CITY OF
PICKERINGTON
CITY HALL, 100
LOCKVILLE ROAD
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY
10, 2005
WORK SESSION
DISCUSSION OF
TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS PLAN
6:30 P.M.
1. ROLL CALL. Mr. Hackworth called the Service Committee Work Session to order at 6:30 P.M., with Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Parker, and Mr. O’Brien present. No members were absent. Others present were Judy Gilleland, Lynda Yartin, Lance Schultz, Frank Wiseman, Jerry Dailey, John Gallagher, Jennifer Frommer, Tony Barletta, and others.
Mr. Gallagher stated he had provided the Committee members with a summary of the proposed Thoroughfare Plan and the currently approved items. He stated he had also provided a copy of the map for the current Thoroughfare Plan and a draft of the proposed Plan. Mr. Gallagher reviewed the proposed changes with the Committee.
Mr. Hackworth clarified that Columbus has reclassified Hines Road and currently they show no changes on their thoroughfare plan. He stated that may change, however, he does not have any further information on it.
Mr. O’Brien stated he thought the Committee would like to see what the Township was planning to do on Refugee Road and Pickerington Road area. Mr. Gallagher stated he would get that information for the Committee. Mr. Hackworth stated if we could get the Township’s plan it might be helpful to know what they are planning when we are finalizing ours. Mr. Hackworth further clarified that Mr. Gallagher felt this draft plan was ready for full Council to review.
Mr. Hackworth ascertained Mr. Gallagher did not have the information regarding where Metro Parks would have their entrance because MORPC just called a meeting to talk about removing that extension. He stated after that meeting he would have more definite information and we may make some changes to our plan based on that.
Mr. Gallagher stated he would like to propose a work session before the next Service Committee where he would present the Transportation Improvement Plan. He stated that would reflect projects that need to happen at some point to make the Thoroughfare Plan a reality. Ms Frommer stated she felt it would be important to show the projects in the order of priority, although that can be changed as needed. Mr. O’Brien stated he felt it would be a helpful tool for Mr. Schultz to have when speaking to potential developers so he can show them what is planned.
Mr. Hackworth stated he would request a work session for 6:30 P.M., March 10, 2005, just prior to the next Service Committee to review the proposed Transportation Improvement Plan. Mr. Hackworth stated he felt it might be a good idea to schedule a work session before Council so any remaining questions can be answered. Mr. Hackworth stated they would request a work session prior to Council on March 15, 2005, to review and discuss the Transportation Improvement Plan.
2. ADJOURNMENT. There being nothing further, Mr. Hackworth closed the work session at 7:30 P.M., February 10, 2005.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
________________________________
Lynda D. Yartin, Municipal Clerk
CITY OF PICKERINGTON
SERVICE COMMITTEE
OF COUNCIL
CITY HALL, 100
LOCKVILLE ROAD
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY
10, 2005
REGULAR MEETING
7:30 P.M.
1. ROLL CALL. Mr. Hackworth called the meeting to order at 7:30 P.M., with Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Parker, and Mr. O’Brien present. No members were absent. Others present were: Brian Wisniewski, Judy Gilleland, Lynda Yartin, Frank Wiseman, Lance Schultz, Jerry Dailey, Jennifer Frommer, John Gallagher, Paul Lane, Tony Barletta, Doug Plunkett, Patti Wigington, Kirk Richards, Jack Sower, Mark Landes, and others.
2. A. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF January 13, 2005,
Work Session. Mr. Parker moved to
approve; Mr. Hackworth seconded the motion.
Roll call was taken with Mr. Hackworth, Mr. O’Brien, and Mr. Parker
voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 3-0.
B. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF January 13, 2005, Regular Meeting. Mr. Hackworth moved to approve; Mr. O’Brien seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Parker, Mr. Hackworth, and Mr. O’Brien voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 3-0.
3. COMMUNITY COMMENTS: Mr. O’Brien stated this evening’s meeting was an opportunity for residents to attend and ask questions regarding the settlement of the BIA lawsuit, and it appears no-one has come to ask questions. He continued there has been discussion for months regarding the Diley Road widening project, and Mr. O’Brien read a statement into the record regarding this issue. (Attachment 1).
