Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil Minutes 08-01-2011RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Min of Dubl City Council Meeting August 1, 2011 Mayor Lecklider called the Monday, August 1, 2011 Regular Meeting of Dublin City Council to order at 6:30 p.m. at the Dublin Municipal Building. ADJOURNMENT TO EXECUTIVE SESSION Mayor Lecklider moved to adjourn to executive session for discussion of legal matters (to confer with an attorney for the public body concerning disputes involving the public body that are the subject of pending or imminent court action); land acquisition matters (to consider the purchase of property for public purposes); personnel matters (to consider the appointment, employment, dismissal, discipline, promotion, demotion, or compensation of a public employee or official); and collective bargaining matters (preparing for, conducting or reviewing negotiations with public employees). Vice Mayor Salay seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Vice Mayor Salay, yes; Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes; Mayor Lecklider, yes. The meeting was reconvened at 7:00 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL Present were Mayor Lecklider, Vice Mayor Salay, Mrs. Boring, Ms. Chinnici- Zuercher, Mr. Gerber, and Mr. Keenan. Mr. Reiner was absent (excused). Staff members present were Ms. Grigsby, Mr. Smith, Mr. McDaniel, Chief von Eckartsberg, Ms. Crandall, Mr. Hahn, Mr. Tyler, Mr. Thurman, Mr. Harding, Mr. Earman, Mr. Hammersmith, Ms. Ott, Ms. Gilger, Mr. Anderson, and Ms. Canavan. SPECIAL PRESENTATION Dublin Counseling Center Resource Card Julie Rinaldi Executive Director, Dublin Counseling Center and Chief von Eckartsberg presented the new resource card developed in conjunction with the Washington Township Fire department. This program is in keeping with Dublin's theme of a "Community that Cares." The resource cards have been distributed to Council, and this card will be provided to families who experience fires and accidents. The Police Department will provide these cards to families upon death notifications. The Battalion Chief will carry these cards in vehicles for distribution at scenes of accidents or fires. She thanked Council for the City's support of this program. Chief von Eckartsberg added that the Police Department is very supportive of the Counseling Center initiative. They are pleased to have this available in situations where they are needed, providing information to families about resources available in the community for support services. Mayor Lecklider thanked them for providing this information to Council and the community. CITIZEN COMMENTS There were no comments from citizens. CONSENT AGENDA Mayor Lecklider stated that Council is introducing a consent agenda process tonight. The consent agenda will include first readings of some ordinances and most resolutions. Such items will generally fall in the category of routine, housekeeping matters that would not warrant discussion among Council Members. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council August 1, 2011 Meeting Page 2 The City Manager proposes the consent agenda items, based on experience with such items in the past. He noted that any Council Member has the prerogative to request that any item be removed from the proposed consent agenda for discussion and consideration in the regular order of the agenda. Mayor Lecklider noted that a motion to waive the Council Rules of Order to allow for use of the consent agenda will be needed this evening. He noted that Council will formalize this process with legislation amending the Council Rules of Order to be brought forward at an upcoming meeting. Ms. Grigsby confirmed that staff will bring forward legislation to Council to modify the Rules of Order at the August 22 meeting. At staff level, there was discussion of appropriate items for the consent agenda. Items not to be included on the consent agenda, as recommended by staff, would be rezonings, economic development agreements, and any items which are of significant interest to the public. She noted that the majority of bids awarded have already been discussed in the budget and are routine items, and therefore would be included on the consent agenda. If Council has feedback about additional information needed in memos or items they believe should not be included on a consent agenda, she asked that they provide it to staff. Mrs. Boring moved to waive the Rules of Order to utilize a consent agenda tonight. Vice Mayor Salay seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Ms. Chinnici- Zuercher, yes; Vice Mayor Salay, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes; Mayor Lecklider, yes. Mayor Lecklider moved to approve the consent agenda as proposed. Mr. Gerber seconded the motion. Mr. Keenan requested that Resolution 37 -11, accepting the bid for the Riverside Drive project, be removed, as he has some questions regarding this item. Mayor Lecklider amended his motion, to approve the items /actions listed on the consent agenda, with the exception of Resolution 37 -11. Mr. Gerber seconded the amended motion. Vote on the motion: Mr. Gerber, yes; Vice Mayor Salay, yes; Ms. Chinnici- Zuercher, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mayor Lecklider, yes. CONSENT AGENDA 1. Correspondence Notice to Legislative Authority — new D1 and D2 liquor permits — Creekside Entertainment Company dba Mezzo Restaurant, 12 W. Bridge Street, Patios and Balcony (no hearing requested) 2. Approval of Minutes • Regular Meeting of June 27, 2011 • Regular Meeting of July 6, 2011 3. Ordinance 40 -11 (Introduction) Adopting the 2012 -2016 Five -Year Capital Improvements Program. (CIP workshops scheduled for Monday, August 15 and Monday, August 29 at 6:30 p.m.; a second reading /public hearing of the ordinance is scheduled for the September 12 Council meeting) 4. Ordinance 41 -11 (Introduction) Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Necessary Conveyance Documentation to Accept the Dedication of a 1.528 Acres, More or Less, Fee Simple Interest, and a 0.382 Acres, More or Less, Utility Easement from RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council August 1, 2011 Page 3 the Board of Education of the Dublin City School District. (Emerald 8 project) (Second reading /public hearing August 22, 2011 Council meeting) 5. Ordinance 42 -11 (introduction) Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Necessary Conveyance Documentation to Accept the Dedication of a .757 Acres, More or Less, Fee Simple Interest, a 0.769 Acres, More or Less, Utility and Drainage Easement, a 0.112 Acres, More or Less, Utility and Drainage Easement, and a .706 Acres, More or Less, Temporary Construction and Grading Easement from the Board of Education of the Dublin City School District. (Hyland -Croy project) (Second reading /public hearing August 22, 2011 Council meeting) 6. Ordinance 43 -11 (Introduction) Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Necessary Conveyance Documentation for the Acquisition of 0.480 Acres, More or Less, Fee Simple Interest From John T. Byers, and Declaring an Emergency. (COIC Phase 2 Sanitary Sewer Extension Project) (Second reading /public hearing August 22, 2011 Council meeting) 7. Resolution 38 -11 (introduction/Vote) Authorizing the City Manager to Execute an Easement with American Electric Power (AEP) for the Installation of Electric Service for the Amberleigh Community Park Development Project. 8. Resolution 39 -11 (Introduction /Note) Accepting the Lowest and Best Bid for the Post Road Water Tower Decommissioning Project. LEGISLATION Resolution 37 -11 Accepting the Lowest and Best Bid for the Riverside Drive Park Project. Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher introduced the resolution. Mr. Keenan stated that he had some inquiries from residents about this project. They have concerns about the connection and pathway related to this project. Mr. Hahn responded that during a public input session on the park design, there were some concerns expressed by residents about the bikepath connection to the neighborhood. Legally, the easements for the paths have long existed on the plat for the subdivision. The park development has prompted utilization of these platted easement areas in the subdivision. Mr. Keenan stated that the residents indicated to him that many in the neighborhood do not support this connection from the park due to the ingress into the neighborhood it would allow. His question is whether there is still an opportunity to address this concern, if this bid is approved tonight. Mr. Hahn responded that the contract proposed for approval tonight includes the connection, and so there would not be an opportunity to review this after the bid is awarded. Mr. Keenan asked Mrs. Boring to comment as ward representative. Mrs. Boring responded that she attended several of these meetings, but this connection has long been planned and the City has the legal authority to proceed because it has been platted. Mr. Hahn added that the only access to Riverside Drive Park from the subdivision would be along Riverside Drive, and there is no bikepath or pedestrian path on Riverside. Therefore, absent this connection, people would be encouraged to trespass on private property to access the park. Meeting �, RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of AttN ^ A NK IN FORM NO 101.0 Dublin City Council August 1, 2011 Mee tine Page 4 Mr. Keenan added that the residents had indicated they could obtain a petition from the neighborhood to request this connection not be done. He is simply providing this information to Council for consideration tonight. Mrs. Boring commented that she appreciates his response to the residents' concerns, but the City has always planned for this connectivity. If this connection is not provided, people accessing the park will trespass on private property. Further, it is generally the adjacent neighborhoods who are the frequent users of the park and who will use the connection. She supports this project as proposed. Vote on the Resolution: Vice Mayor Salay, yes; Mayor Lecklider, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes; Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes. ORDINANCES — SECOND READING /PUBLIC HEARING Ordinance 38 -11 Authorizing the City Manager to Execute all Necessary Conveyance Documentation to Accept the Dedication of a 0.125 Acre, More or Less, Fee Simple Interest; a 0.054 Acre, More or Less, Bikepath Easement; and a 0.188 Acre, More or Less, Temporary Construction Easement from Dublin Plaza LP. Mr. Hammersmith stated that this is dedication of right -of -way and bikepath easement, as previously discussed, along Corbins Mill Drive, south of Bridge Street. This allows construction of a sidewalk along the west side of Corbins Mill Drive. The project also provides an opportunity to clean up some right -of -way issues that existed over many years, but were previously unknown. The property is at Dublin Plaza and is owned by the Don Casto organization. This is a donation, and staff recommends approval of the ordinance. Vice Mayor Salay asked if there will be a crosswalk to allow crossing in this location and across SR 161. Mr. Hammersmith responded that there is no new crossing planned with this project. Vote on the Ordinance: Mr. Keenan, yes; Mayor Lecklider, yes; Ms. Chinnici- Zuercher, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes; Vice Mayor Salay, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes. ORDINANCES - INTRODUCTION /FIRST READING Ordinance 44 -11 Authorizing the Provision of Certain Incentives to Everris NA Inc. to Induce it to Locate an Office and Associated Operations and Workforce within the City, and Authorizing the Execution of an Economic Development Agreement. Mr. Gerber introduced the ordinance. Ms. Gilger stated that staff has been working with Everris, a division acquired out of Scotts by the ICL group, headquartered in Israel. A new location was needed for this division, outside of the existing Scotts Miracle -Gro campus, and additional capacity was available at its South Carolina operation. To induce them to locate in Dublin, staff is proposing a six -year, 15 percent performance incentive, capped at $37,000 and retaining 20 jobs to the Central Ohio region, and committing to ten additional jobs in Dublin. There is a bonus clause included for a three -year lease extension, which would bring the total incentive package to a value of $44,000. The City would net approximately $375,000 in revenue. The company representatives will be present at the second reading /public hearing. Vice Mayor Salay asked about the company's timetable for relocation, and the prospective location in Dublin. Ms. Gilger responded that they are projecting a move in October or November, and they have narrowed their search to two to three flex office buildings in Dublin. M ore]:7aZe]0,:Z0Z6l212Ia]1►PC&_J Meeting Dublin City Council August 1, 2011 Page 5 There will be a second reading /public hearing at the August 22 Council meeting. Ordinance 45 -11 Rezoning Approximately 20.1 Acres Located on the South Side of Rings Road at the Intersection with Atrium Parkway from PCD, Planned Commerce District (Chakeres Wheatley Puckett) to PUD, Planned Unit Development District. (Atrium II) (Case 11- 034Z/PDP /FDP) Vice Mayor Salay introduced the ordinance. Ms. Rauch stated that this rezoning is for the Atrium II location on Rings Road. The site is on the south side of Rings between 1 -270 and Atrium Parkway. It is surrounded by similar office uses to the northeast and to the south. The site contains two five -story buildings that are connected by a glass atrium. The parking for the site is located on the east and west sides of the building, with access provided from three points: 1) a right -in, right -out entry along Rings Road; and 2) two internal entrance drives located in the general northern and southern portions along Atrium Parkway. The proposal is to modify the approved development text in regard to signage for the site. The existing, approved text included three ground signs: 1. One ground sign located at the entrance point along Rings Road. 2. Two additional ground signs flanking the northern entrance drive as it intersects with Atrium Parkway. The approved text also permitted one ground and one wall sign for the 1 -270 frontage for these buildings. As part of this proposal, the applicant is requesting a total of four ground signs: 1. One would remain at the Rings Road entrance. 2. One ground sign would be moved up to the Rings Road /Atrium Parkway intersection. 3. A new ground sign is proposed for the middle island, internal to the site. 4. A new ground sign is proposed for the southern portion of the site at the southern entrance drive. The applicant is requesting two wall signs for the 1 -270 signs in lieu of the previous wall and ground sign combination. They are also proposing four address number only signs on either side of the building for building identification. The sign being relocated to the Rings Road /Atrium Parkway intersection would be increased in size from 50 square feet to 80 square feet with a height of six feet. This is a primary entrance off of Rings Road. The ground sign for the southern entrance is proposed to be 80 square feet, six feet in height as well — an increase from the current 50 square feet. The third ground sign has been moved more interior to the site, based upon the Planning Commission's request. The design will be a ground- mounted sign with individual panels for tenant names. It is green and black, with address numbers located on the top of the sign. The size of this is 50 square feet and six feet in height, consistent with the current development text. The fourth ground sign remains in the same location as previously proposed along Rings Road, but is limited to address only within the development text and has the same size requirements of 50 square feet and six feet in height as the existing text. In regard to the 1 -270 signs, the existing text was per Code, as is the proposed