Month 1999-9 September
Meeting of 1999-9-28 Regular Meeting
MINUTES
LAWTON CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
SEPTEMBER 28, 1999 - 6:00 P.M.
WAYNE GILLEY CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBER
Mayor Pro Tem G. Wayne Smith, Also Present:
Presiding Gary Jackson, Asst. City Manager
John Vincent, City Attorney
Brenda Smith, City Clerk
Lt. Col. Jeff Ewing, Fort Sill Liaison
The meeting was called to order at 6:10 p.m. by Mayor Pro Tem Smith. Notice of meeting and
agenda were posted on the City Hall notice board as required by State Law.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: G. Wayne Smith, Ward
One
Richard
Williams, Ward Two
Glenn
Devine, Ward Three
John
Purcell, Ward Four
Robert
Shanklin, Ward Five
Charles
Beller, Ward Six
Stanley
Haywood, Ward Seven
Randy
Warren, Ward Eight
ABSENT: Mayor Cecil E. Powell
CONSIDER APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF LAWTON CITY COUNCIL REGULAR
MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 14, 1999.
MOVED by Williams, SECOND by Warren, for approval of the minutes.
Shanklin said two weeks ago when we established the negotiating committee, Purcell said he had
been asked by a couple of commissioners to form the committee and asked if that was correct.
Purcell said no, he did not say that . Shanklin asked if it would be on the tape and Purcell said he
did not think so. Shanklin said the commissioners had been canvassed and had not asked anyone
for another committee. Purcell agreed, stating he had not said that. Shanklin said Purcell said he
was asked to do this and that he (Shanklin) said he would give up his spot on the committee the
Mayor had. Shanklin said the other committee was not abolished and that he had asked later if
the intent was to abolish the Mayor's committee and Purcell's response was he guessed all six
people could go; meaning four Council people and the Mayor. Shanklin asked if that would
constitute a quorum. Vincent said it would make any meeting subject to the Open Meeting Act.
Shanklin said it would have to be posted and Purcell should be aware of that because the Mayor
may vote but does not have to so it would be a quorum between the five of them.
VOTE ON MOTION: AYE: Purcell, Shanklin, Beller, Haywood, Warren, Smith, Williams,
Devine. NAY: None. MOTION CARRIED.
AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION: None.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
1. Hear appeal of Donald E. Gaskins of the Building Development Appeals Board
and take
appropriate action. Exhibits: None. (Packet provided separately)
Dan Tucker, Code Administration Director, said this is an appeal from Mr. Gaskins, through his
attorney Mr. Munkacsy, concerning an action by the Building Development Appeals Board on
Mr. Gaskins' appeal for them to consider approving construction that was done on a project on
Cache Road that was not done in accordance with the approved plans. Tucker said the basis of
the denial by the Building Development Appeals Board was that the structures had not been built
according to the approved plans and that the as-built plans would place the properties in violation
of another section of the code which prohibits draining water across more than two lots.
John Munkacsy, attorney, 711 C Avenue, said he had filed a notice of appeal with the Council.
He said one point was whether the appeal was filed within the required time frame, which was a
large part of the discussion with the Building Development Appeals Board. Vincent said he was
not raising that issue here. Beller asked for clarification. Vincent said this morning he prepared a
time line of possible actions and when they took place, and based on the City Code, the two
provisions that could apply, he is within the time. Beller said it is not pertinent to the appeal and
Vincent agreed. Munkacsy said for clarification, there appears to be somewhat of a conflict
between the ordinance and the by-laws that the Building Development Appeal Board has
adopted.
Munkacsy said the denial of Mr. Gaskins' occupancy permit for the Great Plains Self Storage
Facility on Cache Road was the result of as-built construction being different than the design
plans that were approved by staff. He said Jimmy Freeman, construction crew foreman, is present
and can speak, but this property is flat for all practical purposes and the heart of the matter is that
nothing that Mr. Gaskins did or nothing done by T & G Construction effected the flow of natural
run off of the water from the lots immediately to the north and adjacent to this project. Mr. Al
Jung from Landmark Engineering is here and documents are included in the package which
establish the surveys he did and those surveys establish there is no runoff that is blocked by
anything done at that construction site. He said there are some neighbors who believe that rain
water came into their area or garage or other places that was caused by this project but it is not;
it
may have been a coincidence in time, but the fact is that whatever problems they were
experiencing would have happened if that was still an empty field. Munkacsy said that was raised
from the start and is the crux of the issue; the reason Tucker denied the occupancy permit is
because what was built was different from what was approved and that happens all the time so
that in and of itself should not be a problem as long as what was constructed otherwise would be
acceptable and meet building codes. He said he thought the problem was the belief or perception
that somehow this water flow has changed but they had not been provided any kind of an
engineering study that shows that or establishes that; the only one he was aware of was the one
that Mr. Jung had done and that establishes that there is nothing that occurred here relating to
this construction that impedes or backs up the water.
Munkacsy said when this project was first envisioned, the plans provided for the water to flow
generally from south to north, although it is very flat and very little as far as a rate of flow, but
the City staff required a detention pond and that may not have happened if this project would
have started today, but because of that, the contractor built what now exists. He said there is a
perception problem because there is a structure there which abuts other property so because there
is a structure that someone elevated, it must be backing up the water, but that is not the case. He
asked that Al Jung speak in this regard.
Al Jung, Landmark Engineering, said he was hired by Gaskins to design the site plan for this
project, to include the grading and detention pond plans; this was done and the project was
constructed and he was informed that the flume that was located on the north side of the building
was built differently than what was shown on the plans so he went by to look at it. Jung said he
went out two or three different times and one time it was raining while he was there and as you
walk down the flume you can look over the fences into the backyards to the north of the building
and as he did so he could see that water was not impinging or had not extended to the extent that
it was touching the property line so the water was in the back yards. Jung said he went back
another time when it had been raining and had stopped and he did not see any water standing in
any of the back yards, so based on that observation, he prepared a report that said that even
though the flume had been built different from the plans that were prepared, everything was
functioning and there would not be difficulty with the project. He said the engineering staff
disagreed with that opinion and asked for some solid documentation, so he sent the surveyors out
to survey and do spot elevations throughout the back yards, after getting permission to enter the
property, and they surveyed spot elevations all along the back yards and compiled that
information; it can be easily seen that the yards, even though everything is very, very flat and the
slope is very mild, they do slope to the east. Jung said the City of Lawton contour maps also
show that to a certain extent, showing the contour of the land is to the east. He said he then
restated his opinion that based on his observations, based on the spot elevations, he felt there
would not be any problem.
Jung said the first time he became aware of the potential for water entering people's homes was
at the Appeal Board meeting, and some individuals spoke about water getting in their houses but
he was not there to see it and could not say where the water came in or if it backed up from this
property or what could have caused it, and it has not rained enough since then to go out and see
it, so he would stay with his original conclusion that based on the surveys and his observations,
he did not see how the project could have caused the problem of the water in the houses.
James F. Freeman, 2312 NW 73rd Street, said he is employed by T & G Construction, Inc. as the
estimator for large jobs and overseeing the work. He said to put this into perspective as to why it
was not constructed like the design plan that was approved by the City, initially Gaskins got a
temporary building permit to build the foundations and the slabs for three of the structures. At
that point, the surface water was going to be drained off of this property, go around Applebee's
and go out to the state highway or Cache Road, in other words, it was going to flow west and
then north. The grading was set up and the building was set up pretty high so they would have
enough fall to get to the street; they got the floor poured on one and the foundation in on another
and there came a situation where it was decided by the City people in charge of those things that
they had to have a detention pond and to do that, they had to reverse the flow of all of the water
causing it to go to the east and a dam was built across this property right next to the bank
property that would retain the water in a pipe with a hole through it to allow the water to flow
through it at a certain rate of speed. In this process, some of the grading was changed and this
cost Mr. Gaskins quite a bit of money to do. Freeman said the problem came with the little swale
behind the building between the property; it was originally designed to be down flush with the
existing property with a curb on it that would exclude water and also move water to the east to
get into the proper channel; the complication is the spread type footing under the building and if
we lowered the cut behind it, we would have exposed the footing under the building and the dirt
under it and the building would have collapsed. Freeman said to solve the problem, they raised it
up to match the bottom of the foundation and got the drainage going to the east like it was
originally designed to do, and when it was all finished, they put the water in the exact same spot
as if they would havebuilt it like the plans had shown and protected the building.
Freeman said if they were to go out there today and break that all up and expose the footing and
pour it like it was shown, it would not do one thing for the neighbors to the north or change the
water flow at all as far as they are concerned; the only thing it would do would be to expose Mr.
Gaskins' foundation. He said in hind sight, if anyone involved would have known that it would
have gone to this length as far as causing problems, they would have coordinated with the City
and got this minor change approved because it is a minor change and they would have not had
the sticking point of not following the plans exactly as shown.
Shanklin asked Freeman if grades had been shot from the houses to the concrete as to the water
flow because the residents are not imagining the water and not having to build sandbag dams just
for the exercise; if the concrete is higher than the homes, it has to be flooding them. Freeman said
the property drains to the east and not south and the fall from the houses out to the street running
north and south to the east of them is an eight foot fall, and the drainage is very strong to the east,
it always has been and still is. Shanklin asked what it would take to correct it. Freeman said the
yards were never graded properly and the yards themselves need to be graded to the north so the
water would run around the houses instead of running into them and the yards are the problem.
Shanklin asked if any water was coming from Gaskins' concrete onto those properties. Freeman
said no, all of the water from Gaskins' property runs off to the east or into the distilling pond.
Shanklin asked if Tucker had a film showing whether the water run off Gaskins' property into
those yards or not. Tucker said he had a film that showed ponding of water. Freeman said there is
a difference between ponding and running water, and the fact they have ponding is because their
yards never did drain.
Beller asked Tucker if he had pictures of water actually running over the concrete into the yards.
Tucker said no, that does not occur. Shanklin asked what does occur. Munkacsy said the
elevations show it goes the other way.
Donnie Gaskins said he had been a developer for a long time and tried to do responsible
development, and if he thought he was throwing water off on those people, he would have Jim
Freeman and T & G Construction out there tearing it out. He said those yards ponded water
before he ever started the development; there is a natural fall in there to the east as Freeman said.
Gaskins said he did not want to do anything to create a problem for the neighbors. Gaskins said
he knew from the time he bought the land from Security Bank and started the development, it is
behind the Applebee's property, that they had never thrown any water off to the neighbors. He
said he had talked to them on many occasions and if he had ponded water on that property, he
would take care of it but he did not think they had and it happened a long time ago and was
nothing he had created.
Purcell asked Tucker if the plans that they built, as it is now, were brought in today to construct
in the manner that it was constructed, would it meet all the City Codes as they are in effect today.
He said he knew the requirement for retention ponds had been done away with so that is out of
the way. Tucker said no, it would not, and this causes the water to cross more than two lots in the
drainage of the lots; if plans were brought in where that condition did not exist, they would have
approved them. Tucker said if an alternate method would have been suggested, they would have
approved it a while back.
