Loading...
10/07/2008 Regular City Council MeetingCITY OF MONROE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING 300 W. CROWELL STREET, MONROE, NC 28112 OCTOBER 7, 2008 - 6:30 P.M. AGENDA www.monroenc.or~ Recognitions A. Promotion of Officer William Franklin Kilgo to Master Police Officer I B. Officer of the Quarter -Jonathan Reid Barbee 2. City Manager Comments t''~ A. Union County 2008 Man and Woman of the Year Nominations B. NCLM Annual Meeting C. Meeting with Bond Rating Agencies D. Financial Stability E. Boy Scout Troop #55 CONSENT AGENDA The City Council uses a Consent Agenda to consider items that are non-controversial and routine. The Consent Agenda is acted upon by one motion and vote of the Council. Items may be removed from the Consent Agenda and placed on the Regular Agenda at the request of a Council Member or Citizen with consent of Council. The Consent Agenda contains the following items: 3. Approval/Acceptance of Minutes A. Minutes of Regular City Council Meeting of September 16, 2008 B. Minutes of City Facilities Committee Meeting of August 11, 2008 C. Minutes of Transportation Committee Meeting of September 8, 2008 D. Minutes of Environment and Water Resources Committee Meeting of August 19, 2008 E. Minutes of Downtown Advisory Board Meeting of August 26, 2008 F. Minutes of Tourism Development Authority Meetings of May 8, 2008, June 19, 2008, June 25, 2008, and July 10, 2008 G. Minutes of Economic Development Commission Meeting of May 8, 2008 H. Minutes of Charlotte-Monroe Executive Airport Commission Meetings of June 2, 2008 and August 11, 2008 I. Minutes of Public Safety Committee Meeting of September 17, 2008 4. Ordinances A. Amending Chapter 75 of the Code of Ordinances: Traffic Schedules -Through Streets B. Amending Fees Schedule -Charlotte-Monroe Executive Airport Reimbursement Resolution for Natural Gas Transmission Pipeline Project Regulaz City Council Meeting October 7, 2008 Page 161 6. Budget Amendments A. Explorer Program Donation B. Old Armory Renovations C. Monroe Tourism Development Authority Recommendation for Feasibility Study for Sports Complex 7. Call for Public Hearing to be Held October 21, 2008 to Consider CDBG Individual Development Accounts Grant Closeout 8. Municipal Agreement Between the North Carolina Department of Transportation and the City of Monroe Regarding the Realignment of Goldmine Road (Phase 2) 9. Revision to Charlotte-Monroe Executive Airport Fuel Storage Policy 10. Minimum Hangar Construction Standards for Charlotte-Monroe Executive Airport REGULAR AGENDA Public Hearings -Please adhere to the following guidelines: • Proceed to the podium, and state your name and address clearly; • Be concise; avoid repetition; limit comments to three (3) minutes or less; • Designate a spokesperson for large groups. 11. Authorization to File an Application with the Local Government Commission to Finance the Purchase and Installation of Gas Pipeline A. Public Hearing B. Action -Approval of Installment Financing 12. Zoning Map Amendment Request by Tesha McBeth for Property Located at 309 Lancaster Avenue from R-10 (High Density Residential) to Conditional District "309 Lancaster Avenue" (~'! A. Public Hearing B. Action -Motion that Zoning Map Amendment Request be Denied 13. Sk Redhawk Run/Walk at Monroe Middle School 14. Funding Request to Establish Elementary School Band Program (Action Deferred Until November 4, 2008 City Council Meeting) 15. Public Comment Period Regular City Council Meeting October 7, 2008 Page 162 CITY OF MONROE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING OCTOBER 7, 2008 - 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 October 7, 2008 with Mayor Kilgore presiding. Present: Mayor Bobby G. Kilgore, Mayor Pro Tem P.E. Bazemore, Council Members John Ashcraft, Billy Jordan, Lynn Keziah, Dottie Nash, Robert J. Smith, City Manager F. Craig Meadows, City Attorney Terry Sholar, and City Clerk Bridgette H. Robinson. Absent: None. Visitors: Debra C. Duncan, Wayne Herron, Jim Fatland, Bruce Bounds. Susan Osborne, Chris Plate, Jason deBruyn, Pete Hovanec, Tiffany Kilgo, Emily Kilgo, Marilyn Kilgo, Lovanre Kilgo, Nikia Kilgo, Donald Polk, Vickie Hedgepeth, Chris Carrion, C. Rowan, Kelly Stegall, Sandy Nemer, Tracy Nemer, Nat Baily, Jim Loyd, Paul Scoggins, Jerry Ammons, Members of Boy Scout Troop #55, Tim Ahurs, April Ahurs, Joel Pressley, Gail Hicks, Jason Eubanks, Paul Standridge, Angie Barbee, Cody Barbee, Beth Greene, Dorothy Polk, Nick Brumer, Bobby Manus, Gary Taylor, D.C. McCallister, Fred Howell, Virginia Bjorlin, Michael Chambers, Michele Shoultes, Mark Coan, Kathy Cullum, Clinton Seegers, Brian Lilley, Patrick Dunbar, Damon McBeth, Tesha McBeth, Kent Wilkinson, Clint Lawrence, Larry Furr, Kyle Purser, Alex Garcia, Ed Hord, Keshia Meadows, Sharon Isley, Estelle Snyder, Mary Lou Starnes, Libby Long, Bill Thomas, Stan Pierczynski, Hurley Campbell, and others. Mayor Kilgore called the Regular City Council Meeting of October 7, 2008 to order at 6:30 p.m. A quorum was present. Item No. 1. Recognitions. A. Promotion of Officer William Franklin Kilgo to Master Police Officer I. Police Chief Debra Duncan recognized Officer William Franklin Kilgo for receiving his Master Police Officer I advancement. B. Officer of the Quarter -Jonathan Reid Barbee. Police Chief Duncan recognized Jonathan Reid Barbee as the Officer of the Quarter. Regular City Council Meeting October 7, 2008 Page 163 Item No. 2. City Manager Comments. City Manager Meadows briefed Council on the following: A. Union County 2008 Man and Woman of the Year Nominations. Nominations for the 2008 Man and Woman of the Year Awards are due by October 28, 2008. Nomination forms are available in the City Manager's office. B. NCLM Annual Meeting. The NCLM Annual Meeting is scheduled for October 12 through 14 in Charlotte. C. Meeting with Bond Rating Agencies. City Manager Meadows, Finance Director Jim Fatland, Energy Services Director Don Mitchell and Mayor Kilgore will be traveling to New York October 14 and 15 to meet with Moody's and Standard & Poor's Bond Rating Agencies related to the City's upcoming financing. D. Financial Stability. Finance Director Fatland briefed Council on the City's financial status with Wachovia Bank, who is the City's official depository. Staff has had conversations with the Office of the State Treasurer, North Carolina Capital Management Trust, and the State Banking Board. Mr. Fatland was pleased to report that the public funds are protected. The City has a five-year contract with Wachovia and staff will be bringing a recommendation to Council to send out requests for proposals for banking services in the near future. E. Boy Scout Troop #55. City Manager Meadows recognized members of Boy Scout Troop #55 from Central Methodist Church. Members of the Troop were attending the meeting to work towards receiving their citizenship in the community merit badge. Mayor Kilgore extended greetings from the City. CONSENT AGENDA Mayor Kilgore reviewed the Consent Agenda and asked if any member of the Council or citizen would like to have any items moved from the Consent Agenda to the Regular Agenda for discussion. Written background information was provided in advance in the Council Agenda Packets for each item on the Consent Agenda. No further discussion was r'~ held. One motion and vote was taken, which included approval of all items on the Consent t ~ Agenda. Item No. 3. Approval/Acceptance of Minutes. A. Minutes of Regular City Council Meeting of September 16, 2008. Council Member Keziah moved to approve the Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting of September 16, 2008. Council Member Nash seconded the motion, which passed unanimously with the following votes: AYES: Council Members Ashcraft, Jordan, Keziah, Nash, Smith, Mayor Pro Tem Bazemore, and Mayor Kilgore NAYS: None Regular City Council Meeting October 7, 2008 Page 164 B. Minutes of City Facilities Committee Meeting of August 11, 2008. Minutes of the City Facilities Committee Meeting of August 11, 2008 were received as information by Council. C. Minutes of Transportation Committee Meeting of September 8, 2008. Minutes of the Transportation Committee Meeting of September 8, 2008 were received as information by Council. D. Minutes of Environment and Water Resources Committee Meeting of August 19, 2008. Minutes of the Environment and Water Resources Committee Meeting of August 19, 2008 were received as information by Council. E. Minutes of Downtown Advisory Board Meeting of August 26, 2008. Minutes of the Downtown Advisory Board Meeting of August 26, 2008 were. received as information by Council. F. Minutes of Tourism Development Authority Meetings of Mav 8, 2008, June 19, 2008, June 25, 2008, and July 10, 2008. Minutes of the Tourism Development Authority Meetings of May 8, 2008, June 19, 2008, June 25, 2008, and July 10, 2008 were received as information by Council. G. Minutes of Economic Development Commission Meeting of Mav 8, 2008. Minutes of the Economic Development Commission Meeting of May 8, 2008 were received as information by Council. H. Minutes of Charlotte-Monroe Executive Airport Commission Meetings of June 2, 2008 and August 11, 2008. Minutes of the Charlotte-Monroe Executive Airport Commission Meetings of June 2, 2008 and August 11, 2008 were received as information by Council. I. Minutes of Public Safety Committee Meeting of September 17, 2008. Minutes of the Minutes of Public Safety Committee Meeting of September 17, 2008 were received as information by Council. ~'-`~ Item No. 4. Ordinances. A. Amending Chapter 75 of the Code of Ordinances: Traffic Schedules -Through Streets. Engineering Director Jim Loyd advised by memorandum that staff had received a request for speed cushions along Cemetery Drive adjacent to Suncrest Cemetery. He advised that during review of the request, staff discovered that no one was stopping at the stop signs located on Cemetery Drive at Bickett Street. Mr. Loyd advised that the south side of Bickett Street, which is currently shown as the through street in the Ordinance, is blocked by a gate that is part of the fence surrounding the cemetery. ~ Mr. Loyd further advised that the intersection of Windsor Street and Catawba Avenue is now a 4~ ' through movement with the closing of the railroad crossing on Windsor Street in March 1995. Regular City Council Meeting October 7, 2008 Page 165 Staff felt that this intersection needed to be deleted from the Through Streets Schedules and that the stop sign on Catawba Avenue should be removed since it is not needed. Staff recommended that Council adopt an Ordinance amending the Through Street Schedule to show Cemetery Drive as the through street at its intersection with Bickett Street and deleting the intersection of Catawba Avenue and Windsor Street. Council Member Keziah moved to adopt Ordinance 0-2008-42: ORDINANCE TO AMEND TITLE VII: TRAFFIC CODE, CHAPTER 75 OF THE CITY OF MONROE CODE OF ORDINANCES 0-2008-42 t i BE IT ORDAINED by the City of Monroe Council that Title VII: Traffic Code, Chapter 75 - Traffic Schedules of the City of Monroe Code of Ordinances is amended as follows: Schedule II. Through Streets Delete: Add: THROUGH STREETS Throu h Street Sto Street Bickett Street Cemete Drive Windsor Street Catawba Avenue THROUGH STREETS Throu h Street Sto Street Cemete Drive Bickett Street Adopted this 7t'' day of October, 2008. Council Member Nash seconded the motion, which passed unanimously with the following votes: AYES: Council Members Ashcraft, Jordan, Keziah, Nash, Smith, Mayor Pro Tem Bazemore, and Mayor Kilgore NAYS: None B. Amending Fees Schedule - Charlotte-Monroe ]Executive Airport. Economic Development and Aviation Director Chris Plate advised by memorandum that the current Fees Schedule needed to be modified in order to denote recent changes at the airport, such as the acquisition of the new bulk hangar (#5) and other Consumer Price Index (CPI) increases. He advised that there were also many text changes that needed to be added to clarify the fees and the ~ addition or deletion of fees to ensure consistency for our customers. Staff recommended that t Council adopt an Ordinance amending the Fees Schedule to reflect these changes. Council Member Keziah moved to adopt Ordinance 0-2008-43: Regular City Council Meeting October 7, 2008 Page 166 t ' ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE CITY OF MONROE FEES SCHEDULE 0-2008-43 <` t ;, BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Monroe that the City of Monroe Fees Schedule be amended as follows: CHAPTER I. ADMINISTRATIVE ARTICLE A. MISCELLANEOUS Section 10. Charlotte-Monroe Executive Airport Section 1. Delete the following effective October 7, 2008: fDescrip`tiun~: -_ ~y .