CITY OF ROCKY RIVER

OCTOBER 4, 2004

The Committee-of-the-Whole was called to order by Mrs. Bobst, President of Council, at 8:00 p.m.

Council Members Present: Mr. Gollinger, Mr. Potterfield, Mr. Frost, Mrs. Bartolozzi,

Mr. Hagan, Mrs. Bobst

Absent: Mr. Hurtuk

Administration: Mayor Knoble, Mr. Linden

Assistant Law Director: Mr. Hotz

Press: Mr. Kelley, Mrs. McKenzie

The meeting was opened with the Pledge of Allegiance.

MAYOR'S REPORT:

The Mayor distributed the latest issue of the newsletter. Since it is mailed to all postal customers in the City, he encouraged residents who do not receive their copy to call City Hall so that it can be investigated.

The Mayor then noted with sadness the passing of Frank Lord who served the City as Law Director from 1970 to 1973. Mr. Lord was also active in the Chamber of Commerce and several other civic organizations.

The Wooster Road project is nearing completion, and there will be a joint ribbon cutting ceremony with Fairview Park on Monday, October 11 at noon on the Coffinberry island. All are invited. Letters from Fairview Park with the signatures of both mayors will be sent to residents.

The Mayor, Mr. Linden and Chief Wagner have again met with residents of Lakeview Avenue to discuss speed and traffic issues. The Police Department still has a high degree of presence on the street, but the number of tickets issued has decreased, leading the Mayor to feel that the program has been effective. In a recent traffic survey, taken on a Wednesday and Saturday in late September, the average number of cars on Lakeview was about 4500 cars per day; Northview had about 4700 and Wagar, over 10,000.

This Wednesday at 2:00 p.m., a meeting will be held for city-approved sewer contractors who are qualified to help residents confirmed to have a sewer problem in the Phase 2 Wooster-Story sewer correction program. In 2002, URS began the dye testing program which has been continued by the City. This pinpoints homes which need to replace storm and/or sanitary sewers on their properties. The City is beginning to notify those homeowners who will need to address this problem. A list of qualified sewer contractors will be available, but there is no obligation to use these businesses. Any qualified contractor licensed to work in the City may be called.

Discussion: Mr. Gollinger asked if Wooster Road is open for traffic. It is not, as yet, but striping and a few other details will be completed by the ribbon-cutting ceremony on Monday.

Mr. Hagan asked if every house on Wooster and Story has been tested. The Mayor responded that this is an on-going program, started by URS in 2002 and continuing by City workers. Because it is time intensive, we are not yet halfway through. Only those properties which failed the dye test will receive the letter of notification.

UNFINISHED BUSINESS:

Ordinances No. 84-04, 85-04, 86-04 and 87-04: These ordinances establish drive-through service businesses. Mr. Potterfield noted that the approved minutes from the meeting of the Planning Commission have not yet been received. He asked if Council members had questions or comments.

Mrs. Bobst indicated that original discussions had included issues of lighting, security and litter, but that they had been addressed in other parts of the Code. She will discuss this with Mr. Matty. In Ordinance No. 87-04, 1151.07 (4) (ii), she also wondered from where the measurements would be taken, i.e. from a point in the lane, or from the drive-through window. This also will be reviewed by Mr. Matty. Further, Mr. Matty has said that it is not possible to regulate the items dispensed through the window.

In Ordinance No. 85-04 which establishes drive-throughs in Local Business districts, Mr. Gollinger indicated that a number of business areas abut residentially zoned parcels. This will be problematic because the City cannot discriminate in what can and cannot be handled through a drive-through window. In speaking of the dry cleaning business last week which would also like to establish a drive-through, Mr. Gollinger believed that these transactions would not be as simple as picking up a prescription. This could open the floodgates, and many businesses could apply to the BZA for variances. He recommended a close look at Ordinance No. 85-04, which he feels is inappropriate for our City. The present regulations have worked and since there have been no changes, he does not feel that they could be successfully challenged.

Mr. Potterfield also recalled that a brief discussion of a change to Ordinance No. 86-04, 1151.05, B, 8, (p. 115) in which he proposed that the regulation which says that the "development of a buffer...may be required by the Planning Commission should be changed to "will be required" or "shall be required". He feels it is appropriate that the Council should decide that a buffer is necessary, and the Planning Commission should decide what that will be. He concurs with Mr. Gollinger, and said that the beneficiaries of the drive-throughs are businesses, not families which abut those drive-throughs.

Mr. Gollinger emphasized that his feelings are not against business owners. He said that the issue is not business per se, but individuals who patronize those businesses. Those are the individuals who create litter and noise. Many are not residents, but those from other cities and those passing through. He does not see this as a business problem, but a customer problem which businesses cannot control.

