Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1984-09-18 Minutes204 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS A regular meeting of the Fayetteville City Board of Directors was held on Tuesday, September 18, 1984 at 7:30 P.M. in the Board Room of the City Administration Building, 113 West Mountain Street, Fayette- ville, Arkansas PRESENT: Mayor Noland, Directors Bumpass, Johnson, Lancaster, Martin and Orton; City Manager Grimes, Assistant City Manager McWethy, City Attorney McCord, City Clerk Kennedy, members of the press and audience ABSENT: Director Sharp CALL TO ORDER Mayor Noland called the meeting to order, with six Directors present, and asked for a moment of respectful silence. DRAKE ROAD 204.1 Mayor Noland noted the improvements to Drake Road were considered at a Board meeting on August 21st, at which time comments were heard from citizens and the matter was tabled until the Traffic Superintendent could study the plan and recommend the location of cuts in the proposed median between traffic lanes. Noland explained that this project was first added to the Master Street Plan in 1970 and the first phase of construction was included in the 1984 budget ($62,239 plus labor and equipment), with additional funds from Mcllroy Bank ($58,853) and Wade Bishop ($10,000) for their proportionate shares of the cost. The Mayor stated the Board had toured the site. 204.2 Director Orton stated the Board has discussed the concern of the Street Department that, even with a ten -foot median, the tree roots could be cut and possibly die. Director Orton made a motion that a recommen- dation be sought from the City's Horticulturist on how to best have a street with trees, with a preference for a median if that is possible. There was no second to that motion. 204.3 Director Lancaster pointed out there will have to be two elevations if the street is built with curb and gutter with a median in the middle. Lancaster stated the extra curbs and gutters (for the median) will cost an extra $80,000. Director Lancaster, seconded by Johnson, made a motion that a four -lane street be built, with curb and gutter; then 1 205 September 18, 1984 to ask the Horticulturist how many trees and of what size should be 205.1 planted on either side. Director Bumpass asked if the $62,239 budgeted was for a two-lane or a four -lane street. City Manager Grimes explained this figure is for a four -lane street, to be about 44 feet wide, back-to-back. Bumpass pointed out the difference in elevation would call for a 2 CO 1/2 to a 3 -foot tall curb, for drainage, on the south side of the Ln median. Bumpass stated also he did not feel there was a need for a four -lane street at this point and that he would rather see the amount of cost difference between a two-lane and a four -lane street Id being spent on extending the street all the way to Gregg, as intended CO on the Master Street Plan. Q Michael Dabney, resident of the Bishop Addition, addressed the Board. Dabney stated in 1970 it was anticipated that the Bishop Addition and the Villa North Subdivision would develop at the same rate but that now Villa North has much more density, although both additions are still zoned R-2. Dabney stated he thought the purpose of the median idea was to prevent through traffic in the neighborhoods as much as to preserve trees. Dabney quoted from the City ordinance, stating "a collector street serves the abutting properties, carries neighborhood traffic to make the arterial street systems...and, ...where possible, houses should not front on collector streets." Dabney stated the City "is making Susan Carol a collector street" and that the streets in the Bishop Addition will be used as through streets after Drake Road is improved, to get to and from the highway, and will also be getting a lot of Villa North traffic. Dabney stated Wade Bishop had authorized him to state he (Bishop) would "unconditionally give his $10,000 deposit to the City" if the City would commit to dead-end the three streets in the Bishop Addition. Dabney stated the residents feel it would be "a gross error" to connect their streets to Drake Road. Dabney noted the crime rate in Villa Mobile Home Park is a problem which does not presently exist in the Bishop Addition. Dabney, in conclusion, stated the improvements will decrease property values, endanger children, diminish the beauty of their surroundings and the serenity of their neighborhood. Director Martin, referring to the problems of increased density, pointed out the Board must find ways to "move people in and out", particularly when there has been a substantial increase in development in the area south of Drake Road. Martin expressed concerns, in the event of an emergency, that public safety officers might not have quick access to the neighborhoods. Dabney 'suggested some "not unsightly" barricades be placed at the ends of the streets in the Bishop Addition that emergency vehicles could get around. Mayor Noland pointed out the Planning Commission told Wade Bishop, if he was going to build as densely as he planned, that he must have another access; and that was a contingency under which the development 205.2 205.3 205.4 205.5 206 206.1 September 18, 1984 was constructed and why the $10,000 was required in the first place. Noland pointed out that the Street Department has recommended that only Valencia and Susan Carol be connected, not to open all the streets in the Bishop Addition onto Drake Road. Dabney stated his first priority would be for all the Bishop Addition streets to dead-end but, if not, he would be in favor of an unbroken median on Drake Road. Dabney also suggested the improvements be postponed until such time as the street is scheduled to be extended to Gregg. 