HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-04-10 Study Session minutesDublin City Council
Study Session
Monday, October 4, 2010
Minutes of Meeting
Mayor Lecklider called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. in Council Chambers.
Present
Council Members: Mayor Lecklider, Vice Mayor Salay, Mrs. Boring, Ms. Chinnici-
Zuercher, Mr. Gerber, Mr. Keenan and Mr. Reiner.
Staff: Ms. Grigsby, Mr. McDaniel, Ms. Readler, Mr. Langworthy, Mr. Gunderman, Mr.
Combs, Ms. Adkins, Ms. Ray, Mr. Hammersmith, Ms. Cox, Ms. Puskarcik, Mr. Tyler,
and Ms. Gilger.
Guests: David Dixon and Ben Carlson, Goody Clancy representatives.
Mayor Lecklider called the meeting to order. He stated that the purpose of the meeting
is to review the Bridge Street Corridor Study.
Ms. Grigsby stated the Bridge Street Corridor Study has been in process for over a
year. It is an exciting project for the City. At the last Council meeting, Council adopted
its 2010 -2011 Goals. One of those goals was to "Complete the Bridge Street Corridor
plan to provide a vision for the corridor, which will reinforce the City's long -term
competitiveness, create a vibrant and walkable environment with a dynamic mix of land
uses and houses types, and that enhances the City's long -term sustainability." Along
with the goal, some near -term action strategies were identified. The first was to focus
on the vision plan and have that plan "completed by the end of 2010." The second was
to have "a work session with the consultants... "to follow up on "on the major principles,
which form the important foundations..." for the development of the Corridor." That is
the purpose of this work session -- to allow Goody Clancy to provide the overview of the
information that was included in the vision report distributed in Council's packet.
Specifically, for review of the vision statement and the five principles that were identified
and have been reviewed at the public meeting held at the Wendy's facility in June. The
vision concept plan included in the packet is a draft of the current concept, and there
may be changes as it goes through the process. In addition, the seven Corridor
Districts will be reviewed, including a Scioto River overlay, also included in the vision
report. A key component to moving forward is to determine the next action steps for
implementation, based upon Council's goal to have it completed in 12 months. The
intent tonight is to present the report to Council. At Council's direction, staff will then
bring back legislation to have the Vision Report accepted by City Council. Mr. McDaniel
will also review the proposed next steps, the implementation, and the next processes or
consultants that staff believes are needed to review and identify items as the
infrastructure impacts, both transportation and utilities. Discussion is also planned
regarding the time frame for completion of the reviews and some funding requirements,
based on staffs current estimates.
Dublin City Council Study Session
October 14, 2010
Page 2 of 11
David Dixon, Goody Clancy stated that providing the report formally to Council is very
important. He will remind Council of the foundations, market, community and other
foundations for the vision and the principles. Then he will address the principles in
specific, operative terms, which will be used in shaping the important next chapter of
Dublin.
Vision
The charge for this study area is to enhance economic competitiveness, quality of life
and create public spaces — all on seven percent of the land in the City of Dublin; the
other 93% will remain untouched. The principles directing this effort are that Dublin has
a real commitment to market leadership -- thinking ahead of the market and being
positioned to take advantage of changes. This is a period of changing market dynamics
and therefore an important time to be thinking ahead. Above all, Dublin has a
commitment to the quality of the community, and Dublin is not a community willing to
make trade -offs for fiscal, economic development or other benefits, if the City believes
that may diminish the quality of life for its residents. They have been conscious of that
principle, and they are hopeful that Council believes that was addressed. The tradition
of market leadership has clearly been important to Dublin -- an important part of the
foundation for the very high quality of life that has been established in Dublin. The
continued effort to balance housing and jobs is what drives people in their choices of
both, and has influenced employers in their choice of location. That formula is changing
in some ways, and is therefore an opportunity for Dublin to adapt. The City invited a
series of speakers, who spoke about these changes. He considers certain statements
they made as very important.
