Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-11-08 Study SessionDUBLIN CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION Monday, February 11, 2008 Council Chambers MINUTES OF MEETING Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Present: Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, Mr. Reiner, Ms. Salay, Mr. Lecklider, Mr. Gerber and Mr. Keenan. Vice Mayor Boring was absent {excused}. Staff members present: Ms. Brautigam, Ms. Ott, Mr. Hahn, Mr. Earman, Ms. Karagary, Ms. Rauch, and Ms. Burkholder. Also present: Mark Kline, Kinzelman Kline Gossman, Ltd., consultant. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that tonight's study session topic is the draft 2008 Parks and Recreation Master Plan. PARKS & RECREATION MASTER PLAN -BACKGROUND Mr. Hahn stated that the Parks and Recreation Master Plan {PRMP) project began in the winter of 2006. At that time, Kinzelman Kline Gossman, Ltd. was hired as the consultant for this project. Many staff members provided input and technical information for this draft plan. Various user groups, stakeholders and Council members also contributed to the initial explorative research for the plan. In the spring of 2006, several public input meetings were held. In addition to the general public, every homeowner association was invited to participate. The Community Services Advisory Commission facilitated the meetings. Individual meetings were also held with numerous stakeholder groups within the community. A steering committee comprised of staff members and consultants worked on the project, as well as other staff members. Many of these individuals were involved in the offering of certain sections of this plan. The collaboration of staff provided a better understanding of what each division does. The Parks and Recreation Master Plan is a complementary addition to the recently updated Community Plan. Much of the parks and recreation content of the Community Plan was developed in concert with the creation of this master plan. Also addressed by this plan was Council's 2007-2008 goal for Dublin to become a green community, as well as previously established goals regarding bikeways and greenspace. The plan is a combination of specific recommendations and identifies certain area in which more work is needed. Staff identified discussion topics for tonight's discussion; however, if there are other areas Council would prefer to address tonight, those topics can be discussed instead. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher inquired if there were additional items Council would like to add to the agenda. [No topics were suggested by Council.] Parks & Recreation Master Plan -Outdoor Recreation Space Limitations Mr. Earman stated that this topic concerns the City's outdoor amenities and space limitations, primarily the outdoor youth athletic fields. Council direction is needed. One factor impacting the recreation industry is the significant increase in competitive, alternative, and non-recreational sports. Discussions with the Dublin Youth Athletics organization and Dublin Soccer League organization confirmed that the recreation Dublin City Council Study Session Monday, February 11, 2008 Page 2 program is beginning to flatten out. The middle tier and competitive programs are growing. With that trend, a couple of things could be considered. The question is: To what degree does the City have an obligation to accommodate the alternative sports, specifically in regard to sports tournaments? Although the organizations desire to hold more tournaments, the City currently does not have the capacity to provide field maintenance for increased usage. The question is: what is Council's philosophical position regarding the City's obligation to serve recreational sports versus non- recreational or competitive sports? Mr. Reiner inquired if there is a projected curve, as the City reaches build-out, that there will be a decline in the use of sports facilities. Mr. Earman responded that a formal study was not conducted to forecast a potential curve. The general population growth would indicate a general increase in youth athletics, but there is no indication as to whether it would be in recreation sports or competitive or alternative sports. Mr. Hahn noted that the soccer league forecast is that the recreational program growth will be somewhat flat. Based on the trend of the last 3-4 years, soccer growth is occurring only with competitive clubs. Mr. Reiner inquired if more land is needed to provide additional fields for those sports that require large playing fields -- flag football, soccer, baseball. His community is an aging community, so there are less youth activities within it. How are the current demographics affecting youth sports? Mr. Hahn stated that the projected demographics for Dublin is that it will remain a family community. The rate of growth of the youth population will slow somewhat, but the additional trend appears to be a desire for a more competitive level of soccer. If the City's philosophy continues to be City provision of fields for recreational sports only, then there would be no need to acquire additional land. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that she does not believe that government should be responsible for more than recreation. Has staff observed a trend of other municipal governments to assume responsibility for competitive sports? Mr. Earman responded that within central Ohio, the municipal governments provide youth sports for recreation to select programs. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that is consistent with what Dublin does. Mr. Earman responded that it is consistent with the Dublin Yauth Athletics {DYA} program, but Dublin's soccer program is different. The club organizations also represent the premier or elite program and conduct regional recruitment for players. The situation may be due to the fact that soccer produces heavy wear and tear on the fields. Mr. Keenan noted that many parents are interested in the select program who feel that as taxpayers, they should have an equal opportunity to use the City soccer fields. Ms. Salay inquired if, in regard to select, are those children playing in club sports. Mr. Earman stated that the City's youth athletics program offers a select program, which is a travel program, for various sports. Typically, they travel only locally, such as for Dublin City Council Study Session Monday, February 11, 2008 Page 3 tournaments. Ohio FC and the Ohio Premier soccer programs offer more elite programs, and the