206.2 Director Martin stated he thought it more conceivable that traffic would flow off Susan Carol and onto Drake and Highway 71 rather than onto Appleby. Martin noted also, if the street is improved, the traffic flow on Drake will also be beneficial to the Bishop Addition residents. 206.3 Director Johnson stated the Board must make long term decisions and must look at Drake Road in terms of safety and spending the allocated funds in the best manner possible. Johnson stated if the anticipated problems develop, they must be addressed when they occur; that the Traffic and Street superintendents have indicated the median would be hazardous with or without breaks in the curb. Director Johnson proposed the City purchase land to the west in the next budgeting process, so that Drake Street can be extended to Gregg. 206.4 Upon roll call, the motion passed, 5-1, with Director Bumpass voting in opposition, and Director Sharp absent. 206.5 Director Orton, seconded by Bumpass, made a motion that a recommendation be obtained from the City's Horticulturist on how to make Drake Road an attractive street. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 6-0. SANITATION CONTRACT/N.W. ARKANSAS WASTE MANAGEMENT 206.6 Mayor Noland introduced a resolution authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute a contract with Northwest Arkansas Waste Management to service certain large firms. 206.7 Mayor Noland asked Bill Clark, attorney for Waste Management, whether contracts existed with any of the firms listed. Clark explained contracts do not exist and Waste Management feels it is "at a competitive disad- vantage" because the firms they have approached ask for a starting date which cannot be given because of having to wait to get on the agenda for Board approval of a contract. Clark stated this gives the competitor an advantage because it can re -negotiate an existing contract. Clark stated the Board granted a contract to Sunray Sanitation on March 22, 1984 exactly like the one now before the Board. Clark stated Sunray's contract "in essence gives them a license to contract with those companies". 1 207 September 18, 1984 Director Orton asked for information on how such contracts have been 207.1 approved in the past. City Manager Grimes explained contracts were brought before the Board for approval, as they were acquired with certain firms. Director Orton stated she thought the same procedure should be used with both companies. Clark noted the Ordinance does not require that there be a contract in hand with a firm before Board approval, only that there be a contract with the City before hauling trash. Director Orton asked the City Manager which procedure would be the easiest to administer. Grimes stated in the last two years existing contracts with various firms have been "lumped together" on a renewal basis. CO The City Attorney explained the Board approved, for Sunray, a single 207.2 contract covering specifically listed industries - not a blanket contract; that the contract was a renewal of existing individual contracts. Director Orton noted, if the Board were to give permission to both Sunray and Waste Management to negotiate with the same list of firms, the City would have to know who was serving which firms. Director Johnson stated she thought it should be a matter between the haulers and the various companies, as to who picks up the trash, that the Board simply authorizes the haulers to pick up trash. Director Martin stated the Board "loses the right of scrutiny" if it authorizes a number of customers and he asked if the City had the capability to monitor the performance of a new operator. City Manager Grimes stated this could be done by staying in contact with the various industries to see if they are satisfied with the service and by making inspections. Jack Butt, attorney for Sunray Sanitation, addressed the Board. Butt stated he thought the past custom of approving contracts individually should continue but, if "a hunting license" is granted at this meeting, he asked that the same license be granted to Sunray. Director Bumpass suggested a temporary permit could be granted by the City Manager, contingent on later ratification by the Board. The City Attorney explained no amendment to the ordinance would be necessary in this case, but a resolution should be passed to authorize the City Manager to approve a standard thirty -day contract, and at such time as the contracts are negotiated between the haulers and the firms, a two-year contract must then be approved by the Board. Director Bumpass, seconded by Martin, made a notion to pass a resolution to authorize the City Manager to approve a 30 -day contract with each and every company listed in paragraph one of the contract before the Board; and that, prior to the expiration date of the 30 -day contract, a request should be submitted to the Board for approval of a two-year contract. 