President of Council Randy Danbury called Council to order on November 3, 1999, 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 Galster, Manis, McNear, Pollitt, Vanover, Wilson and Danbury.

The minutes of October 20, 1999 were approved with 7 affirmative votes.


Mr. Vanover made a motion to adopt Mr. Wilson seconded.

Mr. Vanover said this is a special group of guys who have worked extremely hard this season. They were the most successful fall athletic team in Princeton this season. They are a neat bunch of gentlemen and very much reflect the coaching philosophy of their two coaches, who are two of the finest examples of what Princeton has. You see these guys out there and feel a little better about the future because they are the future.

Mayor Webster said on behalf of Springdale and the other jurisdictions in the Princeton School system, we certainly are proud of any Princeton athletic team that accomplishes something as you young men have done. Keep up the great play and congratulations.

Resolution R23-1999 passed with 7 affirmative votes.


Mr. Knox read an e-mail from Rob Hormann, 251 Nelson Lane: "Dear Council Members: I am writing in concern of a corner of our City. When you come into our City from either the north or south on Springfield Pike the businesses have done an excellent job of keeping their establishments looking nice, well-groomed and clean. When you get to the west corner of Springfield Pike and Kemper Road, on the south side you have a piece of property that has contained many businesses over the years and is now sitting vacant. On the other corner you have a business that was once a gas station and is now a repair shop and towing business. I can understand that businesses come and go and a vacant building will come up on occasion. However, to allow the current operating business on the other corner to have at least fifteen or more cars parked in no real order and in various states of disrepair, makes the corner look disreputable. I know the City has a law for the residential property owners to keep their property at home looking nice. Is there such a law on the books for businesses? And if so, why are we looking the other way? Thank you for your time."

Mr. Osborn stated we appreciate that correspondence even though it is a little misinformed because it does underscore certain activities that we are pursuing and intend to continue to pursue. There is a property maintenance code that applies to the entire city, not just residential. The property on the southwest corner is a vacant facility that was most recently Precision Tune. We have been working with that property owner and the adjacent property owner, White Castle, for three or four months with White Castle showing the intention of acquiring that property and incorporating it into the White Castle site. That process has gone a lot slower than we had hoped and in fact, the Building Official is going to take it off the agenda for this monthís Planning Commission meeting because we have not seen any recent activity. We will pursue having a light stanchion that is leaning corrected and other minor things. The other property is on the northwest corner of that intersection. Again, we have had that property owner in court several times in the last year. He has been cited for removing some trees without authority, leaving his parking lot in an unsafe and unimproved condition following the removal of underground tanks, and excessive parking of towed vehicles on the lot. As a result of several of these citations the individual has been in court. In his court appearances he gave evidence to the magistrate that he was in the process of selling the property and he anticipated that that would come about. The magistrate counseled the City to try to work out an agreement with him to accommodate the situation until the property changed hands. We recently learned that that is not going to occur. The opportunity to sell that property has disappeared and as a result, there will be further action against that property owner. You may have noticed that within the last week, prior to receiving this, the number of vehicles on that site has diminished, because the Building Official had one of his personnel go out and talk to the owner. It is our intention to enforce the code even-handedly. We all here put a lot of time and effort into trying to make the City look attractive, not only to residents but to the public in general. An eyesore such as the one we are talking about can destroy a great deal of effort put out by other private property owners as well as the City in terms of code enforcement. So itís not a matter of oversight or the fact that we have failed to do anything. Iíd have to say that we have not been successful to the degree we want to be but that only means that we will become a little more aggressive in the future. Frankly, the timing on this letter, while not being fully informed, certainly reinforces our feeling that we need to step up our efforts with that particular party.



Mr. Osborn said we have run legal ads regarding public meetings on this topic for this meeting and the meeting of October 6. The purpose of the public part of these meetings is to solicit input from the residents and community at large regarding any type of activity, improvement program, etc., that would qualify for funding under the Urban County Community Development Program. As Iíve mentioned at earlier meetings the funding for this program is very specific in the types of activities it will include as eligible. In general, the primary objective is to benefit low and moderate income persons or to serve to eliminate or prevent slums and blight, or to address an urgent local community development need. In terms of geographic areas, there are only two areas that quality for potential funding. One is the census block group bounded by Forest, Springfield Pike, Kemper and Greenlawn. The other is the Cityís designated urban renewal district. We have recommended two projects to Council, one in each of those areas. Before Council considers our recommendation and the legislation I have requested, perhaps we open the floor to the public for any additional input on this matter.

