HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/03/2009RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of Dublin City Council__ Meeting
August 3, 2009
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher called the Monday, August 3 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.
Lecklider, Mr. Reiner and Ms. Salay.
Staff members present were: Mr. Foegler, Mr. Smith, Ms. Grigsby, Mr. McDaniel, Chief
Epperson, Ms. Crandall, Mr. Hahn, Mr. Hammersmith, Mr. Harding, Mr. Langworthy, Mr.
Burns, Ms. Ott, Mr. Racey, Mr. Thurman, Ms. Noble-Flading, Mr. Gunderman, Ms. Adkins,
and Ms. Worstall.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mr. Lecklider led the Pledge of Allegiance.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
• Regular Meeting of July 1, 2009
Mr. Gerber moved approval of the minutes.
Mr. Lecklider seconded the motion.
Vote on the motion: Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes, Mr. Lecklider, yes; Ms. Salay, yes;
Vice Mayor Boring, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes.
PROCLAMATION
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher presented a proclamation to the Washington Township
Firefighters in recognition of their continuous support of the Muscular Dystrophy
Association. This year, the Ohio Firefighters collected $665,000 for Jerry's Kids, ranking
fifth in the country in collections.
Don Sleich, representing Washington Township thanked Council, the businesses and the
citizens of Dublin for their support.
CORRESPONDENCE
There was no correspondence requiring Council action.
CITIZEN COMMENTS
Jan Walton Rozanski, Executive Director, Leadership Dublin thanked Council for their
continued support. She noted that there were 15 graduates of the Leadership Dublin
program in May 2009. The projects they were involved with included: the American Red
Cross blood drive; the Shamrock Sign of Pride development plan; and development of the
Welcome Warehouse program. Their youth program was very successful this year, as
well. Leadership Dublin members pursued many volunteer opportunities throughout the
City this year, and many Leadership Dublin alumni are serving on various boards,
commissions and committees throughout Dublin and the Greater Columbus area.
Leadership Dublin is in its 15`" year, and City Council's leadership has been invaluable in
helping them maintain their vision, mission and goals of preparing and empowering future
leaders for the community.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher thanked Ms. Rozanski and suggested that she present an
update to Council in six months. She noted that Council is currently reviewing Leadership
Dublin's request that Council appoint a community member to serve on their board.
LEGISLATION
SECOND READING/PUBLIC HEARING -ORDINANCES
Ordinance 31-09
Authorizing the City Manager to Enter into a Land Exchange Agreement with 7001
Post Road, LLC.
Mr. Smith stated there are no changes since the first reading. This will provide the City
the necessary access for the SR 161 project.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked if there is a request for emergency passage.
Mr. Smith responded that emergency action is not necessary.
Mr. Keenan stated that this legislation is identified as a land swap, but there is a significant
differential in the amount of land being exchanged of approximately .12 acres. He asked
for the justification for this request.
Mr. Smith responded that this exchange achieves the needed access more efficiently.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes ~f Dublin City Council Meetin4
August 3, 2009 Page 2
Mr. Keenan stated that at the current cost per acre, the differential could be valued at
$20,000 - $30,000. Why is the City giving more land than it is receiving in return?
Mr. Hammersmith responded that the driveway, through no fault of the owners, needs to
be relocated. In the interest of obtaining their cooperation and expediting the project, this
was the settlement proposed.
Mr. Keenan asked if any other process is required for the sign relocation mentioned in the
staff report? Is the area in a PUD?
Mr. Langworthy responded that the area is not in a PUD.
Vote on the Ordinance: Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Keenan, no; Vice Mayor Boring, yes; Mayor
Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes.
Ordinance 38-09
Authorizing the City Manager to Execute the First Amendment to the 1999 State
Infrastructure Bank Loan Agreement with the Ohio Department of Transportation for
the Avery-Muirfield/US 33 Interchange Improvement Project.
Ms. Grigsby stated that there have been no changes since the first reading.
Vote on the Ordinance: Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Keenan,
yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Vice Mayor Boring, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes.
INTRODUCTION/FIRST READING -ORDINANCES
Ordinance 39-09
Adopting the 2010-2014 Five-Year Capital Improvements Program.
Mr. Lecklider introduced the ordinance.
Ms. Grigsby stated that is the five year capital improvements plan, which the City updates
each year. CIP workshops are scheduled for Wednesday, August 12 and Wednesday,
August 19. Adoption of Ordinance 39-09 will be scheduled for the September 8 Council
meeting, pending the review at the workshops.
There will be a second reading/public hearing at the September 8 Council meeting.
Ordinance 40-09
Adopting and Enacting a Supplement (S-26) to the Code of Ordinances for the City
of Dublin.
Ms. Salay introduced the ordinance.
Mr. Smith stated that this is a housekeeping item to incorporate recent City and State
legislation into the City's Code of Ordinances.
Ms. Salay moved to dispense with the public hearing.
Mr. Gerber seconded the motion.
Vote on the motion: Mr. Lecklider, yes; Vice Mayor Boring, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr.
Reiner, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes.
Vote on the Ordinance: Mr. Gerber, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes;
Vice Mayor Boring, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes.
Ordinance 41-09
Amending Sections 153.019 through 153.025 (Residential Districts) of the Dublin
Codified Ordinances (Zoning Code) regarding Conditional and Permitted Uses.
(Case 09-042ADM)
Mr. Lecklider introduced the ordinance.
Ms. Noble-Flading stated that this Code modification has been brought forward based on
Council's request. It relates to two uses -religious and family day care facilities. The first
modification is to change religious uses from a permitted use to a conditional use in
residential districts and to include certain development requirements for review by the
Planning and Zoning Commission. The second modification relates to family day care and
is based upon the current provisions of the Ohio Revised Code, which require that Type B
child care facilities be permissive uses rather than conditional uses. The modification to
religious uses will result in a required review by the Planning and Zoning Commission to
ensure they are compatible with the surrounding residential communities. This Code
modification will not affect existing religious uses. The second Code modification for child-
care facilities is related to fences. Currently, fences for the outdoor recreational use
associated with day care facilities are permitted to be chain link and 4-6 feet in height,
RECORD OF PROCEEDfNGS
Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting
August 3, 2009
Page 3
which conflicts with the City's fence standards. The Planning and Zoning Commission
requested this language be modified to require that the fences meet existing City Code.
Ms. Salay asked if the change would affect existing uses.
Ms. Noble-Flading stated that it would not affect existing uses, but rather future
modifications to their fences.
Ms. Salay summarized that if a church desired to expand in the future, that expansion
would then be subject to this ordinance.
Ms. Noble-Flading confirmed that is correct.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher inquired the cost of implementation of this Code change to
churches.
Ms. Noble-Flading responded that the City's current permitting fees are approximately
$1,200 - $1,300.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that her concern is with the additional cost for churches,
which already have difficulty raising sufficient funds for expansions. It also appears that
each time the church has an expansion, it would be necessary for them to go through a
separate conditional use permit process.
Mr. Keenan stated that churches in a PUD would not be required to do so.
Ms. Noble-Flading confirmed that churches in a PUD with a final development plan
approved that includes future expansions would not be required to obtain conditional use
permits for each phase.
Ms. Salay noted that churches in a PUD would not be required to do so, but churches in a
straight zoning district would have to do so.
Ms. Salay asked about the City's current fees related to church expansions.
Ms. Noble-Flading responded that the fees would be related to the construction itself, such
as electrical and sign permits.
Ms. Salay stated that the cost of the conditional use application and review is $1,200.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that the church would also have the additional costs
associated with an architect, who would have to attend multiple City review meetings.
Ms. Noble-Flading responded the $1,200 conditional use costs are the same as the
building permitting fees; it is just a matter of the timing of the submission of the expansion
plans.
Vice Mayor Boring stated that her concern is that this proposed modification appears to be
targeting religious uses. For the preceding six uses, there are no buffering requirements;
but for religious uses, this amendment would require, namely, that "the design, materials,
bulk and height of buildings shall be compatible with and sufficiently buffered from
surrounding development to mitigate any potential adverse impact(s)." She believes that
the "board and care of animals" use -- for example -- would warrant more buffering
requirements. A church use is more compatible with a neighborhood, as it is not in use
every day of the week. Another concern is with the reference to "private schools with
students in residence." Wouldn't any private school be considered a conditional use?
Ms. Noble Flading responded that this entire amendment was intended to be a limited
modification prior to the more comprehensive Zoning Code update.