207.3 207.4 207.5 207.6 207.7 207.8 208 208.1 208.2 208.3 208.4 208.5 208.6 September 18, 1984 City Manager Crimes noted that, before granting such a temporary contract, he would prefer to contact the firms involved for confirmation that both parties have negotiated a contract. It was the consensus of the directors that this procedure would be used by the City Manager. Harold Parsons, owner of Northwest Arkansas Waste Management, expressed concern that a firm would not wish to enter into a contract which may only be temporary. Director Lancaster stated, if Waste Management came back before the Board within the thirty days, the Board would approve a two-year contract. Director Martin, with Bumpass in agreement, amended the motion to provide that any hauler with an approved contract would have the oppor- tunity to request a 30 -day contract. Upon roll call, the amended motion passed, 6-0. RESOLUTION NO. 105-84 APPEARS ON PAGE 2,3/ OF ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION BOOK X I X PARKING DECK REPORT Mayor Noland presented a report from Garver & Garver, Inc., regarding the results of load tests conducted on the City's parking deck; and any remedial work to be taken. The Mayor noted that during the weekend of September 8, loads which reportedly were in excess of 60 pounds per square foot were placed on the deck with no deficiencies being observed; that the deck was designed to carry 30 pounds per square foot. William Driggers, Sr., representing Garver & Garver, addressed the Board. Driggers reported the contractor and the original engineer made a proposal to Garver & Garver that the structure be load tested to demonstrate its integrity. Draggers stated the load test was performed in accordance with the requirements of the American Society for Testing Materials and the American Concrete Institute. Driggers explained a typical beam in the structure was chosen to load test (the third beam from the north part of the structure). Draggers presented a detailed explanation of how the load test was performed and reported that Garver & Garver's conclusion is the structure is adequate to carry the design loads and there are no real significant problems with its integrity. Driggers stated initially they thought one beam should be strengthened with some type of structure alongside it but, after the load test and after receiving additional information on how the crack in the beam probably occurred, they agree with the contractor's proposal that the crack be filled with epoxy and refinished 1 1 209 September 18, 1984 with a grout mixture and continue to be observed. Draggers stated 209.1 they feel the beam will perform adequately the way it is without any structure alongside it. Draggers stated the contractor has hired another contractor who is 209.2 a specialist in epoxy injection and the application to the crack has been completed (with local engineer Ervan Wimberly present on behalf CO of Garver & Garver). Driggers stated a special mixture of bonding agent and concrete with fine aggregate was used to repair the settlement LO in the west round and the cracked area at the interface of the second floor beam and retaining wall in the northeast corner of the structure. W Draggers reported the contractor intends to repair two additional CO cracks, with a different material suggested by Garver & Garver. Q Driggers stated the engineer who designed the structure, Glenn Cook, 209.3 is preparing a report which will be an appendix to Garver & Garver's final report to be submitted within the next two weeks. Director Bumpass asked Driggers what observation period would be approp- riate. Driggers first explained that Garver & Garver determined that the major crack in the third beam from the north (in which an over- stressed tendon broke) occurred at the time of construction. Draggers stated "he was told" that strand fractured because a "dead-end" strand was mistaken for a much longer strand, was elongated and was pulled in two; that when the shock of the failure rebounded against the anchor inside the beam, it fractured the concrete. Driggers explained, if the crack opens again it would be evidence of movement and the structure should be strengthened. 209.4 It was noted that Mr. Driggers need not appear before the Board at 209.5 the time the final report is submitted. MASTER PLAN/COMBS PARK Mayor Noland introduced Dr. Al Einert to present a Master Plan for 209.6 Combs Park, for approval and ratification by the Board. Dr. Einert displayed a drawing of the Master Plan (stating this Plan 209.7 was thirty acres short of the total acreage he was originally told the Park would encompass) which depicted the boundaries of the park, the proposed parking, restrooms, practice softball and soccer fields, and model airplane runway areas; with areas for "passive recreation" and river access. Einert noted the majority of the park lies below the flood plain elevation along the west fork of the White River. Einert suggested the acquisition of property presently under lease, for the private residence and old pump station building to be renovated for park headquarters, with a facility to be moved from Wilson Park. Einert noted access to the park would be from Pump Station Road and 210 September 18, 1984 210.1 Commerce Drive and proposed that someday the park might be connected to Babe Ruth Park by the acquisition of a small parcel between the two parks. Einert recommended also the remainder of a broken impoundment dam be removed. 210.2 Einert presented another plan which he stated he designed initially, before being told that approximately 29 acres above flood plain elevation would be exempted from the park property. Einert explained, if the additional acreage could be included in the park, the four softball fields could be completely separate from the four soccer fields, and some extensive roadway could be eliminated. 210.3 City Manager Grimes noted that the additional acreage being referred to is an industrial tract and a great deal of money has already been spent developing it for industrial prospects. 