Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1980-10-07 Minutes• MINUTES OF A BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING A meeting of the Board 7:30 p.m. in the Board Fayetteville, Arkansas of Directors was held on Tuesday, October 7, 1980 at of Directors Room, City Administration Building, PRESENT: Directors Todd, Colwell, City Attorney McCord, City Manager and City Clerk Koettel. Henry, Lancaster, Noland, Osborne, Sharp, Grimes, Administrative Assistant McWethy, 457 ABSENT: None CALL TO ORDER Following a moment of respectful silence and roll call, the Mayor called the meeting to order. REZONING/SOUTH OF HWY 16 EAST, BETWEEN ED EDWARDS RD. AND MALLY WAGNON ROAD The City Attorney read an ordinance rezoning property as requested in 457.1 rezoning petition R80-19 for 2.14 acres located on the south side of Highway 16 East, between Ed Edwards Road and Mally Wagnon, by petitioner John Maguire. The change requested was from R-1 "Low Density Residential" to C-1 "Neighbor- hood Commercial" as considered in a public hearing before the Planning Commission on September 22. Director Osborne, seconded by Noland, moved to suspend the rules and 457.2 place the ordinance on second reading. The motion passed unanimously and the City Attorney read the ordinance for the second time. Director Osborne, seconded by Sharp, moved to further suspend the rules 457.3 and place the ordinance on third and final reading. The motion passed unanimously and the City Attorney read the ordinance for the third time. There being no further discussion, the Mayor called for a vote on the ordinance which passed unanimously. 457.4 ORDINANCE NO. 2661 APPEARS ON PAGE 4/•7 OF ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION BOOK .ZX . REZONING/NORTH SIDE OF HWY 62 WEST, 500' WEST OF DINSMORE TRAIL The City Attorney read an ordinance rezoning property as requested in rezoning petition R80-20 for 1.72 acres located on the north side of Hwy 62 West, 500' west of Dinsmore Trail, by petitioner John R. Ambrose. The change requested was from A-1 "Agricultural" to C-2 "Thoroughfare Commercial" as considered in a public hearing before the Planning Commission on September 22. Director Lancaster, seconded by Henry, moved the rules be suspended and the ordinance be placed on second reading. The motion passed unanimously with Director Osborne abstaining because the petitioner is a client of his. The City Attorney read the ordinance for the second time. Director Lancaster, seconded by Henry, moved to further suspend the rules and place the ordinance on third and final reading. The motion passed unanimously with Director Osborne abstaining and the City Attorney read the ordinance for the third time. City Manager Grimes pointed out that the major portion of the property lies in the floodplain and that Mr. Ambrose should have it pointed out to him that there is a floodplain ordinance in effect. Director Lancaster stated that this should come up in plat review when Mr. Ambrose gets ready to develop the property. 457.5 457.6 457.7 457.8 458 There being no further discussion, the Mayor called for a vote on the 458.1 ordinance which passed unanimously with Director Osborne abstaining. tut ORDINANCE NO. 2612 APPEARS ON PAGE 4/9 OF ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION BOOK tX . SIDEWALK WAIVER/ASPEN APARTMENTS/WEDINGTON DRIVE Mayor Todd introduced a request by Mr. Ralph Gray, the developer of 458.2 Aspen Apartments, for a waiver of a sidewalk for the portion to the west of the main (and centrally located) entrance drive. The city's recently adopted Master Sidewalk Plan would require the installation of a sidewalk along the entire property line on Wedington Drive. Mr. Gray was present and addressed the Board. He stated that he wished 458.3 to withdraw his request, but would like to know where the Board would like the sidewalk in proximity to the road. City Manager Grimes stated that the city preferred some separation 458.4 between the sidewalk and the road if possible. Also, he pointed out that the city did not mind a wandering -type sidewalk in order to preserve the trees. Mr. Gray pointed out that there is a substantial drop from the road to 458.5 the level of the development and that he wanted to know the Board's desire in regard to the grade. He stated that there is about a ten foot drop and, as a safety thought, it would be better to keep the sidewalk on the level with the development. Mr. Gray said they would like to take the setback require- ment and follow the contour of the road. A member of the audience, Mr. Al Hughes, addressed the Board. Mr. Hughes 458.6 told the Board that the people walk the sides of the streets now, and that they will not go down onto the level of the apartments to use a sidewalk. He told the Board that a sidewalk was really needed on both sides of Wedington at street level. Director Henry asked how far away the sidewalk would be from the road. 458.7 III She stated that people probably wouldn't go down into the development project, but that for safety purposes it might be better not to have the sidewalks right next to the street. Mr. Hughes stated that the developer's right-of-way is some thirty feet 458.8 away from the curb in the trees. Director Osborne said that he thought Mr. Gray was talking of putting the walk ten feet from curb instead of thirty. Mr. Hughes said that if it was put only ten feet away from the curb that the rain would wash mud onto it and that during the winter the walk would be covered with ice. Director Osborne stated that there is a school only one block away from 458.9 the property and that a sidewalk next to the street would not be safe. Director Noland asked if this could be worked out with the street 458.10 superintendent and Mayor Todd answered that it probably could if no one on the Board had strong feelings one way or the other. Mr. Hughes stated that it would be cheaper for Mr. Gray to build a 458.11 sidewalk along the curb to match up with the one along Mcllroy Bank. Mr. Gray stated that he was willing to do whatever the Board desired, 458.12 but that he would like to find out now because he did not want to have to build the sidewalk twice. Mayor Todd pointed out that there were mixed feelings about the sidewalk 