The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About08-10-15 Council MinutesRECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO Held CALL TO ORDER Dublin City Council AAeefinv August 10, 2015 Form 6101 Mayor Keenan called the Monday, August 10, 2015 Regular Meeting of Dublin City Council to order at 6:15 p.m. at the Dublin Municipal Building. Members present were Mayor Keenan, Vice Mayor Gerber, Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher, Mr. Lecklider, Mr. Peterson, Mr. Reiner and Ms. Salay. ADJOURNMENT TO EXECUTIVE SESSION Mayor Keenan moved to adjourn to executive session to discuss the purchase of property for public purposes, for conferences with an attorney for the public body concerning disputes involving the public body that are the subject of pending or imminent court action, and for discussion of personnel matters related to the appointment of a public official. Ms. Chinn ici-Zuercher seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mayor Keenan, yes; Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher, yes; Vice Mayor Gerber, yes; Mr. Peterson, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Ms. Salay, yes. The meeting was reconvened at 7:05 p.m. ROLL CALL Members present were Mayor Keenan, Vice Mayor Gerber, Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher, Mr. Lecklider, Mr. Peterson, Mr. Reiner and Ms. Salay. Staff members present were Mr. McDaniel, Ms. Crandall, Mr. Smith, Ms. Readler, Ms. Mumma, Mr. Foegler, Ms. O'Callaghan, Ms. Goss, Mr. Earman, Mr. McCollough, Mr. Rogers, Ms. Puskarcik, Chief von Eckartsberg, Mr. Hammersmith, Ms. Noble, Mr. Kridler, Mr. Shawn Smith, and Ms. LeRoy. Mr. Daniels of Squire Patton Boggs was also present. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mr. Lecklider led the Pledge of Allegiance. CITIZEN COMMENTS Bill Levering, 94 Franklin Street, Dublin noted he and his wife have lived in their home for 28 years and understand there will be some buying and selling of properties in the area, likely for condominium development. They and their neighbors are very unhappy about this. They are interested in knowing of the plans, or a brief outline of what is proposed. Ms. Salay asked staff if any development applications have been filed with the City in this area, or has anyone met with Planning staff about such proposals. Mr. Foegler responded that nothing has been submitted to date — no concepts, no drawings. Staff has also heard that developers are exploring acquisition of homes in this area, but there is nothing that has come before the City for consideration. Ms. Salay stated she has heard the same information — that people are interested in purchasing some of the single - family homes. She has responded to any developer who has made inquiry that they must respect this neighborhood. There is other land available in Bridge Street for development. Of course, a willing seller may sell their property to a developer, and the developer has the right to bring a project forward for review. Mr. Levering added that two properties have already been sold, but there were circumstances involved in each of those. Mayor Keenan summarized that no plans have been submitted to the City at this time. Ms. Salay suggested that Mr. Levering provide his contact information to staff, and if any plans or concepts are brought forward to staff for development, he could be notified. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes BARRETTBROTHF,RS- DAYTON, OHIO Held Dublin City Council August 10, 2015 Page 2 of 28 Meeting Form 6101 Christina Alutto, 8900 Turin Hill Court North, Dublin announced that she has filed to run for election to City Council in the fall. Her decision to run is based on a desire to continue seeing Dublin be a creative, forward- thinking powerhouse. Dublin was identified as a Top 5 International Smart City, and a Top 20 Creative Class City. This is Dublin's path to the future. She noted she has a strong business background in the public sector and works as Director of Administration for the Solid Waste Authority of Central Ohio. Prior to this, she served with The Ohio State University. She holds a Bachelor's degree in Business from Georgia College and an MBA from The Ohio State University Fischer College of Business. As a business - minded public servant, she sees projects like the Bridge Street District as a perfect example of a public /private partnership. She appreciates Council's foresight and the innovative thought process engaged in to bring projects like the Bridge Street District to the Dublin community. This type of business minded, managed growth helps keep Dublin the place where she wants to live with her family. She has watched the Bridge Street District projects unfold, and has been saddened with some of the misinformation and misleading statements made by non - Council members. Our world -class city is far too classy to have a future built on negativity, fear and misinformation. She reviewed the available public documents on the project, and has listened to Ms. Mumma's comments to Council. From her perspective, she can see that the financials on this project are solid. Well- researched projects such as this are part of what sets Dublin apart. If elected, she will support the direction this Council has taken on these important measures for the City's future. She provided personal background about her family and how this has shaped her decision to work in public service. She noted she is tenacious, hardworking and loves a challenge — a positive person with a thirst for knowledge and progress. She applauds this Council for the leadership they provide to the City, and she hopes to join them in this task, this opportunity. This is Dublin's path to the future. Mayor Keenan welcomed her to what promises to be an exciting Council election in the fall! Roger Vogel 177 Longview Drive, Dublin stated that he is President of the Mid - Century Dublin Neighbors Association. It has been 1 -1/2 years since they introduced themselves to Council as a new neighborhood association. • He thanked Council and staff for the work that has been done on the issues brought forward at that time that affect their area of the City. • They see continued progress on the Dublin Road South shared -use path and hope it will be completed next year as planned. • They appreciate the efforts of Council to arrive at an appropriate dispersal distance for the adult family homes. The ordinance passed is truly innovative and they believe it is defensible and will benefit all residents of Dublin in maintaining balanced and sustainable neighborhoods. • The third issue they raised relates to their neighborhood streets. He noted that the improvement for streets for their neighborhood was listed as a line item in the proposed CIP, but there is no funding programmed for this in the next five -year CIP. • A detailed proposal has been sent to Council by their neighborhood requesting new streets, curbs and gutters, and sidewalks on one side of each street. Deborah Mitchell, Vice President, will summarize what they are proposing. • In the proposal, they have responses to the four objections they have heard to their project. • They have heard that Council is not certain that their neighborhood wants new streets and sidewalks. However, the document includes the results of a survey done from June 26 through July 10, 2015. Of the property owners they were able to contact, over 87 percent signed the statement of affirmation stating they want new streets — not just a recoating — with curbs, gutters, and sidewalks. Less than 13 percent said "no" to that. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of BARRETT BROTHERS • DAYTON, OHIO Held Dublin City Council August 10, 2015 Meeting Form 6101 Page 3 of 28 Mid - Century Dublin neighborhood is truly the gateway to Historic Dublin from Dublin Road South. Council needs to decide whether this neighborhood is to be a strategic, sustainable neighborhood, with all the characteristics needed to complement and help make Bridge Street District successful. Is Council going to let this neighborhood languish with 1950 -style streets and no sidewalks? They urge Council to take a close look at their proposal and they will be pleased to discuss this further with anyone. The contact information is in the document Council will receive. Deborah Mitchell, 178 Longview Drive, Dublin, Vice President of Mid - Century Neighbors Association noted that the materials referenced by Mr. Vogel were submitted to Council via e-mail. They want to call this out prior to the CIP workshops, and she encouraged Council to read the materials in their proposal and consider their request. She commented as follows: • They believe and have data to support that their neighborhood is a very special one, and has some unique characteristics that complement the values and vision that Dublin has for the Bridge Street District and for Dublin beyond. • She shared photos of their neighborhood, noting the neighbors are very active and have come together in the past year around their identity, using social media and word of mouth connections to become an even stronger cohesive neighborhood. • They are not part of Historic Dublin, but were the first official /formal housing development beyond Historic Dublin. The development was laid out in the 1950s and 1960s, and largely consists of homes from that time period — about 75 in total. • The housing is for the most part ranch -style homes of 1,400 to 1,900 square feet, an attractive size for first -time homebuyers and empty nesters alike. • The homes are appropriate for anyone who wants to "age in place." In looking at the residents of their neighborhood, there are many multi - generational families buying homes in the neighborhood in order to attend the schools and to have relatives nearby, living in housing that is often ADA compliant and amenable to the needs of the elderly. She shared photos of the residents living in the neighborhood, reflecting multi - generationally diverse residents. According to the US Census, 25 percent of their neighborhood is under age 18, but over one third are age 55 and up. They also have different ethnicities and people with various backgrounds. • They have worked with Council previously on items such as the adult family home issue. What they are asking now is for Council to consider working with them again. They want to be a model neighborhood — a great complement to the Bridge Street District — showing what can happen with an existing neighborhood in terms of renovating and investing in it to make it reflect the new urbanism, which is all about safety, walkability, and livability. • What this will require is some investment, which they are requesting from the City in the CIP. Their elderly residents cannot walk in their streets; their children are not safe in their streets; there are no sidewalks; the streets are very narrow; there are no curbs; there is nowhere to go if a car is approaching. In the winter, with snow or rain, people must go into the yards and mud to try to walk along the street. There is no opportunity for them to be safe and to be outside. This is really in conflict with new urbanism and the idea of people able to be out and active at every age. • There are also implications in terms of sustainability around stormwater management. There is no stormwater management, as they have no curbs and gutters. The ditches have been filled in over 50 years with infill. Research indicates that using grass swales for stormwater management requires re- grading and re- sodding every 5 to 10 years. Nothing has been done to these Minutes of BARRETT BROTHERS - Held _ RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS OHIO Dublin City Council August 10, 2015 Page 4 of 28 Meeting Forth 6101 for almost 60 years, and there are no ditches into which the stormwater can run. • Their request is for new streets. As early as 2016, they are aware that their neighborhood is scheduled for a maintenance retopping of their streets. Instead, they would like to have new streets with incorporated curbs and gutters and a sidewalk on one side of each of their streets so that, in fact, they are a sustainable neighborhood where people can be out and safely walk. She next responded to four reasons that Council might consider as a basis for denial of their request. 1. 'Residents don't want the improvements." Their survey provided in the materials sent to Council indicates they do — 87 plus percent of the residents have indicated they want the improvements. 2. "'We've never done this for an older neighborhood before." They don't know if any other neighborhood wants this; they are the first, as far as they are aware, that have asked for the improvements. They believe they have strategic importance, which fits with the Community Plan and the vision that Council has for Dublin. 3. "If you do it for use you'll have to do it for every older neighborhood in the City." They don't agree, and believe there could be decision criteria that relate to connectivity. They are within 3/4 mile or 1/2 mile of downtown Dublin, and not every neighborhood is similarly situated. They also believe their neighborhood is ideally suited for aging in place. 