210.4 David Lashley, speaking for the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board, stated the Master Plan was unanimously approved by that Board; that the whole purpose of the plan was to have a long-range idea of what that land will be used for in the future; that there are no plans for the near future other than perhaps allowing the model airplane use. 210.5 Director Johnson asked if a public hearing had been held. Lashley explained there has not been a public hearing but that the Plan has been discussed three times at PRAB meetings which had public notice. 210.6 Director Orton stated she felt, since a lot of money is spent on parks and recreation, that park plans should have public hearings as a matter of policy. Einert noted that he and the PRAB have had dialogues with all the neighbors and model airplane users and there are no residences near the park; that he feels all affected persons have been involved in the planning process. 210.7 Director Johnson suggested the Board should table their approval until such time as the PRAB has held a public hearing. 210.8 Dale Christy, speaking for the Industrial Park Committee, stated they have had discussions with Lashley and others regarding utilization of the land and stated there never was discussion about the availability of an additional 30 acres and he "didn't believe the City was in a position to donate that particular site to the Parks Program". Christy also suggested the public hearing address a plan for the total possible acreage that could be used. 210.9 Lashley pointed out there had been no public hearing for Finger Park and stated the only reason he could see for the hearing would be to determine whether or not people want the model airplane use in the area where it has been designated. 1 N Q After further discussion, Director Orton Plan could be made available in the City access to it and become interested and a be announced. September 18, 1984 noted, if material on the Library, people could have public hearing could later Director Martin raised the issue of the acquisition of contiguous flood plain land for a more extensive park, but Lashley stated he thought land which might be available "is under brush and would be very expensive to clear up." After further discussion, Director Johnson, seconded by Orton, made a motion to table approval of the Master Plan until the Parks and Recreation Board holds a public hearing and until the Board receives a copy of the Master Plan to study it. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 6-0. Dr. Einert noted he had, today, submitted 25 copies of the Master Plan to the City Manager's office. STREET COMMITTEE/SIDEWALK RECOMMENDATIONS Mayor Noland introduced a recommendation from the Street Committee to install sidewalks at locations near public schools, in the Ramey, Root, Butterfield, Happy Hollow and Leverett school areas, as well as in the Wilson Park area. Director Johnson, seconded by Bumpass, made a motion to approve the recommendation of the Street Committee, along with the inclusion of a sidewalk on the west side of Mission Boulevard from North to Maple (inadvertently omitted from the list). Director Lancaster noted that the cost will thought because the Highway Department will to be used. City Manager Grimes clarified still be within the budget with the inclusion sidewalk. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 6-0. 1985-1989 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM be less than originally allow some right-of-way that the sidewalks will of the Mission Boulevard Mayor Noland introduced the proposed 1985-1989 "Transportation Improvement Program" for the City, with the following projects to be done in 1985: Four-laning of Gregg Avenue, from Elm to Ash and from Spruce to North 211 211.1 211.2 211.3 211.4 211.5 211.6 211.7 211.8 211.9 212 September 18, 1984 212.1 Four-laning of North Street from Gregg to Leverett Reconstruction of three railroad crossings on North Street Construction of a two-lane extension of Township Road from Old Wire Road to Highway 265 Construction of a four -lane extension of Drake Road, from Villa Boulevard to Sunny Lane Construction of a bridge and railroad crossing on Gregg Avenue, between Prospect and Douglas Avenue Reconstruction of the Old Missouri Road bridge over Mud Creek Reconstruction of the Poplar Street bridge over Skull Creek Reconstruction of the Old Wire Road bridges over Mud Creek, on the east and west sides of Highway 265 212.2 The Mayor noted most of these are joint projects with the Highway Department. 212.3 Dave Randle, owner of Ranco Building Supply on North Street, addressed the Board. Randle asked for information as to the timetable for con- struction of North Street from Gregg to Leverett; as to whether plans had been finalized and whether they are available for inspection; and as to whether condemnation proceedings had been instigated on other properties east of his property. 212.4 Noland explained the delay has existed because of the relocation of utilities which has not been done on Gregg Street, because the Highway Department wanted the North Street widening and the Gregg Street project to be done together. City Manager Grimes stated the telephone company had informed him there is one more utility relocation to be done on Gregg Street but that he has been unable to obtain a timetable from them on the utility relocation for North Street; that as soon as he has that information, he will advise Mr. Randle. 