HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-29-2016 Council Work Session MinutesDublin City Council Work Session
Monday, February 29, 2016
Minutes of Meeting
Mayor Peterson called the Monday, February 29, 2016 Work Session of Dublin City Council to order
at 6:00 p.m. at the Dublin Municipal Building.
Members present were: Mayor Peterson, Vice Mayor Reiner, Ms. Alutto, Ms. Amorose Groomes,
Mr. Keenan, Mr. Lecklider, and Ms. Salay.
Staff members present: Mr. McDaniel, Ms. Goss, Ms. Gilger, Ms. Ray, Mr. Gracia, Mr. Kridler, Mr.
Papsidero, Ms. Noble, Ms. Husak, Ms. Puranik, and Ms. Richison.
Also present were: Steve Kolwicz - POD Design; Pete DiSalvo - DiSalvo Development Advisors.
Mr. McDaniel stated that for a couple of years, there has been talk of the future of Legacy Office
Parks and how those intersect with Economic Development. Staff has shared some background
with Council but has never discussed it in depth. Tonight’s discussion will focus on this topic.
COMPETITIVE OFFICE STUDY
Overview
Ms. Goss stated that CBRE, one of the world’s largest commercial real estate service firms, reports
that construction of new suburban office space is on the decline. From 2011 to 2012, only 12
million square feet was filled, as compared to 160 million square feet that was built from 1988-
1989. In order to better understand the needs of today’s office environments and the future of the
Metro Office and Blazer Research districts, POD Design Group, Side Street Planning and DiSalvo
Development Advisors have been engaged in a project with staff to conduct an Office
Competitiveness Study. At a national level, there are three things that categorize trends in the
current work environment:
(1) Tenants tend to need less space overall and per employee than in the past. Businesses are
consolidating multiple offices to single locations, adopting cubicle-free open floor plans, and
shared spaces. These flexible designs can accommodate many types of users as well as
allow for telecommuting in a more fluid work schedule.
(2) Tenants want greater access to everything. They want generous amounts of parking,
access to public transportation, nearby amenities preferably within walking distance,
visibility, openness, connected environments, state of the art technology and infrastructure.
Regarding tenant preferences, a 2014 survey conducted by the National Association of Industrial
and Office Parks found that tenants overwhelmingly preferred suburban, vibrant centers to
suburban office areas.
Vibrant suburban centers, such as the up and coming Bridge Street District, support mixed-
used environments that are well connected to parking, public spaces, and outdoor places.
In contrast:
Suburban office development, such as currently exists at Metro Center:
(a) Is much more separated from destinations and amenities, and the interior spaces are
designed around single-occupancy offices, rather than collaborative work spaces.
(b) Has comparatively higher lease costs due to aging infrastructure, outdated mechanical
systems, less eco-friendly building materials, and relatively high operating costs. Those
expenses are reflected in higher rental rates, making them less affordable and desirable
than newer and more efficient buildings.
Dublin City Council Work Session
Monday, February 29, 2016
Page 2 of 13
The good news is that, compared to other metropolitan areas across the country, the office market
in central Ohio is faring relatively well. There is also a smaller gap between urban office and
suburban offices in the region, both in terms of vacancies and lease prices. The bad news is that
according to Reis, Inc., suburban office buildings accounted for 70% of the 135 million square feet
of occupied space that has gone vacant nationally since the beginning of the recession. This
means that, as the quantity and quality of office space availability increases, competition with
neighboring communities also increases. Even generous incentives for economic development may
not be enough to entice new business to our office market.
Local View - Dublin
Ms. Gilger stated that in the fourth quarter of 2015, Dublin had a very low office vacancy of
10.6%. That is good, compared to the regional average of around 12%. Typically, once the rate
drops below 11%, the building community wants to trigger new construction. Unfortunately, that
is not occurring in today’s current market. Staff’s big concern is that 65% of all the empty space
in Dublin is focused in the Metro and Blazer areas. Those areas have nearly 26% vacancy. If some
of those buildings are not backfilled, once Nationwide vacates in 2017, the Blazer area faces more
than 50% vacancy in the office product.
