Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil Minutes 01-10-2011RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting January 10, 2011 Mayor Lecklider called the Monday, January 10, 2011 Regular Meeting of Dublin City Council to order at 6:20 p.m. at the Dublin Municipal Building. Present were Mayor Lecklider, Vice Mayor Salay, Mrs. Boring, Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher, Mr. Gerber, Mr. Keenan, and Mr. Reiner. ADJOURNMENT TO EXECUTIVE SESSION Mayor Lecklider moved to adjourn to executive session for discussion of land acquisition, legal and personnel matters. Mr. Reiner seconded the motion Vote on the motion: Mayor Lecklider, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes; Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Vice Mayor Salay, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes. The meeting was reconvened at 7:08 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mr. Keenan led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL Present were Mayor Lecklider, Vice Mayor Salay, Mrs. Boring, Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher, Mr. Gerber, Mr. Keenan, and Mr. Reiner. Staff members present were Ms. Grigsby, Mr. Smith, Mr. McDaniel, Interim Chief von Eckartsberg, Ms. Puskarcik, Ms. Gibson, Mr. Langworthy, Ms. Crandall, Mr. Hahn, Mr. Hammersmith, Ms. Ott, Mr. Thurman, Ms. LeRoy, Ms. Adkins, Ms. Gilger, Ms. Colley, and Ms. Migliore. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Ms. Chinn ici-Zuercher moved approval of the minutes of the meeting of December 6, 2010. Mr. Keenan seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr Gerber, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Vice Mayor Salay, yes; Mayor Lecklider, yes. CORRESPONDENCE The Clerk reported that no correspondence had been received requiring Council action. CITIZEN COMMENTS Wallace Maurer, 7451 Dublin Road stated that he is aware that some individuals plan to testify tonight regarding the accident, which took place in the crosswalk in Historic Dublin. Given this fact and the nature of the topic he had planned to address tonight, he will postpone his comments until the next meeting. Iren Toms 2562 N. Fourth Street. Clintonville stated that she is present to make comments regarding the accident that happened to her friend, Stephanie Auer on December 28 at the corner of North Street and North High Street in Dublin. She, her husband, and many others have petitioned for a stop light in this location. She understands there have been previous petitions concerning this area. Residents and those who work in the area are very concerned about the intersection. There have been at least 11 accidents in this location over the past five years — now 12, and one fatality. She understands that Mr. McDaniel, Deputy City Manager had mentioned that the location did not warrant stoplights. But in consideration of the circumstances -- the history of collisions, the traffic flow problems, the pedestrian delays, and students crossing at all times — they understand that any precautions taken have been ignored and not taken into consideration by drivers in this area. There is personal responsibility as well. She feels that not enough has been done to address this problem. They have started a petition today, with a goal of at least 2,000 signatures. She asked if there has ever been a study at this intersection by an engineer or by RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS M eeting Dublin City Council January 10, 2011 Page 2 anyone about why there has not been a stop light or a four -way stop in this location. If not, she would like to know how to get this started. With the fatality that occurred, this needs to move forward. Mayor Lecklider responded that Council extends their sympathies to her and her husband upon the loss of their friend. He asked the City Manager to comment regarding Ms. Toms' questions. Ms. Grigsby responded that with regard to traffic signal installation or other safety measures at intersections or other locations where there are pedestrians and vehicles, one of the main guidelines followed is the Ohio Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices. This manual provides information regarding safety measures, looking at all types of issues. In some cases, installation of signals or devices that are not properly installed or warranted can actually create additional safety issues or concerns. There has been information obtained concerning pedestrian counts and other traffic counts in that area. Based upon those counts, the warrants /guidelines in the traffic manual have not been met. The criteria established that identifies the need for a traffic signal was not met. Therefore, a traffic signal has not been installed. Mr. Keenan asked for verification that traffic signal installation is not a City decision — that a warrant must be met. Ms. Grigsby responded that this is the guideline set forth by the state to ensure consistency in addressing safety issues. The City has considered various options, and last week, staff met to review the intersection, the incident that occurred, and what could be done to create better awareness of pedestrians for drivers. Placards were installed over the weekend to increase driver awareness of the potential for pedestrians in the crosswalk. It is a challenging issue. It is important that the City not install devices that provide a false sense of security for pedestrians. It is also important not to install devices that if not property maintained, could create additional safety concerns. Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher noted that, over the years, various ideas have been discussed for this area. She does not recall a traffic signal as high on the priority list, because of the traffic light in such close proximity at 161 /High Street and the potential stacking issue. For that reason, other options were explored. Perhaps, in addition to the bollards that have now been installed, some other options previously discussed could be considered: improving the lighting in the area; prohibiting on street parking on the east side of High Street in areas where it is currently permitted; and considering Mr. Keenan's suggestion to install a motion detection system, which does not require the pedestrian to activate the signal. It would automatically turn on when motion sensors are activated. She suggested that these options be studied again. In addition, with the growth in activity in the District, the City needs to focus on options to mitigate potential problems. Ms. Toms stated that she is aware that steps have been taken, but according to numerous people who live and work in that area, those things have been ignored. According to witnesses, the crosswalk light was not working — but who knows what Ms. Auer did to activate that light. The lighting in the area is horrible. She wants to know who to talk to, because ultimately something must be done — if not a signal, it needs a four -way stop. She does not agree with the false security issue. Clearly, issues have been raised. Someone has died and something needs to be