HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/18/1995 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting Meeting
DAYTON LEGAL BLANK
Held September 18, 1995 ig
Vice Mayor King called the work session of Dublin Ciry Council to order at 7:00 p.m. on Monday,
September 18, 1995.
Staff Comments
Mr. Smith reported:
1. A memo has been provided to Council regazding use of public funds for informational
purposes for ballot issues.
2. The Police division has requested that reseazch be done regazding implementation of a
loitering law to address problems being experienced at the AMC Theatre. A memo will be
provided to Council for their review and for further direction to staff.
Mr. Kindra noted that a temporary traffic signal has now been installed at Hazd Road and Riverside
Drive and is operational.
Ms. Jordan commented that staff is working to resolve the issues involved with the bikepath location
and proximity to a large tree in Brighton Pazk as described by a resident at a recent Council
meeting.
Chief Ferrell reported that the newly installed "turtles" on 161 at Sawmill have helped with traffic
control and improved safety at the intersection.
Chief Bostic, Washington Township Fire Depaztment introduced the township Clerk-Treasurer Rosie
Keaz who is running for re-election in November.
Council Roundtable
Mr. Zawalv commented as follows:
1. He suggests that the addresses for the Internet be as simple and similaz as possible for ease
of access to City staff.
2. Asked about the reasons for the time delay in the City's joining the World Wide Web.
Ms. Grigsby responded that the delays resulted from the need for additional hazdwaze and
the information preparation from the Special Events division. The information services staff
plans to have the system operational very soon and will test the system to ensure that
Council members have access to the E-mail via the Internet.
3. The memo from staff regazding Shawan Falls acquisition dated August 10 was excellent, and
he will be looking for a recommendation from staff in this regazd in the neaz future.
4. Noted that staff has sent a memo dated August 28 regarding the feasibility of a check-off on
the tax form for refunds to be allocated as a contribution to blighted azea acquisition or
greenspace acquisition. This is appazently not practical for the reasons explained in the
memo.
5. Asked about the status of the fee waiver requested by the Dublin Baptist Church.
Mrs. King noted that this item has been added to tonight's agenda.
Mrs. Stillwell commented:
1. Thanks to staff for hosting a meeting with the Old Dublin Woods residents regarding the
Hirth Road matter. The meeting was very productive and several alternatives are being
explored.
2. At a future time, she and Mrs. King would like to share information from the Asheville
conference they attended recently.
3. Congratulations to Ms. Puskazcik and all of City staff for their excellent efforts on the Three
Tour Challenge.
4. A letter from John Ensign of MORPC regarding the recent focus group was contained in the
packet. A futures planning group at MORPC will meet in eazly October to devise an action
~ plan for the next couple of yeazs. She thanked Council members for their participation.
5. She has information regarding the transportation enhancement grant process which she would
like to present to Council at a future date.
Mr. Stria noted:
1. He has sent a letter to Ms. Grigsby regarding the positive results of the audit of the Ciry
which was recently completed. This speaks very well for Dublin's Finance division.
2. There is a constant backlog of traffic at Muirfield/Avery and Route 33 and he asked what
plans aze in place to relieve this situation.
Mr. Foegler indicated that the 1996 capital budget recommends two improvements in that
area: a signalization of the ramps on the south side of the overpass and an improved
signalization and left turn storage lane at the intersection of Shier Rings and Avery. Staff
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting Page 2 Meeting
DAYTON LEGAL BLANK
Held September 18, 1995 19
will also be recommending an entire design study of the Avery Road overpass in 1996.
3. He has had complaints recently about dumpster trucks operating in residential areas at 6 a.m.
and would be interested in sponsoring a noise ordinance if Council would support it.
Mrs. King commented that a commitment was made at the time of the McKitrick rezoning
that the City would investigate a noise ordinance. She would support such legislation.
Mrs. Stillwell indicated that she would want to include other types of disturbances as well.
~ She has had some complaints about noise from her ward.
Mr. Kranstuber stated:
1. He added his praise for Ms. Puskarcik's and all of staff's efforts with the Three Tour
Challenge event.
2. The Dublin Garden Club planted perennials at the Coffman House and he requested that a
letter be sent on behalf of Council to the group. He added that bed tax funds were used to
purchase the materials, but the labor was provided by this volunteer group.
The formal session of the Dublin City Council meeting was called to order by Vice Mayor King at
7:30 p.m. Mrs. Boring led the Pledge of Allegiance.
Roll Call
Council members present were: Mrs. King, Mrs. Boring, Mr. Kranstuber, Mrs. Stillwell, Mr.
Strip, and Mr. Zawaly. Mayor Campbell was absent (excused).
Staff members present included: Mr. Foegler, Mr. Smith, Ms. Grigsby, Ms. Clarke, Mr. Kindra,
Ms. Jordan, Chief Ferrell, Ms. Bearden, Ms. Puskarcik, Mr. Coleman, Ms. Crandall, Mr. Johnson,
Ms. Kennedy, and Ms. Ubbing.
Aparoval of Minutes of the September 11, 1995 Meeting
The clerk noted that the minutes have not been completed at this time.
Vice Mayor King stated that approval of the minutes will be delayed until the October 2 meeting.
