Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/06/1992 Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Meeting DAYTON lEGAL BLANK co. FORM NO. 10148 HeIe) January 6, 1992 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, January 6, 1992 and the Pledge of Allegiance was led by Mr. Kranstuber. .. ."if Judge John Young swore in the recently elected members of Council - Charles Kranstuber, A.C. Strip, and Denise King. Members of Council present for roll call were: Mr. Strip, Mrs. King, Mr. Amorose, Mayor Kranstuber, and Mr. Sutphen. Mr. Campbell, Rozanski, Mr. Mr. Hansley, City Manager, and Mr. Stephen Smith, Law Director, were also present. Mr. Sutphen nominated Jan Rozanski to serve as Mayor and David Amorose to serve as Vice-Mayor. Mr. Strip seconded the motion. Vote on the nominations - Mrs. King, yes; Mr. Strip, yes; Mr. Sutphen, yes; Mr. Kranstuber, yes; Mr. Campbell, yes; Mr. Amorose, yes; Mayor Rozanski, yes. Judge John Young swore in Jan Rozanski as Mayor and David Amorose as Vice-Mayor. Mayor Rozanski thanked Judge Young for his participation in the inauguration ceremonies. ~."'.... Mr. Kranstuber acknowledged his family who were in attendance at the ceremonies, as well as John Livorno, his campaign manager, Keith Jones and Warren Fishman. He also acknowledged all of Barbara Maurer's and Council's assistance during the transition period. -..' Mr. Strip thanked the voters for his re-election and stated he was looking forward to working with the Council members over the next four years. Mrs. King acknowledged the voters' conf idence in re-electing her to Council and pledged to continue to work hard on behalf of all of the residents. She promised to listen to the voters, learn from them, and then make the best possible decisions. She stated that she will maintain her commitment to environmental issues, hoping that Dublin will continue to be a leader in environmental areas. Wants to promote regional j oint efforts on transportation, water and sewer, fire protection and a wide range of other issues. ...' Mr. Amorose stated his belief that Council must seek to maintain the highest quality of staff possible and set a clear policy and direction for staff. Must continue to strive to be the best Council possible, to educate ourselves and work together as a professional team. Beginning his second decade as a City Council member, Mr. Amorose pledged to maintain the standards set by previous councils and continue to meet the responsibilities of the office of Vice-Mayor of the City of Dublin. .. Mayor Rozanski thanked Council for entrusting him with the job of Mayor. Believes that 1992 will be a great year for Dublin, with a resurgence in growth and development for Central Ohio. He is very proud to have the opportunity to be Mayor of Dublin for another two years. Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Meeting NK . F M N . 10148 HeIr) January 6, 1992 19 Page 2 [ Mr. strip motioned to approve the minutes of the December 16, 1991 meeting. Mrs. King seconded the motion. Mr. Amorose noted that there is a correction to the minutes: Page 13 should read, "comprehensive annual financial report" rather than, "comprehensive annual report." The clerk will make these corrections to the minutes. Vote on the minutes as corrected was as follows: Mr. sutphen, yes; Mr. Campbell, yes; Mr. Amorose, yes; Mr. Kranstuber, abstain; Mr. Strip, yes; Mayor Rozanski, yes; Mrs. King. correspondence The Ohio Department of Liquor Control has sent notice to Council regarding a new C-1 and C-2 permit at the Avery Road Farm Market; transfer of a D2, D2X, and D6 permit from the Kroger Co. to 6500 A Riverside Drive; and a new D3 permit for 6500 A Riverside Drive. There were no objections to these permits. council Committee Appointments [ Mayor Rozanski announced proposed appointments to Council Committees as follows: Land Use - Chairperson Chuck Kranstuber, Joel Campbell; Finance - Chairperson A.C. Strip, Denise King, David Amorose; Parks & Recreation - Chairperson David Amorose, Chuck Kranstuber; Public Safety - Chairperson Denise King, A.C. Strip, Chuck Kranstuber; Public Services - Chairperson Dan Sutphen, Denise King; Goal-Settinq - Chairperson Jan Rozanski, Denise King, Chuck Kranstuber; MORPC Representati ve Dan Sutphen; and Planninq and Zoninq Representative - Joel Campbell. Mr. Strip motioned to accept the proposed appointments to Council Committees. Mrs. King seconded the motion. Vote - Mrs. King, yes; Mayor Rozanski, yes; Mr. campbell, yes; Mr. Sutphen, yes; Mr. Strip, yes; Mr. Amorose, yes; Mr. Kranstuber, yes. Boards and commissions Mayor Rozanski announced that Council is in the process of interviewing candidates for boards and commissions and plans to make appointments at the next Council meeting on January 20, 1992. Comments from visitors (items not on agenda). There were no comments from visitors. c Ordinance No. 87-91 - An Ordinance providing for a change of zoning of an 11.728 Acre Tract Located on the West Side of Avery Road Approximately 750 Feet to the North of Shier-Rings Road to be rezoned from PIP, Planned Industrial Park District to PIP, Planned Industrial Park District. Mayor Rozanski asked the proponents and opponents of this Ordinance to come forward and sign in. Mr. Luis Weil registered as a proponent. opponents. There were no Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Meeting . F RM N . 10148 HeIr) January 6, 1992 19 Page 8 ",.<<. .. ' Ms. Leshnock responded that she agreed. stated that the home composting bins currently in use in Dublin have not resulted in complaints from neighbors. Acknowledged that this has been an extremely dry year and perhaps not indicative of normal weather conditions. stated that in other similar programs in Washington state, educational efforts have prevented these types of problems. Ms. Leshnock also stated that the many diverse options for diversion of yard waste will hopefully alleviate problems. Mr. Amorose asked about the definition of yard waste and whether it includes soil rocks and sod. What category would these products fall into for waste removal? Ms. Leshnock and Ms. Kelly agreed it had not been addressed. Mr. Kranstuber stated that he agrees with the March 1 implementation date of the yard waste diversion program. He wants to proceed with the ordinance as proposed. ~~ strip stated that he believes people should first be able to participate on a voluntary basis. He believes that habits are ingrained and the citizens need time to adjust. Mechanical adjustments need to be made to lawn mowers, etc. for this program. Doesn't believe that a few months will make a big difference in landfill diversion. Called this an additional tax on people, in the form of additional costs to people who put out 5 - 6 bags per week. 'iii"" ..