Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-28-17 Council MinutesMinutes RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council ,v e.nw mno August 28, 2017 CALL TO ORDER Mayor Peterson called the Monday, August 28, 2017 Regular Meeting of Dublin City Council to order at 6:00 p.m. in Council Chambers at Dublin City Hall. ROLL CALL Present were Mayor Peterson, Vice Mayor Reiner, Ms. Alutto, Ms. Amorose Groomes, Mr. Keenan, Mr. Lecklider and Ms. Salay. Staff members present were Mr. McDaniel, Ms. Crandall, Ms. Readier, Ms. Mumma, Ms. O'Callaghan, Mr. Foegler, Ms. Goss, Mr. Papsidero, Mr. Rogers, Mr. Earman, Chief von Eckartsberg, Ms. Rauch, Ms. Burness, Mr. Gracia, Ms. Richison, Mr. Krawetski and Mr. Plouck. ADJOURNMENT TO EXECUTIVE SESSION Mayor Peterson moved to adjourn to executive session for the purpose of discussing land acquisition matters and for conferences with the attorney for the public body concerning disputes involving the public body that are the subject of pending or imminent court action. Vice Mayor Reiner seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Ms. Alutto, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Ms. Amorose Groomes, yes; Vice Mayor Reiner, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mayor Peterson, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes. The meeting was reconvened at 7:08 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mr. Lecklider and the members of Boy Scout Troop 185 led the Pledge of Allegiance. PROCLAMATIONS • Scout Troop 18S — 7S' Anniversary Mayor Peterson stated that Council Member and former Mayor Lecklider recently represented the City at the 75"' Anniversary Celebration for Scout Troop 185. He acknowledged the members of Troop 185 who were present at the meeting. Mayor Peterson then read and presented a proclamation in honor of the 75'^ Anniversary of the troop. Mr. Darin McCulley thanked the Mayor for the proclamation and stated they are pleased to continue to provide service to their community. Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy Awareness —Premier Allergy and Little Hercules Foundation Mayor Peterson introduced Dr. Summit Shah of Premier Allergy and invited him to share his involvement with Muscular Dystrophy Awareness and the Little Hercules Foundation. Dr. Shah stated that the Little Hercules Foundation works with children and families who are affected by Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy. The son of an employee of Premier Allergy was diagnosed this past year with Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy, and that prompted Premier Allergy's greater involvement. Dr. Shah introduced Kelly Maynard and invited her to share more about the Little Hercules Foundation. Ms. Maynard stated that the Little Hercules Foundation was launched in January 2013. This foundation raises funds for research leading to a cure for Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy. The Foundation serves the whole country, but they are based in Dublin, Ohio. Duchenne is one of nine types of muscular dystrophy affecting one in 5,000 live male births. As of today, there is no cure and there are only two FDA approved treatments. One treatment offered is appropriate for only 13% of boys with Duchenne because it is mutation specific. The other treatment is a steroid that was only available by importing it from other countries until February 2017. She launched the Little Hercules Foundation when her son was five years old and diagnosed with Duchenne. Ms. Maynard shared a presentation regarding Duchenne, the RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of BARMI BBOT BL0.5 �04Y .QK10 1 feh/ August 28, 2017 Page 2 of 22 symptoms and progression of the disease. Since the launch of the Foundation, they have provided research grants for ten research projects. On September 1, they are expanding their services to include family assistance, such as helping families access approved drugs, provide equipment assistance to families, and assist with travel expenses to help families get to the expert care they need. The Foundation has also: • advocated for the FDA for the first approved drug released In September 2016; • testified in support of the "Right to Try" bill that gives terminally ill patients access to experimental treatments, which was signed into law by Governor Kasich in January of 2017; and • served on several pharmaceutical boards working to develop treatments for Duchenne. They have two fundraisers a year: the Duchenne Dash and a golf classic at Scioto Reserve. She requested Council's assistance in finding appropriate venues for the race because they are outgrowing the current venue. She then shared a video. She emphasized that the clinical trials for the families who need them costs millions of dollars. She thanked the City and corporate sponsors such as Premier Allergy for their support. Mayor Peterson read the Proclamation and reiterated the community's support for her Foundation. • Munger Awareness Month —Dublin Food Pantry Mayor Peterson invited Molly Arbogast, Executive Director of the Dublin Food Pantry to come forward and share information about Hunger Awareness Month. Ms. Arbogast stated that September is not only Hunger Awareness Month, but it is also Hunger Action Month, which brings awareness and promotes what people can do to reduce hunger in the community and across the country. She noted that food insecurity is defined as the lack of consistent access to affordable and healthy foods. They are working to ensure that the people who need assistance know where their next meal Is coming from and ensuring consistent access to food. Food inconsistency has been shown to affect job and school performance and has been linked to mental health issues. Meeting the needs consistently will help reduce long-term health care expenses. She stated that they have been combatting food insecurity through the amazing partnerships in the community, community gardens and monetary donations. In 2016, they served an average of 248 households per month at the pantry. They served more than 8,800 individuals with more than 132,000 meals. Of those served, 38% were children and 21% were seniors, which is the fastest growing population. In conjunction with the Irish Festival free admission on Sunday morning for those who bring a donation for the pantry, 16,772 pounds of food were donated. Over 200 volunteers worked to move the donations to the pantry, sorted, checked and readied them for distribution. She thanked the community and the volunteers. She stated there are always volunteer opportunities and each week a list of what is needed at the pantry is updated based on their inventory. Mayor Peterson inquired as to what is the best way to donate to the food pantry. Ms. Arbogast stated that their website lists the needs for any given week and monetary donations are welcome, too. (www.dublinfoodpantry.org) Vice Mayor Reiner asked Ms. Arbogast if she had a report regarding the total cash donations received during the church services at the Irish Festival. She responded that final numbers are not available, but it was over $8,000. In response to Mayor Peterson, Ms. Arbogast stated that the website also offers information for anyone in need of assistance in how to contact them, what information is needed etc. They can also be contacted by phone at 614-889-6590. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of' Dublin City Council Meeting a�aae-rteaaniaas. onrim.axia onn e,o� Held— August 28, 2017 Page 3 of 22 • Dublin City School District Ranked as Number 5 in the "2018 Best School Districts in America" by Niche Mr. McDonnell. Director of Student Operations and Mr. Andres, Director of Student Services were present to accept this recognition from the City. Mr. McDonnell stated that the website that awarded this designation searched all over the country for neighborhoods and schools to select. Recognitions such as this demonstrate the strong partnership among the community, the City, the students, the parents and the Schools. He stated they strive to provide a world-class education and continuously improve. The criteria for this recognition focuses on: academic performance; student and parent satisfaction; and diversity. Mayor Peterson read and presented a Proclamation to the Dublin City Schools for this recognition. CITIZEN COMMENTS Sven Christianson. 5765 Settlers Place. Dublin addressed Council regarding Llewellyn Farms and Waterford Village, noting they were developed at about the same time as Mulrfleld Village. The residents have had one-story, professional office development around them to date and this office development is tucked away and acceptable. The tools that have been utilized in the past to protect residential areas are the zoning guidelines. The pending Corporate Area Plan Is disturbing to the neighborhoods because it removes the zoning protections that are in place today. During the open forum presentation sessions, the lead consultant implied that zoning concerns would be addressed at a later date. However, the Corporate Area Plan would guide and direct the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council, and if protections are not added now, they never will be. If this effort to protect neighborhood character is successful upfront, then it will save time for development requests or zoning questions. A residential overlay zone or sub district with respectful zoning guidance is a common sense approach. However, the neighborhoods are open to any approach that ensures that the constituents are a priority. When drafting the prudent planning petition that will be submitted, it was clear that the requests are clearly in line with the DNA of the City. They are optimistic that Council can help structure a favorable plan. The Corporate Area Plan covers 1.5 square miles, and their area of concern is a small 5% of that. They understand the overall goal, but the area east of Frantz Road is different. Waterford Village will eventually have development behind them on the existing cornfield. However, what comes in the future should enhance, not detract from the neighborhood. He is requesting a true collaborative effort among residents, Council and consultants. Clay Danev. 