HomeMy WebLinkAbout1984-05-01 Minutes58
MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS
A regular meeting of the Fayetteville City Board of Directors was
held on Tuesday, May 1, 1984 at 7:30 P.M. in the Board Room of the
City Administration Building, 113 West Mountain Street, Fayetteville,
Arkansas.
PRESENT: Assistant Mayor Lancaster; Directors Johnson, Martin,
Orton and Sharp; City Manager Grimes, Assistant City
Manager McWethy, City Attorney McCord, City Clerk Kennedy;
members of the press and audience
ABSENT: Mayor Noland; Director Bumpass
CALL TO ORDER
In the absence of Mayor Noland, the meeting was called to order by
Assistant Mayor Lancaster.
EMPLOYEES OF THE MONTH
58.1 Lancaster presented the employees of the month for April -- Robert
Blythe, Water & Sewer Department; Bill Chester, Finance Department;
and Jerry Surles, Police Department -- with certificates and checks
for $150. Lancaster read comments from their supervisors on their
outstanding performance.
REQUEST FOR WAIVER FROM GREENSPACE ORDINANCE
58.2 City Manager Grimes recommended this request for a waiver from the
literal requirements of the City's Greenspace Ordinance be referred
back to the Parks Board and Planning Commission for their review,
in accordance with the ordinance adopted at the last meeting.
58.3 Director Orton, seconded by Sharp, made a motion to refer this agenda
item to the Parks Board and Planning Commission. Upon roll call,
the motion passed, 5-0, with Bumpass and Noland absent.
1
May 1, 1984
MODIFICATION OF PURCHASE OPTION
Lancaster introduced a resolution authorizing the execution of a modifi-
cation of a purchase option, for 5.63 acres on Robinson'Mountain,
for a future radio tower site.
•
59
59.1
Director Johnson, seconded by Sharp, made a motion to pass the resolution. 59.2
CO Upon roll call, the motion passed,,5=0: . :
ID RESOLUTION NO. 59-84 APPEARS ON PAGE _ial OF ORDINANCE &.RESOLUTION
Na BOOK xv<<k
W '
co WILSON PARK
•
David Lashley presented a recommendation from the Parks & Recreation
Advisory Board regarding 1984 and 1985 development plans for Wilson
Park. Lashley summarized some historical background of activities
of the PRAB since 1969. Lashley -stated the city contracted, in 1983,
with Dr. Al Einert, to prepare a master plan which would incorporate
many of the ideas and suggestions from the PRAB and from citizen input.
Lashley stated a preliminary plan was prepared which addressed problems
of parking, security, traffic, erosion, landscaping and beautification;
that a revised plan was presented. to the PRAB in February, 1984 at
which time the PRAB concluded that traffic and parking needed to be
addressed immediately. Lashley explained the PRAB considered Einert's
plan, which has been adopted by the PRAB, which incorporated part
of his recomfiendations, and revised the plan to present to the City
Board. -
Lashley recommended the following improvements for Wilson Park as
follows:
PHASE I - 1984 Projects
59.3
59.4
DeSign and build asphalt parking lot on east side of park, on 59.5
south side of Prospect Avenue (Parking Lot 11)
Design parking lot on Wilson:Avenue (Parking Lot E2)
•
Replace creek bridge
Plant trees on north side of swimming pool
Replace ballfield bleachers and scoreboard; repair fence
•
Director Orton asked how this recommendation differs from Einert's
plan, and Lashley responded that suggestions of Einert's which were
not included were plans for additional basketball courts, tennis courts,
park activity center (including kitchen, meeting room, rental checkout),
59.6
59.7
59.8
59.9
59.10
60
May 1, 1984
60.1 permanent band concert shell, and exercise/jogging trail.
Orton noted Einert had suggested the ballpark should be taken out.
Lashley stated the PRAB disagrees and wishes to retain the ballpark
for girls' softball. Orton asked if lights would be used late at
night. Lashley stated the Parks Director has said "he can't guarantee
that", but with girls' softball, there is a chance there will not
be late games, unless there are scheduling problems. Lashley stated
they are trying to move all late ballgames to Lake Fayetteville, Asbell,
the Industrial Park, or Walker Park. Lashley stated they do not intend
to remove the lights at this time.
