Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/21/2004 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council . Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC., FORM NO. 10148 June 21,2004 Held 20 Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher called the regular meeting of Dublin City Council to order at 7:00 p.m. on Monday, June 21, 2004 at the Dublin Municipal Building. ROLL CALL Present were: Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, Vice Mayor Lecklider, Mrs. Boring, Mr. Keenan, Mr. McCash, and Ms. Salay. Mr. Reiner arrived at 7:10 p.m. Staff members present were: Ms. Brautigam, Mr. Smith, Ms. Grigsby, Mr. McDaniel, Mr. Ciarochi, Mr. Hammersmith, Chief Epperson, Ms. Puskarcik, Mr. Hahn, Mr. Gunderman, Ms. Wanner, Mr. Stevens, Ms. Gilger, Mr. Harding and Ms. Hoyle. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mr. McCash led the Pledge of Allegiance. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Mr. Lecklider moved approval of the minutes of May 17, 2004. Ms. Salay seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mr. McCash, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes. Approval of the minutes of June 7,2004 was delayed until July 6. CORRESPONDENCE The clerk reported that a Notice was sent to Council from the Ohio Division of Liquor Control regarding a new D5A permit for the Clarion at 600 Metro Place North. There was no objection to the issuance of the permit. SPECIAL RECOGNITION/PROCLAMATIONS Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher presented a proclamation to Gary Browning, Streets & Utilities in recognition of his award in the Local Government Snowplow Operator category at the Ohio Invitational Snowplow/Equipment Roadeo on May 18, 2004. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher also wished Ben Hale a Happy 60th Birthday on behalf of City Council. CITIZEN COMMENTS Scott Drinq, Executive Director, Dublin Convention & Visitors Bureau and Mike Jenkins, Past President provided an update to Council on the Bureau's activities during the last quarter. Mr. Jenkins noted that new officers were installed by the DCVB last week, including President Craig Baldridge, Council's representative to the DCVB. The DCVB Board approved their 2005 budget, and they are predicting a 2.5 percent increase in bed tax revenues next year. The marketing services budget will increase by 13 percent over last year, in large part due to Mr. Dring's efforts in reorganization. The budget ratio between marketing and administrative costs in Dublin is 62 percent marketing/38 percent administrative, while the industry average is 55 percent marketing/45 percent administrative. The budget includes new marketing efforts toward the package travel market, such as tour bus stops. Mr. Dring noted that the bid has been submitted for the U.S. Checkers Championship. The event is scheduled for four days in 2005 and would bring $125,000 into the local economy with 400 room nights. He distributed a copy of the booklet submitted for the bid. The primary competition for this bid is Las Vegas, but the group is seeking a more family oriented destination. The current world champion is a Dublin resident. The online reservation system was incorporated into the web site last year, and in the past 12 months, more than $100,000 in rooms have been booked through that site, with 1,300 reservations from 32 states and Canada. They also offer several packages on the web site. They have added a discount Dublin pass in an effort to secure new events and to maximize the existing events. They are working on the Holiday Basketball Tournament event, and he thanked Council for their support. Wallace Maurer, 7451 Dublin Road noted that he is considering whether he will continue in this five-minute slot, as he had an unscheduled ten-minute exchange with the City Manager today. He had dinner at Mr. Reiner's home recently - a marvel of an experience. Among other things, Mr. Reiner was deputed by a member of the Dublin governance to inform him that it was time to let go of the Kindra topic. He has made the discovery recently that some Council Members have not read the seven-page document RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC.. FORM NO. 10148 June 21, 2004 Page 2 Held 20 about this matter, or in any case, have not read it carefully, based on some observations made. He asked Ms. Salay if she has read the document, and whether she believes it was right or wrong, accurate or inaccurate. Ms. Salay responded that she views the Kindra issue as a personnel issue between the City Manager and staff. If any Council Member felt strongly that a member of the management team had acted inappropriately, it would be taken up in private and discussion would be held. Her sense is that there was not disagreement about the way this matter was handled. Mr. Maurer responded that she apparently has not read the document carefully, as she does not refer to the firing process, as outlined in the City Charter. He is personally prepared to meet anyone, anywhere in the City of Dublin with respect to any citizen of Dublin or member of the governance of Dublin to "have it out." He also does have a way of dealing with this in which everyone would be triumphant. Paula Brooks, 4585 Benderton Court. Upper Arlinqton noted that as a citizen who recently completed eight years of service on City Council in Upper Arlington and still serves on their Economic Development Board, she thanks Council for their public service. It was wonderful to see Council give staff accolades for the outstanding services provided, such as snow plowing. She is here tonight as part of an effort to visit City Councils throughout Franklin County. She emphasized the need to work together. She is looking forward to staying for the meeting and thanked Council for this opportunity. LEGISLATION RECONSIDERATION REZONING Ordinance 146-03 (Amended) 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 Suburban Residential District, to: PUD, Planned Unit Development District. (Case No. 03-155Z - Riverside Woods) Ms. Wanner noted that this rezoning was disapproved by Council on March 15 by a vote of 4-3. Those voting against the rezoning cited concerns with density and tree preservation. On April 5, Council voted to reconsider their previous action and agreed to reschedule a hearing of the rezoning within 90 days. Based on the March 15 hearing, the applicant has made changes to the plan. The density has been reduced to less than 1.20 dwelling units per acre, and the front road has been reconfigured to save a number of landmark trees. The revised site plan now includes 52 lots as opposed to the previous 54 lots. Overall density is 1.29, and the boulevard street has been moved to the south in an effort to preserve a number of landmark trees. Some lots have been shifted, and a cui de sac was moved westward. A tree waiver has been requested, and if approved, the text will need to reflect that language. She showed a slide, delineating the changes between the original and the revised plans. Staff is recommending approval subject to the 17 conditions appended by the Commission. Other conditions discussed at the March 15 Council meeting and now included in the recommendations from staff were an amended Condition #14, stating that the lots identified as inappropriate for walkout basements be restricted from having walkout basements; new Condition #18, that the second bullet point of the text on page DS-2 be eliminated if the tree waiver is granted; and new Condition #19, that blasting be prohibited on the site. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher invited Mr. Hale to comment. Ben Hale. Jr.. 37 W. Broad Street. representing the applicant stated that the modifications have significant impact. The removal of lots has opened up the entryway and the changes have increased the setback along Hard Road. The reduction in density has resulted in open space on the site of over 50 percent. Their revised density calculation is 1.19 dwelling units per acre. In addition, the civic association, who has supported this application through the process, has encouraged the developer to take lot 52 and relocate it to save landmark trees. They are requesting that this be added as a condition of approval. The only landmark trees that will now be eliminated are those to install the street, and potentially a couple of others. They are asking to replace the trees on a tree for tree basis, with the landmark trees to be replaced inch for inch. The replacement trees will be of a higher quality than those existing and will help to reforest the site. The East Dublin Civic Association has supported the application that will provide more executive- RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council -----~--_._-- Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC., FORM NO. 10148 June 21, 2004 Page 3 Held 20 type housing in the area. The lots are all 90 foot wide to accommodate side loaded, three- car garages that are desirable in this price range. They believe that the revised plan is an improved plan, both in terms of appearance from Hard Road and in terms of saving the landmark trees. