HomeMy WebLinkAbout1984-11-20 Minutes1
CO
N
w
Q
MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS
A regular meeting of the Fayetteville City Board of Directors was
held on Tuesday, November 20, 1984 at 7:30 P.M. in the Board Room
of the City Administration Building at 113 West Mountain Street, Fayette-
ville, Arkansas.
PRESENT: Mayor Noland; Directors Bumpass, Johnson, Lancaster,
Martin, Orton and Sharp; City Manager Grimes, Assistant
City Manager McWethy, City Attorney McCord, City Clerk
Kennedy; members of the press and audience.
CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Noland called the meeting to order and asked for a moment of
respectful silence.
C.D. BUDGET/1984
The Mayor introduced consideration of the 1984 Community Development
Block Grant budget, explaining that the public hearing regarding requests
for C.D. funding had been held by the Board at the November 6th meeting,
and a number of suggestions for items to be included were made at
that time. The Mayor also explained that the Board had voted on those
items requested which has resulted in a list of top priority projects.
The Mayor read from such a list compiled by the Community Development
Director:
Housing Rehabilitation
EOA Weatherization
Lewis Street from Maine to Highway 62 West
(engineering)
(construction in 1985)
Wedington Drainage (engineering only)
Combs Park
Oakland Drainage (first phase)
(all engineering)
Phillip Street from Mitchell to Sang
(engineering)
Cemetery Land Acquisition
Finger Park additional acquisition
$ 125,000
3,500
31,096
3,000
31,736
8,725
75,164
20,000
11,959
3,000
20,000
26,470
288
288.1
28"
v
November 20, 1984
289.1 The Mayor explained that these items, Including administration ($88,450)
and contingencies ($10,000), would total approximately the amount
available for 1985 ($458,000).
289.2 C.D. Director Carlisle explained that approximately 18 acres were
purchased for Finger Park and Director Sharp stated the additional
acquisition suggested in the Master Plan for the Park would total
three or four acres. Carlisle stated she had been unable to contact
the adjacent property owners to determine whether land is available
to be purchased.
289.3 Carlisle explained that persons living in 43 units of Lewis Plaza
would be beneficiaries of the Lewis Street project. Director Orton
stated she felt the Lewis Street project should include more than
just engineering in 1985.
289.4 Carlisle pointed out that $75,164 would cover the first phase only
of construction of Oakland drainage, with $20,000 to cover the engineering
for the total project.
289.5 City Manager Grimes explained that some funds for construction of
the Wedington drainage project are included in the Public Works budget.
289.6 Director Martin pointed out that the South Washington sidewalk project
was rated the same priority as was additional acreage for Finger Park
and the acquisition of cemetery land. Carlisle explained that the
$101,400 sidewalk, plus right-of-way and easement expenses, did not
fit within the budget as well as did the other two items. Mayor Noland
noted that there would be some General Fund monies available for sidewalk
construction.
289.7 Director Johnson stated she preferred removing Lewis Street from the
priority list because there are only three houses on that street.
Johnson recommended allocating that $34,096 to Phase One of the Wedington
Drainage project.
289.8 In answer to questions from Director Bumpass, Carlisle stated $2640
per acre was paid for the existing Finger Park acreage, not including
appraisals. David Lashley, Chairman of the Parks and Recreation Advisory
Board, stated that the Improvements thus far to Finger Park include
a parking lot and some play equipment, and the total funds invested
in Finger Park are about $65,000. Lashley stated the land proposed
to be acquired for the Park would be better suited for the Park than
for any other use.
289.9
Director Orton stated she would be more in favor of the Lewis Street
project than the cemetery land acquisition.
1
1
November 20, 1984
In answer to a question from Mayor Noland, Carlisle explained her
estimates for engineering costs for Lewis and Phillip Street are based
on less -than -city -street standards.
Director Johnson, seconded by Bumpass, made a motion to accept the
following list of projects for the 1985 C.D. budget, with the proposed
funding for Lewis Street and Finger Park acquisition to be applied
to the Wedington Drainage project:
Administration
Contingencies
Housing Rehabilitation
BOA Weatherization
Combs Park
Oakland Drainage
Phillip Street
Cemetery land acquisition
Wedington Drainage
$ 88,450
10,000
125,000
3,500
8,725
95,164
14,959
20,000
60,566
Upon roll call, the motion passed, 4-3, with Directors Sharp, Lancaster
and Orton voting in the minority.
It was the general consensus of the directors that Sandra Carlisle
attempt to obtain information about land which might be purchased
for Finger Park.
Director Orton, seconded by Martin, made a motion to use the funds
for cemetery land acquisition for Finger Park land acquisition. Upon
roll call, the motion passed, 5-2, with Directors Johnson and Lancaster
voting in the minority.
