HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/02/2004
III
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of ..... Dublin-City-Council Meeting
DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC.. FORM NO. 10148
February 2, 2004 20
Held
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher called the regular meeting of Dublin City Council to order at
7 p.m. on Monday, February 2,2004 at the Dublin Municipal Building.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
- Ms. Salay led the Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL CALL
Present were: Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, Mr. Lecklider, Mrs. Boring, Mr. Keenan, Mr.
McCash, Mr. Reiner and Ms. Salay.
Staff members present were: Ms. Brautigam, Mr. Smith, Mr. McDaniel, Mr. Harding,
Mr. Hammersmith, Mr. Hahn, Mr. Stevens, Ms. Crandall, Ms. Hoyle, Mr. Gunderman,
Ms. Newcomb, and Chief Epperson. Ms. Heal arrived at 7:45 p.m.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Reqular Meetinq of January 5. 2004
Ms. Salay moved approval.
Mr. Leckliderseconded the motion.
Vote on the motion: Mr. McCash, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Keenan,
yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes.
Reqular Meetinq of January 20, 2004
Mr. Lecklider moved approval.
Ms. Salay seconded the motion.
Mr. Keenan requested a correction on page 10, paragraph 3, the word "no" should be
corrected to "g", to read, "there are companies that provide this service at a cost."
...- Mrs. Boring requested that on page 10, paragraph 4, the word "residential" be added
to read, "...the City of Columbus requires an inspection of the residential sprinkler
system. . . "
Mr. Lecklider amended his motion to accept the minutes with the corrections as noted.
Ms. Salay seconded the motion.
Vote on the motion: Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mayor
Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes.
CORRESPONDENCE
The Clerk reported that a Notice to Legislative Authority was sent by the Ohio Division
of Liquor Control regarding transfer of a liquor permit from Big Bear Perimeter to Giant
Eagle Perimeter.
There was no objection to the liquor permit transfer.
CITIZEN COMMENTS
Bill Yoder, 5661 Wilcox Road, stated he was informed that tonight Council would be
discussing the rezoning process which involves his neighborhood. Almost two years
ago, his neighborhood was notified that the City was reclassifying the properties within
that neighborhood to a parallel City zoning classification. However, the new zoning
classification, Rural, was not parallel to the existing township zoning of R1 B. In
addition, spot zoning was to be included within the neighborhood, which would allow
negative uses that were not formerly permitted, such as: roadside truck sales, storage
-. and processing facilities, crematory mausoleums, cell tower communications
installations, kennels, animal hospitals, veterinary offices, mobile homes, guest
houses, farm tenement/labor quarters, retail sales, garden supply nurseries and
greenhouses. Those uses are not appropriate in a residential area. Other area
properties next to the new proposed Rural zoning were to be placed in a category
which would take away many of the rights to use the land as it had been used under
the Washington Township zoning. The new Residential R1 zoning reduced
development densities by a third, eliminated existing agricultural uses from most
properties, and changed setbacks, lot widths and development standards to be much
more restrictive. This would be a massive neighborhood rezoning. Consequently, on
April 8, 2002, his neighborhood presented a petition to Council that direction be given
to staff to reconsider the proposed zoning. (Mr. Yoder distributed a copy of the
petition to Council.) Council directed staff to meet with the residents with the
u , I:' I ,;i ,...,,, ",,,,:: Iidll'.'II:;I ,:.:
I I
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of .Dut?JjIL-Cl4LGouncil Meeting
DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC.. FORM NO. 10148
February 2, 2004 Page 2
Held 20
understanding that changes might be needed in the Code to align the zoning with the
existing township zoning. City staff held several meetings with the neighborhood
residents in an attempt to work out the differences. A 1974 City ordinance required
,-.... newly annexed properties to be reclassified to the Dublin zoning classification that
most closely approximated the former township zoning. The residents requested staff
to place the neighborhood into a PLR or PUD, which could be made to match the
township zoning as closely as practical. This would more closely comply with the
intention of the 1974 law. It would also be consistent with the other existing PLR's
and PUD's in the area, and would not require any changes in the Dublin Code. The
PLR or PUD could be crafted in such a way as to provide for the agricultural uses that
existed in the prior Washington zoning classification, yet not allow any of the negative
uses of the Dublin Rural zoning text. The property values and rural character of the
neighborhood would be protected. This would be a different zoning for the
neighborhood than depicted on recent zoning maps, but where did the new
designations on the proposed zoning map originate? The first zoning map he was
given was labeled "draft," and the residents were never notified of a public hearing on
rezoning the neighborhood. The residents believe the original zoning should be
honored, not a draft map with an errant zoning classification. To say that this
reclassification is a simple housekeeping procedure is misleading - it is a massive
zoning reclassification, with significant impacts on the neighbors and on the
properties. In response to Council's 2002 direction, the residents have worked with
City staff and believe a resolution is near. They are awaiting the last staff review
before seeking final neighborhood approval. He requests that Council permit the
process begun with the residents two years ago to reach its final resolution.
...- Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that this subject is listed later on tonight's agenda
under "Other." The City Manager will report on questions that have arisen with the
Planning and Zoning Commission.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that Mr. Hale had previously requested that the UDF
topic be moved forward on the agenda. Dublin resident, Mr. Sirnbrich, has also
indicated an interest in addressing that topic. Because Mr. Hale no longer intends an
early departure, she will not move that agenda item forward, if Mr. Sirnbrich is
agreeable. Mr. Sirnbrich indicated that he was agreeable.
LEGISLATION
SECOND READING/PUBLIC HEARING - ORDINANCES
COMPENSA TlON PLAN
Ordinance 01-04 (Amended)
Amending Certain Sections of Ordinance No 98-96 (Compensation Plan).
Mr. Harding noted that Ordinance 01-04 was introduced at the January 5th Council
meeting, and Council referred it to the Administrative Committee for review and
recommendations. The Administrative Committee met on January 14th, and the
Committee's recommendations are attached to the ordinance cover memo, which is
included in Council's packets.
..---. Mr. Harding noted that the Committee concurred with staff's recommendations on all
points, but two, and have recommended amendments to: (1) the proposal to provide
partial personal, sick, and vacation benefits and longevity pay to part-time permanent
employees, and (2) the temporary work assignment provision. At the Committee
meeting, staff withdrew the proposal for personal, sick, vacation and longevity pay
benefits to permanent part-time employees and recommended the provision of 32
annual hours of paid time off for permanent part-time staff, to be used for any reason.
That benefit would be provided to permanent part-time employees who worked a
minimum of 1,040 hours the previous year. Regarding the second amendment: the
present City policy states that if an employee is required to perform the duties of a
higher job classification for more than five days, that individual will be compensated
with a pay supplement retroactive to the first day they began to perform those
additional duties. However, the Administrative Committee recommends the threshold
"I 1:" 'n"I:,",' mal, }ll:J " ..1
I. j,!,1 I l Ll,;)d!J': Fi~I:"di1td!!_U:ti+HIElii:H!'HFii/1Hikt0~liliiF'< mi'f,I_!dij~HH,+'~,:"l:i, IilE, , I
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of DL1ttlin-Ci4L-CollfiCil- Meeting
DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC.. FORM NO. 10148
February 2, 2004 Page 3
Held 20
for that policy be increased from five days to ten days and retroactivity to Day One
would not be automatic; it would be at the discretion of the City Manager.
-. Mr. Harding noted that an additional revision is requested, which has been included in
Section14 of the amended ordinance. Following the January 14th Administrative
Committee meeting, staff became aware that the most senior permanent, part-time
employee was unable to meet the requirement of 1040 hours in year 2003, due to
circumstances beyond his/her control. Therefore, staff requests that in year 2004 all
permanent part-time employees be awarded the 32 hours of paid time off, irrespective
of the number of hours worked in 2003. The condition would be implemented in
January 2005.
Mr. McCash, Administrative Committee Chair, noted that this ordinance was referred
to Committee review due to the number of significant changes proposed; however,
most of those changes have been removed from the proposed ordinance.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher inquired if there was Committee discussion regarding the
effect of the pay grade upgrades on other employees. Will these upgrades result in
other reclassifications?
Mr. McCash stated that Mr. Harding explained to the Committee that reclassifications
to higher pay grades do not occur arbitrarily. If the job duties and responsibilities have
increased over time, the supervisor submits a request to Mr. Harding that the job be
re-evaluated to determine if the job should be reclassified to a higher pay grade.
"..-. There were no further questions.
Vote on the Ordinance: Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr.
Keenan, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes.
BOARD/COMMISSION RESTRUCTURING
Ordinance 04-04 (Amended)
Amending Sections 32.60 through 32.61 and Repealing Sections 32.50 through
32.55 of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Dublin, Combining the Duties
and Functions of the Natural Resources Advisory Commission and the
Community Services Advisory Commission into a Newly Configured
Community Services Advisory Commission.
Ms. Brautigam 'noted that at the January 5th meeting, Council requested a few
changes, which have been incorporated into the revised ordinance. One of those
changes was to add some of the duties of the Natural Resources Advisory
Commission. In addition, when the ordinance was originally written, two sections
were inadvertently left out. A Council member noted this omission, and Section 3 A,
B, and C are also included in the revision.
Mrs. Boring inquired if the title was also amended.
- Ms. Crandall responded that the version which the Clerk has prepared for signature
tonight amends the previous "Amending Sections 32.60 through 32.65..." to
"Amending Sections 32.60 through 32.61... "
Mr. McCash inquired if the current members of the two commissions would serve on
the combined commission with a re-assignment of term expirations.
Ms. Crandall responded that Council would need to determine if they desire to appoint
the members of the two absolved commissions to the new commission. If so, that
appointment would occur with a separate resolution.
Vote on the Ordinance: Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Ms. Salay,
yes; Mr. McCash, no; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes.
1 1 I "I I , :1i~t.:I::i!:I:<::} IIUU!(iPk! I ,
i ! I
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of .DuiJlin,CiiY'-C.o.unciL Meeting
DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC.. FORM NO. 10148
February 2, 2004 Page 4
Held 20
INTRODUCTION/FIRST READING - ORDINANCES
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
~ Ordinance 06-04
Authorizing the Execution and Delivery of an Economic Development
Agreement Between the City of Dublin and CoreSource to Induce a Relocation
of its Operations to the City in Order to Increase Employment within the City.