Purcell said he was still a little confused; the way it is built now, it runs to the east. He asked
if
the reason it did not meet code was because it runs across more than two lots to get to the street
or where it dumps. Tucker said yes, and it previously went into an open field and he was saying
this simply on a supposition because he had no occasion to go out there before it was constructed
but he did look at the plans and it appeared to drain to the south and then to the east, but not
drastically to the south but onto the one lot and that was how they were able to reach a drainage
off of the one lot onto the bank was that they only went to one property.
Vincent said in the packet given to Council is a letter dated March 10, 1999, containing
comments by Tucker on an analysis made by Jerry Ihler on the as-built plans stating that the as-builts
do not meet code. He distributed still pictures taken by one of the property owners to the
north showing run off from the property onto the property owners to the north and it is evidenced
by the fill that is running off of the property to the south, the Gaskins' property to the north.
Vincent said it may not show up in the video, but it is in the still pictures.
Tucker said the certificate of occupancy had not been issued due to the drainage but that was
only one issue and there are other issues on the site that have not been completed; drainage is the
one they have not been able to get any suggestions as to how it could be altered.
Shanklin asked if an appeal from the Building Development Appeals Board comes to Council
and not to District Court. Vincent said an appeal from the Building Development Appeals Board
is to the Council and if the parties disagree, it can go to District Court. Shanklin asked if it can
still go to District Court and Vincent said yes. Shanklin asked if we were prepared to take this to
District Court. Vincent said if the Council denies Mr. Gaskins' appeal and he appeals it, we will
go to District Court. Shanklin asked how many votes are required to deny this item and Vincent
said it takes five votes to approve the motion, regardless of what the motion is.
Munkacsy said it comes down to a question of fact and the thing they have been trying to be
persuasive about is the City has no real proof; those are still photos that show some mud puddles.
He said Jung has gone about his business in a scientific manner, as required and requested by
City staff, and he knew of nothing City staff had done on the site or anything they had pulled out
as far as what was in existence prior to the development of this project to prove what they are
saying and that is what Mr. Gaskins did somehow changed the natural flow of water and caused
it to do something that it did not do before his project. Munkacsy said the scientific proof is that
the existing residential properties have flowed to the east and nothing has been done to change
that; that is what the elevation shots show and the items of worthy, credible proof show that;
what the staff is telling the Council is what is referred to as anecdotal types of evidence and that
is "well, we noticed this and it just so happened at the same time as this and therefore there
is a
cause and effect" and that is not credible evidence. He said the credible evidence supports Mr.
Gaskins' appeal and they would go to District Court if they had to and that is where they started
and were back here. Munkacsy said at no point in this entire process did City staff suggest to
Gaskins what they knew and what Gaskins did not know, and that is, we are at an impasse and
we cannot agree and someone, some third party, needed to make a decision. He said the next
administrative route is an appeal to this administrative appeals board; that was never suggested to
Mr. Gaskins in a year or a year and a half's worth of this back and forth, and they ended up in
District Court and the City is now the subject of a temporary restraining order primarily because
none of this was ever brought out and maybe they could have solved this problem earlier without
so much rancor and dispute, but when the threat was "we're going to shut your utilities off the
day after tomorrow" we wnt to District Court and the City is the subject of a temporary
restraining order. He said it was not their intent to get excited and get that kind of thing done, but
had the City staff suggested, and they knew that Mr. Gaskins did not believe that he did anything
that caused this water to flow differently and they knew that they would not agree to the as-built
construction, but they never said "here's what you should do next, we're at an impasse, here's
what you should do next". Munkacsy said that is not particularly relevant to the decision tonight,
but it is an important part of what has occurred in this process; Gaskins and those he has engaged
have brought credible facts to this body.
Purcell said he understood the contention of the residents to the north and asked if there is
another problem with water flowing over two lots. He said he understood the reason the appeals
board denied the appeal was because the water flows over two lots, and said he was trying to
understand. Munkacsy said he thought that was true, but if you look at the correspondence and
Mr. Tucker's denial letter, they refer to the reason why this occupancy permit will not be issued
is because you have violated this city code and it is specified in the correspondence, and that
particular code section is you built something that is different from the approved plans.
Munkacsy said that is the violation and then they gave the as-builts and asked if those could be
approved as an alternate form of construction, which is permitted, and staff is saying no because
the project causes water to do something different than it did before, but it does not.
Beller asked Tucker if there was an easement behind and to the north of the property under
discussion. He said it appeared the fence was almost against the concrete. Tucker said there is a
utility easement in the rear behind the drainage structure that was installed and the yards. Beller
asked if a grass flume were put in there to bring it to the east, would that be satisfactory with the
code requirements. Tucker said if it was on Mr. Gaskins' side of the property, it would; there are
a number of different ways this could be done. Beller said he was referring to the easement, and
if there is an easement, it is fenced in. Tucker agreed the easement was fenced in. Beller asked if
it was fenced the entire length of the block or just at this property. Tucker said it is pretty much
the entire length of the block. Beller asked if it was permissible, if there is an easement, to make
a grass flume, rather than a concrete flume, if there is a problem with the water. Tucker said that
would work if it were declared a drainage easement, in addition to a utility easement. Beller
asked if that is an option and Tucker said yes.
Jung said the water does drain across more than two lots and it did that before this project was
built and it continues to do so and what Gaskins built did not cause that to change.
Herbert Derricott, 6212 NW Cheyenne Drive, said he lives adjacent and north of where Mr.
Gaskins built his storage and his lawyer can stand up here and say there is no real proof that the
problem was not there before they built it but he was standing here to say the problem was not
there until he built the building. Derricott said he lives there and has lived there since 1984 and
knew what the field looked like before Gaskins built the storage shed and knew what it looked
like after Applebee's was built. He said any yard will have a small amount of water in it, but there
was not a flood of water from the corner of that building all the way down through the houses
until it was built. Derricott said his property was at the far end of the concrete wall shown on the
pictures.
Derricott said they came in with tractors and it made the water flow south back in other people's
yards; when they raised it up too high, the building created a flume so now when the water comes
out of the gutter, it comes out with such force that it goes through the concrete wall he had,
which was old, seeps underneath the bottom and creates a flood in his yard and it stays there for
one or two days, one to two feet of water. He said the same water flows next door to his
neighbor, Mr. Finley, and fills up his back yard. Derricott said before they may have had a small
puddle of water in one area but you did not have water running into Mr. Finley's garage and his
wife was not able to use their washer and dryer, which is the problem now. He said the neighbor
on the other side of Mr. Finley, Mrs. Wynn who is out of town this evening, she has to have her
carpet replaced or have someone come out and dry it out and this did not happen before Gaskins
built the storage shed.
Derricott said he is a citizen of this town, pays taxes and works and if he has to stay within the
code, and had to follow the code when he built his fence, then Gaskins should be required to do
the same thing. He said if Gaskins does not have to follow the code, none of the citizens of
Lawton should have to follow it. Derricott said he did not care if Gaskins did not follow it
completely but was concerned that Gaskins find some way to get the water out of his back yard
and that was all he or Finley or Wynn were asking. He said Gaskins did not follow the code so he
is in violation and if there is a fire or someone has to get to the utilities in the back yard, they
would not be able to get access. Derricott said that building is so close to his property that crews
would have to come from the front and tear out the fences to get back to work on the gas line,
and asked if the City would have to pay for that or if he would have to pay for it. He said his
concern here was that somebody got greedy and if they would have left a little area between his
wall and the building where a utility truck could work, it would have been better. Derricott said
grass is growing in the small area and Finley cannot hardly get out of his back gate to cut the
grass.
Beller asked if Derricott was saying Mr. Gaskins built on the easement. Derricott said Gaskins
went as far as he could all the way up against his wall. Gaskins and Derricott briefly discussed
property lines, surveys, abstract companies and alleged encroachments by each party. Derricott
said if Gaskins can get away with this, he did not feel he should have to follow any codes either.
Haywood asked if water went into the houses before Gaskins build the storage shed and Derricott
said no, it did not run into Mr. Finley's garage. Haywood asked if water was going into Mrs.
Wynn's house also and Derricott said yes and she had to put out sandbags to keep the water from
going in there. Derricott said the water has no place to go other than to the east because the
construction caused a dam and it goes over the abutment and into the yards.
Tucker presented a video tape and stated it was made last March during a rain storm; he narrated
the tape as follows: "this is showing the concrete flume as it leaves Mr. Gaskins' property and
enters the property of the federal credit union there. That was taken to show that the system as it
is designed does drain Mr. Gaskins' property well and it's functioning. It is not throwing anything
onto the property owners. This is an area taken looking to the north from Mr. Gaskins' project,
looking to the houses there on the north and the northwest." Gaskins commented from the
audience regarding the direction of the video and Tucker said it is looking to the west and then
the northwest. Tucker's narration continued: "this shows the backyards of the houses during the
rain storm to the north of Mr. Gaskins' property and you can see in some of the close up pictures
perhaps that water does flow to the east".
Purcell asked if the water was going over the ledge into the yards. Tucker said no. Purcell asked
how the water was getting to the yards from Gaskins' property and that it appeared it was not.
Tucker said where it slopes down to the curb, that is the water from Mr. Gaskins' property and
then it continues and we are looking to the east and it flows along that curb and out into the lot of
the Fort Sill Federal Credit Union where it crosses their pavement directly to the street. Purcell
said if the water is not going over the curb to flow to the properties to the north, it does not
appear the water is flowing off of Gaskins' property to the properties to the north. He asked if
that is correct. Tucker said that is correct, that is not happening, he is not putting water on
these
people's property. Tucker said the drainage before was to the south and east and that has now
been stopped and the drainage is now all to the south. Purcell said it goes to the east and
bypasses the properties we are talking about to the north and asked if that was correct. Tucker
said it is the water
from those properties to the north, their flow and drainage to the south and southeast is what has
been impaired.
Williams asked if the property of the homeowners slopes from north to south, from high to low.
Tucker said it does not slope from north to south with any great degree of drop; across the yards
there was not even an inch difference from the back of the houses. Tucker said this previously
was vacant property and the water ran off onto it and dispersed.
Devine said it appeared when Gaskins raised the elevation on his property, it created a dam and
the true flow of the water is now hitting his curbing and footing, which is turning it back on the
property causing it to back up. He asked if that was correct. Tucker said yes, the original plans
showed a swale or channel down through there where his property and the properties to the north
both came to, and then they would both drain. Tucker said that was modified where the water
from Gaskins' property does not go to the north, it all goes to the east, but that water which is
collected from the north into that approved swale has nowhere to go.
Shanklin asked how you can put in a swale with a footing three feet off the ground or 40 inches.
Tucker said the footing had been sloped down to the property line from the building. Shanklin
asked if we all knew we were going to do this and drain all the water to the east. Tucker said yes,
because it was all on Mr. Gaskins' property, that swale was, and it would be contained to his lot
until it got to the credit union and crossing one lot would be allowed.