By the ordinance Council would be authorizing the application and specifically setting the priorities for our application.

Mr. Galster made a motion to add the emergency clause and Ms. Manis seconded. The motion passed with seven affirmative votes.

Mr. Galster made a motion to approve the ordinance and Ms. Pollitt seconded.

Mr. Osborn said I was going to describe the priorities on the project we are recommending. One project would involve reconstructing the street systems within that census block group that I described earlier bounded by Forest, Springfield Pike, Kemper and Greenlawn. This would be a full curb and gutter replacement, as well as full depth repair and overlay of the street system. We estimate that project to cost just under $445,000. The other project is the rehabilitation and replacement of the street system in our urban renewal district which is bordered on the west by Springfield Pike, the south by Kemper, the east by Walnut and the north by Orange Street. We are recommending that the urban renewal district be designated as our preference for the first year, 2000. The amount of that project is estimated to be $199,250. We would then recommend that the other project be broken down into two phases and funded in two years, $222,000 in 2001 and $222,000 in 2002. Initially we were looking at the western project coming in ahead of the urban renewal area. We have on our long range capital budget a reconditioning program for our subdivision streets and initially we had this subdivision targeted for replacement in the year 2000. However, we are now anticipating when we come back to Council for the 2000 street repair program, we are going to move some of the streets in the Heritage Hill area up to 2000 because they are showing more rapid deterioration. We would come back to the Springdale Parks subdivision in 2001/2002 and at that same time pick up the eastern portion of the streets that would be eligible under this funding program. The two projects would be broken out into three fairly equal increments. We would like to press forward with the reconditioning of the streets in the urban renewal district because we do anticipate the acquisition of that property. We would like to do the redevelopment of the streets in a timely manner so we can be in ahead of or at the same time the property is put back on the market for redevelopment as opposed to trying to market the property, see someone develop it and then come in behind them and do their streets over.

Ms. Manis said I think project two should go first if for no other reason than to get the area around the school cleaned up.

Mr. Danbury asked if we are to put our priorities in place right now and something would come up, is it etched in stone that we have to do this?

Mr. Osborn replied since it is in three increments, letís suppose we are awarded in the order we requested here and for some reason we decide we donít want to do the urban renewal area in 2000, I think the management at Hamilton County Community Development would be flexible enough to let us move them around. If we were talking about two different types of projects and maybe a big discrepancy in the amount of dollars they might have a problem with that, but I think we might have more flexibility given the circumstances.

Ordinance 50-1999 passed with seven affirmative votes.


Mr. Vanover made a motion to adopt and Mr. Galster seconded.

