Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-10-06 Study SessionDUBLIN CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION Monday, April 10, 2006 7:00 p.m. -Council Chambers MINUTES OF MEETING Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher called the meeting to order. Present were Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, Vice Mayor Lecklider, Mrs. Boring, Mr. Keenan, Ms. Salay, and Mr. McCash. Mr. Reiner arrived at 7:15 pm. Staff members present were Ms. Brautigam, Mr. Hammersmith, Ms. Willis and Ms. Ott. The topic of discussion was an update on the following road improvement projects: • Post Road • SR 161/Riverside Drive Intersection • Eiterman Road • POST ROAD Ms. Brautigam stated that during recent discussions regarding the Community Plan update, Council has made reference to future Coffman Park plans. Staff is under the impression that Council may wish to re-evaluate plans to redirect Post Road. Staff is preparing to conduct Post Road traffic modeling, and it is important to be consistent with Council's direction. Following staffs presentation and discussion, Council members will be asked two questions that will provide that clarification. Ms. Willis noted that the last formal discussion regarding Post Road plans occurred when the Tara Hill Task Force recommendation was presented and adopted by Council on June 6, 2005. Since then, a few items have changed. She presented a PowerPoint focused on the following information. Per Council approval, plans for construction of a two-lane roundabout at the intersection of Avery-Muirfield Drive and Post Road are underway. Due to this improvement, current southbound lefts will no longer be restricted. The redirection of Post Road was not included in the intersection improvement project due to a timing consideration. The Coffman Park Expansion Task Force recommendation was that the realignment of Post Road and a southbound left from Avery-Muirfield to Post Road occur simultaneously. Recently, a couple of Community Plan workshops included discussion on the Post Raad area. Dublin's new travel demand model to test land uses and possible roadway networks is nearly ready. The target area includes Post Road, Tara Hill Drive, Coffman Road/Emerald Parkway, Perimeter Drive, Holt Road, Perimeter Loop, Discovery Drive and Avery-Muirfield Drive. Existing Plan The 1997 Community Plan maintained the current Post Raad alignment -Post Road crossing over I-270 and a possible future site of City Hall. The Coffman Park Expansion Task Force composite plan recommended park development along Post Road with an active east side and a passive west side. Suggested traffic-calming Dublin City Council Study Session Monday, April 10, 2006 Page 2 measures in the west side were a traffic circle at Discovery and Post Road and a median on Post Road approaching the intersection with Avery-Muirfield. Realigning Past Road to connect with Commerce Parkway would result in a longer, more circuitous drive to the Community Recreation Center. The Rec Center's connections to Downpatrick Drive and to Coffman Road would be maintained. There would also be a connection from Emerald Parkway to Post Road through the new City Hall parking lot. Recent Area Development In the area east of Avery-Muirfield Drive, the target area is bounded by I-270 to the east, Post Road to the North, Avery-Muirfield Drive to the west, and US 33 to the south. In the area west of Avery-Muirfield Drive, the target area is bounded by Avery-Muirfield Drive to the east, US 33 to the south, and Post Road/Perimeter Drive to the north. Recently approved developments in the area are: Avery Place, Perimeter West, the hospital site, the Homestead development, and the Coffman Park expansion. Ms. Salay stated that much of the remaining space is already committed to the MAG dealership expansion east along SR 161 /US 33, the development proposed for the vacant land between Holt Road/Perimeter Laop, and the expanded office development north of that. Ms. Willis compared Post Road development densities as provided in the 1997 Community Plan, the Coffman Park Expansion Plan studies, and the current studies. The Coffman Park Expansion studies projected traffic volume at 9,290 vehicle trips per day, and current studies project 8,720 through trips for the same area. Even though approved development densities are higher, the projected traffic volume is less due to the type of land use approved. [Mr. Reiner arrived] The Coffman Park Expansion study projected pros and cons of a Post Road realignment versus maintaining the current alignment. Option 1: Redirection to Commerce Parkway: • Pros (1 } By eliminating the west leg of the Post RoadlEmerald Parkway intersection, the opportunity exists to reconfigure lane assignments to provide dual southbound lefts to eastbound Post Road to access I-270 without adding pavement and possibly impacting the Post Road over I-270 bridge. (2} This would provide a direct benefit to large corporate citizens, Cardinal Health and Verizon Wireless. (3} Allows for a unified Coffman Park campus consistent with current Community Plan. (4} Maintains the current 2-lane rural character of Post Road. • Cons Dublin City Council Study Session Monday, April 10, 2006 Page 3 (1 } Post Road is currently designated as a minor arterial in the Community Plan and the community would lose an east-west connector in an already weak network. (2} Approximately 25 trips in the PM peak hour or 200 trips/day will divert to Tara Hill Drive, increasing the need for traffic calming on Tara Hill Drive. {Note: These numbers are pre-traffic calming on Tara Hill, so some of those trips would not now seek Tara Hill} (3} Access to the Rec Center would not be as direct and could de-emphasize the regional access point as originally intended. (4} Consolidates all access from the east through the Emerald Parkway/Perimeter Drive intersection. (5} May have capacity issues if a fourth leg at Perimeter Drive/Emerald Parkway intersection is necessary due to development of the "bowtie" property. Ms. Salay inquired if the traffic calming on Tara Hill was considered in the study. Ms. Willis responded that the Coffman Park Expansion Task Force study preceded the Tara Hill Traffic Calming Task Force, therefore the traffic calming was not considered. With the traffic calming, more traffic would seek alternate routes. Therefore, the actual volume would be less than the projection. Ms. Salay noted that she has been told by many people that they are using Tara Hill now because there is no left turn from Avery-Muirfield Drive to Post Road. When the left turn lane is added back in, more Rec Center traffic will be using Post Road. Ms. Willis responded that the Coffman Park expansion study estimated 100 trips per day would be diverted from Tara Hill to Post Road, but the number could actually be higher. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher requested clarification of the Post Road redirection and the impact on the Rec Center access drive. Ms. Salay noted that approximately 100 additional yards would be added to the drive from Post Road to the Rec Center. Mr. McCash noted that the new entryway could curve around the artwork and then connect to Post Road. That would preserve more greenspace for the park. Ms. Salay responded that when the task force learned the cost of some of the other elements desired, they took the more cost-effective option -leaving that section of the road where it is. However, other alignments within the park were considered. Ms. Willis noted that the Coffman Park expansion traffic study did not consider the possibility of a 4th leg, a driveway, added to the Emerald Parkway/Perimeter Drive Dublin City Council Study Session Monday, April 10, 2006 Page 4 intersection, should the bowtie property be developed. Emerald Parkway is the only logical access for that property; there is a stub there now. Mr. Hammersmith noted that there is another access point to the north, but the primary access would be at the intersection. Ms. Salay stated that during discussions regarding the proposed reconfiguration of the 1270/SR 161 intersection, a suggestion was made to cut into the bowtie piece. Two questions: {1) Is there a potential for development there? {2) Wouldn't the developer of that parcel be required to contribute to the construction cost? Mr. Hammersmith responded to #2 stating that the developer would be required to complete a traffic impact study. If the development required improvements to the existing configuration of the intersection, the developer would be required to construct those improvements. Mrs. Boring stated that previously, Council had determined that land would be maintained at all of the intersections until later decisions were made; this was an attempt to avoid later expensive buyouts. Wouldn't that apply here, also? Mr. Hammersmith responded that it would, and it is included in the current alternatives analysis of the I-270 MIS so that the City can secure right-of--way before the land is developed. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher inquired if there is a design for the I-270/SR 161 site. Mr. Hammersmith responded that at Council's February 27 study session, ODOT shared 4 options. They are trying to stay away from this site, so the impact to that property should be minimal and would not prohibit some development on the site. Mr. Combs responded to Ms. Salay's inquiry regarding proposed land use for the site, stating that the current recommendation is a hotel conference center within a combined afficelpark use. At that time, the potential impacts of the interchange were not known. Mr. Reiner inquired the amount of acreage in the bowtie area. Mr. Combs estimated 13 acres. The difficulty with this site is that the center is narrow. Depending on the use, it could be difficult to plan a site layout to meet all the needs. Ms. Willis continued with the pros and cons of continuing the current alignment of Post Road. Option 2: Maintain Current Continous Alignment of Post Road • Pros: Dublin City Council Study Session Monday, April 10, 2006 Page 5 (1 } Provide alternate emergency route for accident management from Emerald Parkway to Avery-Muirfield Drive; (2} From a transportation perspective, as a minor arterial Post Road has a 35 mph speed limit that helps facilitate flow; (3} Maintains regional access to Rec Center from the east; (4} Provides another east-west through route for the area bounded by US 33/SR 161, Emerald Parkway, Avery-Muirfield Drive, and Post Road; (5} Provides a direct local connection from Frantz Road and Bridge Street to the Avery-Muirfield Drive corridor; (6} Improves business access to those located along Discovery Boulevard and Halt Drive; (7} Would reduce traffic volume on Tara Hill Drive and at the Avery-Muirfield DrivelPerimeter Drive intersection. • Cons: (1 } Limits feasibility to increase capacity at the Emerald Parkway/Post Road intersection as it could impact I-270 bridge; (2} Would likely became a reliever for both US 33lSR 161 and Perimeter Drive through Coffman Park; would be difficult to preserve its present rural, scenic character; (3} If volumes do increase beyond acceptable levels, would require geometric improvements and right-of--way; (4} Would impact residents along the Post Road corridor; (5} A resultant roadway improvement project may have impacts to the south fork of Indian Run; (6} Would not provide an at-grade unified Coffman Park; (7} May result in a need to re-evaluate land uses, park layout, and associated amenities of the Coffman Park expansion; ($} Would increase traffic volumes at the Avery-Muirfield DrivelPast Raad intersection. Mr. Reiner referred to #2 of the cons and stated that it would be a pro -- not acon -- for Post Road to "become a reliever for both US 33/SR 161 and Perimeter Drive through Coffman Park." It would be up to the City's Planning Department to make certain that the present rural, scenic character of Post Road is preserved. Post Road is an important east-west connector, and the #1 issue identified in the community survey was traffic. Ms. Willis continued with her presentation. Travel Demand Modeling Efforts: • The 1997 Community Plan travel demand model underestimated background traffic travel through Dublin; Dublin City Council Study Session Monday, April 10, 2006 Page 6 • The Coffman Park expansion study did not take the Emerald Parkway and Perimeter Drive intersection with four legs into account; • It is necessary to re-examine the findings of the Coffman Park Expansion Task Force {CPETF); • Study roadway network in two ways: - "Constrained" Post Road: Post Road redirected to Commerce Parkway with a two-lane footprint; - "Unconstrained" Post Road: Maintain Post Road in its current alignment and allow all the demand volume access to Past Road. Ms. Willis noted that the new Dublin travel demand model would incorporate the anticipated four legs at the Emerald Parkway/Perimeter Drive intersection, and would certainly provide a higher estimation for Dublin background traffic. It appears that it will be necessary to re-examine the findings of the CPETF, particularly the claim that redirection of Post Road would not negatively impact the roadway network. She clarified the definition of "background traffic" as the amount of traffic traveling through Dublin that does not have an origin or a destination in Dublin. Mrs. Boring noted that continuing to be bound by the 1997 traffic demand model has caused recent problems. How can that be avoided? Mr. Hammersmith responded that the 1997 model has actually been replaced by the new model, which contains a flexible margin. Ms. Willis stated that staff has adjusted the new model in accordance with the current and planned land uses for the surrounding communities. They would like to study the roadway network under two scenarios: {1 } constrained Post Road -redirected Post Road with atwo-lane footprint and a scenic, rural character, and {2} unconstrained Post Road -maintain current Post Road allowing the demand volume to determine the footprint of the road. Mr. Reiner stated that Post Road is currently two lanes. It is also one of the city's major east-west connectors, other than SR 161, Brand, and Glick roads. Could Post Raad potentially become four lanes to mitigate the traffic issues? If sa, that would not be a problem, as there is adequate right-of-way on both sides of Post Road. Mr. Hammersmith responded that a traffic study of an unconstrained Post Road would provide that answer. Mr. Reiner responded that it would be difficult far Post