Director Johnson, seconded by Orton, made a motion to adopt the C.D. budget
as approved. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 7-0.
RESOLUTION NO. 133-84 APPEARS ON PAGE OF ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION
BOOK
REZONING R84-19/ANDERS
The Mayor introduced a request by Director Sharp that the Board give
further consideration to an ordinance rezoning .49 acres located at
the southeast corner of W. North street and N. Garland Avenue. The
Mayor explained the petition to rezone from C-1, Neighborhood Commercial,
to C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial, was submitted by Sterling and Kay
Anders and brought before the Board by George Faucette, Jr. on November
6th.
290
290.1
290.2
290.3
290.4
290.5
290.6
290.7
291
November 20, 1984
291.1 The City Attorney stated he had, at the Mayor's request, researched
Robert's Rules of Order. [McCord recommended the Board consider whether
the City Attorney or some other person serve as parliamentarian.)
McCord stated, should any director move to reconsider the action adopted
at a previous Board meeting, that motion does not require a second
and is debatable because the main motion (adoption of the rezoning
ordinance) was also debatable. McCord explained that the effect of
the making of the motion (to reconsider) is to suspend all action
that the original motion would have required until the reconsideration
is acted upon. McCord stated that, if that motion to reconsider is
adopted, the effect of adoption is to place before the Board the original
question in the exact position it occupied before it was voted upon
previously, the question being "shall the rezoning ordinance pass?".
291.2 Director Sharp asked if the Board could refer the issue back to the
Planning Commission. McCord explained that, if the motion to reconsider
passes by a majority, the original question must be voted upon first.
McCord stated that, if there is a motion to table, the issue can be
tabled for a definite period but not indefinitely.
291.3 Director Sharp referred to a letter he wrote to the City Manager,
requesting reconsideration and asking for clarification of Article
12, paragraph 1(e) of the Code of Ordinances, where it states:
...in case a protest against such change is signed by the
owners of 20 per cent or more either of the area of the
lots included in such proposed change, or of those immediately
adjacent in the rear thereof extending 300 feet from the
street frontage of such opposite lots, then such amendments
shall not become effective except by the favorable vote
of three-fourths of the City Board of Directors.
291.4 Sharp stated that, if the intent of the ordinance is followed, the
rezoning ordinance failed to pass. Sharp also expressed concern that
opponents had not been told by the Planning Office to register their
opposition in writing. Director Sharp, seconded by Orton, made a
motion that the Board reconsider the rezoning.
291.5 Mayor Noland stated the Board had received a memo from Planning Consultant
Larry Wood in which he states that "access to this property presents
a very difficult situation regardless of the proposed use".
291.6 Director Martin expressed concern about referring back to Planning
Commission a matter which he stated had been considered three or four
times by them and in several reports by Larry Wood. Martin stated
he thought, with the exception of property owners not being told to
register their protests in writing, that the process had been followed
very carefully. Martin stated that the property owners have the right
to use their property.
1
1
November 20, 1984
Director Johnson stated her opinion had not changed since the last
meeting but that it is unfortunate that the question of access was
not looked at in the beginning of the process. Johnson suggested
that perhaps the ordinance should be referred to the Planning Commission
and the Planning Office for reconsideration of the notification process.
Director Orton stated that the Board was not alerted because the question
of access was not considered from the very beginning by the Planning
Consultant and the Planning Commisson. Orton stated the City had
LO failed the citizens in the area by the failure to provide notification
and the lack of knowledge of the ordinance.
Id
CO George Faucette, Jr., speaking for the petitioners, stated the access
Q was addressed by the Planning Commission by virtue of their approval
of the waiver of the driveway safety zone on Hughes Street. Faucette
stated he would make a commitment not to provide access off Garland
as part of his Bill of Assurance.
Upon roll call, the vote on the motion to reconsider failed, 3-3-1,
with Directors Sharp, Noland and Orton voting in favor of the motion,
Directors Johnson, Lancaster and Martin voting against the motion,
and Director Bumpass abstaining.
Director Orton, seconded by Martin, made a motion that the Board ask
the Planning Commission to study the definition of "adjacent property
owners" and the legal notification procedures now being used and to
make recommendations for any needed amendments to the ordinance.
Upon roll call, the motion passed, 7-0.
Director Johnson stated it should be pointed out that the City Attorney
advised the Board that "all steps had been followed regarding this
matter".
292
292.1
292.2
°292.3
292.4
292.5
292.6
Director Martin asked the City Manager to direct the Planning Office 292.7
to specify, to the extent that it can, the requirements the City has
for the various items handled out of that office, including permits.
