TOWN OF PLAINFIELD TOWN COUNCIL. October 24, 2005

Transcription

1 TOWN OF PLAINFIELD TOWN COUNCIL October 24, 2005 The Plainfield Town Council met on Monday, October 24, In attendance were Mr. Brandgard, Mr. Kirchoff, Mr. Gaddie and Mr. McPhail PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE CONSENT AGENDA 1. Approval of the minutes of the Town Council meeting of Monday, September 26, 2005 as continued to Thursday, September 29, 2005 and the minutes of the Town Council meeting of Monday, October 10, Second readings of Ordinance No : Duke Construction LP Rezoning from AG, Agricultural District to I-2 Office/ Warehouse/Distribution District and Ordinance No : Dan Jones Road Speed Limit and Parking Enforcement. 3. Approval of the September 2005 monthly report for the Plainfield Fire Department. 4. Approval of the IT Director s Report dated October 23, 2005; Human Resources Director s Report dated October 24, 2005; Town Engineer s Report dated October 23, 2005 and the Transportation Director s Report dated October 23, Permission to advertise for bids for White Lick Creek Bank Restoration Project, Phase 1 per the Town Engineer s Report dated October 23, Approval of an amendment to design a contract for Center Street Pedestrian Trail project with BFS Engineering from $25, to $31, for changes that were made during the design phase per the Town Engineer s Report dated October 23, Approval of a contract with Government Fund Asset Services, Inc. for GASB 34 financial reporting requirements for Fiscal Year 2005 in the amount of $2, per the recommendation of West Bennett, Plainfield Clerk/Treasurer. Mr. Kirchoff made a motion to approve the Consent Agenda as read. Second by Mr. McPhail. Motion carried. Mr. Fivecoat abstained from voting on the September 26 and the 29 th minutes since he was not present at those meetings. PUBLIC HEARING: Whitmore Place Annexation Mr. Brandgard said we have three public hearings this evening and one bid opening. Do we have proof of publication? Mr. Daniel said yes we do. Mr. Brandgard asked, for all four? Mr. Daniel said yes we do. Mr. Carlucci said Mr. President the Whitmore Place annexation is located west of the Church of Christ and the north side of Township Line Road and also west of Williamsburg in the Woods. Whitmore Place is a new residential zoned subdivision, R-2 Zoning District. The acres is probably one of the smaller annexations we have done. It previously had, I believe, two houses on the property. They have been demolished and they are now part of the Whitmore Place Subdivision. That is the purpose for the annexation here tonight. Mr. Brandgard said this is a public hearing. Is there anyone in the audience who would like to address the Council relative to the Whitmore Annexation? With nobody coming forward we will close the public hearing for the Whitmore Place annexation. PUBLIC HEARING: Reed-Stanley-Saratoga Associates Annexation Mr. Carlucci said the public hearing tonight for the Reed- Stanley-Saratoga Associates annexation consists of 6.45 acres. It is on the north side of U.S. 40, approximately one-third to about one-half of a mile west of Saratoga Boulevard. This was actually going to be part of the Saratoga Planned Unit Development. It has already gone through the Plan Commission for that approval. As you can see, that is! 1

2 on the ordinance for the third reading and adoption tonight. The annexation is by Mr. and Mrs. Carl Reed; Mr. Stanley and his wife and Saratoga Associates and again this will be added to the Saratoga Planned Unit Development, which is a multi 180 acre development on the northwest side of Town. Mr. Brandgard asked, is there anybody in the audience who would like to address the Council relative to this matter? With nobody coming forward we will close the Reed-Stanley-Saratoga Associates Annexation Public Hearing. PUBLIC HEARING: Bright House Cable Franchise Mr. Carlucci said the third public hearing listed is for the Bright House Cable Franchise Agreement. At the previous Council meeting on the 14 th you had in your possession the franchise agreement, the proposed agreement. We authorized for public notice for tonight and that is why we are here. We have Lou Zimmerman from Bright House with us here tonight. The agreement is for 10 years with a five-year renewal. It covers Bright House cable s subscribers that are in the Town limits of Plainfield. I believe they have 800 of those. They are all on the edges of Plainfield. I would be glad to answer any questions. Mr. Daniel and I have gone through the contract and have consulted with Mr. McPhail on a couple of items and if there are any questions that you may have to ask Mr. Zimmerman, I m sure he would be glad to answer them for you. We also have three copies of the agreement so if it is your desire, later in the meeting, to approve the franchise, we can wrap this up and move onto Comcast. area? Mr. Kirchoff asked, are there any Town employees in that service Mr. Carlucci said I don t know. Mr. Kirchoff said the reason I ask is I think it would be wonderful to get both our cable suppliers to provide elected officials high-speed internet cable as part of the contract. I think the other one calls for if there are any Town facilities, that they will provide it for free. Mr. Daniel said right, they provide it to Town facilities. Mr. Kirchoff said we are doing more and more stuff electronically. I have had Staff send me stuff and I m not going to sit and crank for 15 minutes with some of the sizes of the files. It would be great to have it for our work. Mr. Lou Zimmerman, General Manager for the Bright House Network said to address that issue it is not currently in the contract, as stated. We have agreed to provide government buildings, libraries and schools and any that may be annexed into the future, one free cable drop. I think there is a clause for a franchise fee that may be something that the Council may elect to use a percent of that money or something to provide that high-speed network to each individual Council member. The situation that we are in is we are currently operating under the Hendricks County franchise. Areas that we served under a county franchise have now been annexed into the Town of Plainfield. So, we feel it is appropriate that we come before you to get a franchise and award you those franchise fees. That is really what this process is about. Mr. Brandgard said for clarification, if we annex other others that are in the Bright House area, will those automatically come into the Town now or do we have to make an amendment or adjustment to the contract? Mr. Carlucci said we would just send them notice that they have been annexed in indicating a map where the customers are located, which is going to happen here shortly on Raceway Road with about 350 homes. It would just cover those that are in the Town limits but we would have to be proactive and send them notice to Bright House that these customers are now in the Town limits. Mr. Brandgard asked, is there anyone in the audience who would care to address the Council relative to this public hearing for the Bright House Franchise? Being no one coming forward we will close the public hearing for the Bright House Cable Franchise.! 2

