President of Council Kathy McNear called Council to order on September 5, 2001, at 7:00 p.m.
The governmental body and those in attendance recited the pledge of allegiance.
Mr. Knox took roll call. Present were Council members Danbury, Galster, Pollitt, Squires, Vanover, Wilson and McNear.
The minutes of August 15, 2001 were approved with six affirmative votes after changing the word "dried" to "dry" on page 7438. Mr. Vanover abstained.
COMMUNICATIONS - none
COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE - none
Presentation Ė Hamilton County Park District Ė Al Winstel
Mr. Knox said Mr. Winstel contacted us back in May. He would like to have done this in July but we looked at the schedule and he moved it back to September. He is going to do a presentation on some of the things the Hamilton County Park District has done. One of the brochures he handed out is Glenwoods Gardens which is located by the new Krogerís in Woodlawn. My wife and I had occasion to walk out there and I highly recommend that area. Mr. Winstel is an expert on that area and I appreciate you being here.
Al Winstel, naturalist at Sharon Woods, said I just wanted to do a quick update of changes in the county park system over the last year. I did pass out three pieces of paper. They are the Glenwood Gardens brochure; the Evergreen magazine that has the two month calendar of park district activities and the community newsletter. So far this year we opened a wet playground at Widley Mound Park in Anderson Township. At Sharon Woods we have a two-year old visitor center there. This year it is planned to be opened 22 days more than it was last year. As of June attendance figures are about 10,000 over last year. A lot of it is probably due to the extra open days. Weíre trying to be open as much as possible so the public can come in and utilize the nature center, gift shop, etc. as much as possible. Glenwood Gardens is about 335 acres with hiking trails and gardens. Itís like an extension of Winton Woods. There are a few programs going on there; a tree hike on September 15 and on September 23 we have a three-mile hike. We have a certificate for a complimentary naturalist program at one of our parks for a school group or senior group in the community. We will provide transportation. We have a program called Community Re-leaf. We provide a tree for the community, the labor to plant it and some care information. You pick out the site and maintain it. The park district has a web site, greatparks.org that weíre continually trying to improve.
Mayor Webster said at the last Council meeting, Council passed an ordinance urging the Hamilton County Park District to cull the deer herd. An ordinance was passed by Forest Park also. Are there plans to do that?
Mr. Winstel replied that is still being worked on. We have been looking at the deer herd for quite a while. Weíve been doing surveys, closure studies, etc., to see the impact the deer have on the plants. In the parks we see some impact in terms of changes in species. Weíre looking at solutions to the problem. If you shoot deer, itís unpopular with some people and other people are all for it. Theyíve worked on birth control mechanisms but none of those seem to be real effective. Itís being worked on but date no decision has been made on how to solve the problem.
Mr. Osborn said I use the bike/walking trail around Winton Woods and Sharon Woods and they are both very nice trails. I was wondering if the one at Winton Woods is ever going to be extended to the west and taken farther around the lake.
Mr. Winstel responded I havenít seen any plans to do that. They are going to be working on a road at Sharon Road, so if you use the high bike trail you may see some changes as to what part of the trail is usable while they do that work.
Ms. Pollitt asked do you have an estimate on the number of deer in Winton Woods? Is there a great increase from last year?
Mr. Winstel replied I donít have the number with me. They have increased in population. The population level is higher than itís supposed to be, but there doesnít seem to be any real health affect on the deer. There is an impact on the plant material.
Mr. Osborn said I know the Village of Indian Hill worked with the Hamilton County Sheriffís Department in using their infra-red imaging camera to do a survey of the deer population in the winter.
Mr. Winstel replied we have done infra-red surveys. Itís supposed to be pretty accurate. Weíve got a pretty good grasp on how many deer are there. The problem is what do you do about it and try to make everybody happy.