ACT 9 BONDS
Regarding consideration of resolutions authorizing Memorandums of
Intent for two Act 9 Bond issues, the Mayor explained that the petitioners
have requested their items be tabled.
Director Johnson, seconded by Martin, made a motion to table items
#2 and 13 on the agenda. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 7-0.
292.8
292.9
293
CENTRAL BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT BONDS
November 20, 1984
293.1 The Mayor introduced a resolution authorizing the issuance of $800,000
in Central Business Improvement District "First Mortgage Revenue Bonds"
to provide permanent financing for the Center Court Square project.
293.2 Les Baledge, Attorney from the Rose Law Firm in Little Rock, addressed
the Board. Baledge explained to the Board that their approval is
required because of changes in the federal tax code. Baledge stated
the District approved the issuance of the bonds by a unanimous vote.
293.3 Director Bumpass asked if a copy of the distribution of the proceeds
had been furnished the Board. Baledge stated the proceeds of the
bonds are to be used to acquire, construct and renovate the Center
Court Square facilities on Center Street (the old Mountain Inn) and
Baledge noted he had available all requisitions and invoices showing
the use of the funds.
293.4 The City Attorney explained that the CBID Board issued short term
bonds (interim financing) for $500,000 a couple of years ago to get
the project completed, with the idea that permanent financing would
be approved later; that in the meantime the laws changed to require
approval of the City Board for permanent financing. The City Attorney
noted that there would be no potential liability on the part of the
City.
293.5 Director Bumpass asked if an annual audit was required for the bond
issues. The City Attorney explained there is no annual report required
by the CBID Board to the City Board because there are no self -generating
funds being administered by the CBID Board. Bumpass asked if there
was an annual report from the Project to the CBID Board. Baledge
explained that the loan documents require that the use of proceeds
be restricted to the renovation project.
293.6 Jack Butt, Attorney for the CBID Board, named those serving on the
Central Business Improvement District Board: A. D. McAlister, Don
Loftis, Truman Yancey, Dale Christy and Pearl Clinehens.
293.7 In answer to a question from Director Lancaster, the City Attorney
explained the property is subject to taxation since it is owned by
the property owner, not by the City.
293.8 Director Bumpass asked if, in the future, requests for issuance of
CBID bonds would come before the City Board of Directors. The City
Attorney explained the Board of Directors has indicated it wishes
to consider approval of the bond resolution first because it would
not be fair to a potential borrower to have the City Board disapprove,
after the CBID Board has approved, a bond resolution.
1
1
1
co
N
1
November 20, 1984
Director Johnson, seconded by Sharp, made a notion to approve the
resolution. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 7-0.
Director Bumpass asked for a requisition summary for his information.
RESOLUTION NO. 134-84 APPEARS ON PAGE OF ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION
BOOK
WILSON PARK PARKING IAT
Mayor Noland introduced a presentation by Ervan Wimberly of Northwest
Engineers of proposed parking lot #1 for Wilson Park, as recommended
by the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board.
Wimberly noted a public hearing was held by the PRAB and comments
were received. Wimberly explained that a layout was designed in an
attempt to destroy the least amount of trees and best fit the terrain.
Wimberly displayed a model of the plan and explained the layout of
the lot, which he stated would be located about ten feet behind the
bleachers. Wimberly stated four trees would be removed and the Park
Horiculturist has developed a landscaping plan which will mostly include
planting of new trees after construction.
In answer to questions from Director Bumpass, City Manager Grimes
explained money has been budgeted for this parking lot and Wimberly
explained the parking lot is included in the Master Plan for Wilson
Park.
Wimberly explained the existing gravel road which comes out at the
corner of Prospect and Park would be closed off and re -landscaped.
A resident of the park area addressed the Board, stating she thought
the proposed location for the parking lot "is in the wrong place"
and stated she thought it would have been better to use the area around
the tennis courts.
With some directors questioning the choice of location for the lot,
Wimberly noted that the only deviation from the Master Plan had been
to move the location of the lot farther away from Prospect to fit
better around some trees.
With the Mayor noting that no Board action was necessary, Wimberly
stated that the plans will be finished up and bids obtained.
'294
294.1
294.2
294.3
294.4
294.5
294.6
294.7
294.8
294.9
295
295.1
November 20, 1984
BILL OF ASSURANCE/DOWERS ESTATE
Mayor Noland introduced further consideration of a recommendation
from the Board of Adjustment that a Bill of Assurances be enforced.
