Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/04/2005 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK INC. FORM NO 10148 April 4, 2005 Ii Held 20 Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher called the regular meeting of Dublin City Council to order at 7:00 p.m. on Monday, April 4, 2005 at the Dublin Municipal Building. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mr. McCash led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL Present were: Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, Vice Mayor Lecklider, Mrs. Boring, Mr. McCash, Mr. Keenan, Mr. Reiner, and Ms. Salay. Staff members present were: Ms. Brautigam, Mr. Smith, Ms. Grigsby, Mr. McDaniel, Mr. Ciarochi, Mr. Gunderman, Mr. Hammersmith, Mr. Harding, Mr. Hahn, Ms. Puskarcik, Chief Epperson, and Ms. Hoyle ADJOURNMENT TO EXECUTIVE SESSION Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher moved to adjourn to executive session for the discussion of personnel matters. Ms. Salay seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mr. McCash, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher reconvened the meeting at 7:20 p.m. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Mr. Reiner moved to approve the minutes of the March 14, 2005 Council meeting. Mr. Lecklider seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mr. Reiner, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. I Keenan, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. McCash, yes. : I CORRESPONDENCE The Clerk reported that there was no correspondence requiring action of Council. CITIZEN COMMENTS Wallace Maurer, 7451 Dublin Road inquired if a date has been established for reinstatement of the City Engineer, Mr. Kindra. Ms. Brautigam responded that the City has appointed a new City Engineer. Mr. Maurer stated that he believes City Council has squandered an innovative opportunity to settle this issue fairly and it could have occurred in June 2002. It could easily be resolved now. However, the Law Director has many conflicts of interest. Although he is the Law Director for the entire City, he also represents the interests of numerous entities - City Council, the Mayor, the City Manager, the management team, and the citizens. He inquired if the City Manager were to hire or dismiss an employee, would he/she be correct in referring to that action as an administrative act? Mr. Smith responded that the City Charter defines the role of the City Manager. While some of the tasks are administrative, the City Manager's job primarily is to execute the policy of the Council. Mr. Maurer stated that he would return at another time to discuss this topic. LEGISLATION INTRODUCTION/FIRST READING - ORDINANCES ECONOM/C DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT Ordinance 22-05 Authorizing the Execution of an Economic Development Agreement between the City of Dublin and CMHC Systems to Induce the Retention and Expansion of Its Operations within the City of Dublin. Mr. Lecklider introduced the ordinance. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK INC FORM NO 10148 April 4, 2005 Page 2 Held 20 Mr. McDaniel stated that this is an incentive agreement with a company who was at a unique crossroads in time. The owners considered selling the company, making no changes, which ultimately could have led to its being acquired by competition, I or growing the company. They chose the latter. They now have a new C.E.O., new staff and are looking at a growth model. The State of Ohio has offered assistance, with a seven-year, 65 percent job tax credit approved last week. Training grant funds and low interest loans definitely demonstrate the State of Ohio's commitment to attract high tech jobs to the state. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher congratulated Mr. McDaniel on this effort. She inquired I about a recent Business First article on this subject, which indicated that there would be 30 jobs with retention of 60 at another location. The staff report indicates that there would be 82 new high tech jobs in Dublin by year 2009. Mr. McDaniel responded that the other location is also in Dublin, but they are looking at shorter windows. The City's numbers are projected, but he will check I the figures and bring that information back at the next hearing. Mr. Lecklider noted that the cover memo makes reference to 82 jobs, while the II actual agreement shows projections out to year 2009. I Mr. McDaniel responded that two years were added to the agreement as an I incentive for growth. I Ms. Salay noted that the company was awarded a $180,000 technology grant. Is that to upgrade their future anticipated offices at Metro Center, which are not presently equipped with the latest technology? Mr. McDaniel confirmed that the technology grant would be for upgrades to that building. There will be a second reading/public hearing at the April 18 Council meeting. INTRODUCTION/PUBLIC HEARING - RESOLUTIONS Resolution 06-05 Authorizing the City Manager to Enter into a Collective Bargaining Agreement with the Fraternal Order of Police, Capital City Lodge No.9, Regarding Wages, Hours, Terms and Conditions of Employment for Employees within the Police Officer, Corporal, and Sergeant Bargaining Units. Ms. Salay introduced the resolution. Ms Brautigam stated that this agreement is a result of serious negotiations over the past several months. The FOP has endorsed the proposed three-year agreement and staff requests Council's approval. Wallace Maurer, 7451 Dublin Road stated that the negotiation process appears to have been very civilized and amicable. He has two questions: 1. In Article 14, page 17, regarding seniority - Section 14.1, line 2 reads, "total continuous from the date". . .. That appears to be a typo, leaving out the word "service." Mr. Harding responded that this is a typographical error and will be corrected. 2. Is the maximum tuition reimbursement for Dublin police $3,250? The chart indicates that the range in other cities is $3,500 - 4,000. Is that amount being gradually increased? Mr. Harding responded that the amount was based on the comparable data collected from other cities. Mr. Maurer responded that it would appear to indicate that Dublin's tuition reimbursement is somewhat lower than surrounding cities. 