Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1973-02-20 MinutesMINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS FEBRUARY 20, 1973 The Board of Directors of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas met in regular session on Tuesday, February 20, 1973 in the Directors Room of the City Administration Building at 7:30 P.M. Present: City Manager Donald L. Grimes; Purchasing, Personnel and Budget Officer, Sturman Mackey; Administrative Aide David McWethy; City Attorney David Malone; City Clerk Helen Young; and Directors Orton, Purdy, Noland, Utley, Murray, Carlson and Stanton. Others Present: Representatives of the news media. Directors Absent: None. Minutes of the February 6, 1973 regular meeting and the February 13, 1973 special meeting had been distributed to the Board members prior to the meeting. DirectorsOrton asked that the minutes of the February 6, 1973 meeting be amended as follows: Page 138, line 11, to read "...and the City has classified moving signs as a nuisance." Page 139, paragraph 2, to clarify that City Attorney Malone's memorandum was in reference to the method of appointments to the Housing Authority. Page 140, last sentence, to clarify that the recommendation on December 19, 1972 was not a recommendation of the Board but rather a suggestion by several individual Board members at that meeting. It was the will of the Board to so amend the minutes. There being no other additions or corrections, the minutes of the February 6, 1973 meeting were approved as amended. There were no corrections or additions to the minutes of the February 13, 1973 special meeting. Those minutes were approved as distributed. Mayor Purdy stated that Item #17 on the agenda, consideration of a resolution authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute a deed for Industrial Park property, should be considered at this meeting. It was the will of the Board to consider that matter directly after consideration of the Taxicab Service Study. City Attorney Malone read the findings of the Taxicab Service Study which included the following: 1. With one exception, all of the letters received by the City Manager's Office during the time of the study indicated a dissatisfaction with the current cab service. 2. Most people in Fayetteville don't ride the cabs, but those who are "over -55" often ride several times a month or more. 3. The most frequently voiced complaint concerned passengers being forced to "double up" and being carried all over town before reaching their destination. 4. Yellow Cab Company consistently violated those sections of the City Code of Ordinances which require a display of the rate schedule, a map of the Base Area, and proper driver identification. 5. Most people who use the cabs with any regularity would like to see the initiation of a second cab company. 145 ** City Attorney Malone handed to the Board members a draft ordinance to amend certain sections of the Code of Ordinances regarding taxicabs. The draft ordinance contained one section concerning a rate schedule. City Attorney Malone advised that if the Board was interested in adopting the proposed ordinance, a public hearing date should be set for the rate schedule and the entire ordinance should be placed on the agenda for a later meeting. Director Carlson moved that consideration of an ordinance amending certain sections of the Code of Ordinances regarding taxicabs be placed on the agenda for the March 6, 1973 Board meeting, and further that notice be given for a public hearing on March 6, 1973 on the proposed rate schedule for taxicab service. Director Orton seconded the motion which passed unanimously. Director Stanton moved that the application submitted by Fayetteville Transportation Company for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity be removed from the table and be placed on the agenda for the March 6, 1973 meeting of the Board. Director Carlson seconded the motion which passed unanimously. The attorney representing Fayetteville Transportation Company was present at the meeting and stated that his client, Fayetteville Transportation Company, would be willing to consider this proposed ordinance at the next regular meeting of the Board before the Board reviewed the application submitted by Fayetteville Transportation Company. It was the will of the Board to consider any other applications for Public Convenience and Necessity Certificates at the March 6, 1973 meeting of the Board also. City Attorney Malone answered a question from the audience by stating that Yellow Cab Company is required to have a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity. "I think as part of the enforcement of the existing ordinance we should call upon the cab company to present their certificate and if they do not have one then they will be asked to apply for one," Mr. Malone said. **Insert shown below. Ron Woodruff, attorney representing Yellow Cab Company, commented that he does not feel the study is accurate. Mr. Woodruff pointed out more than one letter included in the study report which did not contain complaints about the present taxicab service. Mr. Woodruff added that the survey response was poor, and "after soliciting for some time in the newspaper, only