5775 Settlers Place, Dublin stated that he moved to Dublin four years ago from the Short North. He chosen Llewellyn Farms because of the access to downtown Dublin, the river, Bridge Street District, etc. When he moved, he understood that he would have neighbors that were businesses and that was acceptable because these were one-story, modest buildings. However, that is now changing. He feels these changes are bringing uncertainty to the residents in his area. He expressed his faith in the planning team, the PZC, and Council that their concerns will be heard. However, to date, they have not seen it reflected in the Corporate Area Plan. The 5% of the Plan area east of Frantz Road would like to have site use limitations, site restrictions, set back restrictions, green space and landscape buffering. In the past 48 hours, they have gathered over 250 signatures, which reflects that neighbors are concerned. The Dublin Corporate Area Plan is needed, but the area east of Frantz Road needs to be done right and a middle ground needs to be found. He expressed gratitude for the openness of planning and the expectation of great development in Dublin. Eric Kreidler, 5815 Settlers Place. Dublin stated that he grew up in Dublin and has been witness to the explosive growth of the City. He knows that growth is expected and must occur, but when it infringes on quality of life of citizens near that growth, it becomes a problem. The appeal of Dublin is the strong neighborhoods, quality of life, and responsible governance over factors that influence those who live in Dublin first, and RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS minutes ol Dublin City Council Meeting August 28, 2017 Page 4 of 22 those who work in Dublin second. His primary issue is with the validity of the input and results from the public meetings. The purpose of these meetings with the consultant team was to receive the Input of employers, employees and citizens about what they want to see in the area. The analysis of research conclusions is based on the statistical data that is presented to support those conclusions. However, he has seen poor outcomes as a result of using poor data and wants to avoid that mistake in this Plan. He is not against development, but the extent that this is to be addressed is not clear. The analysis of the meetings is there were 198 total participants, 144 of those claim to be Dublin residents. If it is to be assumed that the residents only attended one meeting and did not double up, this represents .3% of the population of Dublin. Mr. Kreidler cited problems with graphs and statistics and how the view can change dramatically, depending upon the number polled. How did they verify information, such as demographics and definition of study area? There were further issues with the survey results and methods. There is data missing or data being omitted. A good business plan contains risk analysis, liabilities and responsibilities, cost benefit analysis and a plan on how to progress. Dublin needs to be concerned with infrastructure, traffic, school, police services, etc. He reiterated that the public input is flawed or biased, and that the lack of explicit zoning regulations is disrespectful and irresponsible to the residents of the area. Dublin's neighborhoods and citizens are what make Dublin a desirable place to live. The voices of the residents should always be more important than the consultants' conclusions. Mark Martin. 4211 Rings Road, Dublin introduced himself as the Vice President of Llewellyn Farms Civic Association. He noted that he agrees with the statements made. He lives across from the open cornfield. He has always believed that Dublin does a very good job of blending commercial and residential areas. However, he is surprised to see a plan with potential multi -story hotels and restaurants butted up against a residential area. He is concerned about the potential plan. He believes there is potential for compromise on a buffer zone between the corporate area and the residential area. Mr. McDaniel thanked the residents for coming forward. He appreciates the positive comments about Dublin's history of planning and development. He asked Mr. Papsidero, Planning Director to comment. Mr. Papsidero stated that this process began almost four years ago with early work on the Legacy Office Park research. Staff has been working on a plan update for the last year and a half, and there has been good turnout at workshops where most of the data has been collected. Currently, staff is working on completing the final details of the plan. They promised the neighborhood residents they would respond with draft material within the week. The goal is to provide the Planning and Zoning Commission with a complete document in late September or early October. They are working through the process and are near the end of it. Mr. McDaniel stated that there is more opportunity for input, particularly at PZC. He invited residents to keep the exchange of information flowing so it can be provided to the consultants. Mr. Papsidero stated that staff recently spent time with the residents walking the properties and viewing the perspective from their backyards, hearing their concerns and ideas about development. Ms. Amorose Groomes stated that she also spent time with the residents in that area and much of the conversation centered on the greenway and the connectivity with Cramer Creek, heading north into the historic core. She encouraged staff to look at the preservation of the creeks in the form of greenways. She is not sure of the need for an overlay district, because there is not a plan adopted yet. She wants staff to consider the creeks and the connections so all the residents can enjoy the area. Ms. Salay asked Mr. Papsidero for his response to the resident concerns that have been expressed. She believes that their concerns are not unreasonable and can staff provide Minutes RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dulzlin_C iy Cnuncil Meeting iexs• o�rmn, aao wm�.,o, August 26, 2017 Page 5 of 22 the residents with some assurance that there is not the desire to rezone the whole area to allow all these difference uses. She encouraged staff to make the plan more neighborhood friendly. She believes that much could be accomplished to satisfy the residents' concerns before the plan is sent to PZC. Mr. Papsidero stated that, throughout the process, staff has been clear about the importance of safeguarding the neighborhoods up and down Frantz Road. Staff committed that more detailed information will be forwarded to the Interested parties before the document is submitted to the PZC. The process has been delayed somewhat due to the number of vacant properties and the number of corporate owners involved. In response to Ms. Amorose Groomes' question regarding whether or not area rezonings or individual rezonings will be done, Mr. Papsidero stated that the goal was to streamline the zoning process of the entire planning area. Building on the model in place for the West Innovation District, the goal conceptually has been to consider one comprehensive rezoning of the entire planning area and having subdistricts that speak to land use, density, design standards as well as adopting design guidelines. Ms. Amorose Groomes cautioned staff that one of the reasons this works so well in the West Innovation District Is the lack of adjacent neighbors. There was a lot more flexibility and freedom for that reason. Perhaps west of Frantz Road would be more appropriate for area rezonings, but she would not support area rezonings on the east side of Frantz Road. Sensitivity to adjacent neighbors is more important east of Frantz Road and she is concerned about the loss of control that can come with area rezonings. It is important to keep that control for residential neighborhoods. Mr. Papsidero agreed with Ms. Amorose Groomes in that he is hoping to add more restrictions to protect the neighborhood. Those details will be explored more in the next phase of the process. Mayor Peterson inquired about the timeframe for the PZC review. Mr. Papsidero responded that it could be in October, dependent upon the communication with the stakeholders. Depending upon the PZC review timeframe, this plan could be before Council at the end of October or early November. PZC will also be reviewing the West Innovation District update at the same time. Mr. Keenan inquired about the large parcel in Washington Township that lies adjacent to Waterford Village and how it is accommodated in the plan. Mr. Papsidero stated that the western half of that parcel fronts on Frantz Road and will be in the planning area. Conceptually, staff has discussed the possibility of it being residential or lower scale office, perhaps retail use-- all with a two-story height limit. Mayor Peterson thanked those who attended tonight's meeting and encouraged them to stay engaged as the process continues. ]ane Fox. 6193 Dublin Road. Dublin addressed Council regarding public engagement. There are many interested residents present, and she is asking that Council support the early engagement for these planning actions. She suggested that civic associations could be invited for brainstorming sessions. Sometimes, there are creative solutions from people who live in the neighborhood. The public meetings do not really offer the same opportunities to develop comprehensive solutions as does a roundtable discussion. She would like to change the flow of information from citizens to Planning staff to Council. She wants to bring people together to determine what they want. It could lead to a shared collaborative discussion. She believes this interaction will strengthen the entire community. CONSENT AGENDA . Approval of Minutes of Council meeting of August 14, 2017 Minutes RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS August 28, 2017 Page 6 of 22 • Resolution 62-17 (Introduction/public hearing/vote) Construction Guarantee Maximum Reimbursement Agreement between the City of Columbus and the City of Dublin for Upper Scioto West Shaft Improvements - Shaft 12. Ms. Amorose Groomes inquired regarding the language in item 9 of the agreement, Reimbursement. "...the City of Dublin shall promptly pay to the City of Columbus 100% of the maximum City of Dublin share of the costs not to exceed the Actual Cost for all work due under the terms of this agreement." She suggested that the words maximum and actual should be exchanged and then it would read correctly: "...the City of Dublin shall promptly pay to the City of Columbus 100% of the actual City of Dublin share of the costs not to exceed the Maximum Cost for all work due under the terms of this agreement." Ms. Readier and Ms. O'Callaghan agreed, noting the change would be made to clarify the language. Mayor Peterson moved to approve the two 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, yes; Ms. Alutto, yes; Mayor Peterson, yes; Ms. Amorose Groomes, yes. SECOND READING/PUBLIC HEARING - ORDINANCES Ordinance 51-17 Amending Sections 91.28, 91.29 and 91.99 of the Dublin Code of Ordinances to Remove Pit Bulls from the Definition of "Vicious Dog," to Change the Definitions of a "Dangerous Dog" and a "Vicious Dog," to Require the Owner of a Dangerous Dog to Obtain a Dangerous Dog Registration Certificate, and to Change the Penalties Involving Ownership of Nuisance, Dangerous, and Vicious Dogs. Ms. Readier stated that in 2002, the City held hearings on potential regulations regarding dangerous and vicious animals. The City proceeded to enact local restrictions that mirrored state law, which included defining all pit bulls as vicious regardless of their behavior. In 2012, Ohio law changed and pit bulls were no longer classified as vicious by nature. Instead, Ohio law created three categories for problematic dogs: nuisance, dangerous and vicious. To fall into any of these categories, a dog would have to exhibit certain behavior and/or conduct as defined by the statute. In 2013, an ordinance similar to Dublin's was struck down by the 3r° District Court of Appeals, which includes Union County. In 2017, a Reynoldsburg ordinance similar to Dublin's was struck down by the 5th District Court of Appeals, which includes Delaware County. Based upon these court decisions, the City's current regulations on dangerous and vicious animals would not be enforceable in the portions of the City located In Delaware and Union counties, While the Franklin County Court of Appeals has not ruled on this issue, it is unlikely that their decision would be different. Therefore, to have consistent enforceable regulations across the City and to be consistent with state law, staff recommends approval of Ordinance No. 51-17. Ms. Amorose Groomes noted a typographical error on page 3 of 9, under Confinement of Dogs, Item B, where it should read `on leash" instead of "in leash." Mr. Keenan asked for further clarification of the definitions in this legislation. Under the law, a dangerous dog would be defined as exhibiting actions that include causing serious injury to someone or killing another dog; a nuisance dog is a dog that without provocation and while off the owner's premises chases or approaches someone in a RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes BARRNT! BROTIIIMi - D, YIQNANIO Field August 28, 2017 Page 7 of 22 menacing way, or attempting to bite or endanger someone; and a vicious dog is defined as a dog that has killed or seriously injured a person without provocation. Why would Dublin adopt legislation providing that someone has to be killed or maimed before it is defined as a vicious dog? Ohio has the second largest number of dog bite insurance claims in the United States; and in Ohio, $530 million was spent on these claims. He believes that Dublin should be more prudent in protecting the health and welfare of its residents. Stephen Smith, Jr., Assistant Law Director stated that with most of the traffic and criminal codes, the City has adopted the same standards as state law so that the City has local jurisdiction to deal with those issues at the local level in terms of Mayor's Court. In this case, under home rule, the City has sole authority on local government matters. However, for matters that fall under the police jurisdiction involving health, safety and welfare, the City cannot have a law that is in conflict with the general law of the state. Dogs are categorized as a police matter. Therefore, when the state law changed in 2012, the cases in the courts are determining that it is general law that must mirror state law, if the law is to be enforced. There are now three categories since the state added the nuisance level. What was the "dangerous" definition is now the "nuisance" definition (for all purposes); the "dangerous" is now the previous "vicious" definition; and the "vicious" has been heightened. Mr. Keenan stated it is an "after the fad" definition. Mr. Smith agreed and stated that it is reactive in nature and not proactive. Because the legal staff knows the law Dublin currently has in place regarding dogs defined in this way cannot be equally applied across the City, the only choices Dublin has are to adopt the state law, or repeal the law currently in place at which time the state law would then apply. If the matter is handled locally, the Dublin magistrates can pay close attention and stay involved with the case. The Franklin County Municipal Court does not have that luxury due to the number of cases on their docket. Ms. Salay asked whether this change places a burden on residents with a certain type of dog or certain behavior. Mr. Smith stated that there is no action required by the residents. He has always encouraged residents to be more proactive in reporting incidents when they occur. In that way, appropriate steps can be taken with the dog owners before it becomes a problem. Mayor Peterson clarified that a person can file a police report without charges being filed. Mr. Smith stated that is correct. Vote on the Ordinance: Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Keenan, no; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mayor Peterson, yes; Ms. Amorose Groomes, yes; Vice Mayor Reiner, yes; Ms. Alutto, yes. Ordinance S2-17 Rezoning Approximately 2.9 acres from PUD, Planned Unit Development District (Oak Park, Subarea D) to PUD, Planned Unit Development District (Oak Park, Subarea D) for Amendments to the Approved Development Text to Permit the Conversion of 36 Townhome Units in Six buildings to 20 Single- family Lots within an Existing Residential Development. (Case 17- 028Z/PDP/PP/FDP/FP) Mr. McDaniel stated that staff recommends Council postpone this ordinance to allow more time for follow-up on the questions raised at first reading. Mayor Peterson moved to postpone Ordinance 52-17 until the September 11 City Council meeting. Ms. Alutto seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mr. Lecklider, yes; Ms. Amorose Groomes, yes; Vice Mayor Reiner, yes; Mayor Peterson, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Ms. Alutto, yes; Ms. Salay, yes. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Cour Ifelrf August 28, 2017 Page 8 of 22 Ordinance 53-17 Petitioning the Board of County Commissioners of Union County, Ohio, to Adjust the Boundary Lines of Jerome Township so as to Exclude that Territory that, as a Result of Annexation, now Lies within the Corporate Boundaries of the City of Dublin. (Pulte Homes of Ohio, LLC annexation of 47.366+/- acres - Ordinance 26-17) Mr. McDaniel stated that this Ordinance would authorize the City Law Director to petition the Board of County Commissioners of Union County to adjust township boundaries in Union County such that the annexed territory would be removed from Jerome Township, and placed in Washington Township. The boundary adjustment will ensure that Washington Township has the ability to impose levies to compensate it for providing their services. Staff recommends approval. Ms. Amorose Groomes asked for clarification about the wording in Section 3 of the Ordinance and use of the word "praying." Ms. Readier responded this is used in legal documents, meaning, "to ask for." Vote on the Ordinance: Ms. Amorose Groomes, yes; Mayor Peterson, yes; Ms. Alutto, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Vice Mayor Reiner, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes. Mayor Peterson moved to waive Council Rules and consider Ordinances 54-17 through 58-17 together. Vice Mayor Reiner seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Vice Mayor Reiner, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Ms. Alutto, yes; Ms. Amorose Groomes, yes; Mayor Peterson, yes. Ordinance 54-17 Appropriating a 0.0121 -Acre Temporary Construction Easement from The Geitgey Company, Located at 7600 Fishel Drive, for the Public Purpose of Constructing Roadway Improvements. Ordinance 55-17 Appropriating 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. Ordinance 56-17 Appropriating 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 at 7520 Plain City Road for the Public Purpose of Constructing Roadway Improvements. Ordinance 57-17 Appropriating 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. Ordinance 58-17 Appropriating 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. Mr. McDaniel stated there have been no changes since the first readings. Minutes RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting August 28, 2017 Page 9 of 22 Vote on Ordinance Nos. 54-17, 55-17, 56-17 57-17 and 58-17: Mr. Lecklider, yes; Vice Mayor Reiner, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Ms. Alutto, yes; Ms. Amorose Groomes, yes; Mayor Peterson, yes. [Ms. Salay briefly left Council Chambers and was not present for this vote.] Mayor Peterson moved to waive Council Rules for the purposes of hearing Ordinance Nos. 60-17 — 62-17 together. Mr. Keenan seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Ms. Alutto, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mayor Peterson, yes; Vice Mayor Reiner, yes; Ms. Amorose Groomes, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes. Ordinance 60-17 Determining to Proceed with the Acquisition, Construction, and Improvement of Certain Public Improvements in the City of Dublin, Ohio in Cooperation with the Columbus Regional Energy Special Improvement District. Ordinance 61-17 Levying Special Assessments for the Purpose of Acquiring, Constructing, and Improving Certain Public Improvements in the City of Dublin, Ohio in Cooperation with the Columbus Regional Energy Special Improvement District. Ordinance 62-17 Authorizing and Approving an Energy Project Cooperative Agreement by and between the City of Dublin, Ohio, the Columbus Regional Energy Special Improvement District, Frantz Investments, LLC, and the Columbus -Franklin County Finance; a Special Assessment Agreement by and between the City of Dublin, Ohio, the County Treasurer of Franklin County, Ohio, the Columbus Regional Energy Special Improvement District, and Frantz Investments, LLC and Related Agreements, All of Which Provide for the Financing of Special Energy Improvements Projects. (5500 Frantz Road Project) Mr. Lecklider introduced the Ordinances. Mr. McDaniel provided the background information. Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) programs represent a great mechanism available for financing energy efficiency and renewable energy improvement projects. Financing for PACE eligible projects in Central Ohio is provided by the Columbus -Franklin County Finance Authority. The building ownership at 5500 Frantz Road is requesting the use of PACE Financing for its energy efficiency improvement project totaling $515,883. Staff will recommend at the second reading on September 11 that Council approve these ordinances by emergency (waiving the thirty -day waiting period). This will allow the business owner to initiate the process for the improvements. Ms. Amorose Groomes noted her appreciation to staff for learning about the PACE program. It is important, if emergency passage is being contemplated, to clarify that creating the district is the only way the City participates. This is essentially a loan application and what the City is doing is establishing the district so that the business can apply for the funding. The City does not participate in any manner except to help the businesses be eligible for this state funding. Therefore, emergency passage may be appropriate given this scenario. Mr. McDaniel confirmed that her statements are correct. This is a loan not from the City, but from the Columbus -Franklin County Finance Authority. Mr. Keenan clarified that the City does provide funding for the energy audits. Mr. Gracia responded that the energy audits were offered on the front end as a part of the Office Competitiveness Program. Mr. Keenan stated that he wanted to be clear that, although the City is not part of the loan, the City has supported this worthwhile program. Minutes Held RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council_ Meeting August 28, 2017 Page 10 of 22 There will be a second reading/public hearing of Ordinance Nos. 60-17, 61-17 and 62-17 on September 11, 2017. INTRODUCTION /PUBLIC HEARING/VOTE — RESOLUTIONS Resolution 63-17 Appointing a Member to an Unexpired Term on the Architectural Review Board. Mr. Keenan introduced the resolution. Mr. Keenan reported that Council has selected a very well qualified candidate to fill the vacant ARB seat created by the resignation of Ms. ]ane Fox. He moved to approve the appointment of Gary Alexander to the remainder of that term, which will expire March 31, 2018. Ms. Alutto seconded the motion. Vote on the Resolution: Vice Mayor Reiner, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mayor Peterson, yes; Ms. Amorose Groomes, yes; Ms. Alutto, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes. Resolution 64-17 Accepting the Grounds of Remembrance Updated Landscape Plan. Ms. Salay introduced the resolution. Mr. McDaniel stated that as a result of the new development sites and associated roadways with the Library and the Parking Garage, there is an opportunity to establish a landscape buffer along the southern edge of the Grounds of Remembrance. Mr. Earman Will provide an overview of the plan. Mr. Earman stated that the proposed landscape plan involves the area along the proposed Rock Cress Parkway abutting the Veterans Park and Grounds of Remembrance. The intent of this plan is to enable that area to continue to be a place of respect and reflection for the community, but at the same time reveal more of the park itself. During this process, input has been obtained from multiple audiences including the Veterans Committee and the original artist, Lisa Rapoport, PLANT architect. The responses were mixed — many compliments as well as some concerns, most of which they were able to address. There were also some suggestions, which MKSK will include in their presentation tonight. Staff recommends approval of this resolution. Darren Meyer. MKSK. stated that since the last discussion with Council about this project at an early March work session, they have spoken with the artist and the Veterans Advisory Committee. He will provide an update on their progress. [He shared PowerPoints of the site and proposed landscape plan.] Site: A number of developments are occurring in the general proximity of the Grounds of Remembrance -- private development, the pedestrian bridge and landing, and the new branch of the Columbus Metropolitan Library. The site is bordered on the north by the Indian Run greenway. Future roadway connections are proposed around the nearby Library site — Improvements to North Street, an extension to Franklin Street and Rock Cress Parkway. These connections are designed to serve the new Library and the parking structure that will serve the Library and provide public parking. However, the proximity of the Grounds of Remembrance recognition walk to the back of the existing Library building is approximately 93 feet. From the edge of the curb of the proposed roadway to that same point on the recognition walk is 85 feet. Consequently, there is a need is to create a buffer around the Grounds of Remembrance to protect the qualities that are important to the visitors to that memorial. At the same time, it would be desirable to enable the memorial to have a better public presence. The question is whether both goals can be achieved. The idea Is to take the great natural qualities of the Indian Run greenway and wrap those around the memorial so that, effectively, the Grounds of Remembrance is a clearing within a naturalized wooded area. Some densely spaced trees would create a buffer, but not an opaque screen, that would hide the memorial from the streets. There would also be a change in ground plane. Today, the Grounds of Remembrance has a very manicured lawn feel with views of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting August 28, 2017 Page 11 of 22 slightly taller, meadow grass. The proposed Rock Cress parkway is on the left side. Adjacent to that is a tree lawn, cycle track and sidewalk, and then the existing recognition walk of the Grounds of Remembrance, and the bordering London planetrees — all of which will be protected and preserved in its current condition. Between those elements would be the proposed landscape buffer. To the left of the site is the historic cemetery. [Description of different views of the site continued.] There is a grade change of four to five feet moving west and upward from the corner of the site toward the school. Although streetscape improvements will be made and the power lines will be buried in this location, the exposed bluffs will be preserved as best as possible and the existing Grounds of Remembrance sign will be retained. Council discussion: Vice Mayor Reiner stated that the Veterans Memorial Park has London planetrees. Is the intent to continue that theme up to Rock Cress Parkway? Mr. Meyer responded that the buffer would contain a mix of large, deciduous trees to add distinction from the rows of London planetrees. Although some London planetrees may be included, they will not be predominant. Vice Mayor Reiner inquired the reason for that. Mr. Meyer responded that the purpose is to provide some differentiation between the original memorial area and the street. Ms. Amorose Groomes stated she is disappointed that the plan does not include tree species. If the intent is for the buffer to appear to be a natural growth of trees, it should be a grove of trees that would naturally occur in this location, and in various sizes, shapes and bark texture. Although this is a landscape plan, none of that information is included. She prefers to see ahead of time what Council would be approving. She asked if Lisa Rappaport has previously accompanied the consultants for presentations to the City. Mr. Meyer responded that she has not. Ms. Amorose Groomes inquired if the artist has been to Dublin previously. Mr. Meyer responded that she might have been in Dublin when the original memorial was developed, but he was not involved at that time. Vice Mayor Reiner noted that the artist was here at that time. Ms. Amorose Groomes stated that the artist's letter refers to artwork and art form. What is the art form that we are trying to preserve? Mr. Meyer responded that he believes the art form is the existing Grounds of Remembrance and all of the elements that are a part of that. Mr. Keenan stated that it would consist of the entire project, including the walkway. Ms. Amorose Groomes stated that the artist refers to the railings and indicates that should there be more railings, they would detract from the original art form. The artist further states that she does not want railings except where absolutely necessary. Ms. Amorose Groomes asked for clarification. Mr. Keenan asked if the Grounds of Remembrance was a public art project. Mr. McDaniel responded that it was in a sense, as the Veterans Committee engaged an artist to design the loggia. Mr. Keenan stated that there was a discussion as to whether the memorial was federally protected, as is some public art. Mr. McDaniel stated that because the Veterans Committee expressed a desire to stay true to the existing art form, it was suggested that the artist be engaged to obtain her perspective on this project. Her feedback is reflected in the copy of her letter provided in Council packets. Ms. Amorose Groomes stated that the artist referred to the existing guardrail as "an art form that stands on Its own as a form that frames and mirrors the cemetery and ravine and the experience between. Any extension compromises the art form." Mr. McDaniel stated that there was discussion specifically about whether the artist wanted that railing coming out to the entranceway from the original art piece. That appears to be the concern raised in her letter. Mr. Meyer noted that the railing she is referring to has a sculpted bronze profile. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS August 28, 2017 Page 12 of 22 Ms. Amorose Groomes noted that the artist also indicates, "no new stone walls should be added. The artwork deliberately uses the smooth limestone and very controlled limestone as foil to the cemetery wall." There are several stonewalls on the site, including the "Dublin stonewall" with its bookshelf stack arrangement on top. From the images, it appears that the proposed stonewalls in this plan are not of a similar pattern as those that exist on the site. Mr. Meyer confirmed that is correct. Ms. Amorose Groomes stated that at present, the site has original stonewalls and the poured monument sign. Why would we want to bring yet another material used in a different way into this area? Mr. Meyer responded that although the detailing may not be the same as the stacked plates that are present on the historic cemetery wall, a similar limestone material would be used. Ms. Amorose Groomes stated that the City invested millions to create the same stonewalls along Dublin Road as a gateway into the Historic District. They are beautiful and well done. If the materials are changed, it is no longer a "welcome to Dublin," but a "welcome to the block". If there is an opportunity to build another stonewall along Dublin Road, It is important that it be the same kind of wall. Not only will that provide continuity, but it is also a branding — who we are. Introducing different kinds of stonewalls would be a loss of our brand. Mr. McDaniel stated that the Veterans Committee also discussed the type of stonewall that should be used. As he recalls, the reason this design was selected is that this is intended to be more of a retaining wall as opposed to the dry -laid stone that is seen along Dublin Road. Mr. Meyer indicated that was part of the concern. When they looked at the inventory of stone in Dublin, it does contain that wall detail that has been used to great effect as a Dublin identifier. However, in Historic Dublin, the buildings and wall remnants reflect a diversity of stone patterns. There is some value in looking at material that is familiar and indigenous to Dublin but used in a way that does not exactly mimic some of the gateway features throughout the community. Ms. Amorose Groomes stated that it is the stonewall that Is reflected on the City's seal. It is Dublin's brand — the City included it on its seal. She cannot comprehend a reason for changing direction in this very important part of the City. Certainly, any wall that would have previously been built in this location would have looked similar to that. Many of them are, in fact, retaining walls; along the river, there are many stonewalls with stacked plates on top. Ms. Alutto stated that her husband, a layperson, noticed the different stonewall in the proposed plan, so she assumes others will notice it, as well. Although there are differing materials in that area, the one constant is the Dublin stonewall. She understands that conversation on that topic also occurred with the artist, who seemed to have posed the same question. She also is concerned about the appearance of trees at the time of planting being quite different many years later. She prefers that trees and underplantings be used that are natural to this area. Vice Mayor Reiner stated that he understands the artist's desire to keep her design separate. The Veterans Committee spent 2-1/2 years working with her on that design. He recalls there was some difficulty with the artists use of the limestone, which was probably due to not being from this area. The artist was not aware of how soft limestone is when utilized on a flat elevation. Because she ground down the limestone for the markers, the City has experienced some difficulty maintaining them. The artist also perceives the railing as a sole element of her design, and does not want that element replicated in this plan. He does not agree with her perception; the City paid for that concept/design, which was then shared with the community. Ms. Amorose Groomes stated that she likes the railings and believes more of them would be an enhancement. Vice Mayor Reiner responded that the artist definitely wants to limit the railings to her particular design. In summary, he likes the landscape plan, which is now a different concept than originally envisioned and provides a stronger buffer. The idea of wrapping the natural elements from the forest around this area will provide the artist the security RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OMO Held August 28, 2017 Form 6101 Page 13 of 23 that her art form would remain sacrosanct. He appreciates that the plan is trying to preserve the natural limestone rock outcropping, particularly on High Street near the park signage. He believes the landscape will be a nice addition to this area. Mayor Peterson stated that the resolution language reads, "that the City Manager is hereby authorized to commence the final design of the recommendations for improvement." Is that the point at which the types of trees would be determined, and who makes that determination? Mr. Meyer responded that the next step in the process would be determining the architectural details for the walls, selecting the tree species, soil details, etc. Mayor Peterson inquired if the final plan would come back to Council for approval Mr. McDaniel requested clarification. Does Council concur with the Veterans Committee and staff's recommendation as provided, or do they prefer to see the final changes? Although the intent was not to bring the plan back to Council, that can certainly be done. Council could also defer the finalization of those details to staff. Mayor Peterson stated that the species of trees were only a curiosity for him; the wall is of more interest. Could the determination be made as to whether the traditional Dublin wall would be viable in this location? He inquired about the height of the turf next to the wall. Mr. Meyer responded that at the corner, the wall is four to five feet in height; moving upward, it disappears with the elevated grade. Ms. Amorose Groomes stated that there were some issues encountered at the Golf Club of Dublin when the stonewall immediately behind that building was proposed. That stone wall and the turf immediately adjacent were to be flush. When the inspectors reviewed this, they indicated a railing would be required on top of this wall as a flush retaining wall in a public space is not permitted due to the safety hazard created. The grade was therefore lowered, and no railing was required. A stackstone would have helped with this transition where the wall could be the height of the adjacent turf or plant bed. We were told that there had to be a nine -inch deviation of lip on the wall from the adjacent turf so that all pedestrians would be aware that a grade change was ahead. She suspects the same problem would be encountered in this case due to a very similar condition. Mr. Meyer responded that they would check into that issue. Ms. Amorose Groomes stated that what this corner represents is a determination of whether we are going to transition into the Library and become more sleek and refined, or let the Library stand on its own and remain true to our history. She believes it is very important to stay true to our history on this site and let the Library architecture stand on its own accord. The Grounds of Remembrance needs to stay completely true to who we are. Let something else provide the transition. The Library is including its own transitional element. She does not feel compelled to transition on both sides for the Library. The Veterans Park is the City's piece and should reflect us. Vice Mayor Reiner asked if this grass is intended to be ankle to knee high, or will a low- rnow grass be used that does not require any care. Mr. Meyer responded that this grass would require no mowing. One option under consideration is the Pennsylvania Sedge, such as is used at the new sculpture garden of the Columbus Museum of Art. It will require only weeding of invasive materials and no mowing. Ms. Amorose Groomes noted because it is a turf species, it could be treated with a broad -leaf weed control. It will not be necessary to weed. Mr. Meyer responded that is correct. Vice Mayor Reiner stated that the idea is to raise the elevation, providing buffering/screening that will create a smaller gap between it and the tree canopies. Mayor Peterson indicated that he supports the plan. His remaining question is if the traditional Dublin wall would be possible in this location, and if so, how it would look. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS August 28, 2017 Page 14 of 22 Mr. McDaniel summarized that Council is generally satisfied with this plan. The only issues remaining are: (1) Council would prefer the traditional Dublin wall; and (2) Council's preference regarding review/approval of the final tree plan. He asked if Council could allow staff to incorporate Council's input tonight into the final plan. Ms. Amorose Groomes responded that she would be satisfied with staff completing the tree plan if they walk the adjacent wood and use the four to five hardwood species found there, as those will be the species that would also be successful in this location. Ms. Salay stated that she is also interested in knowing: (a) what the traditional Dublin wall would look like in this location, and (2) If there could be an issue with the wall and the change in grade for pedestrians. Would the stacking component of the traditional Dublin wall mitigate that issue? Mr. McDaniel suggested that staff research that question and provide an update to Council on the selected tree species, the wall and a potential need for railing. Mayor Peterson inquired if staff has sufficient direction for Council to proceed with a vote on the resolution. Mr. McDaniel responded that Council's direction will be reflected in the record, and staff can act accordingly. Mayor Peterson moved to approve Resolution 64-17 with final landscape plan to incorporate Council direction as provided in this discussion. Vice Mayor Reiner seconded the motion. Vote on the Resolution: Mayor Peterson, yes; Ms. Amorose Groomes, yes, as it reflects the record; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Vice Mayor Reiner, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Ms. Alutto, yes. • Final Site Plan — Riverside Crossing Park West Plaza Ms. Rauch stated that this is the final site plan review for the West Plaza of the Riverside Crossing Park. The site is located on the east side of North High Street, approximately 400 feet north of North Street, between Buildings Z1 and Z2. The plaza will serve as the landing on the west side for the future Pedestrian Bridge. Review Process: The Master Plan was adopted by Council in May 2016. The Basic Site Plan was reviewed by PZC and ARB In November, approved by Council in December 2016, and because Council was designated as the required reviewing body for future applications, this Final Site Plan is before Council for review/approval. This Final Site Plan includes the input from the Basic Plan Review and has been informally reviewed by ARB. ART has also reviewed the Final Site Plan and recommends approval with a parking plan. There is no off-street designated parking given the location of the public parking garage for patrons to the District, so a parking plan is required for pedestrians. Overview: Darren Meyer. MKSK, introduced his colleagues — Chris Kimball, MKSK, who has been the project manager on all the Dublin public projects, and James Peltier, EMH&T civil engineer. He reviewed the timeline for development of the Master Plan for the Park. The west plaza landing for the pedestrian bridge is the only portion of the Master Plan before Council for review tonight. Construction of the plaza will be timed with the surrounding improvements, sequencing the construction to minimize disturbance. The west plaza will create a connection to the pedestrian bridge, a link between the emerging urban neighborhood on the east side and Historic Dublin. There is a need to protect the continuity of High Street's architecture yet ensure that the pedestrian bridge connection Is visible to the public and easy to access. Great architecture is being developed in this area with the Library and surrounding private development. The plaza is a well -thought- out space to open up those views and an experience of the river corridor. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting 4e-DArmn.MIO corm 6101 August 28, 2017 Page 15 of 22 Materials: The Intent is to create a visually seamless and functional Flow from the High Street sidewalk into the plaza, so the main paving material proposed for the west plaza is the Historic Dublin sidewalk brick. Other components: Bollards to control traffic as it approaches the bridge. They are working with ARB on this item. - Architectural precast planter benches and stairs - Grading plan — at -street grade, seamless Flow to plaza from sidewalk - Plant materials will be low, to ensure open views of river and pedestrian bridge Lighting: - Goal is to have inconspicuous lighting - Low-level lighting tucked under seat elements - Lighted handrail - Ambient light from buildings Retaining wall: - Limestone is quarried locally, is used in Historic Dublin - Use of a random, rubble pattern, with detailing on the comers - Base course will have larger stone - Continues the railing with lighting underneath Council discussion: Ms. Alutto inquired the functional purpose of the plaza. Mr. Meyer responded that its purpose is to support the Flow of traffic off the pedestrian bridge into Historic Dublin. Earlier discussions regarding the plaza focused on its size and functions. If the space were larger, it could accommodate more programmed activities. However, an increased size could have sacrificed continuity of the architecture along High Street. The early planning discussions determined that the primary function of this plaza is to highlight the bridge and river corridor and support the movement from the street to that point, limited to an informal use, such as seating. That does not prohibit programming for small events, but a respect for continuous movement would need to be maintained. Ms. Alutto stated that the bench planters are a cool design, but the size of them limits the ability to have other activities in this location. She understands that the intent is primarily to accommodate the pedestrian traffic, but the planters preclude the ability to have a small event to the side of the plaza. Perhaps removable seating should be considered. Are the bollards removable? Mr. Kimball responded that the center bollards are removable to enable EMS service to the bridge, if necessary, and for regular maintenance. Ms. Alutto inquired the height of the benches. Mr. Kimball responded that they are approximately 18 inches high -- the typical bench height. Ms. Alutto stated that although the seating is attractive, her concern is its ability to accommodate a variety of programming. She does not believe that the purpose of the landings was simply to provide passive seating and usher through traffic. If the intent of the space is to provide opportunity for interaction, it does not seem to do so. [A two -minute recess took place to permit the departure of the high school students in attendance.] Council discussion resumed: Ms. Amorose Groomes stated that the documents indicate the plaza is 7,250 square feet. According to the scale, approximately 1,500 square feet or 21% of the plaza is taken up with benches. She agrees that the benches are attractive; however, she is uncertain that Council is willing to give up nearly one-quarter of the plaza space for non -removable benches. She understands that if the plaza were larger, it would be possible to program RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS l 6 RMRRI'1'RROIlQASWYIOV. M1,0 fp�p1R1 Held August 28, 2017 Page 16 of 22 more activities. However, even at this size, there should be room for a small programmed activity, such as an art demonstration. With 21% of the same comprised of fixed benches, that is unlikely. Mr. Earman stated that much of the earlier discussion centered on the function of this plaza. With the pedestrian bridge on the north side, two outdoor seating areas for restaurants, and Dublin Road to the west, the ability to place anything of significance on this plaza is challenging. The use of this plaza was discussed previously in great detail; it was included in the Basic Site Plan that came before each of the bodies, and programming was discussed at the last ARB review. The east plaza will not have neighboring interruptions, and it is anticipated to provide a much larger, programmable space. However, in the west plaza, that opportunity is limited; for instance, utilities are being run through the planters. Ms. Amorose Groomes responded that she would anticipate a higher use on this side of the river for at least small functions, due to proximity to parking and lack of need to cross Riverside Drive. Mr. Earman responded that this space would provide that option. Another look can be done at the size of the benches. Ms. Amorose Groomes noted that on the left side of the plan, the distance between the building and the planter is only 6.5 — 7 feet -- a very tight space in a plaza, which is typically more open. Mr. Keenan inquired if it would be possible to install some or none of the benches at this time, but instead wait to see how the space is utilized before adding more. Vice Mayor Reiner stated that this is really a small, entry space. On the other side of the river, there are flat, display and landing areas that can accommodate the kind of activities being discussed. Is the intent remain to have a bicycle lane on the pedestrian bridge? If so, instead of planters and benches, he would prefer that this space ensure accommodation of the pedestrian and cyclist traffic moving through without conflict. If it does that, this space makes sense to him. Mr. Meyer responded that the space is designed to create a legible funnel for the main pedestrian and cyclist traffic from the bridge and the other traffic. Vice Mayor Reiner stated that the space design makes sense if it eliminates the conflict between pedestrian and cyclist traffic within this tight space. He asked if wire would be run for the lighting along the handrails. Mr. Meyer responded affirmatively. Vice Mayor Reiner expressed approval of the way in which the grade change between the landing and the street was handled with steps, similar to how patios handle such a grade. In his view, the space is too limited to provide display areas and accommodate pedestrian and cyclist traffic effectively. Ms. Amorose Groomes stated that she does not believe cyclists should be moving within the same space in which people may be sitting — that makes a small space even smaller. Ms. Salay stated that this plaza space is flanked by two restaurant patio spaces. Across the street is the Library, which will have a very large public plaza. She is not interested in replicating that in this location, and she assumes a Farmer's Market would be sufficiently large to be located in a larger, more appropriate space than this. From this perspective, the space does not feel tight. She likes the benches and the planters, which will add life and greenery — perhaps seasonal, to the space. She pictures this area as a more intimate space than the larger spaces on the other side of river and the Library plaza. She believes this space is appropriately designed. Mr. Keenan agreed. He envisions this as a meeting space for people crossing the pedestrian bridge, not a programmed space. Ms. Alutto stated that she does not disagree, and that is the