Mr. Osborn said we have an existing tax increment financing district on the area generally known as the Pictoria Island area. Itís bordered on the south by I-275, on the west by the ShowCase Cinema properties and IDI warehouse, on the north by Crescentville Road and on the east by Avon. Itís comprised of about 38 acres. The existing TIF is for $2 million. That paid for the street infrastructure that is out there now. We have seen some success but not to the extent we had hoped. In terms of attracting development we have General Advertising on site and we have Fresh America in the IDI warehouse. The warehouse is only partially full. At the present time the existing TIF is barely in a position to pay the interest on notes that we have been rolling. When this potential development came along, one of the proposals we put to the developer is that the existing TIF be rolled into the new TIF. To simplify things I think we will just leave it at that and let you know that, while we have an existing TIF, weíre talking about creating a new TIF that will effectively absorb the debt of the old TIF. The existing TIF is a general obligation debt of the City which means we have pledged our full faith and credit. The TIF we are looking at with NorthKing would be a revenue bond situation and we would not have public monies at risk. In effect, we would be eliminating a $2 million general obligation of the City, while at the same time attracting a very spectacular development. The proposed development will be explained in more detail by Mr. Tipton who is here this evening. We are talking about a site that includes four quality restaurants such as Bahama Breeze that is already approved by Planning Commission and under construction; and 720,000 square feet of office space. Thatís probably a third of all the class A office space we have in the City already. And there is the potential for a hotel on the site as well. The estimated value of these improvements tops $104 million. In order to induce this investment, we are proposing to issue debt to fund certain public improvements in the neighborhood of $13 million. That would include the construction of additional streets, storm sewers, sanitary sewers, and most importantly, parking facilities. With the existing TIF rolled in, and by the time other issues are resolved weíre probably talking of a debt at $15 -$17 million or higher. We have been working with the developer on these issues for probably the biggest part of a year and I think we are making great headway. We need to get this ordinance on the books, not only to capture Bahama Breeze, but the potential development of the first office building that would be built on the site. If development occurs prior to the adoption of the ordinance creating the TIF, then we stand a real risk that that development would not be counted as part of the improvements to the TIF. We are creating service payments on increased values. Right now that property has an assessed value. Thatís going to change as a result of development. The difference in potential taxes is set aside and becomes service payments that help us retire debt. So that we donít risk losing any of that to this TIF, weíd like to get this ordinance on as soon as possible. There is language in the ordinance that protects the City. In the event that we fail to reach an agreement with the developer we can cancel this agreement without any obligation or liability on the part of the City. In fact, by adopting this ordinance we are not making any commitment to issue debt, so there is no risk to the City by taking this action while we finalize the details on the service agreement. The service agreement, once negotiated, would have to come back to City Council and be approved by you before it could be executed and become a binding obligation. A third document I want to make you aware of involves the school district. Because of state law, the school district has a position in the negotiations. In order to accomplish the things we want to see happen here it will require the approval of the Board of Education to certain elements of this agreement. State law requires revenue sharing with the school district of income tax on projects with an income of over $1 million. We have consistently taken the position that we donít want to enter into that type of agreement. This developer has agreed to negotiate a side agreement with the school district where service credit money would go to the school district based on a certain formula. Once that agreement is reached with the school district, we will also have to be a party to that agreement and I think that will probably be fairly easy for us. The biggest factor is getting the agreement in a fairly final form between the school district and the developer. Once that occurs, that will be another document we will be bringing before Council for your approval.

Mr. Ed Diller, with Taft, Stettinius and Hollister, is representing our bond counsel tonight. Tim Quinn, who has been serving as our principal had another commitment this evening. Ed, who has worked on numerous TIFs in the past agreed to fill in for Tim tonight to answer any questions Council may have regarding action we are taking tonight or action that we will need to be taking in the future.

David Tipton, Tipton, Inc., would like to expound more on the nature of the development.

Mr. Tipton passed out drawings to show what they plan to put on the site. We will have four restaurants around the lake. The first one is Bahama Breeze, which is owned by Darden Foods, who also owns Red Lobster and Olive Garden. It is one of the strongest restaurant chains in the country so weíre pleased to have them. It will be a one of a kind restaurant in Cincinnati. There will be 10,000 square feet inside plus an additional 3,000 square feet of patios. They have excellent food and I think it will be something people will drive for miles around to come to. Weíre into discussions with three other restaurants. Most restaurant sites are about an acre and Bahama Breeze is 3.5 acres. We can put together three acres for the other three restaurants if we need to. Next Wednesday afternoon the representative from MEPTA, which is Multiple Employer Pension Trust, who will be our partner in the office buildings is coming into town, hopefully to start finalizing documents. Weíre trying to close that deal for the first two office buildings this month. Itís very necessary to get this ordinance done prior to that time. The office buildings will probably be the nicest office buildings in suburbia. The nearest thing in my mind would be the Bank One Tower in Kenwood. It is very critical to our ability to market these buildings that we have the parking structure. If we didnít have the parking structure we would have a sea of cars out front and that certainly wouldnít give us the appearance we are looking for for a class A office building. Iíd be happy to answer any questions.

Mr. Wilson said I see the master plan and I see your drawing. They donít match up.

Mr. Tipton said one was done by the engineering firm of Woolpert and one was done by the architectural firm of Cooper Kerry out of Atlanta. They are meeting tomorrow at 1:30 p.m. to try to merge those. The first building nearest to Avon will be a six story building with just over 190,000 square feet. The other building will be an eight story building.