Vice Mayor Boring responded that when Council requested a modification to institutional
uses, she specifically requested that the change focus on all institutional uses and not
focus or discriminate against churches or religious uses. It would not be difficult to include
the other institutional uses. In addition, why was "child care" eliminated from the language
in Section B (2)? She does not object to including child care in a home. I
Ms. Noble-Flading clarified that a name change/replacement was made to the term "child
care;" the category was not eliminated.
Vice Mayor Boring stated that private schools are identified as "permitted uses," but they
are institutional uses as well.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked about child care in a home and the type of use that is
considered. If the home child care has over six children, is it considered a conditional use?
Ms. Noble-Flading responded that if the use involves child care of over six children, no
modification is proposed to this section of the Code. This modification addresses only
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting
August 3, 2009 Page 4
Held 20
private home care services provided by the resident of the home where they care for no
more than six children.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher inquired if this is a new State requirement.
Ms. Noble-Flading responded that it is not; however, this modification proposes to update
the City Code to be consistent with the State standards.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher inquired if the child care facility still must meet the State's
requirements.
Ms. Noble-Flading responded affirmatively.
Mr. Lecklider requested clarification regarding private schools as a permitted use in a
residential district. Is there a distinction in terms of the review process? Would it be
possible to build a private school in a residential district with different standards than those
for modifications to an existing church?
Ms. Noble-Flading responded that the review process for the two uses would be different.
Mr. Lecklider stated that what is proposed tonight is in response to the issues Council
raised regarding the Indian Run Church expansion application. He does not object to
applying the same conditional use standards used for churches to some of the other uses
within a residential district. He does disagree with the comment that churches are used
only occasionally throughout a week. He believes churches are used nearly seven days a
week, and often include child care facilities that operate five days a week.
Mr. Keenan stated that Council gave direction to staff a few weeks ago to draft these
amendments in response to the concerns about the Indian Run Church application.
Mr. Foegler confirmed that these amendments were Council-initiated. It is important to
recognize that this is an interim measure; it does not address everything related to
conditional uses. The more comprehensive Zoning Code update will do so. This
modification will ensure that this particular use undergoes the additional design review and
scrutiny of a conditional use permit. He does not know why the process was not set up in
a manner that could apply to all buildings in a conditional use category. If Council desires
that all conditional use structures have the same set of design standards, the language
can be modified.
Vice Mayor Boring stated that a review of the attached minutes of the previous Council
meeting reflect that Council requested that institutional uses, not only churches, be
included in the amendment. A piecemeal approach has been used, and it needs to be
more comprehensive.
Mr. Foegler stated that staff can draft a more comprehensive change. However, the
amendments would require review by the Planning and Zoning Commission.
Mr. Lecklider stated that everyone is aware of previous examples within the community
where there have been expansions that have not been compatible with existing structures
or with the surrounding development. There have been expansions constructed of metal
panels, which are not compatible with any neighborhood. That was the issue he hoped to
address.
Mr. Gerber noted that this issue arose with the property owned by the Indian Run Church,
which was in a PUD that had lapsed and therefore reverted to a straight zoning. The
straight zoning district permits expansions to be made without a review. Therefore, this
minor modification was requested to serve as a safety net for future such cases. Other
institutional uses could be included, however, in the amendments being considered.
Vice Mayor Boring inquired about the boarding and care of animals use.
Ms. Salay responded that use is in a rural district. This modification addresses religious
uses in both rural and residential districts.
Mr. Gerber stated that the ordinance as drafted attempts to address other issues, as well.
Vice Mayor Boring stated that the other issue addressed is child care facilities, not others.
A general statement requiring the review of design standards could have applied to all
uses in the district.
Mr. Lecklider stated that in the interest of expediency, he recommends that this
amendment be approved with the understanding that staff will address in the future the
other concerns raised tonight.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of ~ubiir~-City Council Meetin~___
Held August 3, 2009 20 Page 5
Mr. Foegler noted that any further changes would require review by the Planning and
Zoning Commission.
Mr. Reiner commended staff for providing the requested Code amendment quickly. He
believes the language achieves what was requested. He does concur with the request
that the other conditional uses be included in future amendments-
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that a second reading/public hearing of Ordinance 41-09
is scheduled for the August 17 Council meeting.
Ordinance 42-09
Amending Section 153.002 and Creating Section 153.099 of the Dublin Codified
Ordinances (Zoning Code) regarding Outdoor Seasonal Plant Display and Sales.
(Case 09-045ADM)
Ms. Salay introduced the ordinance.
Mr. Gunderman stated that this Code amendment has been prepared per Council's
request at the June 15, 2009 meeting. The amendment will require an administrative
permit for the display and sale of live plant material as an accessory use for any retail
establishment, regardless of its current zoning classification. The Code amendment
provides specific requirements limiting the duration, type, location, and size of outdoor
display areas to ensure consistent treatment of outdoor display areas for retail uses selling
live plant materials as an accessory use. The proposed language reflects a time period of
March 1 to November 1, as recommended by the Planning & Zoning Commission at their
July 9th meeting. As with Ordinance 41-09, the amendment proposed is limited; the more
comprehensive Zoning Code update will address associated areas within the Code.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher referred to item C (2) of the proposed language which requires
"at least five feet of clear passage along sidewalks and paved areas adjacent to the
display shall be kept open for pedestrian travel." The Bridge Street Kroger displays live
plants in front of the store, and there does not appear to be five feet available for
pedestrians.
Mr. Gunderman responded that this specific location was also noted at the Planning and
Zoning Commission meeting. They would not have the required space available; it would
be necessary for them to somewhat relocate the site.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked if the language prohibits the display of pots for the plants.
Mr. Gunderman responded that they are not prohibited for display with the plants;
however, display/sale of pots without plants is prohibited.
Mr. Gerber requested clarification of the effective dates -March 1 through November 1.
On page four, it states that all display racks, shelves, plant containers, furniture and
equipment must be removed no later than December 31 of the approved year.
Mr. Gunderman responded that the date should be corrected to November 1.
Mr. Gerber referred to C (3), which states, "No display area for a single building or tenant
space shall exceed 1,000 square feet in area." How was that number determined?
Mr. Gunderman responded that the space of two or three existing sites was estimated,
allowing for some flexibility.
Vice Mayor Boring stated that some stores do not have that amount of space available.
Mr. Gunderman responded that the maximum amount of permitted space is 1,000 feet.
Mr. Gerber stated that some stores have more available space than others.
Mr. Gunderman responded that was discussed. When the Code update is undertaken, it
may be useful to use a ratio based upon the square footage of the store.
Mr. Gerber asked where Christmas wreaths are addressed in the legislation.
Mr. Gunderman responded that another section of the Code already addresses
display/sale of holiday cut materials and will continue to be used until the Zoning Code
update.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher inquired if that section would be applicable to other retail stores -
not locations specifically for the sale of Christmas trees -- for display of wreaths and
summer flowers.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of
Dublin City Council Meeting
,0,48
August 3, 2009
20 Page 6 I
i
Mr. Gunderman stated that the other section of Code relates to pumpkins or Christmas
trees and related materials. Those sites are often not connected to a retail store, such as
a Christmas tree lot.
Mr. Gerber asked if the display/sale of pumpkins could be covered by this amendment
because it would occur within the specified time period of March 1 through November 1.
Mr. Gunderman responded that Ordinance 42-09 covers live plants only -not cut
pumpkins.
Mr. Keenan added that cut flowers would be similar.
Mr. Gunderman responded that is correct; cut flowers would not be permitted in the
outdoor displays.
Mr. Gunderman clarified that cut pumpkins and Christmas trees are permitted by the other
Code section.
Ms. Salay stated that Council requested that staff quickly provide an amendment related
to live, outdoor plant sales to address an immediate need. However, when the
comprehensive Code update occurs, it might be advisable to have a provision related to
both live plants and cut plants.
Mr. Gerber stated that the 1,000 feet requirement may not be applicable to all
establishments selling plants.
Mr. Gunderman responded that 1,000 feet is the maximum area permitted, assuming that
the requirements for pedestrian access and no encroachment into the right-of-way or
parking spaces have been met.
Vice Mayor Boring asked if that would be a 1,000-foot footprint with the possibility of
several elevations within it.
Mr. Gunderman responded that tiered storage racks could be used within a 1,000-
footprint.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked if this regulation would apply to nurseries.
