|
Council of the Village of Yellow SpringsMINUTES IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS January 20, 2004CALL TO ORDER President Tony Arnett called the meeting to order at 7:01 p.m. ROLL CALLTony Arnett, Denise Swinger, Mary Alexander, Jocelyn Hardman and George Pitstick were present. The village Manager Rob Hillard was also present. ANNOUNCEMENTSThe Clerk announced that the Board of Zoning Appeals has designated the second Wednesday of each month as their hearing date. If there are no applications, the meeting will be cancelled. The Clerk also announced that council had received the 2003, 4th Quarter Progress Report on the Vernay Laboratories, 875 Dayton Street facility. The Report is available for review in Council Chambers. President Arnett read aloud a statement from Council regarding the lease between the Village and Caboose Skate and Rental. The Village has pursued all of the issues regarding the lease and has determined the Village is left to decide for itself what it should do regarding the enforcement of Section 4(b) in Resolution 86-29. Council has agreed that the operation of the Cabooses for both sales and rentals is not in the best interest of the public in the future, and (2) the location of the Cabooses so close to the Bike Path is not in the best interest of the public. This Council has further agreed that it does not intend to renew the lease for the Cabooses in the future. (A copy of the statement is available upon request). REVIEW OF THE MINUTESReview of the minutes from the January 5, 2004 regular meeting. Pitstick MOVED and Swinger SECONDED a MOTION for APPROVAL of the minutes as amended. The MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. Review of the minutes from the January 6, 2004 special meeting. Alexander MOVED and Pitstick SECONDED a MOTION for APPROVAL of the minutes as submitted. The MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. REVIEW OF THE AGENDAArnett suggested and Council agreed to discuss the appointments to the Design Advisory Commission under Old Business rather than in an Executive Session. PETITIONS/COMMUNICATIONSThe Clerk will receive and file: AMP OH Newsletter(s) PUBLIC HEARING/LEGISLATION2nd Reading and public hearing of ordinance #2004-02 Amending Minor Subdivisions 1226.11(a) and 1226.12. Pitstick MOVED and Swinger SECONDED a MOTION for APPROVAL. Arnett explained that the amendment allowed for the Zoning Administrator to be the designated authority to approve a minor subdivision and approval of any replats. Arnett opened the public hearing. Having no comments, the public hearing was closed. The roll was called and the MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. 1st Reading of ordinance #2004-03 Amending 252.06 Personnel Policy-Computer and E-mail Usage. Swinger MOVED and Pitstick SECONDED a MOTION for APPROVAL. Alexander inquired if it would be the Village Manager who monitors the email system. Arnett stated yes. Sue Abendroth asked if this policy also covers Bruce Cornett the Village technical person who oversees the mechanical operation of the Village’s system? Arnett explained that although Cornett is not a Village employee, but any operation of a Village system used by him would be covered under this policy. Abendroth raised concerns regarding the witnessing of the emails to and from senders. Arnett explained that once the emails leave the building the policy would not cover them. This policy covers the Village’s e-mail, Internet, and voicemail usage by its employees. The roll was called. The MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. A public hearing was scheduled for February 2, 2004. 1st Reading of ordinance #2004-04 Amending 282.01 Establishment; Purpose of the Design Advisory Commission Alexander MOVED and Hardman SECONDED a MOTION for APPROVAL. Arnett explained that this amendment allowed for an expansion of the role of the Design Advisory Commission. Arnett also offered a friendly amendment to the ordinance. His amendment added the words “ the Village owned grassy area”. Alexander and Hardman accepted the amendment. If approved, the Commission would now be authorized to review all requests for new or modified signs within this area. Sue Abendroth cautioned Council that any effort to deal with aesthetics of the Village is very subjective. Citing an instance where the value of an item by the Tree Committee did not have the same value for the Design Commission; Abendroth added that there is not always agreement on what is aesthetically pleasing and what is visual clutter. Arnett asked Abendroth if she would read the report from the Design Advisory Commission and give him her comments. He added that the Commission has no authority and that they are an advisory group to the Village Manager. The MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. The public hearing was scheduled for February 2, 2004. 