HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/04/2007RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting
une 4,
~i
1
1
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher called the Monday, June 4, 2007 Regular Meeting of Dublin
City Council to order at 7:00 p.m. at the Dublin Municipal Building.
Present were: Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, Vice Mayor Lecklider, Mrs. Boring, Mr. Keenan,
Mr. Reiner and Ms. Salay. Mr. McCash arrived at 8:10 p.m.
Staff members present were: Ms. Brautigam, Ms. Grigsby, Mr. Smith, Chief Epperson,
Mr. McDaniel, Mr. Harding, Ms. Ott, Ms. Hoyle, Mr. Hahn, Mr. Hammersmith, Ms. Noble,
and Ms. Adkins.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mr. Reiner led the Pledge of Allegiance.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
• Regular Meeting of May 21, 2007
Approval of the minutes of May 21, 2007 was delayed until the June 18 Council meeting.
CORRESPONDENCE
The Clerk reported receipt of a Notice to Legislative Authority regarding the transfer of
D5A and D6 Permits from Residence Inn by Marriott, Inc., dba Residence Inn Columbus
Dublin, 435 Metro Place South to Residence Inn by Marriott LLC, dba Residence Inn
Columbus, 435 Metro Place South, Dublin.
There was no objection to the transfer of the permits.
SPECIAL PRESENTATION
Kion Rashidi and Karl Kubalak of the Dublin Piranhas soccer team presented a card to
Council, signed by all of the team members, thanking Council for the decision which
allows them to continue to play together as a team in Dublin under the Dublin Middle
Team Soccer Organization.
CITIZEN COMMENTS
Wallace Maurer, 7451 Dublin Road noted that at the Council meeting of March 19, 2007,
he began by asking whether and when Council would restore his freedom of speech in
this Chamber. That was followed by a long silence, broken by the Mayor who
commented that Council had not deprived him of his free speech rights, but enacted
Council's rules regarding subject matter of speaking. His response at that time was it is
a distinction without a difference. Along silence followed. Mr. Smith, Law Director then
responded that Council had given direction on how they are going to conduct their
meeting. (Mr. Maurer proceeded to quote Mr. Smith's direct comments as he
transcribed from the recording of the meeting.) Mr. Smith's words, "I don't see that
they're going to change that" and "I think that's the rule they're going to operate under"
convey to him that there may be the potential for other possibilities in the future. He
summarized that Mr. Smith is "covered," but he does not believe Council is "covered."
Sherman P. Liddell, 3838 Summitview Road, Dublin stated he is a resident and has
owned this property since 1972. He asked a procedural question regarding signing up to
speak on the resolutions relating to home rule. Should comments on those resolutions
be held until those are considered later tonight, or can he make his comments at this
time?
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher responded that for agenda items, he will be called to testify at
the time at the time they are introduced.
Mr. Liddell continued, noting that there is a saying in the legal community that "justice
delayed is justice denied." The ability to converse with a representative, if a citizen has
a representative, when postponed and held aloof "with a sealed bubble around it" is the
constitutional right of all citizens being denied again.
LEGISLATION
POSTPONED ITEM
Resolution 15-07 (Amended)
Authorizing the City Manager to Enter into an Agreement with TechColumbus
Ms. Brautigam stated that this agreement was reviewed by Council in March. On May
16, a Council study session was held in which Mr. McDaniel and representatives of
TechColumbus were present to discuss a revised agreement.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Dublin Citv Council
une 4,
e
20
D
1
1
Mr. McDaniel stated that this agreement differs from the one previously presented to
Council in that an incubator is not proposed to be pursued at this time. Instead, staff
desires to pursue a proof of concept model. If success is demonstrated, staff will pursue
the incubator at a later date. In addition, there is a termination clause now included.
The services required by TechColumbus are essentially the same as previously
presented, and Legal staff has reviewed the agreement and approved it as to form.
Steve Clark is present from TechColumbus to respond to questions.
Ms. Salay noted that she had to leave the study session early and Mr. McDaniel met
with her last week to review the matters presented at the study session. Her question
relates to the employee provided for Dublin by TechColumbus, staff's level of comfort
with the employee, and how that employee will function with City staff.
Mr. McDaniel responded that staff views this employee to be hired by TechColumbus
and servicing predominantly the City of Dublin as an extension of City staff. He has
discussed with Mr. Clark how they will work together in terms of communications, etc.
Mr. Clark has offered Mr. McDaniel the opportunity to review the posting for the position,
and he will be involved in the selection of the employee. The hiring decision will be
made by TechColumbus as well as any salary costs and performance review matters.
He believes there will be a close working relationship between their employee and with
Dublin staff.
Mr. Keenan congratulated Mr. McDaniel on this revised agreement which is significantly
improved over the first version. He asked about the implementation date following
Council's action tonight.
Mr. McDaniel responded that the implementation will begin immediately upon execution
of the agreement after Council's action tonight. TechColumbus is very anxious to
proceed.
Mr. Keenan asked about the quasi-public review body that was to be comprised of
various entities. Has that been eliminated?
Mr. McDaniel responded that this item was removed from the agreement.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that she agrees with Mr. Keenan, adding that this is a
better way of approaching the issue. Having TechColumbus hire the employee and
oversee them is desirable. It will provide a more entrepreneurial way of looking at
things, which is the intention of this project. She is also pleased to see that Dublin will
have representation on the Entrepreneurial Advisory Committee, as it will provide a
means of learning from others as well as contributing to that group.
Wallace Maurer. 7451 Dublin Road noted that he had previously expressed his
enthusiasm for this undertaking. Was the data regarding experience with incubators a
factor in eliminating this portion of the agreement?
Mr. McDaniel responded it was not. It was felt to be in Dublin's best interest to generate
potential businesses first and then move toward the establishment of an incubator at a
later date.
Vote on the Resolution: Mr. Reiner, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Ms. Salay,
yes; Vice Mayor Lecklider, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes.
LEGISLATION
SECOND READING/PUBLIC HEARING -ORDINANCES
Ordinance 26-07
Providing for a Change in Zoning for 262 Acres Located South of SR 33/US 161,
West of I-270, North of the Municipal Boundary, and East of Avery Road Retaining
Washington Township Zoning To: R-1, Restricted Suburban Residential, RI,
Restricted Industrial, and LI, Limited Industrial Zoning under the Provisions of
Code Section 153.004(D). (Southwest Quadrant Rezoning (Area 1) Case No. 01-1102)
Ordinance 27-07
Providing for a Change in Zoning for Approximately 62.72 Acres Located South of
Dublin-Granville Road, West of the Scioto River, North of Rings Road, and East of
Frantz Road Retaining Washington Township Zoning To: R-2, Limited Suburban
Residential and R-4, Suburban Residential Zoning, under the Provisions of Code
Section 153.004(D). (Inner I-270 Residential Rezoning -Case No. 03-098Z).
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Dublin City Council
June 4, 2007 Page
1
Held
Ordinance 28-07
Providing for a Change in Zoning for Approximately 510 Acres Located South of
Shier-Rings Road, West of Avery Road, North of the Municipal Boundary, and East
of Cosgray Road Retaining Washington Township Zoning To: R, Rural and R-1,
Restricted Suburban Residential Zoning, under the Provisions of Code Section
153.004(D). (Southwest Shier-Rings and Avery Roads Residential Rezoning -Case No.
03-121 Z)
Ordinance 29-07
Providing for a Change in Zoning for Approximately 40 Acres Located South of
Shier-Rings Road, West of Avery Road and East of Cosgray Road Retaining
Washington Township Zoning To: RI, Restricted Industrial and PUD, Planned Unit
Development Zoning, under the Provisions of Code Section 153.004(D).
(Southwest Shier-Rings and Avery Roads Commercial Rezoning -Case No. 03-1222)
Ordinance 30-07
Providing for a Change in Zoning for Approximately 342 Acres Located South of
Post Road, North of Shier-Rings Road, West of Avery Road and East of Cosgray
Road Retaining Washington Township Zoning To: R, Rural, R-1, Restricted
Suburban Residential, RI, Restricted Industrial, LI, Limited Industrial, and GI,
General Industrial Zoning, under the Provisions of Code Section 153.004(D). (US
33/SR 161 Corridor Rezoning -Case No. 03-1232)
Ms. Brautigam stated that these five ordinances are a series of area rezoning
ordinances that will be presented by Tammy Noble, Senior Planner.
Ms. Noble stated that the project was originally proposed and introduced to City Council
on May 21, 2007. It involves five cases. She reviewed maps of the areas proposed for
rezoning. This area rezoning effort was first initiated by the City in 2001 with the
purpose of rezoning all properties that continue to retain township zoning classifications
and/or did not have sufficient zoning documentation to justify a Dublin zoning
classification. The purpose was to establish comparable Dublin zoning classifications for
these properties. Written notification was provided to all of the affected property owners,
and meetings were held throughout the City with the landowners and surrounding
property owners. The Planning Division is supportive of this process, as it provides
regulatory development standards for all properties within the City of Dublin, and
ensures the preservation of private property rights to the extent possible, based on the
fact that it is assigning equivalent zoning classifications for the properties.
She outlined the particular zoning classifications proposed for each of the area
rezonings.
She added that this will aid in zoning code enforcement issues, based on the fact that it
will establish zoning classifications consistent with the zoning maps and consistent
within the zoning districts in the City. It will not particularly involve any type of
redevelopment of parcels and will sustain land uses that currently exist on the
properties.
These were reviewed by Planning & Zoning Commission on April 12, 2007 where
recommendations for approval were made for all five cases. This was presented to
Council for first reading on May 21, 2007. Staff requests approval for these area
rezonings.
She noted that Council had asked questions about the Inner I-270 rezoning and staff
provided documentation in the packet for review.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that most narratives indicate that while there had been
objections raised by some residents, staff was recommending Council move forward
with the area-wide rezonings except in one where staff was recommending an exception
for four properties. She asked for clarification about this inconsistency.