ORDINANCE NO. 42-2001"AMENDING SECTIONS 156.02, 156.08, 156.09 AND 156.15 REGARDING PRESERVATION OF TREES AND WOODED AREAS OF THE CODIFIED ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF SPRINGDALE"
Mr. Galster said Planning Commission was finding that when sites were originally developed they were required to try to replant 50% of the trees taken down outside of the footprint area of the building. We found that people were taking down additional trees and it was hard to go after them to replant more than half of what they had when the site was redeveloped. If the sites keep getting redeveloped the trees keep getting cut in half and half and half. This is an attempt to try to help modify that to try to help the tree population in the city.
Mr. Galster made a motion to read Ordinance No. 43-2001 by title only and Mr. Danbury seconded. The motion passed with seven affirmative votes.
ORDINANCE NO. 43-2001 "AMENDING THE ZONING CODE ARTICLE 2 DEFINITIONS "SIGN, CORPORATE IDENTIFY FLAG"; TO AMEND ARTICLE 12, SECTION 153.072 (A)(B) MINIMUM REAR YARD SETBACK; TO AMEND ARTICLE 32, SECTION 153.218 (A)(B)(C)(D)(E) , CONDITIONALLY PERMITTED USES; TO AMEND ARTICLE 34, SECTION 153.233(A)(B)(C) CONDITIONALLY PERMITTED USES; TO AMEND ARTICLE 42, SECTION 153.423( )(2) SPRINGDALE STATE ROUTE 4 CORRIDOR GENERAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS; AMEND ARTICLE 43, SECTION 153.0448, AMENDMENTS TO PLAN; AMEND ARTICLE 48, SECTION 153.049(A)(B)(C) WASTE CONTAINER SCREENING REQUIREMENTS; ARTICLE 50, SECTION 153.502(C)(L) OFF-STREET PARKING AND DESIGN STANDARDS; SECTION 153.053(A) DETERMINATION OF REQUIRED SPACES; AMEND ARTICLE 52, SECTION 153.529(G)(H) SIGNS IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS; SECTION 153.531(E) SIGN REQUIREMENTS FOR COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS; ADD SECTION 153.533(E)(F), SPECIAL EVENTS SIGNS; AMEND SECTION 153.535(B) EXEMPT SIGNS, SIGNS NOT REQUIRING A PERMIT; ADD SECTION 153.537, CORPORATE IDENTITY FLAGS; AMEND ARTICLE 60, SECTION 153.603(B)(4)(5)(H)(6), BUFFER YARD MATERIAL AND STANDARDS"
Mr. Galster said we recently redid the Zoning Code in its entirety. These are just a few items that we needed to add or amend after the Zoning Code was in use for a few months.
Mr. Galster made a motion to read Ordinance No. 44-2001 by title only. Mr. Danbury seconded. The motion passed with seven affirmative votes.
ORDINANCE NO. 44-2001 "AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE AND SALE OF $5,800,000 RENEWAL NOTES, IN ANTICIPATION OF THE ISSUANCE OF BONDS, TO PAY COSTS OF CONSTRUCTING, FURNISHING AND EQUIPPING ADDITIONS AND RENOVATIONS TO MUNICIPAL RECREATION FACILITY, AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY"
Ms. Pollitt made a motion to adopt and Mr. Galster seconded.
Mr. Knox said this is the same document you saw last year that was mentioning $6, 400,000. As per the budget, which Council has approved, we are paying $600,000 towards the principle on this, which we plan to continue through the final payment. We will also being paying the interest on that note and we will then be issuing new notes for $5,800,000, which we have every hope of having a low interest rate on, given the current situation. We will be issuing the notes on September 14, 2001.
Ms. Pollitt said the Finance Committee met on this and it has our endorsement.
Ordinance 44-2001 passed with seven affirmative votes.
RESOLUTION R8-2001 "AUTHORIZING THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR TO FILE AN APPLICATION WITH THE OHIO PUBLIC WORKS COMMISSION FOR LOCAL TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (LTIP) FUNDS AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CLERK OF COUNCIL/FINANCE DIRECTOR TO EXECUTE ALL CONTRACTS AND OTHER DOCUMENTS"
Mr. Vanover made a motion to adopt and Mr. Wilson seconded.
