Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-25-17 Council MinutesRECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council - -. BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO Held CALL TO ORDER April 24, 2017 Meeting Form &101 Mayor Peterson called the Monday, April 24, 2017 Regular Meeting of Dublin City Council to order at 6:15 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, Mr. Lecklider and Ms. Salay. Staff members present were Mr. McDaniel, Ms. Crandall, Ms. Readier, Ms. Mumma, Ms. Goss, Mr. Foegler, Ms. O'Callaghan, Chief von Eckartsberg, Ms. Burness, Mr. Papsidero, Mr. Haines, Ms. Richison, Mr. Hammersmith, Ms. Rauch, Ms. Husak, Ms. Kennedy, Mr. Tyler, Ms. Miglietti, Mr. Sweder, Ms. Delgado, Ms. Nardecchia and Mr. Plouck. ADJOURNMENT TO EXECUTIVE SESSION Mayor Peterson moved to adjourn to executive session for the purpose of discussing the purchase of property for public purposes; conferences with an attorney for the public body concerning disputes involving the public body that are the subject of pending or imminent court action; and discussion of personnel matters related to the appointment of a public official. Vice Mayor Reiner seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mayor Peterson, yes; Ms. Alutto, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Ms. Amorose Groomes, yes; Vice Mayor Reiner, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes. The meeting was reconvened at 7:00 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Ms. Salay led the Pledge of Allegiance. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS/ PROCLAMATIONS • National Volunteer Week 2017 and Presidential Service Awards Mayor Peterson introduced Dublin Lowe's associates, Bob Harrington and Shawn Shepherd. In 2016, Dublin Lowe's selected the City of Dublin as a Lowe's Heroes service project site, and over a period of several weeks, a team of Lowes corporate volunteers completed many needed upgrades and repairs to the Historic Coffman Homestead. The historical facility is maintained by the City but operated by the Dublin Historical Society. The group's teamwork, camaraderie, skill set, material donations and genuine interest in learning about and preserving Dublin's history were impressive and appreciated. On behalf of the City of Dublin, a certifying agency of the White House Council's Presidential Volunteer Service Award, Mayor Peterson presented to Mr. Harrington and Mr. Shepherd The President's Volunteer Service Award and a proclamation proclaiming the week of April 23 -29, 2017 as National Volunteer Week in the City of Dublin. Shawn Shepherd, Human Resource Manager, Dublin Lowe's stated that for several years, Lowe's has provided the Lowe's Heroes volunteer program. Typically, service projects in this area have been within the City of Columbus. However, this year, Dublin Lowe's was pleased to be able to complete a project within this community, the Coffman House project. Hopefully, the community will enjoy the results. Tom Holton, President, Dublin Historical Society added that the teamwork and energy of the Lowe's team was impressive. Not only has the project made the Coffman House more weather tight than it has been in many years, but the team included additional improvements as needed. The Dublin Historical Society is very appreciative of their efforts. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO Dublin City Council Meeting Held April 24, 2017 Page 2 of 30 FrankHn County Metro Parks - Glacier Ridge — update from Tim Moloney, Executive Director Form 6101 Tim Moloney, Franklin County Metro Parks Executive Director stated that he and Bryan Knowles, Glacier Ridge Park Manager, are present to provide an update on a Glacier Ridge Metro Parks plan. The park, which is located on the northwest side of Dublin, has over 1,000 acres of trails, woodlands, open prairies and a large wetland. Approximately 350,000 persons visit the park annually. Now in its 16th year, it is appropriate to take a closer look at the park to ensure that it is serving the community and county to the greatest extent possible. Through conversations with Dublin City Council, the Metro Parks strategic planning group and other interested parties, they have formulated a master plan, which is being shared for the first time tonight. They are interested in hearing City Council's feedback. He proceeded with his presentation. The focus area is comprised of 500 acres, including the main entrance, parking, restrooms, user amenities, a disc golf course, playground and access to the trails and woodlands. Evaluation of park users' needs, interests, and current trends has resulted in the following proposed improvements to the central area: • Near the wind solar exhibit, create a challenge course area. • Add an outdoor exercise area -- an area in which to work on physical fitness, health and wellness. There is the potential for partnering with the City's Parks and Recreation Department to add programming to the site. Improvements to this area would be constructed to meet the Park's typical use, but perhaps the City could include a fitness class, provide instructions for use of a challenge, and perhaps include an event or two. • In the woodlands /prairie area, add trending opportunities for bike users, including a pump track, and in another section, some man -made obstacles. Currently, Franklin County bicycle enthusiasts are travelling to Chestnut Ridge in Fairfield County to access these types of opportunities. • In a separate area with both mulched trails and an open space, add a fenced in dog park that takes advantage of both. Potentially add a drone field, which is separate from the general population yet not in a sensitive wildlife area. Currently, flying drones in Metro Parks is prohibited. This is an opportunity to provide a user amenity within a densely populated area of northwest Franklin County. Metro Parks has sufficient capital funds this year to begin some of these improvements. With input from Dublin City Council and other interested parties, Metro Parks will begin to phase in the improvements over time and evaluate how they resonate with the community. He invited Council's feedback. Ms. Alutto expressed interest in the pump track idea, which is well situated to the existing Glacier Ridge trails. Adding man -made challenges to a bike park area is also very exciting. She believes the City's existing dog park is inadequate, she would appreciate a dog park at Glacier Ridge. She loves the proposed fitness and challenge area and appreciates the idea of adding programming in a small area of the park. Many park users love this park because of its quiet, reflective spaces surrounded by nature. A potential drone space is concerning; it would need to be well thought out, including the noise factor. Ms. Salay expressed concurrence with Ms. Alutto's comments, including the concern about including a drone -flying area. She visits the park because it is very quiet and likes to watch the birds, including some species that are not seen within the City. She believes drones would disturb and remove the sense of safety for the birds. Mr. Moloney agreed with the concerns about drones. However, the proposed drone area would be within the area of the wetlands that is not a birding area. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting BARRETT BROTHFRS - DAYTON. 0"10 Held April 24, 2017 Page 3 of 30 Mr. Lecklider echoed the comments of his colleagues; in particular, he supports the proposed dog park area. Form 6101 Vice Mayor Reiner stated that this proposal would add exciting components to a passive park for our residents. It would be exciting to have the exercise course, pump course and more natural dog park -- there is sufficient room to add these features. He would like to see an active family area added, including the opportunity for exercise and competition. He appreciates that the Metro Parks has always provided a high standard within its parks system. Mr'. Lecklider noted that Metro Parks currently has one of the nicest dog parks that he has observed. It is located in southeastern Franklin County and is comprised of several acres, providing a fantastic dog park. Mr. Moloney agreed that Walnut Woods is a great dog park. There is also a new dog park at Rocky Fork. It has been a learning process; they do want to move away from dog parks with simply a rectangular fence and 2.8 acres of mowed grass. Mayor Peterson thanked him for the update. The master plan is conceptual; what are the next steps? Mr. Moloney responded that they would proceed to more detailed drawings with some cost estimates, which will be followed by prioritization and allocation of resources. When Priority #1 has been identified, either a contract will be awarded or Metro Parks will complete the work. Their goal is complete the work as quickly as possible. He anticipates that Metro Parks will be able to have two of the components completed with 2017 budgeted dollars. Year 2018 is the last year of their current levy. Due to the fact that funds are typically more restricted that final year of a levy, and the fact that there is another opportunity under consideration, 2018 funds are already committed. At this point, they are interested in learning how the master plan is received. Phasing in the plan is anticipated. CITIZEN COMMENTS There were no comments from citizens regarding items not on the agenda. CONSENT AGENDA Mayor Peterson noted that Ordinance 24 -17, which addresses tobacco sales, is on the Consent Agenda for first reading tonight. The second reading /public hearing of that ordinance is scheduled on Council's May 8 regular meeting agenda, at which time, public comment will be taken. This is an item of particular interest to some Council members. He invited Council members' comments regarding this proposed schedule. Ms. Amorose- Groomes requested that public notice of this hearing be provided through the City's social media outlets, as she has been contacted by several members of the public who are interested in speaking on this item. Mayor Peterson moved approval of the seven items on the Consent Agenda. Vice Mayor Reiner seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Vice Mayor Reiner, yes; Mr. Keenan; Ms. Alutto, yes; Mayor Peterson, yes; Ms. Amorose Groomes, yes. • Approval of Minutes of Council meeting of April 10, 2017 • Ordinance 22 -17 (Introduction /first reading) Amending Ordinance 42 -16 Appendix A to Allow for the Collection of Temporary Membrane Structure Fire Inspection Fees and Amend the Fees for Commercial Plumbing Inspections. (Second reading /public hearing May B Council meeting) Ordinance 23 -17 (Introduction /first reading) Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Three Utility Easements granting American Electric Power Easements on Property Owned by the pity of Dublin along John Shields Parkway Just West of Village Parkway for John Shields Parkway —Phase 2. (Second reading /public hearing May 8 Council meeting) RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of L1ubli� City _.Cound_ BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO Held April 24, 2017 Page 4 of 30 Meeting Form 6101 • Ordinance 24 -17 (Introduction /first reading) Amending the Dublin Codified Ordinances to Prohibit the Sale or Other Distribution of Cigarettes, Other Tobacco Products, or Alternative Nicotine Products to Persons Under 21 Years Old. (Second reading /public hearing May 8 Council meeting) • Resolution 23 -17 (Introduction /public hearing /vote) Accepting the Lowest /Best Bid for the Avery/Brand Roundabout Project. • Resolution 24 -17 (Introduction /public hearing /vote) Accepting the Lowest and Best Bid for the 2017 Street Maintenance Program. • Resolution 25 -17 (Introduction /public hearing /vote) Accepting the Lowest /Best Bid for the Frantz/Bradenton Traffic Signal Upgrade. TABLED ITEMS SCHEDULED FOR HEARING • Basic Plan Review - Columbus Metropolitan Library, Dublin Branch (Case 17- 002ARB- BPR) Ms. Rauch presented an overview of the timeline for this project: - On January 10, 2017, the Columbus Metropolitan Library Dublin Branch and Garage previews were introduced to Council. Subsequently, a zoning application — basic plan submission - was made to staff and an informal review was conducted by the Architectural Review Board. - In February 2017, staff and the Administrative Review Team and design group reviews occurred. - On March 6, 2017, more detail was provided at City Council's work session. - On March 9, the Administrative Review Team conducted its review and provided recommendations. - Public comments on the proposed plans were taken at the March 13 and March 20 Council meetings. Basic Plan applications were tabled by City Council. - The Basic Plan reviews were rescheduled to the Council meeting of April 24. The overall review process: - Because these projects include a development agreement, an optional informal review by ARB was conducted. - Basic Plan review and approval by City Council, including approval of the waivers requested by the applicant and designation of the required reviewing body. - Final site plan with details was reviewed by the designated reviewing body. The current site proposal provides for a 45,560 square foot library in the northeast corner of the site, on the west side of North High Street, between North Street and future Rock Cress. A public plaza area would be located between the library and North Street, and a viewing garden would be located between the proposed library and the proposed parking garage. The ART recommended approval of the application with eight conditions and eight waivers. As the Site Plan details are developed, there could be additional waivers. At this point, ART recommends approval of the following eight waivers: 1. §153.060(C)(5)(a): Block Access Limitations— No vehicular access permitted on Principal Frontage Street (Rock Cress Parkway) required; Vehicular access provided at northwest corner for service area (requested). 2. §153.061(D)(2): Vehicular Access — No vehicular access permitted on Principal Frontage Street (Rock Cress Parkway) required; Vehicular access provided at northwest corner for service area (requested). RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO Held April 24, 2017 Page 5 of 30 Form 6101 3. §153.060(C)(2)(a): Maximum Block Size — Permitted Maximum Block Length: 300 feet. North Street: 379 feet (requested); Permitted Maximum Block Perimeter: 1,000 feet; 1,308 feet (requested). 4. §153.062(0)(11)(a): Loading Facility — Loading facilities are to be located to the rear of a principal structure (required); Loading area at the corner side facade along a Principal Frontage Street (requested). 5. §153.063(D)(4)(b): Building Height — Building height limited to 2.5 stories adjacent to the Historic Core District (required); 3 stories at the northeast corner of the building (requested). 