Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
11-04 2024 Council Minutes
Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS ty Counci Meeting GOVERNMENT FORMS & SUPPLIES 844-224-3338 FORM NO. 10148 Held November 4, 2024 CALL TO ORDER Mayor Amorose Groomes called the Monday, November 4, 2024 Regular Council Meeting of Dublin City Council to order at 7:00 p.m. ROLL CALL Present were Vice Mayor Alutto, Mayor Amorose Groomes, Ms. De Rosa, Ms. Fox, Mr. Keeler, Ms. Kramb and Mr. Reiner. Staff members present were Ms. O'Callaghan, Mr. Hartmann, Chief Paez, Ms. Weisenauer, Mr. Stiffler, Mr. Earman, Mr. Bitar, Ms. Willis, Mr. Gable, Mr. Hammersmith, Ms. Blake, Mr. Althouse, Ms. Wade, Ms. Goliver and Mr. Ament. Others present: Ret. LTC Jeff Noble, Veterans Advisory Committee; David Guion PhD, Dublin Arts Council; Matt Davis, Applicant - COhatch Development; Greg Dale, McBride, Dale, Clarion; Dr. Orie Kristel, Illuminology; Tedd Hardesty, EDGE Group and Kevin Fromet, Guide Studio. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Amorose Groomes invited the veterans present to lead the Pledge of Allegiance. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS e Veterans Day Presentation Mayor Amorose Groomes invited Ret. LTC Jeff Noble and other veterans present to come forward. She read the proclamation for Veterans Week and presented it to Mr. Noble. Mr. Noble invited everyone to attend the Veterans Day ceremony on Monday, November 11, 2024 beginning at 11:00 a.m. e Dublin Arts Council Update Mayor Amorose Groomes invited Mr. Guion to come forward and provide a Dublin Arts Council update. Mr. Guion shared the successes experienced by the Dublin Arts Council outreach efforts. Council expressed appreciation for the work of the Dublin Arts Council and congratulated them on celebrating their 40 anniversary recently. CITIZEN COMMENTS Akshay Dhariwal, address unknown, came forward to comment on Sewa Diwali and the annual food drive associated with this celebration. City Council presented Mr. Dhariwal with a letter of congratulations and thanks for the food drive efforts benefiting the Dublin community. CONSENT AGENDA e Minutes of the October 14, 2024 Council Work Session ° Minutes of the October 16, 2024 Joint Council/Planning & Zoning Commission/Architectural Review Board/Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting e Minutes of the October 21, 2024 Regular Council Meeting e Notice to Legislative Authority of a Transfer of Ownership of C1 and C2 Liquor Permits from Tamarkin Co, dba Dublin GetGo 3401, 6725 Perimeter Loop Road, Dublin, Ohio 43017 to GetGo Operating LLC, dba Dublin GetGo 3401, 6725 Perimeter Loop Road, Dublin, Ohio 43017 e Excuse the Absence of Council Member Reiner and Council Member Fox from the October 21, 2024 Regular Council meeting. There was no request to remove an item from the Consent Agenda. Mayor Amorose Groomes moved to approve the Consent Agenda. Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting i= GOVERNMENT FORM SUPPLIES 844-227-3338 FORM NO, TUTaE Held November 4, 2024 Page 2 of 21 20 Vice Mayor Alutto seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Ms. De Rosa, yes; Ms. Kramb, yes; Mr. Keeler, yes; Vice Mayor Alutto, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Ms. Fox, yes; Mayor Amorose Groomes, yes. SECOND READING/PUBLIC HEARING — ORDINANCES Ordinance 40-24 Authorizing the Annexation of 104.5 Acres, More or Less, of Property from Washington Township, Franklin County to the City of Dublin Mr. Hartmann stated that there are no changes to this Ordinance from the first reading. Staff recommended approval. There were no public comments. Vote on the Ordinance: Mr. Keeler, yes; Ms. Kramb, yes; Vice Mayor Alutto, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mayor Amorose Groomes, yes; Ms. De Rosa, yes; Ms. Fox, yes. INTRODUCTION/PUBLIC HEARING — ORDINANCES Ordinance 41-24 Amending Chapter 35 of the Codified Ordinance to Revise Fee and Service Charge Revenue Vice Mayor Alutto introduced the Ordinance. Mr. Urbanscik provided the history of the cost study and referenced Ordinance 94-13, which established the alternate year study of inflationary increases to the City’s cost of services. He stated that the last comprehensive study update year was 2022. In 2023, an inflationary measure of 4.25% was generally applied to fees in each department. Ordinance 41-24 is the result of a comprehensive analysis reviewing all the fees in the fee schedule. The Finance Committee reviewed the proposed fee schedule prior to this introduction and first reading. Mr. Urbanscik reviewed notable proposed changes to the fee schedule by department. Engineering: no new fees and the fee update increases are primarily based on staff wage and benefit increases. Parks (Cemetery): increases to interment and inurnment services are based on increased staff time and there is a new fee regarding the Grounds of Remembrance Dedication Stone for $300. Police: one increase to the fee associated with Impounded/Abandoned Vehicle Release and there were no changes to Court fees. Public Service: minimal increases to public service fees and to partner funding fees associated with public services, such as Washington Township fleet maintenance. Planning: a new pricing structure is proposed for the planning review fees including a new Planned Unit Development (PUD) component. The PUD residential and non- residential plan and plat review fees require significantly more time compared to standard reviews hence the new fee structure proposal. Similarly, Final Development Plan Review has changes proposed to the fee structure (PUD, residential and non-residential versus non-PUD). Building Standards: to continue to meet the 100% cost recovery goal, the fees will reflect a 30% increase over 2024 fees. Mr. Urbanscik noted that in 2023, the direct cost recovery was 95.5%. There are 30-40% indirect costs associated with building standards services. Council’s goal is to recover both direct and indirect costs. While construction costs have remained relatively stable in recent years, the total approved square footage has been steadily decreasing since many fees are based on square footage of resident and commercial buildings. He stated that this trend necessitates a fee increase. Staff recommended a 30% increase. Parks and Recreation: cost recoveries have remained around 50 to 55%, but based on future anticipated expenditures, fees will need to be adjusted accordingly to maintain the current recreation cost recovery program. Expenditures have returned to pre-pandemic levels and have increased the last two years. Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS blin City Council Meeting GOVERNMENT FORMS & SUPPLIES 844-224-3338 FORM NO. 10148 Held November 4, 2024 Page 3 of 21 20 Costs are anticipated to continue to increase in 2025 based on the strategies identified in the Parks and Recreation Master Plan. As a result of the October 14 Council Work Session discussion, the following is recommended: o Maximize access for Dublin residents to recreation programs, community events and amenities; o New pricing structure (Resident/Non-Resident) — remove the school district resident rate for the majority of services o Athletic Fields —- maximize access for Dublin residents to recreation programs, community events and amenities; and o Pool Lane Rentals — discussions are ongoing at the City/Dublin Schools Liaison meetings. Based upon the anticipated expenditures in 2025, an increase of 5% is recommended in both Dublin Community Recreation Center (DCRC) passes and outdoor pool passes. Mr. Urbanscik stated that the Athletic Field Usage Fees are proposed to be changed as follows: o Resident rate for recreational level of play will continue to be waived, o Resident rate for non-recreational (competitive) levels of play will increase from $10 to $15 per season, © School district residents for all levels of play will increase to $75 per season (it will increase to $150 in 2026) and o Non-resident fees remain the same. o All other field-use rentals (non-league play) should shift the school district resident fee to the non-resident fee. There were no public comments. Ms. De Rosa, referring to the 30% proposed increase for building standards, stated that there has been a real change in that we are seeing more residential than commercial buildings. She expressed concern that the 30% increase is too large of an increase and that it may be time to look at our costs and how to reduce them. Her second question was regarding the cemetery fee increases. Mr. Urbanscik indicated in his presentation that the increase was due to salary increases. She asked for additional explanation for the increases. Mr. Urbanscik stated that part of the analysis of these fees is assessing on average how long it takes staff to perform these duties that are associated with the fees. There is an increase in staff time so it is an added