3. Are there any police or fire chiefs across the country that are union members? Mr. Harding responded that, typically, those are management-level positions and the collective bargaining act precludes their inclusion in the union. II RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Ollhlin City COImdl Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK INC FORM NO 10148 April 4, 2005 Page 3 Held 20 4. What is the proportion of union versus non-unionized police? Mr. Harding responded that the police corporal and sergeant are included in the bargaining unit; the two Lieutenants and chief are exempt. Mrs. Boring inquired what the standard tuition reimbursement is for non-union employees. Mr. Harding responded that it is currently $2,750 for non-union employees. However, frequently what is negotiated for union employees becomes the standard and is made available to all employees. Vote on the Resolution: Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes. OTHER . Request for Water Tap Waiver - Hemingway Village Civic Association Ms. Brautigam stated that the City recently received a request from Steve Stidhem, President of the Hemingway Homeowners Association, for a water tap fee waiver. She indicated to Mr. Stidhem that he should present that request to Council. Staff has provided a report containing the history of Council's action on previous water tap fee waiver requests. Steve Stidhem. 5373 Adventure Drive. HeminQwav Homeowners Association President. stated that he has lived in Hemingway since 1978. There are 414 homes in this area. The homeowners association has attempted to improve the appearance of its entryway over the past few years. Last year, the Association began the effort to obtain City water for a sprinkler system for the entryway, but did not continue the effort due to the associated costs. The estimated costs are: $1,500 - Dublin tap fee; $1,723 - Columbus tap fee, $1,000 - sprinkler system; and the cost for a contractor to bring the waterline to the site. They would like to respectfully request Dublin City Council to waive the Dublin tap fee. If approved, the Hemingway Homeowners Association would make a similar request to the City of Columbus. i Mr. Lecklider inquired the balance of funds for the Association. Mr. Stidhem responded that the Association has an account balance of $5,000. The Association is not a legal entity. Dues are not required, but 40-50% of the residents pay dues, and those dues are used to cover miscellaneous costs, such as lighting for the entryway. Mr. Lecklider inquired the estimate of other costs for the project, excluding the tap fees. Mr. Stidhem responded that a sprinkler system for both sides of their entryway would be $1,000. He has requested, but not yet received estimates of the cost for connecting the waterline to a sprinkler system. Mr. Keenan inquired if Columbus does not waive its tap fee, what impact would that have on their project? Mr. Stidhem responded that a tap fee waiver from Dublin is only a step in the right direction. There are other hurdles for the Association. Mr. Lecklider stated that it should be noted that Hemingway Homeowners Association is not forced and funded. In his view, this entryway enhances the greater community. A waiver of $1 ,500 is a relatively minor contribution for the City I to make for their efforts to enhance the community. It would likely add to the security of the neighborhood. He would support this request for any homeowners association, however, Hemingway is unique. It does not have a forced and funded I II RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of nllhlin r.ity r.OImdl Meeting -- DAYTON LEGAL BLANK. INC., FORM NO. 10148 April 4, 2005 Page 4 Held 20 association, as is typical with the newer subdivisions. He added that he appreciates Hemingway's involvement in community activities. If other associations would support community activities as Hemingway does, it would be a tremendous asset to the City. Ms. Salay agreed. She reiterated that the Hemingway subdivision represents an older area of the City that was developed before homeowner associations became forced and funded. It is difficult for those associations to collect dues. She appreciates that the Association is making an effort to do so. Because the City is now aware of the importance of forced and funded homeowner associations to the long-term beautification efforts of a neighborhood, creation of those associations is now required of the developer. She was not present at the July 22, 2002 Council meeting, where the Lowell Trace Civic Association's request for a water tap fee waiver was denied. She would have voted in favor of the waiver. Mr. Reiner stated that he applauds Mr. Stidhem's endeavor. However, Council has assessed a tap fee to other neighborhoods for similar projects. It is now an issue of fairness throughout the community. If Council were to grant this request, they would be besieged by other neighborhoods with requests for waivers in the interest of improving their neighborhoods. The City should not become involved in assisting with these improvemenVbeautification efforts. There are many needs of a greater priority for City funding. Mr. Keenan inquired how many homeowner associations would have similar circumstances. Are most of the associations forced and funded? Ms. Brautigam responded that staff would have to research this. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that there could be several with similar circumstances. She previously resided in Donegal Cliffs. During the first two phases of that development, there was no forced and funded homeowner association. However, during the last phase, membership was required and dues were mandatory. The Association was also successful in persuading the remainder of the residents to participate, and there were very few homeowners who did not pay dues. The Association dues that Hemingway Village requests are II exceptionally low. It is surprising that they have a balance of $5,500. Donegal Cliffs was not able to retain a balance from year to year, due to the costs of I landscape maintenance and projects such as this one. Traditionally, Council has I not approved these funding requests, except for Kerry Glen. In the case of Kerry , Glen, there were only 25 homes, yet there was a large amount of City greenspace, which is the homeowner association's maintenance responsibility. Given the aging of the community, perhaps an