The Mayor summarized the background behind this matter:
On November 2, 1981 the Board of Adjustment granted Jeff Dowers
the right to construct a principal structure on his property
at 1614 E. Huntsville Road. Approval was conditioned upon Dowers
executing a Bill of Assurance providing that an existing nonconforming
shop building on the property would be removed if the property
were "sold, conveyed or leased". After the death of Dowers,
his estate apparently authorized another party to use the shop
building and property in a caretaker capacity. The Inspection
Department, having received complaints about the shop operation
from neighbors, brought the matter to the Board of Adjustment
to determine if the Bill of Assurance should be enforced. At
the July 16 meeting the Board of Adjustment voted, 4-2, to enforce
the Bill of Assurance.
At the August 21 City Board meeting the City Attorney requested
guidance from the Directors on whether the City should file suit
to enforce the Bill of Assurance and the Directors voted, 6-0,
to table any action until the October 2 meeting to give the City
Attorney an opportunity to research the issue. On October 2
the Board voted, 7-0, to approve a recommendation from the City
Manager that the staff:
...approach the attorney for the estate and suggest
the City take bids and provide the administration
for the removal of the shop building, provided
the estate give either a lien on the property,
or some other contractual arrangement, so that
when the property is sold the City can be reimbursed
for the demolition and removal costs.
295.2 The Mayor explained that since that time, the estate has apparently
not been willing to execute such an agreement.
295.3 The City Attorney stated the Board had received a letter from Gary
Carson, the attorney for the estate, indicating that he will petition
the Planning Commission for a conditional use permit to authorize
the residential structure to be used as a duplex. McCord explained
that, if that permit is granted, the estate will demolish the shop
building at its own expense.
295.4 McCord stated the issue before the Board is whether to instruct him
to file suit in an attempt to obtain a court order requiring demolition
of the shop building -or- to grant the estate additional time to appear
before the Planning Commission. In answer to questions from Director
November 20, 1984
Bumpass, McCord explained the entire lawsuit process could take a
couple of months before a trial would be set and the conditional use
process should take no longer than a month.
Director Lancaster pointed out the petition for conditional use has
no bearing on the issue of the Bill of Assurance. Lancaster, seconded
by Orton, made a motion to instruct the City Attorney to enforce the
Bill of Assurance.
10 A gentleman in the audience addressed the Board, stating bids were
now being taken for demolition of the shop building. Director Bumpass
W pointed out the bid estimates were dated October 24th and the letter
CO from Carson was dated November 16.
Q Director Martin stated he thought it was not clear whether the Bill
of Assurance has been violated. The City Attorney explained that
should the Board approve the motion, the Court would have to determine
that the Bill of Assurance had been violated before it would order
demolition.
Director Sharp stated he would prefer to address the matter at the
next meeting, giving the estate time to clarify whether they intend
to proceed with demolition.
At Director Bumpass' suggestion, Director Lancaster agreed to amend
his motion to defer action on enforcing the Bill of assurance for
two weeks. Director Orton agreed to second this amended motion.
Upon roll call, the amended motion passed, 7-0.
WATER BILLS
The Mayor introduced a request from the Finance Director that the
Board consider an ordinance authorizing the filing of a lien against
property when the owner or lessee is delinquent in paying a water
bill. The Mayor asked Director Martin for information on hbw such
matters are handled by Arkansas Western Gas Company.
Director Martin explained that the Gas Company does not file liens
on delinquent accounts or on persons who leave without paying. Martin
stated a deposit is charged which is intended to cover the cost in
the event an account is delinquent; that the deposit is increased
for persons with credit problems. Martin stated the Arkansas Public
Service Commission permits a deposit of up to two times a customer's
estimated bill to cover such situations. Martin stated he would prefer
to have the Finance Department increase the size of the deposit.
Director Orton asked what procedure the City has for increasing the
size of deposits for those with bad credit records. Finance Director
296
296.1
296.2
296.3
296.4
296.5
296.6
296.7
296.8
296.9
291
November 20, 1984
297.1 Linebaugh explained that the City increases the deposit from $25 to
$40. Linebaugh noted the City presently has $180,000 in bad debts
over several years and another $23,000 will be written off this year
(about 5% of total water and sewer receipts). Linebaugh stated the
major part of the debt comes from renters and that 2 1/2 to 3 months
in receipts are sometimes lost before it is discovered a tenant has
moved out. Linebaugh also explained the City cannot track down tenants
who move because the City's procedure has been to apply the deposit
towards the balance left on the account, which usually only covers
one month's bill.
297.2 Linebaugh explained that, if the landlord would notify the City as
soon as the tenant moves out, there would be no money lost on the
part of the City. Linebaugh noted that raising deposits would hurt
everyone. Linebaugh stated cities such as Little Rock, N. Little
Rock, Conway, Hot Springs, Fort Smith and other cities use the lien
system. Linebaugh stated other cities also raise the deposits up
to 2 1/2 to 3 times the amount of the bill.
