No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/02/2007RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS ~ Dublin City Council 1 1 1 Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher called the Monday, July 2, 2007 Regular Meeting of Dublin City Council to order at 7:00 p.m. at the Dublin Municipal Building. Present were: Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, Vice Mayor Lecklider, Mrs. Boring, Mr. Keenan, Mr. Reiner and Ms. Salay. Mr. McCash arrived at 7:07 p.m. Staff members present were: Ms. Grigsby, Mr. Smith, Mr. McDaniel, Mr. Harding, Ms. Ott, Ms. Hoyle, Mr. Hahn, Mr. Hammersmith, Mr. Langworthy, Ms. Crandall, Ms. Noble, Ms. Adkins, Ms. Rauch, Ms. Husak, Mr. Edwards and Mr. Richardson. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mrs. Boring led the Pledge of Allegiance. APPROVAL OF MINUTES • Regular Meeting of June 18, 2007 Council Meeting Vice Mayor Lecklider moved approval of the minutes. Mr. Keenan seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Vice Mayor Lecklider, yes. PROCLAMATION/SPECIAL RECOGNITION • Parks & Recreation Month Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher welcolmed the staff members representing the various areas of Recreation Services. Mr. Earman, Recreation Services Director introduced them to the audience. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher read ~ proclamation into the record, proclaiming the month of July 2007 as Parks & Recreation Month in the City of Dublin. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted'the near tragedy which occurred at the Dublin Municipal Pool South and the training and expertise of the staff who assisted in the successful rescue. She acknowledged all of the contributions the Recreation staff makes to the quality of life in Dublin. CORRESPONDENCE • Notice to Legislative Authority of New D5 Permit for Dragon House Delaware Inc., dba Ichiban at Dublin, 6728 Perimeter Loop Road There was no objection from Council to the issuance of this permit. CITIZEN COMMENTS Wallace Maurer, 7451 Dublin Road asked about the status of his freedom of speech in this Chambers. Not being restored, he finished a remnant of his argument. Council Member McCash noted previously that there are restrictions of time, place and manner with respect to the application pf the First and Fourteenth Amendments. There are such restrictions for shouting "fire" in a public gathering and other words which incite instant riotous behavior. Beyond these, there are no restrictions. There is one place in this country where free speech is absolutely essential. Where there is government, illegal or legal, there is power. Power has tremendous temptation for abuse. As Lord Achton declared in the 19th century, "Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely." If there is any one place where freedom of speech should be wide open at all times, it is within the structure of government. Today marks the threshold of July 4th, and he would like to have a decision on his request by tomorrow night. If he does not have it, he will appropriately spend his July 4th by drawing up a document. LEGISLATION SECOND READING/PUBLIC NEARING -ORDINANCES Ordinance 40-07 Amending Code Section 153.190 Residential Appearance Standards and Code Section 153.333 (D)(2)(b) Sitei Planting Requirements. (Residential Appearance Standards Case No. 06-121ADM) Ms. Grigsby stated that Ms. Rauch has drafted a response to questions raised at the last meeting. Ms. Rauch noted that clarification was requested for the following: Foundation cladding with a decorative concrete block RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council July 2, 2007 Page uAi.~ 20 ~~ 1 1 In the slide and packet, photos are provided of such a sample and how it has been used in the city. Mrs. Boring asked if there are any specifications in terms of color which describe "decorative?" Ms. Rauch responded that she has not observed any other color being used than the red shown. The language could be modified to state that the material must appear like brick, if Council desires. Mrs. Boring stated that she would not want to preclude something for the future that would be appropriate, even if it were not the red color of brick. Vice Mayor Lecklider agreed, noting that the visuals are excellent. If this were a more traditional concrete color, it would not be an appealing alternative. But he, too, would not want to preclude something for the future in terms of an alternative. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that staff has been working with developers on this. Have there been occasions when some unacceptable material was presented? Ms. Rauch responded that there were issues related to cultured stone, which is a different product. That has been addressed in the update. With regard to this product, she is not aware of any issues. Vice Mayor Lecklider suggested that the color shown could be specified, with staff having the discretion for others that would be appropriate. Mr. Reiner stated that if a house is in the beige family, there may be a desire for a more muted color in the foundation cladding. Following discussion, it was the consensus of Council that the only concern would be with a color that resembles the cinder block. Staff will handle this administratively. Ms. Salay asked if the decorative block is used for the entire foundation or only for the portion above the ground line. Ms. Rauch responded that she is not certain. She assumes that both could be used in a combination. Mr. McCash commented that the issue with the definition of decorative concrete block is that if the intention is to not have a standard concrete block itself, it should state specifics -colored masonry unit, single score, 4 x 16 unit -what is trying to be achieved has not been defined in the term "decorative." The concept was anything other than concrete block. From his standpoint, 90 percent of foundations are covered with plantings in any case, so the standard concrete block would not be visible. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher commented that staff has indicated they have been able to address this issue to date. Council seems to be in agreement with what is being done and what the staff has been able to achieve. If problems occur where more definitive language is needed, Council is receptive to reviewing this again. Council expressed concurrence. Front-loaded garages Ms. Rauch stated that the appearance code allows the total percentage of garage door openings for four and three-car front loaded garages to make up 45 percent of the front elevation. A question was raised about how many four-car, front loaded garages have been approved. Subsequent to the adoption of the appearance code in December 2004, there have been none approved. Shutters The current code states that shutters should be of full height, but the width varies based upon the window. Council asked for discussion about the addition of more detailed language. Staff provided a potential modification which states that shutters be full size to cover all windows, no matter what size; that they are operable or appear operable; RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council e 1 1 1 that they utilize architecturally appropriate shutter hardware; and that they be of higher architectural design. This language was included in the Council packet. Mrs. Boring noted that Council did indicate that the appearance code would be reviewed periodically, in order to address these types of issues. She thanked staff for taking the initiative to do this review. Wallace Maurer. 7451 Dublin F~oad noted there is tremendous, comprehensive, detailed description and cataloging of the exterior of the house under this residential appearance code. However, there is never anything which addresses the inside of the shell. What determines the acceptable guidelines? He can understand the issue of durability of materials and construction. However, upon entering houses in the City, there is an "explosion of creativity." He wonders to what extent the outside appearance might become robotic and stifle creativity. He recalls Frank Lloyd Wright who believed that the building should complement the setting. There is a house in Dublin off of Limerick which is a triple cylindrical building. Fie wonders to what extent there might be some stifling of creativity with the appearance code. Vice Mayor Lecklider moved to' amend the ordinance to include the modification regarding shutters. Ms. Salay seconded the motiorn. Vote on the motion: Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mayor Chinnici- Zuercher, yes; Vice Mayor Lec~lider, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. McCash, yes. Vote on the Ordinance as ame dad: Mrs. Boring, yes; Vice Mayor Lecklider, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mayor Chinnici- Zuercher, yes. Ordinance 42-07 Rezoning Approximately One Acre, Located on the Northwest Corner of Darby Street and Wing Hill, from CB, Central Business District and R-2, Limited Suburban Residential District, to: HB, Historic Business District. (Darby Street Municipal Lot - 35 and 37 Darby Street -Case No. 07-036Z/CU). Ms. Grigsby stated that this relates to the construction of a municipal parking lot at 35-38 Darby Street. There were no additional questions. Vote on the Ordinance: Ms. Shcay, yes; Vice Mayor Lecklider, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes. INTRODUCTION/FIRST READING -ORDINANCES Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher introduced Ordinances 43-07 through 49-07, and moved to waive the Council Rules of Order regarding reading of the title of each ordinance, asking the Clerk to read the name of the property owners into the record. Mr. Keenan seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Vice Mayor Lecklider, yes;, Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Ms. Salay, yes. Ordinance 43-07 Appropriating a 0.227 Acre, More or Less, Fee Simple Interest (With 0.103 Acre, More or Less, Present Road Occupied) and 0.069 Acre, More or Less, Utility Easement, from Capital City Dodge Temple Corporation, Located on the North Side of Tuttle Crossing, County of Franklin, State of Ohio, Appropriating Funds Therefor, and Declaring an Emergency. Ordinance 44-07 Appropriating a 0.069 Acre, More or Less, Utility Easement, from B.E.D. Development Co., Located orh the North Side of Tuttle Crossing, County of Franklin, State of Ohio, Appropriating Funds Therefor, and Declaring an Emergency. Ordinance 45-07 Appropriating a 0.227 Acre, More or Less, Fee Simple Interest (with 0.103 Acre, More or Less, Present Road Occupied) and 0.069 Acre, More or Less, Utility Easement, from the Anita Joye Realty Company, Ltd., Located on the North Side RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin Citv Council age 1 1 of Tuttle Crossing, County of Franklin, State of Ohio, Appropriating Funds Therefor, and Declaring an Emergency. Ordinance 46-07 Appropriating a 0.227 Acre, More or Less, Fee Simple Interest (with 0.103 Acre, More or Less, Utility Easement, from David H. and Delores Gease, Located on the North Side of Tuttle Crossing, County of Franklin, State of Ohio, Appropriating Funds Therefor, and Declaring an Emergency. Ordinance 47-07 Appropriating a 0.227 Acre, More or Less, Fee Simple Interest (With 0.103 Acre, More or Less, Present Road Occupied) and 0.069 Acre, More or Less, Utility Easement, from Samuel L. and Susan C. Stille, Located on the North Side of Tuttle Crossing, County of Franklin, State of Ohio, and Declaring an Emergency. Ordinance 48-07 Appropriating a 0.112 Acre, More or Less, Utility Easement, from United Dairy Farmers, Inc., Located on the North Side of Tuttle Crossing, County of Franklin, State of Ohio, and Declaring an Emergency. Ordinance 49-07 Appropriating a 0.069 Acre, More or Less, Utility Easement, from BRE/ESA P Portfolio LLC, Located on the North Side of Tuttle Crossing, County of Franklin, State of Ohio, Appropriating Funds Therefor, and Declaring an Emergency. Ms. Grigsby stated these ordinances are in follow-up to the resolutions of intent approved at the last Council meeting. In the packet, a map is provided detailing right-of- way acquisition and easement acquisition on both the north and south sides of Tuttle for the project. On the south side of Tuttle, the utilities have already been relocated. These takes will allow for relocation of the utilities on the north side of Tuttle. The construction is anticipated to be initiated in the August/September timeframe. Mr. Smith or Mr. Hammersmith can respond to any additional questions. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked about the completion date for the widening project. Ms. Grigsby responded that it is estimated to be sometime in mid-2008. Brief discussion followed about the appropriation process and the status of negotiations. Vice Mayor Lecklider moved to dispense with the public hearing and treat these as emergency legislation. Ms. Salay seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Vice Mayor Lecklider, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. McCash, yes. Vote on Ordinances 43-07 through 49-07: Mr. McCash, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Vice Mayor Lecklider, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Ms. Salay, yes. Ordinance 50-07 Amending Section 153.021(A) "Permitted Use" of the Dublin Codified Ordinances. (R-2, Limited Suburban Residential District -Code Update -Case No. 07-039ADM) Vice Mayor Lecklider introduced the ordinance. Ms. Noble noted that during the area rezoning process, staff discovered that there were some existing uses identified as two-family dwelling units. In order to make the revisions to the R-2 district, it would in essence make the two-family dwelling units non-conforming to the existing ordinance. Generally, planning principles tend to limit any type of non- conforming residential uses when appropriate. Planning is therefore proposing a text modification to the current R-2 district to make the existing two-family uses permitted uses in the R-2 district. With this amendment, permitted uses within the district would include one-family dwelling units and it would specifically permit two-family dwelling units that exist as of the effective date of this amendment. It would permit the existing two- family dwelling units to be considered conforming uses. They would be required to meet all other development standards in the Code. This does not propose new development or promote new development in relation to two-family dwellings. It does permit that, should these two-family dwelling units be destroyed by any event, they could be rebuilt. Staff recommends approval of this text amendment. Mr. Keenan thanked staff for their work on this compromise for an identified concern. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council July 2, 2007 rage ii Mrs. Boring asked if there are any other properties that would be affected by this change. Ms. Noble responded that there are approximately 8 properties within the Monterey area that would be affected. Staff excluded them from the area rezoning process before it was brought to Council, based upon the belief that there will be future applications for that area. There will be a second reading/public hearing at the August 6 Council meeting. Ordinance 51-07 Establishing Dublin Zoning for Approximately 2.5 Acres Located South of Waterford Drive, West of Dublin Road, North of Longview Drive, and East of Monsarat Drive as R-2, Limited Suburban Residential Zoning under the Provisions of Section 153.004(D). (Inner I-270 R-2 Residential Area Rezoning -Case No. 07- 0402) Ms. Salay introduced the ordinance. Ms. Noble stated that this is part of the area rezoning process. It includes four parcels of land, two acres in total, located generally west of Dublin Road, between Marion and Franklin Streets. These sites were annexed to the City sometime in the early 1900's. They came into the City without any type of formal rezoning ordinance for the properties. Staff has implemented the R-2, Limited Suburban Residential district for these properties and going forward, will create documents to support this classification. They have been developed with two-family dwelling units and are non-conforming under the current code. They will conform to the text modification proposed in Ordinance 50-07. With the two applications, it will support any type of requirements for proper zoning classification but will permit the future land use to continue with these parcels. This effort is intended to rectify any future code enforcement issues for properties that are not properly zoned in the City. The hope is to prevent any type of inconsistencies with the zoning maps. This will continue to maintain existing land uses and is not prompted by any type of future development for these sites. Staff is recommending approval. There will be a second reading/public hearing at the August 6 Council meeting. Ordinance 52-07 Authorizing the Provision of Certain Incentives for Purposes of Encouraging the Expansion by Cardinal Health, Inc. of Its Operations and Workforce within the City, and Authorizing the Execution of an Economic Development Agreement. Ms. Salay introduced the ordinance. Mr. McDaniel stated that the proposed economic development agreement encourages Cardinal Health, Inc. to expand its workforce and office facilities in Dublin. Cardinal intends to relocate at least 675 jobs to Dublin from outside of Ohio. The State of Ohio is providing incentives to Cardinal Health in the form of a job creation tax credit, land purchase buyback program, road improvement dollars, and potential training funds. The economic development agreement key points are as follows: • It is designed to encourage job growth and the build out of Cardinal's master plan. • It proposes to modify the existing 2003 agreement with Cardinal by extending it beyond the year 2013 until such time as Cardinal Health receives a $7.5 million incentive payment. The annual payments will be subject to annual target withholdings, consistent with those set in the 2003 agreement. • The agreement proposes to adjust the economic development withholding incentive payment cap for the first three years to $850,000/year instead of $750,000/year. After year three, it will drop to $750,000. • The additional 675 jobs will generate an additional $785,000/year in withholding tax revenues to the City. • In terms of encouraging the physical build out of Cardinal's master plan, Cardinal intends to construct an additional 250,000 square feet of office space on its west campus, immediately adjacent to the corporate headquarters. • The addition of this facility will add great value to the McKitrick TIF district, allowing for significant capital improvements by the City. These include traffic signals and RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council e ~L 1 i~ associated street improvements, such as turn lanes, median modifications, right in and right out entry way all along Emerald Parkway adjacent to the existing and proposed buildings. Those are consistent with what was previously approved in Cardinal's zoning process. • The City estimates the costs of those improvements at $740,000, which would be paid through the TIF district. • It provides the ability to construct the remaining phase of Emerald Parkway by adding this value to the TIF district. The design of the final phase of Emerald Parkway is budgeted for this year. There will likely be a proposal from staff to begin to construct the Emerald Parkway extension/final phase within the next 5-year CIP, should this project move forward. • The State is offering the City up to $900,000 toward the construction of the final phase of Emerald Parkway. • Another state incentive being offered is the purchase of Cardinal Health's 28-acre south campus. The state will purchase the land for $4 million and hold it over aten- year period. Cardinal can choose to purchase it back at anytime. A third party will need to hold title to this land, and staff is working with the new Columbus-Franklin County Finance Authority on this. If necessary, the City could fill this role. • Associated with the land purchase is the concept of creating ajob-ready site by constructing a road and associated utilities into the south campus land from Dublin Road. These improvements will be constructed in conjunction with the new south campus building, should Cardinal Health decide to go forward with this in the future. It is not a part of this specific agreement. • Staff estimates those improvements to be approximately $2.7 million. If the improvements were to be constructed, along with the Cardinal Health expansion in the south campus, that would add more value to the TIF and better enable the City to construct that section of the road. It could also be done in coordination with the City's Thoroughfare Plan, extending a roadway to parallel the inside of I-270. That would be done at the time adjacent development would be proposed. This would also add significant value to the TIF district and enable that construction to occur. The economic development agreement presented tonight may require some minor changes between now and August 6. The changes will be redlined, and any additional correspondence would be forwarded to Council as well. Cardinal Health representatives will attend the next Council meeting. He acknowledged the assistance of Ms. Grigsby and the Engineering staff in preparing this package for Council. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that this agreement provides the City with an excellent opportunity to continue with an existing, world-renowned business in the community. At the ultimate build out, how will this expansion impact the buildings Cardinal is currently leasing in the City? Mr. McDaniel responded that the 250,000 square foot building is the first phase. The total amount approved for the west campus is 415,000 square feet. His understanding is that the construction is being driven by the new jobs coming to Dublin. Cardinal does lease quite a bit of space in and around Dublin. Staff will continue to work with Cardinal on even more consolidation and more construction in Dublin. Vice Mayor Lecklider asked Mr. McDaniel to provide details about paragraph 5 of the memo, which references nearly $3 million to construct a road and associated utilities for Cardinal south campus. Mr. McDaniel responded that the concept in discussion with the State was to identify a means to make the south campus site ajob-ready site, and how State roadway funds could be used to provide access to the site. By establishing ajob- ready site, it may encourage Cardinal to consider this site for development in the future. During that process, the State suggested that as part of their additional incentives to Cardinal they initiate the land purchase arrangement. The State would purchase the 28-acre parcel for $4 million and would pass it through a third party --either the new Columbus-Franklin Finance authority or through the City of Dublin - to hold title, with Cardinal having the ability to purchase the site back. The additional utilities and streets are in keeping with RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Held ~~ the job-ready site concept, as well as the Thoroughfare Plan update in conjunction with the Community Plan. Ms. Grigsby stated that in early discussions, the State looked at the $900,000 as being applied to this project. In discussions with the State, the City requested that the $900,000 be applied toward the extension of Emerald Parkway, which was determined as a more immediate need. The understanding was that if the Cardinal Health project moves forward on the south campus or if Cardinal sells this property to another company who moves forward in that location, then the City would be required to install those improvements. It is a good way to accelerate that roadway project and open up additional areas for commercial development, similar to Emerald Parkway Phases 1 and 2. Vice Mayor Lecklider asked staff to provide information about the road design. Mr. McDaniel responded that it was intended to be a parking lot entryway. The idea of the road has come up in the Thoroughfare Plan discussion. Cardinal is receptive to the idea, although more discussion would be needed about the potential impact of the roadway as opposed to parking lot entrance on the site itself and for what Cardinal is approved for on the site. Vice Mayor Lecklider asked for clarification. Does the discussion involve something with access to Dublin Road going west and connecting where? Mr. McDaniel responded that the connection would be to Frantz Road. Ms. Grigsby stated it has been referred to recently as the Frantz Road/Dublin Road connector, and looking at ways to alleviate congestion at 161 and Frantz Road and also opening up potential for additional development along the south side of I-270. Vice Mayor Lecklider asked if the expectation is that the nearly $3 million would fund the entire length of that roadway. Mr. McDaniel responded it would fund only the portion from Dublin Road to the west boundary line of the Cardinal property. Ms. Grigsby noted that the staff report indicates discussion regarding the current TIF district established for the Cardinal south project. It was never implemented, as there was not any private development that occurred. One item currently being evaluated and anticipated to be done is to bring back legislation to terminate that TIF district and set up anew TIF district, which will extend the timeframes for collection of service payments. The new district could fund the roadway on the Cardinal south piece as well as a significant portion of the development all the way to Frantz Road. Vice Mayor Lecklider asked about the timeframe for payback. Ms. Grigsby responded that it has not been determined at this time, as these are preliminary estimates of construction costs and there are no projections for the service payments at this time. Ms. Salay asked about the size of the current Cardinal building. Ms. Grigsby responded that it is 360,000 square feet. Ms. Salay stated that the next building contemplated is 250,000 and there is the ability to go to 415,000 on the west campus. Ms. Grigsby confirmed this is correct. Ms. Salay noted for the record that Cardinal has already been through the zoning process for the west campus. Will there be a final development plan filed? Mr. McDaniel responded that he believes this has already been completed. He added that Dublin staff has been meeting with Cardinal's architects, engineers and facilities team and reviewing all of this. It appears to be very consistent with what was previously approved. He is hopeful that a rendering will be available for the August meeting. Mr. Keenan asked for clarification about the location of the traffic signals referenced in the memo and agreement. Mr. McDaniel responded that the final plan calls for a signal at the entrance to the existing building and another at the new building at the western edge of their property. This signal would be shared by Cardinal and Verizon to access Emerald Parkway. Mr. Keenan asked if this additional signal at the western end would operate upon demand or throughout the day. Given its proximity to the signal at Coffman, there is little space for stacking. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council ulv 2. 2007 Page 1 Held Mr. Hammersmith noted that the signal would be further to the east than Verizon's current access to Emerald Parkway. They are spaced appropriately. Mr. Keenan stated that these signals are then to accommodate peak hour traffic to these businesses. He believes that adding two signals in this area may be excessive and would restrict the traffic flow. Mrs. Boring noted that it may encourage people to use Brand Road to Coffman versus Emerald Parkway. Vice Mayor Lecklider commented that he would expect that Emerald Parkway would carry more traffic and that the traffic should not be encouraged on Brand Road. Mr. McCash added that if the signals are on flashing sequence during non-peak hours, Emerald Parkway would still carry the traffic volumes anticipated. Mr. Keenan noted that during off-peak hours, there is really not much traffic during the daytime on Emerald Parkway. I~ C Mr. Hammersmith stated that the Atrium Parkway intersection with Rings has a similar operation with a signal. Mrs. Boring asked if there is a date certain regarding the State's incentives. Mr. McDaniel responded that Cardinal has have been approved through the Ohio Job Creation Tax Credit. The agreement regarding the land purchase is being finalized at this time. The City is involved with it, but is not a party to that agreement. He hopes that is completed by the next Council meeting. The last item is the training program funds that Cardinal may apply for. They have not made a decision on this program yet. Mrs. Boring asked about the status of the $900,000. Mr. McDaniel responded that the City needed to demonstrate to the State that the upcoming CIP has a date certain for implementation of the last phase of Emerald Parkway. Upon providing this documentation, the State will request the 629 funds. There will be a proposal from the City administration in the upcoming CIP. There will be a second reading/public hearing at the August 6 Council meeting. INTRODUCTION/PUBLIC HEARING -RESOLUTIONS Resolution 46-07 Waiving Competitive Bidding Requirements and Authorizing the City Manager to Enter into Contracts for the Construction of "Grounds of Remembrance" in Dublin Veterans Park. Ms. Salay introduced the resolution. Ms. Grigsby stated that the Committee and staff have been working for the past year on this project. An artist was selected for the project -PLANT Architect. In discussion of the contracts needed, there were some issues identified in regard to licensing. Based upon the Law Director's review, it has been recommended that the City enters into the contracts for construction versus PLANT Architect, located in Canada. As part of that, the City will enter into a contract with the artist, as well as contracts with the various contractors for the physical work on the site. Currently, it is anticipated there will be one general contractor - Nadalin -who has negotiated with PLANT Architect on the project, working closely with staff. Staff also anticipates contracts needed for material products, fabrication such as the railing and the loggia, and an electrical contract. In refining the numbers, staff believes the project will exceed the $500,000 budget amount, due in part to the increase in the cost of copper from the 2006 submittal. Staff anticipates that, based upon this legislation, the City will enter into four or five construction or fabrication contracts and that currently, the estimate on the project is higher than originally anticipated -and will likely be in the range of $600,000. She offered to respond to any questions or to have Legal staff or Mr. Hahn provide more information. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that most of the companies the City will be working with are from Central Ohio, so she believes the staff recommendation for the City entering into the contracts makes sense. She is not opposed to waiving the bid RECORD OF, PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Held process, due to the unique product and due to the fact that the City has done business in the past with Nadalin. However, in light of the project cost increase, she is interested in hearing from the Council Members serving on the Committee about the status of fundraising efforts to raise the amount now needed of $350,000. Mr. Keenan responded that much of the fundraising activities have recently been initiated. He distributed a brochure which will be placed on the tables at the July 4m celebration. Details have been resolved regarding the pavers -the cost, the layout and the inscriptions. They hope to have another fundraising committee report at the July 13 meeting of the Veterans Committee. Mr. Reiner concurred, noting that they only recently initiated corporate fundraising. Mr. Keenan added that there was much discussion about corporate names and logos on the project. Although there was much debate, it was eventually determined that the park should be a place for reflection and remembrance, not a place for corporate logos. It is hoped that the corporate citizens will want to participate in the project even without name recognition, as they have family members and employees who have served in the armed forces. He added that some cost increases related to items added such as the electrical enhancements and various other items desired by the Committee. Mr. McCash stated that after review of the documents, there are several "red flags" for him. He recognizes there is a timing issue with the desired November 11 completion for the project, but upon hearing there will be a contract with a general contractor, and other contracts between the City and material suppliers and other subcontractors, he has many concerns. Mr. Smith responded that the reason this has been handled in this manner is due to having the Canadian artist, PLANT Architect. In addition, the City has been involved in the past with a contract dispute that arose when the artist designed the project. The general contractor, Nadalin, has worked with the City on several projects and has done excellent work. However, Nadalin was uncomfortable due to the fact that the costs of the project were difficult to determine to their satisfaction. Mr. Hahn then took over the project, working with Nadalin and the various suppliers. Originally, the concept was to have one contract with PLANT and PLANT would then contract with a local contractor to build the project. However, this did not occur because PLANT is not licensed in Ohio and there would be no way for the City to enforce the contract provisions. At that point, it was determined after review of some international contracts that the City should be in control of the project. Mr. McCash stated that what the City is attempting to do is a design-build arrangement, where one general contractor is responsible for all trades and materials underneath it and also responsible for the design professional. But instead, the general contractor wants to take on limited responsibilities and the City will contract with other suppliers, resulting in an arrangement where accountability will be a problem. In terms of not being licensed in Ohio, PLANT can obtain and should obtain such a license. If they do not obtain licensing in Ohio after being awarded this project, he would have concerns from a legal contracting standpoint. They must be licensed in Ohio if they are practicing architecture in Ohio. He views this arrangement as somewhat of an "open book" to use City money, although there is no accountability for a general contractor who is acting as the design builder. He is not certain how the liability issues would operate, as most design-build insurance policies do not cover design issues, but only contracting issues. The other question is with who will seal the drawings. If PLANT is not licensed in Ohio, the general contractor does not have professional licensure for any of the structural requirements of the project. The question remains of who will seal the drawings. Mr. Hahn responded that the drawings will be sealed by an architect from Ohio, as Dublin Code requires. The loggia area will require a building permit, and those drawings will be stamped with a state of Ohio architect or professional engineer. Mr. McCash noted that if that particular licensed architect is to be the responsible design professional in the state of Ohio from a contracting standpoint, then PLANT Architect is then, in essence, the design architect. Mr. Hahn responded that the materials referred to relate to the bronze work. The materials are not standard construction materials. The bronze materials will be out of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council e Held 2D Franklin, Ohio and the copper from Columbus and will be outside the general contractor's scope of services. Mr. McCash responded that those are standard construction materials and should be part of the general contract. There are already additional cost overruns for the project, and there are 4 x 12 pavers with a $70 installation cost, which is not reasonable. These cost issues give him concerns that the City will not have fair, competitive pricing through this arrangement. Is the arrangement involving open book, time and materials? He cannot vote for this arrangement tonight as proposed. Mr. Hahn stated that in terms of particular pricing for some commodities or services, there is no contract in place at this point. Mr. McCash stated that the artist had provided estimates of costs for installing pavers, which was referenced in e-mails. Mr. Keenan added that in the context of fundraising, this was explored. The costs are only an estimate. Mr. McCash asked who will oversee the project -the general contractor? Will he serve as the project manager? Mr. Hahn responded there would be a defined scope of services performed by the general contractor. That defined "scope" has not been established. The typical trades of masonry work, paving and excavating would be under the general contractor. Mr. Hahn added that there was a detailed architectural rendering of the handrail, and he believes such an item would be outside the scope of a typical construction project. Mr. McCash stated that it is not outside of a typical construction contract. Those are all done as shop drawings, and the general contractor would be responsible for securing shop drawings from the fabricator and making sure it meets the design provisions. Mr. McCash asked who the project manager will be -will it be the City? Mr. Hahn responded affirmatively -that the manager of the project as a whole would be the City. The bronze rail detail is being coordinated between PLANT and the foundry, and the contract would be between the City and the bronze rail manufacturer. PLANT would be the designer, and the foundry will produce the rail. The rail was under the original scope of design. Mr. Keenan asked specifically what PLANT will do in regard to the rail. Mr. Hahn responded that PLANT will do the design of the rail only. The entire project was intended to be done on a design-build concept, as Mr. McCash has indicated. It is now more of a standard type of construction in which the City pays for the design and then pays for the implementation of the design separately. This project differs in that instead of a single prime contractor, there will be multiple primes on site. A couple of the specialty items, such as the bronze and copper work will be outside of the scope of the general contractor. In addition, there are in-kind services for this project which are being donated. These services must be coordinated as well. Injecting in-kind services with a general contractor is another complicating factor. There is more oversight and coordination needed by the City than a typical project, given the various factors. Mr. McCash asked why this cannot be done as a design-build project, contracting with Nadalin or whomever to be the design builder and then responsible for coordinating all of this? Currently, there are multiple contracts which the City must administer. The City should not be the administrator for this project - it should be a professional general contractor/construction manager that can coordinate all of this work. The City should not be in the construction management business. Mr. Hahn responded that Nadalin is reluctant to enter into a contract that has variables not under their control, such as the bronze. They did not determine the design, pricing or delivery arrangements for the bronze. It would be unreasonable for the City to expect Nadalin to enter into a contract in which they were not responsible for any of the design or pricing of the product. Mr. McCash stated that it could be a pass through as a time and material cost, but Nadalin would be responsible for coordinating the scheduling and installation of it. Mr. Hahn noted that there are time windows on site for the various trades, and the railing is one of the last items to be manufactured and will be the last to show up on the site. Nadalin's contract will reflect that they must be offsite prior to that timeframe for delivery RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council ge Held 20 of the rail system. It is not only the fabrication, but also the installation. The fabricator is doing the installation as well of the rail. Mrs. Boring stated that she had understood that the project was to be delivered for the funding of $500,000. Now she is hearing that the additional costs will be borne by the City. If someone is contracted for a project, they should deliver the project at the price they committed to. But under the scenario of the design and construction being split, the City will be responsible for cost overruns. If the architect can obtain licensure in Ohio, why doesn't the City require it? Mr. Keenan responded that he does not believe the licensure issue is major, in view of the fact that the plans can be stamped by an Ohio architect or engineer. Mrs. Boring asked who is paying for the Ohio architect to stamp the plans? Mr. Hahn responded that this is part of the arrangement with PLANT -that all permits and fees associated with the design is their financial responsibility. This entire project could have been set up in the typical manner that the City builds parks and roads, with a complete set of drawings, a bid process and contract award. The awarded contractor is responsible for implementation of the plans at the bid price. This project has been evolving, however, throughout the entire planning and design development phase. It is now at the point of implementation. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked whether the costs for each project were known at the time the three finalists for the Veterans project did their presentations. Mr. Hahn responded that the artists were all given the parameters of working within a $500,000 budget. All three submittals, including their budgets, were preliminary designs with associated preliminary budgets. When the award was given to PLANT, the preliminary plan was then made into a final design and the actual budget followed. Mr. Reiner stated that the budget was clearly communicated to all of the applicants. It would behoove the City to ask PLANT what they can product within the budget. In this landscape architecture/art program, there is opportunity for revisions. It is appropriate to let the artist know that the budget is $500,000 and that the artist is expected to product the project within that budget. Mr. Keenan noted that there were some enhancements that the Committee brought forward as the project developed, including the entryway from Indian Run. The Committee did not feel it was defined well enough. There was also another component to recognize the MIA's and a flag area which was added. The electrical component was added and the military branches on the wall design. Many of the costs related to the enhancements added by the Committee, which they believed could be covered with fundraising. Mrs. Boring noted that one of the artists came in and suggested additions, but it was communicated that the budget would not accommodate additions. Therefore, the other project was not supported due to budget issues. Yet now, this artist was awarded the project at the cost of $500,000, although the additional $100,000 funding may have allowed consideration of the other projects at the outset. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that her expectation was that the total project cost would be $500,000. At this point, the fundraising to date is far short of the $250,000 goal, and there is the need to raise another $100,000. Her experience with fundraising is that people do not donate after a project is built. The fundraising should be done after the design is complete and before the project is underway. Mr. Keenan stated that in hindsight, the timetable was very aggressive. The Committee worked diligently in order to move this forward. Having the benefit of another year would have been much better. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher suggested it may be reasonable, based on these legitimate issues, to delay the project opening until Memorial Day of 2008. Mr. McCash stated that the City typically does projects that are design-bid-build, not design-build. Although the desire is to have the project done as quickly as possible in a RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council 1 r ~ i i design-build approach, from his standpoint, there are many unresolved questions that Mr. Tarullo of the legal department would more than adequately be able to address. He does not want the City to rush this project without having points of responsibility addressed. Vice Mayor Lecklider stated that everyone had the opportunity to speak up before this time, and up to this point, the relatively quick timetable has been endorsed by Council. Discussion continued. Ms. Salay stated that she feels she needs more information from staff, based on Mr. McCash's comments. The issues are valid in terms of the City administering the project. The Mayor's comments about fundraising make sense as well, in terms of having the monies in hand. She will need more information on the various issues, and is not wedded to the November 11 date if it will result in problems in having the project constructed. It would be preferable to adjust the timetable now versus waiting until October to do so. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher clarified that Council believes this is an outstanding project, and the Committee and staff have done outstanding work. It is not a reflection on the work done to date. As others have agreed, art projects can result in issues the City is not accustomed to dealing with. Mr. McCash is very knowledgeable about the contractual piece of this project, and Council needs to have answers regarding some of the questions raised. In terms of fundraising, who is in charge of the fundraising portion, what is the plan, and what is the timeframe for raising the funds? The $350,000 that needs to be raised will not be an easy task. This kind of project lends itself to individual gifts, which are typically not large. She suggests that Council be specific with the questions which need to be answered by staff prior to moving forward. Mr. Hahn noted that there is lead time on some of the materials. If the order is not placed by July 17, the materials will not be available for the project. Changing the process or delaying ordering of the materials will result in the project being delayed beyond November 11. Mr. McCash stated there are ways to address this. The contract could provide for a particular component to be owner provided, contractor installed. The City could order the product and assign the product to the particular design-build contractor who will be responsible for it. What is needed is a close review and understanding of the points of responsibility. He has not worked with Nadalin personally, but perhaps the scope of this project is beyond their capabilities to serve as construction manager. Mrs. Boring asked staff is they are seeking a vote tonight or can this be postponed. Mr. Hahn responded that unless this resolution is approved tonight, staff will spend the next 30 days providing information for August 6 and not moving forward with any construction activities. Mr. Keenan stated that the timeframe cannot then be met. Mr. Hahn agreed. Ms. Grigsby pointed out that under the proposal, the City would contract with the various companies who fabricate and then install. Therefore, having this under one general contractor would involve a subcontractor who fabricates and installs, with profit given to the general contractor for that work. In some respects, by separating these, the same product is obtained without the general contractor overseeing the foundry who is making and installing the bronze railing. Much of the coordination work between the two contractors will be done by Mr. Hahn. The major elements are the art components which are being fabricated -the railing and the loggia. Mr. McCash asked who will coordinate the schedule, making sure the required elements are completed before those pieces are delivered. Typically, the construction manager would handle this. Is the City essentially serving as the construction manager? RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin Citv Council ge I~ 1 Ms. Grigsby responded that PLANT Architect will work with the fabricators to provide information to Mr. Hahn. The timeframes have been identified for fabrication of the railing. Nadalin will likely have all of their site work completed, and it will be the responsibility of the fabricator of the loggia to install and the fabricator of the railing to install. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked if Mr. Hahn is doing this coordination. Mr. Hahn responded affirmatively. Mr. Keenan noted that from the outset, it was assumed that the City would serve as the project manager and would have oversight of the project. Mr. Hahn agreed that the City was aware they would have a lot of involvement on the site activities. Ms. Grigsby noted that the City is paying more for the project because the preliminary estimates were based on current pricing estimates that the artist had in hand. A large component was the railing and the loggia, which involves copper and which has experienced significant cost increases. The original estimates were preliminary and similar to many projects done by the City, there is always a risk. Some projects come in under bid and others come in over bid. Whether the project is done now or delayed, the risk of costs increasing remains. Mrs. Boring asked if there is any negotiation taking place regarding the prices for the fabrication. Mr. Hahn responded that for the two specialty items of bronze and copper, there were multiple contacts made regarding both. Some related to the ability of a foundry to produce and adhere to the design. It was not a matter of contacting one supplier. PLANT acted on behalf of the project in making contacts for the materials, as they were interested in securing the best pricing for the given product. Vice Mayor Lecklider stated that his concern relates to funding. It was ambitious to raise $250,000. How much of the project should be publicly funded? It was to be 50 percent public funds and 50 percent private donations. While there is always risk of projects coming in under or over bid, $350,000 will be a difficult amount of money to raise. Mrs. Boring stated that she agrees that more information is needed. She would support postponing this item until such information is obtained. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that it is important to identify the specific questions to be responded to by staff. Mr. McCash has identified some concerns. Has legal staff reviewed these items? Mr. Smith responded that legal staff has reviewed these matters. Mr. Hahn was given the revised cost estimates two weeks ago and legal staff has been in meetings with him in order to determine how the timeline can be met. The issue is that the contractor that was selected by PLANT to be the project manager will not execute a contract in the normal form the City requests. Mr. Hahn has worked very hard to identify an alternative way to approach this. The contract Mr. McCash has described is exactly what Mr. Tarullo of his firm has recommended be done, but staff has not been able to do this. Given the circumstances, timeframes and funding, it is not possible. Discussion continued about the proposed contract. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that a decision is needed at this point. Based on what Mr. McCash has indicated, it is possible to have a contract with owner supplied, contractor installed items. Is it appropriate for Council to approve a resolution indicating that Nadalin's contract will include specific items? Mr. Smith responded that Council can give staff direction that they approve the waiving of competitive bidding as the resolution states, with the condition that the City as owner will provide materials that would be managed and installed by Nadalin. The City would have permission to enter into that contract on this basis. Further, legal issues raised will be resolved to the satisfaction of staff. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council 1 1 ~i Mr. McCash agreed that a single point of responsibility is the goal, and if the City needs to provide specific materials, that can be done. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked the Law Director to provide the language to amend the resolution in this manner. She asked about the status of funds raised to date. Ms. Grigsby responded that the City has programmed $250,000, and there are close to an additional $100,000 either raised or committed at this point in time. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked what discussion took place at the Committee level regarding any shortfall in funding at the November 11 date. Mr. Keenan responded that this possibility was discussed, and the plan is to continue with fundraising activities after the project is completed in order to make up the shortfall. Ms. Grigsby noted that this was an issue related to the timeframe established and the process of artist selection. The dedication date was determined at the outset, so there was always the risk of not having sufficient dollars at the time of dedication. Part of the discussion was that the City can fund the project, recognizing that once the monies have been allocated it could be more difficult to raise funds. But in order to meet the established project deadline, it was determined this was the only option available. Mr. Keenan noted that in terms of the contractual issues, the Committee was not involved in those details. It was not within their scope. This project is not of the scope and size of other projects done by the City. He believes that staff has proposed a good resolution. Although he understands Mr. McCash's position, within the framework of this project and the trades, he believes Nadalin is capable of completing this. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that she never envisioned that the City ~rrould pay for any shortfall in fundraising, as this was to be a community partnership project. Part of the partnership expectation is to assist financially. Mr. Keenan responded that there was always the potential that the City would have to fund the shortfall and that fundraising would continue after the project opened. Everyone is hopeful that the residents and the corporate community will embrace and support this project. Ms. Grigsby stated that part of the discussion at the Committee was whether the information should specify the project as a $500,000 project, or as a lower amount, recognizing the unknown outcome of the fundraising. The Committee felt that the project should be budgeted at $500,000 to ensure it would be an adequate amount for the purpose of the project. The Committee recognized the potential for a shortfall, but if so, the City had the ability to front those dollars until the fundraising could reimburse the City. Mr. Smith suggested that Council amended the resolution in paragraph 7 to read as follows: "Whereas, the City of Dublin has determined that it is in the best interests of the City and the project that the City enter into an agreement with a general contractor whose responsibilities shall include, but not be limited to, the scheduling, installation and oversight of the installation of the railing, loggia and other specialty items. Further, the City shall be, as the owner, authorized to purchase the necessary specialty items, provide them to the contractor, and bill the contractor for those costs incurred by the City." Mr. McCash moved approval of the resolution with the amendment as stated. Mr. Keenan seconded the motion. Mrs. Boring asked for clarification purposes that Section 1 include the reason why the bidding is being waived by adding the language "for the construction of the "Grounds of Remembrance" in Dublin Veterans Park." It was the consensus of Council to add this clarification. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS July 2, 2007 He Page 15 Vote on the Resolution as amended: Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner, . yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Vice Mayor Lecklider, yes; Ms. Salay, yes. Resolution 47-07 Accepting the Lowest and Best Bid for the Avery Road/Tuswell Roundabout. Ms. Salay introduced the resolution. Ms. Grigsby stated this awards the bid for the roundabout project that has been included in the CIP program. Mr. Hammersmith stated that this is the first phase of the Avery South corridor improvement - a study presented to Council in January of 2006. He shared a presentation outlining the four phases of the project. This first phase involves Avery/Tuswell, extending from Kendall Ridge Boulevard north to Irelan Place. Future phases will include relocation of Old Avery Road, the construction of a roundabout at Shier-Rings and Avery and a roundabout in the future at Woerner-Temple Road. The study addressed 2030 traffic needs in the area. Today's volumes of 14,000 are projected to increase in 2030 to 34,000 vehicles per day. He pointed out that this project will result in closure of full access at Kendall Ridge Boulevard, which will become right in, right out and there will be a full median starting where the Woerner-Temple signal improvement project left off and proceeding north to the roundabout. The median will be terminated at Irelan Place. Secondarily, the only improvement to take place north of Irelan Place will be a bikepath installation along the west side of Avery, extending to Shier-Rings to complete the system along the west side of Avery Road. There will be no roadway improvements north of Irelan. The estimated cost as of January of 2006 was $3.8 million, which included land acquisition and construction. Mr. Keenan asked about Phase 3 at the Shier-Rings intersection, where several business owners have asked about the impacts. Mr. Hammersmith clarified that Phase 1 does not extend to the Shier-Rings intersection. Staff has not moved forward on the design of Phase 3 and has therefore not yet determined the impact on those properties. It will not be known until the design is done. Mr. Keenan asked about the timeframe for design. Mr. Hammersmith responded it is not programmed within the 5-year CIP at this time. Mr. Keenan stated it is somewhat unfair to the business owners, as they know a project is coming, but do not know the impacts. They cannot disclose the impacts to any potential buyers. Mr. Hammersmith noted that staff has communicated to the property owners that once the impacts on their properties are understood, the impacts would be mitigated as much as possible. However, the project is not yet designed. Mr. Keenan responded that not having a design in place for five years is unacceptable and not fair to them. He asked if others have been contacted by the business owners. Ms. Salay stated that she understands the property owners' issue, but at the same time understands staff's position that whatever impact a project has on a property owner is mitigated to the extent possible. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated she has talked with some of the property owners, as she has indicated to Mr. Hammersmith. She does not understand why the design cannot be done at this time, even if the implementation is not to occur in the near future. In this way, the property owners can decide whether to stay or to sell their properties. Mr. Hammersmith responded that this is a good point to consider in the review of the five-year CIP. If Council so desires, the priorities can be shifted to do this design earlier. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher responded that she would recommend that. These are small businesses who are impacted. Mr. Richardson stated that the low bid for the project was from Performance Site Management at $1,555,168.85. This project will also construct a bikepath on the west side of Avery Road from Kendall Ridge Boulevard to Shier Rings, providing connectivity to the north side of Avery Road. They project completion by October 31 of this year. At that time, the Kendall Ridge Boulevard access will be right in, right out. The Tuswell intersection will be a roundabout with full access. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked if the Kendall Ridge residents have been engaged in this dialogue. Mr. Hammersmith responded that there was a public meeting in October of 2005 and Council hearings in January of 2006. He agreed that the residents need to be informed of the construction schedule and any closures to occur. The residents lose only one movement under this scenario, that of the left turn out of their subdivision. Mr. Richardson noted that the closure date for Avery Road to traffic at Tuswell up to Irelan Place is August 15. Staff is working with the utilities to have them relocated in the next four weeks, and trees in the road right-of-way on the west side must be removed. There are also some homes that the City is currently demolishing, and some asbestos issues need to be addressed. The power lines are aerial and the poles will be relocated further to the west. Mr. Keenan asked if there will be issues raised regarding removal of the trees. Mr. Hammersmith responded that the property has already been purchased by the City. Ms. Salay suggested that the notification to the residents include information about the tree removal in conjunction with this project. To the credit of M/I, the developer of Kendall Ridge, the residents were well informed of the access management issues and the fact that their full access would be at Tuswell, with Kendall Ridge becoming right in, right out at some point in the future. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked that the Schools be informed of the road closings as well for bus transportation purposes. Mr. Hammersmith added that for the Villas of Glenealy, Innovation Drive will be open to the east very soon so that they have alternative access into their development. Ms. Salay responded that she is concerned with traffic traveling up to the Villas of Glenealy, making a right on Innovation Drive and finding their way to Emerald Parkway via Innovation Drive. This could result in cut-through traffic continuing in the future for this area. She does not want to see traffic detoured through Innovation Drive. Mr. Hammersmith responded that there are very few units occupied in Glenealy, and the other end of Innovation will be closed at Avery. This would serve the residents of Glenealy only. Mrs. Boring asked about the amount of the landscaping budget for this project and where that is budgeted. Mr. Hammersmith responded that the cost is generally 5-10 percent of total construction. The design has not been completed, and is handled by Parks & Open Space. Vote on the Resolution: Ms. Salay, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Vice Mayor Lecklider, yes. Resolution 48-07 Declaring Certain City-Owned Property as Surplus and Authorizing the City Manager to Dispose of Said Property in Accordance with Ohio Revised Code Section 721.15. Vice Mayor Lecklider introduced the resolution. Ms. Grigsby stated that each year, the City vehicles are reviewed and a determination is made about those which should be considered surplus and disposed of. The list attached to the memo contains those vehicles which will be auctioned on the online auction, similar to what has been done in the recent past. The last vehicle auction was done in this manner and was successful and efficient, saving staff time for the mechanics. Vote on the Resolution: Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Vice Mayor Lecklider, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Resolution 49-07 Approving and Authorizing the City Manager and Director of Finance to Execute an Agreement of Ground Lessor with General Electric Capital Corporation Related to the Golf Club of Dublin, and Extending the Lease Term. Mr. Keenan introduced the resolution. Ms. Grigsby stated that Squires, Sanders & Dempsey, the City's bond counsel who worked on the original development agreements with regard to the Ballantrae