Mr. Stevens requested Ordinance 06-04 not be introduced at this time and that the
first reading be re-scheduled for the next Council meeting. On Friday, he spoke with a
representative of CoreSource, and became aware that changes to the agreement
were necessary. Council action should be deferred until a revised agreement has
been prepared for Council's review.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that the first reading of this ordinance would be
scheduled on the next meeting agenda.
CODE AMENDMENT
Ordinance 07-04
Amending Chapter 151, Flood Control, of the Dublin Codified Ordinances
Regulating the Basis for Establishing the Area of Flood Hazard, and Declaring
an Emergency.
Mr. Lecklider introduced the ordinance.
- Mr. Hammersmith stated that the staff report explains the purpose of the amendment.
Mr. Lecklider inquired what the practical effect of the amendment would be.
Mr. Hammersmith responded that it would put the new map into effect. If not enacted,
the residents' flood insurance rates would be negatively impacted.
Mr. Lecklider inquired if the revision reflects a recession of the floodplain.
Mr. Hammersmith indicated that the alignment of the floodplain has been adjusted as
a result of recent studies. The adjustment favorably impacts property owners.
Mr. Keenan inquired if there were no negative changes that staff can ascertain.
Mr. Hammersmith affirmed there were none.
Mr. Reiner moved to dispense with the public hearing and treat this as emergency
legislation.
Mr. Keenan seconded the motion.
Vote on the motion: Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes;
Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes.
Vote on the Ordinance: Ms. Salay, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr.
- McCash, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes.
INTRODUCTION/PUBLIC HEARING;~..RESOLUTIONS
RESOLUTION OF INTENT
Resolution 04-04
Intent to Appropriate a Combined 0.513 Acre, More or Less, Fee Simple
Interest and a Combined 0.096 Acre, More or Less, Temporary
Construction Easement, from Richard W. Anderson, Located West of
Wilcox Road, City of Dublin, County of Franklin, State of Ohio.
Ms. Salay introduced the Resolution.
I I I I ; i'WI::-i:,I: IIHlk i?l::llit I ,i.:; j .:
, . .:::;;~_,":;;1Hf.ll::tAM'#liIUNd,j'itI&J:~1:",~J.I:kthUJllHi,iJitj:J';:jt;mmt:.!i:~~'1! JlIi;~'flil~t.; .; UH.Htr J: .::^'~IfHWI < I
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of nil b lilLCity_CounciL Meeting
DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC.. FORM NO. 10148
February 2, 2004 Page 5
Held 20
Mr. Smith stated that this is part of the Southwest Area Traffic Calming, Phase
3. The City had a right of entry to build the road. However, the City has been
unsuccessful in negotiations with the property owner and must begin the
- process of acquisition through eminent domain.
Vote on the Resolution: Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes;
Ms. Salay, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. McCash,
yes.
AGREEMENT
Resolution 05-04
A Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Enter into an Agreement
with the Ohio Department of Transportation for the Purpose of Installing
a Cable Barrier in the Median on Portions of 1-270 Within the Corporation
Limits of the City of Dublin.
Mr. Keenan introduced the Resolution.
Mr. Hammersmith stated that this is consent legislation to allow ODOT to proceed with
safety improvements to 1-270. The improvements will occur in the area between
Trabue Road and S.R. 161. City approval is needed for the work within Dublin
corporation limits, which would be the area between Tuttle Road and S.R. 161.
Photographs have been included in the staff report to give Council an indication of the
cable barrier's appearance. The median is approximately 32 feet wide. There has
been a high occurrence of crossover accidents in this particular area in recent years,
~ and the cable barrier will help prevent similar accidents.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher inquired if the barrier would be placed down the middle of
the median.
Mr. Hammersmith responded that the barrier is placed two feet off the paved shoulder,
which will leave a two-foot strip of grass off the edge of the roadway. In Dublin, that
would be to the left of the northbound lane.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that staff's memo indicates that installation of the
cable barrier would be at ODOT's expense; however, any additional features would be
Dublin's expense. She inquired if landscaping to camouflage the barrier would be
desirable, or if the two-foot strip would be too narrow.
Mr. Hammersmith responded that two feet would rather small, and OOOT would also
require Dublin to maintain that area. The height of the barrier would be approximately
48 inches.
Mr. Reiner noted that only one side of the barrier could be camouflaged. However,
many states add landscaping to the medians, as it reduces eyestrain to the drivers,
particularly at night. The light from headlights of oncoming traffic is significantly
reduced. Although screening may not be required, it would be nice for Dublin to set a
I'"'""- higher standard within its corporation limits. If Dublin were to landscape along the
barrier, however, it would be necessary to select salt-hardy plants due to the road salt
used in winters.
Mrs. Boring inquired if staff could investigate the possibilities. Perhaps plant materials
could be placed on both sides of the barrier.