297.3 Jeremy Hess suggested billing the customers a month in advance but
Linebaugh explained this creates problems with customers.
297.4 Jerry Sweetser, local landlord, addressed the Board. Sweetser commented
that, although the City wishes to have landlords to notify the City
when tenants move, the City is not willing to give landlords forwarding
addresses for its customers who have moved.
297.5 Mayor Noland suggested a committee be formed, consisting of City Manager
Grimes, Finance Director Linebaugh, Jeremy Hess and Jerry Sweetser,
to discuss this problem and bring a recommendation back to the Board
within 4-6 weeks.
297.6 There was some discussion regarding the time it takes from the reading
of the water meter until the time the billing is sent out. Linebaugh
explained the City has four billing cycles and the billing goes out
as quickly as possible after the meters are read. Director Martin,
in answer to a question from the audience, stated the Gas Company
is not incurring as large a loss, but that it takes the Gas Company
two days to bill a customer after the meter is read and the customer
then has 22 days to pay the bill (whereas the City gives the customer
only ten days to pay).
297.7 Director Bumpass asked if the law forbids the City from releasing
information regarding its customers. The City Attorney stated he
would research the law on this matter.
1
SERVICE ROADS
November 20, 1984
The Mayor introduced a request by the Planning Administrator that
the Board determine whether the collector streets that run adjacent
to the Fulbright Expressway should have 50' or 60' rights-of-way.
The Mayor explained the Board, at its last meeting, referred the matter
to the.Street Committee which has recommended an ordinance which would
call for. a 50' right-of-way except that "in subdivisions which are
platted after November 20„.,1984, the ,required right-of-way width for
LO such collector streets shall be 60'...if ,the land on both sides of
js- said collector streets is of sufficient size to be developed."
CO The City Attorney read the proposed ordinance for the first time.
Q Director Johnson, seconded by Sharp, made a motion to suspend the
rules and place the ordinance on second reading. The motion passed,
6-0, with Bumpass not present for the roll call. The City Attorney
read the ordinance for 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, 7-0. The City Attorney read the ordinance for the final time.
The Mayor asked if anyone present wished to speak against the ordinance.
There was no response.
Director Johnson clarified that the reason the 60' requirement came
about was because service roads are now identified as collector streets
(which, by definition, call for 60 feet of right-of-way). City Manager
Grimes also clarified that the requirement for collector streets to
have 60 feet of right-of-way when platted after November 20, 1984
only, applies in cases where land on both sides of said streets is
of sufficient size to be developed. Upon roll call, the motion passed,
6-0-1, with Director Martin abstaining.
ORDINANCE NO. 3048 APPEARS ON PAGE I OF ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION
BOOK XX.
STREET COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
Southern Farmers Association
Director Sharp, Chairman of the Street Committee, reported that the
Southern Farmers Association requested a waiver of the right-of-way
dedication and sidewalk construction requirement in connection with
the development of property at the intersection of Highways 71B and
62. Sharp stated the committee recommends requiring the dedication
of right-of-vay now but asks for the execution of a Bill of Assurance
for the installation of the sidewalk. Director Orton, seconded by
Sharp, made a motion to approve the recommendation. Upon roll call,
the motion passed, 7-0.
29R
298.1
298.2
298.3
298.4
299
November 20, 1984
St. James Baptist Church
299.1 Director Sharp reported that the St. James Baptist Church requested
a waiver of the requirement to install curb and gutter and pavement
widening in connection with the development of a new church site at
the southwest corner of East Mountain and Willow. Director Sharp,
seconded by Banpass, made a notion to approve the recommendation of
the Street Committee to require the execution of a Bill of Assurance
for the required improvements. Upon roll call, the motion passed,
7-0.
Clarence Payne
299.2• Sharp reported that the committee considered a request from Clarence
Payne for a waiver of the requirement to dedicate right-of-way and
build a sidewalk in connection with the development of property at
the northwest corner of East Huntsville and Happy Hollow Road. Sharp
stated the committee recommends waiving the right-of-way requirement
because of no significant construction, only the moving of a building
onto a pad. Sharp explained that the committee made no recommendation
regarding the sidewalk, although it was suggested the sub -lessee might
be required to execute a Bill of Assurance for the sidewalk, rather
than the property owner.
299.3
299.4
299.5
Director Bumpass noted the only improvement being made by Mr. Payne
would be a sewer hookup and it seemed acceptable to grant a Bill of
Assurance. With it being clarified that Clarence Payne would agree
to sign such a B111 of Assurance, Director Bu ns made a motion that
Clarence Payne execute a Bill of Assurance to build a sidewalk. The
City Attorney explained that, in this case, a contractual Agreement
would be executed rather than a Bill of Assurance. Director Martin
seconded the motion.
