WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 18, 2009

REGULAR MEETING

6:30 P.M.

1. ROLL CALL. Mr. Wisniewski called the meeting to order at 6:30 P.M., with Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Wisniewski, and Mr. Sauer present. No members were absent. Others present were: Chief Mike Taylor, Lynda Yartin, Jeff Fix, Mike Sabatino, Ed Drobina, Lance Schultz, Greg Bachman, Danny Mahaffey, Tony Barletta, Steve Starr, Rachel Schofeld, Mike McKinley, Daryl Baker, and others.

2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF October 21, 2009, Regular Meeting. Mr. Sauer moved to approve; Mrs. Hammond seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Sauer, Mr. Wisniewski, and Mrs. Hammond voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 3-0.

3. COMMUNITY COMMENTS: Mr. Steve Starr stated he would like to address the Committee regarding the problems he has had with the Diley Road project. He stated he has nine issues that are still not finished on his property. Mr. Starr stated the first issue is his property pins that locate his property on Diley Road. Mr. Starr stated the contractor removed them and no-one seems to know who is going to put them back in. Mr. Starr stated he would like to know who is going to put them back in, and when they are put in a new plot plan will have to be drawn for him. Mr. Starr stated the Fairfield County EPA, the Board of Health, and he have requested an as-built drawing for all of the utilities on his property in April of this year and no-one seems to know who is going to prepare that or when it will be done. He stated he was told an as-built drawing may be done a year after the job is complete, and his understanding is that as-built drawings are made as they go along, so he would like to know who is going to do the drawings. Mr. Starr stated there is a hole in his yard that has been there for two years, and was filled, but unfortunately they buried an old dead tree in the bottom of the hole when they filled it. He stated the individual from the State said that was acceptable backfill, but he did not see how a tree that is going to rot and make the ground sink is acceptable, and he did not see that as being proper backfill. Mr. Starr stated he has two driveways and the incline on driveway number 2, when pulling off the approach is about three and one-half feet. He stated he has a gravel based driveway and when you go up it throws the gravel back out on the sidewalk and into the road. He stated he did not know if it was because it was the wrong gravel or because it is just too steep. He stated when you go down the driveway, it doesn’t throw gravel back up into the yard. He stated he would like to know why that happens and he feels it is a safety hazard throwing gravel out onto the sidewalk with kids riding bicycles and walking there, but no-one seems to want to address this. Mr. Starr continued that driveway number 1 is to narrow, the approach to the driveway is 21 or 22 feet and his understanding is that it was supposed to be 30 feet wide, just like driveway number 2. Mr. Starr stated everyone agreed upon that one afternoon, and the next morning someone changed their mind and made one 30 feet and the other 21 or 22 feet, and he would like to know why. Mr. Starr stated the driveways they took out were 76 and 66 feet wide. Mr. Starr stated he also had downspouts on his house that used to go to a ditch out on Diley Road, they used to empty into the ditch or what they call daylight. He stated they had a meeting and discussed the downspouts terminating or emptying through the curb like they do in almost all other areas, but at the last minute the contractor put them in the storm sewer because they told him his water was polluted and if it went out on the street someone would raise hell. Mr. Starr stated he looked into this, and he knew Mr. Drobina had received a letter from the EPA, stating his water was not polluted coming out of the downspouts so there is no reason that it couldn’t have gone through the curb. He stated it would have been cheaper, and now going into the storm sewer he has no access to clean them out unless you send someone up the storm sewer to clean them out. He stated Mr. Drobina had offered to have someone clean them out from the storm sewer to the easement, which would no doubt be a big help. Mr. Starr stated, however, in order to do that they have to put concrete inspection boxes in the easement and they are eyesores, they look terrible, and there is no reason for them to be there if they had done it right the first time, like they said they were going to do. Mr. Starr stated another issue is the grading of his yard. He stated that is still in the process of being done since September 9^th, and this is the third time they have tried to grade it and they still can’t get it right. He stated he can never contact them to find out why, they just show up one day and do something and then leave. He stated they have said they have completed it three times. Mr. Starr stated Mr. Drobina is aware that you cannot contact them, you call and they won’t return the call, he has sent them e-mails and they won’t return his e-mails. Mr. Starr stated he contacted Chief Taylor today to get some action and somehow, miraculously, someone called Mr. Drobina and told him they will be out there on Friday or Monday. Mr. Starr stated, however, they told him last week they would be out Friday or Monday, and that has already passed, so he does not have a lot of faith in what they say. Mr. Starr stated he does not doubt the Chief, but these people just don’t tell anyone the truth. Mr. Starr stated in the negotiations for the original deal on Diley Road, the land acquisition company offered to make a turn around on his number 2 driveway so he did not have to back out across a four lane road. He stated they told him to get two estimates, which he did, and one was $2,800 and the other was $1,800. Mr. Starr stated he could not do that work until the final grading was done because he could not get elevations to have the driveway cut in, and the final grading is still not done. He stated the most current estimate he got to have that same work done, three years later, is $5,900 and he is being told he should pay the difference. Mr. Starr stated he did not see why he should pay the difference because they prevented him from getting the work done by not finishing their job.

