Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987-10-06 Minutes321 MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE CITY BOARD OF DIRECTORS A meeting of the Fayetteville City Board of Directors was held on Tuesday, October 6, 1987 at 7:30 p.m. in the Directors' Room of the City Administration Building, 113 W. Mountain Street, Fayetteville, Arkansas. PRESENT: Mayor Johnson, Directors Hess, Bumpass, Kelley and Marinoni; City Manager Pennington, City Attorney McCord, City Clerk McWethy, Department Directors Coates and Linebaugh; members of the press and audience ABSENT: Directors Lancaster and Martin ROLL CALL 321.1 The meeting was called to order with five Directors present. The Mayor asked for a moment of silence. REZONING 321.2 The Mayor introduced an ordinance rezoning approximately 1.5 acre located north of Millsap Road, about 500 feet east of Highway 471, from R-0 "Residential -Office" to C-1 "Neighborhood Commercial". 321.3 The City Attorney read the ordinance for the first time. Director Bumpass, seconded by Hess, made a motion to suspend the rules and place the ordinance on its second reading. Upon roll call, the motion passed, E-0. The ordinance was read for the second time. Director Bumpass, seconded hy Hess, made a motion to further suspend the rules and place the ordinance on its third and final reading. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 5-0. The ordinance was read for the third time. 321.4 The Mayor asked if anyone present wished to speak against the ordinance. No public opposition was expressed and, upon roll call, the ordinance passed, 5-0. ORDINANCE NO. 3297 BOOK. XXI� ALLEY VACATION APPEARS ON PAGE 2027 OF ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION 321.5 The Mayor introduced a request from Greg House for an ordinance vacating and abandoning a portion of an east -west alley located between Williams Drive and the unimproved Sequoyah Drive right-of-way. 1 • • October 6, 1987 9 The City Attorney said he believed the Board was aware that the proposal was 7322.1 merely to vacate the portion of the alley between two lots, and no portion of Sequoyah or the remainder of the alley. g The City Attorney read the ordinance for the first' time. ' The City attorney added the petitioner has indicated he will execute an- access %easement to provide access to all abutting property owners.' •Director Hess noted the petitioner had promised to execute a Bill of Assurance that no construction will take place on Lot 5. Hess said this would not inhibit any ingress or egress through the alley for any potential development by others. Hess said this was a dramatic change from House's earlier request. Greg House said he was trying to placate any of adjoining property owner 322.2 Fred Hunt's concerns about any need he might have for the alleyway for his lots to the east. In answer to a question from Mayor Johnson, House said the vacation would 322.3 allow him to obtain a building permit. He said that there is a problem in crossing the alley. The City Attorney explained the ordinance requires, in order for a building permit to be issued, a lot to have frontage on an improved public street. McCord said Lot 6 does not have frontage but, if the alley is vacated, ownership would revert to House and Lots 5 and 6 would become one large lot which would have frontage on Skyline Drive. • House said on the day he applied for the building permit he had begun 322.4 excavation, not anticipating a problem in obtaining the permit. In answer to a question from Director Marinoni, House said the layout of the 322.5 house is oriented within the 60 foot confines of Lot 6 as it is currently platted. 'In answer to a question from Director Bumpass, the City Attorney explained 322.6 House 'originally requested vacation of the unimproved portion of Sequoyah Drive • as well as a portion of the alley, that a second request was made to vacate the entire alley along with Sequoyah, and that was not approved. In answer to a question from Director Bumpass,, House explained that a 322.7 driveway which has been constructed is located on Lot 5, although he originally hoped to construct the drive along the right-of-way. David Randle spoke in opposition to the request. Randle said House cleared the land on Lot 6 as of August 10, and has dug footings within eight feet of the property line. He said he and Fred Hunt feel the closing of the short area of the alley would be detrimental to future development of properties they both own. He said Hunt owns the major portion of the lots adjacent to House, with Bill Bracey owning Lot 4. Randle said he owned property adjacent to Assembly Drive. Randle said since utility easements are requested in the alley, he didn't feel it was necessary to depend on House to give back an access easement. Randle said he thought this was a situation to gain use of a piece of property which_ really should be developed if and when Loraine is ever developed. 