-,# Mrs. King reminded Council and the public that state law is mandating this diversion. This ordinance will permit Dublin to work out any problems in the program prior to its mandated implementation. stated emphatically that this is not a new tax. citizens have many opportunities to avoid this cost by changing their habits - they can leave clippings on their lawn, they can also compost clippings. Shares concern with mismanaged composting, but education can solve this problem. The ordinance provides alternatives for all lifestyles and pocketbooks. There is cost to every citizen in Franklin County for continuing to use up landfill space. Every cubic yard used will eventually lead to required construction of new, far more expensive landfill space. This is a choice we have to make. "","'c' " Mayor Rozanski commented that the best time to start something is at the beginning of the season. People more willing to accept change than at mid-stream. Agrees that March 1 is early, but no one will be cutting grass at that time anyway. Hopes that the Solid Waste Advisory Committee can educate and inform people about the program well before grass cutting season begins. b," ., Mr. Kranstuber acknowledged the expertise of the members of the Committee and asked that they continue to report to Council on their progress. Regarding Ordinance 97-91, Mr. Amorose asked why there will be a member from the Dublin City Schools and what their responsibilities will be. Ms. Kelly responded that the goal was to have a representative from the schools to take education programs to schools, to Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Meeting NK . FORM NO. 10148 HeIr) January 6, 1992 19 Page 9 ~.... ..." enable the school system to participate in programs, and to bring the Committee information about what schools are doing in areas of solid waste management. Mr. Hansley commented that the original idea was to have a student representati ve, but because of required late night meetings a proposal was made to have a school representative. Mr. Amorose asked why the school representative was appointed for just one year instead of a longer term. Ms. Kelly responded that she has no problem with a longer term, that this was merely a part of the effort to stagger terms of members. Ms. Leshnock stated that the school representative is appointed by the School Superintendent and that this would give him more flexibility in the selection of a representative. Mr. Amorose questioned the criteria for commercial representatives, asking why size of business was the determining factor and not type of business. - Ms. Leshnock commented that larger businesses have recycling programs in place, while smaller ones do not. This will provide balance in the representation of commercial businesses. ....., Mr. Campbell commented about language regarding Dublin residents, and that the at-large representatives needs to specify resident of Dublin, not just citizen representative. Mr. Strip initiated a discussion of options for staggering terms and proposed possible initial terms of one year, two years, and three years. All reappointments thereafter would be for three years. This would ensure staggering. Mr. Campbell requested that education and communication efforts be addressed prior to the time of third reading. There will be a third reading of the Ordinance at the January 20, 1992 Council meeting. Ordinance No. 98-91 - An Ordinance Amending Ordinance 23-91, Yard Waste Diversion Program. Second Reading. tf!I1"""'- Mayor Rozanski stated that, since this has been discussed in conjunction with Ordinance 97-91, this Ordinance will have a third reading at the January 20, 1992 Council meeting. .,,* Resolution No. 18-91 - A Resolution to Adopt the Solid Waste Management Plan. Second Reading. There was no discussion regarding this Resolution. There will be a third reading of the Resolution at the January 20, 1992 Council meeting. Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Meeting . F M N . 10148 HeIr) January 6, 1992 19 Page 10 Resolution 19-91 - A Resolution Adopting the City of Dublin's Goals for 1992 and Adopting a status Report for Goals Adopted in 1991. Second Reading. Mr. Hansley commented that the updated version of this Resolution has not been prepared, but will be prepared and made available to Council prior to the third reading. Mr. Amorose questioned the incorporation of a "strategic planning process" in the goal-setting process. Mr. Hansley responded that this statement was an attempt to summarize the concepts Terry Foegler introduced to Council which combine the master plan and the goal-setting process. He requested that Council give staff input regarding all of the stated goals, especially No. 1 to be sure they are in agreement with the goals as stated prior to adoption. staff's proposal would be to incorporate a strategic plan similar to what private enterprise uses. f/ll"""'""," Mayor Rozanski asked that Council members study the goals as stated in the resolution prior to the next Council meeting where there will be a third reading of this Resolution. He also asked that Council members review the status of past years' goals for incorporation into this Resolution. If any changes or additions need to be made to the Resolution, Council members can suggest these at the next meeting. .. y Ordinance No. 01-92 - An Ordinance providing for a change of Zoning of a 46.369 Acre Tract Located on the East side of Coffman Road, Approximately opposite Adventure Drive. To be Rezoned from: R, Rural District (PUD zoning Lapsed) to: PUD, Planned unit Development District. First Reading. Mr. Amorose introduced the Ordinance and motioned that it be referred to Planning and Zoning commission. Mr. Strip seconded the motion. Vote - Mrs. King, absent; Mr. Sutphen, yes; Mayor Rozanski, yes; Mr. Kranstuber, yes; Mr. Campbell, yes; Mr. Strip, yes; Mr. Amorose, yes. Ordinance No. 03-92 - An Ordinance Amending Chapter 1187 (Landscaping) of Part Eleven of the Codified Ordinances First Reading. Mr. Amorose introduced the Ordinance. . , Mr. Bowman commented that there would be no formal presentation regarding this Ordinance, but stated that this Ordinance addresses the issue of recycling bins added to a site after development and allows a 6-month, one-time exemption from screening required by the Landscape Code. He is requesting that this be referred to the Solid Waste Advisory Committee, the Tree and Landscape Advisory Commission and the Planning and Zoning Commission for their recommendations. Mr. Amorose suggested that recycling bins possibly be color- coded to designate their purpose, and that permissible numbers Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Meeting nAYTON LEGAl BLANK CO. FORM NO. 10148 HeIr) January 6, 1992 19 Page 11 of dumpsters be specified and possibly compartmentalized for different purposes - glass, cardboard, aluminum, etc. Would like to see standards for dumpsters in order to limit numbers of dumpsters on sites. Mr. Bowman agreed with these recommendations and will provide this input to the Commissions for their study. Mr. Strip expressed concern about the loss of parking spaces which could result from required screening of these dumpsters, thereby subjecting property owners to violations of existing Codes. Mr. Hansley pointed out that page two of this Ordinance addresses this issue, stating that the screening exemption shall not override other Code requirements or development standards. Mr. strip suggested that the Zoning Code be modified to possibly allow loss of parking space in the interest of encouraging screening of these dumpsters and thereby beautifying