cost of labor. Ms. De Rosa asked why it would take more staff time. She asked for additional explanation to understand why the increase is necessary. Mr. Urbanscik stated that he will provide additional information for second reading. In response to Mr. Reiner’s question regarding these increases being due to a detailed cost analysis that was completed, Mr. Urbanscik responded affirmatively. Mr. Reiner asked if the commercial fee increases did not keep up with the inflationary increases. Mr. Urbanscik stated that the City has not been reaching the ultimate goal of 140% cost recovery. These increases are necessary to reach the cost recovery goal. Ms. Kramb asked about the fees for temporary structures. Mr. Urbanscik stated that a lot of these building standards fees are more at an aggregate. He stated that it is the revenues versus the expenditures averaged. She asked why the fee was so low for temporary structures when other items were so much higher. Mr. Urbanscik will provide more information on that particular fee for second reading. Ms. Kramb asked for clarification regarding the fee structures for PUD that mentioned a certain acreage and other fees mentioned square footage. Ms. Kramb asked why the athletic field fees were being phased in over two years rather than just increasing the fee now. Mr. Earman stated that feedback from Council at the October 14 work session was to phase in the increases rather than one big increase upfront. Ms. Kramb stated that the athletic field usage is the only fee increase that is not being implemented right away. Ms. O'Callaghan asked if the balance of Council was supportive of not phasing the increases. Mayor Amorose Groomes stated that it is her RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Minutes of Meeting GOVERNMENT FORMS & SUPPLIES 844-224-3358 FORM NO, TOTSE November 4, 2024 Page 4 of 21 Held 20 recollection that this was to be a two-year ramp up. Vice Mayor Alutto added that this was to ensure that enough time is provided from a budgeting perspective for the impacted sports to accommodate the changes. Ms. Fox asked about comparative data regarding the plan review fee structure. She stated that Dublin has gone through the process of trying to understand how to streamline or make efficiencies in our development process. She would like to know how Dublin compares with communities of similar size in planning related costs. She expressed the desire to remain competitive with other communities from an economic development perspective regarding efficiency, predictability, cost and timeframe. Ms. Fox stated that some of these fees can be substantial to certain organizations. She expressed the importance of communicating with families and groups the reasoning behind why these increases are needed; and come up with other funding options so raising fees is not the only avenue to cost recovery. Ms. O'Callaghan stated that with regard to the schools, those discussions have been happening and will continue. Ms. Fox advocated for conversations with other organizations and keeping communication going. Ms. O'Callaghan stated that the proposed fees are a result of the conversations held at the work session (10/14). Mayor Amorose Groomes agreed that the proposed fees capture the conversation relative to recreation. She added that there is validity in examining the inspection process and making sure the City is competitive. Mr. Keeler agreed with Mayor Amorose Groomes’ recollection of the discussion at the work session. He commented on the importance of benchmarking and staying competitive among our peers. He stated the residents of Dublin are getting a great deal for a recreation center that is aging. He is hopeful that the health and wellness partner request for proposals (RFP) will reveal a partnership for the recreation center refresh. He stated that our residents are paying $295 for a less than stellar experience. Lifetime Fitness would charge $1,800 a year for a decent experience and Upper Arlington is charging $420 for a stellar experience. He added that if the recreation center is improved, then residents may be willing to pay more for the experience. Ms. De Rosa stated that a challenge is hearing that our goal is cost recovery and not being the most efficient we can be. She added that we are making people pay 30% more because our world changed. She suggested that Council should have a policy discussion to examine the cost recovery model. She would like to know what other policies exist for expense control. She agreed with Mr. Keeler that there should be a policy regarding how we catch up larger amenities that need updating. Cost recovery cannot be the only metric. Mr. Keeler stated that a 30% increase seems to be part inflation and part inefficiency. It would be helpful to see what part of the increase is catching up with wages and benefits. Vice Mayor Alutto agreed that the policy has been solely focused on cost recovery and that there are other dimensions that should be considered. She stated that it would be helpful to have a better understanding of what fully loaded costs look like. She is supportive of talking through the cost recovery policy in 2025 because it is not a full review year. Ms. O'Callaghan stated that a few years ago, staff did a comprehensive benchmarking of the cost of development in Dublin. She offered to provide that report for Council as discussions begin in 2025. Ms. O’Callaghan stated that it would be good to check in with developers again on their priorities. When the past benchmarking was done, they prioritized timely reviews. Mayor Amorose Groomes summarized that there is a comfort level with the recreation related fees because that is aligned with the resident and non-resident. There may be more vetting to do on the development side. She asked staff if the timing worked for second reading with the additional information requested. Mr. Stiffler stated that it would be better to not amend the building fees and allow the remainder of the ordinance to proceed so the fees can take effect on January 1 and discuss the building fees on an appropriate timetable. Ms. O’Callaghan asked if there is an interim amount that Council Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting OVERNMENT FORMS & SUPPLIES 844-224-3338 FORM NO. 10148 November 4, 2024 ~ Page 5 of 21 20 would be comfortable providing and staff can begin the benchmarking next year. Mayor Amorose Groomes suggested bringing an inflationary number back for consideration. Second reading/public hearing is scheduled for November 18, 2024. Ordinance 42-24 Adopting the Annual Operating Budget for Fiscal Year Ending December 31, 2025 Vice Mayor Alutto introduced the Ordinance. Mr. Stiffler stated that the City’s year-to-date operating fund revenues are $87.9 million through the end of September. The 2024 revenues are $4 million higher than last year at this time. If revenues stay on pace, year-end totals should be $112-$113 million across all funds. Mr. Stiffler stated that the year-to-date expenditures are just under $75 million. Last year, expenditures through September were $71.6 million. There was an increase this year of three and a half million dollars. 2024 year-end should see a total of $98-$100 million in expenditures. Income taxes are very strong. September ended with a 5.6% increase over last year. Income tax year-end totals are projected to be $113-$114 million, which is well above the budget of $109 million. The budget estimate that was used to build the 2025 CIP and Operating budgets is a conservative $112 million. The City of Dublin has not seen a decrease in income taxes, even in traditionally bad economic times. Mr. Stiffler stated that the City is well positioned to see an increase next year or at least a flattening of income taxes. Mr. Stiffler shared a list of the 2025 operating funds. The newest fund on the list is the Opioid Relief fund that is a settlement fund that the City will receive for the next twenty years based on a federal settlement with opioid manufacturers and distributors. Revenues in this fund are not expected to be significant, but it is added to the budget as an operating fund so the City can utilize the funds in the coming years. Operating revenue represents $115 million, which is 9.75% over last year. A significant portion of the increase is the $2.5 million revenue from SportsOhio as well as the increase in income tax revenues. Mr. Stiffler shared a graphic illustrating the $10.2 million dollar increase in revenue for 2025. The increase in other financing sources is largely to do with the repayment of advances from tax increment financing (TIF) funds. The Riviera TIF is seeing significant TIF revenues that will be able to pay back the General Fund next year. Mr. Stiffler added that the City has exited the phase of the agreement where it pays the developer annually and the City will repay itself for the next three or four years based on revenues. Mr. Stiffler explained the importance of remaining conservative despite the positive increase in income tax revenue. He shared other important operating revenue projections, beginning with the Recreation and Pool funds. Staff estimated $5.3 million for the recreation and pools fund for 2025. This estimate is based on this year’s actual year-to- date of $4.5 million. The Hotel-Motel Fund Tax Revenues are estimated to be $3 million for 2025. The revenues and expenditures of the General Fund are in compliance with the City’s policy. 