HomeMy WebLinkAbout1983-04-19 MinutesMINUTES OF A BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
A meeting of the Board of Directors of the City of Fayetteville was held at
7:30 p.m., on April 19, 1983, in Room 107, Continuing Education Center, Fayetteville,
Arkansas. 1.1
1
PRESENT: Mayor Noland, Directors Lancaster, Orton, Sharp, Bumpass, and Johnson;
City Attorney McCord; City Manager Grimes; Assistant City Manager McWethy; City
Clerk Kelly, members of the press and audience.
ABSENT: Director Osborne
CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Noland called the meeting to order and asked for a moment of respectful
silence.
0 WILSON PARK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION/PETITION
QMrs. Fred Hanna of the Wilson Park Neighborhood Association addressed the 1.4
Board and presented the following petition: "We, the undersigned members of the
Q Wilson Park Neighborhood Association, formed on October 14, 1983, hereby respect-
fully request and petition the City Manager, Don Grimes, and the City Board to do
the following: (1) To enforce the existing rules of Wilson Park Ordinance #1594;
(2) To install gates with locks at each road entrance. Have an officer open and
shut the park at the designated times daily, i.e. 6:00 a.m. and 11:00 p.m.; (3)
To have violation of Park rules a punishable offense if it is not already so
ruled; (4) To change the Rule #2 which now reads: "No alcoholic beverages allowed
in park" - To read, "No alcoholic beverages, drugs, or controlled substances to
be consumed, allowed or sold in the Park; and (5) To have the lights on tennis
courts fixed so they can not be turned on after 11:00 p.m." Mayor Noland asked
that this petition be included in the files of this meeting maintained by the
City Clerk.
1.2
1.3
SEWER RATE INCREASE/ORDINANCE
Mayor Noland stated that several meetings concerning the sewer rate increase
had taken place since it was first considered by the Board on February 15, 1983.
The rate consultants, Black & Veatch of Kansas City, had recommended interim rate
increases, based on volume of use, ranging from 18.3 percent for low volume users
to 82.8 percent for users discharging 40 million gallons or more per month.
(Campbell Soup would fall in the category of 82.8 percent useage). City Manager
Grimes stated that Campbell Soup representatives had requested an opportunity to
discuss these proposed rate increases with the consultants, the City's Water &
Sewer Committee, and City Staff. He felt they should be afforded that courtesy.
He recommended an immediate rate increase ranging from a low of 13.7 percent to
33.7 percent, with the understanding that the ordinance would probably be amended
at a later time to include the upper levels proposed by Black & Veatch. Mr. Grimes
recommended these rate increases take effect June 1, 1983.
Mr. Blaine Bickel, of Black & Veatch, addressed the Board and recommended
increasing all rates 20 percent for this interim period, and stated that within
a thirty day period his firm would have the figures needed for the new treatment
plant, and they would then develop a new set of rates based on cost of service to
implement the new treatment plant. These rates were proposed to make a move
toward the cost of service. The 20 percent across-the-board increase would meet
the operating and maintenance expenses, current debt service, and routine repairs
needed, and, from an administrative standpoint, would be very little trouble to
implement.
1.5
1.6
2
Mayor Noland reiterated that the decision before the Board was whether to
approve the proposed rate increases, which would top off at 33.5% for all users
over 500,000 gallons on a monthly basis, as an interim measure, or approve the
Black & Veatch proposal for a 20 percent across -the board increase at all levels.
2.1 Director Orton stated that she would prefer the rate schedule which would top
off at 33.5 percent. Mr. Bickel stated that under the existing schedule,
regardless of class of customer, the user would pay the given rate pertaining
to volume useage.
Directors Lancaster, Orton and Bumpass were concerned that a 20 percent
2.2 across-the-board increase would penalize the small, residential user. Mr. Bickel
stated that the reason the higher increases were proposed for industrial users
was so final increases required of all classes of users would show less dis-
parity. He pointed out that the existing rates which were first computed 10
years ago were based on cost of service, but they are no longer based on cost
of service. He felt that the best means to attain cost of service charges was
by the interim rate recommendations made by his firm.
