Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/23/1991 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting Page 1 Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK co., FORM NO 10148 September 23, 1991 Held 19 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 23, 1991. The Pledge of Allegiance was recited by all. Mayor Rozanski, Mr. Strip, Mr. Campbell, Mrs. King, Ms. Maurer were present. Mr. Amorose and Mr. Sutphen were absent (excused). Mayor Rozanski: Any correspondence? Myra: No, Sir. Mayor Rozanski: Comments from visitors on items not on tonight's agenda. We'll move to the third reading of Ordinance 13-91 by title only, please. Ordinance 13-91 - Ordinance To Adopt the Proposed Five-Year Capital Improvement Program for Fiscal Years 1991 through 1995. Mayor Rozanski: Entertain a motion to remove that from the table. Mrs. King: So moved. Joel Campbell: I'll second it. Mayor Rozanski: On the motion to remove it from the table. Mr. Campbell: yes Mrs. King: yes Ms. Maurer: yes Mayor Rozanski: yes Mr. Strip: yes Mayor Rozanski: Terry, do you have a hand-out for us? Terry Foegler: Yes, sir, Mr. Mayor. Essentially, we have compiled the data we think is relevant to the Capital Improvement Program, pulled most of the information from the overall report that we think sets the foundation and the basis for the recommendation. One slight error that is in Council members' copy, I'd like to draw your attention. If you go to the first green page, which are the recommended funded projects, the first page following that is the project summary list that is correct. If you go to the next page, entitled "Five- Year Capital Improvement Program", which shows source of funding, and it looks like this, the only error on there is under "Item 3" in your copy. I believe it says "Scioto Bridge Acquisition and Design". The words "and Design" should be eliminated. That's the $300,000 that simply reflects the acquisition that's taken place. Other than that, we recommend this geared up. A. C. Strip: Let me ask a question, if I may, Mr. Mayor. I'm a little confused. At least one other Council member had the same question that I did. When you get through the whereas, at the Five- Year Capital Improvement Program, Section 1, attaches Exhibit A, is this Exhibit A? Terry Foegler: Yes, sir. A. C. Strip: Terry, the problem that I have is, that is not what came out of this Council a week ago. What came out of this Council a week ago, at a Finance Committee meeting, was a very specific, how did we pass it, we didn't pass it as an ordinance, very specific recommendation, in very specific language, which adopted the Capital Improvements Program and then, in addition thereto, the Police Department, and even that was very specific recommendations as to the planning, etc., which was moved by the Mayor, which you have, and then, also, the statement on the Community Center. My concern about adopting all this is there's a whole heck of a lot of editorializing in here, which we did not adopt. There is a survey of our Council, which I don't want to adopt this in ordinance because this survey was taken some time ago, and our needs have changed since then, my RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting Page 2 Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK CO J-ORM NO 1()14e September 23, 1991 Held 19 own thoughts have changed somewhat. I don't even want to adopt myoId thoughts of the survey taken three or four months ago because the needs of the City have changed, my thoughts have changed. This represents a significant amount of thought of the administration, which I'm not necessarily in disagreement with, but that isn't at all what we talked about last week as adopting. I have no problem with your submitting this, and our accepting this as a recap of the administration's concept; but I would really like to limit the ordinance to just exactly what came out of the meeting last week. I don't want to adopt all of these charts, all the narratives, even if they're 100% right, Terry, I'm not suggesting they're wrong. I don't think it's appropriate adoption, because we're going to be stuck with this forever. And there are going to be issues that come up in years to come that are going to be absolutely inconsistent with some of the statements in here, that's a guarantee. Terry Foegler: If I can explain what the staffs rationale was, and again, you're free to adopt it in part, or adopt it as you wish. Typically, a Capital Improvement Program is much thicker than this; it's a document that has this, plus much, much more narrative with it. What we've tried to do, consistently from the beginning of the process, is to explain the rationale, the method for identifying projects, some of the key financial assumptions that are used in determining affordability to list and inventory all those projects that have been identified. If you look through, for example, just real quickly, what's the major categories include, the financial assumptions include largely the process that was used to identify projects, and then the key financial assumptions, which are those aspects of 10% annual growth, 25 % towards projects, 2/3 of that towards debt, so that it provides the underpinnings of what the rationale was for determining what could be afforded. The next section deals with the cost revenues and general operations, to help determine how many funds are available for the Capital Improvement; again, to reinforce the parameters that were set, how much can the City afford. All of these sayings, following Section, CIP revenues from income tax, takes the current income tax base, projects that growth at 10% a year, to show again where those levels of affordability are from. The final, next section deals with current indebtedness, to show how much debt obligation the City has today. 90% of this is factual information. What we feel is important is that statement reflects a lot of work on the part of Council and others, to come to those projects that have been identified, and the financial limitations embodied in there, so that someone can look at the report, wants to understand it so that Bonding Council, or Bonding Company that's rating the City, can look at the process that it's gone through, to see that it's well thought out, well founded in terms of finance, and represents a complete program, I think is one of our major objectives. This is not something you're stuck with forever. This is a program that you will re-adopt every year, and to agree that you want to change the assumptions, move the numbers around, have it looked at differently, we can certainly do that. But an isolated list of projects that doesn't relate to all of that thorough analysis that's gone into it, I feel does a disservice, in that someone from the public can't come and look at it and see how you got from A to B. That was our rationale for including what we did. Barbara Maurer: It is a one-year adoption, this has all been in each of the things that we have received prior to this, and I read somewhere, in our packet or somewhere, that when they rated, in terms of the percentage of the budget that was going to pay for bonded indebtedness that 15% was the high amount. So it seems to me that the lower you have, the better rating the City has. And it seems to me if we're going to indebt ourselves at a high percentage, that having adopted a discussion that shows how we got there and shows the assumptions that we made, and what our process of thinking was, and I particularly liked the idea that we did go through the process, and this section has our CIP objectives of thinking about the general principle upon which we are basing our priorities, so that it's clear that we thought this through carefully as a Council. I don't think I've changed too much there, I might next year, but I don't think it's something that changes as time goes by. Certainly in the future, I'm still going to want to solve or address a problem which poses a critical threat to public health and safety first before anything else; and do something that's mandated by law or court order or administrative order, unless I want to end up in jail, second. So, I think that adopting this does not do us any harm, and does us a good deal of good in terms of what the outside people are going to see when they come in. If they could see this page, or these two pages, I don't think that they'll be very impressed as something that we adopted as our five-year program; but I think as a document RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting Page 3 Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK CO.. I-ORM NO 1014!::1 September 23, 1991 Held 19 that supports what we're doing, I think that it's a good document. And I read it when we started and I still feel comfortable with the assumptions obviously next year, if we don't have to build the sewage detention basin, then it is going to change, and we will have some money freed up that we can then apply to other projects. In several months, if we find out that there is a loan that's available that's going to reduce the rate at which we can borrow, it's going to change some of the projections. If we decide not to bury the electrical lines, utility lines, along Tuller Road, that will free up some funds that support larger indebtedness, and those ideas are ones that we may adopt within the next month, that would change even a few pages. But I still think that the whole document tells how we got to where we are. A. C. Strip: Let me just say, I have no problem adopting this as a valuable document submitted by administration, but if this otherwise, all ,of this, has to be attached to this record of ordinance, if it's in the Dublin ordinance book. And that's what troubles me, because a whole lot of superfluous, again not necessarily incorrect or anything objectionable, but I think it is not something that I want to see in the thick book of Dublin ordinances dealing with jaywalking, and shrubbery cutting, and ordinances dealing with buildings and regulations. I think the ordinance itself is what we were interested in last week, but I can adopt this booklet as official record of administration's recommendations as approved by Council. Terry Foegler: Perhaps one way to approach that and, again, I'm not sure how the CIP's are typically adopted, again, they are typically very thick books. A. C. Strip: They're not usually adopted by ordinance. Terry Foegler: Perhaps the appropriate way is that the list of the recommended projects perhaps be adopted by ordinance, or perhaps none of it requires an ordinance, period; even that list of projects probably shouldn't be codified in as ordinances, and maybe by resolution, because the program does not bind you; it is not a budget document that guides the appropriation of dollars. It's a program, by which you will make future budgeting decisions, perhaps resolution is a more appropriate way to do it. Steve Smith: I'm not even sure you need a resolution, folks, I think if you adopt this plan by motion as a plan, that's all you need. We're not spending any money with this