November 19, 1997

Council was called to order on November 19, 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 Mr. Knox.

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

The minutes of November 5, 1997 were approved with 7 affirmative votes.


CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION - Mr. Coleman asked to have his Civil Service report moved to the top of the agenda. Mr. Coleman reported the board met November 12, 1997 and a motion was made to authorize the chairman to certify the names for the police officer position. We agreed to have our legal representative, Mr. Keating, schedule the appeal hearing for the pending disciplinary case. As soon as we get that information weíll move forward with hearing that appeal. We acknowledged the probationary appointments of those individuals who had completed their probationary periods and entered that information into the official minutes as a matter of public record.

RULES AND LAWS - no report


PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE - Mrs. Boice reported they met November 10 in regards to the invisible fence situation. After looking at our code rules and information Ms. Manis had pulled off the internet, we felt a fence is a fence, whether it is invisible or one you can see. Therefore, we feel the invisible fences that circle the entire piece of property which includes the front yard, would not be acceptable for a number of reasons. People passing by are totally unaware that there is any fencing there. The mailman, delivery people, emergency people, etc., can transgress into what an animal feels is his territory and this person may do this without knowing there is an animal there that has the freedom to run in this area. We feel very strongly that the invisible fence must be treated as the normal structure. I did call a number of fence companies because we are aware that there are a number of residents who have the invisible fences that do circumvent the entire property and there would need to be some adjustment there. We do not feel this should be grandfathered. One company said they would never reuse wire. If they cut they would want to use all new wire. Servicing that would be $54 the first half hour, $22 for each following half hour, and wire at .45 per foot. Another company said they only service those that they have installed themselves. There would be a $50 service charge and if they needed additional wire it would be .45 per foot. The committee consisted of Ms. Manis, a member of Public Health, Safety and Welfare; and Mr. Galster who is a representative from Planning Commission. We felt we had no choice but to treat this as a fence which is not allowed to be in the front yard. At this point it will go to Rules and Laws.

Mr. Galster stated we looked at it strictly as a safety issue. We didnít look at it as an aesthetic issue. From a safety issue, it was pretty clear cut that this needed to be something retained in the back yard.

PUBLIC WORKS - Mr. Vanover said all the work for the 1997 street program is completed.


CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS - Mr. Wilson said the Community Center HVAC replacement work is completed except for punch list items. Carmen Creek improvements at Heritage Hill School construction plans are complete. We are still awaiting EPA approval on the 401 permit. Construction is planned for the summer of 1998. St. Rt. 747 CSX grade separation environmental document has been approved by ODOT and FHWA. The next step is to contract for final design. The proposal for this final design phase will be reviewed at the Capital Improvements Committee meeting scheduled for December 15. Community Center pool repair and improvement construction is underway and scheduled to be complete in April 1998. Kemper Road traffic signals at McGillard and Lawnview is an ODOT project. It is complete except for punch list items. West Kemper Road storm sewer final plans are complete and are being reviewed by the City. A public meeting is scheduled for January 14, 1998 with construction scheduled for the summer of 1998. Sharon Road resurfacing and bikeway design work is underway and should be complete this year with construction scheduled for the summer of 1998. State Route 4 improvements preliminary plan field work is complete and preliminary design work is underway.

FINANCE COMMITTEE - Ms. Manis reported Finance Committee has received a copy of the new budget. The budget workshop will be December 3. I request that our new Council member receive the budget when the rest of the people do so weíll be prepared.

PLANNING COMMISSION - Mr. Galster stated they met November 11. We had an approval request to record a plat for Pine Garden, Section 3. That was approved 6-0. We had a pro-rated share of Hamilton County Regional Planning Commission dues. It was debated as to whether or not we should be paying them any more and we denied payment by a 6-0 vote so we are no longer a standing member in the Hamilton County Regional Planning Commission. There was request for approval for the renovation of the Perkins Family Restaurant. Thatís under new ownership and they are looking at enclosing the dumpsters, changing some of the exterior facade, getting rid of some of the stone. Based on continued conversation they decided they were going to drop it from the agenda and resubmit at a later date. They are proceeding with some interior modifications at this point.