Ms. Noble responded that staff is handling four properties under a different process - as
an individual application. Within the R-2 district in Ordinance 27-07, there are four
parcels delineated in white. Those parcels contain duplexes. Staff is processing them
under the same guidelines, but as a separate application because they have land uses
different from the surrounding area. They will proceed in the same pattern, but as a
separate application.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked when the separate application will be brought forward to
Council.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Dublin City Council
une 4,
20
1
1
1
Ms. Noble responded that this application will be reviewed by the Planning & Zoning
Commission on June 7, and therefore Council will likely review the application in late
June or early July.
e
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher invited public testimony from those who had signed in on one
of the area rezonings.
Stephen R. Smith, 331 Longbranch Drive noted that his concerns have been addressed
in a-mails with staff. He has no testimony to provide tonight.
Vote on Ordinance 26-07: Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Vice
Mayor Lecklider, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes.
Vote on Ordinance 27-07: Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Ms.
Salay, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Vice Mayor Lecklider, yes.
Vote on Ordinance 28-07: Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Vice Mayor Lecklider, yes;
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes.
Vote on Ordinance 29-07: Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner,
yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Vice Mayor Lecklider, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes.
Vote on Ordinance 30-07: Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Reiner,
yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Vice Mayor Lecklider, yes.
INTRODUCTION/FIRST READING -ORDINANCES
Ordinance 32-07
Authorizing the Provision of Economic Development Incentives to BMI Federal
Credit Union to Induce the Relocation and Expansion of Its Operations and
Workforce within the City of Dublin, and Authorizing the Execution of an
Economic Development Agreement.
Ms. Salay introduced the ordinance.
Mr. McDaniel noted that staff has been working with this company since early 2005.
BMI serves the employees of Battelle in Central Ohio and 26 Battelle offices across the
country, plus 200 companies throughout the United States. BMI intends to build a new
facility on Emerald Parkway to house its branch office and approximately 60 full-time
employees that comprise their staff at headquarters. They have an approximate payroll
of $2.6 million/year. The City is offering a $10,000 facility acquisition grant and a 20
percent performance incentive. Over four years, approximately $44,734 could be paid in
the form of a performance incentive. It would not exceed $65,000. Over the course of
the four-year term, about $273,000 in new payroll withholdings would be paid to the City.
As they will build and own their own facility, staff is looking at this long term and not only
over the four-year period. Representatives from BMI will be in attendance at the next
Council meeting.
Ms. Salay asked approximately how many new employees will result.
Mr. McDaniel stated there is an existing branch in Dublin at this time, near the Giant
Eagle complex. There are approximately seven existing employees in that location.
That branch will move and co-locate with this facility on Emerald Parkway. There will be
an additional 60 employees who comprise the headquarters staff who will be new
employees to the City. Those numbers can certainly grow as they go forward.
Ms. Salay asked when they plan to construct the building.
Mr. McDaniel stated they have been through Dublin's process and are close to obtaining
a foundation permit.
Ms. Brautigam added that they will be contacting the City Council regarding a
groundbreaking ceremony in early July.
Vice Mayor Lecklider asked for confirmation that BMI contacted the City regarding this
economic development project.
Mr. McDaniel responded affirmatively that the initial contact came from BMI.
There will be a second reading/public hearing at the June 18 Council meeting.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Dublin City Council
i.
u
1
Held 20
Ordinance 33-07
Authorizing the City Manager to Enter into a Development Agreement with the
Stonehenge Company for the Redevelopment of Certain Real Property at the
Northwest Corner of Bridge and High Streets for a Future Town Center; to
Authorize the Sale of a Portion of the Future Town Center Site to the Stonehenge
Company for Development; to Authorize the Acquisition by the City of Dublin of
the Property at 37 Darby Street from the Stonehenge Company for the
Development of a Public Parking Area; to Enter into an Agreement with the
Stonehenge Company for the Maintenance of the Future Town Center; and to
Lease a Portion of the Future Town Center to the Stonehenge Company.
Vice Mayor Lecklider introduced the ordinance.
Ms. Ott noted that the proposed agreement has been developed jointly by City staff and
Stonehenge Company. Present to assist with the presentation is Gerry Bird of Bird-
Houk Collaborative and Mo Dioun of Stonehenge Company.
She reviewed the outline of the presentations for tonight, which includes: project history;
a review of the property involved; a modified concept plan for the project; information
about sale, purchase and lease of land for the project; and review of public
improvements, financing and future land use approval process recommended in the
development agreement.
HiStoN
When Council authorized issuing the request for qualifications in the fall of 2005, the
desire was to create a dynamic place on this City-owned land and to find the right mix of
public and private use that would contribute to the long-term vibrancy of Historic Dublin.
This is outlined in the seven objectives listed in the staff report dated May 31, 2007.
Subsequent to issuing the RFQ in November of 2005, staff proceeded with a request for
proposal process, selection of the Stonehenge Company as the recommended
development partner, and now has brought the development agreement for Council's
consideration.
Properties Involved
There are three properties involved in this project. Highlighted in yellow is 37 Darby
Street - a privately owned parcel, currently housing the Dublin Banquet Hall and
consisting of about one-third acre. Immediately adjacent to that highlighted in purple is
the former Krema Peanut Butter Company site that the City acquired in 2006. Third,
highlighted in red is the proposed future town center site that the City acquired in 1996
with the purchase of the former gas station on the site. Collectively, the yellow and
purple areas constitute the proposed future parking lot site and the area shown in red is
the proposed future town center site.
Modified Concept Plan
Gerry Bird, Bird-Houk Collaborative, 6375 Riverside Drive stated that the concept was
based on the desire to maintain the streetscape feel in downtown Dublin. Currently, the
lot is an open field and parking lot. There was a desire to maintain the urban edge of
both Bridge and High Streets. In addition, the desire is to create public space that would
open up at the corner that could be used for small events and decorations of a seasonal
nature. The original concept included a clock tower as an icon, but that concept has
been revised to creating a platform at the corner to house a future art or display element
yet to be determined - a placeholder within the urban plaza for something of that nature.
In the front plaza, an allowance is made for seating to come out on the public plaza so
that there is activity in that location. The concept shows the possibility of some water
walls or features that allow water to come over the edge -adding sound and mitigating
the traffic impact with a small auditory transition. For the large plaza to the back, the site
drops four feet from west to east, so the inner plaza accesses both of the buildings at
grade for ADA accessibility. There is a step down to Bridge Street and High Street,
accordingly, based on grade, so there are stoops and steps along Bridge and High. This
allows for handicapped accessibility. There are steps and ramping down for
pedestrians. In addition, there is potential for seating in the inner public square. There
is a lawn space or green space which softens the plaza and is flexible for some
activities, although it is small. There is an opportunity for a valet drop-off, if desired, to
serve properties in the downtown area.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Dublin City Council
ne
1
1
~I
Held
Ms. Ott added that staff felt this concept created a small park feeling inside the plaza
space, welcoming to both patrons of the businesses as well as pedestrians through the
district -maintaining openness and a visual connection throughout the project.
Mr. Bird emphasized that the desire is to create an edge, not a barrier separating
sidewalk from plaza. He showed slides depicting the concept plan, with the water walls.
There is transparency between the front and the rear plazas. The concept is to create
the urban edge, to open up the corner and to invite people into the site.
Ms. Salay asked about the distance of the buildings from the corner and the distance
between the two buildings.
Mr. Bird responded that they elected to set the buildings back somewhat from both
Bridge and High to allow for the steps and more of a public sidewalk space. There is
approximately 25-30 feet. They are trying to create a definition, but also a visual
connection - it is a balancing issue.
Ms. Salay suggested that stakes be installed to demonstrate the actual setback of the
buildings from the street. This was done for other projects and was very helpful for
visualization purposes. She has had some concerns expressed by residents about
closing down the corner and it would be helpful to stake it, once staff can definitively do
so.
Ms. Ott responded that when the details are more defined, this is certainly possible.
Mr. Reiner asked about the lineal footage between the building facade to the edge of the
curb.
Mr. Bird responded that they have pushed the buildings back five feet from the right of
way line, and he believes the right-of-way line is approximately 12 feet from the curb.
Mr. Reiner noted that the steps will also take up some space. He is curious about how
much comfort zone there will be for people using the sidewalks.
Mr. Bird stated that the steps will encroach into the additional five feet. They do
anticipate some entries recessing into the building, however, which was typical of the
period design. At a maximum, he envisions the steps encroaching three feet into the
five foot setback.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked how these setbacks compare with the buildings on the
south side of Bridge and High.
Mr. Bird responded that it is comparable.
Ms. Ott added that it is fairly close.
Mr. Reiner stated it would be advisable to have the actual setback figures checked.
Four feet is needed for two people traveling one direction, and therefore eight feet is
needed for a total of four people traveling along the sidewalk at one time.
Mr. Bird will check on this. He is certain that there is easily eight feet available for this.
In addition, with light poles and trees, there is likely eight feet in excess of that.
Site Perspectives without Architecture
Ms. Ott showed slides depicting the site and how someone would experience arriving at
the site, either by vehicle or walking.
Parking
The rendering shows the proposed parking at 35-37 Darby Street. There is a portion in
the development agreement that provides for Stonehenge to sell 37 Darby Street to the
City for parking purposes, creating 103 spaces, including some handicapped spaces in
an area which currently has limited handicapped parking. The addition of the 37 Darby
Street parcel has worked out to be a great benefit. For the 35 Darby Street parcel, staff
estimated it would accommodate between 70 and 75 spaces. This represents a
measurable increase as a result of the additional land acquisition.
Mr. Keenan asked how the pedestrian or bicycle traffic flows back into the space.
Currently, there are some parking opportunities there, but traversing the alley areas is
not safe for walkers or cyclists.
Ms. Ott responded that it is definitely a challenge in space not under the City's control.