document, each project has to come in and be appropriated and the funds spent. You could adopt it by resolution, which does not codify it in our ordinance, but I think you can also just adopt it by a simple motion to adopt the plan, just as you do studies, on the Northwest Quadrant Study, or other studies, you adopt it by simple motion. It's the same effect, and it gives the staff impetus to put that plan into effect by bringing specific ordinances. Joel Campbell: Yes, it seems to me, it's also a more flexible document, if we do it that way. If we create an ordinance that lists a half-dozen different projects in it, then that's what the law is, that's what we have to do. Mayor Rozanski: Then we have to have an ordinance to change it. Joel Campbell: Then we have to have an ordinance to undo all that. Whereas, if we have a plan like Steve just mentioned, all we do is bring in the ordinances that deal with spending the money, for those projects pursuant to the plan, and we know this document already, at least we're hoping, is going to be subject to some plan .in the next few months as a result, some change in the next few months, as a result of the hopefully obtained other sources of funds that will allow us to do a few, get down to the items that are listed as 11, 12, and 13 on here. So I guess I would prefer that we just treat this more as a matter of legislative history and adopt it as a plan as opposed to an ordinance. Barbara Maurer: I want to ask the Finance Director, do you know whether the auditors, the people, the bond raters, and so on, prefer a formal, legal adoption by ordinance, or is motion sufficient, a resolution, is there a difference? RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting Page 4 Meeting DAYTUN LEGAL ~LANK cu., F-URM NU lU14t3 September 23, 1991 19 Held A. C. Strip: From the sake of the auditor, before we do anyone of these projects, we will have a specific ordinance authorizing the go-ahead on whatever the road, or bridge, whatever. So we'll have certain the ordinance authority. But Terry and I, here, have been whispering, I think we've come to agreement. Terry Foegler: The analogy to the plan is exactly what it is. It is a financial plan against which future budget decisions will be made. We will bring you ordinances for the purpose of budgeting. It is a plan or a program. The reason we wanted it together, we feel it's important to communicate the whole story, and also describe some of the assumptions which are determined invalid. We redo the analysis in future years and it holds together. A. C. Strip: I would move the adoption of the Capital Improvements Program as a plan, to be adopted by this Council, as an aside, not part of my motion, I want to make it clear that as opposed to an ordinance, as a plan of this Council. And I would commend staff on a good presentation, I think, which we pretty much all adopted. On a very personal note, let me say that I, speaking for myself and, I hope, most of my fellow Council members, there is a pledge on the table from myself, I'll let the others speak for themselves, that somehow we will continue to strive and find the funds to deal with the construction of that police station and community center at the first available opportunity. It is a high priority, but without sewers, you cannot have a city, and you have to have that first; then you can get to the issues that we so dearly want for quality of life. So that goal is still there, and is unchanged and is still very much on the table. Joel Campbell: I'll second the motion and the goal. Mayor Rozanski: Any discussions on the motion? Barbara Maurer: Well, I would just like to say that if we didn't have a sewer, we'd have a heck of a quality of life here. But I think they're very closely related. Ms. Maurer: yes Mayor Rozanski: yes Mr. Strip: yes Mr. Campbell: yes Mrs. King: yes Mayor Rozanski: Now we have to deal with Ordinance 13-91 by defeating that ordinance. Mayor Rozanski: no Mr. Strip: no Mr. Campbell: no Mrs. King: no Ms. Maurer: no Mayor Rozanski: Put that to bed, once and for all, after many, many months, 'til next year. Next, we have Ordinance 54-91. That's been requested to be tabled until the next Council meeting. Entertain a motion to table. Barbara Maurer: Second. Mrs. King: yes Ms. Maurer: yes Mayor Rozanski: yes Mr. Strip: yes Mr. Campbell: yes Mayor Rozanski: Next, for second reading, 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., and declaring it an emergency. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting Page 5 Meeting DAYTON LeGAL BLANK cu., I-ORM NU. lU14ti Held September 23, 1991 19 Terry Foegler: I can give a very quick overview and I think Paul's available to give some more information as well as representatives from Medex. Just to remind Council that sometime back in this year's Capital Program, based on a very preliminary estimate, moneys were appropriated as part of an inducement agreement, with an annexation that involved Medex. That inducement was to construct a sanitary sewer line. At that time, it was based on a very preliminary concept which really had no detailed engineering with it. That inducement agreement was passed by Council as well as the appropriations for the capital budget. Since that time, staff has been working with representatives from Medex to find the best location to make that connection. Some of the initial concepts involved obtaining easements from private property owners, which for a period of time, weren't cooperative. Eventually, the best location was established and determined, and the adjacent property owners did cooperate with the necessary easements. As the detailed engineering progressed and the final construction costs came in, the project is higher than originally anticipated. There is a number of factors, which engineers can go into in more detail. It deals with, basically, the size of the job, some of the interference with easements, utilities that were already in easements, and some of the field management construction that is needed because of the things that exist in the field. As a result of that, we're asking that an additional $24,000 be appropriated for this purpose, to complete the sewer agreement. Just to remind Council, again, this is part of the economic development inducement that looked at a payback; again, with the payroll that we're talking about, we're talking about 100% payback in well less than a year, most of which has already been received by the City. So staff believes it still is a very good deal, that both entities have proceeded in very good faith. We reviewed the construction bids closely with the applicant and with the contractor, and believe them to be good costs, and would recommend that Council approve this modification. Mayor Rozanski: Any comments or discussion from Council? My belief that when we agreed to this in Council the last time, we had a not-to-exceed figure. Do you recall? A. C. Strip: I think it was 37,000 to begin with, could we get some background of how we actually got into this. Terry Foegler: Just to remind Council, we had a situation where a major annexation in the southwest part of the City was proposed. The City was. not a party to that annexation. As a result of that, many folks, many entities, many industries, were annexed, some of whom were not even aware that the annexation had taken place. Included were a number of industrial entities whose first word that they were annexed was being approached by the City saying "Here's your income tax responsibility. Fill out these forms." We've learned from that. Also, at that time, that annexation itself was under litigation, and the validity of that annexation has been questioned. Part of the inducement agreement with Medex was such that, even if that litigation would have succeeded, Medex on it's own, under this inducement agreement, would have pursued annexation to the City. They've also got several other things there in terms of their willingness to participate in City activities, and corporate membership, and those types ofthings. The essence of the City's inducement was to offer sanitary sewer service to them. There were a variety of ways that could be provided, some of which ended up being more costly than others. We do believe this is the most cost-effective route, and we'll, also, with this extension, provide sanitary sewer service to two existing industries that are on septic systems. So we have the environmental issue of hopefully removing three corporate entities with fairly good-sized numbers of employees, from septic systems into centralized sewer. So there were a number of public benefits that were identified with this project. And the payback was quite quick, in terms of the income tax revenue to be achieved. And it's on this basis, that staff recommended its approval. A. C. Strip: I think some of the underlying concern, Terry, was that, what is the likelihood of this coming up again with other companies? Is this a one-time deal only, or are we setting a precedent, are we to be haunted by our action with future situations like this? Terry Foegler: That's a very legitimate concern. I think part of what happened here is it happened so quickly. There wasn't any level of detailed engineering upon which to base a cost. Part of what rose the cost on this as well, was that it was such a small job. Your RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting Page 6 Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK CO I-ORM NO 10141:j September 23, 1991 Held 19 per-foot installation costs will rise dramatically with small jobs, especially ones like this. And that was the reason the original estimates weren't as good as they could have been, the bigger utility extension is high. But Ashland and others, you have had a fairly open agreement, in terms of, "we will agree to put these things in, here's what we estimate the cost to be. If the costs exceed that, we will cover those costs. " You give them the corporation as a certainty. I think what I would suggest in the future is that we probably do the next level of engineering for Council to take affirmative action. That's essentially what you have tonight, nothing has been let, no contracts have been let. The detailed engineering is in, and until that project is bid, you don't know how the contractors are going to perceive it. And both their engineering estimate and our books of unit cost, supported the lower cost to start with. A series of problems that arose with this particular line in these particular locations, caused the cost to raise. This is the same reason we indicate to you in the Capital Improvement Program, these are very preliminary estimates, and those kind of numbers, when you get the real construction costs, based on conceptual level engineering, can be significantly different. A good thing in the Capital Improvement Program, those are bigger projects, and typically those larger projects have more predictable kind of unit costs to them. I guess that would be my response, I don't think that there's a, staff has a major concern with precedent here, because Council, as a