Alpharetta City Council

Posted Wednesday, August 23, 2006

 E-mail this page    Printer-friendly page

Public Hearing and Council Business Meeting of Mayor and Council, August 21st, 2006

This summary is provided as a convenience and service to the public, media and staff. It is not the intent to record proceedings verbatim. Any reproduction of this summary must include this notice. Public comments are noted as heard by Council, but not quoted or paraphrased. This document includes limited presentation by Council and invited speakers in summary form. This is not an official record of the Alpharetta City Council Meeting proceedings. Official Minutes are recorded and available for review.

I. CALL TO ORDER:

The Mayor called the Meeting to Order.

II. ROLL CALL:

All members of Council were present with the exception of Councilman DeRito who was out of town on business.

III. Pledge to the Flag:

IV. Consent Agenda

A. Minutes Public Hearing 8 - 07 – 06

Executive Session 8 - 14 – 06

Public Hearing 8 - 14 – 06

Council Meeting 8 - 14 – 06

B. Financial Statements for Fiscal Year 2007, Period 1 – July

Motion: Councilmember Gibson moved to approve the minutes from the Public Hearing on 08.07.06, Executive Session on 08.14.06, the Public Hearing on 08.14.06, the Council Meeting on 08.14.06, and the Financial Statements for Fiscal Year 2007, Period 1 July. Councilmember Monson seconded and the motion passed unanimously (6-0)

V. deferred Business:

A. Community Development: Councilmember Debbie Gibson

Presented by Diana Wheeler

1. A-05-16 Douglas Road Annexation (Second Reading)

Consideration of an annexation request for approximately 180-acres of land located on the east and west side of Douglas Road. The property includes Leeward Walk, The Pearl of Alpharetta, Hartsmill Pointe, Calumet, Douglas Downs, and Laurel Cove subdivisions as well as individual properties on Douglas Road. The property is legally described as being located in Land Lots 1124, 1166, 1165, 1123, 1189, 1190, 1232, 1231, 1255, 1256, 2nd District, 1st Section, Fulton County, Georgia.

§ This item was heard at the July 6th Planning Commission and the August 14th meeting.

§ The Planning Commission approved the Douglas Road annexation with zoning classifications and land use designations depicted on attached map subject to the condition that residential subdivisions currently under construction shall be completed in accordance with the plans and development standards approved by Fulton County and shall be assessed impact fees comparable to Fulton County.

§ The adoption of this annexation Ordinance will increase the City’s service area by 175.8 acres, and 381 parcels.

§ There have been no changes from the first to second reading.

§ The City Attorney provided the second reading of the Annexation Ordinance.

§ Diana Wheeler did some research on the naming of the street which is presently named Nasser Street and discovered that only one resident lived on that street.

 

Motion: Councilmember Gibson moved to approve an annexation request for approximately 176-acres of land located on the east and west side of Douglas Road. The property includes Leeward Walk, The Pearl of Alpharetta, Hartsmill Pointe, Calumet, Douglas Downs, and Laurel Cove subdivisions as well as individual properties on Douglas Road. Councilmember Monson seconded and the motion passed unanimously (6-0)

B. Engineering and Public Works: Councilmember John Monson

Presented by John Moskaluk

 

1. Second Reading: 2006 Speed Zone Ordinance

§ The Department of Engineering and Public Works is seeking to amend the existing speed zone ordinance in order to incorporate newly annexed streets, streets that have been renamed and changes to existing speed limits for the purpose of public safety.

§ The City of Alpharetta’s Speed Zone Ordinance was last amended April 19, 2004.

§ Since then numerous streets have been annexed into the City and the names and extents of many roadway segments have been changed due to construction.

§ Per Georgia Uniform Traffic Code, all speed limits on roadways which are to be enforced by municipal law enforcement agencies (using radar detection) must be: submitted to the Georgia Department of Transportation for approval; approved by the municipality; and approved by the Georgia Department of Public Safety.