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher invited Council Members to comment. Mr. McCash noted that the Community Plan indicates a density of .5 to 1.0 dwelling units per acre for this area, and Council has consistently strived to adhere to the Community Plan densities, especially for residential uses. What is the compelling reason or justification for Council to go beyond that Community Plan density? Mr. Hale responded that everything must be considered in the context of the surrounding area. It comes down to what is a reasonable expectation, when a developer is proposing executive housing at prices ranging from $400-500,000 - clearly something that the area residents desire. The site plan is very sensitive, with open space of 50 percent and preservation of most landmark trees on the site. He believes the proposal meets any reasonable community standards that Dublin has established. The residents of East Dublin have endorsed this project. As currently zoned, the site would not be nearly as attractive as what is contained within this proposal. The Rumas have consistently done an outstanding job with development in Dublin and have an excellent performance record. This is an opportunity for the east side that everyone supports. The Community Plan is a guide, but there are extenuating circumstances in this case to justify a density of 1.9 on this site. This is a development Dublin should embrace. Mr. McCash stated that the amount of open space is above and beyond what is typically required, so the developer then believes that amenity is an offset to the higher density. Mr. Hale responded that, typically, under the Dublin Code, 15-20 percent open space would result. In this instance, it exceeds 50 percent and results in a substantial increase over the Code requirements. This is a far superior way to develop the property than what the current zoning would allow. Mr. Reiner asked how many lots would be housed on the site, if it met the density of the Community Plan. Ms. Wanner stated that with 43 acres, 43 lots would meet the Community Plan maximum density guide. Ms. Salay thanked the developer, the neighborhood and the Planning staff for their work with Council on the revised plan. It is illustrative to her that the Dublin process does work - the three steps are working with staff, the Planning Commission and Council. Council is not a "rubber stamp" for what the Commission recommends. She was disappointed after the Council vote took place that some of the members' motives were questioned. Her goal was to secure a better product with revisions to the density and the tree preservation. Mr. Lecklider asked if the pond at the southernmost point has a functional purpose. Mr. Hale responded that it is a detention pond and is required. There are no landmark trees in this location. Mrs. Boring noted that a condition was agreed to that they adopt a policy of fining their contractors or subcontractors for tree damage. Is there a process by which this is monitored by the City? Ms. Wanner responded that site landscaping is monitored for all projects, and in this case, special care will be taken due to the number of trees. Mr. Hale noted that this condition was appended by the Planning Commission. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher invited public testimony. Mack Parkhill, 7879 Riverside Drive stated that he is the Vice President of the East Dublin Civic Association. He thanked Council for allowing this opportunity for a rehearing of the application. Over the years, there have been a number of proposals for this site and the Association has opposed all, except for this. They believe this proposal is a very sensitive project to the neighborhood's desires, with its preservation of landmark trees and the changes to the entryway. The Association has been seeking a sensitive final closure to the Riverside Drive corridor for 15 years. Finally, this proposal fits what they want to see. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC., FORM NO. 10148 June 21, 2004 Page 4 Held 20 The Association wholeheartedly endorses this project and asks that Council support the rezoning. Mr. McCash asked if any of the open space is being dedicated to the City as parkland. Ms. Wanner responded that she believes that all of the open space will be dedicated as parkland to the City. Mr. Reiner asked if the center island includes a retention or detention basin. Mr. Hale responded that the area is a retention basin. Mr. Reiner noted that behind lot 25, there is an open field area. The retention basin is located behind lot 46. Why wasn't the retention basin moved behind lot 25? Mr. Hale responded that there is a ravine that affected the location of the retention basin. Mr. Reiner asked why lots 25, 26 and 27 were not pushed back into the unforested area? Was it too close to the road? Mr. Hale responded that they tried to maintain the 200-foot setback. With the planned reforesting, the lots will not be visible from Riverside Drive. Mr. Keenan moved approval of the rezoning with the 17 conditions of P&Z, the modified condition #14, conditions #18 and #19 outlined in the staff recommendation, and with the additional condition # 20 that Lot 52 be shifted to be adjacent to Lot 41. Mrs. Boring seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mayor Chinnici- Zuercher, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. McCash, yes. Mr. Hale asked if Council would consider reviewing the Final Plat for Post Preserve at this point on the agenda. It was the consensus of Council to modify the agenda to do so. Final Plat - Post Preserve. Section 2 Mr. Gunderman stated that this plat contains 67 lots on 61.3 acres and is zoned PLR. The Commission recommended approval by a 5-0 vote on May 6, 2004, subject to ten conditions. Mr. Lecklider moved approval with the conditions of P&Z. Mrs. Boring seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mayor Chinnici- Zuercher, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. McCash, yes. SECOND READING/PUBLIC HEARING - ORDINANCES REZONING Ordinance 144-03 Rezoning Approximately 5.092 Acres Located on the South Side of Brand Road, Opposite Lombard Way, from: R-1, Restricted Suburban Residential District, to: PUD, Planned Unit Development District. [Case No. 03-150Z - Preliminary Development Plan - Freshwater Farm (Humbert Property) - 6325 Brand Road.] RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC., FORM NO. 10148 June 21, 2004 Page 5 Held 20 Ms. Wanner stated that this site is located in the general northwest area of Dublin, along Brand Road. The site lies between Wyndham Village on the west and Indian Run Methodist Church to the east. Shannon Glen lies to the north, and Avery Park to the south. There is an existing farmstead on the site with a number of outbuildings. Surrounding zonings are R-1 for the church and Avery Park, PLR for Wyndham Village, and PUD for the Shannon Glen subdivision. The site plan includes nine lots around a modified cui de sac. Open space is along the south side of the development, as well as a pond. There is a setback along Brand Road with landscaping and a bikepath. The application was forwarded by Planning & Zoning Commission with a positive recommendation. Staff acknowledges that the applicant had not been directed to dedicate parkland to the City prior to this point. However, given the fact that dedication of the open space is consistent with the goals of the Community Plan and that the connection of this open space will retain a streamside connection with Avery Park, staff is now recommending that the applicant dedicate the required parkland. In this case, the required dedication would be .6 acre. Staff is also recommending that a bikepath be included in the plan from the cui de sac to the existing bikepath to create interconnection to Avery Park and further on to the greenway along the Indian Run. Staff recommends approval with the two added conditions from the memo: Condition #6. That the development text be amended to require the dedication of proposed open space to the City, and that all dedicated open space areas be maintained by a forced and funded homeowners association; and Condition #7. That the developer be responsible for the installation of a bikepath through the southern open space connecting to the existing municipal bikepath system. Mr. Lecklider noted that there was extensive discussion at the last hearing about building setbacks for the church along Brand Road, and the developments to the west and the north. Has staff had an opportunity to compare these? Ms. Wanner responded that the first house in Wyndham Village is set back approximately 150 feet from the right of way. It does not have a full 200-foot setback. The pavement setbacks for the church are much smaller. The setbacks for house pads in an adjacent development run between 100 and 120 feet. Mr. Lecklider asked about the building setback for the church. Ms. Wanner responded that she is not certain of this exact figure. Some houses on the other side of the road are setback between 150 and 200 feet. Discussion followed about setback from pavement versus setback from right of way for adjacent areas. Mr. Reiner asked if Brand Road has a 200-foot setback in all locations except for this proposal? Ms. Wanner responded that, in general, Brand Road does have a 200-foot setback. Mr. Reiner noted that this is the only project that would violate that - in fact, some portions along Brand Road have an even larger setback. Was there any way to address these issues with the applicant, subsequent to the last hearing? Ms. Wanner stated that the amount of open space and the small number of lots might have impacted the feeling about the setback issue. Mr. Reiner stated that Brand Road has a cadence and this would break it up. This would be his only objection to the project. Michael Close, 7360 Bellaire Avenue, Dublin. representing the applicant noted that one of the difficulties with setbacks is where they are measured from - from right-of-way or from pavement. There his not a specific and consistent policy for this in Dublin. He noted that the existing house on the property is 55 feet from the pavement and the existing barn is 80 feet and will be in the right-of-way if not moved. Under the existing R-1 zoning, an additional four houses would be permitted on the site. For the subdivision to the west, the house is 200 feet from the centerline, but there is pavement, curb and fence in that space. On the east side of the property, the church property, there is a fence and parking lot within 55 feet of the roadway. Houses on the north side of the street are setback 160 feet, including pavement. There is nothing in the area with an unbroken vista of open space. The project was approved by Planning Commission on February 5. A week prior to the Council hearing on June 7, the applicant received a request for the parkland dedication as described by Ms. Wanner. The applicant does not want to dedicate the parkland in the area specified by staff. The applicant also does not want to connect the bikepath as shown on the plan by staff. They believe it is appropriate to make the connection, but they would like more flexibility in the exact location of the connection, not that it be specifically RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council -- -_.