What has been done is to add a sidewalk on the eastern boundary so that people will not
have to walk on Darby Street. Additionally, a connection will be created up to the Indian
Run parking lot in the northwestern corner of the project. There will be a way to cross
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Dublin City Council
ne
1
1
1
from the southeastern edge of the parking lot over to Wing Hill and Modern Male to enter
the plaza itself. Currently, it is difficult to create a pedestrian way along the City right-of-
way without reducing the width of the alley, making it unusable.
Mr. Keenan asked if there are some pedestrian crosswalks that can be included.
Ms. Ott responded that consideration will be given to the possibility of additional striping
and signage to ensure that people driving on Darby Street are aware of the increased
pedestrian activity from the new parking lot.
Mr. Keenan asked if signage will be included in the plaza to direct people to the
Veterans Park.
Ms. Ott responded that she believes the best way to address that is outside the scope of
this project, through way finding for all of Historic Dublin. This would allow everyone
throughout the District to be aware of all of the locations in the District, including
"Grounds of Remembrance," once it is constructed. There will be way finding in the
public space in these plazas. Staff will bring Council a proposal for such a system and
the costs anticipated for it to be in place throughout the District.
Mr. Bird added that Wing Hill in the Master Plan would not be for through traffic, but
would become more pedestrian oriented, which would help the transition from this new
parking lot to the Modern Male building.
Ms. Ott added that consideration has been given to closing Wing Hill, looking at the
traffic on Wing Hill and those attempting to turn left onto North High Street. This will be
something to be considered within the concept plan stage as it is brought forward to
ARB and Planning Commission.
Key Areas of Development Agreement
Ms. Ott noted that:
• The City will sell the Stonehenge Company approximately 10,000 square feet to be
used as building footprints on the future town center site at a price of $25.30/square
foot. The exact square footage will be determined after the project has obtained the
necessary zoning approvals.
• The City will acquire 37 Darby Street at the appraised price of $375,000 from the
Stonehenge Company directly. Stonehenge is incurring additional costs of
@$100,000 to make that property available for the City's purchase for this project.
• Stonehenge and staff are still working out terms for Stonehenge to lease some patio
space within the plaza area that would be primarily for use of the tenants for outdoor
dining. Those terms will be brought back to Council at the second reading.
There are several public improvements associated with this project. Staff is
estimating the costs conservatively at this time because the project is at the concept
design stage. For land acquisition in total, the City will spend just over $1 million for
35 and 37 Darby Street, under the terms of this agreement. Additionally, to construct
a parking lot on that site will cost approximately $400,000, with lighting, striping,
asphalt, curb replacement, etc. The plazas, both upper and lower together, with
water features, raised planters, greenspace, incorporating tree grates, outdoor
furniture, etc. is estimated at between $885,000 and $1.2 million. Additionally, for
economy of scale, staff is recommending that the City invest in streetscape
improvements along West Bridge, North High, Wing Hill Alley and Darby Street as
part of this project. The improvements include installing new brick pavers on a
concrete base instead of the sand base currently in place in downtown Dublin,
adding new curb where needed along all four roadways, installing new street trees,
and installing tree grates. Preliminary, the estimate of these elements is between
$340,000 and $460,000.
Mrs. Boring asked if the cost of the pavers with a concrete base is double that of the
sand base, based upon the life of the product.
Ms. Ott responded that it is not. With the sand base, the cost is $10-12, and with
concrete, it is approximately $16/square foot.
Mr. Reiner asked if staff has considered a 6 or 8 inch base for pavers that is used for
areas with vehicular traffic. This installation would have a longer life, although there may
be more cost.
Ms. Ott responded that staff will investigate this.
Revenue Sources
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Dublin City Council
une 4,
20
1
1
1
Ms. Ott stated that a significant amount of funding has been provided in prior years' CIP
budgets and has been used for land acquisition costs. Additionally, there is $500,000 in
the 2007 budget dedicated for Historic Dublin improvements. The sale of building
footprints to Stonehenge will generate approximately $253,000 and Stonehenge will
make a $100,000 contribution to parking as part of this agreement. Staff will bring back
to Council a proposal to modify the current Town Center I and II tax increment financing
district for the future parking lot site and future town center site for this project. Staff will
also request additional funding for this project in the 2008 CIP.
At the time this project goes forward, staff will request Council approval of a new tax
increment financing district specifically for this project to allow service payments to offset
the cost of public improvements. With 20,000 square feet and a conservative estimate
of the county's value, staff believes that service payments generated will be
approximately $55,000 per year from this project. Without additional square footage
added into the TIF district in the future, it is not likely that this TIF will reimburse fully the
capital expenditures for this project over its 30-year cycle.
Proposed Process for Land Use Approvals
The Planning Commission will review the rezoning proposal for 35-37 Darby Street at
the June 7 meeting. This involves rezoning the property to Historic Business zoning
classification and requires a conditional use for stand alone parking. In addition, the
plan calls for a review by the ARB for lighting and landscaping details. Ultimately, the
rezoning would come to Council for first reading on June 18 and second reading/public
hearing on July 2. A condition of this is the City becoming the landowner of that property
at 37 Darby Street, and staff anticipates closing on the property in June, should Council
approve the development agreement at the June 18 Council meeting.
Once Council has approved the rezoning, parking lot construction will commence in
early fall, with completion prior to winter. Stonehenge Company will provide oversight
for the construction.
In regard to the future town center site, staff would take the concept plan for review this
summer at Planning Commission and the Architectural Review Board. After receiving
their feedback, staff will bring back a combined preliminary and final development plan
for review by ARB, Planning Commission and City Council. Provided that is approved,
construction will commence in the spring of 2008 and would be completed in 2009.
There are some contingencies in the development agreement. The contingency period
is defined as the time after which the agreement is executed and expires when the final
rezoning is either approved or denied. During that period, either party has the ability to
withdraw from the agreement under certain conditions. There is a built-in recognition
that Stonehenge is incurring costs on City projects, and should zoning be denied, there
is an obligation that the City would reimburse up to $25,000 of the design of the public
space and the parking lot. Additionally, should the rezoning not be approved, the City
would reimburse Stonehenge up to $100,000 in land costs for their acquisition of 37
Darby Street and sale to the City. Finally, the City would consider reimbursing up to
$5,000 of Stonehenge's interest costs, should the rezoning not be approved, for any
loan taken out for 37 Darby Street. That would only be considered if the rezoning were
to be denied. Stonehenge must also make a good faith effort to address issues and
conditions to obtain rezoning approval. They have an obligation to be diligent in their
pursuit to address the issues within the review process, similar to that required for any
other project that comes through City review.
She summarized that staff recommends approval of the agreement at the June 18
Council meeting. She offered to respond to questions.
Mr. Reiner asked about the architectural details, such as the water walls on the
entryway. Will those be done by Stonehenge and their architects, or by the City?
Where is the actual design component of this element?
Ms. Ott responded that it occurs simultaneously with the public and private
improvements. The challenge with that feature is that it must be constructed at the
same time as the lower plaza and upper plaza because of extending utilities and
because constructing it later will require removing material. If it does not occur with the
initial project, it remains an option, but the price would increase.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Dublin City Council
ne
1
Held
e
Mr. Reiner asked who is funding the architectural component for the water features on
the plaza.
Ms. Ott responded that those would be City responsibility. A consideration in the design
is having low maintenance costs for any water features. That is why a low water wall
was included versus a fountain.
Mr. Reiner noted that because this is being designed as a unit, will these elements be
included in the design by Bird-Houk?
Mr. Bird responded that they anticipate including this. Another consideration for water
walls is when the water is not running, it must be attractive. They do anticipate
designing this feature as part of the package.
Ms. Salay asked about the contingencies on page 8 of the staff memo where it
discusses obtaining Council approval and any other required approvals by ARB, P&Z or
otherwise. What occurs if either ARB or P&Z do not approve this? They are advisory
bodies to City Council, so she assumes that ultimately, the final decision rests with
Council.
Mr. Smith confirmed that is correct.
Ms. Salay noted that this project is being referred to as a "town center." She would
suggest another name in view of the existing Town Center I and II across the street.
Ms. Ott noted staff is in agreement. This is at an early design stage, and therefore a
name has not been suggested.
Mr. Keenan agreed that another name would be appropriate.
Ms. Salay noted that staff has indicated Stonehenge had approximately $100,000 in
expenses in acquiring 37 Darby. Is there detail about what that includes?
Ms. Ott responded that her understanding is that Stonehenge is purchasing 37 Darby for
$475,000 and then selling the property to the City for $375,000 -the City's appraised
value for the property.
Ms. Salay echoed Mr. Keenan's comments about crosswalks. Perhaps there would be a
way to use the printed blacktop such as that used on the Tara Hill crosswalks. It would
assist people in way finding and accessing parking. She added that protection on the
streetscape side is needed for pedestrians, whether it is done with large flower pots or
bollards to increase the feeling of safety. On the south side of Bridge Street, at Town
Center I, the pedestrians may not feel completely protected from traffic coming over the
hill heading east. She wants to be sure this in considered in the design for the
streetscape improvement. She very much likes the water features. Perhaps small
sculptures can be included in them so that they will be attractive when the water is not
running. She has observed something similar at the Nationwide Plaza downtown
Columbus. This may be another way to include more public art in the space.
She thanked Ms. Ott for the very thorough staff memo.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that while she appreciates the comments about sidewalk
and safety issues for pedestrians, installing bollards or flowerpots may take up space
needed for strollers and wheelchairs. It would be very helpful to have staking done
sooner than later, even if the design is not completed at this time. It would have been
helpful to know whether these building setbacks will be identical to those on the south
side of Bridge or larger. It would be important not to wait until all of the approvals are
obtained to stake the building locations.
Ms. Salay added that approximate setback lines could be staked.
Mr. Reiner asked about Exhibits 7 and 8. Are these reflective of what is expected with
the tower design?
Mr. Bird responded that a concept was assembled at the RFP stage 15 months ago.