analysis should be done and a policy established. I This may be just one of several areas with similar circumstances. Mr. Keenan noted that there is an area along Coffman Road with fence repair issues. Mr. Lecklider added that the fence repair issue in that area has been extensively researched by staff, and staff has consistently maintained that the fence repair is not the City's responsibility. Yet, there is no forced and funded homeowner association in that area. Will the City remain content to stand by and wait for the homeowners association to collect enough money for the needed repairs? What if large sections fall into major disrepair? Coffman Road is a very visible area to thousands of motorists daily. Right or wrong, citizens probably perceive that fence as the City's responsibility. Mr. Keenan inquired if the homeowners association would receive a water bill for the entryway irrigation. Mr. Grigsby responded that the association would receive a monthly fee based on usage. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City COllncil Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK INC FORM NO 10148 April 4, 2005 Page 5 Held 20 Mr. Keenan inquired if the City receives any of that revenue. Ms. Grigsby responded that the City receives a minor surcharge of approximately $5.00/home, which is used for waterline maintenance. Mr. Keenan stated that Council has waived the fee for one other homeowners association; he does not see a problem with waiving it for this one, also. Mrs. Boring expressed agreement with Mr. Reiner's statement that it is important to be consistent. Except for the case in which 25 homes needed this financial assistance, the City has made no exceptions. There are 400 homes in this neighborhood. If an association wants to enhance their neighborhood, that is their responsibility. If the City waives this fee, there is a possibility that the homeowner associations that already have irrigation systems will want a rebate on the tap-in fees they paid to the City. Mr. Reiner stated that homeowner associations should be responsible for their own landscape and maintenance needs. Muirfield Association members pay $565/year for landscape maintenance in their neighborhood. He cautioned City Council not to encourage its citizens to run to Council to provide them with trees, fence maintenance or irrigation systems. Mr. Lecklider stated that there are 30-40 homeowner associations within the City. Some already have irrigation systems. If 10 requests were received, it would only be $15,000. It is simply waiving a fee. That amount would not negatively impact the City for what it receives in return. He does not believe that homeowner associations that already have irrigation systems would ask the City for a rebate. Mr. Reiner stated that if this issue passes, he would urge other citizens to come to Council to request similar consideration. Other taxpayers should not have to pay for Hemingway's irrigation system. Ms. Salay inquired about the Glick-Muirfield intersection beautification project. It was a very expensive project, paid for by taxpayers' money. Mrs. Boring stated that she did not want to debate the cost of other neighborhood projects, as there are others at much higher costs. However, she and her neighbors pay substantial dues to their homeowners association. If this request is approved, she is going to advise the president of her homeowners association to seek relief for a tap fee. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher suggested that a study session be scheduled to evaluate City Council's position on this issue. Mr. Lecklider moved to waive the $1,500 tap fee for Hemingway Homeowners Association for the purpose of installation of an entryway irrigation system. Ms. Salay seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mrs. Boring, no; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner, no; Ms. Salay, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, no; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. McCash, yes. . Recommendation from Tax Incentive Review Council to Continue the Britton Parkway Community Reinvestment Area. Mr. McDaniel stated that the Tax Incentive Review Council met on March 26. They reviewed the Britton Parkway Community Reinvestment Area (CRA). The Britton Parkway CRA is a post 1994 CRA. The agreement is with Duke Realty. The agreement lists specifics regarding the jobs to be created and the value of the building at 5555 Glendon Court. The primary tenant is Care Works. They have a ten-year, 100% abatement, which expires at the end of this year. The commitment RECORD OE' PROCEEDINGS Minutes of nllblil1 r.ity COI mdl Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK INC FORM NO 10148 April 4, 2005 Page 6 Held 20 was for 225 full-time permanent jobs at that location, and Care Works currently maintains 456 jobs with a total actual payroll for 2004 of $7 million. The Tax Incentive Review Council (TIRC) recommends that the agreement be extended for one year. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher moved to accept the TIRC recommendation to continue the Britton Parkway Community Reinvestment Area through 2005. Mr. Lecklider seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mr. McCash, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes. . Final Plat - Tartan West, Section 5 (Subarea I) Mr. Gunderman stated that this plat was heard by the Planning Commission on February 17 and approved with 15 conditions, as listed in the Record of Action. Mr. Keenan inquired about the stone water table, which is listed in Condition 10. Mr. Gunderman stated that it is a stone veneer placed on the exterior of the pumphouse at a water table height, which is usually about 4 feet. The applicant has complied with this condition. Vote on the final plat approval: Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes. . Request from Applicant to Schedule for Hearing on April 18, 2005 - Concept Plan - Avery Road Condominiums (Case 04-119CP). Ms. Brautigam stated that Council has a copy of the letter from the applicant for Avery Road Condominiums to reschedule the hearing of their application for tonight. However, Council's existing policy is that a tabled case must be returned to Council for them to formally remove from the table and reschedule for a future date. The next available meeting date