Mr. Gunderman responded that it would not. The last paragraph provides that
clarification. However, it would apply to small retail florists. They would be required to
submit a drawing of the display footprint with their administrative permit application.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked what the permit fee would be.
Mr. Gunderman responded that the fee has not yet been determined.
Mr. Gerber asked the cost of the permit for display of pumpkins or Christmas trees.
Mr. Gunderman responded that the fee is minimal.
There will be a second reading/public hearing on August 17tH
Ordinance 43-09
Authorizing the City Manager to Enter Into an Economic Development Agreement
with the City of Columbus, Ohio.
Mr. Lecklider introduced the ordinance.
Mr. Foegler stated that staff has been working for a period of time with the City of
Columbus on the terms of this economic development agreement. Ordinance 44-09,
which follows on the agenda, is companion legislation. The current water and sewer
agreements with the City of Columbus established three zones beyond the City's current
service area: an exclusive Dublin expansion area, an exclusive Columbus expansion area,
and a large area to the northwest identified as a negotiated expansion area. In essence,
neither party was permitted to pursue or accept annexations in the negotiated expansion
area until there was an agreement on the terms and conditions for that area. Ordinance
43-09 is the first major component in establishing the terms and conditions of such
negotiated growth area for Dublin. If approved, a 277-acre area would be designated as
exclusive Dublin growth area. This area is located along U.S. 33 near the Post/SR 161
interchange. The basic terms of the agreement are outlined in the staff memo provided
with this legislation. Primarily, Dublin would retain the first fifty percent of income tax
revenues derived from the area in order to be compensated for infrastructure and service
delivery. The remaining 50 percent revenue would be split between the cities of Columbus
and Dublin. In addition, $1 million dollars will be paid to Columbus for the entire 277
acres, calculated on a pro-rated basis as areas are annexed to Dublin. This legislation
does not cause any annexation to occur; it simply satisfies the terms and conditions of the
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of ~ubiin City. Council Meetin_~
August 3, 2009
Page 7
1993 sewer and water agreement with the City of Columbus to designate this area as an
exclusive Dublin expansion area. This will allow property owners within that area to seek
annexation. In July 2009, Columbus City Council passed legislation authorizing this
economic development agreement and amendments to the water and sewer service
agreements. He noted that emergency action will be requested on the two ordinances at
the August 17 meeting.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher requested clarification of the "non compete" considerations in the
event the income tax rate for Columbus increases.
Ms. Grigsby stated that Dublin has a high degree of influence regarding the location of
companies moving to Dublin. No Columbus companies would be encouraged to locate in
this area. The amount is based upon the income tax revenues generated by the company
within the revenue sharing area, which would be Dublin's two percent income tax. The
two and one-half percent rate would cause the cap to be higher.
Mr. Foegler stated that no Columbus-based firms would be targeted for this area. They
would be directed to other Dublin areas.
Vice Mayor Boring stated that the language indicates Dublin would pay 100% of the
income taxes to Columbus. It does not indicate it would be the Columbus rate; it would be
Dublin's rate.
Ms. Grigsby responded that Dublin's rate of two percent would be what determines the
gross income tax revenues collected. The amount paid to Columbus would be based on
the two and one half percent calculation that the company had paid the previous year to
the City of Columbus.
Mr. Keenan stated that the necessary language has been used to protect Dublin in such a
situation.
Ms. Grigsby responded that the protection is provided. It is important to note that the "non
compete" terms also apply to Dublin companies. Therefore, if Dublin companies locate in
this area, Dublin receives 100% of the income tax revenue as well.
Mr. Keenan asked about the amount paid on the equity share - it is paid for each
annexation. Therefore, if an applicant sought application for 27.7 acres of the total 277
acres, the payment for this portion would be 10 percent of $1 million. Conceivably, this
could take one year or many years.
Mr. Foegler noted that it could conceivably never all be paid if property owners choose not
to annex to the City of Dublin.
Mr. Keenan asked about the capital improvements plan and the bullet point which
indicates 25 percent of gross income tax revenues derived from the EDA shall be credited
each year to Dublin, to reimburse Dublin for all improvements and ongoing maintenance.
So the reimbursement could continue into the future to maintain the roadways.
Mr. Foegler confirmed that is correct.
Mr. Keenan asked why the term of the agreement is 34 years.
Mr. Foegler responded that it is designed to coincide with the terms of the existing water
and sewer agreements.
Mr. Keenan asked about the governmental services section. Would the fire service
provider depend upon how the annexation came in?
Mr. Foegler responded that is correct. The issue could be dealt with at that time.
Mr. Keenan asked if it could be potentially handled differently for each annexation.
Mr. Foegler confirmed it could be considered on a case-by-case basis by Council.
There will be a second reading/public hearing at the August 17 Council meeting.
Ordinance 44-09
Authorizing the City Manager to Enter into a Modification of the Water and Sewer
Agreements with the City of Columbus, Ohio.
Ms. Salay introduced the ordinance.
Mr. Foegler noted that Ordinance 43-09 establishes an economic development agreement
for the 277-acre area. The geography of that 277 acres creates arevenue-sharing area.
In addition, the existing sewer and water agreements must be amended to make that
same 277-acre area as exclusive Dublin expansion area under the sewer and water
agreements with Columbus.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of n~+k~in_G+ty Cour}cil Meeting
August 3, 2009
Page 8
Mr. Keenan stated that under the capital improvement portion, it contemplates
reimbursement for all the improvements and the cost of ongoing maintenance. Does that
include ongoing maintenance of the water and sewer lines?
Ms. Grigsby stated that the water and sewer maintenance costs would be paid from the
water and sewer funds, which are funded by user fees and capacity charges.
Mr. Keenan stated that the language indicates that a capital improvement plan would be
established for the 277 acres that identifies the necessary transportation and utility
infrastructure improvements. It appears Dublin would be able to reimburse itself for the
cost of those improvements.
Ms. Grigsby responded that income tax revenues can be used for any purpose. However,
Dublin's intent is to fund water and sewer improvements through the water and sewer user
and capacity fees paid. The income tax dollars will be directed toward transportation,
parks and recreation, and other such improvements.
Mr. Foegler stated that this provision states that Columbus will not bear any financial
responsibility for the capital improvements; Dublin will carry that responsibility. In
exchange for that, the 25 percent of the income tax that is both the Columbus set aside for
capital improvements and Dublin's set aside for capital improvements will be exclusively
Dublin's. Dublin must provide a capital improvements plan for infrastructure.
Mr. Keenan stated that some of the funds could be diverted to fund utilities rather than
roadways.
Mr. Foegler responded that is possible, but the level of roadway and infrastructure
improvements needed in this area will require all those funds.
~~ There will be a second reading/public hearing at the August 17 Council meeting.
Ordinance 45-09
Amending the City of Dublin Residential Building Code to Comply with State Law.
Ms. Salay introduced the ordinance.
Mr. Foegler provided background on the legislation. Several years ago, Dublin adopted
the State building code by reference, including some specific Dublin amendments.
Several of those amendments were challenged by the State, particularly those dealing
with electric service, ceiling height and stair design. Regarding the issues of ceiling height
and stair design, the State prevailed in two levels of court. Dublin prevailed on the electric
provisions. Dublin does not intend to pursue the litigation further. Therefore, this
legislation is to amend the original adoption of the State Code, eliminating the two
provisions in which Dublin did not prevail in court.
Mr. Tyler noted that, following this amendment, the City will then become certified with the
State of Ohio to enforce the residential building Code. Because staff members are certified
with the State, there was no jeopardy for the City during the litigation.
Mr. Reiner requested clarification of the City's intent with the litigation.
Mr. Tyler responded that in regard to the stair height provision, Dublin was attempting to
mirror the international residential building code. Because Dublin's stair height was more
shallow, it is safer to negotiate. With respect to ceiling height, this was an effort to avoid a
substandard basement with a height of less than 7 feet, 6 inches. The Building Division
processes a large number of permits for basement remodels in Dublin.
Mr. Foegler noted that staff is exploring other means to incentivize higher basement
ceilings, because this provision has benefited Dublin residents.
Ms. Salay inquired the current height requirements.
Mr. Tyler responded that Dublin's requirement was 7 feet, 6 inches. However, the State
Code is 7 feet, and in some cases, 6 feet 8 inches.
Mr. Smith stated that homebuilders in Dublin are encouraged to use Dublin's standard
rather than the minimum State Code, as that is the customary practice in Dublin.
