Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/15/1986 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 197 Minutes of Dublin Village Council Meeting ~ICS lV1 eeting National Graphics Corp., Cols., O. Form No. 1097 ~ Held September 15, 1986 19 The regularly scheduled meeting of the Dublin Village Council was called to order by Mayor Michael Close at 7:30 P.M. on Monday, September 15, 1986. Mr. Thornton led the Pledge of Allegiance. Members of Council present were: Mr. Amorose, Mayor Close, Mr. Jankowski, Ms. Maurer, Mr. Rozanski, Mr. Sutphen, and Mr. Thornton. Mr. Smith, Law Director, was present as was Mr. Sheldon, Village Manager. Members of Village staff present were: Mr. Bowman, Ms. Clarke, Mr. Harding, Ms. Jordan, Ms. Prushing, and Mr. Warner. Mr. Amorose moved to approve the minutes of the September 2, 1986 Council meeting. Mr. Jankowski seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous in favor of the motion. Mr. Amorose moved to pay the bills. Mr. Thornton requested clarification regarding the $1126.00 spent for fire hydrant repair and maintenance, and asked if that cost should not be re- imbursed because the damage was done as a result of an accident by a careless driver. Ms. Prushing said that she would check the accident report. Mr. Sutphen seconded the motion to pay the bills. The vote was unanimous in favor of paying the bills. Ordinance No. 58-86 - Land Dedication or a Fee in Lieu Thereof. Public Hearing. Mayor Close announced the Council Rules of Order on Public Hearings. Mr. Jeffrey Rich and Mr. Greg Stype registered as proponents. Mr. Bruce Burkholder, representing the Building Industry Association (BIA), registered as an opponent. Mr. Greg Stype, Village bond counsel, said that he was in attendance at the request of the Village Law Director, Mr. Stephen Smith, to confirm Mr. Smith's thoughts regarding the ordinance. Mr. Smith had the following comments: 1. The ordinance was originally presented to Council several months ago by the School Board. Mr. Rich was the author of the original ordinancel, which was defeated. 2. After the defeat of that ordinance meetings were held with Mr. Rich and Mr. Burkholder, and with the Village's bond counsel, Mr. Stype. 3. Mr. Smith also met with other independent attorneys. 4. The question was asked whether this ordinance would stand a test in a court of law. 5. Mr. Smith said that it is his opinion that this ordinance is the best the Village can do with a situation that has never been before the court in the State of Ohio. 6. The ordinance is an attempt to use Section 755.16 of the Revised Code which is commonly referred to as the "Cooperation Section" between municipalities and school boards in an effort to increase the amount of land and/or fee that developers should pay the community, leaving the control of that with the Village, not with the School Board, in an effort to minimize the amount of money that the Village has to spend to develop additional recreational facilities for its residents and for the use of its residents. 7. He said that he has had conversations with developers and that they have suggested that the ordinance, in its concept, would also stand the test of the Court. However, they have suggested some changes in the amounts of fees that were included in the ordinance as well as perhaps the addition of commercial space also being required to contribute to the green space and/or fees. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 199 Al inutes of Dublin Village Council Meeting -~ AJ eeting National Graphics Corp., Cols., O. Form No. 1097 ~ Held September 15, 1986 19 r ~ I , I I I 1 Page Two tf!II'i'l""'~"" ..., , Mr. Smith said that he believes that the ordinance as written, based upon the cases that have been interpreted regarding that section of the Code dealing with cooperation, that if challeneged the Village has a very good chance of being successful. Mr. Stype said that he believed that there were two points that should be expressed: A. The research done leads them to believe that the Village does have the power to impose the lands set aside or the fees in lieu thereof, particularly in light of its extraordinary growth and what the Village, has done historically in this type of situation. B. Having accepted fees in lieu of lands set aside, the Village does have the authority to contribute a portion of those fees or a portion of the land that it receives for joint recreation projects with the school district. Mr. Bruce Burkholder, representing the Building Industry Association, had the following comments to make: A. It is their opinion that this would be a circumvention of the law, and that it would not withstand a challenge in the court system. B. They believe that the green space statute needs to be treated inde- pendently. C. They do object to the use of the Dublin green space statute to apparently exact additional land to assist the school board (a problem which they acknowledge does exist) and do oppose the method for the resolution. D. He said that they believe that theri has to be an additional need for parks and recreational facilities in the Village in order to justify or authorize Village Council to increase the green space statute. E. They would not be in opposition to enforcing the green space statute, but if alterations were to be made to the statute for increasing it, that there should be a study commissioned. F. The current amount of green space in Dublin exceeds the current national standards. Responding to a question from Mr. Thornton, Mr. Burkholder said that he felt that there would be a strong likelihood that the BrA would challenge the ordinance if it were passed, or that an individual developer or a group of developers would. Mr. Burkholder said that he would be willing to do a one page synopsis on the case law in the State of Ohio. Mr. Smith asked Mr. Burkholder if he did not feel that the Village can cooperate with the schools under 755.16 and acquire land and do joint projects. Mr. Burkholder said that it is their position that the Village can jointly operate