Director Sharp pointed out the property is near a school, that the
City has built sidewalk next to the property and there is also sidewalk
to the east.
Upon roll call, the notion passed, 6-1, with Sharp voting against
the motion.
Improvements to N. College near Millsap
299.6 Director Sharp reported that the Planning Commission requested and
the Street Committee recommended that the Board ask the State Highway
& Transportation Department to schedule the installation of a fifth
left -turn lane in the area of Millsap Road and North College; and
that two northbound -traffic lanes be extended through this area where
1
November 20, 1984
they presently narrow down into only one lane. Director Sharp, seconded
by Johnson, made a motion to approve the committee's recommendation.
Upon roll call, the motion passed, 7-0.
•
Street Classification Clarification
Director Sharp reported that the Planning Commission had introduced
CO a Resolution calling to the attention of the Board of Directors that
some street classifications shown on the Transportation Improvement
Program are at variance with the Master Street Plan; that some proposed
improvements indicated on the TIP are at variance with the standards
LzJ contained in the City's subdivision regulations; and that public hearings
CIO should be .held before making changes of this nature to the City's
Q Comprehensive Plan.
Director Martin explained that the Commissioners pointed out that
Project F-9 (Poplar Street from Leverett to Gregg) indicates the widening
of a local street to four lanes; that the City's regulations prohibit
such widening of a local street. City Manager Grimes explained it
had been discussed by the Board several years 'ago that, because of
so much heavy commercial and light industrial traffic development
in that area, there was a need for four lanes; that the Planning Commission
was reluctant to change the "local" designation of the street. Director
Martin asked if such a change would require a public hearing and Grimes
stated the Board has the option to approve such construction.
1
Director Martin pointed out that two other projects, F-11 and F-12
(Sycamore and Old Wire Road), show the TIP calling those collector
streets and proposing widening to four lanes.
Regarding Project F-4, Township Road, Martin noted the TIP designated
this road as a principal arterial and the Master Street Plan designates
it as a collector street. City Manager Grimes suggested this may
simply be an error.
300
300.1
300.2
300.3
300.4
300.5
Mayor Noland suggested that some checking should be done to make sure 300.6
that any changes to the Master Street Plan have been incorporated
into the Plan.
Improvements to Zion Road
Director Sharp explained that it was the recommendation of the Planning 300.7
Commission and the Street Committee that the Board place Zion Road
improvements on the 1986-1990 Transportation Improvement Program priority
list of major street improvements. Director Sharp, seconded by Noland,
made a motion to approve the recommendation of the Street Committee.
Director Sharp explained that requests for street improvements are 300.8
reviewed by a Technical Advisory Committee and the Planning Commission
301
November 20, 1984
301.1 which makes recommendations to the Board of Directors for a final
decision.
301.2 City Manager Grimes explained that the Planning Commission referred
this item to the Board when a church on Zion Road made plans to expand
and street improvements were required. Director Bumpass pointed out
that the need for street improvements on Zion Road is not related
totally to additional development or to the use by residents but is
also related to the installation of the traffic light at the Highway
71 intersection and the traffic generated because of the access to
the Mall. In answer to a question from the audience, Director Bumpass
explained that the future improvements would be paid for by developers
as well as by funds from the City's share of county sales tax.
301.3 A resident in the audience commented that that intersection has been
described as one of the most dangerous intersections in the City (even
though there is a traffic light) and it was his opinion that improvements
would increase the traffic even more, thus increasing the amount of
traffic accidents.
301.4 In answer to a question from Director Sharp, City Manager Grimes stated
that Zion Road would be eligible for 75% federal funding/25Z local
funding, but that there is a long waiting list.
301.5 A resident of the area asked what kinds of improvements would be planned
and Grimes explained that the number of lanes had not yet been decided
upon but that, if it is a collector street, it would require sixty
feet of right-of-way; that it would be a year before the street would
be added to the Plan and it would be placed at the end of a five-year
list of projects. A resident expressed her concerns that the City
should notify property owners on a street when it plans for improvements
to be made.
301.6 A resident of the area noted that, when Park lake Apartments were
proposed to be built, some residents objected because of the existing
traffic hazards at the time and the potential for increased traffic.
301.7 City Manager Grimes pointed out there were a number of public hearings
when the Master Street Plan was revised, about five or six years ago.
301.8 There was discussion regarding the lack of usage of Joyce Street,
with Director Bumpass noting it was intended to relieve traffic on
Zion Road. A resident of the area suggested the use of Joyce Street
could be increased by removing the light at the intersection of Zion
and Highway 71 or by dead -ending Zion Road at Old Missouri Road.
301.9 Sue Madison pointed out that citizens are usually not informed of
street designations and she suggested a copy of the Master Street
Plan be made available at the Library or the Mall.
