HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/07/2005
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting
DAYTON LEGAL BLANK INC FORM NO 10148
Held November 7, 2005 20
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher called the regular meeting of Dublin City Council to order at 7:00 ,I
p.m. on Monday, November 7, 2005 at the Dublin Municipal Building.
I'
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The Dublin Veterans in attendance at the meeting led the Pledge of Allegiance.
Erica Seeley, Dublin Scioto High School student sang The National Anthem.
ROLL CALL
Present were: Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, Mrs. Boring, Mr. Keenan, Mr. Lecklider and Ms.
Salay. Mr. Reiner arrived at 7:10 p.m. Mr. McCash arrived at 7:45 p.m., due to an out of
town business meeting.
Staff members present were: Ms. Brautigam, Ms. Grigsby, Mr. Smith, Mr. Ciarochi, Chief
Epperson, Mr. Hammersmith, Ms. Puskarcik, Ms. Ott, Ms. Hoyle, Mr. Hahn, Ms. Willis, Mr.
Harding, Mr. Bird and Ms. Gilger.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Ms. Salay moved approval of the minutes of the meeting of October 17, 2005.
Mr. Keenan seconded the motion, noting a clarification to page 10 regarding the total cost
of the AEP utility line burial. He asked that the Clerk check with staff to clarify the total cost
of this portion of the project.
Mrs. Boring noted a clarification to her comments on page 7 regarding SR 161 and the
need for repaving. This should be changed to "recognition of the need for repaving."
Mr. Lecklider noted a correction on page 19, where "global business" should read "global
basis."
Vote on the motion: Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes;
Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes.
CORRESPONDENCE
There was no correspondence requiring action by Council.
SPECIAL RECOGNITION/PROCLAMA TIONS
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher presented a proclamation to former Council Member and Veteran
Danny Sutphen in recognition of the week of November 7-13 as "Veterans Week" in the
City of Dublin.
Mr. Sutphen and Veteran Bill Doty accepted the Proclamation on behalf of all of the
Veterans of the community. They each made brief comments, thanking the City Council
for this special recognition.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher invited the winners of the essay contest, "What Veterans Day
Means to Me" to come forward and read their essays.
Stacie Melody and Colin Seely, fifth graders from Deer Run Elementary read their essays
and received a certificate of appreciation from the Mayor.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher recognized the Veterans who will represent the Dublin community
by riding on the float in the Veterans Day parade in downtown Columbus. The parade
takes place at noon on Thursday, November 10. They include: Roland Ballow, Don
Cherry, Bob Crewe, Bill Doty, Norm Smith, Bill Ulrey and Jerry Wolfe.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that the City is dedicating funding and staff time in the
development of a future Veterans Memorial. Council Members Reiner and Keenan are
representing Council on this Committee. The monument will recognize the dedication,
commitment and sacrifices made by Veterans and their families. She encouraged
residents and businesses to fly the American flag on Veterans Day.
Maior General (Retired) David Hartley, State Chairman of the Ohio Committee for
Employer Support of the Guard and Reserve (ESGR) noted that he represents the
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Reserve Affairs. He presented the "Chairman's Above
and Beyond Award" to the City of Dublin. The signing ceremony for the ESGR 5 Star
Statement of Support followed. Major General Hartley expressed appreciation for the
exemplary support provided by the City of Dublin to its employees who are members of the
National Guard and Reserve.
I
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting
DAYTON LEGAL BLANK INC FORM NO 10148
November 7, 2005 Page 2
Held 20
SPECIAL PRESENTATION
Douq Moore, Vice President of Planninq, Central Ohio Transit Authority provided a brief
update on their long-range planning process and the public meetings that will take place.
The emphasis at COTA currently is to restore financial solvency, improve service and
successfully negotiate a union contract. A new long-range plan is being developed with
goals of developing a system that can meet the needs of residents, businesses and
visitors; that will demonstrate fiscal responsibility to the taxpayers; that will meet the needs
for the transportation disadvantaged; and a method that will ensure public ownership of the
plan. The phases of the process are data collection and collecting input from the public
about long-terms needs of the community. Alternatives will then be developed for the
region that will focus on different geographic areas. Public comment will be solicited
regarding the alternatives, and a plan will then be brought forward for the region with
another opportunity to collect public input. Components of the planning process include
fixed route service, Project Mainstream service and fixed guideway transit options such as
rail. Any kind of system COT A will implement on a long-term basis will focus on the bus
transportation component, and most of the funding will go toward operating and capital
costs of bus service. The long-range plan may have a rail element and a bus rapid transit
element, but the emphasis will be on the core service of bus transportation. There are six
public meetings scheduled for the initial collection of information from the public, including
a public meeting at the Northwest Branch of the Columbus Library on Hard Road on
Thursday, November 17. He encouraged Dublin to send representatives to one of the
public meetings.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked that the City web site include a link to the COT A website
where the citizens can find information on these upcoming meetings.
CITIZEN COMMENTS FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA
Wallace Maurer, 7451 Dublin Road commented:
1. The October 3 Council meeting, he wonders whether there was a degree of
impropriety in legislative protocol. A former Council Member and former Mayor
came before Council and requested replacement of steel guardrail with wooden
guardrail. He noted that each spoke far longer than five minutes and were both
very repetitive. He recalls that Mr. Hammersmith pointed out that Engineering
had recommended steel over wood on two bases: cost and safety. Today he
read the minutes of the meeting and there is some variance with his
recollection. The minutes suggest that the Mayor requested input from the
Council about further consideration of this issue at that point of the meeting, but
his sense was that it should have been taken back and reconsidered at a later
time.
2. Tonight, he did not leave the Chambers during the recitation of the Pledge of
Allegiance because to do so would send a muddled message. He would not
question the incentives and actions of figures in uniform who have put
themselves at heightened risk in defending the country. He has left the Council
Chambers during the recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance in recent meetings
because of the clause, "with liberty and justice for all" in relation to the
impropriety of the firing of the former City Engineer. He has tried to document
the firing, as Council is aware. He suggested Council vote on whether they
were right in the firing and whether it is incumbent upon Council to reinstate the
City Engineer. He will then consider the results of the vote in determining how
he will vote in tomorrow's election.
LEGISLATION
SECOND READING/PUBLIC HEARING - ORDINANCES
LAND PURCHASE ,
Ordinance 65-05 ,
Authorizing the Purchase of a 0.950 Acre, More or Less, Tract of Land, From Carl W.
Karrer, Trustee of the Emmett H. Karrer Family Trust, Located at 6199 High Street,
Township of Washington, County of Franklin, State of Ohio, and Declaring an
Emergency.
Ms. Brautigam reported that there are no changes subsequent to the last reading. Staff
recommends approval.
Mr. Keenan noted that he did not see reference to any personal property included.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of._____________ Dublin City Council --- --------- ~_eeting___
DAYTON LEGAL BLANK. INC.. FORM NO. 10148 --------- _____________ .________ ________u
-------------- ---~
-r:---.----.---u_---------November 7, 2005 Page 3
!I Held 20
i'
Mr. Hahn responded that the purchase is of the property only and the barn, not its
contents.
Ms. Brautigam stated that emergency passage is requested in order to close on the
property before year-end.
Mr. Keenan moved for emergency passage.
Mrs. Boring seconded the motion.
Vote on the motion: Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mayor Chinnici-
Zuercher, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes.
Vote on the Ordinance: Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mrs. Boring,
yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes.
INTRODUCTION/FIRST READING - ORDINANCES
OPERA T/NG BUDGET
Ordinance 66-05
Adopting the Annual Operating Budget for the Fiscal Year Ending December 31,
2006.
Mr. Lecklider introduced the ordinance.
Ms. Brautigam stated that workshop sessions are scheduled on November 9 and 16 for the
budget review.