Mr. Wilson said the garage will be four levels versus five.

Mr. Tipton responded that is in dispute right now. MEPTA would like to see more parking. We have scheduled everything for four cars per thousand and they are talking about five cars per thousand. That will be discussed next Wednesday.

Mayor Webster said when we met last Wednesday I left the meeting with he impression that you did, in fact, have an agreement with the school board. Has that agreement been executed?

Mr. Tipton replied it has not been executed. Iím told that the treasurer of the school board has discussed this with various members of the school board. I guess sequentially you have to approve this ordinance tonight prior to them going to their board and having it signed. I think that is scheduled for November 15.

Mayor Webster said there will be a new majority on the school board. Do you anticipate any problems with that?

Mr. Tipton responded I asked that question of Mr. McDonnough and he does not anticipate any problems.

Ms. Pollitt said office building #2 will be built first. Can you give me a time estimate on the other office building and parking garage?

Mr. Tipton stated it would be very difficult to tell you when we would do the second one. It would depend totally on the lease up of the first one. When the first one is 50-60% leased, weíll probably start the second one. We have a 100,000 square foot prospect that we are trying to work with for the first one. If we accomplish that it probably wouldnít be too long before we start the second one.

Ms. Manis said I think the buildings in this picture look very nice. I hope the parking garages look just as nice.

Mr. Tipton answered they will. A lot of attention will be put on these buildings and they wonít be plain old concrete. We may try to do an atrium connecting the parking garages.

Ms. Pollitt asked how do you plan to handle the area that is not being developed at the present time.

Mr. Tipton said the land area for the second building will be graded and seeded until such time as we get ready to build the second building there. The back 15.3 acres is where we are stockpiling dirt until we can move it back forward on the front site. We propose that it be seeded and mowed until we get ready to use it for the second building.

Ms. Pollitt asked what about the roadways? Will those be put in?

Mr. Tipton replied the first cul-de-sac by the restaurants will be put in as part of the work to be done right now. Our project starts at the exit ramp. Weíll redo the whole front, reseeding, sodding and making it look decent.

Ms. Manis said they continually store equipment there.

Mr. Danbury said in the event you cannot reach a deal with the school board, would that be a deal killer?

Mr. Tipton replied yes, that would be. I have been assured and reassured that that is not a problem but you never know.

Mr. Danbury asked when do you anticipate that we might see offices three and four? When do you think the whole thing would be complete?

Mr. Tipton responded we hope it is completed in five years. We would consider that a very successful project. In our business it is all up and down. I think this is a wonderful site but itís an unproven site for our business. Weíll have to convince people that this is class A office building territory. Downtown Kenwood obviously is.

Mr. Danbury asked when you do this, do you find that you are getting new tenants to the area or would we be taking tenants from our other buildings?

Mr. Tipton said the 100,000 square foot tenant is from another area. We usually get the biggies coming into the area but I wonít tell you that there wonít be some from existing buildings.

Ms. Manis asked what is the Cityís obligation to the revenue bonds?

Mr. Diller replied the former issue was a GO obligation which meant the City was responsible for the payment of those bonds. With the revenue bonds the obligation comes from the cash flow of the project itself. There also is an arrangement with the developer to provide security for the bond anticipation notes that will be issued as a predecessor to the actual bonds, then some period of time during the issuance of the bonds to have obligations of the developer to take care of shortfalls.

Ms. Manis said so if the property doesnít develop revenue, the bond from the surety firm of the developer will cover that.

Ordinance 51-1999 passed with seven affirmative votes.


Mrs. McNear made a motion to adopt and Mr. Vanover seconded. Resolution R22-1999 passed with seven affirmative votes.

Council recessed from 8:06 to 8:10 p.m. for picture taking.


Mr. Danbury said I just want to call Council and the Mayorís attention to board positions that will be coming up for renewal or appointment of new people. Council has an appointment for BZA at the end of this month. We have two for Planning Commission and one for the end of the year for Charter Revision and Mr. Colemanís position on Civil Service. I just want to get this to everybody so they can think about it. The Mayor has a number of appointments that heíll have to fill. It would be a great idea to have some things finalized the first meeting of December.

