HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil Minutes 03-28-2011RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting
March 28, 2011
Mayor Lecklider called the Monday, March 28, 2011 Regular Meeting of Dublin City
Council to order at 7:00 p.m. at the Dublin Municipal Building.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Cub scouts from Pack 138, Chapman Elementary, 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, Ms. Readier, Mr. McDaniel, Interim Chief
von Eckartsberg, Ms. Crandall, Mr. Harding, Mr. Earman, Mr. Langworthy, Mr. Tyler,
Ms. Willis, Ms. Ott, Mr. Sova, Ms. Martin, Ms. Ray, Ms. Rauch, Ms. Willis, Ms. Justice,
and Ms. Wawszkiewicz.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Mayor Lecklider noted that approval of the March 14 Council meeting minutes will be
deferred to March 28, 2011.
PROCLAMATIONS /SPECIAL RECOGNITION
• Intelligent Community Day 2011
Mayor Lecklider read a proclamation in honor of Intelligent Community Day 2011.
John Jung, founder of the Intelligent Communities Forum, accepted the proclamation
on behalf of the Forum. Mayor Lecklider noted that Dublin was named a Smart21
Community in 2008, 2009, 2010 and 2011 and named to the list of the Top Seven
Intelligent Communities worldwide for 2010 and 2011. On June 8, 2011, the
Intelligent Community of the Year will be announced.
Mr. Jung expressed thanks for the proclamation. He noted that they are very fortunate
to have Dublin as part of their Intelligent Community Family. They anticipate
continuing to hear of Dublin's intelligent community progress in the future.
CITIZEN COMMENTS
There were no comments from citizens on items not on the agenda.
LEGISLATION
Ordinance 10 -11
Rezoning Approximately 23.3 Acres Located on the West and East Sides 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)
Ms. Ray stated that the first reading of Ordinance 10 -11 occurred at the February 28
Council meeting. Council requested no changes, and there is no additional
information to report.
Mayor Lecklider invited public testimony.
Paul Harris, 6322 Lido Court, Dublin, stated that because his property is located in the
immediate area of the rezoning, he received notice of this public meeting via mail. He
has attended tonight's meeting to find out what the church will be building. He
distributed photos of the area behind the church. The area immediately behind the
church has been leveled and fenced. There is a school that meets in the church, so
perhaps a sports field or some other facility related to the school may be planned.
Mr. Reiner stated that all construction at the church is already complete; no other
construction is planned. The land has been leveled and seeded. The fence can be
removed.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of
Dublin City Council
Meetin¢
March 28, 2011 Page 2
Vice Mayor Salay requested that Planning staff confirm that construction is complete.
Ms. Ray stated that is correct. This rezoning limits all future development by
essentially limiting the amount of future impervious surface or lot coverage on the site.
Michael Close. 7360 Bellaire Lane, Dublin repre senting the applicant stated that in
regard to the west side of the site, that is correct — all construction is complete, as it
would increase the amount of impervious surface. However, on the east side of the
site, there is a contingency to potentially install more parking on the east side, but only
after obtaining additional City approval.
Vote on the Ordinance: Vice Mayor Salay, yes; Mayor Lecklider, yes; Mr. Keenan,
yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Ms. Chinnici- Zuercher, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes.
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)
Ms. Rauch stated that the first reading of this ordinance occurred at the February 28
Council meeting. The rezoning would authorize a planned district of three subareas
providing for nine estate lots and 37 cluster lots with 10 acres of open space. At the
previous meeting, Council requested additional information, which has been provided
in this packet. Council requested a follow -up regarding: (1) the Planning staffs
request that Council reconsider the sidewalk addition; and (2) information about the
number of side load versus front load garages within Subarea C. At the earlier
meeting, the applicant requested a tree waiver; however, a provision addressing this
has now been incorporated in the proposed development text for Council's
consideration this evening.
Council requested photographs of similar developments within the City, both with and
without sidewalks. Photographs of other such developments were provided in
Council's packet. The Ballantrae example is similar to this proposal. The sidewalk
and tree lawn can be accommodated within the existing proposed easement area on
the preliminary plat, and therefore staff requests Council's reconsideration of this
request for a sidewalk within that subarea.
Council also requested the number of lots containing side - loaded or court- loaded
garages versus front - loaded garages within subarea C. The original development text
provided for the February 28` meeting indicated that nine lots 75 feet wide were
required to develop with a side -load or court- loaded garage. Staff has worked with the
applicant and determined that an additional five lots could accommodate a side - loaded
garage, as well, and that has been incorporated into the revised development text.
The applicant had requested a tree waiver, due to the fact that the property owner has
planted a significant number of trees on the site. Planning staff has worked with the
applicant to determine language for an appropriate fee waiver, which has now been
incorporated in the revised text. This request differs from previous tree waivers.
Council typically requires tree - for -tree replacement for trees between 6 — 24 inches,
and for trees over 24 inches, replacement on an inch - for -inch basis for all site
improvements, and also a fee in lieu of. The tree waiver, which has been incorporated
into the revised development text, is stricter in that the applicant has agreed to replace
trees that are between 6 — 18 inches on a tree - for -tree basis, and trees 18 inches and
above, on an inch - for -inch basis, given that the trees planted by the property owner
would not have reached a size greater than 18 inches.
In summary, staff recommends that Council reconsider the sidewalk in Subarea C and
approve the ordinance with the proposed development text amendments.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of
Dublin City Council
Meeting
March 28, 2011 Page 3
Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher stated that over the years, the City has attempted to avoid
private streets because of the excessive expense to the homeowners who are
responsible, not only for the snow removal, but also the maintenance and replacement
of the streets. Yet, this plan provides an entirely private street area.
Ms. Rauch responded that there was staff discussion on that issue. She will defer to
the applicant to explain their reasons for a private street rather than a public street.
Ms. Chin nici-Zuercher stated that she would first like to hear staff's position, because,
typically, the City's position has been not to approve private streets.
Ms. Rauch responded that due to the small number of lots, particularly in Subareas A
and B, and the already existing private street in Subarea A, staff believed a private
street would be appropriate in this case.
Mr. Reiner inquired if the private street is coated with a gravel base.
Ms. Rauch responded that it would be in Subareas A and B, consistent with the
existing streets. For the lots in Subarea C, the street would be asphalt.
Vice Mayor Salay inquired if it would have been staff's preference to have permitted
Subareas A and B to be private streets, but Subarea C a public street. She has spent
time in the Tartan West area recently and has noticed a couple of areas where the
private streets have significant issues and are in need of replacement, even though
this is a new development. She is not aware of the reason for this, but is reluctant to
approve further areas of private streets. However, she can understand the reasoning
for the private streets in Subareas A and B.
Mr. Reiner stated that the fact that the streets are covered in gravel means that it
would not be conducive for the City to plow them. He also understands the desire to
achieve a "Euro Estate" look. He would prefer to have the streets remain private,
unless the entire design, including the materials used, is changed. However, that is
not what the residents in a "Euro Estate" lot area would want to happen. It is not
feasible to have City snow trucks plow out the gravel. Therefore, he does not object to
these streets remaining private and retaining a private look.
Mayor Lecklider stated that he has also had some experience with this type of private
street in the Dublinshire area, specifically Caplestone Lane. The problem is that often
when homebuyers purchase a home in these areas they are not aware of the private
street status. Then, when it comes time to levy an assessment to the homeowners for
a repair, the homeowners ask the City to take over the maintenance of those streets.
While it may not be this Council, a future Council will be faced with a significant
expense. In the specific case to which he has referred, Council did not agree to
assume the responsibility for those streets, but it is an issue to consider.
