Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
[MUSIC]
[BANGS GAVEL]
>> WE'LL CALL THE FAYETTEVILLE
CITY COUNCIL APRIL 23rd
MEETING TO ORD.
WE APPRECIATE EVERYONE BEING
HERE WITH US TONIGHT.
AND WE ASK THAT YOU STAND FOR
OUR INVOCATION LED TONIGHT BY
REVEREND WHO IS A SENIOR PASTOR
AT THE NEW LIFE COMMUNITY CHURCH
OF FAYETTEVILLE.
AND IF YOU'LL REMAIN STANDING
FOR OUR PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
>> LET US BOW DOWN OUR HEAD AND
THEN PRAY.
DEAR WISE AND LOVING FATHER,
FIRST LET ME SAY THANK YOU ON
BEHALF OF ALL WHO ARE GATHERED
HERE TODAY.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR MANY AND
ABUNDANT BLESSINGS.
THANK YOU FOR LIFE ITSELF, AND
FOR THE MEASURES OF HEALTH WE
NEED TO FULFILL OUR CALLINGS.
FOR SUSTANCE AND FOR FRIENDSHIP.
THANK YOU FOR THE ABILITY TO BE
INVOLVED IN THIS WORK AND FOR
THE HONOR OF BEARING APPROPRIATE
RESPONSIBILITIES.
THANKS AS WELL FOR THE FREEDOM
TO LIVE OUT IN THIS COUNTRY.
THANK YOU FOR LOVING US EVEN SO
FROM YOUR BOUNDLESS AND GRACIOUS
NATURE.
IN THE SCRIPTURES, YOU HAVE SAID
THAT -- OBEY THE GOVERNING
AUTHORITIES SINCE YOU HAVE
ESTABLISHED THOSE VERY
AUTHORITIES TO PROMOTE PEACE AND
ORDER AND JUSTICE.
THEREFORE, LORD, WE PRAY FOR OUR
MAYOR, FOR THE VARIOUS LEVELS OF
CITY OFFICERS, AND IN
PARTICULAR, FOR THIS ASSEMBLY
COUNCIL.
I'M ASKING THAT YOU WOULD
GRACIOUSLY GRANT THERNLINGS --
THEM, WISH THEM, GUIDE THEM IN
THE CONFLICTING INTEREST OF OUR
TIMES.
LORD, A SENSE OF THE WELFARE AND
THE TRUE NEED OF OUR PEOPLE.
KIDS THIRSTY FOR JUSTICE AND
RIGHTEOUSNESS.
CONFIDENCE IN WHAT IS GOOD AND
FITTING.
THE ABILITY TO WALK TOGETHER IN
HARMONY.
EVEN WHEN THERE IS HONEST
DISAGREEMENT.
PERSONAL PEACE IN THEIR LIVES,
AND JOY IN THEIR TASKS.
WE PRAY FOR THE AGENDA SET
BEFORE THEM TODAY.
PLEASE GIVE ASSURANCE OVER WHAT
WOULD PLEASE YOU AND WHAT WOULD
BENEFIT THOSE WHO LEAD AND WHAT
IN AND AROUND OUR BELOVED CITY
OF FAYETTEVILLE IT IS IN YOUR
MOST PRECIOUS NAME JESUS CHRIST
WE PRAY.
AMEN.
[FLAG SALUTE]
>> WE HAVE SEVERAL RECOGNITIONS
THAT WE'D LIKE TO SHARE WITH YOU
TONIGHT, AND WE'LL BEGIN BY
CALLING MS. ROBERTA WITH THE
NATIONAL ORGANIZATION OF WOMEN
TO THE PODIUM.
>> GOOD EVENING.
>> GOOD EVENING.
>> I NEED STACY SANDERS TO JOIN
ME HERE.
MAYOR CHAVONNE, COUNCIL MEMBERS
AND STAFF AND LADIES AND
GENTLEMEN, I THANK YOU VERY MUCH
FOR ALLOWING ME TO COME BEFORE
YOU THIS EVENING.
I KNOW YOU HAVE A LONG AGENDA.
FAYETTEVILLE NOW, THE NATIONAL
ORGANIZATION FOR WOMEN, IS A
LOCAL BRANCH OF THE STATE AND
NATIONAL ORGANIZATION.
I HAVE SOME FELLOW MEMBERS HERE.
I WOULD LIKE THOSE MEMBERS TO
STAND IF YOU WOULD.
THANK YOU.
WE WORK TO ELIMINATE
DISCRIMINATION, PARTICULARLY
AGAINST WOMEN WHERE WE SEE IT.
SOME OF YOU MAY REMEMBER OUR
MARCH DOWN HAY STREET FOR
WOMEN'S VOTES LAST AUGUST, WHICH
WAS A CELEBRATION OF THE PASSAGE
OF THE 19th AMENDMENT TO THE
CONSTITUTION CONFIRMING WOMEN'S
RIGHT TO VOTE.
HOWEVER, WE ARE NOT ALWAYS
LOOKING BACKWARDS.
WE LOOK FORWARD TO THE COMING
POLITICAL SEASON, TO IMPROVE THE
STATUS OF WOMEN.
WE FOLLOW DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
CASES IN THE DISTRICT COURT TO
SEE THAT JUSTICE ACHIEVED IN
DIFFICULT CIRCUMSTANCES.
WE'VE DEMONSTRATED, LOBBIED,
WRITTEN LETTERS TO THE EDITOR,
AND SPOKEN OUT WHERE POSSIBLE
ABOUT DISCRIMINATION.
BUT WE ARE HERE TONIGHT TO
PRESENT OUR SUSAN B. ANTHONY
AWARD TO OUR 2012 HONOREE.
FIRST, I'LL TELL YOU A LITTLE
BIT ABOUT SUDESSEN B. -- SUSAN
B. ANTHONY.
SUSAN B. ANTHONY WAS A PROMINENT
CIVIL RIGHTS LEADER WHO PLAYED A
PIVOTAL ROLE IN THE 19th
CENTURY WOMEN'S RIGHTS MOVEMENT.
TO INTRODUCE WOMEN'S SUFFRAGE
INTO THE UNITED STATES.
SHE TRAVELED THE UNITED STATES
AND EUROPE AND GAVE 75 TO 100
SPEECHES EVERY YEAR ON WOMEN'S
RIGHTS FOR 45 YEARS.
SUSAN EVEN VOTED IN ROCHESTER,
NEW YORK, IN 1872 IN THE
PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION, WHICH WAS
ILLEGAL.
OFFICIALS INDICTED HER, AND
LEVVIED A FINE.
BUT I'M PROUD TO SAY SHE NEVER
PAID IT.
NOR DID SHE GO TO JAIL.
SHE WAS BORN FEBRUARY 15th,
1820, AND DIED MARCH 13th,
1906.
THAT WAS SEVERAL YEARS BEFORE
WOMEN ACTUALLY GOT THE SUFFRAGE.
ON FEBRUARY 16th, 2012, WE
CELEBRATED HER 1 92nd
BIRTHDAY.
EACH YEAR WE CHOOSE A WOMAN WHO
HAS ACHIEVED IN NONTRADITIONAL
WAYS.
THIS YEAR WE NOT ONLY CHOSE A
WOMAN WHO HAS ACHIEVED IN
NONTRADITIONAL WAYS, BUT WE HAVE
ALSO CHOSEN A PUBLIC SERVANT WHO
GOES ABOVE AND BEYOND HER CALL
OF DUTY EVERY DAY.
SO THIS IS A TRIBUTE NOT ONLY TO
THE FAYETTEVILLE POLICE
DEPARTMENT HOMELESS PROJECT
OFFICER STACY SANDERS, BUT ALSO
TO ALL THE OTHER PUBLIC SERVANTS
WHO TOIL EVERY DAY FOR ALL OF US
WITH VERY LITTLE NOTICE.
OFFICER SANDERS HAS SERVED IN
THE U.S. ARMY.
SHE HAS A BACHELOR OF CRIMINAL
JUSTICE FROM FAYETTEVILLE STATE.
HAS WORKED FOR THE FAYETTEVILLE
POLICE DEPARTMENT FOR ALMOST 12
YEARS.
SHE HAS BEEN THE HOMELESS
PROJECT OFFICER FOR EIGHT YEARS.
AND SHE HAS A BEAUTIFUL
DAUGHTER.
I AM PROUD TO PRESENT OFFICER
SANDERS THIS CERTIFICATE, WHICH
READS THIS CERTIFICATE IS
AWARDED TO OFFICER STACY SANDERS
FOR SERVICE TO HOMELESS PEOPLE
OF FAYETTEVILLE.
[APPLAUSE]
THANK YOU, IT IS WELL DESERVED.
SHE HAS ALSO RECEIVED OUR SUSAN
B. AWARD, WHICH IS A SUSAN B.
DOLLAR TURNED INTO A PENDANT.
CONGRATULATIONS, OFFICER
SANDERS, AND CONGRATULATIONS
CITY COUNCIL.
YOU HAVE A GREAT EMPLOYEE.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.
[APPLAUSE]
>> WE WOULD NOW LIKE TO
INTRODUCE TWO VERY SPECIAL
AMBASSADORS OF OUR ALL-AMERICA
CITY AND I AM ASKING CAN YOU BE
BOBBY HURST WHO WON THE CONTEST
TONIGHT TO JOIN US AS WE INVITE
UP MISS FAYETTEVILLE 2012 CASEY
HALL AND MISS FAYETTEVILLE
OUTSTANDING TEEN 2012 EMMA
CARTER.
LET ME TELL YOU A LITTLE BIT
ABOUT MISS HALL.
SHE ATTENDS CAMPBELL UNIVERSITY
WHERE SHE IS A SENIOR PURSUING A
DEGREE IN COMMUNICATION STUDIES
WITH A CONCENTRATION IN PUBLIC
RELATIONS AND HEALTH
COMMUNICATION.
UPON GRADUATION, SHE PLANS TO
OBTAIN A MASTER OF SCIENCE
DEGREE IN COMMUNICATION FROM
NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY
WITH THE HOPE OF WORKING IN
PUBLIC RELATIONS FOR A NONPROFIT
ORGANIZATION.
CASEY HAS COMPLETED 15 YEARS OF
DANCE INSTRUCTION, 10 YEARS OF
VOCAL INSTRUCTION, AND HAS
PARTICIPATED IN NUMEROUS PLAYS
AND MUSICALS.
FOR MANY PERFORMANCES INCLUDE
CARNEGIE HALL IN NEW YORK CITY
AS A MEMBER OF THE NATIONAL
YOUTH CHOIR, MACY'S THANKSGIVING
DAY PARADE AND DISNEY WORLD.
HER PERSONAL PLATFORM STAND UP
TO CANCER IS A CAMPAIGN DEICATED
TO RAISING FUNDS FOR FINDING A
CURE FOR CANCER.
SHE'LL BE REPRESENTING
FAYETTEVILLE IN THE UPCOMING
MISS NORTH CAROLINA PAGEANT IN
JUNE.
MISS CASEY HALL.
[APPLAUSE]
>> I'M GOING TO TILT THIS UP
BECAUSE I HAVE HEELS ON.
I WOULD FIRST LIKE TO THANK
EVERYONE ON THE BOARD FOR HAVING
US HERE TONIGHT.
WE ARE SO HONORED THAT YOU WOULD
TAKE TIME OF YOUR BUSY
SCHEDULES.
AND MAYOR CHAVONNE, I MET HIM AT
THE USO SHOW IN DECEMBER.
I RECOGNIZED HIS FACE RECENTLY
AFTER HIS ELECTION SO I WALKED
AND I SAID HE IS NOT GOING TO
WANT TO TALK TO ME BUT I AM
GOING TO TALK TO HIM INSTEAD SO
I TAPPED ON HIS SHOULDER AND
INTRODUCED MYSELF AND HE WAS SO
KIND AND GRACIOUS.
AND JUST SO YOU KNOW ONE OF YOUR
OWN WAS OUR JUDGES WHO HELPED
CHOOSE HER.
WE WOULD LIKE TO THANK HER.
OMYA AND I HAVE PLAT -- SO EMMA
AND I HAVE PLATFORMS.
MINE IS STAND UP TO CANCER,
AGAIN LIKE HE SAID WE RAISE
MONEY AND 100% OF PROCEEDS GO
DIRECTLY TO CANCER RESEARCH.
AND THE WAY THEY DO THAT IS THEY
HAVE A FILM INSTITUTE DONATES
ALL MONEY TO GO TO PUBLIC
RELATIONS EFFORTS WHICH IS WHAT
I HOPE TO DO, SO THEY TAKE CARE
OF THE PR, YOU KNOW, HELPING TO
GET CELEBRITIES INVOLVED, YOU
SEE COMMERCIALS, AND THAT'S
REALLY HOW THEY GO ABOUT THAT.
SO THEY CAN DONATE 100% OF
PROCEEDS AND I KNOW IF WE
ENCOURAGE THE FILM INSTITUTE TO
KEEP DOING THAT, WE CAN CONTINUE
TO HAVE THAT MONEY TO RAISE
AWARENESS FOR NEW CARCINOGENS
AND TO TRY TO HELP FIND
SOMETHING THAT CAN COMBAT THOSE
NEW CAR -- CAR -- CARCINOGENS.
>> LET ME TELL YOU MISS CARTER.
DAUGHTER OF BOBBY AND SHAROANA
CARTER A HOME SCHOOLED 9th
GRADER WHO ENJOYS SINGING AND
PLAYING SEVERAL DIFFERENT
INSTRUMENTS.
SHE LOVES TO TRAVEL AND IS
INVOLVED WITH HER FAMILY'S
SOUTHERN GOSPEL MINISTRY AND THE
PRAISE BAND AT HER CHURCH.
SHE ENJOYS DANCE, PHOTOGRAPHY,
AND WRITING.
SHE VIES FOR THE TITLE OF MISS
CAROLINA TEEN IN JUNE 2012.
HER PLATFORM IS MICROCEPHALY
AWARENESS WHERE THE HEAD
CIRCUMFERENCE A LESS THAN IT
SHOULD BE CAUSING SEVERE
DEVELOPMENTAL DELAYS.
CONGRATULATIONS, MISS CARTER.
DO YOU HAVE SOMETHING TO SHARE
WITH US?
[APPLAUSE]
>> THANK YOU EVERYONE FOR HAVING
ME HERE TODAY.
THANK YOU THE MAYOR AND CITIZENS
OF FAYETTEVILLE.
IT IS AN HONOR TO BE HERE
TONIGHT.
MY PLATFORM IS MICROCEPHALY
AWARENESS.
CHILDREN ARE BORN OR DEVELOP A
SYNDROME WHERE THEIR SKULL DOES
NOT GROW.
WHICH PUTS PRESSURE ON THEIR
BRAIN AND CAUSES ABNORMALITIES
AND DEVELOPMENT ISSUES AND SUCH
AS SEIZURES AND THINGS SUCH
AS -- AND SO IT IS GREAT TO BE
HERE TONIGHT AND I AM VERY
PASSIONATE ABOUT MY PLATFORM AND
I LOOK FORWARD TO REPRESENTING
THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE UNTIL
OCTOBER WHEN WE HAVE TO GIVE UP
OUR CROWNS BUT IT IS AN HONOR
AND I LOOK FORWARD TO THE NEXT
MONTH TO COME.
BUT I THANK YOU SO MUCH.
[APPLAUSE]
>> I'D ASK MR. HURST TO WEAR HIS
HEELS.
HE JUST DIDN'T DO IT.
>> OKAY WE WOULD LIKE TO CALL ON
THE MEMBER OF THE NORTH CAROLINA
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES FOR A
VERY SPECIAL PRESENTATION.
REPRESENTATIVE GLAZIER?
[APPLAUSE]
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH,
MR. MAYOR, MEMBERS OF CITY
COUNCIL, AND CITY STAFF.
ALL OF US WHO ARE IN PUBLIC
SERVICE KNOW WHAT GOVERNMENT CAN
AND CAN'T DO.
AND WE KNOW THE LIMITATIONS.
AND WE KNOW THAT THERE ARE
TREMENDOUS NEEDS AND SERVICES
THAT HAVE TO BE MADE AVAILABLE
TO THE CITIZENS OF OUR CITY, AND
OUR STATE, AND THE ONLY WAY TO
DO THAT IS TO ENGAGE OUR
COMMUNITY IN OPENING THEIR
HEARTS AND THEIR WALLETS ON
OCCASION TO, TO THE SERVICE OF
ALL OF OUR FELLOW HUMAN BEINGS.
SOME PEOPLE ARE SIMPLY SPECIAL
IN HOW THEY ARE ABLE TO
TRANSFORM A COMMUNITY.
AND TO OPEN MORE HOMES AND
HEARTS AND CONNECTIONS THAN
ALMOST ANYONE ELSE THOUGHT
POSSIBLE.
THERE ARE CERTAIN PEOPLE WHO
SIMPLY BY THEIR DEEDS AS WELL AS
THEIR WORDS ARE ABLE TO REMIND
US ON A DAILY BASIS THAT OUR
RESPONSIBILITY IS TO EACH OTHER.
AND IT IS MY REALLY TRUE
PRIVILEGE TO BE HONORING ONE OF
THOSE VERY SPECIAL PEOPLE IN OUR
STATE THIS EVENING.
I'D LIKE TO CALL UP IF I COULD
JUDY DAWKINS.
[APPLAUSE]
FOR THOSE -- AND THERE'S VERY
FEW IN THIS ROOM IN FACT VERY
FEW IN OUR CITY WHO DON'T KNOW
JUDY.
JUDY BEGAN HER CAREER IN
ASSISTING PEOPLE VERY MUCH
QUIETLY AND PRIVATELY AND
WORKING AT FT. BRAGG AS A CIVIL
SERVICE OFFICER FOR MANY YEARS
AND THEN TRANSFERRED TODAY --
TRANSFERRED TO THE VETERANS
OFFICE WHERE SHE MADE SURE THERE
WERE SERVICES FOR LITERALLY TENS
OF THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE.
AND THEN SHE RETIED -- RETIRED
SORT OF FOR SIX WEEKS BEFORE THE
CITY ENGAGED HER IN WHAT WE KNOW
AS ONE OF THE GREATEST VOLUNTEER
PROGRAMS AND EFFORTS IN THE CITY
OF FAYETTEVILLE OR IN ANY CITY
OF THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA.
FOR 10 YEARS JUDY SERVED AS
DIRECTOR AND IN EVERY WAY THE
PERSON WHO MADE THE RSVP PROGRAM
WHAT IT IS.
IT SAVED THE CITY TENS OF
MILLIONS OF DOLLARS OVER THAT
10-YEAR PERIOD.
IT ENGAGED THOUSANDS OF CITIZENS
IN SERVING THEIR FELLOW MAN.
IT CREATED A CIRCUMSTANCE THAT
SAVED PEOPLE'S LIVES, AND
TRANSFORMED VERY SEVERELY
INJURED AND VERY SEVERELY NEEDY
PEOPLE INTO PEOPLE WHO HAD
SELF-ESTEEM AND HAD THE CAPACITY
TO LIVE PRODUCTIVE LIVES, AND
SHE DID THAT EVERY DAY BY MAKING
SURE ALL OF THE REST OF US KNEW
THE REASON FOR PART OF OUR BEING
WAS TO HELP EACH OTHER.
SO IT IS MY TRUE HONOR AND
PRIVILEGE THIS EVENING AND ON
BEHALF OF THE CUMBERLAND COUNTY
LEGISLATIVE DELEGATION AND
TONIGHT WITH THE POWER VESTED IN
ME BY THE GOVERNOR OF THE STATE
OF NORTH CAROLINA, BEVERLY
PURDUE, IT IS MY HONOR TO AWARD
YOU ON BEHALF OF THE GOVERNOR OF
THIS STATE, THE MOST RECENT AND
TO MAKE YOU THE NEWEST HONOREE
IN THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
OF THE HIGHEST CIVILIAN ORDER
ACCORDED TO ANY CIVILIAN IN OUR
STATE, THE ORDER OF THE LONG
LEAF PINE.
CONGRATULATIONS.
[APPLAUSE]
>> THANK YOU.
FRANK TOLD ME I WAS GOING TO
A -- HE SAID I HAVE A SURPRISE.
HE SAID YOU MAY HAVE A SURPRISE
BIRTHDAY PARTY TONIGHT.
THAT'S ALL HE SAID.
IT'S VERY RARE THAT I CAN'T
THINK OF SOMETHING TO SAY, BUT
WHEN I SAW MY DAUGHTER AND MY
FRIENDS HERE, I THOUGHT WELL
WHAT ARE THEY DOING IN CITY HALL
IF WE'RE GOING TO GO DOWNTOWN TO
EAT SOMEWHERE FOR MY BIRTHDAY.
BUT I CANNOT THANK YOU ENOUGH.
I KNOW EACH ONE OF YOU, I ASKED
YOU TO -- I INVITED YOU EVERY
YEAR TO THE RSVP BANQUET.
TONY, I THINK YOU ONLY MISSED
ONE, AND THAT WAS BECAUSE YOU
COULD NOT HELP IT.
YOU SENT SOMEONE ELSE.
AND I I KNOW I ASKED A LOT OF YU
TO PARTICIPATE VOLUNTARILY ON
BEHALF OF THE VOLUNTEERS, AND
YOU DID.
AND I CAN'T THANK YOU ENOUGH FOR
HELPING OUR VOLUNTEERS.
I'M NOT THE DIRECTOR NOW.
I THOUGHT SEVERAL TIMES LAST
YEAR WHAT IN THE WORLD DID I DO
WHEN I SAID I WAS GOING TO
RETIRE.
I WILL TELL YOU THIS.
I AM VOLUNTEERING IN OUR CITY
AND COUNTY NOW, AND I WOULD TELL
YOU I'VE LIVED HERE OVER 50
YEARS.
I LOVE FAYETTEVILLE AND I LOVE
CUMBERLAND COUNTY.
I LOVE OUR CITY, OUR CHURCHES,
OUR EVERYTHING.
AND THANK YOU SO MUCH.
ESPECIALLY RICK.
HE CAME EVERY YEAR TWO EXCEPT
FOR ONE.
THANK YOU.
THANK YOU FOR IT.
[APPLAUSE]
>> IT'S GOING TO BE HARD TO TOP
THAT.
WE'LL BEGIN BY APPROVAL OF
TONIGHT'S AGENDA.
MR. ARP.
>> MOTION TO APPROVE.
>> IS THERE A SECOND.
>> SECOND.
>> THANK YOU, MR. HURST.
IS THERE A DISCUSSION ON THAT?
LET ME ASK FOR YOUR VOTE ON
THAT, PLEASE.
OKAY.
THAT'S UNANIMOUS.
WE'LL BEGIN WITH ITEM 5.0 WHICH
IS TONIGHT'S CONSENT AGENDA.
SO A MOTION?
>> MOTION TO APPROVE.
>> MR. HURST, THANK YOU.
IS THERE A SECOND?
MR. ARP, THANKS.
ANY DISCUSSION ON THAT?
MAY I ASK FOR YOUR VOTE ON THE
CONSENT AGENDA, PLEASE 124 ALL
ALL RIGHT.
THAT CARRIES.
THOSE IN FAVOR.
WE'LL TURN NOW TO OUR SERIES OF
PUBLIC HEARINGS, AND LET'S READ
THE GUIDELINE FOR A PUBLIC
HEARINGS AS WE BEGIN.
FIRST OF ALL, EACH SIDE WILL
HAVE A TOTAL OF 15 MINUTES TO
PRESENT YOUR POSITION WHETHER
YOU ARE FOR OR AGAINST.
INDIVIDUAL SPEAKERS WILL HAVE
ONE TIME TO SPEAK, AND WILL BE
LIMITED TO THREE MINUTES EACH
UNLESS BY PREVIOUS ARRANGEMENT A
SINGLE SPOKESMAN IS DESIGNATED
IN WHICH CASE THE SPOKESMAN MAY
USE THE ENTIRE 15 MINUTES.
WHEN YOU HEAR THE BEEP AND SEE
THE LIGHT LOCATED ON THE PODIUM
CHANGE FROM GREEN TO YELLOW,
THAT MEANS THERE'S APPROXIMATELY
30 SECONDS LEFT OF THE THREE
MINUTES.
AND WHEN YOU HEAR THE BEEP AND
SEE THE TIMER LOCATED ON THE
PODIUM BLINK AND CHANGE FROM
YELLOW TO RED, THAT MEANS THE
FULL THREE MINUTES HAS EXPIRED.
WE ASK THAT WHEN YOUR NAME IS
CALLED, YOU COME TO THE PODIUM
AND STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS
CLEARLY SO WE CAN MAKE NOTE OF
IT FOR THE RECORD.
AND WE'LL BEGIN WITH ITEM 6.1,
P12-16F.
MR. HARMON, THANK YOU FOR BEING
HERE, SIR.
>> EVENING, MR. MAYOR, COUNCIL.
FIRST CASE WE HAVE IS AN INITIAL
ZONING.
REQUEST WILL GO FROM A C3 COUNTY
ZONING DISTRICT TO HI IN THE
CITY.
PROPERTY'S LOCATED AT 4433 YOU
CAN SEE ON THE AERIAL MAP WHERE
THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED.
SOUTH SIDE OF I-95.
AS YOU RECALL, I-95 IN THIS AREA
IS OUR BOUNDARY FOR THE MIA SO
THIS PROPERTY IS OUTSIDE OF THE
CITY'S MUNICIPALITY INFLUENCE
AREA.
AT THIS POINT THERE IS ALL
COUNTY SURROUNDING IT.
THERE IS NO CITY LIMITS REALLY
ANYWHERE TO BE FOUND CLOSE TO
THIS ONE.
CURRENTLY IT IS COMMERCIAL.
IT IS WRECKAGE AND SALVAGE YARD.
THAT'S ACTUALLY WHAT BRINGS YOU
THE PETITION TONIGHT, WHICH WILL
BE A LATER MATTER.
THE OWNER WISHES TO STAY ON THE
WRECKER ROTATION LIST FOR THE
CITY, AND THAT'S WHY HE'S ASKING
THAT THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY BE
ANNEXED.
IT'S CURRENT PROPERTY THAT IS
INSIDE THE CITY IS BEING BOUGHT
OUT FOR HIM FOR A ROAD WIDENING
PROJECT.
AND SO HE'S WANTING TO USE
PROPERTY HE ALREADY OWNS OUT IN
THE COUNTY FOR IT TO BECOME PART
OF THE CITY AND BE ABLE TO
MAINTAIN HIS WRECKER SERVICE.
THE LAND USE PLAN DOES CALL FOR
HEAVY COMMERCIAL ON THIS
PARTICULAR PROPERTY, THE GREEN
BEING CONSERVATION AND THE HEAVY
PURPLE BEING HEAVY INDUSTRIAL.
THAT'S MAINLY SAND PIT AREA AT
THE END OF THE ROAD.
FILL DIRT AND STUFF.
BUT THIS AREA, THERE'S ACTUALLY
MORE THAN ONE PROPERTY THAT THE
OWNER HAS PETITIONED TONIGHT
THAT CONTAINS THE SALVAGE YARD.
THIS ALSO DO BUT HE HAS ONLY
PETITIONED THE ONE THAT HAS HIS
GARAGE ON IT.
>> THE ZONING COMMISSION AND
STAFF RECOMMEND THE PROPERTY NOT
BE ZONED INTO CITY.
ZONING COMMISSION AND STAFF ARE
NOT IN FAVOR OF THIS PROPERTY
BEING ANNEXED.
JUST AS A REMINDER, THE FINAL
ACTION ON THIS ITEM WILL OCCUR
AS PART OF THE MOTION TO APPROVE
OR DENY THE PETITION FOR
ANNEXATION.
AND THEN JUST AS A SIDE ROAD, IF
COUNCIL DECIDES THIS IS A
PROPERTY THAT THEY THINK IS
APPROPRIATE TO BE AN BED INTO --
ANNEXED INTO THE CITY, STAFF
WOULD RECOMMEND IT BE ANNEXED
UNDER THE HI DISTRICT SINCE THE
UDO REQUIREMENT FOR SALVAGE
YARDS IS THAT THEY BE LOCATED IN
THOSE HI DISTRICTS.
ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF
AT THIS POINT?
>> WE HAVE ONE.
MR. ARP?
>> I'M SORRY.
I APOLOGIZE.
>> STAND BY.
WE WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.
MA'AM?
>> SO WE HAVE ONE SPEAKER FOR
THIS ITEM.
MR. LARRY BRICKMAN. -- GRIFFIN.
>> MR. GRIFFIN?
>> MR. LARRY BRIGMAN.
>> MUST NOT BE HERE, MA'AM.
>> OKAY.
I HAVE NO FURTHER SPEAKERS.
>> OKAY.
WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING
AND ENTERTAIN ANY ADDITIONAL
QUESTIONS FROM STAFF.
OR A MOTION. MR. BATES?
>> MR. HARMON, WOULD YOU -- YOU
SAID THAT HIS PROPERTY CURRENT
PROPERTY HAS NOW BEEN BOUGHT OUT
FOR WIDE ROADENING.
WOULD YOU HAPPEN TO KNOW WHAT
ROAD PROJECT THAT IS?
>> SOUTHERN AVENUE WIDENING.
HE'S AT THE CORNER OF SOUTHERN
AVENUE AND MOUNTAIN DRIVE.
>> MM-HMM.
>> AND BECAUSE HE'S A CORNER
PROPERTY, THEY'RE NOT ONLY
TAKING THE PROPERTY TO WIDEN
SOUTHERN BUT THEY'RE ALSO DOING
SOME WIDENING TO THE
INTERSECTION AS WELL SO BETWEEN
THE TWO WIDENINGS THERE FOR THE
SIME PROJECT, HE'S BEING BOUGHT
OUT.
>> ALL RIGHT.
THANK YOU.
>> ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS?
IS THERE A MOTION?
MR. HURST?
>> MR. MAYOR, I MOVE TO DENY THE
ZONING REQUEST.
>> OKAY.
SECOND BY MR. BATES.
ANY DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION,
COUNCIL?
MAY I ASK FOR YOUR VOTE, PLEASE.
THAT MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY.
THANK YOU.
WE'LL MOVE NOW TO ITEM 6.2,
P12-17F.
>> NEXT CASE WE HAVE BEFORE YOU
THE REQUESTED ACTION, ANOTHER
REQUEST FOR.
YOU CAN SEE HERE ON THE AERIAL
PHOTO WHERE THE PROPERTY IS
LOCATED.
HERE'S CLAUDE LEE ROAD.
THIS IS THE INTERSECTION OF
CLAUDE LEE AND SNOW HILL.
YOU COME OFF OF SNOW HILL DOWN
AMBITION ROAD, AND THAT TAKES
YOU DOWN TO TIP TOP, WHICH IS
DOWN HERE AT THE BOTTOM.
CURRENTLY IT IS ALL COUNTY
SURROUNDING THIS.
THE PROPERTY, PHASE ONE OF THE
SAME SUBDIVISION THIS AREA HERE
WAS ACTUALLY PETITIONED FOR
ANNEXATION ABOUT FIVE YEARS AGO.
THAT PETITION WAS NOT ACTED
UPON.
AND AT THIS POINT, FOR PHASE
TWO, THEY ARE COMING IN ASKING
FOR ANNEXATION OF THAT.
AND FOR THE PURPOSE OF HAVING
WATER AND SEWER AVAILABLE
THROUGH PWC.
AS YOU CAN SEE ON THE MAP, THERE
ARE R-10 COUNTY ZONING HERE TO
THE SOUTH.
SOME R6 ZONING TO THE EAST.
MORE OF THE R10 HERE TO THE
NORTH, AND A LITTLE TO THE WEST.
AND THEN R15 ON THIS SIDE.
ALL OF THIS IS PLATTED
DEVELOPMENT, BUT IT'S VERY OLD
AND NOTHING EVER HAS COME OF IT.
NO ROADS OR ANYTHING WERE EVER
BUILT.
PROBABLY DUE TO THE FACT THAT AT
THAT TIME THIS WAS WAY OUT IN
THE COUNTY AND WOULD'VE HAD TO
HAVE WATER AND SEPTIC SYSTEMS,
AND IT PROBABLY WOULD NOT
SUPPORT THEM AT THAT POINT.
ON THE LAND USE MAP, MAINLY
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AROUND
THIS PROPERTY AND VACANT
PROPERTIES.
THIS PROPERTY HERE, HERE, PART
OF IT DOES HAVE COMMERCIAL ON
IT.
THEN MORE.
THIS IS RESEARCH DRIVE HERE IS
WHERE THE INDUSTRIAL PARK IS
LOCATED ON.
AND THEN AGAIN THE LAND USE PLAN
CALLS FOR LOW DENSITY
RESIDENTIAL THROUGHOUT MOST OF T
OF THIS AREA.
CONSERVATION AREA HERE IN THE
GREEN.
YOU CAN SEE LAND FOR THE
INDUSTRIAL PARK BACK HERE IN THE
PURPLE.
AND THEN SOME MEDIUM DENSITY
RESIDENTIAL OUT HERE ON CLAUDE
LEE AND THEN COMMERCIAL ON
CLAUDE LEE AND RESEARCH DRIVE AS
WELL.
THE ZONING COMMISSION AND STAFF
RECOMMENDED THAT IT IS ANNEXED.
IT SHOULD BECOME AN SF-10
DISTRICT BASED ON SF-10 BEING
THE CLOSED EQUIVALENT ZONING TO
WHAT THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY
ZONED IN THE COUNTY.
AND JUST A NOTE AGAIN THAT THE
FINAL ACTION ON THIS ITEM WILL
OCCUR AS PART OF A MOTION TO
APPROVE OR DENY THE PETITION FOR
ANNEXATION.
ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF
ON THIS?
>> MR. HARMON DID YOU SAY IF
THIS WAS IN THE MIA OR NOT.
>> I'M SORRY, I DID NOT.
BUT THIS IS IN THE MIA.
THIS IS NORTH OFF OF CLAUDE LEE
FROM WHERE THE OTHER PROPERTY
WAS WE JUST LOOKED AT.
>> ARE THERE ADDITIONAL
QUESTIONS FOR STAFF AT THIS
TIME?
OKAY, SIR.
STAND BY -- I'M SORRY, GO AHEAD,
MR. CRISP.
>> I WILL WAIT FOR AFTER THE
HEARING,.
>> FIRST SPEAKER IS MR. DELL
CRAWFORD.
