Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1983-12-06 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 December 6, 1983 in Room 107, Continuing Education Center, Fayetteville, Arkansas. PRESENT: Mayor Noland; Directors Osborne, Sharp, Bumpass Orton and Johnson; City Manager Grimes; Assistant City Manager McWethy; City Attorney McCord; City Clerk Kennedy; members of the press and audience ABSENT: Director Lancaster CALL TO ORDER Mayor Noland called the meeting to order and asked for a moment of respectful silence. EMPLOYEE AWARDS Mayor Noland presented each of the three employees of the month -- Charles Allen, Police Department; Jesse Beeks, City Shop; and Bill Chester, Finance Department --with a certificate and a check for $150 and noted the comments made about the outstanding performance of the three employees by their supervisors. Mayor Noland noted these employees would be among those eligible to receive the Employee of the Year award to be presented later this month. AIRPORT ADVERTISING Mayor Noland introduced a resolution authorizing the one-year extension of a lease agreement between the City and the Fayetteville Hilton for advertising space in the airport terminal building under the same terms and conditions as in the original lease. With no comments from the Board, Director Johnson, seconded by Director Sharp, made a motion to pass the resolution. Upon roll call, the motion passed unanimously, with Director Lancaster absent. RESOLUTION NO. 141-83 APPEARS ON PAGE `-% g % OF ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION BOOK )(VII • 229 229.1 229.2 229.3 200 12-6-83 REZONING PETITION R83-12/DICKSON ST. & WEST AVE./ BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILWAY 230.1 Mayor Noland introduced further consideration of an ordinance rezoning property as requested in rezoning petition R83-12 for 1.5 acres located on the northwest corner of West Dickson Street and West Avenue, submitted by George Faucette, Jr. for Burlington Northern Railway. The request is to rezone from I-1, Heavy Commercial and Light Industrial, to C-3, Central Business Commercial, was recommended by the Planning Commission (8-0) and was left on second reading by the Board of Directors at their last regular meeting. 230.2 Director Bumpass reported he and City Manager Grimes had met with representatives of the Railway who have agreed to (1) cease serving any companies off the spur tracks which go down West Street and (2) remove tracks and railroad ties at their expense. Bumpass noted the City could then repair the streets and bring them up to standards. Bumpass stated they also discussed the negotiation of a parking lot lease on the south side of Dickson Street where the middle spur runs, for use as a City parking lot. Director Bumpass, seconded by Director Orton, made a motion to rezone the property pursuant to the Planning Commission's recommendation. 230.3 City Attorney McCord read the ordinance for the third and final time. Mayor Noland asked if there were comments from the audience and there was no response. Upon roll call, the ordinance passed unanimously. ORDINANCE NO. 2962 APPEARS ON PAGE 02,2_ OF ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION BOOK Ya 1 REZONING APPEAL R83 -19/N. COLLEGE AVE./WARD & SHERWOOD 230.4 Mayor Noland introduced an appeal of a decision by the Planning Commission to deny rezoning petition R83-19 for .37 acres located west of N. College Avenue and north of Trenton Street. The petition to rezone from R-0, Residential Office to C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial, was submitted by Lee Ward and William Sherwood. Mayor Noland noted the Planning Commission denied the petition (6-2). A representative was present to speak for the owner, Mr. Sherwood. 230.5 The owner's representative explained that Sherwood is buying the property from Mr. Ward, that this is the only tract in the block which is not zoned C-2 and that the only tenant the owner has been able to find is a taxi stand. The owner's primary intention is to operate a western store which he thinks will generate very little traffic; the secondary use of the property would be to operate a pizza delivery service as a conditional use under R-0 zoning. The owner's representative stated the Planning Consultant's primary objection at Planning Commission meeting was a traffic consideration but the owner thinks the planned use would generate substantially less traffic than other traffic hazards created by E.M.S. and others in that block. 1 1 1 1 12-6-83 Director Orton stated she felt the property has remained R-0 because of the feeling that office use would create less of a traffic hazard and she did not think the Board could rezone property for a specific use such as a western store. The owner's representative stated the owner is willing to enter into a Bill of Assurance promising to restrict the usage of the property to the two uses mentioned. Director Osborne stated he thought there was no practical use for the land under the present R-0 zoning, that the Board should consider the possibility of rezoning, especially with a Bill of Assurance. Mayor Noland stated he preferred to see the property remain R-0, with a Bill of Assurance accepted for a pizza delivery service. City Attorney McCord explained a conditional use can only be granted by the Planning Commission. Osborne asked for the Board's feeling as to tabling this appeal so that the owner can petition the Planning Commission for a conditional use for a western store in an R-0 zone. City Attorney McCord explained a conditional use for a western store is not permitted in an R-0 zone. Mayor Noland said his concerns in the past have been visibility problems to the north and the type of exit from the property. McCord stated the Board's past decision to deny C-2 zoning was challenged in court and upheld based upon a traffic safety aspect. He recommended the Board keep in mind that Arkansas law is clear that a property owner is entitled to a reasonable use of property; he stated since the property has been vacant and unused for a significant portion of time since that court decision, the property owner now has a stronger case, in that he has been unable to find a tenant under the existing zoning. Director Orton, seconded by Director Sharp, made a motion to uphold the decision of the Planning Commission. Director Bumpass stated he did not think a pizza delivery service would be much different from a taxi stand, from a traffic standpoint. Bumpass stated he wouldn't mind rezoning (if a conditional use is not allowed) along with a Bill of Assurance for specific uses. McCord clarified for the Board that, although Planning Commission cannot approve a conditional