1st Reading of ordinance #2004-05 Amending Chapter 1262 Site Plan Review. Pitstick MOVED and Alexander SECONDED a MOTION for APPROVAL. Hillard explained the process that Planning Commission had gone through earlier this summer when trying to use the SPR for the Hull Court Development Project. Pitstick supporting Hillard’s statement added that the Planning Commission will continue to visit the Site Plan Review and the Planned Unit Development processes but for now these suggested changes will aid the Commission in moving forward. Pitstick added that the Commission agreed that a PUD would be used for larger development projects over four acres. Some of the changes included the use of the SPR option for any residential parcel that is less than four acres rather than the original fifteen acres. It also allows for a two-step process, giving the developer the option to present his conceptual plan to the Commission for comment prior to going to the expense of having more detailed engineering plans completed. The MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. The public hearing was scheduled for February 17, 2004. Resolution #2004-06 Authorizing the Purchase of a Police Vehicle. Swinger MOVED and Alexander SECONDED a MOTION for APPROVAL. Arnett stated that the last vehicle was purchased late in the year but that this one is being purchased early at a substantially lower price than budgeted. The purchase will be through a contract bid of the State’s Co-op Purchasing Program. The MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. Resolution #2004-07 Correcting a Math Error in the 2004 Annual Appropriations. Alexander MOVED and Swinger SECONDED a MOTION for APPROVAL. Council agreed to change the word effect to affect in the second WHEREAS and the year 2005 to 2004 in Section 1. Arnett explained that there was an error in transferring the numbers of the totals from one form to the other form. The amounts of the line items are correct. The MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. Resolution #2004-08 Authorizing the Purchase of Video Cameras for Police Vehicles. Pitstick MOVED and Swinger SECONDED a MOTION for APPROVAL. Hillard explained that this purchase comes to Council because it is over $15,000. Police Chief Carl Bush added that the video cameras would activate when the lights are utilized. They can also be activated by hand. Bush further added that this is a necessary tool to aid law enforcement. There is a sixty to ninety-day delivery time for the units. He also added that the department would be participating in the Bias Based Prevention Program February 9th – 12 th. Bush also participated in the Mock Crime Scene Program at Mills Lawn. The students took part in fingerprinting, hair and fiber analysis, and crime scene analysis. Pitstick stated that he would like to see an automatic defibrillator in each car and one in the Bryan Center. Arnett added that the video cameras are also under budget. The MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. CITIZEN’S CONCERNSThere were no comments from the audience. SPECIAL REPORTSStorm Water Update. Hillard introduced Paul Romano, P.E., Project Manager from Jones & Henry Engineers, Ltd. Romano reviewed his engineering report entitled Retention Pond-Sizing/Drainage Basin Routing Design. In his review Romano explained that the Report studied flooding issues associated primarily in Drainage Basin III of the 6 drainage basins. These are drainage issues in this basin particularly related to the area north of Yellow Springs; Fairfield Rd. Romano further explained that he had reviewed the earlier report from Worl & Associates, an opinion letter from Guy Ashmore of the Greene County Soil and Water conservation District and a Preliminary Development Report from Floyd Browne Associates. Romano explained that there are three ways of redirection of the flow of water that included constructing a 36” RCP sewer from the intersection of Dayton and Green Streets to Basin II, construction of a 36” RCP sewer from the intersection of Limestone and Green Streets to Basin II and/or constructing a 36” RCP sewer from Tully St. along center College Street to 200’ east of Xenia Avenue. He also explained the advantages and disadvantages of each of these suggestions. The cost of each construction for the redirection was $451,400, $847,000 and $610,000 respectively. Romano recommends a combination of a smaller detention basin on the Glass farm, and storm water improvements in Drainage Basin III on Dayton St. He added that the Village should draft a development plan for the Glass Farm property and the undeveloped properties to the east and enact a storm water ordinance limiting future runoff from undeveloped areas as they develop and construct certain storm water system improvements. A copy of this report is available for review in Council Chambers. Hillard has a model ordinance for storm water and suggested it be directed to Planning Commission. He added that the water on the Westside be redirected North and some redirected East with potentially a series of smaller detention ponds that would control the flow of water. He added that some of the flow of water could be guided through channels rather than utilizing a larger detention pond. Swinger, referring to a comment by Romano stating that 50-60 CSF was a considerable amount, explained that there was a previous recommendation of 144 CSF and asked if that would be enough? Hillard explained that there is a lot of subjectivity to that number. Swinger expressed concern that restricting it down to this may not eliminate the problem in the Fairacres area. Arnett explained that the Village could do something to correct the problem right now however if there were further development then there is a good possibility that the work would have to be redone. He supported a development plan before doing any construction of a detention pond. Hardman asked that if the Village does improvement to the pipes that exist now would that actually create an acceptable situation right now with no development and then add a detention pond after development in that area. Hardman asked specifically how does the Village correct the problem right now? Romano