3 BID OPENING: Reeves Road West of Quaker Boulevard. Mr. Brandgard said we have a bid opening this evening for the Reeves Road West of Quaker Boulevard. The first bid is from Atlas Excavating, Inc., West Lafayette, Indiana. Mr. Daniel said the Atlas Excavating bid is in proper form. Mr. Brandgard said the total amount of the bid submitted by Atlas Excavating, Inc. is $4,409, The second bid is submitted by Crider and Crider, Inc., Indianapolis. Mr. Daniel said the bid from Crider and Crider is a company with a contractor s statement of financial condition as of the close of business of November 30, We normally expect a more current financial statement than that. The bid is supposed to be completed by filling out Form #96, Revised 2000 Acceptable Bid Security. I will leave it up to the Town Council whether or not you think the financial statement, as of next month, will be two years old is current enough to accept that bid. Mr. Brandgard said I don t believe it is. Mr. McPhail said it certainly is not current enough to make me feel comfortable. I think a current financial statement would certainly indicate something more recent than two years. Mr. Daniel said the financial statement indicates on it, all items shown in the above financial statement must be detailed in the schedules and subsequent pages. See notes in the financial statements and there are no schedules attached. It is just the front page of the financial statement with the summary, I assume the scheduled information, but there are no schedules attached. Mr. McPhail made a motion to disqualify the bid from Crider and Crider due to insufficient financial information. Second by Mr. Fivecoat. Motion carried. Mr. Brandgard said the third bid is submitted by Milestone Contractors, Indianapolis. Mr. Daniel said the Milestone bid is in proper form. Mr. Brandgard said the total amount of the bid submitted by Milestone Contractors is $3,994, The fourth bid is submitted by Rieth-Riley Construction, Indianapolis. Mr. Daniel said the Rieth-Riley bid is in proper form. Mr. Brandgard said the total amount of the bid submitted by Rieth-Riley Construction is $4,003, I would like to thank everybody that took the time to submit a bid. The engineer s estimate is $4,242, I would like to ask for a bid review committee made up of Mr. Tim Belcher; Mr. Don McGillem; Mr. Bill Kirchoff and Mr. Richard Hensley to review the bids and come back at our next meeting with a recommendation. BUSINESS FROM THE FLOOR None. TOWN MANAGER S REPORT Mr. Carlucci said before you is the Kensington Street light plan. The red stars are the existing lights and they had asked for three streetlights. Actually, one of them was going to be out on Saratoga Boulevard, which we would have put this kind of light out there anyway so we eliminated that one. The green stars are the proposed additions. If the Council is agreeable with that, we have the Kensington representative here tonight, Ms. Dieckman and if she is agreeable, I will get a letter off to Brian Bentley and indicate to him the Council did approve those two additional lights subject to the homeowners association buying down the cost of those two lights to equal a wood pole with a cobra head light, 100-watt high-pressure sodium light. Ms. Dieckman said I appreciate the Council s consideration for our request.! 3

4 Mr. Kirchoff asked, what kind of lights are out there? Mr. Belcher said it s the acorn type. Mr. Kirchoff asked, is it consistent with where we are going in the future? Mr. Carlucci said these would be the ones that Cinergy still offers. Mr. Kirchoff made a motion to approve the recommendation of the Town Manager to add two additional streetlights in Kensington with the provision that the homeowners association does the buy down. Second by Mr. McPhail. Motion carried. REPORTS Mr. McPhail said as you know, we continue to try to wind down the aquatic center project. We have final billing from Rieth-Riley and the Vestal Road improvements. I would ask the Council to approve the expenditures of about $29, to make the final payment. It s for the widening of Vestal Road for the aquatic center. Mr. Kirchoff asked, what is the additional? Mr. McPhail said it s not actually additional. are not available with the bond issue. It is funds that Mr. Kirchoff made a second to the motion. Mr. McPhail said it is just a final contract amount. Mr. McGillem said it is the final contract and a large portion of that is the retainage. Mr. Brandgard said we have a motion and a second to approve the payment of $29, to Rieth-Riley for the Vestal Road widening project, to complete that project. If there is no further discussion, all those in favor signify by aye. None opposed. Motion carried. Mr. Prince said at the last Council meeting I didn t get my monthly report in in time and then last week I missed the CD on it too. So, I brought my September report in tonight and it wasn t included on your CD but it does include, as you know, I always put the user numbers in there, and it does show Splash Island s final numbers for the season. That was 86,963 people. I was hoping on the last day thirtyfour or thirty-five more people so that we could break 87,000 but it didn t happen but that is up from 65,000 last year. It also shows you the total visits and revenues through September. I wanted to report on a couple of items. Banning Engineering is about 95% complete on the Bob Ward Park. It is my hope to have a meeting very soon and invite Mr. Carlucci and Mr. Gaddie to look at those plans and make sure they are suitable to bring to the Council. Hopefully, in November we can bring that to the Council and we can decide where to go from there with the plans but they should be ready