There was a request to install a 7í x 50í leasing banner to the back of the IDI building at 12075 Northwest Boulevard. That was tabled at the request of the applicant. The last item was the approval of a proposed Wal-Mart Center expansion at 600 Kemper Commons Circle and that was tabled as well.

BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS - Mrs. Boice said they met last evening. Hunterís Glen Limited Partnership was back in as you recall. We tabled that on October 21 because there was some confusion. At that time we felt we were being intimidated. There was a lawsuit pending and the attorney portrayed it to us that everyone had discussed it, but unfortunately we didnít know anything about it. There was a tremendous amount of discussion on this and the variance ended with a 3-3 vote. Technically that denied it. There was a motion to reconsider it and that motion passed with a 6-0 vote. During the discussion after that we did get some more concessions such as more shrubbery, something to make it look more palatable and not so stark. That was granted 5-1 with the conditions that there would be additional plantings; the whole variance that had existed before that would be wiped out; and that the lawsuit would be dropped.

Michaelís Crafts, 425 E. Kemper Road, was back in. They had been granted a variance on October 21 on a sign and they were requesting a modification. There was no representation from Michaelís. We thought it was strange where they wanted to move the sign. We suspected it was because the other tenant would sooner or later want to put a sign up there. That was tabled 6-0. We donít want to get into heavy discussions unless we have a representative. If you want a variance and are interested in doing something with your property, I would think you would want to make a personal appearance. We want to talk to the person who makes the decision.

Dan Wheeler, Target Management, requested a variance to allow building setback at Tri County Parkway. He is actually cleaning up some errors that were made over there and it is really refreshing to have somebody come in who wants to get everything in order. That was granted 6-0.

Maple Knoll Village requested a variance to allow a four seasons room to be constructed at 611 Maple Terrace. There was a setback problem in the rear yard. This particular property backs up to the GE Training Facility and there is a fence there. We did not feel there was any problem with that because this four seasons room is being constructed with stone trim that will be matching the facade that is on the buildings at the present time. Maple Knoll always does things in very good taste, perfect match, good roof pitch. That was granted 6-0.

DeWayne Lloyd, 528 Cloverdale Avenue, requested a variance to allow the construction of an 8í x 10í wood shed six feet from the adjoining residence. Mr. Lloyd had come in and according to all of his requirements he had the shed five feet from the property line both sides and back lot. Unfortunately, the property adjacent to him, when it was built, was set only 1 1/2í from his back property line. It was a case that we felt was not Mr. Lloydís fault. We didnít feel it was the other ownerís fault. As so many of our residents in Springdale do, they openingly try so hard to work with us and we compromise. We asked him to move that in 12í from the rear lot line which gives 13 and 1/2í from the adjoining residence. That was granted 5-0.

Maple Knoll Village was back with another patio room at 609 Maple Trace. This was entirely different from the one at 611 Maple Trace. The windows were aluminum, the pitch on the roof entirely different, no matching stone. We were really a bit puzzled by this because we are so accustomed to Maple Knoll doing everything aesthetically, so perfect, that we felt we needed a representative from Maple Knoll in to discuss why they were deviating from this type of design. The builder had no problem with our wanting to pursue that further and it was tabled 6-0.

The Kieslands requested a variance to allow the installation of a ground sign 8í high at 11590 Century Boulevard. The new sign was very attractive and the variance was granted 6-0.

BOARD OF HEALTH - Mr. Vanover stated the board met last Thursday. Regulation R2-1997 was passed. Because the state can raise its portion of the fee at any time, this is a generic regulation stating the total cost is our fees plus whatever the state charges. The Ohio Revised Code has been updated and Substitute H. B. 25 has been put in place to regulate tattoo parlors and body piercing salons. They are still waiting for the Ohio Health Department to come up with more guidelines but it is now required that any business that offers tattooing or body piercing services must be approved by the Board of Health. The Health Commission presented the 1998 budget and goals.

