Loading...
04/03/2001 · · 3. 4. . 5. 6. · · CITY OF MONROE CITY COUNCIL MEETING 300 W. Crowell Street, Monroe, NC 28112 April 3, 2001 - 6:30 p.m. AGENDA 1. Resolution to Honor Retiring Employee - Ann Keziah CONSENT AGENDA 2. Minutes of Regular City Council Meeting of March 20, 2001 Minutes of Community Development Committee Meeting of February 14,2001 Minutes of Environment and Water Resources Committee Meeting of February 14,2001 Minutes of Board of Adjustment Meeting of February 22, 2001 Minutes of Monroe-Union Historic Properties Commission Meeting of February 6, 2001 Approval of Franchise Agreement with Browning-Ferris Industries (BFI), Second Reading 10170 High Density Watershed Request by Aldi Food Stores for 9.903 acres Agreement with Union County to Install Underground Storm Drain Line Advertisement of Unpaid Real Estate Property Tax 7. Proclamation - "Litter Sweep" 2001 Cleanup 8. Call for Public Hearings To Be Held April 17, 2001 A. Project # 01-100-00006 - Conditional Use Permit Request - Four (4) Classroom Expansions to Benton Heights Elementary School - 1200 Concord Avenue - Union County Board of Education B. Project # 01-100-00007 - Conditional Use Permit Request - Addition of Eight (8) Modular Classrooms and One (1) Modular Office to Union Academy Site - 3828 Old Charlotte Highway - Union Academy C. Ordinance to Call for a Moratorium in the R-8 Zoning District REGULAR AGENDA 9. Public Hearings A. Proposed Street Closing of Unopened Alley Between Jerome Street and Adams Street - (Continued from March 20, 2001 City Council Meeting) B. Project # 01-130-00002 - Rezoning Request - R-40 (Low Density Single Family Residential) to R-20-SU (Low/Moderate Density Single Family Residential Special Use) - 29.07 Acres Located North of Fox Hunt Drive and East of Fowler-Secrest 95 e e e . e C. Project # 01-110-00002 - Special Use Permit Request - 45 Lot R-20-SU Major Subdivision (Fox Hunt-Phase 5) - 29.07 Acres Located North of Fox Hunt Drive and East of Fowler-Secrest D. Project # 01-120-00009 - Zçming Text Change Request - Addition of Truck Rental Establishments as a Permitted Use in B-1 and B-I-SU Zoning District 10. Action from Public Hearings A. Proposed Resolution - Street Closing of Unopened Alley Between Jerome Street and Adams Street B. Project # 01-130-00002 - Rezoning Request - R-40 (Low Density Single Family Residential) to R-20-SU (Low/Moderate Density Single Family Residential Special Use) - 29.07 Acres Located North of Fox Hunt Drive and East of Fowler-Secrest C. Proposed Special Use Permit - Project # 01-110-00002 - 45 Lot R-20-SU Major Subdivision (Fox Hunt-Phase 5) - 29.07 Acres Located North of Fox Hunt Drive and East of Fowler-Secrest D. Proposed Ordinance - Project # 01-120-00009 - Zoning Text Amendment - Addition of Truck Rental Establishments as a Permitted Use in B-1 and B-I-SU Zoning District 11. Rocky River Road Waterline Purchase from Union County 12. Contract Approval Authority for City Manager A. Proposed Ordinance to Delegate Authority to City Manager With Respect to Certain Contracts, and Adding Section 34.04 to the City Code B. Proposed Standing Resolution - Authority of City Manager to Execute Written Contracts 13. Other Business A. Reappointment - Board of Adjustment B. Reappointment - Monroe-Union Historic Properties Commission C. Reappointment - Monroe Housing Authority D. Reappointment - Monroe Housing Authority E. Reappointments - Monroe Tree Board F. Flyers 14. Closed Session (Property Acquisition) 04-03-0 I 96 e e e . e CITY OF MONROE CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 3, 2001 - 6:30 P.M. MINUTES The City Council of the City of Monroe, North Carolina, met in Regular Session in the City Hall Council Chambers, 300 W. Crowell Street, Monroe, North Carolina, at 6:30 p.m. on April 3,2001, with Mayor Judy L. Davis presiding. Present: Mayor Judy L. Davis, Mayor Pro Tern P. E. Bazemore, Council Members Billy A. Jordan, Lynn Keziah, Bobby G. Kilgore, Robert J. Smith, City Manager S. Douglas Spell, City Attorney John Milliken, and City Clerk Jeanne M. Deese. Absent: Council Member Phil Hargett. Visitors: William Bridger, Frances Bridger, Beulah Martinelli, Pat Perkins, Susan Osborne, Redd Osborne, La Vondra Edwards, Jill Martin, Ann Keziah, Ed Keziah, Greg Collins, Cheryl Brown, Thomas Bevis, Joey Woody, Gerald Webb, Rick Black, Noel Williams, Todd Bonnett, Eddie Fullwood, Archie Stokes, Doris Stokes, Lillie Williams, Melba Brantley, Marshall Brantley, Debbie Wilson, Annie Thompson, Fulta Hilliard, Brenda Carpenter, Carol Jackson, Jim Loyd, Myra Brown, Fran Olday, Charles 0lday, Bob Terry, Richard Churn, Michelle Churn, Wayne Cameron, Jf., Janie Cameron, Richard Graybill, Heather Howard, Lorrie Merchant, Ernest V. Curley, Shane Wallace, Dan Eichensehr, Wayne Herron, Dave Fencl, Jason Pauling, Ethel Williams, J.B. Patel, A. Henderson, Ora Blakeney, Barbara J. Garris, Hildren J. Hilton, Mark Donham, Russ Colbath, Robert McCollom, Randy Carpenter, Mary P. Newton, Walter D. Rogers, David C. Brannan, and others. Mayor Davis called the Regular City Council Meeting of April 3, 2001 to order at 6:30 p.m. A quorum was present. Item No. 1. Resolution to Honor Retirim! Emplovee - Ann G. Keziah. Council Member Kilgore moved to adopt Resolution R-2001-27: 97 · e e e e RESOLUTION OF THE MONROE CITY COUNCIL HONORING ANN G. KEZIAH ON THE OCCASION OF HER RETIREMENT R-2001-27 WHEREAS, on the occasion of her retirement on March 30, 2001, it is fitting and proper for the City Council to express its sincere appreciation to Ann G. Keziah for her loyal and dedicated service to the City of Monroe for 30 years; and WHEREAS, Ann G. Keziah joined the City of Monroe as an Accounting Clerk on November 1, 1971, giving her an excellent foundation to advance to the position of Human Resources Technician; and WHEREAS, for 30 years Ann G. Keziah has been an exemplary employee of the City of Monroe, spending countless hours on the telephone researching and resolving employee benefit questions and an equal number of hours ensuring that all the City's employees received their bi-weekly paychecks; and WHEREAS, Ann G. Keziah's work ethic and caring nature created an environment in which employees were comfortable seeking her assistance and confident in her ability to assist them with their needs while maintaining the utmost confidentiality; and WHEREAS, the City of Monroe is most grateful for the professional and personal contributions Ann G. Keziah has given to all departments within the City; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Monroe wishes to acknowledge and express its appreciation for her years of dedicated and distinguished service to the employees of the City of Monroe and their families, noting that Ann G. Keziah will be missed both professionally and as a friend. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mayor and City Council publicly express their sincere appreciation for her outstanding performance of duty to the City of Monroe over the past 30 years, and extend very best wishes for a long and happy retirement. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Resolution be entered upon the permanent Minutes of the City Council. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the Seal of the City of Monroe to be affixed this the 3rd day of April, 2001. Mayor Pro Tern Bazemore seconded the motion, which passed unanimously with the fol1owing votes: AYES: Council Members Jordan, Keziah, Kilgore, Smith, Mayor Pro Tern Bazemore, and Mayor Davis None NAYS: Mayor Davis recognized Ms. Keziah and presented a framed Resolution which she read for the record and a gold watch commemorating her 30 years of service. Mayor Davis complimented Ms. Keziah on her many years of dedicated service to the City, and extended best wishes for her retirement. Ms. Keziah expressed appreciation for the years spent with the City. 98 e e e e e CONSENT AGENDA: Mayor Davis reviewed the Consent Agenda and asked if any member of the Councilor the public would like to have any items moved from the Consent Agenda to the Regular Agenda for discussion. No such request was received. Written background information was provided, in advance, in the Council Agenda Packets for each item on the Consent Agenda. No further discussion was held. One motion and vote was taken, which included approval of all items on the Consent Agenda. Item No.2. Minutes of Re~ular City Council Meetin~ of March 20. 2001. Council Member Kilgore moved to approve the Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting of March 20, 2001. Mayor Pro Tern Bazemore seconded the motion, which passed unanimously with the following votes: AYES: Council Members Jordan, Keziah, Kilgore, Smith, Mayor Pro Tern Bazemore, and Mayor Davis None NAYS: Minutes of the Community Development Committee Meeting of February 14, 2001, Minutes of the Environment and Water Resources Committee Meeting of February 14, 2001, Minutes of the Board of Adjustment Meeting of February 22, 2001, and Minutes of the Monroe-Union Historic Properties Commission Meeting of February 6, 2001 were received as information by Council. Item No.3. Approval of Franchise Ae:reement with Brownine:-Ferris Industries (BFI). Second Reading. Council Member Kilgore moved to approve the Specifications and Agreement for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal with Browning-Ferris Industries (BPI). Mayor Pro Tern Bazemore seconded the motion, which passed unanimously with the following votes: AYES: Council Members Jordan, Keziah, Kilgore, Smith, Mayor Pro Tern Bazemore, and Mayor Davis None NAYS: The Specifications and Agreement for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal with Browning- Ferris Industries (BFI) is incorporated as a part of these Minutes as Exhibit "A. " Item No.4. 10/70 Hie:h Density Watershed Request by Aldi Food Stores for 9.903 Acres. Planning Director Carol Rhea advised by memorandum that the petitioner, Aldi Food Stores, requested that City Council allocate 9.903 acres of a 10 .182 acre tract for the 10/70 high- density watershed option. The property area is located on the north side of West Roosevelt Boulevard between Skyway Drive and Stafford Street Extension. Approval of this request would allow the petitioner to develop the 9.903 acres to a maximum of 70% impervious coverage. The petitioner's property meets the requirements for the 10/70 high-density option 99 e e e . e due to the property abutting West Roosevelt Boulevard, the acreage requested being less than 10 acres, and a storm water management control plan being incorporated for the development. The petitioner's property lies in the WS-III watershed, which has a total of 440 acres available for the 10/70 option. As of April 3, 2001, 133.324 acres have been allocated. Staff recommended that City Council approve the petitioner's 10/70 high-density watershed option request as submitted. Council Member Kilgore moved to approve the petitioner's 10/70 high-density watershed option request for 9.903 acres. Mayor Pro Tern Bazemore seconded the motion, which passed unanimously with the following votes: AYES: Council Members Jordan, Keziah, Kilgore, Smith, Mayor Pro Tern Bazemore, and Mayor Davis None NAYS: Item No.5. Al:reement with Union County to Install Under~round Storm Drain Line. Engineering Director Jim Loyd advised by memorandum that this was a consideration of an Agreement with Union County for installation of an underground storm drain line at the Union County Public Library to re-route an existing drain line from under the building. Mr. Loyd advised that in May of 2000, the City received a request to consider a number of "in-kind" services for the renovations/expansion of the Union County Public Library. Services to be provided include the installation of a storm drain line to route off-site runoff from the adjacent First Presbyterian property around the Library building. The City Attorney drafted an Agreement for installation of the underground drain line which includes an "Indemnification and Hold Harmless" clause as requested by the Engineering Department. Mr. Loyd stated that Staff was concerned that construction vibrations could be transmitted to the structure due to the proximity of the storm drain installation to the building. The Agreement was approved by the Union County Board of Commissioners at their meeting on March 19, 2001 with the inclusion of the following words placed at the beginning of the "Indemnification and Hold Harmless" clause - "To the extent permitted by applicable law." The change is acceptable with the City Attorney. Staff requested that Council authorize the Mayor initial the proposed change and execute the Agreement on behalf of the City. Council Member Kilgore moved to approve the Agreement and to authorize the Mayor sign the Agreement on behalf of the City. Mayor Pro Tern Bazemore seconded the motion, which passed unanimously with the following votes: AYES: Council Members Jordan, Keziah, Kilgore, Smith, Mayor Pro Tern Bazemore, and Mayor Davis None NAYS: Item No.6. Advertisement of Unpaid Real Estate Property Tax. Tax Collector Jill Martin advised by memorandum that this request was being made pursuant to N.C.G.S. 105- 375 which allows an in-rem foreclosure procedure to be used as a means of enforcement action 100 e e e e . against the collection of unpaid real estate property taxes. According to N.C.G.S. 105-369(a), a municipal tax collector must report to their governing board the total amount of unpaid taxes for the current year that are liens on real property. In accordance with that guideline, Ms. Martin reported that the current unpaid balance for the City of Monroe was $268,456.14. Once receipt of the report has been received by the governing board, the board must order the tax collector to advertise a list of unpaid real estate taxes. Ms. Martin advised that a list of the unpaid real estate taxes was available in the Tax Office. Staff recommended that City Council authorize the Tax Collector to advertise the unpaid real estate taxes in the April 6, 2001 edition of the Union Observer (a section of the Charlotte-Observer). Council Member Kilgore moved to approve the advertisement of unpaid real estate property taxes. Mayor Pro Tern Bazemore seconded the motion, which passed unanimously with the following votes: AYES: Council Members Jordan, Keziah, Kilgore, Smith, Mayor Pro Tern Bazemore, and Mayor Davis None NAYS: Item No.7. Proclamation - "Litter Sweep" 2001 Cleanup. Council Member Kilgore moved to adopt P-2001-03: PROCLAMATION LITTER SWEEP 2001 P-2001-03 WHEREAS, the North Carolina Department of Transportation annually organizes a statewide spring roadside cleanup to ensure clean and beautiful roads in North Carolina; and WHEREAS, the spring 2001 "Litter Sweep" cleanup will take place April 16 - 30, 2001 to increase awareness of the need for cleaner roadsides, emphasize the importance of not littering, and encourage recycling of solid wastes; and WHEREAS, the 2001 spring cleanup will acknowledge the 13th Anniversary of the North Carolina Adopt-A-Highway program and its thousands of volunteers who labor through the year to keep our roadsides clean; and WHEREAS, the beauty of our city and a clean environment are a source of great pride for all citizens and aids in recruiting new industries. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED that I, Judy L. Davis, Mayor of the City of Monroe, do hereby proclaim April 16 - 30, 2001 as "LITTER SWEEP" in the City of Monroe, North Carolina and encourage all citizens to take an active role in making our community cleaner and more beautiful. Adopted this 3rd day of April. 2001. Mayor Pro Tern Bazemore seconded the motion, which passed unanimously with the following votes: 101 e e e e e AYES: Council Members Jordan, Keziah, Kilgore, Smith, Mayor Pro Tern Bazemore, and Mayor Davis None NAYS: Item No.8. Call for Public Hearines to be Held April 17. 2001. A. Proiect # 01-100-00006 - Conditional Use Permit Request - Four (4) Classroom Expansions to Benton Hei2hts Elementary School - 1200 Concord Avenue - Union County Board of Education. Council Member Kilgore moved to call for a public hearing to be held April 17, 2001 at 6:30 p.m. to consider this request. Mayor Pro Tern Bazemore seconded the motion, which passed unanimously with the following votes: AYES: Council Members Jordan, Keziah, Kilgore, Smith, Mayor Pro Tern Bazemore, and Mayor Davis None NAYS: B. Project # 01-100-00007 - Conditional Use Permit Request - Addition of Ei2ht (8) Modular Classrooms and One (1) Modular Office to Union Academy Site - 3828 Old Charlotte Hie:hway - Union Academy. Council Member Kilgore moved to call for a public hearing to be held April 17, 2001 at 6:30 p.m. to consider this request. Mayor Pro Tern Bazemore seconded the motion, which passed unanimously with the following votes: AYES: Council Members Jordan, Keziah, Kilgore, Smith, Mayor Pro Tern Bazemore, and Mayor Davis None NAYS: C. Ordinance to Call for a Moratorium in the R-8 Zonine District. Council Member Kilgore moved to call for a public hearing to be held April 17, 2001 at 6:30 p.m. to consider this request. Mayor Pro Tern Bazemore seconded the motion, which passed unanimously with the following votes: AYES: Council Members Jordan, Keziah, Kilgore, Smith, Mayor Pro Tern Bazemore, and Mayor Davis None NAYS: REGULAR AGENDA Item No.9. Public Hearine:s. Mayor Davis explained the procedures the Council follows in conducting public hearings and taking action thereon. A. Proposed Street Closin2 of Unopened Alley Between Jerome Street and Adams Street - (Continued from March 20. 2001 City Council Meeting). Mayor Davis opened this continued duly advertised public hearing. Planning Director Carol Rhea advised that the City 102 · · e · · received a request from John Bentley, Alberta H. Toms, the heirs of Bessie Knots, and F.M. Knotts Hilliard to formally close an unopened alley. The unopened alley is approximately 160 feet in length, covers 1,621 square feet, and runs parallel to Boyte Street between Adams Street and Jerome Street. The unopened alley is bisected in two directions by storm drainage ditches and a one-story frame house is located on a portion of the right-of-way near Adams Street. No lots would be isolated or lack street frontage if the alley closing were approved. The Transportation Committee reviewed the request and supported the closing. Planning Director Carol Rhea advised that City Council continued the public hearing on this request in order for the City Attorney and the Engineering Department to address issues regarding drainage. A public storm drainage easement as well as utility easements have been incorporated into the proposed resolution for the closing of the unopened and unnamed alley. Staff recommended that City Council approve a Resolution closing the unopened alley running between Adams Street and Boyte Street. Council Member Jordan inquired as to how the property was zoned. Planning Director Rhea advised that the property is zoned R-8. Ms. Annie Allen spoke in opposition to the proposal. She expressed appreciation of the City for the help that has been provided in the Winchester area as well as the opportunity to address Council on this proposal. Ms. Allen explained that it was her understanding that the City of Monroe is to maintain the ditches in the proposed area. Ms. Allen stated that this was a flood area. She further explained that the drain pipes are not open and they are almost closed to the brim with dirt and trash. Ms. Allen stated that she did not want anything opened up in the area until she saw what the City of Monroe was going to do about the ditches and drainage pipes. Mayor Davis advised that she was just made aware of the situation this morning and that she and Mayor Pro Tern Bazemore spoke with City Manager Doug Spell regarding this situation. City Manager Spell advised that the City can only maintain drainage pipes and ditches that are either within the City street right-of-way or if there is a dedicated drainage easement. Mr. Spell advised that the City will be glad to look at the specific area Ms. Allen referred to. In some cases, these ditches are on private property and the City cannot and will not maintain. It would be up to the individual property owner to maintain those ditches. Mr. Spell further explained that if the concerns are the pipes going under the roadway, then the City is responsible for them. Mr. Spell again reiterated that the City's Engineering Department would be glad to look at the problem areas. Ms. Alley requested that she be allowed to meet with the persons when they come out to inspect the area. Mr. Spell welcomed her presence at this walk through. Mayor Davis restated that it was her opinion that the City was attempting to have some dedicated rights-of-way for these drainage ditches. Once there was a dedicated right-of-way, the City would then be responsible for these easements. Planning Director Rhea replied that staff incorporated a storm drain utility easement into the paperwork so that if the action were recorded, so the easement would also be recorded. Planning Director Rhea referred a question regarding the binding of the City to the easement back to the City Manager. City Manager 103 e e e e e Spell responded that the reason for the delay of the public hearing was so that verbiage could be added into the street dosing so that if this alley were dosed, a drainage easement would be maintained. If the full width of the alley right-of-way was kept should the City Council choose to dose the alley now or in the future. Mayor Davis asked if this were kept as an easement what would it do to help Ms. Alley's problem. City Manager Spell responded that this was one of the scenarios he mentioned previously that the City would maintain drainage that is within a drainage easement or within a street right-of-way. Mayor Davis reiterated that right now it is not within a drainage easement, but should this action be approved, it would be under an easement. Ms. Allen thanked Council for their time and attention. Mr. Arthur Henderson addressed Council in opposition of this request. He is a resident of Boyte Street. He explained that his property had a drainage pipe from on Boyte Street that runs underneath his property out the back into the area that is being discussed. He further explained that over the years he has maintained the drain, not the City. He stated that he paid for the drain to be fixed with stone. He further explained that the portion of the drain that runs off Jerome Street and underneath and out to the area of the street that is proposed to be blocked off was originally a ditch that had not been maintained. He stated that his concern was that in his yard he has a cover instead of a grate so when the water, trash and debris fills up the sump hole, it ends up in his yard. He stated that last year he received the "Yard of the Year" award. He explained that every time there is a downpour, flood, or heavy rain, his yard is filled with debris. He questioned why he should pay to maintain this drain if it is City property. Mr. Henderson would like to have City Staff corne out and assess whether or not the upkeep of the ditch is his responsibility. Mr. Henderson thanked Council for their time. Ms. Annie Thompson spoke in opposition of this proposal. She is a resident of Boyte Street. She stated that the sewer line is located below her house and sewage is running down the drain into the ditch. She stated that there are rodents around this area and that the sewage can be smelled from her front porch. She further explained that the sewage line runs from Boyte Street all the way down to the ditch that runs to Creft Park. City Manager Spell stated that the City does have capabilities of running cameras into the sanitary sewer line and the storm drain line to look at the connection. The City Manager obtained the exact location and will have it checked out. There being no other speakers, either for or against the proposal, Mayor Davis dosed this public hearing. B. Project #01-130-00002 - Rezonin~ Request - R-40 (Low Density Sin~le Family Residential) to R-20-SU (Low/Moderate Densitv Sin~le Family Residential Special Use) - 29.07 Acres Located North of Fox Hunt Drive and East of Fowler-Secrest. Mayor Davis opened this quasi-judicial public hearing. She stated that this will be conducted as a joint public hearing to consider this request and Item 9(C), a Special Use Permit request for the same property. Action on the two separate requests will be voted on separately. Mayor Davis swore in the following individuals who planned to give testimony: Joey Woody, Noel 104 e e e e . Williams, Thomas Bevis, Dan Eichensehr, Jim Loyd, Bob Terry, Pat Perkins, Shane Wallace, Robert McCollom, Richard Graybill, Marshall Brantley, Melbs Brantley, Gerald Webb, Ron Wilson, Ernest Curley, Sandra Capehart and Carol Rhea, and others. Planning Director Carol Rhea stated that this was a rezoning request as well as a special use permit request. The property in question is currently zoned R-40. The request is that it be rezoned to R-20 special use. This would be considered Fox Hunt Subdivision Phase V. It is 29.07 acres and Noel Williams represented by Joey Woody is the petitioner for this request. The property is located off Fox Hunt Drive approximately 800' from Fowler-Secrest Road. Planning Director Rhea advised that the petitioner's site is predominantly surrounded by land zoned R-40 (Low Density Single-Family Residential). A small portion of property abuts property zoned R-20 (Rolling Hills subdivision). Along the northern and eastern border of this parcel, all land is vacant. South and west of the site is the location of the four existing phases of Fox Hunt Estates. Phases I, II, and III are zoned R-40, and phase four is zoned R-40 cluster. This site lies within the WS-III Water Supply Watershed. Stewart's Creek runs along the southeastern border of the property. The property is located in an area designated for moderate density growth of up to three units per acre. Ms. Rhea stated that the Land Development Plan objectives and strategies relevant to this case include: (1) 0-la: Encourage well-planned residential subdivisions that will promote the best interests of the residents and the community as a whole; (2) 0-lb: Protect the integrity of established residential neighborhoods; (3) S-lc: Encourage all major subdivisions to be connected to public utilities; (4) S-ld: Require street connections between subdivisions and adjoining land uses, where feasible and practical; (5) S-le: Require all rezoning requests for new residential subdivisions to be submitted as special use district requests; (6) S-lj: Encourage minimum design standards for new single-family residential subdivisions as follows. Planning Director Rhea stated that the Land Development Plan strategy relevant to this case was section S-le which requires all rezoning requests for new residential subdivisions to be submitted as special use district requests. She further advised that the petitioner wished to rezone the property from R-40 to R-20-SU. A proposal to rezone 25 acres of this property from R-40 to R-20 was previously submitted and withdrawn prior to being heard by the Planning Board in 1999. At that time, staff requested denial of the rezoning request due to the fact that no information was provided on how the property would be developed, and what design features would be incorporated. Staff also felt that a higher density could have negative impacts and could be incompatible with the existing phases of Fox Hunt subdivision. Presently, staff feels that a special use rezoning would be appropriate in order to address subdivision layout issues and design guidelines. However, staff had concerns that rezoning to a greater density could negatively contrast with the character of the existing neighborhood unless compatibility was addressed through appropriate design. The first three phases of the Fox Hunt subdivision were developed under Union County's regulations in 1991 prior to the area being annexed by the City. The lots were configured to accommodate about 1.06 dwelling units per acre. Phase IV was approved as an R-40 cluster subdivision by the City in 1996. R-40 cluster permits a