done. She appreciates responses, but she needs concrete ideas. It is not just a personal loss — it will and can happen again. Ms. Grigsby stated that staff is currently reviewing the addition of overhead lighting on the pedestrian crosswalk, to point directly onto the pavement. Discussion has taken place about parking along the street and if further reducing some of the allowed parking would improve views and sight lines. Staff has recently looked at additional information based on Mr. Keenan's previous suggestions about installation of motion RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meetine January 10, 2011 Page 3 sensor lighting in the crosswalk. Staff has learned of some installations of this system in Minnesota. Ms. Chinn ici-Zuercher noted that another option is strips on the roadway that alert drivers that they are entering an area where they should slow their speed and be cautious of pedestrians. Perhaps this could be done short-term while other options are explored. Mayor Lecklider summarized that the City is undertaking a comprehensive review, and virtually all options are under consideration. Jana Phillips, 5777 Scotia Court, Dublin asked if the City has looked into the HAWK signal system that is in place in Phoenix, Arizona. The signal has two red lights, with a yellow light underneath and serves strictly pedestrian traffic. She offered to forward that information to staff. Flashing yellow lights only slow traffic, and a red light would indicate that traffic should stop at the pedestrian crosswalk. An extensive study was released this summer on this system. Ms. Grigsby suggested she forward the information to her attention. Ms. Toms noted that staff has indicated that the options are under study. They plan to attend the next meeting, too, and many others are supporting them in this matter. Where can they obtain updates on these studies? They are working on a petition, as she has noted. Ms. Grigsby responded that staff will provide her with the updates as decisions are made. Staff will forward the recommendations and implementation schedule when it is available. LEGISLATION SECOND READING /PUBLIC HEARING - ORDINANCES Ordinance 47 -10 Accepting the Dedication of an Approximate 0.336 Acre Fee Simple Interest from John W. Kessler, Said Property Located in the City of Dublin, County of Franklin, State of Ohio. Mr. Hammersmith stated that this relates to dedication of a portion of reserve area at the intersection of Avery/Muirfield/Tullymore/Valley Stream. It lies along the west side of the roadway and is currently reserve area that should have been dedicated to the City years ago. This was identified in conjunction with the intersection improvement planned in this location. Staff recommends approval. Wallace Maurer, 7451 Dublin Road noticed in reading the staff report that development of this area began in 1985. Why was there such a delay in addressing this matter? Ms. Grigsby responded that this land should have been dedicated as part of the right -of- way dedication for Muirfield Drive, but was inadvertently omitted from the dedication. When staff began design work for the improvement, it was noted that this land was never dedicated. Vote on the Ordinance: Vice Mayor Salay, yes; Mayor Lecklider, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes. Ordinance 49 -10 Amending Section 2 (Wage & Salary Structure /Administration), Paragraph A of Ordinance 73 -06 ( "Compensation Plan for Non -Union Personnel ") for the Purpose of Deleting and Incorporating Certain Job Classification Titles and Corresponding Pay Grades, as Addressed in the 2011 Operating Budget. Mr. Harding noted that a detailed staff memo and background materials were provided at the first reading on December 6. There is no additional information to report, and staff recommends approval. Vote on the Ordinance: Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher, yes; Vice Mayor Salay, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes; Mayor Lecklider, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council MeebnL January 10, 2011 Page 4 INTRODUCTION /FIRST READING — ORDINANCES Ordinance 01 -11 Authorizing the Provision of Certain Incentives to Fast Switch, Ltd., to Induce it to Retain and Expand an Office and Associated Operations and Workforce within the City; and Authorizing the Execution of an Economic Development Agreement. Mr. Gerber introduced the ordinance. Ms. Gilger noted that four of the six EDAs presented to Council tonight represent $12.3 million in state incentives. Should all six meet their projected withholdings targets, it would result in $2.2 million paid out by the City in incentives and a projected net of $8.7 million in revenue. There would be two new buildings constructed in Dublin. The companies represent 105 existing jobs in Dublin, and these EDAs would add 130 plus new jobs in Dublin. Ms. Gilger noted that Ordinance 01 -11 relates to Fast Switch, Ltd., which is currently located in Historic Dublin. The majority of their employees are contracted to other companies and so are not physically located in the Historic Dublin location. Most of the job growth would be placed at other Dublin companies offsite — in particular, at Cardinal Health. This proposal is to keep their expansion in Dublin, and in Hilliard and in Columbus. They are looking to create 111 jobs in total in all three communities, or take those jobs and create them in the Michigan area. Fast Switch has already received $944,000 in state incentives. The proposal tonight is for a three -year, 20 percent performance incentive, capped at $22,000, and would result in 25 new jobs and the retention of 63 jobs with Fast Switch. Mrs. Boring asked if the new jobs being created will pay income tax to the City of Dublin. If these employees work outside of Dublin as consultants, the City will not receive the income taxes. Ms. Gilger responded that, overall, the company is looking to create 100 new jobs, and Fast Switch is committing that 25 of those will be located in Dublin. The incentive is tied to the retention of the 63 already in Dublin, plus the 25 employees who will work within the City limits. Ms. Grigsby added that the incentives are all tied to the withholdings taxes received by the City — not just the number of jobs. There will be a second reading /public hearing at the January 24 Council meeting. Ordinance 02 -11 Authorizing the Provision of Certain Incentives to Equity Resources, Inc. to Induce it to Locate an Office and Associated Operations and Workforce within the City, and Authorizing the Execution of an Economic Development Agreement. Mr. Gerber introduced the ordinance. Ms. Gilger stated that Equity Resources is looking to locate a new office in the northern part of Franklin County, and Dublin is competing with Westerville and other northern suburbs for this. Equity is currently located in Newark, Ohio and has offices in multiple states. They are still negotiating leases on several Dublin facilities, and they are committing to Dublin, pending approval of incentives. This is a four -year, 15 percent performance incentive, capped at $12,500 and would add 12 new jobs to Dublin. There will be a second reading /public hearing at the January 24 Council meeting. Ordinance 03 -11 Authorizing the Provision of Certain Incentives to Infomotion Sports Technologies Inc. to Induce it to Retain and Expand an Office and Associated Operations and Workforce within the City, and Authorizing the Execution of an Economic Development Agreement. Mr. Gerber introduced the ordinance. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Mee tine January 10, 2011 Page 5 Ms. Gilger stated that Infomotion also does business as 9450 Sports Technology. The company currently has a small office at Wilcox Place with one employee, who is the technology behind the company. The investors are located out of state and are looking to expand the assembly and production for their technology. Dublin is competing with Massachusetts, and the state of Ohio has offered a $959,000 incentive. Dublin's proposal includes a four -year, 18 percent performance incentive tied to the company creating payroll that would approximate 45 jobs in Dublin. The majority of the assembly would be done in Dublin. Staff anticipates that the company will outgrow the current Wilcox facility by year three, but because of the state incentive, they are committed to finding an alternate facility in Dublin if needed. She offered to respond to questions. There will be a second reading /public hearing at the January 24 Council meeting. Ordinance 04 -11 Authorizing the Provision of Certain Incentives to Healthspot, LLC to Induce it to Locate an Office and Associated Operations and Workforce within the City, and Authorizing the Execution of an Economic Development Agreement. (Second reading /public hearing January 24, 2011 Council meeting) Mr. Gerber introduced the ordinance. Ms. Gilger stated that Healthspot is in the start-up phase and is looking to create 60 jobs tied to their technology, which is kiosk - based, diagnostic health care. It is similar to the "minute clinics," but is done through an interactive diagnosing process with doctors online. They are developing the technology now, and it is headquartered in the state of Delaware. Most of its investors are located in central Ohio, and their top investor is located at 94. N. High in Dublin, which could absorb the initial office space in Dublin until they grow into larger space in Dublin. The state has offered $425,000 in incentives, and Dublin is offering a four -year, 18 percent performance incentive. The company would have to create 60 new jobs to qualify for payments. There will be a second reading /public hearing at the January 24 Council meeting. Ordinance 05 -11 Authorizing the Provision of Certain Incentives to Nationwide Children's Hospital, Inc. to Induce it to Construct a Facility and Associated Operations and Workforce within the City, and Authorizing the Execution of an Economic Development Agreement. (Second reading /public hearing January 24, 2011 Council meeting) Mr. Gerber introduced the ordinance. Ms. Gilger stated that Nationwide Children's is planning to build additional facilities in Dublin. Initially, they plan to build a 22,000 square foot sports medicine and orthopedic center. Before 2020, a second facility of 30,000 square feet is planned. This incentive includes two identical sets of terms, one for each building — a $15,000 location grant and a five -year, 25 percent performance incentive that would only be granted for the new jobs added. The existing payroll would not count toward that incentive. There is a cap of $70,000 for the first building in the first term. Additional targets would be set for the jobs associated with the second building at the time it is brought forward. The first building would potentially provide 52 new employees. The Planning Commission reviewed the plan on January 6 and approved it. She shared a rendering of the building as proposed, which has similar architecture to the current Venture Drive location. The site map also shows a future building, to be built sometime between now and 2020. She offered to respond to questions. Mayor Lecklider noted that the memo indicates that some language in the EDA may be modified. He asked for clarification. Ms. Gilger responded that redlined versions of the actual agreement are still being reviewed by the attorneys. Earlier today, she received word that the draft in the RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council January 10, 2011 Page 6 Council packet is to be the final version and will be what is included at the second reading. There will be a second reading /public hearing at the January 24 Council meeting. Ordinance 06 -11 Authorizing the Provision of Certain Incentives to Alcatel- Lucent USA Inc. to Induce it to Locate an Office and Associated Operations and Workforce within the City, and Authorizing the Execution of an Economic Development Agreement. (Second reading /public hearing January 24, 2011 Council meeting) Mr. Gerber introduced the ordinance. Ms. Gilger stated that Alcatel- Lucent has been seeking a new facility for a good portion of 2010. The company has been considering several locations in central Ohio as well as out of state locations where the company owns facilities and has excess space to absorb these 540 jobs currently in central Ohio. The state has provided a $10 million incentive to retain these jobs in Ohio. Dublin is proposing a $500,000 location grant to bring the company to Dublin, which would be used for improvements to the building and relocation costs. Dublin is also proposing that the City provide two optical fibers in the DubLink system and a 10 -year, 20 percent performance incentive for those jobs, if pre - determined targets are met. Staff estimates that the company could potentially receive $2 million in incentives from Dublin, and that Dublin could potentially net just over $8 million in revenue. This would bring 540 jobs to Dublin. The company has focused on Atrium II, located at 5475 Rings Road, owned by Duke Realty. The lease would include 120,000 square feet of office space. Mayor Lecklider noted that on page two of the EDA, the lease term does not match the ten -year incentive term. It is noted as a minimum five -year lease in the document. Ms. Gilger responded that the company is only willing to commit to five -year leases. They were agreeable to a five -year lease with a five -year option, and staff felt that in order to entice the company to pick up that option, the EDA would include a ten -year incentive that would retain them in the building. Annually, they can qualify for incentives only if they are physically located in Dublin. If they were in Dublin for only five years, they would be eligible for only five years of the incentive. Therefore, offering a longer term is hoped to persuade them to pick up the second five -year option on the lease. There will be a second reading /public hearing at the January 24 Council meeting. Mayor Chinn ici-Zuercher commented that all of these EDAs represent wonderful opportunities for Dublin and the companies. She congratulated staff on their hard work on these proposals. It is wonderful to have companies willing to expand in Dublin and companies who want to come to Dublin, as reflected in the six EDAs before Council tonight. She is hopeful that the principals of these companies can be present at the next meeting. Ms. Gilger responded that representatives of all six companies have been invited to attend the January 24 Council meeting. INTRODUCTION /PUBLIC HEARING — RESOLUTIONS Resolution 01 -11 Accepting the Lowest/Best Bid for the 2011 North Landscape Maintenance Project. Mr. Gerber introduced the resolution. Mr. Hahn stated that this authorizes a contract with Rocky Fork Company for maintenance of the median strips in the northern portion of the City. This is similar to the package bid last year. He offered to respond to questions. Mr. Keenan asked what company was awarded the bid last year. Mr. Hahn responded that the same company was awarded last year's bid. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Mee January 10, 2011 Page 7 Mr. Keenan noted that a reverse bid process was used this year. How has the reverse bidding process been received by the contractors? Mr. Hahn responded that the response has been positive. Wallace Maurer, 7451 Dublin Road asked for an explanation of the reverse bidding process. Mr. Hahn responded that contractors compete for a contract, bidding online at a website. The third party administrator fees are paid by the winning bidder — not by the City. The bidder can monitor the current activity in bidding and can enter a lower bid to try to secure the award. This bidding process took place over a few hours. Pre - qualification is done of the bidders before they can participate. The bids open and close at a certain time, unless a lower bid is entered in the last few minutes. The process is then extended. Mayor Lecklider commented that the documentation indicates that this process required 1 -1/2 hours and there were 150 bids. Mr. Reiner commented that it is important to ensure that the quality of the work of the contractors is monitored by staff. Mr. Hahn responded that this is a "pay as you go" contract, so unless the work meets the standards, the contractor will not be paid. Mr. Reiner emphasized that the employee in the field supervising the contract is a critical component of this process. Vote on the Resolution: Mr. Gerber, yes; Vice Mayor Salay, yes; Ms. Chinnick Zuercher, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mayor Lecklider, yes. Resolution 02 -11 Authorizing the City Manager to Execute an Agreement with the Franklin County Office of Homeland Security and Justice Programs to Receive Grant Funding for the Dublin Emergency Warning System Radio Narrow - Banding Project. Mr. Gerber introduced the resolution. Interim Chief vonEckartsberg stated that this grant of $16,215, awarded under the 2008 Urban Area Security Initiative grant program will be used to replace the radios in 23 of the City's 26 emergency siren sites. The other three sites were purchased in recent years with narrowband capable radios already installed. This resolution authorizes execution of the agreement in order to accept the grant monies. Vote on the Resolution: Ms. Chinnici- Zuercher, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes; Vice Mayor Salay, yes; Mayor Lecklider, yes. OTHER • Update re Coyotes in Dublin Ms. Migliore, Nature Education Coordinator presented information, based on the research of Dr. Stanley Ghert of OSU, considered the leading coyote researcher in the U.S.; Dr. Suzie Prange, who is a biologist for the state; and Dr. Karen Hallberg, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services. She noted the following: • Coyotes are not indigenous to Ohio, but arrived in the early 1900s. It is thought that coyotes were able to move into Ohio because wolves had been extricated in that time, and there was little competition for prey. Coyotes are a medium - sized predator and wolves are the top predator and control predators under them. Ohio no longer has apex predators other than humans in the state of Ohio. • Coyotes mate for life and are very good parents. They are colored from browns to reds and have a tail that points toward the ground. Coyotes typically have a brown tip to their tails. Coyotes are short-lived creatures -- the majority of them are killed by cars and by humans using guns and traps, etc. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meetine January 10, 2011 Page 8 • Myths about coyotes include their size. They range from 30 -35 pounds in central Ohio. They look larger because of their ability to grow fur in the winter time. • Attacks on humans do occur, but in recorded history, there have been 147 attacks across all of North America. There have been two deaths related to coyote attacks, and one attack on a three -year old girl involved wild coyotes that had been fed by humans. • In comparison, in Franklin County in 2010, there were 449 dog bites. Dublin and Westerville both reported 46 incidents of dog bites in 2010. • Attacks on pets (cats and dogs) by coyotes are common, as they view pets as competition for food and for territory. Humans tend to walk their pets through coyote territory unknowingly. Typically, coyotes form very loose packs and only the alpha pair mates. They tend to hunt as an alpha pair and protect their territory from other dogs and cats who they view as competing for food. • She has received reports about howling coyotes. People hear them and believe the coyotes are hunting. But all predators are very quiet when they hunt. Howling is a safe way for them to express where their territory is to other coyotes. • It is also believed that coyotes come together as a family and bond through howling. • Half of the coyote diet consists of small rodents. White tailed deer is 22 percent of their diet, and this only occurs in the spring when they prey upon fawns. In central Ohio, the coyotes can help to reduce the deer population. Fruit constitutes 23 percent of their diet. Domestic cats are sometimes killed in competition for food — not to eat. • Coyotes live in all 88 counties of Ohio, even in central cities like Columbus. Coyote populations are increasing, which brings potential for more human /coyote conflict. • If an adult human encounters a coyote, it is important to yell and look large and never leave before the coyote leaves in order to show dominance. Humans can throw items in the direction of the coyote to startle them, use water in a spray gun, or carry a walking stick. • It is important to keep dogs on leads, which will protect the pet. Dogs within six to ten feet of its owner are less likely to be attacked by a coyote. • Having the dog on the lead keeps it from wandering into the coyote's territory, as domestic dogs are not familiar with wildlife. • She noted that it is important not to leave dogs and outside cats unattended, as well as children. • She believes in teaching adults, who can then teach their children what they feel comfortable with in regard to wildlife. • Keeping yards clean, keeping recycling bins covered and trash container lids tied down, picking up fruits and vegetables from gardens will help keep coyotes out of yards. • She pointed out that birdfeeders attract all wildlife. She offered to respond to questions. Mr. Keenan noted that their neighborhood hears intense and multiple animals yelping from the woods behind them, and then silence. Is this a pack hunting a deer? Ms. Migliore responded that they are very quiet when they hunt. Coyotes have the ability to sound like a much larger number of animals, based on research. They can throw their voices in three directions with varying sounds. Vice Mayor Salay stated that some constituents contacted her last spring and she suggested they contact Ms. Migliore. A woman was walking her German shepherd along the Indian Run in Coffman Park and was chased back to her home by a coyote. She was told by someone from the City or Ohio Wildlife that the coyote was likely defending a den and she had walked too close. It was a frightening experience for the resident. Perhaps the brush along the bikepath should be trimmed so that the coyotes don't feel comfortable making dens in this location. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meetin_= January 10, 2011 Page 9 Ms. Migliore responded that she believes that there is no need to trim the brush along the path. More education about what to do when encountering wildlife would be very helpful, especially with this small animal. The habitat along the paths is critical for not only wildlife, but for cleaner water. Coyotes tend not to choose den sites next to such paths, but they remove their pups if they believe there is danger. There have been coyote dens in the tree line back to the Justice Center in recent years. Vice Mayor Salay suggested that perhaps signage in the park could provide alerts about coyotes and how to react to them. She has observed educational signage in national forests. In the less populated areas of the City, such as the Red Trabue nature preserve, this signage could be useful. Ms. Grigsby stated that this may be a worthwhile topic for an upcoming homeowners association presidents' meeting. Ms. Chinn ici-Zuercher noted that Mrs. Boring suggested that, similar to Glacier Ridge signage, educational signage could display the story of coyotes and other animals in the area and indicate their presence. Ms. Migliore added that all of the information she has shared applies to all wild animals in the central Ohio area in terms of territories and habits. Board and Commission Items of Interest for 2011 Ms. Grigsby stated that a memo was included in the packet regarding the items of interest. Staff is recommending that Council refer these lists to a Council committee for review, as was done previously. Staff will reformat the information for review at that time. Chris Clinton. Parks & Recreation Advisory Commission noted that, currently, the Commission does not have exposure to the budget process. He believes it is important for PRAC to have exposure to the budget in order to cross matrix into the Community Plan. At the November PRAC meeting, Mr. Hahn stated that it would be necessary for Council to approve that PRAC have that exposure to the process of the details of the budget. Mayor Lecklider asked staff which committee is recommended for referral of the items of interest. Ms. Colley responded that staff recommends the lists be referred to the Community Development Committee. Staff is hopeful that the committee would refer the 2011 items of interest as early in the year as possible so the boards and commissions can begin working on the items. Mayor Lecklider suggested that Mr. Clinton stay apprised through the PRAC liaison of the date for the Committee review of this matter in case he would like to attend. Ms. Chinn ici-Zuercher asked for clarification about Mr. Clinton's comments. Is his request for the Commission to have input into the budget process or merely to become aware of what is in the budget that is approved for parks and recreation, and which of those might have been topics of discussion that PRAC is interested in having Council include in the budget? Mr. Clinton responded that the second portion of her comments is what he is pointing out. It is basically a review of what is in the budget. PRAC does not have any opportunity to cross matrix what might be in the budget against what is in the Community Plan. They are an advisory body, and could advise what is not being attended to or what needs attention. They want to help Council achieve their goals. Vice Mayor Salay moved referral to the Community Development Committee. Mr. Gerber seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mr. Gerber, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mayor Lecklider, yes; Vice Mayor Salay, yes. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS _ Meefine Dublin City Council January 10, 2011 Page 10 6 y;9*101 51i51=1.kb9 Ms. Grigsby: 1. Noted that in the next Council packet, there will be draft legislation in regard to the appeals process for administrative decision of Planning & Zoning Commission. Once Council's feedback is obtained on the draft, the minutes can be forwarded to Planning Commission for their review of the legislation. Following P &Z's review and recommendation, the ordinance will be scheduled for first and second reading at Council. 2. Stated that a memo was included in the packet in regard to the Bridge Street Corridorjoint workshop scheduled for Monday, January 31. If Council has any comments or feedback on the proposed agenda, she suggested they be forwarded to her or to the Clerk. 3. Noted that the various consultants involved with this project will be contacting all of Council to obtain individual feedback in preparation for the January 31 meeting. This workshop will be held in Council Chambers beginning at 6 p.m. Mrs. Boring asked if the consultants will contact Planning & Zoning Commission members as well. She had understood that the Code would have to be reviewed by the Commission at some point, so it would make sense to obtain their input at this point. How much information has been shared with the Commission at this point, and will the consultants be in contact with them as well? Ms. Grigsby responded that she will defer to Planning staff on this. Mr. Langworthy noted that Planning & Zoning Commission members will be contacted — that process has already been initiated. Mrs. Boring asked if the January 31 meeting will be a presentation format, or will there be discussion on the information. Mr. McDaniel responded that staff is seeking such guidance tonight. The draft agenda reflects the introduction of all of the consultants to the group. Council will either meet or interview the consultants via phone before that date, if schedules permit. The next two items on the agenda reflect items on Council's action statement regarding the Intent and the Implementation of Planning Principles. It is anticipated Council will guide that discussion or indicate their intent. In summary, the agenda will consist of an introduction of the consultants, an overview of the process to be presented by the consultants, and a dialogue about how all of this fits together. He invited Council feedback. Mrs. Boring stated that, as she indicated