Mr. Reiner stated that Dublin has attempted to ensure that homeowners would have the
future opportunity to finish their basement areas and not be limited to a space that is
adequate only for storage or laundry facilities.
Mr. Tyler responded that is correct. This year, several of the homes in the Parade of
Homes had basements finished as theater rooms, which require the excess ceiling height.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of Dublin Gity Cour~sil
DAYTON LEGAL BLANK. INC.. FORM NO. 70748
Held
August 3, 2009
Meeting
Page 9
20
Mr. Reiner stated that Council appreciates the Building Division's efforts to establish a
higher standard for Dublin.
Vice Mayor Boring inquired if the ADA standards specify a recommended stair depth and
width.
Mr. Tyler responded that they do not. The ADA standards apply to commercial
developments, not to single-family residential.
There will be a second reading/public hearing at the August 17 Council meeting.
INTRODUCTION/PUBLIC HEARING -RESOLUTIONS
Resolution 34-09
Accepting the Lowest/Best Bid for the Emerald Parkway/Innovation Drive
Intersection Improvements.
Mr. Lecklider introduced the resolution.
Mr. Hammersmith stated that on July 5th, five bids were opened for this project. The
estimated cost of the project was $475,000. This improvement will provide for a traffic
signal at the intersection of Emerald Parkway and Innovation Drive to facilitate future
access to the Interstate Gas Supply (IGS} headquarters, currently under construction east
of the intersection. The project will also include the construction of a 330-foot southbound
left turn lane into IGS and a 210-foot turn lane northbound onto Innovation Drive. There is
an existing 225-foot turn lane on Innovation Drive itself. This particular project did not
require any additional right-of-way. It will involve the construction of a southbound turn
lane and the installation of the traffic signal. The lowest/best bid was received from
Decker Construction Company in the amount of $361,104, which is approximately 24°/G
less than the estimate. The City has had favorable experience with this company in the
past. The internal completion date for the turn lanes is October 30, 2009, but the signal
will not be operational until January 15, 2010.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked when the IGS construction is scheduled to be completed.
Mr. McDaniel responded that staff recently met with IGS to receive a progress report.
The completion date is set for spring 2010, although it could be earlier.
Ms. Salay asked if this project is being funded through a TIF.
Mr. Hammersmith responded that this is being funded through the existing Thomas Kohler
TIF district.
Ms. Salay asked if this signal will operate similarly to the signals further up Emerald
Parkway at Cardinal Health and Verizon.
Mr. Hammersmith responded that it depends upon the volume of traffic on Innovation
Drive. After installation, a recount will be conducted. If it can be operated as a peak hour
signal, that will occur; if it cannot, it will be operated 24 hours/day. The light will be on loop
detection at Innovation Drive and the IGS driveway.
Wallace Maurer, 7451 Dublin Road stated that there is a difference of $100,000 between
the lowest and accepted bid and the highest bid. There is also more than $100,000
difference between the lowest bid and the City Engineer's estimate. What is the reason
for that degree of disparity?
Mr. Hammersmith responded that it represents the volatility and unpredictability of the
current market. What is observed in the bids is a fluctuation in profit margins. Contractors
are competing for work and sometimes settling for a smaller profit.
Vote on the Resolution: Mr. Gerber, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Vice Mayor
Boring, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes.
Resolution 35-09
Accepting the Lowest/Best Bid for the Avery-Muirfield Drive over U.S. 33 Barrier
Improvements Project
Ms. Salay introduced the resolution.
Mr. Hammersmith stated that this project was bid previously and received only one bid, for
$756,000. That bid exceeded the City Engineer's estimate of $730,000. The project was
re-bid, and three bids were received. The lowest/best bid was submitted by the Righter
Company in the amount of $694,299. This project involves provision of additional
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of
Dublin City Council - Meeting _ .
INC-. Fnri7:1 NO. 70748
August 3, 2009 ,~~ Page 10
protection along Avery-Muirfield Drive at the SR 161/US 33 interchange. Steel-backed
timber guardrail will be provided behind the bikepaths along the east and west sides of
Avery-Muirfield Drive, north and south of the Avery-Muirfield Drive bridge over U.S. 33,
with connections to rebuilt concrete bridge parapet walls. The existing stone walls located
at the corners of the US 33 ramps will be reconstructed with curvature following the
roadway radii to allow for proper connection of the guardrail ends. The guardrail
extending from the stone walls east along the ramps will be deep-beam steel guardrail.
The project is scheduled to begin immediately with an anticipated completion date of
November 20, 2009. The City has had previous favorable experience with the Righter
Company.
Mr. Keenan asked which company submitted the solitary bid during the first round.
Mr. Hammersmith responded that Double Z Construction Company submitted the first bid.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked about the impact on the roadway during construction.
Mr. Hammersmith responded that a lane closure would be in effect from the hours of 8
a.m. to 4 p.m. on weekdays. One open lane would be maintained. Similarly, one bikepath
will be kept open at all times.
Ms. Salay asked if it is the City's practice to communicate information regarding roadway
projects, such as this, to the Dublin Schools. This project will significantly impact them.
Mr. Hammersmith responded that the City's practice is to communicate with emergency
services -police and fire services, and when school is in session, communicate to the
school district bus garage to make them aware of which routes will be impacted.
Mr. Lecklider asked about the anticipated start date.
Mr. Hammersmith responded that apre-construction meeting will be held and a schedule
will be shared at that time. Following that meeting, he will communicate the actual start
date to Council.
Mr. Lecklider asked if three lanes of traffic on Avery-Muirfield would remain open at all
times.
Mr. Hammersmith responded that is the intent. However, an additional lane could
potentially be closed to accelerate the project.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that the Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT) has
reviewed these improvements and approved them through the issuance of a limited-
access right-of-way permit.
Vote on the Resolution: Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Gerber,
yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Vice Mayor Boring, yes.
Resolution 36-09
Authorizing the City Manager to Enter into an Agreement with Rumpke of Ohio, Inc.
to be the Sole Provider of Solid Waste, Recyclable Materials and Yard Waste
Collection Services for Waste Generated by Residential Units, Municipal Facilities,
and During Special Events.
Mr. Gerber introduced the resolution.
Mr. Burns stated that the current solid waste contract with Rumpke of Ohio expires on
December 31, 2009, and the Solid Waste Consortium has bid the contract for solid waste
services for a term of three, five or seven years. Solid waste services were bid in two
different ways. First, separate bids were solicited for yard waste processing and recycling
processing. Secondly, a bid was solicited for collection services, including dumping fees
associated with trash. Rumpke has proposed an alternative bid to provide the existing
contract services (trash, recycling, yard waste and collections) with a fuel adjustment
clause added. Staff recommends a five-year contract (2010-2014) with Rumpke,
including two, one-year renewal options. The cost would remain constant for five years at
$15.89/month/household. This price reflects a nine percent increase over the current
consortium contract price of $14.57/month/household in the first year, with no further
increase for the next four years. Tipping fees for yard waste and recyclable materials will
remain at $0/ton for all five years. Per the fuel adjustment clause, both the Contractor and
the City of Dublin may request an adjustment for collection services if diesel fuel prices
increase or decrease by $.25/gallon or more. The base price of diesel fuel was
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of publin Cit~r Councia Meetin~___
August 3, 2009 ,~~ Page 11
$2.17/gallon on May 18, 2009. This price will serve as the base price of diesel fuel for
purposes of calculating fuel adjustments during the contract period. On July 20, 2009, the
EIA reported diesel fuel prices for this region at $2.47/gallon. This results in a $.25
increase per the fuel adjustment clause and increases Dublin's solid waste removal price
per house per month by $.08 or an annual increase of $12,138. All ten Consortium
community members concur that the Rumpke bid was the lowest and best bid received,
and staff recommends approval of a five-year contract.
Mr. Reiner requested clarification of the statement that Republic and Waste Management
submitted no-bid letters. Did they not bid for all of the consortium communities?
Mr. Burns responded that five or six contractors attended the pre-bid meeting, but only
Rumpke submitted a bid.
Mr. Reiner asked for the reason the other contractors did not submit bids.
Mr. Burns responded that he believes that it could be because those companies preferred
not to incur the additional capital costs for equipment to provide services for 55,000
houses under the contract.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher inquired if the additional fuel adjustment cost would automatically
go into effect.
Mr. Burns responded that it would not automatically go into effect; Rumpke would initiate
that adjustment.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher inquired about the basis and how frequently Rumpke could
request an increase.