>> DELL CRAWFORD.
CRAWFORD DESIGN COMPANY.
116 NORTH COOL SPRING STREET
FAYETTEVILLE.
I AM REPRESENTING THE OWNER, AND
I'LL BE BRIEF ON THE REZONING MY
CLIENT IS CERTAINLY IN FAVOR OF
THE REZONING IF THE ANNEXATION
GOES THROUGH, SO I WILL HOLD
FURTHER COMMENTS UNTIL THE
PUBLIC HEARING ANNEXATION, BUT
HE WOULD BE IN FAVOR OF THIS
ZONING.
>> THANK YOU, MR. CRAWFORD.
THANK YOU FOR COMING, SIR.
>> I HAVE NO FURTHER SPEAKERS
FOR THIS ITEM.
>> OKAY.
WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING
AND ENTERTAIN QUESTIONS.
MR. BATES, DID YOU HAVE ONE SIR?
>> YES, SIR.
MR. CRAWFORD?
YOU'RE SAYING THE ARCHITECT
ENGINEER FOR THIS?
>> YES, SIR.
WE'RE THE CIVIL ENGINEER FOR IT.
WHERE DO YOU.
>> WHERE DO YOU PLAN ON DOING
THE STORMWATER RUNOFF?
WHAT'S YOUR PLAN TO MITIGATE
STARM -- STORMWATER RUNOFF?
>> ACCORDING TO MY
UNDERSTANDING, WE CAN DESIGN AND
DEVELOP THIS ACCORDING TO THE
STANDARDS OF THE COUNTY, AND THE
COUNTY AT THIS TIME DOES NOT
HAVE ACTUALLY BMPs BECAUSE
THIS HAS A VESTED RIGHTS THAT
WAS CONTINUED BACK WHEN THE
COUNTY HAD, WE HAD DEVELOPED IT
BACK IN 2007.
>> OKAY BUT NOW IF WE ANNEX IT
INTO THE CITY, YOU WILL HAVE TO
MEET CITY STANDARDS, AND OUR
STORMWATER.
>> THAT IS SOMETHING MR. HAR
HARMON CAN SPEAK ON.
BUT IT IS OUR UNDERSTANDING WE
CAN DEVELOP PER COUNTY
STANDARDS.
>> LET'S ASK MR. SHUFORD TO COME
UP.
I THINK HE HAS CURRENT
INFORMATION ON THAT QUESTION.
>> MR. BATES, THIS PROPERTY IS
PART OF A LARGER DEVELOPMENT, A
PORTION OF WHICH HAS BEEN
CONSTRUCTED.
AND IT WAS STARTED PRIOR TO JULY
OF 2007 WHEN THE COUNTY'S PHASE
TWO REQUIREMENTS WENT INTO
EFFECT.
AND BECAUSE OF ITS CONTINUATION
OF AN EXISTING PLAN, IT HAS THE
POTENTIAL DEPENDING UPON HOW THE
ANNEXATION DECISIONS ARE MADE TO
BE DEVELOPED WITH THEM
INSTALLING A STORMWATER FACILITY
TO START WITH TO CONTROL EROSION
ISSUES, COMPLETE THE
DEVELOPMENT, AND THEN BE ABLE TO
REMOVE THAT TEMPORARY STORMWATER
POND.
SO THE INTENT BEHIND THAT IS TO
MANAGE THE SEDIMENT AND EROSION
THAT WOULD OCCUR AS THE SITE'S
DEVELOPED, AND THEN LATER ON,
ADDRESS ANY STORMWATER
MANAGEMENT THROUGH THEY PROBABLY
WILL HAVE SOME SWELLS OR OTHER
WAYS TO DIRECT THEIR WATER TO GO
TO THE RIGHT PLACE.
>> THEY DON'T HAVE TO DO CURB
AND GUTTERS?
>> THEY PAY ATTENTION TO INSTALL
QUITE A BIT OF INFRASTRUCTURE TO
CITY STANDARDS, BUT I DON'T KNOW
THE DETAILS OF THAT AND I WOULD
ASK MR. CRAWFORD TO COME BACK UP
AND TALK TO YOU ABOUT THE
OVERALL SITE DESIGN FOR THIS
PROJECT IF THAT'S THE QUESTION.
>> OKAY, BEFORE WE GET TO THAT
THOUGH, MAKE SURE I'M CLEAR, DO
THEY OR DO THEY NOT HAVE TO
BUILD THE CITY STANDARDS?
YOU'RE SAYING THEY'RE LIKE
GRANDFATHERED IN OR SOMETHING?
>> MAYBE WE BETTER BACK UP.
THE APPLICATION FOR THIS
ANNEXATION CAME IN THREE DAYS
BEFORE YOUR POLICY CHANGE BECAME
EFFECTIVE.
YOUR POLICY WITH REGARD TO HOW
YOU ANNEX.
FROM THAT STANDPOINT THEY ARE
NOT TECHNICALLY REQUIRED TO
COMPLY WITH ALL CITY STANDARDS
BECAUSE THAT'S NOT WHAT THE
POLICY REQUIRED AT THE TIME THAT
THEY APPLIED FOR ANNEXATION.
>> WHY DON'T WE ASK MR. CRAWFORD
TO COME UP AND ASK EXACTLY WHAT
IS PLANNED?
MR. CRAWFORD, CAN YOU COME UP
AND OUTLINE THE PLANS AS IT
RELATES TO CITY STANDARDS THAT
WOULD WOULD BE PLANNED FOR IN
THIS PROJECT?
>> ABSOLUTELY.
WHAT MY CLIENT'S INTENT IS AND
WHAT WE'VE DESIGNED IS MOST OF
THE CITY STANDARDS WOULD BE
COMPLIED WITH.
27-FOOT BACK-TO-BACK, PAVEMENT,
CURB AND GUTTER, UTILITIES PER
PWC STANDARDS AND THINGS OF THAT
NATURE AND IF YOU EVER BEEN TO
LAKESIDE IT'S NO HILL WHICH IS
OUTSIDE OF THE COUNTY AND THIS
IS PHASE II OF THAT.
I THINK YOU WILL FIND IT IS
REALLY CLOSE TO THE CITY
STANDARDS.
>> SIDEWALKS, MR. CRAWFORD.
>> AT LEAST ON ONE SIDE.
NOT BOTH SIDES BUT AT LEAST OWN
ONE SIDE.
SO AGAIN I THINK YOU WILL FIND
THAT IT'S MUCH MORE THAN JUST
SIDE DITCHES AND THINGS OF THAT
NATURE.
>> YOU KNOW, WITH THAT WETLAND
DOWN ON THE SOUTH BOTTOM PART, I
JUST, YOU KNOW, WAS THERE A
PLAN?
Y'ALL GOING TO DUMP THE
STORMWATER RUNOFF INTO THAT
WETLANDS AND THEN EVERYBODY
DOWNSTREAM YOU KNOW GET FLOODED
OUT?
>> YEAH, WE WOULD COMPLY OR MY
CLIENT WOULD COMPLY WITH ALL THE
REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE IN PLACE
THAT HE NEEDS TO COMPLY WITH.
>> MS. APPLEWHEN THE THEN
MR. HAIRE.
>> YOU SAID THE COUNTY STANDARDS
AND THEN YOU SAID LATER ON THAT
THE DEVELOPER WOULD FIX IT.
THE WATER RUNOFF.
THEY HAVE A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF
TIME TO CONTROL SEDIMENTS DURING
DEVELOPMENT AND THEN LATER ON.
WHAT DOES LATER ON ME?
>> WELL, I'M GLAD YOU ASKED THAT
QUESTION BECAUSE IT'S BEEN A
KIND OF A STEEP LEARNING CURVE
FOR ME THIS TROON -- THIS
AFTERNOON TO LEARN ABOUT ALL
THESE DIFFERENT COUNTY STANDARDS
BUT THE WAY IT WORKS IS YOU
WOULD HAVE A DEVELOPER INSTALL A
SEDIMENT TRAPPING POND AT THE
OUTSET OF THE DEVELOPMENT, AND
THAT POND WOULD BE SET IN PLACE
UNTIL THE AREA -- THE
CONSTRUCTION WAS THROUGH AND IT
WAS CEDED OVER, AND THE
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
THAT THEY WOULD PUT IN PLACE
THAT AGAIN MR. CRAWFORD WOULD BE
ABLE TO BETTER DESCRIBE WOULD
TAKE EFFECT.
AND THEN THAT SEDIMENT POND
WOULD GO AWAY, IT WOULD BE ABLE
TO BE DEVELOPED IN SOME OTHER
FASHION.
>> MR. CRAWFORD, WHAT IS THE
TIME FRAME?
I'M WONDERING IS THIS LIKE FOUR
YEARS DOWN THE ROAD OR.
WHAT MAKES YOU MOVE FORWARD WITH
CLOSING UP THAT SEDIMENT POND,
YOU KNOW, MY CLIENT -- WHAT
HAPPENS IS MY UNDERSTANDING HE
DID PETITION FOR ANNEXATION BACK
IN 2005 AND CITY DIDN'T ACT ON
IT SO HE'S DOING PHASE I IN
PHASES AND THINGS LIKE THIS.
SO WE HAVE THE PROJECT DESIGN.
IT'S FULLY DESIGNED AND
PERMITTED AND ALL.
WITH THE EXCEPTION OF
NEGOTIATING PRICES AND THINGS OF
THE ACTUAL DEVELOPMENT, HE'S
PRETTY MUCH READY TO GO.
>> THE ONLY THING THAT I'M
TRYING TO GET ON IS, YOU KEEP
SAYING WHAT YOUR CLIENT INTENSDZ
INTENSDZ -- INTENDS TO DO.
WHAT I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT
WHAT THE RULES ARE THAT HE HAS
TO FOLLOW VERSUS WHAT HE INTENDS
TO DO.
DID THE RULES SAY WHEN YOU GET
THE OPPORTUNITY TO OR THE RULES
SAY WITHIN SIX MONTHS?
>> WHAT TRIGGER IS TAKING THE
RETENTION POND OUT I GUESS?
WHAT TRIGGERS THAT?
>> YES, NORTH COUNTY DEPARTMENT
OF ENVIRONMENTAL AND NATURAL
RESOURCES HAS SPECIFIC
REQUIREMENTS.
ON EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION.
YOU KNOW, YOU CERTAINLY CANNOT
ERODE AREAS.
YOU CERTAINLY CANNOT PUT
SEDIMENT IN STREAMS.
SO THERE ARE PROTECTIVE MEASURES
THAT ARE PUT IN PLACE DURING
CONSTRUCTION, AND ONCE THAT
PROJECT IS BUILT OUT, THEN AS
THOSE, THEN AS THE GROUND COVER
GROWS, THE STREETS ARE PUT IN,
THEN SOME OF THOSE MEASURES ARE
TAKEN AWAY AS LONG AS THEY HAVE
PROPER GROUND COVER AND PROPERTY
MEASURES IN PLACE SO THAT THEY
WON'T HAVE LONG-TERM EFFECTS.
BUT THE NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL
HEALTH AND NATURAL RESOURCES IS
THE ONES THAT MAKE THAT DECISION
WHEN THOSE MEASURES ARE TAKEN
OUT.
>> OKAY.
>> SO THERE ARE PROTECTIONS.
DURING CORRECTION AND
CONSTRUCTION.
>> SO ONE QUESTION FOR
MS. McDONALD.
I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED ON COUNTY
AND CITY.
CAN WE JUST SAY AS A CONDITION
OF THIS OF APPROVING THIS THAT
THEY MEET CITY STANDARDS AND
FORGET ALL THIS OTHER STUFF?
AND SAY WE WANT YOU -- MAKE THAT
A CONDITION OF IT.
THEY MEET OUR CURRENT STORMWATER
REQUIREMENTS REGARDLESS OF WHAT
THE COUNTY SAYS.
CAN WE DO THAT?
WE CAN'T?
>> MS. APPLEWHITE, I DON'T THINK
YOU CAN PLACE THAT CONDITION
BECAUSE IT IS JUST A REZONING
AND NOT A CONDITIONAL REZONING.
>> OKAY.
>> SO THE SHORT ANSWER IS I
DON'T THINK COUNCIL CAN DO THAT.
>> AND I'M UNDERSTANDING THE
STATE HAS THE LAST SAY BUT I'M
STILL NOT HEARING TIME FRAME BUT
THAT'S OKAY.
THANK YOU.
>> MR. HAIRE?
>> MS. McDONALD, I'M GOING TO
CONTINUE TO FOLLOW UP.
I THOUGHT WE HAD IT WHEN I HEARD
COUNCIL MEMBER APPLEWHITE ASK
ABOUT THE CONDITIONS, I THOUGHT
WE HAD IT, BUT SINCE THIS IS
COMING INTO THE CITY, WE CAN'T
MAKE A REQUIREMENT?
I MEAN, IF IT'S COMING INTO THE
CITY, DOESN'T IT JUST FALL ON UP
UNDER THE CITY STANDARDS?
SIDEWALKS, CURBS, GUTTERS, ON
AND ON?
>> NOT AS A PART OF THIS
PROCESS.
AS MR. SHUFORD OR MR. HARMON
ALLUDED TO, YOU HAVE SOME AS
PART OF YOUR POLICY, YOU HAVE
MADE SOME CHANGES THAT REQUIRE
THAT THEY MEET CERTAIN
STANDARDS.
HOWEVER, THIS APPLICATION WAS
PRESENTED BEFORE YOU CHANGED
YOUR POLICY.
ESSENTIALLY THEY CAME IN RIGHT
BEFORE YOUR CHANGE.
>> OKIE DOKEY.
THANK YOU, MA'AM.
>> MS. McCONLED, RECOGNIZING
WE ARE TALKING ABOUT A REZONING
QUESTION AND LATER THERE IS
ANNUAL ACTIONXATION QUESTION,
WHAT KIND OF FLEXIBILITY DOES
COUNCIL HAVE.
DO YOU HAVE MORE FLEXIBILITY IN
HAVING REQUIREMENTS ASSOCIATED
WITH THAT?
>> THE MANAGER WOULD LIKE TO
RESPOND TO THAT QUESTION.
>> OKAY.
>> I THINK WE WILL HAVE
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.
IT WOULDN'T NECESSARILY BE THE
OPPORTUNITY TO CONDITION, BUT
THERE IS AN OPPORTUNITY
REGARDING TIMING THAT WOULD
IMPACT THE OUTCOME OF THE
PROJECT AND HOW IT MOVES
FORWARD.
THAT'S INFORMATION WE CAN
PROVIDE DURING THE ANNEXATION
PROCESS.
MR. ARPRR.
>> THANKTHANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.
MR. CRAWFORD, I WANT TO MAKE
SURE I UNDERSTAND.
THERE WERE SOME GOOD QUESTIONS
BY CITY COUNCILMEMBERS.
THE CITY STANDARD VERSUS THE
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL AND
NATURAL RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT,
WHICH HAS GREATER STANDARDS?
>> THE CITY HAS THE MORE
STRINGENT STANDARD.
>> OKAY.
BUT WITH THE DENRD STANDARD -- I
WOULD ASSUME IT'S BEEN CLEARED
AT THIS POINT?
>> THE LOTS -- THROUGH THE
SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF THIS WILL
REMAIN IN TREES BECAUSE THERE
ARE SOME ENVIRONMENTAL SENSITIVE
AREAS, THAT KIND OF THING, BUT
NO, IT HAS NOT BEEN CLEAR CUT OR
ANYTHING.
IT HASN'T BEEN DEVELOPED EXCEPT
FOR PHASE I.
>> SO MY POINT IS THOUGH THAT
WHEN YOU GO IN AND BEGIN THE
CLEARING PROCESS, THEN YOU BEGIN
THE EROSION CONTROL PROCESS
WHICH IS BOTH WIND AND WATER AS
I UNDERSTAND IT, IS THAT
CORRECT?
>> THAT'S CORRECT.
>> AND YOU WILL HAVE TO HAVE
SEDIMENTATION FENCING.
YOU WILL HAVE TO HAVE TEMPORARY
SEDIMENT TRAPS.
YOU WILL HAVE TO HAVE DIFFERENT
CONTROL MEASURES TO MEET THE
STATE STANDARD OF CONTROL RUNOFF
TO ENSURE SEDIMENT DOES NOT
ENTER THAT WETLAND, IS THAT
CORRECT?
>> THAT IS CORRECT.
>> WHAT ARE THE PENALTIES LIKE?
>> PRETTY STIFF.
>> PRETTY STIFF IF YOU FILED A
COMPLAINT.
>> PRETTY STIFF IF YOU DIDN'T
MEET THE MEASURES.
>> HOW FREQUENTLY DOES THE STATE
INSPECT?
>> THEY INSPECT PRETTY
FREQUENTLY, YES, SIR.
>> OKAY.
AND ON THE SEDIMENT TRAP DENAR
WILL APPROVE YOUR TRAP.
AND THEY WILL APPROVE YOUR TIMER
BASED ON CERTAIN DECISION
POINTS?
>> THAT IS CORRECT.
>> OKAY.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
>> MR. FOULER?
>> I HAVE A QUESTION.
IN LOOKING AT THE PROCESS OF
ANNEXING THIS AND THE VALUE,
WILL THE ANNEXATION OF THIS
PROPERTY PROVIDE ENOUGH REVENUE
FOR THE PROPERTY OUT THERE?
>> I CAN'T ANSWER THAT BECAUSE I
AM GOING TO HAVE TO DEFER THAT
TO MR. DAVID NASH AND THAT IS A
GREAT QUESTION TO ASK DURING THE
ANNEXATION PART OF THIS WHEN HE
WILL BE UP BEFORE YOU.
>> OKAY.
>> WHILE I'M HERE THOUGH, I
WOULDN'T MIND ADDING ONE MORE
BIT OF CLARIFICATION ABOUT THIS
STORMWATER ISSUE.
THIS PROJECT STARTED BACK IN
2005, AND THE CHANGES TO THE
STORMWATER REGULATIONS THAT
IMPACTED THE COUNTY DIDN'T COME
INTO EFFECT UNTIL MID-2007, SO
THIS BEING A SEQUENTIAL PHASE IT
WAS IN EFFECT TO APPROVE AS PART
OF THAT ORIGINAL 2005 PROJECT.
SO I DON'T KNOW IF THAT HELPS
EXPLAIN IT, AND IF THEY FOLLOWED
THE PROCESS, TO GET TO SEWER YOU
HAD IN PLACE TO PETITION,
APPARENTLY IT NEVER REACHED THE
CITY COUNCIL FOR A DECISION.
BUT, AND WHY THAT'S THE CASE, I
DON'T HAVE A CLUE, BUT YOU
BASICALLY HAVE THIS PIECE COMING
IN TO YOU WITH THE POTENTIAL TO
BE ANNEX.
I'M SORRY I CAN'T ANSWER THAT.
>> THAT'S FINE.
WHAT YOU ARE SAYING IS THIS
PROPERTY COULD BE APPROVED UNDER
SAME STANDARDS.
DEVELOPED JUST THE WAY --
>> WELL, IT WOULD HAVE TO BE
DEVELOPED, WELL, I BELIEVE IT
COULD BE DEVELOPED JUST THE WAY
IT WOULD BE UNDER THE COUNTY.
BECAUSE I'M REMEMBERING YOUR OLD
POLICY, WHICH GAVE YOU THE
ABILITY TO, ALL THEY NEEDED TO
DO WAS TO PETITION, AND THEN
THEY COULD DEVELOP UNDER COUNTY
STANDARDS.
>> MR. BATES?
>> I WANT TO SEE IF I HAVE THIS
RIGHT BECAUSE NOW WE ARE TALKING
ABOUT THREE DIFFERENT ISSUES I
THINK.
THE CITY REQUIRES STORMWATER
CONTROL RUNOFF.
THE COUNTY DOES NOT -- THEY
OPTED OUT OF STORMWATER PHASE II
WHATEVER REQUIREMENTS.
I THINK THAT'S WHAT IT WAS
CALLED, PHASE II STORMWATER
REQUIREMENTS.
>> WELL, THEY ACTUALLY HAVE
TO -- THEIR PHASE II
REQUIREMENTS WENT INTO EFFECT
JULY 1, 2007.
SO THE COUNTY DOES HAVE A
STANDARD OF HOLDING THE FIRST
ONE INCH OF RAINFALL.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE DESIGN
STORM IS.
ON SITE WITH A POND.
THE CITY STANDARDS I THINK ARE
MORE STRINGENT, BUT WE DO
REQUIRE A POND AND THEY DO TOO
NOW.
PRIOR TO THAT, THE COUNTY
STANDARDS WERE LESS RESTRICTIVE
AND WERE MORE DIRECTED AT
ADDRESSING THE SEDIMENT AND
EROSION REQUIREMENTS.
>> AND DENR JUST REQUIRES DURING
THE CONSTRUCTION PHASE SEDIMENT
AND EROSION CONTROL DURING THE
DEVELOPMENT CONSTRUCTION PHASE,
AND ONCE I GUESS THEY GET THEIR
CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY OR
STAMP OF APPROVAL THEY ARE DONE.
THE GRASS ROADS, THE CURB AND
GUTTER'S RUNNING, WE KNOW WHERE
THE WATER'S GOING, THEN THEY CAN
DO AWAY WITH THE SEDIMENT POND
BUT THE CITY WHEN YOU HAVE YOUR
RETENTION POND YOU DON'T COVER
UP THE RETENTION POND.
>> THAT'S CORRECT, SIR, AND IF
IT WAS DEVELOPED ACCORDING TO
CITY STANDARDS, ULTIMATELY THE
CITY WOULD ASSUME MAINTENANCE
FOR THOSE PONDS.
>> OKAY, WELL, SEE, I'M JUST
TRYING TO FIGURE OUT SEE THAT
THEY DON'T RUN EVERYTHING INTO
THAT STREAM.
AND THEN EVERYBODY DOWNSTREAM
STARTS GETTING FLOODED OUT EVEN
THOUGH THEY'RE IN THE COUNTY WE
ARE GOING TO END UP OUT THERE
WITH BACK HOES TRYING TO CLEAN
AND -- ALL RIGHT.
THANK YOU, SIR.
>> AND JUST TO, TO REITERATE, I
BELIEVE THE STANDARD THAT THEY
WERE APPROVED TO IS A WATER
QUALITY STANDARD BUT NOT A WATER
QUANTITY STANDARD, WHICH IS WHAT
YOU'RE GETTING A.
>> MM-HMM.
>> ALL RIGHT.
THANK YOU.
>> ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS?
OKAY, AGAIN, THIS IS THE FIRST
PART OF A PROCESS.
IS THERE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR
FOR ITEM 6.2?
>> MR. MAYOR?
I MOVE WE APPROVE THE REZONING
REQUEST.
>> THANK YOU.
>> ANY DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION?
>> TO APPROVE IT TO SF-10.
>> THANK YOU.
>> ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT?
MAY I ASK FOR YOUR VOTE, PLEASE?
OKAY.
THAT MOTION CARRIES.
THOSE IN FAVOR, MR. BATES,
MS. APPLEWHITE, MR. HURST,
MR. CHAVONNE, MR. ARP, MS. DAVY,
MR. MASSEY, MR. FOWLER.
IN OPPOSITION, MR. CRISP AND
MR. HAIRE.
OKAY.
WE'LL MOVE NOW TO ITEM 6.3,
WHICH IS ITEM P12-18F.
>> NEXT ZONING CASE WE HAVE
BEFORE YOU TONIGHT IS ANOTHER
INITIAL ZONING.
THE REQUEST IS TO GO FROM AN R15
DISTRICT IN THE COUNTY TO SF-10
SINGLE-FAMILY IN THE CITY.
PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 6242 AND
6346 CAVESON COURT.
JUST UNDER A HALF ACRE TOTAL.
ON THE AERIAL MAP, THE PROPERTY
THAT'S ACTUALLY IN QUESTION IS
ONLY THIS LITTLE AREA IN YELLOW
IN THE VERY CORNER HERE.
WHAT WE HAVE IS A DEVELOPER THAT
OWNS THIS LARGER TRACT ALSO OWNS
THE REMAINING PART OF THIS, AND
WE HAVE TWO VERY UNUSUALLY
SHAPED LOTS HERE ON CAVESON
COURT.
THIS BIGGER TRACT IS OUTSIDE OF
THE CITY CURRENTLY.
EVERYTHING ELSE IS INSIDE THE
CITY.
THEY'RE LOOKING TO GET THAT
LITTLE PIECE ANNEXED INTO THE
CITY, AND THEN THEY WOULD SPLIT
THAT PROPERTY IN TWO AND PART
WOULD GO TO THIS PROPERTY AND
PART WOULD GO TO THIS PROPERTY.
TO BASICALLY SQUARE THEM OFF AND
MAKE THEM A MORE, MORE -- BOTH
MORE REGULARLY SHAPED LOTS.
THIS PARTICULAR ONE DOES TAKE
ADVANTAGE OF THE CITY COUNCIL'S
NEW POLICY ON ANNEXATIONS.
IN THE PAST, WE HAD GONE --
ALWAYS GONE STRAIGHT WITH THE
POLICY CALLED FOR US TO GO
STRAIGHT FROM THE CLOSEST ZONING
DISTRICT IN THE COUNTY TO THE
CLOSEST THING IN THE CITY.
IN THIS CASE, THE LARGER
PROPERTY IS R15 IN THE COUNTY.
THE DEVELOPED SUBDIVISION HERE
IS SF-10.
SINCE THIS IS BEING ADDED TO AN
SF-10 SUBDIVISION TONLY SEEMS
LOGICAL THAT IF ANNEXED, THAT
THAT SHOULD BECOME SF-10
PROPERTY AS WELL.
AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THE AERIAL,
AS YOU CAN TELL A WHILE AGO, THE
BIGGER PROPERTY HERE IS
UNDEVELOPED.
MOSTLY SINGLE-FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL.
THE TWO PROPERTIES THIS
POTENTIAL ANNEXATION WOULD
AFFECT ARE RIGHT HERE.
AND THE LAND USE PLAN ALSO CALLS
FOR SINGLE-FAMILY LOW-DENSITY
RESIDENTIAL THROUGHOUT THIS AREA
WITH SOME CONSERVATION AREAS
ALONG THE CREEK WAYS AS WELL.
THE ZONING COMMISSION AND STAFF
RECOMMEND THAT IF THE PROPERTY
IS ANNEXED, IT SHOULD BECOME
SF-10.
BASED ON SF-10 A ZONING DISTRICT
FOR THE ESTOF-- REST OF THE
SUBDIVISION THAT THIS PROPERTY
WILL BE ADDED TO, AND AGAIN AS A
REMINDER THE FINAL ACTION WILL
BECOME PART OF THE MOTION TO
APPROVE OR DENY THE PETITION.
ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF
ON THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT?
>> NONE AT THIS TIME, SIR.
THANK YOU.
MADAM CLERK?
>> WE HAVE NO SPEAKERS FOR THIS
ITEM.
>> OKAY.
WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING
AND ENTERTAIN ANY ADDITIONAL
QUESTIONS FROM STAFF OR A
MOTION.
>> MR. BATES?
>> A MOTION TO APPROVE.
>> A MOTION TO APPROVE AND A
SECOND BY MR. CRISP.
LET ME ASK FOR YOUR VOTE ON THAT
MOTION, PLEASE.
THAT IS UNANIMOUS, THANK YOU.
WE WILL MOVE NOW TO ITEM 6.4,
WHICH I BELIEVE IS A
CONTINUATION OF ITEM 6.3.
MR. NASH, PERHAPS YOU CAN WALK
US THROUGH THIS PROCESS.
>> GOOD EVENING, MAYOR, MEMBERS
OF THE COUNCIL.
GOOD EVENING.
TONIGHT YOU HAVE THREE
ANNEXATION PUBLIC HEARINGS,
WHICH MIRROR THE THREE INITIAL
ZONING PUBLIC HEARINGS YOU'VE
JUST HEARD.
THE NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING
WAS PUBLISHED ON APRIL 13TH IN
THE FAYETTEVILLE OBSERVER.
JUST A SPECIAL NOTE ABOUT THIS
POLICY WE'RE GOING THROUGH
TONIGHT FOR THE FIRST TIME IN
WHICH WE'RE DOING THE INITIAL
ZONING PART FIRST AND THEN THE
ANNEXATION HEARING.
THAT'S BASED ON THE CHANGE YOU
MADE ON FEBRUARY 13th.
TWO OF THESE AREAS THAT'S BEEN
BROUGHT OUT, THE YOUNG PROPERTY
AND LAKESIDE AT SNOW HILL WERE
SUBMITTED BEFORE THE CHANGE ON
FEBRUARY 13th.
BUT ALL THREE HAVE BEEN
SCHEDULED AS IF WEE GOING
THROUGH THE NEW PROCESS
AS IT'S
ENVISIONED.
THE FIRST AREA TONIGHT.
WE ARE WORKING IN THE REVERSE
ORDER CRAIG PRESENTED THEM.
THIS IS CONTIGUOUS TO THE CITY.
VERY SMALL SIZE.
ABOUT 4.45 ACRES.
THIS MAP YOU CAN SEE GREYSTONE
FARMS THERE IN YELLOW.
AND AS CRAIG'S ALREADY POINTED
OUT, IT'S JUST A TINY CORNER OF
THE PIECE THAT IS SURROUNDED BY
THREE SIDES BY GREYSTONE FARMS
AND ALL OF THIS IS LOCATED JUST
NORTH OF THE I-295 HIGHWAY.
NO REAL ISSUES HERE.
WE'VE CHECKED IT OUT.
IT'S SUFFICIENT.
IT'S OWNED BY THE PERSONS WHO
SIGNED IT.
MR. DON BROADWELL AND
MR. CHARLES WEBER.
NO PROBLEMS WITH SERVICES.
IT'S SUCH A SMALL AREA.
AND SO IN THIS CASE, THE STAFF
HAS RECOMMENDED APPROVAL.
ANY QUESTIONS AT THIS POINT
BEFORE YOUR PUBLIC HEARING?
>> ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. NASH.
ALL RIGHT, SIR, STAND BY.
MA'AM, WE'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC
HEARING.
>> NEE -- NO SPEAKERS.
>> ANY QUESTIONS OR A MOTION?
>> MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE
ORDINANCE FOR ANNEXATION.
>> SECOND.
>> ANY DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION?
MAY I ASK FOR YOUR VOTE, PLEASE.
DID YOU HAVE SOMETHING,
MS. McDONALD?
>> AS PART OF THE PROCESS YOU
HAVE TO MAKE SURE YOU RECONFIRM
YOUR ZONING DECISION AS PART OF
THIS ACTION.
SO ANNEX AND TO ZONE THIS
PROPERTY AS SF-10.
>> IS THAT OKAY, MR. BATES?
IS THAT OKAY, MR. HAIRE?
>> APPROVE THE SF-10 AND
ANNEXATION EFFECTIVE
APRIL 23rd, 2012.
>> EVERYBODY CLEAR ON THAT?
ALL RIGHT.
LET ME -- LET'S JUST TAKE
ANOTHER VOTE REAL QUICK JUST TO
BE ON THE SAFE SIDE.
THANK YOU, THAT'S UNANIMOUS.
MR. NASH, LET'S TAKE A LOOK AT
6.5.
>> THIS IS GOING BACK TO
LAKESIDE SNOW HILL PHASE TWO.
AGAIN IT'S THE SATELLITE
ANNEXATION PETITION LOCATED
SOUTH OF THE AIRPORT ABOUT
27 ACRES.
THE LAND IS CURRENTLY VACANT.
ON THIS MAP, YOU CAN SEE WHERE
THE EXISTING CITY IS BECAUSE
IT'S ZOOMED OUT FAR ENOUGH.
YOU SEE THE FAIRLY LARGE
PROPERTY THERE NORTH OF THIS
AREA THAT'S FAYETTEVILLE
REGIONAL AIRPORT.
THE AREA THAT IS BEING
PRUOPPOSED HERE IS PHASE TWO OF
LAKESIDE IN A GRAY AREA WITH RED
DOTS AROUND IT TO TRY TO
HIGHLIGHT IT.
IT'S ALL NORTH OF I-295 AND
NORTH OF ROCK FISH CREEK.
KIND OF CLOSE TO THE COUNTY
INDUSTRIAL PARK.
SOMETHING THIS MAP MAYBE IT'S A
LITTLE OUT OF PLACE.
I WILL GO AHEAD AND POINT OUT IT
IS LOCATED ALMOST DIRECTLY
UNDERNEATH THE FLIGHT LINE OF
THE FAYETTEVILLE REGIONAL
AIRPORT.
THE SITE HERE, THE BOUNDARIES OF
IT ARE SHOWN IN A LIGHT GREEN
LINE.
AND THE ARROW IS POINTING INTO
THE AREA THAT WOULD BE DEVELOPED
AS PHASE II.
THE YELLOW AREA IS THE SO-CALLED
SAFETY AREA DESIGNATED AT THE
ENDS OF THE RUNWAYS.
IN PLACE IN THE COUNTY ZONING
ORDINANCE.
HERE IS A MAP OF THE PROPERTY
BOUNDARIES.
A COUPLE FOLKS OF LAKESIDE AT
SNOW HILL.
THIS IS LOOKING DOWN SNOW HILL
ROAD TOWARDS THE WEST, AND THE
PART THAT'S ALREADY BEEN BUILT
IS 68 LOTS.
THIS IS ON THE LEFT SIDE OF THE
ROAD.
THE ENTRANCE, THE ENTRANCE.
THIS IS LOOKING DOWN THE MAIN
ENTRANCE INTO THE PART THAT'S
ALREADY BEEN DEVELOPED.
YOU CAN SEE THAT SIDEWALKS WERE
BUILT AT LEAST ON ONE SIDE OF
THE STREET HERE.
ANOTHER SHOT OF THE INTERIOR OF
WHAT'S ALREADY BEEN BUILT.
UNFOCH -- UNFORTUNATELY, THIS
WAS NOT BROUGHT INTO THE CITY IN
2005 WHEN THEY PETITIONED FOR IT
TO BE ANNEXED.
SEVERAL ISSUES HAVE ARISEN HERE.
SUFFICIENCY IS OKAY.
IT'S OWNED BY MR. SHAWN DESOHNY
AND THE CORPORATION NAMED
LAKESIDE AT SNOW HILL.
IT DOES APPEAR TO MEET THE
SATELLITE ANNEXATION STANDARDS.