§ This Council Agenda Item, and the Ordinance Amendment, fulfills (b) above.

§ There is no direct fiscal impact associated with amending this ordinance.

§ If the City does not amend the Speed Zone Ordinance, speed detection devices (i.e., radar) cannot be legally used by the Alpharetta Police Department to enforce speed limits within the City of Alpharetta.

§ Section 1: Amendment. Barnesley Lane, between Grey Abbey Drive and cul-de-sac, is amended by addition to the Ordinance. (25 MPH)

§ Section 2: Amendment. The Canton Street school zone, from 95 feet south of Milton Avenue to 50 feet north of Trailer Street, is amended by modification of the school zone schedule. (25 MPH)

§ Section 3: Amendment. Cape York Trace, between Grey Abbey Drive and cul-de-sac, is amended by addition to the Ordinance. (25 MPH)

§ Section 4: Amendment. Carybell Lane, between North Farm Drive and North Farm Drive, is amended by addition to the Ordinance. (25 MPH)

§ Section 5: Amendment. Cogburn Road, between SR 9 and Intersection of Windward Parkway & Webb Road & Cogburn Road, is amended by addition to the Ordinance. (35 MPH)

§ Section 6: Amendment. Cumming Street, between SR 9 and Westside Parkway, is amended by correction to the Ordinance. (35 MPH)

§ Section 7: Amendment. The Cumming Street school zone, from 95 feet south of Milton Avenue to 50 feet north of Trailer Street, is amended by modification of the school zone schedule. (25 MPH)

§ Section 8: Amendment. Douglas Road, between McGinnis Ferry Road and Highland Glen Drive, is amended by addition to the Ordinance. (45 MPH)

§ Section 9: Amendment. Grey Abbey Drive, between cul-de-sac and cul-de-sac, is amended by addition to the Ordinance. (25 MPH)

§ Section 10: Amendment. Harris Road, between Upper Hembree Road and Rucker Road, is amended by correction to the Ordinance. (35 MPH)

§ Section 11: Amendment. The Haynes Bridge Road school zone, from 95 feet south of Milton Avenue to 50 feet north of Trailer Street, is amended by modification of the school zone schedule. (25 MPH)

§ Section 12: Amendment. Haynes Bridge Road, between SR 120 and 189 feet north of Haynes Forrest Drive, is amended by modifying the extents of the road. (45 MPH)

§ Section 13: Amendment. Kimball Bridge Road, between Westside Parkway and 739 feet west of State Bridge Road, is amended by modifying the extents of the road. (35 MPH)

§ Section 14: Amendment. The Kimball Bridge Road school zone, from 95 feet south of Milton Avenue to 50 feet north of Trailer Street, is amended by modification of the school zone schedule. (25 MPH)

§ Section 15: Amendment. Mayfield Circle, between Mayfield Road and cul-de-sac, is amended by addition to the Ordinance. (25 MPH)

§ Section 16: Amendment. Mayfield Manor Drive, between Mayfield Road and cul-de-sac, is amended by addition to the Ordinance. (25 MPH)

§ Section 17: Amendment. Mayfield Road, between SR 9 and Freemanville Road, is amended by modifying the extents of the road. (35 MPH)

§ Section 18: Amendment. The Mayfield Road school zone, from 95 feet south of Milton Avenue to 50 feet north of Trailer Street, is amended by modification of the school zone schedule. (25 MPH)

§ Section 19: Amendment. The Milton Avenue school zone, from 95 feet south of Milton Avenue to 50 feet north of Trailer Street, is amended by modification of the school zone schedule. (25 MPH)

§ Section 20: Amendment. North Farm Drive, between Houze Road/SR 140 and Carybell Lane, is amended by addition to the Ordinance. (25 MPH)

§ Section 21: Amendment. Park Bridge Parkway, between Webb Bridge Road and 400 feet south of Autumn Sage Drive, is amended by addition to the Ordinance. (30 MPH)