minimum lot area of 30,000 square feet, which yielded an 105 e e e . . overall density of 1.27 dwelling units per acre. In Phase IV, the developer dedicated about 4.25 acres of open space. The proposed zoning change to R-20-SU would increase the density to about 1.55 dwelling units per acre. Planning Director Rhea advised that the petItIoner would enter some voluntary design standards that conform to the design standards that were recommended in the Land Development Plan. Incorporation of these design standards did make staff feel that the proposal would be compatible with the area. R-20 is a zoning that staff felt was a minimum requirement to support urban infrastructure. R-40 is more rural in nature. R-20 has been identified by the Land Development Committee as the desired density in this area as long as the design standards were incorporated and any other incompatibility issues were addressed. Staff recommended that the rezoning be approved as requested. The Planning Board also made that recommendation. Planning Director Rhea went on to explain that the petitioner has also requested a special use permit. The petitioner has proposed to incorporate all of the minimum recommended design standards. The preliminary plat appears to meet most requirements of the subdivision ordinance with the exception that 35 by 35-foot sight triangles need to be located at all street intersections, and a 30-foot General Public Utility Easement needs to be dedicated to the City of Monroe for the existing sanitary sewer line located between lots 19 and 20 and adjacent to Stewart's Creek. Public storm drainage easements also need to be provided for open drainage channels as well as storm drainage pipe that meet the requirements of the City of Monroe Department of Engineering. Curb and gutter is proposed for all streets. Sidewalks are required on one side of the new sections of roadway, except for the cul-de-sacs serving less than eleven lots. The lot sizes range from 20,000 to 61,218 square feet and the average lot size is 25,438 square feet. Planning Director Rhea further advised that a significant portion of lot numbers 25, 29, and 30 are located in the 100-year floodplain of Stewart's Creek. A flood study has been done of the property and minimum finished floor elevations have been determined and are noted on the plat for lots 18 through 31. At this time, staff did not recommend any new road improvements for Fox Hunt Drive or for Fowler-Secrest Road. The Planning Board and staff recommended that if City Council choose to issue a special use permit, the following conditions were to be met: (1) The petitioner must complete all land purchases and transfers and submit copies of recorded deeds to staff as evidence of land ownership prior to the recordation of the special use permit; (2) The development of the tract shall proceed in conformity to all plans and design features submitted as part of the special use permit application and kept on file by the City of Monroe Department of Planning and Development, except that the City of Monroe Zoning Administrator may approve minor changes to such plans as required by field conditions. Minor changes shall be defined as any change in lot configuration which does not affect approved public facilities and any change in lot size which does not result in more than a five percent reduction in total square footage as shown on the preliminary plan; (3) A 30-foot general public utility easement shall be dedicated and centered on the existing sanitary sewer main located along Stewart's Creek and between 106 e e e e e lots 19 and 20; (4) 35 by 35-foot sight distance triangles shall be provided at all street intersections and a 10 by 70-foot sight distance triangle shall be provided where the proposed new subdivision connects with Fox Hunt Drive; and (5) The supplementary design standards submitted by the applicant shall be incorporated for all residences and lots within the subdivision. Council Member Keziah asked what were the size of the homes in the first three phases of the subdivisions. Planning Director Rhea advised that she did not know. An unidentified citizen responded that the first phase was 1,200 square feet. Council Member Kilgore reviewed his understanding that if the petitioner did not ask for a special use, the only thing he could build on was a 40,000 square foot lot. With a special use and zoned R-20, he could build on a 20,000 square foot lot, basically cutting the lot size in half. Planning Director Rhea advised that his understanding was correct. Planning Director Rhea went on to say that Council had in the past few years rezoned the properties such as Woodridge Assisted Living, Savannah Way, and Arbor Creek to R-20 which are all in the same general area. City Council has approved R-20 in the area as it saw appropriate to do so. Council Member Smith questioned whether the lots where Stewart's Creek comes through would be buildable. Planning Director Rhea responded that they should be, but that the petitioner could better answer that question. Mr. Noel Williams responded that they were buildable. Council Member Smith further questioned whether people would purchase the lots to build on. Mr. Dan Eichensehr responded that he himself had purchased one of the lots. He is on the same floodplain further down in Phase IV. The houses are built at the proper height. Council Member Smith asked Planning Director Rhea whether or not dirt would have to be used as a fill in. Planning Director Rhea advised that the finished floor elevations had to be identified and they would have to be above flood level. There will be requirements to use fill dirt if necessary. Council Member Smith asked if this site included open spaces. Planning Director Rhea responded that this was not a cluster so there is no required open space. Council Member Smith questioned whether a new road would be added. Planning Director Rhea advised that a drive would come off the main part of Fox Hunt. Council Member Smith further questioned whether or not there would be any more property developed on the left of the subdivision. Planning Director Rhea advised that the land immediately adjacent zoned RAO is undeveloped. Council Member Smith questioned if the land adjacent were developed, would there be a recommendation for additional lanes. Planning Director Rhea responded by saying that it would depend on the number of lots and what the Transportation Committee felt was necessary. Council Member Smith asked for a comparison to Creekwood. Planning Director Rhea advised that the homes are not all brick. Council Member Smith went on to explain that he was looking down the road, if this were developed how would it be compatible with not only Fox Hunt but also the remaining developed area. Planning Director Rhea again stated that the representative of the petitioned should be able to answer all those questions through the design standards. They have placed a minimum square footage on the houses as well as proposed all brick homes. 107 e e e e e Planning Director Rhea stated that she felt the homes would be compatible in size and style with the area. As far as the large vacant tract, Planning Director Rhea responded that the feeling of the Land Development Committee in recommending that subdivisions come through the special use process was that it was necessary to look at each proposal on a case-by-case basis. The special use district process allows this to be done. In that regard, Planning Director Rhea stated that she did not know what her recommendation would be until the plans were brought forward. City Manager Spell commented that it was his understanding that the Department of Transportation was in the process of designing, through a consultant, the bridge replacement of Fowler-Secrest Road over Stewart's Creek and that it was only being designed as a two-lane roadway. He further stated that this was taking into account existing traffic plus future development. 8ityManager Spell asked Engineering Director Loyd to verify this fact. Engineering Director Jim Loyd confirmed that the understanding was correct. Council Member Smith questioned whether the bridge would be raised any. Engineering Director Loyd replied that it would be raised a little. Mr. Joey Woody with Eagle Engineering spoke in favor of this proposal. He represented Mr. Noel Williams in the matter. He advised that they prepared the preliminary plat and that they have met all the minimum design criteria which included a minimum square footage for the houses to be 1,600, all brick, two-car garage, paved driveway, along with all of the other design criteria. Mr. Wood advised that they planned to and have worked with the Planning Department and Engineering Department to come up with the best subdivision that they could for the area to promote connectivity and also they looked at a good transition from the R-20 (Rolling Hills area) and the R-40 around the property that was currently there. Mayor Davis asked the following questions of Mr. Woody in keeping with the required finding of facts: Mayor Davis: Is it your opinion that the use will not materially endanger the public health or safety if located, designed, and operated according to the plan? Mr. Woody: Yes, it is. Mayor Davis: Is it your opinion that the use or development complies with all regulations and standards of this chapter, as well as any other State or local rule or regulation governing the development of land? Mr. Woody: Yes. Mayor Davis: Is it your oplnton that the use or development will not adversely impact surrounding property and will not substantially injure the value of adjoining property? Mr. Woody: Yes. Mayor Davis: Is it your opinion that the location and character of the use, if developed according to the plan as submitted and approved, will be in harmony with the area in which it 108 · e e e e is to be located and will be in general conformity with Monroe Land Development Plan? Mr. Woody: Yes. Mayor Davis: Is it your opinion that public water and sewer services are available in adequate capacity? Mr. Woody: Yes. Mayor Davis: Is it your opinion that the rezoning of land to a special use district will produce a development of equal or higher quality than otherwise required by the strict application of the provisions of a general use district of similar type and intensity and will therefore benefit the owner, his neighbors, and the surrounding community? Mr. Woody: Yes. Planning Director Rhea clarified that the houses would be all brick and not all brick fronts as originally submitted to the Planning Department. Mr. Woody responded that they did revise that to be all brick. Mr. Noel Williams addressed Council in favor of this proposal. He stated that he knew there were concerned citizens from the Fox Hunt community present and he wanted to put them at ease. He stated that he had no intentions of disrupting their neighborhood and he only had intentions to enhance the community. Mr. Williams advised that the special use permit would require 1,600 square feet brick houses and they have all intentions to meet requirements of the special use permit as well as the requirements of the Engineering Department. Mr. Williams advised that he acquired this property in August of 1999 and November of 1999. He stated that his company had been in business since 1972 and that they built all the homes in Fox Hunt except one. He asked that Council approve both requests. Mr. Thomas Bevis who resides at 2326 Fox Hunt Drive spoke in favor of this proposal. He advised that he has spoken with Mr. Williams regarding this proposal. Mr. Bevis' property is downhill. He has a lot of water that runs downhill. He further stated that he has drainage from across the street and uphill and he has asked Mr. Williams to grade this property. Mr. Bevis stated that he was not opposed to this proposal at all because Mr. Williams stated what the prices were going to be. Mr. Bevis went on to say that over in sections three and four the average price is $160,000. If Mr. Williams sells the homes for $190,000 this increases the neighborhood's property. Mr. Bevis advised that this would increase his value even more. Mr. Bevis felt that he was the person that this would have the most impact on. He advised that he felt the roads did need to be widened. Mr. Bevis stated that he had offered to give an easement to Mr. Williams so that he can place a sign for the development. Mr. Dan Eichensehr spoke in opposition of this proposal. Mr. Eichensehr stated that they already had a sign at the entrance of the neighborhood and he felt one sign was enough. He stated that the sign was built for the first phase and the entrance is way too small, too narrow. He stated that he was advised the road was to have been re-paved after the last house in Phase IV was done and that had not happened. He stated that people felt they were deceived. He 109 e e e e . stated that the Williams were excellent builders and they did not feel that their neighborhood needed to be rezoned, and they were not a part of Rolling Hills. He further stated that they purchased their homes because it was a dead end neighborhood. They did not have a problem with keeping the zoning the same. Mr. Eichensehr provided Council with a copy of a signed petition opposing the proposals. He stated that there were a couple of people affected by the road. Mr. Eichensehr stated that he felt that what Mr. Williams said and did were sometimes different. He felt that Mr. Bevis' settling for a sign in his front yard was not going to cut it for the other people. Mr. Eichensehr stated that Mr. Williams closed on the land in 1999 but felt that there was a lot of time and research it took to close. He further stated that a lot of the people who purchased lots backing up to that property felt deceived. He further stated that they have a clean neighborhood, good sized lots, and that everyone took pride in their land. He did not feel that going to small lots would help his neighborhood. He felt that Rolling Hills and Savannah Way had already helped their neighborhood. He felt that they should stay R-40. Mr. Eichensehr stated that