Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-13-17 Council MinutesRECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin._ City COILMCil Meeting BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO Form 6101 �� February 13, 2017 CALL TO ORDER Mayor Peterson called the Monday, February 13, 2017 Regular Meeting of Dublin City Council to order at 6:00 p.m. in Council Chambers at Dublin City Hall. ROLL CALL Present were Mayor Peterson, Vice Mayor Reiner, Ms. Alutto, Ms. Amorose Groomes, Mr. Keenan and Mr. Lecklider. [Ms. Salay was absent (excused).] Staff members present were Mr. McDaniel, Ms. Crandall, Ms. Readler, Mr. Hartmann, Mr. Foegler, Ms. Mumma, Ms. Goss, Ms. O'Callaghan, Chief von Eckartsberg, Mr. Rogers, Mr. Haines, Mr. Papsidero, Mr. Hammersmith, Ms. Gilger, Ms. Richison, Mr. Stang, Ms. Burness and Mr. Plouck. ADJOURNMENT TO EXECUTIVE SESSION Mayor Peterson moved to adjourn to executive session for discussion of the purchase of property for public purposes and 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. Mr. Lecklider 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. The meeting was reconvened at 7:00 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Ms. Amorose Groomes led the Pledge of Allegiance. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS • LeaderSpark Y.I.P.P.I.E. award (Youth Igniting Purpose, Passion, Inspiration & Excellence) - presentation to Alexander Ward Ms. Alutto, member of the Board of LeaderSpark read and presented a proclamation to Dublin Scioto High School student Alexander Ward in recognition of his February 2 receipt of the Y.I.P.P.I.E. award. Mayor Peterson congratulated Mr. Ward on all of his service to the community. CITIZEN COMMENTS Mayor Peterson noted that Dr. Rob Crane is present tonight to speak about the Tobacco 21 initiative. Former Mayor Lecklider as well as other Council members have been very involved with this issue. Mr. Lecklider stated that some of Dublin's peer communities in Central Ohio have approved Tobacco 21 legislation in the past year or two. He has spoken to some of these officials about this matter. He had planned to ask his colleagues to support such legislation in Dublin, and is a supporter of this initiative. Dr. Rob Crane, 5600 Dublin Road, Dublin, family physician and Professor at The Ohio State University addressed Council regarding Tobacco 21, an initiative that would raise the minimum age for purchase of tobacco from 18 to 21. He learned from Council Member Salay that there was some consensus from Council that perhaps this matter should be delayed until the state could address it as a statewide initiative. While he agrees that would be optimal, the problem at the state level is that on Wednesday morning, there will be 30 plus full -time, paid professional lobbyists representing various aspects of the tobacco industry. This industry spends over $1 billion every year on lawyers and lobbyists. Therefore, there is zero chance of passing this legislation at the state legislature at this point. He reminded Council that 14 years ago, he brought to Council the issue of making every workplace and every public place smoke free. It was very controversial and a challenge. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of _. BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO Held_ Dublin Qt Council Meeting Form 6101 February 13, 2017 Page 2 of 18 At that time, bar owners were convinced their businesses would never survive if smoking were not permitted. The restaurant owners believed the same, all having smoking sections for patrons. Dublin City Council stepped up with passage of legislation and the culture began to change. Eventually, Columbus and 11 other suburbs followed with smoke free legislation. Two years later, the state of Ohio passed smoke free legislation, and then the midwest. Dublin City Council members were the leaders and made it happen, based on their desires for a healthy community. [He then shared a video from the Center for Disease Control about why leadership is necessary in smoking prevention.] Two years ago, at the behest of the FDA and Congress, the Institute of Medicine and the National Institute of Health undertook a three -year study, looking at the public health implications of raising the age of tobacco purchase from the current 18 to 19, 21 and to 25. The "sweet spot" was determined to be 21. Twenty -five different scientists came together at this colloquium and found that: • 4.2 million years of life saved just among kids alive today under l y; • a 25 percent drop in youth initiation; • a 12 percent drop in overall smoking; • a 12 percent drop in prematurity of babies, as many young women who are pregnant also smoke; • a 16 percent drop in Sudden Infant Death Syndrome. More of these statistics are found in the book he distributed to Council. In the last three years, 220 different cities have gone to age 21 for tobacco. Only two states, California and Hawaii have gone to age 21 at the state level. Massachusetts has 60 percent of the state covered with local ordinances for age 21, but they have not been able to approve this through the state legislature. Action has to be local, or it simply does not happen. He is hoping that Council will work with him and staff to model some of the Columbus ordinance language approved last month, incorporating a tobacco license and raising the age to 21. This language allows for civil, not criminal prosecution as criminal prosecution never is done. This legislation works, as they have experienced a drop in youth smoking in the high school students by 50 percent. This solution costs almost nothing and does something important. Mayor Peterson thanked him for his presentation. He recalls when there were smoking and non - smoking sections of restaurants, and that is not an option any longer. It is an evolutionary issue and the message being sent is to the young people. He asked staff if a motion is needed from Council. Mr. McDaniel requested that Council direct staff via motion. As part of that, staff can share draft legislation, comparing what other communities have done and obtain background information. Mayor Peterson stated that it will be more efficient to proceed in this way versus referring this to a Council committee. Mr. Lecklider moved to direct staff to review legislation passed in the local area and modeled elsewhere and bring that to Council for potential consideration. On a personal note, he added that his father began smoking as a teenager and died of lung cancer at age 55. This initiative is the right thing to do. Mr. Reiner seconded the motion. He added that he recalls Dr. Crane's presentations to Council years ago about the smoke free legislation. He appreciates the fact that Dr. Crane has continued this fight. He counsels cancer victims and this issue is important to him. Vote on the motion: Mr. Keenan, yes; Mayor Peterson, yes; Ms. Amorose Groomes, yes; Ms. Alutto, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Vice Mayor Reiner, yes. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO Held February 13, 2017 Page 3 of 18 Form 6101 Mr. Keenan suggested that in the review, staff focus on enforcement as well as penalties so that Council has an understanding of how the law will operate. Mayor Peterson stated that Dr. Crane will be notified when this legislation is scheduled for consideration at Council. Dr. Crane noted there is a copy of the Columbus legislation in the packet he distributed tonight. Steve Brown, 6045 Round Tower Lane, Dublin noted that he is accompanied by Cheryl Stump, 6620 Fallen Timbers Drive, Dublin. (He read a letter into the record on behalf of the Lublin Community Swim Team and provided a copy to Council.) Key points of the letter are: • For 20 years, the Sea Dragons (Dublin Community Swim Team) have represented the City of Dublin — a community that the parents and taxpayers have chosen in which to raise their families and contribute to its overall mission, values and vision. • Two weeks ago, the team was informed by Parks and Recreation staff members that opportunities to outsource the community swim team were being sought. They were told that this outsourcing might better serve the needs of their 200 swimmers. • The timing and manner of communicating this potential outsourcing of the team has come as an absolute shock. • The community swim team, fostered by the