Council was called to order on August 20, 1997 at 7:00 p.m. by President of Council Randy Danbury.


The Pledge of Allegiance was recited by the governmental body and those in attendance. The Invocation was given by Mrs. McNear.


Roll call was taken by Mrs. McNear. Present were Council members Boice, Galster, Manis, McNear, Wilson and Danbury. Mr. Vanover was absent. Mr. Knox was also absent.


The minutes of August 6, 1997 were passed with 6 affirmative votes.




RULES AND LAWS - no report



PUBLIC WORKS - no report



CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS - Mr. Wilson reported on the Community Center HVAC replacement. The field work started August 11 and is to be completed by the end of September. The Carmen Creek improvements which are at Heritage Hill School - construction plans are complete. The 401 permit has been filed with EPA and EPA has indicated that they plan to complete the 401 permit application review by August 26. S. R. 747 CSX grade separation final environmental document has been submitted to ODOT for review. ODOT has verbally notified us of several comments which are being addressed. A scope of service meeting to verify the required design process has been scheduled with ODOT for August 18. It is anticipated that the detailed design work will begin in late September. The bids for the June 27 opening of the Community Center pool repair and improvements have been rejected. The project is being rebid. Bids were due August 15, 1997. Construction will take place between September 1997 and April 1998. The work is complete on the Community Center field wiring replacement. The Kemper Road traffic signal project at McGillard and Lawnview is under construction and is anticipated to be complete in October of this year. The preliminary plans are complete for the West Kemper Road storm sewer and a review meeting was conducted July 24. Final plans are to be complete by the end of August. The field survey is approximately 75% complete on the Sharon Road resurfacing and bikeway; and design will follow. We plan on completing design in November, bid and contract for the construction work next February, and have the project under construction from April - October 1998. The S. R. 4 improvements field work is underway and design will follow as soon as the field work is complete.


FINANCE COMMITTEE - Ms. Manis said they were supposed to meet tonight to discuss hiring a part-time secretary for the Tax Department. The meeting was postponed.


PLANNING COMMISSION - Mr. Galster said they had final approval of a new office building at the old Ground Round location. It would triple in size. Parking, a ground sign and the trash receptacle was worked out. It was approved 6-0.


Dan DeHamer requested a concept discussion of a proposed mult-family development at Church, Walnut and Elm Streets He requested to be tabled.


There was a presentation by Duke Associates for redevelopment and reuse of Swallens. They were suggesting three buildings and a possible restaurant. There were questions about density. This was concept discussion and no vote was taken.


BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS - Mrs. Boice reported they met last evening. William Mitchell had submitted his resignation so they elected a new chairman, James Squires; and vice-chairman, David Okum.


BP Pro Care at 11725 Princeton Pike requested a variance for a ground sign one foot from right of way line. They were obviously going to remove trees and were not aware of our tree preservation ordinance. This was tabled.


Tom Fogus, 1223 Castro Lane requested a variance to allow a pool to be 11í4" from the property line. That was granted 5-0.


Karen Day, 11843 Neuss Avenue requested a variance to allow an 8í x 8í shed 4í7" from the property line. She replaced it where a previous shed had been. One member abstained and the variance was granted 4-1.


George Hayward, 389 Cameron Road requested a variance to allow a 12í x 16í wooden shed on his property and the demolition of the garage. The garage was in bad shape and had been taken down several years ago. This was granted 5-0.


There was discussion regarding the fact that Mr. Mitchell is no longer with us. His replacement on BZA would only be for three months as his term expires December 1. It takes you nine months to a year to feel comfortable because this is the final appeal board in the City and cannot be overruled by any other board other than the courts. We felt under the circumstances that it would be unfair to appoint someone for three months when there is no assurance that they would be reappointed for the following term. We have no problem with the board we have. We worked many years with five members. We are comfortable with that. We will wait until December for a new appointee if that is okay with Council. There were no objections.


BOARD OF HEALTH - no report


O-K-I - no report


MAYORíS REPORT - Mayor Webster said I have an update on the Community Pride Program. There have been 195 requests for trucks in 1997. This is a very popular program. I had a voice mail from a lady who said this is the greatest program we have ever had. On the property inspections we have had approximately 1,000 property inspections, 43 referrals or complaints, 366 violation letters sent, and 315 compliances after letters.


ADMINISTRATORíS REPORT - Mr. Osborn said on the Community Center pool improvements we had estimated a cost of $305,000. When we opened the bids they were all higher than that estimate and we rejected them and rebid it. We opened the second round August 15 and again the low bid was $350,000. We believe the market is $350,000 and our estimate is low. Consequently, given the fact that the project is very popular for the potential of bringing additional families into the community center we believe it is worth the cost difference to go forward with the project. We had a preconceived idea of what this would cost based upon estimates. We did our best to come up with a best estimate but we did not hit what the market is bearing for this. It is our recommendation that Council award a contract to the lowest and best bid, Swimming Pool Specialists. Weíd like to ask for legislation at your next meeting awarding a contract.