Mrs. Bobst commented that she feels these ordinances will strengthen the Code. Enforcement of these regulations will depend upon the business owner, and that is a consideration in the decision to include a drive-through. She feels this is an issue to strengthen the Code, not to diminish it. When the issue was first under consideration, she heard from seniors and young families who wanted the convenience of drive-throughs.

Mr. Gollinger again pointed out that if we are moving in that direction, we must understand what we may be opening in terms of future problems.

Mr. Hagan observed that we are a society of convenience. In the presentation of the Master Plan, he noted a plan to slow traffic and make business areas more pedestrian-friendly. Drive-throughs would take away opportunities for those individuals to enter businesses and slow down.

Mrs. Bobst commented that residents want convenience and safety. Council does not want something which will be detrimental to our area. She noted that the Planning Commission had unanimously recommended the ordinances.

Mr. Potterfield asked if there would be objections from Council members if he were to propose an amendment which would require buffering in drive-throughs which abut residences. None were stated. Mrs. Bobst noted that there are also issues of screening, drainage, litter and lighting. Although they are addressed elsewhere, it might make sense to have one section which discusses all of those.

Mr. Frost pointed out that those changes should be made to Ordinance 87-04 which actually deals with drive-throughs, rather than originally pointed out in Ordinance No. 86-04 which deals with General Business regulations. He suggested adding such a section in 1151.07 under (2) below hours of operation. Mr. Frost stated that he would have no objection to such an amendment.

It was pointed out that it would, however, need to be referred again to the Planning Commission if such changes are made.

Resolution No. 91-04: Mr. Hagan reported that this ordinance remains on hold with no additional information available.

Ordinances No. 115-04 and 116-04: These ordinances would rezone City property on Lake Road. The Mayor distributed information received today, but he added that he had no answers as yet to the questions raised by the information, as Mr. Lesiecki is attending a seminar. He explained that the City did a Phase I study which disclosed that the site had been used as a landfill for residential waste for approximately 18 years from the late 40's to the 60's. It was discussed with the EPA who met here and visited the site.

Basically, if the City wants further information on what can or cannot be done, sampling is necessary to see what there is and where the borders of the former landfill are located. The Mayor will try to have more information for the next meeting. He stated that he believes that these ordinances should go forward and the parcels should be split. Even if nothing is done, he would like the parcels to be split. If the City wishes to know more, it will cost more, and according to Council's decision, no more can be spent. He is committed to seeing this through, however, because he believes it is a great site for a low-density, clean office building. It will not, however, be a short process. For example, a 6 to 9 month notification period to the Attorney General's office is required before a property which was once a landfill can be sold. He suggested proceeding with these ordinances.

Mr. Potterfield asked about his recollection that in testing, once the barrier is breached, Rule 13 is invoked, and this is risky because the City does not know what is under there.

The Mayor reminded everyone that 300,000 cu yds of dirt was added and half of that scraped off. It is true that no one knows what is under there, and further, he explained that it will not be possible to obtain a firm quote for the costs involved because the EPA will control the work as it proceeds.

Mr. Potterfield once again referred to breaching the barrier layer. Mr. Frost pointed out that in the summary of the meeting with the EPA distributed by the Mayor, point #9 referred to "an obligation to replace/maintain a 2-foot thick clay cap over anything that is disturbed..." . This could mean that following testing, everything can be restored.

Mr. Gollinger felt it may be possible to strike a deal with a developer to remove the City from this exercise. He recalled it was the intent of the committee to stop spending on this project. Mr. Potterfield agreed. Mr. Gollinger further commented that $800,000 was not spent to prepare the site for sale, but to remove the dirt left over from the construction of the retention basin.

Mrs. Bobst suggested that Council members review the materials and contact the Adminstration with questions.

Resolution No. 133-04: This resolution adopts the Master Plan and has been referred to the Planning Commission. Mrs. Bobst has spoken with Mr. Harvey, its chairman, who has just received it and will place it on the agenda to discuss how the Commission will proceed and how it will approach and divide its sections. We will hear from them. The Law Director has stated that their process should precede the Public Hearing to be held by Council, and since the presentation to the Planning Commission by City Architecture will be October 19, it is likely that the Public Hearing tentatively scheduled for October 25 will be delayed.