the City. Mr. Amorose motioned that the Ordinance be referred to Planning and Zoning, Solid Waste Advisory Committee and Tree and Landscape Commission. Mr. strip seconded the motion. b Vote on the motion - Mayor Rozanski, yes; Mr. Amorose, yes; Mrs. King, yes; Mr. Kranstuber, yes; Mr. Strip, yes; Mr. Sutphen, yes; Mr. Campbell, yes. other Petition to Vacate Portion of Rushwood Drive bv Woods of Dublin Residents Due to the large number of residents in attendance from Rushwood Drive, Mayor Rozanski moved this item up on the agenda. Kris Hess, 5802 Rushwood Drive, Woods of DUblin" introduced herself as the spokesperson for the citizen group. She presented a petition to council, copies of which were enclosed in their packets along with additional information regarding this issue. She stated that there are 66 homeowners in the Woods of Dublin at the present time, and 54 did sign the petition. All of the residents of Rushwood Drive signed the petition with the exception of one person who was out of town and another who was unavailable but who had signed a previous petition which had been presented to the Planning and Zoning Commission. pr""" She cited the Dublin Community Plan as the source for the City of Dublin's commitment to provide residential neighborhoods with protection from through traffic or non-residential volumes. In view of the subdivision's location, across from Donegal Cliffs and adjacent to the Cook property which is up for rezoning on Thursday, January 9, Rushwood Drive will become a connection for two large developments between Route 745 and Brand Road. She also stressed that the integrity and identity of the Woods of Dublin will be compromised with the large number of accesses to the development. with three accesses to the subdivision, there will be one access per 23 homes. This is an excessive number in comparison to other Dublin subdivisions of a similar size. .., . Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin city council Meeting Meeting DAYTON I FGAL BLANK co. FORM NO. 10148 HeIrl January 6, 1992 19 Page 12 .. In discussions with City staff, the residents of the Woods of Dublin were told that opening the end of Rushwood Drive would not result in traffic "cutting through" the area. The committee surveyed the residents of Donegal Cliffs about the route they would choose to Brand Road if Rushwood Drive is opened. Survey results showed that 71% of people would likely "cut through" Rushwood to get to Brand Road. The survey provided to Council also showed that the Rushwood Drive route between Route 745 and Brand Road would be quicker and shorter, and therefore attractive to motorists going west to Perimeter Mall area or to I-270. She cited the fire and police safety issues regarding vacation of this portion of Rushwood Drive and the loss of the back access to the Woods of Dublin as well as the Cook property development. The Edwards Company, developer of the Cook property, is amenable to creating a quasi-roadway for emergency and bike access only between the Woods of Dublin and any future development of the Cook property. The residents of the Woods of Dublin believe this will satisfy the safety concerns regarding access. The Brandon connection, opening in the spring, will also provide access for emergency vehicles. " She reminded Council that Rushwood Drive is only 25 feet wide and typical through streets in Dublin are 30, 31 or 36 feet wide. The straightaway path of Rushwood Drive also will encourage speeding of through traffic. The option of stop signs as were installed on Tara Hill is not available to the Rushwood Drive residents. Speed bumps would be another option to solve this problem, but are not particularly desirable by residents of the subdivision. Ms. Hess stated that their situation is unique, and that they believe their request is reasonable and that the City has vacated streets before, such as Indian Hill in River Forest and Macbeth in the Bright Road area. She stated that cul-de-sac length has been another factor cited in regard to access, but that there are other areas such as The Reserve which is the same length as Rushwood with only one access point. Another example is Dunniker in Muirf ield which is much longer and has cul-de-sacs off of it with only one access. She cited the example of the emergency access created for Monsarrat in Waterford Village as similar to what they are requesting. .. . In conclusion, she commented that while she appreciates the City's efforts for traffic distribution, the Woods of Dublin residents deserve consideration of their request. ... Mr. Foegler responded that City staff has a number of concerns with this issue, especially in the matter of policy and precedent. 1. Staff has concern with the fact that on local streets which are typically built in phases, it is desirable of the homeowners in the first phase to terminate the first phase in the form of a cul-de-sac to prevent larger volumes of traffic through the area when later phases are built and connected. Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Meeting NK . FORM NO. 10148 HeIr) January 6, 1992 19 Page 13 !"- 2 . This particular subdivision was clearly built with the intention of a future connection to adjacent properties. '", 3. It does exceed significantly the maximum length of cul-de- sac in most subdi vision regulations. As a matter of policy, staff believes subdivision regulations should be complied with unless there are topographic problems which would limit the ability to comply. Those variances should be authorized by Planning Commission and by Council. 4. Subdivision regulations of the City call for a maximum length of 600 feet for a cul-de-sac, while Rushwood is 1800 feet in length. 5. The idea in residential traffic is to distribute the local traffic and not encourage large volumes of traffic in residential areas. There is a hierarchy of streets in residential areas, the cul-de-sacs being the most desirable with the lowest amounts of traffic. 6. Rushwood Drive is not wider than 25 feet because it is not anticipated to serve as any kind of major collector of traffic. Because of the unique configuration of the property which causes Rushwood Dr i ve to be longer and straighter, encouraging speeding, it is important that adjacent projects encourage a circuitous routing of traffic. This will discourage use of Rushwood Drive as any kind of a shortcut. He believes that the development proposed for the Cook property (Bristol Commons) has adequately addressed this issue in their plan. " 7. For all of these reasons, staff cannot recommend that this street become a cul-de-sac. Mr. Bowman added that the Edwards Land Co. proposal for the Cook property does protect the roadway system with a circuitous route for traffic. The Dublin Community Plan principles are upheld by this proposed development. He added that he expects the Planning Commission to approve the Edwards Land Company proposed development on Thursday, January 9. Mrs. King asked how Council proceeds with this type of petition for vacation of a street. Mayor Rozanski responded that he recommends Council not vote on this issue, but take it under advisement for further study and input from Planning and Zoning. ,.. Mr. Kranstuber expressed concern about Council taking action tonight and how that would impact the Thursday night Bristol Commons development hearing at the Planning Commission. The procedural issues could be a problem, since the Planning Commission has nearly completed the process of approval for the development. He didn't believe that the road issue before Council tonight would preclude approval of the proposed development by Planning Commission. .., Mr. strip asked if the Planning & Zoning Commission action would estop any Council action. Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin city council Meeting Meeting DAYTON LEGAl BLANK co. FORM NO. 10148 HeIr) January 6, 1992 19 Page 14 .. Mr. Kranstuber and Mr. Hansley confirmed that Planning & zoning commission's action would be independent of any Council action. Mr. Smith recommended that Council request the minutes of all of the discussions that have taken place at Planning & zoning commission regarding the Bristol Commons development for use in council's review of the Rushwood Drive petition. Mr. Hansley explained that the citizens from Rushwood Drive have the right, by statute, to come to Council with a petition for vacation for a street. Council normally would refer this to a committee of Councilor to staff and/or advisory committee or legal counsel for further study. Formal action could come by ordinance of Council at some later date, if Council is in favor of it. If Council disapproves it, no action would be required. Mr. Kranstuber commented that the Rushwood Drives issues have been discussed in conjunction with the Bristol Commons development each time Bristol Commons was on their agenda. Mr. Kranstuber and Mr. Campbell can take back to Planning & Zoning any recommendation of Council as to the merit of this petition or that it was referred to a Committee of Council for further study. b , Mr. strip responded that he thought it unnecessary to refer this to a Committee of Council, and offered to personally visit the Rushwood site and work with the residents on this issue. Mr. Kranstuber stated that the developer of Bristol Commons has been very responsive and cooperative in complying with the Planning & zoning commission's requests in reducing density, providing additional architectural detail, etc. The Commission is prepared to rule on the merits of the development on Thursday, January 9. He asked that Council keep this in mind when deciding what action they will take on the petition. He stated his belief that Bristol Commons will be a quality development and consistent with the surrounding developments. Ms. Hess commented that the Planning & zoning commission had stated to her committee that the Commission would listen to citizen input on density, but not on streets. The Woods of Dublin residents are not opposed to the Bristol Commons development itself; rather, they welcome the quality Edwards Land Co. development. Mr. Kranstuber responded that he was merely trying to provide Council with information so that they would know how their action could input on the Bristol Commons development hearing at Planning & zoning. .<','iI Mr. campbell reminded Council that the Bristol Commons development would be back before Council for hearing following the recommendations of Planning & Zoning. He recommended that Council consider the issues presented tonight at the time of the next reading before Council. He motioned that Council hold this petition, take it under advisement until the Planning Commission has ruled on Bristol Commons, and decide at the time Bristol Commons comes back before Council whether to prepare an ordinance, to take no action, or table it until a later date for further discussion. Mr. Sutphen seconded the motion. I II II Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Meeting F RM N . 10148 HeIr) January 6, 1992 19 Page 15 ljj;, Mayor Rozanski recommended that Council take no action that would jeopardize Planning & Zoning's action on the Bristol Commons development set for Thursday, January 9. Mr. Kranstuber expressed concern that taking the Rushwood Drive issue under advisement could somehow impact the Thursday Planning Commission meeting. Mayor Rozanski responded that it is not uncommon for Council to modify a development after Planning & Zoning has made their ruling on it. Mr. smith stated that Planning & Zoning makes their recommendation on Thursday regardless of tonight's discussion and forwards it to Council. At time of third reading before Council, the ordinance can be (a) adopted; (b) overruledj (c) modified based upon discussions of Council which the developer can either agree or disagree to do; or (d) the ordinance can be sent back to Planning Commission. He recommended that Council allow Planning & Zoning to proceed on Thursday, and recommended that Council members sitting on the Commission mention that the issue was raised at the Council meeting on Monday evening. fl!/lI".,......" itp.. ., Mr. Hansley commented that this is a formal petition and that Council must officially take action on this at some point and recommended that Council motion to take it under advisement. Mr. Chris Cline, attorney representing The Edwards Land Company, stated that the developer had attempted, unsuccessfully, to stay out of this issue. The developer has certainly demonstrated their willingness to comply with whatever the City thinks is best for all parties. His concern is the message that Council is sending tonight to Planning & Zoning. If the project is to go forward for this building season, it will have to be approved by P & Z on Thursday evening. Mayor Rozanski stated that he was hopeful that Council was sending no message to P & Z because he feels Council does not have enough information at this time to do so. He suggests that Planning & Zoning proceed on this application independent of Council. Mr. Cline thanked Council for their attention to this issue. .. Mrs. King stated that she disagreed somewhat, and that her message to Planning & Zoning was to find an extremely circuitous route through the development to satisfy those who are requesting that a cul-de-sac be created. She noted the hard work and efforts on the part of Kris Hess and the residents of the Woods of Dublin in preparing the petition and accompanying materials and for working with Planning & Zoning on this issue. Ms. Hess added that in reference to Mr. Foegler's comment about phasing of streets in subdivisions that Bristol Commons is not a continuation of the Woods of Dublin development but rather an entirely separate development. Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Meeting A NK . FORM NO. 10148 HeIr) January 6, 1992 19 Page 16 /lIP,."" II> Vote on Mr. Campbell's motion - Mr. Strip, yesj Mr. Sutphen, yesj Mayor Rozanski, yesj Mr. Kranstuber, yes; Mrs. King, yes; Mr. Campbell, yes; Mr. Amorose, yes. In response to a question from the audience, Mayor Rozanski responded that if Council takes legislati ve action on this petition there would be three readings of any proposed ordinance. If Council decides not to take action, there would be a motion to take no action. Mr. smith explained that Planning & Zoning commission will send a recommendation to Council on Bristol Commons and that there will be two more hearings on the Ordinance. The notices will be in the newspaper. Mayor Rozanski stated that this does not necessarily mean that Council will take action on the petition. Mr. strip requested that whatever materials are sent by staff to Council regarding these issues also be sent to Kris Hess. This will help the communication process and provide opportunity for a response from the residents. P""'-' Discussion Reqardinq Northeast Quadrant Sewer options ..4 Mayor Rozanski explained that on August 5, 1991, Council discussed this issue and approved the recommendation of Planning & Zoning commission. The developer was given approval to proceed with the design phase at that time. He stated that Council is willing to listen to new information from Dr. Stoycheff regarding this, but Council will not necessarily instruct the developer to change what was approved by Council on August 5 based upon any new information Dr. Stoycheff provides. Mr. Foegler confirmed that the plans for the first phase of engineering for this project have been submitted and staff is reviewing them at this time. All contacts with the developer and representatives have reaffirmed support for the plan that the City has previously adopted. The developer has proceeded in good faith upon that endorsement and acceptance by Council. pi .... Mayor Rozanski read a letter from Zande and Associates stating, "Based upon the outcome of the meeting before City Council, we have proceeded with the design of the sanitary sewer system and the plans for the first phase have been completed and submitted to the City for approval. We believe the design proposed is the best for the City and the area from an environmental and economic standpoint. The plan proposed by Dr. Stoycheff will still require construction of a lift station, force main to serve area east of State Route 257. City council's requirement was to design a system that could serve the entire area east of state Route 257. We believe the one we have proposed is the most environmentally acceptable system for serving this area." Mayor Rozanski then requested that Dr. Stoycheff come to the microphone if he wished to speak. .. Dr. Ted Thomas, friend of Dr. Stoycheff, addressed City Council regarding the Stoycheff proposal. He has 20 years of engineering experience and a Ph.D. in Engineering. He stated that perhaps there are changes which have occurred in the plan Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Meeting DAYTON I FGAL BLANK CO. FORM NO. 10148 HeIr) January 6, 1992 19 Page 17 "" lIio since it was originally submitted to Council. He stated that perhaps there is now blasting required where several months ago he was told by Mr. Mack that there was not. Blasting would be required to install a fairly large lift station; blasting would be required to service the area north along the sewer line. These are changes to the original plan. Another change is that the original plan called for using the zoo sewer trench in common which will not be done. Thus the current plan will have to have some alternative routing. When these changes occur, it is time to step back and look at alternatives. He made several points as follows: 1. The plan as designed services, and does not service in one case, a general population of the northeast corridor. Fifty families to the west of 257 won't be served regardless. Twenty-five families in 0' Shaughnessy Highlands will be served under the current plan by force main. Three hundred in the rest of the northeast corridor will be served by a force main. 2. It is not necessary to have a lift station and a force main for the 300 or so families in the northeast corridor. They have sufficient altitude allowing a natural drop from that point down a route to an existing sewer. He suggested placing in a short cut-off that would do this. It would necessitate some trade-offs, some land access, but it is a short and small change to the existing plan. ......,'~ 3. If the city goes forward with the current plan, they'll have a force main, a $250,000 investment, continuing large expenses to maintain a long force main and the $250,000 equipment. There will be problems involved with blasting and the congestion on State Route 257. 4. His alternative proposes a small change which will result in no blasting with a shallow sewer line. This change will not involve a significant amount of money or time and will result in very little delay in the project. Mayor Rozanski asked Dr. Thomas if he had presented this plan to the developer. Dr. Thomas responded that he had presented it to Mr. Mack of the Engineering Division, but not to the developer. JI'''',.....-, Mr. Foegler gave a brief overview of issues involved in the August 5 decision by Council, and especially in reference to the social and environmental implications. When Council reviewed and approved the rezoning for the Northeast Quad, Council made a commitment because of issues raised by citizens that the sanitary sewer issue and drainage issues and several others be revisited. Staff instructed the developer and his engineering consultant that a feasibility study would be required focusing on the economic and uneconomic factors associated with the two concepts which had been identified as most feasible at that time. That study was prepared and revised several times and there were several public hearings held, one of which was with just the Riverside Drive residents who would be impacted. There were several meetings with the Planning Commission; there was a public hearing held on the Bright Road study; and there was significant citizen comment regarding the relative merits and iJi,,- Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK CO. FORM NO. 10148 HeIr) January 6, 1992 19 Page 18 "' itt. j issues associated with the different options. There was extensive discussion and presentations prior to Planning Commission and Council's acceptance of the staff recommendation. Mr. Foegler authorized the Engineering Division to review Mr. Stoycheff's alternative plan and see what merit it had. Mr. Mack met with the engineer and with Dr. Stoycheff, considered it, reviewed it with the consultants who had originally prepared the study, and concluded that it did not provide significant benef it over the option that had been selected. There were significant environmental consequences in terms of cutting and blasting with the new option that were felt to be far more negative. In terms of the areas to be served, staff believes that the option already selected provides the most cost effective service. The plan already selected is consistent with the Community Plan, consistent with the initial rezoning work done by the applicant, and has undergone an extensive review process. IJI!!"'''