. Presentation re City of Dublin Strategic Plan 2006-2010
Ms. Brautigam stated that the management team has been working on a strategic plan for
several months, following the Council's adoption of the City goals. Staff's plan aligns the
work of the City staff toward achieving those goals. The plan focuses on a vision that can
be proposed to City employees and which includes a set of strategic goals for them to work
toward. A booklet that will be provided to City employees in the coming weeks was
included in the packet. (She then read from the brochure, outlining the eight items in the
vision.) She is hoping that Council will endorse this process and ask her to bring this focus
forward to employees. During 2006, work will begin on aligning the business plans of the
various work units to achieve the goals. The budget reflects this focus on the Strategic
Plan and will align staff to achieve Council's goals. She is seeking Council's endorsement
of this process and direction for moving forward with bringing this kind of focus to
employees to achieve the goals of the City.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that she has some input on the document provided by staff,
but they would be appropriately brought forward during the budget discussion. Is the City
Manager requesting that Council endorse the document itself or the process? She
believes that the process would be separate from the written document generated.
Ms. Brautigam responded that she is requesting endorsement of the process, not the
written document. The document is flexible and Council can certainly clarify the goals in
order to ensure it reflects Council's goals before being distributed to the employees. Each
year, Council reviews the status of current goals and proposes new goals. When that is
done, the strategic plan will change as well. She is seeking Council's endorsement of the
process tonight. Perhaps at the November 21 meeting, Council could direct staff to make
any necessary changes to the document.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher invited comment from Council.
Mrs. Boring stated she would prefer the process be specifically identified prior to Council
taking action to endorse it. There are several items that she cannot link to Council's goals.
She is disappointed that the Plan has been developed to such a point prior to Council
having some kind of workshop to inform them of what was happening and how this is tied
to Council goals. Before endorsing anything, she would like the process defined
specifically.
Ms. Brautigam summarized the process to date. After the Council retreat, staff held a
management retreat to discuss the vision of the City Council and to discuss from a
management point of view the staff vision that ties into that. Once developed, the team
brainstormed certain strategic goals in the document that will move staff toward the goals
and vision established by Council. Many items were proposed, but the list was narrowed
to this list of eight items and sub goals. The plan was to bring this document to Council for
input. This is an internal staff document to align staff with Council goals. After Council's
review and over the course of the budget, if there are changes Council would like, staff will
incorporate those. The Plan will then be shared with employees in a series of meetings
over a period of time. She believes that all of the items are contained in Council's goals.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting
DAYTON LEGAL BLANK INC FORM NO 10148
November 7, 2005 Page 4
Held 20
Perhaps the development and integration of a human capital management plan into the
organizational structure is the item not tied to a specific Council goal. Human capital or the
work and capacity of City employees are necessary to do any work in the City. This
honors the commitment to develop the employees and their skills in order to help them to
achieve the goals that Council and management team has established for them. All of the
Plan relates directly to achieving what Council wants for the future of the City.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher suggested that during the budget process, staff identify which of
the major goals are connected to the budget items in order to ensure alignment.
Ms. Brautigam responded that the management letter at the front of the budget document II
addresses the ways in which the budget is designed to achieve these specific goals. !
,
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher summarized that the Manager is requesting approval of the
process as outlined, consisting of the Council retreat, followed by a management retreat,
taking Council's goals and identifying ways to actualize them through staff activities and
aligning that with budget decisions as well. Once the budget is approved, there would be a
rollout to staff of the Plan.
Ms Salay so moved.
Mr. Lecklider seconded the motion.
Vote on the motion: Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Ms. Salay, yes;
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes.
ANNEXA TlON
Ordinance 67-05
Accepting an Annexation of 82.3+/- Acres from Jerome Township, Union County to
the City of Dublin. (Petitioners: Suburban Improvement of Columbus, Inc.; Cheistoff and
Sandra Sue Steurwald)
Mr. Lecklider introduced the ordinance.
(At this point, Mr. McCash arrived.) I
Mr. Smith noted that this parcel was the subject of a three-party agreement (City,
Washington Township and Jerome Township) regarding service provision. Mr. Hale is
here on his client's behalf. The second reading of the ordinance accepting the annexation
is scheduled for November 21. He added that staff expects that when a zoning is
proposed for this parcel, it will not be approved until the three-party agreement is finalized
and executed, establishing the Community Authority. Mr. Hale has agreed to this. The
agreement is close to being finalized.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher summarized that the property will not be rezoned until the
Community Authority is in place that provides for the funding of the service provision by
Washington Township.
Mr. Keenan asked about the timeframe for establishment of the Authority. It includes many
participants from different entities.
Ben Hale. Jr.. 37 W. Broad Street. Columbus representing the applicant stated that they
have retained Greg Stype of Squire, Sanders & Dempsey for legal services related to
establishment of the Community Authority. The rezoning has not been filed, and the
Authority will be established before any rezoning is brought to Council.
Mr. Smith added that Mr. Stype will attend the November 21 Council meeting to provide a
presentation regarding the Authority.
Mr. Keenan asked if Council will be represented on the Authority.
Mr. Hale stated that, typically, the Authority consists of seven members. Four are named
by the county commissioners, one of which is to be a local government representative.
Three are named by the developer. In situations like this, the developer sometimes cedes
his right to name members to other parties. In this instance, they would likely cede this to
the City and have the City designate all three representatives. The monies will be used for
fire protection, therefore representation from the developer is irrelevant. For projects which
affect the development, the developer sometimes desires the three seats. Discussion
about this will continue. In this case, they will be happy to cede their right to representation
on the Authority to the City.
Mr. Keenan stated that it is important that the City be involved in this Authority.
There will be a second reading/public hearing of the Ordinance at the November 21
Council meeting.
I
j
II
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting
DAYTON LEGAL BLANK INC FORM NO 10148
November 7, 2005 Page 5
Held 20
INTRODUCTION/FIRST READING - ORDINANCES
REZON/NGS
Ordinance 68-05
Rezoning Approximately 0.4474 Acres, Generally Located on the East Side of South
High Street at the Intersection of John Wright Lane, from CB, Central Business
District, to HB, Historic Business District. (Rezoning - Steele Office Building - 138
South High Street - Case No. 05-138Z)
Ms. Salay introduced the ordinance.
Ms. Brautigam stated that this is a rezoning to the Historic Business District and one of
several that are taking place.
There will be a second reading/public hearing at the November 21 Council meeting.
Ordinance 69-05
Rezoning Approximately 0.11 Acres, Generally Located on the West Side of South
High Street, 75 Feet North of Pinney Hill, from CB, Central Business District, to HB,
Historic Business District. (Rezoning - Platinum Management - 87 South High Street -
Case No. 05-142Z)
Mr. Reiner introduced the ordinance.
There were no questions.
There will be a second reading/public hearing at the November 21 Council meeting
LAND PURCHASE
Ordinance 70-05
Authorizing the Purchase of a 0.68 Acre, More or Less, Tract of Land, from Craig R.
Sonksen, Located at 35 Darby Street (Parcel Nos. 273-003680-00 and 273-000310-00),
City of Dublin, County of Franklin, State of Ohio
Ms. Salay introduced the ordinance.
Mr. Smith stated that this purchase is a result of a negotiation and arms length transaction
with Mr. Sonksen. Ultimately, he will move out of these properties, the buildings will be
taken down and the parcel will be part of the Historic Dublin development taking place
through the RFP process. Mr. Sonksen will move his business into Louise's Needlework
building and the review process is currently underway for that. Council previously gave
direction to staff to acquire this property.
There will be a second reading/public hearing at the November 21 Council meeting.
Ordinance 71-05
Authorizing the Purchase of a 0.6289 Acre, More or Less, Tract of Land, from
Edward L. Upperman and Sharon L. Upperman, as Trustees under the Upperman :
Family Trust, Located at 6001 Avery Road (Parcel No. 274-000025-00), City of Dublin,
County of Franklin, State of Ohio.
Mr. Lecklider introduced the ordinance.