reason she asked about the intended function of the space. If the space is Intended to be a meeting space and a RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Afeettr BABRCIT 880i118B3. UAYIRV.gII<Fdm B' Held August 28, 2017 Page 17 of 22 funnel for the pedestrian bridge traffic, not a programmable space, then this design serves that purpose. She is still concerned about the possible conflict between the cyclist and pedestrian traffic. Mr. Meyer stated that the traffic on the bridge would be mixed. He would anticipate there to be an equal amount of pedestrian traffic stopping mid-point to look over the bridge railing at the river as cyclist traffic, and the slower traffic should serve as natural governors to that cyclist traffic, reducing their speed. He does not foresee cyclist traffic coming off the bridge at any significant speeds. Mayor Peterson asked if the overhead and lower views of the space use the same dimensions because they look different. Mr. Meyer responded affirmatively. They are modeled accurately in three dimension from the plan view. Mr. Lecklider stated that he likes the west plaza design. It was not intended to be highly programmed, and that was not how he envisioned it, given all the other opportunities for programming on the west side of the river — at the Library and other locations. Ms. Salay noted that the benches look somewhat like a de facto skate park — something to consider going forward. Mayor Peterson moved to approve the Final Site Plan with a parking plan with no conditions. Vice Mayor Reiner seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mr. Lecklider, yes; Ms. Alutto, yes; Mayor Peterson, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Vice Mayor Reiner, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Ms. Amorose Groomes, yes. Downtown Dublin Garage (Case 17-0756SD/DP/SP/CU) -Final Development and Site Plan/Conditional Use and Waivers Ms. Rauch presented an overview. Background: The site is located on the western portion of the existing Library site, on the west side of North High Street, north of the intersection with North Street. The Basic Site Plan for the public parking garage and library applications was approved by City Council on April 24, 2017. City Council designated themselves the required reviewing body for all subsequent applications related to these two projects. City Council was presented two design options for the garage exterior at the June 12, 2017 meeting (metal fins vs. terracotta baguettes). Council selected the terracotta option for the building material for the final parking structure design. The Architectural Review Board reviewed and recommended approval of the Conditional Use to City Council on July 26, 2017 with no conditions. The final determination of the Conditional Use is required with City Council's review of the current application. The Administrative Review Team reviewed and recommended approval to City Council of the Development Plan and Site Plan on August 17, 2017 with 22 waivers and eight conditions. The Administrative Review Team approved one administrative departure with their review. Tonight, there will be three motions for Council to consider -- one for the Conditional Use, one for Waivers and one for the Development Plan and Site Plan with conditions. Site Plan: There have been no significant changes with the site, just refinement of the details. There are 548 parking spaces within the garage, similar pedestrian entrances as before, on North Street adjacent to the Library on the east elevation and on Franklin Street. The proposed garage includes two vehicular entrances -- one at North Street on level one and another at Franklin Street on level two. An internal book drop is proposed on the ground level in the northwest comer of the garage, with right -out only onto Rock Cress Parkway. A bike hub is proposed along the northwestern portion of the garage, along Rock Cress Parkway. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS August 28, 2017 Page 18 of 22 Council Actions: The Architectural Review Board has reviewed the Plan thoroughly. There are a series of waivers related to the Site Plan, primarily regarding setbacks, lot coverage, the design details, number of entrances and landscaping. Ms. Rauch briefly reviewed details of the conditions. Details of the requested waivers and conditions are provided in the analysis included in Council's packet. Three Council actions are requested regarding Conditional Use, Waivers and Conditions — specifically: A) Approve the Conditional Use with no Conditions. DI Approve the Development Plan and Site Plan with 22 Waivers: 1. Tower Height — §153.062(D)(4)(b). Required: Maximum tower height limited to 12 feet. Proposed: 14.5 feet. 2. Story Articulation — §153.062(G). Required: Articulation required to delineate each story. Proposed: Upper stories are obscured by the material application. 3. Front RBZ — §153.062(0)(12)(a)(1). Required: 5-25 feet along Rock Cress Parkway. Proposed: Bike hub retaining wall set back is zero and located at right-of-way line. 4. Corner Side RBZ — §153.062(0)(12)(a)(1). Required: 5-25 feet along North Street. Proposed: Building setback 1 foot. S. Rear Yard Setback — §153.062(0)(12)(a)(2). Required: Minimum rear yard setback is 5 feet along North Street. Proposed: Building setback is 1 foot. 6. Lot Coverage — §353.062(0)(12)(a)(2). Required: 80% maximum impervious lot coverage. Proposed: 92%. 7. Blank Wall Limitations —§153.062(0)(12)(a)(3)(d)(1). Required: Maximum opacity 30% on street facing. Proposed: 100% shown on ground story and varied % on upper stories. 8. Blank Wall Limitations — §153.062(0)(12)(a)(3)(d)(2). Required: No greater than 30 feet. Proposed: None are provided. 9. Vertical Increments — §153.062(0)(12)(a)(3)(d)(4). Required: Maximum opacity 30% on street facing. Proposed: 100% shown on ground story and varied percentages on upper stories. 10. Permitted Primary Materials — §153.062(0)(12)(a)(3)(d)(5). Required: Brick, stone or glass. Proposed: Terracotta ceramic baguettes and modular trellis panels (green wall). 11. Minimum Primary Materials— §153.062(0)(12)(a)(3)(d)(5). Required: 80% primary material. Proposed: 69% on the north facade and 66% on the south facade. 12. Permitted Secondary Materials — §153.062(0)(12)(a)(3)(d)(5). Required: Glass, fiber reinforced gypsum, wood siding, fiber cement siding, metal and exterior architectural metal panels and cladding. Proposed: Cast -in-place architectural concrete. 13. Tower Location — §153.062(0)(12)(a)(3)(d)(6). Required: Facades at terminal vistas (east elevation). Proposed: Towers at the northwest and southwest corners (stairwell and elevator overruns). 14. Parking Structure Entrance/Exit Lane — §153.065(B)(3)(a)(2) Required: Double entrance/exit lanes no wider than 24 feet at right-of-way. Proposed: 33 feet wide at Franklin Street and 29 feet wide at North Street. 15. Stacking Spaces— §153.065(B)(3)(b). Required: Two vehicle lengths measuring 20 feet each shall be provided between the street and garage entry gate. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS August 28, 2017 Page 19 of 22 Proposed: One vehicle length is provided at each entrance (reviewed and approved by City Engineer). 16. Interior Circulation — §153.065(8)(3)(c)(4). Required: Minimum ceiling clearance of 8.5 feet. Proposed: Upper stories provide 7 feet clearance (meets building code). 17. Landscaping — §153.065(D)(2)(f). Required: Surface area of the bed shall be predominantly covered within four years after installation by living materials, rather than by bark, mulch, gravel or non -living materials. Proposed: Exposed mulch for the green screen plantings (low maintenance, water conservation). 18. Foundation Planting Provision — §153.065(D)(7)(a). Required: Foundation plantings are required. Proposed: Not provided (replaced by green wall). 19. Foundation Planting Requirements—§153.065(D)(7) (b). Required: Foundation plantings require one shrub per 10 lineal feet of building and planting area shall extend a minimum of 42 inches. Proposed: Vines are proposed in lieu of shrubs and planting area extends 18 inches. 20. Entrances — §153.062(F)(3)(a). Required: Prominence and pedestrian -scaled entrances. Proposed: Entrances located appropriately (but are not a predominant feature). 21. Number of Entrances — §153.062(0)(12(3). Required: 1 per 75 feet of faSade minimum: Rock Cress Parkway 3 required, Franklin Street 4 required, and North Street 3 required. Proposed: Rock Cress Parkway 1 provided, Franklin Street 1 provided, and North Street 1 provided. 22. Wall Height — 153.065(F)(1)(b). Required: Maximum 4 feet. Provided: Varied height along Rock Cress Parkway. Approve the Development Plan and Site Plan with eight Conditions: 1. That the applicant provide additional details at the time of permits for the canopies that are proposed at the pedestrian entrances that include dimensions and means of attachment to the structure; 2. That the applicant provide dimensions and details regarding the retaining wall located at Rock Cress Parkway; 3. That the applicant provide revised plans to meet the side yard setback of 5 feet along the eastern property line; 4. That the applicant continue to investigate the incorporation of electric vehicle charging stations within the garage; 5. That the applicant ensure that any surveillance requirements are met regarding pedestrian security and safety; 6. That any trees required to be replaced will be replaced on site or a fee paid in lieu; 7. That elevations and plans depicting the southwestern corner of the garage be revised to be consistent among the plan sets and reflect the changes to the design (at grade entrance); and 8. That the applicant provide a photometric plan for the entire site and final lighting details that meet the lighting requirements of the Code with the submission of the building permit. Miguel Gonzalez, Moody Nolan, reviewed the material updates, including: - Additional detailing of the materials has been made, In particular, patterning In the concrete and details/color distribution of the terracotta. The latest color corresponds to the metal color being used on the Library, then a middle and a darker tone — all within a tight, natural -looking range. - A reveal between the top of the greenscreen and the terracotta has been added to meet maintenance and open-air requirements. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting BA1iRGTf B0.OnILAS-OAYIUN.OHW ipTB101 1teid August 28, 2017 Page 20 of 22 The stone has been used as top of the first floor marker — the most visible location; a cleaner character of the concrete will be located above. The perforated panel guardrail has been updated with a slot detail, more elongated to go with the terracotta pattern. There are three sizes of panels -- one is full, which runs from the bottom of the second floor to the top of the fourth floor crash rail; and a medium and smaller size on the north and west facades. (He shared images and distribution of terracotta -- panels and colors) Changes in some of the species of the greenscreen; there is now a mix of English ivy, Boston ivy and Clematis. Council discussion: Ms. Salay stated that many parking garages are very unattractive because of the lighting. It has been indicated that these lights will be hidden behind the garage beams; she requested verification that the light fixtures would be screened. Mr. Gonzalez responded that the light fixtures will be flush mounted above the lines of the beams — visually hidden from the exterior, and will be dimmable. Ms. Amorose Groomes inquired about the salt tolerance of the greenscreen materials. Dublin tends to place a significant amount of salt on the brick sidewalks in Historic Dublin. Are the plant materials 12-18 inches from the edge of the sidewalk? Mr. Gonzalez responded that the greenscreen materials would be fairly close but would have a bed of mulch beneath them. There will be a buffer zone between the greenscreen and the sidewalk. Ms. Amorose Groomes inquired the distance, as in some places it appears to be 12.15 inches. Franco Manno. EMH&T, Landscape Architectstated that at the closest point -- the southeast part of the garage -- the greenscreen is a distance of 18 inches, but in most places it is approximately five feet from the sidewalk to the greenscreen. Ms. Amorose Groomes inquired about the salt tolerance level of the English ivy, Boston ivy and Clematis. Mr. Manno responded that it is difficult to estimate, but with English ivy, the chemicals could inflict damage. Ms. Amorose Groomes inquired if a type of retaining material, such as the granite curb materials, would add protection in the tighter areas. Otherwise, there is little chance of survival. Mr. Manno responded that an upturned curb could add some beneficial separation; however, overspray from the de-icing materials would cross the curb. This area will be irrigated in the spring, thereby flushing most of the salts and de-icing chemicals from the soil. Ms. Amorose Groomes inquired what the greenscreen maintenance requirements would be while these vines are growing. Mr. Manno responded that they would be set in and staked by a landscaper and develop from that position. The mulch underneath would require some weeding, and there would be some maintenance needed for the irrigation system. The English and Boston ivies will require little manual maintenance, but the Clematis will require more management in the first year, after which the growth would continue appropriately. There will be only two ivies on a fagade; the backbone of the greenscreen will be the English ivy. The Interaction between the three ivies will be interesting to watch. Vice Mayor Reiner noted that the Boston ivy, which climbs quickly is deciduous and unattractive; its value is it can serve as a backbone — a climbing device, for the English ivy. Mr. Manno responded that is correct; it will only be used on the north fagade, primarily due to its shade tolerance. Ms. Amorose Groomes inquired about the starter course. She has seen synthetic materials anticipated to be durable but break down in winter applications. They are RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of .Dublin CityCauncil .til«;;,; SRORIERS VA"M.01110 August 28, 2017 Page 21 of 22 using an Adair limestone starter course, which is anticipated to be a more durable material. Mr. Gonzalez responded that is correct; they have used it in other projects. Ms. Amorose Groomes stated they have not given the dimensions of the starter course. With the change of grades that occur, she wants to ensure that there is at least a 10 - inch height. The applications here indicate that they are level. Mr. Gonzalez responded that this would be detailed as they move through construction documentation. Ms. Amorose Groomes inquired if they would ensure a minimum of 10 inches of a reveal of the starter course at all points. Mr. Gonzales responded affirmatively. The Adair actually comes in only two different finishes; in this case, that works very well with the stone. Ms. Amorose Groomes inquired if it comes in muldple dimensions. Mr. Gonzalez responded that he could forward that information to her. Ms. Amorose Groomes responded that isn't necessary, she is just curious. Mr. Gonzalez stated that he believes it does come in multiple dimensions; a good example is the retaining wall at the hotel — the dimensions are visible at the bottom of that wall. Mr. Lecklider commented positively on the updated design work. Mayor Peterson called for the vote on the conditional use and the final development and site plan. Vice Mayor Reiner moved to approve the Conditional Use with no conditions. Ms. Salay seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Ms. Amorose Groomes, no; Vice Mayor Reiner, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Ms. Alutto, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mayor Peterson, yes; Ms. Salay, yes. Mayor Peterson moved to approve the 22 Waivers as listed in the staff report. Vice Mayor Reiner seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Vice Mayor Reiner, yes; Ms. Alutto, no; Mayor Peterson, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Ms. Amorose Groomes, no; Mr. Keenan, yes. Mayor Peterson moved to approve the Final Development Plan and Site Plan with the eight conditions as outlined in the staff report. Ms. Salay seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mr. Lecklider, yes; Ms. Alutto, yes; Mayor Peterson, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Ms. Amorose Groomes, yes; Vice Mayor Reiner, yes; Ms. Salay, yes. . Downtown Parking Garage (17-068PP/FP) - Preliminary/Final Plats Mayor Peterson moved to approve the Preliminary and Final Plats. He noted that the one condition -- that some minor technical adjustments be made prior to tonight's Council meeting has been met. Vice Mayor Reiner seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mr. Lecklider, yes; Ms. Alutto, yes; Mayor Peterson, yes; Ms. Amorose Groomes, yes; Vice Mayor Reiner, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Ms. Salay, yes. . STAFF COMMENTS Mr. McDaniel echoed Mayor Peterson's earlier comments on the Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy issue. He noted that Dublin is also very fortunate not to have to deal with the Hurricane Harvey situation, as are its peer communities in Texas. Ms. Crandall received a moving message from a city manager in Texas, who commented on the depth of the dedication of their public servants as they face the devastation occurring to their city. The issues we are faced with in Dublin seem trivial in comparison. COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS Administrative Committee Minutes RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting August 28, 2017 Page 22 of 22 Mr. Keenan, Chair stated that Council has received the proposed Council meeting schedule for 2018. He requested that Council members review the proposed schedule, which will be scheduled for discussion and adoption on September 11. Finance Committee Mr. Keenan, Chair stated that City Council met for a CIP workshop on Monday, August 21 to review the proposed 2018-2022 Capital Improvement program. Distributed on the dais tonight was a follow-up memo responding to questions raised at that workshop. Based on the workshop discussion, there does not appear to be a need for another workshop. Staff recommends that the second reading/public hearing of the ordinance adopting the CIP be scheduled for September 11. Unless there is an objection, it will be scheduled accordingly. Dublin Arts Council Liaison Vice Mayor Reiner noted that he has been attending planning meetings for the BREAD! Festival, which is scheduled for Saturday, October 21. He requested that Council members plan to attend. Board of Education Liaisons Ms. Amorose Groomes reported that the City and Board representatives met on August 23 and had a very productive conversation. Dublin Schools recently welcomed 16,223 students back to school! Washington Township Liaison Mayor Peterson Invited Fire Chief O'Connell to comment. Chief O'Connell noted that the new Washington Township administrator, Eric Richter has been hired and will begin work on September 27. Mayor Peterson suggested that an invitation be extended to the new Township Administrator to attend an upcoming Council meeting. COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE Ms. Alutto: 1. Suggested that Council begin early to consider any possible changes to its process for the 2018 Goal Setting. 2. Asked if there are any updates/changes regarding the Concord Township activity. Mr. McDaniel responded that he is not aware of any updates or changes to report. Mayor Peterson: Reported that he and Council members Amorose Groomes and Lecklider recently attended a breakfast meeting in Union County, at which Mr. McDaniel spoke; Dublin Schools Administrator Dr. Hoadley was also in attendance. At an East Side Civic Association meeting later that same evening, Dr. Hoadley also was present. Dr. Hoadley shared that in ten years, the Dublin City School system is anticipated to grow to 20,000 students! The Dublin community is very fortunate to have an individual of this caliber leading the District. The meeting was adjourned at 10:23 p.m. Mayor — Presiding Officer Clerk of Council