matter of policy, doesn't provide a lot of utility agreements. This was a very unique circumstance, that the pending annexation, the agreement to annex. If that annexation had been overturned, an existing on-site system, which has environmental issues and other range of issues like that that affected this one. So I think this one is somewhat unique. Steve Smith: Are we setting a precedent of legal nature? I don't believe so, because I think any time we enter into one of these inducement agreements, it stands on its own merits. .."" And this one, besides having an income tax issue, in terms of getting our money back in a short period of time, this one had, we felt, because, of the three corporate entities out there, also had some environmental issues attached to it. And each one stands on its own. I don't think you're binding yourself to future issues of this type by adopting this. Thank you. Mayor Rozanski: Hopefully we'llleam from this. I guess my biggest concern is that staff presented to Council a figure of $37,000 and we've bought into it with an ordinance. And that you would present something that preliminary to us and have us do it as an ordinance, concerns me. So that in the future, if you are going to present a dollar figure on an issue, that you have a better handle on the cost. Terry Foegler: If I could respond to that. On a project like this, where the preliminary engineering is the basis, realize this wasn't a City-initiated project. Basically, we sit down with their engineer and review the cost and find them to be reasonable or not reasonable. If it is the intent of Council, as I believe it is with another inducement agreement you're looking at, to set an absolute cap, and say regardless of what the project cost is, we can specify that upfront. and say, "Regardless of what your dollar cost is, this is the limit of City contribution. Don't bother to come back for more". And that's a way to avoid that precedent if you have that concern. That is what we have specified with the Cramer Creek extension that's being discussed. Its an absolute, not-to,-exceed amount, regardless of what the dollar project amount comes in, that's the way the ordinance is written. So that can be covered in terms of ordinance language in the future to address that concern as well. I did not mention that also involved a major expansion to this facility, which added employees, and is also part of the inducement to get this corporation to look favorably on additional expansions, and hopefully moving its corporate base here at some point. I think their current employment, we have a gentleman here who can speak more specifically, I think, is it --- Mayor Rozanski: 250 additional? Terry Foegler: So it has had significant employment growth. And again, I think we also shared with Council some of the writing of the business journals, and others who have certainly projected very good things for a company that has been growing very, very well in Dublin. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting Page 7 Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK CO.. F-ORM NU 10141;j September 23, 1991 Held 19 Mayor Rozanski: Anybody else have any comments or discussions? What is the pleasure of Council? Barbara Maurer: I'll move that we waive the three time reading rule and pass it as an emergency, and pass the ordinance. Mayor Rozanski: What is the reason for the emergency nature on this? Terry Foegler: I believe the bids that they have received are technically expired, so that they're trying to hold the contractors to these numbers so we don't find ourselves with a number that continually elusive here. Mayor Rozanski: Any discussion on the emergency nature? Hearing none. Mr. Strip: yes Mr. Campbell: yes Mrs. King: yes Ms. Maurer: yes Mayor Rozanski: yes Mayor Rozanski: And on the ordinance. Any further discussion or comments? Hearing none. Mr. Campbell: yes Mrs. King: yes ..,. Ms. Maurer: yes Mayor Rozanski: yes Mr. Strip: yes Mayor Rozanski: Next, we have Ordinance 62-91 which is the companion ordinance to this. There's no need for any discussion. This is just an appropriation of the money. Could I have a motion to treat this as an emergency and waive the three time reading rule. Do we need this as an emergency? We're not going to payout the money until the job -- Terry Foegler: I think it's structured as a reimbursement. So you could probably take this to a third reading. Mayor Rozanski: This is a reimbursement. They have to do the project before we pay them, so they have months away. Terry Foegler: I don't believe there's a problem with that. Mayor Rozanski: Okay, let's just hold this over for a third reading. 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: Any further discussion or comments? Any additional information? Okay, then we'll hold this over for a third and final reading at our next regularly scheduled Council meeting. Next, we have Ordinance 65-91 by title only. Ordinance 65-91 - Ordinance to Accept an Annexation of 111.5 plus/minus acres in Washington Township to the City of Dublin. Terry Foegler: We have received a significant amount of utility information from the applicant last week. We're right now negotiating some of those extensions and how those would be paid for. We'd like to do a fairly thorough analysis as a result of this, so as part of the initial annexation, the issues of any kind of oversizing or offside extensions, and how those would be dealt with, can be addressed. So we'd like to present our findings on that RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting Page 8 Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK CU., F-ORM NO I0141:J September 23, 1991 Held 19 at the third reading of this ordinance. We are still working with the applicant. Mayor Rozanski: So you'll have that information for us in our next packet, prior to the next meeting? Is there any way you can have it to us sooner? Terry Foegler: We will make every effort. Mayor Rozanski: That we can look at it and have time to ask you any questions prior to the third reading. Terry Foegler: Part of what we'd like to do is, like we've seen with the Cramer Creek sewer extension, is to get those agreements ironed out. And usually they're small details, we can at least have a draft, I think, of what those agreements would look like. I think it would raise the applicant's comfort level, as well as ours, to know what's being looked for in the way of utilities. So, yes, we will try to get those to you ahead of that time. Joel Campbell: I guess I'd also like, I know Denise asked before, and I think we'd kind of like to see, even as a, I realize you can't do it to the pennies, but in general, what things might be impacted by any kind of annexations in the future, particularly in view of our discussion last week about how the services in the City might suffer, if we start trying to be more careful about where we spend our money. I certainly don't think there's any reason to have the services suffer, and if one of those things happens to be because we're taking in more land, then we need to look at that. Terry Foegler: We do plan to have an analysis that addresses those. The key issues that are impacted, though, are the utility ones, and that's why we are focusing so closely on those issues. I think you also have, Planning Commission, I believe, will be hearing the rezoning request of this, so you'll actually have the specific land-use request in front of you, perhaps, at the same time, and might give Council a very comprehensive feel for the whole project, and all annexation. Mayor Rozanski: Next, we have Ordinance 68-91. I'm sorry, we don't need to introduce it, do we? It's the annual reappropriation. Is there any further information on this? The park maintenance goes from 2,500 to 3,000. Terry Foegler: I think the notes were issued to reimburse what has been designed as well as the next level of design that will be done. That's not the entire design cost for it, I think that was an appropriation to reimburse for what's been done, plus get the process going with some additional work. There's a number of consultants that are having to look at environmental issues, in terms of appraisals and other kinds of things. We need the dollars appropriated, so I believe it's a combination of, if you remember, we had the discussion a couple weeks ago, dollars that we've already forwarded from the capital budget, we need to incur as debt, so that we can bond them in the future'. We've done a significant amount of design on 161, in terms of preliminary on the big project, and detailed construction on Bridge and High. So a significant portion of it is to reimburse for those costs, plus some additional analysis that's going to need to be done to keep that project on track. Mayor Rozanski: Any other comments? I'd entertain a motion to treat this as an emergency and waive the three time reading rule. Ms. Maurer: Second Mayor Rozanski: Any discussion on the emergency nature? Hearing none. Mrs. King: yes Ms. Maurer: yes Mayor Rozanski: yes Mr. Strip: yes Mr. Campbell: yes Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Page 9 Meeting LJAVrON LEGAL l:jLANK CO.. I-OHM NU lU14tj September 23, 1991 Held 19 Mayor Rozanski: And on the ordinance itself. Any further discussion or comments? Hearing none. Ms. Maurer: yes Mayor Rozanski: yes Mr. Strip: yes Mr. Campbell: yes Mrs. King: yes Mayor Rozanski: Next, we have Ordinance 69-91 by title only. Ordinance 69-91 - Ordinance Accepting Lowest and Best Bid for Road Salt. Mayor Rozanski: Any new information on this? Okay, we'll hold this over for a third and final reading at our next regularly scheduled Council meeting. Next, we have Ordinance 71-91. Ordinance 71-91- Ordinance Authorizing Acquisition of Fee Simple Interest in a 21.5 + 1- Acre Tract of Real Estate; and Appropriating therefore. Mayor Rozanski: Is there any additional information? Steve Smith: Yes, this is the, we introduced this at the last meeting, first reading, this is the purchase of the park land that we originally discussed with you in Executive Session. We now would ask you to pass it as an emergency simply because the EPA study will be back next week, and our contract, we'd like to close this as soon as we have a positive EPA study. We won't have another Council meeting until sometime after that. Part of the consideration for the purchase price we paid was for a rapid closing on this. The reason we didn't treat it as an emergency last time, we didn't have a read from our EPA consultant when they'd be done; but we should have the Phase One study back late next week. There's a contingency in the contract, we don't close if the study isn't favorable. So, all we're asking you to do is authorize the acquisition; but if one of the terms of the contract is not met, we don't close. Mayor Rozanski: The only reason I bring that up, you know that is located near the tank farm. Steve Smith: That is absolutely why we wanted, well, we do it on all our projects now, but obviously, we're looking at that. Mayor Rozanski: Any questions or comments? I'd entertain a motion to treat it as an emergency and waive the three time reading rule. Any discussion on the emergency nature? Mayor Rozanski: yes Mr. Strip: yes Mr. Campbell: yes Mrs. King: yes Ms. Maurer: yes Mayor Rozanski: And on the ordinance? Mr. Strip: yes Mr. Campbell: yes Mrs. King: yes Ms. Maurer: yes Mayor Rozanski: yes Mayor Rozanski: Next, we have Resolution 15-91 by title only. Resolution 15-91 - Resolution Designating Financial Institutions as Public Depositories. Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Page 10 Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK CO., "'ORM NU lU14t:S September 23, 1991 Held 19 Mayor Rozanski: Marsha, anything new on this? Nothing new on this, then we'll hold it over for third and final reading at our next regularly scheduled Council meeting. Next, we have first reading of Ordinance 72-91 by title only, please. Ordinance 72-91 - Ordinance Authorizing Repair of the Sanitary Sewer System, and declaring it an emergency. Mayor Rozanski: Could I have an introduction? Joel Campbell: I'll introduce it. Terry Foegler: By way of background, Council should be advised first off that this is not appropriating any additional dollars from that which you have already appropriated. What we did initially, if you remember, was indicate to Council we were looking for a way to bid these repairs. We have checked with other cities, a number of them don't bid it. It's a very difficult thing to bid, because 200 totally different repairs are discovered day to day. We have discussed this with the City Attorneys and, basically, with the EPA orders having been issued in July, which now require us to remove this at a faster rate, a clear legal emergency exists. And there's no problem doing this as an emergency while we continue to explore some way to try to bid the unit costs on this. The Finance, the Legal, and the Engineering people in trying to find an acceptable way, and looking for models that other cities have done, aren't satisfied with what we've seen. We clearly have an emergency, if anyone does, to authorize such a repair. I think Steve can add to this. Steve Smith: First of all, obviously, with the new agr~ment with the EPA, so we didn't have to go detention basin, we have to continue to remove certain amounts, and we have to get repairs done. Secondly, I'm not so sure sometimes that a bidding rule of things like this, would be in the City's best interest. If we get unit prices, and Danny knows the market, and he does call around and get different contractor's prices. I think this is one of these instances where probably in the last 18 months, they've had 500 different repairs; and they're trying to bid that, which is an unbelievable amount of paperwork. And I'm not sure it'll get us a better deal. Terry Foegler: It would cost us more. Steve Smith: It would cost us more. And there is a clear legal emergency in that we're dealing with both a court mandate, because you must remember, we're still under Consent Decree; and also, the new EP A directive that came out in August that Terry negotiated putting off the retention basin. So I think it's in the City's best interest, and I think it's legally correct to adopt this. Thank you. Terry Foegler: We have several hundred thousand gallons of repairs identified that need to be made, and that's the basis for this. Mayor Rozanski: Any questions or comments? Hearing none, I'd entertain a motion to treat this as an emergency and waive the three time reading rule. A. C. Strip: Second. Mayor Rozanski: Any discussion on the emergency nature? Mr. Strip: yes Ms. Maurer: yes Mayor Rozanski: yes Mrs. King: yes Mr. Campbell: yes Mayor Rozanski: And on the ordinance. Any further discussion or comments? Hearing none. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting Page 11 Meeting DAYTON U:.GAL BLANK CO., I-ORM NO lU14t1 September 23, 1991 Held 19 Mr. Campbell: yes Mrs. King: yes Mayor Rozanski: yes Ms. Maurer: yes Mr. Strip: yes Mayor Rozanski: Next, we have Ordinance 73-91 by title only, please. Ordinance 73-91 - An Ordinance Providing Preliminary Legislation for Resurfacing Project on State Route 745. Mayor Rozanski: Could I have an introduction? Barbara Maurer: I'll introduce it. Terry Foegler: Yes, I think Paul's in a position to describe this to Council. .. Paul Willis: This is consent legislation for the resurfacing of State Route 745 from the Delaware County line, Franklin-Delaware County line, north to the north corporation of Dublin. And the intention is that this work would be done during next construction season. ODOT is working on their next year's program now, and this is simply consent legislation for us to express our willingness to participate in the project, both financially and cooperatively. Preliminary estimates for the cost of Dublin's portion of the participation is about $800. And I would ask that you consider this ordinance. There is no need for it to be passed as an emergency tonight, because it is for next year's program. I might also mention that very likely in the spring, likely from a standpoint of timewise, ODOT will be giving us other legislation which will actually ask us to give them the money for the participation in this project; so there will be a second piece of legislation to come before you, probably in the spring. Mayor Rozanski: Paul, is any of this the work they're doing up there now, or have completed in the last week? Paul Willis: No. This work starts at the Franklin-Delaware County line, which is near the curve, and goes north from there. Mayor Rozanski: They've been working on that road, paving. Paul Willis: They've been doing some patching up there. Mayor Rozanski: They've paved, almost continuous, both berms, almost the entire length of it. Paul Willis: They had a wheel rut in there, and some breaking down like we had a couple years ago on 745, where we put in some major base repair, before it was overlaid, further to the south. And they have much the same kind of problem up there. Mayor Rozanski: So none of the work that they're doing there is included in this now? Paul Willis: No, this is an overlay project that puts the surface on, on the existing street up there. The reflectors that were removed last year and not reinstalled by the overlay project that ODOT did, were reinstalled today. And that will be paid for from the cash budget item that was approved several months ago. In terms of the existing raised pavement markers that are up there now, it's my intention that they will be removed and reinstalled upon completion of the overlay program. Removed before the overlay and then reinstalled after the overlay. And I believe that our cost for that is included in that estimated $800. Mayor Rozanski: Any other comments? Then we'll hold this over for a second reading at our next regularly scheduled Council meeting. Next, we have Resolution 16-91. Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Page 12 Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK cu., I-URM NO 10141::1 September 23, 1991 Held 19 Resolution Accepting the Amounts and Rates as Determined by the Budget Commission and Authorizing the Necessary Tax Levies and Certifying Them to the County, and declaring an emergency. Mayor Rozanski: Any other comments? Hearing none. A. C. Strip: So moved. Ms. Maurer: yes Mayor Rozanski: yes Mrs. King: yes Mr. Campbell: yes Mr. Strip: yes Mayor Rozanski: And on the resolution. Mayor Rozanski: yes Mrs. King: yes Mr. Campbell: yes Mr. Strip: yes Ms. Maurer: yes Mayor Rozanski: You notice under "Others" on the agenda. Barbara Maurer: I think all these programs are definitely needed and I'm acquainted with a lot of the contract agencies, but I agree with Denise, I'd just as soon vote and put it on the agenda. A. C. Strip: I would remind you, we've also been fairly cautious about endorsements, generally speaking. Talk about precedents, we have, I won't even say refuse, been reluctant, that's a nicer word, we've been reluctant to endorse some levy campaigns right in our own back yard. It's a good cause, that's not the issue, but want to think about that before we start getting on the band wagon, and endorsing levies. Once you start, there's no end. Barbara Maurer: I think that, in the course of looking at this, we might notice that Dublin Counseling Center is included among those agencies as supported by the levy. Family Counseling, Crittenton Services was originally the agency through which I adopted my son, so I think there are some good activities on here and we are all aware, I'm sure, of the extent to which these issues affect us and our relatives and friends and employees and the City. A. C. Strip: Nothing affects the City more than schools, nothing is necessary more than schools, but we have greatly hesitated to ever get involved with school levy endorsements. We've only done it once in all the years that I have been associated with Council. Library levies, it's awful tough to stop, once you start. But everything you say is correct, it's a wonderful organization, but that isn't the issue. I just would urge you, consider great caution when you start the endorsement process. Joel Campbell: I guess I kind of agree with Ace, and I,think that the groups that are listed there are obviously wonderful groups, but I'm not really sure that it's the business of Council to, for lack of a better word, campaign or endorse for other entities. I think that's their job, and their prerogative; and I think the biggest problem is not that these groups are, they're wonderful groups, but like he said, where do you draw the line? And I tend to think that we probably should stay out of other people's business, unless it's a real compelling need to do so. And I think, if we have somebody come out here, that's going to even more likely to create pressure to get involved in someone else's activities. Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Page 13 Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK CO" F-QRM NU lU141j September 23, 1991 19 Held Barbara Maurer: Could I point out, we don't have to ask them to come out here, one of our own residents is the secretary of the board of Adam H and I would suggest we just ask Bob Weisman to drop down from Arlington and tell us what it's about. I would be interested in hearing what the rationale is for the increase, myself. Well, I guess if we are taking it so seriously, then I would like to have someone talk about it at our meeting, rather than relying on the chance that I might run into somebody at Candidate's Night. I haven't heard from League of Women Voters; the only organization I know of that's having a Candidate's Night is Muirfield, and they didn't mention any issues. They only mentioned City Council and Ward Candidates. So I'm not sure I will ever have an opportunity to hear about this. '" Joel Campbell: Are you saying, then, that you would, first of all, you have every opportunity, if you want to endorse this, Barbara, on your own, and campaign for it, more power to you. But the only thing that I think is a problem, is if you have somebody come down and make a presentation in support of this, quite frankly, how are you going to look when you say, "Well, golly, it's a great program and", and it is a great program, they're all great programs on here, I'm familiar with a lot of them just like you are because we deal with them at the Court House and everything else. But how do you tell somebody "Well, you have a great program, but we can't take the position to endorse your programs or your levy because we kind of take the policy we don't think we should get involved in issue campaigns". To me, that just kind of increases it, I know what you're doing, you're increasing the pressure on us to endorse it. And I think that's probably inappropriate for us to do that. So I personally don't see the need to have it on the agenda, to further consider it. I tend to agree with Ace, I think we really should stay away from getting involved in issue campaigns, and Denise had a good point I didn't think of, where do we draw the line? Are we going to go out and look for campaigns to deal with? Just because someone happened to bring this to our attention, if"we start with this, there will be everybody and their brother saying "Golly, we think we'd like Dublin City Council to back this up". What good that does, I'm not sure, because sometimes people don't agree with what we do anyway. Barbara Maurer: Well, I think we, I would just like to say, we don't have any policy. We did already vote for one issue, so we can't say we don't have a policy, or that we have a policy. Mayor Rozanski: Next, we have Reports from Council. A. C. Strip: Mr. Mayor, the Finance Committee met with an authorized substitution of one of the members who was out of town. There were three applications for Bed Tax, let me take them in reverse order just for the convenience of it. One is a request by Team Columbus, in fact, Mr. Mayor, I spoke about that with you some weeks ago, I gave you the wrong name at the time we had a conversation, which is why it didn't ring a bell with you. That request is for $350 which is to be used solely to hire special police protection, security, during the race itself. On the first race, they expended about $650 and this time they thought they could get by with half, again matching funds. The Committee had no problem with the request. We recommend the approval by Council and I would also quickly add that the race is held solely in the confines of Dublin. So we would first recommend the approval of, not to exceed $350, for police hiring by Team Columbus. The second part, I don't know if you want to adopt that or not, but the second request was for a sum of $20,000 to be used by, which was applied for, by Dublin Magazine. Dublin Magazine is a company for profit, although it's not meeting that goal at the present time yet. The committee, I believe, felt that it was not appropriate usage of Bed Tax Funds, not meeting the criteria which was set down by ordinance, not solely because it was a corporation for profit, but it just does not meet the criteria. The Committee, therefore, unanimously recommends to Council the disapproval of that request. The third and last was a request which was spearheaded by Dublin Garden Club. They are a consortium of the Dublin Garden Club plus the Historical Society, and perhaps the Parks and Rec. with volunteerism from every facet of Dublin they could think of. The idea is to have a Heritage Garden at Coffman House and surrounding the Coffman Park lands. The request was $31,725 for funds for purchase of plant materials, fencing, related items, and an amount not Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Page 14 Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK CO.. I-ORM NO. lU14ti September 23, 1991 Held 19 to be determined as being contributed in labor, and sounds like a lot of labor being contributed. This is neat because the committee was really split allover the place. The chair of the Committee, being a tightwad, that's me, was suggesting $10,000 as phase one, not necessarily eliminating the possibility of phase two. On the other end of the spectrum, the liberal in the group, Barbara Maurer, suggested the entire sum of $31,725. The voice of reason, being Mr. Steady, Joel Campbell, suggested coming right in between at $20,000. Barbara reminded me it's an election year, and I'm suggesting that if Barbara, if you would want to compromise and we'll all join Mr. Campbell at the $20,000 level, and that's as an interim phase, which would not preclude you coming back for more. It would not, also, preclude you from obtaining matching funds or getting dedicated funds for memorials, etc. If you would join me in that. Barbara Maurer: Gee, I wish I could do that, but I'm not going to. A. C. Strip: Well, in that case, fellow Council members, you have a Committee recommending approval of the application in sums of $10,000, $20,000, and $31,725. We'll pass that on to you for discussion, Mr. Mayor. . J: Barbara Maurer: I'd like to be recognized. I would just like to say that I feel I'm being very fiscally conservative here, that we have $100,000 of Bed Tax money that has not been allocated this year, that we had a policy that people were supposed to come in by a certain date and request the thing, and this was a, I gather a project being worked over for a period of several months by those two organizations that have presented it, that the focus is to have it done and standing and looking wonderful by 1992, when it is going to be on a tour with the Orange Johnson House, and what was the other, Chi Omega house in the campus area, and that it would be one of three highlights of a tour for people from other countries; that there are antique orchard trees that have been preserved over the years, that are going to be donated, in fact, will be preserved by being able to be planted on this property. And I think that the, we're not in a session here with another bunch of lawyers, who come in with their high figure, and we come in with their low figure, and then we compromise. This is a group of volunteers, who put together a plan that they think is going to be the very best plan that they can find for this particular location. And it includes a very close attention to historical aspects of shrubs, trees, perennials, and so on. I might add, I went through this myself with a landscape architect a couple years ago for our house, which is 100 years old. I never did any of it. And I would really like to see somebody do it and do it well. And as I said to that architect, if this farmer had. had enough money to have any landscaping, what would he have put in. Well, this farmer at Coffman's may not have had any money in the 19th century to do landscaping, but there were incredible landscaping advances. That was when Central Park was designed, the Olmsteads did a good deal of landscaping, and there were many landscapes here in Ohio that are still in existence, and I think this is following a fine, long historical tradition to preserve the past, that we would have and would be very proud of for 100 years, if the planet lasts that long. So, I would suggest that, instead of letting money out bit by bit, which might work in another project, but it doesn't work very well in a project where all the plants should be planted in the fall. And if you plant them, then put the fences in, you may be tearing out the project you had planted in the fall. And it seems to me it has an integrated quality about it that needs to be preserved, and I think we would all be proud of next summer when we have all these people from other countries coming here. Janet Jordan: I just wanted to point out that this project of a floral enhancement in the community is a lot different than a lot of the gateways and entry features that we have undertaken in the past year or two, in that this one has a commitment of a volunteer group to maintain it, which definitely aids us, why Parks and Rec. was interested in being part of this, because it does not, the whole impact of maintenance does not fall upon us. I think that some of our professional know-alls will b~ involved with this for sure, yes, there will be some, but it is not like any of the gateways that we've done previously at Frantz and 161, or Hayden Road and Dublin Road, where we're doing 100% of maintenance. This is a different approach, Presently, our commitment to the Coffman, Fletcher Coffman Homestead, is that we maintain all the grounds there anyway. I don't have those exact hourly rates, I will be more than glad to check and advise you on that, we Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Page 15 Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK CO ,,"UHM NU l014H September 23, 1991 Held 19 can generate that. Mayor Rozanski: Is this an additional 15 hours over and above or is that the hours. Janet Jordan: Yes, as new development, yes, Sir. Mayor Rozanski: Okay, so an hourly rate would be appreciative, we're talking $10,000 in donations for maintenance cost. A. C. Strip: Some of it is lesser in the fall and winter months, than for growing season. Mayor Rozanski: But that's 780 hours you're not going to get by on $112 at $15 an hour. Janet Jordan: Oh, no, Sir, our rate for that work level would be $7.00 an hour. The only thing that we pay into on our seasonal employees is PERS, I believe. As an advisor, as a professional advisor to it, not out there actually being a laborer. Barbara Maurer: Are we talking about two different things? We're talking about somebody they hire each summer as seasonal labor at $7.00 an hour to do the maintenance after it's put in; but we're talking about at the time it's being put in, Sarah Andres advising them. That's two different types of service, Mayor Rozanski: Yes, but we have full time employees also involved on maintenance. You're not asking for $31,000, you're asking for $10,000 supplement year in, year out, for as long as you and I are going to be around. Joel Campbell: I would not even suggest this, except for the fact that it is, City Building, it's going to be surrounded by Coffman Park, the Community Center will be here. I can't imagine a better place, if you're going to invest in a long term maintenance project, I can't imagine a better place. Mayor Rozanski: I'm not arguing with that, I'm just trying to express to the Council, discussion you've had in the past, what this is going to be on a longterm payment schedule. Terry Foegler: Mr. Mayor, could I interject? I think staff and Council has for every new investment we've made, asked us to look at the operating cost. I think what would be appropriate here is for staff to work with the group, to generate what those operating costs would be, what those impacts would be, so that you can fully evaluate that in making this decision. We'd be happy to put that information together for you for your next meeting. A. C. Strip: $11,000 is going into a fence which we really don't need, to see the beautification. I also said we can phase this thing, we can go to a fence next year, or the year after. My $20,000 suggestion as a compromise will give you everything you see, Denise, because you cannot see a fence in there. We don't