Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/06/1988 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS M ill utes of Dublin City Council Meeting ~~~ M eel ill}.!, National Graphics Corp., Cols., O. Form No. 1097",~ Held September 6, 1988 19 T ~ I The regularly scheduled meeting of the Dublin City Council was called to order by Mayor Michael L. Close at 7:30 P.M. on Tuesday, September 6, 1988. Mr. Jankowski led the Pledge of Allegiance. Members of Council present were: Mr. Amorose, Mayor Close, Mr. Jankowski, I Ms. Maurer, Mr. Rozanski, Mr. Strip and Mr. Sutphen. Mr. Hansley, City Manager, and Mr. Smith, Law Director, were also present as were Mr. Bowman, Ms. Clarke, Chief Ferrell, Ms. Jordan, and Ms. Prushing of City Staff. Mr. Amorose moved to approve the minutes of the August 15, 1988 meeting of Council. Mr. Rozanski seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous for approval of the minutes of the August 15, 1988 meeting of Council. Mayor Close explained the Council Rules of Order as they pertain to Public Hearings. Ordinance No. 28-88 - Reclassification of Zoning on a 99.179 Acre Tract Located Approximately 1600 Feet South of Shier-Rings Road, Extending 1200 Feet West of Wilcox Road, and 1400 Feet East of Wilcox Road. Public Hearing. Registered proponents were Mr. Rob Meyer, Mr. Richard Netting and Mr. Steve Krzykoski. There were no registered opponents. Mr. Bowman had the following comments: 1. This rezoning application was heard informally by the Planning Commission in April of this year and was formally heard at the July 7th meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission. 2. The site is currently zoned in Dublin in the old township zoning _ RIB. 3. This is the first major residential proposal that Dublin has seen in the southwest quadrant. 4. The subject site is 99 acres located on either side of Wilcox Road, approximately 1000 feet south of Shier-Rings Road. The site does not front on either Rings Road or Avery Road. 5. The requested zoning district is Planned Low Density Residential District. 6. The proposal is for 312 single family lots, ranging in lot sizes from 50 to 65 feet in width. 7. The gross density of the site of the proposal is 3.15 units per acre, and given the calculations that are required as part of the PLR zoning district regulations, that computes to 3.9 units per acre. 8. To the north along Shier-Rings Road and a bit to the west the land is surrounded by industrially zoned property. South on Rings Road is large acre-type lot development in the township. 9. Staff examined the merits of the proposal as it related to the overal systematic growth and development of the municipality and also looked at the traditional land use type activities. 10. As regards the growth and systematic long term development of the municipality, staff found that the zoning application failed to demonstrate that it would not result in creating an isolated district one that staff cannot insure that could be fully serviced with the regular complement of urban services or could actually provide residential amenities. II II II ,I RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting natio I .gi'<Ii ICS Meetin}.!, National Graphics Corp., Cols., O. Form No. 1097 ""8" 1I eld September 6~ 1988 u r 19 Page Two 11. Staff felt that the only way that staff could satisfactorily convince themselves that this could result in a healthy, safe, convenient, attractive physical environment was to make a number of assumptions off the site. 12. Given the existing and recent developments in the area, staff cannot justify the rezoning proposal based on those types of assumptions simply because they may not be in the power of the developer or in the power of the City to fulfill. 13. The subject site is not a key tract in the area. 14. Uses developed on this site will be heavily influenced by the development that takes place around it. 15. Factors that contribute to staff's uneasiness are as follows: the fact that the developers propose to service this piece of property contrary to the planned sewer extension; the proposed interchange at Tuttle Road which staff feels will have a high impact on the area; this is definitely in an area where Columbus and Dublin, and perhaps Hilliard, will compete for further annexation. 16. Staff believes this to be a premature zoning. 17. As regards the technical merits of the application, staff feels that it lacks a suburban residential image. No standard single family lot should be a buffer between largely incompatible uses. In this area there is a conflict between the industrial uses on the north and on the west, and with the large lot single family homes on the south. Staff feels that a single family development as proposed, and industrial uses, should be separated either by transitional uses or by unusual and extensive buffering. 18. A great deal of mixing of industrial and residential traffic is perceived. 19. Staff does recommend disapproval of the application for two reasons _ that it will potentially create an isolated residential pocket, and that the technical merits of the plan do not overcome the potential land use conflicts. 20. The Planning Commission also recommended disapproval. Mr. Rob Meyer representing Wilcox Road Associates had the following comments: 1. One issue is whether Dublin is going to take an affirmative action to establish a significant residential tone to this area of the southwest portion of Dublin's community. 2. A second issue that is presented by this zoning is whether Dublin will take an affirmative action to establish a significant area for those of moderate incomes to purchase homes within the City of Dublin; that is a need that Dublin has not served up to the present time;a need for the 20,000 people or so who work in Dublin, pay taxes in Dublin, but do not earn a salary that enables them to purchase homes in the current Dublin market. A segment of this development will provide an opportunity for that market to be served. 3. The proposed site has 312 lots in a range of from 50' of width to 90' of width. 4. It provides of expansion to an additional 18 acres at the southwest corner (the Woodin tract) which would be even larger lots _ 70 feet to 90 feet in width. 5. It provides for a perimeter treatment that is consistent with the Dublin code in terms of landscaping, planting, intermittent fencing, and mounding. 