' Correspondence
The clerk reported that there was no correspondence.
Comments from Visitors
Roy Lovell. 4980 Dublin Road asked for a status report on the sewer project.
Mr. Foegler responded that apre-construction meeting is scheduled for next week.
Mr. Lovell asked if an agenda item is reconsideration of the supervision of shaft 10 and shaft 11.
Shaft 10 is on Dublin property and shaft 11 is on Columbus property. He understands that
Columbus will supervise construction of shaft 10. He would prefer that Dublin supervise the Dublin
shaft.
Mr. Foegler stated that Columbus is supervising all of the project in Dublin's behalf by contract.
The day-today construction management is being done by the City of Columbus.
Mr. Kranstuber asked about the status of the sidewalk waiver and the service road issue.
Mr. Kindra responded that Council's preferences have been communicated to Columbus, but there
has been no change to date in the plans.
Mrs. King urged Mr. Lovell to maintain contact with Mr. Hansley on these matters.
Mr. Kindra invited Mr. Lovell to contact him directly as well.
Mr. Lovell indicated that he would contact Mr. Joyce personally unless Council members objected.
There was no objection from Council.
The Dublin Coffman High School Marching Band officers and class representatives and Music
Director Larry Faulk introduced themselves to Council. Mr. Faulk thanked the City of Dublin
residents for the continued support of music in the schools. He announced that there will be five
Community Appreciation Concerts this season, and the first will take place on Friday, September
29 at 5:45 p.m. on the Coffman House grounds.
Council members thanked the band officers for attending the Council meeting, adding that they are
looking forward to the upcoming band season.
Lee Mendelsohn. 5298 Ashford Road addressed Council regarding the recent resolution passed by
Council which authorizes the City to initiate the acquisition of the two gas stations in Old Dublin.
Signatures have been collected in support of saving the Union 76 station, and they have 175
signatures to date. She advocates that Council separate the Union 76 property acquisition from the
acquisition of the Marathon station. She would also request that Council keep a representative of
the citizens apprised of the progress on the acquisitions. One of the aesthetic issues is the unkempt
state of the parking lot to the north of the Union 76 station on High Street. She believes that this
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting Page 3 Meeting
DAYTON LEGAL BLANK
Held September 18, 1995 19
could be worked out to everyone's satisfaction. The quality of service offered by the Union 76
station warrants that it be saved.
Mrs. King urged the residents to continue to provide input on this matter to the members of Council
and she encouraged the residents to become involved in the community plan process as well.
Mr. Foegler commented that the resolution passed by Council did not effectively condemn the
property and initiate the taking process. Instead, this resolution declazed the intent to acquire the
' properties and authorized negotiations with the property owners. The only additional action then
needed if agreement is reached would be to appropriate the funds for the purchase.
Ms. Mendelsohn asked if the two gas stations could be sepazated.
Mr. Foegler responded that Council certainly has that option, but the current policy indicates
Council's support of acquisition of both.
Mr. Strip indicated that Council has merely authorized staff to investigate the purchase of the
properties and legislation would follow with three readings and lots of opportunity for public input.
Marge Rosher. Chairperson of Tree and Landscape Advisory Commission stated that she has been
very involved over the past 5 yeazs with the Coffman House gazden project. Funds have been
donated from the City for the gazden and for the landmark tree preservation program. She has been
made aware that plans aze underway to realign the Coffman Road widening which will result in the
loss of a lazge black walnut tree. The Gazden Club spent 3 hours on Saturday morning planting
perennials at the Coffman House. She is very concerned that the Tree & Landscape Advisory
Commission, the Dublin Garden Club, and the Dublin Historical Society were not told about plans
to move the roadway. She introduced Millie Sliclen, Dublin Gazden Club President and Bill
Sherman who helped to design the garden plots.
Mr. Foegler responded that the right turn storage lane on northbound Coffman for turning movement
onto Emerald Pazkway will impact the Willow Grove property significantly. Options aze being
explored to reduce this impact, including nazrowing the lanes or moving the roadway to the west
resulting in removal of the landmazk tree. Phone calls were made today to notify the Tree &
Landscape Commission and the Historical Society about a meeting tomorrow night with Willow
Grove to discuss the alternatives.
Vice Mayor King noted that the Brighton Pazk agenda matter is scheduled to be discussed between
8:00 and 8:15 p.m. and she suggested that Council proceed with this discussion.
Brighton Park Rezoning Text Clarification Pertaining to Fence Restrictions
Mr. Foegler noted that a memo has been provided to Council from the Law Duector and the
Planning Department about this matter. At the time of rezoning of Brighton Park, a condition was
imposed and accepted by the applicant relating to the implementation of fence standards similaz to
those in Indian Run Meadows. The specific language within the condition made reference to
imposing deed restrictions or covenants similar to those. The Indian Run Meadows restrictions were
actually part of the zoning text and therefore have the weight of zoning. The language in the
Brighton Pazk condition referenced these regulations as covenants or deed restrictions, and therefore
were not incorporated into the zoning text. Staff should have clarified this at the time. Provisions
for a homeowners association were established, however, an association has never been activated
and no funding has been established. There is reference in the declazations to requiring fence
approval, but no delineation of what those standards aze. Several options have been identified in the
memo, and administration would suggest that if Council desires to address fencing throughout
Dublin, staff would recommend that Council consider an ordinance amending Chapter 1309 of the
Dublin Code to make the fence standazds consistent with those of Indian Run Meadows. Staff would
also advocate working with Mr. Ruma to set up mechanisms to enforce proper regulations.