need traffic flow because, unfortunately, we don't have traffic there right now, by way of people coming there. And I also thought if we do it this way, then maybe they could hit the private sector, or donations, or memorials, to raise additional funds; we want to see them do some fund raising. So my $20,000 gives you everything you want, Denise, because you cannot see an $11,000 fence in there. It's not in the print. Joel Campbell: To save further discussions, I'm going to go along with you and Denise, that'll give us three, I don't know if Ace and Jan will either, but I think, the reason I was like Ace, I said the $20,000, exclude the $11,000 fence, that's where the middle-of-the-road number came from, it wasn't that I just picked the 20 out of the air; and for two reasons; one, it seems to me that Coffman House has been a giant receptacle for Bed Tax money over the past few years, to the point where even Historical Society members wonder where all these hundreds of thousands of dollars are going, into a building that never was like it is now, even though we're supposed to be restoring it. So I had a concern about taking a big chunk of money and taking the last 100 we had, and taking a third of it and putting it into one project. And I realize Barbara said, "Golly, there's deadlines, people should have Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Page 16 Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK CO., I-URM NO 1014t1 September 23, 1991 Held 19 applied". Well, that same thing could be said in this case. This is near the end of the year, we have a third of the year to go yet. And we're down to the last 60,000 or 70,000. But, if you guys feel real adamant about it, I'll go along with you, and that'll give us at least three votes and we can resolve this. Joel Campbell: We talked about a maintenance agreement, and I really think we need to do that, because Jan's right, we're going to have troubles maintaining, and remember, our goal discussions were, we don't take anything new on until we can prove we can maintain what we've got. And we're having trouble with that already, and I think it's a good point. Janet Jordan: All I was going to say is, regardless of your decision this evening, I will have an analysis of the work load and the impact of this project and all of the others that we do. I will have this project, an analysis for you by the next Council meeting, as we're working on all of those in preparation for the budget. Thank you. Joel Campbell: Just so we get it done, I'll move to approve the application, so we get the thing resolved. A. C. Strip: There was an application for the bicycle race, an application, also, for the Dublin Magazine, which we recommended against. Joel Campbell: So that one I would not be moving to approve. I would move to approve the Team Columbus application and the Garden Club application, and to reject the magazine application. A. C. Strip: The recommendation is to deny the Dublin Magazine application; the recommendation is to support the Team Columbus application; the recommendation by vote of 2-1 is to support the application of the Dublin Garden Club for $31,725. That's the recommendation. Joel Campbell: So moved. Mayor Rozanski: Any further discussions? Hearing none. Mr. Campbell: yes Mrs. King: yes Mayor Rozanski: yes Ms. Maurer: yes Mr. Strip: To display unanimity that this Council always has, I vote "yes". Mayor Rozanski: Any other Council Committees have a report? Terry Foegler: We posted outside for Council's view, kind of a rough concept of what the new City street map might look like, just to see with some color added. There will be more color than that on it, differentiating some of the roads and some of the other features. You, also, tonight were distributed copies of that map, with hopefully the streets, updated information on it. Please feel free to take a look at it. It has been scrutinized fairly closely, and we are giving awards if anybody can find a mistake in that map at this point. What we'd like to do, we have touched base, and I think Sandra presented this to the Dublin Realtors last Friday, is because we can produce essentially camera-ready work in house, we can get the multi-color production really at very little additional cost beyond the two color, or the black and white. We could pretty much cover our production costs and sell these for $1 a piece, which is well below what comparable communities would be selling a map of this quality for. The Realtors were very enthusiastic about that, so that would be no problem at all. That is our intent to proceed, we're getting bid work on that, we wanted Council to know that that's our goal at this point. Any questions on that? Any feedback, please feel free to give us a call, also, after you have had a chance to take a look at it. You'll notice, also, that with the version out here, there will be one entire color behind the municipal corporate limit, so that there is no question what is Dublin, and what isn't, because that seems to be the biggest, single source of confusion. And that will Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Page 17 Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK CU., I-ORM NO 1014t1 September 23, 1991 Held 19 be one of the key features of the map. Secondly, you'll notice in your packet, that there was a memo to me from Paul Willis, regarding studies for signal warrants as raised by Councilman Amorose, I believe, at the last meeting. At that point, Paul was giving his assessment of the situation, based on his discussions with the traffic consultant. After further discussion with the City Attorney and some of the things that, the accidents that have taken place on Riverside, we will go ahead and do those warrant studies. We think it's important enough to set the record because those issues have been raised, to verify definitively, what's warranted and what isn't, at those other intersection locations. We will add Summit View to that as well. Finally, Tim wanted me to make you aware that we've had some preliminary investigations on terms of using th,e Gockenbach property temporarily for office space for certain Parks and Recreation purposes. Tim believes that has a lot of merit, especially in line of the serious space considerations that we're facing. We have a proposal in hand to do the necessary architectural design work to bring that up to code for office function. I believe in the discussions that Tim has had with Parks and Recreation, looking at only housing, perhaps, three or four people there. The initial estimate is, and this is to be refined, I think about $5,000 in terms of all of the design drawings and specs for the work that needs to be done; and probably $10,000 to $15,000 in work itself, which would need to be done. He would like, at this time, to get feedback from Council. There also is, in that concept, the notion that the property would be used as an extremely passive type recreation phase with perhaps some limited parking spaces, location to do some fishing, perhaps a picnic bench, something like that, located in the lower part of the property. But he wanted feedback from Council at this time, in terms of that concept. I have to check in terms of the code issues, but I think it may be more favorable for us, codewise, not to at this point. We have touched base with the township and basically, I think their interpretation would be that it would be accessory to the Park function, which would be appropriate and permittable. The bigger issue is, when it's changed from residence to that kind of office, the building code standard raises somewhat. Realize, also, it's purchased for a major superstructure highway that's going through there. So in terms of compatibility with neighborhood, certainly retains ~he structure, and we feel that the traffic and those types of things would be extremely minimal. We're not looking at a significant number of people there at all. It is a way to get space, relatively cost effectively, utilize the structure as opposed to getting no value out of it, and still maintaining some kind of minimal park purpose for it. I think, at this point, if Council would simply give that some additional thought, maybe look at the site, and give feedback to the staff, within the next two weeks. Barbara Maurer: I just want to say, I think it could, if not occupied, be subject to vandalism and become an attractive nuisance, and then we'd end up with the cost of raising it, which would be a lot more than 15 or 20,000; and that preserving it and using it for much needed office space, seems to me a very prudent thing to do. A. C. Strip: Speaking fiscal, we're talking about $20,000, I just wonder how much space we can go out and rent for $20,000, that's turnkey and ready to go. And I personally think we're fudging on the zoning. Somehow, Terry, I don't really quite buy the argument that this is an adjunct to a park that doesn't exist. I think we're fudging, I don't think it's intellectually honest for a City to fudge on zoning. Terry Foegler: That isn't, the interpretation that's been received, Bobbie's had the discussions, I believe the interpretations are those coming from the township itself. Now whether they're making the stretch to accommodate the City. Mayor Rozanski: I guess if another entity wanted to use it as office space, and lied within the City of Dublin, would we allow them to do it? Terry Foegler: If they bought it to put a superhighway bridge structure there, I'm not sure what the approach would be. Mayor Rozanski: I guess my thoughts are, if we wouldn't allow anybody else to do it, then we shouldn't allow ourselves to do it. Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Page 18 Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK co., t-UHM NU 1014~ September 23, 1991 Held 19 Terry Foegler: Again, I don't know whether the City would or wouldn't. If that's the test you want us to view in terms of considering this option, we can certainly do that. Barbara Maurer: I'd just like to raise the salvage issue again, because if we use it for a house, then we have responsibility to, as landlords, to keep, the upkeep, and we just filled in the swimming pool behind it, I would guess would make it not too terribly attractive. And I think it would be much more costly to maintain it at it's current zoning. There are always cars parking in that area to go fishing, and having people, 4 or 5 cars of employees, go back and forth during the daytime, is not probably much more than what was happening there when the residents were there. So, my feeling is that the township, which is the governing body, would permit that zoning, then it doesn't make sense to impose our zoning laws overlaying the township when we don't have it. It's outside of our zoning jurisdiction. Mayor Rozanski: Only on a technicality, because we haven't annexed it yet, which we were planning on doing. Terry Foegler: If you would do the zoning analysis, as opposed to speculating what it would or wouldn't be, we would propose that we go ahead and do that for you in terms - Barbara Maurer: Well, then we can take it through Planning and Zoning and see whether they think that would be of use, taking into consideration all the other factors, which is it could become a place, a crackhouse, or something, if it's empty. Terry Foegler: When you have office space jn Avery Park now, and Earlington Park, where no one else would be allowed to have office space, typically municipal offices are conditional type uses in residential areas, that's not atypical, especially when the property is a major arterial, especially when it's bounded on one side by an interstate highway overpass, 270 bridge which passes this side. So in terms of protecting the desirability of residential at that particular location and how disruptive this might be, I think it's clearly something we could look at; but my initial reaction would be, it could be done very compatibly, and not be disruptive to the neighborhood. But let us take a look at that, and get some information back to Council. Mayor Rozanski: Anything else, Terry? Terry Foegler: No, that's all. Mayor Rozanski: Marsha? Chuck, glad to have you on board. You get to see us at one of our shorter Council meetings. Usually, you'd be, at least midnight before you got introduced. It's nice to have you on board. Paul Willis: You may remember some time ago, that Council considered an ordinance to work with ODOT on the repair of 33, with a rollumac treatment that would hold it over until the more major safety upgrading and resurfacing job was done. They had their preconstruction on that the latter part of this past week, and the contractor was out on the job, setting up equipment or setting up signs, preparing to start the work out there. He estimates that, with the right kind of weather, he should, he expects to finish that in a period of approximately one month. Mayor Rozanski: Thank you. Anything else? Move on to Council Roundtable. A. C. Strip: Mr. Mayor, I'm just looking forward to the opening of Muirfield. I know the community is. I think it's a major item for one of our problem areas, which is traffic, and I think to tie it in with the Fall Festival party is a wonderful idea, and it's had a lot of talk in the community. I'm really looking forward to that, and I want to see everybody on Council bob for apples. That's all. Barbara Maurer: I wanted to say that I'm really delighted to see that our Special Events Coordinator/Public Information Officer, or vice versa, is doing what I thought could be done best, and that is showing through an event, what we are doing well in this community. Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Page 19 Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK co !-UHM NO lU14t1 September 23, 1991 Held 19 So I am really pleased to see the itinerary, as she called it, to what we're doing. I just wanted to ask Marsha, we had this article in our packet, "Developing Formal Debt Policies", is this a hint here that we should be working on a debt policy more carefully, and, that's where I got the 15 %. Well, I would suggest the Finance Committee set a time to discuss this, it has a good list of questions that could be answered. Perhaps, you could draft some proposals about how those should be answ~red so that we could have that in place the next time. Terry Foegler: Again, you're referring to percentage of income tax. Yes, we have other sources of revenue besides that, so if you look at total revenues, it becomes significantly less than that. So it's a matter of how you look at it; if you look at it on a per capita basis, we're very high, but it doesn't look at it on a per employee basis, in terms of jobs. So there's a lot of rough indicators, it suggests we're aggressive. Barbara Maurer: That's the sort of thing that would be helpful to know, I think. With the plan that we have adopted, what would be the percentage, do we want to develop some policies staying within a certain area, and all of those questions, it seems to me, which I can't answer, off the top of my head, I couldn't even say what the answers should be. So I would suggest something, staff could propose some good, sensible policy. What we really are looking for is an abstract statement of what our policy has. I just remember attending a seminar several years ago and they talked about cities that didn't have a debt policy and their finance director put everything in longterm speculative stocks, and had nothing to pay the payroll with. I think that's an extreme illustration of what can go wrong if you don't have a policy and you do have somebody that's not responsible. I just wanted to mention, I put this button on tonight after my slip at the last meeting, slightly intentional. I saw this button in a store, it has the universal stop sign with that word I used underneath it. And I think it illustrates what my future policy in terms of my language, but also, it illustrates what the Council's policy is for the future in regard to the sewer, why we adopted the sewer. Just one thing, I've already used this map and it's terrific. What I did was compare it to the 1987 map. All of the yellow lines are the new streets since 1987 and I'm using it as a guide for my door-to-door campaign, so I go to totally new houses and totally new people in Dublin, and it's very, very helpful. So, thank you. Terry Foegler: In fact, we were concerned that that appeared in the paper, it referred to illuminated signs, which wasn't something we had prepared and presented to the press as something that was intended. There clearly is not permanently installed flashing signs, and I don't believe there are any as part of the signage. And that was somehow inadvertently picked up by the press as part of their coverage last week. Discussion. Terry Foegler: Those are temporary, those are the cobra heads. Mark has been working very diligently with the power company, trying to get them to put their permanent design fixture in. I don't if the likelihood of that happening by opening --. A. C. Strip: You know what's going to get them, Denise, is that double stop sign, it's such an unusual characteristic, is to stop, go about 20 yards, and then stop again. It's such an unusual characteristic, that's the one that scares me. Terry Foegler: The median is so wide, to tie into the existing lane. But let Paul update you on the additional signage. Paul Willis: I think the signage is there now in the situation that you're concerned about. I also have some concerns about, we had much the same situation in terms of a new stop sign at Frantz and Rings Road a year ago, or two years ago. We had some problems there when we opened the new southbound lanes of Frantz Road. After a period of about a week, and there was a week of time when it was very dangerous, but after about a week of time, people who pass through there every week, had been through there and expected to stop on Frantz, and expected those, I'm sorry, expected to stop on Rings, and expected those who were traveling on Frantz, not to stop. And that's kind of the situation I think we have at Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Page 20 Meeting DAYTON U:.GAL BLANK CO., I-ORM NO 1014/j September 23, 1991 Held 19 Muirfield and Brand. We believe that this week of testing, this week of trial, this week of getting used to stopping on Brand Road, is the safest possible thing that we could do. We'd much rather do it now, and have people become used to stopping on Brand, while Muirfield Drive still also stops, before waiting until it's open, and then begin to stop on Brand Road. We will monitor it, the police are going to be out there. They were out there today after the covers were taken from the stop signs, and they will be out there when the road opens, to help people be aware that the stop signs are in operation. Mayor Rozanski: I don't know if there's a consensus yet, until we see what kind of traffic there is, because really when you think about it, there is not that much traffic that travels through Brand Road. Paul Willis: No, I think we're going to see a change in traffic. I think we're going to see a change in traffic to a lower amount on Brand Road; and I think we're going to see, perhaps, an increase on Muirfield Drive going both north and south. I don't think there's going to be enough traffic that would warrant the installation of a traffic signal. Mayor Rozanski: One of the concerns I've heard from the residents are getting caught between the two stop signs and stuck in the north or southbound lanes of Frantz Road. Say, in the morning if you're heading westbound on Brand Road and all the traffic's coming out of Muirfield, people are going to come through the first stop sign at regular intervals, because there will be very little traffic coming north. But then they're going to get stuck in the middle, and perhaps one of them is going to get out there and have his tailend on Frantz Road, and get it taken off by somebody coming up Frantz Road, vice versa in the evening, that you'll get more cars in the middle than it can stack. Paul Willis: There's room in the middle on Brand Road to stack probably four or five cars. And I would think they would stop, perhaps they'll squeeze in there, but I hope not. I think those that would be on Brand Road would stop before, and wait until there is room for them to cross over into the median area. Mayor Rozanski: You know, we see people blocking Frantz Road, Monterey Drive, Franklin Street, Dublin Road, they block all the intersections, when they can't get through an intersection quickly. And I don't see them acting any differently at this intersection than they do at the ones downtown. Terry Foegler: I think after a month is the time to do the traffic count. So once the counts are done, then the analysis gets done. We will inform you when we have initiated the formal analysis in four to six weeks, within four to six weeks of opening. Paul Willis: We will do that, we'd like the traffic to stabilize before, as a result of the Muirfield Drive opening, before we have a close look at it. Joel Campbell: I'm glad the Garden Club folks stuck around because I think, we talked a little bit about this in the Finance Committee meeting but, I really would like, I know the Garden Club looks for projects, and I think there's a couple things in this town that just cry out for some help. One of them is the initial construction and maintenance of some entry features. We have to be, for a town of our size and standards, for lack of a better word, we have to be pretty rare not to have a consistent, identifiable, pretty entrance feature at each of our major entrances. We have one, about the south end, where there's a little stone there, and that's the only one that there is in town that I've seen. I know we talk about this all the time, but we really ought to try to have some standard, nice looking, even if it's not expensive, entrance to the City on all the major thoroughfares. And even the entrance into the parks, all have a nice consistent signage, so when you drive by, you know that's a Dublin park. We ought to have something that looks nice so that you drive in there, you know you're in the