6. From a traffic standpoint have retained the services of Mr. Gary Wilcox, a traffic engineer, who makes several key points: Wilcox Road currently is a residential street, particularly to the south of this development; the breakup provided enhances and protects the RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of " Dublin City Council Meeting natio I .grcrQlf.1CS Meetill}.!, National Graphics Corp., Cols., O. Form No. 1097 "'@ II eld September 6~ 1988 19 Page Three residential character of Wilcox Road; provides for segregation of residential traffic and non-residential traffic; works regardless of whether the Tuttle Road interchange happens or not. 7. We have talked to the Fire Department, have addressed their concerns. 8. With regard to the sewer. In 1987 the prospective owners approached the then acting Village Engineer to discuss how this particular area could be served and came up with an appropriate way which called for a diversion of a portion of this property to an under-utilized sewer, and based on approval of that alternative proceeded to purchase and annex the property to the City of Dublin. Mr. Smith, Law Director, indicated to the developer that that would probably not be a problem. 9. At one point there was a concern regarding the ability to serve the property with water on a short term basis; that concern was due in large part to a typographical error in a report which has since been corrected. 10. Do not feel that there is incompatibility of use. Mr. Richard Netting, a resident of Rings Road, presented petitions signed by residents of the area in favor of the development. Mr. Netting said that on the minus side of the development is the density (that they would like to see it a little less dense) but the plus side was that it would be developed residential. He indicated that they had worked with the developer and that he was in favor, for the most part, of the proposed development. Mr. Steve Krzykowski, a resident of Wilcox Road, also expressed the opinion that he would like to see the area developed as residential but also would prefer to see it a little less dense. There will be a third reading of the Ordinance at the meeting of Council on September 19, 1988. Ordinance No. 44-88 - Change of Zoning on 36.80 Acres on the Southwestern Corner of Glick Road and Manley Road. Public Hearing. Mr. Howard Adams registered as a proponent. There were no registered opponents. Mr. Bowman's comments were as follows: 1. The applicant, Professional Acquisition Corporation, has actually purchased a 96 acre fram at the far northwest corner of Dublin, just north of Deer Run School. 2. Actually this application involves 46.03 acres of the 96 acre farm. Approximately 36.8 acres of the application are located in Dublin and another 9.4 acres are located in Union County. 3. The portion in Union County is pending annexation to Dublin. 4. The application is a request for rezoning from the present R-1 zoning district to the Planned Unit Development District. 5. The density would be two units per acre. 6. Glick Road will be extended to the westernmost portion of the site. 7. The required open space will consist of 11.3 acres, with approxi- mately two acres within the Dublin corporate limits. The balance of the 11.3 acres (9 acres) is actually territory being annexed from Union County. 8. Staff supports the rezoning. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval on August 4, 1988, with the following conditions: A. Final approval of the pending annexation to fulfill the open space obligation. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting I 9 ICS "1 ect illg National Graphics Corp., Cols., O. Form No. 1097'~ II eld September 6,1988 19 Page Four B. Submission of development standards which are commensurate with existing Muirfield Village at Final Development Plan. C. Resolution of the bike path on the west side of Avery Road down to the school, according to City specifications. D. Strong consideration that a tunnel for the bike path into the existing Muirfield Village area will be required. E. Strong consideration that a left turn lane off Avery Road into the development will be required. F. Resolution of the width of Glick Road, determination on whether it will be a collector, and the direction it will take. G. Presentation of the storm water retention/detention plan. H. Strong consideration to flattening the curve from Manley Road where it connects with the existing Glick Road will be required. Mr. Adams was available to answer questions or address concerns. Responding to a question from Ms. MBurer, Mr. Adams said that the green space would be a part of the Muirfield program, private and not public. Ms. Maurer noted that when Muirfield was originally zoned Dublin did not have a green space ordinance. Mr. Adams reported that they have an agreement with Planning and Zoning that any additional acres added to Muirfield would be a part of an additional master plan. He also mentioned that the area being discussed is a small amount of acreage and will just about replace the land next to the Deer Run School (which was residential land space) which was sold to the School Board which required additional acreage for perhaps a future middle school Mr. Rozanski asked about the possibility of the school being able to use that green space (a ravine, wooded area) as an outdoor classroom space. Mr. Adams did not think there would be any objection. Ms. Maurer requested a legal opinion regarding the open space. There will be a third reading of the Ordinance on Monday, October 3, 1988. Ordinance No. 62-88 - Amending Ordinance No. 56-82, Establishing an Arterial Traffic Plan for the City of Dublin, Ohio. Public Hearing. Registering as proponents were the following persons: Mr. Larry Abbott Mrs. Barbara Carstens Mr. Sherman P. Liddell Ms. Kay Wagner Mr. Joel Campbell Mr. Tim Solack Mr. Scott Versluis Mr. William L. Callahan Mr. David Blaugrund Mr. Robert Harris Mayor Close suggested addressing the bridge issue first and then, follow- ing that, moving on to address the rest of the arterial plan as a unit. Mr. Bowman reported that the plan simply establishes locations for arterials as well as match that up with possible design standards. He suggested listening to the publics' comments, returning to Council on November 7th, and continue the public hearing after staff has taken into consideration said comments at this evening's public hearing. Mr. Bowman also suggested, after having discussions with a number of people, perhaps recommending taking the bridge in the current notation off of the plan, pending that the City has totally exhausted any negotiations with Columbus for