Ordinance No. 134-04: This issue, the central fire dispatch center, was discussed at Mr. Hagan's committee meeting last week. The Mayor reported that meetings of COG are on-going with another to be held Wednesday. The person who developed the cost structure will be present at this meeting and the Mayor is hopeful that accurate figures will be available then. The Mayor distributed a revised structure, but the Finance Director of Bay Village who sent it does not feel that it is necessarily valid because it simply divides the expenses by four instead of five. Further, the program would not begin until midyear, so 2005 estimates would be extremely high. These figures show that our contribution would rise from $106,000 to $145,000. The Mayor noted that he will have additional information, but not necessarily new numbers. The COG is hopeful that North Olmsted will join before the end of 2005 and perhaps another 2 to 3 cities will also join, further reducing costs.

Mr. Hagan's calculations removing North Olmsted and dividing by percentages is close to the estimate forwarded by Bay Village. He added, however, that there is still a question of the cost in the years to come. In any case, this is not a cost-saving measure, nor does it add any personnel or equipment to the Fire Department. He also cited a concern that Rocky River 911 calls are now answered in the Fire Department. Under the new system, they would be answered by the Police Department and if required, transferred to central dispatch and then to our Fire Department. If our squads are out on runs, however, the Police Department must find a department to deliver mutual aid. This procedure would be more efficiently handled by central dispatch which would know the location of all units and which were available. Mr. Hagan feels that the system has pros and cons. According to the contract, dispatchers would be employees of the City of Westlake.

The Mayor indicated that that matter is still under consideration. In any case, although employees could be employees of the City of Westlake, their salaries and regulations would be under the control of the management board which would make those decisions.

Mr. Hagan commented that he liked the idea, but there are still variables and issues.

The Mayor urged any Council members with questions or problems on this issue to come in and discuss it with him beforehand instead of waiting for the meeting so that answers can be found.

Mrs. Bobst mentioned that there are clear advantages in having a skilled individual on the

phone to manage the situation until the arrival of emergency personnel. Further, on the issue of times when both squads are already assisting other residents, she saw definite advantages to a regional system which will be far more effective in managing that situation.

Mr. Hagan pointed out that our Fire Chief is in favor of the plan. He also pointed out that if the plan does not meet expectations or becomes too expensive, the City can stop its participation with 60 days notice.

Mr. Gollinger commented that would be good in case one or more cities withdraws. Mrs. Bobst pointed out that more cities could join and lower the costs.

In management, the situation would be similar to the City of Rocky River and the WWTP. The Board controls expenditures and policies although WWTP workers are employees of the City of Rocky River.

MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS: NONE

COMMITTEE REPORTS:

Safety Committee: Mr. Frost reported that the Working Group on Animal Control Laws will meet on October 19 from 7 to 9 p.m. in the Committee Room. They are developing subcommittee reports and specific recommendations. All are welcome to this important meeting.

Environmental Committee: Mr. Gollinger announced the meeting of his committee next week at 7:00 p.m. in the David J. Cook Council Chambers. He said that dialogue would be continued on rental properties and on railroad quiet zones. Mayor Knoble, who recently attended a seminar on that subject, will attend.

NEW BUSINESS: NONE

COMMUNICATIONS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS:

Mrs. Bobst reminded Council members to review their Employee Handbooks and to return the signed acknowledgment to Mrs. Whitman.

The Economic and Community Development Advisory Board will meet in Director Koran's office on October 12 at 8:30 a.m.

Press releases have been received announcing that the Rocky River Police Department can now access State and national criminal databases instantly from patrol cars. This department is the first in the state to have this capability.

Mr. Linden explained the leaf pickup procedure which will proceed beginning this week with one truck. The Service Commissioner and a foreman drove through the City and will do so on a weekly basis to see how many leaves are on tree lawns for pickup. Trucks will be added to the schedule as needed in order to keep up with the collection.

The Mayor has discussed the placement of a cell tower on City property with the Law Director who explained that the school system had received a variance from the BZA to place its tower. The Mayor indicated that the City will pursue this avenue as opposed to changing the zoning code.

Finally, the Mayor requested an Executive Session to discuss a personnel issue.

MOTION:

Moved by Mrs. Bobst, seconded by Mr. Gollinger, that, at the request of the Mayor, an Executive Session be held immediately following the meeting to consider the appointment, employment, dismissal, discipline, promotion, demotion or compensation of a public employee or official under Article X, Section 6, Subsection 1 of the Charter.

Vote: Gollinger - aye Potterfield - aye Frost - aye

Hurtuk - aye Bartolozzi - aye Hagan - aye

Bobst - aye

7 ayes 0 nays PASSED

As there was no further business by members of Council, the meeting was adjourned at

9:06 p.m.

_____________________________ _____________________________

Pamela E. Bobst Misao Kurokawa

President of Council Clerk of Council