Mr. Burns responded that the base amount is based upon a $2.17/gallon cost, established
May 18. The amount is obtained from the U.S. Department of Energy. As of July 27, the
cost is $2.50 per gallon for the midwest region. Rumpke can request an increase
quarterly, or if the fuel costs decrease, the City can request an adjustment downward.
The cost would have to be consistently $.25 higher for the entire quarter for them to make
such a request.
Mr. Keenan asked for confirmation that the maximum amount per household would be
$16.22 -even at the worst case scenario.
Mr. Burns responded that there is actually no cap on the fuel price provision.
Mr. Keenan asked if the five-year contract would lock in the costs of tipping fees.
Mr. Burns responded that they are not locked in; they are actually apass-through fee to
the City.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that there was not a fuel provision contained in the
previous contract. This is a new cost. Would the potential $50,000 annual increase be for
Dublin alone or the full consortium?
Mr. Burns responded that it would be for Dublin alone.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that since a $.25/gallon increase in price has already
occurred since the price was set in the contract, the cost per household for the contract
could be $16.22, not $15.89.
Mr. Burns responded that the $.25/gallon increase would result in a $.08/household
increase - not a $.25 increase.
Ms. Salay inquired why the contract would not be based on the cost of fuel at the time the
contract begins, which would be January 1, 2010.
Mr. Burns responded that the contract must be based upon the cost of fuel when the bids
were submitted.
Ms. Salay noted that, unfortunately, the cost was at a low point in May.
Mr. Burns noted that for Rumpke to be permitted to request the increase, the cost must
remain $.25/gallon higher for the entire quarter. If it fluctuates downward, they cannot
request an increase.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher inquired if the increase would be retroactive.
Mr. Burns responded that it would not.
Mr. Keenan stated that under this bid, the only cost that remains constant is
$15.89/monthhousehold. However, the fuel costs and tipping costs can change.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting
NO_1 ~, 48_
August 3, 2009 ^~ Page 12
Mr. Burns responded that it would not be possible to secure more than a one year contract
without including those adjustments. In addition, the tipping fees have always been
passed through to Dublin.
Vice Mayor Boring inquired if the $15.89 includes the current tipping fee.
Mr. Burns responded that the $15.89 was based upon the tipping fee at the time of the
bids. It is now $1.25/ton higher.
Mr. Keenan stated that the current cost per household would actually be $15.89 plus the
$.08 and the $1.25 tipping fee.
Mr. Burns responded the tipping fee is not charged on a per household basis, but on a per
ton basis. Dublin generates approximately 12,000 tons/year.
Mr. Keenan noted that there is no tipping fee for recyclables or yard waste. Therefore, the
greener the City is, the less the cost.
Ms. Salay stated that the staff report indicates the remaining 4,000 households will soon
receive 64-gallon recycling bins.
Mr. Burns confirmed they would be distributed in September.
Ms. Salay stated that Dublin pays this collection cost for its residents. What do the other
communities do?
Mr. Burns responded that it varies. Some communities pass on all the costs to their
residents; some pass on a portion of the costs.
Mr. Lecklider inquired what the projected solid waste collection costs would be for the City
next year.
Mr. Burns responded that in 2009, the cost will be approximately $2.2 million for solid
waste collection. He estimates the 2010 costs will be approximately $2.4 million.
Wallace Maurer, 7451 Dublin Road asked staff to define tipping fees.
Mr. Burns responded that the tipping fee is the cost per ton for dumping at the Franklin
County landfill.
Vote on the Resolution: Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes;
Vice Mayor Boring, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes.
OTHER
• Proposed Homeowners Association Grant Program
Ms. Worstall reported that staff is recommending that the proposed "Beautify your
Neighborhood" matching grant program be referred to a committee of Council for more in
depth discussion. She briefly outlined the history of the proposal. CSAC reviewed the
proposal over three meetings during 2008 and 2009 and provided feedback to staff
regarding the grant materials. The goal of the grant is to provide funding assistance and
professional support to City of Dublin homeowners associations for high quality,
sustainable beautification projects. These are projects that will benefit and enhance the
community. The grants are not need-based, and the grants require that homeowners
associations demonstrate that their project can be maintained by the association into the
future, regardless of the amount of the grant. The purpose of the grant is to assist Dublin
homeowners associations with new or rehabilitation projects that are visible from the
public right-of-way. The projects must benefit the homeowners association and the
community. The grant is not for ongoing or maintenance projects, such as turf
maintenance, weed control, mulching of existing landscaping, lighting or sign repairs.
Rehabilitation projects include such items as updating entry features or stone walls and
fences. HOAs must comply with all Dublin Codes and standards, and the grant is not
intended to pay for permits, tap fees, irrigation systems, sprinkler systems, or pond
aerators.
Staff recommends referral of the matching grant program to a committee of Council -
potentially the Community Development Committee -for in depth discussion regarding
requirements and selection criteria; funding levels; and timing of implementation.
Vice Mayor Boring moved referral to the Community Development Committee.
Mr. Keenan seconded the motion.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of Meeting
Dublin City Council-
FORM ~O. 10148
August 3, 2009 ,~~ Page 13
Ms. Salay thanked staff and CSAC for all of their work and thorough discussion of this
proposal.
Wallace Maurer, 7451 Dublin Road asked if current homeowners associations cover the
entire residential area of Dublin, and if not, is there aid available for individual
homeowners who might have some ideas for increased beautification? He had talked at
one time of totem poles being installed at the entrance to his property.
Mr. Keenan suggested that he attended the Committee hearings on this matter.
Vote on the motion: Vice Mayor Boring, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mayor
Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Ms. Salay, yes.
• Site Selection for the 2010 Bicentennial Art in Public Places Installation
Mr. Guion, Executive Director of the Dublin Arts Council reported that the Dublin Arts
Council has received a grant from the Ohio Arts Council through the Jobs Stimulus
Package. There were 135 applications from arts organizations throughout the state, and
21 received awards. DAC received an award, and the funding will help to retain two
contracted employees for the remainder of the year.
Mr. Guion gave a presentation outlining the process, the parameters, and the site
recommendation for the bicentennial public art project. The call to artists will be national
in scope; the artist must live and work in the U.S.; professional artists with relevant
experience will be considered; and the contract will be with a single artist project manager,
who may choose to work with a team. The call will be placed on a variety of outlets to
reach a large number of artists quickly and economically. The budget for the project is
$150,000 - an all inclusive budget. The fees include travel, materials, shipping and
installation. Dublin Arts Council will assemble a Bicentennial Art in Public Places
Committee, which will draw from across-section of the community for the selection
process. The community will be invited to attend and ask questions during the finalist
presentations, and they will then be asked to vote. Their input will be given a weighted
percentage in the selection process. The timeline calls for an artist response to a request
for qualifications with an expanded letter of interest by October 16; finalists will be selected
in early November and will have one month to develop their proposals; presentations to
the Committee and the community will take place on Tuesday, December 8, with the
winning choice announced on December 10. The artwork will be dedicated in October
2010.
He noted that DAC staff and City staff met on July 22 to discuss potential sites for the
project. The meeting began by identifying what success would look like for the project.
Such visions included delivery of the piece in 2010; that timing could occur shortly after
the Dublin Historical Society Founders' Day event; the community must have a voice in
the selection of the artwork; the location must have meaning to the community; the artwork
resonates with both young and old, and with new and long-time residents; and the artwork
is clearly linked to the bicentennial theme and is relevant to Dublin's history. DAC
reviewed the community and location criteria with City staff and used them as a checklist
in determining the best site to recommend to Council. The criteria include: historical
significance; symbolic relevance; educational potential with the site; overall impact to
natural or constructed environment; minimal disturbance to the site, preserving the site's
integrity; accessibility of the site by vehicle and pedestrians; adequate parking; ADA
compliance; highly visible; and significance in the City's history.
With regard to the location, DAC considered the potential future development at the site;
how it is currently being used; safety for both installation and for visitors; ample
accessibility for the artist to install the work; stability of the site with regard to load and
potential for ground shifting and other architectural concerns; availability of electricity;
underground wiring or plumbing, which may present an installation opportunity; view of the
site from multiple vantage points; and no planned future construction or vegetation growth
that will compromise the site lines.