players travel regionally or even nationally for those programs. At one time, Dublin Soccer League managed the rec to select program. Mr. Lecklider inquired if he is hearing complaints. At one time, his daughter played OP and he does not recall any difficulty with having fields for practice or games. Mr. Earman responded that Dublin Soccer League does a good job distributing the field use. They operate within certain parameters for types of use to protect the integrity of the turf. He does not believe there is a problem with opportunity during the season. Representatives from the clubs have indicated that they want more field use for more practices in their off-season. Mr. Lecklider inquired how other central Ohio communities are dealing with this problem, if they are serving the recto select. Do they have more fields than Dublin? Mr. Earman responded that they have a club organization that offers the elite and premier programs, but they own their own facilities and find their own fields. In Dublin, the City provides all of the resources. Ms. Salay stated that municipalities typically provide resources to their communities for the rec to select soccer programs. At the club or elite level, the cities may or may not participate. Are the clubs seeking artificial fields indoors? There are only a couple of indoor soccer facilities in the area. Approximately 3 years ago, one of the clubs was considering purchasing land in order to build fields for the elite leagues. Is that still under consideration? If Dublin were to buy that land, would it be strictly for the select teams? Mr. Earman responded that Dublin was approached on several occasions by the club organizations, OP in particular, regarding their interest in partnering with the City for an exclusive use facility. Recently, OP entered into a lease agreement for an indoor facility in Plain City far their exclusive use. They are using that facility now but are always seeking indoor facilities for practice during the winter months. From spring to late fall, they focus on outdoor fields. Ms. Ott noted that the issue is the price point of buying land in Dublin versus outside of Dublin. They are trying to leverage their dollars to the best advantage. Mr. Lecklider stated that they are aggressive in terms of program development. On the opposite side, meeting minutes indicate that they want to have more fields, but land purchase is cost prohibitive. He is reluctant to commit the City's resources to doing so. He also sees the clubs as wanting control. He is not being critical of that, but that is the direction this is heading. It is important to recognize that there are approximately 2,000 in the rec soccer program versus a smaller number in the clubs. Mr. Earman responded that the rec soccer program has 2,500 members; the middle tier has about 500 members; and each of the clubs has 350-400 members. Mr. Lecklider stated that he does not see a reason at this point to change the philosophical position of the City regarding soccer programs. Dublin City Council Study Session Monday, February 11, 2008 Page 4 Mr. Hahn responded that given the City's current position, the City does place limitations on use of the fields to rest the fields. The City accommodates the soccer program in the spring and fall and rests the fields in the summer. This is the only way to assure quality fields. Those who are projecting growth are projecting more demand outside of recreation soccer. So far, the City has been able to accommodate most of those because of its inventory. But with the anticipated growth expected in that area beyond rec soccer, the City won't be able to make accommodations any longer. The City then is faced with the question of whether it should continue to meet the needs of that part of the program. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that at some point, it is the parent's decision and financial responsibility if they want their child to have more advanced lessons. She believes that also applies to the advancement of a child in soccer. It is not the larger citizenry who are responsible for the child's advancement in their soccer any more that it is the citizenry who are responsible for private singing lessons for another child. The City's current policy is the responsible way for the City to have a soccer program available for the largest number of young people. Ms. Salay agreed. There has also been a slow down in the growth of the community, and that might be partially responsible. If the City is able to maintain the rec and select programs, that should be sufficient. Whether the City would be able to provide helpful direction regarding a wise land purchase to the clubs, she is not sure, but she agrees the clubs need to be responsible beyond that. Council has also had requests for more City commitment for soccer and swimming, but the City cannot commit its fields and gymnasiums 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Mr. Keenan expressed agreement. Mr. Earman stated that if the trends continue, it may be necessary at some future time to limit some of the alternative numbers of participants in programs above recreation soccer. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that is the understanding. Mr. Earman stated that staff will continue to maximize the use of the fields while maintaining the quality of them, all those things being consistent. As the population grows and trends fluctuate, the City may decide to alter one or the other of the programs. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that as the years progress and trends in the programs change, the City could look at a different kind of park requirement for residential developers than the City has traditionally had. This would be one way of defraying part of the cast to the City. Mr. Hahn noted that many additional tournaments are requested each year. The City does not accept them on the same basis as the current field limitations. The fields cannot accommodate any more use; they are at saturation point now. While some extra Dublin City Council Study Session Monday, February 11, 2008 Page 5 tournaments could bring a lot more money into the community, it is not wise from this standpoint. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher responded that Council believes that the current management of the fields is responsible. Otherwise, the community would be complaining about the maintenance of the fields. NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT Mr. Hahn stated that as the City has recently studied various land management techniques, current practices were evaluated. Although none of the current practices are wrong or detrimental, there are some improvements that could be made, from an environmental point of view. Some of these improvements will be met with resistance from some citizens. Part of the resistance will be based upon the perception of beauty. In most of the parks, the lawns are mowed to the stream edge, for instance, to provide a manicured look. The City uses a lot of chemicals in the wet ponds to control the algae and weed growth and keep them open in the summer. A couple of years ago, part of the Post Preserve subdivision was going into prairie as part of the neighborhood design, yet some of the new residents vehemently objected to that part of the land management plan. Within Chapter 7 are areas that staff has identified as areas where more environmentally accountable land management practices could be implemented. If those are implemented, even with community education, there will be objections from some residents. Staff does not want to proceed without Council's approval. Mr. Reiner inquired why the practice has been to mow to the edge of the streams. Has it evolved for aesthetic reasons? It isn't a good environmental practice; there is nothing to trap the silt and chemicals. How did it come to be a City practice? Mr. Hahn responded that he does not know when the standard was established, but no doubt it was for aesthetic reasons. If the policy is now changed, there may be certain areas where the City chooses to continue the practice of mowing to the stream's edge. Before today, there have been some areas where staff have decided to discontinue mowing to the edge, but they have received complaints from citizens. Staff has responded in some cases by resuming mowing; in other cases, by refusing to do so. Mr. Reiner inquired if the City could take an intermediate position. For instance, with the creek that runs along Post Road - a very visible creek, plant river birches in clumps along bath sides of the creek edge. That creates a shade factor, and it makes sense to let the grasses grow up in those areas. The open spaces between could be mowed. Mr. Hahn stated that the City has done some reforestation along the stream's edge. However, there is a need to make sure the streams are accessible to the public. The Bristol Commons entrance is a goad example of the type of landscape design that could be copied along the stream's edge, but more naturalized. Dublin City Council Study Session Monday, February 11, 2008 Page 6 Mr. Reiner stated that the standard practice is to have no mow zones. The City is not now doing that. Unfortunately, not having those environmental practices in place has resulted in chemicals being transported in rain runoff into the stream and into the Columbus drinking water. Implementing the correct practice would reduce erosion and lighten the City's maintenance. He would suggest planting river birches along the stream. Mark Kline, Kinzelman Kline Gassman, Ltd, stated that when he was employed with the Ohio Department of Natural Resources in the 1980's, they instituted mowing plans in all the state parks. They minimized the mowing to intervals of mowing. Those intervals, ar packets, provided public access to the stream. Although, initially, there were public objections, today, that practice is the norm. Each park has its own management plan - unique and with its own attributes. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that as this moves forward, it would be helpful to engage the residents in regard to the residential parks. Staff could hold a meeting with them and explain why the City is altering its mowing practices. An effort should be made to engage the residents so that they choose to be responsible with their environment and involved in shaping the future. Mr. Reiner noted that there is an abundance of free material available from the government that can be provided to the residents at a public meeting. It should be easy to explain the advantages to their environment the change would make, including more small wildlife. If handled right, this should be an easy transition. Mr. Hahn clarified that the reason the City would change its land management practices is for environmental reasons, not budget reasons. That could be a result of the change, but not the motivation. Public education can go a long way, but Council will hear about it from some residents. As Mr. Kinzelman referred to, the intent is to have a plan, not just to stop mowing. Mr. Lecklider stated that the public education component is critical. He is pleased to see this plan. Mr. Hahn stated that in the last six months Council has seen two development cases in which the applicant has submitted either a nicely designed dry basin or rain garden type of basin. Dublin has evolved from the early, dry basins, which were primarily mowed grass; those did not work. This was followed by the concept that there should be no basin that is not a wet basin. However, to ensure that the wet basins retain clear water throughout the summer requires a tremendous amount of effort, chemicals and money. The attempt today is to have something between the two concepts. Dry basins can be aesthetically pleasing if land design is completed upfront. Mr. Lecklider inquired if a transition could be made, while still controlling the mosquito population. Dublin City Council Study Session Monday, February 11, 2008 Page 7 Mr. Hahn confirmed that it could be controlled. Dublin maintains an oversight process. Even in the severe mosquito years, the wet basins have not evidenced a high level of larvae. The wet ponds have good insect and re-populating fish activity. The mosquitoes are coming primarily from tree cavities, ditches or potholes in the fields. There is also some water turnover from the rain. There are over 40 existing ponds in the park system, however. The purpose of the ponds is to address stormwater quality, and they are meeting that purpose. Residents are using an abundance of turf chemicals. They are not being absorbed by the turf; they are flushed into the stormwater sewer system and intercepted by the ponds. However, those chemicals in the pond do generate weed growth, and the ponds are then treated with broadleaf weed killers and algaecides. Mr. Reiner inquired if the City is developing a program for organic lawn care to reduce the number of chemicals that are working their way into the City's watershed. Mr. Hahn responded that staff looks at that every year, and there are