Mr. Wilson said a while back we talked about income tax and requiring sixteen year olds to file a return with the City whether they were employed or not.

Mr. Schneider said we have been in discussion with Mr. Knox and Mrs. Burton on that subject and we have advised the Administration as to what options we see, what the requirements are, what the documents say and what the practices have been. Weíre in the process of scheduling a meeting with Mr. Knox and Mrs. Burton at their convenience to discuss those.

Mr. Knox said at the moment the Tax Department personnel, Mrs. Burton and I have developed fourteen suggested changes to the current ordinances. In the Finance Department we are also working on proposed changes to the Charter. I would prefer to do these things all in the same time frame. The two outstanding items have to do with business returns and the question Mr. Wilson brought up. We have looked at a lot of if then, whereases in this situation and also the Ohio Revised Code. Of course, Mr. Schneiderís office has provided us with quite a bit of information on that and we think we can make a recommendation. It wonít be perfect because there are so many things bearing on us that we have no control over, but we do intend to come in with recommendations, probably in January.

Ms. Manis said Ms. Pollitt said something at the last meeting about having an excused absence from the Board of Health. I didnít know we had excused absences. I know we have talked about people missing several committee meetings and things we can do about that. Iíd like Council to consider that and make a policy. We have people who miss several meetings and they are getting paid to be there. I think we should do something about that.

Ms. Pollitt said I was out campaigning this weekend and one of the residents brought up the history. We just did something for the time capsule; letís clean up other issues weíve had for a while.

Mr. Parham responded we are pretty much where we were the last time I reported to you. The young lady who came in to prepare the history for us was at that time just working on odds and ends projects. She has since taken on a full-time position and we have not been able to coordinate our schedules to get together, plus I let the ball drop.

Ms. Pollitt asked could we get that going again? Ms. Manis said didnít we get a copy to review?

Mr. Parham said we had a copy and we were asked to place that on hold because there was concern with some of the wording and some of the stories. We brought that back at a later date and I did receive comments back from Mayor Webster and Mr. Osborn. We put those comments and the document itself on hold.

Ms. Pollitt asked for a copy of the history.

Mayor Webster stated I thought we distributed that second chapter that picked up in 1989. I donít know everybody elseís opinion but I thought it was very inadequate. I didnít feel that it flowed well at all with the first chapters. Granted, weíre going to have to deal with two different authors because the lady who did the first part is deceased. Weíll have to find somebody to do the last chapter who can do a better job of dovetailing into the first one. Thatís where we dropped it. We were not satisfied with the product we received. In Derrickís defense I think weíre probably to the point that we need to start over on the last chapter.

Mr. Osborn said I agree with the Mayor. As Mr. Parham reported I made comments on the draft of the most recent chapter. I was unhappy with the product we got. I think weíre working against diminishing returns to go back to the party who wrote that chapter to seek out improvements. I think it was probably some simplification or misstatement of facts. I donít think it was intentional but having not lived through it, the party writing the material relied too much on one or two comments from people and took that as the full truth of the matter. In most cases there are two sides to an issue. This most recent chapter set up what I think to be fairly contentious issues that do not need to be created. The first portion of the history is on our home page. If you want to see the history of Springdale from the late 1700s through the mid 1980s you can go to our web site.

Mr. Galster stated I think everybody was pretty unhappy about the last chapter. Whatís the problem with just forgetting about it at this point because history is continually running. We can always make that the first chapter of the next history book.

Mr. Vanover said I agree with Mr. Galsterís comments that picking up these last ten years is hard. When you put it in the big scale you canít see the forest for the trees. It might be best if we take the large document and publish that and then maybe have a decade book to add chapters to it. History is a snapshot and we may look at it in a different light down the road. I also think it might be worthwhile to search for a different author to rethink that final chapter if it is to be included at this point.

Mayor Webster said as this discussion evolves it triggers some memories of what we did. We did get costs on running a limited number. The more we talked the more options there were available and it became somewhat overwhelming. We collectively did not make some decisions on things. Itís not just on Derrickís plate to get this resolved. I donít think he could if he wanted to. If we really want to drive this we probably need a committee of a couple of Council members and the Administration to try to work this through and bring a recommendation back to Council. Perhaps we should put it on the back burner until December 1 and then make that assignment to whoever is heading up Public Relations Committee.