development and the Golf Club of Dublin development prepared a memo for this item. This legislation allows approval of an agreement with General Electric Capital Corporation for a loan for the golf course development. Currently, the approved loan is through the Huntington Bank, and the balance is approximately $7.4 million and is secured by the City-owned land. Part of this process will provide for a reduction of that debt and reduction of the debt on the golf course overall down to approximately $6.5 million. It will be secured by the leasehold improvements and not by the City's land. Two key points are reduction of the debt and that the City's land will not secure that debt. Also, there will be a change in operators of the facility from Tartan Golf to the Golf Club of Dublin LLC. In past discussions with the investors of the facility, extending the lease for an additional ten years was proposed. The City does not have objections to this and it provides an additional timeframe for the investors to recoup their investment in the facility. Steve Simonetti, an investor in the Golf Club is present to respond to questions. Staff recommends adoption of the resolution. Steve Simonetti, 7115 Calabria Place. Dublin thanked staff, especially Ms. Grigsby and Mr. Smith who have worked with them on this matter. The fact is that the Golf Club of Dublin has an unfortunate amount of debt. They believe that the City and the residents are proud of the Golf Club of Dublin. The owners have decided to inject $2 million of capital to reduce the debt to ensure the golf course becomes along-term viable business. They appreciate the efforts of all involved and look forward to along-standing partnership with the City of Dublin. Mr. McCash asked Ms. Grigsby if the City is a guarantor on any of the existing debt. Ms. Grigsby clarified that the debt is currently secured by City-owned land. At the time the debt was financed, the facility was new and there was no history. Now, there are numbers to support the viability of the business and operational history. Mr. Simonetti added that the club is an ongoing entity, generating almost $3 million/year of revenue and therefore banks and financial institutions view it differently. This allows changing of the leverage. Ms. Grigsby emphasized that the City is not a guarantor on the loan. Mr. McCash asked for clarification. With this new refinancing, the City remains responsible to the same extent as it was under the existing agreement? Ms. Grigsby stated that is correct. In terms of paying off the loan, the City has no obligation. Previously, the City land was the collateral backing the loan. Mr. Keenan asked about the total acreage of the golf course. Ms. Grigsby responded it is 200 acres. Mr. McCash asked about the Tartan Golf LLC. He understands that the membership is changing, and a new LLC is being established. Mr. Simonetti responded that the existing Tartan LLC will no longer exist. The new Golf Club of Dublin LLC has two members who elected not to partake in the injection of capital, and they will therefore have no ownership in the new business. Mr. McCash asked for confirmation that the two members who walked away are not in the additional JJED LLC. Mr. Simonetti responded that is correct. Mr. McCash asked if the people who are part of the JJED LLC are entirely new to this arrangement. Mr. Simonetti responded no. For illustration purposes, there were approximately ten investors in the original business. Eight of the investors voted to inject the new capital, and the other two were not interested in participating. There is one new investor that was not part of the group previously. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council 1 1 July 2, 2007 e Ms. Salay recalled that the Tartan Golf name was viewed as something that enhanced the club at the development stage. Is there an advantage or disadvantage to this new entity, Golf Club of Dublin, being formed? Ms. Grigsby responded that the club is now established and provides the same level of recognition as Tartan did previously. Vice Mayor Lecklider asked about the pros and cons for the City of extending this lease for ten years. Ms. Grigsby stated that it assists the LLC in obtaining their leasing arrangement, which benefits the City. It extends the period of time that someone other than the City is operating the golf course, which can be viewed as either a pro or con. She believes it is preferable that the City is not in the golf course business. Mr. Simonetti responded that the golf course business in general is unstable at this time. As investors, they have recognized and acknowledged that the City of Dublin is a great location for the golf course and the course is doing well. Investing more capital ensures the long-term viability of the course. By so doing, it stabilizes the business for a longer period of time. The extension on the lease allows them to feel somewhat more financially comfortable about the additional $2 million investment. Vote on the Resolution: Vice Mayor Lecklider, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. McCash, yes. Resolution 50-07 Authorizing the City Manager to Enter into an Agreement with the TehKu Tea Company for the Operation of a Cafe within the Dublin Community Recreation Center. Ms. Salay introduced the resolution. Ms. Grigsby stated that as part of the DCRC renovations, the concept of providing these services was discussed. Mr. Earman will provide details. Mr. Earman stated that this agreement will enable the DCRC to provide healthier and higher quality of food and beverage services to patrons. The City engaged in an RFP for vendors and TehKu was selected for the pilot program at the DCRC. A survey was done of customers after the pilot program and the patrons were very pleased with the offerings. He briefly noted the key points of the agreement: 1. The contract with TehKu provides for athree-year term, with two annual automatic renewals, extending to the five-year period. 2. The payment for the services will be provided from TehKu to the City of Dublin in the amount of $500 for the first three months of operation, increasing automatically after the third month to $1,000 per month for the rest of the annual term. For each additional 12-month period, the increase will be 110 percent above that. There is a clause in the agreement that gives TehKu an opportunity to provide the City with detailed information to reconsider that rate. 3. The location decided for the operation is in the art nook in the northeastern hallway of the DCRC, which provides ample traffic and visibility to potential customers without impeding traffic flow in the main corridor. 4. The operation will appear much like the renderings provided in the packet. 5. The hours of operation will be conducive to the hours of operation of the DCRC, recognizing that perhaps one hour after the DCRC opens and one hour before the DCRC closes may not be the opportune times for selling food and beverage. Those are the only parameters in terms of the operation time of TehKu. Any changes to the operation will be at the City's discretion. 6. Staff anticipates the start date for this operation to coincide with the reopening of the DCRC on September 10. The construction for the renovations is scheduled to begin this week. 7. In terms of the vending machine contracts that currently exist, they have been extended through the end of the year, recognizing that the City will be seeking RFP's for those contracts in the future. In those RPF's, TehKu will be recognized as a provider of food and beverage service, including their RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council e Held 20 menu options. With that, there is nothing that is exclusively promised to any party, leaving the City available for negotiations with any other contractor. Mr. Earman noted that staff and the representatives from TehKu can respond to any questions. Mr. Reiner asked if the City is building the booth space to accommodate TehKu within this contract. Mr. Earman responded that the City will provide the utilities for them to conduct their business. TehKu has met with the City's architects. TehKu will be responsible for finishing the space with cabinetry, counter tops, etc. Mr. Keenan stated that the City is then installing the drywall and hardscape services, and the rest is their responsibility. Mr. Earman responded that is correct. Mr. Keenan noted that the insurance section addresses liability and workers' compensation, but there is no property issues identified. Mr. Earman responded that there is a clause indicating that security of their equipment is their responsibility. Mr. Keenan stated that there should be a property section should be included in the insurance portion, as that is standard. Would there be a waiver of subrogation? Mr. Smith noted that staff will check on this language. Mr. Keenan noted it is for their protection as well as the City's. Mr. Keenan noted that the square footage for the space is not identified in the contract. Mr. Earman responded that the actual space in which TehKu will operate is approximately 236 square feet. Mr. Keenan asked if that is outlined in the lease. Mr. Earman responded it is not, but there is a floor drawing of the DCRC including highlighted areas within their realm. Mr. Keenan stated that Section 3 indicates "sufficient space within the DCRC to conduct the food and beverage operations." This is not definitive. It further states that "concessionaire shall have access to all the areas specifically noted on the map attached hereto as Exhibit A." Is Exhibit A defined well enough to have a clear understanding? Mr. Earman responded that staff will define that more clearly. There is a lot of flexibility in this agreement giving the City the sole discretion of making the decisions necessary. Staff will clarify the square footage for the actual operation. Vice Mayor Lecklider noted on page 1, Section D, the last sentence, where it states, "Dublin and concessionaire shall discuss the construction responsibilities of each of the parties to this agreement." He asked for clarification. Mr. Earman responded that there may or may not be issues which arise, but there are two different construction projects underway at the same time, and staff recognizes a decision may be needed where flexibility is critical, i.e., location of an outlet, etc. At this time, everyone is in agreement with the drawings and specs. Mr. Keenan asked if they are aware of the Planning & Zoning Commission review. Mr. Earman responded affirmatively. Vice Mayor Lecklider asked about page 4, Section H where it states, "In the event concessionaire obtains a food service license ..." Do they contemplate this? Mr. Earman responded that the issue came up of using the DCRC kitchen in the context of TehKu having a need for more space to accommodate demand. The kitchen does not have a food license service under the City's name. If someone chooses to use it, they would have to obtain the permits needed from the health department. Mr. McCash stated that TehKu would have a license for their food service operation in any case. They would have to extend it to the DCRC kitchen, if needed. Mrs. Boring asked if there is any expectation of the hours of operation. The agreement doesn't define specific hours of operation. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council 20 Mr. Earman stated that they are expected to operate between open and close of the center within the hour before and after. Any change to that would be at the City's discretion. Mrs. Boring asked for the specific reference in the agreement. The agreement states when they can begin service during the day and end it, but it does not require them to be open a minimal period of time. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher responded that TehKu is interested in making a profit, which will require being open. They will learn about the traffic flow after a period of time and can be open at appropriate times. This is a business decision made in concert with Dublin staff. Mrs. Boring stated that her concern is that in Historic Dublin, there are complaints about the irregular business hours. She assumes that if the customers want the services and they are not open, that staff will address this with TehKu. Mr. Earman stated that staff will work closely with TehKu on this matter. Vote on the Resolution: Vice Mayor Lecklider, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes. Resolution 51-07 Authorizing the Continued Employment of the Clerk of Council. Vice Mayor Lecklider introduced the resolution. Vice Mayor Lecklider stated that this resolution is brought to Council in conjunction with the Clerk of Council's annual evaluation and is consistent with Council's discussion regarding the evaluation, as well as an adjustment to the annual compensation. Wallace Maurer, 7451 Dublin Road commented that at the May 21 Council meeting, he testified regarding amendments to the personnel code in regard to classified and unclassified service in the City. He meant to point out that there are constraints to the apparent absolute power of hiring and firing by various personnel relative to others and that these constraints need to be taken into account. He was surprised in reading the Charter and the relationship of the Clerk of Council to Council. "The Clerk of Council shall serve at the pleasure of Council and may be removed without cause by Council." There is no constraint here whatsoever. In the case of the City Manager, the Manager is appointed by and can be dismissed by City Council. But there is a constraint in the Charter in that at some point in the dismissal process, the City Manager can request a public hearing. Council will be aware of that constraint before dismissal. There is nothing similar in regard to the Clerk of Council. There are constraints with all other levels of employees in the Charter, but none in this case. He will address the larger picture of hiring and firing at the next meeting. Vote on the Resolution: Mr. Reiner, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Vice Mayor Lecklider, yes. OTHER • Final Plat -Shamrock Crossing South (Case No. 07-031 FDP/FP) Ms. Husak noted that this is the final plat for the westward extension of Stoneridge Lane right-of-way and two commercial lots along the south side of W. Dublin-Granville Road. She showed aerial views of the site. Lot 1 consists of approximately 4 acres, and Lot 2 at the terminus of Shamrock Boulevard consists of approximately 6 acres. The Stoneridge Lane right-of-way will be 60 feet of right-of-way with 36 feet of pavement. Planning has reviewed this proposal, based upon criteria for a final plat. Planning & Zoning Commission approved this final development plan at their June meeting. Planning recommends approval of the plat as presented. Mrs. Boring noted that one condition relates to the tree replacement fee. She assumes that many trees must be removed in order to construct this roadway. Is that correct? Ms. Husak noted that the trees being removed consist mainly of fence rows along the boundaries of the lots. With extending a road, there are constraints in terms of the removal of trees. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council July 2, 2007 Nage 1 Held Mr. Reiner asked if there have been any changes to the elevations of the facades on the buildings since the process began. Ms. Husak responded that tonight's review consists only of the plat of the subdivision of the land -not any of the development details. She has not seen any other elevations for this development. Ms. Salay moved approval of the final plat. Mr. Keenan seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mayor Chinnici- Zuercher, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Vice Mayor Lecklider, yes; Ms. Salay, yes. • Final Plat -Banker Drive Right-of-Way (Banker Drive -Case No. 07- 032FDP/FP) Ms. Husak stated that Banker Drive lies to the north of W. Dublin-Granville Road. This plat involves only the right-of-way for the road. Aerial views of the site were presented. It connects existing Banker Drive on the east side from David Road westward to Shamrock Boulevard. This plat will have aright-of-way of 60 feet and pavement width of 36 feet. The length of this piece of Banker Drive is approximately 600 feet. Planning staff reviewed this based on criteria for a final plat and Planning & Zoning Commission recommended approval at their June 7 meeting. Staff recommends approval at this time as presented. Mr. Reiner moved approval. Ms. Salay seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mayor Chinnici- Zuercher, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes. STAFF COMMENTS • Update regarding Davis Log Cabin Mr. Hahn noted that at the last meeting, Council asked staff to provide some alternate locations for the David log cabin. The packet contains this memo and exhibits. Mr. Reiner noted that he supports the Indian Run falls location, as it is consistent with the landscape and environment. Perhaps the parking lot area, backing up to the creek, before it descends would be an appropriate location. Mr. Hahn stated it would have to be placed just north of the parking lot area, but the area contains meadow and would provide such opportunity. Mrs. Boring agreed. ~~ Mr. Keenan echoed Mr. Refiner's comments, adding that this area would lend itself to visitors to Historic Dublin. Many more people would visit it in this location. Mr. Keenan moved approval of the Indian Run Falls location as presented by staff. Mr. Reiner seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Ms. Salay, yes. Wallace Maurer. 7451 Dublin Road asked if there was a price for this cabin, and if the City would be willing to sell it. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher responded that the City has already purchased it and it is an historic cabin. Mr. Maurer can speak to Mr. Hahn about such opportunities. • St. Patrick's Day 2008 Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that an updated memo about St. Patrick's Day 2008 was provided as an informational item. • Ingress Ramp -Dublin Methodist Hospital Ms. Grigsby reported that staff has learned that the earmarked funding for the ramp did remain in the state budget, which is good news. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council e Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher commented that formal thank you letters were sent to the Franklin County delegation, but she suggested that Council thank them at the Wednesday event for the work they did to keep this funding in the budget. COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS/COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE Ms. Salay: 1. Noted that the Dublin Schools have scheduled a family night for Wednesday, November 7, which is a budget workshop night. She asked if Council would agree to reschedule the budget workshop for Thursday, November 8, as the school's family night is consistently the first Wednesday of that month. It was the consensus of Council to reschedule the workshop from November 7 to November 8. 2. Commented that she was present at the Dublin Municipal Pool South when the near drowning occurred. Observing the staff in action and the response of the young people was very inspirational. It is important that Council recognize them as heroes, given their age and level of experience. She asked that they be recognized at the August 6 Council meeting, prior to the time they return to school. 3. Reported that she attended the Community Plan open houses, which had fairly light attendance. She asked when Council will be given a compilation of the feedback from the open houses. Mr. Langworthy responded that they will be available for the August Council meeting packet. 4. Noted that staff is working on the Dublin Arts Council agreement at this time. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher: 1. Noted that many citizens recently received automated phone calls from the Police about thefts occurring from automobiles. The police officer described precautions to be taken and urged citizens to report anything suspicious. The feedback she has received has been very positive. She asked that these comments be passed along to Chief Epperson. 2. Reported that following the fire in Charleston, she sent an a-mail to Mayor Riley on Council's behalf, expressing sympathy and offering assistance to them. This was a terrible tragedy, with loss of nine firefighters. 3. Noted that an a-mail and fax were sent to Council regarding potential interview times with Bob Camoin, who is working on the Historic Dublin market assessment. The sign-up sheet is available tonight for those who are interested. 4. Noted that if any Council Members cannot be present for the July 4cn activities, they should let her or the Clerk of Council know for planning purposes. EXECUTIVE SESSION Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher moved to adjourn to executive session at 10:05 p.m. for land acquisition matters. Mr. McCash seconded the motion. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercf~er announced that the meeting will be reconvened following the executive session only for the purpose of formally adjourning. Vote on the motion: Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mayor Chinnici- Zuercher, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Vice Mayor Lecklider, yes; Mr. McCash, yes. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was reconvened and formally adjourned at 11:15 p.m. Mayor -Presiding Officer Clerk of Council