Monday, October 18th, 2021

April 9, 2007 meeting minutes


Commissioner Mtg. 4/09/07 @ 9:00 p.m. in County Commissioners Room
Those present:
Louis Linkel Eric Roberts Thomas Wilson
Franklin County Chief Deputy Auditor: Veronica Voelker Deputy Auditor: Andrea Arthur
*Louis Linkel opens with pledge of allegiance
I. Transportation Enhancement Funding Grant Application (Purchase of Whitewater Valley Regional Interpretive Park)
a. Louis Linkel – We have had Gene (Stewart) look this over and he thinks it is fine.
b. Candy Yurcak – We want to give you a copy of the Transportation Enhancement Funding Application fort the Grant
c. Louis Linkel – if you all agree, then we can sign it.
d. Thomas Wilson – we are just signing for you to apply for the grant.
e. Louis Linkel – makes the motion to sign
f. Thomas Wilson – seconds the motion
g. Eric Roberts – all in favor
II. Mike Vest and the Storage Building for the First Baptist Church of Laurel
a. Louis Linkel – makes a motion to waive the (up to) $250.00 building permit fee
b. Thomas Wilson – seconds the motion
c. Eric Roberts – all in favor
III. Meeting Minutes – April 2, 2007
a. Louis Linkel – Motion to approve the minutes
b. Thomas Wilson – Seconds the motion
c. Eric Roberts – all in favor
IV. Meeting Minutes – March 26, 2007
a. Eric Roberts – motion to approve
b. Louis Linkel – seconds the motion
c. Thomas Wilson – all in favor
V. Letter from Indiana Housing & Community Development Authority for Brookville Lake Senior Housing Project
a. Louis Linkel – I have a letter here. Any response needs to be in by May 7th. (see letter)
VI. Public Transportation 1st Quarter Reimbursement Claim
a. Louis Linkel – makes a motion to sign
b. Thomas Wilson – seconds motion
c. Eric Roberts – all in favor
VII. Weekly Highway Engineer Report, George Hartman
a. Bridge #38 / St. Mary’s Road over Wolf Creek at Pumphouse Road/Wolf Creek Road Intersection
i. Weather was not favorable for concrete placement. If temp.’s below freezing we have an option to not implement. We are
hoping for Thursday (4/12) to pour wing walls. (See Photo)
ii. John Estridge – Why did you take out all the trees?
iii. You are talking about the South side? The alignment for the new traffic heading southbound during construction, in order to
accommodate this we reduced the trees. It will be reseeded. The electric company did come through to maintenance as well.
b. Bridge #100 / Johnson Fork Road (Designation No. 9785390)
i. Interest free loan check did get deposited into the Cum. Bridge I would guess. I spoke with Hollie (Sintz), county council
meeting is on April 24 and they can take care of appropriations then. In talking with contractor they want the check that week
hopefully over-night it to them. It is a real tight schedule.
ii. The other detail is Whitewater Valley REMC wants to relocate lines at no cost to the County. Cincinnati Bell has to relocate as
well. Notice to proceed was signed March 19, 2007 but there is an amendment to the agreement (handed out). There is a letter
which authorizes this as well (see letter). I was premature in handing out the earlier one.
iii. Thomas Wilson – when will the start date then?
iv. There must be a signed agreement between Franklin County and Whitewater Valley REMC. Gene (Stewart) and Lowell (Teen
McMillin) are working on this. Beginning of May according to I.N.D.O.T.
v. Louis Linkel – We need to sign the notice to proceed?
vi. Thomas Wilson – makes a motion to sign
vii. Louis Linkel – seconds the motion
viii. Eric Roberts – all in favor
c. Bridge #110 / Railfence Road over Salt Creek (Designation No. 0200725) and Bridge #111 / Railfence Road over Harvey Branch
(Designation No. 0500802)
i. Spoke with Brenda Fox of I.N.D.O.T. last week about the email sent by Susan (Jones). Jeff Clanton modified the proposal
because they are altering the letter of interest between the consultant and I.N.D.O.T.
ii. Thomas Wilson – how will this affect the project?
iii. It is still scheduled for May 7th.
iv. Eric Roberts – we will have less say in this process?
v. That is my interpretation of the email. Even though the county signed a contract with the consultant and will pay the
consultant. If you have a concern about that then I can give you Jeff’s number. If you have concerns about that procedure, I
can find out more and report at the next meeting.
vi. Did talk to Brenda Fox about an interest free loan for the Bridge #110 and #111. I drafted a letter. (see handout). Franklin
County would be eligible for this application.
vii. Thomas Wilson – do we need to sign this today?
viii. If you like or if you need to discuss further.
ix. Thomas Wilson – we should go ahead and sign.
x. Louis Linkel – makes a motion to sign.
xi. Thomas Wilson – seconds
xii. Eric Roberts – all in favor
d. H.E.S. Programmatic Sign Project
i. Spoke with Steve from INDOT who stated the contract was signed by all officials. Now funds need to be allocated for the
project. The monies come from the criminal justice fund. The money should be in place by the end of April.
ii. There is training involved for county employees. I am not sure when the training will be scheduled but this is a very important
part of the project and all foremen will need to attend.
iii. The only other aspect as the project moves there will need to be a new inventory of signs and there were a couple options from
WTH. Relative with reimbursement, we need to document all the new signs. A spot check will then take place so the highway
dept needs to have a good record of when and where the signs were placed.
iv. Eric Roberts – twenty something is an expensive quote for the project.
v. It is county wide record.
vi. Eric Roberts – if they had a copy of the uniform sign code; that will mean they don’t need the training?
