Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/02/2009RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting November 2, 2009 Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher called the Monday, November 2, 2009 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 Boring, Mr. Gerber, Mr. Keenan, Mr. Lecklider, Mr. Reiner and Ms. Salay. Staff members present were: Mr. Foegler, Ms. Grigsby, Mr. Smith, Mr. McDaniel, Chief Epperson, Mr. Thurman, Mr. Earman, Ms. Crandall, Mr. Hammersmith, Mr. Hahn, Mr. Harding, Mr. Gunderman, Ms. Willis, Ms. Kennedy, Jr. Tyler, Ms. Nardecchia, Mr. Edwards, Ms. Adkins, Ms. Wawskiewicz, and Ms. Colley. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mr. Lecklider led the Pledge of Allegiance. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Mr. Keenan seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mr. Salay, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Vice Mayor Boring, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes. • Regular Meeting of October 19, 2009 Mr. Gerber moved approval of the minutes. SPECIAL PRESENTATION/PROCLAMATIONS • Update from Dublin Foundation -Chris Kelley, Council Representative to the Board and Gayle Holton, Board President. Chris Kelley addressed Council and introduced Ms. Holton. Ms. Kelley noted that the handout lists the grants by the Dublin Foundation over the past year. She reported that Larry Allen, Past President of the Dublin Foundation passed away in May of 2009. A tribute to him will be made at the Emerald Celebration to be held in February of 2010. Ms. Holton noted that the Foundation has become aware of a perception problem about the Foundation in the community. Many do not know they exist. Recently, they held several strategic planning sessions and are initiating a public relations and marketing campaign to build awareness of the Foundation. They want to build a donor base and capture those monies in Dublin for projects in Dublin. Anew board member has fundraising experience, and will be helpful in this endeavor. They have also initiated an investment strategy for the Foundation. She acknowledged Council's grant for the Emerald Celebration, previously known as the Emerald Ball. They are working with the Schools and the Committee to develop the skits and backdrops for the celebration, which were part of the grant. Ms. Kelley announced that in recognition of the Bicentennial, the City has been selected as the honoree for the 2010 Emerald Celebration. It will be held on Saturday, February 27, 2010, and she invited Council and their guests to attend. Congratulations to the City of Dublin! Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher responded that the City is honored with this selection during the Bicentennial Year. She thanked them for the update regarding activities of the Foundation. CORRESPONDENCE • Notice to Legislative Authority -Stock Ownership Change - D5 and D6 Permits - LaScala Ristorante, Inc., dba LaScala Ristorante & Patio, 4199 W. Dublin-Granville Road There was no request by Council for a hearing on the change of stock ownership for these permits. CITIZEN COMMENTS There were no comments from citizens. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes_of Dublin City Council Meeting LEGISLATION November 2, 2009 Page 2 ?~ SECOND READING/PUBLIC HEARING -ORDINANCES Ordinance 49-09 (Amended) Amending Chapter 35 of the Codified Ordinances to Revise the Fee and Service Charge Revenue/Cost Comparison System and Establishing a Schedule of Fees and Service Charges for City of Dublin Services. Ms. Grigsby stated that the Finance Committee of City Council met on October 19 to review the updated cost of services study, as prepared by the consultant and staff. At the last Council meeting, Mr. Keenan provided a recap of the items reviewed and amendments that staff was directed to incorporate into the legislation. The memo accompanying the ordinance identifies those issues. Staff is recommending adoption of the amended ordinance at this time. Vote on the Ordinance: Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Vice Mayor Boring, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes. Ordinance 58-09 Accepting the Updated Estimated Average Per Acre Value of Land for Park Fees in Lieu of Land Dedication. Mr. Hahn stated that there is no additional information to report. Vote on the Ordinance: Mr. Gerber, yes; Vice Mayor Boring, yes; Vice Mayor Boring, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Ms. Salay, yes. Ordinance 59-09 Authorizing the Provision of Certain Incentives to Mindleaders, Inc. to Induce it to Extend the Lease Term on Its Facility within the City and the Expansion of its Operations and Workforce within the City, and Authorizing the Execution of an Economic Development Agreement. Mr. McDaniel stated that afollow-up report has been provided in the packet, responding to questions raised regarding any previous incentives provided to Mindleaders and their performance. Ms. Salay noted that she appreciates having this detailed information. Mr. McDaniel stated that Doug Bruce, Senior Director of Human Resources and Administration, Mindleaders, Inc. is present tonight. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher thanked Mr. Bruce for the company's decision to remain in Dublin. Doug Bruce, 5500 Glendon Court stated that they are delighted that they were able to extend the lease and can grow and prosper in Dublin. He thanked Mr. McDaniel and his team for their work on this agreement. Vote on the Ordinance: Vice Mayor Boring, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes. Ordinance 60-09 Authorizing the Provisions of Certain Incentives for the Purposes of Encouraging the Location of Delta Energy Holdings, LLC within the City of Dublin, which Include Declaring Improvements to Certain Real Property to be Developed as a Delta Energy Holdings, LLC Facility to be a Public Purpose, Describing the Public Infrastructure Improvements to Be Made to Benefit the Parcels of Such Development, Requiring the Owner Thereof to Make Service Payments in Lieu of Taxes, Providing for the Franklin County Treasurer to Distribute Service Payments to the Dublin City School District in the Amount It Would Otherwise Receive Absent the Exemption, Creating a Municipal Public Improvement Tax Increment Equivalent Fund for the Deposit of the Balance of Such Service Payments, and Authorizing the Execution of a Real Estate Purchase Contract for the Sale of Parcel 273-010591-00, Economic Development Agreement and Tax Increment Financing Agreement, and Declaring an Emergency. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council _ Meeting November 2, 2009 Page 3 Mr. McDaniel noted that a report was provided in the packet in response to questions raised by Council on October 19. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked about the necessity of a guardrail for this development. Mr. McDaniel responded this was included as a placeholder, in case there was a need for it in relation to the pond nearby. He noted that the pond will be a shallow, reflecting pool. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher responded that if a guard rail is needed, she would suggest that the materials be consistent with the architecture and materials of the building. Mr. Keenan pointed out that he will continue to be mindful of the intersection of Perimeter and Emerald Parkway as the area develops. He has had discussions with Mr. Hammersmith about this previously. Mr. McDaniel noted that there are some minor changes to the agreement subsequent to the first reading: 1. In the initial draft, a minimum amount of square footage was noted as 20,000. This will be lowered to 18,000. He added that it is Delta's intent to begin with 20,000 square feet, and they can have a maximum of 35,000 square feet with future phases. 2. Construction must be initiated within 12 months after closing and completed within 24 months. The intent is not to have the land dormant after sale, and that the project proceeds. Delta is agreeable to this. 3. The sharing of the cost of the stormwater detention pond will be based upon a proportionate amount of acreage feeding into it versus capacity. He introduced Sheri Tackett, Founder and President of Delta Energy. Prior to forming Delta Energy, she held senior management positions within Ashland, Inc. She founded Ashland Energy Services in 1997, which later became Delta Energy. Ms. Tackett, President of Delta Energy and Dublin resident acknowledged the efforts of Mr. McDaniel on the economic development agreement. She provided information on the company, noting that there are two business segments: consulting services for companies without their own energy department, serving some of the largest consumers of energy in the world; and secondly, they have a supply business, purchasing and selling natural gas. Many of the clients are local companies. They have a dedicated employee team, and since 1997 have enjoyed a retention rate of 98 percent. The company team has been recognized both locally and nationally, and they are proud of receiving an award as one of the best places to work in Central Ohio for the fourth year in a row. The culture of Delta Energy is one of giving back and serving others. They are also a recipient of a pillar award from Smart Business, recognizing them for giving back to others. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that Council looks forward to having Delta join the community. Mr. Gerber moved for emergency passage. Mr. Keenan seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mr. Lecklider, yes; Vice Mayor Boring, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes. Vote on the Ordinance: Mr. Gerber, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Vice Mayor Boring, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes. INTRODUCTION/FIRST READING -ORDINANCES Ordinance 62-09 Adopting the Annual Operating Budget for the Fiscal Year Ending December 31, 2010. Ms. Salay introduced the ordinance. Ms. Grigsby stated that two budget workshops are scheduled -the first on Monday, November 9 and the second on Wednesday, November 18. Staff will make any modifications as recommended by Council and requests adoption at the December 7 meeting. There will be a second reading/public hearing at the December 7 Council meeting. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council _ __ Mee__tina_ November 2, 2009 Page 4 Ordinance 63-09 Amending the Organizational Structure for the City of Dublin. Mr. Lecklider introduced the ordinance. Mr. Foegler noted that the analysis of the organizational structure was done in the context of many of the initiatives, challenges and priorities facing the City. The emphasis on changing economic conditions, increased emphasis on planning and development of the Bridge Street Corridor, some strategic planning initiatives, and the growing focus on sustainability have all been factors in the proposed structure brought to Council tonight. The exhibits provided include the current organizational structure last approved by Council (Exhibit A) and the proposed organizational restructuring (Exhibit B). He highlighted some elements of the restructuring and what it will accomplish: • Significantly strengthens the role of the Deputy City Managers whose focus will be more active involvement in the coordination of major organizational functions for which they have oversight responsibilities; • Provides a clear and focused communication reporting strategy between the City Manager's office and the many operating units; • Bundles the major organizational functions where there are natural linkages and relationships; • Aligns the major organizational functions with the core organizational priorities; • Maximizes strategic and operational communications capacity, benefitting the needs of the internal and external audiences; and • Institutionalizes the City's growing sustainability efforts by creating a designated function focused on sustainability planning and education implementation. The memo also provides some detail regarding the specific operations and rationale behind some of the restructuring that takes place in accordance with this ordinance. He offered to respond to any questions. Ms. Salay asked if he will review the implications of the reorganization at the operating budget workshops. Mr. Foegler responded that, currently, the structure as proposed provides no new staffing. The new operations have been created with existing staffing who will be moved internally. The memo does indicate that staff wants to evaluate some of the restructuring implications into the first half of 2010 in order to ensure that it can be accomplished with the redeployment of existing resources. It will be reviewed in the context of economic conditions. At this time, however, no additional resources are contemplated to be needed for this restructuring. There are also some space adjustments to be made in association with relocations of staff. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that it seems unusual not to have the important Human Resources function report directly to the City Manager. The most natural fit other than reporting directly to the City Manager would be with the Deputy overseeing Finance and Administration, due to the direct relationship of these operations with Human Resources. Mr. Foegler responded that staff can provide additional information to Council regarding their recommendation. Those were the two deputies considered for placement of this function. Mr. Gerber noted that he had the same thoughts regarding the Human Resources placement in the structure. In addition, Safety, Leisure Services, Strategic Planning, Organizational Development and Human Resources cover a wide range of disciplines and operations. He would be interested in hearing more of the thinking behind this proposed Deputy City Manager Department. Mr. Foegler responded that he can do so. He noted that in considering what was removed from that Deputy Manager's areas, Streets & Utilities, which are two of the largest operations -- the net increase in responsibilities is relatively minor. That Deputy has also had lead responsibility on many of the labor negotiations and has been actively involved historically in many human resources-related studies on RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Mnutes_of Dublin City Council Meetin` November 2, 2009 Page 5 compensation, health care, and others. This position has served as the lead on some of the strategic planning efforts that have leaned more toward organizational development, and there are strong working relationships between those two operations. In terms of net increase in responsibilities versus what was in place previously, there is less level of responsibility than with the previous structure. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked if staff could provide a more comprehensive definition of "sustainability" prior to the second reading. Mr. Foegler agreed to do so. Vice Mayor Boring asked for clarification about the timing of the vote on this ordinance. Is it November 16 or December 7? Mr. Foegler responded that it should be noted as November 16, which is the second reading/public hearing of the ordinance. Vice Mayor Boring stated that the memo indicates that the Deputy City Manager positions and Director positions will be analyzed. In the previous structure, the titles were "Deputy City Manager/Director" -but this has changed. Is the intent to remove such Director titles from the Deputy City Manager positions? Mr. Foegler responded that the emphasis is increasingly on the Deputy City Manager role and with these positions evolving into that being the primary responsibility of the roles over time. Mr. Keenan stated that perhaps the people filling these positions have not yet been identified, but could he provide Council with a chart including the names for those positions where it has been determined? Mr. Foegler responded that he can do so, but pointed out that Council's action would be taken on the structure and not the people in these positions. Mr. Keenan stated that he understands, noting that this exercise would be a visual tool to assist him in reviewing the proposal. There will be a second reading/public hearing at the November 16 Council meeting. Ordinance 64-09 Amending Chapters 51 and 52 Establishing User Fees and Capacity Charges for Sanitary Sewer and Water Systems. Mr. Lecklider introduced the ordinance. Ms. Grigsby stated that as part of the financial review done in the summer for the CIP, staff reviews and evaluates the water and sewer funds, looking at projections for revenue as well as operating costs, capital improvements projects, and the existing and projected debt for both operations. As part of that review, similar to what occurred in 2007 when the most recent adjustments were approved, staff determined that adjustments to the user fees are now warranted. (The cover memo describes these changes in detail.) For the water fund, there is a slight reduction in the user fee and reallocation of that portion to the sewer fund. For the sewer fund, there is an additional $.25 per thousand cubic feet (MCF) for 2010 and an additional $.25 per MCF for 2011. These increases relate mainly to the large debt service obligations in the sewer fund for the Upper Scioto West Branch Sewer and the relining projects, which have been ongoing over the past few years. Mr. Keenan noted that in the chart, it appears that the 2010 reallocation represents no change; there is simply $.25 taken out of one account and put into another. Ms. Grigsby stated that is one portion; there is also $.25 added in the sewer fund so that there is a net increase of $.25 per MCF or about $3.30 per year for an average user. Mr. Keenan stated that it appears that the increase for 2010 is slightly under two percent and 1.83 percent for 2011. This will keep the charges