2025 proposed operating budget expenditures are $114.9 million or just over a 9.8% increase. The City is a personnel-driven, service-driven industry, so personnel services are the largest expenditure representing over 50% of the budget on a fund level. The budget increased for 2025 by just over $10.2 million. Mr. Stiffler stated that budget utilization is higher. Mr. Stiffler reviewed the noteworthy changes in the proposed 2025 budget. Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting GOVERNMENT FORMS & SUPPLIES 644-224-0538 FORM NO, 10148 Held November 4, 2024 Page 6 of 21 20 Noteworthy Changes - Increases The amounts represent $8.3M of the $10.3M increase from 2024 Operating Budget. Salaries & Benefit Stormwater Management Design Manual Update $200,000 Stormwater Master Plan Update $300,000 anucieam West Passenger Rail H Study — Phase II Dublin Design $250,000 West Bridge Street Framework Update $350,000 Secondary Wayfinding Study Economic Insurance and Security Solutions Development Bonding and Cloud Incentives Migrations Implementation $100,000 $226,400 $332,515 $150,000 Mr. Stiffler stated that there is an increase in other wages as the City catches up in both salaries and part-time staff utilization since the pandemic. He is hopeful that this will be the last significant increase in other wages as the market seems to be stabilizing. The collection and recycling contract with Rumpke is a contractual obligation that increases annually. The second row noteworthy changes are related to Envision Dublin and mostly one-time expenditures. Mr. Stiffler also highlighted the increase in Insurance and Bonding and stated that the increase was due to the price of insurance increasing and the City is increasing its property holdings. After the October 14 work session, staff amended the proposed budgets based upon discussion at the work session. The noteworthy changes represent a $270,000 increase for the following: o $100,000 to Transportation and Mobility for Slow Down Dublin; o $75,000 to Human Resources for Organization Evaluation; © $25,000 to Office of the City Manager for Holiday Lights; o $45,000 to Office of the City Manager for Review of Procurement Policies and Procedures; and o $25,000 to Parks Operations for Autonomous Mowers. Mr. Stiffler reviewed the 2025 proposed operating budget expenditures and stated that there was an increase of 7.4% in salaries over the 2024 operating budget and 1 added new position of a Maintenance Worker. Mr. Stiffler noted that there are wage increases in the budget per union contracts. The average wage increase was 4% for non-union personnel. He then provided the 2025 operating budget benefit expenditures. Benefits increased 3.7% over the 2024 budget. Cost of health insurance increased 7.2% for single coverage and 8.1% for family coverage. Contributions to retirement systems are as follows: o Ohio Public Employee Retirement System (OPERS) — the City contributes 14% for all non-police employees and o Ohio Police and Fire Pension Fund — the City contributes 19.5% for police employees. Operating expenditures increased 14.1% over the 2024 operating budget. Contractual Services make up a large portion of that increase. A large portion of the contractual services increase can be attributed to SportsOhio and the new management contract. The remaining increases are largely attributable to the one-time implementation costs of Envision Dublin or different studies associated with the West Innovation District. Mr. Stiffler illustrated the 5.7% increase in supplies over the 2024 operating budget as well as the 2.5% increase in the Other Charges and Expenditures line item. Mr. Stiffler explained that there was an increase in contingencies as well as the Beautify Your Neighborhood grants. Capital expenditures are projected to increase 29.7% from the 2024 operating budget. Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting GOVERNMENT FORMS & SUPPLIES 644-224-3338 FORM NO. 10148 Held November 4, 2024 Page 7 of 21 20 Mr. Stiffer illustrated a positive $71,776 variance in the budget. He concluded his presentation by noting that the City routinely wins the Government Finance Officers Association Triple Crown, which is the reporting requirements for accountability and transparency and the Ohio Auditor of State Award with Distinction for the City’s audits. This year, the City earned an additional honor of being the first and only US City to earn four AAA ratings when we added Kroll Bond Rating Agency. There were no public comments. Ms. Kramb stated that the $100,000 that was added for transportation and mobility as a result of the work session references the evaluation of tactical urbanism methodologies. She stated that she did not recall that conversation and thought the addition was for additional signs or technology. She stated she was not supportive of spending more money to evaluate tactical urbanism before we received the report from the pilot program. Ms. O'Callaghan stated the discussion at the work session was about cameras, but staff was looking at the Slow Down Dublin campaign specifically and since then, there have been issues that have come to light with the installations of the tactical urbanism. Ms. Willis stated that the tactical urbanism pilot projects that have been implemented this year did not wear well. They were meant to see if it would be effective or not. Staff found that the pilots were effective in lowering speeds of vehicles. In preparation for the operating budget and work session, staff was unaware of how the materials would wear. Staff has researched materials and obtained proposals for different types of sticker material that would cost about $33,000 per intersection. Three intersections would cost about $100,000. Ms. Kramb suggested holding off on that and if it is determined that it is needed, it can always be added. She added that Council has not yet discussed the pilot program results or whether it should continue. It could be added later in a supplemental appropriation. Mr. Keeler asked if the quantity of driver feedback signs is already in the budget. He sought confirmation that the $100,000 that was added was not for additional driver feedback signs. Ms. Willis answered affirmatively. She explained that there are six driver feedback signs in the budget, three of which will finish the school zone locations and the additional three for the rotating driver feedback sign program or other needs. Ms. O'Callaghan stated that when the Speed Management Program was adopted by Council, there was an accompanying implementation plan. The proposal in the operating budget matches the implementation plan. There was a request by Council Member De Rosa to add more signs than previously anticipated per that implementation plan. Mayor Amorose Groomes clarified that these are new asks that came out of the work session. Ms. O'Callaghan specified that some of the new items on the list came from comments in her evaluation, and others are staff looking ahead to make sure everything is covered for 2025. Ms. De Rosa stated that we have learned that these driver feedback signs work to slow down traffic. She agreed with Ms. Kramb that it has not yet been evaluated as to whether tactical urbanism works. She advocated for doing what we know works rather than following a prescribed plan. Ms. Kramb questioned the $75,000 for workforce planning. She stated that Council needs to have the discussion and articulate specifically what is needed prior to hiring consultants. Council has not had these discussions yet so she is unsure that hiring a consultant was the expectation. Ms. Kramb also commented that the Clerk position needs to be added to the budget. Ms. De Rosa shared the following comments: o She asked about the difference in the total expenses that were shown at the work session versus at this meeting. Mr. Stiffler stated that the number Ms. De Rosa is referring to was an error. o She is unsure the list of new items includes those that were mentioned by Council at the work session. She asked for reconsideration of the items that Council requested. Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting GOVERNMENT FORMS & SUPPLIES 644-224-3538 FORM NO. 10146 Held November 4, 2024 Page 8 of 21 20 o She also requested an explanation for why the City Manager contingency fund needs to be increased. o She thanked staff for the analysis regarding the Irish Festival, which showed a significant loss. She suggested being more aggressive in how the revenue is viewed for that. She stated that she is aware that a consultant is looking at this. o She noted a disconnect between summer camps and the cost recovery policy that was discussed earlier. Summer camps are cash positive but are not 100% cost recovery which is inconsistent with the rest. If cost recovery should only be at 100% then it should be only at 100% for all fees. She stated that it is a policy discussion for later. o She asked about salary increases in the budget noting that she thought it was 4% but Mr. Stiffler reported that it had gone up 7%. Mr. Stiffler stated that the increase in salary is a number of components, not just the employees’ salary. The salary increase includes the benefits. The self-funded healthcare fund is essentially overfunded. Staff is attempting to lower the fund balance by moving the funding from that fund balance to one that needs it, which is the accrued leave fund. Staff is transferring the costs from benefits to salaries, specifically the accrued leave fund. This allows staff to move the funding where it is needed on the balance sheet more appropriately without impacting the variance between revenues and expenditures. Ms. De Rosa thanked Mr. Stiffler for the explanation and asked that the presentation be updated to reflect that explanation, so the residents do not think there is a 7% increase in our salaries. Ms. Fox thanked staff for the follow-up memo and information. She asked about contractual services versus staffing. She stated that she understands that hiring staff creates long-term responsibilities and increased costs. She stated that she believes it is worth looking at again. She shared that she looks forward to continuing the discussion about some of these items that were added. She expressed that when it comes to additional staffing, she believes it needs some consideration. Mayor Amorose Groomes summarized that staff will bring back a number of clarifying considerations for the next reading. Ms. O'Callaghan suggested going through the new items list now to get clarification. She added that the transportation and mobility and the organization assessment were added based on comments she had heard. She stated that if the majority of Council would like to remove any items, she is fine removing them. Mr. Keeler suggested keeping the transportation and mobility, but recharacterizing for driver feedback signs instead of tactical urbanism. Ms. Fox stated that Council gave the “green light” to staff to implement the Speed Management Plan, so it is unfair to change it now. If additional signs are needed, she suggested putting that request in a supplemental appropriation. Ms. Kramb expressed her concern with leaving it as it is when the project has not been completed or evaluated. She stated it is harder to take the money back later. Ms. De Rosa suggested lowering the amount and making the purpose more generalized so that it can be used for what has shown to be effective. She added that she would like to understand more about the organizational assessment before she agrees to that item. She stated she was fine with the holiday lights and mowers. She wanted to be sure that what was requested for additional information at the work session and this reading was provided to Council. Mayor Amorose Groomes summarized that she is hearing consensus of Council to leave the $100,000 in but earmark it more generally. She continued that the organizational assessment requires additional explanation. Ms. O’Callaghan stated that she can provide a memo with the follow-up information requested prior to second reading. Ms. De Rosa stated that the other outstanding item was Ms. Fox and Ms. Kramb’s request to look at staff again. She explained that Council requested information and that has not yet been resolved. Ms. Fox clarified that she wanted to make sure she understood the process and how staffing requests are filled by following a policy. Ms. O’Callaghan stated that she provided a comprehensive report on all the positions that had been requested as Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting GOVERNMENT FORMS & SUPPLIES 644-224-3558 FORM NO, 10148 Held November 4, 2024 Page 9 of 21 20 well as the disposition of those requests. She asked if there was additional direction from Council. Mayor Amorose Groomes stated that staffing decisions can be made outside the budget process with a supplemental appropriation and to allow time for additional discussion. Vice Mayor Alutto agreed that a supplemental is the appropriate route to allow time for discussion. Ms. Fox agreed that more discussion would be appreciated. In response to whether the building standards 30% fee increase was incorporated in the budget, Mr. Stiffler stated that waiting on the building standards 30% increase will not have a budgetary impact on revenues. Discussion was held regarding the timing of the cost study and whether it needs to “piggyback” on the budget process. Mr. Stiffler clarified that there are fees that do have an impact on the budget, such as recreation fees. The building, planning and engineering fees that are in the general fund are a less-significant revenue source that are not impacted in the budget. Ms. De Rosa would appreciate more clarity on that. Ms. O'Callaghan stated that the Code requires that this is done once a year. Mr. Stiffler added that it is done at this time of year for a January 1 start date. He stated that cost study adjustments have been done during the year if necessary as well. Mayor Amorose Groomes stated that this can be evaluated at an upcoming agenda meeting to get these topics more aligned prior to the end of the year. Second reading/public hearing is scheduled for November 18, 2024. Ordinance 43-24 Amending Various Sections of Ordinance 15-17 (Compensation Plan for Non-Union Personnel) Vice Mayor Alutto introduced the Ordinance. Ms. Miglietti stated that this Ordinance is a companion ordinance to the operating budget ordinance. In addition to the changes that Council has already discussed, there are a few other specific proposed amendments to the compensation plan under wage and salary structure. It is proposed to include an updated list of job classifications consistent with the proposed operating budget. A column was added illustrating which positions are exempt versus non-exempt status. Additionally, it is proposed to pay non-permanent employees time and a half for all holidays worked. Finally, under Section 12 Tuition Reimbursement, it is proposed to increase tuition reimbursement to $7,000 annually. There were no public comments. Vice Mayor Alutto asked if staff anticipates much of an impact from the upcoming Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) changes. Ms. Miglietti stated that based on the upcoming FLSA changes, there have been a few changes to the classifications under exempt versus non- exempt. Ms. Kramb asked how often the tuition reimbursement is used. Ms. Miglietti stated that there are approximately 18 employees citywide that use it. In response to Ms. De Rosa’s question regarding whether the positions listed are in the organizational chart, Ms. Miglietti stated that these are all the position titles that have existed for the last several years and we have added to them. Ms. De Rosa asked how titles are determined, such as Director versus Chief. Ms. Miglietti stated that it largely due to market study. Titles can evolve over time and whatever is happening in the workforce at the time can prompt a title change. Second reading/public hearing is scheduled for November 18, 2024. Ordinance 44-24 Amending Chapters 51 and 52 Establishing User Fees and Capacity Charges for the Sanitary Sewer and Water Systems Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting GOVERNMENT FORMS & SUPPLIES 644-224-3508 FORM NO. 10146 Held November 4, 2024 Page 10 of 217 20 Vice Mayor Alutto introduced the Ordinance. Mr. Stiffler stated that this ordinance establishes the user fees for sanitary sewer and water service. It contains a 1% increase for water service and a 6% increase for sanitary sewer services. These were the fees that were adopted as part of the 2024-2028 CIP. He added that during the CIP process Council stated that they would like to discuss the funding of sanitary sewer projects further. Staff did not proceed with those fees at this time. A discussion will be scheduled early next year to discuss how to fund sanitary sewer projects before the next CIP process. The 6% increase proposed in this ordinance reflects the last adopted multi-year fee structure by Council. Staff recommended approval at the second reading/public hearing on November 18. There were no public comments. Second reading/public hearing is scheduled for November 18, 2024. Ordinance 45-24 Amending the Location and Amount of Cash on Hand for Change Funds