reasons the organic alternatives are interesting. While there may be a better breakdown of organic phosphate, even the organic phosphate causes the algae balloons in the ponds and the waterways. Staff believes the best option for the Parks Division is to practice integrated pest management -not to use any more chemicals than what is demanded by the plants. The City does use broadleaf leaf spray, but the spray occurs only when there is a significant infestation of broadleaf. Nor is annual grass treated unless there is an area demonstrating a problem. They would prefer that homeowners practice the same policy, rather than using subscription lawn services that treat for things that may not exist. Mr. Reiner noted that in Canada, a majority of the citizenry in different areas have taken this issue up with their municipalities. As a result, those municipalities have gone to an organic program that does not require chemicals. There was a 3-5 year transition period when the lawns did not look as well, then they rebounded under the healthy program. The issue actually went before their Supreme Court, as it was fought heavily by the chemical industry. The citizens wan, and today, many Canadian communities are cleaning up their watersheds by eliminating the use of, and getting the citizens to eliminate the use of, the standard chemicals. He requested that Mr. Hahn investigate this issue, looking at what the Canadian municipalities have done. There have not been that many reports from U.S. communities. He would like to see this investigated on a municipal level to see if Dublin could develop an organic system. This would save the City money by restoring the eco-system. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that the Bristol Commons was used as an example . That is a very visible location, particularly in the stream areas. If staff anticipates changing the mowed look significantly, the residents should be engaged in the process. She is in favor of implementing this practice, but even in doing this, the Dublin community should continue to be uniquely different than all other communities. The manner in which natural management is implemented can help to make the community unique. The way that Dublin has incorporated its natural and rural environment has Dublin City Council Study Session Monday, February 11, 2008 Page 8 always been a unique feature of the community. It is important not to lose that. She noted that Council seems to be in agreement with the Natural Resource Management section of the plan. Mr. Reiner referred to the issue of retention basins, which have been used to work out site problems with a new project. He would like to see the City alter this practice. Instead of using these as a buffer or a setback separation between the street and housing, it would be mare prudent to use earth berms. Not only would it save the contractor the cost of hauling away the dirt and clay, it would also add a permanent barrier. The 3 and 3-1 /2 story apartments located along Brand Road are not visible due to the earth berms, same as high as 14 feet. This would also be beneficial in relationship to the issue of dying trees, such as is occurring around Muirfield Drive and Avery Road. Years ago, a great buffer was planted there; now the buffer is dying. The City does not want to incur the cost of a 20-year re-planting of buffers because they did not provide far sufficient setback with the initial zoning. The mound system provides a permanent buffer without an expensive water feature. The City could plant decorative trees, such as crabapple or spruce trees to make the mound attractive. The mound is a permanent feature that does not entail future expense for the City. MULTI-MODAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN Mr. Hahn stated that through the years, Council has encouraged staff to aggressively pursue a City bikepath system, and projects continue to be scheduled every year in the CIP budget. This is one of the most popular amenities of the community. One aspect that staff has purposely not pursued is the incorporation of bike lanes within the transportation system. Bike lanes are quite different than bike paths -they are used for transportation without a concern for the view along the way. Dublin roadways do not have attached bike lanes, and bike lanes could serve the community. There has been discussion concerning how the COIC would relate to other sections of the town. There are logical routes for a bike lane transportation system, which could be considered similar to the vehicular transportation system. During the Community Plan discussion, it was noted that the practice has been to look at the transportation system as vehicular only. Bikepath projects are considered separately. Staff believes that all modes of transportation should be addressed comprehensively in one plan, one document. Mr. Reiner responded that he believes that was the intended direction of the Community Plan. Mr. Hahn inquired if the direction then is to pursue this, bringing proposals before Council for consideration. It would require a study. Mr. Reiner responded that incorporating bike lanes into the transportation system would mean modifying the existing roadways, to add the extra 5 feet. Mr. Hahn responded that the City is continuing to build new roads, which could incorporate bike lanes. Dublin City Council Study Session Monday, February 11, 2008 Page 9 Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that she always viewed it as a total transportation system. The bike lanes would be one element of it. Because of the future cost of gasoline, new generations will look at other methods of transportation than the City has traditionally known. Pedestrian paths may also be addressed differently in the future due to different and greater use than they have today. She would think the addition of bike lanes would be considered with the construction of new roadways. This could be directed by the way the City builds out. Mr. Keenan inquired how the study would occur. Mr. Hahn responded that it would be one aspect of a more comprehensive, intermodal traffic study. While there may be a place for bike lanes, they da not need to be everywhere. INDOOR RECREATION FACILITY SPACE LIMITATIONS Mr. Earman stated that 5 current space issues have been identified: 1. Gymnasium/Multi-Purpose Areas 2. Fitness Equipment/Classrooms 3. Competition Pool 4. Senior Services 5. Storage He noted that a gymnasium has become an immediate need due to the closure of Columbus Basketball Club. There are