HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-26-1974 SS
I
I
I
SPECIAL MEETING
2-26-74
PRESENT: Mayor Vandergrift, Comms. Crawford, Hamby, Harper and
Lyle.
ABSENT:
None.
1 .
Mr. McClendon came on behalf of Orange County stating he had
been instructed by his office to inform the council that the
County wants Flewelling Rd. restored to its' original condition
before Hodes Construction began construction in that area.
Mr. Cowherd came before Council stating that Orange County
contends Flewelling Rd. is their road and they had instructed
Hodes to pave the North 9' of said road yet the City had made
Hodes put up a performance bond of twice the amount of paving
said road. Mr. Cowberd also stated he would give the City
52300.00 toward the cost of paving Flewelling Rd, but he ask
that the road be paved to the County's satisfication (Basic
Asphalt had stated to the City Manager it would cost 53900.00
to pave Flewelling Rd. correctly.)
lYlr. and Mrs. Varnes of said area came before Council
contending that Flewelling Rd. was a good road until Hodes Con-
struction tore it up. The City Attorney informed Mr. Cowherd
that the City Council had read the letter from Hodes Con st. at
their last meeting but that the City had not entered into any
agreement with Hodes. Comm. Hamby suggested that Hodes pay the
$2300 and Orange County pay the difference to pave entire road.
Hodes Const. Attorney, Mr. Hornsby, came before Council
stating Comm. Hamby's suggestion was a very good one and he
felt the City should pursue this course.
Mr. Varnes stated to council if something was not done a-
bout the condition of said road very soon he intended to bring
charges against City, County, and Hodes for damages done to
his property and repaired at his expense.
There was much discussion concerning the ownership of
Flewelling Rd. Comm. Lyle stated if cutting off Hodes Const.
building permits was the only way to get the road paved he was all
for doing so. Attorney Hornsby stated if this was dOne it would
result in a ~million dollar law suit. City Attorney in answer
to Mr. Hornsby stated no one had a right to building permits if
they operated to the detriment of the City. City Attorney asked
I
I
I
-2-
2.
Mr. Cowherd if the City could get a firm bid of $3900.00 to
pave said street would Hodes Const. pay that? Mr. Cowherd
stated he was not in a position to make that offer.
Comm. Harper made a motion to support Orange County in their
action with Hodes CORst. in restoring Flewelling Rd. in its entirety
to a condition acceptable by the County with a final report to be
submitted to the City within 30 days, seconded by Comm. Crawford.
Unanimous.
The Mayor called a five minute recess.
~ White Rd. - Mr. Folsom of Bel-Airs Subdivision came before
Council stating he had received a bill from the City in the a-
mount of $13,116.45 for what the City contends is his share
(ithe cost) of paving White Rd. Mr. Folsom contends all he ~
ever agreed to pay was his share of paving said road which he
contends is $8,636.00(l056' assessed footage), while the City
contends that Bel-Aire was to pay one quarter, Kent Tyus one
quarter and the City would pay one half as is reflected in the
minutes of 9-18-73 Council meeting.
The City Manager played the Commission meeting tapes of
11-21-72 and 9-18-73. The aforementioned tapes revealed that
Mr. Goodman of Bel-Aire West committed his company to pay a
fair share of the paving on Lakewood Ave. The information on
~
the tapes also indicated Mr. Tyus was present at 9-18-73
-~
meetlrlg and in c6mpTete- a-gree~~~t o~f- pav(ng his one quarter share
of tI1f1ite Rd. The 'city Manager stated that on the morning be-
fore the 9-18-73 meeting he met with Mr. Tyus and Mr. Folsom
and they discussed the aforementioned and it was his under-
standing that they were in agreement as to what portion each
would pay. There was much discussion on this matter.
The City Attorney suggested having another meeting with
Mr. Folsom and Mr. Tyus present and before that meeting he would
check on the laws pertaining to Leins to adjacent properties and
assessment possibilities. The City Attorney asked Mn Folsom if
he would pay the $8636.00 now and negotiate on the remainder of
$13,116.45. Mr. Folsom stated before he made any payment he wanted
this matter settled.
~
After much discussion it was decided that the City Attorney
would research and recommend a recourse on Leins and assessments
at next Council meeting. It was also decided that Mr. Folsom
would be assessed the 5% recreation fee immediately. Mr. Folsom
stated the purchase value of ~aid property was $120,000.00
I
I
I
-3- .
The City Manager stated this recreational assessment would be
$6000.00.
Comm. Hamby made a motion to pQint the new
Bell #361 and to look into the cost df painting
tank the same color, seconded by Comm. Harper.
water tank Blue
the old water
Unanimous.
The Mayor declared the meeting adjourned at 10155 P.M.
c;~~ Q G~
.City erk
-r:rs~d+r