fine care of the City of Dublin, meets the needs of swimmers at every level of the sport. The City has hired a talented coaching staff that supports the team's youngest swimmers all the way to high school swimmers. • The concept of outsourcing this community team takes away the most important element from their team — their community. • The Dublin families and swimmers understand there is always a choice to participate in another sport in a better community; however, they value the Dublin community in which they work, play, learn and grow. • This team has provided numerous opportunities for their children to learn about serving others, and their families volunteer throughout the year for the City. • Their swimmers become community lifeguards, swim instructors, and summer recreation league swim coaches in Dublin. • Most importantly, these middle school, high school and Sea Dragon alumni serve as role models for other youth in Dublin. The Dublin Community Swim Team is a place where swimmers can give back to their community. • Their children and families want their team to continue to be owned and managed by the City of Dublin as it has been for nearly 20 years. It is a service they value and appreciate as Dublin residents and taxpayers. • The Dublin Community Swim Team aligns with the results of the 2016 Community Attitude Survey as presented at the 2016 State of the City address. When asked what residents like most about living in Dublin, the response was quality of life and City services at the top of the list. With respect to that survey, the City Manager stated that the City has a strong tradition of engaging and listening to the community and will continue to uphold that tradition. • They want the City to continue to provide the benefit of having a City of Dublin - sponsored swim team, and they want and need their team to continue to add value to the City. They have Dublin pride in being Dublin owned. He thanked Council for their time and consideration. Ms. Alutto asked how the swim team families were notified of this matter. Ms. Stump responded that they were notified by an e -mail from Dublin staff member Kim Wigram on January 30. Ms. Alutto asked what reasons were cited for this RFP. Ms. Stump responded that the main reason cited in the e -mail was the fact that a survey took place in December of 2016 that indicated the team was looking for a more RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO Held Dublin City C February 13, 2017 Page 4 of 18 competitive option and that the City could no longer support the competitiveness and align with the recreation to competitive stance by the City. Ms. Amorose Groomes asked if the survey was sent to the swim team families or the community at large. Ms. Stump responded it was sent to the swim team families and 78 responses were received out of 200 swim team families. Alleeting Form 6101 Mayor Peterson stated that Council will address all of the concerns expressed tonight and provide answers, and this will be done as efficiently as possible. He asked Mr. McDaniel about the timeframe for providing the response. Mr. McDaniel stated there has been much confusion about this process and what it is intended to do. He emphasized that the City is not outsourcing the Community Swim Team. It will be a Dublin Community Swim Team as it always has been. There is a vacancy in the swim coach position. Whenever there is a vacant position in the City of any type, staff reviews options for providing the service. For the swim team, it has been a tradition to have an on -staff coach. Staff has reviewed the coaching position and wants to determine if there is a different way to provide this service. What was issued by the City was a request for proposals (RFP) to learn how other entities provide this service and what other capacity exists in central Ohio. His understanding is that Dublin is the only City that provides this service in this way. Once the responses to the RFP are submitted, staff will meet with the booster club presidents and assess the responses. If there is something that the swim team wants to recommend pursuing, his expectation is that a meeting will take place with the larger group of swim team parents to discuss options. An option might be simply to replace the current coaching vacancy. In terms of the competitive side, if there are efficiencies that can be gained in how other entities are managing their pools in a better way than Dublin, maybe there will be a need to begin offering higher -level competitivE.1 services. He emphasized that the City has no intention of outsourcing the Dublin Community Swim Team. This is simply about replacing a coaching vacancy and looking at how other entities operate similar programs. Even if there was a decision to outsource the coaching function, the City could require that the current coaching staff be maintained. The commitment he has asked of staff is to include the greater parent group in this discussion. If staff chooses that route, it will come back to Council for approval. He has directed staff to secure the support of the parent group before bringing an option back to Council. There is no lowering of service and no outsourcing of the swim team being done. Ms. Stump asked Mr. McDaniel to define outsourcing as used in the context of the RFP. Mr. McDaniel responded that the question is if the City is going to outsource the coaching staff through a contract as opposed to having a hired staff member as coach. That is the primary issue. If there is a different management approach to how another entity manages the pool, and it provides more efficiency, thereby enabling more services, then that would be a goal. The primary goal is not to lower the service level. Ms. Stump stated that much of the confusion among swim team parents comes from the fact that the current RFP does not call for input from the parents until the incumbent is hired and that it is outsourcing the management of the team. Mr. McDaniel responded that an RFP is written for those who may respond — not to the customer. The RFP did indicate that proposals would be reviewed by the booster presidents as part of the process. It did not provide details about the final decision process, which comes to the City Manager if it is a staffing issue. If it is contractual, he will advance it to City Council. Those are the other steps in the process that are not typically explained in an RFP sent out. Mr. Brown asked if there is a timeframe that can be shared that may be different from what was originally presented to them. Mr. McDaniel responded that he believes there was one date in the RFP, the date by which the responders must submit -- in late February. This is the date for responses, not for any final decisions. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of — Quhlia._Ciiy Cnuncil Meeting BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO Held February 13, 2017 Page 5 of 18 Form 6101 Mr. Keenan commented this is similar to soccer, in terms of a limited resource – the pool in this case. He wants to understand how a competitive program fits into this, given the City's recreation goals for a limited resource. Mr. McDaniel responded that the City's primary focus is on recreational programs. This will remain as the highest priority. There is always a push for a higher competitive program, but this will not be done at the expense of the general recreation programming. There is a finite resource involved. Staff is trying to maximize the use of the pool, focused on recreation. The City also provides the resource for the high school teams as well as other programming offered by the DCRC. If there is a better way to manage the resource, it may be learned through this RFP process. If services can be increased or expanded, staff will support that. However, this is simply an exercise in learning what is being done in other facilities. Valoria Hoover, 5972 Dunheath Loop, Dublin stated that much of the confusion came from the fact that the RFP was sent out prior to the swim team boosters being notified. Secondly, it was sent not as an informational request of how other entities do things, but as a specific request about what coaches an outside provider would bring. This is the reason so many parents are upset. The parents believe the survey done in December may not have been fully truthful in the sense of why it was being