O-K-I REPORT - no report

MAYORíS REPORT - Mayor Webster reported the debris removal program should be slowing down to a halt although October was the second highest month weíve had all year. We had 38 trucks dispatched for that program last month; 277 year to date. We will be judging the Christmas lighting starting on Friday, December 12, continuing through Sunday, December 14. Thatís a little early but we intentionally did this in response to a suggestion that we announce the winners before Christmas so the public can go out and look at these lights. We plan to announce the winners at the Council meeting on December 17 and present the awards in January. The tree lighting ceremony will be Sunday, December 30 at 7:30 p.m. There will be refreshments served in the building after the ceremony.


ADMINISTRATORíS REPORT - Mr. Osborn said earlier this year we discussed a project that would involve the construction of an electronic sign at the intersection of Lawnview and Springfield Pike to provide information to the community on current events and items of interest. This has expanded into a landscape feature that would also have a waterfall effect and very extensive landscaping. Because of the cost of the project it was determined that we ought to look at a fund raising effort to involve the overall community in funding the work. The total cost of the project is estimated to be $150,000. We set about trying to find ways of bringing private donations into this and we looked at what other jurisdictions have done. We have identified ways that we can use the concept of brick pavers in a walkway. The layout we have would provide for 2300 4" x 8" pavers, twenty-one 12" x 12" medallion pavers, ten specimen trees and two benches. The bricks would sell for $40 apiece; the medallions for $500 each; the trees would sell for $1,000 each and the benches would sell for $1,000 apiece. If we were successful in selling all those items we would raise $80,000 or just over half the cost of the project. There will be an article in the upcoming city newsletter that will describe the project to the community, set out the cost of various items and request that if anyone has interest, that they fill out a non-binding pledge form that we have in the newsletter. Itís a referendum to see if there is enough interest in the community to justify going forward. We do hope the information gets disseminated throughout the residential areas in the December newsletter and folks who have an interest do respond because this is our only chance to assess the level of interest in the community. If we get a low response I donít think weíll have sufficient justification to go forward with the project. If we get a strong response from the community I will be back here in January reporting on how much money we think we can raise through outside resources.

LAW DIRECTORíS REPORT - Lisa Rammes is sitting in for Mr. Schneider. Judge Melba Marsh will be at the December meeting to swear in the newly elected Council member.





Congratulations to Allison Diehl, Aimee Diehl, Stacey Runge, Megan Bustamante, Katie Osterbrock, Melissa Woods, Amber Lawson, Samantha Williams, Hayley OíBrien, Suzanne Wallace, Jessica Carson, Nicole Salatowski, Andrea Randolph and Jennifer Smith for having a most successful soccer team. Also congratulations to the coaching staff of Bob Diehl, Jill Smith and Christy Runge.

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

Mayor Webster said we are very proud of you kids. We had 11 teams go to tournament this year so the program took a giant step forward. I apologize for not being there to see it. We wanted to be there but we had another commitment.

Ms. Manis offered congratulations. You all were out there playing in the rain, mush and mire. I know how difficult it was. Congratulations on a great season and weíll see you here next year.

Mrs. Boice said maybe I should have made a tape but we give the young girls so much credit and they deserve it; but itís the moms, dads and coaches who get them to the games and the various sponsors who back them. Girls, remember that it was mom and dad who saw that you were at the practice, the games, etc., and remember to thank them. Iíd not only like to congratulate you but also wish you and your families the happiest of holidays and a super 1998.

Mr. Danbury said congratulations to everybody. I have a different perspective since some of my friends are coaching. I know the coaches donít get the credit they deserve. Not only do they coach but they are taxi cabs as well.


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

Ordinance 78-1997 passed with 7 affirmative votes.