would be April 18th. Ms. Salay moved to take the Avery Road Condominiums Concept Plan from the table and schedule it on the April 18, 2005 Council agenda. Mr. Lecklider seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes. Mr. McCash inquired if the case had been postponed to a date specific. Ms. Brautigam responded that the case was scheduled on the agenda twice and tabled twice. The second time it was not postponed to a date specific. Mr. Smith concurred that it had not been postponed to a date specific. Mr. McCash noted that the applicant's letter requesting to be scheduled on the April 4th agenda is dated March 4th. It would seem that the proper procedure would have been to remove it from the table at the March meeting and schedule it on tonight's agenda, which is fairly light. Mr. Lecklider inquired if it is necessary for Council to schedule it tonight to a date certain. Mrs. Boring stated that is necessary for public notice purposes. Mr. Lecklider stated that the public notice occurs for all Council agendas, so whether Council schedules it for a date certain or not, the agenda on which it is scheduled would be advertised. He asked for an opinion from Legal staff. Mr. Smith responded that it is Council's policy not to hear an item at the meeting at which it is removed from the table, and further, it has also been Council's practice to reschedule it for a date certain. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher moved to schedule this item for the April 18 Council agenda. Ms. Salay seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes. RECORD OE' PROCEEDINGS Minutes of nllblin r.ity r.olJndl Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK INC FORM NO 10148 April 4, 2005 Page 7 Held 20 . Request from Staff to Schedule for Hearing on April 18, 2005 - Ordinance 13-05 - Authorizing the Exchange of Land with Grabill & Company, LLC for Commercial Development and Parking Improvements in the Dublin Historic District. Ms. Brautigam stated that this ordinance concerns the proposed land exchange between the City, Krema, and Mr. Grabill. It was last heard in mid February and tabled indefinitely by Council with the direction to staff to work with the applicant to refine the plan and inform the public more fully. A public forum is scheduled for Wednesday, April 6 at the Community Recreation Center. All the contiguous property owners have been informed of the meeting. She requests that Council take Ordinance 13-05 from the table and schedule it for the April 18 meeting agenda. Mr. Lecklider moved to remove Ordinance 13-05 from the table and schedule it for the April 18 Council meeting. Mr. Reiner seconded the motion. Mr. McCash inquired if the April 6th meeting would be a Planning Commission meeting. Ms. Brautigam responded that it was not a Planning and Zoning meeting. Mr. McCash stated that this plan would then not be referred to the Planning Commission for a formal review until after Council adopts the land exchange ordinance. Ms. Brautigam responded that is correct. The ordinance is limited to approval of the land exchange. It does not include a rezoning or a development plan. Mr. Keenan stated that the land exchange is intended for that purpose, so if the Planning Commission does not approve the zoning or development plan, the land exchange would not occur. Ms. Brautigam concurred. Mr. McCash stated that in the last version of the plan he viewed, the footprints were already finalized. Ms. Brautigam responded that staff informed the developer and architect that Council does not want to see a building footprint with significant detail. It should be more conceptual and give staff and Council the ability to have input in the architectural detail of the fac;ade. The current version reflects that direction. Mr. McCash inquired about the overall site plan review, which the Planning Commission typically reviews. Ms. Brautigam responded that the Planning Commission review would consist of all items that they normally review. Mr. McCash stated that for the purpose of consideration of Ordinance 13-05, the building footprint does not contain architectural details. Those details would, however, be included in the comprehensive Planning Commission review. Ms. Brautigam stated that is correct. The footprint reveals that one building will be located along High Street and the other along Darby Street. Mrs. Boring stated that the current plan is not what the developer originally proposed. It is the result of a compromise with the City. Ms. Brautigam responded that she would not term it a "compromise," because the developer is pleased with the revisions. He believes the current plan is improved from the original concept. Mrs. Boring noted that Council is in essence agreeing to the plan if they approve the land exchange. Otherwise, the land exchange would not make sense. Ms. Brautigam stated that Ordinance 13-05 acknowledges only that buildings of a certain square footage will be constructed. This ensures the value of the buildings so that the TIF makes sense in terms of paying for the parking lot. Vote on the motion: Ms. Salay, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Ollhlin City Council Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK INC FORM NO 10148 April 4, 2005 Page 8 Held 20 CITY MANAGER/STAFF REPORTS . Enforcement of No Swing Sets in No-Build Zones Ms. Brautigam stated that staff recently received a complaint from a homeowner regarding a neighbor's swingset located within the no build zone. The City Code does prohibit the placement of any type of swingset within a no build zone. Before proceeding with enforcement of the Code with the homeowner, staff conducted an investigation to determine approximately how many similar cases exist. There are at least 92 occurrences. Staff's plan is to forward a letter to all non-compliant homeowners, but before that occurred, she wanted to share this information with Council. She was not the City Manager at the time the law regarding no build zones was established in 2000. Because she is uncertain of Council's desires regarding this issue, she requests direction from Council at this time. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that the memo from Mr. Gunderman regarding the issue did not include the minutes of the September 18, 2000 Council discussion related to the adoption of Ordinance 101-00. Therefore, Council members were unable to review the background on this subject prior to tonight's meeting. She asked staff what had prompted the creation of this provision in Ordinance 101-00. Mr. McCash responded that the Planning Commission determined that they wanted to ensure that no swingsets, trampolines, basketball courts or other play equipment could be placed in the no build zone. It is a preserved area in which nothing is to be placed. Mr. Keenan noted that the edge of his deck is at the no build line; however, a large amount of his yard is within that no build zone. Mr. McCash stated that under the Code, nothing - not a toolshed, play structure, etc. can be placed within that area. Mr. McKeenan stated that he does not understand that. It may be an illegal take. Ms. Salay inquired who owns the no build zone. Mr. Smith responded that the homeowner owns the no build zone. He clarified that the 92 instances of non-compliance are an estimate; a number of subdivisions have not been reviewed. He suggested a couple of possible solutions: (1) To enforce this Code requirement throughout the City. He noted, however, that these are not basic "swingsets," but play structures costing approximately $5,000 - $10,000 with poured concrete foundations. (2) In the definition of a "structure," it could be clarified that a swingset is not a "structure." He noted that there are older lots in Muirfield that do not have no build zones; lots in newer areas do have no build zones. Mr. McCash stated that the no build zones are depicted on the plat and on the property deeds. Homeowners bought their homes understanding that they could not place structures within that area. He assumes that the person making the complaint was fully aware that this is a no build zone Mr. Smith noted that the City's subdivision regulations state that no structures, including swingsets and play structures, can be placed within the no build zones. The individual who complained is clearly aware of the City's Code requirements and is insisting that the Code be enforced. However, many of the play structures are very large and could not be accommodated in any other location on the lot. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City COI Incil Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK INC FORM NO 10148 April 4, 2005 Page 9 Held 20 Mrs. Boring stated that it would appear from the massive size and expense that these swingsets are structures. No build zones are protected areas. She is concerned that the neighbor who has complained legitimately expected that no structures would be placed in that zone. The Planning Commission was concerned that some people were building outside their lot boundaries and encroaching into adjoining City parkland. Ms. Salay stated that she recalls discussion regarding use of City parkland. The City was more concerned with swingsets, trampolines, etc. migrating to the City parkland, versus placing them on a no build zone on the homeowner's property. To her, if it can be considered temporary, perhaps it need not be considered a structure. A problem exists with that, though, due to the size of the structure and the current expectations of the neighbors. Mr. McCash inquired if playhouses were considered. If so, is Council suggesting that all swingsets and playhouses be removed from the no build zone? Ms. Salay responded that she has always considered a swingset or playhouse that is placed for a child as temporary. In ten years, it would likely be gone. Mr. Reiner stated that the no build zone is a visual corridor. Could the City enforce the Code in those situations in which there is a complaint and leave the others? Mr. Smith stated that would constitute selective enforcement. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that she agrees that the City should be consistent in the application of regulations. Would it be less offensive if letters were sent to all residents indicating what the rule is and stating that if they have a structure within the no build zone, they are required to move it? Many residents may not be aware of this requirement. Mr. McCash stated that even if such a letter is sent, the resident may not know if it applies to them or to their neighbor. How do they know who has a no build zone? Ms. Salay noted that they are different in every neighborhood. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that after receiving the notice, it would be the homeowner's responsibility to learn if they have a no build zone. Mr. Lecklider stated that the City's purpose in creating no build zones was to create a visual corridor. Mrs. Boring noted that in her neighborhood, no build zones are filled with pine trees, and in order to place structures there, trees would have to be removed. Mr. Lecklider stated that the newer neighborhoods are not blessed with trees. If everyone's backyard includes 15-foot high structures, the visual corridor would essentially be eliminated. He recalls that Council restricted fences in order to create a visual corridor. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that if the consensus of Council is to retain the no build zones, staff should proceed with the notifications to those who are in violation. Mr. Lecklider expressed concern that the building footprints are so large on many lots that when a no build zone is applied, little land remains available for the homeowner's use. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dllblin City r.OI mdl Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK INC FORM NO 10148 April 4, 2005 Page 10 Held 20 Mr. Keenan stated that is the situation with his lot. Twenty percent of it is designated no build, which leaves no space for a play structure. Mr. Lecklider suggested that perhaps Council needs to look at the planning process, considering these issues. Mr. Keenan suggested the goal might have been missed in terms of what the City had hoped to accomplish at that time. Mr. Reiner stated that the City was attempting to create green space behind the houses, and it has been successful. It would be premature for Council to consider amending the law at this point. Mr. Keenan stated that the complaint might reflect a resident's issues with noise adjacent to his home from children at play. Mr. Reiner stated that in Muirfield, this type of complaint was handled on an "as needed" basis. If a letter