facilities, pursuant to that statute. Mr. Smith then asked him if it was his position that the Village cannot acquire and operate or construct, build or maintain recreational facilities. Mr. Burkholder said that they would not stipulate that there could be a joint acquisition, but that there could be a joint operation. Mr. Rich, attorney for the School Board, had the following comments: A. This is the greatest piece of tax saving legislation, if it is passed, that the Dublin Village Council will have an opportunity to consider, for the following reasons: RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 201 Minutes of Dublin Village Council Meeting ~ Meeting National Graphics Corp., Cols., O. Form No. 1097 ~ 1I eld September 15, 1986 19 1~~ I I i I I ! I ! Page Three B. If this legislation is passed it will minimize the effect of an increase in taxes for new schools because there will be an alternative method of assisting in the development of the land acquisition (working with Council) to provide sites that both the community and the schools will have available. , The cost under the present ordinance, if in fact the maximum of I $1,000.00 was passed along to the owners of the property (assumin$ a 10% loan for 30 years) would be 29i per day. ! Believe the building industry is being shortsighted in its opposition i because not only will they be able to charge an additional $1,000.00 . for a house but will probably be able to charge additional amounts because of the expanded amenities available in the community. These are the persons that are advertising Dublin schools, Dublin community, etc. but then want to absolve themselves of the responsi- bility (a modest one) for making certain that the facilities are "on line" that are necessary to have a high quality of living. 2. 1. C. Mayor Close said that he could not see where anything had been substantial- ly changed from the original piece of legislation to the current one, and that created a problem for him. Mr. Rich said that the change was extremely substantial. The current ordinance is a one step process requiring that green space be taken "and that is all". It does not require that it be used for the school (that is the major difference. Mr. Thornton asked Mr. Rich if his employers would be willing to share the cost of defending a suit should the need arise. Mr. Rich said that the school board, at the very least, would be an amicus curiae in any litigation that may result. They would be a "friend of the court" - filing of briefs, doing whatever is possible. He did say that whether or not they could become a formal part to the action he did not know. Mayor Close expressed another concern, saying that he believed that the Village has a very strong green space ordinance which has resulted in substantially more park and green areas in the community than anywhere else in the Central Ohio area. He said that his concern was that if the Village passes the ordinance,they perhaps could be vulnerable to losing what the Village has in way of green space ordinances. The next acreage developed then perhaps could be developed without parks, without bikeways, and without the green space that the community has been able to insure that it has in the part that has been developed. Ms. Maurer expressed the following concerns: A. The constitutionality of the proposed ordinance. B. Also concerned about the original objection that was expressed which said that there are certain ways in which schools can tax, those ways being established by State law. C. The previous ordinance was found objectionable in that it constituted a tax for the schools. D. The property tax has the advantage of directing its tax at both residential homeowners, businesses, corporations, and laboratories. E. This statute directs the fees solely at residences and residential developers. In that respect it greatly differs from the intent of the property tax that is the primary source of income for the schools. F. The legislative history arising out of the previous ordinance which was unconstitutional, that it is going to be "killed in court" by that same legislative history. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 203 1\1 inutes of Dublin Village Council Meeting ~~tb Meeting National Graphics Corp., Cols., O. Form No. 1097 ~ Held September 15, 1986 19 t= Page Four Mr. Rich said that the history of the Ohio General Assembly and their concern with the school systems and cities working together resulted in the legislation that is Revised Code Section 755.16 and that it is a vehicle for schools and for villages to work together. With regard to the legislative history of this legislation, the key word is "may". The Village does not have to give the money for the develop- ment of a joint school site - it is totally up to the Village. Mayor Close announced that the third and final reading will be held at the October 6th meeting of Council. He also asked the Law Director to draft a proposal to amend the ordinance to apply to commercial use also. He suggested that that be available for Council Members by Monday, September 22, 1986 so that they would have sufficient time for further study before the next Council meeting. Ii II Ii 11 j! ii I 1i TEFRA Heading - IDRB - River's Edge Project III. Ms. Rebecca Princehorn of Bricker and Eckler, bond counsel for this project was present at the meeting. She noted that the Planning and Zoning Commission of the Village had approved the project plan on May 8, 1986. She noted that the CIC approved it on June 19, 1986 and that it was induced on July 7, 1986. Ms. Princehorn said that the request is for $2,050,000.00 for the purpose of assisting River's Edge III Limited Partnership in the purpose of developing a five building 22,000 square foot office building facility. It was noted that there had been no changes since the project was first approved. Resolution No. 13-86 - Proposal for a "T-turnaround" on Macbeth Drive. Tabled. Mr. Amorose said that the area is an area with about 26 homes with lot sizes from one to three acres. The residents are hoping to build