use for a western store under the R -O zoning, they may grant a conditional use for a pizza delivery service. To operate a western store, the property must be rezoned C-2 and the Bill of Assurance proposed would be for the purpose of restricting the use of the property to the two uses'mentioned. The Bill of Assurance runs with the land and is binding • 1, 231 231.1 231.2 231.3 upon subsequent property owners. Director Osborne made a motion to amend Orton's motion to state the rezoning be approved with a Bill of Assurance offered by the owner to restrict the use of the property to the two uses of pizza delivery service or western store. Director Bumpass seconded the motion. McCord suggested this amendment should be a new motion and that the first motion should be voted upon. Upon roll call, the motion to uphold the decision of the Planning Commission failed, 3-3, with Directors Noland, Orton and Sharp voting in the affirmative and Directors Bumpass, Johnson and Osborne voting against the motion. 231.4 . 5 . 6 . 7 231.8 12-6-83 232.1 Director Osborne, seconded by Bumpass, made a motion to approve rezoning conditioned upon the owner submitting a properly executed Bill of Assurance restricting uses to that of a western store or a pizza delivery service. Director Sharp asked if the Bill of Assurance could contain a clause that the property would revert to R-0 if the uses were changed. McCord stated, according to the motion which is proposed, the uses would be restricted to only those included in the Bill of Assurance. Director Osborne agreed to amend his motion to include Director Sharp's suggestion. Director Bumpass agreed to second the amended motion. 232.2 Director Orton stated this is not the way to decide on land use and she expressed hopes that there would not be a rash of requests of this nature. 232.3 Mayor Noland asked if this action could be called "contract zoning" and McCord stated it was not "contract zoning" since the Board is not imposing the conditions; that this would be a case where the offer has been initiated by the property owner and accepted by the Board. 232.4 City Attorney McCord read the ordinance for the first time. Director Osborne, seconded by Director Bumpass, made a motion to suspend the rules and place the ordinance on second reading. Upon roll call, the motion passed unanimously. City Attorney McCord read the ordinance for the second time. Director Osborne, seconded by Bumpass, made a motion to further suspend the rules and place the ordinance on third and final reading. Upon roll call, the motion passed unanimously and the City Attorney read the ordinance for the final time. Upon roll call, the ordinance passed, 5-1, with Director Orton voting against the motion. ORDINANCE NO. 2963 APPEARS ON PAGE 0.z5 OF ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION BOOK XV/ REZONING PETITION R83-18/HIGHWAY 16 WEST & LONNIE AVE/MARINONI 232.5 Mayor Noland introduced an ordinance rezoning 5.47 acres located south of Highway 16 West and west of Lonnie Avenue, submitted by Paul Marinoni, Sr.. Rezoning is requested for Tracts 1 and 2 from R-1, Low Density Residential to R-2, Medium Density Residential; Tract 3 to be rezoned from R-1 to R-0, Residential Office. Noland explained Planning Commission has recommended denial of rezoning Tract 1 to R-2 but did grant a conditional use for duplexes. Planning Commission recommended approval for Tracts 2 and 3. Noland suggested consideration of each tract separately. Tract 1 232.6 City Attorney McCord explained the City's zoning ordinance expressly provides that jurisdiction over conditional use is vested in the Planning Commission and there is not a right of appeal from a Planning Commission decision to this Board. Any aggrieved property owners or the Board has the right to challenge the decision of the Planning Commission in Circuit Court. 1 1 1 12-6-83 Mayor Noland made note ofithepetitions which had been submitted in opposition to the rezonings and also noted several of those persons were present in the audience. 2 3J 233.1 Tract 2 Mayor Noland asked if there was anyone present who wished to speak 233.2 against the petition to rezone Tract 2 from R-1 to R-2. There was no response. Tract 3 Mayor Noland asked if anyone in the audience wished to speak 233.3 against the petition to rezone Tract 3 to R-0. There was no response. City Attorney McCord noted the ordinance would apply to both 233.4 Tracts 2 and 3. McCord read the ordinance for the first time. Director Osborne, seconded by Johnson, made 'a motion to suspend the rules and place the ordinance on second reading. Upon roll call, the motion passed unanimously. Director Osborne, seconded by Johnson, made a motion to further suspend the rules and place the ordinance on third and final reading. Upon roll call, the motion passed unanimously. The City Attorney read the Ordinance for the final time. Director Orton stated she would like more information about the petitions expressing opposition to the rezoning. Orton asked the City Attorney if R-0 density could be just as high as that for R-3, High Density Residential. McCord said multi -family dwellings are permitted in R-0 as a conditional use with Planning. Commission approval, but are not a use by right. The residential uses permitted by right in the R-0 district are for single family and two family dwellings. A resident of the area addressed the Board, stating "we're in the flood area" and expressed his concerns over drainage problems of the area being increased with the addition of multi -family dwellings and the buil- ding of parking lots. He said 90% of the residents of the area were opposed to the conditional use which was granted for Tract 1. He remarked, however, that if the property owner would withdraw his conditional use for Tract 1, he (the resident) would drop his opposition to the rezoning of Tracts 2 and 3. McCord pointed out Tract 1, being 2.15 acres, is within the purview of the large scale development ordinance; that subdivision regulations can require drainage improvements as part of approval. Mayor Noland asked the City Attorney what appropriate mechanism there was for transmitting the drainage concerns to the Planning Commission for consideration. McCord suggested a resolution could be passed by the Board, addressed to the Planning Commission, expressing the concern and the desire of the Board to take care of any drainage problems during the large scale development or subdivision plat approval process. A member of the audience asked Mr. Marinoni what he intended to build on the Tract under petition for R-0 zoning. Marinoni stated he planned on building professional offices of a small type (e.g., doctors or insurance office). Marinoni displayed a map showing 28 acres of C-2 233.5 233.6 233.7 233.8 233.9 0 J' 12-6-83 234.1 zoning abutting to the west of Tract 3, stating he thought the R-0 zoning would be a transition between the residential and commercial zoning. 