THOSE ARE OUTLINED IN THE
ORDINANCE THAT'S IN YOUR
MATERIALS.
IN TERMS OF SERVICES.
THE POLICE DEPARTMENT HAS
EXPRESSED SOME CONCERN ABOUT
SERVICE DELIVERY HERE.
FISCAL IMPACT.
RATHER HARD TO ASSESS BECAUSE
THE POLICE GAVE US A VERY LARGE
NUMBER, BUT IT'S HARD TO BREAK
IT OUT INTO VARIOUS YEARS.
AGAIN, PHASE I WAS NOT ANNEXED
EARLIER AND AGAIN WAS BROUGHT
OUT EARLIER.
THE INITIAL ZONING IN TERMS OF
THAT WAS PETITION FOR ANNEXATION
WAS SUBMITTED THREE DAYS PRIOR
TO YOUR POLICY CHANGE.
AIRPORT COMPATIBILITY HAS
ALREADY BEEN COVERED BRIEFLY IN
THAT SLIDE I SHOWED YOU.
THERE ARE THREE OPTIONS AS
OUTLINED IN YOUR MEMO.
ONE IS TO ADOPT THE ORDINANCE
EFFECTIVE DATE AS OF TONIGHT.
SECONDLY ADOPT THE ORDINANCE
WITH A DELAYED EFFECTIVE DATE.
AND SATELLITE YOU CAN GO OUT AND
DELAY IT AS LONG AS SIX MONTHS
FROM TONIGHT, PUT YOU OUT TO
OCTOBER 23rd.
THE THIRD OPTION IS DO NOT ANNEX
THE AREA, AND MR. FOWLER HAD
ASKED ABOUT I GUESS THE REVENUE
VERSUS COSTS.
IF YOU MAKE SOME ASSUMPTIONS
ABOUT HOW FAST THIS AREA MIGHT
BUILD OUT, AND I DID THAT IN A
SPREAD SHEET, IT LOOKS LIKE THE
FIVE-YEAR REVENUES WOULD BE UP
TO ABOUT 1 78,000 SPREAD OUT
OVER FIVE YEARS ASSUMING THEY
STARTED BUILDING NEXT MONTH AND
BUILT 3 HOUSES PER MONTH AND HAD
IT BUILT IN 13 MONTHS.
AND ALL THE REVENUES THAT GO
ALONG WITH THE POPULATION IS
ALSO BASED ON THE SAME VALUES IN
FADES -- PHASE I.
LAND BUILDINGS, EXTRA FEATURES.
I REALLY CANNOT PUT THE COST
FIGURES WE RECEIVED AT THE
DEPARTMENTS INTO THE SPREAD
SHEET AT THIS POINT BECAUSE WE
JUST DON'T HAVE ENOUGH DETAIL ON
HOW THEY WOULD SHAKE OUT PER
YEAR.
THEY GAVE ME A LITTLE MORE
INFORMATION THAN WHAT YOU HAVE
IN YOUR PACKET, AND IT ACTUALLY
INDICATES THE COST PER OFFICER
TALKING POLICE COST HERE, WERE
EVEN HIGHER THAN WHAT HAD BEEN
USED ORIGINALLY.
THEY WERE ESTIMATING THAT TO
ANNEX THIS AREA, IT TIPS THE
SCALES COMPLETELY CAUSING THEM
TO NEED FIVE NEW OFFICERS.
ALL FIVE OFFICERS WOULD NEED NEW
VEHICLES.
THE TOTAL COST WAS $450,000.
IT WOULD BE EVEN A LITTLE MORE
BASED ON THE NEWER FIGURES BUT
SIR, WE JUST CANNOT PUT THEM IN
THE SPREAD SHEET YEAR BY YEAR
ACCURATELY AT THIS POINT.
YOU WOULD BE ADDRESSING THE
POLICE DEPARTMENT'S NEEDS I'M
SURE IN FUTURE BUDGET YEARS AS
THEY COME TO YOU AND TELL YOU
THAT WE'VE BEEN ANNEXING AND
THAT WE'RE PUTTING THEM IN
SOMEWHAT OF A BIND.
THE PROBLEM WITH THIS AREA IF
THERE IS A PROBLEM IS THAT IT IS
LOCATED FAIRLY FAR AWAY FROM THE
CITY.
BUT NOT AS FAR AS THE NEXT AREA
THAT DWHROWL -- YOU'LL BE
SEEING.
>> COMMISSIONER, LET ME ASK THE
QUESTION BECAUSE THIS IS ONE OF
THOSE, YOU KNOW, MOVING BEFORE
LAW CHANGE AND THE WHOLE NINE
YARDS.
THE LAW THAT WAS IN PLACE, THE
ORDINANCE THAT WAS IN PLACE
BEFORE THE COUNCIL ADOPTED THE
MOST RECENT ORDINANCE, IF
SOMEONE PETITIONED FOR
ANNEXATION INTO THE SAIRKTS I AM
AM -- CITY.
IF THEY WERE PETITIONING, JUST
PETITIONING WOULD GET THEM WATER
AND SEWER.
HELP ME UNDERSTAND THAT LETTER?
>> I BELIEVE IT DID.
I WAS NOT WORKING WITH THIS THAT
MUCH BACK THEN, BUT --
>> MR. BOWER, DO YOU KNOW IF
THAT'S THE CASE, SIR?
>> THAT IS THE CASE, YOUR HONOR.
>> SO, YEAH, NO --
>> SO IF SOMEONE BEFORE WE
CHANGED OUR ORDINANCE JUST TO BE
SURE -- IT IS CAUGHT UP IN
THERE.
IT IS ONE OF THE WEIRD ONES.
SOMEONE COULD APPLY FOR IT AND
JUST THE MERE FACT THAT THEY
PETITIONED FOR ANNEXATION WOULD
ALLOW THEM TO GET WATER AND
SEWER WITHOUT ANNEXATION.
>> THAT'S CORRECT.
YOU HAD THE OPTION TO YOUR
POLICY SIMPLY STATED YOU WERE
REQUIRED TO PETITION SO COUNCIL
CD'VE TAKEN ACTION -- COULD'VE
TAKEN ACTION AND SAID WE WOULD
NOT ANNEX THE PROPERTY BUT THEY
WOULD STILL BE ELIGIBLE TO
RECEIVE WATER AND SEWER.
THAT WAS PART OF THE --
>> THAT WAS POSSIBLY GOING ON
EVEN FIVE YEARS AGO WHEN THE --
WE BELIEVE THE PROPERTY OWNER
PETITIONED AND THE COUNCIL
DIDN'T HEAR IT AND THEY WERE
ABLE TO GET WATER AND SEWER?
IS THAT WHAT WE THINK HAPPENED
THEN?
>> WE DON'T KNOW.
>> WHAT I HEARD ACTUALLY WAS
THAT THE STAFF WAS CONCERNED
ABOUT DEVELOPMENT IN THE FLIGHT
PATH.
AND THEY THOUGHT THAT BY NOT
MOVING FORWARD ON IT, THEY MIGHT
BE ABLE TO PREVENT DEVELOPMENT
FROM MOVING FORWARD.
THAT IS WHAT I HAVE HEARD.
>> DO YOU HAVE A QUESTION,
MA'AM?
>> IN REGARDS TO THE POLICE
DEPARTMENT CONCERN, WAS IT JUST
THE COST AS YOU MENTIONED OF THE
ADDITIONAL OFFICERS AND YOU
KNOW, WHAT IT WOULD COST TO HIRE
THAT OR WAS IT THE ABILITY TO
DELIVER SERVICE TO AN AREA OR
COMBINATION OF BOTH?
>> COMBINATION OF BOTH.
THEY POINTED OUT THAT WE HAVE
HAD A COUPLE OTHER ANNEXATIONS
IN THE LAST SIX MONTHS.
NOT VERY LARGE ONES.
BUT THESE TWO WE HAVE BEFORE YOU
TONIGHT ARE OUT IN THAT
DIRECTION.
JUST THINK THAT THEY FELT LIKE
THAT ZONE THAT SERVES THAT PART
OF TOWN WAS GETTING TOO
EXTENDED.
>> AND TALKING ABOUT 28 ACRES,
APPROXIMATELY HOW MANY -- HOW
BIG WOULD THAT SUBDIVISION BE?
HOW MANY ADDITIONAL HOMES?
>> THIS PART WAS GOING TO HAVE
39 LOTS.
>> SO 39 ADDITIONAL HOMES.
>> RIGHT.
AND THE PHASE THAT'S ALREADY
BEEN BUILT I BELIEVE HAD 68.
TOTAL 107, 108 LOTS.
>> OKAY.
>> AND MY LAST QUESTION, AND I
AM KIND OF CONFUSED AS WELL
BECAUSE WE DID CLARIFY THAT THIS
IS IN IN THE MIA.
SO I THINK MY UNDERSTANDING OF
THE MIA IS THAT THESE AREAS
WOULD BE BUILT TO CITY
STANDARDS.
SO IF THAT IS THE INTENT OF THE
MIA, AND THEY ARE IN THE MIA BUT
THEN WE'RE GOING TO ALLOW THEM
TO -- AND I DON'T WANT TO BEAT
UP ON THAT LAST ISSUE, BUT THEN
WE'RE GOING TO ALLOW THEM TO
BUILD A DEVELOPMENT AND PERHAPS
HAVE DIFFERENT STANDARDS IN
TERMS OF STORMWATER?
>> I THINK STAFF MIGHT HAVE AN
ANSWER FOR THAT.
>> THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION,
CAN YOU BE APPLEWHITE.
ACTUALLY UNDER THE MIA, BEFORE
COUNCIL'S CHANGE IN POLICY,
DEVELOPMENT IN THE MIA COULD
MOVE FORWARD UNDER THE COUNTY,
AND THE COUNTY HAD AGREED TO
APPLY A SUBSECTION OF OUR
STANDARDS, INCLUDING THE
SIDEWALK STANDARD AND THE
STREET, STREET STANDARD
BASICALLY.
SO MOST OF OUR STANDARDS THAT
WERE APPROVED THROUGH THE NEW
DEVELOPMENT REGULATION LAST YEAR
WOULD NOT APPLY UNDER THE MIA
AGREEMENT THAT YOU ADOPTED.
YOUR CHANGE IN POLICY IN THE
LAST COUPLE OF MONTHS THAT HAS
TRIGGERED THE POTENTIAL FOR A
MORE RIGOROUS APPLICATION OF THE
CITY STANDARDS IN THOSE AREAS.
>> CAY.
THAT'S GOOD.
THANK YOU.
>> THE CASES TONIGHT ARE NOT
REALLY GOOD ONES TO EXPERIENCE
WITH THIS POLICY BECAUSE THIS
ONE HAD ITS PLANS APPROVED BY
THE COUNTY YEARS AGO.
>> SEEMS LIKE WE ARE DEALING
WITH A LOT OF THESE KIND OF IN
THE TRANSITION.
THEY STARTED BEFORE THE
ORDINANCE WAS CHANGED.
YOU WERE TALKED ABOUT WHEN WE
WERE REZONING INITIALLY, YOU
HEARD SEVERAL COUNCILMEMBERS
TRYING TO EXPLORE WHAT KIND OF
FLEXIBILITY WE MIGHT HAVE AND IT
DIDN'T SEEM LIKE WE HAD ANY
THEN, DID WE HAVE ANY
FLEXIBILITY AS IT RELATES TO
ANNEXATION TO SPEAK OF THE
COUNCILS -- STANDARDS THAT
COUNCIL IS INTERESTED IN PUTTING
IN?
>> THERE'S A DEBATE ABOUT THAT.
>> WELL, I THINK THAT THE
COUNCIL WAS REALLY VERY LIMITED.
THAT IS CERTAINLY THE MOST
CONSERVATIVE APPROACH.
CERTAINLY A LESS CONSERVATIVE
APPROACH WOULD BE TO ADOPT THE
ANNEXATION ORDINANCE AND MAKE IT
EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY, WHICH
WOULD THEN TRIGGER THEM HAVING
TO GET THEIR PERMITS FROM THE
CITY.
BUT A MORE CONSERVATIVE APPROACH
IS THAT WE ARE USING OUR
PREVIOUS STANDARD, AND SO WE
WOULD NOT HAVE THOSE OPTIONS
AVAILABLE TO US.
I WOULD ALSO POINT OUT THAT THIS
IS PHASE II OF A SUBDIVISION,
AND SO YOU WILL BE -- THIS
PETITION ONLY PERTAINS TO PHASE
II, SO PHASE I WILL REMAIN OUT
OF THE CITY SUBJECT TO SOME
INITIATION OF --
>> VOLUNTARY.
>> CITY INITIATED ANNEXATION OR
SOME OTHER PETITION.
>> SO IF WE WERE TO VOTE TO
APPROVE ANNEXATION, CAN SOMEONE
SPELL OUT EXACTLY WHAT THAT
WOULD MEAN TONIGHT?
>> JUST TO MAKE SURE WE'RE ALL
CLEAR BECAUSE THIS IS REALLY
CONFUSING. THE DEVELOPMENT
WOULD OCCUR.
IT WOULD BE ON SIDEWALKS.
IT WOULD BE ON CURB AND GUTTER.
IT WOULD HAVE A SHORT-TERM
RETENTION POND.
>> YES.
>> NOT A LONG-TERM ONE.
>> YES.
>> WOULD WE -- CAN YOU IDENTIFY
THE OTHER DIFFERENCES?
IF WE WERE TO PUT IT IN
ANNEXATION TONIGHT, CAN WE
IDENTIFY THE DIFFERENCES THAT
WOULD HAPPEN BECAUSE OF THE
TIMING OF THIS ONE VERSUS IF IT
WERE JUST A NORMAL ONE THAT WE
MIGHT DO NEXT MONTH OR, YOU
KNOW, ONE THAT DIDN'T GET CAUGHT
UP IN THE TIME FRAME?
WOULD THERE BE DIFFERENCES OTHER
THAN THE RETENTION POND?
>> UNDER OUR CURRENT STANDARDS
OTHER THAN RETENTION PONDS ARE
WATER QUALITY STANDARDS NOT
WATER QUANTITY STANDARDS.
THEY WOULD BE DEALING WITH
EROSION CONTROL RATHER THAN
RETENTION MOVING FORWARD.
ANOTHER ONE WOULD BE SIDEWALKS.
THEY HAVE BASICALLY A PERMISSIVE
STANDARD.
I MEAN, THEY SAID THAT THEY ARE
GOING TO PUT IN SIDEWALKS BUT
THEY ARE NOT NECESSARILY
REQUIRED TO PUT IN SIDEWALKS.
I CAN THE COUNTY WOULD HOPEFULLY
ENFORCE ONE SIDE OF THE STREET
WHICH IS PART OF THE MIA THAT
WAS AGREED TO.
THEY WOULD SEE THOSE WHEREAS OUR
CURRENT REGULATION IS BOTH SIDE
OF THE STREET.
THERE MAY BE OTHER STANDARDS
THAT APPLY TO THE LAYOUT OF
LOTS --
>> BUT IF WE DID ANNUAL ANNUAL N
TONIGHT THERE WOULDN'T BE A
REQUIREMENT?
>> SO WE WOULD BE GUARANTEED
THERE WOULD BE SIDEWALKS ON ONE
SIDE OF THE STREET.
THEY WOULD BE CURB AND GUTTER.
THERE WOULD BE GUARANTEE OF
THAT?
>> OUR STREET STANDARDS WOULD BE
COMPLIED WITH.
I THINK IT IS ALL PART OF OUR
DESIGN.
THOSE ARE THE MAIN DIFFERENCES.
I THINK YOU IDENTIFIED THOSE
ACCURATELY.
>> OKAY, WE HAVE A QUESTION,
MS. APPLEWHITE..
>> I HAVE A SIDE BAR HERE.
IS IT A STANDARD PHASE --
BECAUSE OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT
HAS EXPRESSED CONCERNS ABOUT
BEING ABLE TO SERVICE AND THE
COST.
DO WE HAVE A PROCEDURE WHERE WE
PAY THE COUNTY SHERIFF'S
DEPARTMENT TO SERVICE THEM WITH
LAW ENFORCEMENT?
IS THAT WHAT, WE HAVE DONE
BEFORE?
>> NONE OF THE COUNTY TAXES FOR
SHERIFF SERVICES ARE ABATED, SO
THANE -- THEY CONTINUE TO
CONTRIBUTE THE SAME AMOUNT OF
MONEY FOR PROTECTION AS THEY DO
BEFORE ANNEXATION.
>> SO OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT.
>> OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT WOULD
BE THE PRIMARY CALL.
MUTUAL AID WOULD BE IN PLACE.
>> WE WERE THINKING ABOUT, WHAT
WAS IT?
OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT GOES OUT
THERE.
>> THEY WOULD AT LEAST GET THE
CALL.
>> MR. CRISP.
>> MR. GNASH, DID CUDID YOU JUST
SHOW PICTURES OF THE ENTRANCE OF
LAKESIDE.
>> YES, SIR.
>> ARE THEY ON BOTH SIDES OR ONE
SIDE?
>> THERE'S ONE ON THIS PICTURE
HERE IT'S ON THE RIGHT SIDE.
BUT FURTHER DOWN I BELIEVE IT'S
ACTUALLY ON BOTH SIDES.
>> SOME OF THE STREETS ON PHASE
I HAVE SIDEWALKS ON BOTH SIDE
BUT MR. CRAWFORD SAID THEY ARE
GOING TO BUILD SIDEWALKS ON ONE
SIDE IN PHASE II.
DID I UNDERSTAND THAT CORRECTLY?
>> YES, SIR, AT A MINIMUM THEY
ARE GOING TO BUILD A SIDEWALK ON
ONE SIDE.
AT A MINIMUM.
I AM NOT SURE IF THEY ARE GOING
TO BUILD A SIDEWALK ON BOTH
SIDES.
RIGHT NOW THEY ARE GOING TO
BUILD A SIDEWALK ON ONE SIDE.
>> WERE YOU RESPONSIBLE FOR THE
DEVELOPMENT OF LAKESIDE PHASE I?
>> YES, SIR, WE.
>> BUT YOU BUILT SIDEWALKS ON
BOTH SIDES THERE FOR THE
CONVENIENCE OF THE RESIDENTS?
>> ACTUALLY THE CLIENT I THINK
PUT THOSE IN AFTER WE DID THE
DESIGN WORK, SO THAT WAS PUT IN
ACTUALLY BY THE BUILDERS
THEMSELVES.
>> MM-HMM.
>> EXTENDED BY THE BUILDERS
THEMSELVES AND NOT ACTUALLY A
PART OF OUR CONSTRUCTION
DOCUMENTS.
BUT YES, SIR, THERE ARE
SIDEWALKS, MAINLY ON ONE SIDE
BUT THERE ARE SOME SIDEWALKS ON
BOTH SIDES OF THE STREET.
BUT IN THIS CASE PHASE II WOULD
JUST BE ONE SIDE.
AT A MINIMUM.
>> I GOT A PROBLEM WITH THAT.
THANK YOU.
>> YES, SIR.
>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?
I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE SUMMARIZE
AND GET THIS BECAUSE THIS IS A
CONFUSING ONE.
WE ARE GIVEN OPTION OF
ANNEXATION WHICH HAS PIECES ON
IT THAT WE MIGHT NOT NECESSARILY
LIKE.
IN THE ABSENCE OF THAT, BECAUSE
THIS CAME IN UNDER A PREVIOUS
ORDINANCE, THEY COULD GET WATER
AND SEWER AND NOT COME INTO THE
CITY.
ARE THOSE THE TWO OPTIONS THAT
WE HAVE?
>> OR NOT DOING IT AT ALL?
>> NOT DOING IT AT ALL THEY
COULD GET WATER AND SEWER AND
NOT COME INTO THE CITY.
AM I READING IT WRONG?
>> THAT'S WHAT I UNDERSTAND.
>> IS THAT CORRECT,
MS. McDONALD?
>> YES.
>> OKAY.
>> ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS?
>> MR. NASH.
MY UNDERSTANDING, THE NEAREST
FIRE DEPARTMENT IS 2.2 MILES
FROM LAKESIDE PHASE I, PIERCE'S
MILL.
HOW WILL THEY GET BETWEEN THOSE?
SO THE FIRE DEPARTMENT WOULD GO
IN LAKESIDE PHASE I TO GO TO
PHASE II AND IF THIS GOES
THROUGH THAT WOULD BE CONTRACT
WITH PIERCE MILL WAS WE --
BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE -- BUT
2.2 MILES IS OUTSIDE OUR
RESPONSE TIME, ISN'T IT?
>> COME ON, CHIEF.
WE DON'T HEAR FROM YOU SOMETIME.
>> OUR CLOSEST STATION IS
6 MILES FROM THAT STATION SO WE
WOULD CONTRACT WITH PIERCES'
MILL FIRE DEPARTMENT.
>> NOW PIERCE MILL THAT
2.2 MILES THEY CAN STILL RESPOND
WITHIN THE OPTIMUM TIME FIVE
MINUTES OR MORE OR LESS?
>> YES, SIR, A GOOD ESTIMATE IS
2 MINUTES PER MILE, A 5-EMPTY
RESPONSE.
>> 5-MINUTE RESPONSE.
ALL RIGHT.
THANK YOU SO MUCH.
>> ARE WE PAID PER CALL?
>> NO, SIR, WE WOULD DO A
SERVICE CONTRACT.
FULL SERVICE CONTRACT WITH
PIERCE'S MILL TO PROVIDE FIRE
PROTECTION COVERAGE AND EMS
COVERAGE.
>> THE OTHER CONCERN, AND YOU
CAN'T HANDLE THIS ONE, CHIEF.
THANK YOU, ANYWAY.
MR. NASH, I GOT GREAT CONCERNS
ABOUT OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT
BEING ABLE TO RESPOND THAT FAR
OUT.
CURRENTLY, PHASE I --
>> WE DIDN'T OPEN THE PUBLIC
HEARING.
AND SO THAT WAS THE PHASE FOR
ASKING QUESTIONS.
IF WE COULD OPEN THE PUBLIC
HEARING.
>> HOLD THAT, MR. CRISP.
>> I THOUGHT --
>> WE DIDN'T OPEN IT?
>> NOPE.
WE WERE JUST ASKING QUESTIONS.
>> OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING,
MA'AM.
>> WE JUST HAVE ONE SPEAKER FOR
THIS ITEM.
MR. DELL CRAWFORD.
>> MR. CRAWFORD.
>> JUST SIT RIGHT THERE.
>> ANY QUESTIONS?
>> I'LL BE BRIEF.
CERTAINLY APPRECIATE THE
DIALOGUE BACK AND FORTH.
THIS IS A HARD DECISION.
I UNDERSTAND FOR THE COUNCIL.
IT'S A HARD DECISION FOR MY
CLIENT, AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT
HAPPENED BACK IN 2004-2005.
I WILL CLARIFY SOMETHING.
IT WAS NOT JUST PHASE I THAT WAS
PETITIONED FOR ANNEXATION.
IT WAS THIS TRACT ALSO.
IT WAS THE ENTIRE DEVELOPMENT
THAT WAS PETITIONED FOR
ANNEXATION BUT FOR WHATEVER
REASON IT WASN'T ACTED ON AND
NOW WE ARE BACK TO SQUARE ONE
WITH ANOTHER PETITION ON THE
SAME PROPERTY THAT WAS
PETITIONED BEFORE, AND SO I HOPE
YOU ALL CAN UNDERSTAND THE
CONFUSION WITH MY CLIENT BECAUSE
THEY JUST WANTED TO DEVELOP IT
TO STANDARD.
CERTAINLY IF IT CAME IN WITH
CITY STANDARDS, THEY WOULD
DEVELOP TO CITY STANDARDS.
BUT IT DIDN'T AT THAT TIME.
AGAIN I DON'T KNOW WHAT HAPPENED
WITH THE CITY.
WHY THEY DIDN'T GO AHEAD AND
PROCEED WITH THE PETITION BUT IN
ANY CASE THEY DIDN'T BUT IT WAS
THE ENTIRE TRACT AND NOT JUST
THE PARCEL TRACT.
WITH THAT SAID, MY CLIENT, YOU
KNOW, CERTAINLY IS OPPOSED TO
THE ANNEXATION, IF IT GOES
THROUGH.
HE CERTAINLY UNDERSTANDS BUT
THEY ARE OPPOSED TO IT FOR
OBVIOUS REASONS.
AND ALL.
I DO THINK IT'S A CONCERN, ME
BEING A TAXPAYER CONCERNED WITH
WHAT I HEAR.
YOU KNOW, ALL THESE COSTS TO
ANNEX THIS AND TO MAINTAIN IT
FIVE OR SIX MILES OUTSIDE OF THE
CITY LIMITS.
ALSO GOING THROUGH THE COUNTY ON
A PHASE I TO GO INTO PHASE II,
IT DOES POSE SOME PROBLEMS SO ON
A PERSONAL NOTE I WOULD BE
OPPOSED TO IT.
BUT IF YOU DO CHOOSE TO ANNEX,
WE CERTAINLY WOULD APPRECIATE TO
AVOID ANY ADDITIONAL CONFUSION
IS TO ALLOW THEM TO, YOU KNOW,
ONCE THEY BUILD THE HOMES, AND I
THINK WE'VE ALREADY MADE THE
DECISIONS ON THE ACTUAL
DEVELOPMENT BEING TO COUNTY
STANDARDS BUT ONCE THEY
CONSTRUCT THE HOMES THAT THEY
WOULD BE ALLOWED TO THE COUNTY
PROCESS AND NOT CITY.
TO AVOID CONFUSION BUT I WILL
CERTAINLY ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS
YOU HAVE.
>> THANK YOU, SIR.
WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING
AND HEAR ANY ADDITIONAL
QUESTIONS.
MR. BATES?
>> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.
MR. CRAWFORD, I GUESS THIS WOULD
GO FOR SATE MANAGER OR -- CITY
MANAGER OR CITY ATTORNEY SO I
WANT TO MAKE SURE ALL THIS INFO
IS GETTING DIGESTED.
IF WE APPROVE, THEN CITY
STANDARDS, PWC, WATER AND SEWER,
AND THEY BUILD AND ALL THAT GOOD
STUFF.
IF WE DISAPPROVE, THEY BUILD AND
THEY'RE IN THE COUNTY.
BUT THEY STILL BUILD AND THEY
HAVE PWC SEWER AND WATER AND WE
RECEIVE NOTHING OUT OF IT.
>> THAT'S ESSENTIALLY CORRECT.
OF COURSE, IF YOU DO APPROVE,
THEN CURRENTLY THEY ARE VESTED
UNDER COUNTY STANDARDS.
STANDARDS WOULD APPLY.
BUT IT IS REALLY A QUESTION
ABOUT WHETHER THEY DEVELOP IN
THE CITY UNDER THEIR CURRENT
APPROVALS OR WHETHER THEY
DEVELOP IN THE COUNTY UNDER
THEIR CURRENT APPROVALS.
>> YEAH.
>> ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU.
AND FOR THE CHIEF MAJORS, DO YOU
KNOW HOW MUCH IT WOULD COST TO
CONTRACT WITH PIERCE'S MILL?
ABOUT HOW MUCH IT'S GOING TO
COST FOR US TO CONTRACT WITH THE
FIRE DEPARTMENT TO COVER IT?
>> $97,000.
>> I DON'T CURRENTLY HAVE THAT
DATA BECAUSE, WELL, IT'S BASED
ON PROPERTY VALUATION -- TAX
VALUATION.
CURRENTLY, THERE'S NO
DEVELOPMENT THERE.
OF COURSE, FUTURE YEARS, THE
COST WOULD INCREASE.
>> WELL, THEN HOW DO THEY
FIGURE, MR. NASH OR SOMEBODY
BROUGHT UP IT WAS GOING TO BE
LIKE $178,000 IN TAXES OVER FIVE
YEARS.
SO HOW DO YOU ALL FIGURE THAT IF
WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE HOUSES
ARE VALUED AT AND.
>> IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE IT'S
EASY TO PROJECT THE REVENUE
PHYSICAL WE ASSUME WE ANNEX IT
THEN IT IS TO ASSUME THE COST.
YOU JUST HAVE TO DECIDE HOW FAST
YOU THINK THE HOUSES WILL BE
BUILT AND APPLIES THE VALUES IN
PHASE II TO THEM.
THERE ARE SALES TAX PER CAPITA.
YOU ASSUME HOW MANY PEOPLE LIVE
IN EACH HOME.
REVENUE HAS TO BE FACTORED IN.
STREET MILES AND POPULATION.
THOSE THINGS ARE DONE FAIRLY
ROUTINELY AND ARE --
>> THEN CHIEF, IF WHEN ONE HOUSE
IS BUILT AND SOLD AND JUST SAY A
CHILDLESS COUPLE MOVES IN, THERE
ARE ONLY TWO PEOPLE LIVINGNIST
HOW.
IT DOESN'T MATTER THE VALUE OF
THE HOUSE THAT ONE HOUSE THAT WE
ARE GOING TO HAVE TO PAY
PIERCE'S MILL TO COVER. TO BUY
COVERAGE FOR.
AND THEN AS THE YEARS OR THE
MONTHS GO BY AND THERE'S TWO,
THREE, FOUR, FIVE HOUSES THAT
ARE OCCUPIED, THE PRICE KEEPS
GOING UP.
>> THAT IS CORRECT.
IT'S THE COST OF TAX VALUE OF
THE HOME ITSELF.
AND ALSO PERSONAL PROPERTIES IS
FIGURED INTO THAT.
>> OKAY.
NOW IF -- I THINK WE HAVE BEEN
LOOKING TO PUT A FIRE HOUSE OUT
THERE ON CEDAR CREEK SOMEWHERE.
YOUYOU KNOW, IT MIGHT BE FIVE YS
OR 10 YEARS DOWN THE ROAD, BUT
IT JUST -- WOULD THAT NEW FIRE
DEPARTMENT, IF IT WAS OUT BY THE
295, OR 95 CITY CREEK
INTERCHANGE, WOULD THAT BE ABLE
TO COVER THIS?
>> I THINK IT WOULD STILL END UP
CONTRACTING WITH PIERCE'S MILL.
>> ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU, CHIEF.
>> MR. FOWLER?
>> MR. CRAWFORD?
JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I HEARD
YOU CORRECTLY.
IS THAT THE HONOR ACTUALLY
OPPOSES THE ANNEXATION OF THE
PROPERTY, IS THAT CORRECT?
>> THAT'S CORRECT.
>> SO IF I'M UNDERSTANDING IT,
THEN THE PURPOSE OF THE
ANNEXATION WAS TO MAKE SURE
THERE WOULD BE PWC WATER AND
SEWER THERE.
>> THAT'S CORRECT.
>> OKAY.
>> HOLD ON, MR. CRAWFORD.
WE WERE JUST TOLD BY ATTORNEY
AND CITY MANAGER THAT BECAUSE
THIS CAME IN UNDER PREVIOUS
POLICY THAT JUST THE MERE ACT OF
PETITIONING.
>> THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING.
THAT'S THE PURPOSE FOR THE
PETITION.
>> RIGHT.
>> WAS SO THAT THEY COULD DO
THAT IN THE HOPES IT WOULD BE
OPPOSED AND NOT VOTED IN AS
ANNEXED.
>> STILL SAME AS IT WAS IN 2005.
>> STILL PWC WATER AND SEWER.
>> BUT I JUST WAS LOOKING FOR
THE MOTIVE BEHINDúTHE PETITION,
AND I THINK WE FOUND IT.
>> ALL RIGHT.
THANKS.
ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS?
OKAY.
HOW ABOUT A MOTION?
>> MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE
OPTION 1, ADOPT THE ANNEXATION
ORDINANCE WITH AN EFFECTIVE DATE
OF APRIL 23rd, 2012.
>> HAVE A MOTION FROM MR. ARP.
IS THERE A SECOND TO THE MOTION?
I'M SORRY?
SOMEONE FROM MS. McDONALD.
>> THE MOTION WILL ALSO NEED TO
INCLUDE THE ZONING.
>> TO INCLUDE ZONING OF SF-10.
>> SECOND.
>> HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND BY
MR. HURST.
IS THERE DISCUSSION ON THE
MOTION?
ALL RIGHT, MR. FOWLER?
>> THE BIG CONCERN I HAVE ON
THIS IS THAT, THAT WE INCUR
COSTS BEYOND WHAT IT WILL TAKE
TO PROVIDE THE SERVICES.
AND I UNDERSTAND THERE'S SOME
CONCERN ABOUT BEING PLAYED TO
SAY HEY, THEY ARE GOING TO GET
SEWER AND WATER BECAUSE THEY ARE
DOING THIS.
AND WE COULD SAY, OKAY, WE'LL
FOIL THEIR PLANS BY GOING AHEAD
AND ANNEXING THEM AND THEY ARE
GOING TO BE STUCK WITH THAT BUT
WE COULD BE STUCK WITH AN
EXPENSE THAT WE SIMPLY ARE GOING
TO HAVE TO SPREAD THAT, THAT
ADDITIONAL EXPENSE OR BEARING
THAT BURDEN TO THE CURRENT
CITIZENS OF THE CITY OF
FAYETTEVILLE.
AND I AM A LITTLE LOATHE TO ADD
ADDITIONAL COST ON TO THOSE
CITIZENS IN THIS RESPECT, SO I
JUST WANTED TO MAKE THOSE
COMMENTS KNOWN TO THE COUNCIL.
>> MS. APPLEWHITE.
>> IF I COULD FOLLOW UP ON YOUR
SAME THOUGHT PROCESS.
RIGHT NOW WE ARE -- WE HAVE
HEARD BRIEFINGS FROM CHIEF OF
POLICE SAYING WE NEED X NUMBER
OF POLICE JUST TO MEET THE NEEDS
OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE AND
WE'RE TOYING AROUND WITH HOW
MUCH THAT IS GOING TO COST US
FOR OUR EXISTING LAND.
SO NOW WE HEAR THAT THIS
SUBDIVISION THAT'S, YOU KNOW,
DISLOCATED FROM THE BODY OF THE
CITY AND THEY WILL NEED PERHAPS
FOUR OR FIVE.
WE CAN'T PROVIDE POLICE SUPPORT
FOR WHAT WE HAVE.
SO I'M NOT GOING TO SUPPORT
THIS.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.
>> ONE OF THE THINGS THAT DAVID
NASH INDICATED WAS THAT AS THIS
ENTIRE PROJECT IS EVOLVING,
RESOURCES ARE GOING TO BE MADE
AVAILABLE.