Mr. Wisniewski asked Mr. Drobina if he could provide any information on these issues. Mr. Drobina stated with regard to the property pins, all he has ever been able to find out is that they will be put back when the project is completed. Mr. Starr stated the road has been completed since October or November, so why couldn’t they put his pins back. Mr. Drobina stated as far as the as-built drawings, he has asked ODOT for those and the inspector for ODOT said he would get them to us, but he has not as yet. Mr. Drobina stated with regard to the hole in the yard, the ODOT individual did say it was fine to fill it in that manner. Mr. Drobina stated Mr. Starr’s previous driveway was gravel, but it had grass in it so it did not kick out. Mr. Starr stated his other driveway was flat and they lowered the road three and one-half feet, that is the incline he is talking about and that is why the gravel goes out in there or it is the wrong gravel. Mr. Drobina stated with regard to the driveways, he and Mr. Starr talked to the contractor at one time about making it a 30 foot drive, and then another time Mr. Starr stated he did not want any more than what his neighbor got. Mr. Drobina stated after looking at the neighbor’s he told Mr. Starr they would take out the driveway and put back the typical driveway, which is what they did, and this is a 21 or 22 foot driveway. Mr. Drobina stated in meeting a few days later with Greg Butcher, the contractor, and ODOT everyone agreed the northern driveway would be 30 feet wide and leave the southern one the width it is. Mr. Drobina stated with regard to the downspouts, they had discussed with the contractor about delighting those out rather than tying the into the storm sewer. He stated the contractor did some elevations and the pipe was going to be up in the cement of the sidewalk if they went through the curb, so they tied them into the storm sewer. Mr. Starr stated the contractor came out and checked the elevation of the downspouts and there was clearance for the pipe to pass underneath the sidewalk and go through the curb if they would have put them in like they said they were going to do originally and the downspouts would have been in before the sidewalk was even there. Mr. Drobina stated they did put inspection boxes in so Mr. Starr would have access to his downspouts to clean them out. Mr. Drobina stated he had offered to clean them from the inspection box down to the storm sewer and Mr. Starr said he did not want him to do that. Mr. Starr stated he had stated he did not see why it should be the city’s responsibility to clean up where a contractor screwed up. Mr. Wisniewski inquired if Mr. Drobina saw any liability on the part of the contractor that should be taken up with them through ODOT since this is an ODOT project. Mr. Drobina continued that the gravel in the driveway is per plan and he was informed today that they would be out either Friday or Monday to take care of the grading of the yard. Mr. Drobina stated Mr. Starr was paid extra for him to put in the turn around or connector. Mr. Wisniewski stated the issue is this is an ODOT project; it is not the City’s project. He stated the City’s staff has done work on it through our staff to a certain extent, and clarified that ODOT is the agency that will say when the project is completed. Mr. Wisniewski further clarified the hole on Mr. Starr’s property has been filled in and if it appears later we can go back and take care of it. Mr. Drobina stated he would talk to them again about the property pins because there are other properties that are still missing the pins. Mr. Wisniewski further clarified that Mr. Starr was the only resident that requested the as built drawings. Mr. Starr stated in the original agreement in 2006 with Mr. Hillman he requested that he have extra wide driveways, and that is in Mr. Hillman’s notes. Mr. Starr stated originally when the project started they were only going to give him one driveway and he argued with them for a year to prove he was supposed to get two. Mr. Wisniewski stated he understood Mr. Starr’s frustration, but he was not sure what else could be done from the City’s perspective. He stated Mr. Drobina is working on getting the property pins replaced, obtaining the as built drawings, and the grading of the yard is being actively worked and Mr. Bachman would be able to look at the graded slope. Mr. Wisniewski stated staff has spent considerable time working on this and they will continue to do so to the best of their abilities, but we are dealing with ODOT as this was their project. Mr. Wisniewski stated we will do the best that we can, but he would not guarantee that Mr. Starr would be 100 percent satisfied. Mr. Starr further questioned what would be done about the turn around in the driveway where he would have to spend an additional $3,000 out of his pocket to get it done because he couldn’t get it done when they told him to. Mr. Wisniewski inquired if the City could do the work for the amount of money that Mr. Starr was given and Mr. Drobina stated he would have to see what Mr. Starr wanted done. He stated if he just wanted it graded and gravel hauled in he could do that. Mr. Wisniewski asked Mr. Drobina to talk to Mr. Starr and see what he wanted to see if the City could take care of it and then let this Committee know what was happening. Mr. Wisniewski asked that this remain on the agenda for the next meeting.