I would like to refer you to a memo of August 18 related to the community relations sign. I would like to postpone discussion until Old Business.

At our next meeting we will be bringing in a resolution authorizing the application for the next round of funding under the State Capital Improvements Projects for three projects: Kemper Road storm sewer Phase I costs $483,000; Phase II is $363,000. Phase I will be in 1998. We will try to get as much assistance from outside resources as possible. We would like to include this under the SCIP application. The second project is the Sharon Road project at an estimated cost of $520,000. We have been bumping that back because we have been going after funding and have not been successful. We would like to do it again and see if we can generate more interest.

We have a traffic study on Kemper Road underway and the study is three-fourths complete. We are able to glean some information from it. It substantiates that we need more lane capacity right now on East Kemper Road east of S. R. 747. One of the elements in that report that Mr. Shuler will be presenting in September will probably involve the addition of a lane eastbound from S. R. 747 to Tri County Parkway. This will be a major project and have a substantial price tag with it. However, itís a project of regional importance and we believe it will fair pretty well in competition for SCIP or LTIP funding. We will be bringing in a resolution identifying the projects and prior to that we will be submitting a report as to our prioritization and recommendations for the percentage of local match on each project.


Mr. Wilson asked for an update on the gas main project. My memo of August 18, 1997 states that to break even we need 106 units. We have had affirmative responses from 98 property owners. Construction will start in Oxford Hills the first week of September. The streets involved in this construction project will include parts of the following streets: Allen Avenue, Ashmore, Chardon, Dimmick, Glensprings, Grandin, Greencastle, Harcourt, McClellans, Neuss, Observatory, Ray Norrish, Rose Lane, Springdale Lake Drive, Valley View and Yorkhaven. When it is done it will provide gas service to every home in Springdale. We have all those portions of streets that do not have gas in the right of way. This effort is to make our City complete in terms of gas service.

In my memo outlining upcoming legislation I requested that you consider having a public presentation at your next Council meeting for an electronic time recording system that we are considering for the City. Our PC network that is still under construction is on track to be completed by October 1. We would like to install the electronic time recording system this year.


LAW DIRECTORíS REPORT - A suit has been filed against the City involving a police officer assisting store security in stopping a juvenile in an alleged theft. Itís a $250,000 claim. It is being defended by MVRMA.

This is a summary of the information on Ordinance 62-1997 with a brief explanation of each section involved. For the most part these are required changes in our codification of the state law. Definitions are not required but it makes sense that we would be consistent with state law. You can change any sections that would not be inconsistent with the requirements of our Charter and state laws. If you have questions you can ask me. If there are sections of the code that should be changed differently just let me know and I can discuss whether we have the right to do it or not.


ENGINEERíS REPORT - Mr. Shuler said the summer street program is continuing on schedule. It should be complete in September. The driveway apron program is on schedule and should be completed by the end of the month.



Letter dated July 14, 1997 to Mr. and Mrs. Brett Marlar, 128 Rosetta Court: During the marking of the section of your driveway apron, which is schedule to be replaced by the cityís contractor, it was noticed that two sections of curb are heaved slightly. This is something that wasnít observed in he previous inspection. In reviewing the curb with my assistant, Mr. David Butsch, I believe that if we remove and replace the two entire sections of curb it will eliminate your driveway apron from the failure list.

As of this letter I am scheduling the two sections of curb in front of your driveway to be replaced by the cityís contractor during our current program and I am removing your driveway apron from the removal list. If you have any questions, please contact my office Monday through Friday from 7:00 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. Sincerely, Robert N. Sears, Superintendent of Public Works

Letter from Mr. and Mrs. Bret Marlar To Whom it may concern: My wife and I were elated to the good news of Springdale, concerning the fairness of the Cityís system - of review after the Board of Reviewís outcome in relationship about our apron. Specifically stating in paragraph 2 July 14, 1997 personally signed in black ink by Robert N. Sears, letter, where he goes on to say "I am removing your driveway apron from the removal list. My wife and I are again very grateful to the city and everyone and for Mr. Searsí very keen eye and professionalism for realizing the entire two sections of the curb to be removed was the problem! Youíre all to be commended. Job well done. And Iíd further like the residents of Springdale to know that itís not always so that in the city of Springdale the old saying doesnít bear true or hold water, "that you canít beat City Hall!" Itís true and people do care!! Thank you. Just NEVER give up!! Sincerely, new residents, Mr. and Mrs. Bret West Marlar (8-6-97) per conversation appxtíy 9:10 a.m. Mr. Sears assured me also he thinks the markings on the apron are nothing to be concerned about! (Just the curbs!) Two entire sections. (I hope so!) If not, from receipt of this letter, let me know.




