Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/17/2008RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minute_~_c~f _ ---- -__ Qutzlin~ily_~~ncil _-- ------M~etin~ __-- NO. 10148 - --~ -_--~ -- Held i -.- - ~-- ' Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher called the Monday, March 17, 2008 Regular Meeting of Dublin ~ I City Council to order at 7:00 p.m. at the Dublin Municipal Building. ' i ' Present were Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, Vice Mayor Boring, Mr. Gerber, Mr. Lecklider, and Mr. Reiner. Mr. Keenan and Ms. Salay were absent (excused). !, ; ', Staff members present were Ms. Brautigam, Mr. Smith, Ms. Grigsby, Mr. Epperson, Mr. ', I Hahn, Mr. Hammersmith, Ms. Ott, Mr. Earman, Mr. Gunderman, Mr. Langworthy, Mr. ' '~i;~ Tyler, Mr. Harding, Mr. Ball, Ms. Adkins, and Mr. Phillabaum. III,I PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ~' Mr. Lecklider led the Pledge of Allegiance. APPROVAL OF MINUTES • Regular Meeting of March 3, 2008 Mr. Lecklider moved approval of the meeting minutes of March 3, 2008. Mr. Gerber seconded th e motion. Vote on the motion: Mr. Gerber, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Vice Mayor Boring, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes. CORRESPONDENCE The Clerk reported that a Notice to Legislative Authority was received regarding D3 and D51 liquor permits for Montgomery Inn of Columbus, Inc. for a location at 4565 W. Dublin- '~~ Granville Road. There were no objections to the issuance of these permits. (At this point, Mr. Reiner arrived) CITIZEN COMMENTS Wallace Maurer, 7451 Dublin Road noted that within the past year or two, a reunion took place in this country of American veterans who were slaughtered in the Pacific islands by I the Japanese during the war. In the second part of the World War in the Pacific theater Americans began to retake the islands and they likewise slaughtered the Japanese. At '~ this reunion of the Japanese and American veterans who had escaped death in the slaughters, they fell into each others' arms and wept. This was the end - 60 years after December 7, 1941 - of the hostilit brewin in the 1930's but there was no "GHR" ar n Y ou d. 9 ~ There are some characteristics of what w ould be taken into account in a GHR think tank I It w ould involy e arti t s s hil os h o er th s eolo ian s eve y one comin P P ~ to ether to identif a g 9 9 Y hostilit and d v' y e ise a solution, taking it to those who would effect it. One characteristic of these hostilities is that there are always two combative perceptions/impressions battling each other. They are very reductive, tiny and narrow. In the Iran/U.S. confrontation, . . v e e thin that is Ameri can is dis i m ssed with rY one word. 9 Satan. Eve thin '~ Irani an is rY 9 . dismi ssed with one word: terrorists. The second st age of hostility would be a meltdown. An exam le of such a p meltdown is with Israel and Palestine. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that his five minutes have now expired. LEGISLATION SECOND READING/PUBLIC HEARING -ORDINANCES Ordinance 11-08 Authorizing the Provision of Certain Incentives for Purposes of Retaining and Expanding Northwoods Consulting Partners, Inc. and its Operations and Workforce within the City of Dublin and Authorizing the Execution of an Economic I Development Agreement. Ms. Brautigam stated that there have been no changes subsequent to the first reading. Mr. McDaniel is ill and could not be present tonight. Staff contacted Northwoods and indicated that th e could attend a I ater meetin t Y g o be introduced to Council, if they desire. ~, Wallace Maurer 7451 Dublin Road noted that there i sat oon a e on eofth yp p g e memo, ' « „ under Summary -paragraph 3, item one, Retention Grant. i; Ms. Brauti am stated that this w' 9 ill be corrected. March 17, 2008 Vote on the Ordinance: Mr. Reiner, yes; Vice Mayor Boring, yes; Mayor Chinnici- Zuercher, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS in Cit~r Council _ Meeting Held March 17, 2008 1 1 1 Page 2 Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked that Council's appreciation be extended to Mr. McDaniel and to Northwoods Consulting. Hopefully, Council can meet the company officials at some future point. Ordinance 12-08 Authorizing Amendment of Ordinance 73-07 Designating Eligible Financial Institutions as Public Depositories. Ms. Brautigam stated that there have been no changes subsequent to the first reading. Mr. Sova is present to respond to questions. Wallace Maurer, 7451 Dublin Road asked about the deposit of City funds into banks. In view of the frenzy in the financial systems across the country, have these banks been carefully reviewed? Ms. Grigsby responded that the City receives the audited statements regarding the banks designated as depositories. These audit statements support the information contained in the banks' financial reports. Vote on the Ordinance: Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes; Vice Mayor Boring, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes. INTRODUCTION/FIRST READING -ORDINANCES Ordinance 13-08 Creating Section 153.037 (Central Ohio Innovation Center Zoning District) of the Dublin Zoning Code. (Case No. 07-101 ADM) Mr. Lecklider introduced the ordinance. Ms. Brautigam stated that Mr. Langworthy will present the ordinance. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that at previous goal setting retreats, Council has discussed the COIC area. In order to attract the type of research and development companies desired, it was determined that specialized standards should be developed exclusively for this area. Staff then went forward to draft this Code. Tonight's presentation will include a brief overview of the process to date, who has participated in the process, and will highlight the primary procedural changes that will be incorporated into the Code. In addition, the policy questions for Council will be highlighted. Responses will be needed from Council by the final hearing on April 7. Further, there are several issues not resolved with some of the City's partners in this endeavor. Mr. Langworthy will review those issues. Mr. Hale, representing the partnership interested in development, will also present their recommendations for changes, together with the justification. Council believes that a work session is desired to delve more into the details of the standards. Council can determine how they want to proceed after the presentation tonight. Mr. Langworthy stated that staff is very excited about bringing these standards forward. He provided an overview of the ordinance, which requests a change to the zoning code to add the Central Ohio Innovation Center Zoning District. Background: In the Community Plan process, the US 33 corridor/COIC general area was identified. The district focused on at this time is the HDP or High Density Pod, and much of tonight's discussion relates to the HDP, which will be the area primarily before Council and staff in the coming months. Ultimately, the Code discussion will involve all of the districts. He pointed out on the maps the general site for the proposed particle therapy center. Timeline: • In terms of evolution of the current code, the process began in November of 2006 when a technical team was formed to discuss this area, prior to the Council discussion at goal setting. • In December of 2006, staff began work on the COIC District, assembling an outline of the items that would be included in the district. • In February of 2007, prior to Council retreat, he and Mr. McDaniel visited the Research Triangle Park and the North Carolina State University Centennial Park Innovation Centers. They talked with some of those in charge of the facilities and RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS March 17, 2008 Page 3 LJ 1 1 Held 20 received good information about what to do and what not to do, based on their experience. • The technical team then visited the RTP and met with O'Brien Atkins, a consultant the City was working with at that time, to help work on the US 33 and COIC area. As a result of this three-day session, a draft master plan of the COIC and US 33 Corridor up to US 42 was completed. • Following that, within the Community Plan process, a fiscal analysis was done for the area, based upon needed infrastructure and the proposed land uses to see if they would be financially viable. BBC Research helped with this analysis. • In June of 2007, staff began some consultation with David Powell, who provided input about what should be in the Code, and what should be in the Master Plan to make this a more competitive area and one that would be successful over the long term. Also at that time, Mr. Hale and his firm began to attend some of the meetings. • In July of 2007, the Plan was introduced to the US 33 Corridor committee. • Throughout the entire process, there have been COIC working groups meeting on a regular basis. There are several levels of groups -two internal technical staff teams and a smaller technical team working with the particle therapy center, as well as a larger group working with the developer and the City's partner as a whole. • In September, a Council work session was held with an overview and introduction to the COIC and US 33 Corridor plans. • The Planning Commission then received an introduction and overview of US 33 Corridor and COIC as a whole. The Commission then began the text review of the District. That extended into meetings in November of 2007 and January of 2008. At their last meeting in January, the Commission recommended approval of the zoning code to Council. • Mr. Hale and the particle therapy partners attended most of those meetings. Throughout the process, they have been offering staff suggestions regarding improvements to the text. Many of those suggestions have been incorporated during the draft review process. Policy Issues for Council: There are three key elements of the Code: 1. Buildings, including articulation, roof styles, materials for buildings, clearly defined entryways and height limitations. In terms of "green" provisions, the height provisions are incentive related, whereby if they provide certain "green" incentives, such as structured parking or rain gardens, applicants can receive increased building height. This would also improve storm drainage. 2. Site elements. Parking, with a simplistic calculation. It can also be tailored to individual uses and needs and is much more progressive. Landscaping provisions have been added. For lighting provisions, they defer to the lighting code recently passed. Sign provisions are stricter than the ones in the current code. There are a variety of signs permitted. Circulation and access requirements and open space requirements, with a minimum percentage as well as open space and common seating areas are provided. 3. The process. He shared a chart which demonstrates the items to be reviewed by the Administrative Review Team (ART) and what would be reviewed by the Planning Commission in each of the four districts. In the HDP, there are two areas in which Planning Commission has review authority: commercial services and warehousing as a primary use. In a high density use, it was felt the warehousing should be a conditional use, as it is not a strong employment generator. Current Development Process • The current planned development process begins with a P&Z work session, then a public hearing by P&Z on the rezoning, recommendation for approval of the preliminary development plan, which comes to Council for approval as the rezoning. When ready, the applicant returns with a final development plan, which is approved by the Planning Commission. As needed, an amended final development plan can be submitted. • In a standard zoning district - a district other than a planned district -the rezoning would ultimately be approved by Council. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS March 17, 2008 Held Page 4 j ~~ 1, If any conditional uses are required under the current process, these are approved by Planning Commission. ~~ If any variances are needed, they are approved by the Board of Zoning I, Appeals. I,!i Following those approvals, Review Services reviews the application for '; building permit and ultimately a permit is issued for development. Ili Processes as Proposed for COIC Mr. Langworthy shared a chart, summarizing the process for the COIC. ~', I~~ 1. Application. The applications can come from an applicant, or from the City itself. I; Ultimately, City Council is the approving authority for all rezonings. There is an optional process for the Administrative Review Team, where they can do a pre- !~ application session with the applicant to review the requirements and the process to be '. followed. New applicants will likely take advantage of this process. ~'~ 2. Administrative review. All applications which meet the requirements of the District ~! would go through the ART. The ART has the authority to approve administrative '~I'~ departures, which are minor variances. There are guidelines and restrictions upon the ART for these parameters. The aim is to keep as much of this at the administrative level as possible. ~', 3. Site plan approval. This review is done by P&Z and would be focused on I~ requirements that are not met. This review is limited, however, to only those II requirements that are not met -not the entire plan. If an administrative departure is denied, it would also go for site plan approval to P&Z. 4. Retail uses. P&Z requested that they review all retail uses within the COIC. In the commercial service use category, there are retail uses permitted. Therefore, that category has been separated out as going to P&Z. It would be in the HDP and would l come to P&Z for review. 5. Another provision currently in the Code gives the ART the ability to refer a plan to I', P&Z under certain circumstances. After P&Z review, should they deny site plan I' approval, this item can be appealed to City Council. Council would have ultimate decision regarding the site plan. ICI 6. All conditional uses stay as they currently are in the code. The conditional use process is handled by the P&Z Commission. gill ~ Issues raised by City's partner requiring further Council review: 1. Conditional uses for larger commercial uses. A provision is included m HDP in the ~!„ Code regarding retail commercial square footage and that a certain level triggers ~! the need for a conditional use. Originally, staff had proposed 60,000 square feet i~ and P&Z proposed reducing this to 20,000 square feet. P&Z's recommendation is !i that retail commercial over 20,000 square feet would require a conditional use; 'I,j anything less than 20,000 square feet would be permitted. '! 2. Specific to particle therapy, some issues were raised regarding building setback, l'~ parking setback and four-sided architecture. The partners felt they would have I'; difficulty meeting these requirements. 3. Commercial use review by P&Z in the HDP. 4. Composition of Administrative Review Team. The partnership asked that the ART include two citizen members, that the Police Chief be excluded from the ART, and Ill that there be a requirement for a majority vote. ~I 5. ART referral to P&Z. The partnership has asked that this provision be deleted. Staff is not opposed to deleting this provision. ~I Ma or Chinnici-Zuerch r k ,, y e as ed that a copy of this presentafion be provided to Council m '~ next week's packet. She invited Mr. Hale to address Council. Ben Hale. 37 W. Broad Street stated that the partnership is very supportive of the City's efforts. They have some technical issues to be addressed. He added that the team approach used in recent years for major developments in Dublin has now been institutionalized. It has worked well for Dublin Methodist Hospital and for Cardinal Health Issues: 1. Conditional use for commercial retail over 20,000 square feet in the HDP. He does not believe the Code currently states that they could even file a conditional use and exceed that 20,000 square feet. He believes they should be able to do that. For a RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 1 Held March 17, 2008 20 Page 5 commercial service use now, as he reads the Code, it can also be interpreted to include office, hotel, and offices. Hotels are always larger than 20,000 square feet. They support cone-stop shop for review versus bifurcating the process in this way. 2. In regard to appeals, there are two sections now addressing appeals. One states that if an application is turned down by the ART, it will automatically go to the P&Z. Another section states that they can elect to send it to the P&Z. Yet there is no right for the applicant to appeal it to the P&Z. They would like to have the right to appeal, as there would be no other recourse other than the courts. This is an administrative process, and if the ART does not forward it, the only option for the applicant is to file a court case. He would like these sections clarified so that appeals can eventually come to Council. 3. There are a number of standards contained that the particle therapy center could not comply with. For larger projects, they have proposed there be some amendment to the standards to accommodate them. The functions of the buildings determine how they will be built. They have made some proposals about how the issues could be addressed for very large projects. 