4. ""Why did you buy in this neighborhood if you don't like narrow streets with no sidewalks? If you wanted something different, you would have shopped elsewhere." They have a vision for their neighborhood, just like Dublin has a vision for all of Dublin. They have invested in their homes and are hoping that Council will invest in their neighborhood. Mayor Keenan thanked her for sharing this information. David Guion Executive Director, Dublin Arts Council noted he is present tonight, at the request of Council Member Reiner and on behalf of the Board and staff of the Dublin Arts Council to thank Council for their generous support of the exhibition of Eddie Adams: Vietnam. This rarely viewed collection of 50 photographs of the Vietnam War by Pulitzer price- winning photographer Eddie Adams is breaking attendance records and remains on view through September 11. The exhibit opened on Memorial Day, and was featured in a front -page story in the Columbus Dispatch. Over 25 videos have been captured in the reflection room for the exhibit, with recordings by retired Associated Press Bureau Chief Hal Buell and Alyssa Adams, widow of Eddie Adams. The Dublin Arts Council is very grateful for the City's leadership in providing a $12,000 hotel -motel tax grant to bring the exhibition to Dublin. This support has leveraged more than $22,000 in additional funds from other supporters. Significant in -kind support has been provided by a Dublin -based company, Roto — an award - winning museum and entertainment exhibit designer firm who helped create and install the video feedback booth and playback station. There are remaining opportunities to view the exhibit through September 11. On August 18 through 20, the DAC will host the display of the 1967 Huey helicopter on the DAC grounds. A special reception will be hosted for the community to see this artifact on Tuesday, August 18 from 6 -8 p.m. The helicopter is being displayed courtesy of Vietnam Veterans of America, Chapter 55 in Newark, Ohio. On September 11, the DAC will host a closing reception for the exhibition from 5:30 -7:30 p.m., followed by a concert at the Abbey Theater by singer songwriter and poet David Morris who served as a medic in Vietnam. Admission is no charge with a suggested donation of a non - perishable food item for the National Coalition of Homeless Veterans. [In closing, he read two short excerpts from a transcript from the video feedback booth.] Mayor Keenan proposed that, due to the number of residents in attendance for the utility extension discussion, the item be moved up and discussed at this point. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO August 10, 2015 Held There was no objection from Council. Meeting Forth 6101 Page 5 of 28 OTHER • Water Utility and Sanitary Sewer Utility Extensions to Existing Developed Property Ms. O'Callaghan stated that staff has provided a series of memos to Council over the past year containing much background information that has led up to this water and sanitary sewer utility extension policy discussion. Much of this was discussed during the Council work session on June 15, and all of that information has been provided in tonight's meeting packet. After that work session and the following Council meeting, staff was instructed to bring forward a formal policy as well as an implementation plan for the utility extensions for consideration at tonight's Council meeting. She will focus on the following topics: - Recap of background information - Existing conditions. They have identified those properties that are within 100 feet of water and /or sanitary sewer services. - Recommended policy proposal - Staff recommendations RECAP Several years ago, there was an effort to identify all of the areas that do not currently have water and /or sanitary sewer services, and the general location map, as shown tonight, was developed. The color -coded map shows: (1) orange flags - developed areas that do not currently have access to sanitary sewer services; (2) green flags - developed areas that do not currently have access to water service; (3) purple flags — developed areas that do not have access to either service. The areas included on the map are primarily existing single - family areas, but some existing commercial businesses are show as well. In order to determine the cost of extensions of the main lines, it was necessary to do preliminary design of the needed extensions. The costs are significant. Estimated costs of sanitary sewer extensions exceeds $12 million; water extensions would be nearly $6 million, for a total of $18.4 million. Total capacity charges for both sanitary sewer and water are over $9,000. These costs are typical for new home construction, as well, and are typically included in the construction cost of a new home. These costs do not include the construction cost of the service line from the main lines to the structure on the property. Those costs are difficult to estimate because they vary widely depending on the site. They are estimating that the costs could range from $3,000 to $12,000 depending on site circumstances. Dublin City Code regulates sewer and water services as well as Ohio Revised Code, and those have been taken into account in developing the proposed policy. At the June workshop, representatives from Franklin County agencies discussed their annual inspection responsibilities and program, and the results of those inspections. Currently, Franklin County Public Health Agency is responsible for performing annual inspections on two types of household sewage treatment systems (HSTS). Due to a change in the Ohio Administrative Code, the agency will be required to inspect all HSTS in the future. So in the future, Dublin will be receiving up -to -date annual information on the status of all the HSTS in the City. That information will be critical in helping the City's prioritization efforts in the future. In order to develop the policy, it was essential to understand the location of all the privately- maintained systems, as well as the condition of each of those systems. In order to do this, Dublin partnered with the two County agencies in preforming a scope of work that included: - Inventory that catalogued and evaluated 378 HSTS in Dublin - Peformance of a health -based risk assessment, taking into account the age of the system, failure rate, groundwater pollution potential and soil type RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of BARRETT BROTHERS •DAYTON,OHIO Held Dublin City Council August 10, 2015 Page 6 of 28 Meeting Form 6101 - Map of the system risk assessments. The systems with the higher potential for risk are located in the Scioto River corridor. The findings of that risk assessment indicate that the majority of the systems in Dublin are in working condition. There were 37 of the 378 parcels that have HSTS where Franklin County was able to work with the property owners to remedy the maintenance concerns. The aeration treatment units have the majority of the issues, and these units are found in many of the homes along the Scioto River. EXISTING CONDITIONS Staff located examples of special assessments levied by the City in the late 1970 - 1980s. In the early 2000s, the City funded and extended water and sewer main lines to a few areas. Residents were required to connect or to obtain a hardship waiver. There are other options available with regard to funding of the main line extensions. The most commonly used tool is City assessment of the individual landowners for the entire cost of installing the main lines. Dublin City Code requires that once the City extends sanitary or water services to within 100 feet of a property line, the property owner is required to connect to the system at their own expense. Staff have updated City records regarding developed properties that currently have access to public sanitary sewer and /or water but are not presently connected. Staff obtained billing information from the City of Columbus, which enabled evaluation of the parcels in the City that are within 100 feet of public sewer /water that are not connected. Based on the data, it appears that Dublin currently has 158 developed parcels located within 100 feet of public water service. Mr. Peterson inquired if the 158 number is included in the 378 number of HSTS. Ms. O'Callaghan responded that she was speaking only of public water, though there could be some overlap with the water /sanitary sewer. Mr. Reiner inquired if the parcels within 100 feet of public water service have structures on them. Ms. O'Callaghan responded that staff narrowed the list to include only the developed parcels that have structures. There are 105 developed parcels with structures on them that are currently located within 100 feet of public sanitary sewer service. There is some overlap between the parcels within 100 feet of sewer and the parcels within 100 feet of water, but there are also many that are within 100 feet of only one or the other. STAFF RECOMMENDATION In the interest of reducing potential health risk to the community, staff recommends working with these property owners to achieve their connection to the public utility systems. Staff took a lot of information into account in drafting a policy. They used the health risk assessment; City Council minutes from the past decade; results of surveys of residents in the affected areas from the mid- 2000s; benchmarking from throughout the country; and updated cost estimates. It is important that the policy have parameters but also provide flexibility. It isn't possible to plan all the extensions at this time, because it will take time to implement the extensions. They need the flexibility to review the extensions annually and update the plan on an ongoing basis. PROPOSED POLICY The policy sets forth two processes by which utility main line extensions may be initiated. 1. The City will prioritize and program planned extensions as a part of the annual CIP process. 2. Property owners within an area may petition the City to move their area up in priority. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO Held Dublin City Council August 10, 2015 Meeting Form 6101 Page 7 of 28 City Prioritization /Programming: With the first option, the City would annually determine whether to extend public utilities for the purpose of improving the public safety, health and welfare of the community, and /or take advantage of an opportunity to leverage a planned transportation or utility project that has been programmed in the CIP, for the purpose of cost effectiveness. The criteria, as listed, was taken into account as staff reviewed and prioritized the extension areas. Based on these criteria, and working with Finance on a fiscal analysis of the situation, a 25 -year conceptual implementation plan has been developed. Because the CIP workshop is next week, she will briefly review the first five years of the plan tonight. The first items included are the extensions that can be accomplished by leveraging other planned transportation and utility projects; next included are the areas with the greatest potential for health risk, along the east side of the Scioto River, with the following schedule. 2016: Design of the extensions that would be constructed in 2017. 2017: Construction of Area 13, leveraging the Avery Road /Brand Road intersection Improvement project. Extensions to Area 11A, leveraging the Limerick Lane stormwater improvement project. 2018: Construction of Area 12, leveraging a waterline replacement project; construction of Area 3A, due to a higher potential for health risk. It would also achieve a greater impact for the funds available by containing more parcels within that area. Area 3 must be constructed before Area 2. 2019: Construction of Area 8A, leveraging the Tuttle Crossing Boulevard extension project. 2020: No scheduled construction, in order to catch up with the funding. Property Owner Petition Property owners within an area would have the opportunity to submit a petition that could potentially move their area up on the prioritization list. The request would be evaluated in conjunction with the larger project list. Because it is important that there be a significant property owner commitment to justify moving an area up ahead of other areas that were planned, 85% of the property owners within the defined extension area must sign the petition that would be part of the utility extension application. The process would include the petition, an affidavit of willingness to connect, and commitment of the property owners to donate any easements that would be necessary for construction of the service lines. Those applications would be due by March 1 of each year; staff would review the applications; and the City Manager would provide a recommendation to Council as part of the annual CIP process. Design /Construction The City would fund 100% of the cost of the design and construction of the main line extensions. Property owners would be required to pay for their private connection costs, which include tap fees, capacity charges, cost for extension of private service lines from the public utility main line to the structure on their property, and any modifications to their interior plumbing that may be necessary for them to connect. In the case of petitioning property owners, it is important to acquire further commitment from them because it is likely their project would be displacing another area within the prioritization. Therefore, they would be required to pay their tap fees and capacity charges prior to the City advertising the construction contract for construction of the public lines. If those petitioning property owners did not pay those fees prior to the advertisement, then the City would withdraw the funding for that project and return to the original prioritization plan. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council BARRETT BROTHERS • DAYTON, OHIO August 10, 2015 Held Meeting Forth 6101 Page 8 of 28 As an incentive for people to connect as required by City Code, property owners would receive a waiver of 50% of Dublin's tap fees and capacity charges if they connect within the required time. The City cannot waive the Columbus portion of the fees. Connection Timeframe City Code currently requires connection within 90 days after the date Dublin provides official notice to connect. Benchmarking of other public entities throughout the country was performed to compare the 90 -day timeframe. Most of the examples were within central Ohio. Staff learned that 90 days is on the short end of the spectrum. There was one example of five years, but that was for an annexed property. Mayor Keenan inquired if the benchmarking included a comparison of how many other public entities paid for design and construction costs. Ms. O'Callaghan responded that their inquiry focused on situations where the cost of the main line construction was assessed on the property owner. Mayor Keenan noted that cost is significant and is typically assessed to the property owner over a period of 20 -30 years as part of their tax bill. Ms. O'Callaghan stated that the goal is to give property owners sufficient time to plan, budget and line up contractors. Up -to -date information would be maintained at the City website to which resident inquiries would be referred. The Five Year CIP information would be included, as well as the future conceptual plan. As part of the annual CIP process, staff would recommend providing annual written notification to those property owners that are in extension areas that are programmed as a part of that process. This would provide the property owners with advance notification of what year they are scheduled to receive the extension. Staff recommends that Chapters 51 and 52 of the City Code be amended to require connection within two years after the date of official notice to connect, as opposed to the current 90 days. This process, including the advance CIP notice and official notification required by Code, would provide property owners a total notice of 3 -7 years. Mayor Keenan inquired if the current policy requires connection within 90 days, if the property is within 100 feet. Ms. O'Callaghan responded that is what is currently required by City Code. Mayor Keenan inquired if that has been enforced. Ms. O'Callaghan responded that it has not been an enforcement priority. Mayor Keenan inquired if the Code was amended to two years or other, would everyone have that same timeframe, including those properties that are currently within 100 feet. Ms. O'Callaghan responded that the recommendation is to amend the Code first, then proceed within initiating the connections. It is important to manage this issue on an ongoing basis by updating City records every year. The proposed policy requires the City Manager to provide an annual report to City Council, including: - the health risk information from Franklin County; number /quantity of known water wells and HSTS; - updated list of properties within 100 feet; - updated map of the extension areas; - updated preliminary estimates for extensions; - any recommendations related to applications /petitions received by received by March 1; - list of recommended extension areas for the next Five Year CIP update; - copies of any notifications to property owners of utility extensions planned within the upcoming CIP period. That packet of information would be provided for the annual CIP discussion. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO August 10, 2015 Held Page 9 of 28 Meeting Form 6101 Staff Recommendations are that: 1. Council direct staff to draft an ordinance amending Chapters 51 and 52 of City Code to require property owners to connect to the public utility systems within two years of the official notice to do so. (This step to precede the following steps.) 2. Council direct staff to initiate a connection process with property owners of developed parcels that are currently within 100 feet of public sanitary sewer and /or water services. A letter would be sent to the property owners notifying of the connection requirement per City Code. Staff would work with them to have them connected to the system. 3. Council adopt the recommended policy for water and sanitary sewer utility extensions to existing developed properties. 4. Council direct staff to propose the five -year planned extensions as part of the 2016 -2020 CIP process. Mayor Keenan thanked staff for the comprehensive information including estimates. Council Questions/ Discussion: Mr. Lecklider inquired about the possibility that the state and /or federal government may one day mandate that local governments provide these extensions. Ms. O'Callaghan responded that they do have requirements and Franklin County Public Health Department does check in with the City of Dublin occasionally to check the status of requiring connections. Mr. Lecklider stated that in terms of water quality — whether that is the State or Federal EPA, is there a possibility of that being made a mandate? Mr. McDaniel stated that he served on the Franklin County Board of Health for more than ten years, until just recently. The Board is proactive in requiring connections throughout the County when the properties are within 200 feet, according to County Code. Dublin requires connection within 100 feet. Certainly, EPA requirements continue to become more and more stringent, as well as the Corps of Engineers' rules and regulations on connectivity. It is important to protect the watersheds. The 25 -year program that is proposed would be reviewed and revised annually in preparation of the Five Year CIP. The purpose of that 25 -year program is to address the issue of protecting the watersheds. Dublin does not have any serious situations to address because residents do a good job of taking care of their onsite HSTS. However, the proposed policy is an attempt to achieve a process for funding the estimated $18.4 million cost of the program. Although Dublin does not have any areas that are failing, there are some individual issues. However, this issue needs to be addressed by areas or neighborhood, not on an individual basis. Mayor Keenan stated that extending the main lines is the right thing to do. Dublin is blessed as a community to be able to think about policy. In terms of the timeframes — two years for connection and a 25 -year program for implementation — are those parameters matters for discussion? Were those defined by staff, and could Council revise them? Mr. McDaniel responded that staff considered a combination of years. Given all the competing requirements that are known today in the CIP, 25 years was determined to be comfortable from a planning perspective. That issue needs to be based upon science, because it is necessary to have a systematic deployment of the main lines in order to serve certain areas. For design, funding and actual construction and extension, 25 years seemed more comfortable. That may seem a long time to some, and that is why the petition option is offered. If there is catastrophic system failure in one area or if the property owners are more ready for connection than another area, the residents can petition to be moved up in the schedule. That would be evaluated on an annual basis. Staff has made an effort to lay out a systematic, scientific approach with an option, if needed. Although this is a 25 -year deployment plan, if more RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO V,a- AI Dublin City Council August 10, 2015 _ Meeting Forth 6101 Page 10 of 28 resources become available or less available, it could be completed in either a shorter or longer timeframe. Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher stated that with the last utility line extension projects, residents could request a hardship waiver due to certain circumstances. That capability remains within the proposed policy, as well. Staff and Council are always respectful of individual situations. She would prefer to have that opportunity versus the City becoming a "bank" for those situations, which would not be the best direction for a municipal government to take. Mr. McDaniel stated that as the program moves to notifications preceding deployment, a closer look could be taken at the hardship waiver. He would reserve the option to come back to Council at a later date regarding how hardships might be addressed. It might be desirable to define a process, perhaps through a citizen advisory committee or a Council subcommittee, to consider hardships waivers, which would be based on criteria. That issue deserves more development than what has been done for it in the past. Mayor Keenan stated that if a homeowner recently installed a new system and is in an area that is scheduled to be connected sooner rather than later, could the hardship be simply that they just invested in a system that will serve them for 10 -15 years? Mr. McDaniel responded that it seems a valid criteria, if they just invested in an HSTS that has a projected life cycle of 10 -15 years. Ms. Salay stated that it is important to be mindful, however, that the hardship waiver does not waive the necessity to connect. It may be that the City needs a low- income or fixed- income program and consider whether that might be included on the tax bill. The ultimate goal is to have every household connected. There are many retired folks in the older areas of the City. What is the impact of this 25 -year program on the water and sewer funds that Council reviews every year? Ms. Mumma responded that two years ago, the City began allocating money from the CIP tax fund to the Water and Sewer Funds in the amount of $200,000 each year. In this CIP program, that allocation will occur for the Water Fund, but for the Sewer Fund, it will increase to $400,000 per year during this five -year period. Water and Sewer Funds are proprietary funds and are to be funded by the revenues received. In order to not burden the rate with the cost of extensions of these lines, it will necessitate infusion of other dollars to help fund these extensions. The City has a significant amount of debt that is outstanding within the Sewer Fund. That was one of the reasons the start of this program was delayed to begin in 2017, which is the last full year of the Interceptor payment -- $1.3 - $1.4 million per year. Once that obligation is completed, it will allow some flexibility. It is important to ensure that the cost of extending these lines is balanced and not to burden the rate that is charged to the existing users of the system. For that reason, funds have been programmed from the CIP for the Water and Sewer Funds. However, there are competing projects that also necessitate Capital Funds, so, as is typical, priorities are set in the CIP each year. The implementation of the first five years of this is in the proposed CIP. It is much more difficult to project revenues and expenditures of a system beyond that period. During this five -year period, the groundwork will be laid for implementation of the plan, which will be reviewed on an annual basis. Ms. Salay inquired where the requirement to have 85% of citizens in agreement originated. It seems to be a difficult threshold to reach for an area. Ms. O'Callaghan responded it was based on benchmarking from around the country. It was also based on discussion of Council during early 2000, which ranged between 80% and 90 %. The position of Council was that the participation needed to be a significant percentage. Staff used the number that had been decided upon at that time, as reflected in Council meeting minutes. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO Held. Dublin City Council August 10, 2015 Page 11 of 28 Ms. Salay stated that in regard to the Sewer Fund, the Interceptor debt will roll off but the Dublin surcharge will remain for all the ratepayers in the Dublin portion of the Columbus system. Ms. Mumma confirmed that is correct. Meeting Forth 6101 Ms. Salay stated that for parity purposes with all other citizens who own homes and who are connected to the systems, she believes people should contribute to the cost of the extension of these lines. Hardship waivers can be considered, but everyone who purchased a home in Dublin has had the cost of the water /sewer connection built into the cost of their home. It seems fair that those people who will benefit significantly should contribute to the costs. It will raise their property values and quality of life to have dependable, safe drinking water. Mayor Keenan responded that he has heard that there is a significant cost associated with running a lateral line from the street to the house -- $5,000 - $10,000, which is approximately what the cost is when a house is built. Dublin also has many areas with significant rock and limestone, and running a line from the street to the house will not be an easy task. It will be difficult enough to secure everyone's cooperation. There are sustainability issues, watershed issues, and health and safety issues. He recalls that there was a resident in the Indian Run neighborhood who was sickened with E -coli from contamination in that area, yet it was difficult for that neighborhood to reach 85% resident agreement. His position is that the City should construct the utility lines and provide two to five years for connection. To attempt to do anything beyond that will stall the project. Mr. Peterson stated that he is in favor of the City installing the trunk lines and absorbing the costs. That is the appropriate thing for the City of Dublin to do and he supports doing this, doing it correctly and as quickly as possible. He is in favor of the prioritization process. However, the issue he is concerned about is the required connection for a homeowner who recently installed an HSTS system and now has a system that functioning well. If for the next ten years there will not be a problem, is it possible for the City to build in a two -year timeframe for an incentive or when there is a health justification requiring them to connect? Mr. McDaniel stated that he believes that the City funding the installation of the main lines and then requiring people to connect is a good balance. If the policy is for the City to absorb 100% of the cost of the main line, then the City needs to have a connection requirement when that line is completed. That will provide a partial cost recovery by adding users to the system. It is also a more fair approach for the other users of the system, as it would not impact the rates for all the other existing users. Mr. Peterson inquired if it is simply a matter of timing. If the City required everyone to tap in when their system fails, then it is tied to some substantive justification requiring their tap in, not just a two -year timeframe. Mayor Keenan inquired how a health justification would be known. Mr. Peterson responded that the Health Department maintains a list of the specific systems that are on watch. Mr. McDaniel responded that he believes the way in which his concern could be addressed is with the hardship waiver. If someone has recently installed a new system, they could provide that as a reason not to connect at the required time, which Council could choose to accept. That provides the relief valve. Mr. Peterson responded that it is essential to be very careful with this. If someone on a fixed income qualifies and someone next door does not, that will appear that the City is making a preference, but there is an arbitrary health justification. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO August 10, 2015 Held Page 12 of 28 Meeting Form 6101 Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher stated that it is important to develop appropriate criteria. She would advocate looking more closely at the two -year requirement versus three or five years in terms of cost recovery. Mr. McDaniel responded that it should be possible to model that out for those currently within 100 feet for the proposed five -year program. Mr. Reiner stated that he believes that staff has presented a good compromise. He served earlier on the Committee that reviewed a request for utility extensions. Initially, there was good resident support, but, as the costs were known, many of the residents indicated they did not want to participate or pay for the extension. They outnumbered those who had requested that the City provide the service. To be fair to the current users of the system, there needs to be some cost recovery from the new extensions, and the proposal appears to achieve a middle ground that will hopefully encourage resident support. Ms. O'Callaghan stated that with the benchmarking performed, all the communities they found accomplished the main line extension by assessment. Staff inquired the reason, if they were extending the main line by assessments, why they were requiring the connection. The response was that they wanted to be ahead of any problems that could occur with HSTS. Although they were assessing the main line costs, they also required connection for the purpose of avoiding any failures. The over - arching purpose of the program was to protect the public health. Mayor Keenan noted that there are not many public entities that could fund 100% of the main lines. He invited public testimony. Dan Shoenberger, 8171 Trails End Drive, Dublin stated that he has resided in his home for ten years. When he moved in, he was told that sewer extension was planned. Later, they learned that the discussion has been ongoing for many years. They have followed the issue over the last year. Staff has put together a very good plan, and they hope the proposal, as presented, will finally succeed in providing water and sewer to all the under and unserved areas within the City. He has two implementation suggestions. (1) Schedule of 25 years. His area -- 113, is not scheduled for sewers until 2033, which is 18 years out. During that time, residents on Trails End will expend a lot of money and resources maintaining their systems. Once 2033 is near, there will be no incentive for people to maintain their systems, and there could be an issue. Mayor Keenan noted that there is the alternative of the petition process. Mr. Shoenberger stated that there is that alternative, but a 25 -year program is just "kicking the can down the road." It is not setting a realistic timeframe. No urban planners can plan 25 years in advance what this great City will be, including resources and needs. That is a long time for a plan. He would like to see a more reasonable goal set to have every property tied into the City's water and sewer. He truly believes this great City can do better than 25 years. There is a provision for petition, which is a viable method for areas of 6 -10 residences. There are 30 plus homes in his area. He does not believe it is possible to have 85% of those homeowners commit to spend $10,000 - $15,000 of their money for an extension. It would be a burden to them and will not happen. The petition process could consider other factors -- perhaps they could get 60 %, or maybe it is a high -risk area. Perhaps there could be more flexibility provided. (2) Prioritization may not have been thoroughly vetted. In his area, 30 plus homes could be tied in for a budget of $370,000. That is a very reasonable amount. Did the prioritization consider that? Area 3, on the other hand, would be $1.3 million, which is a significant amount to spend upfront. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO Held Dublin City Council August 10, 2015 Meeting Form 6101 Page 13 of 28 (3) Funding is an issue, but as a consulting engineer, he has many clients with public institutions around the State of Ohio. One of his clients has said to him repeatedly that there is always money, if the priority is high enough, for anything you want to achieve. He believes the health, safety and welfare of the residents of Dublin should be a high priority. Kent Haroz, 8245 Trails End Drive, Dublin, stated that residents in their community have met over the past few months to discuss this issue. He believes his comments are representative of the majority of the people on Trails End Drive. He has three areas of comment: (1) Thank you for the development of this proposed policy. He appreciates the work that has been put into this and the commitment that Council is making to the initiative. (2) Request for clarity of the total cost of action and inaction. At a previous Council meeting, a representative from a Franklin County agency indicated a cost in excess of $30,000 - $40,000 for someone to replace a septic system. That type of information was not included in the 2006 survey that indicated only 25% of the residents were interested in connection to the sewer system. If another resident interest survey were to be done, he requests that a clarification be made of both the cost of action — approximately $12,000 per homeowner for connection, versus the cost of inaction — full cost, approximately $30,000- $40,000 to homeowner for replacing a failed system -- before that particular neighborhood is included in the timeline. He believes the response rate would increase if both sides of the equation were presented. (3) Request for clarity of the timeline and prioritization. They realize that funding of large initiatives is always a delicate balancing act, but they ask that Council consider the cost of inaction, with homeowners having to pay upwards of $30,000 - $40,000 to replace systems before the $10,000 - $12,000 connection option is available. The hardship waiver would help to address that, but they would like some clarity of that hardship criteria. They understand the issue of competing priorities, but respectfully request that the 25 -year timeline for the entire water -sewer extension be re- examined. He thanked Council for the progress that has been made. They are looking forward to the next steps. Mayor Keenan inquired Council's preference in regard to taking action on staff's recommendations. Do they prefer to do so tonight, perhaps in a draft form, in order to begin some work prior to the CIP workshop? Ms. Salay stated that she is interested in some of the suggestions to examine the different timelines — 20 — 25 years, and costing that out, and Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher's suggestion in regard to costs of 1, 2 or 3 years within the first 5 -year CIP extension plan would be helpful. Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher stated that the CIP workshop is one week away, but if staff could take another look at the schedule to determine if there is a way to move some areas up on the schedule, if the necessary funds are identified elsewhere. It may be possible to shorten the timeline. She agrees with the two speakers tonight that 25 years is a long time. It is critical to develop the criteria for prioritization sooner rather than later. She encourages one of Council's subcommittees to work with staff on the criteria for prioritization or hardship. Vice Mayor Gerber stated that he is in favor of this policy going forward, but he would like to see a variety of modeling. Council learned during the work session on this subject that these systems may last 15 years, but homes on the back end of that schedule may need to replace systems at a significant cost and later connect to the City utility system at another large expense. Perhaps staff could look at different modeling in terms of timeframes to avoid that hardship. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO Held Dublin City Council August 10, 2015 Page 14 of 28 — Meeting Forth 6101 Ms. Salay stated that if staff provides that modeling at the CIP workshop, the CIP budget is not approved until a later Council meeting. Mayor Keenan stated that Council can provide some direction to staff at the CIP workshop. Ms. O'Callaghan clarified that Recommendation #4 is limited to the five -year plan for 2016 through 2020. Approval is not requested for the entire 25 -year plan, because it will need to be discussed and re- evaluated every year. Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher clarified that her request was to see if more areas could be moved up into that five -year plan. Mr. McDaniel responded that perhaps staff can provide information about how that would that would impact the rest of the CIP. However, he is not certain that information can be prepared in advance of next Monday's meeting. He would request that the funding as requested and programmed in the CIP be maintained as a placeholder. More time can be provided for that discussion at a later date. He understands Council's direction to consider options. Many options have been reviewed at staff level, and some of that information could be shared. They will work on the options and will be able to provide more information following the workshop. Ms. Salay noted that the public hearing and vote on the CIP budget is scheduled for September 8, nearly a month out. Mr. Lecklider stated that staff has done a great job with the proposal. Whatever conclusion is reached will not address every concern. The proposal suggests reasonable compromises. There is the issue of funding. Dublin is the exception in that the City does not assess the costs of the main line. Mayor Keenan stated that this item will be discussed further at the CIP workshop with the additional modeling and timeframes. The hardship waiver will likely need to be discussed at a future meeting. Mr. McDaniel stated that staff appreciates Council's guidance and the input of the residents and their patience with the policy development. CONSENT AGENDA Mayor Keenan moved approval of the actions listed for the nine items on the Consent Agenda. Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mayor Keenan, yes; Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher, yes; Vice Mayor Gerber, yes; Mr. Peterson, yes. • Approval of 7 -1 -15 Regular Council Meeting Minutes • Approval of 7 -13 -15 Special Council Meeting Minutes • Notice to Legislative Authority re. new D3 liquor permit for Soccer First, Inc., 6490 Dublin Park Drive, Dublin, OH 43016 • Notice to Legislative Authority re. transfer of D1, D2 and D3 liquor permits from Diane and Girls LLC, dba Biddie's Coach House, 76 -78 S. High Street, Dublin, OH to CBS Garvey LL, LLC, 76 -78 S. High Street, Dublin, OH 43017 • Notice to Legislative Authority re. new 135A liquor permit for Hotel 6364 Frantz OPCO LP, dba Residence Inn Columbus /Dublin, 6364 Frantz Road, Dublin, OH 43017 it I RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of BARRETT BROTHERS • DAYTON, OHIO Held Dublin City Council August 10, 2015 Page 15 of 28 Meeting Forth 6101 • Ordinance 54 -15 (Introduction /first reading) Adopting the 2016 -2020 Five -Year Capital Improvements Program. (Finance Committee of the Whole review on August 17; second reading /public hearing September 8 Council meeting) • Ordinance 57 -15 (Introduction /first reading) Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Necessary Conveyance Documents to Acquire a 0.049 Acre, more or less, Temporary Easement from Property Located at 7690 Riverside Drive Owned by Brown and Erdmann, LLC, for the Construction of the Riverside Drive Shared -use Path Connection. (Second reading /public hearing August 24 Council meeting) • Resolution 59 -15 (Introduction /vote) Authorizing the City Manager to Enter into a Reimbursement Agreement with Pulte Homes of Ohio, LLC for Asphalt Repairs to Hyland -Croy Road. • Acceptance of Revised Final Plat - Wexford Estates, Lot 14 (15- 058AFDP /FP) SECOND READING /PUBLIC HEARING — ORDINANCES Ordinance 44 -15 (Amended) An Ordinance to Facilitate the Redevelopment of Certain Real Property within the Bridge Street District by Crawford Hoying Development Partners, LLC and to Authorize the Execution of Various Related Agreements, and Declaring an Emergency. Mr. McDaniel stated that per the first reading of both Ordinances 44 and 45 -15, on July 13, staff recommends adoption by emergency. Council's packet contained a staff report, redlined development agreement and infrastructure agreement, highlighting the proposed changes since the first reading. The changes reflect nothing materially adverse to the City. The first phase of the Bridge Park project is catalytic, helping to achieve Council's vision of the Bridge Street District and supporting the overall economic vitality of the City. Staff recommends passage as an emergency due to benefits resulting from the implementation of the project's transportation improvements, many of which are public in nature, as well as the numerous benefits to the City's overall economic health and competitiveness, and the critical timing and seasonality considerations associated with the construction of public improvements, private improvements and leasing. The project under consideration has been before City Council, the Architectural Review Board and the Planning and Zoning Commission for many months. The City has been extremely proactive in making the proposed agreement public to include the extended period of time for review and comment by the public at and between Council meetings. Additional resident engagement meetings were also held three times over the last three weeks, at which there was good turnout. We have communicated with the public extensively since the inception of the Bridge Street District over six years ago. This has occurred on an ongoing basis, but particularly in the last eight months, as we have been speaking to the need for the Bridge Street District, the challenges, and economic development tools associated with the redevelopment, process that needs to occur, most of which is in the Bridge Street District, and the concepts behind the project before Council tonight. Kevin Walter, 6290 Ross Bend, Dublin, stated that he also is a candidate for Dublin City Council. He has concerns regarding several items contained in Ordinance 44 -15. Before the first reading, he published an opinion piece titled "Sixty -one Hours and a New Text." Since that time, he has had discussions about the concerns he raised with City staff members, with Brent Crawford, and with some Council members. His goal is to strive for understanding and to ensure that the opinions that he communicates are factually based. His commitment to everyone he has met with was that he would correct any errors RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes BARRETT BROTHERS • DAYTON, OHIO Held Dublin City Council August 10, 2015 Page 16 of 28 that he has made in his communications. He will begin with those errors in communications. • In his piece, he stated that the City provided only 61 hours to review the ordinance. In fact, the City provided 61 hours to review the document before the first reading, and ample time to review prior to the second reading — semantics, but a clarification he is willing to make. • Further, he indicated that the proposed sales tax would apply to the Bridge Street District; in fact, the sales tax applies to the Bridge Park Development, or the current proposed development. With those clarifications made, he now wants to focus on several specifics. • This ordinance provides for .5% sales tax increase. Taxation, no matter how inconsequential, must be publicly debated and highlighted. One - half percent for Bridge Park tonight could lead to one -half percent for the next project and the next. Taxation of any amount is a slippery slope. He does not believe this project warrants an increase in the tax burden. Taxation demands a value greater than the tax burden itself. He does not believe the community benefits of this project warrant further taxation. • In the converse of taxing citizens, this ordinance also provides the developer with a 25% reimbursement grant to the City's bed tax revenue generated by the proposed hotel at Frantz Road. This is a wholly inappropriate use of tax money. It is also precedent setting. With this action, Council is inviting every future project in Dublin to request that 25% of their tax generated by their project be reimbursed. Every retail development, institutional developer, homebuilder, or commercial office project should demand that the 25% of their generated taxes be returned to them. This ordinance grants this revenue stream in perpetuity to the developer. This is a dangerous precedent. • He believes this is harmful to the Dublin City Schools. He believes, too, it is too large an investment of public funds, and believes it will be the death knell for Historic Dublin. Retail is fickle. Dick's Sporting Goods just moved an entire store from one end of Easton to the other, because it was the newer development attracting new buyers. What makes anyone think this will not happen to Historic Dublin? Why eat at Oscars when if you can eat at the new Cameron Mitchell's? • Some Council members call this project bold and visionary. He believes it is a project that is similar to many other projects going in around the country. It is simply Dublin's version of a mixed -use development. It is also happening in Grandview, in Columbus, in Upper Arlington, in Cleveland, and all over the United States. This project is not bold; this project is risky. • He has the courage of his convictions to question this project. He is a courageous voice for a better tomorrow. His opinions are informed by the facts, and he has worked hard to understand the details of the project. • He asks that Council also stand for their conviction. Reject the new sales tax; reject the precedent- setting bed tax grant; reject the level of public commitment; and reject this ordinance tonight. Mayor Keenan requested that Ms. Mumma address the 0.5% sales tax issue, which is imposed by the New Community Authority. Ms. Mumma stated that the New Community Authority is the body that will approve any NCA charge that is assessed, whether it is on retail or hotel stays. The NCA meetings are open to the public, they are publicized on the City's website and advertised in the Columbus Dispatch. The meetings are open and public comments are accepted. As Mr. Walter clarified, this is only for Meeting Forth 6101 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of BARRETT BROTHERS • DAYTON, OHl^ Held Dublin City Council August 10, 2015 Page 17 of 28 properties within the Bridge Park development. Consumers in those areas have a choice as to whether they want to frequent those establishments where that charge exists. It is certainly not in the best interest of the developer to invoke a charge that would price them out of the market or make them not competitive with other areas within Dublin or central Ohio, recognizing that there is competition for everyone's discretionary spending. In regard to the bed tax revenue and the comment that it is precedent setting, any of the City's development agreements are handled on a case -by -case basis. The City has laid the groundwork for utilization of a number of economic development tools throughout the course of the last couple of months. It is not a foregone conclusion that any developer that comes forward with a project will get a certain type of economic development incentive. They are all handled on a case -by -case basis, looking at the valuation of the project brought forward and what revenue streams come back for repayment to the City. In this particular case, over the course of the past few Council meetings, we have described a financial model that shows a level of certainty of repayment with respect to the parking structures and the roadway infrastructure proposed. Staff believes that the minimum service payment provides a revenue stream so that if property values do not materialize and the TIF revenues are not sufficient to meet the debt service, that minimum service payment is in place as a backup. We believe that our financial models have all been very conservative in projecting what those TIF revenues will be. Legal counsel can speak more to the minimum service payment and the priority position it has. We believe for those reasons that this is an appropriate use of public funds in terms of the City's upfront investment and with the level of repayment that will be returned. With respect to the bed tax, in particular, by allocating a portion of the 75% of the bed tax that the City retains, and having that go to the New Community Authority, not the developer, for the limited use on the community facilities, staff believes that it is within the scope of what bed tax dollars are to be used for — to generate heads in bed and to bring people to the community. A conference and events center and parking structures fit the definition of what bed tax dollars can be used for. Mayor Keenan inquired how many members are on the NCA, and how many are appointed by Council. Ms. Mumma responded that there are seven members on the NCA; four are appointed by Council. Their next meeting is on Thursday at 8:30 a.m. at City Hall. Chris Amorose Groomes 5896 Leven Links Court, Dublin, stated that she is a firm believer in the vision of Bridge Street District, although she does not support the manner in which it is being executed, particularly in the proposal before Council tonight, to be passed by emergency. An article in the Monday, August 3 edition of the Columbus Dispatch focused on a Worthington zoning issue on this November's ballot. At the heart of the issue, Worthington voters will decide on several limitations regarding when ordinances should be able to be passed as an emergency. Currently, passing legislation by emergency in Worthington has the same effect as passing emergency legislation in Dublin. It eliminates the required waiting period for an ordinance to take effect and prohibits the public from filing a referendum on the ordinance, should the citizens not agree with the decision by Council. The Dispatch article specified how many ordinances have been passed by emergency in other municipalities. Westerville had 22 in the past year; Hilliard had 18; Pickerington had five; Grove City had four; Worthington had four; and New Albany had five. In 2014, Dublin passed 66 ordinances as emergencies. Section 4.05 of Dublin's charter is very specific about when the emergency clause may be invoked, stating that Meeting Form 6101 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council BARRETT BROTHERS • DAYTON, OHIO August 10, 2015 Page 18 of 28 Held "each emergency ordinance shall declare that it is an emergency for th immediate preservation of public peace, health, safety or welfare, and sha clearly specify the nature of the emergency. She stated that she does nc believe the language in the ordinance before Council tonight has adequatel specified the nature of the emergency from the public's perspective. Last yeas Council passed 66, or 53 %, of all ordinances by emergency. That means that on average, every 5 -1/2 days there was an emergency that threatened th public peace, health, safety or welfare of the citizens of Dublin to such a extent that Council thought it necessary to prevent the public from challenging their decision by referendum. When she addressed Council at the last meeting, she urged Council not to pass this economic development agreement legislation by emergency. Council's response was, "There has been nothing that has short circuited or limited either the review process, our process, public participation, comment, nothing. We have not short circuited or limited the process in any way." But if Council acts as proposed tonight, that will simply not be true. If Council votes to pass this agreement as an emergency, they will remove one of the opportunities the City Charter gives to the public to participate in the process of their own governance. Developer Charlie Ruma is quoted in the Dispatch article in regard to how much a referendum might cost a developer. He states, " As a developer, I don't like it, but as an American, I support the process." That is the issue she brings before Council tonight — returning transparency and openness to the public process. If this agreement is a great deal for Dublin, then it should be able to pass the filter of a full public