Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-05-2015 regular meeting City Council of Peachtree City Meeting Minutes February 5, 2015 7:00 p.m. The Mayor and Council of Peachtree City met on Thursday, February 5, 2015, at City Hall. Mayor Vanessa Fleisch called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Other Council Members attending: Terry Ernst, Eric lmker, Mike King, and Kim Learnard. Announcements, Awards, Special Recognition Fleisch recognized outgoing volunteer board members Bill Rial, Airport Authority, 2009 - 2014; Shayne Robinson, Recreation & Special Events Advisory Board, 2007 - 2014; and Andrew Dunn, Convention & Visitors Bureau- Recreation Venue, 2013-2014. FCDA Report- Emily Poole Emily Poole, business retention and expansion manager at the Fayette County Development Authority (FCDA), gave an update on FCDA activities during the last quarter, noting the recent "win" of Osmose Utilities and the decision to move its United States corporate headquarters to Peachtree City. Not many of the employees were planning to move, so Poole said more than 100 jobs would be created. A local development firm would build the complex, and there had been a significant capital investment by Osmose Utilities. She expected three more projects to be announced soon representing the aerospace/aviation, manufacturing, and corporate headquarters (relocation) sectors. Poole's projects from FY 2015 included workforce development, training assistance, expansion plans, tax credit assistance, regulatory questions, real estate, and acting as a liaison between state and regional partners. The sectors that were assisted included aerospace/aviation, advanced manufacturing, film industry, corporate headquarters, and research and development/high-tech engineering. Requests for information (RFIs) and recruitment inquiries had come from corporate headquarters, aerospace/aviation, and advanced manufacturing. Poole continued the Georgia Office of Economic Development, Georgia Power Company, Georgia EMC, and direct contact from the companies themselves were sources for leads. The targeted industries were corporate headquarters, research and development centers, advanced manufacturing, film, high tech/software/IT, and aerospace aviation. Minutes January 9, 2015, Retreat Minutes January 15, 2015, Regular Meeting Minutes King moved to approve the January 9, 2015, Retreat minutes as written. Learnard seconded. Motion carried unanimously. Ernst moved to approve the January 15, 2015, regular meeting minutes as written. King seconded. Motion carried 4-0-1(Fleisch). Consent Agenda 1. Consider Increase in Administrative Fee for Municipal Court lmker moved to approve the Consent Agenda. Ernst seconded. Motion carried unanimously. Old Agenda Items 03-14-04 Discuss Subdivision Entrance Sign Replacement Policy City Council Minutes February 5,2015 Page 2 Community Services/Public Services Director Jon Rorie reminded Council there had been a workshop on this topic in 2014. One of the items from the workshop was to conduct a survey to see what the residents wanted, and 231 people responded to a survey on the City's website on subdivision signs. The results were: 28% supported continuing the current process of maintaining/replacing as needed, 20% supported setting a dollar limit for sign maintenance/replacement, 16% supported making signs the neighborhoods' responsibility, 14% supported establishing a standard entry sign, 11% supported allowing subdivisions to upgrade signs with an agreement, and 9%supported removing signs as they age. Rorie continued that the idea was to come up with a plan of action and the most cost-effective approach to making repairs. Without a policy, staff was left to make decisions on a case-by- case basis. He noted that most of the subdivisions had one or more entrance signs installed in the City's rights-of-way. The development procedures required two-year maintenance agreements by the developer for the signs. After those two years, the maintenance responsibility for the signs and landscaping was transferred to the City. Forty-one subdivisions had homeowners associations (HOAs) that were maintaining signs and entrances, and the City was responsible for 157 subdivision entrances (171 signs). The City did not maintain irrigation or lighting systems. Some of the signs were small, basic, and simple, while others were large, fancy, and grand, according to Rorie. There were three construction types - masonry, EFTS/foam/stucco, and wood. The maintenance/replacement requirements for masonry signs were low, and 78 of the signs were masonry. Fifty-six signs were EFIS/foam/stucco, and the maintenance replacement demand was moderate. Wood had the highest maintenance/replacement demand, and 34 of the signs were wood. Rorie showed photos of several recent sign repairs, most of which involved only a good cleaning and given a fresh coat of paint. He noted that the outsourced repair quote for the sign at Southern Trace had been $3,035 to repair the stucco and repaint the sign and lettering. The City repaired it at one-third of the cost or less. He also showed two examples of replacement signs, noting the quote for an EFIS/faux stone sign was $3,200. The quote for a masonry sign with wood inserts was $2,850. Some subdivisions had taken ownership of their entrances and had taken on the responsibility of purchasing items that were needed for entrances that had design elements in addition to the subdivision sign