the widening of the O'Shaughnessy Bridge, and said, secondly, that the bridge would only return only after a very factual RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting Meet illg 9 ,ICS National Graphics Corp., Cols., O. Form No. 1097 r,,;;Si1 H chi September 6, 1988 ur 19 Page Five engineering base has been established, and a definite need has been determined. Mayor Close recalled that in 1983 there was an attempt to put a bridge on the master plan. At that time the history residents were given was that over a period of 25 to 30 years, MORPC had the bridge on the plan and subsequently totally removed the bridge from the plan as something that was not ever going to be feasible or workable. Why look at it again? Mr. Bowman acknowledged that that was part of the problem; that he did not have the factual engineering base needed to make a specific recommenda tion. He said that he was presenting it as a consideration to Council, as a suggestion, as something Dublin might have to do to keep the discussion alive should, in the future, to, Ms. Maurer noted that at a previous discussion in a committee of Council that it was mentioned that even were O'Shaughnessy Bridge to become four and even though there are four lanes on the Scioto River Bridge that because of the distance between those two bridges (approximately three miles) that good planning considerations would dictate that there be some other outlet from the quadrant to the four lane road on the east side of the river so that traffic on Dublin Road could be relieved. She also noted to the public that one of the hoped for plans in the future would be to have a bridge that runs under the 1-270 overpass that would ta e the heavy traffic anticipated from the expected office development from Coffman Road to 1-270 and around the outerbelt between Coffman Road and Dublin Road. Mr. Bowman said that at the present time, in his estimation, both personal y and professionally, that if the O'Shaughnessy Dam Bridge were widened that the City probably could not justify a capital expenditure for an additiona bridge over the Scioto River. The feasibility of a bridge under 1-270 will continue to be studied. Mr. Bowman expressed a concern about the possibility that a bridge at some point between Glick Road and S.R. 745 may actually cause more traffic than would normally be on the road; one of the biggest concerns would not be development in Dublin but development in Delaware County and beyond. He also said that part of the reason for a bridge would be to relieve some of the other limited access points into Dublin - Dublin Road and Bridge Street, Coffman and Avery Road; if there were better outlets elsewhere I the City might be able to draw some of the traffic away from those limited outlets into another location. Mr. Bowman also said were a bridge built that it would be best to extend it to the east. Mr. Larry Abbott, representing the Donegal Cliffs Civic Association, and noted that members of Council had received a petition with in excess of 100 signatures opposing the bridge noting that they thought that placement of such a bridge would increase traffic, would change the entire character of the neighborhood, the bridge would go "nowwhere", as well as large amount of money to construct such a bridge. Mr. Abbott said that he felt that even if Dublin had to "pick up" the entire addition to take the O'Shaughnessy Bridge from two lanes to four lanes, it would be cheaper than to build a completely new bridge across the river. Mrs. Barbara Carstens of River Forest also presented a petition to Council which indicates the majority of the residents between Glick Road and S.R. 161 generally subscribe to the comments as presented by Mr. Abbott. Mr. Bowman mentioned a third reason for delaying a vote on the plan, that being that staff is having discussions with residents, property owners, etc. in the northeast planned area of Dublin and noted that those conversa tions and discussions will certainly affect the arterials within the I il II I! II RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS M hlUtes of DlIhlin c'iry r.01mril Mppr~ng .-m1CS M eetill}.!, National Graphics Corp., Cols., O. Form No. 1097 ~ Held September 6, 1988 19 Page Six Mr. Sherman Liddell said that he agreed with what the other speakers had said. He did say, however, that he felt that it was premature to go forward with this particular thoroughfare plan until additional information has been compiled as well as the completion of studies on the east side of the river. Ms. Kay Wagner of Dublin Road, in addition to agreeing with the previous speakers, expressed concern regarding the proposed 80' right-of-way on Dublin Road. Mr. Tim Solack expressed a concern with regard to the lack of definitive engineering information. Mr. Scott Versluis, a resident of Donegal Cliffs, agreed with Mr. Solack's concern regarding the lack of factual and base engineering information. Mr. William Callahan of River Forest said that it had been his under- standing that there would not be a connection to S.R. 745; that when Muirfield Boulevard is completed that it will drain much of the traffic between Muirfield and the Scioto River into the Avery Road/U.S. 33 inter- change. Mr. Blaugrund had no additional comments. Mr. Robert Harris commented that Mr. Bowman had addressed many of his concerns. Mr. Rozanski asked Mr. Bowman for his professional opinion on whether Glick Road "will go anywhere other than dump out onto Riverside Drive". Mr. Bowman said that "it certainly has an even chance of doing anything at this point". Mr. Rozanski also said that he felt that an option should be left open for the possibility of a bridge in the future; that if nothing is planned the decision will be made for the City; the developers will develop everything between Dublin Road and the river and there will not be an access anywhere along there for a bridge. With regard to the 80' right-of-way, Mr. Bowman does give the municipality the opportunity to widen Dublin Road if in the future public concern says that it ought to be widened. Mayor Close commented that it seemed to him that throughout the planning process, including development of the master plan, that the whole quest of the traffic plan is to develop traffic flow that takes people to the west and south away from the area, and that a bridge at this proposed point is absolutely contrary to the planning that was done in the past. He also said that the municipality has intentionally made decisions that Dublin Road would