Raad to remain two lanes as the build-out of this part of the city occurs. The interests of the majority must override the interests of a few. Dublin City Council Study Session Monday, April 10, 2006 Page 7 Ms. Salay responded that along much of the road, the City has only 60 feet of right-of- way. Beyond that, the City would have to purchase property from private homes or businesses. Mr. Keenan noted that there are only a few residences on Post Road, and over half of those have very extensive setbacks. Ms. Salay noted that Homestead Communities has been approved for development and there is an office development on one corner. West of that, it would be necessary to buy the homes to widen the roadway. Mr. Reiner responded that may be true, but it is the only roadway where it would be necessary to buy only a few. Ms. Salay noted that Perimeter Drive was designed to be the east-west connector in that area, along with SR 161 and Shier Rings. The Coffman Park Task Force and Tara Hill Task Force traffic studies assumed a redirected, not closed, Post Road with redirected Post Road having the capacity to carry more traffic than it does today as a two-lane roadway. All the businesses on Discovery and Holt would continue to have access to Post Road and Perimeter. Post Road would be redirected in a gentle turn movement to Perimeter Drive. The only place there would be a constraint is at the Perimeter Drive/Emerald Parkway intersection. Mrs. Boring stated that perhaps the solution isn't limited to two choices. Dublin has conscientiously made a decision to keep certain connectors two-lane. Why isn't it possible to run a constrained model that maintains Post Road as two lanes? Mr. Hammersmith responded that it would be passible to run a model on Post Road in its current alignment and constrained to two lanes. Mrs. Boring stated that Dublin has traditionally preserved its two-lane, rural roadways with the expectation that traffic would be encouraged to seek another route. A third option would be to maintain Post Road as a two-lane direct route, and she would like any traffic studies to evaluate that, as well. Ms. Willis responded that option would also be evaluated. Vice Mayor Lecklider inquired if Post Road were to be widened east of Avery-Muirfield Drive, would it also be widened west afAuery-Muirfield? Mr. Hammersmith responded that it would extend from Emerald Parkway to Perimeter Drive, west of Avery-Muirfield Drive. Dublin City Council Study Session Monday, April 10, 2006 Page 8 Vice Mayor Lecklider inquired what development west of Avery-Muirfield would be impacted. Mr. Hammersmith responded the Convalarium and Gorden Farms are on the north side of that section of Post Road; on the south side, it would primarily be the Daimler project. However, the travel demand model would indicate whether the section of Post Road west of Avery-Muirfield would also need to be widened. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher inquired if the desire is not to do this, why should the City waste time and money modeling it? The decision has already been made not to widen that section. The Daimler project was approved without sufficient setbacks to support future widening. Therefore, she would suggest looking at other alternatives. Mr. Reiner inquired if it would be preferable to have a wider two-lane road with a 40- mph speed limit and with turn lanes at Holt Raad. It would become mare of an access thoroughfare, such as Henderson Road. Ms. Willis stated that the higher speed limit would attract some traffic, but it would not increase capacity so it would not affect the modeling results. Vice Mayor Lecklider noted that it would not be desirable to increase traffic through the city's central park. It is important not to lose sight of the overall goal for Coffman Park. Mr. Reiner responded that there are not many options remaining for alleviating the traffic issues that will result from the coming development in that area. Ms. Salay responded that if Perimeter Drive were to be used as intended, it would be the solution. It has five lanes and a 100-foot right-of--way, so it could be widened. There is also limited access along the roadway. It is important to remember that the only section of Post Road that would be removed, which is so important to Coffman Park, does not impact the capacity of the road. In the redirection of Post Road at Commerce Parkway to Perimeter Drive, the traffic flow is shifted but the capacity is maintained. She is concerned that Council not lose sight of the position it has already taken regarding the expansion of Coffman Park. The Coffman Park Expansion Task Force worked on the plan for 1-1 /2 years with the input of many city residents. Council deliberately included some Post Road residents in the membership of that task force. Council ratified the task force recommendations, and some Post Road residents subsequently made decisions regarding their properties due to Council's action. The recommendations achieved a central park and a road network that works. Redirected Past Road works. Mrs. Boring stated that she also appreciates the opportunity for the large central park in the central portion of the city. However, the central park would still be possible with the Dublin City Council Study Session Monday, April 10, 2006 Page 9 present alignment of the road, maintaining the two lanes and perhaps enhancing its rural look. The present alignment would provide the residents greater access to the park and an attractive, scenic view towards the center of the park. Mr. McCash stated that the redirection would provide the same result. The passive section of the park will have that scenic drive. The active segment of the park that will be developed as office does not contribute to the passive park appearance anyway. Mr. Reiner stated that he would encourage Council to seriously look at the traffic aspect. Ms. Salay stated that she never would have voted to redirect Post Road around Coffman Park if it could have negatively impacted the road network. The pros and cons were studied very thoroughly, and the conclusions were that the redirection would not negatively impact the traffic flaw. With that assurance, why not choose the alignment that is best for the park? As Walter Kulash, the speaker regarding "livable traffic" has stated, cities should make proactive decisions to determine what roads the community will have and the character of those roads. Mrs. Boring stated that she would prefer that studies of all the possible scenarios be conducted as the results would provide the basis for the vote she will ultimately cast for the community. Vice Mayor Lecklider inquired if one of the pros for the realignment was that it would allow southbound Emerald Parkway to turn onto eastbound Post Road. Mr. Hammersmith responded that is true. Vice Mayor Lecklider inquired if it were possible to estimate the traffic impact if Cardinal Health were to double in size, but there was no ability to construct two southbound turn lanes. Mr. Hammersmith responded that scenario was included in the Cardinal Health traffic impact study, which was conducted for the approval of their second building. That study did assume the redirection of Post Road, as that was already planned at the time. Ms. Willis stated that