458.13 by members of the Board. He said it would be nice to have the walk away from the street because of the safety factor. However, on the practical 11/ side, people would be more likely to use the walk with it on street level. He stated that he would recommend letting Mr. Gray work this out with the City Manager and City Engineer in the absence of a strong board sentiment. City Manager Grimes told Mr. Gray to have the sidewalk staked out and 458.14 someone from the city would come out and look at it. Mr. Gray asked that if the sidewalk was brought up on grade, would there 458.15 be a possibility of the city helping develop that area. Mayor Todd asked if 1 459 extra expenses would be incurred in order to bring the sidewalk up to grade. Mr. Gray answered that he was certain of this. Mayor Todd stated that he could see no rationale for city participation, but that, basically, the regulations as they are written do require a sidewalk along the property and that cost would be a variable that would have to be taken into account. Mayor Todd clarified that the decision reached with the City Manager and City Engineer would be final and that it would not have to come before the board again. Director Colwell pointed out to Mr. Gray that, as far as the Board knows, 459.1 the highway department has no plans for improving that street. However, if the Arkansas State Highway and Transportation Department did widen the street and take the sidewalk, they would replace it. Mayor Todd accepted Mr. Gray's request to withdraw the request for waiver 459.2 O of the sidewalk. QIMPROVEMENT WAIVER/NETTLESHIP STREET @ GRAHAM AVENUE Mayor Todd introduced a request by Mr. Jeremy Hess, developer of a nine unit 459.3 Q apartment complex, for a waiver of sorne of the improvements that are required to be installed in connection with the development of property at Nettleship Street @ Graham Avenue. The improvements required in the case are: 1) widen the two streets 5' each; 2)install concrete curbs and gutters on each street; 3) install a 4' concrete sidewalk along Nettleship; and 4) install 124' of storm drainage along Graham. Mr. Hess told the Board that he was asking that the requirement of 459.4 widening the streets by 5' each be waived, and that the requirement of II/ installing curb and gutter along Graham Street be postponed until such time as the neighborhood changes to primarily apartments. Mr. Hess told the Board that the traffic on Graham street is very minimal and he did not believe that the nine units of apartments would substantially increase the traffic flow on the street. Mr. Hess stated that the street superintendent, Clayton Powell, had suggested that this was a transitional area which was rapidly becoming all apartments. Mr. Hess said that he could see where another developer might come into that area and tear down some old existing houses and build apartments. He proposed that he post a bond of assurance stating that he would install the curb and gutter at a later date. He said he was not trying to avoid putting in curb and gutter along Graham Street, but that he was trying to avoid putting in curb and gutter that might be nonstandard by the time more apartments are built in the area. Mr. Hess told the Board that he did not feel the 5' requirement of 459.5 widening Graham street was needed because: 1) the traffic does not need it, and 2) there are trees along the street that might have to be removed if the street is widened. He told the Board that he planned to put a berm around both corners and landscape it and that the additional footage of the road would destroy that affect. Mayor Todd clarified that Mr. Hess was asking for a waiver of the 459.6 additional five feet of pavement on Graham and Nettleship and for a delay on installation of curb and gutter on Graham. The other requirements, a sidewalk along Nettleship, storm drainage of 124' along Graham, and curb and gutter along Nettleship would be done. City Manager Grimes said that he had discussed the widening of the streets 459.7 with Street Superintendent Clayton Powell, and that he was in agreement that it probably would destroy the trees.' City Manager Grimes stated that the city had no problem with narrowing the street so long as they have a minimum of twelve feet in the driving lane on that side of the street. He did point out that the city would recommended parking on the street be prohibited. 460 Mr. Hess replied that they had more than adequate parking space for the nine units in their lot. He said they could end up having as many as 18 spaces in the lot and are only required to have 14. City Manager Grimes stated that the city would not recommend waiving 460.1 anything on Graham because they feel the corner should be completed at this time. They would agree to the reduced width on the street, but that drainage should be installed, the sidewalk should be installed on Nettleship, and that as many trees be saved as was possible. Mr. Hess was informed that he could build the sidewalk to go around the trees. Director Noland asked the City Attorney if a bill of assurance could be 460.2 required stating that the curb and gutter along Graham be installed at a later date. City Attorney McCord stated that there are several ways this could be handled. He said you could have a cash bond, a contract whereby the city would have a lien on the property if the improvement is not installed by a certain date, or a corporate performance bond. 460.3 City Manager Grimes stated that the city would like to see the job on Graham completed at this time. He pointed out it is at a low point and would be the logical place to begin. Mr. Hess stated that it could cost somewhat more than $7,000 to do everything. He said if the additional 3' of pavement width was waived it would reduce the cost some, but the main reason for asking for a delay on the curb and gutter on Graham would be to reduce the cost at this time. City Manager Grimes pointed out to Mr. Hess that if his curb and gutter costs are similar to the city's, it would cost only approximately $600 to go ahead and install the curb and gutter along Graham Street. Mr. Hess told the Board that he would withdraw his request for the delay of curb and gutter along Graham and would go ahead and