Mr. Smith stated that purchase of this property has been discussed previously with
Council. The purchase price agreed upon is within the appraisal done on the property.
The second reading is scheduled for November 21. The closing on the property will be
held after January 1, 2006.
There will be a second reading/public hearing at the November 21 Council meeting.
INTRODUCTION/PUBLIC HEARING - RESOLUTIONS
STATEMENT OF SERVICES
Resolution 71-05
Adopting a Statement of Services for a Proposed Annexation of 207.9 Acres,
More or Less, from Washington Township, Franklin County, to the City of
Dublin. (Petitioners: David H. Gease; Freda Whitmer, Trustee)
Mr. Lecklider introduced the resolution.
Ms. Brautigam stated that this and the next resolution are required under state law
to be provided by the City prior to the hearing of the county commissioners on the
annexation.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked about page 3 of the memo where it indicates that II
water and sewer line extensions would be needed. Who will pay for the I
extensions?
Mr. Gunderman responded that these would be an expense of the developer.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting
DAYTON LEGAL BLANK INC FORM NO 10148
November 7, 2005 Page 6
Held 20
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that under the section, "Roads and Streets" it
indicates that if the City plans to extend the four-lane divided highway initiated by
Franklin County on Cosgray, additional right-of-way would be needed. What is the
current plan for what the City will do?
Mr. Gunderman responded that it would not be useful to speculate at this early
stage of the process, prior to the additional work on traffic modeling. It is not
inconceivable that Cosgray would be widened.
Ms. Salay noted that she has had some inquiries about whether Dublin has a
choice in accepting an annexation.
Mr. Smith responded that Council certainly has discretion about accepting an
annexation. Staff's recommendations address what is contemplated to be annexed
in conformance with the adopted Community Plan. The landowner has a choice
not to petition for annexation. There will be more landowners on the City's borders
who may seek annexation in the future, but Council has the right to reject them.
Ms. Salay asked if it is consistent with the water and sewer agreement with the City
of Columbus in terms of exclusive service areas. The property owner could not be
served by Columbus without Dublin's consent, is that correct?
Mr. Smith responded that is correct.
Mr. Lecklider stated that if the City refused an annexation, the primary purpose of
which is to gain access to sewer and water, a landowner may then proceed to
petition Columbus for annexation?
Mr. Smith responded because the landowner is in Dublin's exclusive service area,
they can obtain those services only from Dublin, per the agreement with the City of
Columbus. That does not mean that the property owner must annex to Dublin or
that Dublin must accept the annexation. When the service maps were established,
it was Council's direction to grow within these areas. There has not been a case
where a developer has petitioned for annexation in the City's exclusive area where
the City refused the annexation. Staff does not bring annexations to the floor if they
are not consistent with the City's policy. He was contacted by an attorney recently
whose client was in Dublin's exclusive service area and the attorney indicated that
he advised the client to seek annexation. However, no one can require someone to
annex. The City is currently studying areas to determine water and sewer
capacities.
Ben Hale. Jr.. representinq The Edwards Land Company stated that Edwards has a
contract to purchase these properties. They have a slightly different viewpoint of
the annexation issue. He has always considered that the landowners are a third
party beneficiary to that contract. The City cannot say that it has the exclusive right
to serve the property and then choose not to serve them, making the services
unavailable to the property owner. While this has not been litigated, he does not
believe this position would be upheld.
Mr. Smith stated that the question was whether the Council must accept the
annexation and serve the area. His belief is that the City does not have to do so,
but this does not mean the property owner could not obtain services elsewhere.
Mr. Hale commented that annexation is a legislative act and Council is given broad
discretion under the law.
Wallace Maurer. 7451 Dublin Road asked about page 2 of the memo where it
states, "Future Development." The last sentence indicates that the existing
farmstead and outbuildings will probably be developed as new development takes
place. Regardless of what Council does, is there is any parkland/educational i
potential in this land and building, similar to the Karrer barn property?
Mr. Smith responded that the Planning Division looks for opportunities to preserve
historic structures during the development process.
Vote on the Resolution: Ms. Salay, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr.
Lecklider, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher,. Yes.
STATEMENT REGARDING INCOMPATIBLE LAND USES
Resolution 72-05
I II
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting
DAYTON LEGAL BLANK INC FORM NO 10148
November 7,2005 Page 7
Held 20
Adopting a Statement Regarding Possible Incompatible land Uses and Zoning
Buffer for a Proposed Annexation of 207.9 Acres, More or Less, from Washington
Township, Franklin County, to the City of Dublin as Required by Section 709.023{c)
of the Ohio Revised Code. (Petitioners: David H. Gease; Freda Whitmer, Trustee)
Mr. Lecklider introduced the resolution.
Mr. Smith stated that this is a companion resolution related to incompatible land uses and
is required by Ohio Revised Code.
Vote on the Resolution: Mr. McCash, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mrs. Boring,
yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes.
OTHER
. Woods of Indian Run Request for Bikepath Lighting
Ms. Brautigam stated that she received a call from a resident who was disappointed with
the staff recommendation. She encouraged them to attend the meeting to address
Council.
Mr. Hahn stated that the memo in the packet included a letter from the Homeowners
Association of the Woods of Indian Run requesting lighting for a portion of the bike path
that connects their neighborhood to a path system at Coffman High School. Staff
reviewed this request and the report reflects some considerations for Council's decision
on whether or not to light this portion of bikepath. These considerations include
precedent and cost. He offered to respond to questions.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that Mr. Hahn would not have had time to review how
many other bikepath lighting requests could come about as a result of what is done in this
case. Would he have any general feel for what that number could be?
Mr. Hahn responded that if this would relate to schools only, he doesn't believe there is a
school in Dublin that is not served by a bikepath. Those bikepaths are in areas with
minimal or no lighting. Extending this concept to other destination points would result in
many more cases where a potential exists for bikepath lighting requests.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that from the outset, this was a policy instituted when
developing the bikepath system. She asked Mr. Hahn to explain the reason for the City's
policy of not lighting the bikepath system.
Mr. Hahn responded that it has been a practice and relates to the land use bikepaths fall in
- that being parks. Other than designated activity zones, the City does not light parks. By
ordinance, parks are closed at dark and lighting is not included in park design, other than
for security and other designated points of activity. This particular path does not relate to a
park, but is on a bikepath easement through and on top of a scenic easement and on the
school property. The City does not have control over the practice of how bikepaths are
implemented on school property. An assumption, right or wrong, is that those living
I adjacent to bikepaths do not want lights. For the community good, the City minimizes the
impact of bikepaths on individual properties.
II Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that there would be significant maintenance costs for
lighting the bikepath.
Mr. Hahn responded that there are 60 miles of paths in the City and if the concept of
lighting bikepaths is considered, this would be an important factor.
Mrs. Boring noted that there could be exceptions to the policy. In this case, the bikepath is
heavily wooded, making it a unique situation.
Mr. Hahn responded that this former Starkey property driveway was tree lined, and many
of those trees remain adjacent to the bikepath. This path essentially paved a section of the
old driveway that led to the house.
Mrs. Boring asked if the vacant land behind the School Administration building is owned by
the Dublin Schools.
Mr. Hahn responded affirmatively.
Mrs. Boring stated that the lighting would not impact private residences. Another concern
is that if the City is encouraging pedestrian movement, and because the start time of the
school results in students traveling in the dark in the morning, there is a unique safety
issue. The main purpose of this path is to provide a connection to the school for students.
There is also a bikepath between here and Coventry Woods subdivision.
Mr. Hahn responded that there is a bikepath in Coventry Woods, and in the proposed 2006
budget, there is a line item to connect the Woods of Indian Run to the Coventry Woods
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting
DAYTON LEGAL BLANK INC FORM NO 10148
November 7, 2005 Page 8
Held 20
bikepath. He agreed that the main use of this bikepath relates to connecting this
neighborhood to the school property
Mr. Lecklider asked for clarification - there is a connection in the proposed budget?