some of the people would be willing to work with Mr. Williams on the road but that they would like something in writing. Mayor Davis restated one of Mr. Eichensehr' complaints as being that the entrance way was too narrow for the existing houses. Mayor Davis asked Planning Director Rhea if the entry road could be readdressed. Planning Director Rhea replied that Council could consider offsite improvements if they felt it was necessary to make the development conform to the findings that must be made. Mayor Davis asked if this has been looked at and if so, what was the opinion of the City. Planning Director Rhea advised that the Engineering Department had looked at the street. Engineering Director Loyd advised that when this development first came up for review in 1992 when the City annexed the property, he did agree that the roadway was narrow. He further stated that at that time, one way to calm traffic in the development was to put in an "S" type curve. That is not an accepted practice now. With 45 lots, Engineering Director Loyd advised that his first inclination was that it would really not have a significant impact since the new development would be at the front of the subdivision. Engineering Director Loyd further advised that since the annexation in 1992, one of the first things he did was look at the area and contemplated whether or not the "S" curve should be straightened out. Since he had not received any complaints, he felt uncomfortable recommending any type of improvements to the roadway to enhance traffic flow. Mayor Davis questioned whether the new road was the same width as the existing road. Engineering Loyd advised that the proposed roadways are 28 feet back to back. It is larger than the old roadway. Mr. Eichensehr responded that he himself liked the "S" curve which allows traffic to go slower. Mayor Davis pointed out that to get to Phase V, you would not have to go into the old part of the subdivision. Citizens commented that you must go through two "S" curves before you get to the new proposed road. Mayor Davis asked Mr. Eichensehr to restate his other concerns. Mr. Eichensehr responded that there are other folks that lots will have a road in their backyard. Mr. Eichensehr stated that Mr. Bevis will now have a road on two sides now and the lights in his house. Mayor 110 e e e e e Davis asked Mr. Eichensehr to clarify how many lots would be affected by a road. Mr. Eichensehr said he could not tell. After some discussion, it was confirmed that three lots would be impacted. Mr. Eichensehr said that he was also concerned that the lots remain the same size. He felt bigger houses were fine, just not on smaller lots. Mr. Eichensehr stated that he was told that road would be paved after the last house in Phase IV had been built, he would like to see that carried through. He also felt they did not need another sign. Council Member Kilgore questioned Mr. Eichensehr regarding what he meant when he said "something is being worked out with Mr. Williams." Mr. Eichensehr said he meant to keep the lots the same and to get something in writing. Mr. Bob Terry who resides at 2306 Fox Hunt Drive spoke in opposition of this proposal. Mr. Terry stated that he had lived at this address since 1998 and Mr. Williams built him a good house. He stated that the width of the existing road going into the subdivision was his biggest concern. He further stated that he had to go to the School Board to get special permission for buses to come into the development since the roadway was not wide enough for a bus and a car. He felt that Council should make Mr. Williams widen the old road for safety purposes. Mr. Terry questioned why the road was only 18 feet. Mayor Davis responded that this was something that was done before that development was annexed into the City. Mr. Terry referred this question to Engineering Director Loyd. Engineering Director Loyd responded that minimum DOT width is 18 feet. Mr. Terry stated that he spoke with a DOT Engineer today and that the engineer told him the width was 24 feet. Mayor Davis again stated that this was something that was done before it was annexed into the City. Mr. Terry stated that his request was to have the road widened. Mayor Pro Tern Bazemore questioned whether the property owners in the area would be acceptable to widening the road from 18 feet to 24 feet. Mr. Terry stated that it probably would not be accepted and would need to be worked out. Mr. Terry further advised that the City already had a right-of-way of 60 feet. Ms. Pat Perkins who lives at 1640 Pageland Highway spoke in opposition of this proposal. She represented her elderly parents who reside in Helms Run Court, which is right off of Fox Hunt. She stated that someone has allowed a house at the first part of the subdivision as you come off of Fowler-Secrest to be built with a side garage that faces onto Fox Hunt. When you turn the corner, you cannot tell when the resident is coming out of their driveway. She felt additional traffic would not be able to see the resident either. Ms. Perkins stated that she felt the property in question was wetlands and felt that the City should preserve the area. She felt that a complete study had not been done of the subdivision; many of the homes had water problems, adding more homes would impact the schools; and also add more traffic to the area. Mr. Eichensehr questioned why curb and gutter were not in the other phases of the development if they were now a requirement of Phase IV. Planning Director Rhea advised that curb and gutter is required under the subdivision regulations but is one of the things that the Planning Board has had the authority to waive on occasion when they felt it was not in character with the rest of the subdivision. This applies particularly to situations where there 111 · e e e e were extensions onto existing roads, cul-de-sacs, etc., where curb and gutter was not required. Through the special use district process, City Council assumes any and all authorities the Planning Board would have in approving the subdivision plat, so if Council felt that curb and gutter was not in keeping with the rest of Fox Hunt, Council does have the authority to waive that. Mr. Eichensehr said that if they did have a say, they would like to say that curb and gutter did not match the rest of the subdivision. Engineering Director Loyd explained that as the lot size decreases, there can be a problem maintaining drainage ditches, especially when lots are around 20,000 square feet. There is the possibility of water ponding between driveways if you do not have curb and gutter. From an engineering standpoint on an R-20, they would prefer to have curb and gutter from a maintenance standpoint. Mr. Eichensehr stated that from a homeowner's standpoint that is what they do not want. He further stated that if the homes were kept down in order not to put curb and gutter. City Attorney John Milliken questioned the reason the neighborhood did not want curb and gutter. Mr. Eichensehr responded that it was out of character with the rest of the neighborhood. City Attorney Milliken stated that it enhances the neighborhood. Mr. Eichensehr stated that it enhanced the new phase and made their neighborhood look bad. City Attorney Milliken replied that curb and gutter is an aid to maintaining the streets and he felt that because Mr. Eichensehr's phase of the subdivision did not have it was a reason to say new owners should not have it. Mr. Eichensehr stated that it was a dead end street, one way in - one way out and when you enter the neighborhood you should see the same thing heading out. Mr. Shane Wallace who resides at 2020 Fox Hunt Drive spoke in opposition of this proposa1. He stated that the majority of the residents wanted to keep the neighborhood R-40 to keep the structure the same as the existing neighborhood, and did not want curb and gutter since it did not fit with the existing homes. He advised that the other six homes that are affected and most of the people that they have spoken with in the neighborhood would like some sort of separation between their backyard and the new road. For example, they would like brick peers every 10 foot with some type of wood slab in between those to separate these folks from the traffic. Mayor Davis questioned whether the neighborhood was a member of a homeowner's association. Mr. Wallace replied that they were not but did have standards, covenants and restriction that they have to follow as a community. Mayor Davis suggested that a group who could represent the present phases meet with the builder to work out these concerns. Mr. Eichensehr said that this would have to be in a written format. Mr. Robert McCollom who resides at 2313 Hounds Run Court spoke in opposition of this proposal. He stated that when Mr. Williams built Phases III and IV, residents of the existing phases had the same concerns. Mr. McCollom said that they met outside of the meeting place and came up with the idea that if Council waived curb and gutter it would allow Mr. Williams to put the homes on larger lots. Mayor Davis explained that was an R-40 cluster on those phases, which still gave them smaller lots. Mr. McCollom stated that it did give them smaller lots but that Mr. Williams advised him that he would keep the lots somewhere around .66 of an acre or better, which he averaged better than that in the whole area. He felt that if something like this could happen in the present situation that may help some of the people. 112 e e e e e Mayor Davis asked City Attorney Milliken whether it was possible to continue the hearing and allow the parties to work out these problems themselves. Mr. Williams stated that he would be willing to speak with the residents. Mayor Davis suggested that the neighborhood come up with five representatives who could meet with Mr. Williams within the next ten to twelve days. Council Member Billy Jordan questioned whether or not Mr. Williams was going to withdraw his petition. Mayor Davis advised that he was not going to withdraw his petition. Mr. Williams stated that he would not change his request from R-20-SU. The neighbors are saying that the only thing they will be happy with is if it remains R-40. Mayor Davis stated that an R- 40 cluster is not that different from an R-20-SU as far as lot width and that sort of thing. Council Member Jordan reiterated that what they were doing was asking Mr. Williams to go back and reconfigure his subdivision so that he could get the same number of homes that he wants to get, and do it in such a way that the neighbors are acceptable. Mayor Davis said it may be a give-and-take meeting and wanted to give the parties a chance to work out an acceptable resolution. Mr. Eichensehr said that they would like to try meeting with Mr. Williams. Mr. Richard Graybill who resides at 2311 Fox Hunt Drive spoke in opposItion of this proposal. He agreed with Council Member Jordan that the biggest issue was the R-40 cluster. He felt that the neighborhood wanted everything to remain as it was. Mr. Marshall Brantley who resides at 2405 Fox Hunt Drive spoke in opposition of this proposal. He stated that his deepest concern was the narrow entrance into the community. He stated that his yard had been messed up during the last construction and he had to pay for it to be fixed. The new road would come out of his driveway and would be a continuous road. He stated that with this new construction, his yard would be completely torn up unless the road was widened. He said he was told that the City was going to widen the road at least two feet when they were annexed into the City and nothing had been done about this to date. Mrs. Melba Brantley stated that her husband, Marshall Brantley, had almost been hit three times getting the mail out of the mailbox because the road is so narrow and curvy. She did not feel this would be feasible for them or for the children. Mr. Gerald Webb who resides at 2321 Fox Hunt Drive spoke in opposition of this proposal. He stated that he was very concerned about the entranceway and asked that Council keep this in consideration when making a decision. Council Member Keziah requested that Mr. Williams meet with staff to consider doing away with curb and gutter and widen the entrance way into the new part of the subdivision. Mr. Ron Wilson who resides at 2408 Fox Hunt Drive addressed Council on this proposal. He stated that he has had cars in his yard and had lost his mailbox around 20 times. He stated that he was previously told that Mr. Williams was going to widen the road by 3 feet on each side before he started the last construction project. He stated that this had not been done before and 113 · e e e would likè some type of guarantee that if they waived the curb and gutter, the road would be widened. Mayor Davis responded that if it were a special use permit, he had to abide by the guidelines. A special use is a written document that must be followed or no homes could be built. Mr. Eichensehr questioned that if they met with staff and anything was agreed upon whether or not it would be a part of the special use permit. Mayor Davis advised that it would. Mr. Williams stated that the DOT already had control of the road before he built the last phase. He stated he never told anyone he would widen the road. Mr. Ernest Curley who resides at 2333 Hunter Davis Court spoke in opposItIon of this proposal on behalf of himself and his neighbor. He stated that they would have a road behind their houses and felt that it would be unsafe and depreciate their property values. He felt that there should be a privacy fence at least six feet tall, all brick. He agreed with the neighbors that the bricks and slabs would be acceptable. Ms. Sandra Capehart who resides at 2121 Fox Hunt Drive spoke in opposition of this proposal. She stated that she felt like she was the one who got everything started before she knew everything that was going on. She does not have a problem with Phase IV. She questioned if Phase IV had a special use permit for that neighborhood. Mayor Davis replied that it was a R- 40 cluster. Ms. Capehart questioned if the lots were going to be smaller. Mr. Williams replied that there would be 45 lots on 29.07 acres, which is an average of not quite three- fourths of an acre per lot. Mr. Williams further responded that lots have to be at least half an acre. Planning Director Rhea advised that according to the City's records, the lots were going to range in size from 20,000 to 61,218 square feet, with an average lot size of 25,438 square feet (an acre lot being 43,560 square feet). Council Member Smith pointed out that half of the 61,000 square foot lot is in the creek. Most of the homes would be right at half an acre. Ms. Capehart stated that if the neighborhood could be like Phase IV and not have curb and gutter and widen the road, she felt they could get along. She stated that the neighbors sounded as though they were not willing to change and Mr. Williams sounded as though he were not willing to change. Ms. Capehart questioned what R-20/R-40 meant. Mayor Davis explained that if Mr. Williams did not have a special use permit then the City couldn't dictate what type of homes he could build. With a special use permit, the City can then set minimum standards that must be followed. Ms. Capehart stated that in her opinion, it would be more advantageous for the homeowners for the land to be R-20 instead of R-40 because then they could say what they would want built. Council Member Keziah again stated that he would like to see the consideration be given between the staff and Mr. Williams to discuss elimination of curb and gutter, widen the road at the new entrance way, and privacy issues. Council Member Smith asked Mr. Williams whether any consideration was given to have a second entrance. Mr. Williams stated that he did not have another outlet. The new road is on e a pre-existing easement. 