234.2 Mayor Noland asked Marinoni what the engineers have told him about drainage on Tract 1. Marinoni said Tract 1 drainage ends up in the ditch on Lonnie Avenue, stating drainage will bypass the neighbors immediately to the east and should not affect them. A member of the audience stated Mr. Marinoni had said about a year ago he intended to build single family dwellings and asked what happened to those plans. Marinoni said those plans "died on the vine" for lack of demand. 234.3 Director Bumpass asked if there were plans to four -lane Highway 16 from the Bypass to Garland Avenue. City Manager Grimes said this was a long range plan of the State Highway Department but, because of financial problems, many of their projects may never be accomplished. 234.4 Marinoni said he planned to build four duplexes on Tract 1 (one per lot). A member of the audience asked what assurance there was that there would not be any multi -family dwellings built on the R-0 tract. McCord said there would have to be a public hearing held for the Planning Commission to consider conditional use approval for multi- family dwellings. A member of the audience asked how many apartments and of what size would be permitted on the R-2 zoned tracts. Marinoni stated he intended to build tri-plexes. McCord stated R-2 zoning allows 4 to 24 families per acre. Director Sharp pointed out, regardless of any assurances from Marinoni, since rezoning goes with the land, it can be sold and can be developed to its maximum density. 234.5 Upon roll call, the ordinance to rezone Tract 2 to R-2 and Tract 3 to R-0 was passed, 4-2, with Bumpass and Orton voting against the motion. 234.6 Director Osborne stated, until now he did not know there could be no appeal from the decision to grant a conditional use and he would not have been in favor of granting that conditional use. Director Sharp, seconded by Bumpass, made a motion that the City Attorney draft a resolution to the Planning Commission stating the Board's concerns on the potential flooding in that area when it is developed. Upon roll call, the motion passed unanimously. ORDINANCE NO. 2964 APPEARS ON PAGE 03/ OF ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION BOOK XVI RES. NO. 142-83 APPEARS ON PAGE 49,5 -OF ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION BOOK )(VH SEWER AND DRAINAGE RECOMMENDATION FROM PLANNING COMMISSION 234.7 Mayor Noland introduced a recommendation from the Planning Commission regarding the adoption of a sewer and drainage study for the recently annexed area along Highway 16 West. Noland remarked the Planning Commission had made suggestions that additional loading to the Hamestring Pump Station be restricted and suggestions as to how the entire project should be implemented over time. Mayor Noland asked if the Board was ready to adopt the recommendations of the Planning Commission at this time. 1 1 1 12-6-83 Director Orton noted the motion made at the Planning Commission ..that the Commission recommend that these studies along with the other studies which have been done across the City on sewerage and stormwater, be put in the appropriate department heads'. hands for development of a specific set of priorities with associated costs for the Board's consideration for inclusion in the 1984 budget" was passed unanimously. Orton stated she was not ready for the City to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to implement improvements in the Highway 16 West area when there are drainage problems in more built- up areas where more people are affected. Director Johnson concurred with these comments. City Attorney McCord remarked one purpose of the study and the recommendation is to enable the City to require developers to comply with and remedy drainage problems; that state statutes on land develop- ment indicate the developer can be required to comply with the City's plan currently in effect; that right now the City has no adopted drainage plan and he thinks it would be appropriate to adopt a plan for various areas of town as studies are made. made. 235 235.1 235.2 Mayor Noland stated the referrals to department heads have been 235.3 Director Johnson, seconded by Orton, made a motion to adopt the 235.4 study as part of a master drainage and sewerage plan. Upon roll call the motion passed unanimously.XVIII RES. NO. 143-83 APPEARS ON PAGE 1 OF ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION BK SIGN APPEAL/1599 N. COLLEGE AVE/ROBERTSON OIL COMPANY Mayor Noland introduced an appeal from the literal provisions of 235.5 the sign ordinance for a sign located at 1599 North College Avenue in a C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial District, submitted by Robertson Oil Company. .The Mayor explained permission is requested to leave an existing 58 square foot free-standing sign at a 21 foot setback from North College right-of-way. The sign ordinance requires a setback of 39 feet unless the Board determines that strict enforcement would be unreasonable. Director Johnson, seconded by Osborne, made a motion to approve 235.6 the requested variance. Director Orton stated she did not think a variance of 18 feet should be granted. Osborne noted the applicant has explained he has a common structure which supports the sign and canopy which makes the sign look like a roof top mounted sign when in fact it is not. Direc- tor Sharp pointed out this is an existing sign which is not too large; that he would feel differently if this were a new sign; that it would be difficult to move the sign without tearing down the canopy. In answer to a question from Osborne, City Attorney McCord explained a variance applies only to the existing sign, not to a new sign which might be erected in its place. 235.7 235.8 23u 12-6-83 236.1 Mayor Noland asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak against the motion to approve the variance. There was no response. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 5-1, with Orton voting against the motion. SIGN APPEAL/2403 N. COLLEGE AVE/NELMS CHEVROLET 236.2 Mayor Noland introduced an appeal from the literal requirements of the sign ordinance for a sign located at 2403 North College Avenue in a C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial district, submitted by Nelms Chevrolet. The Mayor stated the appeal would be tabled at the request of the petitioner. SEWER BONDS/RESOLUTION TO EXECUTE CONTRACT FOR FINANCIAL ADVICE 236.3 The Mayor introduced a resolution authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute a contract with "The Financial Advisers" (First National Bank, Mcllroy Bank & Trust and Northwest National Bank) for expert financial advice in the development of a marketable wastewater treatment plan and system bond issue, for a fixed fee of $10,000. The Mayor noted this fee is a minimal one compared to more convential financial advisers and stated the request is satisfactory. 