basketball programs looking far space. The community swim program is a very popular program and there is not enough pool space. The senior services are near capacity, approximately 930 members to date, and the demographic trends indicate additional growth. Strategies to address these space issues include conducting a community survey, analyzing demographic trends, analyzing other service providers, strengthening partnerships, expanding outreach programs, further limiting of non-core programs and reducing participation to non- residents. Implementing these strategies will focus service levels to core offerings, and reduce DCRC's ability to continue offering the volumes of programs to the community. It is likely this will have negative implications with the public as a result. They are working with the Dublin Schools and other entities to strengthen partnerships and utilize joint use agreements. They are looking at which programs could be taken out of the Rec Center and provided elsewhere. This does not mean rental of additional space, but finding a niche for it elsewhere, such as a business or school. Another solution is to restrict DCRC program access to Dublin residents and/or school district residents to make room for the residents in the core programs and maximize the use of facilities for the residents. Staff is ready to implement these strategies. Does Council have any concerns about those strategies, and to what degree would Council prefer each be pursued? Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that it would be less costly for the City to pursue agreements with other facilities than to build another facility with its ongoing cast. Dublin City Council Study Session Monday, February 11, 2008 Page 10 Mr. Earman responded that the City has received requests from businesses to provide aerobic classes for their employees. The solution may be for the City to provide an instructor for a class housed in their own facility. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that some churches have space available. Mr. Reiner inquired if the schools are involved. Would it be possible for some of the gymnasium needs to be met in school facilities? Ms. Salay responded that gymnasium space is at a premium everywhere. Mr. Earman stated that it is mare than just space that is an issue. It is also the amenities in the gym space -baskets, nets, etc. Mr. Reiner stated that this is the perfect economic opportunity for an entrepreneur - another LifeTime Fitness. Mr. Earman responded that studies are conducted annually to determine the trend in Dublin and to evaluate what could be done differently to maximize the use of the facility based an the needs. If the City is duplicating a service provided elsewhere in the community, eliminating it could provide the opportunity for another program. The DCRC sports program supervisor has worked with multiple sports supervisors within the Ohio Parks and Recreation Association, and they are developing a central tJhio sports commission. The commission will coordinate state information for the purpose of communicating facility locations and available programs. This type of initiative will lessen the burden on individual municipalities. Mr. Keenan inquired clarification of the intent to further limit DCRC participation. Mr. Earman responded that Dublin residents have the first option with DCRC programs. As the programs fill and the public is turned way, it is becoming more necessary to limit the number of non-residents or even school district residents. It may become impossible to accommodate any of them. Ms. Salay stated that it would be preferable to eliminate the school district tier and have a resident and non-resident fee structure, regardless of the school district. Mr. Earman stated that this subject was also discussed at the last cost study discussion. There is a desire to transition to a two-tier system. There is continuing discussion regarding how to phase out other levels. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher responded that the City has known that eventually there would be the need to move to a two-tier system. Residents pay the taxes and are paying for services that the school district residents are not. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher inquired what is the estimated cost of this type of study. Mr. Earman responded that this study can be conducted internally using existing software applications. The community survey, however, will have a cost. Mayor Chinni-Zuercher inquired if some of these questions would already be on the current community survey being conducted. Dublin City Council Study Session Monday, February 11, 2008 Page 11 Mr. Earman responded that there would be qualitative questions regarding DCRC current offerings. The anticipated study, however, would be specifically regarding the community needs for the programs being offered. It would be a more general, holistic view to establish a baseline. They are working with Community Relations on the options for such a survey. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that there are options that did not exist 10-12 years ago when the DCRC was constructed, and a regional approach is also very worthwhile. Mr. Earman stated that a recurring question he receives is when will the City build another rec center. The master plan will outline a process for the City to make these decisions for the future. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked about the Chiller and the 25-year City partnership. Ms. Ott responded that she believes the agreement expires in 2012. Staff will check on this and report back. GREENWAYS Mr. Hahn stated that this establishes a plan versus a reactionary approach to greenspace acquisition. The example shows a stream corridor with public and private lands in between. What is proposed is to identify the stream corridors in the City, the potential for easement acquisition or outright land purchase along the corridors, with the idea of connecting public lands and protecting the corridors. This is not afee-based study, but an in-house review of existing conditions. Staff did not want to undertake such a plan without Council input, as it would be land mass specific -showing business or private property within such a plan. The intention is to focus on a vision or plan for the future, but this would be a public document and it could be deemed inappropriate to show private lands on such a public land acquisition or easement list. Mr. Reiner stated he does not have a concern with this, and it