Public Hearing



Tom Bonneville of Target introduced Art Harden of Woolpert Engineering who gave a presentation on Target. Mr. Harden said Target is looking at a residential area in the Tri County/Kemper Commons area that has not been developed over the years. There are two Kroger developments, Best Buy, a car dealership, a church, and industrial business in the area. This whole entire area on Kemper Road is controlled by several traffic signals and they are going to be some key points in the Target property and how we propose to develop that. There are two signals in the area close together at the Kemper Commons Center and Commons Circle. We propose to extend Century Boulevard up to Kemper Commons through this undeveloped property. Mr. Harden showed slides and said the area had not been developed because of topography. It will involve extensive costs to develop the property. There is an approximately 60 foot differential from one end of the property to the other. There will be massive grading to accommodate any type of development. There are three drainage swales that run through the property and a fourth that runs off to the east. The plan was presented to Planning Commission and there were two retail buildings shown on the east side of the proposed Century Boulevard extension. At the last Planning Commission there were questions as to how the property was to be built and incorporated into an overall masterplan that the City is looking at. Target has agreed to not ask for any site plan approval for that portion of the project this evening. The only two items we are looking for approval of are the parcel and the extension of Century Boulevard other than asking that that section be rezoned commercial along with the balance of the property. We also recognize that we will be required to come back into Planning Commission and City Council for a final site plan whether that property is developed by Target or is incorporated into a much larger development to accomplish the Cityís masterplan program. One of the changes we made in the site plan since the July 8 meeting was to reduce the retention basin to accommodate only the Target development. We will be extending the water line through the development, extending the sanitary across the development and sending electric along Century Boulevard.


At the July 8 Planning Commission meeting there were questions about additional landscaping. If you look at the handout Iíve given you, you can see that we have added additional landscaping since the July Planning Commission. We are going to retain a twenty-five foot no disturb buffer to protect the residents along McClellans Lane.


The building sits down below the roadway. In response to some staff comments, youíll notice that the light poles are bronze. We have met with staff on a couple of occasions. I met with Ann McBride on July 22 to review some of her comments presented on July 8. It was the request of Planning Commission that Target not develop what is considered the outlot parcel across Century Boulevard and that has been removed. Easement for properties on McClellans Lane and other areas have been taken into consideration and that is addressed in the latest revised site plans. There was an encroachment onto a forty foot strip. Target typically uses a sixty-three foot parking bay width which is the way the plan was originally developed. In order to eliminate the parking from off the adjacent properties we went back to a sixty-two foot parking bay which meets City standard and is typical by code. That is something your City Planner has not seen to date. We have been discussing this with her and this is the latest solution to that issue.


Initially Target had requested signs be permitted on the south, west and north faces of the building. We have deleted the sign off the north side. We are still requesting our pylon sign out front. We met with the City Engineer on August 13. We are incorporating his issues into the final plan approval.


Mr. Danbury said this is a public hearing. This and the next ordinance deals with this proposed element. This issue before us right now is whether we should rezone this from residential to PUD. The next ordinance deals with the actual plan he is representing tonight.


Louis Damron, 11666 McClellans Lane, said I am speaking for our street. We are opposed to it at this time but we have come a long way with agreements. As of right now we havenít reached any point where we agree. Weíd like a little more time to work out a few things we have to work out before we would agree to it.


Ms. Manis asked can you tell us what you are talking about? Are you looking to sell all your land?


Mr. Damron replied we have been talking with the developer. We have come to an agreed price but we have to get a few more things worked out. Thatís for the whole street and that way it goes as one unit and weíre not left there in this island of a nightmare of a traffic jam. We are all in it together. We have to work out some paperwork.


Mr. Wilson asked how much time do you need?


Mr. Damron responded 2-3 weeks. We need to see some things on paper.


Mr. Galster said through the course of time when we sent out a survey, had a McClellans Lane meeting, the residents have said take all of us or take none and leave us alone. They have made progress as far as a solution that keeps everybody happy but it has not happened up to this point. In conversations I have had with residents, if they canít agree on this they donít want any of this development to happen.


