November 5, 1997

Council was called to order on November 5, 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.

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

The minutes of September 24, 1997 were approved with 7 affirmative votes.

The minutes of October 15, 1997 were approved with 7 affirmative votes.


Letter addressed to Jim Burton, Parks and Recreation Department signed by 14 people representing 11 families: A complaint made by a Springdale soccer coach that Glenview children are playing sports for Glendale has resulted in the children forfeiting all games for the fall 1997 season as well as being declared ineligible to register for Glendale youth sports. Many children in Glenview have been playing sports for Glendale for the past four years because that is the public school designated for this sub-division. The children want to play sports with their peers and are in no way conspiring to stack teams as some overzealous adults would like to believe. After several seasons of playing with their classmates, it was decided by adults midseason that playing in your school district is illegal. Instead the children must play sports for the city in which they live. According to the USYSA Rules, Policies, Regulations and Procedures Manual for 1997, a district is defined on page 16 as a geographical area, school district, city, village, township, etc., in which a local organization forms recreational teams. It appears, according to the definition, that Glenview children would be permitted to play sports in either Glendale for their school district, or Springdale, the city in which they live. As one of the first families in Glenview, the Simpsons were told by Springdale representatives during the annexation process that living in Springdale but going to school in Glendale, would in no way adversely affect the children. Well, the Simpson children play sports for Glendale and have since moved on to junior high and high school. We ask that our children be allowed to play youth sports with their peers. We ask that Springdale cooperate with the Glenview residents in this matter by agreeing to waive any Glenview resident who wishes to remain in youth sports at Glenview. Thank you. Glenview residents

Mayor Webster said I have asked Gene Burt, our local representative to the Soccer Association; and Ken Cooper, president of that organization to speak to that issue since these residents are asking Council to intervene and waive their status.


Kim Greene, 479 Vista Glen, said I have been a resident of Springdale for the past three years and considers it a great place to live. It is close to the interstates, numerous restaurants and shopping and has excellent city services. This fall, however, I realized the only Springdale residents I know are in the Glenview subdivision, where I live. The Glenview children are not allowed to go to Springdale Elementary. They go to Glendale and this is where they have established their ties with their friends, clubs and youth sports. The residents of Glendale were very welcoming to the new children as well as the parents in considering us a part of their community. As anyone who has children knows, your social group revolves around your children during the school age years. Seven games into this soccer season, during a Glendale versus Springdale soccer game, my daughter was pointed out as a Glenview and not Glendale resident, which weíve never hidden. Weíve always put our address on the sign-ups, thinking we were following the rules. Springdale protested the game and as a result of this, the league, without any input from the residents of Glenview, had decided from that point on that the teams in Glendale were illegal. My daughter was pointed out by the coach, who said thanks a lot. They had to forfeit the entire seasonís game. I coach U-9 soccer. Not to be selfish, but we had lost only one game all season, and we still had to forfeit everything so it was a real disappointment for the kids, plus finger pointing and blame put on the kids for something that was not in their control at all.

When I called Gene Burt to ask about sign ups I was told about the book that is given out every year and thatís true, but fliers go out at school. He meant Springdale Elementary, which is where my kids cannot go, even if we wanted them to. I was told to contact the Rec Center to see about future sign ups for my kids. Now comes my bad experience. I called the Rec Center and explained the situation. I was scolded like a child for missing the registration dates. I went in person to register my daughters for basketball. There was no seventh grade team, nor would they even take her name on a list to see if others would sign up after finding out about this. I then registered my third grader and was told I would be called about placement. One week later I had not heard from Springdale. I followed up with a phone call and was told the team was already full. I did not even get the courtesy of a response from Springdale Rec Center. I have since registered my seventh grader at Forest Park. They were full but were willing to accommodate her. I registered my third grader at Sharonville. They were full. They had two teams of ten kids and thought what is one more. Letís do it for the kids. In both cases with the teams being full, the neighboring communities were willing to go out of their way to accommodate the children who did not even belong to that community. As a matter of fact, every community has been warm and welcoming in the area, except for Springdale. Even the most senior residents of Glenview have moved here within the last four years. The children have already had to change schools and make new friends, and now the Springdale Recreation Center is forcing them to do so again through the sports programs. I feel the only ones suffering are the children. I canít help but feel that after four years Springdale only now wants the children of Glenview for their programs so they can justify a proposed expansion of the Rec Center. I feel that Springdale should either fully accept our children into your schools, social clubs and communities, or leave us alone to enjoy the friendships and teams we have formed strong ties with over the last four years.