2.3
2.4
2.5
Director Bumpass made a motion to approve the recommendation of Black &
Veatch, as outlined in their letter of April 8, 1983, to increase the sewer
rates on an interim basis. There was no second to this motion. City Attorney
McCord pointed out that the motion of Director Bumpass should be construed as
an amendment to the ordinance which had been before the Board on February 15,
1983.
Director Johnson, seconded by Director Lancaster, made a motion to amend
the ordinance, to allow for a 20% across-the-board increase in the sewer rates,
as an interim measure to cover the current operating deficits. Upon roll call,
the amendment to the ordinance passed by a vote of 5-1-1, with Director
Bumpass voting in the minority and Director Osborne being absent for this vote.
City Attorney McCord pointed out that the ordinance was left on first
reading and tabled at the meeting of February 15, 1983.
2 6 Director Johnson, seconded by Mayor Noland, made a motion to suspend the
rules and place the ordinance, with amendment, on second reading. Upon roll
call, the motion passed by a vote of 5-1-1, with Director Bumpass voting in the
minority and Director Osborne being absent for this vote. City Attorney McCord
read the ordinance for the second time. Director Johnson, seconded by Mayor
Noland, made a motion to further suspend the rules and place the ordinance on
third and final reading. Upon roll call, the motion passed by a vote of 5-1-1,
with Director Bumpass voting in the minority and Director Osborne being absent
for this vote.
2.7In discussion, City Attorney McCord pointed out that the original ordinance
read on February 15, 1983, contained an emergency clause. However, since the
ordinance did not pass unanimously, the ordinance would not become effective
immediately, but would become effective thirty-one days from the date of
publication.
2 B Director Orton, seconded by Director Sharp, made a motion to invoke the
emergency clause. Upon roll call, the motion passed by a vote of 5-1-1, with
Director Bumpass voting in the minority and Director Osborne being absent
for this vote. In further discussion, City Attorney McCord pointed out that
the emergency clause did not specify the effective date of the rate increase
as being June 1, 1983. Director Lancaster, seconded by Director Johnson, made
a motion to amend the emergency clause to specify the effective date of this
1
rate increase as June 1, 1983. Upon roll call, the motion to amend the
emergency clause passed by a vote of 5-1-1, with Director Bumpass voting in
the minority and Director Osborne being absent for this vote.
The City Attorney read the ordinance for the final time. Upon roll call, the
ordinance passed by a vote of 5-1-1, with Director Bumpass voting in the minority
and Director Osborne being absent for this vote.
ORDINANCE NO. 2913.._ -APPEARS. ON PAGE / OF ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION BOOK XIV
AMENDMENT/BLACK & VEATCH CONSULTING ENGINEERS CONTRACT
Mayor Noland introduced a resolution authorizing a $30,000 amendment to a
sewer rate engineering contract with Black & Veatch Consulting Engineers, for
additional work in connection with the computation of sewer rates. This amendment
({) to the contract has been reviewed by the Finance Director and City Manager and has
TH their recommendations.
O Director Lancaster, seconded by Director Bumpass, made a motion to authorize
the execution of this resolution and contract amendment. Upon roll call, the 3.4
Q motion passed by a vote of 6-0-1, with Director Osborne being absent for this vote.
3.1
3.2
3.3
Q RESOLUTION NO. 53-83 APPEARS ON PAGE 2.99 OF ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION BOOK XV(
PUBLIC FACILITIES BOARD/REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION OF AGENDA ITEM
Mayor Noland stated that Director Sharp had made a request that this matter
be reconsidered at this meeting. The request for authorization to issue up to
$4,000,000 in revenue bonds to finance the construction of a 96 -unit multi -family
housing project had been denied by the Board at the meeting of April 5, 1983,
by a vote of 5-1-1, with Director Osborne abstaining and Director Bumpass being
absent for this vote. Director Sharp stated that he had been asked by the attorney
for the petitioners, N & R Properties (Messrs. Clemen Neff and Sam Rogers), to
withdraw this request for reconsideration.