§ Section 22: Amendment. Park Bridge Parkway, between 400 feet south of Autumn Sage Drive and SR 120, is amended by addition to the Ordinance. (35 MPH)

§ Section 23: Amendment. Rucker Road, between Wills Road and Spring Place Lane, is amended by modifying the extents of the road. (35 MPH)

§ Section 24: Amendment. Sandridge Court, between Tuxford Drive and cul-de-sac, is amended by addition to the Ordinance. (25 MPH)

§ Section 25: Amendment. Sugar Valley Trail, between Waters Road and cul-de-sac, is amended by addition to the Ordinance. (25 MPH)

§ Section 26: Amendment. Tuxford Drive, between Kimball Bridge Road and Sandridge Drive, is amended by addition to the Ordinance. (25 MPH)

§ Section 27: Amendment. The Warsaw Road school zone, from 95 feet south of Milton Avenue to 50 feet north of Trailer Street, is amended by modification of the school zone schedule. (25 MPH)

§ Section 28: Amendment. Waters Road, between Kimball Bridge Road and 335 feet north of Jones Bridge Road, is amended by addition to the Ordinance. (35 MPH)

§ Section 29: Amendment. The Webb Bridge Road school zone, from 95 feet south of Milton Avenue to 50 feet north of Trailer Street, is amended by modification of the school zone schedule. (25 MPH)

§ Section 30: Amendment. The Webb Bridge Road school zone, from 95 feet south of Milton Avenue to 50 feet north of Trailer Street, is amended by modification of the school zone schedule. (25 MPH)

§ Section 31: Amendment. The Webb Bridge Road school zone, from 95 feet south of Milton Avenue to 50 feet north of Trailer Street, is amended by modification of the school zone schedule. (25 MPH)

§ Section 32: Amendment. Westside Parkway, between Sanctuary Parkway and Old Milton Parkway, is amended by addition to the Ordinance. (40 MPH)

§ Section 33: Amendment. Windward Parkway, between Cogburn Road and North Point Parkway, is amended by addition to the Ordinance. (35 MPH)

§ Section 34: Amendment. Windward Parkway, between North Point Parkway and McGinnis Ferry Road, is amended by modifying the extents of the road. (45 MPH)

§ Section 35: Pursuant to Georgia Code 40, Article 9, Section 40-6-183 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated concerning local authorities power to alter lawful speed limits, the following ordinance regulating speed limits within the City of Alpharetta, Fulton County, Georgia is adopted.

§ Section 36: This Ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its adoption, and shall repeal any ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict therewith. This ordinance shall become part of the Code of the City of Alpharetta.

§ The City Attorney provided the second reading of the ordinance.

Motion: Councilmember Paine moved to amend the existing speed zone ordinance in order to incorporate newly annexed streets, streets that have been renamed and changes to existing speed limits for the purpose of public safety. Councilmember Gibson seconded and the motion passed unanimously (6-0)

V. NEW BUSINESS

A. Engineering & Public Works - Presented by Dr. John Moskaluk

 

1. Roadway and Greenway through Downtown

 

§ The Engineering and Public Works Department is seeking Council’s approval of Gresham Smith and Partner’s proposal for additional design work to prepare a set of construction plans specifically for the greenway in accordance with the Transportation Enhancement requirements and additional turn lanes and median breaks for the roadway project along Old Milton Parkway, in the amount of $111,416.89.

§ On February 21, 2005, the Alpharetta City Council approved the design of a roadway from Old Milton Parkway to Milton Avenue to Gresham Smith and Partner’s (GS&P).

§ Included with the proposal was the design of a greenway path and a roadway from Old Milton Parkway to Milton Avenue.

§ Through preliminary design with GS&P and City staff, the scope of work has increased and additional funding from Georgia Department of Transportation (GDOT) has been received.

§ The increase in the scope of work is due to designing a full signalized intersection at Old Milton Parkway, road re-aligning/closing, and a more comprehensive and detailed design of the proposed greenway.