Devine asked if the plans were looked at as far as Gaskins raising the elevation on the footing.
Tucker said the drainage was discovered on a site inspection and the work had already been done
and we told them that it did not meet codes and asked them to submit something to show how it
would drain.
Shanklin asked how we drain the backyards now and what would have to be done for them to
drain properly and if a swale would work. Tucker said a swale is one solution and another would
be if there could be two collection points and an underground pipe run through a box and then
out to the north, but that is just one of many and he was not saying that is the only thing, but
there are solutions that could be done.
Devine asked if Jung looked at anything as far as draining the backyards, as opposed to tearing
out a lot of concrete. Jung said no, he did not look for solutions to those problems because he
was hired by Gaskins to address his project and they did not feel Gaskins' project had caused any
damage to the north, but the items Tucker mentioned would be possible solutions. Devine asked
Gaskins if he would have a problem looking into that if Council could hold this off and make a
decision. Gaskins said he had no problem correcting something that is wrong. Munkacsy said
they did not have the right to go on someone else's property. Devine said he was sure the owners
would be willing to work together if there was a solution, and if there is an easement, it could be
used for drainage if needed.
Purcell said since the original plans would have conceivably solved the problem, why did we not
follow the original plans. Freeman said the original plans did not have the problem solved; the
original plans had the building up high enough to run water all the way out to Cache Road, and
then the City said no, you have to build a retention pond but at that point we had slabs and
foundations already built up to a certain height to run water out front but then they were told to
build a pond and make water go another way. Freeman said once you have the foundation up that
high, you have a problem. Purcell said the original plans were to run the water to the south out
onto Cache Road. Freeman said the ground was lower than the foundation so if you drop the
drainage lower, the foundation would be exposed.
Beller said the only solution appeared to be to build some sort of drainage without using concrete
over the easement and take the water to the east. He asked if it would be feasible to table this and
ask them to look at that possibility and see if Tucker could work that out. Beller said he
sympathized with people who had a foot of water in their backyard and it could be a result of the
water not flowing to the south like it did before, but there has to be an answer to take the water to
the east. He asked if the only other alternative was to remove the concrete. Tucker's response
from the audience was not audible. Beller asked if this were tabled for two or four weeks, would
there be an opportunity to look at options and if none are satisfactory, other action would have to
be taken. Tucker said it would be acceptable to him and it would be up to Gaskins. Beller said
Council had heard as much as it could with regard to the mechanics of the appeal and that they
would not have to go through that process again but could bring back a suggested remedy and if
it meets with the approval of those who have water in their backyards, we should be concerned
with that, along with the business owner, and if that can be resolved, everyone would go away
happy.
Smith asked if Derricott would be agreeable to that and he indicated he would. Derricott said the
concern was that someone create a way for the water to get out of their backyards where it does
not flow into the houses. Beller said it would obviously mean moving the fences off of the
easement to the north. Vincent said another solution mentioned was the piping and permission
may be needed to modify the easements and they could work that out.
MOVED by Devine, SECOND by Haywood, to table this for four weeks and bring it back with a
solution; staff will work with the developer and homeowners for a solution on the drainage.
AYE: Shanklin, Beller, Haywood, Warren, Smith, Williams, Devine, Purcell. NAY: None.
MOTION CARRIED.
BUSINESS ITEMS:
2. Hold a public hearing and consider an ordinance changing the zoning from C-1
(Local
Commercial District) to C-4 (Tourist Commercial District) zoning classification located at 1701
West Gore Boulevard. Exhibits: Ordinance No. 99-_____; Location Map; Application; Site
Plan; Map Illustrating Protest Petition; Petition (on file in City Clerk’s Office); LMAPC
Minutes.
Bob Bigham, City Planner, presented a view graph map and pointed out the location of the
proposed rezoning, as well as surrounding establishments and zoning classifications. He said the
tract in question is 200 feet by 138 feet and represents half of the frontage of the block on Gore.
The LMAPC held a public hearing on the request and seven persons appeared to speak against
the request for a drive-in restaurant at this location, and one person spoke in favor of the request.
The LMAPC by a four to two vote recommended denial of the rezoning. A petition against the
request was filed with the City Clerk's Office on August 23 and this represents 58.17% of the
land area within the 300 foot notification area. According to State Statute and City Code, this
does require a 3/4ths vote of the Council to approve the ordinance; therefore, six affirmative
votes are required. Notice of public hearing was mailed to 26 property owners within 300 feet
and proper notice was published in the Lawton Constitution.
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED.
John Ryder, #16 Ketch Creek Drive, Lawton, Oklahoma, objected to the rezoning of the property
due to traffic problems. He said he has owned the office building at 1709 W Gore for 21 years
and was very familiar with the traffic problems on the block. Ryder said exiting from this
proposed business going any direction but west will be a problem; traffic will have to cross a left
turn lane and two lanes of traffic going east if it is attempting to exit to the east. He said he felt
this would cause motorists to exit by way of the alley onto 17th Street and cars would have to
cross a sidewalk that children use to get to Wilson School, which could be a problem. Ryder said
the alley is narrow and used for utilities and residents set their trash out in the alley, and it could
create a dangerous situation.
Ryder said another problem is property values. He said he had checked the 300 foot zone
surrounding this and there are 13 single-family homes in that 300 feet; these are people who live
in the homes and they are not rent houses but homeowners. Some of the residents have lived in
their homes for 25 to 30 years. Ryder said the noise, lights and increase in traffic would lower
property values. Some of the homes will be located within 100 to 150 feet of the proposed
business, which is pretty close and the backyards would be within 50 feet of the parking lot.
Ryder said the present zoning of C-1 is the correct zoning for this property. There are a number
of businesses that can be built in C-1 that the residents would not object to that would be very
compatible with the neighborhood.
Beller asked which way people turn when they exit from Ryder's parking lot. Ryder said they
have to be very careful when they turn east but they are in the middle of the block, where this
would be closer to the light. Beller asked if they still have to cross the left turn lane. Ryder said
no, the left turn lane does not extend to his property. Beller said if a barrier were installed to
cause traffic to go west, that would solve the problem. Ryder said he did not know, but knew he
had a problem going east from his property and there is no left turn lane in front of it. Ryder said
the traffic backs up in the stacking lane now. Beller said he had driven it when there had been
traffic stacked there and had made it a point the last week to loop the block a number of times.
Ryder said he appreciated that and had been at this location for 21 years and could attest to how
the traffic had changed.
Delbert Warren, applicant, said the traffic in Lawton is not a problem but a blessing to anyone
who is in business, so it should be viewed as positive rather than negative. He said Ryder
mentioned the school children. D. Warren said he had visited with Mr. Douglas, who is the
crossing guard, and he stated that in the morning about 20-25 children cross the street, at lunch
there are two to four children crossing the street, and in the afternoon, there are 20-30 children.
He said during the winter, about 16 children cross the road, and that street is controlled and
probably the safest intersection in Lawton due to the traffic light, flashing yellow light and the
crossing guard. D. Warren said if he thought this would harm one child, he would not attempt it.
He said he did not feel the traffic should be used as a reason to deter someone from realizing
financial gain from a property. D. Warren said the turn lane was put in to stack cars to turn and
not to impede traffic.
D. Warren said the area is declining in population and that he had received facts from an
organization in Newport Beach, California, showing since 1990 the population has dropped 12%.
He said in the half mile area around this location, there are 383 vacant houses today, there
are1,509 total houses within this half mile radius and 883 of them are renter occupied, not owner
occupied. D. Warren said he would appreciate favorable consideration, and if not, they would
live with that too, and all go away as friends.
Williams said the information shows the footprint of the building on the proposed location. He
asked if patrons of Sonic would be able to come down the alleyway and pull in for service or if
there would be a fence to prevent that. D. Warren said there are businesses all over Lawton
where people use the alley for egress and they will use the alley here; they would pave the alley
to keep down the dust and put up a fence and try to get along with the people because they are his
customers.
D. Warren said the information submitted is not a plan. He said he was not trying to get a
building permit and that was just a site description that was drawn because it would cost $30,000
to get a blueprint, and he did not want to get that if he had no use for it. Williams said he had
heard objections about cars coming down the alley but some of those would be overcome if a
fence were put up to prevent access from the alleyway or a barrier that would not allow
customers to exit the facility and turn back to the east across the traffic lanes. D. Warren said it
would seem better to have three or four exits from a business than one as far as dispersing the
traffic, and that he would like to keep the alley but would pave it for the entire block.
Purcell said when you are going west on Gore after the light, people will be coming from that
direction and make a right into the Sonic. He asked if Mr. Warren was planning to build a turning
lane to allow them to turn right or if they would turn off of Gore into the Sonic. D. Warren said
you cannot put in a turnbay at that location because there is not enough room and that none of the
businesses on the major roadways have collecting areas for traffic to turn. Purcell said it was not
Mr. Warren's problem, but that there is a major problem at the corner of Sheridan Road and Gore
Boulevard; it is not the restaurant's fault but the way people drive and that was why he had asked
about getting the cars off the street. D. Warren said it would be 77 feet down and not on the
corner.
Shanklin said the City had denied ingress/egress from alleys in the past and made them do other
things. Bigham said an alley cannot be used as a primary access to a business and a key point
with the alley is the screening requirement; the code has an option as to whether the fence would
be placed on the south or north side of the alley and the residents may not allow the screening to
be placed on the north side of the alley. Bigham said if the screening must be placed on the south
side of the alley, it would limit vehicular access to the business. Bigham said the code does not
allow an alley to be the primary access to the parking lot of a business. Shanklin said other
businesses had to adjust their plans to meet that requirement.
Mr. Wyrick, 1710 Arlington, said he has lived at this address for 20 years. He said there is more
traffic in the alley due to Mr. Ryder's business and there has been more water run off because any
time you pave an area completely, there will be water run off. Wyrick said the Sonic customers
who want to go back to the east will use the alley to get to 17th Street or circle the block in front
of his house. He said he saw no advantage to having this high volume traffic that this business
would create.
D. Warren said he had been in this business for 25 years in Lawton and did not think the Sonic
Drive-Ins had increased traffic on any major artery at all. He said the traffic count on Gore was
12,500 cars some years ago and is probably 12,600 now, and the Sonic would not create more
traffic.
Francine James, 1706 Arlington, said she was opposed to this due to the noise level and traffic.
She said her father passed away a month ago and she did not want to be subjected to young
people revving their engines and squealing out of the drive-in with loud music coming from the
car windows as she has noticed when attending the Sonic's on Cache Road, and they do not close
until midnight. She said the families in the neighborhood go to bed before that and some are
elderly. James said it would be dangerous to the children crossing the alley if there is an exit and
entrance through the alley.
Ruth Massad, 17th and Arlington, said she was definitely opposed to the request and had lived in
her home since 1950. She said she maintains her property well and has to pick up a lot of trash
every morning from her yard. Massad said there is a lot of noise now from the traffic on Gore.