322.8 • v.-t October 6, 1987 323.1 Director Hess asked Randle how the vacation would be detrimental to his development. Randle said, if he and Hunt decide to develop property together, the entire alley should be open. Hess pointed out the perpetual access easement would allow for access to continue. Randle said he was surprised that the petition was before the Board, stating he understood it required the signature of other property owners to bring it back before the Board. 323.2 Adjacent property owner Fred Hunt asked what would keep someone else from building on Lot 5. The City Attorney explained the Bill of Assurance, precluding development of Lot 5, would be binding on successors in title, would "run with the land". 323.3 Director Bumpass asked Randle if part of his concern was the way the house would face. Randle said his main concern was the placement of the house, commenting that it should not face Skyline, but should face Loraine, if and when Loraine is opened. 323.4 Director Marinoni asked Randle to explain how the alley would benefit him. Randle said there needs to be access to the rear of property for removal of refuse. Marinoni pointed out there were no latter day subdivisions in Fayetteville with alleys. Marinoni said he thought this alley was platted during the time when alleys were used to get horses into stables kept in back yards. He said sanitation service is provided now from the streets in the front of houses. 323.5 Director Hess said he failed to see any damage to potential development of Randle's property, given the fact that there would be a perpetual easement allowing Randle perpetual ingress and egress through the alley. Randle asked, if there is damage, where is the recourse. The City Attorney said, if there is an effort to build over the easement, anybody whc has an interest in the easement can obtain an injunction to prevent development. 323.6 Bill Bracey, adjacent property owner, said the "cavalier attitude" about the development of property in Fayetteville more than concerns him, and said the lack of due process of law is going to jeopardize our city. Bracey assured the Board he never signed any petition to vacate any alley based on the ordinance as it appears in the agenda. He said House had offered to grant an access easement to every lot but Lot 4 which he (Bracey) owns. Bracey expressed concern about the right of the public in an alley which he said has been used for a great number of years by utility companies and property owners in the area. He said he doubted seriously if it was proper to cut off rights of the public, unless there has been a clear intent to abandon those rights. Bracey said these rights are already vested and are not the type of rights the Board can suddenly divest by an ordinance. Bracey said he thought, for the ordinance to pass, there should be a copy of the Bill of Assurance to let the property owners know exactly what limitations are imposed on Lot 5. Bracey said the lot was so narrow that it leaves very little room to even imagine a structure that would be "in the best interests 1 ( of our community". Bracey said he would have to object for those technical 324.1 reasons. • October 6, 1987 I The City Attorney explained that, under Arkansas law, there were two 324.2 procedures for vacating alleys: (1) a petition requiring the signature of all abutting property owners; or (2) the City Board has the authority to vacate an alley that the Board determines is.'not required for corporate purposes. McCord said that procedure does not require the signatures of adjoining property owners. McCord asked House if he intended to exclude Lot 4 from the access easement. 324.3 House said that was an oversight. McCord said, if House refused to execute the access easement or refused to execute the Bill of Assurance, the Board could repeal the ordinance before it became effective. Bracey said his original indication of willingness was based on 324.4 representation that Hunt had concurred. Director Bumpass remarked that the alley had been platted for a long time 324.5 and said he would prefer to allow House access from Sequoyah Drive or from Loraine, at something less than City standards. Marinoni pointed out that neither Sequoyah Drive nor Loraine were presently existing, that they were "just woods." r The City Attorney pointed out there was no procedure for varying the 324.6 requirement that a lot have frontage on an improved public street. He said Lot 6 could be developed if the owner went to the'Planning Commission for "tandem lot" approval - a tandem lot being one with no frontage on an improved public street, located behind a lot which does have such frontage. McCord explained this would require a 25' wide access easement which House could provide. He said policy does not permit a driveway to be constructed over a public alley. He said