THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 14, 2008

REGULAR MEETING

7:30 P.M.

1. ROLL CALL. Mr. Wisniewski called the meeting to order at 7:30 P.M., with Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Wisniewski, and Mr. Sauer present. No members were absent. Others present were: Lynda Yartin, Lance Schultz, Ed Drobina, Jennifer Frommer, Brenda VanCleave, Linda Fersch, Mayor O’Brien, Jeff Donohew, Jerry Dailey, Kerry Hogan, and others.

2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF January 10, 2008, Regular Meeting. Mrs. Hammond moved to approve; Mr. Sauer seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Sauer, Mr. Wisniewski, and Mrs. Hammond voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 3-0.

3. COMMUNITY COMMENTS: No Community Comments.

4. PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT:

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. Sauer stated Planning and Zoning met on February 12^th and approved Strike City, which has been on the agenda for a while. He stated there was a lot of discussion regarding the use of speakers on the patio, and it was approved with conditions. Mr. Schultz stated patios do require conditional use approval, and conditions regarding noise were placed on the approval. Mr. Schultz stated if there is a noise problem it would go through the Code Enforcement process.

(2) Review and discussion of development process. Mrs. Hammond stated it appears that we are not that far out of line with other communities. Mr. Schultz stated he felt our platting process was longer than most other communities, and our PUD process is right in the middle. Mr. Schultz stated staff is investigating ways to shorten this process. Mrs. Hammond stated if we only needed to look at two areas, it would be much easier to address just those issues. Mr. Wisniewski clarified Mr. Schultz would bring some recommendations back to the Committee on suggested changes.

B. ACTION ITEMS: Mr. Schultz stated he had no action items tonight, but would answer any questions anyone might have.

5. SERVICE DEPARTMENT

A. REPORTS:

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

B. ACTION ITEMS:

(1) Review and discussion regarding utility billing agreement with Canal Winchester. Mr. Sauer stated as he recalled, this Committee had requested language be included in the agreement that would kick in should their rates be higher than ours. Mr. Drobina stated that language was not included in this addendum, but he would get with the law director and have it put in. Mr. Wisniewski stated he felt that was critical before this Committee went forward with this agreement.

Mr. Drobina stated Ms Frommer had distributed a memorandum just prior to the meeting dealing with the WTP waste force main. He stated this is a CIP project from last year to upgrade the lift station at the water treatment plant. Mr. Drobina stated he does not have a draft ordinance as yet, but if the Committee wanted to move it forward he would get the ordinance done. Mr. Wisniewski clarified this was not a critical project and it could wait until the next meeting when all of the documentation is before the Committee. Mr. Drobina stated he would have it for the next Service Committee packet.

(2) Review and request for motion to approve draft ordinance authorizing the City Manager to enter into a contract with G&G Enterprises for the Hill Road South sanitary sewer extension. (TABLED, 11/19/07) Mr. Drobina stated this is tied to the billing agreement with Canal Winchester. Ms Frommer stated she had contacted the contractor and he agreed to extend his bid until the day after the second Council meeting in April, which is April 16^th. She stated if this were approved at the March Service Committee meeting, it would require two readings at the next Council meeting. Mr. Wisniewski clarified the contractor would hold the bid price for the 30 days until the legislation would be in effect.

(3) Review and request for motion to approve draft ordinance authorizing a contract with Neptune Equipment Company. Mr. Drobina stated this is an annual ordinance to purchase our meters from Neptune as our meter reading equipment is Neptune. Mr. Wisniewski inquired if it would make sense to have the contract for more than one year, and Mr. Drobina stated the price of meters changes each year. He stated he would speak to Neptune about doing a contract for two or three years when we get the pricing next year. Mr. Wisniewski moved to approve the draft ordinance and forward to Council; Mr. Sauer seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Sauer, Mrs. Hammond, and Mr. Wisniewski voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 3-0.

6. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CAPITAL PROJECTS.