Mr. Langworthy stated that there are many aspects to consider in the choice between
public or private streets. From a professional planning standpoint, staff's preference
would be public streets. However, in some development areas, particularly those that
are heavily treed with associated topography, a requirement to install public streets
could have a significant impact on the environmental aspects of that development. In
addition, the City does not have a specific policy or requirement that a street be public
or private, so staff cannot require one or the other.
Mr. Keenan inquired if a sinking fund is contemplated to address future maintenance.
Michael Close 7360 Bellaire Lane Dublin representing the applicant stated that there
are two reasons that these streets are contemplated as private. First, these streets are
built to the City's standards, unlike the private streets built earlier and for which the
City is now being asked to assume the responsibility. The only difference in the
streets in Subareas A and B to the north and typical City streets is the width. Although
the streets are completely built to the City's standards, they will receive a gravel
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Meeting
Dublin City Council
March 28, 2011 Page 4
overlay to provide a more natural appearance, and he does not want the City's snow
plows chipping away at that gravel. The streets in Subarea C will be built completely
to the City's standards with the regular, flat asphalt finish. The only reason they are
included in this plan as private is because of the gate that extends across the street;
that gate also applies to Subareas A and B. Subarea C will have a forced
homeowners association, which will provide the maintenance for that property and for
all the "no -cut" areas. Subareas A and B will share the responsibility for the northern
area. In addition, due to the lack of traffic volume in this area, it will not experience the
normal wear of the typical City street. He does not foresee a future maintenance
issue. However, if the City wants them to be public streets, they would still desire the
gates and the gravel overlay in the northern streets.
Ms. Chinn ici-Zuercher stated that she understands his position. However, in regard to
the Tartan West example, she has been contacted by a resident in that development.
The portion of the development referred to has private streets, and there is no one to
hold accountable because of the bankruptcy situation. Perhaps the street was installed
improperly or with the wrong materials, because it should still be under warranty. The
residents will ultimately be financially responsible, because it is a private street. These
are the issues that Council should be conscious of when considering the approval of
private streets. The area in which she resides has private streets, which she was
not aware of when purchasing her home. Shortly after moving in, she received a
significant assessment for the street repair. The area had not previously been
maintained by the association leadership. It is important Council be cognizant of this
issue for the residents. Council has discussed this issue previously.
Mr. Keenan stated that there has been a similar problem with the roadway behind the
auto dealership in the Perimeter Center area. But in this case, it is a gated
community; for him, that is the distinction. He can support private roadways in this
case.
Mayor Lecklider asked if there is any additional discussion regarding staff's
recommendation for the inclusion of sidewalks.
Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher stated that she does not support the inclusion of sidewalks in
the plan.
Vice Mayor Salay stated that she continues to advocate for sidewalks. A resident of
the Muirfield neighborhood shared with her today that they would have preferred to
have had sidewalks when raising their children. In her view, Council should always
advocate for public streets and sidewalks, typical amenities for communities. In this
case, she could support not having sidewalks, as the gates make her more
comfortable with not including that amenity.
Mr. Close stated that this issue was discussed at length in the Planning and Zoning
Commission meetings. There are a number of communities within Dublin where
sidewalks could be installed, but in the context of those neighborhoods, sidewalks
really would not serve as an amenity. Due to the size of this subdivision, the situation
is similar.
Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher noted that before voting, it will be important to clarify specifically
what Council will be approving.
Mayor Lecklider asked if there is Council discussion regarding the tree waiver
associated with this development.
Vice Mayor Salay stated that language clarifying what the tree waiver provides and
whether the additional side - loaded garages, per the staff report, will be required
should be in the motion to provide clarity.
Ms. Rauch stated that these two items are addressed in the amended development
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of
Dublin City Council
Meeting
March 28, 2011 Page 5
text, which now requires that 14 lots have side - loaded garages. It also articulates the
requirements for tree replacement or a tree waiver. Although staff recommended
sidewalks, the amended text does not include a requirement for sidewalks in
Subarea C. Adopting the ordinance with the amended text should achieve that which
Council has indicated support for tonight.
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.
Ordinance 12 -11
Authorizing the City Manager to Enter into an Agreement for the Purchase of
3.824 Acres, More or Less, Fee Simple Interest from the Muirfield Village Golf
Club, Said Acreage Located on State Route 745, City of Dublin, County of
Delaware, State of Ohio. (Land Acquisition for Dublin Road Water Tank)
Mr. Hammersmith stated the first reading took place at the March 14 Council
meeting. Staff has made no changes.
Ms. Grigsby stated that a question was raised at the last Council meeting regarding
the total purchase price. The staff memo describes how the purchase price was
determined. There was some discussion regarding the treed area versus the untreed
area, but an agreement was reached on the net acquisition, excluding the present
road occupied, at $70,000 per acre.
Vote on the Ordinance Mayor Lecklider, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Vice Mayor Salay,
yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes.
INTRODUCTION /FIRST READING — ORDINANCES
Ordinance 13 -11
Amending Sections 153.019, 153.020, 153.021, and 153.026 of the City of Dublin
Zoning Code to Allow Daycare Facilities to Operate as Permitted Uses in the R,
Rural District, R -1, Restricted Suburban Residential District, R -2, Limited
Suburban Residential District and the Suburban Office and Institutional District.
(Cases 10- 084ADM and 11- 006ADM)
Mr. Gerber introduced the ordinance.
Ms. Rauch stated that this is a proposed Code modification to include daycare
facilities as permitted uses in three residential districts (the Rural, Restricted Suburban
Residential and Limited Suburban Residential Districts) and in the Suburban Office
and Institutional District. The intent of the proposed amendment is to allow daycare
uses in appropriate locations in residential and office areas as a convenient service
while minimizing possible negative effects on established development character.
Daycare uses are currently permitted only in the CC district as conditional uses and in
some planned districts. Staff was recently made aware of a few daycares operating
within the City in facilities where the uses were not currently permitted. In an attempt
to address that deficiency within the Code, modifications are proposed that will permit
the daycare in the three districts listed above if they meet certain criteria, as
delineated in the staff memo and in the proposed ordinance. The Planning
Commission has reviewed the proposed amendments, and at their January 20
meeting, the Commission voted to recommend approval to Council.
Mrs. Boring inquired if any additional signage restrictions in the residential districts
were included.
Ms. Rauch responded that no additional restrictions were added.
Mrs. Boring stated she is concerned that if a daycare were to take full advantage of
the permitted sign size, that may conflict with the residential character of the area.
Mayor Lecklider stated that he would support staff's examination of the signage that
would be permitted in a residential area.
Ms. Rauch responded that staff would provide that information at the second reading
on April 11th
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Dublin City Council
March 28, 2011 Page 6
Vice Mayor Salay stated that the packet information includes a map with a highlighted
designation of two -plus acres in the arterial and collector road. It is her understanding
that the only places these uses would be permitted is in these highlighted areas.
Ms. Rauch stated that the map is incorrect; it indicates only four parcels that would be
affected. There are additional areas, which she will include with the second reading
packet.
Mayor Lecklider inquired if the impetus for this amendment was the fact that three
churches were discovered to be housing daycare uses, and so the Code is being
amended to permit that use in residential areas.
Ms. Rauch stated that this is separate from the waiver that is also before Council
tonight. Its purpose is two -fold. First, it is to correct the zoning for the existing
daycares. However, there is also a deficiency in the Code because it currently does
not permit this use, even in a Suburban Office (SO) District,
Mayor Lecklider stated that he realizes that it would be appropriate in the SO District,
but he would like to be more comfortable with what is allowed now that is not
otherwise allowed in a residential district.
Ms. Rauch asked if he is requesting additional information on other areas of the City
that would be impacted in addition to churches.
Mayor Lecklider stated that he is trying to envision a daycare facility in a residential
district that is not located within a church.
Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher noted that Dublin Schools recently purchased a property on
Coffman Road located just north of the Schools Administrative Offices. It was
originally a home but was converted to a daycare facility and operated as such for a
time, although not in recent years. She believes that is within a residential district. It
backs up to the Woods of Indian Run subdivision.
Mr. Keenan inquired if that area is within the city or the township.
Mrs. Boring stated that she received calls on a regular basis concerning Code
violations and other issues with that facility.
Vice Mayor stated that a daycare is considered a business. How would a daycare
business not located in a church impact a neighborhood, or would it not fit at all?
Mr. Gerber stated that during his service on the Planning and Zoning Commission
several years ago, the Commission addressed this issue. There was a concern about
the impact of a daycare use in residential areas. At that time, it was the
recommendation of Legal staff to continue to address daycare as a Conditional Use,
so that it could continue to be monitored to ensure a balance between daycare use
and the neighborhoods.
Mayor Lecklider stated that he has no objection to a daycare use within an existing
church. Churches are permitted within residential districts, and traffic related to the
church poses no surprise to nearby residents. However, he is concerned about the
impact of a free - standing daycare business in a traditional residential setting.
Ms. Chinn ici-Zuercher stated that the Code language should be crafted in a way that
would eliminate that potential. There are daycare businesses that are located on major
corridors that, while they back up to residential areas, are not as integrated into the
residential neighborhood.
Mr. Keenan noted that there are two daycare facilities behind the UDF on Muirfield
Drive, which are directly across the street from a residential community.
Mrs. Boring stated that the Conditional Use category is important. It permits the City
to consider the impact the daycare would have on the community.
Ms. Rauch stated that there was staff discussion about the possibility of modifying the
text to state that an independent, freestanding day care would require Conditional Use
approval.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Dublin City Council
March 28, 2011 Page 7
Mr. Reiner stated that with a Conditional Use, the City would have the ability to
consider the size of the lot, traffic volume, etc. in determining the impact on the
residential neighborhood. That would be a preferable way to address daycare.
Mrs. Boring agreed. However, if daycare were made a Permitted Use in R1, it would
not be subject to a review.
Mayor Lecklider noted that the property might be zoned Commercial, even though it is
located across from a Residential District.
Council consensus was to have staff modify the language as suggested for a
Conditional Use.
Ms. Chinn ici-Zuercher stated that she recalled a previous case in which the City
disapproved a daycare operation inside an office building.
Vice Mayor Salay responded that, in that case, the issue was not the land use per se,
it was other operational issues.
Mr. Keenan asked if a corporate citizen wanted to include a daycare business inside
their building, would that be addressed similar to a Suburban Office zoning?
Ms. Rauch responded that it would be addressed the same. A Community
Commercial District also permits daycare uses.
Mayor Lecklider asked if staff has sufficient direction to modify the language for the
second reading.
Ms. Rauch responded affirmatively.
There will be a second reading /public hearing at the April 11 Council meeting
INTRODUCTION /PUBLIC HEARING — RESOLUTIONS
Resolution 11 -11
Waiving Competitive Bidding for the Purchase of Diesel Fuel and Authorizing
the City Manager to Enter into a Contract with Marion Oil.
Mr. Gerber introduced the resolution.
Ms. Crandall stated that this legislation will permit the City to purchase high
performance clean diesel fuel from Marion Oil for one year. She presented a
PowerPoint showing the potential advantages of using this fuel and the validation
process the City would use to evaluate the experience. The other partners
participating in the one -year program are Dublin Schools and Washington Township.
Representatives from Resource 100 and EcoChem and are present to respond to any
questions Council may have. The High Performance Clean Diesel fuel has been
developed by EcoChem Alternative Fuels, a Dublin- based, green technology start-up
company. Some of the potential advantages that have been observed in initial testing
are increased fuel efficiency, decreased emissions of nitrogen oxides and
hydrocarbons, reduced maintenance, and improved cold starts. It addresses some of
the problems related to the use of ultra -low sulphur diesel, which is the fuel the City
currently uses. This fuel was Federally mandated in 2006, but the fuel industry has
noted some problems since then, including: corrosion of onboard fuel tanks, clogged
filters, deterioration of seals and gaskets, particles, such as rust in the fuel, and
increased bacteria microbes in the water that collects in the fuel as it comes from the
pipe line to the City's fueling station. The high performance clean diesel
manufacturing process removes the sediment, particles, foreign materials and an
additive is placed in the fuel for lubricity. The results are increased fuel efficiency and
decreased fuel emissions.
The results of the initial testing conducted by EcoChem in 2010 indicated a 16%
increase in miles per gallon (mpg), 1% reduction in NOx and 53% reduction in
hydrocarbons. The initial results warrant taking a closer look to validate them.
Baseline testing began with Dublin Schools this month -- twelve buses will run on
these fuels, and data will be collected on mpg and emissions. The school buses are
ideal for this testing, because they have consistent routes and miles. Resource One
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of
Dublin City Council
March 28, 2011 Page 8
will evaluate the collected data. The initial testing of the Dublin School buses will be
followed by testing of city and township vehicles. The proposed fuel purchase will
result in increased fuel costs of 15¢ per gallon. However, if the City achieves an
increased fuel efficiency of 5 %, that would be a break -even point. EcoChem has
committed an additional $20,000 if a 5% fuel efficiency is not achieved, which would
reduce the break -even point to 3 %.
Vice Mayor Salay asked if initial results of improved fuel efficiency and reduced
emissions were reflected with City vehicles or other vehicles.
Ms. Crandall responded that these results were with the Marion Oil distribution trucks.
Vice Mayor Salay inquired the period of time data would be collected on the 12 school
buses.
Ms. Crandall responded that it would be approximately three months — March 8` to the
end of the school year. Some type of testing may continue throughout the year.
Vice Mayor Salay asked if the independent testing lab would be working with the
Schools to do the emissions testing.
Ms. Crandall responded that City employees are collecting the data related to
emissions and providing it to Resource 100.
Mr. Keenan asked if the City, as the Supplier, has any liability to the Schools or the
Township.
Ms. Crandall responded that the City's agreement with Marion Oil requires that they
carry all the liability for this period of time.
Mr. Keenan stated that this contract appears to be in concert with the Compressed
Natural Gas (CNG) agreement that follows.
Ms. Crandall responded that the City is headed to having a very "green" fleet.
Mr. Keenan inquired if CNG is the ultimate goal for these vehicles.
Ms. Crandall responded that the City is converting many of its gasoline -run vehicles to
CNG. It is uncertain whether that would be extended to the City's dump trucks. She
recently met with the new director of Ohio EPA. They are very interested in this
testing. There are quite a few non attainment zones throughout the State, so if they
wanted to bring a new company in that has emissions, they would be required to offset
those with reductions. They see this as a good potential for economic development
within the State of Ohio.
Mr. Keenan inquired if that could ultimately involve a public partnership with the City to
purchase CNG from the City's facility. As he understands the process, it is a
significant expense.
Ms. Crandall responded that could definitely occur. In fact, the City has partnered with
IGS, who is part of the CNG project. They will supply the fuel but will also handle any
private fleets or individuals who want to fuel there.
Ms. Grigsby stated that the federal grant the City received requires some type of
public participation or use. The City anticipated meeting that requirement through IGS
and their customers.
Mr. Reiner asked where the diesel fuel is produced. Is it shipped in by tanker truck?
Ms. Crandall confirmed that is correct. The City's ultra -low sulphur diesel will be
shipped to Marion Oil, where it will be processed on -site.
Mayor Lecklider stated that this agreement and the following do not compete with but
complement each other. They address different portions of the fleet. Some vehicles
can be converted to CNG, but the diesel fuel vehicles will use the high performance
clean diesel.
Ms. Crandall responded that the diesel fleet could be converted to CNG, but it will be
the last group converted.