the Board could change that policy as long as public use is not inhibited by the fact that the alley is closed and utilities are in place. He added that the tandem lot ordinance requires greater setbacks, meaning House would have to obtain a variance from the Board -of Adjustment. McCord said with these approvals from the City Board, the Planning Commission and the Board of Adjustment, a building permit could be issued without the alley being vacated. Fred Hunt remarked that, before any foundations were dug, House knew there 324.7 were objections to the vacation of Sequoyah Drive and the alley. Hunt said he told House at that time he would buy Lot 6 or both lots, for what House paid for the property. Hunt said he couldn't see the urgency to close the alley.; Director Hess made a motion to suspend the rules and place the ordinance on 324.8 its second reading. The motion was seconded by Marinoni and, upon roll call, failed, 4-1, Director Bumpass voting in the minority. The Mayor explained to House that five affirmative votes were necessary to move the • rtl 0-0 kJ October 6, 1987 325.1 ordinance to its second reading. She told him the ordinance would appear on the next agenda. PRATT WOODS WAIVERS 325.2 The Mayor introduced a request for waivers from the requirements of the Subdivision regulations concerning certain improvements to the Pratt Woods Addition, located east of Sang Avenue and south of Markham Road. - 325.3 The Mayor explained the request is that: (1) the street width be reduced from 31 to 27 feet, with the staff recommending approval, because the street will feed into other 27 foot wide streets; (2) cast iron Victorian -style streetlights be allowed in lieu of aluminum streetlights. The Mayor said the staff recommended approval as long as the City is not responsible for any maintenance costs beyond the usual monthly contribution for streetlights; and (3) approval to use 5 1/2" of exposed aggregate concrete in lieu of 6" base and 2" asphalt, or 5" of concrete. The Mayor said the staff recommended denial, but would consider approval under two conditions: (1) repair and maintenance costs above that of conventional methods be borne by lots owners; and (2) additional casings be installed to allow for future utility crossings. 325.4 Ervan Wimberly, speaking for the owner, said the street repair and maintenance costs are proposed to be borne by lot owners, and deposited in an escrow account to be used for streetlight maintenance. 325.5 Director Hess asked how it would be determined what "conventional" methods would cost. The City Attorney said a written agreement would have to provide replacement in accordance with City specifications "on the date of replacement", with the property owners providing the cost differential. Hess asked if the property owners would be responsible for repairs. Wimberly said it is proposed that the City would make the repairs, but the additional costs would be charged to the property owners. 325.6 Director Marinoni asked what the owner did not develop the property as a "planned unit development". Wimberly said the owner felt there was a stigma to the PUD concept in Fayetteville. 325.7 Director Hess said he thought exposed aggregate concrete would have a shorter lifetime on a hillside than a regular concrete street. 325.8 City Engineer Don Bunn said he did not think there were any structural differences between a regular concrete street and an exposed asphalt street, but the difference would be in the maintenance of the surface. He said he didn't think there was a way to determine what the maintenance costs are going to be. He suggested the City could make a determination at some point that more than the usual amount of maintenance is being required on the street and then charge the property owners on that basis. 1 • 1 October 6, 1987 Wimberly said it would not be economically feasible to do resurfacing just to take care of loss of some of the surface. Wimberly said he thought exposed aggregate would hold up better than asphalt in this case. Wimberly said 4" of base would be applied under 5 1/2" of concrete. Director Bumpass asked how funds would be collected from the property owners. The City Attorney said the City would simply not install aggregate until it had money in hand. Wimberly said an escrow account would be set up in advance, as lots are sold, with the City made accessible to the account. Director Bumpass asked if covenants.of aproperty owners' association could be submitted to the City Attorney for review before this is approved by the Board. The City Attorney said if the Board approved the concept, he would approve a property owners association, and the Board could see the contract if it wished to do so. Director Bumpass moved to approve the three waivers, with the third waiver including two conditions recommended by the staff, and with the Board to see some of the paperwork. The motion was seconded by Hess. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 4-1, Director Johnson voting in the minority. SHELTER BIDS The Mayor introduced consideration of the award of bids for the addition to the Shelter for Victims of Family Violence, funded under the Community Development Block Grant program She reported the staff recommended the award of bid to Landmark Construction and Spring Mountain Heat and Air, at total bid costs of $25,138. The Mayor said these funds were within the budget. -The Mayor noted both bids were the low bidders. Director Marinoni, seconded by Johnson, moved the bid be awarded. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 5-0. SIGN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT The Mayor introduced an ordinance amending the City's Sign Ordinance to regulate the display of windblown signs. The City Attorney said the current ordinance absolutely prohibits windblown .signs, and that the amendment would liberalize the ordinance. He said windblown signs (flags, pennants, balloons, spinners or blimps) would be prohibited except one time per year for a period not to exceed 72 hours The City Attorney read the ordinance for the first time. Director Bumpass, seconded by Kelley, made a motion to suspend the rules and place the ordinance on its second reading. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 5-0. The ordinance was read for the second time. Director Bumpass, seconded by Kelley, made a motion to further suspend the rules and place the ordinance 1,1410 iJ Iv 326.1 326.2 326.3 326.4 326.5 326.6 326.7 326.8 326.9 October 6, 1987 327.1 on its third and final reading. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 5-0. The ordinance was read for the third time. 327.2 327.3 In answer to a question from Director Hess, the City Attorney said the ordinance would not require a permit. Hess asked how the City would "police” the ordinance. The City Attorney said the ordinance would be "policed" based on complaints, the way most of the ordinances are "policed." In answer to a question from Hess, Public Safety Director Coates said it would be better for enforcement if there was a permit. 327.4 Director Bumpass, seconded by Hess, made a motion to amend the ordinance to require a permit at a basic fee of $10. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 5-0. 327.5 In answer to a question from the audience, it was clarified that a company flag, the American flag and the State flag may be flown all the time. 327.6 Upon roll call, the ordinance passed, 5-0. ORDINANCE MO. 3298 APPEARS ON PAGE 12027 OF ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION BOOK )0X0 V SIGN APPEAL 327.7 The Mayor introduced an appeal from the literal provisions of the Sign Ordinance for an existing 24 square foot freestanding sign at a height of 12 feet located at Glendale Apartments in the street right-of-way. 327.8 Joanne Bayles, manager of Glendale Apartments, spoke on behalf of the appeal. Bayles said the request was to leave the sign where it is because there is no other place it can be placed where it can be seen, because the location is so far down from the street. 327.9 Director Bumpass, seconded by Marinoni, moved to grant the variance as requested because the extraordinary drop off the side of the road makes it impossible for them to move the sign back. 327.10 In answer to a question from Director Hess, Building Superintendent Wood said he thought the sign was located about one foot inside the street right- of-way. Hess said he thought there had been discussion about rotating the sign 180 degrees. Wood said this would still not put the sign in compliance as to the setback, but would give the sign at least a four foot setback. 327.11 It was explained to Bayles how the sign could be rotated. Bayles said that would be a lot of trouble. She said there was a University of Arkansas sign across the street on the City right-of-way, and there was a U. S. Post Office mailbox in the right-of-way on the corner of Hill and Putman. 1 li ;I • October 6, 1987 Upon roll call, the motion passed, 3-2, Directors Bumpass, Kelley and Marinoni voting in favor and Directors Hess and Johnson voting against the motion. UNSAFE STRUCTURES The Mayor introduced an ordinance ordering the abatement of unsightly conditions -and the razing and removal of unsafe structures located at 1720, 1802 and 1804 Stone Street. The City Attorney read the ordinance for the first time. Director Bumpass, seconded by Kelley, made a motion to suspend the rules and place the ordinance on its second reading. Upon roll call, the motion failed, 3-2, Directors Hess, Bumpass and Kelley voting in favor and Directors Johnson and Marinoni voting against the motion. The Mayor noted that the ordinance would be left on its first reading until the next meeting [five affirmative votes being necessary to move the ordinance on to its second