6. §153.062(0)(11)(b): Story Height — Ground Story maximum is 24 feet (required): 28.5 feet at the northeast corner of the building (requested). 7. §153.062(0)(11)(a): Front Setback —15 feet required along N. High Street. Proposal: 5 feet is shown at the northwest corner of the building. 8. §153.062(0)(11)(d): Building Type - Street Facades: Number of Entrances Required — 1 per 75 feet of fagade for buildings. Rock Cress: 2, 1 provided; North High Street: 3, 1 provided; and North Street: 2, 1 provided. ART recommends approval of the following eight conditions: 1. That the applicant file a Demolition request, prior to the approval of the Site Plan; 2. That the applicant investigate the use of stone in lieu of brick on the lower portions of the building; 3. That the applicant continue to refine the architectural details and Building Type requirements, as part of the Site Plan; 4. That the applicant update the required parking information and submit a Parking Plan with the Site Plan; 5. That the open space, gateway, and terminal vista details be addressed with the Site Plan; 6. That the applicant provide the final details regarding landscaping, lighting, utilities, and stormwater with the Site Plan; and 7. That the design not require the construction of Darby Street between North Street and Rock Cress Parkway as reflected on the Street Network Map and for staff to update the Street Network Map accordingly. 8. The applicant and the City engage in a collaborative, committee -based process to define a transitional design element that is integrated within the Library's public space, which will be reviewed and approved by City Council with the Site Plan. Also requested is Council determination of the required reviewing body for future Development Plan Review and Site Plan Review applications (City Council, ARB or ART) Tim Frommeyer, President, Board of Trustees, Columbus Metropolitan Library, stated that he and his wife have been Dublin residents for 27 years. They have four children, who enjoy participating in Library programs. The Dublin Library and its staff are outstanding. The Library Board of Trustees and leadership have been excited about this project. The Columbus Metropolitan Library is in the second half of its program to fully renovate 10 of its 23 library branches. To support this program and vision, it was necessary to raise $135 million. This was accomplished by issuing financing notes and by soliciting funds from the public. Their program expanded the square footage, adds RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO Held— Dublin City Council Meeting Form 6101 April 24, 2017 Page 6 of 30 community space and meeting rooms, expanded computer and internet access and provided training programs for children, teens and adults. They have built these libraries considering today's demographics and how they will change in the future. The communities -- its leaders and customers -- have fully supported their united efforts. Their libraries and the library leadership have received local, national and international recognition and awards. Dublin is one of their signature projects. They recognize the passion of the Dublin community. This project is necessarily very complex. Their engagement and partnership with the City at each step has been very active and participative. The project is now at the point of moving forward so that certainty of timing, scope and cost can be established. Their request tonight is that City Council approve the Basic Plan. This library will be a civic highlight for Dublin residents today and in the future. Pat Losinski� CEO, Columbus Metropolitan L stated that Columbus Metropolitan, among all urban libraries in the nation, been designated the #1 Ubrary three times in a decade, and is the only urban library to receive five star rating for the first seven years in their trade publication, Library Journal. In 2010, they were the National Library of the Year, and in 2011, the Library received the national medal from the Institute for Museum and Library Service. That is an asset to the community, as they recognize the caliber of their library system, which is the result of the great support they have enjoyed for many years. This August, they were able to host the World Library Information Congress. The nine guiding principles of the Library have provided guidance throughout the design and master planning process, which began in 2008 and included representatives of Dublin. [Showed slide presentation of the proposed new Dublin Library branch.] Mr. Losi nski stated: • They have heard feedback that the new library is imposing from the northeast corner. They want to recognize the significant grade change and the importance of having an access point in the northeast corner, which will greet residents who come over from the pedestrian bridge. • In response to Council's request, the height of the building has been lowered three feet, and it is in line with the other buildings on the same side of High Street. • Also discussed was the possibility of transitioning from the originally proposed brick to a stone base material. • They have also been looking at transition materials for the sidewalk, particularly the plaza area. • A historical transition element will also be added. • Ten days ago, they were notified that the American Institute of Architects and the American Library Association had announced their seven award-winning libraries for 2017, one of which was the Columbus Metropolitan Whitehall branch. [Showed images of the seven award - winning libraries.] He noted that a renovation to the east side of the main library downtown has been completed — moving from three stories of concrete to three stories of glass. Libraries are moving from housing collections only to making important connections, and Columbus Metropolitan has the ability to do just that in Dublin. • Tonight is the Basic Plan review of the Library. Fund - raising conversations are beginning, and design completion is anticipated in the summer of 2017. They are actively seeking a temporary location for the library, which will be maintained during construction. If the Basic Plan were approved tonight, construction would begin in November 2017 with an opening of the new library in 2019. Construction would be coordinated with the joint effort for construction of the parking structure, which is a great example of two public entities partnering to accomplish much more than either could do alone to serve the community. • The City of Dublin seal displayed on Council Chambers wall states, "Where yesterday meets tomorrow." They believe their library represents tomorrow. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO Held Dublin City Council Meeting April 24, 2017 Page V of 30 Form 6101 A.J. Montero, NBBJ partner, highlighted a few specific features that have been discussed recently. • There have been some adjustments to the design. The design challenge has been moving from the existing library building on a larger site to a larger building on a smaller site. Libraries today are less about the assets, although books are still vital. Libraries are also about collaboration and team learning. This library will be both a place for books and a place for people. Moving from an introverted to an extroverted building was the goal. Libraries have always been ahead of the curve, not only in seeking knowledge but also in how that knowledge and interaction is contained. Early on, NBBJ tried to pair the Library's guiding principles and the City of Dublin's aspirations for the Library. Dublin has a revered east but also a compelling future. This library attempts to be a part of both. • They have heard feedback that the Library should seek to be more responsive to the context; that it should use materials that exist in close proximity. The changes made to the design recognize those important factors. The surroundings to this site have beauty, character, materiality and a landscape befitting this library, as well. It is impossible to mimic those elements in quaint, smaller buildings in this large facility, but they desired to appropriate some of those elements into this design. They are investigating all those elements in terms of materiality. A stone base will be in keeping with the character of the original design and they will work with the City to determine exactly what that stone masonry material might be. • There should be more understanding that the Library is a transition point, not a total break from old to new. The library is literally a transition point from the older neighborhoods and their materials. Through landscaping and the placement of the building, the Library will be the perfect launch point to the new development in the area. In fact, the Library is closer to some of the new development. The plaza area to the south of the Library would be the best area in which to incorporate an historical element, as a transition from north to south occurs in that plaza. • Add a signature historical transition element. They look forward to collaborating with the City in this attempt to establish a strong visual connection or transition between Dublin's historical identity and its dynamic future. That collaborative process would include Council, other members of City government and the public. The Mayor invited public testimony. Kris Hickey, 6872 Gullway Bay Drive, Dublin, OH 43017 shared her thoughts on the design of the new building. 1. Historic Dublin has deep meaning to her and her family. Her mother taught at Indian Run Elementary for more than 30 years. When she and her sister helped her in the classroom, they would be rewarded with a trip to Biddies. When Biddie's closed its doors for good, that was painful for her. Therefore, she can understand that members of the community are emotional about the changes occurring in Historic Dublin. Change is difficult, and the new design is different. However, she believes this design is the right direction for the community. 7. In the interest of full disclosure, she is an employee of the Whetstone branch of the Columbus Metropolitan Library, and previously assisted in the opening of the Whitehall branch — the second building built in the Library's 20 -20 vision plan. She witnessed first -hand how much the customers liked the modern look and ambitious design. Similarly, the design of the new Dublin branch provides a large building, full of natural light. The new Northside branch will open in June. She recommends that people visit one of Columbus Metropolitan Library new branches, preferably in the evenings, when the communities' families utilize these libraries — they are vibrant spaces. She had hoped that the design for the new Dublin branch would also have clean lines and plenty of natural light, and it is everything she had hoped it would be. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS .Minutes Of Dublin City Council Meeting BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO Feld April 24, 201Y Page 8 of 30 Form 6101 3. She moved back to Dublin eight years ago. Dublin's schools are the best, and the community offers many activities and a fantastic Recreation Center. The "Dublin Difference" means that our children receive the best start in life so that they can accomplish great things. The young mind strategy of Columbus Metropolitan Library states, "We create a foundation for a successful life." The Library's values match this community's values, and we need a library building that matches our vision. When her 12 -year old saw the library design, she responded, "That's a library? That's awesome!" Jerry Kosicki, 4313 Wyandotte Woods Drive, Dublin, OH 43016 stated: 1. Sometimes a relatively few loud voices create the impression that they speak for everyone. The manner in which the public debate regarding the Library has shaped is an example. When CML unveiled the design, there were grumblings on social media and Council received citizen emails and calls. 2. As he, Chris Cooper, Kris Aldemie and Andrew Graham watched this unfold, they realized that the other view on the Library issue was not being presented. They started a petition on Change.org for people who liked the proposed design. They wanted to challenge the false impression that the Dublin community as a whole was opposed to this contemporary library project. In just over four weeks, 506 people have signed the petition in favor of a contemporary library. That is 56% more than the critics of the project collected in 12 weeks. That suggests that a greater number of people support the library project. These expressed opinions of Dublin community members should serve as important data for Council's decision- making. They do fully understand that the decision is ultimately Council's, as the community's elected officials. 3. Council's considerations will include their longstanding Council goals and priorities; economic development needs of the City; the well -being and intellectual advancement of Dublin's citizens; the needs of the business community; the health of the City's continued partnership with CML. In addition to those considerations, he believes Council will also want to consider the fit of the project with the City's vision for the redevelopment of the Bridge Street District, including Bridge Park East and West and the pedestrian bridge. Those criteria support going forward with the Library project. The project is too important to the City and community to be decided on narrow criteria, such as personal aesthetic tastes and preference of a small number of individuals. 