4. There is a housekeeping issue with a section in the Code regarding the 56 days for P&Z to make a decision. He summarized that they desire that the Code is clear. Most of these items are internal conflicts that can occur in a very large document. Mr. Smith asked for Mr. Hale's input regarding the proposed Administrative Review Team composition. Mr. Hale responded that it is acceptable as proposed. This is no longer an issue, and he has discussed this matter with Mr. Langworthy. Mr. Smith asked about the blanket overview referral. As he understands it, Mr. Langworthy had written this in at the request of P&Z. He asked Mr. Hale to outline his view on this. Mr. Hale responded that there are both objective and subjective portions of this Code. He wants to preserve the right to present his case. The ART, in his view, does not need this provision to be able to send an application to P&Z. ART has a list of subjective standards to consider. However, they should have to justify why they are sending it to P&Z, based on the objective and subjective standards. He believes this process is important. If Council wants the ART to review this process, they should review it. There should be justification if the ART is not going to do so. The process needs to be very clear, as timing is a critical issue, as well as a process with certainty. The first request he has from applicants regarding a case is for a timeline for review. For good cause, ART should send it on to P&Z for review, but not without justification. Mr. Smith summarized that Mr. Hale does not have an issue with the Administrative Review Team having the right, under both the subjective and objective standards to send it to P&Z if the ART disagrees with something. What he does not want is for the ART to have a blanket authority to send something on for review without cause. Mr. Hale agreed. If he is told to do certain things by the ART or be subject to P&Z's further review, he may choose to comply with the ART request. Or he has the option to have it heard at P&Z. It provides the applicant with a choice. Mr. Lecklider stated that as currently drafted, if the ART should refer a matter to P&Z, do the time limitations continue to apply? Mr. Langworthy responded affirmatively. There are specific time limitations in the Code. Mr. Lecklider stated that the concern seems to be with the right to refer to P&Z without a defined list of justifications. Mr. Hale responded that timing remains a concern. Often, meetings with staff are held over months of time. Typically, P&Z receives a packet just prior to their meeting and P&Z could indicate a need for more time to review the information before voting. The ART absolutely has the right to send it on, but he wants to have the specific justification for why they are doing so. The nature of the P&Z process will, however, slow down the timeline. Mr. Langworthy stated for clarification that in terms of timing, there is a caveat that upon mutual agreement of the applicant and P&Z, the time can be extended. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS n 1 D He March 17, 2008 Page 6 Mr. Lecklider responded that at some point, he would like to hear staff's rationale behind the current draft about which Mr. Hale has expressed concern. It was the consensus of Council to schedule a workshop for further review of the ordinance on Monday, March 31 at 6 p.m. in Council Chambers. The meeting of the Administrative Committee, previously scheduled for that evening will be rescheduled for a later date . Ordinance 14-08 Accepting the Annexation of 8.5+/- Acres from Jerome Township to the City of Dublin. (9341 Jerome Road) Mr. Gerber introduced the ordinance. Mr. Gunderman stated that this Regular annexation from Jerome Township was approved by the County Commissioners on January 7, 2008. Council had previously sought and received verbal agreement from the applicant to pay any reparations to the City for property taxes the City might owe, should this area be removed from Jerome Township. Later on tonight's agenda is a resolution approving the agreement with the property owners to effect this. Staff recommends approval of the annexation at the second reading/public hearing on April 7. This property is within the City's exclusive water and sewer service area. There will be a second reading/public hearing on April 7. Ordinance 15-08 Amending Section 32.63 of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Dublin Regarding the Community Services Advisory Commission, and Declaring an Emergency. Vice Mayor Boring introduced the ordinance. Mr. Smith stated that this ordinance and Ordinance 16-08 have been prepared at the direction of Council. Each of these ordinances expands the membership and adds flexibility to the number of members appointed to the Commissions by Council. Emergency action is requested so that the appointments can be made to the expanded commissions for terms beginning April 1. Mr. Lecklider moved to dispense with the public hearing and treat as emergency legislation. Mr. Gerber seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mr. Reiner, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Vice Mayor Boring, yes. Vote on the Ordinance: Vice Mayor Boring, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes. Ordinance 16-08 Amending Section 32.75 of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Dublin Regarding the Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission and Declaring an Emergency. Mr. Gerber introduced the ordinance. Mr. Lecklider moved to dispense with the public hearing and treat as emergency legislation. Mr. Gerber seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Vice Mayor Boring, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes. Vote on the Ordinance: Vice Mayor Boring, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes. INTRODUCTION/PUBLIC HEARING -RESOLUTIONS Resolution 11-08 Authorizing the City Manager to Enter into aPre-Annexation Agreement Describing the Intentions of the Parties to Annex Certain Real Property Located in Jerome Township, Union County, Owned by Daniel E. and Melissa A. Lorenz. Mr. Lecklider introduced the resolution. Mr. Smith commented that this is the agreement which relates to the reparations to be paid by Mr. and Mrs. Lorenz following the boundary adjustment. It is consistent with the previous direction of Council. RECORD OF PROCEED[NGS Page 7 March 17, 2008 1 1 Mr. Lecklider asked if this type of agreement has been done previously. Mr. Smith responded that one other was done where the applicant agreed to pay reparations. Under the majority owner annexation process, one of the parties must pay reparations to the township. Dublin has not paid reparations, but instead has entered into agreements with the annexation petitioners regarding payment of the fees. In some cases, a developer agreed to pay the reparations. Mr. Lecklider summarized that this would constitute Dublin's current policy for reparations, and he supports it. Mr. Smith confirmed this is the current policy. Wallace Maurer. 