JAIL FUNDING
Mayor Noland called for consideration of a request by County Judge Charles
Johnson that the City pledge up to 10% of its county sales tax revenues to assist
in the financing of the proposed new County jail. This request had been to the
Board Finance Committee and was referred to the Board without recommendation.
Director Orton stated that it is her understanding that the jail proposal has not
been finalized with regard to funding needs, and in discussion with county repre-
sentatives she was informed that there could be a reduction in the amount of funds
needed. Director Lancaster stated his opposition to the use of City sales tax
proceeds for use in financing the County jail.
Director Orton, seconded by Director Bumpass, made a motion to table this
discussion. Upon roll call, the motion passed by a vote of 6-0-1, with Director
Osborne being absent for this vote. Director Sharp stated that he would be in
favor of the Board meeting with Judge Johnson to discuss this proposal in more
detail, adding that he was appreciative of the efforts made thus far by County
representatives.
RATES REDUCED FOR PARKING-BY-CARD/ORDINANCE APPROVED
Mayor Noland introduced an ordinance reducing the monthly rate for parking -by -
card in the third level of the City's parking deck, to $15.00 per space per month,
from $20.00 per space per month. This reduction was designed to stimulate useage
and increase revenues.
3.5
3.6
3.7
3.8
City Atto
seconded by Di
ordinance on s
6-0-1, with Di
read the ordin
4.1 Johnson, made
third and fina
with Director
o rdinance for
o f 6-0-1, with
rney McCord read the ordinance for the first time. Mayor Noland,
rector Johnson, made a motion to suspend the rules and place the
econd reading. Upon roll call, the motion passed by a vote of
rector Osborne being absent for this vote. City Attorney McCord
ance for the second time. Director Bumpass, seconded by Director
a motion to further suspend the rules and place the ordinance on
1 reading. Upon roll call, the motion passed by a vote of 6-0-1,
Osborne being absent for this vote. The City Attorney read the
the final time. Upon roll call, the ordinance passed by a vote
Director Osborne being absent for this vote.
ORDINANCE NO. 2914 APPEARS ON PAGE 4 OF ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION BOOK XIV-
ADDITIONAL
IV
ADDITIONAL METERED, ON -STREET PARKING ZONES/ORDINANCE APPROVED
Mayor Noland introduced an ordinance authorizing the Traffic Superintendent
4.2 to designate additional metered, on -street two hour -limit parking zones. City
Manager Grimes stated that he and the Traffic Superintendent have designated
Center Street, and Mountain, from College to Church, and Block and East, from
Rock to Meadow for these additional zones. He added that spot checks would
be taken to note the license numbers. Maps would be prepared of these
areas to include the license numbers to maintain these spot checks.
City Attorney McCord read the ordinance for the first time. Director
4.3 Bumpass, seconded by Mayor Noland, made a motion to suspend the rules and
place the ordinance on second reading. Upon roll call, the motion passed by a
vote of 6-0-1, with Director Osborne being absent for this vote. The City
Attorney read the ordinance for the second time. Director Bumpass, seconded
by Mayor Noland, made a motion to further suspend the rules and place the
o rdinance on third and final reading. Upon roll call, the motion passed
by a vote of 6-0-1, with Director Osborne being absent for this vote. The
City Attorney read the ordinance for the final time. Upon roll call, the
o rdinance passed by a vote of 6-0-1, with Director Osborne being absent for
this vote.
ORDINANCE NO. 2915 APPEARS ON PAGE 7 OF ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION BOOK Jilt/
1
1
VIDEO EQUIPMENT PROPOSAL CONSIDERED
Mayor Noland called for consideration by the Board of a proposal to pur-
4.4 chase certain pieces of video equipment to allow continued multi -camera live
coverage of City Board meetings. The proposal before the Board had listed the
equipment necessary for a remote system, as well as the equipment needed to
continue multi -camera coverage. Shea Crain, Manager of Fayetteville Open Channel,
addressed the Board and said that the information presented to them referred to
a proposal whereby the City would purchase a switcher and head sets for those
o perating the camera, with Fayetteville Open Channel providing the cameras. She
said a remote system would be a savings of labor in that one person could operate
the entire system, and it was suggested to address the future needs of communi-
cation and could be expanded to take in coverage of various different meetings.