a T- turnaround at the north end of Macbeth Drive, and are asking that the Village vacate some ground so that Macbeth Drive cannot be extended to the north. It was noted that a large number of acres to the north have been purchased by a developer and that there is a possibility that it will be rezoned to a higher density. The homeowners are willing to give whatever land is necessary to build the turnaround. The Village has not expended any monies in the area, and the people are basically asking for $2,700.00 to engineer and construct the T-turnaround. Mr. Amorose said also that the homeowners were asking for some type of a mounding barrier at the end of the turnaround. The vote was unanimous in favor of the resolution. Ordinance No. 46-86 - Rezone .8 Acre on Darby Street, North of Bridge Street. Tabled. Mr. Bowman said that the easement is still not finalized; the bank is to survey the property, and the agreement has not been reached. He recommended keeping the ordinance on the table. Mr. Sutphen moved to table the ordinance indefinitely. Mr. Amorose seconded the motion. The vote was 7-0 in favor of tabling. Ordinance No. 67-86 - Adopt Chapter in Fire Protection Code Regarding Fireworks. Second Reading. The third reading was scheduled for Monday, October 6, 1986. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 205 Minutes of Dublin Village Council Meeting ~&r1CS AJeeting National Graphics Corp., Cols., O. Form No. 1097 ~ Held September u15L1986 19 -r= +- I I I 1 I Page Five Resolution No. 16-86 - Statement of Services for an Area Proposed for Annexation. Second Reading. Mr. Amorose moved to do away with the three time reading rule and treat as an emergency. Mr. Sutphen seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous in favor of doing away with the three time reading rule and treating as an emergency. The vote on the ordinance was 7-0 in favor. Ordinance No. 68-86 - Amend Section 1193. of Dublin Codified Ordinances Regarding Off-Street Parking. First Reading. Mr. Amorose introduced the ordinance. Mr. Rozanski asked about the requirements for a shopping center under 100,000 square feet; requirements for vehicle parking. Mr. Bowman said that that would be "lumped" under a general commercial category and that parking would be assigned - one parking space per 150 square feet of gross area plus another computation for storage areas. Mr. Amorose mentioned the fact that there are several churches in the area with gravel parking lots and Mr. Bowman said that the Village should be more restrictive with regard to paving of parking lots. Mayor Close suggested the following amendment, "commercial or business service unless it is otherwise specifically provided for herein, including shopping centers of under 100,000 square feet". This amendment is to be included on page eight, under 1193.13 (Minimum Number of Parking Spaces Required), Type of Use, Commercial, Shopping Center. Mr. Amorose moved to include the amendment. Mr. Rozanski seconded the motion. The vote was 7-0 in favor of the amendment. The ordinance was referred to the Planning and Zoning Commission for their review and a report back to Council. Ordinance No. 69-86 - Amending 1986 Annual Appropriations. First Reading. Mr. Amorose introduced the ordinance. Ms. Prush~~~ directed Council's attention to her cover memorandum. 1. Mayor Close said that he would discuss item 1. 2. Engineering design costs and construction of an additional 6' of road- way to the Rubin Shopping Center, as well as an additional $11,000.00 to cover the cost of a final change order for the 1986 Street Improve- ment project and additional street lining costs. 3. $500.00 to cover the cost of an additional cash book and docket book for Mayor's Court. Mayor Close discussed the first item on the memorandum which was an proposed appropriation for $20,000.00 for an Ice Skate Rink Pilot Project. He said that he had discussed with Janet Jordan the possibility of installing an outdoor ice rink on existing tennis courts in the Village. It would involve building a frame, covering it with plastic, and putting white sand in to reflect the sun and water on top of that. That would give 30 to 60 dyas of usable ice time during the course of a given year. The proposal is essentially as follows - that if Dublin will provide for the $20,000.00 the Columbus Foundation will reimburse the Village the $20,000.00 for the capital costs and start-up costs for doing the project. The sole purpose would be to see whether or not in a community the size of Dublin there would be an interest in having outdoor ice skating available to the public RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 207 Alinutes of Dublin Village Council Meeting ~tb ZVl eel ing National Graphics Corp., Cols., O. Form No. 1097 ~ .~ at minimal or no cost. which will be given to Department. The Parks in its entirety. He the and -19--+= I I ! said that he would have some proposed contracts I Finance Director and to the Parks and Recreation I Recreation Department will outline the project I I I I II eld September 15, 1986 Page Six e'" Ms. Maurer said that she did not have enough information about the project to feel comforable with it, and said that even if the Village were to recoup the cost that there would probably be some operating costs involved for the Village. She also wondered if there would actually be 30 to 60 days of ice time in Central Ohio, and also wondered if the subject had been discussed by the Parks and Recreation Committee. Ms. the Ms. p"'- two the the for Mr. The Mayor Close said that the $20,000.00 appropriation means that the money will be available if the contracts are ultimately let. Mr. Jankowski said that he had no objection with the fund transfer, but said that he did object to the fact that no one on Council knew anything about the project. He said also that he was under the impression that the Columbus Foundation was a charitable organization and not involved in recreational projects. Maurer moved to amend the ordinance by striking the appropriation for Ice Skate Rink Pilot Project and keep