Dublin Development History
In the 1970s, the first commercial buildings came to Dublin, aligning inside the new I-270
outerbelt. These included Ashland, Wendy’s, OCLC, and the beginnings of the Metro
Center. Muirfield Village was under construction, and several small office buildings were
added in the northern area.
In the 1980s, the success of the outerbelt enabled better movement for commuters around
central Ohio, and growth boomed in Dublin. More traditional office parks came in, mostly in
the Frantz Road corridor. Metro Center added many more buildings as did Riverside Drive
and the Sawmill-I270 exit. Some Office use began to be developed outside of the outerbelt,
as well. The Adria Labs facility was constructed in the far western section of Dublin and
some smaller offices at Sawmill and Bright Road. In 1987, Dublin became a City.
In the 1990s, building increased significantly in Dublin. The Tuttle Crossing interchange
opened and immediately served a dozen new buildings along the southern border of
Dublin. Cardinal Health built their headquarters facility in Dublin, and the first phases of
Emerald Parkway were completed. This caused more of the construction to spill to the
outside of the outerbelt. This was also the time when CheckFree and Metatec were
pushing commercial development further to the west toward Avery Road.
In the early 2000s – pre 2003, Pacer Global Logistics built its headquarters along Perimeter,
and Nationwide built its large facility at Rings and Frantz roads. More office development
occurred, primarily in the Tuttle Crossing area.
After 2003, still feeling the effects of 2001, development essentially froze for the remainder
of the decade. The only significant office addition after 2003 was Cardinal Health’s second
building. Dublin was also fortunate to have Dublin Methodist Hospital added and some
other office products in the western section of the City.
Since 2010, little development has occurred. The freeze on new Office product continues.
Other nearby areas have offered lucrative incentives, and Dublin is competing with Easton,
Polaris, New Albany, the earlier stages of Grandview Yard and the resurgence of downtown
Columbus. Although IGS and Delta built their facilities during this decade, they were not
Dublin City Council Work Session
Monday, February 29, 2016
Page 3 of 13
speculative but were built as owner-occupied facilities. The speculative market is
essentially non-existent at this time.
Fortunately, at the western edge of the City, Ohio University has breathed new life into two
1980s buildings – formerly Adria Labs. Currently, the only “hot” spaces in Dublin continue
to be medical space in the west near the hospital and OU.
In 1970 through 1990, over 7 million square feet of Office product was added. Since 2000,
technology growth, the “green building movement,” the 9-11 event, and the economic
recession have impacted new commercial development significantly.
The total current square feet of Office in Dublin is 9.8 million. That includes small office
condos; large, class A office buildings, and owner-occupied facilities -- OCLC, Ashland and
Cardinal Health. Of that total square footage, 80% -- over 7 million square feet – is
between 17-45 years old.
Office Competitiveness Factors/Guiding Principles
Steve Kolwicz, Principal of POD Design, Columbus, stated that POD Design is a landscape
architecture firm. He and Pete DiSalvo of DiSalvo Development Advisors will be presenting
information on the two phases of the study in which they have participated.
Parking Site Analysis
The parking study evaluated the following:
How to Optimize Parking
- Evaluate parking situation -- quantities and effectiveness of parking lot layouts.
- Strategies to make some of these properties more marketable
Use of contemporary green infrastructure approaches to generate ground area, if parking
capacity is desired.
Inclusion of amenities in office parks – development of mixed uses
Improvement of site access – alternative methods of getting people to the properties that
would alleviate the parking situation other than vehicles, which generate a need for
parking, such as public transportation and interconnected pedestrian access to the
properties.
Economic Development provided them with a list of the properties they wanted them to evaluate.
Looking at them from a parking standpoint, they initially categorized the sites as:
- Potential greenfield sites – open property where future parking could be developed around
new buildings.
- Sites with constraints - developed, had some limitations but a potential for modifications to
improve or increase total parking counts on the property.