7451 Dublin Road asked about the distance from the Lorenz property to Dublin's existing water and sewer lines. Mr. Hammersmith responded there is a water line along the frontage of the property on Manley Road and there is sewer service available in Tartan West, adjacent to this property. Vote on the Resolution: Vice Mayor Boring, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mayor Chinnici- Zuercher, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes. Resolution 12-08 Intent to Appropriate a 0.988 Acre, More or Less, Fee Simple Interest, a 0.123 Acre, More or Less, Utility Easement, and a 0.564 Acre, More or Less, Temporary Construction Easement from Post Hylands Co., Ltd., Located on the West Side of Perimeter Drive, City of Dublin, Counties of Franklin, Union and Delaware, State of Ohio. Mr. Lecklider introduced the resolution. Mr. Smith stated that the City has been in discussion with the property owner and his attorney. There is currently no counsel representing the property owner. This involves the first phase of the interchange improvement. At the next meeting, the appropriation ordinance will be brought forward. Negotiations will continue throughout this process. Mr. Lecklider asked when the funds are actually deposited with the court. Mr. Smith responded that will be done after the appropriation ordinance is approved at the next Council meeting. Vote on the Resolution: Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Vice Mayor Boring, yes. Resolution 13-08 Supporting the Leadership Dublin HeartSafe Project. Mr. Gerber introduced the resolution. Ms. Brautigam stated that this was prepared at Council's direction, in response to the Leadership Dublin presentation at the last Council meeting. Wallace Maurer, 7451 Dublin Road asked about the statistic cited in the brochure that studies have shown survival rates can increase up to 70 percent or more when AEDs are in place. More clarification is needed. He assumes it means survival beyond the application and use of the AED. Vote on the Resolution: Mr. Gerber, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Vice Mayor Boring, yes; Mr Lecklider, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes. Resolution 14-08 Appointing Members to the Various Boards and Commissions of the City of Dublin. Vice Mayor Boring introduced the resolution. She noted that Council has interviewed candidates, and the Administrative Committee is now recommending the following individuals be appointed: • Todd Zimmerman reappointed to a four-year term on Planning & Zoning Commission; • Clayton Bryan reappointed to a three-year term on Architectural Review Board; • Bangalore Shankar reappointed to a three-year term on the Board of Zoning Appeals; RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 1 1 March 17, 2008 Page 8 • Victoria Newell appointed to the unexpired term of Jeffrey Ferezan on the Board of Zoning Appeals; • Richard Filler, William Sherman and Eric Snyder appointed to three-year terms on the Community Services Advisory Commission; • Christine Gawronski appointed to a one-year term on the Community Services Advisory Commission; • Naomi Hoyt appointed to a two-year term as City representative to the Dublin Arts Council; • Ken Frazer and Tim May reappointed to three-year terms on the Parks & Recreation Advisory Commission; • Chris Clinton and Ron Geese appointed to three-year terms on the Parks & Recreation Advisory Commission; • Michele Baker and Lois Reese appointed to two-year terms on the Parks & Recreation Advisory Commission; • Mark Stemm reappointed to a three-year term on the Personnel Board of Review; • Darin Moore appointed to a three-year term on the Records Commission. Vice Mayor Boring noted that the ordinances approved tonight regarding amendments to PRAC and CSAC indicate that the members' terms begin immediately upon appointment. Therefore, she recommended that the resolution be amended in Section 8 to state that, "Each of the above-named persons shall serve beginning April 1, 2008 and until a successor is appointed, or until death, resignation or removal for cause, as determined by City Council." Vice Mayor Boring so moved. Mr. Reiner seconded the motion. Vote on the amended Resolution: Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Vice Mayor Boring, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes. Vice Mayor Boring added that Council interviewed a very passionate group of citizens who desire to serve the City. She thanked them for their interest and suggested they contact the Volunteer Administrator in regard to other opportunities to serve. Resolution 15-08 Authorizing an Agreement for Maintenance at Cramer's Crossing. Mr. Lecklider introduced the resolution. Ms. Brautigam stated that this resolution was drafted in follow up to the discussion at the last meeting. Mr. Hahn stated that this document reflects the direction given by Council. A representative of Cramer's Crossing is present to respond to any questions on the Association's behalf. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked Mr. Hahn for an estimate of the costs involved in the maintenance. Mr. Hahn responded it is approximately $4,000 per year for turf maintenance. The pond aerator maintenance is approximately $1,500 to $1,700 per year as he can best estimate. Vote on the Resolution: Mr. Reiner, yes; Vice Mayor Boring, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher thanked the Cramer's Crossing representatives who were in attendance at the meeting. OTHER • Request for Alcohol Waiver for Rental Group Using DCRC Community Hall - Saturday, March 29, 2008 Mr. Earman noted that a memo was included in the packet from Vishnu Vaka, 8171 Campden Lakes Boulevard requesting that Council waive certain requirements for serving of alcohol in the Community Recreation Center. He is asking for an hour addition to the permitted serving hours -beginning at 6:30 p.m. instead of 7:30 p.m. In addition, he is requesting permission to serve liquor at the event. Mr. Vaka is present to respond to questions. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS _-- ---___-_ Dublin_City~oun~il-- Held 1 March 17, 2008 -- __ Page 9 20 - -_ _~~ - - - ~ - ' Vice Mayor Boring asked if the customers are made aware of the restrictions at the facility regarding alcohol at the time they make the reservation for the space. ~I ~' Mr. Earman responded that they are notified at that time. Vice Mayor Boring asked what time the DCRC closes on Saturday evening. II! Mr. Earman responded it closes at 8 p.m. Vice Mayor Boring asked why the 7:30 p.m. start time for alcohol service was decided upon for the facility. 'II Mr. Earman responded that he believes the rationale was based on many factors. There ", are family-oriented activities at the DCRC which do not mix with events serving alcohol. 'I Given that, there are many requirements that help control the event and ensure it will be '~, held within the confines of the space. Mr. Reiner asked if these rules have been waived previously. Mr. Earman responded that he does not believe that these requests have been brought forward to Council. There have been some minor adjustments made by staff related to events, but nothing substantial. There may be one or two requests for alcohol serving each year that are denied by staff. Mr. Lecklider asked with respect to serving liquor versus beer and wine, has serving of liquor ever been permitted by Council? Mr. Earman responded that there have been no waivers approved by Council to allow serving of liquor. Mr. Gerber asked about the rationale of excluding liquor service. Mr. Earman responded this decision was made prior to his service with the City. He does not have specific information. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked Mr. Vaka to testify regarding his requests. Vishnu Vaka, 8171 Campden Lakes Boulevard stated they are planning to have a social hour before the event begins, and they want to begin the event earlier due to the need to leave the facility before 12 midnight. His rationale is that people prefer to have beverages ~' served during the social time. Those attending are of good standing in the community and ~~ he does not expect any problems to occur. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher responded that the request does not relate in any way to the type of people attending an event. It is related to the fact that the DCRC is open to patrons until 8 p.m. and is family oriented at that time. Because of the children present, it was determined that alcohol service should not take place until a later time. Mr. Vaka pointed out that the doors to the room will be closed, and therefore there will be no one drinking alcohol in the lobby area. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher summarized that there are two questions before Council: 1) to waive the timing for serving of alcohol from 7:30 p.m. to 6:30 p.m. for this event; and 2) to waive the rule of no liquor to be served at the DCRC. Mr. Lecklider asked if such an event requires a police presence. Mr. Earman responded that it does require a uniformed police presence and requires an '~'~ additional deposit of $150. The event activity must be restricted to the confines of the Community Hall itself. '~ Vice Mayor Boring noted that there was considerable discussion regarding alcohol serving at the DCRC when the guidelines were developed. Considering that the facility is a community recreation center and given the community movement to prevent drug and ', alcohol abuse, she is concerned with adjusting the starting time. The applicant was made aware of these restrictions at the time they reserved the space. Vice Mayor Boring moved to adopt staff's recommendation of denial of the request for the time change for serving alcohol. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes; Vice Mayor Boring, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes. Hel RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS ___ __ ___Dublin City_Council___ March 17, 2008 __ Meeting_ . Page 10 ~! 1 1 1 Mr. Lecklider added that he is pleased that Mr. Vaka wants to hold this event in the Rec Center. The vote is not any reflection upon his invited guests. There is always a conflict with serving of alcohol in a facility such as the Rec Center. He noted that there is nothing to prevent this event from going forward at 6:30 p.m., with the alcohol service beginning at 7:30 p.m. Mr. Gerber asked how many events take place each year at the DCRC where alcohol is served. Mr. Earman estimated there are 10-12 per year. Mr. Gerber asked if the limitation on the choices of beverages available discourages rental of the facility, or is there not a large demand for the facility for an event with alcohol? Mr. Earman responded that he is not certain. The facility is promoted for weddings and other activities, but there are not many who request waivers for alcohol serving. Mr. Lecklider moved to deny the request to serve liquor at this event. Vice Mayor Boring seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Vice Mayor Boring, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher summarized that beer and wine may be served beginning at 7:30 p.m., but liquor is not permitted to be served as has been requested. • Burial of Electric Utility Lines in Historic Dublin Ms. Ott stated that with the construction of the Bridge and High project, staff reviewed the potential of burial of utility lines in the northwest quadrant of the area. There are some economies of scale with the amount