Mr. Wisniewski stated he may not agree with 100 percent of Mr. O’Brien’s statement, he did agree with the majority of it. Mr. Wisniewski stated if we were to do this, it must be a bond issue that the citizens are willing to pay for. He further stated in his mind it is imperative that we continue on with this as a five-lane project and we need to stay on track. Mr. Wisniewski stated MORPC and ODOT have already stated they will not fund this as a three-lane project, so that would come out of the taxpayer’s pockets. Mr. Wisniewski stated it would be fiscally irresponsible for Council to turn down this funding, they have tried to find other funding and it does not exist, so if the citizens want three-lanes they must pay for it. Mr. Wisniewski stated if we tried to absorb a ten million dollar project we would blow our Moody’s bond rating and the City’s debt structure completely and we would bankrupt the City. He stated this project must stay on schedule and go forward as a five-lane project, and if the citizens want to vote on it they have the opportunity to do so. Mr. Wisniewski stated he has listened to the voters and he values listening to the citizens more than anything, but he also has to be a fiscal steward for the City and he cannot vote on something that we do not have the money to do. Mr. Wisniewski stated he agreed with Mr. O’Brien, we should take it to the voters and he has already contacted the Law Director about getting this going. He stated the Law Director requested we speak to our Bond Counsel and he felt we should get this going in an expedient manner and try and let it happen. Mr. Wisniewski concluded, however, he felt we cannot risk the funding for the five-lanes.
Mr. Hackworth stated Mr. Landes is present this evening to answer any questions anyone may have on the legislation regarding the BIA lawsuit, which he was going to bring forward under Other Business. Mr. Hackworth stated if there were no objections, he would address that at this time. He stated Council had referred the six ordinances related to the lawsuit to this Committee for Committee action and to provide the opportunity for the citizens to ask any questions they may have. Mr. Wisniewski clarified the settlement of this lawsuit will not affect the ability of the City to control growth in the future. Mr. Landes stated this settlement says the City can control growth pursuant to the studies that tell you how to do it, why you need to do it, and to what extent you can do it. He stated if Council comes up with the right kind of plan for the right kind of control, their hands are not tied. Mr. Landes stated the developers have said they will not challenge the moratorium or the two units per acre limitation. Mr. Landes reviewed the ordinances individually.
Review and request for motion to approve Ordinance 2005-01 (As Amended), an ordinance authorizing the City Manager to execute an agreement settling claims arising from Franklin County Common Pleas Court Case No. 03CVH11-12173. Mr. Landes stated this would authorize the execution of the agreement, and would permit the City to do whatever controls they want to do, consistent with and pursuant to, any plans that we have done or new plans that we may do.
Review and request for motion to approve Ordinance 2005-02 (As Amended), an ordinance to amend Section 1442.04 of the Pickerington Codified Ordinances relative to building permit transfers. Mr. Landes stated this allows for building permit transfers.
Review and request for motion to approve Ordinance 2005-03 (As Amended), an ordinance authorizing the City Manager to toll dates applicable to certain approved preliminary and final plats. Mr. Landes stated this legislation allows deadlines to be tolled or stopped, as if the City Manager can hold the minute hand on a clock and keep the clock from moving for awhile. He stated because the moratorium put everyone on hold for a year, this would put the clock back on building permits and other things that had been issued so they have the same amount of time to use them now that the moratorium is over.
Review and request for motion to approve Ordinance 2005-04 (As Amended), an ordinance authorizing the City Manager to extend the life of building permits. Mr. Landes stated this also relates to the time permitted to use the building permit.
Review and request for motion to approve Ordinance 2005-05, an ordinance accepting the final plat for Phase 2 of the Maronda Georges Creek subdivision. Mr. Landes stated this allows the developer to act on the preliminary plat they had filed prior to the moratorium.
Review and request for motion to approve Ordinance 2005-06 (As Amended), an ordinance accepting Shawnee Crossing subdivision Phase I pursuant to Code Section 1258.31. Mr. Landes stated this accepts Phase I of the Shawnee Crossing subdivision.
Mr. Wisniewski clarified we are allowed to go forward with our Comprehensive Land Use Plan, we are allowed to continue with allowing two units per acre, and we are allowed to control growth as we see fit according to studies.
Mr. Parker stated he would like to note for the record that his vote this evening would be to send the ordinances back to Council as that is where they need to be. He stated he has abstained on some of the issues through the process and he would abstain on them again at Council, however, he would vote to send them back to Council.
Mr. O’Brien moved to approve and return to Council Ordinance 2005-01 (As Amended), Ordinance 2005-02 (As Amended), Ordinance 2005-03 (As Amended), Ordinance 2005-04 (As Amended), Ordinance 2005-05, and Ordinance 2005-06 (As Amended); Mr. Hackworth seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. O’Brien, Mr. Hackworth, and Mr. Parker voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 3-0.
Mr. Hackworth stated he would also request Committee action on Ordinance 2005-12 regarding acceptance of an annexation of 362 acres into the City of Pickerington at this time.