Mayor Noland pointed out that the fact that the Board Meetings are being held
in the CEC temporarily would necessitate the movement of the equipment when
the City Administration Building is renovated. Ms. Crain pointed out that this
equipment is totally portable and totally compact. Director Johnson stated
that in light of the amount of money the City has committed to television this
year, she would not be in favor of an additional commitment at this time.
Director Johnson, seconded by Director Bumpass, made a motion to table this
discussion.
1
1
In further discussion, Director Lancaster asked Ms. Crain of Fayetteville
Open Channel to seek information on purchase costs and delivery times of the
equipment. Director Lancaster preferred the equipment purchase be delayed due
to the necessity of moving the equipment at the time the City Hall is completed.
5
5.1
Director Orton made a motion to amend the motion to table, to specify instruc-
tion to the Manager of Fayetteville Open Channel to seek specific delivery dates 5.2
and purchase costs of this equipment. There was no second to this amendment to
the motion to table.
Upon roll call, the motion to table this matter passed by a vote of 5-1-1,
with Director Orton voting in the minority and Director Osborne being absent for 5.3
this vote. The Board would review any additional information provided by
Fayetteville Open Channel concerning purchase costs and delivery times of the
equipment.
coCONTRACT CANCELLATION REQUEST/HOWELL TRUMBO
CO Mayor Noland called for consideration of a request by Howell Trumbo for
0 Board to terminate a contract closing access onto Highway 71 North from Lots
Q 3 and 4 in Bassett's Place Subdivision.
Cr
1
Mr. Howell Trumbo, property owner, presented a letter dated April 15, 1983,
from the Arkansas State Highway and Transportation Department, which states that
before upgrading an existing driveway, a request for a permit to reconstruct the
drive should be made to their office. The letter also states the issuance of
the permit by the AHTD does not supercede any requirement of the City or County
which has jurisdiction over the development of the property. Mr. Trumbo stated
that he is entitled to two accesses, ingress and egress, but he is requesting
ingress only. He is in the process of negotiating a contract to sell the property,
upon the granting of this access. He pointed out that the contract, dated
November 14, 1977, between Johnnie Bassett and the City of Fayetteville, states,
in part, "if the developers feel undue hardship would be caused by the closing of
an existing access, they may petition the Fayetteville Planning Commission for an
exception to permit keeping the access open."
Mr. Trumbo presented a plat of the area for the Board's review. Mayor Noland
noted that the plat which accompanied the Arkansas Highway Department's letter
referred to Lots 1 and 2, while the specific lots referred to by Mr. Trumbo were
Lots 3 and 4. He felt this should be clarified, in that the areas may have been
replatted recently. In reviewing the plat, Director Lancaster noted that there
are other lots in the area owned by Mrs. Stout and he felt that the granting of
this access to Mr. Trumbo might prompt Mrs. Stout to seek access to those five
lots. Mr. Trumbo felt that Mrs. Stout already had access to her property by way
o f Shepherd Lane, Director Sharp felt that the terms of the contract pertaining
to the petition to be placed before the Planning Commission should be noted. Mr.
Trumbo stated that legal counsel had informed him that the proper forum for this
contract termination was the City Board. City Attorney McCord stated that he
understood the facts to be that there was an existing access, which, in fact,
was closed when this service road was completed. Therefore, the contract had
been complied with. Mr. Trumbo is therefore asking permission to have access to
the road that was closed by the City. Mr. McCord added that the request before
the Board was proper for this purpose, but he added that the City Board had the
authority to refer the matter to the Planning Commission for their recommendation.
Director Lancaster reiterated that this contract was written for the purpose
o f controlling traffic, and he would not be in favor of rescinding the contract in
that it may add to traffic hazards in that area. Mr. Trumbo stated that he would
e rect a sign at the access, stating, "THIS IS NOT AN EXIT."
