Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1973-05-15 MinutesMINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS MAY 15, 1973 The Board of Directors of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas met in regular session on Tuesday, May 15, 1973 at 7:30 P.M. in the Directors Room of the City Administration Building. 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. Directors Absent: None. Others Present. Representatives of the news media. Minutes of the regular meeting of May 1, 1973 had been distributed to the Board members prior to the meeting. Director Orton questioned the last sentence in paragraph one of page 208 which read as follows: "If the plans and profiles do not meet the standards of Ordinance No. 1245 the matter will be brought -back -to the Board for further consideration." Director Orton moved that that statement be amended to read as follows: "If the plans and profiles do not meet the standards of Ordinance No. 1245 the matter will be handled in the normal administrative manner." Director Noland seconded the motion. Upon roll call vote the motion passed unanimously. There being no further corrections or additions to the minutes, the minutes of the May 1, 1973 meeting were approved as amended. Upon request of Mayor Purdy, the City Attorney read a proposed ordinance to declare a moratorium on building permits for lands covered under petition for rezoning. City Manager Grimes commented that this ordinance protects both thetpetitioner for rezoning and the applicant for a building permit. Mr. Grimes added that he feels that this ordinance is needed. Director Carlson suggested that the proposed ordinance be amended in Section 2 to provide that the building permit "may" issue if final action by the City Board of Directors is not taken on the question within three months of the time the matter is so referred. (The ordinance as drafted read "shall" issue.) City Attorney Malone suggested that the word "shall" remain in the ordinance and that the ordinance be amended by adding "provided all other City requirements are met." *Mr. Malone further explained that the property owners can always go into *See Chancery Court and attempt to enjoin the construction. "They still have their insertion private rights and remedies," the City Attorney said. ** page 222 Director Stanton moved that the proposed ordinance be amended in Section 2 to **See read as follows: "Provided, that if final action by the City Board of Directors insertion is not taken on the question within three months of the time the matter is so page 222 referred, the permit shall issue provided all other City requirements are met." Director Noland seconded the motion. Upon roll call vote the motion passed unanimously. Director Orton moved that the rules be suspended and the ordinance be placed on second reading. Director Utley 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. City Attorney Malone read the proposed ordinance the second time. 213 Director Murray moved the rules be further suspended and the ordinance be placed on third and final reading. Director Utley 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. The City Attorney read the ppoposed ordinance the third and final 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" Carlson. There being six "Ayes" and one "Nay" the Mayor declared the Ordinance passed. *Ordinance No. 1918 appears on pages 181 and 182 of Ordinance and Resolution Book 3. Upon request of the Mayor, City Attorney Malone read a proposed ordinance to rezone a 0.4 acre tract (the "Old Safeway Building" parking lot) located on the north side of Davidson Street, 200 feet east of North College Avenue; from R-1, Low Density Residential District, to R-0, Residential Office District. Petitioner is Willis and Company. Director Stanton moved the rules be suspended and the ordinance be placed on second reading. Director Orton seconded the motion. Upon roll call vote the motion passed unanimously. City Attorney Malone read the proposed ordinance the second time. In answer to Director Utley's question, the City Manager stated that there were protests on the request to rezone this property to C-2. Mr. Grimes explained that R-0 is the most restrictive zoning the City has which provides for a parking lot. City Manager Grimes added that the parking lot that is there now just meets the requirements. "They would have to tear down part of the building in order to build another buildigg," Mr. Grimes said Walter Niblock, representing the petitioner, stated that no new structures will be built on this property. Director Noland moved the rules be further suspended and the ordinance be placed on third and final reading. Director Murray seconded the motion Upon roll call vote the motion passed unanimously. City Attorney Malone read the proposed ordinance the third and final 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, Carlson and Stanton. "Nays" None. There being seven "Ayes" and no "Nays" the Mayor declared the Ordinance passed. *Ordinance No. 1919 appears on pages 183 through 186 of Ordinance and Resolution Book 3. Upon request of the Mayor, City Attorney Malone read a proposed ordinance to rezone a 3.4 acre tract located at the southeast corner of Highway 62 West and Smokehouse Trail from A-1, Agricultural District, to C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial District. Petitioner is R. Frank Sharp. Frank Sharp was present at the meeting to show slides of the proposed development and the proposed operation to be developed on the property. There was no opposition to the request for rezoning voiced from the audience. City Attorney Malone explained that Zoning Ordinance 1747 leaves the inter- pretation up to the Planning Commission as to the use unit to which this type operation belongs. The Planning Commission recommended approval of C-2 zoning for this operation. 