Vice Mayor Alutto introduced the Ordinance. Mr. Stiffler stated that as staff evaluates operations and makes improvements, the cash needs of the City are evaluated and adjustments are made based on the cash needs. The division of Court Services proposes to increase their Change Fund from $100 to $200. The Finance Division is proposing a reduction in Cash on Hand from $200 to $100. A change fund is no longer needed in Finance as credit card processing machines make it unnecessary. He stated that the changes reflect efficient changes to operations. Staff recommended approval of the ordinance at the second reading/public hearing on November 18. There were no public comments. Second reading/public hearing is scheduled for November 18, 2024. Ordinance 46-24 Rezoning of Approximately 0.913 acres on Both Sides of N. Riverview Street, South of North Street and North of Wing Hill Lane from HD-HR, Historic District - Historic Residential and HD-HP, Historic District - Historic Public to HD-HC, Historic District - Historic Core (Case 24-110Z) Vice Mayor Alutto introduced the Ordinance. Mr. Bitar stated that the City acquired eight parcels in 2021 with the goal of spurring development that is compatible with the character and scale of the Historic District. The area of the rezoning is North Riverview Street, south of North Street and North of Wing Hill and consists of three parcels on the west side of the street and part of three parcels on the east side of N. Riverview Street. An advisory committee was formed and an RFP issued in 2022. Two proposals were received, with COhatch being one of the proposals. The advisory committee and City Council were supportive of the approach, which included preserving and renovating some of the existing structures, as well as adding and creating new structures. In early 2023, the Architectural Review Board (ARB) reviewed the concept plan and was supportive of the concept and for the potential rezoning of these properties to accommodate the uses that were proposed. Three of the parcels to the south were sold at auction and are in the process of being renovated. The City signed a Development Agreement with COhatch in late 2023 that outlined an approach for COhatch to get through the approval process through 2024. The City also played a role in public infrastructure improvements that would be made. In March of 2024, the Architectural Review Board (ARB) recommended approval of the concept plan for the project and demolition of some of the accessory structures. More recently, ARB approved the parking plan, the Preliminary Development Plan and recommended to Council and the Planning and Zoning Commission (PZC) approval of the rezoning with no conditions. PZC made the same recommendation. The Final Development Plan is still subject to ARB approval later this month. Mr. Bitar provided an overview of the project itself. The zoning on the west Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS ublin City Council Meeting GOVERNMENT FORMS & SUPPLIES 844-224-3338 FORM NO. 10148 Held November 4, 2024 Page 17 of 217 20 side is currently Historic Residential which accommodates residential uses. The east side is Historic Public which accommodates parks, public spaces, schools, and so forth. Neither of these allows the uses that are being proposed by COhatch, so a rezoning to Historic Core is necessary. It is important to note that the only portion of the east side that is being rezoned is the minimum necessary to accommodate the developments. Current Zoning ay HD-HR: Historic Residential #4 HD-P: Historic Public i] HD-HC: Historic Core The area in yellow is the area requested for rezoning. Everything else on those parcels to the east would remain under City ownership with the Historic Public zoning and would be incorporated in the Riverside Crossing Park development. The uses proposed under the rezoning are consistent with the Mixed-Use Village that was incorporated into the Envision Dublin Plan. It is also consistent with the Historic District Special Area Plan within Envision Dublin. Staff recommended approval at the second reading/public hearing scheduled for December 9, 2024. There were no public comments. Ms. Fox stated that she is in favor of the rezoning and excited about this project. She asked about the parking issues that have been discussed as part of ARB’s review. She stated the reality of this density is there are likely to be parking issues. Mr. Bitar stated that there are specific provisions in the Historic District Code in terms of the requirements for parking within the Historic District. He also referenced the Community Plan and the goals to achieve parking away from these dead-end streets and confined areas. The intent is to use the garages and public spaces. Mr. Bitar explained that the provisions were discussed and vetted at ARB and the Board was satisfied that the criteria had been met. He reiterated that the goal is to direct vehicle traffic away from the areas, so the nature of the area becomes more pedestrian oriented. Ms. Fox expressed her concerns about parking. Mr. Reiner asked about the City’s financial commitment to this project. Ms. O’Callaghan stated that there are estimates, but some decisions still need to be made regarding the materials. Many of the estimates are included in the CIP. The topic of public improvements and streetscape treatments will be coming to Council in an upcoming meeting. Mr. Stiffler stated that there is $11.4 million in the 2025 CIP and there was $1.5 million approved in the 2024 CIP for design. Mr. Reiner asked if the current owner of these parcels will be able to sell them. Mr. Bitar stated that there are obligations of the parties regarding ownership in the development agreement. The rezoning does not address those provisions. Ms. O’Callaghan stated that staff will outline the terms of the development agreements associated with this project as a refresher. Mayor Amorose Groomes stated that typically a rezoning covers the entirety of a parcel, but that is not the case here. She asked if a parcel adjustment is being done with this rezoning. Mr. Bitar responded affirmatively and stated that once all approvals have been Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting GOVERNMENT FORMS & SUPPLIES 644-224-3308 FORM NO. 10148 Held November 4, 2024 Page 12 of 27 20 granted there would be a lot split. There is a legal description that is specific to the new parcel shown in yellow. Mayor Amorose Groomes asked if the portions that fall outside the yellow boundaries will revert back to parkland. Mr. Bitar stated that what is in the yellow is a new tract of land essentially. Ms. Kramb stated that the rezoning is just for the surveyed area, not the parcels in their entirety. Mayor Amorose Groomes asked if it is possible to rezone just a portion of a parcel. Mr. Hartmann responded affirmatively and stated that as long as there is a legal description, then it will be finalized once the rezoning is complete. Ms. Fox asked Mr. Davis (applicant) if there would be the use of a valet to help mitigate parking concerns. Mr. Davis stated that many discussions have taken place with the Historic Dublin Business Association (HDBA). He is happy to be part of those discussions, and valet is certainly an option. He added that he is very comfortable with the City’s studies and analysis regarding parking. Mr. Reiner asked Mr. Davis about the specific uses for the different structures in this project. Mr. Davis stated that the red cabin at 62 North Street will be a restaurant, bar and café. He shared some of the other ideas that will serve this area as well. He shared that his goal is to get everyone walking off the Dublin Link bridge to connect with this area. He also envisions working space for meetings and co-working during the day. Vendors and craftsmen can come in on the weekends and demonstrate their art or craft and bring vibrancy to the area. Second reading/public hearing is scheduled for December 9, 2024. Ordinance 47-24 Authorizing the Provision of Certain Incentives to CSD Dublin LLC to Induce it to Develop Riverview Village and its Associated Operations and Workforce within the City; and Authorizing the Execution of an Economic Development Agreement Vice Mayor Alutto introduced the Ordinance. Mr. Gracia stated that the Real Estate Transfer and Development Agreements in October 2023 regarding Riverview Village have provisions for the City to provide income tax incentives and development grant payments tied to the development of Riverview Village. This ordinance authorizes an economic development agreement that lays out performance income tax incentives for COhatch’s headquarters as well as all new members starting in 2027. This agreement is a little different in that it does not specify minimum targets but does provide for annual caps on performance incentives for the City’s budgeting purposes. COhatch must maintain operations for at least ten