earlier in this process, she anticipated much more discussion concerning the Implementation of Planning Principles. When she had discussion with the consultant, he showed her a plan. However, she thought the discussion would focus on concepts. Mr. McDaniel inquired if she were referring to the concept plan and renderings that were adopted. Mrs. Boring confirmed this. Mr. McDaniel stated that is the starting point and basis for the discussion. Mrs. Boring requested that the Clerk forward to her a copy of the minutes from previous meetings regarding this topic. Ms. Chinn ici-Zuercher requested clarification about the intent of the meeting on January 31. When Council last met and accepted the work Goody Clancy had completed on this project, the understanding was that the next step was the specialized evaluations that would need to occur with engineering, transportation, utilities, etc. The consultants have been retained. Have they completed their work or is the work well underway? Mr. McDaniel responded that the work is not completed, and some consultants are nearer that goal than others. Before the meeting on the 31 st, a joint meeting with staff and the consultants will occur for review of the work done to date, and to then lay out plans for community charettes. The agenda proposed for the joint session of the bodies on January 31 follows Council's designated action plan for the Bridge Street RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council January 10, 2011 Page 11 Meefin Corridor goal. He is unsure what Council wanted to achieve with that session. The focus of tonight's dialogue is to understand what Council wants to achieve from this joint session. Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher summarized that at this point, the consultants have been retained and the purpose of the meetings is for Council to meet the consultants and hear the scope of the consultants' work. The group can then react to what is presented. Staff was entrusted to outline the scope of the work for the next phase. Ms. Grigsby responded that this meeting is taking place early in the process. Items such as the pattern book and the framework that Goody Clancy is familiar with and has had interactions with Council will be a little further advanced. The transportation portion has just begun, and the utility work has not yet been initiated. This meeting will give the consultants the opportunity to ask questions of Council about the principles and what specific details of architecture are desired, so that they have a better understanding of Council's desires before a draft plan is developed. The goal is to obtain feedback and input from Council early in the process. Mrs. Boring stated that during her discussion with the consultant, the consultant indicated that the project was on a "fast track" and that most of their work was to be completed by the January 31 meeting. Mr. McDaniel responded that is not accurate, and is not the intent. Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher pointed out that it was Council who requested a faster timeline for this initiative. Ms. Grigsby stated that the consultants have been made aware of Council's adopted timeline. The goal is to abide by that to the extent possible, recognizing that if there are items that will take longer, the goal is produce a good product, not to have a speedy process at the expense of quality. Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher asked Mrs. Boring to clarify her expectations of the discussion to take place on January 31 Mrs. Boring responded that when Council discussed the concept plan, she had concerns about some items that were missing, such as greenspace. She believed that the principles were "on target," but that the concept plan seemed to need improvement. It was her understanding was that it was a "work in progress," which would be brought back to Council. Additionally, she is unaware of any direct input from the Planning and Zoning Commission on the concept plan. She has heard that the Commission has had to request copies of various items related to this project. There has been no input from the Commission on this. Ms. Grigsby stated that it is staff's expectation that following the January 31 joint session, there will a series of meetings throughout the year. Similar to any Community Plan process, as the consultants' work progresses, there will input sessions for Council and for the public, as well. Mrs. Boring stated that her concern is that the January 31 st agenda appears to indicate a number of presentations and not dialogue. Mr. McDaniel responded that it is intended to be both. The first item, Introduction of Consultants and their Overview, is expected to go very quickly. The following dialogue with Council is expected to provide the consultants and staff with direction early in the process. The agenda also reflects Council's action plan, using terms such as "intent" and "action plan." The end of the agenda indicates expectations of Council — timing, principles, and Council feedback. Invited to and included in the discussion will be the Planning and Zoning Commission (PZC), Board of Zoning (BZA) Appeals and Architectural Review Board (ARB). Some of their members will also be interviewed prior to the January 31 st workshop. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council M eeting January 10, 2011 Page 12 Mayor Lecklider stated that his perception of this meeting was that it would serve as an initial meeting with the consultants, Council, PZC, BZA and ARB to share information from the consultants and seek affirmation and /or direction from Council. Mr. Gerber stated that in his meeting with the consultant last week, he was asked about any issues he had with the concept plan, which they then discussed. The consultant indicated he would schedule similar discussions with other Council members, and he would then begin to write some preliminary outlines of what the Code would look like. What is hoped to be achieved with a joint meeting at this point in time? Is it primarily an opportunity for Council and board and commission members to provide input, or is it primarily intended for the consultants to clarify their work to date and request direction about whether they are "on track "? Ms. Grigsby responded that there are three strategies /actions that Council included in its Bridge Street Corridor goals. The first two have occurred, and this is the third action /strategy. The intent is for Council to give direction to staff and the consultants, but also to give Council the opportunity to clarify Council's position on this project and the development in this area with its boards and commissions, recognizing it is a different development plan that what has occurred in Dublin in recent years. Vice Mayor Salay stated that she believes that having a combined session at this point makes sense. Council traveled with PZC to Franklin, TN and to Greenville, SC and several PZC members have been present at the earlier Bridge Street Corridor meetings. They have been actively engaged and are aware the direction Council is taking with this. She