4. Rejecting this proposal may lead to a number of unintended, negative consequences for future development. He hopes Council will agree with many Dublin residents and approve this strategically significant Dublin library. The entire community will benefit for years to come. 5. As a long -time Dublin resident, over the years he has seen a transformation of a decrepit strip shopping center and the declining golf driving range into an exciting development at Bridge Park East. This positions the City well to remain an economic and intellectual powerhouse in the coming decades. As some consultants pointed out at Council's recent work session, the amount of high - quality development that has been accomplished so quickly is astonishing. That suggests that the City's forward - thinking and strategic planning efforts have been successful. The upcoming pedestrian bridge project will unite the areas east and west of the river and encourage the economic revitalization of the Old Dublin area, as well -- a very big priority for Council. Considerable private investment leveraged by substantial but relatively modest and affordable public investments have made this ambitious vision become reality. We all benefit from this. The buildings nearing completion on the west side of the river will fit perfectly with the proposed library design. He asks that Council support this strategically important library project. The positive benefits will be experienced by the residents well into the future. Andrew Graham, 5678 Duddingston Drive, Dublin, OH 43017 thanked the Columbus Metropolitan Library for their work. He realizes that they have devoted many resources to this project. Ile is in favor of this current library design. He believes in the preservation of Historic Dublin, but how that is achieved is the question. The images of the libraries shown in the presentation tonight show that the blending of modern and historical buildings can be done beautifully within the most beautiful capitols of Europe -- London, Paris and Madrid. He likes the design concept incorporating stonework. We live in the 21St century, and we need to build buildings that reflect that. The current library is woefully inadequate for the size of Dublin; it needs to be expanded. There is also a RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, (CHIC) . - •1A Dublin City Council incil Meeting April 24, 201Y Page 9 of 30 Form 6101 serious parking problem in Dublin that is only going to be exacerbated by the increased development. For that reason, he likes the idea that the library and the parking garage will be constructed simultaneously. He asks that Council approve this project. Linda Childs, 5382 Crossing Lane, Dublin, OH 43016: 1. Thanked Council for all their work. She moved here to be near family and because Dublin has zoning laws. Unlike other areas, in Dublin gas stations are not built next to an apartment building. When she moved here, she left a 115 -year old house, so she understands the difficulty in trying to determine how to update a lovely area of Dublin. She loves the current library in Dublin. It is easy to use and is in a beautiful setting. However, she understands that a new library is needed. 2. However, it seems that they are trying to build a convention center, not a library. Rock Cress Parkway is also a concern. The proposal seems to be for a library, a parking garage and another major road that are tightly coupled. Is it possible to build the library without Rock Cress Parkway? 3. The proposed road has received significant negative response, because it would extend through the Indian Runs Falls Park. Does the EPA permit the road to be constructed in that location? The school property with its existing two schools is in this location. Is it worth building a road, which would end at Franklin Street, unless all these other problems are resolved? Referring to her 115 -year old house analogy — changing one thing usually leads to a need to replace other things. She does not have as much concern with the large library or even the garage, which could have an attractive fagade, as she does with Rock Cress Parkway. The City will be spending a significant amount of tax revenue for this road, which may end at Franklin Street forever. As she suggested to Ms. Groomes in an email, without Rock Cress Parkway, a better transition for the project is possible. 4. In summary, she moved to this community because of its zoning laws. With this proposed project, she sees many exceptions being made, and many other issues created. She requests that Council closely evaluate the requested exemptions. She would prefer that the Library be required to meet Code requirements, even if it means the project has to be tweaked. Kris Aldemie, 4337 Oak Wood Court, Dublin, OH 43016, stated that she has lived in many old cities throughout the world, including Istanbul, Paris and Milan. She has observed new buildings added where there are old buildings in a complementary manner and blend well. She appreciates that Dublin is using NBBJ, a local company that is first class and world known. She appreciates that this project will anchor the east and the west in Dublin and complement the old and the new. In 2002, she observed the work done by NBBJ in renovating the Beijing Hotel, which is an historical hotel. She has full faith that NBBJ will do a fantastic job in Dublin, providing the same high caliber of work. Nancy St. Clair, 6164 Karrer Place, Dublin, OH 43017 stated she takes the opposite position on this issue. She and her family have lived on Karrer Place for 32 years. They love being adjacent to the Historic District and the fact that the library is a short walk from their home. They use the library often. Initially, she was very excited to hear that Dublin would have a new library building, but then was ver=y surprised to see the rendering of that building and its radical departure from everything occurring in the Historic District. She has seen many changes over 32 years and believes Dublin has done a great job with redevelopment. A perfect example are the buildings along Bridge and High Street. She knows those buildings have only been there a few years, but visitors think that they have been there for many years and have been well maintained. That is a success story. It shows that new construction can respect what is around it, and that is what has given the Historic District a sense of unity and harmony that is special and should be preserved. She has no issues with contemporary design. That design would be wonderful on the other side of the river. However, she does believe that if the proposed building is built in the Historic District, it will be a jarring and discordant presence. She understands that the easiest path is to just approve this and move on, so that the schedules can be maintained. Before she came tonight, she looked at a City of Dublin document, "The Historic Dublin Design Guidelines." Those guidelines state under the heading of new construction that "the successful design of new buildings take RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of D► blin Clty Cr), incll Meeting BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO Held April 24, 2017 Page 10 of 30 important queues from what exists around them. The most appropriate designs for a new building make an effort to fit in visually, and new construction must be compatible with the existing historic setting." This building does not meet those criteria. So her question to Council is, why do those guidelines not apply to this project? Form 6101 Amy Kramb, 7511 Riverside Drive, Dublin, OH 43016 stated: 1. Although Columbus Metropolitan Library has worked with City staff for years on this design, it was only recently brought to the public view. She is very disappointed in the applicant's lack of interest in the local Dublin citizens' views. This application has been tabled twice over the last month under the guise of considering Dublin citizens' comments. Although time has been allowed for comments, those comments have not been addressed. 2. The exterior of the building before Council tonight is exactly the same as that presented in January. It makes little difference if the brick is changed to stone in one or two locations, when the overall design does not meet Dublin's existing Code. The applicant has disregarded the public's comments and City Code, but City Council should not. 3. City Council is elected to be the voice for all of its citizens and to protect the voters' interests and the taxpayers' money. City Council has a duty to uphold the City's standards and values in the Code. That is why Council should deny all the waivers that are being sought tonight by the applicant, and at a minimum, require the applicant to meet the Code without the waivers. If that requires the applicant to make tweaks to the design or delays their schedule, so be it. Council needs to stand strong, abide by the Code and deny these waivers. The application before Council tonight does not meet Code, as evidenced by the numerous waivers requested, and Planning staff has indicated more waiver requests may follow. Council, staff and citizen volunteers have spent years developing the Bridge Street Code. That Code was created to ensure high standards and that growth and new development would be compatible with existing Dublin. This Code was set as the minimum requirement to which applicants are held. Often, Council and its boards and commissions have required applicants to go beyond what the Code requires. 4. Tonight, the applicant requests waivers for block length and perimeter, for ground story height, building stories, setback and more. The Planning report minimizes the significance of the ground story height and the building story waivers by suggesting that it is only the portion of the building on the northeast corner. The northeast corner is the most prominent portion of the building. It is what is viewed as a driver travels south on Dublin Road and entering the Historic District. It is the first thing that is seen, and at street level, it will be the highest point that pedestrians will pass — a very tall facade is not pedestrian friendly. This is a very important requirement of the Bridge Street Code. When the highest point of this building is next to the Grounds of Remembrance and the pedestrian environment — that requirement should not be minimalized. 5. The applicant has made it clear that they do not want to redesign this building, so they need these waivers. However, the Code has review criteria for granting these waivers, and the applicant fails to meet the review criteria. These waivers are not being sought because of unique conditions or circumstances beyond their control. It is because they do not want to re- design it. Four or five of the waiver requests completely fail. It is unbelievable that the City would consider requesting waivers of its Code for its own garage. The City is paying for this garage, is responsible for designing it, and yet asking to not follow its own Code — that sets an extremely bad precedent. The Bridge Street Code is still new and the City should not be making all these exceptions and granting all these waivers. At a minimum, the applicant should be held to the existing Code, which the plan before Council tonight fails. Considering the level of public interest in this project and the controversy surrounding the applicant, regardless of your position, these requests should not be taken lightly. She requests that Council deny all the waivers. Tony Gugliemotto, 5693 Lismore Court, Dublin, OH 43017 stated that he has been a resident of Dublin for 21 years. His family has used the library thousands of times. When Dublin's historic buildings were built, someone was forward thinking. With regard to this library, it will be a beautiful juxtaposition to the historic part of the town. In other cities, it is a delight to the eye to see what was and then, what is. He asks that Council RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO Dublin City Council Held April 24, 2017 Page 11 of 30 consider approving a project that will be worthy of being a historic marker 100 years from now, as are the existing historical buildings. Meeting Form 6101 Claire Wolfe, 5521 Indian Hill Road, Dublin, OH 43017 stated that she has been a Dublin resident for 44 years, moving here when Dublin was a village. There have been innumerable changes in the last 44 years. Dublin is no longer a village. They have liked some of the changes and not others. However, she believes the new library design is wonderful. It provides an excellent transition. The south part of Historic Dublin is beautiful; the north part is not. The library transitions to the new architecture on the east side. She likes the design as presented. Linda Rudy, 129 S. Riverview Street, Dublin, OH 43017 stated: 1. The proposed library is a beautiful building. The problem is the size and character of the two structures on the current library site. It has been said many times that modern and historical structures can co- exist, but in what manner? Instead of honoring the surrounding area and its charm, this design imposes in a way that detracts from the environment. The stated architectural intent of dominating the Historic District is explicitly arrogant and wrong for the District. By contrast, the existing library, although an updated library is needed, has been a part of the District and a very good neighbor. "Tomorrow" needs to be across the river. There has been an attempt to talk about transition, but there is no room for any real transition between old and something so modern. 2. There are ways to address the District's parking issues without a parking garage. As a resident, she has noticed that any time of day or evening, there are plenty of parking spaces available, if some sort of cooperation were forged. At any rate, the garage need not be so large, tall or modern. She and her husband recently saw some great examples in Yorktown, Virginia — a community concerned about historic preservation -- and they can furnish pictures upon request. 3. The Columbus Metropolitan Library's need for more space is falsely conflated by all its proponents with the contextually jarring design and institutional scope creep that is proposed. An architecturally interesting, but not imposing, CML 2 design could easily arise from a competitive process with public input or voting. There are ways to have an iconic building that is a work of art itself, while still honoring, or even celebrating the District's history and character. This could be done by mimicking scale and roof lines that exist in the District, even while employing more modern materials, like glass and metal and combining with stone, brick etc. in creative ways. 4. Many people would like to see the library remain where it is. If so, the site is simply not conducive to being a large community center with a cafe and lots of gathering and entertainment options in a walkable district that already has an array of coffee shops and restaurants. The library should complement that, rather than compete with them. The new style of libraries that the architect has described in these meetings may have a greater need to be all things in order to attract foot traff=ic, because libraries often are not situated in a district such as Dublin's that already offers those amenities. CML is evincing a mis -use of recently approved tax levy Bands by expanding the library's scope to include civic center functions — a classic case of "scope creep." The money should go to the facility — not to a palace, staff, salaries and actual materials. 5. The Bridge Street Corridor is a large canvas with other choice locations for a new community center, even one that enhances rather than detracts from its surroundings by drawing attention to itself. Perhaps that was the goal of being iconic. Some of these other sites would be quite walkable to the Historic District. Earlier plans for the Bridge Street corridor showed a civic center just across the river, which would have provided access and drawn the public to the river bank, and could have been quite accessible to the Historic District via the pedestrian bridge. 