[{"_1":2,"_123":-5,"_124":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87,99,111],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6361549,"mediaKeyId","2170575-11a76c329be7ecbea1969290e0d050c5","parentId",2170575,"title","Residents urge Bexley to press Columbus on Cassidy–Fifth Avenue design over pedestrian safety concerns","audioSeconds",440,"startMs",1984000,"endMs",2424000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2170575-11a76c329be7ecbea1969290e0d050c5&start=1984&end=2424","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2170575-11a76c329be7ecbea1969290e0d050c5/thumbnail_1984000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6361549/Bexley/Franklin-County/Ohio/Residents-urge-Bexley-to-press-Columbus-on-CassidyFifth-Avenue-design-over-pedestrian-safety-concerns","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6361549-aac8db0f124171d0f5c7339685259f74/orig.mp4?Expires=1775456044&Signature=UesuudPVPGtKi7hvcrF8q6lLnJZpfT1tp8wRUQBDLWSimMthturTubOtOTDXl3Mng4WcnTwNPaQrzUoZA4z3igQBiAeA0PnEH2ieSuF7QT3VX7TNBvlLvr63EA0G2hnpMTveTyM9uOV2Op2ZebiTqxATzWAltqB8W7WGJk0X2iKUyrvTdHY6eYm7TGMY5-pvUT-HHSd5FTuYmmaHru~3WD9QbIeM1vGxuNMiSkl47PvfHPjEKvE2T2pcMp4NQftlzxUB1q15h~8QU7UzUp9RS0FsA8~2ei-M5ti58pI6KC0yIb3Oz4NKrVQMd7-Ed6Juoikk95zXCyRt-eCXNN4CKw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","City Council of Bexley OH","date","2025-01-31T00:31:07.673Z","article","Two residents used the Jan. 28 public-comment period to ask Bexley officials to press the City of Columbus on traffic-safety designs for the Cassidy and Fifth Avenue intersection, saying planned widening would lengthen crosswalks and increase risk for pedestrians, cyclists and students headed to a newly acquired school site.

Virginia “Ginger” Tornas told council the Columbus plan would “dramatically increase crossing distances, jeopardizing the safety of those on foot, wheelchair or bicycle” and flagged a specific design change she said would raise curb turning radii from a recommended 22 feet to 68.5 feet. Tornas cited guidance from the National Association of City Transportation Officials and other research in the remarks she provided to council and asked Bexley to work with Columbus to abandon the planned widening.

“Widening Cassidy and Fifth Avenues and increasing curb radii will dramatically increase crossing distances,” Tornas said, and she told council she had included citations from NACTO, the Institute of Traffic Engineers and Johns Hopkins research in an email to the mayor and council.

Resident Carl Hoffman (appearing as Carl Holtman in the speaker record) told council his property in North Bexley gives him standing and urged officials to pursue pedestrian safety measures, saying heavier foot traffic is likely if the Bexley school district develops its newly purchased site near Cassidy and Sixth Avenue. Hoffman suggested a pedestrian overpass above Fifth Avenue as a possible long-term solution to separate school pedestrian flows from vehicle turning movements.

Mayor Ben Kessler told residents that Bexley does not control Columbus projects and said he had checked with Columbus, which was in the process of awarding the bid for the federally funded project. “This is a federal fund project… once it goes through that engineering design phase and it's going to bid and it gets awarded, it is fairly set stone,” Kessler said, adding the city will remain engaged with the schools and look at potential bicycle and pedestrian connections to the site.