Mr. Lecklider stated that while he agrees that the barrier is unsightly, it is no more
unsightly than the concrete barrier visible when proceeding north. The cost of
maintenance is the real issue. He inquired if there is a greater incidence of
automobile crossovers than truck crossovers. Would this barrier prevent a tractor-
trailer crossover?
I
I i I Ii .i:hll'AII'i !iii ltl'llttll!H "i,iil,i!I,lil:HI"UIII:: I il+IlHlk J .",lxtU, I . II
i i' I
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of Dllblin City COI m.ciL Meeting
DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC.. FORM NO. 10148
February 2, 2004 Page 6
Held 20
Mr. Hammersmith stated that while the barrier would eliminate automobile crossovers,
it would only slow down a tractor-trailer.
- Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher requested staff to investigate the potential cost of
maintenance of such screening.
Mr. Hammersmith responded that staff would investigate the cost and provide a report
to Council at a later date.
Mr. McCash inquired if it would be wise to take on this responsibility. There are
guardrails along 1-270 within the City's corporation limits that Dublin isn't attempting to
landscape. Why assume significant maintenance cost for a highway component?
Mr. Reiner stated that he would be interested in looking into the possibility. Not only
would it be screening a barrier, it would also be making a statement about the higher
standards of Dublin.
Mr. Keenan inquired if the consent legislation is in response to a request or a direction
from ODOT. What is the level of authority?
Mr. Hammersmith responded that ODOT requests the cooperation of local
jurisdictions. He does not believe ODOT would proceed with the project without that
consent.
Vote on the Resolution: Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher,
..- yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. McCash, yes.
OTHER
. Fee Waiver Request - Dublin A.M. Rotary Club
Ms. Brautigam stated that a fee waiver request has been received from the Dublin AM
Rotary Club for use of the Dublin Community Recreation Center (DCRC) on Saturday,
March 13 and Sunday, March 14. The Rotary Club hosts Rotary international
exchange students overnight who come to participate in the St. Patrick's Day Parade.
The fee waiver has been granted previously. The total value is $925.
Vote on the request: Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Ms.
Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes.
. Fee Waiver Request - Central Ohio Diabetes Association
Ms. Brautigam stated the Central Ohio Diabetes Association has requested use of the
DCRC's aquatic facilities to host their annual Swim for Diabetes Business Swim on
March 5th and annual Swim for Diabetes on March 7th. This fee waiver has also been
granted previously. The total value is $594.00.
Mr. Lecklider inquired if any complaints have been received concerning use of the Rec
Center pool for this purpose.
Ms. Brautigam was not aware of any complaints.
Vote on the request: Mr. McCash, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mrs. Boring; yes; Mr. Keenan,
yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes.
-
. Fee Waiver Request - Conditional Use Application - Dublin Schools
Ms. Brautigam stated that Dublin COffman and Dublin Scioto applied for and received
special permits from the Board of Zoning Appeals for the temporary use of portable
classrooms. The following year, the City neglected to pursue the required annual
permit renewals. This year, the City realized the oversight and requested the permit
renewals. Although the schools have filed the appropriate documents, City staff
recommends waiving the fee due to the fact that: (1) the oversight was the City's; (2)
Dublin Jerome High School will open soon, and the portable classrooms will be
removed; (3) this would encourage a good relationship with the Dublin Schools.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher inquired if it is certain that the portable classrooms will be
removed.
II i I Hi!' n'I>'" IIIIW .,111'1 I j '!I
.l..."I~1 ; ~"_~-'-'-_ .....:.:.~.:;jJLLJ;~-~~~;I;:>i_J;:_,j~lV4iJ;til'i:t;1~I!':j:h_ '.L 1I~.i!tlliljf4"H~lIitlH!i!tj;,.~!:~bJ#l:.:,t:;:~bt: :
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of r1ublln-Ci4':-C-ounciL--.- Meeting
DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC.. FORM NO. 10148
February 2, 2004 Page 7
Held 20
Ms. Brautigam stated that a condition of the permit is that the portable classrooms be
removed when the permanent facility is completed.
,.,.......,
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that neglect of annual permit renewals for temporary
structures has been a recurring problem. She suggested that a tickler file be
established for this purpose.
Mr. Gunderman responded that such a tickler file has recently been established.
Mr. McCash inquired if the schools have acquired variances from the Building Code
for accessibility and snow removal requirements. Students have complained about
slipping on the stairs that have not been cleared. He clarified that a variance for
Building Code requirements must be obtained from the State, rather than the City's
Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA). Perhaps the Building Division could check to see if
such variances were obtained; if not, the City could notify the schools of the Code
requirements for snow/ice removal.
Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher inquired if it were possible to obtain a variance not to clear
steps.
Mr. McCash stated that it would be possible to obtain a variance not to cover the
steps. The Code requires that building steps be covered to minimize snow/ice
accumulation.
-. Vote on the request: Ms. Salay, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Lecklider,
yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes.