Mayor Lecklider noted that as the legislation indicates, in this case, competitive
bidding will be waived, as Marion Oil is the sole supplier.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Dublin City Council
DAYTON LEGAL BLANK INC. FORM EQ. 10148
March 28, 2011 Page 9
Vote on the Resolution Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes;
Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes; Mayor Lecklider, yes; Vice Mayor Salay, yes.
Resolution 12 -11
Waiving Competitive Bidding for the Purchase of Compressed Natural Gas
Conversion Kits and Authorizing the City Manager to Enter into a Contract with
Altech -Eco Corporation.
Mr. Gerber introduced the resolution.
Ms. Crandall stated that this resolution authorizes the purchase of 44 compressed
natural gas (CNG) conversion kits directly from the manufacturer, Altech Eco
Corporation. The City previously has attempted to purchase these kits via two
different methods. Those methods were not successful, so staff now requests
authorization to purchase the kits directly from the manufacturer. The total cost of
these conversion kits is estimated to be approximately $465,000. The conversion will
be conducted in- house, which will save the City approximately $82,000.
Vote on the Resolution Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Ms.
Chinni ci - Zuercher, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes; Mayor Lecklider, yes; Vice Mayor Salay, yes.
Resolution 13 -11
Accepting the Final Recommendations of the Bicycle Advisory Task Force.
Mr. Gerber introduced the resolution.
Ms. Martin stated that the Bicycle Advisory Task Force (BATF) presented their final
recommendations at the March 14` Council meeting. This resolution requests
Council's approval of those recommendations. The report attached to the resolution
includes the two sections missing in the report provided previously.
Ms. Chinn ici-Zuercher stated that she contacted Ms. Grigsby today regarding a
procedural issue with this legislation. Is Council being asked to accept the report as
the work of the task force, or is Council being asked to approve all the
recommendations for formal implementation?
Ms. Grigsby responded that, as the resolution is written, approval of the
recommendations for implementation is requested. If there is concern regarding the
implementation of all of the recommendations, the title can be modified to state that it
is a resolution accepting the report. The language is Section 1 can also state that it is
accepting the report, which will be used as the City's policy or guidelines in its pursuit
of attaining the Bicycle Friendly Community designation.
Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher stated that she is not prepared to approve anything other than
the language Ms. Grigsby has suggested. Cost factors have not been provided on
any of the recommendations, and prioritization of the recommendations has not been
discussed. She wants to avoid a situation similar to that which Council has
experienced previously when Council has given a Task Force a charge, and the Task
Force has provided a report. Council believes they have accepted the report, but
instead, it has been understood that Council accepted the report with the expectation
of implementing 100 percent of it. Therefore, she would prefer the language Ms.
Grigsby has suggested.
Mrs. Boring agreed.
Ms. Grigsby stated that as staff moves forward with this effort, staff can provide
additional information to Council regarding how the recommendations can be best
implemented, so Council can have the needed detail for those decisions.
Mr. Gerber asked if accepting the report is acknowledging receipt of the report, or is it
more than that.
Ms. Grigsby responded that it is acknowledging receipt of the report, acknowledging
the recommendations that are included, but also recognizing that the implementation
of all the recommendations is not guaranteed. Additional information will continue to
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Dublin Citv Council
March 28, 2011
Page 10
be evaluated as the process moves forward. The report will serve as the guide in
considering how to achieve Council's goal to become a Bicycle Friendly Community.
Mrs. Boring stated that if this report is accepted, is it understood that there will be
future discussion regarding how an ongoing advisory committee will be formed?
Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher responded that it is her understanding that recommendations
would ultimately come back to Council with some specificity.
Ms. Martin confirmed that would be the expectation.
Ms. Grigsby responded that at this point, the details are uncertain, but the discussion
has been that a smaller group would be selected to serve as a sounding board as the
effort moves forward. The group could also help to prioritize some of the
recommendations.
Mayor Lecklider asked if the verbal modification suffices, or does the resolution
language need to be amended before adoption.
Ms. Grigsby responded that if it is Council's preference, the resolution language can
be amended, so that Council can be more comfortable with what they are adopting.
Council members expressed concurrence. An amended resolution will be provided for
the April 11 Council meeting.
Resolution 14 -11
Appointing Members to the Various Boards and Commissions of the City of
Dublin.
Vice Mayor Salay introduced the Resolution.
Vice Mayor Salay suggested that, based on Council's discussion during their last
evening of interviews, Council adjourn to executive session for further discussion of
the appointments. Consideration of Resolution 14 -11 would then take place after the
meeting is reconvened.
Mayor Lecklider clarified that the executive session would take place at the end of
tonight's meeting.
OTHER
Historic Dublin Crosswalk Update
Ms. Grigsby noted that several meetings have taken place in regard to the crosswalk
at N. High Street as well as the other crosswalks within the district. Part of the
consideration is to ensure there is consistency among the crosswalks to improve the
awareness for both pedestrians and drivers. Staff has also reviewed some potential
items to be implemented in the Bridge Street Corridor in an effort to make it more
pedestrian friendly. The crosswalks are part of the bigger picture of the entire district.
Ms. Willis reviewed a PowerPoint summarizing the options and scenarios considered
by staff, as summarized in the report provided in the packet.
1. Installation of curb bulbs. Proposed for the east side of N. High Street,
effectively removing pavement for on- street parking, lengthening the curb ramp,
and redoing the street print for the crosswalk. The initial estimate for this work
was $20,000. The benefit would be to reduce vehicle speeds in the
northbound direction.
2. At staff level, there was discussion of implementation of curb bulbs on the west
side of N. High Street as well. The centerline pavement marking on the north
side of the crosswalk location would be shifted to the east, the curb bulb
installed on the west side, both at the north and south side of the intersection.
Effectively, this significantly reduces the pedestrian crossing length to 25 feet
versus 32 feet with one curb on the east side. Currently, the pedestrian
crossing length is 42 feet with the existing mast arm. By confining this space,
vehicles speeds would be significantly reduced. It will also help drivers to slow
down and drive more cautiously through this intersection.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Dublin City Council
March 28, 2011 Page 11
Mr. Keenan asked her to point out the location of the Oscar's valet.
Ms. Willis responded it is just to the north on the east side of N. High Street.
Mr. Keenan asked how the valet service would be impacted with moving the centerline
of the road.
Ms. Willis responded it would not impact the valet operation.
Vice Mayor Salay noted that there was discussion about large vehicles in the report
and their parking. Would the curb bulbs restrain the parking deliveries in the area for
large trucks? Will the corners be constrained to the point where two large vehicles
could not pass through at the same time? It appears to be narrow.
Ms. Willis responded that in making this narrower, trucks will need to be more
cautious, and it will require slowing down and paying close attention if crossing at the
same time. The loading zone in front of the Brazenhead is another issue that they
hope is remedied with the installation of the curb bulb, particularly on the east side.
The pedestrian has an additional six feet of protected zone and vision around a parked
vehicle will improve. Currently, a pedestrian has to enter the roadway to see around a
parked vehicle.
Mayor Lecklider stated he has observed this situation of delivery trucks to Brazenhead
right up to the crosswalk.
Ms. Willis stated that currently, there is a "no parking" zone established in this area.
With the curb bulb, the ability of the truck to move north will be restricted by the
location of the curb. This will guarantee the 20 -foot no parking distance from that
crosswalk, and this will significantly aid the pedestrian in crossing the roadway.
Mr. Keenan stated that with the addition of the bollard in the center of the roadway, it
has slowed the traffic. Will the bollard remain with the curb bump out?
Ms. Willis responded it is staff's intent to have the bollard remain in place.
Ms. Chinn ici-Zuercher stated that the restaurants in this area have large trucks
delivering to them on a regular basis. Will the parking on the east side that is in front
of the dental office be removed so that the large trucks have adequate space to pull to
the east side to park?