the others. Maurer moved to amend the ordinance by separating the items out into separate ordinances - Ordinance No. 69-86(A), the appropriation for roadway widening and the Mayor's Court costs - Ordinance No. 69-86(B), appropriation for the Ice Skate Rink Pilot Project to be held over a second reading at the next meeting of Council. Sutphen seconded the motion. vote on the amendment was as follows: Mr. Jankowski, yes; Mayor Close, yes; Mr. Amorose, yes; Mr. Thornton, no; Ms. Maurer, yes; Mr. Rozanski, yes; Mr. Sutphen, yes. Mr. Amorose moved to do away with the three time reading rule and treat as an emergency (Ordinance No. 69-86(A). Mr. Sutphen seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous in favor. The vote on Ordinance No. 69-86(A) was 7-0 in favor. Resolution No. 17-86 - Accpeting Amounts and Rates from Budget Commission. First Reading. Mr. Amorose introduced the resolution. Mr. Tno"nton moved ~o do away with the three time reading rule and treat as an emergency. Mr. Rozanski seco~~ed the motion. The vote was 7-0 in favor of the motion. The vote was unanimous in favor of the resolution. '!h... J Resolution No. 18-86 - Issuance of Certificates of Appreciation from Village of Dublin. First Reading. Ms. Maurer introduced the resolution. Ms. Maurer said that these were the names of people and organizations that were submitted by the Village of Dublin Department Heads and Council Members as appropriate recipients of Certificates of Appreciation from the Village for gifts of property or service. Ms. Maurer moved to waive the three time reading rule and treat as an emergency. Mr. Sutphen seconded the motion. The vote was as follows on the motion: Mr. Amorose, yes; Mayor Close, yes; Mr. Jankowski, abstain; Ms. Maurer, yes; Mr. Rozanski, yes; Mr. Sutphen, yes; Mr. Thornton, yes. The vote on the resolution was: Mr. Thornton, yes; Mr. Sutphen, yes; Mr. Rozanski, yes; Ms. Maurer, yes; Mr. Jankowski, abstain; Mayor Close, yes; Mr. Amorose, yes. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 209 Minutes of Dublin Village Council Meeting ~~b M eei ing National Graphics Corp., Cols., O. Form No. 1097 ~ Held SeptembexL5, 1986 19 .. _nuT I -t I Page Seven Approval of Final Plat - The Woodlands Mr. Bowman said that the staff and the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval with the following four conditions: 1. That there be T-turnarounds at the end of the development. 2. That future walkway easements be made part of the future development. 3. Provide a drainage easement along lots 9, 11 and 12. 4. Need to comply with all the recommendations of the Village Engineer as construction begins. Mr. Amorose asked Mr. Warner to be sure that the engineering recommenda- tions are made in the field; that it could be very critical in this particular development. Mr. Amorose moved to approve the Final Plat - The Woodlands. Mr. Rozanski seconded the motion. The vote was 7-0 for approval. Approval of Final Plat - Donegal Cliffs Section 5. Mr. Thornton moved to approve the final plat. Mr. Jankowski seconded the motion. Mr. Bowman said that it was recommended for approval by both staff and the Planning and Zoning Commission, that there were three conditions which have been put on the plat, and that it is now approvable as recommended by the Planning and Zoning Commission. The vote was unanimous for approval. Approval of Final Plat - Earlington Village Section 3. Mr. Sutphen asked if this particular property owner owned the whole develop- ment. Mr. Bowman said that there is a problem with Section 4, but that he was sure that it was not a part of Section 3. Mr. Sutphen said that it was his understanding that some of the lots have been platted across a piece of property that is not owned by the developer at this point in time. Mrs. Headlee commented as follows: Mr. Bowman has assured her that that particular piece of property is not in Section 3. She also pointed out that if it is not in Section 4 that it has not had a public hearing, it has not had a rezoning, and it has not gone through the Earlington Village approval process. Mr. Warner said that it was not in Section 3. Mr. Sutphen moved to table until the October 6th meeting to give the Law Director an opportunity to look at the maps. Mr. Rozanski seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous in favor of tabling. Approval of Final Plat - Dublin Village Center. Ms. Maurer moved to approve the final plat. Mr. Jankowski seconded the motion. Mr. Rozanski expressed a concern as to whether or not the roadways are wide enough for the projected traffic that the project will handle. Mr. Bowman said that the Village does have a commitment from the developer to widen Dublin Center Drive if an additional lane were to be required. He also said that it has been planned that the traffic will be distributed enough so that anyone point should not be overly impacted. The developers are also negotiating for more property; namely along Federated as it comes in off of Sawmill Road to put in an additional lane on that section, if it comes in. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 2 1 1 Al inutes of Dublin Village Council Meeting ~&r1CS Meeting National Graphics Corp., Cols., O. Form No. 1097 ~ Held September 15, 1986 19 ~ Page Eight Mr. Amorose said that he thought the street should be widened "up front" so that it does not have to be torn up subseqnetly if it needs to be widened. He also said that he thought that there should be some signaliza- tion put in at the intersection of Federated Boulevard and Dublin Center Drive. It was pointed out that the Tuller Road entrance would be essentially a right in/right out only; that there will be no left turns out of Tuller onto Sawmill Road. Mr. Bowman said that the final plat is in conformance with the preliminary plat. Mr. Warner said that he would review the radius at the corner of Dublin Center Drive and Tuller Road when the plans come in for Tuller Road to Riverside Drive. It was pointed out that in the preliminary plat that was approved in April that it was agreed that the roadway