it would be in the travel demand model. Vice Mayor Lecklider stated that some of the neighborhoods in the north would benefit from having two southbound turn lanes on eastbound Post Road. Mr. Hammersmith stated that there are difficulties in the a.m. peak hour with the southbound Emerald to eastbound Post Road movement. Mrs. Boring noted that extending Emerald Parkway to Sawmill Road should alleviate some of the traffic. Dublin City Council Study Session Monday, April 10, 2006 Page 10 Ms. Willis agreed. Currently, the "path of least resistance" is I-270, so much of the traffic seeks that route. She stated that it is important to recognize with this discussion that the traffic model used with the 1997 Community Plan was also used for the Coffman Park Expansion study, and it grossly underestimated the background traffic for Dublin. It satisfactorily predicted the traffic that would be generated by development within Dublin, but not that which would come from outside of the community. Therefore, the Coffman Park traffic study that indicated the redirection of Post Road would not negatively impact the community cannot be relied upon. That study needs to be conducted again, taking into account an updated projection of future background traffic. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that staff is requesting approval for a traffic study of a constrained and unconstrained Post Road. Ms. Willis confirmed that request. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher added that Mrs. Boring has requested the study include other alternatives. Ms. Willis indicated that would not be a problem. Mr. Hammersmith noted that the model would also include the alternative of a constrained Post Road on its existing alignment. There would be three scenarios. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher clarified that the study could include additional scenarios. She asked what the consensus of Council is at this point. Council consensus was that staff proceed with the traffic study as indicated. Mr. Reiner inquired the level of confidence that could be placed on that study into the future. In seven years, will the situation contradict the study findings? Mr. Hammersmith responded that a prediction is not certain. However, using the best numbers available at this time, it will definitely be an improvement over the previous model. Mr. Reiner inquired if it is possible to make a solid prediction on the traffic volume that will be generated by the technology park. Ms. Willis confirmed that it is possible to do so. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher inquired the timeframe for the study. Ms. Willis responded that the travel demand model is nearly ready. However, there are some land use issues to be worked through to year 2030. Dublin City Council Study Session Monday, April 10, 2006 Page 11 Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher inquired if staff would be ready to initiate the study by May 1. Ms. Willis confirmed the date and estimated it would take approximately three months to complete. Mr. Keenan inquired if the study could consider the completion of the Post Road intersection improvements at US33 and how that would impact driver habits. It would definitely impact Avery-Muirfield traffic. Mrs. Boring inquired if consideration has been given to eliminating the intersection of Emerald Parkway at Coffman Park Drive, making the Emerald Parkway intersection a continuous movement. It would require elimination of the present City Hall building. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that it would also require relocation of the historic Coffman Home, possibly within the Coffman Park. Mr. Hammersmith stated that staff is also requesting authorization to delay construction of the two-lane roundabout at Avery and Post Roads to incorporate the findings of the new travel model analysis. This dovetails well as the anticipation was not to begin construction until spring 2007. He clarified that with the roundabout, it is not possible to restrict southbound left turns, and the roundabout project does not include the redirection of Post Road at this time. Mr. Keenan expressed concern. There is a high level of pedestrian traffic at Avery- Muirfield and Post and he is concerned with their safety. It very difficult to traverse that intersection without left turn movements. The traffic continues to back up. Perhaps an adjustment can be made to the timing of the lights. Mr. Hammersmith responded that could be done. The original intent was to complete the roundabout project this year; however, that is not possible. Construction cannot begin until next year, but it is uncertain whether the project would begin before or after the Memorial Tournament. Mr. McCash stated that the Coffman Park Task Force recommendation was not to construct the left turn at Post and Avery-Muirfield until Post Road was redirected. However. the roundabout would solve the left-turn lane issue. Mr. Hammersmith agreed that it could not restrict the southbound left. Mr. McCash stated that if the roundabout is constructed now, essentially, a left turn at that intersection results. It can then be observed what leaving Post Road in its present alignment with a left turn would be like -much as it was previously. Then, the impact Dublin City Council Study Session Monday, April 10, 2006 Page 12 of a potential realignment of Post Road can be evaluated. He does not believe there is a need to delay the two-lane roundabout. Mr. Hammersmith responded that the Post Road residents believed that there would be an increase in traffic volume, and Council agreed to delay the left turn until the redirection of Post Road. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher responded there will be an increase in traffic anyway. The information Council will obtain from the studies will not change the decision about the two-lane roundabout. The two projects are separate matters. Therefore, she would prefer to move forward with the roundabout. The traffic at the intersection is a significant problem today, and more residential and commercial traffic is being brought online. The roundabout would alleviate the problem for the residents sooner versus later. Mr. Hammersmith stated that staff had not intended to delay the project. However, the preliminary engineering, detail design and land acquisition has not been completed in time to allow the project to begin in June. There was previously a connection between the timing of the intersection improvement and the redirection of Post Road; however, if Council desires to remove that restriction now, that is fine. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that some Council members have consistently seen them as separate issues due to the serious problem with the left turn restriction that existed at that time. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked Mr. Hammersmith to clarify the reason for the delay requested and its relation to the potential Post Road redirection. Mr. Hammersmith responded that the request is to delay the roundabout until next year due to the inability to begin the project in June 2006. He is also requesting whether Council desires to include the redirection of Post Road in that project, as the studies that will be conducted will provide needed information. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher responded that there is no restriction that the two projects occur within the same timeframe. The roundabout project should begin as soon as possible next year. Ms. Salay suggested that there be a communication with the Post Road residents regarding Council's direction. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher agreed that the communication should occur, however, the Post Road residents are already aware that the roundabout was approved earlier this year. Dublin City Council Study Session Monday, April 10, 2006 Page 13 Ms. Salay stated that Council was silent at that time on the redirection issue. Vice Mayor Lecklider noted that Council had agreed to the redirection previously. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that restriction was removed in January 2006, when the roundabout project was approved. The approval of the roundabout has already occurred, and Council's direction tonight is to approve an additional study regarding whether or not the redirection of Post Road will have an impact on traffic. Mr. Hammersmith responded that it may not be clear that the roundabout approval lifted the restriction that it be tied to the redirection of Post Road. He therefore suggests Council take action to clarify that. Mrs. Baring responded that the Coffman Park Task Force recommendations were a concept plan. The minutes clearly reflected that. Mrs. Brautigam responded that because Council accepted that report, staff believed that a commitment had been made to follow the recommendations. However, staff is now requesting clarification of Council's direction regarding the linkage between reinstituting a left turn at Avery-Muirfield via the roundabout and a redirection of Post Road. Ms. Salay noted that the Tara Hill Task Force acknowledged that understanding in their later recommendation to Council. Vice Mayor Lecklider noted that Council members need to determine whether they feel bound to the previous action. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher responded that in this case, staff has indicated that the model used for making that determination had major flaws and should be reevaluated. New information on the appropriateness of the road redirection could change Council's previous decision. Mr. Keenan stated that Council agrees on two points: {1 } to move forward an the roundabout at Post and Avery-Muirfield as soon as possible, and {2) to reevaluate and decide what should happen with the other end of the road, using a new travel demand model. Ms. Brautigam requested Council clarification of their direction regarding scheduling redirection of Post versus proceeding with the roundabout. Mr. Keenan noted that although a few Post Road residents could be unhappy, the issue is the interests of a few Post Road residents versus 39,000+ other Dublin residents. Council owes it to the entire city to gather critical information before making such a decision. Dublin City Council Study Session Monday, April 10, 2006 Page 14 Mr. Keenan moved to direct staff to proceed immediately on completion of the Avery- Muirfield/Post Road roundabout and to reevaluate the advisability of a Post Raad redirection using the new traffic demand model. Furthermore, staff shall communicate Council's direction to the Post Road residents. Mr. Reiner seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mr. McCash, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mrs. Baring, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Vice-Mayor Lecklider, yes. • S.R. 1611RIVERSIDE DRIVE INTERSECTION Ms. Brautigam stated that during the Community Plan process, discussion regarding this intersection came up. At one of the meetings, staff was shown a possible site for a future city hall or a commercial building at the corner of Bridge Street/SR 161. That proposal suggested the relocation of this intersection to the east. Council did not consider that to be a realistic option. Due to the high volume traffic statistics, staff has continued to study this intersection to identify options to improve its safety. Ms. Willis showed a PowerPoint presentation of the intersection layout. Mr. Keenan inquired if there are historical factors related to the southbound express lane, which separates from the main roadway and runs under the bridge. He had heard that it is the first of its kind in the nation. Mr. Reiner stated that the ingenuity and foresight of the engineer who designed that is unsurpassed. Ms. Willis stated that the southbound bypass lane carries 10,000 vehicles/day, removing a high volume movement from that intersection. It has prolonged the life of the intersection significantly. In spite of that, it is the city's highest accident location. Discussion continued regarding the vehicle originationldestinatians. Ms. Willis noted that 37,000 vehicles per day enter the intersection. There were 62 accidents from March 2003 -February 2006, approximately two per month. Thirty-two percent of the accidents resulted in an injury. The accident rate per million vehicles entering the intersection {MVE rate} is 1.21. That is double the rate of the Avery- Muirfield/Perimeter Drive intersection. Mrs. Boring inquired if there is a way to compare the MVE for that intersection with the MVE rate nationwide or for a Columbus intersection. Is there a base MVE rate? What is the "trigger point" at which other communities assume there is a need to address an intersection? Ms. Willis responded that there is no base MVE rate. However, she is more concerned Dublin City Council Study Session Monday, April 10, 2006 Page 15 with the severity rate than the MVE rate. That reveals more -such as the speed and volume of the traffic and the type of collision. At the SR 161 /Riverside Drive intersection, mast of the injury-related accidents are "rear ends" or ACDA's - "assured clear distance ahead." This probably relates to the speed of the traffic on Riverside Drive. Ms. Willis displayed a concept plan for the intersection that was based upon area plan input and direction received by the Planning staff that would achieve the following: • Relocate the Riverside/SR 161 intersection assuming the necessary future bridge deck replacement to produce true pedestrian connection across the river. • Provide a civic or other use along the river that could provide a better physical and visual link than is possible on the west side of the river. • Provide the opportunity to implement a pedestrian greenway system along the east side of the river that could potentially link to the Kiwanis riverwalk. • Provide a more symbolic gateway into the historic district from the east. Ms Willis displayed an aerial to indicate where a potential intersection relocation site might be to the east in relation to where the Shoppes of River Ridge is being developed It would skirt River Ridge to the south. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher inquired the cost estimate of that type of project. Ms. Willis responded that they do not yet have any figures. Mr. McCash stated that this concept would require the removal of Wendy's and Tim Hortons. This design would also impact the River Ridge building due to the grading. In addition, it would be necessary to buy the existing shopping center. This would be an extremely expensive project. Ms. Salay agreed. It is an attractive design, but not realistic. The cost for land acquisition alone would be astronomical. Mr. McCash inquired about the cost for cutting Emerald Parkway into the hill. Mr. Hammersmith responded that he did not have the information with him. Ms. Salay inquired if this concept would also require cutting into the hillside and significant earthwork. Mr. McCash noted that it would require cutting into the hill or raising it to the same road level. The remaining piece of land on the northeast side of the site would be difficult to access, as it would be down in a "bowl." Mr. Hammersmith stated that shifting the intersection to the east was suggested by the Community Plan. Staff's intent was to include the concept in the alternatives analysis, but it would not be the only alternative considered. Dublin City Council Study Session Monday, April 10, 2006 Page 16 Ms. Salay inquired if staff is requesting Council's permission to study the concept. Mr. Hammersmith affirmed that was the intent and also to obtain Council's approval of the evaluation criteria, as noted on page 6 of the staff report. Mrs. Boring stated that there have been previous roadway projects that were considered vital to the community in spite of the high cost. However, there may be other satisfactory alternatives for this intersection that are less costly. Although this concept meets a goal of the existing Community Plan -provide more access to the river -- the high cost of the project appears to be a deterrent. She requested more information on what creative types of financing could be available and what considerations the City used in evaluating previous expensive roadway projects. Mr. McCash suggested that the cost be included in the evaluation criteria and goals. Mr. Reiner inquired if a traffic circle could be used in the current intersection site. Mr. Hammersmith responded that a traffic circle would be difficult at this location, but that alternative would also be evaluated. Mr. McCash noted that it would require some realignment of Riverside Drive. Mrs. Boring noted that it would achieve a better river view. Mr. Reiner Hated that he thinks the idea has merit; he would like to see the associated costs. Vice Mayor Lecklider inquired if there is an issue of volume related to traffic circles - is there a point at which a roundabout does not have the capacity to handle the volume? Mr. Hammersmith responded that, assuming there is a balanced inflow from all legs of the intersection, a roundabout will typically be more effective than a traffic signal. That is due exclusively to the delay -all the gaps in movement are filled in with continuous flow. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that she is pleased to see that "an improvement in safety" is listed as #1 in the list of evaluation criteria. She received a couple of emails from citizens noting that during the Ballantrae issue discussion at the last joint Community Plan work session, the safety factor was not recognized. Therefore, she would like to request that although safety and cost are often considered "given" factors for evaluation, that for the sake of the public they should always be specifically listed. She requested clarification of staff s request for Council direction. Ms. Willis responded that staff is requesting approval for the SR 161 /Riverside Drive intersection study: (1 } to include the alternatives of relocation of the intersection east, a modern roundabout, and other alternatives; (2} criteria as listed in the staff report, Dublin City Council Study Session Monday, April 10, 2006 Page 17 including any additions, deletions, or "weighting" per Council's direction. Ms. Salay inquired if staff could conduct the study and any potential weighting be assigned to the factors before beginning the evaluation. Ms. Willis responded that understanding the weighting, if assigned, would be helpful to staff while conducting the study. Mrs. Boring stated that she does not believe Council can assign points at this time. Ms. Salay responded that the suggested list appears satisfactory. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that safety would be weighted most heavily; otherwise, she cannot assign importance. One item has already been added to the criteria -- cost. If the cost is millions of dollars, the project won't be done. Also, it is important to prioritize the intersection within the list of City intersection projects according to the need of the greater whole. For instance, if another intersection improvement would benefit the City more significantly due to an anticipated high increase in volume, this one would be of less priority -- even though it has a higher accident rate. Mrs. Boring noted that this is a state route, so if there is an opportunity for additional funding, that should be included. Also, in regard to weighting the criteria, cost and priority would be heavily weighted. • EITERMAN ROAD EXTENSION Mr. Hammersmith stated that tonight Council will be provided a brief overview of the status. However, a public meeting will be held soon to update the community. Mr. Phillabaum reported that staff has been meeting on a weekly basis with Hilliard School representatives, including the school architect and civil engineers. He displayed the site plan. In the first phase, the elementary school will be constructed as well as half of the parking lot and four curb cuts along the Eiterman Road extension. The issues that staff has identified in addition to those the neighbors have brought to staff s attention are: • The design of the roadway Eiterman Road through Ballantrae is a median design with a landscaped median, single travel lanes in each direction and minimal curb cuts. The Golf Club of Dublin has the only private driveway access to Eiterman. All the others are public right-of- ways. Staff is working with Hilliard Schools to determine how they can provide better access to their site. Ms. Salay inquired if the reason four curb cuts are needed is for bus loop purposes. Mr. Phillabaum responded that the school wants to separate the bus drive from the parent drop-off traffic. Dublin City Council Study Session Monday, April 10, 2006 Page 18 Mrs. Boring inquired if staff would approve that number. Mr. Phillabaum responded that is not likely. Presently, the discussion is focusing on there being three curb cuts. Mrs. Boring noted that the traffic can be separated after entering the school property. Mr. Phillabaum responded that the outer loop is envisioned for the bus traffic dropping students off at the rear of the building. The inner loop would be designated for parent drop-off of students. Hilliard Schools had requested four curb cuts due to prior experience -- one school was constructed with only three curb cuts and the parent traffic and bus traffic are in constant conflict. However, staff has identified a manner in which three curb cuts would be adequate, still providing the stacking capacity needed. • Additional buffer between the rear lots of the neighbors and school site. A significant tree row has been added to the east property line of the school. Staff has been working with the Schools in an attempt to shift the