Ms. Willis responded that the no parking zone is already established at 90 feet from
the crosswalk on the east side of N. High Street. No one should be parking in this
location for any length of time — it is designed for unloading for the restaurant itself.
Ms. Chinn ici-Zuercher responded that she has observed cars parked in front of the
dental office frequently. She believed that the no parking zone was near the
Brazenhead lot line.
Ms. Willis responded that her understanding is that this no parking zone already exists
in this location.
Ms. Chinnici- Zuercher stated that it would then be important to have the no parking
enforced in order to allow the large trucks to make deliveries.
Vice Mayor Salay added that this curb bulb would provide another impediment and
keep the no parking zone free.
Mr. Hammersmith stated that staff would provide additional information on how trucks
will use this area to understand how they will fit. The parking is currently restricted,
but whether it is consistently enforced is another question.
Mr. Reiner stated that the traffic coming southbound on Dublin Road travels at a fairly
high rate of speed before entering this pedestrian zone. Should some traffic
modification and deceleration occur north of the District? Rumble strips or some other
traffic - calming device could alert motorists that they are entering a pedestrian area.
Ms. Willis responded that one suggestion is for driver feedback signs, such as the
ones used in school zones. These could be installed north of the district to alert the
driver of their speed as they are entering the district. After the curb bulbs are installed
as recommended, evaluation can be done and other options considered, such as
driver feedback signage.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of
Dublin City Council
MeetinL
March 28, 2011 Page 12
Mr. Hammersmith added that the StealthStat data in the memo indicates fairly good
consistency with speed limits in the District. The curb bulbs are expected to provide
better consistency. After implementing this recommendation, staff would do
evaluation.
Mayor Lecklider commented that he would want staff to consider all options before
considering rumble strips because of the noise generated, especially in the area of the
Veterans Park.
Ms. Willis continued:
3. As part of the comprehensive review of crosswalks in the District and the need
for a consistent feel and approach to crosswalks, staff reviewed the existing
crosswalks on S. High Street at Spring Hill. Curb bulbs would be installed on
the east and west sides of the road, removing the additional width of pavement
of seven feet on both sides that was to accommodate on- street parking. The
street print would be maintained, and there is potential for overhead lighting
and signage. The cost estimate for these curb bulbs is $34,000 and the benefit
is reducing the pedestrian /vehicular conflict area.
Mr. Gerber noted that he has observed cars parking right up to the crosswalk during
busy times of day. Perhaps there is an enforcement issue in this location as well as at
the Brazenhead.
Ms. Willis stated that the curb bulbs are 20 feet on the south side of the crosswalk,
physically restricting the ability to park up against the crosswalk.
Mrs. Boring asked whether vehicles stacked up during busy times of day should block
the crosswalk area.
Ms. Willis responded that, technically, the crosswalk area is considered part of an
intersection and it should be open and free of obstructions.
Mrs. Boring suggested that this could be monitored as well.
4. On Bridge and Darby Street, with the vet clinic on the north side of Bridge and
Starbucks on the south side, the recommendation is to install overhead
signage and lighting that will extend over the crosswalk. The mast arms are 15
feet long, and additional luminaires will be provided at the curb ramp location to
illuminate the pedestrian entering the crosswalk itself. The cost estimate is
$160,000 for this treatment.
5. On S. High Street, staff reviewed some alternatives for overhead lighting and
signage. One option is to install a single mast arm with a slightly long arm
length, similar to what exists at N. High Street at the Brazenhead, with a
decorative luminaire at the end to provide lighting for the pedestrian over the
pavement and a single luminaire street light on one side and a luminaire on top
of the mast on the opposite side. In order to be consistent with what is
proposed for Bridge Street, there is an option for a dual mast arm approach,
with similar overhead signage and lighting, with luminaires on either side. Staff
recommends these systems be pedestrian pushbutton activated so that lights
on the upright are blinking when a pedestrian is in the roadway.
6. Staff has continued to research in- pavement lights for the area that could
withstand weather conditions. Staff may have identified a manufacturer for this,
but will view some installations in the Cleveland area to ensure the systems
work properly when activated.
Mr. Keenan noted the in- pavement system is worthwhile to consider, as he has
previously described. It may not be needed in all locations in the District, but is
definitely needed at the N. High Street location.
Vice Mayor Salay stated that the other factor to consider is how long the system has
been in place in the other locations.
Ms. Willis responded that the second installation done for the Cleveland RTA has
been quite successful and they are satisfied with the product at this point. Staff will
thoroughly review this product and the experience the RTA has had with it.
Mrs. Boring asked if the City has used in- pavement lighting previously, as on Riverside
Drive.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of
Dublin City Council
Meetin
March 28, 2011 Page 13
Ms. Willis responded that those are raised pavement markers and are still in place.
Mrs. Boring suggested that perhaps these would be less expensive and effective to
use in this area.
Ms. Willis responded that the raised pavement marker is designed to illuminate center
and edge lines for a driver versus in- pavement light alerting drivers there is a
pedestrian in a crossing.
Mayor Lecklider stated that he appreciates the focus on the N. High Street
intersection, but he is very concerned as well with the Bridge and Darby Street
intersection. If people will be encouraged to cross at Bridge and Darby, it will certainly
require in- pavement lights or whatever option is available to make it safe.
Mr. Gerber noted that he observed pedestrians halfway through the Bridge and Darby
crosswalk and traffic not stopping to allow them to complete the crossing. Perhaps
there is a need to advise drivers in advance that this is a pedestrian area, or maybe
there is a way to synchronize the crosswalk with the stoplights.
Mayor Lecklider stated that, currently, there is greater danger for speed from the cars
coming from the west into this area, although that could change in time as
development of the Corridor occurs. Further, there is no safe island in the center for
pedestrians crossing in this location.
Mr. Hammersmith stated that staff is recommending additional signage, a blinker
system, along with overhead lighting to accentuate this pedestrian crossing.
Mr. Gerber added that might help in the evening, but how effective are the lights
during the daytime for restaurant patrons crossing?
Mr. Hammersmith responded they have been effective in other locations, because
they are strobes that illuminate during the light hours and the signs are there in the
daytime as well and are equally visible. At night, the signs are internally illuminated for
additional visibility.
Vice Mayor Salay noted that if in- pavement lighting is to be added, the Bridge and
Darby crossing would be a preferred location due to the relative traffic hazards and the
width of the roadway.
Mayor Lecklider added that it is Council's goal to facilitate pedestrian movement from
north to south and vice versa in the District and the environment must be created to
allow this.
Mr. Hammersmith stated that for all of those reasons, staff is making these
recommendations tonight.
Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher asked for clarification of the recommendations for Bridge Street.
Ms. Willis responded that dual mast arms with overhead lighting and signage are
recommended for this crossing.
Ms. Chinn ici-Zuercher asked if there is a reason that the in- pavement lighting cannot
be added in this location.
Mr. Hammersmith responded it is possible, but staff will first need to review the
proposed system to ensure it will be workable.
Ms. Willis stated it certainly can be added after the field investigation.
Mayor Lecklider stated that the City is essentially inviting people to cross at Bridge and
Darby. What kind of legal ramifications result?
Vice Mayor Salay responded that a pedestrian in a crosswalk has the right of way.
Obviously, it is difficult to have this enforced.
Mr. Hammersmith noted that what does assign right of way to a pedestrian is the
HAWK signal, included in a previous staff report. It does stop vehicles and assigns
the pedestrian the right of way. What stops vehicles currently is the pedestrian being
in the crosswalk. The HAWK signal is activated by the pedestrian before entering the
crosswalk and it actually stops vehicles and changes the assignment of right of way
from the vehicle to the pedestrian.