4. DEVELOPMENT:

A. Development Director’s Report. Mr. Schultz stated he had provided a written report and would answer any questions.

5. PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT:

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

(1) Planning and Zoning Representative Report. Mr. Sauer Planning and Zoning met on November 10^th and approved a detached garage on North Center Street, and temporary directional signage for Rutherford Auto Body. He stated the Commission had also approved a memorial for the former Violet Grange location.

B. ACTION ITEMS:

(1) Review and discussion regarding preparation of Refugee Road Study. Mr. Wisniewski stated he was assuming the actions in the report were back to back in the timeframe and none of them could be performed simultaneously. Mr. Schultz stated the first three are overlapping and could be done in three to six months depending on the workload in the office. Mr. Schultz stated he had spoken to a consultant and this is typically a nine month to one year project because you have meetings with Committees and Commissions and you need to digest information. He stated this would be very similar to the Diley Road corridor study we did in the past. Mr. Wisniewski stated he understood that, and the consultant was dedicated to doing that whereas Mr. Schultz had other responsibilities. Mr. Schultz stated he would like to think his department could get this done in a year, but he wanted to put the caveat in there that it depended on the workload of the department. Mr. Wisniewski stated then that Mr. Schultz felt he could do this project if that was what the Committee desired. Mr. Schultz stated that the Planner in his department would do most of the graphics and field work, he would do the writing, and he would have to have someone put it together. He stated either the Planning and Zoning Commission or this Committee could be the steering committee, so some details would have to be worked out as we move forward. Mrs. Hammond stated she would like to give Mr. Schultz’ department a chance to do this, and Mr. Wisniewski stated he felt this was an important project because there is a lot of open land in there that we would like to develop. Mr. Sauer stated he agreed this was the time to do this study. Mr. Schultz stated he would also work closely with the Engineering and Service departments on this project as well. Mr. Wisniewski moved to request the City Manager have the Planning and Zoning Department start the Refugee Road Study and provide monthly updates to the Service Committee; Mr. Sauer seconded the motion. Mr. Schultz stated he would like to clarify that this Committee would like for him to work through the Planning and Zoning Commission in a process similar to the one used for the Diley Road Study, and keep this Committee updated monthly. Roll call was taken with Mr. Sauer, Mrs. Hammond, and Mr. Wisniewski voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 3-0.

Mr. Starr stated he had one further question for the Committee as the ODOT inspector had told him that the City planned on annexing his property to the City and he would like to know if there was any truth to that. Mr. Wisniewski stated the City has no plans to annex Mr. Starr’s property or annexing any houses into the City.

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. Mr. Wisniewski clarified Well No. 2 at the Diley well field is just being cleaned because we try to clean one every year. Mr. Drobina stated he had done a pump test on the well just prior to it so he could see what it was doing so we could test it when they get done. Mr. Wisniewski further clarified with regard to the resident who claimed the construction of the wastewater plant caused cracks in their basement, that prior to construction the contractor hired a firm to go to each of the houses that backed up to the property and take pictures inside the houses. Mr. Drobina stated he had received an inquiry about renting the house at 10093 Diley Road that the City owns. He stated his plan has always been to tear that house down, but he wanted to make the Committee aware of this request. Mr. Wisniewski clarified this is the house that ODOT has been using during the Diley Road project, and the Committee stated they did not feel the City wanted to get into renting the property. Mr. Drobina stated further that he would be meeting with the Township next week to discuss maintenance of vehicles and the possibility of trading a few roads for plowing. Mr. Wisniewski clarified leaf pick up has started and is going well.

Mr. Wisniewski stated he would like to address the issue at the entrance to the Hermann and Henry Eye Doctor’s offices. He stated going southbound on S.R. 256, it now looks like you cannot turn left into their offices because the northbound left turn lane on S.R. 256, turning into the new empty commercial development, cuts right in front of the eye care business. Mr. Bachman stated with the signal going in at the intersection of Commerce Drive there are not a lot of options. He stated the signal dictates the left turn lane and that turn lane extends down to the eye doctor’s entrance. He stated you could potentially shorten up the left turn lane, it is sized for the full development of the Zane tract and it will not be fully developed for some time, so that could be a temporary fix. Mr. Wisniewski stated perhaps we can put signage up on southbound to indicate where their entrance is, because it really looks like you cannot make a left hand turn into that business any longer, and it is not our desire to cut off access to businesses that have been in the City for 30 years. Mr. Bachman stated he did not recommend signage and you can make a left into there even though it is not as clear as it was before. Mr. Sauer questioned if it would be an option to move the entrance to the eye care business a little south, and Mr. Wisniewski stated that would put it very near PASA’s entrance. Mr. Wisniewski asked if Mr. Bachman could look into finding a solution to this problem.