~ Dr. Thomas stated that he and Mr. Mack did meet as described. He said that Mr. Mack had told him that if changes were required in the plan, in other words, if blasting were to be required, that the alternative option would be revisited. He commented that neither the changes nor the evaluation have been communicated to him or to Dr. Stoycheff by Mr. Mack and have not been made public. .. Dr. James Stoycheff commented that he is asking Council to revisit his plan in view of the blasting which will be done under the adopted plan. Regarding the Wedgewood Hills development, those developers hope to blast 20 or 30 feet since there is no restriction on blasting in the northeast quad. He claims that this is a direct result of the Schottenstein Homewood Plan which states that the pump station will be installed in order to drain the area and a tile will need to be installed 20 to 30 feet deep at the pump station site. He stated that there has not been adequate testing or boring to determine that blasting is required. His alternative plan consists of a buried pump station at the bottom of Maumee to pump from that area up to Club Road in which a 24-inch gravity line proposed by Dr. Stoycheff could service everyone. He stated that the engineer for Wedgewood Hills agrees that his plan is feasible. Is requesting a boring at the bottom of the pump station and the line going north to serve his area to see if blasting would be required. Mayor Rozanski commented that he knows of no location in the city where blasting is prohibited. .'P~"';"'" Dr. Stoycheff responded that a resident on Summitview lost a well during waterline blasting. He believes that the citizens are very opposed to blasting. Mr. Strip asked Dr. Thomas if he was a practicing engineer at this time, and Dr. Thomas responded that he was a consultant in the field of environmental engineering and does not work in civil engineering. Mr. strip expressed his concern, given all of the hearings and studies and all of the monies expended by the developer on this project, about changing plans at this point and stated that it is a little too late to pursue a different option. ."'" -1 Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Meeting NK . FORM NO. 10148 HeIr) January 6, 1992 19 Page 19 -~':''''' .---or Mr. Foegler promised to send a written response to Dr. Stoycheff describing in more detail the engineer's response to Dr. Stoycheff's proposal. This response has already been conveyed verbally to Dr. Stoycheff by Mr. Mack. Dr. Stoycheff commented that he was not personally told of the decision to adopt the Zande plan, but that he had heard this through the grapevine. ..,.,~"'... Mr. Mack responded that Dr. Stoycheff was told of the decision when he met with him on the 4th of November. Mr. Mack told Dr. Stoycheff and Dr. Thomas at that time that their proposal - by the way, this was the first time that Dr. Stoycheff admitted that his plan would require a force main, that you couldn't service the entire area with gravity - was a workable one, but that the City would have to weigh it against the approved one. The city engineering staff reviewed it, Zande reviewed it, Jim Olhausen, an independent consultant, reviewed it. On November 22, he talked with Dr. Thomas by telephone and advised him that the City would proceed with the original proposal due to the economics and in consideration of the disruptive factor. The proposal that Council approved combined a fairly shallow gravity sewer with a shallow force main sewer to minimize any disruptive action. The only deep excavation was to be at the point of the pump station. The proposal by Dr. Stoycheff calls for a gravity line which would need to be 25 to 30 feet in depth in places because of the previously described rock conditions. Mr. Mack stated that he made no commitment on November 4 to give them a written report, and he told Dr. Thomas on the 22nd of his findings. Due to recent phone calls from Dr. Stoycheff, Mr. Mack prepared a written report for Mr. Foegler which will be sent this week. Mr. Mack emphasized that he believes they've given the proposal a thorough review, and that the proposal adopted by Council will service the area and cause the least disruption. " Dr. Thomas added that he believed that Mr. Mack had said that if blasting were to be required or other significant changes were necessary, that the Stoycheff proposal would be revisited. Major changes, he believes, will be the requirement for blasting and that the location of the sewer will have to be changed because the pre-existing cut by the zoo sewer cannot be used. For these reasons, he is asking that Council revisit the Stoycheff proposal. fI/IIl""""l Dr. Stoycheff commented that the entire premise of the original sewer from Schottenstein and Homewood was that there would be no blasting. He asked if Mr. Mack could guarantee that there will be no blasting with the Wedgewood Hills development from their sewer line to the pump station. ,*"...<, Mr. Mack commented that he had not seen their plan, that he had met with Joe Trippel today and that Mr. Trippel had indicated that they did not yet have a plan for their sanitary sewer. Mr. Mack stated that Dr. Stoycheff is referring to a document that the developer's consultant said does not exist; therefore, Mr. Mack could not comment on it. Dr. Stoycheff said that he strongly recommends that the City Engineer request this document considering that the rezoning is scheduled for Thursday. I Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Meeting nAYTON LEGAL BLANK co. FORM NO. 10148 HeIr) January 6, 1992 19 Page 20 ~"... ..? Mr. Foegler commented that, in regard to the Northeast Quad plan approved by Council, a condition of approval imposed was that the detailed engineering for this project fully consider the potential impacts upon groundwater resources and that contingencies be prepared to handle possible problems. This is a requirement that will be imposed before the contract is let on this project. The key criteria in evaluating the whole proposal was minimizing the amount of blasting - not to guarantee that there be no blasting , but have a shallow enough system so that the depths of the cuts and amount of blasting could be minimized. All of the consultants who have reviewed this plan for the developer and for the City, as well as the independent consultant for the City, conclude that the proposal does this. Dr. stoycheff asked if Mr. Foegler was referring to the Schottenstein plan also. Mr. Foegler stated that he was referring to the Northeast Quad Sewer Concept Plan which was adopted by Council, the East Scioto trunk extension. Dr. Stoycheff commented that in his review of the records, he recalls that Mr. Schottenstein and Homewood agreed to no blasting in their project. ., Mr. Foegler again stated that he was referring to the action on the sewer plan itself - whatever conditions imposed by Zoning would still apply. Dr. stoycheff asked again if blasting will be required in the Schottenstein-Homewood plan and will it be required on the Wedgewood Hills plan. Mr. Foegler responded that Wedgewood Hills is just in for preliminary rezoning. Staff is working with the developer now. Mr. Foegler stated that he cannot guarantee that no blasting will take place in conjunction with the Schottenstein development. If this was a condition of rezoning, then it would apply. There are no regulations currently that would prohibit blasting, but the City would want a plan that would restrict and eliminate blasting as much as possible by virtue of design. Dr. Stoycheff reaffirmed that the East Dublin civic Association will take a firm stance against blasting. The plan adopted by the City is dependent upon what happens at Wedgewood Hills, and Dr. Stoycheff recommends the City keep an open mind about other options. f"Ii';' ..... Mack Parkhill, 7879 Riverside Drive, a trustee of the Northeast civic Association, expressed concern about blasting - not because of the noise or the disruption, but because of the water. He explained that the homes on the west side of Riverside Drive are dependent on wells and will most likely never have water because of the zoo sewer line location. Blasting has in many cases disrupted the groundwater supply and sometimes requires redrilling of a well. Regarding the existing plan approved by Council and the pump station as now planned, he asked if blasting would be required at that site. ,*" .