Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/15/2006 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Min_utes i>f __ --------------- Dublin City Council - ----------------- M~etinK- - DAYTONlEGAL BLANK, INC.. FORM NO. 10148 ---- -----.---~-.----------.----,.-,.--------____rT--.- ~- -- ..---------------------- May 15, 2006 I. Held 20 I Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher called the Monday, May 15, 2006 regular meeting of Dublin City Council to order at 7:00 p.m. at the Dublin Municipal Building. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mr. Keenan led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL Present were: Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, Vice Mayor Lecklider, Mrs. Boring, Mr. Keenan, Mr. McCash, Mr. Reiner and Ms. Salay. Staff members present were: Ms. Brautigam, Ms. Grigsby, Mr. Smith, Mr. Ciarochi, Mr. Harding, Chief Epperson, Mr. Gunderman, Mr. Hahn, Mr. Hammersmith, Ms. Puskarcik, Ms. Ott, Mr. Earman, Ms. Cox, Mr. Phillabaum, Ms. Willis, Ms. Wawszkiewicz and Ms. Hoyle. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Vice Mayor Lecklider moved approval of the minutes of the May 1, 2006 Council meeting. Ms. Salay seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mr. Keenan, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Vice Mayor Lecklider, yes. CORRESPONDENCE There was no correspondence requiring Council action. CITIZEN COMMENTS Wallace Maurer, 7451 Dublin Road: (1) Continued his prepared statement from the last Council meeting, picking up after Mr. Smith's comment that Mr. Kindra had signed a settlement, and his response that it was a legal fiction, a non sequitur. According to his interpretation of the firing procedure mandated by the Dublin Revised Charter, Kindra had not been properly or legally fired; therefore, there was nothing to settle. Mr. Kindra should be provided with every individual's right to justice and liberty through due process. The City should offer Mr. Kindra reinstatement and fire him by the mandated firing procedure, or apply an overdue process -- that is, present Dublin as a model to the world for unprecedented, creative correction of a governmental error. He concedes that his statement consists primarily of conjecture, except for one indisputable truth, and that is that Mr. Smith has refrained from publicly assessing his interpretations for some reason. (2) He read from an article in the University of California, "Berkeley Wellness Letter" regarding traffic circles or roundabouts. "They reduce the risk of injury-causing crashes by as much as 75 percent compared to intersections with traffic lights or stop signs, according to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. That's why more traffic circles are being built in this country. They are safer in large part because vehicles do not approach each other at right angles or head on, thus avoiding the most dangerous types of crashes. Moreover, without traffic lights drivers do not speed up to beat the red light or make risky left turns across oncoming traffic. Circles also produce lowered traffic delays since usually there is no need to stop, also significantly reducing fuel consumption and vehicle emissions." At the May 1 Council meeting, Mr. Hammersmith defended the City's need for roundabouts. He has shared the Berkeley Wellness Letter information tonight to express his and the community's gratitude for Mr. Hammersmith's guidance on this issue. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher thanked Mr. Maurer for his comments. LEGISLATION PUBLIC HEARING/SECOND READING - ORDINANCES Ordinance 24-06 Accepting the Annexation of 4.634 More or Less Acres from Washington Township to the City of Dublin. (Petitioner: Washington Township Trustees) Ms. Brautigam noted this is the annexation of the Washington Township administration building on Eiterman Road. Wallace Maurer, 7451 Dublin Road stated that page 3 of the February 2nd staff memo indicates that waste collection services would not be provided by the City because of an RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of~___ Dublin City Council ________ _ Meeting ---- _,_u__ -DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC.. FORM NO~n~_______~____ --r~---------- May 15, 2006 Page 2 II Held 20 existing commercial use in the property. In the ordinance, however, there is no reference to waste collection services. Does the lack of reference indicate a consistency with the memo - that the City will provide no waste collection? Ms. Brautigam confirmed that there would be no waste collection service due to commercial use on the site. Mrs. Boring requested clarification of the zoning classification for annexed property. Mr. Smith responded that the zoning classification upon annexation would be R-Rural. Mrs. Boring noted that the development on the site is therefore a nonconforming use at this time under that category. Vote on the Ordinance: Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Vice Mayor Lecklider, yes; Ms. Salay, yes. Ordinance 25-06 Rezoning Four Parcels Totaling Approximately 33.33 Acres, Generally Located on the North Side of West Bridge Street, Approximately 1,000 Feet East of Shawan Falls Drive From R-2, Limited Suburban Residential District, To HR, Historical Residential District (1919 Building, Sells Middle School, and Indian Run Elementary School -144, 150, and 60 West Bridge Street - Case No. 06-048Z). Ms. Brautigam stated this continues the City's ongoing effort of rezoning areas to a Historic District classification. Vote on the Ordinance: Ms. Salay, yes; Vice Mayor Lecklider, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes. Ordinance 26-06 Accepting the Annexation of 226.6 More or Less Acres from Washington Township to the City of Dublin. (Petitioner: Carmel Farms, Inc.) Ms. Brautigam noted this annexation is located in the southwest portion of the community. Vote on the Ordinance: Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Vice Mayor Lecklider; yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Ordinance 30-06 Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Mutual Aid Agreements with Other Political Subdivisions. Ms. Brautigam stated that at the first reading of this ordinance on May 1, Council requested additional information. A memo in Council packets responded to those issues. Chief Epperson is also present if further clarification is needed. Chief Epperson stated that the City's Risk Management office has informed him that when responding to mutual aid calls in other jurisdictions, the City's police officers are covered under Dublin's workers' compensation insurance. The other inquiries concerned the frequency and types of mutual aid calls received, and a four-page report detailing 2005 mutual aid provided by the City of Dublin Police Division and the mutual aid received by the Dublin Police Division has been provided in Council's packets. Mr. Keenan stated that the calls listed are within the geographical boundaries of the current mutual aid contracts. Could Dublin receive requests for mutual aid contracts for jurisdictions outside that area? ,~ Chief Epperson responded that this ordinance would authorize the City Manager to enter into the agreements as they are presented to the City. However, most of the jurisdictions are included and covered by the Franklin County mutual aid agreement. Other than the Union County mutual aid agreement, there should be no other contract necessary. Requests from outside the Central Ohio area are covered by the Ohio Revised Code provisions for mutual aid in emergencies. Mr. Keenan noted that the "blanket" authorization concerns him. Would Council receive copies of any other contracts entered into by the City? It is important for Council to know of these commitments. Chief Epperson responded that copies of contracts can certainly be forwarded to Council. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of ----------- -- Dublin City Council _~ M~~linL ---~ DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC" FORM NO. 10148 20 .pa~ T------.----------------.-----May 15, 2006-- II Held Mr. Keenan stated that the report indicates 30 to 40 percent of the City's emergency responses are to Union County. Chief Epperson responded that is correct. Most of those are to the eastern edge of Union County within a couple of miles of the City's jurisdiction. Similarly, most of the Columbus responses are to the Sawmill Road area. Mrs. Boring stated that the report also indicates that most of the Union County calls are burglary alarms. A few years ago, Dublin adopted a policy to charge fees for false alarm calls. Since then, the number of false alarm calls has been reduced. How can Dublin continue to minimize the occurrence of false alarm calls if its policy is not enforced within this area? It is her understanding that adoption of the false alarm fee policy did reduce the number of 911 calls received. In addition, it is not appropriate to charge the City's residents and not those outside the City's jurisdiction for these calls. Chief Epperson responded that the frequency of false alarm calls was reduced significantly, yet there are still a large number that are non emergencies. He is not aware whether Union County charges for false alarms; however, Dublin would not be able to charge for calls responded to outside its jurisdiction. Mrs. Boring stated that the City's policy is then unfair to its own residents/businesses if areas outside the jurisdiction are not charged. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that the policy permits a certain number of false alarms before a charge is imposed. How often does a charge occur? Chief Epperson responded that charges occur in many cases. They begin with the third false alarm in a six-month period, with the fine escalating for each occurrence thereafter -- $150 and up. He is made aware of appeals of false alarm charges, which also occur very frequently. Vice Mayor Lecklider inquired if mutual aid agreements place an undue burden on the Dublin Division of Police. Chief Epperson responded they do not overburden the division. The officers do not respond to a mutual aid request if there are not sufficient resources to do so. The City is never left at risk as a result of responding to these calls. The Division handled over 50,000 calls for service in 2005. Only 120 were mutual aid calls, and most of those were of short duration. Mr. Keenan requested clarification that the blanket authorization is limited to police mutual aid agreements. Ms. Brautigam responded that the statement, "... for the interchange of public safety related equipment and/or services" specifies that limitation. Mr. Keenan moved to approve the ordinance with the proviso that Council is notified whenever a mutual aid agreement is entered into and that mutual aid statistics are maintained. Vice Mayor Lecklider seconded the motion. Vote on the Ordinance: Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Vice Mayor Lecklider, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes. Wallace Maurer. 7451 Dublin Road inquired if all of the jurisdictions listed on the report have a mutual aid agreement with the other entities on the list. Chief Epperson responded that most of them are included in the Franklin County mutual aid agreement in which all jurisdictions agree to provide mutual aid response to the other parties. Because Dublin lies within two other counties, there are mutual aid agreements with some other jurisdictions. Mr. Maurer inquired if technology has enabled very rapid communication among all parties. Chief Epperson responded affirmatively. Mr. Maurer stated that the list indicates that Dublin provides mutual aid more often than it receives it. Does that not reflect favorably upon the efficiency and reputation of Dublin? Chief Epperson responded that it does indeed. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher requested that Chief Epperson investigate the question of whether the other jurisdictions have policies in place to charge for non emergency 911 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of ________.. Dublin City Council_ __ M~~tll1~_ ----- ------------- _. - - -DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC.. F<l1'l~.c>-'0148 ---_._._---~ May 15, 2006 Page 4 Held 20 calls. If so, they should pass on the reimbursement they receive to Dublin, in cases where Dublin has provided the service. Chief Epperson responded that staff would do so. INTRODUCTION/FIRST READING - ORDINANCES Ordinance 31-06 Accepting the Annexation of 4.9 More or Less Acres from Washington Township to the City of Dublin. (Petitioner: Dublin Baptist Church) Vice Mayor Lecklider introduced the ordinance. Ms. Salay inquired if there is a particular reason the church is pursuing annexation at this time. Mr. Gunderman responded that the church is undertaking a significant facility expansion for which water and sewer services are needed. Therefore, they are petitioning for annexation of this property. There will be a second reading/public hearing at the June 5 Council meeting. Ordinance 32-06 Repealing Sections 150.055, 150.056, and 150.057, Amending Sections 96.01, 96.16, 96.99, and 150.999, and Adding Section 150.055 of the Dublin Codified Ordinances Regarding Encroachments on City-Owned Property and Easements. Ms. Salay introduced the ordinance. Ms. Brautigam stated that this code amendment will address an existing problem. From time to time, residents choose to build patios or place an accessory structure within the City-owned parkland or easements adjacent to their properties. The City's policy regarding such encroachments has been inconsistent. Staff and the Law Director's office has worked on developing a unified response to those encroachments. Vice Mayor Lecklider inquired if play structures have previously been placed upon City- owned property with the City's knowledge, would those structures then be permitted to remain? Mr. Hahn responded that they would not. Their removal would be required. Vice Mayor Lecklider stated that he is aware that such situations exist. Vice Mayor Lecklider referred to page 2, Section 5 of the ordinance and inquired under what circumstances encroachment agreements would be granted. Mr. Hahn responded that no encroachments on City parkland will be permitted; however, the City may permit encroachments on easements or rights-of-way. Ms. Cox stated that easements are City-owned property in which public infrastructure exists, i.e., sanitary sewer, storm sewers, water lines. Easements can also include areas dedicated for flooding or drainage purposes. There will be a second reading/public hearing at the June 5 Council meeting. INTRODUCTION/PUBLlC HEARING - RESOLUTIONS Resolution 49-06 Accepting the Lowest/Best Bid for the Renovation of the Community Recreation Center Teen Lounge and Wee Folk Room. Vice Mayor Lecklider introduced the resolution. Ms. Brautigam stated that this project provides for the demolition of the present teen lounge and wee folk room. The wee folk area will be expanded including an adjacent 1,697 square foot outdoor play area. The project cost estimate was $302,000. A single bid was received from C.P. Construction in the amount of $305,000. Staff recommends .." that Alternate #2, at an additional cost of $12,000, also be included in the project. The City has no previous experience with this contractor, but the references received were satisfactory. Ms. Salay inquired if the teen lounge and wee folk locations are being swapped. Ms. Brautigam responded that is correct. Vote on the Resolution: Mr. Keenan, yes; Vice Mayor Lecklider, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes. Resolution 50-06 Intent to Appropriate a 0.270 Acre, More or Less, Fee Simple Interest, and a 0.047 Acre, More or Less, Temporary Construction Easement, from David Bloom, Located South of River Forest Road and West of Dublin-Bellepoint Road, City of Dublin, County of Franklin, State of Ohio. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS _ Minutes 91_________ Dublin City CounciL --------.-- __M~~tiI1~__ ----DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC" FORM NO. 10148---- _.._-~--_._-----'--- ----_.~- - -----_..~-_. ~---- - -- ------- -- ---- ---------May 15, 2006-------- Page 5 !i Held 20 'I Resolution 51-06 Intent to Appropriate a 0.061 Acre, More or Less, Temporary Construction Easement, From William M. Caserta, Located North of River Forest Road and West of Dublin-Bellepoint Road, City of Dublin, County of Franklin, State of Ohio. Resolution 52-06 Intent to Appropriate a 0.007 Acre, More or Less, Fee Simple Interest, and a 0.055 Acre, More or Less, Temporary Construction Easement, From Sheila M. Turner, Located North of River Forest Road and West of Dublin-Bellepoint Road, City of Dublin, County of Franklin, State of Ohio. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher introduced Resolutions 50-06,51-06 and 52-06, moved to waive the rules of order to read legislation by title only and asked the Clerk to read the names of the property owners into the record. Vice Mayor Lecklider seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mr. Keenan, yes; Vice Mayor Lecklider, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes. The Clerk read the names of the property owners into the record. Mr. Smith noted this the first step of land appropriation for construction easements for the River Forest bikepath tunnel. The City is currently attempting to negotiate satisfactory agreements with the landowners. Mr. McCash stated that when the residents initially came before Council requesting the pedestrian tunnel, they indicated they would provide the necessary land or easements to build the tunnel. Is that still the case, or has the situation changed? Mr. Hammersmith responded that is not the case. The majority of the residents requesting the tunnel live within the subdivision and their properties are not adjacent to Dublin Road at the locations where the easements are needed. He doesn't recall commitments to donate land or to secure commitment of land for the projects. Mrs. Boring commented that Council did previously discuss and/or decide to require that necessary easements and land for citizen requested public improvement projects, such as bike trails and pedestrian tunnels, must be donated for the project in order for the project to occur. Mr. Hammersmith stated that has been discussed several times, including at the time of the southwest traffic calming program. However, it was never established as a requirement for any project or for the adoption of the CIP. Mrs. Boring requested that staff research to verify that no Council action has been taken regarding such a requirement for any project. Ms. Brautigam responded that requirement was made in regard to water and sewer projects only. It would not be practical for Council to make such a blanket requirement, as there are some City projects in which the citizens would not have an interest and the City would expect to compensate them for the connection through their property. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that the cost of the project is significantly more than estimated, based upon addressing the vertical profile and shoulder at the tunnel. Was that a project change that came as a result of further assessment? Mr. Hammersmith responded that it was a result of the detailed design that occurred at a later date, once the profile of the road and sight distances were known. This has been determined as the appropriate time to bring them into conformance with today's standards. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that in the future, Council should have more information on this type of project - tunnels, roundabouts, etc., before being asked to commit to a project. Council often prioritizes projects based upon the cost of the projects. Had Council known that the project cost would be $750,000, it may have prioritized it differently. The difference in the cost and the estimate is substantial; in fact, it is nearly double the amount. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK INC FORM NO 10148 May 15, 2006 Page 6 Held 20 Mr. Hammersmith responded that he understands Council's concern. In this case, however, it would not have changed the priority of the project, as priority #2 was the SR 161 Tunnel at Monterey Drive, priority #3 was the Dublin Road Tunnel and the Summitview Tunnel was number #4. I I Ms. Salay noted that she was not pleased to learn that Dublin Road would be closed again for three months, so soon after the Dublin Road roundabout project was completed. She requested that staff expedite the project and make every effort to have the road closed for a minimum amount of time. Mr. Hammersmith responded that is staffs intent. They are attempting to coordinate the contractor's work with the utility companies, asking that the utility companies complete their work before the road closure. Mrs. Boring noted that she has received many phone calls from residents concerned about egress and ingress safety in that area. If road closure is necessary to preserve safety for the residents, that action is preferable. There are also existing drainage issues for the residents in that area that she wants to address with Mr. Hammersmith at another time. Vote on the Resolution: Mr. Keenan, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Vice Mayor Lecklider, yes; Ms. Salay, yes. Resolution 53-06 Authorizing the City Manager to Execute an Easement with the Ohio Bell I' Telephone Company (SBC) for the Relocation of Telecommunications Equipment. - Vice Mayor Lecklider introduced the resolution. Ms. Brautigam stated this project will improve the telephone service in the Barronscourt area of the Ballantrae subdivision. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher inquired what type of service problem exists. Ms. Brautigam responded that the current location of these utilities is contributing to their deterioration. They need to be located within a more secure area. Mr. Hammersmith responded that SBC is running out of service capacity. This improvement to their infrastructure is necessary to improve and to expand their service. Wallace Maurer. 7451 Dublin Road inquired if the reference to "subsurface wiring" refers to the burying of their communication lines. Mr. Hammersmith responded that their existing lines are underground. Mr. Maurer inquired if all phone lines throughout the city are underground. Mr. Hammersmith responded that they are not, although it would be a long-term goal of the City to have them buried. Vote on the Resolution: Ms. Salay, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Vice Mayor Lecklider, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes. OTHER . Eiterman Road Discussion Mr. Hammersmith stated that the Hilliard City School District voters recently approved the bond issue that will allow the construction of a new elementary school on a 31-acre !J!'l'-"" site north of Rings Road and adjacent to the northern and eastern boundaries of the Ballantrae subdivision. It will be necessary for the City of Dublin, working with the City of Hilliard, to implement one portion of Dublin's 1999 adopted Thoroughfare Plan - the ~"..... extension of Eiterman Road from Ballantrae to Rings Road. When the Ballantrae subdivision was constructed, the first portion of the extension occurred -- Eiterman Road from Shier Rings Road to Ballantrae. At the time Ballantrae was developed, the school site was not part of the original subdivision, and the second portion of the extension was delayed until a later time. That time is now. In response to concerns raised by residents regarding this extension, a public information meeting was held on April 27, 2006 at the Dublin Service Center. He will review the information provided at that meeting. History: The Eiterman Road extension has been planned for 20 years, first appearing on the City's Thoroughfare Plan in 1988 as an arterial roadway extension from Shier Rings RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK INC FORM NO 10148 May 15, 2006 Page 7 Held 20 Road to Hayden Run Road. It was included again in the 1997 Thoroughfare Plan and in the 1999 Thoroughfare Plan as extending from Shier Rings Road to Tuttle Crossing Boulevard. The functional classification of the roadway was downgraded from an arterial in the 1988 plan to a collector in the 1999 plan. Both the Ballantrae Traffic Impact Study and the Ballantrae Preliminary Plat indicate the extension of Elterman Road from Shier Rings Road to Rings Road and further south. The Preliminary Plat adopted by Council in September of 2000 states: "Eiterman Road to be extended to Rings Road, alignment to be determined." In 2001, the City of Hilliard purchased a 31.22 parcel through which the extension is planned. The Traffic Study for Eiterman Road projected traffic volume 25 years into the future. On the most southern portion of Eiterman Road it projected 17,800 vehicles/day; on the midsection, it projected 14,900 vehicles/day. Two of the more important strategies are to "provide connections to several surrounding roadways within developments" and to "encourage the development of multiple connections, including a continuous network of collectors between subdivisions." The Community Plan included strategies to implement those policies. The Community Plan included strategies to implement those policies. Two of the more important strategies are to "provide connections to several surrounding roadways within developments" and to "encourage the development of multiple connections, including a continuous network of collectors between subdivisions." At the April 27, 2006 public meeting, information was gathered from the residents. That has been distilled into four primary areas of concern: 1. The need for the roadway connection; 2. Safety issues; 3. Location of the roadway/proximity to the Ballantrae residents; 4. Other design possibilities for the road alignment. #1 The need for the Eiterman Road Extension The primary function of this extension is to serve the Ballantrae residents. This connection would provide direct access to Rings Road, by which motorists could access the arterials of Avery Road and Cosgray Road. The alternative would be to travel along local subdivision streets, such as Royal Dublin Drive and Dalmore Lane, with multiple residential driveways to access the arterials. Much of the Ballantrae subdivision remains to be built out. It is estimated that with the full build-out, approximately 9,850 trips per day will be generated solely by the Ballantrae subdivision. With this many trips, a collector street, such as Eiterman Road, is essential to keep the traffic volumes lower on the local subdivision streets. It will also provide alternate routes for local trips so that the residents do not have to enter the arterial system. The arterial system would be used for longer through trips for those who want to access the interstate system. For that purpose, the collector street essentially collects the traffic from the residential streets and distributes it into the arterial systems. #2 Safetv Issues Related to School Residents have expressed a concern about the proximity of the proposed extension to their lots. They have requested an increase in the buffer to provide more offset between the two. Therefore, staff suggests: . Shifting Eiterman Road to the west approximately 40 feet from the eastern common property line. This would also protect the existing tree line. . A median in the roadway to achieve a speed reduction. . Mounding and landscaping to provide additional buffering. . School zone flashers and driver feedback signs. . Pedestrian sidewalk at Dalmore Lane and Eiterman Road. #3 Location of the Roadwav/Proximity to the Residents The residents questioned if there are other areas within the City where homes back up to roadways in a similar arrangement as to that proposed with Eiterman Road. There are several existing locations: in Dublinshire, Avery Road is a minor arterial where homes are within 75 feet of the edge of roadway; in Earlington Village, Sells Mill Drive is a collector where homes are within 70 feet of the edge of roadway; in Hawk's Nest, Avery Road is a minor arterial where homes have side yards within 40-45 feet of the RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of ------ Dublin City Council___ u_. M~etiI1L_ -_.---- --------------- ---- DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC" FORM NO. 10148 ~~------ ----_.