114 e . e e . Council Member Keziah stated that he would be willing to meet with staff and Mr. Williams. Council Member Keziah moved to continue this public hearing until the April 17, 2001 Council Meeting. Council Member Smith seconded the motion, which passed unanimously with the following votes: AYES: Council Members Jordan, Keziah, Kilgore, Smith, Mayor Pro Tern Bazemore, and Mayor Davis None NAYS: Mayor Davis explained that the meeting has been continued so that staff and Mr. Williams could meet to attempt to work out the curb and gutter issue, widening of the entrance way, and privacy issues. Council Member Keziah volunteered to attend this meeting. He also restated that this meeting was not to discuss R-20/R-40. This is strictly a meeting to talk about taking away curb and gutter, widening the entrance way, and privacy issues for the lots that would be affected by the road. It will then be brought back to Council on April 17 , 2001. There being no other speakers, either for or against the proposal, Mayor Davis continued this public hearing. C. Proiect # 01-110-00002 - Soecial Use Permit Reauest - 45 Lot R-20-SU Major Subdivision (Fox Hunt - Phase V) - 29.07 Acres Located North of Fox Hunt Drive and East of Fowler-Secrest. This quasi-judicial public hearing was held in conjunction with Item 9(B) above, and continued until April 17, 2001. D. Proiect # 01-120~00009 - Zonin!! Text Chan!!e Reauest - Addition of Truck Rental Establishments as a Permitted Use in B-1 and B-I-SU Zonin2 District. Mayor Davis opened this duly advertised public hearing. Planning Director Carol Rhea advised that this is a consideration of a request by Jyotindra B. Patel to add truck rental establishments as a permitted use in the B-1 and B-1-SU (Neighborhood Business) zoning district. Currently, truck rental establishments are permitted in the following districts: B-3 (Highway Business) and BA (General Business). The B-1 zoning district is primarily intended to accommodate very low intensity office, retail, and personal service uses close to or within residential areas. The district is established to provide convenient locations for businesses which serve the everyday household needs of nearby residents without disrupting the character of the neighborhood. The district is not intended to accommodate retail uses which primarily cater to motorists or draw customers from beyond the immediate neighborhood. Ms. Rhea reported that staff and the Land Development Committee are actively reviewing what uses should be permitted in each zoning district in conjunction with a complete rewrite of the City's zoning ordinance. Staff recommended that the City not permit truck rental establishments in the neighborhood business district now or as part of the ordinance update due to the fact that these uses do not meet the criteria for neighborhood uses. Staff recommended that the zoning text amendment be denied as submitted. Likewise, the Planning Board at their meeting on March 7,2001 recommended the zoning text amendment be denied as submitted. 115 e e e e e There being no other speakers, either for or against the proposal, Mayor Davis closed this public hearing. Item No. 10. Action from Public Hearinl!s. A. Resolution - Street Closin~ of Unopened Allev Between Jerome Street and Adams Street). Mayor Pro Tern Bazemore moved to table this item. Council Member Keziah seconded the motion, which passed unanimously with the following votes: AYES: Council Members Jordan, Keziah, Kilgore, Smith, Mayor Pro Tern Bazemore, and Mayor Davis None NAYS: B. Project # 01-130-00002 - Rezonin&: Request - R-40 (Low Density Sinele Familv Residential) to R-20-SU (Low/Moderate Density Sin&:le Family Residential Special Use) - 29.07 Acres Located North of Fox Hunt Drive and East of Fowler-Secrest. The public hearing was continued until April 17, 2001, therefore, no action was taken. C. Proposed Special Use Permit - Project # 01-110-00002 - 45 Lot R-20-SU Maior Subdivision (Fox Hunt-Phase 5) - 29.07 Acres Located North of Fox Hunt Drive and East of Fowler-Secrest. The public hearing was continued in conjunction with the above public hearing until April 17, 2001, therefore, no action was taken. D. Ordinance - Project # 01-120-00009 - Zoninl! Text Amendment - Addition of Truck Rental Establishments as a Permitted Use in B-1 and B-I-SU Zonin&: District. Mayor Pro Tern Bazemore moved that this request be denied. Council Member Keziah seconded the motion, which passed unanimously with the following votes: AYES: Council Members Jordan, Keziah, Kilgore, Smith, Mayor Pro Tern Bazemore, and Mayor Davis None NAYS: Item No. 11. Rocky River Road Waterline Purchase from Union Countv. Water Resources Director Colbath advised that this is consideration of purchasing water lines owned by Union County that lie within the Rocky River Road annexation area. Mr. Colbath advised that the existing water and sewer contracts between the City of Monroe and Union County required the City to purchase water and sewer facilities from Union County within any area annexed by the City. In June 1999, the City of Monroe completed the annexation of the area along Rocky River Road, generally between Secrest Shortcut and Unionville-Indian Trail Road. Mr. Colbath further advised that the Water Resources Department has negotiated an equitable price to purchase Union County's water infrastructure in the subject annexation area. There are no Union County sewer facilities in this area, therefore, none will be purchased. The City Attorney has approved the contract. The Union County Board of Commissioners also 116 e e e e e approved the contract on March 19, 2001. Staff recommended approval of the contract for purchasing water lines owned by Union County that lie within the Rocky River Road annexation area. Council Member Smith moved to approved the contract for purchasing water lines owned by Union County that lie within the Rocky River Road annexation area. Council Member Keziah seconded the motion, which passed unanimously with the following votes: AYES: Council Members Jordan, Keziah, Kilgore, Smith, Mayor Pro Tern Bazemore, and Mayor Davis None NAYS: Item No. 12. Contract Aooroval Authority for City Mana2er. City Manager Doug Spell advised that this is a consideration of designating the limits of contract approval authority for the City Manager and also authorizing the City Manager to execute formal contract documents following City Council approval. Mr. Spell advised that The Charter of the City of Monroe in Section 4.2 stipulates that "The City Manager shall have all the powers and duties conferred by general law, except as expressly limited by the provisions of this Charter, and the additional powers and duties conferred by the Council, so far as authorized by general law. " Mr. Spell further advised that in reviewing past actions of City Council, the City Manager had been authorized to award and execute the following items without formal City Council action: (1) Execute Change Orders for City construction contracts where the Change Order does not exceed the sum of $50,000, or the amount of unencumbered contingency funds for the contract, whichever is less, per Resolution R-2000-76 adopted December 4, 2000; and, (2) Settlement of Claims Against the City up to $5,000 per Section 4.9 of the City Charter. Mr. Spell stated that currently there is no authorization designated for the City Manager to award purchase, service, or construction contracts. He further noted that City Council granted authority to the Director of Finance and Administration and the City's Chief Purchasing Official to purchase apparatus, supplies, materials or equipment as authorized by N.C.G.S. 143-129 for informal bid processes, in an amount of $100,000 or less. This was granted by Ordinance 0-1999-11 adopted on April 6, 1999. In evaluating ways to streamline the internal processes, Mr. Spell reviewed the contract approval and award limits of several other North Carolina municipalities, including Salisbury, Concord, Wilmington, and Durham. It appears to be rather consistent that the City Manager is granted authority to approve, award, and execute contracts meeting the "informal" bid threshold as outlined in N.C.G.S. 143-129. Mr. Spell requested that City Council establish by Ordinance the following limits on contracts which the City Manager can award and execute without City Council action subject to availability of budgeted funds: (1) Professional Service contracts such as architectural, 117 · e e e e engineering, and surveying services in an amount up to the statutory authority amount for informal contracts; (2) Construction contracts up to the amount of statutory authority for informal contracts; and, (3) At the City Manager's discretion, for contracts in an amount less than $5,000, the City Manager may delegate approval authority to a department director. Additionally, the City Manager requested that City Council consider authorizing the City Manager to execute formal contracts on behalf of the City following City Council award of the contracts. This is an effort to streamline the document execution process following award by City Council. A. Ordinance to Dele~ate Authoritv to City Manae:er With Respect to Certain Contracts. and Addinl: Section 34.04 to the City Code. Council Member Keziah moved to adopt 0- 2001-17: AN ORDINANCE DELEGATING AUTHORITY TO THE CITY MANAGER WITH RESPECT TO CERTAIN CONTRACTS AND AMENDING TITLE III, CHAPTER 34: FINANCE BY ADDING SECTION 34.04 0-2001-17 BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Monroe that Title III, Chapter 34 of the City of Monroe Code of Ordinances is hereby amended to add new §34.04 as follows: A. Grant of Authoritv. Subject to the restrictions and conditions hereinafter provided, when letting contracts for construction or repair work on informal bids pursuant to NCGS § 143-131 or in the procurement of Architectural, Engineering, and Surveying Services pursuant to NCGS§ Article 3D, Chapter 143, in addition to such authority as may be provided by the law and/or otherwise delegated by the City Council, the City Manager shall have the authority, subject to the provisions of and as authorized by N.C. Gen. Statutes and the Charter of the City of Monroe, to: 1. prepare, or cause to be prepared, plans and/or specifications setting forth a complete description of the work to be performed on the services rendered; 2. advertise, or otherwise secure bids, for such item(s) if required under applicable law; 3. award contracts for the work to be performed or services rendered; 4. reject bids; 5. re-advertise to receive bids; 6. waive bid bond or deposit requirements; 7. waive performance and payment bond requirements; and, 8. execute and deliver the contract(s). 118 e e e B. Report. At the first meeting of the City Council following the award of any contract(s) pursuant to this Ordinance, the City Manager or his/her designee shall submit a report to the City Council summarizing the bids received and the contract(s) awarded. Such report shall be included in the minutes of the meeting at which it is received. C. No Limitation of Other Authoritv. The provisions of this Ordinance are not intended to limit, restrict or revoke, in any manner, authority otherwise granted and/or delegated to the City Manager or the Director of Finance and Administration or his/her designee by statute, law or action of the City Council. D. Appropriation Required. No contract shall be let by the City Manager under authority of this Ordinance unless an appropriation for such purpose has been authorized in the annual budget, or by supplemental appropriation or budget appropriation amendment duly adopted by the City Council and an unencumbered balance exists equal to or greater than the contract amount. E. Application of General Statutes. In acting pursuant to the authority delegated by this Ordinance, the City Manager shall comply with the requirements of Chapter 143 of the North Carolina General Statutes, as from time to time amended, modified, supplemented, revised, or superseded, to the same extent as would have otherwise applied to the City Council. F. For contracts requiring the expenditure of less than $5,000.00, the City Manager is authorized to delegate the authority granted to him to the appropriate department director. G. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be effective upon adoption. Adopted this 3rd day of April, 2001. Council Member Smith seconded the motion, which passed unanimously with the following votes: AYES: Council Members Jordan, Keziah, Kilgore, Smith, Mayor Pro Tern Bazemore, and Mayor Davis None NAYS: B. Proposed Standine Resolution - Authority of City Mana~er to Execute Written e Contracts. Council Member Keziah moved to adopt R-2001-28: STANDING RESOLUTION AUTHORITY OF THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE WRITTEN CONTRACTS R-2001-28 e THAT, WHEREAS, the City is engaged in many undertakings which require the execution of written contracts; and, whereas, it is the desire of the City Council to expedite the execution of these documents in order that the business of the City will not be unnecessarily delayed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Manager is authorized to execute all City contracts and related documents except the following: deeds of conveyance of fee simple title to real 119 e e e . e property; bonds and notes of the City; and any other documents that are required by law to be executed by the Mayor or Mayor Pro Tern. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the authority given herein in no way eliminates or diminishes in any way the authority of the Mayor or Mayor Pro Tern with respect to the execution of contract documents. This resolution shall be in effect from the date of its adoption until it is rescinded by action of the City Council. Adopted this 3rd day of AoriL 2001. Council Member Smith seconded the motion, which passed unanimously with the following votes: AYES: Council Members Jordan, Keziah, Kilgore, Smith, Mayor Pro Tern Bazemore, and Mayor Davis None NAYS: Item No. 13. Other Business. A. Reappointment - Board of Ad¡ustment. Mayor Pro Tern Bazemore moved to reappoint Wilton E. Damon, Jr. to a full term on the Board of Adjustment. Council Member Keziah seconded the motion, which passed unanimously with the following votes: AYES: Council Members Jordan, Keziah, Kilgore, Smith, Mayor Pro Tern Bazemore, and Mayor Davis None NAYS: B. Reappointment - Monroe-Union Historic Properties Commission. Mayor Pro Tern Bazemore moved to reappoint Virginia Bjorlin to a one-year term on the Monroe-Union Historic Properties Commission. Council Member Keziah seconded the motion, which passed unanimously with the following votes: AYES: Council Members Jordan, Keziah, Kilgore, Smith, Mayor Pro Tern Bazemore, and Mayor Davis None NAYS: C. ReaDDointment - Monroe Housine Authoritv. Mayor Pro Tern Bazemore advised that Jack Lawson's term expired on October 3, 2000. He requested that Mayor Davis reappoint Mr. Lawson to another full term on the Monroe Housing Authority. Mayor Davis reappointed Jack Lawson to a full term on the Monroe Housing Authority: 120 e e e e e CERTIFICATE OF REAPPOINTMENT OF COMMISSIONER OF THE MONROE HOUSING AUTHORITY WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Monroe, North Carolina, held a duly authorized regular meeting on the 3rd day of April, 2001; and, WHEREAS, at said meeting it was noted that Jack Lawson's term expired October 3, 2000. NOW, THEREFORE, pursuant to the provisions of the "Housing Authorities Law" of the State of North Carolina, and by virtue of my office as Mayor, I hereby reappoint Jack Lawson to serve as Commissioner of the Monroe Housing Authority for a term beginning October 3, 2000, and ending October 3,2005. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto signed my name as Mayor of the City of Monroe, North Carolina, and caused the official corporate seal of said City of Monroe to be attached hereunto, this the 3rd day of April, 2001. Isl Judy L. Davis, Mayor D. Reappointment - Monroe Housin~ Authority. Mayor Pro Tern Bazemore advised that Joe Beach's term expired on April 19, 2000. He requested that Mayor Davis reappoint Mr. Beach to another full term on the Monroe Housing Authority. Mayor Davis reappointed Joe Beach to a full term on the Monroe Housing Authority: CERTIFICATE OF REAPPOINTMENT OF COMMISSIONER OF THE MONROE HOUSING AUTHORITY WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Monroe, North Carolina, held a duly authorized regular meeting on the 3rd day of April, 2001; and, WHEREAS, at said meeting it was noted that Joe Beach's term expired April 19, 2000. NOW, THEREFORE, pursuant to the provisions of the "Housing Authorities Law" of the State of North Carolina, and by virtue of my office as Mayor, I hereby reappoint Joe Beach to serve as Commissioner of the Monroe Housing Authority for a term begirming April 19, 2000, and ending April 19, 2005. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto signed my name as Mayor of the City of Monroe, North Carolina, and caused the official corporate seal of said City of Monroe to be attached hereunto, this the 3rd day of April, 2001. Isl Judy L. Davis, Mayor E. Reappointments - Monroe Tree Board. Mayor Pro Tern Bazemore moved to reappoint Bobby Yandle and Ken Collins to one-year terms on the Monroe Tree Board. Council Member Keziah seconded the motion, which passed unanimously with the following votes: AYES: Council Members Jordan, Keziah, Kilgore, Smith, Mayor Pro Tern Bazemore, and Mayor Davis None NAYS: 121 e e e e . F. Fivers. Council Member Kilgore advised that he had received two complaints from citizens regarding flyers being thrown in the yards/driveways. City Attorney Milliken advised that the City has received calls about this. Companies have the right to distribute their flyers, and he suggested the best way to handle would be if the citizen does not want the publication, that the citizen call the company and request they be taken off the distribution list. _ Item No. 14. Closed Session (Property Acquisition). Mayor Pro Tern Bazemore made a motion to move into Closed Session to discuss property acquisition. Council Member Kilgore seconded the motion, which passed unanimously with the following votes: AYES: Council Members Jordan, Keziah, Kilgore, Smith, Mayor Pro Tern Bazemore, and Mayor Davis None NAYS: Upon return from Closed Session and there being no further business, Council Member Keziah moved to adjourn. Council Member Kilgore seconded the motion, which passed unanimously with the following votes: AYES: Council Members Jordan, Keziah, Kilgore, Smith, Mayor Pro Tern Bazemore, and Mayor Davis None NAYS: The Regular City Council Meeting of April 3, 2001 adjourned at 9:00 p.m. Attest: Minutes transcribed by Bridgette Robinson, Administrative Assistant II 04-03-01 122 -- EXHIBIT A SPECIFICA TIONS AND AGREEMENT SOLID WASTE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL e Ths Agreement is made and entered into this :3Æ&(day of ~ ' 2001, by and between BFI Waste Systems of North America Inc., a Division of Allied Waste Industries Inc., licensed to do business in North Carolina (hereinafter referred to as the Contractor), and the C;". 'Y OF MONROE, a municipal corporation incorporated under the laws of North Carolina (hereinafter referred to as City). e e e e The tenns, covenants, promises and conditions of this Agreement are as follows: 1. Tenn: The tenn of this Agreement shall be for a period of four (4) years and three (3) months beginning on the first (1 sl ) day of July, 2001 and ending at midnight on the 30th day of September, 2005, subject to extension or tennination as hereinafter set forth. 2. Perfonnance Duties: The Contractor shall furnish all equipment, disposal facilities and personnel necessary to carry out this contract and shall collect all garbage, other fonns of solid waste, trash, recyclables, and other refuse, as described in this Agreement, and shall dispose of same, all as hereinafter set forth. Perfonnance of the Contractor's duties shall be governed by the provisions set forth as specified by the tenns of this Agreement. 3. Territory: The Contractor is hereby granted the nonexclusive franchise, license, and privilege to and hereby agrees to provide the services hereinafter described in all areas of the corporate limits of the City during the term of this Agreement. 4. Disclosure of Subcontractors: At any time the Contractor decides to use a subcontractor, the Contractor shall submit infonnation about the subcontractor sufficient for the City to detennine compliance with all of the requirements of this Agreement as stipulated herein. 5. Quantities and Unit Pricing: The quantities listed in the proposal are estimates of the actual units to be served as provided to the City on June 1, 2001 by the Contractor and detennined to be acceptable and reasonable by city staff. The number öf units to be paid for yard waste collection will be the same as the number of units to be served by residential collection. Actual quantities for residential, office, and business collection shall be adjusted every six (6) months on or about December 1 and June 1 during the contract period with the quantities being detennined from a unit count survey which will be coordinated and/or conducted concurrently by both the Contractor and the City to correspond with the actual number of units to be serviced the first day of each six month period. In the case of annexation(s) the Contractor shall be entitled to additional compensation beginning with the first day services are required of it in any newly annexed area in accordance with the per unit cost detennined by a unit count survey, which will be coordinated and/or conducted concurrently by both the Contractor and the City to correspond with the actual number of units to be serviced the first day of service per a schedule hereinafter set forth. The individual unit prices for curbside collection for all residential, office, and business customers and for all City dumpster customers shall be as set forth on the Proposal submitted to the City by the Contractor. All individual unit prices for the second and subsequent years of the tenns hereof may be adjusted upward or downward each July 1 in a percentage amount equal to 10f9 e e e - e two-thirds (2/3) of the net percentage increase in the seasonally adjusted Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (all items), published by the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics for the month of June in each contract year, not to exceed an increase or decrease of four percent (4%) per annum. In addition to the foregoing, the cost of disposal in the unit prices may be adjusted to reflect any cost increase or decrease that may result from any local, state, or federal legislative changes in laws, ordinances, rules, or regulations, subject to negotiation and agreement by both parties. 6. Schedule of Pavment: The amount due the Contractor shall be paid by the City to the Contractor montWy on or before the last working day of each calendar month following the month which the billing covers, beginning in July, 2001. This payment schedule will be based upon the Contractor properly invoicing the City for the monthly amount by the fifteenth (15th) day of the month. The Contractor's sole recourse for payment is with the City only, and not to any customer of the City. 7. Residential Schedule of Service: The Contractor shall collect garbage from all residences, approximately 7,426 units, at street curbs from garbage carts once each week, on an approved schedule to be provided by the Contractor with allowance for holidays as hereinafter set forth. In the event a cart is filled to overflowing and a bag is placed on the cart, the bag must be collected. During the term of this Agreement, the Contractor shall maintain and replace the 95- gallon carts for residential use as necessary and at the Contractor's expense. New carts provided by the Contractor shall be a standard color approved by the City. No signs may be placed on the outside of the cart except for numbers printed on the carts and signs imprinted in the same color as the cart. Collection shall not begin prior to 7:00 a.m. of the standard time then in effect, and shall be completed no later than 7:00 p.m. The parties acknowledge that there are residential units occupied by individuals who have been determined by medical certification as to being unable to move the garbage cart to the street curb. For these residents, the Contractor shall collect the garbage of the residence from the garbage cart at or near the back door of the residence. Written certification from a doctor or other medical authority will be supplied to the Contractor in order for these residents to be served in this manner. No additional fees are to be charged for these collections. 8. Residential White Goods Service: The Contractor shall collect from all residences, once each week at the curb, any residential white goods, including, but not limited to, appliances, stoves, refrigerators, window air conditioners, and water heaters. BFI drivers and City staff will report needed pick-ups in addition to call-ins from residents. 9. Residential Bulkv Item Service: The Contractor shall collect from all residences, once each week at the curb, any residential bulky items, on an approved schedule, including, but not limited to furniture and carpeting. The Contractor shall not be responsible for the removal of building materials, construction, demolition, and remodeling materials. 20f9 e e e It e 10. Residential Yard Waste Service: The Contractor shall collect from all residences at the curb, approximately 7,426 units, once each week, on an approved schedule to be provided by the Contractor, items including, but not limited to, brush, tree branches cut into sections no longer than four (4) feet and no more than six (6) inches in diameter, tree and shrub trimmings, and leaves and grass clippings which have been placed in clear or open opaque plastic bags and which weigh no more than 50 pounds. All yard waste collected by the Contractor shall be hauled to a compost site. The charge for disposal at the compost site shall be included in the rate set forth in the Proposal for each residential unit serviced by the Contractor. The Contractor shall not be responsible for tree limbs longer than four (4) feet in length and six (6) inches in diameter and which cannot be readily loaded by two laborers, or be responsible for any items produced by tree service or landscape contractors, nor any dirt, rocks, and stumps. 