maintain the character it has at present and that to put a bridge back on the plan would, in essence, be saying that the municipality cannot be trusted to abide by a plan upon which people made educated decisions as to where they want to live. Mayor Close also said that in considering a bridge which would create a major east/west route that there would be significant impacts on Summit- view Road and/or Bright Road and/or Brand Road and that the significant costs involved should also be considered. Mayor Close reported that there are ongoing discussions with the City of Columbus in an attempt to resolve some of the issues such as the O'Shaughnessy Dam Bridge project. Mr. Strip moved to delete the bridge from the plan. Mr. Amorose said that he felt that it would be a disservice to future generations if the bridge was removed from the plan and not given any consideration. He further stated he wondered how the buildup pressure in the Muirfield area will be relieved. He noted that people are going to want to get to the east side of the river and that the City has to plan for it now. I! il Ii I I RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Meetillg National Graphics Corp., Cols., O. Form No. 1097 ~ --1- Held September 6, 1988 19 Page Seven He further stated that he was for doing a traffic study; if the bridge is necessary design the road system to handle the traffic; the traffic is going to come. There was no second to Mr. Strip's motion to take the bridge off the plan. Mr. Jankowski reported that the intent of the land use committee and the planning staff who placed the bridge on the plan was for consideration by Council and the entire City was to say one thing and one thing only - that the municipality ought not to exclude the possibility of another bridge some place across the Scioto; that was all it was meant to do; that Council and staff has a duty to plan for the community; that, however, it is not a commitment to build a bridge but not to overlook the possibility of it happening. Mr. Sutphen agreed. Mr. Rozanski commented that when the possibility of a four lane bridge ove O'Shaughnessy was being discussed that residents of Glick Road expressed their concern about the high volume of traffic. Mr. Liddell said that he felt roads have to be developed in the northeast quadrant to alleviate traffic from the river road to get people to Sawmill Road. He also said that he felt that a plan should be worked out using the least amount of displacement to existing residents as possible; that it is more logical to go through vacant fields rather than to dis- place present residents. He also said again that he felt that it is premature to approve any plan that does not incorporate those types of roads. Ms. Maurer said that she was opposed to the 80' right-of-way on Dublin Road; that she preferred to see Dublin Road kept scenic, keep the traffic off of it and not destroy the trees along the road. For the same reason she said that she was also opposed by the placement of a bikeway down Dublin Road. Ms. Maurer went on further to say widening Dublin Road or finding a that she would prefer the bridge, I trees. I Mr. Bowman, with regard to the suggestion on the plan to widen Dublin Road, noted that the widening of any existing roads will be a controversial matter, and that if public conern outweighs the benefits then the road most likely will not get widened but by putting it on the plan that it "simply tells anybody doing business within the municipality that we have a plan of what Council is likely to do". if she had to make a choice between place to put a bridge across the road keeping the scenic route with all the Mr. Joel Campbell of Brand Road said that he was an opponent of the thoroughfare plan. He noted that it has been his understanding that Brand Road also would remain a scenic route Ms. Maurer commented that historically the municipality has always assumed that Dublin Road and Brand Road would be scenic routes. Mr. Bowman noted that it has been the State's plan that State routes ought to be arterial and have 80 feet of right-of-way, and so in that sense nothing new is being proposed. He noted that in this case the staff has been consistent with the plan, consistency right back to the City's first comprehensive plan that was done in 1967. Previous discussions regarding a bike path behind the trees on Dublin Road to the downtown area were recalled. Mr. Mand specifically recalled as a member of Council six or seven years ago, there was a bike path plan and that plan did not take a bike path all the way down S.R. 745. Mayor Close recessed the meeting for five minutes. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting ~Qlf~ Meetillg National Graphics Corp., Cols., O. Form No. 1097 ~ Held September 6, 1988 19 Page Eight Ordinance No. 17-88 - Amending Chapter 1187 of Planning and Zoning Code - Perimeter Landscaping and Screening Structures. Public Hearing. There were no registered proponents. Registering as opponents were: Mr. Chris Cline, Mr. Jim Immke, Mr. Dave Fillmore, Mr. Doug Schrim and Ms. Mary Ann Rausch. Ms. Clarke had the following comments: 1. This is a plan amendment to the Zoning Code to bring landscaping requirements for a parking lot, to take that same standard and to apply it to a vehicular sales area, a car lot or to a service station. 2. There have been several proposals before the Planning Commission in the last several years that were for rezonings for automobile dealerships, for example. 3. In every case the Planning Commission has extracted screening that was not contained in the Code. 4. Staff felt that the appropriate mechanism was to put the standard in the code so that anyone who wants to put a car dealership in Dublin would at least understand that vehicular display areas would be treated similarly to any parking lot. 5. When it was adopted there was a word deleted and thusly effectively eliminated the need for screening in one section of the code and in the other section where an alternative is to be proposed where the words "sales" has been deleted and therefore there is no perimeter definition as to how a sales facility is to be dealt with. 6. It is staff's proposal to make these similar which means putting a three foot screen along all public rights-of-way. 7. There is a second section within the ordinance that deals with screening of service facilities; the current code only addresses them in residential areas or in professional office zones. 