She said it was not fair to the residents to have to think about buying another home because they
could not; they are too old to buy new homes and would be dead by the time they were paid for
or before. Massad asked Council members to consider whether they would like this to be across
the street from their homes. She said she had nothing against Sonic or drive-in restaurants and
that Mr. Warren seemed like a very nice person. She said he had asked her to take her name off
of the petition and she said she could not because she was one of the ones who started it and
definitely wanted it considered.
Norman Russell, 1704 Arlington, said his granddaughter attends Wilson School and crosses that
road, and he usually walks her to school. He said there is already a lot of traffic and there are a
lot of school children who walk down the sidewalk to the school. Russell said the alley is very
narrow and if it was used for loading and unloading, cars could not get through it. He said he saw
a lot of problems with it and was against having it there. Russell said he liked his home, had lived
there for three years, and planned to live there until he died. He said it was not right for the
neighbors to have to move out because they were dissatisfied that someone else wanted to put
this in.
Haywood asked Russell how long he had lived in the house. Russell said he bought it and
remodeled it and had lived there 2 ½ years.
D. Warren said there was an article in the paper recently stating there is a good possibility that
Wilson School will be closed next year and the children may not be going there.
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED.
Beller said it is hard to support something when there are so many nice people coming forward to
state their concerns, but that he had driven the area being discussed and did not see the problems
that were brought out, although he may have seen it had he lived there. He said he went to the
three Sonics in Lawton today and last Sunday and there was not one piece of debris on those
three lots except one soda can on Lee Boulevard, and Sonic does not sell canned sodas so it came
from somewhere else; it was a very clean operation for food service, which he had been in for 35
years. Beller said he rolled his window down and there was no noise at any of the locations and
heard no music; ordering is done through a phone type system and it is not loud, so some of the
fears are certainly founded but some are unfounded. He said the businesses are first class
operations. Beller said if a person owns a piece of property and it can
accommodate a business, then he felt a responsibility to approve the rezoning. He said he knew
there was a lot of opposition and it was hard to stand up against a group as formidable as this but
he felt there was probably opposition when the rezoning was done for Mr. Ryder's insurance
company but it was a good use of the property and it happens that way.
Beller said he felt east turns would have to be prohibited from this location, and the alley should
not be used as egress or ingress and should be paved and made one-way and work with the
residents on that. He said he thought the school children problem was non-existent. Beller said he
felt the location could accommodate a business.
MOVED by Beller, SECOND by Warren, to approve the rezoning from C-1 to C-5 located at
1701 West Gore Boulevard and adopt Ordinance No. 99-34, waive reading of the ordinance, read
the title only.
SUBSTITUTE MOTION by Shanklin, SECOND by Haywood, to deny the rezoning request from
C-1 to C-4.
Shanklin said the request was for C-4 and not C-5 as Beller stated in his motion. Shanklin said he
represents this area in his ward and identified with the children's problems.
Purcell said this is a no-win situation and he felt for what Mr. Warren was trying to do and
thought the Sonics were great. He agreed they were clean and not noisy, however, he was very
concerned with the traffic problem on Gore, not travelling on Gore but exiting from Gore into the
location and will exit from the location back onto Gore. Purcell said he had driven by a couple of
times during the week, after receiving telephone calls, and found a situation that caused major
problems further on down on Gore. He said there is no way that someone coming from the east
on Gore could turn into this location without causing a major problem, and something needs to
be done about those problems so he could not support the rezoning mainly due to the traffic
problem. He said this was done previously a little further west on Gore and the traffic has
become a problem so he would support the substitute motion.
VOTE ON SUBSTITUTE MOTION: AYE: Haywood, Smith, Williams, Purcell, Shanklin.
NAY: Beller, Warren, Devine. SUBSTITUTE MOTION CARRIED.
A recess was called at 7:40 p.m. Meeting reconvened at 7:45 p.m. with roll call reflecting all
members present.
3. Hold a public hearing and adopt resolutions declaring the structures at 806
and 806 ½ SW
15th Street to be dilapidated and detrimental to the health and safety of the community, and
authorize the expenditure of CDBG Funds, if necessary, to demolish the structures. Exhibits:
Resolution No. 99-120.
Dan Tucker, Code Administration Director, reviewed background information including
numerous previous actions by Council. The owner obtained a remodel permit which was revoked
after no work had been done for 30 days. Background information from the agenda item is
included for the record as follows: "1) The attached resolutions declare these structures
dilapidated and declare for their removal. The specified structures are presently dilapidated and
vacant. The property owners and mortgage holders, if applicable, are as indicated on the attached
resolutions and have been notified of this public hearing by certified mail.
2) These structures were presented to Council 16 October 1997, 29 June 1999 and 10 August
1999.
3) These dilapidated structures at the location specified above have been inspected by the
Housing Inspector and the Fire Marshal and found to be in dilapidated condition, detrimental to
the health, safety and welfare of the community and to create a fire hazard and blighting
influence."
Devine asked how long it would be before this will be removed if it is condemned. Tucker said
we would go out for bids this week and probably 4-5 days will be needed to get the bids, then the
contractor would have 30 days to remove the structures.
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED.
Charles Sartain, owner, said he got a structure re-wired and that was inspected by Mr. Cruz in
Code Admin. He reviewed other projects he was working on and stated some of his materials and
other property had been stolen. He said he had pictures and had shown then to Mr.
Woommavovah. Sartain said that he had said it would take him six months to get the work done,
as he had asked for last time.
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED.
MOVED by Devine, SECOND by Williams, to put this back on for condemnation and adopt
Resolution No. 99-120.
Vincent explained that if Council adopts this resolution, the property would be demolished.
VOTE ON MOTION: AYE: Warren, Smith, Williams, Devine, Purcell, Beller. NAY: Shanklin,
Haywood. MOTION CARRIED.
(Title only) Resolution
No. 99-120
A resolution determining certain structures to be dilapidated and detrimental to the health,
benefit, and welfare of the community, and ordering that the buildings be demolished and
removed.
4. Hold a public hearing on the Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation
Report
(CAPER) for Federal Fiscal Year (FFY) 1998, receive citizen input, approve the report and
authorize the Mayor to execute the approval document. Exhibits: None.
Frank Pondrom, Housing and Community Development Director, presented slides showing
expenses in each category and the required percentage of expenditure.
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED. No one appeared to speak. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED.
MOVED by Shanklin, SECOND by Haywood, to approve the report and authorize the Mayor to
execute the approval documents. AYE: Smith, Williams, Devine, Purcell, Shanklin, Beller,
Haywood, Warren. NAY: None. MOTION CARRIED.
5. Hold a public hearing to consider Change 1 to the Consolidated One-Year Action
Plan for
FFY 1998, receive input from citizens, consider approving the change, and authorize the Mayor
to execute the approval documents. Exhibits: Table 2 (FFY 1998 Home Funding Allocations
Summary)(Revised) to Change 1; Listing of Proposed Projects.
Pondrom recommended moving $8,500 from the rental rehabilitation program to the first time
homebuyer program, stating there had been no interest expressed in the rental program.
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED. No one appeared to speak. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED.
MOVED by Haywood, SECOND by Warren, to approve Change 1 and authorize the Mayor to
execute the approval documents. AYE: Williams, Devine, Purcell, Shanklin, Beller, Haywood,
Warren, Smith. NAY: None. MOTION CARRIED.
6. Hold a public hearing to consider revisions to the Citizen Participation Plan
for Housing and
Community Development, receive input from citizens, consider approving the proposed change
and authorize the Mayor to execute the approval documents. Exhibits: None.
Pondrom said the current plan requires public hearings at each neighborhood center and the area
of the H.C. King Center has had a demographic shift and block grant funds cannot be used in that
area. He said it would be better if they were not required to have public hearings at each of the
centers but rather be available on-call to meet with neighborhood groups. Pondrom said there are
a couple of other minor, housekeeping changes but this is the main change being considered.
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED. No one appeared to speak. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED.
Williams asked that information be provided on demographics and per capita income. He said he
felt it was important that staff hold meetings with citizens to gain their input and that people
would not know to call in and request a meeting. Williams said he did not support this revision.
Pondrom outlined efforts made to receive citizen input and Williams asked if there was a plan for
this. Pondrom said yes, but it was not presented to Council. Williams said this concerns $1.5
million in federal funding and it is important to get the information out to the public.
MOVED by Haywood, SECOND by Devine, to approve the new Citizen Participation Plan and
authorize the Mayor to sign the approval documents.
Warren said he felt this would be an opportunity for citizens to form their own groups and
request meetings on their time frame as opposed to staff setting a date for them to attend.
VOTE ON MOTION: AYE: Devine, Purcell, Shanklin, Beller, Haywood, Warren, Smith. NAY:
Williams. MOTION CARRIED.
Smith asked that Item 8 be considered before Item 7 and this was done.
8. Consider the recommendation from Staff and the Community Playground Committee
for the
park location of the new Children’s Community Playground. Exhibits: None.
Gary Salva, Parks & Recreation Director, said the Children's Community Playground Committee
is anxious to begin the $150,000 fund raising effort to bring a community playground to Lawton.
The Committee at the July 13 meeting recommended the playground be at Elmer Thomas Park;
the original site recommended by the Committee was the 35th Division Park. The Committee
appeared before the Parks & Recreation Commission after the July 13 meeting recommending
the Elmer Thomas Park location; the Parks & Recreation Commission recommendation was the
first recommendation would be Elmer Thomas Park and the second recommendation would be
Greer Park. Staff recommendation is that the community playground site be 38th Street Greer
Park.
Smith said Mr. Steve Johnson requested to speak and Council agreed to receive input.
Steve Johnson, #7 NW Fort Sill Boulevard, President of the Old Town North Neighborhood
Association, said 35th Division Park is located on the block bounded by Dearborn and Columbia,
and 5th and 6th Streets. He said Council approved 35th Division Park as the site for this new
playground on 23 February, however, some members had reservations about the site and
requested an independent committee examine potential locations and report their findings, and
Salva presented that information. Johnson said the committee held a public hearing at the
community center on 21st Street on 26 July and recommended that the park be located, in
descending order of preference, first at Elmer Thomas Park , second at Greer Park, and third at
Louise D. McMahon Park.
Johnson pointed out that neither the committees nor staff even mentioned 35th Division Park in
their choices after Council had initially approved the site. He spoke in favor of retaining the
initial site of 35th Division Park for the playground site. Johnson presented a slide showing
availability of facilities at each of the park sites mentioned.
Johnson said 35th Division is shown as a neighborhood park, but it is still available to the city as
a whole, so the fact that it is shown as a neighborhood park, as opposed to a community park, is
merely semantics. He said 35th Division Park is under utilized and the architect designed the
park to fit this site. Johnson said the playground should be the major focus of the park in which it
is located and be away from heavy traffic and have mature shade trees and homes on all sides. He
said the only apparent shortcoming for 35th Division Park is the lack of parking, and the need for
parking will subside after the playground has been in existence for some time. Johnson said the
body of the facts clearly show the best location for the playground to be 35th Division Park and
he asked that a decision be made at this time on the site.