text — permitting individual tenants to use wall signs of a maximum of 300 square feet each, with individual channer- mounted letters. The major tenant in each building would therefore have a wall sign. Alcatel- Lucent, the tenant of the northernmost building meets this criteria for their sign. The final portion of the proposal is for address numbers. The Code typically permits 24 -inch maximum height letters, given the setback. However, given the large parking fields and the desire to orient patrons to the building, the applicant is RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS MeetinL Dublin City Council August 1, 2011 Page 6 proposing an increase in this letter height to 30 inches for the pin- mounted letters displaying the address. The Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed this application at their June 23 meeting and recommended approval with six conditions. The applicant has met all of the conditions. This application also included a final development plan, and the approval is contingent upon approval of the rezoning by Council. The applicant is present to respond to any questions. Jack Reynolds attorney with Smith & Hale stated that he is representing Duke, the applicant and owner of the property. Mr. Hale is out of town. They have had discussions with staff and the Commission and reached a compromise, which is being considered tonight. This sign package is acceptable to the new partial tenant of the building, Alcatel- Lucent who is relocating from Columbus and taking over the former Nationwide facility. Mrs. Boring noted that there are three different tenant ground signs in the packet of information. Ms. Rauch stated that is correct — each would have individual tenant panels within the sign. Mrs. Boring asked if this type of sign exists in the area. Ms. Rauch responded that this is a unique site, in that most of the surrounding office buildings in the immediate area have one user, and this is a multi- tenant building. In other parts of the City, there are signs with individual tenant listings where needed. Ms. Chinnici- Zuercher stated she is very pleased to have this new tenant and that the City and the applicant could find a solution that meets both of their needs. Mr. Reynolds stated that this will be a multi- tenant building, and Duke believes there is benefit in individual tenant signage in terms of attracting tenants. The applicant did agree that the tenant panels would only have the name of the tenant, no logos, and would be of one color. It will provide necessary guidance to those visiting the site. Mayor Lecklider commented that the atrium design makes this a beautiful building and he is pleased to hear the positive news about tenants. There will be a second reading /public hearing at the August 22 Council meeting. RESOLUTIONS — INTRODUCTION /PUBLIC HEARINGNOTE Resolution 41 -11 Accepting the Lowest and Best Bid for the Historic Dublin Pedestrian Enhancements and Indian Run Parking Lot Improvements Project. Vice Mayor Salay introduced the resolution. Mr. Hammersmith stated that staff is bringing forward the pedestrian enhancements, as directed by Council, as well as improvements to the Indian Run parking lot. The improvements to Indian Run parking lot include lighting and the addition of a sidewalk along North Street, adjacent to the library to provide enhanced pedestrian access to the lot. Two bids were received on July 19 for this project. The Engineer's estimate was $800,000, but did not include previously ordered mast arms for this project at a cost of $46,000. The mast arms were ordered in advance due to a backlog in the supply due to demand related to infrastructure damage from recent tornados. This advance ordering of the mast arms will help to keep this project on schedule for completion this year. A favorable bid was received from Complete General Construction in the amount of $785,444.50. The original funding allocation for the project was $863,000. The staff report provides a breakdown of the costs for each RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council August 1, 2011 Page 7 portion of the improvements. The pedestrian enhancements for Historic Dublin were estimated to be $540,000; the improvements for lighting at the Indian Run parking lot were $115,000; and the sidewalk and lighting improvements along North Street were $208,000. There is currently funding in the amount of $250,000 within the CIP for the Historic District, and that will fund this project, together with additional funds available within the CIP. Staff has had previous favorable experience with Complete General Construction. Given their bid and the materials already ordered, the total project cost is $830,180.50, which is less than the budget for the project. Staff recommends acceptance of the bid from Complete General Construction as lowest and best. Completion is expected this year, but is dependent upon arrival of the mast arms from the supplier. Mayor Lecklider asked for the estimated arrival date for the mast arms. Mr. Hammersmith responded that it is estimated as October. Vote on the Resolution: Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher, yes; Vice Mayor Salay, yes; Mayor Lecklider, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes. OTHER • Report re. Brand Road Multi -Use Path Alignment Options Mr. Hammersmith noted that this discussion began as multi -use path options with a bike and pedestrian facility study that was presented to Council on March 14, 2011 In addition, an open house was held in April and public input was obtained for a report back to Council on June 27. Staff presented alternatives to Council on June 27 and is providing additional follow -up information, as requested on June 27. This proposed improvement is to accommodate bicycles and pedestrians along Brand Road, beginning at Muirfield Drive and extending approximately 8,800 feet to Dublin Road, crossing several intersections, including Bristol Parkway, Brandonway Drive, and Earlington Parkway. The path then heads east to Coffman Road, ending at Dublin Road, connecting to existing paths at both the west and east ends. There are three segments involved: from Muirfield Drive to Bristol Parkway is approximately 1,400 feet; from Bristol Parkway to Brandonway Drive and Earlington is approximately 2,200 feet; and from Brandonway to Dublin Road is approximately 5,200 feet. accommodated. The drawings include the offsets from the pavement to the edge of the multi -use path, and also to the existing structures along the alignment. Some topographic features are also identified, power poles, vegetation and other constraints along the alignment. The staff recommendation on June 27 was to install the multi -use path in a location to allow for the installation of bike lanes in the future and that the middle segment not be constructed at this time. Based on Council's requests, staff provided the following: 1. Refined alignment drawings for two alternatives, without bike lanes shown. The two alternatives are a multi -use path along the alignment that would not accommodate future bike lanes and a multi -use path along the alignment that would accommodate future bike lanes. 2. A cost breakdown for both alternatives in each of the three segments and information about the length of the alternative path someone would have to take, if the middle segment is not built along Brand Road. 3. Information regarding a Muirfield private path system connection on Muirfield Drive. 