1
1
November 20, 1984
City Manager Grimes explained that placing the improvements on the
priority list would simply be an implementation of something already
shown on the Master Street Plan -- that this is not an amendment to
the Master Street Plan.
Director Sharp suggested asking the Planning Commission to .report
back to the Board as to whether this recommendation of the TIP is
CD in compliance with the Master Street Plan. Grimes recommended this
matter be sent back to the Planning Commission to be more thoroughly
examined and a more specific recommendation be brought back to the
Board.
W
CO After a resident of the audience stated she did not object to having
Q the road widened but was simply asking to be kept informed, the roll
was called and the motion passed, 7-0.
Referrals to TAC
Director Sharp reported that the Street Committee recommends that
the following items be referred to the Technical Advisory Committee
of the Northwest Arkansas Regional Planning Commission: (1) An additional
east -west street to connect Highway 265 with North Street and/or Rockwood
Trail; (2) the removal of the arterial street shown on the Master
Street Plan south of Dickson Street and immediately west of the Burlington
Northern tracks --from Dickson to Sixth; and (3) the redesignation
of a segment .of arterial street in the vicinity of. the Industrial
Park to the existing Armstrong Avenue. Director Sharp, seconded by
Johnson, made a motion to approve the recommendation. Upon roll call,
the motion passed, 7-0.
PROPERTY DEMOLITION
The Mayor .introduced further consideration of an ordinance ordering
the razing'and removal of an unsafe structure located at 618 West
Lafayette Avenue. •
Director Johnson explained the Board had received a letter from the
property owner, Thad Kelly, indicating that he plans on repairing
the structure, not changing the structure. Johnson stated Kelly had
obtained a building permit and has a contract with a local contractor
to begin work. Director Johnson noted that Phil Colwell (who expressed
concerns at the last meeting) has no objection to the tabling of this
item until the next meeting. Director Johnson, seconded by Bumpass,
made a motion to table the item. Upon roll call, the motion passed,
7-0.
302,
302.1
302.2
302.3
302.4
302.5
302.6
303
November 20, 1984
BID AWARD 1604/MAINTENANCE HANGAR
303.1 The Mayor stated the recommendation is to award Bid 1604 (for a maintenance
hangar) to the low bidder, Structural Systems, for $150,280. The
Mayor noted there were four bids. Director Lancaster, seconded by
lampass, made a motion to award the bid to Structural Systems.
303.2 Airport Manager Dale Frederick asked that the approval include a four-
hour fire wall and exterior sewer lines and system. There was general
agreement by the Directors that this be included.
303.3 Upon roll call, the motion passed, 7-0.
RESOLUTION NO. 135-84 APPEARS ON PAGE OF ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION
BOOK
BID AWARD 1605/1985 REPORT TO THE PEOPLE
303.4 Mayor Noland stated the recommendation is to award Bid 1605 (for the
printing of the 1985 Report To The People to Heritage Press) in the
amount of $11,371.20. The Mayor noted there were several bids.
303.5 Director Orton, seconded by Sharp, made a motion to award the bid
to Heritage Press. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 7-0.
AUDIT CONTRACT
303.6 Director Martin, speaking for the Finance Committee, reported that
12 proposals were received to perform an audit, the professional selection
policy was followed and the selection narrowed down to three firms.
Martin, seconded by lampass, made a motion to approve the Finance
Commitee's recommendation to award the contract to the City's present
auditor, Arthur Young and Company, to perform the financial, compliance
and performance audit over the next four years.
303.7 Director Orton asked Director Martin to explain the performance audit.
Martin explained that audit would involve a comprehensive study by
industrial engineers and specialists in the firm, of the efficiency
and effectiveness of the City's departments. Martin noted that all
firms claimed that the cost savings resulting from their recommendations
would more than offset the audit fee. The Mayor noted that the performance
audit would take place over a three-year period and the financial
and compliance audit over a four-year period. Martin pointed out
also that the performance audit can be terminated after one year,
if the City is not satisfied.
1
1
304
November 20, 1984
Upon roll call, the motion passed, 7-0. 304.1
RESOLUTION NO. 136-84 APPEARS ON PAGE Ir/9 OF ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION
BOOK XX
DIRECTIONAL SIGNS
Mayor Noland introduced further consideration of an ordinance amending
the Sign Ordinance by allowing off-site, free-standing directional
�() signs in industrial zoning districts.
CO The City Attorney explained the matter was tabled at the last meeting
to enable the staff to formulate a recommendation which would be consistent
with other provisions in the ordinance. McCord reported that, after
review, the City Manager (1) recommends that the display surface size
not exceed four square feet, as for directional signs in general;
(2) does not have a recommendation for minimum setback and asks the
Board for a policy decision on that; and (3) recommends adding a provision
that the height not exceed six feet, which is consistent with the
provisions for the R-0 districts.