From an artistic perspective, the DAC looked for a site that would lend itself well to a
variety of artistic considerations: the artwork will enhance the site; will be thoughtfully
created, incorporating ample research and embracing Dublin's history; the art is respective
and sensitive to the integrity of the site and the community; the artwork has
transformational potential, allowing visitors to contemplate Dublin's history, and Dublin's
present and future; the artwork will have lasting impact in the community and beyond;
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeti_n~
August 3, 2009 Page 14
Held 20
artist will bring their unique gift of creative approach to the project and artwork will be
historically and aesthetically strong, resonating with the community.
After visiting the various sites suggested by staff, the site recommendation from DAC staff
was unanimous for the Historic Karrer Barn site. The site has tremendous historical
significance, educational potential, and high traffic and easy access. It has unrestricted
viewing and lends itself well to the creation of an artwork that is relevant to the
bicentennial theme and is geographically close to Historic Dublin. (He shared an aerial
and street view of the site.)
He noted that:
1. The site is large enough to accommodate a project that will enhance the location
without compromising the integrity of the site or its structures.
2. Minimal, if any, site preparation is needed.
3. Electricity is available to the artist, which was a concern with some of the other
locations considered.
4. All of these factors will contribute positively to the realization of the art work on time
and on budget.
He offered to respond to questions.
Mr. Keenan concurred that it is important the art work be visible, as several Dublin art
installations are not readily visible to the public. The Field of Corn is located at a similar
corner location in Dublin, and has been very well received. Although this site is an
excellent one, are there other highly visible corners or locations where land for the project
would be donated by a corporate resident, such as locations visible from Emerald
Parkway, Dublin Road, I-270? This is just a suggestion. However, the fact that the site
selected is visible from the roadway and that parking would be available are positive
factors for this project.
Mr. Guion responded that, historically, this is a significant site versus a corporate property.
But there are other sites which Council could consider, if desired.
Mr. Keenan added that he would like to see public art in the community similar to what is
observed in cities like Phoenix.
Vice Mayor Boring agreed. For this particular piece, she supports the Karrer barn site, but
she, too, would like to explore locations such as the SR 161 bridge railing for a future
public art location.
Mr. Guion noted that City staff has identified the locations to be considered for this
bicentennial piece. He believes many of the sites have much potential for the future.
Mr. Reiner noted that the criteria outlined for the site may be somewhat limiting. In the
future, he agrees with Mr. Keenan and Vice Mayor Boring about other potential sites for
public art.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher commented that the criteria and community impact factors were
clearly identified, and helped to communicate what went into the decision-making process.
She supports this site for the bicentennial project. In the future, both the City staff and
DAC staff need to think differently about the use of public art and where it is located. The
considerations have typically focused on land the City owns, and so having a partnership
with a corporation and dedication of land to the City for this purpose would require further
consideration in the future.
Ms. Salay commented that parking should be on street versus having a designated
parking lot. At one point, the City had considered erecting an historic log cabin on this
site, but the desire was to preserve the view shed of the barn. Preserving the integrity of
the site, as mentioned, is a critical factor for her and the art work should be an
enhancement to the site -not taking away from the site which houses a beautiful piece of
Dublin's rural history.
Wallace Maurer, 7451 Dublin Road asked for confirmation that, with Council's
concurrence, this site will house the bicentennial public art piece, and the artist will be
instructed to propose a work for this site?
Mr. Guion confirmed this is correct.
Mr. Maurer stated that he was impressed with the list of sites, and each had some
challenges. Public art placed within a roundabout would not be accessible by pedestrians.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting
August 3, 2009 Page 15
The view would be fleeting at a roundabout. The area at Brand and Dublin Road is City-
owned, and this would be an option to consider for public art.
Mr. Gerber moved to accept the recommendation of the Historic Karrer Barn site as the
location of the bicentennial art in public places project.
Mr. Keenan seconded the motion.
Vote on the motion: Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Vice Mayor Boring, yes; Mayor
Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes.
• Appointment of City Representative to MORPC
Mr. Foegler noted that the previous City Managers served as one of two City
representatives to MORPC. Deputy City Manager Mr. McDaniel has been serving in this
capacity during the interim period. He is now recommending that Council approve that he
replace Mr. McDaniel as a City representative to MORPC.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher moved that City Manager Terry Foegler be appointed as City
representative to the Mid-Ohio Regional Planning Commission.
Mr. Gerber seconded the motion.
Vote on the motion: Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes;
Vice Mayor Boring, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher thanked Mr. McDaniel for his efforts in representing Dublin at
MORPC.
STAFF COMMENTS
• Zoning Code Update
Mr. Langworthy provided an overview of the objectives that are to be achieved in the
update. As with any major project, the first step is to ensure there is understanding of the
basic objectives of the project. This is done to be used as a benchmark to make sure
anything submitted meets the `test' of the objectives established.
1. Develop a modern, innovative Code, as called for in the Community Plan. The
Plan calls for developing a framework for a clear and predictable development
process and making sure that high standards of development quality are vigorously
and consistently applied in the future, as they are today.
2. Maintaining Dublin as a competitive community in the marketplace. Based on
discussions with Economic Development and the City Manager's office, there is a
need to focus on this. There has been feedback from developers and builders
over the years who indicate they will build what Dublin wants, but want to know
what the City desires early in the development and decision-making process.
3. Changing character of development. In Dublin, there is movement away from
larger-scale, green field development and toward more infill development and
redevelopment projects. These create significant challenges in terms of zoning
and ensuring compatibility with the neighborhoods.
4. Developing for the future. Council has expressed their desire for more green
building and green technologies to be incorporated into the City's zoning and other
regulations.
5. Make it Useful. The desire is to make the zoning code as useable as possible for
the average user who uses the Code only occasionally. This will involve a better
table of contents, numbering, tables and checklists, and graphics in order to
achieve this objective.
6. Making it Work for Dublin. It is important to keep the unique characteristics that
Dublin has in its zoning code, but there is recognition that many situations aren't
addressed by the Code, given its relative age. There have been some piecemeal
updates implemented, but staff would like to have the opportunity to do a
comprehensive revision -not just the individual pieces that arise.
7. Timely process. Council has indicated their desire for this to be done in a shorter
timeframe than required for the Community Plan update. Council does want to
ensure that there is adequate input and a review process through the Planning
Commission. The City Manager has emphasized to Planning staff the need to
impress upon the Planning Commission the need to focus on the major Code
elements and the policies and objectives versus aline-by-line review. Staff will ask
the Commission to provide input to staff separately regarding any grammatical,
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting
August 3, 2009 Page 16
stylistic or other criteria under which they are reviewing the Code. In this way,
these can be incorporated without taking up time during the review sessions.
He explained that to make the process more manageable, based upon direction at
Council's work session, staff has broken this into four categories in the order to be
completed: zoning districts, which will soon be submitted to the Commission for review;
site development requirements; zoning approvals; and administrative. The only change
made to the schedule is that the zoning approvals portion will be done second and not
third in the order. The process is scheduled to be completed in approximately six months,
based upon Council's previous direction. At the July 16`h Planning Commission meeting,
they indicated their desire for a joint meeting with Council to ensure all are "on the same
page" with respect to the Code update. The City Manager subsequently met with
Planning staff and suggested that, because the Commission has not reviewed any
proposed new language for the Code, that a decision regarding a joint meeting be
postponed until the Commission has seen some language. If they still believe that all are
not on the same page, the Manager would be willing to address the Commission regarding
their expectations and desires for the update. At that point, he could bring to Council a
recommendation for a joint meeting, if that is determined to be necessary.
Mr. Foegler clarified that, based upon the minutes of the Commission's discussion, their
perspective seems to be that a Code that adds clarity and predictability may not include
the appropriate amount of discretion in the review process. The Administration, Planning
staff and he believe that can be accomplished. The suggestion is that before a joint
meeting is scheduled, he meet directly with the Commission to help enhance the
understanding of the process going forward, and gain a better sense of their concerns.
Staff will facilitate a joint meeting at that point, if it is determined to be necessary. He
asked for Council's input.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that if Council is not to have a joint meeting as requested
by Planning Commission, she would ask that the City Manager meet with the Commission
to give them an opportunity to ask questions and for the City Manager to respond. They
can then make a decision accordingly. The minutes reflect the concern with the staff
going forward and presenting a draft to Council when the Commission believes the goals
were not the same as what they heard in the meeting. They requested a joint meeting to
clarify what they understood to be the goal of the Code update. Perhaps the City Manager
could meet with the Commission as soon as their Thursday meeting.
