HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil Minutes 05-09-2011RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Dublin_ Cit)t-Council
May 9, 2011
Meetine
Mrs. Boring called the Monday, May 9, 2011 Regular Meeting of Dublin City Council to
order at 6:00 p.m. at the Dublin Municipal Building.
ADJOURNMENT TO EXECUTIVE SESSION
Mrs. Boring moved to adjourn to executive session for discussion of land acquisition,
legal, collective bargaining and security matters.
Ms. Chinn ici-Zuercher seconded the motion
Vote on the motion: Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes; Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher, yes;
and Mrs. Boring, yes. Mr. Reiner, Vice Mayor Salay and Mayor Lecklider arrived at
6:10 p.m. and joined the session.
The meeting was reconvened at 7:00 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, Mr. Keenan and Mr. Reiner.
Staff members present were Ms. Grigsby, Mr. Smith, Mr. McDaniel, Chief von
Eckartsberg, Ms. Readler, Mr. Harding, Mr. Hahn, Mr. Tyler, Ms. Crandall, Mr.
Langworthy, Mr. Thurman, Mr. Hammersmith, Ms. Gilger, Ms. Nardecchia, Mr. Combs
and Mr. Phillabaum.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
• Regular Meeting of May 9, 2011
Mr. Gerber moved to approve the minutes of the meeting of April 25, 2011.
Mr. Keenan seconded the motion.
Vote on the motion Mayor Lecklider, yes; Vice Mayor Salay, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes;
Mr. Gerber, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes.
CORRESPONDENCE
The Clerk reported that no correspondence had been received requiring Council
action.
PROCLAMATIONS /SPECIAL RECOGNITION
The Kiwanis Club of Dublin 50 Anniversary
Mayor Lecklider presented a proclamation in honor of The Kiwanis Club of Dublin's
fifty years of service to the Dublin community. The proclamation was accepted by
Judge Clayton Rose, Kiwanis Club founding and current member, and Jack Popovich,
current president. Mayor Lecklider noted that the Dublin Kiwanis Frog Jump, initiated
in 1967, is Dublin's oldest community event. The contributions and service of the
Kiwanis Club over the past fifty years to the Dublin community have been significant,
and it has greatly enriched the lives of Dublin's families. The City looks forward to a
continued partnership in the years ahead.
Building Safety Month
Mayor Lecklider presented a proclamation in honor of Building Safety Month to Jeff
Tyler, Director of Building Standards, acknowledging the dedication and service of
local Code officials to the Dublin community, and thanking them for their vigilance in
ensuring the safe construction of Dublin's buildings and the safety and well -being of
Dublin's citizens.
CITIZEN COMMENTS
There were no comments from citizens.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of
Dublin City Council
Meeting
May 9, 2011 Page 2
LEGISLATION
SECOND READING /PUBLIC HEARING - ORDINANCES
Ordinance 18- 11(Amended)
Adopting Section 153.044 of the City of Dublin Codified Ordinances (Zoning
Code) to Establish the New Technology Flex Zoning District. (Case 10- 064ADM)
Mr. Combs stated that Ordinance 18 -11 was introduced at the April 25, 2011 City
Council meeting. Among the issues raised by Council were concerns about the review
process and the proposed landscape compliance language. Council requested that
Planning revise the ordinance to include language regarding compliance with the
landscaping requirements of the Zoning Code. The ordinance has been modified
accordingly, and staff recommends Council approval of Ordinance 18 -11.
Mrs. Boring stated that at the previous meeting, the issue of trim color was discussed.
However, although mentioned in the memo, it has not been effectively addressed in
the revised ordinance. There is no definition addressing the size, detailing or
limitations. This is an important issue in view of the potential of a large box retail store
seeking to develop in this area, and potentially requesting a full roof in its accent color.
Specifics are needed, including a clear definition of the amount of trim permitted.
Vice Mayor Salay concurred. At the previous meeting, she had cited a couple of
examples. She had hoped this issue would be addressed in the revisions. What is
staff's view concerning this issue? Does staff believe the building on Innovation Drive
that was referenced to be acceptable?
Mr. Combs responded that like architecture, it is a subjective matter. Staff heard some
opposing viewpoints, but not necessarily clear direction. It would be possible to add a
percent limitation that could provide a general framework.
Vice Mayor Salay referred to the Perio Building, which has bright orange trim. What
percent of the front elevation is trim?
Mr. Combs responded that he would estimate 10 to15 percent -- a very minimal use of
color in terms of the overall structure.
Vice Mayor Salay stated that she does not object to a color, but it can overwhelm a
building. A couple examples of that currently exist in the City, and she does not
believe more of that is desired. The intent is to focus on the use of base colors and
use color as an accent. Language that is more prescriptive can be added.
Vice Mayor Salay responded that "accent" could range from 10 to 35 percent. She
would prefer that the accent be closer to 10 percent.
Mr. Combs stated that the Code requires that the materials be 80 percent primary and
20 percent secondary. Therefore, 20 percent or less for accent trim would be
consistent with that general intent.
Mayor Lecklider asked how that would be measured.
Mr. Combs responded that a percentage would be applied to the full surface area of
the elevations.
Mrs. Boring asked if 20 percent of the building is a secondary material, does that
qualify as a trim. In her view, that is too high of percentage for accent. She would
support specification of a percentage.
Vice Mayor Salay suggested that schematic drawings with sample architecture could
be used as a basis for determining that percentage. Twenty percent would be one -
fifth of the total elevation, which would constitute more than an accent.
Mayor Lecklider asked if 20 percent of the total area of all four sides could result in the
front elevation being all trim color.
Vice Mayor Salay responded that would be determined by how it was measured.
Would 20 percent of the trim be permitted in color, or 20 percent of the entire building
elevation?
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of
Dublin City Council
Meeting
May 9, 2011 Page 3
Mr. Combs responded that it would be measured against the total building elevations.
That is why he has suggested that 10 to 15 percent would be more appropriate.
Vice Mayor Salay stated that she prefers to limit it to 10 percent. It is in keeping with
the entire community. The City restricts use of corporate colors to a more subdued
palette, such as at the Perimeter Center. It provides the corporate identification,
although the permitted color may not match the exact shade of the corporate color. A
palette would provide her some assurance regarding the intent of this legislation.
Mayor Lecklider responded that it would be impossible to create a palette with all the
potential corporate colors.
Vice Mayor Salay responded that the intent would not be to include all the corporate
colors. Use of the blue color would be limited to a "Perimeter Center blue," for
example. There are specific shades of the other main colors included in the palette
that also must be used. It would be helpful to her to view some schematics, as well as
existing examples with their total elevation and percentage of accent. She would like
to see an example of a building with 10 percent in a bright accent color.
Mr. Combs responded that staff would provide those examples.
Mayor Lecklider stated that, given where this Tech Flex zoning would apply, he would
prefer to have the issue addressed by percentage versus a color palette.
Mr. Reiner asked if there is architectural review language that would apply.
Mr. Combs responded that, based on the Code, there is general intent language that
would apply. That specifies the base level of architecture that is expected.
Mr. Reiner responded that most of this issue would be addressed in that manner.
Mrs. Boring responded that it would not, if the proposal met the Code. If it meets the
Code requirement, Council cannot arbitrarily determine the amount is too much. That
is the objective of this district — if an application meets the Code, it is approved
administratively. Therefore, it is important to be definitive at this point.
Mr. Keenan stated that this zoning is intended to be an economic development tool.
He could agree to limit the use to a percent, but not to a particular color palette.
Mr. Reiner agreed. If the City's objective is to attract businesses into Dublin, it is
important not to restrict their corporate identity.
Mr. Gerber stated that when the City was doing primarily planned developments, it
was desirable that the aesthetics of the development relate to the surrounding area. If
this remains the intent, where are such examples within this Code? He is primarily
concerned about the evaluation of the aesthetics in comparison to the surrounding
area.
Mr. Combs responded that the Code provides general language relating to the
architectural intent, providing specific examples of that graphically. One example in
this corridor is Hidaka. Hidaka uses corrugated metal with exposed fasteners, but
because of the size, it is broken up well. It has windows to provide fenestration and
changes in the roofline. Those major elements have been incorporated into an
industrial building to distinguish it from a plain, rectangular box. Another example in
this corridor would be the detailing used on the Smith Medical building.
Mr. Gerber asked if the Code would prohibit a company from using its corporate
identity if the logo is, for example, bright blue.
Mr. Combs responded that the Code is written to permit those colors to be used as an
accent, to a limited extent, for that type of purpose. Depending on the detail of the
architecture and its design, it would be reviewed in terms of where it is most
appropriate in identifying the entrance or the office component of the building.
Mr. Gerber asked if it would also take into consideration surrounding buildings and the
surrounding area, ensuring that it blends in aesthetically.
Mr. Combs responded affirmatively. The fact that the Code requires the use of neutral
colors for a minimum of 80 percent of the building establishes the overall character of
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Dublin City Council
May 9, 2011 Page 4
the building. Application of an accent color would be for minor detailing to highlight
entry points, similar to the Perio building or the Stanley Steemer building on Innovation
Drive.
Vice Mayor Salay asked about Stanley Steemer and the percentage of accent color
used.
Mr. Combs responded that he would estimate it to be approximately five percent — a
minor application of accent color.
Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher noted that on page 8, under "Color," it is stated that it must be
"harmonious with the surrounding area." Could an additional sentence simply be
added that specifies "not more than" or "up to" a certain percentage?
Mr. Combs responded that it could be added. Based on what is currently occurring in
the corridor, ten percent or less would be acceptable.
Ms. Chin nici-Zuercher recommended, in the interest of moving this legislation forward,
that language be added to Item 413: "....to identify main public entrances... not to
exceed ten percent."
Vice Mayor Salay responded that would be acceptable.
Mr. Gerber suggested additional language: .. .....and subject to the discretion of the
Director." In some instances, ten percent may be acceptable; in others, it might be too
great.
Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher agreed, but noted that the specification of "up to" implies that
determination would be part of the process of approval, whether administratively or
through the Commission. The language could mean both "can be less" and "can be
required to be less."
Mr. Gerber responded that it would depend upon whether it is interpreted and applied
in that way.
Mr. Combs stated that he believes that "ten percent or less" would accomplish that
goal, based on the examples of Perio and Stanley Steemer.
Mayor Lecklider requested the Law Director to comment on the recent discussion and
inclusion of the suggested language.
Mr. Smith responded that if it reads, "not to exceed ten percent and subject to the
discretion of the Director," it would achieve the objective. That language does not
automatically provide the applicant with ten percent, but prohibits it from being more
than ten percent. However, issues could arise depending upon how the discretionary
language is written. Therefore, it is important to draft the language very specifically. If
the majority of Council believes this to be an important issue, it would be preferable to
draft that language and provide it for consideration at the next Council meeting.
Ms. Grigsby requested that staff confirm that if the staff review on this issue would
identify a percent lower than 10 percent as appropriate, the applicant would still have
the right to the appeal process.
Mr. Combs confirmed that is correct. The applicant could appeal the administrative
decision to the Board of Zoning Appeals.
Mayor Lecklider asked if it is the consensus of Council to request that staff prepare
amended language for the next Council meeting. Further, is there adequate time for
staff to prepare the documents?
