Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil Minutes 02-28-2011RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dubtin City Council Meetins February 28, 2011 Mayor Lecklider called the Monday, February 28, 2011 Regular Meeting of Dublin City Council to order at 6:30 p.m. at the Dublin Municipal Building. Present were: Mayor Lecklider, Vice Mayor Salay, Mrs. Boring, Ms. Chinnici- Zuercher, Mr. Gerber, and Mr. Keenan. Mr. Reiner was absent (excused). Staff members present were: Ms. Grigsby, Mr. McDaniel, Ms. Gilger and Mr. Smith. ADJOURNMENT TO EXECUTIVE SESSION Mayor Lecklider moved to adjourn to executive session for discussion of legal matters (to confer with an attorney for the public body concerning disputes involving the public body that are the subject of pending or imminent court action) and land acquisition matters (to consider the purchase of property for public purposes). Mr. Gerber seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mr. Keenan, yes; Mayor Lecklider, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes; Vice Mayor Salay, yes; Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes. The meeting was reconvened at 7:05 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Vice Mayor Salay led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL Present were Mayor Lecklider, Vice Mayor Salay, Mrs. Boring, Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher, Mr. Gerber, and Mr. Keenan. Mr. Reiner was absent (excused). Staff members present were Ms. Grigsby, Mr. Smith, Mr. McDaniel, Interim Chief von Eckartsberg, Mr. Hahn, Mr. Earman, Mr. Harding, Mr. Langworthy, Ms. Rauch, Ms. Willis, Ms. Cox, Ms. Canavan, Ms. Ott, Mr. Thurman, Ms. Adkins, Ms. Gilger, Ms. Colley, and Ms. Burness. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The approval of the minutes of the meeting of February 14, 2011 was postponed until the March 14, 2011 meeting. CORRESPONDENCE The Clerk reported receipt of a Notice to Legislative Authority of the transfer of D1, D2, D3 and D6 liquor permits from Dublin Express, 6546 Riverside Drive to Rainbow Hospitality Columbus LLC, 6502 Riverside Drive. There was no objection to the transfer of these permits. PROCLAMATIONS /SPECIAL RECOGNITION Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) Awards of Excellence — Officers Kyle Groves, Jacob Williams, Bruce McKenna Mayor Lecklider and Vice Mayor Salay presented City awards to Officers Groves, Williams and McKenna. These officers were recognized by MADD on February 17 with Awards of Excellence for their efforts to reduce impaired driving in Central Ohio. Officers Williams and Groves were recognized for their work in OVI arrests, and Officer McKenna for his work in developing the "Choose Your Ride" campaign and his years of dedicated teaching in the Dublin D.A.R.E. program. Interim Chief von Eckartsberg commented that Lt. DeJarnette is also present, as he is their Bureau Commander. The City is very proud of these officers, who are among a select group of officers from all of Central Ohio that were recognized by MADD. Recognition of Officer Kevin Rickenbacher — Award of Merit Mayor Lecklider noted that the Award of Merit is being presented to Officer Rickenbacher for his role in the apprehension of an attempted murder suspect on December 14, 2010. Interim Chief von Eckarstberg commented that this very prestigious award is the second highest award given by the Division of Police. Officer Rickenbacher is RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council February 28, 2011 Page 2 recognized for apprehending the suspect within a very short time after the shooting occurred on Frantz Road. In doing so, the situation was handled safely and professionally. Officer Rickenbacher was also honored by Central Ohio Crime Stoppers as the February 2011 Officer of the Month. • Safe Ride Month —March 2011 Mayor Lecklider presented a proclamation to Interim Chief von Eckartstberg in recognition of March 2011 as "Safe Ride Month" in Dublin. Interim Chief von Eckartsberg thanked Central Ohio Safe Ride for partnering with the City on this initiative. This is a continuation of the "Choose Your Ride" program that Officer McKenna helped to create. It enables the City to keep this initiative moving forward, providing taxicab vouchers to establishments in Dublin. CITIZEN COMMENTS Patrick Byrne, 829 Oxley Road, Columbus Chairperson, Central Ohio Safe Ride stated that this initiative began in 2009 as a collaboration between Byrne's Pub and Fado Irish Pub. It was designed to provide taxicab vouchers during the St. Patrick's Day holiday season. Since that time, they have collaborated with the Columbus Board of Health and Riverside Methodist Hospital in development of the program, which now includes 17 participating establishments in a year -round program. They are pleased with the support from the City of Dublin and Dublin establishments. The program is very effective in reducing the number of impaired drivers on the road. These establishments are investing their own funds in the program. They are hopeful that the program grows throughout Central Ohio. Linda Tvorik 240 Parsons Avenue, Columbus Public Health Safe Communities Program noted that they partnered with Byrne's Pub and Fado Irish Pub to initiate Safe Ride in 2009, and expanded the program to year round in 2010. They provided 141 vouchers in 2009 and 388 in 2010. They are pleased that the program is now expanding to the City of Dublin. She is hopeful that the other Franklin County communities will join their program as well. The goal is to keep the roads safe by ensuring everyone has a safe ride home. They plan to have a media event in Dublin on March 16, and they are appreciative of the proclamation that they will incorporate in their efforts. The Franklin County Sheriff's Department and the Ohio Unit of Investigation from Ohio Department of Public Safety is also part of their group. Bill Jacob, 53 N. High Street, Dublin introduced himself as the 2011 President of the Historic Dublin Business Association. He invited everyone to attend the kick -off meeting tomorrow at the Dublin Library branch at 8:30 a.m. They will share their plans for 2011 with current and prospective members. He added that the City has a strong partner with the H.D.B.A. in making the Historic Dublin a wonderful experience for visitors and residents alike, and ensuring they have a safe and enjoyable visit to downtown Dublin. They look forward to working with the City in the future. LEGISLATION INTRODUCTION /FIRST READING — ORDINANCES Ordinance 10 -11 Rezoning Approximately 23.3 Acres Located on the West and East Sites of Avery Road, at the Intersection with Holywell Drive from R -1, Restricted Suburban Residential District and PUD, Planned Unit Development District (Brigid's Green) to PUD, Planned Unit Development District. (St. Brigid of Kildare Catholic Church - Case 10- 058Z/PDP) Mr. Gerber introduced the ordinance. Ms. Ray stated that this application was reviewed by Planning & Zoning Commission at their February 3, 2011 meeting, and a recommendation of approval with three recommendations was made to Council. • She shared an aerial view of the site, noting that the application consists of two parcels that are part of the rezoning request to PUD: a 15 -acre parcel, located on RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting February 28, 2011 Page 3 the west side of Avery Road, generally south of Brand Road and Avery Park; and the Brigid's Green PUD, which is an 8.3 acre parcel located on the east side of Avery Road. Surrounding development in the area consists of single - family residential neighborhoods zoned PLR, including Wyndham Village, Wexford Estates and Dublinshire. • The applicant has met with adjacent property owners to discuss the application, and some of the residents attended the February 3 and November 4, 2010 rezoning hearings and made comments. The residents' main concerns are the amount of development on this site and future potential development. Planning staff has spoken with these residents, who indicate they are generally satisfied with the proposed development text provisions that will help limit all future development on both of these parcels. • There are two subareas: subarea