60.2 Orton asked about Einert's plans to save certain valuable trees.
Lashley noted Einert's plan is a conceptual plan. Lashley explained
that in the area where a retaining wall is planned to be built, there
are only about three trees that would be affected, that those three
trees are still alive but "not very well". Lashley stressed also
the engineer would consult with the park horticulturist.
60.3 Director Johnson asked about plans
responded that in 1985 they "hope to
from Wilson Park" Lashley stated
one of the buildings for horticulture
regarding the park shop. Lashley
have the shop activity removed
it might be an advantage to keep
supplies.
60.4 Director Johnson asked about streets in the interior of the park.
Lashley stated those streets would be closed off and returned to park
use, that they have no plans at this time to remove the streets.
60.5 Director Martin asked whether the trees make the parking lot south
of the pool less visible. Lashley agreed that this was so, and that
they hope to have greenery barriers for the proposed parking lots.
60.6 Director Johnson asked for estimated costs for the 1984 projects,
and Lashley responded that he can only guarantee to stay within the
budget.
60.7 Lashley presented one other recommendation not included on the Phase
I list:
60.8 That there should be a sidewalk on the east side of
on Park Street, going north to Prospect.
60.9 Lashley presented the PRAB's Phase II recommendations:
60.10 PHASE II — 1985 Projects Suggested
60.11 Asphalt parking lot on Wilson Avenue (Parking Lot #2)
60.12 Close off park interior roadways
60.13 Wilson Park entry signs on SE and NW sides of the park
the park,
1
1
61
May 1, 1984
Remove maintenance.activity and beautify the area 61.1
Stabilize and beautify the creek banks and rebuild creek -bridges 61.2
•
• Repair service road to the swimming pool - 61.3
Renovate ballfield 61.4
InBuild flower garden and small gazebo on SE side of park 61.5
N Replace playground equipment and some picnic facilities 61.6
W
CO Build drainage tile underground between tennis courts 61.7
Renovate park restrooms 1 61.8
•
Several members -of the audience addressed the Board, particularly 61.9
in reference to the plan for closing off the interior roads of the
park. 'One citizen commented that -families will have to walk farther
to bring -their -picnic supplies into•the park.' Another citizen expressed
the 'dpi'nion that traffic' on the -interior -roads is not 'a' hazard to
' the children, because the•speed bumps cause that traffic to travel
at'a slow rate of,speed. Another member•of the audience suggested
postponing'the construction of•a new parking lot until it;can be determined
whether the parking lot at the tennis courts would be sufficient,
stating perhaps -not that many people bring their cars to the'park.
One citizen spoke in favor of closing the interior roads, stating
his child had been run down, but fortunately not seriously hurt.
Another citizen pointed out that the asphalt will eventually deteriorate
on the interior roads. A park area resident stated she had observed
several cars "zooming around" on the interior roads and "huge college
students" using the children's playground equipment.
1
Director Sharp noted the PRAB has been very flexible in'their responsive- 61.10
ness to needs of the park area residents in the past, and stated he
was certain the'PRAB would be very flexible in their design for the
parking. Director Sharp, seconded by Orton, made a motion to accept
the recommendation of the PRAB. Lancaster stated future plans in
regards to these recommendations will come back before the Board.
Upon roll call, the motion passed, 5-0.
BID AWARD/AERATION EQUIPMENT
Lancaster introduced the award of'bid for acquisition --of aeration
equipment•for the Pollution Control Plant. Director Johnson, seconded
by•Shatp,'made a motion to award the•bid to the'low bidder, Aqua Aerobic
Systems, Inc., for $39,507.80, for acquisition of the aeration equipment.
Upon roll call, the motion passed, 5-0.
61.11
62
May 1, 1984
62.1 City Manager Grimes cautioned that the order on this equipment not
be placed prior to the funding approval. Vernon Rowe, speaking for
McClelland Engineers, stated the aerators cannot be purchased until
after facility plant funding is approved, that the Board's action
will simply authorize the purchases.' Rowe stated also that advertisement
has been made for the installation of the aerators, which bids should
be received on June 4. Rowe stated approval of the facility plant
is expected around June 1.