Kessler and staff said Bexley has discussed multiuse-path connection options and would continue to coordinate with Columbus and the school district to seek ways to enhance pedestrian safety and connect existing bike/ped facilities to the school site. The mayor asked residents to send additional information and documents to the city; Tornas said she had emailed her materials to the mayor and council.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","City Council January 28 2025","oneSentenceSummary","Two residents asked Bexley City Council on Jan. 28 to press Columbus to change a planned widening of Cassidy and Fifth Avenues, saying larger turn radii and extra lanes would increase crosswalk distances and risk for pedestrians near a newly purchased school site.","taxTitle","Bexley, Franklin County, Ohio","taxId",72409,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6361554,"Council hears third reading on 700 Grandin lot split; ordinance taken off table then re-tabled for Feb. decision",696,1112000,1808000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2170575-11a76c329be7ecbea1969290e0d050c5&start=1112&end=1808","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2170575-11a76c329be7ecbea1969290e0d050c5/thumbnail_1112000.jpg","/articles/6361554/Bexley/Franklin-County/Ohio/Council-hears-third-reading-on-700-Grandin-lot-split-ordinance-taken-off-table-then-re-tabled-for-Feb-decision","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6361554-dcc6c9809db9ed4f94363161a7777132/orig.mp4?Expires=1775456044&Signature=ZXtDxChMqVreTxfLOVOUgRxBThzIqg4EvosO8brC7N1s3-D3ygPlSdt9GumQRl3spddar~koOkDHt70lP3v1uTEJ-xXuK3uFtmP-6OCMcZOCaXV-hKU21qp2sTYnhvDQB3DXiRHc1k3IaCvzxt32WBt3-TKJZlA6gOfXvnpWqNPXRuXjZoVNWYjJCl0cTwT2GS8ohb3naOHSXUXmODqmOOZmQyQXQnVD95MIX~NX76uGbBpxP0oT2r3tQLGNVWDZHiS7amB9y-PpL0TXqsj698KAFkcd0F2YfujAfIkFOJBxN485E8bZpmA2E6xEcGciyL1ykUv3fJXKiGPBpJ4hEw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","City Council opened a public hearing on Ordinance 42-24 — a request to split the lot at 700 Grandin Avenue and allow a new single-family home — during the Jan. 28 meeting, then moved the item off the table for discussion and ultimately tabled the matter again for the council’s first February meeting.

Councilmember Anthony Marcelino introduced the applicant and the project and invited the owners’ representative to describe the request. Connie Klima, representing the property owners, told council the lots were platted “years ago” at 40-foot widths; the owner wishes to build a house on the adjacent lot but the lot pattern is nonconforming under the current R-6 rules. Klima said, in effect, the request seeks to restore the platted lot pattern and allow construction of a new home on lot 132 next to the existing house on lot 131.

City legal and planning staff explained the seven statutory considerations the council must weigh for an area variance — including whether the property can yield reasonable return without a variance, whether the variance is substantial, and whether the character of the neighborhood would be altered. City Planner Matt Klingler and city attorney counsel recommended that council grant the variances if the ordinance passes, noting that some specific variances (side-yard setback adjustments, relocation of a condensing unit and possibly a fence) were written into the proposed ordinance so the applicant would not need separate Board of Zoning Appeals review. Klingler also said the new house would need architectural review and review by the Tree and Public Garden Commission.

No members of the public took the podium during the hearing. Council first voted to take Ordinance 42-24 off the table so the hearing could proceed. Motion to remove from the table: moved by Councilmember Anthony Marcelino; seconded by Councilmember Matthew Hurley. Roll call on the motion to remove from the table recorded unanimous support: Miss Fiebel — yes; Mister Markham — yes; Mister Hurley — yes; Mister Marcelino — yes; Miss Saad — yes; Miss Lampe — yes; Mister Silverman — yes; motion passed.

After questions and discussion, and with the applicant stating that waiting would not impede the development timeline, Marcelino moved to table Ordinance 42-24 to the first meeting in February; Hurley seconded. Roll call on the motion to table recorded unanimous support: Miss Lampe — yes; Mister Hurley — yes; Mister Markham — yes; Mister Marcelino — yes; Miss Fiebel — yes; Mister Silverman — yes; Miss Saad — yes. The motion passed; council will take final action in early February.

Councilmembers stressed that written application materials and staff analyses were on the record and had been circulated in advance for review. Staff noted the property has historically been assessed by the county as single-family lots, and that the applicant will need to submit architectural plans for ARB review and coordinate with the Tree and Public Garden Commission once the subdivision and variances proceed.