A on the west side of Avery includes the existing church, pastoral center, and school; subarea B on the east side of Avery includes an existing residence, athletic fields, and a 102 -space parking lot. • The site on the west side of Avery has a long development history. St. Brigid Church and school have undergone several expansions since their construction in 1990 and 1995, respectively. Most recently, the applicant applied for a variance in 2009 to permit the lot coverage on the church site to exceed 45 percent. The Board of Zoning Appeals disapproved this variance, but did approve a shared parking agreement with Radiant Life Church, which is located 1,000 feet to the south of the parcel. This is designed to accommodate the parking requirements for the church's recent sanctuary expansion. • The church is requesting rezoning to PUD to allow the lot coverage to exceed 45 percent and to allow the church to share parking between the subarea A and subarea B. • The proposed preliminary and final development plan generally represents the existing site conditions, with a plan for future parking, should additional parking spaces need to be constructed to meet parking requirements. • The proposed text includes two subareas, and the proposed permitted uses are the existing uses in each subarea. • Two of the primary issues discussed at P &Z were lot coverage and parking. The proposed text includes provisions that would allow all uses between the two parcels to share required parking and /or required parking would defer to Code. Of the 417 total parking spaces required, 381 are provided with the two parcels of the church site and Brigid's Green. The remaining 36 spaces are provided through the agreement with the Radiant Life Church; however, if that agreement terminates, the final development plan includes a provision showing how the additional parking will be accommodated within subarea B. • In terms of lot coverage, the proposed coverage is what exists today. It is 50.3 percent for subarea A and 13 percent for subarea B. If the additional parking were required to be installed to meet requirements, the text would allow the permitted lot coverage to be 17 percent for subarea B. Planning & Zoning Commission recommended approval to Council with three conditions: 1) That the applicant modifies the development text to address the comments discussed in the Planning Report regarding parking, subject to Planning approval; 2) That the development text be modified to require the same landscape screening for the southern boundary of the new parking lot, subject to Planning approval; and 3) That the additional text modifications requested by the Commission be made to the development text, subject to Planning approval. Planning is recommending approval of Ordinance 10 -11 at the second reading /public hearing. She offered to respond to questions. The applicant is present tonight. Michael Close, 7360 Bellaire Avenue. Dublin noted that: • All of the development on the site has been done according to permit. However, there were some miscalculations at one time resulting in the RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting February 28, 2011 Page 4 sanctuary building and some of the parking exceeding the 45 percent lot coverage limitation. Therefore, the applicant originally requested a variance to allow them to keep the parking on the site. It was denied, however the Board approved the use of spaces offsite at Radiant Life, which exceed the Code required limit of 300 feet from the site. The issue relates to the Christmas and Easter church services and the parking overflow needs. For the remainder of the year, the parking spaces are adequate. This rezoning commits that there will be no further development on the site beyond what is already permitted. This rezoning will allow the existing parking spaces to be retained. The church has already removed a detention pond on the property, which was a concern of adjacent property owners. There is also a contingency that if the Radiant Life parking agreement is terminated, the Church will build the parking as required on the site. This rezoning simply brings the development into compliance with the requirements. They have met with numerous neighbors who are now satisfied. He requested that Council hold over the second reading /public hearing until March 28, as he will be out of town on March 14. Mrs. Boring asked how stormwater management is being handled, if the detention pond has been eliminated. Mr. Close responded that the City has already approved a re- engineering of the detention on the site and it has been completed. It was done under the previous R -1 zoning, because the neighbors objected to the detention pond that existed. Mayor Lecklider recalled some comments in the record about the crosswalk on Avery. Was this resolved? Mr. Close explained that when the rezoning was done for Brigid's Green, the crosswalk was relocated. There has been no further change. Mayor Lecklider noted there was some discussion about maintenance of this crosswalk. He asked for clarification. Ms. Ray responded that a Commission member asked about the parking located on both sides of Avery Road and whether there would be a need for additional maintenance for this crosswalk. It is located in the public right -of -way, but the City will work with the Church to ensure it is maintained properly. Mr. Close added that the applicant is also improving and widening the existing bikepath along the west side of Avery Road on a portion of this site from a five -foot sidewalk to an eight -foot bikepath. Ms. Ray noted that there is a portion that tapers to a five -foot sidewalk, and staff recommended that the portion be improved to an eight -foot bikepath. Mayor Lecklider asked if the concrete sidewalk will be removed and asphalt installed to widen it to the bikepath standard of eight feet. Mr. Close responded that it could be an asphalt overlay; they will comply with whatever Engineering recommends be done. Mayor Lecklider noted that he appreciates the efforts of the applicant, staff and the neighbors to work together to address the issues and concerns. Mayor Lecklider stated that the second reading /public hearing will take place on Monday, March 28 as requested by the applicant tonight. Ordinance 11 -11 Rezoning Approximately 51 Acres Located on the Northeast Corner of the Intersection of Dublin Road and Memorial Drive, from R -1, Restricted Suburban Residential District and PUD, Planned Unit Development District (Wasatch Estates) to PUD, Planned Unit Development District. (Deer Run - Case 10- 062Z/PDP/PP) Mr. Gerber introduced the ordinance. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council February 28, 2011 Meeting, Page 5 Ms. Rauch stated that this is a rezoning /preliminary development plan for Deer Run PUD. It was reviewed by the Planning & Zoning Commission on February 3, 2011. She noted the following: • The site is located on the northeast corner of the intersection of Dublin Road and Memorial Drive and contains 51 acres. Surrounding the site are the Scioto River and Amberleigh Park to the east; Muirfield Village and River Forest to the west; single - family development in Kerry Glen to the north; and single - family development in Amberleigh North to the south of this site. • The site is heavily wooded and contains a steep ravine and creek. • As part of the PZC review, there was interest and concern expressed by the neighbors regarding the development. Staff has requested that the applicant meet with the neighbors regarding this proposal. As of the staff memo date, no meeting has been scheduled. • The applicant is proposing three subareas — A, B, and C. Subareas A and B contain nine estate lots; subarea C at the southernmost portion contains the cluster lots for the proposed development. • There are two private drive entrances for subareas A and B off of Dublin Road with the existing curb cut. Access for subarea C is located off a proposed new private drive entrance off of Memorial Drive. • A concept plan was reviewed in 2009, depicting a layout with one less unit for subarea c as proposed with this development. • At the time of the concept plan review, the Commission expressed concerns that the setbacks be