236.4 Director Osborne, seconded by Bumpass, made a motion to pass the resolution. 236.5 Director Johnson asked what amount of bonds would be issued. City Attorney McCord said the amount would depend upon the amount of federal grant funds the City receives, that the range could be from $18 to $25 million. McCord explained the bonds could be issued in a series until the City knows exactly how much funding is needed. Mayor Noland stressed these would be short term bonds. 236.6 Upon roll call, the motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 144-83 APPEARS ON PAGE S OF ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION BOOK X1fli RADIO TOWER/RESOLUTION TO EXECUTE PURCHASE OPTION 236.7 The Mayor introduced a resolution authorizing the execution of a purchase option for 5.63 acres on top of Robinson Mountain, at $1,421 per acre, for a future radio communications tower for the City. 236.8 Director Sharp stated he preferred to table this item, as more questions need to be answered on which direction the City will go in the purchase of a communications system; that it should be determined whether the City will need as much as 5.63 acres of land before purchasing property for the tower. 1 1 1 12-6-83 City Manager Grimes noted Director Lancaster has expressed the same concerns. Grimes stated, although there is a possibility the City would not need as much as 5.63 acres, it was thought that this amount of land would cover any needs over the long term. He said his only concern in tabling the item is the fact that the City's offer has been publicized. Grimes explained the City has a four month option but he has discussed with Frederick the possibility of extending this option for an additional four months. Director Osborne, seconded by Director Sharp, made a motion to pass a resolution to incorporate the City Manager's recommendation. Director Bumpass reported that Louisville, Kentucky has an 800 trunking system in operation and Louisville, Texas will have its 800 system in operation in January. Bumpass thought these two locations would be most useful for the Board to study. Bumpass also reported that competitive bids will be taken on both the 800 and the 450 systems. 237 237.1 237.2 237.3 Upon roll call, the motion passed unanimously. 237.4 Purchasing Officer Mackey stressed the need for the Board to reserve frequencies for either the 800 or 450, because at this time there are no dedicated frequencies available. s Director Osborne, seconded by Director Bumpass, made a motion that the Mayor be authorized to apply for whatever frequencies are necessary under both the 450 and 800 systems at the earliest possible time, with the understanding that the City may withdraw the application for the frequency which the City will not use. Upon roll call, the motion passed unanimously. Director Bumpaass askedttbat.Purchasing Officer Mackey obtain estimatesand also that he check with the cities of Louisville, Texas and Louisville, Kentucky to find out how many people use their systems, the type of terrain, and how many channels they use. RESOLUTION NO. 145-83 APPEARS ON PAGE 9 OF ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION BOOK MO ADVERTISING & PROMOTION COMMISSION REPORT Mayor Noland introduced a report from the Advertising and Promotion Commission regarding the use of hotel/motel/restaurant tax revenues for advertising and promotion purposes. The Mayor explained that, as back- ground information, the City of Fayetteville (because of the Continuing Education Center) receives "turnback" funds each year from sales tax generated from those persons drawn from out of the state who use the Center for meetings. Noland reported the Commission decided there may be untapped resources in the way of additional groups which could be brought to Fayetteville to use the Center. The Commission would like to have an employee. (contracted on a 50-50 basis with the Chamber of Commerce) 237.5 237.6 237.7 237.8 23o 12-6-83 238.1 who would coordinate solicitation of convention seminars for groups which are non -educational and which the Center cannot solicit. This employee would also represent the City and the Chamber of Commerce at meetings of the Arkansas Tourism Foundation, the North- west Arkansas Recreation Association, travel shows and other conferences where Fayetteville could be represented; this employee would be responsible for helping in the development of increased interest in attracting visitor business to Fayetteville and responding to requests from advertisements currently placed in newspapers and tourist brochures. In order to do this, the Mayor explained the Commission is requesting the City to restructure the repayment of the General Fund loan to the Continuing Education Center fund to permit the addition of S60,000 per year to the Advertising and Promotion Commission fund. Mayor Noland stated this fund currently operates on $35-$40,000 per year for advertising. Noland explained also that the CEC fund is currently paying 10% interest on this General Fund loan -- there is also a request that the loan repayment be extended and the interest be eliminated so that approximately $60,000 per year can be generated for advertising and promotion and the 1/2 salary of the new employee. 238.2 Dale Christy, speaking for the Chamber of Commerce, expressed his hopes that with the solicitation of more convention seminars in Fayetteville, there might be more funding available from the State's turnback on the sales tax rebates, which would be added to the potential revenues from the h/m/r tax and the general city sales tax. Christy noted Little Rock's advertising budget alone is $120,000 for 1984; that Eureka Springs spends 2% of h/m/r tax on advertising (around $200,000). 238.3 Mayor Noland pointed out the Commission intends for this employee to be "self-supporting" after two or three years because of the additional revenues. 238.4 Director Orton asked that an accounting be made available of how the APC funds were spent last year. Finance Director Linebaugh stated an accounting of how funds were spent each year has been sent to the Board as an informational item in the agendas. Mayor Noland noted that initially a lump sum was set up to carry the APC for five years. Linebaugh said that sum has run out this year and that $100,000 is actually needed (from the h/m/r tax money) at this point ($40,000 for this year already in the APC fund plus the additional $60,000 requested). Linebaugh said the reason the APC ran out of expected funds was because of expenditures for the parking deck bonds. 