214 1 1 "Ayes" Orton, Purdy, Noland, Utley, Murray, Carlson and Stanton. "Nays" None. There being seven "Ayes" and no "Nays" the Mayor declared the Ordinance passed. *Ordinance No. 1919 appears on pages 183 through 186 of Ordinance and Resolution Book 3. Upon request of Mayor Purdy, City Attorney Malone read a proposed ordinance to rezone a 92.27 acre tract located on the north side of Highway 16 West, approxi- mately one-half mile west of the Highway 71 Bypass, from A-1, Agricultural District, to R-1, Low Density Residential District, and R-2, Medium Density Residential District. Petitioners are Daniel B. Thomas and J. C. Calabria. City Manager Grimes stated his concern about the use which would be made of the property fronting on Highway 16 West since it was not included in the rezoning request. Director Carlson recommended that the property be rezoned from Highway 16 West\ northward at this time. City Attorney Malone advised that this matter could be tabled until a recommendation is received from the Planning Commission regarding the remaining property fronting on Highway 16 West. Bryce Davis, representing the petitioners, stated that the property owners want R-3 zoning for that portion of the property fronting on Highway 16 West. Mr. Davis explained that the property owners are waiting for sewer service to become available to the area before petitioning for R-3 zoning. Mr. Davis further stated that he would prefer that the Board table this matter until he has a chance to contact the property owners and until the property owners have an opportunity to initiate action for rezoning the property fronting on Highway 16 West. Director Utley moved that this rezoning request be tabled pending a recommendation from the Planning Commission for the rezoning of the 1,222 feet lying between the property described in the proposed ordinance and Highway 16 West. Director Orton seconded the motion. Upon roll call vote the motion passed unanimously. Upon request of the Mayor, City Attorney Malone read a proposed ordinance to rezone a three acre tract located between Highway 112 and Highway 71 Bypass, just south of the intersection of the two, from A-1, Agricultural District, to C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial District. Petitioners are D. B. Thomas and J. C. Calabria. Director Carlson moved that the rules be suspended and the ordinance be placed on second reading. Director Stanton seconded the motion. Upon roll call vote the motion passed unanimously. City Attorney Malone read the proposed ordinance the second time. Director Orton asked what arrangements had been made for the service road for the property. Bryce Davis, representing the property owners, replied that the service road will be the presently existing short county road that comes up tbethe fairgrounds. Director Noland moved that the rules be further suspended and the ordinancebbe placed on third and final reading. Director Utley seconded the motion. Upon roll call vote the motion passed unanimously. The City Attorney read the proposed ordinance the third and final 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, Carlson and Stanton. "Nays" None. There being seven "Ayes" and no "Nays" the Mayor declared the Ordinance passed. *Ordinance No. 1919 appears on pages 183 through 186 of Ordinance and Resolution Book 3. 217 City Attorney Malone read a proposed resolution to authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute a contract guaranteeing that the contractor/developer will install certain improvements in Strawberry Hill Subdivision. Director Orton stated that she was hesitant to vote on a contract guaranteeing improvements before deciding what improvements the contract would cover. Mrs. Orton asked that the Board be allowed to discuss the matter of whether or not to grant a waiver of the sidewalk requirements in the cul-de-sacs as approved by the Planning Commission. City Attorney Malone explained that the Planning Commission has the authority to waive the requirements of an ordinance when a hardship exists. "I don't believe in this case it (the installation of sidewalks) would qualify as a hardship," City Attorney Malone said. The City Attorney advised the Board that the City could enter into a contract with the developer guaranteeing the installation of all improvements required by Ordinance No. 1750 and require that a cash bond