~r> ,-~' ", ~,~:'.F,ee ~~ `*r Monthl Towin Fee Southern Cross Ranch $225 Aerocraft Holding Co. (David Peeler) $25 Section 2. Add the following effective October 7, 2008: 1Descr~pt~on~: _:-4~~:v~....:: ~ _ ~,.,,-__ . _, _ ~° . ~ ~{fir 1_ . ~ Fee Han ar3 $1,450 ermonth Hangar 5 Office Space (includes kitchen and common areas) Office A $10/sf/ Office B $10/sf/ Office C $10/sf/ Maintenance Area $6/sf/ Land Lease $0.183/sf/ Section 3. Change the following effective January 1, 2009: ~Descri lion ` ~~.:"°-~_ ~ ~ . _ ~a~Old Fe~~: .~ + .+a~Ne~~~ Fee. Change Burnt Out Obstruction Li ht $90 $100 Price for Full Service Fuel- Service $0.95 above purchase price lus tax $1.05 above purchase rice lus tax Han ar 1 Office S ace $7.44/sf/ $8.00/sf/ Han ar 4 Office S ace $7.58/sf/ $8.00/sf/ Monthl Tie Down Fee Single and Small Twin Piston $60 $70 Turbine and Large Twin $120 $130 Ovemi ht Parkin Fee Airplanes Regular City Council Meeting October 7, 2008 Page 167 Piston Single $5 $10 Engine iDesc"r"i`"fion~ .` ~~~: " O1d.4Fee .= ' New'~Fee Piston Twin $8 $15 Engine Helico ters Piston $5 $10 Helico ter Turbine $10 $15 Helico ter Transient Customer Service Charges with No Fuel Purchase Large Lavator $40 $50 Terminal Office Space $11.55/sf/yr $12.00/sf/yr Lease Section 4. This Ordinance shall be effective upon adoption. Adopted this 7`h day of October, 2008. ~\ Council Member Nash seconded the motion, which passed unanimously with the following votes: AYES: Council Members Ashcraft, Jordan, Keziah, Nash, Smith, Mayor Pro Tem Bazemore, and Mayor Kilgore NAYS: None Item No. 5. Reimbursement Resolution for Natural Gas Transmission Pipeline Proiect. Finance Director Fatland, City Attorney Sholar, and Energy Services Director Mitchell advised by memorandum that Council adopted Reimbursement Resolution R-2007-17 for the gas transmission pipeline project on March 7, 2007. Staff advised that a new Reimbursement Resolution was being recommended for approval by Council for the estimated cost of $42,000,000. The Reimbursement Resolution has been reviewed and approved by Bond Counsel. Council Member Keziah moved to adopt Resolution R-2008-91: REIMBURSEMENT RESOLUTION WITH REGARD TO TAX-EXEMPT OBLIGATIONS R-2008-91 AUTHORIZING CITY OF MONROE, NORTH CAROLINA TO UNDERTAKE CERTAIN EXPENDITURES WITH RESPECT TO A CAPITAL PROJECT PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE BY THE CITY OF TAX EXEMPT OBLIGATIONS IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $42,000,000 WHEREAS, the Internal Revenue Service and U.S. Treasury Department have published regulations that govern when a political subdivision such as the City of Monroe, North Carolina (the Regular City Council Meeting October 7, 2008 Page 168 City), can issue or execute tax-exempt obligations to reimburse itself or any agency or division thereof for expenditures on projects prior to the issuance oftax-exempt obligations for such projects; and WHEREAS, the regulations require that the governing body of the political subdivision adopt a Resolution reciting certain facts and intentions prior to the incurrence of the expenditures; and WHEREAS, the City Council approved Resolution R-2007-17 on March 7, 2007, authorizing City of Monroe, North Carolina to undertake certain expenditures with respect to a capital project prior to the issuance by the City of tax exempt obligations in an amount estimated at $25,000,000; and WHEREAS, the City of Monroe has expended less than $25,000,000 to date for rights of way, design engineering and other related costs; and WHEREAS, the City anticipates incurring certain expenditures in an approximate amount of not exceeding $42,000,000 (the "Expenditures") with respect to Natural Gas Transmission Pipeline (the "Project") prior to the issuance by the City of tax-exempt obligations for such purpose in an amount not to exceed $42,000,000; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Monroe as follows: Section 1. The City Council hereby declares a reasonable "official intent" pursuant to Regulation 1.150-2 and other applicable regulations to the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, to reimburse the City from the proceeds of tax-exempt obligations for such Expenditures with respect to the Project. The City anticipates incurring Expenditures in an approximate amount of not exceeding $42,000,000 with respect to the Project prior to the issuance oftax-exempt obligations by the City for such purpose in an amount not to exceed $42,000,000. Section 2. The Expenditures are incurred solely to acquire, construct or rehabilitate property having a reasonably expected economic life of at least one year. Section 3. The source of funds is expected to be charges for services. Done in meeting duly assembled this 7~' day of October, 2008. Council Member Nash seconded the motion, which passed unanimously with the following votes: AYES: Council Members Ashcraft, Jordan, Keziah, Nash, Smith, Mayor Pro Tem Bazemore, and Mayor Kilgore NAYS: None Item No. 6. Budget Amendments. A. Explorer Program Donation. Police Chief Duncan advised by memorandum that the Police Department had received a $1,086 donation for the Explorer program. This money has been designated to be used to help offset the costs for training, uniforms and equipment for the Explorer program. Staff recommended that Council accept the donation and adopt a Budget Amendment appropriating the funds. Council Member Keziah moved to adopt Budget Amendment BA-2008-31: Regular City Council Meeting October 7, 2008 Page 169 BUDGET AMENDMENT BA-2008-31 1. Amendment necessary to designate and appropriate funds for a donation to the Explorer program. General Fund: Revenues: Miscellaneous $1,086 Expenditures: Public Safety $1,086 ~? Adopted this 7~' day of October, 2008. Council Member Nash seconded the motion, which passed unanimously with the following votes: AYES: Council Members Ashcraft, Jordan, Keziah, Nash, Smith, Mayor Pro Tem Bazemore, and Mayor Kilgore NAYS: None B. Old Armory Renovations. Parks and Recreation Director Mike Courtney advised by memorandum that the cost of the Armory Renovation Project totaled $809,092.95. Revenues for the project totaled $700,765.55 leaving a remainder needed to make final payment to the contractor of $108,766. He advised that the major changes to the project that were not in the budget were repairs to the south parapet wall, structural repairs to the trusses and tower, cost of utilizing a structural engineer, changing to wood windows, creating a separate computer room, and contracting with the COG to administer the grant. Staff recommended that Council adopt a Budget Amendment appropriating $108,766 from the General Fund Fund Balance to cover the additional costs associated with the Old Armory Renovation project. Council Member Keziah moved to adopt Budget Amendment BA-2008-33: BUDGET AMENDMENT BA-2008-33 1. Amendment necessary to appropriate funds to cover the costs exceeding the budget for the Old Armory Renovation Project. General Fund: Revenues: Appropriation of Fund Balance $108,766 Expenditures: Capital Project $108,766 Regular City Council Meeting October 7, 2008 Page 170 ~ Adopted this 7`h day of October, 2008. t ; Council Member Nash seconded the motion, which passed unanimously with the following votes: AYES: Council Members Ashcraft, Jordan, Keziah, Nash, Smith, Mayor Pro Tem Bazemore, and Mayor Kilgore NAYS: None C. Monroe Tourism Development Authority Recommendation for Feasibility Study for Sports Complex. Finance Director Fatland advised by memorandum that the Monroe Tourism Development Authority had unanimously voted to move forward with a feasibility study for a proposed sports complex. The feasibility study will include site analysis, a master plan, and financial analysis. Mr. Fatland advised that it was the Authority's recommendation that W.K. Dickson conduct this study. Staff and the Monroe Tourism Development Authority recommended that Council adopt a Budget Amendment appropriating $40,000 from the capital reserve fund (formerly the Civic Center Fund) for a feasibility study for the proposed sports complex. Council Member Keziah moved to adopt Budget Amendment BA-2008-32: BUDGET AMENDMENT BA-2008-32 1. Amendment necessary to appropriate fund balance to conduct master plan and feasibility study for sports complex. Former Civic Center Fund 134 Expenditures: Capital Project-Sports Complex $40,000 Revenues: Appropriation of Fund Balance 40,000 Adopted this 7th day of October, 2008. Council Member Nash seconded the motion, which passed unanimously with the following votes: AYES: Council Members Ashcraft, Jordan, Keziah, Nash, Smith, Mayor Pro Tem Bazemore, and Mayor Kilgore NAYS: None Item No. 7. Call for Public Hearing to be Held October 21, 2008 to Consider CDBG Individual Development Accounts Grant Closeout. Council Member Keziah moved to call for a public hearing to be held on October 21, 2008 at 6:30 p.m. to consider this request. Council Member Nash seconded the motion, which passed unanimously with the following votes: Regular City Council Meeting October 7, 2008 Page 171 AYES: Council Members Ashcraft, Jordan, Keziah, Nash, ~~,~ Smith, Mayor Pro Tem Bazemore, and Mayor Kilgore NAYS: None Item No. 8._ Municipal Agreement Between the North Carolina Department of Transportation and the City of Monroe Regarding the Realignment of Goldmine Road Phase 2 . Economic Development and Aviation Director Plate advised by memorandum that the Goldmine Road Realignment (Phase 2) will allow this thoroughfare to remain a significant east-west connector for Monroe, Union County and the Charlotte Region. He advised that the project was integral in the future growth of the City. Mr. Plate advised that the realignment required several interactions with the NC Department of Transportation (NCDOT), because the road will eventually become a state maintained roadway. NCDOT must agree to the plans, specifications, and other vital details associated with this roadway. One part of this process is for the City and NCDOT to enter into a municipal agreement for the City to construct the road. He advised that the NCDOT is expected to approve the agreement associated with the Goldmine Road Relocation (Phase 2) at their meeting on October 2, 2008. Staff recommended that Council enter into a Municipal Agreement with the NCDOT for the realignment of Goldmine Road Realignment (Phase 2). Council Member Keziah moved to enter into a Municipal Agreement with the NC Department of Transportation for the realignment of Goldmine Road Realignment (Phase 2). Council Member Nash seconded the motion, which passed unanimously with the following votes: AYES: Council Members Ashcraft, Jordan, Keziah, Nash, Smith, Mayor Pro Tem Bazemore, and Mayor Kilgore NAYS: None Said Municipal Agreement is hereby incorporated as a part of these Minutes as "Exhibit A. " Item No. 9. Revision to Charlotte-Monroe Executive Airport Fuel Storage