Mr. Osborn said on September 24 we held a special meeting of City Council to hear a presentation by CDS on the East Kemper Road corridor. We are all aware of the increasing pressure on that street and the potential additional development we are going to be seeing there in the next few years. There were several questions that came up as we discussed the three primary long term options that were presented and questions related to funding alternatives, cost of real estate, etc. Mr. Eisenmann has responded to those questions and submitted an addendum to the original Corridor Report dated November 17. That was distributed to you yesterday. We would like to provide Council with additional information this evening.

Mr. Eisenmann stated Mr. Osborn gave us a memo of issues that needed to be further addressed and the addendum goes into detail on what we have been able to determine on some of those issues. It was difficult to compare the level of service between the various options, compare the impact of what the options were in an easy form, and it was difficult to get a feel for the total cost of individual options. We put together an additional table that hopefully summarizes a lot of that information so you can do a more easy comparison. We looked at four different scenarios, all under basically the same traffic volumes. We looked at existing traffic plus any of the short term projections plus the long term assumptions that were done on the report. We compared a no build situation, the short term condition, option 1 under those same traffic volumes and our preliminarily recommended option, option 3 under those traffic volumes. The more improvements that are in place the more the level of service is improved, certainly between the no build in comparison with the short term and then in comparison to option 1. If you then compare option 1 to option 3, most people would say there is no improved benefit for option 3 over option 1 as far as level of service. Weíve reduced the improvements on Kemper Road under option 3 and traffic has been assigned to other roadways. We specifically reduced the amount of improvements that we needed to do on Kemper Road so that we got a similar level of service to option 1. We were concerned that Council might feel that option 3 offered no improvement. We prefer to look at it as offering the same level of service. It could offer a much better level of service if we did those same improvements that we intended for option 1. We were just trying to reduce the cost of option 3 as much as possible.

At the bottom of the table there is an opinion of construction costs. Weíve expanded the dollars that were in the original report. We only looked at construction dollars. Weíve now done estimates on right of way acquisition and weíve done estimating on engineering fees. These are a little better numbers than what you looked at last time. If you compare the construction numbers in the addendum to those in the original report, they probably are not going to agree. Thatís because we have spent the last two months fine tuning those numbers and doing a better job on them for you.

Weíve put together time frames for implementation of any of the various options or short term improvements. Weíve provided a comparison of the Saturday peak under three different scenarios. Weíve given you a one page summary of various funding sources that might be available to the City. I will caution you that the use of these funding sources are probably limited at this time. There is probably a negative side to every one of these.

Mr. Osborn stated we came into this exercise trying to find innovative alternatives to widening Kemper Road. One option called for going around to the north through a tunnel. Alternative 3 calls for the construction of a new east/west corridor south of the current Kemper Road corridor. The traditional option is increasing lane capacity on Kemper Road itself. I came in biased towards doing something new and creative; but the cost for creating a new corridor is very hard to justify if you are looking at this from the standpoint of how can we move traffic most efficiently and do it at a more reasonable cost. The levels of service on option 1 and option 3 do not discriminate too much, yet the cost for option 3 is considerably higher. The option 3 cost is so high that when you look at the resources we have to help fund that it becomes clear very quickly that we would probably be looking at financing at least $10 million out of City resources. If we were lucky enough to get outside funding it would not be substantial. The road programs we looked at do not favor new capacity projects. There are state loans available but they are available for restoration work. We could fall back to the point of issuing debt but frankly, given the level of service that improvements under the traditional method of widening Kemper Road would provide as compared to option 3, itís clear to me that we should continue looking at upscaling the size of the Kemper Road corridor itself. Thatís not to say that option 3 does not have a value to us or should be set aside. Option 3 can remain a long term solution that can be kept in mind as property develops, as land use changes. We can try to retain the intention of providing a new corridor to the south. Itís hard to justify that at this point. The original study looked at going around Tri-County Mall via a tunnel under the railroad. Another intermediate option involves an at-grade crossing between two of our major traffic generators, Tri-County Mall and the Tri-County Commons area.