maintained and be consistent with the subdivisions north and south of the proposed development area. What is shown is consistent with those setbacks. • There has been preliminary stormwater and tree preservation information provided as part of the rezoning and a traffic study is in process at this time. • For subareas A and B, there are nine estate lots proposed in total. These subareas contain a large ravine and creek area, nearly dividing the two subareas. • The proposed text accounts for the setbacks for the development as well as architectural and material requirements. Those are the same for both subareas A and B. • The access for subareas A and B will be provided off Dublin Road and will utilize the same material, private street design and layout as is existing. The only difference between A and B is that within subarea B, the southern portion of lots 5 through 9 contain a platted tree preservation area. This is where a large portion of the substantial trees on the site are located and the applicant has agreed to provide a platting requirement to preserve as many trees as possible. • In addition, there are open space areas located on the periphery of the site that total approximately three acres. • Subarea C is the southernmost portion and contains 37 cluster lots. Access is off Memorial Drive and will align with Autumnwood Way in the Amberleigh North subdivision. The proposal does include as part of the final development plan provision of some on street parking spaces around the two larger island areas within the proposed development. • The text for subarea C addresses setbacks and provides an opportunity for lots to have a zero to 10 -foot build zone to which the structure is required to be within. This provides some street presence, bringing the buildings closer to the street, and helps provide character for this cluster lot development area. • In addition, the lot dimensions in subarea C range from 60 to 70 foot in width with 120 -foot depth. • For proposed pedestrian connections to this development, the applicant has provided a public sidewalk on the north side of Memorial Drive, consistent with the subdivision regulations. This will connect to Vista Ridge Drive -- where the existing stub is located on the east side -- and also provide a connection into the future Amberleigh Park development. • In addition, as part of this review, Planning recommended to the Commission that an internal sidewalk be provided within subarea C due to the narrower streets and RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council MeetinL February 28, 2011 Page 6 the potential for on street parking, which could result in potential pedestrian /vehicular conflicts. Planning also wanted to ensure adequate pedestrian circulation and connections within the site and to the offsite improvements. This condition was removed as part of the Planning Commission review, but staff is recommending that Council reconsider this item in order to provide the necessary pedestrian connectivity within subarea C. Regarding architecture, the text outlines architectural design and materials but also provides an architectural guideline supplement to the text to show typical architectural layouts and design elements. Two of the images are shown to provide an illustration of the proposed character for the development. Two proposed lot layouts are provided to show the build zone and how a lot could lay out within subarea C. As part of the final development plan, the final details of the architecture and materials will be reviewed and approved. She summarized that Planning Commission recommended approval to Council with four conditions for the rezoning and one condition for the preliminary plat, which the applicant has met. Planning recommends that Council reconsider a requirement for an internal sidewalk for subarea C and approval of the ordinance at the March 28 Council meeting. Mayor Lecklider asked for clarification about the internal sidewalk. The Planning Commission removed this condition, yet there is a recommendation to reconsider this condition? Ms. Rauch clarified that staff recommended approval of the internal sidewalk condition. Planning Commission, after discussion with the applicant, did not want to move forward with that condition. Staff felt it is very important to include an internal sidewalk within that portion of the subdivision, and is therefore requesting Council reconsider this. Mr. Keenan asked why Planning Commission supported removal of this condition. Ms. Rauch responded that the Commission largely felt that it was unnecessary to provide this internal sidewalk due to the character of the cluster lots. Staff remains concerned with the need for an internal sidewalk for the reasons stated. Ms. Chinn ici-Zuercher stated that this seems similar to the Lea Court area in Muirfield with zero lot lines. Having sidewalks would detract from the homes and their relationship to the street. Vice Mayor Salay suggested moving the houses back to accommodate a sidewalk. Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher responded that would change the character of what they are trying to achieve. Mr. Gerber stated that the Commission has already opined on this. Is staff appealing the Commission's recommendation to Council? Ms. Rauch responded that staff felt this was an important feature for the site and suggests that Council reconsider this item. Mayor Lecklider asked if these streets have curb and gutter. Ms. Rauch responded affirmatively. Vice Mayor Salay noted that Council had visited a development in Franklin, Tennessee that had a similar character. She recalls that there were sidewalks in front of all of those homes. She is inclined to agree with Planning on the need for internal sidewalks in subarea C. Perhaps staff could obtain some photos of sidewalks in this type of development for review at the next hearing. Mrs. Boring recalls that other developments they viewed in Franklin had heavily wooded sites and did not have sidewalks. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council February 28, 2011 Page 7 Held 20 Vice Mayor Salay pointed out that the trees will be removed in the construction process. Mrs. Boring stated that she believes sidewalks would take space away in front of the homes. Vice Mayor Salay responded that the houses would need to be moved back on the lots to accommodate a sidewalk. Mr. Gerber and Mrs. Boring asked how it would be possible to move the homes back to do this, given the layout. Mayor Lecklider stated, given the existing zoning, how many lots can be developed on the site? Ms. Rauch responded that the existing zoning allows 63, and the proposed rezoning allows for 37. Vice Mayor Salay asked if there is any requirement about the number of garages that face front versus those that are side loaded. Ms. Rauch responded that the text is not specific about the number of units with front or side loaded garages. Michael Close, 7360 Bellaire Avenue. Dublin representing the applicant stated that it is much easier to have a side load garage on a 70 -foot wide lot than a 60 -foot wide lot. The 70 -foot wide lots will likely have side load garages and the 60 -foot wide lots will have front loading garages. Vice Mayor Salay asked how many of each width is included in the plan. Mr. Close responded that this will likely change at the final development plan stage, but it is approximately one -third side loading garages and two thirds front loading. Vice Mayor Salay stated she is sensitive to this because she has recently spent time at Tartan West development. In the Vineyard Havens section and the Pratalino villa section on the two ends of Corazon Drive, the front load garages completely detract from the architecture and aesthetics. All one views from the front are driveways and garages. She would prefer that one third of the homes be front load garages and two thirds be side load to have some variation. Mr. Close responded that the slides shown tonight depict the Rivergate community on the south side of Fishinger Road, between Dublin Road and the river. This is a very high -end development as is this proposal. In moving homes back to accommodate sidewalks, trees will be lost. The applicant wants to preserve as many trees as