Mr. Smith noted that he would support addressing fencing regulations generically City-wide as stated
by Mr. Foegler.
" Mr. Zawaly stated that it would be difficult to amend the zoning text. This is a classic situation
where the developer verbally committed to enforce via deed restrictions what the intent of Council
was in this regazd.
Mrs. Boring asked if the City has deed restrictions on file for the residents to review.
Mr. Zawaly responded that even if the City has them on file, the City is unable to enforce the deed
restrictions.
Mr. Foegler added that the building permit window has information available regazding homeowners
associations and applicants aze encouraged to contact those associations regazding any design
development review standazds or covenants in place.
Mr. Zawaly maintained that in this case, the developer has "dropped the ball" and now the City is
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting Page 4 Meeting
DAYTON LEGAL BLANK
Held September 18, 1995 lg
in the position of trying to resolve the situation.
In response to Mr. Kranstuber, Mr. Foegler stated that staff should have explained to Council the
implications of deed restrictions versus zoning text restrictions at the time of rezoning. Secondly,
staff should have verified during the platting process that the appropriate covenants and deed
Po restrictions were recorded with the plat.
Mrs. King agreed that the developer did not follow through with the zoning condition by including
~x the fencing regulations in the deed restrictions.
Mr. Strip commented that this matter must be resolved within the neighborhood with the developer
and the association. Although Council may wish to resolve this, the legislative process was
completed four years ago.
Mr. Kranstuber noted that he believes the Ciry bears some responsibility for this situation.
Mr. Foegler pointed out that even had the condition been followed, the covenants been installed per
Indian Run, that had the Association been active, the City would still have issued the permit in the
same fashion.
Mr. Zawaly maintained that this is not a Council matter, that this is a matter which should have been
handled by the developer and by the Association.
Mrs. Stillwell commented that she believes fencing should be addressed at a broad level across the
City. Staff has recommended that the Law Director's office request that the developer address the
fencing issues, and she wonders if the City can require that the developer address these issues on
behalf of the residents of Brighton Park.
Mr. Smith responded that the 80 homeowners have some ability to enforce their own private deed
restrictions. The City can bring this to the developer's attention, but he would not recommend
,
getting in the middle of this type of litigation.
Mrs. King expressed her disappointment that there is no way for Council to enforce a policy which
was set. Council's vote for the rezoning was contingent upon the developer's willingness to carry
through with his commitments.
Mrs. Stillwell suggested that the Law Director meet with Mr. Ruma to resolve this matter. She
asked what will happen with the existing fences and the pending fence permits.
Mr. Foegler responded that there is no existing zoning violation for those installed. Some of those
pending have a setback problem regardless of the deed restriction. The City will issue permits that
comply with the City's zoning requirements. The staff provides notice to the applicant that there
are regulations in some subdivisions regarding design development standards.
Further discussion followed about the process for amending the deed restrictions by the homeowners.
Tony Devito. 5567 Barney Drive stated that he wants a privacy fence. Before he purchased his
home, he was not told that a 6-foot privacy fence would be prohibited. He purchased his home from
a builder not from the developer. Since there are two existing fences in the subdivision and since
he assumed that they were permitted, why should he now have to live with the consequences?
Mrs. King responded that this is a private matter between him and the other members of the
association.
Mr. Devito stated that if the City issues permits, the City should then can then police the matter as
well.
Mr. Zawaly pointed out that the deed restrictions are dated April of 1993 and Mr. Devito should
have been aware of those deed restrictions at the time of purchase.
a.
Mike Baker. 5551 Barney Drive stated that the intent of Council in 1991 was for Mr. Ruma to
impose deed restrictions for the homeowners association to enforce. There are other areas where
Mr. Ruma has not followed through. He believes the solution lies in the activation of a homeowners
association; that Council should enforce what their intent was; and that perhaps the existing fences
could be treated as anon-conforming use.
Mr. Baker confirmed that there have been no assessments for a homeowners association as outlined
in the deed restrictions.
Mr. Zawaly asked hypothetically, if the developer had done what had been requested by Council,
and if an association was in place and properly funded, would Mr. Baker be looking to the
association to take legal action to enforce the deed restrictions and to have the current fences
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting Page 5 Meeting
DAYTON LEGAL BLANK
Held September 18, 1995 ig
eliminated?
Mr. Baker responded that had there been a homeowners association in place, the fences would not
have been constructed. He would be now looking to the association to enforce the restrictions.
Iim Allen. 5610 Wilcox Road stated that when they moved into their house, he believed that their
deed restrictions prohibited chain link or stockade fences. Picket or split rail fences were not listed.
He has applied for a fence permit for a picket fence, but it was disapproved by the City. Brighton
Park is a rapidly growing subdivision of tract homes. They would like to build a picket fence to
protect their children from a neighborhood dog. If it was left up to the developer to enforce this,
why was it the homeowner's responsibility to contact the developer?