Votes at a glance:
- Motion to remove Ordinance 42-24 from the table — Moved: Anthony Marcelino; Second: Matthew Hurley. Outcome: passed (unanimous roll call yes).
- Motion to table Ordinance 42-24 until the first February meeting — Moved: Anthony Marcelino; Second: Matthew Hurley. Outcome: passed (unanimous roll call yes).","City Council opened a hearing on a lot-split and variance request for 700 Grandin Avenue on Jan. 28, took the ordinance off the table for consideration, and then re-tabled the matter until the first February meeting.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6361559,"Bexley Citizens Review Board reports 2024 activity to council; zero appeals recorded",220,587000,807000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2170575-11a76c329be7ecbea1969290e0d050c5&start=587&end=807","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2170575-11a76c329be7ecbea1969290e0d050c5/thumbnail_587000.jpg","/articles/6361559/Bexley/Franklin-County/Ohio/Bexley-Citizens-Review-Board-reports-2024-activity-to-council-zero-appeals-recorded","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6361559-1b8f1944bdae27e0ea5ccb901e8a332c/orig.mp4?Expires=1775456044&Signature=cremFyZvIp8pRCttWdt47P0qTr3MoJNJZd4CXZ2ycQw-vJQZLizet45vgc9uIEsCrZDxXdBtduj7qn8p9yAw7fQN5B0ifVqoAwR71lBfsATXqwP6OnAie91JXR-ZuuAvLo2tWiHz7C4TLit-3enWU124jDZyBp8gtwAYbV2uYkTETCk5qrCoUOiOjCDiKZ-1oFKUY4YHePPMAjS3M4hkVKnNHpX5vq~FwQ9E53~jZ9iIG~s7Ejs3sOGUALf8-9Dh0EdqKqLcyhDIKcwP-ggI~9T1RawvJzcm8V4HsP2kvEXIpRH7hNkGwHWsfxRsgBseTr3XrPvAc10rbLFVZn5QwQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Citizens Review Board presented its 2024 annual recap to the Bexley City Council on Jan. 28, telling council members the board held two meetings in 2024 and received no complaint appeals.

The board’s chair, Tiffany Hunt, said the review body was established as an advisory board to the mayor in 2020 and expanded by council later that year. “I’m Tiffany Hunt, the chair of the Citizens Review Board,” Hunt told council during the presentation. She outlined the board’s mission: providing residents “an opportunity to have other citizens review unresolved or unsatisfied complaints” and to improve transparency.

Hunt said the board has a statutory-style framework for its work and listed the board’s authorities and limits. “We have 4 resolved complaint briefings today, 0 complaint appeals,” she said. Hunt added that the board confirmed a 90-day time limit for appealing a complaint response and that the board has nondisclosure obligations for confidential materials. She told council the board may “interview and subpoena individuals concerning the matter under review as well as access any records that will be pertinent to that.”

Council members asked how a resident initiates an appeal. Hunt said the city’s website contains an appeal application and that the city provides a complaint “concierge” to help residents — including nonresidents — navigate the steps that could lead to a Citizen Review Board hearing. Councilmember Matthew Hurley pressed for a practical explanation of the steps and Hunt walked through the online process and the concierge role.

Council members asked whether the board needed additional support. Hunt said she had not encountered major obstacles and would reach out to the mayor if issues arose. Hunt also noted the board meets to provide an annual summary to the mayor and council and thanked the city for the opportunity to serve.