Exhibits 7 and 8 are from that submittal. The intention was to retain the character of the
architecture of downtown Dublin, but to potentially enhance the storefronts so that there
is some more detail and character. While he supports this approach, there are several
steps ahead in the review process.
Mr. Reiner noted that the architectural detail on these elevations is complicated, so he is
hopeful of having something this interesting and elaborate for the downtown center.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that she likes the front doors being setback, as
demonstrated in the renderings.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Dublin City Council
une 4, 2007 Nage
1
1
Mr. Bird responded that with this design, the doors do not encroach upon the setbacks
and some cover is provided outside of the door.
Mo Dioun, Stonehenge Company clarified that at the time of submittal of a response to
the RFP, they made a commitment to deliver 37 Darby. Stonehenge is incurring -- at a
minimum -- $100,000 over what the City can pay under the appraisal price of $375,000
in order to acquire 37 Darby. In addition, they are contributing $100,000 toward the
construction of the parking lot. Therefore, there is a total of $200,000 over and above
the $253,000 toward the purchase of the footprint and any lease agreement that is
worked out with staff regarding the patio areas.
There will be a second reading/public hearing at the June 18 Council meeting.
(At this point, Mr. McCash arrived.)
Ordinance 34-07
Adopting the Proposed Tax Budget for Fiscal Year 2008.
Vice Mayor Lecklider introduced the ordinance.
Ms. Brautigam stated this is the annual start of the budget year. Ms. Grigsby can
respond to questions.
There will be a second reading/public hearing at the June 18 Council meeting.
Ordinance 35-07
Updating the Arterial Traffic Plan (Thoroughfare Plan) of the City of Dublin
(Thoroughfare Plan Amendment -Revision of Map 26 -Case No. 07-042ADM).
Vice Mayor Lecklider introduced the ordinance.
Ms. Adkins noted that this amendment was requested by City Council and the Planning
& Zoning Commission after the April 30 joint work session. This amendment will
increase the future right-of-way along Hyland-Croy, as indicated in red, from 80 to 100
feet with a variable width median. This is based upon necessary road improvements, as
demonstrated by land use and transportation modeling. She offered to respond to
questions.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked which streets were added as collectors, if any, on this
Thoroughfare Plan.
Ms. Adkins responded she does not have this information.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher requested that staff provide information about any streets
added, particularly as collectors at the second reading/public hearing on June 18.
Ms. Salay stated that the focus is on an amendment related to Hyland Croy, but there
are some other inaccuracies in the map attached to the ordinance. The staff report
mentioned encouraging a 200-foot setback, although not actually requiring it. Is that
consistent with what has been done in the past?
Ms. Adkins responded that issue is not part of this amendment, but rather the larger
Community Plan update as a whole. It is consistent with what has been done in the
past, in that the 200-foot setback is a recommendation and not a requirement.
Ms. Salay noted that the 200-foot setback was mentioned in conjunction with scenic
roads.
Ms. Salay noted that Wilcox Road is shown as a through street all the way to Hayden
Run, and it is not. At what point will these corrections be made, or is this something that
will done with the entire plan adoption? The Wilcox Road double cul de sacs are not
reflected on the attachment.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that it is important to have an up-to-date map, reflecting
the changes since the 1999 Thoroughfare Plan update. She asked that staff incorporate
all of the changes made since 1999 to this map prior to the next reading.
There will be a second reading/public hearing at the June 18 Council meeting.
Ordinance 36-07
Authorizing the City Manager to Enter into an Agreement with the Franklin County
Commissioners regarding the Administration of the Wireless 9-1-1 Sub-Grant
Award, and Declaring an Emergency.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Dublin City Council
une
~~
C
~i
Vice Mayor Lecklider introduced the ordinance.
Chief Epperson stated that this agreement is the mechanism to allow the City to receive
funds through Franklin County Commissioners for receiving wireless 9-1-1 calls. Exhibit
A details approximately $73,000 which should be received from Franklin County for
expenses already incurred by Dublin. Within a couple of months, the City will begin
receiving the 9-1-1 calls. He added that there is no need for emergency action at this
time.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked if the City of Dublin has had discussions about this with
the Franklin County Administrator or the County Commissioners.
Chief Epperson confirmed that staff has had such discussions.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked if this is part of the Homeland Security funding, or is it
from General Revenue funds.
Chief Epperson responded that he believes these monies are from general funds.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that she is pleased that Dublin's dispatchers will receive
the wireless 9-1-1 calls directly.
Chief Epperson stated that Dublin and Westerville are the only two agencies who
currently will receive wireless 9-1-1 calls other than Franklin County and Columbus.
Mr. Keenan asked about coordination with Jerome Township when a wireless 9-1-1 call
comes to a Dublin dispatcher.
Chief Epperson responded that Dublin will forward the call to the appropriate jurisdiction.
Those jurisdictions which are not receiving 9-1-1 cellular calls will have the ability to
have them forwarded to them by Dublin.
Mr. Keenan asked who will oversee this. Is there an agreement with the other
jurisdictions?
Chief Epperson responded that many jurisdictions were not interested in receiving the
wireless 9-1-1 calls. Dublin will likely receive some wireless 9-1-1 calls from areas not
actually in the City of Dublin, especially in the northeastern portion of the City. to these
cases, the calls will be forwarded to the appropriate fire and police jurisdiction.
Mr. Keenan asked if the other jurisdictions are aware of this arrangement, specifically,
Jerome Township in Union County.
Chief Epperson responded that he is certain they are aware, but he will check into this.
He is aware that all of the jurisdictions around the outerbelt who are not receiving
wireless 9-1-1 calls directly have the technology to receive them in a transfer from
Dublin.
Mr. Keenan asked if Dublin is actually doing the dispatching or if Dublin is simply
forwarding those calls.
Chief Epperson responded that Dublin will forward those calls to the appropriate
jurisdiction; Dublin will not be doing any dispatching on their behalf.
Mr. Keenan stated that his concern would be with liability, if Dublin were to dispatch
based on those calls.
Vice Mayor Lecklider noted that the memo indicates that expenses incurred beyond
2008 will not be recoverable. Will the City need to budget for those expenses beyond
2008?
Chief Epperson responded that the equipment shown in Exhibit A is what is needed to
handle the wireless 9-1-1 calls and to add a fifth console to dispatch from. In the 2007
operating budget, an additional dispatching position was approved, largely because of
the anticipated receipt of wireless 9-1-1 calls. That position has not yet been filled, but
between now and 2008, there will be some personnel costs related to wireless 9-1-1
calls for which the City will be eligible to receive reimbursement. Beyond 2008, unless
the Bill is renewed and funds are available, the City will not be able to recover any
monies. The additional communications technician will be included in the operating
budget at that time, but staff does not anticipate additional equipment being needed.
Vice Mayor Lecklider noted that the grant monies will then cover equipment, for the most
part.
Chief Epperson stated that is correct, but if additional personnel are needed to handle
the calls, those costs are reimbursable as well. They cannot reimburse for current
employees, but can reimburse for additional employees needed in the future.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Dublin City Council
ne
Mr. Keenan stated that the system could be overburdened with the volume of wireless 9-
1-1 calls, based upon numerous calls after an accident.
Chief Epperson responded that research indicates that wireless 9-1-1 calls will increase
the 9-1-1 call volume by 40 percent. But for multiple calls for the same emergency, the
calls will be very short. He agreed that there will be a substantial increase in calls with
this expanded service.
There will be a second reading/public hearing at the June 18 Council meeting.
Ordinance 37-07
Authorizing the City Manager to Enter into aPre-Annexation Agreement
Describing the Intentions of the Parties to Annex Certain Real Property Located in
Washington Township, Owned by the Costner Consulting Company.
Ms. Salay introduced the ordinance.
Ms. Grigsby noted that the City has been in discussion the past couple of years with Bill
Costner, the owner of 7679 Post Road, in regard to the possibility of annexation of his
property to the City. This discussion has been driven by the fact that Mr. Costner `s
property, currently in the township, has no access to public water and sewer. The City's
desire for this property to annex is because of the potential development of this area as
it relates to compatible uses with the development of the Central Ohio Innovation Center.
In discussion among the parties, agreement was reached regarding the terms of the
annexation of this property into the City, as outlined in the memo. The key components
are: extension of water and sewer lines with Mr. Costner paying for his proportionate
share of the extensions, which are programmed in the City's 2008 budget to serve the
COIC area; and dedication of the needed right-of-way on SR 161 for the future
improvements needed for the roadway and development of the Costner property in
accordance with the future land use map adopted by Council in February of 2005. The
City will assist Mr. Costner with the annexation process and waive the annexation fee;
the City will provide an easement related to stormwater and roadway access on his
property; and the City will support lesser setbacks and increases in lot coverage, based
upon the development, in accordance with the land use map. Representatives from
Planning, Engineering and the Law Department have been working with Mr. Costner and
his attorneys on this agreement. Staff is recommending this be held over for second
reading/public hearing at the June 18 Council meeting.
Vice Mayor Lecklider asked about provision 3 of the pre-annexation agreement in regard
to setbacks and lot coverage. Although he does not necessarily disagree with the
provisions, how close will the development be to the road, given the character of the
roadway?
Ms. Grigsby responded that discussions have occurred with Planning staff and Mr.
Costner has agreed to work with staff on how this would be implemented. There were
concerns expressed relating to the setback. Once the City takes the roadway dedication
needed for right-of-way, the options for development of his land are more limited.
Therefore, the City indicated a willingness to work with the property owner regarding
setbacks and lot coverage, recognizing the parcel is not wide. Mr. Costner's concern
was with the future developability of the remaining land.
Mr. Keenan asked if this is the City's first pre-annexation agreement.
Ms. Grigsby responded affirmatively. It is important to note that it relates to economic
development, and the initial discussion focused on the development of this site and the
type of development the City wants to encourage in the COIC.
There will be a second reading/public hearing at the June 18 Council meeting.
