CITY OF PICKERINGTON

SERVICE COMMITTEE OF COUNCIL

CITY HALL, 100 LOCKVILLE ROAD

THURSDAY, APRIL 8, 2004

REGULAR MEETING

7:30 P.M.

1. ROLL CALL. Mr. Hackworth called the meeting to order at 7:30 P.M., with Mr. Hackworth, and Mr. O’Brien present. Mr. Parker was absent. Others present were: Frank Wiseman, Lynda Yartin, Jerry Dailey, Bob Mapes, Lance Schultz, Ed Drobina, Mike Maurer, Tony Dill, Matt Schneider, Vicki Bradley, Pat Elder, Doug Mitchell, Rany Butcher, Buzz Portune, Doyle Hartman, and others.

2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF March 18, 2004, Regular Meeting. Mr. O’Brien moved to approve; Mr. Hackworth seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Hackworth and Mr. O’Brien voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 2-0.

3. PLANNING AND ZONING

A. REPORTS:

(1) BZA Report. Mr. Schultz stated there were no cases in March and there will be one case in April.

(2) Planning and Zoning Representative Report (Mr. O’Brien) Mr. O’Brien stated this month the Planning and Zoning meeting falls after Service Committee, so they have not met since the last meeting.

B. ACTION ITEMS:

(1) Review and request for motion to approve draft ordinance to authorize the City Manager to enter into a contract with McBride Dale Clarion for land use planning services. Mr. Wiseman stated the amount in the draft ordinance was left blank, and if this committee concurred he would request the amount be not to exceed $85,000. Mr. Hackworth moved to forward the ordinance to Council with the not to exceed amount of $85,000; Mr. O’Brien seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Hackworth and Mr. O’Brien voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 2-0.

4. SERVICE DEPARTMENT

A. WATER UTILITY MAINTENANCE.

(1) Water services to Pearl Lane and Florence Drive (CIP# 98-01-002) – Update. Mr. Hackworth stated he understood the contractor started work this week. Mr. Drobina stated that was correct, however, the contractor did hit a couple of sewer laterals and it put a lot of mud into the main sewer system. He stated that has been taken care of and the City had one basement cleaned today. Mr. Drobina stated it is a 60-day project.

B. WASTEWATER UTILITY MAINTENANCE. No report.

C. STREET MAINTENANCE. No Report.

D. STORM WATER UTILITY MAINTENANCE.

(1) Long Road/Bowen Road Stormwater Discussion. Mr. Hackworth stated Mr. Hartman was present to provide an update on this study. Mr. Hartman stated as the Committee requested, he had reviewed the area that has the immediate flooding problem. He stated at 8351 Long Road it starts with a 10 inch pipe and then the pipe sizes vary from 8 to 12 inches down to a catch basin in front of 8173 Long Road, then a 12 dropping to a 10 inch pipe going down to the creek. Mr. Hartman stated last month we had discussed the bottleneck at 8301 Long Road, and it was his opinion as a temporary fix if the pipes there could be replaced with a 15 or 18 inch pipe it would help substantially. He stated this would increase the drainage capacity in that area. Mr. Hartman continued this will not solve all the problems, but it will help move the water downstream. Mr. Wiseman requested Mr. Hartman provide the Committee with some cost estimates at the next meeting, including the engineering design costs. Mr. Wiseman stated he is also in discussion with the Army Corps of Engineers, through Representative Hobson’s office, and they are actually recommending a larger study area than we have been looking at. Mr. Wiseman stated we may be able to get funding for the entire project, both engineering and construction. Mr. Hartman stated he would have some cost figures for this temporary fix at the next meeting.

E. SCIP (Formerly Issue II Program) – Update. Mr. Wiseman stated we do not have the application date as yet, and we do plan on submitting the application for the Long Road/Diley Road intersection work.

F. Review and request for motion to approve draft ordinance to authorize the City Manager to write off uncollectible water, sanitary sewer, and stormwater charges. Mr. Mapes stated there are cases where people have filed bankruptcy, they move away and we have no way to find them, and they are still on our books six or seven years later. He stated this would provide a method for us to take them off the books when they are not collectible. Mr. Mapes stated we will continue to use all methods for collection, but there is a point when they become uncollectible.