Council President Lampe and others thanked board members for their service and asked staff to make the 2024 recap available as an attachment to the meeting materials for public review.","The Citizens Review Board presented its 2024 recap to Bexley City Council on Jan. 28, reporting four complaint briefings and no appeals and summarizing its scope and rules for confidentiality and subpoena authority.",{"_33":100,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":101,"_41":102,"_43":103,"_45":104,"_47":105,"_49":106,"_51":107,"_53":108,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":109,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":110,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6361539,"Board of Control debates $500,000 sewer-system study contract; staff to return with apples‑to‑apples comparison before council review",448,8411000,8859000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2170575-11a76c329be7ecbea1969290e0d050c5&start=8411&end=8859","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2170575-11a76c329be7ecbea1969290e0d050c5/thumbnail_8411000.jpg","/articles/6361539/Bexley/Franklin-County/Ohio/Board-of-Control-debates-500000-sewer-system-study-contract-staff-to-return-with-applestoapples-comparison-before-council-review","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6361539-d7d18fc44bcf650d6487db8af4091374/orig.mp4?Expires=1775456044&Signature=XaoW2TvbyOsCwgsv9Or0N~XY3HGuJrJN6WLOvo8EO8tIk6IEe3MjxRX5w0kqNIG~MPbaeDIxLpdKL54PingEcF1fD4uZstgz7x9zreZgxVFNRc8ZXnBso50l6F73oc2JDWnxeV7dXeI2WhFaRQJlE0VC0C1t0A~YU3aZwy8884HKwVgW4UUWq3~JAu-wkKiNaLOE8YRDdkRf-KJ7aK-gcs5h1JXfbY8GTAX~5b01NFl8gL2xi5okxiQ1FtMhZO-fNrCHKGDpeeXDevXSjVVz-g2TUzm-WBHJFJJ9nY1xccip~qqILHnS7lQEVeKq7-GdCP3rqzDCKgOslodQfpchow__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Bexley’s Board of Control spent extended discussion time on Jan. 28 evaluating responses to an RFP for a comprehensive sanitary sewer inflow and infiltration (I/I) study. Staff outlined a two-phase, field-focused study approach and recommended contracting with Burgess & Niple; board members asked staff to provide an explicit apples‑to‑apples comparison of what the three responsive firms would deliver for the same price before any final award.

Megan Meyer and other staff explained the city’s need for updated, system‑wide data. Meyer said the city’s most comprehensive prior sanitary-sewer evaluation dates to 2014 and that interim studies and field observations have not provided the full, current picture required to create a targeted capital program. “We want the best possible data going into that evaluation,” Meyer said, arguing that without a fresh, field‑based study the city could misplace large capital dollars.

The three firms that responded proposed notably different approaches. Staff said Burgess & Niple proposed a more boots‑on‑the‑ground scope — smoke testing, targeted field inspections and modeling — while the other proposals relied more heavily on modeling and some use of existing Columbus/regional data. Because the vendors’ scopes varied, staff produced a bid‑comparison table and sought to phase the work so council could fund an initial $500,000 phase in 2025 and then decide on a second phase in 2026 once preliminary data are in hand.

Mayor Ben Kessler emphasized the value of strong data before additional capital spending: “Without it, we're not positive that we're putting the money in the strategically appropriate place,” he said.

Board members pressed staff for further clarity. Several members said the proposals appeared financially disparate: one bid was roughly double another’s without delivering an obvious, directly comparable extra output. Board members asked staff to repackage the Burgess & Niple scope into explicit Phase‑1 deliverables and to produce a side‑by‑side cost comparison showing what each firm would provide at the same price points.