IF PEOPLE MOVE IN, PAY TAXES
WHATEVER THE CASE MIGHT BE SO
IT'S NOT AS IF -- IN OTHER
WORDS, EVERYBODY ELSE FROM THE
CITY ARE GOING TO BE PAYING FOR
POLICE PROTECTION, HERE, THERE,
WHATEVER THE CASE MIGHT BE.
HE DID INDICATE THAT IT WOULD
DEPEND UPON THE SPEED OF THE
EVOLUTION.
NOW, THE QUESTION THEN BECOMES
DO WE LIMIT OURSELVES?
I HEAR WHAT BOTH YOU AND
COUNCILMAN ARE SAYING ABOUT
PUTTING THIS ON EVERYBODY.
BUT BY THE VERY SAME TOKEN, IS
THIS IN OUR MUNICIPAL INFLUENCE
AREA?
IS THIS A PART OF THE GROWTH
PROCESS?
AND IS THIS THE PRICE WE PAY TO
GROW?
I DON'T KNOW.
IF WE DON'T WANT TO SHARE THAT,
I UNDERSTAND BUT BY THE VERY
SAME TOKEN JUST LOOK AT BOTH
SIDES OF IT.
>> MR. BATES?
>> MR. SHUFORD, DO YOU KNOW IF
THERE'S ANY MORE OF THESE THAT
WERE SNUCK IN UNDER THE WIRE OR
SUBMITTED JUST BEFORE THE
CUT-OFF DEADLINE?
>> MR. BATES, THAT'S PROBABLY A
BETTER QUESTION FOR MR. NASH,
BUT I'M LOOKING AT HIM AND WE
DON'T THINK -- WE THINK THIS IS
THE LAST GROUPING THAT WOULD
FALL INTO THAT CATEGORY.
YOU MAY STILL HAVE SOME OF THE
SAME SERVICE ISSUES, EVEN IF
THEY ARE BUILT ENTIRELY TO OUR
STANDARD.
STORMWATER AND EVERYTHING ELSE.
THAT YOU WOULD NEED TO CONSIDER,
BUT THERE AGAIN, THAT'S BEEN
MENTIONED, IT IS A, A GROWTH
ISSUE, AND WE'VE SORT OF DEFINED
WHERE OUR GROWTH BOUNDARIES ARE
THROUGH THE MIA.
>> AS I SAID, I LIKE THE WAY
WE'RE, THIS PROCESS BETTER THAN
THE OLD PROCESS THOUGH.
>> MR. CRISP.
>> MR. MAYOR, IF I MAY COMMENT
BRIEFLY.
I THINK WE HAVE HAD NUMEROUS
DISCUSSIONS BASED ON THE BIG
*** WITH REGARDS TO WHETHER OR
NOT IT SHOULDN'T BEEN DONE ON A
SMALLER SCALE BECAUSE OF THE
ABILITY OR INABILITY TO PROVIDE
ADEQUATE SERVICES.
HERE WE ARE AGAIN WITH A BRIDGE
THIS FAR, AND OUR POLICE HAVE
SAID THAT THIS WILL BE IN A
STRETCH, A BURDEN.
AND I'M JUST OPPOSED TO ANY
ANNEXATION WHERE WE CAN'T
PROVIDE ADEQUATE SERVICES TO
THOSE PEOPLE THAT WE'RE TALKING
ABOUT ANNEXING.
THANK YOU.
>> ALL RIGHT, SIR.
THANK YOU.
I BELIEVE THAT'S EVERYBODY ELSE.
THE MOTION ADOPT ANNEXATION
ORDINANCE EFFECTIVE DATE OF
APRIL 23rd, SF-10, ZONING.
MAY I ASK FOR YOUR VOTE ON THAT
MOTION, PLEASE?
OKAY.
THAT MOTION FAILS.
THOSE IN -- LET'S SEE, IN FAVOR,
HURST, CHAVONNE, MASSEY.
OPPOSITION.
OKAY.
WE'LL MOVE NOW TO ITEM 6.6.
WHICH IS PUBLIC HEARING
CONCERNING THE YOUNG PROPERTY.
>> BEAR WITH ME.
>> MM-HMM.
>> OKAY.
THE YOUNG PROPERTY IS THE THIRD
ANNEXATION HEARING TONIGHT.
YOU'VE HEARD FROM MR. HARMON
HALF AN HOUR AGO ON THE ZONING
PART OF THIS.
ON THIS MAP HERE, WE'RE AGAIN
SHOWING YOU THE LOCATION IN
RELATION TO THE AIRPORT.
AND I-95.
IT'S SOUTH OF THE I-95 AND IT'S
OUTSIDE SLIGHTLY FROM THE
FAYETTEVILLE MIA.
HE'S POINTED OUT THE REASON FOR
THIS ONE ABOUT THE WRECKER
SERVICE.
THIS IS LOOKING DOWN CLAUDE LEE
ROAD BRIDGE OVER I-95.
WE ARE NOW OVER I-95 GETTING
CLOSER TO THE PROPERTY.
PROPERTY'S COMING UP NOW ON THE
LEFT.
AND HERE IT IS.
STRAIGHT AHEAD OF US.
WRECKER SERVICE OPERATING OUT OF
THE BUILDING AND CARS ARE PARKED
IN THE REAR, WHICH I BELIEVE WE
COULD ASSUME IS A SALVAGE YARD
OR STORAGE YARD AT LEAST.
I'VE LOST MY INFORMATION FOR
SOME REASON ON THIS ONE.
BUT HERE IS A SUM RARO ISSUES.
I THINK YOU HAVE -- SUMMARY OF
ISSUES.
I THINK YOU HAVE HEARD ENOUGH.
IT'S SUFFICIENT.
IT DOES COMPLY WITH THE
STANDARDS AS SHOWN IN THE
ORDINANCE.
AGAIN, THE POLICE DEPARTMENT HAS
VOICED CONCERNS OVER THIS ONE.
THEY LOOKED AT THIS ONE BEFORE
THE LAKESIDE ONE.
AND THEY IMMEDIATELY SAID THAT
THE TYPE OF BUSINESS OUT THERE
MIGHT GENERATE AN UNUSUAL LARGE
NUMBER OF CALLS FOR SERVICE.
CALL PERHAPS BREAK-INS AGAINST
CARS PARKED IN THE REAR.
AGAIN, FISCAL IMPACT IS HARD TO
ASSESS ON THIS ONE.
IN THIS CASE, THE STAFF HAS
REMMED THAT YOU NOT APPROVE THE
ANNEXATION PETITION.
>> ANY QUESTIONS?
MA'AM, CAN WE OPEN THE PUBLIC
HEARING?
92 WE HAVE ONE SPEAKER.
MR. LARRY BRIGMAN.
>> GOOD EVENING, LADIES AND
GENTLEMEN.
MY NAME IS MR. LARRY BRIGMAN.
I RESIDE AT 2444 CLAUDE LEE
HOME.
I HAVE RESIDED OUT THERE SINCE
THE VA LOAN IN 1970.
USED TO BE A WONDERFUL PLACE.
YOUR HONOR, MAY I --
>> GIVE IT TO THE CLERK.
SHE WILL BE HAPPY TO DISTRIBUTE
THAT, PLEASE.
>> MEMBERS OF THE HONORABLE
COUNCIL.
WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT, AND WHAT
MOST OF YOU ARE GOING TO SEE
LIKE THE GENTLEMAN SPOKE ABOUT
BEFORE, THE CONCERNS FROM THE
POLICE DEPARTMENT.
RIGHT NOW -- [INDISCERNIBLE]
THE -- IT'S GETTING SO BAD DOWN
THERE, LEE ROY SINCE HE OPENED
UP THIS PLACE SINCE IT'S REALLY
WENT FROM A SALVAGE YARD AS YOU
WILL NOTICE LIKE THE CITY ZONING
COMMITTEE SAID WENT FROM A
SALVAGE YARD TO A JUNKYARD.
I HAVE FEES ALL THE TIME
DURING -- THIEVES ALL THE TIME
DURING THE NIGHT.
MY DOGS HAVE BEEN POISONED.
MY WIFE'S VEHICLES HAVE BEEN
VANDALIZED.
MY VEHICLE HAS BEEN VANDALIZED.
THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HAS
REALLY MADE THIS A WONDERFUL
PLACE.
I LOVE THIS PLACE.
I WAS BORN AND RAISED RIGHT HERE
IN THE OLD QUICK AIRBORNE.
I KNOW YOU PEOPLE KNOW FROM
YEARS AGO WHILE YOU SIT HERE.
BUT OUT THERE WHAT I AM LIVING
UNDER IS HORRIBLE.
I'VE GOT -- IF YOU LOOK AT THE
PICTURES WE STILL HAVE WEST NILE
VIRUS.
I HAVE PICK-UP TRUCKS ACROSS THE
STREET LOADED WITH WATER,
MOSQUITOES.
LIKE I SAY SINCE I HAVE BEEN
LIVING THERE WE HAVE VANDALISM.
I HAVE TO INSTALL CAMERAS ALL
AROUND MY HOUSE.
THEY HAVE SNUCK UP UNDER MY
STORAGE BUILDING AND BEAT MY
SECURITY LATCH OUT.
LEFT A STICK LAYING ON TOP OF
THE TRAILER.
I GOT A BULLETHOLE.
IF YOU GO DOWN THERE NOW YOU
WILL SEE A WHITE BEAUTIFUL VINYL
FENCE.
USED TO BE GREEN.
BUT NOW THERE'S A BULLETHOLE IN
THAT.
I WENT OUT THE OTHER DAY AND I
TALKED TO TO THE COUNTY MANAGERD
HE IS PRAYING LIKE EVERYTHING
YOU PEOPLE GOING TO ZONE THIS
THING BECAUSE HE WANTS NOTHING
TO DO WITH IT.
THE LADY THAT WORKS DOWN HERE IN
THE COUNTY MANAGER'S OFFICE SAYS
SHE HAS BEEN HERE 13 YEARS,
NAMED CINDY, SWEETEST LADY YOU
EVER MET IN YOUR LIFE.
I KNOW EB YOUNG.
I REMEMBER WHEN HE WAS TOURING
CARS.
AND THE PARKING BRAKE ON.
I REMEMBER WHEN THE CITY WENT
OUT THERE TO INSPECT AND CHECK
OUT ALL THOSE JUNK CARS.
JESUS CHRIST, A LOT OF PEOPLE
WENT TO JAIL THAT DAY.
WHAT I'M SAYING IS I GOT A MESS,
MY WATER, MY WATER'S POLLUTED.
MY HOT WATER HEATERS AREN'T ANY
GOOD.
I CHANGE THEM OUT EVERY THREE OR
FOUR MONTHS.
15 YEARS COUNTY INSPECTOR,, THE
COUSIN, HE WAS DOWN THERE
WRITING THEM UP.
HE WAS CAUGHT ON VACATION.
HE LIVED IN THE WOODS AT LAZY
RIVER CAMP GROUND.
HE WAS TERMINATED FOR DOING HIS
JOB.
A FEW WEEKS LATER HE IS
DECEASED.
IF ANYBODY -- I'VE BEEN TO THE
COUNTY PLANNING ZONING AND
PLANNING AND CALLED THEM AND
CALLED THEM AND COMPLAINED.
PEOPLE COMING AND DUMPING AIR
CONDITIONERS.
THE AIR CONDITIONING BEING
DUMPED ACROSS THE ROAD AT THE
ROLLBACK.
PEOPLE COME OUT THERE AND PUT
THE AIR CONDITIONER OUT THERE
GIVEN TO HIM BY PARKING GAS AND
THE GUY PULLS UP TO THE SIDE OF
THE ROLLBACK AND SHELLS THOSE
ACs, BLOOM, BLOOM.
I AM SITTING THERE WATCHING IT.
THERE IS MORE VANDALISM NOW.
THERE'S NO MORE QUIETNESS.
USED TO AT NIGHT THE GREATEST
THING IN THE WORLD WOULD BE AT
NIGHT AND ENJOY PEACE.
FOLKS, I AM GOING TO MOVE AWAY
FROM THERE.
I CAN GO ON AND ON AND ON BUT
WHEN I REPORTED TO THE COUNTY,
ABOUT PEOPLE DUMPING THE MESS
OVER THERE, THOSE AIR
CONDITIONERS, NEXT THING I KNOW
WHEN I STARTED REPORTING THINGS
AND THINGS STARTED GETTING OUT,
NEXT THING YOU KNOW YOU GOT A
GUY THERE WORKING PARKER'S GAS,
MICHAEL BLACKWELL, FEDERAL
MARSHALS LOCKED HIM UP.
BRANDON YOUNG.
OH, MY LORD.
WHEN THEY LOCKED HIM UP HE
SQUEALED LIKE A JAYBIRD.
>> WE PROBABLY MAKE THIS
PERSONAL, SIR SO IF YOU HAVE
SOMETHING TO SAY ABOUT THE
PROPERTY, THAT WOULD BE
APPROPRIATE.
>> I HAVE HAD MY PLACE
EVALUATED.
FORGIVE ME FOR BEING PERSONAL.
IT'S THE ANXIETY I HAVE BEEN
GOING THROUGH ALL THESE YEARS.
RIGHT NOW THE SITUATION IS IT'S
SO BAD THAT THERE'S NO PEACE AND
REST.
I'VE GOT CONTAMINATION.
LOOK AT THAT PROPERTY THERE, YOU
WILL SEE OIL WATER LIKE I SAY
GEOLOGICAL REPORTS.
ALL THE WAY UNDER LEROY AND RUNS
TO ME.
YEARS AGO MY MOTHER,
MOTHER-IN-LAW USED TO WASH
CLOTHES IN THOSE STREAMS.
MY DAD IN LAW AND MY MOTHER.
WHEN MY WIFE WAS BORN IN 1948,
MY FATHER-IN-LAW WAS DOWN THERE
MAKING LIQUOR.
RIGHT NOW THOSE STREAMS ARE SO
CONTAMINATED IT'S HORRIBLE.
WALK BEHIND MY HOUSE.
THOSE STREAMS ARE CONTAMINATED
WITH GAS AND OIL.
GUESS WHERE THE STREAMS ARE
GOING?
THEY ARE GOING INTO ROCK FISH
CREEK.
ANYBODY GOT ANY QUESTIONS BEFORE
I SIT DOWN?
SORRY FOR TRYING TO BE --
>> WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC
HEARING AND SEE IF WE HAVE ANY
QUESTIONS.
>> NO FURTHER SPEAKERS.
>> WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC
HEARING AND THEN ENTERTAIN ANY
QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL FOR
MR. BRIGMAN OR STAFF.
HEARING NONE, IS THERE A MOTION
ON THIS AGENDA ITEM? MR. BATES?
>> MOTION TO DISAPPROVE ANNUAL
ACTIONXATION -- ANNUAL ANNEXATIN
PETITION.
>> SECOND.
>> IS THERE DISCUSSION ON THE
MOTION?
MAY I ASK FOR YOUR VOTE, PLEASE?
THAT MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY.
OKAY WE WILL MOVE TO 6.7,
AMENDMENT TO THE CITY CODE.
>> THANK YOU, MA'AM.
>> THIS IS ONE OF NINETY FOUR -R
TEXT AMENDMENTS YOU HAVE.
ACCESS STANDARDS.
IT HAS THREE PARTS TO IT.
THE FIRST ONE DEALS WITH CROSS
ACCESS REQUIREMENTS THAT WE'VE
PLACED ON GENERALLY IT'S GOING
TO BE ON COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES
SO THAT ADJACENT PROPERTIES HAVE
A LINK ACROSS THEIR PROPERTIES
INSTEAD OF MULTIPLE CURB CUTS ON
TO THE LARGER ROAD.
THE SECOND IS WHEN THERE IS NOT
DIRECT ACCESS ON THE PUBLIC
STREET AND I WILL WALK THROUGH
THOSE VERY QUICKLY.
THERE IS A HANDOUT THAT I AM
GOING TO ASK THE CLERK TO SHARE
WITH YOU BECAUSE THERE WERE SOME
CHANGES WITH THE PLANNING
COMMISSION WHO HEARD THE CASES
LAST WEEK.
SO THIS IS THE FIRST TIME YOU
WILL GET THE RECOMMENDATIONS,
AND THERE WERE SOME ADJUSTMENTS
THAT WE MADE.
THE CROSS ACCESS IS ACTUALLY
PROVIDED FOR IN THERE.
AND THERE ARE SOME OPPORTUNITIES
FOR EXCEPTIONS.
THOSE DID NOT COVER ENOUGH OF
THE CIRCUMSTANCES WE WERE
ENCOUNTERING DURING DEVELOPMENT.
YOU MAY HEAR OF ONE SPEAKER
TONIGHT.
THERE WAS ONE SPEAKER AT THE
PLANNING COMMISSION WHO PROVIDED
AN EXAMPLE OF A SITUATION WHERE
IT JUST DIDN'T MAKE SENSE.
IT WASN'T NECESSARILY
TAUPOGRAPHIC ISSUES BUT SIMPLY
DIDN'T MAKE ECONOMIC OR TRAFFIC
SAFETY MANAGEMENT SENSE.
SO THIS ACTUALLY JUST SIMPLY
EXPANDS AND CLARIFIES THE
CIRCUMSTANCES UNDER WHICH
ADMINISTRATIVELY WE CAN SAY IT'S
AN UNNECESSARY STEP AND WAIVE IT
AT THAT POINT AT THE STAFF
LEVEL.
THE NEXT ASPECTS OF IT, FIRST
PART IS RESIDENTIAL AND THEN
THERE IS A QUESTION ABOUT ACCESS
FOR COMMERCIAL.
SO THE FIRST PART, THERE ARE A
SERIES OF LANDLOCKED PARCELS
AROUND THE CITY OUT IN THE
COUNTY AS WELL.
ONE OF THE WAYS IN WHICH ACCESS
CAN BE PROVIDED IS THROUGH WHAT
WE CALL A FLAG LOT.
WHICH IS WHERE THAT LONG ACCESS
ROAD IS ACTUALLY OWNED.
IT'S PART OF THE PROPERTY THAT
IS GENERALLY BEHIND.
IT'S WELL OFF THE PUBLIC STREET.
THAT HAS NOT BEEN CLARIFIED IN
THE ORDINANCE, SO THERE ARE NO
STANDARDS THERE FOR IT.
IT ISN'T RECOGNIZED.
WE ARE PROPOSING A SET OF
STANDARDS.
IT BE AT LEAST 20 FEET WIDE.
THAT GENERALLY RESPECTS THE FIRE
DEPARTMENT'S ACCESS.
BUT IT SERVES ONLY ONE SINGLE
FAMILY USE OFF OF THAT FLAG.
THAT THE FLAG BE AT NO MORE THAN
250 FEET LONG.
AND WITHIN 500 FEET FROM A FIRE
HYDRANT.
I WILL SHOW YOU THE KIND OF
IMPACT THERE WITHIN AN OVERALL
SUBDIVISION THAT THERE BE NO
MORE.
IF IT'S LESS THAN 20 LOTS IN
THAT SUBDIVISION, THERE BE NO
MORE THAN ONE FLAG LOT.
IF THERE ARE MORE THAN 20, IT'S
CAPPED EITHER BY 5% OR BY TOTAL
OF 12.
AND THEN WE HAVE PROPOSED
SPECIFIC STANDARDS FOR
CUL-DE-SAC STREETS.
THESE ARE COMPARABLE TO WHAT WAS
IN THE OLD CODE.
SIMPLY CLARIFIES HOW FAR BACK
YOU CAN BE BEFORE IT HAS TO BE
OF A CERTAIN WIDTH.
BUT TO ILLUSTRATE.
THIS IS TOTALLY HYPOTHETICAL.
THE ACTUAL CIRCUMSTANCES OF
THESE PARCELS IS A LITTLE
DIFFERENT BUT YOU CAN SEE IN ONE
SECTION WHAT WE WOULD CALL THE
LONG FLAG.
THIS IS THE POLE.
AND IN THIS INSTANCE THIS IS THE
PROPERTY SO THIS IS THE FLAG.
THE ASSUMPTIONS OF THOSE
STANDARDS IS A MINIMUM OF
20 FEET WIDE.
THE LENGTH OF THE POLE IS NO
MORE THAN 250 FEET.
AND THE RELATIONSHIP TO THE FIRE
HYDRANT IS LET'S SAY THAT'S
250 FEET.
THEN THE FIRE HYDRANT COULDN'T
BE ANYMORE THAN 250 FEET EITHER
WAY ON THE ROAD, SO A TOTAL OF
500 FEET BETWEEN WHEREVER THAT
HYDRANT IS LOCATED AND UP THE
FLAG TO THE PROPERTY.
IN THIS INSTANCE, ONLY ONE OF
THE LOTS CAN BE ACCESSED OFF THE
FLAG, AND THE DISTINCTION HERE
IS THAT THE DEED IS OWNED.
IT IS A PART OF THE PROPERTY.
WE ARE NOT DEALING WITH
EASEMENTS, WHICH ARE MUCH MORE
DIFFICULT TO MANAGE.
THERE IS A SIMILAR ISSUE WITH
THE STANDARD IN THE SUBDIVISION
STANDARDS ABOUT NONRESIDENTIAL
PROPERTY MUST BE ON A PRIVATE OR
PUBLIC STREET.
THERE ARE NUMEROUS INSTANCES USE
TO
USED TO BE CALLED GROUP
DEVELOPMENT IN OUR CODE WHERE
INDIVIDUAL PARCELS ARE NOT
ACTUALLY FRONTING ON A PUBLIC OR
PRIVATE STREET BUT THEY ARE
DEVELOPABLE PARCELS.
IN THIS INSTANCE, THERE WOULD BE
PROVISION FOR A RECORDED
EASEMENT OR RIGHT-OF-WAY, THE
ACCESS ROAD HAS TO MEET THE CITY
STANDARDS, AND THERE IS A
MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT THAT'S
INCORPORATED WITH IT.
WE ARE GOING TO BEGIN
MENTIONING, AND IT WASN'T IBYOUR
IBYOUR -- IN YOUR REPORT SO I AM
CALLING IT OUT IN OUR
PRESENTATION HERE THAT IT IS
GENERALLY SUPPORTED BY BOTH
ADOPTED POLICY PLANS, THAT YOU
HAVE, YOUR STRATEGIC PLANS, AND
BY THE 2030 VISION PLAN.
WE DO SEE IT IS SUPPORTED BY
SPECIFIC POLICIES IN THOSE
DOCUMENTS AND THE PLANNING
COMMISSION AND THE STAFF DO
RECOMMEND APPROVAL.
THERE ARE TWO MODIFICATIONS THAT
I MENTIONED TO YOU THAT CLARIFY
THE LANGUAGE ABOUT OVERALL
LENGTH OF THE POLE AND ACCESS IN
RELATIONSHIP TO THE HYDRANTS.
WE DO RECOMMEND APPROVAL.
>> MS. APPLEWHITE.
>> THANK YOU, KAREN.
NOW TWO WEEKS AGO WE HAD A
PROPERTY, I DIDN'T KNOW WHAT A
FLAGPOLE LOT WAS.
SO IN HANDLING THAT CASE, I
STARTED THINKING ABOUT THE AREAS
IN WESTERN FAYETTEVILLE THAT
HAVE BEEN ANNEXED INTO THE SATE.
THEY HAVE -- CITY.
THEY HAVE BEEN EXISTING IN A
CERTAIN WAY FOR MANY, MANY
YEARS, AND IN PARTICULARLY, THAT
LOT THE POLE WAS 15 FEET WIDE
VERSUS THE 20 YOU ARE
RECOMMENDING, AND SO IF WE USE
THAT AS AN EXAMPLE, SAY
SOMETHING HAPPENED TO THE
STRUCTURES THERE AND THEY WANTED
TO REBUILD, AND THAT LOT AND
THAT ROAD IS ONLY, THAT FLAGPOLE
IS ONLY 15 FEET, HOW DOES THIS
IMPACT THEM?
WOULD THEY NOT BE ABLE TO BUILD
AGAIN BECAUSE THAT FLAGPOLE IS
ONLY 15 FEET?
IF WE PUT THIS IN THE ORDINANCE,
OR IS THERE A WAY TO GRANDFATHER
PROPERTIES THAT ARE ALREADY
EXISTING IN THIS STATE THAT
DON'T MEET THIS 20-FOOT
REQUIREMENT.
>> OUR PREFERENCE IS NOT TO
GRANDFATHER IN THESE INSTANCES,
PARTICULARLY IF IT'S AN EASEMENT
SITUATION OR SOMETHING LIKE
THAT.
IF IT'S AN EXISTING SIT
SITUATION, THERE MAY BE
CIRCUMSTANCES IN WHICH THEY HAVE
THE ABILITY TO REDEVELOP.
I THINK THE SUBDIVISION WAIVER
WOULD BE THE OTHER OPTION FOR
THE FIVE FEET MISSING.
AND THEN IT WOULD BE A JUDGMENT
AS TO WHETHER THAT'S A PROBLEM
FOR FIRE AND SAFETY ACCESS,
EMERGENCY ACCESS.
FOR INSTANCE A DAY CARE, A
SECOND HOME AND A 3rd HOME
IN THE BACK.
WOULD THAT CONSTITUTE A
SUBDIVISION WAIVER?
>> THAT'S A SPECIFIC INSTANCE,
YEAH.
OKAY.
>> MS. HILTON DOESN'T KNOW THE
SPECIFIC DETAILS OF THAT.
YOU GRANTED A SUBDIVISION WAIVER
AND THAT IS IN THE SAME MANNER
AS APPROVAL FOR SETBACK OR OTHER
DIMENSIONAL STANDARD AND THAT
RUNS WITH THE LAND SO IT --
YOU'VE APPROVED THAT ONE, THAT
ONE WILL REMAIN IF THE LOT THAT
IS CREATED THAT, IF THE LOT
ACCESSES THE EASEMENT, IF
SOMETHING HAPPENS TO THAT, THAT
COULD BE REBUILT.
>> I USE THAT AS AN EXAMPLE BUT
JUST SAY THERE IS ANOTHER ONE A
SEPARATE ONE OUT THERE BECAUSE I
GOT A FEELING IN WESTERN
FAYETTEVILLE THE COUNTY
STANDARDS, THERE ARE PROBABLY A
BUNCH OF THEM HANGING AROUND OUT
THERE.
SO THIS WOULD AFFECT THEM IN
WHAT WAY?
IF THERE ARE OTHERS WITH A
15-FOOT FLAGPOLE HOW DOES THIS
AFFECT THEM?
WHAT IS THE IMPACT TO THEM?
>> I THINK THEY WILL FALL UNDER
OUR NONCONFORMING STANDARDS WITH
REGARD TO EXISTING SITUATIONS.
WHAT WE LOOKED AT BEFORE WAS A
VACANT LOT, AND THAT'S WHY A
WAIVER HAD TO BE GRANTED TO
ACCESS.
ADDITIONALLY, THE PLANNING
COMMISSION I UNDERSTAND LAST
WEEK ASKED STAFF TO START TO
LOOK AT THE SITUATIONS AND BRING
FORWARD IDEAS FOR THEM TO
CONSIDER AND START DISCUSSING
WITH THEM TO ADDRESS ISSUES YOU
SEE LIKE THIS ELSEWHERE IN THIS
CITY.
>> OKAY.
>> SO I'M HOPEFUL THAT WE WILL
AT LEAST BE ABLE TO BRING YOU
SOME LONGER TERM SOLUTIONS TO
THIS APPARENTLY SIGNIFICANT
PROBLEM.
>> OKAY.
THANK YOU, SIR.
>> MR. FOWLER.
>> YES, MS. HILTON.
THE PURPOSE BEHIND THIS
DETERMINATION OF 20 FEET IS TO
DO WHAT?
>> 20 FEET IS TYPICALLY THE
MINIMUM WIDTH FOR THE FIRE
DEPARTMENT FOR ACCESS,
CLEARANCE, SETTING UP TO EITHER
SIDE IF THEY NEED TO STOP THERE
AND BEGIN TO UNLOAD EQUIPMENT
AND.
>> SO IS THERE ANY REQUIREMENT
IN THE POLICY FOR THAT 20-FOOT
PIECE OF LAND, IS THERE ANY
REQUIREMENT IN THAT THAT PIECE
OF LAND BE CLEARED?
>> IN THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS,
IT WOULD BE A CLEARED -- IT
WOULD BE A PAVED IMPROVED DRIVE.
>> IS THAT -- IS THAT SPELLED
OUT IN THE POLICY?
AND DOES IT TPELL OUT THAT'LL BE
A PAVED IMPROVED DRIVE 20 FEET
WIDE IN OTHER WORDS GOING THE
FULL WIDTH OF THE FLAGPOLE.
>> TYPICALLY YOU DON'T PAVE THE
FULL WIDTH.
YOU NEED THAT ROOM TO SET UP ON
EITHER SIDE.
IF NEED BE.
IN THIS CASE, THE ACCESS TO THE
PROPERTY IS REALLY WHAT IS
NECESSARY IN THAT CLEARING
PROCESS.
BUT THE MINIMUM 10 TO 12 FEET.
THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, THE
PROPERTY AS IT GOES FOR ITS
BUILDING PERMIT, THEY WOULD
DOUBLE CHECK THE DRIVE, AND IT
IS NOW REQUIRED FOR ALL
RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES TO BE AN
IMPROVED SURFACE.
>> AND FOR THOSE THAT WERE, THAT
WERE BROUGHT IN, WHO DON'T HAVE
THAT WIDTH,.
>> IT WOULD BE PROBABLY A
SUBDIVISION WAIVER IF IT'S AN
EXISTING LOT IT WOULD BE AN
EXISTING NONCONFORMING EXISTING
DEVELOPMENT.
IT WOULD BE AN EXISTING
NONCONFORMING SITUATION.
IF IT'S A NEW DEVELOPMENT THEY
WOULD GO THROUGH A PROCESS MUCH
LIKE WAS JUST DESCRIBED WITH THE
WAIVER.
>> SO THEY WOULD HAVE THE
OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE THE WAIVER.
THEY WOULD COME TO US AND THEY
WOULD STILL BE ABLE TO GRANT A
WAIVER.
>> THOSE GO TO THE PLANNING
COMMISSION.
IT IS QUASI-JUDICIAL BUT THEY
WOULD GO THERE.
MM-HMM.
>> ONCE IF GOES TO THE PLANNING
COMMISSION, WOULD IT GO TO US OR
STOP AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION?
>> APPARENTLY IT CAME HERE THE
LAST TIME.
>> SO IT WOULD STILL COME HERE.
>> I THINK IT WAS THE FIRST ONE
THAT WE'VE HAD UNDER THIS.
WE HAVEN'T TYPICALLY IN THE PAST
HAD ANYBODY APPEAL THESE
SITUATIONS.
THEY SIMPLY ARE UNDEVELOPABLE
LOTS.
>> OKAY.
>> I WOULD LOVE TO PREVENT --
LOATHE TO PREVENT PEOPLE FROM
BEING ABLE TO USE THEIR LOTS,
SO.
>> ANYTHING ELSE?
OKAY, WE WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC
HEARING, MA'AM.
>> MR. MAYOR, WE HAVE ONE
SPEAKER, MR. MORRISON WEST.
>> DOES THIS WORK HERE?
>> WE CAN HEN YOU -- HELP YOU
WITH THAT.
>> SHOW A PICTURE OF WHAT I GOT.
>> STOP THE TIME NOW.
>> HADN'T STARTED IT YET, SIR.
>> I'M MORRISON WEST, I OWN WEST
AUTOMOTIVE TORN OUT WITH A
TORNADO.
WE ARE ALLOWED CERTAIN THINGS,
AND WE LEARN THINGS AFTER THE
FACT.
AND THIS IS ONE ISSUE SHE IS
TALKING ABOUT ACCESS TO
PROPERTY.
I'VE BEEN THERE FOR 37 YEARS.
50-70 HOURS A WEEK I WORK THERE.
I FOUGHT THE TORNADO.
I FOUGHT THE INSURANCE COMPANY.
I FOUGHT THE THIEVES.
AND NOWIUM DEALING WITH THE
CITY -- NOW I'M DEALING WITH THE
CITY.
THERE IS QUITE A BIT THERE GOING
ON, BUT THE MAIN THING IS NEXT
DOOR THE GENTLEMAN IS
REBUILDING.
HE ASKED IF HE COULD DRIVE
ACROSS MY LOT.
I SAID NO WAY.
LIABILITY ISSUES.
I DON'T NEED THAT.
I THOUGHT HE REBUILT AND MADE
HIS BUILDING SMALLER AND I FEEL
SOMEONE HERE MISSED THE SIZE OF
HIS BUILDING AND MADE ME THE
SCAPEGOAT BECAUSE WHAT'S
HAPPENED IS HIS BUILDING IS --
RIGHT HERE, HE WAS TOLD IF YOU
HAVE A SIDE STREET YOU COME IN
FROM THE SIDE.
NO LONGER.
D.O.T. BLOCKED THE ROAD.
I HAVE TWO ACCESS HE HAS ONE.
FINE, WE GO ALONG WITH THAT.
FIRST THREE ARE IDENTICAL.
STOP SIGNS AT THE END NO STOP
LIGHTS OR ANYTHING ELSE.
HE COMES IN RIGHT HERE, AND
THAT'S HIS ENTRANCE AND HE STOPS
RIGHT HERE.
[INAUDIBLE]
MY PROPERTY'S HERE, TWO
DRIVEWAYS.
WELL, I'M FINE WITH THAT.
THEN THE OTHER DAY I MOVE
ADDUMPSTER AND HE SAID I AM SO
GLAD YOU MOVE THAT SO I CAN
DRIVE ACROSS YOUR LOT.
HE SAID THE CITY SAID IT'S OKAY.
THE CITY SAID THERE IS A RULE
YOU CAN DO THIS.
WELL, THIS IS THE THIRD LOT IN
THE MIDDLE AND THE MAN COULD NOT
GET TO RILEY ROAD YES YOU MIGHT
COME ACROSS HIS OR MY LOT.
MY LOT IS 198 BY 200.
HIS IS 98 BY 200.
HIS BUILDING SHOULD'VE BEEN
CONTROLLED FOR HIM TO HAVE HIS
OWN PARKING LOT TURN AROUND AND
COME BACK THE SAME WAY YOU COME
IN.
WELL YOU CAN GO ACROSS THIS LOT
IN HERE.