Mr. Combs responded that staff could do so.
Mr. Smith summarized that Council's direction is that the language clarify that the trim
cannot exceed ten percent; that there is some discretion for staff in determining that
amount; and that the applicant has the right of appeal to the Board of Zoning Appeals.
Council is also requesting that examples be provided.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Dublin City Council
May 9, 2011
Page 5
Mrs. Boring requested clarification — is this a percent of the front elevation or a percent
of the total building surface?
Mr. Combs responded that it would be determined based on the entire surface of the
four wall elevations.
Vice Mayor Salay moved to postpone Ordinance 18 -11 (Amended) to the May 23
Council meeting.
Mrs. Boring seconded the motion.
Vice Mayor Salay stated that she also has questions about the landscaping provisions.
She will contact staff for clarification prior to the next reading.
Vote on the motion Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes;
Mr. Reiner, yes; Vice Mayor Salay, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mayor Lecklider, yes.
Ordinance 19 -11
Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Mutual Aid Agreement with the City
of Delaware, City of Powell, City of Westerville, Village of Ashley, Village of
Ostrander, Village of Shawnee Hills, Village of Sunbury, Genoa Township,
Delaware County Preservation Parks Authority, Ohio Wesleyan University
Police, and the Ohio Health Network.
Chief von Eckartsberg stated that this updates the City's mutual aid agreement with
entities in Delaware County. The ordinance is unchanged from the first reading. Staff
recommends approval.
Vote on the Ordinance Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Ms.
Chinnici - Zuercher, yes; Vice Mayor Salay, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes; Mayor Lecklider, yes.
INTRODUCTION /FIRST READING — ORDIN
Ordinance 22 -11
Amending the 2007 Dublin Community Plan to Incorporate the Economic
Advancement Zone (EAZ) Plan as a Refinement of the U.S. 33 Corridor Area Plan
for Areas South of SR 161 /Post Road. (Case 11- 010ADM)
Vice Mayor Salay introduced the ordinance.
Mr. Combs stated that this is a refinement of the US 33 Area Corridor Plan for the
southern portion of the Central Ohio Innovation Corridor (COIC). The purpose of the
plan is to define the general development pattern and character for the area west of
US 33. This will provide a guide for an administrative zoning process for the area,
help to plan infrastructure, and establish a zoning and development framework to
match the plan. This will be used to market and facilitate development of properties
within the area. The key planning goals in the document are derived from the
Community Plan and, in general, have not changed since creation of the area plan.
Those include focus on an employment center for the area that maximizes the visible
areas along US 33; integrating and providing additional housing options; looking at the
streetscape and pedestrian environment of the area; and ensuring that natural
features are preserved and enhanced within the area through high quality and flexible
design standards.
The land use plan in the document includes a multi- tiered approach to research and
technology development, including higher profile Research Office development for
areas along US 33; moving westward toward CSX railroad and Houchard Road there
would be Research Flex of one to two -story flexible development space; further to the
west, there would be more assembly type of development.
Around the Darree Fields area will be a mixed -use tech category, providing for a mix
of residential and office uses. Along Avery Road, with future redevelopment, there is a
potential option of support services for the overall EAZ.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of
Dublin City Council
Meetine
May 9, 2011
Page 6
The Chapter also includes a height - regulating plan, which will be translated into the
Zoning Code. The allowable height would increase, as development is closer to US
33.
The Thoroughfare Plan portion of the document includes some major changes.
Through the public process, staff is looking at realigning Shier -Rings Road and
creating a reliever for US 33 that would link Emerald Parkway to Marysville. This
would move traffic through the area and provide better access. Staff is also looking at
an east -west route parallel to SR 161. This would open up development along the
Post Road interchange. Through public input, staff has also considered minimizing
some of the road network along residential areas to help separate neighborhood and
employment and through traffic. What is shown on the plan are dashed areas where
roadways could potentially be added in the future or kept in place as appropriate.
One comment received through public comment is a suggestion of shifting the option
to either leave in or remove a segment of Shier -Rings Road to downplay the
neighborhood area — shifting that over to Cosgray Road so that residents have easier
access to Shier -Rings and to the Post Road interchange.
The overall intent of this area of the Plan for the long term is to create a new main
entrance to Darree Fields that would be highlighted by some of the mixed residential
and neighborhood office development in the area north of Shier - Rings.
Typologies for streets within the area are based on a three - tiered level of road network
— an Emerald Parkway style development for arterials with two lanes in each direction
with center median and bike lanes; roads of one lane in each direction and a bike lane;
and internal to the areas of development would be more typical neighborhood street
development for the research components, including on street parking and signed bike
routes.
Phasing for roadways in the area will be focused on establishing development around
the Post Road interchange and creating a reliever link for US 33 to open access to
both interchanges and help to facilitate development within the interior portions of the
project. As development moves to the west, additional phases would be added as
shown in orange and yellow on the slides.
Transit was reviewed as well. The Plan focuses for the long term on providing for the
availability of options for the City. As conditions change, this can be adapted to meet
the needs of the City. This would begin by expanding the current COTA bus routes
throughout the area. Over time, as density increases and congestion, there is the
potential for creation of a circulator through the center of the City and, over time,
progressing to rapid bus transit and, eventually, to light rail. The Plan demonstrates
that by showing the extension of COTA routes to the west of the hospital area as
currently shown in COTA's long -range plans. As development occurs, a major transit
spine would be encouraged through the Perimeter Drive corridor to link the EAZ with
the Bridge Street Corridor Area. If light rail develops in the future, the spine can be
extended long term to the west to link with a future transit station.
In terms of open space, the Plan builds on the existing parks in the area, ensuring
linkages throughout the EAZ by using stream corridors, connecting to regional
destinations and residential neighborhoods. Key setbacks along roadways are
needed to provide for pedestrian connectivity as well. The EAZ would be linked to
Red Trabue and portions to the east, eventually connecting all the way to Sawmill
Road through the greenway network. Bikeways would be emphasized, and the EAZ
would be a test area for a comprehensive implementation of bike options for
recreational and commuter use. Major arterials would include an on- street bike lane.
There is the ability to coordinate through the greenway system and multi -path system
to have interconnectivity. Signed bike routes will be internal to the developments. The
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of
Dublin City Council
May 9, 2011
Meeting
Page 7
Plan identifies a future multi -use bridge connection across US 33 that will enhance
pedestrian connectivity across the freeway.
For architecture, the Plan focuses on a contemporary style, with glass, metal and a
variety of building forms and shapes.
For the three major districts along US 33, the Research Office District will have more
of an office look and feel; moving inward, the focus becomes the flex district and has
combinations of warehouse, office and laboratory space that is interchangeable over
time; near the rail line, some assembly manufacturing is possible, and this would be
done through larger building footprints.
In terms of architectural review, the Plan includes four different types of benchmarks
for architectural footprints: one story with regular footprint; multiple story buildings;
and for larger footprints, one story and multiple story applications in different areas.
For large footprint buildings, there are additional architectural requirements to ensure
the larger facades have appropriate detailing and emphasis on design. The Plan also
looks at a variety of architectural elements that can be added to help facilitate meeting
the general requirements of the applicable Code.
In regard to landscaping for the EAZ, the Plan looks to build off the links character of
the Golf Club of Dublin and Ballantrae, as well as the Glacier Ridge Metro Park. This
contemplates an informal, natural landscape design with defined programmed spaces
around buildings and in open space areas. Lower maintenance plantings are
encouraged, and fencerows and hedges are contemplated. He shared slides showing
examples of such character.
The Plan also identifies major and secondary gateways as shown in red and blue. It
preliminarily identifies locations for future public art works, whether in roundabouts,
gateway locations, or along major greenway vistas throughout the development. The
section maps identify some concepts for gateway or entry signs for the EAZ as well as
secondary way finding and street sign applications. Streetscape elements are
included that coordinate with the general character of the intended architecture and
the landscaping to provide a contrast between technology and the architecture and the
natural environment.
The Plan meets the considerations for amending the Community Plan. Staff
recommends approval of the Plan at the May 23, 2011 Council meeting.
Mayor Lecklider invited Council Members to comment.
Vice Mayor Salay noted that the Plan is terrific and exciting. She particularly likes the
picture on Page 90, which helps her to envision this. She asked about the Ballantrae
neighborhood and what view they will have from their backyards? What is the plan for
Shier -Rings Road? She initially understood it was to be de- emphasized in the future
and that it would not be a major part of the road network for the EAZ. What will this
environment look like for the Ballantrae residents for the homes that back onto Shier -
Rings and for the Shier Oaks residents?
Mr. Combs responded that the Plan calls for extension of Shier -Rings as a four -lane
road with center median from Eiterman Road, taking it north to Industrial Parkway.
Originally, the Planning process looked at some different concepts and iterations.
Based on analysis and public input, once the road was envisioned to swing north
through the areas, the development capacity of the parcels was reduced significantly.
In addition, it affected the overall access for many parcels internal to the development.
Based on this, the preferred scenario was to "swing" Shier -Rings to the north as
shown. The remaining portions of Shier - Rings, based on feedback from Ballantrae
and Shier Oaks subdivision residents, would be downplayed and maintained as a
residential street, extending some of the park and open spaces in Ballantrae and the
bike path systems, establishing this as more of a pedestrian connection long -term to
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of
Dublin City Council
May 9, 2011
Page 8
Darree Fields. With development to the north, the new entrance can de- emphasize
that and there can be better control over access through the area.
Vice Mayor Salay asked if the Eiterman and Shier -Rings Road intersection is
contemplated to be a roundabout.
Mr. Combs responded that, conceptually, it is shown as a roundabout until traffic
levels are studied. This would also separate the neighborhoods to the south and
create a more formalized entry.
Ms. Chinn ici-Zuercher asked about the timeframe for the new entrance to Darree
Fields.
Mr. Combs responded that the plan at this point, since this is more of a secondary
level type of road that would be dependent upon creating this main reliever, is that is a
long -term addition. This is all dependent upon the development that occurs in this
area, unless a new entrance is specifically programmed in the CIP. As this
development occurs, it could be extended to Cosgray and with development of the
larger tract, it could be punched through to the park.
Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher stated that the traffic in this location is already problematic.
She understands that the timing is contemplated to be long term, but if there is
something that could be phased in, it would help this exceptionally used area, which
serves many sports teams.
Mr. Combs stated that he understands that Engineering is working on a roundabout to
be installed at Cosgray and Shier - Rings. This creates a short to medium -range
solution to address the conflicting movements. If the need increases to the point that it
impacts the residential areas, the City could consider this as a capital project.
Ms. Grigsby noted that the design for the Cosgray and Shier -Rings intersection is
complete. Right -of -way acquisition is underway, and the plan is to award a
construction contract later this year or early in 2012.
Ms. Chinn ici-Zuercher agreed with Vice Mayor Salay that this is a great opportunity to
take this area to market. In addition to the proposed Code, is there a marketing plan
in place?
Mr. McDaniel responded there is not a marketing plan in place, but it is staff's intent to
develop this once the Plan, Code and rezoning are adopted. This new area Plan can
certainly be promoted, but having the Code aligned and the area rezoning completed
will be important to complete before investing in marketing.
Ms. Chinn ici-Zuercher asked if this can be accomplished in 2012.