Mr. Eisenmann said we did look at the possibility of an at-grade crossing as opposed to the tunnel. We looked at an at-grade crossing that would connect the mallís ring road opposite the south entrance to the east parking garage with the west side of the Wal-Mart Store tying into Kemper Commons Circle. Thatís probably the only location we were able to get at-grade crossing to physically work. There are four sets of tracks in that area so we are talking about a substantial safety impact. Itís not our opinion that there would be a lot of diverted traffic off the surface street but it would be very accessible to the shoppers and merchants back and forth between those two developments. We see it as something that warrants further study. Weíve done some preliminary budgets on it; and based on crossing gates, rubber crossings, and the amount of roadway work that would be necessary, we are probably talking in the range of $600,000 to do something like that. We have not had any discussions with the railroad to date. There is always the safety issue. In discussions I have had with other communities recently I am getting feedback that grade crossings are possible.

Mayor Webster asked can you predict with any degree of certainty how many people leave one of those centers and go to the other one?

Mr. Eisenmann replied there are probably ways through parking lot surveys or individual surveys of shoppers that we could gather some statistical data to evaluate that. Or we could survey license plates at each location under similar time frames and see what kind of duplication showed up but thatís a very intensive type operation and youíd probably get statistical reports just as good just by talking with people.

Mayor Webster said I was pleasantly surprised to hear the cost of the at-grade crossing but the key to even proceeding with that would be to get the sign off from the two property owners.

Ms. Manis said the short term option time table is the year 2000 which to me doesnít seem very short term. What would the short term construction time table on the grade crossing be?

Mr. Eisenmann responded the biggest issue would be coordination with the railroad and getting all the necessary permits and agreements in place with them. That takes a long time and without having some kind of upfront discussion with them I donít think it would be appropriate to give you a time frame at this time.

Ms. Manis continued would we eliminate the middle entrance curb cut on Kemper Road with the addition of the lanes on Kemper?

Mr. Eisenmann replied we have not made a recommendation on that. Itís virtually impossible to make that left turn movement at times. We did not look at the traffic accident history but if there were a real raft of accidents occurring there, it would probably be appropriate to modify that entrance.

Ms. Manis asked what the cost would be on a monorail.

Mr. Osborn answered that they are cost intensive to the point that none of them are self-sustaining. We have talked to various developers who have had that as a vision from time to time but itís never really happened. Weíve talked about a skywalk system, a moving skywalk system, but right now the resources are not out there through public funding to do something like that. It would take the private sector to get behind a monorail to make it happen.

Ms. Manis said before we had brought up going across the railroad bridge. We had brought up the addition of all the traffic coming through the mall. Just using it for shuttle busses from the mall to Tri-County Commons might encourage people to ride them. I do think that will be the great saver of traffic on Kemper.

Mr. Galster said itís $600,000 for an at-grade crossing. What if we actually bridged over and had the flexibility of moving it wherever we needed to move it in order to make the flow work better.

Mr. Eisenmann replied to go over the railroad tracks north of Kemper Road is very difficult to accomplish because of the grades on both sides of the street and being able to tie back in and give access to the properties in question. The only way we felt we could do anything to give access to the mall property at all was to put a bridge that would connect to the upper decks of the parking garages which meant you had to work your way through the parking garages to even get access to it. The other side presented a problem getting back down to grade. You would be 40 feet in the air as you came across the railroad tracks. The only way to get down to grade would be a ramp system that would be very difficult to construct and maintain long term. It didnít seem to be a practical application.

Mr. Vanover said I know with the railroad, a lot of times there is storage of cars back there and if that were to continue, that would kill that at-grade crossing. I agree in concept with Ms. Manis about the mass transportation but besides getting the vehicles in place, you have to deal with terminal parking. Looking at the addendum on the summary of service options, Table A-1, and then looking at the section on opinions of cost, when you compare that to what you have on addendum 1, long term improvements, the total options for long term improvements is $10,700,000. On Table A-1, the opinion of cost is $12, 745,000. You note that $700,000 is Sharonville. Is that factored into Table A-1?