years at this location, otherwise they would be asked to repay all incentive payments made by the City. There were no public comments. Mayor Amorose Groomes stated that there are no changes to what was agreed upon in the 2023 development agreement. Mr. Gracia responded that was correct. Second reading/public hearing is scheduled for November 18, 2024. Ordinance 48-24 Declaring the Improvement to Certain Parcels of Real Property in the City’s Bridge Street District to Be a Public Purpose and Exempt from Taxation; Providing for the Collection of TIF Service Payments; Specifying the Public Infrastructure Improvements Directly Benefiting the Parcels; and Authorizing Compensation Payments to the Dublin City School District and the Tolles Career and Technical Center (COhatch Project) Vice Mayor Alutto introduced the Ordinance. Mr. Stiffler stated that, as stated earlier in this meeting, the 2024 CIP contained design costs of $1.5 million for the public improvements associated with the private Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting GOVERNMENT FORMS & SUPPLIES 644-224-0308 FORM NO. 10148 Held November 4, 2024 . Page 13 of 21 20 improvements regarding the COhatch project (Riverview Village). The 2025 CIP includes $11.4 million for construction of private and public improvements in the Riverview Village area. This ordinance (48-24) would place a tax increment financing district on the headquarters, three houses and COhatch building in order to generate service payment revenues to make payments toward the debt service associated with those public improvements. There were no public comments. In response to Mr. Reiner’s question regarding private investment, Mr. Stiffler stated that there is at least $8 million in private investment funded by COhatch. Mr. Reiner stated that the City’s budgeted amount is $11.4 million for construction and $1.5 million for design. Mr. Stiffler responded affirmatively but added that the improvements are not necessarily all associated with this development, some are improvements in the area. Mr. Reiner asked what will happen to this property after the ten-year obligation that COhatch has. Mr. Stiffler stated that the TIF revenues would be based on property values. Second reading/public hearing is scheduled for November 18, 2024. Ordinance 49-24 Amendments to Zoning Code Sections 153.170, 153.173, 153.174, and 153.176 to Address Background Buildings, Administrative Approvals and Waivers Criteria (Case 24-012ADMC) Vice Mayor Alutto introduced the Ordinance. Ms. Holt introduced Mr. Dale from McBride, Dale, Clarion. Mr. Dale stated that this process is part of a larger effort in which the City has been engaged to improve processes regarding the Historic District. In 2023, Council approved the first round of changes recommended. There were a series of public hearings at the time to solicit input from residents and business owners in the area. Out of those discussions came an interest in further improvements to the process and to create a process that was faster and more efficient for applicants. The scope of phase two was the following: e Increase types of Administrative Approvals Clarify background building guidance (Code and Guidelines) Provide timeframe extension for Final Development Plans Create door and garage door approvals for Landmark Buildings Address typographical errors and Simplify waivers/variances. Ms. Holt stated that, at the public’s request, staff expanded the numbers and types of administrative approvals. She provided the following list: Administrative Approvals * Lighting + Residential hardscape < 3’ tall (patios, walls) + Commercial landscapes . Signs (not MSP) + Replacement aw + Commercial outdoo * HVAC screening, not affecting architecture Ms. Holt stated that this list represents the topic areas that are now eligible for administrative approvals. There are some built-in safeguards for this process, such as reporting all administrative approvals quarterly to ARB as well as the clause requiring a full hearing if requested by either the City or the applicant. Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting OVERNMENT FORMS & SUPPLIES 644-224-3058 FORM NO, 10148 Held November 4, 2024 Page 14 of 21 20 She stated that this is also an opportunity to address waivers and simplify this process. There are currently three different categories of waivers in the Code. The proposed amendment would combine all three of these different types of divergencies into just waivers that would be approved by ARB only. Legal staff was in agreement with this proposed amendment. Ms. Holt shared that new specific language was added that the requested waiver amount is just the amount necessary to affect and address this needed change. All other waiver criteria stay in place. Mr. Dale concluded by stating that this was an extensive process to make sure that it did provide efficiency and was effective. The initial public meetings that took place were integral in making these changes after hearing what the public wanted. There was no opposition by either ARB or PZC at their meetings and both unanimously recommended approval. There were no public comments. Ms. Fox thanked staff and Mr. Dale for listening to residents and making the process easier. She stated that everyone in the Historic District wants a beautiful community and neighborhood. She reiterated the importance of going through this exercise. Ms. Fox asked about the subjectivity on the part of the reviewer and whether there is good predictability about how the process will go from the applicant perspective. Ms. Holt stated that she believes that there is predictability and that the guidelines, which is the next step, will help with that also. The guidelines will be coming forward on November 18, as this ordinance has its second reading. Second reading/public hearing is scheduled for November 18, 2024. INTRODUCTION/PUBLIC HEARING/VOTE — RESOLUTIONS Resolution 56-24 Authorizing the City Manager to Enter into a Contract with Artist Ivan Depefia for the Design, Construction and Installation of the Muirfield Art in Public Places Project (“S/WING”) Located at the Northeast Parcel of Muirfield Drive and Whittingham Drive Vice Mayor Alutto introduced the Ordinance. Mr. Earman stated that in May 2022, staff was informed that the City received a grant award from the State of Ohio for $175,000 for a particular art piece. In September of that year, the City entered into a Memorandum of Understanding with the Dublin Arts Council and the Muirfield Association to ensure that requirements were met for the grant. August of 2023, the site selection was approved at the northeast parcel of the Muirfield and Whittingham Drive intersection. October of 2023, the Dublin Arts Council performed a call of artists. In June of 2024, Ivan Depefia was chosen out of 122 applicants. The project represents the inspiration drawn from movement and flight. The artwork embodies the dynamic motion of a golf swing inspired by Jack Nicklaus. The piece will be approximately 12-15 feet high by 12-15 feet wide and be made of cast stone. Mr. Earman stated that the City will fund the upfront total amount of the project which is $175,000 and was included in the Q3 supplemental appropriation ordinance. The Muirfield Association will donate a portion of the parcel for the artwork. The Muirfield Association will grant any easements necessary for artwork installation and maintenance going forward and the City will seek reimbursement from the State. By way of agreement, Muirfield will maintain the parcel landscaping and the City will maintain the art piece itself. There were no public comments. Vote on the Resolution: Mr. Reiner, yes; Ms. Fox, yes; Ms. De Rosa, yes; Mr. Keeler, yes; Ms. Kramb, yes; Mayor Amorose Groomes, yes; Vice Mayor Alutto, yes. Resolution 57-24 Authorizing the City Manager to Enter into a Contract for Public Health Services with the Board of Health of the Franklin County General Health District for 2025 Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting GOVERNMENT FORMS & SUPPLIES 644-224-3338 FORM NO. 10148 Held November 4, 2024 Page 15 of 21 20 Vice Mayor Alutto introduced the Ordinance. Ms. O'Callaghan stated that Resolution 57-24 authorizes a contract with Franklin County Public health to continue providing public health services for 2025. Franklin County Public Health serves as Dublin’s public health agency for the entire city and that includes the portions of Dublin that are within Union and Delaware Counties. The Board of Franklin County Public Health approved a new rate for 2025 that reflects an overall increase of 3% over that of 2024. The City’s cost for the 2025 contract is estimated to be just over $497,000 which is based on our population. That equates to an increase of approximately $10,386. Ms. O'Callaghan stated that the City values its partnership with Franklin County Public Health and the City has been satisfied