Mr. McDaniel responded affirmatively.
There will be a second reading /public hearing at the May 23 Council meeting.
Ordinance 23 -11
Amending Section 153.235 to the City of Dublin Codified Ordinances (Zoning
Code) Regarding Appeals of Administrative Decisions to City Council. (Case 11-
001 ADM)
Vice Mayor Salay introduced the ordinance.
Mr. Smith stated that this ordinance was presented in draft form to the Community
Development Committee of the Whole on February 14, 2011. Some suggestions were
incorporated into the draft in follow -up, and it was forwarded to Planning and Zoning
Commission for review and recommendation. Ms. Readier is present and can provide
a brief presentation and /or respond to questions.
Ms. Readler stated that staff had requested further policy direction before finalizing the
draft of this ordinance, providing for a potential administrative appeal from Planning
and Zoning Commission decisions to City Council. The ordinance that Council is
considering tonight is the same as what was discussed at the Committee of the Whole
meeting. Legal staff was directed to explore the need for an appeals process, based
on litigation occurring because of certain administrative decisions. Staff felt it would
be prudent to have a "safety valve" in terms of a Council review prior to an appeal
Meeti
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Dublin City Council
Meeting
May 9, 2011 Page 9
being filed with the county court. The appeal process covers decisions by the
Commission regarding conditional use applications, final development plans, and
amended final development plans. The general outline of the appeals process calls for
the applicant to file a request for an appeal with the Clerk of Council within 14 days of
the Planning and Zoning Commission's adverse decision. Only the applicant can file
such an appeal, and once filed, the Record of Action is stayed until Council makes a
final decision on whether or not to hear the appeal. Council would then decide, at their
total discretion, whether to hear the appeal. A majority vote of the entire Council is
required on a motion to hear an appeal. Once Council decides to hear an appeal and
the applicant decides to go forward, that appeal would be heard within 30 days. The
same evidence submitted to Planning and Zoning Commission is submitted to Council.
Council would apply the same criteria as applied by the Commission and determine
whether to approve, approve with modifications, or disapprove the application. At that
point, Council's decision becomes a final administrative decision and that decision
may be appealed to the county court via a Chapter 2506 appeal under the Ohio
Revised Code.
Planning and Zoning Commission had a detailed discussion regarding the proposed
ordinance, and the minutes are included in the Council packet. The cover memo
highlights the general objections of the Commission to the ordinance, which include:
the developers would bypass the Planning Commission and go directly to Council; the
process could be politicized; and Council could be in a difficult circumstance if they
decide to grant an appeal for one corporate citizen and then do not allow another
discretionary appeal for another corporate citizen. The Commission had many
fundamental objections to the legislation. Legal staff requested a tabling at the first
meeting of PZC to determine whether modifications could be made to address their
concerns. However, because their concerns were so fundamental to the process, it
was determined that modifications could not address their concerns adequately. At
the next meeting of PZC, the vote was to recommend disapproval of the ordinance to
Council. She offered to respond to any questions.
Ms. Chinn ici-Zuercher noted that she contacted Ms. Grigsby this morning and left her
a voice mail message regarding her fundamental question about this legislation.
What is Council trying to address?
Ms. Readler responded that at the outset, when staff was asked to explore this, the
potential of litigation and related costs without Council having the option of reviewing a
decision was the driving factor.
Ms. Chin nici-Zuercher asked staff for their opinion about why the applicants are going
to court on these cases during the past three to five years. Is there a particular trend
or factor involved?
Ms. Readler responded that, generally, the disapproval by Planning and Zoning
Commission has triggered the appeal to the courts.
Ms. Chinn ici-Zuercher asked if there are additional factors involved, such as a staff
report recommending approval without conditions, and the Commission then
disapproving the application — perhaps due to other considerations that should have
been raised at the staff level. What is the fundamental reason that the Commission
has taken a different stance than the staff in terms of what is trying to be addressed
with this appeal process?
Mr. Smith responded that the individual cases are "all over the board." Sometimes,
PZC disagrees with the staff report and sometimes the developer believes that the
staff report influenced the PZC who disapproved an application. There are a variety of
reasons for this.
Ms. Readler added that with some recent 2506 appeals, there have been examples on
both sides of this — some where the staff recommended approval and the Commission
took a different view, and vice versa. There have been conflicting opinions for pending
cases in the past few years.
Ms. Chinn ici-Zuercher asked if there is an increase in this type of litigation, based on
historical information, and why that is the case?
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Dublin City Council
May 9, 2011
Meetine
Page 10
Mr. Smith responded that there has been an increase in the past two to three years,
and the economy may be a factor in terms of an applicant's desire to have a quicker
decision from the court. Some in the development community believe the judge may
be more objective than the City in reviewing the record. In the last 12 months, there
have been four to five cases taken to appeal. Legal staff was asked to review this
matter several years ago, and what prompted this was the desire on Council's part to
reduce litigation costs.
Ms. Grigsby stated that other communities have such a process in place to keep the
hearings at the local level versus having a court review the cases. She agrees that
the economy is a factor as well as the increased competition in Central Ohio. In some
cases, there have been concerns with the Code and the lack of clarity, making it more
difficult to negotiate what the City desires. Some have chosen to go to court based
upon this. If there is a need for discussions among Council, Planning Commission
and staff to identify some of these issues and how improvements can be made, that
can be scheduled as well.
Mr. Gerber commented that the City's track record in the court appeals has been
good.
Mr. Smith responded that over the past 33 years of his experience with the City, it has
been very good, but in the past few years, there have been some decisions that did
not favor the City for various reasons. The costs of litigation have also increased.
Mr. Gerber stated that, overall, the City's track record has been good. Personally, he
will not support this legislation. Several years ago, in the PUD process discussion,
this appeal process was discussed and there were concerns expressed about a
developer not making the best effort at PZC due to the potential for an appeal to
Council. If a developer can appeal an administrative decision of PZC to Council, it
takes away a portion of the "teeth" of the review process. He does not believe that this
legislation will remedy the situation, and that better communication is needed between
staff, Planning Commission and Council. It is important to maintain the process as it
exists, which brings the best outcome. Council's role is not to serve as another review
body for Planning and Zoning Commission decisions. For all of these reasons, he will
not support the ordinance.
Mrs. Boring stated that she has not supported this in the past and will not support it
now. In the Planning Commission minutes, Mr. Hardt commented that he is
experienced with this appeal process and, although it appears workable as written, it
does not function as expected. Recently, two applications were reviewed by Planning
Commission and the Commission requested modifications; the applicant has already
contacted Council about these cases, although the second hearing at PZC has not yet
occurred. An applicant will not make modifications as requested, if an applicant
believes they can appeal the decision to Council. Personally, she does not want to
spend time hearing such appeals, and she does not want to take on the role of the
Commission. She has already served many years on the Commission. Council
selects seven citizens to serve on the Commission and this process would undermine
their authority and their hard work on cases. It would be difficult for Council to be
involved in cases involving corporate citizens, and this process would undermine the
relationship between the Commission, Council and Planning staff. Having a balanced,
well - planned community at times requires a "no" vote. Council is working hard to
establish zoning districts where the process will be clearer, while maintaining the
development standards. She cannot support the ordinance at this time and added that
the Commission does outstanding work and has always done so.
Mr. Gerber added that he agrees it is important to send a strong message to the
community and to the Planning and Zoning Commission that Council does support the
Commission.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of
Dublin City Council
May 9, 2011
Meetina
Page 11
Mr. Reiner agreed, noting he has always been a proponent of a strong Planning
Commission. They do the tough job of development review in a non - political
environment, and it should remain that way. His fear is that an appeal process would
be a common path taken by developers, if it is available. If there are internal
differences of opinion between staff and the Commission, that needs to be addressed.
If litigation is occurring due to these factors, the situation should be addressed. He
appreciates all of the hard work of the Commission over the past decades.
Vice Mayor Salay noted that she appreciates the Commission's careful review of this
and has thoroughly reviewed their minutes. She has much hesitation in supporting
this legislation, based on all of this input. She views this process as a tool available to
Council. The staff memo noted that most other communities have such a process
available to enable Council to hear an appeal. She would be interested in hearing
how such a process works in other communities and whether it becomes political. The
appeal process is only available for conditional uses, final development plans, and
amended final development plans, however, and not rezonings. In the end, Council
does weigh in — whether it is in executive session as a litigation matter or other. The
question is whether Council addresses this in a public meeting or in an executive
session related to litigation. She agrees that there is a communication gap among the
three bodies involved and is interested in how this can be improved, moving forward.
A natural tension exists among Council, Planning Commission, and staff as they serve
in three distinct roles. However, there are communication opportunities to take
advantage of going forward.
Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher stated that another distinguishing factor for Dublin versus other
communities is that the others have always had such a process in place. Therefore,
the likelihood of the process being utilized is less, given it has long existed in those
communities versus having a new process in Dublin. Her major concern is that in
changing the process, it sends a message that Council lacks confidence in the
process in place. That is not a message she advocates. Developers already have
access to Council Members and many take advantage of this for various reasons.
There is already opportunity for open dialogue to understand the expectations of the
community for development. She does not want to signal such a major change at this
point in time. Council and the Commission are devoting much time to updating Codes
and creating Districts to facilitate the development process. There is a need to allow
these new Codes and Districts to be utilized and tweaked, if necessary, versus
changing the process at this point.
Mayor Lecklider stated that Mr. Smith was asked about the City's success over the
years as well as the success in recent years with appeals. It has been recognized that
there have been more appeals in recent years than in the past. In determining the
rate of successful outcomes to these cases, would this include the settlements
achieved?
Mr. Smith responded that it has been rare that the City has settled a case once it is in
the courts. Generally, the City has let the process proceed in the court system. The
City has attempted to settle some of the cases, and some are still pending. When the
City has negotiated a settlement, either because the case is in litigation or because a
stay has been placed on the action, there has been success. At the time staff began
to work on this legislation to provide an appeals process, the new Districts and Codes
had not moved forward, although some of the work was in process. These should be
helpful to the development process.
Mayor Lecklider stated that in reviewing the minutes of the February 14, 2011
Committee of the Whole, indicating that Council Members expressed unanimous
support for the legislation, he questions what has occurred over the past 60 days. He
would have preferred to save the staff time spent on preparing this legislation.
Mrs. Boring responded that there was not a formal vote taken at the Committee
meeting. She has never been supportive of this type of legislation. In the future, she
will ensure that her silence does not imply agreement.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of
Dublin City Council
Meeting
May 9, 2011 Page 12
Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher commented that often, when Council meets in a committee
format, the information and the dialogue are only a piece of the entire picture. It
requires the staff to memorialize this in written form to enable the boards and
commissions to have a more engaged dialogue. Council then can review the written
document and understand the ramifications of it. Personally, she believes the work
had merit, even if there is not support for the legislation. Council has learned much
about what is important and what to avoid, potentially, in a public decision- making
process at this point in time.
Mr. Smith commented that the unanimity at the committee level, as he recalls, was to
move the process forward to draft the legislation. That did not indicate a Member
would support the legislation at a later date.
Mayor Lecklider commented that he does not believe anyone is bound by a discussion
that occurred in the past. This was merely an observation on his part. Based on the
discussion, there is no need for continued effort on this matter. Procedurally, what is
the next step?