5.4
5.5
5.6
5.7
6
Director Bumpass raised the question of whether this contract is a binding
contract. Mr. Trumbo stated that he purchased the property in June of 1977,
under an escrow contract. Mr. McCord stated that since this is an escrow
6.1 contract, Johnnie Bassett had legal title and the deed had not been recorded,
but that Mr. Trumbo had equitable title. Mr. Trumbo said that Notice of
Contract had been recorded at that time. Mr. McCord stated that under the
law of escrow contracts, Johnnie Bassett had legal title at that time, and
Mr. Trumbo had equitable title. He felt that the fact that Mr. Trumbo had
equitable title at that time might make the contract voidable.
Mr. Trumbo then asked the City Attorney to render an opinion on whether
6.2 the City has the authority to close an access that has already been granted by
the State. Mr. McCord said that a recent Arkansas Supreme Court decision held
that a portion of the Ordinance in question was unconstitutional. That portion
would require the developer to construct and dedicate the service road. That
case did not address the issue of whether the City has the authority to require
access points to be closed. He felt that it was an issue which needed to be
addressed and, if the Board directed, he would research that issue and render
a formal opinion. He added that other attorneys have the opinion that only
the Highway Department has the authority to require the closing of an access.
He stated that the Supreme Court has ruled that the City could not require a
developer to dedicate a service road, but the issue of the authority to close
access points has not been addressed by any court, to his knowledge.
Director Orton, seconded by Director Lancaster, made a motion to continue
6.3 this contract, and thereby deny the request of Mr. Trumbo. Upon roll call, the
motion passed by a vote of 4-2-1, with Directors Bumpass and Johnson voting in
the minority, and Director Osborne being absent for this vote.
6.4
6.5
6.6
ORDINANCE CLOSING PORTION OF EIGHTH STREET
Mayor Noland called for an ordinance closing and vacating an unopened
portion of Eighth Street, running east from Locust Avenue for a distance of
160'. Mayor Noland stated that this had been considered in a public hearing
before the Planning Commission on April 11, and they recommended, by a vote of
8-0, approval of the closing, subject to the retainage of a utility easement.
City Attorney McCord read the ordinance for the first time. Mayor Noland,
seconded by Director Johnson, made a motion to suspend the rules and place the
ordinance on second reading. Upon roll call, the motion passed by a vote of
5-0-2, with Directors Bumpass and Osborne being absent for this vote. City
Attorney McCord read the ordinance for the second time. Mayor Noland, seconded
by Director Johnson, made a motion to further suspend the rules and place the
ordinance on third and final reading. Upon roll call, the motion passed by a
vote of 5-0-2, with Directors Bumpass and Osborne being absent for this vote.
The City Attorney read the ordinance for the final time.
Mrs. Cecil Drake, the petitioner, was present. Director Lancaster asked
Mrs. Drake her reason for wanting this street closed. She stated that for a
period of over twenty years she and her husband had been maintaining the area,
clearing if of garbage and debris, and they are seeking to abandon it so they
can fence it in and keep it well maintained. Mayor Noland stated that the Board
has been advised by the Sanitation Superintendent that this is the only opening
between 6th Street and 15th Street, and he felt that in the future there might be
some importance for the City to maintain its street right-of-way. City Manager
Grimes stated that the Drakes could be permitted to install a fence in the
middle of the street and use the north half until such time as the City needs
it for street purposes. City Attorney McCord stated that the law states that
1
public right-of-way cannot be acquired by adverse possession, and if the property-
owner
roperty-owner fences in the right-of-way and uses if for more than seven years, the
property owner does not acquire title by adverse possession, and the City can
require the fence to be moved to open the street at a later time.
Mayor Noland then called for the final roll call on the ordinance. Upon roll
call, the ordinance failed by a vote of 6-0-1, with Director Osborne being absent
for this vote. It was determined that the petitioners had the right to fence in the
platted, and unopened right-of-way, but that the property owners can be required to
move it when a street is installed.