-._. ----- , T-------------- ---- ------May 15, 2006 Page 8 II 20 !i Held II I edge of roadway; in Indian Run Village, Muirfield Drive is a collector where there are homes within 90 feet of the edge of roadway; in Muirfield Village Phase 1, Muirfield Drive is a collector where there are homes within 75-80 feet of the edge of roadway; in Muirfield Village Phase 4, Memorial Drive is a collector where there are homes within 35- 40 feet of the edge of roadway. In summary, the setback from the edge of pavement to the backs of homes was the residents' concern. The typical distance from the edge of Eiterman Road to the existing homes will be 110 feet. This distance is consistent, and in most cases exceeds the distance of other collectors and arterials in Dublin between the homes and roadways. #4 Other Desiqn Alternatives Several residents suggested alternate designs to provide access to the school with different alignments for Eiterman Road. Two of the proposed alignments depicted Eiterman Road in a more circuitous alignment with varying degrees of encroachment into the school site. Another proposal provided for an extension of Eiterman Road into the school site from the north and south with the use of cul-de-sacs or looped roads to disconnect the roadway at the school. Staff analyzed the viability of these proposals and submits the final recommendation: (1) That Council uphold the adopted 1999 Thoroughfare Plan; (2) Further evaluate the extension of Rings Road through the Hilliard School site; and that the extension of Eiterman Road to Tuttle Crossing will be re-evaluated through the Thoroughfare Plan; (3) Re-evaluate the proposed extension of Eiterman Road to Tuttle Crossing; (4) The City should partner with the Hilliard City Schools to address resident concerns through the roadway and site design. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that Council has always enjoyed a close partnership with the Dublin City Schools, working together to establish appropriate infrastructure, mounding, landscaping, etc. to accommodate the location of schools in residential areas. This is a new process for the Hilliard City Schools, but they have been an active participant in Dublin's planning meetings for this project. Will there be additional costs associated with the City's recommendation that Hilliard Schools might not have anticipated? If so, what type of cost-sharing arrangement is being considered? Mr. Hammersmith stated that there would be additional costs associated with some of the more advanced safety features, such as the driver feedback signs. Dublin has assumed the responsibility for the school zone flashers throughout the City. Discussions with the school regarding cost sharing have been initiated only recently, so there are no specifics to report. However, that is a significant issue, as well as several site plan issues. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher invited testimony from citizens. Marv Curran. 6695 Ballantrae Place stated that she lives one house away from the proposed Eiterman Road extension. She is aware that many safety issues related to the proximity of the school are being addressed that pertain to in-session hours, but what about after-school safety issues? There are fifteen children living within a four-house radius. At least 50 Ballantrae subdivision children are on the swim team and use the Community Pool South, accessing it by bicycle, scooter or skateboard. They moved to Ballantrae because it is a great family community, located a distance from the "feeder" road. They are concerned about the future safety of their children outside the school session hours. Although their children attend a private school, they purchased a particular lot because it is adjacent to the school property. She requested that Council seriously considered their children's safety. Kevin Griffin. 5559 Kinvarra Lane referred to the first sentence of the first paragraph on page 3 of the memo, which states that "the function of Eiterman Road is to serve the Ballantrae residents. He attended a public meeting on March 21, at which Aaron Stanford stated that "Eiterman is needed to alleviate the traffic on Avery Road and Cosgray Road." If the road function is to serve the Ballantrae residents, then he requests that it not be extended to the south into another development whenever one should be built in the future. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Coun_cil Meeting ____ - -- . DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC" FORM NO. 10~.48____ ~ - ~-~ -------- ---~ May 15, 2006 Page 9 I Held 20 Sandy Wymard. 6609 Dalmore Lane stated that she lives on the undesignated neighborhood cut-through street -- a curved road that leads to Royal Dublin, the only southern entrance into Ballantrae. They have experienced a lot of speeding traffic, which is a safety issue for Ballantrae. Dave Silvius. 6721 Swickard Court stated he has raised one issue with Mr. Hammersmith and that is whether there is really a need to move traffic from Avery and Cosgray onto Eiterman. There are many more children crossing Eiterman than cross Avery or Cosgray Roads. The City is proposing moving traffic from two roads with very little child pedestrian activity to a road with a significant amount of child pedestrian activity. Laurie Sullivan. 6557 Ballantrae Place stated that at the April 27 meeting, a suggestion was made for an underpass for the children to enable children to safely cross Eiterman both during and after school hours. That has not been addressed tonight. Mr. Hammersmith stated that a resident did ask if a pedestrian tunnel could be incorporated into the design. When staff reviewed the adopted pedestrian tunnel study, this location did not compete in terms of criteria with locations that had already been considered and were not yet programmed in the CIP. Ms. Sullivan inquired if this location could potentially compete after the traffic flow is actually observed. Could it be reassessed after Eiterman has been extended? Mr. Hammersmith responded that such pedestrian studies are re-evaluated in 5-6 years. Certainly, the location could potentially compete. However, if Muirfield Drive near Scottish Corners Elementary does not meet the requirements for programming a pedestrian tunnel, it is unlikely this site would meet them. Ms. Sullivan inquired if there is a reason the extension of Eiterman Road to Rings Road cannot be delayed, addressing the improvement of Avery and Cosgray Roads prior to any extension of Eiterman. Mr. Hammersmith stated that the earlier statement that Eiterman is intended to be a reliever road to Avery and Cosgray is not accurate. The intent is to allow residents to use a local collector street and not have a need for them to access Avery or Cosgray Roads. By doing so, the capacity on the arterial system is relieved. Delaying the project results in delaying a collector that is needed in this area. The alternative is to use a local residential street or force residents out onto the arterial system to make local trips. Ms. Salay stated that the projected year 2030 traffic volume numbers are so high that it is difficult to visualize. The information indicates an estimated 17,800 trips per day on Eiterman Road compared to today's number of 12,000 trips/day on Muirfield Drive in front of Scottish Corners. Was that study conducted with the assumption of Eiterman as a four-lane road? Mr. Hammersmith responded that Eiterman Road was modeled as a two-lane road in the 2003 study. Ms. Salay stated that nearly 10,000 trips/day will be generated by Ballantrae residents alone. Mr. Hammersmith clarified that the numbers are for traffic originating from the Ballantrae subdivision. Ms. Salay stated that nearly 10,000 trips/day will be generated by Ballantrae residents alone. Is that a number for Eiterman Road alone or for the neighborhood? Mr. Hammersmith responded that the numbers are for the Ballantrae neighborhood. The collector street connections are Woerner- Temple and Eiterman Road to the north and Eiterman Road to the south. Ms. Salay stated that if 10,000 trips/day will originate from Ballantrae and 17,800 will be using Eiterman Road, a large percentage is originating elsewhere. Mr. Hammersmith responded that the 17,800 number reflects the assumption that Eiterman Road would be extended from Rings Road to Tuttle Crossing Boulevard. The updated modeling should indicate a much different number, with no extension to Tuttle Crossing Boulevard. On the collector streets, there will be some through traffic. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council M~~ti.!l.L_ ---DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC., FORM NO, 10148 --.---.-'.-...-..-- May 15, 2006 Page 10 Held 20 Ms. Salay expressed thanks to staff for the very productive public meeting on April 27th relating to the extension of Eiterman Road. She empathizes with the Ballantrae residents who were unaware of plans to possibly extend Eiterman Road. The timing of this project is not good from the standpoint of the fact that the City's Community Plan and Thoroughfare Plan are in the process of being updated. Another year would permit the City to have this roadway in focus and provide a higher comfort level to the residents. She cannot support the extension of Eiterman Road if it is to continue south to Tuttle Road. Her vote tonight would be based on that caveat. The success of Ballantrae will be based on the long-term quality of life for that neighborhood. Although there would be some cut-through traffic, Eiterman Road is primarily a roadway to serve the Ballantrae residents. Maintaining that as an access to their neighborhood is really important to the residents and needs to be important to the community and Council, as well. Council has talked extensively about road networks, connections, and the importance of providing adequate access to their neighborhoods. In fact, most neighborhoods have multiple connections. She recalls a comment made by the consultant during a recent Community Plan discussion: "If you try to solve traffic congestion by adding more lanes, it is equivalent to trying to solve obesity by loosening your belt." At a recent meeting, Mr. Griffin noted that the unsettling fact for Ballantrae residents is that they do not know what will develop to the north or south in the future. This is a question for Council as well, as they look at the character of