or replacing electric lights with solar lighting. Rorie said two possible policies had been provided to Council for consideration, and he would like to add the adoption of a policy to an agenda in the near future. Option 1 was for the City to replace and maintain signs throughout the City. Draft 2 was for the City to discontinue the past practice of maintaining or replacing subdivision signs and landscaping and require residents of the individual neighborhoods to assume this responsibility. Funding ($25,000) was earmarked in the FY 2015 budget for cleaning, painting/repair, and replacement of subdivision signs. The key questions for Council were whether the City should expend funds for subdivision sign maintenance, how much, and the maximum amount per sign. Another question was what the standard sign should be - masonry, EFIS/foam, or wood. The last question was whether or not the City could transfer responsibility for maintenance to the subdivision residents. For a subdivision to take over its own maintenance and landscaping, 51% of the residents had to agree to do so. Rorie explained that when a subdivision sign was in such a state of disrepair that it had to be removed, the homeowners would be notified before the removal so they could make a decision on whether or not to take over the maintenance. The subdivision could be City Council Minutes February 5,2015 Page 3 eligible for a "grant" to help with replacement, but from that point on, the City would no longer maintain the sign or landscaping. Fleisch asked Rorie how the signs were being chosen for maintenance, saying the signs along Peachtree Parkway were very visible. Rorie said the first option was always to repair and maintain the sign, not to replace it. City Manager Jim Pennington reminded Council that a number of subdivision signs were maintained by the HOAs. Those residents were paying the same taxes as the subdivisions without HOAs and were also paying to maintain their own signs. It was a question Council should answer as it was a policy decision. Learnard noted that the survey results ran the gamut, asking Rorie for his recommendation. Rorie agreed with Pennington that there would be residents who did not want to pay for another subdivision's sign since they were taking care of their own. He asked what would happen if all the subdivision signs were torn out. The signs gave distinctive characteristics to the subdivisions. The City should move forward with a policy and cap the costs, identify a standard sign, and replace them over the years. However, Rorie said the city did not install or maintain annual flowers at any of the subdivisions. Fleisch pointed out that the signs had not been maintained for a long time, which was why they were looking so bad. Rorie said there were limitations on what Public Works could do, but once they had worked on a sign, the feedback had been immediate and positive. Fleisch said she wanted the City to continue to maintain the signs, adding she would like another Glenloch Village sign at the intersection of Peachtree Parkway/SR 54. The original sign had been removed because of visibility issues. Rorie proposed Council move forward with Draft 1 of the policy, which would standardize the signs upon replacement. He said he would add the policy to one of the next few agendas. Imker asked how some subdivisions ended up with the responsibility of maintaining the signs and entrances, while others did not. Rorie said there were subdivisions that did not form an HOA. Establishing an HOA now would require 100% approval from the residents of the subdivision. Pennington added that some subdivisions had HOAs in the past, but they had folded. Imker said he wanted to be sensitive to the subdivision residents who maintained their own signs. Fleisch pointed out that it was a resident's choice to live in a subdivision with or without an HOA. Ernst asked if Rorie was saying future maintenance and repairs would be done in-house. Rorie said there was a limitation to that, and some work might have to be outsourced. Painting and pressure washing could be done in-house. The goal was to refinish four signs per month, and a maintenance cycle needed to be established. No action was needed on this agenda item. 11-14-02 Consider Dredging of Lake Peachtree Pennington said the City had been very lucky that the County had moved ahead with a $1,449,000 contract to start dredging. The City had added a number of alternate locations to the bid , and Pennington was amazed at the cost of the vegetation removal, which totaled $235,000, and over $602,000 for the additional dredging by the contract winner, Massana. The removal of Snake Island would cost $2.4 million. Pennington said he was not sure whether the removal of the additional silt was worth more than $600,000. The question was whether or not City Council Minutes February 5,2015 Page 4 the cost of the vegetation removal could be lowered. He continued that Massana had questioned how to remove the vegetation, and there had been some conversations on the best way to do that, possibly contracting it out to another company. Pennington said the only room to negotiate was on the vegetation removal, unless Council wanted to proceed with dredging any additional areas of the lake. Staff would continue to work with Massana on the cost of the vegetation removal. Massana said they were going to do a test to determine the best way to cut the grass, and Pennington hoped to have a better