Currently Springdale wants it both ways. This problem transcends the sports issue. Generally, I feel that Glenview is treated as an afterthought as a part of Springdale. Living in Springdale but going to school in Glendale presents a unique set of problems. Even now as the Princeton School Board is deciding the fate of Glenview students, Springdale has not been seen speaking up for the Glenview residents. The proposal to close Glendale Elementary and combine those students with those at Woodlawn caused an uproar in Glendale and consequently in Woodlawn, where each community is proposing to have their own community school, thus, once again, leaving out the kids in Glenview who donít have a home right now. This battle of proposals of community only schools has a great impact on us Springdale homeowners in Glenview, as well as the those residents in the Colony apartments. Where are the quotes from our mayor in the Tri-County Press on these issues that have had quotes from both the Woodlawn mayor and Alec Brockmeier from Glendale. Where will the Glenview students from Springdale go if that is changed and who is speaking up for the children and families in Glenview.

The eighty-nine homeowners of Glenview deserve an answer to that much. We ask that you please support our request by the Glenview homeowners to issue a general waiver for the children wishing to play sports with their peers and please encourage the Recreation Commission members to deal with the issues in a more adult manner rather than making a group of kids forfeit their hard earned seasons. The kids sure would have had fun in tournaments this year and Iíd like for the grownups to try to tell them why it didnít happen and itís not their fault.

Mayor Webster said, first off, the Springdale Parks and Recreation Commission had absolutely no involvement in this predicament at all. They were apprised of the problem for the first time last evening. So you made reference to the Springdale Recreation Commission which has no authority over the issue here and had absolutely no involvement in it.

Mrs. Greene said Gene Burt was at the Springdale/Glendale soccer game and raised the issue. It was seen as a complaint from Springdale.

Mayor Webster replied you are talking about Mr. Burt as the soccer representative for the City, not as a member of the Parks and Recreation Commission so I really object to you making reference to the Parks and Recreation Commission. Letís take one issue at a time. The primary issue is soccer. Then you want to know why your mayor didnít speak up for salvaging the Glendale School. I have some private thoughts on that. Iím not sure this is the proper forum for me to express those but Iíll be happy to tell you my opinion on that outside of Council.

Mr. Burton said this is first I have heard of Mrs. Greeneís problems with basketball sign ups so itís hard to address that issue. I guess I am annoyed that it comes in a public forum instead of giving us a chance to address that.

Mrs. Greene stated I talked to Gary Thompson yesterday.

Mr. Burton responded if you were unhappy with his service I would have appreciated the opportunity to follow up on that. The Springdale Community Center, I as Director, the Council or the Mayor do not have the say so in this matter. As many of you know, we put our children into the NEESA soccer program, Knothole District 15 program, Tri City softball program and the basketball program. We play by the guidelines of the programs we put our kids into. We have no authority to change those. Iíll let Mr. Burt and Mr. Cooper speak to the districts and how they were established but I do have a constitution in front of me that speaks under article 3 to the Village of Glendale and the City of Springdale. So the boundaries go by the village or city, not the school district. When we put our children in those programs we have to adhere to their rules. I couldnít change their boundaries if I wanted to. We were also damaged by this process. You say this has been going on for years. I have no way of knowing that because I donít see the City of Glendaleís soccer rosters. We were hurt by this too. Had we had the opportunity to incorporate the young ladies who played out of the City we would have had three teams. As it turned out we had two teams of eighteen. I donít need to tell you that thatís conducive to play.

Mr. Gene Burt said first of all, there was no protest. There was a complaint on ineligibility. This is a copy of the constitution that the NNESL plays under. This defines whether you are a district, city, village, etc., in article 3. You are a Springdale resident. On our rules the last line in the book says "you play in the district in which you reside."