1. Chris Leinberger talked about the fact that as opposed to a decade ago, mixed
use, walkable environments are increasingly commanding a premium in the
marketplace, whether it is housing - office, retail or other uses.
2. Carol Coletta pointed out that this country has a chronic and growing labor
shortage of skilled and educated workers that employers follow as opposed to
those people following employers, at this point in time. They are making choices
between the ages of 25 and 34 about where they want to spend their lives and
make their economic contribution. Increasingly, that is driven by the ability to live
and possibly work in a walkable, attractive environment with a strong sense of
community. Focus groups indicated that 50% to two thirds of those participating
really value downtowns and great neighborhoods near them as decisive
indicators in where they want to live, but they do not want to live in big cities.
Dublin would be a desirable place for many of them.
3. Laurie Volk and Sarah Woodworth both conducted in -depth market studies for
over 5 -7 years for housing and 10 years for market for the City. The results
indicated a need for probably 1,500 units of housing and more than a million
square feet of office and mixed use development as a basis for beginning to
construct this great new district that can become the new downtown "heart' of
Dublin.
Dublin City Council Study Session
October 14, 2010
Page 3 of 11
4. Ms. Volk's message was that this housing market exists because of the
significant changes in households. In 2010, in most regions, 60% of households
are singles and couples, and the percentage is likely increasing. This means that
there are more people potentially interested in walkable, lively environments with
a sense of community. Then she broke down the market by unit types, so that
the City has potential "building blocks" as it starts this initiative.
5. Sarah Woodworth looked at Office, Hotel and Retail, and had a couple of
significant messages. First, the nature of market demand is changing, so, in
addition to the large building employers, there is a growing demand for smaller
businesses. Dublin has a significant entrepreneurial spirit — a great many
companies are born in Dublin, and Dublin wants to be able to hold on to them as
they grow. Secondly, there is a leakage in retail. This reflects the desire for a
different shopping experience — for walkable, mixed -use developments that more
recently typify the market.
Dublin has tremendous opportunities to build something that leaps ahead of that and is
even more competitive. People love Dublin for what it is, but that doesn't mean they
wouldn't like the option for a walkable, mixed use environment. High quality in terms of
design and every aspect of planning has been very important to people. Preserving
natural features and access to those features is important.
Many people have talked about introducing a next generation of public transportation
options, not to replace the car, but to provide other choices. Historic Dublin is beloved
and the community has made very clear that it should be preserved and not replaced by
development. This type of initiative is occurring in other places, but what Dublin is doing
is much more "cutting edge." It is a model that is already attracting interest. When they
attended the APA Conference in New Orleans and presented a program on Dublin, it
was probably the best - attended session in the entire conference. This is an indication
that many suburban communities are interested in learning how to add the same type of
dimension that Dublin is planning. This, then, is the foundation for the Vision
Statement.
Mr. Dixon discussed the vision's five principles in depth.
Principles
1. Enhance Economic Vitality. Create vibrant and walkable mixed -use districts that
build on the community's quality and character to make Dublin a highly
completive place to live, work and invest.
2. Integrate the New Center into Community Life Connect the new center into
community life. Connect the Bridge Street Corridor to the surrounding
community through enhanced bike, pedestrian, auto and transit connections,
lively public spaces and a mix of retail and other uses that invite the larger
community, and with civic, educational, and other uses to engage the full
spectrum of community life.
3. Embrace Dublin's Natural Setting and Celebrate a Commitment to
Environmental Sustainability Celebrate the Scioto River, North /South Indian
Dublin City Council Study Session
October 14, 2010
Page 4 of 11
Run, and other natural features as symbols of Dublin's commitment to
environmental preservation and sustainability.
4. Expand the Range of Choices Available to Dublin and the Region Offer housing,
jobs, shopping, recreation, transportation and other choices increasingly
supported by changing demographics and lifestyles to complement and support
Dublin's existing community fabric.
5. Create Places that Embody Dublin's Commitment to Community Design a 21 sc
century center for community, inspired by Historic Dublin and marked by
walkability, variety and vitality.