possible. The sidewalk is not a "deal breaker." However, the ambiance of the proposed development would be impacted by installing sidewalks. Further, with the lower volume of traffic, internal sidewalks are not necessary. They did add the sidewalk parallel to the main drive entering subarea C because there was a need to provide a pedestrian route to connect to the sidewalks outside of the development. This is a down zoning that will reduce the proposed homes by 33 percent from the current zoning. This proposal also removes two allowable curb cuts, making it one to connect to Autumnwood Drive. He added that there is an issue with tree preservation that Council should be aware of at this point. Mr. Walter planted thousands of trees on this site, and Mr. Close will return for a future discussion with Council about whether all of the trees must be replaced with this development. The internal sidewalk issue was fully discussed with Planning Commission, and they unanimously recommended there not be an internal sidewalk on this site. This applicant traded .6 acre of land with the City last year, and this rezoning implements the plan for development. Mrs. Boring noted that the county line crosses this development. Will that be an issue? Mr. Close responded that the surveyors indicate that between Avery Road and Riverside Drive, there are no monuments that are appropriate for use in surveying. They will need to work with Franklin and Delaware county. For the most part, RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting February 28, 2011 Page 8 subareas A and B will be in Delaware county, and subarea C in Franklin county. He is confident this will be worked out when the surveys are completed. Mayor Lecklider asked for clarification about the front and side load garage question. He believes there is a Code requirement with respect to the percentage of the frontage for garages. Would that be applicable? He recalls this discussion as part of the appearance code. Ms. Rauch responded there are regulations about how much percentage a garage can take up of the front fagade. It does not relate to the percentage of front loaded garages versus side load garages on a certain number of lots. They will have to comply with the Appearance Code. Mayor Lecklider asked about the percentage of the fagade specified in the Appearance Code. Ms. Rauch recalls it is 40 percent, but she can confirm this at the second reading. Mayor Lecklider asked Vice Mayor Salay if she believes that the examples she cited in Tartan West exceed that 40 percent requirement. Vice Mayor Salay noted she is uncertain, but encouraged Council to drive through these cluster design neighborhoods to view them. Mr. Close stated that, obviously, this village type concept will be different from some of the other examples cited. Vice Mayor Salay agreed that the development will be beautiful, but she wants to ensure it is as nice as possible. Mr. Close added that this is the nicest piece of land remaining in Dublin, with the ravine and topography. Pat McMillen, 8397 Somerset Way. Dublin stated that she is a resident of Amberleigh North subdivision. The main concern of Amberleigh residents is the traffic that will be created with the entrance on Memorial Drive to the 37 cluster homes. With the current traffic at Memorial and Dublin Road at peak hours, it is difficult to exit. A fear is that many who are in a hurry will opt to travel down Autumnwood Way and weave through the Amberleigh North development to exit. With the swimming pool and tennis courts in that location and the many children using these facilities, the traffic generated by the cluster homes will increase the traffic levels. It would be preferable to have the cluster home entrance and exit off Dublin Road. There is an existing exit used by Mr. Walter, and there is better line of sight in both directions at this location versus the Memorial Drive entrance to Dublin Road. The construction of Amberleigh park has begun, and the park will create a lot more traffic for Amberleigh as well. Another concern is when the construction of the cluster homes begins, there will be parking of construction vehicles on Memorial Drive. (She distributed a photo taken this morning of the cars and trucks parked along Memorial Drive.) In addition, there will be a lot of noise from trucks and dirt generated by the construction, and this will impact the pool and tennis court users. They would appreciate consideration of not having the entrance to the cluster homes at Autumnwood. Her house does face the entrance. She asked if there is a projected start date for the project, and the timeline for buildout. Mr. Close responded that, as indicated in the text, Mr. Walter has no intention of moving at this time. The intent of this rezoning is to ensure that when this property is developed at some future date, it is done correctly. He cannot project the timeframe at this point. The large lots in subareas A and B could be developed one at a time. Typically, with a cluster home area, the development would take place over a tight timeframe, based on experience. However, there is no firm start date. Steve Smith, 4886 Gillingham, Dublin stated that he is a Board Member of the Amberleigh North Association. He reiterated the comments made by Ms. McMillen. He noted that Mr. Tom Hart has now contacted the neighborhood to offer a meeting to discuss concerns. Ms. McMillen does live directly across from this entrance to the cluster homes. Some in the neighborhood attended the recent Planning Commission hearing and spoke about the possibility of having the curb cut through the drive onto RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council February 28, 2011 Page 9 Dublin Road. The reason for this is that the entrance off of Memorial Drive will create more traffic at this cross -area. With the park development, even more traffic will come into this area. There is a traffic study underway, and he is hopeful that Council will consider the impacts on Amberleigh. The construction traffic, parking, and mud is a concern that has been raised, and the City will need to address that. The Amberleigh residents had previously requested that the entrance to Amberleigh Park be on Memorial Drive to discourage traffic from coming through Amberleigh subdivision. However, the park entrance will be directly across from the middle of Amberleigh subdivision. Residents moved to Amberleigh due to its ambiance, and more traffic will now be fed into the neighborhood. They asked for consideration of all of this when Council is reviewing approval of the subdivision. Mayor Lecklider asked staff why they are recommending access to the 37 cluster homes be off Memorial Drive versus Dublin Road. Ms. Cox responded that the applicant's proposal included an entrance for the cluster homes off Memorial Drive. Memorial Drive is a collector street and having multiple neighborhoods access that road would not be unusual. Staff did not consider another location for this entrance. If the entrance was between the Memorial Drive intersection with Dublin Road and where the drive enters the Walter property, there would not be adequate room to space the access points for safety. She does not believe the applicant wants to combine all of those entry points onto Dublin Road. The Memorial Drive location for the access seems appropriate, in staff's view. Mr. Keenan asked if there are terrain issues within subareas A and B, which would preclude access to subarea C other than off of Memorial Drive. Ms. Cox responded that the topography is a consideration, as well as the trees. The profile of Dublin Road and accommodating more access points is another challenge. Mr. Keenan recalled that a bridge was once planned for Memorial Drive in this location, which would indicate that the road was expected to be heavily traveled. Ms. Cox confirmed that the previous Community Plan showed Memorial Drive as a bridge location. Vice Mayor Salay stated that Ms. McMillen indicated that egress onto Dublin Road from Memorial is difficult at certain times of day and that sight distance is not adequate. Is staff aware of any engineering concerns if the traffic volumes are increased at this location, and whether there is a sight distance issue? She recalls that Dublin Road was modified near Coventry Woods due to some sight distance issues. Ms. Willis responded that Engineering staff reviewed the sight distance at Memorial and Dublin Road, and adequate sight distance has been provided for the homes. Vice Mayor Salay asked if it is adequate with traffic moving at 45 mph on the roadway. Ms. Willis responded it is adequate at those speeds. Mr. Keenan added that the standards are established by the State, not by the City of Dublin. Ms. Willis agreed, noting that the City follows those guidelines. Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher recalled that when the tunnel was constructed under Dublin Road, the roadway was modified. Ms. Willis responded that the hill was flattened to improve the vertical sight distance. Vice Mayor Salay stated that there is construction traffic at the location related to the sewer relining project, as shown in the photos. When development occurs, does the City regulate mud and other such issues? Ms. Rauch responded that these are zoning compliance enforcement issues. The City ensures that the streets are kept free of debris from construction. Ms. Cox added that, during construction, the Engineering department has inspectors assigned to the projects. They work with the contractors to address issues such as parking and mud. There has recently been construction underway in this area due to the sewer relining project. in`, RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council February 28, 2011 Page 10 Vice Mayor Salay stated that once the street is built into subarea C, the traffic for construction will likely be contained within the subdivision. Ms. Cox responded that once the streets and utilities are installed, the contractors will park as close as possible to the home sites. Mayor Lecklider stated that the second reading /public hearing will take place on Monday, March 28 as requested by the applicant tonight. INTRODUCTION /PUBLIC HEARING — RESOLUTIONS Resolution 05 -11 Accepting the Lowest/Best Bid for the Dublin Springs Renovation Project. Vice Mayor Salay introduced the resolution. Mr. Hahn stated that staff recommends award of this contract to McDaniel's Construction. Most of this is renovation, with the exception of providing a staircase off the 161 bridge deck down to N. Riverview Street. Currently, from N. Riverview, there are stairs that provide access to the park itself. In addition, some stormwater improvements in the area will be done in conjunction with this project. He offered to respond to questions. Mr. Keenan asked about the low bidder who withdrew their bid. Are they penalized for this? Mr. Hahn responded that it is at the City's discretion. The low bidder had errors in their calculations, and because there were other bidders, the City felt there was no reason to penalize them. There was a very sound second low bidder. Vote on the Resolution: Mr. Gerber, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher, yes; Mayor Lecklider, yes; Vice Mayor Salay, yes. Resolution 06 -11 Authorizing the City Manager to Enter Into an Agreement With the Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT) for Preliminary Engineering and Detailed Design for the I- 270 1US 33 Interchange Upgrade, Phase 1. (FRA- 270 - 17.29) (ODOT PID Number 88310) Vice Mayor Salay introduced the resolution. Ms. Willis stated that this authorizes an agreement with ODOT for the Phase 1 portion of the 1- 270 /US 33 preliminary engineering and environmental field work project. Staff and ODOT have worked diligently on this agreement and to establish the financial responsibilities and how they are articulated in the agreement. She offered to respond to questions. Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher asked about the projected timeframe. Ms. Willis responded that, initially, the consultant was to be under contract as of November of 2010, but that did not occur. That pushes the timeline to complete Part 1 of this project to November /December of 2011 and Part 2 at approximately the end of 2012. Mr. Keenan asked if these plans bring about any actual construction or improvements in this location, which he assumes is still years out in the future. Ms. Willis responded that this agreement relates to the environmental phase, which is necessary before moving forward to detailed construction design phase. This is very preliminary. Mayor Lecklider asked for confirmation that the funds have been programmed for this in the Capital Improvements budget. Ms. Grigsby responded that the funds were programmed for this in the CIP for 2010, and staff will bring forward an appropriation ordinance for this piece of the project. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council MeetinP February 28, 2011 Page 11 Vote on the Resolution: Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes; Mayor Lecklider, yes; Vice Mayor Salay, yes. Resolution 07 -11 Authorizing the City Manager to Enter into an Infrastructure Agreement with the Edwards Golf Communities, LLC for Waterline Improvements. Vice Mayor Salay introduced the resolution. Ms. Cox stated that this is one of the areas identified at the Community Plan update as needing additional connections for the water system and additional storage to alleviate some issues with fire flows and pressures. She reviewed some of the improvements already made to address these issues. The focus tonight is the small connection into the Ballantrae subdivision. In order to maximize the benefit of the investments made in the large tank and the water line, there is a need to make this connection into the Ballantrae Place loop to help with the pressures. This agreement with Edwards will facilitate it. The agreement calls for reimbursement to the City by The Edwards Company when they build the neighborhood around this waterline improvement. The reimbursement timeframe is within 30 days of the approval of the final plat of this section of Ballantrae or by December 31, 2013, whichever comes first. The cost of the project is estimated at $158,000 and staff would like to package this with a second waterline improvement off Emerald Parkway near Verizon and Cardinal Health. It will provide some redundancy in the system to serve these large commercial buildings. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. Mrs. Boring asked if Council is approving both waterlines tonight. Ms. Cox responded that the one along Emerald Parkway was designed at the time the intersection improvements were done in that location. Tonight, Council is approving an infrastructure agreement with Edwards to build the Ballantrae waterline. Edwards will provide the necessary easement for this and reimburse the City at a later date, as described. Vote on the Resolution: Mr. Keenan, yes; Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes; Vice Mayor Salay, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mayor Lecklider, yes. Resolution 08 -11 Waiving Competitive Bidding Requirements, Pursuant to Section 8.04 ( "Contracting Procedures "), Paragraph (C) ( "Waiver of Competitive Bidding ") for the Material Portion of the Blazer Water Tank Repainting Project and Awarding a Contract to Tnemec Company, Inc. Vice Mayor Salay introduced the resolution. Ms. Cox stated that the City has reviewed options for available systems to recoat water towers. There are two options approved by the City of Columbus and which meet the specifications required for this infrastructure. Two manufacturers are currently approved for exterior painting of water towers by the City of Columbus product review committee. The manufacturers are Carboline Company and Tnemec Company. She reviewed the painting history of the water towers in the City. For the Avery Road and Post Road towers, records do not exist about the paint used when they were built in the early to late 1980s. When the silhouette package for the Avery and Post Road towers was placed on them in 1994, the Carboline material was used. Within four years, the west side of the Avery tank showed some bleed through in the coating system. By 2001, recoating of the tank was needed due to deterioration. The Post Road tank is showing age, with rust and corrosion. Staff has programmed the Post Road tank for