Mrs. Greene asked will you read page sixteen in the book?

Mr. Gene Burt read the definition, "a district is defined as a geographical area: school district, city, village, township, etc. We have 21 districts in our league. A representative of each district shall be a member of the league board and be responsible to see that USYS, OSYS and NEESL rules, regulations, policies and procedures are adhered to in their districts. A player must register in the district in which he/she resides." Iím sure what we are talking about is defining a district. On article 3 it says, "the principal operation of this organization shall be districts in and about the following geographical areas: Clermont Northeastern School District, City of Deer Park, Village of Evendale, Village of Fairfax, Village of Glendale, Village of Golf Manor and Amberly, the Goshen School District, City of Springdale, etc. That is to define whether you are a district, city or village. As you can see, the ones called school districts are unincorporated. Glendale is incorporated. I would like to have an opportunity to talk to you and your group at your convenience and go through this whole thing and try to clarify your situation. I have the power to sign a waiver but I cannot waive your people to play in another district. The only way I can do that is if we have teams formed and there are an abundance of players that we canít place, then we would sign a waiver for the kids to play elsewhere. In this situation we had two teams. The extra players would have given us three teams. This cuts down on the playing time of the kids. I am the district representative from Springdale. I know Glendale has a problem with the number of kids who play. I sympathize and Iíll work with them any way I can but I have to look out for our district. There was one team involved and your daughter happened to be pointed out. Nothing against your daughter; sheís an excellent player. I donít know those kids. We have a map with the streets on it. If you pay taxes in Springdale you play in Springdale. If you pay taxes in Glendale you play in Glendale. When these kids were told their games would have to be forfeited, everyone let these kids finish the season out. I canít waive any portion of a district to play in another district. I would never let anybody go just to play with school chums. When you have 21 districts you have to have a set of rules and stick with them.

Mr. Ken Cooper, president of the North/Northeast Soccer League said I have been president for eighteen years and when I inherited this position the districts had already been established. Glendale may feel they belong in a couple of the categories but they donít. They are the Village of Glendale. The representative to our board from Glendale is well aware that only the kids who live in Glendale can play on Glendale teams. When I found this out I went back through the maps and went through the rosters. There are two children from Sharonville and seven from Springdale on four rosters. Those children were declared ineligible to play on those teams. We have 6,000 children on 400 teams in 21 districts. I personally do not have the time to check every address to make sure the children are not playing where they are not supposed to be. However, when itís brought to our attention we do what we have to do. If nobody had brought it to our attention, they may have done it another four years.

Ms. Manis asked did you go to your district rep? If you are angry at anyone I would think it would be your own district rep for not telling you you were illegal.

Mrs. Greene replied my district rep is still appealing this. She does not believe Glenview kids are illegal. She did not give me this sheet. She only gave me the rulebook.

Mr. Cooper said their district rep has a copy of that. Every time itís updated a copy is passed out to every representative. If she didnít get a copy itís because she wasnít at the meeting.

Mrs. Greene stated no matter whoís to blame, the kids are the ones who suffer.

Ms. Manis responded right. but I donít think you should be saying Springdaleís to blame because they caught you. I would say itís a misunderstanding.

Mrs. Greene said it was pointed out during a game and it was a humiliating experience. Mr. Burtís granddaughter was on the team and things get competitive, and my daughter paid the price.

Mr. Burt said unfortunately in every situation like this, the children are the ones who suffer because of adult mistakes. In a lot of places city taxes fund the sports programs. Itís not fair for kids from other areas to participate in the sports and not pay the taxes.

Ms. Manis said we have the same situation in Heritage Hill. Children in Sharonville and Springdale both go to Heritage Hill School. Theyíve never been able to play in the sports programs in Springdale and weíve never played in Sharonville. They play against them and they donít have a choice of which school they can go to. Itís not just unique to Glenview and Glendale.