done. The swim parents were left out of the loop. Mayor Peterson stated that this Council is very dedicated to these kids, as is the staff. Communication can be difficult, and it can be corrected moving forward. The deadline for responses to the RFP is February 24. He asked if the swim team can provide staff with a list of every parent in the group who wants to be notified regarding these matters. Mr. McDaniel responded that a follow -up e -mail was sent out by Ms. Gee to explain some of these nuances. Ms. Hoover confirmed that is correct, noting that Ms. Gee's e -mail did address some of the concerns and timeline questions. Mr. McDaniel stated that staff has all of the contact information that has been shared with the City and has been sharing information. He apologized for any miscommunication and for anyone's resulting great concerns. However, it is always the staff's mission to look at the most cost effective, efficient way of providing services. However, it would not be done at the expense of the program in the sense of lowering the service level. Mr. Earman has indicated that he plans to retain the coaching staff in place. Mayor Peterson noted he hopes that the swim parents are now reassured as a result of this discussion. The City will keep the lines of communication open as this process continues. Ms. Amorose Groomes asked when the evaluation process for the RPFs submitted would be completed. Mr. McDaniel stated he would check with Mr. Earman, who is currently out of the City. There are many parties involved in this review process. CONSENT AGENDA Mayor Peterson moved approval of the three items on the Consent Agenda. Mr. Keenan seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Vice Mayor Reiner, yes; Mayor Peterson, yes; Ms. Alutto, yes; Ms. Amorose Groomes, yes. • Approval of Minutes of Council meeting of January 23, 2017 • Resolution 08 -17 (Introduction /public hearing /vote) Accepting the Lowest and Best Bid for the Rings Road Shared Use Path Project. • Resolution 09 -17 (Introduction /public hearing /vote) Authorizing the City Manager to Execute an Intergovernmental Agreement with the Franklin County Commissioners for the Administration of Wireless 9 -1 -1 Government Assistance Funds. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin-City Cou ncil Meeting BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO Held February 13, 2017 Page 6 of 18 Form 6101 POSTPONED ITEMS — ORDINANCES Ordinance 57 -16 Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Development Agreement and Other Necessary Documents with the Columbus Metropolitan Library ( "CML ") to Facilitate the Building of a Parking Garage, Library and Adjacent Streets on the Current Library Site in the Historic District. Based on staff's recommendation, Mayor Peterson moved to postpone the Ordinance to the February 27 Council meeting. Mr. Keenan seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mayor Peterson, yes; Ms. Amorose Groomes, yes; Vice Mayor Reiner, yes; Ms. Alutto, yes. SECOND READING /PUBLIC HEARING — ORDINANCES Ordinance 11 -17 Amending the Annual Appropriations for the Fiscal Year Ending December 31, 2017. Ms. Mumma stated that in 2016, Council adopted a formal policy for the General Fund Balance. This memorialized the practice of maintaining a General Fund balance at a minimum of 50 percent of the expenditures of the year; to the extent that the fund balance is in excess of 75 percent, 25 percent of that amount in excess would be transferred to the Capital Improvements Tax Fund. Council retains the right to deviate from that policy at any time, if desired by the majority of Council. Based on the December 31, 2016 year -end General Fund balance of nearly $56.7 million, representing approximately 85.6 percent of the expenditures for the year, the amount in excess of 75 percent is $1,747,693. Staff is proposing to transfer this amount to the Capital Improvements Tax Fund, in accordance with the adopted policy. This ordinance supplementally appropriates this dollar amount in order to facilitate the transfer to the Capital Improvements Tax Fund. Ms. Amorose Groomes asked if the $1,747,693 amount is earmarked for a specific project, or does it simply go to the Capital Improvements Tax Fund, which would be offset by bonds the City would not sell. Ms. Mumma responded that this amount goes to the Capital Improvements Tax Fund. When staff presented the 2017 -2021 CIP, staff contemplated an amount slightly higher than that to go into funding for the overall projects and programs for 2017. Any of the cash allocation does not change as it pertains to debt, and this would not allow the City to issue more debt by transferring this amount to the Capital Improvements Tax Fund. Ms. Amorose Groomes asked if this money is already programmed in the CIP budget. Ms. Mumma responded that it was included as an estimated resource for the year when taking into account all of the projects to be funded. When staff brought forward the proposed list of CIP projects for 2017, staff indicated the various resources that would fund those projects. Included in that was a transfer amount from the General Fund and all of the expenditures to come up with a positive variance at the end of 2017. Vote on the Ordinance: Mr. Keenan, yes; Ms. Alutto, yes; Mayor Peterson, yes; Ms. Amorose Groomes, yes; Vice Mayor Reiner, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes. INTRODUCTION /FIRST READING - ORDINANCES Ordinance 12 -17 Rezoning an Approximately .67 -Acre Parcel Located at the Northwest Corner of the Intersection of Summit View Road and Sawmill Road, from R -1, Restricted Suburban Residential District to SO, Suburban Office and Institutional District. (Case 16 -100Z) Mr. Lecklider introduced the ordinance. Mr. Stang, Planner noted that this proposal is to a standard district rezoning in the northeast portion of the City. The site is located on the northwest corner of the intersection of Summit View and Sawmill Roads. The property is approximately two - thirds of an acre in size, and is currently undeveloped. The property in the surrounding RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO Held D-ub1in City Council February 13, 2017 Page 7 of 18 Meeting Form 6101 area is not currently served by public utilities, and there are no utility extensions planned in the Five -Year CIP. • The applicant proposes rezoning the property from R -1, Restricted Suburban Residential to SO, Suburban Office and Institutional District. • The current zoning permits only single - family dwelling units, and the proposed zoning classification permits a number of professional and administrative uses, including general office, medical office and legal services. • The SO District also outlines a number of conditional uses, such as beauty and barbershops and animal services. • Upon approval of this rezoning, any future development proposals would be subject to the City's zoning code and the applicant would file directly for building permits. • The Community Plan designates the future land use as Neighborhood Office and Institutional for the entire northwest corner of Summit View Road and Sawmill Road. • This classification is identified for areas adjacent to residential, where land transitions and buffers are necessary. • Development intensity would be low, due to greater setbacks and extensive landscaping, and would usually not exceed 9,500 square feet per acre. • The proposed zoning classification permits uses that correspond with this future land use designation. • The Thoroughfare Plan identifies both Sawmill Road and Summit View Road as corridors of interest. Summit View is designated as a collector, with a planned right -of -way and an existing right -of -way of 60 feet. • Sawmill Road is designated as a major arterial, with a planned right -of -way of 160 feet. However, because Sawmill Road lies within the City of Columbus jurisdiction, any improvements or right -of -way dedication would have to meet the Columbus Thoroughfare Plan, which only calls for 120 feet of right -of -way. Based on a recent survey, Sawmill Road currently contains 80 feet of right -of -way, leaving a 40 -foot deficit. This means that the applicant would be required to dedicate approximately 20 feet of right -of -way to the City of Dublin before this property could be developed. • The property is also located within a Special Area Plan, as shown on the slide. These area plans contain conceptual design recommendations for areas of interest throughout the City with the intent of guiding future development. • The Summit View /Sawmill Area Plan has a few recommendations that pertain to this site: 1. A recommended setback of 100 feet for office development. 