in line to cover ongoing maintenance. Ms. Grigsby confirmed this. She noted that as far as water and sewer operations, better information is now available in regard to ongoing maintenance costs and the actual systems. Much of the information was obtained as part of the Community Plan RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting November 2, 2009 Page 6 update adopted in 2007. Moving forward, and once better information is available regarding the sewer relining project, staff anticipates there may be additional increases for the sewer. Mr. Keenan asked about the relationship between the debt issuance and these projects. Ms. Grigsby responded that $2 million of the issuance related to the sewer relining project and the sewer fund. Mr. Keenan noted that this would not take into account any changes Columbus would make in regard to water surcharges, correct? Ms. Grigsby agreed, noting that this includes only the Dublin surcharge. Any other charges imposed by Columbus would be an additional charge. Ms. Salay noted that the Upper Scioto West project will be repaid in 2018, and she recalls that the sewer surcharges were initiated in response to that project, correct? Ms. Grigsby stated that is correct. Ms. Salay asked if the surcharges will drop off in 2018. Ms. Grigsby stated that there is some potential that the charges could be reduced. However, based upon the aging of the system, there may be additional fee increases. As the update is done each year, there will be continuing evaluation. Mr. Keenan noted that expansion to the west and northwest was contemplated, and the economy has now impacted that. What is the status of meeting the capacity projections made? Ms. Grigsby responded that the capacity of the Upper Scioto West Branch Interceptor was always sized to have more capacity than what was anticipated coming into the system. It was designed to ensure there was sufficient capacity if the system were to be extended through the negotiated area. Mr. Keenan stated that the City projections were not dependent upon receiving this revenue, correct? Ms. Grigsby stated that is correct. There will be a second reading/public hearing at the November 16 Council meeting. INTRODUCTION/PUBLIC HEARING -RESOLUTIONS Resolution 54-09 Supporting the I-270/US 33 Interchange Improvements, Phase 1 State of Ohio Funding Application as Submitted to the Transportation Review Advisory Council. (TRAC) Ms. Salay introduced the resolution. Ms. Willis, Engineering Manager noted that this resolution is to support the interchange improvement upgrade Phase One, as submitted to the Transportation Review Advisory Council (TRAC) -- the state funding committee working through ODOT. She reviewed the project and process: • The I-270/US 33 interchange was constructed in 1967 when Dublin had 670 residents and was primarily agricultural in nature. This construction set the stage for the explosive growth that has occurred in Dublin over the past 40 years and has helped Dublin build one of the state's largest economic engines along these two corridors. • This interchange is 40 years old and operates much the same today as when it was constructed. No significant upgrades have occurred since that time. There are now 34,500 employees in the area of service, and this also serves 3,000 employees from Honda, 3,000 employees from the Industrial Parkway area, and 800 from Scotts. • In 2005, Marysville and southeast Union County had approximately 13 million square feet of commercial developed space with 19,500 employees. MORPC estimates that by 2020, there will be 22 million square feet of developed commercial space in Marysville and southeast Union County, with 38,000 employees. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes. ~f Dublin City Council _ Meeting November 2, 2009 Page 7 • Dublin currently has 22 million square feet of developed commercial space and another 17.5 million square feet undeveloped. • Using MORPC projections, the area highlighted in yellow could experience the addition of 3,000 jobs over 15 years. • The interchange problems are related to safety and congestion. The US 33/161 bridge over I-270 has a crash rate five times worse than the statewide average and is ranked No. 10 in the state for freeway crashes, based on frequency, location, and severity. • The interchange is on the verge of failure because the volume is well over 20 percent of the capacity it was designed to carry. The interchange will be at full system failure by the time the solution can be constructed, so it is important to be in the state's pipeline for future projects. • The problem also relates to decreased productivity, as businesses rely upon safe, efficient and free-flowing traffic for access. • Congestion costs are in the range of $1,600 per person in lost time and fuel on an annual basis. UPS estimates that local businesses lose $115 million per year for every five minutes of traffic delay. • Emissions and stopped traffic also impact the environment. She noted that there is a phased solution for rebuilding this interchange, and is based upon financial needs and planning, and prioritization. The City of Dublin has worked with ODOT to identify the best immediate and long-term beneficial solution for the interchange and surrounding freeway system. She noted that the first portion to be constructed would be a new northbound to westbound flyover ramp. Other projects must follow, including the westbound to northbound ramp, the eastbound to southbound, and finally some lane additions. The lane additions will not be useful until these ramps and congestion on the ramps is resolved. The lane additions, therefore, would occur in later years. In terms of strategy, she noted the following steps: • To work with the State to secure funding for the next few steps of the process, the preliminary planning steps. • The application has been submitted to the Transportation Review Advisory Council (TRAC). The group consists of nine members, including the Director of ODOT who serves as Chairperson; six representatives appointed by the Governor; and one appointment each by the Speaker of the Ohio House of Representatives and the President of the Ohio Senate. The group looks at projects submitted statewide. • TRAC determines all major state transportation priorities for projects over $5 million. Officially, the TRAC ranks projects based on the project's ability to increase mobility, provide increased connectivity, increasing the accessibility of the region for economic development, increasing the capacity of the transportation facility, and reducing congestion. • One of the newest focuses of TRAC is the ability of the project to also focus on job retention and creation. The following has been done to date: • In July of 2009, staff submitted the application to TRAC and on November 12, 2009, the public hearing will take place at TRAC. The project will be presented to TRAC and the case made for funding. In February of 2010, the TRAC decisions will be made to determine which projects are included on their list and the funding availability. The TRAC is now considering projects for the 2010 through 2015 fiscal years for the State. Staff understands that if successful at the hearing process, funding for the interchange would not be provided until the 2014-2015 time frame. For this reason, it is critical to be in the pipeline now in order to have the planning studies done, which are required prior to construction. • The City plans to work with the federal congressional delegation in trying to secure funding for construction for the northbound to westbound flyover ramp. She provided information on the cost of this project. • The City has applied through the State TRAC funding application for $9.6 million of state money. There is a 20 percent local match requirement for the TRAC application, and the City has programmed the $2.4 million funding in RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting November 2, 2009 Page 8 2014 in the CIP. These total $12 million, which provides for the cost of preliminary engineering, interchange footprint, interchange justification study, environmental documents, detailed construction drawings, right-of-way acquisition, and utility relocation. It includes all items prior to construction. • Federal funding would then be needed of $30-33 million to construct the ramp, for a total project cost of Phase One of $40-45 million. • She pointed out that the interchange footprint and the environmental documents will cover the entire interchange -not just one ramp. The detailed construction drawings, right-of-way acquisition and utility relocation would focus on this specific ramp project. • A presentation was made to the Columbus Chamber of Commerce and MORPC. As regional partners, they submit a priority ranking of all projects to the state. As a result of the work done to date, the interchange received the third highest priority project in the region for projects not yet programmed in Central Ohio. • Staff has met with area businesses and surrounding jurisdictions to seek their support, asking them to write letters supporting the project. Residents are helping as well, responding to an a-mail blast with a draft letter included. The website currently has links to information about the interchange project and includes sample letters. There has been a good response from all of these groups to date. • Staff will present to the Union County Commissioners on November 9 and will ask for a resolution in support of the project. They have been receptive to this request in discussions. She offered to respond to questions. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked for the specific time frame for the project, if all goes well. Ms. Willis responded that if, as ODOT has indicated, funding can be anticipated in 2014, it will require 2 to 2-1/2 years to complete the planning studies and design work. Potentially, construction could then take place in 2017. This is a multi-year effort, and the City must go to TRAC each year to keep the project in the forefront. Mr. Reiner asked if there is any way to obtain parallel funding over and above the TRAC funding. Ms. Willis responded that staff has submitted for a Tier 2 project, a project not yet ready for construction. Staff is actively seeking other funding sources, such as Ohio Public Works Commission, for construction. Currently, with the state, the TRAC is the best means to obtain the $9.6 million in funding. Mr. Reiner asked if the City can only apply for one portion of the project at one time. Ms. Willis responded that the preliminary engineering will determine the interchange footprint. Through the I-270 MIS study conducted several years ago, all of the conceptual alternatives identified the northbound to westbound ramp as the first phase that needs to occur. The concepts for the interchange all depict a flyover ramp. This is also one of the most congested ramps and therefore needs to be addressed first. The other ramps cannot be pursued until the preliminary engineering is completed. Mr. Reiner asked if the flyover ramp would require widening of SR 161. Ms. Willis responded that a widening would be needed for the merge area only for this ramp. Mr. Reiner asked if visuals will be included at the presentations, depicting the congestion at all of the interchange, resulting in safety hazards. Ms. Willis responded that the presentation with the TRAC is a 10-minute time period, so there is a limit to what can be presented. Some businesses will also testify on behalf of Dublin's project in that 10 minutes. There are some photos which will be shared. Mr. Reiner applauded the business involvement in this effort, as Dublin is often identified as a core area for Central Ohio businesses and employment. Mr. Gerber asked if there is any way to expedite this. What he has heard is that a new roadway would not be constructed until 2017, under the process as described. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Mi_n__utes of _ Dublin City Council _ MeetnL._ I LEGAL BLANK. WC FOFf"1 NO 'U1.9R November 2, 2009 Page 9 eld 20 Ms. Willis responded it is a very likely scenario. Staff will work to expedite this as much as possible, but must work within the state parameters and the TRAC funding cycles. Mr. Gerber stated that there has been awareness of the need for this interchange improvement for quite a while. What is the cause of the delay? Ms. Willis responded that the State identified the project as part of their strategic plan. They were to bring forward the projects for funding. What has happened, however, is that the TRAC has not convened since 2006 because there was overprogramming of projects and no funds available to fund them. This is the first time since the strategic plan was published that the City has had an opportunity to apply for funding. Mr. Gerber stated that he recalls discussion of an expansion of US33, from I-270 west to Avery-Muirfield. Is that still planned? Ms. Willis responded that this was discussed. However, when a safety study was conducted on US 33, it was found that the real congestion and safety issues on 33 are a result of the interchange. Adding lanes on US33 does not resolve the problem. Mr. Gerber noted that there are issues as well for those coming south on Avery- Muirfield and then heading east on 33 to access I-270. Ms. Willis responded that because the interchange is a cloverleaf design, with four loop ramps in all four quadrants. Once a weaving area begins to fail, all of the congestion occurs in the interconnected loop ramps. Addressing one loop ramp will bring significant relief for the others. Mr. Keenan noted that there were a large number of business group participants involved in the meeting, as well as State representatives and the Mayor of Marysville. Who represented Council at this meeting? Mr. Foegler responded that senior administrative staff from Dublin attended. He noted that Marysville Mayor Schmenk attended in her role as Governmental Affairs representative of Scotts. Staff has also requested that the City of Marysville pass a resolution of support for the project. Mr. Keenan stated that if elected officials are attending these meetings, it would be good to have Dublin City Council represented as well. Mr. Foegler stated that staff invited the state delegation of elected officials to the meeting to inform them of progress to date. The intent of the meeting was largely to mobilize the business community. Vote on the Resolution: Vice Mayor Boring, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher thanked staff for the work done to date on support for this project. Mr. Foegler noted that from the Administration's perspective, the importance of this interchange cannot be overstated. The project is not on anyone's "radar" as an improvement project at this time, and it is important to overcome this first hurdle to have it included on the list. It must continue to be a focus in the years ahead as well. But absent overcoming this first hurdle, it will not be on any list as a priority. Mr. Gerber stated that in a state that is struggling to retain jobs, it is amazing that the system in place will require 9-10 years to complete phase one. Mr. Foegler agreed, noting that from an Ohio perspective, the largest company by sales in the state, Honda, is impacted, together with one of the largest employment centers in the state, which is Dublin. From a state economic development perspective, there is not a more important interchange to serve the region. Mr. Foegler responded that in terms of the US33 widening, the state has emphasized that until the interchange has more capacity, adding more lanes to US33 will not occur. Staff will keep Council apprised of the progress going forward. Mr. Reiner added that Dublin could be impacted negatively from a development perspective, if the improvement is not made. ~i RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes. of Dublin City Council Meeting November 2, 2009 Page 10 Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked which projects were rated above Dublin's in the MORPC region ranking. Ms. Willis stated that the number two project is the City of Columbus -North High Street, adding pedestrian connectivity and sidewalks. The first project in ranking was the I-70/Alum Creek intersection on the east side. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that perhaps Dublin needs more advocates for their projects. From an economic development standpoint, Dublin is an important hub in the region and the state. She encouraged staff to analyze further what could be done to lift up the importance of this interchange to the region and state. There is a broad area impacted, including Marysville and the 33 corridor. Mr. Keenan asked staff to provide a list of the TRAC members to Council Mr. Foegler responded that meetings are scheduled with the members of the federal delegation and with more key state officials, prior to the TRAC hearing. It is a great opportunity for a northwest region intergovernmental cooperation effort to make this happen. STAFF COMMENTS • Report regarding Establishment of Railroad Quiet Zones Mr. Hammersmith stated that staff will present their report regarding establishment of railroad quiet zones at Cosgray Road and Rings Road. The report will include an overview of the request before Council, to establish a quiet zone at Cosgray Road and Rings Road; some background regarding previous discussion by Council in 2005 and 2006; a summary of the requirements for quiet zones; the background on quiet zones, including legal analysis; and a recommendation from staff regarding how to proceed with pursuing quiet zones, if Council so directs. He introduced Ms. Wawszkiewicz, City civil engineer. Ms. Wawszkiewicz stated that this information is provided in follow-up to the petition from Ballantrae residents received on September 21, 2009. They have requested the City make improvements to the