§ Recently, the City of Alpharetta was awarded Transportation Enhancement (TE) funding from the Georgia Department of Transportation in the amount $800,000.00 for the construction of a greenway.

§ Transportation Enhancement funds follow a strict protocol and process. Numerous steps must be followed during the TE process including: preparing a conceptual report, various environmental studies, public hearings, obtaining appropriate right-of-way and additional submittals of the plans to GDOT for its review and approval.

§ Following this strict protocol causes two things to occur: increase the design time line and increase the amount of work the design team must complete.

§ Also, the next step in the design process can not begin until the current step has been approved by GDOT.

§ A typical TE funded project takes approximately two years to complete the design plus the time required to acquire the needed right-of-way.

§ The reason for the additional time is because the design team can’t work on the project while the right-of-way is being acquired.

§ One facet of the revised scope of the project is beautifying the existing detention pond adjacent to the proposed greenway.

§ The existing detention pond currently constructed, is very simplistically designed for the Marietta Street Townhome development.

§ The pond was not designed to be an aesthetically pleasing amenity.

§ Since the pond will be an integral part of the greenway, aesthetics of the pond are extremely important. Conceptually, the greenway will wrap around a portion of the pond to minimize any impact to neighboring residences.

§ The new proposed pond will be designed in such a fashion to enable individuals to sit near the pond and enjoy the surroundings with lush landscaping in the vicinity.

§ Additionally, the pond will bring some flood relief to the citizens downstream of the development.

§ Currently, numerous residence flood due to the water discharging out of the stream banks.

§ Minimizing the downstream flooding can be accomplished by detaining stormwater and holding it for a longer period of time.

§ Gresham Smith and Partners has accomplished numerous tasks through the Transportation Enhancement (TE) funding process and are extremely knowledgeable about the process and requirements of the program.

§ Utilizing a firm with Gresham Smith’s experience in (TE) process is a vital component in successfully designing the project.

§ Funds in the amount of $111,416.89 for this project are available under the Downtown Greenway bond account.

§ Public comment was invited.

§ Marty Cleypool came forward to comment on this greenway.

 

Motion: Councilmember Monson moved to approve the Gresham Smith and Partner’s proposal for additional design work to prepare a set of construction plans specifically for the greenway in accordance with the Transportation Enhancement requirements and additional turn lanes and median breaks for the roadway project along Old Milton Parkway, in the amount not to exceed $111,416.89. Councilmember Gibson seconded and the motion passed unanimously (6-0)

 

2. Janitorial Services Contract, Bid No. 06-015

 

§ The Engineering and Public Works Department is seeking to award Bid No. 06-015 to Building Maintenance Services for a two-year contract in the amount of $132,480.00 and authorize the Mayor to execute all necessary documents.

§ The City advertised for competitive bids for the Janitorial Services Contract at 11 City facilities as follows:

§ City Hall Building

§ Engineering/Public Works Building

§ Police Department Headquarters

§ Eagle Village Gymnasium

§ Gymnastics Center

§ Fire Department Headquarters

§ E-911 Building

§ Community Development Office

§ Parks Administration

§ Community House

§ Park Services Office

§ The area types to be maintained on a daily basis at the various locations include:

§ Entrances

§ Administrative Areas

§ Lobbies/Lounges

§ Corridors

§ Restrooms

§ Break Rooms

§ Food Service Areas

§ Computer Rooms

§ Work Rooms

§ Mail Rooms

§ Council Room

§ Exterior Walkways/Steps

§ Patios (within 50-feet of building entrance)

§ In addition to daily cleaning, there are some tasks that would be performed on a weekly or monthly basis.

§ Examples include spray buffing or burnishing floors coated with floor finish (weekly), and vacuuming exterior HVAC ducts, grills and register surfaces (monthly).

§ The City received bids ranging from $97,147.20 to $247,473.12 that were opened on May 25, 2006. The apparent low bidder was Forum Cleaning Services.