be posted in order to guarantee the installation of a sidewalk before a lot could be released. Director Stanton commented that sidewalks should be installed after all the excavation is done and suggested that possibly the sidewalk requirement could be handled at the time a building permit is issued. Bryce Davis stated that there would be less expense involved if the property owners developed the sidewalk after construction was completed. City Attorney Malone stated that that was what he was suggesting, that the developer could put up a cash bond guaranteeing the installation of that sidewalk in order to get the lot released. Director Utley commented that a cul-de-sac, by design, is different from a through street and since there would be much less traffic on a cul-de-sac sidewalks would become less necessary. City Attorney Malone advised that in order to accomplish that, Ordinance No. 1750 would need to be amended to require sidewalks on through streets only. Ginger Parker in the audience commented that she feels that sidewalks are necessary on cul-de-sacs and on all streets. Mrs. Parker said that she does not wish to teach her young children that it is acceptable to play in the street and therefore she feels that sidewalks should be required on cul-de-sacs all the way around. Director Stanton moved that a resolution to authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute a contract guaranteeing that the contractor/developer will install all of the improvements required by Ordinance No. 1750 be adopted. Director Noland seconded the motion. Upon roll call the following vote was recorded: "Ayes" Orton, Purdy, Noland, Utley, Murray, Carlson and Stanton. "Nays" None. There being seven "Ayes" and no "Nays" the Mayor declared the resolution adopted. *Resolution No. 42-73 appears on page 140 of Ordinance and Resolution Book 3. Consideration of an ordinance accepting the dedication of streets and utility easements in Strawberry Hill Subdivision was temporarily tabled to allow Ervan Wimberley, engineer of Strawberry Hill Subdivision, an opportunity to contact the developer. City Attorney Malone read a proposed resolution authorizing the Mayor and the City Cletk to execute a contract for certain improvements in the Fayetteville Park System. These improvements would include the resurfacing of the four existing tennis courts at Wilson Park and the building of two new tennis courts and a play area. 218 1 Director Orton stated that she has no doubt that this development will be an asset to the area. Mrs. Orton added that the problem here, however, is that the land use plan for Highway 62 West was recently adopted and this request is to rezone a spot which was recommended for residential uses. Director Orton asked Mr. Sharp if he had considered purchasing property further in toward town for this operation. Mrs. Orton said that, "The question here is 'What is the reason for our going against our land use plan'." Director Carlson said that she felt that the development would be quite dignified since the property owners have provided for lots of land around the proposed development. Mr. Sharp explained that this operation is a rural business and further stated that he hoped to keep their property rural. Director Carlson commented that she felt that every zoning request should be based on a presented cause and a known expected result. "Each petition has to stand on its own merits and the judgment made in one case does not necessarily set a precedent," Mrs. Carlson said. City Attorney Malone advised that it would be possible to amend the A-1 Use Unit 6 to include this type operation - processing and sale of agricultural products. Director Utley stated that he felt that this would be a good plan since it would preclude this property being used for other commercial uses Director Noland moved that the Board recommend to the Planning Commission that they study an amendment of Use Unit 6 to include the type operation proposed by the Smokehouse. Director Utley seconded the motion. Upon roll call vote the motion passed unanimously. Upon reqqest of Mayor Purdy, the City Attorney read a proposed ordinance to rezone a 0.62 acre tract located on the west side of East Farmers Avenue from A-1, Agricultural District, to R-1, Low Density Residential District. Petitioner is James Baker. There was no one presentaat the meeting in support of or in opposition to this rezoning request. City Manager Grimes stated that he thought R-2 would be the ppoper use for this property. Director Stanton moved that the rules be suspended and the ordinance be placed on second reading. Director Noland seconded the motion. Upon roll call vote the motion passed unanimously. City Attorney Malone read the proposed ordinance the second time. Director Noland moved that the rules be further suspended and the ordinance be placed on third and final reading. Director Orton seconded the motion. Upon roll call vote the motion passed unanimously. City Attorney Malone read the proposed ordinance the third and final 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, Carlson and Stanton. "Nays" None. There being seven "Ayes" and no "Nays" the Mayor declared the Ordinance passed. *Ordinance No. 1919 appears on pages 183 through 186 of Ordinance and Resolution Book 3. Upon request of Mayor Purdy, City Attorney Malone read a proposed ordinance to rezone a five acre tract located on the west side of North College Avenue between Millsap Road and Longview Street from A-1, Agricultural District, to C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial District. Petitioners are Garvin E. and Eleanor F. Martini. 