of complaint were received that the open corridor was obstructed, the homeowners association would address it. Mr. Lecklider stated that homeowners should have an opportunity to have swingsets in their back yards. He also sees the value in a no build zone. This conflict implies there is a problem with the lot size. With the size of the home footprint and a no build zone, insufficient room remains for a swingset. Ms. Salay stated that many move to Dublin to have a larger home, so the builders are responding to that demand. Dublin relies on the builders to educate their customers that there are no build zones on the lots, and the remaining usable space may preclude decks, fences and swingsets. Mrs. Boring stated that the City has worked diligently to achieve a green view. If the no build zone fulfills that purpose, it needs to be enforced. Otherwise, there is no need to establish such no build zones. Ms. Salay stated that over the years she has been confronted with fence restriction issues. She has explained that Council established fence restrictions that were consistent with the desires of the community. If the community wants something different, they can petition Council to revisit the issue. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher requested a motion to give direction to staff. Mr. Lecklider responded that he prefers that the first step consist of a resident notification/information letter. Mrs. Boring concurred, noting that it should explain Council's goal of open space and a visual corridor. Mr. McCash suggested that a better method of informing the public would be through the City Manager's column in the local papers. Mr. Keenan suggested that the City revisit the definition of a no build zone, and simply remove "swing sets and play structures" from the definition. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that the original goal of the legislation was to maintain the green vista. So far, that goal has not changed. Mr. Keenan responded that this is a community of families and their children desire swingsets and play structures. He recommends that Council revisit the issue, RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dllblin City COI mcil Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK INC FORM NO 10148 April 4, 2005 Page 11 Held 20 amending that Code section to exclude "swingsets and play structures." Removing those two items out would probably eliminate the issue. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher responded that it eliminates the issue for people who want swingsets, but not for those who do not. Mr. McCash inquired whether a resident is permitted to erect an accessory structure in a residential subdivision. Ms. Salay responded that it would depend upon the deed restrictions. Does the homeowners association have adequate monies to enforce their deed restrictions? Mr. McCash stated that he was not concerned about deed restrictions. The no build zone requirements are listed in the deed restrictions of the subdivisions. Mr. Reiner responded that the play structures are not merely swingsets. They are very large, red, blue and yellow jungle gym boxes. Mr. Keenan's proposed legislation would ruin the view corridors and diminish everyone's property values and the overall aesthetics of the entire City. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher pointed out that the City has not said its residents cannot have swingsets, just that they cannot place them in the no build zone. Mr. Lecklider expressed concern that there is not adequate space in the newer subdivision lots to place swingsets. Mr. McCash moved to direct staff to proceed with enforcing the current subdivision regulations regarding no swingsets in no build zones, to send notices to property owners in violation of the Code, and that the City Manager address the issue in a future newspaper column. Mr. Reiner seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Keenan, no; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Mr. Lecklider, no; Ms. Salay, no. . Bid Awards Ms. Brautigam stated that previously, bid awards have been approved by ordinance, which requires two readings and which are effective 30 days after passage. Often, the public hearing is waived and/or the ordinance is passed by emergency. She suggested the process be shortened by approving bids by resolution. Mrs. Boring stated that she preferred to have two readings. In the past, Council had three readings. The process has already been shortened to two readings. Although the public usually has no objections concerning bid awards, she prefers the open process that offers the opportunity for public input. Mr. Keenan suggested the two-reading process continue to be utilized for large projects over a defined amount, but smaller projects could be approved by resolution. That would provide Council with more oversight on the larger projects. Mr. McCash stated that all these projects have been programmed in the capital improvements plan, which involves a separate hearing process. The amount of the funding for the project is allocated at that time. The bidding element is simply the implementation of what has already been budgeted. Ms. Salay stated that she prefers not to approve ordinances by emergency. This suggestion would reduce the amount of emergency legislation. If there should be RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of I1llblin City COllndl Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK INC, FORM NO 10148 April 4, 2005 Page 12 Held 20 significant public interest in a particular item, the resolution could be postponed to allow more time for public input. Mrs. Boring inquired if passing an ordinance by emergency eliminates the referendum process. Mr. Smith confirmed that it did. Mrs. Boring inquired if a referendum could occur on a resolution. Mr. Smith responded affirmatively. He noted that resolutions often reflect secondary actions on a project. Typically, an earlier ordinance approves a project. A resolution would approve a later action that was part of the execution of that project. Case law reflects that in most cases, a referendum must occur with the original approval action of the project. Mr. Lecklider moved to direct staff to prepare resolutions versus ordinances for the award of future bids. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mr. McCash, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. Keenan, no; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes. . Council Retreat Report Ms. Brautigam stated that the report has been provided to Council for their review and comments. At the next meeting, a resolution stating Council's goals for 2006- 2007 will be provided for Council adoption. Ms. Salay stated that she had to leave the Council retreat early, and a goal relating to the State Route 161 corridor was added after her departure. The information provided in the report concerning that goal refers to a shopping center. Has that development been approved by the Planning Commission? Mrs. Boring indicated that the center has been approved as a straight zoning. She added that it was desirable to make that goal a high priority, as the area between Sawmill Road and Riverside Drive is anticipated to be very active. Wallace Maurer, 7451 Dublin Road stated that to date, Council retreats have involved Council and key staff members only. Is there any consideration to opening these to the public in the future? Mrs. Boring responded that the entire goal-setting meeting is open to the public. Mr. Maurer stated that he was unaware of that. Was there any citizen participation? Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher responded that there was no citizen participation. That was not within the meeting format. However, the identified goals will be on an upcoming Council agenda, and the public will have the opportunity to offer comment concerning those goals. Mr. Maurer stated that would be acceptable. The only instance in which Council appears to have a problem with citizen involvement is with the civic and civil rights of all citizens. He would like to propose to the City attorney that he would back off from his requests for justification regarding the firing of the City Engineer and apologize if he can be shown he has been in error. What duties are included in the role of the City Manager? Which duties are administrative and which are not? Dublin's City Charter was adopted, but a minority of citizens who opposed it did so because of their concern regarding citizen watchdog situations. They had a concern about the open-ended requirements relating to closed executive sessions. Those citizens were sensitive to the need for protection. There is perpetually a conflict between two orders of government: (1) a representative government, which is responsible to the citizenry, and (2) a business-model type of government, reflective of the Donald Trump manner of thinking. The intent was to include protections for those who might be arbitrarily dealt with. If Council can publicly RECORD OE' PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK INC, FORM NO 10148 April 4, 2005 Page 13 Held 20 persuade him that the City represented the public in their action, he will drop his charges. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher thanked Mr. Maurer for his comments. She asked Council members to forward any revisions/comments regarding the Council Retreat report to Ms. Brautigam. COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS/COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE Mr. Reiner referred to the tree-trimming report in Council's packet, and inquired if the City of Dublin has any oversight in the tree trimming that AEP conducts. Does the City horticulturist have any communication with AEP on this issue? Ms. Brautigam responded that the City's horticulturist does not oversee AEP's work. AEP's report indicates that they conduct tree trimming in accord with horticulturist standards. Mr. Reiner responded that he has worked with AEP tree trimmers, and he has observed that the trimming can be carried out in two different manners. Trees can be nicely trimmed or they can be chopped, leaving the entire City looking quite unattractive. The latter seems to be occurring this year, and the residents have been complaining. Information he has received indicates that the trimming program was not completed properly last year, hence the destruction from the ice storm this winter. Now, AEP is essentially moving into "overdrive" and aggressively trimming. Does the City have any discussion with AEP on such issues? Ms. Brautigam responded that the City has no oversight in the program, however staff members do have frequent communications with AEP. She will ask Mr. Ciarochi to include in his communications that the tree trimming within the City is carried out without "chopping." Mrs. Borinq: 1. Congratulated Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, who has been honored with the appointment to Vice-President of the Central Ohio Municipal Council. 2. Referred to the notice that Clear Channel will carry a Dublin radio station, although they will not be located here. She indicated that there previously was a radio station based in Dublin for some time, yet no one seemed very interested at that time. 3. Referred to the letters in Council packet from Donerick's Pub and Architect Brian Wieland. How will those concerns be addressed? Mr. McCash noted that the letter from Mr. Wieland concerned a BZA matter heard on March 31. Mr. Gunderman responded that he is not aware of the specific contents of the letter, but the applicant did receive the resolution he was seeking. Mr. Keenan stated that his understanding was that the applicant was seeking a variance from the City's architectural appearance code, specifically regarding window trims. The suggestion was made that the City put a mechanism in place to recognize that high value homes are outside the parameters of the appearance code. The argument is that there is sufficient architectural detail in a $750,000 _ $1,000,000 house that would not warrant the normal oversight. It would save the applicant the need to seek a variance. Mrs. Boring stated that the owner of Donerick's Pub met with some City officials to discuss his concerns. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that Mr. McDaniel met with them, and she later met with the representatives. His request was that the City adopts an exemption for bars whose business is 65% or more alcohol sales. This would be similar to what Hilliard passed and the City of Columbus is considering on the May ballot. Ms. Salay responded that she was not interested in amending the legislation. To the contrary, she believes that Council should direct a letter to its State RECORD OE' PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City COI mcil Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK INC FORM NO 10148 April 4, 2005 Page 14 Held 20 representatives asking that they consider the issue on a statewide basis. That would contribute equally to the health of Ohio's citizens, and by leveling the playing field, it would eliminate the local squabbles. Mr. McCash noted that business is suffering at that particular bar. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that this business has a very large percentage of business as alcohol sales, compared to other bars in the City who have food as well. In addition, their location is an extreme detriment. When she met with them, she stressed the importance of changing their marketing plan. Any business would need to do so when they are impacted by a major change in policy. She inquired Council's interest in revising the current no smoking legislation. Mrs. Boring moved that Council schedule a work session to consider the Donerick's Pub request. Mr. McCash seconded the motion. Mr. Keenan recommended deferring this issue until after the May election. Vote on the motion: Mrs. Boring, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, no; Mr. Reiner, no; Mr. Keenan, no; Ms. Salay, no; Mr. Lecklider, no, Mr. McCash, yes. Mrs. Boring requested that staff send a letter to Donerick's Pub indicating that Council considered their request but Council's decision was to retain the current legislation. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher requested a motion on Ms. Salay's previous suggestion. Ms. Salay moved that Council direct a letter to the State representatives requesting that they consider adopting a clean indoor air ordinance for the State of Ohio. Mr. Keenan seconded the motion. He suggested that the letter contain verbiage regarding the unfairness of the impact on certain businesses, which would be resolved by having a level playing field. Vote on the motion: Mr. Lecklider, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes. 4. Inquired the status of the COD sign ordinance that Council referred to P&Z. Mr. Gunderman responded that he did not have that information. Ms. Brautigam indicated that staff would forward a status report to Council on this issue. Mrs. Boring stated that with the development in the S.R. 161 corridor, this issue needs to be addressed immediately. Ms. Salay: 1. Inquired the City's policy in a scenario in which a business with a non- conforming sign goes out of business, and a new business comes in. Does the new business then inherit the approved signage package of the previous owner? This has occurred with a prominent business located along S.R. 161. She was surprised that the new owner has a similar, over-sized sign such as the previous business had. Mr. Smith stated that he wrote an opinion on this a couple of years ago; however, he cannot recall the specifics. He will review that question and provide a report Council. 2. Noted that at their last meeting, Council requested a study session be scheduled for review of the conservation subdivision design resolution. When she read the minutes, she realized that she had requested that the Planning & Zoning Commission be involved. That was not her intention. Her recommendation is that Council schedules a Study Session in which the Planning Commission is invited to participate. Does staff have a projected date for this meeting? RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City COI mcil Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK. INC.. FORM NO. 10148 April 4, 2005 Page 15 Held 20 Ms. Brautigam stated that she discussed the proposed study session with Mr. Bird before he left for a vacation. No date has been identified, but the goal is to have it late Mayor early June. There is a study session in May, but the Historic Dublin presentation is scheduled for that meeting. 3. Stated that she observed a City worker sawing down all the trees at the entrance to Avery Square. The trees were just beginning to look attractive, but now they are stubs. She requested a report from staff as to why this occurred. Mr. McCash inquired if there were power lines in that location. Ms. Salay responded that there were not. Mr. Lecklider inquired about the e-mails the City received concerning the St. Patrick's Day parade. Ms. Puscarcik responded that following the event, the City received citizen e-mails expressing concerns regarding safety as parade participants throw candy to children alongside the parade route. Her staff has checked regarding the way this issue is handled in other cities. Staff does not have a recommendation at this time; however, it is an issue which must be discussed and City policy determined. The practice of throwing candy has become an expectation of the community's families, so staff would like to find a way to continue the practice and yet ensure safety. Mavor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that: 1. The Dublin Jerome High School golf team, who won their division competition, has presented a signed golf cap to City Council. 2. She and Mr. Hahn visited the Miracle League baseball field in Birmingham, Alabama last week. They were very impressed with the positive impact it has had on families of children with disabilities and on the community at large. From a technical standpoint, which was the purpose of the visit, the engineers and landscape architects were able to receive good input concerning critical issues in the development plan. She added that ground breaking on Dublin's Miracle League baseball field would occur in 4-6 weeks, and play on that field is anticipated in Fall 2005. ADJOURNMENT TO EXECUTIVE SESSION There being no further business, Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher moved to adjourn to executive session for discussion of legal and personnel matters. Ms. Salay 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; Mr. Lecklider, yes. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that following the executive session, the Council meeting will be reconvened only to formally adjourn. No further action will be taken. The meeting was adjourned to executive session at 9:15 p.m. The meeting was reconvened and formally adjourned at 10:45 p.m. ~C!-~ Clerk of Council