Residents urge council to block or reconsider school fuel‑station move, citing traffic, drainage and contamination risks

Canal Winchester — Residents of the Die Edition neighborhood told the Canal Winchester City Council on April 6 that a planned high‑school expansion and relocation of a school fuel‑refueling station to Franklin Street would increase cut‑through traffic, strain pedestrian safety at tight intersections and pose drainage and contamination risks to nearby homes and wetland basins.

What speakers said: Mike Talbert, who lives on West Columbus Street, said the new parking lot and a Franklin Street fuel station will create additional traffic that residents will avoid by using narrow residential streets as shortcuts: "We were told that the traffic was only going to be increased by about 65 vehicles per week. We believe that number is greatly underestimated," Talbert said.

Environmental concerns: Resident Michael Delgaso warned that the proposed tank site is at a high point that drains into a nearby lift station and wetlands and told the council he has documented breached tile and several uncapped wellheads in the drainage area. He said a serious spill could trigger EPA reporting thresholds and long‑term abatement needs.

Resident Deb Carpenter described near‑misses and obstructed sight lines at the Clinton/Columbus intersection and renewed a request for a stop sign, saying pedestrian and school‑related traffic have increased in recent years.

Staff response and limits of city authority: Development Director Mr. Hair and City Administrator Mr. Peoples said the school submitted and received site‑development approvals and a building‑height variance, and that the city’s building‑permit and fire‑safety review (including state fire marshal permitting for tanks) is the process that will examine tank location, protection and spacing. Mr. Hair said, "We would permit it like we permit any accessory structure to the primary use being the school," and added that tank permitting includes state fire marshal review and building‑department safety checks.

Mr. Hair and Mr. Peoples also told residents that the city has limited discretion to block school projects that meet zoning and building‑code requirements and urged residents to engage the school board and participate in the school’s public processes. The school board was not represented at the council meeting.

Next steps: City staff recommended residents contact school‑board officials for project details and said the building‑permit and fire‑marshal review processes will address technical safety and containment measures. Council members asked staff to revisit traffic‑control options in the neighborhood, noting past stop‑sign requests had been denied under uniform traffic‑control guidance but that staff will re‑examine safety warrants and potential mitigations.

What remains unresolved: Residents pressed for additional neighborhood protections and clearer project communications; the school‑district decision to relocate the tank and the detailed containment and screening plan remain subject to building and state fire‑marshal permitting and any further variance requests.