would be 36' and that the developer agreed that he would widen same when the Village deemed that it was necessary. Mr. Smith said that since the final plat was in conformance with the preliminary plat that it should be approved as presented. He did say that the Village can indicate to the developer what has happened in the four to six months in the surrounding area and because they now have some commitment from users that they did not have before (hotel and restaurant) that if in fact the Village Planner and Engineer determine that the road should be widened now, that they would (even if reluctantly) widen the road now. He said that he thought that the final plat had to be approved, but that Council could direct that if it is the determination of the Planner and Engineer that the widening is needed now that it be done. Mr. Amorose asked if the David Road residents had been totally satisfied. Mr. Bowman said that there were two representatives of David Road at the last Planning and Zoning Commission meeting that spoke with the applicant. The mounding is be put in place now, and he has received no telephone calls from the residents regarding same. Mr. Amorose also asked if the applicant has agreed that the gateway will contain some stone. Mr. Bowman said that he had not spoken to the applicant about that issue. With regard to the street tree planting along Sawmill Road and S.R. 161, Mr. Bowman said that he would suggest the identification of a street tree on Tuller Road where the outparcels will be located so that the planting will be consistent. He said that he thought that it was the expectation that when the main body of the shopping center came in, that that was when the applicant would do the landscape plan for the entire center. He noted that there is a commitment on the part of the Dublin developers as well as the Columbus developers to widen Sawmill Road, and that they have collected nearly $900,000.00. He suggested that it would probably be best to do the street tree planting after the widening takes place. The direction was made to the Planner and Engineer regarding the widening. The vote was unanimous in favor of acceptance of the final plat. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 213 Dublin Village Council Meeting ~tb AJ eeting Minutes of National Graphics Corp., Cols., O. Form No. 1097 ~ Held September 15, 1986 19 Page Nine g' '.""", Discussion Regarding Proposed Bell Tower - Village Square Shopping Center. As background information it was noted that a request had been before the Board of Zoning Appeals regarding a variance to permit a 24' bell tower to be built at the street intersection of the Village Square Shopping Center. The BZA granted the variance to permit the additional height as requested, but felt that the issue of musical chimes was out of its jurisdiction, and so referred the matter to Council. Mr. Smith said that there is nothing in the Dublin Code that would prohibit the chimes in the bell tower. ... Mr. Craig Stewart of the Adirondack Corporation, representing the new owners of the center was present at the meeting to answer questions and present information. It was noted that the bell tower is programmed to play electronic chimes on the hour, and to also playa variety of songs at pre-scheduled times. The applicant proposes to expand the usual broadcast schedule for the holiday seasons, O.S.U. and Dublin High School football days, etc. with appropriate musical selections. Mr. Sutphen said that he had received numerous telephone calls and letters from citizens who were against the installation of the tower. Mr. Smith said that he did not feel that Council had any jurisdiction in the matter, but that after it was in place and was determined to be a nuisance, then Council could have it removed. Ms. Maurer requested facts - what would be the decibel level, how far would the sound travel, etc. It was noted that the volume control on the unit can be so lowered that it could only be heard within the shopping center. It would be Westminster chimes which would strike on the hour, and in this particular instance would be played from 9:00 A.M. to 9:00 P.M. It can also be programmed to play music at given times. Mr. Thornton said that he felt that the basic question before Council was why the Village does not have a sound ordinance. Mayor Close said that he had received favorable as well as negative responses to the possibility of a bell tower. He said that his personal response was that he did not feel such chimes would be unpleasant, as long as the "noise" is reasonably restricted by time. Mr. Amorose said that he had a concern that it might be used as an "attention-getter". Mayor Close pointed out that the prevailing winds from the shopping center are generally west to east, and west to east is commercial. Ms. Maurer said that she did not have a problem with it if the sound would be focused on the center, and that usage be limited. Mayor Close concurred with Mr. Thornton that it is time for the Law Director to look at the possibility of a noise ordinance. Mr. Thornton suggested that others beside the Law Director be involved in the drafting of such an ordinance (a committee action). Mr. Herb Jones, a resident of the area, said that he did not have an objection to the chimes. Comments from Staff Mr. Sheldon said that he had received information regarding the filing of a lawsuit against the Village with regard to a school sponsored outing. Mr. Smith will review the issue further and report back to Council. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 21 5 IHinutes of Dublin Village Council Meeting -~- Meeting National Graphics Corp., Cols., O. Form No.1097~ Held September 15, 1986 19 ==-r - , I Page Ten p Mr. Sheldon also reported that the 47 acre annexation on S.R. 745 along the county line was approved by the Delaware County Commissioners. Request - Village Approval for Sale of Beer During Bridge Opening Celebra- tion. Mr. Thornton moved that the Dublin Jaycees be allowed to operate a "Beer Wagon" during the Bridge Opening Celebration planned for October 15, 1986. Ms. Maurer seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous for approval of the motion. Mayor Close commented that since the previous Council meeting he had not had a single call regarding trash. i<io, Comments from Citizens Mrs. Diane Nicholls was present to present petitions with approximately 700 signatures to Village Council to express citizen's viewpoint about how concerned they are about the growth situation as it stands in the Village of Dublin. Mrs. Nicholls referred to the letter which was distributed to members of Council. She noted that the persons signing the petition would like the Village Council to pass an interim zoning ordinance, imposing a building moratorium on residential building to give the Village an opportunity to "catch up". She mentioned health and safety concerns such as not enough schools, potential sewerline capacity in three years, water pressure problems, lack of adequate roadways. She commented that the Fire Department has had to add another tanker truck because the water pressure is not adequate in certain quadrants. Mrs. Nicholls also said that they would like to see Council consider enacting some long term growth manage- ment ordinances as well as some short term measures. .Iie Mrs. Nicholls had also made available to members of Council a copy of a growth management ordinance enacted in Boulder, Colorado ten years ago; said ordinance being challenged six times, never successfully. She also had available that evening a master plan and ordinance from Zionsville, Indiana, having been in effect for three years. She said that they felt that an interim zoning ordinance (short term, six months duration with two six month optional extensions) would give the Village a chance to pause and review. Ms. Maurer said that she had called the planner in Boulder, Colorado that morning and had spoken with him. Ms. Maurer said that she was concerned that there was an impression that th~ Village is not planning - the Village does have plans that have been developed over the years for the Village. She said that the water pressure problem is a solvable problem. Ms. Maurer said that part of the mandate to Council has been to require developers to pay to put the lines in. The Village has required the developers, for example, of Earlington and Brandon to pay for and build the sewer that is going up from Adria to Earlington. Muirfield has built and paid for "up front" the waterline across the river to their development as well as the sewer and then were paid back later by tap fees from the Village. Part of the reason that there is a water pressure problem in the northern part of Muirfield is partly due to the fact that on the east side of the river there has been an enormous amount of expansion. Ms. Maurer presented background information on the proposed looping of the waterline going up to Muirfield which will hopefully increase the water pressure sufficiently to alleviate the water pressure problems in the northern portion of Muirfield. It was noted that that looping will be in place by December 15, 1986. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 217 LH inutes of Dublin Village Council Meeting national gramLlCS l\J eeting National Graphics Corp., Cols., O. Form No. 1097 ~ Held September 15, 1986 19 T= I I I I I , Page Eleven I/If/""j<-,i&, ..... " Ms. Maurer said that the Law Director said that the Village could impose a moratorium if the problems are not solvable and only if there were a true emergency. Mrs. Nicholls said that it was her belief that Ohio is a strong home rule state, and under the Ohio Constitution municipalities are given the power to enact ordinances to protect the health, safety, welfare and morals of the community. Mayor Close said that part of the difficulty is that the Village is being asked to respond both on behalf of itself, as it pertains to to some very limited issues, and on behalf of the school system. He pointed out that because the tax base and the boundaries of the school system more than double the size of the Village proper, the Village does not have control over that. Mayor Close said that in addition to consideration of home rule Council must also consider other factors, including taking of property with due process. In order for the Village to use the health and safety issue to impose a moratorium, the Village must have substantive, articulable measures to do that as well as have solutions to the problems. He noted that studies are being done with regard to the Village's sewer and water lines. .. Mrs. Nicholls said that with regard to the growth management ordinances that most of them cite the quality of life as their reason for initiating those measures, and said that she felt that the quality of life has been affected in Dublin. For example, if the study shows that the sewer will not be full for three years, an 18 months moratorium neither helps nor hinders, nor solves that particular problem. Mayor Close suggested that it would be better to wait 30 days and get the water and sewer studies completed. Mayor Close noted that there is a balance that needs to be achieved - that he has gotten many telephone calls from persons who feel that the Village is too restrictive. fW' 0.' Mr. Smith said that approximately three weeks ago Ms. Maurer and the Planning and Zoning Commission asked him to look into the possibility of slowing down, modifying, eliminating or terminating growth in the Village and the legal issues dealing with same. He said that his recommendation to Council on that issue would be that Council, not Planning or Zoning or any other Commission, nor the Village Staff, be the determining body as to when and if a moratorium or a slow- down of some nature is to be initiated. He commented that a member of Council had indicated that because of the overcrowding of the schools that the continued growth might be prohibiting education. Mr. Smith said that it is not a function of municipal government to provide an education for the children in the community. Mr. Smith said that the issue of health, safety and welfare