The board did not award a contract on Jan. 28. Staff agreed to prepare a revised comparison and bring the material to council at its next meeting (Feb. 11) so council members can review the proposed phased approach and the likely 2026 budget implications. Staff said the city currently has $500,000 appropriated in the sewer fund for 2025 work and estimated a 2026 need of roughly $650,000 for follow‑on work depending on the data generated this year.","The Board of Control reviewed three engineering proposals for a comprehensive sanitary sewer inflow/infiltration study. Staff and the mayor recommended Burgess & Niple for a phased, field‑heavy approach but board members asked for a clearer phase‑by‑phase comparison and for council briefing before awarding a multiyear commitment.",{"_33":112,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":113,"_41":114,"_43":115,"_45":116,"_47":117,"_49":118,"_51":119,"_53":120,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":121,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":122,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6361544,"Council hears first reading of proposed galvanized service-line replacement loan program; auditors and council members press for cost details",114,6096000,6210000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2170575-11a76c329be7ecbea1969290e0d050c5&start=6096&end=6210","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2170575-11a76c329be7ecbea1969290e0d050c5/thumbnail_6096000.jpg","/articles/6361544/Bexley/Franklin-County/Ohio/Council-hears-first-reading-of-proposed-galvanized-service-line-replacement-loan-program-auditors-and-council-members-press-for-cost-details","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6361544-01658d4d22b1e30251558f68217433b1/orig.mp4?Expires=1775456044&Signature=JrhLP66WuF8SrRG5wV8k6NU9mtq0OpMj27JvrpAOR6-FtwLPWhQ4j-ohHh~MpJPVkmUGlCgDGvaCYWzehfh~zKJYnSdOOvPOR0p~7M0Mx--O5dMy7Fgx-rdF6cvkkBAJ4WgRh~Ivu-hdjbk81KBkmf7gOo1WLfFM3o0MhjwMXZhUmUs0cS5vCdJJpPg3slwHKjLM3PWZ3ASlH6qoHZ34G1Z10ifEqloxq~MAX2mahF2AvUJvjhkqgfaJwi~5jPWwEDuGWay5cb2mKSyjipZLXICnfkNi6QXaRAoezoAChT4C2CeVyZVgUjyIkAAVUzkUnXRsxnXkvxTjAUSa0L3ICg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Council received a first reading on Ordinance 06-25 on Jan. 28, a proposed galvanized water service-line replacement loan program meant to help property owners replace privately owned galvanized service pipes that the U.S. EPA has reclassified as a higher-priority replacement need.

Councilmember Saad introduced the legislation, saying the EPA “is tasking communities with making sure that we are changing these out to become… replaced with copper or PVC.” Auditor Audra McPeek and staff discussed potential financial exposure and program mechanics. McPeek said the program’s size depends on homeowner participation: “If a 1000 people take this up, that's a $4,000,000 in total loans,” she told council, and added the city could act as the lender and may need to manage liquidity if take-up is high.

The draft ordinance includes a per-property maximum loan cap; section 1(2) sets the proposed maximum loan amount at $4,000 or up to 80% of the total cost of the service-line replacement, whichever is less. Council and staff discussed the range of likely replacement costs — staff noted national averages can vary widely, from roughly $1,500 to $15,000 per property depending on site conditions — and flagged the need for bulk pricing from contractors to limit homeowner costs.

Council members pressed on repayment terms and administrative burden. Councilmember Marcelino asked whether the proposed loan would be repaid over 10 years; staff said the current ordinance contemplates a 10-year assessment but that the repayment period could be set differently by council. Councilmember Fiebel asked whether city staff would need new hires to administer the loans; staff said billing and assessment experience from prior programs would reduce overhead but third-party administration tools could be used if demand rose.

Staff noted an initial appropriation of $200,000 in the infrastructure fund as seed money tied to the city’s 2025 water-main projects and said the full scope of demand will determine future budgeting. Councilmembers asked staff to refine cost estimates, contractor pricing assumptions and the proposed repayment schedule for a future reading.","Council reviewed the first reading of Ordinance 06-25, which would create a city-administered loan/assessment program to help homeowners replace galvanized water service lines. Staff warned the program could grow quickly depending on homeowner take-up and discussed repayment terms and administration logistics.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Residents urge Bexley to press Columbus on Cassidy–Fifth Avenue design over pedestrian safety concerns

Council hears third reading on 700 Grandin lot split; ordinance taken off table then re-tabled for Feb. decision

Bexley Citizens Review Board reports 2024 activity to council; zero appeals recorded

Board of Control debates $500,000 sewer-system study contract; staff to return with apples‑to‑apples comparison before council review

Council hears first reading of proposed galvanized service-line replacement loan program; auditors and council members press for cost details