not just this future roadway, but the entire southwest area. She encouraged residents to attend the Community Plan meetings to have their concerns addressed. The future of a neighborhood can depend upon its residents' participation in the planning process. She has become convinced that the roadway extension to Rings Road is needed, but a future connection to Tuttle Crossing should not occur. Ms. Salay inquired if it would be possible to lower the speed limit on Eiterman Road to 25 mph, for the portion south of the golf course. There are currently several streets in Dublin that border backyards that have such a limit. Mr. Hammersmith responded that the City's approach to any requested speed reduction is to commission a speed study. The speed limit is intended to fit with a street's functional classification. In this case it does -- 35 mph is the appropriate speed for a collector roadway. To lower the speed limit, there must be a compelling reason, such as a concern about safety expressed by the neighborhood. Lowering the limit on that road would be out of character with the City's collector roadway system. The City tries to attract use of the collector system versus the local streets. One of the enticements is that it is a more efficient roadway in terms of movement. Ms. Salay inquired if the results of the speed study on Eiterman Road are available. Mr. Hammersmith responded that data has been collected, but no results are available. Staff will share the results with Council as soon as they have been compiled. Stealth Stat reports provide the first indications of speed problems. Ms. Salay stated that the residents are particularly concerned about the roadway near the school zone. Mr. Hammersmith responded that the City collectively monitors those roadways, gathering complaints. When there are concerns, the Police Division reviews the area and gathers Stealth Stat data to determine the extent and character of the problem. Ms. Salay inquired whether the detailed planning has been completed for the buffer .~".....,.. requirements. She suggested that a 75 percent winter opacity with a heavy installation of spruce trees would protect the backyards and provide privacy. Mr. Phillabaum responded that discussion has recently begun. The intent is to achieve an opaque buffer with a mix of deciduous evergreens. Ms. Salay noted that where the City has provided opaque buffers, the wooded appearance has alleviated the problem for the residents. She thanked the residents for their participation. She invited residents to become involved in the Community Plan update process, as that is beneficial in protecting the quality of life for the community. Mr. Keenan thanked the staff for their efforts and the residents for their involvement. It has been beneficial, as it has focused attention on the details, such as mounding and the opacity of the buffer. He and Ms. Salay attended a meeting with the residents last week where the potential extension of Eiterman Road to Tuttle Crossing Boulevard was RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of [)ublin City Council --- -- -. .----------- ---- __ Me~til}g-n __ DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC.. FORM NO. 10148 ---- '1----------- _.-----------. --------- -- ---------------- --- I Page 11 I May 15, 2006 Ii Held 20 discussed. If the extension further south to Tuttle were a part of the vote tonight, he could not vote in favor of the extension. Mr. Reiner thanked staff and the residents for their continued involvement in the issue. He inquired if mounding is intended for the tree line. Mounding would normally damage a tree line, but perhaps the mounding would occur in intermediate areas. Mr. Hammersmith stated that Council had the same concerns as staff and will work with the project engineer and architect to ensure the mounding does not damage the root zone of the trees. Mr. Reiner stated that over the years, he has observed that mounding is much more beneficial than plant material in terms of noise abatement and screening. Is the soil to be taken from the road bed? Mr. Hammersmith responded that at this time there has not been enough site work to know the amount of soil that can be anticipated from that source; however, staff will work with the Hilliard Schools to address the mounding need as much as possible. Mr. McCash stated that when Ballantrae was planned in 1999-2000, the traffic flow and traffic patterns were analyzed. As a result, Eiterman was downgraded to a collector from an arterial. Over the years, the City has avoided undertaking the extension of Tuttle Crossing due to traffic concerns for this area of Dublin. However, the extension of Eiterman between Ballantrae and Rings is critical for safety/fire access. Currently, 45-52 homes sites in Section 9 do not have that access. He believes the extension to Rings Road is necessary. South of that, he shares the same reservations expressed by others. The intent has been to eliminate extraneous traffic in this area. Mrs. Boring thanked staff for the time they have spent on the resolution of this issue. She thanked Council Member Salay for the time she spent as their ward representative with the residents of this area considering and addressing their concerns. She stated that in the past the City has approached this issue from the perspective of not widening roads, but accepting a lower level of service. If this road were not extended, would it be necessary to widen the other roads in the area? Mr. Hammersmith responded that is staff's concern. If Eiterman Road is not extended, the future 17,800 trips per day in 2030 will have to look elsewhere within the system for a route. It has been difficult to maintain the south corridor of Avery Road as a four-lane roadway. The proposed roundabout will help, but it is on the fringe of becoming a six- lane roadway. That does not meet the desired community character for that area as indicated by the Community Plan -- a four-lane roadway was to be the widest roadway. Not extending Eiterman Road would impact the adjacent roadways. Mrs. Boring stated that not extending Eiterman Road will impact the other roads in the system, which have many curb cuts. She believes it is important to stay on track with the plans for this roadway, which is its extension to Rings Road. Vice Mayor Lecklider agreed with previous comments of Council members. He recognized staff for their thorough work on this issue and the residents for their involvement. The residents' concerns have contributed to a very thorough analysis. While they may not be entirely satisfied with the result, they can appreciate that there was a great deal of study on this issue. He is assured that, ultimately, the community will have a result that everyone will be satisfied with. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that at one time, there was a more positive consideration of the future extension of Eiterman Road to Tuttle Crossing Boulevard. A different configuration is now being considered due to the concern for the Ballantrae subdivision and the Central Ohio Innovation Center. There is a desire to move traffic to that area as opposed to traveling through neighborhoods. Certainly, it is the sentiment of Council not to have Eiterman Road extend to Tuttle Crossing Boulevard, and staff is expected to give that serious consideration when an ultimate recommendation is made at a later date. The timing is not as the City would have chosen, but Hilliard Schools are now prepared to break ground for this school. To facilitate that, it is essential for Council to make a decision tonight. Mounding and buffering elements are expected to be planned and implemented to the greatest extent economically feasible. Dublin is known to take great care to protect the quality of life of its residents whenever adjacent development is occurring. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of --_.._-_._..._-~_._--- Dublin City Council Meeting ---- --DAYTON-LEGAL BLANK, INC.. FORM NO:101~' --- ~--- -------- ------r;"ay 15, 2006 Page 12 . Held 20 Vice Mayor Lecklider moved to approve the extension of Eiterman Road to Rings Road. Mr. Reiner seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mr. McCash, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Vice Mayor Lecklider, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes. . Final Plat - Emerald Parkway Phase 58 (NE Quad PUD, Subarea 58 and lifeTime Fitness PUD); Ms. Brautigam stated that the recommendations of the Planning Commission are included in Council's packet. Mr. Reiner noted that the proposed street tree planting for the center median includes a Winter King Hawthorn. That particular species has a multitude of thorns and could scratch the finish of any vehicle coming into contact with it. He referred to the lifeTime Fitness project, noting that the plan indicates a curb cut into the forest. During the previous discussion, Mr. McCash had requested that the curb cut be removed in order to avoid cutting down these trees Mr. Hammersmith responded that in the final site plan approval, the curb cut was moved further south to avoid cutting down the trees. Mr. Reiner moved to replace the Winter King Hawthorn from the median street tree design with a species without thorns. Mrs. Boring seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mr. McCash, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Vice Mayor Lecklider, yes. Mrs. Boring stated that it appears that the tree preservation waiver is not being adhered to on that site. Ms. Salay agreed. When she drove through the area recently, she observed that a large number of trees had been removed from the site. Mrs. Boring stated that this was a major issue discussed and one of the conditions for