Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/09/1991 Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Page 1 Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK CO FORM NO 1014~ September 9, 1991 Heln 19 ;p' The regularly scheduled meeting of the Dublin City Council was called to order by Mayor Jan Rozanski at 7:30 P.M. on Monday, September 9, 1991. The Pledge of Allegiance was repeated by all. Ms. Maurer, Mayor Rozanski, Mr. Strip, Mr. Sutphen, Mr. Amorose, Mr. Campbell were present. Denise King arrived at 8:35 P.M. Mayor Rozanski: Entertain a motion to approve the minutes of the last Council Meeting. Dave Amorose: So moved. Mayor Rozanski: Is there a second? Dan Sutphen: Second. Mayor Rozanski: Any discussion or comments? Hearing none. Mr. Campbell: yes Mr. Amorose: yes Mr. Sutphen: yes Mr. Strip: yes Mayor Rozanski: yes Ms. Maurer: yes Mayor Rozanski: Any correspondence? Myra Caplinger: No. Mayor Rozanski: I have a Proclamation I'd like to read. A few weeks ago, we had the pleasure of giving a Proclamation to a group of gentlemen who put on and hosted the 14- year-old Continental Amateur Athletic Baseball World Series here in Dublin. And they did an excellent job and showed off Dublin very well with our hospitality and our Parks and Rec. and everything we could do here. But during that same period of time that we were hosting the 14-year-old World Series, a group of Dublin boys in the 9-year-olds was out west representing Dublin in the World Series for the Continental Amateur Baseball Association in the 9-year-old group. And they won. They are the World Series Champions and I think we owe them a round of applause. I think it's great for the City to have such fine, young athletics and to have them represent us throughout the United States and to come away as the World Series Champs is quite a feat. So, we have a Proclamation for you boys. (Proclamation was read, followed by applause.) Coaches, is there anything you'd like to say on behalf of your team? Comments by coaches. Comments from Visitors Hi, I am Pat Johnston, President of Dublin Women's Club, and I'm here with good news, also. I'm here to thank the City of Dublin on behalf of the Dublin Women's Club for all the support in our Arts Festival yesterday. I saw lots of your faces there, and I think you probably saw even hundreds and hundreds of more people there. And if it wasn't for your allowing us to have the Bed Tax Funds, we couldn't have made the type of expansions that we made this year, and I really want to thank you for that. But to go into more detail, I'd also like to introduce you to our two co-chair persons, who will tell you exactly some of the neat things that they did with the money, so I'd like to introduce Robin Resnick and Bridgette Baxendell, and they're going to tell you a little bit, exactly what made the Festival such a success yesterday. Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Page 2 Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK co f-ORM NO 10l4tJ September 9, 1991 Hekl 19 Robin Resnick: I first want to correct Pat, it was thousands and thousands and thousands of people, hopefully not hundreds and hundreds. When Bridgette and I took over this Festival, we had four goals that we really targeted and wanted to focus on. One was developing a program that hopefully in the future, besides your funds, we can also get more funds for, and I brought that in case you didn't get that yesterday. The second one was expanding our entertainment and putting it in more places. The third one was having restaurants give us food instead of us serving it ourselves. And the fourth one was creating publicity that would really make this an event attended by all of Columbus, not just Dublin. And we feel that we accomplished that because of the Bed Tax Funds, and we wanted to thank you and present this poster that we had made, also. (Poster presented, followed by applause. ) Pat Johnston: I feel I need to say one other thing about the poster. We had, one of our artists at the Festival actually made that poster for the Women's Club, actually made the painting which is hanging in one of our downtown stores, Reed Art, and we made posters from it. So that was really special this year, too. It was Sally Barefoot Cochran, and we were really lucky to have that. Thanks, you'll be hearing from us about exactly how much money we spent and whether we need to come back for more next year. So don't forget our faces. Mayor Rozanski: Pat, if I was a betting man, I would bet I'll see you here next year. Congratulations on your success. Anybody else have anything to comment on that is not on tonight's agenda. Then we'll move along. West Bank Sewer Project Mayor Rozanski: Next, we're having a discussion regarding the West Bank Sewer Project and it's different options. Council has had this before them for a year and a half, two years, we're all very aware of the project. We know the pros and cons of it. Is there any need to go into this in depth from our staff, or would you like to just have a brief overlay of what the two options are again so all the audience can hear the two. A. C. Strip: From the standpoint as a Councilman, if we don't know it by now, we'll never know it. But from the standpoint of folks in the audience, maybe a 30 second update. Mayor Rozanski: Terry, why don't you give us a real brief update. Terry Foegler: Very briefly, as Council is aware, the past reports of the investigation are still vital. For the division of Dublin portion of the West Branch intersection has been previously identified as the forgotten Dublin route. So, I believe Council, through the different analyses that have been performed, many of which we've run copies for the public from time to time, we've also obtained copies of this study, the various studies that have been done, I think have a clear perspective on what the different issues are with the two proposals. If you'd like us to highlight some of the pros and cons of the proposals, we'd certainly be happy to do that. With the deep tunnel, as I indicated before, we've used Columbus', for the purpose of budget analysis, higher estimate of approximately $16 million. The obvious benefits to that approach are that the operational and maintenance costs associated with that solution are far less. There is no mechanical equipment to depend upon, there is normal gravity system maintenance. And those costs are really negligible in terms of the analysis that have been done. Probably the biggest unknowns that have been identified as part of that project were, that there is a tendency with the deep tunnel projects to tend to have cost overruns during construction. The consultant indicated to us that it is quite common in deep tunnel to have a disputed contract at the end of construction. There tends to be more unknowns, the deeper they go. I think Columbus and our consultants felt, however, that with the vast amount of exploration that has been done, test drilling, core drilling, this information and feasibility by additional consultants on the part of Columbus, that many of those variables have been tied down. Obviously, the biggest negative to that Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Page 3 Meeting DAYTON Lt.GAL BLANK co., I-URM NO. 1014!::l September 9, 1991 19 ReIn approach, all other factors being positive, is the cost, the impact to the City of a $16 million investment. Just by virtue of comparison, I believe the biggest capital investment the City has made previously is in the neighborhood of $4 million for a Service Complex. So you're talking an investment four times anything the City has ever invested in any capital improvement. But it has all the advantages that we've indicated. The force main and lift station operation involves a lower capital investment, we're talking about, I think, a total capital cost of $6 million, of which a portion includes reimbursement to Columbus for design work that they've already done on our deep tunnel. The upfront capital cost is probably in the neighborhood of $10 million less. Functionally, it should be equivalent to the deep tunnel in terms of it's capacity to handle sewage. It would be designed in a way so that the flow of both would be capable of handling the same amount of fluids. So there would be no functional difference in that regard. The main difference comes in all those problems that would be associated with a force main and lift station operation. Those include a significant and annual ongoing operating expense, not the least of which are energy costs, operational and maintenance, manpower to do those services, the replacement of equipment which will wear out and have to be replaced on a regular basis, the issues of odor which are more likely with a lift station, force main operation than they are with the deep tunnel, all constitute probably the most significant factors weighing against the force main as an alternative. That's basically a highlight of the issues as we see them, there are many other sub-issues, many other factors that we can discuss in detail based on any questions Council and the public may have. Mayor Rozanski: Does any member of Council have any questions for staff on the issue? Denise King: Terry, I had asked you to look into this earlier and I don't know if you've had an opportunity to at this point or not. Are other communities in Central Ohio paying for these same kinds of improvements, and if so, what source of funds are they using? Terry Foegler: I think in terms of order of magnitude, and we have made some informal inquiries but really didn't have time to do a more comprehensive review, no one else had an improvement that was comparable to this. I think if you're referring to sewer and water improvements, or just sewer improvements, all of the utility expenses that the City is incurring are quite significant by any normal standard for a city our size, except for a city which owns its own utility systems. The $16 million, for example, in the deep tunnel, combined with over $3 million on water, could conceivably make $20 million of your capital improvement investments go for utility improvements, and this is for a city that doesn't own its utility systems. That's very unusual. So I think in the context of the kind of expenses that are having to be made, they are not typical. The funds that will generally pay for these kind of improvements in Dublin are income tax dollars. And I think the thing that makes this particular issue difficult is that it competes with other income tax funded improvements. Typically in communities that have their own utility systems, they largely are funded by utility revenues and don't have to compete with the other general fund type of capital improvements that is having to take place here in Dublin. So in that sense, yes, it is unusual, certainly with this order of magnitude. Denise King: Were you able to determine what revenues other communities are using to fund these types of improvements? Terry Foegler: If they are smaller improvements, like most other communities are having to deal with, a relatively small surcharge or small 'tap fee, over time, can generate significant revenue. Since none of them have improvements of this level, there really isn't anything comparable. I believe those that do, however, have to do improvements beyond what their revenue stream of sewer and water fees will pay for, will similarly have to go toward the income tax. Denise King: But there are large trunk sewer lines allover Metropolitan Columbus. Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Page 4 Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK CO., FORM NO. 1014H September 9, 1991 Held 19 Terry Foegler: I believe the primary difference here is, and I wasn't here for all the history that negotiated and got us to where we are, is that City of Columbus does pay for interceptors, that's their policy. In fact, within the City of Columbus, anything 18" or over, they pay for 100%. No developer even contributes if it's a trunk across their property. They view it, I believe, as an interceptor, effectively when it hits the City of Dublin. At that point, it's Dublin's job to get it to that point. I think the fact that our lift station is located some distance north of that point, then in their mind makes it logical that that's a portion of the interceptor that Dublin should pay for. These are clearly the kind of issues we still wish to negotiate with Columbus, especially if part of that capacity would serve Columbus area. There is a portion of this line that serves Columbus developments along Tuttle Road, that is tributary to ours, and in that regard we believe that Columbus probably should contribute in some fashion to that capacity that's being provided for them. But that's the rationale I have been given as to why the distinction is made. Interceptors go up to the suburban units; from that point on, it's the suburbs job to get it to the point of interception. Joel Campbell: Terry, what about borrowed funds? Is there a method by which, rumor has it that there might be the possibility of borrowing money or a portion of the money from federal programs, or the EP A, or something like that. Number one, is that a possibility? number two, if it is a possibility, does that help us a little bit cash flow-wise? And number three, if it does, will we be able to repay loans like that out of the money that we have and maybe allow ourselves to go forward with some of the other things? Terry Foegler: Yes, there is in existence a loan program like that. The federal government, remember, several years ago funded sewer treatment plants through grant programs. Most of those grants were 75 %. Columbus' treatment plant that we discharge into, was funded, in fact, with a 75% Federal Grant. The Feds realized, in the 80's, that their dollars were going out far quicker than they were .coming in, that those type of grant programs simply weren't affordable. They made the decision to create a revolving fund program, where basically they would give money to the states, that the states would then reloan and reloan. The State of Ohio EP A now administers that loan program. The City of Columbus has applied for the low-interest loan for the entire portion of the West Branch that's in Columbus; we have also submitted that application from the City of Dublin, and in fact, submitted for the full $16 million, again always assuming worst-case scenario in terms of the options. So we now have that application in the EP A and have met with them twice regarding that. The effect of that loan program, the single, biggest effect, is the low interest rate. I think we, effectively, have been borrowing money in the neighborhood of 7%, which is very good for a community our size. The low-interest loan program of the city, or of the State of Ohio, is expected to be 5.2% for the next several years. That's a very significant difference in terms of debt service, that kind of reduction. So that's a major plus. The other factor that, and regardless of what program, which alternative you choose to fund, we would pursue this funding, the other factor that we think is critical, when the City did obtain voted debt capacity, those were not for utility improvements. The voted debt capacity was for a series of other type of improvements. With a $16 million option, we wanted to examine what the effect was on our non-voted limit, or the infamous 10 mil limit. Currently, all the tax and jurisdictions in the Dublin area are at 4.7 mils, of that 10 mil limit. A $16 million general obligation deb~ against that would raise that in the neighborhood of 7.4 - 7.5, which is getting very high by most standards in terms of that non-voted debt limit; in terms of some discussions Marsha has had with some of the finance people, that starts to raise the concern. It is our understanding, and we're still investigating this with the financing people, is that the state loan is not general obligation debt and is not, therefore, against the 10 mil limit. That would be a very big plus and would address one of the major concerns staff has at this time regarding the impact on the non-voted debt limits. So those are two big pluses of that program. We've been told we have a good likelihood of approval for funding of that loan, and we're doing everything to make sure we stay on the list. Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Page 5 Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK LU.. !-OHM NO lU14t::S September 9, 1991 HeIcJ 19 ~,",,,,, Barbara Maurer: Well, this is the proverbial rock and the hard place, although I actually feel more like the guy in the drawing over there on the board, with his head upside down under the ground. If we do fund the $16 million from our own resources, our own income tax resources, that will mean that our chances of building some of the other things that are on the Capital Improvements Program, such as the Police Station and Phase One of a Community Center are going to be slim. I'd like to revisit some of the other issues that we started with. What I think we would probably like to do, is try to do the tunnel sewer so that we don't have the side effects that we have right now. I have to say, I've had more personal letters addressed to me, more phone calls, at least one threat of a lawsuit, than I have had from any other issue that I can recall in my 12 years on Council, all of the opinions being on the side of having a tunnel sewer. Some people were experts who called, some people just had very stained noses who called, and others were very concerned about the ecology and the environment and the effect of the force main sewer on any route it might take, either down the river or down the road, and the river is out now, but even going down the road. And digging a deep ditch to put in the force main sewer would have some pretty substantial side effects. So the issue becomes, where do we find the money and what are some of the resources that we can utilize. We've talked about the state loan and I guess it's not clear to me to what degree that would, there is a 10 mil limit, but there is also the actual limit of the amount of income tax that we will get in during the period that we have to pay for the tunnel. And even if we don't push the 10 mil limit, bonding limit, we're still limited by the amount that we can payout on a debt, just as any homeowner is who is trying to figure out how to pay a mortgage. So we have, I think our focus might be on, has to be on, where the money is going to come from. And I'd just like to revisit the first issue that Denise raised. We have talked about this a number of times in Council meetings and have tried to figure out what the history is of this, but the fact of the matter is that our interceptor, like the interceptor that's south of this that is going to come up by Hilliard, our interceptor that runs up through Dublin, will also serve Columbus in the same way that the interceptor does south of this, the interceptor south of this is serving Columbus on the east side of Dublin Road, the interceptor that is coming up to Dublin will be serving the growth area that Columbus projects to the west of Dublin, as I understand it, and search as I may, as a person with a reasonable mind, I can't figure out what the distinction is. It seems to me that that cost which is being carried by Columbus for the interceptor south of us, would logically also be carried by Columbus for the interceptor that's coming up to Dublin. I know from my history, it happened before I was here on Council, but I know that the sewer that came down the road was paid for primarily by federal funds back when there were federal funds; and that was partly because we happened to be in this rural population bracket that there weren't very many other cities in, and we were able to get some federal funds at the time. Now there are two issues that concern me. First place, when Columbus applied for the federal funds for their system, they included, not only Dublin, but Shawnee Hills, and the whole area west of Dublin, in their application stating that they needed the funds in order to serve that entire area. So it seems to me that those federal funds ought to be accessible to us, and that in our discussions with Columbus, that that is an important issue. And my question would be, what sort of chance do we have of having that issue resolved in our favor? The second thing is, you mentioned that other communities pay for the cost of their utilities out of the revenue they receive from the utilities. Now, Columbus has been collecting revenue from Dublin residents for years and years and years and years in the form of tap-in fees and monthly payments for the cost of the sewer and water and what's the other one, assessments, I forget the third source, surcharge, no, something else, connections, yes, the tap fees, okay, well I guess there isn't a third