Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1966-10-17 MinutesThe Board of Directors of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, met in regular session on Monday, October 1966, at 7:30 P. M. in the Directors Room in the City Administration Building. Present: City Manager Gerald G. Fox, City'Clerk Ceorge J. Davis, City Attorney Hugh Kincaid, and Direct Kerlin, Swartz, McFerran, Melton, Christie, Trumbo, and Dunn. Absent: None. The minutes of the regular meeting on Monday, October 39 1966, a copy of which had previously been to each of.the Directors, were approved as written. Consulting Engineers L. M. McGoodwin and John Mahaffey appeared before the Board of Directors and press: the Final Plans and Specifications for'the Sewer Treatment Plant and Outfall Line. Mr. McGoodwin read a letter explaining the plans and specifications together with the estimated cost of the project. The letter was spread on the minutes and reads as follows: Copy Of Letter Mr. Gerald G. Fox, City Manager, The Mayor and Board of Directors City of Fayetteville Fayetteville, Arkansas Gentlemen: October 17, 1966 We are happy to present herewith completed plans and specifications for the construction of waste, water treatment facilities to serve the city of Fayetteville. These documents include two separate sets of plans and specifications, which cover the first phase of the expansion of overall sewerage facilities heretofore planned. The plans and specifications provide the construction of: 1. A 36 inch outfall sewer from the site of the existing sewage treatment plant to the site of new waste water treatment complex, and a water main to serve the new treatment facilities. 2. The initial 'section of a waste water treatment complex desighed to treat all the waste water the sewage system of the city. . It is proposed that these plans and specifications be presented to the State Board of Health and Arkansas Pollution Control -Commission early next week. As soon as approval is obtained from these two ag it is suggested that the -city advertise for bids so that the construction can be carried on during the 1 construction season. These plans and specifications have been prepared in accordance with our original "Report on Sewe. Facilities," dated 1965 and amended in September, 1965. Plans for the outfall sewer are in accordance wi those provided for in the report. Plans.for the waste water treatment facilities, although in direct Mee with the amended report as to treatment procedure, have been revised and enlarged to provide for greater ease of plant expansion and flexibility of operation. The report provided for a plant designed for 10 million gallons per day.capacity,-with provisions for expansion to 15 million gallons per day capacity. The plans presented herewith provide for a plant design of 20 million gallon's per day capacity for all facilities except the sedimentation and aeration processes. A 10 million gallons per day capacity is provided for these processes, with planned modular expansion to 20 million gallons per day on an incremental basis. The first six months of the year after our report was presented were spent in design studies. The studies included trips to plants using new processes which we had under consideration, and some of these features have been incorporated in the proposed facilities. During this same six-month period, water usage in Fayetteville increased at a very rapid rate, wh at the same time water usage in some of our sister cities increased at an even greater rate. Although th rapid industrialization of Northwest Arkansas was known, the continuing accelerated pace made us realize that a 15 million gallons per day plant could become inadequate in the relatively near future. As our design evolved, it became apparent that with slight plan changes we could provide all pretreatment and sludge disposal units fora 20 million gallons per -day capacity with relatively small increments of increased cost. Also, it was found that the settling and aeration sections could be cons in 10 million gallons per day increments at no increased cost for these units. Based upon these consid the plans were revised to provide for the extra expansion capacity. The attached estimabbs.of cost show that increasing the plant to 20 million gallons per day capac would cost only approximately.one-third of the project as proposed. The facilities as proposed provide for the use of the homogeneous mixing activated sludge process together with pretreatment units and sludge. processing equipment which is just now being widely used in larger plants. The plant design provides for producing a pland effluent of approximately 25 parts per million, with sewage having organic loadings of Fayetteville's existing sewage. If the organic composit of Fayetteville's sewage should increase materially, additional'facilities would have.to be provided. The plant is not designed to treat metallic wastes or inorganic matter not subject to biological reduction. The city will need to be constantly on guard that plants which produce these types of wastes pretreat their wastes to accestable standards.' t The plant as proposed incorporates the latest