to go. I had a few issues with some Cinergy poles and Councilman Kirchoff took a drive with me out there and I appreciate that. Mr. Belcher s office has worked with us concerning how Bob Ward Park and the trailer interact with each other and there was an issue there with some sewer lines and whatnot. We will bring those to your attention. The sewer line has to come through one point or the other. It s just whichever project we want to put it through with. At the work session I presented you a document that has quite a few tasks on it. I m happy to report to you that we are moving along and clipping those off at quite a pace. Some of those things that we have taken care of are a lot of the improvements at Splash Island. The diving board mounts have been changed. The sand shower is being repaired. We have ordered the bike racks. We have planters coming in. We are repairing some concrete and making them more ADA accessible at the water park. I wanted you to be aware that we are continuing at the UV system for the pool and the Franklin Playground is coming down slowly. As my guys get done winterizing, they are taking that playground out. In November or December we should have a playground planned for you to approve and get that piece of equipment ordered.! 4

5 I would also like you to know that the John Deere tractors are in at the dealer. They are prepping those and they should be delivered at any day. So, I m kind of proud how we are knocking some of those items out. I would also remind you that one of those projects was removing the old skate park at Franklin Park. We are repairing some asphalt at that park. I had sent Mr. Castetter an on that and I went to the park the other day and it is done. So, I would like to thank Mr. Castetter for that. If you think about that, that is going to make a nice grass area over there now. I would like to thank Mr. Castetter and the Public Works guys for doing that because it is like how they put up these new buildings, you look one day and nothing is there and you go the next day and it is complete. So, I would like to thank him for that. One last thing that I would like to bring to your attention is something that has been happening quite a bit over this last summer. We are having rental guests ask for non-traditional uses of the park. What this means is they want a reservation in a different area of the park or they want to do something that we haven t typically done. I will tell you since I have been here anytime somebody wants to use a park for, what we call non-traditional use, our standard off-the-shelf answer is we have to have approval of the Town Council. I think you know that we have brought that to you before. But we are really starting to get requests where they want to get married at the waterfall at Friendship Gardens or the Enabling Garden or somewhere else in the park. Really that is not permitted. Really what they reserve is the gazebo only. I don t particularly have a problem with it but we need to adjust this so my office knows how to go about doing this. Another issue that was just brought up was we have a woman who wants to get married in Franklin Park down near the creek somewhere. We have no rental fees for this. Do we want rental fees for this? Do we care? If they get married down there, they want to set up tents. We have to have permission for that. I think it is because we are a growing community and the parks system is developing. People want to use the parks in different ways. I m not here for an answer tonight. I m here mostly to plan a seed that we have a meeting in November where we considered a policy changes to bring to you for the year I will probably, for the year 2006, want us to come up with a solution or an answer to some of these questions with the Council input. I didn t want an answer tonight but I just wanted to make you aware of it and let you know that we will probably want to talk about that a little more in depth before next spring arrives, which will be here before you know it. Unless there are any questions that is all that I had tonight. Mr. Kirchoff said first of all I think it is a compliment to the department that people are trying to find creative ways to use your facilities. In the past you have worked with them so they feel comfortable in asking you for acceptance and I think that is a good thing. Verses if you had really been hardnosed and not easy to work with, they probably wouldn t be knocking on your doors. I think you should take that as a compliment. When you are giving us a list of things that you are going to be purchasing for the recreation center, and this is confession time for me because I have kind of taken the summer off and I m just now kind of getting in the swing of things, I was thinking that we were going to be ordering some kind of mats. Mr. Prince said Brent asked me about that the other day. He said, I thought you ordered a big mat. What happened was we were having trouble getting a response from people. There are about three people that make those type of mats in the nation. They are very unresponsive and we asked the company that was the lowest bidder to send us color samples and they would never do it. They said they will be there tomorrow or they will be there next week and they would never do it. They finally got me to the point that if you can t deliver my color samples, are you going to be able to deliver the mat? We lost confidence in them. We didn t have confidence in the other two and that project kind of withered on the vine. Since then Brent has ordered more and better quality individual mats and those are going to be coming in. If I m going for perfection, I have less than that but we are going to get some in that are easy to move and are more cost effective and we know that they are going to show up. If there is something that we end up not liking, they are a product that are going to be used up and then we can make a decision to order something more! 5