stated that it would be very difficult to answer that question right now, however any rerouting of the water would benefit the area. Pitstick stated that the current 54” pipe under Dayton St. is a very large pipe that could channel a considerable amount of water. He added that he liked the idea of doing abatement and the idea of a smaller detention pond. He supported reserving an area within an elevation of 1015’ on the Glass Farm for no future development until the Village has a development plan. He also supported drafting a storm water ordinance. Arnett referring to the Kingsfield and Park Meadows developments asked if the basins were functioning properly? Romano explained that he is not a supporter of small detention ponds. He added Park Meadows is functioning but there is a maintenance problem. The Kingsfield rear area basin has added some value to the flow from the Glass Farm. He further added that smaller detention basins are not as sufficient unless you have a master development plan. Pitstick asked if a developer wanted to give money to enlarge an existing basin rather than create one would that not be a more viable course of action. Romano agreed. Arnett summarized and Council agreed on four actions that Council could consider further. They were:
Swinger added that this was a rather timely issue considering it would not be long before the spring rains would begin. Council agreed that another proposal be drafted by Hillard for the “next level of study”. Alexander asked what could be done now? Are the residents expected to put up with the flooding for another year? Arnett explained that there was nothing that could be done this year and that a study should determine the next course of action. Reviewing their action points, Council agreed to move forward on points 1 and 2. They also agreed to direct Hillard to prepare a proposal for further study. There were no suggestions for point 4 at this time. Council thanked Romano for his report and his presentation. David Erskine stated that he initially was cautiously optimistic but now he is disappointed. He hoped that there would something that could be done now. He also hopes that the Village would try to stop the flooding in the Fairacres area and not do anything to make it worst. Referring to work done by Bill Bebko, Erskine further added that there was more information regarding the flooding that was not being used. Arnett explained that the scope of this study was preliminary and was not intended to offer any design at this time. It alerted Council to what is happening and what should happen next. He further explained that the next study would more specifically address this problem. Peggy Erskine stated that the amount of water flowing under the culvert in King St. does not reflect the flooding in Fairacres. She suggested that a measurement of the flow should also be considered. She also asked what are the guarantees on what would work. She stated that in the past she has been assured that there would be no increase in flooding because of development, but her experience demonstrates the opposite. Arnett supported the measuring of the flow under the King St. culvert and supported the inclusion of all work regarding this issue in future discussions and in the development of the ordinance. Sue Abendroth asked if there is a redirection of the flow down Limestone St. what would be the impact on the Glen? Hillard explained that the existing structures to the east are already going into the Glen. Arnett added that the piping system itself would act as a buffer. Abendroth added that this was if the piping is in-tact and not collapsing. Arnett then repeated Council’s agreed plan of action and will wait to receive the proposal from the Village Manager. Village Mediation Program’s Annual Report. Toni Dosik, Chair of the Village Mediation Program and Tucker Malishenko, Program Coordinator reviewed the Report. Dosik explained that even though there had been a reduction in funding from Council, the Village has been very responsive. Malishenko explained that there had been several referrals from the Police Department and the Village Manager. He added that the Program has highly qualified volunteers along with professional mediators. Hardman noted that the number of cases was slightly off from last year. Dosik explained that the figures represented nine months and not twelve months. Figures were not available for three of the months. Hillard offered complimentary remarks to Malishenko and the volunteers of VMP for their efforts. Malishenko explained how much effort happens before an actual mediation takes place and that those figures are not measured. Arnett agreed, stating that not every call turns into mediation. Some calls are rerouted to other agencies while other problems are solved during a telephone conversation. Swinger noting the decrease in funding, asked had there been any success in researching of grant monies? Len Kramer answered by stating that there are funding sources available. Dosik added that funding was on the Steering Committee’s agenda. Council thanked VMP for their annual report and commended them for their dedication. OLD BUSINESSCouncil Goals for 2004. Arnett explained that Council had agreed to take each goal and draft a plan(s) of action. The major topics were Business, Housing, Financial, Communication and Continued Goals of 2003. Arnett, Pitstick and Hillard met to draft a plan to address Goal #3, Financial. Their plan consisted of them assembling a package of financial information, reviewing the