11. Commercial Cardboard Dumpster Collection: The Contractor shall market and provide commercial cardboard recycling collection for commercial dumpster customers that wish to participate. Customers must provide the dumpsters. 12. Community Cleanup: The Contractor shall provide support for four Saturday community cleanup days per contract year, which includes collection and disposal of litter, rubbish and other forms of loose sanitary waste, yard waste, and tires. 13. Adopt·A-Street Program: The Contractor shall provide streetside collection and proper disposal of orange bags from Adopt-A-Street program. The City will notify the Contractor when bags from an Adopt-A-Street cleanup are ready for collection by the Contractor. In the event the program proves very successful and the waste generated from the program increases significantly, the cost of the program will be reviewed jointly by the Contractor and the City. 14. Cardboard "Event" Boxes: The Contractor shall provide cardboard boxes for City sponsored events at no charge. ,.1 " 15. Emergency Debris Removal. The Contractor shall provide emergency debris removal . as requested by the City at a rate and on a schedule to be negotiated by both parties at the time clean-up is required. 16. Office and Business Service: The Contractor shall collect at the curb once each week from all identified offices and businesses, approximately 680 units, on an approved schedule provided by the Contractor with allowance for holidays as hereinafter set forth. The City shall supply a serviceable 95-gallon roll-out garbage cart for each unit at the beginning of this Agreement, with the Contractor providing containers for all services added after the beginning of the Agreement. Included in the garbage and rubbish pickup service, the Contractor shall collect weekly from containers on City property on locations specified by the City. Contractor shall also collect garbage and rubbish from all dumpsters on the schedule as outlined on the Addendum to the Proposal submitted by the Contractor to the City. The City shall give the Contractor a schedule of all such dumpsters specifying the size and frequency of collection. 30f9 e e e e e 17. Independent Contracting: The Contractor shall not independently contract any service to customers within the City for services it provides to the City under this Agreement. IS. Recyclable Materials Service: The Contractor shall collect recyclable materials from all residences, offices, and businesses, approximately S,136 units, at street curbs from recycling bins once each week, on an approved schedule to be provided by the Contractor with allowance for holidays hereinafter set forth. Recyclable materials shall include aluminum beverage containers, glass containers (clear, brown, and green), PET beverage containers, HDPE milk jugs and steel cans, newsprint, mixed paper Gunk mail, etc.), corrugated cardboard, magazines, and telephone books. In the event a bin is filled to overflowing and a bag is placed on the bin the bag must be collected. The City shall provide an IS-gallon bin for each residential unit at the beginning of this Agreement, with the Contractor providing containers for all residential units added after the beginning of the Agreement. Additionally corrugated cardboard must be flattened and stacked in dimensions of three (3) feet by three (3) feet for collection. During the term of this Agreement, the Contractor shall maintain and replace the bins as necessary and at the Contractor's expense. New bins provided by the Contractor shall be a standard color approved by the City. Collection shall not begin earlier than 7:00 a.m. of the standard time then in effect, and shall be completed no later than 7:00 p.m. 19. Disposal: All refuse collected for ~isposal by the Contractor shall be hauled to an approved landfill or yard waste site. The charge for disposal shall be included in the rate set forth in the Proposal for each residential and/or business unit serviced by the Contractor. The Contractor shall provide the City a list of disposal facilities it may use in the administration of this Agreement prior to July 1,2001 for City approval. Any additions shall be reported and pre- approved as required in section 39 ofthis Agreement. '11 20. Holidays: The following are "holidays" for the purpose of the Agreement: (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) New Year's Day Martin Luther King, Jr. Day Good Friday Memorial Day Independence Day Labor Day Thanksgiving Day Christmas Day The Contractor may decide to observe any or all of the above mentioned holidays by suspension of collection seryice on the holiday, but such decision in no manner relieves the Contractor of his obligation to provide weekly collection services as specified. The Contractor will provide written notice of any alteration to their routine schedule to the City ninety (90) days prior to the scheduled holiday. 21. Equipment: The Contractor shall at all times provide an adequate number of vehicles in good mechanical condition for providing the services required by it under this Agreement. All vehicles and other equipment shall be kept in good repair, neat in appearance, and in a sanitary 40f9 e . e e e condition at all times. Garbage trucks will be of a compactor type with enclosed watertight bodies and have radio dispatch capability. The name and telephone number of the Contractor shall be imprinted in a place, clearly visible to the public on each vehicle. 22. Uniforms: The Contractor shall at all times provide uniforms, with identification of company and employee, for all drivers and attendants. 23. Business Office: The Contractor shall maintain a business office equipped with a local toll-free telephone and have a representative available between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. on all weekdays, excluding holidays, for the purpose of communicating with persons, firms, or corporations by telephone regarding the collection of garbage, trash, and other refuse. The Contractor shall provide 24-hour emergency phone support and crew response for emergency situatioilsas determined by the City. The Contractor will also appoint an individual from their organizatÍon to be the primary contact regarding relations with the City, and who comes to the City on a regular basis to supervise the employees. 24. Indemniíìcation: The Contractor agrees to indemnify and hold, the City harmless from any claim, liability, or loss arising from any negligent act or failure to act on the part of the Contractor or any of its agents, servants and employees during its performance of this contract, including any attorney's fees incurred by the City in pursuing such indemnification or in defending any such claim. The City and the Contractor agree that in the performance of this Agreement, the Contractor shall be acting as an independent contractor. Nothing herein shall constitute or be construed to be or create a partnership, agency, joint venture, or other similar relationship betwee'n the City and the Contractor. The Contractor agrees that it will not represent to anyone that its relationship to the City is other than that of an independent contractor, and the City and the Contractor may so inform any parties with whom they deal and may take any other reasonable steps to carry out the intent of this section. The Contractor shall be fully and solely responsible for its own acts and omissions, and those of its employees, officers, agents, and subcontractors. 25. Liabilitv Insurance: The Contractor shall provide and maintain during the life of the contract automobile, general liability, and umbrella coverage in the following amounts: General Liability $2,000,000 Automobile Liability $1,000,000 Excess Liability $5,000,000 Workers' Compensation (To statutory limits) Environmental Liability $1,000,000 and/or base insurance to protect the Contractor, its agents and its employees from claims for damage for personal injury including wrongful and accidental death and property damage which may arise from operations under the contract, whether such operations be performed by the Contractor or its servants or agents. 50f9 e e e e e The policy or policies shall name the City as additional insured and shall contain a clause that the insurer will not cancel or decrease the insurance coverage without first giving the City sixty (60) days notice in writing. A Certificate of Insurance shall accompany this Contract and an updated Certificate shall be forwarded to the City upon renewal of the policy. 26. Performance Bond: The Contractor shall, during the term of this Agreement, maintain in full force and effect, at its expense, and shall furnish to the City a performance bond executed by one or more surety companies legally licensed to do business in the State of North Carolina, in a manner and form approved by the City Attorney. The performance bond shall be in an amount equal to one hundred percent (100%) of the annual contract sum, conditioned on the faithful performance by the Contractor of all the terms, conditions and covenants contained in this contract. Said bond is made a part of this Agreement by reference. If the Contractor shall fail to comply with anyone or more of the provisions of the Agreement, there shall be recoverable, jointly and severally, from the principal and surety or sureties, of such bond any damages or losses suffered by the City as a result thereof. Said bond shall provide for sixty (60) days written notice to be given to the City prior to the cancellation or material change in said bond, orof the intention by surety or surety companies not to renew such bond. In the event said bond is cancelled or the surety thereon relieved of liability this Agreement is subject to cancellation by the City unless an adequate replacement bond is provided by the Contractor to the City. Damages recovered by the City from the surety shall not be construed to excuse faithful performance by the Contractor or limit the liability of the Contractor under this Agreement, or for damages, either to the full amount of the bond or otherwise, or preclude exercise of other right or remedy allowed by law, whether exercised concurrently or subsequently. The Contractor may, at its option, provide an irrevocable Letter of Credit in a manner and form approved by the City Attorney, in lieu of these performance and payment bond requirements. 27. Workers' Compensation Insurance and Emplovee Benefits: The Contractor shall maintain appropriate workers' compensation insurance, unemployment insurance, comply with the requirements of the Occupational Safety and Health Act, and further, comply with all state and federal regulations regardi':lg working conditions and employee benefits. 28. Termination: Should the City Council of the City determine, in its sole but reasonable discretion, that the level and quality of service being provided by the Contractor is materially inadequate, which is decided to be a breach of this Contract, written notice of that fact shall be provided to the Contractor by the City. Should the Contractor fail to correct the deficiency to the satisfaction of the City Council of the City within thirty (30) days after delivery of same to the Contractor's local representative, then and in that event, the City may cancel this Contract by providing the Contractor one-hundred eighty (180) days' notice of such termination. The City's remedy of early termination shall be in addition to all other rights and remedies which the City may have against the Contractor for breach of contract or otherwise. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, should the Contractor fail to provide service under the provisions of this contract for a period of seven (7) days, the City may, at its option, immediately and without notice to the Contractor, terminate this Agreement, to the end that it might provide the collection service for which it is responsible. 60f9 e e e e e 29. Drug-Free Work Place: The Contractor agrees to make a good faith effort to establish and maintain a drug-free workplace in connection with the performance of this Agreement. 30. Public Relations and Customer Service: The Contractor, through its agents, servants, and employees, shall make every effort to create and maintain an excellent working relationship with the persons, firms and corporations it is servicing in the City. To that end, the Contractor will encourage all of its representatives to be courteous and exercise good judgment in dealing with the persons whom it serves. Likewise, the Contractor shall cooperate with the City in fulfilling its obligations under this Agreement including the investigation of any alternative service levels or procedures which the City may wish to examine for the purpose of providing such service to City residences and commercial establishments. The Contractor shall provide a public information program for the citizens of Monroe, including cable television public access programs as both the Contractor and City deem appropriate, quarterly bill stuffers to be included in City utility bills, bimonthly advertisements in The Enquirer Journal and the Union Observer, and any other programs or activities that may be mutually agreed upon by the City and the Contractor. 31. Financial Condition of the Contractor: The Contractor shall annually submit to the City its Annual Financial Report, as well as any other public financial documents requested by the City. 32. Notice: Such notices as are contemplated by this Agreement may be hand-delivered to the person in charge of the office maintained by the Contractor to fulfill this Agreement, or may be given by mail, in which event the same shall be sent certified mail, return receipt requested, to: District Manager, Allied Waste Industries Inc., P.O. Box 1027, Pineville, NC 28134. The contractor's telephone number is: 704.377.0161, ext. 229, and the facsimile number is 803.802.2449. Notices given to the City may be hand delivered to the City Manager or the City Clerk at the City Hall, or if mailed, shall be sent by certified mail, return receipt requested, to the City at P.O. Box 69, Monroe, North Carolina 28111-0069. 