and most efficient processes to achieve a high of treatment fbr Fayetteville's combined domestic -industrial sewage. To accomplish this degree of went, the facilities will be enpensive to maintain and operate. Even though the plant is of modern design, and even with the expenditures and city is now making, it is important to realize that treatment processes as developed today will be improved, and that as our urban society grows demands.for yet mere efficient treatment processes will be experienced. , , Letter from We are progressing on the plans for the improvements to Fayetteville's sewage collection systems, McGoodwin and will be presenting these to you for your consideration some time early in 1967. (continued) Respectfully submitted, 'E. Mahaffey (s) L. M. McGoodwin ohn E. Mahaffey L. M. McGoodwin Attachment ESTIMATES OF COSTS SEWAGE TREATMENT FACILITIES FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS 1. Treatment Plant Complex ------------------------------------------------ $1,978,000 lvA. Deductive Alternates, as set out in proposal, if accepted, would reduce the -cost to -- 1,8949000 2. The thirty-six inch outfall sewer and plant water supply line Using Estimate 1-A, which includes all items originally proposed, plus the additional plant capacity, the total estimated cost of this section of the projuct would be $2, 8149000. This represents an increased cost of $349,000 over the original estimate. It is estimated that the treatment facilities could be expanded to a 20 million gallons per day capacity at this time for the sum of $635,000• October 17, 1.966 ' After a long discussion, the City Manager introduced and, at the re4uest of the Mayor, read a proposed resolution in its entirety approving the final plans and Specifications for Sewer Treatment Plant and Outfall Line as presented by Consulting Engineers L. M. McGoodwin and John E. Mahaffey. Director Christie moved that the Resolution be adopted. The motion was seconded by Director McFerran and upon rollacall the following vote was recorded: "AYE" Kerlin, Swartz, McFerran; Melton, Christie, Trumbo, and Dunn. Resolution No. "NAY" None. There being Seven AAYES" and No "NAYS", -the Mayor declared the Resolution adopted. 28-66 RESOLUTION N0. 2646 WHEREAS, the -City of Fayetteville has received approval of a Water Pollution Control Grant for the construction of a waste water treatment plant, outfall line, sewer mains and interceptor (WPC -ARK -216); WHEREAS, Consulting Engineers John Mahaffey and Associates and McGoodwin, Williams and Yates have completed final engineering plans for the waste water treatment plant and outfall sewer. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE,..ARKANSAS: SECTION 1. That the final plans for the waste water treatment facility and outfall line are hereby approved; and, SECTION 2. That the consulting engineers are hereby instructed to submit such plans to proper state and federal agencies for approval. PASSED, APPROVED, -AND ADOPTED ON this, the 17th day of October, 1966. ' APPROVED: ATTEST: ' c ) l AA11y DON TRUMBO, MAYOR GEORGE IS, CITY CLERK The City Manager introduced and, at the.request of the Directors, read a proposed resolution in its entirety entitled, "A RESOLUTION APPROVING UNDERTAKING OF GENERAL NEIGHBORHOOD RENEWAL PLAN AND FILING APPLICATION FOR FEDERAL ADVANCE'OF FUNDS." Director Melton moved that the resolution'be adopted, The motion was seconded by Director Kerlin and upon roll call, the following vote was recmrded: "AYE" Kerlin, Swartz, McFerran, Melton, Christie, Trumbo, and Dunn. "NAY" None. There being Seven "AYES" and No "NAYS", the Mayor declared the Resolttion adopted. No. 27-66 RESOLUTION N0. 27-66 A RESOLUTION APPROVING ADVANCE OF FUNDS, OF GENERAL NEIGHBORHOOD RENEWAL PLAN AND FILING APPLICATION FOR 60 • WHEREAS, under Title I of the Housing Act of 1949, as amended, the Housing and Home Finance Administrator may make advances of funds to local public agencies for the preparation of General Neighborhood Renewal Plans for areas defined in Section 102 (d) of such Title where the interest of sound community planning makes it desirable that the urban renewal activities proposed for the areas be planned in theinnentirety; WHEREAS Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964; and the regulations of the Housing and Home Finance Agency effectuating that Title provide that no person shall, on the ground -of race, color, or national ' origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied-the.benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination in the undertaking and carrying out of urban renewal projects assisted under Title I of the Housing Act of 1949, as amended; and WHEREAS, it is desirable and in the public interest that the Housing Authority of the City of Fayettevill Arkansas, perpare a General Neighborhood Renewal Plan, presently estimated to cost $559836.00, to that certain area, herein designated a General Neighborhood Renewal Area, located in the City of Fayetteville, County of Washington, and State of Arkansas, and described as follows: tion No. Beginning at the intersection of Spring Street and Locust Street which is located at the (Cont.) Northwest corner of Lot 4, Block it, of the Original Town of Fayetteville Plat; thence East along the center of Spring Street to the center of Town Branch; thence in a South- westerly direction with said branch to the center of Huntsville Street; thence Northwest to the center ofSSouth Street;thence Southwest with the center of South Street to the _center l.itie of College Avenue; thence South with the center line of College Avenue to the center line of South Street; thence West with the center line of South Street to the center line of Locust Street; thence North with the center line of Locust Street to the point of beginning. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS: . That the proposed General Neighborhood Renewal Area described above is an area consisting of an urban enewal area or areas, which is of such size that the urban renewal activities in the urban renewal area r areas may have to be initiated in stages, consistent with the capacity and resources of the Housing uthority of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, over an estimated period of not more than 8 years. That the undertaking by the Housing Authority of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, of the preparatic f kh@eneral Neighborhood Renewal Elan for the General Neighborhood Renewal Area described above is herebi That it is cognizant of the intention of the Housing Authority of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, o undertake an urban renewal project promptly upon- completion of the General Neighborhood Renewal Plan rid the preparation of an urban renewal plan.for such project, which project shall embrace at least 10 ercent of the urban renewal area or areae within the General Neighborhood Renewal Area and shall be of he character contemplated by Section 110 (c) of Title I. . That it is cognizant of the conditions that are imposed in. the undeetaking and carrying out of urban snewal projects with Federal financial assistance under Title I, including those relating to (a) a easible method of relocation, (b) the provision of necessary local grants-in-aid, and (c) the Prohibitioi discrimination because of race, color, creed, or national origin; as well as the requirement of Sectioi )2 (d) of Title I that a General Neighborhood Renewal Plan conform to the locality's general plan and )rkable program for community improvement. . That.it is the intention of this body that the General Neighborhood Renewal Plan will be used to the illest extent feasible as a guide for the provision of public improvements in the General Neighborhood enewal Area and that the Plan will be considered in formulating codes and other regulatory measures Tfecting property in such Area and in.undertaking other local governmental activities pertaining to the evelopment, redevelopment, rehabilitation,.and conservation of the Area That the filing of an application of the Housing Authority of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, for n advance of funds from the United States_to enable it to defray the cost of preparing a General eighborhood Renewal Plan- for the proposed General Neighborhood'Renewal Area described above is hereby AND APPROVED THIS 17th day of October, 1966. DON TRUME09 JR., MAYOR City Mgnager then read a proposed resolution in its entirety entitled, "A RESOLUTION APPROVING ERTAKING OF SURVEYS AND PIANS FOR AN URBAN RENEWAL PROJECT AND FILING OF AN APPLICATION." ector Kerlin moved that the Resolttion be adopted. . motion was seconded by Director Melton and upon roll call.the following vote was recorded, E" Kerlin, Swartz, McFerran, Melton, Christie, Trumbo, and Dunn. Y" None. re being Seven "AYES" and No "NAYS", the Mayor declared the Resolution adopted. RESOLUTION N0. 28-66 RESOLUTION APPROVING UNDERTAKING. OFkSURVEPS AND PLANS FOR AN URBAN RENEWAL PROJECT AND FILING OF AN 'PLICATION. REAS, under .-� Title I of the Housing Act of 1949, as amended (herein referred to as "Title I"40 the using and Home Finned Administrator is authorized to extend financial assistance to local public tncies in the elimination and prevention of the spread of their alums and urban blight through the nning and undertaking of urban renewal projects; and MEAS, it is desirable and. in -the public interest"that.the Housing Authority of. the City of Fayetteville ansas, make surveys and prepare plans, presently estimated to aostaapproximately $101,704,90, in order undertake and carry out an urban renewal project of the character contemplated by Section 110 (c) of Is I, in that area proposed as an Urban Renewal Area, situated in the City of Fayetteville, County of Kington, State of Arkansas, which is described as follows: Beginning at the intersection of Meadow and Church Streets; thence East to the center of North East Street; thence South along the center of North East Street to the center of East Center Street; thence East along center line of East Center Street to a point North of the Northeast corner of Lot 5, Block 28 of Original Town Plat; thence South to the center line of Mountain Street; thence East along center line of Mountain Street to the center line of College Avenue; thencg South along center line of College