Mr. Hahn responded that connection is in a different portion of the subdivision, but it is
included in the 2006 budget.
Mr. Lecklider recalls some controversy during the rezoning about what was City property
and what was not.
Mr. Hahn stated that there was a long debate about whether or not the Starkey driveway
was dedicated as a construction easement or as a permanent easement. Eventually, the
City received a legal opinion that it was a construction easement only. At the time of the
debate, that section of bikepath only existed to the depth of the lots, lying between the two
houses and dead-ending into the remnants of a gravel driveway. A resident of the Woods
of Indian Run granted the City a scenic easement over the width of his property, which is
why this section of paved bikepath exists today.
Mr. Lecklider asked about the portion to the east of this.
Mr. Hahn stated that the property to the east belongs to the Schools.
Mr. Lecklider asked if the City has the ability to create a bikepath to the east.
Mr. Hahn responded that the City does not. That section of the old driveway is deemed to
be on private property and there is not an easement. In order to extend bikepath to the
east, property owners would have to grant easements over the back of their properties to
the City.
Amy Leveridqe. 7040 Willow Run Drive, President of the Homeowners Association of the
Woods of Indian stated that she is joined by four other Board members as well as many
members of the Association who support this bikepath lighting. The issue is crucial to their
neighborhood and the City. It is an issue of safety, as the walking path serves as a
primary route of travel for most residents and visitors to the neighborhood who attend high
school football games, City events and activities at the school. It is the sole route of choice
for children who use the path to travel to and from school. There is no bus service
available to their neighborhood from Coffman High School, and children must therefore
walk. The walk is short, but at certain times of the year it is very dark. There is no ambient
lighting in the area that filters through the trees. They feel it is an accident or crime scene
waiting to happen. They have considered alternatives, such as cutting down trees to allow
ambient lighting to filter through, if it were available. This was ruled out due to a desire to
preserve trees throughout the City. Children can walk all the way up to Coffman Road and
down the path, but that leads to more safety problems, such as traffic and more travel time
in the dark. The most practical solution is some form of lighting. They know that cost is a
factor in the decision, however they feel that the value of a child's safety far outweighs the
minimum investment to make the path safe. The City Manager also mentioned a concern
about potential vandalism, but they believe that lighting this path will help reduce
vandalism in and around their neighborhood. The darkness of the path currently offers a
haven for vandals or would be criminals. There is vandal resistant lighting available which
would reduce or eliminate this concern. Lastly, in terms of setting precedent, this is a very
unique situation. There are not many similar locations in Dublin - a path in such close
proximity to the school, not to mention a majority of City events, and one which must be
used daily by students. There are two households in near proximity to the path and one
family wanted to attend tonight but could not. They have sent a letter expressing their
support of the lighting. The other family who had granted an easement previously has
recently moved, but prior to doing so had also approved the plan for the lighting. The
Association requests that Council approve this important safety initiative. There are
individual residents with personal concerns who would like to speak tonight. They look
forward to hearing of Council's decision.
Robert Alamshah. 7017 Timberview Drive stated that he has a 14-year old daughter who is
a freshman at Coffman High School. She enjoys the walk, but for much of the year, the
path is pitch dark. He fears for her safety and walks behind her some mornings. There is
no other alternative than parents driving children to school. He has an 11-year old son
who attends DFL football practice at Dublin Coffman. They practice until dark and he
travels that same accessway to Timberview Drive. He is concerned for his safety as well.
They believe this is a unique situation and ask that Council addresses it.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting
DAYTON LEGAL BLANK INC FORM NO 10148
November 7,2005 Page 9
Held 20
Mary Popper. 7153 Timberview asked if any Council Members have daughters and sons
and whether they would allow them to walk three blocks in the night? The bushes are not
even maintained. There are so many children in the neighborhood who do walk.
Nikki Huqhes. 7024 Willow Run Drive stated that the City of Dublin is haunted by "if only's." II
"If only" the roundabout had been installed sooner at Brand and Muirfield, perhaps that
little boy riding in his mother's car would still be alive. If only the light at Chapman
Elementary had been in place sooner, perhaps that parent wouldn't have died. She urged
Council not to allow a rape or murder by keeping that path in darkness. She does not want
to see this path become another "if only."
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher commented that she appreciates the residents' concerns about
the potential for accidents and crime. She asked staff if there have been incidents that
have been reported to the Police.
Ms. Brautigam stated that she does not have that information. Chief Epperson will arrive
at the meeting later tonight.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that this would be good information to have for both
Council and the public as this issue is addressed.
Wallace Maurer. 7451 Dublin Road stated that it is an issue which makes people
frightened, and it deals with the dark side of human nature. If it is a matter of "outgaming"
vandals, they will see part of this as a game with lights versus getting to the roots of the
causes of vandalism. There is technology available with a sensor which triggers light when
there is movement in an area. There is no question that something should be done.
Tom Snide, 5211 Forest Run Drive stated that he serves on the Board of the Homeowners
Association. He recently relocated his home and business from Columbus to Dublin for
the business environment and because of the school system. The number one concern of
the Dublin Schools is with the children's safety. Safety is only as good as the weakest link
in the system. If children travel to the schools on this path, he would have concerns about
safety. As an Association, they are representing those in their neighborhood who travel to
the school. But with the new bikepath in place, there will be a safety issue for all of the
students walking from nearby developments to the high school. He urged Council to give
this careful consideration.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked about the staff plan to look at the broader community issue
related to this request.
Mr. Hahn responded that he could identify similar areas and provide that to Council.
Mr. Keenan noted that this situation is very unique. There may be a couple of parallel
situations, but this is very dark and covered and has a high level of pedestrian traffic.
Mr. Hahn offered that he would secure from Dublin Schools a list of the bikepaths used as
part of their pedestrian transportation plan. Staff does communicate about this in terms of
snow removal plans. Staff can do a broader analysis of the community about similar cases
that exist.
Mr. McCash noted that Violet Vale Court has a bikepath through woods, there is a path
along the back of Llewellyn Farms to Thomas Elementary and Scottish Corners has a I
similar bikepath access through a wooded area. This same issue exists in several II
locations and these need to be considered.
Ms. Salay stated that she would be interested in having more information. It sounds that
this to a large part is an issue related to the school transportation plan. Perhaps this is an
opportunity to partner with the schools in devising a solution.
Mr. McCash stated that if it were a safety issue, he would not endorse a piecemeal
approach but rather a broad plan.
Mrs. Boring noted that it is not unusual for Council to become aware of a safety issue in
this manner. She does not believe there is another densely wooded area with a bikepath
access to a school. The City has not requested the Schools to partner on school zone
flashers. If encouraging pedestrian travel is desirable, and if safety is a consideration, this
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting
DAYTON LEGAL BLANK INC FORM NO 10148
November 7, 2005 Page 10
Held 20
should be considered as a unique and needed improvement. If other situations are
brought forward where neighborhoods desire similar lighting, they can be considered at
that time. In reviewing what was done with the recent guardrail request, this does not
seem to be a large price to ensure safety for the students.
Mr. McCash pointed out that this is the price for only one location. With the bikepath
tunnel requests, Council engaged in a comprehensive review of the needs and priorities,
considering the budgeting aspect as well. A global approach is needed. Council is elected
to address these issues globally, not in a piecemeal fashion.
Mrs. Boring pointed out that this neighborhood first expressed concerns over a year ago
and no other neighborhood has brought such a request to the City.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher commented that Council has talked extensively over the past few
years about the Schools pedestrian transportation system and the fact that communication
is needed between the Schools and the City about these needs. It is an excellent idea to
request their pedestrian transportation system may be modified with the redistricting
process underway. She asked how quickly staff could obtain this for a quick analysis. It is
not a matter of when Council will respond. Council should be proactive about this issue
which they are now aware of because of the residents' request.
Mr. Hahn responded that he could provide information at the next meeting about the date
when a more comprehensive review can be completed.