Mrs. King responded that it is standard practice for a PUD to establish a homeowners association
and for that association to be operated by the developer until at least 50 percent of the homes are
occupied by buyers. After a nucleus of homeowners exist, they take over control of the association.
In this case, it was not done correctly, and she is unwilling to allow this developer to operate without
correcting the situation.
Mr. Zawaly pointed out that the amendment process for the deed restrictions calls for a written
instrument to be executed by 75 percent of the homeowners.
Mr. Allen pointed out that he does not see stockade fences in other parts of Dublin and wonders why
they were permitted in Brighton Park.
Mrs. Allen commented that their fence permit was disapproved because of this controversy over the
fence restrictions.
Mr. Kranstuber acknowledged that staff had put fence permits on hold until the issue was resolved
at Council.
Mrs. King urged the homeowners to contact Mr. Ruma in regard to their fence permit since the
homeowners association must approve the design.
Mr. Baker commented that three different home builders are represented here and each told the
buyers different things about fences.
Mr. Zawaly noted that upon reading further into the deed restrictions, he finds that the amendment
process cannot take place until after 2013 unless there are enough lot owners to constitute control
of the association.
Mr. Kranstuber added that this points out another example of why private entities should not do
public functions -people expect to get these answers at City Hall.
Mr. Zawaly moved that the Public Services Committee, with the assistance of staff, consider and
make a recommendation for the feasibility of a new fence ordinance in Dublin.
Mr. Kranstuber seconded the motion.
Mr. Strip asked for clarification that this would be to study the feasibility, not to propose a new
fence ordinance.
Mr. Zawaly agreed.
Mr. Strip suggested that other cities and suburbs of Dublin's size be contacted to see how they
handle these matters.
Mrs. Stillwell commented that perhaps the Community Development Committee would be a more
° appropriate body to review this.
Mr. Zawaly agreed.
Mrs. Boring commented that this would be a similar issue to the appearance Code which would fall
under the Community Development Committee purview.
Mr. Zawaly amended his motion that this matter be referred to the Community Development
Committee.
Mr. Kranstuber seconded the amended motion.
Vote on the motion -Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Kranstuber, yes; Mr. Strip, yes; Mrs. Stillwell, yes;
Mrs. King, yes; Mr. Zawaly, yes.
Mrs. Stillwell moved to have staff meet with the developer to resolve the issue and report back to
Council.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting Page 6 Meeting
DAYTON LEGAL BLANK
Held September 18, 1995 19
Mr. Zawaly seconded the motion.
Vote on the motion - Mr. Strip, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mrs. Stillwell, yes; Mr. Zawaly, yes; Mr.
Kranstuber, yes; Mrs. King, yes.
Mrs. Stillwell added that, pending the result of this meeting, Council can then take further action.
She would reserve the right to recommend some future action on this matter.
x - Brief discussion followed regazding enforcement of zoning conditions.
Mrs. King urged the residents to keep in contact with Council and staff regazding this issue.
Council Roundtable (cont.)
Mrs. King:
1. Thanked staff for their prompt installation of the temporary signal at Bard Road and
Riverside Drive.
2. Noted that she has been working with staff to resolve a ditch issue on Wilcox Road in front
of Mr. Tiberi's house. The ditch is steep and difficult to mow safely, and she is requesting
a letter from the City Manager to Mr. Tiberi regazding: 1) can the slope of the ditch be
modified to make it safe to maintain; (2) whether or not there aze funds appropriated as part
of the annual CIP for ditch enclosure; (3) whether or not it would be appropriate to have this
project pursued under those funds; and (4) what ordinance gives a private property owner
the responsibility to maintain a public ditch in the public right-of--way? She would appreciate
a prompt resolution of this from staff and asked that Council be copied on the response.
3. There aze a number of properties within the City that still have old township zoning
classifications. There are areas south of Post, north of 33, east of Avery, west of 270 that
are still zoned Limited Industrial. She proposes that the City initiate a rezoning on all the
parcels within that area to perhaps Suburban Office to remove some of the uncertainty and
to foster the type of development envisioned for the azea. She clarified that only the LI
parcels would be included unless there are other areas with equally outdated classifications.
Mrs. King then moved that all land south of Post Road, north of 33, east of Avery and west of 270
that is currently zoned Limited Industrial or other township zoning classification be proposed for
rezoning through aCity-sponsored rezoning to Suburban Office.
Mr. Strip seconded the motion, suggesting that a staff review be provided before a rezoning is
initiated.
Mrs. King accepted the amendment.
Mr. Foegler stated that staff will review the area and identify the zoning classifications.
Mrs. Stillwell suggested that the Post Road residents be provided with an opportunity to comment
prior to presentation of a rezoning to Council.
Mrs. King agreed, and asked that contact be made with all of the landowners impacted by this. A
city-sponsored rezoning would be financially advantageous for the landowners.
Mr. Strip seconded the motion as amended.
Mr. Zawaly asked if this would affect any currently pending rezonings such as the SuperAmerica
rezoning.
Mrs. King responded that it is not intended to affect it.
Mr. Foegler stated that aCity-initiated review and rezoning process would take many months.