one. When I was researching sewer systems and sewer plants a couple of years ago, just for the fun of it, I was in Glendale, Arizona, where they recycle their water, and I was just kind of interested in that process, but since then I've kept in touch with people who run that system, and one of the things that they have decided to do is, they asked the City of Phoenix for all of the funds back that they had deposited with Phoenix over the years through their tap-in fees and their surcharges, etc., and they set up their own system, or they are setting up their own system, most of it is to do recycling of their water back on to their very badly-needed desert that they live in. The moral of that is not that I think we ought to recycle water, we are in Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Page 6 Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK co., FORM NO IQ14l::J September 9, 1991 ReIn 19 a water belt and presumably have plenty of water, although we're beginning to wonder about that, but that there is a, sort of an escrow fund there that we have been depositing funds in for years and it seems to me that that is what should be used to build this major part of the system that is going to be serving the growth area of Columbus west of us. So I would feel that if we do go for the $16 million tunnel sewer, or if we commit ourselves or at least if we say that that's what we will try to do, that we ought to have some conditions, or things that we will do, in order to fund that to make sure that Dublin residents are in the same position as other suburban residents who are served by the City of Columbus. I think it's correct that no other suburb has had to build the substantial portion of its system. I'm excluding now the things that we did because of the EPA order, that's a totally different issue. So I would suggest to Council that when we look at this issue, that we look at that as a condition of using this type of sewer, of doing this type of sewer, of looking at that as a resource that we will have to rely on, in order to be able to afford it for our City. The other source would be, of course, various kinds of tap-in fees and surcharges that we're permitted to apply that would go back to the users. Right now, the income tax comes from a lot of people who aren't users, as well as people who are users, and we've talked up here before about the equity of that situation with those people who are on wells and septic systems and have to pay all the costs of those, it might not be equitable to have them paying the same rate that people who actually get the use of the sewer and water systems. That's another source I think we need to look at. That's all I have to say for right now. ~ Mayor Rozanski: I have two questions, Terry. One is, it is my understanding the line being designed is a 72 II line? Okay, do we need that big of a line to service the City of Dublin in the future service area as it is in the contract, or can we get by with a smaller diameter line for lesser money. Terry Foegler: Yes, I think that directly relates to the last question that was asked, and that's essentially, if in fact the service area that we agreed to with Columbus in our new service agreement is significantly smaller than what would be needed, what would fill a 72" line, or to say it another way, the 72" line would be .significantly bigger than whatever service area we would agree to in the contract, we would certainly think that's a strong basis to approach Columbus about contributing to oversizing, because it would obviously be the case then that we are paying for sewer well beyond what would ever serve Dublin in the reasonable, foreseeable, planning future. So I think that determination has to be made as part of, I think most appropriately, negotiation for a new sewer and water agreement, as well as negotiation for the joint funding of the West Branch Sewer. Mayor Rozanski: And the second question and I'll direct this to all of staff, is anyone aware of Columbus trying to service an area north or northeast or northwest of us, that would utilize this line from, say the line that runs up the river to Muirfield or just south of Shawnee Hills. Is there a future standpoint that Columbus will be sending their sewage down through our lines and then through this line, and if so, do we have a mechanism to get tap-in fees or recoup acreage fees of some sort? Terry Foegler: I think from the perspective of staff, we're not sure what Columbus' intent might be in that regard. We are aware that Delaware County has had an interest in providing sewer service to the area north of Dublin and south of 42 for future growth and development, and we know they have approached Columbus about the potential of Columbus in some fashion servicing that area. To what degree Columbus feels that is viable or has offered that as a solution, or is pursuing that, would be sheer speculation. As with all the contracts, we may tie into any Columbus line that's in Dublin, and similarly Columbus may tie into any of our lines that exist and extend them beyond our service area. So that's allowed in the current contract and, in our future contract that we've been negotiating, we've been trying to get language that would make sure that that's not at the expense of our needed capacity. And I think where we've incurred substantial capital Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Page 7 Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK co., f-OHM NO lU14H September 9, 1991 Heln 19 investment to provide that capacity, even where it doesn't jeopardize it, we probably would want to look for some kind of payback agreement. if,~.,,,... ~- Mayor Rozanski: I think this is a unique situation. If they do tap in north of us, then we are building a trunk line, which historically in the past, Columbus has built all the trunk lines, as you said. Terry Foegler: The sewer line did, between the time Wolpert did their feasibility study and MS, there was a debate as to what size the deep tunnel should be, and Wolpert, as you'll remember, used a 60"; MS said the decision has been made to go 72" with that. So I think the issue of how large of a line is needed to serve Dublin and what then is oversizing, is a real proper consideration for the City. Mayor Rozanski: Are there any more questions by Council of staff! Joel Campbell: I think we're kind of at crunch time here, as they say in the NBA, and it's time to deal with this. Quite honestly, when I start into this, I lean toward the force main sewer. And I don't think that's necessarily any secret. It's real hard to ignore a $10 million difference in a price tag. But obviously we've "been studying this thing like crazy for the past number of months, probably longer than we all would like to, including us and the folks in the community. And you have to start out with the idea that one is significantly less expensive than the other. However, when we were at the meeting the one night with the gentleman from MS, he pretty clearly indicated a subjective preference for the deep tunnel sewer, and essentially the only favorable thing he could say about the force main was that it was a less expensive alternative. He basically indicated that in his present worth analysis that they did, in a 20-year period of time, it amounted to a $4.2 million difference, and in a 50-year period of time, it amounted to a $1.8 million difference. Obviously, the longer the time, the more minimal the difference; and at some point in time, of course, they also mentioned that the graph lines, if you took the total of the cost and the maintenance and put them on a graph, the lines cross at somewhere between 60 and 70 years into the future. Obviously, your first reaction is "Golly, I'm not going to be here 60 or 70 years into the future", none of us in this room will be unless we have some kind of magic, and the initial impression is, why worry about that? But against that, you also seem to indicate, and quite frankly it's been weighing on my mind ever since, I'm sure it has to you all, too, that there's risk with the force main that doesn't seem to be there with the deep tunnel. That was the one thing that troubled me through this whole process. Quite frankly, I certainly, like Barbara mentioned, I was aware that there's quite a bit of community support for the deep tunnel, particularly in the area right near where "the project is going to be. But I represent Ward 4, and I certainly took my efforts to try and do what amounts to a non- scientific survey of the people in the ward that I technically represent, to see what their feeling was. In general, I think that the one impression I got from people was, the one thing they were worried about was, we didn't want to end up doing anyone project in this City to the detriment of all the rest of them, including the deep tunnel. But the problem that I have, and of course I think all of you do, this deep tunnel, does it really cause a detriment to the rest of the projects in the City? I think that's what Barbara was talking about a little bit ago when she was discussing alternative sources of how we deal with the pinch we're in here. I think that in the long run, if we do the force main, we're probably doing ourselves a disservice. Sure we save money upfront, and that was real hard to ignore, but I believe that the deep tunnel probably provides the better likelihood of long-term sustained development and growth in the City, which may end up creating additional funds to help us pay for some of these other projects in the future. If we took the short-term fix with the force main, we may end up continuing the present, somewhat negative, attitude toward growth in Dublin by people outside the City, potential investors in the City, so to speak, which may end up making a short-run fix, but a long-term problem. So after having wrestled with all those different factors, it seems to me, I don't know exactly what everybody else is going to do, but I think what I have to do is change my mind from what I originally leaned towards, which was the force main,. and lean towards the deep tunnel. Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Page 8 Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK CO., FORM NO 1014H September 9, 1991 Reln 19 The reason is, I believe that we have to eliminate any risk of further damage to our reputation in this town, to eliminate any further controversy between ourselves and the EPA and the surrounding communities, I think we have to take every effort we can to provide for greater growth potential within the City. And it seems to me that the one alternative that allows for that, without any real risk, is the deep tunnel. It's a matter of building it and forgetting it, which is a lot of money to spend at this stage, but it seems to me that we have to take the approach, to borrow a phrase from Field of Dreams, if we build it, they will come. And if we put the money into the deep tunnel, it's a lot of money, but I think we'll have a generally better chance of providing for growth in the City in the long run, which should help us pay for it. But, I think that we also need to be very careful to study alternative plans for paying for this. I think we need to take a good look at the financing alternatives, as I talked with Terry about a little bit ago here, we have to look at what Barbara mentioned, the possibilities of looking very carefully at our terms and our water and, particularly, our sewer contract, to make sure that we don't end up bearing a disproportionate share of the construction costs, and we need to take a good look at any other alternate sources to help us pay for other importaJ:lt projects in the City, not the least of which is the Community Center, which was one of the single biggest things that I continually heard during my little inquiries in town to see what people thought. And I'm sure you all had the same kind of thoughts that I did. So I would ask that if we do vote for the deep tunnel, that the staff makes every effort to explore, and us, too, to explore alternative sources for money and to be able to go forward, at least in some parts, with some of these other programs that I think we also need to go forward on, rather than taking the deep tunnel to the exclusion of everything else. Thanks. Mayor Rozanski: Any other Council person want to make comment? A. C. Strip: I am not even going to discuss how I am going to vote, because that will be self-evident in about a minute, or five minutes, whenever it is. I just didn't want to leave one statement on the table that my colleague, Barbara, left on the table. I'm not suggesting her statement is correct or incorrect, but insofar as other projects, as in the Community Center, I am not sure that the result, let's say, of a deep tunnel system would leave those other projects as being slim. I do think it'll mean renewed efforts and a review of the Capital Improvements of the City in the immediate future, and by the way, there is a Special Council meeting called next week, special meeting, it's a working meeting, to discuss this very item. I'll only tell you that should we spend the extra $10 million for gravity, which is, it's tough to bite off, that $10 million additional cost on an item, it's no different than anything else you buy, it's a big spread. But if we should bite it off, I know I speak for many of us, we will renew our efforts and pledge to seek ways to get other things done in this City that need to be done as well. I do not regard the Community Center, as one constituent called me and said, a frill; it is not a frill in this City, it is an important part of this City that was to maintain a high standard of living for its citizenry. So should it go that way, and should we suddenly find ourselves spending $10 million more than the numbers you've been hearing about, it is not a death knell for a new Police Station or a Hall of Justice or a Community Center or all the other things that this City needs, just means we'll have to find the money, we'll have to sharpen a pencil, and all items from hereon in, speaking for myself, I will redouble and renew my pledge to get those things done either way. Thank you. Denise King: I wasn't sure which rotation we were using this evening, but I think it's important to respond to all the people who have contacted us. I greatly appreciate the input we've had from the citizens on this issue, and as I told someone this morning, "Don't wait until we offer to dig up your yard next time to call us". There are a lot of issues that we appreciate hearing from you on, every issue for that matter. And I hope that you found us to be as receptive and reasonable as you have been, because as I look through my mail on this issue, and the phone calls, it's really outstanding, the rational commitment, the research that is reflected in the comments of our citizens. And those benefit us as we try to put together good public policy. I will try to make this brief, I agree with everything my Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Page 9 Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK co., "URM NO lU14t:J September 9, 1991 Heln 19 Ip colleagues have already so eloquently stated, I favor the deep tunnel option, the gravity option, I have for a long time. I think it's the best investment of the public's funds over the long run. It keeps the commitment that Dublin has made to the Karrer Place residents and the area around that, that the pump station will be temporary. And I think it's important to keep your commitments. It's also the best solution to protect the river over the long term, and it allows us to preserve the scenic beauty and the walls of historic quality along Dublin Road. Like Ace and Joel and Barbara, I do not believe it precludes us from having some of the other amenities that the citizens of Dublin have indicated that they desire. We will simply have to be careful and judicious in phasing those in and making sure that we do not over-commit the resources of this City. None of us want to be responsible for promoting so many projects that we have to raise the real estate taxes, and I think that's something you have to be careful about, because sometimes people promise you too much. So we can, I believe, fund the first phases of a Community Center and some of the other Capital Improvement Plans that we have committed to that are safety issues, as well as the deep tunnel option. And I agree that we will have to look for new and creative sources of revenue, including loans and perhaps a greater share of the sewer and water funds that our citizens have already been paying for a long, long time. So I'd just like to conclude by borrowing a line from one of Dublin's well known citizens in saying that I believe we should do it right, or not do it. Thank you. W""'l: Dan Sutphen: Those of you that are regular Council watchers, probably know what I'm about to say, but I've never voted for a pump station, I don't believe while I've been in this chamber; if I had, it was something that was maybe so small or temporary that it wasn't going to be a long-term effect. I, too, as everyone else has mentioned, $10 million is $10 million. But my business, I work on a lot of mechanical things and a lot of them happen to be pumps, a little different type, but they do break down. And with the ultra-modern system that we have right now that's pumping sewage across the river, we still have problems. And I think that probably brings the point home even more to the rest of the Council as well as myself, I hope that in the future we try to stay away from pumping stations. So there's only one alternative, to me anyway, and that's to do the deep tunnel. That's it. Dave Amorose: I had about 12 points I wanted to touch on this evening, but they've been very well addressed so far by the fellow Council people. I'm also very much in favor of the deep tunnel alternative. Joel covered about 10 of the points I was going to touch on, and Barbara, one, and Ace, one. I think I would like to elaborate a little bit on what Ace said, and when we do look at the Capital Improvement Program at the next meeting, that we ought to look into tapping another resource we have in the community, of course that's a great resource, and that's our business community. And I feel by working with them, we can get into some joint ventures which would, in the long run, I think benefit everyone in the community. It would get the businesses more involved, it would provide much needed, even recreational facilities, that I think everyone in this community is in need of and wishes to have in place. And I guess going with deep tunnel, realizing that's a tremendous amount of our resources put in the ground, underground where it's never seen, but here again, if we want to insure our future growth and future goodwill, we need to send the message to the EP A, we need to send the message to our surrounding communities, especially to the City of Columbus. If they're going to go deep tunnel- and do it right, then Dublin's not going to do anything less but assure that we're going to keep our environment clean and invest the dollars, and basically invest in our future growth. That's all I have. Barbara Maurer: I already, I think by implication, indicated that I think we need to do the deep tunnel sewer. And I'm like Joel, a month ago, I was down on the other side because I'm doing the usual politician's balancing act saying "Well, we can do some of this and some of the other, we can't do it all, but we can do some of each thing". And all we can do of sewer is $6 million worth, if we're going to do all the other things. I'm also a very rational person, I'm an attorney, and I tend to think that if you look at the facts, everybody will understand them. And if you tell somebody that, at our worst, we were only putting Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Page 10 Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK co., FURM NO l014tj Reln September 9, 1991 19 fi"" .041 % of the fecal coliform into the river when we were overflowing, everybody will understand that we weren't terrible, bad guys. But somehow or other, those figures don't mean anything to the people, it's still shit, and no matter what percentage it was, or no matter how small it was, it still looks bad. And that appears, and I'll tell you, I've used that figure many, many times, and it doesn't seem to mean anything to anybody, it was a figure that came out in a very rational way by the scientists from the University of Michigan who tested the river above and below the pump station during what we now call a rain event, not a storm, and that's what we're doing to the river, but it still doesn't mean anything. And I was initially thinking, well, at its very worst, the effect of the failure or temporary failure to the force main, will affect few people and they'll be temporarily