Mr. Keenan asked that he identify locations where similar situations exist with walkways to
the schools that would have lighting needs.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked if staff can obtain the pedestrian transportation system
plan from the Dublin Schools tomorrow, do a cursory review, and determine whether the
Woods of Indian Run would be a top priority? This would enable Council to act prior to the
time the final report is completed.
Mr. Hahn stated that this request is feasible.
Mrs. Boring stated that school start times would be another consideration.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher summarized that staff will do an analysis of all of the pedestrian
walkways to schools. In two weeks, Mr. Hahn will have the transportation plan from the
Schools, can do a cursory review, and determine whether or not the Woods of Indian Run
would be a top priority. Council can then give specific direction regarding the residents'
request for bikepath lighting.
Tom Snide, 5211 Forest Run Drive stated that the Association also requests that
consideration be given to identifying on the map the locations of registered sex offenders.
A concern raised was about a sexual offender who lives just south of Dublin Coffman High
School.
Another audience member stated that this person has moved.
Mr. Snide recommended that this aspect be superimposed on the map. It is found on the
Franklin County Sheriff's web site.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked the Chief of Police to respond regarding where that web
site is housed and the City's responsibility in this matter from a legal standpoint.
Chief Epperson stated that it is a requirement of the county sheriff to register and maintain
that database. Notifications regarding registered sex offenders are sent to residents within
a certain perimeter, to the school system and to law enforcement. There are very few
registered sex offenders in Dublin.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked what the schools do with this information.
Chief Epperson responded that the Schools and law enforcement personnel are notified for
their use, but the information is not disseminated. Individual citizens can access the
information from the Franklin County Sheriff's web site.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked if there have been significant incidents reported on this
bikepath.
,
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting
DAYTON LEGAL BLANK INC FORM NO 10148
November 7, 2005 Page 11
Held 20
Chief Epperson responded that he does not recall any such reports for this particular area,
but he can check to obtain a definitive response. Bikepath crime is tied back to an address
close to the bikepath, so this would take some additional research.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked that in the ultimate report, safety information be provided
as well. She thanked the residents for bringing this to Council's attention.
. Final Plat, Ballantrae - Section 6 - Lots 471-515 (Case No. 03-019FP)
Ms. Brautigam stated that this plat was approved by the Planning Commission. There
were no questions from Council.
Ms. Salay moved approval.
Mrs. Boring seconded the motion.
Vote on the motion: Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes;
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes.
. Final Plat, Ballantrae - Section 8 - Lots 568 through 614, Trafalgar Lane (Case No.
05-109FDP/FP)
Ms. Brautigam stated that this plat was approved by the Planning Commission. There
were no questions from Council.
Ms. Salay moved approval of the plat.
Mr. Keenan seconded the motion.
Vote on the motion: Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr.
McCash, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes.
. Avery-Muirfield Drive/Avery Road Corridor Operational Analysis
Mr. Hammersmith stated that staff is present to present the results of the Avery-Muirfield
Drive North Corridor study. The study began just over a year ago and was performed by
the consulting firm of Burgess & Niple. The presentation will be done by Ms. Willis. Staff
is seeking Council's concurrence tonight for a two-lane roundabout with a three-lane
footprint at the intersection of Avery-Muirfield and Post Road. The emphasis tonight will
be on this intersection, as the City is programmed to construct an improvement in this
location next year. Ms. Willis' presentation will include background from previous studies
conducted; the relationship to US 33/State Route 161 Northwest Freeway Study; the
findings of the Avery-Muirfield North Corridor Study, with emphasis on the Post Road
intersection; and to discuss the recommendations for not only Post Road, but long-term
for the entire corridor.
(Mr. Keenan left the Chambers at this point, as he is an affected property owner and has
been advised by Legal staff to abstain on this matter.)
Ms. Willis emphasized again that staff is seeking Council's concurrence for a two-lane
roundabout with a three-lane footprint at the intersection of Avery-Muirfield and Post.
She noted the following:
. The traffic impact studies performed for the Coffman Park Expansion Task Force,
the Avery Place Retail Center and Dublin Methodist Hospital have demonstrated
that the developments east of Avery-Muirfield Drive have been approved at
densities lower than what was anticipated in the 1997 Community Plan. The Avery
Place Retail Center and the Dublin Methodist Hospital demonstrated that the
overall density of the area west of Avery-Muirfield has been approved slightly
higher than the 1997 Plan, but still slightly lower than the Coffman Park Expansion
Task Force study.
. Looking at the vehicle trip generation from these approved developments east and
west of Avery-Muirfield Drive, it is still slightly less than what was previously
assumed. What this means is that it is not the recent development activity within
the Avery-Muirfield corridor that brings this traffic, but the background traffic and
traffic moving through Dublin.
. Concurrent with these studies is the 1-270/US 33/Northwest Freeway Major
Investment Study or MIS. This is a study released by ODOT with cooperation from
Dublin, Franklin County, Union County, Columbus and Hilliard. The goal is to
develop long term mobility solutions for the 1-270 west outerbelt area, including the
US 33/SR 161 freeway west of 1-270 to US 42. The traffic projections from the MIS
cause a "wrinkle" in the Avery-Muirfield corridor analysis because it projects
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting
DAYTON LEGAL BLANK INC FORM NO 10148
November 7, 2005 Page 12
Held 20
significantly higher volumes in the Avery-Muirfield corridor than the previous studies
for Avery Place Retail Center and the 1997 Community Plan. This resulted in more
analysis needed regarding the discrepancies. The outcome was the same volumes
in the Avery-Muirfield corridor that are being presented tonight.
. The MIS process does complete steps 1-4 of ODOT's 14-step project development
process.
. For the corridor itself, the study analyzed two distinct options: a fully signalized
alternative and full roundabout options. She showed slides demonstrating the
alternatives and provided detailed information about the number of lanes needed
for a signalized alternative. It would require three additional lanes or a nine-lane
intersection. Staff visited a recently constructed nine-lane intersection in
Reynoldsburg at State Route 256 and Taylor Station Road. Important to note are
the number of dashed lane lines that are needed through the intersection in order
to channel traffic properly through the intersection due to the wide spans of asphalt.
. She showed a slide demonstrating the appearance of a nine-lane in a typical link
section of roadway, the driver's perspective in the approach to the intersection.
. At Avery-Muirfield and Perimeter, the study analyzes the roundabout alternative
with three lanes within the roundabout to accommodate through movement
northbound and southbound, but in this location, a westbound right turn bypass
lane would be needed to meet the 2030 needs for levels of service.
. She showed a slide depicting Avery-Muirfield and Post Road with a two-lane
roundabout with a three-lane footprint, requiring minor reconstruction when the third
lane is needed.
. In 2008, in order to achieve better levels of service at Perimeter Loop and Hospital
Drive, a westbound ingress-only ramp is recommended. This would not be a
northbound, left turn in ramp, but would merely serve the ramp traffic and
southbound right turns.
. In 2010, because of the proximity of Perimeter Loop and Perimeter Drive, the study
recommends the addition of two two-lane roundabouts with three-lane footprints
and the ability to widen to the central island.
. Between 2015 through 2018, the study recommends the widening of these three
roundabouts to three lanes, widening to the central island.
. Between 2020 and 2025, the study recommends the installation of right turn bypass
lanes for the westbound to northbound right turn movement, and also the
eastbound to southbound right turn movement.
. The Avery-Muirfield Drive and Post intersection was shown comparing the
signalized intersection versus the three-lane roundabout and the impacts for right-
of-way.
. With a fully signalization option, eight lanes are required at Avery-Muirfield and
Post and will operate well through 2022. After that, it will fail.
. By contrast, the three lane roundabout option at Post requires six lanes for both
northbound and southbound, but operates well into year 2030. This provides an
operational level of service equivalent of "An in 2030 - a full 25 years.
