Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-10-2016 Council MinutesRECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO Held CALL TO ORDER October 10, 2016 Mayor Peterson called the Monday, October 10, 2016 Regular Meeting of Dublin City Council to order at 6:45 p.m. in Council Chambers at Dublin City Hall. ROLL CALL Meeting Present were Mayor Peterson, Vice Mayor Reiner, Ms. Alutto, Ms. Amorose Groomes, Mr. Keenan, Mr. Lecklider and Ms. Salay. Staff members present were Ms. Crandall, Ms. Mumma, Ms. Readier, Ms. O'Callaghan, Ms. Goss, Mr. Rogers, Mr. Earman, Mr. Foegler, Chief von Eckartsberg, Mr. Hammersmith, Ms. Richison, Mr. Papsidero and Mr. Plouck. ADJOURNMENT TO EXECUTIVE SESSION Mayor Peterson moved to adjourn to executive session for discussion of personnel matters regarding the appointment of a public official. Vice Mayor Reiner seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Vice Mayor Reiner, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mayor Peterson, yes; Ms. Amorose Groomes, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Ms. Alutto, yes; Ms. Salay, yes. The meeting was reconvened at 7:00 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Ms. Salay led the Pledge of Allegiance. SPECIAL PRESENTATION Dublin Community Recreation Center 20th Anniversary Mayor Peterson read and presented a proclamation in honor of the 20th anniversary to Tracey Gee, Director of Recreation Services. Ms. Gee thanked Council for the recognition. She noted that some Recreation Services staff members are present tonight to join in the celebration. On behalf of DCRC staff, she thanked the current City Council and all City Council members who came before for their support of recreation services. Her strongest memory of the opening of the DCRC in 1996 was the look of awe on the face of everyone who entered the facility. At the time, no one was familiar with a leisure pool or a lazy river, yet these modern amenities are now commonplace in Recreation centers. It is a credit to the strong pairing of Council leadership and staff expertise that has been a hallmark in the way the City does business. Visionary leadership has provided the community with something spectacular and not expected, and the Recreation Center now has become something they could not live without! She introduced a 20 -year DCRC member, Wayne Rausch to comment. He works out at the DCRC every morning, is a member of the Dublin Senior Citizen group, and a valued volunteer. Wayne Rausch, 5176 Ashford Drive, Dublin addressed Council. He commented that it is important for senior citizens and retired people to have a place to exercise their minds and bodies. The DCRC meets that need very well. He and his wife joined the DCRC when it opened in 1996. Every morning he works out at the gym at the DCRC. As of today, he has worked out 4,316 times at the DCRC. When the Rec Center is unavailable, he works out at other area gyms, but much prefers the DCRC. The cost of a Dublin resident senior citizen membership is $100 per year, which is very reasonable. He and his wife also belong to the Dublin Seniors group, which offers a variety of activities. They take classes at the DCRC and attend Abbey Theater performances. The DCRC is an important part of their lives. It is an excellent use of taxpayer money! Ms. Gee added that there is cake available for everyone to share after tonight's meeting. Form 6101 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin. City Council Meeting BARRETT BROTHERS • DAYTON, OHIO Form 6101 Held October 10, 2016 Page 2 of 11 Vice Mayor Reiner commented that the City felt it was important that everyone have a healthy lifestyle. He recalls that Council Members Joel Campbell and Chuck Kranstuber were two of the driving forces in the establishment of a Rec Center. The City had the fortitude and foresight to drive that concept forward and execute it. He is very proud of the Council and staff who led the creation of a community recreation center in Dublin. It reflects their care about the citizenry and the health of the citizenry. Mayor Peterson added that he has been impressed with staff's ability to continue to offer programming while the renovations and maintenance are underway for this 20 -year old facility. He thanked staff for all that they do. • Dublin Kiwanis — AmTryke presentation Mayor Peterson invited Dublin Kiwanis members to come forward to share information about the AmTryke, which is being presented tonight to a special needs student as part of the Ohio Kiwanis Governors project. Walt Buss, Immediate Past President noted he is accompanied by President Greg Ruff and members Faith Levine, Clay Rose, Jack Pettrey and Jeff Chan. Representatives of Dublin Schools present were Mike Leopold, Special Education Coordinator; and Peg Mills and Matt Bickley, Dublin Schools Adapted Physical Education teachers. A.J. Emig, Dublin resident and Dublin Schools student rode the AmTryke into Council Chambers. Gerald and Jody Emig_, 6813 Vally Down Road, Dublin, parents of A.J. Emig were introduced. Mr. Emig noted they are 29 -year residents of Dublin. They are proud to live in Dublin and in a school system that is so welcoming and accommodating to people whose children have special needs. Ms. Emig stated this is a wonderful gift, and will be very appreciated by their son and his teachers. Mr. Buss noted that two weeks ago, they presented the 69th AmTryke at Scottish Corners Elementary to the Dublin school system. Tonight's