A. WASTEWATER

(1) Wastewater Plant Expansion - Update. Mr. Drobina stated the plans are 95 percent complete. He stated he did receive a letter from DLZ that we should be ready to bid March 30^th. Mr. Wisniewski inquired what deadlines were in the DLZ contract as far as when the design was to be complete; as he thought the 95 percent complete design was due in December. Mr. Wisniewski further clarified there were no penalties in the contract if they did not meet that deadline. Mr. Drobina stated we look for the EPA to approve the PTI by March 15^th, and DLZ would like to submit the final bid documents by March 30^th, so we should be able to advertise for bids by April 1^st. Ms Frommer stated DEFA may have some additional requirements as there are some other things related to the loan so it may not be that date. Ms Frommer stated generally the process for DEFA begins when they receive plans and they begin environmental investigations. She stated we last met with them in November and they outlined a number of things that were required to be submitted and indicated they would key off of the plans submittal. She stated she just wanted to clarify that things are taking shape, but she was not confident that with the DEFA submittal documents that it would be ready for bid on that date. Ms Frommer stated the likely time for a contract to be signed is 120 days after receipt of the PTI. Ms Frommer stated the loans are typically done the last Thursday of the month. She stated we will make a submittal to DEFA, they will go through the documents, and they will forward it to the Ohio Water Development Authority (OWDA). She stated OWDA generally requires the receipt of the loan information by the 15^th of any given month to act on in the last week of the month. Ms Frommer stated it is a couple of months process after the plans have been approved, the environmentals have been approved, and the advertisement has been done to get it into their hands for funding. Mr. Wisniewski further clarified that when we get the bids back, we will still be in the loan process. Ms Frommer stated we would probably be looking at June before an award could be made with the contracts signed in July. Mr. Drobina stated everything should work out for a July or August construction start date. Ms Frommer stated if the Committee would like, she would take what DLZ is suggesting as the schedule and add the loan information to that and provide it to the Committee so they can see when it would be expected construction would start. Mr. Wisniewski stated he would like that information for the Committee. Mr. Drobina stated as he recalled, the original plan was for construction to start in late summer or early fall of this year.

Mr. Wisniewski stated his next question was when we needed to have a construction management firm in place, given that construction will not occur until July or August. Mr. Drobina stated he did not feel we actually needed an inspector there until construction started. Ms Frommer stated at this point DLZ’s contract includes bidding services so that would take it all the way through the schedule they note, the way it is structured at present, you would have a construction administrator taking over for inspection and carrying it through to completion. She stated shop drawings would occur after that, and the way the contract with DLZ is structured right now there are no services that you would be in want of until you have a contractor ready to start.

Mr. Wisniewski stated one of the questions at the last meeting dealt with the review of the shop drawings. Ms VanCleave stated DLZ quoted $54,090 for review of shop drawings and URS quoted $67,700. She stated it is hard to compare these numbers however, because DLZ actually knows what is going to be required as far as the number of submittals and URS did not have that information so they just assumed a set amount. Mr. Wisniewski inquired which firm would typically review the shop drawings, the company that performed the engineering or the construction management firm. Ms Frommer stated there are a number of models; her preference would be that all of that work would be contained in the construction administration contract. Mr. Sauer clarified Ms Frommer was suggesting the construction management review the shop drawings, and Ms Frommer stated that was correct. Mr. Sauer stated it seemed that if DLZ did the original drawings when reviewing the shop drawings it would seem they would know what they were looking for, if there is an error somewhere. Ms Frommer stated it has been done that way, with the thought being that the construction manager would be up to speed on the plans and because they are a professional engineer and would have people skilled in the field as well, it would be hoped they would have digested the plans well enough to be able to reflect on the submittals also. Mr. Sauer stated further it seemed you would have a single point of responsibility instead of having it spread out over two contractors.