238.5 Director Orton asked when excess h/m/r tax moneys would go to the Performing Arts Center. Linebaugh stated it would be at least 1990 before that could happen. Linebaugh said the total excess is now about $200,000 per year, about half of which goes to the parking deck; $60,000 would go to advertising and promotion and the remaining $40,000 would go to the General Fund loan. 238.6 After lengthy discussion, Director Osborne, seconded by Johnson, made a motion that (1) interest be eliminated from the inception of the CEC Fund loan from General Fund; and (2) the request for $60,000 of funding from the CEC excess funds be approved each year for three years, for advertising and promotion and a half-time employee. 1 1 1 1 12-6-83 Director Orton asked to amend the motion to include that the Board receive the APC budget each year. Directors Osborne and Johnson agreed to the amended motion. Upon roll call, the motion passed unanimously. 239 239.1 INCINERATOR LEASE Mayor Noland introduced a resolution authorizing the execution 239.2 of a 27 -year incinerator site lease agreement between the City and the Northwest Arkansas Resource Recovery Authority for two tracts, totaling 7.91 acres, at $5,000 per year. Director Osborne, seconded by Director Johnson, made a motion to 239.3 pass the resolution. Upon roll call, the motion passed unanimously. City Manager Grimes pointed out this resolution was introduced 239.4 at a.November meeting and was approved for 25 years. Grimes explained that, at that time, the lease was drawn up for 20 years with a five year option to extend and now, because the anticipated life of the structure is 25 years, with two years construction time, the lease must be drawn up for 27 years. RESOLUTION NO. 146=83 APPEARS ON PAGE 0 OF ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION BOOK VIII EASEMENT/BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD Mayor Noland introduced further consideration of an agreement with Burlington Northern Railroad for an easement to allow the crossing of their tracks with a 12" sewer line to serve the Andrew Corporation. This item was tabled at the November 15 meeting until it could be determined whether the Burlington Northern Railroad actually owned the land. City Manager Grimes stated the Railroad does own the land. Grimes explained the attorney wishes to make some changes to the agreement. In regards to #1, page 1, "Railroad reserves the right to change the said charge at any time . . .", Mr. Grimes stated the railroad representatives told him and Director Bumpass they had not seen a price change in many years; that the City Attorney suggests adding a section which will indicate if they should choose to increase the charge, the City reserves the right to condemn the easement. Under #9, "...Railroad may at any time cancel...", Grimes stated the Railroad agrees to strike this section. 239.5 239.6 Director Johnson, seconded by Director Bumpass, made a motion to 239.7 approve the agreement with Burlington Northern Railroad. Upon roll call, the motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 147-83 APPEARS ON PAGE ;2Y OF ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION BOOK YVIll 12-6-83 UTILITY RELOCATION/APPLEBY ROAD BRIDGE 240.1 Mayor Noland introduced consideration of Board approval of utility relocation costs ($6,666.52) for the construction of Appleby Road bridge. 240.2 City Manager Grimes stated this has been worked out with the telephone company and he recommends approval of this payment. 240.3 Director Bumpass, seconded by Johnson, made a motion to approve the City Manager's recommendation. Upon roll call, the motion passed unanimously. BID AWARD/CDBG PARK PROJECTS & PAVING STONEBRIDGE ROAD 240.4 The recommendation of Purchasing Agent Mackey is for the award of the bid, for construction of basketball courts/parking lots 'at Walker Park North and Finger Park and the paving of Stonebridge Road from East Huntsville Road to Wyman Road, to the low bidder, Tomlinson Asphalt Co. 240.5 Director Osborne, seconded by Orton, made a motion to award the bid to the low bidder. Upon roll call, the motion passed unanimously. BID AWARD/CDBG PROGRAM/ELLIS AVENUE SIDEWALK 240.6 The recommendation of Purchasing Agent Mackey is for the award of the bid, for construction of a sidewalk along Ellis Avenue, to the low bidder, Jerry D. Sweetser Construction Co. 240.7 240.8 240.9 240.10 Director Orton, seconded by Osborne, made a motion to award the bid to the low bidder. Upon roll call, the motion passed unanimously. BID AWARD/WORD PROCESSING EQUIPMENT The recommendation of Purchasing Agent Mackey is for the award of the bid, for word processing equipment in the Water and Sewer, Planning and Finance Departments, to Computer System of N. W. Arkansas. Mayor Noland asked about the significant price difference between $2995 quoted in the PC World article and the bid recommendation price of $6895.30. Sturman Mackey pointed out the addition of a printer, the software and Hercules Graphics Board are additional costs over the base price. Finance Director Linebaugh explained the $2995 quoted in the article is for a Corona with 64K Memory and the City wishes to purchase a Corona with a 384K Memory. Mackey stated one system would be used for word processing and the other would be used for the Pollution Control Plant. Director Johnson asked Linebaugh if he had checked with department heads on the software equipment to make sure it is exactly what they need. Linebaugh said he had been working with the Water and Sewer 1 1 1 r 12-6-83 241 Department and the other system would be used in his department. 241.1 Director Johnson, seconded by Orton, made a motion to award the bid to Computer System of N. W. Arkansas. Upon roll call, the motion passed unanimously. BID AWARD/FORK LIFT/POLLUTION CONTROL PLANT The recommendation of Purchasing Agent Mackey is for the award of the bid, for the purchase of a fork lift, to the low bidder, Springdale Forklift. Director Bumpass, seconded by Osborne, made a motion to award the bid to the low bidder, Springdale Forklift. Upon roll call, the motion passed unanimously. BID AWARD/HAND HELD RADAR UNITS The recommendation of Purchasing Agent Mackey is for the award of the bid, for hand held radar units, to the low bidder, MPH, Inc. Director Bumpass, seconded by Osborne, made a motion to award the bid to the low bidder, MPH, Inc. Upon roll call, the motion passed unanimously. ORDINANCE WAIVING COMPETITIVE BIDDING REQUIREMENTS/MEMORY TYPEWRITERS Mayor Noland introduced an ordinance waiving competitive bidding requirements for the purchase of two memory typewriters for the City Manager's Office. 