2. A sensitive placement of office development within the existing trees and natural features. 3. The use of a green corridor as an amenity to both office and residential development as well as a buffer for the office development from adjacent residential uses. The Summit View /Sawmill Area Plan recommendations are based on a larger scale commercial development, as shown on the slide displayed. This was the projected course of development for this Neighborhood Commercial component. The large development would remove a number of site constraints that exist for developing the single property. However, the proposed rezoning meets the intent of this commercial component and would be the first step toward achieving this land use as outlined in the Area Plan. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of this rezoning on January 5, but expressed concern that this rezoning prevents a number of Special Area Plan recommendations from being achieved. The ideal plan would be a larger scale rezoning and an associated development with that. Staff recommends approval of this ordinance at the second reading /public hearing on February 27. He offered to respond to questions. Mr. Reiner asked if sewer and water service is available to this property. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO Held _ February 13, 2017 Page 8 of 18 Meeting Form 6101 Mr. Stang responded serves are not currently available, and the future planned extensions are not in the Five -Year CIP. The closest extension at the corner of Riverside and Summit View Road is planned in 2021. Mr. Reiner asked staff if there is adequate setback planned in view of future widening of Sawmill Road. There have been many widening projects for Sawmill in the past years. The site plan shows a green buffer and retention basin on the front, but this would erode with a future widening of the roadway. He noted that the City attempted to require a 200 -foot setback several years ago, but it met with resistance from developers. He asked Mr. Stang if the setback is appropriate, given this information. Mr. Stang responded that he believes the 100 -foot setback is appropriate for this area of the City. However, the only way to achieve that is to develop a number of the properties all together. With what the applicant is proposing for this site, he would be subject only to the zoning setbacks that are set by the right -of -way. With 120 feet, this is measured from the centerline of Sawmill, resulting in 60 feet from the property line after dedication. Ideally, the City would desire the larger setbacks with the greenspace. This area is the northeast gateway of the City, and it is desirable to have more greenspace. There is also a potential connection of greenspace to Emerald Fields to the south, benefitting the community and surrounding property owners. Mr. Keenan asked about the distance from this property to the closest sewer line. Mr. Stang responded that he believes the sewer line will be extended up to the corner of Riverside Drive and Summit View in 2021. There is no extension currently programmed to this property or others at the far eastern edge of Summit View Road. Ms. Amorose Groomes noted there is water and sewer service available in Campden Lakes and the development to the east of that. Mr. Stang responded that those developments are served through existing main lines. This future extension would be a main line up Riverside and along Summit View. The City would extend a main line along Summit View in the future and all of these properties could tap into it - -but that extension is not programmed. Mr. Lecklider asked about access to this site. Mr. Stang responded that Engineering has reviewed this. The applicant owns the adjacent property on the west side, and one potential is for a shared access easement, with access shared between the residential property he owns and this commercial development. The other option is working to provide access from Summit View or Sawmill Road, but either of those would likely be limited to right in, right out. Staff has notified the applicant of these potential options for access. Mr. Lecklider asked if Dublin would control the Sawmill Road access or Columbus. Mr. Stang responded that Dublin would have to work with the City of Columbus on this, as Sawmill is technically under their jurisdiction. Given its proximity to the intersection, access from Sawmill Road would be very difficult. Mr. Lecklider stated that he cannot imagine the City would do this in any other location. Mr. Stang responded that the City does need to provide access to this property if the owner wants to develop it. The ideal approach is the shared access with the residential property. The traffic engineers are evaluating this, which seems to be the best approach. Mr. Lecklider asked if anyone lives in the home to the west. Mr. Stang responded affirmatively, adding that a number of improvements have been made to that house. Ms. Amorose Groomes stated that she agrees with Mr. Lecklider about access to Sawmill Road, as well as Summit View. This individual parcel would be difficult to develop in and of itself with the access and other issues. Is it Planning's opinion that they support this rezoning because it begins the process of rezoning all of these parcels in order to achieve ultimately something akin to the Community Plan? Mr. Stang responded affirmatively. While it is difficult to develop a single property, it is in keeping with achieving the Community Plan goals. It meets the intent of the Special Area Plan and it meets the future land use as outlined in the Community Plan. For RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO Held_ February 13, 2017 Page 9 of 18 Meeting Form 6101 standard district rezonings, the consideration for reference is what was outlined and approved in the Community Plan. This would work toward achieving that neighborhood commercial component and, ideally, could help drive other properties to seek rezoning to the commercial zoning. Ms. Amorose Groomes asked if there are drawings available from the applicant for the intended near -term development. This could help determine whether the property is developable in the fashion the applicant desires. Mr. Stang responded that he has not seen those. Staff has looked at this from a zoning perspective, and it is possible to fit what the applicant has discussed doing on this property. If this rezoning were approved, the applicant would file directly for building permitting and all of the zoning aspects of reviews for that would be handled with the permitting process. There would not be another public review to discuss the design and the site layout. It would all be reviewed under the established Zoning Code. Ms. Amorose Groomes stated that she would need to have information about the access on Summit View -- or at least the portion Dublin can control -- because this parcel is very near Sawmill Road. Have the traffic engineers looked at this to determine where a commercial use curb cut could be accommodated along Summit View this close to Sawmill? Mr. Stang responded that Engineering has not reviewed this to define the exact location Of it, but they have reviewed the site. When the applicant first approached staff about developing this property, Planning reached out to Engineering and they outlined several options. It partially depends on what the applicant is looking to do. If the applicant wants a separate curb cut on Summit View, it would likely be at the western edge of that property to keep it as far from the intersection as possible. If he plans to use the existing curb cut from the adjacent residential property, that is another option to pursue. That would prevent adding to the access points near the intersection. Mr. Lecklider stated that it appears the reality of this is speculation. With utilities not being imminent — at least not in the near term -- the timing strikes him as early. Perhaps the applicant wants to have the rezoning approval in hand. Ms. Amorose Groomes stated that her concern is that with approval