Mrs. Vivian Paffe, 11645 McClellans Lane, said I am the wife of Tim Paffe. Weíre the fourth generation of Richards/Paffe residents to live on this property. Weíve lived on the farm which we share with Mom, Lorene Richards Paffe and it was our intention to stay as long as we want to. As Springdale continued to grow and Don Pablos, Dickís, etc. moved in, it was obvious that this whole area was intended to be commercial. Two years ago we gave a great deal of thought and prayer and planned to start looking at offers. We have had offers since Tri County Mall was built twenty years ago. We heard from a number of people. We wanted to work with a company who would put their name on the building. We wanted a company that would be concerned with their community profile and would stake their reputation by putting their name on the building. We wanted something that was going to give back to the community. Target puts forth a lot of contribution to the community. I have spent the majority of my life here. My husband and his family have spent their whole lives here. Target met the criteria. There were a lot of companies out there who are interested but Target responded to all of our concerns immediately, with courtesy and a great deal of professionalism. The entire process was handled without aggression or imitation. I donít know if anyone else has ever dealt with a company who wants what you have but professional courtesy is not to be taken for granted. This was the first time in a long time that nice guys actually did finish first. This is not something that came upon us lightly. Target has taken into consideration all of the community. It is easy to be nice for two hours but this company has been talking with us for two years so the newness has far worn off. They have maintained quite a good relationship with us. To try to remove five generations from our homes was not easy.


Ms. Lori Wendling, North American Properties, said I am working with the property owners of McClellans Lane if anyone has any questions.


Ms. Manis asked how long do you think the process will take?


Ms. Wendling responded we have talked about duplicating some of the same documentation we used on the original four homes on McClellans. It will take two to three weeks.


Mr. Danbury said there are a lot of outstanding issues. The Law Director just received a complete copy of the covenants yesterday. Those have to be submitted fourteen days prior to the public hearing. I donít think we should be rushed into it. here are some issues that could sway us. We are going to have a traffic study done by our City Engineer for the September 24 meeting. I would rather make the right decision and would like to see if we can continue this to a later date, possibly in October.


Mr. Osborn asked would that it be possible for the staff to go on record with their reports this evening. It may affect your decision. Mr. Shuler has some comments he would like to give Council and Ms. McBride, our City Planner, is in the audience tonight if Council might have any questions for her.


Mr. Shuler said I put in front of each Council member a copy of the written report and have highlighted a few items. It is important to note as Mr. Harden commented, this is an ongoing process. A number of our comments are relating to the July 20 Planning Commission meeting because we have received new submittals as late as Monday and have not had time to review them to determine whether the information is sufficient to answer and address some of the issues that we are working on with the applicant. I donít believe there is any indication that issues will not be resolved. Itís just that I canít report to Council this evening that we have all issues worked out and we could support the project as submitted. The storm water detention basin is on the east side of Century Boulevard. The store and the entire parking lot is on the west side of Century That is a public street; therefore, the detention basin will be on a lot different than the major development. There will be a section of the covenants that will guarantee that this detention facility will be maintained by this developer. It is very normal in most projects you see to have a storm sewer system that will take minor storms and then have a major storm water routing which is usually over land where we get these severe storms and the water will run over land to the detention basin. In this case, since the detention basin is on the other side of a public street, we will require that the storm sewer system will be sized sufficiently so that they can put the 100 year storm into that detention basin without it flooding the public street. I assume they are working on that.


Traffic is difficult for us. As Mr. Osborn mentioned, we have been working since March on a Kemper Corridor Traffic Study. It will be presented at the meeting September 24. As we are working with the applicant on this site we know the traffic that this site will generate. We are working with them to resolve issues and handle that traffic properly. However, we are finding that there are other issues. Other development of the area will impact this site as well. We did not want to represent to Council that what you see on these plans will address all the traffic issues because there is the other off site future development which is also adding traffic to this area which we know will require modifications to Kemper Road, the Kemper/Century intersection and Century Boulevard. If you look through our report, I put two sections in here. One is called site traffic and roadway improvements. These are the issues we are working with the applicant on that primarily deals specifically with their site issues. The last page of that says Kemper Corridor issues. Knowing this was going to be a public hearing tonight we did not want you to act on this request without knowing the implications that the off-site traffic may have on that. As to projected traffic on Kemper, it appears not only are we looking at an additional lane on the north side of Kemper that was started when the Kemper Commons development was built, but also a right turn at major intersections which require another ten feet of right of way over and above what is shown on this development plan to accommodate that. As the area develops traffic increases. To handle the traffic into this site and also to handle the through traffic, you will probably see a double left turn off Kemper onto northbound Century. That would require widening Century to accommodate that double left onto Century Boulevard which means that we will require additional right of way on the east side of what has been shown here of that future commercial development. We are also working with the applicant and requesting that a barrier be put on Century Boulevard north of Kemper. Major traffic exiting onto Century Boulevard is in a location where we have the double left turn onto Kemper. We are concerned that entering traffic will be blocked by the left turns. We are recommending a barrier be put up to extend the traffic up to the north entrance into their parking lot. This becomes essential when Century Boulevard is completed to the north, is tied in to Kemper Commons Drive and according to our thoroughfare plan and the development agreements with the development to the west, at that time, Kemper Commons Drive signal be removed. That will be a right in, right out only onto Commons Drive. That means traffic in the Roberds area will be coming out and Century will have more traffic than just Target. There are a lot of issues I think will become much clearer in the next month. We will address them in the Corridor Traffic Study. Some issues do impact the site. There is a lot of information here and we could get into specifics but frankly, with an on-going work in progress, itís very difficult to answer specific questions but Iíll certainly try if you have any.