Review and request for motion to approve Ordinance 2005-12, an ordinance to accept an annexation of 362 acres in Violet Township, Fairfield County, to the City of Pickerington. Mr. O’Brien moved to approve and return to Council; Mr. Hackworth seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Parker, Mr. Hackworth, and Mr. O’Brien voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 3-0.
Mr. Hackworth stated at this time he would like to move to Item 5.A.(1), Review of draft Fee Schedule Analysis and Recommendations, Part II – Stormwater, Building Regulations, Planning and Zoning, Parks & Recreation fees.
Mr. Plunkett stated he was engaged by the City last May to review the City’s fee schedule, analyze it, and make recommendations based on his findings. Mr. Plunkett stated he has completed that analysis and provided a copy to the Committee this evening. Mr. Plunkett stated he had looked at water and sewer fees and last summer he took a cursory look at stormwater fees. Mr. Plunkett stated stormwater fees, however, are strictly an engineering matter. He stated his review of stormwater fees was restricted to a comparison of Pickerington’s fees to other communities. Mr. Plunkett stated he would note that Pickerington’s stormwater fees on a monthly basis per ERU are fairly low in the overall scenario of metropolitan central Ohio. He stated he found in the communities he reviewed that Pickerington is the only one that charges a stormwater capacity fee, and he felt as time went on other municipalities will adopt that. He stated it would be his recommendation when reviewing the stormwater fees that the City engage the engineer who determined the fees to do that rather than going out to bid because they have the baseline data and can work with the construction inspection division to update those appropriately. He stated in examining the fees charged by the Building Regulations Department, he looked primarily at the fees charged by other communities for similar services and the Department’s own direct and indirect costs of operations. Mr. Plunkett stated in that review he was tasked with seeing if the construction inspection division could perhaps charge an overtime rate since, in fact, their inspectors often have to work during hours that would be outside their normal work hours to accommodate contractors. He stated as of 2003 their charge was $50.00 per hour and he had determined that the direct cost of operations for the construction services division was $28.61 per hour and the indirect cost was $11.95, and that would come to less than the $50.00 per hour. He stated it was his recommendation, at this point, that until more data is built up that that fee be left alone. He continued for the construction inspection division the direct cost per hour was $36.02 and, again, the indirect cost per hour was $11.95. The plan review division cost per hour was significantly higher because that was sent out, but it would probably not behoove the City to bring that service in house at this time because the overall expense for that process is not great enough to bring it in house. He stated it is still cost effective to contract that service out. Mr. Plunkett further stated the direct cost per hour for the Planning and Zoning Division was $21.48, and the total cost was $27.32 per hour. Mr. Plunkett stated these fees should be reviewed annually and adjusted to reflect the changes in both the direct and indirect cost. Ms Gilleland ascertained Mr. Plunkett had provided the results from a survey in surrounding communities regarding their building inspection fees. Mr. Plunkett stated Pickerington’s fees were relatively comparable to other communities for building, plumbing, and electrical inspections. Mr. Plunkett stated the Parks and Recreation revenue sources for the City are three; the annual General Fund subsidy, charges for services or programs, and the building recreation fee. He stated Parks & Recreation would have to continue to be subsidized by the General Fund in order to continue to operate. Mr. Plunkett stated he would be happy to answer any questions anyone might have.
Mr. Parker stated as the Committee had only received the report this evening he would like to have some time to review it in depth. Mr. Hackworth stated Mr. Plunkett had presented a review of the sewer and water fees and ascertained that report was complete. Mr. Plunkett stated this was the final part of his review of all fees.
4. PLANNING AND ZONING
A. REPORTS:
(1) BZA Report. Mr. Schultz stated the Board had one case last month and approved a use variance for 42 W. Columbus Street. He stated in February they have two cases, a front yard fence variance for Seton Parish and front, side, and rear yard set back variances for the Giant Eagle site plan.
(2) Planning and Zoning Representative Report (Mr. O’Brien) Mr. O’Brien stated Planning and Zoning met on Tuesday and approved a Certificate of Appropriateness for building materials for an addition at 42 W. Columbus Street and the Commercial Design Guidelines and a permit for a drive through car wash at the Sunoco Station. Mr. O’Brien stated the remainder of the meeting dealt with the Giant Eagle project and they did approve the site plan with staff recommendations for changes to their site and the approval of the building was tabled. Mr. O’Brien stated the Commission had asked the developer to meet with staff and try to get a little closer together on what the project should look like.