understanding of that before the next meeting. Learnard asked if a controlled burn could be done to get rid of the vegetation. Pennington said he and Fire Chief Joe O'Conor had discussed it. O'Conor said he had asked the regional chief ranger of the Forestry Commission about the risk of a wild fire in the lake bed, and the ranger had said there was low risk based on the water table along with other indicators. O'Conor said he had not asked about a controlled burn, but he could ask him. Learnard said the cost to remove the vegetation was exorbitant, and people did hold controlled burns every day. Pennington said there were reasons to not do a controlled burn, including the smoke and the proximity to SR 54, and he asked O'Conor to contact the regional chief ranger. Learnard said she also wanted to understand the necessity of the extra vegetation removal and dredging. No matter what happened, the sterile carp would have to be restocked. Pennington said there was no necessity. The dredging would only take those additional areas areas down to four feet from a natural level of three feet. The question was whether it was worth the money, and Pennington said it was not. These areas were discussed at the beginning by Council and the citizens. The County was removing two to three times more silt than ever before. His concern was whether removing the vegetation was worth spending $235,000. Ernst asked if a lot of the vegetation would die when the lake filled. Rorie said it would, but the problem was the potential for a fish kill and the oxygen levels downstream would have to be monitored. Spending the money or burning the vegetation could avoid that. Pennington said the continuing negotiations with Massana to bring the cost down could help, and staff would be meeting with them toward the end of the month. Rorie said the issue was hand-cutting the vegetation or being able to use heavier equipment to bush hog the area; they did not know the answer yet. Pennington said his recommendation was that Council not consider the $602,000 for dredging the additional areas. He noted the grass could be a problem, and he wanted to look into that further. The mobilization for the dredging should begin at the end of February or thefirst of March. King asked where the silt would be taken. Pennington said he understood Massana had property on Dividend Drive. They would move it to that site, then sell the silt. The silt had been tested by the County, and it was clean dirt. This was one of the ways to keep the cost of the dredging down. King pointed out the decaying plant material would smell, so they needed to get the plant material out now. Ernst asked when the actual dredging would start, saying the citizens wanted to know as soon as possible. Pennington said he would ask the County Administrator, and the plan was to have it finished by May. City Council Minutes February 5,2015 Page 5 lmker asked if the actual dredging of silt by the City was being taken off the table. Pennington said it was. lmker said the cost for dredging was above what he expected, so he wanted to concentrate on the vegetation removal. No action was taken. New Agenda Items 02-15-01 Public Hearing-Consider Step One Annexation Application for Two Tracts of Land on HWY 54 East(Bradshaw Family, LLLP) Senior Planner David Rast addressed Council, saying the applicant, Bradshaw Family, LLP, wanted to annex two tracts of land on SR 54 East that totaled 28.3 acres, with frontage on SR 54 and Sumner Road. The tracts (14.1 acres and 14.2 acres) were currently located in unincorporated Fayette County. The land use in the County was low-density residential, and the zoning was Agricultural Residential (AR). Because this was a Step One application, Rast said staff would not be making a recommendation. Jerry Peterson represented the applicant, noting this property had been in the Bradshaw family for generations, and it was one of four areas Council had identified several months ago as possible annexation areas. There was 755 feet of frontage on SR 54, as well as an existing median cut onto the highway with full turning access. He continued that the Georgia Department of Transportation (GDOT) would give two access points if the applicant wanted them. The frontage on Sumner Road was 1,160 feet to the City limits. Peterson continued that many Smokerise residents had lived in their homes a long time and could be looking at downsizing, saying the proposed plan would have a residential component that would have quality homes in same area. The residential component would be on the north portion of the property, comprising about 40% of the plan. There were also two small commercial components on SR 54, as well an office component that would serve as a transition between the commercial and residential components. Internal cart paths were planned that would connect to Smokerise and Lexington Park. Septic tanks were a problem in this area, and sewer was coming to the area. If the property was not annexed, it would be developed on septic, although Peterson said that, long-term, it would be better to develop the property on sewer. The City would also have some control on how the property looked as it was built out if the property was annexed. There would not be a big box or a big 20-acre strip center. The businesses would be small scale like the ones already in the area. The taxes would benefit the City. Fleisch noted that this was a Step One application, and approval would