215 John Lisle, representing the petitioners, stated that the purpose of this rezoning request is to allow the building presently on the site to be used as an office building. Mr. Lisle added, in answer to Director Orton's question, that there is already sewer service to Lewis Ford so it would not take much to bring sewer service to this property. Mayor Purdy clarified that the City has adequate protection through large scale development requirements to insure that this property will not be developed until sewer service is available to the property. There was no opposition to this rezoning request voiced from the audience. Director Stanton moved the rules be suspended and the ordinance be placed on second reading. Director Noland seconded the motion. Upon roll call vote the motion passed unanimously. The City Attorney read the proposed ordinance the second time. Director Noland moved the rules be further suspended and the ordinance be placed on third and final reading. Director Utley seconded the motion. Upon roll call vote the motion passed unanimously. The City Attorney read the proposed ordinance the third and final 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, Carlson and Stanton. "Nays" None. There being seven "Ayes" and no "Nays" the Mayor declared the Ordinance passed. *Ordinance No. 1919 appears on pages 183 through 186 of Ordinance and Resolution Book 3. Upon request of the Mayor, the City Attorney read a proposed ordinance to rezone a 1.72 acre tract located between Poplar and Ash Streets at the northwest corner of Birch Avenue and Ash Street; from R-3, High Density Residential District, to I-1, Heavy Commercial and Light Industrial District. Petitioner is Helen Edmiston. There was no one present in the audience in support of or in opposition to the rezoning request. Director Utley commented, "In previous actions we designed, funded, and built an Industrial Park for the purpose of concentrating industrial activities. I accept this petition as it was written that this (to have excluded this tract from a previous rezoning petition, R73-17) wasaan error. I intend to object to development of industrial areas over the City unless it is specially laid out and traffic is such that it will preclude traveling residential streets for the truck traffic. We must consider residential areas when looking at industrial areas. I am going along with it because it was intended to be incorporated in the previous action which the Board has approved." Directors Orton and Carlson expressed agreement with Director Utley's statements. Director Utley moved that the rules be suspended and the ordinance be placed on second reading. Director Murray seconded the motion. Upon roll call vote the motion passed unanimously. The City Attorney read the proposed ordinance the second time. Director Murray moved that the rules be further suspended and the ordinance be placed on third and final reading. Director Utley seconded the motion. Upon roll call vote the motion passed unanimously. The City Attorney read the proposed ordinance the third and final time, after which the Mayor asked the question, "Shall the Ordinance pass?" Upon roll call the following vote was recorded: 216 7 1 City Manager Grimes explained that bids were taken for these improvements and the bid amount exceeded the funds budgeted for the improvements. Mr. Grimes explained further that additional funds will need to be allocated for the project or the project will have to be reduced in scope. J. E. McClelland, Consulting Engineer, was present at the meeting to answer questions regarding the project. In answer to questions from the Board members, Mr. McClelland stated that asphalt courts could be expected to last possibly 20 years and that he sees no reason why asphalt courts would not last as long as concrete courts at Wilson Park; that concrete courts would not necessarily be cheaper to construct; that concrete contractors are so busy that they might not be willing to bid on the project; that asphalt courts are easier to damage and also are easier to repair; that if the completion date for the project were extended it would not effect the bid price. Director Stanton suggested that the City try to obtain some bids on concrete surfacing of the tennis courts since concrete is considered to be more permanent. City Manager Grimes explained that the City might not be successful in acquiring bids from concrete contractors since they are so busy. Mr. Grimes further explained that the specifications for the project would have to be re -written and the process would probably take a month or more to accomplish. Mr. McClelland