-11 Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Meeting : I II I . F RM N . 10148 HeIr) January 6, 1992 19 Page 21 "",""''+II! "" ~ Mr. Foegler stated that with the design approved, the depth was minimized on the entire system. The consultant's opinion was that he doubted blasting would be necessary. Mr. Parkhill stated that he recalls Mr. Smith, representing the Homewood and Schottenstein group, told the civic association on several occasions that they would agree to no blasting for this project. He asked that Council keep this in mind as they proceed, and that the developers be held to this agreement. Mr. Foegler stated that this was a major condition of Council's approval of this concept. If additional blasting becomes necessary, there will be additional pUblic forums to allow review and input. Mayor Rozanski stated, for clarification, that his understanding of the new plan proposed by Zande minimizes the depth of the lines with the possibility that no blasting will be required. Mr. Mack confirmed that to extend the gravity sewer to the point that it minimizes the lift station capability, as proposed by the Stoycheff plan, requires a deeper gravity sewer line and a longer one. There is a greater likelihood that blasting would be required in the Stoycheff plan than there is with the current plan. !JIllII"e,,"'l! .. Mr. Foegler commented that on the major lift station built by the City, which was all in solid rock, all was rippable. with the right equipment, the lines can generally be ripped. Dr. Stoycheff remarked that it was only 8 feet deep, and that the lift station proposed by Mr. Dye is between 20 and 30 feet deep. Dr. Stoycheff believes that this is not rippable. Mr. Foegler commented that he cannot respond to this project which is just in the initial stages of rezoning. Dr. Stoycheff stated that Mr. Dye said that his pump station was directly related to this project, and to assume that it will only be 8 feet deep and that there will be no blasting is ridiculous - there is solid rock in the ravines at only 10 feet of depth. Mr. Strip commented that this was turning into a debate which is no longer in place. ",,' I I I I I I Mrs. King announced that all of Council has now received the I minutes of the safety Committee meeting from December 4. She requested that Council adopt the recommendations of the Safety I Committee regarding pedestrian safety and signalization issues lion the Muirfield Boulevard connector which were to (1) lower the mounding in the median area; (2) to continue a high profile police presence in the area; (3) to train neighborhood residents in the use of speed monitor equipment; (4) to move the crossing lines; (5) to add flashing yellow lights for school zone during restricted hours; and (6) to recommend a pedestrian and vehicle- Mayor Rozanski thanked Dr. Stoycheff and promised to keep the lines of communication open. Council Committee Reports -,-/~ Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Meeting N co. F RM NO. 10148 HeIr) January 6, 1992 19 Page 22 'f/il"' operated, well lighted signal crossing at Sells Mill and Muirfield Drive. She commented that Council had requested from staff additional guidance on the subject of whether or not the City was allowed to install a full traffic signal at that intersection, but they have not received this guidance. In response to a request for clarification from Mr. Strip, Mrs. King stated that the "full traffic signal" would be a red, yellow and green signal where a pedestrian could push a button, allowing him to cross safely and that vehicles could trip the signal. The signal would operate on a demand basis. The discussion by Council called for phasing in of these recommendations over a period of time, but to act quickly. In response to the issue on signalization, Mr. Foegler commented that he recommended at the Committee meeting that the City attorney provide an interpretation. The Committee members then debated whether that was warranted. In a subsequent discussion with the City attorney and the City Manager, Mr. smith commented that there is some new case law directing this. Staff recommends that Council request a legal opinion on this. The City attorney does not yet have that directive from Council. ....,..,,, Discussion followed regarding whether a directive had been issued to obtain a legal interpretation. Mayor Rozanski commented that staff should have followed up with Council to clarify whether or not they wanted a legal interpretation by the City attorney. Mr. Foegler stated that staff had recommended at the Safety Committee that they should get a legal interpretation. Committee members wanted to be sure the expense was warranted. It was mentioned again at the last Council meeting, but there was no consensus at that time that it should be done. Mr. Hansley agreed that there was no motion from Council regarding obtaining a legal interpretation. Mayor Rozanski stated that Council had the impression after last Council meeting that Mr. smith was going to investigate this issue. He stated that Council was at fault, but asked that staff help resolve these kinds of issues in the future. "'"~ Mrs. King stated that she favors adoption of the recommendations of the Safety Committee as stated in the minutes of the December 16, 1991 Council meeting to include recommending a pedestrian- operated, well-lit signal crossing that would also be operated by cars approaching from Sells Mill and Mojave. This does not preclude receiving the information on legal issues of this signal installation. In an effort to reduce the cost of this request, she proposes staff prepare a position paper as suggested by Mr. Foegler and have the Legal Department review this paper. This will allow Council to move ahead with the recommendation, while still providing the legal advice which may alter the course of this phased-in development at a later date. Mr. Foegler commented that the administrative recommendation and previous legal opinion was that the home rule capability did provide Council with much flexibility. This is counter to what Mr. smith has told staff most recently - that the home rule Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Meeting nAYTON LEGAL BLANK CO. FORM NO. 10148 HeIr) January 6, 1992 19 !I 'I j' I' I II I, I' I I II I Page 23 #'J.'" "" ... , capability has been restricted by recent case law. Mr. Foegler promised to work with the City attorney to