Ben Carlson, Goody- Clancy shared a draft illustrative concept of the Vision Plan. It is a
scenario of what the study area could look like if it were developed in accordance with
the principles. People tend to walk within a quarter mile radius, so they envisioned four
primary walkable neighborhoods -- Historic Dublin, the OCLC area, the riverfront area
near the intersection of Riverside Drive and W. Dublin- Granville Road, and the Sawmill
Road area near Dublin Village Center. There are many other opportunities to introduce
walkable networks, streets, and development, as well, but these four areas will be
emphasized. The many greenways that meander throughout - -with the Scioto River and
Indian Run, recreational greenways, and a series of public parks — all will serve as the
organizing framework. The overall area is broken into a series of seven (7) districts.
There are many physical distinctions, which delineate the boundaries between the
districts — the river corridor, the creek and major roads. Market studies show that
people appreciate unique places in which to live and to do business. He reviewed the
anticipated characteristics and potentials of the seven districts:
1. Bridge Street gateway into Historic Dublin
2. OCLC and Cardinal Health land to the north
3. Existing Historic Dublin neighborhood
4. The entire corridor that follows the east edge of the Scioto River
5. The stretch of West Dublin- Granville Road moving to the east, past the
Wendy's headquarters
6. The Tuller - Greenway neighborhood, the least visible and accessible district
7. The Sawmill District, largely occupied by Dublin Village Center
Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher inquired the location of Riverside Drive in relation to the current
road.
Mr. Carlson responded that they are suggesting that it be moved modestly a couple
hundred feet to the east, less than what some of the earlier concepts suggested. This
is a better balance — it would create a substantial amount of park space and access
there, but also retain the opportunity for a mixed -use neighborhood to develop next to it.
Mr. Gerber inquired how many people they believe would live /work in this area.
Mr. Carlson responded that this is a 20 -year plan. Ms. Volk has estimated 1,500 units
in the next 5 -7 years. As the market becomes established, the pace should increase.
Dublin City Council Study Session
October 14, 2010
Page 5 of 11
Conservatively, the estimate is for 4,000 units on one side and 6,000 -7,500 on the
other. That would be 6 -10 million square feet of housing and 2 million square feet of
office /retail.
Mr. Gerber inquired the anticipated number of occupants per housing unit.
Mr. Carlson responded that they would be smaller households — 1 to 1.25 occupants
per unit — approximately 5,000 -8,000 people, and 5,000 -7,000 employees.
Mrs. Boring inquired if this concept builds around what currently exists in this area.
Mr. Dixon responded that the plan has been built upon a couple of principles. In most
cases, they have had conversations with the property owners regarding the vision for
this area. Also, they have proposed ideas that would increase -- not hold neutral or
decrease -- the value of their land. The vision is illustrative and conceptual, not a plan
that dictates what must happen. The spirit of the plan is that it will be in the interest of
the property owners involved.
Mr. Carlson noted that there are many large property ownerships involved — areas of at
least 10 acres, and in some cases, 40 -80 acres. It is possible to do something
significant in those areas via the private sector that does not require land takings. A
redevelopment initiative can fit within a bigger picture. There are benefits to starting
this in distinct areas, providing a network of different uses.
Mr. Dixon stated that there are two very substantial holdings in Dublin. This
development will not replace current development in Dublin, but it will be concentrated,
which means it will take less infrastructure investment to accommodate it. The
infrastructure built will also support many smaller projects in the future.
Mayor Lecklider inquired how the new projection for residents in this area would
compare with the numbers estimated by the 2007 Community Plan. What impact would
this project have on those estimates?
Mr. Langworthy responded that it would not be significantly different, probably less than
10 percent.
Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher noted that the primary difference would be in the mix of uses
within the project area.
Mr. Gerber inquired what the forecast for central Ohio is over the next 25 years in
regard to the number of people who will come here to either live or to work.
