They felt that maintaining the appearance of a solid forest from the Riverside Woods area through Bryson Cove and up to Sawmill Road is critical. The impact of the parking lot on this site, however, would be significant. The applicant has been agreeable to concessions regarding parking numbers on the site and to provide no less than the 60-foot buffer between the edge of the tree line and the beginning of the concrete. On the basis of this, they believe it will work. If the parking is built in stages, it will be easy to judge the adequacy of the parking as the project develops. Mr. Reiner noted that the corner at Hard Road and Sawmill is one of the nicest aspects of the forest. It seems that Mr. Parkhill is amenable to a phased construction of the parking lot. Mr. Dugger responded that what is displayed on the easel tonight is the submitted final development plan. The staff condition was for some phasing component to address the tree issue along Hard Road. The applicant prefers to work with Mr. Parkhill and the staff to address this at the final development plan stage. They do not want a constraint imposed with a phasing requirement. They will submit their proposed solution at the time of final development plan to the Planning Commission. Mr. Reiner commented that it is difficult to determine to what level the forest will be preserved. Council has long felt it very important to protect trees on both sides of the road in conjunction with any entry features. Mr. Dugger stated that this plan is much improved over the previous plan in terms of tree preservation. Mr. McCash stated that knowing the history of this site, he is disappointed with the layout and the intensity of the use. He would have preferred to have seen more trees preserved, perhaps through a reduction in curb cuts on Hard or Emerald Parkway, or through the use of underwater stormwater detention so that some of the parking could be taken out of the treed areas. Mr. Dugger responded that in the planning phase, they actually envisioned rotating the building on the site to place it in the area with the least amount of tree mass. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC., FORM NO. 10148 c o er age Held 20 Mr. McCash stated that using underground stormwater detention components would have allowed for them to relocate the parking from some of the more intensely treed areas to the side areas. Mr. Dugger commented that this is a new suggestion to them. A minimum number of spaces are necessary for the operation of the facility and they must be located within a certain distance from the door. This suggestion could be considered with the final development plan. Mrs. Boring commented that while that is an interesting concept, there is already a lot of underground piping that exists in the northeast quad area. Staff would have to review that carefully. She added that the applicant needs to be reminded that the goal for them is not to satisfy only Mr. Parkhill, although he is working hard to represent the area residents. Mr. Dugger agreed that Mr. Parkhill is representing an important stakeholder in this plan, and this was a negotiation matter. Mr. Keenan stated that he is satisfied with the plan. Mr. Lecklider noted that the plan contemplates removing 5,000 caliper inches of trees. Is a waiver from the tree preservation requirements being requested? Mr. Dugger responded that part of the next piece of legislation relates to the waiver. Mr. Lecklider stated that this is a significant waiver and should have been referenced in the summary from staff. Ms. Grigsby stated that there was discussion about a tree waiver with regard to the TIF district. In the past, once a developer has met the intent of the tree preservation ordinance of saving as many trees as possible, staff then considers the possibility of recommending a waiver. In this case, the request for the waiver was offset by the dedication of the 3.07 acres on the southeast corner of Hard and Emerald, as well as a $150,000 contribution over athree-year period for tree replacement. These are included in the next piece of legislation. - Mr. Lecklider asked for confirmation that this represents a compromise. Ms. Grigsby responded that is correct. Mr. Lecklider noted that there is also an outparcel on this plan. What is the size of the development contemplated for it? Mr. Dugger responded that they estimate it at 15,000 square feet - or a two-story building with 6,000 square feet in each level. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that she has no further comments. The Planning Commission and the East Dublin Civic Association have worked closely with the developer and the staff to bring forward the plans proposed tonight. She asked for the specific locations of signs. Mr. Bird responded that they would be located at the entry points on Hard Road, future Emerald Parkway, and right in/right out on Sawmill. These will be monument signs. Mr. McCash noted that in reviewing the concept layout in the packet, there is a finger of land between Emerald Parkway and where Basin A is designated. In looking at this property and the property owned by Sawmill Limited Partners, it would make sense to adjust the property lines so that the 70/30 lot coverage would not apply -moving more of the parking out of the woods and in the area with no trees. If that finger piece were included, the parking could be moved to that area, saving more trees. Mr. Dugger responded that the centerline of the original Emerald Parkway alignment was moved to the west for two reasons: to accommodate a higher design speed and for purposes of tree preservation. City representatives walked the site. The area to the west that appears not to have trees actually does. Mr. McCash stated that immediately across from Basin A on the site plan, assuming they extend Basin A to the left it would be in a field area without trees. Mr. Dugger stated that the alignment selected was determined to be preferable from the standpoint of tree preservation. Mr. Reiner stated that in the formation of the site, the finger of land does not seem to have any use for the adjoining landowner. Could that have been acquired? RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC., FORM NO. 10148 c o er age Held 20 Mr. Dugger responded that there are ongoing discussions with Sawmill Partners about that issue. However, they need to move forward with the other piece while those discussions continue. Mr. Reiner stated that Mr. McCash's suggestion is an interesting one. Mr. Dugger responded that for this and other reasons, some of the issues are to be ' addressed at the final development plan. They are still working with Sawmill Partners on w the resolution of access to Emerald Parkway Phase 5B, Mr. Smith added that he and Ms. Grigsby have had conference calls regarding who will maintain this piece, how it will be used, and the new alignment of Emerald Parkway selected by the City. It was determined that the issues would be addressed at the final development plan stage. They were concerned about the maintenance into the future, if the City owns the land. Mr. McCash commented that by rezoning the property now and addressing this at the final development plan stage, the City loses the advantage in negotiation. Mr. Smith responded that the City actually created that finger piece with the realignment. Mr. McCash asked if the City is purchasing that finger piece from Sawmill Partners. Ms. Grigsby responded that staff is currently in the process of discussing the roadway portion of Emerald Parkway Phase 5B which involves these two parcels of land. It is a small portion of the overall parcel. Part of what the City can do is to see if there is a way to make it work into this project. Phase 5B also creates a greenbelt along Emerald Parkway at the entrance on Hard Road. Mr. Smith stated that there are tradeoffs and staff continues to negotiate. This is not a part of the proposed rezoning. Vote on the Ordinance: Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. McCash, no; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes. TAX INCREMENT FINANCING AGREEMENT Ordinance 58-05 (Amended) Authorizing the Provisions of Certain Incentives for the Purposes of Encouraging the Location of LTF Real Estate Companies, Inc. within the City of Dublin which Include, Declaring Improvements to Certain Real Property to be Developed as a LifeTime Fitness Facility to be a Public Purpose, Describing the Public Infrastructure Improvements to Be Made to Benefit the Parcels of