Policy. Economic Development and Aviation Director Plate advised by memorandum that the City of ~`1 Monroe created the Fuel Storage Policy in late 2007. After nearly a year of working with this new policy, staff felt that it would be appropriate to eliminate the current minimum investment criteria established in the policy. Mr. Plate advised that staff had not seen this be a benefit or detriment to the airport's ability to recruit new aircraft, or provide better service to our customers. He advised that with that in mind, it would allow the administration of the policy to be more efficient without this provision. Staff recommended that the following text amendment be deleted from the Fuel Storage Policy: " 2. To qualify, the person or entity must have a minimum of $3,000,000 of total taxable assets located at the Airport with base aircraft at the Airport with a minimum of $2,000,000 in taxable value and pay all City and County taxes associated with said assets" and replaced with the t~ following: " 2. To qualify, the person or entity must have aircraft situs at the Airport and pay all City and County taxes associated with said aircraft." Regular City Council Meeting October 7, 2008 Page 172 f,1 Council Member Keziah moved to approve the changes to the Fuel Storage Policy: l CHARLOTTE-MONROE EXECUTIVE AIRPORT FUEL STORAGE POLICY WHEREAS, the City of Monroe recognizes that the location of aircraft at the Charlotte-Monroe Executive Airport contributes the tax base of the City; and WHEREAS, the City desires to increase the location of aircraft at the Charlotte-Monroe Executive Airport by taking reasonable measures to provide service opportunities to those aircraft based at the Airport; and WHEREAS, providing owners of aircraft with the opportunity to purchase fuel in bulk by ~' allowing such fuel to be stored in the City owned fuel facilities provides an additional incentive for aircraft owners to locate at the Airport. NOW, THEREFORE, the Monroe City Council adopts the following Fuel Storage Policy whereby aircraft owners are given the opportunity to purchase bulk quantities of aviation fuel (Jet A only) to be delivered and stored in City owned fueling facilities to be dispensed to privately owned aircraft under the following terms and conditions: 1. Any person or entity with an active lease with the City of Monroe or an owner of a hangar at the Airport may take advantage of this Fuel Storage Policy; 2. To qualify, the person or entity must have aircraft situs at the Airport and pay all City and County taxes associated with said aircraft; 3. Enter into a Fuel Storage Agreement with the City; 4. Individual must contract and purchase all fuel in the name of the person or entity owning the aircraft which is subject to the Fuel Storage Agreement and shall be solely responsible for contracting, purchasing, and payment of all fuel delivered; 5. All fuel purchases and delivery must be from a City approved fuel supplier with the minimum quantity being delivered at a time being 8,000 gallons; 6. Only fuel which is properly certified and suitable for its intended use may be delivered to City fuel facilities and shall meet or exceed all requirements established by the City; 7. The Airport manager shall be contacted prior to delivery of fuel who will determine if the fuel to be acquired is suitable for storage and if the City has sufficient capacity available for storage. If capacity is not available, no delivery will be accepted. All deliveries to the City fuel facilities shall be under the supervision, inspection, and testing of City staff or their agents; 8. Purchaser of fuel shall be solely responsible for the clean-up of any site that becomes contaminated due to the spillage or loss of fuel during delivery to the City facilities; 9. Upon delivery of the fuel to City fueling facilities the purchaser shall pay to the City the amount per gallon established in the City Fee Schedule on the date of delivery; 10. Fuel will be dispensed in individual aircraft and the request of the owner of the fuel and City staff will keep a running tally of fuel dispensed until the fuel is fully dispensed at which time subsequent fuel delivered shall be at the then established price by the City. Only aircraft owned, operated, or under the control of the Owner maybe fueled with City stored fuel; 11. The availability of storage will be determined on a first come/first served basis depending on the availability of fuel storage capacity. This policy is adopted by City Council and effective as of November 21, 2007 and amended on October 7, 2008. Regular City Council Meeting October 7, 2008 Page 173 Council Member Nash seconded the motion, which passed unanimously with the following votes: AYES: Council Members Ashcraft, Jordan, Keziah, Nash, Smith, Mayor Pro Tem Bazemore, and Mayor Kilgore NAYS: None Item No. 10. Minimum Hangar Construction Standards for Charlotte-Monroe Executive Airport. Economic Development and Aviation Director Plate advised by memorandum that the City of Monroe was the owner and operator of the Charlotte-Monroe Executive Airport and in that capacity, the City can lease land on the airfield for the purpose of private hangar development. He advised that currently, there are no minimum standards for those entities that would have an interest in constructing and owning a hangar facility. Mr. Plate advised that as the owner of the airport, the City needs to ensure to the current hangar owners, based customers, and the citizens that the integrity of the airfield's development will be of reasonable quality and will withstand the wear and tear of years of use. Also, at the time the land lease terminates, the City will then have the responsibility of maintaining the hangars that were built. He advised that it was in the City's best interest to have a set of common standards so that staff can reasonably predict the level of maintenance repairs that will be expected for these hangars. Mr. Plate advised that the main provisions in the hangar construction standards will be: 1) quality of roof and wall material; 2) door type and height; 3) minimum hangar square footage; and 4) acceptable color schemes. Staff recommended that Council adopt the Minimum Hangar Construction Standards for the Charlotte-Monroe Executive Airport. Council Member Keziah moved to adopt the Minimum Hangar Construction Standards for the Charlotte-Monroe Executive Airport: CHARLOTTE-MONROE EXECUTIVE AIRPORT MINIMUM HANGAR CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS I. GENERAL: The following minimum standards shall apply to all hangars constructed at the Charlotte-Monroe Executive Airport after the effective date of adoption of these standards. These minimum standards have been adopted by the City Council and are intended to ensure a.reasonable level of quality, functionality, uniformity of appearance, and conformance with applicable code requirements (local, State and National). II. MINIMUM CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS: All construction shall be in accordance with National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 409 (current edition) requirements for Group III hangars, local or State codes, whichever is more stringent. Hangars: Regular City Council Meeting October 7, 2008 Page 174 Storage Hangars (Conventional) -minimum 10,000 square feet Maintenance Hangars -minimum 8,000 square feet Office Space (If Desired by Lessee): Sufficient to meet all National, State and Local building codes for the numbers of persons using and occupying the structure. If required by applicable codes, sanitary septic facilities shall be provided in accordance with City of Monroe requirements. Floors and Concrete Apron at Main Aircraft Door: Concrete capable of supporting design load for largest aircraft expected to use facility with a minimum thickness of five (5) inches and a minimum wire mesh reinforcement of 6" x 6" - 10/10. The floor slab shall also include aturn-down perimeter footing at least 12 inches thick from finished floor level. A 6-mil thick polyethylene vapor barrier shall be installed under the floor slab. Floor slab shall be designed by a North Carolina registered professional engineer. Concrete shall have a (`~'~ minimum compressive strength of 4,000 psi at 28 days. Joints (preferred by sawcutting) shall be made 1 in the concrete as soon as possible while concrete is still plastic at a spacing in both directions no greater than twice the thickness of the concrete in inches expressed in feet (e.g., 5" thickness will have joint spacing no greater than 10 feet). Structural Members: Structural members shall be structural steel and shall be designed by a North Carolina registered professional engineer to withstand the wind loads, snow loads and seismic loads required by the North Carolina State Building Code and other applicable National codes. Structural members shall be painted with at least one coat of shop primer. All bare metal shall be touched up with field primer immediately prior to installation of roof and wall insulation. Floor Drains and Outside Holding Tank: Floor trench drains shall be provided as required by NFPA 409 (Current Edition) with sufficient piping below slab level sloped to drain to an underground holding.tank installed outside of the hangar footprint. The floor drain, piping and holding tank shall be of such materials that can withstand any damage from Jet-A fuel and AV-Gas fuel and shall also be ofnon-combustible material. Holding tank shall be certified leak-proof to the satisfaction of the City of Monroe Fire Marshall and shall be vented to the atmosphere in accordance with applicable National, State and Local codes. Permanent hold down straps and anti-flotation system for holding tank shall be designed by a North Carolina registered professional engineer to prevent flotation of tank in accordance with the tank manufacturer's requirements. The minimum tank size required shall be 1,000 gallons. No single aircraft having a total fuel capacity greater than 1,000 gallons shall be stored in a hangar with other aircraft or stored alone in a hangar until the hangar lessee has increased the total holding tank capacity to equal or exceed the total fuel capacity of the largest single aircraft desired to be stored in the hangar, in a manner acceptable to the City of Monroe. Known suitable tank manufacturers and tank models are listed below: Manufacturer Highland Tank One Highland Road Stoystown, PA 15563 (814) 893-5701 (814) 893-6126 (FAX) Tank Model ACT-100U DW Regular City Council Meeting October 7, 2008 Page ] 75 Xerxes Tanks Double Wall Fiberglass 7901 Xerxes Avenue, South Minneapolis, MN 55431 (952) 887-1890 (952) 887-1882 (FAX) Doors: Self-contained and in accordance with National, State and Local building codes. Minimum aircraft door height shall be 24 feet. Preferred aircraft door type for conventional hangars is a bi-parting sliding type using bottom steel wheel rolling system, capable of being stacked pocket less, or within the overall door opening with a maximum stack width of one door panel. Door operation may be manual or mechanical. Other door types will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis by the City. At least one 3-foot wide by 7-foot tall personnel door shall be required on the hangar wall opposite the aircraft entry hangar door with materials and construction meeting applicable code requirements. More personnel doors may be required by applicable codes based on the intended use and layout of the hangar. Known hangar door manufacturers are listed below: Manufacturer D.P. Industries 6685 El Pomar Drive Templeton, California 93465-8638 (805) 238-9011 (805) 238-1917 (FAX) (800) 411-8996 (TOLL FREE) Industrial Door Contractors, Inc. 820 Mayberry Springs Road P.O. Box 158 Columbia, Tennessee 38402-0158 (800) 320-6455 (931) 380-3658 (FAX) Norco Manufacturing Corp. P.O. Box 246 Franksville, WI 53126-0246 (262) 835-2600 (262) 835-2660 (FAX) Roof and Walls: Roofing shall be a minimum of 24 GA screw down Galvalume panels on a minimum pitch of 1 in 12. Walls, gutters, downspouts and trim shall be 26 GA. painted metal in a color similar to existing adjacent hangars. Paint shall be a minimum of Kynar 500 with a 20-year paint performance warranty. Interior Insulation: Minimum insulation for roof and walls of conventional hangars shall consist of 4 inch thick white reinforced vinyl-backed and properly secured to the roof and wall systems and shall comply with the special provisions for aircraft storage hangars, interior wall and ceiling finish criteria of NFPA 101, Life Safety Code. Electrical Devices: Regular City Council Meeting October 7, 2008 Page 176 All electrical devices and installations shall be in accordance with Chapter 8 of NFPA 409, Article 513 of NFPA 70 (National Electrical Code), State and Local building codes. Explosion-proof devices and installations shall be required in all hangars. A minimum of one (1) duplex receptacle per interior ' wall shall be installed for conventional hangars. A minimum of one (1) duplex receptacle shall be installed for each T-Hangar unit. The main exterior breaker panel box shall include capability for at least 30 circuits and have a minimum total capacity of 200 AMPS. Interior Lighting: All lighting installations shall provide a minimum of 10 foot-candles average illumination within the aircraft storage area of the hangar. Lighting installations within other space uses in the hangar shall be in conformance with National, State and local code requirements. Grounding Facilities for Static Electricity: Grounding facilities shall be provided for removal and control of static electrical accumulations on (~ aircraft while aircraft are stored in the hangar in accordance with Section 8.7 of NFPA 409. Fire Extinguishers: Two (2) 10-pound ABC fire extinguishers shall be installed inside the hangar in accordance with NFPA 10. Additional fire protection shall be required for any hazardous activities as required by Section 8.9 of NFPA 409. Plans: All construction plans must be approved by the City of Monroe prior to construction. Accordingly, ample review time shall be afforded these agencies prior to the desired construction date. ~\ Alternate Designs and Alternate Materials: ( 1 All construction plans containing alternate designs and materials that differ from the requirements t listed above must be reviewed and approved by the City of Monroe prior to construction. Each alternate design or material must include documentation that proves the proposed design and/or materials are equal to or better in performance and code compliance than the requirements listed above. However, in no event will the City of Monroe consider any hangar designs utilizing wood products for structural members, walls, roofs or doors. The City of Monroe's decision on each proposed alternate design or use of alternate material will be final. Council Member Nash seconded the motion, which unanimously passed with the following votes: AYES: Council Members Ashcraft, Jordan, Keziah, Nash, Smith, Mayor Pro Tem Bazemore, and Mayor Kilgore NAYS: None REGULAR AGENDA Item No. 11. Authorization to File an Application with the Local Government Commission to Finance the Purchase and Installation of Gas Pipeline. A. Public Hearing. Mayor Kilgore opened the duly advertised public hearing. Finance Director Jim Fatland stated that one of the purposes of this meeting was to conduct a public hearing regarding the installment financing of the acquisition, construction and installation of an approximately 43 mile, 12 inch diameter steel gas transmission line, a related two inch Regular City Council Meeting October 7, 2008 Page 177 polyethylene fiber optic conduit to be installed in the same rights of way of the transmission line and polyethylene gas distribution mains to be installed in the same rights of way as the transmission lines (the "2008 Project"). Mr. Fatland informed Council that a notice of the public hearing had been published in The Enquirer-Journal on a date at least ten (10) days prior to the date of the public hearing. He requested that an affidavit showing such publication be attached to the extract of minutes as Exhibit A. Council Member Smith previously moved to adopt a Resolution R-2008-90 on September 16, 2008 to proceed to hold a public hearing on the 2008 Project. The motion was seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Bazemore and was adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Ashcraft, Jordan, Keziah, Nash, Smith, Mayor Pro Tem Bazemore, and Mayor Kilgore NAYS: None Mayor Kilgore announced that Council would hear anyone who wished to be heard on the installment financing of the 2008 Project. Ms. Mary Lou Starnes, 7401 Concord Highway, addressed Council in opposition of this matter. She stated that she did not understand why a public hearing was being held since civil lawsuits had already been filed against those who have not signed an easement. She stated that there were others who, if they had been given proper notice, would have been present as well to express opposition. She hoped that the City of Monroe was going to hold a public heanng for people m Cabarrus County since they had a larger stake in this issue. Ms. Starnes stated that she did not know what good it would do to hear the concerns and complaints nor did she feel it would change anything. She stated that she did not think it was a good idea for the City to consider going out in the bond market with today's economy and uncertainty. Ms. Starnes advised that City Manager Meadows had stated that the reason for this pipeline was because Piedmont Natural Gas would not work with them to lower rates. She stated that she had a letter from the Chairman of Piedmont Natural Gas who stated to her that he submitted a proposal last August that was both lower in costs and risks to the City than this pipeline project. Ms. Starnes also requested that someone give her a straight answer as to why this pipeline route was running across country from Indian Trail all the way to Highway 601 North, going only about seven or eight miles on Highway 601 North, and then cutting back across to go to Cabarrus County. She stated that there was no reason to come to Highway 601 North when this was a major highway which is probably slated for expansion. Ms. Starnes stated that easements would come over into her front yard and if the City were to go to a secondary road, which is more direct to Cabarrus County, the City could stay in the road right of way. Regular City Council Meeting October 7, 2008 Page 178 Ms. Starnes stated that it was recently reported in the Concord Standard weekly newspaper that the City of Monroe and the Town of Midland had partnered with a private entity and now 1 Monroe was paying Midland $1.6 million over and above what they have already paid. Ms. Starnes questioned the purpose of the partnership. Ms. Starnes stated that the town official she spoke with that confirmed this information was true advised her that he imagined that it was to avoid litigation with the private entity. She stated that she did not see how this was any different than working with Piedmont Natural Gas. Ms. Starnes questioned to what extent Council Member Smith's involvement with the Electricities' Board influenced this project and what was his personal stake in the matter. She felt that this project was unnecessary and she had seen nothing that had made her believe or feel ~'~ comfortable in Monroe's ability to operate and maintain a project of this magnitude. She further t stated that she did not see any benefit to those whose land was being confiscated. Ms. Libby Long, 117 Highway 218 West, addressed Council in opposition of this request. She stated that she read in the paper that this public meeting was being held tonight and posed the following questions to Council: 1. On September 11, 2007 when the initial meeting was held with the Monroe, Council Member Bob Smith slammed his first on the table and advised that there would be no public meeting. Why is Monroe having a public meeting now that the condemnation notices have been served? 2. Why has there been no notice in the Monroe paper about the City partnering with a private company? 3. Do the residents of Monroe know that the City has again paid Midland $1.6 million in order to accomplish this partnership and that this is over and above what Monroe has already paid Midland? 4. Monroe keeps saying that this will result in a lower gas rate for your customers. Has Monroe published how much of a savings each individual customer would receive? 5. Has Monroe published the current rate for residential customers and industrial customers? 6. What does Monroe anticipate the savings would be when the pipeline is ready? 7. Has Monroe awarded the contract for laying the pipeline yet? ~'1 8. Monroe has been saying that the pipeline was going to cost $24 million since 2004. Is Monroe so naive to believe that costs have not risen? 9. Does Monroe know what the true cost of the pipeline is going to be for the City of Monroe and whether it can be paid for with the revenue of your customers as you have told Fairview? Ms. Long stated that when Monroe finally agreed to meet with Fairview in April, Monroe was asked repeatedly if it had taken into account the cost of maintaining the pipeline. The only answer Fairview received over and over again was that Monroe would realize the savings on the debt service by not paying distribution costs to Piedmont Natural Gas. Ms. Starnes stated that not once did Mr. Meadows acknowledge the cost of maintaining the pipeline. Ms. Long stated that she was very frustrated and advised that this project could have been sold not only to Fairview but also to those in Cabarrus County. She stated that instead, they had gone Regular City Council Meeting October 7, 2008 Page 179 through a plethora, of shenanigans. Ms. Long stated that Monroe had tried to bully people into easements, giving some people large amounts of money, and then giving some nothing and ~l devaluing their land. Ms. Long stated that the United States Constitution guaranteed fair market value for land taken for government use. Ms. Long stated that this public hearing should have not been called for until the appraisals had been posted and published so that everyone could see them readily available. She challenged the City to publish this information where all can find it, name the appraiser that performed the appraisals, and his criteria for appraising the land to be taken. Mr. Paul Scoggins, 7209 Concord Highway, stated that he owned 1,700 feet of road frontage that this project would be going through. He stated that he was not against the project and he knew ~~ that the energy was going to be needed. Mr. Scoggins stated that he was against the way the City was going about trying to make the project work. He stated that the City approached him and asked him for right of way for this project. He stated that he asked what was in it for him and he was advised that he could receive approximately $100. Mr. Scoggins stated that this was almost three quarters of an acre and in 2003 he purchased a tract of land off the road approximately 400 feet for $8,300, which was market value. Mr. Scoggins stated that the Union County Tax Assessor accessed this property at $50,588. He questioned whether this was a true assessment and whether he needed another assessment or does he take what is being offered for almost as much land road frontage of $4,800. Mr. Scoggins questioned if this was fair. He stated that the project was not fair and felt the City should go about this in the right way. Mr. Bill