Mr. Schultz stated he had provided a memorandum to the Committee regarding the Luse Office Buildings. He stated their builder would like to determine how many office buildings could be constructed that the current access drive could accommodate safely. Mr. Schultz stated our engineer had stated that number would be three and staff would send a letter notifying them they could build three office buildings utilizing the Pickerington Medical Complex access road. Mr. Schultz stated he hoped in the next few months we would have a concept plan for the entire 15 acre parcel so we can review the access plan into their site and potentially have a stub north on old S.R. 256 into the Giltz property behind Drug Mart. Mr. Schultz stated we are continuing to work on the other access issues in that area.
B. ACTION ITEMS: Mr. Schultz stated he had nothing further for the Committee this evening.
5. SERVICE DEPARTMENT
A. ACTION ITEMS:
(1) Review and of draft fee schedule analysis and recommendations, Part II – Stormwater, Building Regulations, Planning and Zoning fees. Mr. Hackworth stated Mr. Plunkett had provided his briefing earlier in the meeting.
(2) Review and discussion regarding Service Complex. Mr. Wiseman stated staff has discussed this issue, and determined it would be best to remodel the building that currently houses the Building Department and do some expansion on City Hall. He stated this would provide us time to make the broader decision of where we want to go in the future. Ms Gilleland stated staff had determined the house that was purchased next to the Service Complex on Hereford Drive should be demolished and we were waiting to hear from the Fire Department if they would like to use it for a practice burn.
(3) Review and discussion regarding Commercial Deduct Meters. Mr. Wiseman stated this was discussed at the last meeting and a draft ordinance had been provided to the Committee this evening. Mr. Wiseman stated the process would be that an application for a deduct meter would be made through the Service Director, presented to the Service Committee, and determinations would be made on a case by case basis. Mr. Wiseman stated it would have to be for water that was being used for production and definitely not going into the sanitary sewer system and does not at all relate to irrigation systems. Mr. Hackworth clarified that a deduct meter would not be allowed for use of watering lawns at model homes, etc. Mr. Hackworth moved to approve and forward to Council; Mr. Parker seconded the motion. Mr. Parker ascertained Mr. Wiseman did not think there were would be that many requests, and by having the Service Committee review the applications he did not think there would be a problem. Roll call was taken with Mr. O’Brien, Mr. Hackworth, and Mr. Parker voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 3-0.
B. WATER UTILITY MAINTENANCE.
(1) Review and discussion of Pickerington Hills Water Main Loop Project. Mr. Wiseman stated we are proceeding with the project.
C. WASTEWATER UTILITY MAINTENANCE.
(1) Review and discussion regarding tertiary sand filter replacement. Mr. Wiseman stated we are continuing with the work and it should be completed shortly. He stated this could be removed from the agenda if the Committee desired. Mr. Hackworth stated this item could be removed from the agenda.
(2) Review and discussion regarding sewer back-up issues. Mr. Wiseman stated the generator is on site and we are also going to investigate the cost of having an additional four inch portable pump.
D. STREET MAINTENANCE. Mr. Wiseman stated we have mostly completed the pick up of debris from the storm, however, if anyone needs something picked up they can call and let us know.
E. STORM WATER UTILITY MAINTENANCE.
(1) Long Road/Bowen Road Stormwater – Update. Mr. Wiseman stated weather permitting he hopes to have the north side finished up in the next few weeks. He stated our application with the Army Corps of Engineer’s is proceeding well and they appear very interested in the project.
F. TREE COMMISSION. Update. Mr. Wiseman stated he had nothing to report this evening.
G. SCIP (Formerly Issue II Program) – Application Submitted. Mr. Wiseman stated we have heard unofficially that we were not funded for our project nor for the joint project in Mingo we submitted with the County and the Township. Mr. O’Brien clarified we would resubmit both projects and try and improve our applications for both projects.
6. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CAPITAL PROJECTS
A. WASTEWATER
(1) Wastewater Plant Expansion (CIP# 02-03-005) – Update.
a. Wastewater Treatment Plant Stress Test Update. Mr. Wiseman stated we are waiting for the EPA’s comments on the stress test report submitted.
B. TRANSPORTATION:
(1) Courtright Road.
a. Courtright Road Extension Project, Phase III – Update. Mr. Schultz stated he had provided the Committee with three alignments and staff would recommend Alignment C as it connects with Milnor Road in the short term and can be extended to Stemen Road in the future. He stated in addition this alignment could yield the lowest construction costs as it would likely affect the least amount of single-family lots and condominium units combined. Mr. Schultz stated the construction costs for this alignment could be reduced if the City and developer could work out a cost sharing agreement. He stated he would like direction from the Committee on what they would prefer. Ms Gilleland stated we have requested cost estimates from the developer as to their net loss for reconfiguring the lot layout. Mr. Schultz stated his concern would be that the road alignment may be able to yield more single-family lots and reduce the multi-family. Ms Gilleland stated the developer is going to provide us with some designs that we can review and if necessary we can schedule a Service Work Session to work with the developer.