Such Development, Requiring the Owner Thereof to Make Service Payments in Lieu of Taxes, Providing for the Franklin County Treasurer to Distribute Service Payments to the Dublin City School District in the Amount It Would Otherwise Receive Absent the Exemption, Creating a Municipal Public Improvement Tax Increment Equivalent Fund for the Deposit of the Balance of Such Service Payments, and Authorizing the Execution of an Economic Development and Tax Increment Financing Agreement. Ms. Grigsby stated that this tax increment financing district ties into the LifeTime Fitness rezoning. The legislation will authorize the execution of an economic development agreement and TIF. The proposed development provides a facility to help meet and address the City's growing recreation and leisure needs. The TIF will be anon-school TIF district for the three parcels identified and will generate $200,000 per year in service payments to fund the public infrastructure improvements listed in the exhibits. These include the intersection at Sawmill and Hard Road, the continued construction of Emerald Parkway, some stormwater improvements in the area, and any related Bright Road ,r improvements needed as part of the Emerald Parkway construction. In terms of impact on otherjurisdictions, that information has been provided in the memo. The school district still _ will receive the service payments in the same amount as the property taxes they would have received. Because it is exempt property, it does not impact the schools' state funding with the exception that it does not reduce it. The new economic development agreement provides that LifeTime will dedicate three plus acres to the City to preserve the southeast corner of Emerald and Hard Road -the heavily wooded area. It will be preserved as open space, with the ability of LifeTime to construct hard or soft walking paths through the site with the approval of the City. The City has agreed to provide some assistance with the funding of the intersection improvements at Hard and Sawmill Roads. Based on the traffic impact studies, the City will fund or front the first $500,000 of the project; LifeTime will fund the next $500,000; and anything above that, the City will pay and will be reimbursed from the TIF district first. This is a slight change RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC., FORM NO. 10148 c o er age Held 20 from the last reading. There was some concern about the dollar amount, since the project cost has not been tied down at this time. Based on estimates, staff believes that the LifeTime share of the improvement will be less than $1 million, therefore, staff does not believe there is additional risk or liability for the City at this time. Regarding the tree preservation, in addition to the donation of 3.07 acres of land by the developer, the City will also receive a total of $150,000 over athree-year period to be paid to the tree preservation account. The changes subsequent to the first reading are outlined in the staff memo and include the following: 1. The name change for the organization to LTF Real Estate Companies, Inc. is reflected in the documents. 2. LifeTime requested that the City add that the easement given to them over the land between Emerald Parkway and their site for road access also includes sufficient space for the monument sign. 3. If Emerald Parkway is not complete, that their Certificate of Occupancy will not be held up for that reason -similar to what was done previously with the Hard Road project. 4. The addition of language that until Emerald Parkway is open, they will have full access movement off of Hard Road. Once Emerald Parkway is completed, the access off of Hard Road will be a right in and right out, and a left in. The current version includes right in/right out, but the other movement was not included. 5. There are some slight changes in the Sawmill/Hard Road intersection. 6. There are some minor amendments in Section 11 that define the timing of the land dedication; some additional information on LifeTime's desire to maintain the property dedicated to the City, based upon approval of the City; and a restriction in the deed that it be preserved as open space. At the last Council hearing, there was discussion about a contact from the joint vocational district. Mr. Berg has signed in to speak tonight regarding the ordinance. Carl J. Berq, 6634 Weston Circle, Dublin, Superintendent of Tolles Career and Technical Center read a letter into the record regarding the three recent TIF agreements the City has entered into or is contemplating entering into. On behalf of the Tolles Career & Technical Center Board, he expressed general concern about the negative consequences to non- participating tax-dependent entities such as Tolles. The Ohio Revised Code does not mandate that school TIF's include Career and Technical School Districts, but the ORC does not prohibit their inclusion. Unlike other economic development tools, TIF's extend over long periods of time -sometimes up to 30 years -and result in a long period to wait for any tax revenue from a development project. The current structure of TIF's administered by the City of Dublin leaves out the Tolles Center from the distribution of payments, communicating that Tolles is not a school of value to the City of Dublin. Tolles serves 62 Dublin City Schools students at the Plain City campus and 193 part-time students in Tolles satellite programs at the three Dublin high schools. He requested that the City make modifications in TIF's to include Tolles in the distribution of payments of tax revenues. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher thanked him for his testimony and suggested that Ms. Grigsby address the issues he has raised. Ms. Grigsby stated that the one issue that is the most critical with regard to how the City uses TIF's as compared to Community Reinvestment Areas or Enterprise Zones is that those types of economic development tools actually abate the taxes. With tax increment financing, the City is not abating any taxes. The developer or the company involved is still paying their fair share, but the dollars are redirected to fund public infrastructure improvements that are critical to the project and critical to the overall community. While she appreciates his comments about the need to continue to generate tax revenues for the school district, she believes that in this case, the taxes are not being abated but are being used for public infrastructure improvements. i Mr. Keenan added that another key component of this TIF is to complete the Emerald Parkway, which will bring more economic development and more tax revenue for all entities. Ms. Grigsby concurred. Much of the development done under a TIF brings other development into the surrounding areas as a result of having the improvements done. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC., FORM NO. 10148 c o er age Held 20 Mr. McCash asked if she is indicating that the land around this area will not be subject to a future TIF. Ms. Grigsby responded that each case is different, but many of the roadway improvements paid for with TIF's have generated additional investment in the community that has not been included in a TIF district. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked for clarification about the memo of October 13, in Section B, where it states that LifeTime's proportionate share will not exceed $1 million. The document indicates that they will never pay more than $500,000. Ms. Grigsby responded that the first $500,000 of LifeTime's fair share of the roadway improvement will be fronted by the City; anything above $500,000, LifeTime will reimburse directly to the City; anything above $1 million, the City will pay and will be reimbursed through the TIF district. Mr. Reiner asked about the total expense of the Sawmill/Hard Road intersection improvements. Ms. Grigsby stated that based upon preliminary reviews, staff estimates the cost to be in the range of $750,000. There are issues with Columbus participation/involvement in the project. The engineers are currently working on the total projects costs and breaking out the costs among the different developers, determining the cost share for each. Mr. McCash stated that what he understands is that the City will pay $500,000 and will be reimbursed through the TIF and LifeTime will pay their proportionate share of roadway improvements and will also be reimbursed through the TIF. Ms. Grigsby confirmed this is correct. Mr. McCash stated