Thomas, 9404 Mill Grove Road, addressed Council concerning this matter. As a member of the Fairview Town Council, Mr. Thomas stated that he had received phone calls from citizens advising that someone from the City of Monroe was approaching them and advising that if they did not sell the land, Monroe was going to condemn the property and take the land. Mr. Thomas stated that he was unaware of what was going on; however, he had read about the pipeline going up Highway 74. He stated that he contacted the Observer and they furnished him with an article dated July 6, 2004. He stated that this was the time period when the Mayor was Judy Davis and the City Manager was Doug Spell. Mr. Thomas referenced various statements contained in the article. Mr. Thomas stated that when he discovered Monroe was pursuing this project, the Town of Fairview set up a meeting on September 11, 2007 in which the project consultant, Don Mitchell, Ron Cobb, and City Manager Meadows attended. He stated that this gentleman was trying to condemn the property and he had said that there was no way to hook onto line. However, half way through the meeting, Mr. Meadows advised that the citizens would be able to tap onto the line. Mr. Thomas stated that he spoke with the people in Midland and they advised that the City of ~~ Monroe was going to put a fiber optic line beside the gas line and also offered Midland 15% of the fiber optic space. Regular City Council Meeting October 7, 2008 Page 180 Mr. Thomas stated that there was a meeting scheduled in February 2008 where Monroe officials were supposed to come explain the gas line to the citizens of Fairview. He stated that there were 34 people at this meeting and all but four were property owners. However, no one from Monroe was at the meeting. He advised that the headline in the newspaper read "Mix-up Leads City to Stand Up Fairview." Mr. Thomas stated that Fairview did not know that the meeting was going to be stood up. Mr. Stan Pierczynski, stated that he was speaking on behalf of Hurley Campbell who resided at 109 Brief Road, Indian Trail. He stated that he was helping Mr. Campbell and others in the Town of Fairview to not be taken advantage of by others' doing wrong. Mr. Pierczynski stated that the Town of Fairview needed water and sewer services more than they needed a gas pipeline. He advised that he had witnessed Monroe use intimidation, lying, cheating, and stealing to obtain property that made it useless to anyone but Monroe. He stated that there were other routes and options that could have been considered; however, Monroe refused to think about or consider these options. Mr. Pierczynski stated that compensation was not necessarily what they were talking about. He stated that as much principle and arrogance that came from the City of Monroe, they did not want a piece of Monroe's "pipeline pie" as Council Member Smith had stated in a previous meeting. Mr. Pierczynski stated that this public hearing was just now being called after everything had gone into motion and this was wrong. He stated that maybe this "pie of greed" would be in the City's pockets someday, but not before it might be in their face. Lastly, Mr. Pierczynski stated that a petition opposing the pipeline had already been placed in the hands of officials and apparently the County Commissioners and the City of Monroe chose to ignore that as well. There being no other speakers, Mayor Kilgore closed the public hearing. B. Action -Approval of Installment Financing. Council Member Smith moved that the installment financing of the 2008 Project be approved. The motion was seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Bazemore and was adopted by the following vote: ,~ AYES: Council Members Ashcraft, Jordan, Keziah, Nash, Smith, Mayor Pro Tem Bazemore, and Mayor Kilgore NAYS: None Item No. 12. Zoning Map Amendment Request by Tesha McBeth for Property Located at 309 Lancaster Avenue from R-10 (High Density Residential) to Conditional District "309 Lancaster Avenue." A. Public Hearing. Mayor Kilgore opened the duly advertised public hearing. Assistant City Manager Herron stated that this was a zoning amendment request by Tesha McBeth for .42 acres located at 309 Lancaster Avenue from R-10 (High Density) Residential to Conditional District "309 Lancaster Avenue." He advised that the property as well as adjoining properties were currently zoned R-10 (High Density Residential). Regular City Council Meeting October 7, 2008 Paget 81 Mr. Herron stated that there was currently a 2,404 square foot residence located on the property. He advised that the applicant was requesting a conditional district in order to allow an attorney's office as an allowable use on the property. Ms. McBeth will be the only attorney in this office. There will be six paved parking spaces in the rear of the residence. The property has a variety of mature trees and shrubs. All landscaping requirements including streetscape, parking lot landscaping, and screening buffers will be provided in accordance with the Unified Development Ordinance. In an attempt to address some of the concerns staff has received on this project, Mr. Herron answered the following questions. {~ With regard to Council's support of the zoning in this area and the past rezoning, staff has t '. researched prior records and a rezoning has not occurred in this area within the last nine years. Any requests that came forward have either been detoured or turned away based on the type of use being requested. With regard to this matter being presented to the Historic District Commission and the Downtown Advisory Board, Mr. Herron stated that this property currently was not in the historic district; therefore, this case was not forwarded to the Historic District Commission. With regard to comments to include the property in the historic district, Mr. Herron advised that there had been a request to include the property in the historic district as well as several other properties in the southwest area. This will come before the Planning Board on October 8, 2008. Any recommendation of the Planning Board will come at a later date for cons>deration of Council. Insofar as the Downtown Advisory Board review, the property is not in the identified area that the Downtown Master Plan has specifically covered, and that is under the purview of the Downtown Advisory Board. With regard to Ordinance requirements for posting of the property, Mr. Herron advised that three signs have been posted; however, the signs are being removed from the site. Mr. Herron stated that according to the City's Ordinance and in conjunction with State statute, mail notification went out to the adjoining property owners after the call for the public hearing. With the desire to have the property remain single-family and the request to have the property used as an attorney's office, Mr. Herron advised that this was a case from a land use standpoint where both sides have specific desires as to what they would like the zoning to be; however, from a professional standpoint, both requests are legitimate land uses that could be recommended and that are also within the desires and policies of the City. Mr. Herron displayed and reviewed excerpts from the Land Development Plan with regard to this property. He also shared with Council copies of photographs displaying positive changes being made in the neighborhood area. Regular City Council Meeting October 7, 2008 Page 182 Mr. Herron reviewed the pros and cons of both situations. He advised that if the property were ~~ to remain single-family, pros would include that the predominant land use in the area is residential; the majority of the neighborhood that talked with staff desire single-family; and there is an influx of new ownership and new money that is renovating and bringing the neighborhood back and raising property values. Mr. Herron reported that one of the cons for single-family would include the property being located on ahigh-volume traffic corridor. He advised that these corridors are often the last and most difficult to see interest in true single-family development or redevelopment. While this does not occur at the pace that staff would often like it to, Mr. Herron advised that it can occur. One other con includes a high desire for rental property within residential areas. He advised that rental properties have a higher rate of opportunity for over-occupancy assisting in the decline in property value, increased crime, and ,~"~ increased civil violations with maintenance of grass and other situations that occur with rental 1 properties. When discussing the pros of the attorney's office, Mr. Herron stated that a conditional district stood on its own. He stated that you were strictly looking at whether this use fits this property and fits in as a positive factor in the neighborhood in this location. In addition to looking at whether this request would be a "fit" for this location, timing should also be a consideration. Mr. Herron advised that conditional districts could be locked in and this particular conditional district had specific language that states "attorney's office only" and there could be no other general business uses. He advised that office use would be the only legitimate transitional use that would ever be considered as a conditional district within a neighborhood. Mr. Herron advised that the reason offices can often be considered is that they maintain single- family appearance, the hours of operation are generally nine to five, and they are not nuisances with noise or issues after five o'clock. He advised that there was a high probability of positive upkeep maintenance and appearance with the increased landscaping, and also the possibility for increased property value. Mr. Herron stated that cons would include that this would not be asingle-family use; increased parking; increased impervious surface provided by increased requirement in the rear yard; and potential for increased traffic with incoming customers. Mr. Herron advised that even if the historic district were put in place, the underlying effort would be to preserve uses, the primary effort was to preserve structure. He advised that there could be a variety of uses within the historic district including office use. Mr. Herron advised that the Land Development Committee does not vote on these requests; however, they did feel that this request should be considered and passed it onto the Planning Board. Staff and the Planning Board recommended approval of the request; however,. if the property remained single-family, Mr. Herron felt that the Planning Board would be agreeable with that decision as well. He stated that this situation had two good uses and it needed to be determined which was the better use at this point and time. Regular City Council Meeting October 7, 2008 Page 183 Council Member Ashcraft requested that staff reiterate the controls established by a conditional district versus the site being left residential. Mr. Herron explained that if the site were left ~~ residential, staff hoped that the property would have a good owner that would have a good single-family locate in the home and keep the property up. However, Mr. Herron reiterated that the City did have occupancy problems. Mr. Herron described that a conditional district stipulates exactly what can and cannot be done with the use and it is easier to enforce. In addition, the owner comes in and specifies exactly what the use is that is non-residential. He advised that this one specifically says attorney's office only and there is no other option for any other residential, business, or office-type use. If any other use were to come in, the applicant would have to bring the request before Council and hold a public hearing for the community. ~~ Council Member Smith asked if the traffic