. Formal Withdrawal of Development Plan/Conditional Use - Thomas Kohler
PCD, Subarea E - United Dairy Farmers/Mobil Gas - 5565 Woerner-Temple
Road (Case No. 01-088DP/CU)
Ben Hale, Smith & Hale, stated that his client received Development Plan/ Conditional
Use approval from the Planning Commission, but the case is currently in Common
Pleas Court on appeal. His client has decided not to pursue that development and
would like to formally withdraw their application.
Mr. Smith noted that if Council formally accepts the withdrawal, the appeal will be
dismissed and the issue dropped.
Mark Birnbrich. 5768 Castleknock, stated that he is present tonight to formally thank
those who have assisted the residents in their appeal. He presented a letter of thanks
from the "Neighbors for Responsible Zoning" to each Council member.
He expressed his personal thanks to Dublin City Council, City staff, and the Boards
and Commissions for their leadership. He thanked the developer and his team who
have been working with the residents in a spirit of true collaboration.
Ms. Salay moved to accept UDF's request to withdraw their application.
- Mr. Reiner seconded the motion.
Vote on the motion: Mr. McCash, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mrs. Boring,
yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes.
. Tree Waiver Request - NE Quad PUD Emerald Parkway Phases 5A
and 58
Mr. Gunderman stated this request is similar to several previous tree waiver requests.
It takes advantage of a policy City Council established which applies to well-wooded
properties where it would not be practical to replace the trees on an inch-for-inch
basis, as the ordinance requires. This project is a co-partnership between Sawmill
Partners and the City to reduce the requirement to a tree-for-tree basis. This project
is much larger than those dealt with in the past. There is more length to the roadway
and includes a substantial area of trees. Although roadway design is not completed,
I I 'I I I 'liJiii",,;; Ililll! lJl,d!d' I !',.J , ' II
I :I
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of Dublin-Cll~Co.uncil Meeting
DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC.. FORM NO. 10148
February 2, 2004 Page 8
Held 20
there is a good tree survey for the project. City staff has developed estimates on the
trees to be replaced or fee paid in lieu of. With the tree waivers, approval is given on
a tree-for-tree, rather than inch-for-inch basis. He noted that in this particular case,
- the calculations are not as solid as in most cases.
Mr. Hale stated that the developer has been working with City staff a year and a half,
and a development plan is proposed which will preserve most of the three substantial
stands of trees on this property. Only those trees will be removed which are essential
for the construction of roads. This meets the intention of the City's ordinance, which is
to preserve as many stands of trees as possible.
Mr. Lecklider inquired if the charts on the second page of the memo reflect tree-for-
tree calculations.
Mr. Hale responded that the non-Iandma.rk trees are calculated on a tree-for-tree
basis, and the landmark trees are on an inch-for-inch basis.
Mr. Gunderman agreed and stated that, using that calculation, the recommended tree
replacement for this waiver would be for a total of approximately 672.5 inches.
Planting 269 2-~ inch caliper trees or paying a fee of $67,250 or some combination
thereof would accomplish that.
Vote on the request: Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mrs.
Boring, yes; Mr. McCash; yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Ms. Salay, yes.
-. . Tree Waiver Request - Wyandotte Woods Boulevard
Mr. Gunderman noted that the location of this road has been revised in an attempt to
help preserve as many trees as possible. Although most of the development is
located outside the treed area, a road remains through that area.
Vote on the request: Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Ms. Salay,
yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher,
yes.
· Appointment of Actina Clerk
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that Ms. Clarke, Clerk of Council, will be on vacation
Wednesday, February 4th, through Thursday, February 12th, and requests that Ms.
Beal, Deputy Clerk, be appointed Acting Clerk in her absence.
Mr. Keenan moved to appoint Ms. Beal as Acting Clerk of Council in Ms. Clarke's
absence.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Lecklider.
Vote on the motion: Ms. Salay, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr., Lecklider,
yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Mr. Reiner~ yes; Mr. Keenan, yes.
CITY MANAGER/STAFF REPORTS
· Traffic Calmina Proaram Update
-- Mr. Hammersmith stated that an updateon the City's traffic calming program was
provided in Council's packets. The policy has been revised and updated into a
program of education and enforcement before progressing to traffic studies and
implementation of traffic calming measures. Staff requests that Council move this
topic from CSAC assignment, where it was recently reviewed, to the review of City
Council's Public Services and Community Development Committees. It was
previously assigned to those committees, but they were waiting for the completion of
CSAC review before scheduling a meeting. Staff suggests that the two committees
meet jointly.
Council consensus was that a joint meeting of the two committees be scheduled.
I
1 I: I .I I" ; ,i INIL !41101 1 , ; 'i
I I_I I
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of D1lblin-Clty--Coundl Meeting
DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC.. FORM NO. 10148
, Page 9
February 2,2004
Held 20
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that Ms. Heal had arrived. She stated that although
Council has already approved the Diabetes Association fee waiver earlier on the
agenda, Mr. Lecklider had inquired if the Rec Center had received any citizen
~ complaints about the use of the Rec Center pool for this purpose on this weekend.
Ms. Heal responded that no complaints have been received. Their practice is to keep
three lap lanes open for swimmers wanting to swim laps.
COMMITTEE REPORTS/COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE
. Area-Wide Rezoninas.