of the rezoning, the applicant goes directly to obtain building permits. There is no further level of review for Council or the community at large. Mr. Lecklider stated that this begs another question for a future date -- within what period of time after building permit issuance is development to occur. Mayor Peterson summarized that if the City does not rezone this, the property remains as residential zoning. However, the straight rezoning application does not permit a further review process through PZC. Mr. Keenan stated that sewer would be required to develop this property. Ms. Amorose Groomes stated that it not necessary. Many commercial businesses operate without public water and sewer such as Martha Vance. Mr. Keenan asked for further comment from staff about this issue. Mr. Stang responded that the county regulates septic systems. Without public utilities, it is unlikely the property could be developed. Ms. Amorose Groomes stated that she believes a septic system could serve this property. Mayor Peterson stated that the challenge is that the Community Plan specifies this as office use. Council is supportive of this type of land use, but desires that this be part of a larger rezoning. However, this applicant wants to rezone his property now. Ms. Amorose Groomes noted that the intent of the property owner is to develop a business on this site in the near term, according to the information provided. Mr. Keenan asked if there has been any effort by the property owner to assemble a larger rezoning. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City C, 'I BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON. OUIJO Held_ February 13, 2017 Page 10 of 18 Meeting Form 6101 Mr. Stang responded that he believes the applicant has reached out to several adjacent property owners, but at this time none are interested in pursuing a mass rezoning. Mr. Keenan asked if Council has options available. Ms. Readier responded that when Council reviews a rezoning application to a straight zoning district, the primary reference point is the Community Plan and the Area Plans. All of these plans recommend this type of zoning. The City cannot compel the property owner to file a planned district application, or to assemble land for a rezoning application. The actual development will require utilities and will be in compliance with the Dublin Zoning Code. Mayor Peterson invited the applicant or his representative to address Council. Akhil Patel, Ari Investments, 6516 Ballantrae Place, Dublin stated that his company owns the subject property. The company purchased this property, together with the adjacent house in May of 2016. He is an attorney who owns his own law firm. His intent with this property is to build a law office and perhaps a doctor's office as well. This parcel is rather small in terms of acreage, but it is feasible, based on his meetings with staff, an architect and a contractor. The property can accommodate a building and parking space, and can be served by a septic system. He does not believe there is anything in the Dublin Code that requires use of public utilities. The adjacent house purchased with this has an existing septic system. Most of the surrounding residential properties have septic systems. The electric service is available, and water can be obtained otherwise. His plan is for a small office building of 4 -5,000 square feet. He has not proposed a plan because of the cost investment should the rezoning not be approved. The application process and plan preparation is expensive. That is the only reason a plan has not been prepared. If rezoning were conditional upon having a plan, he would have obtained one. In terms of the suggestion of rezoning a larger number of properties at the same time, there is a diversity of ownership in terms of the residential properties. In his opinion, if nothing begins at a smaller scale, the area will remain the same as it now exists 25 years out. On both sides of this property are houses — one on Sawmill and one on Summit View. For the last five to ten years, the houses have been empty. The adjacent house he purchased was in poor condition. He does not believe the City of Dublin desires to have empty houses at the entrance to Dublin. The Sawmill house is empty and appears to have been so for quite some time. It makes sense to get things started. He is aware that some residents may be present tonight who attended the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting and who are not in support of this rezoning. Their concerns are legitimate in terms of increased traffic, etc. But at the same time, this property is 2.2 miles from a WalMart on one side and .5 miles from a Target. The property should be developed, as otherwise it is unsightly. The greenspace can be accommodated; on the Sawmill side there will be at least 60 feet of setback. On the Summit View side, at least 30 feet of setback is provided. There are established trees on the site and none would be removed. If this rezoning were to be approved, they would work with the City. In response to concerns about no further review by Council, citizens or PZC, the City permitting process is not an easy one. He offered to respond to questions. Ms. Alutto stated that he indicates he owns property with an existing house to the west, and that this house is vacant. Mr. Patel responded it is currently vacant, but he is remodeling the house. It is an extensive remodeling and will be a beautiful property. If this rezoning is approved, he may seek rezoning for the adjacent property, and may develop an office building in that location. Ms. Alutto stated that the question is why he would not rezone these two properties at the same time. Mr. Patel responded that he began to rehab the house because of the extensive time the rezoning process has taken. If he had been aware of the timeframe, he would likely have torn down the house and rezoned the properties together. Ms. Alutto asked about the timeline for improvements to the property being rezoned. Mr. Patel responded that he does not believe the utility issue is insurmountable, as this business would use less water and sewer than a home. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO Held Dublin CityS.muncil February 13, 2017 Page 11 of 18 Meeting Form 6101 Ms. Alutto asked if he has completed the renovations on the house next to this. Mr. Patel responded the renovations are nearly complete. Ms. Alutto asked if he plans to rent or sell the home. Mr. Patel responded he plans to sell it. However, it is still possible he will seek commercial rezoning for that property. Ms. Alutto stated that she is struggling with the proposed rezoning, and if the plan is to sell the property next door after the remodel, it is unlikely a new buyer will pursue rezoning. Ms. Amorose Groomes asked if the house on the property to the north is vacant. Mr. Patel responded he believes it is vacant. That lot is owned by a person who also owns property on Summit View. From its appearance, the house has been vacant for some period of time and is in need of painting. Mr. Reiner recalled that years ago, someone tried to combine the properties around that corner in keeping with the long -term plan of the City. Is there any interest by neighbors to do something on a larger scale, or is his entire focus on the properties he owns? Mr. Patel responded that there was no progress on combining the properties for development over the years. He did speak to a neighbor in the area who indicated that a number of people have tried to initiate such a proposal. He is not aware of the interest of neighbors in redevelopment. He is a real estate attorney and owns commercial property. He would be willing to pursue a larger development if others had interest. Mr. Reiner stated it is surprising, as it seems that packaging a group of properties for a rezoning would make sense. There are challenges in this small parcel and the City's expectations in the Community Plan for commercial development and the entryway to the City. Mr. Patel reiterated there is a diversity of ownership among all of these houses. Even if financially feasible, it is challenging to persuade individual property owners to do something collectively. He does believe this rezoning will spur things. The house to the north on Sawmill is vacant. He believes the property owner may be waiting for a developer to