process. Meeting Form 6101 Mayor Keenan pointed out that no community in the area has the level of activity as Dublin. There is an incredible amount of bikepath construction; each one has numerous parcels that require a purchase for the project to go forward. There are road projects, as well, that many times involve small easement acquisitions, all of which require approval to keep those projects moving forward. Mr. McDaniel stated that Earl Rinehart, who wrote the newspaper article, contacted him and he responded regarding emergency passage in the City of Dublin. He provided him a list of statistics. All that has been done has been in accordance with the City Charter. Certainly, emergency language is not necessarily something that staff or Council desires, but the amount of activity that the City of Dublin has is second to none in central Ohio for a city of its size relative to development. There has been a tremendous amount of land acquisition activity occurring in preparation for right -of -way for multiuse or shared use paths. That has certainly skewed the numbers in regard to use of emergency language. Many times the City has to complete land acquisitions quickly once the landowner is willing, because Dublin does not often do takings. The City negotiates at length with residents, so once agreement is reached regarding purchase, action is needed quickly to meet construction timeframes. Sometimes the emergencies relate to construction, not just right - of -way and bikepaths, but City facilities. Sometimes, the City is responding to an economic development situation in which Dublin is in competition with another city. When one considers the safety, health, welfare and economic viability of the City, then it is appropriate to consider these actions as an emergency. For example, this spring the City have worked very hard to set the conditions for redevelopment. Council has put into place the economic development tools that have been needed to do the hard work of redevelopment. They were put into place by emergency basis this past spring to respond to the opportunities that are being presented — not just for Bridge Park. People do want the opportunity to sell their property for redevelopment and other opportunity, so RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO Held Dublin City Council August 10, 2015 Page 19 of 28 the City is responding to the landowners who want that opportunity. There are projects in the pipeline which can take advantage of those economic development tools. Staff appreciates Council's support, and in the cases where staff has asked for emergency action, it has been to put these tools in place. Specific to this ordinance tonight, he realizes that an emergency has been requested again for the reasons that he has read into the record earlier. That sets up the conditions for this development, and because of the construction season, right -of -way issues related to the infrastructure agreement, it is appropriate to request passage by emergency. As Mr. Walter pointed out, there was an extended period of time between the July 13 meeting and this meeting. An additional meeting was held in July in order to facilitate two readings on these ordinances. He believes that Council has acted appropriately and has been as transparent as possible. Staff has had a number of engagements with residents in town hall meetings. When people have spent time learning about Bridge Street in general, this project specifically, and learning about the agreements and economic development tools needed to do this type of project, how all that ties together in terms of economic development — everyone who has attended those meetings has walked away with a more positive feeling about the project , and there has been virtually no opposition. Concerns were raised by some within the area in regard to street connectivity and staff is working with them to address that issue. Mr. Lecklider added that he had a copy of Mr. McDaniel's e-mail response to Mr. Rinehart and asked Mr. McDaniel to comment further for the record. • In the past 12 months, 101 ordinances were passed, 47 by emergency, and 32 of those were for land conveyance, purchase and exchange purposes. • In response to the question of "Do you believe there is any validity to the complaint by some of Council's use of emergency declaration to prevent a challenge to the legislation," Mr. McDaniel said "he had no basis to assess what other Councils may do or why. In his 27 years with the City of Dublin, he has never known Dublin City Councils to act on an emergency nature for the purpose of preventing a challenge. City Council and staff work proactively with the community to vet issues and make sure there is a significant communication with the public to make them aware of upcoming actions. This often goes beyond just the advertising requirements per our Revised Charter. Further, if staff recommends and Council concurs, a need for emergency passage is well articulated and tied to the reasons required by the City's Revised Charter. As noted above, land exchange and agreements that are associated with construction and risk due to seasonal limitations are often passed by emergency in order to get projects underway. This can often save costs to the City. Dublin City Councils have always been sensitive to the issue of emergency legislation. In his experience, he does not believe they would enact any legislation by emergency if they did not believe the ordinance and its associated topic had not been well vetted or otherwise agreeable with the sense of the overall community. That is what they are elected to do." • The Worthington zoning issue is very contentious, and the proposed development abuts many adjacent neighborhoods. The mixed -use agreement related to the development brought over 400 residents to a meeting. Dublin's project certainly is of interest, but this is the context of the article about the Worthington rezoning and emergency action. Ms. Salay stated that Council members all take their responsibility as representatives of the citizens very seriously, as they stand for election every four years and are responsive to direction. Council's collective sense is that the Meeting Form 6101 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of BARRETI' BROTHERS • DAYTON, OHIO Held Dublin City Council August 10, 2015 Page 20 of 28 community supports this project, based on surveys of the community, public meetings, and emails and conversations. The community understands that at its heart, the initiative is about economic development and moving our City forward. In regard to the health, safety and welfare — saving taxpayer money and economic health is certainly worthy of the welfare designation. Ms. Salay added that she received a question from a resident about what would be the worst -case scenario. In all of her conversations with Mr. Daniels, Mr. Foegler, Ms. Mumma and Mr. McDaniel, she has a good idea of what that could be, but she would like to share, for the public's benefit, what we have considered. Mr. Daniels stated that from the legal perspective, what the City team has tried to do is limit the worst -case scenario to what would happen with Phases 2 and 3 of the project. There are a number of protections built into Phase 1; most notably is the use of a minimum service payment guarantee to ensure the City can recoup its investment from the Phase 1 properties. What is still out there to be done by the developer, as part of their work, is to move forward and get Phases 2 and 3 done. There is no additional City investment monetarily in those phases, but it is the sense of the City team and everyone he has talked with in the City, that as part of this catalytic development, everyone desires that Phases 2 and 3 will happen. There is no legal way to guarantee that. Through all the diligence with the developer, there is a high level of comfort that will occur, but that is the risk out there — that the City would not be out money, but that the additional benefits of future phases of this development may not materialize. Ms. Salay inquired if it is a fact that there is a provision included whereby the City can buy back land. Mr. Daniels responded that is correct in the case where there is a problem with the developer specifically. If there is a market problem, there may be some delays in overall development, but there is nothing anyone can do about that. In terms of there being an issue with this particular developer, the City has the ability to buy the property and transfer it to another developer who can undertake the project and complete it. He added that through the City's diligence, the team does not believe there are issues and believes the developer is highly qualified to do this development. There was no further public comment. Vice Mayor Gerber moved to treat the ordinance as an emergency due to the benefits resulting from the implementation of the project's transportation improvements, as well as the numerous benefits to the City's overall economic health and competitiveness, and the critical timing and seasonality considerations associated with the project's construction and leasing. Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Peterson, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mayor Keenan, yes; Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Vice Mayor Gerber, yes. Vote on the Ordinance: Mr. Reiner, yes; Vice Mayor Gerber, yes; Mayor Keenan, yes; Mr. Peterson, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes. Meeting Forth 6101 Ordinance 45 -15 An Ordinance Creating a Tax Increment Financing Incentive District; Declaring Improvements to the Parcels within the Incentive District to be a Public Purpose and Exempt from Real Property Taxation; Requiring the Owners of Those Parcels to Make Service Payments in Lieu of Taxes; RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO August 10, 2015 Held Meeting Form 6101 Page 21 of 28 Establishing a Municipal Public Improvement Tax Increment Equivalent for the Deposit of those Service Payments; Specifying the Public Infrastructure Improvements that Benefit or Serve Parcels in the Incentive District; Authorizing Compensation Payments to the Dublin City School District and the Tolles Career and Technical Center; and Declaring an Emergency. Ms. Mumma stated that she has nothing further to add. She noted that this TIF pertains to the residential component of the Bridge Park development. It is a TIF on the residential units. Vice Mayor Gerber moved to treat the ordinance as an emergency due to the benefits resulting from the implementation of the project's transportation improvements, as well as the numerous benefits to the City's overall economic health and competitiveness, and the critical timing and seasonality considerations associated with the project's construction and leasing. Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mr. Reiner, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Peterson, yes; Mayor Keenan, yes; Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher, yes; Vice Mayor Gerber, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes. Vote on the Ordinance: Mr. Peterson, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Vice Mayor Gerber, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Ms. Chinnici- Zuercher, yes; Mayor Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes. INTRODUCTION/ FIRST READING - ORDINANCES Ordinance 51 -15 Authorizing the Provision of Certain Incentives to MBA Focus LLC to Induce it to Retain an Office and Associated Operations and Workforce within the City, and Authorizing the Execution of an Economic Development Agreement. Vice Mayor Gerber introduced the ordinance. Mr. Gracia stated that before Council is an economic development agreement with MBA Focus. Staff has been in discussions with the company for the retention and expansion of their main corporate office to Dublin. The catalyst for the project was a pending merger and acquisition of CSO Research Inc., based in Austin, Texas. This merger and acquisition has been completed since the original offer letter. The project results in the retention of 23 employees and the addition of 28 new employees, doubling their headcount by the year 2019. It requires them to remain in a lease within the City of Dublin through 2021. It is a four -year, 12 percent incentive, and withholdings are capped at $36,000 for the term of the agreement. The State of Ohio has also provided economic incentives to the company to help retain its operations in the State of Ohio. This project was in competition with the states of Texas and California. Mr. Lecklider inquired the net withholdings over the term of the agreement. Mr. Gracia responded that number is $394,000. There will be a second reading /public hearing at the August 24 Council meeting. Ordinance 52 -15 Declaring the Improvement to Certain Parcels of Real Property in the City's Bridge Street District to be a Public Purpose and Exempt from Taxation; Providing for the Collection and Deposit of Service Payments and Specifying the Purposes for Which those Service Payments May be Expended; Authorizing Compensation Payments to the Dublin City School District and the Tolles Career Career and Technical Center; and Declaring an Emergency. Vice Mayor Gerber introduced the ordinance. Ms. Mumma stated that this is the main TIF that will govern the Bridge Park development, but as it is proposed, it applies only