Mrs. McNear said I was going to volunteer to work on that committee and since Iím in Public Relations I would be happy to start that so that if Iím not on that board come December 1 we could at least have something started.

Mr. Wilson said the last issue appeared to be like an overview of the last ten years but it wasnít complete because there were issues that attracted national attention that werenít even mentioned or they were glossed over, where the previous chapters were more in depth. I agree we need to do something with that last chapter, either eliminate until the next edition or we get someone who can write in the same mode.

Mr. Wilson continued about the comment Ms. Manis made and Ms. Pollitt responded to, if I remember, Mrs. Boice brought up that same topic because there were certain individuals who were missing boards and commissions and getting paid. I think that is something we need to look at. All of us who have served on boards have seen board members come late or just miss meetings. Sometimes it was business that kept them out of town. I think in the future we need to look at whom we nominate and make certain that they can make a commitment of 90% of the meetings. When you are talking about one meeting a month on the same night every month, you know ahead of time. Maybe we need to look for individuals with more of a commitment and nominate them. Maybe we need a policy that says if you miss x number of meetings youíre not going to draw a paycheck. These are important boards and commissions and I think those who come on board have to take it in that light. If we continue to let them miss meetings and pay them we are doing ourselves and our citizens a disservice.

Mr. Danbury said I donít think the paycheck is the drawing card for people. Unfortunately, we have to choose between candidates and we need to have someone who will be committed. Not only are they missing the meeting but they are putting pressure on the other members of the board.

Mr. Osborn said at the last Council meeting I brought up the Cityís 40th anniversary celebration on November 14th. We have put together a mailing list and have sent out invitations to a great number of people. I am passing out a list of former officials, retired employees and a list of persons we cannot find through our current resources. I know some of you can help us identify people and tell us how to reach them. A number of people on the list are deceased. Our intention is to send an invitation to a surviving spouse. We would like to make an effort to cover every person who has ever served the City. Despite what people think about government, we donít have a record on everybody. It was hard work trying to come up with a list of people who served the City because itís not written down anywhere. Thereís not a master list anywhere. Debbie Dunfee is compiling the material and weíd appreciate any assistance we can get from you.

Mayor Webster said time is of the essence as it is a week from this coming Sunday.

Ms. Manis asked could you give Council a breakdown of what this is costing? Also, when I was out talking with people they didnít even know we had a web page. I would like to see us do a little more advertising of that and also have people send us their e-mail addresses and we could send them e-mails about what is going on in the City which would save us time and money.


Mr. Danbury said we have a request to change a liquor license for Benniganís. Itís just a name change. There were no objections.

Mayor Webster said all three of our contracts with our court officials expire as of December 1. Iíd like to have those ordinances on the next agenda. Mr. Gainesí involvement with the City will change somewhat. Up to this point he has been classified as an employ and the City has had to pay his PERS. He is going to be retiring from the prosecutorís office as of January 1 and therefore, he can no longer be an employee of the City so he will be a contractual employ. The dollar amount we pay him will change but we will no longer be paying the PERS.

Mr. Osborn said under our City Administrative Code there are sections dealing with the assistant recreation directors and assistant police chief and the manner in which they may acquire overtime. These are salaried employees and as long as we are asking them to do work which falls under their titles and responsibility they are salaried employees, but from time to time we need to utilize these people to fill in for others who may be absent, like a lieutenant. We may have a shortage for a supervisor on a second or third shift on a Sunday. If the assistant chief would like to stand in for that person we felt it was to our advantage, so a number of years ago we created the situation where the assistant police chief and assistant recreation directors would be eligible for overtime when they volunteered to come in to work for another employee and that work was outside the scope of their duties to the City in their primary position. We failed to take notice of the Fire Department. At that time we did not have a full-time assistant fire chief and we would like to treat the assistant fire chief in the same manner. We are working on an internal policy for the Fire Department that will be very consistent with the overtime policy in the Police Department. One of the factors weíd like to include in that is that the assistant fire chief be eligible to fill in for a captain as a line supervisor on a shift where he would not otherwise be working for the City, like a Saturday or Sunday. We would put him on the rotation list with the three captains and as an opportunity for overtime came up he would be given the same consideration as the three captains. We feel this is equitable since we have been doing this 12-14 years for other departments. If Council concurs Iíd like to ask for legislation to be brought in at the next meeting.