Mayor Lecklider stated that the Bridge and Darby crossing is somewhat unique, with
four lanes of traffic and fairly high speeds. In spite of what is posted, his personal
experience is that vehicles are traveling at higher speeds.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of Meeting
Dublin City Council
March 28, 2011 Page 14
Mr. Hammersmith responded that another solution is to eliminate the crosswalk in this
location.
Ms. Readier stated that, legally, the City has the capacity to place these extra
measures and to enforce them. It is important to be careful with implementation to
ensure they are the safest and most effective means of providing for the pedestrian
movement. The City has the authority to consider all of these measures.
Mayor Lecklider stated that perhaps this crosswalk is sufficiently distinct from the
others that a different solution should be considered — perhaps something like the
HAWK system.
Mrs. Boring stated that with the Bridge Street Corridor plan underway, she is
concerned that there is not a comprehensive long -term plan for traffic and pedestrians
being considered. The City may implement some things now and then need to make
constant changes going forward.
Ms. Grigsby responded that staff is looking at consistency in marking crosswalks to
improve awareness of the crosswalks. For the long term, staff does anticipate change
over time and more pedestrian traffic. This is a short-term solution to some of the
problems, recognizing there likely will be changes as the District is extended and
pedestrian traffic increases. The on street parking, as previously proposed, would
slow the traffic, similar to the curb bulbs. In the future, the environment may change to
the point where overhead signage is not needed due to the pedestrian - friendly nature
of the District.
Ms. Willis added that these solutions are consistent with those suggested by the
transportation team working on the Bridge Street Corridor Plan. These methods are
proven pedestrian enhancements in other locations.
Ms. Grigsby stated that there is potential for driver feedback signs for eastbound traffic
on Bridge, and signage indicating a pedestrian area ahead can also be considered.
There is a balance needed to ensure the placement is appropriate in order to have the
most impact.
Vice Mayor Salay asked about the potential of pedestrian flags for those crossing in
this location. It would ensure the driver's attention to a pedestrian crossing.
Ms. Willis responded that this was considered as well. It can be done and is relatively
inexpensive at $500 per intersection. It would require pedestrians being responsible
for using the flags. She does not believe it would be as effective as the overhead
lights and signage, but could be an enhancement.
7. Another option is street print, which is the colored and stamped asphalt used at
some crosswalk locations in the District. Street print could be implemented in
other locations, with white bars as borders. In addition, street print could be
implemented at the signalized locations in the District — Bridge Street and High
School Road and Bridge and High Streets. These could be done through the
annual street maintenance program after evaluation of the pavement condition.
Mrs. Boring stated that this treatment gives the entire area a pedestrian feel. She is
very supportive of this treatment.
Ms. Grigsby added that the street print at High School Drive would also serve as a
visual signal to vehicles that they are entering a more pedestrian area, serving as a
traffic calming feature.
8. Ms. Willis showed a depiction of the driver feedback sign, noting that the solar
version cost is $14,000, but they are very effective.
Ms. Willis summarized the costs per intersection:
For N. High Street:
1. Curb bulbs installed on both east and west sides would cost $90,000.
2. If the dual mast arm option is selected for S. High Street, staff would
recommend the same treatment at N. High Street for consistency in
appearance. Modifying the existing single mast arm to a shorter arm with
another mast arm on the west side of the intersection would cost $100,000.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of
Me etin g
Dublin City Council
Page 15
March 28, 2011
3. In- pavement lighting cost estimate is $29,000 and assumes mast arms are
present on both sides of the road.
4. Street print for the three crosswalks at N. High (two over North Street and east -
west crosswalk on N. High Street) cost estimate is $8,000.
5. Pedestrian flags for this intersection would cost $500.
6. Driver feedback sign installation north of the District would cost $14,000.
For Bridge Street:
1. The dual mast arms system cost is $160,000.
2. In- pavement lighting cost estimated at $43,000, which assumes the overhead
signage and mast arms are in place so that the existing conduit and poles can
be used. If the in- pavement lighting is pursued independently, the cost would
more than double.
3. The street print already exists at Bridge and Darby Street.
4. The pedestrian flags would cost $500.
For S. High Street:
1. Curb bulbs would cost approximately $34,000. The drainage impacts would
increase the costs somewhat.
2. Overhead lights and signage would cost approximately $148,000 and this
assumes the double mast arm installation. With the single mast arm, it would
cost $119,000.
3. In- pavement lighting cost would be $29,000.
4. The street print is existing.
5. The pedestrian flags would cost $500.
For the signalized intersections at Bridge Street and High School Road and Bridge
Street and High Street:
1. Street print would cost approximately $50,000.
She summarized that the recommendations are as follows:
1. For the intersection of N. High Street and North Street, installation of curb bulbs
on east and west sides of intersection; maintaining the street print in the east -
west direction and installation of street print over North Street; and repeating
the option selected for the S. High Street location. This could involve a retrofit
of dual mast arms at N. High Street. These dual mast arms would form a nice
arch and create a more confined space feeling, impacting driver behavior.
2. For S. High Street, installation of curb bulbs on east and west sides of roadway;
determining whether or not the single or dual mast arms will be pursued, with a
cost range of $153,000 to $182,000.
3. For Bridge Street, installation of overhead signage and lighting for a total
estimate of $160,000.
4. Pursuing street print at signalized intersections at Bridge /High School Road
and Bridge /High Streets.
The total estimate for implementation of the recommendations is a range of $511,000
to $540,000.
Mayor Lecklider noted there is a reference in the memo of $250,000 in programmed
funding. What is the plan for the additional funding?
Ms. Grigsby responded that staff would consider the dollars allocated but not
programmed for any specific items as well as additional dollars from the fund balance
in the CIP Tax Fund. This fund comes from additional income tax dollars collected.
Mayor Lecklider asked about the timeframe for implementation, and whether it can be
completed this year.
Ms. Grigsby responded affirmatively.
Mrs. Boring stated that she assumes there is adequate space to accommodate the
poles and mast arms as proposed.
Ms. Willis responded affirmatively.
Ms. Grigsby added that the decision about the option of single versus double mast
arms for S. High may be based upon the trees and visibility. The sight distance issues
will have to be reviewed going forward.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of
Dublin City Coun
Meeti n
March 28, 2011 Page 16
Mrs. Boring moved to accept the staff recommendations presented, with the provision
that they follow up with Council about whether a single or double mast arm will be
installed.
Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher seconded the motion.
Vote on the motion: Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr.
Keenan, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes; Mayor Lecklider, yes; Vice Mayor Salay, yes.
• Fee Waiver Request for Rezoning Application - Earlington- Brandon PUD (Dublin
Presbyterian Church, Prince of Peace Lutheran Church, Dublin Baptist Church)
Mr. Langworthy noted that staff has been working with the various daycare operations
operating in the City to bring them into compliance with the Zoning Code, as discussed
earlier this evening. Three additional locations have been identified in the
Earlington /Brandon PUD where daycare is being operated in three churches. The
rezoning is necessary to bring them into compliance, as the existing development text
does not permit daycare services. Staff has requested the churches apply for a
rezoning to amend the development text to add daycare use to the allowable uses,
bringing them into compliance. Staff is supportive of a fee waiver for this rezoning. All
three of the operations are combined into a single request for a text amendment to the
existing PUD.
Vice Mayor Salay indicated she is supportive of this, but asked if the daycares are
operated as non - profits or do the profits return to the church. She wants to ensure
that a precedent is not set with this action in terms of a business operating daycares
and fee waivers.
Mr. Langworthy responded that the operations of two of the daycares were described
in their letters, which were included in the packet. They indicate that they operate as
not - for - profit. His understanding is that all three daycares operate as not - for - profits.