Ordinance 38-07
Authorizing the Execution of an Amendment to the Agreement between the City of
Dublin and Dublink Development Company, LLC Increasing the Dublink Service
Area.
Vice Mayor Lecklider introduced the ordinance.
Mr. McDaniel noted that the ordinance proposes an expansion of the service area as
outlined on the attached map. By expanding the Dublink area, Dublink Development
LLC will in effect extend the conduit system to accommodate future broadband
providers, as well as provide the conduit within which the City would extend its own fiber
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Dublin City Council
une 4,
1
C
1
optic system. The area depicted on the map essentially consists of the COIC. The
extension is proposed to occur at the same time that significant road improvements are
done in that area. By extending the City's fiber to this area, it will allow connectivity
among public facilities, extend the Central Ohio Research Network (CORN), extend the
WiFi service, other institutional uses, as well as point-to-point connectivity which has
been a successful tool for economic development.
Legal staff has reviewed this as to form and recommends approval.
There will be a second reading/public hearing at the June 18 Council meeting.
Ordinance 39-07
Authorizing the Purchase of a 0.654 Acre, More or Less, Fee Simple Interest, From
Norma Kaiser, Located on Avery Road, City of Dublin, County of Franklin, State of
Ohio and Declaring an Emergency.
Ms. Salay introduced the ordinance.
Mr. Smith stated that Mrs. Kaiser contacted the City six months ago regarding her plans
to move to an assisted living residence. The City needs this property for the
improvements at be done at Avery Road and Tuswell, and Mrs. Kaiser has accepted the
appraisal price. Staff is requesting that Council dispense with the public hearing and
treat this as emergency legislation in order to proceed with closing on the property.
Ms. Salay moved to dispense with the public hearing and to treat this as emergency
legislation.
Mr. Reiner seconded the motion.
Vote on the motion: Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. McCash, yes;
Mrs. Boring, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Vice Mayor Lecklider, yes.
Vote on the Ordinance: Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Vice Mayor
Lecklider, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes.
INTRODUCTION/PUBLIC HEARING -RESOLUTIONS
Resolution 32-07
Authorizing the City Manager to Enter into a Lease Agreement with Dublin City
Schools for the Northern Indian Run Elementary Parking Lot.
Vice Mayor Lecklider introduced the resolution.
Ms. Ott stated that staff has been in discussion with Dublin City Schools since early
2007 regarding making the northern parking lot at Indian Run Elementary available for
public parking on weekdays. The current agreement with the District limits the
availability of parking until after school hours and weekends. Through an arrangement
with the District for the City to make additional improvements to the property for
approximately $50,000, the City would have the parking lot available for public parking
during business hours Monday through Friday. The intent would be to have this used as
an employee parking area for the businesses in Historic Dublin, to continue to use it as
valet parking for the businesses, and to use this parking for the Veterans Project once it
opens. She offered to respond to any questions.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that she appreciates the clarification of the purpose of
this investment, in light of the City's planned investments for parking at 35-37 Darby
Street. Based on the comments regarding employee and valet parking, have there been
discussions with the business owners in Historic Dublin that they, in fact, will require
their employees to park at this location?
Ms. Ott responded that she has initiated some of this discussion. The challenge is with
enforcement. The City must consider whether there should be time limited parking in
this quadrant of the District, specifically within the new lot to be constructed this year at
35-37 Darby. It would discourage parking at the new lot for those working in the district
for several hours, and the northern Indian Run Elementary parking lot would provide an
option for them within reasonable distance from their place of employment.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that this is a critical issue. On the one hand, the
business association talks of the need for parking, but if it is taken up by employee
parking, it does not serve their purpose. She notes that in the early morning, the Town
Center parking lots are full, which indicates that employees are parking in these lots,
leaving no parking available for customers. She agrees that the City needs to work on
this issue with the business owners, particularly in light of the additional investment
being made to improve a parking lot for this purpose. She understands the Grounds of
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Dublin City Council
ne 4, 1UU ~ rage
20
1
~~
1
Remembrance parking needs, but this remains school property in which the City is
investing $50,000. Is this as a result of the Schools not maintaining this parking lot to
the standards required?
Ms. Ott responded that the $50,000 includes a bikepath extension from Darby Street
North to connect to the bikepath at the Grounds of Remembrance, the removal of a
portion of the chain link fence and replacement with split rail form the parking lot back to
the easement for Indian Run Falls trail, dumpster enclosure to accommodate increased
public use, and additional curbing and restriping of the employee parking area so that it
will be used more efficiently. In addition, directional signage will be needed to identify
public parking and parking reserved for school use, closer to the school building.
Ms. Salay asked for confirmation that in this context, she is speaking of school
employees' parking -not business employee parking.
Ms. Ott responded that staff anticipates that employees of any restaurants, businesses
and offices will work in partnership with the City and the owners will instruct their
employees to park in this location. This effort must be coordinated on the part of the City
and the Historic Dublin businesses.
Ms. Salay stated that she assumes that the school employees will park in the lot area
closest to the school -the bottom of the "L-shaped" parking area.
Ms. Ott responded that this area is reserved for the school in order that the district
employees can park close to the school building.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked for clarification. Are there enhancements being done to
the portion of the lot reserved for school employees?
Ms. Ott responded there are some improvements to that lot which will improve its
functionality and will address the security issue by making it one way.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked why the Schools would not then participate financially in
this project.
Mr. McCash asked how these improvements will make the parking lot more secure.
Ms. Ott responded that upon entering the lot, the public parking area will be defined with
a right turn. signage will indicate that the other area is for school employee parking
only.
Mr. McCash stated that it will not stop anyone from parking in that location.
Ms. Ott responded that the Schools will have the responsibility to ensure that only their
employees use that designated portion.
Mr. McCash asked why the City would spend money on replacing chain link fences,
bikepaths that are not clearly connected and providing curbs and landscaping inside the
School District property?
Ms. Ott responded that there is an existing landscaping waiver for this property approved
by Council in the past. This can be continued, if Council does not want to bring the
landscaping up to Code at this time. The larger issue is that if the City wants this
parking available in the Historic District during business hours and the School District
does not need this parking, it is difficult to persuade the School District to contribute to
this project.
Mr. Keenan asked how many square feet is included with the footprint of the new town
center.
Ms. Ott responded that it is comprised of 20,000 square feet.
Mr. Keenan stated that in view of the new development, any opportunity to obtain
additional parking spots should be pursued by the City.
Mr. McCash stated that his issue is with spending money unnecessarily on these
improvements.
Mrs. Boring commented that she would prefer to understand to what extent this parking
will be used, because of the distance involved to access the parking spaces in this
location. She would prefer to wait and see how much it is used before making these
improvements.
Mr. Keenan stated that if the businesses have an economic incentive to keep the spaces
open near their businesses by having their employees park in this location, the parking
will be used.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Dublin City Council Meeting___
1
1
1
une 4, 1uu i rage
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher and Mr. McCash responded that the businesses are not
encouraging alternate parking at the present time, so it is important to have discussion
with the business owners about this matter.
Vice Mayor Lecklider noted that the businesses should encourage their employees not
to use customer parking. He was disappointed to hear of the parking problems at Town
Center I and II in view of the $1 million investment to be made at 35-37 Darby for
parking. In any case, in this particular location, the $1 per year lease for the lot is an
important factor.
Ms. Salay added that providing parking for the Veterans Project is what convinces her to
support this, as it will be very convenient, with handicapped access and connection with
the bikepath and Darby Street parking. In regard to the split rail fence, a fence of some
type is needed, and the split rail fence installation will be consistent with the other
fencing in the Indian Run Falls Park area.
Mr. Keenan stated that the City also has the right to purchase the land with a first right of
refusal. The cost of the improvements would be deducted from any future purchase
price.
Ms. Ott confirmed that the City has asked the District for first right of refusal on this
property.
Mr. McCash asked if the District's lease of the property to the City at $1 per year is
contingent upon the City doing these improvements.
Ms. Ott responded that some of the improvements have been requested by the School
District. Some are improvements that City staff believes are necessary to make this
parking lot workable in terms of access. Something not shown on the plan and being
worked on by staff is how to connect this curvilinear sidewalk to somewhere. Currently,
it routes into Darby Street. Over time, there will be opportunities to improve the
pedestrian connectivity throughout the District that will encourage people to use it. Other
issues to be addressed in the future are lighting after hours for safety reasons. For
these reasons, at this time the focus is on valet and employee parking for those familiar
with the area versus visitors.
Mr. Keenan stated that having the option of first right of refusal within the agreement is
significant.
Mr. Reiner stated that this is very inexpensive parking space in view of the cost of land in
Historic Dublin. Currently, the employees park in available spaces due to the lack of a
designated parking area for them. If the management communicates the availability of
this parking to employees, the patrons will then be able to use spaces closer to the
businesses. This is a good proposal.
Ms. Salay stated that the key is communication with the Historic Dublin Business
Association, having them require their employees to use this parking and determining a
way to enforce this.
Mrs. Boring asked if there is a parking area currently designated for such employee
parking.
Ms. Ott responded that, informally, after school hours and on the weekends, this area
has been designated for such use. However, the parking complaints she receives from
the District are generally regarding Monday through Friday times -not for after hours.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked about the status of the portion of the agreement related
to first right of refusal.
Ms. Ott responded that the School District administrative staff has agreed to it, and this
same agreement will be brought to the School Board on June 12.
Mr. Reiner noted he applauds the fact that the chain link fence will be replaced with split
rail. It will be a big improvement to the area from a visual standpoint.
Ms. Ott responded that it is hoped that the same replacement can be done for the north
and west sides of the parking lot as well. At this point, though, finding an alternative for
that fence at that height has been challenging.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Dublin City Council
une 4,
G
'~ - ~
1
Held 20
Wallace Maurer. 7451 Dublin Road asked what the School District originally envisioned
as the use for the northern parking lot.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher responded that it was for their employees.
Mr. Maurer noted that from what he read in the report, he understands the Schools want
to retain this property for use in events for parents or the community.