- ---~---- Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC., FORM NO. 10148 June 21,2004 Page 6 Held 20 conditioned upon being located next to the two southernmost lots. In addition, he cannot recall another instance where land was donated as parkland, located contiguous to City parkland, with the developer or homeowners then required to maintain it. This was a surprise to him at this late date. In the past, the City maintained land donated to the City. He recommends that the City maintain the land. At the concept plan stage, the setback was discussed. The reality is that the economics of the site are that its size does not provide the economy of scale as that of a larger development. Houses have been removed from the proposal; the floodway/floodplain at the rear constricts the plan; and they are restricted by the need to have the maximum setback at the front of the plan. It is not possible to do anything further with the setback. Because of the interior lot setbacks, the setback will be 135 feet at its closest. Given the surrounding areas, which include fences and roads in front, the setback is adequate in this case. The neighbors to the west want quality homes on this site, and these homes will be more expensive than those to the north and to the west. All of this needs to be considered in Council's decision. Mr. McCash asked how much of the back portion is floodway versus floodplain. Mr. Close responded that this information was assembled quickly in response to the request for parkland. There are portions where the floodway and floodplain are virtually identical. Ms. Wanner stated that the back half is consumed by floodway and floodplain. Mr. McCash noted concern that the City will ask them to maintain the open space in a floodway, knowing the concerns in other areas of the City with flooding and the burden for small homeowners associations to address them. Mr. Hahn stated that, given the fact that the City maintains the adjacent land, it would not be much of a burden for the City to maintain the dedicated parkland, as it is proposed to be natural. Mr. McCash suggested that because this came up as a parkland dedication issue and most of this is undevelopable floodway/floodplain, would it make more sense to allow them to pay the fee and use this as a conservation easement for the City? This would protect the floodway/floodplain and provide access, yet allow development of parkland in another location. Mr. Hahn responded that the intent of the dedication would not be for development purposes. Avery Park is located on both sides of the stream, and the rationale for this dedication is that the City would want the stream area as well. Whether it is held under a conservation easement or deeded to the City is not an issue. The desire is to protect both sides of the stream corridor and to have the land set aside for public use, not for a neighborhood park development. Mr. Lecklider noted in regard to the bikepath connection, that if the path is not installed in the location proposed by staff, the connection might be difficult. Mr. Close responded that they are merely asking for some latitude to shift the connection by a lot if necessary. There has not been adequate time to do the study. Mr. Hahn stated that the important point is to secure a connection from the modified cui de sac to the existing bikepath, and this will meet the intent. Wallace Maurer. 7451 Dublin Road noted that the applicant believed he had the option of paying a fee in lieu of parkland dedication. How is this amount determined, and where are the funds deposited? Ms. Wanner responded that the land value per acre is established by ordinance and regularly updated. The fee is currently $39,500 per acre and is calculated based upon the requirement of land for dedication. The funds are then deposited into a parkland acquisition fund. Mr. Lecklider commented that he remains concerned about not achieving a large setback with this development. He is seeking a compelling reason why this development should be permitted to encroach within that desired scenic setback along Brand Road. Another concern is with the future of Brand Road and the potential need for widening, especially for the portion from Hyland Croy to Avery as a result of the development, including the high school. Mr. Reiner agreed with Mr. Lecklider, although he acknowledged that the applicant made great efforts to improve the plan. There has been a 20-year battle to retain Brand Road RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC.. FORM NO. 10148 June 21, 2004 'Page 7 Held 20 as a scenic roadway, and he can't see the justification to break that tradition and reduce the setback. There is a big difference between a house in the setback and a fence. The fence still provides a sense of openness and spaciousness. Mrs. Boring commented that she agrees with Mr. Lecklider and Mr. Reiner in that this has been an ongoing battle. While the existing house might sit close to the roadway, the desire is for improvement in conjunction with development. She agrees that the setbacks in this area are very important. Mr. McCash stated that not having a road within the 200-foot setback benefits any development. The new access road installed along SR 161 is not attractive, and he would prefer having open space. In the case of the Humbert property, the site has a constraint on the backside that cannot be changed, and there is a need to balance the economics of development. This applicant has done a good job with a difficult piece of property to develop. Mr. McCash asked Council if they want to include condition #6 regarding maintenance of open space, given the input from staff. Ms. Wanner stated that the City would accept either the open space or the conservation easement. Mr. McCash asked the applicant's representative to respond. Mr. Close stated that he has not discussed a conservation easement with his client. It is likely insignificant, if it results in credit toward the parkland dedication requirement. Mr. McCash clarified that what he is proposing is that the applicant pay the fee as well as provide the conservation easement to protect the floodway from development. Mr. Close stated that he could not commit to a conservation easement without consulting with his client. He does have the authority to commit to the parkland donation. Mr. Hahn clarified that the desire is for the protection of the stream corridor and to provide public access. That can be effected with a conservation easement. Mr. Smith clarified that what is being requested of the applicant is a conservation easement, which is a no-build with access, as well as a parkland dedication fee. Mr. Close responded that he would agree to the parkland donation that will provide the desired public access. Mr. McCash stated that he was trying to balance the setback issue by providing another compelling reason to approve this. He moved approval of the rezoning with the dedication of the parkland as recommended by staff, with the open space areas being maintained by the City and not a homeowners association, and with condition #7 - that the bikepath be installed through the southern portion, subject to working out a location at the final plat stage. Mr. Keenan seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Lecklider, no; Mr. Reiner, no; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Mrs. Boring, no. (Motion carried 4-3) TAX BUDGET Ordinance 36-04 Adopting the Proposed Tax Budget for Fiscal Year 2005, and Declaring an Emergency. Ms. Brautigam reported that state law requires that this be in place by July 20, and therefore so emergency action is being requested. Mr. Reiner moved for emergency passage. Ms. Salay seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. McCash, yes. Vote on the Ordinance: Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes. COMPENSA TION PLAN Ordinance 38-04 Amending Section 3 (Performance Bonuses) of Ordinance No. 98-96 (Compensation Plan). RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC.. FORM NO. 10148 June 21,2004 Page 8 Held 20 Ms. Brautigam stated that this would authorize City staff to create an instant bonus program for extraordinary actions described in the ordinance that benefit the City. It would not include anything deemed to be normal job duties. Mr. Keenan asked if this would be at the discretion of the Department/Division head. Ms. Brautigam stated that they would be approved by the City Manager to ensure consistency across the various divisions. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that when the criteria is created, she would like to review these. Ms. Brautigam responded that the criteria would essentially consist of doing something that significantly enhances the operational efficiency. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that after there has been some experience with the program, she would like to see some examples. Vote on the Ordinance: Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes. BID ACCEPTANCE Ordinance 39-04 Accepting the Lowest/Best Bid for Pool Chlorine and Authorizing the City Manager to Enter into a Contract for Procurement of Said Commodity. There was no additional information provided. Vote on the Ordinance: Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes. Ordinance 40-04 Accepting the Lowest and Best Bid for Fitness Equipment and Authorizing the City Manager to Enter into a Contract for Procurement of Said Equipment. There was no additional information provided. Vote on the Ordinance: Mr. Keenan, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes. STREET NAME CHANGES Ordinance 41-04 Requesting Approval to Change the Name of Frontage Road to Sharp Lane in the City of Dublin, Ohio. Ms. Brautigam stated that there is no further information to report. Vote on the Ordinance: Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes. Ordinance 42-04 Requesting Approval to Change the Name of Carnoustie Court to Carnoustie Circle in the City of Dublin, Ohio. Ms. Brautigam stated that there is no further information to report. Vote on the Ordinance: Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Ms. Salay, yes. INTRODUCTION/FIRST READING - ORDINANCES CODE AMENDMENTS Ordinance 37-04 Amending Dublin Code Section 137.02 Relating to Carrying Concealed Weapons, and Declaring an Emergency. Mr. Keenan introduced the ordinance. Mr. Smith stated that the intent of this ordinance is to bring the City's Code into compliance with the new state law regarding concealed weapons. Mr. Keenan asked how this applies to parks. Mr. Smith responded that there is ongoing discussion about how this can apply to parks. It is his opinion that when the City sponsors a function and fences off the park, the park will then be treated as other than a park in terms of the concealed weapons law. A memo will be provided to Council about this specific matter. Discussion followed about how this would apply to school grounds. Mr. Keenan asked if the City has any administrative function in the concealed carry law. Mr. Smith responded that the City does not. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher summarized that what this law provides is that in order to carry a gun, a person must have a license. The purpose of the ordinance is to bring the City into RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City CounciL~_~~...n__. Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC., FORM NO. 10148 June 21, 2004 Page 9 Held 20 compliance with state law, recognizing that if there are changes at the state level due to legal challenges, the City will need to amend their law as well. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked if Dublin has charged anyone under the state law prior to Dublin's consideration of the legislation tonight. Chief Epperson responded that no one has been charged in Dublin. The state law was effective on April 1, 2004. Mr. Lecklider clarified that his affirmative vote tonight is for the purpose of meeting the obligation of conforming to state law, and should not be considered an endorsement of the state legislation. Wallace Maurer. 7451 Dublin Road noted that at the Franklin County Courthouse, there is a metal detector in place. Is this a requirement in government buildings, or is this screening permissible in places such as the Dublin Justice Center? Mr. Smith responded that if desired, the City of Dublin could legally install a metal detector at the door of a City building. Mr. Keenan moved to dispense with the public hearing and treat this as emergency legislation. Mr. McCash 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. McCash, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes. Ordinance 43-04 Amending Dublin Code Section 76.01 Regarding Prohibited Standing or Parking Places, and Declaring an Emergency. Mr. Lecklider introduced the ordinance. Ms. Brautigam stated that this legislation is brought forward to allow residential parking permits in the City, as discussed at the last meeting. Staff will work with the Shannon Park residents to create guidelines for the pilot program in their area. Staff is requesting passage by emergency so that the program can be initiated in the summer and a report can be given to Council later in the year. Mrs. Boring asked how the permits would be issued. Ms. Brautigam responded that a process will be established to provide the homeowners with a certain number of permits, and records will be kept of the number of permits and who holds them. By the end of the year, the pilot program will be evaluated to determine its effectiveness. Mr. Keenan stated that staff would have to guard against duplication of the permits. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher commented that other communities have implemented such permit parking programs, and they can provide information about its administration. Mr. Reiner stated that Mr. McCash has suggested that the permits be assigned to individual license plates that will ease the record keeping. Mr. Lecklider moved to dispense with the public hearing and to treat this as emergency legislation. Mrs. Boring seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mr. McCash, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes. Vote on the Ordinance: Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes. LAND APPROPRIA TION Ordinance 44-04 Appropriating a Combined 0.513 Acre, More or Less, Fee Simple Interest and a Combined 0.096 Acre, More or Less, Temporary Construction Easement, from Richard W. Anderson, Located West of Wilcox Road, City of Dublin, County of Franklin, State of Ohio, and Declaring an Emergency. Ms. Salay introduced the ordinance. Mr. Smith stated that agreement has not been reached in regard to compensation for this land, and therefore an appropriation action must be filed with the court. The road is already built on the land. Right of entry was previously secured, and this ordinance begins the process for appropriation. This is the last instance where the City accepted bids for a project prior to the time the land had been obtained. A similar situation occurred with the Galli property, but it was resolved. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City CounciL Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC.. FORM NO. 10148 June 21, 2004 Page 10 Held 20 Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that her understanding is that the owner had originally agreed to this. Mr. Smith responded that the owner had originally discussed with staff donating the land to the City of Dublin, but wanted things in return which the City would not agree to do. This was discussed with Council and it was decided to proceed with accepting the bids and building the project. The discussions with staff evolved into a situation that the property owner wanted certain zoning on the land. Mr. Keenan asked if the City had budgeted for the project, anticipating the costs for the land. Mr. Smith responded that he believes the engineering estimates included the City's appraisal numbers. Land acquisition costs were included in the project budget. Ms. Salay moved to dispense with the public hearing and treat this as emergency legislation. Mr. Keenan seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. McCash, yes. Vote on the Ordinance: Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes. LAND PURCHASE Ordinance 45-04 Authorizing the Purchase of a 0.92 Acre, More or Less, Tract of Land, from Theodore M. Daroski and Kimberly A. Daroski, Located West of Dublin Road and North of Brand Road, City of Dublin, County of Franklin, State of Ohio. Ms. Salay introduced the ordinance. Mr. Smith stated that this involves the property located at Brand and Dublin Road. This agreement was reached with the property owner. It involves the land needed to construct the roundabout. There will be a second reading/public hearing at the July 6 Council meeting. BID ACCEPTANCE Ordinance 46-04 Accepting the Lowest/Best Bid for the Emerald Parkway, Phase 5A Project, Appropriating Funds Therefor, and Declaring an Emergency. Ms. Salay introduced the ordinance. Ms. Brautigam stated that the bids were very favorable. The engineer's estimate was $2.6 million, and the bids came in at under $1.9 million. Mr. Hammersmith commented that as noted in paragraph 2, storm sewers were indicated as part of the project. However, a decision was made late in the process to remove this portion so that the developer could move forward with ordering materials to expedite the improvements. The storm sewer portion will be an added cost that the developer will be reimbursed for, and the project will still be under $2.6 million. The estimate of the storm sewer portion is $300-400,000. There was also a change in the alignment that accompanied the request to remove this portion from the project. Mr. Keenan summarized that the bids, then, are actually $300,000 under the engineer's estimate. Mr. Reiner moved to dispense with the public hearing and to treat this as emergency. 