241.2 241.3 241.4 241.5 241.6 241.7 City Attorney McCord read the ordinance for the first time. 241.8 Director Osborne pointed out a mathematical error on the purchase requisition, for typewriter ribbons. With this correction, Director Johnson, seconded by Osborne, made a motion to suspend the rules and place the ordinance on second reading. Upon roll call, the motion passed unanimously. McCord read the ordinance for the second time. Director Osborne, seconded by Johnson, made a motion to further suspend the rules and place the ordinance on third and final reading. Upon roll call, the motion passed unanimously and the City Attorney read the ordinance for the final time. Director Sharp asked Assistant City Manager McWethy who would use his existing memory typewriter; McWethy stated this would be given to the Finance Department secretary. Upon roll call, the motion passed unanimously. ORDINANCE NO. 2965 APPEARS ON PAGE 0,35 OF ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION BOOK x vi 241.9 241.10 244 12-6-83 WATER LINE RELOCATION AGREEMENT 242.1 Mayor Noland introduced for the Board's consideration approval of a water line relocation agreement with the Arkansas Highway and Transportation Department, for 400 feet of 8" line located north of Farmington, to be 100% reimbursable by the Highway Department. 242.2 Director Osborne, seconded by Sharp, made a motion to pass a resolution to approve this agreement. Upon roll call, the motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NUMBER148-83 APPEARS ON PAGE 33 OF ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION BOOK X 711 WHITE RIVER/CH2M HILL REPORT 242.3 Mayor Noland introduced a report by CH2M Hill on the recent action by the Arkansas Pollution Control Commission regarding reclassification of the White River as an "effluent dominated stream". Richard Hirsekorn was present representing CH2M Hill and Vernon Rowe was present to represent McClelland Consulting Engineers. 242.4 Mr. Hirsekorn stated, in order to proceed with the wastewater project and receive EPA funds through the State, Fayetteville's discharge criteria from the proposed treatment plant must be incorporated into the area -wide water quality management plan. He stated the State's computer -simulation ("modeling") of what will happen in the White River under varying temperature and flow conditions, determines what the standards need to be. The 5/5/2/1 standard allows Fayetteville to discharge five milligrams per liter of b.o.d. total suspended solids, two parts per million of ammonia and one part per million of phosphorus into the White River from the new plant. The State has concluded that, in their opinion, under extreme temperatures and a seven day low flow period occurring in a ten-year period, Fayetteville could not meet the six milligrams per liter dissolved oxygen concentration required in the stream. The State's recent action was to inform the City that it would be advisable to apply for an effluent dominated stream status (allowing the river to meet the standards with a discharge of four milligrams per liter). 242.5 Vernon Rowe explained to the Board the conditions under which the 5/5/2/1 effluent quality was modeled. Rowe stated the probability of 29 degree centigrade temperatures (85-90 degrees farenheit) coupled with low flow conditions represents a "worst case situation" that probably would not occur. Once the State determined the 5 mg/liter standard could not be met, they pursued some additional modeling which indicated there were two scenarios under which the 4 mg/liter standard could be met: (1) the 5/5/2/1 quality with no flow augmentation in the stream and (2) a less stringent treatment level of 10/15/1.51 which would require ten cubic feet per second of flow augmentation from Lake Sequoyah into the White River. Rowe stated the EPA seems 1 12-6-83 most interested in alternative (2) which creates a dilemma for the City because in order to meet the 1 mg/liter standard, there must be an effluent filter which EPA does not want to fund. Rowe stated if the City has a filter whi-ch,will meet the 1 mg/liter standard, then the 5/5/2/1 standard will also be met. Rowe stated the engineers feel the City's treatment should have a biological nutrient removal process, followed by filtration. Rowe stated the engineers feel, from a practical standpoint, that_the-City can meet the 6 mg/liter d.o. standard as long as the upstream concen- trations don't effect it. He noted the options available, in a drought situation, are (1) to store wastewater in the effluent storage reservoir, earning approximately 28 days for extremely critical conditions, or (2) land application of the wastewater. Rowe stated that, from an administrative standpoint, circumstances beyond the City's control appear to necessitate applying for the effluent dominated stream classification. Rowe explained a public hearing would be necessary in order to pursue the reclassification, with a ten-day notice requirement. Ron Horton, resident of Eureka Springs, addressed the Board. He stated Eureka Springs had held a public hearing on reclassifying their stream and part of the qualifications require that there be no personal contact in the water, no fishing and no wildlife. He stated his opinion that the White River is not an effluent dominated stream and should not be reclassified as such. Mayor Noland stated, after hearing a presentation last week from the Beaver Lake Advisory Committee, he felt the City had no choice but to apply for reclassification. Director Osborne asked what would be gained if action is initiated by the Board to reclassify to an effluent dominated stream. Vernon Rowe stated the ADPC & E's modeling does not recognize that -different conditions willtexist in -the stream. Osborne asked if the action was necessary in order to receive favorable consideration for funding. Rowe said the engineers understood that it was. Hirsekorn said that was never actuallystated but may be implied. Director Orton pointed out the City has options available to prevent certain conditions from existing in the stream and suggested the possibility of the City deciding not to apply for reclassification and saying measures would be taken to prevent a 4 mg/liter quality from occurring in the stream. Hirsekorn said this would have to be discussed further with the State and it would have to be made clear that the City is not being defiant. A resident of Eureka Springs who -also spoke for the National Water Center, addressed the Board. She stated once the stream is reclassified, it means that others who want to put waste effluent into the river will be able to take advantage of this and put less well-treated waste in the river than they can in a Class A stream; that this sets up a "domino" that will act to the detriment of the lake. 243 243.1 243.2 243.3 243.4 243.5 24 12-6-83 244.1 Director Johnson stated she thought Fayetteville was caught between the 5/5/2/1 standard established by the DPC & E and a 4 mg/liter standard established by the "staff"; Johnson said she thought applying for reclassification could give the City "grace" to have 4 mg/liter at any one time in a ten-year period. 