Mrs. King clarified that her intent is to address parcels other than the SuperAmerica pazcel.
Mrs. King amended her motion to exclude any parcels involved in pending rezonings.
Mr. Strip seconded the amended motion.
Vote on the motion - Mr. Kranstuber, yes; Mr. Strip, yes; Mr. Zawaly, yes; Mrs. King, yes; Mrs.
Boring, yes; Mrs. Stillwell, yes.
,
4. Mrs. King asked that staff respond to Mazge Rosher's and her own request about the traffic
signal needed at Glick and 745.
Mr. Foegler responded that staff has sent correspondence to the state about this matter and
will follow up.
Mrs. Stillwell noted that Mr. Dobbs of the Dublin Baptist Church is present for an item under
"Other" and suggested that this item be moved up on the agenda ahead of the legislative portion.
There was no objection from Council.
Discussion of Fee Waivers for Dublin Baptist Church
Mr. Foegler stated that the City has received a request from the church asking for some relief from
the water and/or sewer service chazges imposed in terms of tap fees and capacity chazges for the
proposed expansion of the church. He noted that the fees estimated by the applicant's engineer aze
incorrect -the $29,405 figure should be $26,732 and the sanitary capacity chazges for the Dublin
RECORD OF PROCEED[NGS
Minutes of Dublin Ciry Council Meeting Page 7 Meeting
DAYTON LEGAL BLANK
Held September 18, 1995 19
portion in 1995 is $27,627. The water and sewer capacity chazges and user fees are included by
reference in the MSI study, and staff believes that the provision for waiver in the MSI ordinance
applies and therefore the applicant was made awaze of this opportunity. The specific provision in
the ordinance provides that fees can be waived for economic development opportunities as an
incentive or in the case of undue hazdship. Staff has indicated that Administration is not
recommending approval of this fee waiver, consistent with previous requests for waiver. Staff has
concerns about setting a precedent for establishing fee waivers for tap chazges which could become
difficult to consider in the future. The fee contemplated here is fora 3-inch line, and the basis for
the fee waiver is that the only time the peak demand would exist would be on Sunday. Staff s
concern is that this is a capacity charge, and those charges are based on what the peak demand is
for many different types of users. The fact that the usage will be less on the remaining 5 or 6 days
will result in a lower quarterly user fee. Fee waiver requests from other entities such as the Dublin
schools, the township fire department have been previously not supported by staff.
Following review of the provisions for fee waivers, Mrs. King noted that the ordinance requires that
the City Manager recommend a waiver. There seems to be a procedural issue here.
Mr. Strip noted that the waiver is to be voted upon at the Council meeting following the
recommendation for waiver from the Ciry Manager.
Jim Dobbs. Chairman of the Trustees of the Dublin Baptist Church stated that there aze discrepancies
in the numbers due to a 10 percent overhead fee included by the contractor. They have compazed
their usage to a similaz 55,000 square foot building occupied by a business for a 40-hour week and
believe the fees should be less for the church. He recognizes there is a capacity factor involved as
well.
Mr. Strip asked what size of fee waiver the church is requesting.
Mr. Dobbs responded that the total fees involved aze $54,359 and they aze seeking any type of relief
from the fees.
Mrs. Stillwell asked if they have approached Columbus for a waiver for the same reasons.
Mr. Dobbs responded that they have not.
Mr. Foegler stated that staff has indicated to Mr. Dobbs that Columbus has a cleaz policy that they
do not make exceptions to tap fees.
Mr. Strip asked how Council will then deal with waivers requested by other churches being
constructed in Dublin.
Mr. Dobbs responded that the rates are azbitrazy and do not take into account usage. Another
church could make the same case for relief based upon usage. They aze asking to be treated
differently not because they are a church, but because their use of water and sewer service will be
much less.
Mr. Strip stated that the chazges would then be based upon usage and not upon capacity which is
the basis for the structure of fees.
Mr. Kranstuber commented that he believes it is within Council's power to declaze this a hazdship
if they see fit. It does not necessazily set a precedent which Council must follow in the future.
Mrs. King noted that the ordinance does not define a hardship. Technically, a hazdship waiver
cannot be granted under the ordinance unless it is recommended by the Manager.
Mr. Smith does not believe this technicality prevents Council from considering the request tonight.
There should be some criteria established for hazdship waivers.
Mrs. Boring noted that this church has been through an extremely long rezoning process and in fact
hired a second architect during the process. Thus, she sees a potential hardship case, since the fees
have increased for water and sewer since the rezoning process was initiated.
Mr. Foegler responded that the sewer capacity charges in 1994 would have been $4,000 less and the
water capacity chazges would have been the same. In 1993, the water chazges would have been
$2,7001ess and the sewer charges would have been an additional $4,000 less.
Mr. Zawaly commented on the rezoning process, stating that he does not see this as a hazdship for
the applicant. Council expects the Commission to do their job well and this involves a rigorous
process at times. In this case, the process worked and the final product is a much better project.
He is also aware that St. Brigid Church will be bringing a new school and educational center project
and they may then expect relief as well. He sees this as a taxpayer issue and he does not see
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting Page 8 Meeting
DAYTON LEGAL BLANK
Held September 18, 1995 19
hardship. A good precedent must be established in this case.