of disturbance already taking place with the construction project. Staff believes it would be best to proceed with removal of 10 existing utility poles in the area and bury approximately 800 lineal feet of lines. The cost is approximately $385,000. It would be done under the master agreement with the Stonehenge Company. She pointed out that some tree trimming will be needed to install above ground lines along Blacksmith Lane north of Bridge Street. This is necessary because the private service for those buildings on the east side of High Street currently spans across High Street from west to east. That would be changed so that the service comes from the rear of those properties rather than from the front. Secondly, in terms of the timeline, AEP is interested in initiating this work quickly to accommodate the summer cooling demands and to do it in conjunction with some adjustments to circuits for the expansion of Cardinal Health. At this point, staff has not had contact with specific property owners or tenants regarding this project. Staff wanted to bring this to Council prior to initiating those contacts. Mr. Reiner congratulated staff on this initiative, as it will be a major improvement for the District to have the service underground. For the tree trimming for Blacksmith Lane, is there information about the impact? Ms. Ott responded that staff does not know if the removal of any trees will be necessary. There has been some preliminary review, but AEP has not determined the exact location on the pole sitings for that area. This information can be brought back to Council when it is available. Mr. Reiner indicated he would like to review this information. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked about disturbance to the businesses. Will there be down time for businesses as a result of this? The interruption of service is the biggest potential concern. Mr. Hammersmith responded there would be a brief period of interruption as the service is transferred from aerial to underground. He estimates this would be %2 hour of interruption. AEP would work with the business owners to time this during the off peak hours. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated she is very supportive of this improvement. Mr. Gerber agreed, noting that sufficient notice - at least a week ahead -should be given to the businesses in the area. Mr. Hammersmith responded that staff will ensure this notification takes place. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS March 17, 2008 Page 11 it ii it Mr. Lecklider asked for clarification about the trees on Blacksmith Lane and why they 'I would require trimming. III ~i Ms. Ott responded that these are the individual business service lines that must be relocated. The only alternative is to do service line burial under High Street itself at i~ multiple locations, or to redo the streetscape on the east side of High at the same time. Vice Mayor Boring noted that the memo indicates there will be tree removal along the east '~ i side of North High Street. ~ Ms. Ott clarified that the tree removal will take place along the west side of North High Street. i ~ 'th I n -term oal of Council to Vice Ma or Borin stated that this ro'ect is in kee in wi a o Y g p J P 9 9 9 I move utilities underground wherever possible in conjunction with projects. She thanked 'I ~ Ms. Ott for bringing this opportunity to Council's attention. I Mr. Gerber moved to approve the proposed utility line burial as outlined in the staff memo. '~, i Mr. Reiner seconded the motion. '' Vote on the motion: Vice Mayor Boring, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, ~, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes. ~' AEP Line Maintenance Update ~~~ ~ Ms. Brautigam stated that a report was included in the packet. Mr. McDaniel, Mr. ~ ' Langworthy and Mr. Hahn have met regularly with AEP representatives and have ~' ~'' prepared a report on the various activities AEP plans to undertake in Dublin in 2008. ~'~ ~ Mr. Hahn stated that AEP is planning their normal distribution line clearance, but is also ' ~I' preparing to undertake the transmission line clearance this year. They will begin clearing later this month, and they are contacting property owners regarding this activity. Staff has ,~~~ been working with AEP to assist wherever necessary. The memo describes the plans in '~ detail, and the exhibits depict the impacted areas. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked that staff provide better maps, as they are not readable. ~j Mr. Hahn agreed to provide better exhibits for both the transmission and distribution line II work. , ~'~, Mr. Reiner commented regarding the "AEP Areas of Concern -Distribution Line" '; attachment. It states that the Kroger Bridge Street Center is a good area for tree removal C and for a restoration project. It further states that trees have been topped before. Is AEP I I suggesting those trees be removed? Mr. Hahn responded that these trees have been topped numerous times, and the question I ~~, becomes removal and replacement versus topping them again. Staff wants to move toward the concept of "the right tree in the right place," and topping trees every 3-4 years is not consistent with this philosophy. Staff is working with AEP toward this goal. Mr. Reiner stated that sometimes, the wires are well concealed due to the pruning over '~~ the years. Pruning is a big expense for AEP. The goal should not be to reduce expenses I for AEP, but to maintain the established aesthetics. He wants to know exactly which trees are proposed for removal. ', Mr. Hahn assured Council that he will provide better exhibits. There are some trees still in good form, but others which are not due to continual topping. Mr. Reiner asked which staff member works with AEP on this. Mr. Hahn responded that Ms. Chope is the staff person who works with the AEP field personnel or their subcontractors. Mr. Reiner stated that losing trees is a sensitive issue to the neighborhoods. He asked ~; that staff ensure careful analysis is done on each of the trees. !