would not go down in the area with the completion of M.L. King, Jr. Boulevard. Mr. Herron stated that according to the numbers received from NCDOT, the overall expectation is a reduction of approximately up to 7%; however, there was still going to be a high volume of traffic. Council Member Smith felt this was a very fragile residential area and he questioned whether a conditional district would upset the character of the neighborhood. Mayor Pro Tem Bazemore asked if the request were approved, what value would this have on the surrounding properties. Mr. Herron stated that both uses could have a positive impact. Mayor Pro Tem Bazemore stated that while he understood Council Member Smith's perspective, he felt that a conditional district provided a guarantee of maintaining the value of surrounding properties. He stated that if something was not in place to guarantee this, you would not know when or if something else would be put there that would have a negative impact on the surrounding area and legally, Council would have no authority and would be unable to do anything about the situations that could arise. Mr. Kent Wilkinson, 307 Lancaster Avenue, spoke in favor of this request. He stated that he had resided at his current residence for 18 years. During this time, the home at 309 Lancaster ~~ Avenue has been a rental home or vacant. In addition, Mr. Wilkinson advised that due to the lack of ownership, there had been little done to enhance the home. He stated that this home had been proposed to be in the historic district for the past 15 years and it still had not happened. With regard to traffic on Lancaster Avenue, Mr. Wilkinson stated that in his opinion the traffic had increased and it was not conducive to a residential appeal. He advised that within one block there were residential homes that had been converted to commercial use and have maintained their residential historic appeal. Mr. Wilkinson stated that on Waxhaw Highway, there were several homes that had been converted to business homes and they also have maintained their residential appearance. He shared with Council examples of property values of historic homes. Mr. Wilkinson stated that the lack of home ownership has impacted the home in a negative manner, the increase in traffic has diminished the residential appeal of the home and the presence Regular City Council Meeting October 7, 2008 Page 184 of converted residential homes for commercial uses has proven to be a positive impact in the area, conversion from residential use to commercial use has proven to be beneficial in similar areas and the upkeep and maintenance has and will increase property values as long as the residential feel is kept intact. Attorney Tesha McBeth stated that after graduating from law school in 2001, she came to Monroe to work as an Assistant District Attorney and in 2004 she opened her own practice. She advised that her office was currently located at 110 East Jefferson Street where she rented two rooms. Her predominant practice is family law. The f rm consists of Ms. McBeth and a legal assistant. Attorney McBeth stated that she would like to relocate her firm to 309 Lancaster Avenue and requested that Council approve the rezoning request. ~~ Attorney McBeth stated that when the initial thought came to have her office relocate to 309 Lancaster Avenue, she stated that she spoke to the adjacent property owners in April or May. She stated at that time, there were no major objections and she proceeded to meet with the Land Development Committee who recommended the project. Attorney McBeth advised that the home was built in 1937. She purchased the home in August 2008, and in September met with the Planning Board who also approved the request. Attorney McBeth stated that if Council approved the rezoning request, she would start on renovations which would include improving landscaping, making the structure ADA compliant, re-freshening the exterior by painting, and completing small repairs while preserving the current look and feel of the home. She stated that foliage and new fencing would be added to conceal the parking area. Attorney McBeth advised that both she and her husband are from historic towns and were familiar with the importance of preserving an area's character and this was their plan for the proposed property. Attorney McBeth stated that insofar as the amount of traffic the business would bring to the area, she referred to the Downtown Master Plan's discussion of Lancaster Avenue being one of the gateways to bring people into Monroe. She felt that this street would continue to be highly travelled. Attorney McBeth stated that she normally did not have more than two clients in her office at a time and appointments are usually scheduled on Tuesdays and Wednesdays. On these dates, Attorney McBeth advised that the parking would be behind the home and with the buffers, she did not feel that the cars would be visible. She stated that most homes in the downtown area did not have garages; however, this property had atwo-car garage that would house both her car and her assistant's car. She felt that the cars generated by her business would equal or be less than vehicles found in the surrounding homes. Attorney McBeth addressed financial concerns. She stated that she researched tax values surrounding some of the historic residential homes that house businesses. She reported that there did not appear to have been a negative impact on the surrounding homes. Attorney McBeth felt that this rezoning would be an asset to the community. She stated that her business would be able to endure a financially struggling economy, the business would exist long Regular City Council Meeting October 7, 2008 Page 185 term, and the business would provide the financial means to take care of the property and support the community. Attorney McBeth stated the previous owners purchased the home in 2000 and the home remained vacant for four years. She advised that in 2004, the previous owners rented the home to a family for two and a half years on a rent-to-own basis; however, the family was unable to buy the home. She reported that the home had been vacant since that time. Attorney McBeth requested that Council not compare the office use to the next best use which would be residential. She stated that the fact of the matter was that she was the owner of the property and if the rezoning were denied, she would have to use her financial resources to build her office elsewhere and she would not be able to make any improvements to 309 Lancaster ~, Avenue. The home would become another rental property making Monroe an unattractive and } uncertain market in which to invest. Attorney McBeth stated that according to the City's ordinances, other uses for residences that are zoned R-10 would be a family-care facility of up to six people, nursing care home, church, bed and breakfast, temporary home for the homeless, outdoor recreational facility, or a child care center. She hoped that Council would think that an office would be a more acceptable use. Attorney McBeth stated that when she speaks to someone about this home, people refer to it as saying that when Dr. Ormand owned it, it was the home to see. She stated that she wanted nothing more than to make it this way again. Attorney McBeth stated that the goal of her profession was to attract clients and she could not do that with a shabby office and un-kept lawn; therefore, she would have to make her office and property aesthetically pleasing and if given the opportunity she would do that. Mr. Ed Hord of The Moser Group stated that he was hired by Attorney McBeth to provide an Impact Study on the subject property. In preparing the Impact Study, he stated that he looked at the property, how it fit in with the neighborhood, other land uses, other commercial properties, and how this project would affect other properties insofar as valuations. He provided a brief overview of the Impact Study. His conclusion was that with the plans to keep the home's appearance residential and maintaining the home, this would not negatively affect property values in and of itself. Mr. Tim Ahurs, 408 Lancaster Avenue, stated that he put a lot of money and time into his home and he did so with the understanding that Monroe was supportive of a continued residential redevelopment of the historic district and neighborhoods. He advised that at no time was he given any information that would have warned that there was the possibility of their residential area becoming commercial. He stated that the commercial areas that have previously been referenced are in the areas of Charlotte Avenue and Franklin Street. He stated that his investment, time, labor, expense and commitment was not just to be a property owner, but to also make a dedication to being a committed neighbor and being committed to the community. Mr. Ahurs stated that by allowing the rezoning; this would jeopardize the neighborhood. He stated that if this rezoning was approved, there were other homes in the area that would pursue the same rezoning. He requested that Council deny the request. Regular City Council Meeting October 7, 2008 Page 186 Ms. Ann Standridge, 400 Lancaster Avenue, thanked Mr. Herron for providing a balanced view. She felt that the proposed law office was going to be one small spot surrounded by residential homes. She stated that she and her husband bought their home in 1983 and when they did, Washington Street looked like a slum. Ms. Standridge stated that homes on Washington Street and Crawford Street were now not only privately owned and being developed, but they had been bought by young couples with children and she would like to see this pattern continue. She expressed concern that if one small spot such as the law firm showed up in the middle of the neighborhood, additional business would soon move into the area and might not be as attractive as the proposed law office. Ms. Estelle Snyder, 506 Crawford Street, referenced the Downtown Master Plan and pointed out ~~ the home on 309 Washington Street. She stated that there was no business on Lancaster Avenue between Charlotte Avenue and the Palace Restaurant. She stated that the school district had torn down the houses that were used as offices. Ms. Snyder stated that the demographics in the Master Plan talked about the residents, houses, redevelopment, and the growth in the historic district. She stated that in describing gateways, the Master Plan states that downtown has historic neighborhoods nearby that have seen an increase in reinvestment as more people choose to live near downtown. Ms. Snyder next referenced page 42 of the Master Plan wherein it states that commercial space is available and rents are low. She stated that the commercial space to which they refer is not in the residential district, it is in the downtown area where the ideal is to encourage people to build business offices, to rent business offices, and to be business people in the business district. Ms. Snyder stated that Land Use in the Master Plan advises that one of the planned suggestions was to reinforce existing neighborhoods and to provide additional housing as traditional uses between the core and the existing neighborhoods. She further went on to explain how the Master Plan discusses protecting the existing fabric and preserving it through the promotion of similar form, scale and style of houses. Under Character and Cultural Resources, Ms. Snyder advised that the Master Plan states that character and cultural resources are mainly defined by historic buildings, neighborhoods, gateways, and events. In addition, it further discusses the gateway into the City, as well as Lancaster and Houston Streets where there will be a roundabout. Ms. Snyder stated that along Highway 75, one building after another has fallen