Mr. Smith responded that Council could withdraw the ordinance or vote to disapprove
the ordinance at the second reading.
Ms. Chinn ici-Zuercher moved to withdraw Ordinance 23 -11 from consideration.
Mr. Gerber seconded the motion.
Vote on the motion: Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Ms. Chinnici-
Zuercher, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes; Mayor Lecklider, yes; Vice Mayor Salay, yes.
Ordinance 24 -11
Authorizing the Provision of Financial Assistance to Avondale Woods Senior
Housing Limited Partnership for the Construction of Avondale Senior Village, an
Affordable Housing Project for Seniors, in the City; and Authorizing the
Execution of Certain Loan Documents Evidencing Such Financial Assistance.
Vice Mayor Salay introduced the ordinance.
Mr. Thurman stated that National Church Residences has worked with the City for
some period of time, and requested financial support from the City for this project.
This legislation authorizes the City Manager to execute an agreement with Avondale
Woods Senior Housing Limited Partnership to provide financial assistance to construct
affordable senior housing in Dublin. The financial assistance will be in the form of an
$800,000 loan at three percent interest per year, to be paid from the available cash
flow as outlined in the loan agreement, with a balloon payment for any remaining
principal and interest payable at the end of 40 years. Upon completion, the project will
have an estimated value of over $11.3 million and will provide 100 units of affordable
senior housing. The real estate transaction and loan agreements are scheduled for
closing on June 7, with groundbreaking tentatively scheduled for June 17. The project
is required to be completed within 18 months -- by the end of 2012. Aside from the
financial considerations, the City's attorneys looked closely at provisions to ensure the
completion of the project. Therefore, NCR, serving as the general partner, pledged
their assets and provided a guarantee of construction completion. In addition, to
ensure the City's liabilities were limited for the term of the loan, detailed language was
added to the loan agreement. A detailed memo and copy of the loan agreement was
provided in the packet, together with the promissory note, guarantee of construction
completion, and other pertinent information, including the letter of support provided by
the City to NCR. In addition, minutes from the Council Study Session from 2008 were
included in the packet.
Staff is recommending approval of Ordinance 24 -11 at the second reading /public
hearing on May 23. Staff will recommend passage by emergency in order that the
legislation is effective in time to allow the closing on June 7. He offered to respond to
questions.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of
Meeting
Dublin City Council
May 9, 2011 Page 13
Mr. Reiner noted that some Dublin residents are anticipating the completion of this
project. He is interested in learning about the requirements for entry into the project
and the financial costs are for securing residence at this property. The Ponderosa
residents in particular have expressed such interest. He understands that the housing
in the project will be open to everyone, and not just to Dublin residents. He would like
Dublin residents to be aware of the requirements so they can apply if interested and
eligible, in view of this being a City initiative.
Ms. Grigsby responded that staff will ensure that this information is provided through
NCR, and will work to ensure the information is circulated via the senior group at the
DCRC and various other groups the City communicates with on a regular basis.
Mr. Gerber agreed this will be most helpful.
based on some preliminary cost estimates at that time. This figure is based on more
accurate construction costs. In NCR's review of the other funding sources available,
this is the gap that the City is trying to meet.
Vice Mayor Salay asked if there are specific items related to the increase in the
financial support needed.
Ms Grigsby responded that the City had estimated $650,000 in support at the outset,
Mr. Keenan asked for confirmation that at the time this concept was discussed with
Council in 2008, NCR indicated that a two - bedroom unit would rent for $900 full
market and a one - bedroom unit would rent for $750 full market. Mr. Slemmer had
indicated that people would pay 30 percent of their income, and so the largest subsidy
for a one - bedroom unit would be approximately $200. He wants to have additional
information about the rent and subsidies for the next meeting. Those rents were from
2008, so have they changed or remained the same, and what is the cash flow
projection for this?
Mr. Thurman indicated that representatives from NCR will be present at the next
meeting to respond to any questions.
There will be a second reading /public hearing on May 23, at which time a request will
be made for emergency passage.
Ordinance 25 -11
Amending the Annual Appropriations for the Fiscal Year Ending December 31,
2011.
Mr. Gerber introduced the ordinance.
Mr. Thurman stated that this provides funding for the senior housing project by
amending the annual appropriations for 2011. In addition, some clean -up items are
included in the ordinance, such as funding for additional salt based on the heavy
usage this winter and funding for the upcoming Presidents Cup and for the Legends
Luncheon held on April 18. Staff recommends approval of the ordinance at the
second reading /public hearing on May 23.
There will be a second reading /public hearing at the May 23 Council meeting.
Ordinance 26 -11
Authorizing the Provision of Certain Incentives to City Barbeque, Inc. to Induce It
to Retain and Expand a Headquarters and Associated Operations and Workforce
within the City, and Authorizing the Execution of an Economic Development
Agreement.
Mr. Gerber introduced the ordinance.
Ms. Gilger stated that City Barbecue leases space on Riverside Drive and is in need of
additional office space. They desire to build and own a headquarter facility. This
proposal includes a $7,500 location grant payable upon occupancy of a newly
constructed facility; a five -year, 20 percent performance incentive, which is capped at
$45,000; over the term of the agreement, the City would pay an estimated $50,000
and would net approximately $161,500. City Barbecue has identified a location along
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of
Dublin City Council
May 9, 2011 Page 14
Meetin
Emerald Parkway to build their new 5,000 to 6,000 square foot facility. The company
officials will be in attendance at the second reading to respond to any questions about
their multi -state expansion. Staff recommends approval of the ordinance at the May
23 Council meeting.
Ms. Chinn ici-Zuercher asked if City Barbecue plans to have a retail store in Dublin.
Ms. Gilger responded that staff has discussed this with the company.
Mr. Reiner commented that the owner is a Dublin resident and he was not aware the
company was headquartered in Dublin. He requested that staff provide a list of
corporations that are part of the Dublin community, so that they can be acknowledged.
Ms. Gilger responded that staff can provide an updated list to Council.
Mr. Gerber added that he recalls that of the Dublin -based companies, 85 percent have
seven employees or less. He would like this list to be provided as well.
Ms. Gilger responded that is correct — the median size of Dublin businesses is seven
employees.
There will be a second reading /public hearing at the May 23 Council meeting.
Ordinance 27 -11
Authorizing the Provision of Certain Incentives to Netsmart Technologies, Inc. to
Induce it to Retain and Expand an Office and Associated Operations and
Workforce within the City, and Authorizing the Execution of an Economic
Development Agreement.
Mr. Gerber introduced the ordinance.
Ms. Gilger stated that Netsmart Technologies is located in Metro Center and has
recently been acquired by new ownership out of New York. This proposal includes a
four -year, ten percent performance incentive, capped at $100,000 in consideration of
retaining 104 employees in Dublin, with the hope of enticing 99 jobs to move from New
York to the Dublin location by 2015. This proposal is also tied to a five -year lease
extension of the current facility. The company has several options to grow, by adding
a second location at another leased facility in Metro Center or expanding the current
facility. Two retention grant payments are also included in the proposal, and are tied
to two separate three -year lease extensions. Overall, the incentive is valued at
$160,000 tied to 11 full years of leasing at Metro Center. The company
representatives will be present at the second reading on May 23. She offered to
respond to any questions.
There will be a second reading /public hearing at the May 23 Council meeting.
INTRODUCTION /PUBLIC HEARING — RESOLUTIONS
Resolution 22 -11
Accepting the Lowest/Best Bid for the Storm Water Maintenance Program.
Vice Mayor Salay introduced the resolution.
Mr. Hammersmith stated that this annual program provides for maintenance,
construction and repair of storm sewers, catch basins, ditches, manmade channels
and other structures that discharge storm water into surface waters throughout the
city. This program has been an important part of the City's NPDES (National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System) permit. The City has a Phase 2 permit from
the Ohio EPA and this is a requirement to keep the system well maintained. The
annual budgeted funds for the program are $300,000. Typically, all of this funding is
utilized within this program. The current contract expired in 2010 and was a three -
year contract. After internal review and evaluation, the upcoming program will expend
$200,000 on the program itself and utilize the remaining $100,000 for the Street
Maintenance Program. Typically, much catch basin repair is done with the Street
Maintenance Program and a more favorable price can be obtained in that program
versus the storm water program.
Three bids were opened on April 26 and the recommended bidder is Danbert, Inc.
They have done work for the City in the past and have performed satisfactorily.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of
Dublin City Council
Meeting
May 9, 2011 Page 15
References were contacted and the results were favorable. Staff therefore
recommends acceptance of the bid by Danbert in the amount of $1,511.99 on a per
unit hour basis. He offered to respond to questions. .
Mrs. Boring asked for additional clarification of the per unit hour basis.
Mr. Hammersmith responded that there is an hourly rate for each piece of equipment
used, plus the hourly rate for a foreman and worker. The total of the components
comprises the hourly rate. This provides a basis of what is obtained with the per unit
hour bid. Overall, staff then selects the best per unit hour price.
Mrs. Boring asked if the contractor is expected to use all the equipment listed.
Mr. Hammersmith responded that the contractor would use the equipment necessary
to complete an identified task. Staff reviews and approves the use of equipment
through the work order process. Staff has overseen this program since 2000 and has
a very good sense of the time required to complete the work.
Mr. Reiner asked if staff is permitted to set the specifications before the contractor
begins the work.
Mr. Hammersmith responded that staff approves the work order, but it is difficult to
define ahead of time due to the changing site conditions.
Mayor Lecklider asked about the curb and gutter inlet repairs, which are done with the
Street Maintenance Program. Does this mean that only the inlets on the streets to be
resurfaced are repaired?
Mr. Hammersmith responded "no -- the inlets are defined in the condition assessment
and an inventory is taken of the needed repairs. Typically, it is not the catch basin
itself that needs to be repaired, but the top of it. This generally involves concrete work
for the curb and gutter and the subcontractor is generally more acclimated to the street
maintenance program than the storm water maintenance program.
Mayor Lecklider asked in what manner the residents are notified of locations where
inlets are to be repaired.
Mr. Hammersmith responded that they are notified in advance of work that impacts
their property, but not of routine maintenance work.
Vote on the Resolution: Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Ms.
Chinn ici-Zu ercher, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes; Mayor Lecklider, yes; Vice Mayor Salay, yes.
Resolution 23 -11
Authorizing the City Manager to Enter into an Indefeasible Right to Use
Agreement with Careworks Ltd. to Allow Careworks Ltd. to Utilize Fibers within,
and Connect to DubLink Facilities.
Vice Mayor Salay introduced the resolution.
Mr. McDaniel stated that this resolution and the following one are related to economic
development. They authorize indefeasible right to use agreements to allow the
companies to use the City's optical fiber system. In the case of Careworks, they have
expanded into multiple buildings and are making a significant investment in their
information technology structure and would like to have access to optical fiber. A local
ring will be established around the existing buildings they are housed in, connecting to
the larger ring that runs throughout Central Ohio. Careworks has over 600 employees
in Dublin and is growing. Staff is proposing a three -year term, which is coterminous
with their three -year lease. Staff recommends approval of Resolution 23 -11.
There were no questions.
Vote on the Resolution: Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Ms.