presentation is the 70th AmTryke donated by all Kiwanis Clubs in Ohio this year as part of the Ohio Kiwanis Governors Project. Mayor Peterson thanked them for coming to the meeting. He also thanked the Kiwanis for their work on the annual Frog Jump, an iconic event held in Dublin each year. CITIZEN COMMENTS There were no comments from citizens. CONSENT AGENDA Mayor Peterson moved approval of the actions for items listed on the Consent Agenda. Mr. Lecklider seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Vice Mayor Reiner, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Ms. Alutto, yes; Mayor Peterson, yes; Ms. Amorose Groomes, yes. • Approval of Minutes of Council meeting of 9/26/16 • Notice to Legislative Authority — New D3 liquor permit for T &K Group, Inc., dba Sushi.Com Japanese Restaurant, 7178 Muirfield Drive, Dublin, OH 43017 • Notice to Legislative Authority — New D5I liquor permit for Wine Dine Dublin LLC dba Napa Kitchen & Bar, 7148 Muirfield Village Drive, Dublin, OH 43017 • Ordinance 38 -16 (Introduction /first reading) Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Necessary Conveyance Documents to Acquire a 0.224 Acre, More or Less, Permanent Easement, and a 0.111 Acre, More or Less, Temporary Easement, from 535 Metro Place South, LLC, for the Property Located at 535 S. Metro Place for the Public Purpose of Constructing a Shared -use RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin Git�vCoun -nal _ Meeting BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO Held October 10, 2016 Page 3 of 11 Path and Related Improvements. (Second reading /public hearing October 24 Council meeting) • Ordinance 39 -16 (Introduction /first reading) Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Necessary Conveyance Documents to Acquire a 0.143 Acre, More or Less, Permanent Easement from Columbus 2, LLC, for the Properly Located at 5160 -5168 Paul Blazer Parkway for the Public Purpose of Constructing aShared -use Path and Related Improvements. (Second reading /public hearing October 24 Council meeting) • Ordinance 40 -16 (Introduction /first reading) Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Necessary Conveyance Documents to Acquire a 0.059 Acre, More or Less, Permanent Easement, and a 0.225 Acre, More or Less, Temporary Easement, from Ruma Investment Company, for the Property Located at 6701 Discovery Boulevard, for the Public Purpose of Constructing a Shared -use Path and Related Improvements. (Second reading /public hearing October 24 Council meeting) Form 6101 SECOND READING /PUBLIC HEARING — ORDINANCES Ordinance 36 -16 Authorizing the City Manager to Enter into a Contract for Public Health Services with the District Advisory Council of the Franklin County General Health District for 2017. Ms. Crandall noted that this ordinance authorizes the renewal of the City's contract with Franklin County General Health District. The contract reflects an approximate five percent increase over the 2016 per capita rate. The total contract amount is calculated based on MORPC's estimated population for Dublin, which is 44,641. As noted in the memo, two years ago, Franklin County Public Health notified Dublin and other contracting jurisdictions of the need to raise an additional amount of $957,500 to address core service needs. After hearing input from Dublin and other contracting jurisdictions, Franklin County Public Health chose to phase in the increase. This contract is the last year reflecting those phased -in increases. This contract does not include the mosquito management program, which is handled under a separate contract. That contract will be brought to Council in January of 2017, per the previous discussion. Vote on the Ordinance: Ms. Alutto, yes; Vice Mayor Reiner, yes; Ms. Amorose Groomes, yes; Mayor Peterson, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Ms. Salay, yes. Ordinance 37 -16 Providing for the Issuance and Sale of Bonds in the Maximum Principal Amount of $10,,000,000 for the Purpose of Paying the Costs of Improving the City's Vehicular Transportation System within and Serving the Bridge Street District, Ms. Mumma stated that this ordinance requests authorization to issue and sell up to $10 million in bonds. The majority of these funds will be used to pay for the construction costs of John Shields Parkway Phase 2. Any residual amount will be used for other Bridge Street District roadway improvements that were advanced and were discussed in prior Council meetings. There are no changes to the legislation since its first reading and presentation on September 26. Vote on the Ordinance: Mr. Keenan, yes; Ms. Alutto, yes; Mayor Peterson, yes; Ms. Amorose Groomes, yes; Vice Mayor Reiner, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes. OTHER • Appeal Request for Bridge Park B5 (Parking Structure) Ms. Crandall stated that because this is the first appeal of this type that Council has been requested to hear, Ms. Readler will provide a summary of the procedural process and will clarify the decision that is before Council tonight. Mr. Papsidero will then provide the background related to this case. Finally, representatives of Crawford Hoying will present their request to Council to hear the appeal. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO Dublin City council He ld October 10, 2016 Page 4 of 11 Meeting Form 6101 Ms. Readler provided an overview of the procedure, as this is the first appeal filed for the Bridge Street District. The process is potentially a multi- tiered review. • The first step is for Council to determine whether or not to hear the appeal. This is the only decision being requested of Council tonight. The decision whether or not to hear the appeal is completely within Council's discretion and must be made by motion approved by majority vote. • If Council decides to hear the appeal, a subsequent hearing would be scheduled at an upcoming Council meeting. At that hearing, all the details of the appeal will be thoroughly discussed. • Council can then affirm, reverse or otherwise modify the decision of the Planning and Zoning Commission. Mr. Papsidero stated that this appeal is to a decision by Planning & Zoning Commission regarding a Minor Project Review for the B5 Parking Structure in Bridge Park. [He shared a locator map.] • The proposal considered by the Commission was to change out some of the detailing, add detail to the brick on two elevations of the garage, as well as to modify the metal screening that is on the two elevations. • In addition, the request included reducing the size of the living green facade, in order to allow natural ventilation in the garage structure. • The slide shows two elevations as proposed. The other two elevations are framed by residential units. Another slide shown depicts the additional masonry material that has been added to the garage in three locations. • He shared a slide depicting the living green wall that was reduced in size. The yellow box in the middle captures the changes in the metal screening, which is on all the sections of each facade where metal panels are seen on both the south and east elevations. • The next renderings shown compare what was originally approved (at the top of the slide) and the proposal for changes (at the bottom of the slide). • In terms of the metal panels in particular, those had been proposed as cantilevered in a random pattern. In the current proposal, they are now mounted flat to the elevations. • Another slide shows the prospective rendering of the proposal that was considered by the Planning & Zoning Commission. • In terms of case history, this was considered by the Architectural Review Team in September. The ART worked with the applicant over several months and did recommend approval with some conditions to help modify the proposal. o These included that the applicant stain the concrete on the crash walls to match the color of Brick# 1 as shown on the elevations; and that the applicant work with staff to create more randomness to the pattern of the metal screens. Given the magnitude of the changes, the ART moved the case forward to the Planning & Zoning Commission. The Commission heard the case on September 15 and voted to disapprove it. The applicant subsequently requested an appeal to Council. He offered to respond to any questions. Ms. Alutto asked about the purpose behind the changes made to the garage structure. Mr. Papsidero responded the applicant is present and can speak to that in more detail, but the changes were principally driven by cost issues. Ms. Amorose Groomes asked if there have been any changes to the proposal since the Commission last reviewed it. Mr. Papsidero responded there have been no further changes since the Commission reviewed the proposal. Mayor Peterson reiterated that Council's only decision tonight is whether they want to entertain an appeal — not to decide for or against it. If Council does decide to entertain the appeal, nothing said tonight is binding upon that subsequent vote, correct? In other RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Meeting BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO Form 6101 Held October 10, 2016 Page 5 of 11 words, a vote to entertain the appeal does not limit the vote on the appeal when presented. Ms. Readier confirmed that is correct. Mayor Peterson stated that Ms. Readier had indicated earlier that, should Council decide to hear the appeal, Council could affirm, reverse the decision, or modify it. Could Council refer the matter back to the Commission to allow further study of the issues? Ms. Readier responded that staff can explore the options and provide a list to Council, should they decide to hear the appeal. Mayor Peterson asked about the third condition from ART, which seems to relate to signage and was to the screening. Mr. Papsidero responded that the renderings submitted for consideration by the ART included signage on the garage that is part of the master sign plan. It was a technical staff recommendation to remove those aspects of the drawing from the rendering, as they were not pertinent to what is being considered tonight. Mayor Peterson clarified that there would be signage at some point, but it is not in the proposal before Council. Mr. Papsidero responded that a master sign plan has been approved by the Planning & Zoning Commission and will address all signage within Bridge Park. Ms. Alutto asked if it is the developer's intention to make some modifications to those renderings prior to a hearing on their appeal, or would the renderings be the same as shown tonight. Mr. Papsidero responded that, given the progress of the case, and that what is before Council is an appeal to the decision of disapproval by the Commission, it would be within Council's discretion whether to add those conditions, should Council take action to approve the proposal. Ms. Amorose Groomes stated that Council would want to hear the appeal based on the merits of the case heard by the Commission. If more