6. The Columbus Metropolitan Library must obey the laws as they stand, not as they or Council desire them to be. For decades, every other business and property owner has been made to submit to the existing guidelines, down to choosing color from are historic palette. Once the Historic District is fundamentally transformed, we can never get it back. The Dublin Historic District has been a labor of love that the public wants to see preserved. This is not simply about a library, but its impact on everything else around it. We can continue the infill development of the Historic District in a positive way with appropriate, sensitive designs for both the Garage and the Library. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO Held_ Dublin City Council Meeting Form 6101 April 24, 2017 Page 12 of 30 7. City Council might have an easier time if it pursued true, informed public input before advancing too far with projects like these. She has to believe that such input has not been pursued in a real way, when she witnesses the incredulity people feel with putting this design right in the Historic District. A different site, a different vision, perhaps a different architectural firm that a different signature style could have been more conducive to the type of legacy a body of true elected public officials would wish to leave, not to mention fewer delays, less money wasted and better publicity. Scott Haring, 3280 LilyMar Court, Dublin, OH 43017, stated that his residence is off of Martin Road, which is a very walkable location to the Library. 1. He is so glad to hear some of his comments stated by others tonight, including, the question of why we have laws? In 20 years, he has attended many Planning and Zoning Commission (PZC) meetings and Council meetings on all sorts of developments and projects. He has seen many people interrogated and sent back to the drawing board multiple times. There was the grocery store example, where there was an argument over the color of the panels on the gasoline pump. In very broad view, this site has an existing library and that is an approved use. 2. It is great that a new library is proposed, but he is concerned to hear about the eight waivers requested. There have been some genuine concerns on other projects in the past, which are typically related to geography or hardships. However, he doesn't see any hardships in this case and the exemptions should be denied. One of the slides shown indicated "proposed" 41,000 square feet." Perhaps it is not possible to accommodate a 41,000 square foot building on this site. He believes the appropriate answer is to say "no" to all these waivers, not for this building on this site. 3. The design is not appealing to him at any location. However, he did attend a meeting several weeks ago, where approximately 15 people spoke and said that they did not object to the design, but not in this location. That was the consensus view. At that meeting, there was a lot of discussion about this landing point and being close to the bridge. There might be another site that is available in the future at the end of the existing bridge and on the circle — the old Wendy's parcel, which the City purchased to help facilitate construction of the traffic circle. Others have also suggested putting the library on the other side of the river. Perhaps a funky design like this library on two acres with a graded hill and some parking decks is possible. However, the project proposed for this site does not match the spirit of Dublin's zoning laws. Significant waivers, as those requested, seem unnecessary. Reference is made to a transition occurring, but three trees, a little monument and a change of pavers serving as a transition from historic to this is insufficient. Garrick Daft, 21 Indian Run Drive, Dublin, OH 43017, stated: 1. He would likely be the most impacted by this new library design, given his property's location. He does not have objections to the design. It is cool, but not iconic, and it is in the wrong place. It should be on the east side of the river. There is plenty of land on the Other side. This site is likely one of the most valuable pieces of land in Old Dublin, and Council is considering using it for a massive library and massive parking space. It doesn't make sense to him why Council would do that, especially since it will require all these variances. Moreover, it doesn't look right on this site. 2. His concerns, should Council decide to go forward with this is, are with what kind of lighting will be used, and what kind of shielding will be provided for the ravine and the animals in the ravine, and for his property? The current library creates little intrusion with its lights. He would request that some type of barrier be provided; the design looks very reflective to him. 3. He is disappointed with the new condominium development. He was assured at the ARB review meeting, where the developer requested another floor, that the floor would match the level because of the way in which the elevation changes. However, now, the top floor of that penthouse is looking directly into his windows. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin Citv Council Meeting BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO Form 6101 Held April 24, 2017 Page 13 of 30 4. He believes it would be foolish to proceed with the proposed building on this site, because it is a very valuable location. They could have an even bigger library across the river and could be made even more iconic. CML is trying to limit the new building to the small area that they have in this location. It doesn't make sense, and the four -story parking garage does not make sense in this location. 5. However, if Council does permit this to move forward, he does not believe they should grant so many variances. He also requests that they be respectful to the existing neighbors by providing lighting barrier and by providing more notifications to the neighbors. He just found about this meeting tonight. 6. In summary, the proposed building does not belong on this site, and he believes Council knows that, as well. In this area with little shops where people like to go to dine and meet — it does not make sense to put a massive library in the middle of it. Michelle Cramer, President and CEO, Cramer & Associates, 555 Metro Place N., Dublin OH 43017, stated that Cramer & Associates is a fundraising consulting firm. They have been working with nonprofit organizations around the country. She believes that the opportunity to bring this iconic, world -class library to this community is unheard of. She has worked with the Des Moines Public Library and other libraries, and very rarely does a library system hand a community an iconic library such as this one. Typically, the library system asks for a public - private partnership. It is very rare that it is already 1000/0 funded. In addition, as president of the Board of the Dublin Foundation, she wants to express the Foundation's full support of the incredible opportunity for the education of our children. Should the proposed library move forward, they would like to partner with the library system. Mr. hosinski is one of the top three, most respected non - profit leaders in the region, and his, and his staff's accomplishments are remarkable. Dublin is fortunate to have this opportunity. She urged Council to approve the project. Dave Kirkley, 6025 Holywell Drive, Dublin, OH stated that he is not a fan of the proposed design. He has heard suggestions to move it to a different location. Because of the existing level of traffic in Old Dublin, that would be a good idea. Everyone agrees that a new library is needed, and very grateful that CML is willing to build it. The issue is the design, which he also believes does not fit in Old Dublin. Council questions: Mr. Lecklider: 1. Inquired if the proposed library height is 40 feet to the east on High Street. Ms. Rauch responded that the height is 42.5 feet. Mr. Lecklider inquired if, due to the change in grade, the height at the west is 30 feet. Ms. Rauch responded affirmatively. Mr. Lecklider inquired the height of the Rri -1 li buildings at the northwest corner of Bridge and High. Ms. Rauch responded that she does not know the height of those buildings. The applicant provided an appropriately scaled graphic, which Mr. Losinsky had shared. It indicated that the height range is similar to the proposed library building. Mr. Lecklider inquired if the typical peak height in the City's subdivisions is 35 feet. Mr. Rauch responded affirmatively. Mr. Lecklider noted that he was attempting to add perspective. Ms. Rauch responded that Bridge Street is different, as well, due to rearranged floors and stories. In an urban environment, the appropriate ratio is considered, so it is somewhat different. 2. In regard to waivers, he does not recall another Bridge Street project that was approved without waivers. Ms. Rauch responded that there are some projects that have had a significant number of waivers. The purpose of waivers is to be flexible where there is opportunity to be flexible. Mr. Lecklider noted that he recalls that Council contemplated the anticipated waivers with adopting the Bridge Street Code, However, Council is not obligated to approve the requested waivers. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of D-uh1in i inril Meeting BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO Held. April 24, 2017 Page 14 of 30 Form 6101 Ms. Amorose Groomes: 1. Stated that the design is a skillfully done example of contemporary architecture. She does not question that. The question is whether this building's architecture is appropriate for this site. The Bridge Street District Vision Statement states that the history of our community has been to preserve and build upon the adjacent historic core. Based on the Code that governs this site, this project is not appropriate. This is the wrong building on the wrong site. The Code changes that occurred nearly four years ago require this body to serve essentially as the ARB. Therefore, she will make her best effort tonight to be a good steward of the rules that govern ARB decisions. She has with her tonight the Bridge Street District Zoning Code. It is a lengthy document that contains a tremendous number of details. It is what has been used to forge the District. 2. Building height - The most egregious item about this building is the 12.5 -foot plinth on which it is perched; the entire north edge of the building is raised 12.5 feet above the sidewalk. The public meeting rooms along Rock Cress and North High Street are nearly windowless, with a few random punch -outs. There is an outdoor space adjacent to the kids' area that is also raised 12 feet -6 inches above the sidewalk. All this represents a design approach of an object on a podium, which is the antithesis of the overall intent of the Bridge Street District — not just the Code, but the vision and the intent of the entire District. There are countless references in the Bridge Street District documents requiring projects to be pedestrian- focused, engaged with the street, maximized transparency, etc. -- all of which apply, regardless of what Bridge Street District subarea the project lies in. This project does not do any of that. It completely inactivates the streetscape. In addition to the first floor of the Library having a 12 -foot- 6 -inch floor height, the top level is 14 feet. A typical office building would have a 14 -15 feet floor -to -floor height. Additionally, in the renderings, there is no evidence of a parapet. She indicates those facts because she believes this building is going to become significantly taller as the project progresses. She anticipates approximately 6 -1.0 feet will be added to the overall height of the Library by the time the details evolve. 3. Maximum block size — The proposed block size is larger in both directions. What is permitted is 300,000 square feet; what they propose is 495,732 square feet. The City is trying to create a pedestrian- oriented block. There have been extensive studies done on what a walkable block is and the appropriate block size. The City has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to hire consultants to tell what those numbers are and we included those numbers in the Code. The proposed block is 300% larger than what is permitted by this Code in Section 153.060(C)(2)(a). 4. Principal frontage streets -Code Section 153.060(C)(4) addresses principal frontage streets. One of the requirements is for continuous pedestrian - oriented block faces on the front of the building and toward the public space, 5. Block access configuration — Code Section §153.060(C)(5)(a), and having multiple principal frontage streets. This building has two principal frontage streets — on High Street and Rock Cress. The Code details how those streets should be constructed and the ways in which the pedestrian is engaged with those. Waivers have been proposed for the distance between door accesses and a number of other things, all of which significantly impact the pedestrian experience. 6. Code Section §153.062(D)(3) addresses roof types and in section (b), eaves are encouraged on street - facing facades. In (c) and (d), walls that interrupt the eave are only permitted on one -half of the vertical wall. §153.060(G) indicates that, "Facades shall he designed to follow the story of the building with fenestration organized along and occupying each floor. door to floor heights are set to limit areas of the facade without fenestration." On the Rock Cress and North Street facades, this wilding has very little fenestration. 7. Code Section §153.062(H)(b) states specifically, "highly reflective glass is prohibited'. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of r) bl i n -City Courla BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO Held April 24, 2017 Page 15 of 30 Meeting Form 6101 8. Council was not provided any sign packages, vent penetrations, or many of the details that she suspects will require more variances. The documents provided reference only to the District's newest buildings; they do not reference any of the historical buildings. The two buildings that are namely referenced in this document are the Bridge & High II project, where Mezzo is located, and the condominium building that is under construction. If Council allows this pattern of only referencing our newest buildings without having any historical reference to the older buildings, we will get further and further away from the historic core that the City values. 9. Council needs to enforce the ARB's historic guidelines. Council needs to enforce all of the guidelines with which every other applicant that has come before any City review body has been required to comply. This project should not be handled any differently. 10. She has heard the comment that this project is 100% funded. However, this is a private- public partnership. The City is subsiding each of their 200 parking spaces, $8,000 to $13,000 per space. The City has a lot of investment in this, and she believes the City deserves to have a voice. 