ORDINANCE CLOSING PORTION OF EIGHTH STREET - II
Mayor Noland called for an ordinance closing and vacating an unopened portion
of Eighth Street, running west from Church Avenue for a distance of 145'. Mayor
Noland stated that this had been considered in a public hearing before the Planning
CO Commission on April 11, and they denied this request by a vote of 6-2.
0 Director Sharp, seconded by Mayor Noland, made a motion to affirm the action
Q of the Planning Commission. Upon roll call, the motion passed by a vote of 7.4
6-0-1, with Director Osborne being absent for this vote.
7
7.1
7.2
7.3
1
SIDEWALK INSTALLATION/BILLS OF ASSURANCES
Mayor Noland stated that Director Osborne had requested that an ordinance be
considered authorizing a property owner to execute a Bill of Assurance to guarantee
the installation of a sidewalk and to execute these administratively. 7.5
City Attorney McCord read the ordinance for the first time. Mayor Noland,
seconded by Director Lancaster, made a motion to suspend the rules and place the
ordinance on second reading. Upon roll call, the motion passed by a vote of 6-0-1,
with Director Osborne being absent for this vote. City Attorney McCord read the
ordinance for the second time. Director Bumpass, seconded by Mayor Noland, made
a motion to further suspend the rules and place the ordinance on third and final
reading. Upon roll call, the motion passed by a vote of 6-0-1, with Director
Osborne being absent for this vote. The City Attorney read the ordinance for the
final time.
In discussion, Director Sharp stated that the Board had not had an opportunity
to thoroughly review this ordinance and he added that he would like to have
Director Osborne's explanation of how this would be administered. The ordinance
was left on third reading.
NOISE VARIANCE APPEALS HEARD
Mayor Noland opened the meeting to presentation of appeals to the granting of
variances from the literal provisions of the City's Noise Ordinance. (These
variances are outlined in the agenda material):
Assistant City Manager McWethy stated that soon after the Noise Ordianance
was passed, the Board established a policy that variances should be granted each
semester for parties of this sort. Consistent with Board action at this time last
year, Mr. McWethy received requests for variances on five different nights, and he
asked representatives of these groups to select two of those five nights. He
administratively granted variances for the groups listed for the nights of Friday,
April 22, and Saturday, April 23. He added that since the agenda was prepared, he
had received a request from Sigma Alpha Epsilon. for a variance for the night of
Saturday, April 23, and would administratively grant that variance, consistent with
the action taken by the Board on the others before them. Mr. McWethy stated that
7.6
7.7
7.8
7.9
8
Tau Kappa Epsilon and Fulbright had also requested variances for the night of
April 30, but they were denied in that their requests were for a third night,
in one semester, and it has been City Board policy to restrict it to one or
8.1 two specific nights, and everyone is required to comply with that timeframe.
A representative of Fulbright addressed the Board and stated that their
membership consists of individuals who would be involved in other functions
8.2 occurring on April 22 and 23, and this would hinder the success of their
function. She felt also that the group would be in a better position financially
if their function were held on April 30. Their party would be held outside and
the weather was also a factor. Their intention was to have e disc jockey, rather
that a band. Director Johnson stated that her recommendation would be to grant
them a permit for 60 decibels, and Mr. McWethy was instructed to grant this
permit in the form of a letter to be presented to the Head Residence at Fulbright.
A representative of Tau Kappa Epsilon addressed the Board and stated that
8.3 he was seeking the variance due to conflicts on the dates of the 22nd and 23rd,
and due to financial problems as well. There was some question as to whether
this group would use a live band or stereo equipment for their function. In
discussion, the Board determined that Tau Kappa Epsilon would be given a letter
from the Assistant City Manager outlining the terms of the Noise Ordinance with
respect to decibel limits. It was also determined that the group would seek a
variance from the Assistant City Manager if they chose to use a live band.
Mayor Noland stated that the remaining variances, as granted by Mr. McWethy,
were approved.