§ The chart below lists the contractors and their price for a two-year contract:

§ Forum Cleaning Services $97,147.20 – Withdrew Bid

§ China Maids $120,000.00 - Non-responsive/Non-responsible

§ Building Maintenance Services $132,480.00

§ Bryant Commercial Solutions $133,773.08

§ GA BMSI $135,907.88

§ Great Maintenance Enterprises $150,355.00

§ FMS $153,600.00

§ GMI Group $247,473.12

§ Staff conducted a pre-ward meeting with Forum Cleaning Services on June 14, 2006 to review the scope of work and confirm their price reflected the required work to be accomplished.

§ At the meeting Forum informed staff they would stand by their price.

§ However, in the days before the Council meeting to award the contract to Forum a representative from Forum Cleaning Services informed staff it made an error and would be unable to do the amount of work required in the scope of work at its current bid.

§ Thus, Forum Cleaning Services withdrew its bid and staff went to the next lowest bidder, China Maids.

§ Upon examining China Maids bid, staff noticed they did not submit proof of insurance with its bid as instructed.

§ Staff felt this was an oversight and went on to check references of China Maids.

§ When China Maids references were contacted, staff was informed by the references they no longer utilized China Maids services

§ Thus, staff concluded China Maids was a non-responsible and non-responsive bidder.

§ Staff then proceeded to the next lowest bidder, Building Maintenance Services.

§ After reviewing their proposal and verifying they met all of the requirements specified in the project manual, staff went onto the next step, a pre-award meeting.

§ Staff conducted a pre-award meeting with Building Maintenance Services on July 28, 2006 to discuss the scope of work, coordination with City staff, procedures for monitoring work performance and the proposed work schedules.

§ Engineering and Public Works staff will monitor the contractor’s performance, take any complaints from designated contacts at each City facility and forward them to the Contractor for disposition.

§ Building Maintenance Services assured City staff that quality control would be in-place ensuring that the City would be pleased with their work.

§ Further, Building Maintenance Services agreed to furnish adequate staff to perform the cleaning services outlined in the bid documents.

§ Building Maintenance Services is the current contractor for the janitorial contract for the City.

§ Numerous departments have praised Building Maintenance Services for its quality of work and the manner issues are resolved.

§ Specifically, issues that occur receive the up most attention from the area manager.

§ Overall, Building Maintenance Services have exceeded staff’s expectations and staff is looking forward to working with Building Maintenance Services for the coming years.

§ In summary, Building Maintenance Services informed staff that it fully understands the City’s expectations and is looking forward to continuing its working relationship with the City.

§ Staff determined Building Maintenance Services is more than capable of providing the City continued janitorial services at various City locations.

§ Therefore, Building Maintenance Services is the most responsive, responsible bidder.

§ Funds in the amount of $132,480.00 are available for janitorial services the Maintenance Contract account.

§ The Council asked questions of staff.

§ The City pays approximately $120,000 per year presently.

§ Councilwoman Gibson asked if the building in the new contract will be the same as what are being cleaned now. The answer was yes.

§ Public comment was invited. No member from the public came forward for comment.

 

Motion: Councilmember Monson moved to award Bid No. 06-015 to Building Maintenance Services for a two-year contract in the amount not to exceed $132,480.00 and authorize the Mayor to execute all necessary documents. Councilmember Gibson seconded and the motion passed unanimously (6-0)

 

3. FY 2007 Milling and Resurfacing, Bid No. 07-001

 

§ The Engineering and Public Works Department is seeking to award Bid No. 07-001 to C.W. Matthews Contracting Co., Inc. in the amount of $2,446,179.06 and authorize the Mayor to execute all necessary documents.

§ Each year the City budgets dollars to place towards milling and resurfacing various roads within the City.

§ Accomplishing this task enables the roads useful life to be extended and increase the roads ability to handle the City’s growing traffic volume. City staff, with the input from Council has selected two roads, North Point Parkway and Webb Bridge Road to address this year.