discombobulated and we'll fix it and then we'll go on, and that's the way it'll be for many years, just like it has been, and so it will be no different, and lots and lots of communities in the country have force mains. They have to have them for one reason or another, or they couldn't afford anything else. Or they just have to go uphill. But again, I found that it wasn't just a few people who would be affected, in many ways, the whole community would be affected. Joel mentioned business growth. I think there are other kinds of effects on a community when a community appears not to be a doing a good job of good government and a good job of providing basic services to people. I grew up in a business that also dealt with a lot of mechanical failures, my father had a hardware store and I started working in there, I'd say at the age of five, he said it wasn't that young, but I know that's what I spent my life doing, or my young life doing, is providing nuts and bolts and repair parts for people who came and asked for things with strange names that I didn't understand. And those experiences, and I think any person's general experience with what I find very frustrating, we don't have any perpetual machines that go on working forever, are those experiences that tell you that force main is going to be a continuous problem. It's going to be more of a problem to people that live next to it. But it also influences and affects the rest of us indirectly. So, I'm like Joel, I did change my mind the last few weeks, and I've got to tell you, folks, it's the personal letters that you sent. I keep telling that to the people that I work with in my business, it's the personal letters that are going to be very influential with their legislators, but I hadn't realized how much until I was the subject of some of them. So, keep those letters coming, as Denise said. So that is where I've come down, but I feel really strongly that we are in a position where we have some rights to ask for help from some of the other entities that are going to benefit from this interceptor. And I've said it before, I won't go into it again because I've already been lengthy about it, and I do think that there are other resources we can tap, including the community resources that Dave talked about. I'm sure there are a lot of people in this room that would love to have a room named after them in the new Community Center, so please step forward at the end of the meeting. So that's where I am, and thank you for the time. ~,'dli Mayor Rozanski: As Mayor, I guess I get the choice of either speaking first or last. And since I've publicly spoke for the deep tunnel all along, I felt that I would speak last tonight. And I want to speak on the tough decision that this Council had to make. I've been on Council since 1986, January of '86, and this is, I think, the second toughest issue we've had to deal with. And I applaud Council for keeping an open mind on this, because three months ago, if I was a betting man, I would have bet on the force main with this Council. Today, or last week, it was 4 to 3, and I wasn't sure which way it would have gone. And before I came in here today, I figured it was 5 to 2 for deep tunnel. So I applaud you for keeping an open mind and thinking about the future of Dublin. The downside of the deep tunnel? There are a number of them, ladies and gentlemen. Don't think you're going to be construction-free. There's going to be dirt, there's going to be dust; some of you, your neighborhoods are going to be disrupted by the shafts that go down, the service shafts that they're going to have to dig to go down to them. But just like the force main, there will be construction, there will be disruption of the area, so be prepared for it. Last year, Council put a number of issues on the ballot. One of them was a Community Center. But this Council made it very clear to all the citizens that we would not build it, if we couldn't do it without raising taxes. We would not raise taxes to build the Community Center. And that is still the goal of this Council. If we can do it without raising taxes, we're going to Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Page 11 Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK co., FORM NO 10148 September 9, 1991 HeIn 19 find a way of doing it. But if it can't be done without raising taxes, it's not going to be done. Because we feel that you're taxed enough, through the growth of the schools, and the county, and the state, and everything else; and we don't want to raise your property taxes any higher than necessary. So it's been a tough decision by this Council, and they've worked hard and spent many hours on it. And I do thank them immensely for their thoughts, their ideas, their long deliberations on this. I'm going to open this up to the floor, but I would like comments, if anybody's got anything new to add. Not the same rhetoric we've had for months about polluting the river, or the wells, or digging ditches down Dublin Road in the asphalt. If you have something new to add, please feel free to present it to us tonight. Is there anybody in the audience who would like to speak? Jan Patterson: I'm not a Dublin resident, but I pay school taxes and I've lived here for 22 years. I just am curious, who pays the bills, does Dublin pay the bills, or does Dublin pay Columbus and Columbus pay the bills, how are they going to figure that out? Mayor Rozanski: Regarding what, Jan? Jan Patterson: In the force sewer or any type of system that they put in? Whichever is approved, and we know pretty well what is going to be approved, do we pay the contractors after the bids go out, or does Columbus control that and then we pay Columbus? Terry Foegler: Under the force main option, City of Dublin would have been the manager of the design as well as the manager of the construction. Under the deep tunnel option, as it has been perceived, since Columbus is already retaining the main contractor, the design needs to be coordinated, Columbus would oversee the design and construction, which would be paid for by the City of Dublin, for Dublin's portion of the line. ii;;{, Mayor Rozanski: Any other, anybody else like to speak? Jay Casey: I'm a resident of Dublin. I'd just like to address an issue that's pretty close to my heart. I've been here for about three years. I realize the consequences of the decision you're encountering tonight. One of the issues voted on last November was the issue of a Community Center, it's been brought up here by all the Council Members. It does impact heavily upon some of us who have had experience here in the community, looking for that kind of Community Center that's a multi-purpose, swimming, recreational, senior citizen, to see it come to this level again to be postponed or curtailed. And I would encourage you all that, as a community, with youth, students, a population in this high school that is just burging at the walls, that we really need to consider that in light of some of the other issues that the community faces. In particular, one issue, swimming has become a growth sport in this community. It's no surprise to the community at large here, that swimming is popular. Our high school's popular. Our Dublin swimming pool has 220 young swimmers, ages 8, or 7, to 16. The high school swimming program is also very popular. We have 50 or 60 high school freshman and sophomore girls. We have a high school team that's competitive. Yet, we don't have a pool. We have quality swimmers in this community, but yet we have to travel to Westerville, Gahanna, our high school team goes to Urbancrest. 45 minutes down the road, in a bus, to swim for 40 minutes, and to travel back for 45 more minutes. So, it's again, looking at an issue that, I feel, and some of the other community members as citizens here of Dublin, feel needs to be addressed. And I just bring that to the floor that yes, there's a need for adequate sewers. We need the best technology. We'll not argue the merits, the technical merits here that have been addressed on the floor. Would like to see the issue of the Community Center, not postponed any longer, that alternative financing be explored, if it doesn't come from our tax base here, and that the benefits of what it brings, not to the high school swimming team of right now or the swimmers that are there, but to the future. And not just swimming, whether it's volleyball, senior citizen, art center, that community center will be a self-financing center, once it's erected. I've seen it in other communities. You can draw in master swimmers, you can draw in life-saving, Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Page 12 Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK co., FORM NO 10148 September 9, 1991 Heln 19 ,",.". .', you can draw in the Red Cross, it truly can become a multi-purpose center. And I would just like to bring that to the whole Council, that we don't forget that a large base of this group voted in favor, when that issue was brought on the ballot last November for a Community Center. So I'll leave that thought with the Council, and I appreciate your consideration. Mayor Rozanski: Anybodyelse? Okay, seeing no other hands, I'd entertain a motion from Council to direct staff to prepare next week's Capital Improvement Package with the deep tunnel option in it, so we can proceed with the five-year Capital Improvement Program. A. C. Strip: So moved, Mr. Mayor. Dave Amorose: Second. Mayor Rozanski: Any discussion or comments? Barbara Maurer: Now my question, is that the appropriate thing to do, or to add that the exploration of other kinds of financing that we talked about tonight, be considered in the development of this Capital Improvement Program. Terry Foegler: I think that could probably be added at the Capital Improvement review. We have, as you will recall, made certain funding assumptions in the capital budget itself, regarding 161, Tuller Road, and I think with the adoption of the program, all of the concerns and conditions you may want to impose within the financing, would be appropriate at that time. f!f" Mayor Rozanski: Because there is other financing for other projects that would need to be adopted at the same time. Mayor Rozanski: yes Mr. Sutphen: yes Mr. Amorose: yes Mrs. King: yes Mr. Strip: yes Mr. Campbell: yes Ms. Maurer: yes Mayor Rozanski: You've got your marching orders, Terry. Next, we'll move on to second reading of Ordinance 54-91 by title only, please. Ordinance 54-91 - Ordinance Authorizing the City Manager to Enter Into a Sewer Line Extension Agreement With Davidson-Phillips, Inc. Mayor Rozanski: Is there anything new to add at this time? Okay, if not, we'll hold this over for a third and final reading at our next regularly scheduled Council meeting. Next, we have first reading of Ordinance 53-91. Ordinance 53-91 - Ordinance to Accept the Lowest, Best Bid for the Old Dublin Historic District Street Lighting Project. Mayor Rozanski: Could I have an introduction, please? Dan Sutphen: I'll introduce it. Mayor Rozanski: Steve, you want to make some comments on this? Steve Smith: Yes, we opened bids today, and we have a revised ordinance authorizing, and Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Page 13 Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK co., I-UHM NO 1014t:J September 9, 1991 ReIn 19 ,,, it's in front of me here, authorizing us to enter into a contract with the lowest and best bid on a not-to-exceed $155,280 price tag. We have not put the name of the successful bidder in because we presently are checking references and things of that nature. And what we would like Council to do, because we want to get this project in the form of construction quickly, we'd like Council to approve the ordinance to permit us to award to lowest and best bidder on a not-to-exceed $155,280 bid, based upon review by our engineer and contacting for references and the other checks. But we have opened bids today on this, but since we've not made all the calls that we normally get to make, usually we have a couple- day grace period, the ordinance you're reading, Jan, is the old one. This is the new one that's being distributed right now. That would be our request. As you know, this project had to be rebid twice because of engineering estimates and the fact we couldn't get low enough bids. And there had been other numerous delays with respect to these street lights, and the Old Dublin folks over there would like to get these street lights in for the holidays. And we have a short construction period and that is the reason we're asking to do it this way. We are only awarding it, based upon this, to the "lowest and best bid, the lowest bid in this case being the $155,280. So we're not asking that you give us a Carte Blanche to award, only to award to the lowest bidder. If Council is uncomfortable with that, then the only other thing I can suggest to you is that you place it on the agenda for next Monday, and we'll lose another week, it may not be crucial, and we'll be able to supply you the name of the lowest bidder at that time, with the reference checks and things of that nature. Tim Hansley: They cannot act on it next Monday, because that's a special purpose Finance Committee meeting of the whole, so they'd have to wait, it would be two Mondays from tonight. And the ordinance that is before them does not contain the words "Not to exceed", and we would like to have them add that language, just in case there's a chance we could have somebody that would be below what is the apparent low bidder right now. So it would be "Not to exceed" to be the low bidder or below that. So we're asking that you insert those words, if you pass this ordinance tonight. The other choice is to defer two weeks, or I guess a third option is declare that meeting Monday night as a special meeting for the purpose of CIP and other business to come before Council. That would be the third option. Steve Smith: I thought that's what we did at the last meeting. Tim Hansley: That meeting's been called as a Finance" Committee meeting for Council of the whole. A. C. Strip: The problem I have with adopting this, and I certainly don't question anybody's intentions, is two fold. One, I think it's kind of a sticky precedent to begin and say, "We'll let staff really, we're going to delegate our work to staff', and that's what we'd be doing. Secondly, Steve, I'm just wondering, will an unsuccessful bidder, the unsuccessful bidder, have we opened up a little door for him to come in and indicate that this was a bid not passed upon by Council, but passed upon by staff. Steve Smith: There is ample case law to support this position in the State of Ohio, been tested, Ace, where Council has authorized staff to enter into lowest and best bid. A. C. Strip: How much difference will a week make, do you think? Steve Smith: The folks in Old Dublin are concerned that they may not get it done now for the holidays, Ace. And we opened bids today, we had to re-bid it, and it's one of these situations where there's no good answer. But we feel comfortable, at the moment, with the lowest bid, that Paul has reviewed, but again, we opened, how many bids were there? Terry Foegler: There were only two bids. A. C. Strip: Why can't you share the bids with us? Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Page 14 Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK co., FORM NO 10148 HeIn September 9, 1991 19 Terry Foegler: We'd be happy to share the information with Council. A. C. Strip: That would solve my problem. ."";;:1 Terry Foegler: In fact, we can describe what the issue is that's of concern. There appears to be an item, I'll let Paul go into more detail, that's double-counted in the higher bidder, which if it were subtracted, would make him slightly less than it appears to be the preferred bidder. In putting all the data together today and reviewing it, we were unable to get hold of the high bidder to get some clarification on a couple of their items. It is strictly being done as an effort to try to accommodate the desires of the Old Dublin Association to get this done quickly. You're aware we did this at the last meeting. The bids exceeded the estimates by more than 10 % . The second bid was opened today, which was the earliest possible date. Steve Smith: Ace, if the higher bidder now, it turns out has duplicated an item, he will become the lower bid by $1,000. Dan Sutphen: How can that be legal, though? It's a sealed bid, it's bonded, and if he turns in a proposal and says, "My price is this", we are negotiating after sealed bid, asking for a price change. Steve Smith: No, we're not. We're asking for a clarification of addition, basically. And we're allowed to do that under the law. Tim Hansley: Yes, we're not going to waive any irregularities in the process, our boiler plate always says that. So if there's just an obvious arithmetic mistake, we can waive that. Steve Smith: There mayor may not be an arithmetic mistake, and that's why we tried to get hold of the guy to talk to him about it. Dan Sutphen: Why are we checking their arithmetic, though? Steve Smith: We check everybody's arithmetic, on every bid. Paul Willis: It's not unusual to find mathematical errors in bids that are submitted to us. Steve Smith: Danny, it happens all the time. We not only check their arithmetic, we check their references, we talk to people that they've worked for before. Dan Sutphen: I don't have any problem with that. I just think that if we're checking arithmetic and pointing out to them, "You're high bid oecause your price, you doubled up on something". That's his fault. That's like, if I charge somebody twice for a fire pump, that's my fault. Tim Hansley: The bottom line is, the taxpayer will be down $1,000. Steve Smith: The taxpayer pays more money if we don't check it, Danny. If that could be a $20,000 item, we'd save the citizens $20,000. Dan Sutphen: All I'm saying is, the low bidder didn't do that. I don't know who any of these companies are, have no preconceived ideas about either one of them. The low bidder is truly that, the low bidder. Tim Hansley: The bottom line, we will do what's in the best interest of the taxpayer. That's always the recommendation we'll make to City Council, is the one that gives the most quantity at the least amount of money to the taxpayer. That's our job. Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Page 15 Meeting DAYTON LE.GAL BLANK. t.:O., ~ORM NU lU14tl ReIn September 9, 1991 19 Steve Smith: Danny, that's just normally, we have many times where there's a heck of a lot more than a thousand dollar difference that we find in their addition. Dan Sutphen: But at the same time, I don't understand how you can change something after you get a sealed bid. You're changing the bid price. Paul Willis: I may be able to shed a little bit of light on that, Danny. If you'll look at the bid tabulation Terry passed over to you, the higher bidder, the one on the right side of your sheet, at the very bottom of the page, there are two items which he has added, which were not a part of the original bid items, on which we were asking for unit cost. Those two items, namely the nameplates, the identification tags that go on the lamp posts, and the lamps, which, in the vernacular of the street lighting people, are the screw-ins, or are the bulbs. He's added a unit cost for those two items, and we had asked them to include the cost of those into the related other unit costs, and we need some clarification on that. If he did, in fact, double-price those items to us, and we delete those two items from his bid, he becomes the lower bidder, by approximately $1,000, compared to the one that is the lowest as of this time. Dan Sutphen: So it isn't right? Paul Willis: It isn't correct. Dan Sutphen: I didn't get a chance to study this beforehand, so that's why I'm asking. Mayor Rozanski: Paul, where did you ask them to include those in? Paul Willis: They're included in the cost of the installation for the lamp fixtures. Terry Foegler: What's the line item there, Paul? Paul Willis: It's a standard statement in the plans that il).cludes the cost of, in this case, the bulbs and the nameplates, into the related items that are already bid, or that are included in the bid. Dan Sutphen: But in a way, what if he did do that? I'm just being the devil's advocate here. In a way, that's a way for them to say, "Yes, maybe he did do it, and I'm lowering my price". Is it clearly marked in their bid, I guess I want that to be real sure, it's clearly marked in their bid, that these were options, or items that you asked for to be included later. Paul Willis: They are not items which we asked them to include. They are something that they added on their own, and we're not sure of the reasons why they added them. That's why we're not willing, or not able, to offer recommendations tonight, because we don't have all the facts we need to make a recommendation. Mayor Rozanski: But the low bidder does have them in their price someplace? Paul Willis: Yes. Mayor Rozanski: Can you tell me in what line item? Paul Willis: No, because it's included, the way it's set up, it's included in other related items for which there are unit costs. Terry Foegler: Where would they choose to include it? Mayor Rozanski: Wherever they choose. Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Page 16 Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK CO., f-ORM NO 1014ts September 9, 1991 HeIn 19 Paul Willis: They probably have included them in the cost of the lamp post installation and the light fixture installation. Mayor Rozanski: Or the luminaries? " Paul Willis: Yes. Mayor Rozanski: What is the pleasure of Council on this? Denise King: I move that we authorize the City Manager to, or I move the approval of this ordinance as an emergency, and that we authorize the City Manager to clarify the discrepancy that currently exists, and assure us that the project will be awarded to the lowest bidder, not to exceed $155,280, and that the project commence forthwith. A. C. Strip: Want to waive the three time rule? Denise King: And to waive the three time reading rule, thank you, Ace. Dave Amorose: I'll second the motion. Mayor Rozanski: Any discussion or comments? Marsha Grigsby: We need to clarify that under Section 2, where it states that $155,280 are hereby appropriated from the Hotel/Motel Tax Fund. It doesn't necessarily have to state that it's appropriated, because it has previously been appropriated. That section is in there to clarify what account it is to come from, so we don't actually need to state that it's being appropriated. Tim Hansley: And I think I would recommend that you change Section 2 to say, "Funds which have been previously appropriated from that fund will be utilized for this purchase", I think would be the proper way to say that. A. C. Strip: Take out the "are hereby" and just put in the word "previously". Marsha Grigsby: Yes, that was just put in there to clarify the account that it was being charged from. A. C. Strip: Yes, was the same amount appropriated? Marsha Grigsby: Yes, it was included in the $150,000 and $250,000 that was appropriated as part of the Bed Tax Funds. Mayor Rozanski: We have a motion to treat this as an emergency and waive the three time reading rule, and motion to direct Council to accept the lowest and best bid, not to exceed $155,280. Any discussion or comments on the emergency nature? Joel Campbell: I just don't think it passes the sniff test. To me, I'd love to get this job going yesterday, but I, if there wasn't a discrepancy in the bid process, I'd be voting in favor of the emergency, but something isn't right about it, and because of that, I'm going to be opposed to the emergency nature, because one of these contractors is going to end up being upset about it, I think, and I'll just vote against it; but obviously, you guys do what you want. Mayor Rozanski: Paul, what's the timetable on this project? Paul Willis: The scheduled completion time for the project is 100 calendar days following notice to proceed. Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Page 17 Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK co., I-UHM NU. lU14ti September 9, 1991 Heln 19 Mayor Rozanski: And if we pass this tonight, when do you perceive that notice to be given? Paul Willis: Within about two weeks. And there's a real special interest on the part of the people in the downtown area to pursue this at the fastest possible pace in terms of the administration of the contract. And if the contractor is willing and if he does not have any hesitation with going ahead, whichever contractor that may be, and is willing to go ahead even before he has an officially signed and agreed upon contract, we would give him a Notice of Intent, to proceed with the contract. Dave Amorose: May I ask who's going to oversee this project? Is Mark Jones? Paul Willis: It'll have inspection by the City's Engineering Inspectors and they'll be there on a daily basis. Dave Amorose: Mark, will you be involved in it since you're working with the downtown merchants, and you're doing the landscape design of the downtown area, so you'll see that they're placed properly, and so forth? I need that commitment from you before I would support this on an emergency, simply because I have great confidence in you to see that the project is done properly and in a timely manner. So you'll oversee it then? A. C. Strip: Am I miscalculating, or are we not going to get done anyway until after the first of the year? Terry Foegler: That's what the contract provides for; I think what the apparent low bidder has indicated, that if they can proceed quickly, it is their belief they can get it done by Thanksgiving. That's going to take everything falling into place very quickly. The contract allows for 100 days; if they use the full contract period, no, it will not get done by the holidays. Mayor Rozanski: Ace, I think you're right. If we don't award within, if we award within two weeks, that puts us up to September 23, right? And then 100 days, which puts us after Christmas. Yes, after the first of the year. So there's no guarantee, even if they fulfill the contract, that it'll be done by Christmas? But then, any rain day gets added on to that, and snow day, and everything else. Tim Hansley: Probably guarantee that it won't be done until after the first of the year. Joel Campbell: The only problem I have, it's not, if we were saying "give it to the low guy, the one who is the low guy on the sheet", I wouldn't have a problem. But you're telling us that the low guy on the sheet, isn't the low guy. Might not be. And I'm like Danny, it seems to me that, if I was the guy who was the low guy, and then somebody else comes in and says "Well, wait a second, I'm going to jockey my numbers around and make me the low guy". That just seems to me, if you do any kind of bidding, that's going to make somebody upset. And that's the only problem I have with making it an emergency. I'd like to get this job done yesterday, like all the rest of us, but the problem is, we're basically awarding it to somebody and we don't know who we're awarding it to yet. A. C. Strip: Sure we do, Joel, because the minute somebody talks to the high guy, the immediate thing he's going to say is, "You're right, it was a $4,000 mistake, I'm $1,000 lower, thank you". I can tell you the winner right now. That's what bothers me. Joel Campbell: Yes, that's what bothers me, too. A. C. Strip: And that's what bothers Danny. Joel Campbell: Okay, we're on the same wave length. Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Page 18 Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK co., f-ORM NO lU14t:S September 9, 1991 ReIn 19 A. C. Strip: It doesn't take a genius, how he responds, and if he's not smart enough to suddenly say that, I don't want him to do our job anyway. Tim Hansley: I wouldn't make the commitment, if that's, given that that's the fear that Council has, there's only one piece of advice I give you, and that's to reject all bids and do it one more time. Mayor Rozanski: This is the third time now; every time we've rebid it, it's gone up. Tim Hansley: But if that's a concern that three out of seven Council members have, at least, if not more, then you need to. Background discussion. Mayor Rozanski: Okay, we have motion to treat it as an emergency and waive the three time reading rule. Let's get that out of the way and then we can work from there. A. C. Strip: That wasn't the motion. The motion was to delegate it to staff. Mayor Rozanski: And treat it as an emergency and waive the three time reading rule. Background discussion. Mayor Rozanski: Well, we're treating the motion that was presented before us as an emergency. And now, we can vote that motion down. Tim Hansley: It takes five votes because it's an emergency ordinance, just for clarification. Mr. Amorose: yes Mr. Sutphen: no Mrs. King: yes Ms. Maurer: no Mr. Strip: no Mr. Campbell: no Mayor Rozanski: no Mayor Rozanski: Now we have a motion to direct staff to take the lowest and best bid, not to exceed $155,280. Any discussion or comments on that motion? Mr. Sutphen: no Mrs. King: I guess I have a question, how is that different from my last motion? Mayor Rozanski: That was your motion. We're voting on your motion. Mrs. King: I thought you were trying to, you were going to the next process. Mayor Rozanski: No, we're trying to get rid of your motion, so we can go on. Dave Amorose: Couldn't she just have withdrawn her motion? Discussion. Mrs. King: I'm voting yes. Ms. Maurer: no Mr. Strip: no Mr. Campbell: no Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Page 19 Meeting DAYTON LeGAL BLANK co., f-ORM NU lU14ti September 9, 1991 Heln 19 Mayor Rozanski: no Mr. Amorose: no Mayor Rozanski: Entertain a motion from Council. fb.. Joel Campbell: I'll move to award the bid to the apparent low bidder on the bid sheet, which is Miller Cable Company, in the amount of $155,280, and waive the three time reading rule and declare it an emergency, and make that an immediate affect. Dave Amorose: So moved. Joel Campbell: Second. Mayor Rozanski: Any discussion or comments? Dave Amorose: Does that include the bulbs, then, Paul? We will get bulbs in the lamps in the lamps. Paul Willis: Yes, that's included. Mayor Rozanski: We won't find a purchase order later down the line for bulbs and nameplates? Okay, any other discussion or comments? Tim Hansley: Let me just, we have that ordinance prepared as well, but we would add that, our assumption is, we would add the same clarification on the appropriation in Section 2. We would also advise you that our intent of staff is, if we check out the references on Miller Cable, which we have not done, and for some reason we find that he's not a good quality contractor, we would so advise Council, probably at your meeting a week from tonight, just to let you know that we would recommend that you then defeat this ordinance at your next appropriate regular meeting. Joel Campbell: Would it be defeating it, or reconsidering it, because if we approve it tonight, it's over. So we'd have to come back. Tim Hansley: I'm saying, before staff would enter into the contract, we would so advise Council that we had problems with the references. Joel Campbell: That's fine, I'm in favor of that. Mayor Rozanski: Has Miller Cable done work for us before? Terry Foegler: Not to my knowledge. Paul Willis: Miller Cable has not done work for Dublin, but they have done a lot of work recently for the Ohio Department of Transportation; and they currently have a project for tower lighting at Sawmill Road and 1-270, as well as 315 and 1-270. I think some of that information is in your packet tonight. And I think over the course of several months ago, I think there were some newspaper photographs of them installing some of the tower lighting with helicopters. Mayor Rozanski: So they are a large company, capable of handling this project? Tim Hansley: We work on the assumption that they are the obvious low bidder. Mayor Rozanski: Any further discussion or comments on the emergency nature of the motion presented to us by Joel Campbell. Hearing none. Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Page 20 Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK co., FORM NO lU14tJ September 9, 1991 ReIn 19 Mrs. King: yes Ms. Maurer: yes Mr. Strip: yes Mr. Campbell: yes Mayor Rozanski: yes Mr. Amorose: yes Mr. Sutphen: yes Mayor Rozanski: And on the motion, any further discussion or comments? Ms. Maurer: yes Mr. Strip: yes Mr. Campbell: yes Mayor Rozanski: yes Mr. Amorose: yes Mr. Sutphen: yes Mrs. King: yes Mayor Rozanski: Next, we have Ordinance 61-91 by title only, please. Ordinance 61-91 - Ordinance Amending Ordinance 18-91 Regarding the Extension of the Public Sewer Line to Medex, Inc. Mayor Rozanski: Do I have an introduction? ~ Dave Amorose: I'll introduce the ordinance. Adore Kurtz: Over the last several months, we've talked about that, and passed an ordinance in March of this year, basically appropriating money for the extension of the sewer to Medex. Bids have been taken, received, and they exceed the original expectations for the cost of the City's portion of the job. You have, in front of you, a memo from the Development Department which basically outlines where those differences are, and also a draft of Agreement of Intent. We'd asked that, Mr. Terry Sanborn from Medex is here tonight, as well as Dan Smith, watching the proceedings. What we'd like, to be scheduled for second reading in two weeks, where we can explain at greater length, the reasons for the apparent overage, and Paul Willis will then be able to go through all the specifics and the details. Mayor Rozanski: So what you're requesting is us to table any discussions tonight on this until our second reading? Adore Kurtz: Yes, and then we would like to be scheduled as an emergency legislation at that time. Mayor Rozanski: Anybody on Council have any problems with that? Okay, then we'll hold this over for a second reading at our next regularly scheduled Council meeting. I assume that on the next Ordinance 62-91 you would want the same? Adore Kurtz: That's correct. Mayor Rozanski: We'll need an introduction on Ordinance 62-91. Will you read it by title only, please. Ordinance 62-91 - Ordinance Increasing the Appropriations by the Capital Improvement Fund for the Extension of the Public Sewer to Medex, Inc. Mayor Rozanski: Could I have an introduction. Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Page 21 Meeting DAYTON U:.GAL BLANK co., J-ORM NU lU14t1 September 9, 1991 Heln 19 Denise King: I'll introduce it. Mayor Rozanski: Okay, and we'll hold this over for a second reading at our next scheduled Council meeting. Next, we have Ordinance 63-91 by title only, please. Ordinance 63-91 - Ordinance Amending Ordinance 55-90 Regulating Street Signage in the City of Dublin. Mayor Rozanski: Could I have an introduction? Joel Campbell: I'll introduce it. Mayor Rozanski: Who's addressing this? Tim Hansley: Between myself and Denise and/or Danny, this is recommended to you by the Service Committee, that's why either one of them may also have a comment. The primary change is in Section 2, Paragraph B. We've added language that will allow us to deal with a very specific subdivision that we're aware of, your previous ordinance allowed us, it was installed signage, it was non-standard, it had been approved as part of a PUD. Those could remain as long as they put in white, reflective lettering, primarily looking at Muirfield as the subdivision we had in mind, and then there were a few others that also qualified. The assumption we made, staff and Council together, was that Donegal Cliffs was existing and had been approved as a PUD. When Danny Johnson got involved with discussions trying to explain the options to them, he did some research with Bobby Clarke and others in the Planning Department, we discovered that Donegal Cliffs had never been approved, at least the signage had never been approved as part of the PUD application. So that left a gray area that was not covered by your ordinance. And we then contacted the Civic Association to ask them what their druthers were, did they want signage similar to Waterford, which is a nonstandard pole but a standard sign; Llewellyn, which is standard post and standard signage, totally remain the way it was, similar to what Muirfield has been allowed to stay where they were, with adding the white, reflective lighting. That is the preference of that particular neighborhood. This ordinance, if you adopt it, would allow that situation, then, to control. That if it's in place, previous to the ordinance, and a vote of the homeowners has been taken, and they add the' white, reflective lettering, then it would become legal under this ordinance. The other change that has been added since the Service Committee looked at this just a few days ago, is Section 4, and that allows for, basically, staff to recommend to Council, other sections or neighborhoods to also be allowed to be nonstandard, compared to this ordinance. One area that we have in mind that you're likely to have that request made by staff, is in the Old Dublin area. They're looking at a different type of distinctive signage that would not meet all the pertinent conditions of this ordinance; primarily they're going to be requesting at some appropriate time, white on black signage, more in keeping with the Historical District. And that's what Section 4 would provide for, where the City staff would initiate a request for Council to deviate from your own standards. The other changes were also recommended to you by the Service Committee, in Section 5 we would take the 36-month window of time to comply, down to 12 months, because this has been on the books in some form already for over a year. And once this is passed, after two or three readings, then everybody would have to be in compliance within 12 months instead of 36 months. The other, in C & D, we had a couple housekeeping changes where they'd have things filed with the City and the City basically, we specified that that would be the City Manager or his designee, to clarify who that has to be filed with. With that, I would defer to Denise or Danny. Dan Sutphen: Basically, we just converted and agree that there are going to be times, we thought we had a foolproof sign ordinance the first time, and that's not going to be the case. There are going to be times where special instances are going to come back, but we still are giving staff a major guidance, and this is a slight corked correction, and if nothing else, I don't think, it was an oversight because we thought that Donegal Cliffs, in particular, was Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Page 22 Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK CO., f-ORM NO. lU14tJ September 9, 1991 Relrl 19 a PUD, and it is not, so this is basically allowing them to do what we thought we allowed them to do, they're weren't PUD so it didn't cover them. So, this is allowing that to happen. Barbara Maurer: It seems to me that the, where you say- it's nonstandard distinctive signage which had previously been accepted by the City, that's not going to apply if we develop new signage in Old Dublin. It's going to be not previously accepted. Tim Hansley: Section 4 controls that. That's why there's a whole new Section 4 that says - - yes, if you turn the page there, you'll see Section 4 says that in any area, whether it's installed or to be newly installed, that we can come to Council, the staff will come to Council and then Council, by motion, could say "We authorize ourselves to ---" Barbara Maurer: Oh, okay, I didn't see that, I read this too fast. I was trying to get through my packet too fast. Excuse me. A. C. Strip: The only comment I have, Dan, is if, in fact, we put a burden on the, let's call it a subdivision, if we put a burden on the subdivision to file a request within 60 days of the effective date of the ordinance, I think conversely there ought to be a burden upon us, the City, to give them some kind of notification that we passed this ordinance; otherwise, how can they respond if they're not aware of it. Tim Hansley: Yes, the quick conciseness is a very good point. Most of them have been notified already because of the previous legislation; they had a burden already to come in compliance. Our intent, directed by the Service Committee, is that when this passes, all civic associations that are on file with the City, which is basically every neighborhood, will be notified with a copy of this legislation, and given, one more time, the options. Again River Forest, Llewellyn Farms, Muirfield, Donegal Cliffs, most of those neighborhoods we've been in direct contact with, they've been weighing their options all this time. Some of them have made some provision to comply. But we will, one more time, say, "Here's another amendment, here's the effect of that. Please let us know soon what you wish to do". So that is part of the direction we got from Service Committee. A. C. Strip: That 60 days too tight, you think? Civic associations are like cities, they tend to move slowly. Denise King: In the case of Donegal Cliffs, they had a meeting tonight, which is why I was late, and they were very glad this was on our agenda, and they're ready when we are. I don't expect that will impose a burden on anyone else. If anything, most of us work better under deadline, with a deadline, and I would like to see the City adopt a deadline for getting the signage up in Donegal Cliffs, if they choose to go with the City street names. Obviously, if they choose to retain their own, then it's in their hands to comply within the guidelines of the law. Tim Hansley: That is covered within the section where, if they're asking us to do it, we