Avenue to the center line of Rock Street; thence W at along center line of Rock Street to the center line of Bleck Avenue; thence North along center line of Block Avenue to center line of Mountain Street; thence West along center line of Mountain Street to center line of Church Avenue; thence North along center line of Church Avenue to the point of beginning, containing in all Blocks 16, 17, 27, 29, 90 and Lots 5 through 15 of Block 28 all_in the Original Town of Fayetteville Plat. , THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS: 1 1 Resolution No. (tO That the proposed Urban Renewal Area described above is a slum, blighted, deteriorating area 2846 (font.) appropriate for an urban renewal project and that the undertaking by the Housing Authority of the City I Fayetteville, Arkansas, of surveys and plans for an urban renewal project of the character con- templated by Section 110 (c) of Title I in the proposed Urban Renewal Area is hereby approved. That the financial assistance available under -Title I is needed to enable the Housing Authority of he City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, to finance the planning and undertaking of the proposed Project. That it is cognizant of the conditions that are imposed in the undertaking and carrying out of rban renewal projects with Federal financial assistance under Title I,•including those relating to (a) he relocation of site occupants, (b) the provision of local grants-in-aid; (c) the prohibition of iscrimination because of race, color, creed, or national origin, and•(d) the requirement that the ocality present to the Housing and Home Finance Administrator, as a prerequisite to approval of the pplication described below, a workable program for community improvement, as set forth in Section 101 (c) f Title I. for utilizing appropriate public and private resources to eliminate and prevent the developmen r spread of slums and urban blight. . That it is the sense of this body (a) that a feasible method for the relocation of individuals nd families displaced from the Urban Renewal Area, in conformity with Title I, san be prepared, and b) that the local grants-in-aid can and will be provided in an amount which will be not less than one- ourth of the Net Project Cost of the Project and which, together with the Federal capital grant, will e generally equal to the difference between Gross Project Cost and the proceeds or value of project and sold, leased, or retained for use in accordance with the urban renewal plan. . That the filing of an application by the Housing Aughority of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, or an advance of funds from the United States of America to enable it -to defray the cost of the surveys ad plans for an urban renewal project in the proposed Urban Renewal Area described above is hereby AND APPROVED this 17th day of October, 1966, Personnel The City Manager presented a few changes in the Personnel Policy as adopted on September 19, 1966, which Policy Changes �he recommended that the Board of Directors approve. After a brief diecffission, Director McFerran moved to approve the amendments to the Personnel Policy as adopted on September 19, 19660 as recommended by the City Manager. The motion was seconded by Director Christie and passed unanimously. CHANGES IN PERSONNEL POLICY ADOPTED SEPTEMBER 19. 1966 1. Page 2 Attendance and Work Week Work hours for all employees, except fire shall be eight hours per day and/or forty hours per week. `D (This is necessary to reflect some odd hours per day worked in the water department which does come out ;at 40 hours per week.) ' 29-66 2. Page 7 Retirement s extenuating circumstances justify exceptional actions by the City Manager,.all employees in the s service shall be retired from active duty upon reaching the December 31 next -following their 65th day. Extensions of retirement shall be for not longer than twelve month intervals. Civil Service commission has recently adopted a 65 retirement for Fire and Police personnel. Above hange reflects this. Also, by allowing retirement on December 31 next following, no social•security roblems should be encountered.) 3. Page 9 Definitions 1. Part-time•or Call Employee means an employee who is employed for a certain position for a certain eriod of time or to perform a job during irregular hours on a call basis as determined by the department sad and the city manager. This type of employee shall not be eligible for any of the leave provisions s. outlined in the personnel policy and shall perforn•probationary period -as determined by the department ead. 4. Page 9 Effective Date provision of this policy shall take effect on November 1, 19660 and shall supersede all other isions previously adopted. ,The City Manager reported that the City had been unable to reach an agreement with several property owners on the value of their property for the necessary real estate for the Arkansas State Highway No. 16 Loop (Bypass) and he recommended that the City Attorney be authorized to inttitute condemnations, proceedings to acquire the land necessary for the Right-of-Wahy. After a brief discussion, the City Manager read a proposed resolution entitled, "A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SAND DIRECTING THE CONDEMNATION OF CERTAIN LANDS IN WASHINGTON COUNTY, ARKXNSAS, FOR USE AS RIGHT OF WAY THE HIGHWAY 16 BY-PASS." IDirector Christie moved that the Resolution be adopted. The motion was seconded by Director McFerran and upon roll call the following Vote was recorded, "AYE" Kerlin, Swartz, McFerran.