Mayor Webster said I was going to speak to the same subject. We have the school in Springdale but there are children from Sharonville and Butler County that come to Heritage Hill Elementary School. Iím sure when sign up slips are handed out they are given to all of the kids. The parents need to know where their kids are supposed to play. We did years ago have that same problem to some degree in Heritage Hill where we had Sharonville kids signing up in both communities. They would get drawn on a team in Springdale; then if they didnít like the team or the coach they would go back to Sharonville. It took us a long time to get that situation resolved. If we went to Glendale when it was time for soccer sign ups in Springdale we would reach seven kids who should be in our district. We do put out the annual brochure. Iím sure the people in Glenview get that. A lot of the people who signed the letter have children enrolled in other programs in Springdale. We are sorry it happened but it had nothing to do with the Recreation Commission or Mr. Burtonís staff. As Mr. Burton said, we belong to a league and we have to abide by their rules. I know every kid looks forward to going to the tournaments. Only about 10% actually get to go on and play. I would like to commend the soccer association for making sure these kids got to finish the regular season. Even though it was explained to them that these games werenít going to count they still got to finish out the regular season so they got to play just as many games as any other team that didnít go on to tournament play.

Mr. Cooper stated once it is determined that they are illegal players on illegal teams their season is over. Maybe we did go against our rules somewhat but we felt we would let them play, not only for their benefit but for the benefit of the teams they were going to play. As for tournament play, it is a privilege to play in the tournament and they didnít actually earn that privilege. Itís not fair to teams that do things according to the rules to not go while someone who broke the rules get to go.

Mr. Vanover said Councilís hands are tied. Itís not our jurisdiction. I do take offense to the feelings that you expressed that Springdale has treated Glenview as a stepchild. I serve with Dr. Ketring on the Board of Health and we have other board and commission members from that area active in the government. As for where they go to school you can talk to the Princeton School Board about that because thatís their decision. As for soccer, Iím a coach and I know the rules we have to follow. Itís not fair that we get to pick and choose. If you want to blame someone for what happened maybe you should talk to the Glendale rep. Thatís their responsibility to check eligibility.

Mr. Danbury said itís unfortunate that the children are the ones who suffered on this. Hopefully, Mr. Cooper, if the district representatives were made a little more aware of looking at rosters throughout the league you could alleviate this. Thank you for coming here. Maybe we can include this in our newsletter and state that if you live here you play here.

Mayor Webster said a lot of times we gear the release of the newsletter around these important sign-ups. I donít know what else we can do but go door to door. Weíre sorry if you feel like a step-child; thatís not the case. I think your community is integrated into Springdale as a whole and it hurts me to think that people who live there think they are not part of the city, because we consider them part of the city.


Mr. Danbury said Mr. Osborn sent out a letter to the residents on McClellanís Lane dealing with the fact that the two ordinances before us tonight donít seem to have any solution at hand. Is there a motion to continue Ordinance 59-1997 in progress.

Mr. Galster made a motion to continue the public hearing in progress on Ordinance 59-1997 until December 3, 1997 and Mr. Vanover seconded.

The motion passed with 7 affirmative votes.


Mr. Vanoverr made a motion to continue the public hearing in progress on Ordinance 60-1997 until December 3, 1997 and Mr. Wilson seconded.

The motion passed with 7 affirmative votes.


Mrs. Boice requested to make the report on the October BZA meeting now rather than have two reports at the next Council meeting.

BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS REPORT - Mrs. Boice said Mr. Tiedke, 11830 Lawnview Avenue, requested a variance to enclose an existing covered roof area. He withdrew. His plans were very sketchy and we made him aware that if that variance was not granted, he would have to wait another six months to appeal.

Catherine Kauffman, 11831 Ramsdale Court, requested renewal of their variance to allow a dog grooming business in her residence. That was granted 5-0.