install it at this time. 460.4 Mayor Todd pointed out that the board only needed to take action on the reduction of the width of the street. There would be a minimum of 12 feet in the driving lane itself, from the center line of the street to the front edge of the curb. 460.5 Director Henry, seconded by Lancaster, moved to approve the reduction of Graham and Nettleship by 3' on each side. Director Sharp pointed out that the reduction of the street was because of the trees and Director Henry, seconded by Lancaster, amended her motion to approve the reduction of the streets in order to save the trees. Upon roll call the motion passed unanimously. Director Colwell told Mr. Hess that he felt the estimated cost of $7,000 460.6 for the improvements was not realistic, but that the cost would actually be much higher. Mr. Hess answered that he was already committed to building the apartments and even if the cost was more he would have to bear it. CD BUDGET REVISIONS The Mayor introduced a resolution authorizing certain budget revisions in the 1976-1979 Community Development Block Grant Budgets to reflect cost aver- and under -runs on completed projects. Administrative Assistant McWethy stated that Rick Mason of Community Development had to attend a hearing in Springdale and would be present later if the Board wanted to consider this after he arrived. Mayor Todd pointed out that this was considered by the Community Development & Housing Committee on September 18 and was unanimously recommended for approval. The Board agreed to go ahead with the item. Director Henry, seconded by Lancaster, moved to authorize the budget revisions. The motion passed unanimously upon roll call. 460.7 460.8 460.9 460.10 RESOLUTION NO. 102-80 APPEARS ON PAGE IM OF ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION BOOK X . CD FUNDS FOR DEAD END STREETS 461 Mr. Ish Benton addressed the Board on behalf of the Community Development 461.1 Committee. He requested the removal of the restriction the Board now has that CD funds not be used for improvements on dead end streets. He stated this would allow the CD committee a wider range in making their recommendations for this year's program. Director Colwell pointed out that the Board had approved some dead end 461.2 streets in 1980, but that some of them were to less than city standards due to the expense factors. He stated that he had no objections to considering dead end streets, but the density of that street would be an important factor to consider. Director Osborne, seconded by Lancaster, moved that the CD committee be 461.3 allowed to consider dead end streets, but that the Board would look at CO these closely and make the final decision. 0 Upon roll call the motion passed unanimously. 461.4 CO ARKANSAS WESTERN GAS COMPANY FRANCHISE 'Ci Mayor Todd introduced an ordinance restating and amending previous 461.5 ordinances which give Arkansas Western Gas Company an exclusive franchise in the city. City Attorney McCord stated that Mr. Charles (Chip) Brannan was present 461.6 representing the gas company. City Attorney McCord stated a copy of the proposed ordinance was included in the agenda, but he would like to amend the ordinance as follows: 1 (1) That section 2 be amended by adding the provision: 461.7 "; and, provided, further, the streets, avenues, roads, highways, alleys, sidewalks, and other public places as now laid out or as hereafter established, shall not be unnecessarily and unreasonably impaired or obstructed thereby." (2) That section 7 be amended by adding the following at the end of 1: 461.8 "; provided, said franchise tax may be increased after June 30, 1986, by the City of Fayetteville if such increase is approved at a referendum election by a majority of the electors of the city voting on the question." McCord eXplained that the existing tax was approved by an ordinance 461.9 which was adopted and approved by referendum four years ago. It provides for a 4% franchise tax on residential and commercial and a 1% tax on industrial. Under that ordinance the tax is to be maintained at that level through June 30, 1986. Mr. Brannan addressed the board and told them that the request to change 461.10 the wording from "gas" to "natural gas (and) such alternate, substitute or supplemental fuels as. . .liquified natural gas, liquified petroleum gas, synthetic natural gas and propane -air" is based on the fact that in the future there could be different types of supplying energy through presently natural gas pipelines. Basically, this is the gasification of coal and synthetic •gases.. Mr. Brannan said this was not anticipated in the near future because the supply of natural gas for Fayetteville, at the present con- sumption rate, should last for 25 years. However, he did feel that they should be prepared for this. He said the gasification of coal is in research now and it might be ten years before the facilities would be available here. Mr. Brannan told the Board that Arkansas Western Gas does not intend to get 462 get into the LP gas business. He said that anytime they change their methods of operation it is subject to the Arkansas Public Service Commission and any changes related to environmental or safety are controlled by the federal government Department of Energy plus the Arkansas Public Service Commission. Mr. Brannan informed the Board that in 1979 the Public Service Commission, at the urging of the Arkansas Municipal League, conducted a hearing. The result was that taxes paid would be listed as a separate item on the utility bill. The gas company needs to file the taxes in the cities served with the Public Service Commission before January, 1981. Mr. Brannan said they elected to wait until December of 1980 to reveal this on the gas bill. On December's gas bill these taxes will appear as a separate item. There is 4% on residential, 4% on commercial, and 1% on industrial. Director Sharp stated that he was concerned about the last sentence of 462.2 Section 1 because it gives the gas company the exclusive right to sell fuel (without necessarily limited to) natural gas. Mr. Brannan said it was not the company's intention to sell liquified petroleum through their gas lines,but that it would be satisfactory to remove the word exclusive from