three dozen or so letters were received." Mr. Woodruff contended that the study did not present a clear indication of the sentiment of the community. City Attorney Malone read a proposed resolution to authorize the execution of the contract for sale of Tract K in the Industrial Park to Armstrong Realty Company. Mr. Malone handed to the Board members a copy of the draft contract of sale. The City Attorney stated that the contract contains the standard contract provisions for the sale of real estate plus a para- graph regarding the pollution control regulations. Armstrong Realty Company is in agreement with the original draft of the contract except for Paragraph 14, Mr. Malone reported. Armstrong Realty Company requested a deadline limitation on the repurchase clause for unimproved property, providing that if they do not produce 300 full time jobs within five years the option could be extended two additional five-year periods. In response to a question from the audience, "Do we enforce the ordinance or don't we", Mr. Malone responded that letters were being wirtten to the cab company. 146 Director Carlson stated that she thought a time limitation of 199 years or so would be well, and that any time during that time when the land becomes for sale it should revert back to the City. Director Orton stated that she is inclined to favor the 300 job limitation on the clause, Director Carlson questioned Paragraph 7 which stated that "Taxes for the year 1972 and all prior years shall be paid by Seller." City Attorney Malone explained that there are nottaxes. Director Carlson asked that Paragraph 13 contain a phrase to provide that all service utilities required by the Buyer are constructed underground within the boundaries of the Industrial Park. Director Carlson asked that Paragraph 4 regarding title insurance be omitted from the contract. Director Carlson also asked for financial statements and other information about the company which had been promised at the February 13, 1973 meeting. City Attorney Malone explained that by giving the Buyer the option of title insurance theyBuyetdcould be sure of getting good title without being acquainted with Arkansas law. The cost of the title insurance would be about $377, Mr. Malone added. The cost of prepating an abstract would be $150 to $200. Director Utley moved that Paragraph 4 regarding title insurance be retained in the contract as drafted. Director Stanton seconded the motion. Upon roll call the following vote was recorded: "Ayes" Orton, Purdy, Noland, Utley, Murray and Stanton. "Nays" Carlson. There being six "Ayes" and one "Nay" the motion passed. Dale Christy stated that the Buyer has negotiated with the utility companies to supply services to a point. Mr. Christy said, "I don't think it would be possible for them to go back and negotiate underground utilities if this is not the policy of the utility companies already." Director Orton asked if there is any way underground utilities could be suggested without being required. The City Attorney said the City could deal directly with the utility companies. Mr. Christy agreed that the matter should be between the City and the utility companies. Director Stanton moved Paragraph 13 of the proposed sale contract be retained as originally drafted. Director Utley seconded the motion. Upon roll call the following vote was recorded: "Ayes" Purdy, Noland, Utley and Stanton "Nays" Orton, Murray and Carlson. There being four "Ayes" and three "Nays" the motion passed. Director Orton moved the proposed sale contract be amended to include the 300 job limitation on the repurchase clause by adding to the end of Paragraph 14 the phrase "...provided, however, that the provision of this Paragraph 14 shall become null and void when the Buyer has employed 300 full time employees at the facility constructed on the above property." Director Utley asked that "full time employee" be defined as defined by Workmen's Compensation provisions. Director Orton accepted that amendment to the motion. Director Noland seconded the motion. Upon roll call the following vote was recorded: "Ayes" Orton, Purdy, Noland, Utley, Murray and Stanton. "Nays" Carlson. There being six "Ayes" and one "Nay" the motion passed. Director Carlson repeated that the Board had not been provided the additional information on the company which was promised at the February 13 meeting. Dale Christy stated that the firm's representatives have been checked out and 147 were found to be a reputable industry. The company has a good record, he said. Mr. Christy added that he did not think it proper for corporate financial statements to be aired anymore than it would be for a personal financial statement to be aired. Mr. Christy said the wages the industry pays will be better than any wages paid in this area now, jobs are of higher skill than most other jobs in Northwest Arkansas, the firm has a satisfied work force now, they have a retirement plan for employees with mandatory retirement at age 65. In answer to Director Carlson's question about how the industry would get rid of waste oil, Leonard Kendall, a member of the Industrial Park Committee, said all industries are putting in primary treatment for the oil produced by