changes are introduced, it is not an appeal, but rather a new determination. Ms. Alutto stated that is her concern as well. Ms. Readier summarized that the appeal process in the Bridge Street District is somewhat different. It explicitly indicates that Council can consider the record and everything prior, but Council can also consider additional evidence and testimony. Therefore, it is a more expansive review than the typical appeal process. Mr. Keenan stated that he is aware that Ms. Salay was not present at the Commission hearing on this matter, due to travel out of the country. Does she have any input to share about this proposal? Ms. Salay responded that she supported the garage as previously approved, particularly the metal panels. In regard to the living green wall, she questioned how that would work in terms of maintenance. In her view, the metal panels, lit from below, were what would really set this garage apart. When Council discussed building the garages, the sentiment expressed was that no one wanted an ordinary parking garage in Bridge Street. Mr. Keenan stated that Council would have the opportunity to accept part, all, or none of the proposal. It sounds as if Council wants to hear the appeal. Ms. Amorose Groomes stated that she is not necessarily in favor of hearing appeals regarding projects on the basis of cost overruns. This could result in the need for many more meetings of Council. Ms. Salay stated that if Council should elect to hear an appeal, for whatever reason, that does not bind Council or commit Council in any way and is not a precedent for hearing other appeals in the future. Ms. Readier confirmed that is correct. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO Held Dubin City _On.! ! gcil Meeting October 10, 2016 Page 6 of 11 Form 6101 Mr. Lecklider asked staff for confirmation that this is the first appeal to be requested of Council under the Bridge Street Code. Mr. Papsidero responded affirmatively. Mayor Peterson invited the applicant to comment. Nelson Yoder, Crawford Hoying Development Partners, 555 Metro Place North, Dublin stated that they are requesting an appeal due to cost issues. It is the first appeal they have brought forward in the Bridge Street District. Given that they are well under construction over the last year on three different blocks of Bridge Park, they believe it is a testament to the quality of the project that they have not been back prior to this time. There have been lots of cost challenges, as construction costs are up 20 to 30 percent across the board in all of their projects in Dublin. They have reviewed their options to make this work. On the commercial part of the garage — the part that is attached to the garage and screens it — they were able to remove residential units on the ground floor of the garage and replace them with retail units and more commercial space. This will activate the street and benefit the project as a whole. That was a creative means to try to address the cost overruns on the private development process. The challenge with the parking garage is that it is not an income - generating part of the project. These are free parking garages and available to the public. They are at a point where they cannot come up with additional dollars through raising rent. The New Community Authority overlays this entire project. A cost overrun of $700,000 on this garage simply means this amount must be cut somewhere else, or they will have to make modifications to the other New Community Authority facilities — be that the interior of the convention space or the future parking garages. There is no way to secure additional dollars at this point to cover this expense. He apologized for bringing forward this appeal. When they brought forward plans to the Planning and Zoning Commission and to Council, they based their plans on the information provided by their contractors and design professionals. The design professionals rely upon information provided by their material suppliers who were able to create the screening effect. By the time the process of bidding out the drawings occurred, it was found that the supplier capable of creating that look was in a single- source supplier situation and they were able to charge whatever they desired to charge. They are in a position now where the public parking garages are being taken advantage of because a particular type of material, shown on a drawing, is the only one that is acceptable. Once they recognized this situation many months ago, they began working with the Commission to find a solution. They believe that if the garage now proposed to the Commission and Council had been shown to them at the outset, everyone would have supported and approved it. It is still more costly than the A garage, more than the C garage, and more than any other garage in the region, to their knowledge. It is not a question of a lower quality garage than others in the area. For the C garage, they have begun installing the panels and lighting them from below. Even though the panels are flat, the effect is incredible. Mock -ups are in process. With this redesign, they have gone through the process of fully rebidding the drawings as is — in order to be certain that what is being proposed is affordable and that the change to the drawings and supplier would not result in additional problems. They believe what is now proposed is beautiful and of high quality. As the owner of 12 buildings around this parking garage, they have a vested