Mr. Osborn said I want to try to differentiate between the elements that are site related and those that are related to Kemper Road. Target has been working with the engineering staff in a very constructive, forthright manner. While they were aware that this study was going on, in fairness to Woolpert and Target this information is new to them. It is new to me too. We have been making fair progress. There is information that has just come in and there is the one issue about the median on Century Boulevard but that is under discussion. The right of way just surfaced. I want to make it clear that Target has not been reluctant to discuss this. Ms. McBride is in the audience this evening. I think you have her report from Planning Commission. There have been items in response to her comments. I donít know if you want to add anything at this point or answer questions, Ms. McBride.


Anne McBride said Iíd be happy to answer any questions. We had prepared a staff report which you have a copy of. We had asked for information on a number of occasions, particularly dealing with landscaping, lighting, signage, etc. I believe the majority of information came into our office Monday. We have not had a chance to thoroughly review that. Obviously, some of it is being submitted to you this evening and we have not had a chance to look at that. If it is Councilís pleasure weíd be happy to take a look at that information that has recently been submitted and compare it with the staff report that went to Planning Commission and prepare a revised staff report for Councilís use at your next meeting.


Ms. Manis asked have we addressed any of the lighting issues?


Ms. McBride replied they submitted that information Monday. My quick review of that information indicates that they significantly reduced the light levels at the property line. It was a great concern to staff that there not be any light spillage onto any of the residents on McClellans Lane so long as they choose to live there.


Ms. Manis said we didnít get the staff report. We just have responses to yours.


Ms. McBride said in summary, there were a number of landscaping issues. We didnít feel the property was being adequately landscaped. We didnít think the residents on McClellans Lane were being adequately protected for the time they chose to live there. There were concerns about whether our 20% open space requirement was met. There has been stated repeatedly that there would be no outdoor display or storage and I noticed in the information that came out most recently, that there is going to be some outdoor storage and display. We have asked for access easements for when the properties on McClellans Lane if or should they develop. The signage was a concern, both on the building and free standing. There were some questions on building elevations. Those were the major topics.


Mr. Galster said on outside cart storage which we said wouldnít be permitted, they are proposing landscaping to shield it. Not all the concerns are addressed so I think itís only fair, instead of going through the sheet we have and the sheet she has, that we wait and let it be disseminated appropriately.


Mr. Schneider said I do have in hand a submission of declaration of covenants and commitments which I have reviewed and Iím sure I can work it out with legal counsel. Weíve been in touch by phone. There are a lot of elements I am not familiar with. I did not have a chance to discuss some of the elements with Mr. McErlane. There are issues of joint property, the SKA property, the connection of the road and whoís responsible for the fill. As of July 8, I outlined twenty-two questions I had. Most have been responded to in the covenants I now have in hand. I need additional information as to where the various reports are and what we have done to resolve some of the issues before I can have the covenants near final form. I think we can resolve the covenants once details other people have mentioned are resolved within the administration.


Mr. Danbury said we were aware of some of the issues beforehand. I would like us to think this out. Is there a motion to continue this to a later date and keep in mind, we have a report concerning the traffic on the Kemper Road Corridor on September 24.


Mrs. Boice made a motion to continue the public hearing in progress until October 15 and that we have everything reviewed and tied up. Mr. Wilson seconded. The motion passed with 6 affirmative votes.

Public Hearing



Ms. Manis said I would like to discuss something. I want to make my feelings about the development known so they have some idea where Iím coming from. I was going to move to continue the hearing until the residents are taken care of. That was my main concern. We are kidding ourselves if we think nothing commercial is going to come in here. I would rather have one big, nice thing than a bunch of small things. I know traffic is something we have to deal with, whether itís widening Kemper or finding a different access to the site; but I do think we have to look at it seriously. There are a lot of issues to address still but as long as the residents are happy, I think we can work something out.


Mr. Schneider said I suggest so that everybody has adequate time for review and to give the necessary response back, that the developer consider having everything in before October 15.


Mrs. Boice said I think itís great that you made that point. I donít want to come in on October 15 and get 4, 8, 10 type written pieces of paper. We are the ones who cast the vote. We need time before we come into that meeting. We need the information one week in advance.