8. This landscaping amendment went before the Planning Commission on two occasions; on the first occasion it was a 2-2 tie vote. It was taken to the Planning Commission on a second occasion; following a lively debate on that occasion as well, the vote of the Planning Commission was to support the amendment as proposed by a vote of 3-2. Mr. Chris Cline, attorney, representing Mr. Dave Fillmore's car company and the various Immke dealerships had the following comments: 1. In 1981 the Council of the City of Dublin enacted a landscape ordinan e for Dublin for the first time, and in that Ordinance which imposed a mounding or screening requirement for vehicular use areas required a three foot mound along the road or a screen of opaque plantings; in other words, anyplace there were cars parked next to a road a three foot mound or opaque screening would be required. 2. That code, however, specifically exempted car dealerships from the requirement of that screening. 3. That mounding would prevent a successful operation of a car dealer- ship. 4. That code was based on the code of the city of Lexington, Kentucky which likewise exempted car dealerships. 5. The reason why car dealerships were exempted was because one would be depriving that particular type of business of its operability. 6. In car sales the dealer wants his merchandise displayed, the public has an interest in seeing the cars displayed. 7. There can be quality landscaping without a 3 foot mound. 8. We are in opposition to Sections 1, 2, 3, and 4 of the proposed Ordinance; we do not have a problem with Section 5. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS L\1 illldes of Dublin City Council Meeting ~~ICS Meet ill}.!, National Graphics Corp., Cols., O. Form No. 1097 ~ Held September 6, 1988 19 Page Nine Mr. Jim Immke reported on the need for an automobile dealership to be able to display automobiles so that they can be seen by persons driving by. He noted that they do not consider a car dealership display area as a parking lot. Mr. David Fillmore agreed that the proposed required mounding would impose a hardship as regards sale of automobiles, noting that he felt that 90% of their sales came as a result of "drive bys". Mr. Douglas Schrim of Midwestern Enterprises, representing Mr. Don Marsh and Mr. Bob Fergus, agreed that it was a necessity for a car dealer to be able to display his merchandise. It was noted that Lexington, Kentucky had amended their previous require- ment of a 3' mound to 18". Mr. Amorose commented with regard to the fact that he had noted "wrecked" automobiles on blocks in the service area at Crestview Cadillad and that he felt that this was unsightly. Mr. Immke said that they would be willing to fence in that area. Ms. Rausch, a member of the Planning and Zoning Commission, noted that she had voted against the amendment because she had never considered a display area a parking lot and that she felt that it was necessary for a car dealership to be able to display their automobiles that were for sale Ms. Rausch also commented that there is presently an ordinance in effect and did not feel that it was necessary to change said ordinance. Responding to a question from Mr. Strip, Mr. Bowman said that this law would require that if a car dealership were to expand beyond 25% of their existing operation that the entire site would have to be brought into conformance. Discussion followed regarding the interpretation of what is considered display area and what is considered vehicular parking area. Mr. Bowman noted that in interpretation of Code car dealers have been allowed to come in front of the building line as any vehicular use area is allowed to do, in a sense treating them as parking lots in that regard. I For instance in the case of Sawmill Road where the building line is 50' car dealerships are allowed to extend another 22' toward the right-of-way. Were there to be a strict application of Code, calling a display sales area as part of the building, they would be required to be back 50'. Mr. Rozanski said that he found the lights in the display areas more offensive than the cars. Mr. Bowman noted that what is in front of the Dave Fillmore car dealership meets the actual requirement; they met the requirement with a small bush every 10 feet. Mayor Close expressed a concern with "changing the rules" of a previously well thought out, enacted ordinance. Ms. Maurer said that she felt attractive landscaping should be the consideration, that she did not have a problem with seeing automobiles. Mr. Fillmore and Mr. Immke said that they would be willing to work with the City as regards quality landscaping but that they did not want to hide the cars that were for sale. Mr. Amorose said that that he felt that by not adopting some type of amendment to the existing code that the City was giving special treatment to automobile dealers, that every type of business would love to display their wares in front of the building. There will be a third reading of the Ordinance on September 19, 1988. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dl1h 1 in C,i ry c'Ol1nr i 1 MP__, Meet ill}.!, National Graphics Corp., Cols., O. Form No. 1097 ~ II eld September 6, 1988 19 Page Ten Ordinance No. 03-88 - Change of Zoning on 284.58 Acres on Southeast Side of Post Road and Avery Road; North of U.S. 33/S.R. 161, 2700 Feet West of Coffman Road. Previously Tabled. Mr. Rozanski moved to take the Ordinance off of the table. mr. Jankowski seconded the motion. Vote on the motion - Mr. Sutphen, yes; Ms. Maurer, no; Mr. Amorose, yes; Mr. Jankowski, yes; Mr. Strip, yes; Mr. Rozanski, yes; Mayor Close, yes. Mr. Smith reported that there had been an agreement negotiated concerning the arrangement of the improvement of Avery Road. Chief Bostic expressed his concerns regarding the difficulty of accessing fire and emergency equipment were Post Road to be cuI de sacd. Ms. Clarke said that there was nothing in this particular plan that would require the closing of Post Road, that the design of the center gives the City the opportunity close off Post Road if, at a later date, that would be something that the community would desire. Mr. Cline reported that what the Post Road Civic Association had said repeatedly in discussions was that Post Road will not be closed and until adequate access for the Fire Department is provided. It was also pointed out that it will be the City who will make the decision to close Post Road. Chief Bostic asked that he keep informed regarding the decision of whether or not to close Post Road. Following discussion and a request made