- Land-locked sites – difficult to add parking, although with some, there could be the
potential to minimally increase the parking count by redevelopment of the site.
They began by conducting onsite evaluations of all the properties. They evaluated the sites on 2-3
different days of the week and at two different times of day. They re-categorized the sites
according to their ability to meet the industry standard of four cars per 1,000 square feet. They
learned that many of the sites exceeded that standard, so looked for what other factor(s) were
hindering them.
Dublin City Council Work Session
Monday, February 29, 2016
Page 4 of 13
Four Specific Case Study Sites
Site 1 - Frantz and Rings Road (Existing Nationwide Building):
They discovered that the parking lot was never completely full. That had to do with where
the parking was -- this lot had the biggest radius of parking away from doorways. People
prefer to park as close to the door within sight distance as possible. Consequently, the
parking area on the northern end was under-utilized.
Site 2 – Metro Place:
No one parked further than 350 feet away from the doors.
Site 3 – Parkwood Place:
The information they received was that there was no parking, but what they observed was
that the parking lot and entrance door were not on the same side – a land planning issue.
Site 4 – The Preserve:
This site had fairly full occupancy.
Mr. Lecklider inquired if The Preserve was an example of a good parking site.
Mr. Kolwicz responded that it is, although there are some specific layout issues that could be
applicable to future land planning. Parking was one issue; the market was another.
Market Analysis
Pete DiSalvo, DiSalvo Development Advisors stated that they were charged to look at the Legacy
Office Parks from a market perspective and identify the areas that offer the best opportunity to
incorporate retail and/or restaurants to effectively transform some of the dated office parks into
the desired vibrant centers. Market exposure is essential to retail or restaurants. That means high
volume roads, providing high visibility, and nearby retail clusters. Although location near existing
retail is optimal, more isolated area with a destination retailer can overcome that factor.
Frantz Road Corridor:
Looking at these factors, the Frantz Road corridor represents one of the better opportunities to
investigate. In regard to a raw demand for restaurants and service and convenience retail, it
doesn’t get much better than a market of hotel patrons and office workers.
- Market Factor – Adjacent Area Hotels
Around the office parks on Frantz Road, there are two significant hotel clusters -- at the north end
of Frantz Road, there are approximately 200,000 annual room nights; on the south end of Paul
Blazer Parkway, there are approximately 180,000 annual room nights. Each area has more than
$20 million in retail and restaurant spending potential.
- Market Factor – Adjacent Office Space
There is Office clustering of 325,000 square feet at the north end, and more than 1 million square
feet at the south end of Paul Blazer. This offers a spending potential for 1,600 – 6,000 office
workers. Using a middle range of that, there are approximately 3,500 office workers within a ¼
mile circle -- they were charged with looking at the spending power potential within a walking
distance.
An International Council of Shopping Centers (ICSC) ranking of total spending shows the greatest
demand of office workers is for grocery stores, restaurants and retail. The estimated annual retail
spending power of office workers within walking distance is:
Metro/Frantz - $5.5 million;
Dublin City Council Work Session
Monday, February 29, 2016
Page 5 of 13
Frantz/Rings - $13.1 million.
Blazer Parkway - $18.5 million. The spending potential is the greatest on south Blazer
Parkway, where there is very limited development space – that is an enormous obstacle.
Site 1 – Frantz and Rings Road
Market Demand
Based on the potential market exposure and the raw demand, their study indicates that the
greatest opportunity to transform these office parks into a vibrant center exists along the Frantz
Road corridor.
- Capitalize on Frantz Road frontage.
- Incorporate portions of Metro’s vast reserve areas.
- Improve pedestrian connectivity. Remove the moats or ponds, which are obstacles for
people to walk.
- Place more development closer to Frantz Road, both to improve the visibility of retail and to
draw patrons farther down Frantz Road from SR161.
Mr. DiSalvo showed a retail development concept at Frantz and Rings Road. Because there is a
good volume of traffic and a strong base of office workers, the concept use for this area is focused
on employee spending potential. It includes a grocery, restaurant, and a convenience-oriented
retail center with perhaps small, second-story offices.