has to be supported by hard evidence in a courtroom. He said that if Council were to enact a six month moratorium that by 4:00 P.M. the next day the Village would be in serious litigation with a number of developers, commercial as well as residential, who have spent a considerable amount of money on various improvements within the Village of Dublin. He said that it was his recommendation to Council that the Village immediately get an independent study as to the capacity of the sewer system and to get a water study because the delivery of services affect the safety and welfare and health of the people, and that he did not believe that the Village has available to them the facts to support a moratorium at present. rj;- RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 219 Minutes of Dublin Village Council Meeting ~Qlb [vI eeting National Graphics Corp., Cols., O. Form No. 1097 ~ - -, --------------------- '-- ------ ---------1 19 I ===r- i Held _ September 15, 1986 Page Twelve To summarize, Mr. Smith said that the Village does have the right to enact a moratorium. As to the procedure as to where it would be done, who would make the decision, that his opinion would be that it would be done by Council at the issuing of the building permit. In order to be able I to s,upport the fundamental fairness issue in a moratorium, he said that he 1 would have to have facts. He said that he did not believe that the functio of providing an education would win the case for the Village. I I Mrs. Phyllis Gubanc, a resident of Dublin, said that she had moved to Dublin from Cleveland where the infrastructure was in constant repair. She said that she was finding that there are serious problems in Dublin, and that she did not believe Mrs. Nicholls was saying that it was Council's fault, but that there should be a "time out to review what is happening". She said that she felt that there were a number of beautiful plans for the community, but that these plans are not being carried through. Another resident spoke regarding the fact that she had a real concern regarding the fact that her children were being bused out of their own neighborhood to go to school. Dr. Nicholls suggested the possibility of putting in some type of growth management ordinance - 20% growth this year, 10% growth next year, etc., mentioning a slow-down in single and multi-family development, not commercial. Responding to a question from Mayor Close, Dr. Nicholls said that he thought that some of the community might be willing to pay in increase in income tax as well as perhpas an increase in property tax if the quality of the community were to remain intact. Mrs. Headlee asked why, if the Village was so short of water, that they were continuing to issue fire hydrant permits, mentioning specifically a red water truck and a blue water truck taking water from the fire hydrants. She also mentioned that residents were watering their lawns (even on weekends). Mrs. Headlee suggested drawing up an ordinance to enforce the sprinkling ban, as well as on usage of fire hydrants. Mr. Rozanski also said that another problem was the fact that some persons were using jockey pumps to increase their own pressure. Responding to a question from Dr. Nicholls, Ms. Maurer said that the Village has been working on a strategic management program and that one of the top priority issues is a master plan and land use planning. She said that Council has directed the Village Planner to focus on those plans, and that Council would be authorizing the hiring of another person. Ms. Maurer had some comments regarding the ordinance in Boulder, Colorado. She said that she had talked with the planner of Boulder and the circumstances under which the ordinance was passed. Boulder, in 1960, had 22.63 square miles; Dublin is approximately 23 square miles at present. In 1960 Boulder already had 37,718 puplation. In 1970 they had 66,870 people. In 1976 they passed the ordinance after they had reached approxi- mately 70,000 people, and at the time the ordinance was passed primarily to limit residential growth to a 2% growth rate. The reason that they chose 2% is that was the rate of growth of the state of Colorado at that time. Boulder, Colorado is a core city with suburbs. Dublin is a suburb next to a core city. The purpose of the ordinance was to limit growth in order to permit them to build roads, etc. They have a separate school system just as Dublin has; it is not under the city. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 221 Al inutes of Dublin Village Council Meeting ~&r1CS Meeting National Graphics Corp., Cols., O. Form No. 1097 ~ Held SeptembeXu15.u 1986 19 r-= I I i Page Thirteen II!fW!';C"-" # Mrs. Pamela Bauman, a resident, asked when there would be some direct answers - a statement giving specific facts, not feelings, not opinions, facts from those who elect you. She said that she would like a State of the Village report or something similar. Mr. Sheldon said that the results of the sewer and water studies should be available by the end of October. Mrs. Bauman asked what could be done about the school problem. Mayor Close said that the only persons that can address the problems relating to the schools is the school board. He said that he did not know what the solution would be to the school problem but that the Village is limited by law as to what effect they can have on the problem. He noted that the Village and schools can jointly use space, which has been done; the Village can make the process easier, what has been done, but once again the solutions lie with the school systeml and not the Village. ' Mayor Close suggested that interested citizens go to the school board meetings and express their concerns as they have expressed them at the Village Council meeting. Mrs. Bauman said that she would like an official statement from Council about having studied other cities and how they have dealt with growth so that the citizens of Dublin can have some assurance that the developers are not "running the show". '" Mr. Rozanski said that when Muirfield Village was