244.2 Director Orton asked, if the river were reclassified, would this apply (theoretically) to other plants discharging into the stream. Rowe explained, if there were another plant downstream from Fayetteville's plant, Fayetteville might possibly have to clean up its wastewater in order to allow for the additional dis- charge, as it is the total wasteload that determines whether the standard can be met. In answer to a question from City Manager Grimes, Rowe stated he did not know of any instance where reclassif- ication could be made for only part of the stream. 244.3 The National Water Center representative stated it was her understanding that reclassification would mean there are no beneficial uses for the stream, that it would not be used for wading, swimming, fishing or wildlife. Rowe stated that the water quality standards for a Class A stream require that dissolved oxygen standards shall be 6 mg/liter, unless circumstances exist where the effluent flow to the stream is greater than 50% of the stream flow during low flow conditions, in which case the water quality standard can be changed to 4 mg/liter if it does not interfere with downstream beneficial uses of the stream. Ron Horton stated it came out in the public hearings in Eureka that you must prove the stream is not Class A in order to reclassify it. 244.4 Hirsekorn stated letters of approval from the State Health Department and Game & Fish Commission must be submitted to the State along with comments from the public hearing, that there is a possibility the reclassification could be granted regardless of the City's actions, if the Health Department or Game & Fish Commission speak out against the City's actions. 244.5 Vernon Rowe stated one problem in consistently being able to maintain 6 mg/liter is that the State is assuming the upstream quality is 6 mg/liter and is assuming the upstream b.o.d. values are higher than the b.o.d. coming out of the treatment plant. 244.6 Hirsekorn recommended a plan of action he stated would cover what the engineers think needs to be done and would cover the concerns of the Board and the public -- that, because of the time frame element and the ramifications involved in getting overall project funding, the Board schedule the public hearing, but at the same time instruct the engineers to discuss with DPC & E staff the concerns of the Board and the public, and to discuss in further detail some of the ideas expressed at this meeting regarding ways to work around reclassifi- cation; to ask whether the State's recent action is a recommendation or a mandate, and what are the ramifications of the City stating it wants the river to stay classed at 6 mg/liter; if the engineers find out by the time of the public hearing that reclassification is a mandate, for a good reason that everyone feels comfortable with, then the engineers would proceed within the time frame allowed; or after 12-6-83 245 meeting with the DPC & E staff, it might be announced at the public 245.1 hearing that the action to reclassify is not a mandate. Director Orton, seconded by Johnson, made a motion to proceed 245.2 with Hirsekorn's recommendation. Director Johnson asked to amend the motion to state that an understanding should be obtained from the Pollution Control Commission as to their feelings. Director Orton stated that could be done unofficially but that the intent of her motion is for the City to cover themselves within the time frame allowed but that the City has environmental concerns and wishes to keep the White River a Class A stream. Ron Horton asked that Harrison, Green Forest, Eureka Springs and 245.3 other communities downstream be notified of the public hearing. Hirsekorn stressed the fact that the design of the treatment 245.4 plant has not changed in any way. A member of the audience asked what the ramifications were as far 245.5 as the usage of the water, if the stream were to be classified as effluent dominated. Rowe reiterated that the impact is, according to water quality standards, that a lower dissolved oxygen level is allowed in the stream if it does not impair the downstream beneficial uses of the stream. It was pointed out that no decisions would be made regarding reclassification of the river at the time of the public hearing. Upon roll call, the motion passed unanimously. 245.6 It was decided the public hearing would be scheduled for December 245.7 19 at 7:00 P.M. Hirsekorn reported the preliminary design report is being sent out 245.8 for review and the value engineering study will take place next week. OTHER BUSINESS City Hall Renovation/Change Orders Mayor Noland introduced consideration of approval of change orders 245.9 which have been processed for the City Hall renovation. Director Osborne, seconded by Johnson, made a motion to approve the change orders. Upon roll call, the motion passed unanimously. RES. NO. 149-83 APPEARS ON PAGE u OF ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION BOOKXVII Landfill City Manager Grimes explained he had written a letter which states 245.10 the City recognizes that there must be a landfill available for disposal of solid waste items, that this letter was needed as a part of the financing package for the incinerator project. Grimes stated he hoped the Board would acknowledge their agreement with this. • 12-6-83 Joint Sealant at Airport 246.1 Mayor Noland introduced a settlement offer received by City Manager Grimes from Jerry D. Sweetser, Inc. and McClelland Consulting Engineers, Inc. to reimburse the City $15,000 for costs incurred due to failures in the expansion/contraction Joint sealant between sections of the concrete terminal apron on the east side of the Airport terminal building. 246.2 Director Johnson, seconded by Osborne, made a motion that the City accept the settlement offer of $15,000. Upon roll call, the motion passed unanimously. City of Fayetteville v. Microdata Corporation 246.3 Mayor Noland introduced a settlement offer of $5,000 received from attorneys for Microdata Corporation regarding City of Fayette- ville vs. Microdata Corporation. 