Hunterís Glen Limited Partnership requested a variance to allow a 140 s.f. sign, 18í6" high located 14í from the I-275 right-of-way. I reported on this June 17 and that variance was denied by a 5-0 vote. Subsequently Hunterís Glen filed a lawsuit. When we saw this on our agenda the entire board was surprised because we had the packet of the lawsuit in our files and had heard absolutely nothing on it. The attorney who came before us proceeded to tell us that he had discussed this with our attorney, Mr. Ken Schneider; that he had discussed it with Mr. McErlane, etc., giving the impression that it would be preferable if the Board of Zoning Appeals could come to some type of conclusion rather than pursue this suit. It seemed he had talked to everybody except nobody had talked to us. We have to make the ultimate decision. Needless to say, the BZA members were livid. I called Mr. Schneider the next morning and told him he left us out on a limb. Mr. Schneider responded that he had had a phone call from the attorney and told him it was his prerogative to go before the board again but the City is prepared to defend this case. So, as often happens when we have attorneys come in to the Board of Zoning Appeals, they have a tendency to try to intimidate. I want to make it clear that you are not going to intimidate the people on the Board of Zoning Appeals. Weíre not going to be bullied or threatened so we moved to table that variance. We bend over backwards trying to work with people and 99% of those people try to work with us, so Iím just going to say to some of the high powered attorneys that appear before that board, cool your jets because we donít take well to that type of approach. We are not going to tolerate it. We are not going to be forced into a decision until we have talked with our legal people and until we have notice from them.

Dan Wheeler of Target requested a variance to allow the canopy at 175 Parkway to extend 12 feet over the front yard setback. It was granted 5-0.

Michaelís Crafts, 425 East Kemper Road, requested a variance allowing them to move their existing wall sign west and that was granted 5-0.

Duke Associates, developer of Tri-County Marketplace, 11741 Princeton Pike, requested a variance to allow wall signs exceeding some of the measures we allow. This was referred by Planning Commission. They were over 169 square feet. When you realize how far back that is set from Princeton Pike it does not present a problem. That was granted 5-0.

I would like to publicly apologize for ruining Mr. Schneiderís morning. I should have known better but Iím sure you understand the position we felt we were in. I thank you very much.

Mr. Osborn said earlier this year Council adopted Ordinance 39-1997 authorizing an agreement with CDS for additional public works inspection. The construction season and the number of projects we used that inspector to cover went beyond the scope of the original numbers of the contract. Weíd like to bring in an ordinance amending the contract to reflect the actual time we consumed for public works inspection.

The West Kemper Road storm sewer project has been under discussion for some time. The topic surfaced several years ago when we were looking at this as a bikeway project as well as a storm sewer project. Over time it has evolved more towards the construction of a storm sewer system. We budgeted and executed engineering for Phase I of that project in 1997. We are scheduled to go to construction in 1998. Phase I would be from Springfield Pike west to a point just west of Greenlawn. We are scheduled to do the engineering for Phase II in 1998 and go to construction in 1999. We are planning a public meeting with the residents of Kemper Road to explain the project to them in detail and give them an opportunity to ask questions and to advise them as to what easements the City may require in order to accomplish the project. Mr. Shuler is prepared to give you more background on the project