11. There are not many constraints on this building site. There is a topography change, but there will be a topography change on every site that is developed in Historic Dublin. To make these early exceptions to this degree would certainly set a dangerous precedent moving forward. 12. References were made to the Louvre, etc., but the problem with this building is its size and scale. If the carousel glass pyramid that sits in front of the Louvre were 300/0 taller than the Louvre, she believes people would object. It is the reference to the Louvre itself that makes the pyramid palatable and interesting. This building will be /1(2 feet at its northeast corner -- 42 feet that is not buffered in any way for those travelling from the north. If the building were tiered down and made to come up to grade, it might be more palatable, but it is not, it comes directly out of the ground at 42 feet on the corner. That is not fitting into a District; that's being obtrusive to a District. 13. It is a lovely building, but she is saddened that the issue of this library has been made one of "all or nothing," because life isn't "all or nothing." i,ife is about compromise, teamwork, supporting one another, working together and a sense of community. This building doesn't bring a sense of community, or a sense of working together, of respect. It really ignores the process of how we got to this point. The library was before Council in early March and there was talk of "rolling up our sleeves" and working together. There was talk of listening to our community and engagement, but she has seen very little of that to this point. She does not want the choice to be all or nothing. This isn't about whether we want our kids to be able to have a library or not. This is about whether we are going to be respectful of one another, and whether we are going to hold everyone to the same standard. We need to treat everyone that wants to come into Dublin to do business equally. The playing field has to be level. We can't break the rules when we want to. She served on the Planning and Zoning Commission and is aware that City staff spent thousands of hours writing the Bridge Street Code. The Planning and Zoning Commissioners spent another thousand hours reviewing this Code. This body spent hundreds of hours reading through it and confirming that it was the vision desired for this part of our community. This will set a precedent for those who follow in terms of meeting Code. 14. She does not believe that this building cannot be contemporary. There is nothing in the Code that precludes contemporary architecture. Similarly, she does not buy into the idea that creative thought only happens in a contemporary building. Creative thought happens when minds feel free and when they are in a comfortable setting. That comfortable setting is different for different people. The City has some contemporary buildings. Most of the buildings that have been constructed in this community recently have been very contemporary. This body and this community are not opposed to contemporary architecture. It doesn't matter what style of architecture they build, but the City has zoning regulations, and it has those for a reason. Many who testified tonight RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin ('itC-nuncil Meeting BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO Held April 24, 2017 Page 16 of 30 Form 6101 shared that they have lived in Dublin for many years, and the reason they have lived in Dublin, she assumes, is because the built environment is lovely -- that has resulted in a tremendous financial resource, which, in turn, provides the public with great services. That is what the Code has done for the City, and she sees no justification for turning our back on that at this time. Ms. AI utto stated: 1. She agrees that a contemporary solution is possible, if that is for the greater good. 2. Part of the reason the Library wants to stay on this site is that if it moves, it: no longer owns the land, nor does the City own it. It then reverts to the Dublin Schools. It would be financially challenging for the Library to find another location. This Council agrees that the preference would be to build this building in another location, but from a financial perspective, that is challenging for the Library to do. 3. She, too, has an issue with so many Code waivers requested. As she has stated before, it presents a challenge when a body begins to manage by exception. 4. She has an issue with the process. The Library, the Schools and Cite worked a long time to create something that all can live with. It is unfortunate to have such consternation over a design, but that could have been avoided if the process had permitted an earlier and longer engagement with the public. The design was presented after little public involvement. She does not see that there has been much "rolling up our sleeves and working together." A new library is needed, and she does not object to that occurring on the current site. She believes it is possible to come up with a contemporary design that would be much more acceptable to people. Because it did not occur at the beginning of the process, she has little confidence in the honesty of its relationship with the public as the process moves forward. Previously, the City has developed many projects that involved public input opportunities and charrettes. Council was told that was not wanted in this ease because of the desire to move forward on the project. However, this is a public space and a public building; so the public should be involved. It is a benefit to learn of the public's different opinions, and within that process, it is possible to find a solution that works best for everyone. The difficulty in this case is a result of that collaboration not occurring on the design. Although it was lengthy, appropriate collaboration did occur on the development agreement, and the result was excellent. However, a struggle exists now, due to the lack of collaboration on the rest of the project. Council does not take the public's opinion lightly. Although it is not possible to please everyone in the public sphere, she would have preferred to have greater public satisfaction with this project. This project has brought more angst and negative public feedback than any other she has experienced. She continues to have a struggle with the proposal. In summary, her issue has been primarily with the lack of appropriate public process in the design. Mr. Keenan: 1. Stated that the initial process with Council began years ago at a goal setting retreat, which a CML representative attended. This current site is not what Council initially desired, and the City explored a number of other sites — across the river, across from the Recreation Center, and sites that might be close to Dublin Coffman High School. However, the Library wanted to be on this site and part of the area that was developing rapidly -- a part of that synergy and dynamic activity. 2. He prefers not to wait until 2025 to build a library. Elected officials have the duty to look after the healthy, safety and welfare of our citizens — that is the body's primary charge. The Llibrary contributes to the general welfare of our citizens. We are divided over an exterior appearance. He hopes that Council does not lose sight of the most important function of the Library, which is to promote the general welfare of the community, including education, and serve as a gathering space and resource to the community. Mayor Peterson: Stated that he has questions about the recommended conditions. 1. "That the applicant investigate the use of stone in lieu of brick on the lower portions of the building." Is the City asking them to investigate it or to incorporate it? RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin Citv co, � cil Meeting BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO Held April 24, 2017 Page 17 of 30 Form 6101 Nis. Rauch responded that it is Council's discretion to make that a more solid condition. The Library has indicated it is considering various options. Mayor Peterson stated that he defers to experts who believe that the use of stone could change that dynamic. ids. Rauch responded that, without samples of the materials on hand, the intent was to have the Library provide those for the final detail review. Ms. Readier clarified that there is another level of review to be conducted by the body that Council designates. That body will have the opportunity to approve the final selection. 2. A signature transitional element. An ad hoc committee will be tasked with identifying a recommendation. What occurs if the ad hoc committee cannot identify a recommendation or if CML does not want to include the recommended element? Is the condition considered satisfied, or does the condition require that the element must be included for the condition to be satisfied? Ms. Rauch responded, as the condition is written, that recommendation must be brought to Council for formal approval. Mayor Peterson inquired if there would be another approval process for this. Ms. Rauch responded affirmatively. Mayor Peterson inquired if the brick is not replaced with stone or the transitional element is not incorporated into the final design, does the final reviewing body have authority to vote to disapprove the project because of the absence of those two items? Ms. Rauch responded affirmatively. Ms. Amorose Groomes inquired what impact would a "no" vote have at that point. Ms. Readier responded, that depending on which reviewing body is designated by Council, the final development and final site plan applications must be approved by that body before any construction could begin. Mr. Peterson inquired what results if that approval does not occur. Ms. Readier responded that the project would not move forward. Ms. Amorose Groomes stated that there is criteria that determines what is reviewed at each level of review. Ms. Readier responded that there is criteria for each application. A criterion for each — the development plan and site plan applications — is that they comply with the Basic Plan. Therefore, if Council puts a condition in the Basic Plan approval with which they do not comply, that is a reason for disapproval. Nis. Amorose Groomes stated that this design could proceed further and still be disapproved. [As. Readier stated that the purpose of the Basic Plan is review the concept. This one is unusual because it is a more developed plan than what is typically seen in the Basic Plan review stage. Compliance with the conditions is required, but the plan is also more advanced with the other elements. Mayor Peterson: 1. Stated that the conditions therefore need to be substantive and have "teeth," and the final reviewing body needs to be able to say those have not worked and disapprove the plan. He commented that he has wavered back and forth on this plan significantly. He has a tremendous amount of respect for the people who serve and who have served on this Council previous to him and the staff work that has gone into this plan. However, as a member of Council, he now must make a decision. He takes this charge seriously. He must do what he believes is best for the residents. Sometimes, the decisions relate to economic development agreeements, road closures, or dealing with the federal government. Whatever it is, his single focus is to do what is best for all the residents, [lot just those in a particular area. He has to consider all the information Council receives. Council does not know how much information the people signing the petitions have been given. He respects their position; it is valuable feedback, but they may not be totally informed. There are probably some who are not aware of the value of this land. The RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of bbl' CCnancil Meeting BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO Form 6101 Held— April 24, 2017 Page 18 of 30 current Library site is worth several million dollars. If the Library goes to another site, they must start over with acquisition of land, which is costly. 2. Council must choose from the options in front of them. With respect to the new Library project, everyone agrees that it is a wonderful asset that will benefit our community. The question is what issues stand between us and getting the project done. There is no solution that the entire community will support, so Council must pick from the options provided to us. It is an important project, and we need to minimize as many of the controversies as possible. 3. Council does value Historic Dublin. There is a tremendous City commitment to the Historic District as a whole, to preserving everything possible. The Historic core is our identity and we must remember that. 4. Council also has to look at the bigger picture, and this is a piece of a much bigger puzzle. If this project fails, he cannot predict the impact that may have on so many other important aspects of this community. The traffic and parking issues for the District do need to be addressed. This project meets some of those needs of the Bridge Street Disitrict and the changing demographics. Voting "no" on this application due to the waivers from Code requested would not be responsible without also considering the far - reaching impact of that decision on so many other components. He would not be carrying out the responsibilities of a Council member effectively. 5. Process. die, too, did not like this process. Although there may have been past Council discussions about the library, the first time he viewed a rendering of the proposed building was at the January 10, 2017 Council meeting. He wishes the process would have been different, but he cannot change history or the facts. He must now choose from the options before him. Some good results came from the process, however. The development agreement that was ultimately reached with Dublin City Schools will provide many of the Dublin Schools with broadband access. If the project now fails, the provisions of the agreement are nullified. He is therefore willing to put the flawed process behind him. He appreciates Dr. Hoadley's and the Library's foresight in working with Council on these issues. However, he does not believe that it was unreasonable for Council to have required the pause in the process after the Januar -y 10 reveal of the proposal. That pause was warranted, as it allowed time to hear and consider the public's concerns and feedback. 