Parking Option
Mr. Kolwicz stated that they considered parking capacity of the site concept with the goal of
efficient parking that meets market demands, aesthetics and green infrastructure, connectivity to/
across/ within the site. There is the potential to add additional Office to the site. He showed a
potential parking layout -- although there are other options -- which provides five spaces per 1,000
square feet, a little higher than the average. It allows for a pedestrian corridor through the site to
connect the amenity space to the existing Office and the other direction, as well, to connect the
new Office space. If more density is needed, there is the potential for center parking decks. This
concept shows the capacity of the site with the current development approach, including green
infrastructure and pedestrian connectivity.
Site 2 – Metro Center
Mr. DiSalvo stated that the conceptual use for this site shows a much heavier restaurant cluster
along the northern end, due to the volume of hotel patrons there. They also looked at a small
retail office development on the southern end. On the southern-most side, they have suggested
small Residential or Hotel, potentially an extension of the Extended Stay, which is to the west of it.
Mr. Kolwicz stated that this plan represents significant redevelopment along the Frantz Road
frontage, where some spaces currently have a different character and different buildings. The
concept shows a redeveloped parking lot for one of the properties, increasing it from 3.9
spaces/1,000 sq. feet up to five spaces/1,000 sq. feet. There are opportunities to increase it
higher. Currently, spaces that serve as an amenity for the office users are park-like spaces. The
concept provides a more purposefully-designed employee amenity that shares spaces between
office buildings.
Dublin City Council Work Session
Monday, February 29, 2016
Page 6 of 13
Site 3 – Parkwood Place
This site was evaluated to see how a change to a previously developed site relates to potential
Code elements. They identified eight characteristics that would warrant future discussion regarding
how to re-develop these properties:
- Right-of-way screening zone
- Entry zone
- Overgrown divider
- Same use screening zone
- Special case screening zone
- Freeway screening zone
- Tree preservation zone
- Potential parking expansion
The intent of the City’s landscape code requirements is to protect, preserve and promote the
aesthetic appeal, character and value of surrounding neighborhoods, and to promote public health
and safety through the reduction of noise, air pollution, visual pollution, air temperature and
artificial light glare. When the current Code was written, Dublin “set the bar” for the central Ohio
area. What they are proposing does not suggest there is anything wrong with that, but looks at
how Dublin could set a new bar for future development and redevelopment in the marketplace.
[Review of the 8 characteristics continued.]
Site 4 – The Preserve
This site exemplifies some of the values discussed. The buildings contribute to the aesthetic value
of the streetscape. There is no need to screen all the cars on Frantz Road because the parking is
behind the buildings. Behind the buildings, there is an existing landscape area that was
maintained. Ways could be identified to incentivize assurance of a functional, aesthetic greenspace
-- preserved or new – to alleviate the parking island affect. Trees could do much better in urban
conditions. The current Code doesn’t necessarily promote a healthier environment for that
vegetation. Either developers could be asked to implement those islands differently, or if
appropriate on the site, allow them to aggregate the space – still having the greenspace but
placing it on a part of the site where trees have plenty of root zone, so they can become healthy,
large, and viable and provide the intended cooling and shading effect.
DEC - Stakeholder Input
As part of the study process, a focus group meeting was held at the Dublin Entrepreneurial Center
(DEC) on December 1, 2015. Developers, real estate brokers, and building owners and company
owners were invited to be part of the focus group. Approximately 30 participants attended the
focus group meeting. Their input indicated:
- Maximum preferred walking distance from parking lot to office entrance – up to 500 feet
- Amenities most needed along Frantz Road – restaurants, personal care, drug stores,
groceries, etc. (similar to the ICS Study)
- Parking perception – 45% is average; 55% is below average
- Most of the input related to landscaping requirements, such as setbacks and densities,
which are challenges
- Traffic patterns that don’t make sense
- Signage restrictions, related to the setbacks. Customers cannot see the signs.