(2) Engineer’s Report. Mr. Bachman stated he had provided a written report and would be happy to answer any questions.

a. Water Master Plan and Sewer Master Plan - Update. Mr. Bachman stated he had met with the consultant for the Water Master Plan and he would be meeting with the consultant for the Sewer Master Plan tomorrow. He stated he would confer to them that the money we have in the budget is the money that we have, period. He stated if we need more work done to complete the study we would utilize his staff and Mr. Drobina’s staff to do some of that leg work. Mr. Bachman stated the work on the Hill Road culvert should begin Monday morning and word about the closure on S.R. 256 has been provided to local news agencies, the fire department, the Township, and County Engineer. Mr. Drobina stated a message board will be put up tomorrow at Diley Road with notification of the closure.

B. ACTION ITEMS:

(1) Review and discussion regarding TDS options and costs. Mr. Drobina stated he has not received the final report, however, he was told the results were positive. Mr. Wisniewski clarified that when we receive the final report we will provide it to our attorney who will contact the EPA.

(2) Review and discussion regarding new water tower paint color and logo. Mr. Sauer clarified that Mr. Bachman’s recommendation would be to paint the tower white with no logo. Mrs. Hammond clarified that we will be getting bids on three tank styles and then a decision will be made on which style we would like. Mrs. Hammond stated she felt the water tower should be as unobtrusive as possible. Mrs. Hammond moved to direct the new water tower be painted white with no logo; Mr. Sauer seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Wisniewski, Mr. Sauer, and Mrs. Hammond voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 3-0.

7. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CAPITAL PROJECTS.

A. WASTEWATER

(1) Wastewater Plant Expansion – Update. Mr. Drobina stated the project was moving along on schedule.

B. TRANSPORTATION:

(1) Diley Road Improvements Project – Update. Mr. Wisniewski stated he understood Mr. Bachman had received some calls regarding the speed limit on Diley Road. Mr. Bachman stated that he has received questions regarding increasing the speed limit from 35 to 45 MPH. Mr. Bachman stated it was his understanding that when the public meetings were held at the beginning of this project, statements were made about keeping the speed at 35 MPH even after construction. Mr. Bachman stated he would point out that it is difficult to stay at 35 MPH on that road now. Mr. Wisniewski stated he thought there had been a commitment from City Council to the people who lived along that road, because they had grave concerns about increased speed. Mr. Wisniewski stated with no buffer there were concerns about cars jumping the curb and a very heavily used bike path so close to the road. Mr. Wisniewski stated he felt that 35 MPH speed limit was a commitment that Council had made. Mr. Daryl Baker stated he is a resident of the Manchester subdivision that is on Diley Road, and although he knew Mr. Wisniewski meant well, he was present this evening because he felt the 35 MPH speed limit was too low, and he stated he has spoken to a number of his neighbors and they also feel it is to low. Mr. Baker stated he had also spoken to ODOT and he had information from their speed zone studies that talk about artificially low speed limits. Mr. Baker stated one concern is that Diley Road will become a speed trap, and ODOT refers to the increased risk of accidents because of artificially low speed limits. Mr. Baker stated he felt that 45 MPH would be much more realistic because he felt you would be hard pressed to find anyone who is not doing 45 MPH already. Mr. Wisniewski stated he understood and he drives Diley Road three or four times a day, but he also knew when we were beginning the project people were lined up out the door complaining about the speed limit going to 45 MPH, the project, etc. Mr. Baker stated he was afraid this would create a bad image in the community if people think it is a speed trap they will avoid it, and they will also get angry with our police. Mr. Baker stated he knew it was the police department’s job to enforce the speed, but if you are going 35 MPH on Diley, with five lanes, he thought you could drive 45 easily and still make those turns. Mr. Baker stated he had spoken to so many of his neighbors who feel the same as he does, and if there was a petition right now he thought everyone would feel 45 MPH was a safe speed for Diley. Mr. Wisniewski stated he would request Mr. Bachman look into this and if Mrs. Yartin could pull the records from those hearings he would like to look at that. Mr. Bachman stated he would provide some of those ODOT journals for Council and typically, if you don’t have a police presence out there all the time, people are going to drive what they feel is appropriate for the road. Mr. Bachman stated he would also like to do an analysis of a speed study and see how that comes out. Mr. Wisniewski stated he would like to send this to Safety as speed limits are a safety issue. Mr. Sauer stated as a member of Safety Committee he would appreciate receiving the information Mr. Bachman would provide.

a. Review and Discussion of Diley Road project complaints (Mr. Starr). Mr. Wisniewski stated this had been discussed earlier in the meeting.

C. WATER: No Report.

D. STORMWATER. No report.

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

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

10. ADJOURNMENT. There being nothing further, Mr. Sauer 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 7:35 P.M., November 18, 2009.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:

________________________________

Lynda D. Yartin, Municipal Clerk