I AM LOSING EIGHT FEET OVER HERE
FOR SIDEWALK AND CURBING.
NOW WE ARE TALKING ABOUT COMING
ACROSS THE PARKING LOT.
I KNOW THE FIRST PERSON TO BE
SUED WHEN HE COMES ACROSS THE
LOT TO BE SUED IS ME.
THERE IS NO THIRD LOT IN THE
MIDDLE.
HERE THEY APPROVE SOMETHING HE
SHOULD'VE GONE OUT THE SAME
DRIVEWAY HE COME IN AT.
HIS BUILDING WOULD'VE BEEN MOVED
BACK TO FRONT BECAUSE YOU HAVE
SO MUCH BETWEEN THE BUILDING AND
THE CURB, AND I MEAN, HE KNEW
THREE MONTHS BEFORE BECAUSE HE
ASKED ME THE QUESTION AND I JUST
THINK THERE IS NO WAY FOR
SOMEONE TO COME ACROSS MY LOT.
I CAN'T UNDERSTAND SOMEBODY
SAYING WE ARE COMING ACROSS IT.
BLOCKING OFF THE DRIVEWAY,
D.O.T.
IT WOULD BE GREAT IF THEY WOULD
OPEN IT UP BACK WHERE HE IS AT
BUT OF COURSE D.O.T. IS A
DIFFERENT PERSON BUT THAT'D BE A
CURE TO THE PROBLEM.
SO THAT'S THE BIGGEST THING I
GOT.
YOU KNOW, I WANT TO SEE A
MODIFICATION.
I AM -- I DON'T THINK ANYBODY IS
GOING TO SAY LOOK, WE DON'T
ALLOW THAT TO HAPPEN TO YOU.
WE TAKE .9 COMMERCIAL LOT MAKE
IT SMALLER AND SMALLER AND
SMALLER.
COMMERCIAL PROPERTY IS VERY
VALUABLE.
AND THAT'S WHAT I'M HERE FOR
JUST TO ASK Y'ALL TO CONSIDER
THIS AND I DON'T KNOW WHO YOU
TALKED TO ABOUT ANYTHING AFTER
THIS BUT LIKE I SAY OUR LOTS
HAVE BEEN CUT DOWN THERE.
>> THANK YOU FOR COMING.
>> I APPRECIATE IT.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THE
OPPORTUNITY.
>> STAND BY.
WE COULD HAVE SOME QUESTIONS,
SIR. WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC
HEARING.
WE COULD HAVE SOME QUESTIONS, SO
STAND BY.
>> NO FURTHER SPEAKERS, SIR.
>> WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC
HEARING, AND I AM SURE STAFF --
SOMEONE CAN HELP US PUT ALL THIS
TOGETHER HERE.
>> MAYOR AND COUNCILMEMBERS, THE
AMENDMENT BEFORE YOU TONIGHT
DOESN'T HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH
THE ISSUE THIS GENTLEMAN'S
REFERRING TO, BUT WE'LL BE HAPPY
TO LOOK INTO IT AND GIVE YOU A
REPORT BACK AND COORDINATE WITH
HIM AS WELL WITH REGARD TO IT.
>> ALL RIGHT, SIR.
SOUND LIKE A PLAN.
IS EVERYBODY HAPPY WITH THAT?
MR. HAIRE, MR. SHUFORD,
MR. HAIRE HAS A QUESTION, SIR.
>> MR. SHUFORD, HAD YOU HEARD OF
THIS CONCERN BEFORE TONIGHT?
>> AS FAR AS CROSS ACCESS
REQUIREMENT, I HAVE NOT HEARD OF
THIS PARTICULAR ONE.
I DO KNOW THAT AS PROPERTIES ARE
DEVELOPED, WE DO LOOK TO
ESTABLISH THOSE CROSS-ACCESS
THINGS BUT I AM NOT SURE WE CAN
DO IT WITHOUT THE CONSENT OF THE
PROPERTY OWNER WHICH IS WHY I
NEED A LITTLE TIME TO REPORT
BACK TO Y'ALL.
>> ALL RIGHT,.
>> THANK YOU, SIR.
>> ACTUALLY THE AMENDMENT WE
HAVE GOT BEFORE YOU THIS EVENING
WOULD MAKE IT EASIER FOR US TO
ADDRESS THE SITUATION HE'S JUST
DESCRIBED, WHICH IS WE HAVE JUST
TWO.
AND YOU HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO
GO TO A SIDE STREET.
THEY DON'T NEED THAT CROSS
ACCESS.
IT DOESN'T BENEFIT ON THE, YOU
KNOW, LIMITING --
>> IT DOESN'T MAKE THE SITUATION
WORSE.
>> IT IS AN OPTION TO ADDRESS
IT.
>> OKAY.
WE LOOK FORWARD TO YOUR REPORT,
MR. SHUFORD.
ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS ON ITEM
6.7, COUNCIL?
HOW ABOUT A MOTION?
MR. HURST?
>> MR. MAYOR, THANK YOU VERY
MUCH.
I MOVE TO ADOPT THE AMENDMENT AS
PROPOSED.
>> THANK YOU.
THANK YOU, MS. DAVY.
IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION ON THAT
MOTION?
LET ME ASK FOR YOUR VOTE,
PLEASE.
THAT MOTION CARRIES.
MR. CRISP, MR. BATES, MR. HURST,
MR. DAVY, MR. HAIRE, MR. MASSEY,
IN OPPOSITION MS. APPLEWHITE AND
MR. FOWLER.
OKAY.
WE'LL MOVE NOW TO ITEM 6.8.
CITY CODE CHAPTER 30.
MS. HILTON.
MR. SHUFORD?
>> I'M SORRY I AM TAKING SO LONG
FINDING THE POWERPOINT.
I MAY HAVE TO BRING THEM UP.
>> JUST TELL ET US ABOUT IT.
WE GETTING READY TO SO MOVE YOU.
>> I'M ACTUALLY NOT -- WELL,
THERE'S ONE OF THEM.
HERE WE GO.
I'M SORRY IT TOOK SO LONG TO
DISCOVER THAT ONE.
>> PUT YOU ON ANOTHER AGENDA.
AND AFTER ALL THAT, I REALLY
ONLY HAVE ONE SLIDE FOR YOU.
OUR DOWNTOWN ZONING DISTRICT, WE
ARE PROPOSING A NUMBER OF
DIFFERENT AMENDMENTS TO IT, AND
THOSE AMENDMENTS ARE INTENDED TO
ADDRESS WHAT I THINK WAS AN
EFFORT TO BRING TO SOME EXTENT
SUBURBAN STANDARDS INTO OUR
DOWNTOWN.
AND WE'VE HAD A FAIR AMOUNT OF
DISCUSSION WITH YOU, THE
PLANNING COMMISSION, WITH THE
DOWNTOWN STAKEHOLDERS AS WELL,
AND HERE IS WHAT WE'VE COME UP
WITH.
THE FIRST ONE WOULD ELIMINATE
MINIMUM PARKING AND LOADING
REQUIREMENTS IN THE DOWNTOWN.
IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO PROVIDE
THAT PARKING, AND ANYONE WHO
DOES RESIDENTIAL IS LIKELY TO
LOOK FOR WAYS TO PROVIDE IT BUT
THIS KEEPS YOU FROM HAVING TO
PROVIDE IT.
THE SECOND ONE IS TO ELIMINATE
DENSITY REQUIREMENTS.
WE CURRENTLY HAVE A DENSITY CAP
IN THE DOWNTOWN OF 40 UNITS AN
ACRE.
THAT IS A VERY LOW NUMBER FOR
URBAN ENVIRONMENTS.
IT SOUNDS HIGH BUT IT IS QUITE
LOW, AND WE WOULD PROPOSE
ELIMINATING THAT AND LET THE
BULK STANDARDS OF THE ORDINANCE,
THE HEIGHT AND THE SETBACK
REQUIREMENTS DETERMINE HOW MANY
RESIDENTIAL UNITS YOU MIGHT CAN
GET IN.
THE THIRD CHANGE WOULD BE TO
MODIFY WHAT WE CALL OUR GLAZES
GLAZES -- GLAZING REQUIREMENTS.
BASICALLY THE AREA OF THE FACADE
THAT FACES THE STREET THAT HAS
GLASS IN IT OR A DOORWAY AND THE
INTENT BEHIND THAT IS TO MAKE IT
EASIER BECAUSE WE'RE REDUCING
THE REQUIREMENT FROM 60% TO 50%,
WHICH IS A MUCH MORE DOABLE
PROVISION.
CERTAIN LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS
IN THE DOWNTOWN.
THE ORDINANCE DOES PROVIDE FOR
TREE PLANTING AND FOUNDATION
LANDSCAPING DOWNTOWN BUILDINGS.
DOWNTOWN PROPERTIES.
WE NEED -- THAT'S BASICALLY AN
OVERSIGHT, AND WE NEED TO CLEAR
THAT ONE UP.
BUT IF SOMEONE DID A SURFACE
PARKING LOT, WE WOULD STILL
RETAIN THE, THE PARKING LOT
LANDSCAPING STANDARDS OR
ELSEWHERE IN THE CODE.
MODIFYING THE SETBACK
REQUIREMENTS.
THAT IS ONE OF THE BIGGEST ONES
HERE.
IN DOWNTOWNS, TYPICALLY YOU DO
WANT YOUR BUILDINGS TO BE BUILT
UP CLOSE TO THE SIDEWALK AT THE
EDGE OF THE PROPERTY BUT IN SOME
CASES, CERTAIN TYPES OF USES, IF
YOU THINK ABOUT THEM, TYPICALLY
PLACES AT WORSHIP, AND CIVIC
USES LIKE COURTHOUSES, CITY
HALLS, MUSEUMS, THAT SORT OF
SITUATION, YOU HAVE AREAS THAT
YOU WANT TO ACTUALLY SEPARATE
THE BUILDINGS FROM THE IMMEDIATE
EDGE OF THE SIDEWALK AND THE
STREET.
JUST LIKE WE HAVE A COURTYARD IN
FRONT OF THE CITY HALL WHICH
HELPS WHEN PEOPLE COME OUT AND
CONGREGATE.
LIKEWISE WITH CHURCHES WHENEVER
THERE ARE WEDDINGS, FUNERALS, OR
OTHER GATHERINGS, YOU DON'T WANT
TO CONGREGATION IMMEDIATELY
RIGHT OUT ON THE SIDEWALK AND
VIRTUALLY EVERY CHURCH IN OUR
DOWNTOWN WOULD BE NONCONFIRMING
UNDER OUR CURRENT REQUIREMENTS
BUT WE'RE SUGGESTING THAT WE
MODIFY THIS TO AVOID THAT
PROBLEM.
LAST TWO DEAL WITH OPEN SPACE
AND PARKLAND REQUIREMENTS.
VERY DIFFICULT TO PROVIDE EITHER
ONE OF THOSE IN A DOWNTOWN
HIGHLY URBAN SETTING WHERE YOU
ARE EXPECTING BUILDINGS TO BE
BUILT PROPERTY LINE TO PROPERTY
LINE.
WE LARGELY EXEMPT THE OPEN SPACE
REQUIREMENTS UNDER THIS
ORDINANCE.
AND WE WOULD ELIMINATE ENTIRELY
THE PARKLAND REQUIREMENTS.
I WOULD BE GLAD TO ANSWER ANY
QUESTIONS.
WE HAVE RUN THIS BY OUR DOWNTOWN
STAKEHOLDERS AND I BELIEVE WE
DON'T HAVE ANYONE HERE TO SPEAK
ON THIS ISSUE, WHICH INDICATES
WE'VE DONE A FAIRLY GOOD JOB OF
COMMUNICATING WITH THEM.
>> ANY QUESTIONS FOR
MR. SHUFORD?
OKAY, MA'AM, LET'S OPEN THE
PUBLIC HEARING PLEASE.
>> MR. MAYOR, WE HAVE NO
SPEAKERS FOR THIS ITEM.
>> OKAY, WE WILL CLOSE THE
PUBLIC HEARING AND ADDRESS ANY
ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS
FROM COUNCIL.
MS. DAVY.
>> I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION
THAT WE APPROVE THE PROPOSED
CHANGES BY STAFF.
>> WE HAVE A MOTION.
IS THERE A SECOND.
THANK YOU, MR. FOWLER.
ANY DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION.
MAY I ASK FOR YOUR VOTE, PLEASE
THAT IS UNANIMOUS.
THANK YOU.
WE WILL MOVE NOW TO ITEM 6.9.
>> OKAY, MAYOR AND
COUNCILMEMBERS THIS IS A CODE
AMENDMENT WE SPENT A FAIR AMOUNT
OF TIME TALKING ABOUT AT OUR
AGENDA REVIEW MEETING.
AND IT IS BASICALLY MODIFYING
SEPARATION DISTANCE FOR GROUP
HOMES, HALFWAY HOUSES AND
TRANSITIONAL HOUSING AS WELL AS
ESTABLISHING A NEW TRANSITIONAL
HOUSING USE.
THE PROPOSAL IS IN THREE PARTS.
THE FIRST ONE IS THAT THE
ORDINANCE DOES NOTHING TO CHANGE
THE HALF-MILE SEPARATION
DISTANCE FOR GROUP HOMES,
HALF-WAY HOUSES, AND OTHER
FACILITIES OF THIS TYPE IN
RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS.
THE SECOND ONE IS THAT GROUP
HOMES AND, AND HALFWAY HOUSES
AND TRANSITIONAL HOUSING SHOULD
YOU APPROVE THAT NEW USE WOULD
BE APPROVED THROUGH A SPECIAL
USE PERMIT PROCESS, AND IN
NONRESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS, THAT
SEPARATION DISTANCE WOULD BE
DETERMINED BY YOU TAKING INTO
ACCOUNT THE INDIVIDUAL
CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE PROPERTY TO
DETERMINE THE SEPARATION
REQUIREMENT AND THEN THE THIRD
ONE, IS ESTABLISH THE
TRANSITIONAL HOUSING AS A NEW
USE.
LET ME TAKE THE FIRST ONE.
I WON'T BEAT THIS ONE TO DEATH,
BUT I DO WANT IT VERY CLEARLY
UNDERSTOOD THAT WE ARE NOT
SUGGESTING ANY MODIFICATION TO
THE HALF-MILE SEPARATION
DISTANCE.
IN RESIDENTIAL ZONING AREAS.
SO THERE IS NO CHANGE TO THE
CURRENT SEPARATION REQUIREMENTS
IN THE RESIDENTIAL ZONING
DISTRICTS IN THIS ORDINANCE.
THE SECOND ONE, AGAIN, WE'VE GOT
2640-FOOT HALF-MILE SEPARATION
DISTANCE BETWEEN THESE TYPES OF
FACILITIES, THERE'S NO WAY TO
BURY IT.
AND AS A BIT OF HISTORY, THE
SEPARATION STANDARDS WERE
ESTABLISHED SEVERAL YEARS AGO TO
AROUND 2001 TO ADDRESS A REAL
PROBLEM THAT THE CITY WAS HAVING
BECAUSE THE STATE HAD CHANGED
ITS POLICIES WITH REGARD TO
HANDLING PEOPLE WITH VARIOUS
TYPES OF DISABILITIES AND THEY
WERE BEING MAINSTREAMED AND
BROUGHT TO HOMES AND THERE WAS A
HUGE MONETARY REASON FOR PEOPLE
TO WANT TO OPEN UP RESIDENTIAL
PROPERTY TO THESE NEW RESIDENTS.
NOW, THAT HAS CHANGED BECAUSE
THE STATE POLICY HAS AGAIN
CHANGED AND THE FUNDING IS NOT
THERE, SO THE PRESSURE'S OFF
SOMEWHAT BUT WHAT WE'RE
PROPOSING IS IN NONRESIDENTIAL
DISTRICTS TO ALLOW THE SPECIAL
USE PERMIT PROCESS TO MAKE THAT
DETERMINATION.
HERE MIGHT BE REASONS YOU MIGHT
WANT TO REDUCE SEPARATION
REQUIREMENTS.
PERHAPS THERE IS A TOPOGRAPHICAL
FEATURE SUCH AS A RIVER THAT
WOULD BE BETWEEN A TWO TYPES OF
USES OF A SIMILAR TYPE.
OR MAYBE A MAJOR TRANSPORTATION
FACILITY.
MAYBE ONE ON ALL AMERICAN AND
ONE ON THE OTHER.
MAYBE THEY ARE FAR DISTANCE BUT
NOT QUITE HALF A MILE FROM OTHER
GROUP LIVING FACILITIES.
OF COURSE YOU CAN ALSO TAKE INTO
ACCOUNT THE SPECIAL TESTIMONY
GIVEN DURING A DETERMINATION
PROCESS FOR OTHER REASONS.
WE HAVE A 500-FOOT SEPARATION
REQUIREMENT BETWEEN A BAR AND
NIGHT CLUB AND A CHURCH, FOR
EXAMPLE, AND THAT'S SHOWN THERE
ON THE RIGHTS SIDE.
OUR GROUP HOME SEPARATION IS, IS
THIS LARGER CIRCLE WHICH GIVES
YOU SOME PERSPECTIVE ABOUT THE
SCALE OF THE IMPACT OF THE
CURRENT SEPARATION REQUIREMENTS.
FINALLY, THE LAST ONE IS THE NEW
TRANSITIONAL HOUSING USE.
MOST OF OUR GROUP LIVING
DEFINITIONS LIMIT THE POPULATION
OF THE PEOPLE WHO ARE BEING
HOUSED TO PEOPLE HAVING EITHER
MENTAL OR PHYSICAL DISABILITIES
OR IN THE CASE OF HALFWAY HOUSES
PEOPLE BEING RELEASED FROM
INCARCERATION.
BUT WE HAVE SEEN WITH THE
RECESSION MANY PEOPLE ARE
HOMELESS FOR REASONS THAT ARE
JUST FINANCIAL.
NOT DISABILITY OR SOME SORT OF
INCARCERATION ISSUE.
FAMILY CHANGE AND THERE ARE
ISSUES CREATED SO WE FEEL LIKE
WE NEED A TRANSITIONAL HOUSING
USE TO ACCOMMODATE ALL THOSE
FOLKS.
IT WOULD BE ALLOWED IN THE SAME
DISTRICTS AS THE LARGE GROUP
HOMES.
STILL BE REQUIREDADS -- REQUIRED
AS A SPECIAL USE PERMIT SO YOU
WOULD GET A CHANCE TO SEE THEM.
THAT IS MY PRESENTATION ON THIS.
I UNDERSTAND LAST WEEK THE
PLANNING COMMISSION HEARD THIS
AND DID RECOMMEND THAT YOU ADOPT
IT AND STAFF DOES AS WELL.
>> ANY QUESTIONS FOR
MR. SHUFORD?
MR. BATES?
>> IF THERE IS NO QUESTION, MAKE
A MOTION --
>> WE HAVE TO HAVE A PUBLIC
HEARING FIRST, SIR.
OKAY, WE WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC
HEARING, MA'AM.
>> YES, SIR OUR FIRST SPEAKER IS
MR. CHARLES MORRIS.
>> 831 ARSENAL AVENUE.
WE HAVE BEEN WORKING ON THIS FOR
SOMETIME WITH THE PLANNING
STAFF, AND THEY'VE BEEN VERY,
VERY HELPFUL.
ACTUALLY, MY PREVIOUS EMPLOYMENT
HISTORY, I USED TO WORK FOR HSA
CUMBERLAND HOSPITAL WHILE I WAS
IN COLLEGE IN THE MID-80s AND
EARLY 90s I WAS STILL DOING A
LITTLE BIT.
AND DURING THAT TIME, THE
WILLIAN GROUP HOME COURT CASE
HAD COME UP, AND BASICALLY
MENTAL HEALTH AND MEDICAID
FUNDING AND OTHER FUNDINGS CAME
ABOUT AND THESE GROUP HOMES WERE
DESIGNED TO HOUSE 6-1 -- UP TO
SIX INDIVIDUALS, AND BASICALLY
IT BECAME A OVERNIGHT DEGREE AND
IN INDUSTRY POPPED UP ALL OVER
THE COUNTY.
NOT ONLY CUMBERLAND BUT OUTSIDE
OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY.
THE GROUP HOME SITUATION GOT TO
THE POINT WHERE SOMETIMES THERE
WERE TWO OR THREE OF THEM SIDE
BY SIDE AND IT BECAME AN ISSUE
BEFORE YOU ALL AND ACTUALLY AND
I WENT THROUGH THE MINUTES.
MR. MASSEY WAS THE ONLY ONE -- I
AM LOOKING THROUGH THE NAMES
HERE.
MR. MASSEY WAS THE ONLY ONE HERE
AT THAT TIME WHEN Y'ALL WERE
ADDRESSING IT.
AND WHEN I WENT THROUGH ALL THE
NOTES AND LOOKED AT THEM,
BASICALLY THE CITY COUNCIL WAS
LOOKING AT AN 800-FOOT TO
QUARTER MILE SEPARATION AND ALL
THROUGH AM MINUTES AND NOTES
THAT -- THROUGH THE MINUTES AND
THE NOTES REFERRED TO WAS
INTEGRITY OF THE RESIDENTIAL
NEIGHBORHOODS AND MAINTAINING
THE RES RESIDENTIAL CHARACTER
AND BASICALLY THIS WAS ALLOWING
BUSINESSES TO INFILTRATE THOSE
RESIDENTIAL AREAS.
THE REASON I AM SUPPORTING THIS
TEXT AMENDMENT IS BECAUSE I
THINK THE INTEGRITY OF THE
NEIGHBORHOODS IS EXTREMELY
IMPORTANT, AND THIS TEXT
AMENDMENT DOES NOT IN ANY WAY,
SHAPE, OR FORM ADDRESS WHAT HAS
ALREADY BEEN PASSED HERE AND HAS
BEEN PLACED TONIGHTISM BUT.
BUT WHAT IT DOES ADDRESS IS SOME
OF THE TRANSITIONAL HOUSING AND
ESPECIALLY IN THESE COMMERCIAL
DISTRICTS AND THE COMMERCIAL
DISTRICTS PROVIDE THEIR OWN
SEPARATIONS AND BUFFERING.
BUT BASICALLY LOW THE SPECIAL --
THROUGH THE SPECIAL USE PROCESS,
THAT SHOULD BE UP TO THE SPECIAL
USE PROCESS.
THAT'S WHY YOU HAVE A PROCESS.
THE PROCESS WORKS WELL.
AND WE'RE SUPPORTING THE TEXT
AMENDMENT BECAUSE IT MAKES
THINGS WORK VERY WELL.
BECAUSE THERE IS ALIC OF -- A
LACK OF FUNDING WITH MENTAL
HEALTH, MEDICARE, MEDICAID, ALL
THE DIFFERENT BUDGETS CUTS THAT
HAVE COME ABOUT THE MAJORITY OF
GROUP HOMES HAVE SHUT DOWN OR
ARE VERY RESTRICTED IN THEIR
FUNDING, AND THEIR LIFE IS, IS
SOMEWHAT LIMITED.
>> SIR, OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS
MR. JOHN TYSON.
>> MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL, MY
NAME IS JOHN TYSON.
101 HAY STREET, FAYETTEVILLE.
I AM HERE TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF
THE TEXT AMENDMENT.
MR. MORRIS AND I HAD MET WITH
STAFF ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS AFTER
IT BECAME APPARENT THAT THERE
WAS A HALF A MILE SEPARATION
REGARDLESS OF ZONING DISTRICT IT
WAS ABSOLUTE HALF MILE THAT YOU
COULD NOT PUT GROUP HOMES,
THERAPEUTIC HOMES, AND HALFWAY
HOUSES.
I DON'T WANT TO REPEAT WHAT
MR. SHUFORD AND MR. MORRIS SAID.
I WANT TO CONCENTRATE ON ONE
THING.
THAT IS THE INCLUSION OF HALFWAY
HOUSES WITH THERAPEUTIC AND
GROUP HOMES DID NOT ARISE UNTIL
THE UDO.
THE ORDINANCE PRIOR TO THE UDO
APPLIED ONLY TO GROUP HOMES
WITHIN RESIDENTIAL
NEIGHBORHOODS.
WE THINK AND DISCUSSIONS WITH
STAFF IT WAS A DRAFTING ERROR
THAT BROUGHT THE HALFWAY HOUSE
USE AND PUT IT IN THE SAME
CATEGORY AS A GROUP HOME.
THEY'RE COMPLETELY DIFFERENT.
THE NEEDS ARE DIFFERENT.
MY UNDERSTANDING OF THIS
AMENDMENT IS SIMPLY THIS.
AS TO THE RISK OF SUBDIVISION,
RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION, NOTHING
CHANGES.
YOU STILL HAVE THE HALF A MILE.
WHAT MR. SHUFORD SAID AND THE
REASON I'M SUPPORTING IT IS IF
YOU HAVE A RIVER, A MAJOR
HIGHWAY, OR A MAJOR BARRIER AND
YOU'RE OUTSIDE OF A RESIDENTIAL
AREA, THIS COUNCIL ALONG WITH
THE ZONING COMMISSION WOULD HAVE
THE DISCRETION TO REVIEW THAT
PARTICULAR USE IF IT'S LESS THAN
A HALF MILE FROM A GROUP HOME,
THERAPEUTIC HOME, YOU WOULD
STILL HAVE THE ABILITY TO
APPROVE THAT SPECIFIC USE ONLY.
THE ORIGINAL INTENT WAS TO
PROTECT NEIGHBORHOODS.
PROTECT RESIDENTIAL
NEIGHBORHOODS.
THIS TEXT AMENDMENT PRESERVES
THAT PROTECTION.
I ASK THAT THE COUNCIL FAVORABLY
CONSIDER AND VOTE TO APPROVE THE
TEXT AMENDMENT.
THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.
>> THANK YOU, SIR.
>> WE HAVE NO FURTHER SPEAKERS.
>> OKAY.
WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING
AND, MR. SHUFORD, ONE QUESTION
JUST CAME UP.
MAYBE YOU COULD HELP ME WITH,
SIR.
MR. TYSON JUST MENTIONED THIS
BEFORE THE UDO AND AFTER THE UDO
IN COMMERCIAL ZONING BEFORE THE
UDO WAS ADOPTED, WERE THERE
LIMITATIONS ON HOW CLOSE THESE
TYPE OF FACILITIES COULD BE IN A
COMMERCIAL ZONE BEFORE THE UDO?
>> MR. MAYOR, I'M NOT CERTAIN ON
THAT.
BUT I COULD FIND OUT IN FAIRLY
SHORT ORDER.
>> ALL RIGHT.
DO YOU KNOW, MS. HILTON?
>> I THINK WE ACTUALLY HAVE THE
MINUTES THAT -- AND THE ACTUAL
MOTION MADE TO INCREASE THE
DISTANCES.
IT MAY WELL HAVE BEEN THAT WE
HAVE BEEN OPERATING AT -- THIS I
CAN'T ANSWER TONIGHT.
IT MAY WELL HAVE BEEN THAT WE
WERE OPERATING WITH AN
INTERPRETATION THAT THEY ALSO
APPLIED TO HALFWAY HOUSES.
IT -- IN MUCH THE SAME WAY YOU
MIGHT RECALL WHEN WE HAD
SEPARATION STANDARDS BETWEEN
BARS AND NIGHT CLUBS AND CHILD
CARE CENTERS, FOR EXAMPLE.
WE APPLIED THAT AS A RECIPROCAL
ARRANGEMENT SO THAT YOU WOULD
NOT HAVE A CHILD CARE CENTER
LOCATING NEXT TO A OR NEARBY A
NIGHT CLUB BECAUSE YOUR
ORDINANCE THERE JUST SIMPLY SAID
THAT A BAR OR NIGHT CLUB COULD
NOT BE CLOSER THAN 500 FEET TO A
CHILD CARE CENTER.
BUT I CAN'T ANSWER THE
INTERPRETATION PART OF IT
TONIGHT BUT I THINK I CAN BRING
FORWARD THE ACTUAL CODE
AMENDMENT THAT OCCURRED IF YOU
CAN GIVE ME ABOUT FOUR OR FIVE
MINUTES.
>> PERHAPS, MR. TYSON, CAN YOU
SHED ANY LIGHT ON THAT?
I THINK YOU WERE THE ONE THAT
MADE THE --
>> MR. MAYOR, WHEN I REVIEWED
THE MINUTES FROM 2001, ALL OF
THE REFERENCES IN THERE WERE
SOLELY TO GROUP HOMES, SOLELY IN
RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS.
THERE WAS NO MENTION IN THERE OF
THERAPEUTIC HOMES, NOR HALFWAY
HOUSES.
ALL OF THE DISCUSSION FROM THE
MINUTES WAS SOLELY RELATED TO
GROUP HOMES IN RESIDENTIAL
SUBDIVISIONS.
>> RIGHT BUT THIS MENTION THAT
YOU MADE, THAT CHANGE WITH THE
UDO, CAN YOU SHED ANY LIGHT ON
THAT?
THAT IS THE PART WE SEEM TO BE
UNCLEAR ON.
WHETHER THAT'S A TRUE STATEMENT
OR NOT.
>> MR. MAYOR, IN DISCUSSIONS
WITH THE STAFF, I WAS LED TO
BELIEVE THAT THE ADDITION OF
HALFWAY HOUSES WITHIN THE
RESTRICTION OF GROUP HOMES ONLY
OCCURRED WITHIN THE UDO, AND
THAT WAS NOT TRUE PRIOR TO THE
UDO.
>> THANK YOU, SIR.
MR. HAIRE?
>> I'M TRYING TO MAKE SURE I'M
STILL FOLLOWING, MR. SHUFORD.
SO WHEN THIS ITEM CAME FORWARD,
AND I BROUGHT THIS ITEM FORWARD
IN THOSE YEARS, IT WAS ARE YOU
SAYING THEN IT'S ONLY REFLECTING
THE RESIDENTIAL -- FROM MY
UNDERSTANDING IT'S ONLY
REFLECTING JUST GROUP HOMES AND
NOT THESE OTHER GROUPS WITHIN
THE RESIDENTIAL AREA.
YOU ARE NOT SAYING THAT THAT
HALF A MILE WENT INTO THE
RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY WITH THESE
OTHER HOMES LIKE THE
TRANSITIONAL HOMES, THE HALFWAY
HOUSES, IS THAT WHAT WE'RE --
>> WELL, LET ME GO BACK TO THIS
SLIDES.
I THINK IT'LL HELP US.
THE HALF-MILE SEPARATION DOESN'T
DISTINGUISH BETWEEN RESIDENTIAL
AND NONRESIDENTIAL RIGHT NOW.
IT'S HALF A MILE AND GOVERNS
HALFWAY HOMES, THERAPEUTIC
HOMES, WHICH ARE TYPICALLY
SMALLER IN SCALES, AND
TRANSITIONAL HOMES.
HALFWAY HOUSES ARE FOLKS BEING
RELEASED FROM AN INCARCERATION
SITUATION, GROUP HOMES DEAL WITH
FOLKS WITH SOME FORM OF
DISABILITY, AS DO THERAPEUTIC
HOMES.
BUT THERAPEUTIC HOMES ARE SMALL.
SO WE'VE GOT THOSE SEPARATION
STANDARDS THAT APPLY WHETHER THE
GROUP HOME SEPARATION IS THERE.
WHAT WE WANT TO DO IS MAINTAIN
SEPARATION REQUIREMENTS IN
RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS BUT
IN A COMMERCIAL DISTRICT IT
WOULD ALLOW YOU AS CITY COUNCIL
TO CONSIDER A SPECIAL USE PERMIT
THAT WOULD ALLOW ONE OF THESE
TYPES OF USES AND DECIDE ON THE
MERITS OF THE CASE WHETHER OR
NOT YOU FELT IT WAS APPROPRIATE
TO ALLOW THAT AS A SPECIAL USE
PERMIT IN A COMMERCIAL OR
NONRESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT.
>> SO IF I'M JUST UNDERSTANDING
PROBABLY MORE FROM MY
CLARIFICATION THAN ANYONE, AM I
HEARING YOU SAY THAT WHEN
THIS -- WHEN WE DEVELOPED THIS
IN 2001, IF THAT'S WHAT IT IS,
IT ONLY WAS, YOU'RE SAYING -- IT
ONLY WAS FOR GROUP HOMES.
>> I BELIEVE THAT'S WHAT JUDGE
TYSON'S SAYING.
>> OKAY.
SO THEN FROM THAT POINT UNTIL
TODAY, THERE WAS NEVER, EVER
ANYWAY OTHER -- ANY OTHER TYPE
OF CASE TO COME BEFORE US
CONCERNING THIS TYPE OF A
MATTER, THE REASON THAT WE ARE
WHERE WE ARE NOW.
IT NEVER HAPPENED FROM 2001 TO
2012.
>> THAT'S CORRECT.
THERE'S NOT BEEN A SUBSTANTIVE
CHANGE TO THE TEXT BETWEEN THE
LENGTH OF TIME FROM 2001 WHEN
THE SEPARATION STANDARD WENT
FROM 800 FEET TO A HALF MILE TO,
TO TODAY OTHER THAN THE
POSSIBILITY THAT JUDGE TYSON HAS
RAISED THAT HALFWAY HOUSES ARE,
HAVE BEEN ADDED TO THE USES THAT
NEED TO HAVE THE SEPARATION
STANDARD.
AND I HAVE TO CONFIRM THAT.
I'M SORRY I DON'T HAVE THAT
INFORMATION.
>> YEAH BECAUSE IT'S JUST KIND
OF HARD FOR ME TO, TO ACCEPT
THAT FROM THAT POINT TO THIS
POINT.
THAT TYPE OF INTEREST WAS NEVER,
EVER BROUGHT UP FOR A REZONING
CASE.
I MEAN, NEVER, EVER.
>> RIGHT.
>> UNLESS EVERYTHING WAS GROUPED
INTO THAT ONE AND THAT'S HOW IT
WENT UP TO NOW AND BECAUSE OF
WHERE WE ARE TONIGHT AND
WHENEVER THIS ISSUE STARTED
COMING UP THEN YOU STARTED
LOOKING AT A SEPARATION.
>> WELL, WHAT WE'VE BEEN DOING
IS APPLYING THE SEPARATION
STANDARDS SINCE THE TIME THAT
THE -- IT WAS PUT IN PLACE IN
2001.
