CITY OF PICKERINGTON

CITIZEN’S TASK FORCE FOR PROPERTY MAINTENANCE

CITY HALL, 100 LOCKVILLE ROAD

MONDAY, DECEMBER 2, 2004

REGULAR MEETING AGENDA

6:30 P.M.

Ms Gilleland stated Mr. Keith Smith has agreed to be Chairman of this task Force. Mr. Smith called the meeting to order at 6:30 P.M., with roll call as follows: Mr. Barletta, Ms Trout, Mr. Smith, Ms Goodrich, Ms Carter, Mr. Sells, Dr. Henry, Mr. Bowen, and Mr. Walburn were present. Mr. King was absent. Others present were Judy Gilleland, Lance Schultz, George Parsley, Lynda Yartin, Larry Rousch, and others.

Ms Gilleland requested if anyone would be unable to attend a meeting, if they could notify Mrs. Yartin, Mr. Schultz or her office as soon as possible it would be very helpful. She stated further, if there would not be a quorum it would give staff time to notify other members of the committee.

Mr. Smith stated the first topic for discussion this evening was the newly adopted ordinance regarding garbage disposal. Ms Gilleland stated what we hope to accomplish with this committee is to look at various areas of the Code that have been identified, consider various changes, and make a recommendation to Council for revisions. Ms Gilleland stated the garbage disposal ordinance came about because a council member received several telephone calls on this issue, it was discussed in Safety Committee and forwarded to Council. Ms Gilleland stated a fourth degree misdemeanor is nothing out of the ordinary and we do not throw people in jail for a violation of this section. Ms Carter questioned if this committee would review the issue of the containers provided by our waste removal contractor being larger than our Code currently allows. Ms Gilleland stated we can look at that when we look at the entire garbage/rubbish section of the Code. A copy of the garbage disposal ordinance was provided to all committee members.

Ms Gilleland stated she would like to start out by looking at areas or issues that are giving staff the most problems in terms of gray areas and that we are seeing regularly. She stated once those areas have been worked through we can start reviewing other sections of the Code.

Mr. Smith stated he would like to ask staff the brief the committee on the current problems they are experiencing with each topic prior to opening it to discussion by the committee. He stated he thought this process would allow each topic to be worked through.

Mr. Smith stated the next item for discussion was with regard to vehicle and trailer parking (on and off-street parking). Mr. Schultz stated Code Enforcement has recently been moved from the Building Department to the Planning and Zoning Department, and one of the goals of Council is to improve enforcement of our Code. Ms Gilleland stated with the help of this committee what we hoped to accomplish is to define our Code more clearly so we don’t have to do guesswork, and where we can show a resident who might be in violation the section of the Code that states the violation. Mr. Schultz added that there are several instances where a violation crosses into different sections of the Code and we would like to develop a streamlined process for enforcement by the proper office.

Mr. Smith stated as he understood it, this committee would be looking at the various sections and making recommendations, but would not actually be writing the legislation. Mr. Schultz stated that was correct. Mr. Smith stated further this committee would be looking at subjects, not sections of the Code, so that might require jumping around in the Code.

Mr. Parsley stated with regard to parking of vehicles and trailers, one of the biggest issues they deal with is a resident parking a utility trailer in his driveway or on the street. Mr. Parsley stated if this is an individual’s means of making a living, such as a landscape or lawn care business, he didn’t know how much latitude that resident should receive. Mr. Parsley stated our Code currently states that you are allowed to park a utility trailer in the driveway for 48 hours in any calendar week. He stated if you park the trailer in the driveway each night then you are exceeding the time allowed. He stated in one section of the Code if you leave it parked in the street, attached to the vehicle, that is not a problem, but in another section, it is a problem. He stated these are the types of issues he has to deal with. Mr. Smith stated it appeared there is a fine line between storage and parking. He stated he understood that “storage” means you have a travel trailer you take out “x” number of times a year, versus “parking” meaning you use it every single work day. Mr. Smith continued we have to determine where we want to draw the line, such as parking versus storing. Ms Trout stated if it is used every day that is one thing, but if it is left in the driveway, propped up by blocks to keep it from rolling, that is another thing. She further stated if the trailer is used for lawn care or whatever, that is a seasonal business, so during the off season would it be determined to be stored rather than parked. Ms Trout further stated if one person parks their trailer on the street, then others will do it and you will have a row of large trailers parked on the street with kids darting in and out on their bikes. She stated she felt the biggest issue with parking these trailers on the street in residential neighborhoods was that it was a safety issue. Mr. Smith stated he did not like on street parking in residential neighborhoods at all, but our Code does allow it. Mr. Walburn stated he felt the issue would be clarifying the definition between trailer and vehicle so it is clear if parking is allowed. Mr. Smith stated there is a definition of trailer in the Code, however, perhaps it should be expanded to cover these utility types of trailers. Dr. Henry stated perhaps the issue would be if an exception should be made for commercial trailers that are used every day as a part of the resident’s profession, and then not allowing any other trailers to be parked in the driveway. Dr. Henry stated he agreed then that some clarification should be made between “parking” and “storing” a trailer. Mr. Schultz clarified that this is one example where various sections of the Code are involved. He stated driveway parking is covered under the zoning code and on street parking is covered by the traffic code. Mr. Smith stated if these commercial or utility trailers are in the garage, then there is no problem. Mr. Bowen inquired if we had any idea of how other communities address this, and Ms Gilleland stated they are all over the board. Mr. Sells clarified that any appeal on code enforcement was heard by the Safety Committee of Council. Mr. Bowen clarified that Mr. Parsley finds anywhere from three to seven of these utility trailers in any one neighborhood at a time. Mr. Smith stated he felt the decision should be made if any commercial utility trailer could be parked in the driveway or not. Mr. Walburn stated the Code does address travel trailers, boat trailers, and recreation trailers regarding on street parking, but it does not mention commercial trailers at all. Mr. Bowen stated he did not feel we want to legislate to much in terms of restricting these trailers. He stated he felt it seemed unreasonable to force someone to store their trailer somewhere every day. He stated he felt it was reasonable to require RVs, boats, etc., that are not used every day to be stored off site, but to force someone to do something with their trailer that they use every day to make their living, was unreasonable. Mr. Smith stated he did feel that some of these trailers, such as the one used for lawn care equipment, should not be parked in the driveway during the seasons they are not using them. Ms Trout stated perhaps the Code could prevent parking in the driveway for no more than 48 hours, with the exception of overnight parking. Ms Gilleland stated many members of this committee have already done some research, and she would suggest we come up with a way to survey other communities to see what they do. Mr. Walburn inquired if the Ohio Municipal League had any information on these topics, and Ms Gilleland stated that might be possible. Mr. King stated he felt the committee was at a point where they should do research on how other communities handle this problem, and then at the next meeting discuss the research and then propose language and standards. Ms Gilleland stated the committee could talk through each of the issues, get to a point where you are ready to do research, and then do all of your research at once or direct staff to do the research. She stated it would be this committee’s decision if they want to deal with one issue at a time or wait until they have several issues to research. She stated she did not think it would be a good idea to be calling around to various communities every month getting information on different issues. She further stated the committee should also determine which communities in the area we want to be comparable with. Mr. Smith stated he liked the idea of researching first because he felt that would expedite the process. Mr. Walburn stated it might be a good idea to break down into a couple of subcommittees to do research on different subjects. He stated he felt that way more ground could be covered. Mr. Smith stated he thought that was a good idea and perhaps two or three of the committee members could get together and do research on topics and bring it back to the committee at the next meeting.