to Blocks C and Z, that are identified in the ordinance. This is a standard commercial TIF. The residential TIF, which Council just approved, will be layered on top of this. This will provide the basis for the City to RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO Held Dublin City Council August 10, 2015 Page 22 of 28 Meeting Forth 6101 collect the tax increment financing revenue, service payments in lieu of taxes, in order to fund the public infrastructure improvements. Ordinance 53 -15 Approving a Compensation Agreement with the Franklin County Board of County Commissioners for the Bridge Park Residential Incentive District. Vice Mayor Gerber introduced the ordinance. Ms. Mumma stated that as it pertains to Ordinance 45 -15, which Council recently passed, the residential incentive district TIF requires either an agreement with the Franklin County Board of County Commissioners or the statutory compensation agreement. Staff has reached an agreement with the County Board of Commissioners, which provides that in years one through 15 of any incentive district, the compensation payments to the County will be 0% of the County levy amount. In years 16 -20, the County will receive 25% of the taxes that they would have levied had it not been for the TIF. In years 21 -25, that compensation payment will be 30 %; in years 26 -30, in any incentive district, that compensation payment will be 35% of the amount of taxes the County would have levied. The City is appreciative of the County's participation. They understood the importance of this development to the region as a whole. Mayor Keenan inquired about the departure from the normal scenario. Ms. Mumma responded that staff was using a 50% level. In the first 16 -20 years, it could translate to an additional $70,000. Over the course of 30 years, there could be a good amount of money that could be used to fund this project. There will be a second reading /public hearing at the August 24 Council meeting. Ordinance 55 -15 Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Necessary Conveyance Documents to Acquire a 0.853 Acre, more or less, Permanent Easement from the Dublin City School District Board of Education for the Construction of a Shared -use Path Connection along the Western and Northern Property Lines of Dublin Scioto High School, and Declaring an Emergency. Vice Mayor Gerber introduced the ordinance. Mr. McDaniel stated that the City is preparing to construct a shared -use path connection along the western and northern property lines of Dublin Scioto High School. This will provide a new path connection between Hard Road and the Wyandotte Woods area. The school district has agreed to execute the permanent easement transferring those rights to the City of Dublin at no cost. He thanked the Schools for their partnership in contributing that easement. This will provide a safer pedestrian situation for area residents and the School itself. Staff requests that this be passed by emergency as it does relate to the public health, safety and welfare. In addition, it is planned for construction and completion by the end of the 2015 construction season. Vice Mayor Gerber moved to dispense with the public hearing and pass as emergency legislation. Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mr. Reiner, yes; Mayor Keenan, yes; Mr. Peterson, yes; Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Vice Mayor Gerber, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes. Vote on the Ordinance: Ms. Salay, yes; Mayor Keenan, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher, yes; Vice Mayor Gerber, yes; Mr. Peterson, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes. Ordinance 56 -15 Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Necessary Conveyance Documents to Acquire 4.57 Acres, more or less, in Fee Simple, which Constitutes the Entire Parcel Owned by Dale Drive Properties, LLC, Located Adjacent to and RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes BARRETT BROTHERS • DAYTON, OHIO Held Dublin City Council August 10, 2015 Page 23 of 28 Meeting Form 6101 Northeast of Dale Drive, to Connect Dale and Tuller Ridge Drives and for the Construction of the new Park Avenue. Vice Mayor Gerber introduced the ordinance. Mr. McDaniel stated that this parcel is impacted by several key transportation improvement projects, some of which are referenced in the title. The City has extended Dale Drive to the north to connect with Tuller Road and is preparing for the future extension of a proposed east -west roadway, known as Bridge Park Avenue. Both the roadway extensions represent the key transportation links within the Bridge Street District roadway system. The City is also assisting Central Ohio Transit Authority (COTA) with the relocation of its Park & Ride facility, which is currently located in the pathway of these roadway extensions. There has been much discussion over the past months regarding the COTA Park & Ride, and this would accommodate its relocation almost immediately adjacent. The City has reached an amicable agreement with the record titleholder and mortgagors of record to purchase the entire parcel for the appraised value, as presented in the staff report. Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher inquired who will receive the $1.2 million. Ms. Readler responded that will go to the property owner, Dale Drive Properties, LLC. There will be a second reading /public hearing at the August 24 Council meeting. INTRODUCTION/ PUBLIC HEARING - RESOLUTIONS Resolution 57 -15 Authorizing the City Manager to Enter into a Contract with and Execute a Guarantee Maximum Price Amendment (GMP) with Elford Inc., Construction Manager at Risk, for the Justice Center Construction/ Renovation Project. Vice Mayor Gerber introduced the resolution. Mr. McDaniel stated that this resolution authorizes the construction agreement with Elford Inc. The agreement establishes the first phase of a guaranteed maximum price (GMP) in the amount of $2,191,093. Approval of this initial GMP amendment will enable the groundbreaking for the 18,000 square foot addition to begin within the week, and will enable construction of the project to remain on schedule. The overall budget for the addition /renovation project is $10,640,000. Staff will ensure that the full GMP amount is at or below budget. Vote on the Resolution: Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher, yes; Mr. Peterson, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Vice Mayor Gerber, yes; Mayor Keenan, yes; Ms. Salay, yes. Resolution 58 -15 Accepting the Lowest and Best Bid for the Dublin Road South Multi —Use Path - Rings Road to Waterford Drive Project. Vice Mayor Gerber introduced the resolution. Mr. McDaniel stated that three bids were received for this project. It was bid a couple of months ago and then re -bid to add the option of being able to maintain traffic while the shared -use path was installed. This project involves the construction of about 2,900 feet of eight -foot wide asphalt multi- use /shared use path, concrete ramps, stonewalls and two fabricated pedestrian bridges. It is the section along Dublin Road South from Rings Road to Waterford Drive. This project is the final phase of this path. The first phase was constructed in 2012 and second phase in 2013; this completes the section from Tuttle Road to Historic Dublin. There were increased costs for this project compared with the original estimates, but it is the result of adding the maintenance of traffic requirement to the project to confine the work area in the subsurface conditions. There is shallow rock in that area. Staff originally anticipated closing Dublin Road, as occurred with the previous shared -use path projects to the south, but this was not desirable due to the other construction underway in the area. The residents are hoping the project can be completed this year, and staff recommends paying the additional costs to maintain traffic during construction. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO Held Dublin City Council August 10, 2015 Page 24 of 28 Vice Mayor Gerber stated he is pleased to see this, as the residents have been anticipating this project for a long time. He believes that traffic has been manageable in his area, given the construction underway in other parts of the City. The long -term benefit of completing this path outweighs the inconvenience. Thanks to Ms. O'Callaghan and her staff for moving this forward. Mr. McDaniel pointed out that through traffic will be reduced to one lane to accommodate the construction, but only from 9 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. Ms. Salay stated that she assumes the traffic maintenance will be similar to what is occurring now with the work already underway. On behalf of the residents of Ward 2, she complimented and thanked staff for persevering on this project. Meeting Form 6101 Vote on the Resolution: Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. Peterson, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Vice Mayor Gerber, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mayor Keenan, yes; Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher, yes. STAFF COMMENTS Mr. McDaniel introduced the following new employees: 1. The new Director of Development, Donna Goss began service with the City three weeks ago. She comes to Dublin from Ohio University. 2. Doug McCollough, new Chief Information Officer and Director of Information Technology who served most recently with the City of Richmond, Virginia. He is originally from Ohio and has worked with state agencies as well. 3. Homer Rogers, the new Director of Human Resources comes to Dublin with over 30 years of military experience. He also led Human Resources for the Adjutant General's Department for the past 10 years. He also noted that Jennifer Miglietti has been promoted to Human Resources Manager within the Division. He extended congratulations to her. COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS • Caplestone Lane petition — Public Services Committee recommendation Ms. Salay, Committee Chair, reported that the Committee met on June 29 to discuss Caplestone Lane and the unique circumstances that surround it and the potential City maintenance of the streets. Staff provided a report for the committee meeting, which has been included in the Council packet tonight, together with the minutes of the committee meeting. She suggested that public testimony be taken from the residents who are present. Matt Ottman, 5572 Caplestone Lane Dublin, Trustee of the Woods of Dublinshire thanked the City for taking time to review the unique situation that Caplestone Lane presents. The Woods of Dublinshire was originally developed as a private street. The reasons for that are not entirely clear. However, with only 36 homes they are not financially big enough to hire a management company and their Association must make decisions about snow removal as well as when and how to properly maintain the street. It has become increasingly difficult to solicit the extent of community involvement necessary to maintain their street and other services on their own. They take great pride in their neighborhood. They are, however, effectively requesting the City help them in assisting with street maintenance and snow removal. The City has the highest level of expertise in these areas and they would greatly appreciate the City's assistance. They are not aware of another single - family, non -gated community in Dublin with detached homes on a private street. While building Caplestone as a private street may have made sense at the time, the burden on the 36 homeowners who do not have the experience and expertise that the City has is becoming increasingly difficult. He thanked the City Council for consideration of this matter. The residents of Caplestone Lane, many of whom are present tonight, appreciate Council's consideration and the thought that the City of Dublin would be willing to help them. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO Held Dublin City Council August 10, 2015 Page 25 of 28 Meeting Forth 6101 Mr. Lecklider pointed out that he believes this is a unique circumstance within the community. The staff report fully explains the history, and he believes this request is worthy of Council's consideration. He supports the City assuming maintenance responsibility of this particular street. Mr. Reiner noted he takes a dissenting view of this matter. He recalls that the costs involved are $185,000 over 10 years, and based on 35 homes the cost is $514 per resident. The 2,400 families in the Muirfield development pay $861 per year in HOA fees. He does not believe the Caplestone situation merits the City's taxpayers picking up this additional burden and allowing the residents not to fund it. Ms. Salay asked about the $861 per year, and whether this fee include swimming pools. This is an apple to oranges comparison. Mr. Reiner responded that in this situation, if the homeowners have the ability to pay, and they purchased their homes knowing of this situation, he does not believe the amount of maintenance fee is exorbitant. He is aware of cases in the past where Council has determined that some maintenance responsibilities were a burden for homeowners, but in this case and at this amount, it is not a large burden. He does not believe the City should assume responsibility for funding this maintenance. Mr. Keenan noted he read the minutes of the Public Services Committee. It was a thoughtful discussion and staff did a good job of providing the information for the discussion. This appears to him to be an unusual, perhaps one -of -a -kind situation, and he will support the Committee recommendation. There were no further comments. Mr. Lecklider moved approval of the Committee recommendation to assume maintenance responsibilities for Caplestone Lane (pavement, curb and gutter, snow and ice removal, and storm sewer). Ms. Salay seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher, no; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. Peterson, yes; Vice Mayor Gerber, yes; Mr. Reiner, no; Mayor Keenan, yes. (Motion carried 5 -2) Ms Salmi Planning and Zoning Commission representative noted that the Commission had a short break in July. Last week, they heard a couple of cases, including the Home2 Hotel proposed at Frantz /SR161, which generated lots of discussion by the Commission and the developer. Vice Mayor Gerber Chair Administrative Committee noted that there is a vacancy on the Architectural Review Board. Advertisement for candidates will be done by the Clerk, and a date is needed for interviews. Following discussion, the consensus was to set up interviews on the evening of Tuesday, September 22 beginning at 6 p.m. Candidates will be notified that they must be available on that date for an interview. Mr. Reiner, Chair Community Development Committee: 1. Reminded the members that the Committee is scheduled to meet on Monday, August 24 at 5:30 to review Beautify your Neighborhood grant applications. 2. Suggested that in view of the $200,000 estimated maintenance at the Riviera development, he would like the City to consider some options. The City is not in need of additional active parkland space for tennis courts or ball fields at this time. He suggests turning a large portion of this open space into wetlands or reforesting it so that the maintenance costs can be reduced. He recommended that the Parks and Recreation staff review this and come back with suggestions in the near future, prior to any residents purchasing lots. The HOA will pay for a large portion of the mowing, and from a planning perspective, those areas should be located behind the actual units /homes for scenic views /aesthetics. The staff should review the other portions of the project to make suggestions in order to mitigate the $200,000 per year of maintenance expense for the City. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of BARRETT BROTHERS • DAYTON, OHIO Held Dublin City Council August 10, 2015 Meeting Form 6101 Page 26 of 28 Ms. Salay agreed, noting it is important to have this in place before the area is developed so that buyers are aware of what they are purchasing. With regard to what areas will be privately maintained and publicly maintained, it was specified in the zoning text, which would need to be reviewed. Ms. Chinnici- Zuercher, Chair, Finance Committee reported: 1. The Committee met this evening and she is pleased to report that the City continues to do well. There has been a slight decrease in income tax, largely due to the Verizon departure. This points to the importance of continuing to facilitate the expansion of existing companies and attraction of new companies by Economic Development staff. One concern is state legislation, such as Senate Bill 98, which is of great concern to many municipalities, including Dublin. It proposes having only residents paying income tax to municipalities. As with many cities, Dublin is highly dependent on and has worked to maintain the balance of corporate versus residential units in order to provide high quality services to the residents. The City's lobbyist and various organizations are working on this issue and will provide updates. 2. The Five -Year CIP workshop is scheduled for Monday, August 24. The start time has been adjusted from the previous 6:30 p.m. to 7 p.m. Mr. McDaniel clarified that he is requesting an executive session at 6 p.m., followed by the workshop at 7 p.m. Mr. Peterson, Dublin Board of Education liaison stated that the group meets next on August 27. He is very encouraged with the interest expressed in continuing these regular meetings. Mr. Lecklider, Council liaison to NW 33 Innovation group reported that he and Mr. McDaniel continue to be actively engaged with this group, which consists of Union County, City of Marysville, Jerome Township, Millcreek Township and Dublin. The goal is to collaborate with respect to development in the area. The "'spine" of this area is roughly Industrial Parkway and the area extends from Dublin to Marysville. With the upturn in the economy and development heightened in the area, such as the Ohio University development in Dublin west of the Post Road /33 interchange and with the proposed development that includes Costco on the west side of the interchange outside of Dublin's jurisdiction — there are impacts to infrastructure. There is also development pressure along Hyland -Croy, primarily on the west side but also on the east side. Dublin's historical approach has been to plan for infrastructure ahead of development occurring. As Dublin bears the majority of expense for that infrastructure — whether in or out of its jurisdiction — there has recently been proposed a study. He asked Mr. McDaniel to provide details. Mr. McDaniel stated that as a result of the working group, the idea of a joint planning process was proposed, where the comprehensive community plans for the City of Dublin and Jerome Township converge, in the corridors mentioned. On July 20, Union County Commissioner Gary Lee and he attended the Jerome Township meeting and proposed to the Trustees a joint planning process. They seemed agreeable to this, with the assistance of Eric Phillips of the Union County Economic Development office who also works on the City of Marysville economic development efforts. Jeff Stauch, Union County Engineer, the City of Marysville, and Dublin staff have assembled a proposed joint planning process, which would be facilitated by the Logan- Union- Champaign Regional Planning Commission. Potentially, MORK would have a role as well. The scope of work was put together, and Dublin's contribution would be approximately $15,000. Dublin will also commit staff and other consulting time to prepare data, background, etc. Staff plans to move forward with this joint planning process and is hopeful that all of the jurisdictions will agree to this and participate. There will be public meetings held relative to that process. Ms. Salay asked if there is a timeline for the process. Mr. McDaniel responded they estimate about five months, assuming there is positive momentum. They are waiting to hear whether Jerome Township will participate. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO Held Dublin City Council August 10, 2015 Page 27 of 28 Council indicated they support this investment and participation in the study. COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE Mr. Peterson thanked staff for all of the information put together regarding the Street District and upcoming transportation projects. These include FAQs for the Bridge Park Development agreement, the Bridge Street Brief, and speaker cards, etc. He is very appreciative of their efforts. Mr. McDaniel recognized the Community Relations and other staff who have contributed to this effort. He appreciates this positive feedback. Mr. Peterson stated that, from his perspective, his morning commute to downtown through all of the construction has not been as impacted as he had anticipated. Staff has done a great job of keeping the City mobile during all of this work. — Meeting Form 6101 Ms. Sala v: 1. Echoed the positive comments, noting it is great that the City is working to keep the public informed to this level. Having this information available has been very helpful. She encouraged HOA leadership to contact the City for speakers about any topics. She is pleased to see there has been a good response to the coffee sessions hosted by the City. It would be helpful to offer them at various times of day. Mr. McDaniel responded that staff agreed today that they will continue the coffees, and will leverage different topics in the future. 2. Complimented everyone's hard work – both staff and volunteers – on the Dublin Irish Festival! The weather was wonderful, too, and the event was very enjoyable for all who attended. Ms. Chinn ici-Zuercher noted that, as an example of how important the City's events are, she met a couple at the Emerald Club from Pensacola, Florida. They indicated they identified the Dublin Irish Festival on an internet search of summer festivals. They flew to Dublin for the Festival, loved the music, dancing, and plan to return. Hats off to staff! The vendors were very happy, of course, and all indicated Dublin's is one of the best run festivals they attend, which is why they return year after year. Mr. McDaniel chimed in to thank staff for all of their efforts on the Festival. There were 1,300 volunteers who supported this as well. He asked Ms. LeRoy to provide an update on attendance for this year's Festival. Ms. LeRoy stated that a new ticketing company was used this year, which resulted in a delay in reporting to ensure the numbers were correct. She reported that there were just over 102,500 attendees. In 2010, the attendance was 102,800 and two years ago, there were 104,000 in attendance. The revenues this year were a record high at over $2 million. Mr. Lecklider thanked staff as well for their efforts in supporting the Dublin Irish Festival. He, too, always talks with the vendors and they consistently commend staff for the support they receive. One vendor with an Irish accent indicated he was a native of Dublin, Ireland but now resides in West Palm Beach! Mr. Reiner: 1. Stated that he talked with a vendor from New Jersey who attends Irish Festivals throughout the country. She indicated that Dublin's is the best organized, best set -up, etc. She acknowledged that the rules and regulations that staff has in place do ensure a great Festival, even though they sometimes complain about the rules! 2. Commented about the West Nile problem the City is experiencing and the spraying that also kills lightning bugs and bees. He talked with Parks staff about the City's public grounds of over 1,300 acres and whether the City could consider allowing beekeepers to set hives on City property, where it would not conflict with resident use. This would offset the unintended consequences of mosquito spraying. r- RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of BARRETT BROTHERS • DAYTON, OHIO Held Dublin City Council August 10, 2015 T Meeting Forth 6101 Page 28 of 28 Ms. Salay added that the City already has beehives at Darree Fields. If this concept is successful, the plan is to expand it. She would support Mr. Reiner's suggestion, and also advocates spraying as little as possible. Many valuable insects die as a result of spraying for the mosquitoes. 3. Congratulations again to Ms. LeRoy and to Ms. DiSalvo for a Festival that was well organized and very successful. Vice Mayor Gerber: 1. Echoed the positive comments about the Irish Festival! 2. Noted that the Clerk has distributed a proposed 2016 Council meeting schedule. He asked that Council members provide feedback so it can be adopted in September. 3. Ms. O'Callaghan spoke at the Rotary a couple of weeks ago. She did a fantastic job of addressing the construction and long -term plans for the major projects being undertaken in Dublin. 4. Commented that an earlier speaker mentioned Council received an e-mail regarding the requests from the Mid - Century Neighbors Association. He did not receive this e-mail. Ms. Salay clarified that Ms. Mitchell sent her a draft, and her response was that it should be shared with all of Council. She believes it has been sent to them this evening. Vice Mayor Gerber recalled there was discussion about this item at last year's CIP workshop and staff was to provide a follow -up report, based on input from the Association. He hopes it is not too late this year to consider this request in the CIP process. Mr. Reiner added that he reviewed the memo about the proposed plaque for Emerald Parkway and noticed that it did not include any of the Engineering team. Mr. McDaniel responded that the City typically does not include these on such plaques. Mayor Keenan reported: 1. He and Mr. McDaniel attended the ribbon cutting of The Residence Inn near the Hyde Park restaurant. It is a very nice facility with over 100 rooms. 2. A meeting was held with the condominium association president of Craughwell Village in regard to the issues they have raised. Some suggestions were provided for them to consider. 3. He and Mr. McDaniel also attended the Sunrise Senior Living ribbon cutting recently. It was a long construction process, but this project has turned out very nice. 4. Noted there was a follow up report in the packet about the sanitary sewer operations. Has this report been shared with the residents who were impacted? He is aware that a lot of work is being done to mitigate the problems. Mr. McDaniel responded that this was shared with the residents and they were informed about the position of the insurance company in regard to claims. Staff continues to be engaged with the residents on these matters. ADJOURNMENT Th e rn.eeting was adjourned at 9:55 p.m. or — Presiding Officer Clerk of Council