Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/15/2004 1 I i i ~ I _ i ~ 1 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meetin~_ DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC., FORM NO. 10148 March 15, 2004 Held 20 Mayor hinnici-Zuercher called the Regular Meeting o u in ity ounce to or er at 7 p.m. on Monday, March 15, 2004 at the Dublin Municipal Building. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mr. Reiner led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL Present were: Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, Vice Mayor Lecklider, Mrs. Boring, Mr. Keenan, Mr. McCash, Mr. Reiner and Ms. Salay. Staff members present were: Ms. Brautigam, Ms. Grigsby, Mr. Smith, Mr. McDaniel, Mr. Ciarochi, Mr. Harding, Mr. Harvey, Mr. Gunderman, Ms. Newcomb, Ms. Coen, Ms. Hoyle, Ms. Crandall, Ms. Puskarcik, Mr. Stevens, Chief Epperson, Mr. Villareale, and Ms. Heal. ADJOURNMENT TO EXECUTIVE SESSION Ms. Salay moved to adjourn to executive session at 7:05 p.m. for discussion of land acquisition, legal and personnel matters.. Mr. Lecklider seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mr. McCash, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes. Mrs. Boring, yes. The meeting was reconvened at 7:40 p.m. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Ms. Salay moved approval of the minutes of the March 1, 2004 meeting. Mr. Reiner seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes. CORRESPONDENCE The Clerk reported that there are some pending liquor permit matters that the Law Director will address. Mr. Smith noted that a request has now been filed for a hearing regarding the issuance of C1 and C2 licenses for the gas station at 20.1 W. Bridge Street, based on previous direction from Council Based on Council's previous discussion, the objection to the issuance of ?iquorlicenses for a restaurant at 50 W. Bridge Street has been withdrawn. These licenses are for a restaurant use at that location and not for carryout permits. Mr. Smith noted that the Bogey Inn has filed for a transfer of permits, most likely to take their permits out of escrow for use during the Tournament period. He will be discussing the future plans for the facility with the owners. Mrs. Boring stated that there have been complaints about noise on the site previously. She has concerns about allowing the permits to be transferred due to this ongoing issue. Ms. Brautigam stated that she has been in touch with the new Mayor of Shawnee Hills who has indicated they will move forward with the noise ordinance requested by Dublin. She is not certain of a timetable for adoption of such an ordinance. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that the' memo from Legal staff indicated that filing an objection would preserve the City's opportunity to object; after March 22, the City cannot file the request for hearing. Mr. Lecklider noted that his understanding is that the conservative approach recommended was to preserve the right to objection to these permits by requesting a hearing. Mrs. Boring agreed. It was the consensus of Council to request a hearing on the transfer of D1, D2, D3, D3A and D6 permits at the Bogey Inn, 6013 Glick Road. Mr. Smith agreed to notify the property owner and obtain further information from him about their plans for the facility. He will report back to Council on this matter. CITIZEN COMMENTS Scott Dring, Executive Director, Dublin Convention & Visitors Bureau distributed their annual report to Council which reflects the year's progress. He noted that the upcoming weekends will be very busy in Central Ohio with the Fitness Tournament, state basketball tournaments, and the NCAA tournament games. They estimate that the economic impact to Central Ohio is over $50 million. The DCVB is working to have a portion of this spent in Dublin, and has booked two of the teams from the NCAA Tournament in Dublin, 6 of the RECORD CAF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC., FORM NO. 7014H ,,~~.,~y~ QI VII I J, GV VHF Held 20 teams for the Holiday Basketball Tournament in Dublin. Mentor High School and Wheeling Park High School will play Dublin Coffman and Dublin Scioto in the tournament that takes place over the holiday season. In addition, they are working to bring the World Checkers Championship to Dublin in 2005. The current champion lives in Dublin. The organizer for the Association lives in Cleveland. This four-day event will bring $125,000 of impact on the local economy. They are working on summer campaigns for midwest publication and have developed a "Discover Dublin" discount pass that provides discounts at local restaurants for those who stay in Dublin. Wallace Maurer 7451 Dublin Road noted that he has six points to address with Council. 1. Regarding the minutes from. March 1, on page 2, his comments were not transcribed accurately. He did not state that implementing the suggestion of reinstating the City Engineer would not be practical The phrase he did use was "seeming inconvenience" - in recognition of the amount of paperwork which would be required to do so, given the fact that a new engineer had already been appointed. 2. During the recent "State of the City" presentation, he was attending a conference out of state. When he returned, he searched the newspapers for any reference by the City Manager regarding reinstatement of the City Engineer, or whether anyone had brought it up at the presentation. He found no reference to this matter. ' 3. There are only 24 people he knows of to whom his report was given. He made the discovery sometime back that one of these 24 had not received the report, and in order not to have wrong messages in the future, he read the list of people to whom the report was provided: six of the Council Members of last year; City staff, including Brautigam, A. Clarke, B. Clarke, Puskarcik, Crandall, Ciarochi, Harding, Grigsby, Stevens, Hoyle, Epperson, Hahn, Hammersmith, McDaniel, Heal, Smith and Kindra. Mr. Keenan was provided a copy of the materials in January, and in keeping with his principle of everyone communicating everything in front of everyone else, a transcript of that communication was provided to Council as well. 4. He asked at the last meeting why the citizens rise to recite the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag in each meeting. In that Pledge is the machinery that could have ended this discussion a long time ago - "with liberty and justice to all." He is assuming that the argument laid out before Council is persuasive, as there was never a word or phrase of objection to it. Sometimes when the Pledge is announced, it is recited with reservation, which means liberty and justice to all, except in this case to the Engineer. 5. Several avenues remain open to him. One would be that the newspaper is prepared to do a story on this, focusing on his persistence in regard to the matter. Second, one of the newspapers has a principle with respect to the letters to the editor -that any citizen of Dublin can publish only one letter per month, a letter he could use for periodic updating on this matter. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that the five minutes has now expired. Mr. Maurer can continue his comments at the next meeting, if he desires. LEGISLATION POSTPONED UNTIL MARCH 15 2004 TAX INCREMENT FlNANClNG Ordinance 09-04 Creating the Tartan West Incentive District, Declaring Improvements to Certain Real Property within that Incentive District to be a Public Purpose, Describing the Public " Infrastructure Improvements to Be Made to Benefit that Parcel, Requiring the Owner Thereof to Make Service Payments In Lieu of Taxes, Providing for the Union County Treasurer to Distribute Service Payments to the Dublin City School District in the Amount It Would Otherwise Receive Absent the Exemption, Creating a Municipal Public Improvement Tax. Increment Equivalent Fund for the Deposit of the Balance of Such Service Payments, and Authorizing the Execution of a Tax Increment Financing Agreement and One or More Infrastructure Agreements, and Declaring an Emergency. Ms. Brautigam reported that there have been no changes since thelast reading. Staff can respond to questions at this time. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that Council had requested information, and it has been _ I I k I ,I i 1 k I C J ; RECORD OF PROCE~DII`IGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meetin~_ DAYTON IEGAl6LANK, INC., FORM NO. 10148 Held 20 issues in which Council had expressed interest: Ben Hale Jr. 37 W. Broad Street asked for clarification of the specific issues. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked for an update on the three outstanding issues with respect to The Golf Club of Dublin. Mr. Hale responded that: 1. The comfort stations are under. construction as of today. The construction subcontracts have been entered into, and will be complete sometime within the next 45-60 days. 2. There is an outstanding contract for pavement. The company did not complete the paving due to weather conditions, and the paver has agreed that the club will be the firsfpaving done in the spring. 3. In regard to the cart barn, Mr. Anderson has deposited in Mr. Hale's client's fund account $411,955.00, which is the estimate for that work. There-are a few remaining issues with the building permit, but the cart barn will be under construction in the next 30 days and. the construction will take approximately 90 days to complete. The condition of the escrow account is that they will provide him with draw requests and he will write checks for the draw. The issues have now been addressed. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked if there. are other questions for Mr. Hale. There were no further questions. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that several speakers have signed up to testify. Cynthia Reed, 5208 Aryshire Drive noted that she represents the Civic Action Committee of the residents of the area. It is their understanding that before a water tower can be placed in the first proposed site of Manley/Jerome Road, that a separate water tower application must be made. Therefore, they are not opposing the process of the TIF tonight. They are in negotiations and have a meeting with the City on March 25 regarding residential input and to review other possibilities for the water tower location. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher invited Mr. May to testify, if this is his interest. Mr. May indicated he is present to observe, not to testify. Wallace Maurer 7451 Dublin Road noted that he reviewed the materials today. Is he correct that there are 482 units involved in this development within 251 acres, 100 acres of which are open space? Mr. Hale responded that there are now'439 units on 251 acres, with 100 acres of open space. Mr. Maurer asked about the disposition of public and private open space. Ms. Grigsby responded that there is a total of 104 acres of open space, 71 public and 33 private, and all will be privately maintained. Mr. Maurer noted that the average value of one unit is between one-third to one-half million, and the cost of construction would range from $260,000 to $800,000. An observation was made regarding this development that it would be a high quality development that sets a new standard for the area. He does not know exactly what "high quality" means? Is he right in assuming that the target market is empty nesters? Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher responded that this is the target market for a portion of the development. Mr. Maurer asked if Council is certain that empty nesters in this current economy have the funds to purchase these units? Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that, based upon market research, there is a population group interested in this type of product.` Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher called upon Pat Hitesman to testify. Mr. Hitesman noted that he does not want to testify at this time. Mr. Reiner noted that he had expected some type of presentation regarding the status of the water tower location. Mr. Hale stated that they continue meeting with staff and the neighbors and have done some photography to show what the towers will look like. The issue will be reviewed by the Planning Commission. There are two locations identified on the site and two others off-site, but the ultimate disposition of the location is the City's decision. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Minutes of Meetin_g_._ DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC., FORM NO. 10148 _ Held 20 Hale. More meetings are scheduled on Thursday with those in control of another site. There is nothing to report in terms of a conclusion this evening. Staff is working diligently on this issue. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that in the agreement, it states that the developer will provide the site for the water tower needed fo serve Tartan V1/est and future development. This means that the developer will provide the land, but is it correct that the ultimate decision on location will be the City's? Mr. Hammersmith responded that he is not certain if the final decision will be made by staff. In terms of onsite locations, they are correct that will be reviewed by the Planning & Zoning Commission in conjunction with the final development plan. Staff is working toward a solution offsite that will be more acceptable to the surrounding residents. There were no further questions from Council. Mr. Keenan moved for emergency passage. Ms. Salay seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mayor Chinnici- Zuercher, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes. Vote on the Ordinance: Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes. SECOND READING/PUBLIC HEARING -ORDINANCES CODE AMENDMENT Ordinance 59-03 (Amended) Amending Portions of the Zoning Code by Amending the Landscape-Requirements in Section 153.133 and 153.134 and Adopting Section 153.190 Residential Appearance Standards. (Case No. 03-014ADM -Landscape Code Amendment and Adopting Residential Appearance Standards). Mr. Harvey stated that when the standards were adopted in November of 2003, there was discussion regarding some projects underway and already approved which could not meet some of the standards due to physical constraints. The only design criterion in the standards that related to physical size was the garage doors. The question was whether a waiver process could be established in cases that involved a physical constraint, hardship or physical impossibility. After reviewing the standards and the legal tests that may be faced in the future, it was determined that physical constraints per se did not exist for a garage door, as a smaller garage door was a possibility. Since the primary intent of Council seemed to be accommodating existing projects and allowing them some period of time to implement their product, to change their designs, staff is suggesting that in Lieu of trying to define a waiver process which'could be inconsistent from timeto time, that the projects underway be given a little more time to be exempt. Staff is recommending extending the six months exemption to twelve months from the date of adoption. This would allow more time for compliance and changing their designs. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked if there .were any concerns or comments from Council. Mrs. Boring asked for confirmation that the 12 months exemption would be from the original effective date. Mr. Harvey stated that it would translate to December 3, 2004 - 12 months after the original effective date. Mr. McCash asked about the issues related to the new trash containers and the garages at a bare minimum size for existing homes. Perhaps the architectural standards are shortsighted, as they don't account for garage storage. It may result in moving garage items outside. This change may create further hardships and enforcement issues. Mr. Harvey stated that when the residential appearance standards were drafted and brought to Council, they did not include an objective to contain space for the portable dumpsters. Changing it will not compromise anything in the residential appearance standards. If Council wants to consider a future amendment to the appearance standards to include adjusting garage size to allow for locating dumpsters in the garage, that can be done. Mr. McCash stated that the 25 percent length of garage as the maximum amount of the front elevation is included in the standards. Mr. Harvey responded that only the garage door is restricted. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meetin~_ DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC., FORM NO. 10148 ~ ~ ~ y~-,} dI 1.11~~V`t Held 20 c receptacles without changing the garage door size. Ms. Brautigam stated that in the pilot project,-staff has been very flexible in regard to the kind of trash containers used. They have worked with residents to accommodate their needs with 33, 64, or 96-gallon containers. Not fitting in the garage has not been a problem for either of the pilot areas. Mr. Reiner moved for passage of the amended Ordinance 59-03. Ms. Salay seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes. REZON/NGS The Clerk read the titles of Ordinances 94-03 (Amended), 108-03 (Amended), 109-03 (Amended) and 119-03 into the record. Mr. Gunderman stated that, for the most part, these are area rezonings and involve corrections to the zoning map. He showed a map delineating the various rezonings. He noted that there have been few difficulties encountered in the review process of informal meetings with area residents. As is the case with other area rezonings, they are principally composed of land that either showed up on the previous zoning maps of the City as a City zoning classification, but where research did not demonstrate proper records supporting the zoning classification. In other cases, the areas were shown as township zonings, and based upon the recommendation from the Law Department, the desire is to assign City zoning classifications closest to the existing township zoning classification. Ordinance 94-03 (Amended) Establishing Dublin Zoning for 83 Parcels Comprising an Area of Approximately 142 Acres as Annexed from Perry Township in 1961 and 1972, South of I-270, West of Sawmill Road and East of the Scioto River, to R-1, Restricted Suburban Residential, R-2, Limited Suburban Residential; or R-4, Suburban Residential Districts. (Case No. 03-0802 - CDD, Residential Area Rezoning). Mr. Gunderman stated that most of these are areas that showed up as City zoning districts, with a couple of exceptions. .Some locations had shown up as R-4, permitting multi-family. The neighborhood meetings indicated a desire not to retain the R-4 which permits single family and multi-family. While this is somewhat of a discrepancy from the policy followed in other areas, based on the neighborhood's desire, staff did not see any reason not to assign the R-2 zoning. Ordinance 108-03 (Amended) Rezoning 50 Parcels Comprising an Area of Approximately 400 Acres as Annexed from Washington Township between 1965 and 1969, Southeast of I-270, West of Dublin Road, North of Rings Road, to: CC, Community Commercial, OLR, Office, Laboratory and Research, SO, Suburban Office and Institutional, and LI, Limited Industrial Districts. (Case No. 03-0992-Inner Circle I-270, Commercial Area Rezoning) Mr. Gunderman stated that this is the inner circle commercial area. There was no particular discussion on these, except for the LI district. It was pointed out that if changes were considered to this, much of the development pattern in the area would be non-conforming. Ordinance 109-03 (Amended) Rezoning 75 Parcels Comprising an Area of Approximately 136 Acres as Annexed from Franklin County and Washington Township between 1980 and 1999, Southeast of I-270, West of the Scioto River, North of Hayden Run Road, to: Dublin R-1, Restricted Suburban Residential District. (Case No. 03-1052 -Inner Circle I-270, Residential Area Rezoning -South Dublin Road)) Mr. Gunderman noted that these were fairly straightforward and had shown up as R-1 on the zoning map. Ordinance 119-03 Rezoning Approximately 29 Parcels Comprising an Area of Approximately 43 Acres as Annexed from Washington Township between 1881 and 2001 South of Brand Road, North of West Bridge Street, East of Coffman Road, West of the Scioto River, RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting__ DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC., FORM NO. 10148 - h ~Tb ~ -2004 ~ Held 20 Suburban Residential District. (Case 03-1.202 Indian Run et al. Area Rezoning) Mr. Gunderman stated that this area is a bit more complicated. A portion of the residential lots had been in the City previously and the City had zoned if to an R-2 classification, which, given the reduced size of the lots made sense. Portions came in more recently, and for the most part, R-1 was the closest district to the previous township zoning. Others } had been on the books for sometime in the classifications seen. He noted that these four rezonings were recommended by P&Z on January 8 by a 7-0 vote on the first three, and a 6-1 vote for the last. He offered to respond to questions. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked about the participation of citizens in the hearings. Mr. Gunderman responded that he does not have a good number on these. In the area along Martin Road, participation at the first meeting was lacking and a second meeting was scheduled after the residents contacted staff. For the rest, he does not believe there was a great deal of participation at any`of the meetings. The planner assigned to the case has dealt with many of the property owners by phone and was able to address their concerns. Scott Haring, 3280 Lilvmar Court noted that he attended the second meeting at the community church. He was surprised at the R-4 categories of properties along Riverside Drive. He was please that staff ultimately concurred with the R-2 classification for most of the corridor, in keeping with the desire of the neighbors on Lilymar and Martin Road. The largest square of R-4 category zoning has two homes and the R-4 is the appropriate category. But the other ones above that seem to be similar to the R-2 classifications throughout the corridor. Today, he printed off the recommendations from P&Z and the staff report for tonight's meeting and tried to compare the addresses. It seems that the color-coding in some portions of the map is not fully consistent with what is listed as the recommendation from P&Z. He would like further clarification. He had expected an R-2 broad-brush classification for the entire .corridor, except for the largest lot which has the special consideration and the R-4 south of Martin Road, which is the new condominium development. Mr. Gunderman stated that the map being shown is what was recommended by the Commission. In terms of the logic of a couple of the properties, he is not in a good position to speak to the details about what was or was not said about those. It was staff's intent and the recommendation .forwarded to the Commission, and generally consistent with what the residents wanted, to utilize this configuration. He understands Mr. Haring's point about the particular lots, and if they did not participate in the discussion, the tendency was to retain the R-4 zoning. Ms. Salay asked what is currently existing on the lots. Mr. Gunderman responded that they are single-family homes. Ms. Salay asked why the City would want to assign a more intense zoning than what is existing. It does not make sense, other than it fits with the map. Mr. Gunderman stated that the bottom Fine is that it fits with the existing zoning map. Ms. Salay asked if that is also the bottom line explanation for the OCLC campus being Limited Industrial? Mr. Gunderman responded affirmatively. In addition, the actual construction of OCLC took place under LI rules. Placing another zoning district on that property would make some characteristics of the property non-conforming, such as setbacks. Ms. Salay stated that she has major issues with the inner circle 1-270 rezoning and cannot support it. The OCLC campus should be an SO or an OLR. She is concerned with assigning an LI rezoning to valuable commercial frontage that is Class A office space, just for the sake of matching up with the map. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that her understanding of the criterion for the process was to match to the degree possible the current existing zoning. Mr. Gunderman responded that the difficulty in some cases such as this one was that records did not exist for the zoning classification that was assumed to have been assigned to the property. Over the years, staff has been administering the areas as though these zoning classifications were in place. To that end, to the extent that staff had used a zoning map in the past that indicated these districts, staff is trying to follow through using that logic. There was a lot of discussion at P&Z, but in the end, the position taken was .RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meetin~_ DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC.. FORM NO. 10148 -P~g-~7 Held 20 to the property owners,this is the logic to be followed. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked if this parcel were to be categorized as Ms. Salay is suggesting, what would that mean to the current owner in terms of expansion or sale of the property? Mr. Gunderman responded that if the current owner wanted to sell the property to a different user, there are more potential users for the LI district versus the SO. In terms of expansion, the current zoning would allow this. .For the SO district, they could do everything in their current LI zoning that is permitted in the S0 as well as some conditional items. Ms. Salay asked if this parcel might warrant'revisiting in terms of a planned district because taking this valuable commercial property and assigning it to LI does not make sense. Mrs. Boring noted that the LI zoning permits the uses which were previously housed on the site at the time it housed Midwestern Volkswagen. Removing the LI would limit their ability for that type of use. Her concern is with limiting what OCLC has done in the past or will want to do in the future. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked if OCLC participated in any dialogue regarding this rezoning. Mr. Gunderman responded that he does not believe they had any direct participation. Ms. Salay asked for confirmation that the City consulted with OCLC on this matter. Mr. Gunderman responded that correspondence was sent to OCLC, similar to what was sent to others in these rezoning actions. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that they did have the opportunity to participate in the dialogue. Did the correspondence indicate what the recommended rezoning classification would be? Mr. Gunderman responded that it did. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that the assumption was then that they were in agreement with this zoning classification. Mr. Gunderman concurred. Mr. Lecklider noted that he would not want to restrict OCLC's ability to expand or restrict their uses. However, he would be concerned with a future user other than OCLC having the ability to do something under the LI zoning that perhaps would not be as desirable. Is there another option available? Ms. Salay suggested a planned district for this parcel. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked if they are proposing a motion to remove this parcel from the ordinance and refer it back to Planning Commission for further discussion. Ms. Salay stated that she is willing to propose that motion. She believes a planned district is appropriate. To have had no dialogue`with this major corporate citizen about their future plans for this industrial park, whicfi constitutes valuable commercial office space along I-270 is unfortunate. Ms. Salay moved to remove the OCLC parcel from Ordinance 108-03 and to open up dialogue with OCLC to learn if a planned district could be designed for their campus. Mr. Lecklider seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mrs. Boring, no; Mr. Keenan, no; Mr. Reiner, no; Ms. Salay, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, no; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. McCash, no. Mr. McCash stated that he is trying to determine what the underlying charge was with these area wide rezonings. His understanding was that they were reviewing properties annexed to the City, reviewing what the existing township zoning classification was, and placing it into a category in the current zoning code that closely resembles what it was in the township zoning. But what he is hearing now, for some of the residential properties, is that they are actually rezoning those or downzoning those components, changing OCLC from LI to SO, PUD or PCD. On the outside of 1-270 along Emerald Parkway extended, on both sides of that, is limited industrial along Post Road. He would not want LI for that open, vacant land. It would permit self-storage units, for example, along the freeway, which makes no sense. What is the intention with thiseffort? If the City is now RECORD OF' PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council _ Meetin DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC., FORM NO. 10148 arc age... - Held 20 ra occur with the other area rezonings. Those would need to be redone also. Mr. Gunderman responded that the difficulty arises with some of the oldest annexation areas. Staff tried to ascertain the City action on every parcel ever annexed to the City. The difficulty with the older annexations is the lack of records at the township for zoning. Therefore, staff then reviewed how the properties were treated in terms of zoning since the time they were annexed. For these tracts, the City administered zoning as though they had these categories -whether it was OCLC or other business. This is the only logical direction staff could take, once it was determined that the township zoning classification could not be verified in their records. Mr. McCash stated that if the City cannot determine what the zoning was in the township records, how much active dialogue took``place with the residents or property owners to see if they would have any records regarding the zoning of their properties? Mr. Gunderman responded that some property owners have come to a hearing with this type of information about their township zoning. Staff has then investigated further. But for the most part, that has not happened, and the ownership of the properties has. changed several times since the time of annexation. Mr. McCash stated that there was an adopted 1980 zoning map that listed the zoning classifications on these properties. In essence, then, weren't these properties rezoned with the adoption of that zoning map including the classifications on that map? How is the City then down zoning various pieces of property? Mr. Gunderman responded that he does not believe the City is down zoning any properties, other than the few residential properties pointed out. What is being presented is generally consistent with any of the maps staff has uncovered, and if staff had found a particular map that was adopted as a map, he does not believe it is being dealt with at this particular time. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher called for a vote on the ordinances. Vote on Ordinance 94-03(Amended) -Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. McCash, no. Vote on Ordinance 108-03(Amended) -Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes, Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. McCash, no; Ms. Salay, no; Mr. Lecklider, no; Mrs. Boring; yes. Vote on Ordinance 109-03(Amended) - Mr. Keenan, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. McCash, no; Mrs. Boring, yes;lVlr. Reiner, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes. Vote on Ordinance 119-03 - Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. McCash, no; Mrs. Boring, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes. Ordinance 146-03 Rezoning Approximately 43.55 Acres`Located on the.East Side of Riverside Drive and the South Side of Hard Road, Approximately 900 Feet from the Riverside Drive and Hard Road Intersection, from: R-1, Restricted Siuburban Residential bistrict, to; PUD, Planned Unit Development District. (Case No. 03-1552-Riverside Woods). Mr. Gunderman stated that this rezoning is located on the east side of Dublin, close to the corner of Hard and Riverside Drive. It is proposed as a PUD, and is surrounded by residential PUD to the east, the high school PUD, and a PCD zoning for the fire station at the intersection of Hard and Riverside. The site plane in the packet reflects the current tree patterns on the property. The site consists of 43.5 acres and is proposed for 54 single- family lots of 90 feet in width. It was reviewed by Planning Commission on February 5 and approved by a vote of 6-0 with 17 conditions. He has another suggested condition which is related to the tree waiver listed on the agenda tonight. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked if Council would Like to review the tree waiver at this time. Mrs. Boring stated that, legally, the zoning should be considered prior to consideration of any tree waiver for the site. Mr. Gunderman responded that the reason he has suggested this is that if staff's recommendation for the tree waiver is adopted, a correction would be needed to the text which would then become Condition #1 Mrs. Boring stated that she would not want to grant a tree waiver to the developer before having the zoning approval for the land. RECORD OF PROCEEDII`IGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting. DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC., FORM NO. 10148 arc age Held 20 ' i i- uerc~ier as a r. a e i a wou i e o ma a commen a ore any Council discussion on the rezoning. Ben Hale Jr. 37 W. Broad Street representing the applicant noted that he has worked closely with staff on this rezoning. They have tried to minimize any tree removal. He introduced Mr. Ruma who has also worked closely with the East Dublin Civic Association. The Association is fully supportive of this development. Mr. Reiner asked why they are requesting a tree waiver. Is there a grading problem which precludes siting the houses within the freed area? Mr. Hale responded that there is a ravine on the site which contains the best trees. In the open areas to the west, there are few trees. The best trees are the ones which will remain in place. The standard practice with tree waivers is that the right of way is cleared and when the house is sited, the trees are `cleared and are replaced to the extent possible on the same lot. Sometimes this is not possible, but that is fhe general practice and this is how Wyandotte Woods was handled. Mr. McCash stated that in reviewing Exhibit C, the existing conditions map which shows the tree locations, there are a significant amount of trees on the eastern side of the property, which is where 12 lots are located. Since this is a heavily wooded location, wouldn't it make sense in terms of conservation subdivision design to reduce the lot sizes to less than 90 feet and move as many as possible into the open areas? This would minimize the amount of tree waiver needed and would preserve open space. Mr. Gunderman responded that the overall discussion with this project dealt with the densities. Some previous proposals for the site were at 2 units per acre, and this proposal is at a reduced density. It is a balancing act in any case. Mr. McCash suggested that the 1.25 density be retained and the layout shifted to preserve more trees. Mr. Gunderman stated that this is possible. Ms. Salay commented that in the Community Plan, this site is designated as low density residential or .5 to 1 dwelling unit per acre. Why not bring the density in line with the Community Plan, and there will then be less of a tree waiver needed. Developers can always ask for a higher density than the Plan specifies, buf generally they do not receive approval of their proposal Mr. Gunderman reported that P&Z grappled with some of the same issues prior to making their recommendation of approval Mr. Hale noted that one of the issues addressed with the Civic Association was that they felt that the type of development in' Wedgewood and Wyandotte Woods was very appropriate for their area, in terms of tyle of housing, side load garages, and lot size. They felt there are enough cluster type units in their neighborhood and their strong preference was for this type of development. They felt that along Riverside Drive, the quality housing with 90-foot lots was appropriate. They worked hard on the site plan to utilize the open areas, to retain the setbacks and to have an appropriate entry. They believe this is a good development, in keeping with the potential of the area and meets the desires of the surrounding neighborhood. Mr. McCash commented that the same desire can be achieved on smaller lots, keeping ~•-M side load garages. Mr. Hale responded that, typically, smaller lots will not accommodate side load garages. It is very difficult, but not impossible, to justify the type of house to be built if the lots are narrower. Mr. McCash noted that the zero lot line, side load garages exist in Ballantrae -cluster type homes. Mr. Hale responded that these are side loaded garages where the garage extends out to the front. It is difficult to have a side load garage on a lot less than 90 feet. Mr. Ruma stated that it is not impossible to build a side load whether it is an interior side load, The Civic Association felt strongly that there is a need for more family housing near the schools and not more empty-nester, cluster type housing in the area. The family housing cannot be done on smaller lots, without making the product smaller. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council. Meetin DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC., FORM NO. 10148 --1Vf-arcFi--1-5~00~--- -Pazde-10 Held 20 association and the community to devise this plan. The neighborhood and the civic association for various reasons have endorsed this plan and want to move forward with this. .r--- Mr. McCash asked, in view of the neighborhood's desires for the type of housing specified, why didn't the neighborhood association require them to stay within the .5 to 1 unit per acre specified in the Commurty Plan? fihis would have reduced the impact on the site and still provided the larger lots that the east side wants in the marketplace. He .has concerns with deviating from the Community Plan density requirements. Mrs. Boring responded that as Mr. McCash has often stated, the Community Plan is a guideline. Except for six homes, all the homes have open space behind them, there is a generous setback along Riverside Drive and Hard Road, and the overall look is desirable. It was a balancing act, and at this point is agreeable to the neighbors. Mr. Keenan asked about any drainage issues. to the north and existing well issues. Have these been addressed? Mr. Gunderman stated that this project is to be served with City water and will not affect the existing wells. In regard to stormwater detention, there are a lot of fractures in the bedrock and potential for runoff into those openings. A geologic study was done for this development, and staff is comfortable with the results. Ms. Salay stated that an issue was raised previously about noise from the fire station. Will there be some type of notification to purchasers of the homes? This is very important to avoid future surprises to the buyers. Mr. Ruma responded that anote-will be placed on the plat and a letter provided in the closing package for potential buyers. Ms. Salay asked about the square footage for the homes envisioned on the site. Mr. Ruma estimated that they will be in the 3,000 to 5,000 square foot range and priced in the range of $400,000 to $600,000. Mr. Lecklider asked how Condition #9 was resolved. "Underground stream overflow" seems a contradiction in terms. Mr. Gunderman responded that the report on the geologic survey showed that there was more soil on top of the rock than