vii. Don’t think they will allow that. The training is more formal type than reading the manual. The other thing to talk about is the
style of signs for the project. The more productive we are the more we get in return for the county. The more signs they can get
in per hour and the more efficient they are will help with the project.
viii. Thomas Wilson – it is actually free to the county.
e. Phase I Bridge Inspection
i. Kevin Loiselle – all the field inspections are turned in other than Bridge #144 (Causeway) which is not complete. I.N.D.O.T. is
hiring a consultant to inspect all pins and hinges. Two years from now Phase II will be responsible. I sent a letter to the Corp.
of Engineers about bridge and Steve Lee had a copy of the letter send to Marshall Graham. He couldn’t find any records on the
bridge. Franklin County can take over the bridge but that isn’t the case. They didn’t really say what was going to happen.
ii. Thomas Wilson – they can’t force us to take it?
iii. Kevin Loiselle – I am not sure. It is important to get this resolved b/c it will cost money in the future. – gave George Hartman a
cd report for the inspections. For Bridge #48 Pipe Creek Road over Pipe Creek-Alley Ford need to sign the design conceptions.
iv. Thomas Wilson – motion to sign
v. Louis Linkel – seconds the motion
vi. Eric Roberts – all in favor
vii. Kevin Loiselle – I put together a chart (see handout) for the design exceptions. Bridge #102 Snow Hill Bridge, we are at a
juncture where we either need to move forward with purchase of property or something. The right of way is the key issue at
this point.
viii. Eric Roberts – what stage of the game are we for Bridge #102?
ix. Kevin Loiselle – Did bring a sketch of the bridge and area.
x. John (Graf) is here to pickup and discuss additional projects.
xi. John Graf – Bridge #94 Blue Creek Road over Blue Creek – approved as far as design is concerned but is sitting in our draw
waiting on right of way. There isn’t much we can do until right of way comes through. The only other thing we might need to
do is reapply for permits because of the time. Estimated cost $841,734.00 looked at in 8/06. There is an additional 15% for the
state inspection on site. It has been a little less than a year since that was updated so costs have gone up since then. Time wise
– as soon as right of way is cleared we can submit a plan within 30 days. Bridge #100 Johnson Fork Road should be taken off
the list as well. You are aware of the problems with the utilities on that one. We need the agreement signed so we can deliver it
to the State.
xii. Eric Roberts – our attorneys is working with theirs on that.
f. John Graf-Bridge #110 Railfence Road over Salt Creek – it should be coming back to us in the next 30 days. Right of way is the issue
again here. Cost for Bridge #110 estimated $943,215.00 construction letting in 10/07. Bridge #111 Railfence Road over Harvey
Branch estimated for letting 10/07 w/ an estimated cost of $715,182. Bridge #94 was estimated at $835,000. Bridge #110 and #111 are
being bid as one project. For funding it is split as two projects for accounting purposes at the state.
i. George Hartman – The letting date for #110 and #111 would be?
ii. John Graf – It is very possible to be done late this year. It will depend upon the right of way; and how much time the State
iii. Thomas Wilson – I don’t think right of way will be an issue.
iv. John Graf – It is timelines and when the other projects are completed.
v. Susan Jones – What about Bridge #73?
vi. George Hartman- Plans were filed in 3/05 in advance of right of way so, that project is ready to go with the exception of right
of way. James A Barber – there has been no signed contract with them as yet. The included both design and construction but
that does not have to happen. There was a question raised at the state and we answered that. I don’t know where Joe stands
with right of way.
vii. Louis Linkel – I haven’t talked with him on that.
viii. George Hartman – Susan (Jones) do you know when the state will be here next week?
ix. Susan Jones – 9:45 a.m.
VIII. Contractors in the County (Bonding of)
a. Thomas Wilson – I think Larry (Franzman) drafted this. Anyone who offers their services will post a bond until services are
completed. I think one of them needs to get with Larry and draft this into ordinance form.
b. Eric Roberts – this is pretty general to me. It should be more specific.
c. Thomas Wilson – such as?
d. Eric Roberts – regardless of work being done there should be a minimum bond.
e. Thomas Wilson – so should we tell Larry (Franzman) the bond needs to be 25% greater than the estimated cost of the project?
f. Eric Roberts – there should be a waiver if someone doesn’t want to have the bond b/c they have confidence in the person doing the
IX. Countywide Clean Up
a. Terry Duffy – There will be an advertisement in this week’s paper regarding items to be allowed. See handout
X. Payroll
a. Thomas Wilson – motion to approve payroll
b. Louis Linkel – seconds the motion
c. Eric Roberts – all in favor
XI. Adjourn
a. Louis Linkel – motion to adjourn
b. Thomas Wilson – seconds the motion
c. Eric Roberts – all in favor
Those also present:
Susan Jones, Secretary George Hartman, County Engineer John Estridge, Whitewater Publications Candy Yurcak
Eugene Stewart, Attorney Ron Yurcak Larry Franzman, Area Planning Jean Owens
David H. Cook Debbie Blank, Herald Tribune Paul Baudendistel G.I. Ball
Mike Selke Don Vonder Meulen Marty Han Terry Duffy
Jo Ball Robert McKain Norma McKain Kevin Loiselle
John Graf
Approved 04/16/07

Speak Your Mind

Tell us what you're thinking...
and oh, if you want a pic to show with your comment, go get a gravatar!