Mr. Eisenmann said the information on the individual sheets further back in the addendum relates to the long term options with the short term options standing alone. When we went to Table 1 we tried to address what we feel is the total cost to the City of Springdale for any particular option. No matter what you do, you are going to do the short term improvements. The numbers at the bottom of Table A-1, under short term, that is the short term improvements as they relate to whatís in the rest of the addendum. You should be able to take the total dollars in option 1 in the back up information in the addendum, add to that the dollars in the short term improvements and you should get whatís in the bottom of the column on option 1. Similarly you should be able to take the short term dollars and add the dollars in option 3 in the addendum and come up with the totals that are on the bottom of Table A-1.

Mr. Vanover said there is a long term window that we will exhaust at some point in time in adding on to Kemper Road. What is your best guess that we have on that window before it closes, or before we have to spend major dollars to continue that window on the backside?

Mr. Eisenmann replied thatís all dependent on development schedules in the area, how aggressive the market place is. The numbers we have generated are based on certain development assumptions. Those may occur quickly; they may occur slowly. When we say short term and long term it wasnít so much time as it was known development versus potential developments. All these things could happen in the next five years. They might never happen or they may happen in a different format than what we predicted today. We did some projections for the Levitz Store based on our professional judgment and discussions with staff about what might happen there in the future. Itís speculation. Please understand, the numbers we have generated and the decisions and recommendations we have made are no better than the data and the assumptions we have created. Hopefully we have done our homework well enough that we have a good feel for what changes are going to happen in the area and what market factors are going to be driving that.

Mr. Danbury said eventually we are going to max out on how far we can expand on Kemper. It seems the only option in the future will be going behind Levitz. What would the cost be if we were to take it from Century Boulevard to Tri-County Parkway rather than all the way to Chester Road?

Mr. Eisenmann said we have the figures but I didnít bring them with me tonight. Iíd be happy to get that number to Council. The bridge is a major portion of that cost, 40-50% of the total cost.

Mr. Danbury said I know we wouldnít get any money from Sharonville and probably wouldnít qualify for federal funds but it seems to me that eventually we will have to look at it. We can look at it in different stages.

Mr. Eisenmann responded if this is something you want to keep on the table I would encourage you to amend your thoroughfare plan and protect that land in the future so that future development does not preclude the possibility of that taking place.

Mr. Osborn stated the sequence in which these things happens probably isnít going to deviate too much. We have to make improvements on Kemper Road. In the budget that is coming before you next month we already have built into it, design in 1998 for items 2 and 3 on the short term list and the initiating of right-of-way acquisition for items 2 and 3 with construction scheduled for 1999 and 2000. Then we will be coming in with the design for item 4 on the short term. So these things are already being put in the pipeline for your consideration and weíre certainly going to move as quickly as we can. But we have to keep in mind that we have other things in our budget as well. We have to maintain our other roads and there are other items we have to address. Itís hard to take on a project of the magnitude of option 3 without serious consideration of priorities. I think if you look at it, itís sequential anyhow. Even if you do option 3 there are a lot of improvements that have to be done to Kemper Road. I donít think you are giving up anything by starting out looking at option 1 as the initial long term option with the understanding that if funding opportunities change then address implementing option 3. I donít think itís an either/or situation; I think itís more of a continuation.

If you go back to the at-grade crossing, we may only be dealing with one property owner because on the east side of the railroad our right-of-way comes up right against the railroad right-of-way for a considerable distance along there and this may fall in that category. We may only have to deal with Tri-County and the railroad. Another reason why that location is a good one is it makes the route more circuitous. If you want to move from I-275 to Best Buy, it will be so circuitous that you wonít cut through Tri-County Mall but it will be handy enough that if you are at Tri-County Mall and you want to go to Samís, you will cut across. We donít run into the problem where we are dumping a lot more traffic on intersection A at Tri-County Mall at S. R. 747, but at the same time we are facilitating intra-business traffic so I think itís a real advantage to not having it as big scale as we had initially talked. We accomplished a lot of what we were hoping for without the impact outside the perimeter of the businesses. Safety is going to be a real concern there. In traffic on S. R. 747, when the gates come down thereís no place to go. Imagine being over there, same situation, queued up to make a turn off the ring road. You make the turn off the ring road, youíre lined up and youíre on the tracks, the gates come down and thereís gridlock. There will have to be some safety restraints built into it.