(2) Diley Road Realignment:
a. Diley Road/256 Intersection Improvement Project, Phase II – Update. Mr. Wiseman stated we have notified the contractor of the standards the road will have to meet and we will be checking the variances in the road to make sure they are within the variances that are allowed.
b. Diley Road/S.R. 256 Intersection Improvement Project, Phase III – Update. Mr. Wiseman stated we have a start date of April 15th, but they are willing to begin before that time if we have the right-of-way acquisition phase completed. Mr. Wiseman stated that acquisition is coming along, however, we may have to proceed with the eminent domain process on a couple of homes, but they may be willing to give us a right of entry to start the project while we work out the details on compensation.
(3) Diley Road Improvements Project:
a. MORPC/ODOT Project (CIP#98-03-005 and 03-03-005) – Update.
1. Review and request for motion to approve Change Order for R. D. Zande. Mr. Wiseman stated this is a change in scope to the R.D. Zande contract, and we will also have a change in scope for the Stilson contract. He stated we changed the alignment to the road which required us to do additional environmental work, we required additional noise work, and other items. Mr. Wiseman stated the cost for the change in scope for R.D. Zande is $24,550 and we will need legislation approving that as well as an appropriation of the funds. Mr. Wiseman stated he had not had a chance to review the change for Stilson, although additional engineering was required for the same reasons as he stated before. Mr. Wiseman stated their additional costs would be approximately $110,700 and he would have draft legislation for the Committee at the next meeting. Mr. Parker moved to approve the change order for R.D. Zande in the amount of $24,550 and forward to Council; Mr. Hackworth seconded the motion. Mr. O’Brien stated he would like to point out that the original contract with R.D. Zande, approved in 2002, the contract states the purpose of the study was to go from a two lane arterial to a five lane minor arterial. Roll call was taken with Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Parker, and Mr. O’Brien voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 3-0.
(4) Cover/Ebright Connector (CIP#02-03-010)
a. Pickerington Health Care Access Road – Update. Mr. Wiseman stated this is in the hands of our attorney right now.
(5) I-70/S.R. 256 Joint Improvements Project with Reynoldsburg and ODOT – Update. Mr. Gallagher stated Safety Committee has requested a schedule of when the signage and stripping will be done and he is trying to obtain that from ODOT. He stated he is also still working with the timing on the signals with ODOT.
(6) Traffic Signal Update. Mr. Gallagher stated he had prepared a breakdown of the projects and he is prepared to proceed with several of the items if the Committee desired. Mr. Hackworth stated these items were included as contingency items in the budget, and Mr. Wiseman stated when Mrs. Fersch and Ms Gilleland determine the funds are available the Committee will be notified. Ms Frommer stated if the City desired, some of these projects can be completed individually, and Mr. Wiseman stated when the funding is available it will be for the entire proposal.
(7) Traffic Improvement Plan (TIP) – Update. Mr. Hackworth stated Service Committee has requested a work session prior to Council on March 15th for the review of the Thoroughfare Plan and a work session prior to the next Service Committee for the Transportation Improvement Plan. He stated he felt the Thoroughfare Plan was complete other than any changes requested by Council. Mr. Hackworth moved to approve the Thoroughfare Plan and forward it to Council with any amendments requested by Council; Mr. O’Brien seconded the motion. Mr. Hackworth stated he thought it was important to get this started as Mr. Schultz needs to have firm information when dealing with developers. He stated although the work session for Council to discuss the Thoroughfare Plan will not be held until March 15th, he would like to go ahead and have the first reading at the March 1st Council meeting. Mr. O’Brien stated the Thoroughfare Plan and Transportation Improvement Plan are separate items and the Transportation Improvement Plan will be the next item to complete. Roll call was taken with Mr. Hackworth, Mr. O’Brien, and Mr. Parker voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 3-0.
(1) Wellfield Investigation – Update. Mr. Wiseman stated he has had some communication with Canal Winchester regarding a wellfield site they have.
D. STORMWATER. No Report.
7. CHAIRMAN. Mr. Hackworth stated he had nothing to bring forward.
8. OTHER BUSINESS. No other business was brought forward.
9. ADJOURNMENT. There being nothing further, Mr. Parker moved to adjourn; Mr. Hackworth seconded the motion. Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Parker, and Mr. O’Brien voted “Aye.” Motion carried, 3-0. The Service Committee adjourned at 9:20 P.M., February 10, 2005.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
________________________________
Lynda D. Yartin, Municipal Clerk