Mr. Foegler responded he would be happy to do so, whether in their Thursday session or
as part of a separate work group that they would like to designate.
Mr. Gerber commented that he concurs with the Mayor's comments. He has spoken to
some Commission members who are anxious to begin the Code update. They did not
take a summer break in the hope of beginning this project. The minutes seem to reflect a
focus on fonts and colors, which is not a good use of their time and which even offended
them.
Mr. Langworthy responded that this was a miscalculation in terms of how much
information to provide to the Commission. They generally err on the side of providing too
much information.
Mr. Gerber stated that it would be helpful to have the City Manager speak with the
Commission to ensure the direction and focus are clear.
Mr. Foegler commented that, as expressed previously by Council, there is a concern with
the balance between predictability to establishment of standards versus discretion. This is
associated with much of the anxiety being expressed. He would like to thoroughly discuss
this with the Commission going forward.
Mr. Gerber responded that no one is challenging that. The planned district process has
served the community very well, and developers have benefitted as well in profits made in
Dublin. People do want to hold onto this process. On the other hand, the Code is
outdated and antiquated, and the standard is much lower than what is desired and
obtained through the PUD process. However, this Code update cannot be a three-year
process as was the Community Plan update.
Vice Mayor Boring commented that if the entire concepts are changed, however, Council
and the Commission will feel the necessity to do a line by line review. She was surprised
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Dublin Citv Council
August 3, 2009
Page 17
with the fact that three design concepts were created by a consultant. All that was desired
was a document updating the zoning code -not something to the design level of the
Community Plan.
Mr. Foegler responded that Mr. Langworthy has summarized that staff miscalculated the
level of detail desired by the Commission. The intent was to communicate the new format
and the nature of the new content of the updated code. He asked that Council allow him
to have further discussion with the Commission. He added that he believes the major
issue for Council is the achievability of the timeframes, based upon the expectations and
processes involved.
Mr. Gerber stated that perhaps a list could be compiled, based on experience over the
past 10-15 years, regarding items which need to be addressed in terms of
improvements/updates to the Code.
Mr. Langworthy responded that is how staff has been proceeding to date -securing input
from various review areas of the City.
Mr. Gerber noted that Planning Commission could likely compile such a list in one
session, based on their experience over the years.
Mr. Foegler noted that much of the Code-related administration involves items which are
not part of the Council or Commission review of rezonings or development review
approvals. The administrative portion is where there are many shortcomings in the
present Code.
Mr. Gerber agreed, noting that the Commission is very eager to begin the substantive
work on the Zoning Code update.
Ms. Salay commented that at various points in time, Council has requested a level of
detail that staff could never have anticipated. She appreciates that staff has erred on the
side of providing too much information.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted one item of concern in the memo, which has not previously
been brought to Council. This relates to maintaining Dublin as a competitive community,
and the implication/suggestion that Dublin is no longer that. Other than in reviewing
economic development incentive-related matters - a totally separate process from
rezoning and development -she does not recall ever being informed that Dublin is no
longer competitive, based on planning and zoning issues. She recalls that large projects
over the past several years have even been assigned a specific project manager in Dublin
to ensure completion of the process in a timely manner, and to serve as a liaison between
the developer and staff.
Mr. Foegler responded that this statement was actually his, and not Mr. Langworthy's.
The intent was to make clear the position Dublin was in 10-15 years ago when there was
little competition in the area; the length of time for approvals; the lack of predictability of
the timeframes; and the unknowing of time and costs for development approval. Given
the level of competition existing today and the alternatives in the area, there are other
jurisdictions with high standards which are creating much more predictable, time
conscious processes for review and approval. He strongly believes some are not
approaching Dublin because of the reputation of unpredictability and associated
timeframe. The goal is with how to retain the quality and discretion needed, while adding
as much predictability to both standards and the timeframe as possible through this
process.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher agreed that Council has heard of these issues, and because of
time constraints or other constraints, did not handle them by updating the Code. Instead,
they were handled on a case-by-case basis, which may not be helpful to some considering
development in Dublin. Certainly, Council wants to assist developers who want to come to
Dublin, and to those who want to stay and expand in Dublin. It must be balanced with the
desire to maintain high standards. The concern in more recent years is with what the
elected body views as high standards and what some others view as high standards are
not necessarily consistent. There may be a need for more discussion regarding that
definition.
Mr. Foegler stated that staff concurs_ The way to eliminate the ambiguity of the process is
to articulate the standards in the Codes. The high standards should be made as explicit
as possible. Therefore, the unpredictability of timeframes and uncertainty of costs can be
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Dublin City Council Meeting
August 3, 2009 Page 18
minimized. He believes both goals can be achieved -maintaining high quality standards
and improving the uncertainty associated with the development review process.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher summarized that Mr. Foegler will be attending the Planning
Commission meeting on August 6 and will report back to Council regarding the outcome.
Mr. Foegler responded he will contact the Chair of the Commission in this regard.
STAFF COMMENTS
Mr. Foegler:
1. Thanked all of the staff as well as volunteers and organizations who assisted in
carrying out a very successful Irish Festival over the past weekend.
2. Reported that National Church Residences was not successful in its bid to secure
low-income housing tax credits in this round. There is not a clear understanding of
what made it less competitive in that process. Staff will continue to work with the
applicant toward future next steps, and the next round of tax credit applications.
3. Reported that the Bridge Street Corridor study continues to move forward. The
consultants are scheduled to be in Dublin the week of August 17t", and individual
interviews with Council Members have been scheduled. Staff continues to engage
stakeholders and is pleased with the progress to date.
4. Noted that the road closures related to the Post Road/Commerce Parkway project
will be initiated on Monday, August 10 and will remain closed until late September.
The main implication relates to access to the Rec Center, and the normal
communication channels will be used to send this information to the public.
5. Reported that Dublin's 2009 Operating Budget was recognized for once again with
a Distinguished Award from the Government Finance Officers Association. He
congratulated staff and Council for their work in creating this excellent budget.
6. Noted that Harrison Smith, a major contributor to the growth and development of
Dublin over the years, passed away last evening. Memorial services will be held
for him at the Lincoln Theater in Columbus on Thursday.
COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE
Mr. Reiner announced his candidacy for re-election to City Council. He is humbled and
honored to have had the opportunity to serve with this Council and to serve the City. This
is a great team, which has accomplished much, and he is looking forward to hopefully
working with them again.
Mr. Gerber thanked Mr. Racey for the information regarding the Teen Outdoor Movie Night
that has been scheduled for August 14. He is interested in the response to that program.
Mr. Keenan:
1. Congratulated staff and the many volunteers for their effort with the Dublin Irish
Festival. There was great weather, a record turnout, and he anticipates a great
outcome.
2. Noted that a team from Public Broadcasting Services (PBS) was present in Dublin
from Thursday to Monday, filming a documentary. He spent some time this
morning with some of the crew members. One of the crew members, who
previously served as a fire commissioner in Rhode Island, also visited some of the
area fire stations. Some of the crew members commented positively regarding the
seamless operation of staging the Dublin Irish Festival. The PBS crew departed
this morning for the Rock `n Roll Hall of Fame in Cleveland, and then will travel to
Dublin, Ireland to film a second segment of the documentary on Irish music. That
film is to be released in October or November. He will be interested in seeing what
they captured on film in Dublin.
Ms. Salay:
1. Referred to the Historic Dublin crosswalk update, and thanked staff for agreeing to
identify a resolution. She proposes the concept of a median refuge island. She
realizes that this is a very tight area, but if it is possible, it would make people
much safer, particularly those crossing Bridge Street. She remains concerned
about the safety of a midblock crosswalk with the traffic coming over the hill.
Perhaps signage indicating "pedestrians in the crosswalk" would be helpful.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting
August 3, 2009 Page 19
Mr. Hammersmith stated that staff has considered that option to increase the visibility of
the crosswalk. However, they have also recommended bump-outs. He suggested that
Council visit the theater area on Winter Street in Delaware. As part of an Historic District
project, the pavement was narrowed, and bump-outs installed. This brings the
pedestrians closer to the roadway, but increases visibility and slows vehicles. In addition,
signage, such as Ms. Salay suggested, would increase awareness.
2. Echoed previous comments regarding the Irish Festival. She is always amazed
with the transformation that occurs at Coffman Park for this event -all of which is
quickly restored to its former condition!
3. Thanked Mr. Racey for his work on the Teen Movie Night. She anticipates great
attendance. How will that be publicized to the teens?
