WEDNESDAY, APRIL 22, 2009

REGULAR MEETING

8:00 P.M.

1. ROLL CALL. Mr. Sauer called the meeting to order at 8:00 P.M., with Mrs. Hammond, and Mr. Sauer present. Mr. Wisniewski arrived at 8:04 P.M. No members were absent. Others present were: Tim Hansley, Lynda Yartin, Ed Drobina, Joe Henderson, Brenda VanCleave, and others.

2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF March 18, 2009, Regular Meeting. Mrs. Hammond moved to approve; Sauer seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Sauer and Mrs. Hammond voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 2-0.

3. COMMUNITY COMMENTS: There were no community comments.

4. DEVELOPMENT:

A. Development Director’s Report. Mr. Hansley stated he had nothing to add to the report he had provided to Council.

5. PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT:

A. Planning and Zoning Director’s Report. Mr. Henderson stated Mr. Schultz was out of town, but he had provided a written report. Mr. Henderson stated he would try to answer any questions that anyone might have.

(1) Planning and Zoning Representative Report. Mr. Sauer stated Planning and Zoning Commission met on April 7^th, and had moved forward the two items on tonight’s agenda. Mr. Henderson stated the Board of Zoning Appeals did not meet last month but would meet tomorrow evening.

B. ACTION ITEMS:

(1) Review and request for motion to approve draft ordinance approving the rezoning of 77 W. Church Street from R-4 (Residential) to PC-2 (Planned Central Business/Mixed Use). Mr. Henderson stated the owner is looking to rezone the property so they can move their business, Winstead Gallery, to the property on Church Street. Mr. Wisniewski ascertained the surrounding property owners were notified when this item was before Planning and Zoning Commission, and they would be notified when the public hearing is held before Council. Mr. Henderson stated one neighbor had some questions about drainage and that would be dealt with when the owner came in for a Certificate of Appropriateness. Mr. Henderson stated the neighbors did not have any problems with the actual use. Mr. Sauer moved to approve the rezoning of 77 W. Church Street from R-4 (Residential to PC-2 (Planned Central Business/Mixed Use) and forward to Council; Mrs. Hammond seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Wisniewski, Mrs. Hammond, and Mr. Sauer voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 3-0.

(2) Review and request for motion to schedule public hearing at Council for open discussion regarding proposed rezoning of 77 W. Church Street for June 2, 2009, at 7:20 P.M. Mr. Wisniewski moved to schedule a public hearing for open discussion on the proposed rezoning of 77 W. Church Street from R-4 (Residential) to PC-2 (Planned Central Business/Mixed Use) for June 2, 2009, at 7:20 P.M.; Mr. Sauer seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Sauer, Mrs. Hammond, and Mr. Wisniewski voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 3-0.

(3) Review and request for motion to approve draft ordinance to accept a bike path which encompasses 0.675 acres in the Homestead condominium development. Mr. Henderson stated we are looking to accept the existing bike path on the western side of the creek. Mr. Wisniewski inquired why we would want to accept this and Mr. Henderson stated the Parks Master Plan identifies this as a bike path route as development occurs. Mr. Wisniewski inquired if we had to maintain it and Mr. Drobina stated it is a paved bike path. Mr. Henderson stated he believed this would be accepting just the physical bike path, and Mr. Hansley stated he believed Mr. Schultz had negotiated with the developer and all we are taking is the black top and the primary purpose is to make it part of the connection when we expand system at some point. Mr. Wisniewski inquired how we knew we were accepting only the black top and if possible add another paragraph to the ordinance that the City is not going to be responsible for mowing and upkeep of the area. Mr. Hansley stated he would check with Mr. Schultz to confirm that it is only the black top path that we would be accepting. Mr. Wisniewski moved to approve forwarding the draft ordinance to Council with that condition; Mrs. Hammond seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Wisniewski, Mr. Sauer, and Mrs. Hammond voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 3-0.

6. 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.