Ms. Manis asked do you have the ordinance number for the policy that is in effect now?

Mr. Osborn said it is in Chapter 32 in the overtime language.

Mr. Schneider reported that Lisa Rammes will be acting as Law Director at the next meeting.

Mr. Osborn said we are completing Phase II of the storm sewer project on Kemper Road. At present projections we will be about $17,000 above our original budget of $335,935. The budgeted amount on this project was $407,000 so we are well under what we budgeted. We have seen some cost overruns in two areas that are resulting from field conditions. About $10,000 in additional cost is attributed to driveway restoration and $7,000 in additional modular wall. This is a situation where they think they can predict the cut of the slope because they are going off topographic drawings but maybe the field conditions arenít the same as the topographic drawings.

Also, another item which I shared with Mr. Danbury today is some work on Glensharon. Last year we did storm sewer work on Sharon Road. At the time I received calls from residents on Glensharon asking us to give them similar consideration. I looked at the situation and while it is not as severe as the conditions on either Kemper or Sharon, certainly there was a condition that would warrant taking a look at making an improvement. Dave Butsch and I had discussed last fall making this part of the project I just discussed with you, but both of us failed to recall that. In September I received a call from a resident on Glensharon again inquiring if the City could do something. I asked the Engineerís office to meet with the contractor we have on Phase II to determine what the cost would be to go in and do the ditch elimination on the section of Glensharon. Their quote to us was $25,891. While this is an unbudgeted expense for us at this time, it would still bring the project in below the original appropriation. If we forego doing it at this time and try to do it next year itís going to cost us more than the $26,000 because we are getting unit prices from the major project. If they had to remobilize and come back next spring or summer and do a project of this scale, we would not get the same unit prices because they wouldnít be dealing with the same volumes. As a result I would like to recommend to Council that we do a change order on this project and include that portion of Glensharon where the residents have raised the question of why they were overlooked when we did Sharon Road. This would bring the total change order for this project up to $43,000 and this would require legislation from Council.

Mr. Danbury asked when do you anticipate they will finish Phase II?

Mr. Shvegzda replied that should be substantially completed this week. Mr. Osborn said if Council can give us tentative approval we will move the contractor onto Glensharon while they are still here.

Mr. Galster asked how many residents on Glensharon are affected? Mr. Osborn replied a dozen or less.

In response to Ms. Manisí question about easements, Mr. Shvegzda said all the work will be done within the existing right-of-way. We may need some permission to do some temporary grading but thatís all.

Mr. Osborn said it will be far smaller pipe, far shallower, not the type of excavation we experienced on Kemper.

Ms. Manis said I wanted to ask Mr. Knox about the notices from the CPAs.

Mr. Knox replied, if you notice, that information is only for City Council and the Administration and I suggest we not discuss it in public. I would prefer to write a memo. There are two outstanding questions that I need to talk with Mrs. Burton about. This is the first year we did this with the recommendation from the auditors in 1998. We will do it on a continuing basis.


Planning Commission - November 9

Board of Zoning Appeals - November 16

Board of Health - November 11



Zoning Regulations - open

L-TIP funding - November 17

Waste Collection - December 1


New contracts with Gaines, Flessa and Garry - next meeting

Overtime for assistant fire chief - next meeting

Change order for $43,000 for construction - next meeting

Contract proposal from Law Director and Engineer - December

Mr. Knox asked about a date for the Zoning Regulations as that has to be advertised.

Mr. Osborn said we just got the copies today. We still owe you an executive summary. Keep in mind that this is a total rewrite of the code. Iíve asked the Building Official to draft an executive summary of key issues, recreational vehicles, parking, signs, any changes weíve made that are critical.

Council adjourned at 8:58 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,




Edward F. Knox

Clerk of Council/Finance Director

Minutes Approved:

Randy Danbury, President of Council



__________________________, l999