interest in the look and quality of this garage. He is wholeheartedly in support of this new design and new look. He believes it may be more durable long term than the original design. The fact that it cost less does not translate to less quality, based on what he has described. Ms. Alutto asked if the changes Crawford Hoying is proposing will result in a savings of the full $700,000 they reference. Mr. Yoder responded that the two changes proposed to the "skin" will make that difference. With the skin as designed, it was the most expensive fagade on any building in the project — a more expensive fagade than both the AC Marriott and the office buildings. Ms. Alutto asked if Council should decide to hear this appeal, will he return with additional changes, based on the feedback from the ART, or will it be the exact same RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of _ nublin ('-itC:nuncil Meeting BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO Form 6101 Held October 10, 2016 Page 7 of 11 design? What would the process be between now and an appeal hearing, if that is the decision of Council? Mr. Yoder responded that there are not any substantial changes requested, but perhaps a minor modification to the randomness of the panels. That could be changed between now and a hearing on this appeal, if Council chooses to do so. Adding stain to the back of the panels is not something that would be visible on the renderings, but simply visible in the field. Mayor Peterson emphasized that the only question before Council tonight is whether or not to schedule a hearing on this appeal. If Council should decide to hear an appeal, it would take place at the next Council meeting. Vice Mayor Reiner stated that the original design was aesthetically very pleasing. Regarding the concept of the living plant wall, based on his experience, it is very difficult to maintain. If parts of that were deleted or sections reduced, what is the savings variable compared with the original panels? This green wall would be a maintenance issue long-term. Mr. Yoder responded that he believes that the green wall constitutes only $50- 100,000 of the $700,,000 overrun. The vast majority of the cost savings would come from the change from a single - source supplier to a material that could be provided by many others. Mr. Keenan asked who is responsible for maintenance of this green wall — is it the New Community Authority? Mr. Yoder responded that the Association would be responsible for this through Common Area Maintenance (CAM) charges. These would be paid by all the tenants to the property management company that maintains the garage, the grounds and the entire project. Vice Mayor Reiner stated that perhaps this green wall could be substituted with a wall mural or the graphic, which would not require the same level of maintenance. There is a lot of foot traffic and it would be attractive. He is interested in the aesthetics of the building, and the green wall contributed to that effect, too. Mr. Yoder reiterated that the vast majority of costs were tied to the panels. He added that where a green wall would be removed, a mural at full height would result in not having adequate ventilation in the parking structure. The open parking structure designation allows not having a sprinkler system or ventilation system in the garage, which adds $1,000 of cost per parking space. More review would be needed about the impacts of using murals as suggested. Vice Mayor Reiner stated he appreciates Mr. Yoder's upfront approach to this issue. Ms. Amorose Groomes stated that she believes it is really important for Council to support the Planning and Zoning Commission and the decisions they make. The applicant had the ability to request tabling in order to return with something different, but that did not happen in this case, based on her review of the minutes. Mr. Lecklider moved that Council hear the appeal. This is not to suggest that he is inclined to grant it. However, given that the applicant is a year under construction, it seems to be the fair thing to do under the circumstances. Ms. Alutto seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Ms. Salay, yes; Ms. Amorose Groomes, no; Vice Mayor Reiner, yes; Mayor Peterson, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Ms. Alutto, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes. Ms. Readler stated that staff will determine if this can be scheduled for the October 24 Council meeting. Mr. Keenan requested that staff provide all options to Council for consideration at the appeal hearing. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes o n� rite Cn- U. Meeting BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO Form 6101 Held October 10, 2016 Page 8 of 11 Vice Mayor Reiner indicated he would like to see some examples of the new material that is proposed. For him to consider changing this material, the quality of the design must be maintained. He wants to understand what had been approved and what is now being proposed. Mayor Peterson asked staff to include whether or not the option of referral back to the Planning and Zoning Commission is a legally justifiable option. Ms. Alutto agreed with Vice Mayor Reiner, adding she would like to have the materials in advance of the meeting versus at the hearing to allow opportunity for more review. She clarified that agreeing to hear an appeal does not in any way indicate disagreement with the decision of the Commission. From her