AND AT THAT TIME THERE WERE A
WHOLE LOT OF FACILITIES, LARGELY
SMALL GROUP HOMES WHICH HAD
SPRUNG UP IN NEIGHBORHOODS THAT
DIDN'T MEET THE STANDARDS.
AND OVER TIME, SOME OF THEM HAVE
TRANSITION TO OTHER USES AND ARE
NO LONGER ACTIVE.
AND THEY CANNOT BE
REESTABLISHED.
SO I THINK THE REAL ISSUE IS
THAT WE'VE NOT HAD AT LEAST FROM
WHAT MY STAFF TELLS ME, WE HAVE
NOT HAD A LOT OF LARGER GROUP
HOME HALFWAY HOUSE TYPE
APPLICATIONS.
THE PREDOMINANT ONES THAT WERE
AN ISSUE WERE THE SMALL ONES
THAT PEPPERED THE CITY.
AND THEN WE HAVE NOT HAD A LOT
OF LARGE ONES COME FORWARD.
BUT EVEN IF THEY CAME FORWARD,
THEY STILL WOULD HAVE TO GET A
SPECIAL USE PERMIT FROM YOU
WHETHER THEY ARE IN RESIDENTIAL
ZONING DISTRICT OR COMMERCIAL
DISTRICT.
AND THEN SECONDLY, IF THEY
COULDN'T MEET THE SEPARATION
DISTANCE, WE TURNED THEM AWAY.
WE SAID THAT PROPERTY IS NOT ONE
THAT WE CAN EVEN BRING FORWARD.
IF THAT HELPS. AND THAT'S --
I'M SURE THAT'S WHY YOU HAVEN'T
SEEN ANY OF THEM.
>> MR. FOWLER?
>> [INAUDIBLE]
IF WE HAD A GROUP HOME OR A
HALFWAY HOUSE IN A COMMERCIAL OR
NONRESIDENTIAL AREA, AND THAT
WAS LESS THAN A HALF A MILE FROM
A RESIDENTIAL AREA, THAT WAS
ALLOWED, THEN SOMEONE WANTED TO
PUT ONE IN A RESIDENTIAL AREA.
THAT WOULD BE LESS THAN HALF A
MILE FROM THE COMMERCIAL.
THAT WOULD AUTOMATICALLY NOT BE
BROUGHT FORWARD BECAUSE IT HAS
TO MEET THE SEPARATION
REQUIREMENTS BECAUSE IT'S IN A
RESIDENTIAL AREA, CORRECT?
>> THAT'S CORRECT, YES, SIR.
>> AND IF THERE -- BUT IF THERE
IS ONE THAT IS CURRENTLY IN A
RESIDENTIAL AREA, THERE COULD
POSSIBLY BE A SPECIAL USE PERMIT
TO ALLOW ONE IN A NONRESIDENTIAL
AREA LESS NAN A HALF A MILE --
LESS THAN HALF A MILE BUT ONCE
AGAIN HAD TO BE DONE BY 13E8GS
SPECIAL PERMIT.
>> THAT'S EXACTLY RIGHT.
>> BUT MANY OF THE PEOPLE GOING
INTO THESE FACILITIES ARE GOING
IN THERE BECAUSE THEY HAVE
NOWHERE ELSE TO GO.
IS THAT CORRECT?
>> WE WOULD ASSUME THEY ARE
LOCATING IN THESE FACILITIES
BECAUSE IT IS THE BEST PLACE FOR
THEM TO GO.
>> THERE IS NO SEPARATION
REQUIREMENT IF THEY SLEEP UNDER
A BRIDGE OR ANYWHERE ELSE OR
WHEREVER YOU ARE WITHOUT
SUPERVISION.
THAT IS A RHETORICAL QUESTION,
SIR.
>> THAT'S TWO DIFFERENT THINGS.
>> LET ME FOLLOW UP ON THAT
BECAUSE I AM A LITTLE CONFUSED
BY THIS, AND SO LET'S SAY THAT
YOU HAVE A RESIDENTIAL -- A
COMMERCIAL ABUTS A RESIDENTIAL
AREA.
I GUESS ALL OF THEM DO BUT LET'S
JUST SAY THAT HAT -- THAT
HAPPENS.
AND SOMEONE WANTS TO PUT A
COMMERCIAL -- HALFWAY HOME IN A
COMMERCIAL AREA, HOW ARE
RESIDENTIAL PEOPLE IMPACTED BY
THAT?
ARE THEY ABLE TO SPEAK TO THAT?
ARE THERE ANY PARAMETERS?
>> YES, SIR.
THEY WOULD --
>> LET ME ASK.
IF THERE IS ONE ONE WITHIN A
HALF MILE OF THE COMMERCIAL AREA
IN A RESIDENTIAL AREA, LET'S SAY
RIGHT BEHIND IT.
LET'S SAY THERE IS A HALFWAY
HOUSE IN THE RES RESIDENTIAL
AREA BEHIND IT AND THERE WAS
GOING TO BE A REQUEST FOR ONE IN
THE COMMERCIAL AREA THAT ABUTS
THAT, HOW WOULD THAT PROCESS
WORK?
>> WELL, IT WOULD BE A SPECIAL
USE PERMIT PROCESS UNDER THIS
PROPOSED CODE CHANGE.
IT WOULD COME TO YOU AS A
SPECIAL USE PERMIT.
WE WOULD NOTE THE PROXIMITY OF
THE FACILITY IN THE RESIDENTIAL
ZONING GRICT -- DISTRICT AND
SHOW IT ON A MAP.
YOU WOULD SEE HOW CLOSE TOGETHER
THEY WERE.
WHETHER THEY WERE SEPARATED BY
ANY BARRIERS.
WHETHER IT BE TOPOGRAPHICAL
BARRIER, A TRANSPORTATION
BARRIER, A RAIL LINE OR
SOMETHING ALONG THOSE LINES.
AND YOU WOULD HAVE THE ABILITY
THEN TO ALSO HEAR FROM THE
PEOPLE WHO RECEIVE NOTICES.
BECAUSE WE WOULD NOTICE THE
SPECIAL USE PERMIT JUST AS WE'VE
DONE FOR ZONING CASES AND OTHER
ITEMS THAT COME BEFORE YOU.
>> BUT THOSE PEOPLE TODAY ARE
PROTECTED IN THAT RESIDENTIAL
AREA?
THEY ARE PROTECTED BY KNOWING
THAT THERE COULD NOT BE ONE
CLOSER THAN A HALF MILE FROM
THEM AND THEY ARE LOSING SOME OF
THE PROTECTION?
THE PROCESS IS IN PLACE I GUESS
WHERE THE COUNCIL MAKE A
DECISION.
>> THAT'S CORRECT.
YES, SIR.
>> OTHER QUESTIONS?
WE GET EVERYBODY?
ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS?
>> I WOULD LIKE TO FOLLOW UP ON
YOUR POINT THERE JUST REAL
QUICKLY.
CURRENTLY IF THERE IS 93 -- NO
HALFWAY HOUSE THAT ABUTS UP NEXT
TO A COMMERCIAL AREA AND SOMEONE
WANTED TO PUT ONE OF THOSE IN
THE COMMERCIAL AREA, NOW THERE'S
NO SEPARATION REQUIREMENT ISSUES
BECAUSE THERE'S NOT ONE WITHIN A
HALF MILE IN THAT RESIDENTIAL
AREA.
IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE HALF A
MILE -- NO, I'M TALKING ABOUT
THERE IS NOT A CURRENT ONE
WITHIN A HALF A MILE BUT THE
COMMERCIAL PROPERTY ABUTS TO THE
RESIDENTIAL AREA. IF THERE'S
NOT A SEPARATION ISSUE, IN THE
INSTANCE OF THE HALF MILE, THEN
YOU COULD STILL PUT ONE THERE,
RIGHT?
>> YOU COULD PUT ONE IN CERTAIN
OF THE RESIDENTIAL ZONING
DISTRICTS WITH A SPECIAL USE
PERMIT.
>> YOU COULD EITHER PUT IT IN
THE RESIDENTIAL AREA OR IN THE
NONRESIDENTIAL.
>> YES, SIR.
>> IF THE SEPARATION REQUIREMENT
IS MET, RIGHT?
>> THAT'S CORRECT.
>> SO IN OTHER WORDS YOU COULD
NOT ONLY COULD YOU HAVE ONE
ABUTTED TO A RES -- RESIDENTIAL
AREA, YOU COULD HAVE IT IN THE
RESIDENTIAL AREA IF THERE IS NOT
A HALF MILE SEPARATION ISSUE.
>> THAT'S RIGHT.
AGAIN IT WOULD BE UP TO THE
COUNCIL'S DISCRETION.
>> OKAY.
AND UNDER WHAT YOU ARE TALKING
ABOUT NOW IT WOULD COME UNDER A
SPECIAL USE PERMIT IN WHICH CASE
THE CITIZENS WOULD BE PROTECTED
BECAUSE YOU WOULD HAVE THE
SPECIAL USE PERMIT REQUEST THAT
HAS TO BE FILLED.
>> WELL, JUST TO CONTINUE, THIS
DIALOGUE THAT WE'RE HAVING, IF
YOU HAVE AN EXISTING ONE IN A
RESIDENTIALIARYIA, -- RESIDENTIL
AREA WHICH IS ALREADY THERE AND
THEN SOMEONE WOULD WANT TO PUT
ONE IN A COMMERCIAL AREA LESS
THAN HALF A MILE AWAY FROM YOU
YOU WOULD HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY
TO HAVE THAT PUT THAT THERE.
YOU DO NOT HAVE THAT OPPORTUNITY
TODAY.
THAT'S WHAT I WAS TALKING ABOUT,
YOU'RE AT LEAST GIVING UP THE
OPPORTUNITY, NOT THAT COUNCIL
COULD -- IT WOULD BE A SPECIAL
USE PERMIT BUT AT LEAST LET'S
ACKNOWLEDGE IT FOR WHAT IT IS.
THE RESIDENTIAL PERSON DOES HAVE
THE RISK OF SOMETHING ELSE BEING
PUT THERE.
THAT WAS MY POINT.
>> THAT'S EXACTLY CORRECT.
THE ORDINANCE WOULD ALLOW YOU TO
PUT THEM POTENTIALLY QUITE CLOSE
TOGETHER IF YOU FOUND
JUSTIFICATION FOR IT.
BUT TO MR. FOWLER'S POINT IF YOU
LOCATED ONE THAT DID NOT HAVE A
SEPARATION REQUIREMENT OR YOU
WENT THROUGH THIS OTHER PROCESS,
THEN THAT RESIDENTIAL AREA WOULD
FOR A HALF MILE AROUND WOULD NOT
BE ABLE TO HAVE A HALFWAY HOME
OR GROUP HOME AROUND IT.
>> MR. CRISP?
THOOYEAH, --
>> YEAH, I'M TRYING TO SORT THIS
THING OUT.
EVERY TYPE -- TIME I HEAR
SOMETHING, IT STIRS SOMETHING
AGAIN.
WE HAVE A 2640-FOOT DISTANCE
FROM A GROUP HOME INA A
RESIDENTIAL AREA, RIGHT?
>> YES, SIR, ACTUALLY IN
RESIDENTIAL OR NONRESIDENTIAL.
>> IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT IS
WHAT KIND OF BOTHERS ME A LITTLE
BIT.
BUT YOU SAY TO US IF WE APPROVE
THIS, SOMEONE COULD APPLY FOR
SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO PUT A
GROUP HOME IN A NONRESIDENTIAL
DISTRICT PUT IT NEXT TO FOOD
LION OR WHEREVER, WHEN ACROSS
THE STREET IS A RES RESIDENTIAL
DISTRICT.
YOU COULDN'T PUT IT THERE OR WE
COULD APPROVE THE SPECIAL USE
PERMIT AND VIOLATE OUR OWN?
WHAT ARE WE DOING?
C1
SGLOO ***
>> CURIOUS.
WHY WOULD YOU HAVE TAKEN THAT
PART AWAY.
WHY NOT THE PROCESS THAT YOU
TOOK IN A CONSIDERATION OF A
THOUSAND FEET THAT A BUTTED
COMMERCIAL SIGHT?
WHY WOULDN'T THAT CONTINUE?
>> WELL I THINK YOU COULD
ESTABLISH A STANDARD TO WHATEVER
YOU WANT.
BUT I LIKE TO THINK THAT YOU
WOULD TAKE, IN FACT THE
ORDINANCE SAYS THE PROXIMITY OF
OTHER THESE TYPE GROUP LIVING
FACILITY IS SOMETHING YOU NEED
TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT AS YOU
EVALUATE THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT
IF THERE WAS ONE NEAR-BY AND YO
FELT THERE WAS TOO MUCH OF AN
CONGREGATION THAT WOULD BE AN O
FOR YOU TO SAY NO TO THE SPECIA
USE PERMIT.
>> OKAY.
SO IF THERE IS A GROUP HOME
INSIDE A RESIDENTIAL AREA, AND
ANOTHER GROUP HOME WANTS TO COM
IN, THAT IS 2650 FEET AWAY, YOU
WOULD SAY YES FOR THEM TO GO
FORWARD WITH A SPECIAL USE
PERMIT TO GO IN?
IF THEY WENT IN 545 FEET YOU
WOULD CURRENTLY SAY NO, DROP IT
THAT'S IT.
NO FURTHER DISCUSSION?
>> IF YOU WOULD CHANGE TO IT 39
FEET I'LL SAY ABSOLUTELY.
2539 FEET.
ANYTHING WHEN WITHIN THAT THE
DISCUSSION DOES NOT GO FURTHER?
THIS ALL THIS WILL DO HERE IS
THAT WILL NOT CHANGE AT ALL.
THAT STAYS THE SAME.
>> YES, SIR.
>> AND IN THE NONRESIDENTIAL
AREA IF THERE'S A GROUP HOME
THAT IS 2639 FEET AWAY FROM
WHERE I WANT TO PUT ONE IN, YOU
WOULD SAY ONLY IF DOCOUNCIL
APPROVE AS SPECIAL USE PERMIT?
>> CORRECT.
>> IF IT'S 6041 FEET IF COUNCIL
APPROVES IT'S A SPECIAL PERMIT?
>> THAT'S RIGHT.
>> WELL IF I UNDERSTAND IT I
THINK WE CAN - I'M JUST THE LAST
ONE TO UNDERSTAND SOMETHING.
>> THE ONLY THING I WANT TO
BRING OUT AS FARS AND CORRECT M
IF I'M WRONG.
THE WAY THIS CAN PROTECT IS IF
YOU HAVE A PLACE THAT CURRENTLY
SOMEONE WANTS TO PUT A TFACILIT
IN A MAN RESIDENTIAL OR AND
THERE'S ONE THAT A BUTTS THEN I
WOULD FALL BEYOND THE DISTANCE
IF YOU LOOK AT MR. BATES THING
OF BEING 2640 VERSES 2680 OR
WHATEVER THEY COULD GO INTO THE
ADJACENT NEIGHBORHOOD AND HAVE
THAT PUT IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD
RATHER THAN HAVE THE FLEXIBILITY
IN THE NONRESIDENTIAL AREA
BECAUSE WE WERE ABLE TO BE
LITTLE MORE FLEXIBLE WITH THE
SEPARATION IN NONRESIDENTIAL
AREAS THAT GIVES US MORE
PROTECTION OF AREAS RATHER THAN
LESS IF WE DO THAT.
>> OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY.
READY FOR A MOTION, I THINK.
MR. BAITS?
>> YES, SIR.
MOTION TO APPROVE THE ORDINANCE
CHANGES MANAGEM AMENDMENT CHANG.
>> SECONDED BY MR. FOWLER.
ANY DISCUSSION.
I'LL ASK FOR YOUR VOTE, PLEASE.
HIS IS READ.
HE TOLD ME SO THAT MOTION FAILS.
ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION?
MRS. APPLE WHITE.
MR. BATES.
>> TWO LIGHTS ON.
>> HIT IT WITH MY FOOT.
I APOLOGIZE.
>> 5-5.
MOTION DOES NOT CARRY.
CLARIFIED THAT BEFORE I SHOWED
THE LIGHTS I HAD SEEN THOSE.
ANOTHER MOTION ON THE FLOOR. MR.
BATES?
>> MOTION TO DEFER AND HAVE IT
BROUGHT BACK TO OUR COUNCIL WORK
SESSION FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION
AND CLARIFICATION?
>> SECOND?
>> SECOND THAT MOTION.
WAS THE FIRST.
ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT MOTION
COUNCIL?
ASK YOU TO VOTE, PLEASE?
MR. CHAIR?
THANK YOU.
>> THAT'S UNANIMOUS.
OKAY WE'LL GO NOW TO ITEM I
BELIEVE IT'S 6 POINT 10.
>> OKAY THIS IS VERY QUICKLY
PRIMARILY ADJUSTMENTS AND
CORRECTIONS,ED A JUST MEANTS AR
LIMITED I WOULD CALL THE FIRST
ONE IN THIS LIST AN ADJUSTMENT
REALLY.
THE PARKING LOCATION TABLE.
ONE OF THOSE FOOTNOTES.
THE VERY FIRST ONE DESCRIBES TH
PARKING AS BEING LIMITED BETWEE
THE FRONT EDGES OF THE BUILDING.
THAT'S ACTUALLY SO IF IT'S
PLACED FRONT OF THE BUILDING IT
HAS TO BE BETWEEN THE ENDS OF
THE BUILDING AND THAT'S CREATED
AN AWKWARD SITUATION BECAUSE IN
MOST CASES YOU HAVE A DRIVE
AISLE AND YOU NORMALLY WOULD PU
PARKING ON BOTH SIDES AS YOU
COME UP AND THE CURRENT FOOTNOTE
ABSOLUTELY PROHIBITS THAT.
SO THIS SIMPLY DELETES THIS
FOOTNOTE.
THE SECOND PART IS DOESN'T
CHANGE THE LANGUAGE BUT WHAT IT
DOES IS TAKE TWO PIECES THAT
HAVE TO DO WITH THAT APPEAL, TH
APPEAL PROCESS FOR WHEN THERE IS
A PROPOSED CONNECTION BETWEEN A
EXISTING SUB STREET AND A NEW
STREET.
ONE OF THOSE PORTIONS TALKS
ABOUT THE PERCENTAGE OF PEOPLE
WHO HAVE TO AGREE TO THE FINAL
AND FOR THE APPEAL AND THAT'S
OVER IN SECTION 2.5.
THE OTHER HALF IS OVER IN
SECTION 2.2.C18 GIVING THEM
TOGETHER UNDER THE APPEAL
PROCESS EXPLAINING THE SPECIFIC
PROVISIONS OVER HOW SOMEONE
WOULD TAKE EXCEPTION TO THAT
PROPOSED CONNECTION.
THE THIRD ONE IS A STANDARD IN
THE OLD ORDINANCE. WHAT IT DOES
IS RECOGNIZE WHEN YOU HAVE A
CORNER PROPERTY THERE'S
ESSENTIALLY TWO FRONT YARDS SO
YOU HAVE A SET-BACK TYPICALLY O
25-30 FEET ON THE NORMAL FRONT
AND THEN ON THAT CORNER SIDE YOU
HAVE THE SAME SET-BACK.
AND THE OLDER ORDINANCE
RECOGNIZED THAT BEGAN TO SQUEEZE
YOUR DEVELOPMENT HOMESITE, YOUR
BUILDING SIGHT QUITE A BIT
ALLOWING YOU TO SHRINK YOUR REA
YARD AND GAVE YOU MORE USABLE
PROPERTY ON THAT TYPICAL LOT
SIZE BECAUSE YOU GAVE UP SO MUC
FOR THE SIDE YARD AND SO MUCH
FOR THE FRONT YARD SO IT'S A TO
IT DRAW BACK FROM TYPICALLY
ABOUT 30 FEET TO 25 FEET.
THE NEXT ONE SIMPLY A CORRECTION
IS IN ARTICLE FIVE WHICH IS YOUR
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS.
ARTICLE SIX IS SUBDIVISIONS AND
THE TERM SUBDIVISION HAS NO
MEANING AT ALL IN ARTICLE FIVE.
NO PURPOSE IN BEING IN THAT
TABLE.
THE LAST ONE DOESN'T AGAIN
CHANGE THE STANDARDS.
WHAT IT TRIES TO DO IS MAKE
CLEAR A VERY DIFFICULT TO READ
FIGURE.
THERE ARE A COUPLE OF REFERENCE
THAT MAKE IT SOUND AS THOUGH TH
LOT AREA IS ALSO HAVING TO BE
MET.
BRIEFLY 0 LOT LINE ALLOWS A LOT
OF FLEXIBILITY.
STANDARD IN THE OLD ORDINANCE
AND IN THE NEW REGULATIONS.
WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE IT CLEAR
THAT YOU HAVE FLEXIBILITY IN THE
LOT AREA.
WITHIN THAT SUBDIVISION.
THAT ON THOSE EDGES WHERE IT'S
ACROSS FROM A TRADITIONAL
NEIGHBORHOOD THAT FRONT AND SID
SET-BACK HAS TO BE MET BECAUSE
YOU'RE ESSENTIALLY LOOKING AT
SOMETHING AND YOU WANT TO IT BE
RELATIVELY COMPARABLE ONE SIDE
OF THE STREET TO ANOTHER OR
IMMEDIATELY BESIDE EACH OTHER.
THE OVERALL SIZE OF THE LOT IS
NOT WHAT'S SO CRITICAL AND THE
LAST ONE IS THINGS SUCH AS
OVERHANG INSTEAD OF OVER HAND.
IT'S TRULY YOUR TYPOGRAPHICAL
ERRORS SO IF THERE'S QUESTION,
I'D BE GLAD TO ANSWER THOSE.
>> ANY QUESTIONS FOR MRS.
HILTON.
THANK YOU A MA'AM.
OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.
>> THERE'S NO SPEAKERS.
>> WE'LL CLOSE AND ENTERTAIN ANY
QUESTIONS OR THINGS FROM
COUNCIL?
>> I WOULD MAKE A MOTION THAT W
MOVE TO APPROVE THE TEXT
AMENDMENTS AS PRESENTED NOW.
NEW CO CONSECUTIV
SECOND.
>> ASK FOR YOUR VOTE.
THAT'S UNANIMOUS.
OUT OF 6.11.
MRS. MACDONALD WOULD WELCOME US
THROUGH THIS PROCESS.
BY THE NEXT STEP.
>> CAN, DO HAVE THE LATITUDE TO
MOVE THE AGENDA AROUND A BIT?
YOU READY TO DO YOUR PART, SIR?
RANDY?
COME RIGHT UP.
>> TO STAFF I CAN SAY, YES.
BRING HIM ON.
THEY ABOUT SLEEP BACK THERE.
NEW DURING REGULAR AGENDA ITEM
7.3.
WE'LL GIVE YOU AN OPPORTUNITY.
>> MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL, WHAT
WE'RE BRINGING TO YOU TONIGHT
ARE A COUPLE OF CIVIL RIGHTS
PROGRAMS.
WE RECEIVE FEDERAL GRANTS AND
THOSE HAVE CERTAIN PROVISIONS O
THEM INCLUDING CERTAIN CIVIL
RIGHTS PROVISIONS AND WE HAVE TO
UPDATE THOSE EVERY THREE YEARS
AND WE WENT THROUGH A
COMPETITIVE PROCESS, THROUGH TO
FIND A CONSULTANT TO HELP US DO
THAT AND THAT'S COLLECT HOT AND
ASSOCIATES AND THEY HAVE BEEN
WORKING ON THE TITLE SIX PROGRA
THE OVERRIDING CIVIL RIGHTS
PROGRAM.
THE LANGUAGE OR LIMITED ENGLISH
PROFICIENCY PROGRAM THAT'S PART
OF THIS AND THEN THE ENTERPRISE
PROGRAM.
AND I WILL TURN IT TO HER TO LE
HER DO THE PRESENTATION.
SHE'S A DONE A REVIEW AND HAS
RECOMMENDATIONS ON HOW TO
IMPLEMENT THAT AND ALSO HOW TO
PRESENT THE NEW PROGRAM.
>> THANK YOU.
>> OKAY.
ALRIGHT. THANK YOU AND GOOD
EVENING AND THANK YOU ALL FOR
HAVING US. IT PROMISE TO BE
BRIEF AND NOT STAY BETWEEN
PEOPLE AND DINNER ANY LONGER.
I'M A CONSULTANT AN ATTORNEY AND
I DID SOME WORK FOR THE CITY OF
FAYETTEVILLE ON MUSICIANS THE
CITY ATTORNEY SEVERAL YEARS BAC
AND I HAVE WITH MY TEAM A
RECENTLY RETIRED INDIVIDUAL FRO
THE OAKLAND AND HAD BEEN TITLE
SIX OFFICER FOR THE DEPARTMENT
OF CALIFORNIA TRANSPORTATION FOR
MANY YEARS AND WE HAVE KIM STEW
WARTED WHO WAS NOT ABLE TO BE
HERE BUT SHE ASSISTED US WITH
DATA COLLECTIONS SO LET ME WALK
THROUGH THIS VERY QUICKLY.
I'M GOING TO TALK ABOUT THE
PROGRAM AND THEN BETSY WILL TALK
ABOUT THE TITLE SIX AND THE,
L.E.P. COMPONENTS THE PURPOSE OF
THE PROJECT IS TO REVIEW AND
UPDATE THE CITIES TITLE SIX
PROGRAM AND YOU SEE THERE ON
YOUR SCREEN THE DELIVERABLES A
REPORT ON BOTH PROGRAMS
ADDRESSED PROGRAM FOR THE,DBE
PROGRAM YOU CAN SUBMIT TO THE
FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION
ENTITLED SIX PLAN AND AS PART O
THAT LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENCY
UPDATE.
SO WE MADE SEVERAL
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR BOTH
ELEMENTS OF THE PROJECT AND I'L
GO THROUGH THE RECOMMENDATIONS
QUICKLY.
THE FIRST ONE IN SOME WAYS THE
MOST IMPORTANT ONE OVER THE
LONG-TERM IS TO ENHANCE THE
PROGRAMS ADMINISTRATION AND
STAFF RESOURCES RESPONSIBILITIE
AND RESOURCES.
THEY'RE GOING GILMAN'S WORK
WITHOUT A LOT OF SUPPORT AND
WITH THE LIAISON OFFICER BEING
STAFF OF ONE, PEOPLE SEEM TO BE
SPREAD EXTREMELY THIN.
ESPECIALLY BASED ON MY
EXPERIENCE WITH DEALING WITH
LITERALLY DOZEN OF TRANSIT
AUTHORITIES AROUND THE COUNTRY
ABOUT WHAT'S NECESSARY IN ORDER
TO HAVE A FULLY COMPLIANT
PROGRAM THAT'S ALSO EFFECTIVE.
REGULATIONS ALSO REQUIRE THAT
YOU HAVE A BIDDERS LIST AND
THAT'S NOT HAPPENED YET.
WE DID MAKE SUGGESTIONS ON HOW
TO GET INTO COMPLIANCE AND WE
SUGGEST YOU REVIEW YOU'RE AN
YOU'LL GOAL SETTING METHODOLOGY.
WE DID LOOK AT THE SEE MY ANNUA
REPORTS YOU SUBMIT AND HAD
CONCERNS HOW THAT GOAL SETTING
METHOD HAD BEEN APPLIED IN THE
RESULTS.
YOU ARE DUE TO SUBMIT A NEW GOA
THIS SUMMER AND AS PART OF THE
PROJECT WE'LL BE WORKING WITH
RANDY AND FRANCIS AND OTHERS TO
PUT THAT TOGETHER FOR YOU TO
MAKE SURE IT'S FULLY COMPLIANT.
YOU SHOULD CLARIFY HOW YOU'RE
SETTING GOALSEN INDIVIDUAL
CONTRACTS AS YOU PROBABLY KNOW
YOU CAN'T SET THE SAME GOAL BOT
THE REGULATIONS AND COURTS
REQUIRE THAT BE NARROWLY
SPECIFIC TO THE JOBS YOUR
BIDDING AND WE HAVE SPECIFICS O
HOW TO DO THAT AS WELL.
WE THINK YOU CAN MAKE REVISIONS
TO ENHANCE YOUR POLICIES AND
PROCEDURES TO ESTABLISH WHETHER
A BIDDER HAS MADE A GOOD FAITH
EFFORT TO REVEAL THE GOAL.
IT'S KNOW THE A QUO THE.
IT'S A GOAL BUT YOU DO EXPECT
PEOPLE TO USE THEIR BEST FAITH
EFFORT TO MEET IT AND THAT
INCLUDES QUESTIONS ABOUT HOW TO
EVALUATE A BID BEFORE AWARD AND
THEN ALSO WHAT TO DO WHEN A,DBE
NEEDS TO BE REPLACED ON A
CONTRACT.
RECENT MENLTS REQUIRE YOU HAVE
SPECIFIC PROCEDURES AND WE HAVE
DRAFTED FORMS FOR YOUR REVIEW.
THAT WOULD ADDRESS THOSE ISSUES.
YOU NEED TO ENSURE THAT THE
COMMITMENTS THAT BIDDERS MAKE
ARE IN FACT ADHERED TO DURING
CONTRACT COMPLIANCE.
WE HAVE SUGGESTIONS ABOUT THAT
AS WELL AND PUT TOGETHER SOME
FLO
FORMS FOR YOU TO USE WILL HELP
PEOPLE COMPLY DURING CONTRACT
PERFORMANCE AND THEN IMPROVING
YOUR DATA RETENTION AND
COLLECTION PROCESSES WE THINK I
VERY IMPORTANT.
YOU ARE REQUIRED UNDER THE TERMS
OF YOUR F TA GRANTS TO DO THAT
AND TO HAVE DATA THAT CAN BE
REPLICATED SHOULD YOU GET AN
AUDIT SO WE HAVE SUGGESTIONS
ABOUT THAT AS WELL.
IT INCLUDES DATA BOTH ON YOUR
CONTRACTS AS WELL AS DATA ON TH
FIRMS THAT ARE BIDDING AND QUOTE
TOGETHER YOU ON THE JOB.
FINELY THE RECENT REGULATIONS
REQUIRE NOW AN EXPLICIT SMALL
BUSINESS DEVELOPMENTS IN YOUR
PROGRAM AND THOSE ARE DUE TO F
TA BASICALLY NOW WHICH IS WHY I
UNDERSTAND WHAT'S ON YOUR AGEND
IS TO APPROVE THE ELEMENTS TO B
SUBMITTED THE TIMELY FASHION AN
SO WE HAVE SUGGESTIONS ON HOW T
DO THAT.
ACTUALLY AS IT TURNS OUT THE
CITY IS DOING A FAIR AMOUNT
ALREADY TO ASSIST SMALL
BUSINESSES SO THAT WAS GREAT TO
SEE THAT.
YOU'RE AHEAD OF A WHOLE LOT
OTHER PLACES IN THAT RESPECT BUT
WE THINK THERE'S SOME MORE STEPS
THAT YOU MIGHT TAKE.
THESE INCLUDE REVIEWING YOUR
BONDING, INSURANCE AND
REQUIREMENTS TO MAKE SURE
THEY'RE NOT GREATER THAN REALLY
NECESSARY.
THEY DON'T PRESENT A BARRIER TO
SMALL FIRMS.
PARTNERS WITH OTHERS TO ASSIST
WITH BONDING.
ONE THING WE HEAR FROM THOSE
EVERYWHERE IS DIFFICULTY IN
THIS.
A THOUSAND FIRMS I'VE
INTERVIEWED IN THE LAST YEARS
AND I HEAR THIS PROBLEM
EVERYWHERE.
I THINK IT'S SOMETHING YOU
SHOULD ADDRESS.
MAKE SURE YOU'RE SOLICITING
DBA'S FOR YOUR INFORMAL
CONTRACTS AND MAKE SURE THEY'RE
INCLUDED IN CALL.
THIS A LOW-HANGING FRUIT THERE
BECAUSE YOU HAVE A PRETTY HIGH
INFORMAL BIDDING THRESHOLD.
IT'S MORE THAN MOST GUILT SIS
GIVING YOU A LOT OF FLEXIBILITY.
I THINK YOU SHOULD OR COULD DO
SOMETHING THERE.
MAKE SURE YOU ENCOURAGE THE,DBES
AND EVEN ON CONTRACTS THAT DON'T
HAVE A GOAL.
IT'S A VIEW TO THE FAYETTEVILLE
AND WE WOULD LIKE YOU TO MEET
OUR GOALS IF YOU'RE GOING TO
WORK WITH US AND COLLECT DATA ON
THE UTILIZATION OF SMALL FIRMS.
BUT YOU PROBABLY NEED TO THAT
COMPONENT WHERE YOU CAN TELL,
THEM HOW GOOD THE MEASURES ARE
WORKING.
NOW TITLE 6.
>> THANK YOU GOOD EVENING.
AS SHE MENTIONED WE DID FIND OUT
TODAY IN MEETING WITH STAFF
THERE'S A QUITE A FEW THINGS
YOU'RE DOING ON A GLOBAL LEVEL
WITH THE CITY. OUR CHARGE WAS
TO LOOK AT THE FAST TITLE SIX
PROGRAM THAT THEY HAD IN PLACE
OVER THE LAST THREE YEARS.
IN REVIEW OF THAT, ONE THING WE
WOULD LIKE TO RECOMMEND TO THE
CITY ON A GLOBAL PERSPECTIVE IS
THAT THEY ESTABLISHED A CIVIL
RIGHTS UMBRELLA.
ALTHOUGH WE'RE ESTABLISHING A
FAST REQUIREMENT FOR TITLE 6 YO
HAVE A LOT OFF THERE THINGS
GOING ON AND CENTRALIZING THE
PROGRAM ALLOW YOU TO BETTER USE
YOUR RESOURCES AND MAKE SURE
THAT EVERYTHING IS COMPLIANT.
UNDER TITLE SIX THE CITY IS THE
RECIPIENT OF FEDERAL AID
FUNDING.
ALL YOUR CITIES PROGRAMS ARE
REQUIRED WHERE THEY RECEIVE
FUNDING OR NOT.
THAT'S ONE THING UP FRONT FOR
YOU IN REVIEW THAT WAS THE FIRST
ONE WE ALSO SUGGEST YOU UPDATE
YOUR DEMOGRAPHIC DATA FROM 2000
AND 2009.
WE REQUEST THAT YOU TRY TO LOOK
AT THE CENSUS OUT AND UPDATE TH
DEMOGRAPHICS FOR YOUR REGION
HERE.