Dublin City Council Work Session
Monday, February 29, 2016
Page 7 of 13
Recommendations
Mr. Papsidero stated that staff and the consultants have conducted a technical analysis. The next
step is to enter a public planning process this year, involving a plan amendment and code
amendment, which will further engage the stakeholders at Metro and Blazer and the
neighborhoods on the east side of Frantz Road. The desire is to learn the level of support for land
use, code, and design guideline recommendations in order to advance the effort to re-establish the
competitive nature of Metro and Blazer, while at the same time providing some walkable amenities
to the neighborhoods to the east. Throughout Dublin, there are a number of neighborhoods that
have been asking for small-scale, neighborhood retail that is walkable, or any type of food or other
service. That is missing is some parts of town. This is an opportunity to address that for the
neighborhoods in this area.
Next tasks to refine the work:
- Refine development strategies
- Refine site retrofitting strategies for existing development in Metro and Blazer
- Explore support services to capitalize on market opportunities and to attract the future
workforce to these office buildings
- Explore alternative and sustainable practices for better land uses
Develop Recommendations:
- Based on the issues we have identified today, and probably others that will come out of the
public process, prepare policy recommendations, code revisions and design guidelines
- The approach could be to prepare code provisions that support the creation of a new
mixed-use office zoning in this area, replacing the current zoning in Metro and Blazer
- Prepare design guidelines that implement the policy and code provisions
Review and Adoption Process:
- Complete existing conditions analysis – March-April
- Preliminary engagement with adjacent neighborhoods and stakeholders – April-May
- Develop conceptual recommendations – May–July
- Final engagement with neighborhoods and stakeholders – Aug-Sept
- Refine recommendations (plan and code) – Sept-Oct
- Propose plan and code amendments to Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council
for approval – Nov–Dec
These are the recommendations for adoption of a policy, code and design guidelines to improve
the competitive nature of the office parks.
Council Discussion
Mayor Peterson stated that the site that previously held Cooker’s, then Salvis, then a steakhouse
has experienced businesses that failed. The site would seem to be perfect – with frontage and
located next to a hotel and office cluster. Why didn’t those businesses succeed?
Ms. Gilger responded that the site has always been isolated on that side of the street. With only a
right in/ right out, the access was difficult. The issue was lack of wayfinding and the fact that it
was an isolated site without retail support – there was nothing to “feed” business to it.
Dublin City Council Work Session
Monday, February 29, 2016
Page 8 of 13
Mr. DiSalvo stated that those are good points. The visibility was also a problem. He did not believe
the ingress/egress was a significant issue. The businesses themselves were part of the issue --
Cooker went out of business; Stoney River Steakhouse was operating as a high-end steakhouse
during the recession; the Salvi’s Bistros were popular, but this last one was not actually run by the
owner. This site was not part of their operations, but was run by another group that licensed the
name. They were not a sophisticated group, and immediately fell behind on taxes and had other
issues. Initially, they had the same questions. After a closer look, they believe that the failures
are somewhat due to the market and the site issues, but primarily, it has been a result of
operational issues.
Mayor Peterson responded that he understands that, but why hasn’t Dublin been able to create an
environment that encourages the market to come, including addressing Code requirements that
may be discouraging? With the positive factors of the hotel, foot traffic, etc., there should be
market interests seeking to place a business in this location. If the City goes through the proposed
process to improve the office park competitiveness, will it open up that door?
Mr. McDaniel stated that he agrees with the comments about Stoney River and Cooker, which was
always very popular – its closure was due to a chain issue. Looking at the frontage of Frantz Road
– the same businesses have been there forever. Max and Erma’s, Graeters Ice Cream and the two
banks comprise the entire frontage of Frantz Road from Upper Metro to the hotel on the south
end. There is no opportunity for turnover. He thinks that because of its zoning and the history of
what Dublin would allow, no developer would have approached the City to ask to redevelop it. As
Development Director, he had tested the interest for that, and at this time, the development
market does not see redevelopment here as possible – not until the conditions are re-set, such as
the zoning. Otherwise, it isn’t possible to attract any interest.