railroad crossings at Cosgray Road and Rings Road in order to establish a quiet zone. The Woodlands of Ballantrae is just over 500 feet from the tracks, and the Ballantrae subdivision is'/4 mile from the tracks. She noted the following: • The Cosgray Road crossing is within the City of Dublin corporation limits, but Rings Road crossing is in Franklin County and is maintained by them with CSX rail. There are approximately 22 trains using this track per day, with a speed of 50 mph. The track on Cosgray Road has 600 vehicles crossing per day, and Rings Road has 2,400 per day. • The City looked at these crossings previously with respect to a wayside horn system. This system plays the recording of the horn at the roadway, so that it is the same amount of noise but a more limited space, as the noise does not travel along the rail line. That system was programmed for a couple of years in the CIP, but was not pursued due to lack of interest and momentum. In the meantime, staff has learned that CSX does not support these systems, and does not have any wayside horns in their systems across 23 states. They would not likely approve them. • In the current review done by staff, there is a federal law which requires the horns to be sounded at every public grade crossing for vehicle and pedestrian safety, as the rail has priority in the transportation system. An update to the law in 2005 allows public authorities to establish a quiet zone, or an area where the locomotives are not required to sound their horns, unless there is a conflict on the tracks. This would be implemented by installing supplemental safety measures (SSMs). They would offset the risk of not blowing the horn. • The first two methods are four quadrant gates and median barriers. The other method approved in the ruling is roadway closure at the crossing, which is not something the City is interested in at these locations. It would be a permanent RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes ~f Dublin City Council Meeting November 2, 2009 Page 11 closure; a temporary closure, which would be at night and the horns would still sound during the day; or creating cone-way street, The first method would involve adding two additional gates to the existing systems, which would prohibit vehicles from circumventing the gate. Another SSM would be the installation of a raised median, which would function by preventing traffic from going around the gate. She outlined the steps to establish a quiet zone: 1. Submit a written Notice of Intent to CSX and to the Federal Rail Administration. 2. Complete the national railroad inventory for the existing conditions. 3. Enter into an agreement with CSX to have them conduct a field review and evaluate what exists. 4. Determine with CSX the appropriate SSMs needed and install them. 5. Update the national railroad inventory to include the additional SSMs added. 6. Document the reduced risk of silencing horns by providing SSMs. 7. Install signage. 8. Notify all appropriate parties, including law enforcement, rail administration, CSX. There is a 21-day period for CSX to comply with the quiet zone. The requirements to be able to consider adding supplemental safety measures are: 1. Gates and lights in place, which they currently are. 2. Constant warning time and power warning light, and other standard safety equipment to be in place. 3. The zone must be one-half mile in length. In looking at Cosgray Road crossing, the Rings Road crossing would have to be included, as it is less than '/z mile away. That would require cooperation from Franklin County, as they maintain Rings Road at that crossing. 4. The two crossings of focus are Cosgray Road and Rings Road. There is the opportunity, however, to consider a broader approach by working with other communities to establish a greater quiet zone. From the crossings at 161 to Leap Road in Hilliard would be six miles, and Hilliard has initiated the process of a quiet zone for their crossings at Davidson and Leap Road. They have filed the notice of intent and done the field review with CSX and FRA. 5. The longer the zone, the better the effect, but it is costly. The initial estimates, based on discussion with CSX indicate: • Preliminary engineering and determination of which SSMs are needed will cost approximately 15,000 per crossing. • The construction and installation of the SSMs is approximately $300,000 for the four quadrant gates per crossing. • Replacement of atwo-quadrant gate and adding a median would be approximately $200,000 per crossing. • Using the existing gates and adding a median only as a SSM would be approximately $50,000 per crossing. • Additional costs may be incurred to bring the crossings up to minimum safety levels before the SSMs are added. • There are also costs for detailed design work and ongoing maintenance costs for SSMs once installed. She noted that the funding options are more limited than initially anticipated. • Funding through Ohio Rail Development Commission and CSX is only considered if crossings are eliminated, which brings the best safety benefit to the rail system. They do not fund any other types of SSMs. • The deadline for the stimulus (ARRA) funding has passed, so these funds are not available. • Franklin County has indicated in preliminary discussions that they support pursuing the quiet zone, but they need to know the magnitude of the project before committing any funding. • Staff has been invited to the Washington Township Trustees meeting on November 10 to gauge their interest in pursuing a quiet zone with the City of Dublin. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council. Meeting _ DAYTON LEGAL BLANK. INC,_FORM NO._t OtnB Held -- • The City of Hilliard and City of Columbus have both indicated their interest in discussing pursuit of a quiet zone with Franklin County and the City of Dublin. • Staff can also reach out to ODOT, Madison County and Darby Township, if Council desires staff to proceed with investigating a quiet zone up to the SR 161 crossing. There are three cities in Ohio that have established quiet zones: Brook Park with three crossings and Moraine with a single crossing. Both of these have used 100 percent local funds to establish their quiet zones. A larger quiet zone was established in Springfield, with 23 crossings. They did have some outside funding sources related to the closure of five of their crossings. They also were able to obtain stimulus funding, due to the timing. If Council wants to pursue a quiet zone, the five next steps in order are: • Ongoing dialogue with adjacent jurisdictions regarding whatever limits Council wants to pursue for the length of the zone; • File the notice of intent with CSX and FRA. The notice must come from the jurisdiction which maintains the roadway, so Dublin could only submit for Cosgray Road. The other jurisdictions would submit for their crossings. • CSX would then do the field review and establish the level of preliminary engineering needed at each crossing. Staff is estimating the preliminary engineering at $15,000 per crossing. • SSMs and associated costs could then be determined. • Report back to Council regarding the costs for the SSMs, and discuss source of funding and the time frame for implementation. Mr. Reiner stated that he is interested in the use of the existing gates and bollards for a quiet zone. Mr. Hammersmith responded that this decision is up to CSX, and is an item to be reviewed in the onsite diagnostic review. Mr. Reiner stated that $15,000 seems a high price for this, if the existing equipment could be utilized. Mr. Hammersmith stated that staff has provided an upper limit for the preliminary engineering. It may be less costly, but could be up to $15,000. Mr. Reiner stated that it would be necessary to reach outside of the jurisdiction to have two crossings with SSMs, as only one crossing is in Dublin. Mr. Hammersmith agreed, based on the distance between the two crossings at Cosgray and at Rings Road. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that she assumes what exists today at the crossings was installed by CSX years ago. Is that correct? Mr. Hammersmith responded that it is possible, but it could have been funded by PUCO. Staff did not ask this question. There are two quadrant gates today, but in order to be considered a quiet zone, the SSMs must be added to prevent motorists from going around the gate. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher added that there would be limited reason for CSX to indicate the crossing does not need a complete upgrade, in view of the age of the existing gates. Mr. Hammersmith responded that based on his discussion with CSX, the focus is on what would be needed to comply with the SSM requirements to create the quiet zone. In Hilliard, a power failure indicator light was needed at one crossing to inform the engineer of a power outage. He does not believe CSX views this as an opportunity to upgrade their system. Mr. Gerber asked if there are safety records available forjurisdictions which have implemented quiet zones. Mr. Hammersmith responded that they are too new to have such records, but staff can check further about this. Brook Park indicated there are some issues with compliance by train crews and operators, and how to enforce the quiet zone with the railroad. November 2, 2009 Page 12 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council .Meeting November 2, 2009 Page 13 Mr. Lecklider noted that the report indicates that a quiet zone is not guaranteed to eliminate all locomotive horn noise related to the CSX lines. Could he clarify this? Mr. Hammersmith responded that the train crew and operator of the locomotive always have the option to blow the horn if needed, based on a safety issue - a pedestrian or animal on the rail, for example. It does require a good reason for doing so. Ms. Wawszkiewicz added that the bells at the crossing would still sound for the drivers, and the engine, wheel and track noise would continue to exist. It will not be a completely silent environment, even if a quiet zone is implemented. Mr. Lecklider asked about the cost of preliminary engineering. Is Dublin considering the preliminary engineering with respect to the Cosgray Crossing only? Mr. Hammersmith responded that, at a minimum, staff would recommend doing the preliminary engineering for Cosgray and Rings, which would be a total of $30,000. If Council directs staff to continue the interjurisdictional discussion with Columbus and Franklin County to extend the zone out to Hayden Road and Avery, those two crossings would be an additional $15,000 each. The preliminary indication from Franklin County Engineer's office is that they would be willing to participate in the preliminary engineering costs. In Hilliard, he does not believe they necessarily spent $15,000 on preliminary engineering. He understands that Hilliard is using the raised medians as their SSM, and he understands that determination was done fairly quickly by CSX. Mr. Keenan asked if Hilliard has the preliminary engineering reports back. Mr. Hammersmith responded that they have their SSMs identified at this point. Mr. Keenan noted that his interest is not in the cost of the preliminary engineering for Hilliard's crossings, but what the report indicates. Mr. Hammersmith stated that staff can request a copy of this report from Hilliard. Mr. Keenan responded that this would be useful information for this effort. Mr. Lecklider asked about the Houchard Road crossing. At the last discussion of this topic, it was commented that the hope for the future was that as the COIC develops, there would be interest in a quiet zone in that location as well. What is Engineering's opinion with respect to that more northern crossing being part of this initiative? Mr. Hammersmith responded that staff would recommend that a Notice of Intent be filed for that crossing as well, and to work with the other jurisdictions for the Avery and Hayden Run crossings. Staff would recommend having an onsite field diagnostic review with CSX, which will provide a good indication of what will be needed. Mr. Keenan asked what jurisdiction Houchard Road lies in. Ms. Wawszkiewicz responded that it is in Washington Township, Franklin County. Mr. Keenan responded that he believes Washington Township would be interested in partnering on this. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that staff indicates that Franklin County would be willing to contribute the funds for the preliminary engineering for their crossings. Mr. Hammersmith responded that is correct, but Franklin County would have three crossings, which would require $45,000. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher clarified that Dublin's responsibility at this point would be $15,000 for preliminary engineering for one crossing, as Franklin County would pay $15,000 for the other one. Mr. Hammersmith agreed. Mr. Lecklider commented that he would be interested in exploring the feasibility of a quiet zone for the entire six mile stretch. Mr. Hammersmith responded that it is worthwhile to consider the longer zone, as there would be more benefit in terms of noise reduction. The fallback position would be for just the two crossings that are under discussion tonight -Cosgray and Rings. Mr. Gerber agreed with Mr. Lecklider, noting that having asix-mile stretch of quiet zone may abate more of the potential horn noise if compliance would become an issue RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council _ Meeting November 2, 2009 Page 14 for the train operators. He asked about the time frame for this process, from start to finish. Mr. Hammersmith responded that with an aggressive and idealistic situation for the two crossings at Cosgray and Rings Roads, they could be completed by the end of 2010 - if it involved a raised median. Most people have indicated that the process involves a two to three-year time frame. It is somewhat driven by funding sources and programming. Mr. Gerber noted that it appears that Norfolk Southern did offer some funding for the Springfield crossings. Is CSX inclined to donate funding? Mr. Hammersmith responded that they will not contribute, unless it involves closing of a crossing. They have indicated they don't necessarily favor quiet zones, as they believe train horns provide the safest environment. However, they will work with jurisdictions to create quiet zones. Based on the new federal rule, they do need to do so. Vice Mayor Boring asked if Council directs staff to proceed with the first four next steps identified in the process, what is the time frame to receive a report regarding the results. Mr. Hammersmith responded that it would require a minimum of three months, given the notices of intent, reaction from CSX and FRA, and scheduling the field reviews. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that staff has had some preliminary dialogue with all of the impacted jurisdictions within the six-mile area, but not any confirmation that they would submit a notice of intent. Mr. Hammersmith agreed, noting that the City of Columbus has not researched this and Dublin would need to share that information with them. Mr. Reiner asked if Dublin could take the lead for its two crossings. Mr. Hammersmith responded that he could do this for the one crossing on Cosgray Road. The notice of intent must come from the jurisdiction with the roadway crossing of the rail line. All indications from Franklin County are that they would support submitting such a notice for Rings Road. Ms. Salay thanked staff for their work on this, noting she is a proponent of this quiet zone in view of the high number of trains passing through each day. She pointed out that in the recent Bridge Street Corridor speaker series, it was highlighted that the future for communities involves passenger rail systems. If so, a quiet zone will become more important as rail traffic increases. It is important to consider the future of the COIC and include Houchard Road, if possible. In view of the government responsibility for addressing this, Ballantrae is a beautiful community and will include over 1,000 households when completed. The entire quality of life for the southwest quadrant of the City is impacted by the noise from these trains. It is a health, safety and welfare issue, as quiet zones are safer -especially for young drivers who may be impatient with train crossings. She supports directing staff to proceed up to step 5, and then returning to Council with a report about the cooperation commitment from otherjurisdictions. This is an opportunity to lead the region in establishing a quiet zone. The quality of life for Dublin residents and those along the six-mile stretch will be impacted favorably, as well as safety improved in the corridor. Mayor Chinnic-Zuercher asked for clarification, noting that the memo indicates Franklin County would not contribute to the preliminary engineering costs. Mr. Hammersmith clarified that in discussion with Mr. Palatas, he did indicate they would be willing to contribute to the preliminary engineering costs. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that she had a-mail discussion with ODOT Director Molitoris, who indicated she would request an ODOT staff member to research some opportunities for financing. Mr. Keenan added that he spoke with State Rep. Grossman about this, and she expressed interest in being involved as well. A good portion of this area lies within her jurisdiction. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS M'-_nutes of _ Dublin City Council November 2, 2009 Meeting Page 15 Mr. Gerber noted that he has spoken with Rep. Carney and State Senator Hughes about supporting this initiative. Rep. Carney serves on the House Transportation Committee. Mr. Gerber indicated that he supports this initiative going forward, based on the information presented. He would support staff proceeding with steps 1 through 4, securing support from other jurisdictions to create a quiet zone for the entire six-mile area, which would lead to greater safety. He is interested, too, in considering the costs of this project, and believes there may yet be other funding sources identified outside of the City. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that she did receive one a-mail and spoke with two other residents of Ballantrae who indicated they are not supportive of the City undertaking this, believing there are no problems with the horns as they exist. She asked Mr. Driscoll to come forward and comment regarding how the Edwards Company would participate in a solution. Charles Driscoll, The Edwards Company, 495 S. High Street stated that they are interested in participating in this solution. Mr. Keenan noted that many Council Members and staff have relationships with those in other jurisdictions, and it would be helpful to speak to them about supporting this effort. Mr. Hammersmith stated that the intent with the six-month time frame was to be in a position to report back to Council prior to the CIP discussions next year. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that she spoke with Rep. Carney today about the fiscal challenges of the state. She noted that Rep. Grossman also serves on the Transportation Committee. They will both be interested in a dialogue about how they can help. Mr. Gerber moved to direct staff to proceed with steps 1 through 4, as outlined in the staff report: 1. Ongoing dialogue with adjacent jurisdictions to maximize the limits of the quiet zone and pursue cooperative funding of any required improvements ~~ 2. File a written Notice of Intent with CSX and FRA (filed by each jurisdiction) ~~ 3. Complete field on-site diagnostics review with CSX at each crossing 4. CSX will determine the level of preliminary engineering needed at each crossing Mr. Keenan seconded the motion. Vice Mayor Boring noted that staff mentioned the CIP and potential programming. She assumes that Council will also consider at that time the broader quality of life issues such as failing septic systems and water for those who don't have City water and sewer. Mr. Hammersmith responded that Council will certainly have a discussion about priorities and their desire for what is to be pursued in projects at that time. Ms. Salay added that it is not possible to impact the quality of life of upwards of 1,000 people with a couple of wells, septic systems, or a water line serving a half dozen households. Vice Mayor Boring responded that there are residents of the City with failing septic systems, and there are health impacts when the septic system seeps into their wells. She is merely requesting that this be prioritized in the overall review for the CIP in the broader spectrum of the entire community who has waited for safe drinking water and for septic systems that do not fail and impact the health of entire neighborhoods. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Mnutes of Dublin City Council _Meetina November 2, 2009 Page 16 Vote on the motion: Ms. Salay, yes; Vice Mayor Boring, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes. STAFF COMMENTS There were no further staff comments. COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS/COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE Mr. Reiner: Commended staff for their efforts with the Spooktacular event. Although there was a significant reduction in the costs of the event this year, there was very little impact on the quality. He enjoyed the event very much! Mr. Gerber: 1. Noted that tomorrow, AEP will interrupt the power to several businesses near Perimeter Drive for potentially athree-hour period of time, 7-10 a.m. It would have been preferable for AEP to do so at a different time, as the morning is very busy for many of the businesses, such as Midwest Auto Group. AEP is essentially shutting down their business for a few hours. There should be some way that AEP could work with the City and be more sensitive regarding the high level of inconvenience. He thanked Mr. McDaniel for his efforts in communicating with AEP. 2. Thanked Mr. Hahn for his efforts to respond to citizen complaints during the BriHi construction. He notified the City Manager a couple of weeks ago that he has been contacted by several businesses in that area who are complaining of the lack of a sidewalk to their front door in an alleyway full of mud. The businesses in that area have endured a great deal over the year and a half that this construction project has been underway. Hopefully, the project will be completed this spring. He recently noticed many home-made signs along the streets or in the windows of the businesses. He recognizes the business climate is difficult and is very dependent upon signage. However, Dublin has established a standard of clean roadways, businesses and neighborhoods. This project is beginning to diminish the District's appearance and the image Dublin has worked for many years to create. He is aware that City staff, particularly Code Enforcement, is working on signage issues. Perhaps the City's web site could provide information regarding appropriate signage for business to promote their business. Mr. Foegler responded that staff would review the issue and provide afollow-up report to Council. Mr. Keenan: 1. Asked if the bond issue has been completed. Ms. Grigsby responded affirmatively, noting that the pricing occurred last week. Mr. Keenan asked how it differed from the original estimate. Ms. Grigsby responded that the rates have dropped slightly. For the refunding of the existing debt, the City will save $1.875 million. Two weeks ago, the projected savings were approximately $2 million, but the revised amount is still favorable and better than it would have been earlier in the year. 2. Received a letter from a Dublin High School student regarding the Dublin Road bikepath that leads to the public library and the Dublin Veterans Park. The resident's concern is that the speed limit on that section of road is 35 mph with very little space separating the road from the bikepath. In some areas, only three feet of mulch separate the path and road, which provides a risk to bikers and pedestrians who use this path. The resident asks if the City could address this in some manner. He applauds the young man for making this effort, and will pass along the letter to staff to follow up with him. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that for a government class, Dublin high school students are required to write letters to an elected official on a topic. Staff is available to assist with these responses. Ms. Salay: RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes_of Dublin City Council Meeting November 2, 2009 Page 17 1. Reported that she was contacted by a president of a homeowners association regarding an issue with residents who leave their garbage cans outside of the garage. She was asked if there is a City ordinance requiring screening of garbage receptacles, but the City's legislation requires only that trash containers be set out and put away within a reasonable timeframe. She contacted Mr. Langworthy by email about the issue, including the possibility of legislation requiring that trash containers not be set out more than 24 hours before the collection time and that they be put away/placed in a screened environment within a stated timeframe. She would be interested in moving this idea along, and inquired if Council members would support this type of legislation. Mr. Lecklider stated that there has been previous discussion on this topic in various neighborhoods. Council had expressed concern that with the rollout of the large recycling receptacles, they might be permanently stored in driveways or along the sides of homes. Mr. Smith responded that a couple of years ago, a question arose regarding this concern. The current City Code has been in place for many years and does not address trash containers, as are typically used today. It simply states that trash must be set out within a reasonable time frame, and if not picked up, it must be removed from the driveway/street. As indicated in the email exchange, it would be simple to add such language to the Code. There are essentially two issues to address: leavinc the trash container by the street and storing the containers outside the garage. Mr. Lecklider stated that Council Members were not prepared to discuss this issue tonight, but at some point he would like to determine if there is Council support for pursuing this. It can be anticipated that some residents would not be pleased with such an ordinance. What are Council's expectations, and what are the community's expectations? Does Council have the necessary resolve to follow through with this? Enforcement of such an ordinance would likely be complaint driven. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher responded that she does not believe adding a 24-hour time requirement would be appropriate. She is concerned, however, about a requirement that the trash receptacle be screened if left outside due to the level of specificity that would be necessary in the ordinance to ensure that the result wouldn't be something more unsightly than a trash container. She has mentioned certain situations of this type in the past to Mr. Burns, and his staff contacted the resident to inquire if they needed a smaller recycling bin that would fit inside their garage. That addressed the issue in some of those cases. She is undecided due to the level of specificity regarding screening that would be necessary. Ms. Salay stated that her personal preference would be a simple requirement that the containers be moved inside after 24 hours, versus allowing a screened environment. That could be difficult to enforce. She believes that most residents would be supportive of this type of ordinance. Mr. Lecklider stated that he agrees, but wanted other Council Members to understand that some residents may object to such legislation. Vice Mayor Boring stated that she has some concerns. How far should Council should go with this? The 24-hour rule might work. If enforcement is complaint driven, how will it be addressed? Mr. Smith responded that it would be addressed similar to any other Code violation. The resident would be given notice of the violation. Vice Mayor Boring inquired if the penalty would be a fine. Mr. Smith responded that would need to be determined. Mr. Keenan inquired how this would be handled in cases where there are no garages or places to store the containers. To him, philosophically, this constitutes more government and is not necessary. He understands the rationale of wanting to have a clean, beautiful neighborhood, and for the most part, people are cooperative. He does not believe a major problem exists in Dublin. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC.. FORM NO. 107x8 Held November 2, 2009 Page 18 Mr. Gerber noted that, often, deed restrictions address this situation. He is not aware of a problem in his neighborhood, although it seems the situation is occurring in some areas. He is not sure of where Council should draw a line. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked if it is the consensus of Council that this issue be referred to a committee for further study. Vice Mayor Boring responded that it seems a majority may agree with Mr. Keenan's philosophy; if so, it wouldn't be worthwhile referring it to committee. Mr. Gerber stated that he would prefer to refer it to staff to identify whether it is really a citywide issue. If it is, then it can be brought back to Council, and Council can refer it to the appropriate committee. Mr. Lecklider stated that this community has a history of valuing aesthetics, not only within its commercial corridors, but within its residential neighborhoods. Some neighborhoods do not have strong, forced and funded associations that take the initiative with these situations. He is not suggesting this is a widespread problem, but if the enforcement is complaint driven, it really shouldn't require a lot of staff time. Mr. Keenan asked if the community survey has already been circulated. If not, he would be curious to have input from the community about this, and whether they would support such legislation. Mr. Reiner stated that if this question is added to the community survey, the question should be if they believe there is an existing problem, or if they have neighbors who permit their trash receptacles to sit out for a long period of time. Ms. Salay suggested that the question should also be if they would support legislation to address this as well. Mr. Foegler stated that staff would devise a question about this issue to be included in the community survey. Vice Mayor Boring requested that the question be worded carefully to determine whether they would favor regulations addressing the issue, if they believe one exists. Vice Mayor Boring stated: 1. Ceremonies will be held on Friday at 2 p.m. to mark the commencement of the Industrial Parkway project. 2. She spoke with Mr. Foegler about the proposed policy concerning sewer and water for unserved areas. Is there a time frame in which he anticipates that would come before Council? Mr. Foegler that he anticipates having draft language for a proposed utility extension reimbursement policy in December for Council to refer to a committee for review. 3. The Dublin Arts Council (DAC) states that the bicentennial public art project will be a site specific permanent public art work. Is the current piece on the DAC lawn permanent? Her concern is that when she asked the artist how long the life of the artwork, he responded that it is dependent upon Dublin's maintenance of it. If maintained well, it should last 15 years. In the public discussion concerning the art piece, it was stated that the piece would need protection. She is concerned that the City will be investing money in a piece of artwork that is not permanent. Do other Council members share this concern? Ms. Salay stated that DAC has not yet made a decision which sculpture to purchase or what to recommend. Vice Mayor Boring responded that is exactly her point. She is concerned about the cost to the City of maintaining a piece that will have a short life. That does not seem to be in the public's best interest. Mr. Reiner stated that he shares this concern about the maintenance of the wooden art work on the DAC grounds. Maintenance of that piece would be a significant problem. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher inquired if DAC would take the maintenance issue into consideration when they make their decision. She believes that Mr. Guion has commented previously that it is not part of their consideration. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting November 2, 2009 Page 19 Mr. Keenan stated that DAC's judging will be on the artistic value of the piece, not based on any consideration of maintenance. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked if Council would like the DAC Council representative, Ms. Salay to bring up this concern with the Board. It was the consensus of Council to have Ms. Salay bring this concern to the DAC Board's attention at their November 10 meeting. Mr. Keenan added that in all future purchases for Titration, maintenance is an element that should be considered. 4. Referred to the staff memo regard the Health Savings Accounts (HSAs). She is not totally supportive of the concept. She asked how this program will coordinate with Medicare? Mr. Harding responded that the clarification staff received on that question was that if an individual is enrolled in Medicare, they cannot participate in an HSA. Vice Mayor Boring asked if that is also true if the employee's spouse is enrolled in Medicare. Brief discussion followed. Vice Mayor Boring noted that perhaps this matter warrants an additional review by the Committee. Ms. Salay suggested that Mr. Harding provide information regarding the number of employees who are covered by Medicare as well as the City's plan. Mr. Harding responded that he would provide that information. Vice Mayor requested that he provide the estimated future number as well, and the number of spouses that would be in that category. Mr. Harding responded that staff would check on that, as well. 5. Stated that the Administrative Committee met to review the proposed amended Rules and Regulations for the Planning and Zoning Commission, Board of Zoning Appeals and the Architectural Review Board. The Committee will request approval of the BZA Rules and Regulations, based on the fact that BZA is aquasi-judicial entity. She encouraged Council Members to review the ex parte contact portion of the proposed Rules for P&Z and ARB. A suggestion was to meet with P&Z to discuss what is being addressed with this portion of the Rules. A second issue related to limiting the testimony/comment time for speakers under the Meeting Procedures. These are the two issues for discussion with Council Members. 6. Reminded everyone to vote tomorrow, and congratulated the ward Council Members who are running unopposed for re-election. ADJOURNMENT TO EXECUTIVE SESSION Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher moved to adjourn to executive session at 9:05 p.m. for discussion of legal matters (to confer with an attorney for the public body concerning disputes involving the public body that are the subject of pending or imminent court action), land acquisition matters (to consider the purchase of property for public purposes), and personnel matters (to consider the appointment, employment, dismissal, discipline, promotion, demotion, or compensation of a public employee or official) Mr. Gerber seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Vice Mayor Boring, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes. Tqe meeting was reconvened at 10:00 p.m. and formally adjourned. Mayor -Presiding Officer ~zY~ L ~ ~~ Clerk of Council