believes they will attend this joint session to learn more and provide input. Council had indicated that at this point, they want PZC, BZA and ARB to become involved because of their role in the process. Mrs. Boring stated that an individual contacted her and indicated that some Commissioners were not even aware that a report was being prepared. There seems to be some lack of communication. When Council receives reports /updates /plans regarding this project, those should be automatically shared with PZC. Ms. Grigsby responded that the report was made available at the City's website. But if Council desires that paper copies be provided to PZC members, copies can be included in the next packet. Mayor Lecklider stated that he appreciates the Commissions' interest. However, his view is consistent with staff's view of what can be accomplished at this joint session. Ultimately, this is a Council initiative and Council certainly desires the support and cooperation of Planning Commission and the other boards and commissions that would be involved in this major undertaking. Mrs. Boring stated that one of the questions the consultant asked was if Planning and Zoning Commission input was needed regarding the Code for this area. Her concern is not giving PZC the opportunity to weigh in until the plans are too far along. Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher responded that her intention is not to do business as has always been done, which was the point of having a pattern book and codes for this area, as was done in Franklin, New Albany and Westerville. They zoned the land and created the code and development books they needed so that developers coming into their area knew from the outset what was desired. The role of Dublin's Planning and Zoning Commission will be different in that process. Mrs. Boring responded that is what will occur once the process is approved. Her question is how much input Council desires from PZC to determine what these codes and standards will be. Ms. Chinn ici-Zuercher stated that she has been on record as stating that she wants this process done in six months. There are two developments that are ready to move forward at this time. Staff and the consultants need to obtain the necessary input and provide Council with the best professional document possible within that time period. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council M eeting January 10, 2011 Page 13 Mayor Lecklider stated that because of the aggressive timetable Council has imposed on staff, the consultants have begun to draft the Code and standards. By necessity, some of that must begin now, although it will be subject to modifications. Mr. Gerber stated that his expectation for this joint meeting is for Council to hear from the consultants, affirm whether or not they are "on track" and provide additional input. He has also previously expressed his preference for a tight timeframe for this project. Therefore, he wants to avoid a debate in this forum about everyone's role in this process. Mr. Keenan stated that there is a significant amount of potential economic development driving this effort, and it is Council's role to lead this initiative. Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher stated that Council has also indicated that they desire that the experts, understanding the intent for this area, provide a draft code that would actualize the intent. That is what Council, PZC, BZA and ARB will be reacting to on January 31 Mayor Lecklider stated that in his meeting last week with the consultant, he requested that they provide examples of where this type of planning has been implemented successfully, to increase everyone's comfort level. Mr. Reiner stated that with the compressed timeframe the City is working within and the limitations of this particular project, it is important to include PZC throughout the process so that they will also be prepared and to avoid the risk of later conflicts. Ms. Chinn ici-Zuercher responded that is the purpose of the joint meeting on January 31 st Mr. Gerber noted that the consultant with whom he spoke last week indicated that he was also speaking with PZC members. Mr. McDaniel stated that the consultant to whom he is referring is the code consultant; they are slightly ahead in their work versus the other consultants. The consultant conducting the interviews works out of a Cincinnati office. Because he is local, it is easier for him to conduct face -to -face interviews. Council will also be meeting with other consultants in the coming weeks. Mr. Keenan asked if everyone has met with the consultant. Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher noted she was not contacted until Friday and has not yet been scheduled. Mr. Gerber noted that he, Mrs. Boring, and Mayor Lecklider have been interviewed to date. Mr. Reiner suggested that the process continue as scheduled with the workshop on January 31 St . 4. Ms. Grigsby noted that a Parade Participation survey form for St. Patrick's Day and July 4"' has been provided to Council. She asked that they complete and return it as soon as possible. COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS Finance Committee Recommendations re. Pending 2011 Hotel -Motel Tax Grant Applications Mr. Gerber stated that the Finance Committee met tonight preceding this Council meeting to follow up on four pending hotel -motel tax grant applications from the November 22 meeting. The Committee is making the following recommendations: 1. Kiwanis Club of Greater Dublin — 2011 Teen Driving Roadeo RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting January 10, 2011 Page 14 The Committee recommends a grant of $2,200 for driving safety kits and educational materials. The Committee suggested they work with the City in regard to promotion of the program. 2. Dublin Area Art League The DAAL had requested $14,800, but revised their application to $10,800 for year 2011 and $5,000 for year 2012. The Committee recommends approval of the revised requests for 2011 and 2012, with the goal that the event becomes self sustaining in the future. The DAAL has retained a firm to assist them with the event. 