6. He must now choose from the options before him and vote. He will choose a middle position — voting "yes" -- but the conditions that are intended to address some of the issues must be met. He does not know what exactly the different materials should be, but the communication must be improved going forward. Nor does he know what the transitional element should be, but his intent is that it be something that captures the public's interest. We are capable of doing that. Ms. Amorose Groomes: 1. Inquired if the proposed height would be accepted with the approval of the waiver as requested Ms. Readler responded if that waiver were approved, the height would be approved. Mr. Lecklider inquired if the height would be limited to the waiver that is requested, which would be to 42.5 feet. He inquired if the language of the waiver specifies a height limit. Ms. Amorose Groomes stated that it actually is not listed in the conditions; the applicant would be receiving a waiver of the required building height. Ms. Rauch responded that there are two different waivers — first is related to the number of stories and the second related to the story height, which ultimately equate to 42.5 feet. Ms. Amorose Groomes stated that it is possible for the applicant to have three stories that would be taller than 42.5 feet. It limits them to three stories, and it gives them a waiver on height. Ms. Rauch responded that they would receive a waiver to the number of stories, which is three stories. The building type requirements outline the maximum height of those stories. In addition, they are exceeding the ground story height by 4.5 feet. Therefore, they wi I I be receiving two waivers. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of N ib�lin City Council Meeting BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO Held April 24, 2017 Page 19 of 30 Form 6101 Ms. Amorose Groomes clarified that Conditions 5 and 6 do not limit them to 42.5 feet. It limits them to three stories. At present, one of those stories is 12.5 feet, floor to floor, which she expects will increase to at least 15 feet as the design process progresses. Nis. Rauch responded that the applicant would then need to request an additional waiver. MKS. Amorose Groomes stated that it would still be three stories, however. Nis. Rauch responded that there is a maximum height for each of the stories. Ms. Amorose Groomes responded that, per the Code, the maximum height is 15 feet. Ms. Rauch stated that the ground story maximum height is 24 feet. They are requesting 28.5 feet. They are already receiving a waiver for that. The upper story height is 14 feet, which is the maximum, and that is what they are requesting. So they are at the maximum and are getting a waiver for the additional height for the ground story. If they wanted any of those stories to be more, they would need to obtain approval of another waiver. Vice Mayor Reiner cautioned that this is an architectural solution. When Council toured a Bridge Street -type building along Lane Avenue in Upper Arlington a few years ago, inside the building, it was evident that the ceilings were too low. The low ceilings ruined the architecture of the space, because the rooms were very small. With depressing the ceilings to a lower height, the effect was that of being in a cubicle. It is important to be cautious of how space is defined in the architectural world. When we attempt to legislate architecture, we must be cautious. It is possible to ruin the very building we are considering. Ms. Amorose Groomes responded that she does not disagree with that point. However, she anticipates this building height to become greater, unless limitations are included. Mr. Lecklider re- stated his earlier question: If these waivers as requested are approved, is the maximum height limited to 42.5 feet? KS. Rauch responded that the Code does not specify that; however, by default, it is. Ms. Amorose Groomes continued: 2. If the waiver is approved, is the five -foot setback then approved. Ms. Rauch responded affirmatively. 3. In terms of the building types and street facades, there is no other opportunity to engage the streetscape, once these waivers are approved. What she is trying to confirm is that, with approval of these waivers, there will be many things that Council will no longer be able to change. The design elements could be discussed, as would stone in lieu of brick. Aside from those, once this Basic Plan Review is approved, all of the other details presented tonight are locked in. Council will be limiting our input to those two options. Ms. Rauch responded that is correct. Tonight's approval of the waivers will give those assurances to the applicant. Ms. Salay: 1. Stated that she appreciates what all of her colleagues have said and the amount of community input on this issue. The petitions and the public engagement demonstrate that architecture, beauty and appropriateness of style are all a matter of personal taste, and are all subjective. It is not possible for everyone to love this building and its location. It is certainly a very contemporary building, but to her, it is not being placed next to are historic building. This site is at the northernmost end of the Historic District, and the buildings that surround it are not significantly historical. The new buildings across the street are more contemporary, and the pedestrian bridge will come across to this building. The first time she viewed the renderings, she thought it was very cool, but acknowledged that is her taste. Her concern is if it is possible to make this contemporary building blend with the historic buildings. It is a difficult decision, but other great historical cities have successfully blended a contemporary building with historical structures. She does not want to detract from this great building to make it match what is historic in the District. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON. 0"10 Held_. Dublin City C ounril Meeting Form 6101 April 24, 2017 Page 20 of 30 2. She acknowledged that the process could have been better in terms of inviting more public input for the proposed architecture. However, Council has to consider the big picture — what the new library will mean to our built, economic and cultural environments. She believes this building will be an enhancement to all of those aspects. She will be proud to have been able to vote on this building. The current library facility and its staff are wonderful, but the facility is limited. The new library will be unlimited. 3. The idea of a transitional element to blend the old with the new is exciting. She views this as a public art project — both the building and the transition element. She is excited and enthusiastic to support it. Ms. Alutto: As referred to earlier, she prefers that the conditions have more "teeth." "Investigate" [in Condition #2] is a weak word, and Condition #8 [define a transitional design element that is integrated within the Library's public space] needs to be worded more strongly, as well. Vice Mayor Reiner: 1. Stated that he was unhappy to see something as wonderful as a library arouse so much controversy in our community. He believes a library is more important than a sports field for the development of civilization, minds and a community. He agrees with Ms. Salay's comment — when he first viewed the architecture, he also thought it was a cool building. However, that was followed by the realization that there were many people concerned about the negative impact on the Historic District. 2. When he inquired about potential changes to the design, the architects told him that only the Library, the owner of record, could make changes. The architects must respond to their client — the Library. 3. He was upset by the fact that the Library design does not respond as well as it could to the aspect of the historic community in that part of the City. He agrees that a transitional element that will bridge the contemporary library to the historic area is needed. Although the Library has agreed to put some stone on the building, which is a nice feature, what is needed is a transitional design element to help that building fit in better with the Historic District. We haven't seen that element yet. 4. He agrees that the design overall will create a beautiful space. He is hesitant to attempt to re- design spaces, ceiling heights and square footage — that is the role of the architect. 5. Typically, social media doesn't provide reliable and complete information, often being driven by emotion rather than knowledge. That is difficult for anyone who is seriously interested in an issue. The local government is trying to present the facts and have public input opportunities. Unfortunately, people do not become engaged until near the end of the process. 0. In regard to the transitional element, an appropriate committee will be formed to work with the Library to identify a possible transitional element that will help incorporate this structure within the Historic District. He is hoping for a middle ground solution. Mr. Lecklider: 1. Stated that he appreciates the public input from those in support and those opposed. The City is fortunate to have this issue to debate. He agrees that there is subjectivity that exists in our various views of the architecture. 2. He was somewhat concerned about the Library's presentation this evening. One of the early slides listed that one of the primary aspirations of the City of Dublin was to achieve an "iconic, contemporary design." He has been involved in this process as a Council member from the beginning. He, along with other Council members at that time, was present at the goal setting retreat where this was discussed. The Library provided a very limited presentation -- very brief and not very interactive. Images were shown of some very contemporary libraries throughout the country and around the world. Those images were flashed on the screen for 3 -4 seconds at a time, and there was little dialogue between the Council members and the Library staff providing the presentation. His recollection of the Council members' reactions was that all were thrilled to learn that the Library was thinking about providing the Dublin community with an upgraded library, but, beyond that, there was no discussion about the architecture that we supported. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON. OHIO Form 6101 Held April 24, 2017 Page 2 .1, of 30 Council talked about different sites, and at that point in time, the need focused on more square footage. He did not imagine that a library that might double in size, regardless of what the architecture might be, would remain at its present location. Frankly, he did not believe that could he done and parking also provided, and that has proven to be the case. That is why there is now a proposed parking structure and a partnership between the City and the Library. It is not possible to provide sufficient surface parking in this location for a 40,000- square -foot library. There was no public meeting where he expressed any preference with respect to architecture, whether it should more closely match the existing architecture in Historic Dublin or that it be something much more contemporary, similar to library architecture elsewhere in the country. However, he is not surprised at what the Library ultimately presented. However, it has been stated publicly at Council meetings by critics of the architecture that what the Library has done is execute the vision of City Council. however, that is not the case. The first time that Council saw the proposed architecture was January 10, 2017. The reference to iconic has been over -used, and CML's translation of iconic appears to be "contemporary." Perhaps that is also the translation of some of his colleagues. That is not necessarily a pro or con of the proposed architecture. 3. Council is always interested in public opinion and feedback. Council is more accustomed to a greater interactive process, from January to April, that was not the case. Only last month, Council asked CML to meet in a workshop setting with Council to discuss further these considerations, but CML declined. That is not the process to which most Council members are accustomed, and that is a disappointment to him. 4. Additionally, the fact sheet that was distributed by CML has a statement that could be perceived as a veiled threat — indicating they want the vote called for either a "thumbs up or thumbs down." No further workshop or discussion is desired, just a vote. So this is where we find ourselves this evening. 5. He concurs with respect to making the conditions more specific. 6. He has been influenced by some of the feedback he has heard and less by his own personal preference with respect to the architecture. He has tried to view it through the eyes of others, both pro and con. From the critics, he has not seen a concept of what would be more fitting in this location. He tried to view this from the perspective of the future users —the youth of our community. Their view is more important to him than his own personal views. He also is taking into account all the public testimony that has been Offered, either electronically or as public testimony at Council meetings. 7. He is a little perplexed that the critics of the proposal have not directed any of their petitions to CML and their board of directors. We all pay taxes that support the Library; he urges the members of the public to review their property tax bill. They will notice that they pay more taxes to CML than to the City of Dublin. There is accountability all around. If the public is disappointed in what they view as a lack of collaboration, there are other opportunities for advocacy. 