-Melton, Christie, Trumbo, and Dien. "NAY" None. No. iThere being Seven "AYES" and No "NAYS", the Mayor declared the Resolbtion adopted. RESOLUTION N0, 2946 RESOLUTION•AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CONDEMNATION OF CERTAIN LANDS IN WASHINGTON COUNTY, ARKINSAS, R USE AS RIGHT OF WAY FOR THE HIGHWAY 16 BY-PASS, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS: 41 Resolution No. 2946 SECTION t. .That the City Attorney is hereby authorized and directed to institute condemnation. (lontinued) proceedings to acquire the necessary lands for right-of-way for the Highway 16 By -Pass as described in the final construction plans of Job No. 9458 of the Arkansas Highway Department, fron the following named property owners: of of 1519 Dee Kellar and Mary Kellar - Raymond Kellar and Doris Ann Kellar C. P. Rose William Combs and Gladys Combs -Cecil Faubus -Jones A. Faubus Fannie Walker (Tyo tracts, #14 and # 19) Lambert 0. Parrish Ernest E. Lancaster Wilson and Cate (City Liquor Store) Cy Carney f . . Eugene Dressendorfer Mildred Ridenoure • Herman Tedford Nae Buxton Finis S. Sutton Usmes H. Lawson Lawrence H. Wilson, Carl R#nmey 0. U. Green Ola Inez Lawson Robert S. Tomlinson -B. F. Ross Samuel R. Barnes Robert K. Brown Jack Greathouse Milton Tate under escrow contract to William Taylor PASSED AND APPROVED THIS .17th day of October, 1966 • SECTION 2. That as the questions in controversy in said condemnation proceedings are likely to retard the progress of the proposed construction of said_By-Pass, the City Attorney is further authorized fo and directed to petition the Court for permission r the City to provide appropriate deposits in Court for making compensations and payment of damages, in order that immediate possession of the said lands may be secured and in order that construction may be commenced and prodeed prior to assessment and payment of damages. APPROVED: DON TRUMBO, MAYOR There being no further business Director Melton moved to adjourn. The motion was seconded by Director Kerlin and passed unanimously, whereupon the Mayor declared the meeting adjourned. � APPROVED: c-77� ��C��1/✓�' � C DON TRUMBO, MAYOR GEORGE Fe WISo CITY CLERK The Board of Directors of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas met ih special session on Wednesday, October 26, 1966 At1B930JftM ,•dm the ftreft6btalRbgm of the City Administration Building, Present: City Attorney Hugh Kinhaid, City Clerk George J. Davis,,and Board Members:Kerlin, Swartz, McFerran, Melton, Christie, and Dunn. Absent: City Manager Gerald G. Fox, and Mayor Don Trumbo. In the absence of Mayor Don Trumbo, Asibstand Mayor Sylvia Swartz acted as Mayor. The Acting Mayor reported that the purpose of the meeting was to consider the Amendment of Ordinance No. 1517, dated October 3,-1966, to correct certain errors appearing in the description of the properties to be annexed, and that all members of the Board of Directors had been notified by U.S. Mail and by telbphone, but Mayor Don Trumbo was out of the City and could not attend, however he had signed a Waiver Of Notice of the special meeting. WAIVER OF NOTICE OF SPECIAL MEETING OF FAYETTEVILLE CITY BOARD OF DIRECTORS Comes now the undersigned, being a duly elected, qualified, and acting member of the Board of Directors of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, and specifically waives notice of a special meeting of the Fayetteville Board of Directors to be held in the Directors Room of the City Administration Building, Fayetteville, Arkansas, at 10:30 o'clock a.m., on October 26, 1966. Dated this 25th day of October, 1966. ll h' L�vy(1 D Director The City Attorney introduced and, at the request of the Directors, read a proposed ordinance in its entir entitled,"AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 1517 OF OCTOBER 3, 1966,. TO -CORRECT THE DEACRTF'TIONS OF Tl PROPERTY PROPOSED FOR ANNEXATION BY ORDINANCE N0. 1517.11. • Director McFerran moved that the rule be suspended and that the ordinance be placed on the second readii The motion was seconded by Director Kerlin. and upon roll call, the following vote was recorded: "AYE11 Kerlin, SeartZ. McFerran, Melton, Christie, and Dunn. "NAY" None. There being six "AYES" and No "NAYS", the Acting Mayor declared the motion passed. The Ordinance was then read for the second time. _ The Acting Mayor then declared the Ordinance open for discussion. After a long discussion, Director Melton moved that the rule be further suspended and that the Ordinance be placed on the third and final reading. The motion was seconded by Director McFerran and upon roll call the following vote was recorded, "AYE" Kerlin, Swartz, McFerran, Melton, Christie, and Dunn. "NAY" None. There being six "AYES" and No 11NAYSt1, the Acting Mavor declared the motion passed.