to commercial development. She stated that there were no residences. She felt that once a business got into a highway, the streets turn to business. Ms. Snyder recommended that if Council wanted businesses for Lancaster Avenue that they needed to make that known so that no one else was fooled into buying a property, working on it and redeveloping it to find out that it is not being supported by the Council. Ms. Snyder stated that she did not have anything against attorneys. She stated that the project in question was not a home office but rather a commercial use. Ms. Snyder stated that the Regular City Council Meeting October 7, 2008 Page 187 description the Council has been given is between a slum dwelling or an office. She stated that there was another option, creative redevelopment. Ms. Snyder presented Council with a copy of a petition signed by residents who were opposed to the rezoning. Ms. Virginia Bjorlin, 1212 Rosa Drive, stated that she was opposed to the rezoning to accommodate any type of business. She stated that this was a fragile residential area with many historic homes in the area. She stated that although the house was close to downtown, the house was not close to any other business. Ms. Bjorlin felt the Planning Board acted in good faith. She stated that there was no opposition ~`~, expressed because no one knew the Planning Board's agenda or when they met. She asked if t there was not a better way to let neighbors know of a pending rezoning in a residential area rather than the last stop, a public hearing before City Council. Mr. Michael Chambers, 301 Lancaster Avenue, stated that his opinion and his wife's are equal to the opinions in opposition previously expressed by his neighbors. He also expressed concern with the domino effect. Mr. Tracy Nemer, 505 South Washington Street, addressed Council on behalf of his parents. He advised that his family moved into the neighborhood 28 years ago and was one of the first families to move into the area. Mr. Nemer stated that his family had a vision for the neighborhood and began restoring their home. He advised that over the years, the family had seen a change from what was effectively old homes with older residents to a new life that has been injected with new families, children on the streets, and new paint on the homes. Mr. Nemer reported that over 90% of the neighborhood opposed the rezoning. While some of the concerns have been addressed, he advised that one of the biggest concerns to be considered was that there was integrity for the neighborhood and a community has been built. He advised that people came in with good faith and good intentions and it has borne fruit. Mr. Nemer addressed comments regarding property values. He felt a lot of this was attributed to ~1 the development in the community and neighborhood to refurbish these older homes and create an environment that was conducive to family life. Mr. Nemer stated that there were things such as seeing children playing in the yards and greeting neighbors that could not be quantified by value. He advised that loud neighbors had never been an issue with the neighborhood. He stated rather than seeing an office close at five o'clock he would rather see neighbors in the yard and children outside playing. In addition, Mr. Nemer stated that he was not aware of renters being a problem in the neighborhood now or in the past. There being no other speakers, Mayor Kilgore closed the public hearing. B. Action -Motion that Zoning Map Amendment Request be Denied. Council Member Jordan moved BE IT ORDAINED that this property not be rezoned from R-10 (High Density Regular City Council Meeting October 7, 2008 Page 188 Residential) to Conditional District "309 Lancaster Avenue." Council Member Smith seconded the motion, which passed with the following votes: AYES: Council Members Jordan, Nash, Smith, and Mayor Kilgore NAYS: Council Members Ashcraft, Keziah, and Mayor Pro Tem Bazemore Item No. 13. Sk Redhawk Run/Walk at Monroe Middle School. City Manager Meadows stated that Council had received a $5,000 request from Monroe Middle School to help fund the Sk Redhawk Run/Walk. He advised that Monroe Middle School and the Monroe Police Department had developed a partnership bonding the school, community members, and local businesses to establish a health and wellness program. Council did provide $5,000 last year to ~ l offset expenses associated with the Sk Run/Walk. Monroe Middle School Principal Montrino Belton stated that Council had supported this event in the past and requested that Council fund the Sk Run/Walk. He advised that any remaining funds will be used to purchase activity equipment for Monroe Middle School. Council Member Jordan felt that this was a worthy project. If funds were donated, Council Member Jordan would like to see the money used for playground equipment at Monroe Middle School and not be used towards advertising. Mr. Belton stated that more of the proceeds this year would go towards equipment since the course was certified last year and would remain certified for ten years. He advised that they were also seeking other sponsors. Council Member Jordan asked if the Union County Public Schools had been approached about donating fund>ng. Mr. Belton stated that Union County had not been approached. He advised that there were 53 schools in Union County and with each school having events it would be hard to receive funding without providing funding to each school. Mr. Belton stated that this was a partnership that Monroe Middle School was attempting to develop with the City of Monroe. He did advise that Union County Public Schools did provide in-kind services. Council Member Jordan stated that the City had always been very supportive to the schools within the City limits. He stated that the City was in the same position as Union County Public Schools and whenever Council did something for one school it gave another school an ~1 opportunity to come and ask for help and the City was not an endless pool of dollars. He again reiterated that if funds were appropriated that they be used towards the equipment. Council Member Jordan asked if there were any other corporate sponsors. Mr. Belton advised that they had sought corporate sponsorship; however, CMC-Union was the only one so far who advised they would be willing to help. CMC-Union will provide $1,000 to purchase t-shirts. Council Member Nash moved to adopt Budget Amendment BA-2008-34: BUDGET AMENDMENT BA-2008-34 1. Amendment necessary to appropriate fund balance to provide funding for Monroe Middle 5K Run/Walk Regular City Council Meeting October 7, 2008 Page 189 Expenditures: ~""~ Special Appropriations $5,000 Revenues: Appropriation of Fund Balance $5,000 Adopted this 7th day of October, 2008. Council Member Keziah seconded the motion, which passed unanimously with the following votes: AYES: Council Members Ashcraft, Jordan, Keziah, Nash, ~'~ Smith, Mayor Pro Tem Bazemore, and Mayor Kilgore NAYS: None Item No. 14. Funding Reauest to Establish Elementary School Band Program. Council Member Smith stated that he was contacted by Jim Hill, Director of Bands for Monroe elementary schools, to purchase musical instruments for the four elementary schools in Monroe. The purpose of this new program is to bolster the sagging band programs at Monroe Middle School and Monroe High School. He advised Mr. Hill that he would bring the matter before City Council for consideration. Council Member Smith stated that the Council had been a strong supporter of Monroe City schools. In 2006, the City approved $36,000 for band uniforms for the Monroe High School Band Booster Club, approved $11,000 in funding requests from Monroe Middle School the past two years, has invested significant funds towards Walter Bickett Stadium and other park/recreation facilities to complement school programs, and has also supported the Monroe Athletic Association and Police Athletic League. Council Member Smith felt this was a worthy request and asked if Union County Public Schools had agreed to participate with this program. He advised that the intent of the program was to foster a renaissance in bands within the Monroe area schools. Council Member Smith felt that this would ultimately help both the Monroe Middle and Monroe High School bands and would ~, create a pool to foster increased involvement in band. Council Member Jordan asked if this would include all elementary schools within the City. Council Member Smith advised that it would. Council Member Smith asked where the schools would practice. Monroe Middle School Principal Belton stated that he had been involved in this process. He advised that Monroe Middle and Monroe High were economically challenged. He advised that Monroe Middle is 85% to 90% free and reduced lunch which is what the school uses as an indicator for poverty. This means only 10% of the children at Monroe Middle are identified as not being in poverty. Mr. Belton stated that band programs are supported primarily by parents, band booster clubs, and the community. He stated that they had been unable to keep a band program going. He advised that the Monroe High School band was down to approximately 24 students. Regular City Council Meeting October 7, 2008 Page 190 Mr. Belton stated that Monroe Middle approached Dr. Davis about a band program that was comparable to other band programs in other parts of the County. He advised that Union County provided approximately $50,000 to Monroe Middle and Monroe High for this program; however, resources ran out. These funds were used for band instruments, band cases, and repair of old instruments. Mr. Belton stated that this was the reason Mr. Hill was reassigned to Central Academy and now works with the elementary schools. He stated that unfortunately, instruments are not available at the elementary level. Mr. Belton stated that the school system purchased instruments for Monroe Middle School, so any child that attends Monroe Middle and wishes to be in the band can do so. In addition, the middle and high school now have two band directors. Council Member Jordan asked how the children would have access to the instruments. Mr. Belton stated that Mr. Hill will carry the instruments around to the elementary schools. They have surveyed the interest level of the children and they will be divided accordingly. With regard to the specifics of the program, Mr. Belton felt that this could be better addressed by Mr. Hill. Council Member Smith stated that Mr. Hill indicated that there was a band boosters club being organized at Central Academy. Mr. Belton advised that today, Union County provided an additional $10,000 that will be divided between Monroe Middle and Monroe High. Council Member Jordan stated that the school system understands that the students within the Monroe boundaries probably are not as well off as students in other parts of the county. As a tax payer and a citizen, Council Member Jordan felt that if there are additional needs for students to have recreational activities or scholastic opportunities, it is up to the school board to help provide those. Council Member Jordan stated that the school system should ensure that every child in Union County has the same opportunity to play instruments and the school board should provide that as well. Council Member Jordan asked if this request could wait until after the audit to check the status of the General Fund Fund Balance. Finance Director Fatland stated that Council will have the ,~ Financial Statements by the end of October and by November, Council will have an answer on the Fund Balance. Council Member Smith made a motion to defer action on this request until November 4, 2008 to allow the audit to be completed and a determination has been made as to the status of the Fund Balance. Council Member Nash seconded