only give staff the opportunity to look at the annexation with the applicant. Fleisch opened the public hearing. Emily Nadeau said her backyard would be the retention pond. Her concern was annexing and rezoning from light density residential to a more dense use. She owned a large home and was interested in a smaller home, but she was not interested in having as many neighbors as proposed for the residential component. The entrance would be in her bedroom window view. The plan was not a light residential plan. Lee Snedeker said she and her husband owned 22 acres on Sumner Road and had lived there for 21 years. When the City asked to annex some property, they gave the City less than an acre and had been assured there would be no curb cuts on Sumner Road. Many people used Sumner Road as a cut-through, and she asked where access would be for the property. Sumner Road was a narrow, residential road, and she was concerned about where the traffic for the proposed uses would come and go from the tract. City Council Minutes February 5,2015 Page 6 Allison Willison asked what size the residential lots would be. Peterson said this was a schematic plan, but 28 lots were planned approximately 70 feet by 150 feet. The entry could move somewhere else. He pointed out the left side of Sumner Road was already in the City, and a park was planned there so the entry would not be right at someone's house. Willison said she did not like the crammed in houses and only one way in and out. Learnard clarified that Step One Annexation application was about whether to advance the conversation, not about the size of the lots. An approval of the application would only let the process start. Martine Yancey said she liked to go to the area by golf cart, following the path through Lexington Circle, then dropping off onto Sumner Road. The cars travelling on Sumner Road went fast and cut around golf carts. She asked Council to make sure they looked at cart paths in the area if it was annexed. William Mastin said his concerns were the previous tracts that had been annexed, including the Foot Pain Clinic building. They had promised landscaping and improvements that were still pending. The tracts annexed did not conform to the City's standards. He had been told Sumner Road was a scenic road, and it was degrading. Gary Rickards was concerned about the proposed density of the property, saying he was not against the annexation, but asked Council to keep the zoning as it was in the County. Traffic was already an issue, and increased density would increase traffic. Tom Brogan asked how the City would benefit from the annexation and how the taxpayers would benefit. Fleisch said economic impact studies would be done as part of the annexation. The public hearing closed. Learnard reiterated that this vote would not be on the plan or the traffic, but to move the conversation along. On that point, she had no issues. Imker said this tract had come to Council two years ago, but no plan for development had been presented. Council had rejected it at that time, but Imker believed this concept to be potentially viable. He reiterated that by voting in favor of the Step One application Council was only saying it was ok to present a proposal. He had issues with the density and the access to Sumner Road. Imker said he was prepared to vote against the Step Two application if it did not meet his expectations after hearing from the Planning Commission, other Council Members, and the public. Ernst agreed, saying the plan could change. He was only saying he wanted to look at the plan by voting for the Step One application. King agreed with Ernst and lmker, pointing out that, unlike a lot of developments, this tract would be developed by a City resident, and the developer was willing to work with staff to make things right. Now there was a starting point for the plan. Fleisch said she had many concerns, and she would have a lot of caveats so SR 54 East did not look like SR 54 West. This tract was virgin land, so the opportunity was there to make it look like the rest of the City. The property could also hook into the new lift station for sewer. City Council Minutes February 5,2015 Page 7 King moved to approve the Step One Annexation application for the two tracts of land on SR 54 East owned by the Bradshaw Family LLP. Learnard seconded. Motion carried unanimously. Learnard asked how many more properties were in the area. She wanted to take a comprehensive look and reach out to the remaining properties. Rast said there were four tracts left to complete the triangle. Imker noted there was another parcel owned by a family trust at the intersection of Sumner and Highway 54 already in the City, and they were not interested in annexation. Rast said that was correct. lmker said he was concerned the City could create an unincorporated island in the City. City Attorney Ted Meeker said it would depend on how far up the east side the annexations went. King said he had been approached by a property owner, and there was interest in annexation on the south (east) side of the highway. lmker recalled the City had been sued due to the creation of an island during the west side annexations, and he did not want that to happen again because an island was accidentally created. Meeker said there was the potential to create an island, but until the City had applications, there was not much that could be done. 02-15-02 Public Hearing - Consider Variance to Front Building Setback, Braelinn Village Office Park Rast said a tract of land adjoining the Braelinn Village Retail Center had been developed as Braelinn Office Park with five lots for office development. The Mahaffey Medical Clinic, Braelinn Dental Clinic, and a multi-tenant building had been built, leaving two undeveloped tracts. A plan had been approved for Lot 4, and the foundation for the building was in place. The variance request was for Lot 5, which fronted four private streets on all sides, As a result, the front setbacks and front parking setbacks applied to each side of the tract, which restricted the amount of developable property on the lot. Rast continued that the plan was to build a 10,000 square-foot multi-tenant building and associated parking. There were several issues with the lot, including a problem with topography. A retaining wall would have to be built on one side to build up the site for parking. The tenants for the building needed exposure to the Braelinn Village Retail Center, so the front of the building would face the main property, with the rear of the building facing one of the other office buildings. One corner of the building would encroach 9.7 feet into the 40-foot front building setback. There were no issues with the parking or service drive, just the one corner of the property. There were options that could be used to move the building out of the setback, but the variance was appropriate due to the location and the four front building setbacks. Staff reviewed the request based on the six criteria for a variance, and staff supported the request with the following conditions: 1. The variance shall be limited to an encroachment of no more than 9.7 feet as shown on the conceptual site plan for Bicycles Unlimited as prepared by Capstone Engineering, Inc. (dated January 16, 2015). There shall be no other encroachments permitted without first securing additional variances. 2. A foundation survey shall be submitted to the Building Official prior to the beginning of any vertical construction. The purpose of the survey is to ensure the building foundation encroaches no more than 9.7 feet into the front building setback as permitted by this variance. Chuck Ogletree, applicant, represented the owner of the new building, Bicycles Unlimited, which had run out of space in its current location. He continued that the tract was difficult and had a severe drop-off on the southern end of the property, which dropped about 12 feet. The building would probably not end up with 10,000 square feet, but they wanted to maintain as City Council Minutes February 5,2015 Page 8 much space as possible. They wanted to make the tract more pedestrian-friendly, and it would include bike racks and picnic tables. Ogletree said he had also asked for a variance for a dumpster enclosure inside the 40-foot setback because there was no place on the site for the dumpster. The surrounding property owners were in agreement with the variance requests. The lot had several challenges, and granting this variance would not harm the general public. Ogletree said approval of the variance would not necessarily set a precedent because of the unique situation of four front sides and the topography. Fleisch opened the public hearing. Mary Giles said she was very familiar with Ogletree's work and whatever went in would be quality. However, Braelinn Village had only one office park, and it had taken almost 15 years to get that. It had been worth the wait. She asked why they could not wait longer and get a building that faced the rest of the office park. She did not understand why this building needed to face the shopping center parking lot. Giles asked Council to look at the bigger picture and say no to the variance request unless the building could be made smaller to fit within the guidelines. She noted Dr. Mahaffey's office had a slope and did not have a retaining wall, asking if something more visually pleasing could be added so people would not be able to see the retaining wall. Ogletree said he thought they would be able to put in ground cover that would spill over and cover the wall. Giles said her preference would be for Council to deny the variance request. It was an office park, and there was plenty of retail. She wished the retail center owner would use some of the parking lot for offices. Ogletree said ift would be an owner- occupied building. Bicycles Unlimited was a stable business that would be there for a while. Ogletree said reiterated there was not a demand for office space. He owned the other multi- tenant building, and it had taken three to four years to fill it. The new building would be a bit of a transition between the shopping and the office areas. Alan Phelps said this was a great idea. He appreciated all the concerns, but noted the biking clubs congregated at shop at times. Phelps said having the business in this location would allow riders to congregate away from the main parking lot. Fleisch closed the public hearing. Imker asked if the Planning Commission would work with Rast on the site plan, noting that it was on the Planning Commission's agenda for February 9. Imker said that would allow staff and the Planning Commission full reign to work with the applicant to ensure the project met the City's requirements. Ernst moved to approve the variance request to the front building setbacks for Braelinn Office Park subject to the staff conditions. Learnard seconded. Motion carried unanimously. Meeker noted a variance for a dumpster had been mentioned, adding Council could not vote on that since it had not been advertised. Ogletree said he would ask for that later. 