previously expected. But in terms of location of the stormwater detention, there was no reason to believe there would be difficulty. Mr. Lecklider noted that there are a large number of ash trees listed in the tree inventory. In light of the recent problems with ash trees, this is a concern. Is it possible that it might be ordered in the future that all of the ash trees be removed? Mr. Reiner stated that it would be important that the trees are not replaced with ash trees. He would not advocate taking down the ash trees at this point. Mr. Hale added that the developer will work with staff on tree replacement and will plant a variety of species, not including ash. Mr. Lecklider asked if Mr. Gunderman has any comments to add with respect to the discussion of density. Mr. Gunderman commented that he does not. All of the relevant information has been discussed previously. Mr. Lecklider asked about the impact on the density with elimination of 12 lots at the eastern end. Mrs. Boring estimated that it would result in a density of approximately one unit per acre, as there would be 42 lots on 43 acres. Mr. McCash commented that this would conform with the Community Plan. Mrs. Boring asked if there is any projected need or desire for blasting in this area? Previous projects from Amberleigh and north of that have been restricted for blasting. Mr. Ruma stated that the geologic survey went to 15-20 feet in depth and did not hit rock. It does not appear that blasting will be necessary. Mrs. Boring asked if the applicant would object to a condition prohibiting blasting. Mr. Ruma stated that they would not have a problem with this condition. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meetin DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC., FORM NO. 10148 ~Marcf~r1-5 ~ 2d0~ -1~az~ 1-1- - Held 20 t to the 14t" condition, that lots identified as not appropriate for walkout basements be restricted from having walkout basements. Mr. Hale agreed. Mrs. Boring asked Mr. Gunderman to summarize the condition staff is proposing. i Mr. Gunderman stated that part of the text requirements regarding tree replacement indicate that the replacement trees could be utilized to meet the new requirement in the appearance code that lots of 90 foot in width would have to have three new landscape trees added to the property. The developer is requesting that the replacement trees be used for this purpose, but staff does not concur. Staff recommends that replacement trees can be placed on fhe property, but not as a substitute for the new requirement. This is more consistent with what has been done with other tree requirements in the Code, i.e., street trees. Ms. Salay agreed, and added that rather than planting the trees on private property, they should be planted on public property. Mr. Gunderman responded that staff discussed this with Mr. Hahn. Mr. Nahn did not have a good supply of ready locations to accommodate additional replacement trees. Staff believes that the replacement trees should be utilized wherever possible on the property. In this case, there are probably more trees to be replaced than can be accommodated on the site, and staff therefore recommends that they pay the fee in lieu of. Ms. Salay stated that by planting replacement trees on the private property, it increases the value of the private property. The replacement trees should be placed on public property if possible. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that, in any case, the fees are deposited in funds used for parkland. Mr. Hale added that, historically, it has. been Dublin's desire to replace as many trees on the lot as possible. That is what was proposed in the letter. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that Council does not disagree with this, but it is not in lieu of the additional requirement for three new landscape trees on each lot. Mr. Gunderman stated that in response to Mrs. Boring's comment, his suggestion would be that in addition to the additional Condition #18 she has suggested, another condition #19 be added that the second bullet under "front yard trees" as stated in the text, be removed upon approval of a tree waiver with such a condition attached by City Council. Mrs. Boring asked for clarification. Mr. Gunderman stated that the second bullet point of the text on Page DS-2 under "Front Yard Trees -Front Yard Trees shall count as Replacement Trees" -should be eliminated, if the tree waiver is approved Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked for a motion. Mr. McCash moved to disapprove the rezoning application for the following reasons: 1. It fails to comply with the Community Plan density guidelines; 2. Impact on the schools and the traffic by the increase in the density does not provide an offsetting economic benefit to the community; 3. It fails to adhere to the Council stated goals implementing conservation design principles to minimize the impact on the existing forested areas and to promote a significant preservation of greenspace; t--~ 4. It provides no appreciable creativity or upgrades to justify the deviation from the established density guidelines and also adds to the continuing commercial and residential imbalance that exists in the community. Mr. Lecklider seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mr. Keenan, no; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, no; Mrs. Boring, no; Mr. Reiner, yes. (Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that the rezoning ordinance failed.) BIDS Ordinance 16-04 Accepting the Lowest/Best Bid for the City of Dublin Floor Maintenance and Upholstery Cleaning Project, and Declaring an Emergency. There were no questions from Council RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meetin DAYTON LEOAL BLANK, INC., FORM NO. 70145 arc Held 20 Ms. Salay seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes, Mr. Reiner, yes; Mayor Chinnici- Zuercher, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Ms. Salay, yes. Vote on the Ordinance: Mr. McCash, yes; Mi-. Keenan, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes. Ordinance 17-04 Accepting the Lowest/Best Bid for the City of Dublin Facilities Painting Project, and Declaring an Emergency. There were no questions from Council. Ms. Salay moved for emergency passage. Mr. Lecklider seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Ms. Salay, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes. Vote on the Ordinance: Mr. Lecklider, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. McCash, yes. STREET NAME CHANGE Ordinance 19-04 Requesting Approval to Change the Name of Metatec Boulevard to Discovery Boulevard in the City of Dublin, Ohio Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked when the signage would actually change for this street, if the ordinance is approved. Mr. Hammersmith responded that staff can proceed with this change, based upon the schedule at the Service Department. Bethany Willett, 6760 Metatec Boulevard, an employee of A Place to Grow addressed Council briefly, indicating their support of the name change. They are concerned with the number of changes being made, in that the name of Wilcox Road is proposed for change as well. She asked about the timing, for the purpose of updating company maps on their literature. Mr. Hammersmith stated that the. name change for that portion of Wilcox Road is scheduled for first reading tonight, with the second reading at the April 5 meeting. The intent is that these changes be closely linked in terms of timing. Vote on the Ordinance: Mr. McCash, yes; Mr. Reiner,-yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes. LAND PURCHASE Ordinance 20-04 Authorizing the Purchase of a 1.32 Acre, More or Less, Tract of Land from Patrick G. Costello and Valerie Bergdall-Costello Located at 5886 Post Road, City of Dublin, County of Franklin, State of Ohia. There were no questions. Vote on the Ordinance: Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes. INTRODUCTION /FIRST READING -ORDINANCES STREET NAME CHANGE Ordinance 21-04 Requesting Approval to Change the Name of a Portion of Wilcox Road (between Perimeter Drive and Post Road) to Holt Drive in the City of Dublin, Ohio. Mr. Lecklider introduced the ordinance. Mr. Hammersmith stated that at the lasf meeting, staff noted that a name change was being proposed for this portion of Wilcox Road. Two suggestions were proposed, and the staff recommendation has been narrowed to Holt Drive. Staff is proposing this as a first reading tonight, with a second reading on April 5. Mr. Keenan asked in terms of emergency services, how quickly are the maps updated for name changes such as these? Chief Woo indicated that these changes can be made in their own map books, but it may take time to have the information shared with surrounding jurisdictions. Mr. Hammersmith stated that these changes are filed with Franklin County and the maps are then updated on the GIS systems countywide. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meetin~_ DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC., FORM NO. 10148 ~;-2604 -Page~13- - Held 20 STREET NAME SIGNAGE Ordinance 22-04 Amending Ordinance 02-89 Regulating Street Name Signage in the City of Dublin. ~ Mr. Lecklider introduced the ordinance. Ms. Brautigam stated that it recently came to staff's attention that the ordinance regulating public street name signage in the City contained fee language that was not current. The ordinance reflects updated language, consistenf with the established fee structure. The ordinance was also updated to clarify and address areas not previously included in the ordinance, such as Historic Dublin signage. Staff has been working with homeowners on the kinds of street signs existing in order to have a more uniform look for signs with wooden posts. Ms. Grigsby stated that this ordinance was initiated as a result of some fees established in 1992. Clarification was needed to clearly define the signage currently used to make sure it is addressed in the ordinance, to address signage in the Historic District, and for private street signage. A redlined version was provided to show the changes being made. This was across-divisional effort. She offered to respond to questions. Mr. McCash noted that the City-installed signage has a certain reflectivity. For custom signage, does the City require some level of reflectivity in the paint? There have been some issues with areas such as Muirfield Village where signs are not visible at night. Mr. Hammersmith responded that there has been an effort by Muirfield Village to make their signage more reflective. He is not certain if that matter is addressed within the ordinance. Mr. McCash stated that emergency services has difficulty in finding these streets at night, as well as citizens. Ms. Salay stated that Section 2(b} seems to address this issue. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that the language, "when the need arises to replace existing would seem to indicate it could take years to show a level of improvement in areas such as Muirfield Village. Mr. Hammersmith stated that the intent of this ordinance is not to retroactively replace all of those signs. Mr. McCash stated that he is aware of that, but when the letters are repainted on these signs, they could use a more reflective paint to obtain a higher level of reflectivity in the lettering. Mr. Hammersmith stated that this is the intent in Section 2(d). Perhaps this can be modified to better address the concerns expressed. Mr. Reiner stated that he is not aware that there is an intent to replace the signs in Muirfield. If that is the case, he would want the Board to be made aware of it. Mr. Hammersmith responded that this is not the intent of the City. Mr. Lecklider asked if the reflectivity issue has been resolved. Mr. Reiner responded that this issue arose at a Board meeting several months ago. He asked if staff has worked with the Association on this. Mr. Hammersmith stated that the Association is working with Danny Johnson on this. If Council desires, the wording can be modified to address these specific cases. Mr. McCash stated that when the fire hydrants were painted, glass beads were added to improve reflectivity of the paint. Perhaps something similar can be done for the lettering on street signs. Mr. Hammersmith stated that this would be difficult on a vertical surface. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher summarized that, staff will review the wording for modification prior to the second reading. Any ordinance approved should be sent out to the Associations who are impacted by these requirements for upgrades and the related fees. Mr. Hammersmith agreed. Mr. Lecklider asked Mr. Reiner if he envisions an issue regarding the reflectivity of their signage in Muirfield. Mr. Reiner responded that the Association, too, welcomes any assistance in increasing the visibility of the signage at night. I r ~ ~ i i r. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meetin~___ DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC., FORM NO. 10148 Held 20 posts for the Waterford, Donegal Cliffs and the Reserve areas. This seems costly. Mr. Hammersmith responded that this is correct, assuming the City performs the work for them. Ms. Salay stated that the posts in Waterford Village did disintegrate and required replacement. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked if there would be discrimination between rotting versus a damage situation by a car or other incident. It is no fault of the homeowners association that weather and age impact the signs. They are not the ones who made the decision regarding what type of street sign would be used. Mr. McDaniel stated that the $425 fee is based on the types of wood posts that exist. The $75 charge is for the labor and equipment charges involved with replacement. Years ago, it was determined that civic associations would be permitted to have special sign posts if they paid for the cost of replacement. The City encouraged them to replace them with regular street signs, but the associations wanted to retain the special signage. Council at that time required the Association to take responsibility for replacing special signage. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that theAssociation, however, would not have made the initial decision to have that sign post. Mr. McDaniel responded that the Associations were given the opportunity to opt out of having the special signs. The City would prefer that they use the standard signage. Mr. McCash asked if there is a difference in the policy depending upon whether there is a forced and funded homeowners association? He recalls that Donegal Cliffs does not have a forced homeowners association. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher clarified that only a portion of the Donegal Cliffs development does not have a forced association. Mr. McCash stated that, in these cases, how can the City then force the Association to pay for the costs of replacing the wooden signage? Mr. McDaniel stated that this is a policy decision of Council, and the policy can be changed if Council desires. Mr. McCash stated the question then becomes whether the City proceeds to replace a wooden sign with a standard sign in an area without a forced and funded homeowners association, or does the City wait until the Association. addresses the situation? Mr. McDaniel stated that a temporary sign can be installed until the issue of replacing a post is resolved. He has not had an experience where an association does not want to replace wood posts with a similar post. Mr. McCash commented that the issue with fence replacement along Coffman Road arose because of the lack of a forced and funded homeowners association to address it. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that due to the aging of much of the property and landscaping, homeowners associations are encountering increasing costs for maintenance of the required areas. Her understanding of the current policy is that if a post is destroyed or damaged, the City will replace it without a fee with the standard pole, under any circumstance. Mr. McDaniel clarified that the sign is replaced with the same type of sign post that exists and is charging the association a fee for-the wood sign post. For ordinary street signage, there is no charge. Mr. McCash asked about a case where a wooden sign post needs to be replaced in an area without a forced and funded homeowners association. Mr. McDaniel stated that the Association is charged for the sign. Mrs. Boring added that if they do not have funding available, a regular street sign is installed. If the residents request a custom post, the association is charged a fee. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that Mr. McCash's point is that the City may not be aware of the financial situation of the Association before incurring costs for installing wooden sign posts. When an invoice is sent, the Association may not have the funds to pay for it. Mr. McDaniel stated that they have not encountered this situation in all the years they have been replacing street signage. There will be a second reading/public hearing at the April 5 Council meeting. i ~ ~ r, ~ ~ RECORD Off' PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting____ DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC., FOAM NO. 1014A - - arc ~ wag Held 20 SALE OF BONDS Ordinance 23-04 Providing for the Issuance and Sale of .Bonds in the Maximum Principal Amount of $3,000,000 for the Purpose of Paying the Costs of Constructing and Equipping a Municipal Swimming' Pool Together with All Necessary Site Improvements and Appurtenances, and Authorizing a Loan Agreement with the Ohio Municipal Bond Program. - Ms. Salay introduced the ordinance. Ms. Grigsby stated that this provides forlong-term bonds for the construction of the second outdoor pool. Because of the size of the bond issue, the City is using the new Ohio Municipal Bond Program, recently established. This should result in a better interest rate and lower issuance costs due to lower administration costs. There will be a second reading/public hearing at the April 5 Council meeting. Ordinance 24-04 Providing for the Issuance and Sale of Bonds in the Maximum Principal Amount of $1.,550,000 to Pay the Costs of Acquiring Real Estate and Interests in Real Estate for Park Purposes, and Authorizing a Related Loan Agreement with the Ohio Municipal Bond Program. Ms. Salay introduced the ordinance. Ms. Grigsby stated that this provides for the issuance of bonds to fund a portion of the acquisition costs related to the bait store property as authorized at the last meeting. There will be a second reading/public hearing at the April 5 Council meeting. INTRODUCTION/PUBLIC HEARING -`RESOLUTIONS RECOMMENDATION FROM ADVISORY COMM/SS/ON Resolution 10-04 In Support of the Development of a Sledding Hill at Glacier Ridge Metro Parka Mr. Lecklider introduced the resolution. Mr. Hahn stated that PRAC has been seeking a more effective vehicle for communicating with the Metro Parks their desire fora sledding hill in this area. The idea of a sledding hill was proposed during the master planning phase of the Glacier Ridge Metro Park, and to date, there has been little indication either pro or con from the Metro Parks staff. PRAC views the resolution as an effective vehicle to communicate the desire of the Dubliri community for more sledding opportunities to serve the area. Mr. McCash clarified that there are no funding implications with this proposal. Mr. Hahn responded that this is merely a way to communicate the desire for this amenity. Vote on the Resolution: Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Mr. Lecklider,. yes; Ms. Salay, yes. TRAFFIC CALMING Resolution 11-04 Adopting a Revised Traffic Calming Program. Mr. Lecklider introduced the resolution. Mr. Hammersmith stated that this resolution formally adopts the revised traffic-calming program, as previously discussed by Council Vote on the Resolution: Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes. BOARD AND COMMISSION APPOINTMENTS Resolution 12-04 Appointing Members to the Various Boards and Commissions of the City of Dublin. Mr. McCash moved to postpone the Resolution until the April 5 Council meeting, and to reappoint Todd Zimmerman to the Planning & Zoning Commission for afour-year term. The Commission meets prior to the April 5t Council meeting, and therefore there is a need for this reappointment tonight. Ms. Salay seconded the motion. Vote on the Motion: Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes. ._.q_..