Section 1 of the ordinance in so far as it applied to liquifed natural gas. Director Sharp also stated that he did not know if the emergency clause 462.3 contained in Section 10 was necessary. Mayor Todd asked Mr. Brannan if the gas company needed this passed in a hurry. He explained that without the emergency clause the ordinance would not take effect until November 7, 1980. Mr. Brannan replied that would be sufficient and that it would not rush the company on their December billing. Director Lancaster asked if the 4% was shown as 2% tax and the other 2% built into the rate structure. Mr. Brannan answered that the commission has ordered the gas company to take 2% out of the rate base, reduce the rate by that dollar amount, and show it as a separate item to the customers. It will now be shown as 4% residential, 4% commercial, and 1% industrial instead of 2% residential, 2% commercial, and 1% industrial. He stated that there would be no actual change in the percentage or revenue. Director Lancaster inquired if the language in the proposed franchise ordinance which required that any increase after June 30, 1986 be approved at a referendum election was consistent with the other utility franchises. Mayor Todd pointed out that there is always a check and balance, in that 462.8 if the people of the city do not like the action of the Board they can put the matter to a vote.462.9 After considerable discussion, it was suggested by City Manager Grimes that Section 7 be amended by adding only the following at the end of the first sentence in order to make the proposed franchise uniform with the other utilities 462.1 462.4 462.5 462.6 462.7 "; provided, said franchise tax may be increased after June 30, 1986, by the City of Fayetteville." Mr. Brannan stated this would be acceptable to the gas company. He said they would prefer the citizens of Fayetteville vote on it just as they did the last time the franchise tax was increased. A member of the audience, Mr. Steve Zisner, asked why there is a different 462.12 percentage structure for industrial versus residential and commercial. Mayor Todd explained that 1976 was the first time there was any tax for industrial, and that up until that time the tax structure was 3% residential, 3% commercial, and 0% industrial. The 1976 vote increased each by 1%. Mr. Zisner asked if there were reasons for not raising the industrial tax to 4% across the board. Mr. Brannan replied that historically, and even only a few years ago, the city was looking for industries to locate in this area to provide payrolls, to provide taxes, and to support schools. A company was attracted to come to this area by not having the additional tax on their utility bill. He stated that there are now other incentives. 462.10 462.11 462,13 1 10-7-80 463 Mayor Todd asked Mr. Brannan if the gas company has changed their 463.1 thinking on this. Mr. Brannan replied that the gas company has no position on it at this time, but they do believe there are greater incentives for locating in Fayetteville. Mayor Todd asked Mr. Brannan if the franchise tax applied on maintenance 463.2 and repair fees and Mr. Brannan answered that it did not. He said that the gas company does not pay taxes on service charges or deposits. Mayor Todd stated that gas sales were the major part of the gas company's 463.3 business, however, another part is service revenue. He felt that it should be taxed for service revenue in the same sense as there are service establishments, i.e. plumbers, who pay an occupation tax. Mr. Brannan stated that if an occupation tax was charged by a municipality 463.4 to his utility on an equal basis with other businesses, the occupation tax would be paid by Arkansas Western Gas and would not be passed on to the consumer. He pointed out that Arkansas Western Gas Company is currently exempt from the occupation tax. City Attorney McCord pointed out that the gas company is exempt because 463.5 the present franchise ordinance contains a clause stating the franchise tax is in "lieu of all other taxes." After some discussion, it was agreed that the statement, "in lieu of all 463.6 other taxes" would be removed from the proposed franchise agreement. The City Attorney read the ordinance incorporating the changes decided 463.7 on by the Board and Mr. Brannan. After some discussion, Mayor Todd, seconded by Osborne, moved to add 463.8 occupation taxes to the phrase in section 7 which presently reads: . .(other than automobile license fees, improvement districts, special 463.9 millage taxes, and the general ad valorem taxes). . .", if the City Attorney determines that it would be legally possible to levy an occupation tax. 463.10 Director Osborne, seconded by Colwell, moved to suspend the rules and place 463.11 the ordinance on second reading. The motion passed unanimously with Director Lancaster absent upon roll call and Director Noland abstaining. Director Noland stated he was abstaining because he owns stock in the company. The City Attorney read the ordinance for the second time. 463.12 Director Lancaster, seconded by Henry, moved the rules be further suspended and the ordinance placed on third and final reading. Upon roll call the 463.13 motion passed unanimously with Director Noland abstaining. City Attorney McCord suggested that a repealer clause be added and a 463.14 motion to do so was made by Director Osborne, seconded by Director Henry. The motion passed unanimously upon roll call with Director Noland abstaining. The mayor called for a voteon the ordinance as amended and the ordinance 463.15 passed unanimously with one abstention. Director Colwell told Mr. Brannan that the Board appreciated him coming 463.16 and discussing the franchise tax. In response, Mr. Brannan thanked the Board for their consideration and said that Arkansas Western Gas was proud to be in Fayetteville. ORDINANCE N0. 