approval. Something has transpired that was not agreed upon. Mr. Hammersmith stated that over three years ago, Council adopted the tree preservation waivers for Sections 5A and 58. Staff also noticed the large number of trees removed and is conducting an accounting per the terms of the tree waiver granted. That report will be forwarded to Council when complete. Mrs. Boring requested that staff also review the site of the lifeTime Fitness Center, particularly along Hard Road. Mr. Hammersmith indicated staff would do so. Mr. Keenan moved approval of the final plat. Vice Mayor Lecklider seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Vice Mayor Lecklider, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes. . Final Plat - Villas at Glenealy Mr. Gunderman stated this is the final plat for a development of 22 four-unit buildings. This plat contains the street alignment for the continuation of Innovation Drive through the center of this project. The final plat divides the site into two primary parcels and several reserves. Mrs. Boring stated that part of the condition of approval for this project was that Council would be provided a copy of the deed restrictions at the time of the request for final plat approval to ensure that the issue of renting versus owning units was addressed. Was that information included in the packet? Mr. Gunderman stated that he believes the appropriate documents are on file. Mrs. Boring stated that because it was a condition for approval, she cannot vote affirmatively for this item tonight. Joel Rhoades. Epcon Communities. 500 Stonehenqe Parkwav, Dublin stated that the deed restrictions were submitted as required for the final development plan approval. They have not changed. It is impossible to submit final documents until the first homes RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS _ Minutes L___________~. Dublin City Coun~iL_______u___ _MeelllL DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC.. FORM NO. 10148 -~ -~----- -------- -~ 11--=--------------- May 15, 2006 Page 13 Held 20 are substantially complete. However, Epcon Communities is committed to the draft that was submitted earlier. Mrs. Boring reviewed the condition as stated on page 14 of the August 18, 2005 Planning and Zoning Commission minutes: "(12) That the deed restrictions limiting the number of units an owner may possess be submitted with the Final Development Plan for review and approval of the Planning and Zoning Commission." Mr. Rhoades responded that the condition was discussed at the January 5, 2006 meeting with Attorney Ben Hale. It was indicated that the draft condominium documents that were submitted satisfied that condition, and no additional documents were required. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher inquired about the provisions of the draft document submitted by The Epcon Communities and approved by staff. Mr. Gunderman responded that he does not recall the particulars of the document, but he does recall that the discussion at the meeting indicated that staff was satisfied that the condition had been met. Mr. Rhoades noted that a draft "Declaration of Condominium" document was provided per the August 18, 2005 condition for the January 5, 2006 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. Mr. McCash stated that he assumes that the materials for the January 5 meeting contained a copy of the deed restrictions addressing the number of units an owner may possess and that it was determined the condition was thereby met. There is no further condition noted in the January 5 Record of Action to indicate that issue remained outstanding. Mr. Gunderman responded that was the belief of both staff and the Commission. Mr. McCash stated that the condition that Mrs. Boring's comment refers to is the issue regarding the issue of owner occupancy versus rental. The August 18 condition does not state that the owners would be prohibited from renting out their units, only that the number they could own would be limited. Mrs. Boring responded that issue has been addressed previously with other developers such as Homestead. Ownership of more than one unit has been prohibited to ensure the development does not turn into a rental community. A document to that effect must then be on file. Mr. Gunderman responded that he believes there is such a document on file, and Council could make that a condition of the approval. Vice Mayor Lecklider stated that the language of condition #12 implies that it would be possible to own more than one unit. The intent of the limitation is not clearly stated. Mrs. Boring responded that is the basis of her concern. She was not certain that staff had received a final document that specified the limitation. Her understanding was that the intent was not to limit individual ownership to one unit. Mr. McCash noted that it could be acceptable to own two units, living in one and renting the second. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that the deed restriction, whatever it is, limits the number of units an individual may possess. Council needs to know exactly what that restriction is. Vice Mayor Lecklider inquired what the intent was - was it to restrict ownership to one, two, or more units? Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked why the minutes do not clarify the intent that led to the ultimate conditions. Why don't the minutes include this discussion? Mr. Gunderman responded that he cannot explain why that discussion was not included RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of ________H___Dublin City CounciJ._ ___u_ __~_M~~lLnz_ _ ---- DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC.. FORM NO. 10'48 __..._______._ _ ~---.-..------- --------- May 15, 2006 Page 14 I, Held 20 I in the minutes. Mrs. Boring stated that she is not certain that the discussion wasn't included in the minutes. There was a lengthy discussion at the August 18 meeting resulting in the condition that the applicant provide the document. If it was then provided, perhaps no further discussion occurred at the later hearing. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that the following discussion is included on page 12 of the August 18 P&Z minutes: "Mr. Hale agreed to a condition that their deed restrictions contain a provision against rental. He said it could state that they would submit deed restrictions at the time of the final development plan for Commission review and approval. He said they were not building a rental community. Ms. Boring and Mr. Saneholtz said it was not planned to be a rental community today, but asked what about in the future. Steve Smith, Jr. said if the deed restrictions were part of the final development plan, they could address the Commission's concerns. Ms. Boring asked if it needed to be made part of the text that the deed restrictions will say this. Mr. Smith responded that if the Commission wanted to add a condition stating that they will bring it back as part of the final development for the Commission's review, it would be sufficient. Mr. Hale [said] he did not object to a provision against rentals. " Ms. Salay inquired what Mr. Rhoades' understanding of the condition is and if he believes the document submitted met that condition. Mr. Rhoades responded that their understanding was that the Villas at Glenealy would not be a rental community. However, it was also his understanding that no owner would be prohibited from renting his unit as frequently occurs in any other residential subdivision. The draft Declaration of Condominium submitted for the January 5, 2006 meeting was a standard condominium document, which staff considered similar to those of other Dublin condominium communities. They were satisfied and it was not an issue that was discussed further. Mr. Reiner inquired if Mr. Rhoades had the authority to verbally commit to meet the requirement of this condition on behalf of the applicant. Mr. Rhodes responded that he could do so, but it would be necessary to clarify the requirement. Mr. Reiner requested the Law Director to clarify the terms. Mr. Smith inquired if the Planning Commission and Council's intent was to ensure that this development not become a rental community. While any individual owner might rent out their own unit, they would be prohibited from owning additional units that in turn could be rented. Is that what the draft Declaration of Condominium provides? Mr. Rhoades responded that the draft document does not prohibit ownership of multiple units. Mr. McCash noted that it would be difficult to restrict ownership - he could perform multiple LLC's of separate ownership. Mr. Smith responded that many condominium documents address that situation. He would need to review the language of this document to determine if it were addressed. Mr. Rhoades responded that the language does not prohibit ownership of multiple units and rental of those units. Mrs. Boring stated that in the past, this type of situation has become a problem for a neighborhood when one individual or entity purchases multiple units and turns them into rentals. Planning and Zoning Commission's intent was to ensure that this condominium community was a neighborhood, not transitional housing, and limiting the number of units that one individual owns would accomplish that. However, she does not believe P&Z necessarily wanted to restrict the ownership to one unit - perhaps it was two. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that it would be necessary for staff to provide the draft condominium documents at the next Council meeting before Council can continue this discussion. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of ----~----_._- Dublin City CounciL~___~u___~~ M_~~ljl)L -----DAYTONi.E~Il~I<! INc:" FO!l'-4 NO.