Mr. Galster has mentioned trying to predict how much traffic would move from one business facility to another. The problem we have is, while we have a fairly sophisticated closed loop traffic system, they work on an axis. They are not a grid. The data isnít automatically linked together. Traffic moving on S. R. 747 is controlled by one closed loop system. Traffic moving east and west on Kemper is controlled by two more closed loop systems. While our traffic experts try to keep them in sync as good as possible through setting the parameters they work under, they are not interconnected in terms of sharing information. Mr. Eisenmann mentioned in his report the concept of modeling; taking data, putting it into a very sophisticated model on traffic analysis and trying to make some predictions. There are some resources out there. Iíve talked to him about contracting with a particular piece of software that is intended to model at this level. Many engineering traffic models are macro. They look at multi counties. When they try to get down to something as detailed as this they fall apart because they werenít built for those types of situations. If we were to do that for our community it would range from $50,000 to $100,000. We havenít recommended that because at this point we werenít sure Council needed that additional information to make any decisions. I want to let you know that resource is out there; I just donít know that itís cost beneficial.

Mr. Vanover said Mr. Galster mentioned doing the mini version of the by-pass to Century Boulevard. Would there be any benefit to take that over to the east, do an extension of Chesterdale on the southern side of Kemper and tie in there. That would bring us to the eastern border of the development. Would that be viable?

Mr. Eisenmann replied we have discussed it but we havenít really looked at it. When we really started talking about the Tri-County Parkway extension, the original plan was to terminate it at Century Boulevard. The more we started looking at, the more we felt that wasnít a solution to the problems on Kemper Road. It would help provide a partial by-pass but it really wouldnít divert any traffic away from Kemper Road. It just didnít have a logical start and end to it. We werenít leaning that way at all until we had a meeting with Mr. Osborn and the Mayor and they really encouraged us to pursue that further. We started looking at aerial photographs and driving the area and thatís when we came up with the idea of taking it to Chester Road. We felt we had something that really was a true parallel road system. Certainly it could be phased but the real benefit, in our opinion, comes through the connection all the way through to Chester Road. We specifically avoided trying to do anything with Chesterdale. Itís been our understanding all along that thereís been a sensitivity on the Cityís part, to maintain as much as possible, the residential character of that road. However, there has been some question as to whether Chesterdale could be extended to the south and tie into this. Our preliminary observations say thereís physically no reason why that couldnít be done.

Mr. Vanover said once we hit Chesterdale we run into another municipal jurisdiction. We can plan on our side but the success and benefits are going to hinge on that section being updated too.

Mr. Eisenmann said thatís certainly our opinion. The extension to Chester Road is a very key element of making this function long term the way we would envision it should function.

Ms. Manis asked if we have asked the police what they think. They know a lot about traffic.

Mr. Osborn replied part of this report involved interviewing all the businesses in the area. At the same time the engineers sat down with members of the Police Department and had that type of brainstorming process as well.

Mrs. Boice said when I look at these right-of-way figures there are big sums there. As we are attempting to improve our infrastruction and help all the businesses, are we going to be approaching them about donating the right-of-way?

Mayor Webster said we will do everything we can to negotiate the best deal we can get for the City. Hopefully, that will be a donation of the right-of-way with those businesses that will directly benefit from it. Historically our business community has been pretty generous and pretty cooperative.