2663 APPEARS ON PAGE 420 OF ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION BOOK 2x . NOMINATIONS/BICYCLE TASK FORCE/ELECTRICAL LICENSING BOARD/POLICE PENSION FUND BOARD Director Henry reported on the Board Nominating Committee which met at 4:30 p.m. on Monday, October 6. Nominations were made to the Bicycle Task Force and to the Electrical Licensing Board as follows: Bicycle Task Force - Seven new positions„ with indefinite terms: Gerald Bradley,Perry Franklin, Thomas 0. Graff, Mark Risk, Harry W. String, Gary L. Todd, and Mark A. Widder. Electrical Licensing Board - For the position previously held by John Lindsay, ending October 1, 1982: The reappointment of John Lindsay. For 463.17 463.18 463.19 10-7-80 464 the position previously The appointment of John Police Pension Fund expiration dates, for 2 -year terms Ernest Lancaster Scott Linebaugh Clint Hutchins Dan Epperley Dr. James Mashburn Mayor Todd asked if there were nominations were made. held by Delano Cotton, ending October 1, 1982: R. Ambrose. Board - The establishment of the following on this Board: October 1, 1982 October 1, 1982 October 1, 1982 October 1, 1981 October 1, 1981 further nominations and no additional 464.1 464.2 Director Henry, seconded by Colwell, moved to approve the nominations 464.3 and the motion passed unanimously. SIGN APPEAL/DAVE TACKETT SERVICE STATION/400 NORTH COLLEGE AVENUE Mayor Todd introduced an appeal from the literal provisions of the Sign Ordinance for a sign to be located at 400 North College Avenue; Zoning District: "C-2 Thoroughfare Commercial." The variance requested by petitioner, Dave Tacket Service Stations by Dave Tackett, is permission to replace a 49 -square -foot non -conforming free-standing sign with one 36 -square feet in size, at a setback of 14' from North College Avenue. The ordinance requirement is a minimum setback 15' for an free- standing sign; the minimum setback for a 36 -square -foot sign is 28', unless the Board determines that strict enforcement would be unreasonable. Mr. Tackett pointed out that the original sign was moved because the Highway Department had to put a pole up for traffic lights at the intersection of Lafayette and Highway 71. Director Osborne, seconded by Noland, moved to allow a sign variance so long as the business continues to be used as a service station. Upon roll call the motion passed unanimously. SIGN APPEAL/DAVE TACKETT EXXON STATION/313 WEST DICKSON STREET Mayor Todd introduced an appeal from the literal provisions of the Sign Ordinance for a sign to be located at 313 West Dickson Street; Zoning District "C-3 Central Business District Commercial." The variance requested by petitioner, Dave Tackett Service Stations, by Dave Tackett, is permission to allow the installation of a free-standing 26 -square -feet sign at a 16 foot setback. The maximum size allowed at this setback would be 12 -square -feet. Mr. Tackett told the Board that this property was boxed in by buildings on both sides, and that a sign was necessary to let people know the station was there. He stated that another sign was taken down which was out on the sidewalk and was not in compliance with the sign ordinance. Director Noland, seconded by Lancaster, moved to allow the sign variance so long as the business continues to operate as a service station. Upon roll call the motion passed unanimously. Mr. Tackett told the Board he appreciated all the work the Board members have done for Fayetteville. He said he has lived here for 21 years and has seen a lot of improvements and that the Board is to be commended for its fine work. SIGN APPEAL/LEWIS FORD SALES, INC./3373 NORTH COLLEGE AVENUE Mayor Todd introduced an appeal from the literal provisions of the Sign Ordinance for a sign to be located at 3373 North College Avenue; Zoning "C-2 Thoroughfare Commercial." The variance requested by Lewis Ford Sales, Inc., by Ronald Bumpass, is permission to relocate an existing 464.4 464.5 464.6 464.7' 464.8 464.9 464.10 464.11 464.12 464.1. 11 1 465 110 square foot free-standing sign to a point located 40' from the street right-of-way. The ordinance requires the maximum size allowed at a 40' setback is 75 square feet unless the Board determines that strict enforcement would be unreasonable. Mr. Bumpass, on behalf of Lewis Ford Sales, Inc., told the Board that he 465.1 was in favor of the sign ordinance. He told the Board that the sign is presently one foot from the right-of-way and thatLewis Ford proposes to move the sign to comply with the ordinance setback requirement of 40'. He stated that the sign is presently in compliance with the height requirement. Mr. Bumpass stated that the roof sign will be lowered onto the mansard roof and the small Ford Rent-A-Car sign will be removed and either placed on a wall or placed inside the building. Director Lancaster, seconded by Director Sharp, moved to grant the appeal 465.2 in view of the fact that this was a new -looking sign that could not be altered without destroying it. It was pointed out that variances had been made for two competitors, Mr. Fisher and Mr. Jones. The motion passed unanimously upon roll call. Director Colwell pointed out that the roof sign, which is now in violation,465.3 is going to be corrected and that Lewis Ford has been more than willing to make concessions in every extent that they can. SIGN APPEAL/DANDY OIL COMPANY/257 EAST TOWNSHIP Mayor Todd introduced an appeal from the literal provisions of the Sign 465.4 Ordinance regarding nine signs to be located at 257 East Township by petitioner Dandy Oil Company, by Gary A. Dandy: Zoning District "C-2 Thoroughfare Commercial." The variance requested is permission to install nine "informational signs" that vary in size from 5.5 to 7.0 square feet each. The ordinance requires that informational signs shall not exceed four square feet in size unless the board determines that strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of characteristics unique to the property in question. Gary Dandy addressed the board and told them that the signs are needed to identify the bays in his carwash. He stated that they are located approximately 140' from the center of the highway. Mr. Dandy presented pictures of the signs to the board members. He stated that all signs have been removed now except the ones for the automatic carwash. They were put up before Mr.iDandy realized that they were in violation of the sign ordinance. Sign Inspector Dietzen what was measured. City Manager Grimes street for these signs, 50'. informed Director Noland that the lettering was asked what would be the minimum setback from the and Sign Inspector Dietzen answered it would be 465.5 465.6 465.7 Sign Inspector Dietzen stated that it would be very costly to remove the 465.8 two automatic carwash signs, which are seven feet each. Director Osborne, seconded by Colwell, moved that the variance be 465.9 granted based on the fact that the carwash is so far back off Township Road. In response to Director Noland, Sign Inspector Dietzen stated that all 465.10 other signs at the carwash were in compliance. Director Colwell stated that he felt the distance from the right-of-way 465.11 is a factor that should be kept in mind. Director Noland stated that the board continually receives requests for 465.12 variances after the sign has already been purchased and has been erected. He stated that some people that sell the signs know more about the requirements than the people purchasing the signs. Director Sharp stated that he agreed with Director Noland. 