Chinnici - Zuercher, yes; Vice Mayor Salay, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes; Mayor Lecklider, yes.
Resolution 24 -11
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of
Dublin City Counci
May 9, 2011
Meeting
Page 16
Authorizing the City Manager to Enter into an Indefeasible Right to Use
Agreement with Interstate Gas Supply, Inc. to Allow Interstate Gas Supply, Inc.
to Utilize Fibers within, and Connect to DubLink Facilities.
Vice Mayor Salay introduced the resolution.
Mr. McDaniel noted that this agreement has a three -year term as well. IGS owns its
own facility in Dublin and could expand on their site with an additional building, which
would enable them to have fiber optics on site to connect to an additional facility. Staff
recommends approval of this resolution.
Vote on the Resolution: Vice Mayor Salay, yes; Mayor Lecklider, yes; Mr. Gerber,
yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher, yes.
OTHER
• Report re. Valet Parking in Historic District
Mr. Tyler noted that staff is proposing that the valet parking program be approached in
a consistent, systematic and comprehensive manner. Monitoring, enforcement and
maintaining vigilance are important, and if stricter standards must be imposed, staff
will return to Council with that recommendation. Tonight's presentation includes a
five -part program to address the five elements to work toward a viable valet parking
program in the District.
Indian Run Parki Lot im provements
1. This lot is underutilized, and employees in this quadrant are using the
Darby lot and not the Indian Run lot. Staff proposes improvements to
the Indian Run parking lot, including a crosswalk from the Darby Street
lot to the Indian Run lot at a cost of $9,300.
2. Parking lot lighting would be improved to ensure it is adequate and
uniform. Revamping existing fixtures with LED lights and incorporating
three new fixtures in the middle of the Indian Run lot will address this.
This lighting is estimated to cost $106,000.
Vice Mayor Salay asked about the timeframe for completion of the crosswalk and
lighting.
Mr. Tyler responded it would be done as quickly as possible, once direction is
provided by Council.
3. In addition, parking lot repavement is needed and can be done in next
year's CIP under the annual parking lot maintenance work at a cost of
$34,000.
4. Staff is proposing a sidewalk improvement from the Indian Run lot to the
North High Street crossing. This would allow more utilization of the
Indian Run lot and a safe means to traverse the area. Discussions have
taken place with the library, and they are in agreement in principle with
this proposal. The cost of this improvement is estimated at $208,000.
He noted that once the parking lot is improved, the City will work with the businesses
within this area of the District to move all the valet services into the Indian Run lot to
free up the Darby Street lot for public parking.
Valet Parking Agreement with Bridge and High LTD
He stated that Bridge and High LTD, formerly known as Stonehenge, will enter into a
four -part agreement with the City addressing hours of operation; parking; valet shed;
and destinations. Staff hopes to execute this agreement very quickly and has
indicated to them that it needs to be in place before the Mezzo opening. Once Mezzo
opens up, the employee number in this quadrant will increase substantially.
Mon itoring /Enforcem ent
Staff proposes monitoring and enforcement of the time limited parking system in the
District. This five day per week enforcement began today, and is being carried out by
Code Enforcement officers as well as Building inspectors. In addition, valet parking
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of
Dublin City Council
Meeting
May 9, 2011
Page 17
monitoring is planned, with enforcement in the future to ensure that valet parking
occurs in the Indian Run lot.
Securit
Additional security measures will be implemented for the Indian Run lot, in response to
patrons' complaints about safety and security. Lighting will address part of this
concern, but stepped -up enforcement will provide a level of security for users of this
lot. The Police Department will provide this extra enforcement through their "Like it,
Lock it" program. In the future, security cameras may be added if needed.
Public Awareness
Information will be shared with the businesses and patrons about the available valet
services and the Darby lot and Indian Run lot parking. Staff is working with HDBA on
a public awareness campaign, talking to businesses individually, and urging them to
have their employees use the Indian Run lot to free up spaces for customers.
Newsletters, the web site, and social media will all be used to share this information.
He noted that if there is a need to bring regulations for Council to consider, the data
will be available to support this need. At this time, he is not certain there is
understanding of who is using the valet services, the numbers, and the level of
enforcement needed. Staff has contacted other communities about their experience
with valet parking. The key to success lies within monitoring and enforcement, as well
as awareness of the program.
Staff therefore recommends approval of the program and associated expenditures, in
the total amount of $357,300. Of this, $106,000 will be funded by the Historic Dublin
Parking TIF; $34,000 would be funded in the 2012 CIP; and $217,300 would be
funded from the 2011 CIP. He offered to respond to questions.
Mayor Lecklider invited public testimony.
Alan Reuter, proprietor of Woodhouse Day Spa 19 N. Hioh Street. Dublin stated that
he represents the Historic District retailers, which includes his spa, Mr. Sushi,
Cupcakery, Timeless Skin Solutions, Mezzo, BriHi Limited, La Chatelaine, Jani's
Splendid Ice Cream, Jewelers of Dublin, Starbucks, Design Team, Create, and others.
He acknowledged the City staff for changing the two -hour parking to three -hour
parking, which will address some of their challenges. They hope to have a better
understanding of when 80 percent of the parking spots will be identified as timed.
Currently, the Darby lot has seven signs for timed parking, so it is considerably less
than the 80 percent that they believed would be time - limited by now. In this era of
fiscal conservatism, he offered a potential solution to the City, with little cost or
manpower needed and that can be initiated immediately. They met with Shamrock
Towing today, and with City approval, Shamrock can enforce timed parking and tow all
violators. Once authorized, Shamrock can also issue parking tickets to the violators.
This has the potential for a win /win situation. Without enforcement, nothing will
change and no one will use the Indian Run lot. Enforcement will be the key to having
employees park in the upper lot and to solving many of the problems.
Mr. Reiner asked how Shamrock determines there are violations of the three -hour
parking restriction.
Mr. Reuter indicated that they have GPS tracking equipment on their trucks and enter
photos of license plates. They can track the time the vehicle is in the space through
photos and track when they tow it. Other municipalities use Shamrock for this service.
The City can authorize Shamrock to issue tickets. He added that he believes the
employees of the businesses are the parking violators. The cost is $135 for
Shamrock's service and whatever fine the City imposes for the parking violation. After
the initial phase of towing cars, he predicts the employees will utilize the Indian Run
lot.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of
Dublin City Council
Meeting
May 9, 2011 Page 18
Val Wielezynski La Chatelaine, 65 W. Bridge Street, Dublin stated that he has been
working on this project for months, and believes it is now time to let the professionals
do the job of monitoring and towing, as suggested by Mr. Reuter. City Code
Enforcement and Building inspectors have others jobs to do in the City.
Vice Mayor Salay noted that staff is proposing that employees and valet parkers would
be instructed to park at the Indian Run lot. Does someone have an estimate of how
many employees, how many valet customers, and how many parking spots are
available in the Indian Run lot?
Mr. Tyler responded that there are a total of 88 parking spaces in the lot. He does not
have updated numbers for J Liu's and Tucci's valets, but J Liu's uses their own lot for
valet parking. The numbers related to the BriHi Square opening are estimated in the
range of 26 employees at lunchtime to 49 employees at dinnertime. This takes into
consideration the Woodhouse Spa, Mr. Sushi, and Mezzo.
Vice Mayor Salay stated that currently, there are about 41 employees at peak time,
which would potentially fill 50 percent of the Indian Run lot.
Mr. Tyler stated that one item in the proposed Bridge and High LTD agreement is that
valets must park the vehicles at the Indian Run lot or other spaces as designated by
the City. If the City recognizes it is not possible to accommodate all employees as
well as valet parked cars in the Indian Run lot, there may be an option to use the back
part of the Darby Street lot. Other steps are underway, including the initial parking
sign installation for three -hour spots. The next step is to install additional three -hour
parking signage for 28 spaces in the Darby Street lot. Staff is also proposing that the
City enter into agreements with the library and with the Dublin Community Church for
generally employee parking to alleviate the burden in that quadrant. They are close to
executing these agreements.
Mayor Lecklider asked about the library parking, and what time of day the employee
parking would not be in conflict with the library user parking.
Mr. Tyler responded that the library believes that what they are offering would not
result in a conflict with their users. It is a contribution that will serve as a relief valve.
Staff is working with the HDBA to have them serve as a repository for managing and
monitoring that program. If there is employee parking in the library lot, HDBA would
manage who would receive the employee parking stickers. This is a much more
managed approach versus a "free for all." Staff did not want to open this up to public
parking because the consistency of how that will work is not known.
Mr. Reiner suggested it could be a good overflow parking area for the valet parking at
night, if the library is not open.
Mr. Tyler responded that is possible. The library and church are very willing to help
out, and want to learn the specifics.
Mayor Lecklider asked Mr. Tyler to comment regarding the suggestion of using a
private towing company.
Mr. Tyler responded that staff has investigated this. One of the concerns he would
have with this is the message sent to the patrons of the District. Up to this point, the
City was only enforcing sporadically, and this was not effective. With a more
permanent solution, the City has the ability to monitor the situation. He would
recommend these steps be implemented before ever considering private towing.
Mayor Lecklider stated that if such tickets are written and not paid, could a warrant be
issued?
Mr. Smith responded that these would be handled as any other citation.
Mr. Reiner asked if staff has reviewed the parking opportunities in the Blacksmith Alley
area.
Mr. Tyler responded that staff is hoping to pursue shared parking agreements in the
future. Staff would suggest finalizing the proposed shared parking with the library and
church prior to moving onto other such agreements.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of
Dublin City Council
Meetine
May 9, 2011 Page 19
Mr. Reiner noted that the businesses are under stress in terms of losing business from
patrons who cannot find parking places. How quickly can the City assess the
effectiveness of the compliance underway?
Mr. Tyler responded that Council has requested that staff provide regular updates on
the progress of these initiatives. It is important to allow the shared parking
agreements to be in place as well as the enforcement before moving to another level.
Mr. Reiner commented that by the time the lighting and other improvements are made
to the Indian Run lot, the businesses will have lost several more months of business.
It concerns him that there is a waiting period for all of this to happen in view of the
retail businesses that are under stress. He appreciates the systematic approach and
hard work, but he and Mr. Gerber have heard about the financial problems the
business owners are experiencing and he would like to expedite this program. He is
supportive of the three -hour parking signs being installed in the District.
Mr. Tyler added that the Parking Demand study indicated the percentage of timed
parking that should be available. He is not certain that the business owners are in
agreement with the percentage. In the future, it may be possible to have more time -
limited spaces in the lots, but not until the shared parking agreements are in place.
Mr. Reiner asked about the status of enforcement efforts.
Mr. Tyler responded that today, warnings are being issued for violations. Tickets will
be issued as soon as the Building inspectors have completed their training for this
function. This will require a few days at a maximum.
Vice Mayor Salay asked for clarification about tickets for employees parking in areas
where they should not park.
Mr. Tyler responded that the tickets will be issued to violators of the time - limited
spaces.
Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher commented that the employees are simply moving their cars
every few hours to avoid receiving a ticket. They are continuing to use the same
spaces and will not be ticketed or towed. She does not understand why the City
cannot have a formal, legal discussion with the companies whose employees are
causing the problem. The government is not obligated to provide parking for these
employees. Why can't the City prohibit the employees from parking in these spaces?