Ms. Brautigam stated that at a recent Planning and Zoning Commission hearing of an
area-wide rezoning, Commission members expressed lack of understanding regarding
the southwest area rezoning. The history on the subject is that, in response to a
proposed rezoning of their neighborhood, the residents of the southwest
neighborhood attended the April 2002 City Council meeting. The residents petitioned
Council to request staff to reconsider the proposed rezoning and meet with the
neighbors to develop a zoning more suitable to existing uses on those properties.
Staff met with the southwest residents and, as a result, the residents were asked to
prepare their own planned district (PUD). Staff then reviewed the draft plan,
requested revisions, and the neighborhood submitted a revised PUD. This was,
however, a unique process. Typically, staff identifies the most appropriate zoning
category for a property, and in general, the rezonings occur with little objection.
Because the rezoning process was different with this neighborhood, Planning
Commission is cautious. Their direction appears to differ somewhat from Council's
direction for this case, and some questions have been raised: (1) Should the process
-- be separated, with the area-wide rezoning occurring at one meeting and the planned
district (PUD) review at the following meeting; (2) Should the City co-sponsor the
application for the neighborhood PUD, or should the neighborhood be the sole
applicant? Staff requests Council's clarification of the process before proceeding.
Ms. Salay stated that as Mr. Yoder indicated, in April 2002 City Council agreed that
the process described above should occur. The neighbors have worked for two years
on this process, and the following issues exist: (1) the neighbors petitioned Council at
the first reading of the rezoning for changes; (2) the Rural zoning is inappropriate for
this neighborhood, as it would allow many new and objectionable uses; (3) the
character of the area is different and does not fit into any other standard Dublin zoning
category. For example, there are some single-family properties along Rings Road
that have stables with horses at the rear of the properties; (4) making the properties
non-conforming would lower their property values. A planned district (PUD) resolves
the situation. The allowable uses are defined; this protects the neighbors and the
property values are preserved. For a homeowner to subdivide his land, the property
would have to be rezoned from the PUD to another category. This would also give
the City more control over its future use. She requested that the meetings with the
residents continue. If there are any issues, she is unaware of them. Staff's reports
with regard to the other area rezonings to Council have been that, although
neighborhood attendance at meetings has been poor, the issues are being resolved.
She suggested that if issues should arise with other area-wide rezonings, Council
~ should consider working with those residents similarly to the southwest neighborhood.
This has been an effective process for achieving both the neighborhood's and the
City's goals.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher requested that Mrs. Boring report on the discussions that
have occurred on this subject at Planning Commission.
Mrs. Boring stated that area-wide rezonings have been a difficult and time-consuming
issue. With each rezoning, the lengthy process begins again. There are always
residents who suspect the City's process, and staff must then educate the residents
on the fact that this is a simple, housekeeping issue with no negative impact to the
property owners. At times, the process has become particularly difficult because the
residents raised hard questions. However, the Commission's direction to residents
,
1 I" I I I II " mllH V'!!t!IIW I I'I
1 ,1..11.1
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of DubhCit,-Co.uncil Meeting
DAYTON LEClALBLANK, INC., FORM NO. 10148
February 2, 2004 Page 10
Held 20
has been that they may return rJquest a rezOning. In order to accomplish the
goal of a City-wide zoning map, the process must continue. However, the Planning
Commission concluded that, in order to handle the area rezonings consistently, the
-- planned district (PUD) should be handled separately.
Mr. Gunderman stated that Mrs. Boring's summary is correct. Staff's goal was to
ensure that documentation existed for the zoning that has been assumed existed on
these properties for quite some time. Some of the difficulty encountered was due to
the fact that the Planning Commission was composed of new or nearly new members.
Although they did not have the comfort level that the previous Planning Commission
had with area-wide rezonings, the issues involved with the previous rezonings were
simpler and more easily addressed. It was understandable that Planning Commission
was concerned. They were concerned that the City was extending favors to one part
of the City, but not to another. The question also was raised, if the planned district
application is separate, would the application fee be waived?
Ms. Salay stated that the properties in the southwest are single-family, large lots, and
the township zoning permits lots of that size to have large animals. There is no similar
category in the City Code.
Mr. Gunderman stated that is true. The southwest properties do not have a zoning
that parallels a City zoning category. Originally, staff considered dividing the property
into two categories - Rural and R1. It soon became evident that was not an equitable
resolution; a customized solution was the only answer - a planned district.
Subsequently, lengthy meetings have been held, and progress has been made on
- developing a suitable planned district.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that the issue before Council is whether the Planning
Commission should hear the area-wide rezoning first, and the planned district
application second, with the neighborhood and City as co-applicants.
Mr. Gunderman inquired if the PUD remains a neighborhood application, does Council
intend to waive the fee?
Mr. McCash inquired if the straight rezoning occurs first, the PUD rezoning second, is
there the danger that an application for one of the undesirable uses in the first
category apply in the interim?
Mrs. Boring stated that Planning Commission's intention was not to include Mr. Yoder
and the other affected properties in the area-wide zoning. Their properties would
undergo only the PUD zoning.
Mr. Gunderman concurred that was the Commission's intention.