Mr. Bowen stated he would like staff to give the committee an idea of the typical problems they are facing with each item and that would give the committee a focus on what they should be researching.

Mr. Schultz stated he was unable to find any definition on commercial vehicles or trailers, but he would review the Code in more detail before the next meeting.

Mr. Schultz stated another topic to be looked at was home businesses. He stated the white collar businesses such as attorneys, CPAs, or computer people who work at home are not really an issue. He stated the problems occur more with businesses that do woodworking, alterations, crafts, repairs, etc. He stated in cases where the neighbors can see large machinery or if the product takes up a lot of space in the backyard but is easily moveable that presents a grey area. He stated our Code identifies that for a home business no more than 20 percent of your yard can be used, you cannot employ more than one person outside the family and you cannot sell merchandise as a retail use. He stated he has to determine if it is actually a business and then prove it. Ms Goodrich stated she felt there was a difference between a home business and being self-employed. Mr. Schultz stated there is also a problem with signage in the yards advertising these businesses. Mr. Smith stated a home occupation/home business is required by our Code to have a Certificate of Zoning Compliance that is renewed annually. He stated he felt this was pretty clear and that we should enforce the requirement for the Certificate of Zoning Compliance. Mr. Schultz stated his problem is if they do not apply for the certificate he is not aware of the business. Ms Goodrich stated if a neighbor complains and we do not have a certificate on file, it would be easy to send a letter letting them know that a certificate is required. Mr. Smith stated the way a home business makes money is by advertising, so it shouldn’t be to hard to know if a business is in the home. Ms Trout stated the problem she has seen in her neighborhood is someone doing car repairs, however, when someone complains they state they are just working on a car and that is allowed. Mr. Parsley stated if we can develop some type of regulation for home businesses that would help him a lot in enforcing the Code.

Mr. Smith clarified that if someone calls in with a complaint they do not have to give their name and phone number. Mr. Schultz stated if someone calls with a complaint his policy is to ask them to get back with him in a few days or whatever rather than taking their name. He stated if he takes that information on a complaint form, and someone asks for a copy of the complaint, that is a public record and must be released.

Mr. Smith stated he would like to have Ms Goodrich, Dr. Henry, and Mr. Walburn look at the home business issue discussed this evening and bring some information back to the committee for their next meeting. He stated he would then like to have the remaining members of the committee research the parking and storage of vehicle issue. Mr. Smith clarified that if the members have any research they would like to include in their next packet, if they will get it to Mrs. Yartin prior to December 29^th, it will be included in the packet that is mailed out on December 30^th. That will allow all of the committee members to review the research prior to the meeting on January 6^th. Mr. Smith stated the information can be dropped off at City Hall or can be e-mailed to Mrs. Yartin for inclusion in the packets.

Mr. Smith stated he felt there had been good discussion this evening and the committee members were now aware of the types of problems that our city staff encounters on these types of issues.

There being nothing further, Ms Goodrich moved to adjourn; Mr. Barletta seconded the motion. Mr. Walburn, Dr. Henry, Mr. Barletta, Mr. Bowen, Ms Carter, Ms Goodrich, Mr. Sells, and Mr. Smith voted “Aye.” Motion passed, 8-0. The Property Maintenance Task Force adjourned at 8:30 P.M., December 2, 2004.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:

_______________________________

Lynda D. Yartin, Municipal Clerk