~~ Mr. Hahn responded that staff has emphasized to AEP that at a minimum, fair notice must be given to the property owners about the impacts of the work. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher suggested a newspaper article or information on the website that ', describes the approach being taken and how the citizens will benefit as a result, pointing out that the landscape may look different than what people are accustomed to viewing. ~ Mr. Hahn responded that staff will follow up accordingly. STAFF COMMENTS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Held 1 1 March 17, 2008 Page 12 Ms. Brautigam noted that at the Mayor's suggestion, she prepared a brief memo for distribution tonight regarding the US 33 Corridor meeting last week. Mr. Keenan, Mr. Hammersmith and she attended that meeting. The US 33 Corridor group has now been divided into two subcommittees. Dublin is in the group that will focus on issues south of SR 42. The members of this subcommittee are Dublin, Jerome Township, Union County, Marysville, and the Logan/Union/Champaign Regional Planning Commission. A decision was made at the meeting to seek the services of a facilitator that would help the group meet in a retreat format to determine the goals for the area south of US 42. Jerome Township has already appropriated $5,000 for this effort, and the suggestion is that each entity contribute to the effort. Staff is requesting Council's favorable consideration of $5,000 for this item to be funded from the City Manager's budget. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher clarified that in discussion with Mr. Keenan, she understands that the request is for up to $5,000, based on what is actually needed to fund this. Ms. Brautigam responded that is correct. Vice Mayor Boring asked if these meetings will be announced and open to the public. Ms. Brautigam responded that the various entities have different views on this matter and further discussion is needed. Mr. Lecklider moved to approve funding of up to $5,000 for this purpose. Mr. Gerber seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes; Vice Mayor Boring, yes. COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE/COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS Mr. Reiner commented that the St. Patrick's Day parade was wonderful and the Community Relations staff did an excellent job with the events, which were enjoyed by all! Mr. Gerber noted that this was his first parade as a Council Member. It was a challenge to keep up with the float while distributing candy to everyone! It was very enjoyable! Mr. Lecklider reported that Vice Mayor Boring, Ms. Brautigam and he had a productive trip to Washington, D.C. last week, seeking federal funding for a study regarding the widening of US 33 from the Post Road interchange to I-270. A summary memo was provided by Ms. Brautigam in the packet. The group met personally with Rep. Tiberi, and with the staff of Rep. Pryce and Senators Brown and Voinovich. The support materials for this trip were provided by Engineering, Streets & Utilities and Community Relations and enhanced the presentations. It is everyone's hope that this is the beginning of significant future improvements to US 33 and the associated interchanges. Thanks to everyone on staff for their support! Vice Mayor Boring: Commented favorably regarding the St. Patrick's Day Parade. Agreed that the Washington trip was very productive, as Mr. Lecklider has already described. Asked that the media reports which are included in packets be discontinued, as she does not believe they are of value. It was the consensus of Council that staff discontinue providing media reports in Council packets. Mavor Chinnici-Zuercher: Noted that the St. Patrick's Day parade and events were great. She acknowledged Jason Liu who donated the luncheon for the Grand Leprechaun held at Jasons Restaurant. In addition, she acknowledged the media partner, WBNS-10 TV and Dom Tiberi, Dublin resident, who assisted with parade coverage. Other media partners included Dublin News and Sunny 95 who helped with promotion. Sponsors included LifeTime Fitness who sponsored the four-mile run; Trophies Plus donated ribbons for parade participants; Tim Norton's donated coffee and doughnuts for the hospitality tent; Crowne Plaza housed guests from the International Festival and Events Association; Gordon Foods donated candy for the parade; Little Clinic, Great Clips and the Columbus Ophthalmology Associates also helped with sponsoring the entertainment for the parade. RECORD OF PROCEED[NGS 1 March 17, 2008 Page 13 Held 20 Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked that participant numbers for the four-mile run be provided as well as feedback from the IFEA about the Dublin parade. Commented that Paul Thomas, owner of Touch of Class Car Wash read about Grand Leprechaun Lois Dixon's desire to ride in a horse drawn carriage. He contacted the City and offered to partner with the City on this expense. Thanks to him for this generous donation! Lois was thrilled with this surprise. Lois is a fine example of a community member who has lived in Dublin for over 50 years, who will soon celebrate her 99`h birthday, and who continues to contribute to the community. Lois was an excellent choice for Grand Leprechaun 2008. ADJOURNMENT TO EXECUTIVE SESSION Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher moved to adjourn to executive session at 8:20 p.m. for land acquisition matters (to consider the purchase of property for public purposes). Mr. Gerber seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes; Vice Mayor Boring, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher announced that the meeting will be reconvened only for the purpose of formally adjourning. There will be no further action taken by Council. meeting was reconvened at 9:10 p.m. and formally adjourned. 1 Mayor -Presiding Officer ~~C_. Clerk of Council 1