stated that the bid which was received for the asphalt re -surfacing must be accepted within 30 days, and after that 30 days expired it is up to the contractor whether or not he wishes to extend the time period. Director Utley commented that he did not feel that the City should take additional funds out of the budget for tennis courts. Director Utley explained that he felt that this money could be used in the streets. Dale Clark, Parks and Recreation Director, stated that it was the recommendation of the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board that if there was not enough money to accomplish all of this project that the two new tennis courts be constructed since the existing four tennis courts are still playable Director Utley moved that a resolution be adopted authorizing the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute a contract within the limitations of the funds currently budgeted for improvements of parks, the decision of priorities for the improve- ments to be made in cooperation with the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board, the City Manager, and the Consulting Engineer. Director Stanton seconded the motion. Upon roll call the following vote was recorded: "Ayes" Orton, Purdy, Noland, Utley, Murray, Carlson and Stanton. "Nays" None. There being seven "Ayes" and no "Nays" the Mayor declared the resolution adopted *Resolution No. 43-73 appears on page 141 of Ordinance and Resolution Book 3. Ervan Wimberley, engineer for Strawberry Hill Subdivision, reported that he had contacted the developer of Strawberry Hill Subdivision and that the developer is willing to sign a subdividers' contract which requires the installation of sidewalks on cul-de-sacs as well as major streets. Upon request of the Mayor, the City Attorney read a proposed ordinance accepting the dedication of streets and utility easements and approving the final plat of Strawberry Hill Subdivision submitted by MEJCO, Inc. for property located off Old Wire Road North. Director Stanton moved the rules be suspended and the ordinance be placed on second reading. Director Noland seconded the motion. Upon roll call vote the motion passed unanimously. The City Attorney read the proposed ordinance the second time. Director Orton moved the rules be further suspended and the ordinance be placed on third and final reading. Director Stanton seconded the motion. Upon roll call vote the motion passed unanimously. 219 City Attorney Malone read the proposed ordinance the after which the Mayor asked the question, "Shall the Upon roll call the following vote was recorded: "Ayes" Orton, Purdy, Noland, Utley, Murray, Carlson "Nays" None. There being seven "Ayes" and no "Nays" the Mayor declared the Ordinance passed. *ordinance No. 1920 appears on page 187 of Ordinance and Resolution Book 3. City Attorney Malone read a proposed resolution authorizing the City Manager to sign a street striping contract with the State Highway Department for striping to be done under the TOPICS Program. (One-half of the cost will be reimbursed to the City.) A copy of the contract was attached the agenda Director Orton moved the resolution be approved. Director Utley the motion. Upon roll call the following vote was recorded: "Ayes" Orton, Purdy, Noland, Utley, Murray, Carlson and Stanton. "Nays" None. There being seven "Ayes" and no "Nays" the Mayor declared the resolution adop *Resolution No. 44-73 appears on page 142 of Ordinance and Resolution Book 3. Attached to the agenda was bid tabulation for Bid #194 for clay pipe products and the recommendation that the bid of Waterworks Supply Company, the only bidder, be awarded. Director Stanton moved that the City Manager's recommendation be accepted. Director Murray seconded the motion. Upon roll call vote the motion passed unanimously. third and final time, Ordinance pass?" and Stanton. to seconded Attached to the agenda was bid tabulation for construction of sewers on Longview and Plainview Streets and recommendation that the low bid of Jim Murray be rejected as he is unable to obtain a performance bond per specifications, and that the second low bid of Triple A Construction Company of Siloam Springs be awarded. Director Utley moved that the City Manager's recommendation be approved. Director Noland seconded the motion. Upon roll call vote the motion passed unanimously. City Attorney Malone read a proclamation designating the day of May 17, 1973 as Captain Alan Rose Day in the City of Fayetteville. Captain Alan Rose, USAF, was freed as a prisoner of war in North Vietnam on March 28, 1973. Director Utley moved the proclamation be adopted. Director Orton seconded the motion. Upon roll call vote the motion passed unanimously. City Manager Grimes announced a meeting of the Housing Authority Board to be held on Thursday, May 17, 1973. City Manager Grimes announced that he has received a letter of resignation from City Attorney David Malone. The City Manager asked for authorization to employ a person for $300 a month to work with City Attorney Malone until the time Mr. Malone's resignation becomes effective, August 15, 1973. Mr. Grimes