246.4 Director Johnson, seconded by Orton, made a motion that the City accept the $5,000 settlement offer. Director Bumpass asked City Attorney McCord what Microdata's exposure was on damages and McCord said he thought it was in the range of $25,000. McCord stated the Arkansas Supreme Court does not address the issue of whether a disclaimer by a manufacturer is effective against a third -party ultimate consumer. Director Osborne asked whether there was any possibility of receiving punitive damages and McCord said the City had no chance of recovering punitive damages because it does not have a cause of action for misrepresentation. Director Bumpass asked if the disclaimer was something the City had notice of and McCord said there is no question that the City of Fayetteville did not have notice from the manufacturer; the City had a disclaimer from the distributer which was effective and there was a similar disclaimer from the manufacturer to the distributor. 246.5 Mayor Noland asked McCord if he thought there was any validity in attempting to make a counter-offer. McCord stated his opinion is that the offer is not commensurate with the exposure, that a reasonable counter-offer would be appropriate. McCord stated, in discussions he had with Microdata's counsel after receiving the settlement offer, he suggested this Board might be receptive to an offer of around $20,000. Their counsel indicated it was unlikely that offer would be accepted but that a reasonable counter-offer might be $15,000. 246.6 With Director Orton withdrawing her second to Director Johnson's motion, Director Bumpass, seconded by Sharp, made a motion the City counter-offer for $15,000. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 5-1, with Johnson voting against the motion. Osborne asked if it could be made clear that McCord has the authority to settle if the $15,000 offer is accepted. Bumpass agreed this be included in his motion. 1 1 12-6-83 Impoundment of Illegally Parked Motor Vehicles It was decided to place on the next agenda consideration of a proposed ordinance which would delete the five ticket requirement before impoundment of illegally parked motor vehicles is authorized. T -Hangar Fire Walls City Manager Grimes referred to a letter from Weinland, Inc. regarding a change in T -Hanger construction which is necessary because it has been determined that the Fayetteville Code requires one hour fire walls inside the hangar. Grimes explained this question went before the Board of Building Appeals and they also require the fire walls. Mr. Grimes recommended the Board accept Weinland's proposal for a deduct on their base bid of $11,670 for deleting the thin metal partitions which would have been used. Mr. Grimes estimated it should cost from $5-7,000 in additional expense to install fire walls. Director Osborne suggested changing the Code, stating he did not think fire walls were necessary in T -hangars. Director Sharp noted that fire walls did.. have. a.purpose in that a fire in one person's airplaine would be prevented from spreading to.the next partition. Grimes pointed out the new State Code, which will be effective in a few months, will require fire walls in T -hangars. After further discussion, Director Sharp, seconded by Orton, made a motion to approve the City Manager's recommendation. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 5-1, with Osborne voting against the motion. r RESOLUTION NO. 150-83 APPEARS ON PAGE 75 OF ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION BOOK /M Joint Use Agreement/Burlington Northern Railroad City Manager Grimes asked that the Board authorize the City to enter into an agreement with the Burlington Northern Railroad Company for joint use of right-of-way, where the City will be working on their road crossing on Route 156 going to the Andrew plant. Director Bumpass, seconded by Johnson, made a motion to pass a resolution authorizing this agreement. Upon roll call, the motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 151-83 APPEARS ON PAGE 416 OF ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION BOOK XVII) Employee of the Year Banquet It was decided that the Employee of the Year Banquet which was tentatively scheduled for December 22 be changed to December 16 at the Hilton Hotel so that all Board members could attend. Museum Resolution Director Orton introduced a resolution authorizing the City to 247 247.1 247.2 247.3 247.4 247.5 247.6 247.7 247.8 2.4o 12-6-83 248.1 encourage the University of Arkansas to provide more appropriate space for its museum in a more accessible location. Director Orton read the proposed resolution and, seconded by Director Johnson, made a motion that the Board pass the resolution. Upon roll call, the motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 152-83 APPEARS ON PAGE al OF ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION BOOK XUIII Finance Committee Meeting 248.2 Director Osborne asked that the Finance Committee schedule a meeting to review the General Fund and Public Works budgets. It was decided to schedule this meeting for 3:00 on December 13. Special Board Meeting 248.3 Mayor Noland noted the special Board meeting to consider the water and sewer operational contract for the new plant is scheduled for December 14 at 3:00. Highway 62 West Speed Limit 248.4 Director Sharp noted he had written a letter to the Arkansas State Highway & Transportation Department stating he thought 45 mph was an appropriate speed limit for the section of U.S. Highway 62 west of the Highway 71 Bypass to the Farmington City Limits. Sharp wondered if the Board would like to give input to the Highway Department prior to the establishment of a speed limit. Director Orton expressed her agreement with Sharp's comments. Mayor Noland suggested that the Board take this route on their next tour. Improvements to Airport on East Side 248.5 Director Sharp noted that, of the total $1,003,567 spent in preparing for the new air traffic control tower at Drake Field, $738,960 was federal money, $75,803 was State money, $75,804 was local money and $113,000 was money spent by the telephone company. MINUTES 248.6 The following correction was made to the minutes of the October 30, 1983 retreat meeting: 208f.5: Director "Johnson" should read "Orton" 248.7 The following correction was made to the minutes of the November 15, 1983 meeting: 225.5: "a high priced dispatcher" should read "expensive maintenance" 248.8 With these corrections, the minutes of the October 30, November 15 and November 30 meetings were approved as distributed. ADJOURNMENT 248.9 With no further business before the Board, the meeting adjourned at 11:40 P.M. 1 1