6 permanent, if that is the direction that we want to go. what happened to that project. So, that is Mr. McPhail said you know that you and I have somewhat spent some time with your landscaper and I think we finally got the landscape package where it belongs but I want to commend you and your staff on how well you have maintained that and the improvements when they turned it over to us. It is a showplace. Mr. Prince said I appreciate that and I will pass that along to the people that are helping out with it too. Chief Brinker said the first thing that I would like to do is sitting back here we have Officer Caleb Givens who asked me if it would be okay for him to come in and observe tonight. He wanted to see how the Council worked and I encouraged that. I m glad he did make it tonight to be part of this. I thought I would say something because he will probably have to get out of here sometime real soon and I didn t want him to miss an opportunity. The second thing that I would like to report on is yesterday Commissioner Jack Burlison became ill at lunch and was taken to Hendricks Community. They were afraid at first that he had a mild stroke. We are pleased to hear that MIR tests that were taken earlier today found that it was an inner ear infection that gave him many of the same symptoms. Mr. McPhail informed me that he did arrive home just a little bit ago so we are all glad to hear that. The third thing is that in the 2006 budget meetings I presented the 12-hour shift request for changes in order to increase our manpower presence on the street where at the same time provide flexibility that could give us the opportunity to take our officers and make them available during the hours especially now that the shopping mall is going to be available. With that change we are looking at hiring four new officers over the next four years as opposed to nine in order to achieve the same numbers. What I would like to request tonight is that if that 12-hour schedule is the direction that you want the department to continue on with, I would like to move in that direction and with that there is one other thing that we need to do. If we are going to make that change, we need to allow for the addition of a lieutenant position and another corporal position to our ordinance so that we can go ahead with the promotional process. At the same time we need to delete the sergeant s position from our current status. Mr. Brandgard said as we discussed during the budget session, I think, I m going to call it an experiment at the moment, but it is a good one to see if that will work. If it works, this is going to be a good move. So, with that I would be in favor of making the changes that you are asking for. Mr. Fivecoat said I do too Mr. President. Being an ex-commander of the police department I would like to have had my superior officers working with their whole shift the whole time under this proposed program that Chief Brinker has offered here. That does that. The corporal and the lieutenant works right with their shift. When they are working, they are altogether and when they are off, they are all off. That way the higher rank is working with their shifts. I think it would be a benefit to the department and the men. I am in favor of this 12-hour shift. Chief Brinker said with that I would like to implement it January 2 nd. The reason for that is that will be the beginning of the first full paid period in As far as the benefit and the compensation, it may need adjustments for the 12-hour shifts. Mr. McPhail and I have had an opportunity to discuss that through the weekend. That is not as immediate to have passed tonight at this meeting as the need is for these two items as far as the promotional process goes. Mr. Kirchoff said I think we have time to work on the other so that he can get underway for the staffing changes and give some thought to the compensation policy. Mr. McPhail made a motion to accept the recommendation of Chief Brinker to go to the 12-hour shift on January 2, 2006 and add to that one lieutenant and one corporal position and to delete one sergeant s position on the Plainfield Police Department. Second by Mr. Fivecoat. Motion carried.! 6

7 Chief Brinker said Thursday Hendricks County had their emergency management mock disaster tabletop exercise. Plainfield was represented at that meeting. We had a couple of the Plainfield police officers that were there that came back and, as part of our accreditation process, we want to perform a mock assessment through a tabletop exercise in November. The Town Council has three dates that we might consider for this for all of the Town as opposed to just the police department. Mr. Brandgard said the dates that have been suggested are Saturday, November 19 th, Monday, November 21 st, and Tuesday, November 29 th. It would be a two to two and a half hour session. Mr. McPhail said it really doesn t make any difference to me except the first two dates I will be out of Town. Mr. Brandgard said I think the 29 th would be a better time. The 19 th and the 21 st are leading up to Thanksgiving and a lot of people disappear that whole week. Will that work? Mr. Fivecoat said that will work for me. best? Chief Brinker asked, is there a particular time that would be Mr. Brandgard said six o clock. Chief Brinker said we will make that work and will get that out to staff. I will also send reminders out. Mr. Brandgard said there is a big event that is going to happen at the end of the week on Friday about 9:00 a.m. Are we prepared to handle the influx of people coming into the Town? Chief Brinker said we have been gearing up for this for six months and I believe on January 2 nd we will be more than prepared and between time we will definitely figure out something. This is going to be a great opportunity for the Town. We are excited and concerned because things are going to be different for law enforcement but it presents a lot of great opportunities and challenges and we will be ready. Mr. Castetter said at the last meeting we discussed a couple of things that we would like to do at the Town Garage property, one of which, on the front in black on your far left side, the west property, we requested from DNR a permit to put that fence up. It represents where the possible future bark park will be. In red is the representation of the AG bin that I m wanting to build in relation to everything that is there at the Town Garage. After looking at different sites and the possibility of putting the AG bin at a secondary site this is probably the best situation for us right now. It gives us a chance for the guys to go out to a job. A lot of times we carry stone or material out with us as we got to a job site. So, having a secondary location I think at this time may defeat that purpose of being able to go out to a job site and be prepared without having to go to a second stage. Again, the AG bin is about $36, and I would like permission to move forward