perspective, Council is simply looking to gather additional information to determine whether to affirm the Commission decision. There is no issue of trust or lack of faith in the Commission and their decisions. Ms. Salay requested that the applicant bring material samples large enough to see what is being proposed versus just a rendering. This would be very helpful in the review process. Vice Mayor Reiner agreed, noting that the original version bowed out and was interesting, and the revision seems to be a flat elevation attached to a building. He wants more clarity about what is being given up and what is being proposed. • Adoption of 2017 Regular Meeting Schedule Mr. Keenan stated that he is in favor of the proposed schedule with the exception of the first January meeting proposed for Monday, January 9 that conflicts with the National Championship game. This could be a conflict for Council, staff and the community in general. Following brief discussion, it was the consensus of Council to adjust this meeting to Tuesday, January 10. Mr. Keenan asked that the Clerk circulate potential dates for goal setting retreat in 2017. Ms. Salay requested that the goal setting retreat take place sometime in February. Council agreed. Ms. Amorose Groomes stated she is interested in the option of the July meeting being scheduled on July 31 versus July 3. Many will have family in town or may be traveling over the July 4th holiday. Council members were in agreement with meeting on July 31 versus July 3. Mr. Keenan moved approval of the 2017 Regular Meeting schedule for 2017, incorporating the changes of Tuesday, January 10 and Monday, July 31. Ms. Alutto seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Ms. Amorose Groomes, yes; Mayor Peterson, yes; Ms. Alutto, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Vice Mayor Reiner, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes. STAFF COMMENTS Ms. Crandall reported: 1. The packet included the proposed work session agenda for Monday, October 17. The work session will begin at 6 p.m. Due to the number of agenda items, it is anticipated to conclude at 8:30 p.m. 2. The City is rolling out the new "Leaf Go" website application, building upon the success of the Snow Go program implemented previously. Ms. O'Callaghan will review this new website application. Ms. O'Callaghan stated that today was the first day of leaf collection season for the year. The new Leaf Go system is being rolled out, which will enable residents to be updated on the status of leaf collection. It is the same concept as the Snow Go web application. It is a web -based mapping tool on the City's website. The collection equipment has sensors that send data back to the computer and that data is used to assist with updating the map. The City has a two -zone collection process in place. Today, Zone 1 was collected and completed, because many leaves remain on the trees at this point. There is a color -coded legend on the map, indicating collection is complete, in progress, RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO Dubin city. Council Meeting Held October 10, 2016 Page 9 of 11 or not begun in the zone. Within each zone there are subzones; there are 13 subzones throughout the City. Ms. Amorose Groomes asked if collection will be put on hold until there is significant leaf drop. Ms. O'Callaghan responded that collection will continue, as it helps to work ahead for efficiency reasons. Vice Mayor Reiner asked about the last date of leaf collection, given that oak trees drop leaves very late. Ms. O'Callaghan responded that the advertised leaf collection program ends on December 16. Staff will monitor that, however, and extend the collection if needed. Mr. Keenan noted that if a resident misses the collection date in their zone, there is the potential for a two -week gap for collection. Is it possible to have a trailer pick up in the heavily wooded areas to address this? Bags of leaves on the tree lawn for an extended period of time kill the grass. Is there any way to capture these areas? Ms. O'Callaghan responded that with residents being able to view the progress of collection online, it will help guide them in terms of timing of raking their leaves. Another way is by working ahead on collection, as is being done. Mr. Keenan stated that, unfortunately, residents' raking schedules do not always align with the collection dates. Ms. Salay stated that if a resident is aware that their zone will be collected the following week, they should rake their leaves over the weekend and they will then be collected during the week that follows. The longest period of time the bags will be on the tree lawn would be 5 -6 days. Mr. Keenan summarized that he is simply suggesting additional measures due to the heavy leaf fall in the wooded areas of the City. Ms. O'Callaghan added that the small truck icons on the map will indicate where the trucks are currently located when collections are underway. This information will be shared on social media as well as the website. Mr. Lecklider asked how many trucks are in the field at one time. Ms. O'Callaghan responded there are between four to eight crews out, depending upon the volume of leaves to be picked up. Form 6101 Mr. Keenan added that the difficult part of this operation is transitioning from leaf pick -up to snow pick -up when snowfall comes early in the season. Ms. Crandall continued: 3. A memo is on the dais tonight regarding the new "Yard Squad" program. This program matches