a. Review and request for motion to approve draft ordinance authorizing the City Manager to execute an amendment to the agreement with Fairfield County for emergency water services and the construction of certain water facilities. Mr. Wisniewski stated if we were going to have an emergency connection to the Fairfield County water, he questioned why we would need to have another above ground storage tank. Mr. Drobina stated this particular connection is more for Fairfield County than it is for us. Mr. Drobina stated in 2007 the City put this project out to bid and we had an agreement with Fairfield County where they would reimburse us 100 percent of the money for the line and we would split the cost of the meter pit fifty-fifty. Mr. Drobina stated that project was never built, and now the County has taken over the project and building the waterline and all we have to pay for is one-half of the meter pit. Mr. Drobina stated since the County is doing the project, they are not reimbursing us. Mr. Wisniewski clarified that with this project both the City and County can benefit, but the water plant this is tied into for the County can only produce 500,000 gallons of water per day. Mr. Wisniewski stated if we have emergency connections, he did not understand why we needed the new water storage tank. Ms VanCleave stated what EPA envisions is that we need to be able to support ourselves with our own water regardless of having emergency connections. She stated, therefore, we have the 24-hour storage in addition to whatever else we may have in emergency. Mr. Wisniewski inquired what would happen if we did not go forward with the water tower project, and Ms VanCleave stated nothing at this time. Mr. Wisniewski stated we are in difficult situations with our fee increases, with rates, with taxes, with unemployment and everything else that is going on, and he did not see the need to go forward with a two-plus million dollar project at this time that is just going to further cause us to continue the rate increases. Mr. Wisniewski stated if we could go with a one-year moratorium or more on raising our rates, he would be very much in favor of that so we could give the residents a break. He stated he would like to discuss in Finance as to where our finances are in water and sewer and whether we need to continue the rate increases as they are. He stated some of the numbers he has heard as to where our balances are going to be based on ten, fifteen, and twenty year projections are pretty much out of the ballpark. He stated he was not in favor of the rate increases as they were put forward, and he is second-guessing that and would be asking some serious questions in Finance about that. Mr. Drobina stated if he recalled, there was discussion in the Utility Review Commission that if we got to a point where we did not need to increase the rates, we could drop it off. Mr. Sauer stated he was a member of that Commission and he agreed with Mr. Drobina’s recollection. Mr. Wisniewski stated he understood that, and if we had things planned that absolutely had to get done, then let’s do them. He continued stating that if we are just doing things because we can, because we are raising the rates to accommodate for these things, then he did not agree with that and he did not agree with building this two-plus million dollar water tower just because it might be a great thing to do. Ms VanCleave stated she would look at her notes and in the CIP for this year a water study was approved to look at our distribution in the future. She stated that has not gone out for RFQs as yet but should in the next couple of months. Mrs. Hammond stated then essentially there was not an immediate need for the water tower. Mr. Hansley stated it is not a suggestion of the EPA, it is required that we must keep 24-hours of storage above ground and as our town continues to grow as far as water users you need to keep ahead of that curve. Mr. Hansley stated the emergency connection does not become a substitute for that, and the EPA will not accept that. The water tower is to give a one-day storage in case the system gets contaminated, a power outage, etc. Mr. Hansley stated these are two different issues, two different types of emergencies. Mr. Hansley continued that this tower has been engineered, we have been in negotiation to provide the site, and he did not know that we should delay it forever because we have already paid the up front costs of designing it, and the rates have been set assuming this capital project was in a year or two timeframe from now. Mr. Wisniewski stated that was fine, but he did not see the need for it right now. He further stated the city is not growing at any exponential rate and we are not having businesses knocking down the door and we are not having building permits for residential going through the roof. He stated if we can delay this and we can leave the rates where they are for a year and give everyone a break, then he thought that would be a good show of faith to the community that we are actually not just spending it because we have it. He stated it sounds like we have 24-hours of storage and we have plenty of time to figure out how to get this taken care of. Mr. Drobina stated he would like to point out that as the hospital in the Canal Winchester area grows, we will provide water for that. Mr. Wisniewski ascertained that the cost for half of the meter pit is approximately $23,000. He further clarified that should either entity need to use the emergency connection, the City Manager and the County Engineer need to jointly agree to open the valve and the water would be metered through the meter pit. Mrs. Hammond stated then user would pay for the water and Mr. Sauer clarified that the party receiving the water will pay the providing party the least expensive rate then being charged by the providing party. Mr. Wisniewski clarified that our rates and the County’s rates are very close right now. Mr. Sauer moved to approve and forward to Council; Mrs. Hammond seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Wisniewski, and Mr. Sauer voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 3-0.

(2) Staff Engineer’s Report. Ms VanCleave stated she had provided a written report and she would answer any questions. Ms VanCleave stated the storm sewer and water main replacement project for the Olde Pickerington Village, which is the project we received the OPWC grant for, is out for bid. She stated as this is a part of a stimulus package they would like to see it go to construction as quickly as possible. She continued the bids will be opened next week on April 30^th, and a Committee waiver and three readings at Council on the award of the contract would be appreciated. She stated she would provide a report on the bids prior to the next Council meeting. Mr. Wisniewski stated rather than waiving Committee action, just in case something came up and all Committee members were unable to sign a waiver, he would request a Special Service Committee meeting be scheduled for just prior to Council. He stated this would be the only item on the agenda so if someone is sick or whatever, the committee action can still occur. Mr. Wisniewski moved to schedule a Special Service Committee meeting on May 5, 2009, at 7:20 P.M. to handle this item; Mr. Sauer seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Sauer, Mr. Wisniewski, and Mrs. Hammond voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 3-0.

Mr. Wisniewski stated he would request this item be included on the Council agenda and should something occur that it does not come out of Committee it can be tabled at Council.

B. ACTION ITEMS:

(1) Review and discussion regarding TDS options and costs. Mr. Drobina some analyses have been run and they are waiting on the TDS results.

7. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CAPITAL PROJECTS.

A. WASTEWATER

(1) Wastewater Plant Expansion – Update. Mr. Drobina stated the construction is going well and is on schedule.

B. TRANSPORTATION:

(1) Diley Road Improvements Project – Update. Mr. Drobina stated the only two change orders we have had any control over was approximately $200,000 for a 14-inch force main so we wouldn’t have to tear up the road after it was completed, and a $20,000 change order to run a sanitary sewer under Diley Road so we wouldn’t have to tear up the road. He stated all other change orders have basically been ODOT driven. Mr. Hansley stated the City is not the applicant of the project; ODOT is, so we receive the change orders more as a formality. Mr. Hansley stated the largest change order so far has been for black top because the cost has gone up 100 percent since this project started. Mr. Sauer stated it appeared the noise walls have a gap under them and Ms VanCleave stated she believed that gap was left for drainage so they do not act as a dam.

C. WATER: No Report.

D. STORMWATER. No report.

8. CHAIRMAN. Mr. Wisniewski stated he would request for the next meeting a breakdown of our projections for water and wastewater, what our balances are, what they are projected to be in the next one to five years, and what projects that entails paying for. Mr. Sauer stated he would also like to receive a breakdown of our current expenses with regards to what we are extended for in terms of any loans that are outstanding. He stated Utility Fees Review had this information showing the break even point, and that way we could see what the current break even point is and how any decision made would impact that.

9. OTHER BUSINESS: No other business was brought forward.

10. ADJOURNMENT. There being nothing further, Mrs. Hammond moved to adjourn; Mr. Sauer 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., April 22, 2009.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:

________________________________

Lynda D. Yartin, Municipal Clerk