by Ms. Clarke, Mr. Jankowski moved to delete the following on page three, "The landscape buffer along the south side of Post Road shall be installed in its entirety from Avery Road to Wilcox Road with the beginning of construction on Subarea G, H, F or the construction of perimeter drive from Avery to Wilcox. The landscap buffer from Wilcox Road to Metro North Business Park will be installed in its entirety with beginning of additional construction in Subarea B, C or D or the completion of Perimeter Drive from Wilcox Road to Metro North Business Park", insertion of the underlined section on page 9, as well as the addendum regarding the paving of the roadway, etc. prepared by Mr. Smith, making sure that the Clerk gets the conforming documents. Mr. Strip seconded the motion. Vote - Mr. Sutphen, yes; Ms. Maurer, yes; Mr. Amorose, yes; Mr. Jankowski, yes; Mr. Strip, yes; Mr. Rozanski, yes; Mayor Close, yes. Mr. Hale, responding to a concern from a Post Road resident, Mr. Shoemaker said that following administrative action by Council that they are willing to do pay for and do the necessary work required to close off Post Road. Mayor Close commented that he would prefer to see Post Road closed as long as there would be adequate access to safety vehicles. Mr. Rozanski agreed. Mr. Bowman commented that there are residents along Tara Hill Drive who would prefer that Post Road not be closed, believing that by closing Post Road there will be more traffic on Tara Hill. Mr. Cline said that the main reason they would like to see Post Road closed is not because of the traffic but that as long as the intersection at Post Road and Avery Road remains that the demarcation between residential and non-residential development would be destroyed. Vote on the Ordinance - Mayor Close, yes; Mr. Rozanski, yes; Mr. Strip, yes; Mr. Jankowski, yes; Mr. Amorose, yes; Ms. Maurer, yes; Mr. Sutphen, yes. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting natio I "gnU ICS Meet in}.!, National Graphics Corp., Cols., O. Form No. 1097 ~ 1I eld September 6, 1988 19 Page Eleven Ordinance No. 71-88 - Amending Section 1317.05 of the Dublin Codified Ordinances - Driveway Widths. Third Reading. Vote on the Ordinance - Mr. Rozanski, no; Mr. Strip, no; Ms. Maurer, no; Mr. Sutphen, no; Mayor Close, no; Mr. Jankowski, no; Mr. Amorose, no. Ordinance No. 77-88 - Ordinance to Accept Annexation of 22.26 Acres in Washington Township to City of Dublin - Wilcox Road Associates. Third Reading. Vote on the Ordinance - Mr. Jankowski, yes; Mayor Close, yes; Mr. Strip, yes; Mr. Amorose, yes; Mr. Sutphen, yes; Mr. Rozanski, yes; Ms. Maurer, ye . Ordinance No. 78-88 - Agreement with O.D.O.T. Regarding Improvements to Highway - Union County Line to Franklin Street. Third Reading. Vote - Mr. Amorose, yes; Mayor Close, yes; Mr. Jankowski, yes; Ms. Maurer, yes; Mr. Rozanski, yes; Mr. Strip, yes; Mr. Sutphen, yes. Ordinance No. 86-88 the Dublin Codified Hours Restricted." - Ordinance Amending Section 717.07 of Chapter 717 of Ordinances Entitled "Peddlers and Solicitors Business First Reading. Mr. Amorose introduced the Ordinance. There will be a second reading of the Ordinance on September 19, 1988. Ordinance No. 87-88 - Ordinance Authorizing Inducement Agreement Between City of Dublin and Ashland Chemical Company. First Reading. Mr. Amorose introduced the Ordinance. There was discussion, following a concern expressed by Mr. Strip, regardin the wording of the agreement Mayor Close moved to amend the agreement by inserting on page two under Agreement of Intent, rather than "The parties hereby agree as follows:, saying The parties,predicated on the previous recitation,agree as follows: Mr. Jankowski seconded the motion. I Vote on the amendment - Ms. Maurer, yes; Mr. Jankowski, yes; Mr. Amorose, I yes; Mr. Rozanski, yes; Mr. Strip, yes; Mr. Sutphen, yes; Mayor Close, yesr Mr. Jankowski moved to do away with the three time reading rule and treat as an emergency. Mr. Rozanski seconded the motion. Vote on the motion - Mr. Rozanski, yes; Mr. Jankowski, yes; Mayor Close, y s; Mr. Sutphen, yes; Ms. Maurer, yes; Mr. Amorose, yes; Mr. Strip, yes. Vote on the underlying Ordinance - Mayor Close, yes; Mr. Sutphen, yes; Mr. Strip, yes; Mr. Rozanski, yes; Mr. Amorose, yes; Mr. Jankowski, yes; Ms. Maurer, yes. Ordinance No. 88-88 - Ordinance Accepting Lowest/Best Bid for Leaf Loader. First Reading. Mr. Rozanski introduced the Ordinance. Mr. Sutphen moved to do away with the three time reading rule and treat as an emergency. Mr. Rozanski seconded the motion. Vote on the motion - Mr. Sutphen, yes; Mr. Rozanski, yes; Mayor Close, yes Mr. Strip, yes; Mr. Amorose, yes; Ms. Maurer, yes; Mr. Jankowski, yes. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting ~~.b Meet in}.!, National Graphics Corp., Cols., O. Form No. 1097 ~ Held September 6, 1988 19 Page Twelve Vote on the Ordinance - Mr. Rozanski, yes; Mr. Jankowski, yes; Mr. Amorose yes; Ms. Maurer, yes; Mayor Close, yes; Mr. Sutphen, yes; Mr. Strip, yes. Resolution No. 18-88 - Resolution Amending Resolution No. 13-88 (Amended). First Reading. Mr. Sutphen introduced the Resolution. Mr. Smith reported that the language of the Ordinance had been changed following a meeting with the Secretary of State. Mr. Sutphen moved that the date for the special election be changed from September 13, 1988 to December 6, 1988. There was discussion as to whether or not it would be better to have a special election or the issue be placed on the general election ballot. Mr. Rozanski seconded the motion regarding the amendment. Vote on the amendment - Mr. Strip, yes; Mr. Jankowski, yes; Mayor Close, yes; Ms. Maurer, yes; Mr. Amorose, yes; Mr. Sutphen, yes; Mr. Rozanski, yes. Mr. Strip moved to do away with the three time reading rule and treat as an emergency. Mr. Amorose seconded the motion. Vote on the motion - Mayor Close, yes; Ms. Maurer, yes; Mr. Rozanski, yes; Mr. Sutphen, yes; Mr. Strip, yes; Mr. Jankowski, yes; Mr. Amorose, yes. Vote on the Resolution - Mr. Rozanski, yes; Mr. Sutphen, yes; Mr. Amorose, yes; Ms. Maurer, yes; Mayor Close, yes; Mr. Jankowski, yes; Mr. Strip, yes Resolution No. 19-88 - Resolution Appointing Willard Chambers to Board of Zoning Appeals. First Reading. Mr. Rozanski introduced the Resolution. Mr. Rozanski moved to do away with the three time reading rule and treat as an emergency. Mr. Strip seconded the motion. Vote on motion - Mr. Amorose, yes; Mayor Close, yes; Mr. Jankowski, yes; Ms. Maurer, yes; Mr. Rozanski, yes; Mr. Strip, yes; Mr. Sutphen, yes. Vote on the Resolution - Ms. Maurer, yes; Mr. Amorose, yes; Mr. Sutphen, yes; Mr. Strip, yes; Mayor Close, yes; Mr. Jankowski, yes; Mr. Rozanski, yes. Other Request for Approval of Final Plat - Brandon Section 4 The request had been tabled previously because of the concern with regard to the storm drainage, specifically Mr. Cavanagh's property. It was noted that a report had been prepared by the City Engineer and made available to members of Council. Discussion followed regarding the possibility of storm water runoff onto Mr. Cavanagh's property (which has had no problems with standing water since he has lived there) with construction of this development. It was again noted that Dublin Code requires that there be no more storm water runoff after development than was present prior to development. Mr. Cavanagh again noted that there is no storm water runoff which crosses his property at the present time. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS M ill utes of 01lhlin r.iry (:{)lInril Meeting ~~ICS Meet ill}.!, National Graphics Corp., Cols., O. Form No. 1097 ~ Held September 6, 1988 19 Page Thirteen Mr. Strip moved to approve the Final Plat, Brandon Section 4 conditioned upon Mr. Cavanagh receiving a letter from Planned Communities (Terry Andrews) that they will put tile in in the event there is storm water runoff onto Mr. Cavanagh's property. Mr. Amorose seconded the motion. Vote on the motion - Mr. Sutphen, yes; Mr. Amorose, yes; Mr. Strip, yes; Mayor Close, yes; Mr. Rozanski, yes; Mr. Jankowski, yes; Ms. Maurer, yes. Request for Approval of Final Plat Lowell Trace Section 2. Mr. Bowman reported that staff and the Planning Commission recommended approval. Mr. Strip moved to approve. Mr. Jankowski seconded the motion. Vote - Mr. Amorose, yes; Mayor Close, yes; Mr. Jankowski, yes; Ms. Maurer, yes; Mr. Rozanski, yes; Mr. Strip, yes; Mr. Sutphen, yes. Request for Approval of Final Plat - The Reserve Phase 2. Mr. Bowman said that the developer had essentially removed two lots off of the end of the cuI de sac rather than do it by lot split. Mr. Strip moved to approve. Mr. Sutphen seconded the motion. Vote - Mr. Rozanski, yes; Mr. Amorose, yes; Mr. Sutphen, yes; Ms. Maurer, yes; Mr. Jankowski, yes; Mr. Strip, yes; Mayor Close, yes. Request for Approval of Plan Refinement - JALL Ms. Clarke said that the proposal is to connect with a service road, Sawmill Road and S.R. 161, to thread behind the commercial properties behipd S.R. 161 and Sawmill Road. The first section of that service road is in; it is called Marcy Lane. It heads northward from Martin Road and wraps I behind the Dublin/Sawmill Shoppin Center at that intersection and deadends. It picks up further to the west with the JALL developed as well as a 'I proposed location for a BMW dealership. The dealership has since moved elsewhere but the roads were built. Hobbs Drive which is a north/south I section connecting S.R. 161 with the service road, at this location called Stoneridge Lane. That section is in at a 36' pavement width. The east/ west section has been constructed at a 32' pavement width. The property immediately to the west, the JALL property, is the property on which Golden Bear has already been constructed. The balance of that site is vacant. They wish to construct the rest of that service road at a 32' pavement width. That will match up with everything else that has been constructed so far; the only problem is that their documentation at the time of rezoning said 36' pavement width. The application was taken to the Planning Commission to amend it to 32' in conformance with all of the plans and that body voted for approval unanimously. It is being brought to Council as a plan refinement for Council's acknowledgment also that the developer will be relieved of his responsibility of constructing a 36' wide street and will instead be constructing a street 32' wide. Mr. Sutphen moved to accept the Plan Refinement - JALL. Mr. Rozanski seconded the motion. Vote on the motion - Ms. Maurer, yes; Mr. Strip, yes; Mr. Amorose, yes; Mayor Close, yes; Mr. Sutphen, yes; Mr. Jankowski, yes; Mr. Rozanski, yes. II I ,\ RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting ~ICS Meet illg National Graphics Corp., Cols., O. Form No. 1097 ~ II eld September 6~ 1988 19 Page Fourteen Request for Approval of Plan Refinement - Universal Gymnasts Ms. Clarke noted that this is also a request for a plan refinement; the site is located on old Avery Road and Universal Gymnasts is the tenant. Two buildings were constructed on the site. One of the conditions from the Planning and Zoning Commission was that no gymnastic competitions were to be held in the facility due to the fact that the facility was built with a restricted number of parking spaces. The applicant has re- petitioned the City to have that restriction lifted. Competitions would b held only on weekends and only for juveniles. The Planning Commission imposed a maximum of 14 plus of the home team (Universal Gymnasts) to compete on site. The other condition was that the property owner would need a written agreement with Universal Gymnasts that Universal Gymnasts would be allowed to use the parking lot of the second building for competitions on weekends for juveniles. If Universal Gymnasts were to lose the ability to use the rest of the parking lot it would also lose its ability to run competitions at that site. Discussion followed regarding the number of teams, parents, etc. that would be requiring use of the parking lot at competitions. Mr. Strip moved to approve the Plan Refinement for a period from October through April of this year on a temporary basis subject to the conditions imposed by the Planning and Zoning Commission. Mr. Jankowski seconded the motion. Vote on the motion - Mr. Strip, yes; Mr. Rozanski, yes; Mr. Sutphen, yes; Mr. Jankowski, yes; Mr. Amorose, yes; Ms. Maurer, yes; Mayor Close, yes. Consideration of Request from Dublin Village 10 Theatres Regarding Number of Video Games on Site. Since there was not a representative from Dublin Village 10 Theatres present at the meeting there was no discussion. Discussion Regarding Leasing of Office Space to Police Department. Ms. Maurer noted that she had discussed the possibility of using the Dublin Counseling Center building for the Parks and Recreation Department, since their lease would be up at the end of this year. She commented that she did not feel that it would be fiscally responsible for the City to go out and lease space when space is already