Mr. Mapes stated further currently a means of either collecting or enforcing collection for utilities is that a lien can be put against the property of a homeowner, then it is collected when the property is sold, however, this does not apply with apartments. Mr. Mapes stated we were trying to develop some sort of co-signing process where we will go after the tenant, but if for whatever reason we cannot collect, we can collect from the property owner. Mr. Mapes stated he had drafted the following language for discussion purposes: “The owner of any property where water service is to be provided shall co-sign as the responsible party with any tenant. Should such tenant not timely pay all applicable water charges, the owner shall be responsible for their payment and such unpaid water bills shall be a lien upon the property and may be added to the Auditor’s Tax Duplicate as provided by this chapter in the Ohio Revised Code.” Mr. Mapes stated this would help us in the case of apartment buildings, etc., where everything is in the tenant’s name. Mr. Hackworth stated his concern was that a landlord cannot legally go in and turn water off, but the City can do that. Mr. Mapes stated he was soliciting input from this Committee on this procedure and he hoped to have a draft ordinance for next month.

5. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CAPITAL PROJECTS

A. WASTEWATER

(1) Wastewater Plant Expansion (CIP# 02-03-005) – Update. Mr. Wiseman stated he had provided his recommendation to the Committee, and he does still recommend awarding the contract, without the alternate, to Crace Construction Co. Mr. Buzz Portune stated he was present representing PAE and Associates, and he had provided a position statement to Mr. Mapes. Mr. Mapes stated that was distributed to the Committee members. Mr. Hackworth requested Mrs. Yartin provide copies of this position statement to all Council members as well. Mr. Protune stated Mr. Pat Elder, the President of PAE and Associates, is present this evening, as well as, Mr. Doug Mitchell, the Vice President. Mr. Portune stated if it is the recommendation of staff, and there is the assumption that the contract as awarded should not include the deduct alternate, then there would be no argument as to the impact of the recommendation and the letter of directive from the Ohio EPA. He stated if you compare the numbers of the PAE and Wagner Smith bid with the combined bid submitted by Crace Construction, PAE’s base bid is $79,000 less than the one submitted by Crace. He stated the combined electrical bid of PAE and Wagner Smith is $50,000 less than the combined bid of Crace Construction. Mr. Portune stated the law is fairly clear that when a public works contract is being let, it will be awarded to the lowest and best bidder who is both responsive and responsible. He stated it appeared the issue being addressed by this Committee is whether PAE is a responsible bidder. Mr. Portune stated he has not had the opportunity to review the basis of the recommendation the award be made to Crace, but he would suggest it is useful to look back at the action of this Service Committee and the action of Council as a whole when this project was originally bid in the fall of 2003. He continued that at that time PAE was recommended by the Service Committee and accepted by Council as a responsible bidder, and to the extent that something has changed or if additional information has been obtained, he would appreciate the opportunity to address and respond to that. Mr. Portune stated he had asked Mr. Elder to look at the jobs that have been performed by PAE and listed as references in their submittal as part of the bid package, and to contact those references and ask what type of experience they had with PAE; whether the work was done property, if they were a contractor that could be dealt with, whether the work and the ability to relate and to have the work done by PAE in fact was what an owner, a city, a municipality was entitled to under the contract. Mr. Portune stated they had assembled a package of those findings and testimonial letters and provided these copies to the Committee members. Mr. Hackworth clarified there is a protest procedure to be followed. Mr. Hackworth stated he did not think this Committee should be made into a public hearing, and he did not feel this was the place to try and do that. Mr. Protune stated as he saw it, there was a first reading on an ordinance to recommend the award to Crace Construction based upon the inclusion of the deduct alternate. He stated since that first reading by Council there has been action taken, and further information provided by the Ohio EPA, that has caused a re-thinking of whether the contract should be awarded the way it was initially presented to Council. He stated what he had heard this evening was a recommendation it go back to Council with a recommendation that it be awarded without the deduct alternate. He stated if you do not include the deduct alternate, Crace is not the low bid, PAE and Associates is the low bid. He stated he respectfully suggested the very role of the Service Committee is to look at that issue and determine if PAE is in fact the low bid, why is it that they are not being recommended for this contract. He stated it was very appropriately back in Service Committee for a review and evaluation and then a presentation back to Council with a recommendation. Mr. Mapes stated quite some time ago Council adopted the lowest responsive and responsible bidder statute, not the best and lowest, and if the Committee finds that PAE, who is the lowest bidder, and if this committee believes that PAE is not a responsible bidder they must make a finding of that fact, we must notify them of the reason why we believe they are not the lowest, responsible bidder by certified mail, they have a right to request a protest within five days of receiving that notice and have a hearing on that protest. He stated Council cannot take final action until they address whatever is raised at the protest. Mr. Mapes stated the issue before this committee at this point would be if PAE is the lowest responsible and responsive bidder. Mr. Mapes stated we have our engineer checking the references provided and it is a different engineer than the firm who checked them last time. He stated a set of questions were asked of the references they provided to us and the responses we got back are what Mr. Wiseman has presented to the committee. Mr. Mapes stated we must respond to PAE in writing of the reasons we do not consider them a responsible bidder. Mr. Dailey clarified the City has not done anything wrong to this point. Mr. Mapes further clarified this was referred by to Committee from Council to discuss the EPA issue and to determine if we should award the contract without the deduct alternate. Mr. Mapes stated if the deduct is removed, then this Committee must address PAE being the lowest and most responsive bidder. Mr. Mapes stated if it is determined by this Committee that PAE is a responsible bidder, then the contract must be awarded to them. He stated if it is determined they are not a responsible bidder, then you can go to the next lowest responsive, responsible bidder. Mr. Hackworth stated the Committee does have the recommendation of our engineer and the City Manager.