Ms. Ott responded that similar to the current agreement, they want to ensure the lot will
be available for parent-teacher conferences and other large group gatherings as
needed.
Mr. Maurer asked if the school staff would have adequate parking in the area near the
building.
Ms. Salay responded that between the Sells parking lot, this one and the back of Indian
Run, there is adequate parking.
Mr. Maurer asked for confirmation that the City is interested in this northern parking area
for public parking. It would be hard to control who parks in this location.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that this discussion relates to the fact that the City would
be using this parking area not only in the evenings, but also during the daytime. Visitors
to the Historic District could use it, but staff would work with the Historic Dublin Business
Association to have them direct their employees to use these spots and to use it as valet
parking as well.
Ms. Salay noted that this lot would also be the closest public parking area adjacent to
the Veterans Park.
Ms. Ott confirmed that is correct.
Vote on the Resolution: Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mayor
Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Vice Mayor Lecklider, yes; Ms. Salay, yes.
Resolution 33-07
Opposing Ohio House Bill 154 and any Other State Legislation that Would
Preempt or Limit the Authority of Local Self Governments as Provided in Article
XVIII of the Ohio Constitution.
Ms. Salay introduced the resolution.
Ms. Smith stated that this resolution sets forth Dublin's position with respect to the major
changes proposed with respect to Mayor's Court at the state level. There has been
some movement on the bill in respect to the hiring of magistrates and clerks, but this bill
and Senate Bill 117 directly impact the city's right of self governance and home rule
authority. The major change that occurs with House Bill 154 is that the Mayor's Court
becomes a court of record, with a totally different process. Amendments have been
proposed to the bill which will alleviate some of the concerns about the magistrate
selection, clerk appointment and appeal process. Staff believes that Dublin should join
many other municipalities in Central Ohio and adopt this resolution, setting forth
Council's opposition. It will be sent to the state legislators upon passage.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher added that Dublin initiated a meeting with all Mayors and
Clerks of Court in Dublin. Rep. Wolpert and many legislators from the area attended. At
the meeting, only Rep. Wolpert and Rep. Flowers did not take a position regarding the
bill. Many municipalities have already approved a resolution in opposition. She
encourages Council to approve this resolution as written. While there have been
suggestions for amendments, the amendments introduced to date have not addressed
the City's issues regarding home rule and local control over the magistrate and court
clerk. She believes Dublin should go on record as being opposed to this bill. Rep.
Wolpert has stated in presentations in various venues that when an entity has not taken
a formal position, he views them as being supportive of the bill. Therefore, it is important
that Dublin take a formal position in opposition to the bill as currently drafted.
Mr. Smith stated that there will be testimony of opponents on Wednesday, and Dublin
will have representatives from his office to testify.
Ms. Salay noted that most Dublin residents have not had personal experience with the
Mayor's Court. It would be helpful to describe the process in Dublin and why it is to the
residents' advantage to have their own Mayor's Court.
Mr. Smith responded that the legislature is proposing a sweeping change for all Mayor's
Courts to address the problems experienced with a few. There have been a number of
movements over the years to abolish Mayor's Courts in various ways. In his experience,
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Dublin City Council
une 4,
20
1
i_i
1
many municipal courts are not run as well as Dublin's Mayor's Court. This bill impinges
upon home rule. While the Chief Justice indicates this will place courts under judicial
control by making this a community court, what really is happening is this is the first step
toward it becoming a county court in the future. The administrative judge of the Franklin
County Municipal Court would appoint Dublin's magistrate under the bill as currently
drafted.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that as currently written, this would be an annual
appointment, so there could be a rotation which would be a concern in terms of
consistency.
Mr. Smith added that this also creates problems with Dublin's Charter and the role of the
Mayor as outlined in the Revised Charter.
Wallace Maurer, 7451 Dublin Road stated that he has two questions. First, does the bill
call for either the establishment of a community court or not to have a community court,
but transfer all pending Mayor's Court cases to the municipal court? Secondly, is the
municipal court a county municipal court?
Mr. Smith responded affirmatively. This would be Franklin County Municipal Court, or
the county municipal courts in both Delaware and Union counties -depending upon
where the offense occurred.
Mr. Maurer asked if anyone knows what Chief Justice Moyer's motives are for this.
Mr. Smith responded that Chief Justice Moyer believes that any court should be under
the jurisdiction of the judiciary branch.
Vote on the Resolution: Ms. Salay, yes; Vice Mayor Lecklider, yes; Mr. McCash, yes;
Mrs. Boring, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes.
Resolution 34-07
A Resolution Opposing Ohio Senate Bill 117 and any Other State Legislation that
Would Preempt or Usurp the Ability of Local Governments to Regulate Video
Service Providers and Cable Service Providers that Use the Public Right of Way.
Vice Mayor Lecklider introduced the resolution.
Mr. Smith stated that this resolution has been adopted by many communities across the
state. Dublin led a coalition of cities in the debate underway with this bill. This is the
"AT&T bill" which, in the first draft, took away a city's right to govern its right-of-way.
This bill has many issues related to home rule, the least of which is it abrogates current
contracts. An existing cable contract, under which a city is owed cable franchise fees,
would become null and void. There is an issue of the state government imposing upon a
city's right to determine who will provide video services or cable services within a city.
The good news with this version is that the first draft provision regarding governance of
the right-of-way has been removed. There have been several bills introduced in the
legislature this year which relate to a city's right to home rule.
Staff encourages Council to adopt this resolution.
Vice Mayor Lecklider commented that at the time the AT&T representatives were before
Council regarding their new Project Lightspeed, he had asked whether city programming
would be accommodated within the service. They seemed surprised about the question,
and perhaps this state bill had some bearing on their reaction at that time.
Vote on the Resolution: Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Reiner,
yes; Vice Mayor Lecklider, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Ms. Salay, yes.
OTHER
• Dublin Chamber of Commerce Lease
Ms. Brautigam stated that a staff report was provided in the packet. Perhaps Mr.
Keenan may want to discuss the Committee's findings, or Council may prefer to hear
staff's recommendation at this time.
Mr. Keenan suggested that staff first provide an overview.
Ms. Grigsby stated that the City owns the property located at 129 S. High Street,
currently occupied by the Dublin Chamber of Commerce since the lease agreement was
entered into in 1988. The lease term was for 20 years and will expire in July of 2008.
As part of the Chamber's budget preparation for 2008, they requested from the City in
February that the City consider this lease agreement at this time. As a result, Council's
Finance Committee met to review background information in March, and follow-up
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Dublin City Council
I1
1
ne
Held 20
meetings were held on April 2 and May 2. As part of the follow-up meetings, the
Committee requested information from staff and from the Chamber representatives who
were in attendance. The key issues involved with the lease are the lease rate and the
length of the lease. Based upon the discussions at the Finance Committee meetings,
staff felt that afive-year renewal was the direction, subject to Council approval, and that
the lease rate needed to be determined. Under the current lease, the Chamber pays
$20,000/year, with a reduction of 20 percent, with a net payment to the City of
$16,000/year. This 20 percent reduction related to the City's ability to utilize the space
for meetings, such as ARB, and the availability of the restrooms to the public during
business hours. As part of the discussion at the first Committee meeting, the members
requested that staff obtain an appraisal regarding market lease rates in the Historic
District. The report was presented to the Committee, and the recommendation of staff
was that the lease rate be established in the range of $12-13/square foot for this facility.
Part of the discussion at the Committee level was considering what type of reductions
should be provided regarding the City use of the facility and the benefits the community
receives from the Chamber allowing community groups to utilize the facility at no rental
cost. Another consideration was the maintenance costs paid by the Chamber for the
parking lot and the building. At the last meeting, the Finance Committee members felt it
was important for the entire Council to discuss this matter.
Mrs. Boring asked for staff's recommendation.
Ms. Grigsby responded that, based upon discussion of the information presented at the
Committee meetings, staff considered the lease rate recommended in the appraisal
report as well as deductions discussed. The result was a recommendation for a
$7.90/square foot rate and afive-year renewal.
Mr. Keenan stated that the Committee began with the $12 appraisal rate; deducted the
20 percent usage in the lease which brought it to $9.60; any maintenance/repairs which
may be needed would bring a reduction of $.50; all of this results in a $9.10 rate.
Further discussion took place about a 10 percent deduction for use by the community
groups and that brought the rate to $7.90. This is more than the current rate, but less
than the fair market value recommended by the appraiser. The Committee felt that it
was their responsibility to balance the issues of revenues from this City asset with the
value given to the community for use of the property.
Mr. McCash asked about the $.50/square foot reduction for maintenance. The lease
indicates the Chamber is responsible for maintenance and upkeep, and that would not
change.
Mr. Keenan responded that after a 20-year lease, there would be an expectation of
some property improvements needed by the tenant.
Mr. McCash stated that this is not a new lease, however, but rather invokes the option
for continual renewals on a five-year basis.
Ms. Grigsby stated that the main issue at this time is the lease rate. The current lease
includes an option for renewal for five-year periods, but it also indicates it is subject to
review and negotiation of a new lease rate.
Mr. McCash stated that it is in effect the same lease, renewed for afive-year period at a
new rate.
Mr. Keenan stated that there were several issues to be resolved. First, was it the desire
of Council to continue to own the building? The Committee believes that the City wants
to continue ownership of this building in Historic Dublin, as it is important to have a
presence there. The next issue was whether the City was agreeable to extending the
lease for five years. The final issue is with the obligation to the taxpayers to balance the
community use with a fair rental rate. He does not view this lease as an automatic
rollover from the 20-year lease.
Mr. McCash disagreed, noting that what is proposed is a renewal of the original lease.
Mr. Smith stated that without agreement on the lease rate, there is no lease to consider.
It is a five-year rollover, but the key portion is the rate. It is Council's decision to make
regarding the lease rate to be offered.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Dublin City Council
une 4,
J
1
Held 20
Mr. McCash asked about the cost per square foot for the Dublin Arts Council to lease the
Gelpi mansion which is city-owned property.