with that and try to get it built before winter. Mr. Kirchoff asked, is this something that you will do? Mr. Castetter said actually I have it contracted out. Here is a rough sketch of the size of this AG bin. The $36, is for the total completion. That is for the dig out, putting stone base, concrete reinforcement with three-foot high walls. It is needed. We have stone piled here and dirt piles there and it will make sense of what we have there and I m trying to clean it up a little bit for the White Lick Creek rehabilitation that is going to take place to try to let those folks get in there and have room to work. Mr. McPhail made a motion to approve the construction of an AG bin at the Town Garage as shown in the design presented for the not to exceed cost of $36, Second by Mr. Kirchoff. Motion carried. Mr. Lydick said about two years ago we created the Information Assistant Specialist position and hired Bill Castetter to fill that position. The direction that the Town is taking with technology we feel like it is time to upgrade his position to IT Director s position.! 7

8 There is an ordinance for you to pass this evening giving the salary range for that position. It is requested that as a result of the changes in the duties that have already been accepted and future plans for this position that we raise the salary for the IT Director s position at $47, per year. The ordinance is on the agenda for later in the meeting. Mr. Brandgard said I think we are adding a position to the Salary Ordinance. Mr. McGillem said a couple of items in the report that I pointed out was that I intend to advertise for bids for the Moon Road south approach, U.S. 40 and the Hadley/Cambridge intersection project, Clarks Creek Road. Both of those projects are being advertised for November 28 th. I wasn t sure it would get on the Consent Agenda so I wanted to be sure that the Council knew that we were going forward with the advertisement. Mr. Brandgard said I have no problem at all. Is there consent to move forward? Consent given. Mr. McGillem said the second item on the bids that we took tonight on the Reeves Road/Red Pride Drive I would like to ask permission if the review committee comes out recommending to the Council for the low bidder, Milestone, if we could possibly move forward with the award on that reporting to the Council at the next meeting. We have a verbal completion portion in that and our intent is to try and get the grades that have been set by the high school for the Red Pride/Reeves Road section around the rest of the storm drainage and that covered up before winter rather than letting that go and be exposed and have to get on it next spring. This time of year a few weeks makes a difference. Mr. McPhail said the apparent low bidder and the apparent second low bidder both have a good reputation so I would move that we allow the review committee to award the bid after they review those and move forward. And authorization for Councilman Kirchoff to sign the documents on behalf of the Council. Second by Mr. Fivecoat. Motion carried. Mr. McGillem said other than that we are trying to do our best to meet the opening date. Mr. Belcher said regarding the sewer extension in the area of the Maple Grove Subdivision. It is an area on the eastern of Town and has been under some distress for some time in terms of sewers. It has come up before. Christina Whitlow is in the audience and is one of the residents who owns property out there. She has had a serious problem out there and has tried more than anybody to fix her problem and has not been successful in doing that. She had asked, and the Council had agreed, for me to go forward looking at possibly the Barrett Law as a solution. Dave Lahey is with me here tonight to show a presentation on that and I would like to first maybe sit down here and go through a little background of where it is and talk about one area that might come up in the presentation and make sure the Council understands about an off-sight project that could affect the cost of this to the residents. This is basically the area that we are going to talk about, Campbell Street, Hunt Street and some of Maple and I don t think Tulip is involved. This goes way back to the Clarks Creek Conservancy District and I couldn t explain all the history of why the entire area wasn t included in the project when it was done at the time, probably the 60s. That conservancy, I believe there were people who could opt out of that when it was requested. Many did and unfortunately now they are left without sewer. That s unfortunate because at that time there were grants in place and sewers were built at a very low expense for the folks in the area. What we have now is Campbell Street has no sewer. I don t think Hunt has any. There are somewhere in the neighborhood of 40 or 45 residential homeowners that do not have sewers. I think there is water in most of the neighborhood but that is really not the topic that we have tonight. There are some issues with the drainage so if the Council were to go forward with a sanitary sewer project, which is our main focus tonight, there might be some issues that would come up with drainage to try to improve that. So, that we don t put sanitary sewers in an area that would then become a place for people to get rid of storm water, which is something that ends up being a problem for our sanitary system.! 8

9 But one thing that I wanted to go through is this large parcel here, which is called the Bodenheimer Farm. It has been in development for several years as far as people coming to us with potential projects. Nothing has gone forward. It has been before the Plan Commission and zoned PUD I think and another developer is looking at it now. When they came to talk to me about sewer service and knowing the problem with the Campbell Street area I had sort of directed them towards looking at a solution to bring sewer down Smith Road and across the old CR300 and down Campbell Street to a sewer that exists on U.S. 40. What that would do if that project were to take place, would be to effectively lower the cost to the neighborhood by lowering the cost of the sewer project hopefully by outside the development paying part of that cost. This is not the first time that we have attempted to do that but we don t have control of when that will develop. The Council certainly has a right to control the project and if they seek to go forward with the project, the sewer could be sized