Mr. Elder stated he would like the opportunity to address the Committee. Mr. Elder stated last September they picked up drawings and paid a deposit to bid on this project thinking they had a good chance to get the job. He stated they worked hard on this, they spent about $25,000 in labor and phone calls and all the things it takes to make the bid. He stated they were the low bidder and they had to hold their bid for 120 days. He stated in December they notified the City that there would be some very big price increases, and they anticipated getting the contract around the middle of January. He stated that did not happen and he did not know why that did not happen. Mr. Elder continued that in February they were called and asked to extend their bid, however, in January steel suppliers raised their prices. Mr. Elder stated they had agreed to extend their bid if the City would help with the escalation, and when they were told no they had no choice but not to extend their bid. Mr. Elder stated when the project was re-bid they spent another $10,000-$15,000 on the bid and, again, they were the low bidder and they thought they had a job. He stated they did not come this evening for a hearing, but to talk to the Committee. He stated they have done a lot of work on this bid and they want to do this job for the City.

Mr. O’Brien stated the Committee received a lot of information tonight as well as in the past few weeks. He stated he would like to have time to take all of this information, put it together and review it. Mr. O’Brien stated further he has not had the opportunity to speak with the City’s engineer and he has a lot of questions for him. He stated to give everyone a fair chance he would like to have this remain in Committee until he has time to get all of his questions answered.

Mr. Mapes stated he would just caution the Committee that bids are only good for so long, and there is the issue of costs going up. Mr. Dailey stated the bid prices are good until June 10, 2004.

Mr. Hackworth stated he agreed with Mr. O’Brien that they have received a lot of information tonight that they have not had a chance to review. He stated he also has some issues with the financial numbers on this project. Mr. Dailey stated the contract award would not be effective until 30 days after the third reading. He stated if there is a reading at the next Council meeting and one reading at the first meeting in May, with the 30 day waiting period, it would just make the timeframe of when the bid prices are good. Mr. Hackworth clarified the Committee can call a special meeting with a 24 hour notice. Mr. Hackworth stated he would like to have this remain on the agenda at this time, and if necessary the Service Committee can call a special meeting.

Mr. Dailey stated his firm did check the references provided by PAE, and those results will come out in the protest procedure. Mr. O’Brien stated as he understood it, typically a protest does not happen until a contract is awarded. He stated once a contract is awarded, then everyone that wants to file a protest may do so. Mr. Mapes stated the problem now is that we have to work with specific timeframes. He stated if the protest in this case were filed after the contract was awarded, we would be beyond the timeframes we must work within. Mr. Hackworth stated again he would like to have this continued on the agenda.

B. TRANSPORTATION:

(1) Cycle Way/Freedom Way (CIP# 02-03-013) – Update. Mr. Dailey stated he had nothing new to report.

(2) Courtright Road.