that other developers must pay for roadway improvements related to their development and are not reimbursed through property tax dollars. This developer will have all of their costs reimbursed for the roadway improvements. Further, the City will not receive the monies owed from the tree waiver they are receiving as a part of the agreement. This agreement seems very favorable to the developer. Ms. Grigsby responded that staff believes that this is a favorable agreement for both the developer and the City. In the majority of TIF districts established for public infrastructure improvements, there would have been developer contribution that the TIF does pick up and pay for. In some cases, the developer pays for 100 percent of the costs, and in this case it will be funded 100 percent by the TIF district. In regard to the tree waiver, staff reviewed this and recognized that the City is receiving three acres to be preserved, which ~ creates a greenway along Hard Road - an entrance to the City - as well as the corner leading to the southern piece of Emerald Parkway. In addition, the developer is paying the City a total of $150,000 over athree-year period to the tree preservation account. Mrs. Boring commented that at one time, the City considered acquisition of this land at the entrance to Dublin. She recalls the cost to have been in the range of $400,000 per acre. The developer's donation of three acres of land is likely valued at $1 million. She believes that this is very positive for the City. Mr. Lecklider commented that he would have preferred to have the tree waiver included in the rezoning summary. As he expressed at the first reading of this ordinance, he reiterated his concerns that this represents somewhat of a "stretch" of the tax increment financing tool. Vote on the Ordinance: Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. McCash, no. REZONING Ordinance 59-05 Rezoning Approximately 0.57 Acres, Generally Located on the North Side of West Bridge Street, 100 Feet West of Darby Street, From CCC, Central Community Commercial District, To HB, Historic Business District. (Rezoning -Jason's Restaurant - 50 West Bridge Street -Case No. 05-1372) Mr. Bird stated that this property lies on the north side of Bridge Street and is the first among several properties to be rezoned and formally brought into the Historic Dublin Business District. Inclusion in the HDB district provides that the Architectural Review RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC., FORM NO. 10148 c o er age Held 20 Board will govern the properties in terms of development approval. Staff is recommending approval. Vote on the Ordinance: Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS Ordinance 61-05 Authorizing the Provision of Economic Development Incentives to Smiths-Medical to Induce the Creation and Expansion of the Smiths-Medical Shared Service Center and Workforce, and the Retention and Expansion of the Existing Medex, Inc. Operation and Workforce Within the City of Dublin; and Authorizing the Execution of an Economic Development Agreement. Ms. Gilger stated that three representatives of Smiths-Medical are present tonight - Cliff Oman, Chris Bresnahan, and Troy Frye. The Smiths-Medical Medex economic development agreement is three-tiered. It includes a job retention grant for $120,000; a job growth incentive for four years at 10 percent for any new jobs at the former Medex facility on Shier-Rings road; and afive-year, 20 percent incentive tied to the shared services operation -anew consolidated operation of Smiths-Medical that will be located at 5200 Upper Metro Place. Mr. Keenan asked if the jobs that would be retained are full or part-time. The representatives responded that they are full-time. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher commented that the City is delighted that the company is staying in Dublin and expanding. Vote on the Ordinance: Mr. Lecklider, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes. Ordinance 62-05 Authorizing the Provision of Certain Incentives for Purposes of Encouraging the Establishment by the Garden City Group, Inc. of its Operations and Workforce within the City and Authorizing the Execution of an Economic Development Agreement. Ms. Gilger stated that the Garden City Group currently has a Central Ohio office that will be moving to 5151 Blazer Parkway, in addition to a consolidation of several out of state operations. They will move into 50,000 square feet that will house at least 125 new employees to Dublin. The proposal is a four-year, 20 percent withholding equivalent incentive that is tied to the company meeting certain payroll growth projections. There is also a $15,000 facility and technology grant to help upgrade the facility for their technology needs. Rich Cohen, Senior Vice President and Managing Director of the Garden City Group is present to respond to any questions. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked for the present location of the company in Central Ohio. Ms. Gilger responded that they are presently located in New Albany. Mr. Lecklider commented that the City is very pleased that they are moving their operations to Dublin. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked for information about the origin of the company name. Rich Cohen, Senior Vice President, Garden City Group responded that the company was originally formed as a spin-off from an accounting firm, KPMG when the Kuwait oil crisis took place and there were war reparations for the Kuwait citizens from their government. They founded an office in Garden City, Long Island -thus, "The Garden City Group." Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher welcomed the company to Dublin and encouraged them to have ~ their employees become involved with the City where there are many opportunities for corporate sponsorship and volunteer activities. Vote on the Ordinance: Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Ms. Salay, yes. ROAD NAME CHANGES Ordinance 63-05 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC., FORM NO. 10148 - c o er age Held 2D Requesting Approval to Change the Name of a Portion of Perimeter Loop Road to Hospital Drive in the City of Dublin, Ohio. Mr. Hammersmith stated that the staff report was provided at the last meeting. There were no further questions. Vote on the Ordinance: Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes. Ordinance 64-05 (amended) Requesting Approval to Change the Name of a Portion of Manley Road to Avery Road in the City of Dublin, Ohio. Mr. Hammersmith stated the staff report was provided at the last meeting. The Union County reference was corrected to Delaware County. Staff is recommending approval. Vote on the Ordinance: Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes. INTRODUCTION/FIRST READING -ORDINANCES LAND PURCHASE Ordinance 65-05 Authorizing the Purchase of a 0.950 Acre, More or Less, Tract of Land, From Carl W. Karrer, Trustee of the Emmett H. Karrer Family Trust, Located at 6199 High Street, Township of Washington, County of Franklin, State of Ohio. Mr. Keenan introduced the ordinance. Mr. Hahn stated that this parcel is located on the corner of S. High Street and Waterford Drive and includes the historic Karrer family barn. The ordinance authorizes the purchase. Mr. Lecklider recalled that there were certain implements inside the barn. Will these become City property? ` Mr. Hahn responded that Mr. Karrer has agreed that they will remain in the public domain, perhaps to be held by the Dublin Historical Society. This purchase is for the land and the barn only. There will be a second reading/public hearing at the November 7 Council meeting. INTRODUCTION/PUBLIC HEARING -RESOLUTIONS STATEMENT OF SERVICES Resolution 67-05 Adopting a Statement of Services for a Proposed Annexation of 71.3 Acres, More or Less, from Washington Township, Franklin County, to the City of Dublin. (Petitioners: Jay W. Liggett, Trustee; Steven A. Buck, Trustee; Charles Buck, Trustee) Ms. Salay introduced the resolution. Mr. Smith stated that this and the next resolution are housekeeping items required by statute. Vote on the Resolution: Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes. Resolution 68-05 Adopting a Statement Regarding Possible Incompatible Land Uses and Zoning Buffer for a Proposed Annexation of 71.3 Acres, More or Less, from Washington Township, Franklin County, to the City of Dublin as Required by Section 709.023(c) of the Ohio Revised Code. (Petitioners: Jay W. Liggett, Trustee; Steven A. Buck, Trustee; Charles Buck, Trustee) Ms. Salay introduced the resolution. Vote on the Resolution: Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. McCash, yes. EXECUTION OF EASEMENT Resolution 69-05 Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Easements with AEP for the Dublin Road and Brand Road Roundabout Project. Mr. Lecklider introduced the resolution. Mr. Hammersmith stated that this provides for anon-exclusive easement to AEP for the placement of the switches and transformers adjacent to the Dublin/Brand roundabout. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council _ Meeting DAVTON LEGAL BLANK, INC., FOPM NO. 10148 - October 17, 2005 Page 10 Held 20 This initiative was undertaken as a result of concerns by residents regarding tree impacts of the relocation of power lines from the west side to the east side of Dublin Road. Staff has worked cooperatively with AEP to pay an incremental cost difference to have the power lines buried underground. That cost difference is approximately $230,000 $85,000 to AEP for the cost difference between overhead and buried lines, and the remainder to Igel Construction within the project for burying conduit to facilitate the electric lines and their placement. Staff is recommending approval of this resolution. Mrs. Boring asked about the aesthetics of the above ground transformers. Will there be screening? Mr. Hammersmith responded that screening would be done as part of the landscape plan. Mr. Keenan asked how far from the roadway the boxes will be placed. Mr. Hammersmith responded approximately 10 feet behind the right-of-way. One is on the north end of the former Daroski property, and the other at the southeast corner of the pump station site. These are not massive structures, but are minimized as much as possible. Mr. Reiner noted that the burial of the electric lines is a major aesthetic improvement. What is the total yardage? Mr. Hammersmith stated that it is the entire length of the project along Dublin Road - estimated at 1,800 to 2,000 feet. It extends from Limerick Lane to Chaddington. Vote on the Resolution: Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes. WAIVE COMPETITIVE BIDDING Resolution 70-05 Waiving the Competitive Bidding Process, Pursuant to Section 8.04 (Contracting Procedures) Paragraph (C) (Waiver of Competitive Bidding), for the Procurement of Demolition Services for the Demolition of Structure and Removal of Fuel Storage Tanks on City Property Located at 191 W. Bridge Street, in the City of Dublin, County of Franklin, State of Ohio. Ms. Salay introduced the resolution. Ms. Brautigam stated that the City is now the owner of the former Duke and Duchess property. Staff is anxious to have the demolition initiated and is therefore requesting waiving of the competitive bidding process. A favorable bid was received from Loewendick who has experience with the City. According to Mr. Johnson, the City has saved approximately $15,000 on this bid. Ms. Salay stated that she recalled that at the time of purchase of the property, the property owner was to take care of clean-up of the site. Mr. Smith responded that when the price was negotiated, it did not include taking out the tanks. This was a negotiated item. Mr. Keenan stated that his recollection was that the price included the tank removal. Mrs. Boring was not aware that the price of the property did not include removal of the storage tanks. She is disappointed that the City has to bear this cost. Vote on the Resolution: Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked about the timeframe for completion of the demolition work. Ms. Brautigam stated that staff would check and respond on this item. OTHER • Request for Waiver of Fees for City Services - T3 Trot for Tots Ms. Brautigam stated that last week, staff received a request for a waiver of the fees for City services needed for this charity race, which will take place in November. Staff provided a recommendation to Council in a packet sent out Friday, Based on the analysis, staff believes the maximum cost of City services would be $6,901. Based on staff's analysis of this event, the anticipated hotel nights associated would not justify waiving the fees, and staff is therefore recommending denial of the waiver. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked if the Finance Committee had reviewed this. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC., FOFM NO. 10148 c o er age Held 20 Mr. Keenan stated that the Committee did not formally review this application, as it was not submitted within the deadlines for applications. He did speak with someone involved with the race and provided some suggestions for next year's planning, noting that it would be _ important to submit an application for hotel/motel tax grant monies at an earlier date. Mr. Keenan added that they are trying to raise money for a worthy cause, but the cost of the City services are prohibitive in view of the amount of money that can be generated from an event. Ms. Brautigam responded that there are sometimes overtime costs involved if there are not volunteers for special duty. Closing the streets is an expensive undertaking. Mr. Lecklider acknowledged the good cause, but moved to deny the fee waiver for City services based on the information provided by staff. Mrs. Boring seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes. • Update re Historic Dublin Revitalization Plan Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that following the last Council meeting, there was some discussion of a desire to review the revised document that was sent on to ARB. Council had a presentation regarding the Plan in May, and subsequently, meetings were held with the citizens. Those changes are now incorporated into the document and Council requested a brief presentation on the updated Plan. It is important that if there are specific items included on which Council does not recommend moving forward, that it be stated tonight, and that any other considerations for ARB and P&Z be stated by Council as well. Mr. Combs summarized that an initial presentation was provided to Council in May. Since that time, a series of Community Plan public meetings were held in July and August. The first reading of the ordinance was held on October 3. A Special Meeting is scheduled with ARB on October 19; following that, the Planning Commission will review the document and a make recommendations to Council for the public hearing. The timeframes have been modified somewhat in view of interest in the Historic District development. He reviewed the quadrants of the Plan and the major changes made following the public input process: Northwest quadrant 1. Based on public input, their unanimous desire is that the library remains in the district and be expanded as needed. It is afamily-friendly use and needs to be in the district. 2. Regarding the Indian Run Falls Park and associated uses, it was recently formally rezoned by Council and the trail system and bridge are in the process of being implemented. 3. In regard to utilizing the 1919 Building to create a civic center, this was supported by the public. Staff is recommending in general that the City provide consolidation of uses such as the Convention Bureau, Chamber of Commerce or other civic-type organizations. This would also provide a good way-finding for those coming from 1- 270. 4. In regard to a City Hall building, they asked the public if they felt it would fit within the district. The overwhelming majority felt it should not be housed in the district. When asked about other locations close to the district, two locations were noted by the public in addition to the Coffman Park site: the Village Square across the river and the Kroger shopping center on Bridge Street. These would be a valid discussion point for boards and for Council as the process moves forward. 5. In regard to the boundaries of the district and entry points to the district, most liked the idea of creating a strong streetscape presence along Bridge Street with mixed uses. They felt that the edge of the district on the west side should be pushed further to Corbins Mill. Staff has incorporated additional mixed uses integrated with some of the existing buildings. Northeast quadrant There were not many changes. The general feedback is that the public would like better visual access to the river and having mixed uses. Staff is proposing mixed uses creating a solid streetscape from the bridge to the corner, and utilizing the topography change to provide for parking levels. That was generally well accepted, and so little change has been made since the May work session. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC., FORM NO. 10148 c o er age Held 20 Southwest quadrant There was significant public discussion about the quadrant, particularly about the cemetery expansion and what form that should take long term, and where the district boundaries should be. Those from Monterey and the older segments of the population liked the concept of expanding the cemetery; but there was an equal presence at the meeting of those who felt that while providing a cemetery service is generally good, future cemetery service is in question for a much larger city. Some suggested that the Community Plan process consider an alternate location to serve the buildout of the City in the future. Southeast quadrant The recommendations remain unchanged from the May version. It is basically an issue of infill development and providing for compatible development on the McDowell property with the quarry site. Some neighborhood park amenities are needed to serve the needs of the S. Riverview area. He summarized the modifications: • The Issues and Recommendations chapter -pages 29 through 61. The strikethroughs are bolded to show the revisions from May. • Master Plan modification chapter -pages 62 through 65. Those are the quadrant maps just described. • Master Plan design elements. Some minor changes were made. A major change was regarding the current obelisks at the gateways to the Historic District. It was felt that they don't represent a vital, active district. There was not clear consensus on gateway entry markers. Staff is proposing for discussion some type of large stone pier of Dublin limestone, with a copper top treatment and bronze plaques to highlight the entries to the district. These could be used in the median islands as well. The current obelisks could be used as wayfinding markers for walking tours of the district. • The 1997 Community Plan called for creation of a village square with institutional and mixed uses. Staff had recommended a corner plaza at Bridge and High, with a public plaza, lined with buildings. In the public input process, there were two trains of thought. Some like the plaza, but some liked the historic value of lining the buildings along the street. Based on those approaches, staff and the working group is undecided and is proposing both options to Council and the boards and commissions on what they believe is the best direction for this space. The appendix has been modified to incorporate support materials of minutes and public input summaries. Mr. Reiner acknowledged the amount of work that has gone into producing this document. He appreciates the hard work on this document, all while maintaining the workload of the Planning division. He does have some reservations about the library and whether it will be large enough to accommodate the needs of the future City. Regarding the Bridge and High Street corner, he would support option one which opens up the corner versus lining the street with buildings. Mr. McCash echoed the comments about the future library needs of the City. The library is too small and inadequate to serve the needs of the community. He would support relocating the library and expanding it. This would create other opportunities for the Historic District in this location as well. Mrs. Boring noted that she, too, has concerns with the size of the library. Library users do not patronize the district businesses and it creates traffic conflicts for those who do want to visit the businesses. She did speak with some people about relocation of the library, but the issue is likely one of financing. The present location is not ideal. On page 39, the acquisition of the Karrer barn can now be added. The other concern relates to the 1919 Building and the concept of moving the Dublin Chamber to that location. They are not interested in moving from their present location. She would support having a dialogue with the Chamber directly to learn about their plans for the future. While she supports using the 1919 Building in some civic manner, she is not certain that relocating entities from their present locations is advisable. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC., f-0RM NO. 10148 c o er age Held 20 Mr. Keenan noted that a lot of effort was needed to produce this document and Council appreciates the efforts of staff. The Dublin library is his concern as well, as it requires a great deal of parking and the needs are not met by this facility. Dublin now has three high schools, and even expanding the present library facility will not likely meet the needs of the district and the community. In regard to the proposed City Hall building, he understands the thought process of staff. He cannot envision the City Hall at the Kroger center or Village Square. In regard to the Bridge and High corner, he will reserve his opinion about the two options pending the outcome of the RFQ and RFP process. The process is complicated with too many stakeholders. Ms. Salay expressed appreciation to staff for this document. In regard to the library, she shares some concern about its location in view of the expansion needs, but it is not the City's decision - it is the library system's decision. Perhaps in the Community Plan process, some discussion should take place with the library system about their future needs and desires. She understands that it is one of the busiest branches in the system. The Plan process is to be one of a longer term vision into the future, and that should make it easier to consider the 1919 Building and its potential for housing uses in the future, the boundaries of the Historic District, etc. Years into the future, the Chamber may need a larger space to accommodate its needs. In regard to Wednesday night's meeting, is staff seeking an affirmation from the public about what has now been proposed? Mr. Combs responded that at the public meetings in July, broad questions were posed. In August, the Plan was generally defined and the questions related to specific elements of the Plan. At this point, staff is seeking additional public input as warranted, but desires to move it through the public adoption process. They are hopeful that ARB will make a formal recommendation at that time. Mr. Lecklider thanked the team for their hard work, which is much appreciated. He echoed the comments made by other Council Members about the library. In regard to the corner of Bridge and High, he would favor option one of a more open plaza space. He does like w the concept pictured on page 73. His question at this point relates to what Council is approving with the ordinance. He assumes it is more conceptual, and would not want future development and decisions restricted to what is in this Plan. Mr. Smith responded that this is a Revitalization Plan that will become a part of the Community Plan. The Plan is a working document, is conceptual and gives direction to staff. Mr. Lecklider asked if it is typical that Council would adopt a portion of the Community Plan by ordinance. Mr. Smith responded that it is unusual, but because of the interest in the project in Historic Dublin, this was treated somewhat more formally. The ordinance form gives broader public notice than an item under the "Other" portion of the agenda. Mr. Lecklider asked if it would require amending an ordinance to make a change. Mr. Smith responded that the Revitalization Plan is just that - a plan, a concept. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher followed up on this. She is concerned with Section One, which states that the 2005 Historic Dublin Revitalization Plan be adopted as a special Area Plan as part of the Dublin Community Plan. She believed that what was being adopted was not the plan verbatim, but that Council was giving direction to the staff about the various issues to be considered in this discussion. Mr. Smith suggested that Section One could be amended if needed to reflect these comments. Ms. Brautigam clarified that this ordinance has not been adopted by Council, but will be reviewed by ARB and Planning Commission and will then come back to Council for a public hearing. Mr. Smith stated that the language would be revised prior to the public hearing at Council. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher thanked everyone involved in the process. She is pleased that some of the controversial portions have been removed, based on feedback. She recalls the library representatives being involved in the May hearing, as library funding was being cut in the state budget. She is certain that the library would be interested in discussion of the City participating financially in future expansion or relocation. It is important to consult the entities named in a document, especially those who do not own their buildings, such as the Chamber. In follow-up to Ms. Salay's comments, she is hopeful that significant visioning will occur, especially about the use of the river. This is an amenity that is not RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC., f-0RM NO. 10148 c o er age Held 20 utilized in any way of significance in the City. The City has purchased land along the river and there is a need to be creative about its future use. There are many examples in this country and around the world about incorporating access to the river in future plans. CITY MANAGER/STAFF REPORTS • Report re Columbus 311 System Chief Epperson stated that staff attended a meeting in July with representatives of the City of Columbus to discuss with them their initiative known as 3-1-1, a one-call customer service number for Columbus. It will affect every jurisdiction within Franklin County. Officer Jay Sommerville will provide a staff report. Officer Sommerville provided a quick overview of the Columbus plan to implement this system throughout Franklin County. • They will combine their nine existing divisional answering points into one central location, using a unified customer service software piece. It will allow them to input all customer service requests made to Columbus for their various City services. They will track work order and set performance standards to increase accountability for the city services provided. • They expect to have this 3-1-1 consolidation in place by December of this year. Columbus originally talked about the system four years ago, but it was never initiated. It has been moved to the Department of Service from the Department of Technology. • The plan is to allow the public to call 3-1-1 to ring to one central answering point between 6 a.m. and 11 p.m. daily. They have not discussed advancing this to 24 hour coverage in the future, although they have indicated this is a possibility. • They plan to go live and begin a marketing campaign around January 1, 2006. They will continue to allow the public to calla 7-digit number to access the call center, because if not, someone outside the 3-1-1 service area could not access their service system for reporting. • The PUCO required Columbus to define the boundaries of the 3-1-1 service area and Columbus elected to define the boundaries of Franklin County as their 3-1-1 service area. In the absence of a request from any governmental entity outside the boundaries of Columbus but inside Franklin County, after January 1, their calls to 3- 1-1 would automatically be directed to the Columbus call center. • The PUCO did require that once Columbus declared their boundaries for this service, they must allow other entities that fall within those boundaries an opt-out plan. • As a city, the only step needed to opt out of having any calls placed to the 3-1-1 network from within Dublin's boundaries from being routed to Columbus is to have the City Manager forward correspondence to the City of Columbus requesting that Dublin opt out. • The PUCO did require that if a city opts out, the city must provide a list of locations within the city limits to be opted out of the 3-1-1 call routing. They are asking that this be done via the zip code plus four listing, and the City of Dublin will also provide a list of the addresses. • Unless an opt-out has been requested from the City of Columbus on January 1, any call placed within Franklin County to 3-1-1 will be answered by a City of Columbus employee capable of processing only City of Columbus requests. • Columbus is still negotiating and does not yet have a plan devised to service those areas of Columbus that are located in counties other than Franklin. They are still negotiating with phone companies but do not yet have an agreement in place. The service will be available only in Franklin County unless those agreements are finalized by the end of 2005. • For wireless calls, Columbus must contact every wireless provider within the area in order to negotiate a plan and cost recovery mechanism to route those calls. Routing is determined by the tower in which the call is received. If Dublin chooses as a city to opt out of this 3-1-1 plan, we can include the wireless calls as well. • Last month, a team was assembled of staff members from various divisions, including front line contact staff. The general consensus of the group is that Dublin should opt out of the 3-1-1 system and not have Dublin calls routed to the Columbus answering point. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC., f-0RM NO. 10148 c o er age Held 20 • Opting out would allow Dublin to preserve the 3-1-1 number for Dublin's own purpose in the future if Dublin decides to have a one call to City Hall option. • It will also allow Dublin to keep its options open for providing some form of centralized or one-stop customer service. • The City of Columbus did offer to negotiate with the various governments that fall within this 3-1-1 boundary area to either collaborate or cooperate on staffing of the centralized center. But it became clear that the City of Columbus would build, maintain, staff and operate the Center. • If Dublin chooses not to opt out and allow the calls to be routed to Columbus, they would notify the caller that the location in which they are reporting a need for service is not in the City of Columbus and they will provide the caller a single 7-digit number to call for service. • When Columbus invited Dublin to the July meeting, it was apparently to serve as their required public notice to the Columbus area that would be impacted. Other jurisdictions are not yet aware of this plan. • Staff is recommending that the City Manager be directed to draft a letter to the City of Columbus to opt out of the call routing plan. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher complimented him on this informative presentation. In the meeting, was there discussion about the amount of money they have already spent on this project and plan to spend in the future? Mr. Sommerville responded that one of the problems Columbus encountered was the need for physical space. They have developed software in-house as opposed to spending $2-3 million to purchase it. They are planning on some staffing savings by consolidating various front end customer service response areas. They did not provide figures on the total costs. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher emphasized that the system is designed to handle any questions about government -not simply calls for service or complaints. It assumes that call center staff can be trained to refer calls to the appropriate department. She personally supports opting out of the Columbus system. Mr. Keenan commented that this would be well above and beyond what would be expected in a dispatching center. Emergency calls could be delayed by someone inquiring about a pothole. Mr. Sommerville commented that an asset tracking team centralizing work orders for the City is already in process. A centralized knowledge database is being developed as well, spearheaded by the City's executive and administrative assistants group. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher moved to direct staff to move forward with opting out of the Columbus 3-1-1 system at this time. Mr. Keenan seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Mayor Chinnici- Zuercher, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes. • Amendments to Personnel Code (Chapter 33) Ms. Brautigam stated that the Personnel Code currently states that if an employee is transferred from one position to another position in the City that is a lateral move, they are not subject to an additional probationary period. Staff is recommending anytime an employee shifts to another position in the City that they are required to serve a six month probationary period. The proposed changes to the Code were included in the packet. No action is necessary tonight, but if no action is taken by Council within 30 days, the change will automatically go into effect. Mrs. Boring asked for clarification about how this applies to a promotion. Would it trigger a probationary period? Ms. Brautigam stated that currently, a promotion to a higher grade does trigger a probationary period. The presumption is that it involves new job duties and a probationary period is appropriate. Mrs. Boring asked if the promotion is accepted by an employee, does it allow dismissal for any reason during that probationary period? Ms. Brautigam stated that is correct. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC., FORM NO. 10148 c o er age Held 20 Mr. Keenan asked if there has been an incident in recent months that prompted the need for this change. Ms. Brautigam responded that it is not to address a particular situation. What it does address is that employees want to continue to work in Dublin and do often apply for other positions within the city. It is important that they are subject to a probationary period in a new position, just as anyone hired from outside. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked if a probationary period affects elements such as vacation or sick leave accrual. Ms. Brautigam stated that this would not impact accruals or benefits. Mr. Keenan asked how someone like Dana McDaniel who moves from Service Director to Economic Development Director would be impacted. Ms. Brautigam stated that it would not affect Directors, as those positions serve at the pleasure of the City Manager. This would affect the classified service, non-union employees. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked if union employees who are promoted would be subject to a probationary period. Ms. Ruwette responded that it would depend upon the union contract and is a negotiated item. With the Steelworkers contract, the probationary period is 95 days. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked why the non-union employees would then be subject to a longer probation. Ms. Ruwette responded that the six-month probationary period is already in the Personnel Code for new hires and for promotions. This language makes the probationary period apply to any change of position -lateral transfer, demotion, or reinstatement. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked if the six month probation is already included for a promotion? Ms. Brautigam responded that is correct. This change would apply to a lateral transfer within the City. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked if lateral moves for a union employee trigger a probationary period. Ms. Ruwette responded that they do not - only a promotion situation triggers it. Mr. Keenan asked if the goal is to eliminate frivolous transfers as much as possible. Ms. Brautigam responded that staff instead wants the discretion to impose a probationary period for an internal lateral transfer employee similar to what would apply to an external candidate. The goal is to place the internal and external candidates on the same footing. She clarified that there are three categories of employees: union employees, non-union and classified employees, and directors who are at will employees. This would apply only to the non-union, classified employees. Mr. l_ecklider stated that it is a matter of accountability, and requiring someone who seeks out a new position to demonstrate the same abilities as someone who might apply from outside the organization. This is not unusual in personnel codes. Mrs. Boring stated that her concern is that the rules are not consistent with those negotiated by the union. It provides another reason for employees to consider unionizing. If a loyal employee makes a lateral transfer, it seems odd that they are required to serve another probationary period. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher responded that it relates not to the classification, but to the function. It is also a supervisor responsibility to provide supervision and training to enable a person to be successful in a new position. Mrs. Boring stated that she recalls examples where employees have transferred to a lateral position and it did not work out for various reasons. They were allowed to return to their previous job. She would want that consideration to continue to be provided to an employee if a lateral move does not work out. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of _ Dublin City Council _ _ - ___Meetn~ DAYTON LEGAL OLANK, INC., FORM NO. 70148 October 17, 2005 Page 17 Held 20 Mr. Lecklider stated that he would not view this as foreclosing that prospect. It is still within the discretion of the Administration to allow them to return to their previous position. Ms. Brautigam stated that it is not a guarantee. If the position they left is open, they can be considered for the position. It does not preclude that possibility. Mrs. Boring stated she would hope that current employees are given the opportunity to transfer to other positions. If it does not work out for whatever reason, they should be given more flexibility. Mr. Reiner asked if perhaps this should be referred to Administrative Committee if Council is not prepared to vote. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher suggested that a vote be called at this time. Mayor Chinnici- Zuercher moved to adopt the recommendation of staff that any change in position for a classified, non-union employee would require a probationary period. Ms. Salay seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mrs. Boring, no; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Keenan, no; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes. Mr. Reiner cautioned that he has concerns that this may encourage employees to join a union. Mr. McCash echoed this concern. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher requested reports twice a year on the impacts of this policy change so that Council is aware of any need to change the direction given. Ms. Brautigam responded that staff would submit reports including information about any employees moving to a new position and their longevity in the new position. Ms. Salay asked if the employees who change jobs are given an interim review during the six-month probation period so they are aware of their performance. Ms. Brautigam stated that it is required that the employee be given an evaluation at the end of the probationary period. Staff is working on providing timelier and more frequent reviews for employees. Ms. Ruwette noted that staff recommends a mid probationary review and a review at six months. If after six months their performance is not acceptable, the supervisor can extend that probationary period if desired. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher and Mr. Lecklider agreed that an employee should be given a three-month or mid-probationary review so that they are aware of any problems with their performance. COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS/COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE Mrs. Boring commented: 1. She left a phone message for Mr. Hammersmith regarding SR 161 and the recognition of the need for pavement repairs in the vicinity of Wendy's. 2. She appreciated the report from Ms. Gilger about the job losses and net gains by Dublin over the last couple of years. Thanks to staff for their continued efforts with economic development. Mr. Keenan: 1. Thanked staff for their efforts with the park dedication for Killilea. It was a well attended event. 2. Noted several Dublin Council Members and staff members attended the Stoney River Legendary Steak grand opening at Upper Metro Place. 3. Asked if there will be information in the newspaper or the web site about the closing of the Chaddington/Dublin Road entrance to Coventry Woods subdivision as part of the Dublin/Brand roundabout project. Mr. Hammersmith responded that public notices would be sent through all of the normal channels. The Chaddington/Dublin Road intersection will be closed to lower the roadway approximately 12-18 inches to place new curbs and widen the roadway to proper lane widths. This will take approximately 2-3 weeks. Mrs. Boring commented that the reason for the many delays have all been attributed to the utility company. Why weren't these delays built into the schedule at the outset? RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of_ Dublin City Council Meetin~_ DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC., FORM NO. 10148 - - - _ cfober 17;-200 - Fage'1~-- Held 20 Mr. Hammersmith responded that the delays are with AEP. They are restoring power to hurricane victims in the south. He estimates that completion will be by mid-November, weather cooperating. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked about the tunnel completion date. Mr. Hammersmith responded that they estimate within the next week. They are working diligently on the channel improvement in the same area. They hope that it will be open by the end of the month. Ms. Salay: 1. Apologized for arriving late. She attended the league volleyball tournament for the middle schools. Two Dublin teams brought home first and second place trophies. 2. Asked if staff is aware of the situation at the former Chi Chi's site where more limbs are cut from the trees each day. The perimeter landscaping has been nearly reduced to nothing. She wants to ensure that the site is compliant with Code in terms of landscaping. Dublin's Code should have provisions for lighting, as was proposed by Mr. McCash a few years ago. If such provisions were included in the Code, the problems would not occur in the future. She assumes that what will be installed on this site will not be attractive. She would be interested in staff working on such a Code, but she recognizes their level of activity at this time on other projects. 3. Thank you to Ms. Gilger for the informative and timely report regarding job gains and losses. 4. Asked that Mr. Hahn and Chief Epperson meet with her briefly following the meeting to discuss Indian Run park issues. Mr. Lecklider wished the Clerk of Council a Happy Birthday! Manor Chinnici-Zuercher: 1. Noted that there is a request to appoint Judy Beal as Acting Clerk of Council from October 19-21. Ms. Salay moved to appoint Judy Beal as Acting Clerk of Council from October 19 through October 21. Mr. Lecklider seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes. 2. Noted that a proposed calendar for 2006 Council meeting dates has been distributed. If Council Members have changes, please forward to the Clerk. Council can then adopt their 2006 schedule at the November 7 Council meeting. ~ The Clerk pointed out that Council might wish to consider changing the Monday, July 3~d meeting date in view of the Tuesday, July 4th holiday. 3. Noted that on Friday, November 11 at 9 p.m., the opening ceremonies of the National Throws Coaches Association will take place. They have requested that a Council Member welcome the group. This is a City holiday. If someone is available to do so, please contact the Clerk of Council. 4. Asked about labor negotiations and how the composition of the cross functional team is determined. Ms. Brautigam responded that staff tries to determine what kinds of issues will be discussed and seeks to include appropriate staff on the team. 5. Asked about the new private recreation center referenced in the PRAC meeting minutes. Ms. Brautigam stated that she believes this is focused on the LifeTime Fitness Center. 6. For the Parks and Recreation Master Plan process, has it been shared with Council yet? When will Council's input be solicited? Ms. Brautigam responded that Council input would be solicited closer to the end of the process. Council will have input via PRAC who will work with staff and the consultant selected for the project. Staff had put together information for Council at the end of August, prepared an RFP that was sent out, and has received three proposals. Staff is in the process of interviewing them at this time to determine the consultant selection. 7. Noted that she brought up this issue several months ago. In the September 15 Planning & Zoning Commission minutes regarding the Shoppes at Avery Place, RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeti _ n DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC., FORM NO. 10148 ~ - - - - - - 9 - - - October 17, 2005 Pa e 19 Held 20 the condition states that umbrellas and awnings shall exhibit no logo, signage names or advertising. While no one has any idea of what the buildings are, as the back of the buildings face Avery Road, the City is allowing posters on the windows facing Avery Road. It seems inconsistent that the City recommends that a water tower include a name and yet small businesses have no identification. Mrs. Boring stated that she viewed the site and agrees that tasteful signage on that side of the building would be reasonable. At the time, it could have been done through the PUD text. Now it would need a zoning amendment. Mr. McCash stated that it could be a minor text amendment, but why wasn't this addressed at the outset? Ms. Salay stated that it was reviewed by Planning & Zoning Commission and Council and not addressed. Mr. Keenan commented that he has heard from some small business owners in that center that their businesses are not doing well because of the lack of identification. Mrs. Boring stated that a reason it was not addressed is because of strict compliance with the sign code. It was considered in the same manner as other similar developments in terms of signage. Ms. Salay asked why businesses would choose this location knowing they would not have a sign facing Avery Road. Mr. Keenan commented that it is an odd project, with narrow streets and curb cuts. From a fire services perspective, he does not know how the fire equipment could access the site. He assumes there was a fire code change in process at that time. Ms. Brautigam summarized that staff did receive previous input from the Mayor about this issue, but staff felt it was the obligation of the property owner to come forward with a request to amend their PUD sign package. The property owner has not done so. Does Council want staff to investigate this further and assist the property owner in this? Mrs. Boring responded that the applicant has endured extensive scrutiny throughout the process and likely would not want to come before the Commission again, especially not knowing what the outcome could be. On the other hand, the outcome could not be guaranteed, not knowing what may be submitted. Mr. Smith commented that staff does not treat any sign request as a minor issue. Staff is not going to entertain a minor adjustment to the Code -signage was specifically not included in the minor adjustments, which can be approved administratively. The applicant can either request an amendment to the PUD or Council can initiate such an amendment, giving direction to Planning Commission about their concerns. Mr. Lecklider stated that whether the applicant brought this on himself or it is a consequence of the process, he is concerned with the appearance of Council favoring a property owner and not considering the signage issue on a global basis. Every business owner in the City would certainly benefit from more signage. The business owner should have been aware of the signage requirements at the time they entered into a lease agreement. However, he is not saying he would not consider some revision to the sign code to address what seems to be a problem. Mr. Keenan responded that he understands his position, but this could result in another Dublin Village Center situation. If the businesses cannot survive, empty storefronts will exist. Mr. McCash asked if the internal streets are public or private. Mr. Keenan stated that the streets are private. Mr. Keenan stated that there are also ingress and egress issues. Mr. Lecklider pointed out that the Rusty Bucket has enjoyed great success with the same type of signage as the previous tenant. People will eventually become acquainted with the RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of - _ Dublin City Council- - _ Meetin~_ - - DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC., FORM NO. 10148 - ~c~o6er~f7;~005- Page 20-____.__-- i Held 20 businesses in the Center and will find them. He would be willing to consider a global revisit of the sign code to address issues such as these. Mrs. Boring stated that she does not want to entertain a global change, but would prefer to handle these on a case by case basis as a PUD. Mr. Lecklider clarified that "global" does not imply a dramatic change in the City's sign code. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher summarized that there is not consensus on changing anything at this time. 8. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher invited everyone to share in a birthday cake for the Clerk of Council whose birthday was Saturday. Mr. McCash moved to adjourn the meeting. Mr. Lecklider seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mr. McCash, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes. The meeting was adjourned at 10:05 p.m. Mayor -Presiding Officer Clerk of Council