Ms. Gilger stated that in the areas further down along Frantz, Blazer and Parkwood, there are no
nearby amenities that encourage this development. The current zoning is Office, and it is well
known that Office does not get rezoned to Retail in this community.
Mayor Peterson inquired if going through the planning process that was just described would
provide the needed changes that would encourage developers. We do not want to proceed this
direction unless there is a good chance of success.
Mr. Papsidero stated that is the goal. Part of the zoning code amendment would be to allow the
uses that staff believes are appropriate along the corridor, taking into consideration the public’s
input regarding acceptable uses.
Ms. Salay stated that the assumption is that the City’s should put in place rezonings that would
permit redevelopment by private developers, such as restaurants. Looking at the conceptual
drawings, the office with a center plaza is interesting. This concept looks more Dublinesque; some
of the others look like strip centers. She is interested in development that is integrated into an
office park versus a strip center. How does the Frantz Road corridor identify with Bridge Street?
Due to Metro Place’s proximity to the Bridge Street District, it appears to be an extension of that
District. Perhaps that site, now an office park, could be an area for Bridge Street type things to
happen.
Dublin City Council Work Session
Monday, February 29, 2016
Page 9 of 13
Mr. Papsidero responded that in terms of her first comment, the intent is that the design guidelines
and Code would deliver the character and quality that is acceptable in this area of Dublin – not just
standard commercial strip development. In terms of the Bridge Street District – the goal is not to
re-create the Bridge Street District or its density, but a much smaller scale of redevelopment due
to the neighborhoods to the east. Across the street are single-family neighborhoods. This
redevelopment must be very sensitive to that, and not overwhelm it. Rather, it should invite the
residents to enjoy it. It is a balancing act -- meeting the needs of the day-time workers while
meeting the needs of the residents in the evenings and weekends -- together, creating a strong
consumer market.
Ms. Salay stated that she appreciates the intent to seek the Waterford and St. Andrew’s
neighborhood feedback. She is not sure what their reception might be. There is a good amount of
both skepticism and interest concerning Bridge Street. For future re-sale purposes, it will be an
advantage to list a home as adjacent or walkable to the Bridge Street District amenities. Re-
orienting the redevelopment into the office parks versus strips along Frantz Road is an opportunity
to make it more attractive.
Mr. Papsidero agreed. Placing development further down Frantz Road, closer to the Nationwide
building, would integrate a walkable development further to the west. With the greenspace, it
would physically and psychologically connect people back to the frontage, essentially creating a
civic space for workers and residents to interact in a public plaza-like area with amenities and
sidewalks. There could be second level office overlooking the plaza – an attractive space.
Ms. Salay stated that perhaps everything could be connected with a walking/biking path -- many
people take walks in the middle of the day, particularly office workers. It would be a great amenity
to have in close proximity a place to eat lunch and walk outside. It is geographically possible to
connect the entire space.
Mr. Papsidero agreed. It would strengthen the consumer market.
Mr. Reiner stated that:
Frantz Road now appears dated. In the 1980s, videos of this area were done to share
information with other cities about how to upgrade the aesthetics of their communities
similar to Dublin, using mounding, setbacks and landscaping. Dublin has a reputation of
being an attractive, green city, so he is glad to see that a landscape architecture firm is
involved.
With the ponds at the front of the Metro Center, there is some wasted space. The Code
could be revised to permit something other than mounds, such as a simple stone wall, to
screen the view of cars. It adds a softening element. It is important to ensure that
element remains in the composition.
He likes the idea of utilizing pods. People are seeking walkable environments, and the pods
-- integrating retail with office -- are a good idea.
One idea that has not been discussed is the need for high-end residential opportunities
located close to the office parks. CEOs do not want to drive a distance to their offices, and
it is important to attractive the CEOS, if the City desires to fill its office buildings. That has
not been a strategic element of our planning. It would benefit the City’s tax base, as well.