~__e_~,_ i I I s i r iri a RECORD ~F PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meetin DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC., FORM NO. 10148 ~ _ Held 20 Resolution 13-04 Authorizing the City Manager to Execute an Easement with American Electric Power (AEP) for the Development of Dublin Community Pool South. Mr. Lecklider introduced the resolution. Ms. Brautigam stated that this easement is needed to serve the new community pool Mr. McCash asked if the City is installing the line in the easement or paying for the installation. Mr. Hammersmith responded that AEP'is installing the line. In order for AEP to maintain the line, they need an easement. Mr. McCash stated that for private development, AEP has typically been charging construction costs for the line. So if they are charging the City for installing the line, he is not interested in providing an easement at no cost: If the City could trade the easement for the cost of the line, that would be acceptable. But he cannot support the use of public dollars to install the line while providing-them with a free easement. Mr. Hahn responded that AEP is charging to run the line from the right of way to the new transformer on the site and back out. Electric service is not being extended down the right of way. The PUCO has given AEP the right charge these fees, and in order for the City to have electric service, AEP is exercising fhe allowable fee structure: Mr. McDaniel stated that the same situation was encountered with the Service Center. These fees are permitted under electric deregulation. Vote on the Resolution: Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. Reiner, no; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes: OTHER • Tree Waiver Request -Riverside Woods (Due to the disapproval of the rezoning. request, there was no need to consider the tree r--. waiver request.) • Speed Limit Change on SR 161 between Riverside Drive and Sawmill Road Mr. Hammersmith stated that this item was discussed previously with Council. It was included on the agenda so that Council is aware of staff's plan to proceed with increasing the speed limit to 45 mph for this portion of SR 161. Ms. Salay emphasized that it is important that the City enforce the 45 mph speed limit, due to the tendency of people to travel 5 to 10 miles over the speed limit. Traveling at these speeds westbound into the Historic District, where the ultimate hope is fora 25 mph speed limit, will be dangerous. Perhaps signage indicating that the speed limits are strictly enforced in this area would be advisable. • Discussion of Council Goals from City Council Leadership Workshop of 1/23/04 Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that the report from the session was included in a previous packet. Council's practice is to formally approve a resolution with the goals agreed upon. If there are no further comments or changes to the report, this item will be included on the next agenda for formal adoption: Mr. McCash commented that he was not able to attend goal setting due to the fact that he had car problems the day prior and filing deadlines to comply with on the day of the workshop. However, he questioned the high priority goal of revitalization of Historic Dublin, predominantly because this has been on the goal list since 1990 in various forms. Has Council set forth some committee or task force to determine implementation of the revitalization plans? The City is currently implementing the stormwater improvements for the area, but what about a timeline, funding, and public/private involvement? This goal continues to come up on the high priority list. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that the discussion at goal setting was that significant progress has been made since the task force work of four years ago. The direction is that with adoption of this goal, a new task force would be formed, staff will update them on the accomplishments of the recommendations to date, and a new vision would be established for the future. Mr. McCash asked if this task force is envisioned to be more of an implementation task force, based upon all of the studies and work done in the past. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher responded that'some of that will be true. • Discussion re Reporting Requirements for Political Action Committees Mr. Keenan commented that there are adequate reporting requirements already existing. RECORD Off' PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council - Meetin~___ DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC., FORM NO. 10148 ' a - Held 20 . Zr-c r~r suggested in the Law Director's memo. He is suggesting: 1. That political action committees making contributions to local candidates should disclose their contributors. 2. That for disclosure of both contributions and expenditures, trigger dates should be the actual receipt or the actual expenditure and not the date of deposit for a contribution. For example, with respect to expenditures, the date of billing as opposed to the date of payment. 3. Consideration of requiring disclosure of an individual making efforts or incurring expenses. For example, an individual distributing literature or advertising in support of a candidate -requiring disclosure in that case as well. 4. Also, some clarification with respect to penalties. He is not certain that the existing law addresses the failure to disclose contributions. Mr. Smith responded that if Council .decides to implement reporting requirements for a political action committee (PAC), Council can adopt a policy regarding thresholds for contributors to PAC's, i.e., $10, $25 or other level. There have been some First Amendment cases regarding the threshold. forlisfings of contributors to a PAC. As a home rule City, however, Dublin could choose to do so. Staff did not review the issue of requirements for reporting of ads or literature circulated in support of a candidate, which would also involve First Amendment rights. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher questioned how this type of support would be a candidate disclosure issue. Mr. Lecklider responded that he is not suggesting that it is. Mr. McCash stated that this would typically fall under the soft money contributions category for campaigns. His understanding of Mr. Lecklider's suggestions was to establish some type of complete and fair disclosure process of everyone that is interested in a campaign financially -either pro or con -and that having the candidate disclose to the extent they are aware of such contributions. The other issue relates to how PAC's are spending money on campaigns inside Dublin -not specifically donating monies per se but spending monies on the campaign in some manner. The federal campaign ads now include language that the candidate approved an advertisement, and perhaps that could be required in Dublin. Mr. Smith stated that he is not certain a City can require a candidate to report what they may know about someone spending funds on behalf of their campaign. This would likely involve First Amendment issues. Mr. McCash agreed, but suggested that a requirement could be that a candidate include on all campaign literature that they have endorsed the message contained in the ad. By implication, If the literature does not include this message, it was then not specifically endorsed by that candidate. Mrs. Boring asked why Council would want to go to this extent in disclosure? If this is adopted, and a PAC makes a contribution to a candidate, perhaps another PAC has already contributed to that first PAC. How deep would'this reporting go? There may be many layers of such contributors. Mr. Smith responded that someone generally forms a PAC to support a candidate or an issue, and people then contribute to such a PAC. In any reporting requirements, it would be important that the City treat everyone'the same, as there is case law on this. Election campaign laws already require disclosure of campaign materials paid for by a candidate. (At this point, Mr. Keenan left the meeting due to an out of town travel commitment.] Mr. McCash stated that the issue is accountability - he is not advocating one way or another. Mr. Smith stated that if Council directs, he can draft legislation to require reporting of PAC contributions for Dublin campaigns. Ms. Salay stated that she believes this inappropriate. Theoretically, a PAC could fund an entire Council campaign to circumvent the local. reporting requirements and the citizenry would be unaware of who is supporting that candidate. It is also appropriate to take this a step further and identify those contributing to the PAC. In a campaign a couple of years RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meetin~_ DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC.. FORM NO. 70148 arc a-~~1 g-= Held 20 This was an unidentified person or persons trying to influence the local election. She would support political action committees identifying their members. Mr. Lecklider commented that if a certain developer did not agree with his view on density, what would prevent such an individual from running an ad opposing his election? Mr. Smith stated that in this case, the First Amendmenf rights would allow someone to do so. Mr. Lecklider clarified that his interest is with disclosure. Mr. McCash stated that if a developer supports a campaign by means of a PAC, citizens are not aware of the source of the financial campaign support. Mr. Smith stated that.. requiring reporting of contributions by PAC's can be done, but the more difficult issue is whether the City could implement a law that requires disclosure of others expending funds or taking actions to support a candidate. If Council directs, he can research this further. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher commented that, personally, she believes this is creating a situation that does not exist. These are suburban City Council elections, not a Presidential election. However, if the majority of Council present tonight desires a more thorough dialogue and an opportunity to provide legal counsel and interpretation of the options, it should be referred to a Council Committee. It was the consensus of Council to refer this to the Administrative Committee. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that Mr. Smith has sufficient information of the specific charge. Mr. McCash suggested that, prior to any meeting, Legal staff provide a brief, bullet point summary of what can and cannot be done in terms of requirements. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher commented thaf it would probably be advisable to convene a meeting of the Committee to pose the specific questions to be researched, versus having staff do unnecessary research. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked that all Council Members be notified of this meeting date so that they can attend if interested in this topic. CITY MANAGER/STAFF REPORTS There were no further reports from the City Manager. COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS/COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE Mr. Reiner, Communitv Development Committee Chair stated that the Committee met at 6:30 p.m. this evening to review the proposed letters to be sent out regarding the US 33 corridor regional partnership. Four Council Members attended the meeting, and the recommendation is to proceed with sending out the letters to initiate this effort. In response to Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher about the target audience for each letter, Ms. Brautigam clarified that the first letter invites elected officials and the administrator of a jurisdiction to the roundtable. These are targeted to the jurisdictions which have frontage along the corridor, and includes Union County Commissioners and the Union County Engineer. The second letter is a notice for the various Planning Commissions, adjacent township trustees, and others of the meeting date. They are invited to listen and observe the meeting, but not to actually participate at the roundtable. Mr. Reiner moved approval of the recommendation of the Committee. Mr. Lecklider seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that April 20 is a Mayor's Court night and would preclude her participation. Ms. Brautigam stated that perhaps a magistrate can be retained for the Mayor's Court session that evening. Staff had great difficulty in finding an available date for this meeting. Mrs. Boring commented: 1. The Martin Road residents have continued to request some type of deterrent to discourage people from driving around the speed humps. What is the status of this? i,' I I j i' ~ RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dukilin City Council Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC., FORM NO. 10140 - ~e Held 20 driving around them, and this wil(be accomplished no later than the end of May. 2. Sometime ago, Council gave direction to staff to work with the residents on a rezoning for the David Road area. When it was brought to P&Z, P&Z tabled it due to some issues associated with .the proposal What is the procedure for bringing this back? Mayor McCash stated that his recollection was that this proposal was withdrawn because the residents could not agree on a plan. Mrs. Boring stated that is not correct. Mr. Ciarochi clarified that there was quite a bit of debate with that rezoning. Staff had worked with the neighborhood to devise a planned commercial district. The discussion at P&Z led to P&Z tabling the proposal. He believes that the process would require P&Z to remove this from the table. Mr. Smith concurred. Mrs. Boring stated that if a developer's rezoning is tabled, the developer returns at a later date to P&Z. She does not recall any action from P&Z to remove it from the table. Mr. Ciarochi stated that if an item is tabled so that staff can work on certain issues, staff will then present back before the Commission. In this case, the case was tabled indefinitely without any specific direction to staff. More recently, he has heard from several residents that the one resident who had concerns is no longer involved. Mrs. Boring stated that a long time ago, there was one resident who had concerns, but that resident no longer resides there. At the time, it was Planning & Zoning Commission who had issues with the proposal. There are people who have been waiting for a long time for the City to fulfill their promise for a rezoning to help the residents of this area. Mr. Smith stated that, procedurally, Council can send a message to the Commission to ask them to take this item off the table, or direct staff to bring this back to the Commission. Mrs. Boring moved to direct staff to do what is necessary to bring this rezoning back before the Commission. Ms. Salay seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes. Ms. Salav asked why the Architectural Review Board meeting of March 17 was cancelled: There is a case on the..agenda which involves the Grabill property. _ Staff will report back on this. Mrs. Boring stated that she circulated a copy of a recent article in USA Today regarding Boulder, Colorado. On page 2, it describes a local growth ordinance that caps new housing starts at 1 percent per year. From recent discussions by Council, it appears they are looking for a means of monitoring housing growth. Perhaps this should be referred to the Community Development Committee, if there is interest in investigating what other cities have done. Mr. McCash suggested that the Law department could review the Hudson, Ohio ordinance which provides a lottery system for the number of houses which can be built in the community each year, based upon the availability of water, sewer, schools, police services, etc. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that a major piece of information that the Committee would need for this review is predicting the ratio needed for the balance of commercial and residential. There has been some discussion that this ratio is out of alignment and that the schools and other service entities are feeling the pressure as a result of the reduction in income tax revenues. Ms. Brautigam stated that one of Council's goals this year relates to financial stability. She pointed out that limiting residential growth doesn't necessary mean that commercial growth may come. This is market driven for the most part. Mr. McCash stated that perhaps the residential development could be limited until the commercial growth rebounds. Ms. Salay noted that the Community Plan has many areas designated as 1-2 units per acre, and if that all develops as such, what is the impact on the commercial base and future maintenance? Some financial projections may provide a starting point for discussion in the Plan update. Perhaps the misalignment is due to the fact that the market conditions currently are conducive to residential housing, and the commercial development may come back. This misalignment may be temporary, and by the year I I I i iI i, i RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublh City Couricil Meeting___ DAYTON LEGALOLANK, INC., FORM NO. 70148 arc -Pa~~-20- Held 20 forum. Ms. Brautigam may have some information, based on her recent experience with Colorado. Ms. Brautigam stated that the focus in Boulder is really more with affordable housing. Ms. Salay stated that, in view of the concerns expressed about affordable housing in Dublin, if multiple opportunities are available within the School District itself, could this impact Dublin's needs to provide affordable housing within the City limits? Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that when Council has discussed affordable housing and during the Community Plan discussion,` the focus was not the Dublin School district - it was the City itself. More discussion of this topic would be needed if the scope of the geographic area is to be redefined. Ms. Salay responded that on the one hand, there is a desire for raising the development standards with the appearance code, lowering densities, and limiting residential growth. On the other hand, if there is a desire to provide affordable housing, these two goals are not compatible. She would be interesting in resolving this. Mr. McCash stated that it has in fact been resolved. The more residential standards and other elements that are approved, the more that affordable housing will diminish -moving to Columbus and other areas. It is not possible to achieve the provision of affordable housing with the many new standards which have been approved. Mrs. Boring stated that in the Boulder example, they require each development to provide a certain percentage of affordable housing, However, their average housing price is $500,000 and may not be termed "affordable" in Ohio. Similar to the parkland dedication requirement, the City could require a certain percentage of affordable housing. This would, however, result in the need for more administration. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher suggested that this item be referred to a Committee or perhaps a Committee of the Whole at a future date. It was the consensus of Council to schedule this for a future study session. Ms. Salay asked about the topic of the April 12 study session. Ms. Brautigam responded that staff plans to provide an update on telecommunications. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that she has provided some possible dates for the joint meeting with P&Z and BZA. She asked that everyone return these surveys as soon as possible. Mr. Reiner moved to adjourn the meeting. Ms. Salay seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Ms. Salay, yes. The meeting was adjourned at 10:35 p.m. Mayor -Presiding Officer Clerk of Council