465.13 466 City Attorney McCord stated that the fact that the signs were erected 466.1 without a permit should be disregarded, and it should be considered whether a variance would be granted if that were not the case. Director Osborne pointed out that he would not have made the motion had 466.2 the distance been 50' from the right-of-way, but that the carwash is more than twice the required setback distance from the highway. Mayor Todd stated that he was not convinced that the setback distance 466.3 was significant. Director Henry stated that she felt there was merit in allowing the 466.4 variance in terms of the distance from the right-of-way. Director Sharp asked why these were considered informational signs and 466.5 not wall signs since they were on the building. It was pointed out that only one wall sign would be allowed. Upon roll call the motion to grant the variance failed by a vote of 466.6 4-3 with Directors Colwell, Henry, and Osborne voting in the minority. Director Lancaster, seconded by Noland, moved to grant a variance up to 466.7 7 square feet for two informational signs, specifically the "automatic" signs. Upon roll call the motion passed by a vote of 6-1, with Director Sharp voting in the minority. City Manager Grimes pointed out that there was a typographical error in 466.8 a recent newspaper article which stated that there were 700 signs not yet in compliance with the sign ordinance. This figure should have been 70. WATER LINE OVERSIZING/COUNTY ROADS 94 and 707 Mayor Todd introduced a request by the City Engineer for authorization 466.9 to "oversize" a water line in the area of County Roads 94 and 707, at a city expense of $4,618. City Manager stated that this came up on a relatively short notice 466.10 and that it had not been to the Water and Sewer Committee. He pointed out that City Engineer Don Bunn was in Little Rock on city business and the assistant City Engineer, Sid Noorbakhsh, was present to answer questions. City Manager Grimes stated that this was in keeping with what has 466.11 been tried in the past and that was to anticipate what is going to happen in the future. Mayor Todd pointed out that a certain amount is budgeted for this kind 466.12 of thing in the annual budget, but that the city does not directly or specifically budget a particular project. Money had been budgeted for projects similiar to this one. He stated it is a situation where the city is trying to prepare for the future. The city is trying to anticipate the growth and the need for a larger line, and will pay the difference between the line needed now and the line that might be needed in the future. Director Noland pointed out that this is consistent with the policy 466.13 that the city does not like to put in a two inch water line. A member of the audience, Peter Tooker, asked what development is foreseen 466.14 that will necessitate the oversizing and to what extent the development will be served. He also asked whether or not the future developers would repay the city for this cost. City Manager Grimes stated that he could not identify any specific 466.15 developments. He pointed out that this is in the northwest area outside city limits. He stated that everyone anticipates the area growing fairly rapidly and that within the next ten years it could possibly be heavily urbanized. He added that he could not say at this time what developer would have to pay a portion of this, because he does not know what development is going to take place, but that the city would hate to extend a two inch water line, which the residents will pay for, and have a development come in beyond that and have to come back with a four inch line. The city feels it is good business to oversize now iri anticipation of what is going to happen in the future. City Manager Grimes said that if a developer here in town is going to hook a subdivision on to a main line they are not assessed any more than the tapping fee which is about the cost of making the connection and getting it out from under the street. Mr. Tooker asked City Manager Grimes if he could explain what the human limits of this oversizing are; how many residential units will be served by this. The City Manager replied that he could not tell how many houses a four inch will serve. He stated that if you could keep looping back you could almost serve an indefinite number. However, there could come a time when an eight inch or twelve inch loop would have to be run. Director Lancaster asked about the difference in price of $4,618. Director Sharp asked if the Water and Sewer Department was planning 0) on getting more bids and Mr. Noorbakhh said that they were planning on 0 taking more bids and the one he had was only an estimate. CO Director Henry, seconded by Colwell, moved to table the item until 0 the time when more competitive bids are received. Upon roll call the motion passed unanimously and the item was tabled. a Q BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS/FISCAL PERIOD ENDING JUNE 30, 1980 Mayor Todd introduced several budget adjustments for the period ending 467.6 June 30, 1980. Director Osborne, Chairman of the Finance Committee, stated that these 467.7 budget adjustments had been considered by the finance committee and that they were recommending budget adjustments in expenditures for the general fund, public works, airport, and department head transfer requests. Director Osborne, seconded by Colwe 1, moved to approve these adjustments and upon roll call the motion passed un imously. RESOLUTION N0. 