BID AWARDS/SANITATION DEPARTMENT
62.2 Lancaster introduced an award of Bid #567A for a 23,000 GVW truck
chassis with bed, for the Sanitation Department. Director Johnson,
seconded by Sharp, made a motion to award the bid to the low bidder,
Lewis -Ford, for $19,113.00. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 5-0.
62.3 Lancaster introduced an award of Bid 1567B for a 24,000 GVW truck
with packer body, for the Sanitation Department. Director Johnson,
seconded by Sharp, made a motion to award the bid to the low bidders,
Choctaw and Lewis Ford. Director Lancaster pointed out these bidders
were the only bids received. Purchasing Officer Mackey explained
the Chevrolet Division has said they do not make that size truck anymore;
that although the GMC Division does manufacture that size, they did
not submit a bid. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 5-0.
BID AWARD/PARK BLEACHERS
62.4 Lancaster introduced an award of Bid #570 for three sets of bleachers
for Babe Ruth Park. Director Orton, seconded by Sharp, made a motion
to award the bid to the low bidder, Sturdisteel Company of Waco, Texas.
Purchasing Officer Mackey explained two sets of bleachers are for
Babe Ruth Park and one is a replacement set for Wilson Park. Upon
roll call, the motion passed, 5-0.
BID AWARD/POLICE & FIRE DEPARTMENT
62.5 Lancaster introduced an award of Bid #571 for eight Police and one
Fire Department vehicles.
62.6 City Manager Grimes explained the State bid was not held firm, due
to time constraints on ordering this year's models. After reviewing
this with the staff, Grimes stated it is their recommendation the
bid be rejected and that we wait to take bids until prices are available
on 1985 models.
1
1
AUL/bb
May 1, 1984
Grimes, referring to the Vehicle Mileage Report for the month of April,
reported the estimated mileage by December for Units 22 through 28.
Grimes stated Unit 2 on the Mileage Report is presently the Assistant
Chief's vehicle, and asked for authorization to advertise for bids
for one standard floor -model sedan for the Assistant Chief, so that
Unit 2 can be transferred to a patrol unit.
Director Lancaster asked if the Board could be provided with a list
of the vehicles that are proposed to be replaced. Grimes stated the
list of units for which he reported high mileage by December were
most of the units which are proposed to be replaced.
Director Johnson, seconded by Martin, made a motion to reject the
bids and that the Purchasing Agent be authorized to advertise for
bids for a standard sedan
Director Martin pointed out that, by the time the proposed units are
replaced, some of them will have at least 70,000 miles on them and
Martin asked if the city's experience has been such that the police
have been able to use similar vehicles with that type of mileage.
Grimes stated experience has shown that maintenance cost go up after
60,000 miles but that, because of the $18,000 difference between the
bids, the staff wants to try to wait until the 1985 models can be
purchased from the State. Grimes noted also, that with revisions
in the Shop operation, maintenance of these high mileage vehicles
may provide a test of the Shop operation.
63
63.1
63.2
63.3
63.4
Upon roll call, the motion passed, 5-0. 63.5
JANITORIAL SERVICES
Lancaster introduced a resolution authorizing entering into a month-
to-month contract with Harmony House for janitorial services for City
Hall.
63.6
Director Orton, seconded by Sharp, made a motion to pass the resolution. 63.7
Purchasing Agent Mackey explained the resolution should actually authorize 63.8
a purchase order, not a contract, on a month-to-month basis, until
such time as the city and the contractor are "thoroughly satisfied
with each other". Mackey stated, if everything goes smoothly, there
would be a request to enter into a contract with a thirty -day cancellation
clause. City Attorney McCord stated he would draft a resolution to
state "a month-to-month purchase order".
RESOLUTION NO. 60-84 APPEARS ON PAGE Mo OF ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION
BOOK XVIII
64
64.1
64.2
64.3
May 1, 1984
CHANGE ORDER/ANDREW CORPORATION
Lancaster introduced approval of a change order, in the amount of
$8,500.85, in the cost of the sewer line serving the Andrew Corporation.
City Manager Grimes explained this change was necessitated because
of additional rock excavation and a substantial area will be served
to the south from this particular sewer line.