forging. Mr. Kendall added that, "Those of us who are in this industrial development will not entertain an industry that will pollute the air or streams." City Attorney Malone read a proposed resolution authorizing the execution of the contract for sale as amended. Director Stanton moved the resolution be adopted. Director Noland seconded the motion. Upon roll call the following vote was recorded: "Ayes" Orton, Purdy, Noland, Utley, Murray and Stanton. "Nays" Carlson. There being six "Ayes" and one "Nay" the Mayor declared the resolution adopted. *Resolution No 12-73 appears on page 108 of Ordinance and Resolution Book 3. City Attorney Malone read a proposed resolution authorizing the execution of a warranty deed conveying property from the City of Fayetteville to Armstrong Realty Company. Director Stanton moved the resolution be adopted. Director Orton seconded the motion, Upon roll call the following vote was recorded: "Ayes" Orton, Purdy, Noland, Utley, Murray and Stanton. "Nays" Carlson. There being six "Ayes" and one "Nay" the Mayor declared the resolution adopted. *Resolution No. 13-73 appears on page 10q of Ordinance and Resolution Book 3. Mayor Purdy asked the Board members to support him in closing the meeting at 11:00 P,M, approximately, There were no objections to the Mayor's suggestion. City Attorney Malone read a proposed resolution to amend the General Land Use Plan for property on both sides of Highway 62 West from the 71 Bypass to the Farmington/Fayetteville city limits. Mr. Larry Wood from Northwest Arkansas Regional Planning Commission was present at the meeting. Mr. Wood gave a brief explanation of the proposed plan. Director Orton expressed concern about the number of accesses to the highway and commented that she did not feel the access to the highway is limited enough. Director Carlson moved that this matter be tabled until the March 20, 1973 meeting to allow more time for Board members to study'the matter. 148 Mr. Wood said that during the period of delay he could study possible solutions to the access problems. City Attorney Malone said Mrs. Orton's suggestions could be taken as part of the Major Street Plan. Director Carlson suggested that the City Manager refer this matter to the City Appearance Committee. Director Orton seconded the motion to table this matter. Upon roll call the motion passed unanimously. The next item on the agenda was consideration of an appeal of the Planning Commission decision not to recommend a request to rezone a tract of land located at 1789 Highway 45 East from R-1, Low Density Residential, to C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial District. Petitioner was Speedway Grocery, Inc. F. H. Martin, attorney representing Speedway Grocery, stated that the petitioner simply desired to place a canopy over existing gas pumps. Mr. Martin asked for temporary rezoning for a portion of the property until the canopy is constructed. Several area property owners were present at the meeting to state opposition to the proposed rezoning, Many said they did not object to a canopy, but did object to rezoning to allow the canopy to be constructed. City Attorney Malone stated that he would be happy to look into the possibility of an amendment to the present ordinances to allow certain structural changes in non -conforming buildings without changing the zoning of the property. Mr. Malone warned, however, that any such amendment should be considered carefully to make sure it applied only to what it was meant to apply. Mr. Malone advised the Board that they could rezone a portion of the property around the gas pumps only if they wished to do so. Director Orton asked if there is such a thing as "contract rezoning". City Attorney Malone said that the City would be in a difficult position if the property were rezoned with the intention of rezoning the property back after the canopy were constructed and then the property owner objected to having the property revert back to its original zoning. Mr. Malone said if the area around the pumps only were rezoned then if the property owner did not rezone the property back as he had agreed to do the area would not be large enough to cause any harm. Director Utley said the property was rezoned R-1 for a purpose and to change the zoning would be breaking faith of those residents in the area. No action was taken on the matter and appeal of the petitioner was denied. Upon request of Mayor Purdy, City Attorney Malone read a proposed Ordinance to amend zoning ordinance #1747 to change the acreage requirements for a Planned Unit Development from the present 20 acres to five acres in R-1 zones, or 50 dwelling units in R-3 and R-2 zoning districts. Director Orton stated that she WasAlainfavor ofZreducing tlie' requirements for the area' but'YWV§ questioning -the amount of the reduction. Larry Wood said the idea was to encourage the use of some land in the central core of the City for apartments. He noted that it would be difficult to assemble a block of land in the central core of the City. Mayor Purdy and Director Orton commented on the drastic reduction in the area requirements. Director Stanton reminded them that the density would not be changed. Director Carlson said she would like more time to study the matter. 