103-80 APPEARS ON PAGE un ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION BOOK X WATER AND SEWER BUDGET 1980-1981 Mayor Todd introduced the 1980-81 Water & Sewer Fund Budget for approval 467.9 by the Board. He pointed out that the city has a number of different funds and that one of the more important ones is the Water & Sewer Fund and that it is an enterprise fund, meaning it has to be self-sustaining over a period of time. He stated the city is faced with a deficit budget for this year, but that they will be looking at possible additions to revenue in the near future and that in the meantime reserves which have been built up in past years will be used. He stated that this budget has been reviewed by the Water and Sewer Committee and the Finance Committee. Director Noland pointed out there are approximately $350,000 of relocation 467.10 projects which are more or less mandatory if current road work is to continue. He said these things are irtportant from the standpoint that the city is doing some oversizing and looping work in conjunction with some of the projects, but that really they are more or less dictated to the city without too much leeway as to whether or not the city accepts the relocations. Director Osborne stated that Mayor Todd had pointed out to the finance 467.11 committee that a couple of items under revenues (page 14.04 of directors' agenda) are not actually revenues and that they have been footnoted as actual cash receipts or transfers. Mayor Todd pointed out that Finance Director Scott Linebaugh was present 467.12 to answer any questions about the Water and Sewer budget. City Manager'Grimes pointed out that it has been ten years since there 467.13 has been a water or sewer rate increase in the City of Fayetteville. The water rate was increased about January, but that was the first in about ten years and this proposed increase for sewer would be the first in approximately eleven years. 467 467.1 467.2 467.3 467.4 467.5 467.8 468 Mayor Todd pointed out some of the larger projects as widening Hwy 62 West 468.1 at a cost of $160,000 for water lines and $25,000 for sewer, Highway 71 bypass in the vicinity of Hwy 62 at $103,000 in sewer lines, a twelve inch relocation on Hwy 71 bypass at $200,000. Also he stated there is a fluoridation process for $140,000 that was voted by the people of Fayetteville some two to three years ago. He also mentioned that considerable work was being done on the study of sewage disposal. One study is for $134,000 and another for $157,000. Director Lancaster pointed out that the city is hoping to get a grant for $66,000 for the fluoridation project. Director Noland, seconded by Henry, moved to adopt the Water and Sewer 468.3 budget for the year 1980-81 and upon roll call the motion passed unanimously. Mayor Todd stated that the City Engineer heads up the Water and Sewer 468.4 Department and could not be present because he was in Little Rock on city business. Mayor Todd also pointed out that the Water and Sewer Department has been working on energy conservation and has developed some ways of saving on utility costs and have actually lowered authorized manpower. RESOLUTION NO. 104-80 APPEARS ON PAGE $421 OF ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION BOOK X BID AWARD/PASTURE LEASE IN INDUSTRIAL PARK Mayor Todd presented an award of bid for pasture lease on a portion of 468.5 the Industrial Park property. City Manager Grimes stated that this is about 100 acres which lies almost 468.6 totally in the floodplain in industrial park. He stated the city has had requests from joint property owners to lease this for pasturing and that the city was recommending a three year contract at $1,250 per year to Mr. Frank Combs. Director Osborne, seconded by Henry, moved that the bid be awarded to Mr. Combs and upon roll call the motion RESOLUTION NO. 105-80 APPEARS ON PAGE CONSTITUTION SUPPORT/ARKANSAS MUNICIP 468.2 Il• passed unanimously. OF ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION BOOK E REQUEST Mayor Todd introduced and read a resolution, requested by the Arkansas Municipal League, endorsing the proposed Constitution of 1980; and recommending its adoption. Director Henry, seconded by Osborne, moved to adopt the resolution. Upon roll call the motion passed unanimously with Director Colwell absent upon roll call and Director Sharp abstaining. Director Sharp stated that he was abstaining because he recommended that everyone vote, but that he did not want to tell them how to vote. RESOLUTION NO. 106 80 APPEARS ON PAGE *SSW ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION BOOK X SOILD WASTE AUTHORITY/ADDITION OF MADISON COUNTY, ST. PAUL, HUNTSVILLE, PRAIRIE GROVE, AND FARMINGTON Mayor Todd introduced an ordinance approving the addition of Madison County 468.10 St. Paul, Huntsville, Prairie Grove, and Farmington to the Northwest Arkansas Solid Waste Authority. He stated that this is a mandatory action in order to include these municipalities. Director Henry explained that the structure of the membership of the Northwest Arkansas Solid Waste Authority requires that every member of the authority must unanimously agree before anyone else can enter. City Attorney McCord read the ordinance. 