. She then highlighted the impacts on the properties in the northwest and southeast
quadrants of the intersection and the proximity of the right-of-way required for a
three-lane footprint versus the corners of the existing buildings. The right-of-way
requirements would extend very close to the existing buildings.
. In order to examine all options available to the City, staff examined a two-lane
roundabout with a two-lane footprint versus a three-lane footprint. This provides
the same operational efficiency as a two-lane with three-lane footprint, with the
added advantage of the proximity of the edge of right-of-way to the corners of the
buildings. However, when the need to widen out for the third through lane, the City
would be phasing major reconstruction and could not widen to the central island. It
would have to be widened to the outside, removing curb and gutter, relocating
utilities and bikepaths, tree lawns would be impacted, resulting in a more difficult
construction process.
. The next slide depicted the difference in right-of-way requirements for the two-lane
roundabout versus the two through-lane traffic signal.
. Another slide highlights the differences in the ultimate solution for either the three-
lane signal or three-lane roundabout. The signal has greater impacts on the
frontage of the properties along Avery-Muirfield and increased traffic noise due to
starting and stopping. For the roundabout, there are more impacts along the actual
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting
DAYTON LEGAL BLANK INC FORM NO 10148
November 7,2005 Page 13
Held 20
corners of the intersections themselves and the distance of the right-of-way to the
corners of the building. There is a decrease in traffic noise and controlled speeds
through the roundabout, with a side benefit of traffic calming.
. She compared the right-of-way needs for a three-lane roundabout versus a three-
lane traffic signal at Avery-Muirfield/Post. She pointed out the proximity of the right-
of-way for the three-lane roundabout to the corners of the existing buildings, yet the
additional right-of-way needed for the signal extends much farther along the
frontage of the properties versus the roundabouts.
. Perimeter Drive intersection with Avery-Muirfield in the p.m. peak is already
operating at a service level "E." With the 55.4 seconds of overall delay for the
intersection, the eastbound shared right through movements and the westbound
shared left through movements have 102 seconds of delay and 93 seconds,
respectively, or a level of service of "F."
. She shared analysis they performed to determine the ultimate operational solution
to recommend to Council. They looked at several alternatives for signalization and
roundabout design of all of the intersections in the corridor.
. The roundabout alternative proves to be the best for Perimeter Drive through 2030
and it is recommended to install a double-lane roundabout between 2010 and 2015
and update that to a triple lane between 2015 and 2020, and triple lane with a right
lane bypass between 2020 and 2030.
. Because of the proximity of Perimeter Loop and Hospital Drive to Perimeter Drive,
these two intersections need to work together for queuing and stacking. Because
of this, they need to be installed in concert. A double-lane roundabout is
recommended between 2010 and 2015; the triple-lane roundabout is
recommended between 2015 and 2025; triple lane roundabout with right-turn
bypass in the westbound and eastbound directions between 2025 and 2030.
. For the westbound ramps, staff analyzed both the roundabout alternatives and
signalized alternatives and at this location, the signals are recommended to remain
in place through 2030. It will provide acceptable levels of service at this location.
The analysis includes the westbound ingress lane opposite the westbound ramps.
. The next slide summarized the operational analysis conducted to consider whether
or not the westbound ingress lanes opposite the westbound ramps are necessary
for the overall efficiency of the corridor. It was determined that it is necessary to
maintain the continuous right off of the westbound ramps. Bringing that right turn
movement into a signalized or stopped condition significantly degrades the level of
service, even with the addition of a lane.
. Knowing the need to keep the continuous right turn in place and understanding the
weave that is created with keeping this continuous right turn in place between the
westbound ramps and Perimeter Loop and Hospital Drive, it was determined that
there are some benefits of installing the westbound ingress lane. If it is installed,
then Perimeter Loop/Hospital Drive can continue with one dedicated northbound
left turn lane. If it is not installed, it is necessary to have dual northbound dedicated
left turn lanes.
. By installing the westbound ingress lanes, it does not degrade the level of service
at the westbound ramps; the signal timing and phasing of the ramps does not need
to be changed because the inside or right left turn lane becomes a shared left
through and the traffic can be adequately served.
. Staff reviewed the construction costs estimates for every scenario presented
tonight. At the intersection of Post Road, which includes 1,000 square feet of
three-lane section with curb and gutter on Post Road, the requirement of the Avery
Place Retail development for turn lanes, the church needing a turn lane per their
TIS, the roundabout cost is estimated at $2.6 million versus a traffic signal of $2.3
million, about $700,000 of which is for the improvements along Post Road.
. For the westbound ramps in 2008, the westbound ingress lane is $1.3 million and it
is not currently programmed in the CIP.
. For Perimeter Loop and Perimeter Drive in 2010, the cost of the roundabouts is $3
million versus $3.1 million for the traffic signal.
. For Perimeter Loop and Perimeter Drive between 2015 and 2018, a cost of $1.6
million for the roundabout versus $2.1 for the traffic signal.
. The Perimeter Loop and Perimeter Drive and westbound ramps slight intersection
improvements at the westbound ramps for a cost of $1.5 million. There is not a
comparable traffic signal for that cost.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting
DAYTON LEGAL BLANK INC FORM NO 10148
November 7,2005 Page 14
Held 20
. The bolded numbers are the recommended solutions, and the total over the years
of the recommended solution is $10 million. The full roundabout alternative would
result in a cost of $10.9 million and a traffic signal would cost $7.5 million. These
costs include right-of-way acquisition.
Short-term recommendations are:
1. At Avery-Muirfield and Post Road, to construct a two-lane roundabout with right of
way for expansion to a three-lane roundabout widening to the central island.
2. In 2008, US 33 westbound ramps and Avery-Muirfield Drive, add an ingress only
ramp to the Dublin Methodist Hospital and maintain the continuous right turn
movement at the signal.
Long-term recommendations are:
1. Construct a three-lane roundabout at Avery-Muirfield and Post Road between 2015
and 2018.
2. Perimeter Drive and Avery-Muirfield Drive - construct a two-lane roundabout in
2010 and expand to a three-lane roundabout between 2015 and 2018 and add right
turn bypass lanes in 2020 to 2025.
3. Perimeter Loop and Hospital Drive and Avery-Muirfield Drive - same series of
improvements and timeframes as for Perimeter/Avery-Muirfield.
4. Westbound ramps - intersection widening to provide three southbound through
lanes and one dedicated left turn lane and two southbound receiving through lanes
and one dedicated southbound receiving lane between 2020 and 2025.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher thanked staff for the presentation. It will take some time to
digest all of this. She appreciated having the intersection staked out at Brand and Dublin
Road prior to Council making a decision to understand the impacts of the roundabout.
This would be helpful at the Avery-Muirfield/Post intersection to visualize the impacts on
the existing commercial buildings.
Mr. Hammersmith summarized that there are three central issues - level of service and
capacity long term, long term financial effectiveness and safety. Left turn lanes at these
intersections will continue to be a problem under a signalized alternative, especially with a
nine-lane section. Although the roundabouts have the appearance of a significant impact
overall for the property owners, in terms of the transportation network being cost effective,
providing a long-term good level of service and being safe, they are the recommended
alternative.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that she is aware that the hospital is having discussions
with State Rep. Hughes about having their own ramp off of US 33. If they were able to
have that alternative, how would that impact these recommendations?
Ms. Willis responded that without knowing what they are contemplating, it would be her
assumption that it would negate the need for the westbound ingress lane as they would
serve the same function.
Mr. Lecklider asked about the westbound ramps and that roundabout - is the projection
that it would not be necessary until 2030?
Ms. Willis responded that staff is not recommending a roundabout at the westbound
ramps, but rather improving the signal. The graphic depicted four roundabouts, which is
the full roundabout alternative.
Mr. Hammersmith stated that presently, it is not the recommendation to have a
roundabout at the westbound ramps. The benefit is not there to justify the roundabout
cost.