212.5 Bob Brandon, resident on Wilson Avenue, addressed the Board. Brandon stated the Wilson Park area is directly affected by the widening of Gregg and North Streets. Brandon stated Director Frank Sharp visited with the Highway Department and looked at their plan (which he stated has never been made public) to widen Gregg Street into the Wilson Park neighborhood. Brandon expressed concerns that the completion of these plans and the installation of a light at the intersection of North and Gregg will encourage commercial and thoroughfare traffic onto the residential streets in the Wilson Park area. Brandon stated he attempted to arrange a meeting in Fayetteville with federal and state people involved, to devise a plan so the construction would 1 September 18, 1984 probibit the thoroughfare traffic from continuing through the park area, but that the meeting was cancelled by City Manager Grimes. Grimes stated that meeting was cancelled at the request of Director Sharp, Chairman of the Street Committee. Mayor Noland commented that the Street Committee, including Director Sharp, has approved the proposed projects. The Mayor also commented that a four-lane bridge south from North Street (brought up by Brandon) is not on the 85-89 Transpor- tation Improvement Program. Brandon requested that public input be allowed before any plans are finalized. Brandon stated his neighborhood had started a petition W campaign which has turned into a letter-writing campaign, and Brandon CO presented the Mayor and City Attorney with copies of over 100 letters Q addressed to the District Engineer in Little Rock asking that no funding be approved until a public hearing can be held. Brandon also asked that these letters be included by the City in any grant application. Brandon asked that the Highway Department be notified that there must be some kind of design at the intersection to protect the neighborhood, to notify the neighborhood residents of a public hearing, and to devise a plan which would be "taken through the Master Street Plan revision process, through the Regional Planning Commission and the Regional Transportation Policy Board". After further discussion, Director Johnson made a motion that Brandon's conments be referred to the Street Committee and that the Street Committee hold a special meeting at which Brandon would appear, since Director Sharp has information which the other Directors have not yet seen, and since Director Sharp is not present at this Board meeting. Director Lancaster asked Brandon what his plan would be for the traffic at the intersection. Brandon suggested that, at the corner of Gregg and North, southbound traffic would turn east or west; and south of the neighborhood, on perhaps West Street, West Street traffic would travel south for about a block. Director Bumpass seconded the motion. Director Johnson clarified that her motion does not refer to any of the proposed projects listed for 1985. Brandon suggested the Board review the Highway Department plan he had referred to and Director Martin asked that Director Sharp informally be asked to bring this information to the Street Committee meeting. Upon roll call, the notion passed, 6-0. Director Johnson, seconded by Bumpass, made a motion to approve the 1985-1989 Transportation Improvement Program. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 6-0. 213 213.1 213.2 213.3 213.4 213.5 213.6 213.7 213.8 214 214.1 214.2 214.3 214.4 214.5 September 18, 1984 Mayor Noland stated the neighborhood residents should be notified of the Street Committee meeting. DEMOLITION BIDS Mayor Noland introduced consideration of bids for the demolition of unsafe and unsanitary structures located at 1155 South Maxwell, the intersection of Seventh and South Locust and at 144 East Meadow. The Mayor stated the recommendation is that the bids be awarded to the low bidder. The City Attorney explained one of the properties is owned by the City but the other two are properties on which the City has adopted an ordinance ordering the property owners to raze the structures; that notice has been given and time has expired with no compliance. McCord stated the original drafting of the ordinance authorized his office to institute litigation; but in order for the property owners to be absolutely insured of due process McCord recommended awarding the demolition bid but not giving notice to proceed until one final notice is sent to appear at the next meeting to show cause why the structure should not be razed; and McCord recommended amending the ordinance to authorize the City Manager to raze the structures rather than authorizing the City Attorney to institute a lawsuit. With that procedure being acceptable, the City Attorney read an ordinance for the first time, to amend Ordinance No. 3022 (for the property on S. Locust). Director Bumpass, seconded by Johnson, made a motion to suspend the rules and place the ordinance on second reading. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 6-0. The ordinance was read for the second time. Director Bumpass, 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, 6-0. The ordinance was read for the final time. Upon roll call, the ordinance passed, 6-0. ORDINANCE NO. 3033 APPEARS ON PAGE 44y_ OF ORDINANCE b RESOLUTION BOOK ylx The City Attorney read an ordinance for the first time, to amend Ordinance No. 3014 (for the property on S. Maxwell). Director Bumpass, seconded by Johnson, made a motion to suspend the rules and place the ordinance on second reading. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 6-0. The City Attorney read the ordinance for the second time. Director Bumpass, seconded by Johnson, made a motion to further suspend the rules and 1 1 CD 10 N W m Q September 18, 1984 place the ordinance on third and final reading. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 6-0. The City Attorney read the ordinance for the third and final time. Upon roll call, the ordinance passed, 6-0. ORDINANCE NO. 3034 APPEARS ON PAGE BOOK ytY OF ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION Director Lancaster, seconded by Bumpass, made a motion that the demolition bids be awarded to the low bidder, Frederick Baughman. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 6-0. There was a ten-minute recess. AIRPORT COMMITTEE REPORT Mayor Noland presented, for the Board's consideration, one-year direct - phone leases with the Fayetteville Hilton and Best Western/The Inn; advertising space leases with the Fayetteville Hilton and Best Western/The Inn; and a lease agreement with the Federal Aviation Administration for the Flight Service Station and a portion of the Old Terminal Building. The Mayor noted the Airport Committee recommends approval of the leases. Director Orton, seconded by Bumpass, made a motion to approve the recommendation of the Airport Committee. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 6-0. RESOLUTION NO. 106-84 APPEARS ON PAGE ;HZ OF ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION BOOK K/X RESOLUTION NO. 107-84 APPEARS ON PAGE .2615 --OF ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION BOOK )(IX RESOLUTION NO. 108-84 APPEARS ON PAGE .24,g OF ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION BOOK )(IX Director Lancaster noted the FAA has asked for an extension until November 30th on the automated flight service station. Director Johnson, seconded by Martin, made a motion to extend the offer until November 30th. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 6-0. City Manager Grimes introduced consideration of approval of an additional lease for limousine service at the airport. Grimes explained this lease would be the same as the other existing lease for limousine service. Grimes explained the lease would cover one parking space in front of the terminal at $25 per month and 12 square feet in the terminal at $55 per month. Grimes stated this lease had not been before the Airport Committee but that FAA regulations require that the City offer the same provisions to this individual. Airport Manager 215 215.1 215.2 215.3 215.4 215.5 216 216.1 216.2 September 18, 1984 Frederick stated he felt there was space available in which to accommodate this additional limousine service. Director Johnson, seconded by Bumpass, made a notion to pass a resolution to approve the lease. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 6-0. RESOLUTION NO. 109-84 APPEARS ON PAGE 2 8a. OF ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION BOOK )0)K R -O -W PAYMENTS/CITY LAKE ROAD 216.3 Mayor Noland introduced authorization of the payment for rights-of- way acquired for improvements to City Lake Road. 216.4 City Manager Grimes noted that $25,000 had been budgeted as the City's share of costs in what was to be a cost-sharing project; that it turns out now there will be no federal participation in the right-of-way acquisition and the City must pay 100%. Grimes explained it is now recommended that the $55,420 balance be taken from the $99,000 budgeted for the North Street project which will not be started this year. Grimes noted that the City will not be asked to participate in the roadway improvement and that the original plan has been doubled in length. Grimes noted that, in the past, costs have been recouped when lots are sold and that it is possible that some of the amount can be recouped in this manner. 216.5 Director Lancaster, seconded by Martin, made a motion that the right- of-way payments be authorized. It vas clarified that the motion vas meant to include City Manager Grimes recommendation concerning the City's 100% costs. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 6-0. 216.6 216.7 PILOT PLANT STUDY Vernon Rowe, speaking for CH2M the EPA -mandated requirement that in connection with proposed sewer Hill, addressed the Board regarding the City conduct a pilot plant study treatment plant improvements. Rowe explained the EPA has already drafted this pilot plant study as part of the grant condition, which will require a simulation of the entire treatment process to try to ascertain what effects different types of operating conditions will have on the performance of the system. Rowe stated CH2M Hill is presently assessing the best way of conducting the pilot study; either to contract with someone who already has a trailer -mounted type test system which could be modified; or to build a small pilot -scale treatment process at the site. Rowe stated the preference would be to build a system at the site in order 1 1 September 18, 1984 to minimize costs to the City. Rowe reported the State must feel there is some probability that the pilot study may be deemed grant - eligible because they have indicated that, once a final determination has been made as to what the study will consist of and what it will cost, the facility plan should be amended to include the pilot study. Rowe explained that when the grant is issued, it will be required that a detailed work plan be submitted by October 15 to be approved by November 1. Rowe stated Cliff Thompson would provide more details LO at the first meeting in October Rowe reported also that a meeting has been scheduled with EPA Administrator W Ruckelshaus, representatives from the Department of Pollution Control m and Ecology, and Representatives and Senators from Arkansas and Oklahoma Q for Thursday, September 20, in Washington, D.C., to discuss the "overall Illinois River situation". Rowe stated also that, in discussions with aides from Representative Hammerschmidt's office, he was told that the City of Fayetteville has not been invited to this meeting and that it was not felt the City should be represented there. Director Johnson, seconded by Orton, made a motion to approve Task Order 13, to amend the agreement with CH2M Hill, to include the Pilot Plant Study. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 6-0. RESOLUTION NO. 110-84 APPEARS ON PAGE ,Z gI OF ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION BOOK XIX 217 217.1 217.2 217.3 VEHICLE LIFT/INTERIM CITY HALL SHOP Mayor Noland introduced a request by the City Shop Maintenance Coordinator 217.4 for authorization to purchase a hydraulic vehicle lift for the Interim City Hall maintenance shop; and a budget adjustment of $2,500. City Attorney McCord explained that the lift will be put out for bids 217.5 so that an ordinance to waive competitive bidding requirements need not be considered at this time. Finance Director Linebaugh explained the only action needed by the Board is for a budget adjustment which can be approved at this time or after bids have gone out. It was the consensus of the Directors to consider the budget adjustment 217.6 at a later tine. ENGINEERING AWARD/WILSON PARK Mayor Noland introduced a resolution authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute a contract for engineering services with Northwest 217.7 r 218 September 18, 1984 218.1 Engineers, Inc. for the development of plans and specifications for a parking lot at Wilson Park. 218.2 Director Johnson, seconded by Lancaster, made a notion to approve the resolution. 218.3 Director Orton asked if neighborhood residents had seen the plans. Purchasing Agent Mackey explained this action would simply approve the contract to develop the plans and specifications. Director Orton noted the Board should be sure the residents have an opportunity to see the plans after they have been developed. It was clarified that these plans must be brought before the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board for public comment and then brought before the Board. 218.4 Upon roll call, the motion passed, 6-0. RESOLUTION NO. 111-84 APPEARS ON PAGE .?.6).0t OF ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION BOOK XIX BID AWARD 11594/VIDEO EQUIPMENT 218.5 Mayor Noland introduced consideration of the award of Bid #594 for video equipment for use in televising City Board meetings. 218.6 Director Orton, seconded by Johnson, made a motion to accept the low bid from Gray Communications. 218.7 Director Johnson noted this expense is under -budget. Director Johnson stated a receiver monitor still has to be purchased. 218.8 Upon roll call, the motion passed, 6-0. OTHER BUSINESS 218.9 Director Martin, Chairman of the Finance Committee, presented that committee's recommendations. 218.10 Budget Adjustments Martin noted that budget adjustments came before the Finance Committee as a result of the review of the final audit by Arthur Young and Company. Martin stated there were fairly good reasons why the audit report distributed to the Board in early August was as late as it was. Martin stated this presented no serious problems but "obviously is not a pattern to continue to follow". Martin explained some of the larger adjustments were covered elsewhere in the budget and simply had been 1 September 18, 1984 charged to accounts under which they were not budgeted. Martin explained many of the rest of the adjustments were unavoidable. Mayor Noland pointed out these adjustments were for 1983 but could not be recommended until the final audit report was available. Director Martin, seconded by Orton, made a motion to approve the budget adjustments as shown, stating these were unanimously recommended by CO' the Finance Committee. Upon roll call, the notion passed, 6-0. LO J RESOLUTION NO. 112-84 APPEARS ON PAGE 290 OF ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION BOOK XIX W Audit Report CO Director Martin reported that a representative of Arthur Young and Company was present at the Finance Committee to discuss their audit report. Martin stated the firm made certain recommendations concerning improvements in the City's systems and controls, some having to do with data processing and some with accounting procedures; that these were not "significant control weaknesses", that most have already been corrected and some will take somewhat longer to correct. 1 Director Martin, seconded by Orton, made a motion to approve the 1983 Audit Report from Arthur Young and Company. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 6-O. Financing the "800" Communications System Director Martin reported that the Finance Committee addressed the question of possible savings by phasing -in the implementation of the radio system; that the City's consultant recommends not phasing -in the system. Martin explained that $400,000 was previously budgeted for a radio system, so that some financing will be necessary. Martin reported the consensus of the committee was that the Board consider paying for the system as rapidly as possible. Martin stated the Finance Director provided the committee with figures for a five-year payoff which Martin stated "would give us an insurance policy against uncertainty". In going out forbids on a financing package, Martin explained it would be stipulated that there be no pre -payment penalty. Director Martin stated it is the recommendation of the Finance Committee and