4 Multi -use path crossing at Coffman Road and how that would be RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council August 1, 2011 Page 8 The current cost estimate for the western and eastern segments in a location that would accommodate a future bike lane is $1,080,000. Staff will proceed as directed by Council, and this project will be discussed again at the CIP workshops. He understood that Council's intent as expressed on June 27 was to make a decision tonight about the alternative to pursue, and that it would be carried forward into the CIP discussions. He explained that the alternative to the middle segment as discussed was picking up the path at Earlington Parkway /Brand Road, proceeding on Earlington to Dublinshire, and ending at Muirfield Drive, then heading north on Muirfield to the roundabout. Staff provided an exhibit showing the comparison of the length of the middle segment along Brand versus the alternate route recommended —which is 2,270 feet for the Brand Road segment versus 3,960 feet for the alternate route — a difference of 1/3 mile. In terms of a Muirfield Drive connection to the existing private trail system located within Muirfield, this was discussed during the Muirfield Drive bike lanes discussion. Those drawings depicted two connections up into Muirfield where the bike lanes would be picked up and connected into the roundabout at Muirfield /Brand. The easiest way to make the connection to the existing path system is to do so on the west side of Muirfield Drive, connecting to the existing bikepath in the northwest quadrant of the roundabout, extending it north, constructing a pedestrian bridge over the north fork of the Indian Run, completing another small segment of path, crossing across Moors Place, and then connecting to the existing path within Muirfield. To do so on the east side of Muirfield would require extending it north of Luckstone Drive within Muirfield Greene. Following the existing path on the east side of Muirfield Drive, it heads south and ties into Luckstone Drive at the northern end of the bulb cul de sac. The estimated cost for the connection on the west side of Muirfield Drive is $178,000, and a large share relates to the pre- fabricated bridge needed. He noted that for the alignment drawings, the top drawing on each page shows the path location in orange without consideration for future bike lanes, and the bottom drawing path shown in blue with consideration for future bike lanes. He pointed out that, generally speaking, the path alignment moves to the south if a provision is made for future bike lanes. The amount of movement varies. In the western segment, it moves eight or more feet, depending upon existing vegetation. Not all trees can be preserved, but as many as possible would be preserved. As detailed engineering is done to complete construction drawings, this would be further refined. From the western end at Muirfield Drive, the first five properties would be crossed on the south side of Brand until the existing pedestrian tunnel at Bristol Parkway. For the middle segment, it begins on the east side of this location, picking up the existing path and crossing City property. This is where the path shifts more to the south, as the widening for bike lanes was all on the south side of Brand Road in the middle segment, due to the location of the North Fork Indian Run and not having the ability to widen Brand Road on the north side. For the Campbell property, without the bike lanes accommodated, it is 29 feet from the edge of the path to the house structure. With the bike lanes accommodated, it is 21 feet from the edge of the path to the house structure. The drawings also show the offset from the pavement to the near edge of the bikepath itself. Continuing to the east, the red lines show the existing right -of -way. Approaching Brandonway Drive / Earlington Parkway, there is an existing at -grade crossing to the north side of Brand Road. For the eastern segment of path, there is no change regardless of bike lanes being accommodated or not accommodated — the path is RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meetine in the same location and has the same cost. This is a function of the alignment accommodating existing features — utilities, vegetation — and responding to resident input regarding the preferred path location. There can still be some modification to this, but in general, the two alignments for this segment are identical. Regarding the crossing at Coffman Road, the drawings reflect a new path for both alternatives, connecting on the west side of the intersection, heading south and connecting to an existing bikepath along the west side of Coffman Road. He spoke to the owners of the historic brick structure at the southwest corner of Brand and Coffman, and they have asked that the City route the path around large trees and preserve vegetation on their property in conjunction with this project. Staff has also worked closely with the Spears, who own property on the north side of Brand Road. The path along their property does not move under either alternative. It does impact a large tree, but preserves the existing vegetation to the north of the path. Staff would work to ensure good drainage is a product of this path, as well as pedestrian access. For Coventry Woods Drive, there is no change from what was previously shown — only more detailed information. Staff also provided some cost estimates for the project. He noted a correction to the total amount for the entire length without accommodation for future bike lanes. This figure should be $1,243,750.00. The western and eastern segments total $978,750, and with the middle segment, the total is $1,243,750. Accommodating bike lanes for the western and eastern segments brings the total to $1,079,750, and adding the middle segment brings the total to $1,556,750. The true cost of providing for bike lanes for the entire three segments is approximately $300,000. He offered to respond to questions. Mr. Keenan noted that there has been discussion of a roundabout at the Coffman /Brand location at a future date. If a roundabout were installed, how would the crossing occur in view of the historic home on the southwest corner? Mr. Hammersmith responded that as detailed design work is done, the goal would be to minimize impacts to this corner historic property, moving the roundabout to the north by acquiring additional right -of -way. There is not much existing right -of- way in this area. The goal would be to preserve the southern property and work toward adjustment of the roundabout to the northern property. Mr. Keenan asked if the bikepath would traverse the roundabout, or be routed around it. Mr. Hammersmith responded that he would expect the path to be routed around the roundabout in this location and provide for a crossing on the west side of Coffman for the bikepath. Mayor Lecklider invited public testimony. Andy Keeler, 5281 Brand Road stated that he and his wife are the owners of the historic brick home at the southwest corner of Brand and Coffman. He believes that staff has represented their position well. He appreciates Council's efforts in considering the input of the Brand Road residents. He noted that the historic house on the property did not draw them to purchase it, as it had been abandoned for three years. A walk of the property is what convinced them to buy it at an auction. A number of the trees on the property are landmark trees, and one tree is a 50 -60 foot tall Tamarack tree, located just off the roadway. A bikepath would likely interfere with the root base of this tree. Across Coffman Road, there is an existing sidewalk that continues on to Brand Road, and this could serve as an alternate connection to the multi -use path. August 1, 2011 Page 9 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Meetine Dublin City Council August 1, 2011 Page 10 Neil Hahn, 5505 Brand Road stated that he and his wife have resided in their home for 25 years. Their property is adjacent to Prince of Peace Lutheran Church and is in the section of Brand Road between Bristol Parkway and Brandonway -- the segment of path that staff is recommending not be installed. The North Fork of the Indian Run is within 35 feet of his frontage, and he has a stream to the west of his property, Bear Run. Both of these rise to the top of the bank in a heavy rain. His property has been flooded previously and he is pleased that staff has recommended that a multi -use path not be installed in this segment. Using the existing path from Bristol Commons to the municipal pool should be sufficient to take care of