8. He and his family are long -time supporters of CML and he expects to continue to be in the future. Ms. Amorose - Groomes stated that one point Mr. Lecklider made was excellent, that Council members' individual preferences for architecture are left behind when they serve in this role. What protects Council members from interjecting their own personal preferences into issues is the Code. The Code also protects Council from approving things that are too big or don't fit. She may have opinions, but she will not bring those into architectural considerations. The Code is designed to provide protection against biases. Mayor Peterson inquired about amendment to the verbiage, per Council's input. Ms. Rauch suggested the following modifications: Condition #2 - "That the applicant will use stone in lieu of brick on the lower portions of the building," and Condition #8 - "Council will create a collaborative committee to provide a design recommendation for a significant transitional element, which shall be subject to final review and approval by City Council with the Site Plan Review Application." RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO Dublin ouncil Meeting Form 6101 Held April 24, 2017 Page 22 of 30 Ms. Readier stated that the applicant is typically asked if they concur with the revised conditions. Condition #2: Mr. Losinsky indicated that he believes they are fine with moving forward with the revised language, but they are investigating the stone options to ensure that it will work. If it moves the project forward, they concur. Mayor Peterson indicated that if for some reason it were determined to be impractical, Council would have the ability to re -visit that condition. A.J. Montero, Architect, NBBJ indicated that they are comfortable with the general aesthetic that stone or a masonry material would provide, so they concur with the revision. Cnnrlitinn #�R• Mr. Losinsky stated that their understanding was that Council would appoint a committee to work with the CML design team and architect to advise in the process. They are supportive of that. Mayor Peterson stated that it is anticipated that proposed membership for that committee, including CML, will be submitted for the next Council meeting. Mr. Losinsky responded that it was their understanding that CML would not be on the committee; the committee that will advise the Library and its architect. Mr. Keenan stated that what was discussed is that there would be two representatives from CML, which he assumes could be the architect and another CML member. Mr. McDaniel stated that the memo that was provided in Council's packet suggested the committee composition, including two CML members. Mr. Losinsky stated that their information as of last Thursday was that this would be a five- member committee appointed to work with the two members of CML. Mayor Peterson stated that it is vital that CML be at the table. Mr. Losinsky concurred. Mayor Peterson moved to amend the language of Condition #2 and #8 to state: Condition #2 - "That the applicant will use stone in lieu of brick on the lower portions of the building," and Condition #8 - "Council will create a collaborative committee to provide a design recommendation for a significant transitional element, which shall be subject to final review and approval by City Council with the Site Plan Review Application." Ms. Alutto seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mayor Peterson, yes; Ms. Amorose Groomes, yes; Mice Mayor Reiner, yes; Ms. Alutto, yes. Ms. Amorose Groomes inquired if the first vote will be to approve the Basic Plan with the conditions as amended; the second will be to approve the requested waivers; and the third vote will be to define the next reviewing body. Mayor Peterson responded affirmatively. Mayor Peterson moved to approve the Basic Plan - Columbus Metropolitan Library, Dublin Branch (Case 17- 002ARB -BPR) with the eight conditions as amended. Vice Mayor Reiner seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Ms. Amorose Groomes, yes; Mayor Peterson, yes; Vice Mayor Reiner, yes; Ms. Alutto, yes. Mayor Peterson moved to approve the eight waivers as outlined in the staff memo. Ms. Salay seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Vice Mayor Reiner, yes; Ms. Amorose Groomes, no; Mayor Peterson, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Ms. Alutto, no. Ms. Amorose Groomes stated that for consistency and integrity, she believes it is important to have ARB review the project. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO Held April 24, 2017 Page 23 of 30 Form 6101 Ms. Salay stated that she believes the review body going forward should be City Council. Ms. Salay moved to designate City Council as the reviewing body for future Development Plan review and Site Plan review applications for the Library. Mr. Keenan seconded the motion. Ms. Alutto stated that she would prefer to have a joint review by Council and the ARB. Ms. Readier stated that the Code provides three options for that review body. Mayor Peterson inquired if it would be possible to request that ARB attend the Council review meeting and provide informal input. Ms). Readier responded that would be appropriate. Mayor Peterson stated that it would be good to have AI's input. Mr. McDaniel stated that the question then is which body would have the final vote. Ms. Salay stated that she believes that Council should have that responsibility. Ms. Rauch stated that, historically, ARB has also reviewed the applications informally at each step, so ARB could do the same in this case. Ms. Amorose Groomes stated that everyone has stated their dissatisfaction with the process thus far, because of the inability for Council and others to provide input along the way. Is Council now eliminating yet another body from providing their level of review? Ms. Salay stated that she believes the final review should be conducted by Council, but if Council believes ARB should be involved in the discussion, that is fine. This is not an historic building, although it lies on the edge of the Historic District. Ms. Amorose Groomes responded that this project is similar to the condominium development across the street. A building that was not historic was demolished and replaced with a building with which we are satisfied. ARB has proven that they can do such review. Mayor Peterson called the vote on the motion on the floor that has been seconded: to designate City Council as the reviewing body for future Development Plan review and Site Plan review applications for the Library. Vote on the motion: Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Ms. Amorose Groomes, no; Mayor Peterson, yes; Vice Mayor Reiner, yes; Ms. Alutto, no. • Basic Plan Review - Library Parking Garage (Case 17- 003ARB -BPR) MS. Rauch stated that this structure will be located on the same site, to the west. The history for the Garage is the same as for the Library, including the review process. The same type of actions are requested on the recommended conditions, waivers and designation of the required reviewing body moving forward. The proposal is for a new 549 -space parking garage with associated site improvements, including three pedestrian entrances, with stairs and elevator where needed, two vehicular access points and one exit only. The Administrative Review Team has reviewed the Basic Plan and recommends approval with the following eight conditions: 1. That the applicant file a Demolition request prior to the approval of the Site Plan; 2. That the applicant investigate the use of stone in lieu of brick on the lower portions of the building and at the tower elements; 3. That staff should continue to work with the applicant on the provision of additional entrances; 4. That the applicant continue to refine the architectural details and Building Type requirements, as part of the Site Plan; 5. That the applicant provide the final details regarding landscaping, lighting, utilities, and stormwater with the Site Plan; RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of D,1blin City Co—ouncil BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON. OHIO Held April 24, 2017 rage 24 of 30 Meeting 6. That the design not require the construction of Darby Street between North Street and Rock Cress Parkway as reflected on the Street Network Map and for staff to update the Street Network Map accordingly; 7. That the applicant continue to work with Engineering to refine the geometry of the book drop exit onto Rock Cress Parkway; and 8. That the applicant continue to work with staff on the internal circulation and dimensions within the garage. The ART also recommends approval of the following 11 Waivers: Form 6101 1. §153.060(C)(2)(a): Maximum Block Size — Permitted Maximum Block Length: 300 feet. North Street: 379 feet (requested); Permitted Maximum Block Perimeter: 1,000 feet; 1,308 feet (requested). 2. §153.060(C)(5)(a): Block Access Limitations — No vehicular access permitted on Principal Frontage Street (Rock Cress parkway) required; Vehicular access provided at northeast corner for book drop exit (requested) 3. §153.061(D)(2): Vehicular Access — No vehicular access permitted on Principal Frontage Street (Rock Cress Parkway) required; Vehicular access provided at northeast corner for book drop exist (requested). 4. §153.063(D)(4)(b): Building Height — Building height limited to 2.5 stories adjacent to the Historic Core District (required); 3 stories at the north, east, and youth elevations (requested). 5. §153.062(0)(12)(b): Story Height — Ground Story minimum and minimum clearance is 12 feet (required); 11 feet (requested). 6. §153.065(B)(5)(c).- Story Height — Minimum clearance is 12 feet (required); 1.1 feet (requested). 7. §153.062(D)(4): One tower permitted per building (required); three (requested). B. §153.062(0)(12)(d)(6)).- One tower permitted per building (required); three (requested). 9. §153.062(0)(12)(c): Use and Occupancy Requirements — Commercial uses required; No commercial uses is provided (requested). 10. §153-062(0)(12)(c).- Use and Occupancy Requirements — Occupied space (required); No occupied space is provided (requested). 11. §153.062(0)(12)(c): Use and Occupancy Requirements — Parking is not permitted in an area of the structure with frontage on a PFS and a greenway (required); Parking is provided in an area of the structure with frontage on a PAS and a greenway (requested). Al -so requested is determination of the required reviewing body determination for future Development Plan Review and Site Plan Review applications (City Council, Architectural Review Board, or Administrative Review Team). Miguel Gonzalez, Moody Nolan, presented slide images of the exterior components of the Garage, including: incorporation of stone in lieu of brick to be more appropriate to the specific site; a green screen (examples of successful projects shown); a metal fin system to provide texture (metal fin recommendations were reached following studies on options related to spacing patterns and color); and application of a horizontal terra cotta element. They will continue to study the options and refinements to the design. The intent is to make a final recommendation this summer. Ile requested that the record RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Iii ihlin City Cal ncil Meeting BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO Held_ April 24, 2017 Page 25 of 30 show that this is the Dublin City Garage, not the Library Garage. Although some spaces will be used by the Library, it will be a public garage. Form 6101 Mayor Peterson moved to amend the Basic Plan - Parking Garage Condition #2 to be consistent with the same amendment made to the Basic Plan - Library Condition #2, to read: "That the applicant will use stone in lieu of brick on the lower portions of the building." Mr. Keenan seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Ms. Amorose Groomes, yes; fps. Alutto, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Vice mayor Reiner, yes; Mayor Peterson, yes. Ms. Amorose Groomes: 1. Inquired the height of the tallest tower. Mr. Gonzalez responded that the tallest point is at North Street and is 45.9 feet. The reason for that is the elevators and over -run. There are two towers with elevators and a third with stairs; the decision was to keep them all consistent. 20 Stated that many of her comments will be the same. City Code limits this to 2.5 stories and this is four stories. Council just reviewed a building that was 42.5 feet in height, and now this building is 45.9 feet in height. Development in the area is just beginning; there are more blocks proposed for redevelopment. 3. In perpetuity, Rock Cress won't dead -end at this parking garage, as it does today. We have disengaged the street network completely. There is probably nothing more pedestrian - unfriendly than the treatment at the base of a parking garage. No one will walk in and out of this along Rock Cress, so Rock Cress will become a pedestrian -dead street. We approved waivers to make this block too big, and now we have a block that is too big and disengaged from the pedestrian activity. We have a parking garage located on the streetscape of Rock Cress. 4. How are we going to move from this to a more appropriate scale? We have genuine historic buildings across the street and immediately to the south. How are we going to make this not look like the movie, "Up," or are we going to make it look like that ® where the historic buildings go away so that subsequent things come in? -low and where will this get back to scale? Where is the transition from an incredibly contemporary architecture Library? It will have to be big. How about behind it. How about where the Darby Street lot exists today? I suspect we are not going to want to put a shorter building behind these tall buildings, so how tall will we allow it to be? She does not believe anyone is going to want a building that will just look into the side of a parking garage in perpetuity. How are we going to make those transitions? All of her previous comments about height, and scale and massing stand. Mr. Lecklider: 1. This parking garage presents a real challenge, but he doesn't see how it can be made smaller, or how a waiver can be avoided with respect to the block size. It doesn't make sense to do other than what we are doing with respect to the size of the garage, which makes maximum use of the land that is available to the City. Essentially, this is being accomplished without having to invest in land. Council has heard public comment that this isn't the place for this. Most of us agree that a parking garage has been necessary for some time. If it wasn't in this location, it wouldn't be far away. Unless the City builds it on the lot that it already owns, which isn't large enough, the City would have to purchase more land. Perhaps the City has not sufficiently acknowledged the benefit of having this free land. 2. Stated that he is not a fan of the metal fins. The vertical treatment accentuates the height, and he would like to see everything possible be done to bring the eyes down. What is proposed is creative, and he appreciates that, but he would like to see further exploration of a more horizontal treatment and the terra cotta option. Vice Mayor Reiner: 1. Stated that it was essential to provide the parking that the Library would lose as a result of the loss of their surface parking lot. On nearly any night, it is almost impossible to find parking in the downtown Dublin area. With the new development, including restaurants and other activities that will need parking, the City would be RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of ni ihlin Cit,i Council BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO Held April 24, 2017 Page 26 of 30 Meeting foolish not to build this size garage. The parking will be needed. If there were sufficient space, trees could be added to diminish the impression of the building size. Form 6101 Ms. Amorose Groomes continued: 1. The City does have other opportunities. It has the Darby Street parking lot. Because there is other land that the City owns, it is not essential to make the Garage of this scale. We don't have to solve the entire downtown parking problem with one structure. We have the opportunity to make more pedestrian - friendly, more human - scale buildings that park cars, which could be built sequentially. We could start the construction of this Garage to serve all of the Library's needs and probably accommodate as many parking spots as we have in the Darby lot, and then construct another, more