Mr. Racey responded that the event is being publicized at this time via posters in the Rec
Center, E-News over the web, and text messaging.
Ms. Salay suggested formation of a Dublin Teen Group on Facebook.
Mr. Racey responded that a City of Dublin Facebook page will be initiated later this month.
Mr. Lecklider:
1. Echoed the sentiments expressed regarding the Dublin Irish Festival - a good job
done by all.
2. Stated that he is attempting to confirm the response regarding a question or
complaint about mosquito spraying. He has heard that calls were received with
respect to mosquito spraying. The resident apparently was told that the City of
Dublin had ceded the mosquito spraying program to the County. The resident
was also told that there has been no spraying since the County took over the
program. He does not believe that is the case, but he would like confirmation.
Further, signage was displayed in the vicinity of the Irish Festival informing of
upcoming spraying. There is the perception that special consideration was given
to the Irish Festival over the needs of the residents.
Mr. Burns responded that spraying has occurred over the past two years. However,
fogging is not always the best way to manage mosquitoes. The crux of the program is to
conduct surveillance to determine where mosquitoes are breeding, and then to apply
larvicide to those areas to prevent larvae from developing into adults. Over the past three
weeks, special attention has been given to the Lowell Trace and Red Trabue Nature
Reserve areas. The latter has received two barrier sprays, surveillance and additional
larvaciding. Fogging was done for the high school area prior to the July 4t" festivities and
to the Coffman Park area prior to the Irish Festival. Spraying in specific areas of the City
occurred last year on three occasions as a result of finding mosquito pools that tested
positive for West Nile Virus.
Mr. Lecklider stated that it appears that fogging has occurred only on a limited basis the
past two years.
Mr. Burns responded that the fogging is limited only in comparison to what was done four
to six years ago, when the City sprayed every area on a weekly basis. The spraying is
now based on several considerations: mosquito trap counts, evidence of West Nile Virus;
the number of complaints, and whether larvaciding and barrier sprays have been effective.
Mr. Lecklider inquired if the City is conducting the larvaciding and barrier spraying.
Mr. Burns responded that all of this work is conducted under a contract with the Franklin
County Board of Health and performed by Vector Disease Control, Inc.
Mr. Lecklider inquired the response process for a complaint.
Mr. Burns responded that within 24 hours, Franklin County Board of Health or VDCI will
contact the resident and then visit their home to determine what is occurring in the vicinity.
Larvaciding, trapping or a barrier spray may subsequently be used.
Mr. Lecklider inquired who is monitoring the mosquito traps.
Mr. Burns responded that VDCI is doing so.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher suggested that staff be provided a memo sharing this information
so that if they receive a call, they are able to be comprehensive in their response.
Mr. Lecklider inquired if it is accurate that the City's mosquito treatment program through
the County is complaint driven.
Mr. Burns responded that it is not entirely complaint driven, but it is one of the tools that is
used to determine where services are needed. Therefore, he does not perceive the
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Dublin City Council
August 3, 2009 Page 20
complaint as a negative; it is a necessary tool. It would be a negative, however, if a timely
response did not occur.
Mr. Lecklider stated that because the present method of addressing the issue is different
from what the residents were familiar with for many years, an education effort should be
made to provide understanding of the current process, encouraging residents to
participate by reporting any problems. He is not advocating a return to indiscriminate
fogging.
Vice Mayor Boring:
1. Noted that the City's Healthy By Choice Program has won a Well Workplace Gold
Award from the Wellness Councils of America.
2. Stated that staff has indicated a need to schedule a meeting with Council to review
the City's employee health benefits program.
Mr. Foegler stated that on August 17, staff will provide a report on the City's financial
assumptions and budget reviews. Included will be a brief overview of the direction that is
being considered for the health benefits program. Amore detailed review of the plan will
be scheduled with Council in September.
3. Inquired by what means the additional households will be made aware that they
will receive the recycling bins.
Mr. Burns responded that at the beginning of September, the residents will receive a letter
informing them of the dates when they can expect to receive the recycling containers. The
letter will also provide additional pertinent information.
Vice Mayor Boring inquired if an educational piece would also be provided to make the
residents aware of the cost benefits to the City of recycling.
Mr. Burns confirmed that information would be included.
4. Stated that the Dublin Rec Center patrons are pleased with the opening of the
Subway facility at the Rec Center.
5. Requested that Council members review the proposed 2010 Council meeting
calendar, which was provided in Council packets. Specifically she asked that they
note their preference for the date of the first January Council meeting.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that the 2010 calendar review would be scheduled on one
of the two upcoming meeting agendas, depending upon on the length of the agendas.
She asked that Council Members provide a list of their preferences and conflicts to the
Clerk for consideration in the meeting schedule discussion.
6. Reported that she met with Ms. Rozanksi, Executive Director of Leadership Dublin.
Leadership Dublin has requested that a representative to their Board be appointed
by Council. The City does have representatives for other boards that receive
funding from the City, such as the Dublin Convention & Visitors Bureau. One of
the responsibilities of a Leadership Dublin Board appointee would be to provide
regular reports to Council. If there are no objections, she would like introduce a
motion tonight to appoint a representative to the Leadership Dublin Board.
Ms. Salay responded that she would concur with making such an appointment but would
prefer to defer the appointment until the normal Board and Commission appointment
process next spring.
Discussion followed.
Vice Mayor Boring moved to establish aCouncil-appointed representative to the
Leadership Dublin Board.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher seconded the motion.
Vote on the motion: Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes; Mr.
Keenan, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Vice Mayor Boring, yes.
Vice Mayor Boring stated that the timeframe for the appointment will be determined at a
later date.
7. Reported that she met with Ms. Crandall and briefly reviewed the applications
received to date for the Bicycle Advisory Task Force. They discussed ways of
narrowing the list of 43 applicants before interviews are conducted. Ms. Crandall
has also suggested some ways to involve or maintain contact with all the
applicants, perhaps through a "cafe" type of meeting.
Mr. Keenan suggested that an effort be made to have representation geographically by
ward. He concurs with the other suggestions provided by staff regarding representation.
Vice Mayor Boring asked if a list of the applicants who ride their bikes to work has been
compiled.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of Dublin City Council M_eetna
August 3, 2009 Page 21
Ms. Crandall responded that list has not yet been compiled. She and Ms. Martin are in the
process of conducting follow-up calls to each applicant. After this is completed, a list of
applicants from the various categories will be forwarded to Council.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher:
1. Echoed the comments regarding the Dublin Irish Festival. It is enjoyable to hear
the positive feedback. Are there any preliminary numbers on the Festival results?
Mr. Racey responded that the numbers continue to be tallied. Based on staff's
observations, the attendance results should be good.
2. Stated that she was disappointed with the story in the Saturday edition of The
Columbus Dispatch. Although the event featured many wonderful vendors and a
teen area and wee folk area, the front page article focused on beer sales. She has
received comments from many who indicated they were personally offended by
that story. On the other hand, there was a story in the Sunday edition regarding
the importance of WiFi in the central Ohio community. The article credits Dublin as
a pioneer in this area and recognizes Dublin's continued efforts to upgrade the
system and remain competitive.
3. She noted that Mr. Racey shared a positive report regarding the Festival. Last
year, the City collected 12 boxes of food donations for the Dublin Food Pantry.
This year, two box trucks were filled with food donations.
Mr. Lecklider suggested this would be a worthy story for the newspapers to print.
3. Inquired the status of the BriHi project.
Mr. Hahn responded that tenant fit outs of the retail spaces will occur throughout the
remainder of this year. The opening of retail shops is projected for spring 2010.
4. Noted that several individuals have commented that they purchased pavers for the
Grounds of Remembrance that have not yet installed. She suggested that staff
communicate with the individuals who purchased pavers when they might expect
that installation to occur.
Mr. Hahn responded that staff would do so. All pavers purchased to date are anticipated
to be installed within the next two weeks.
5. Noted that Senators Jim Hughes and Bill Harris have sent the City a
commendation from the Ohio Senate congratulating Dublin on being voted by
Columbus Monthly as the 2009 Best Suburb.
ADJOURNMENT TO EXECUTIVE SESSION
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher moved to adjourn to executive session at 10:00 p.m. for
discussion of 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)
Mr. Reiner seconded the motion.
Vote on the motion: Vice Mayor Boring, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr.
Gerber, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes.
The meeting was reconvened at 11:45 p.m. and formally adjourned.
Clerk of Council