ADDRESS ENHANCEMENTS FROM TITLE
SIX PLAN.
YOU HAVE FIVE MAIN AREAS THAT
YOU TALKED ABOUT THAT WHAT
YOU'RE PROPOSING TO DO THAT WAS
INCLUDE.
25-FOOT MOTOR COACHES AND
ENHANCING THOSE TO 35 FOOT MOTOR
COACHES.
COLLECTING ON TIME DATA IT
CETERA. WE COULDN'T FIND IF
THOSE WERE COMPLETED.
SOME OF THEM WERE.
IF THERE'S A DIFFERENT PRIORITY
YOU SET IN THOSE TITLE SIX
ENHANCEMENTS AND THEY HAVE
CHANGED YOU NEED TO REPORT THAT
BACK TO THE F TA AND ALSO PUT IN
ANY NEW ENHANCEMENTS YOUR
PROPOSING OVER THE NEXT THREE
YEARS.
THE OTHER ONE WAS TO DETERMINE
SYSTEM WIDE POLICIES YOU SAY
THAT YOU DO THIS BUT YOU HAVE NO
CRITERIA AS TO HOW TO ESTABLISH
THOSE TO MAKE SURE THERE'S NO
DISPARAGE TREATMENT.
THIS IS VERY CRITICAL.
ESPECIALLY ON ALL TRANSPORTATIO
PROCESSES FROM THE PLANNING
PROCESS TO CONSTRUCTION AND
MAINTENANCE SO THAT'S SOMEHOW
HAVE TO BE DEFINED IN YOUR PLAN.
THAT WAS MISSING.
WE KNOW YOU DO TITLE SIX
ASSESSMENTS BUT THERE WERE
PIECES MISSING IN THE PROCESS.
DEMONSTRATE EQUAL OPPORTUNITY
EMPLOYMENT COMMITMENT.
THIS PART OF YOUR CIVIL RIGHTS
UMBRELLA ESPECIALLY WITH
CONTRACTS AND EMPLOYMENT.
THE NEXT PIECE WAS REVIEW OF AL
CONTRACT DOCUMENTS.
WE COULDN'T PINPOINT WHETHER OR
NOT YOU INCLUDE THE TITLE SIX
ADA REQUIREMENTS FOR YOUR
CONTRACTORS AND THIS IS
SOMETHING THAT YOU HAVE TO DO
AND YOU HAVE TO INCLUDE THE
LANGUAGE BECAUSE IT'S PASSED
DOWN TO THE SUB RECIPIENTS AND
THE CONTRACTORS ARE THOSE.
DEMONSTRATING COMPLIANCE WITH
THE ADA.
THIS AGAIN WAS PART OF YOUR
ENHANCEMENTS THAT YOU PROPOSED.
YOU DID PHYSICAL ASSETS AND YOU
SHOULD TAKE CREDIT FOR IT THAT
IS A YOU SUBMIT THAT TO, F TA
AND INCLUDE THOSE AS POTENTIAL
GOALS.
THE OTHER ONE IS DEFINE AND
CLARIFY THE COMPLAINT PROCESS
WHILE CERTAIN COMPONENTS WERE
LISTED WE REALLY DIDN'T SEE
WHERE YOU WOULD, WHAT STEPS YOU
WOULD TAKE TO ADDRESS THE
COMPLAINT ITSELF.
YOU GAVE EVERYONE THE ABILITY T
FILE THE COMPLAINT BUT WE DIDN'T
SEE THE STEPS.
WE GOT THE COMPLAINT.
THANK YOU FOR SENDING IT US TO
NOW WE'RE GOING TO TAKE 60 DAYS
TO REVIEW AND GET BACK TO YOU
WITH A RESOLUTION AND AGAIN
TRACKING THE EQUITY COMPLAINTS,
ACROSS THE CITY, NOT JUST IN TH
FAST AREA. AND THEN CONDUCTING
PUBLIC OUTREACH AND INVOLVEMENT.
THERE WAS NO DISTINCT PROCESS I
HOW TO ENGAGE THE PUBLIC.
WE KNOW YOU ENGAGE THEM AT THE
CITY COUNCIL MEETING AND KNOW
YOU HAVE LARGE MAJOR PROJECTS
YOU WILL ENGAGE THEM THROUGH
PERHAPS ONE OR TWO PUBLIC
HEARINGS BUT HOW DO YOU ENGAGE
THEM TO LET THEM KNOW WHAT THE
CITY IS DOING WITH RESPECT TO
ALL THE PROGRAM AREAS?
SO WE DEVELOPED A MALL PROCESS
FOR THAT.
INCREASING ACCESS TO
INFORMATION.
WE RECOMMENDED YOU DEVELOPMENT
AS PART OF YOUR WEBSITE AN
INFORMATIONLE WEBSITE THAT WILL
ADDRESS THIS AND TITLE SIX
BORROW OU SUR
BROCHURES.
WE TOLD HUMAN SERVICES ONCE YOU
PUT OUT A BROCHURE THESE ARE
YOU'RE RIGHTS AND BE PREPARED
SOME PEOPLE WILL ACCESS THAT
PROCESS.
TO SAY I FEEL DISCRIMINATED SO
YOU MAY BE ABLE TO ADDRESS THE
PROCEDURAL PROCESSES THAT NEED
TO BE ENHANCEED IN YOUR PROGRAM.
WE REVIEWED THE, L.E.P. PLAN.
AND WE AGAIN RECOMMENDED THAT
YOU UPDATE YOUR FOUR FACTOR
ANALYSIS REQUIRED BY THE FEDS.
FACTOR ONE IN PERSONS SERVE AND
ENCOUNTERED IN THE SERVICE
POPULATION ALTHOUGH WE SAW IN
THE PLAN THAT THIS WAS BEING
DONE WE COULDN'T DETERMINE HOW
IT WAS BEING DONE.
THE FREQUENCY OF CONTACT WITH
INDIVIDUALS, NOTHING WAS TRACKE
PER SE.
WE KNOW THE CONCERNS OF A L.E.P
PERSON IF SOMEONE COMES TO YOUR
OFFICES THEY'RE ADDRESSED BUT N
ONE IS KEEPING TRACK OF WE A
HAVE 15 IN TRANSIT AND FIVE IN
HUMAN RESOURCES, ET CETERA SO
YOU CAN DETERMINE YOUR NEEDS AS
AN AGENCY.
THE IMPORTANCE OF FAST SERVICES
TO, L.E.P. PERSONS IF YOU PUT IT
ON A GLOBAL BASIS THE IMPORTANC
OF YOUR SERVICES IN THE CITY AS
A WHOLE WHERE FOR CONTRACTING O
WHETHER IT'S FOR HUMAN RESOURCE
OR AGAIN FOR TRANSIT SERVICES
YOU HAVE TO KNOW WHAT THOSE ARE
AND THE RESOURCES AVAILABLE TO
THAT AND THE COST.
AS WE MET WITH STAFF, THERE WER
SOME SERVICES THAT STAFF DIDN'T
KNOW ABOUT YET THE CITY HAS
THEM.
FOR EXAMPLE YOU CAN CONTACT A
LANGUAGE SERVICE BY CALLING UP
AND USING YOUR CARD AND GETTING
SOMEBODY ON THE OTHER LINE AND
THIS WAS DONE IN SOME AREAS, BUT
STAFF THAT WAS CRITICAL IN
KNOWING THIS DID NOT KNOW THAT
SERVICE WAS AVAILABLE TO THEM.
THAT NEEDS TO GET OUT TO
EVERYONE THAT MAY HAVE POTENTIA
CONTACT WITH THE PUBLIC.
WE REALLY DO RECOMMEND
ESTABLISHING A MOD CUTE OF
TRAINING AND WE KNOW THAT THIS
WAS DONE I BELIEVE BY THE EQUAL
ACCESS UNDER HUMAN RELATIONS AN
WE JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT
EVERYTHING IS COVERED IN THAT
STAFF TRAINING AND INCREASING
THE ACCESS TO INFORMATION FOR
THE INDIVIDUALS.
HOW DO YOU ADDRESS WALK IN
L.E.P. INDIVIDUALS?
SOMEONE COMES TO YOUR TRANSIT
OFFICE AND THEY DON'T SPEAK
SPANISH THEY SPEAK A DIALECT OF
CHINESE IS HOW ARE YOU GOING TO
AN ADDRESS THAT.
WE HAVE RECOMMENDATIONS ABOUT
THAT IS A FAR AS INTERACTION
WITH THEM AND WALKING CUSTOMERS
AND PHONE CALLS FROM L EDD
INDIVIDUALS.
WE LISTED STEPS WE FEEL THE
AGENCY SHOULD TAKES AN A WHOLE
THAT WILL ADDRESS SOME OF THE
NEEDS YOU DO HAVE.
THAT CONCLUDES MY PORTION OF THE
PRESENTATIO
PRESENTATION.
>> HERE WE HAVE A COUPLE OF
QUESTIO
QUESTIONS.
>> THANK YOU.
THANK YOU.
ATTORNEY HOPE?
YOU KNOW I HAVE ONE OBJECTIVE
HAS BEEN CLOSE TO ME FOR SOME
TIME AND FOR THE OVERALL COUNCI
AND I WANT YOU TO DO SOME
CLARIFICATIONS AND MAKE SURE I'M
SPEAKING ABOUT THE SAME THING.
WE TALKED ABOUT YOU MENTIONED
SOMETHING ABOUT THIS INFORMING
BIDDING LANGUAGE.
>> NOW INFORMAL BIDDING
LANGUAGE.
>> YOU SAID WE HAD AN AREA OF
ABOUT $100 THOUSAND.
TELL ME ABOUT THAT.
I WANT TO SEE IF THAT'S THE SAME
THING AS WHAT I'M SPEAKING OF?
>> MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THE
CITY OF FAYE YELL VISITTEVILLE'
CONTRACT IS NOT SUBJECT TO THE
FULL PANEL OF FORMAL BIDDING
PROCEDURES THAT YOU NEED A
MINIMUM OF THREE QUOTES CALENDA
ISSUE A PURCHASE ORDER WITH PRE
BID CONFERENCES THAT GOES WITH
THE FORMAL BID.
THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING.
>> TAKE IT STEP-BY-STEP SO IT
DOESN'T EXPLAIN TOO MUCH FOR ME.
>> IS THAT TRUE?
>> OKAY.
>> OKAY.
>> THANKS.
>> SOOSHGS I'M THINKING MAYBE
THIS IS SOMETHING DIFFERENT.
I'M LOOKING AT YOU AND OVER HERE
AT THE CITY MANAGER AND THE
ATTORNEY THAT THIS IS SOMETHING
DIFFERENT THAN THIS $$30,000
FUND BUT IS THIS ONLY, OKAY BUT
I WANT TO - IS THIS - IS THIS
FOR ACROSS THE BOARD OF BIDDING
OR ARE YOU SPEAKING ONLY TO THE
BOARD OF TRANSIT?
>> TRANSIT IS WHAT WE LOOKED AT
AND WITHOUT A NORTH CAROLINA LA
LICENSE I'M NOT GIVING YOU AN
OPINION.
>> I STARTED FLAPPING MY WINGS
ON SOMETHING SO I'LL JUST PULL
IT BACK IN BECAUSE I WAS GONE.
WAS ON A MISSION TO HAVE MY
QUESTIONS LINED UP.
SPEAK ON THAT.
SPEAK ON THE TRANSIT AND TELL
ME.
THEN CAN WE DIRECT THAT TO OUR
SMALL BUSINESS FOLK WITHIN OUR
CITY HERE?
THIS $100 THOUSAND INFORMAL
BIDDING?
CAN WE MANIPULATE HOW TO SUPPOR
SMALL BUSINESS AND FEDERAL
>> WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE
PROCESS BY HOW YOU PROCURE
SOMETHING IF IT'S A FEDERALLY
ASSISTED CONTRACT AND YOU WOULD
LIKE TO MAKE SPECIAL OUTREACH
EFFORTS TO SMALL BUSINESS IN TH
COMMUNITY, THAT'S PERFECTLY
ACCEPTABLE.
IF YOU NEED TO GET THREE QUOTES
I SUGGEST THAT SOME OF THE FIRM
THAT YOU CONTACT ARE CERTIFIED,
SMALL BUSINESSES AND DBE'S.
MAKE SURE YOU DO THAT.
WHAT THE FED WILL NOT LET YOU D
IS RUN A SET ASIDE ON FEDERALLY
ASSISTED CONTRACTS SO YOU CAN'T
SAY WE'RE ONLY GOING TO CALL
LOCAL, CERTIFIED SMALL
BUSINESSES.
THAT YOU CAN'T DO BUT YOU CAN
MAKE SURE THEY'RE IN THE POOL.
IT'S ABOUT I SAW WHERE YOU WERE
GOING WITH THIS.
>> YES, MA'AM, I WAS.
>> SO YOU CANNOT RUN A LOCAL,
SET ASIDE ON FEDERALLY ASSISTED
DOLLARS.
>> NOW MY OTHER QUESTIONS IN
DOING YOUR DATA RESEARCH, CAN
YOU TELL US JUST - IS THERE A
SMALL POOL?
IS THERE A SMALL AMOUNT THAT,
THAT WAS BEING DONE IN OUR AREA
IN OUR CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE?
AS FAR AS SMALL, YOU KNOW, THAT
WE'RE RECEIVING JOBS?
>> WELL I WANT TO BE CLEAR.
WE CERTAINLY DIDN'T DO ANYTHING
THAT LOOKS LIKE A DISPARITY OR
AVAILABILITY STUDY SO WE DIDN'T
LOOK AT INDIVIDUAL CONTRACTS.
WE INTERVIEWED STAFF AND ASKED
THEM WHAT THEIR NORMAL PROCESSE
WHERE AND THEY ALWAYS MAKE AN
EFFORT TO SOLICITDBE'S FOR
CONTRACTS NOT SUBJECT TO FORMAL
PROCUREMENT.
WE WANTED TO STRESS IF YOU
CONTINUE TO DO THAT YOU WANT TO
ALSO BE SURE TO ADD SMALL
CERTIFIED BUSINESSES TO THAT
POOL SO THAT YOU'RE MAKING SURE
YOU HAVE A GOOD OUTREACH AND
YOU'RE REQUIRED TO TAKE THREE
AND MAYBE SOMETIMES YOU'LL TAKE
SIX IF YOU THINK THAT IS A GOOD
USE OF STAFF TIME.
THEY'LL HAVE TO USE THEIR
JUDGEMENT ABOUT THAT BUT YOU
WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYBODY
OUT THERE HAS AN OPPORTUNITY TO
QUOTE TO YOU ON YOUR INFORMAL
PROJECTS.
>> AND MY LAST QUESTION, I
THINK, IS THEN, IN YOUR RESEARCH
MY QUESTION WAS, DID YOU SEE AN
DATA, DID YOU SEE ANY
INFORMATION WHERE THIS $100
THOUSAND INFORMAL BIDDING WAS
BEING THAT OUR LOCAL SMALL
BUSINESSES WERE BEING SUPPORTED
BY THAT LOCALLY?
WAS THERE ANY DATA?
>> NO.
WE DIDN'T LOOK AT INDIVIDUAL
CONTRACTS OR UTILIZATION THAT
WAY.
WE HAVE ASKED AND SO WE STILL
HAVE LITTLE MORE RESEARCH TO DO
FOR YOU.
KIND OF HOW THE CONTRACTS FALL
OUT.
AND THE TRANSIT PEOPLE HAVE
ABOUT TEN OR SO A YEAR?
THAT ARE OVER 100 THAT ARE LARG
AND SUBJECT TO COMPETITIVE
BIDDING.
MOST OF THE REST FALL UNDER
THAT.
WE ASK TO TRY TO GET A PICTURE
OF WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE BUT IT
WON'T BEACON TRACT BY CONTRACT.
>> OKAYY DOEKY.
THANK YOU MAYOR.
>> THANK YOU SO.
GOOD TO SEE YOU.
CAN YOU EXPLAIN WHAT THE TERM
EQUITY COMPLAINT IS.
YOU SAID WE DON'T HAVE A
MECHANISM FOR TRACKING EQUITY
COMPLAINTS ACROSS THE CITY.
>> IT'S EQUAL OPPORTUNITY
COMPLAINTS THAT ALL YOUR
PROGRAMS ARE EQUITABLE AND
EVERYONE CAN PARTICIPATE.
HOW DO YOU TRACK YOUR TITLE SIX
COMPLAINTS?
WE DON'T KNOW.
THERE WAS NO FORMAL
DOCUMENTATION TO REPORT IT BACK
SO WE WERE RECOMMENDING THAT AL
OF YOUR COMPLAINTS BOW TRACKED
THAT WAY.
ADA EMPLOYMENT.
TITLE SIX WHATEVER COMES UP
UNDER THE CIVIL RIGHTS UMBRELLA.
>> WE HAVE A FORM FOR YOU TO DO
THAT.
>> THAT'S GOOD.
IF I COULD ASK MR. BOWER I THIN
HAS BEEN ABOUT A YEAR SINCE I
BROUGHT THIS WHOLE ISSUE UP AND
OUR CONSULTANTS ARE SAYING THER
IS A LANGUAGE SERVICE MECHANISM
THAT YOU MENTIONED?
AND WE HAVE NO WAY OF TRACKING
OUR CONTACTS WITH L.E.P..
SINCE THIS WAS BROUGHT TO STAFF
OVER A YEAR AGO, HAVE WE
ACCOMPLISHED DO WE KNOW AND
WHERE ARE WE IN REGARDS TO THE
ENTIRE CITIES EFFORTS UNDER THE
CIVIL RIGHTS UMBRELLA?
>> TITLE SIX BECAUSE SHE'S
SAYING IT'S A PRETTY WELL-KNOWN
OPPORTUNITY TO USE.
I'M WONDERING DID WE NOT
RESEARCH IT OR WHERE ARE WE WIT
OUR EFFORTS?
>> MY UNDERSTANDING AND I
APOLOGIZE SOME OF THE
INFORMATION I'M HEARING FOR THE
FIRST TIME TONIGHT WAS LITTLE
FRUSTRATING BUT MY UNDERSTANDIN
IS WE DO HAVE THAT PROGRAM IN
PLACE AND WE HAVE TRAINED OUR
STAFF ON HOW TO USE THE
PROCUREMENT CARD TO ACCESS THAT
SHOULD THEY NEED.
ONE OF THE THINGS THEY SAID
TONIGHT WHICH I FIND CHALLENGING
IS ON OF SOME OF OUR STAFF WAS
UNDER AND THE THE PROCESS.
THAT'S PART OF OUR FORMAL PLAN.
>> ONE OF THE THINS WAS FOUND
WAS THERE WAS ACTUALLY LOT GOING
ON BUT PERHAPS MORE
COMMUNICATION BETWEEN
DEPARTMENTS?
I MEAN FOR EXAMPLE ALL OF YOU
SHOULD KNOW THAT YOU HAVE
PROBABLY THE RIGHT TO DO THAT
TOO IF A CONSTITUENT CALLS YOU
WITH LIMITED ENGLISH?
SO IT'S IMPORTANT TO GET THAT
TRAINING OUT THERE AND WE
RECOMMEND MORE OF IT.
>> THAT'S GOOD.
>> AND ONE OF THE THINGS WE
THOUGHT WOULD BE HELPFUL WOULD
BE TO DEVELOP WRITTEN FORMS AND
PROCEDURES FOR YOU AND WE'VE
DONE THAT.
IT'S PART OF THE VERY THICK
PACKET YOU HAVE ON YOUR DESK
THERE.
YOU WILL SEE AT THE BACK THERE'S
ALL OF THESE FORMS AND
PROCEDURES FOR YOU THAT ARE
SAMPLES FOR YOU TO LOOK AT,
ADOPT, CHANGE IF YOU LIKE BUT
THAT GIVES YOU SOMETHING TO USE
TO ACTUALLY IMPLEMENT THE
PROGRAM.
>> SO IF I COULD MR. BOWER AND
MRS. MACDONALD THERE WERE OTHER
COMMENTS ABOUT NO TRACKING OF
OUR COMMENTS.
CAN WE GET, I WOULD LIKE AN
UPDATE ON THE ACCOMPLISHMENTS
THAT STAFF HAS HAD SINCE IT'S
BEEN A YEAR AND IF THERE ARE
COMMUNICATIONS ISSUES NOT JUST
UNDER THE TRANSPORTATION SIDE
BUT ACROSS THE CITY IF WE COULD?
A TRACKING THING FROM A YEAR
AGO?
>> I WOULD LIKE TO PROPOSE WE
EXPAND THAT.
I'M NOT SURE STAFF HAS SEEN
THIS.
THIS WOULD HAVE BEEN BETTER
MAYBE FOR THE WORK SECTION BUT
LET'S GET STAFF TO REVIEW AND
EXPECT YOU COME BACK MR. BOWER
ANSWERS AND STRATEGIES TO ALL O
THE THINGS THAT WERE SPELLED
OUT?
>> YES, SIR.
>> AND MR. HUHUME?
THERE WITH SEVERAL
RECOMMENDATIONS ABOUT STAFF
BEING PERHAPS YOU KNOW THEIR
PLATES ARE FULL WITH BEING ABLE
TO BECOME FULLY COMPLIANT.
I CAN'T READ MY GIBBERISH HERE.
BUT COLLECTION OF DATA AND
BEINGDBE STAFF.
WITH OUR BUDGET DELIBERATIONS,
HAVE YOU INCLUDED ADDITIONAL
STAFFING TO ADDRESS THE TITLE
SIX ISSUES THAT THEY MAY HAVE
IDENTIFIED OR WOULD YOU HAVE TO
REVISE THE YOUR REQUEST FOR
STAFFING?
>> WE DID NOT INCLUDE REQUESTS
FOR ADDITIONAL STAFF TO DO THIS.
WE DID NOT HAVE THE REPORT TO
FIT IN IN OUR BUDGET.
SOME OF THAT MAY NOT BE
FULL-TIME STAFF BUT CONTRACTED
STAFF WE MIGHT USE.
>> SO WOULD YOU AGREE THAT IT'S
OUTSIDE YOUR, THE NEEDS ARE
GREATER THAN WHAT YOU HAVE IN
WHERE IT'S CONTRACTING OR
FULL-TIME PERSONNEL THERE WILL
BE A COST ASSOCIATED WITH IMLE
MEANTING?
NEW THERE WOULD BE SOME COST IN
TERMS OF SOME OF THIS WE CAN
COVER WITH THE PLANNING GRANTS
AS WE SET THAT UP THROUGH THE
PROCESS WE CAN RECOVER SOME OF
THAT BOTH THROUGH CONTRACT
PROVISION AS WELL AS STAFF AND
WE COULD USE THAT.
BUT IT'S NOT THERE'S NOT EXTRA
IN THE BUDGET FOR IT.
>> SAY THAT AGAIN.
>> THERE'S NOT EXTRA IN THE
PROPOSED BUDGET RIGHT NOW.
>> YOU ANTICIPATING ADDRESSING
THAT?
I'M GOING TO ASSUME TITLE SIX
FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS IS NOT IF
WE WANT TO DO IT BUT WE KIND OF
HAVE TO DO IT?
>> THE OTHER THING I CAN ADD IS
AT LEAST FOR THE,DB PROGRAM
THOUGH EXPENSES ARE
REIMBURSABLE.
THEY WON'T GIVE YOU MORE MONEY
FROM IT BUT YOU CAN USE EXTRA
MONEY TO SUPPORT IT IF YOU NEED.
>> WHEN DID YOU GET THIS REPORT?
>> GOT IT I GUESS LAST WEEK?
EITHER THE END TO PREVIOUS WEEK
OR THE BEGINNING OF LAST WEEK SO
WE'VE NOT HAD IT VERY LONG
EITHER.
>> MR. FOWLER?
>> I THINK MY QUESTION WILL HAV
TO BE ANSWERED AFTER MR. BOWER
LOOKS AT THIS BUT HOW MUCH WILL
THESE CHANGES COST?
CENTRAL, CITY DOLLARS OR WHAT?
>> I CAN'T SAY.
I THINK MY SUGGESTION IS TO TAKE
A LOOK AT THE RECOMMENDATIONS
AND SEE WHERE YOU THINK YOU CAN
I
INTEGRATE THEM.
MAKING SURE EVERYONE KNOWS WHAT
YOUR ALREADY DOING.
IT'S STAFF COST AND TIME PITS
NOT GOING TO COST YOU MONEY.
MAKE SURE WE COVERED EVERYTHING
AND THEN TRY TO FIGURE OUT HOW
IT WOULD COST, I COULDN'T EVEN
SPECULATE.
I DON'T THINK WE'RE TALKING A
LOT OF MONEY BUT IT WON'T BE
FREE.
>> IF YOU'RE SAYING WE WOULD
LOSE FUNDS?
>> NO I CAN NEVER REDIRECT WHAT
THEY'LL DO BUT IN THEORY THEY
CAN CERTAINLY REFUSE TO FUND IF
YOU'RE OUT OF COMPLIANCE.
>> THANK YOU AND YOUR STAFF FOR
PROVIDING US WITH THIS
INFORMATION AND MRS. APPLE
WHITE, I CONCUR WITH YOUR
REQUEST 200 PERCENT AND THAT WE
NEED TO GET THIS INFORMATION AN
I THINK YOU HIT IT ON THE HEAD
WHEN YOU SAID, THERE'S SO MUCH
GOING ON AROUND HERE THERE'S SO
MANY TIMES THE RIGHT HAND
DOESN'T KNOW WHAT THE LEFT HAND
IS DOING AND SOMETIMES WE JUST
ENHANCE OUR COMMUNICATION AND
LOOK AT WHAT WE PRESENTLY DO
HAVE, WE MIGHT BE SURPRISED WHAT
WE'LL BE ABLE TO DO WHAT
WEDNESDAY WWED ONCE WE
KNOW WHAT TO FOCUS ON?
>> ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO ACCEPT
THE REPORT.
>> SECONDED.
>> ANY DISCUSSION ON THAT?
>> THIS IS TO A SEPARATE REPORT
NOT TO APPROVE ALL THE
RECOMMENDATIONS?
>> RIGHT.
>> OKAY.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU.
>> IT TOOK ME A LONG TIME TO
READ THIS KIND OF STUFF.
>> IF I COULD.
ONE CLARIFICATION.
ONE OF THE REASONS THIS CAME UP
SO SUDDENLY IS THE SMALL
BUSINESS COMPONENT ADDING TO,DB
IS A NEW REVISION WE WERE GIVEN
SHORT TIME TO IMPLEMENT.
WE HAVE A DEADLINE TO SUBMIT
THAT TO F TA OR WE'RE OUT OF
COMPLIANCE AND THAT'S ONE OF TH
REASONS THIS WAS PUSHED NOW.
THE PROGRAMS ARE NOT REALLY DUE
UNTIL AUGUST BUT WE HAD TO PUSH
THIS ONE LITTLE SOONER.
>> OKAY, SIR.
THANK YOU.
>> OKAY.
I THINK WE'RE BACK NOW TO 611?
AND CAN YOU ADVISE US ON THAT?
I THINK WE ELECTED MR. GBATES AD
MRS. MACDONALD?
ITEM 6.11.
MR. BATES, WE STILL FOLLOWING
THAT?
GOING TO DEFER.
>> I HAVE SPOKE WHEN THE
APPLICANT BUT MY RECOMMENDATION
IS BASED ON YOUR ACTION IN 6.9
THAT YOU DEFER ACTION 6.11.
>> WELL, I THINK THAT 6.9 IS
COME INTO THE WORK SESSION AND
THEN WE'LL MAY 7TH AND THEN
WE'LL SEE AFTER THAT.
RIGHT?
ISN'T THAT WHAT WE DECIDED ON?
KEIT
KEITH?
>> IT'S ALL HERE AND DISCUSSION.
MOTION THAT WAS STATED BASED ON
DECISION ON ITEM 6.9 WE DEFER
PUBLIC HEARING TONIGHT UNTIL
FURTHER DATE.
>> RIGHT.
WE DIDN'T DISCUSS A DATE BUT
IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THEY'RE
MAKING A REQUEST.
>> I WANT TO MAKE SURE IT COMES
BACK TO WORK SESSION FIRST.
>> WELL 6.9 IS DEFINITELY COMING
BACK TO THE WORK SESSION.
WE'VE TAKEN THIS BACK AFTER
THAT.
>> MOTION TO DEFER ACTION 6.11?
>> YES.
>> YOUR MOTION, MR. BATES?
YOU'RE SECONDING THAT?
ASK FOR YOUR VOTE, PLEASE?
>> I'M SORRY.
WE CAN'T GET IT, DISCUSSING THI
WITH COUNCIL ON THE SEVENTH WE
CAN'T GET IT ADVERTISEED BY THE
14TH.
>> JUST SAYING ONLY COMMITMENT
IS THE WORK SESSION IN MAY FOR
ITEM 6.9.
WE UNDERSTAND WE CALENDAR
ADVERTISE.
>> WE'RE NOT DEFERRING TO A
DATE?
>> NO, NOT THIS ONE.
THIS ISN'T DEFERRED TO A DATE
CERTAIN BECAUSE WE HAVE TO DO
THE WORK SESSION FIRST.
>> OKAY THANK YOU.
>> NO DATE SESSION DEFERRED ON
THIS PARTICULAR MOTION.
SAYING IT'LL DEAL WITH THE WORK
SESSION IN MAY AND WE'LL GO AS
QUICK AS WE CAN AFTER THAT.
MR. FOWLER?
UNANIMOUS.
OKAY.
WE MOVE NOW TO ITEM 7 POINT 1
WHICH IS UPDATE FROM THE CHAMBE
OF COMMERCE AND MRS. REBECCA?
>> GOOD EVENING I KNOW YOU'RE
ALL PROBABLY GETTING TIRED.
I HAVE IMPORTANT INFORMATION TO
SHARE WITH YOU.
IF YOU BEAR WITH ME I'LL GET
THROUGH THIS AS QUICKLY AS
POSSIBLE. I'M HERE TO RECORD TH
THIRD QUARTER OF THE FISCAL YEA
RELATED TO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
FROM THE CHAMBER.
WHAT I'VE DONE FIRST IS OUTLINE
THE FIVE PRIORITYS OF OUR
ORGANIZATION THAT I BELIEVE
AMERICAN WELL WITH THE CRITICAL
ACTIONS THAT THE CITY CONTINUES
TO PURSUE.
I'LL LET YOU REVIEW THOSE AT
YOUR LEE SOOUFRMENT YOU SHOULD
HAVE A COPY OF THIS SENT OVER
ELECTRONICALLY SO IF YOU DON'T,
LET ME KNOW AND I'LL MAKE SURE
THAT YOU HAVE ONE SO.
THOSE ARE THE FIVE PRIORITIES.
JOB CREATION AND THE RETENTION
OF JOBS.
LEVERAGING THE CONTINUING BUILD
UP TO MAKE SURE WE'RE IMPROVING
AND THREE IS TO ENHANCE LOCALLY
AND WE'RE ON THE PATH TO DO
THAT.
FOUR IS TO EXECUTE STRATEGIES T
IMPROVE THE OVERALL LIVE BUILT
OF THE COMMUNITY AND FIVE IS TO
MAKE SURE THAT THE CHAMBER
REPRESENTS ARE SATISFIED WITH
THEIR INVESTMENT.
A QUICK REMINDER OF OUR ECONOMI
DEVELOPMENT STAFF YOU HEARD IN
THE EARLIER SESSION THAT
DOUGBIRD WILL BE LEAVING AND
RETIRING I THINK FOR THE THIRD
TIME.
THIS TIME OFFICIALLY AFTER BEIN
WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
AND ALSO WITH THE JACKSONVILLE
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT GROUP.
DOUG WILL BE LEAVING ON THURSDAY
AND WE'LL HAVE RAE SEPGS MONDAY
NIGHT WHERE WE'LL ALSO INTRODUCE
OUR NEW EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDEN
FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMING
TO US FROM INSIDE THE STATE.
THE - LET ME GO QUICK TOY THE
RECOGNIZE THE NEW AND EXPANDING
BUSINESSES AND I'LL SHARE THE
TARGETS.
HERE'S THE RUN DOWN OF THE
COMPANIES WE'VE BEEN PART OF
ASSISTING.
TWO OF THOSE DEFENSE CONTRACTOR
AND CONTRACT MANUFACTURE ONE IN
THE MOLD INDUSTRY.
THE OTHER WAS DEFENSE CONTRACTO
REPRESENTING AN ENGINEERING
FIRM.
BOTH OF HOTHOSE REMAIN ANONYMOU
WE CAN TALK TO YOU FURTHER ABOUT
THOSE COMPANIES OFF LINE IF YOU
CHOOSE.
HINDER CHRYSLER AND JEEP HAS A
I
MOVING FORWARD ON A FACILITY.
>> JOBS AND INVESTMENT.
GOOD YEAR TIRE AND YOURER
COMPANY TO SUBSTANTIATES THE
BOLD INVESTMENT THE COMMUNITY
MADE HAS INVESTED AN ADDITIONAL
13 MILLION AND WE EXPECT THAT
INVESTMENT TO CONTINUE.
THAT DOES NOT RESULT IN THE
CREATION OF ANY NET NEW JOBS BUT
IT DOES NOT RESULT IN THE LOSS
OF ANY JOBS IF YOU REMEMBER PART
OF THE PLAN WAS TO AUTOMATE AND
MODERNIZE THE FACILITY AND THEY
HAVE IN FACT ADDS SEVERAL
HUNDRED JOBS AS A RESULT OF THA
INVESTMENT.
MARKET SQUARE IS ONE THAT WAS
ANNOUNCED I THINK WAS IN THE
NEWSPAPER A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO.
THAT IS THE 100 BLOCK OF HEY
STREET.
2 AND A HALF MILLION DOLLAR AND
THE CREATION OF 50 JOBS SO TO
DATE FOR THE THIRD QUARTER.
192 JOBS CREATED, 25 MILLION
790,000 IN CAPITOL INVESTMENT.
HERE'S WHAT OUR TARGETS WERE.
IF YOU LOOK AT THE CAPITOL
INVESTMENT, HOUR CONNOLLEY
TRAMURAL ARRANGEM CONTRACT.
WE EXPECT TWO ANNOUNCEMENTS THAT
WILL SIGNIFICANTLY INCREASE THA
NUMBER.
JOB CREATION.
LET ME ADDRESS AND I'M SURE THA
ALL OF YOU KNOW THIS.