Mrs. Boring noted she shares this concern. Is there an option for the City to sponsor
the rezoning, based on the fact that these daycares have been in operation for a long
time?
Mr. Langworthy responded that staff did consider this option. However, a City -
sponsored or applicant sponsored rezoning would bring the same compliance.
Mrs. Boring pointed out that a City- initiated rezoning would not require that any fee be
waived, however, and would not set a precedent.
Mrs. Boring moved to have the City sponsor the rezoning for these three daycares,
based on the fact that they have existed for a long period of time and the City is
desirous of ensuring zoning compliance.
Mr. Gerber seconded the motion.
Vote on the motion: Mr. Reiner, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Vice Mayor
Salay, yes; Mayor Lecklider, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes; Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher, yes.
Right -of -Way Encroachment for Patio — Piada Restaurant (Case 10- 79CDD /CU)
Ms. Martin stated this encroachment request is associated with a patio for this new
restaurant, to be constructed at 6495 Sawmill Road. The site is located on the
southwest corner of Banker Drive and Sawmill Road. The Planning and Zoning
Commission approved the site plan on February 17, 2011. The City had asked the
applicant to move the building up toward the corner intersection to create a street
presence and to be more pedestrian friendly. The applicant is requesting approval of
the right -of -way encroachment as shown on the exhibit. The patio, patio planters and
patio fencing will encroach into the Banker Drive right -of -way approximately 5 feet 6
inches. It is Planning and Engineering's recommendation that Council approve the
encroachment. The applicant is present to respond to additional questions.
Mrs. Boring asked how this site will relate to the Boston Market restaurant in terms of
setbacks.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of
Dublin City Council
Meeting
March 28, 2011 Page 17
Held 20
Ms. Martin responded that staff evaluated this case for PZC, based on the Community
Plan, the area plan and the Bridge Street Corridor plan. The concept was to create
more of a pedestrian presence. The setbacks that would apply to this site would
create a situation where the developable area would be far back on the site. The
Boston Market and KFC restaurants to the north on Sawmill were granted variances
for setbacks. Therefore, this is consistent with the general area development and
consistent with what is hoped for in the future development in the Corridor.
Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher asked if this is the golf course store site and is that building
being removed with this proposal.
Ms. Martin responded that is correct, and this will be a total new build on the site. She
pointed out the location of the restaurant on the aerial shown and the proposed access
points.
Ms. Chinn ici-Zuercher asked if there is a separate access to this business from
Sawmill Road or a combined one with the adjacent business.
Ms. Martin responded that it is separate. One of the conditions of approval from the
Commission is that when redevelopment begins in this area, the applicant work with
the developers of parcels to the south to devise a combined access and shared
parking arrangement.
Vice Mayor Salay asked about the environment along Sawmill Road, and whether it
would be suitable for patio dining.
Ms. Martin responded that much discussion took place about this question. It is
similar to the patio location for Chipotle on the east side of Sawmill Road. Staff
believes it will blend well, once future development in the Bridge Street Corridor takes
place.
Vice Mayor Salay asked for verification that the City is thinking in terms of form -based
designed and that the building will blend in for the long term, regardless of what
restaurant or business it houses.
Ms. Martin responded that the applicant was given a copy of the proposed Bridge
Street Corridor plan. Their design was based on some of the images in the plan, and
therefore staff believes it will fit in. This is a transition area and sets the tone for what
the architectural elements could be for the future.
Mr. Gerber asked if there is adequate parking for the restaurant.
Ms. Martin responded that there are 38 spaces on the site, and they are leasing an
additional 15 from the Fifth Third Bank.
Mr. Reiner stated that the building is very attractive and the business will be a
welcome addition to Dublin. When do they plan to open?
Mayor Lecklider invited the applicant to testify.
Tom Beery, Thomas Beery Architects stated they hope to apply for permits in April
and open early in the fall.
Mr. Reiner asked if this is a prototype design or something designed just for Dublin.
Mr. Beery responded that they are hopeful it becomes a prototype design.
Mr. Gerber stated this will be a nice offering for Dublin and he welcomes them.
Unfortunately, a 20 -year business with seven employees housed on this site has been
displaced and has moved out of Dublin.
Mr. Reiner moved approval of the encroachment.
Mr. Keenan seconded the motion.
Vote on the motion: Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mayor Lecklider, yes; Vice
Mayor Salay, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes; Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes.
• Historic Dublin Beautification
Mr. Hahn stated that Council asked staff to explore some ideas for beautification of
Historic Dublin. The packet includes information regarding planters and
recommended locations, and a recommendation to use hotel -motel tax dollars for
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of
Dublin City Council
Meetine
March 28, 2011 Page 18
Held 20
funding the project. Parks, Engineering and Planning reviewed the proposal to ensure
nothing was in conflict with the recommendations presented tonight by Engineering.
Phase one would include placement of 26 planters on Bridge Street, located two feet
from the curb line, framing the sidewalk areas. The planters are 22 inches in height
and the plantings would be changed out at least twice per year, spring and fall. The
main emphasis would be on Bridge Street, with a bit of wrapping around on High
Street. On S. High Street, there are some grade issues on the west side and soil
issues on the east side that would need to be addressed. For N. High Street, there is
a similar situation. On Bridge Street, staff is proposing utilizing the areas where there
is a brick sidewalk in place from the face of the buildings to the curb line, starting at
the Community Church and going east on both sides of the road, down to the High
Street intersection.
Mrs. Boring thanked staff for their work on this. She was hopeful that staff would take
this proposal to the Historic Dublin Business Association for their input. She is
supportive of placing these on Bridge Street, which will provide some separation for
pedestrians from the traffic.
Mr. Hahn responded he has spoken with the President and Vice President of HDBA.
This staff report and the details of the planters were submitted to these officers. He
received an e-mail confirmation and endorsement from both of them for this project.
Mrs. Boring noted that she is hopeful that the information will also be provided to ARB,
so they are aware of the project.
Mr. Hahn responded that upon positive endorsement from Council, staff was hopeful
the planters could be installed by the Memorial Tournament.
Mrs. Boring stated she is supportive of the proposal, but is cognizant of the history
related to changes or projects affecting the Historic District.
Mayor Lecklider observed that the discussion over the years and with the Bridge
Street Corridor study has related to creation of wide sidewalks and space between the
curb and the businesses. In viewing the planters, while they are attractive and will be
appealing when they have flowers in them, how much space will the planters occupy?
It seems to run counter to what the City is trying to achieve in terms of the wide
sidewalks. Secondly, how will they appear off - season without flowers? In the City of
Oakwood, along Far Hills Avenue — a four -lane street with 35 mph speed limit — they
have a railing along most of the curb, which creates some sense of comfort for
pedestrians. It is decorative enough to be appealing. He asked for other input.
Mr. Hahn responded that the tree wells in the area would be used as a point of
reference. They are located five to six feet from the edge of the curb and the planters
would not intrude as far or deep as the existing tree wells.
Vice Mayor Salay asked if the planters could be relocated in the future if needed.
Mr. Hahn responded that the plan is to place the planters on existing bricks with no
mounting. The weight of the planters will suffice. If there is a desire to move some or
all in the future, it can be done.
Mrs. Boring moved to accept the recommendation of staff, and to fund this project with
hotel -motel tax revenues as proposed.
Vice Mayor Salay seconded the motion.
Vote on the motion: Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Ms. Chinnici-
Zuercher, yes; Vice Mayor Salay, yes; Mayor Lecklider, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes.
STAFF COMMENTS
Ms. Grigsby commented that:
1. Information was provided regarding Council goal setting. A draft resolution
adopting the goals will be provided on April 11 for Council's review, with the
formal adoption scheduled on April 25.