§ The City will resurface Webb Bridge Road from Lake Windward Drive to Maid Marion Close. North Point Parkway, between Haynes Bridge Road and Mansell Road, will have four lanes milled and resurfaced and two lanes will be reconstructed.

§ The travel lanes adjacent to the commercial developments will be reconstructed through the use of a process called soil cement.

§ These two lanes will be milled four inches and then the next nine inches will be pulverized and injected with cement and then placed back down on the road.

§ When this occurs, the base of the road is extremely strong and supports greater vehicular loads on the road without road failure.

§ After the cement has cured for seven days the lane is ready to have a surface coat placed on it.

§ The other four lanes will be milled three inches and resurfaced with four inches.

§ In order to accommodate commercial development along North Point Parkway the work at the signalized intersections will occur at night to ease the impact for businesses and patrons.

§ Driveways along North Point Parkway will remain closed throughout the duration of the project.

§ City staff has worked with the Community Development Department to notify the owners of businesses along North Point Parkway about the upcoming construction project.

§ The Department of Engineering/Public Works prepared a request for bids for the two roads.

§ The City advertised for competitive bids for the Annual Milling and Resurfacing Contract and held a mandatory pre-bid meting on Tuesday July 18, 2006, to answer any questions contactors may have.

§ Bids for the project were received on August 10, 2006, and the City received a total of two bids from the following:

§ C.W. Matthews Contracting Co., Inc. $ 2,446,179.06

§ Stewart Brothers, Inc. $ 3,014,180.00

§ C.W. Matthews Contracting Co., Inc. was determined to be the lowest responsive, responsible bidder.

§ Staff checked references of the low bidder - C.W. Matthews Contracting Co., and was informed they successfully completed several milling and resurfacing projects in the metro Atlanta area. Last year C.W. Matthews Contracting completed the milling and resurfacing project for the City of Alpharetta.

§ The project consisted of nine roads and construction costs were over $900,000.00.

§ The project was accomplished on schedule, and the only change orders that occurred during the project were due to unforeseen conditions, poor sub-grade material. C.W. Matthews performed their work in a very professional manner and informed City staff about any field conflicts prior to commencing work.

§ By informing staff of field issues, problems were resolved in a timely manner which enabled the project to remain on schedule. Currently, C.W. Matthews is under contract with the City for the construction of Westside Parkway Phase III Section 2.

§ Though the project started July 24, 2006, C.W. Matthews has worked diligently to ensure the project stays on schedule.

§ Overall C.W. Matthews was an excellent contractor to work with, thus staff determined C.W. Matthews Contracting Co., Inc. is the lowest responsive and responsible bidder.

§ Because this is a unit price contract, progress payments to the contractor will be based on the quantity of work completed for each item based on the values submitted by the contractor in its bid to the City.

§ The City’s representative will verify the quantity is correct prior to approving the payment.

§ Once a contract with C.W. Matthews Contracting Company has been finalized and executed, construction can begin immediately.

§ With the impending holiday season, construction will begin on September 5, 2006 to ensure the work on North Point Parkway is accomplished by October 30, 2006.

§ Funds in the amount of $2,446,179.06 are available in the Milling and Resurfacing capital account.

§ The Council asked questions of staff.

§ Councilman Monson stated that C.W. Matthews is a good contracting company who has a vested interested in providing a durable roadway within a reasonable timeline from September 5th to the end of October.

§ The City Council requested that a press release be issued to advise the public of this activity.

§ The distribution of the L.A.R.K. funds have been deferred due to the lack of funding available.

§ There will be inconveniences and there will be delays even though most f the work will be done between 9:00 pm and 6:00 am.

§ Public comment was invited.

§ Marty Cleypool came forward with some suggestions.