Mr. Smith responded that the issue is that the parking lots are "public" and the problem
relates to those parking over the time limit, including the patrons of the businesses.
Enforcement is necessary to resolve the issues, and it may require limiting parking by
the same vehicle in the same lot to three hours per day.
Ms. Chinn ici-Zuercher responded that moving a car each two or three hours will allow
someone to circumvent the regulation. Have there been formal meetings with the
businesses whose employees park in the close lots and move their cars to avoid
tickets?
Mr. Tyler responded that these discussions have taken place. The businesses have
indicated that their employees would use the Indian Run lot if there were a viable way
to cross Bridge Street to access the lot.
Ms. Chinn ici-Zuercher commented that she would not expect the employees working
in the southwest quadrant to park in the Indian Run lot. However, the businesses
could have discussions with other property owners to arrange for parking for their
employees. She has concerns with the recommendations of HDBA about towing, and
what that would do to the camaraderie of the business community in the District.
Mayor Lecklider commented regarding having the employees of businesses in the
southwest quadrant park in the Indian Run lot. He does not believe this is
unreasonable, based on his experience in downtown Columbus and having to pay for
parking.
Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher responded that those who work downtown Columbus do have a
different view of parking than those in the suburbs. However, if the Indian Run parking
lot were used by the valet parkers and the employees of businesses on the north side
of Bridge, it could meet the needs for this side of the District. The north and south
sides of the District have separate and distinct issues.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of Meeti
D City Council
May 9, 2011 Page 20
Mr. McDaniel commented that he is aware of a business that had a parking
arrangement with the church, but it was terminated because of a change in church
operations. This parking issue is a good problem to have, and it is a matter of
balancing the demands /needs. Staff was hesitant about towing, due to the risk of
alienating patrons who use the District. There is a need to leverage all of the parts to
overcome the issues, including utilizing capital funds and addressing the safety
concerns. He believes that the City can work with the companies to push the
employee parking to the outer areas of the District, creating additional capacity for
patrons parking close to the businesses.
Mr. Reiner commented regarding the south side of Bridge Street. He wants to be
assured that staff is talking with the property owners in the area about additional
parking on the Blacksmith Alley area. That would resolve many of the parking issues
in this portion of the District.
Mr. McDaniel responded that staff is first addressing the parking for the areas where
there is the least resistance and where some quick improvements can be made. Staff
will definitely approach the Blacksmith Alley property owners going forward. This is
the next phase to be pursued, with the help of the HDBA.
Mayor Lecklider commented about the situation of employees moving their cars every
few hours to avoid tickets. How is this to be addressed?
Mr. McDaniel responded that is difficult to control. Staff will take the approach of
working with the employers to seek their cooperation.
Vice Mayor Salay asked about the possibility of employer- issued parking passes
authorizing parking in certain areas. Staff's recommendations are very reasonable,
and she does not endorse towing, which would alienate people.
Mr. Keenan stated that this same discussion has occurred many times. If a parking
structure had been built a few years ago, the problem would be resolved. There is a
need to have adequate parking for the patrons of the District. He does not agree with
the findings of the Study, based on his regular use of the District businesses. There is
not adequate parking in place. Other communities have constructed parking garages.
The existing surface lot could accommodate a parking garage, which could be
amortized over many years. The recommendations brought forward are simply a
band -aid approach.
Mr. Gerber noted that there are short-term, mid -term and long -term solutions and he
believes the parking garage would be the long -term solution. However, in regard to
short-term solutions, why can't the Darby lot have three -hour time limited parking from
7 a.m. to 7 p.m.?
Mr. Tyler responded that can be considered.
Mr. Gerber asked if staff will do enforcement until 7 p.m. in the evening.
Mr. Tyler responded that schedules will be shifted to accommodate this need.
Mr. Keenan asked how many spots are currently time limited.
Mr. Tyler responded that there are 22 out of 104 in the Darby lot.
Mr. Keenan and Mr. Gerber suggested time - limited parking for the entire lot.
Ms. Grigsby stated that, currently, there are 22 time - limited spots in the Darby lot and
28 time - limited spots are being added, doubling the number. The same is being done
at Town Center II in terms of doubling the time - limited spots. The impacts of all of the
changes, including the church and library agreements, will make a difference for the
short term. The improvements at the Indian Run lot will benefit the District as well. It
will take time to see the benefit of these improvements.
Mr. Gerber responded that he understands that, but he does believe the entire lot at
Darby needs to be time limited. With respect to valet parking, there are two
restaurants that will likely not cooperate unless the City imposes regulations. He
encouraged staff to proceed with preparing regulations, especially in view of the new
businesses coming to the District. He has observed valet parkers using close parking
spots in the Darby lot that should be used by patrons.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of
Dublin City Council
May 9, 2011
Meeting
Page 21
Mr. Keenan stated that if the three -hour time limit parking is instituted, it is important to
communicate with the businesses that the employees cannot move their cars every
three hours to avoid being ticketed. Mr. Smith may have language that could be
incorporated to prevent this practice.
Mr. Tyler stated that Code enforcement monitors parking per lot, so a vehicle could not
be moved within the same lot after three hours of parking. The staff member marks
the license plates of cars parking in the lot.
Mr. Keenan stated this is a good reason to time limit the entire lots to three hours.
Mrs. Boring stated that the last report indicated that the time limited parking would be
enforced per parking lot, not per parking space. A vehicle could only park for three
hours in the same lot.
Mr. Gerber stated there are two types of violators — those who work in the District all
day and who use these lots, moving their cars from one space to another. Secondly,
there is lack of cooperation from a couple of restaurants that allow their employees
and valets to use the close parking lots. He encourages staff to work with these
restaurants and to have the valet parking agreements and shared parking agreements
executed. He also requested that staff update Council on the progress at each
upcoming Council meeting.
Mr. Keenan asked Mr. Smith if the Darby lot can be restricted to prohibit valet parking
completely.
Mr. Smith responded that this restriction can be imposed, provided it is applied to
everyone. Many communities identify parking spots as valet parking only and use a
remote lot for this purpose.
Mr. Gerber suggested that this be imposed immediately, as voluntary compliance is
not working.
Mayor Lecklider invited the public to testify.
Stan Wielezvnski owner of La Chatelaine 65 W. Bridge Street. Dublin stated that he
and those who accompany him tonight are very discouraged about this situation. The
business people they talked with today from the District are exasperated. The
situation is that the businesses are trying to tell the City what those doing business,
generating revenue for the City want in their work environment. After six months of
discussion, negotiation and meetings with all of the City staff about various ideas, they
feel the government is not moving forward whatsoever. As a businessperson, he must
take action to address business issues and the government must do the same. He is
present tonight to beg Council to consider their recommendations to resolve the
situation in the Historic District. The business owners need Council's support in
directing the staff to take action. Two weeks ago, Council directed staff to impose time
limits on 80 parking spaces for the Town Center II and Darby lots. Staff changed the
signs from two to three -hour limits and the sign color was changed from blue to green.
They are still hearing comments from their patrons who do not understand why the
City is not helping. They have not met their expectations for revenue in operating their
business. They want the three -hour parking signs installed and they want Shamrock
Towing to begin enforcement. There are spots available on Blacksmith Alley, as has
been stated tonight. The employees who work in the District will find a parking space
in any location, but patrons of the businesses need to have available parking or they
will not patronize the businesses.
Ms. Grigsby stated that she agrees that it has taken a long time to get to this point.
However, at the last Council meeting, staff indicated their plan for enforcement and
increasing the number of spaces and that has been done. The signs on existing time -
limited spaces have been changed out; the additional time - limited spaces have been
identified; and the signs are being made for installation as quickly as possible. Five -
day per week enforcement has commenced today, and four additional staff members
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of
Dublin City Council
Meeting
May 9, 2011 Page 22
are being reallocated to this function. She believes the issue of time - limited spaces as
requested is being implemented this week.
Mr. Reiner responded that enforcement is the critical piece and it might need to be
more severe after the implementation is underway. The Blacksmith Alley issue has
been discussed for 12 years. He does not endorse spending tax monies to build a
parking garage at this point — first, all existing spaces must be made available and
utilized. There is a need to accelerate all of this work in view of the feedback from the
businesses.
Mayor Lecklider asked if there is a motion to be brought to the floor in terms of funding
for the recommendations staff has brought forward.
Mr. Keenan stated that there has been discussion of time limiting the entire lots.
Should that be addressed in a motion?
Mr. Tyler responded that staff will be updating Council each two weeks on the
progress.
Mr. Keenan moved to direct staff to implement the recommendations as outlined in the
staff report.
Vice Mayor Salay seconded the motion.
Ms. Chinn ici-Zuercher clarified that what is being proposed is approval of the
$357,300 funding for the various items outlined in the staff report.
Mrs. Boring added that the motion would also includes the implementation of valet
parking in the northwest quadrant as outlined in the staff memo.
Vote on the motion: Mr. Keenan, yes; Mayor Lecklider, yes; Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher,
no; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes; Vice Mayor Salay, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes.
• Concept Plan - North Riverview Street Mixed Use Development
Mr. Phillabaum provided a PowerPoint overview of the site and proposed
development. He stated that the applicant is requesting Council review and feedback
under the Code provisions for Planned Development Districts. Under these
procedures, the applicant may request Concept Plan review and feedback from the
Planning and Zoning Commission and /or City Council. The applicant has already
received input from the Architectural Review Board and the Planning Commission.
Given the high profile nature of this location, the applicant is also requesting feedback
from City Council before proceeding with filing a rezoning application.
He stated that a Concept Plan is the first stage in the Planned Development District
rezoning process, and generally indicates the proposed land uses, design, and
relationship to the surrounding area. Review comments on the concept plan are not
binding on either the applicant or the municipality, but are intended to inform the
applicant about whether the request appears to be generally appropriate to the City
and worthy of further pursuit. The site is comprised of a total of eight parcels totaling
2.94 acres, located between North Blacksmith Lane and North Riverview Street, north
of Bridge Street. The proposal is focused on the six parcels located between
Blacksmith and Riverview that are bisected by Wing Hill. The applicant has indicated
that the two parcels north of Dublin Spring Park may be of interest to the City for the
expansion of the Dublin Spring Park. He does not anticipate any development on this
site due to floodway issues. The topography of the site drops approximately nine feet
from the southwest corner of the site down to the first parcel. Retaining walls are
present in those locations. From North Blacksmith down to North Riverview, there is
an approximate five -foot grade change. The application includes seven existing
residential structures on the site, which are listed on the Ohio Historic Inventory. Six
of these structures would be required to be relocated or demolished to facilitate the
proposal. Removal of these structures must be approved by the Architectural Review
Board per the Zoning Code ARB provisions that relate to demolition.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of
Meetirn
Dublin City Council
May 9, 2011
Page 23
The areas in which the applicant is seeking Council input are: site plan and
arrangement of uses; architecture — specifically the mass, scale and height; the
amount and location of parking provided; consistency with adopted plans; and any
other feedback Council would like to provide.