2. Last week, after contact was initiated by Mr. Gerber and Mr. Keenan, several
staff members met with representatives from COSI regarding the potential for
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of
Dublin City Council
Meetine
March 28, 2011 Page 19
shared services for programs they offer and the ones offered through the City's
recreation programming. This includes the potential of partnering with the
library and the Schools. The meeting was very productive and Ms. Crandall
and Mr. Earman will lead the City's efforts. The next meeting is scheduled for
April 5, and staff is hopeful of bringing information back to Council very soon
that will provide benefit to both Dublin and COSI.
3. She updated Council on the process to appoint the City's next Chief of Police,
noting she is requesting a motion from Council in regard to this process. As
Council is aware, Lt. von Eckartsberg has been serving as Interim Chief of
Police since the departure of Chief Epperson. Over the past seven months,
she has been extremely impressed with his performance. He has
demonstrated his leadership and technical competence for the position and has
met or exceeded the expectations associated with this position. Upon review
and evaluation, she believes it is in the best interests of the City to appoint
Heinz von Eckartsberg as the new Chief of Police. She described the internal
process done by Mr. Harding, including an analysis and assessment of his
qualifications and evaluation of his core competencies. Staff also had an
independent/outside assessment process completed by professional
assessors. Ron Ferrell of the Ferrell Group was the lead on this project
together with another Chief of Police. The Ferrell Group also performs
assessments for multiple jurisdictions and their comment was that Interim Chief
von Eckartsberg performed higher than any of the other candidates in the other
jurisdictions that they had reviewed. They noted his passion for the City and
his passion for the job and department. In order to comply with the Charter,
which requires a competitive selection process unless Council authorizes
otherwise, she requested that Council approve a motion to allow the City
Manager to proceed with the appointment of Interim Chief von Eckartsberg as
Chief of Police without an external competitive process.
Ms. Chinn ici-Zuercher moved to waive the requirement of a competitive selection
process for the Chief of Police, allowing the City Manager to proceed with the
appointment of Heinz von Eckartsberg as Chief of Police.
Mr. Gerber seconded the motion.
Vote on the motion: Mayor Lecklider, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher,
yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes; Vice Mayor Salay, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes.
Council Members congratulated him on this appointment.
Interim Chief von Eckartsberg stated that he is very grateful to City Council and the
City Manager for their confidence in him. He thanked his staff, noting that he believes
Dublin's Police Department is one of the best in the state of Ohio. He credited them
for all of their support, noting he is very excited about his new position.
COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS /COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE
Mr. Keenan commented:
1. In regard to Ms. Grigsby's comments, he and Mr. Gerber were contacted by
Jeff Garascia, COS] Board Member about scheduling a meeting regarding
possibilities for collaboration among COS[, the City, Schools and library. He is
very excited about these possibilities and looks forward to hearing more from
staff in the future.
2. An update is needed to let residents know about how to contact the City for
chipper services.
Mr. Gerber commented:
1. The meeting with COSI was very productive, and some fantastic opportunities
for synergies will come about in the future as a result.
2. The Finance Committee of the Whole is scheduled for Monday, April 11 at 6
p.m. for the quarterly financial update. All Council Members are invited to
attend.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Dublin City Council
Meetim=
March 28, 2011 Page 20
Held 20
Ms. Chinn ici-Zuercher reported she attended the MORPC regional meeting last week
and there were presentations regarding the state budget and the proposals under
consideration. She attended another meeting today of a local government coalition.
They are seeking feedback from local entities regarding the effect that the potential
reduction in local government funding and potential estate tax reductions would have.
They are also interested in human interest stories, which would help the state
legislators understand how local government funds are used in communities and the
impacts that the reductions would have.
Vice Mayor Salay:
1. Congratulated Mr. McDaniel and his team on the Intelligent Community Forum
reception this evening. This is a great honor for the community and very
exciting!
2. Reminded Council of the civic association presidents meeting tomorrow
evening at the DCRC from 7 to 9 p.m. She encouraged everyone to attend.
3. Noted that she traveled south on vacation last week, but remarked how
wonderful it was to come home to beautiful Dublin. In her view, there is not a
more beautiful community, which is a result of Dublin's zoning, landscaping,
and signage standards.
Mayor Lecklider commented:
1. Congratulations to Mr. Earman, Mr. Hahn and staff who were awarded two
2010 Ohio Parks and Recreation Association Awards of Excellence. Awards
were received for the Teen Entrepreneur Camp and the Special Needs Camp.
2. Noted that on March 20, he attended the memorial service for the local
Japanese community at Dublin Baptist Church. A portion of the program was a
brainstorming session regarding the ways the community could provide support
and assistance to Japan in the aftermath of the earthquake, tsunami and
nuclear plant issues. Information will be included on the City's website about
this effort.
3. He and Mr. McDaniel attended a meeting of the Columbus Council on World
Affairs last Friday at which the speaker was Japanese Consul General Matsuda
who gave an update on the situation in Japan and the needs. Mayor Lecklider
encouraged everyone to give support and assistance wherever possible. He
added that the City of Dublin is home to the largest concentration of Japanese
community in the state of Ohio. Of 8,000 Japanese citizens in Ohio, 1,000
reside in Dublin. Consul General Matsuda repeatedly expressed his gratitude
to the Dublin community as well as the City Administration and City Council for
all of their support for the Japanese residents within the community.
4. In the packet, a memo from Mr. McDaniel included proposed dates for the
Bridge Street Corridor meetings. He suggested that the Clerk gather
information on the preference for meeting dates from each of the Council
Members.
5. Asked if staff is seeking any feedback regarding the Muirfield Drive bike lane
analysis.
Ms. Grigsby responded that staff plans to present the results of the studies at the April
11 Council meeting.
ADJOURN TO EXECUTIVE SESSION
Mayor Lecklider moved to adjourn to executive session for land acquisition, legal and
personnel matters. He noted that Council will reconvene for the purpose of
considering appointments to boards and commissions.
Vice Mayor Salay seconded the motion.
Vote on the motion: Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes;
Mayor Lecklider, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Vice Mayor Salay, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes.
The meeting was reconvened at 11:00 p.m.
All Council Members were present.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Dublin City Council
March 28, 2011 Page 21
Held 20
Resolution 14 -11
Appointing Members to the Various Boards and Commissions of the City of
Dublin.
Ms. Salay introduced the resolution. She reported that Council has interviewed
candidates and the following candidates are recommended for appointment:
• Joseph E. Budde, Sr. to a four -year term on the Planning and Zoning
Commission
• Tasha Bailey to a three -year term on the Architectural Review Board
• Brian Gunnoe to a three -year term on the Board of Zoning Appeals
• Chris Clinton and Steve Stidhem to three -year terms on the Parks and
Recreation Advisory Commission
• Ingrid Grass to a three -year term on the Parks and Recreation Advisory
Commission
• Mindy Carr to the unexpired term of Kevin Cooper on the Community Services
Advisory Commission
• William Sherman, Richard Filler and Kari Hertel to three -year terms on the
Community Services Advisory Commission
• Jim Renard to a three -year term on the Personnel Board of Review
• Darin Moore to a three -year term on the Records Commission
Vice Mayor Salay moved approval of Resolution 14 -11 with the appointments as
recommended.
Ms. Chinn ici-Zuercher seconded the motion.
Vote on the Resolution: Mr. Gerber, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Vice Mayor Salay, yes; Mrs.
Boring, no; Mayor Lecklider, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher, yes.
Mr. Keenan moved to direct staff to bring forward a proposal, including costs for
videotaping of the Planning and Zoning Commission meetings for placement on the
website.
Vice Mayor Salay seconded the motion.
Vote on the motion: Mr. Reiner, yes; Vice Mayor Salay, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mayor
Lecklider, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes.
The meeting was adjourned at 11:10 p.m.
Mayor — •�' . O fficer
G ('
Clerk of Council