Mr. Wisniewski stated he still needed to digest some of this information and it did not appear there was a pressing need to go forward with the construction management this evening. Mr. Sauer stated he had invited Mr. Jeff Donohew of James & Donohew Development Services, Inc., to attend the meeting this evening. He stated he has worked in this particular area in the past; however, he has not been involved in our process. Mr. Sauer continued that he felt it might be helpful to receive an outside viewpoint from someone with experiences in this area. Mr. Jeff Donohew stated he is currently performing the construction management for the City of Zanesville. He stated both Stilson and URS are both well respected firms and all he could do is give the Committee some ideas on how he did this, and DLZ is the engineer he has been working with in Zanesville. Mr. Donohew stated one thing he would suggest is that the sooner you get the construction manager on board the better off you are. He stated as an example, he found a lot of errors in the bidding documents, and the construction manager knows better how to manage the project, and he does feel it is money well spent to get someone in looking at the drawings as soon as possible. He stated he has the construction manager receive, log, and track all of the submittals sent to the design engineer to review, and then they come back to the construction manager so there is an accurate record of when it was submitted, when it went to the engineer, when it came back from the engineer, and when it was given back to contractor. He stated typically you have issues in that process, not if the drawing was checked or was it correct or not.

Mr. Wisniewski stated the issue he has on this is we have one bid on this contract and when we went out for bid on this we did not have the ability at the time to ask for prices and making that part of our bid document for RFQs. He stated we have updated our Code and we can do that now. Mr. Wisniewski stated with that being the case, and this being a massive project, he would like to see bids associated with a few firms to come back and questioned if there was any reason we could not go out for new RFQ including shop drawings. Ms VanCleave stated she could not recall if we can ask for prices up front at the beginning or if it was after the top three firms were chosen. Mr. Wisniewski stated he believed it was based on qualifications, so we would probably need to do a new RFQ, including the shop drawings, having it come back, and if they are qualified to perform all of the services, including the shop drawings, and then when we get the top three add prices and have that be part of it. He stated what has bothered him on engineering items in the past is that we have never been able to go out for what the cost is associated with the entire package. He stated he would prefer to do this so we can make sure we are getting a qualified firm, and getting a good price for it. Mr. Sauer stated given the challenges we are going to be facing this year and in the coming years, he felt this was the most prudent path to take. He stated this is a large project and to handle it in a fiscally responsible manner is extremely important. He stated he felt this would give us the transparency in the process to be able to do it from that position, and he agreed with Mr. Wisniewski. Mr. Wisniewski moved to go out for RFQs for the Construction Manager, including review of shop drawings, and including the price as part of the component after the top three firms have been selected for qualifications; Mr. Sauer seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Wisniewski, Mr. Sauer, and Mrs. Hammond voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 3-0.

(2) Review and request for motion to approve draft ordinance authorizing the City Manager to enter into a contract with URS Corporation for construction management of the City of Pickerington Wastewater Treatment Plant Expansion project. Mr. Wisniewski stated he would like this item continued on the agenda.

B. TRANSPORTATION:

(1) Diley Road Improvements Project:

a. MORPC/ODOT Project – Update. Mr. Drobina stated ODOT has moved into a house as their office and the contractor is using a trailer at 512 Diley Road, which is property we own. He stated the contractor has staked the temporary right-of-way and they hope to start putting up a silt fence in the next few days and then they will start grubbing the area and start utilities, water lines, sewer lines, and storm sewer. Mr. Wisniewski clarified ODOT was using the Pavlic house as their office. Mr. Wisniewski inquired what we were going to do with the other vacant house we purchased and Mr. Drobina stated he has not received any information on that as yet, if it would be demolished or whatever. Mr. Drobina stated he would like Mr. Drobina to get with Mr. Hansley and come back to the Committee with some recommendations on what we will do with that property. Mr. Drobina stated he would have something for the next meeting.

Mr. Drobina stated the power company has pretty much finished up and the gas company is laying gas lines. Mr. Wisniewski inquired if there would be any temporary gas interruption when they switch over and Mr. Drobina stated he did not know, but he would get an answer for the Committee. Mr. Drobina stated he would get the contractor’s schedule as soon as ODOT approves it and forward it to this Committee. Mr. Drobina stated the completion date right now is July 30, 2009.