take action. However, a developer would not be able to develop a large group of properties without utilities. A single property owner could develop with a septic system. Mr. Reiner asked when this area is scheduled for utility extensions by the City. Mr. Stang responded that it is beyond 2021 — perhaps 2024 -2025 is the likely timeframe for utility extension to this far edge of Summit View. Ms. Amorose Groomes noted that the timeframe could change if certain criteria were met or if conditions changed, allowing them to advance this extension in the CIP funding process. Mr. Keenan asked about the cost of extending a sewer line from Riverside Drive to this location. Mr. McDaniel responded that he recalls it is substantial, based on estimates from a few years ago. Ms. Amorose Groomes stated that the decision for Council is deciding between the Community Plan recommendations for setbacks, gateways, etc. versus the rezoning of this property for immediate development. Ms. Readier stated that, fundamentally, in reviewing a rezoning proposal, Council's frame of reference is the Community Plan. Once a rezoning is approved to a straight rezoning district, there is no further review. There are Code requirements to meet, but there is no further review. Ms. Amorose Groomes stated that, essentially, Council would not be following the Community Plan and the Area Plan if this rezoning is approved. Ms. Readier responded that the rezoning is consistent with the Community Plan. The graphic representation is a Special Area Plan. Mr. Stang stated that the Area Plan is a series of recommendations — there is no guarantee that development would appear as the conceptual plan. This is just a RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO Feld February 13, 2017 Page 12 of rendering of how this could appear, based on what the Community and the Cit looking to see on this site. Meeting Form 6101 Mr. Peterson asked if Council requests any additional information prior to the second reading on February 27. Ms. Amorose Groomes requested information about the feasibility of curb cuts along Sawmill and Summit View. She requested graphic representations of setbacks, the buildable area, height restrictions and potential square footage of any structure that could be built on this parcel. Mayor Peterson summarized that the information desired is what a straight zoning would allow for all of these items. He thanked Mr. Patel for the information presented. Perhaps now is the time if there is momentum to regroup and work for something larger. Mr. Patel responded that he will speak with the neighbors as suggested. Mayor Peterson invited public testimony. Dr. Tara Haid, 8280 Bibury Lane, Dublin stated that several residents in her area, Wedgewood Glen, are opposed to this proposal. The public utilities are not the only issue. Sawmill Road is already congested. While there is a WalMart, Target and Kroger near this property to the north and south, what is immediately adjacent are homes — homes to the south and across Sawmill as well. There are condominiums across the street, between this road and the WalMart. There are also single - family homes between this intersection and Kroger, and more single - family homes are under construction near Emerald Fields and the high school. The desire of their community is for more single - family homes — not more congestion and not more commercial development. There is plenty of commercial development to the north and to the south. This rezoning will not benefit or increase the quality of the neighborhood. She speaks in opposition to this plan. She also believes this plan "puts the cart before the horse" based on all of the future plans mentioned tonight in this discussion. Mr. Reiner stated that because this proposal involves placing an office building on what is now a residential lot, he wants to understand how the curb cuts will work. He does not believe the setbacks are adequate to make this a workable plan -- either on Sawmill or on Summit View. Mayor Peterson added that Council would like more visualization of this plan. Mr. Stang responded that staff can provide a site plan, outlining all of the setback requirements, etc., based on the zoning district proposed. This information will be prepared for the next reading. There will be a second reading /public hearing at the February 27 Council meeting. Ordinance 13 -17 AmendH"ng Section 153.065(H) of the City of Dublin Codified Ordinances (Zoning Code) to Amend the Bridge Street District Sign Regulations. (Case 16- 107ADMC) Mr. Lecklider introduced the ordinance. Mr. Papsidero stated that a joint Council and Planning Commission work session was held mid -year in 2016 on this topic. • The proposal is to modify the Bridge Street District Code to require that pre- existing commercial uses in some specific subdistricts meet the sign requirements that were in place at the time of the adoption of the Bridge Street Code. • The Bridge Street sign provisions are pedestrian oriented, reinforcing a walkable environment. Since adoption of the Code, pre- existing auto - oriented businesses in many cases have benefitted from these newer standards. Because the Code itself was silent relative to this interim condition — that of outdated building forms not meeting the urban aspect of the Bridge Street District — they were able to take advantage of more signs and more diversity of signs on their properties. • The Bridge Street Code itself as drafted applies to these structures that conform to its form -based Code to create a more urban character. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO Held February 13, 2017 Page 13 of 18 Meeting Form 6101 • The bottom line is that it allows the creation of a great number of signs, although those are smaller than the Code as it stands in the rest of the City, but also allows a great diversity of sign types and combinations. • The City's sign code outside of the BSD is auto - oriented, allows for a small number of signs that happen to be larger — 80 square feet versus 50 square feet in Bridge Street -- but also allows no combination of sign type. • The proposal before Council is to revise the Code so that the Bridge Street sign standards only apply to new buildings that are constructed to meet the Bridge Street Code and its intent. Those earlier buildings would have to meet the City's standard sign code and it applies to very specific subdistricts within the Bridge Street District. • The proposal also allows for the retention of the Master Sign Plan option. • The proposal applies to the subdistricts on the map outlined in red dashed lines. Council originally requested that staff look into this in late 2015. Staff reported back to Council in November of 2015; there was detailed discussion at the joint Council /PZC workshop in May of 2016; staff submitted a memo to Council in October with a proposal; staff hosted an open house in late November, with notification to all the property owners and tenants within the District. There was low turnout at the meeting and very few questions at the office. Staff also notified the sign contractors. There has been very little interest in this Code change. In January, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of these Code changes to Council. Staff also recommends approval at the second reading. Mr. Lecklider asked if pre - Bridge Street District buildings are demolished to make way for new development on the site, would the new standards apply? Mr. Papsidero responded that is correct. Mr. Reiner stated that all of the others are grandfathered in as they exist, correct? Mr. Papsidero responded that is correct. These would be legally non - conforming signs. There will be a second reading /public hearing at the February 27 Council meeting. Ordinance 14 -17 Amend o ng the International Property Maintenance Code and Relocating the Nuisance and Health /Safety Related Sections of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Dublin to Section 153.076, Public Nuisance Regulations. (CASE 16- 036ADMC) Mr. Lecklider introduced the ordinance. Mr. Stang stated this primarily involves relocating various sections of Code to create a comprehensive list of health and safety regulations under the Zoning Code. He shared an overview of the Code sections affected by this amendment. • The majority of these sections are being relocated to Section 153.076 under the Zoning Code. The remainder are undergoing minor revisions to address errors or outdated information. • There is an addition of a subsection to the storage of residential waste and recycling containers Code provision. Subsection 2 that is being proposed outlines screening requirements that pertain to Historic Dublin specifically. This subsection allows for alternative materials as well as an approval process that is a Certificate of Zoning Plan Approval for that type of screening to ensure it adheres to the zoning requirements as well as the historic nature of many of those residential properties in the District. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval at their January 5 meeting. Staff is recommending approval at the second reading on February 27. Ms. Amorose Groomes noted that in the memo, the table of additions, insertions, changes is labeled as Code Section 153.231, but it should be Section 150.231. • She asked about the garages being part of the home occupation dwelling calculation. There may be some unintended consequences of this change. If a RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of DUblinsitv Council Meeting BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OH10 Held February 13, 2017 Page 14 of 18 Form 6101 portion of the home occupation space is in the garage, it will displace cars from storage, resulting in a home without a garage. This may occur in a neighborhood where homes were intended to have garages. She suggested that Council have discussion about the garage being home occupation space for reasons of the resulting displacement of cars. Secondly, she is not certain that a garage can be a habitable space without changing the exterior of the facility. To meet Code, there would be entry and egress requirements, insulation, heating and cooling issues. This may precipitate the need of change to the Appearance Code with respect to that structure. She is not in favor of changing the Code to include the attached garages in the space that would be used for a home occupation. Mr. Keenan asked if there is a permit required for a home occupation. Mr. Stang responded affirmatively. Mr. Keenan asked if statistics regarding home occupation permits that have been issued and their location can be provided to Council for the second reading. Mr. Stang responded that staff can provide information about home occupation permits issued for the past few months, the locations, and the potential uses of those. Mr. Keenan asked that information for a longer period of time would be more useful. Mr. Stang responded this can be provided to Council. Mr. Lecklider agreed with Ms. Amorose Groomes' concern about converting garages to home occupation use unless there is equal garage space created at the same time, assuming the other Code requirements can be met. If someone is converting an existing two -car garage, he would want to see two garage spaces added. Ms. Amorose Groomes stated that the proposed Code amendments do not require that. Mr. Keenan agreed, noting they would likely need a variance to add a garage. Mr. Lecklider stated that the reality is that a second garage may not be possible on a site. Mr. Keenan stated that language is needed so that a property owner who can add garage space is not precluded from using the existing garage space for a home occupation. Ms. Amorose Groomes stated that is a separate issue. The property owner would need to apply for a building permit, as they are adding a garage and converting the existing garage into dwelling space. It is no longer a garage conversion, but instead a home addition. She believes that homes are required to have two -car attached garages to avoid having cars on the driveway or on the street. She cited an example of Rose Hill [give in Reynoldsburg where many garages have been converted to home occupied space — another bedroom, etc. Now all of the cars are in the driveway or the street and there is no longer garage storage available. Mr. Lecklider stated he would prefer that this loophole be closed, if that can be accomplished with these amendments. There will be a second reading /public hearing at the February 2/ Council meeting. INTRODUCTION /PUBLIC HEARING /VOTE — RESOLUTIONS Resolution 10 -17 Authorizing the City Manager to Enter into an Agreement with Revi Ventures (fka TechColumbus). Mr. Lecklider introduced the resolution. Ms. Gilger stated that this represents a continuation of services provided by Rev1 that focuses on new technology, job creation and new company growth in exchange for the City providing $200,000 in matching funds for the Third Frontier grant program. The proposed agreement provides for the continuation of services provided by Rev1, which RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Duhlin City Council Meeting BARRETT BROTHERS- DAYTON, OHIO Held February 13, 2017 Page 15 of 18 Form 6101 includes coaching, mentoring and training provided at the Dublin Entrepreneurial Center. Two specific companies mentioned in Rev1's quarterly report are CropZilla and Updox. The City has supported this program since 2007 and has experienced a 30 to one return on investment, based on the funding that Dublin companies have received. She introduced Charles Hill, Director of Community Outreach at Rev1 and Tom Walker, President /CEO of Rev1. Mayor Peterson welcomed them to the meeting. Mr. Walker thanked Council for the ongoing City support of Rev1. They have helped Dublin companies raise approximately $2.3 million of investment in 2016, slightly over a 10 to one leverage. Overall, since 2007, when combining the revenue of companies they have helped support in Dublin and the capital they have attracted, it is over a 50 to one leverage. For 2016, he is most proud of the way that the City's Economic Development team and Rev1 work together to build some new support services for entrepreneurs. It is impressive to see the impact it is having on the DEC and the community. Mr. Hill stated he is excited about the outreach efforts in Dublin at Rev1 and working With Economic Development and all of the businesses at the DEC. They are also pleased with the inclusion numbers achieved at Rev1. They are now up to 32 percent with minority -owned or women -led companies. Ms. Amorose Groomes noted she viewed their website today, adding the organization is impressive and they have built an outstanding team. She found it very interesting to learn about all of the things they do. She asked Ms. Gilger if Council could have a list of all of the companies and people working at the Dublin Entrepreneurial Center. It would be very helpful. Ms. Gilger responded that staff can provide this. Their intern is currently compiling a report about the people and companies at the DEC, how long they have been at the DEC, their growth and business plans. This will be completed in about 45 days. Ms. Alutto suggested that a story or two about successful DEC graduates would be great, as well. Mr. McDaniel added that much of the return on investment from this goes to non -DEC companies as well. The report in the packet provides information about the funding that goes to other businesses in the community, as well as the DEC. Mayor Peterson thanked them and noted that the City appreciates this partnership. Vote on the Resolution: Ms. Alutto, yes; Mr. I,ecklider, yes; Mayor Peterson, yes; Ms. Amorose Groomes, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Vice Mayor Reiner, yes. STAFF COMMENTS Mr_ MrnaniP1 1. Acknowledged Kelly Riglno of Recreation Services who was recently inducted into the Dublin Coffman High School Athletic Hall of Fame. 2. Reported that Jeremiah Gracia has won the Development Counsellors International " "40 Under 40" award in Economic Development. This is the only award of its kind recognizing young talent in the economic development profession. 3. Thanked Ms. Crandall and Ms. Novak for the quick turnaround on the Council retreat report. If Council has any comments, questions or additions, please let staff know. He appreciates Council's time spent at the retreat. COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS Mr. Keenan, Administrative Committee Chair: 1. Noted that a tentative date of Wednesday, March 22 was proposed for an executive session for performance evaluations discussion. He asked that the Clerk send out that date and some alternative dates to Council for response on their availability. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON. OHIO Held_ DubWn City Council February 13, 2017 Page 16 of 18 Meeting Form 6101 2. Reported that board and commission candidate interviews are scheduled on Wednesday, March 8 for the Board of Zoning Appeals and the Personnel Board of Review. He asked that Council members ensure this date is on their calendar. 3. Noted that the four City representatives to the Bridge Park New Community Authority are up for reappointment in March. The current City appointees I -ynn Readey, Sheri Tackett, A.C. Strip and Rick Schwieterman are interested in reappointment and the Administration has indicated their support of the reappointments. He asked that Council give this some thought so that the appointments can be done in Mach. Ms. Alutto, Dublin Friendship Association reported that she and Ms. Richison are working on a report of responses to the recommendations given by the consultant. These responses will be distributed to Council. Mr. Reiner, Dublin Arts Council representative noted that the Emerging Student Artist Show is taking place at the DAC. This is a great opportunity to view some amazing talent. This will continue for two weeks. An exhibit of Barbara Eisenhardt, landscape painter will begin on February 28. He reminded everyone that Friday, May 5 is the annual Garden Party fundraiser for the DAC. It is held at OCLC from 6 -9:30 p.m. Ms. Amorose Groomes, Council liaison to Dublin Board of Education noted that she and Ms. Alutto met with the Board members and staff on February 8. They talked about future school facility needs and their location, land currently owned by the Schools and pending acquisitions. Dr. Hoadley was very reassuring and believes they have the necessary land for elementary schools 14, 15 and 16. They have a parcel in mind for middle school 5, and were continuing to pursue alternative high school solutions. He shared their enrollment numbers, which is again exceeding expectations this year. In terms of land acquisition, they felt comfortable with their current progress. Ms. Alutto, Council liaison to Dublin Board of Education noted that Dr. Hoadley is reaching out to various entities regarding partnerships to provide more real world experiences and hands -on projects that relate to academies. This was good information to hear as well. Mayor Peterson, Council liaison to Washington Township, noted that a meeting is being scheduled with Mr. McDaniel, Ms. Ott, Ms. King and himself. Mr. Lecklider, representative to the Northwest 33 Innovation Corridor group noted that Dublin hosted the meeting on Friday. • A number of updates were shared regarding fiber, Council of Governments, and a Transportation Research Center update on autonomous vehicle testing. • The Transportation Review Advisory Council has approved $7 million in funding toward Union County's request for the Post Road interchange project. • Some members of the Corridor group are organizing a trip to Amsterdam to learn about their Smart Mobility System. • With respect to the Cosgray intersection by the new Costco, his understanding from the Logan /Union /Champaign Regional Planning Commission is that the intersection design is 90 percent complete and construction of the roundabout, originally expected to be completed in 2017, is now likely to be delayed. Mr. McDaniel confirmed that staff indicates there is some delay in that project, which is likely to continue into the next construction season. • There was also a lot of discussion at the meeting regarding the Crossroads Area Plan and its implementation. COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE Ms. Amorose Groomes: 1. Noted she appreciates the information about proposed updates for the West Innovation District, Metro Blazer and Bridge Street District. Under the Bridge Street District section, it mentions the role of the Administrative Review Team being reduced and that staff wants to explore the mandatory referral of the Basic RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, 01410 Held Dublin City Council February 13, 2017 Page 17 of 18 Meeting Form 6101 Plan to Council as part of economic development agreements. She is interested in hearing more about what changes staff anticipates with that in respect to the Bridge Street District. Mr. Papsidero stated that this topic will be discussed at the joint Council /PZC work session in April. In terms of Bridge Street, staff is looking at steps to expedite the process, which may include removing the ART from some of the major approvals so that they go directly to the Planning Commission. 2. Thanked Ms. O'Callaghan for the traffic information about the roundabout at Riverside and 161. There is one movement in that traffic circle that is of most concern to her. The report states that the majority of incidents occur with the northbound traffic on Riverside Drive. Does staff know if those incidents occur at the entry point to the roundabout or closer to the exit point? In her opinion, the most troublesome movement in the roundabout is heading west on 161 where the northbound 33 traffic peels off with a division in the center of the road. There is an assumption that there is a continuous movement there. At what point in the traffic circle are the accidents occurring? Chief von Eckartsberg stated that staff will provide additional information in response to this question. Mayor Peterson added that he agrees — the cement triangle in that location gives the impression that this is a continuous turn lane. However, there is still the need to yield when merging into the roundabout. Ms. Amorose Groomes stated that the driver has the impression they are out of the roundabout at that point. A chart depicting where on the roundabout the accidents have occurred would be very helpful. Chief von Eckartsberg stated he is not certain the records are that precise, but he will work with Ms. O'Callaghan on providing this. 3. Congratulated Dublin Springs on their new outpatient facility. The ribbon cutting was held on January 26. It is a very nice facility and her understanding is the occupancy on the day of opening was 90 percent. A tremendous need in the community is being met with this outpatient facility. 4. Commented that she appreciated the Council members taking time for the Council retreat on February 2 and 3. 5. Reported that she and Ms. Alutto met with the Dublin Schools group on February 8, and it was a productive meeting. Ms. Alutto commented that Ms. Amorose Groomes had asked previously about the stark white cement along the underpass on Riverside Drive and if there were options to improve its appearance. She is interesting in hearing what options staff may have identified. Mr. Keenan: 1. Noted that at the retreat, he mentioned his interest in receiving information from staff regarding the proposed intracity transit system at an earlier date. However, in reading the various updates in the packet regarding the capital projects, the Planning activity, etc., he was reminded of the volume of work staff is engaged in at this time. He did not realize the number of projects already underway or in the planning stage at this time. Hats off to staff, and he apologizes for his reaction to the timeframe needed to provide information on an intracity transit system. 2. Commented that the northbound Riverside traffic movement to westbound Emerald Parkway is resulting in stacking well beyond Tuller Road. Mr. McDaniel responded that he mentioned this to staff today. There has been some tweaking of the signals during the week, and there is need to monitor this on the weekend, as well. Staff will report back. Vice Mayor Reiner offered condolences to a number of families who have recently experienced losses. Carolyn Bell, wife of long -time Rocks announcer George Bell, recently passed away. Other recent deaths include the brother of Terry Foegler, and the mother and brother of Barb Gerber. Ms. Alutto added that the Bell family lives next door, and George's son also passed away recently. Heartfelt sympathies to him during this difficult time. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council._ Meeting BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO Form 6101 Held February 13, 2017 Page 18 of 18 Mayor Peterson echoed tho entiments. ._._ AD7�lURNMENT Tl�e�neeting was a 'ou ned,�8:51 p.m. Mayor — Preingpfficer Clerk of Council