Mr. Osborn said this is very similar to the legislation we adopted last year authorizing the LTIP application for 2001. Weíre now proposing to submit the 2002 application and the three projects we have recommended include East Kemper Road, Phase II, which is a continuation of the East Kemper Road project that just wrapped up this fall. Itís from just east of the railroad bridge to the Sharonville corp line. The project cost estimate without right-of-way is just a little over $1.1 million. The application we are submitted to LTIP is for $440,568 which represents 40% of the project cost. The rest of the funding would be split between 20% from the municipal road fund and 40% from Springdale. Our 40% local share would be the same as the funds we are applying for the LTIP funding. The second project is a new one for public discussion. The section of SR 747 within the limited access right-of-way, between the ramps of the expressway system is in very poor condition. It is asphalt over concrete. The concrete is pulverizing. We looked at the possibility of doing a fracturing process and then asphalting over that without having to go through the removal of all of the old asphalt and concrete. We found that the soilís condition and the poor condition of the concrete wouldnít lend itself to that type of fracturing project. We now anticipate that we will have to take out the entire pavement section and replace it from the base upwards. Another thing we wanted to consider on this was the timing in relationship to the grade separation project. We didnít want to delay the project until after the grade separation because it will have a significant impact on traffic. We will have the SR 747 area tied up for two years with the grade separation project. We donít want to put the orange barrels up again as soon as that project is done. We will try to get the funding for this project and get it done contemporary with or prior to the grade separation. We hope to score high with the District 2 Integrating Committee, which is Hamilton County. Thatís the group that decides points for awarding funding. The last project is the Sharon Road/Springfield Pike intersection. This would be a joint project with the Village of Glendale. It would run approximately 225 feet north of the intersection and end about 250 feet south of the intersection. Itís a redesign to improve the geometrics or lane alignment as they go through the intersection, as well as a replacement of the signal with new signalization equipment. We have some problems there already with left turn movements that we want to try to correct as well as some alignment problems going north and south through the intersection. Glendale is in a position, however, where they cannot afford to commit local funding to this so our application for this $160,000 project would be $80,000 LTIP and the other $80,000 under MRF, 25% of it being Springdaleís and 25% being Glendaleís. There would be no local money used on these. The deadline is fast approaching and we would appreciate your favorable consideration on this resolution.
Resolution R8-2001 passed with seven affirmative votes.
RESOLUTION R9-2001 "PLEDGING COOPERATION WITH THE VILLAGE OF GLENDALE FOR THE SHARON ROAD/STATE ROUTE 4 INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT PROJECT"
Mr. Squires made a motion to adopt and Mr. Vanover seconded.
Mr. Osborn said this relates to the previous ordinance. Whenever you have a joint project with another jurisdiction, one of those agencyís has to be the lead agency. This resolution would define Springdale as the lead agency and would express how the jurisdictions would pay for any cost overruns. Any overruns will be related back to the physical area of the project that generates those costs.
Mayor Webster asked how much of that intersection is actually in Springdale?
Mr. Shvegzda replied SR 4 coming at an angle, the north side comes due south such as to encompass the whole southwestern portion of the intersection within Glendale. Only two of the corners are within the city limits of Springdale.
Mr. Osborn said itís hard to describe the line. You canít say itís from this corner to this corner or right down the middle of the right-of-way. Itís neither of those. Itís an irregular line that Iím certain is related to the layout of the City and had nothing to do with the future right-of-way.
Resolution R9-2001 passed with seven affirmative votes.