Ms. Grigsby responded that it was not setup on a per square foot basis. Rather, it was
set upon the ability to recover a portion of the debt service that the City is paying for the
facility. This year, the DAC's payments will total $68,000. She is not certain of the
square footage contained in the building.
Ms. Salay stated that this would not be a valid comparison.
Mr. McCash noted that in reviewing the City properties that are leased, the Dublin
Village Tavern recently renewed their lease at a rate of $9/square foot. Further, the
tenant is doing significant renovations to the building. With the Chamber, there is no
discussion of significant funding for improvements in the future. Why not use the same
lease rate that is being used for the Village Tavern?
Mr. Keenan responded that the difference with these two leases is that the Chamber
provides community services and the Village Tavern is a for profit venture.
Mr. McCash stated that the DAC pays $68,000 rent for their building, but they contribute
much more to the community as a whole with arts programming, etc. than does the
Chamber. The Chamber deals primarily with the business community.
Mr. Keenan stated that the Committee tried to approach this from a business perspective
by obtaining an appraisal of the rental rates in the District. Deductions were then made
for the 20 percent City use called for in the original lease.
Ms. Salay stated that 20 percent would be one business day per week.
Mr. Keenan responded that the 20 percent represented what the City had set aside for
itself to use. This was done at the time Dublin was a village.
Ms. Salay responded that the 20 percent is irrelevant today.
Mr. Keenan stated that the 20 percent also included the public restrooms.
Ms. Salay noted that the City should make a better effort to advertise this, as she was
not aware the restrooms were available to the public. It appears as private office space.
Mr. Keenan stated that the same issue has occurred with the athletic fields at the
schools, where the City has the right to use them. The City has the right to use this
building according to the lease terms. Perhaps some other groups could be directed to
use the Chamber space.
Ms. Salay asked if the City provided any fees to the school district for using the 1919
Building for the ARB meetings.
Ms. Grigsby stated she is not aware of any fees paid to the Schools, but would have to
check on this specifically.
Ms. Salay stated that the ARB meetings could easily be held in Council Chambers or at
another City building if desired.
Ms. Grigsby added that when a meeting is held at a school building during off hours, the
user must pay the fees for custodial charges. She is not aware of any payment that the
City was required to make to them for this purpose.
Vice Mayor Lecklider noted that at the time the lease was entered into, the City did not
have all of the present facilities. Meetings are currently held in many City facilities. He
is struggling with how the 20 percent reduction is valued. It is certainly not for restrooms
that are available only on Monday through Friday during business hours. The greatest
need for restrooms is outside those hours and not at this location. He questions taking
20 percent off of the lease rate, plus an additional 10 percent, based on what has been
reported. Council needs to decide on a reasonable starting point for negotiation, and a
reasonable deduction. What has been done is to take the low end of the market rate at
$12/square foot.
Ms. Salay agreed. A significant number of the public would expect to pay far more for
office space in the Historic District.
Mr. McCash stated that if the average lease rate were used and all the discounts given,
the rate would be $11.22/square foot.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher invited public testimony.
Marino Colatruglio. Board Member. Dublin Chamber stated that he is Vice President of
Corporate Real Estate for Cardinal Health. There has been much discussion of the
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Dublin City Council
11
1
1
value of the 20 percent and the value of the Chamber. The question is: What is the
value of the Dublin Chamber of Commerce to the citizens of Dublin? Much has changed
in 20 years, and that has been recognized. Dublin is a great community because there
has been a phenomenal partnership between the City and businesses. The citizens
benefit with business - as businesses grow and employment increases, the tax base is
enhanced, allowing the City to do many things. The Chamber has provided that
partnership with the City. In regard to the Village Tavern, they are a for profit business.
The Chamber is in business to support the City of Dublin. They support the business
community, both large and small, and the City. The Chamber does provide public
restrooms, public parking and they have maintained their facility through substantial
renovations paid for over the years. There are members present tonight who can
address this.
In considering the appropriate lease rate, the approach should be of a partnership, not
as a business venture. This is not simply an office building where the Chamber
conducts its own business. The Chamber is conducting the business for the citizens and
helping to bring business about. Cardinal Health has enjoyed the benefits of the
Chamber, who has provided assistance for relocation of their employees. He views this
as a partnership, which is why they sent the original letter. In essence, the Chamber has
occupied this space for 20 years and has in essence paid back the City for its use.
Therefore, the Chamber requested a longer term lease of ten years at a reduced rate.
Perhaps what can be considered is another ten-year lease at the same rate that they
currently pay. The Chamber provides a great service to the City of Dublin and will
continue to do so. This provides a great return to the citizens of Dublin.
A.C. Strip, 5482 Aryshire Drive stated that the Chamber does not receive any subsidy
from the City. Secondly, this lease specifically states that the Chamber has the
opportunity to renew this lease in perpetuity. It states specifically that the renewal term
will be renegotiated by the parties "substantially on the same terms." He is in
attendance tonight to provide some history of this. The concept of the lease was that the
City advanced a substantial sum of money to have the building built. The Chamber was
to repay the monies over 20 years. It was called a "lease" at the time because, legally,
that is what it was. The City has been repaid and the City money invested in this
building at this point is "0." The intention as the lease is written is that it would be
renegotiated upon the same terms and conditions. He pointed out that the business
approach taken to this matter by the Committee would be a good approach if the lease
involved a business. But it is being leased to what he believes is an "arm of the City."
What the City has in the Chamber is essentially another development director. The
purpose of the Chamber is to develop business for the City. He doesn't believe that the
City needs to consider the return on everything it does, including rec centers, skateboard
parks, Irish Festival. These would never have come about if the sole consideration was
return on investment. There are some things a City does because it is the right thing to
do, and in this case, he believes the right thing to do is to extend this lease in five year
increments, per the lease, at the current rate. It is very simple and does not involve
placing values on restrooms, etc.
Mr. McCash noted that although Mr. Strip is representing the Chamber, he has left out
the lease provision which states that, "the additional renewal term of five years, with the
rent for each such renewal term to be negotiated by the parties with substantially the
same terms." The language does not state the same rent amount, just the same terms
in the lease.
Mr. Strip responded that this had already been stated tonight, so there was no need to
restate it. Mr. McCash is correct. Terms also includes the amount of the rent.
Mr. McCash responded that in his view, the rent would be a separate issue from the
terms of the lease which relate to maintenance, etc.
Mr. Strip stated that he would leave this judgment to the City Attorney. However, terms
to him translates to everything in a lease. The language does "negotiated" - it does not
state "at a rent to be determined by City Council." It is to be a rent negotiated between
the parties. He believes the present lease rate has worked for 20 years and the building
has been paid for, and this is not afor-profit business. It is the right thing to do. He
clarified that he is not an active member of the Chamber and is not present as a paid
advocate. He can't imagine a resident saying that the building is being rented at too low
of a rate.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Dublin City Council
1
D
une 4,
age
Ms. Salay asked if other cities have a similar situation.
Ms. Grigsby responded that she is not aware that there is a consistent way this is
handled in cities. For the majority, the Chambers likely lease space from someone other
than the City. Several years ago, the City checked with some surrounding communities
and she does not recall that the other Chambers were leasing space from their cities.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that she met the New Albany Chamber of Commerce
director who indicated they pay $1/year. A private sector development company owns
the building.
She asked Mr. Keenan what he recommends at this time.
Mr. Keenan stated that he believes the lease rate should be more than the current rate,
and something less than the market rate in terms of the contributions the Chamber
makes. There was much dialogue at the Committee level about this.
Mr. Keenan moved to extend the lease for afive-year period at the rate of $7.90/square
foot, with a review of the current lease for any clean-up needed.
Mr. Keenan added that there are some insurance issues regarding the building which
were discussed and need to be resolved.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher seconded the motion.
Mr. McCash asked about the annual insurance costs being paid by the City, due to the
inability to obtain a certificate of insurance for the property.
Mr. Keenan responded that the City is self-insured.
Ms. Grigsby added that this property is included in the overall pool for liability, so there is
not a separate amount dedicated for this facility. Staff could do some calculation if
necessary. The amount is not significant.
Mr. Keenan stated that he believes the Chamber carries property insurance on the
building.
Mr. McCash asked about the status of the certificate of insurance being obtained from
the Chamber.
Ms. Grigsby stated that Mr. Whittington indicates he has requested the certificate, but
has not received it.
Margery Amorose, Executive Director, Dublin Chamber of Commerce stated that they
carry a $1 million policy on the building and always have.
Mr. Keenan stated that would be liability insurance. The lease indicates that the
Chamber is to provide property coverage. As the owner of the building, the City should
be named in the contract as either a loss payable or mortgagee.
Ms. Amorose responded that she believes the Chamber carries this coverage and the
City is named as a loss payable. This insurance has been continued over the years with
the same company.
Mr. Keenan noted that his goal was to have the City's risk manager review this policy to
ensure it has appropriate coverage.
Ms. Salay agreed that this housekeeping matter should be taken care of by providing the
paperwork to the City.
Ms. Amorose stated that 21 years ago, the City had a need for public restrooms and
meeting space for community organizations. The Chamber met this need. The City
provided the funding to the Chamber at the prevailing interest rate. The Chamber will
have paid back all of the monies advanced by the City at the end of the 20-year lease.
Mr. Keenan noted that the opportunity cost to the asset is lost, if it is viewed from this
perspective. The City provided $220,000 to build out the improvements 20 years ago.
Over 20 years, the City has collected $160,000/year or $320,000 over 20 years, leaving
a net recovery of that asset to the taxpayers of $100,000. That works out to $5,000/year
over 20 years or $1.99/square foot. Therefore, it was a very attractive lease
arrangement. Any property owner that owns a building has an expectation of receiving
rents over a period of time.