Mrs. Boring agreed, as noted by the applicant, that the resulting project was of better quality. The
issue remains that the length of time for the process was unexpected, thus delaying the application
for tap fees.
Mr. Strip stated that he would personally have no problem in granting relief if Council establishes
a separate tier for religious institutions. To pick and choose, however, would create problems and
-3 it should be done for all or none.
Mr. Smith noted that setting up classes of groups for fee waivers would create constitutional
problems in terms of legislating policies for religious institutions.
Mrs. Stillwell agreed that standards have been established and it is fair to treat all equally.
Mrs. Boring suggested a $4,000 reduction of fees based on the fees in place at the time they began
the rezoning process.
Mr. Zawaly stated that this could establish some precedent in fixing fees based upon the beginning
of the rezoning application. He believes a valid azgument could be made here.
Mrs. Boring moved that the water and sewer capacity chazges levied upon this application be those
in effect in 1994 resulting in a $4,000 reduction of fees from the 1995 fee levels.
Mr. Kranstuber seconded the motion.
Mr. Zawaly commented that he has some hesitation in voting without input from staff on the
implications of this waiver. Council must be aware that they aze setting a type of precedent.
Mr. Foegler stated that the other waivers granted to date under the MSI fee ordinance related to
appeals fees or permit fees in cases where staff felt the City had some responsibility for the delays.
It has not been done for sewer and water fees. He added that in the very few cases where Council
has modified or waived the tap fees, Council has taken action to protect the integrity of the water
and sewer funds by requiring that income tax funds generated from a project be earmazked to
reimburse. In this case, the standazd from the previous yeaz is being applied and fees aze not
actually being waived so this policy would not apply.
Mr. Zawaly asked what Mr. Foegler's recommendation would be in this case.
Mr. Foegler responded that he is not clear about the nature of the delays for the rezoning, but if in
fact there was some level of City responsibility that resulted in a longer than reasonable process for
this development, that would be specific enough of a reason.
Mr. Dobbs commented briefly on the problems encountered during the rezoning process. He had
done everything requested by staff and had staff's recommendation of approval at Planning
Commission. The Commission established a subcommittee to try to work through the issues, three
sepazate hearings were held at the Commission, and all of these delays resulted in cost increases.
Mr. Zawaly commented that based upon the testimony tonight, he will vote in favor of this waiver
due to the nature of the specific circumstances of this application.
Vote on the motion - Mr. Kranstuber, yes; Mrs. Stillwell, yes; Mr. Strip, yes; Mr. Zawaly, yes;
Mrs. Boring, yes; Mrs. King, yes.
Legislation
Ordinance No. 45-95 - An Ordinance Authorizing the City Manager to Enter into a Cooperative
Agreement with the City of Columbus for an Intersection Improvement at Frantz Road and
Hayden Run Road. (Tabled until September 18, 1995)
Mrs. Stillwell reported that she would like to keep this on the table until the October 2 meeting. At
that point, the agreement will be brought to Council for a vote. She has been working with the
~K ' residents on this matter.
Mrs. Stillwell moved to table this until October 2, 1995.
a Mr. Strip seconded the motion.
Vote on the motion - Mr. Zawaly, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mrs. King, yes; Mr. Strip, yes; Mrs.
Stillwell, yes.
Ordinance No. 91-95 - An Ordinance Authorizing Bonds to be Obtained for the City Manager,
the Director of Finance, the Assistant Director of Finance and the Tax Administrator and
Setting the Amount of Those Bonds. (Third Reading)
Mrs. Stillwell asked about the amount of the premium and from what account this will be paid.
Ms. Grigsby stated that the premium would be paid from the insurance account, but she does not
have the exact figures. The bonds are set at $250,000, so the cost is minimal.
Ms. Crandall reported that there will be no cost to the City this fiscal yeaz, and the amount will be
reflected in the 1996 budget to be presented to Council in November.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of Dublin Ciry Council Meeting Page 9 Meeting
DAYTON LEGAL BLANK
Held September 18, 1995 ig
Vote on the ordinance - Mr. Zawaly, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mrs. Stillwell, yes; Mr. Strip, yes;
Mrs. King, yes; Mr. Kranstuber, yes.
Ordinance No. 93-95 - An Ordinance to Amend Certain Sections of the Codified Ordinances
of the City of Dublin Pertaining to the Penalties for the Illegal Operation of a Motor Vehicle
in a Construction Zone. (Third Reading)
There was no additional information from staff.
Mrs. Stillwell asked why indigents are treated as a separate class in this ordinance.
Mr. Smith responded that this is required under state statute, and alternate arrangements are made
for those determined to be indigent. This provision has never been used in Dublin.
Vote on the ordinance - Mr. Kranstuber, yes; Mr. Strip, yes; Mr. Zawaly, yes; Mrs. King, yes;
Mrs. Stillwell, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes.
Ordinance No. 9495 - An Ordinance Authorizing the City Manager to Enter into a
Cooperative Agreement Between the Ohio Department of Transportation and the City of
Dublin, Ohio for the Bridge Deck Widening at Rings Road Over I-270. (Second Reading)
Mr. Foegler stated that this contains a standard cooperative agreement between the City and ODOT
which provides for the Ciry to contribute the difference in cost between the proposed deck
replacement ODOT had contemplated for the Rings Road overpass at I-270 and a widening of that
overpass to the City's standards with regard to athree-lane, bikepath and sidewalk construction. The
cost to the City will be $500,000.