Overview
The mixed -use development spans the area generally between North Riverview Street
and North Blacksmith Lane. Portions of Wing Hill — the area between the two building
footprints -- would be required to be vacated to facilitate this proposal. A parking
structure is located under these building footprints with access from North Riverview
Street at the southern end. There is two -way vehicular circulation around the site, with
parallel on street parking on the east side of North Blacksmith Lane. Where Riverview
is currently a dead -end street, a turnaround would be provided within that public
parking area under the building. Pedestrian circulation is indicated along Bridge
Street, North Blacksmith Lane and between the buildings. The stairway is located at
the terminus of North Riverview and provides access from that parking area up to
Bridge Street. Public space is provided at the north and south ends of the site, as well
as over Wing Hill. The portion at Wing Hill would extend over North Riverview Street
to an overlook deck within Dublin Spring Park. The applicant has discussed the
possibility of including stairs that would wind down and connect into a boardwalk
system. He displayed a schematic that describes the vertical arrangement of uses
within the proposed development. Beginning at the lower level, the east elevation
faces North Riverview Street; the south elevation faces Bridge Street. On the lower
level are 114 of the proposed parking spaces; the other 12 are along Blacksmith.
There are retail and restaurant uses of 5,680 and 6,000 square feet, respectively, in
addition to a 1,500 square foot patio in association with the restaurant. The two floors
above would include 22,830 square feet of office use. The remaining portion of the
southern building is residential condominiums — a total of 31 units, between the three -
story portion and the four -story portion north of Wing Hill. The residential portions of
these buildings are connected via an enclosed pedestrian walkway at the second and
third floors of the buildings.
Mayor Lecklider inquired the total square footage of the residential units.
Gerry Bird Bird -Houk Architects 600 Creekside Plaza, Gahanna. Ohio, representing
the applicant, responded that the proposed residential development is approximately
35,000 — 45,000 square feet.
Mr. Phillabaum pointed out a schematic that was developed due to some concerns
expressed by the Planning staff and ARB regarding the height of the proposed
building within the surrounding context. He described the elevations in relationship to
several existing structures on the site and from various views of the site. To a person
standing in the lower plaza at BriHi Square, the ridgeline of the proposed building
would be approximately 38 feet high. To a person standing on the patio of the
proposed Riverview development, the building ridge would be about 47 feet high. He
reviewed schematics depicting the building footprints of the proposal in context with
the existing structures.
Parking
The proposal provides 126 spaces — 74 public and 52 private spaces for the
condominium owners. They conducted an analysis of the number of parking spaces
required under the existing Code, the draft Bridge Street Code, and the Bridge Street
Code with a shared parking adjustment. Under the existing Code, 358 spaces would
be required, although it is not likely that many will be needed. The draft Bridge Street
Code would require 187 spaces. With a shared parking reduction factor, 139 spaces
would be required.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of Meeting
Dublin City Council
Page 24
May 9, 2011
Consistency with Existinq Plans
This proposal is located within the Bridge Street Corridor Vision Plan, which outlines
five Vision Principles that are action - oriented concepts that lead to the fulfillment of the
Vision. The Principles provide a framework for decision - making, communicate the
intent of the Vision Plan recommendations, and provide a context for addressing
critical issues or future decisions not anticipated at this time. Development proposals
within the Corridor are evaluated, based on how effectively the five Vision Principles
are achieved. The Vision Principles are:
1. Enhance economic vitality.
2. Integrate the new center in the community life.
3. Embrace Dublin's natural setting and celebrate a commitment to
environmental sustainability.
4. Expand the range of choices available to Dublin and the region.
5. Create places that embody Dublin's commitment to community.
Within the Bridge Street Corridor Vision Plan is a framework of recommendations for
each district within the Vision Plan. Specifically for the Historic Dublin District, the
recommendations are for:
1. Near -term pedestrian and parking improvements as a key element of
successful new development to enhance existing conditions.
2. Sensitive mixed -use redevelopment with an emphasis on housing as a
complement to existing uses.
3. The sensitive treatment of surrounding neighborhoods and natural areas to
avoid negative impacts.
The Historic Dublin portion of the 2007 Community Plan is very closely aligned with
the vision principles of the Bridge Street Corridor Vision Plan. It emphasizes goals
and objectives aimed toward the enhancement and revitalization of Historic Dublin as
an activity center that is vibrant, pedestrian- oriented and user - friendly with an
integrated mix of uses. The conceptual area plan that was developed for this portion
of the Historic District includes design recommendations such as limited right -in /right-
out access at North Blacksmith, future parking terraces to serve mixed uses along the
Scioto, mixed use infill fronting onto a pocket park at North Street, commercial reuse
of residential structures, public access to boardwalk and river trail system, integration
of multi -story residential units overlooking the Scioto River, and a pedestrian bridge
over the Scioto River.
A summary of the feedback from ARB and the Planning Commission has been
provided in Council's packet. Some of the issues they identified include:
Architectural Review Board
Some members of the ARB stated a preference for the existing residential structures
to be preserved and others were supportive of a mixed -use concept in this location,
but expressed concern about the scale and intensity of the proposal. They expressed
additional concerns related to the potential traffic that would be generated, the amount
of parking provided, how storm water would be managed, and pedestrian circulation to
Dublin Spring Park.
Planninq and Zoning Commission
Overall, the Commissioners were supportive of the mixed -use development proposal,
although some expressed concerns about the height and scale of various portions of
the architecture. There was also a desire for an improved pedestrian circulation to
Dublin Spring Park, and it was strongly recommended that more parking be included
in the development proposal.
In summary, the applicant requests feedback from Council regarding the site plan and
arrangement of uses, the architecture, parking, and consistency of this proposal with
adopted plans, in addition to any other feedback Council would like to provide.
Mayor Lecklider invited the applicant's representative to comment.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of
Meeting
Dublin City Council
May 9, 2011 Page 25
Mr. Bird stated that they have touched base with the Historic Dublin residents, Historic
Resource Commission, Historic Dublin Business Association, Planning Commission,
staff, and are now bringing this concept plan to Council. They did enough work on the
plan to provide a concept and an idea that Council could react to, but not so much that
the plan is inflexible or difficult to change. They are also considering the form -based
Code change, the Bridge Street Corridor Study, and looking at parking ratio
modifications in the Historic District. Despite tight parking criteria, there have been
many waivers granted in the downtown area resulting in a shortage of parking. He is
working with staff on this. They believe the ratios they have presented are realistic
and more on target than they have previously been. He believes the key issues are
the parking ratios, the density of use, and the building height. The concept he had
was a two- and -half story structure on Bridge Street. He was attempting to utilize the
attic space of the pitched roof for a partial third floor, or two and a half floors. If they
raised Bridge and High by four to five feet, they could gain that third floor space. The
third floor is optional; it would be 8,000 square feet. That also helps with parking
ratios. The restaurant site on Bridge Street on the river with a patio is very attractive.
It is a small restaurant of 5,000 square feet.
He invited Council's input, after which he will prepare a revised proposal.
Council Comments
Mr. Keenan asked if any issues with sewage and water exist in this area due to the
elevation at the lower levels. This site is down at the river level.
Mr. Bird responded that this development will be above the existing floodplains. All of
the existing homes are well above the floodplain. In addition, on Riverview Street,
there is a large sewer and major waterline.
Mr. Keenan stated that one elevation shows the rooftops of this development well
above the existing buildings on High Street. Is he indicating that is not what will be
viewed?
Mr. Bird responded that one exhibit shows the Bridge Street elevation at nine feet
above Bridge and High — that is the one he had indicated could be reduced
approximately five feet and still retain a partial third floor.
Mr. Keenan stated that the blue graphic, which indicates that height, is of concern to
him.
Mr. Bird responded that looking east, there are a series of one -story buildings on High
Street. The graphic projects the profile of a potential building beyond those buildings —
approximately 200 feet away. That potential building has a fourth story with four units
on the left side. The graphic looks at that building against the one -story buildings;
however that will never be the actual view. The intent of the graphic is to show relative
proportions of the buildings.
Vice Mayor Salay stated he has indicated that is not the view that would actually be
seen; however, it seems that for one standing across the street, that would be the
view.
Mr. Bird responded that a five or six -foot person walking on High Street would view
the 14 -foot buildings across the street. This building behind them would not be in the
individual's sight line. They would have to be at a much higher site, such as Indian
Run Elementary, to see the relationship of the buildings.
Mrs. Boring noted that a depth perception would be absent.
Mr. Bird responded that is exactly the situation.
Mr. Gerber asked if there will be retail use in this development.
Mr. Bird responded that there will be retail on the first floor. Due to the traffic and
other factors, residential units on Bridge Street would not be marketable. Therefore, a
transition use between Bridge Street and the residential units is necessary. A small
restaurant visible to Bridge street would be attractive, and office use on Bridge Street
would provide a buffer.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of
Meetine
Dublin City Council
May 9, 2011
Page 26
Mr. Gerber stated that, based on his experience, retail space located below residential
units does not work; however, these uses will be located across the street.
Mr. Bird clarified that there will be no residential units above commercial uses. In one
building, commercial will be located above parking, and in two other buildings,
residential will be located above parking.
Mr. Gerber inquired where the additional parking would be located, if it should be
required.
Mr. Bird responded that there are two potential sites. Although they have not yet
discussed traffic flow, he believes there is agreement that left hand turns out of
Blacksmith Lane are not desirable. Therefore, there is the possibility of angled parking
along Blacksmith Lane. The buildings will be set back to allow for a 26 -foot pavement,
parallel parking, sidewalk and green space. Ultimately, the west side of Blacksmith
Lane will develop, and it can accommodate some parking. However, only six or eight
feet is needed to angle park the entire 400 -foot length of the street. Angled parking is
very efficient and flows nicely. He is confident that he could provide 139 -140 spaces
with this density.
Vice Mayor Salay stated that she likes the concept of the small restaurant, the retail
and the residential. She also likes the idea of potentially moving the historic houses.
Several ARB members are concerned about losing those homes. In some other
communities, such as Grandview and German Village, moving houses is more
common than it is in Dublin, but that opportunity should be evaluated. She is
concerned about the height, parking ratios and scale of the buildings. She was not
prepared for the size of BriHi Square in relation to the buildings across the street.
Because the scale of the BriHi Square building does not match that of the Town
Center building across the street, it creates an odd look. She is concerned the
proposed development would escalate that impression.
Mr. Bird responded that is due to two reasons. The Town Center building steps the
floors down three times, while BriHi Square does not. That adds about four or five feet
of visual height by means of those steps. However, the steps limit the uses. In
addition, the roofs on the Town Center shops have flatter pitches. The BriHi Square
shops have steeper pitches. The floor heights are not dissimilar; it is the roof pitches
that are different.
Vice Mayor Salay responded that is her point —the scale does not match. Therefore,
with the proposed development, she would suggest smoothing that perspective out
and making it more in keeping with the scale of the surrounding buildings.
Mrs. Boring asked what the residential area will be comprised of — duplexes or three -
story units?
Mr. Bird responded that the residential units will be flats, and at this location along the
river and downtown, they will be expensive. There are four to five sizes of units,
ranging from 900 to 1,850 square feet. They will be highly secure -- each unit will
have its own parking space within a gated parking area with card access only, and
elevators with card access lead to the units.