Beller said a group is raising the funds for the park and asked if Old Town North would
undertake the fund raising if 35th Division is selected and those raising the funds disagree with
that site. Johnson said he did not understand that the committee raising the funds had selected a
site. Beller said it was his understanding from an earlier presentation by Mr. Glenn that if it were
put in 35th Division Park that some of the major contributors would withhold their contributions
and that he would verify that. Beller said his question was if they declined to raise the funds due
to the location, would Old Town North assume that responsibility. Johnson said no, they could
not assume the responsibility of raising the funds. Beller asked if Council should put the
playground in a different location than the fund raising group recommended. Johnson said that
group had not recommended any particular location. Beller said it seemed they had
recommended Greer Park. Johnson said that was not the playground committee; the committee
that recommended Greer Park was the staff. Beller said the information shows the staff and the
playground committee recommended Greer Park and that he would clarify that with Mr. Glenn.
Mark Glenn, #1 SE 75th Street, said his playground committee just wanted to get it built and it
was his idea to put it in 35th Division but he was asked to be flexible and that was why he put it
out for comment and the other sites were suggested. He said that committee agreed that either
Elmer Thomas or Greer Park were acceptable, and that they would raise the money wherever it is
built. Glenn said no one completely agrees on the location. Haywood asked Glenn where he
wanted it and Glenn said his idea was 35th Division Park. Beller said he thought the reason for
that was the trees and location. Glenn agreed and said several had concerns about that location so
they started receiving input. Beller said the parking was the problem in 35th Division and
everyone wanted to have the park in their area.
Ken Isaac, 310 NW Compass, said he was the PR Chairman for Glenn's committee. He said he
was not speaking in that capacity, but as a parent and concerned citizen. Isaac said he was not
present to support any particular location but asked that a decision be made tonight. He said he
appreciated the caution being exercised with regard to the location, and that this has been under
discussion for four months. Isaac said the majority just want the playground to be built and a
decision is needed so the committee can go forward. He said 150 children are serving on this
committee and met with the architect and named it "Kids Zone". Isaac asked that differences
be
put aside and the kids be considered.
Beller said the only negative aspect with 35th Division Park was the lack of parking. He asked
Salva to comment in that regard.
Salva presented a slide of 35th Division Park and stated it is a neighborhood park. He said the
definition of a neighborhood park is to serve a small, immediate area of the community according
to the national organization. 35th Division contains tennis courts, a wading pool and restrooms.
Locating the playground in 35th Division would eliminate an open space, grassy area; restroom
would have to be completely re-done; walking paths in the park would have to be upgraded, and
parking would have to be provided, which would cut into the amount of space available in the
park itself, the trees and sidewalks, and could result in children running between cars and a
danger, although the need for parking may subside after the novelty wears off. He said the Greer
Park site could be more easily viewed by police and less prone to vandalism. Salva said the staff
recommendation for Greer Park includes the fact that a large restroom could be built which
would accommodate both the tennis complex and the playground. He said one of the deficiencies
at Greer Park is lack of shade so landscaping will be required.
Susie Erwin, 205 SW 78th Street, said she is the general coordinator for the community
playground project and attended the Council meeting when 35th Division Park was selected as
the site. She said she bought into that idea also, throughout this project, however, as it has
evolved and a great number of volunteers have accumulated, they talked about different concerns
and ideas about the location. Erwin said she felt it would be an injustice if she did not represent
those concerns tonight, and pointed out the greatest concern was a sense of safety and security to
the parents to bring their children to a location. She said 35th Division Park is more isolated and
there is a sense of a lack of safety in that area because of some of the surrounding neighborhood.
Erwin said Old Town North has a very strong neighborhood association and she was thankful for
their support, but wanted to bring this to Council's attention. She said they had major
contributors who suggested they would not support the project because of the lack of safety that
they feel.
Erwin said by locating it in Greer Park, it would be more visible and the parents would be able to
see the children more clearly, and there may not be as much vandalism take place because it is
not in an isolated area. She said this will enhance the quality of life in Lawton and the visibility
of 38th Street would enhance Lawton as a whole; newcomers to town and people driving through
Lawton could see it and think that is a community where they want to be because there is
something here for the children. Erwin said nestled in a neighborhood is a beautiful area but it is
not seen. She said the playground is not meant to draw tourism, but if we are going to spend this
kind of money and effort, we might as well use it to enhance the community. Erwin said this is a
$400,000 plus playground; $150,000 is being raised because materials and labor will be donated,
but a project this large is certainly an enhancement to the community and should be a little more
visible.
Shanklin asked if Ms. Erwin had seen the park in Enid. Erwin said she had been to Enid's park,
which is in a historical warehouse district and has a very cold feeling; no homes are around it at
all, but it is not in a high traffic area and it is hard to find. Erwin said there were no children
in
Enid's park when she was there, but there is no grass around it and it does not have the feeling of
a park or recreational area.
Shanklin said the reason he supported it in 35th Division is the central corridor of Lawton needs
a junior high that is comparable to those in east and west Lawton; we need a jail downtown to
keep Lawton proper solidified. He said if we lose some of the items he just mentioned,
downtown Lawton and the courthouse, downtown Lawton will decay in ten years and this would
help solidify this end of town and it is close to the Mall. Shanklin said there are some reasons not
to put it there and they could not raise all of the money themselves, but the Old Town North
group is ready and willing to go to work on it, and once it is put in, some of the residents will
come back. He said many homes are being inhabited and remodeled.
MOVED by Beller, SECOND by Devine, to approve Greer Park as the site of the new children's
community playground.
SUBSTITUTE MOTION by Shanklin, SECOND by Haywood, that we make 35th Division the
selected site for the new children's community playground. AYE: Shanklin, Haywood. NAY:
Purcell, Beller, Warren, Smith, Williams, Devine. SUBSTITUTE MOTION FAILED.
Shanklin asked where the funds would come from for the items that will have to be done and
asked if Salva was running the budget now and knew where he would get the funds. Beller said if
Council agrees to put it in Greer Park, he was sure they would find the funding for it at Greer
Park and we seem to be able to find money when we need it. Beller said staff had done an
exemplary job of showing why it should be at Greer Park. Shanklin said the parking at Greer
Park is gravel and there would likely be a cost involved in improving the parking, and that was
the only advantage Greer Park had, if you want to call that parking. Shanklin said it may be
visible, but it is the wrong choice.
VOTE ON ORIGINAL MOTION: AYE: Beller, Haywood, Warren, Smith, Williams, Devine,
Purcell. NAY: Shanklin. MOTION CARRIED.
7. Hold a public hearing to consider Change 1 to the Consolidated One-Year Action
Plan for
FFY 1999, receive input from citizens, consider approving the change, and authorize the Mayor
to execute the approval documents. Exhibits: Table 1 (FFY 1999 CDBG Funding Allocations
Summary)
Pondrom said when the Plan was approved to start July 1, 1999, the issue remaining to be
addressed was the wading pool in George Lee Park. He said after the application was submitted,
they worked to come up with a change and in doing so, they identified money that could be used
for additional projects. Pondrom said they found about $134,108 that could be used for projects
and went through the process required by HUD to do a change. He said many people were
interested in this funding.
Williams asked if public hearings were held before this hearing tonight and if Council was aware
of them. Pondrom said yes, they were published and a copy of the schedule was provided to the
City Manager.
Purcell said the agenda sheet shows the same project twice. Pondrom said he did that to show
that there is existing funding for those projects and would explain it during his presentation.
Pondrom presented slides and recommended $6,480 be used to write a grant for the Weed &
Seed Program, $28,000 be granted for the Youth With A Purpose Project (Zoe N.E.E.D.),
$20,000 be allocated for the Town Hall Roof Project, and $5,200 be allocated to design a
Skateboard Facility. He said $5,000 was included for the Ranch Oaks Park wading pool and
recommended $80,908 be included for this to be able to include an ADA compliant restroom.
Pondrom said the funding for the 35th Division Park playground in the amount of $50,000 would
not need to be considered as Council had selected another site for the playground.
Williams said he had a question as to the boundaries where CDBG funding could be used and
that he assumed the boundaries for 35th Division Park would qualify as an area where CDBG
funding could be used. Pondrom said we have put money in 35th Division Park as a
neighborhood park, and as to the boundaries, they would draw a circle in connection with where
other parks are located in the area and inside that service area there must be at least 51% low and
moderate income residents. Pondrom said if that were the sole criteria, there would not be a
problem with the funding, however, there are other criteria. Pondrom said if they were building a
municipal swimming pool for use by the entire community, they would have to consider the
entire community, rather than the more immediate area.
Williams said he was trying to identify where the circle was drawn and requested Pondrom
provide him with a copy of the map. Pondrom said the map would be in the documents to be
published and Williams asked if Pondrom had a copy and could provide one and response was
yes.
Haywood asked if Pondrom was recommending Alternative A or B and Pondrom said
Alternative A.
Pondrom said hearings were held before the LMAPC and the Parks & Recreation Commission
and both Commission's recommended Alternative A.
Purcell said he had a question on the current funding versus the proposed funding in the
commentary. He said he understood finding an additional $134,308 and asked if that included the
funding shown as current. Pondrom said no. Purcell said Alternative A for proposed should not
have $134,108 but that amount plus $25,000. Pondrom said the current figures are in the budget.
Purcell asked if the "proposed" column should be $134,108 plus $25,000. Pondrom said yes.
Purcell asked if the Youth With A Purpose would get $48,000 and Pondrom said yes. Purcell
asked if the Ranch Oaks Wading Pool would get $85,908. Pondrom said yes. Purcell said he did
not know they should be added together and thought the "proposed" was what Council was being
asked to approve.
Purcell asked where the $6,480 would come from for the Weed & Seed grant writing. Pondrom
said it could come from the current year's contingency. Purcell asked if it would take almost
$86,000 to build a wading pool and restroom. Pondrom said the restroom itself runs between
$30,000 and $40,000. Smith spoke in favor of the funding for Weed & Seed for Lawton
Outreach. Pondrom said he would bring back an item for a contract in that regard and show the
funding from CDBG Contingency.
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED.
James Stewart, 627 SW Sedalia Place, spoke in favor of the Ranch Oaks Park wading pool
project. He said many people and children in the neighborhood would use the facility, which
would help keep them off of the street and put them in a more supervised situation where
neighborhood parents could care for them. Stewart said it was critical to include a restroom with
this project.
Quinn Sorensen, 4625 W Gore, #12, said he would like to address the skate park issue. He said
there are probably 2,000 people who ride bikes, skateboards and roller blades and more would do
it if there were a place it could be done where they would not be harassed by police officers or
get hit by cars. Sorensen said they really have no place to enjoy this sport, and the City builds
basketball courts and other facilities for people to use, and they did not feel it was unreasonable
to ask for some funding to help them be able to do what they like to do. He said groups go to
Norman, Dallas and Houston just to use their skate parks, and a park here might help bring
people in from other places.