Ms Frommer stated Mr. Hansley had spoken to her regarding what is being posted on the web site with regard to noise walls, and as far as she can tell, a notice will be going in the utility bills. Mr. Wisniewski stated if we could get a schedule so we can inform the citizens, and Mr. Drobina stated as soon as we get the schedule it will be put on web page, showing road closures, etc. Mrs. Hammond stated she would also assume we would get coverage on that in the papers. Mr. Drobina stated the contractor is using the flashing road construction signs on the roadway as well.

(2) Review and discussion regarding S.R. 256/Refugee Road Intersection Safety Grant. Ms Frommer stated she had distributed a memorandum on this project to the Committee this evening on the technical merits of this project. She stated this project has been on the CIP for a number of years, it was funded in 2006, and additional funds were awarded to it in 2007, by virtue of a Safety Grant from the Ohio Department of Transportation. Ms Frommer stated there has been some discussion regarding finances on the project and she was looking for information or direction.

Mr. Wisniewski asked for a little background information on how this project came about, why did the project come to where it is. Ms Frommer stated in 2005 the City initiated a signal planning study of the S.R. 256 corridor and the closed loop system of its signals. She stated at that time Stilson also did a study on intersection capacity at all the intersections on the closed loop system, and provided capacity information to the City. She stated it was determined that the Refugee Road/S.R. 256 intersection is a problem, and there is a ripple effect because it is the location of the master signal controller and a lot of things are keyed off of that intersection. She stated from that point the City commissioned a safety study of that intersection and it was determined at that time that ODOT would make available safety grant funds, so as the project itself had been appearing on the MORPC TIP and ODOTs list as far as them being aware of the project and the City didn’t have the funds or the time to do it. Ms Frommer stated Stilson suggested to the City they apply for the safety grant funds because this area has been on ODOTs watch list, congested signal list, for quite some time. Ms Frommer stated in 2005 the City did apply and the grant was not awarded to you. She stated you applied for a $4 million project in 2006 and were awarded $2.2 in grant funds. She stated when it was reapplied for in 2007 they bumped it up to $2.6 million. She stated three-year crash rates at that intersection between the 2206 and 2007 applications rose 33 percent, which is a matter of concern. She stated Stilson definitely feels the project has technical merit. She stated she also provided a project cost estimate that came out of the application. Mr. Wisniewski clarified there are approximately 30 to 45 accidents per year at that intersection. Ms Frommer stated the project would include adding an additional dedicated left-turn lane heading southbound, a dedicated right-turn lane heading west, add a through lane on Refugee Road heading west and a through lane on Refugee Road heading east, installing concrete medians on three legs of the intersection, the signal would be converted to a mast arm signal, and a mast arm installation at Refugee/Windmiller. Mr. Wisniewski stated we are estimating $4 million and change for the entire project with $2.6 coming from grants, and the other $1.4 coming from the City. Ms Frommer stated that was correct. Ms Frommer stated the estimated $1 million for right-of-way was an estimate for purchase. Mr. Wisniewski stated then the majority of the City’s funds would be for the purchase of right-of-way. Ms Frommer stated that was correct, and the right-of-way was needed from BP, CVS, McDonalds, and Walgreens, however the Walgreen’s right-of-way was being donated at present. Mr. Wisniewski stated we would not be taking right-of-way from residents and the more traffic that is available through the intersection the better it is for the businesses that are going to be a part of this. He questioned if they have been approached about donating the land, and Ms Frommer stated not to her knowledge. Mr. Drobina stated we have not met with any of the businesses as yet. Ms Frommer stated further these are pre-design estimates of right-of-way takes. Mr. Wisniewski stated he felt we should put together something to show these businesses and see if we can get the right-of-way donated to the City. Mr. Wisniewski stated he knew Mrs. Fersch was going to say we cannot afford this project, so we should try and get some buy-in from the businesses to help this intersection because if the intersection goes down, their businesses will go down. Mrs. Hammond stated one of the reasons we considered doing this project to begin with was because when Diley Road gets improved, more traffic will be coming from there.