Mrs. Boring stated that at this point, understanding that the graphics are one -
dimensional only, she is not enamored with the look. It is not compatible with the
area. She is less hesitant about the height, however. She does not want to "pigeon
hole the future development. If the individual projects, as they come in, are limited to
the current look, how will development ever graduate to three -story buildings for a
future library, parking structure, etc.? It may be possible to preserve the charm of the
small buildings while adding taller buildings.
Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher stated that she had the opportunity to meet with Mr. Bird to
discuss this concept. She also attend the Planning and Zoning Commission (PZC)
meeting, where the concept plan was presented in greater detail than tonight. She
very much likes the project and it is exactly what she anticipated years ago when
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of
Dublin City Council
May 9, 2011 Page 27
these houses were purchased. Planning Commissioner Kramb, who is in the business
of historic preservation, pointed out at the PZC meeting that these homes cannot be
moved due to their state of deterioration. Residential use along the river has been
envisioned for this area. She anticipates an eager market for these residential units.
It is great to show what was, as long as it is realized that "what was" is not what the
future will be. The small footprints of the existing structures will become part of an
integrated area of both small and large buildings. In regard to parking, 400 spaces will
never be required. The Codes are purposely being re- written to accommodate the
change and expectations for these areas. Mr. Bird has indicated that 140 parking
space will be manageable. In addition, there will be shared parking. The way in which
Blacksmith Lane will be used sounds appealing. In regard to the bigger building — it
will be set further back than may be realized. It is important to recognize how close it
will be located to the bridge. Due to the difference in elevation, she believes the view
of the building from High Street or walking west from the bridge will be appropriate.
Mr. Bird stated that the diagram shows the building set back from the property line
approximately 15 -20 feet. He believes that the building should be brought closer.
Adding the 15 -20 feet to the sidewalk outside the property line results in a total of 35-
40 feet from the curb. The geometry of this piece is a trapezoid. If he were to bring the
south piece a little closer and shift it down somewhat, he would gain the area needed
for angled parking. The area from the curb to the building is substantial and could be
finessed slightly. He had set the buildings back that distance to ensure public space
and accessibility to the public park. He believes this project will enhance the future
use of that park through the overlook and the transitions down the site. He is
confident there will be satisfactory solutions available.
Mr. Reiner stated that because staff is aware of the City's long -range plans in this
area, he is interested in staff's perspective on the project.
Mr. Phillabaum responded that staff has been very supportive of this concept. It is a
matter of details regarding how it will fit on the site. Staff expressed some concerns
regarding how this will relate to the existing historic character. There is an adage that
the most successful infill projects in the Historic District are never actually noticed,
because they blend in seamlessly. The City is obviously looking to take a different
direction with the Bridge Street Corridor, including some different building types. They
have discussed the draft code development standards with Mr. Bird. Staff concurs
with PZC in regard to some of the building heights and, potentially, a different balance
of uses. Perhaps an overall scaled down project would better achieve the necessary
balance between parking and the use being developed.
Mr. Reiner stated that he is concerned about the lack of parking, the pedestrian
orientation around the building, and the building height. However, he believes the
project is exciting and, if implemented, will probably be successful. He is hopeful Mr.
Bird will return with a revised plan.
Mayor Lecklider stated that he, too has concerns about the building height. Will the
overall square footage on these 1.3 acres be 70,000 to 75,000 square feet?
Mr. Bird responded that is an approximate number.
Mayor Lecklider stated that the City is now embracing a generally greater density
throughout the Bridge Street corridor. Nevertheless, parking is an issue that needs to
be addressed. Perhaps if an adjustment is made to the proposed building height, that
will have a positive effect on the parking needed. He is also concerned about how this
project might affect a future pedestrian bridge and that should be kept in mind. In
regard to the proposed architecture, he is more interested in the architecture
complementing the river than complementing the development at BriHi and Town
Center. During Council's site visit to Greenville, South Carolina, he noted that the
architecture along the river was more complementary, although the architecture
surrounding that was different.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of
Dublin City Council
Meetine
May 9, 2011
Page 28
20
Mr. Bird responded that he struggled with that aspect for some time. He believes that
the City should complete the site on the Bridge Street side with architecture that
complements the downtown area. Along Bridge Street is not the appropriate place to
begin a new expression. However, in the residential portion, which is tucked around
the corner to the north, the predominant elements facing the river are screened in
porches, decks, glass and views of the river — naturally different than the Historic
Dublin architecture. On the Blacksmith Lane side, he tried to respond more to the
character of the downtown. He is attempting to tie everything together and make it
work.
Mayor Lecklider stated that he is hopeful Council's input has been helpful.
Mr. Bird responded that he appreciates Council's input.
STAFF COMMENTS
Ms. Grigsby stated that:
1. A memo was included in Council's packet regarding a visit on Wednesday of
this week from the Ohio EPA director, Scott Nally. He will be visiting the
Service Complex to see the diesel fuel project the City is working on in
conjunction with Washington Township and Dublin Schools. He will also visit
the Dublin Entrepreneurial Center's Green Integrator projects.
2. A memo regarding the Ballantrae Park and the Community Pool North Spray
Park was provided to Council. The Spray Park at the North Pool will not be
operational this year. Some major improvements will be implemented to meet
some requirements. In addition, the Ballantrae Park hours will be reduced this
summer based on last year's utilization and the needed improvements. Those
improvements will be implemented later this summer.
Mrs. Boring inquired if signs will be posted to notify the public.
Ms. Grigsby responded that staff has discussed ways that the message can be
shared, including signage, homeowner associations and the various media outlets.
COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS /COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE
Mrs. Boring:
1. Recommended that, in light of the City's new initiatives to address parking
needs in the Historic District, direction be given to the Board of Zoning Appeals
to clarify Council's direction that, in spite of the existing precedent, parking
waivers should no longer be granted.
Mayor Lecklider responded that if that is the consensus of Council, staff can share that
message with the BZA.
Ms. Grigsby responded that staff can do so, or Council can request that the minutes
be distributed to BZA for their next meeting.
Vice Mayor Salay stated that she hesitates to interject herself into their proceedings.
Staff is intimately aware of the issues and can share Council's direction with BZA.
Mrs. Boring stated that the last time she read BZA minutes, the Board was basing their
decisions upon precedent to maintain consistency.
2. Stated that in the past, some City beautification projects have been done with
hotel -motel tax funds. She would like to explore the possibility of using some of
these funds for a beautification project on the Dublin Arts Council grounds.
Perhaps Mr. Hahn could discuss this idea with DAC and make some project
recommendations. These are the City's grounds, and they are in need of
beautification.
Mrs. Boring moved to direct Mr. Hahn to discuss possible beautification ideas with the
DAC staff and make recommendation to Council for a beautification project to be
funded with hotel -motel tax funds.
Vice Mayor Salay seconded the motion.
Mayor Lecklider asked if staff has specific ideas regarding how this should be
approached.
Ms. Grigsby responded that the first step would be the discussion between City staff
and the DAC staff to develop some ideas. Then, a recommendation taking into
consideration appearance and maintenance can be shared with Council.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of
Meetine
Dublin City Council
Page 29
May 9, 2011
Mayor Lecklider asked about the timing of this.
Ms. Grigsby responded that staff can provide an update on the process at the next
Council meeting.
Mr. Keenan noted that the City has historically handled the maintenance of the
grounds, but there has been varying support for anything additional, such as
flowerbeds. He would support some additional improvements.
Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher stated that the City's contract indicates the City will be
responsible for the grounds.
Mr. Keenan stated that the issue has been what constitutes maintenance of the
grounds — and whether that includes shrubbery and flowerbeds.
Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher stated that in a previous discussion regarding the Arts Center, it
was pointed out that the Gelpi family, and perhaps the City as well, has photographs
of how the estate landscaping once appeared. Therefore, it would be possible to
replicate what had originally existed. It was her understanding that the City's contract
provides for the City to be responsible for the grounds.
Mr. Hahn responded that that the City is responsible to maintain what exists, not to
enhance it.
Ms. Chinn ici-Zuercher stated that this is the City's property.
Mr. Hahn responded that the City maintains the property, including mowing and
maintaining the foundation plantings, but new gardens have not been created. Since
the City purchased the property, the Arts Council has commissioned several designs
for enhancing the property. However, the City has indicated that it will maintain what it
has purchased, but not maintain a higher level. For this reason Mrs. Boring is
suggesting it be handled differently in the future.
Council consensus was to have Mr. Hahn meet with the Arts Council staff to develop a
preferred landscaping recommendation for Council's consideration.
[Mrs. Boring and Vice Mayor Salay withdrew their motion and second.]
Ms. Chin nici- Zuercher stated that in the previous discussion this evening concerning
potential direction to BZA not to follow an historical precedent for granting parking
waivers, Vice Mayor Salay expressed a preference not to interfere in their process.
However, she is of the opinion that such direction is necessary, as their minutes
indicate that they attempt to remain consistent with historical decision - making.
Because historically, the City had approved parking waivers in the past, in 2010 -2011
BZA had decided to remain consistent with that precedent. Therefore, she believes it
is Council's responsibility to provide BZA more direct direction. She does agree with
the concept of what Vice Mayor Salay has expressed. Today, Council realizes that
those earlier decisions were not wise and Council cannot continue with such waivers.
It has recently been suggested that applicants who come in today must "make up" for
those earlier decisions. However, that is not fair — a balance is necessary. There is a
need to communicate directly with the Board of Zoning Appeals about this, and
perhaps the Administration can do so. It does not appear that the staff who are doing
the presentations are being effective in conveying the information.
Ms. Grigsby responded that staff will provide the updated direction to BZA, perhaps
through distribution of these minutes, once they are prepared. In years past, the
purpose for granting the waivers was to encourage businesses to locate in the Historic
District. That development has now occurred and the City needs to change its
approach to this issue.
Mr. Keenan asked staff to compile a history of the parking waivers granted in the past
and provide that information for the next Council meeting
Ms. Grigsby responded that staff would begin to compile that information. If it is not
possible to provide a complete report for the next meeting packet, staff will provide
what is available and supplement the report at a later date.
Mrs. Boring congratulated BZA on being vigilant about the need to be consistent.
Because they are a quasi-judicial body, that is important. However, now that Council
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of
Dublin City Council
May 9, 2011
Meeting
Page 30
has changed this policy direction, BZA should be made aware that denying parking
waivers is now an appropriate decision.
Mr. Gerber reminded everyone of the Monday, May 30 Memorial Day parade and
ceremonies, which will take place in Historic Dublin and at the Dublin Veterans Park.
better frame of reference for the parking issue discussion.
Vice Mayor Salay requested information from Economic Development regarding the
job numbers in the Historic District, including retail, and the parking needs of the
businesses that the City has incentivized to locate in the District in order to have a
and participated in this important ceremony.
Mayor Lecklider
1. Reminded everyone of the Emerald Fields playground dedication tomorrow,
May 10 from 10 -11 a.m.
2. Noted that he and Mrs. Boring attended the Police Memorial ceremony today,
where recognition was given to Central Ohio police officers who had died in the
line of duty. The City videotaped the ceremony, and this will be broadcast on
the government cable channel. Kudos to the staff members who organized
The meeting was adjourned at 10:55 p.m.
Mayor — Pni9l ing Officer
Actin Jerk of Council