Beller said funding is shown only for planning such a park. He asked if we would try to pursue
finding additional funds for this after that point. Beller said this has been brought up before as a
need and he commended Sorensen on his presentation. Pondrom said CDBG funds can be used to
plan such a park. Shanklin said CDBG funds could not be used if it were to be built in Greer Park
and Council should be told where it could be built. Sorensen said it would be used regardless of
the location. Pondrom said to be able to use CDBG funds, you would have to look at how it was
built and who it was built for; if it is built in a small park and it is a small facility in a low to
moderate income area, CDBG funds could be used; if it is a larger facility to serve the entire
community, regardless of location, CDBG funds could not be used.
Purcell said $5,200 is included for the plan only and asked if the plan would be back in time so
funding for construction could be included in next year's budget. Salva said a skateboard park
was built in Columbia, MO and the cost was $300,000, so clarification is needed as to the scope
of the project. Salva said a parking lot with a ramp or two would be a smaller scope, and a
consultant could identify the needs, the size and location within CDBG areas, and it is wise to
plan before building especially when we really do not know the scope of the project at this point.
Sorensen said they had a video on skate parks and the cost was about $8 per square foot, and a
10,000 square foot facility could probably accommodate 200 people at a time.
Devine said instead of paying a consultant thousands of dollars and still not having anything but
some papers, he suggested the young people form a group and design what they would like to
have and they could do some research on it and it would be a good education for them. He
suggested the youth become involved and work with Salva.
Lt. Col. Ewing asked if this was only for skateboards or if it included in-line hockey and in-line
roller blading. Sorensen said it was not so much for the hockey, but they need ramps mainly.
Beller asked if a facility such as this was available at Fort Sill. Ewing said not in terms of
skateboards, but they had built an in-line hockey rink by converting tennis courts, and Fort Sill
worked with Lawton Parks & Recreation and opened it as a community service facility and they
have an on-going league now that has grown by a third every season it has been held. Ewing said
the number of children using the facility has doubled in a year and they have spring and fall
seasons; adult hockey has picked up now also.
Jean Matthews, 6579 NW Eisenhower, said she was a mother of an in-line skater. She said
wading pools are great but skating is done all year except when the weather is very, very
extreme. Matthews spoke in favor of funding for this item and agreed with having the skaters
provide input but said she felt the input of a consultant would be valuable.
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED.
MOVED by Haywood, SECOND by Devine, to approve Change #1, Alternative A, and authorize
the Mayor to execute the approval documents.
Beller asked if this alternative includes the restroom with the wading pool and response was yes.
Smith asked what needed to be done to provide funding for Lawton Outreach (Weed & Seed).
Pondrom said he would return a grant agreement for that funding.
VOTE ON MOTION: AYE: Beller, Haywood, Warren, Smith, Williams, Devine, Purcell,
Shanklin. NAY: None. MOTION CARRIED.
9. Consider adopting an ordinance amending Chapter 20, Article 1, Section 20-101,
Lawton
City Code, 1995, by amending provisions relating to parking vehicles and trailers on public right
of ways in residential areas. Exhibits: Ordinance No. 99-34.
Warren said he requested this item and Council received comments several meetings ago about
tractors and trailers in neighborhoods. He said those comments combined with quite a few
telephone calls prompted him to bring this item, as well as the next item. Warren said Item 9 is in
regard to parking on the right of way, which basically comes down to parking on the city streets,
and the changes to the existing ordinance are an addition of cab and chassis exceeding one ton
rated capacity as far as vehicles that would not be allowed to park on the right of way between
sunset and sunrise; and it would prohibit parking any trailer in front of a house or on any public
way between 7 p.m. and 7 a.m., to include a boat that is on a trailer.
MOVED by Warren, to adopt Ordinance No. 99-34, waive reading of the ordinance, read the title
only.
Smith said Glen Alford had asked to speak on this issue and Council agreed to receive comment.
Glen Alford, 6712 SW Embassy Circle, said he had been a Lawton resident since 1957. He said
most people have the idea that a truck is big, ugly and makes noise. Alford said he did not
represent a trucking industry but was representing his own interest and that he owned a trucking
company and a wrecker service and a repair facility, and that he was on the City Council when
the ordinance was passed that is currently on the books.
Alford said if a truck were parked in a driveway, it would not block any city streets, and a lot of
people in Lawton are involved with the trucking industry. He said he had a payroll of about
$750,000 a year and 95% of this comes from trucks, and the amount of trucks in Lawton will
increase due to Republic Paper; Duncan is putting in a regional facility for Family Dollar and
will have about 300 trucks a day and part of those people will live in Lawton and bring their
trucks here. Alford said many who operate cross country trucks live in them and it is their second
home; the trucks are valued from $100,000 and up so they have to take care of them, and many
park them in their driveways. He said the noise discussed may have come from reever trucks and
those were not allowed in residential areas under the old ordinance. Alford said he felt the
current ordinance would take care of the problems if it were enforced. He said gasoline trucks are
parked inside the city limits, as well as those carrying hazardous gases, and this was not allowed
under the old ordinance and it should be enforced.
Alford said he had a problem with the one ton requirement; many City employees drive
equipment home at night to be able to respond to emergency calls, such as water main breaks,
and he felt many of those would be in excess of one ton. He said he was involved in the wrecker
business and only two wreckers in Lawton fall under the one ton classification and most of his
were two ton. Alford pointed out the need to be able to respond to wrecker calls in a timely
manner, which would be hampered if a driver was not able to take a wrecker home. He said the
existing ordinance is adequate and should be enforced.
Purcell said the ordinance being discussed now says you cannot park them in the street, and
asked if Alford had a problem with the proposed ordinance saying you cannot park a one ton and
above in the street. Alford said it was his understanding that the original ordinance said that
already. Purcell said the next item deals with that. Vincent said we are dealing with Section 20-101C
of the current City Code and it would read, without any changes, "no person may park from
sunrise to sunset upon any street right of way any truck tractor or trailer having dual wheels or
the chassis thereof or any boat trailer or any vehicle having a width greater than 84" within areas
zoned R-1 single family, R-2 family dwelling district, R-3 multiple family or R-4". Vincent said
we are deleting the word "street" and adding "public right of way" because that
is what we call
them now.
Alford asked if that would include the easement in the front lawn that people must mow and keep
clean or receive a ticket. Vincent said the proposal is to not park on public right of way and it is
public right of way from the outside right of way line which includes the paved portion and the
curb. Alford asked if it included the grass in his front yard and Vincent said yes.
Vincent said another proposed change is to add "or a cab and chassis that exceeds one ton rated
capacity" and then delete "or chassis thereof" and delete "boat" in front of
"trailer" so it will
apply to any trailer, and the other change is to remove the word "any" from in front of "vehicle".
He said those are the only proposed changes on this ordinance; this does not apply to the
driveway and that comes in on the next agenda item.
Purcell said he thought the intent of this ordinance was to not allow these vehicles to be parked
in the street, but he was also hearing you cannot park them on the easement on your lot. Vincent
said the other ordinance said that too and the only change was from street to public and the other
one said street right of way, and it is called public right of way now instead of street right of way;
that is a ministerial change and we have not changed the current code; you cannot park today
between the curb line and the right of way line in the grassy area in front of your house. Purcell
asked if the next agenda item was the one which would prohibit trucks from being parked in a
driveway and Vincent said yes.
Purcell said if a truck is parked in a driveway but sticks out up to the edge of the street but not
in
the street, it would be over the easement but it is still in the driveway, he asked if this ordinance
would preclude that. Vincent said it is already precluded; the current ordinance has that in there
and the only thing done here is to take out the word street and insert the word public; street right
of way and public right of way mean the same thing, but the current usage within the business is
"public right of way".
Purcell said what we are trying to do is say you cannot park it in the street because cars will not
be able to drive by; the next item deals with parking trucks in a person's driveway. Vincent said
this ordinance can be amended to say you cannot park on the paved portion of the public right of
way. Warren said he had never even considered the grass. Alford said that would be acceptable.
Purcell said the intent was to not block the street from other cars trying to get by. Shanklin said
you cannot park a vehicle on a surface that is not asphalt or gravel. Vincent said to accomplish
what is being suggested, it should read "no person may park from sunrise to sunset within or
upon the paved portion of the public right of way". Beller said the wording is transposed and it
should be from sunset to sunrise as opposed to the way Vincent read it and Vincent agreed.
MOVED by Warren, SECOND by Smith, to adopt Ordinance No. 99-34 to include the language
change stated by the City Attorney, waive reading of the ordinance, read the title only.
(Title read by Clerk) Ordinance
No. 99-34
An ordinance relating to streets and sidewalks, amending Section 20-101, Article 1, Chapter 20,
Lawton City Code, 1995, by amending provisions for parking vehicles and trailers on public
right-of-ways in residential areas.
VOTE ON MOTION: AYE: Haywood, Warren, Smith, Williams, Devine, Purcell, Shanklin,
Beller. NAY: None. MOTION CARRIED.
10. Consider adopting an ordinance amending Chapter 15, Article 5, Section 15-503,
Lawton
City Code, 1995, by amending provisions permitting the parking of commercial vehicles on any
lot occupied by a dwelling unit or any lot in a residential area. Exhibits: Ordinance No. 99-___.
Warren said the important thing to remember on this item is that it refers to commercial vehicles
only and does not include a personal vehicle or motor home. He said the changes are, instead of
just a commercial motor vehicle, it has added "with a cab and chassis of one ton rated capacity
or
less" which means you are allowed to park a one ton or less capacity in your driveway. Warren
said language was added to allow commercial motor vehicles with a cab and chassis that exceeds
one ton capacity are permitted on such lots only between 7 a.m. and 7 p.m. He said what this is
basically saying is that if you have a commercial vehicle that is in excess of one ton, you cannot
park it in your driveway or on any portion of your property between 7 p.m. and 7 a.m. for
residentially zoned property. Warren said there are arguments on both sides, but the complaints
were in regard to the noise from the vehicles starting during the night. He said he was not
extremely concerned with the safety issue but the noise and starting of the engines was a
concern. Warren said some complaints were in regard to a business being operated from a
residential property.
MOVED by Warren, to adopt Ordinance No. 99-35, waive reading of the ordinance, read the title
only.
Vincent said the language regarding not exceeding three axles was deleted. Glen Alford said if
you limit this to a one ton capacity, you will stop every wrecker in the City of Lawton from being
driven home at night. Warren said he knew some wreckers would be prohibited by this ordinance
but that pictures were being passed around of wreckers that could still be driven home. Alford
said only two would pass.
Beller said language was included "except in the case of an emergency" and asked if that was
an
ambiguous provision. Vincent said a fire truck could be driven into a residential area during the
night and be parked to put out a fire, as an example, or having a wrecker go into a residential area
at night to work on a wreck. Beller said he did not feel the language was clear. Warren said he
thought it was in case a truck ran out of gas or was broken but could not remember for sure.
