The newly installed Boston Street culvert has shown some cracks and Washingtonville officials are concerned about how bad the problem is. During Monday’s meeting, council discussed the culvert that was installed by Foust Construction of Girard for $41,692 with a $2,499 change order added in December, along with $1,091 for fencing. Utilities Superintendent Brian Gudat suggested running a camera through the culvert “to make sure nothing’s collapsed.” The village placed yellow caution tape and orange safety cones at the site. (Salem New photo by Larry Shields)

WASHINGTONVILLE — Concerned about safety and underground structural weakening at the Boston Street culvert, the village placed yellow caution tape and orange safety cones around it.

During Monday’s meeting, council discussed the culvert, which was recently completed by Foust Construction of Girard, because a portion of the work had caved in.

Foust, which was the lowest of six bids that were received, bid $41,692 on the job that Howells & Baird estimated at $44,250; with an alternate bid of $1,091 for fencing around the culvert.

The project was paid for with $26,560 in Ohio Public Works Commission (OPWC) grant money, and the balance of $7,460 came from the village.

The water line cost of $7,672 came from the water department budget.

The culvert directs water under the road in the 600 block of Boston Street from a small distributary off the Cherry Valley Run.

Work began last summer and was recently concluded but not before a change order for $2,499 involving additional piping and concrete work was made in December, and after council also approved the additional $1,091 to pay for the safety fencing.

When it was approved in December, Mayor Herman Frank said, “Were talking about safety … it’s more-or-less a safety factor. A little kid riding a bike could go down there” and Councilman James McFarland noted, “They did a pretty good job down there.”

During Monday’s meeting, Frank said they need to contact Foust Construction.

“They’ve also got to put fencing up,” he said, and suggested the ground at the wingwalls wasn’t compressed enough and “that’s why” it caved in.

Utilities Superintendent Brian Gudat said, “We’re going to have to have them check it to see if something hasn’t collapsed underneath.”

He added they might want to make them “run a camera through there to make sure nothing collapsed.”

No action was taken other than saying Foust Construction would be contacted.

In other business, Councilman Eric Sobek said he’s received resident complaints about items in “people’s yards.”

He related they were saying if we’re going to be paying income tax, they want the yards cleaned.

“Maybe people don’t know there’s an ordinance,” Sobek said, adding there was no sense in having a washing machine in the back yard “when you can put it out front and it will be taken.”

Solicitor Jeffrey Heintz said the village can pay to have yards cleaned up and charge the property owner on their tax record. Enforcing codes the village already has is the sticking point.

Frank said if the village wants the property cleaned up “it comes down to who goes there … the property owner could come out with a gun.”

He added, “We can put it on their tax (property), but the problem is going on their property” and Heintz suggested filing a lawsuit but that would cost money.

Frank said. “It’s just unfortunate that people don’t have enough pride in their property to keep it clean” and Heintz said the the county health department doesn’t get involved unless there a hazard to health and safety.

In February, council discussed enacting zoning or property maintenance resolution, and Heintz described what council needed to do in either case.

He said a maintenance law would be less expensive to put together and enforce. It would start with the planning commission.

“I can’t help with what types of zoning it is … once the planning commission comes up with a plan, council certifies it,” he explained, adding it would need a public hearing before council acted on it.

“Then, like any ordinance,” he said, it’s passed and he recommended holding the three separate readings on it.

Heintz explained how the zoning board is structured by appointing people including council members.

He suggested the Ohio Municipal League “may be able to give input” regarding the cost while adding that forming a zoning code is “probably not inexpensive.”

Frank asked about a property maintenance code and Heintz replied it depended on “how strict do you want it to be?”

He explained that Youngstown has people going around issuing citations for garage doors not being painted …” and added, “you can have a great property maintenance code, but if you don’t enforce it …”

Sobek wondered about police doing that or if a separate person needed to be used.

Heintz said other communities have zoning inspectors.

“That’s the person, in theory, who would be most familiar with the property maintenance code … as far as the police department, take it up with the police department, whether that’s something additional they can do,” he said.

Frank said they have had the police cite people and thought maybe they could get someone part time and Councilwoman Becky Vignon said she didn’t want police doing it … and with no money, she asked, “Do we need a property maintenance code?”

No action was taken at the time or since, but Council President Ron Stevens said Monday that, “At some point here we’re going to have to take a stand.”

Councilman Al Vignon agreed, “And show them we’re not kidding around.”

lshields@salemnews.net