THURSDAY, MARCH 19, 2007

REGULAR MEETING

7:30 P.M.

1. ROLL CALL. Mrs. Hammond called the meeting to order at 7:30 P.M., with Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Hackworth, and Mr. Fix present. No members were absent. Others present were: Mike Sabatino, Judy Gilleland, Lynda Yartin, Ed Drobina, Lance Schultz, Brenda VanCleave, Jennifer Frommer, David Owen, Dan Heitmeyer, Maggie Arendt, Stan Fox, Chad Flower, Gary Smith, Larry Jones, Tricia Jones, Carol Carter, Tony Barletta, Dennis Bourzewski, Bruce Englehardt, and others.

2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF February 15, 2007, Regular Meeting. Mr. Hackworth moved to approve; Mr. Fix seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Fix, Mr. Hackworth, and Mrs. Hammond voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 3-0.

3. COMMUNITY COMMENTS: There were no community comments.

4. PLANNING AND ZONING

A. Planning and Zoning Director’s Report. Mr. Schultz stated he had provided a written report to the Committee and he would be happy to answer any questions.

(1) Planning and Zoning Representative Report (Mr. Hackworth) Mr. Hackworth stated the Planning and Zoning Commission met last week and one zoning issue that was reviewed is on tonight’s agenda.

B. ACTION ITEMS:

(1) Review and request for motion to approve rezoning and preliminary development plan for approximately 8.76 acres from AG (Rural District) to PC-2 (Planned Central Business/Mixed Use District) for a spa, bed and breakfast, and office development at 376 Hill Road South located just west of Pickerington Central High School (Heitmeyer) Mr. Schultz stated from a land use perspective staff supports this because the use within a campus setting appears to be compatible with adjacent uses and would provide an appropriate buffer between the school and other residential uses to the west. He stated Planning and Zoning approved this request contingent upon ten staff conditions being met, and those ten conditions were included in the Committee’s packet.

Mr. Gary Smith stated he was present representing the applicant along with Mr. Chad Flowers, Mr. Steve Fox, and this is a project they have been working on for quite awhile. Mr. Smith described the project to the Committee members and stated they would be happy to answer any questions. Mr. Fox gave a power point presentation and stated the property has a large amount of trees and as part of the project the barn and silo would be removed. He stated the intent is to retain the existing house and after renovation operate it as a bed and breakfast. He stated if the market is not there for a bed and breakfast the house would probably be renovated and converted into some sort of office use. He stated they have done a tree survey and the intent is to integrate site development into the natural features to create responsible development that utilizes the natural features as an amenity for the site. Mr. Hackworth stated he had noticed several trees on the site that should probably be removed and Mr. Fox stated they surveyed almost 1,000 trees and they have been able to maintain only a 30 percent removal of the trees. Mr. Fix stated this looked like a very nice development and his only concern was with the traffic study they would be doing. He stated they had mentioned a drive thru for a restaurant and that can create a decent amount of traffic at peak hours. He stated Hill Road is a two-lane road in that area and he would be concerned about what kind of issues that might create. Mr. Fix moved to approve the rezoning and preliminary development plan; Mr. Hackworth seconded the motion. Mrs. Hammond clarified this will be going back to Planning and Zoning for the final development plan. Roll call was taken with Mr. Hackworth, Mrs. Hammond, and Mr. Fix voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 3-0.

5. SERVICE DEPARTMENT

A. REPORTS:

(1) Utility Fees Review Committee Representative Report (Mr. Hackworth). Mr. Hackworth stated he had no report.

(2) Service Manager’s Report. Mr. Drobina stated he had provided a written report to the Committee and he would be happy to answer any questions.

B. ACTION ITEMS:

(1) Review and request for motion to approve draft ordinance approving the Violet Township Maintenance Building use of Fairfield County water. Mr. Drobina stated he has nothing to report this evening. Ms VanCleave stated she had just submitted her last set of corrections to the engineering plans. Mrs. Hammond stated this would remain on the agenda.

C. WATER UTILITY MAINTENANCE:

(1) Review and request for motion to approve draft ordinance authorizing the City Manager to enter into a contract with Morton Salt for water softening salt. Mr. Drobina stated the bid opening for the water softening salt was held today and we received two bids. He stated Morton Salt had the lowest bid for a two-year period and he would recommend we accept their bid. Mr. Drobina stated the cost of salt did increase by 36 percent. Mr. Drobina stated we purchase approximately 25 tons per week and our current contract will expire on June 1, 2007. Mr. Sabatino clarified the two bidders, Morton Salt and Cargill, are the two largest providers of the water softening salt. Mr. Drobina stated he would try to find out why the increased cost was so large. Mr. Fix moved to approve and forward the contract for water softening salt with Morton Salt to Council; Mr. Hackworth seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Fix, Mrs. Hammond, and Mr. Hackworth voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 3-0.