City Manager Grimes explained that the purpose of the directional
signs in the industrial district is to assist drivers in locating
industries. Grimes suggested a one-year limit on the signs.
1
304.2
304.3
304.4
Director Lancaster made a motion to approve the recommendation that 304.5
the surface size not exeed four square feet and that the sign be set
back one foot from the right-of-way.
It was clarified that the signs would be at the cost of the property 304.6
owner.
Director Johnson asked if, instead of passing an ordinance, the Board
could grant a one-year variance for the signs. The City Attorney
stated, if a request for a variance is submitted, the Board could
grant such a variance including the conditions just discussed.
Director Orton, seconded by Johnson, made a motion to grant a variance 304.8
including the conditions as discussed. Upon roll call, the notion
passed; 7-0.
Director Bumpass stressed that a "directory" sign is still needed 304.9
in the Industrial Park for informational purposes.
304.7
30'
AERO -TECH HANGAR LEASE
November 20, 1984
305.1 Mayor Noland introduced a resolution authorizing the Mayor and the
City Clerk to execute a lease agreement with Aero -Tech Services, Inc. for
the lease of hangar space at Drake Field.
305.2 Director Lancaster, seconded by Johnson, made a notion to approve
the execution of the lease.
305.3 Director Bumpass stated Aero -Tech has agreed to furnish their most
recent financial statements and have agreed to guarantee the lease
payments.
305.4 Upon roll call, the notion passed, 7-0.
RESOLUTION NO. 137-84 APPEARS ON PAGE OF ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION
BOOK
OTHER BUSINESS
Treatment Plant Bids
305.5 Cliff Thompson, representing CH2M Hill, reported that bids were received
that day from four contractors for construction of the Wastewater
Treatment Plant. Thompson reported that the estimate for the first
contract was $20,400,000 and the low bid was $21,295,000. Thompson
stated if all deducts are accepted, it would bring the low bid down
to $21,110,000. Thompson reported the low bidder was Olson Construction
Company out of Dallas. Thompson stated a recommendation will be brought
before the Board in two weeks. Thompson explained a bid award and
a Notice To Proceed must be issued before the end of the year to meet
the necessary requirements.
305.6 Thompson reported the pilot plant is installed and that all plumbing
and electrical connections are being made. Thompson reported that
measures are being discussed to reduce the work scope of the pilot
plant program to reduce the cost to about $475,000, of which 752 would
be grant -eligible, making the City's share somewhat over $100,000.
305.7 Thompson reported the FY85 grant application is currently at EPA and
approval is expected before the end of the year.
NWARRA Meeting
305.8 Director Orton reported that the Resource Recovery Authority would
meet at 1:30 P.M. on November 27 in Room 326.
1
1
i
LO
N
m
Q
November 20, 1984
306
Wage and Salary Committee Meeting
Director Johnson reported that the Wage and Salary Committee would 306.1
meet at 10:30 A.M. on November 27.
•
Aeronautics Commission Funds
Director Johnson reported that the City had received $101,000 from
the Arkansas Aeronautics Commission for airport improvements.
AML Fall Conference
Director Johnson noted that the Arkansas Municipal League will hold
its first Fall Conference from December 13 through 15.
•
Parks Ordinance Correction
The City Attorney explained that there had been an error in drafting
Ordinance 3043 (amending the Parks Ordinance) and he introduced an
ordinance to correct this error. McCord read the ordinance for the
first time. 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, 7-0. McCord read the ordinance 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, 7-0. McCord read
the ordinance for the final time. Upon roll call, the ordinance passed,
7-0. nn
ORDINANCE NO. 3049 APPEARS ON PAGE OF ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION
BOOK XX.
MINUTES
273.2
280.4
Add to that sentence "...and Sandra Carlisle."
"Richarson" should read "Richardson"
Change "...and that this has been delayed several times." to
"...but the sale of bonds has been delayed."
281.1 Change the end of the first sentence to read "...but also
includes additional funds needed for the Resource Recovery
budget for the remainder of the year."
281.2 Delete "Watts explained that Lahontan recommended a financing
package which was not accepted; that Stephens is now the
financial advisor."
306.2
306.3
306.4
306.5
307
November 20, 1984
307.1 285.2 Add after contract "...with the University of Arkansas..."
286.5 Change "Sutherland Memorial Association" to "Southern Memorial
Association"
With those changes and additions, the Minutes were approved as circulated.
ADJOURNMENT
307.2 With no further business before the Board, the meeting adjourned at
about 11:30 P.M.
1
1