Director Johnson, seconded by Sharp, made a motion to approve the
change order. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 5-0.
RESOLUTION N0. 61-84 APPEARS ON PAGE 9102/ OF ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION
BOOK XVII
BID WAIVER/STREET REPAIR
64.4 Lancaster introduced an ordinance waiving competitive bidding requirements
for the repair of Prospect Street, near Olive Avenue; and awarding
the job to Tomlinson Asphalt Company, in the low bid amount of $6,150.
64.5
The City Attorney read the ordinance for the first time. Director
Sharp, seconded by Johnson, made a motion to suspend the rules and
place the ordinance on second reading. Upon roll call, the motion
passed, 5-0. McCord read the ordinance for the second time. Director
Sharp, 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, 5-0. McCord read the ordinance for the third and
final time. Upon roll call, the ordinance passed, 5-0.
ORDINANCE NO. 3007 APPEARS ON PAGE 1970 OF ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION
BOOK XVII I
OTHER BUSINESS
Building Maintenance Location
64.6 City Manager Grimes, referring to his memo regarding Interim City
Hall and related space use, stated this had been prepared as a summary
of proposed space use, that after the Board has reviewed it, and if
they concur, "we'll begin working in that direction".
64.7 Director Sharp noted this summary came out as a result of a request
made at a City Hall Committee meeting, to be sure that everyone had
the same understanding of space allocation.
1
co
N
m
a
1
May 1, 1984
Grimes stated the only aspect of the memo needing action at this time
was locating the Building Maintenance operations on the first floor
of Interim City Hall.
Grimes reported that microfiching of records now stored in mechanical
roans has begun and he predicted that, in about a month, the:shelves
stacked to the ceiling should be down to head height.
Director Sharp asked that the :next•.Board tour include a review of
the areas addressed in the memo.
•
Director Martin stated he had taken a tour of the proposed areas for
building maintenance and woodworking facilities.and•stated the amount
of space proposed is ample, but.not+too muchy as'1t•is'his opinion
that any less space would hamper efficiency. Director Martin, seconded
by Orton,. made .a motion that the proposed space locations as set out
in.the memo be approved. Upon.roll ca21, the motion:passed; 5-0;
Director Lancaster asked how long the City
a woodworking department. Grimes.explained it
but the entire building maintenance division,
of all the structures the city has, along with
and repairs.
. 1111' .. 1, ',.
Manager foresaw having
is not just woodworking,
which is needed, because
the needs for- shelving
Sign Variance/First United Presbyterian Church
City Attorney McCord, referring to a letter he received from Charles
Harwell (representing First United Presbyterian Church), explained
that, perhaps due to a breakdown in communication, the church has
placed their sign in a location not in accordance with a variance
which was granted by the Board. McCord noted Harwell is asking either
for Board approval of the present location or to have the matter placed
on the agenda for further consideration.
1
Sign Inspector Bert Rakes clarified the fact that the sign is,presently
located 14 feet from Calvin Street and 15 feet from Old Wire Road
(measurements from the streets, not from the rights-of-way).
65
65,1
65.2
65.3
65.4
65.5
65.6
65.7
Director Johnson stated the Board approved a variance of l0.feet from 65.E
Old•Wire Road:and 25 feet from Calvin. Director Johnson, seconded
by -Orton, made a motion to change the variance to 14 feet from Calvin
and 15 feet from Old Wire Road. I act
Rakes clarified for the Directors that the present
sign from the rights-of-way are 0 feet from.Calvin S
feet from Old Wire Road. Director Orton suggested the
be temporary so that, if the streets are ever widened,
have to be moved back. Director Johnson agreed to
•
setbacks of the
treet and four
variance should
the sign would
that amendment.
65.9
66
May 1, 1984
66.1 Director Martin expressed two concerns: (1) that the Board approved
"something that was unworkable"; and (2) that the sign was installed
in a location that was not approved. Director Martin asked if petitioners
are furnished copies of minutes. The City Attorney stated he did
not know if applicants are furnished copies of minutes but pointed
out that, in this case, Mr. Harwell was under a mis-impression of
the location approved and did not intentionally place the sign in
the wrong location.