anyone wanting to exercise in Dublin. He first heard about this project in June of 2008, and he and his wife have been concerned with this proposal. However, in the segment in which he lives, there is one home where the path would be within 21 feet of the front door, if the path with accommodation of a future bike lane is installed. He has five trees in his front yard that are over 50 feet in height, and they are within the right -of -way. They also have 200 feet of hedge in this location. They would like to have a vote tonight to bring closure to this long- standing proposal. He is aware that Council has received input from residents of many subdivisions in Dublin, and they have indicated their desire to have this path on Brand Road. He is hopeful that Council can come to agreement tonight that will satisfy everyone. Bruce McLoughlin 5131 Brand Road Washington Township stated that he and his wife have lived in their home for 31 years. If Council does not select the alternative that allows for bike lanes, it will have no impact on his property. His comments are related to the project and concept in general. When this discussion with Council began in March 2011, it focused on bike lanes on both sides of Brand Road and a multi -use path. Council then asked staff to meet with the property owners impacted and staff listened to the input. In June, staffs recommendation to Council was not to install bike lanes on Brand Road at this time and not to construct the segment between Bristol Parkway and Brandonway Drive. He is suggesting that Council not deviate from staffs recommendations. At the June meeting, Council asked staff to provide some alternatives so that bike lanes could remain on the table for future Council consideration. However, the Mayor indicated that the residents of Brand Road would like some closure on this issue and want to know that bike lanes will not be revisited again in the future. He opposes the option to increase the right -of- way to accommodate bike lanes, and he believes the Brand Road residents oppose this strongly. He recommends that Council adopt the option of not accommodating future bike lanes at the cost of $978,000 as outlined by staff. At the time this project was discussed in March, the estimated cost was $2.5 million. This is a significant savings over what was discussed previously. He asked that Council not abandon their decision to "kill' the option of bike lanes on Brand Road. He believes that if Muirfield residents were told today that 20 feet of their front yards would be taken for a bikepath, they would oppose it. On behalf of his neighbors, those near the fire station, and Mr. Spears, all of whom would be dramatically impacted by this, he hopes that Council provides the Engineering Department direction to consider carefully those impacted by the project. He is hopeful that Council will eliminate the option of bike lanes on Brand Road. Jon Reynolds 5151 Brand Road Washington Township noted that he is in agreement with the comments by Mr. McLoughlin. Mayor Lecklider invited Council comments /questions. Vice Mayor Salay asked about the Coffman Road connection, and why the recommendation is for a connection on the west side versus the east side of Coffman where the high school is located. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council MectinL= August 1, 2011 Page 11 Mr. Hammersmith responded there is existing bikepath along the western side of Coffman Road. The eastern portion has a sidewalk in place. The plan provides for a bikepath connection to an existing bikepath. Vice Mayor Salay noted that staff is not recommending a continuous path all along Brand Road. Is the primary impetus for this the flooding concerns noted by Mr. Hahn, or is it the neighbors' concerns about proximity of the path to their homes? Mr. Hammersmith responded it is two -fold. It will be a difficult segment to locate in view of proximity to structures, vegetation and other constraints. Secondly, there is an alternative way to travel east -west on existing pathways that is only one third mile longer. Given the difficulty with the middle segment, using the existing paths seemed to be a good alternative. If Council is in agreement, the western and eastern segments could be done as a first phase, and then a closer review could be done of the middle segment. Staff recommends proceeding with the first portion of the project and then looking at a second phase in the future. Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher asked about the sidewalk on the eastern side of Coffman Road, and where it terminates. Mr. Hammersmith responded he is not certain whether it extends the entire length, or if there are gaps. The bikepath on the western side does not continue the entire length. Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher noted she is confused, as staff had indicated the reason for recommending the west side connection was due to the continuous sidewalk. Mr. Hammersmith clarified that there is an existing bikepath on the west side of Coffman, and this extension would be routed down to the Baptist Church, near the location where the path currently terminates. Mr. Keenan commented that there may be other options to consider, once the roundabout is constructed at Brand and Coffman. Mr. Hammersmith responded that there is an alternative of replacing the sidewalk with bikepath on the east side of Coffman, but he would first research why a sidewalk was installed on the eastern side versus a bikepath. Mayor Lecklider asked if the proposed multi -use path would interfere with the Tamarack tree described by Mr. Keeler. Mr. Hammersmith responded he does not have that level of detail at this point, but when detailed design is done, they would work to minimize this impact as much as possible. Mr. Keenan noted that some rubberized materials were used for multi -use paths or sidewalks in neighborhoods where there was interference with trees. Could this material be utilized in a small section such as this to preserve the tree? Mr. Hammersmith responded that, typically, a boardwalk could be used to avoid such a tree. There are some alternatives that can be considered. Mrs. Boring noted that for several years, a bikepath has been budgeted in the CIP to connect to the existing sidewalk on the Wellington frontage. Did the CIP budget anticipate a bikepath all the way to Brandonway or Earlington? Mr. Hammersmith responded that the CIP budget included a bikepath for the entire length of Brand Road. Ms. Grigsby clarified that in the current CIP, a larger amount is budgeted for this because in last year's CIP preparation, the funding included a multi -use path and bike lanes. Sufficient dollars were programmed, in case Council decided to do both. Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher asked for clarification. What is being considered from the roundabout at Brand and Dublin Road is a multi -use path on the north side of RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council August 1, 2011 Meetine Page 12 Brand until Earlington Parkway. At Earlington, the proposed path moves to the south side of Brand Road and travels to Bristol Parkway. Mr. Hammersmith stated that the existing tunnel lies just to the east of the Bristol Parkway intersection. The path then connects to the existing paths located south of Brand Road, and then a new connection would be made heading west, on the south side of Brand. Mr. Gerber stated that staff presented two options in the materials sent out on July 22. One option included bike lanes, and the other included only a multi -use path. In this report, the path extends from Dublin Road all the way to Muirfield Drive. What is staff now recommending? Mr. Hammersmith responded that, initially, the staff recommendation was to build only the western and eastern segments. The middle segment is shown in response to Council's questions about the impact the middle segment would have on the properties. Mr. Gerber asked if the revised cost estimate sheet, distributed tonight, represents a continuous