02-15-03 Consider Amendment to Municipal Court Ordinance-Failure to Appear Fee Pennington asked Council to adopt an ordinance to establish a Failure to Appear fee and to establish the fee at $75. He continued that the state had a fee of $55 on all citations issued when a defendant did not appear for Court. The state recently requested each municipality enact their own ordinance that would allow a fee to be assessed. Pennington said there had been 843 Failures to Appear in 2014. The Court had been hit hard by the volume of cases that City Council Minutes February 5,2015 Page 9 were prosecuted, and the judge was concerned about failures to appear. The judge would have the choice of charging the $75 or having the defendant put in jail for three days. Imker moved to approve the amendment to the Municipal Court ordinance - Failure to Appear fee. Learnard seconded. Motion carried unanimously. 02-15-04 Consider Amendments to Convention & Visitors Bureau Bylaws Wende Blumberg, chairman of the Peachtree City Convention and Visitors Bureau (CVB), addressed Council, noting the proposed changes to the bylaws. She added that the CVB board had approved the changes to the board member descriptions at its last meeting. The proposed changes included modifying one Board Member description from the qualification "tourism media related experience" to "tourism related experience." In addition, the option to appoint one or two members to the CVB under the same Board Member description was added. Blumberg pointed out the quorum rules would also change from four to five if an eighth member was appointed, which was included in the proposed amendments. The Recreation and Special Events Board Member description would be amended to "representative," rather than "Chairperson of the Recreation and Special Events Board or Community Services Director." Blumberg noted that the change in the Recreation and Special Events Board member aligned it with the requirements for the representative from the Peachtree City Airport Authority. King moved to approve the amendments to the Convention & Visitors Bureau bylaws. Learnard seconded. Motion carried unanimously. 02-15-05 Consider Contract Award-Meade Field Restroom City Engineer Dave Borkowski said staff recommended awarding the bid for the restroom construction to Quality Construction by McLeRoy for $93,777. The budgeted cost was $1 10,000. Borkowski said McLeRoy submitted the only bid, since the second bidder did not submit their bid on time. Staff was looking at the company's qualifications and references, adding McLeRoy was currently working for the City of Newnan building three restrooms and a Public Works building. Borkowski said funding for the project would come from Recreation impact fees and a contribution earmarked to assist with building the restroom from Somerby of Peachtree City Retirement Community. No funds would come from the General Fund. Learnard asked where the building would be located at Meade Field. Borkowski said it would be almost at the end of the field next to the wood line, near the gravel drive between the farthest field and the field next to it. Rorie added it would also be located adjacent to the cart path from The Gates. Fleisch asked when work would start and if it would be ready when the season began. Rorie said it was a simple project that should move quickly, but it would not be ready when the season began. Imker asked if the restroom would be connected to the sewer line between The Gates and Somerby. Rorie said that making the connection to the sewer had been a requirement of The Gates annexation. Rorie asked Council to keep the total budget at$100,000. Learnard moved to award the contract for the Meade Field restroom to Quality Construction by McLeRoy for $93,777 and to establish the total budget for the project at $100,000. Ernst seconded. Motion carried unanimously. City Council Minutes February 5,2015 Page 10 02-15-06 Consider Contract Award- Facility Bond Fire Protection Systems Replacements Rorie said this was a Facilities Bond project. There were currently three replacement projects, including the City Hall fire alarm system, Library fire alarm system, and the City Hall vault Halon Suppression System, which totaled $78,133. He recommended awarding a contract to PROSTAR Fire Systems, Inc., not to exceed $78,134 to replace the systems. Rorie continued that PROSTAR had been awarded an annual contract for fire alarm and sprinkler services in November 2012 after staff had solicited Requests for Proposals (RFPs). The agreement included inspection and maintenance of City fire protection systems, devices, and extinguishers. Rorie said the proposal was approximately$22,000 under budget. King moved to award the contract to PROSTAR Fire Systems, Inc., for a not to exceed amount of $78,134. Ernst seconded. Motion carried unanimously. 