Beller asked if the motion had died for lack of a second. Smith said he did not hear a second and
asked if there was a second to the motion. There was none. Smith declared the motion died for
lack of a second.
11. Consider adopting an ordinance approving an amendment to Chapter 1, Section
1-119 of
the Lawton City Code increasing the amount of fines and penalties that may be assessed by the
Municipal Court, providing for severability and establishing an effective date. Exhibits:
Ordinance No. 99-35.
Vincent said the State Legislature passed a law allowing municipal courts not of record to
increase the fines for certain things and limited fines in other areas, and allowed an increase in
the amount of time that people can be put in jail. On certain offenses, excluding traffic related
offenses, the fines are increased from a $200 maximum to a $500 maximum, and from a 30 day
maximum jail time to a 60 day maximum jail time. An area decreased is that on the exterior
boundary roads that are federal or state highways, the maximum penalty that can be assessed for
speeding of not more than 10 mph is $10 and court cost of $15, as well as the additional $7 state
court cost; the fine for that previously was $62.50 to $10 plus $22. Vincent said the ordinance
also includes the industrial pretreatment program in connection with the Wastewater Plant and it
is being moved to this section so all of the fines will be listed in one area of the code.
MOVED by Purcell, SECOND by Haywood, to approve Ordinance No. 99-35, waive reading of
the ordinance, read the title only, and establish an effective date of November 1, 1999.
Warren asked if the intent of changing this to a $10 maximum was to stop some of the smaller
communities from over doing that. Vincent said that was correct from the legislative history that
was published. Warren said it should not make a marked difference in Lawton's tickets.
(Title read by Clerk) Ordinance
No. 99-35
An ordinance relating to General Administration, increase the amount of fines and penalties to
conform with Oklahoma State Statutes and providing for an effective date.
VOTE ON MOTION: AYE: Warren, Smith, Williams, Devine, Purcell, Shanklin, Beller,
Haywood. NAY: None. MOTION CARRIED.
12. Discuss modifications to Council Policy 5-2, which establishes policies
and procedures to
regulate the sale of treated water outside the City limits and take appropriate action if necessary.
Exhibits: Council Policy 5-2.
Beller said he was recently appointed to serve on the Outside Water Sales Committee, and a
person outside the City limits who wants water goes to the Planning Department to ask to buy
water and the staff must respond that the area must be annexed and you must meet city codes. He
suggested Council consider changing that portion of Council Policy 5-2 that alludes to the area
having to be annexed into the corporate limits of the city and that no treated water will be sold
prior to annexation. Beller said those two parts should be stricken and the applicant should still
have to meet all other requirements, including the infrastructure having to be installed in
accordance with the City Code. He said we sell water on a regular basis to people outside the
City limits and the practice seems to conflict with that policy. Beller asked if that policy should
be returned in that manner if Council agrees. Vincent said Council should see the policy before
giving final approval and it would be appropriate to direct staff to make the appropriate revisions
and return it for Council action.
Beller said there is an item on tonight to consider Dr. McGath's request and it includes waiving
the policy. Vincent said staff will be recommending deletion of that item as there are problems
involved other than the policy. Beller asked if Dr. McGath was aware of that and Smith said it
would be covered shortly.
MOVED by Beller, SECOND by Purcell, to authorize the City Attorney to bring back Policy 5-2
deleting, on page 42 of today's agenda that has the developing timing areas two and three shown
as an attachment, and to strike "the areas must be annexed" and to strike the portion that
says no
treated water will be sold prior to annexation.
Devine said the proposal is for people to be able to continue to buy water without being annexed.
He said everyone is moving out of the City. Beller said a precedent has been set. Devine said he
understood that but it is easier to build outside the City limits and Lawton is doing everything it
can for them and is furnishing water to them but they do not have to abide by our rules or codes
and we get no taxes from them or anything. Devine asked when the properties would be annexed
and they would contribute like everyone else that is inside the City limits. Devine said this is just
enticing people to move outside of the City limits. Beller said we are selling water to other
governmental entities and you cannot annex them. Shanklin asked what taxes Lawton was
missing.
Warren said there is a whole direction for Council to decide as far as where the City of Lawton
should go; if we continue to sell water outside the City limits, we need to be willing to accept the
fact that the City proper is going to turn into an industrial, commercial area and the residents will
move out to where they do not have to follow the rules and they can still buy water, which is
fine. He said the reverse is also true, if we refuse to sell water and not make any adjustments to
the policy as it is, then we push the commercial and industrial out to a small extent and bring the
residential back in, and that is something the Council should decide as to the direction of the City
in ten or twenty years. Warren said he understood the reason for suggesting the policy be
changed but it should be noted that when the exception is made in the committee, it is generally
done with the understanding that the infrastructure will be put in to City standards, which is what
we truly want so when an area is annexed, the infrastructure is up to grade as far as what we
would accept.
Shanklin said we are making people meet the codes and did not know how you could build a
house that would stand up without meeting codes. He said they are inspected by state plumbers
and electricians if they are built outside the City limits. Shanklin said if we will sell the water
to
the people outside at the same cost Lawton residents are charged, it would be very simple. He
said some Lawton residents are not in a position to subsidize those outside the City limits and
that was what he had been trying to do for over a year was to get equity to those who live outside
and everyone he had talked to was willing to pay it because they have to have water and Lawton
has it to sell. Warren said price is not the issue.
Purcell asked if he heard correctly that we are selling water to individuals outside the city limits
cheaper than we are selling it to our citizens inside the city limits. Shanklin said yes, you
certainly did. Purcell asked the reason for that and Shanklin said he had been trying for a year to
get out of it; we sell it to them for $1.61 per thousand, one meter, 200 people tied on to it, we
charge them $14 to read the meter and $1.61 per thousand. Purcell asked why they do not change
it. Shanklin said some of the members wanted to charge an even smaller rate to Geronimo.
Purcell said there was a difference between governmental agencies and individuals, and
suggested an item be brought back regarding individual rates.
Beller suggested this item be separate from the rates and asked that the policy be amended so
Bigham does not have to tell people they cannot have water unless they are annexed. Shanklin
said Bigham does not do that, he brings the requests to the committee. Bigham said he tells the
applicants the proper procedure and advises them of the Council policy. Warren said a lot of
requests have been approved and asked how they all show up if they are all told they have to be
annexed. Bigham said he does not tell them to disregard the Council policy. Warren said Bigham
must explain they have the option of going forward with the request and Bigham said yes.
Williams asked if one of the responsibilities of the outside water committee was to set the prices
and make recommendations to the Council. Shanklin said they are the negotiating committee.
Beller said they are working on the price issue and a matrix is being developed and it will be
brought back to Council with a recommendation from the committee. Shanklin said he wanted to
be able to tell Lawton residents they are no longer subsidizing other people as far as the water.
Vincent asked if the policy change needed to go back to the outside water sales committee and
response was no.
VOTE ON MOTION: AYE: Smith, Williams, Devine, Purcell, Shanklin, Beller, Haywood,
Warren. NAY: None. MOTION CARRIED.
13. Consider awarding a construction contract to Wicker Construction Co.,
Inc., for the Public
Works/Engineering Administration Building Project #99-5 and authorizing additional funding for
this project. Exhibits: Location Map.
Jerry Ihler, Public Works Director, said bids were received and the low bid was from Wicker
Construction in the amount of $259,900. This bid was about 15% higher than the budgeted
amount; request was to transfer funds from the 1995 CIP Squaw Creek Sewer Line Project,
where funding is adequate even with the transfer, and asked that the contract be awarded.
Contract time is 180 days and Wicker has not had a contract with the City in the last 24 months.
MOVED by Shanklin, SECOND by Williams, to award the contract to Wicker Construction in
the amount of $259,900. AYE: Williams, Devine, Purcell, Shanklin, Beller, Haywood, Smith.
NAY: None. OUT: Warren. MOTION CARRIED.
14. Consider accepting two computers from the Oklahoma Developmental Disabilities
Council to promote access to electronic information systems by persons with disabilities and
authorize execution of the contract. Exhibits: None. (Contract on file in City Clerk’s Office)
MOVED by Williams, SECOND by Purcell, to approve the item. AYE: Devine, Purcell,
Shanklin, Beller, Haywood, Warren, Smith, Williams. NAY: None. MOTION CARRIED.
CONSENT AGENDA:
15. Consider the following damage claim recommended for approval: Terressa C.
Spencer.
Exhibits: Legal Opinion/Recommendation; Resolution No. 99-121.
(Title only) Resolution
No. 99-121
A resolution authorizing and directing the City Attorney to assist Terressa C. Spencer in filing
a
friendly suit in the District Court of Comanche County, Oklahoma, against the City of Lawton;
and authorizing the City Attorney to confess judgment therein in the reduced amount of Eight
Hundred Six Dollars and Eighty-Five Cents ($806.85).
ITEM 16 WAS CONSIDERED SEPARATELY AS SHOWN BELOW.
17. Consider approval of filing of releases of liens for the following
properties which were
demolished by the owners following Council action to condemn: 804 SW 4th Street, 1409 SW
Park Avenue, 1302 SW 21st Street and 1904 NW Andrews. Exhibits: Memorandum. Action:
Approval of item.
18. Consider adopting a street light resolution to authorize installation of
additional street lights
in residential areas. Exhibits: Street Light Resolution No. 410. Action: Approval of item to
install light at entrance to Gooch Park.
19. Consider a request for the removal of traffic control devices at the intersection
of NW 75th
Street and NW Willow Creek Drive. Exhibits: Excerpt, 9/16/99 draft Traffic Comm. Minutes.
Action: Denial of request to remove two stop signs at intersection of NW 75th and Willow Creek
making it a two-way stop. (Intersection to remain four-way stop).
20. Consider requests for the installation of traffic control devices in the
2600 block of NW
Cornell Avenue and in the alley behind 1501 SW Roosevelt Avenue. Exhibits: Excerpt from
9/16/99 draft Traffic Commission Minutes. Action: Denial of requests for traffic controls as
shown.
21. Consider a resolution authorizing the installation of traffic control devices
at NW Cache
Road intersection with NW 23rd Street and NW Erwin Lane. Exhibits: Resolution No. 99-122;
Excerpt from 9/16/99 draft Traffic Commission Minutes.
(Title only) Resolution
No. 99-122
A resolution authorizing the installation and/or removal of traffic control devices at certain
designated locations within the City of Lawton, Oklahoma. 1) To install road buttons, pavement
markings and signage at NW 23rd/NW Erwin and Cache Road prohibiting left turn and straight
through movement from the north/south approaches of NW 23rd and NW Erwin.
22. Consider a resolution authorizing the installation of traffic control devices
at #52 NW 24th
Street. Exhibits: Resolution No. 99-123; Excerpt, 9/16/99 draft Traffic Comm. Minutes.
(Title only) Resolution
No. 99-123
A resolution authorizing the installation and/or removal of traffic control devices at certain
designated locations within the City of Lawton, Oklahoma. 1) To install pavement markings and
signage for one handicapped parking space at the requestors expense contingent upon the
installation of a handicapped ramp at the same location.