City of Dublin. And I think the Garden Club, I know a lot of cities, the Garden Clubs do that, or areas of town, Garden Clubs do that. So I really think that would be a nice thing to help. Second thing, that I've had the unfortunate occasion over the last couple of months, to spend some time in the Dublin Cemetery, including as of this morning when we buried my father, and the grounds there need a little attention. There's Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Page 21 Meeting LJAyrON LE.GAL BLANK co., I-URM NU lU14tj September 23, 1991 Held 19 just a tremendous amount of weeds and things in the back, the new part of the cemetery, that probably really needs to have some work done to it. So, I don't know if the Garden Club can do that, or the Cemetery Commission, or whatever, but I think we need to take a little closer look at that. We raised the fees, so we ought to have a little additional money to do those kind of things. I intend some day, and I'm sure many of you do, intend to buy a burial plot and be buried there, and I think we ought to have it look nice, because it's a City function. Second thing is, there was a case this last week, and you probably saw it, Steve, Montgomery County, that emergency legislation where they, just so you all don't think I'm crazy when I mention to you that it's important that we are careful when we do emergency legislation, this case happened to be a Court of Appeals case, which is kind of a second level of the court system below the Supreme Court, but it cited some Supreme Court cases, and they were very careful to point out that, a couple of spots in here talk about, before municipal government can enact an emergency measure, it must state the reasons for the measure. And the reason that they talk about here is that emergency legislation has the practical effect of insulating the Council's actions from referendum by the voters, etc., in most cases. And in fact, in this case, they had language in there where they just said that, just because it happens to be for immediate preservation of public fees, health, safety and welfare of the inhabitants, and the reason that immediate action was required, they said that alone is not sufficient; you'd have to have some reason specifically why you're doing what you're doing. In at least one case where we did that and probably saved ourselves a little bit of grief this year. Steve Smith: Staff, every week when we get Obar as well as Municipal Litigation Reporter and two other current Municipal Law, and that one was sent to Tim. In fact, the language that we wrote, Tim and I sat down and wrote from a case that he had down in Lebanon, when we wrote it specifically for one we passed. Obviously, that was an issue in something that was talked about tonight in the annexation. So, yes, we did see that, and Tim got a copy of it for distribution to staff. Joel Campbell: I think it's a good idea to put some language in when we do it. Another item along the lines of traffic safety signage. I'm fairly certain the reason for most of the "Do Not Enter" red bullet signs on both sides of the road going down Frantz Road, is probably the same thing we just talked about at the corner of Brand and Muirfield. I'm wondering now, it's been a year or more, if we still need to maintain that set of double, big, huge, red signs going down the other side, saying "Do Not Enter". I've looked around, I kind of thought about it when I was driving by over the past few months, and I thought, golly, there's a lot of these big, huge, red signs, and of course, we're pretty careful on our signage here in town so we don't have things that are ugly, and these are pretty ugly; but that's the reason for them, they get your attention. But then I got to thinking, golly, we don't have them on most of the divided highways in this town that have been around awhile. For example, you go east and west on 161, all you have is a little sign that says "Keep Right". You don't have big, huge, red things on the other side saying "Do Not Enter". And I'm sure it was a transitional thing, and I have to believe that people that drive east and west, I'm sorry, people that drive north and south on Frantz Road are just as intelligent as those who drive east and west on 161, but if you put a little "Keep Right" sign in there, they're going to probably do it. So I think it's one of those things, for a while it's probably very important to have extra-heavy signage allover the place, things like Denise was talking about, those fluorescent green things you can't help but miss, or something like that. But after a while, once the real reason for those initial extra signs goes away, maybe it's a good idea to take a look. I'm not sure if that's a safety issue, or if it's just that we forgot to take them down, or what. Terry Foegler: Let us look into that, we'll report back to Council on that. Mayor Rozanski: Joel, just for your information, Sunday, the police stopped a lady going the wrong way down Frantz Road. Joel Campbell: Well, she can't read the "Keep Right" signs, because some of them have "Keep Right" and "Do Not Enter". I'm just asking if there's something, sometimes I think some of these things get put up, and well-meaning, they should be there in the beginning. Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Page 22 Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK co !-OHM NO lU14/:j September 23, 1991 Held 19 But after a period of time, sometimes the need for them is not as great. Another, maybe Jan, you're right, maybe the people going north and south on Frantz aren't as intelligent as the ones going east and west. And I happen to go on Frantz once in a while, so it's possible. Another one, during the stuff about the Muirfield opening, I'm sure you all got calls from the contractor on or about the day of the opening, which is certainly, I have to commend the company and everybody else, the staff, everyone who is connected with getting this thing done on time, because it was a big issue, and it did get done. And we have to be candid about that, both from staff and contractor's perspective. There's some concern that, Blazer Parkway apparently is in the final stages, it could be opened imminently, but there's some problem about the intersections. Is there any news on why that's being held up? Does somebody know? Terry Foegler: We had a discussion with the City Engineer. There were until, I think, the last meeting, the traffic, stop signs themselves had not been installed. I believe those subsequently have gone up. There was the emphasis there to try to get the work in the adjacent right-of-way done so that we didn't have to close lanes down when they came in to do the final grading. But basically, in discussions with the City Engineer, we indicated that the traffic can go ahead and use it, we will go ahead and open it up. I believe it is the intent of the City Engineer to do that this week, even though there is adjacent work that still needs to be completed there. Joel Campbell: Another thing on the Muirfield issue, one of the things that struck me when I was driving down, already opened on Muirfield, I guess it's probably still technically Avery Road there, and I'm wondering if there's any legal or practical or financial or any other reasons why the name Muirfield Drive shouldn't go from where it is now all the way down to the freeway, because that's the one thing people generally are going to probably when they get off the freeway, want to know if they're getting onto Muirfield Drive. Obviously, that's going to break Avery into a couple pieces, but by the same token, I'm not sure which is more confusing. We've got Avery disappearing into the bushes as you're driving along the street, or we have Muirfield that breaks A very in two parts. And I'm sure, I would be virtually sure that the majority of people coming off that exit eventually are doing it because they think they're getting onto Muirfield Boulevard and opposed to Avery Road, eventually. And if we're going to think about making the change, it seems to me it might be better to do it now when there's nothing there, than to wait a couple years and say "Gee, we probably should have named that Muirfield Boulevard", and by then we've got 100 people and buildings and banks and you-name-it there. Paul Willis: It's always been our intention to present legislation for you to act upon it, to rename that section of street from Avery to Muirfield. In actual fact, Avery, the county road which also carries a county road number, would actually overlap that section of Muirfield. But it would be signed and named Muirfield from 33 up to north of Glick Road, to Glick Road. Joel Campbell: So if you got off, you would think you're getting off on Muirfield and still actually be on Avery, but all the signs will be Muirfield, is that the idea? You said that Avery is going to maintain through there as a county road in its name, but Muirfield is what the signs will say. Paul Willis: In actual fact, I've discussed this with the county quite some time ago, the county road number and the county road designation would continue through there, even though it's called Muirfield Drive. They call it an overlap. Joel Campbell: Okay. Well, I was just thinking that the average person when they get off, they're not going to worry if it's County Road 16, or whatever it is, they're going to say, "Where's Muirfield Boulevard?" Paul Willis: That's exactly right. The other thing that will need to be changed and coordination will need to be done with ODOT for changing of the signs on 33 to identify both A very Road to the south and Muirfield Drive to the north at the exit ramps. Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Page 23 Meeting OAYTON LEGAL BLANK co., t-ORM NO. lU141::S September 23, 1991 Held 19 Joel Campbell: Next thing, there was a lab, the lab that's right next to Medex, that's it, Roche Biomedical, they had a very nice plan, they came in, probably six months it seems to me now, went through the process, got it all approved, and nothing's happened. Has anybody heard why? The building looked great when they came, I just wondered if they changed their minds on that. And the last thing is, the income tax issue we didn't talk about in the Finance Committee. I know we didn't get there because we had other things to do. A. C. Strip: Steve, for some reason, maybe miscommunication, he was here last week when we talked about it. I was looking for him this evening, I didn't see him, so I thought in fairness to him, I did not bring it up. But it has to be done. Joel Campbell: Yes, because they were saying if we're going to do something, we need to do it soon so they can change the forms. A. C. Strip: I was sure we announced that last week, that we would look at it, and talk. Joel Campbell: Then we'll still work on it then? A. C. Strip: Yes, because I still feel the same way you do, Joel, it does need some attention. I'll check, Dave Amorose is out of town, he's unavailable, before next Council meeting. Mayor Rozanski: This meeting is adjourned. v 14M f t ~~~/ Clerk of Council , /