in a way that it could accomplish that same goal. However, we would have to work with the developer so that they would pay us back for that but that is one of the key issues that I wanted to bring to the forefront. If this were to go into development tomorrow, the problem with part of this neighborhood there would be a solution available. It would not solve all of it. We wouldn t want to go in part of the neighborhood without looking at the whole thing but this is an area when Mr. Lahey goes through his presentation, I wanted you to know that it could come into play as we look at the Barrett Law. Again, because of a relatively strict process of the Barrett Law we have to be very careful how that is handled. With that I will let Mr. Lahey go ahead and get started with his presentation. Mr. Lahey said I appreciate the opportunity to come before the Council on this question. As Mr. Belcher pointed out, the Maple Grove sewer is a long problem that hopefully for the residents and the Town can have resolution at some near date and I will touch on that. I won t go through everything on the slides but you will note that we are referencing the code directly and the application is for all municipalities and the qualifying purpose is the betterment of sewage works. On the initiation slide the Council is certainly aware of how the project moves forward. I want to point out the second line, the incorporation of what I call the collateral sewer question. That is how it is described within the code and that is what Mr. Belcher was just talking about. It would be important to identify that at the beginning so we don t have to start the process over. So, whether you are able to work out the issues with the developer prior to moving forward but certainly the way the Town normally operates I would expect that the collateral sewer would be incorporated in some form or fashion. The next thing that I point out is really all you need to do at that point is to establish the hearing and you adopt the project resolution. With regard to the project benefit hearing itself there is an issue of benefit verses cost as required by the code. In the end though the last line, if the finding is that the project benefits equal, which is directly what the code says and I m forced to presume that it would exceed as well, the cost, such as final and conclusive, enabling the project to proceed. What that does it forces the 100% participation. That is an important point that I wanted to bring out and that is any abutting un-sewer property. On the project procedure slide Mr. Belcher and I had some discussions concerning how to incorporate the collateral sewer. Not only is it a question of sewer size but of depth in order to enable the collateral sewer and the code would require that you have a base bid, in my interpretation, that you would have a base bid for the eight-inch sewers and you would have an alternate bid to upsize for the collateral sewer. Upsize being not only making it bigger perhaps as a 10-inch or even bigger but make it a deeper sewer so that it can serve that collateral area. You determine the assessments based upon the base bid and then you establish the funding mechanism for both the base bid and the alternate bid. Obviously, the funding mechanism being the assessment role, which is the title of the next slide. Again, I won t go through this slide in great detail. I think many members of the Council have gone through it before. In the end it! 9

10 becomes a question similar to a taxation. The fiscal officer has the duty per statute and then you establish an installment and interest rate schedule per statute. Typically, I guess in the case of the Town it has been 10 years in the past for an installment period and you could have a lump sum payment up front as well. In summary there is no timeline specified for the hearing except that you have to have at least 10 days notice as far as publication. Engineering is a prerequisite for the Barrett Law so you are actually ahead of the game and you establish those facts and that is what you present at the hearing, the fact being that the benefits equal or exceed the cost. The process is a design bid bill process. With regard to the project schedule a standard project as far as engineering, 90 days or less. The project benefit hearing, the previous slide we talked about 10 days. There is some time for the Council or a sub-committee of the Council to have an understanding exactly what the hearing would entail including staff. The bidding process, 30 days, which is pretty typical. The assessment role hearing, again another 30 days. And the construction time about 120 days. Just to summarize that it would be about one year from initiation until you would be able to start connecting people. Mr. McPhail said could you go back to slide one. The finding is that the project cost benefits what are you really telling us there? Mr. Lahey said the project benefits would be the fact that the property values would be restored. For example, there may be other economical development benefits associated as well. Those would be the benefits and you would apply those benefits as a direct factor against the cost of the project. It is a requirement within the code that those benefits, and they almost always do, either equal or exceed those costs. Mr. Belcher said for example, if you are pumping weekly and you are paying $ a week, because of the health requirement, etc., I would think that would add up pretty quickly. The property values speak for itself in terms of the difficulty of selling homes. It is very much what we experienced in Wincher Heights before. There was nothing selling. They literally could not sale homes, as I recall, because of the problems. That would go in that calculation of benefits. Mr. McPhail asked, how would you determine that? to have some appraisals done on the property? Would you have Mr. Lahey said I think it can be based upon engineering judgment and input of elective officials, etc. I don t believe it is required to have that detailed of a fact. Essentially, what I am saying is like in a market analysis you don t need an actual appraisal. It is pretty obvious that is going to happen. Mr. McPhail said the value of the property is going to go up. We can t get into a situation like we did at Wincher Heights. If we do it, everybody is going to hook up. I don t want to have to go through that again. Mr. Daniel said I think under the Barrett Law there is no other choice. If you are in the area that has been designated, I believe you have to hook-up. Mr. Fivecoat said I think their slide said 100% participation. Mr. Kirchoff asked, does that mean everybody has to pay or does it mean that everybody has to hook-up? Mr. Daniel said both. Mr. McPhail said I think Mr. Belcher hit on a critical issue in that area, which is drainage. Surface drainage is a problem there and is a good reason why the septics are not working. We have a two-fold problem there. Mr. Kirchoff said can you put the map back up for us please. Mr. Daniel asked, how many properties are involved in that?! 10