Dublin City Council Work Session
Monday, February 29, 2016
Page 10 of 13
Unlike other cities, it is almost impossible to “cheat” on the City’s Code regarding parking
lots. There are some fundamental aspects in our Code that enable Dublin to have that
green identity. No other city codes guaranteed that. How the Code is modified is of great
interest to him. He wants to ensure the City’s aesthetic strength remains unchanged.
Mr. Lecklider stated that:
The Preserve is one of his favorite office developments. It is one of the best examples of
how an office park should look. It benefits by being broken into three buildings with three
main entrances, as opposed to one large building with one central entrance, such as the
Nationwide Building.
He would be interested in hearing about some of the neighborhoods that have asked for
neighborhood retail. The City has had some experiences with The Shoppes at the Athenry.
What he has heard is that the timing of the Athenry shops development was the reverse of
what it should have been. The City should have had the retail and restaurants in place
first, before the residential was added. However, the residential neighborhood existed
there for nearly 20 years before retail was added, and the residents were not accustomed
to that. There has been controversy surrounding that center since it was developed, and
even more recently when there was debate about the addition of an outdoor patio. There
is also an issue about the servicing of dumpsters and food deliveries at 2:00 a.m.
He concurs with Mr. Reiner with respect to the screening of parking lots. He might be
willing to sacrifice some of the landscape islands within the parking lots, or consolidation
of them in some instances, but he would not want to give up the screening – whether that
is by stone walls, mounding, etc.
The proposal is appealing. Council is supportive of doing anything reasonably possible to
enhance office competitiveness.
Transportation for the Metro Center should also be considered – perhaps a shuttle.
Mr. McDaniel stated that a transit study is included in this year’s budget. He requested an update.
Mr. Papsidero responded that the expectation is that the first phase of a longer study would be
initiated later this year. The goal was to conduct an outreach to understand the community’s
transit desires, needs, destinations, and acceptable modes. After that, they can launch the next
phase regarding options, management considerations and need for partners.
Mr. Lecklider inquired if Emerald Phase 8 would be included in the study. He does not want to
unintentionally repeat what has been done elsewhere, which the City is trying to correct now.
Ms. Gilger responded that the City hopes to accomplish that in pockets. Because it is near the
highway and much closer to a neighborhood, the City has to be very sensitive, particularly with the
Bright Road Area Plan update. They do see some type of connection to Bridge Street, because it is
immediately across the highway from Bridge Street. Connecting the two and bringing more of
those services to Emerald Phase 8 is beneficial. Currently, it is strictly Office and there is not much
interest in development.
Mr. Lecklider noted that would seem to be the same problem that the City is experiencing with
Metro Place.
Mr. Papsidero stated that there are even more challenges in terms of density and height. Any
Office development would have to be at a lower scale. Staff is evaluating the traffic issue now.
Following the Planning Commission’s recommendation, they are working with Engineering.
Dublin City Council Work Session
Monday, February 29, 2016
Page 11 of 13
Ms. Amorose Groomes stated that she is glad to see the City taking this look at the Metro Center,
with which she is very familiar -- her first job and home were in the area. She has two concerns:
This is one of the most challenging parts of the City in terms of traffic, particularly at peak
hours. A traffic study should be done at an early point. If we double the volume of people
moving through that area, it isn’t possible to double the street capacity. How would this be
addressed? Choking the traffic down would be counterproductive.
PZC looked at possible removal of excess parking lots within this area. However, the efforts
they considered would have created so many unintended consequences that they
abandoned the mission. She wants to ensure that the “costs are counted” very closely.
She, too, has no interest in lining Frantz Road with any strip malls. She understands the
renderings were only suggestions, but she did not see anything she would be interested in
having on Frantz Road – not the Mellow Mushroom or Bexley projects.
She agrees with Mr. Reiner that the landscaping in this area is very tired, largely due to the
Emerald Ash Borer. The City lined that street with ash trees, and they have been
compromised. The operating budget includes a reforestation effort, and she hopes to have
information on where that will occur. There are many things that could be done to Frantz
Road to make it look much more current, utilizing stone walls, plantings, etc. She is not
opposed to looking at some options, but wants the community to be creatively engaged.