reading]. Director Bumpass commented that it was families living in these condemned houses. in favor of moving this on to a conclusi unsightly, unsanitary and unwholesome. T -HANGAR LEASES particularly agonizing to see He said for that reason he was on. He said it was unsafe, The Mayor introduced a resolution authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute leases for space in T -Hangar A at the Fayetteville Airport - a one year lease with Randall Parette at $135 per month, and a one year lease with the University of Arkansas at $620 per month. Bumpass, seconded by Marinoni, moved approval of the resolution authorizing the execution of the leases. Director Hess asked if the City had instituted any screening procedures on the people requesting leases. Hess said until a method is started to get at least one reference on the character of these people he was going to vote against the leases. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 4-1, Hess voting in the minority. RESOLUTION NO. 73-87 APPEARS ON PAGE .3( 7 OF ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION BOOK XX1/1/1 The Mayor introduced a resolution authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to renew a lease for space in T -Hangar B, for Nick Enterline, in the amount of $110 per month. • • 328.1 328.2 328.3 328.4 328.5 328.6 328.7 327.8 327.9 October 6, 1987 329.1 Director Bumpass, seconded by Marinoni, moved approval of the resolution authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to renew a lease with Nick Enterline. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 4-1, Hess voting in the minority. RESOLUTION NO. 73-87 BOOK %`1(41111 FAA LEASE APPEARS ON PAGE 361 OF ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION 329.2 The Mayor introduced a resolution authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute a renewal of a lease with the U. S. Government for use of office space and parking spaces at the Airport. The Mayor said the lease included 3,096 square feet of office space in the Flight Service Station building and the old Terminal Building, as well as parking spaces, at an annual rent of $21,821.25. 329.3 Bumpass, seconded by Johnson, moved approval of the resolution authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute a renewal of the lease with the U. S. Government for office space and parking spaces at the Airport, at an annual rent of $21,821.25. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 5-0. RESOLUTION NO. 74-87 APPEARS ON PAGE 32/ OF ORDINANCE AND RESCLUTION BOOK XxVi 1 AIRPORT ADVERTISING 329.4 The Mayor introduced a resolution authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute a renewal of a lease with Western Inns Management, Inc (dba Best Western -The Inn) for advertising display space at the Airport, at $80 per month. 329.5 Director Bumpass, seconded by Kelley, moved approval of the resolution. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 5-0. RESOLUTION NO. 75-87 APPEARS ON PAGE 32o OF ORDINANCE AND RESCLUTION BOOK /Will SEWAGE DAMAGE POLICY 329.6 The Mayor introduced consideration of a change to the policy regarding the payment of compensation by the City for property damage caused by a City sewage system backup. The Mayor said an increase is recommended from the present $1,000 maximum policy to a $2,500 maximum. 329.7 Director Bumpass asked how many claims had been brought to the Board in the last few years. Kelley asked if a $2500 maximum was normal procedure in other cities. City Manager Pennington said it varied from community to 1 1 October 6, 1987 community, but he thought the amount was normal. Bumpass asked if the Board 330.1 was always notified of the claims. Linebaugh said the Board was not notified in cases under the maximum $1,000 amount. The City Attorney said the reason for the policy is so that each claim does not have to come before the Board. City Manager. Pennington said normally such claims are handled as an administrative procedure, once the Board has established the pplicy. Bumpass asked how the claims are awarded, if estimates are obtained. City 330.2 Engineer Don Bunn explained that usually the cleanup is done in a hurry by the property owner, and the City then makes a decision on each claim. The City Attorney said an amendment to' -the policy will be for payments to be made based on paid receipts. Bunn said a change in the policy will also be to use an adjuster when necessary. He said that the City does not pay for backup due to inflow from general flooding into the sewer line, nor does the City pay far an overflow due to a power outage at a pump station. In answer to a question from the Mayor, Bunn said there have been three or 330.3 four claims over $1,000 since January. • Director Kelley made a motion to approve the policy as recommended in the memo from Al Rukgaber. Director Bumpass said he thought the City Board should be informed if there are problems in the sewer system. He asked if this could be included as an informational item in a Board agenda. Director Marinoni, seconded by Bumpass, moved to amend the motion to include the use of an adjuster in cases over $1,000. Director Hess seconded the original motion by Director Kelley. Upon roll call, the motion do the amendment passed, 5-0. Upon roll call, the original motion, as amended, passed by a vote of 5-0. _ r RESOLUTION NO. 76-87 APPEARS ON PAGE sql OF ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION BOOK X X U M ( SEWER REHAB CHANGE The Mayor introduced a resolution authorizing approval of a change order to the City's contract with Fayette Tree and Trench for a sewer system rehabilitation project, for rock excavation, a ditch crossing on North Street, and pier anchor straps on two line segments, increasing the total contract price by $15,149.19. In answer to a question from Director Bumpass, the City Manager recommended approval. • 330.4 330.5 330.6 330.7 330.8 330.9 330.10 October 6, 1987 331.1 Director Bumpass, seconded by Marinoni, moved approval of a resolution authorizing a change order for $15,149.19. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 5-0. RESOLUTION NO. 77-87 APPEARS ON PAGE 39,2 OF ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION BOOK WATER LINE OVERSIZE 331.2 The Mayor introduced a resolution authorizing approval of a change order to the City's contact with Fayette Tree and Trench for the construction of the Holland Drive water line extension, located in the City's Growth Area. The Mayor explained that this would involve an increase from a two-inch water line to a 6" water line and would cost the City $22,205. 331.3 Director Marinoni noted that the 6" line would be fed by a 4" line and eventually loop into another 4" line. Director Bumpass asked why the line was proposed to be 6" instead of 4". Bunn said there was a policy to not install any lines smaller than 6". He said this was especially important in the Growth Area, since the 4" lines will eventually be replaced with larger lines. Bunn said the price difference between the 4" and 6" line would be about $3 or $4 a foot, or a savings of $10-15,000. 331.4 Director Bumpass said he couldn't foresee there being over 100 houses built in that area and thought it was overkill to install a 6" line between two 4" lines. 331.5 Bumpass moved to approve oversizing to 4". 331.6 City Manager Pennington said the City should have a master water development plan which would dictate the types of lines for the future. He said it was standard for future planning to use larger 6" and in some cases 8" lines. He told the Board that he would like to meet with the City Engineer regarding the projections for that area, before the Board makes a decision on the size of the line. 331.7 Director Johnson, seconded by Bumpass, moved to table the request. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 5-0. WATER LINE RELOCATION 331.8 The Mayor introduced consideration of the award of bid for water line relocation on the Black Oak Road bridge; and approval of a budget adjustment. She said the staff requests a budget adjustment in the amount of $31,572 and recommends award to the lowest of four bidders, Sweetser Construction Company, bidding $44,772. 1 1 October 6, 1987 In answer to a question from Director Bumpass, Administrative Services 332.1 Director Linebaugh said the water line was 8" and goes to Mt. Olive Water District, serving approximately 750 people, and 12 households. City Engineer Don Bunn explained this was the only supply line for the district at this time, although at some time in the future they will have a tie-in to a Highway 71 South line. Director Marinoni asked what monthly revenue the City receives for the sale 332.2 of this water to Mt. Olive Water District. Linebaugh said this information was included in the city's water rate studies. Bumpass asked if they are charged differently than other' water'purchasers in the City. Bunn said he thought the cost was different. Linebaugh said the cost would be "factored in". when the rate studies are done. • Linebaugh said the budget adjustment would be taken from the Poplar Street 332.3 bridge project. Bumpass asked who would pay for the new line from Highway 71 South. Bunn 332.4 said the District would pay for that, but would still need to feed their system from two different directions. Mayor iJohnson, seconded by Hess, moved the award of bid 'and budget adjustment. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 4-1, Bumpass voting in the minority. RESOLUTION NO, 78-87 APPEARS ON PAGE .59 S NO. XXvIII SOCCER FIELD EARTHWORK • .OF ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION The Mayor introduced consideration of the award of bid for soccer fields earthwork at Walker Park North; and approval of a budget adjustment. The Mayor said the staff recommended the award of bid to Sweetser Construction Company, the lower of two bidders, bidding $13,800. She said $14,000 was budgeted for this expense,but that $1,000kof that has been expended for engineering fees. She said a budget adjustment was requested for $800, to be taken from funds budgeted for the Lake Fayetteville boat dock stalls. 