11 Mr. Belcher said I know it s not more than 45. We did a study several years ago and there were 45 at that time. There have been a few neighbors on Shady Lane that have hooked themselves up and hired a contractor for themselves. So, there are probably four or five that have been taken off so somewhere in the neighborhood of 40. So, half the size of the Wincher Heights project. I think the estimate several years ago was $450, for this project so you are talking about all of Campbell Street and most of Hunt Street, if not all of it. North of Maple is un-sewered. I m not sure about Maple. There are some on Maple that do not have sewer but I believe there is a sewer on Shady so there could be some corner lots that would not be involved. The old conservancy district, as part of their project, they put sewer down Tulip. It points out how there was a solution at one time but it sort of slipped away from many of the folks out there. I guess the good news is part of that conservancy project, the sewer on U.S. 40 was part of that project too and it is there and it is large enough to service both this project plus that development if it were to come to reality. Mr. Daniel said we bought the assets of Clark Creek. I had forgotten that but there are little cut out squares in there where it was pretty obvious that anybody that would be opposed to the conservancy they just took them out of the district. That was the solution but then that ended up with lots out there that probably should have been in for sewers but were out. Mr. Belcher said this development here, the new duplexes here up near the old railroad, they extended the sewers at their expense up CR900 and across to when they developed, I think it was Paul Hardin. So, that was their expense but it went around this area. Some of the areas have been picked up and some have not and we are talking about those few who have not. Mr. Kirchoff said it may be too early to ask this question but how do we plan for the contingency of the development to the north? Can we lock that in? I know you do the alternate bid thing but how do we protect ourselves if that is done? Mr. McPhail said they can t get sewers anyplace else. Mr. Kirchoff said I understand that but I m just saying how do we make sure that we have invested that money now and when the developer comes in, we say, Oh, by the way here is your part of the cost to develop. Mr. Lahey said there is a statute provision for 15 years so if there is any activity within that area and we would establish that area, within 15 years they would have to pay that cost. Mr. McPhail said our intent some day is to improve and take Shady Lane on up to the Township Line Road. Do you think it is a possibility helping that drainage with that project? Mr. Belcher said we had that study done at one time, how could we run storm water north of the old railroad and then go east and that was physically found to be possible but the financial aspect of it was substantial at that time, very substantial, almost doubling the cost of the sewer, etc. So, I would think what would happen would be some kind of sharing with the development of this parcel and the Shady Lane being extended in this additional Galyan s area would be the best time to either partner and share cost or somehow make that part of the development requirements to develop a drainage outlet or something like that. Because, as you know, the problem is U.S. 40 did us no favor with some of the drainage that they have on U.S. 40 and what is coming south to it is kind of blocked so we don t have a real positive outlet. The best place I think we could drain would be our land here or part of that development at some point in the future. I ve never had a submittal on that since I ve been here. It could happen tomorrow but I haven t had one yet. Mr. McPhail said that whole area has a drainage problem. Mr. Belcher said it s a lot like Wincher Heights. There were some problems with drainage in Wincher Heights and when we went in there, we did everything and we walked away and it s not gone back. It has been solved with the exception of the 100% connection up front. That is the only problem that we left for ourselves when we came back with the issue of the drainage and the sanitary sewer and the roads. In those areas I think you have seen the appreciation of value and it! 11

12 certainly has become a very nice area and it was headed the other way at the time. Mr. Carlucci said that project on the Bodenheimer would be similar to what happened with Bentwood where the sewers ran those through Clover Drive and that substantially reduced the cost of the sewers. I don t remember what the connection fee was. Mr. Belcher said I think we got that down anywhere from $10, to $15, to $3, for the residents in there. So, their cost would be going from that end of the sewer lateral to their home, that is their additional top $3, So, that compared to $8, in Wincher Heights 10 years ago was quite a benefit in that neighborhood so that is why I hope we can offer the same kind of benefit leveraging new development for this neighborhood but we can t force that to happen. Mr. McPhail said we are going to have some homeowners in this area that will have difficulty paying those fees, whatever they are. I m in favor of moving forward because these sewage problems are not going to go away and the longer you wait the more it costs. Ms. Christy Whitlow said I m a property owner on 3509 Campbell Road. Sewers are the only options. I have went round and round with the Hendricks County Board of Health. They will not let anybody fix or repair. Their only answer is hook up with sewer so if there are no sewers, nothing gets fixed and it gets worse and worse. I m asking if you could approve to move forward with the project because that is our only option. Thank