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. Vote on the Ordinance: Mr. McCash, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes. RESOLUTION COUNCIL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDA nON Resolution 27-04 (Amended) Amending Resolution 48-03, Requiring Development in a Conservation Design Pattern in Appropriate Areas of the City of Dublin. Mr. Gunderman stated that this was reviewed by Council on May 17 and referred to the Community Development Committee. Originally, Resolution 48-03 was approved on December 13, 2003. It required certain procedures and reviews regarding conservation design. The Planning & Zoning Commission, after some experience with Resolution 48- RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC.. FORM NO. 10148 June 21, 2004 Page 11 Held 20 03 and its application, chose to make a recommendation to Council in the form of Resolution 27-04. On June 9, the Community Development Committee, together with Council Member Boring met with the Planning & Zoning Commission subcommittee to review the recommendation made by the Planning & Zoning Commission. The packet contains a redlined version of the original Resolution 48-03, amended in accordance with the Committee's recommendation from June 9. Staff believes that the language changes are fairly self-explanatory, and the language reflects an accurate reflection of the direction of the Committee that evening. Mr. Reiner thanked Planning Commission members Gerber, Reiss and Zimmerman and Council Members Lecklider, Salay and Boring who attended the lengthy meeting. The concept pursued was to come to consensus and meld together the two pieces of legislation. There was unanimous support from both bodies at the end of the evening. The benefit of this is that Council and Planning Commission are now on "the same page" in terms of this legislation. The Committee recommendation is for Council to adopt the legislation as revised. He thanked the Planning staff for their assistance. Mr. Lecklider noted that he has a slightly different view of what occurred, if not the outcome. The discussion focused on the requirement regarding 50 percent open space and 75 percent adjacency to view sheds. Ultimately, general consensus was achieved regarding the 50 percent open space. However, there was vigorous debate about the 75 percent requirement. The Commission's reason for what they proposed with Resolution 27 -04 was that they felt that Resolution 48-03 did not allow for much discretion, and did not allow for those exceptional projects that may not strictly fit with what the City defines as conservation design. His concern is that when Council approved Resolution 48-03, not everyone had a comprehensive understanding of conservation design. Apparently, some members of Planning & Zoning Commission as well did not understand, and proceeded to create the subcommittee to examine the issue in detail. His concern is with the language requiring 50 percent open space, as a case may come forward where they the City would want to demand a greater percentage of open space to preserve natural features. His concern with the 75 percent adjacency requirement is that it does not allow for a variety of housing styles. He agrees that the creation of more open space is laudable. However, the resolution does not address the need for more empty nester housing. The economic development strategy talks about the relative aging of the community and the needs of that community. He is concerned that what is proposed tonight leaves Council with no options, with no discretion. In addition, the issue of maintenance of the open space has not been addressed. Imposing this on the homeowners creates additional burden for them. He also does not believe this design can be promoted as resulting in more affordable housing - just the opposite will occur. His concern is exchanging one style of housing for another, with more open space, but without the discretion to consider other options that might appeal to the community. Mrs. Boring commented that Mr. Lecklider had a choice to vote differently at the meeting. His position is a surprise to her. In terms of maintenance of common facilities, staff will bring forward a plan for that. She believes that unless a minimum number is included, there is no chance that a developer will agree to 65 percent open space. In regard to exceptional development, Section 5 addresses that situation and provides that discretion. Her concern is that there is not much land left for development, and this is a start in making changes. It can always be modified, if necessary. Mr. Keenan stated that while he shares the concern with having Council's hands somewhat tied, he is willing to give this a chance, reserving the right to reconsider this later if issues are brought forward by staff or the Commission Ms. Salay noted that she shares Mr. Lecklider's concern about essentially trading one type of "cookie cutter" development for another. A development proposed may meet the 50 and 75 percent requirements, yet it may still not be what Council is seeking and staff's hands will be somewhat tied in their recommendation. She would prefer that staff have the ability to come to Council and Planning Commission when a project cannot meet the requirements, yet is determined to be a creative and desirable project for the City. There are some areas and parcels where this is not workable. However, she is willing to give this a try. Council has indicated for a long time that they would like changes, and this is headed in the right direction. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council --------. Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC., FORM NO. 10148 -- --------- --....- [1---- - June 21,2004 Page 12 ,. Held 20 Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that she agrees that Council has asked for new and different types of development for a long time, and absent new requirements, this will not occur. She does not want to give the impression, however, that her expectation is that staff will continually bring feedback to Council that the proposed developments are not suitable for this type of planning. Nothing creative or different will then be submitted or __t.-_,.,..,.. brought forward. She is not certain this is the solution, but the requirements currently in place are not conducive to obtaining the desired outcome for the remaining land to be built out in Dublin. The Tartan West development did a good job of meeting many of these requirements, and their development will meet the needs of empty nesters. It demonstrates that it is possible to bring in creative designs to provide a continuum of different housing stock. Mr. McCash stated that when Council approved this resolution in 2003, it was more of a conditional type scenario for cases where it was workable. This version seems more of a "cram down" approach that forces a developer into this type of design. He is not comfortable with this, as there are areas where it would make sense and others where it clearly does not work. He would prefer some type of conditional or flexible approach. Many of the conservation design elements address rural areas where farmland is subdivided in order to avoid the platting process. These tools address such rural development, and yet Dublin is a suburb of a larger municipality, not a rural area. While Dublin should address some open space provisions and have a more creative approach, he doesn't believe this is the right way to do this. The previous resolution has not been in place long enough to assess its workability for numerous development proposals. Mr. Lecklider noted that he agrees with 95 percent of the resolution as proposed tonight. The issue for him is the 75 percent viewshed requirement that is extremely limiting. It may actually discourage the creative submissions that may come as a result of the balance of the requirements contained in the resolution. Mr. Reiner commented in response to Mr. McCash, that what has resulted from the passage of Resolution 48-03 is that developers are submitting poorly configured conservation design plans in the hopes of resubmitting the design plan they actually want to build. It is time to have the courage to change. Conservation design allows for different types of housing products, and has worked in Muirfield. It has worked in other parts of the country, and he would like to see Dublin take an innovative, creative approach. He urged Council to give this a chance, noting that it will require vigilance on the part of staff to demand the quality that has resulted with this design in other parts of the country. Wallace Maurer. 