33. Assignment: The Contractor shall not assign this Agreement without prior written approval of the City, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld provided, however, that the proposed assignee must be as well qualified to perform the Contract as the Contractor and the statutory requirements for granting a franchise must be followed. 34. Notification: The Contractor agrees to make known to the City Manager upon request all contracts entered into between the Contractor and other persons, firms or corporations within the City for the purpose of providing front load dumpster solid waste collection service in addition to the service provided under the terms of this Agreement. 35. Modification: No modification or waiver of any provision of this Agreement shall be valid unless in writing and signed by both parties involved. 70f9 e e e e e 36. Severabilitv: If for any reason any provision hereof shall be inoperative, the validity and effect of all other provisions shall not be affected thereby and shall continue to be binding upon the parties thereto, their successors and assigns. 37. Renewal: The City shall have the right to renew this Agreement for one (1) successive one (1) _year term after the initial term and under the same provision as the original term. The City mllst notify Contractor one hundred eighty (180) days prior to the end of the current term of its desire to renew. In addition to the above, the City shall have two (2) separate but successive one (1) year options to renew this Agreement upon the same terms except rates. The City must notify the Contractor one hundred eighty (180) days prior to the end of the current term of its desire to renew. The parties will then make a good faith effort to agree upon rates for the next term during the six weeks immediately following the date of notice. If the parties cannot agree upon mutually acceptable rates during that six week period, then the current contract and any additional renewal option will terminate at the end of the current term. 38. Compliance: The Contractor shall be governed under, and comply with, all applicable laws of the State of North Carolina, the Federal Government, Union County and the City of Monroe, including any subsequent changes to such laws. 39. Reporting Requirements: The Contractor shall be required to provide on a monthly basis to the City a report which shall include, but not be limited to total tonnages for solid waste, bulky, and white goods; and cubic yards of yard waste. The Contractor shall be required to provide on a quarterly basis to the City all information requested for the City to be in compliance with the reporting requirements of the Solid Waste Management Act of 1989 (SB 111), and any other acts or ordinances that the City may be required to comply with. The Contractor is to be thoroughly familiar with the reporting requirements. This shall include but not be limited to the following information: a. Solid Waste: Total tonnage for each: Residential, Commercial, along with the name of the disposal facilities used for each, and the major materials handled. b. Recycling: Total tOlUlage for each commodity picked up, along with the name of the disposal facilities. c. ApDroved Disposal Sites: The Contractor is to provide a list of proposed licensed disposal sites prior to any change in disposal of City waste. 40. Force Maieure: Neither the Contractor nor the City shall be liable for the failure to perform their duties if such failure is caused by a catastrophe, riot, war, governmental order or regulation, fire, act of God (including but not limited to, a flood, hurricane, or tornado) or other similar or different contingency beyond the reasonable control of the Contractor. In the event of a flood, hurricane, or other act of God, the Contractor and the City will negotiate the payment for any additional service to be made to the Contractor, as well as any variances in routes and schedules deemed necessary by the Contractor. 80f9 ..... e 41. Hazardous Materials: The Contractor shall be under no obligation to collect, transport, or dispose of in any way, any hazardous waste. For purposes of this Contract "hazardous waste" shall mean any waste which is defined, characterized or designated as hazardous by the United States Environmental Protection Agency or appropriate State agency or pursuant to any Federal or State law, or waste which is regulated under any Federal or State law, and shall also include any motor oil, gasoline, paint and paint cans. WITNESSETH: That for and in consideration of the payments and agreements herein mentioned: 1. The Contractor will furnish all materials, supplies, tools, equipment, labor and other services necessary to carry out the work described herein. e 2. The Contractor agrees to perform all of the work described in the CONTRACT DOCUMENTS and comply with the terms therein for the amounts as shown in the unit prices of the PROPOSAL. e e e The tenn "CONTRACT DOCUMENTS" means and includes the following: (A) Proposal Format (B) Specifications and Agreement (C) Performance Bond 3. The City shall pay the Contractor in the manner and at such times and in such amounts as required by the CONTRACT DOCUMENTS. 4. This Agreement shall be binding upon all parties hereto and their respective heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed or caused to be executed by their duly authorized officials, this Agreement in three (3) copies each of which shall be deemed an original on the date first above written. ATTEST: CONTRACTOR: e: :j\M.M\L C. Title: ~ \ ~ Y'^e¡v!e....r\-) 'D \&\ ~Q SEAL 90f9 e PROPOSAL FORMAT SOLID WASTE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL CONTRACT The undersigned, having read the attached specifications, visited the site, and examined the form of the contract and bond, agrees to furnish all labor, equipment, and materials necessary for providing the services in the manner required. The undersigned proposes to enter into a contract in accordance with the proposal and specifications, and on the contract fom1s attached for providing solid waste collection and disposal in the manner specified for the following unit prices: 1. Once a week scheduled curbside collection ofresidential roll out garbage materials: $4.60 per cart, per month e 2. Once a week scheduled curbside collection of residential recyclable materials: $2.07 per unit, per month 3. Once" week scheduled curbside collection of office/business roll out garbage materials: $5.00 per cart, per month 4. Once {I week scheduled curbside collection of office/business recyclable materials: $1.87 per unit, per month e 5. Once a week scheduled curbside collection of yard debris: $3.35 per unit, per month 6. Once a week scheduled curbside collection of bulky material: $0.00 per unit, per month 7. Once a week curbside collection of white goods: $0.00 per unit, per month 8. Provide Commercial Cardboard Recycling (Minimum 1 pickup per week. Proposer must specify interval and method of collection and number of businesses included in the estimate. There are approximately 2600 businesses within the city; actual program participation is uncertain) : e $60.19 per month for an 8.yard container, 1 pickup per week 9. Support for four Community Cleanup Days which includes collection and disposal of litter, rubbish and other forms of loose sanitary waste, yard waste, and tires: $0.00 per clean up 10. Streelside collection and proper disposal of orange bags from Adopt.A.Street program: $0.00 per pickup 11. e 12. 13. Collection of existing City dumpster customers, as outlined on the attached addendum: {(see attached Addendumfor Proposal (#1 I)) COJ1lractor shall provide cardboard boxes for City sponsored event: $0.00 per event Con/ractor shall provide emergency debris removal as requested by the City: $85.00 per hour Page 1 of2 Addendumfor Proposal (#11) Actual Service Figures . The Ci ty of Monroe currently provides dumpster service for a number of business customers. The size of dumpsters and frequency of pick-ups are as follows: Pick-ups per Week Container Size 1 ~ 2- ~ á 6* 2IMonth 2 Yard 51 7 6 0 0 0 5 4 Yard 103 42 18 0 1 1 10 6 Yard 51 27 10 0 0 0 1 8 Yard 79 80 67 14 16 16 11 e *Six pick-ups per week include Saturday pick-up. Front End Commercial Rates (not including rental rates for dumpsters) e Dumpster Size Number of Pick- Monthly Ups Per Week Rate 2 Yard 2 times/month $7.52 1 time/week $15.04 2 times/week $30.09 3 times/week $45.14 4 times/week $60.19 5 times/week $75.23 6 times/week $90.28 10/times/week $150.42 4 Yard 2 times/month $15.04 1 time/week $30.09 2 times/week $60.19 3 times/week $90.28 4 times/week $120.38 5 times/week $150.47 6 times/week $180.57 10 times/week $300.95 6 Yard 2 times/month $22.57 1 time/week $45.14 2 times/week $90.28 3 times/week $135.42 4 times/week $180.57 5 times/week $225.71 6 times/week $270.84 10 times/week $451.37 8 Yard 2 times/month $30.09 1 time/week $60.19 2 times/week $120.38 3 times/week $180.57 4 times/week $240.75 5 times/week $300.94 6 times/week $361.13 e e Page 2 of 2 e e e e e CITY.OF MONROE CITY COUNCIL MEETING 300 W. Crowell Street, Monroe, NC 28112 April 17, 2001 - 6:30 p.m. AGENDA CONSENT AGENDA 1. Minutes of Regular City Council Meeting of April 3, 2001 Minutes of Economic Development Commission Meeting of February 1,2001 Minutes of Community Development Committee Meeting of March 21,2001 2. Resolution to Oppose House Bill 514 - Closed Sessions 3. Summary of Contracts Awarded Pursuant to 0-2001-17 and Change Orders Executed Pursuant to R-2000-76 4. Call for Public Hearings to be Held May 1, 2001 A. Project # 01-130-00007 - Initial Zoning Request (County RA-20 to City R-20) - 4907 Myers - 6.043 acres B. Project # 01-130-00006 - Zoning Map Change Request - R-20 (Low/Moderate Density Single- Family Residential) to G-I (General Industrial) - Approximately 34 Acres at the Intersection of Stafford Street Extension and Morgan Mill Road - Carolina Tractor and Equipment Company C. Project # 01-120-00006 - Zoning Text Amendment - Addition of Storage Unit Regulations D. Project # 01-120-00011 - Zoning Text Amendment - Change Submission Deadline Date for Board of Adjustment From 10 days to 13 days E. Project # 01-600-00001 - Annexation Request - 4907 Myers Road - 6.043 acres - Resolution Directing the Clerk to Investigate a Petition Received Under G. S. 160A-31 F. Project # 01-600-00001 - Annexation Request - 4907 Myers Road - 6.043 acres - Certificate of Sufficiency G. Project # 01-600-00001 - Annexation Request - 4907 Myers Road - 6.043 acres - Resolution Fixing Date of Public Hearing on Question of Annexation 5. Request to Apply for a Federal Emergency Management Agency It Assistance to Fire Fighters Grant It 6. "Main Street Live" Contract - Monroe Jaycees 7. Budget Amendments A. Information Systems - Miner and Miner B. Natural Gas - Hamilton Place (Phase II) Subdivision and Cardinal Meadows Subdivision C. Natural Gas - Purchases and Sales D. Electric Department - Hamilton Place (Phase II) Subdivision E. CDC Downpayment Assistance Funding Request REGULAR AGENDA 8. Public Hearings A. Project # 01-130-00002 - Rezoning Request - R-40 (Low Density Single Family Residential) to R-20-SU (Low/Moderate Density Single Family Residential Special Use) - 29.07 Acres 123 e e e e e Located to the North of Fox Hunt Drive and to the East of Fowler-Secrest (Continued From April 3. 2001 Council Meeting) B. Project # 01-110-00002 - Special Use Permit Request - 45 lot R-20-SU Major Subdivision (Fox Hunt-phase 5) - 29.07 Acres Located to the North of Fox Hunt Drive and to the East of Fowler-Secrest (Continued from April 3, 2001 Council Meeting) C. Project # 01-100-00006 - Conditional Use Permit Request - Four Classroom Expansion to Benton Heights Elementary School - 1200 Concord Avenue - Union County Board of Education D. Project # 01-100-00007 - Conditional Use Permit Request - Addition of Eight Modular Classrooms and One Modular Office to Union Academy Site - 3828 Old Charlotte Highway - Union Academy E. Ordinance for Proposed Moratorium Until September 30, 2001 on Receiving Applications for and/or Issuing Permits Within the High Density Single-Family Residential (R-8) Zoning District 9. Action from Public Hearings A. Project # 01-130-00002 - Rezoning Request - R-40 (Low Density Single Family Residential) to R-20-SU (Low/Moderate Density Single Family Residential Special Use) - 29.07 Acres Located to the North of Fox Hunt Drive and to the East of Fowler-Secrest (Continued From April 3, 2001 Council Meeting) B. Project # 01-110-00002 - Special Use Permit Request - 45 lot R-20-SU Major Subdivision (Fox Hunt-phase 5) - 29.07 Acres Located to the North of Fox Hunt Drive and to the East of Fowler-Secrest (Continued from April 3, 2001 Council Meeting) C. Project # 01-100-00006 - Conditional Use Permit - Four Classroom Expansion to Benton Heights Elementary School - 1200 Concord Avenue -Union County Board of Education D. Project # 01-100-00007 - Conditional Use Permit - Addition of 8 modular classrooms and 1 modular office to Union Academy site - 3828 Old Charlotte Highway - Union Academy E. Ordinance for Moratorium Until September 30, 2001 on Receiving Applications for and/or Issuing Permits Within the High Density Single-Family Residential (R-8) Zoning District 10. Petition for Ordinance to Declare Certain Property Unfit for Human Habitation A. Donald O. & Dorothy C. Polk, 711 Fairley Avenue - Petition for Ordinance B. Donald O. & Dorothy C. Polk, 711 Fairley Avenue - Ordinance to Declare Property Unfit for Human Habitation 11. A ward of Bid - Fire Ladder Truck 12. Renovations to City Hall A. Budget Amendment B. A ward of Contract 13. Call for Special City Council Meetings - Fiscal Year 2001/2002 Budget Schedule A. Budget Work Session - May 24,2001 at 3:00 p.m. B. Budget Work Session - May 31,2001 at 4:00 p.m. C. Cancellation of Regular City Council Meeting Scheduled for July 3, 2001 14. Other Business - 905 Gillman Street 15. Closed Session 04-10-01 124