Mr. Shuler said I passed out a few sheets from the construction plans for your reference, knowing that we will be sending out notices to the residents about a public meeting. We also knew we would get some telephone calls asking us to tell them more about this. The purpose of this eveningís information is just to give you a little more background and maybe a reminder on some of the issues we have talked about. At the public meeting we have with the residents we will go into detail, explain the project to them and then after that we will have time set aside. Weíll have a couple of the engineers here with a full set of plans so they can sit down with residents individually and answer questions about what is going to happen to their property. As Mr. Osborn indicated the total limits of the project are Kenn Road to Route 4, and the basic goals of the project as they were originally envisioned were to eliminate the side road ditches, to put in a storm sewer system that we did not have at this time, and get the maximum amount of water into the storm sewer system, and to deal with the flooding that now occurs north of Kemper and east of Greenlawn as the major storm sewer that comes underneath Kemper just west of Greenlawn flows under Greenlawn and spreads out into the yards before it gets to the creek. The main purpose of this project was to eliminate the site ditches and then transmit to the maximum extent possible, that water that is now flowing across yards along Kemper Road and empty to the channel where it crosses Kemper Road by the Presbyterian Church. With that in mind we will be able to accomplish some other benefits with this project. With the storm sewer in place we will be able to regrade the yards. Some yards are very steep and hard to maintain along the ditch areas. We will be widening the berm area. We now only have a two foot berm along that road. The mailboxes are on the back side of that berm. Weíve had complaints as we do in a lot of other areas about people standing on the road getting mail out of their mailboxes. As we are regrading the areas on both sides of the road, and there will be storm sewers on both sides of the road to deal with the local drainage issues, this will allow us to widen the berm area. It will make it a safer area and will allow a future bike lane along Kemper Road or sidewalks, a combination of both, etc. It will make it necessary for us to regrade and replace driveways. The project will affect landscaping, trees. There are some that will have to come down in conjunction with the storm sewer and the regrading. We will be replacing trees as part of the project. Mr. Butsch is presently doing a tree survey to identify what trees will be affected, the type, size, the condition. We will be looking at suitable replacements. The storm sewer will be placed at or behind the existing right-of-way. There are numerous existing utilities in the present right-of-way. We will be placing the storm sewer behind the utility poles so that we do not have to encounter the extreme cost of relocation or repair or replacement of existing utilities. We will be talking with the residents about securing a storm sewer easement from them. We are not going to take additional right-of-way for this project. The size of the lot of the residentsí yard will remain the same but there will be an easement in the front yard across the setback area. It should not affect any use of their property or reduce the size of the property. We will need right of entry from each resident to get onto the property to do the regrading and driveway work. There still will be some swale in some locations. Kemper Road is not a road where we have curb and gutter that controls the drainage and all the water that falls on the yards runs to the streets and we collect at that point. The water will still run off the road and we do need to collect that in some manner. Instead of a ditch along the road there will be very gentle graded areas and yard drains between driveways that will pick this water up and will put that water into the storm sewer system. You wonít have water flowing from one yard to the next as it goes under driveways, culverts, and flows on down the ditch line. The water that weíll be collecting is simply what runs off from that yard and weíll pick it up and put it in the storm system. Weíre looking at this as a two year project with the first year being the major trunk line and to address the Greenlawn flooding area. The second phase of the project will pick up the project just west of Greenlawn and go on to Kenn Road. The City has been in contact with Forest Park because we do have a part of this Kemper Road corridor area that is split between Springdale and Forest Park and they are going to be working on their side of the road the same time that Springdale is doing the north side. When we have completed this we should have the ditches on both sides of Kemper Road all the way from Kenn To Route 4. The schedule we hope to be on is having the meeting with the residents in December answering as many of their questions as we can. Following that meeting weíll start the process of securing the storm sewer easements. We would like to then bid the project out in January or February, whenever we feel we can get the best bids. We would like to start construction as soon as the weather would allow in the spring so that the project could be completed by fall. There are still details that we are working out and weíre anticipating there may be others from the questions the residents ask. This gives us another opportunity to maybe find out about a problem that is not obvious, plus give the residents forewarning of what is coming, what to expect, time schedule. Weíll have to maintain traffic and driveways, and it will be difficult at some times but I think the best help there is communications. You may receive some calls. If you can answer the question, fine. If you want to refer it to me Iíll be glad to talk to anyone about it. The handout I gave you was a typical section of the project and the three plan sheets have house numbers on them.

Ms. Manis asked what do the yard drains look like?

Mr. Shuler replied the ones we are using now are about 12" in diameter. Normally they have a beehive top that rolls up so the leaves and grass donít cover them and create a pond.

Mr. Galster asked when will the residents be notified of a meeting.

Mr. Osborn responded first we wanted to get Councilís consent. I shouldnít have been so affirmative in my initial conversation with you. The purpose this evening was to get Councilís concurrence in going on to the next step. Assuming that happened this evening we plan to get a letter out to the residents as soon as possible advising them of the December 10 date. We will target those residents on Kemper that woud be directly affected as well as some residents on Greenlaw who have contacted us in the past because of the flooding problems they have experienced.

Mr. Danbury asked Mr. Shuler, you are going to start around March?

Mr. Shuler replied we donít want to get in too early, make a mess, then find out that we have to sit for three weeks because of bad weather. Weíll watch that in the spring. Weíll start when the weather seems that we can start and stay on it.