7451 Dublin Road commented that the phrase, "in appropriate areas" becomes a question of who determines what is appropriate. The underlying drive behind this highly imaginative and brilliant design is the following: it is a large, cultural, social thing that has occurred. Urbanization has cut civilization off from its literal origins of air, water, soil, sun and earth. It comes down to conventional design versus conservation design. The conservation design succeeds in so clustering houses, no matter what size or type, so that one has a constant vision and connection with the rural area. He noted that the Planning Director would have to be very imaginative and see the ingenious ways in which indeed civilization's origins are made available and "seep into our psyche." The City should not be seen as a suburb, but rather as a community of human beings. This is the last opportunity to try to make the remaining land shapeable in this way. Every citizen involved will need at hand an aerial map of Dublin, a topographical map of Dublin and a map which indicates what land use has been built in each section. One must think about combining those aspects of what is left with design and building. This is potentially the most imaginative challenge the City will have for the rest of its existence. If this resolution is defeated, there will have to be a reactivation of it in the City as a whole. It was stated that there has been time to set up rural elements in design of housing, but no one has brought that forward - it depends on the energy and determination of individuals. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that his five minutes has now expired. Vote on the Resolution: Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. McCash, no; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Lecklider, no. OTHER . Economic Development Strategy Update - Final Report RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC.. FORM NO. 10148 June 21,2004 Page 13 Held 20 Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher first acknowledged that Council is sorry to hear of Mr. Stevens' departure from the City. He has done excellent work for the City, and Council looks forward to working with him in his new capacity with Cardinal Health. Mr. Stevens thanked Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher and noted that he is proud to have served the City of Dublin. He stated that the Steering Committee has worked on the Economic Development Strategy Update for the past nine months, and consultant Curtiss Williams, Project Manager for the consultant team will present an overview of the results to Council tonight. If the Plan is acceptable to Council, staff will bring back a resolution adopting the strategy to Council on July 6. Curtiss Williams. Curtiss Williams & Associates commented that Mr. Stevens has done an excellent job for Dublin and for the Central Ohio region and he will be missed. He noted that he is present tonight, along with Dale Bertsch and Diane Harris of Burns, Bertsch & Harris. The intent of the project was to update the 1994 economic development strategy that was done for the City by the Mt. Auburn Associates. Tonight's overview will focus on what has been done, including the process, how the study was facilitated, the findings, the creation of a community profile for the City and what was discovered in the process of assembling the profile. In addition, information will be presented about what the strategies should include from a goals standpoint. The package is very detailed and needs careful review. Lastly, they will discuss the implementation plan. . The most important part of the process began with creation of a Steering Committee of knowledgeable people committed to Dublin and those with insight into the issues. The Committee has done a wonderful job, and the staff members have provided excellent support. . A community profile was created, containing existing conditions, providing insight into the existing problems, and provided a basis for the development of the economic development update strategies and implementation plan. . A series of roundtables was held, including those with Council Members, neighborhood associations, and a group from the region with interests in economic development. They met with business representatives as well as realtors representing residential and commercial sectors. . A series of 20 community interviews took place, including 11 with community business leaders. . With the information from the roundtables and interviews, a SWOT analysis was done and a questionnaire provided the opportunity to secure responses in developing goals and strategies. . Research was done of demographic data, census data, regional data and the plans and document from Dublin itself as well as national reports and studies. This information was included in the document presented tonight. . A market analysis was done, including an economic overview of 2002-2004 locally, market conditions, inventory of available sites and buildings and vacancy rates compared with other communities in the region. Dublin's business assistance programs were reviewed to see what is in place for those who want to expand or relocate within the community. . They reviewed the City's organizational structure in regard to economic development and have some recommendations on this. . They reviewed regional competition for economic development opportunities and looked at programs, staff and budgets, especially for those considered as direct competitors. . This information was then provided to the Steering Committee and reviewed at five meetings. A goal-setting meeting was held to establish goals for the economic development strategy update, and that led to the development of an implementation plan. The Committee was very concerned about how the Plan would be implemented in terms of priorities. In terms of findings, he emphasized that it is important to read the entire document. He highlighted the important aspects: . The top strengths would be the high quality of life and physical environment of Dublin, as well as its excellent infrastructure and highway access. . Dublin, comparatively, has a fair amount of vacant land for office and commercial development. The issue is how the land is utilized going forward, in view of the RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC. FORM NO. 10148 June 21,2004 Page 14 Held 20 approaching build out of the City. The goal should be for the best utilization for the land in terms of maximization of income tax revenue. . For weaknesses, the number one response was the development approval process. This was a recurring issue for the businesses interviewed. . The critical issues relate to the perceived toughness of the process, the lack of clarity, the uncertainty of the process, and the cost of the process. . The lack of business services, especially retail and a variety of restaurants, was often cited. Mr. McCash noted that the residents interviewed in indicated they felt the City had too much restaurant and retail. Mr. Williams responded that this is true. Yet they spoke with 12-15 people who felt there was a need for more retail and restaurants. There are obviously some who have different opinions. Mr. Keenan commented that he was in the First Watch and McDonald's area at Perimeter at lunchtime today and experienced total congestion. His observation is that a large portion was families, not just office workers. This seems to indicate that there is still a need for restaurants to serve the City. Mr. Williams continued: . Dublin has been perceived as being anti-business. The comments made by business people were very disheartening. . Businesses are also looking for ways to be involved in Dublin, to have connectivity with the community, including Council. . Another weakness relates to low-density commercial development. In view of maximizing the potential for income tax generation, this is an important issue. While Dublin is very concerned about density and traffic, there is a need to strike a balance with development, especially with public policy stances regarding growth and annexation. He pointed out several opportunities: . First is DubLink. This is an exciting opportunity and Dublin should maximize this opportunity, especially in the changing arena of telecommunications. This is an important marketing opportunity toward businesses. . Dublin has the resources to help resolve regional issues such as transportation, infrastructure and economic development. Dublin needs to take a leadership role in this area. . Dublin has the resources to create cutting edge partnerships. With all of its noteworthy companies, marketing partnerships could be created. . Another opportunity is with entrepreneurial ship. Dublin has a highly educated and entrepreneurial citizenry, and this should be maximized by providing the mechanisms for them to do so. In terms of threats: . Dublin is a maturing community and there are issues with redevelopment that the City will face, such as Dublin Village Center. . Dublin now has competition from other communities who have prime office space for development. They are competing with infrastructure, incentives, and quality of development. The environment has changed and Dublin must develop policies to address issues in a more competitive environment. . Another important finding was that Dublin has an under appreciated business community. Other findings include: . Ninety-five percent of Dublin's income tax revenue comes from 26 percent of the companies. If some of these businesses were to leave Dublin, it would have a substantial impact. Dublin has many businesses, but 2,700 of those pay only five percent of the income tax. . Dublin has a lack of diversity, both socioeconomic and in terms of housing and development. This has been a topic among developers and businesses. They view Dublin as a very nice looking community, but stale. . The importance of economic development has not been institutionalized. It needs to be seen as important, even more than other divisions of the City. Having the right programs, the right connectivity with local businesses will ensure the future financial stability of the City. Some of the recommendations will help the City to move in this direction. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC., FORM NO. 10148 June 21, 2004 Page 15 Held 20 . There is a lack of connectivity with small businesses, and all businesses in general. Greater growth opportunities come in working with small businesses, because in general, 60-80 percent of new job creation comes from small businesses. The Steering Committee adopted the following mission statement for the economic development effort: "To enhance the quality of life and economic vitality of the City, its residents and its corporate citizens by creating a community supportive of business investment." The goals developed with the Steering Community were: 1. Revenue enhancement. Increase tax resources within the Dublin community by supporting existing business, local entrepreneurs and attracting new targeted employers that provide sustainable employment opportunities. Elements include strengthening the economic development framework, revitalizing the Community Investment Corporation, creating development opportunities, redeveloping sites underserved, and connecting with the business community. Another element is engaging the business community, working on retention and expansion, ongoing marketing, and looking at redevelopment opportunities. 2. Become an information resource. Develop a reservoir of accessible information to support the economic development process. Understanding the opportunities as well as the problems of the community, the makeup of the business sector and understanding the trends as well as the businesses that the City wants to target. 3. Regional leadership. Advocate for local, regional and state policies that support regional economic sustainability. Lead and support discussion on regional issues and support regional partnerships such as JEDDs and CEDAs. The implementation plan has seven phases in the timeline. The emphasis is on building a strong foundation of information, a foundation of organizational structure, undertake - intelligence gathering, and proceed with program development and marketing. The Steering Committee encourages the implementation to begin at the earliest date. He thanked Council for their attention and for their trust in them in this effort. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher thanked the group for their hard work and noted that this is a top priority for Dublin. The City has spent more time in recent months talking about the importance of economic development. She acknowledged that the environment is different than that of the 1990's, and therefore the strategies must be consistent with that external environment change. Certainly, some of the internal dynamics have not kept pace with what has happened in the market. The plan calls for adoption by Council on July 6. Prior to that time, Council should review the document to understand the recommendations so that a productive dialogue can take place on July 6. Mrs. Boring stated that there is a need for Council to review carefully the information in this important document before adoption and implementation. She is not certain this can be done by July 6. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that she agrees, but Council does not meet again in July. In addition, it is important to have a plan in place with the search for a new Director of Economic Development pending. She doesn't disagree that this is a lot of material to review, although Council has received much of the information throughout the process. It was the consensus of Council to schedule this for adoption on July 6. Any questions should be directed to staff prior to that time so that they can be addressed. CITY MANAGER/STAFF REPORTS . Fee Waivers - Sundays at Scioto Concerts and Arts & Music Festival - Dublin Arts Council Ms. Brautigam reported that earlier in June, a letter was received via fax from the Dublin Arts Council requesting fee waivers that amount to approximately $15,000. Staff felt it was appropriate to provide Council with the history of fee waivers granted as well as financial information for the DAC. Staff is suggesting that Council approve the waivers tonight for the Sundays at Scioto concerts, as it is more pressing in terms of the timeframe, but that Council direct the Finance Committee to meet over the summer to review the fee waiver for the Arts & Music Festival to be held at the end of September. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher expressed concern with the timing of the Finance Committee recommendation. If the recommendation, for example, would be not to grant future RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting _ .. ___ DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC., FORM NO 10148 June 21, 2004 Page 16 Held 20 waivers, this implementation should be gradual so that the organization has time to plan and raise sufficient funds to pay the fees. To be told less than 30 days before the event of a requirement to pay fees that have not been levied in the past years would be unfair. Unless there is an expectation of grandfathering for this year, less than 30 days is not a sufficient period of time for notice. Ms. Brautigam stated that she suggested this because of the summer timing and the difficulty the Committee may have in finding a meeting date. If the Committee can set an earlier meeting date, that would be preferred. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked for a motion for a waiver of the fees for City services for the Sundays at Scioto concerts in the amount of $6,525 and to refer the policy discussion and fee waiver for the Arts & Music Festival to the Finance Committee for recommendation to Council. Ms. Salay so moved. Mr. Reiner seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. McCash, abstain; Mr. Keenan, yes; Ms. Salay, yes. . Status Report re Post Road Properties In view of the late hour, Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher suggested that this item be deferred until the next meeting. There was no objection from Council to deferring this to the July 6 meeting. . Draft Amended and Restated Charter Agreement for COT A Ms. Brautigam reported that COT A has sent this document to the Mayor and to the City Manager for Council's review. COT A would like to move forward soon with a final draft of the Charter, and is seeking input from other Central Ohio municipalities. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that her questions relate to the taxing issue. The City of Dublin, Franklin County, residents already pay this sales tax. For those living in the Delaware County portion of Dublin - what would transpire if this is approved by Council? !: Ms. Grigsby responded that the tax itself would be on the purchase of goods at retail businesses in the City of Dublin-Delaware County. For those entities, the tax rate would increase by .25 percent. Currently, they pay 6.25 percent sales tax and it would increase to 6.50 percent. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked about the petition process - is this for the citizens or the businesses? Ms. Brautigam responded that the City of Dublin-Delaware County citizens would have the right to petition Dublin City Council so that they would not be a part of this. Mr. Keenan stated that this is essentially an unvoted tax. Mr. Smith concurred. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that she totally supports COT A as a public transit provider, as the region needs public transit and there is a need for the improvements. However, she is concerned about placing an unvoted tax on residents who do not have access to the COT A services. Ms. Brautigam stated that this is the exact issue that was raised with COT A in December of 2003 when they first approached the City. Dublin felt that such a tax should be voted upon. COTA then spent several months researching this and gave a legal opinion that Dublin, as a City, is precluded by state law from placing this on the ballot. This is the only manner in which this can proceed. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher commented that this is a Catch 22 situation - without the funding, it is not possible to extend the services, but those who do not have services are unlikely to vote for such a tax. Mrs. Boring stated that if the approach is to work regionally, the cost of funding entities such as the zoo, COSI, etc. needs to be shared by counties other than Franklin County. The fact that the various services are not available in the area does not mean that they do not use the services. COTA does increase the viability of the entire region, so it may be warranted to charge the additional sales tax to enable the extension of services. It is time to begin sharing in the funding mechanisms to support these regional draw services. Mr. Keenan stated that the same would hold true for Union County. Ms. Brautigam added that there are currently no businesses located in the Union County portion of Dublin. She added that the memo regarding affected Dublin businesses omitted the Bogey Inn. Other affected businesses include the Muirfield Country Club and the Morgan House. Mr. McCash stated that it is important that Council vote on this. The citizens who live in Delaware County are already paying this tax on items purchased in Franklin County. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC:: FORM NO. 10148 .. June 21, 2004 Page 17 Held 20 Ms. Brautigam clarified that the motion would actually direct the City Manager to contact COT A and convey that Dublin is willing to move forward when COT A has a final draft of their Charter. A formal resolution to adopt the Charter would be brought to Council at a later date. Mr. McCash so moved. Mr. Keenan seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mr. Reiner, no; Ms. Salay, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. Keenan, no; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. McCash, yes. II . City Manager 360 Degree Evaluation Ms. Brautigam stated that this was information for Council regarding an e-mail they will be receiving about an evaluation of the City Manager in the form of an online tool. Mrs. Boring asked about the issue of such an e-mail and whether or not it is considered a public record. Ms. Brautigam responded that the Law Director needs to review that. Generally, e-mails sent between Council and the City Manager are public records. The way this is structured is that Council will be sent an e-mail address and will then log in online to the entity that provides this instrument. The online information will go to the psychologist who will be preparing the report. There is an issue of whether this would be considered a public record, and Mr. Smith will review this. As a public official, she does not have concerns with the fact that Council's evaluation of her is open to the public. Mrs. Boring asked how there can be anonymity with an e-mail response. If employees want to be candid, how can they be assured that the evaluation comments will not be traced back to them? Ms. Brautigam stated that their responses are sent to a person who compiles the information, and that person will not have the name of the employee or any person who files the information via e-mail. The information is sent to a private, not a public entity. Mrs. Boring asked why these responses cannot be done by mail. Ms. Brautigam stated that this is possible, but it would be more efficient and easier to respond online. Mrs. Boring stated that she would prefer to have the option of a mail response. Ms. Brautigam stated that she believes this would be possible. Mrs. Boring stated that she would also request that Mr. Smith research whether a mailed response would constitute a public record in this case. Mr. Smith stated that he would have a response in the next packet regarding this matter. . Tara Hill Drive Traffic Task Force - Status of Membership and Ratification of Officers Ms. Brautigam stated that information was contained in the Friday packet regarding the resignation of Mary Bearden from the Task Force. Staff is requesting a motion from Council to ratify the recommendation for Randy Luikart as Chair and Amy Gerhart as Vice Chair. Ms. Salay moved to ratify the recommendation of Randy Luikart as Chair and Amy Gerhart as Vice Chair of the Task Force. Mr. Lecklider seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes. I COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS/COUNCIL ROUND TABLE Mrs. Borinq noted that some neighborhood park dedications have been scheduled. She asked if there had been a dedication for the northeast quad park, or whether she missed this. Mr. Hahn responded that there have not previously been formal park dedications. For the northeast quad park, there will be subsequent phases that will lend themselves to some type of ceremonies. Mr. Lecklider: 1. Noted that in light of the Dispatch articles about public records, does the City plan to re-evaluate how it responds to public records requests? Ms. Brautigam responded that this was discussed briefly in the management staff meeting today. The City did receive excellent evaluation marks, due to Mr. Harding's prompt and forthcoming responses. The staff did discuss the need for awareness and training of all City employees to ensure that those who have the most immediate contact with the public act in a similar fashion. I RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC., FORM NO. !0148 --- June 21, 2004 Page 18 Held 20 Mr. Lecklider asked if the City has a consistent charge for copies. Ms. Grigsby responded that the charge for copies is set in the annual cost study and currently is $.25 per copy. Mr. Lecklider responded that in view of the article in the newspaper, the City's charge may be high. Mr. Smith stated that some interesting questions have been raised, especially in regard to discovery related to criminal matters. He will be re-examining this and will send a memo to Council. 2. Asked about the Jerome Township meeting - the location and who will attend. Ms. Brautigam responded that the meeting is at the township hall on Industrial Parkway at 7 p.m. Council Members attending are Mr. Keenan, Mr. Lecklider, Mrs. Boring and Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher. Mr. Reiner indicated he will be out of town. Mr. McCash was uncertain about his availability. 3. Reported that Council needs to identify a replacement from Shannon Village for Mary Bearden and asked how they would like to proceed. There are a total of three candidates. Following brief discussion, it was determined that Mr. Lecklider and Ms. Salay would set up interviews with the candidates and that all of Council was welcome to attend the interviews. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher: 1. Reminded Council Members that a farewell reception is scheduled for Christy Rosenthal of the Dublin Arts Council on Monday evening at the Center. I 2. Noted that she serves on the Central Ohio Municipal Council and attended a meeting last Thursday night in Grove City. MORPC gave a presentation W>".. regarding clean air quality at the meeting. This is in keeping with the smoke free campaign currently in process in Columbus. Ms. Brautigam has been contacted by the Smoke Free Association. At the COMC meeting, Mayor ",'il Chinnici-Zuercher learned that many cities are currently considering voting for either a smoke free policy for their own community or supporting Columbus in their smoke free policy. Many indicated that they would in turn vote in favor of such a policy if Columbus approved it. Upper Arlington City Manager Virginia Barney is developing a letter following their Council meeting tonight and the content of this letter could be shared with other communities for their adoption. Ms. Brautigam stated that the content of the letter would state that the municipality would support the City of Columbus adoption of a smoke free ordinance. It would not commit a local government to adopting such an ordinance, but would commit that the local government would consider the issue. Upper Arlington and Worthington were scheduled to approve resolutions tonight to not only support Columbus in this effort, but that they will also adopt a similar ordinance. Hilliard and Grove City may adopt a similar ordinance tomorrow, and there will be a meeting between the Smoke Free group and the City Council of Bexley tomorrow night. Powell has a first hearing on July 6, and Grandview has already adopted a policy. The first contact Smoke Free Columbus will have with Whitehall, Westerville and Gahanna is this week. What they are requesting from Dublin is a letter, signed by the City Manager and Mayor, to be presented to Columbus City Council on Wednesday evening, to indicate the support in the suburbs for Columbus moving forward on a smoke free ordinance and a commitment of the suburbs to consider this matter in their local jurisdictions. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked for Council's input. Mrs. Boring asked for the key points of their legislation. Ms. Brautigam stated that it prohibits smoking inside or on the premises of a restaurant or bar, including a patio or within 20 feet of an entranceway. I Mr. McCash pointed out that there may be some retrofitting issues for existing facilities. I Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher clarified that the letter would indicate Dublin's support for the Columbus legislation and commit to considering similar legislation. Ms. Salay stated that the key point is that if Columbus adopts such an ordinance and the suburbs do not, the suburbs have an edge in attracting the smoking group. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that it also means that the smokers could then move to the suburbs, affecting those who do want a smoke free environment. Personally, she believes that this legislation should be approved in Dublin as well. When contacted by a RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC., FORM NO. 10148 June 21, 2004 Page 19 Held 20 reporter, she indicated that Dublin's process, if they choose to consider this, would be an inclusive one, including those impacted by these regulations. This letter simply indicates support of passage of the Columbus ordinance and again, that Dublin would consider such legislation. Mr. Reiner moved to direct the City Manager and the Mayor to sign the letter on behalf of City Council as discussed. Ms. Salay seconded the motion. Mr. Keenan emphasized the need for an inclusive process for Dublin regarding this matter. Council members concurred. Vote on the motion: Ms. Salay, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes. 3. Reported that Friendship Village will have a ribbon cutting ceremony tomorrow for their expansion and she will attend to represent the City. 4. Noted that a letter was sent from Carlyle Perry's family thanking the City for their memorial contribution. 5. Commented that it is important for Council to support the staff in the activities they are involved in outside of the City. Mr. McDaniel has received a significant promotion to Colonel in the National Guard. She thanked him for his continuing service to the country. II ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 10:35 p.m. ~- ~C1-~ Clerk of Council !! I I' I