decommission, and with the investment in the Darree Fields tank, a decision was made not to recoat the Post Road tank at this time. Recently, the recoating used for newer tanks has been a Tnemec product. The decorative pattern on the Blazer tank was done with the Tnemec product, and there is no corrosion after 17 years. The Darree Fields tank and Tartan West tank have the Tnemec product on RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council February 28, 2011 Page 12 them, and the Tnemec product was recently used on the Avery tower. Staff has been very satisfied with the Tnemec coating system and therefore is requesting that Council waive the bidding process for the material for the coating. The labor for placing the coating on the tank would be bid. The price for material has been established, as outlined in the memo, and staff is requesting that competitive bidding be waived. Vice Mayor Salay asked about the timeframe for decommission of the Post Road water tank. Ms. Cox responded that funding is programmed in 2011 for this purpose. The process for this has recently begun at the staff level. Vote on the Resolution: Mr. Gerber, yes; Vice Mayor Salay, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mayor Lecklider, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher, yes. COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS /COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE • Community Development Committee recommendations for "Beautify Your Neighborhood" Grant awards Ms. Colley offered to provide a summary, if Council desires. Vice Mayor Salay noted that a complete report was provided in the packet. Mayor Lecklider asked if there are questions regarding the recommendations included in the packet. Ms. Chinn ici-Zuercher noted that she was contacted by the Muirfield Association with some concerns about the grant recommendation, which was substantially different from their request. She would be interested in hearing the Committee's rationale for this recommendation as well as the one for Bryson Cove. The other three recommendations are for the grant amounts requested by the homeowner associations. Vice Mayor Salay stated that Council recently granted the Muirfield Association a fee waiver in conjunction with their permits for signage. At the Committee meeting, an approximately $3,000 figure for waivers was given, and the $2,000 grant award recommended equaled the $5,000 grant request. In addition, the Committee discussed the spirit of the Beautify Your Neighborhood grant program. The Riverside Woods HOA representative attended the Committee meeting and described the participation of the residents in their project to beautify their neighborhood. The Committee felt that the Muirfield Association request was for signage for two businesses located within the neighborhood and wondered whether the businesses were contributing any funding. There was no Muirfield representative at the Committee meeting, and Mr. Reiner, a Board member had to recuse himself from the discussion. The Committee felt that the grant request did not meet the spirit of the program that was envisioned and recommended funding in a lesser amount. For the Bryson Cove grant request, the Committee suggested they reapply for grant funding, as the project was not fully developed, based on the materials provided. They had not worked extensively with staff on project details. The project was not ready for funding this year, and so they were encouraged to reapply at a future date. Mrs. Boring agreed that the Bryson Cove project plans were not complete and they are encouraged to work with staff and reapply next year. Muirfield is a unique area of the community and there was concern that the signage was directional with a commercial aspect. The Committee is not aware of other neighborhoods with such directional signage in place. The Committee was concerned with the commercial aspect of the directional signs. Vice Mayor Salay added that for Muirfield and Ballantrae grant applications, a business entity was applying for the grants, and community members were not contributing hands -on labor for the projects. That is why the Committee did not recommend full funding of either grant application. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council February 28, 2011 Page 13 Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher stated that if labor being done by the residents is a criterion for the future, it should be added to the grant application. Vice Mayor Salay responded that the Committee discussed this matter, and felt there may be a need to revisit the expectations for the grants. This was the first time for the process and staff did an excellent job. It would be appropriate to re- evaluate this program and what is to be achieved. Mr. Gerber noted that in reviewing the internal scoring of applications, the Muirfield Association was rated the highest. He asked for more information about the Bryson Cove recommendation. Mrs. Boring responded that the Committee really felt that the project was not ready to move forward, and that is a criterion. Mr. Gerber asked if the associations hire a landscape company or architect to assist them with the beautification projects. Mrs. Boring responded that some did and some did not. Vice Mayor Salay added that two of the proposals included in -kind donation of a landscape plan, and this was a criterion as well. Mrs. Boring emphasized that this is a first -time process, and there may need to be some further discussion of the criteria. Mr. Gerber noted that with respect to the Muirfield Association, it seems they are attempting to enhance the gateway feature at Glick and Dublin Road. He reviewed the signage and the listing of the golf clubs, but he does not view this as commercial advertising. During the Memorial Tournament, these entities bring thousands to Dublin and the signage would help to direct people to the event. Personally, he would support a grant for the full amount of the request. Mrs. Boring asked staff for clarification about the points for community involvement included in the Muirfield grant application. Ms. Colley responded that staff discovered that the community involvement cited in the Muirfield application actually related to development of the application itself — not for the project. The applicant then indicated that the community members would volunteer time to inspect the project work by the contractor to ensure installation as designed. This would not have impacted the final scores. Mrs. Boring agreed that the directional signage will certainly help visitors to find the golf clubs. However, during Tournament week, there are numerous signs directing people to the Tournament, and further signage is not necessary. Mr. Keenan noted that he can think of no other area more in need of proper signage than this Muirfield entry. He agrees with Mr. Gerber that the applicant should not be penalized, noting that the application received the highest point rating by staff in the assessment. He understands the concerns, but he would support a grant of the entire amount requested or a higher amount than what has been recommended by the Committee. This area represents one fourth of the community and what is being awarded is not excessive, given the nature of the grant program. Mayor Lecklider commended staff and the Committee for their work. Although he was an impetus for initiation of the grant program, he continues to have concerns regarding the fact that certain homeowner associations would have an advantage over others. Many of the subdivisions in his ward are not forced and funded, and lack the resources and organization to accomplish the projects funded by these grants. However, Council approved the program, and these HOAs followed the guidelines in securing these grant awards. For him personally, some of what he sees in the applications, particularly for the Muirfield Association does not meet the spirit or intent of the grant program. In addition, this association has already received a waiver of permit fees for the signage. He moved approval of the recommendations made by the Committee. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council February 28, 2011 Page 14 Mr. Keenan stated he would prefer to separate the recommendations so that they can be voted upon individually. He moved approval of a grant award for the Muirfield Association's application in the amount of $4,000. Mr. Smith noted a point of order — that Council must address the motion on the floor before considering another motion. A second is needed for the original motion to be considered. Vice Mayor Salay seconded Mayor Lecklider's motion Mr. Gerber requested further discussion. Mr. Keenan noted that the discussion will be challenging, if the result is to be a tie vote. If that occurs, the motion will fail. Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher noted her concern that Muirfield Association is structurally different from other associations in the community. It was the first large community built in Dublin and the model was not repeated. All of the association models are different -- some are forced and funded and some are not. She is concerned about the match requirement and the ability of non forced and funded associations to make an application for a grant. At the other end of the spectrum is the Muirfield model, which includes an assessment based upon the tax valuation of a home. Because of the large number of homes and acreage included in the association, Muirfield elected to hire formal management staff to handle the area. Those assessments have funded a large portion of the maintenance for the Muirfield subdivision. In essence, Council is treating that model differently than the other two types of associations in Dublin. Muirfield will not have volunteers to work on this project, because that is not how they function. They do have volunteers who work on their many subcommittees and the Board, but these volunteers may not actually be planting shrubs or grass. Mayor Lecklider clarified that his comment with respect to the model is not intended as a criticism of the model or to place them at a disadvantage because of the model utilized. His comments relate to the overall standards for the grant program as established. The criteria favor the Muirfield model as well as other forced and funded associations. The distinction with the Muirfield application, for him, is that flowers, shrubbery, trees and mulch are appropriate for a beautification program — not directional signage. Mr. Gerber stated that he agrees with Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher. It seems that each neighborhood must be considered on its own merits. Muirfield is a unique area, and he believes that gateway features would qualify as beautification. Vice Mayor Salay stated with respect to the signage aspect that the Committee was not able to determine whether the businesses with names on the signage had contributed to the costs of the signage. She is aware that the Ballantrae community has requested signage for their neighborhood and it was denied, based upon being considered as off site signage. The existing signage delineates Ballantrae Park alone, and there is no signage on Woerner - Temple Road to direct people to the Ballantrae neighborhood. Does the offsite signage regulation not apply in the Muirfield PUD? How does that relate? Ms. Grigsby responded that it would relate to the location of the signs, whether they are located in the reserve areas or the right -of -way. Mrs. Boring recalled that the Muirfield signage was located in the right -of -way, because a condition of the fee waiver was that they pay for relocation of the sign if future roadway changes necessitated that. Mr. Gerber pointed out that the fee waiver is not part of the grant application being reviewed tonight. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council M eeting February 28, 2011 Page 15 Held 20 Mrs. Boring suggested that, based on the discussion, Mayor Lecklider withdraw his motion so that the Muirfield application can be voted upon separately. Vice Mayor Salay noted that a compromise would be to consider the $1,600 fee waiver that Muirfield has already received, and award a grant of $3,400. The Committee recommendation was based upon the assumption that a $3,000 fee waiver was already approved. It was later learned that the fee waiver approved was $1,600. Mr. Keenan commented that he does not believe the $2,000 recommendation is fair, based on all of this information. Mrs. Boring indicated support for the proposed compromise grant of $3,400. Her struggle was with the commercial entities involved in this signage and why they are not contributing to the cost of the signage. Mr. Keenan noted that they contribute significantly to the City in terms of the economic impacts of the Tournament. Mayor Lecklider withdrew his motion. Vice Mayor Salay withdrew her second. Vice Mayor Salay moved to approve the recommendations of the Community Development Committee, and to approve an amended recommendation for the Muirfield Association in the amount of $3,400 in recognition of the fee waivers already approved and based upon the discussion tonight. Mr. Keenan seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mayor Lecklider, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Ms. Chinn ici - Zuercher, yes; Vice Mayor Salay, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes. STAFF COMMENTS Ms. Grigsby: 1. Noted a memo was included in the packet regarding the St. Patrick's Day parade with details of the morning events and Grand Leprechaun luncheon. 2. Reported that information was provided in the packet with regard to letters from Dan Sullivan of the Memorial Tournament. These relate to sponsorship of the Presidents Cup, which is coming to Dublin in 2013 and sponsorship of the Legends Luncheon, which is being held in April 2011. Mr. Sullivan met with City officials regarding a potential sponsorship for the Presidents Cup. With regard to the Legends Luncheon, due to the event being planned for April, and because of the potential economic development benefits, staff recommends funding the additional sponsorship for the luncheon through the Community Relations budget. Staff would bring this additional appropriation at a future date. With regard to the Presidents Cup sponsorship, Mr. Sullivan can attend a Council meeting and make a presentation, or can provide any additional information needed for a decision on sponsorship. She noted that the number of visitors, including dignitaries from around the world who attend the Presidents Cup makes this a great opportunity for the City. It is similar to the Memorial Tournament in terms of economic benefits to the City. Mayor Lecklider noted that he and Mr. Gerber, together with Ms. Grigsby and Ms. Puskarcik met with Mr. Sullivan regarding these opportunities. He asked what the pleasure of Council is in term of additional details or a presentation and dialogue prior to making a decision. Ms. Chinn ici-Zuercher responded that she does not need additional information or a presentation regarding these sponsorships. She supports both of these requests. The Presidents Cup is one of golf's most prestigious world events and it is phenomenal that it will come to Dublin. It is a substantial investment, but a tremendous opportunity for Dublin. She does not require additional information to secure her support of both sponsorships. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting February 28, 2011 Page 16 Mr. Keenan agreed, noting these are great opportunities for the City, with tremendous economic impacts. He is not in need of additional information. Mayor Lecklider noted this is his recommendation as well, based upon his meeting with Mr. Sullivan. It was the consensus of Council to support the sponsorships. Ms. Grigsby noted that staff will provide additional information as needed in terms of appropriation requests and funding in the budget. Mr. Gerber added that he was impressed with the presentation given by Mr. Sullivan and reminded of the great economic partnership the City enjoys with the Tournament. Dublin, Ohio will have world coverage with the Presidents Cup, another marquee event being held in the community. Mayor Lecklider added that this is a wonderful and prestigious opportunity for Dublin, and the financial commitment requested will bring great economic impact to the City. 3. An update was provided regarding the North High Street crosswalk, including some of the costs for the HAWK system. An additional option for Council to consider is a curb bump out. She asked for Council's preference in terms of additional information needed at this time. Mr. Keenan commented that the estimated costs for the HAWK system were extremely significant and much larger than he anticipated. He would propose that staff provide information about the costs of the curb bump out. Ms. Grigsby responded that the estimate is approximately $20,000, but staff can provide a more detailed estimate. Mr. Keenan responded that he has been an advocate of safety improvements at this intersection over many years. The recent additions have enhanced visibility at the crosswalk. He proposes Council consider the curb bump out option after cost estimates are provided by staff. Vice Mayor Salay stated that she supports pursuing the bump out option. Is there a need for improvements at other crosswalks recently installed in Historic Dublin? While the speed limit in the business district has been lowered, it seems that stretching that speed reduction area and enhancing visibility in the crosswalks would be desirable. She would support consideration of these items. Ms. Willis responded that staff is currently pursuing some additional enhancements, particularly for the Bridge and Darby Street crosswalk. The intent is to bring these forward for consideration at the Capital Improvements program discussions. If Council would like to consider these enhancements at an earlier date, that is feasible. Mr. Gerber stated that he desires a more comprehensive report on this project, and the other crosswalks in Historic Dublin. However, time is of the essence, and he would prefer to have a report to consider at the next meeting for discussion. Mrs. Boring asked if it is possible for staff to do so in this timeframe. Vice Mayor Salay asked what specifically is being requested. Mr. Gerber responded that he would like to hear Ms. Grigsby's recommendation, information about the bump out, and then have Council discussion about this matter. Mrs. Boring asked if the current limitations for on street parking provide adequate sight distance near the N. High crosswalk, especially for rainy and dark nights. Secondly, could down lighting be provided to illuminate the crosswalks? Mr. Keenan recalled a proposal to eliminate on street parking on the east side of High Street. Ms. Willis responded that on street parking is currently restricted on the east and west sides of N. High Street within 90 feet of the crosswalk in all four directions. She believes this is an adequate restriction. Additional down lighting has been added at the N. High Street crosswalk near the Brazenhead, and that option is being pursued for the Bridge /Darby crosswalk. It may require a smaller mast arm that mimics the street light, but is somewhat heftier to bear the weight of this lighting and overhead signage. Staff is also exploring some in- pavement lighting through the technology RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Meetine Dublin City Council February 28, 2011 Page 17 used at airports for runway lighting. These options are all being considered to enhance crosswalks, particularly in the Historic District. Vice Mayor Salay commented that she recalls viewing a flag system at crosswalks for pedestrians to carry. Ms. Willis responded that Worthington has this system. This is another interim option for the crosswalks, as staff anticipates the costs for the infrastructure to be high, especially for the Bridge Street crosswalk. A reflective flag and canister system may be used in the interim. Vice Mayor Salay asked for clarification of timing of the next discussion. Ms. Grigsby responded that she will meet with Engineering to determine what information can be provided by the next meeting. At a minimum, a memo will be provided to indicate the status of the work and when the next update will be provided. Mayor Lecklider noted that the update will include the costs for the curb bump out. Ms. Grigsby confirmed that is correct. 4. In response to Mayor Lecklider, Ms. Grigsby indicated that staff had planned to have an overview of the Brand Road bikepath report tonight. However, due to Mr. Hammersmith's absence, it will be delayed until the March 10 meeting. Staff will provide an overview on March 14` of information related to the preliminary alignment work being done by the consultants. She suggested that Council retain the report from the packet for consideration on March 14 COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE Mr. Keenan: 1. Thanked the Streets & Utilities department for all of their work with snow and ice removal as well as chipper services. He has heard positive feedback from residents about the response to the tree damage from the ice storms, and he recognizes the challenges of alternating between these separate services. Kudos to staff! 2. Noted that the City received an early wake -up call today at 4:30 a.m., due to a tornado warning in Union County. He emphasized that a portion of the City lies in Union County, which was under a tornado warning, and the City is required to sound the sirens. Dublin is one of the few communities in Franklin County with its own emergency warning system, which is needed due to the City being situated in three counties. Ms. Grigsby added that another factor involved was the direction the weather system was traveling from Union County, and there was a need to alert residents as quickly as possible to this threat. Mr. Gerber thanked Mr. Keenan for sharing this important information about the Dublin emergency warning system. Ms. Chinn ici- Zuercher: 1. Reported she recently attended the Ohio Municipal League Board meeting. OML is part of a coalition of state associations that are advocating for a continuation of local government funds in the state of Ohio. They are providing testimony on this topic. In addition, there is concern by OML members regarding the future of estate tax and what will result from the recommendations being considered by the legislature. 2. Reminded Council of their commitment at the retreat to identify items on the Council agenda that are suitable for consent items and provide the list to the Clerk. Vice Mayor Salay: 1. Thanked everyone for participation in the goal setting retreat. She asked Ms. Grigsby about the timeframe for the report from the retreat for adoption by Council. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council February 28, 2011 Page 18 Held 20 Ms. Grigsby responded that Ms. Novak, the retreat facilitator indicated she would provide the report quickly. She expects to have draft information to Council regarding new goals within 30 days. 2. Commented that the public meeting notice regarding the parking demand study scheduled for Tuesday, March 15 in the Historic District indicates that reservations are encouraged. Typically, this is not required for a public meeting. Mr. Langworthy responded that an RSVP is not required; this simply facilitates set -up of the room for small group discussions and ensures adequate tables and chairs are available. 3. Noted that the Community Development Committee assignment list includes an item that dates from when she chaired the committee -- drafting an agreement with the Dublin Arts Council. It indicates that staff is drafting the agreement, based on the input of the Committee and that a committee meeting would be scheduled to review it. She is not aware that anything has been scheduled in this regard. Should this item be removed from the list, or could staff provide a status report so that it could move forward? Ms. Grigsby responded that staff will review this item and report back for the next Council meeting. Mrs. Boring wished Mr. Smith a Happy Birthday on Friday, March 4. He can serve as a leader to help those who follow learn how to sign up for Social Security! Mayor Lecklider invited everyone to the St. Patrick's Day parade on Saturday, March 12, adding he hopes for good weather! He asked Council members to respond regarding their attendance at the Grand Leprechaun luncheon. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 9:11 p.m. / %/u �I III % f • § - ., • • • fficer Clerk of Council