Mr. Bonneville said I apologize for the lack of timeliness, and perhaps, now that you have described it more completely to me, our rudeness for bringing data to you as late as we have. We didnít know exactly that there was a deadline. We thought a vote on zoning did not mean final site plan approval. I really donít know about additional data you will need between now and October 15 so I think this is really our input. We have surprise data that came to us from the Corridor Study. We didnít think from prior discussions that our project would be wrapped into that in anyway. We know you need to plan for the streets. I know when you work with highway departments sometimes it takes ten years for roadway design development, implementation, budgeting, approvals, etc. I hope you will keep that aspect of road planning in mind. What we have to do on Century Boulevard is administratively a lot easier because we are dealing with a board of directors. We are supposed to meet with the capital expenditures committee this month. We hope we can give them some assurances as to where we stand. I donít know if there is any possibility of an earlier meeting if we were to request it. Has that ever happened?


Mr. Shuler said we are planning to distribute the study on September 17 so Council can look at it before we make the presentation on September 24.


Mr. Danbury said this corridor study affects you. The study affects everybody. All businesses are going to be impacted. If nothing happens there we want to make sure that traffic is taken care of. If something like your business goes in there we want to make sure itís taken care of. I would think you would want something like this and I would hope that you would be at the meeting on September 24 to hear what will be told to us.


Mr. Osborn stated that while your consultants and Target have submitted all material that doesnít mean all the answers are in place. I would anticipate that many are now but I think there is still potential for dialog on some issues. We need to resolve all of those well in advance and have documents to Council the week before October 15. I really have to anticipate that given the volume of information that we will have questions and you will have to give us answers. Ultimately we will come to a favorable conclusion I would anticipate. I donít think itís fair to say youíve given us everything we need so now itís our turn. I think there will continue to be a dialog.


Mr. Bonneville said I will try to make sure Art Harden and others are available to your staff. I hope we can get through this with you next time.


Ms. Manis made a motion to continue the public hearing in progress until October 15 and Mrs. Boice seconded. The motion passed with 6 affirmative votes.


Mr. Galster made a motion to recess and Mr. Wilson seconded. Council recessed from 8:25 to 8:40.




Mrs. Boice made a motion to read by title only and Mr. Wilson seconded. The motion passed with 6 affirmative votes.


Mr. Galster made a motion to adopt and Mrs. Boice seconded.


Ms. Manis said I know you explained this before. The majority of our ordinances are modeled after the State of Ohio ordinances. When there are changes to those then we are changing ours to match theirs.


Mr. Schneider responded we have to do it in some instances that involve criminal matters. In others we can create our own things. I set it out as the state code sets it out. If there are some things we choose to change we can do that. The Chief of Police has reviewed it all and is in agreement with the changes that are in this recommendation tonight.


Ms. Manis asked is this initiated once a year. Mr. Schneider replied yes.



Ordinance 62-1997 passed with 6 affirmative votes.




Mrs. Boice made a motion to adopt and Mr. Galster seconded.




Mr. Galster made a motion to adopt and Ms. Manis seconded.


Ms. Manis asked are we still under budget?


Mr. Shuler replied the budget was $500,000. A number of other projects were put in to bid as a package to get a better bid. We are still under what our combined estimate was.


Ordinance 64-1997 passed with 6 affirmative votes.




Mr. Galster made a motion to read by title only and Ms. Manis seconded if the ordinance is explained. The motion passed with 5 affirmative votes.


Ms. Manis made a motion to adopt and Mr. Galster seconded.


Mayor Webster said in 1994 Council issued a $2,000,000 note to finance the improvement to Northwest Boulevard. We renewed it in 1995 and 1996. This is the third renewal. The plans were to sell bonds to take care of this indebtedness and the length of bonds will be decided by Council. The revenue to retire the bonds is to come from the property itself, the tax the City derives from the increased valuation that is caused by building that road that goes into a separate fund called the TIF. We are starting to get substantial money in - $52,000 this year. This is another reason why we need Mr. King to get his development going. Once that happens we should be able to sell the bonds and start retiring this debt. Until that time the only choice we have is to roll the note.


Ordinance 65-1997 passed with 6 affirmative votes.