Ms. Willis stated that the MIS study will also look at the Avery-Muirfield interchange as
part of that process. For purposes of this study, staff assumed that the interchange
configuration remained constant and that the MIS process could review what should
happen at the Avery-Muirfield interchange, if anything. In order to change the intersection
treatment at Avery-Muirfield and the westbound ramps, the City would have to open up
the interchange justification study again. Given a MIS study is ongoing, that would not be
prudent.
Mr. Lecklider asked if this took into account an additional lane east and westbound on
161/33.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting
DAYTON LEGAL BLANK INC FORM NO 10148
November 7, 2005 Page 15
Held 20
Mr. Hammersmith responded that he does not believe it would impact this analysis, but it
will certainly be a consideration in the MIS and any adaptation of the interchange that
might be proposed in the MIS.
Mr. Lecklider asked about any funding possibilities for the hospital ramp.
Mr. Hammersmith responded that staff has not discussed this. Staff only recently
received the results of the study that support that ramp. The next step is to discuss this
with the hospital and work with them on funding alternatives they are pursuing to have
that constructed at the state level. As Ms. Willis indicated, it is not currently programmed
within the CIP.
Ms. Salay had understood that the hospital ramp would come directly off of 33 into the
hospital property.
Mr. Hammersmith responded that it will have to be aligned with the intersection itself, with
the off ramps currently in place. Having another ramp for the hospital is not feasible
because of the proximity of the ramps on and off and the weave that would result on the
freeway itself. It would result in safety concerns for ODOT.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher invited public testimony.
Lou Chorich. M.D.. an owner of the buildinq at 6805 Averv-Muirfield at the northwest
corner with Post testified that he comes to express some thoughts for consideration, not
really as an owner of a building affected by the proposed changes, but as a physician who
delivers patient care to those who come to their practice. They use 75 percent of the first
floor of the building to deliver care as ophthalmologists. They are a retinal surgery
practice affiliated with OSU and this is a satellite office. They use the southernmost
portion of the first floor, and the corner of the building is used to do procedures and
deliver patient care. He has some concern about the noise and proximity of the vehicles
to the building while performing laser surgery and other office procedures. Another
consideration is signage, as patients who come to them have some difficulty in locating
their building as it exists now. If the changes are made, he is hopeful that they will be
given due consideration for some changes in signage. As one approaches the
intersection from the south, it would be very difficult to see the sign as it exists in the
notch of the building. A physician on the second floor of the building relies upon signage
for walk-ins and to build his practice. That is an important aspect to the medical
professionals who have offices in this building. As a final note, he does not want to sound
like he is objecting to the changes. Those in this area recognize the need for the
expansion. He is hopeful it will be done with consideration of the properties and the
activities that take place there. Having seen this for the first time today, would there be
anyway to think about using the vacant property at 6800 to provide some "breathing
room" between the properties on the west side of the road and the south side of the road?
He appreciates Council's consideration and time.
Wallace Maurer. 7451 Dublin Road stated that he wants to talk about what he will term,
"roundabout overload." If divorced from particular intersections for a moment, he believes
there is a logic and pressure when beginning with a two-lane roundabout where the plans
are in place to move to a three-lane roundabout and then a right-turn bypass. The
abstract pressure lines of this design for traffic goes in that direction. He gathers that
some of the symptoms of overload in a roundabout are increased rear-end collisions and
sideswiping of cars. He gathers that some municipalities have returned to signalized
handling of this, perhaps with still long lines of traffic. One of the seemingly logical places
for a roundabout would be the intersection of Emerald Parkway and Dublin Road.
Currently, it has a highly sophisticated, nuanced signalization and the longest wait he has
had as a pedestrian is perhaps a minute. He does not know what the impact would be of
the imposition of a roundabout at this heavily trafficked juncture of the City. Does anyone
know the history of municipalities who have implemented roundabouts and the pressure
of what he thinks is the conceptual sense of what happens with roundabouts from two
lane to three lane and the right lane bypass? What has happened in cities that are further
along in the adoption of roundabouts?
Mr. Hammersmith responded that the roundabouts are being implemented to maximize
the capacity of intersections, as signalization has capacity limitations. The roundabouts
help to achieve continuous flow, minimizing traffic delays and filling in gaps. With the
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting
DAYTON LEGAL BLANK INC FORM NO 10148
November 7, 2005 Page 16
Held 20
roundabout, it is done safely at low speeds and with good visibility. The City is
experiencing higher speeds through signalized intersections. For other municipalities,
they are removing signalized intersections and installing roundabouts and have good
outcomes. There are accidents with roundabouts as well, but they are less serious and
fatalities and personal injury accidents are reduced. Permissive lefts at signalized
intersections do have a greater risk of injury accidents and fatalities. This has been the
experience nationwide and in Dublin. In terms of a higher capacity intersection, Emerald
and Dublin Road is not one - Perimeter and Avery-Muirfield is one of the City's higher
capacity intersections, as well as Riverside Drive/161. Signals do work where there is
good spacing and coordinated timing, but in the Avery-Muirfield corridor, that is not the
case. Signalizing these intersection results in vehicle stacking and back up.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked if Council is in agreement with having the intersection at
Post/Avery-Muirfield staked as she has suggested.
Ms. Salay commented that it would be helpful. She assumes staff considered shifting the
roundabout onto the vacant land and decided not to do so.
Mr. Hammersmith responded that these are conceptual drawings which will be refined
during detailed design engineering. Shifting the right-of-way to the northwest actually
impacts right-of-way along the east side of Avery-Muirfield more significantly. It is a
balancing issue, and this would be considered at the detailed design phase. He pointed
out that there is the opportunity to build a two-lane roundabout with a two-lane footprint,
understanding that there would be greater expense in the future to expand it, as Ms. Willis
has described. A conscious decision could then be made in the future to expand to a
three-lane, but it would then be on the outside with more expense. With a two-lane in a
three-lane footprint, this would already be in place and would not change in the future.
Ms. Salay stated that for her and for the benefit of the property owners, she would
suggest that staff stake out the edge of the pavement, because right-of-way edge is not
the same as pavement edge and could be significant to the property owners. She would
also be interested in the pedestrian aspect of the roundabout in view of the many bikers
and rollerbladers along the corridor, and the impact on the bikepath system.
Mr. Hammersmith responded that it is the intent to maintain that pedestrian connectivity
and staff can provide some real world examples of how that is done. There are fewer
conflict points for the pedestrian with a roundabout - 8 versus 32.
Ms. Salay stated that the community may benefit in having a video showing how the
corridor would operate with roundabouts.
Mr. Hammersmith stated that the Avery-Muirfield/Post improvement is programmed for
construction in 2006 which results in a tight timeframe in terms of implementing in 2006,
because the design has not been initiated. Direction will be needed in December to be
able to be ready to move forward in 2006. Otherwise, the project may have to be
deferred until 2007.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that if staff has the staking done, Council can then view it
in the field.
Mr. Hammersmith stated that staff will do so.
Mr. Lecklider asked about the a.m. peak southbound, should this roundabout be installed
at Post and Avery-Muirfield. How is it that there is not a back up at the existing signalized
intersection at Perimeter Drive?
Mr. Hammersmith stated that some detection can be included within the roundabout itself,
which would activate the signal if that would occur, clearing the corridor. That has been
done elsewhere.
Mrs. Boring asked if there are measures the City can take, such as phasing, in order to
eliminate the downtime and to maintain traffic during construction of a roundabout.
Mr. Hammersmith stated that there are, as complete closure is not possible in this
corridor.
. Proposed Council Meetinq Calendar for 2006
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked if there are any requests for change of dates in the
proposed calendar which was distributed a few weeks ago to Council.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting
DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC., FORM NO. 10148
November 7,2005 Page 17
Held 20
Mr. McCash suggested that the Council meeting on April 17 be moved to Tuesday, April 18
due to the Easter holiday travel. He also suggests that the Council meeting on Monday,
July 3 be moved to Monday, July 10 because of the Tuesday, July 4 holiday. There may
be staff members who will be out of town over the July 4th holiday weekend.