Mayor Webster said Iíd just like to comment on the previous two resolutions. There really is a great need to get that intersection approved. I certainly hope we score better than we did last year on this project. I think the area of the City that this impacts more than any other is the area of Cameron Road and Naylor Court. There is a tendency with log jam at that intersection for people to cut through Cameron Road by the cemetery and get back on Route 4. Itís really causing a safety hazard at times. If we score poorly again, Iím not sure where we go with it being in different jurisdictions. Even though we have the money I donít believe we could go in and totally fit the bill for this project but it is one that is greatly needed.
Mr. Osborn said I have two items. One is the Ross Park bid opening. We have not brought any legislation forward on that item because we are going to recommend to Council that we reject all bids. The low bid was $205,151. We had budgeted for that project $170,500 so we are almost $35,000 short for that project. This is an elective project. It is not being done out of necessity or as a result of some safety issue, but itís a project we want to get accomplished. It doesnít have to be done this fall. We are recommending that the project be put over to 2002. In the legislative update I identify some projects in the 2001 capital improvements budget that have run over. One that ran over considerably is the Walnut Street/Pear Street project. Two years ago we budgeted $205,000 for that project. It has come in at $385,500. Weíre $177,500 over what we had budgeted for that project when we put the budget together two years ago. We would recommend in order to keep the capital improvements program in the black, that we roll this bridge project for the park into 2002. If you agree with that we will need legislation at your next meeting rejecting the bids.
The second item I have relates to our SR 4 streetscape project. At the next meeting I would anticipate asking for legislation authorizing what is called an LPA federal project agreement. We are using enhancement funds through the State of Ohio and the Federal Highway Administration. This funding comes with certain procedures you have to follow and some options. There is an option available to us that would allow the City of Springdale to manage the project even though itís being done with federal funds. Typically on a federally funded project the State of Ohio has jurisdiction and they do all of the right-of-way acquisition, the spec writing, bidding and overseeing the project in the field. On this particular project we would prefer that it be a local project. We want to exercise the local public agency alternative which allows Springdale to be the manager of the project. The federal government will present us with the funding. Under the terms of the agreement we have to do certain things such as include them in the performance bond. At the next meeting we do anticipate bringing in legislation authorizing the LPA project agreement for the SR 4 streetscape program. As a result of using federal money we have to send a letter to all of the property owners within the limits of the project, advising them of the project and we will offer them a two-week comments period. This is a procedural item we have to do in order to maintain our eligibility for the funding. In fact, we do this anyhow. Itís usually closer to the project but we invariably put a letter out to all of the residents along a project and the City Engineer meets with them. We have the option of bidding the light poles out early. That can become critical to us because next year we plan to start this project in March and have it completed by August. Immediately behind that we have funding from the State of Ohio for them to resurface SR 4 at no cost to the City. There will be some peripheral costs that we have elected to take on but they are going to pay for the resurfacing of SR 4 from Glensprings to Cameron. Thatís a significant stretch of asphalt. We want to get the streetscape project in first and then get the resurfacing in, so if we have a delay on the poles, itís going to slow down the project and jeopardize our opportunity to get the paving in. We would like to recommend to Council that we bid the poles out by themselves for acquisition by the City in October and award the contract in November. The remainder of the project would be bid in December and opened in January. These poles are the item with the longest lead time for this project. This will save the City some money. It will end up netting us about $3,000 in savings. The more critical thing is that it will allow us to get the poles in hand much earlier than if we have to wait and bid them as part of the overall project.
Mr. Galster asked Mr. Osborn, the poles are for what area?
Mr. Osborn replied from Kemper Road to Northland Boulevard.
Ms. Pollitt asked can you refresh my memory on the Walnut Street/Pear Street project? Why were the overruns so great?
Mr. Shvegzda stated the actual final project incorporated some things that werenít in the original estimate, the bus pull out adjacent to the elementary school and considerably more water main work; also upgrading from the six inch main that was there to an eight inch main. There was some reimbursement by Cincinnati Water Works on that but a small percentage.
Ms. Pollitt asked does the school have any buy out on the bus pullout?
Mr. Shvegzda replied no, that is strictly the City.