At the last MORPC meeting, a map public engagement tool was shown. The community
could enter negative or positive comments at various points on the map. She would like the
City to explore other avenues to garner public input, rather than just surveys and open
houses.
As Mr. Reiner said, Frantz Road has been one of Dublin’s “identity areas”. It is important
not to lose that. She supports having an improved, but not new, view of the area.
This proposal is worthy of consideration, but she believes that Council should move very
cautiously.
The current trend with new building construction is parking decks. Dublin has seen little of
that; perhaps the City could look into that opportunity. Some time ago, Duke was
interested in that parking solution.
Ms. Alutto stated that the presentation was helpful. She believes a study such as this is a good
idea.
It is good to look at how to marry Dublin’s green legacy with something more modern –
determining how to retain those values and become more contemporary.
Council members have shared their interests and concerns about how to move forward
with this plan. As staff proceeds, it will be important to continue to reach out to Council
members, individually or as a group, so that the plan addresses those concerns. It is
better to propose a plan with more than one variation to avoid a need to send it back to
the drawing board.
A comprehensive communication plan for communicating with the surrounding
neighborhoods is important because the proposed changes would affect their
neighborhoods. It is important to have the support of those neighborhoods.
Mr. Keenan stated that:
He wants to ensure that what is being proposed meshes well with what is existing.
Dublin City Council Work Session
Monday, February 29, 2016
Page 12 of 13
The parking decks are a good idea. In the 1980-1990s, the City had a lot of land, and
surface parking was the way that parking needs were addressed.
The transit piece will be very important. He envisions the peak hour traffic being addressed
with a trolley or small bus moving through the area regularly – every 10-15 minutes. The
route could run from OU, Metro Center, Bridge Street, the Historic District, the Rec Center,
and the Library. COTA will not be the answer, and the City has the resources to provide
this piece. It does not need to be a 24-hour service.
He is interested in hearing input from the affected neighborhood residents, the office
tenants, and the landholders – three different sets of stakeholders.
Mr. Reiner stated that:
He likes the idea of pods at the back, somewhat retaining the front aesthetics.
In their previous experiences with other cities, is there a financial benefit for a City to use
restaurants as an infill?
Mr. Kolwicz responded that many of the examples shown were plucked from infill projects that
were perhaps more fully developed. Specific suburban applications are a new aspect. It is
necessary to determine how to avoid the strip center look -- how to add the right pieces but still
have the Dublin fit and finish.
Mr. Reiner continued:
Many of the trees in Dublin are stressed because they were put in 3-4 foot tree pits. As
discussed at the last Council meeting, the intent now is to provide a linear space for tree
root development. There is also discussion about providing 6-8 foot pits. Those
considerations are important. We want to keep our aesthetics, yet actually have landscape
materials that grow. Currently, some of the material in the older communities has grown
about 15 feet, then stopped.
He agrees with Ms. Amorose Groomes that the City may have let down on the Frantz Road
landscaping. It has been necessary for the City to require the St. Andrew’s community to
replace their pine tree screening 2-3 times, which needs to be addressed again. Emerald
Ash trees were also used along that street, which have been significantly impacted by the
Emerald Ash Borer. Frantz Road is not the sharp, beautiful street it once was, and that
may partially be because the City has let up somewhat in this area.
Mr. Keenan stated that City staff has requested that he replace the dead Emerald Ash Trees in his
project, so he doesn’t believe the City has “let up” on their efforts, at least not along Avery-
Muirfield.
Mayor Peterson stated that the expected timeframe for the planning process was provided
tonight. Does staff require anything additional from Council? He assumes updates will be
provided to Council as warranted.
Mr. McDaniel stated that staff will be following the timeframe provided. The transit piece will be
integrated at some point, depending on staff’s workload. Council ideas on that piece will also be
discussed at their upcoming retreat.
Ms. Amorose Groomes inquired if it is possible for the Community Relations staff to conduct a study
on other ways to communicate. Currently, it seems that the process involves distribution of