3. Dublin City Schools — 2011 Outdoor Drama Leatherlips The Committee postponed any action on this application and is requesting additional information. The applicant is requesting $13,240, which is $4,200 higher than last year's grant. The increase is primarily related to expansion of operations and purchase of audio equipment. Such equipment would be owned by Dublin Schools, and therefore the Committee recommends the applicant discuss this further with the Schools. No recommendation is made at this time. 4. Flight Team at The Ohio State University — National Safety and Flight Evaluation Conference 2011 (SAFECON) The applicant provided additional information regarding the number of hotel room nights filled by the attendees and the economic impact. The Committee is recommending a grant of $7,500. Mrs. Boring asked how the Flight Team event relates to the City of Dublin. Mr. Gerber responded that the information provided in the packet indicates that they fill hotel rooms and spend money in Dublin and this is in line with the criteria. Mr. Reiner added that the group estimates they will generate $15,000 in hotel /motel tax revenue alone. Mr. Gerber noted that this is one criterion of many for the grants, but was key to this particular recommendation. Mr. Gerber moved adoption of the three recommendations as outlined. Mr. Keenan seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Vice Mayor Salay, yes; Mayor Lecklider, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes; Ms. Chinnici- Zuercher, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes. COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE Mr. Gerber stated that 2011 is an election year for Dublin City Council, Dublin School Board and Washington Township Trustees. He announced that he will seek re- election to a second four -year term as an at large representative on City Council. Mr. Keenan 1. Reported that Steve Stolte, former Union County Engineer was appointed to fill the unexpired term of Tom McCarthy as a Union County Commissioner. The City worked closely with Mr. Stolte in the US 33 Corridor group and on the LUC Regional Planning Commission. He suggested that a congratulatory letter be sent to Mr. Stolte. 2. Asked about the status of the texting while driving legislation. Mr. Smith responded that a draft ordinance will be provided for Council to introduce at the January 24`" meeting. 3. Commented again about the pavement system for crosswalks he observed in Marco Island, Florida. One of the important components of the system is the motion detection system, which did not require the pedestrian to push a button. This could be an important feature of any future improvements that are installed. Ms. Grigsby confirmed that staff will provide a report with information on all options Council may want to consider. Mr. Reiner proposed that the Community Development Committee meet on Wednesday, February 2 at 6 p.m. to review the board and commission items of interest. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting January 10, 2011 Page 15 It was the consensus of the Committee to meet on this date. Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher: 1. Asked if there is follow -up information on outcomes of the "Choose Your Ride" campaign, i.e. how many vouchers were used and how the restaurants took advantage of the education offer for their employees. Interim Chief vonEckartsberg responded that he does not have numbers on the vouchers used, and there was no response to the offers for the education for employees. He noted that the City will partner with the county's program in order to secure the vouchers in the future. The group they partner with also oversees the DUI task force, and many suburban communities are involved. 2. Regarding snow and ice removal on bikepaths, the report indicates the limitations of staffing and equipment. As the City endorses more healthy activity in the community, perhaps this should be considered in the budget next year to ensure availability of the paths throughout the community all year. Ms. Grigsby responded that staff will review where the bikepaths are located that are in use in the winter so that plowing is not done on those which are not utilized in the winter. Staff will review the locations where clearing may be warranted due to the use patterns. Mayor Lecklider stated that he understands the logic of which paths are cleared, but he will personally advocate for bikepath snow clearing as much as possible. Ms. Chinn ici- Zuercher noted that a new system was in place this year for prioritization of snow plowing. It is also important to ensure enough paths are open for everyone to use. Ms. Grigsby stated that staff will follow up regarding any changes to snow plowing priorities that have been implemented. Mrs. Boring: 1. Noted that in the past, rumble strips were installed on Dublin Road to indicate a driver was entering the Historic District. For some reason, they were removed. Could staff look into why they were removed and whether they should be reinstalled to alert drivers to slow down? Ms. Grigsby responded that they were removed when ODOT resurfaced the roadway. It was the City's responsibility to reinstall them. However, due to some concerns /complaints expressed about the noise created by the rumble strips, they were not reinstalled. 2. Asked Mr. Smith if installing devices that are not warranted places the City in a precarious legal situation. Mr. Smith responded that it would not place the City in a positive legal situation. It depends on the particulars of the situation. Legal staff can prepare a memo regarding warrants for signals and when the City can do things that are extraordinarily beyond what is warranted. 3. Asked if extra speed patrols have been instituted in Historic Dublin. Ms. Grigsby stated that if there are complaints, additional traffic control is implemented. The City is in the process of doing additional StealthStats in the District, subsequent to the accident, based upon a complaint filed. Interim Chief vonEckartsberg added that when the Police receive traffic complaints, they do extra enforcement. They are studying the area and using StealthStats to assess the speeding issues. This will be included in the report to Council. Vice Mayor Salav: 1. Reminded Council that there is an ongoing investigation of the recent crosswalk accident and much information that is not yet known. She is aware that staff will provide a report about modifications that could be considered. She encouraged everyone to be prudent in their discussions and comments until they have more information. 2. Suggested that Council confirm a date for their annual retreat. She believes that the evening dinner session followed by a full -day session worked well in the past. She suggested that Council meet on Thursday, February 24 for a dinner session and all day on Friday, February 25. These dates have been tentatively listed on the calendar. She will communicate with Council about securing a facilitator for RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meet January 10, 2011 Page 16 the session. Staff and Council will need to consider what they want to accomplish in this retreat and how best to do it. She will contact Ms. Grigsby this week to discuss this and then obtain feedback from all of Council. If anyone has a conflict with these dates, please notify the clerk as soon as possible. Mayor Lecklider stated that the new year will likely be busy with many challenges, and he is confident that Council and staff are up to the task. He looks forward with anticipation to the City's successes in 2011. ADJOURNMENT TO EXECUTIVE SESSION Mayor Lecklider moved to adjourn to executive session at 8:56 p.m. for discussion of land acquisition matters. Mr. Reiner seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mr. Keenan, yes; Mayor Lecklider, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes; Vice Mayor Salay, yes; Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes. The meeting was reconvened at 9:20 p.m. and formally adjourned Mayor — PreVIng Officer Clerk of Council