you. Mr. Kirchoff said I m assuming that you are representing the thinking of the neighborhood. Ms. Whitlow said yes. I think I have the least amount of problems of everybody on the street. I tried selling my house the first of the year. The buyers backed out because of sewage trouble, they wouldn t touch it. So, I lost the sell of my house for $89, Therefore, I couldn t sell. I built a new house. Now I m strapped financially because I couldn t sell my old house so that puts a big burden on me because of the sewer/septic issue. Two houses down she says when it rains, they can t flush their toilets. That s gross. Across the street they have no system. They have to pump every week at $ a week. There s a big soggy place in the front yard, which we have moved since July. I couldn t let my kids play in the front yard because it stunk and that s not healthy. There are a lot of kids in the area, senior citizens, a lot of families. Everybody else I ve talked too seemed like they had it worse than we did, which I thought we had it pretty bad but compared to everybody else theirs are far worse. Mr. Brandgard asked, do we have consent to move forward? Consent given. Mr. Belcher said we will get started on that preliminary engineering. A lot of that we have done in the past and we will update it and we will get going as quick as we can. Mr. Kirchoff asked, what kind of communication should we start with the neighborhood or when should it start? Mr. Belcher said I m not sure what the law would require. Certainly we would do the public hearing part but I committed that once we got information like cost, etc, that we would have a meeting. Mr. Kirchoff said communicate the action tonight and let them know that we have started the clock rather than waiting down the road. From what I heard you say there are some serious problems there and I think we owe it to them to let them know what we did tonight and send the message that we are going to help get it fixed. Mr. Belcher said the sooner we can get the word out the better. Attendance that we will have at the public hearing is what you want to have so we will do that. OLD BUSINESS Mr. McPhail said sometime back we had talked about our water meter rates for fire protection where we have some un-metered rates,! 12

13 which are flat rates and then we are charging 10 times that amount for fire protection for one that has a meter on it. I know we were doing some work on that and I don t know where we are and I keep getting phone calls. Lois do you have an update for us? Ms. Burgner said we took care of Mr. Jones. There is a clause in the ordinance that allows discretion so we took the sewers off those hydrants that were definitely for fire protection. The others it is really kind of hard to tell in Airwest on the compound meters so we opted not to do anything about that. They are not complaining and if they have a fire line that is separate, they are not paying sewer for it. Mr. McPhail said they are not paying the meter direct, they are paying the flat rate and that is where the discrepancy is that I see. I looked at an annual fee of like $ for an un-metered line and if had a meter on it and it was just for fire protection, we charged them a minimum every month and the whole thing. From what I calculated it was 10 times one system verses the other. Mr. Brandgard said I think the difference is if you have a meter on it and there is a fire event, they are going to get a big bill for that water use where if you are on a flat rate, you are not going to have that big bill because you have been paying it. That is where the difference is. We have to resolve how it works. Mr. McPhail said a flat rate is less than the metered rate. Our ordinance says, if I remember right, an un-metered fire line we have an annual fee of like $ some dollars. If you have that same sized meter, your monthly billing rate is more than that, if you never use a drop of water. Is that correct? Ms. Burgner said in the discussions we had in some of the places in Airwest it is hard to tell what they are doing. I mean they can have their fire line or their sprinkler system hooked up to a meter that they use for everything else. Mr. McPhail said I understand that we have different situations but I m telling you the ordinance has a flaw in it when it says if you don t have a metered, you only pay $ a year and if you have a metered and you don t use a drop of water, you are paying $3, That s a problem we have to address in our ordinance. That is totally unfair and that is the way it reads. I thought we were going to Umbaugh to see if they would make a recommendation in how we could correct it. I don t think we have done that. Mr. Carlucci said we did get a report from them. We can go back and recreate this and get something back to the Council. One thing that we looked at is some of that cost that they pay we have to provide in our water plant and system that availability to everybody out there. They are paying for that extra availability for fire protection. That is what those fees are for. Mr. Brandgard said I agree and that is where I was going with my argument. I think the problem is our rates are determined by the size of the water meter. So, if you are using water and it goes through that meter and all you are using every month is what people normally use in water, you are paying an awful big bill because it is going through that big meter instead of the smaller meter that you could probably get by with. I think that is maybe what we have to look at. Mr. Belcher said you are on the right track and what we found is the compounding issue because a six-inch compound meter has a six-inch meter and maybe a one-inch meter on the side of it. The way that our ordinance is looking at that is if it is two services instead of just one service. That is part of the confusion. We are billing it the way the ordinance says and I think that is the problem because it is not intended to do that. Mr. McPhail said I don t have an argument in the way that we are billing. I said we have a discrepancy. Mr. Brandgard said I m not sure we have a problem with the ordinance. I think we have a problem with the way we are using it. I m saying it from the standpoint your per gallon charge for a six-inch meter is a lot higher than it is for a three-quarter inch meter that you have in the house or a one-inch meter. If we are billing for what you would normally use to operate to wash your hands and flush the! 13