appropriately scaled parking garage on the Darby lot. She wants to solve the parking problem but to a scale that is appropriate to the area. We worked so hard to try to build a pedestrian- friendly environment in that part of our community. We are dismantling the pedestrian scale. She would prefer to solve the parking space with two, smaller buildings than one gigantic building, and the City already owns additional space that could accommodate that. Mayor Peterson moved to approve the Basic Site Plan for the Library Parking Garage with the seven original conditions and the one amended condition. Vice Mayor Reiner seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mr. Keenan, yes; Mayor Peterson, yes; Ms. Alutto, yes; Dice Mayor Reiner, yes; Ms. Amorose Groomes, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Ms. Salay, yes. Mayor Peterson moved to approve the 11 waivers as requested. Vice Mayor Reiner seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Vice Mayor Reiner, yes; Mayor Peterson, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Ms. Amorose Groomes, no, Mr. Keenan, yes; Ms. Alutto, no. Mayor Peterson moved to designate City Council as the required reviewing body for future development plan review and site plan review applications. The desire was expressed that ARB participate in an informal way to provide feedback. Ms. Alutto seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mayor Peterson, yes; Vice mayor Reiner, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Ms. Amorose Groomes, no; Ms. Salay, yes; Nis. Alutto, no. SECOND READING /PUBLIC HEARING — ORDINANCES Ordinance 18 -17 Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Necessary Conveyance Documents to Dedocate a 0.657 -Acre Portion; a 0.224 -Acre Portion; and a 0.397 -Acre Portion of Dublin -Owned Reserve Area Property, Located at the Intersection of Avery Road and Brand Road, to Public Right -of -Way for the Public Purpose of Constructing Roadway Improvements, Mr. McDaniel stated that ordinance relates to the proposed construction of a roundabout at the intersection of Avery Road and Brand Road. The City owns adjacent property, and this will authorize the conveyance of that public property. Council had no questions. Vote on the Ordinance: Mayor Peterson, yes; Ms. Alutto, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Vice Mayor Reiner, yes. Ordinance 19 -17 Amending Sectiovi 2 (Wage & Salary Structure /Administration) of Ordinance No. 15 -17 ( "Compensation Plan for Non -Union Personnel "). Mr. McDaniel stated that there are no changes since the introduction of the ordinance. Council had no questions. Vote on the Ordinance: Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Vice Mayor Reiner, yes; Ms. Alutto, yes; Mayor Peterson, yes. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City (nuncil Meeting BARRET"T BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO Form 6101 Held April 24., 2017 Page 27 of 30 Ordinance 20 -17 Establishing the Location and Amount of Cash on Hand for Change Funds. Mr. Stiffler stated that there were no changes since the first reading. This ordinance will establish change funds for the Events division and increases the amount of petty cash in Finance Administration. Council had no questions. Vote on the Ordinance: Ms. Autto, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mayor Peterson, yes; Vice Mayor Reiner, yes. Ordinance 21 -17 Amending the Annual Appropriations Ordinance for the Fiscal Year Ending December 31, 2017. Mr. Stiffler stated that this ordinance will amend the 2017 Appropriations, and details are outlined in the memo. There are no changes since the first reading on April 10. Vote on the Ordinance: Vice Mayor Reiner, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mayor Peterson, yes; Ms. Amorose Groomes, yes; Ms. Alutto, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes. INTRODUCTION /FIRST READING — ORDINANCES Mayor Peterson moved to suspend Council's Rules of Order and address Ordinances 26- 17, 27 -17 and 28 -17 together. Mr. Lecklider seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mayor Peterson, yes; Ms. Amorose Groomes, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Vice Mayor Reiner, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Ms. Alutto, yes. The Clerk read the following titles into the record. Ordinance 26 -17 Accepting the Annexation of 47.366 Acres, More or Less, in Jerome Township, Union County to the City of Dublin. (Agent: Tom Hart, Attorney /Agent for Petitioners, Johnston H. Means, R. Oliver Griffith and Deborah L. Griffith) Ordinance 27 -17 Rezoning Approximately 47 Acres from R, Rural District to PUD, Planned Unit Development District for the Development of the Site with 73 Single- family Lots and Approximately 21 Acres of Open Space on the East Side of Hyland - Croy Road, North of the Intersection with Park Mill Drive Under the Provisions of Zoning Code Section 153.050; and a Preliminary Plat for 73 Single- family lots, Rights -of -way, and Open Space in Accordance with Chapter 152, the Subdivision Regulations (Case #16- 086Z /PDP /PP). Ordinance 28 -17 Authorizing the City Manager to Enter into an Infrastructure Agreement with Pulte Homes of Ohio LLC for the Autumn Rose Woods Development, Ms. Salay introduced Ordinances 26 -17, 27 -17 and 28 -17. Nicole Martin, Planner stated that this is a request for consideration of an annexation, rezoning and preliminary development, preliminary plat and infrastructure agreement. She inquired if Council would prefer to have the staff presentation at this meeting or the next hearing. Ms. Salay suggested that, due to the lateness of the hour, she would prefer to defer that to the next hearing. Council concurred. The presentation will be at the second reading /public hearing, which is scheduled on May 22, 2017. Mayor Peterson inquired if the applicant has any objection to deferral of the presentation to the second reading. The applicant indicated he has no objection. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of nublin City Council Meeting BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO Form 6101 Held April 24, 2017 Page 28 of 30 There will be a second reading /public hearing at the May 22, 2017 Council meeting. INTRODUCTION /PUBLIC HEARING /VOTE — RESOLUTIONS Resolution 26 -17 Authorizing the City Manager to Enter into a Collective Bargaining Agreement with the Fraternal Order of Police — Capital City Lodge No. 9 Regarding Wages, Hours, Terms and Conditions of Employment for Employees within the Police Officer, Corporal, and Sergeant Bargaining Units, Mayor Peterson introduced the resolution. Mr. McDaniel stated that the staff memo highlighted the changes from the previous agreement. The term of this agreement is for three years. The bargaining unit has ratified the agreement. Staff recommends approval. Vote on the Resolution: Mayor Peterson, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Ms. Amorose Groomes, yes; Vice Mayor Reiner, yes; Ms. Alutto, yes. Resolution 27 -17 Adopting a Statement of Services for a Proposed Regular Annexation of 44:0 Acres, More or Less, from Jerome Township, Union County to the City of Dublin. (Aaron L. Underhill, Esq. and /or David Hodge, Esq., Underhill & Hodge LLC, 8000 Walton Parkway, Suite 260, New Albany, OH 43054, Agent for Petitioners Roger Warren Gorden and Denise Ann Gorden, 7866 Harriott Road, Dublin, OH 43017) Vice Mayor Reiner introduced the resolution. Ms. Readler stated that the Union County Commissioners have scheduled a hearing for this matter on May 16, 2017. For a regular annexation petition, the City must adopt a statement of services and submit it at least 20 days prior to that hearing. The resolution provides the City's assessment of services that would be provided to the area upon annexation, as detailed in the packet information. Staff recommends approval. Council had no questions. Vote on the Resolution: Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Vice Mayor Reiner, yes; Ms. Amorose Groomes, yes; Ms. Alutto, yes; Mayor Peterson, yes. Resolution 28 -17 Adopting a Statement of Services for a Proposed Regular Annexation of 72.1 Acres, More or Less, from Jerome Township, Union County to the City of Dublin. (Aaron L. Underhill, Esq. and /or David Hodge, Esq., Underhill & Hodge LLC, 8000 Walton Parkway, Suite 260, New Albany, OH 43054, Agent for Petitioners Arthur G. Wesner and Elizabeth I. Wesner, 7455 Hyland Croy Road, Plain City, OH 43064 and Paul Jacquemin and Mary ]acquemin, 7437 Hyland Croy Road, Plain City, OH 43064) Vice Mayor Reiner introduced the resolution. Ms. Readler stated that the annexation petition hearing is scheduled for May 23, 2017. The statement of services detail is provided in Council's packet. Council had no questions. Vote on the Resolution: Ms. Amorose Groomes, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Vice Mayor Reiner, yes; Mayor Peterson, yes; Ms. Alutto, yes. Mayor Peterson moved to suspend the Council Rules of Order to address Resolutions 29- 17 through 36 -17 together. Vice Mayor Reiner seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Vice Mayor Reiner, yes; Ms. Alutto, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mayor Peterson, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes. The Clerk read the properly names and addresses of the following Resolutions into the record: RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO Held April 24, 2017 Page 29 of 34 Meeting Form 6101 Resolution 29 -17 Intent to Appropriate a 0.0230 -Acre Temporary Construction Easement from Robert E. Williams, II, Located at 7608 Plain City Road, for the Public Purpose of Constructing Roadway Improvements. Resolution 30 -17 Intent to Appropriate a 0.1270 -Acre Fee Simple Right -of -Way; a 0.9139 -Acre Fee Simple Right -of -Way; a 0.6520 -Acre Permanent Utility Easement; and a 0.0953 -Acre Temporary Construction Easement from Kevin G. Bennington, Mark A. Bryant, Larry D. Clarke and Marc A. Palmer, Successor Co- Trustees of the Duroc Trust, Located at the Southeast Corner of S.R. 161 and Cosgray Road; a 0.0299 -Acre Temporary Construction Easement, from the Same Property Owner, Located on Plain City Road; and a 0.0232 -Acre Temporary Construction Easement, from the Same Property Owner, Located at 7520 Plain City Road, for the Public Purpose of Constructing Roadway Improvements. Resolution 31 -17 Intent to Appropriate a 0.0229 -Acre Temporary Construction Easement from Ralph E. Smucker, Located at 7500 Plain City Road, for the Public Purpose of Constructing Roadway Improvements. Resolution 32 -17 Intent to Appropriate a 0.5877 -Acre Fee Simple Right -of -Way, a 0.1264 -Acre Fee Simple Right -of -Way, and a 0.0009 -Acre Fee Simple Right -of -Way from Jeffry Weingarten, Jeffry Weingarten T.O.D., Virginia M. Acosta T.O.D., Located at 7453 -7455 Cosgray Road, for the Public Purpose of Constructing Roadway Improvements. Resolution 33 -17 Intent to Appropriate a 0.0034 -Acre Temporary Construction Easement from Jeffrey T. Beckman, Located at 7423 Cosgray Road; a 0.3304 -Acre Fee Simple Right -of -Way, and a 0.0132 -Acre Temporary Construction Easement, from the Same Property Owner, Located at 7505 Plain City Road, for the Public Purpose of Constructing Roadway Improvements. Resolution 34 -17 Intent to Appropriate a 0.0121 -Acre Temporary Construction Easement from The Geitgey Company, Located at 7600 Fishel Drive, for the Public Purpose of Constructing Roadway Improvements. Resolution 35 -17 Intent to Appropriate a 0.2919 -Acre Fee Simple Right -of -Way from Pinney 7495, LLC, Located at 7495 Plain City Road, for the Public Purpose of Constructing Roadway Improvements, Resolution 36 -17 Intent to Appropriate a 0.0423 -Acre Fee Simple Right -of -Way and a 0.0141 - Acre Temporary Construction Easement from Brian Cunningham and Corin Cunningham, Located at 7515 Plain City Road, for the Public Purpose of Constructing Roadway Improvements. Mr. Lecklider introduced Resolutions 29 -17 through 36 -17. Mr. McDaniel stated that these resolutions relate to a proposed roundabout at Cosgray Road and SR 161 /Post Road. The City of Dublin, Franklin County Engineer's Office and Union County Engineer's Office are working together to construct this roundabout. A cooperative construction agreement with these entities exists, with the City of Dublin serving as the main point of contact. These acquisitions represent what will be needed for this project, a couple of which are total property takes. The City hopes to reach an amicable agreement with the property owners, but these resolutions state the City's intent to appropriate, enabling the City to pursue the eminent domain process in the event negotiations are not successful. Staff recommends approval. Council had no questions. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO Held April 24, 2017 Page 30 of 30 Meeting Form 6101 Vote on Resolutions 29 -17 through 36 -17: Ms. Salay, yes; Mayor Peterson, yes, Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Ms. Amorose Groomes, yes; Ms. Alutto, yes; Vice Mayor Reiner, yes. Resolution 37 -17 A Resolution Combating Intolerance, Negative Stereotyping and Discrimination, Based on Religion, Belief or Ethnicity. Mayor Peterson introduced the resolution. Ms. Richison stated that this resolution denounces intolerance and supports the City of Dublin as a diverse, inclusive and welcoming community. It provides that all citizens should be treated with respect and dignity. Staff recommends approval. Mayor Peterson noted that this action follows the Sunday Supper discussion during the Martin Luther King, Jr. Day events, and the meeting with the Indian community last i- hursday at the Dublin Rec Center. The staff, the City and Council are dedicated to all those important issues. Mr. Lecklider complimented Ms. Richison for her efforts and thanked all staff members who participated in the community meeting last week. Ms. Amorose Groomes stated that it was a nice event, well peat together and well attended. Vote on the Resolution: Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mayor Peterson, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Ms. Amorose Groomes, yes; Vice Mayor Reiner, yes; Ms. Alutto, yes; fair. Keenan, yes. STAFF COMMENTS Mr. McDaniel noted that, as outlined in a memo in the packet, a recommendation from Council for a City representative to the Dublin Foundation Board is requested. Mayor Peterson moved to recommend Council Member Amorose Groomes as a representative to the Board of the Dublin Foundation. Mr. Keenan seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mayor Peterson, yes; Ms. Amorose Groomes, yes; Vice Mayor Reiner, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Ms. Alutto, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes. Coun 'members wished ayor Peterson a happy birthday tomorrow! Th rry�eting was adjourned at 10:50 p.m. Makor — Preshfiing Officer Clerk of Council