Ms. Amorose added that the Chamber invested $40,000 in improvements at the initial
buildout.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Dublin City Council
une 4,
G'
'~]
~~
Hel
Mr. Keenan noted that over 20 years, the building has been maintained meticulously by
the Chamber.
Mr. Reiner noted that he was not aware of the public restrooms at the building. Is there
signage indicating this?
Ms. Salay responded that there is not.
Ms. Amorose indicated that at one time, there was an issue in regard to such signage.
She is aware that many people do use the restrooms throughout the day, especially
construction workers and landscape workers in the area.
Mr. Reiner added that general tourists to the Historic District, however, would not be
aware of the restroom availability.
Mr. Keenan added that there is some parking available behind the Chamber. That was
part of the discussion as well.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher called for a vote on the motion.
She asked for clarification regarding the issue regarding clean-up of the language in the
lease.
Mr. Keenan responded that there is some clean-up needed, as the language can be
interpreted in various ways.
Mr. Smith stated that the lease served the City well for 20 years, but in view of the five-
yearextension, items such as the insurance issue can be checked upon. The lease is
clear that at the end of 20 years, the rent is to be renegotiated, which is what has
occurred. All other terms remain substantially the same. The agreement could be
slightly tweaked, if necessary.
Mr. Keenan stated that the lease has language that it will be renewed "in perpetuity."
That seems to indicate forever. Later in the lease it states that, "The City shall have the
right, if it determines it is in the best interests of Dublin to use the premises for municipal
purposes, to terminate this lease at the end of the initial 20-year term or any renewal
thereof, by giving written notice to the Chamber." He assumes that if there would be an
alternative use for the property, this language would allow for the change. So the term
"perpetuity" seems not in keeping with the other provisions.
Mr. Smith responded that the intention was that the City would not lease it to another
party, and that if the City did not use it, the Chamber would have the right to use it. In
other words, the City would not lease the property to the general public or to another
business or restaurant. This language can be clarified.
Mr. McCash stated that if the Chamber were to outgrow the facility, they could also
abandon the five-year renewal provision.
Mr. Smith stated that is correct -that at the end of five years, they would have the option
to relocate if they needed a larger facility.
Mr. McCash stated that Council must be responsible for the community's assets and
what is received in terms of rate of return on investment for property such as this. In
reviewing all of the market factor information, rent for office space in the Historic District
is currently at a cost of $16-17/square foot. He believes that Council has a responsibility
to the citizenry to protect their investment. He is concerned that there is too much of a
reduction in the rate in the proposed motion.
Mr. Keenan stated that the Committee tried to approach the issue mindful of the need to
have a reasonable return on investment.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that she disagrees with Mr. McCash. The Town Center
is a for profit company and the City subsidized the Bureau to locate in that building. She
does not understand why this lease would be compared to a for profit owned building or
a for profit business such as Village Tavern. Chambers of Commerce are essentially an
arm of the community to encourage economic development and to provide social
networking and training for their members. This is an asset to any community. In recent
discussions with Mr. McDaniel, there has been specific emphasis on the need to partner
more with the Chamber in order to understand more about the businesses in the Dublin
community. To her, the relationship between local government and Chambers of
Commerce is substantially different than with other businesses. In cities such as
Columbus, the Chamber is very key to business retention and expansion efforts.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Dublin City Council
June 4. 20 7 age
Mr. McCash stated that he is looking at this from a business perspective. If the
Chamber cannot afford this rent, perhaps another business would house the Chamber at
a low lease rate, such as is the case in New Albany. In order to compare not for profit to
not for profit, the Dublin Arts Council effective lease rate would need to be considered.
Mr. Keenan pointed out that the maintenance of the DAC facility is paid for by the City,
however, so that would impact the net costs to the DAC.
Vice Mayor Lecklider stated that he would not support a dramatically increased rate
above $7.90, but he cannot support the rate as proposed at $7.90.
Vote on the motion (lease rate of $7.90/sa. ft over 5 year term): Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr.
McCash, no; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Ms.
Salay, no; Vice Mayor Lecklider, no.
(Motion carried 4-3)
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that if there are changes needed in the actual lease, the
Chamber's attorney and City staff will need to bring this back to Council. She asked that
Mr. Whittington obtain the insurance certificate this week from the Chamber.
STAFF COMMENTS
• Adoption of Economic Development Actions and Programs
Ms. Brautigam stated that Mr. McDaniel has provided a report that summarizes the study
session from May 16 and details several programs discussed at that time. Staff has
requested authorization for use of additional funds to survey businesses, to enhance the
web site, etc. At the end of the meeting, staff requested that Council approve the
programs and actions identified and committed to bringing afollow-up report
summarizing what was requested. Staff is recommending that Council approve the
actions and programs identified in the staff memo by motion tonight.
There were no questions.
Mr. Reiner moved approval of the economic development actions and programs
proposed on May 16, 2007 as outlined in the staff memo.
Mr. Keenan seconded the motion.
Vote on the motion: Ms. Salay, yes; Vice Mayor Lecklider, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr.
Keenan, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. McCash, yes.
• Update on Ohio Health Access Road
Ms. Brautigam updated Council on the Ohio Health access road. Several meetings ago,
staff reported to Council that State Rep. Hughes was very helpful to the City and was
able to place into the House version of the state budget a $1 million amendment toward
the cost of building the access road to Ohio Health, leaving an additional $1 million of
funding needed for the access road. Recently, Ohio Health has been working with the
State to identify additional monies, and they hope to secure approval from the
Department of Development for an additional $500,000 in 629 monies. These monies
come to cities and not to private entities, and therefore, she will execute any documents
necessary to indicate that the City would accept that funding. She wanted to advise
Council of this. It is preliminary, but staff continues to cooperate and work on this
additional funding for the access road.
Vice Mayor Lecklider asked if the state requires such monies to be spent within a certain
time period after it is disbursed.
Ms. Grigsby responded that there are some requirements with regard to timeframes as
to when the funds must be requested. These 629 funds are areimbursement-based
funding and must be requested within a certain time period, based upon actual
expenditures. There is also follow-up reporting for three years with the state to confirm
that the infrastructure was completed and that the hospital generated the jobs as
estimated.
Vice Mayor Lecklider asked if there an estimate on the cost of this improvement in total.
Ms. Brautigam responded that the estimate is $2 million in total. There is currently $1
million in the state budget as proposed, although the budget is not yet approved. Staff is
hopeful this will go forward, and has heard positive feedback from the Strickland
administration. The 629 monies would bring an additional $500,000 for the project,
although it cannot be counted upon at this point. Staff will keep Council apprised of the
status of this funding.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Dublin City Council
ne 4,
Held
e
Mr. Reiner asked if there are any other obligations or restrictions associated with
acceptance of the 629 funds.
Mrs. Boring noted that the ISTEA funding had certain restrictions about project design.
Ms. Grigsby responded that there are no such restrictions, other than confirming that the
project has been completed and invoices are submitted to receive reimbursement.
• Follow-up on Golf Club of Dublin
Mr. Smith reported that Mr. McCash had several inquiries regarding the Golf Club of
Dublin at the last meeting. Staff has investigated and found that there are private items
on the City property which will be removed. All of the issues are being addressed, and
he will report to Council when the work is completed.
COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS/COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE
Mr. Keenan:
1. Reported that a US 33 Corridor Executive Committee meeting was held at
the City on May 22 and was well attended. The members are currently
reviewing the purpose statement for the group and will come back with
comments about how the committee should now move forward.
2. Thanked everyone for their efforts with the Veterans Project groundbreaking.
There was a great turnout, which exceeded the expectations. Rep. Pat Tiberi
attended and participated.
Ms. Salay:
1. Reminded Council to take a drive on Tara hill, now that the landscaping has
been installed on the islands. There is additional striping as well. The project
is more user friendly and attractive and was completed before the
Tournament.
2. Thanked staff for their efforts with the Tournament which was very enjoyable.
The atmosphere at the villa was very nice, and she appreciates all of the hard
work.
Vice Mavor Lecklider echoed Ms. Salay and complimented staff for all of their efforts
leading up to and in support of the Tournament.
Mavor Chinnici-Zuercher:
1. Commented that the Memorial Day groundbreaking for the Veterans Project
was wonderful. Several hundred attended, and the artist did a superb job of
describing the project so that people could visualize it.
2. Reported that she sent letters on behalf of Council to Sen. Stivers, asking for
his support of the Senate version of the budget which includes the $1 million
for the roadway access proposed by Rep. Hughes. She personally has met
with Sen. Stivers and he feels relatively confident that this amendment is
supported by the administration. The project meets many criteria and goals
of the administration.
3. Noted that she serves on the MORPC Regional Steering Committee. They
met last week. The new Executive Director, Chester Jourdan is much more
visionary than reactive and is helping to lead the regional development for
important issues, not exclusively for transportation issues. He has a green
initiative underway. The Committee took an assertive approach to proposed
legislation impacting home rule and wants to bring municipalities along to
testify on important issues before committees. Ms. Brautigam is currently
serving as the MORPC Secretary and is in the line of leadership for MORPC.
She is aware of some criticism over the years of MORPC and its value to the
Dublin community, and she believes there will be new direction and that
Dublin will benefit from all that MORPC is doing.
4. Commented that the Tournament events were excellent. In regard to the
villa, guests were enthusiastic about its location along the course and its easy
access. There was some suggestion made to move the beverage serving
indoors at the villas to reduce noise which could disturb play on the course.
EXECUTIVE SESSION
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher moved to adjourn to executive session at 10:00 p.m. for land
acquisition, legal and personnel matters.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Dublin City Council
June 4, 2007
age
Mr. Reiner seconded the motion.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher announced that the meeting will be reconvened following the
executive session only for the purpose of formally adjourning.
Vote on the motion: Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mayor Chinnici-
Zuercher, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Vice Mayor Lecklider, yes; Mr. McCash, yes.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was reconvened and formally adjourned at 11:15 p.m.
-e./
Mayor -Presiding Officer
G
Clerk of Council
i
1