have the option, facing budget constraints, to phase that in, that's Section 3. Denise King: I realize we do, but Donegal Cliffs has waited patiently for a very long time for us to resolve this issue, and we can ask some other neighborhood that hasn't been waiting as long as they have. Tim Hansley: Well, Donegal Cliffs has already let us know what they want to do, they want to leave up their distinctive signage, and they're going to paint the routed part in reflective paint. So that's what this is all about. Dan Sutphen: But there's also, in Phase 2, I don't know what the proper phase of Donegal Cliffs is, if you go to the south of that development, it's nothing more than temporary poles Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Page 23 Meeting DAYTON LEGAL f:lLANK CO., f-ORM NU lU14t:S September 9, 1991 ReIn 19 with temporary signage on it, and that's what a lot of the people up there want resolved. So, one way or another, they're going to let us know real soon. Tim Hansley: We know for the existing old Donegal Cliffs, they're going to leave the existing signage and just paint in the white. We have ~ letter to that effect already. Mayor Rozanski: I have two concerns. One is, one you just mentioned, is then painted reflectively white. Now Muirfield supposedly had to do that, and has done it, to my understanding? Tim Hansley: They are in the process, I don't know if they're totally complete. Mayor Rozanski: Yes, it's not white, it's yellow, and it doesn't seem to be too reflective. It's better than what it was, but it's far from being easy to see. Chief Chief Ferrell: No microphone, inaudible Mayor Rozanski: Yes, they have a time constraint on that, and are we supervising that to make sure? Yes, they had to have them all changed over. Tim Hansley: It was 36 months. Dan Sutphen: It was three years, that was in the old ordinance. Tim Hansley: Now the recommendation before you tonight is to change it from 12 months from whenever this is effective. Dan Sutphen: Tim, my only comment is, theirs are all yellow right now, and if we change it to white, it will be different in the different citites and I don't like white. Tim Hansley: That's a mistake I made in Section, if you look at Section A, Section 2, Paragraph A, I had thought that was a typo and added white in. I was not aware that Muirfield was yellow. So, you can simply strike that white, that's why that was missing before it was my mistake. Denise King: I think it's a custom cream, so maybe we shouldn't get into giving a name to this color. Tim Hansley: Yes, if you leave it out in Section 2A, then you're okay, because it should be white for everybody else. Mayor Rozanski: My other concern is that Planning and Zoning put a lot of effort working on this sign code along with Council, and I don't know if we should just make changes in this without approaching them on it, plus this gives the. Manager some discretionary --, in this ordinance, which he's never had before, and I'm wondering if we really want to do that? And that's in Section 4. Tim Hansley: I don't see that I have any discretion at all in Section 4, all it says is I can recommend to Council like I can anything else, and it's subject to the action of Council. If you don't take the action, then it becomes, then the ordinance controls. It should say "Shall be approved by formal action of Council", that should be "shall". Steve Smith: You know when we did the sign ordinance, and I don't want this thing to drag out because it took us two years to do the sign ordinance, but I want to tell you the people on P&Z put a lot of time in staff meetings with us. And if you're going to change this thing, you ought to at least let them see it. I think you ought to at least give them the courtesy of letting them see it, what you're doing. Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Page 24 Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK co., !-ORM NO lU14l::J Hekl September 9, 1991 19 Tim Hansley: P&Z did not have any input on this ordinance. Steve Smith: Yes, they did. P&Z had alot of put on the original sign ordinance that you modified with this ordinance. $it.....,. Dan Sutphen: The most recent modification is that we're not changing the color of the signs it's painted on, all we're doing is, through a loophole which we didn't anticipate in the Donegal Cliffs section, their subdivision, we thought it was a PUD, and it's not. So, the ordinance doesn't cover that. So all we're doing is kind of putting an umbrella out and catching them and bringing them back in so it's all und~r the ordinance. I don't know that we have to take it back to P&Z for that. Joel Campbell: I agree, Danny, it seems to me, I guess it almost falls in the category of "Housekeeping", and because of that, I don't know that it's worth going back through, delaying the whole process. If there's at least one subdivision who's been on the fence on this for some length of time and they've already made the applications, I agree with you. I think I'd just as soon act on it and get it resolved. Dan Sutphen: I know Denise, she said she went to the meeting, she's told me she was going to go the meeting, and to try to make them act one way or another in a swift manner. And I'm sure that's what their meeting was about tonight, I'm sure we'll hear about it tomorrow. I'm not asking for an emergency, I just want to have a first reading. ':f*' Tim Hansley: The problem we're having with Section 4 is, I wrote that and it's poorly written, what it really should say is "Such a request shall not be effective unless it's approved by Council". In other words, it's to clearly say that the Manager has no discretion whatsoever, that it's only, all I can do is ask, and then it's not effective at all. If it said "Such a request shall be approved", that would make you say you had no choice but to approve it. That's not the right language either. Yes, subject to the approval of Council. . Mayor Rozanski: Then you want to hold this over to the second reading and clean up the language on it? We'll have a second reading at our next regularly scheduled Council meeting. Next, we have Ordinance 64-91 by title only. Ordinance 64-91 - Ordinance to Accept the Lowest/Best Bid for the Blazer Parkway Landscaping Phase 2. Mayor Rozanski: Can I have an introduction? Dave Amorose: I'll introduce the ordinance. Mayor Rozanski: Dave, if it wasn't for you, none of the ordinances would be introduced today, I appreciate that. Who's presenting it, Pat? Patrik Bowman: Yes, Your Honor, Members of Council. We took bids on a Phase 2 landscaping project at Blazer Parkway. We had 6 bidders, the lowest bidder was Eastside Nursery in the amount of$33,715. We recognized this as being the lowest and the best bid, and we would recommend that Council approve their Did, as well as respectively request emergency on this ordinance. Mayor Rozanski: Any discussion or comments? Joel Campbell: The ordinance says $33,000, we probably have to put the actual numbers in, don't we? You said $33,715 something. The ordinance says $33,000 even. So we better make it $33,715, were there pennies on there, too? Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Page 25 Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK. CO., f-OHM NO 1014t:S September 9, 1991 19 Helrl Mayor Rozanski: Any discussion on the amendment? Hearing none. Ms. Strip: yes Mr. Campbell: yes Mayor Rozanski: yes Mr. Amorose: yes Mr. Sutphen: yes Mrs. King: yes Ms. Maurer: yes Mayor Rozanski: Entertain a motion to treat this as an emergency and waive the three time reading rule? Joel Campbell: So moved. Dave Amorose: Second. Mayor Rozanski: Any discussion on the emergency nature? Hearing none. I,~ Mr. Campbell: yes Mayor Rozanski: yes Mr. Amorose: yes Mr. Sutphen: yes Mrs. King: yes Ms. Maurer: yes Mr. Strip: yes Mayor Rozanski: And on the motion, on the ordinance? Dave Amorose: Pat, on Drawing 1 of 4, at the entrance way of Rings Road onto Blazer, the drawing shows that there is a substantial entry feature there, and as I recall, that was included in Phase 1. We're discussing Phase 2 this evening. Was there a change made in Phase 1, that that did not get accomplished, and if so, will it be accomplished in Phase 2? Mary Newcomb: Part of the Phase 1 planting has not been completed yet, it will be installed this fall. The evergreens were put in in the spring. The service areas will be put in in the fall to complete those entries. Dave Amorose: The Rings Road entry, as shown on this drawing, did not happen this spring, the plants, the use of the spruce there, they were planted in a different configuration than you have on this drawing. And what I'm saying, I've had several people comment that that planting needs to be broadened out, widened out, so it looks more like an entry feature than just a single row of spruce. So with this passage of Phase 2, I hope you can beef up, or please beef up the planting there at the entryway. Mary Newcomb: We can do that. Mayor Rozanski: Any discussion or comments on the ordinance? Hearing none. Mayor Rozanski: yes Mr. Amorose: yes Mr. Sutphen: yes Mrs. King: yes Ms. Maurer: yes Mr. Strip: yes Mr. Campbell: yes Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Page 26 Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK CO., f-ORM NO 1014tJ Helrl September 9, 1991 19 Patrik Bowman: Thank you very much. Mayor Rozanski: Next, we have Ordinance 65-91 by title only. Ordinance 65-91 - Ordinance to Accept an Annexation of 111.5 Plus or Minus Acres in Washington Township to the City of Dublin, Ohie. ,..,:'<~ Mayor Rozanski: Could I have an introduction? Dan Sutphen: I'll introduce it. Terry Foegler: I think Council's aware, this action has been approved by the Commissioners for release to the City. It has now come before the City. Application is also being filed for zoning in conjunction with this land which is also on the agenda. Previously, Council has expressed some interest in having a good handle on the, particularly the fiscal effects of annexation. I guess what we would like to know is, before the second reading of this ordinance, what additional information Council would request from us, so that we are adequately prepared. We feel this particular one, because it's adjacent to the City, basically it's adjacent to utilities, there are some minor offsight extensions, it is essentially industrial use, that the fiscal impacts are quite clearly positive. If they would like more analysis on this in line with some discussion that has taken place with previous annexations, we would like some direction on that for the next meeting. :f:~' .!I Mayor Rozanski: Terry, I know I would like, in writing, exactly what cost to the City, the City would bore on this annexation as far as servicing the property, as far as water and sewer. Are we extending lines to it, and if so, at what cost, and what are our obligations? I realize this is not a residential piece, so as far as City services, there would be few, if none, on the property, other than plowing snow on the dedicated roads, basically. Terry Foegler: Utilities are clearly the main cost associated with this. You've got the normal lower level services here, the police protection, those type of things, and we can give you a brief overview of those. But I think where the, on this size annexation, on this particular land-use proposed, it is strictly the utility information, I think. It presents the opportunity for the most direct, up-front costs. Denise King: Utility information is fine and it's useful, but I'm not sure exactly what all you're including in that. We also need to understand the impact that it would have on our transportation system, street lighting program, the need for additional traffic lights; maybe you're including those under utilities, I'm not sure. Since in this case, there are no residential impacts, that certainly does reduce the concerns a great deal, and it also escalates the value to the City, because I presume there are going to be employees in here working, they're going to be paying income tax, and there will be real estate taxes involved, and those kinds of things. But rather than invent the criteria and make sure that we are comprehensive at this meeting tonight, I think we need to look to other cities that have this requirement and to borrow the very best system that's out there, and adopt it as our own so that we consistently apply the same criteria to every single one of these. Terry Foegler: I don't disagree, I think the issue is, what level expense and what level of analysis for an annexation, and for this particular annexation. Part of the problem in adapting systems from other cities, for example other cities level of police protection is nowhere near what this city's is. You need to look at what this city's standard is for how often we patrol each road, how quickly we remove snow, and all these other things to determine a reasonable cost for those services. I think we can give you the general criteria, and that's what I meant by, in terms of general parameters, this would be quite simple, because of the nature of the industrial use. But certain things, however, in terms of projecting traffic and all the rest, this Council still has to make a land-use decision on this piece, and approve development plans, which can be quite variable in terms of the amount Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Page 27 Meeting DAYTON LE:.GAL ~LANK CO., FORM NO. lU14t:l September 9, 1991 19 Helrl ~j,;... .~ of traffic that would go on the site. I think it's good that the applicant here is bringing both of those through simultaneously so that you can at least have a better handle on that. But typically the annexation comes first, then it goes through the process of land-use analysis and rezoning, which determines really what the use is. So it's somewhat difficult, in the absence of a full, detailed land-use plan, to fully evaluate the impacts. We have to make some rather significant assumptions. We can do that, but I want you to know it's fairly generic in terms of what you'd be getting. Denise King: We ought to be able to come up with, in this City, a cost per residential acre, and an income stream per residential acre, and a cost per industrial acre, and a cost per commercial acre, and likewise, the value, the income stream generated by those. Terry Foegler: Yes, and I have done those studies before, I can tell you they're very detailed, they're very expensive to do to get accurate data that's meaningful. I think we need that because there's a lot of misperceptions out there. The perception, for example, that commercial development, retail is a big tax benefit to the City. They're not, they're typically losers to the City, in terms of fiscal impact on City government. There's a lot of things like that that would help give us data for good decision making. Before this item will come back to you, I can tell you very clearly, detailed fiscal analysis of what the City spends on those services, what typically an acre residential, commercial district will cost, is a very big study. It's not a small thing that we can throw together. We can pull together some of the commonly accepted standards from other cities and those types of things, and give you some fairly generic things which we think will help you with this analysis. That's why I was looking for direction, trying to look for what,is needed for this annexation. And we know for a matter of bigger policy, that you do, in fact, want a more comprehensive analytic framework that we can use then for all annexations. Denise King: And I would hope that once that has been done and the dollar figure is arrived at, that you don't have to either delay projects or do it again, other than to update it with inflation. Terry Foegler: Once it's done, the updating of it becomes a very easy thing. Denise King: I'm not looking for a big, expensive answer, I'm looking for good policy guidance. Terry Foegler: Well, I guess what I'm saying at this point is, our intent next time would be to bring you those things that we can analyze and bring together fairly quickly, which would be fairly crucial review for this annexation, for this analysis. I want to make it clear that that's the product that we're bringing back. Tim Hansley: I'm hearing Terry say that's what staff intends to do. Denise is asking for a higher level. Mayor Rozanski: Well, on this particular annexation, I think since it's a nonresidential, it's strictly a commercial use basis, I think a brief, less expensive one would probably suffice on this particular one. Tim Hansley: We're going to bring you more than you've had in the past, but less than what you ultimately may end up with. Mayor Rozanski: I mean if we're talking several hundred acre multi, PUD, with commercial, residential, the whole ball of wax, I think we're looking for a more in-depth analysis, wouldn't you say, Denise? Denise King: If you do it right, and have one standard, and you develop a figure for the cost per acre of these different developments, then you've done it, you're finished. But Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Page 28 Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK CO.. FORM NO. lU14l::J September 9, 1991 19 Helrl since we don't have time to do that on this particular one, we'll go with something that's brief and beautiful, rather than quick and dirty and meaningful. And then we're going to have to get together in Goal Session, or some other time, and really work out exactly what should be involved with the other larger study, and to what extent we want to fund something like that, and how much staff time we want allocated to it, and all those kinds of things. We're not going to solve those tonight. But I guess I didn't want to indicate that what we use on this one should necessarily be what we use long term. Tim Hansley: I'll give you one other quick paragraph I've given you before, and that's that you still need to adopt ultimately the policy statement that says, if you do the full fiscal impact study and you find out that it's a money loser, does that mean that you annex it always, or not annex it always, or do you choose to, you may have a policy statement that says we will only annex those that are fiscally negative if they accomplish another goal that will help the utility extension pattern, or it's a piece of valuable public land that we could use to become a public park at some point, and so forth and so on. You may have a policy statement that says, "Here's how we use that fiscal impact study". It may be that you don't use it as the only analysis that you do. Mayor Rozanski: Well, if you use it as the only analysis, every residential piece that was annexed into Dublin would be a loser; therefore, you wouldn't annex it, and you wouldn't get further growth. I think you have to take it almost as an average in a region. This project has no fiscal impact on the, it doesn't hurt schools, it nothing but helps the schools, it doesn't put one student in, so this could offset a very negative project. And as a whole, it still could be a profitable package. 'M' Tim Hansley: Your policy may sound something like maintaining the present 60-40 split, the one that tips the balance the other way, might be when you begin to say "no" to all residential annexations, or something along those lines. I'm saying don't lock in the mind the sentence that says we do the fiscal impact study, but if it comes out negative, we always turn them down. That's normally not what cities do. Mayor Rozanski: So you have your marching orders on this one? Okay, we'll hold this over for a second reading at our next regularly scheduled Council meeting. Next, we have Ordinance 66-91 by title only, please. Ordinance 66-91 - Ordinance for a Change of Zoning on 111.203 Acres Located on the East Side of Cosgray Road Approximately 900' to the North of Shier-Rings Road. Dan Sutphen: I'll introduce it. Mayor Rozanski: And I need a motion to refer it to P&Z. Is there a second to the motion? Any discussion or comments? Hearing none. Mr. Strip: yes Ms. Maurer: yes Mr. Amorose: yes Mayor Rozanski: yes Mr. Sutphen: yes Mrs. King: yes Mr. Campbell: yes Mayor Rozanski: Next, we have Ordinance 67-91 by title only, please. Ordinance 67-91 - Ordinance for Change of Zoning on 85.236 Acres Located on the North Side of Brand Road and the East Side of Ashbaugh Road. Mayor Rozanski: Could I have an introduction. Is there a second to the motion? Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Page 29 Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK CO.. FORM NO. 1014t:1 September 9, 1991 19 Helrl Denise King: Second. Mayor Rozanski: Any discussion or comments? Hearing none. "" Mr. Campbell: yes Mrs. King: yes Mr. Sutphen: yes Mayor Rozanski: yes Mr. Amorose: yes Ms. Maurer: yes Mr. Strip: yes h Mayor Rozanski: Next, we have Ordinance 68-91 by title only, please. Ordinance 68-91 - Ordinance Amending Annual Appropriation Ordinance. Mayor Rozanski: Could I have an introduction? Denise King: I'll introduce it. Barbara Maurer: Do we need to review it? It had a total explanation, I think, here in the packet. Mayor Rozanski: Okay, Marsha, you want to present this? ~";.",,... Marsha Grigsby: You have a memo that I think explains all the different sections of the additional request. I might point out that Sections 1 and 2 pertain to the note issues that you had approved at the last Council meeting; and that on August 28, we did accept bids and we received 9 bids, and the low bid was a rate of 4.57. And I talked to our Bond Council and different investment bankers, and they stated that that was a very good rate and that showed the investors faith in the City. It's a rate that's slightly lower than what it's been, some of the other offerings that have been issued recently. So we did get a good rate on our debt that we issued last week. .".."", Mayor Rozanski: Are there any questions or comments by this Council? Does it need to be passed as an emergency? Marsha Grigsby: It wouldn't have to be, but if we have it as an emergency, then the funds as far as the note issues that we have, then technically they're available for expenditure immediately, for like design costs and things like that. Mayor Rozanski: When this is put on, Myra, I know you draw this up, do you have the exact language as the emergency nature when you draw this up, or do they just give you the title of the ordinance? Myra: I don't know on that one. Mayor Rozanski: Myra I know that the ordinance says, but our agenda doesn't say emergency and I really think that we should follow the agenda, if it's appropriate. And I'm asking the question of whether you get that information if they requested it as an emergency or not. Myra: That was not, to the best of my knowledge, asked to be an emergency. Mayor Rozanski: OK. Any questions or comments for Marsha on this? Hearing none, is it the desire of this Council to treat this as an emergency? Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Page 30 Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK co., F-()~M NO. 10148 September 9, 1991 19 Relrl A. C. Strip: Is there really a factor in the administration of your office. ~- Marsha Grigsby: Well, technically, if it's not treated as an emergency, we can't spend these funds until after it's had the three readings and then the additional 30 days. So it would technically put us out of compliance with the Ohio Revised Code, unless we not make payments until the appropriations are effective. Denise King: Or unless we pass this at another meeting and make it an emergency at that time. Marsha Grigsby: Right, and then at that, like if we would pass it at the next meeting, then we would be in compliance as far as being able to m~e expenditures from these funds. A. C. Strip: That's what I'm trying to ask is, do you need it as an emergency tonight, in anticipation of anything you're going to appropriate or spend in the next couple weeks? Marsha Grigsby: There are some expenditures that we can make, it's not absolutely necessary, but there are some that we can make. A. C. Strip: Well, we can always make expenditures. Do you need it passed as an emergency, Marsha? Marsha Grigsby: No, it doesn't have to be. Tim Hansley: The point being, she should recommend it as an emergency to you. pI/"<' A. C. Strip: Well, I keep asking her and she. Barbara Maurer: Well, it was only emergency, not on the agenda, it says emergency here, if you read your packet, you saw it as an emergency, so I think we had plenty of notice. Mayor Rozanski: Well, I'm not saying, we don't, I'm just saying it wasn't advertised that way to the public, and we try to stay in tune with that as much as possible. You're welcome to make the motion, Barbara, if you. Barbara Maurer: I did. I made the motion, pass as an emergency, waive the three time reading rule. Mayor Rozanski: Is there a second to Barbara's motion? Okay, the motion dies for lack of a second. We'll hold this over for a second reading at our next regularly scheduled Council meeting. Joel Campbell: Could we have it advertised as an emergency then for the next one, that way we won't have a problem. Mayor Rozanski: Yes. Make sure it's advertised that way, please. Next, we have Ordinance 69-91 by title only, please. Ordinance 69-91 - Ordinance Accepting the Lowest and Best Bid For Road Salt. Dan Sutphen: I'll introduce it. Dave Harding: In addition to the ordinance, there should be my administrative report and bid tabulation. Let me just summarize, this year we did request bids based on a quantity of 4,000 tons for a contract period of November 1, 1991, through March 31, 1992. We did receive 4 bids. The same 4 companies that gave us bids last year brought us bids again this year. Two companies submitted the low bid of 3275 per ton, those were Morton Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Page 31 Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK co., t-(J~M NO 1014tJ September 9, 1991 19 Helrl .f,'"j\, International and Cargill. However, the bid from Cargill did not meet the salt specifications; therefore, it is our recommendation that the bid from Morton be accepted as the lowest and best bid. I would also add that Morton was the company that provided the City with salt last winter, and they provided very timely and excellent service to the City. One final note, the ordinance is not written as emergency legislation. We believe there is enough time, get adequate supplies, and good weather patterns, we should not need an emergency passage. ffo#,;"'-."j Mayor Rozanski: Any comments or discussions on the ordinance? Dan Sutphen: I just think it's great that we went out to bid early enough this year so that we don't have to pass it as an emergency. Mayor Rozanski: Then we'll hold this over for a second reading at our next regularly scheduled Council meeting. Next, we have Ordinance 70-91 by title only, please. Ordinance 70-91 - Ordinance Authorizing the Purchase of Additional Sewage Flow Meters For the Dublin Sanitary Sewage Collection System, and declaring it an emergency. Mayor Rozanski: Could I have an introduction? Denise King: I'll introduce it. Terry Foegler: This is simply a follow-up to the negotiated, modified findings and orders of the EP A in July, where as part of our increased program of inflow and infiltration reduction we agreed and the EP A subsequently ordered, us to issue additional flow meters. Last year we had purchased flow meters so that the type and make has basically been determined, because these meters are moved around various points on predetermined types of mounts within the system. And we're requesting that Council give us emergency authorization to go ahead and purchase additional flow tote meters. Mayor Rozanski: Any questions for Terry? I'd entertain a motion to treat this as an emergency and waive the three time reading rule. A. C. Strip: So moved. Dan Sutphen: Second. Mayor Rozanski: Any discussion on the emergency nature? Hearing none. Mr. Amorose: yes Ms. Maurer: yes Mr. Strip: yes Mr. Campbell: yes Mrs. King: yes Mr. Sutphen: yes Mayor Rozanski: yes Mayor Rozanski: And on the ordinance itself. Any further discussion or comments? Hearing none. Ms. Maurer: yes Mr. Strip: yes Mr. Campbell: yes Mrs. King: yes Mr. Sutphen: yes Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Page 32 Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK co.. f-Of.fM NO 1014!j September 9, 1991 19 Helo Mayor Rozanski: yes Mr. Amorose: yes Mayor Rozanski: Next, we have Ordinance 71-91 by title only, please. Ordinance 71-91 - Ordinance Authorizing Acquisition of Fee-Simple Interest in a 21.5 Acre Tract of Real Estate and Appropriating Funds Therefore. Mayor Rozanski: Could I have an introduction? Dan Sutphen: I'll introduce it. Tim Hansley: This proposal before you is part of the authorization received in Executive Session two weeks ago. The terms that have been negotiated on a tentative basis are consistent with the direction given to us by Council. We're not requesting an emergency at this time. We have also provided you with a graphic that shows exactly where we are, we just want authorization then to proceed to complete this sale. Steve Smith: Just a couple other brief comments. We have been trading, we prepared a real estate purchase agreement, it's not attached to the ordinance tonight. It is consistent with the terms, we do not need this as an emergency, but we may be asking, we will have the real estate purchase agreement, the draft is in the hands of the attorney representing the seller. We will have the, before the next Council meeting, we'll be sure Council sees the purchase agreement itself, and probably at that point, if the EP A Phase 1 study is back, probably at that point, we will be asking that it be passed as an emergency because part of the arrangement with the seller, as we explained in Executive Session, was based upon a, the purchase price per acre was based upon a fairly rapid closing. So we're waiting on, we've ordered the EPA study already, the survey has been ordered, the EPA Phase I study is in process; and the title work's been done, but just introduce it tonight, if you would, please. Tim Hansley: Again, for the benefit of the press, this is just an extension, this purchase will allow for an expansion of the jointly owned park between us and Washington Township out west of Cosgray Road, and two critical entry points into that, and that land that's beyond the frontage. And we do have a print available for public use, it's no secret what land we're buying at this point. Mayor Rozanski: Any further discussion or comments? Hearing none, we'll hold this over for a second reading at our next regularly scheduled Council meeting. Next, we have Resolution 14-91 by title only. Resolution 14-91- Resolution for the Improvement of that Portion of U.S. Rt. 33 Lying Within the Corporate Limits of the City of Dublin and declaring it an emergency. Mayor Rozanski: Could I have an introduction? Dan Sutphen: I'll introduce it. Paul Willis: This is the third time Council has been asked to take action on this particular project. First time to agree to participate financially in the project, the second time to put your money where your mouth is, so to speak, and this time they're asking for money. The project is scheduled to go to sale very shortly, and we're asking that Council consider taking action on this tonight as an emergency so that Marsha can process the check and put it in the ODOT coffers as our contribution to this project. This is the guardrail replacement on Riverside Drive. Mayor Rozanski: Any discussion or comments from Council? Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Page 33 Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK CU.. FORM NO lU14ti September 9, 1991 19 Helo Dave Amorose: As I read this, we're committing to a total sum of $400, not to exceed, because there's some language in here that says we're responsible for all relocation of utilities, and signage. Paul Willis: I think the verbiage within the ordinance is directed towards any additions that we may ask them to add to the project. For example, if we were to ask them to add some additional length of guard rail, in addition to what they have on the project, they would ask us to pay for that. I believe that's what the verbiage within the ordinance is saying, rather than leaving us wide open to pay additional costs that may be unforeseen at this point. Mayor Rozanski: Any other comments or discussions? Hearing none, I'd entertain a motion to treat this as an emergency and waive the three time reading rule. Denise King: So moved. Barbara Maurer: Second. Mayor Rozanski: Any discussion or comments on the emergency nature? Mr. Strip: yes Mr. Campbell: yes Mrs. King: yes Mr. Sutphen: yes Mayor Rozanski: yes Mr. Amorose: yes .~ Mayor Rozanski: And on the resolution, any further discussion or comments? Hearing none. Mr. Campbell: yes Mrs. King: yes Mr. Sutphen: yes Mayor Rozanski: yes Mr. Amorose: yes Ms. Maurer: yes Mr. Strip: yes Mayor Rozanski: Next, we have Resolution 15-91 by title only, please. Resolution 15-91 - Resolution Designating Financial Institution or Institutions as Public Depository or Depositories. Mayor Rozanski: Could I have an introduction. Denise King: I'll introduce it. Marsha Grigsby: Again this, with the ordinance is a memo that explains basically the procedure we went through to come up with this appropriation, or this ordinance. And also attached is the evaluation that was performed by Mr. Denum Pride, we used his services to assist us in the preparation of the RFP and also the evaluation. And, also, a copy of the investment depository policy is attached for your review. And basically, I think, the memo explains the procedure that we followed and the recommendation that we're making, and our recommendation is included in the ordinance. Mayor Rozanski: Any comments or discussions? You need this treated as an emergency? Marsha Grigsby: No. It's scheduled to have the second and third readings, with the third Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Page 34 Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK CO.. FORM NO 1()14tj September 9, 1991 19 Helo reading needed as an emergency. ., Mayor Rozanski: We'll hold this over for a second reading at our next regularly scheduled Council meeting. That concludes the formal part of the agenda. Next, we have under "Others", final plats for Wyndham Village, Section 1. Patrik Bowman: Wyndham Village was approved by Council last June. We subsequently went back and made a couple changes to it, nothing substantially as far as the roads and other utilities. We changed the street names, based upon review by the Engineer, as well as I think the Fire Department. We had three very similar sounding names; we changed those on the plat. They're now Warsham, Weismer, and Wigham, no easier to say, but a lot different than very similar words. We also added a fence detail and some other items that we negotiated as part of the Planning and Zoning approval. Wyndham Village is 128 acres on the west side of Avery Road, just south of Avery Park. We would recommend to Council to make that approval and accept the plat. Mayor Rozanski: Any discussion or comments from Council on the approval of this section? Hearing none, I'd entertain a motion, Denise King: I move that we approve the final plat with the conditions listed in the Planning & Zoning report. Mayor Rozanski: Is there a second to that motion? Any discussion or comments? Hearing none. Mayor Rozanski: yes Mr. Sutphen: yes Mrs. King: yes Mr. Campbell: yes Mr. Strip: yes Ms. Maurer: yes Mr. Amorose: yes Mayor Rozanski: Next, we have Brandon Section 2, Phase 2. Patrik Bowman: Both these Brandon plats were actually approved by the Planning Commission last year, they got hung up within the sewer ban. They subsequently both are under construction. Brandon Section 2, Phase 2, is a small 15 lot cul-de-sac extension of Haverill Court. It's 14 lots, just a cul-de-sac extension right along the stream in the southern part of Brandon. It's under construction now. I think the only thing that needs to be done is have it punched out for engineering detail. They have complied with, in the meantime, we've worked out each of the conditions as it was approved by the Planning Commission, and they should be taken care of. So we would recommend approval of this section of Brandon as well. You're accepting it, you're not approving it. There is a big difference. The street system, as far as the PUD, is also combined with the preliminary plat. But after final development plan approval by the Planning Commission, the applicant really has an option of either proceeding and then having Council approve it, or coming to Council to approve it and then post a bond. In this case, I think they're doing both. Mayor Rozanski: Any discussion or comments? Hearing none. Mr. Sutphen: yes Mrs. King: yes Mr. Campbell: yes Mr. Strip: yes Ms. Maurer: yes Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Page 35 Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK CO., FORM NO 10148 ReIn September 9, 1991 19 Mr. Amorose: yes Mayor Rozanski: yes yt" Patrik Bowman: Same circumstance at Brandon 5, Section 5. This is Phase 1 of Section 5. Section 5, if you can picture Brandon, comes off the main street, is moving north toward the Woods of Dublin. It's just a small extension of a north/south street as well as, then a cul-de-sac, which will have 15 lots. Again, the same circumstances, they were started about the same time. The road is in, most improvements are nearly complete; the only thing that needs to be done would be a final punchout of that Phase 1. We would recommend approval. All the conditions of the Planning Commission are on the plat and have been taken care of prior to construction. ~" Mayor Rozanski: Comments or discussion? Patrik Bowman: Yes, Wynwood eventually will hook up into Wynwood Drive in Woods of Dublin. Mayor Rozanski: Is there a second to that motion? Any further discussion or comments? Dave Amorose: I just have a couple general questions about Brandon. Is there, or will there be, or is there a possibility of having a school site in this project. .'-1't Patrik Bowman: The school site is there, it's owned, it has been purchased, they own it. In some of the conversations, there's still a preference, they think they're going to need it eventually. Projections still show it. The preference, if they could get another site, is to look farther north, but that's yet undetermined and no location picked yet. So this is still a very viable school site. .. Dave Amorose: And then at the Phase 1, Section 1 entrance way off of Brand. That is a reserve area, and is that under the control of the owner's association ? Patrik Bowman: Yes, I forget what the arrangement is, it is listed as park land, it's in the reserve. Do we maintain it at all? We maintain it. Dave Amorose: Originally when it came through P&Z, I thought that was to be a naturalized area along the Indian Run Creek there, and now it appears to be a very formal mowed and manicured area. Patrik Bowman: Yes, that's going back a long way, too. We went through a wild flower phase and the first flood washed every one of them out, so we planted grass. Dave Amorose: When you get time, could you research that and see if we're holding true to what the original agreements were on that piece. Thank you. Patrik Bowman: I'd be happy to. Denise King: And would you let all of us know? Patrik Bowman: Yes, Mayor Rozanski: The school site, I know the school's looking at different parcels further up the road, if possible. If they would purchase that site and abandon this site as a school, would it have to come back and forth, P&Z have, if they sold it off to a developer, would it have to come back before P&Z? Patrik Bowman: Mayor, I'm going to have to check, but as I recall, I think we did approve two cul-de-sacs, which would have an appropriate number of lots in the school site at the Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Page 36 Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK CO., FORM NO. 10148 Helrl September 9, 1991 19 same time. Mayor Rozanski: What about park dedication? ~ Patrik Bowman: The park dedication, all in all, Brandon is much lower density than they ever started out with, so I suspect park dedication wouldn't be a problem. If you recall, this area was zoned for a cluster development in the original plan. -....,,'4ii/ Mayor Rozanski: Well, yea if you go back to '76 it was zoned for thirty, thirty four hundred, but when we did rezone it, we did a park dedication based upon the number of units on the rezoning, and that really hasn't changed, has it? Patrik Bowman: No, the numbers, like I said, they've given all the park land they promised, as part of that 1984 or 1985 zoning. Since then, the numbers of the subdivision have substantially reduced, so I believe they far exceed the park dedication requirements. Mayor Rozanski: I gues I don't remember any flux of homes near the park. Patrik Bowman: It went fast, yes, it was almost zoned, almost 4 units per acre. The entrance to Brandon was also to be a cluster unit, and even the one cluster project, the Borror condominium development was even under density than suggested. So the number of units based on what it was zoned, I suspect that there's a lot of parkland. Mayor Rozanski: Okay, I'd entertain a motion, Second, Myra. .",'4'} Mr. Strip: yes Ms. Maurer: yes Mr. Amorose: yes Mayor Rozanski: yes Mr. Sutphen: yes Mrs. King: yes Mr. Campbell: yes ... Mayor Rozanski: Next, we have dedication of Park Center Circle. Patrik Bowman: Park Center Circle is one that we did slip in on you. It's in a very accelerated time frame. It's in the Tuttle Crossing area. It involves no other property owner other than the developers of the Tuttle Crossing area. It is a street extension of a street that is now built in the City of Columbus. It will arc along the west side of Blazer Parkway as it is extended through Tuttle Crossing. It just forms an arc and will come out at an intersection across from existing Park Center Drive in the Tuttle Crossing area. It is the site of Duke Associates announced building, the 85,000 square foot building which will house, primarily, the Zerox Corporation. I told the Planning Commission last Thursday that it's a 12-month process, they're going to get the building done in 8 months, so they might have even been out there starting construction today. We would recommend, this is, the Planning Commission approved the plat, it's a 60' wide, 60' right-of-way street, 32' of pavement. We'll have all the other extensions, of all utilities. We recommend approval, as did the Planning Commission, with the conditions listed in the staff report, all of which the developer had absolutely no problem with, and all in all, were very standard requests for street dedication. Mayor Rozanski: Any questions or comments from Council? I'd entertain a motion from Council to approve the dedication of Park Center Circle. Dan Sutphen: So moved. Denise King: Second. Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Page 37 Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK CO., fORM NO. 1014B September 9, 1991 Helrl 19 ....,'1'< Ms. Maurer: yes Mr. Amorose: yes Mayor Rozanski: yes Mr. Sutphen: yes Mrs. King: yes Mr. Campbell: yes Mr. Strip: yes h."..,,,,, Mayor Rozanski: Next on the agenda "Reports from Council Committees". Any Council committees wishing to make a report at this time? A. C. Strip: Let me say a word for Finance on a strictly housekeeping thing. We're suggesting a couple small changes in the forms for Bed Tax. Dave and Barbara, you got them from me, if you have any comments, let me know. Marsha, I think I sent you the form, if you have any comments, let me know. You all know about the unhappiness of a couple taxpayers that was conveyed to us through Joel Campbell on the estimated tax payment. Finance Committee is going to take a look at that. We got another, and it wasn't prompted by Joel or me, yes, it came completely out of the, it wasn't prompted by us. Joel Campbell: The same topic, but came from out of.the blue. "..'''" A. C. Strip: Right on target on what we're talking about, please take a moment to read it if you haven't. Maybe we can kick it around next meeting. The issue really is, are we going to try and maximize the dollars to the City, or as I see it, are we going to service the public, and I think that's really the issue. So please take a look at that HER letter, because I think it succinctly wraps up his problems, and it may be time to change that. While we're at it, if you have any other complaints from accountants on our tax structure, it is a good time to let us know. .' Joel Campbell: Ace, I put a copy of the letter from the accountant that originally contacted me with the question about the estimations that I mentioned a couple weeks ago, and then I got a note from you later saying if he had any other thoughts, to pass that along. I put a copy of his letter in your stack on your desk today, and it deals with apparently a $25 automatic penalty that if anybody fails to file, normally when you file for an extension, if you file a request to the federal government, it's a matter of sending a form in, particularly these days, it's an automatic thing. Dublin apparently has a requirement contrary to the state and most other municipalities, that you must file an application for the extension here as well; if you fail to do that, it's an automatic $25 fine. I sent him a note, the reason he sent me that letter back, was I sent him a note in response to your request, if there was anything else he had any thoughts about, to pass them on since we were dealing with this, and that's the letter that came back. So, I guess when you, if you, in Finance Committee consider the estimation question on the previous exchange of our correspondence, maybe throw that in there. A. C. Strip: Last thing, Mr. Mayor, we got a couple Bed Tax requests, which I think are in everybody's packet, which will be reviewed by Finance Committee at a meeting yet to be set, and then we'll bring it before Council. Dan Sutphen: A month went by, remember I took August off, so Terry reminded me I needed to bring up our Service Committee meeting. And it was a, Myra is busy doing lots of other things, so we haven't got our minutes out, but it was quite a lengthy meeting, about 2-112 hours, and at that time engineering presented us, I guess I'll call it a third alternative, Denise, which we adopted. Dollars and sense-wise, it came down quite substantially. Certainly it will be up to Council, put it on the Capital Improvement budget where they think it needs to belong. But the Service Committee meeting, Denise and I both adopted it, and I'll let her. I Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Page 38 Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK co., FORM NO 10148 September 9, 1991 Helrl 19 .".''*'' Denise King: It might be helpful to read the motion that we passed at that committee meeting. We recommended, the Public Service Committee recommended that the Dublin City Council construct an on stream detention project as recommended in this Wilbur Smith report; otherwise known as the third alternative for Billingsley Ditch, in their July 10, 1991 report to the City Engineer. And that a second 16" culvert be installed under MacBeth Drive after the detention pond is installed and evaluated. And that the City of Dublin apply for Issue 2 funds for the construction of these projects and that we investigate a partnership with the City of Columbus in applying for these funds, because we thought it would enhance the possibility of receiving them, thereby unburdening our budget to the extent that we are able to receive a low interest loan or actual grant dollars. There continues to be a strong need for dealing with detention in Billingsley and our committee recognized that and has made this recommendation back to full Council. ~.8."1iIJ Dave Amorose: At that same meeting, we brought up the issue of land acquisition and the possibility that it may be difficult with costs unknown. I suggested at that meeting that we try to sell the project by possibly converting it, or at least looking into the possibility of making it a wet pond as well, so that it would be a live body of water at all times. And your motion did not mention that. f{IIfi;""l't: Denise King: No, but there was, I'm glad to have you bring that up because we were looking for ways of trying to meet everyone's need in this project. As a matter of fact, I didn't read all the rest of the motion, I was going to say, I know we met one other need, and that was the issue of cleanliness, and so let me just continue with this, our recommendation included, also, that when the detention pond is improved that the City of Dublin maintain the area behind the detention pond and remove any trash and debris that accumulates thereon as a result of this project, on a regular basis. And there the motion did end, but we did have some additional discussion about the need to look at the option that Dave raised, of making this project not just a dry detention basin, but possibly selling it as an amenity to the upstream residents who would be impacted by the project to the benefit of the downstream residents by asking them whether or not they would favor creating a permanent pond there, below the level that would be held for detention or retention. "", Dan Sutphen: It wouldn't cost any more money, as I recall. Barbara Maurer: I thought it would. Denise King: Well, that was part of this discussion. Dan Sutphen: 25-year storm, was what this is designed around, and to do it, it wasn't going to cost that much more, it wasn't millions, or hundreds of thousand dollars more. There's a certain amount of freeboard that they have to have in the pond anyway. And to dig out the area a little bit deeper for silting, which was brought up, and some other items, that wasn't going to be a problem. Denise King: The question really was, let's talk to the landowners who would be impacted by this project and ask them if they would be willing to donate the value of the land, rather than charging the City $30,000 an acre, or $20,000, or whatever the market would bear for the land acquisition costs, but rather donating that land to the City, if the City made an amenity out of that land, or in some way reducing the 'Cost of the project. And that was, Dave, am I summing up your suggestion accurately. Dave Amorose: Because we thought we needed to make some kind of a selling point there, and the selling point, as you say, an amenity to the area. And, in realizing that it's in the floodway, in the floodplain, so it's not, you cannot build in the area anyway, so why not give them a nice view, so that whatever they develop around that basin, you're not looking at just a dry basin that once in a while floods and gets somewhat unsightly at certain times of the year. Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Page 39 Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK CO., FORM NO. 1014~ Helrl September 9, 1991 19 A. C. Strip: The motion that you're reading has many parts to it. Was it your intention to have this brought up and passed tonight? ~A", Denise King: We simply wanted to make the recommendation back to Council so that Council could be aware of our work and our recommendation at the time of our next meeting, when we talk about Capital Improvements. A. C. Strip: I have no problem with your recommen,dation. I heard you use the word "motion" a couple times. Dan Sutphen: It was our motion, we voted on it through Service to recommend to Council that this is what we're recommending to Council. A. C. Strip: Oh, it's a motion to recommend, okay. Mayor Rozanski: You're recommending this to go in as another project in the 5-year Capital Improvement Package. Dan Sutphen: That's correct, and/or look into Issue to funds and/or whatever. A. C. Strip: Well, that's what I said, it had many parts because the first part was to basically to go ahead and do something; and then the next part was to explore funding. It just seemed to me, maybe it's the reverse. You look at the funding or you approach Columbus, and then you do. I mean I don't know which comes first. Dan Sutphen: We're trying to give staff some direction how to, the next thing that they need to do on this to, right Terry, am I correct? Terry Foegler: Yes, I think our understanding was that the committee viewed the charge as to determine the preferred option, the most cost-effective and best solution for the problem, which they have done, recognizing it must now compete with other capital projects, and see either with additional systems or with other systems, whether it's feasible in the context of your 5-year program. Denise King: And quite honestly, we didn't not include Dave's recommendation in the language of our motion because of our recommendation, because we don't know whether or not the residents want to pursue that option or not. And I think everybody needs to have time to think about it. Terry Foegler: I think, also, the consultant was kind of asked on the cuff, about the feasibility of that notion, and he responded that some type of small sediment basin is needed anyway, that could probably be enlarged without affecting detention. What that would add to cost, I'm sure would be a function of how big that pond got, how much excavation would have to take place, and I think a whole feasibility look at that, would have to be done if you wanted to present that to adjacent property owners as amended, to see if it would be even feasible and what the cost would be. Denise King: We announced it at public hearing. Dan Sutphen: We announced it at Council Meeting, it was in the paper. Terry Foegler: The paper announced that the Committee was meeting for that purpose and whoever showed up, showed up as a result of the notice as it appeared in the paper. Dan Sutphen: And they weren't all for this. Terry Foegler: Yes, the paper did have articles announcing the Service Committee was Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Page 40 Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK CO., FORM NO 10148 September 9, 1991 Helrl 19 meeting for that purpose. ~'-''''!! Denise King: And this report, it was presented to Council back in July, we've had this for a while. I think it's very unfortunate when citizens find out about these projects at this point, rather than earlier. However, it is not too late for input, and I would urge you, if you haven't received a copy of this already, we'd gladly make one available to you. And it's not too late for input. ..",~ Dan Sutphen: This is far from being finished. Mayor Rozanski: Ma'am, Council hasn't taken any action on this. It's a recommendation from the Committee to present it to Council, so Council will have to go through a three time reading rule, public hearings, the whole bit, and it will be a part of our Capital Improvements Program, and it will have to stand on its hidden merits, along with all the other projects that are going to be on the list of Capital Improvements. Dave Amorose: Terry, correct me if, we had a change in plans, right? The pond has been relocated from the original discussion we had as far as the road alignment to the present site, which is basically almost under the power lines, . 1:H''<ti Terry Foegler: It's gone through several iterations, I think the first was the conceptual and quieting the waters, which was based on the topo that existed at that time. When the more detailed topo was done, and the element of a proposed road crossing were added, it significantly changed its configuration, mainly in terms of, where do you excavate to get additional detention? And there was a lot of excavation created to create mounding for this future road that would go over. This last version pretty much honors the existing contours again, and just creates the dam in a way that it would follow the location of a future road. So we're back to putting as much natural retention is there, without any additional excavation, minimal excavation, for the dam that would be constructed. .'0".-,4 Dave Amorose: So Herb maybe you need to look at the new drawings, and maybe they differ somewhat from the older ones. Mayor Rozanski: Well, it's not a sure bet that we're going to do the project. Dan Sutphen: That's one thing. The other thing is, Mrs. Marshall, I'm looking at this plat, and Mr. Jones, your properties, the way they go back on it, it says on, what I'm looking at right here, it says, "no build, no excavation", so it qoesn't change. Well, number 1, it was, you weren't there, but there were people that feel the same way you do, and when the program was finished, when it was finished, I felt very good that we had taken care of all the people that attended that meeting, and did everything that we could in changing the dam position, to not have to literally scrape the back of all these people's back yards. And I thought we did something right. Obviously you're telling us, we didn't. So I do want to tell you, it was in the newspaper, I'm sorry you didn't get a notification, but it wasn't a formal, this was not something that's in front of Council, it came to a Committee stage, that's why we have committees, and we'll be more than glad to, you write us a letter or call us on the phone, we'll be glad to come and look at the property. All we've said is, this is competing with a whole bunch of other issues at this point. Come next Monday night, it might not be competing at all if we can't afford it. So that's maybe something you ought to wait and see on. Mayor Rozanski: Well, Sir, then you have somewhat of an obligation to check the newspaper, call the City, we can go so far, and you have somewhat of an obligation yourself to make yourself informed, right? Okay, Dan Sutphen: For this month? No, we do not at this time. Usually Denise, this is the first time I've been back in a month; so we'll set up a I)1eeting date, and I'll be glad to, if Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Page 41 Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK co., FORM NO 1014tJ September 9, 1991 Helrl 19 you leave your name and number with the Clerk, everybody that's in here, we'll be glad to call you at the next one. ~.~ Mayor Rozanski: Any other reports from Council Committees? Hearing none, we'll move right on to Comments From Staff. IIllk__"'>> Terry Foegler: Just real briefly, want to introduce you, you saw the attached map that you got indicating the drawing of the park acquisition. That was put together by John Nelms, who, John, would you stand up? Want to introduce you, I don't know if you've met him yet, he's our CAD operator, all the property line information on there, we now have for most of the City, so if Council wants maps for whatever purpose, produced that show property lines, streets, those type of things, we can produce those. We'll try to give you these types of exhibits that give you better information, show you what you're buying, show you the areas you're looking at in the future, but I wanted to introduce John to you. Mayor Rozanski: John, glad to have you on board. We met some time ago, and you've got the expensive play toy in your office there that you do this on. It makes our life a lot easier, it really does, it gives us a much better description and idea of what we're dealing with, so we do appreciate it. Welcome aboard. 11"';"'-'-"'" Marsha Grigsby: The only thing I have is that I've talked to Steve Hoffman, the tax administrator, concerning the income tax issue, and he's brought up a couple concerns as far as timing, where we need to know if there are going to be changes for ordering forms and also making changes in the software for the computer system. So there's a timing issue that, if we can resolve the issue maybe at the Finance Committee meeting, so that we can get legislation to you as soon as possible in order to meet our deadlines. .... Mayor Rozanski: Do you know what those deadlines are? Marsha Grigsby: He mentioned that he needs to know, no later than by the end of October. Mayor Rozanski: Then that gives Finance Committee, then, a goal to shoot by. Anything else? Then we'll move on to Council Roundtable. A. C. Strip: Not to seek continuing look at what light's going to be put on flash at 11:00, or midnight, or 1 :00. I think it goes without further explanation. Secondly, someplace on line, Janet Jordan, if a policy exists, I don't know if it does or not, could you share with me as to, do we give preference to Dublin kids to get in to leagues before we close them, such as, if we have a limited number, do we give preference to Dublin kids before we open them up, let's say to Worthington or Westerville? I don't know, I'm just thinking out loud. Since we're using City facilities, though, I just wonder if we shouldn't. Don't misunderstand. I'm not looking for a breakdown, who's from Westerville and who's, that's not the question. The question is, is there a policy, what I'm wondering is, I'm hoping that we don't have Dublin kids who are precluded from using our own facilities in favor of kids from other communities. So it would be a DYA policy, not a City policy? That's helpful, thank you. Nothing more. Barbara Maurer: Met with Mike Gorison and Tim in regard to the next step in Goal Setting. In the past, I've been the one who initiates every meeting, but I've busy, it didn't get done, and Mike and Tim have agreed to take on that responsibility from now on. So the next step will be remind me Tim I can't remember. Tim Hansley: We're working on trying to implement, we're trying to phase the goal setting process into the operating budget schedule. We will need another meeting with Council, either late, late September, or sometime in October, is what we believe right now. A. C. Strip: You mean Goal Setting or --? Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Page 42 Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK CO.. FORM NO 1014B September 9, 1991 Helrl 19 Tim Hansley: Well to, really, you've never adopted '92 goals. You've set, very preliminary proposed goals. Barbara Maurer: Right, and what is supposed to happen during the summer period, in the interim, before the fall meeting, is that Staff is to look at our goals, talk about how much, give us information how much it will cost and how much personnel it would take to implement, then we review them. Also, there's an opportunity, I was reminded by this because I was reading the minutes of the Parks and Recreation Board and it said there's no deadline of when goals need to be turned in, and I think ~f that's the impression of the Parks and Recreation Committee, we'd better send them all notices of what the deadline is, because there is going to be some, at some point. So I think that those groups should be encouraged to meet a deadline so we can have an opportunity to consider them at the next Goal Setting meeting. Il!If~v','~ Tim Hansley: As a quick reminder of where you were most recently, is that Frances sent out, to the Boards and Commissions, a request for their goals. We got one back, and I think I was unaware until tonight that some Commissions may still think they have time to submit them. I thought they had all not submitted goals. Discussion. Right, she probably would have had a follow-up procedure. But at any rate, once those got back and were given to Council, and Council somehow blessed them as another proposed goal, then your previous goals, those Commission-generated goals, would have been flushed out by staff prior to you then adopting a list, that would be included, in some fashion, in your '92 operating budget, which is why Mike and I scheduled a meeting with Barbara, because we're getting ready to start the budget process, in fact, we've already started it at staff level, trying to give it to you earlier this year, trying to get it to you by mid-November. And the question that staff raised of me is, "gee, how does Goal Setting fit into this?". Well, Council has yet to adopt the '92 goal, so we're all kind of struggling with what you do next. The difference this year, as you may remember, is that you do not set very many new, large, global goals. What you really set, is finish'up the '90 and '91 goals. So there aren't a lot of new ones to flush out. One of the primary ones just says "in the '92 budget, if you adopt this as a goal, is have a more detailed performance analysis for road salt, and police response times, and those types of things". One thing we want to know is, if you're going to adopt that one, that's one we can't flush out, but we can include some of that element in the '92 budget as we prepare it. So we need some meeting with Council to have you bless what goals you want to have us address in '92. A. C. Strip: Want to make two comments, and that is that I think you just saw about a $16 million difference in our checkbook that's heading our way. I don't know, but it may well result in a re-prioritization of some of our previously stated goals. Don't know that it will, but I wouldn't be surprised if it does. Secondly, it has traditionally taken us months in advance to set a goal meeting. I would not want to have one with 4 Council members, or 5. So if we're thinking of having one in late September, I personally think you're kidding yourself, since this is right about the 10th of September. So if you're talking about having one in October or November, I think we better start getting some dates now. I don't mean this minute today, but soon. Barbara Maurer: What we've done before is, Frances called, the Clerk of Council called everyone with several possible dates and got a list of wh'en and where. And that's probably what we'll do this time. Mayor Rozanski: Well, Tim, work on setting up a date, okay? Barbara Maurer: And Mike, the lawyers will follow through on that technicality of notifying everybody of when I have to have the goals done. Oh, I just want to say one thing. The Arts Fair was great yesterday. The Dublin Women's Club was complimented by several of the artists that I ran into, saying they had never had such a well organized Arts Fair that they've attended. And so I think that they ought to know that, didn't have Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Page 43 Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK CO.. FORM NO 10148 I! i Relrl September 9, 1991 19 a chance to say it when they were up here, but I think it was very well done. ... Dave Amorose: Several things. Riverside Drive is getting to be a real raceway. I don't know if any of you have traveled it lately, but its', due to the fact that it's up and down, around, and a lot of hidden peaks and valleys in that roadway, it's becoming very difficult to safely enter that highway from Tuller Road, for example, or Bright Road, or Summit View. And since the Chief s here and so forth, if we could kind of enforce the speed limit on Riverside Drive, that might help out the chances of some of the people getting out of there alive, without any accidents. Also, I think we really need to look into some, as much as I hate to slow the traffic down with signalization, but we have to be getting close to the point now where it's starting to warrant some type of signalization, maybe with the future development along Tuller Road, we need to somehow create some breaks in that flow of traffic between 161 and the Zoo. So, if you could look into that, I would appreciate it. Second item, is with the lighting, street lighting throughout the community. It seems like the poles that we have under contract with Columbus and Southern, whether it's in Muirfield, or whether it's in Metro Center, or wherever, some of those poles are absolutely in a state of disrepair, as far as I'm concerned. They're rusted, they're leaning. Of course, when they start to lean, the light pattern's completely different than what it was ever meant to be. I see some of the lights shining up in the air, and off into the ditch, and everyplace but where they should be directed. So, if we're paying Columbus and Southern "X" number of dollars per year to supply our power and provide and maintain the poles, I think we need to bring that to their attention again, that they certainly aren't living up to their part of their contract. And also, like to mention to Herb and everyone else in the area, I'd love to meet with you and walk back there, and maybe bring you the newer drawings, so we can take a look at it, walk it, and get your input. It was unfortunate that you somehow, we missed connections on this meeting, but it was advertised in the newspaper and every attempt was made to get everyone together and discuss it. A number of the people, Larry Vance and Jeff, and Shonkwiler's attorney, and Alexan,der, and so forth, they were there. There were a number of property owners in the area present, but it's unfortunate that we missed connections. So, I'm sure that the Committee and myself, we would be happy to take some special time and meet up there on site with you someday. Sure, I know you're very concerned, I certainly would be if it were in my backyard. And Danny Johnson, if you have a moment after the meeting, I'd like to talk to you. And that's all I have. iiJ>j; Dan Sutphen: I would just like to say for the books, one more time, that I took the month of August off, I told you I was going to do that, and I think we ought to all take the month of August off, like the City of Columbus does. And if you want me to make a motion of that, so it can fail, then so be it. My suggestion is to ditto Columbus and many other cities that shut down during the month of August. It's a busy month and I think if we all knew in advance that we were going to have that time to do other things with, do extra work, or vacation, or whatever, we could. Maybe I won't ask you that tonight, but the next meeting, public meeting, at Goal Setting, that's a good idea. That's all. Denise King: I wanted to ask Council to think about some way that we could make sure that the audience, if there's somebody in the audience, has a chance to speak when we consider legislation under the emergency aspect. Our procedure right now is to make sure that all of us get an opportunity to speak, and sometimes I'm wondering if maybe one of the vendors on the light project, or whatever, was here tonight, I don't have any idea whether or not they were. And perhaps could shed light on some of these issues that are on here as an emergency. So I wanted to raise that issue, you can think about it. I think we need to do as good a job as we can on allowing public participation, I know there's no intent not to, but every once in a while, I think we could do better, and I include the issue of notifying the land owners under that category. That's all. Joel Campbell: I just want to take a minute to thank Peter Lenz and Steve Mack who both, in the last week or two, have been stuck in the middle of a couple of controversial topics with some folks on things that I had to get involved in, too, things that both fall in their Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Page 44 Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK co., FORM NO 10148 Helrl September 9, 1991 19 ,.. own particular categories, and they both responded immediately to the concerns of the residents, or in one case, it was an office, and they kept me posted as to what they were doing by sending back the fax and all that type of thing. It's one of those things I'm not sure we can ever totally make the folks happy, but I certainly appreciate the fact that they took the time to get in touch with the affected parties right away and let me know how they were doing. So I just want to let you know I appreciate that. Thanks. u..',.....",.; Mayor Rozanski: I just have two things. Paul, when is the new section of Blazer Parkway opening up? Paul Willis: About a month ago, I believe, I reported to Council that the contractor had estimated his completion date around the first of September. He's not changed that schedule with us, but he's also not been on the project for about two weeks or three weeks. Mayor Rozanski: What needs to be done to finish it up? Paul Willis: Basically, the pavement is finished. There's some dressing on the side, and seeding. There's also embankment to construct on Rings Road for the widening of Rings Road for turning lanes into that. But that certainly does not prevent the opening of the street before that's constructed. Mayor Rozanski: So just for some grading, is the only reason we're not opening up the road? Paul Willis: Basically that's correct on the Blazer Parkway Extension. If.~ ~ ~ Mayor Rozanski: But there's nothing preventing us from opening it up, there's no safety or health, or unfinished work that prevents us from driving on it? Paul Willis: That's pretty much correct, the widening of Rings Road needs to be done, there's some punchlist. Mayor Rozanski: Is that a separate job? Paul Willis: The widening of Rings Road is a part of this job, and it's to provide for turning lanes into Blazer Parkway along Rings Road. Mayor Rozanski: I'm getting a lot of comments from people working in the area, this road is sitting there complete, and why can't it be used? Paul Willis: The old bridge into, the house that needs to be removed, there's some other grading and seeding along and in the median of Blazer Parkway that needs to be done. And if it's done under traffic, the contractor would be parking within the limits of the driving lanes. One other thing is, the traffic signing is not yet up. I understand that's to be put up later this week. Mayor Rozanski: So at least I can pass that information on to the people there. Next one, Muirfield and Brand Road. Now that Muirfield is getting ready to open up shortly, I hope, we all hope, the plan for signage at that intersection. What is the City anticipating doing? Paul Willis: You're speaking of Brand and Muirfield Drive? There is a fairly comprehensive amount of signing that's to be installed as part of the project at that intersection. The traffic pattern at the intersection will be changed from what it is today. Muirfield Drive will be the through movement of traffic through the intersection. And Brand Road will stop for Muirfield Drive. The stop signs on Brand Road will be installed on either side of Brand Road so that there are larger target areas. There will be one set installed as you approach Muirfield Drive from each direction. There will be second sets Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Page 45 Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK co., FORM NO lU14H September 9, 1991 19 Helrl f"" within the median of Muirfield Drive, so that Brand Road traffic will stop before it crosses the second set of lanes. Those also will be dual. In addition to that, we are considering some other options for better alerting the traffic approaching the intersection, because of the concern for the change, alerting them that the conditions have changed over what they are today. And one of the things that we're planning to do, is to install those stop signs before Muirfield Drive is opened, by about a week, so that people can become accustomed to stopping on Brand Road, and alerting them, also, that the cross-traffic, when Muirfield Drive is open, does not stop, as we did down at Rings and Frantz Road. Mayor Rozanski: Okay, I guess my concern is notifying the public that there's going to be a change made, we need to get it out to them as far in advance as possible, because that's going to be a major change in traffic flow in this community. Terry Foegler: Paul was gone last week, in fact we had a couple special meetings on this subject to address it with Steve Mack and the other staff members. We had Sandra make several attempts to contact the contractor so we could get a date to organize a public notification campaign around, and she's still attempting to do that. We want to get significant coverage in the press as well, so as much information as possible can get out regarding this, because it is a very significant change, it's a very complex stopping pattern. The other aspect that we've added, I think Paul maybe got familiar with this this morning, is we think, from my own experience driving that way at night, it's a very easy intersection to miss, the ramps are very easy. We think at night it's going to be particularly dangerous, so we're looking at immediate lighting of that intersection. Engineering has worked with Mark Jones. The electric company has assured us that they can put temporary Cobra lighting up immediately, then with the permanent fixtures of the type that we would specify, I believe, being able to go up by the end of October, and Steve might be able to confirm that. So we want that intersection to be safely and fully illuminated so that it's as safe at night as it can possibly be as well. Mayor Rozanski: With Muirfield Drive being a through street, across Brand Road, has any consideration been thought of for the speed, that's going to be like a raceway coming north up there. It's going to be divided highway coming up through open land. I already have people in court doing over 90 miles an hour on Muirfield as is. When we have miles of open stretch, unimpeded roadway, has that been taken into consideration? Terry Foegler: I think that was one of the considerations in trying to make that street as curvilinear as we could. If you remember, we looked at two or three options to start with. The straighter the street, the higher the traffic tends to go. But even as curvilinear as it is now, you get a big, major boulevard with limited access on it, the primary method of controlling speed is through enforcement. We can try to do some things for notification. I'm sure Engineering may have some possibilities in terms of looking at reducing speeds, but I think enforcement is going to be the bottom line. Mayor Rozanski: Yes, because one of the things is, you have a school on that road that you're going to have traffic going by for the first time. And that's going to make a real safety hazard right there. Terry Foegler: Not only the speed, but the sheer volume will be much, much more than anyone is accustomed to there. A. C. Strip: What is the projected opening date, so to speak, what is the contract date? Paul Willis: The completion date is set up in the contract as September 18. At one point in time, I think, we reported to Council, we anticipated the contractor was approximately a month-and-a-half behind, six weeks behind schedule. He's made a significant improvement, or significant impact on the work progress, and he's not six weeks behind at this point. It looks like he's going to come very close to that, and perhaps meet that Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Page 46 Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK co., FORM NO 1U14H September 9, 1991 19 Helrl September 18 finish date. Mayor Rozanski: So if he does meet it and it's finished, then you have to get word out to the public relatively quick that we're changing the intersection. A. C. Strip: That's just a week off or so, and that leads me to my next question. I don't mean to be unkind, but if we're about a week off from opening, why are we just now considering the lighting and the signalization, or signing. Why wasn't that considered some time ago? Terry Foegler: The signing plan is fully designed as part of the program. The complete double signage and all those things that Paul was describing, is part of the design that the contractor has to do. What was raised more recently was, there's a concern that we probably ought to go beyond the normal here. We think that the patterns are such and the speeds are such that even more notice than normal is appropriate. We still don't have a confirmation from the contractor that that date will be available. We're trying to get this, I think Council has some sense that there will be some type of opening ceremony and all the rest. It just won't be arbitrarily opened one day, until there is safe notice, safe lighting, safe signage; all those elements will go into it. Lighting is something that we raised recently as a concern, and pulled the power company in within the next day, and they agreed to have lighting there by the time that road is open. I think they responded very, very quickly on that. We typically don't add street lighting to projects. You have to realize that's not a norm here, we've just started to get the street lighting business. And as we informed Council a couple weeks ago, we're looking at all key intersections where there's conflict, to at least get temporary lighting in there, because it's such a safety concern. Tim Hansley: We had hoped to be able to tell you tonight that the contractor told us four days ago, or five days ago, or a week ago, that he would be done on the 18th. Then tonight we would have on the agenda, a request to have you authorize some pre-opening party, or event, that Sandy could advertise, that we would open two or three days later, or whatever. The problem we have is that we don't have a definite date to tell you tonight. We know what the contract says, it says it shall be done by the 18th, subject to him being subject to penalty. A. C. Strip: There is a penalty clause there, if I recall. Tim Hansley: That's correct. And is that substantial completion, or total completion, the attorney's going to have to work that out for us. As of right now, we don't know that it will be done on the 18th. As soon as we get a commitment, then we will poll you by telephone, or at your next meeting, or somehow to say "Before we open it, do you want to have an event, a walk-a-thon, or a big wheel contest, or whatever, some type of marching parade or whatever?" Then we will determine when you want to have that, what weekend you want to have it, then it would open to the public sometime after that. We're trying to meet all those deadlines and we just don't have a confirmation yet. Mayor Rozanski: Does the contractor have any rain days that extends his time? Are there any other reasons? Paul Willis: No, there are really no rain days that have occurred this year. There's always anticipated a certain average number of rain days, each and every construction month of the year. And we've had far fewer than what are normally anticipated this year. Mayor Rozanski: I know we've had far fewer, but I just wondered if there were any, because we are aware that the first four months of this year were wetter than the first four months of last year, so we did have rain this year, just,not recently. Just curious. Tim Hansley: For your information, they did begin the paving process up there today, for Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Page 47 Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK co.. f-ORM NO. lU141j September 9, 1991 Helrl 19 those of you who haven't seen it, that did begin today. Mayor Rozanski: I'd entertain a motion to go into Executive Session to discuss a personnel matter and land acquisition. Tim Hansley: We don't need the land acquisition, that was to give you any update on the park purchase. Since you didn't have any questions, we just have a need for personnel action. Steve Smith: Yes we do, we need land acquisition on a piece of litigation. Mayor Rozanski: I'd entertain a motion, Dave Amorose: So moved. Dan Sutphen: Second. Mr. Sutphen: yes Mrs. King: yes Mr. Campbell: yes Mr. Strip: yes Ms. Maurer: yes Mr. Amorose: yes Mayor Rozanski: yes Mayor Rozanski: This meeting is adjourned. We will not be reconvening. May JJf1M "-f~t4 Cle of Counc'