the motion, which passed unanimously with the following votes: AYES: Council Members Ashcraft, Jordan, Keziah, Nash, Smith,. Mayor Pro Tem Bazemore, and Mayor Kilgore NAYS: None Item No. 15. Public Comment Period. There were no speakers. Regular City Council Meeting October 7, 2008 Page 191 There being no further business, the Regular City Council Meeting of October 7, 2008 adjourned at 8:40 p.m. Attest: ~ Y'1~~I~fi~ ~ - ~7~6 ~~ 1/1 ~SlS1~ Bri tte H. Ro inson, City Clerk bby G. 1 re, Mayor Regular City Council Meeting October 7, 2008 Page 192 1 NORTH CAROLINA UNION COUNTY 08/22/08 t NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND CITY OF MONROE MUNICIPAL AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into on the last date executed below, by and WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the Parties have agreed to make certain street and highway constructions and improvements within the Municipality, Union County; and, WHEREAS, the Department and the Municipality are authorized by the following legislation: between the North Carolina Department of Transportation, an agency of the State of North Carolina, hereinafter referred to as the "Department" and the City of Monroe, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as the "Municipality". G.S. 130-66.1 and 136-66.3 to participate in the planning and construction of a project approved by the Board of Transportation for the safe and efficient utilization of transportation systems for the public good; and, WHEREAS, the Department and the Municipality have agreed that the corporate limits of the Municipality, as of the date of the awarding of the contract for the constructio n of the above- mentioned project, are to be used in determining the duties, responsibilities, rights and legal obligations of the parties hereto for the purposes of this Agreement; and, WHEREAS, the Parties to this Agreement have approved the construction of said project with cost participation and responsibilities for the project as hereinafter set out. Regular City Council Meeting October 7, 2008 Exhibit "A" Page 1 of 7 L 2 NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto, each in consideration of the premises and the benefits accruing to the Department and the Municipality as the result of the construction of the 1 Project, it is agreed as follows: SCOPE OF THE PROJECT: This project consists of the realignment work on Goldmine Road (SR 1162) and Sanford Lane (SR 1394) in Monroe. PLANNING AND DESIGN: 2. The Municipality, and/or its consultant, shall prepare the environmental and/or planning document and obtain any environmental permits, and the plans, contractor specifications and estimates (PS&E package) needed to construct the project. All work shall be done in accordance with Departmental standards, specifications, policies and procedures. 3. The Municipality shall design and prepare plans and specifications for the project, in accordance with the Department's standard practices for highway construction. Said plans and specifications are subject to the review and approval by the Department. SMALL PROFESSIONAL AND ENGINEERING SERVICES FIRMS REQUIREMENTS: 4. Any contract entered into with another party to perform work associated with the requirements of this agreement shall contain appropriate provisions regarding the utilization of Small Professional Services Firms (SPSF). This policy conforms with the SPSF Guidelines as approved by the NC Board of Transportation. These provisions are incorporated into this Agreement by reference www.ncdot.orq/doh/preconstruct/ps/contracts/sp/2006sp/municipal html The Municipality shall not advertise nor enter into a contract for services performed as part of this Agreement, unless the DEPARTMENT provides written approval of the advertisement or the contents of the contract. If the Municipality fails to comply with these requirements, the DEPARTMENT will withhold funding until these requirements are met. Regular City Council Meeting October 7, 2008 Exhibit "A" Page 2 of 7 3 UTILITES AND RIGHT OF WAY: 5. The Municipality without any cost or liability whatsoever to the Department, shall relocate and adjust all utilities in conflict with the project. Said utility work to be performed, or provision made therefor, in a manner satisfactory to and in conformance with rules and regulations of the Department prior to the Municipality beginning construction of the project. The Municipality shall make all necessary adjustments to house or lot connections or services lying within the right of way or construction limits, whichever is greater, of the project, whether said connections or services are owned 'by the Municipality or by others. 6. The Municipality, at no expense or liability whatsoever to the Department, shall be responsible for acquiring any needed right of way and/or permanent easements required for said project. Acquisition of right of way shall be accomplished in accordance with the Right of Way Acquisition Policy and Land Acquisition Policy contained in the Federal-Aid Policy Guide, Part 712, Subpart B, and in accordance with policies and procedures set forth in the North Carolina Ri ht g of Way Manual (Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970). The Municipality sha-I remove from said right of way all obstructions and encroachments of any kind or character (including hazardous and contaminated materials). The Municipality shall indemnify and save harmless the Department from any and all claims for damages that might arise on account of said right of way acquisition, and construction easements for the construction of said project. CONSTRUCTION: 7. The Municipality shall construct, or cause to be constructed, the project in accordance with the plans and specifications of said project as filed with, and approved by, the Department. The Municipality shall enter into and shall administer the construction contract for said ~;~roject and the procedures set out herein below shall be followed: Regular City Council Meeting October 7, 2008 Exhibit "A" Page 3 of 7 4 (A) The construction engineering and supervision will be furnished by the Municipality without cost to the Department. (B) The Department's Division Engineer for the Division, at his discretion, may assign a resident engineer to the project who shall have the right to inspect any portion of the work being performed by the Municipality or the Municipality's contractor to ensure compliance with the provisions of this Agreement. The resident engineer will be the Department's representative on the project. The resident engineer will furnish the Municipality with any forms that may be needed in order to follow standard Department practices and procedures in the administration of the contract. (C) Letting of contracts for construction and purchases shall be in accordance with North Carolina General Statute 143-129. (D) The Department's Division Engineer shall have the right to inspect, sample or test, and approve or reject any portion of the project during construction. (E) The Municipality shall sample and test all materials in reasonable close conformity with the Department's Guide for Process Control and Acceptance Sampling and Testing. (F) During construction of the project, if any changes in the plans are necessary, such changes must be approved by the Division Engineer prior to the work being performed. (G) All materials incorporated in the project and workmanship performed by the contractor shall be in reasonable close conformity with the Standards and Specifications of the Department. (H) Upon completion of the project, the Municipality will furnish the Division Engineer with two (2) complete sets of "Plan of Record" plans. (I) Prior to the final acceptance and payment by the Department, the Division Regular City Council 1vleeting October 7, 2008 Exhibit "`A" Page 4 of 7 J 5 Engineer shall make a final inspection of the completed work. The Division Engineer will be responsible for final acceptance of the completed work on behalf of the Department. j~ (J) During construction of the project, the Municipality shall provide and maintain adequate barricades, signs, signal lights, flagmen, and other warning devices for the protection of traffic in conformation with standards and specifications of the Department and the current edition of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways published by the Federal Highway Administration. (K) The Municipality shall complete said work within one (1) year of execution of this agreement. If the Municipality has not completed its responsibilities, or in the opinion of the Department, satisfactory progress has not been made, the unexpended balance of funds may be recalled by the Department and assigned to other projects by the Board of Transportation and the Municipality shall reimburse costs incurred by the Department associated with the Project under the terms of this Agreement. ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS: 8. Subject to compliance by the Municipality with the provisions set forth in this Agreement, the Municipality shall be responsible for all costs identified by provisions "2" through "6" on pages 2 through 5 of this Agreement, and the Department shall not participate in the costs of the Project. Failure on the part of the Municipality to comply with any of these provisions will be grounds for the Department to terminate participation in the costs of the project. 9. It is further agreed that, upon completion of the project, the Department shall own, maintain, and control said Road. 10. It is the policy of the Department not to enter into any agreement with another party that has been debarred by any government agency (Federal or State). The Municipality certifies, by signature of this agreement, that neither it nor its agents or contractors are presently debarred, Regular City Council Meeting October 7, 2008 Exhibit ..q» Page 5 of 7 6 suspended, proposed for debarment, declared ineligible or voluntarily excluded from participation in this transaction by a Federal or State Department or Agency. 11. The Department shall have the right to abandon the project at any time before the Municipality has been called upon to perform any part of its agreement. This Agreement is solely for the benefit of the identified parties to the Agreement and is not intended to give any rights, claims, or benefits to third parties or any person or to the public at large. IT IS UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED that the approval of the project by the Department is subject to the conditions of this Agreement. t ' Regular City Council Meeting October 7, 2008 Exhibit "A" Page 6 of 7 r ' ,.., " y ~Q ' ~,;• q ~ ~ 7 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement has been executed, in duplicate, the day and. year heretofore set out, on the part of the Department and the Municipality by authority duly given. ATTEST: r CITY OF MONROE ,~ BY: e~feJ yl~y1 BY: ri g e i on r ea ow ' TITLE: City C 1 er k TITLE: 10/7/ ;08 DATE: DATE: ». r1,.~08 ~~ Approved by City Council of the City of Monroe as attested to by the signature of Bric$ette H. Robin;song ,Clerk of the City Council on October 7, 2008 ~ ~."~ (Date) ~~~~ ~ ( ' ;,~~ ^"~) ~ This instrument has be e-audited in!I • - The man er req a Local Government +_~' ~ - ~ r;~:~ udget d on of Act. ~~ ; : , ~ ~ti !~ ce Oifii er Federal Tax Identification Number 56- 60012879 City of Monroe Remittance Address: City of Monroe (~ ~ _p o. fox 69;~roe~, Y~G 2al - I-bo6~9 DEPA TMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, BY: ~ ~raD~= l STATE HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATOR i DATE: ~ Wfi~~a-~ ~ 0 `~ PRESENTED TO BOARD OF TRANSPORTATION ITEM O: October 2. 2008 ~, ! Regular City Council Meeting October 7, 2008 Exhibit "A" ~ Page 7 of 7 . . .~~