Mr. Osborn brought up the community information sign. The project would cause an information sign to be placed at the northeast corner of Lawnview and Springfield Pike. There is a landscape feature there and one reflected across the street. The idea behind this sign is to provide an opportunity for all of the buildings on the municipal campus to have the opportunity to provide notice to the public on Springfield Pike about events such as Council meetings, public hearings, special events, fire prevention week, etc. We kept in mind some of the recommendations of the corridor plan. We wanted to treat this as a gateway type landmark for the municipal complex. We originally had this laid out as a continuation of the original wall with a sign set in that wall. Since that time a couple of ideas have come up which we have incorporated into the planning. The first is a water feature and we brought in a landscape architect to help with this. He made some suggestions like not having water trickle down over stone. He said itís an exposed area and you will get calcium and algae buildup. He recommended that the water feature not have a trickle to it but a waterfall appearance using two scuppers. There is a flat stone with another flat stone on the sides to channel the water. The water cascades down into a collection trough. There is a scupper on each side of the sign. The water will fall down into the lower reservoir. A submerged pump will pick up the water and pump it back to the upper reservoir. The upper reservoir will feed the scuppers. We have a water service planned for the project that would service an automatic fill feature on the water feature. In addition, we think the additional cost of bringing water to the site is beneficial in that it will allow us to provide better irrigation to the landscaping we have already and with additional sections of wall. The next idea was using an electronic message board instead of an internally illuminated box sign with changeable letters. Attached to my memo of August 18 I show you three different signs. There is a three line sign with 10 inch characters, 16 characters per line. The larger version is a four line sign but causes the cost to go up $6,000 more. The last drawing I have is the sign we were originally going to use, the internally illuminated box sign. The project has grown in cost. Initially in the budget planning at the beginning of the year we set aside $35,000. That was my best estimate as to what this would cost with our forces doing as much work as possible and trying to break it up into smaller increments and do it on a purchase order basis. That cost was off by $10,000. The first concept for this project would have a more realistic expense of $45,500. To add a water feature is $12,000; plumbing is $5,000. The project will have to be packaged and bid in order to meet the requirements of the Charter in terms of construction projects. The third alternative includes the water feature and electronic sign and takes the cost up to $97,200. Thatís a substantial growth in what started out to be a relatively simple project. Just as we had some preconceptions on the water slide, that cost has grown a little bit. I think we have to look at this in the same vein. It started out as a rather simple project. Some very good ideas have come in and we have incorporated those in. The sign is located at the entry to the municipal complex. Itís on a piece of green space. Doing something like this ensures that that corner will be green space from now on. Before we went any further we wanted to bring the cost back to you and ask you which option you would like us to pursue.


Mr. Danbury asked do we allow businesses to have electronic signs?


Mr. Osborn replied yes, but we donít allow them to pan across. We donít intend to do that. The advantage to that sign is that we can change it more simply than moveable letters. The control would be from the Municipal Building. It would be attached to a computer in the building and operated from here so we can have different messages. If we have two or three events we can cause it to change two or three times a day. There are signs like this in the community. It would not have movable text. .


Mr. Wilson asked what effect will weather conditions have on this electronic sign?


Mr. Osborn replied we have solicited a proposal from one of the sign companies. Thatís what they are built for - to be outside.


Mr. Wilson said some have shorted out. Whether itís weather or mechanical related I donít know.


Mrs. McNear said I worked at USA Mobile on I-275. We probably had about three outages in six years. Sometimes it was a lightning strike but for the most part there was no problem with the sign. Would it have graphics as well?


Mr. Osborn responded I donít know if that capability is in the software. We hadnít planned on it. We can have three lines or one big line. Dissemination of information is what I saw as important.


Mrs. McNear said the system we had did have some pre-programmed graphics on it. If you were handy with a mouse you could create some of your own pictures too.


Mr. Osborn responded that would probably be a situation where you have moving text and have more room.


Mr. Danbury said if we do that we will have to allow businesses to use it also so weíd be defining our code.


Mr. Osborn said there is no problem with graphics as long as itís not moving.


Mayor Webster said we started off very small. Mr. Osborn and Gary Thompson were going to put it together. It is a lot of money and a far cry from what we started with. I look at it as this is one of the gateways to the City. Itís the entrance to the City campus. Even though itís a lot of money it pales in comparison to what we have here. We have owned the property for some time. Itís a great setting. The wall blends in with the plaza next door. I wholeheartedly recommend we do it. My question is, are three lines enough or should we go with four lines.


Mrs. Boice said alternative one is more than double alternative three. The wall jumps in price. I know Mr. Galsterís water is near and dear to him and I can relate to projects that are near and dear to people but that water feature jumps the project $19,000 alone. I agree that corner is certainly an entry to all that we have. I have trouble with the price.


Mr. Osborn said Mr. Galster had no idea how much it cost. I really think the water feature makes this a unique landmark. For that reason I agree with the Mayor. Itís worth the investment. It has a hefty price tag but itís a unique opportunity to add character to this part of the corridor. It gives us an opportunity to continue setting a theme or standard for the remainder of the corridor as it develops. Itís rather pricey but I think we would probably regret it if we built the wall without it.


Mayor Webster said the cost starts at $45,500. Itís another $27,100 for the water and the electronic board would add another $24,600.


Ms. Manis said I would rather have the sign than the water. After looking at this sign the other sign looks chintzy. I echo Mrs. Boiceís sentiments. It looks very pretty.