66.2 Director Orton suggested the Board might ask for recommendations from
the Sign Inspector, as to placement of signs, when variance requests
are considered. Bert Rakes stated he agreed that points of measurement
can be estimates in some cases but pointed out, when an applicant
receives a sign permit, the application indicates what the Board has
approved before the permit is issued.
66.3 Director Sharp stated he saw no reason to place this item under "Other
Business" at this time, that he did not think of this item as a crisis
situation.
66.4 Director Johnson, seconded by Sharp, made a motion to table this item
until it can be placed on the next agenda. Upon roll call, the motion
passed, 5-0.
Free -Standing Signs in R-0
66.5 The City Attorney reported he had been contacted by Director Orton
regarding the ordinance passed at the last meeting to regulate the
location of free-standing signs in R-0 districts. McCord stated Orton
reminded him there had been discussion at the last meeting that, if
a free-standing sign is allowed, wall signs should not be allowed.
McCord stated, if this is the wish of the Board, he has an amendment
prepared to that effect.
66.6 Director Orton stated it was her feeling that, if a yard sign is now
permitted, it would be more attractive in a residential area not to
have other signs as well. Orton asked if the other Directors meant
to allow more than one sign in these cases.
66.7 Director Johnson asked if the intention is for there to be a choice
between a yard sign and a wall sign or if the intention is to delete
wall signs altogether. The City Attorney stated it was his understanding
the discussion is for there to be a choice, unless the Board grants
a variance.
66.8 It was the consensus of the Directors that an amendment be made to
the ordinance that a wall sign shall not be allowed when a free-standing
sign is used, without a variance from the Board.
1
1
May 1, 1984
The City Attorney read the amendatory ordinance for the first time.
Director Johnson, seconded by. Sharp, made.a motion to suspend the
rules and place the ordinance on second reading. Upon roll call,
the motion passed, 5-0. McCord read the ordinance lot the second
time. Director Johnson, seconded by Sharp, made a motion,to further
suspend the rules and place the ordinance on third and final reading.
Upon roll call, the motion passed, 5-0. McCord read the ordinance
for the third -and final time. Upon roll call, the ordinance passed,
5-0.
I� ORDINANCE NO. 3008 APPEARS ON PAGE 4/ 7j OF ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION
Id BOOK Wilt
CO
Q 1983 Fire Code
1
The City Attorney stated the State of Arkansas has adopted the 1983
edition of the State Fire Code. McCord explained that, several years
ago, the City adopted by reference the previous 1965 edition of the
State Fire Code. McCord pointed out there is no reason for the City
to "adopt" what is already State law. McCord recommended the sections
of the City Code adopted by reference to previous State Fire Codes,
and certain amendments thereto, be repealed in order to remove any
ambiguity.
The City Attorney read the repealing ordinance for the first time.
Director Johnson, seconded by Orton, made a motion to suspend the
rules and place the ordinance on second.reading. Upon .roll call,
the motion passed, 5-0.' McCord read the ordinance for the second
time. Director Sharp, 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, 5-0. McCord read the ordinance
for the third and final time. Upon roll call, the ordinance .passed,
5-0.
ORDINANCE NO. 3009 APPEARS ON PAGE 1475 OF ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION
BOOK /On
Warner Cable Franchise
The City Attorney, referring to the Board's actions at the last meeting
instructing the staff to attempt.to renegotiate the Warner Cable franchise,
stated the staff would appreciate some specific direction as to exactly
what portions of the franchise should be renegotiated. McCord asked
that individual Board members contact him as to their particular areas
of concern, so that he can begin the renegotiating process.
Donrey Litigation
67
67.1
67.2
67.3
67.4
The City Attorney reported that the U.S. Supreme Court denied Donrey's 67.5
petition to review the State Supreme Court decision upholding the
68
68.1
68.2
68.3
68.4
68.5
68.6
May 1, 1984
City's sign ordinance. McCord stated the original Chancery Court
decree entered in November of 1982 ordered removal of Donrey's signs
within 180 days; that the State Supreme Court decision became final
on December 19, 1983. McCord explained 180 days from that date would
be May 22, 1984. McCord stated "obviously it is impossible for Donrey
to remove approximately 60 signs by May 22nd". McCord stated the
City Manager, as well, feels if Donrey undertakes the removal process
promptly, and proceeds diligently, the City should not pursue sanctions
for contempt of Court for technical non-compliance if the signs are
not all removed by May 22nd. McCord stated, if this position is acceptable
to the Board, he would advise Donrey in writing.