bikepath from Dublin Road to Muirfield Drive. Mr. Hammersmith responded that the total is $1,243,750 for the entire length of 8,800 feet. If only the western and eastern segments are done, the cost is $978,000. Mr. Gerber asked for staffs recommendation about the continuous path. Mr. Hammersmith responded that staff's recommendation is to construct the eastern and western segments and utilize the existing path as an alternative for the middle segment. Mr. Gerber stated that his belief is that most cyclists and pedestrians would prefer a straight route on Brand versus traveling through the neighborhoods. He believes they will stay on Brand Road, with or without the path in place. Isn't this a safety concern? Mr. Hammersmith responded that any location adjacent to a roadway without a pedestrian walkway or bikepath would present a safety concern for a young person who chooses to stay on the roadway. Mr. Gerber stated that multi -use paths throughout the City have been discussed for years by City Council, with the goal of connecting neighborhoods and destinations throughout the City. His understanding was that Council wanted to provide complete connectivity in areas such as Brand Road, from Dublin Road to Muirfield Drive. Mr. Hammersmith responded that, historically, it has been the goal to have as complete connectivity as possible. The Community Plan certainly reflects that. Ms. Chinnici- Zuercher asked what is the advantage of not building the entire connection between Muirfield and Dublin Road at this time. Mr. Hammersmith responded that doing this project in two phases would allow the land acquisition to occur for the western and eastern segments, the project could be designed, and the easements secured. Those two segments could be bid and the middle segment could be done as a second phase. It would serve to expedite the project and have a path in place for the two segments. It is not necessary to do the project in this way, however. Mr. Gerber stated that, based on his review of the information provided to Council on the alignment, it appears the proposed multi -use path is within the existing right - of -way. Mr. Hammersmith responded that is correct for the path itself, but in several locations, temporary easements would be needed to construct the path. Grading adjustments and drainage adjustments will also be needed. Ms. Grigsby added that in reviewing the timetable of constructing the improvements this year, it anticipated bike lanes and a multi -use path. In that review, it became apparent that with a bike lane installed, some of the multi -use path would come RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council August 1, 2011 Page 13 very close to existing structures, Staff then began to consider options available. In removing the bike lanes, some of the concerns with regard to proximity to the structures and vegetation are eliminated. Mrs. Boring stated that she totally supports bike lanes in appropriate locations, but they are not workable for Brand Road. She moved to limit the consideration to only multi -use paths and to eliminate bike lanes from consideration. Mr. Gerber seconded the motion. He added that his understanding was that bike lanes were already off the table, based on the last discussion. Vote on the motion: Mr. Gerber, yes; Vice Mayor Salay, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mayor Lecklider, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher, yes. Mr. Gerber asked for clarification about the needs for temporary easements. Won't temporary easements also be needed for the bikepath on Dublin Road South to accommodate the construction and the various obstacles for the path? Ms. Grigsby responded that is correct. In removing bike lanes from consideration in the Brand Road project, it is much more likely that the project can be accommodated within existing right -of -way. Mr. Hammersmith shared an example in the area of the Eger and Campbell properties. Easements and construction and temporary grading easements will be needed. Mr. Gerber stated that it may be possible to move the path closer to Brand Road in the case of these two properties. Mr. Hammersmith responded that the power poles present a constraint. The detailed construction drawings can include small shifts to accommodate as needed. Mayor Lecklider noted that there is a bikepath along Avery from Avery- Muirfield to Wynford Drive. At Wynford, the path enters Wyndham Village and continues in a northerly direction and back to Avery Road. In his 20 years as a resident, he has never observed a child or adult continuing north on the road after the bikepath terminates on Avery. Avery is fairly narrow with a minimal shoulder area, and people do find their way through the Wyndham connection heading north. He believes there are other examples throughout the City of similar routes. He simply offers this as perspective. Neil Hahn requested to speak again. Mr. Hahn quoted Mr. Gerber from the June 27 meeting, "At the same time, I would like to see more photos. If I saw a bikepath 15 feet from my house, I'd be pretty upset, and rightfully so." Mr. Hahn noted that a homeowner is present this evening who lives in his section of Brand Road, and the proposed path will be 21 feet from his structure. Mr. Hahn assumes that anyone having a path that close to his /her house would object to it. He asked if Mr. Gerber has any comment. Mayor Lecklider thanked him for his additional testimony. Mr. Keenan stated that Council has the staff recommendation before them to build the western and eastern segments of this bikepath, at a considerable savings. Council is in agreement with respect to the bike lanes, which would profoundly impact the appearance of the scenic roadway. He moved to approve the staff recommendation. Mrs. Boring seconded the motion. Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher asked what is included in the staff recommendation — is staff recommending that the middle segment not be built at this time, but that it be planned as a future phase? Or is staff recommending that the middle segment not be shown on the map as a future phase? RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council M eetin_ August 1, 2011 Page 14 Mr. Hammersmith responded that this is a policy decision for Council. Staffs recommendation is not to move forward with construction plans for the middle segment, nor any acquisition of property to provide for that middle segment. Mr. Keenan commented that it would be difficult for Council to tie a future Council's hands about this, regardless of whether or not they agree with the staff recommendation. Mr. Gerber stated that when bikepaths and bike lanes were discussed, it was clear that the project would encroach upon and exceed existing right -of -way. Based on the report provided last week, the multi -use path will be contained within the existing right -of -way. Residents have been aware that bikepaths were planned for this connection long ago. He is puzzled about why the City would not complete a continuous path from Dublin Road to Muirfield Drive at this time, given this history. Mr. Keenan responded that the reason is that an existing path currently exists to the south that can facilitate the connection for the east and west segments, the school, and the North Pool. The existing tunnel at Bristol Parkway is an investment of $750,000 and is not utilized. Crossings are done at- grade, despite the existence of the tunnel. He is hopeful that the installation of the bikepath to the west and east will bring users to the tunnel. Mayor Lecklider agreed. He recalls from a City survey with respect to the bikepaths that users found most appealing the experience of using bikepaths that do not run parallel to the roadways. In this case, there is an alternative available for this connection. Cyclists also enjoy using the segments that run along parks and streams. Mr. Gerber stated that he is considering the precedent in terms of other bikepaths. In the Dublin Road South bikepath project, there is sufficient right -of -way to construct the multi -use path, although it may encroach upon some fences and may require some adjustments to accommodate certain features. How will it be handled for the Dublin Road South project? Mayor Lecklider asked if there are alternatives available with the segments of the Dublin Road South project, as there are with the Brand Road path. Vice Mayor Salay noted that some homeowners would argue that there are alternatives, but they diverge from the continuous path desired along Dublin Road South. A continuous path makes the most sense to her. She is aware that there are three property owners on Dublin Road South who are very concerned about the proximity of the planned path to their homes and there is an historic home that will be impacted. All the paths constructed in the City result in some angst from those impacted. In this case, one home is 28 feet from the path as it is preliminarily aligned, and perhaps this could be moved somewhat closer to Brand. The other homes in that section are quite a distance from the path. Experience has demonstrated that the paths are viewed as an amenity and are part of the landscape of the property. Council has heard from residents that the Brand Road path is really important to the majority of the community and to decide not to build it because of impact on a small number of property owners is not the right decision. Mr. Gerber stated that the impact has been minimized by virtue of staying within the existing right -of -way, and taking the bike lanes out of consideration. He is concerned with establishing a precedent if the middle segment is not constructed; the path is within the existing right -of -way; and the residents have been aware of this plan for decades to connect the City through bikepaths. Mrs. Boring stated that the major precedent is providing connectivity and Council determines case -by -case the alignment of bikepaths. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting August 1, 2011 Page 15 Mayor Lecklider noted that it is evident from tonight's discussion that the residents and Council as well care very much about bikepaths. The City is fortunate to have over 100 miles of bikepath in the community. He appreciates how passionate the residents and Council feel about the alignment and construction of bikepaths. Mayor Lecklider noted that Mr. Reiner could not be present tonight, due to out of town travel, and summarized his statements: Mr. Reiner supports the plan which allows for future bike lanes to be added. He favors an uninterrupted multi -use path along Brand Road for the entire length, between Muirfield and Dublin Road. Mr. Gerber noted that it is unfortunate that Mr. Reiner is not present for an issue of this magnitude. It would have been preferable to have all seven members of Council present for the discussion. Mrs. Boring noted that she believes that Council should not delay this decision, as the residents have long awaited it. The decision has already been delayed for two to three years to allow for resident input and it is time to make the decision. She noted that there is a motion and second on the floor. Vote on the motion: Mr. Gerber, no; Vice Mayor Salay, no; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mayor Lecklider, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher, no. Mayor Lecklider noted that the motion failed due to a tie vote. Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher moved to approve the Brand Road multi -use path from Dublin Road to Muirfield Drive, as demonstrated by staff tonight. Vice Mayor Salay seconded the motion. Mr. Gerber asked for clarification of what this would include. Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher stated that this would include all three segments. Mrs. Boring stated that although she supported the other option, in order to move this project forward she will support this motion to build the three segments. Vote on the motion: Mayor Lecklider, no; Mr. Keenan, no; Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes; Vice Mayor Salay, yes. (Motion carried 4 -2.) • Update re Ballantrae Spray Park Mr. Hahn updated Council on this project, including the budget. Bids were opened on the rework of the mechanicals on July 20, and two bids were received. Both were substantially over the original estimate and both were from companies experienced in wastewater treatment plans. Staff does not have a viable alternative other than proceeding with the work at a higher than budgeted cost. Vice Mayor Salay noted that, at one point, there was discussion about the fact that much of the work occurs in a vault and there are certain regulations of OSHA that apply for those working in this environment. Was there discussion of making the vault larger so that the maintenance could be done easier and less expensively? Mr. Hahn responded that this design is similar to building a cave in the side of the hill, and the entrance would resemble that of a mine shaft. The design would include all mechanicals associated with water quality. The pumps in the existing vault would remain, as they require much less maintenance than the water quality system to be housed in this new cave. Operationally, an advantage is that pool staff could perform routine maintenance for the water quality systems. Staff has discussed the bid with the lower of the two bidders, Thomas & Marker, and is working on ideas to scale back some of the costs. However, much of the design is driven by regulations and cannot be modified. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting August 1, 2011 Page 16 Staff is merely providing Council notification of the fact that the bid acceptance on the August 22 agenda will involve a higher amount than what was budgeted. Mr. Keenan noted that Ron Eger has a Dublin company that does this type of work. Perhaps staff should speak with him. Mr. Hahn responded that the City frequently does business with Mr. Eger. The major issues for this project are that the state has certain design criteria to be met, and there is sound rationale behind them. There are a tremendous number of users of the spray park and the risk of contamination is high. Mr. Hahn stated that the bid will be included on the August 22 Council agenda. STAFF COMMENTS Ms. Grigsby stated that: 1. She will attend National Incident Management System (NIMS) training at Washington Township for the next three days. 2. A memo was provided in regard to the Bridge Street Corridor workshop on August 11 with a proposed agenda. Mr. Keenan stated that the memo was fairly self explanatory. Mrs. Boring stated that the agenda includes "Vision Implementation Discussion." Will David Dixon be the facilitator for this session? She is aware that Council has expressed desire for several issues to be addressed, and she is concerned with prioritizing them and addressing them in a reasonable manner. Ms. Grigsby responded that as facilitator, Mr. Dixon will be charged with keeping the session on track, with the support of the participants. If there is not sufficient time on August 11 to complete the agenda, there may be need for a follow -up meeting as well. Mrs. Boring responded that this option will allow adjourning at a reasonable time on August 11. Mr. Gerber thanked Mr. Langworthy for his offer to meet with staff to learn more about form -based Code. He is very appreciative of this opportunity. Ms. Grigsby commented that the form -based Code will be a learning experience for everyone and will require time and training. If Council desires additional training in form- based Code, staff can certainly arrange for that. COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS /COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE Mrs. Boring 1. Noted that she received another communication from the Riverside Woods Homeowners Association in regard to truck noise. She has observed signage in other cities prohibiting engine compression brakes on trucks. The resident who sent the e-mail makes a valid point about how the noise level is measured by location. Why does the City not install the signage to regulate the trucks, even if the prohibition is hard to enforce? It has been done in other cities. Ms. Grigsby responded that in the Hard Road example, staff has learned that the noise is not necessarily the result of the braking, but from trucks accelerating up the Hard Road hill. Staff had scheduled the next measurement of the noise on site, but there were some equipment problems. Staff has now scheduled another two - day testing in August to gauge the noise generated with different volumes of traffic. Testing has taken place in December, April and will be done in August. Mrs. Boring asked if the homeowners association concurs that the noise is a result of the trucks accelerating on the hill. Ms. Grigsby responded that staff has had this discussion with the residents. Staff has been present at the time of the data collection to view what is creating the noise. Mrs. Boring asked that the noise reports identify the source of the noise for each incident. Ms. Grigsby responded that can be done. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting August 1, 2011 Page 17 2. Congratulated the Police Department for the new "Meet the Police" program. The neighborhoods are very appreciative of having the Chief of Police present at the meetings. It demonstrates the caring level of their service to the community. 3. Commented about the status of the deer management program. In talking with Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher over the weekend, she indicated there is such a program in place in the City. Ms. Migliore indicated the City removed 65 deer from the roadway last year, and because deer don't always die on the roadway from a collision, it is necessary to add 10 percent to that number. These accidents are not generally reported to the Police Department, but only to the insurance carrier. Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher indicated that surrounding communities are taking measures for deer management, and Mrs. Boring suggested the City review what other communities are doing in this regard. Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher stated that she shared with Ms. Grigsby today that she had spoken with Mr. Amorose over the weekend. His neighborhood of Campden Lakes is within both Franklin and Delaware counties. They had an extensive problem with geese and deer, and Delaware County gave permission for a resident to shoot the geese and deer and they did so. Ms. Grigsby stated that the City is reviewing the options for what can be done to address this. In checking with Parks and Police, the City has not experienced an increase in deer killed on the roadways in Dublin over previous years. It is not a highly rated cause of crashes in Dublin. She does not believe that the City would be in a position at this point to make any comments or recommendations on changes in approach. Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher stated that, at a minimum, the City should learn about the county policies on this matter. Ms. Grigsby stated that City law prohibits discharge of a firearm in the City limits. It would be necessary to change the City Code to allow this. Staff is trying to confirm what is being done in other areas. Mrs. Boring stated that if a vehicle has a collision with a deer, the driver would likely not call the Police, as Ms. Grigsby has stated. Vice Mayor Salay pointed out that the deer would be on the roadway, however, and would be collected. Staff has indicated they have not observed a marked increase in the number of deer killed and picked up from the roadways, presumably as a result of a vehicle collision. Mr. Hahn responded that the deer actually collected from the roadway is what is recorded in the statistics. There are approximately 60 plus road kill each year that are deer, and Police have substantially less accident reports involving deer. Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher added that the issue is that the City receives complaints on a regular basis, generally about landscape damage done by deer. The number of deer picked up from the roadway does not reflect the nuisance damage done by deer. Mr. Hahn responded that the citizen surrey asks if residents have experienced property damage from deer. In the last survey, 14 percent indicated they have had such property damage /vegetation damage from deer. Clearly, there are wildlife issues in the City, most often about skunks. But is there any reason to believe the level of wildlife damage occurring in Dublin is any different from the typical suburb? He does not believe so. New Albany and Gahanna have implemented some deer control measures, but their land masses are completely different from those in Dublin. Practically speaking, given that culling is the only effective means of control, these are complicated issues to resolve. Mr. Keenan added that he forwarded an article from the neighborhood association in Georgia regarding their efforts in deer management. Vice Mayor Salay stated that her concern is with another jurisdiction issuing permits for hunting within the City limits. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Dublin City Council August 1, 2011 Page 18 Chief von Eckartsberg responded that he spoke with the ODNR officer assigned to Delaware County who indicated that this permission was not given to anyone. Mrs. Boring noted that with 65 deer on the road killed in collisions, and another 10 percent involved in collisions but not found on the road, at what point does the City decide that crashes caused by deer are a problem? Mr. Hahn responded that he does not have an answer to this, but the question is what are the alternatives available? The statistics indicate that the crashes do not occur in 25 mph zones, but rather on higher speed roads in the City, such as Riverside Drive and Dublin Road. The speeds on those roadways average 45 -55 mph, and perhaps it is the driver speed and behavior that should change. It is easy to identify the problem, but the solution is the issue. There are limited options to pursue. Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher: 1. Noted that the Power Point presentations from the MORPC regional meeting were forwarded to Council: the Ohio Infrastructure Report Card, prepared by the Ohio Society of Civil Engineers, which indicates the level of investment needed to repair and improve bridges and the presentation regarding the Innovation Fund. More information will be forthcoming on this. 2. Stated that she volunteered at the Pan Ohio Bicycle Race on Saturday, organized by Dennis Hoffer of Inside Outfitters to raise funds for the American Cancer Society. This is the fifth year of the event and 440 bikers participated in the Cleveland to Cincinnati race from Friday through Sunday. They were most appreciative of the support from the Dublin Police who assisted them in safely traversing the course through Dublin. Hats off to Dennis for raising funds for this important cause! Mr. Keenan thanked staff for bringing forward the consent agenda this evening. This worked very well, and he is most appreciative. Mr. Gerber, Finance Committee Chair reported that the Committee of the Whole met tonight for an update on the second quarterly financials. The receipts are up 4.33 percent over last year at this time, which equates to a $1.5 million increase. This demonstrates the positive growth of the workforce in Dublin. Hotel /motel tax receipts have also increased over last year, which is also positive news. Vice Mavor Salav Administrative Committee Chair stated that at the last meeting, she reported that the performance review for the Clerk would be forwarded to Council for input. Based on a discussion with the Clerk, she will complete her self - performance review prior to Council's work on this. Mavor Lecklider noted that he hopes to see everyone at the Dublin Irish Festival this weekend, and hopes for good weather as well! ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 9:03 p.m. Mayor— Presiding Officer Clerk of Council