BID AWARDS
Award of Bid/Extension of Sewer Line/Miller Addition
Mayor Noland stated that this is construction of a sewer line to serve some
8.4 of the lots in the Miller Addition. There were eight bidders, with the low
bidder being Don Mitchell, Incorporated, at a contract price of $19,478. City
Manager Grimes stated that it is the recommendation of himself and the City
Engineer that this contract be awarded to Don Mitchell, Incorporated.
Director Johnson, seconded by Director Lancaster, made a motion to award
8.5 the bid to Don Mitchell, Incorporated, at a contract price of $19,478. Upon
roll call, the motion passed by a vote of 6-0-1, with Director Osborne being
absent for this vote.
RESOLUTION NO. 54-83 APPEARS ON PAGE 30( OF ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION BOOK X'V1
Award of Bid #517/Motor Grader/Street Department
Mayor Noland stated that this equipment is a John Deere Model 672A, and
8.6 Con -Mark Construction Machinery of Arkansas is the low bidder on this item,
at a contract price of $96,901.37. Clayton Powell, Street Superintendent, stated
that the alternate bids did not meet the all wheel drive specifications, and he
was confident of the quality of this equipment. This equipment would replace
machinery which is twelve years old.
Director Johnson, seconded by Mayor Noland, made a motion to award the
8.7 bid to Con -Mark Construction Machinery of Arkansas, at a contract price of
$96,901.37. Upon roll call, the motion passed by a vote of 6-0-1, with
Director Osborne being absent for this vote.
1
1
1
1
PARKS & RECREATION REQUEST/ART CONTEST
Mayor Noland called for consideration of a request by the Parks & Recreation
Advisory Board for authorization to have a swimming pool art contest, for a mural
on the bathhouse of the Wilson Park Pool. The request had been tabled from the
Board Meeting of April 5, 1983.
Mrs. Connie Edmonston, of the Parks & Recreation Department, addressed the
Board concerning this request and stated that it was determined to set an age 9.2
limit of twenty-one years of age or older, to insure that the project would be
completed responsibly.- Director Johnson stated that she had some concern that
the preparation of the mural would interfere with the routine use of the pool
facility, but Mrs. Edmonston assured her that the project would be limited to the
hours before Noon and after 6:00 p.m., when the pool was not in use. Director
Sharp inquired as to the cost of the project and Mrs. Edmonston stated that the
prize to the winner of the contest would be $300, with the total for prizes and
materials totalling approximately $700-800. Mayor Noland pointed out entries
Op would be submitted in small scale form for review by the Pool Committee. Mrs.
(' Edmonston stated that the Committee would be comprised of representatives from
Q the University Art Department, another artist, some representatives of the business
a community, and members of the City Board.
Director Orton, seconded by Mayor Noland, made a motion to grant authoriza-
tion of the swimming pool mural contest. Upon roll call, the motion passed by a
vote of 5-1-1, with Director Johnson voting in the minority and Director Osborne
being absent for this vote. Directors Johnson and Orton were selected as the
City's Board's representatives on the Pool Committee.
9.1
1
9.3
OTHER BUSINESS
Eminent Domain Proceedings Authorized
City Manager Grimes stated that Right -Of -Way Agent, Ed Connell is requesting
the matter of condemnation proceedings for consideration by the Board against 9.4
Kearney National, Inc. Mr. Grimes stated that the City has been negotiating with
Kearney National, Inc. for acquisition of property at the airport for some time.
This property lies off the north end of the runway, which the City needs for
expansion of the airport. The City plans to continue negotiations, but due to
the lack of time on this project, the City would like to have authorization to
file condemnation proceedings against Kearney National, Inc. The City's appraisal
was $15,000 for ten acres, and the appraisal done by Kearney National Inc. was
$40,000 for ten acres. Mr. Grimes noted that the bulk of this land lies in the
flood plain.
Director Bumpass, seconded by Director Lancaster, made a motion to authorize 9.5
the condemnation proceedings against Kearney National, Inc. Upon roll call, the
motion passed by a vote of 6-0-1, with Director Osborne being absent for this vote.