23. Consider authorizing the Mayor to execute the recertification application
for the
Community Rating System of the National Flood Insurance Program. Exhibits: Report. Action:
Approval of item.
24. Consider acknowledging receipt of the permit to supply water from
the Oklahoma State
Department of Environmental Quality to serve Caldwell Water Association, Comanche County,
Oklahoma. Exhibits: None. Action: Approval of item.
25. Consider acknowledging receipt of the permit to supply water from
the Oklahoma State
Department of Environmental Quality to serve Valley View Water Association, Comanche
County, Oklahoma. Exhibits: None. Action: Approval of item.
26. Consider approving plans and specifications for the Fire Department Administration
Building Project #99-3, authorizing staff to advertise for bids. Exhibits: None. Action: Approval
of item.
27. Consider awarding a construction contract to S.M. Burk Mechanical
Contractors for the
“E” Avenue Waterline Project #99-16. Exhibits: Location Map; Bid Tab. Action: Award contract
in the amount of $198,350.00.
28. Consider awarding a construction contract to Brox Industries, Inc.
for the Municipal Pool
Building Re-Roofing Project #99-20. Exhibits: Location Map; Bid Tab. Action: Award contract
in the amount of $6,403.00.
29. Consider rejecting bid proposals for the McMahon Auditorium ADA Access
Project 99-15. Exhibits: None. Action: Reject bid.
30. Consider approving Change Order No. 1 assessing liquidated damages,
accepting the
Grandview United Complex Irrigation System Project #99-12 as constructed by S & G
Construction, Inc. and placing the maintenance bond into effect. Exhibits: Location Map.
(Change Order #1 on file in City Engineer’s Office) Action: Approval of item. Change Order #1
is a charge of $1,800 against the contractor for liquidated damages.
31. Consider adopting a resolution authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk
to execute a Right of
Way, Public Utility, and Encroachment Agreement with the Oklahoma Department of
Transportation (ODOT) for the intersection modification and traffic signal at Lee Boulevard and
SW 52nd Street. Exhibits: Location Map; Resolution No. 99-124; Agreement.
(Title only) Resolution
No. 99-124
A resolution whereby the City Council of Lawton, Oklahoma, authorizes the execution of an
agreement with the Department of Transportation of the State of Oklahoma for right-of-way,
public utility and encroachment for the construction of intersection modification and traffic
signals on Lee Boulevard at SW 52nd Street under plans and specifications for Federal Aid
Project No. STPG-16B(295)UR, Job No. 09186(02)(03)(04), in accordance with the terms and
tenor of 69 O.S. 1991, Sections 1205, 1206, 1401 and 1403.
32. Consider adopting a resolution authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk
to execute a Right of
Way, Public Utility, and Encroachment Agreement with the Oklahoma Department of
Transportation (ODOT) for the intersection modification and traffic signal at Lee Boulevard and
SW 67th Street. Exhibits: Location Map; Resolution No. 99-125; Agreement.
(Title only) Resolution
No. 99-125
A resolution whereby the City Council of Lawton, Oklahoma, authorizes the execution of an
agreement with the Department of Transportation of the State of Oklahoma for right-of-way,
public utility and encroachment for the construction of intersection modification and traffic
signals on Lee Boulevard at SW 67th Street under plans and specifications for Federal Aid
Project No. STPG-16B(2966)UR, Job No. 09187(02)(03)(04), in accordance with the terms and
tenor of 69 O.S. 1991, Sections 1205, 1206, 1401 and 1403.
33. Consider renewing employee and dependent life insurance with Canada
Life of the U.S.
Action: Renew employee life insurance and voluntary life insurance effective October 1, 1999.
34. Consider approving the following contract extensions: A) Credit Card
Acceptance
Program with Bank of Oklahoma; B) Heavy Equipment - Parts & Service with Darr Equipment
Co. Action: Approval of item.
35. Consider awarding contract for Electric Auto Crane. Exhibits: Recommendation;
Abstract
Action: Award contract to Perfection Equipment of Oklahoma City.
36. Consider awarding contract for Liquid Chlorine. Exhibits: Recommendation;
Abstract.
Action: Award contract to DPC Industries, Inc., of Cleburne, TX.
37. Consider awarding contract for Portable Lift Station. Exhibits: Department
Recommendation; Abstract of Bids. Action: Award contract to Prime Equipment (Items 1, 3, 4
and 5) of Lawton.
38. Consider ratifying contract for Agricultural/Grazing Sublease Agreement
- Tract E-23.
Action: Ratify contract with Raymond Veal, Jr.
39. Consider approving contract change order to delete Wastewater Treatment
Plant from
Rental of Cleaning Supplies with Western Uniform which will reduce the operating cost of the
Wastewater Treatment Plant. Exhibits: Contract Change Order; Department Memorandum.
Action: Approval of item.
40. Consider rejecting bids for Bleachers. Exhibits: Bid Tabulation; Recommendation.
Action:
Reject bids.
41. Consider appointments to boards and commissions. Exhibits: Memorandum.
Traffic Commission: Barry Ezerski, Term: 4/27/99 to 4/27/2002; Robert Cole, Term: 3/9/99 to
3/9/2002; Shaun Wicker, Term: 3/9/99 to 3/9/2002
Human Rights & Relations Commission: Rev. Gary Bender, African American Rep., Term:
9/30/99 to 9/30/2001; Sally Herzig, Asian Rep., Term: 9/30/99 to 9/30/2001; SFC William
Holmes, Fort Sill Rep., Term: 9/30/99 to 9/30/2001; Ester Moreno, Hispanic Rep., Term: 9/30/99
to 9/30/2001; Candida Sahr, Hispanic Rep., Term: 9/30/99 to 9/30/2001.
Lawton Housing Authority: Everett Hill, Term: 4/27/99 to 4/27/2002
Parks & Recreation Commission: Mary Kay Dunay, Ward 6 Rep., Term: 9/24/99 to 9/24/2001
Building Development Appeal Board: Tony Capuccio, Licensed Real Estate Rep., Term: 9/24/99
to 9/24/2001
42. Consider approval of payroll for the period of September 20 through
October 3, 1999.
Vincent asked that Item 16 be pulled.
MOVED by Shanklin, SECOND by Haywood, to approve the Consent Agenda items as
recommended with the exception of Item 16. AYE: Purcell, Shanklin, Beller, Haywood, Warren,
Smith, Williams, Devine. NAY: None. MOTION CARRIED.
16. Consider waiving the provisions of Council Policy 5-2 and consider entering
into an
agreement with the Windridge Estates Water Association, Inc. for the sale of treated water
outside the City limits. Exhibits: Letter of Request with Map; Location Map; Proposed
Agreement; Excerpt of 9/1/99 Committee Minutes.
Vincent said the first time he saw this item was today and the contract has not been reviewed and
there may be an error on the first page. He said Dr. McGath's attorney, Mr. Copeland, attempted
to call him to discuss a couple of items and they were not yet ready for the item to be considered.
Beller asked if Council could approve it contingent upon the City Attorney's consideration and
allow him to make changes. Vincent said that could be done but he was not sure Council wanted
that it be done. Beller asked if this would hold up everything. Norman Mayhue said they could
not sell lots until this was done.
Vincent said Council could approve the concept of selling the water and direct staff to finish the
contract and bring it back for final approval.
MOVED by Beller, SECOND by Haywood, to approve the concept of selling water and direct
staff to finish the contract and bring it back for final approval. AYE: Shanklin, Beller, Haywood,
Warren, Smith, Williams, Devine, Purcell. NAY: None. MOTION CARRIED.
REPORTS: MAYOR/CITY COUNCIL/CITY MANAGER.
Beller commended the Parks & Recreation Department regarding the softball tournament and
noted a recent article commending the staff in this regard.
Purcell said there is a major problem at Sheridan Road and Gore Boulevard, and something must
be done to prevent cars from going back and forth across the lanes and causing traffic jams. He
said there was one today and cars were backed up through the intersection coming from the west
and three cars were trying to turn into Arby's and one car was trying to go across the traffic
buttons. Purcell said something should be brought back on this problem. Jackson suggested the
Traffic Commission review the situation and return a recommendation to Council.
Jackson said the carpet replacement has started at the Library and it is a 30 day project; the
lighting bids were received and should be on the next Council agenda for award. He said the
automation project is also underway at the Library and should be completed in November.
Williams asked if smoke detectors were included in the automation project. Marion Donaldson,
Library Director, said it was not part of the automation but they were working on that. Smith said
he thought it was to be included in the lighting. Donaldson said Carrier was to give them a
proposal but they had not done that; smoke detectors were funded in this year's budget and they
are working on that.
Jackson said Flower Mound Road is nearing completion; the end of next week it should be
finished. The intersection of Cache and Flower Mound will be closed this Thursday, Friday and
Saturday.
BUSINESS ITEMS:
43. Pursuant to Section 307B4, Title 25, Oklahoma Statutes, consider convening
in executive
session to discuss the arbitration styled Lawton Police Officers Association, Local 24, IUPA,
AFL, CIO and Sean Hart v. City of Lawton, FMCS No. 97-05677-7, and take appropriate action
in open session. Exhibits: None.
44. Pursuant to Section 307B4, Title 25, Oklahoma Statutes, consider convening
in executive
session to discuss the pending lawsuit styled Chase Mortgage Company v. Freeman, et al., Case
No. CJ-98-874, in the District Court of Comanche County, and take appropriate action in open
session. Exhibits: None.
MOVED by Williams, SECOND by Warren, to convene in executive session to consider Items
43 and 44 as recommended by the legal staff. AYE: Beller, Haywood, Warren, Smith, Williams,
Devine, Purcell, Shanklin. NAY: None. MOTION CARRIED.
The Mayor Pro Tem and Council convened in executive session at approximately 10 p.m. and
reconvened in regular, open session at approximately 10:25 p.m. with roll call reflecting all
members present.
Vincent reported the Mayor Pro Tem and Council considered Item 43 as shown on the agenda.
He recommended a motion be considered to grant the City Attorney's Office the authority to file
a petition to vacate the award and seek an injunction.
MOVED by Smith, SECOND by Warren, to grant the City Attorney's Office the authority to file
a petition to vacate the award and seek an injunction regarding Item 43. AYE: Warren, Smith,
Williams, Devine, Purcell, Shanklin, Beller, Haywood. NAY: None. MOTION CARRIED.
Vincent reported the Mayor and Pro Tem and Council considered Item 44 as shown on the
agenda. He recommended a motion to waive collection of the outstanding mowing lien in the
amount of $118 on the property involved.
MOVED by Purcell, SECOND by Warren, to waive collection of the outstanding mowing lien as
recommended by the City Attorney. AYE: Smith, Williams, Devine, Purcell, Shanklin, Beller,
Haywood, Warren. NAY: None. MOTION CARRIED.
There being no further business to consider, the meeting adjourned at 10:27 p.m. upon motion,
second and roll call vote.