originally planned, it was planned for 3800 units. Through Planning and Zoning and their great efforts that has been cut down to approximately 2000 units. Brandon Subdivision, which was zoned in 1975 as Evergreen, was a much higher densi than the Planning and Zoning Commission has allowed now. The Planning and Zoning Commission has worked diligently on cutting down the zoning and reducing the number of units in the Village. Steps are being taken - the Village is working on it. Mayor Close said that he appreciated the interest of those present at the meeting and that the sewer and water reports should be back by the latter part of October. He said that the Village would be happy to share them with anyone who would like to review them, and said that he invited the interested residents to come back to Council after they have reviewed the reports and that additional discussion could be held at that time. Mrs. Bauman asked if there would be a report on the progress of a master plan. Mayor Close said that there is no single identifiable master plan at the present time, but that the corridor studies and studies of that nature are in place. He said that work is being done on the master plan but that it is not something that is "going to be turned out over night". Mayor Close, responding to another question from Mrs. Bauman, said that it has been determined that there are a number of additional staff functions that are necessary in order to free up more time for planning, and that those are to be implemented as rapidly as possible. He noted that the Village operates under budgetary limitations. He said that Council does anticipate that the Planner will have additional staff shortly. Mayor Close invited interested citizens to come by the Village offices and speak to Mr. Bowman or Ms. Clarke about what the Village has in the way of future planning. He noted that in many cases the planning is being done by quadrant rather than the Village overall. Ii" RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 223 Minutes of Dublin Village Council Meeting Meeting ~&r1CS National Graphics Corp., Cols., O. Form No. 1097 ~ Held Septernb~r15, 1986 19 1 ~ I Page Fourteen Mrs. Bauman said that she felt that the key word was communication and that would be what they would be looking for. She also said that the civic associations need to be aware as another link in the communication system. Mr. Thornton commented that the statement "Council does nothing" comes up frequently. He said that Council has spent a great deal of time, individually and collectively, committee-wise, and in other ways on the sewer and water problem. He said that Council is continuing to work on the situation to the best of their ability and that he became upset when residents of the Village inferred that Council did nothing. He said that members of Council work hard on issues such as these mentioned. Mr. Jankowski commented that he felt that most of the reason for the signatures on the petitions and most of the concerns expressed really stem from the school situation, and that that appears to be the over-riding issue. He also said thac in addition to the master plan that Council should specifically address the growth management question which has been presente Mayor Close suggested that the Land Use Subcommittee look at the plans and make a recommendation to Council, probably at the October 17th meeting of Council. Martin Road Residents j;,. Mrs. Holt asked about the status regarding the Meijer Store and Martin Road residential properties. Mr. Rozanski said that there had been a meeting about the situation, and at that time several items were proposed to the Meijer people which the committee felt would help alleviate the problem. He said that basically Meijers has agreed to do everything that they have been asked to do. Mr. Smith said that they would start immediately. In addition, Mr. Rozanski said that they have agreed to replace all of the pipes with a larger pipe, and that everything they were asked to do, they agreed to do. It was agreed that copies of the engineering reports would be given to those who requested same (Mrs. Holt being one.) Council Roundtable Discussion Mr. Rozanski 1. Said that he and Ms. Jordan drafted a letter to the residents in the Monterey Park area regarding vandalism and destruction in the park. The residents were requested to "keep an eye on the park" anu report any vandalism to the police. One reaction from the rebid~nts wa:; that the park is very dark. One of the homeowners suggested possibly extending the street lighting up Monterey Drive to the park and rerhaps installing one security light in the park. Mr. Warner said th~t he wiil study the macter further, getting a rough cost estimat~. Mr. Jankowski 1. Thanked Mr. Sheldon for acting so promptly regarding the the installation of a stop sign on Tara Hill Drive. He a~so ~sked Mr. Sheldon to check the street sign on Stover Court. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 225 Minutes of Dublin Village Coun;:il Meeting ~QWJ;s ZH eeting National Graphics Corp., Cols., O. Form No. 1097 ~ ---r--- Held September 15, 1986 19 - --------------------------_..,- - --------------..----..------ -------- ------------..------- --------".---------.-- Page Fifteen Mr. Sutphen 1. Suggested the possibility of forming a committee to look into that type of situation - where there is improper signage, traffic lines on Coffn~n Road, reflectors, deflectors, etc. Mayor Close reminded those present of the Open House on Thursday, September 18, 1986 at 7:30 P.M. for the purpose of touring the building, and pre- senting awards to those who have served on boards and commissions as well as those who have contributed their monies and services to the Village. Mayor Close announced Lhat there would be an executive session on September 22, 1986 to discuss personnel matters. Mayor Close announced that the Council would recess for approximately 10 minutes and then re-convene in executive session for personnel issues. The regular meeting was adjourned at 11:02 P.M. JA~'gj.lW~ Clerk of Council (