Mr. McCash stated that it appears reasonable to keep them as status quo while the
area-wide zoning is occurring; however, would it be easier to create a new zoning
classification for these 5-acre and 1 + acre parcels, with the uses defined as desired?
Are the parcels contiguous?
-.
Mr. Gunderman stated they are contiguous.
Mr. McCash stated that, typically, if a change is desired in a PUD, the property is not
rezoned -- a minor text revision occurs. It would not be desirable to have many
different subsets.
Mr. Gunderman stated that is a concern, but staff believes the PUD planning has
progressed significantly with the neighborhood, and at this point, it would be simpler to
handle the issues involved with the PUD. The intention is to make a set of standards
that will read more like a zoning district than previous PUD's have had.
I I I I I.. IllTUi ,.;.,"'Ji, I I:
1'1 i
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of Dubli~Council Meeting
DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC.. FORM NO. 10148
February 2, 2004 Page 11
Held 20
Mr. McCash stated that he understands what could be handled via the text, but there
is the procedural issue. How will modifications and variances be handled? Is this
being handled in the manner easiest for the property owners in the future?
.-.-....
, Mr. Gunderman stated that staff has considered those issues, and have found
practical solutions for all of the associated scenarios. They believe the concerns can
be handled with the planned district.
Mr. McCash stated that the Development Code Revision Task Force addressed the
PUD process. Is the current proposal consistent with the recommendations of that
body?
Mr. Gunderman stated that most of the proposed legislation is consistent with the
current PUD process. Mr. McCash's concerns are reasonable, and these issues have
been considered by staff with the conclusion that they would like to continue to pursue
the PUD process.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that the first question is if the area-wide rezoning and
the PUD can be handled separately.
Consensus of Council was to exclud~ the Rings and Wilcox Roads property owners
from the southwest area-wide rezoning (Ordinance 47-02) underway and to handle
those properties in a separate zoning.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that the second question is whether the neighborhood
...- will pursue the application process with fees, or will the City be a co-applicant, in
which case the City would not pay fees to itself.
Mr. McCash stated that the City began the entire process and should not charge the
residents.
Consensus of Council was that the City and property owners would sponsor a joint
application for a planned district; as such, there will be no related application fees.
Mr. McCash referred to earlier references regarding the City's zoning map. Is there
such a map that is available to residents?
Mr. Gunderman responded that there is a draft document, which is being updated as
each of the area rezonings has occurred. It is a solid document with only one or two
areas on which some research remains to be completed. When those questions are
resolved, the document will be available to the public. There is also a map on GIS,
but the first document is more accurate.
Mr. Keenan stated that the practice of Washington Township is that all zoning
changes are made by resolution, then the Township zoning map is revised, signed,
dated and distributed to the public.
Mr. McCash stated that he has not seen a copy of Dublin's zoning map since the early
1980's.
,.--,
Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher requested that copies of the draft zoning map used by staff be
provided in Council packets.
Mr. Gunderman will do so.
Mrs. Boring inquired if the southwest area was part of the earlier merger.
Mr. Gunderman stated that he is not aware if it was part of the merger.
Mrs. Boring inquired if other area-wide rezonings have occurred in that area.
, , .
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of ~~.y-CG6Iflcil Meeting
DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC.. FORM NO. 10148
February 2, 2004 Page 12
Held 20
Mr. Gunderman stated there have been no others.
Mrs. Boring inquired if other township zonings exist that will have issues similar to
r- those currently under discussion. If so, perhaps it would be easier to have a zoning
classification that all these parcels would fit in.
Mr. Gunderman stated that although staff is unaware of any other areas with a
township zoning, there may be one or two that research will reveal.
COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS/ COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE
Ms. Salav:
1. Inquired about an update on the DSL agreement.
Mr. McDaniel stated that a draft agreement is nearly completed, which he anticipates
will be circulated to DSL by February 20th. All changes incorporated in the agreement
have been previously discussed by Council. There will be nothing new in the
agreement.
2. Thanked Council for the Graeter's ice cream coupons for her birthday.
Mr. Reiner:
1. Inquired about a meeting date for the Traffic Calming discussion.
Ms. Brautigam stated that the US 33/NW Corridor discussion is scheduled for the
February 9th Study Session. The Traffic Calming discussion could also be scheduled
on that agenda.
Consensus of Council was to include the Traffic Calming discussion on the February
9th Study Session agenda.
.....-
Mrs. BorinQ:
1. Requested that the Jenmar Court Noise Study be presented to Council before
it is available to the public, perhaps also on February 9th.
Ms. Brautigam stated that because that discussion should be substantially shorter
than the two Study Session topics, it could be scheduled on the February 17th Council
meeting agenda.
Council concurred.
Mr. Lecklider inquired if special public notice should be given regarding the Study
Session.
The Clerk will take care of public notification through the local papers and the City's
website.
2. Encouraged Council to attend the public meetings on February 18, 24 and 25
regarding the water/sewer subject.
3. Noted that Mr. McDaniel has advised that it will not be necessary to appoint a
Childcare Advisory Task Force this year. The Rec Center staff will update the local
childcare directory online.