Director Sharp suggested Donrey be asked to submit a removal schedule
to the Board.
Director Orton expressed concerns that Donrey might not proceed with
removal of the signs by May 22nd. McCord explained, if Donrey does
not remove the signs, they will be in contempt of the Chancery Court's
Order and the city can ask the Court to impose sanctions, or whatever
the Court deems appropriate. McCord stated also there is past precedent
for the city to begin cutting the signs down. Director Orton stated
she thought the Board should "be reasonable" but pointed out a considerable
amount of taxpayers' money has been spent to get to this point; that
Donrey has had years of added time.
It being the consensus of the Directors, the City Attorney stated
he would proceed with asking Donrey to submit a removal schedule,
so that the Board can decide if the schedule is reasonable.
"Chief Motel" Litigation
In answer to a query from Director Lancaster, the City Attorney provided
the Board with an update on litigation involving the Chief Motel.
McCord explained the Chief Motel has been charged in Municipal Court
with refusal to comply with the amortization provision in the sign
ordinance. McCord explained also the Chief Motel was a party in the
Holiday Inn case but that since that time, the ownership has changed
and the city may enforce the ordinance against the new owner, which
is being done by prosecution in Municipal Court.
American Awning & Patio Sign Appeal
Director Lancaster pointed out that, at the last meeting, the Board
denied an appeal from American Awning & Patio to have a rooftop sign;
that the rooftop sign has still not been removed. The City Attorney
explained the Board can direct the staff to remove the sign or to
charge the owner in Municipal Court. McCord recommended his office
ask the City Prosecutor to notify the owner that, if the sign is not
removed within a very short period of time, one of those actions will
be pursued.
1
1
Comments from Director Lancaster
May 1, 1984
Director Lancaster stated that as •a result of a City Hall committee
meeting held a few weeks ago, the Board "might have moved too far"
into the area of operations and management, specifically -regarding
coffee breaks. Lancaster, seconded by Orton, made a motion to rescind
the Board's actions and stated this action is taken in recognizing
that Don Grimes is the manager and that it is his prerogative to run
the building as he sees fit. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 5-0.
N
LLQ
CI) MINUTES
Q
The following corrections were made to the Minutes of the April 17
meeting:
42.4 1 -channel should be 12 -channel
44.5 "KOED" should be "CBN"
"to add CBN, perhaps to Channel 14;" should be changed
to read "perhaps CBN could be added to Channel 14;"
44.6 add "or to provide relief" to "duplicated must carry
stations"
delete "to lobby"congressmen regarding the cable situation
in Fayetteville and Arkansas and regarding House Bill
4103"
69
69.1
69.2
69.3
69.4
69.5
69.6
69.7
With those changes, the Minutes were approved as distributed. 69.8
CITIZEN COMMENTS
William Giese, resident of Fayetteville, addressed the Board. Giese
thanked Director Sharp for having taken time to present "the city's
side of the shop situation". Giese asked if it would be possible
to publish brief job descriptions. Giese also asked to be allowed
to accompany whomever will be going to look at what has been done
at the Shop, after it has been set up. Director Lancaster stated
he saw no reason why Mr. Giese should not go along on such a tour,
but pointed out to Giese that the city has employed Mr. Van Bell to
manage the shop situation.
69.9
Director Johnson, in reference to Giese's request for job descriptions, 69.10
stated the city may soon undertake a wage analysis study and an evaluation
70
May 1, 1984
70.1 of job descriptions. Giese asked if this study would be made public
and Director Johnson stated it would probably be too lengthy for pub-
lication, but would be available in the City Manager's Office.
70.2 City Manager Grimes stated Giese's request for a Shop tour was agreeable
to him.
ADJOURNMENT
70.3 With no further business before the Board, the meeting adjourned at
9:30 P.M.
1