is in keeping with the Clean Water Act. Acquiring or at least protecting the riparian corridors with setbacks is reasonable. Mr. Hahn responded that protection is certainly appropriate. Mr. Reiner stated that several years ago, he attempted to have the Law Director engage the City in a legislative act that would accomplish this, but it did not move forward. He is interested in protecting these corridors for clean water value. This will require placing private property on a map at some point. Ms. Salay stated that if someone's private land is to be shown on such a map, there must be a level of sensitivity. It requires talking to the property owners about the intent of this. In the past, the issue has been that if the City wants someone's land in 15 years, how does that impact the property value today. Perhaps scenic easements could be obtained versus buying an entire tract of land. This would not threaten someone's land ownership. In the past, there was not a lot of transparency about these actions. Communication upfront and making the intention clear increases the comfort level with such a plan. Dublin City Council Study Session Monday, February 11, 2008 Page 12 Mr. Hahn showed a sample plan for such a corridor, with a basis of what has been legally defined as a stream corridor or greenway corridor. It would not be a land purchase, but rather a scenic easement, taking into account that the land is private. Mr. Reiner added that some of this concern is mitigated with the City routing a bikepath through the land, upgrading the value of the property. Ms. Salay stated that many citizens would view having a scenic easement as an enhancement and they would be happy to participate. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked how many greenway systems exist. Mr. Hahn responded that he does not know. They have been defined within this document, and the exhibit will show that they are fragmented. The greenway study intent is to show how the missing pieces could be connected. Again, this study could be done in-house with the GIS staff. Opportunities sometimes arise, and if land acquisitions make sense, they will be brought to Council. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked about the timeline far this. Mr. Hahn responded that this is a long-term plan. PARKS & RECREATION SURVEY Mr. Earman stated that this will provide a snapshot of the community - a baseline of what the needs are. Surveys are dependent upon the time of year they are sent out. There are ways to construct surveys to obtain info about year round services and needs. The survey is budgeted in 2008 for $15,000. Parks and Rec staff will work with Community Relations staff to develop the survey instrument and then have it reviewed by a professional firm, thereby holding down the costs. Questions for Council: Do they want to be involved in the survey design? Who would they like involved with the process far the survey? Are there any concerns Council would like addressed as far as assessing the community's needs? Ms. Salay stated that the questions should be carefully considered. A question should not be asked if staff is not ready to hear the answer and be ready to be responsive to a degree. Mr. Reiner believes that the survey will bring requests for a bigger rec space, better workout equipment, etc. He is somewhat concerned with the results of such a survey and how it would impact decision-making by the Council. There are some other factors to be considered, such as private facilities handling some of the demand. Perhaps that could be part of the survey, determining residents' preferences for private facilities with more amenities. Mr. Earman agreed that the survey focus needs to be on the recreational needs/interests/use patterns of the families -not on a wish list that cannot be met. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked if the budget for the survey is adequate. Mr. Earman responded he had a brief discussion with Community Relations about this. Staff will continue to work on this and will come to Council if the funds are not adequate. Dublin City Council Study Session Monday, February 11, 2008 Page 13 Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that hearing from those with an active lifestyle is equally important to input from those who are actual users of the current facilities in Dublin. Mr. Reiner stated that he would be interested in hearing input about other outdoor physical activities families engage in -snow skiing, snow boarding, etc. Mr. Earman agreed that it is important to know the recreation patterns of those residents who recreate outside of the City as well. They will include such questions in the survey. COMMUNITY ART PLAN Ms. Ott stated that this document was reviewed by Council a year ago at their goal- setting retreat. Based on Council's input and ongoing discussions with Dublin Arts Council, the plan has been updated. There are a few areas in which staff would like Council's input this evening. The first is regarding definitions. Ina Community Development Committee meeting with the Dublin Arts Council, it became clear that there is a need to define what "public art" is from the City's perspective. When it comes to City-financed public art acquisition, is that to be limited to physical works and not other expressions, such as theatrical performances? The section titled "Definitions" is located in Chapter 10, page 1. Does Council concur with those definitions? Mr. Keenan noted that from Dublin Arts Council's perspective, limiting public art to physical works would not be correct. Their belief is that art could include other expressions. Ms. Ott stated that the City's definition of public art was intentionally limited to physical works based on the Community Development's discussion that City tax dollars or hotel- motel tax revenue expended for public art for the community should be limited to physical works. Ms. Salay stated that other expressions of art would be within the realms of the Dublin Arts Council's programs. Ms. Ott responded that there other forms of art could be included within the Community Recreation Center programs, perhaps, but expenditure of tax dollars for public art would be limited to permanent acquisitions that citizens can see, touch and feel in perpetuity. Ms. Salay stated that the definitions are well articulated. Ms. Ott referred to the next item, "Community Art Goals," located at the top of page 2. This section covers what public art in this community strives to accomplish. It is recognized that no single piece of art could accomplish all of the objectives. The last bullet point, "Inspire joy and be uplifting," was added based on Council's retreat discussion last year. Because it adds a different aspect to acquisitions, she would like Council's confirmation. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked clarification of what "inspire joy" could mean. Dublin City Council Study Session Monday, February 11, 2008 Page 14 Ms. Ott referred the clarification to Mr. Reiner. Mr. Reiner stated that, as he recalls the discussion, Council was discussing public art as it is seen in other communities. Often, the art is very clever, perhaps in its placement, to the point that it inspires mirth or a positive reaction and, consequently, a positive impression related to the city itself. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that an example here would be Dublin's public art cornfield. Ms. Salay stated that Council also talked about a particular work, which looked at a darker aspect of life, evocative and sad. The subject of the proposed piece was child abuse or a murder, and the piece was to be located at the Rec Center. Council stated that type of subject was not what was wanted. She agrees that an uplifting focus of the art piece should be required. Mr. Keenan noted that the art community would take exception to that perspective of art. Mr. Reiner responded that he agrees with their definition of art as a whole, but the City has the option to limit what may be acquired as public art for the community. Setting the limit for acquisitions to physical pieces will be eliminating a lot of artistic creativity of people who do not engage in the creation of physical art, and some artists focus on the dark side of humanity. It is nice in a public place to see something whimsical, for instance the "Frog" in Historic Dublin. He volunteers with cancer patients and sees a great deal of focus on death and darker topics. He believes the City should direct a focus on what might be uplifting; it is a "win" situation for all. Mr. Keenan suggested that the goal could say "have an emphasis on being inspiring." Mr. Salay referred to the Veterans Memorial. Council agrees that it is public art, and it is inspirational, but it probably wouldn't be considered uplifting ar joyful. Mr. Reiner stated that the veterans made sacrifices that the average American does not, and recognizing them is uplifting. He agrees "inspires joy" is not the correct verbiage. Ms. Ott responded that Council's direction seems to provide flexibility in the language. One installation may not meet all the goals as long as it meets multiple others. Mr. Keenan noted that it is also important that the public art pieces be accessible to all residents and visitors. There are accessibility issues with several current pieces, particularly the "Watch House." The art pieces should meet ADA accessibility requirements. Ms. Brautigam stated that there may be the option of placing public art in the medians. While they would certainly be visible, they would not be accessible. Dublin City Council Study Session Monday, February 11, 2008 Page 15 Mr. Lecklider stated the objective should be that there is an accessible vantage point from which to view it and appreciate it. Ms. Ott referred to page 3, "Selection of Public Art," which provides seven criteria which future public art pieces should meet to be selected. Mr. Gerber inquired who will be responsible for making that determination. Ms. Ott responded that it will be a combination of -Council, Dublin Arts Council and in some cases, others. Currently, that is determined on a piece by piece basis. Every proposal is brought to Council for approval. Ms. Salay stated that she envisioned these issues could be resolved by Council at the upcoming goal setting retreat. Ms. Brautigam stated that it would be unusual for a City Council to be the body that viewed and selected all artworks. That becomes too political. Ms. Salay agreed that it wouldn't be good far the community, the arts or for Council. Ms. Ott stated that after Council brought up this topic for the Council retreat, she and Mr. Guion discussed this topic. They have developed a few suggestions that Council could discuss at their retreat and provide the input needed to develop a formal agreement for Council to consider. At this point, do the "Selection Criteria" appear to be satisfactory? Mr. Keenan responded that he believes they are satisfactory. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher inquired what is the difference between the City's collection versus the Dublin Arts Council's. Ms. Ott responded that the City owns the pieces and the copyrights on them; the Dublin Arts Council does not. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that she understood the ownership, but this program has historically been a partnership with the Dublin Arts Council. It seems this Administration may be taking a different approach. Ms. Ott responded that there are multiple pieces in the City's collection that were acquired separate from Dublin Arts Council. This provides recognition that has occurred and continues to be a medium for acquiring new works. The City acquired 8 donations in 2007, of which the 3 largest were not part of the public arts acquisition process with Dublin Arts Council. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher agreed. Creating an art piece for the City's public art program, which includes jurying and selection is different than donation of an already completed piece. Dublin City Council Study Session Monday, February 11, 2008 Page 16 Ms. Brautigam stated that this could be another policy matter for Council to consider. Council could indicate they want to have more public art in addition to pieces in the parks - art on the walls of City buildings, for instance. Having Dublin Arts Council select and purchase all of that would be difficult. The City could acquire public art differently. Outside of the formal submittal, jury and selection pieces, other smaller pieces could be obtained more quickly. Those would not be the DAC sponsored collection; they would be outside of that. The City could discuss these options for the future public art program. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that the problem with having that discussion at the retreat is that Mr. Guion needs to be a participant in that discussion. She is aware that Mr. Guion has had strong opinions as to the roles of each party. Ms. Brautigam stated that staff has made Mr. Guion aware that the City's public art program would be discussed at Council's retreat and that he is welcome to attend. The meeting is open to the public. Ms. Salay stated that it would be interesting to hear his perspective and it would be good to provide him with a comfort level in regard to Council's direction. There doesn't need to be a conflict. Ms. Brautigam agreed. Ms. Salay stated that there is a lot of potential for City parks. Council viewed info about a dog park where some of the community's members had made tiles with their dog's paw print ar name, and that became part of a planter or a walkway. For such simple projects, it would not be necessary to involve the Arts Council. Mr. Gerber stated the problem with one body selecting all the art is that the city would end up with one theme or style. Great cities, such as Chicago, Atlanta and New York, have a large amount of public art. It should come from many different sources and through many different avenues. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that there is a need to articulate in writing whatever the City's plan is and whose responsibility it is to perform the various components of it. That has not happened satisfactorily in the past, although there is an existing agreement between the City and Dublin Arts Council. Mr. Gerber responded that this seems the appropriate time to revisit that agreement. Ms. Brautigam responded that is what the City is trying to accomplish, both with the public arts program agreement and the operating agreement for the facility. Mr. Reiner stated that he agrees with Mr. Gerber in that it is not good to have one arts council or body selecting the public art for the City. The citizenry have enough sense to know and to say that they would rather have one piece over another. How can they be Dublin City Council Study Session Monday, February 11, 2008 Page 17 involved in the selection of pieces? There needs to be a variation of people involved in review and selection. Ms. Ott responded that there are different layers built into the process. There are some acquisitions that do not require the same financial commitment as a larger commission would. Different processes could be involved. At this point, City staff cannot purchase smaller works, even with the help of DAC staff, without having approval from Council. Mr. Reiner stated that personally he would prefer to see art that is evocative and interesting, like the troll under the bridge in the state of Washington. Bold, clever pieces. He does not believe the City's money should be used far multiple small pieces or pieces the public cannot perceive. Ms. Ott responded that would be a critical point to clarify. Currently, one of the policy statements in the draft plan is that the City, in partnership with others, has the responsibility to increase the availability of art in the community. If it is not to acquire smaller pieces, what is Council's expectation? The language needs to be reworked to meet Council's expectation. Mr. Gerber responded that the pieces could be small one time, but large another time. Mr. Reiner agreed. The size cannot be stipulated. Ms. Ott stated that there is one new policy statement in the plan -- #8, which states: "The City will encourage the incorporation of art in private developments when the art is within the public realm." That means it would be visible from the public right-of--way ar from City-owned land. Staff would like to have Council's input on that statement. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that there are many statements in the plan that need Council's review and input. There are also some significant changes in policy direction in this plan, so Council needs to carefully review it and be certain they are comfortable with it. She does not want to be confronted with a situation in a few months where staff comes forward and indicates that Council approved something that she did not understand would be interpreted as such. Tonight, she is not prepared to vote on this plan, because she needs to read it carefully and prepare questions she might have. The issue is how staff will interpret the provisions that are in the plan, particularly the public art component of it. FUTURE STEPS Mr. Hahn stated that to finalize the plan, staffs next step would be to draft the final text, format, graphics, exhibit insertion, layout and print. However, Council wants to provide a more detailed review and input on Chapter 10. Staff is seeking general direction on how Council wants to proceed regarding additional input and review of the document. Mr. Reiner stated that he has completed his review of the plan other than Chapter 10, and if the suggestions made tonight are incorporated, that would suffice. Dublin City Council Study Session Monday, February 11, 2008 Page 18 Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that she is also satisfied with the plan, other than Chapter 10. She does want more time to specifically review that component, which she believes is also scheduled for Council's retreat agenda. VlJhat she heard from Council members saying tonight regarding the parks and recreation areas was that they agree analysis needs to be completed. Council is not now approving construction of a $50M recreation center. They want to look at a more phased in plan and different ways of doing business. She does not want it to be assumed that Council is committing funds to the ultimate outcome, because it cannot now be known what that will be, what other options might be available, or haw many years it might be before the City is ready to implement some of these things. Mr. Earman stated that the way the document is designed, it can be reviewed and updated annually. As studies are completed, the results can be integrated into the plan. It can be an evolutionary document, rather than one "written in stone." Year 2008 will involve a lot of work that is defined in this document, but it will be a document that continues to grow. Ms. Brautigam stated that while it is good that the public art program will be discussed at Council's retreat, it is not the only topic. The art topic has been a provocative discussion over the years, and she hopes Council does not spend hours on it at the Retreat. She suggests instead that the April study session be devoted to Chapter 10. Mr. Guion can be present at that meeting. The time can be spent to make everyone comfortable and in agreement. Hopefully, Chapter 10 can be finalized at that time. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher adjourned the meeting at 9:07 p.m. Clerk of Council