468.12 Director Osborne, seconded by Noland, moved that the rules be suspended and the ordinance be placed on second reading. The motion passed unanimously 11/ and the City Attorney read the ordinance for the second time. • 468.7, 468.8 468.9 468.11 468.1 469 Director Osborne, seconded by Noland, moved that the rules be further 469.1 suspended and the ordinance placed on third and final reading. The motion passed unanimously and the City Attorney read the ordinance for the third and final time. The ordinance passed unanimously upon roll call. ORDINANCE NO. 2664 APPEARS ON PAGE/44/OF ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION BOOK .r/= . GIFT OF HOUSE FROM BOB HAY Administrative Assistant McWethy told the Board that Dr. Bob Hay wants 469.2 to give a house to the City of Fayetteville, no strings attached, and he would like to have authorization to proceed with the acquisition under those terms. The house is located north of the airport just east of Kearney Electric on approximately one half acre. McWethy stated that he had been out to look at the house and that it is in reasonably' good condition, and that he could see no reason why the city should not accept the house. Q) McWethy explained this would be a gift. However, Dr. Hay does own twenty 469.3 acres around the house and might like to sell some of this to the city at a CO later date if needed. This would not be a condition of the gift. Q Director Lancaster, seconded by Noland, moved to authorize the City Manager 469.4 to proceed with the acquisition of this property on a gift basis. Upon roll Q call the motion passed unanimously. Q NOISE ORDINANCE Administrative Assistant McWethy asked what the Board wanted to do on variances to the noise ordinance. He has received a request from someone who wants to have a live band outside on campus on October 31. City Attorney McCord stated that he felt the ordinance needs to be clarified because this question keeps recurring. He said that he and McWethy have meet with the Dean of Students, President of the Interfraternity Council, the Chief of Police, and others to try to clarify to them what the substance of the ordinance is, but even after this there was still confusion about the ordinance. This is the reason he felt the1ordinance needs to be clarified. It was decided that City Attorney McCord and Director Osborne would meet and draft an amendment to clarify the intent of the committee as recommended to the Board and present an amendatory ordinance to the Board at the next meeting. SIDEWALK AGREEMENT/WADE BISHOP Administrative Assistant McWethy requested the board's authorization to negotiate a proposed cost-sharing arrangement with Wade Bishop in regard to sidewalks along Appleby Road, for board ratification at a later time. Director Henry, seconded by Noland, moved that this authorization be granted and upon roll call the motion passed unanimously. 469.5 469.6 469.7 469.8 469.9 EMS LITIGATION City Attorney McCord reported that Judge Hannah, Chancery Judge in White 469.10 County, is serving as the Judge in Exchange in the law suit on the constitutionality of the EMS service fee ordinance passed by the Quorum Court. He did rule that the City of Fayetteville and EMS could intervene in that law suit and that the parties were give 30 days from the date of the hearing to submit proposed stipulation of facts and 15 days within which to submit trial briefs.. He stated that in all probability the case will be submitted under a complete stipulation of facts and a trial will not be necessary, although there is the possibility that a few witnesses will have to be called. He stated there should, hopefully, be a decision in that case very expeditiously. 470 SIDEWALK ORDINANCE Mayor Todd introduced an ordinance amending section 18-31(c) of the Fayetteville Code of Ordinances to clarify the sidewalk construction requirements prescribed thereby. The intent is to eliminate some ambiguous language by deleting new subdivisions and new large scale developments. Mayor Todd asked City Attorney McCord if this impairs the city's effectiveness in getting sidewalks built in new subdivisions and McCord answered that it does not. This is covered under the subdivision ordinance. The City Attorney read the ordinance. Director Osborne, seconded by Henry, moved that the rules be suspended and the ordinance be placed on second reading. Upon roll call the motion passed unanimously and the City Attorney read the ordinance for the second time. Director Osborne, seconded by Henry, moved that the rules be further suspended and the ordinance be placed on third and final reading. The motion passed unanimously upon roll call. The Mayor asked sn311 the ordinance pass and the ordinance passed unanimously. ORDINANCE NO. 2665 APPEARS ON PAGE 4,250F ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION BOOK rz FAIRHOUSING ORDINANCE Mayor Todd stated that the City received a letter approximately 59 or 61 470.7 days ago from the Housing Urban Development Department basically directing the city to do something about taking affirmative action on fair housing in Fayetteville. The Housing Urban Development Department's solution to the problem is a fairhousing ordinance, but the Board indicated that this would be considered as a last resort. Mayor Todd stated that there is some II/proposed litigation by some other cities. He asked City Attorney McCord if within the next two weeks he could get an update on the litigation and also suggest some alternatives available to the Board. City Attorney McCord stated that he had checked with several municipalities470.8 shortly after receipt of the letter and no litigation had been filed as of that date. However, the City of Little Rock was considering litigation in the matter. McCord said he would check with them again. 470.1 470.2 470.3 470.4 470.5 470.6 CHANGE ORDER/WHILLOCK STREET City Manager Grimes asked for the Board's approval of a change order in construction on Whillock Street. The width had to be reduced in order to get away from some fill slippage. City Manager Grimes stated that he approved this change order rather than shut the job down. Director Todd, seconded by Osborne, moved to approve the change order. Upon roll call the motion passed unanimously. SANITATION POLL RESULTS Director Colwell reported on the sanitation survey results. An ad had been run in the paper requesting citizens' comments and feelings about curb side service in hope to keep sanitation charges down. He stated that in most all of these comments were complaints about the dogs. He requested that in the next two weeks the Animal Control Department give some information to the Board on their activity the last two months, inform the Board of their policy on complaints, and their recommendations of what it would take to get the dogs off the streets. Director Colwell stated that something was being done wrong. The City has the personnel and it has the trucks, but the problem still exists. 470.9 470.10 470.11 1 1 MINUTES The minutes of the 9-16-80 meeting were approved as submitted. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 11:10 p.m. 471 471.1 471.2