(A) Courtright Road Extension Project, Phase III (CIP#s 03-03-011 and 03-03-012) – Update. Mr. Dailey stated he had no update at this time.

(3) Diley Road Realignment:

(A) Diley Road/256 Intersection Improvement Project, Phase II – Update. Mr. Dailey stated the Committee had received a progress report on this project.

(B) Diley Road/S.R. 256 Intersection Improvement Project, Phase III – Update. Mr. Dailey stated based on the Committee’s previous approval this project has been modified and redesigned to shift away from Cherry Hill and should be ready to advertise next week.

(4) Diley Road Improvements Project:

(A) MORPC/ODOT Project (CIP#98-03-005 and 03-03-005) Mr. Dailey stated the date for the public meeting notice is out and the meeting will be April 22, 2004, from 4:00 P.M.-7:00 P.M. at Peace United Methodist Church on Diley Road. Mr. Dailey stated notices will also be mailed to all of the affected property owners. Mr. Dailey stated anyone can come to this meeting and it is a chance to receive input from the community.

(5) Downtown Revitalization Project Phase III, IV, and V and West Columbus Street Public Parking Lot (CIP#s 02-06-001, 03-06-001, & 03-06-003) – Update. Mr. Dailey stated work will start next week to finish this project. He stated street closures will be kept to a minimum and advance notice will be provided. He stated the project should be complete by June 1^st.

(6) Cover/Ebright Connector (CIP#02-03-010)

(A) Pickerington Health Care Access Road – Update. Mr. Mapes stated he will follow-up on his last conversation with the doctor’s attorney.

(7) I-70/S.R. 256 Joint Improvements Project with Reynoldsburg and ODOT – Update. No Report.

(8) Traffic Signal Update. Mr. Dailey stated there have been two problems recently. He stated the problem at Yarmouth may be caused by power surges, and they will look at that to see if there is a recommendation. He stated further there was a problem with the signal at Kroger and he hoped that was taken care of. Mr. Dailey stated he has submitted a TIP update plan and access plan update and he is ready to discuss that whenever the Committee is ready. Mr. Hackworth asked to have this added to the agenda for the next meeting.

C. WATER

(1) Additional. Water tower – Update. Mr. Wiseman stated he has no update at this time.

D. STORMWATER. No Report.

6. CHAIRMAN.

A. Review and discussion regarding Community First requested traffic study. Mr. Hackworth stated he would like to have this remain on the agenda.

7. OTHER BUSINESS.

Mr. Mapes stated he had provided a draft ordinance to the Committee regarding the building permit issue that was discussed with Council earlier. He stated he tried to address the concerns of the transferring of permits being allowed in subdivisions between improved lots. Mr. Mapes stated this legislation provides for a person who has been issued a specific permit for a specific house plan for a specific lot or parcel, if in a subdivision where all required infrastructure improvements have been completed, may have the building department transfer the permit to another lot or another parcel or to another person so long as the new lot or parcel, if in a subdivision, has all the required subdivision improvements in place. Mr. Mapes stated this creates no new permits so within our building moratorium it will not give anyone anything more than what they have. Mr. Mapes stated further if a different house plan is desired or is necessary, then they must go through the whole process again. He stated it is clear that these transfers do not extend the life of the permit and these permits are not subject to the moratorium so they are not lottery issues. Mr. Mapes stated he would request this be moved forward so it can be in effect prior to the next lottery and it will help with the BIA lawsuit. He stated the next lottery is set for May 10^th, therefore, he has written the legislation with emergency language. Mr. O’Brien moved to approve and forward to Council; Mr. Hackworth seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. O’Brien and Mr. Hackworth voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 2-0.

Mr. Schultz stated he would like to mention that the County has indicated they will provide mapping services for the City. He stated it would be his recommendation that we transfer from the engineering maps to the County GIS system. He stated the County is doing these at no cost other than the cost of printing. Mr. Schultz stated the County keeps an inventory of the parcels up to date daily, and he felt it was a good service for the community.

8. ADJOURNMENT. There being nothing further, Mr. O’Brien moved to adjourn; Mr. Hackworth seconded the motion. Mr. Hackworth and Mr. O’Brien voted “Aye.” Motion carried, 2-0. The Service Committee adjourned at 9:20 P.M., April 8, 2004.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:

________________________________

Lynda D. Yartin, Municipal Clerk