Mr. Danbury asked, since we have discussed possible phases 2 and 3 down the road, do you think it would be prudent to order additional poles the first time?
Mr. Osborn answered we will order more than the number of poles that we have to have. We will probably keep one or two in case of a knock down. I wouldnít suggest ordering a lot of poles, primarily because I donít think we will be choosing a pole that is going out of production. We want to get a guarantee from this company that this pole wonít be phased out next year. The pole we agreed on here in Council has been in production for quite some time and is one of their leading products.
Mr. Galster asked is the wireless tower project in the ODOT land considered finished?
Mr. Osborn replied we donít consider it complete. Iím not certain what they think. I know the Building Official has written them a letter asking them when are they going to complete the project and comply with our code involving screening, etc.
Mr. Osborn stated we will be recommending to Council that the City adopt a new 1, 2 and 3 family building code. Our current code is the 1995 CABO Code. The CABO Institution is no longer around. As a result of that the Ohio Building Officials Association in 1999 created a new model code and Mr. McErlane has recommended that we consider adopting the 1999 OBAA Code. He will have a full explanation for us as to what changes will result from that. He assures me that there is nothing significant. We just want to be consistent with the other jurisdictions around us and throughout the State of Ohio.
We received salt bids yesterday from three companies. I do not have a recommendation for you yet. They are still being evaluated by the Public Works Superintendent. I can tell you they are going up by more than twenty percent. We will see some significant figures when he brings his recommendation in. Once he saw the price he took the opportunity to fill our salt dome to the brim under the old contract price. The numbers were the same whether we bid in the summer or later in the year.
Mr. Osborn continued a year or two ago we asked the City of Fairfield to join with us in funding the SR 4/I-275 interchange modification study. That cost was $17,500 each. Our presentation to them was that it would benefit both communities. They have now turned our argument around on us. They are doing a study for improvements for the SR 4/Crescentville intersection on their north leg as well as widening on SR 4 north of the intersection. They have asked us to share the cost of that study with them and itís a modest $5,750. With Councilís consent we are going to agree to that commitment.
Mr. Osborn reported Gary Thompson has officially submitted his notice of retirement. His last working day will be June 21, 2002 and his effective retirement date will be June 30, 2002.
Mr. Parham said we have received calls from parents relative to the ingress/egress of vehicles into and out of the Heritage Hill School. We have had some discussions with the City of Sharonville as to put up a fully operable traffic signal. They declined initially and wanted to put a flashing signal up. We saw no value in that and after additional conversation and intervention on the part of our mayor speaking to the mayor of Sharonville and further conversations between me and the Safety Service Director we have come to a gentlemanís agreement. Their Council has approved installation of a fully operable traffic signal. The signal will remain in flash mode with the exception of peak times at school to allow busses to enter and exit the premises. One of the requests that Sharonville had is that there is a closed loop system that would allow vehicles to exit the school property at certain times. The price is between $36,000 and $39,000 with each jurisdiction participating at 50%. I ask that we bring in legislation at the next Council meeting identifying Springdale as the lead agency. The City Engineer is putting together the numbers so we can go out to bid.
MEETINGS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
Planning Commission - September 11
Board of Health - September 13
Board of Zoning Appeals - September 19
Swearing in of police officers Ė new hire introductions September 19
Mayor Webster said the principal of Springdale Elementary School is planning to attend the next meeting. She is very grateful of the work the City did with the bus cut-off at the school.
COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE - none
UPDATE ON LEGISLATION STILL IN DEVELOPMENT
Ordinance 42 - September 19
Ordinance 43 - September 19
RECAP OF LEGISLATIVE ITEMS REQUESTED
Reject Ross Park bridge bids - September 19
LPA project agreement - September 19
Lead agency for signal at Heritage Hill - September 19
Agreement with Fairfield for study - September 19
Council adjourned at 8:00 p.m.
Edward F. Knox
Clerk of Council/Finance Director
Kathy McNear, President of Council