There will be a third reading of the ordinance at the October 2, 1995 Council meeting.
Ordinance No. 95-95 - An Ordinance Accepting the Lowest and Best Bid for M.L. "Red"
Trabue Nature Reserve -Phase 2/ Earlsford Bikepath Connector. (Second Reading)
Ms. Jordan stated that staff is requesting emergency action on this ordinance at the time of third
reading in order to complete construction by December 1. She then described the location of this
bikepath connector.
Mrs. King asked about the status of the map showing the missing links of the bikepath.
Mr. Foegler responded that staff is coordinating a meeting date with the Service Committee for this
presentation in October.
There will be a third reading of the ordinance at the October 2, 1995 Council meeting.
Ordinance No. 96-95 - An Ordinance Accepting the Lowest and Best Bid for Road Salt
and Authorizing the City Manager to Enter into a Contract Governing the Procurement of Said
Salt. (Second Reading)
There was no additional information presented on this ordinance.
There will be a third reading of the ordinance at the October 2, 1995 Council meeting.
Ordinance No. 99-95 (Amended) - An Ordinance Amending Ordinance No. 2490, Griggs
Reservoir Lease Agreement, and Authorizing the City Manager to ~ecute a License
Agreement. (Second Reading)
Mrs. King noted that an amended version of this ordinance was presented to Council tonight.
Ms. Jordan explained that the amendment involves Section 2 where the payment of a license fee of
$5,500 was eliminated since those fees would be paid to the City of Columbus as the property
owner. The ordinance provides additional parking spots for the Kiwanis Riverway Park and
handicapped ramp access to the park and at the same time provides parking for the Neat Nests
project along the river.
There will be a third reading of the ordinance at the October 2, 1995 Council meeting.
Resolution No. 22-95 - A Resolution Accepting the Amounts and Rates as Determined by
the Budget Commission and Authorizing the Necessary Tax Levies and Certifying them to the
County Auditor, and Declaring an Emergency. (Second Reading)
Ms. Grigsby noted that the ORC requires that this resolution be adopted and file with the county
auditor's office by October 1. Staff is requesting adoption by emergency to comply with the State's
timeframes.
Mr. Strip moved to waive the three-time reading and treat this as emergency legislation.
Mr. Kranstuber seconded the motion.
Vote on the motion -Mrs. Stillwell, yes; Mr. Strip, yes; Mrs. King, yes; Mr. Zawaly, yes; Mrs.
Boring, yes; Mr. Kranstuber, yes.
Vote on the resolution - Mr. Kranstuber, yes; Mr. Zawaly, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mrs. Stillwell,
yes; Mrs. King, yes; Mr. Strip, yes.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of Dublin Ciry Council Meeting Page 10 Meeting
DAYTON LEGAL BLANK
Held September 18, 1995 ig
Resolution No. 25-95 - A Resolution Adopting a Visioning Statement for the Community
Plan. ()First Reading)
Mrs. Stillwell introduced the resolution.
Ms. Clarke stated that the Chairman of the Steering Committee for the Community Plan, Dave King,
and staff coordinator Lisa Fierce plan to address Council on this matter at the second reading on
October 2.
Mrs. Stillwell commented that the document is dated September 14, while the reference in Section
1 of the ordinance is September 12.
Mr. Zawaly commented that he has had difficulty with exactly "what" the vision is after reading the
statement several times. He will be looking for more information prior to the vote upon this
resolution.
Resolution No. 26-95 -A Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to File an Application and
Enter into an Agreement with the Ohio Department of Transportation for the Purpose of
Acquiring Funds Through the Transportation Enhancement Program for the Landscaping of
the I-270 and US 33/SR 161 Interchange, and Declaring an Emergency. (First Reading)
Mr. Zawaly introduced the resolution.
Mr. Foegler stated that this is a resubmission of a request to obtain federal funding for this project.
He apologized for bringing these resolutions to Council which require emergency action, and staff
will bring these to Council earlier in the process in the future.
Mr. Strip noted that following discussion with Mr. Foegler of some issues raised in a memo to
Council earlier today, he is now comfortable with voting in favor of the resolution.
Mr. Zawaly moved to waive the three-time reading rule and treat this as emergency legislation.
Mr. Kranstuber seconded the motion.
Vote on the motion -Mrs. Boring, yes; Mrs. King, yes; Mr. Strip, yes; Mrs. Stillwell, yes; Mr.
Kranstuber, yes; Mr. Zawaly, yes.
Vote on the resolution - Mr. Zawaly, yes; Mrs. King, yes; Mr. Kranstuber, yes; Mrs. Stillwell, yes;
Mr. Strip, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes.
Mrs. King asked if endorsement letters accompanying the application would be helpful.
Mrs. Stillwell responded that letters of support would probably be helpful and asked that Council
be copied on the letters.