he so moved, that the Finance Director be authorized to obtain bids for a five-year financing program on the City's radio system with no pre -payment penalty involved. Martin clarified that there would be no payments due, nor interest accumulated, until the system is installed. Director Lancaster stated, if approximately $400,000 has already been budgeted, if another $200,000 could be allocated in the next budget, and since no money is to be paid until the system is installed, his 219 219.1 219.2 219.3 219.4 219.5 219.6 219.7 219.8 220 220.1 220.2 220.3 220.4 220.5 220.6 220.7 220.8 220.9 September 18, 1984 opinion is that the Board should wait until such time as the system is to be installed to decide how much more money is needed. Director Martin agreed with Lancaster that the funds presently (and henceforth) allocated for the radio system should be segregated from all other funds and not be used for any other purpose without prior Board approval. Director Johnson asked if Motorola's requirements include a down payment. Purchasing Agent Mackey stated Motorola will not require "a great deal up front" nor did he think they would have any concern about an early payment, were they to be awarded the bid on a lease—purchase package. Mackey explained also the bid specifications contain a provision that no payment would be required until the system is "on line and operating". Mayor Noland seconded the motion. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 6-0. Director Bumpass asked if there had been any discussion regarding cost allocation by departments. Bumpass noted the 800 trunking system is reported as having, as an option, the capability to allocate time used by each department. Bumpass, with Martin concurring, suggested the City could lease time to other users to help generate income. Director Orton stated the committee discussed each of those questions and it had been discussed that, once the system is in operation, cost could be allocated according to time used. Finance Director Linebaugh explained the existing budgeted funds have been allocated per unit. It was agreed that the Purchasing Officer would contact Motorola for information on possible commercial applications that other owners of this system have used. Proposed Audit Specifications Director Martin reported the Finance Committee asked the Finance Director to prepare a request for proposals for a financial and compliance audit and, in addition, for a performance audit. Martin explained the request has been reviewed by the Finance Committee, adding that the proposal for a financial and compliance audit is written separately from the proposal for a performance audit, so that any firm could bid on one or both of the audits. Martin noted the performance audit would be done to determine, in general, the following: 1. Whether the City's departments are managing and utilizing their resources, such as personnel and property, economically and efficiently; 1 1 1 221 September 18, 1984 2. The causes of major inefficiencies or uneconomical practices; 221.1 3. Whether the departments have complied with the laws and regulations concerning economy and efficiency; 4. Whether the desired results and benefits are being achieved; () 5. Whether the objectives established by the Board are being 1.11 met, and N 6. Whether the City's departments have considered alternatives W which might yield desired results at a lowered cost. m Director Martin, seconded by Orton, made a motion to authorize the Finance Director to send the requests for written proposals to qualified firms. It was clarified that the financial and compliance audit is designed to be a four-year program; that the proposal for the performance audit is to be a three-year program which can be terminated after one year; that the intention of the performance audit is for all departments to be evaluated over three years. 221.2 221.3 Upon roll call, the motion passed, 6-0. 221.4 Handicapped Access to Wilson Park Director Johnson referred to a letter which was written to the Board by a citizen who attempted to bring a handicapped friend to a concert in Wilson Park and, because of so many obstacles (to a person in a wheelchair), was never able to reach the concert area. Director Johnson asked that the letter be officially submitted to the City Manager, for action to be taken to allow access, by the handicapped, to Wilson Park. City Manager Grimes stated that he would address that matter. MINUTES 221.5 The following corrections were made to the Minutes of the September 221.6 4th meeting: 192.1 "bars not permitted in skylights" should read "uncovered bars not permitted in skylights" 194.2 "release" should read "lease" 200.4 "...after retaining an additional 18 feet..." should read "...retaining 18 feet..." 222 222.1 200.5 September 18, 1984 delete "...but it was agreed to retain an additional 18 feet of right-of-way" 222.2 With those corrections, the Minutes were approved as circulated. EXECUTIVE SESSION 222.3 City Manager Grimes asked for a brief executive session to discuss some personnel matters. City Attorney McCord advised, if any action is taken by the Board in executive session, that action needs to be affirmed in public session. 222.4 Director Johnson, seconded by Bumpass, made a motion to adjourn to executive session. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 6-0. 222.5 The executive session began at about 11:40 P.M. At the end of the executive session, the Board did not reconvene and, consequently, no matters discussed were ratified. The executive session ended at about 12:25 A.M. 1 1 1