 

Motion: Councilmember Monson moved to award Bid No. 07-001 to C.W. Matthews Contracting Co., Inc. in the amount not to exceed $2,446,179.06 and authorize the Mayor to execute all necessary documents. Councilmember Gibson seconded and the motion passed unanimously (6-0)

 

B. Financial Services - Presented by Carol Wolfe

1. Georgia Fund 1 State Investment Pool Resolution

§ The Finance Department is requesting the adoption of a resolution authorizing the deposit of funds for investment purposes into the Georgia Fund 1 state investment pool.

§ The City’s financial policies call for investment of excess cash in a manner designed to maximize interest revenue and maintain the safety and liquidity of cash assets.

§ In 1980, the State legislature created an investment mechanism for local governments called the Georgia Fund 1 (Georgia Code Section 36-83-1).

§ The Georgia Fund 1 is a public sector mutual fund for Georgia cities, counties, and school districts and was created to allow local governments to consolidate and invest idle funds.

§ Participants in essence own a prorata interest in the securities pool based on their level of participation.

§ The Fund’s primary objective is the preservation of capital contributions with yield maximization the secondary objective.

§ The Funds allowable investments mirror those investments that can be purchased directly by local governments.

§ Those investments include obligations issued, insured or guaranteed by the federal government (treasury bills, etc.), bankers acceptance and repurchase agreements. By consolidating funds from all pool participants, local governments can receive a higher rate of return on investments than they possibly would receive by investing individually.

§ The funds are not locked into longer maturities, so the liquidity is flexible.

§ The Georgia Fund 1’s investment policies are established by the State Depository Board and operations are administered by the Office of Treasury and Fiscal Services Division of the Georgia Department of Administrative Services.

§ The Finance Department provided additional information on fund fees, performance, and profile.

§ Staff recommends approval of a resolution giving the Finance Department the option of investing funds with the Georgia Fund 1 State Investment Pool.

§ The City Attorney read the Resolution.

§ Public comment was invited. No member of the public came forward for comment.

§ The Council asked additional questions.

§ Councilwoman Gibson confirmed that two signatures will be needed for transactions.

§ The Council believes that investing the money for a short period of time is beneficial to operations in order to cover anticipated expenditures.

 

Motion: Councilmember Aiken moved to adopt a resolution authorizing the deposit of funds for investment purposes into the Georgia Fund 1 state investment pool. Councilmember Belle Isle seconded and the motion passed unanimously (6-0).

 

C. Administration - Presented by Bob Regus & Sam Thomas

 

1. A Resolution Authorizing the Purchase of Certain Fulton County Property (Property of Fulton County, Georgia – 95 Academy Street)

 

§ The City Administrator Bob Regus presented this item to the Council.

§ The last piece of property to acquire to complete the City’s portion of the deal for the City Hall project is the old Fulton County Health Center.

§ The County uses the building for water crew purposes.

§ In March or 2006, the City Council approved a Resolution to offer Fulton County $159,000 for the property.

§ Since that time the County countered the City’s offer recommending we settle on a value of $220,000.

§ The property is worth $220,000 based on an earlier appraisal.

§ The County Manager expects to put this item before the Board of Commissioners at the September 6th, 2006 Commission Meeting.

§ The City Attorney read the Resolution.

§ Public comment was invited. No member of the public came forward for comment.

Motion: Councilmember Gibson moved to approve the resolution authorizing the purchase of 95 Academy Street in the amount of $220,000. Councilmember Monson seconded and the motion passed unanimously (6-0).

V. CITIZENS’ COMMENTS

§ Marty Cleypool of 61 Wills Drive came forward to discuss the need to have citizen comments regardless of when the comment cards are turned in or how many get turned in.

§ He also commented on the discussion that took place last week during the John Smoltz Baseball Complex and impacts to existing softball programs.

§ He also spoke on monies available for sidewalks for Wills Drive that are being spent on the downtown greenway that could be diverted.

VI. REPORTS:

A. New Residents happy to be annexed

Presented by Mayor Letchas

 

§ Residents from Providence Place sent a thank you letter thanking the City for their services.

VII. ADJOURNMENT

Discuss this story in our forum...


Sponsored Links: