HomeMy WebLinkAbout6-87 RESOLUTION•
RESOLUTION 6-87
No resolution was ever written for this item.
.1
January 20, 1987
There is already a commercial use on the property and C-2 District
will release the use from a nonconforming status; and
3. The intersection of Double Springs Road and Highway 16 West is a
logical location for future commercial development.
21.2 Director Marinoni said the property was located in his neighborhood and
involves an auto repair center in a somewhat substandard building. Marinoni
said Ralston proposes to remove the building and construct a new building
which would be appropriate in appearance and would be moved farther back
from the highway, so as not to obscurethe view of oncoming traffic.
Marinoni stated he was in favor of the passage of the ordinance.
21.3 Upon roll call, the ordinance passed, 7-0.
ORDINANCE NO.3237
APPEARS ON PAGE /J/ OF ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION BOOK
WEDINGTON DRAINAGE CONDEMNATIONS
21.4 The Mayor introduced a resolution authorizing the initiation of condemnation
proceedings against 17 tracts of land, for the acquisition of easements
necessary for the Wedington drainage project.
21.5 Property owner James Parrish addressed the Board. He stated he was not
contacted regarding the Board's recommendation he negotiate with the staff.
Parrish said he did not think the City had enough money to do the project.
Parrish agreed that the drainage project is needed for Stephens Avenue and
the property below it, but asked that the project be stopped for the area
east of Stephens Avenue.
21.6 City Manager Grimes asked Parrish if he had refused to accept certified mail
since the last Board meeting. Parrish said he refused certified mail two to.
three months ago but had not since. Grimes stated certified mail sent to
Parrish since the last meeting was returned to the City.
21.7 Director Bumpass said the minutes of the last Board meeting indicate that
the City Attorney had asked Parish to contact his or Sandra Carlisle's
office regarding a convenient time for a meeting. Parrish said it was the
City's responsibility to contact him.
21.8 Helenclair Southern, resident of 1540 Stephens Avenue, addressed the Board.
Mrs. Southern said she had been asked for one ten foot easement from the
center of a culvert, and another ten foot easement so work can be done. She
said this would absolutely ruin her property and that of the man next door.
She said she thought a 20 foot ditch would be dangerous to toddlers and
could create a terrible health problem. She asked the Directors if any of
them would consider selling their property for 15 cents a square foot. She
said that, although she was told verbally that this will still be her
•
January 20, 1987
property, this was not "what the paper said". Mrs. Southern said a 20 foot
easement would take 3/4 of her garage, and will take trees off her property.
She said she felt all the people in the area were cooperative and want to do
what's right, but would like for this "to be a two-way deal".
Director Bumpass told Mrs. Southern that only a five foot drainage swale was
planned for her property, and a ten foot easement would only be used to
drive equipment to the site and build the drainage structure, after which
that easement would no longer be needed. Director Bumpass explained that,
after construction, the areawould be a grassy Swale which could be mowed.
Mrs. Southern said that by using a grassy swale, the City was throwing its
money "down a rat hole".
Project engineer Ervan Wimberly said a grassy swale will work if it is
maintained. He explained the plan was to construct a five foot flat
,bottomed ditch, to be sided, seeded and stabilized, with the sides at a
gentle slope so it can be mowed. Wimberly said it is hoped the residents
will maintain it just as they do their yards. He said the reason for a 20
foot permanent easement is so the ditch can wind around as many big trees as
can be saved. Wimberly said a lot of the drainage problems existing in the
area are there because the ditch has not been maintained. He said that a
part of the project, north of S. Maxwell Drive, has been nicknamed "Lake
Maxwell" because the water.in the yards is so deep. Wimberly assured Mrs.
Southern that even though the easement technically would be in part of her
garage, work will not be done in her garage. He said to redescribe the
easement would increase the cost of the project.
Director Martin asked if a grass swale was commonly used for a drainage
ditch and would be effective. Wimberly said it was common, was effective,
but must be maintained. He said if the property owners don't maintain it,
then the easements will; allow the City to provide maintenance. Wimberly
said this will be less of a safety hazard to the children.
Mayor Johnson said because this involves federal funds and appraisals were
done, federal guidelines only allow payment of 10% over the appraised
values.
James Parrish said he thought "filling" would take care of the Lake Maxwell
problem, as that property is lower than the property surrounding it.
Parrish said he was giving the City four feet off the front of Lot 2 for a
sidewalk, 15 feet off the back for a permanent easement, and nothing off the
lot behind his property. He said the City is taking a 10', 20' and 15'
easement off Lot 23 which he owns, and nothing off the adjacent lot.
Parrish said, in addition, there is a 10' sewer easement on the north side
of this lot. He said the City was offering him 15 cents per foot. Director
Hess commented that the size of Lot 23 was so much larger than other lots,
he did not think the City was asking for an unequivocal amount in easements.
22
22._
22.2
22.3
22.4
22.5
22.6
1
23
January 20, 1987
44 1 Mayor Johnson suggested a meeting be scheduled with James Parrish, Sandra
Carlisle, Ervan Wimberly and Jim McCord for Monday, January 26 at 10:00 a.m.
in Sandra Carlisle's office.
23.2 Wimberly emphasized that the City is requesting easements, not taking
property from the landowners. He explained that the easements would give
the City the right to go on the property and maintain the ditch if the
property owners do not do so. He pointed out that the easements would not
affect any building plans the owners might have, as the easements are all
located within the building setback area.
23.3 Director Lancaster, seconded by Martin, made a motion to proceed with
condemnation. Lancaster commented that negotiations can continue in an
attempt to work out a settlement.
23.4 Director Bumpass said hewaswilling to support the condemnations as he
thought they were necessary in order to get the entire project completed.
23.5
Director Hess said he did not think the condemnations would impact the value
of the owners' property in a detrimental way, or he would vote in
opposition.
6 Director Johnson reported that a settlement had been reached today for one
of the 17 tracts of land involved (Tract No. 3).
23.7 Upon roll call, the motion passed, 6-1, with Marinoni voting in the
minority.
23.8
23.9
RESOLUTION NO.6_87
APPEARS ON PAGE OF ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION BOOK
FAYETTEVILLE GENERAL PLAN
The Mayor introduced a. recommendation from the Planning Commission that
proposals be sought for the preparation of the new Fayetteville General
Plan.
Ernest Jacks, Chairman of the Planning Commission, told the Board a
committee of the Planning Commission had worked on this issue for a long
time, and brings before the Board their recommendation for a "Scope of Work"
which they propose be put in bid form and advertised for proposals. He
added that community facilities are not included, as parks will be taken
care of by the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board and school locations by
the School Board. He noted that the Planning Commission itself has
rewritten the subdivision regulations, and has a committee working on
zoning. Jacks said, of the five elements that normally compose a General
Plan - the land use study and map, the zoning ordinance and zoning map,
subdivision regulations, master street plan, and community facilities - the
scope of work will take care of all of these, with the exception of