Mr. Danbury said I did speak with a resident over the weekend and he did ask me a question. I did clarify it with Mr. Osborn but we will be starting from the eastern portion and moving west. Weíll start where the creek ends and move up towards Forest Park.

Mr. Shuler stated we will be starting at the channel by the Presbyterian Church and working both directions from the discharge into the creek upstream.

Mr. Danbury said there would be a lot of other residents besides those on Kemper who would be affected such as Rose Lane, Observatory and Madison. Could we invite those people as well?

Mr. Osborn said Iím sure we could get a newspaper article out. Our strategy was to promote the project as much as possible through the media but do a direct mailing to the residents whose property will be involved. The cost estimate on this project without any consideration for a sidewalk or bike lane is approaching $500,000 for Phase I. As you can, this is a tremendous project but I think the impact of the appearance and profile of Kemper Road and the safety factor as relates to the deep ditches and storm water run-off. This does not mean there will never be another flooding of the properties on Greenlawn but it will hopefully make those periods far more distant between events. Weíre going to try to make the storm sewer trunk that runs from Greenlawn to the creek designed to a 50 year storm. A typical storm sewer is designed to ten years. The whole purpose is to capture that water and take it to the creek and divert it from what is considered its normal major storm routing. Unfortunately, that major storm routing goes right behind some homes and gets in the basement. Part of this project is to expand on what would be a normal storm sewer system. While weíre doing this to mitigate the consequences as much as possible, at some point there is still going to be water in those homes on Greenlawn. Thereís no way we can avoid that but weíre trying to reduce that potential to the greatest extent possible.

Mr. Shuler said design criteria is created by measuring a storm intensity over an historic period. Thereís a 2% chance of a 50 year storm happening this year. We may go ten years and have none, then we may have two in a year. Itís really the level of storm protection that is used in designing storm sewers.


Mr. Wilson said I have a letter written by a resident. I will read part of it that pertains to a specific issue. "As a frequent walker of Oxford Hill I have been terrified of the dogs that run along their property lines on corner lots with only electronic fences between me and their snarling teeth. Two such lots are at the corner of Greencastle and Cedarhill, and Cedarhill and Cantrell. There is only one house between these two homes so walking along that stretch is quite unnerving. I know of one time that the Cedarhill/Cantrell corner lot dog did run through and after a neighbor that was walking past. I usually cross the street to give more distance. The ordinances keeping physical fencing to back yards should also apply to electronic fences. For aesthetic reasons physical fences have to be to the back but for safety purposes I think electronic fences should also be in the back or at least 25 or more feet from the sidewalks. If the electronically contained dog decides heíll take the jolt and run through, it could be deadly. Also, what about medical and other emergencies to the property. If that dog is loose and no one is available to contain it, how would police, fire and medical personnel get into the house without stunning the dog or calling the SPCA to do so. I ask that you do something to correct this possible deadly or injuring situation before it occurs. It is a shame that people, especially children, have to be maimed or killed before corrective actions are taken. Stop signs, signals, speed zones have been changed after such horrible accidents so letís take care of this before one occurs. I do not think the developer of these fences meant for them to be used as such. Sincerely, Sharon K. Broenner, 12025 Greencastle Drive"

Mayor Webster said I certainly have empathy for that. Maybe we should have somebody take a look at that. These dogs come rushing right out to the edge of the sidewalk. I think itís a legitimate concern.

Mr. Danbury said letís send it to Planning and then Rules and Laws. A resident on my street was attacked by a dog who went through an invisible fence.

Mr. Osborn said I have had these same thoughts myself because I walk the same neighborhood. Iíve never talked with Sharon about that but I share her concerns. If you are walking that neighborhood with your own dog, it really becomes scary. You have to restrain your dog. Your dog excites the other dog. As a homeowner I had to make that same decision recently. I live on a corner lot. I decided not to put up an invisible fence. It only restrains my dog. It doesnít prevent somebody from coming in and petting my dog. Am I really in control of my animal if somebody can just step across the sidewalk onto my property and my dog bites them. I decided to put my dog behind a fence for that reason, to protect my dog and to protect the public. I think itís a decision every property owner has to make. I donít even know if there is any law on it but I think itís a very valid safety issue that we ought to consider.