make sure that Council has the staff position on this issue from an engineering perspective and the legal side. Mr. Hansley requested a motion from Council to this effect. Mr. sutphen commented that he could see no reason why Dublin cannot provide signals in school areas for safe pedestrian crossing such as Arlington has. Mr. strip stated that there are two issues before Council: the first is adopting the first five recommendations and the second is further investigation of the sixth recommendation. Mr. Foegler responded that staff was asked to begin investigation of the first five recommendations and they have done so. Staff is Obtaining prices on solar-powered flashers for that area; Engineering staff is proceeding with the design for the pedestrian refuge area in the median area as well as investigation of lowering of the mounding to provide greater clear site distance in the area. ~ ~ Mrs. King motioned that Council adopt the first five recommendations of the Public Safety Committee as noted in the December 4 minutes of their meeting and repeated in the Council meeting minutes of December 16. Mr. Strip seconded the motion. ..",.H-.", Vote on the motion - Mr. Amorose, yes; Mr. Campbell, yes; Mr. Kranstuber, yes; Mr. Strip, yes; Mayor Rozanski, yes; Mrs. King, yes; Mr. Sutphen, yes. Mrs. King further motioned that Council request that staff follow through on the recommendation of Mr. Foegler to prepare a memo to the Legal Department on the issue of whether or not a full signal is warranted at Sells Mill/Mojave and Muirfield Drive, and to receive a recommendation from the Legal Department by the time of the next Council meeting, allowing sufficient time for Council members to review this recommendation. Mayor Rozanski commented that this motion should be clarified to ask the Legal Department for a legal recommendation on the Safety Committee's Recommendation Number 6, not on whether or not a signal is warranted. Mrs. King amended her motion as Mayor Rozanski suggested. Mr. Sutphen seconded the motion as amended. fl(iIIIIM,.... Vote on the amended motion - Mr. Strip, yes; Mr. Kranstuber, yes; Mr. Campbell, yes; Mr. Amorose, yes; Mrs. King, yes; Mayor Rozanski, yes; Mr. Sutphen, yes. 'it. " Mr. Strip announced that the next Finance Committee meeting on the proposed 1992 budget is scheduled for 7:30 on December 18. Mr. Sutphen announced that he plans to schedule a meeting for the Public Service committee this month. Mr. Foegler reminded Mr. Sutphen that the capital budget contains two signals for next year, sites unspecified. Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Meeting II II 'I II Ii --~~ -1'... ---- . , 'i I I '" to DAYTON LEGAL BLANK co. FORM NO. 10148 HeIr) January 6, 1992 19_ Page 24 Mr. Hansley suggested setting some additional Finance Committee meetings for budget hearings and discussed possible dates. Comments from Staff Janet Jordan announced that the Parks and Recreation class brochure is being mailed now and that there are 74 classes contained in the program, 26 of which are new. Chief Ferrell announced that the speed enforcement program in the Muirfield Drive school zone area has been effective. Sandra Puskarcik announced that the Special Event Planning Guide for the City of Dublin has been distributed to all who held events in the City during 1991. Also added that the Columbus Monthly magazine contained the "Definitely Dublin" advertisement on the back cover. Peter Lenz announced that 1991 was a good year for Dublin from the standpoint of building permit activity. Approximately 330 single-family building permits were issued during the year. Council Roundtable Joel Campbell welcomed Chuck Kranstuber to Council. Denise King called attention to the Parks and Recreations Committee minutes where the park maintenance staff expressed a need for improved facilities for the staff including eating areas and restrooms. She also mentioned that area real tors were pleased that the City of Dublin is providing advertising such as that in Columbus Monthly. She is pleased to see such positive image-building publicity for the City, in addition to all provided by the reporters who cover the Council meetings. Also proposed that Council take August 3rd off, that Council not hold a meeting the first meeting date in August. Believes that it is appropriate to publicize this well in advance so that no adverse impact is made on rezoning requests. Asked that if Council agrees with this concept to let the Clerk know so that a proper resolution can be prepared for this purpose. Mr. Hansley commented that the Charter only requires that Council meet once a month at a minimum; council can set a more frequent schedule by rule of Council as has been done. Mr. Sutphen commented he is looking forward to attending the MORPC meetings with Mr. Hansley. Mr. Hansley commented on the excellent orientation program provided by MORPC. Mr. Amorose extended a welcome to Chuck Kranstuber and expressed sincere appreciation to Jan Rozanski for serving as Mayor for the past three years. He acknowledged the amount of personal time that Jan donates to performing his duties as Mayor. Mr. Strip extended a warm welcome to Chuck Kranstuber and his hopes for Chuck's experience on Council to be as meaningful as it has for other Council members. Reminded all present of the reception for Barbara Maurer at the Chamber of Commerce on Friday, January 10. Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting Meeting I -----~I P' ... -f/IIf""""," ." :f #;;"'0. "'*, ,.~ DAYTON I FGAL BLANK CO. FORM NO. 10148 HeIr) January 6, 1992 19_ Page 25 Mr. Kranstuber thanked all of the Council members who have made him feel very welcome. Mayor Rozanski commented that the packets included updates for Council Members' green informational books. He requested that Council members bring their calendars to the Saturday, January 11 meeting so that goal setting dates can be set. Discussion followed regarding possible dates for goal setting. February 1 and 2 were agreed upon as good dates. Discussion followed regarding the value of a team building program in conjunction with goal setting. various options for the goal setting process were discussed. Jan Rozanski will work with staff to determine where and when the sessions will be held. Key staff members will be invited to the sessions. staff will suggest facilitators for the sessions to be approved by the Goal-Setting Committee. Discussion continued on the value of goal setting and the need for a renewed commitment to the process in light of budget considerations for the next year. Council members agreed that February 1 and 2 would be the best dates to schedule the goal setting meeting. Mayor Rozanski, Chairperson of Goal-Setting, will work with staff to make arrangements that are agreeable to the rest of Council. Mayor Rozanski requested that Mr. Hansley provide evaluation forms to Council for the City Manager evaluation and asked that Council members return their evaluations of the City Manager to the Mayor prior to the goal setting meeting. Mayor Rozanski adjourned the meeting at 11:30 p.m. /,- //~ '" /~ / ;;:/ v ---r \ ~4~" ,;)/0.:-'<",,"t _ r, presidin9~fficer / ~ (1)_- ~~ Clerk of Council ~ I i I Ii Ii I I