Resolution No. 27-95 - A Resolution Designating the City Manager to Act as the City's
Official Representative and Authorizing the City to File Multiple Applications and Enter into
Agreements with the Ohio Public Works Commission for the Purpose of Acquiring Grant Funds
Through the State Capital ImprovementProgram/Local Transportation Improvement Program,
and Declaring an Emergency. (first Reading)
Mrs. Stillwell introduced the resolution.
Mr. Foegler explained that state funding is being sought for the Coffman Road widening from Brand
to Perimeter and the Perimeter Drive extension to Coffman Road, for the Frantz Road/SR 161/Post
Road intersection improvements and for Emerald Parkway between Coffman Road and Dublin Road
- Phase II. These applications are consistent with the City's capital improvements budget in terms
of dollar amounts. Staff is requesting approval of this resolution by emergency action.
Mr. Zawaly moved to waive the three-time reading rule and treat this as emergency legislation.
Mr. Strip seconded the motion.
Vote on the motion - Mr. Kranstuber, yes; Mrs. King, yes; Mr. Zawaly, yes; Mrs. Stillwell, yes;
Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Strip, yes.
Vote on the resolution -Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Strip, yes; Mr. Zawaly, yes; Mrs. Stillwell, yes;
Mrs. King, yes; Mr. Kranstuber, yes.
Ordinance No. 100-95 - An Ordinance Vacating a Sanitary Sewer Easement in Reserve A
of Shamrock II.
. Mr. Strip introduced the ordinance.
Mr. Foegler stated that this ordinance provides for the vacation of a sanitary sewer easement since
the sanitary sewer was rerouted with the Safety Solutions construction.
Mr. Zawaly asked if there are any safety concerns involved or any residual liability for the Ciry.
Mr. Foegler responded that most of the sewer line was removed and the rest was filled with concrete
to guard against infiltration. Vacation of the public easement eliminates any public interest in this
private property.
There will be a second reading of the ordinance at the October 2 Council meeting.
Ordinance No. 101-95 - An Ordinance Authorizing the Replacement of the Roof, Rooftop
HVAC Units and Related Systems/Equipment and Phase One Installation of Screening for
Rooftop Units for the 5800 Building, Waiving Competitive Bidding Requirements, and
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting Page 11 Meeting
DAYTON LEGAL BLANK
Held September 18, 1995 19
Declaring an Emergency. (First Reading)
Mr. Kranstuber introduced the ordinance.
Mr. Foegler stated that the 1995 budget appropriated $185,700 for parking lot improvements at the
5800 Building. A memo was sent to Council recently stating that staff was evaluating whether the
roof system could last until 1996. Due to the condition of the roof and the need to preserve the
property, staff is recommending that bidding be waived and that dollars be reappropriated for the
i roof repairs. It is also recommended that the HVAC mechanicals on the roof and Phase 1 of the
roof top screening be installed simultaneously to minimize the impact on the new roof. Staff is
requesting that Council have a first reading tonight, and staff will bring a summary and tabulation
of quotes taken and recommendation of award.
Mr. Strip asked if funds are set aside for the 5800 Building for next year.
Mr. Foegler responded that those funds are in the capital budget adopted by Council.
Staff will be requesting emergency action at the October 2 meeting.
Mr. Strip added that information is to be provided about the screening figures -his concern is how
many phases there are and the grand total.
Mr. Foegler responded that the structural systems to support the future screening system will be
installed now. Staff will provide further information for the next reading.
OTHER
Public Easement and Dedication Plat for Villages at Heatherstone
Mr. Foegler stated that this is a mechanism to transfer the public easements for the sanitary sewer
and some additional roadway dedication associated with this residential development located just east
of Perimeter Lakes apartments.
Mrs. Stillwell moved to accept the plat.
Mr. Zawaly seconded the motion.
Vote on the motion - Mr. Kranstuber, yes; Mr. Strip, yes; Mrs. King, yes; Mr. Zawaly, yes; Mrs.
Boring, yes; Mrs. Stillwell, yes.
Council Committees
Mr. Zawaly, Charter Review and Revision Commission stated that they will meet on Wednesday at
6:30 p.m. to review the suggestions made by Mr. Gotherman and Judge Close. He hopes to have
information prepared for Council to review on September 25.
Mrs. King, Community Development Committee stated that the Committee will meet on Wednesday,
September 27 at 7:30 a.m. She requested that, if possible, staff provide information to the
Committee on the proposed motion for the City sponsored rezoning discussed tonight.
Mr. Foegler agreed to bring zoning maps to verify the areas involved.
Mrs. Stillwell, Administrative Committee stated that the Committee will meet on September 27
immediately following the Development Committee.
Mr. Kranstuber, Public Services Committee stated that they will meet in mid-October to discuss
bikepath prioritization and budget implications. He asked about the status of the Muirfield
maintenance agreement which was discussed with the Committee some time ago.
Mr. Foegler responded that Mr. McDaniel has met with Larry Holbrook of the Muirfield
Association and they have identified the remaining issues.
Mr. Kranstuber asked that Mr. Foegler check on the status and report back to him as Public Services
Chairperson. If necessary, the matter can be reviewed again by the Committee.
,
The meeting was adjourned at 10:35 p.m.
Vice Mayor -Pre ' ing Officer
Clerk of Council