package with a small test group of individuals for feedback, Council would then review that information and prioritize a list of options and revise the package. The new revised package would be reviewed by community groups, and Council would again review the information gathered from the community groups and would further revise the package and forward to the whole community through a survey sent to all residents and through community meetings. Council would then draft a final plan and move forward. Pitstick stated that Council is responsible for the health, safety, and welfare of as well as the amenities. Council is also faced with the how to pay for the capital needs in a structured manner. Hardman suggested that a random sampling could be done rather than a census. Arnett stated that he would want the process to be an open opportunity for participation. Swinger supported the process but requested that Council’s role in the process take place as a work session rather than within a regular Council meeting. This would enable Council to focus on the process. Council agreed that Arnett, Pitstick and Hillard would be charged with the development of the financial packet after which Council would schedule a work session to begin to address this issue. Arnett asked if any members of Council would like to volunteer to begin work on another goal for Council’s February 17th meeting? Hardman and Alexander agreed to work on Goal #2 Housing. Se Abendroth suggested Villagers would be willing to assist Council members when needed. Design Advisory Commission Appointment. Swinger reported that she and Alexander had interviewed four of the five applicants. The fifth applicant withdrew after reviewing the time needed for the work of the Commission. Swinger and Alexander recommended David Battle and Sam Bachtell who would continue as members and David Reyes, Ph.D an architect who also teaches at Antioch McGregor School. Hardman MOVED and Swinger SECONDED a MOTION for APPROVAL of the recommendation. Alexander suggested that when interviewing applicants for commission that the Council representative be a part of the interviewing team. Arnett explained that that is the general procedure but in this case there is no Council representative. The Design Advisory Commission works directly with the Village Manager. The MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. NEW BUSINESSVolunteer Recognition. Alexander suggested that Council offer recognition to its many volunteers to the commissions, committees and boards during National Volunteer Week in April. She also suggested that an article in the paper asking other organizations to do the same and a proclamation from the Mayor. Council agreed to the following:
Sue Abendroth suggested formulating a community-wide list of volunteers Peggy Erskine asked for inclusion of the all-volunteer organizations and put the entire listing in the newspaper. Council directed the Clerk to prepare the volunteer list and Arnett to compose the recognition letter for review at the next Council meeting. MANAGER’S REPORTHillard reported that he had received the proposed Township Wellhead Protection Resolutions and had forwarded the copies to the Ohio EPA for comments. The Ohio EPA’s basic comment was that this was a good start and is indicative of first-time wellhead protection resolutions. He reminded Council that there was a joint meeting scheduled with the Township Trustees for March 2004. The Village is soliciting professional services for design/bid/inspection for the public works remodeling and ball diamond regarding. The Village has worked through the Health Dept. and obtained a $5,324 quote from a local contractor to install the on-site septic system on the Village-owned property at 1274 S.R. 343. This cost will be considered in the final sale of the property. Hillard asked that if anyone was interested in membership to the County’s Park District Advisory Board to contact Hillard or the Greene County Park District. Phil Hawkey supplied a listing of construction permits and requests received in his office. Arnett stated that he appreciated the summary information. Hillard added that Council would receive the Public Works Report and the 4th Quarter Financials at the next meeting. STANDING REPORTSArnett Village Mediation Program (On file) AGENDA PLANNING The next meeting of the council of the Village of Yellow Springs will be held at 7:00 p.m. on Monday, February 2, 2004 in Council Chambers, John Bryan Center, 100 Dayton Street. Items for discussion at the February 2nd meeting are: 2nd Reading and Public Hearing of Ordinance #2004-03 Amending 252.06 Personnel Policy- Computer and E-mail Usage 2nd Reading and Public Hearing of Ordinance #2004-04 Amending 282.01 Design Advisory Commission 1st Reading of ordinance amending the Library Commission 1st Reading of ordinance amending the Environmental Commission Annual Report fro Planning Commission Greene County Children’s Services-Levy Resolution re: Employee Expenditure 4th Quarter Financials Resolution re: Water Tower Painting Volunteer Recognition FUTURE AGENDA ITEMSProposal for Attracting Eco-Friendly Users to Commerce Park (2/17) EXECUTIVE SESSIONPersonnel-Appointment to Design Advisory Commission was moved to Old Business. ADJOURNMENTHaving no further business, Alexander MOVED and Hardman SECONDED a MOTION to ADJOURNMENT. The MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY at 10:08 p.m.
______________________________ Tony Arnett, President _______________________________ Deborah Benning, Clerk |
|