332.5 332.6 Director Hess, seconded by Johnson, made a motion to approve the award of 332.7 bid. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 5-0. RESOLUTIION NO. 79-87 APPEARS ON PAGE y0 7 _ OF ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION NO., ,K '// CITY POOL DECK SUPPORTS The Mayor introduced consideration of the award of bid for beam supports and concrete footings to support the City Pool deck; and approval of a budget • 332.E October 6, 1987 333.1 adjustment. She said the staff recommended the award of bid to Jerry D. Sweetser, Inc., the lowest of three bidders, bidding $11,476. She said $7,000 is budgeted for the expense and the budget adjustment is requested in the amount of $4,400, to be taken from the Lake Maintenance Building Cost Account. 333.2 Director Bumpass asked if it would do any good to re -bid the project. City Engineer Bunn said he didn't believe so, and stated that even though the bids were above the budget, they were not over the cost estimate after the plan was developed. 333.3 Bumpass, seconded by Kelley, moved the award of bid. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 5-0. RESOLUTION NO. 80-87 APPEARS ON PAGE y/ 0 BOOK XXVII 1 BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS PERSONAL COMPUTER OF ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION 333.4 The Mayor introduced a request from the Public Works Department, Parks and Recreation Division, for a budget adjustment in the amount of $2,750, for a personal computer and printer. She said funds would be transferred from the Budget and Research Division's Office Supplies and Minor Equipment Accounts, and from the Parks Division's Building Cost Account, to the Parks Division's Fixed Assets Account. 333.5 Linebaugh explained the transfer would allow the Parks Division to use one of Budget and Research Division's P.C.'s (which is not compatible with other P.C.'s in the division) and will allow Budget and Research to purchase a P.C. which is compatible. 333.6 Director Bumpass, seconded by Johnson, made a motion to approve the request. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 5-0. OVERTIME 333.7 The Mayor introduced a request from the Public Safety Department, Communications Division, for a budget adjustment in the amount of $2,500, for overtime expenses due to turnover in personnel. She said funds would be transferred from Salaries and Wages Account to Overtime Non -Uniform Personnel Account. 333.8 Director Bumpass, seconded by Marinoni, made a motion to approve the request. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 5-0. 1 1 PERFORMANCE AUDIT 4 October 6, 1987 The Mayor introduced a request from the General Administration Department/City Manager, for a budget adjustment in the amount of $53,463, to cover payment to Arthur Young for the performance audit. She said funds would be taken from unreserved Fund Balance. Director Bumpass, seconded by Kelley, made a motion to approve the request. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 5-0. In answer to a question from Director Hess, Linebaugh said there was no offsetting budget item for this amount in General Fund. GULLEY PARK The Mayor introduced approval of the concept of a new park to be located northeast of the intersection of Township Street and Old Wire Road; approval to secure an option to purchase land; and approval to appraise property proposed to be purchased for the park. Director Hess, seconded by Marinoni, moved approval of the request. The City Attorney said, once an appraisal is obtained, a request will be brought back before the Board for approval of an option. A citizen in the audience asked about plans for the use of the future park. Bill Waite, speaking for .the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board, said a Master Plan would be drawn up for the park. He said the Parks Board had discussed the character of this park as being similar to that of Wilson Park - not heavily developed for 'competitive sports, but more for walking and jogging trails and picnic facilities, with some play fields. In answer to a question from a citizen, Waite said the 20 acres to be acquired would not include the house northeast of the intersection, that there would be about a 200' buffer between the intersection and the park. • Waite said there would be a number of published meetings to solicit 'neighborhood input into the plans for the park. A citizen asked if the property was in the flood plain and said the citizens would have very limited access to the property. Waite said a lot of city park land was in the flood zone, which was how it was able to be acquired. He said there may be a day or two of loss of use of the play fields per year when there is flooding. Waite said the park could have access from Primrose, Magnolia or Country Way. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 5-0. 334.1 334.2 334.3 334.4 334.5 334.6 334.7 334.8 334.9 334.10 334.11 , ,•1J OTHER BUSINESS WASHINGTON COUNTY V. CITY October 6, 1987 335.1 In reference to Washington County v. City , an action by the County to impose an equitable trust upon revenues from the County's 1% sales tax which the County alleges were wrongfully distributed to the City by the State Treasurer, the City Attorney told the Board Judge Lineberger upheld the County's claim to recover funds improperly disbursed. McCord said he did not recommend an appeal because he believed the Chancellor's decision would most likely be affirmed, and because the County has agreed to a reasonable settlement. He said the County originally made a claim of $215,099 against the city but has now agreed to a settlement of $102,337.74, which McCord said he believed was a reasonable settlement. He said the County has agreed to installments over the same period of time that the money was disbursed at a 10% interest rate, if that is the desire of the City. 335.2 Director Hess asked if the City could use the funds owed the County to build certain County projects which might be needed, such as the road at the jail house. The City Attorney said he did not think the City was in much of a bargaining position. He said the court held the County had a vested right to these funds and that they were, in fact, the County's funds. McCord said the City could request, but could not stipulate, how the money would be spent. 335.3 In answer to a question from Director Bumpass, McCord said the 10% interest was "like a judgment". He explained the Court did not determine the amount which should be recovered, because the County's attorney and he agreed that an amount could be agreed upon by the parties. 335.4 In answer to a question from the Mayor, McCord said in his opinion the City had no recourse with the State Treasurer 335.5 Director Bumpass said the County wouldn't have had a sales tax if it hadn't been for the vote of the citizens of Fayetteville. He said County constituents voted against it and it was Fayetteville which carried the election. He said the County had benefitted a great deal from that vote and this troubled him when the City runs into lack of cooperation from the County at times. 335.6 The Mayor said it disturbed her that the City was made to be "the fall guy" when in actuality it didn't set out to defraud the County of their sales tax money, nor did it have anything to do with its distribution. The City Attorney said the money was disbursed in accordance with a promulgated policy by the State Treasurer which the City did not participate in formulating. He said it was interesting to note that another county participated in this lawsuit and did not seek reimbursement from cities in that county. 1 October 6, 1987 Director Marinoni, seconded by Bumpass, made a motion 'to approve the settlement. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 5-0. INCINERATOR SITE • The City Attorneytold the Board that, in view of the fact that the Happy Hollow incinerator site has been abandoned, he would dismiss the condemnation case that -was filed to acquire that site, and have the deposit returned to the City. • Director Bumpass, asked if the State- air permit for that site could be "vacated." The City. Attorney said that Project Director Louis Watts had drafted a letter to the DPC&E for Chairman Lancaster's signature to that effect. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE Director Bumpass asked if the City Attorney was going to prepare an ordinance in reference to the Subdivision Committee, the notice requirement and the right of appeal of final decisions of that body. The City Attorney said this -would be on the next agenda. RETREAT DATES The Mayor asked the Board to set a date for the annual Board retreat. The Mayor suggested a 6-8 hour session. The City Manager pointed out that some consideration should be given to the budget process in planning the date for the retreat. He said he needed some time to prepare some recommendations to discuss- with the Board. It was decided• the staff would make a recommendation for a date to present to the Board. MINUTES • • • The minutes of the September 15 meeting were approved with the following correction: 311.4 "form" should be "forum" The minutes of the September 22 meeting were approved. CITIZEN COMMENT A citizen in the audience asked that the City paint a crosswalk on Mountain Streetacross from the Federal Building. The Mayor said the City staff would check into the request. 336.1 336.2 336:3 336.4 336.5 336.6 336.7 336.8