02-15-07 Consider Lake Peachtree Dam/Spillway Expenses Pennington asked City Council to approve an additional $300,000 from cash reserves for the Lake Peachtree Dam/Spillway expenses. The funds were needed to pay the deficit of $45,255 currently encumbered (from FY 2014 approved $100,000) and additional anticipated costs for the geotechnical evaluation ($44,650), Schnabel Engineering ($38,840), Emergency Action Plan ($37,730), dam alternatives analysis ($33,840), bathymetric survey ($17,752), and estimated legal and other expenses ($81,933). Pennington said $45,255 was for Integrated Science & Engineering (ISE) and Schnabel for the work done to get the category determination. He added ISE would perform the geotechnical evaluation. Schnabel would write the Emergency Action Plan. Pennington continued that an Emergency Action Plan needed to be in place for every dam. The dam alternative analysis was to provide alternatives for the future. The bathymetric survey would also look at the future, and the estimate of $17,752 might drop. The estimated legal and expenses ($81,933) would be available to help clean this project up, according to Pennington. Fleisch verified that Schnabel would conduct the Emergency Action Plan. Pennington said that was correct, and ISE would do the geotechnical evaluation. The work was either being done through contracts with the attorneys or ISE. Imker said he was concerned the City had gone into a new fiscal year without paying money owed during the last fiscal year. Pennington said the expenses had occurred at the last minute as the attorneys were moving forward with the negotiations with the Environmental Protection Division (EPD). Additional information had been required that the City did not have, and those costs were not available until after the beginning of the year. Imker said he was not questioning paying the bill, but he was concerned that another $250,000 would be needed in six months. He did not know what the City's final responsibility for the project would be, so he could not vote for anything until he had some comfort level on the City's responsibilities. He asked if the City was responsible for repairing the spillway. He did not have a clear understanding of what they were buying with taxpayer money. Pennington said they were not dealing with the spillway at this time. Every one of the items on the list had been planned out and discussed, and the Emergency Action Plan was a safeguard for the future. Imker said Pennington would not convince him at this meeting that the money needed to be spent. Pennington said they could not go forward with signing another contract or request for engineering unless the funds were available. Imker said that was where City Council Minutes February 5,2015 Page 11 Pennington should be. He could not vote for it until he understood what the City was responsible for. Learnard noted that the memo for the agenda item had discussed the money from FY 2014. Meeker said $6,758 of the $45,255 was the amount that exceeded the $100,000 budget that was set. Since that time period, another $38,497 had been incurred. Learnard asked if approving the funds was urgent or if Council could have another conversation in the near term. Pennington said in the near term was fine, but there were bills that had to be paid. He noted everything but the $45,000 at the top of the list were items that were still to come. Imker said that was what he wanted to stop, saying Pennington had done the right thing by stopping the spending and getting approval from Council before moving forward. An Emergency Action Plan should be in place before anything formal was done with the dam and spillway, but there was time. Meeker asked lmker to consider the expenses from FY 2014, adding Council could delay the other matters. Pennington continued that legal expenses continued to incur, which he could handle out of the Legal Expenses account. lmker recalled setting aside $100,000 for legal bills. Pennington said the City had tracked all the expenses for the lake. Salvatore said Schnabel had not been paid. If the work had already been done, then it should be covered. Of the $145,000 spent to date, only legal and engineering from ISE had been paid. Pennington said Schnabel's bill was coming through ISE. The Emergency Action Plan would be a separate item, and he wanted Council to be aware of the money being spent before he proceeded. Fleisch agreed this was a lot of money, but added the team had been wonderful to work with and had done a great job for the City. Learnard moved to approve $45,255 for additional Lake Peachtree dam and spillway expenses and to continue the additional items until the next meeting in February. King seconded. Motion carried unanimously. Council/Staff Topics Pennington noted that all City employees would attend harassment training beginning Monday, February 9, and training would continue through the end of February. He said a summarization of everything done at Retreat on January 9 had been completed, and staff was trying to group everything by topic areas. He hoped to have it to Council by the next day or early the next week. Another meeting with the representatives from the Wilksmoor annexation developers would be held Monday, February 9, to discuss where things were going and how MacDuff Parkway was coming along. Executive Session Learnard moved to convene in executive session at 9:11 p.m. to discuss acquisition or disposal of real estate, personnel, and threatened or pending litigation. King seconded. Motion carried unanimously. King moved to reconvene in regular session at 10:02 p.m. Learnard seconded. Motion carried unanimously. City Council Minutes February 5,2015 Page 12 I There being no further business, Learnard moved to adjourn the meeting. Ernst seconded. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjour e at 10:02 p.m. _ w 'u��J \ e Pamela Dufresne, puty City Clerk Vanessa Fleisch, Mayor