(2) Review and request for motion to approve capacity fee for 10-inch fire line. Mr. Drobina stated in the Canal Pointe area that we serve water to they are building a Meijer Store and they are requesting a 10-inch fire line. He stated our ordinance does not go that high and says that the capacity fee would require special Council action. He stated he had calculated that a 10-inch line is 56 percent larger than an 8-inch line and came out with a fee of $79,000. He stated he had also done some comparison with other communities and that would fall in line with Lancaster, be higher than Columbus and Newark, but lower than Canal Winchester and Westerville. Mrs. Hammond inquired how Westerville calculated their fee and Mr. Drobina stated for their fire line they use 50 percent of their domestic tap fee and their domestic tap fee is quite high. Mr. Sabatino stated if we did not supply the water it would come from Canal Winchester, so why would our fee be lower than theirs. He questioned why our fee would not be the same as Canal Winchester’s fee. Mr. Drobina stated he had done the calculations by percentage because he wanted something that in five years we could look back and see how it was calculated. Ms Gilleland stated Mr. Sabatino had a good point, and we just wanted a method whereby we could make this calculation again. She stated if we have a target number then we will create another method. Mr. Drobina stated other communities use a comparison to what they charge for a ¾-inch domestic tap, ¾-inch versus a 10-inch, do the multiplication and use 20 percent of that number. He stated if we were to do that the capacity fee would be $131,798.04. Mr. Drobina stated mathematically you can put 177 ¾-inch lines in a 10-inch line. Mrs. Hammond stated she thought that might a little to high and Mr. Drobina stated that would be the same calculation that Canal Winchester uses. Mr. Drobina stated this is for fire protection only, so the only time this particular line would be used was if there would be a fire. Mr. Fix stated he felt we had a reasonable argument that since they are in the Canal Winchester area, but our water rights, they should be expected to pay what they would pay if Canal Winchester was providing the water, which is $107,413. Mr. Sabatino stated he felt that was the most logical way to look at it. Mr. Drobina stated we could use that justification in that area, but if it were in another part of the City we could use the comparison from a ¾-inch line to a 10-inch line and we could use that calculation in any part of the City. Ms Gilleland clarified that we did not have to make a decision this evening if the Committee would like more information. Mr. Hackworth clarified that anything above an 8-inch line must be approved by Council. Mr. Hackworth stated he was in favor of using the same method Canal Winchester does for anything over an 8-inch, using the ¾-inch line and Mr. Fix stated he concurred with that. Mr. Hackworth moved to calculate capacity fees for water lines over 8-inches by using a comparison to what we charge for a ¾-inch domestic tap, ¾-inch versus a 10-inch, do the multiplication and use 20 percent of that number, which is the same method used by Canal Winchester; Mr. Fix seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Fix, and Mrs. Hammond voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 3-0.

D. WASTEWATER UTILITY MAINTENANCE:

(1) Review and discussion regarding contract for biosolids. Mr. Drobina stated he just wanted to make the Committee aware that our contract expires in August and he will be putting this out for bid shortly. He stated we currently pay $415.62 per ton, and we did 293 tons last year for a total cost of $119,834.

E. STREET MAINTENANCE.

(1) Review and request for motion to approve Annual Street Repaving Project. Mr. Drobina stated he was recommending Long Road west of Diley Road to the corporation limit and Hill Road south, starting south of Circle K and going to the corporation limit. Mr. Fix stated he agreed with Mr. Drobina’s recommendation and his only concern would be if the project reviewed earlier in this meeting goes forward, would we be paving an area that would be torn up by construction. Ms VanCleave stated that project would involve a very short segment. Mr. Hackworth clarified that Mr. Drobina had evaluated all of the subdivision streets and they are not in more need than these two streets. Mr. Drobina stated there are several streets that are getting to that level, and this year he wants to start a crack sealing program as that hasn’t been done for several years and he hoped that would maintain the quality of our streets a little longer. Ms Gilleland stated we hoped to come up with a five-year plan and prioritize when paving would be scheduled. Mr. Fix moved to approve the repaving of the streets as recommended by Mr. Drobina for 2007; Mrs. Hammond seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Hackworth, and Mr. Fix voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 3-0.

F. STORM WATER UTILITY MAINTENANCE.

(1) Review and discussion regarding stormwater annual report. Mr. Drobina stated per Ordinance 2000-140, the City Manager is required to complete a report each odd year on our stormwater utility. Ms Gilleland stated part of the report examines the fees and revenues and makes a recommendation to Council on the stormwater fees and projects. She stated she felt because we have an established Utility Fees Review Committee that would be the appropriate place to look at the fees with regard to the projects and what items we have coming out of the stormwater fund. Ms Gilleland stated the ordinance speaks about a committee of Council examining the stormwater utility charges and we do that, in essence, when we look at the budget. She stated since our Utility Fees Review Committee is in place she felt that might be an appropriate thing for them to look at. Mr. Fix stated he thought it was totally appropriate to have the Utility Fees Review Committee review these fees, and Mr. Hackworth stated he concurred that would be the appropriate committee for this review.

6. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CAPITAL PROJECTS

A. WASTEWATER

(1) Wastewater Plant Expansion - Update. Ms VanCleave stated we are currently in negotiations with our top ranked firm. She stated they submitted a proposal that staff is reviewing and we hoped to schedule a meeting next week to discuss it. Mr. Fix clarified if we do not reach an agreement we will go to the second ranked firm.

B. TRANSPORTATION:

(1) Diley Road Improvements Project:

a. MORPC/ODOT Project – Update. Ms Frommer stated she has had some extended negotiations in helping to facility the utility relocations with regard to a couple of property owners. She stated all parcels of right-of-way on the project are now cleared and she expected private utility relocations on the project to begin this month. She stated she expected to be pushing ODOT to bid the project in a short time. Mr. Hackworth clarified that Mr. Drobina hoped to have all of the trees that are in the way of South Central Power by mid-April.

b. Review and request for motion to approve draft ordinance approving the appropriation of 2.522 acres, more or less, gross fee simple interest; 0.186 acre, more or less, easement; and a combined 0.685 acre, more or less, temporary construction easement located west of Diley Road, City of Pickerington, County of Fairfield, State of Ohio, from William M. Lane and Sarah Lane Crabtree, Trustees. Mrs. Hammond clarified this was not a total take but acreage that fronts Diley Road. She further clarified this is an agreed settlement with the property owner. Mrs. Hammond moved to approve and forward to Council; Mr. Fix seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Fix, Mr. Hackworth, and Mrs. Hammond voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 3-0.

c. Review and request for motion to approve draft ordinance vacating 0.341 acres, more or less, of Old Diley Road located southwest of S.R. 256, City of Pickerington, County of Fairfield, State of Ohio. Mr. Hackworth clarified this was south of S.R. 256, north of Windmiller. Mr. Schultz stated it is adjacent to the Kroger out lot and the DeCesare out lot. Mr. Fix clarified when we vacate the property it goes back to the owners. Mr. Hackworth moved to approve the ordinance and forward to Council; Mr. Fix seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Hackworth, and Mr. Fix voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 3-0.

d. Review and discussion of Diley Road right-of-way outside municipal boundaries. Ms Frommer stated from the outset of the project, the way we are currently proceeding, that you are doing a portion of the project and the Township has done their portion of the project in cooperation with Canal Winchester. She stated there is a housekeeping item that has yet to be resolved, and that is the City is procuring right-of-way down the Diley Road corridor. She stated if the City elects to or does not elect to annex the parcels that front the road, granting accesses and land uses and development of those parcels can be nightmarish if you are not the single entity that controls access and then governs uses on the parcel. She stated she just wanted to make the Committee aware of this because we are almost at the point where it can become an issue. She stated it might be wise to entertain discussion with the Township regarding single control of things that involve granting of access and property use along the corridor that you are soon to own. Mr. Sabatino inquired how this would impact someone who owned property on Diley Road but desired to annex into the City, and Ms Frommer stated she would defer to the attorney to answer that type of question. Ms Gilleland stated as questions come up on this issue she will forward them to the law director. She stated there will be further discussion and this is not something that a decision has to be made on tonight or even next month, she just wanted to make the Committee aware of it.

C. WATER: Ms VanCleave stated she had provided a report to the Committee and would be happy to answer any questions.

D. STORMWATER. Ms VanCleave again stated she had provided a report to the Committee and would be happy to answer any questions.

7. CHAIRMAN.

A. Review and discussion of Master Economic Development Agreement proposed by Violet Township. Mrs. Hammond stated everyone had received the agreement that was sent by the Township. She stated she would limit any discussion to this agreement only. Mr. Sabatino inquired if there was any plan to act on this soon, and Mrs. Hammond stated she was not aware of any plan to act on it at all.

Mr. Larry Jones stated he would like someone to explain to him what it meant to conform one’s boundaries and why that is an issue. Mr. Sabatino stated it is very simple and for example the City of Columbus conforms its boundaries to its own township, which is Montgomery Township. So, if Columbus would annex property it would be removed from its current Township and placed in Montgomery Township. Ms Gilleland stated a city’s municipal boundaries would then become the Township’s boundaries and the City would be removed from the surrounding Township and create its own Township, and be a “paper” township. She stated the reason it is called a “Paper” township is because it is within a municipal corporation and you don’t need the township form of government if you have the township within the municipal boundaries. Mrs. Hammond stated essentially, Pickerington is a municipality that exists within Violet Township so when you conform the boundaries you decide that you no longer want to be a part of the township you are in, but you must be in a township. She stated, therefore, a paper township would be formed for the municipality. Mr. Jones stated then as he understood it, if we were to conform our boundaries and form a paper township, the City of Pickerington would no longer be a part of Violet Township. Mrs. Hammond stated that was correct.

8. OTHER BUSINESS. No other business was brought forward.

9. ADJOURNMENT. There being nothing further, Mr. Fix moved to adjourn; Mrs. Hammond seconded the motion. Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Fix, and Mrs. Hammond voted “Aye.” Motion carried, 3-0. The Service Committee adjourned at 8:50 P.M., March 19, 2007.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:

________________________________

Lynda D. Yartin, Municipal Clerk