residents who are in need of clean up in their yards with City volunteers. It will be announced at the upcoming neighborhood leadership meeting in October. Mr. Reiner noted that he assumes this program is for those residents with health issues or for the elderly. How does someone access these services? Ms. Crandall responded that the matches are made through Volunteer Resources. Those in need of help or who know someone in need of help should contact Volunteer Resources. Mayor Peterson suggested that the City contact all of the homeowner association presidents to make them aware of this project. Ms. Crandall responded that a rollout plan for this program is being finalized. COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS Mr. Keenan, Finance Chair reported that the Committee held their quarterly update meeting this evening. The financial state of the City is strong, based on the staff RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of _ 4 n� 1hiin CAY- Gounnel _ Meeting BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO Form 6101 Held October 10, 2016 Page 10 of 11 information provided. The Committee also heard an update on the Cost of Services, and legislation will be presented at an upcoming Council meeting to update the fees for 2017. Mr. Lecklider, Mid -Ohio Reqional Planning Commission representative noted that the Commission will meet on Thursday, October 13. Mr. Lecklider, Logan- Union - Champaign Counter Regional Planning Commission representative stated that information was included in the packet about the upcoming annual dinner meeting on Thursday, November 19. All members are welcome to attend. Mr. Lecklider, US 33 Innovation Corridor Group representative reported that the group will meet on Friday, October 14. Mr. Reiner, Dublin Arts Council representative noted that the BREAD!Festival is scheduled on Saturday, October 15 in Historic Dublin. Dublin is one of the few cities in the U.S. to host such a festival. Varieties of bread from around the world will be available. He encouraged everyone to attend. Ms. Alutto, Council liaison to the Dublin Board of Education reported that the group will meet on October 26. Ms. Amorose Groomes, Council liaison to the Dublin Board of Education reported that Dublin Schools hosted a Community Conversation on Wednesday, October 5. It was well attended and interesting topics were presented. She is looking forward to what will take place at subsequent meetings. The focus of the October 5 meeting was primarily opiate addiction. COUNCIL ROUND TABLE Ms. Amorose Groomes: 1. Commented regarding the SR161 /Riverside Drive roundabout /realignment. She recalls that when the roundabout was opened, a 60 -day timeframe was anticipated for completion of the southbound bypass lane. Is this on schedule for completion by November 16? Ms. O'Callaghan responded that this bypass lane is on schedule to open as planned. 2. Reported that she has received lots of feedback regarding the October 4 Historic Dublin meeting conversation. Most of it was very positive. Presentations were made, and one scenario seemed to be more desirable than the other two scenarios. She is hopeful that another meeting with the same folks can be scheduled, once the City has identified the preferences. This would allow more information to be shared about the preferred scenario. She thanked staff for hosting this meeting. Due to the time constraints for the first meeting, another meeting is warranted to focus on what is being moved forward. Mr. Lecklider noted a memo was included in the packet related to the trash /recycling can screening. Under the background section, the last sentence indicates, "Providing alternatives to natural landscaping would provide more options to ensure compliance." This seemed to be a subtle suggestion that Council may want to adjust the regulation. He asked for staff input. Mr. Papsidero responded that was not the intent of the memo, aside from doing additional research in terms of the findings. Over the last five years, there have been 80 violations and all violators have voluntarily complied. It will be interesting for staff to tour the City proactively to identify the violations that exist at this time. If those findings lead to any issues for consideration by Council, staff would bring that forward. Code Enforcement officers will be reviewing the City for Code compliance, but staff is not certain of the findings. If the results raise any issues or questions for consideration by Council, staff would certainly bring that information forward. Mr. Lecklider asked for clarification. Is natural landscaping the only type of screening that is allowed? RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Quhlin ('it�, r�njinnil Meeting BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO Held October 10, 2016 Page 11 of 11 Mr. Papsidero responded affirmatively. One- hundred percent natural landscaping screening on all sides to the height of the cans is required if the cans are not stored in --.. the garage. Ms. Salay noted that she has a neighbor who has a lovely natural landscaping screening around her trashcans. If staff could photograph some of the success stories and provide ideas to residents about plant materials that work well for this screening, that would be very helpful. She would suggest a more proactive approach versus simply Code enforcement. Mr. Papsidero stated that this information can be added to the website. rned at 7:58 p.m. Clerk of Council Form 6101