road over to provide 40 feet from the edge of the school pavement to the property line to provide additional buffer. Mr. Reiner inquired if the Schools would maintain the buffer. Mr. Phillabaum responded that they would not. There would be additional right-of--way that would be dedicated to the City, so the City would have to maintain it. Mr. McCash noted that would be consistent with current policy. Dublin Schools do not maintain the adjacent right-of-ways. Mr. Phillabaum stated that Hilliard Schools has an issue with justification of use of taxpayer monies. One of the debated issues is the design of the Eiterman Raad extension with a median and additional buffering -- elements not typical in a Hilliard straight zoning. Mr. McCash inquired if Dublin could agree to pay for part of that. The City paid for the additional landscaping buffer adjacent to the Jerome High School site. Mr. Phillabaum responded that staff has made that offer. Another issue is the existing sidewalk stub directly in line with the existing tree row. Hilliard Schools have objected to extending the sidewalk on the east side of Eiterman Road; however, on the west, they would construct the sidewalk, as it would serve their property. Ms. Salay inquired if there is a bikepath along Eiterman Road. Mr. Phillabaum responded that there is sidewalk on both sides of Elterman Road. Dublin City Council Study Session Monday, April 10, 2006 Page 19 Mr. Ciarochi noted that there is a bikepath on Rings Road, but not Eiterman. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that Hilliard Schools' position is that they do not object to extending the sidewalk on the west side of Eiterman Road because it enhances access to their site, but they will not extend the sidewalk on the east side of Eiterman Road. Don't they consider it necessary to enhance the access for students walking along the west side of Eiterman to their school? Mr. Phillabaum responded that the preference of Hilliard Schools would be to extend the existing stub across Elterman Road and bring it dawn the west side. However, the design of Eiterman Road indicates sidewalk along both sides of the road. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that her understanding is that staff also recommended to Hilliard Schools that a community meeting be held far the residents. However, they have objected and indicated that the public venue is with the Hilliard Board of Education. Mr. Phillabaum stated that there was a meeting this morning with Hilliard Schools, and a meeting is scheduled on Wednesday evening with the Ballantrae residents to discuss bond issue #2. It is likely the residents will also bring this issue up. Ms. Salay noted that she has had discussions with many Ballantrae residents. They believe the school should be built and are supportive of the levy. Their issue is the roadway network and that the school site is developed appropriately to minimize negative impact on the neighbors. Mr. McCash stated that the road system should have been completed before the homes were built. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher agreed. She has visited the area to better understand the residents' concerns. To her, it seems very apparent hat Elterman Road was intended to be extended to Rings Road. She cannot understand why those who purchased properties there would not have been aware of that. Ms. Salay stated that several residents have indicated to her that Eiterman Road was not indicated on the plat map, and in visiting the model home it was not apparent. Although some buyers would be aware of the need to visit the City offices and look at the City thoroughfare plan before purchasing property, many would not. Mr. McCash noted that the two street stubs north of the property were very visible. Ms. Salay responded that the homebuyers were told that was a school site and the stubs were to provide access to the school and not a through access. In addition, the Kinvarra Lane residents have told her that they all paid premiums far their lots, creating Dublin City Council Study Session Monday, April 10, 2006 Page 20 the mindset of the residents. At this point, it is very important to communicate to the residents the necessity that Eiterman Road be more than an access to the school site -- that it will play a vital role in the future. She has attempted to respond to the emails she has received by explaining that in addition to evaluating the need to extend Eiterman Road, the City is reviewing the entire thoroughfare system of the City in conjunction with the update of the Community Plan. The character of Rings Road, for instance, may change in the future. This plan shows the extension of Eiterman Road all the way through to Tuttle Crossing, but is that necessary? If Eiterman Road terminates at Rings Road, it becomes more of a neighborhood road to serve the Ballantrae residents, Golf Club of Dublin and the community pool rather than a major throughway. In the Ballantrae area, Woerner Temple west of the traffic circle and Elterman Road with the median north of the Golf Club do effectively slow traffic and are very attractive roadways. Is that what would occur to the south? Mr. Phillabaum responded that it is staffs recommendation that the same median design be continued through to Rings Road. Ms. Salay stated that feature would be important. Is it possible to achieve some slight curving and buffering, which visually encourages traffic to slow? Mr. Hammersmith responded that there is limited opportunity to introduce curvature, but staff would like to pursue that as much as is possible in cooperation with the school site plan. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher suggested that due to the limited opportunity for curvature, that brick or some other material that visually slows traffic be used at each of the curb cuts. Isn't it true that the new plan does not show Eiterman Road extending beyond Rings Road? Mr. Hammersmith responded that the 1997 Thoroughfare Plan showed Eiterman extended to Tuttle, but staff has suggested that connection be reconsidered to de- emphasize Eiterman Road in the current Plan update. Mr. Keenan stated brick treatment at crosswalks can sometimes result in a noise disturbance for residents. Mr. Hammersmith responded that brick is currently used in Ballantrae. The noise level created depends upon the texture used. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher inquired if someone from City staff would attend the Hilliard School meeting with residents on Wednesday. Mr. Phillabaum responded that staff did not plan to attend, as it could encourage the discussion of more than the school bond issue. However, City staff will be scheduling Dublin City Council Study Session Monday, April 10, 2006 Page 21 a meeting with the residents in the near future, and Hilliard School officials will be welcome to participate in that meeting, if they wish. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher responded that she understands the reason staff decided not to attend the meeting Wednesday. However, she is concerned that Hilliard Schools will not be able to answer any questions about the road. Ms. Salay stated that is why the City meeting is essential. She hopes that Hilliard Schools will participate, as it would be helpful to demonstrate a cooperative relationship to the residents. Mrs. Boring stated that in fairness to the residents, the new extension should be as nice as the existing road design. Narrowing the road with a median strip has a natural, calming effect, and it is important to continue that design. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher agreed. As Mr. McCash stated, it would be preferable to install the roadway system before the development is constructed. Commercial or residential buyers should be able to see the road and know what they are purchasing. Mr. Hammersmith noted that he believes it was not built due to financial considerations. The City did not want to build what they knew a developer would build in the future. Mrs. Salay inquired if there is a way for the City to build the improvement and then be reimbursed by the developer? Mr. Hammersmith responded that it is possible to establish a reimbursement district. The City is considering that at Bantry Green in order to be reimbursed far some of the improvements, such as the roundabout. Ms. Salay noted that the maps in the model homes for new developments need to be accurate and have more details. Will Dallymore intersect with Eiterman? Mr. Hammersmith responded that it does. Mrs. Boring stated that the City has have never allowed any other development to have that many offsetting curb cuts. Mr. Hammersmith responded that they have not yet completed the site plan. Mr. Phillabaum noted that some other alignments would be made. Mr. Hammersmith stated that Council will be notified of the community meeting date. Ms. Salay suggested that a letter be sent to the Ballantrae property owners south of Dublin City Council Study Session Monday, April 10, 2006 Page 22 Woerner Temple notifying them of the meeting. The local newspapers should also be notified. Mr. Keenan inquired if they have a website. Ms. Salay stated that the Ballantrae residents do have their own website, and their webmaster probably would post the meeting information. It should be posted on the City's website as well. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that concludes the discussion of the agenda items. • OTHER ITEMS Finance Committee Meeting Date Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that a meeting date is needed for the Committee to review hoteUmotel tax grant applications. Following discussion, a Finance Committee meeting was scheduled for Wednesday, April 19, at 6:00 p.m. Wyandotte Woods Drive Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that she recently drove down Wyandotte Woods and was struck by the width of the roadway. With all the traffic-calming projects the City has had to construct, why was such a wide road built? Mr. Hammersmith responded it is a 44-foot wide road with curb cuts. He has no explanation of why it was constructed at that width. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated the road feels like a freeway. It may ultimately require traffic calming, which is expensive. Mrs. Boring stated that the road was approved in 1990 with the preliminary plat. Community Plan Update Meetings Ms. Salay inquired about the date of the next round of Community Plan meetings. Ms. Brautigam responded that no meetings have been scheduled at this time. Staff is now preparing the draft of the Community Plan, which will then be presented to the Planning Commission far review and ultimately presented to City Council. Two proposals have recently been made: {1 }afield trip for Council to assist in their vision regarding residential development in the Community Plan; and {2) another Community Plan meeting for the community. She recommended that the field trip occur before the community meeting discussion of the Community Plan. It would be beneficial for Council to have the visual experience of the concepts in mind when they are discussed. Ms. Salay stated that when the discussion of the area plan for the parcel in the southwest occurred, the public participation was very low. She believes there was a civic association presidents meeting that evening. The residents have been very adamant that the parcel wrapping the southwest pool not be developed as retail. Therefore, she suggested to the Community Plan consultant that the community be Dublin City Council Study Session Monday, April 10, 2006 Page 23 involved in that discussion before it is pursued further. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that several Council members have indicated that what is being recommended by the consultant does not reflect the input of the residents. Far this reason, another public meeting is recommended. She personally does not support spending more money on the consultants pursuing something the community is not interested in. The project seems to be on hold. It is important to make the field trip and keep the process moving. The longer this process takes, the more zoning decisions will be made and less land will remain for other land use options. Ms Brautigam stated that staff is looking at May 12 or May 19 for the field trip. Information will be provided to Council at the next meeting. If Council wants to have a community-wide forum for awrap-up discussion of the Community Plan update, that also needs to be scheduled before the end of June. The manner that forum will be conducted -- in charettes, tabletops, ormini-forums -- would also need to be decided. Ms. Salay stated that in regard to discussion of the southwest area, the majority of the people who would have an interest and would attend the meeting aren't aware of what has been tested and the concepts that are being considered. only by reviewing actual renderings and site plans can they have a sense of what staff is talking about. There is a lot of land remaining in the southwest. The City has received a proposal for a large tract of land - 900 of 1,400 acres. If the City hopes to shape that or dismiss it, these decisions need to be made. Ms. Puskarcik stated that the cable television channel could possibly be used in some manner as a communication tool for this issue - either a review of what has happened to date, or to televise one of the meetings. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher suggested that the education could be provided via cable television, then the public would be educated before attending the public meeting. Ms. Puskarcik stated that she could work the details out with Mr. Combs. Mrs. Boring stated that the structure of a community-wide meeting is important. Those interested in the southwest do not want to spend time hearing about the northwest. Ms. Brautigam suggested that the Council members sit at different tables designated by the wards they represent and the at-large representatives move among the tables. People would be able to choose the table where a dialogue about their concerns is occurring. Council members, along with staff, would then need to bring back information on the input to the entire group. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that setup should work. She requested that information regarding the Avery Park parking issue be included in Council packets for the next meeting. Dublin City Council Study Session Monday, April 10, 2006 Page 24 The meeting was adjourned at 9:20 p.m. Clerk of Council