available. Mr. Hansley reported that the Dublin Counseling Center had recently re- quested a two year extension on their lease (by letter). He also commented that he did not know if those facilities would be adequate, noting that the rooms were small, ceilings were low, there being no provision in the building for handicapped persons to move from the ground floor to the floor above, etc. Mr. Hansley said that as a courtesy if Council were not to extend the lease that personnel at the Dublin Counseling Center be so informed as soon as possible so that they could make other arrangements. Mr. Hansley also noted that all space available was being used at 5131 Post Road and that the basement at 6665 Coffman Road is being used primarily for storage. He noted that the main emphasis of his report to Council was to suggest a two or three year lease; that that would give the City time to do the Coffman Park study, etc. to determine space a building options for the City administration, Police Department, Fire Department, etc. Mr. Hansley also noted that there is a problem in that most property owners do not want a Police Department as a tenant. II II II II II RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting ~ICS Meetin}.!, National Graphics Corp., Cols., O. Form No. 1097 ~ Held September 6, 1988 19 Page Fifteen It was noted that leasing approximately 5,000 square feet of space in the Discovery Systems building would be the preferred option. They are open 24 hours a day and would be in favor of having the Police Department as a tenant; they would look upon it as an advantage in terms of security for their building. It is estimated that with improvements the rate per square foot would be somewhere around $12 or $13 per square foot. Mr. Rozanski moved to refer the item to the Safety Committee. Mr. Amorose seconded the motion. Vote - Mr. Sutphen, yes; Mr. Rozanski, yes; Mr. Amorose, yes; Mr. Jankowsk', yes; Ms. Maurer, yes; Mr. Strip, yes; Mayor Close, yes. Discussion of Tara Hill Signage Mr. Smith said that he did not have an answer for the residents at this time; that a recent judgment had been handed down in the Cuyahoga Falls case which was different than the one handed down in the Dayton case. Mr. Smith said that he has requested information from the Safety Director and City Attorney of Cuyahoga Falls and when that information becomes available he will so inform Council. A petition which was circulated in the Tara Hill Drive area was presented to members of Council, requesting that the stop signs remain in place until a study has been completed and a legal opinion has been rendered. A resident of Tara Hill Drive recommended that the issue go to the Safety Committee for some interpretation on the Ohio Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices and that a traffic engineering study be done. It was recalled came up because be there. There subsequently that the discussion regarding the stop signs originally it was determined that they are illegal and ought not to was a request for additional signage. Ms. Maurer recalled that Council voted to bring the traffic signs in the entire City into conformity with the Ohio Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices, noting that a serious liability issue could result which could cost the City millions of dollars Mr. Hansley reported that traffic and radar enforcement in the area has been upgraded. Mentioned was a traffic safety problem with children trying to cross the street. Mr. Jankowski said that he felt the City should be more concerned with saving lives than the possibility of liability risk; that "we should not get hung up on some legal technical issues". Chief Ferrell suggested getting a traffic study done. Mr. Smith was requested to report to the Safety Committee on his findings with a recommendation as to what the City should do regarding the stop signs. Comments from Staff Comments from Citizens Mr. Randy Roth of Grandee Cliffs Drive spoke with regard to the planning process, referring specifically to a matter that deals with Jenmar Court, etc. He specifically expressed a concern with regard to rumors regarding the possibility of the schools building a high school in that area. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS M illutes of Dublin City Council Meeting ~Qlftb Meetill}.!, National Graphics Corp., Cols., O. Form No. 1097 ~ 11 eld September 6, 1988 19 Page Sixteen Mr. Roth said that residents in the area do support Mr. Bertsch's proposal which is for a campus-style commercial development, non-retail, non-hotel for Grandee Cliffs east to the power lines as well as the fact that they are trying to create a park there on the historic Indian mounds. He said that he is researching the site and that the major owner of the tract would like to see it preserved as a park. He also noted, however, that one property owner is dumping on a corner of the park site and had been informed that the school board has decided to purchase properties in the area for a high school. The proposed purchase, he noted, has raised concerns on the part of residents. Council Roundtable Discussion Ms. Maurer 1. The City will be extending a formal invitation to the Lord Mayor and City Manager of Dublin, Ireland, inviting them to attend the opening performance of the Dublin Abbey Theatre on November 11, 1988. There was no objection on the part of Council to having a reception in their honor. Mr. Amorose 1. Asked for a status report on the Dublin Bridge wall. Mr. Hansley reported that there are several major improvements to be done before the project is completed; the primary one is to shrink the size of the island that is in the center of the roadway so that large trucks can make that radius. He also noted that there was a problem in finding someone qualified to do the work on the wall, but that he felt that all the work will be accomplished before cold weather sets in. Council Members wondered why there was no left turn signal at Bridge and High Streets for cars traveling eastward to turn north. Ms. Maurer recalled that said signal was promised in August of this year. Mayor Close requested that he be kept apprised of the Council meeting agenda items so that such a lengthy meeting would not likely occur again. Mr. Sutphen, at 12:20 P.M., moved to adjourn to Executive Session. Mr. Rozanski seconded the motion. Vote - Mr. Amorose, yes; Mayor Close, yes; Mr. Jankowski, yes; Ms. Maurer, yes; Mr. Rozanski, yes; Mr. Strip, yes; Mr. Sutphen, yes. Ma~-*r ~h/hZa:J~. ~ Cterk of Council II il 11 II II