AND IN A PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION
JOBS ARE TYPICALLY SLOW TO BE
CREATED BUT WE EXPECT SOME TIME
IN THE NEXT 3-6 MONTHS THERE TO
BE AN ANNOUNCEMENT OF ABOUT 180
NEW JOBS IN THE COMMUNITY FROM
TWO DIFFERENT EMPLOYERS PROJECT
THAT WE EXPECT TO BE SUCCESSFUL
IN LANDING.
WE CALL ON 75 EXISTING
COMPANIES, SIX MIST EXISTING
MANUFACTURERS TO REMIND YOU COLD
CALLS ON COMPANIES THAT WE WANT
TO TELL THE TIMBERLAND STORY TO
WE SAID WE COULD TALK TO 150 AN
TO DATE WE'RE AT 140 AND WE
CONTINUE TO INVEST IN OUR WEB
PRESENCE AT THE REQUEST OF THE
SIGHT COMMUNITY.
AS WE GO OUT AND TOUK TO, IF YOU
LOOK AT THE FOURTH LINE DOWN.
THE THIRD LINE DOWN THE
RETENTION VISITS WE USUALLY
INDUSTRY STANDARD SOFTWARE COULD
IN CRO
SYNCHRONIST AND WE ASK THEM TO
DO TR BUSINESS HERE.
THE FOLLOWING NUMBERSLY SHARE TO
YOU NOT IN GREAT DETAIL.
ONE IS A LOW SCORE SEVEN IS A
HIGH SCHOOL AND IF YOU LOOK AT
THIS PARTICULAR CHART IT SHOWS
YOU, EXACTLY HOW FOLKS IN THE
INDUSTRY ARE RATING SERVICES
AVAILABLE HERE IN THE COMMUNITY.
NOT ALL OF THOSE ARE CITY, SOME
ARE COUNTY.
SOME ARE PRIVATE AND BUT IT IS
AN ACCURATE INDICATOR OF HOW
WELL WE'RE PERFORMING AGAINST
THE EXPECTATIONS OR THE
SATISFACTION LEVEL OF THOSE
COMPANIES THAT ARE COMM CURRENT
INVESTED HERE.
>> SIX PERCENT?
>> SEVEN.
YOU HAVE TO WALK ON WATER TO GET
A SEVEN.
I'VE BEEN DOING THIS A LONG TIM
AND USING THIS PROGRAM FOR A
LONG TIME AND NEVER SEEN
ANYTHING MORE THAN A SIX AND A
HALF AND THAT WAS, THAT WAS A
RARITY.
>> MR. PETERS ONE QUESTION.
THIS IS A MEASURE THAT WE USE
AGAINST OURSELVES, DO SIMILAR
COMMUNITIES USE THE SAME
MEASURE?
IS THERE AWAY TO RACK AND STACK
AGAINST OTHER COMMUNITIES?
>> I THINK ALL OF YOU ARE AWARE.
THE CITY MANAGER ITZILLIONTHS OA
STEERING COMMITTEE.
WE HIRED A FIRM CONDUCTING A
VERY IN STRATEGIC PLANNING
PROCESS FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
UNIQUE TO THIS COMMUNITY.
THERE'S TWO SPECIFIC COMMUNITIES
OUT THERE THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE
BENCHMARKING OURSELVES AGAINST.
ONE IS HUNTSVILLE AND THEN ONE
IS AUGUSTA AND WE DO TRADITIONAL
AGAINST GREENSBORO.
WILMINGTON AND JACKSONVILLE THA
ARE INSIDE THE STATE SIMILAR
COMMUNITIES AND WE DO HAVE DATA
THERE IN ADDITION TO THOSE
NUMBERS, THAT DON'T TELL YOU A
LOT OF WHAT LED TO THOSE
RANKINGS, WE ALSO ARE COMPILING
A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF DATA
RELATED TO OVERALL COST.
COSTS INSIDE AND OUTSIDE THE
CITY AND COSTS FOR UTILITIES AN
LAND AND LABOR AND ALL THE
THINGS THAT GO INTO A SIGHT
SELECTION AND THAT WILL BE
SHARED WITH YOU IN YOU HAVE AN
INTEREST.
THIS IS LOOKING AT POLICE FIRE,
M T AND GOES INTO SCHOOLS, K-12
AND I CAN TELL YOU OUR 5.15
RANKING DOES RANK HIGHER THAN
SOME COMPETITORS LUSING SAME
METHODOLOGY.
THIS TALKS ABOUT PUBLIC
TRANSPORTATION AND THAT'S
PROBABLY WHERE WE LACK AND SOME
OF THAT IF WE LOOK AT THE
COMMUNITY MOST OF OUR INDUSTRY
IS OUTSIDE THE CITY PER SE,
THERE ARE ISSUES RELATED TO
PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION AND MOVING
EMPLOYEES TO THE WORK SIDE.
AIR PASSENGER SERVICE.
I THINK THAT THIS NUMBER WILL GO
BACK UP BECAUSE WE WERE TOLD AN
I THINK THAT A LOT OF OUR
INDUSTRY WAS UNDER THE
IMPRESSION THAT THE DIRECT
FLIGHTS TO WASHINGTON WERE GOIN
TO BE EXORBITANTLY PRICED AND
WE'VE FOUND THAT NOT THE CASE
AND WE BELIEVE THEY ARE NOW ARE
COMPETITIVE WITH,RDU.
THAT NUMBER WILL GO BACK WHEN
FOLKS EXPERIENCE THAT.
PROPERTY TAXES?
IT'S AN ISSUE.
PARTICULARLY COMBINED PROPERTY
TAXES BUT WE'RE WORKING TOWARD
SOLUTION THERE AND I WANT TO
THANKS THE CITY FOR THEIR
ASSISTANCE IN HELPING US TO MOVE
THAT NEEDLE.
AND THEN WE ALSO HAVE RANKING O
TRADITIONAL COUNTY SERVICES
STATE WORKFORCE INITIATIVES AND
SO ON.
GIVE YOU AN UPDATE QUICKLY ON
THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN.
THERE'S A RED FLAG AREA FOR
FUNDING ALLOCATION THAT WILL BE
UP TO YOU ONCE PURCHASE OPTIONS
ARE SECURED.
WE CONTINUE TO FOCUS ON THE ARE
OF THIS ROAD.
THERE ARE ABOUT SEVEN DIFFERENT
PROPERTIES THAT HAVE BEEN
APPROACHED AND KNOW GET
ORGANIZATION ON TWO OF THOSE ARE
TAKING PLACE.
THERE'S ADDITIONAL PROPERTY JUST
SOUTH OF THE JASPER STREET
INTERSECTION THAT HAS A VERY
EXCITING PLAN THAT WE'RE WORKING
WITH CURRENTLY.
THAT WE BELIEVE WILL BE - I
DON'T WANT TO HEDGE HERE BUT
COULD BE TRANSFORMATIONAL FOR
THAT ENTIRE CORRIDOR AND WHAT
WE'RE SEEING OUT OF FABLE STATE
AND WHAT'S HAPPENING WITH THE
NORTH IN THE INTERCHANGE WE
EXPECT CONTINUED GOOD THINGS.
THE NEXT TIME I'M BEFORE YOU IS
AT THE CLOSE OF THE FISCAL YEAR
AND THERE SHOULD BE PROFOUND
ADVANCEMENT MADE ON THAT ROAD
PLAN.
HOPE SIX BUSINESS PARK I'M VERY
HAPPY TO TELL YOU AND I THINK
VICTOR IS STILL HERE, VICTOR
SHARP AND I MET THIS MORNING AN
WENT OVER THE PROPOSAL, WE DO
HAVE THE GREEN LIGHT NOW TO
PROCEED.
ONE OF THE MOST RECENT HICCUPS
WAS THE MARKET ANALYSIS FIRM
THAT WAS - I GUESS COMMITTED BY
THE CITY. WE HAD TO INTEGRATE
WITH THE FOLKS DOING THE SIGHT
PLANNING AND OTHER WORK FOR US.
THAT HAS BEEN DONE.
WE HAVE A CONFERENCE CALL
SCHEDULED FOR TOMORROW AND THE
DATE WE GREED ON THIS MORNING
WAS JUNE FOURTH FOR AN OVERVIEW
OF COUNCIL USING THOSE
CONSULTANTS HAVING THEM TO BRIN
UP TO SPEED ON WHERE WE
ASSISTANT IN TASSI STAND.
THE CAMPUS FOR AN ADVANCEMENT
AND SUSTAINABILITY ARE CURRENTL
UNDERGOING A MARKET ANALYSIS.
AND I BELIEVE THAT CONTRACT HAS
BEEN LET.
THE COMMUNITY SUSTAINABLE
COMMUNITIES FOUNDATION BOARD HA
NOT MET RECENTLY BUT I BELIEVE
THEY WILL ONCE THEY HAVE
SOMETHING TO SIT AT THE TABLE
AND GO OVER WHAT IS THE PRODUCT
THAT'S BEEN PAID FOR IN THAT
MARKET ANALYSIS.
THIS IS TO SUBSTANTIATES WHETHER
OR NOT THAT CAMP US WILL BE
SUPPORTED IN THIS MARKET.
I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY
QUESTIONS OF COURSE YOU HAVE.
>> ANY QUESTIONS FOR PETER?
>>
>> IT'S ON THIS COMPUTER.
YOU CAN KEEP OUT.
WE'RE TRYING TO CUT.
>> THANK YOU.
>> I APOLOGIZE.
WE'RE TRYING TO CUT BACK ON
COST.
>> IF YOU CAN GET THOSE TWO US
IN THE FUTURE I THINK WE'D LIKE
A COPY OF THESE TOO REBECCA.
THANKS FOR COMING.
>> I THINK THAT WAS HIS EARLIER
I THINK WE'RE GOOD.
THANK YOU.
>> GOOD EVENING MAYOR AND
MEMBERS OF COUNCIL.
ITEM 7.1B ON YOUR AGENDA IS THE
PRESENTATION OF OUR THIRD
QUARTER STRATEGIC PLAN REPORT I
YOUR AGENDA PACKET YOU RECEIVED
THE FULL NARRATIVE THAT DETAILED
THE BACKGROUND AND ACTION PLANS
OF THESE ITEMS AND I BROUGHT
WITH ME AND YOU SHOULD HAVE
BEFORE YOU A COLOR HAND-OUT.
DO WE HAND THAT OUT?
MADAME CLERK?
COMING AROUND.
OKAY.
THANK YOU.
FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO QUICKLY
WALK US BRIEFLY THROUGH THE
ACHIEVEMENTS IN THE THIRD
QUARTER.
LIKE TO MENTION STRATEGIC
MANNING IS A MUCH LARGER SYSTEM
THAT REQUIRES DISCIPLINE AND
LONG-TERM PLANNING.
THE EVALUATION TONIGHT ALLOWS
OUR ORGANIZATION TO STAY ON
TRACK AND ALSO TO RESPOND TO TH
CHANGING ENVIRONMENTS.
THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HAS A
COMPREHENSIVE STRATEGIC PLANNING
MODEL THAT TAKES THROUGH AN
ANNUAL PROCESS OF UNDERSTANDING
WHERE WE ARE AS AN ORGANIZATION
WHERE WE'LL GO AND HOW WE'LL GET
THERE.
OUR VISION STATEMENT REFLECTS
THE COMMUNITY WE HOPE TO ACHIEVE
THROUGH OUR ACTIONS TODAY.
OUR PARTNERSHIPS THROUGHOUT THE
XHOO UNITY WILL ENSURE THIS IS A
GREAT PLACE TO LIVE ONE IS
VIBRANT AND SUSTAINABLE.
OUR MISSION STATEMENT IDENTIFIE
FOR EMPLOYEES AND THE CITIZENS
OUR ORGANIZATIONAL ROLE IN
PURSUING THAT COMMUNITY VISION.
AND COUNCIL LIKE YOU CITY STAFF
IS COMMITTED TO PROVIDING
THESEER IS IS TO OUR COMMUNITY
WITH RESPECT SO THAT WE CAN DO
OUR PART TO SAFEGUARD AND
ENHANCE THE PUBLIC TRUST IN
LOCAL GOVERNMENT.
OUR PLAN ALSO SETS FORTH THE
PATH OUR ORGANIZATION MUST
FOLLOW IN ORDER TO REACH THE
COMMUNITIES VISION.
THEY INCLUDE GROWING OUR TAX
BASE.
BE COMES MORE EFFICIENT CITY
GOVERNMENT AND TAKING STEPS TO
MOVE OUR COMMUNITY FORWARD IN
UNITY.
FROM TOOEST GOALS YOU DEVELOP A
WORK PLAN WITH 27 TARGETS FOR
ACTION AND THESE ITEMS THAT YOU
REPORT TONIGHT FOCUSES ON.
GAS IS WORK TOGETHER DEVELOP A
BOND REFERENDUM THAT WILL
SUSTAIN PARK INVESTMENTS
PREVIOUSLY AND ENHANCE LIFE FOR
FUTURE AGAIN SI
FUTUREGENERATIONS.
WE ALSO HAD A PROPOSAL AND
INCLUDED RESOURCES NEEDED IN THE
BUDGET.
THE POLICE SUBSTATION PROJECT
ANALYZEED THE FEASIBILITY OF
ANALYZING THESE STRATEGIC
LOCATES THROUGHOUT THE CITY IN
THE THIRD QUARTER THE
RECOMMENDATIONS COVERED OPTIONS
FOR THE CREATION OF TWO POLICE
SUBSTATIONS ONE FOR EACH SERVIC
BUREAU.
THE VAST IMPROVEMENTS SUPPORTS
THE CITIES GOAL OF PROVIDING A
FOR MORE EFFECTIVE GOVERNMENT
SERVICE.
ALSO THE FAYETTEVILLE ADVISORY
COMMITTEE ON TRANSIT PRESENTED
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL FOR
FISCAL YEAR 2013 SERVICE
IMPROVEMENTS THE TRANSIT
DEPARTMENT HAS BEEN WORK OKAY
PROMISING GRANT PROPOSED ALSO
OUTLINED IN YOUR REPORT THIS
EVENING.
THE BUILDING DEMOLITION PROGRAM
SUPPORTED THE GOAL OF MORE
ATTRACTIVE CITY BY PRIORITIZING
BUILDING DEMOLITION FUNDS.
DURING THE THIRD QUARTER STAFF
DEVELOPED A TITLE SEARCH PROGRA
IN COORDINATION WITH THE REAL
ESTATE DIVISION 109 PROPERTIES
IDENTIFIED FOR JUNE 30THEST
MAKES COMPLETION DATE.
THE CITY PARTNERS FOR ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES AND I
THANK MR. PETERS FOR THAT
UPDATE.
THE SIGN ORDINANCE TARGET FOR
ACTION FOCUSED ON ASSIGNEDUD O.
FOCUSED GROUPS ARE SET WITH THE
PLANNING DIVISION WORK TOGETHER
FILL THE URBAN DESIGNER
DIVISION.
THE STREET LIGHT ORDINANCE
FOLLOWS ESTABLISHING OF
UNIFORMITY FOR THE YLOCATIONS O
LIGHTS.
IN A FOR STRUCTURE REQUESTED 90
DAY IMPLICATION PLAN FOR AREAS
THAT DO NOT NEED OUR STANDARDS.
TODAY THE CITY HAS RECEIVED FOU
OF THE THREE PROVIDERS WRITTEN
RESPONSES AND BASICALLY THE
RESPONSE IS STATE THAT THE
PROVIDEERS WOULD ADDRESS THE
LIGHTING DEFICIENCIES IDENTIFIE
BY CUSTOMERS OR THE CITY. CITY
STAFF WILL CONTINUE TO WORK WIT
NEIGHBORHOODS TO GUIDE THEM
THROUGH EACH PROVIDERS PROCESS.
COUNCIL RECOGNIZES THAT HIRING
AND RETAINING QUALITY STAFF IS
ACQ
CRITICAL PROCESS AND YOU'VE
REQUESTED A COMPENSATION PLAN.
DURING MARCH WORK SESSION
COUNCIL HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO
REVIEW THE STUDY OUTCOME AND TH
RECOMMENDATIONS FROM
CONSULTANTS.
COUNCIL PROVIDED APPROVAL TO
MOVE FORWARD WITH THE
IMPLEMENTATION AND STAFF IS
WORKING ON IMPLEMENTATION
OPTIONS.
THE SOLID WASTE PROGRAM THOUGHT
TO RESEARCH AND FIND
OPPORTUNITIES FOR OUT SOURCING
SERVICES.
EARLY IN THE THIRD QUARTER COST
INFORMATION WAS PRESENTED TO
COUNCIL.
FLO ING THAT ADDITIONAL
INFORMATION WAS PREPARED AND
PRESENTS TO COUNCIL.
ANALYSIS SAID IT WAS MORE
EFFICIENT AND EFFECTIVE FOR THE
CITY TO PROVIDE ALL GARBAGE
COLLECTION THAN TO UTILIZE
SERVICE FOR A PORTION OF THE
CITY. CITIES RECOMMENDATION WA
NOT TO PROCEED AND REJECT THE
PROPOSALS.
FAYETTEVILLE BEAUTIFUL IS
DEDICATED TO ENCOURAGING OTHERS
TO TAKE GREATER RESPONSIBILITY
FOR IMPROVING ENVIRONMENT.
THEY RECEIVE WEEKLY REQUESTS FOR
VOLUNTEER SUPPORT TO HELP WITH
CLEAN UP AND BEAUTIFICATION
PROJECTS.
IN THE THIRD QUARTER
FAYETTEVILLE BEAUTIFUL WAS BUSY
PLANING THE SPRING CLEAN UP HELD
THIS LAST SATURDAY.
MORE THAN 25,000 POUND OF LITTER
AND TRASH WAS PICKED UP AND WE
THANK EVERYONE FOR MAKING
FAYETTEVILLE A BETTER PLACE FOR
ALL.
COUNCIL WILL NOW MOVE TO
MANAGEMENT AGENDA.
THE DOOR DOOR DEVELOPMREDEVELOP
FAYETTEVILLE'S TRANSPORTATION AS
WE CONSTRUCTI 295.
STAFF DEVELOPED AND ISSUED AN
RSP TO SOLICIT FIRMS.
STAFF TELLS ME WE HAVE HAD A
ROBUST RESPONSE FROM THE PRIVAT
SECTOR AND CONTRACT NEGOTIATION
IS UNDERWAY.
AFTER TWO YEARS OF HARD WORK AND
COMMUNITY COLLABORATION THE
FAYETTEVILLE REGIONAL AIRPORT
WAS REWARDED WITH A U.S. AIRWAYS
ROUND TRIP DIRECT FLIGHT TO OUR
NATION'S CAPITOL AND THE SERVIC
BEGAN IN THE THIRD QUARTER ON
MARCH 25TH.
THE RECLAIMING NEIGHBORHOODS
PROJECTS TAKE A HOLISTIC
APPROACH TO THE PROBLEMS IN
SPECIFIC NEIGHBORHOODS THE
POLICE DEPARTMENT ISSUED ON THE
BONNY DUNE FOCUS AREA AND
THEY'LL CONTINUE TO DEVELOP
RELATIONSHIPS AND CONSIDER BE
FORTS OF THIS PROJECT A SUCCESS.
THE POLICE DEPARTMENT ALSO MADE
A DETERMINATION ON THE NEXT
FOCUS AREAS AND THEY'LL CONDUCT
A RECLAMATIONS IN TWO DISTRICTS
AND THE LOCATIONS ARE
IDENTIFIED.
THE HOPE SIX PARK BUSINESS
DEVELOPMENT PROJECT WILL ADDRES
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES
THAT WITNESSES HEARD T RI IMPOR.
COMMUNICATION STRATEGY SEEKS TO
DEVELOPMENT APPROVEMENTS AND
POLICY AND PROTOCOL AND I'M
PLEASED TO SHARE WITH YOU IN TH
THIRD QUARTER WE'VE RECEIVED
FOUR WORDS FOR EXCELLENCE AND
COMMUNICATION GUYS NORTH
CAROLINA CITY AND COUNTY
COMMUNICATORS THAT SHOW CASES
THE BEST OF THE BEST IN LOCAL
GOVERNMENT COMMUNICATIONS IN
NORTH CAROLINA.
WE'RE IN FIRST PLACE FOR THE
ALL-AMERICAN CITY STRATEGIC
MARKETING PLAN.
FIRST PLACE IN THE PARK AND
RECREATIONS ACTIVITY GUIDE AND
SECOND PLACE FOR CITIZEN
PARTICIPATION IN THE SIT IT ICI
ACADEMY.
I WOULD LIKE TO MENTION THE
FOLLOWING STAFF.
I ALSO WISH TO THANK THEM AND
OUR CITY EMPLOYEES THAT SUPPORT
OUR EFFORTS EVERY DAY.
STAFF FOCUSED ON WRAPPING UP THE
ALL-AMERICAN CITY MARKETING
CAMPAIGN BY PLANING THE FINAL
BIG FINALE.
WE'RE ALSO PRO PAIRING FOR EPAR
SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORM AND WORK
TOGETHER PROGRESS TOOLS AND
FOLLOWING THE DEVELOPMENT OF AN
OVER ARCHING CITY-WIDE POLICY
THAT MITT GUIDE STEPS TO BAN
GAGE BARRIERS AND SERVICES TO
CITIZENS.
STAFF WORKED TO CONNOLLEY O SOME
DATE CONSOLIDATE THE
LIST FOR THE CITY EMPLOYEE
TRAINING CLASSES AND AS A
RESULT, IN LIGHT OF TONIGHT'S
PRESENTATION STAFF WILL REVIEW
THE CONSULTANT'S REPORT AND
BRING RECOMMENDATIONS TO
COUNCIL'S WORK SESSION.
RSVP FOR THE OLD SIGHT
DEVELOPMENT ADVERTISED EARLIER
THIS YEAR, WE KID NOT RECEIVE A
RESPONSE.
THE TEAM REVISED TO INCLUDE
RENTAL PROPERTIES AND MINOR XHER
THAT W
COMMERCIAL AND THE SCHEMATIC
DESIGN IS COME MEET AND THEY
CONTINUE WITH ZONING ADJACENT
STREET PROPERTIES AND STAFF
COMPLETED A COMPETITIVE GRANT
APPLICATION SUBMITTED FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION OF THE FACILITY
OVER THE BUS INITIATIVE.
PRINCE CHARLES HOTEL IS A
HISTORIC LANDMARK DOWN INL TOWN.
THE PROPERTY OWNER WILL BE
ENCOURAGED TO ACHIEVE CODE
COMPLIANCE AND ENFORCEMENT
VIOLATION LIENS.
CURRENTLY OUR COMMUNITY HAS TWO
PUBLIC SAFETY POINTS THIS
PROJECT SEEKS TO FOLLOW THE
EFFORTS TO CONSOLIDATE THE 911
OPERATIONS AND COORDINATION
EFFORTS ARE FOCUSED BY MERGING
THE CAD SYSTEMS INTO ONE AND THE
ACTUAL MERGER WAS ACCOMPLISHED
IN FEBRUARY SO NOW THE CITY AND
COUNC
COUNTY.
THE RANT PROGRAM WORK EFFORTS
RELATE TO CITY COUNCIL AND
STAFF'S DESIRE TO IDENTIFY AND
BETTER MANAGEMENT OF RESIDENTIAL
PROPERTIES CITY-WIDE.
THIS QUARTER OUR EFFORT WHERE I
REWARDED AS THEY APPROVED IN AN
EFFECTIVE DATE OF JULY 31ST.
THIS CITIES YEAR THEY CELEBRATE
A BEAUTIFUL LIVING PART THAT
CHANGES THE FACE OF
FAYETTEVILLE'S DOWNTOWN AND
DESIGNED TO HONOR VETERANS OF
ALL MILITARY BRANCHES IT'S
COMPLETED IN THE INSTALLATION OF
THE NORTH CAROLINA DOG TAG
DISPLAY.
THE PARK CONTINUES TO BE
CELEBRATED AS A HUGE SUCCESS AND
A TRIBUTE TO THOSE HONORED,
ROTATING HISTORICAL EXHIBITS AR
PLACED THE CENTER.
CONTRIBUTION OF THE NORTH
CAROLINA AFRICAN AMERICA WAS
DISPLAYED.
OWNERSHIP OF THE FESTIVAL STREE
PLAZA APPROVING THE OCCUPANCY
RATE WILL CONTINUE TO MONITOR
AND ASSESS THE CLIMATE FOR
FUTURE USE OF THE BUILDING AND
THE CITY WILL WORK WITH THE
CHAMBER OF COMMERCE TO HAVE THE
REDEVELOPMENT.
THE BODY OF WORK REFLECTED IN
THIS REPORT IS DIRECTLY RELATED
TO THIS ORTHSS COMMITMENT TO
CONTINUING PLAN OF REPORTING AS
COUNCIL MAKERS YOU'RE THE
KEEPERS OF THIS AND THE
INVESTMENTS WILL KEEP OUR
COMMUNITY MOVING FORWARD.
I THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY
TO SHARE WITH YOU AND THE
CITIZEN'S THE PROGRESS WE HAVE
MADE FOR TARGETS FOR ACTION.
I'D LIKE TO THANK THE PROJECT
LIAISON WHO HELD WITH ME HERE
THIS EVENING AND THE REPORT AND
THE STRATEGIC PLAN IS AVAILABLE
ON OUR WEBSITE AND WITH THAT I
WOULD ASK YOU ACCEPT THE REPORT
AND I'LL BE A HAPPY TO TAKE
QUESTIONS OR DIRECT THEM TO YOU
PROJECT LIAISON.
>> MOTION TO ACCEPT THE REPORT?
MR. BATES?
THANK YOU SIR, SECOND?
ANY DISCUSSION ON THAT MOTION?
ASK FOR YOUR VOTE, PLEASE?
THAT'S UNANIMOUS.
THANKS FOR YOUR HARD WORK ON
THA
THAT.
>> READY FOR ME TO GO.
I WANT TO LET YOU KNOW THAT ONE
OF THE THINGS THAT BROUGHT ME TO
THIS COMMUNITY IS HOW SERIOUS
YOU TOOK ADDRESSING BRIGHT
SITUATIONS AND OF COURSE THAT
WAS BEFORE I KNEW WHERE YOU PUT
IT ON THE AGENDA.
HAVE SIX RESIDENTIAL DWELLINGS
THAT ARE BRIGHTED.
NONE THE PAST 11-MONTHS IS VERY
SIGNIFICANT.
7526 BETHESDA COURT.
POWERED SINCE THE TORNADO.
FIVE CALLS FOR ONE CODE
VIOLATION.
YOU CAN SEE IT'S EXTENSIVELY
DAMAGED.
1018 ELLIS STREET.
THIS WAS FIRE DAMAGED AND
UTILITIES BEEN OFF FOR ABOUT
NINE MONTHS AND AGAIN YOU CAN
SEE THE CONDITION OF THAT
STRUCTURE.
908 MARSH STREET THIS ONE HAS
BEEN WITHOUT POWER FOR SEVEN
YEARS MORE OR LESS AND RECALLS
FOR 911 SERVICE IN THE PAST 24
MONTHS, THREE CODE VIOLATIONS IN
THE PAST 24 MONTHS.
AND 525 MECHANIC STREET.
THIS ONE AGAIN, THIS IS A FIVE
YEAR DISCONNECT OF UTILITIES
ALMOST EXACTLY.
EIGHT CALLS FOR SERVICE.
FIVE CODE VIOLATIONS AND A
CERTAINLY A PROBLEM FOR US AND
THE LAST ONE IS 2325 ROSE HILL
ROAD.
FIRE DAMAGED, AND 41 CALLS FOR
911 SERVICE.
THAT ONE IS A RECORD AS FAR AS I
KNOW IN 24 MONTH PERIOD.
SO A REAL PROBLEM PROBABLY
PROPPED AND WE ASK YOUR APPROVA
TO PROCEED THROUGH THE PROCESS
AND HEAD TOWARDS THE STRUCTURES.
>> THANK YOU.
I JUST WANTED I CAN'T SPEAK ON
ALL THE PROPERTIES BUT JUST ONE
SPECIFICALLY 1018 ELLIS STREET.
I JUST WANT TO SAY FOR THE
RECORD THAT PROPERTY OWNER HAS
TAKEN OUT PERMITS AND THEIR WORK
OKAY THAT?
THAT'S NOT HOW THE STRUCTURE
LOOKS CURRENTLY?
>> THAT'S CORRECT.
I THINK IF I CAN GET THE CORNER
UP HERE. THEY HAVE STARTED WORK
ON REPLACING SOME OF THE SIDING
AND WHAT WE HAVE BEEN ABLE TO D
WHEN PEOPLE ARE SHOWING GOOD
FAITH EFFORT TO MOVE FORWARD WE
WORK WITH THEM AND SET GUIDE
LINES.
MILESTONES FOR THEM TO ACHIEVE
AND YOUR ACTIONS ARE VERY
HELPFUL FOR US TO KEEP
PRESSURING THEM TO KEEP THEM
ACTIVELY MOVING TOWARD IN THE
PROCESS AND OBVIOUSLY WE'RE NOT
INTERESTED IN DEMOLISHING
BUILDINGS THAT CAN BECOME VIABLE
PARTS OF THE COMMUNITY BUT WE D
NEED TO HAVE YOUR SUPPORT AND
MAKING SURE THAT WE ARE ABLE TO
STAY ON TOP OF THESE PROBLEMS.
>> SO IF THE APPLICANT DOES
APPROACH YOU ALL, PULL OUT THE
PERMITS AND IS WORKING ON THE
PROJECT ON A CONSISTENT BASIS
SHOWING GOOD FAITH MEASURES YOU
SAY THERE IS A PROGRAM WORKED
OUT FOR THAT?
>> WE DO.
WE HAVE A PROCESS WE WORKED OUT
WITH THE CITY ATTORNEYS OFFICE
WHERE THEY SIGN IN EFFECT A
CONTRACT SAYING THEY WILL
ACHIEVE THESE GOALS OVER THIS
PERIOD OF TIME AND IF THEY'RE
SUCCESSFUL THEN EVERYONE IS A
WINNER AND THAT'S WHAT WE WANT.
>> THANK YOU.
>> SCOTT, THANK YOU.
AND I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAN
ANSWER THIS BUT MAYBE YOU CAN,
BECAUSE WELL - I ASKED - I DON'T
KNOW A MONTH OR SO AGO - WHEN
WOULD WE HAVE THE INFORMATION ON
HOW LONG WE CAN ALLOW THE
STRUCTURES TO BE BOARD UP?
WHEN IS THAT COMING BACK TO
DISCUSSION?
>> WE NEED TO BRING THAT ONE
BACK TO YOU.
I CANNOT COMMIT TO HAVING IT TO
YOU AT YOUR MAY 7TH WORK SESSIO
BUT CERTAINLY BY THE JUNE
TIMEFRAME IF THAT'S AVAILABLE W
WILL TOUCH BASE WITH YOU ON THE
BOARD OF STRUCTURES.
>> YOU WERE AWARE.
>> YES, SIR.
>> THANK YOU.
>> DISREGARD.
OKAY.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR IS THERE
A MOTION?
MR. BATES?
>> MOTION TO APPROVE THE
DEMOLITION AS PRESENTED.
DO NEED TO NAME EACH STREET?
>> ADOPT AN ORDINANCE AND
DEMOLISH STRUCTURES IS OKAY.
THANK YOU MR. FOWLER.
ANY DISCUSSION?
YE
YES?
>> WHAT'S HAPPENING IS WHY IS -
WITH THE WORK BEING DONE, HAVE
THEY NOT FOLLOWED THROUGH ON THE
PLAN OR WHAT?
>> WELL, WE HAVE NOT ENTERED
INTO THAT SAME CONTRACT WITH
THEM TO MY KNOWLEDGE.
WHAT WE DO IS TAKE THEM THROUGH
THIS PROCESS AND WE GET YOU'RE
OKAY TO PROCEED TO DEMOLITION
AND THEN IF THEY APPROACH US
THEN THEY'VE HAD A CHANCE,
REMEMBER WE GO THROUGH THIS
PROCESS AND IT TAKES A MINIMUM
OF 97 DAYS TO GET TO WHERE WE
ARE TONIGHT.
ELLIS STREET I DON'T KNOW HOW
LONG HAS BEEN THERE BUT IT'S
PROBABLY BEEN LONGER THAN THAT.
THAT THEY HAVE HAD OPPORTUNITY
UPON OPPORTUNITY TO PROPOSE
SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE
SUCCESSFUL.
WE HAVE HAD SUCCESS STORIES
WHERE YOUR ACTION SEND AS CLEAR
MESSAGE AND WE'RE ABLE TO GET
PEOPLE TO REALLY BUCKLE DOWN AN
FIX THESE HOMES UP.
BUT THERE ARE OCCASIONALLY
SITUATIONS WHERE, THEY ENTER
INTO THE IDEA WITH THE BEST OF
INTENT AND THEY JUST CAN'T MAKE
IT HAPPEN AND WE ARE ABLE TO
MOVE FORWARD TO DEMOLITION.
>> UNDERSTOOD.
THANK YOU.
ASK FOR YOUR VOTE, PLEASE?
THAT'S UNANIMOUS.
WE HAVE ONE MORE ITEM HERE.
COUNCIL, STAFF TOLD ME WE DID
NEED TO MAKE ONE MODIFICATION.
WE DO NEED TO APPROVE THE SMALL
BUSINESS REPORT.
THAT'S WHAT THE TIMES THAT WAS
REQUIRED THE NIGHT.
>> IF YOU COULD ACTUALLY HAVE A
MOTION TO APPROVE 26.39 AS A
POLICY.
I WILL ALSO SAY THAT THERE ARE
COUPLE OF PROVISIONS IN HERE
THAT WE'LL COME BACK TO YOU WITH
SOME CORRECTIONS AND ADJUSTMENTS
BUT WE NEED SOMETHING IN PLACE
IN THE NEXT TEN DAYS.
AND WE'LL BRING IT BACK TO YOU
AND HAVE A CONVERSATION IN THE
NEXT 60 DAYS.
>> NEED TO MAKE A MOTION TO
APPROVE THE SMALL BUSINESS
SECTION, 26 POINT 39.
SECOND MR. MASSY AND ANY
DISCUSSION ON THAT?
THANK YOU, MA'AM.
THAT'S UNANIMOUS.
ANYTHING ELSE TO COME BEFORE