Mrs. Boring commented that she is not opposed to the April meeting change, but believes
.. that taking the meeting to July 10th interferes with the summer break in the schedule.
Discussion followed about the moving of the July meeting to the 10th.
It was the consensus of Council to adjust the July meeting from July 3 to July 10.
Mr. Keenan pointed out that the Tuesday, January 3 meeting could be shifted to Monday,
January 9, as there are five Mondays in January and it would not preclude having the
study session and second meeting in January. This would provide for the second meeting
on January 23 and the study session on January 30. This would allow for holiday travel
time for those with college students and also not interfere with the bowl games. The staff
would likely be taking vacation the week prior, and this would allow more time for packet
preparation.
Discussion followed.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher summarized that the changes proposed are:
Tuesday, January 3 moved to Monday, January 9; Tuesday, January 17 moved to
Monday, January 23; study session moved to Monday, January 30; Monday, April 17
moved to Tuesday, April 18; Monday, July 3 moved to Monday, July 10.
The Clerk pointed out that Council goal setting dates are not included in this schedule and
will need to be added later.
Mr. Keenan moved to approve the schedule as amended.
Mr. McCash seconded the motion.
Vote on the motion: Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mayor Chinnici-
Zuercher, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Ms. Salay, yes.
CITY MANAGER/STAFF REPORTS
There were no further staff reports.
COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE/COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS
Mr. Reiner encouraged all citizens to vote in the election tomorrow.
Mr. McCash. Administrative Committee Chair noted:
1. Two applications have been received for the vacancy on the Architectural Review
Board. He is suggesting interviews for either November 14 or November 16, prior
to the scheduled meetings at 6 p.m. It was the consensus of Council to schedule
the interviews for 6 p.m. on Monday, November 14.
2. He understands that there is an agreement in process and potentially to be
executed with the soccer clubs. Will those be brought to Council before being
executed? There are some concerns that they may not necessarily be in line with
what Council's desires were regarding the middle tier organization and carding.
With Mr. McDaniel away, much of the history is not available.
Ms. Ott responded that on November 21, two of the agreements will be brought to
Council under resolutions - one with Ohio Premier, the girls select soccer league and
one with OFC, the boys select soccer league. At this point, the middle tier organization
has some firming up to do in regard to legal recognition, insurance, etc. That
agreement is not yet ready for Council consideration.
Mr. McCash asked if Council will have copies of the proposed agreements.
Ms. Ott responded that these will be provided in the packet for November 21. If
Council Members have other concerns, they should contact her. The long-standing
policy under which the agreements were drafted is that recreational soccer is the
priority for the City.
Mr. McCash responded that he has heard issues regarding carding and middle tier
organization and how different tournaments operate. Council has discussed all of this
previously.
Ms. Ott stated that OFC has a preference about how they would like this to be
addressed, and her understanding is that it is in line with Council's direction.
Mrs. Borinq:
1. Posed a legal question regarding the organizational meeting of Council for 2006
being held on January 9. Her current term ends on December 31,2005. What if
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting
DAYTON LEGAL BLANK INC FORM NO 10148
November 7, 2005 Page 18
Held 20
something occurs during the first week of January that would necessitate a Council
meeting?
Mr. Smith responded that he made some notes regarding the fact that the City would
be without a Mayor until the January 9 Council meeting vote and how that would
impact the Mayor's Court. The Mayor serves a two-year term that begins on the day of
the January election.
Mr. McCash stated that his understanding is that the Mayor's term continues until the
first meeting in the next year.
Mr. Smith responded that the Charter language states a two-year term. He will check
and report back to Council.
2. Asked if the Dublin Road/Brand Road roundabout can be opened without all of the
utility work completed?
Mr. Hammersmith responded that seeding and grading work is in process, the bikepath
was paved today and will be backfilled, the poles are coming down tomorrow and the
pavers are scheduled to begin paving the first of next week. It will require three days
for paving and striping, with an opening date of November 18. Staff tried to move the
paving date up, but the date was established based on information from AEP a week
ago about their timeframes. AEP's work could not be completed until November 11.
The landscaping work will not be completed, but the street lighting is also being
installed at this time.
Mr. Keenan:
1. Thanked everyone for their support in the water and sewer line installation for
Indian Run. An elderly couple on the northwest side of the road did have bacteria
in their well prior to tap-in that constituted a health and safety issue for them.
2. Noted are several private roads within the developments along Avery-Muirfield,
-"It' such as the private road in the Mercedes dealership, the roadway along First
Watch, and the recent Daimler project. What is the City's recourse in ensuring that
those roads are kept in good condition? There are currently a lot of potholes on the
roadways.
Mr. Hammersmith responded that in the past, it has been a Code enforcement issue
between Planning and Engineering. Mercedes Drive is a classic example where letters
have been sent to the owners and some patching was then done. It is a Code matter,
as there are not covenants in place to address these.
Mr. Keenan stated that the only incentive for the owners to keep the roadways in good
repair is for the tenants to complain.
Mr. Hammersmith stated that many of these are drive-aisles providing access to
private parking lots. These would not be designated as private streets, per se.
Mr. Keenan stated that as Council reviews developments in the future, consideration I
should be given to addressing these considerations in the text to ensure maintenance
of the roads.
Mr. McCash added that there is language in the property maintenance Code that
addresses this.
3. He noted that a recent letter from Franklin County Soil and Water District indicated
that a number of jurisdictions, with the exception of Washington Township and the
City of Dublin have contributed funding. He asked staff to comment.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher commented that those are likely the jurisdictions that have
paid to date. A request was attached to the letter seeking payment from the City of
Dublin.
Ms. Grigsby clarified that this is not an invoice, but a request for funding from the
District.
Mr. Lecklider:
1. Commented regarding the Muirfield street signs and their visibility/reflectivity at
night. He has had occasion to travel more in this area because of having a
daughter attending Dublin Jerome. The signage visibility issue at night constitutes I
a traffic hazard, not only for the residents but more so for visitors. He recalls that
there was previous discussion about improving the signage, and asked about the
status.
Mr. Hammersmith responded that the Association was planning to include glass beads
in the paint when repainting the signs in order to improve the visibility.
Mr. Reiner added that there are some prototypes the Association is reviewing at this
time.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting
DAYTON LEGAL BLANK. INC. FORM NO. 10148
November 7, 2005 Page 19 II
Held 20
2. Noted that the Burgundy Room on Avery-Muirfield was apparently open on
Saturday evening and a large crowd was in attendance. There was some
discussion at Council about a need for improved signage, so he wonders how
people were able to locate the restaurant.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher clarified that this event was a special party given by the
owners for the Restaurant Association and chefs.
3. Noted for Chief Woo that he was recently northbound on Avery-Muirfield at
Perimeter Drive after 7 or 8 p.m. on a week night and observed emergency
equipment coming from the Shier Rings station. The pre-emption system was
apparently not working at this intersection or at Post Road in terms of tripping the
signal. He left a message for the fire department about this.
Chief Woo responded that not all of the vehicles have emitters, so if it was a training
exercise, the vehicles could have been responding and not tripping lights because they
are not equipped. Stations 95 and 92 do not have lights. There is the ability to find out
from the City Engineering department what actually was tripped and if the lights were
pre-empted.
4. He encouraged everyone to exercise their right to vote tomorrow.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher moved to adjourn to executive session for land acquisition
and legal matters. She noted that the meeting would be reconvened only to formally
adjourn. No further action will be taken.
Mr. Keenan seconded the motion.
Vote on the motion: Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mayor
Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Ms. Salay, yes.
The meeting was adjourned to executive session at 10:05 p.m.
The meeting was reconvened and formally adjourned at 11: 15 p.m.
....
-
Mayor - Presiding Officer
~c. ~
Clerk of Council