4. Inquired why copies of a Community Event permit were included in the packet.
The Clerk stated that the information was forwarded from Community Relations and it
- was assumed to be packet information.
Mr. McCash:
1. Referred to a "Letter to the Editor" from a citizen who was charged higher than
the City's negotiated natural gas aggregation rate.
Mr. McDaniel stated that those residents who have already selected a choice program
were not notified of the City's new choice program. He has contacted the resident and
encouraged her to request IGS to include her in the City's new choice program as
soon as possible, either' by terminating her present program, or when it expires.
I I
i .1 t i --J
RECORD QF.PRQCI;I;PIN<:.;S
Minutes of D u b-1trrGi-ty-Getfficil- Meeting
DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC.. FORM NO. 10148
February 2, 2004 Page 13
Held 20
Mr. Keenan:
1. Inquired who was sponsoring the public meetings on the water/sewer program
on February 18, 24, and 25.
r- Ms. Brautigam stated that it would involve a coordinated effort of staff - Engineering,
Finance, and Ms. Crandall from the City Manager's office.
Mrs. Boring stated that this is an attempt to educate homeowners in unserved areas of
the City of the potential cost of water/sewer connection, regardless of the City's
commitment.
Mr. Lecklider:
1. Recognized Ms. Grigsby and her staff for receipt from the Government Finance
Officers Association of a Certificate of Achievement in Excellence in Financial
Reporting for the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for Fiscal Year ending
December 31,2002.
2. Referred to a letter provided in Council packets suggesting the renaming of
Downpatrick Road to Old Abbey Street or Lower Abbey Street. He inquired if Chief
Epperson and Mr. McDaniel had any objections.
Chief Epperson and Mr. McDaniel had no objection.
Following discussion, Mr. Lecklider volunteered to discuss the suggestion with Eric
Kerchner, Abbey Theater supervisor, to obtain his recommendation.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher:
1. Thanked Mr. McCash for preparing testimony for the 1/29/03 State Legislature
Land Use subcommittee meeting. Although Council members were unable to attend
- the meeting to testify, she requested that Mr. McCash submit the letter to the
Legislature "for the record."
Mr. McCash noted that he did not rec~iv~. responses from some Council members
regarding the document, which he had forwarded by email. He was not comfortable
with testifying at the State Legislature committee meeting without sufficient
input/support from Council. However, he will submit the letter for the record.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher urged Council members to read their email on a daily basis
to respond to requests for input/approval.
2. Noted that Mr. Keenan will be recognized for 20+ years of service with
Washington Township at an awards ceremony on February 17th. Therefore, he will
be delayed in his attendance at the February 17th Council meeting.
3. Noted that she will be on a trip to Honduras at that time, and Vice Mayor Mr.
Lecklider will officiate at the February 17th meeting.
4. Requested Council feedback on the draft summary of Council's Goal-setting
Session on January 23rd to enable a final document to be completed.
5. Reported that she, Ms. Salay, Ms. Brautigam, Mr. Ciarochi, and Mr.
,.-... Hammersmith partiCipated in the NWCorridor Steering .Committee meeting hosted by
MORPC on January 28th. Many of those in attendance disagreed with MORPC's
report on the outcome of the meeting held in Hilliard on January 7th. Following
discussion, recommendations for changes to the agreement have been made. It was
made clear to the Columbus City CounCil members and staff who were present that
the townships andthe cities of Hilliard and Dublin urg~d Columbus to respond to the
recent input received by pursuing a different decision than originally had been
indicated. The committee was unable to make a commitment about the time for the
process. The Cqlumbus Development Committee had turned down the Plan the week
before and had hot had an opportunity to discuss the next steps; that will occur within
the next ten days. A committee has been established that will be composed of staff
from the different municipalities, which will put all the community plans on the table
and address mutual issues related to the traffic study. Mayor Coleman has recently
I I ~ >1 I
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of DubliJlCj4LGouncll Meeting
DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC.. FORM NO. 10148
February 2, 2004 Page 14
Held 20
provided a "Set of Values," which will serve as a framework for that discussion. The
process should not take more than 90 days. Their goal is to provide the various
jurisdictions with a set of recommendations.
~
I
6. Noted that she attended Mayor's Court training this past Friday and Saturday;
Vice-Mayor Lecklider will attend Mayor's Court training this coming Friday and
Saturday (February 6-7).
7. Thanked Colonel Chris Cline for the opportunity to welcome the JAG group,
which met in Dublin this past Saturday. This is the fifth year they have selected Dublin
for their annual training session.
8. Referred to a request from casl for a letter of support from Dublin City Council
for their request for a levy, which will be on the ballot for the March election.
There was no Council interest expressed in a letter of support.
ADJOURNMENT TO EXECUTIVE SESSION
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher moved to adjourn to executive session at 8:30 p.m. for
discussion of land acquisition matters. The meeting will be reconvened only to
formally adjourn.
Mr. Lecklider seconded the motion.
Vote on the motion: Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher, yes;
Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes.
The meeting was reconvened at 9:30 p.m. and formally adjourned.
~a-~
Clerk of Council
-
I
L