Mr. Osborn stated one of the factors in the cost associated with right-of-ways isnít necessarily just the value of the property but the cost of restoration and replacement or modification of the site. BP at the corner of S. R. 747 and Kemper is certainly going to come into play on this project coming up. We will have to rely on our engineers to come up with some very innovative ideas about sloping the road, etc. to reduce the amount of property we will have to take from that station. If you take right-of-way so deep that it eliminates a pump island there is going to be a cost of lost business to that company that their corporation is going to look to us to make good. Itís more than just getting another ten feet of property. In many cases itís going to be a business impact or itís going to be the cost of reconstructing a parking or lighting system, etc. I certainly agree with you and the Mayor that weíll make every effort to seek donations wherever possible, but realistically we have to expect that going down a major corridor with existing businesses on both sides, there is going to be a fiscal impact from expanding the right-of-way.

Mr. Danbury said there was discussion earlier on traffic studies. Most companies know who their customers are. So if they have an interest maybe we could talk to Tri-County and see if we could add a question about what other areas besides Tri-County Mall do customers shop, and possibly do some random surveying in various other areas. If we were just to do the current road analysis, that may show people currently, but if there were an access road right now that might open the flood gates.

Mr. Osborn said there is a routine type of survey called an origin and destination analysis where a technician asks a few questions of a person in the mall, such as where did the trip originate, where do they go from here, how many stops are they going to make, etc. Weíve done those. I wouldnít discount that as a relatively low cost exercise.


Mr. Danbury said there are board and commission positions that will be up for renewal. We should consider these on December 3: one member on BZA; one for Charter Revision; one for the Civil Service Commission. I will contact Mr. Darby and ask him if he is still interested in continuing. I have received correspondence from two people Mr. Fred Borden, who has been a member of community and our audience for a long time. has expressed interest in some board or commission. Mr. Jerry Allen is interested in BZA. We also have to fill the position presently held by Mayor Webster by January 5, 1998.

Judge Marsh will be in attendance on December 1 at 7:30 p.m. to administer the oath of office. I have dinner reservations for Dave & Busterís at 8:30 p.m. Please let me know if you will be attending and bringing a guest.


Mr. Knox said you have all received a memo from me concerning a meeting I attended on November 13 on ICRC concerning a court decision which could possibly increase the cable television fee to residents. If a resident has a cable bill of $20 we have a 5% franchise fee to recompense the City for utility work and to ICRC for public access television. The 5% on $20 would be $1. The courts have held that since it is a fee we can, if we so desire, charge 5% of that extra dollar, thereby raising it to $21.05. Warner Cable will not collect this fee unless the City requests that it be collected. I personally feel that itís an additional tax and recommend that we do not collect this additional fee. Council agreed not to charge the additional fee.




Ms. Manis asked about a resolution for Mrs. Boice and Mr. Danbury said that has been taken care of.

Mr. Knox said we would need the information on residents not returning to boards and commissions. Mr. Danbury said letís wait until we see who is returning and do them all at one time.


Continuation of public hearing for amended zoning and approval of the preliminary plan for the proposed Target

Budget hearing - work session at next meeting

Transfer of dollars that will be considered on December 17

IBI contract for first reading

Mr. Danbury said this is Mrs. Boiceís last full meeting. Is there anything you want to say here?

Mrs. Boice replied Iíve enjoyed every minute of it. Iím not going to miss the meetings. Iím going to miss the contact with so many people I have worked with over the years and Iíve worked with a lot of neat people. There comes a time when itís time to move on and my time has come. I must say Iím very, very happy with the fact that Marjorie Pollitt will be sitting in this seat. She has been one of my constituents for a long, long time, one I heard from probably more than any of the others. Sheís always been on top of what goes on in this City and I look forward to welcoming her to this seat. I do thank all of you that Iíve worked with over the years.

Mrs. Boice made a motion for Council to go into executive session as a meeting of the whole to discuss personnel issues. Mr. Vanover seconded. The motion passed 7-0. Ms. Pollitt was included in the executive session because the issues to be discussed will be considered at a later meeting.

Council went into executive session at 9:03 p.m. Council reconvened at 9:24 p.m. Council adjourned at 9:26 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,




Edward F. Knox

Clerk of Council/Finance Director

Minutes Approved:

Randy Danbury, President of Council



__________________________, l997