-'~'-48 -_____________ ---------- --------~_._._--------- I May 15, 2006 Page 15 Held 20 Mr. Gunderman noted that he does recall that Mr. Hale described what he considered to be practical restrictions for the condominium documents and that the Planning Commission seemed to consider that would be satisfactory. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher responded that Council has not seen those documents, however, and cannot determine if it would be practical to Council, as well. If Council could review that document at the next meeting, then Council can move forward. Mr. Keenan noted that there is one additional issue. When Council reviewed the concept plan for this development, it was indicated that a fence around the cemetery would be included. He does not see that documented in the minutes or the conditions. Mr. Rhoades responded that he would defer to staff on how that has been documented, but it is included in the owner's commitment. Mr. Gunderman stated that he would check the final development plan for that commitment and would provide documentation for the next Council meeting. Mr. Keenan moved to postpone action on The Villas of Glenealy final plat to the June 5 Council meeting. Ms. Salay seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Ms. Salay, yes; Vice Mayor Lecklider, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes. . Request for Approval to Serve Alcohol in Coffman Park for Dublin Irish Festival on August 4, 5 and 6, 2006 Ms. Brautigam stated that this authorization is requested annually for the Irish Festival. All alcohol servers are required to attend a class before they are permitted to work. A patrol officer is on duty to ensure that no underage drinking occurs on the premises. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher moved approval of the request. Mr. Keenan seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Vice Mayor Lecklider, yes. . Request for Approval to Serve Alcohol on City-owned Property at Bridgel High Streets in conjunction with the Great Race on June 26, 2006 Ms. Brautigam stated that the Historic Dublin Business Association requests permission to sell alcohol on City-owned property in the Historic Dublin business district during the Great Race. Vice Mayor Lecklider stated that his wife recently attended the Parents Encouraging Responsible Choices (PERC) town hall meeting, which some City Council members also attended. His wife reported that some citizens expressed concern that City Council is sending a mixed message by serving alcohol on public property. The Historic Dublin Business Association (HDBA) views this event as a good opportunity to raise money for their Association, and the City wants to see the HDBA succeed. However, a few years ago, the City denied the Kiwanis permission to serve alcohol on City parkland. He will not attempt to fight an uphill battle in regard to the Irish Festival, but would it be possible to counterbalance that by sending a consistent message to the youth of the community in regard to other City events? Ms. Puskarcik noted that there was an earlier discussion concerning beer sales at Bridge and High. As this is a family event, it was considered prudent to contain the area, limiting the space where alcohol could be purchased. Mrs. Boring stated that there are already four businesses with patios in Historic Dublin where alcohol can be purchased. She opposes the sale of alcohol on City property. In addition, this particular event is about "driving," and drinking and driving are not compatible. Ms. Salay stated that she attended a follow-up to the town hall meeting this morning. She was given a list of the questions asked at the town hall meeting. Because many of the questions related to the City, she volunteered to obtain answers to those questions and to then forward the responses to the PERC group. One of the questions was: RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of __~____ Dublin City Council__._n_~___ __M~~tiIlL_ -. --- DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC., FORM NO. 10148 - .---------------- ------ ----- --~----_.__.- r-----------.------- May 15, 2006 Page 16 !i Held 20 "What can be done about all the alcohol-related events in Dublin? They begin with St. Patrick's Day and continue through the football season." That caught her attention. She had not previously considered the City's impact as a community on underage drinking and an "alcohol culture" the City might be promoting at family-type events. The Blarney Bash, for instance, is a family event at which alcohol is served. In regard to tonight's request, she believes it is not necessary to serve alcohol at the Great Race event. While she, too, wants to see the Historic Dublin Business Association succeed, it is important to be consistent with her vote. When the Kiwanis wanted to serve alcohol, their reasons were also compelling. She voted against that request, so she will vote against this request for the same reasons. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher inquired if the reason this request is before Council is due to the location. HDBA could serve alcohol at another site that is not City-owned property. Ms. Puskarcik responded that she is not certain there is another space that could accommodate this event in Historic Dublin that is not City-owned. Mr. Keenan stated that an argument could be made for keeping this activity under the City's control. City workers would be on site and volunteers would be trained to serve alcohol. If alcohol isn't sold at this site, the event attendees would have access to alcohol via coolers in cars. It isn't possible to control the behavior of a crowd of 8,000- 10,000 in this type of environment. Mrs. Boring responded that is all the more reason for alcohol not to be sold on the City's property. Ms. Salay noted that the City has an open container law that would address those issues. Mr. Keenan responded that even so, prohibiting HDBA from selling alcohol would not help the event. The sale of alcohol was to be a fund raiser for HDBA. Mrs. Boring stated that the message the youth would hear is that it is not possible to have a successful party or event without alcohol. That isn't true, and the City should demonstrate to the youth that it is possible to have a good time at the City's events without alcohol. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that she also attended the first PERC meeting, after which she e-mailed the City Manager and Ms. Puskarcik regarding the issues which were raised. There were statements, not questions, made by two parents. One parent raised the issue, as mentioned previously, regarding the City's events at which alcohol is served, such as the Blarney Bash and the Irish Festival. On Independence Day, however, significant checking is done to prohibit people from bringing alcohol into that event, yet some continue to attempt to do so and succeed. Another individual raised the concern that at the Irish Festival, the majority of people earning money from sales are from school booster programs. It seemed inconsistent that the school formed the PERC group and are working to promote parent education on how to talk to children about not drinking alcohol or taking drugs, yet the same people are using the means of alcohol sales to raise money to run the youth organizations. The City should seek other adult groups who want to raise money through sales of alcohol at the Festival, not youth- oriented groups. The Kiwanis group sponsors the annual Frog Jump, a family event. Previously, they requested permission to sell alcohol in Coffman Park. They proposed to raise money from an evening event including entertainment, which would follow the Frog Jump. The theory was that the parents would take their children home and return later in the evening. The City denied their request on the basis that it was inconsistent with the purpose of the Frog Jump, and that it was unlikely many parents would be able to return three hours later for a second event. Kiwanis ultimately found another way in which to raise funds. She does not see the need for either of these types of organizations'to sell alcohol. Ms. Puskarcik responded that the Historic Dublin Business Association would like to attract participants to the Historic Dublin business area for the entire day. There will be many options, including a kids' area, a National Guard presentation, and entertainment provided by the Great Race organization. Alcohol sales will occur in a location designated for adults. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of ---------.---- - --"-.-- .-....--- Dublin City Council_ .._ MeeJing..... _ DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC.. FORM NO. 10148 -- -~~-_._.- ---- r~eld May 15, 2006 Page 17 20 Mr. Keenan moved approval of the request. Mr. Reiner seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mr. Keenan, yes; Ms. Salay, no; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Mrs. Boring, no; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Vice Mayor Lecklider, no. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that the City needs to have an internal discussion on how to work in partnership with PERC. It is important to establish a City policy and then a level of consistency between the policy and City activities. This is no longer a parent to parent issue but a matter that needs authoritative leadership from the community leaders. Perhaps a community leaders group should also be formed to have a dialogue with the parents to develop an understanding of what realistically could be achieved. . Appointment of Acting Clerk of Council Ms. Salay moved to approve Ms. Judy Beal as Acting Clerk of Council for the period of May 14 - May 19, 2006. Mr. Keenan seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Ms. Salay, yes; Vice Mayor Lecklider, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes. COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS/COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE Mr. Reiner: Reported that the Public Services Committee met on Monday, May 8 to discuss potential reduction of fire suppression capacity charges. The staff information provided indicated the City of Dublin is very competitive with other communities in relation to capacity charges. After discussion, the Committee voted to recommend that the City maintain the current policy/fee structure. The issue may be revisited if the City learns of other financing options developed by other communities. There was no further discussion from Council regarding the Committee recommendation. Mr. McCash: 1. Reported that a problem exists at the Golf Club of Dublin that has resulted in recent altercations between golfers and the residents of properties adjoining the golf course. The residents are using the golf course cart paths during the hours of play. This is a safety issue. Could signs be posted prohibiting residents' use of the cart paths during the hours of play? In addition, there have also been incidents of residents hitting golf balls at the players, evidently because balls were inadvertently hit into their yards. There are laws prohibiting interference with hunters. Are there similar laws prohibiting resident interference with the golfers? Ms. Brautigam responded that the golf cart paths are not public pathways. They are privately owned. The City can remind residents of that in the next civic association newsletter. Ms. Salay noted that some of the bikepaths in the area are in close proximity to the golf cart paths. This might be confusing to the residents. Some discreet signage could perhaps address the problem. Mrs. Borinq: 1. Stated that there are some safety problems where bikepaths cross streets. There are stop signs on the bikepaths, but they are not being seen by the cyclists. Could staff identify some method to inform cyclists of this safety issue in terms of interaction with vehicles? Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher suggested that a notice be posted on the cable television channel informing residents that bikepath stops exist at all street intersections. Staff will investigate ways to resolve this issue. 2. Reported that the Administrative Committee met on Monday, May 8 to discuss the employee dental benefits plan. Mr. Harding informed the committee that the UCR limitation is no longer imposed on the dental services component and there are no preferred providers. The Committee also discussed the possibility of increasing the annual limit for major dental work and for orthodontia services. Additional information was requested from staff for further consideration of that RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council -~--_._- Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC.. FORM NO. 10!48 II May 15, 2006 Page 18 Held 20 issue. Mr. Keenan: " 1. Reported that he attended the May 2 Dublin Arts Council Board meeting. He learned that Executive Director David Guion has scheduled a meeting with Cheryl Herbert, Dublin Methodist Hospital to discuss locating art sculpture exhibits in the hospital garden. Mr. Guion was recently approached by the owner of the Camden Professional Center at Woerner-Temple and Emerald Parkway and asked to assist them in finding an artist to create a sculpture appropriate for their site. Mr. Guion has also met with UMC Partners to discuss a public art display for the 450-foot front fac;ade of the super particle accelerator facility; discussions are ongoing. Finally, there is an arbitration meeting scheduled for mid-June regarding the River Watch public arts piece. 2. Thanked staff for their coordination of the Indian Run Falls Park dedication that occurred this afternoon. Many citizens attended the event. Speakers included Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher; Denise King, Washington Township Trustee; resident historian Herb Jones; John Orr, Indian Run Elementary School principal; and City Parks and Open Space Director, Fred Hahn. Several Council members attended as well. 3. Noted that two US 33 Corridor meetings are scheduled this month -- an executive committee meeting and a meeting of the whole group. There are some important issues pending regarding the formation of an accord and he will bring back additional information to Council for future discussion. 4. Noted that the first meeting of the Veterans Monument Committee will be held tomorrow, May 16. 5. Noted that Washington Township firefighter, Lt. Collier passed away today after a short battle with cancer. He leaves behind a wife and three young sons. Services are being scheduled for later this week at the Dublin Baptist Church. Ms. Salay: 1. Stated that she attended a PERC meeting this morning. The PERC group would like to engage all aspects of the community in their efforts. She forwarded the questions posed by PERC to the City Manager, asking her to forward the questions to the appropriate staff for brief responses, which she will, in turn, forward to the committee. She agrees that it will be necessary to engage this group and have a discussion about the City's role in the culture of the community in regard to underage drinking and alcohol use and abuse, in general. It is important not only to the parents, but to the community as well, that children are making healthy choices. 2. Noted that many businesses throughout the community are displaying small, inexpensive plastic signs promoting a particular event or service. Although some remove the signs in a timely manner, others businesses are neglecting to remove the signs. She asked that Code Enforcement check on these. Vice Mavor Lecklider congratulated Mr. Hahn on the Indian Run Falls Park project and thanked staff for the nice dedication event coordinated today. This park is an incredible jewel within the community and it exists only a short walk from the four lanes of traffic on SR 161. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher: 1. Noted that she has been appointed by the Franklin County Commissioners to the Housing Advisory Board. It is primarily responsible for housing projects for special groups, senior housing, and deals with major development and redevelopment of areas. They meet monthly to review applications submitted. 2. Reminded Council members to respond to Ms. Puskarcik regarding their availability to work in the hospitality tent during Memorial Tournament week. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublill City Council Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC.. FORM NO. 10148 May 15, 2006 Page 19 Held 20 3. Reminded Council members that Council will be hosting its own appreciation event on Thursday, June 1 at the Muirfield Pavilion during the Memorial Tournament. The Dublin Chamber of Commerce Board of Directors, Dublin Board of Education, Dublin Arts Council Board, and Dublin Convention and Visitors Bureau Board are some of the groups that have been invited. At the event, City Council will recognize its volunteer board and commission members for their service. 4. Reminded Council members of the trip to Franklin, TN this Thursday and Friday, May 18-19. Anyone with questions regarding travel plans should contact Sara Otto 5. Noted that a couple of Council members have commented in regard to the number of meetings in recent months and the impact on personal time. Although she will be out of the country and would not personally benefit, she would like to suggest that the July 10 Council meeting be rescheduled to July 3. That would provide a four-week period without meetings, allowing for family vacations. The July 3rd meeting could be scheduled for only essential legislative items. Following discussion, the July 10 Council meeting was rescheduled to July 3 at 6 p.m. Ms. Ott noted that staff is checking with the Community Plan consultant regarding two potential dates for a Community Plan joint work session - possibly July 31 or August 2. Mrs. Boring suggested that the 1 O-year celebration of the Dublin Community Recreation Center be rescheduled from July 22 to July 29 in keeping with the concept of having a break from City activities. Ms. Ott responded that July 22 was selected to correspond with the original opening date, but she will check to see if that event can also be rescheduled and will report back. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that both she and Vice Mayor Lecklider will be absent for the June 19 City Council meeting. To ensure a quorum, she inquired if four Council members would be present. The remaining Council members indicated they would be present. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher also noted that according to Council's Rules of Order, the next senior Council member - Mrs. Boring - would officiate at the meeting. She inquired if Mrs. Boring would be present and willing to preside. Mrs. Boring indicated she would be willing to do so on June 19. ADJOURNMENT TO EXECUTIVE SESSION Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher moved to adjourn to executive session for discussion of personnel matters and noted that the meeting will be reconvened only to formally adjourn. Vice Mayor Lecklider seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mayor Chinnici- Zuercher, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Vice Mayor Lecklider, yes. The meeting was adjourned to executive session at 9:45 p.m. The meeting was reconvened and formally adjourned at 10: 15 p.m. 1'.. ~ 'A.'i1M1 J A g Clerk of CounCil