Mr. Dixon stated that the aging nature of the housing market across the nation is
increasing. It is the demographic changes within that population that are creating new
housing markets. The number of households headed by people over 35 and under 55
without children are the two fastest growing segments of the housing market, and they
Dublin City Council Study Session
October 14, 2010
Page 6 of 11
are the under -built markets. Many in that target group are interested in urban
environments.
Mr. Langworthy noted that MORPC has estimated a regional growth of 500,000 over
20 -30 years.
Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher noted that study was generated 18 -24 months ago, so it did not
necessarily take into account the current development environment.
Mr. Dixon noted that lower housing cost regions, such as Central Ohio have been
benefitting from the economic slowdown. When it comes to attracting the young
workforce, that group is now less interested in specific destinations, such as San
Francisco. They are more interested in finding vitality in less expensive regions. On the
other hand, although the population may increase, the number of homebuyers may not
be in sync with the number of home sellers. The trend is moving into more of a net
seller model than previously.
Mr. Gerber stated that regardless of the concept's walkability, vehicle transportation in
the area will increase. People from other areas, such as Muirfield, will be attracted to
these areas. Are in -depth traffic studies contemplated?
Mr. Dixon responded that doing so would make sense. It will be easier to study and to
address the transportation needs of a district such as this, as they will be concentrated.
They have had some discussions with Kittelson & Associates about what it takes to
create a low threshold transit. They indicated that the types of densities and build out
contemplated here for the first ten years tend to make an area ready for transit to
support new services. They have considered a Bridge Street Corridor transit from
downtown Dublin to the COIC, because he would suspect many of the young people
who work there would love to live here. A transit service would be a plus. However, this
district is planned around the assumption that the automobile is here for a long time.
That is one of the reasons for the grid of streets through the corridor — so people are not
forced to concentrate on the same roadway, bringing congestion.
Mr. Gerber stated that SR 161 is a very busy roadway. Council has looked at adding
on- street parking as a way to change its character.
Mr. Dixon responded that he would expect that Dublin will do a transportation study that
will focus on adding curbside parking to a pedestrian street and provide alternatives
over time. By doing so, Dublin will achieve a great, real "Main Street," with offices,
hotels, housing, etc. Clearly, that would be done in conjunction with a larger
transportation strategy.
Next Steps
Mr. McDaniel stated that this is a consolidated plan for future studies -- essential tools.
The first step is to prepare a resolution for the October 25 Council meeting to adopt the
concepts and final vision report. The second step is to adopt a District pattern book with
the design guidelines for each district. This will provide a bridge from the vision to
Dublin City Council Study Session
October 14, 2010
Page 7 of 11
implementation. It would set forth expectations, yet provide flexibility. Next, a
regulatory framework code would be proposed. There will be an over - arching
transportation modeling or plan for the district. This is critical due to the densities. The
plan will be inclusive, involving all the property and business owners. Utility remodeling
will be necessary. Some base modeling has already been done for transportation and
utilities through the Community Plan process, and that work would be tweaked.
Mr. Keenan stated that there are issues related to the need for electric redundancy.
Also, there are other communities that have required fiber optic wiring to be part of the
infrastructure as it is developed, even in the residential area.
Mr. McDaniel responded those other utilities would definitely be included in this process.
He noted that the redundancy issue is high on the list of every project.
Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher stated that the Community Plan transportation modeling for this
area was based upon an entirely different vision. Therefore, will this modeling require a
significant redesign of the area that encompasses 1 -270, OCLC, Cardinal Health and
Emerald Parkway?
Mr. McDaniel stated that they would be building off the physical platform model
compiled for the Community Plan, but a more urban model will be needed.
Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher stated that because this modeling is to be completed by July 1,
2011, she wanted to ensure the modeling of that area was included.
Mr. McDaniel responded that it would be included.
Mr. Hammersmith stated that the Community Plan existing travel demand model would
be used, and trip generation coming off the new land uses would be input into the
model. This would provide a predictor of the needs for the future network. A second
component will be added to this process — a micro simulation, to look closely at
intersection levels and street capacities. With that input, design will be determined for
this urban model.
Mr. McDaniel noted that once the urban model is built, it will not be necessary to re-
study it each time someone comes forward with a project. The intent is to develop
computer modeling that will enable this to occur without conducting additional traffic
studies.
Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher inquired if they are indicating the modeling would drive the
design needed.
Mr. Hammersmith clarified that it indicates the demand and predicted users.
Accommodating that demand against the preferred level of service and tolerable
congestion is then evaluated and determined.
Mr. McDaniel responded it does not lay out the network, but it enables modeling against
an understanding of the future needs and impacts.
Dublin City Council Study Session
October 14, 2010
Page 8 of 11
Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher inquired approximately when it will be possible, with everyone's
input, to state what the road design will be. The building and configuration of the area,
particularly the south area, is very dependent upon the road design.
Mr. Hammersmith stated that the intent is for this to be an iterative process during the
transportation analysis. As output is received, it will be possible to determine the road
network that is needed and to make alterations in land use to change trip generations.
The acceptable level of service at the intersections must be determined.
Vice Mayor Salay stated that the SR 161 corridor is the sole focus. In the Historic
District, it is just four lanes wide. There was discussion concerning the potential
addition of on- street parking, but the decision was made that would not be tolerable, as
it would decrease the level of service. What works best between balancing moving
traffic and the expectations that all the intersection should function at higher level? Is it
better to accept a lower level of service?
Mr. Dixon responded that the expectations of level of service differ based on where you
are and where you are going. On an arterial highway connecting point A to point B, a D
or F level is frustrating. A short trip from a couple of destinations in the midst of a
pedestrian level would find a level D or F acceptable, as there is a counter balancing
benefit — the surrounding environment. With the Bridge Street Corridor, it would be
best to experiment. If Bridge Street is to be a route to travel from east to west, on-
street parking would not make sense. However, if a portion of Bridge Street will
become very important to the "life" of Dublin and adds to the quality of the community, it
would be good to experiment with curbside parking for off -peak traffic times.
Mr. Gerber stated that there are two traffic patterns involved — the internal roadways
and the external roadways — 1 -270 and SR 161, which are used by people from the
surrounding areas.
Mr. Dixon stated that he certainly would not experiment with curbside parking during
peak hours. As Historic Dublin becomes more important to the life of the entire
community, as people seek to invest there and extend its walkability, then the value of a
pedestrian- oriented Bridge Street may become more important, a counter - balancing
value, to the value of moving traffic through. To date, there has been no counter
balance. However, that counter balance is on the table now. He suspects the reason it
will be a counter balance is that there are more property owners in Dublin who believe
that the more amenities that can be found in that district, the more their property is
worth. He respects Council's desire to carefully evaluate this to find the right balance.
The advantage of curbside parking is not that it adds parking. It is that it makes it much
more comfortable to walk up, down and across the street -- it sends a different
message.
Mr. Keenan stated that the issue is balancing that benefit against 20 -30 minute traffic
backups in the District, east and west.
Dublin City Council Study Session
October 14, 2010
Page 9 of 11
Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher inquired if there will be a plan integrated and ready for discussion
with OCLC and the other anchors in the area.
Mr. McDaniel clarified that, in addition to the modeling, impact, counts and trips,
scenario grids will also be laid out to be modeled against. There is the planning aspect
that parallels the transportation /traffic modeling aspect.
Mr. Langworthy stated that the connections between points on the grid would be tested,
such as a connection between OCLC and Dublin Road.
Mr. Keenan stated that what he has seen work best around the country is when the
public streets in a downtown square are closed off with a pedestrian walkway. Then
development occurs around that square, such as in Aspen. Previously, Council has
discussed the potential for a different configuration for the roadway in the Historic
District. It would parallel 1 -270.
Vice Mayor Salay stated that it might be more of an alternative road than a bypass.
Mr. Keenan responded that an alternative would remove some of the pressure.
Mr. Langworthy stated that alternative could be instituted into the model to see what
might occur.
Mayor Lecklider stated that the vision concept appears to provide for two alternate
routes north of Bridge Street with access to Dublin Road, leading to Tuller Parkway.
Mr. Carlson stated that it makes it easier to access the Emerald Parkway Bridge, which
has more capacity than currently is being utilized. Having more choices, more
redundancy in the network is beneficial. Choices are better than investing in one
roadway.
Vice Mayor Salay inquired whether it is better to enhance Bridge Street, even at peak
times, by slowing traffic. It is helpful to drivers looking for a place to stop to eat or shop.
Mr. Carlson responded that slower traffic does really benefit the businesses. Pedestrian
areas do really work in some areas, such as college towns. A mix is quite viable.
Mr. Gerber inquired if the computer modeling will assess the level of service various
roadway configurations would provide.
Ms. Grigsby responded that the computer modeling will identify the number of cars
traveling through an intersection, and identify which level of service is desired and how
many lanes of roadway are needed to accommodate that level of service. Or, it could
indicate if there is an alternative to SR 161, such as a potential roadway from OCLC to
Cardinal Health. A couple of projects in the 5 -year CIP are: the extension of Emerald
Parkway Phase 8, which will help alleviate some traffic in the downtown district, and the
Dublin City Council Study Session
October 14, 2010
Page 10 of 11
flyover at 1 -270 and US 33 interchange. The process involves analysis, then
recommendations, and then perhaps modifications to the recommendations. There are
also ongoing discussions to determine what is financially feasible, both from the City's
and the developer's standpoints. She is not certain that all the information on all the
needed improvements will be available on July 1. One thing that will be helpful is that
OCLC has hired Kittelson, who has a report that identifies potential options, which
they'd like the City to consider. The next step is to meet with OCLC and Kittelson to
understand those options, the estimated costs, and how that would tie in with the City's
plan.
Mr. McDaniel noted that property owners will be included in this modeling process.
Mr. Gerber stated that, ideally, the City would provide the identified road network and
development code to a developer from which to work.
Mayor Chinnici - Zuercher responded that it was her understanding that was the intent
with the pattern book and the regulatory framework -- to provide a developer a
timeframe and substantially reduced steps to secure project approval.
Mayor Lecklider noted that the 1- 270 /US 33 flyover and Emerald Parkway Phase 8
extension provide him optimism. Has Engineering ever attempted to track the traffic
that travels along SR 161 from east to west or vice versa, and how much of that is local
traffic? While it is desirable to capture business from commuters, who are we focusing
on? People traveling though our District to destinations?
Mr. McDaniel responded that they have never accurately identified the through volume
versus local volume. Often, that includes an origin and destination study. However, how
important is it to have really definitive numbers? Regardless, the volume remains the
issue to address. Sometimes the solution to traffic problems is distribution and alternate
paths.
Mr. Keenan stated that there is concern from the corporate residents. Much of the
traffic flow is in the morning and evening — people coming in to work in Dublin and
leaving Dublin. Would that be considered local traffic?
Vice Mayor Salay responded that it would, as their destination is within the City.
Mr. Hammersmith responded that is his point — is it really that critical to know where the
traffic is coming from? The only information needed is land use and traffic counts. We
know what the volume is today and how it will grow in the future.
Mr. Keenan stated that it is important to consider the corporate community as well.
Mayor Lecklider stated that he was referring to traffic east of Sawmill Road traveling
through Dublin, which does not originate or end in Dublin. They would have other
options for reaching their destinations with a flyover and Emerald Phase 8.
Dublin City Council Study Session
October 14, 2010
Page 11 of 11
Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher moved to direct staff to provide a resolution accepting the interim
vision report for Council consideration and adoption at the October 25 Council meeting.
In addition, staff should also provide a proposed timeline and cost estimates.
Mr. Gerber seconded the motion.
Vote on the motion Mr. Gerber, yes; Vice Mayor Salay, yes; Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher,
yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mayor Lecklider, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes.
Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher noted that another joint work session with PZC, ARB and BZA
needs to be scheduled after the October 25 Council meeting.
The meeting was adjourned at 7:45 p.m.
Clerk of Council