Mrs. Fersch stated she and Mr. Hansley had provided a report to the Committee regarding the funding issues on this project. She stated in looking at our debt schedule, the one large street issue debt we have is the Courtright/Diley and the downtown streetscape currently stands at over $2 million. She stated in 2005 and 2006 we did not pay anything on principal because we were looking for money for street paving for our streets. She stated with notes you are flexible with what you pay, but you can only run them for 20 years. She stated after five years you could convert them to bonds and go another 20 years, so you would have a maximum of 25. Mrs. Fersch stated this year we will be paying $92,000 in interest on the $2 million issue. Mrs. Fersch stated we will have to pave S.R. 256 in the near future and we will have to pay 20 percent of the cost of that paving. Mrs. Fersch stated a lot of our general obligation debt is in streets, which is non-revenue producing, where our utility debt is producing revenue. Mrs. Fersch stated our City income tax is lower than any of the communities around us and has been the same since 1976. Mrs. Fersch stated we need flexibility to respond if we have a crisis. Mr. Wisniewski stated he had asked several times if we could afford Diley Road and he was told “yes” numerous times. Mrs. Fersch stated that was because we had certain sources and we also figured that at a certain point in time we would go out for a longer period of time for that debt. She stated the reason we have a large payment right now is because it is a ten-year debt, and we had a three percent interest rate. She stated in the beginning it was better to do that, but as our evaluation goes up we are going to have to look and see what we are going to put into a long term; whether the police station or this one. She stated when we do our debt capacity is closed, and $4 million takes up a lot of debt capacity. Mrs. Fersch stated Dennis Schwallie, our Bond Counsel, will be at the next Finance Committee meeting to brief everyone on debt capacity, etc. Mrs. Hammond stated the immediate problem is that Council needs to make a decision on this project and Ms Frommer stated the decision must be made as soon as possible because in the current schedule there are certain activities that need to take place during the year and we need to consider your legislative process for selection and things like that. She stated it is the City’s project and ODOT said there was some flexibility in being able to push some end activities into 2012. Mr. Wisniewski clarified that if the right-of-way were donated, that would not affect the amount of money from ODOT, it would still be $2.6 million. Mr. Wisniewski stated that would mean the City’s portion would be $400,000 and he would be happy with that. He stated, however, if the businesses choose not to donate the right-of-way, the project would not go forward. He stated he felt Mr. Hansley should get with the businesses and have an answer for this Committee next month. He stated if we did not have an answer at next month’s meeting he did not feel any member of Service Committee would vote for this project to go forward. Ms Frommer stated the City did apply for a $500,000 grant from the Ohio Public Works Commission and did not receive that. She stated, however, that is an apply once a year grant and you have four years where in each year you could reapply. Mr. Drobina stated one of the reasons we did not get that grant was because the design was not done and we did not have the right-of-way. He stated one of the things considered was whether the project was ready to go out for bid, and so we did not rate to high. Ms VanCleave stated we ranked 77^th out of 82 applications. Mr. Drobina stated if we wanted to apply again, he felt we would need to be further along in the project. Mrs. Hammond stated she liked the idea of seeing if the businesses will donate the right-of-way because she felt we should explore every option available to us before we give up on the project.

C. WATER: No Report.

D. STORMWATER. No Report.

7. CHAIRMAN. Mr. Wisniewski stated he had nothing to bring forward.

8. OTHER BUSINESS: Mr. Hogan stated his company, URS, negotiated the contract with the City, and he did not see how his firm could be measured now as their fee is on the City’s web site, it is in meeting minutes, and they would be the high bidder. Mr. Wisniewski stated prior to going out for RFQs he felt we should discuss this issue with our engineer and law director. Mrs. Hammond and Mr. Sauer concurred.

9. ADJOURNMENT. There being nothing further, Mr. Wisniewski moved to adjourn; Mrs. Hammond seconded the motion. Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Wisniewski, and Mr. Sauer voted “Aye.” Motion carried, 3-0. The Service Committee adjourned at 8:50 P.M., February 14, 2008.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:

________________________________

Lynda D. Yartin, Municipal Clerk