RESOLUTION NO. 55 -83 APPEARS ON PAGE 3/3 OF ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION BOOK )(VI
FAA Funding Received.
Mayor Noland stated the appreciation of the City of Fayetteville for the 9.6
$622,750 FAA grant funding, to complete the access road and reconstruct and extend
the west side apron, including a stub taxiway and lighting, as well as extension of
the eastside parking apron, and lighting.
10 Radar/Drake Field
Director Lancaster stated that the construction of the new tower at Drake
Field would necessitate advance consideration of the radar needs to accommodate
10.1 a tower of the type contemplated. Director Lancaster suggested the Board
contact the area Congressional delegation to impress upon them the need for
consideration of these requirements.
Director Lancaster, seconded by Director Orton, made a motion to prepare
10.2 a resolution to the Congressional delegation concerning these radar requirements
at Drake Field. Upon roll call, the motion passed by a vote of 6-0-1, with
Director Osborne being absent for this vote.
RESOLUTION NO. 56-83 APPEARS ON PAGE 3/f— OF ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION BOOK XUI
Mcllroy Bank Sign Suit/Hatfield Sign Suit
Director Lancaster asked the City Attorney his interpretation of the
10.3 difference between the Mcllroy Bank Sign lawsuit and the Hatfield Sign lawsuit.
The City Attorney stated that the difference is that the City brought the law-
suit against Hatfield and the Prayer of the Complaint asked for injunctive
relief, plus the authority for the City to do the removal and have the lien
if the injunction was not complied with. In the Mcllroy Bank Sign case, the
sign owners brought the lawsuit for Declaratory Judgment that the Ordinance
was unconstitutional, and they lost on their Prayer for that relief. Mr.
McCord felt that the ultimate Decree will authorize that the signs be removed
at the sign owner's expense, although the City Attorney has had some discussion
with the Plaintiff's counsel about the effect of the Supreme Court ruling in so
far as who must bear the cost of removal. The City Attorney felt the cases
should be resolved imminently.
Remarks by Director Orton
Director Orton stated that she hoped that future Committee Membership
10.4 appointments would include more women.
10.5
Director Orton congratulated Assistant City Manager McWethy for saving
the City 517,500 on insulation charges for the City Hall Renovation project.
Director Orton asked that the matter of Fire Safety Measures for Rental
10.6 Property be reconsidered by the Ad Hoc Fire Committee, adding that the Committee
has not met since April, 1982. Directors Sharp and Bumpass, members of that
Committee, instructed City Staff to include a copy of the minutes of that
meeting in the agenda for the Board Meeting of May 3, 1983. The full Board
would consider the matter at that time. Notice was to be given to the members
of the Committee by copy of the agenda.
Meeting of Street Committee
A meeting of the Street Committee was scheduled for Tuesday, April 25,
10.7 1983, at 3:00 p.m., in the Chamber of Commerce. Director Sharp stated that
the Committee would consider amendments to the Master Street Plan and the
Master Sidewalk Plan.
10.8
Bill of Assurance Granted
City Manager Grimes stated that Mr. Calvin Edens had requested the
Board's authorization to enter into a Bill of Assurances to construct a sidewalk
at the intersection of Leverett and Sycamore. Mr. Edens is constructing town-
houses at this location and has requested delay in the installation of the
sidewalk on Leverett until their construction is completed. He felt that
installation of the sidewalk at this time would not be adviseable in that the
construction could damage the sidewalk.
Director Sharp, seconded by Director Johnson, made a motion to authorize
the Bill of Assurances to install the sidewalk at this location at the time of
completion of the construction, or within one year of the date of the request
(April 15, 1984), whichever date comes first. Upon roll call, the motion passed
by a vote of 6-0-1, with Director Osborne being absent for this vote.
MINUTES
There being no additions or deletions to the minutes of the meeting of
April 5, 1983, the minutes stand approved, as circulated.
CO ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting
adjourned at 10:07 p.m.
11
11.2
11.3
11.4