with the services they provide. Staff recommended approval. There were no public comments. Vote on the Resolution: Mayor Amorose Groomes, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Ms. Fox, yes; Ms. De Rosa, yes; Mr. Keeler, yes; Vice Mayor Alutto, yes; Ms. Kramb, yes. OTHER BUSINESS e Community Health Needs Assessment and Draft Strategic Action Plan Update Ms. Steiner introduced Dr. Orie Kristel, Principal at Illuminology. She stated that for the last 18 months, the City has been working with Illuminology to conduct a comprehensive community health needs assessment to identify and analyze community health needs specific to Dublin. This project is consistent with the themes and goals outlined in the City’s Strategic Framework, with the purpose of contributing to the City’s goal of being most resilient. A draft Community Health Needs Assessment Report and Strategic Action Plan has been developed to help guide the City toward improved health outcomes. Staff requested feedback from City Council before finalizing the plan. Dr. Kristel provided a high-level summary of the plan. Dr. Kristel stated that the assessment is a unique and holistic evaluation of the public's health and well-being. Since then, the focus has shifted to the City’s Strategic Action Plan that focuses on leveraging those assessment results and developing recommendations that help to improve community health. The success of a community planning effort like this is dependent on the engagement and participation of a variety of community organizations. Fortunately, there are many organizations that have agreed to participate in this process. Dr. Kristel stated that this health planning effort builds on the foundation of the work that was done last year, which included six focus groups of residents, 21 stakeholder interviews, a survey of adults and a community poll. The process is now in the synthesis, prioritization and planning phase of work. The result of the aforementioned work is the prioritized health needs, which are: e Community Connections; e Health Care Navigation; e Youth Behavioral Health; and e Transportation. There are objectives to each of these prioritized areas. The Community Connections relates to engaging members of the community with each other whether that be through homeowners’ associations (HOAs) or faith-based organizations or clubs. Understanding what makes some residents feel less connected than others and working to better communicate with them is paramount. Regarding Health Care Navigation, a centralized source of healthcare access information for Dublin residents was the main focus. The work group is currently considering the potential for artificial intelligence solutions for this objective. The other focus is on deploying additional health workers that have expert knowledge about the types of healthcare access and getting them more connected to residents. Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting GOVERNMENT FORMS & SUPPLIES 644-224-3338 FORM NO, 10148 Held November 4, 2024 Page 16 of 21 20 Youth Behavioral Health objectives center around informing and empowering Dublin parents and exploring potential actions that can be taken to make it easier for Dublin families to access treatment for their children. Lastly, with regard to transportation, the focus was the possibility of expanding outreach efforts associated with the Dublin Connector and educating residents on LinkUS initiatives. He welcomed Council feedback or questions. There were no public comments. Mr. Reiner stated that connectivity and common friendship are mainly found with common interests. He is very supportive of this initiative. Dr. Kristel stated that the City can play the role of facilitator in these conversations. Ideas can be shared with other organizations around the City to offer options and opportunities to connect. Mr. Reiner noted that the healthiest civilizations are focused on diet and exercise. Mr. Reiner referenced past City programs that have been in furtherance of health and wellness. Dr. Kristel noted that the City does a nice job in many areas so continuing programs that are already in place is important. He stated that Dublin residents reported feeling anxious, depressed, and a lack of connection to others. He stated that what this tells us is that the physical aspects of health are being handled well, while there is still room for improvement with mental and social health. Ms. De Rosa asked about who will take the lead on these initiatives and the budget that is involved. Dr. Kristel stated that the report will specify the metrics to track and it will also suggest who would lead those efforts and initiatives. Ms. Stiener stated that there is money allocated for this project. She added that the specific action steps that will be taken have yet to be determined. Discussions among the working groups continue. In response to Ms. De Rosa’s question regarding the budget, Ms. Steiner shared that for 2025, the budget is just over $40,000. Ms. De Rosa asked about sponsorships from some of the organizations that have participated in the work groups and interviews. Ms. Steiner stated that the goal is to tie this work to an RFP that will seek community partners. She is also hopeful that as the action steps are determined in the working groups, the organizations involved will be agreeable to help fund the efforts. Vice Mayor Alutto thanked staff for the work and stated that it will be important to consider how this will continue long term. She also noted the challenges that exist particularly in the behavioral and mental health realm regarding access to face-to-face care. She would like to understand how to fill those gaps. Mr. Reiner asked about whether similar programs exist in other cities. Ms. Steiner stated that she found one program in Lakewood, Ohio that did a comprehensive health needs assessment, but their results were vastly different than Dublin’s, so their priority areas were different as well. Dr. Kristel stated that in addition to the working groups, they have consulted with The Ohio State University Center for Public Health Practice and found evidence-based health practices for each of those priority areas. Understanding the leading practices is important as we consider action steps. Ms. Fox asked about the organizational framework that would make this possible. She added that having a director, or an advisory group committed to making sure that action was taken and the community could see the results of that action would be important. Mayor Amorose Groomes expressed that she is hopeful that we will find a good partner to fund some of this work that could be shared with other communities and ultimately the State of Ohio. Ms. Kramb asked to have one page that describes the recommendations. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Minutes of Meeting GOVERNMENT FORMS & SUPPLIES 644-204-0358 FORM NO, 10146 November 4, 2024 Page 17 of 27 Held 20 City Entryway and Monument Signs — CDC Recommendations Ms. Singh stated that this project was initially started in October 2021 with the goal of addressing entryway aesthetics across the City. This topic was referred to the Community Development Committee (CDC) and a final recommendation was made to City Council, which was approved at the March 2022 meeting. In November 2023, the topic was referred back to CDC to allow additional considerations and have further discussion. The revised intent was to incorporate accolades and contextual differences between sign locations as well as a focus on the durability of materials. The CDC recommended design align with the current branding guidelines. Ms. Singh reviewed the design considerations, color and lighting options and provided samples of the sign designs and materials at the meeting. Regarding accolades, she stated that the CDC recommended only the most prestigious designations that meet review criteria should be featured on the entryway signs. The review criteria consists of City visions, national recognition, consistency and longevity as well as those that cater to civic pride. Ms. Singh displayed the six monument sign locations and noted that entryway signs are in 25 secondary locations around the City. She noted that the West Innovation District could be an additional entry point for a monument as development continues to progress in that area. She introduced Tedd Hardesty, EDGE Group and Kevin Fromet, Guide Studio. Mr. Hardesty shared the recommended concepts. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting jOVERNMENT FORMS & SUPPLIES 844-224-3338 FORM NO. 10148 November 4, 2024 Page 18 of 217 Held 20 Proposed Monument Sign — Horizontal The stone would preserve that flared base on the pier vertical column. The logo is recommended to be backlit, and the accolades are shown as well. Mr. Hardesty shared that the context where these monument signs will be implemented is important to note as well. Context a a a SR 161 & Sawmill Road Dublin Road (South of Glick Road) He showed the examples above regarding how the location and amount of visual clutter in an intersection can impact where the signs are constructed. Regarding the secondary signs, Mr. Hardesty provided an illustration of the recommended design. Proposed Entryway Sign Mr. Hardesty stated that this design brings consistency of signage throughout the community. Minutes of RECORD OF FROCEEDINGS n City Council Meeting GOVERNMENT FORMS & SUPPLIES 644-224-3338 FORM NO. 10148 Held November 4, 2024 Page t9 of 21 20 Ms. Singh stated that the cost for the six monument signs is $420,000 and the cost of the entryway signs is $175,000, which is a total of just under $600,000. The budget for these signs is in the 2024-2028 CIP. Staff recommended approval. There were no public comments. Ms. Fox stated that the monument is impressive. She asked about the grey color versus bronze and whether one blended better with the color of the stone. Ms. Singh stated that the color choice is to match the current wayfinding signs. Ms. Kramb stated that it seems excessive to have two of the more expensive monument signs within a quarter of a mile of each other on Sawmill Road. She supported leaving the sign at the Hard Road/Sawmill Road intersection because it gets much more traffic than Emerald Parkway. She advocated for removing the Emerald Parkway location. Mr. Reiner asked about the lighting on the letters and logo. Mr. Fromet described the LED lighting behind the lights. The letters themselves are painted aluminum. Mr. Keeler asked about the monument sign shown in the median and whether that meets ODOT’s approval. Ms. Willis stated that this is within our jurisdiction and home rule allows us to decide what goes in our public right-of-way. ODOT would have concerns about whether these structures can withstand a crash. She stated that the design will be crash worthy. Mr. Keeler stated that the other example shown on Dublin Road (above) appears to be very close to the road. He asked if there could be a little more space between the sign and the road. Vice Mayor Alutto stated that she agrees with Ms. Kramb that the two signs on Sawmill Road are too close together. She agreed that the Hard Road intersection makes sense. She asked if the shamrock on the vertical portion of the monument sign would be centered. Ms. Singh stated that the design wraps around the vertical portion of the monument and that is why it does not appear centered. Vice Mayor Alutto expressed concern regarding the accolade signs. She is very proud of the accolades, but shared concern that it will be construed as favoring one accolade over another. Cluttering the signs diminishes the City of Dublin portion of the sign. She stated that we want to welcome people into our City and offer the opportunity to them to discover all the wonderful things about our City. She shared her concern that there are too many accolades to put on the signs so someone will feel left out. Ms. Kramb agreed that she also does not care for the accolades. It looks too busy, will always be changing and space could be an issue for all of them to be represented. Ms. De Rosa agreed the signs on Sawmill are too close together and asked if there was a reason that was recommended. Ms. Singh stated that this study was done in 2021, and the locations were identified based on the number of cars entering and number of access points within the City. These locations can be researched and modified. Ms. De Rosa is in favor eliminating one of the signs in that area. Regarding accolades, Ms. De Rosa stated that they seem to compete with the sign itself. Drivers will not be able to identify what is on the sign as they drive past. She expressed pride for the accolades, but if the goal is to highlight these accomplishments, then we need to find another way to do it that does not compete with the signs. Ms. O'Callaghan stated that staff researched how the current accolades came to be on the signs. The Tree City had been a request by Council years ago and the Minutes of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS n City Council Meeting GOVERNMENT FORMS & SUPPLIES 844-205-3338 FORM NO. 10148 rv 1 SADA = BA. pA Held Purple Heart City had been discussed at the time of the proclamation that there would be indication of that designation at the entrances to the City. The Bicycle Friendly signs had been obtained a couple of years ago. Staff drafted an outline of criteria for determining whether accolades are included in the sign for Council’s consideration. Mr. Reiner stated that these are three really important accolades. He stated that they would not have to be this large, but thought they match the sign well. He added that they were all discussed by Council at some point to implement them. Mayor Amorose Groomes stated that this process was started for the purpose of cleaning up the entry signs to the City. This exercise was to streamline the signs and keep them clean. Council specified in 2021 that the signs needed to be clean, elegant and reflective of our community. There is no policy as to what will be represented on these signs. She stated that this proposal is representative of where we started and not where we were going for three years. She suggested that Council develop a policy regarding whether something should go on the signs or a policy regarding where else in the City these accolades can be put to honor them. She suggested Veterans Park would be fitting to honor every citizen that has received a Purple Heart. Mayor Amorose Groomes stated that the design is lovely and scalable so it can fit where it needs to fit at each location. She shared that the accolades should not go on the sign at this time. She suggested moving forward with the signs and leaving the accolades off until it can be further discussed by Council. Ms. Fox agreed that the two on Sawmill Road are too close together. She suggested moving one of them to a place as you come in from US 33 into Dublin. Mr. Reiner stated that removing the accolades will give it a really clean look. Mayor Amorose Groomes moved to approve the city entryway and monument signs with the locations to be evaluated and the accolades removed. Vice Mayor Alutto seconded. Vote on the motion: Vice Mayor Alutto, yes; Mayor Amorose Groomes, yes; Ms. De Rosa, yes; Ms. Fox, yes; Mr. Keeler, yes; Ms. Kramb, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes. STAFF COMMENTS Ms. O'Callaghan shared that we are looking forward to spending an Evening of Gratitude with our Boards, Commissions, Committees and many leadership and active volunteers on Wednesday, November 13" at The Exchange at Bridge Park from 6 — 8 p.m. It’s always a wonderful evening with so much interaction with the people who give so much to our city and a nice time to tell each other in person of our gratitude for their service. COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS Finance Committee Report Mr. Keeler reported that the Committee met on October 22 to review requests for the 2025 Hotel-Motel Tax grants. Two new organizations applied for funding. There was $234,000 budgeted for grant requests and over $379,000 in requests were received. The Committee evaluated requests using a scoring rubric for community events and a formula for sports events. The recommendations will come to Council on November 18. COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE e Mr. Keeler told a fun story about a resident referring to Dublin as Disneyland. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutesor Dublin City Council Meeting GOVERNMENT FORMS & SUPPLIES 644-224-3338 FORM NO. 10148 November 4, 2024 Page 27 of 21 Held 20 e Ms. De Rosa thanked every candidate who raised their hand for public service. She shared the sentiment that people gave their lives so that we had a right to vote and she is respectful and appreciative of that. Mr. Reiner invited everyone to join in the Veterans Day Ceremony. Vice Mayor Alutto encouraged everyone to vote. Mayor Amorose Groomes shared the following: o October 28, she joined Dr. Marchhausen for his Senior Citizen Council; o October 29, MORPC held the Summit on Sustainability where she learned about food waste recycling and multi-tenant housing recycling options; o October 30, she attended the Buckeyes in the City meeting; o October 31, she traveled to Fort Wayne, IN with a group from MORPC to meet with Mayor Tucker in the City of Fort Wayne. Discussions were held regarding passenger rail. Garnering her support was very important; o November 1, she and the City Manager attended the COMMA meeting which was held at the Governor’s residence; and o She expressed appreciation for “Shred It Day” and o She reiterated the importance of voting and participating in our democracy. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 10:22 p.m. [—-A— Mayor — Presiding Officer (nf. (Db! get of CAincil U