Mrs. Boice said I hope this wonít be bopping around in committee too long. Letís get this done before the horse is out of the barn door. It seems to me that we donít allow fences in the front yard so I think itís cut and dried. It shouldnít have to spend too much time in committee. We donít allow visible fences either. A fence is a fence.

Mr. Wilson said with Councilís concurrence I would like to talk with the chairman of Planning and have him put it on the agenda for next Tuesday. I would also like to talk with Mrs. Broenner. Give her a call and see if sheíll come in just as well. Letís get it done next week and pass it on. Letís make a concentrated effort to get this resolved within thirty days. Even after that it will take time for those residents. There might be some resistance. We should get it resolved. One life is too much. One person maimed is too much.

Mr. Danbury suggested you send an invitation to Dr. Ketring to attend or have input.

Mayor Webster said Mr. Wilson, everything you said I agree with. Iíd like to see it get on the fast track and get put on the books. Assuming we could get this on, is there anyway we can do anything about people who have invisible fences in their front yards right now.

Mr. Schneider replied basically public health regulations are not bound by laws similar to building codes, etc. If itís a public health issue, I believe the law is pretty clear. I will check to see if this has been interpreted recently in the law but my understanding is that if it is public health, safety and welfare, everybody complies.

Mr. Knox stated one of the things to be taken into consideration is the areas that have covenants that say you cannot have an impenetrable fence. For the people who have dogs at this time and have electronic fences, if we said they had to move to the back yard and the covenants say they canít have a fence, we put them in a rather peculiar situation. I would request that we look into that also.

Mr. Vanover said you might want some input from the Police Department on how they deal with the animals when they respond to an emergency situation.

Mr. Galster said given the desire not to have the grandfather clause and because of public health, safety and welfare, maybe it shouldnít be going to Planning at all. It should be going to Public Health, Safety and Welfare.

Mr. Danbury said letís have a committee with Public Health, Safety and Welfare and also with Rules and Laws jointly. We could have Mrs. Boice, Mr. Galster and Ms. Manis look at this together. It would be a good idea to invite Dr. Ketring or a member of the Board of Health. Also you might want to invite another member of Planning Commission if you want. Would you want Mr. Schneider there for legal advice? Maybe we could get a report from some of the areas. I think Mr. Knoxís point was well taken. There are some covenants in some areas where fences are prohibited. Whatever you come up with may not apply to every single resident within the city. Mr. Osborn, do we have a record of what Glenview or other areas allow?

Mr. Osborn replied we donít have it readily available but we can develop it. We know that certain condominium complexes have covenants and Glenview has a homeownersí association and we can find out what their rules and covenants are.

Mr. Danbury said I would like to congratulate the winners of the recent elections. We are going to have a swearing in on Monday, December 1 at 7:30 p.m. Mr. Schneider is lining up a judge.


Planning Commission November 11, 7:00 p.m.

Board of Zoning Appeals November 18, 7:00 p.m.

Board of Health November 13, 7:00 p.m.

Mr. Danbury said there are some Council appointed positions whose terms are expiring. Everyone should start thinking about nominees.



Public hearing on ordinances 59 and 60 December 3

Budget hearing and appropriation ordinance -

public hearing December 17

Work session December 5

Request for executive session to discuss

employee compensation ordinance next meeting

vote December 17


Executive session

Ordinance for inspection services by CDS with emergency

Resolution for U-11 girls who won soccer championship

Mayor Webster said our soccer program took a giant step forward this year as 11 teams qualified to go to tournament this year.

Mrs. Boice made a motion for Council as a whole to go into executive session to discuss matters of real estate acquisition. Mr. Vanover seconded.

Council went into executive session at 8:30 p.m.

Council reconvened at 9:00 p.m. and adjourned at 9:01 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,




Edward F. Knox

Clerk of Council/Finance Director

Minutes Approved:

Randy Danbury, President of Council



__________________________, l997