Mr. Danbury said I have some concerns. We can always add it. I have spoken with a few residents about this and some people wonder why we would want a sign but one person said she forgot about the concerts we have at the amphitheater. So I think there is some wisdom of putting this in. The water is a good idea but for the cost we can always add it.


Mrs. Boice said I think it would be more expensive to add it later. I love the concept. Iím just having a difficult time thinking I have to bite into that kind of money.


Mr. Osborn said we donít have to have a decision tonight but if we donít make one soon we will have to put it off until next year. We had the first proposal in August 1995. Two weeks wonít hurt.


Mrs. McNear said we could have not so much a memorial garden but a celebration of life garden. Perhaps this is how we can finance this where people could buy a brick. Iíve seen it done in other cities and itís very attractive. People could see their stone in the wall and I think that would become a community project where people would have more pride instead of saying we spent $100,000 on a sign. We could put stone on the wall or place a plaque on the wall.


Mr. Danbury said itís an idea and Iím not shooting it down. But to put it up there; itís paid for graffiti. We want to have it really nice.


Mrs. McNear said maybe you use pavers. I would like to see something that we could say we own a piece of. I think it would be fun for people who live here.


Mr. Osborn said we could take a look at that. Rather than put something on the wall it might be possible to line the sidewalk with pavers. Maybe we could find corporate sponsors. Rather than make a decision and pull up short I think we are better off pushing it back and trying to come up with outside funds to help us do it the way most of us would like to see it done.


Ms. Manis said on the history some of us have discussed maybe knocking it off in 1987. We could add another ten years in 2,000 or whenever we decide to do hardback.


Mrs. Boice said whatever you choose to do. I have been pushing this project for so long.


Mayor Webster said I think we told you at the last meeting that we would have it to you by tonight and next meeting we would have a discussion at the next meeting.


Mrs. McNear said I was on vacation last week and have not had a chance to read it but I donít understand why we would have gone to the expense of having an update and not include it in the publication.


Mr. Galster said I did get a chance to read the whole thing and I thought it was pretty well written. Some things are time dated. I am not interested in line item veto. I was interested reading it before it was published and I do support publishing it. Time is what judges history. If you try to make it history and it comes too close to the present day, then maybe itís not objective. It hasnít stood the test of time.


Ms. Manis said itís very interesting. Take it for what it is. Itís a history of the City that is taken from minutes and other certain things. Iím sure there is a lot of history that isnít included because they werenít a part of us. A lot of people have a different idea of the history of Springdale than what comes out of this building. You have to take it for what it is. I personally would change the way itís written as a whole. With my style of writing I would rather see something else. Itís very good, very interesting. I learned some things I never knew before.


Mr. Danbury said it was portrayed in an article since I brought it up, that I want to hide the negatives. I stated in the minutes that I donít want to sugarcoat anything. There are a couple of issues that were totally neglected. I felt this person wrote well and covered the material very well.. But here was one instance that was national news. We had live reports from every single TV station here and there was not one mention of it. If you are going to talk about historical things, itís not negative. It just happened. We have other positive things that werenít really delved into. Why do we go ahead and sanction this. She did a very wonderful job but she didnít cover things the way I would have liked her to cover them.


Mr. Wilson said I feel comfortable with it up to 1987 based on what Iíve read. I donít feel comfortable with after 1987. Thatís more like current events subject to interpretation.


Mr. Danbury said we can discuss this at the next meeting.




Mrs. McNear requested a resolution for Mr. Mitchell for his service on Board of Zoning Appeals.


Mayor Webster requested a resolution for the Explorers. I will also issue a proclamation and have that ready for the next meeting.


Mr. Osborn said the event starts at 7:00 p.m. Because there is a conflict with another event that evening he proposed that that evening be changed so that the public officialsí comments can begin at 7:00 and conclude around 7:30 p.m. Then theyíll have their dinner and other awards. They have other fire officials to speak. He is trying to accommodate us by providing some time early in the evening that public officials can participate.


Mr. Glaster said in my Planning Commission report I forgot to mention that a three story office building was proposed to go behind the black stone building on Century Boulevard with access on Century Boulevard.




Planning Commission September 11, 7:00 P.M.

Special Council Meeting September 24, 7:00 P.M.






Ordinances 59 and 60 - continued until October 15

Item 5 - Springdale Building Code - September

Item 7 - Resolution authorizing application for SCIP

Ordinance for sprinkler system for municipal building grounds

Presentation on the electronic timekeeping -September 3


Ordinance on pool renovation - $350,000

Resolution for William Mitchell

Resolution for the Explorers


Council adjourned at 9:40 p.m.


Respectfully submitted,





Edward F. Knox

Clerk of Council/Finance Director


Minutes Approved:


Randy Danbury, President of Council




__________________________, l997