149, Garland Melton, Jr. commented that there are several people who would be happy to brief the Board on PUD's. He suggested the Board schedule a session to learn more about why PUD's can work. Larry Wood stated that he could arrange for someone to be present at the next regular meeting of the Board on March 6, 1973 to further explain the concept of Planned Unit Developments. It was the will of the Board to leave the proposed Ordinance on first reading until the March 6, 1973 meeting. Upon request of the Mayor, the City Attorney read a proposed Ordinance to amend the Planning Area Map to align its boundaries with those of the Beaver Water District Service Boundary. Director Orton moved the rules be suspended and the Ordinance be placed on second reading, Director Utley seconded the motion. The motion passed with six "Ayes" and no "Nays". Director Carlson abstained from voting. The City Attorney read the proposed Ordinance a second time. Director Utley moved the rules be further suspended and the Ordinance be placed on third and final reading. Director Orton seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion passed with six "Ayes" and no "Nays". Director Carlson abstained from voting. City Attorney Malone read the proposed Ordinance a third time, after which the Mayor asked the question, "Shall the Ordinance pass?" Upon roll call the following vote was recorded: "Ayes" Orton, Purdy, Noland, Utley, Murray and Stanton. "Nays" None. Director Carlson abstained from voting. There being six "Ayes" and no "Nays" the Mayor declared the Ordinance passed. *Ordinance No. 1900 appears on page 144 of Ordinance and Resolution Book 3. The next item on the agenda was further consideration of an ordinance imposing a $1.00 security fee on each passenger boarding at Drake Field. City Manager Grimes recommended that the matter be tabled for an additional 30 days since there is legislation pending in Congress which would require the FAA to either provide the security guards or reimburse municipalities for providing the security services. Director Orton moved the matter be tabled until the March 20, 1973 meeting, Director Utley seconded the motion which passed unanimously. City Attorney Malone read the third and final time a proposed Ordinance regarding drive-in theatres which show X-rated films. Director Utley moved that Sections 1 and 2 as originally written in Draft No. 1 be reinserted in the proposed Ordinance, and further that Section 1 in the proposed Ordinance be made Section 3, modifying that section to exempt theatre personnel except the owner himself. The City Attorney declared Director Utley's motion out of order *ince Sections 1 and 2 were deleted'by motionito amend at the February 6, 1973 meeting. Director Utley restated his motion to modify Section 1 of the proposed Ordinance to exempt theatre personnel other than the owner or the local manager of the theatre. Director Stanton seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion passed with six "Ayes" and no "Nays". Mayor Purdy abstained from voting. 150 Director Carlson moved that Section 1 of the proposed Ordinance be amended by deleting the phrase describing the scenes which shall be unlawful and adding the phrase, "...if the sight or accompanying sound is received by other than patrons or guests of the theatre." Director Orton seconded the motion. A person in the audience said that sometimes sound will carry regardless of what one tries to do about it. Director Carlson, in response to Director Orton's question, said she would be willing to strike the sound part from her motion. A person in the audience stated that this would force drive-in theatres to use the small individual screens or close their operation. He said the individual screens cannot be used for a large operation like the drive-ins in Fayetteville. Director Orton said it is not her intention to close drive-in theatres in Fayetteville, Mrs. Orton suggested that future drive-in theatresscreens be required to be turned away from the highway. Upon roll call vote the motion to amend Section 1 of the proposed Ordinance failed.i The.folTowng vote was recorded: "Ayes" Carlson, "Nays" Orton, Purdy, Noland, Utley, and Stanton. Director Murray abstained from voting. Director Orton moved that Section 2 of the -proposed Ordinance be amended to add the phrase ",.. and each separate showing shall be considered a separate offense." Director Noland seconded the motion. Upon roll call the following vote was recorded: "Ayes" Orton, Noland, Utley, Murray, Carlson and Stanton "Nays" None. Mayor Purdy abstained from voting. Mayor Purdy then asked the question, "Shall the Ordinance pass" Upon roll call the following vote was recorded: "Ayes" Orton, Noland, Utley, Murray and Stanton. "Nays" Purdy and Carlson. There being five "Ayes" and two "Nays" the Mayor declared the Ordinance passed. *Ordinance No. 1901 appears on pages 145 and 146 of Ordinance and Resolution Book 3. Director Carlson moved the meeting be adjourned,until Tuesday, February 27, 1973 at 7:30 P.M. Director Utley seconded the motion which passed unanimously, whereupon Mayor Purdy declared the meeting adjourned. ATTEST: City erk 151 APPROVED: 72/6(44evef (Sir /9 Mayor