02/06/1990 Meeting Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Council Minutes of 2/6/90 -2- discharge into Rocky River to be too high. The solution seems to be to run the plant, per design, with a substitute for activated carbon - not regenerating it. This substitute will cost the city approximately $20,000/$30,000 per year. As of noon on Friday, less than twenty-four hours after leaving Columbus, the plant was operating per design, using a substitute carbon. In promising EPA to do this, the city stipulated that if it ran the plant per EPA's design, by EPA's guidelines, and still found violations of the permit, then it became more or less EPA's problem. City would be doing it EPA's way and would need funding to correct any problems; feels the city has a strong case should this occur. Temporarily, the. city is out of trouble with EPA; has solved that part of the permit problem and has been relieved of the tap-in ban; has satisfied USEPA on the Fairview Park agreement which both cities have agreed to. Copies of the agreement will: be forwarded to USEPA with copies to the Ohio EPA. They will return it to the city; it will be put into ordinance form and will then be pre- sented to North Olmsted and Fairview Park City Councils. 7) Met with representatives from the County Engineer's office on January 31st to discuss what potential there is for use of county money and the County Engineer with respect to North Olmsted's streets, specifically Clague Road and Stearns Road. Both roads are set to go in two or three years with engineering now being done. Engineering study on Clague Road should be released to the city in .late Spring. Stearns Road will take an additional year. Would like public hearings held on both projects so area residents could participate. Would like the addition of a third lane at Stearns and Lorain Roads since traffic making left turns at Lorain block traffic almost back to 1480 during rush hours; County Engineer has agreed to look at this problem as well as the ditch work being done in the soccer fields off of Bradley Road and the twenty foot culvert in the area. Mayor was advised that snow removal. by the county will end this year. City has asked for relief by having the county continue to plow until North Olmsted can increase and replace the snow removal equipment it now has on hand. 8) Talked with Traff-Pro on Februay 2nd-with respect to traffic signalization and they are ready to roll. Another meeting is scheduled to discuss their increasing their study to include lights at Gessner and Lorain Road, Walter and Lorain Road, Root and Lorain Road as well as on Dover Center Road. The Dover Center Road light would be synchronized with the lights at Rose and Lorain Road; Mayor be- lieves this would be a good place for. it. Is afraid the Walter and Lorain Road light may not work out but feels it is a good idea to study it right now. The described additional road studies would be done at a cost of $1,200 and it would be presented to the state for funding. If everything went through and the state agreed, it would then cost the City of North Olmsted $12,000 additional money for the four new lights. 9) With respect to flooding, has talked with URS Dalton about the entire Deerfield area. Is currently studying diverting a portion of the run-off at Walter Road with a culvert running 900 feet over to the Noreen ditch; this study is continuing. Will also put another culvert out of Deerfield to Maple which will stop some of the erosion in this area which is slowing the flow of water out of Deerfield. Hopes to have a more detailed report on this at the next council meeting. The money for this can come out of Step Three; there should be no additional cost to the General Fund. Mrs. Saringer asked how long the sewer tap-in ban had been lifted; Mayor responded that it has been lifted until mid-March, 1990; expects at that point that EPA will lift the ban again. Law Director Gareau reported: 1) Just as a technical aspect, it is not that E lifted the ban, it is that the city has agreed not to hear the appeal whether or not the ban was appropriate in the first place, until mid-March. There is a significant difference - it has been agreed that the ban should be lifted but whether or not it was appropriately placed is another issue entirely.