stated that it is possible that this person will become the City Attorney. The City Manager also stated that it was possible that he will be asking for a full-time City Attorney at a later time. 220 ted. City Attorney Malone read a proposed resolution authorizing the expenditure of $300 a month from the Water and Sewer Contingency Fund for the purpose of employing a part-time helper to work with the City Attorney until August 15, 1973. Director Carlson expressed concern about using Water and Sewer monies for this purpose. Mrs. Garlson stated that if this part-time employee does anything else other than work for the Water and Sewer Department, then the City has transgressed on the Water and Sewer Fund. Mrs. Carlson added that she felt it would be best to leave the Water and Sewer Funds sfor the purpose of making water and sewer improvements. City Manager Grimes said that it would be fine if the Board wished to designate that the funds be allocated from the General Fund Unappropriated Fund Balance. Director Utley moved that a resolution be adopted authorizing the expenditure of funds from the General Fund Unappropriated Fund Balance for the purpose ofe employing a part-time helper to work with the City Attorney until August 15, 1973. Director Murray seconded the motion. Upon roll call vote the following vote was recorded: "Ayes" Orton, Purdy, Noland, Utley, Murray, Carlson and Stanton. "Nays" None. There being seven "Ayes" and no "Nays" the Mayor declared the resolution adopted. *Resolution No. 45-73 appears on page 143 of Ordinance and Resolution Book 3. Director Stanton presented the Nominating Committee report with recommendations as follows: 1. That the Nominating Committee unanimously recommends for appointment to the Civil Service Commission, Gene Thrasher, to fill the unexpired term of Jack Sowder, deceased. (Term to expire on 4-1-76) 2. That the majority recommendation from the Nominating Committee is that Marvin Murphy be appointed to the Planning Commission to fill the unexpired term of Walter Brown. (Term to expire on 1-1-74) Director Orton nominated Mrs. Samuel (Betty) Siegel for appointment to the Planning Commission. Mrs. Orton made a brief statement 6f Mrs. Siegel's qualifications for this position. Director Carlson nominated Marvin Murphy for appointment to the Civil Service Commission. Director Stanton made a brief statement of the qualificationsoMarvin Murphy for the position on the Planning Commission and the qualifications of Gene Thrasher for the position on the Civil Service Commission. Mayor Purdy called for a voice vote on the nominees, Marvin Murphy and Gene Thrasher, for appointment to the Civil Service Commission. Upon roll call the following vote was recorded: Marvin Murphy - Orton and Carlson. Gene Thrasher - Purdy, Noland, Utley, Murray and Stanton. Mayor Purdy announced the appointment of Gene Thrasher to the Civil Service Commission. Mayor Purdy then called for a voice vote on the nominees, Betty Siegel and Marvin Murphy, for appointment to the Planning Commission. Upon roll call the following vote was recorded: Betty Siegel - Orton, Noland and Carlson. Marvin Murphy - Purdy, Utley, Murray and Stanton. Mayor Purdy announced the appointment of Marvin Murphy to the Planning Commission. City Manager Grimes announced that he will be out of town on May 16 and 17 in order to travel to Big Sandy, Texas to look at a solid waste compost unit. 221 Mayor Purdy again encouraged the Board to put some time in on solid waste disposal plans. In answer to Director Carlson's question, City Manager Grimes stated that he expected to have in a few weeks the rough draft of the report of the study conducted by the University of Arkansas management class of the Sanitation Department services in Fayetteville. There being no further business, Director Utley moved the meeting he adjourned. Director Orton seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously whereupon Mayor Purdy declared the meeting adjourned. ATTEST: J) CitM mG Clerk/ APPROVED: *Director Stanton asked why had Section 1(d) of Article 4 been changed in addition to the change for Article 9 concerning the suspension of permits. Attorney Malone explained that it was in Article 4 that definition of non- conforming structures was set forth. Director Carlson said she saw no justi- fication for changing those very explicit terms which gave the city, or any of its citizens, a chance to contest a proposed building before the actual construction of it was started, regardless of whether or not a permit had been issued. The proposed change would give the builder uncontestable go- ahead just as soon as he got his building permit. Since getting a permit is a private matter, not requiring any notice to the public or adjoining property owners, no one would know about a controversial undertaking until it was too late to reverse it. The Razorback Road kind of issue would be impossible for the citizens to raise if the builder managed to get his permit first. **Director Carlson suggested that "private rights" are not the same as public rights and that this amendment took away the public rights. 222 1