HomeMy WebLinkAbout1988-11-01 MinutesMINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE CITY BOARD OF DIRECTORS
•
A. regular meeting of the Fayetteville City Board of Directors was held on
Tuesday, November 1, 1988 at 7:30 p.m. in the Directors' Room of the City
Administration Building at 113 West. Mountain Street. ,
PRESENT: Mayor Johnson, Directors Marinoni, Hess, Lancaster, Martin and
Kelley; City Manager Pennington, City Clerk McWethy, City
Prosecutor Jones; members of the staff, press and audience
ABSENT: Director Bumpass
CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order by the Mayor with six Directorspresent. 341.
CONSENT AGENDA
The Mayor introduced the consent agenda which consistedof the following items: 341.
APPROVE:
A. Minutes of the October 18, 1988 City Board meeting; 341.
Award of Bid 5878 for contract for . road widening and the 341.
construction of turn lanes at the intersection of Old Wire Road
and Township Street; and budget adjustmeint of $25,000;
Recommendation: Award of bid to lowest of two bidders, Jerry 341.
D. Sweetser, Inc.; Bid: $63,938.95; Budget: $40,000.
Because Appleby Road and Joyce Street engineering were below 341.
budget, it is recommended $25,000 be taken from funds
budgeted for those projects and transferred to the Old Wire
Road/Township project.
Rates for snow removal services to be provided by McClinton- 341.
Anchor on an as -needed basis for the 1988-89 winter season;
Recommendation. Approval of rates which remain the same as 341.
those for the last two seasons.
Budget adjustment of $9,000 for City's cost to remove old fuel 341.
tanks from what was formerly the Skyways Fuel Farm at the
Fayetteville Airport;
November 1, 1988
342.1 Recommendation: Approval of the budget adjustment to be
taken from funds originally budgeted for an asbestos removal
project at the Airport which will not take place.
342.2 E. Award of Bid #881, for the sale of a 1964 pumper fire truck;
342.3 Recommendation: Award to the highest of two bidders, West
Fork Rural Fire District, bidding $17,501.99.
RESOLUTIONS:
342.4 F. Authorizing the award of contract for financial audit services for
the years 1988 through 1991;
342.5
342.6
342.7
342.8
Recommendation: Audit Selection Committee (City Directors
Martin and Kelley, City Manager Pennington, Assistant City
Manager Linebaugh, Distinguished Accounting Professor Dr.
Leon Hay, and city accounting staff members Yolanda Perez -
Beltran and Zelda Parson) recommends award of contract to
Coopers and Lybrand. The committee reviewed seven audit
proposals and selected four to give oral presentations.
Not -to -exceed maximum prices:
1988 1989 1990 1991
$45,000 $47,000 $49,000 $51,000
RESOLUTION N0. 79-88 APPEARS ON PAGE OF ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION BOOK
G. Authorizing a one-year agreement with Johnson Controls of Little
Rock, to provide annual routine maintenance of all heating,
ventilating and air-conditioning equipment and systems at the main
terminal building at the Airport;
Recommendation: Award of contract to Johnson Controls,
submitting the lowest of four quotations received. Quote:
$1,640. Airport staff estimates 50% of the cost would be
paid in 1988 and 50% in 1989. 1988 Budget currently contains
$945 to cover the necessary 1988 expense.
RESOLUTION NO. 80-88 APPEARS ON PAGE OF ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION BOOK
342.9 H. Authorizing an amendment to the City Airport's Minority Business
Enterprise Program;
342.10 The amendment would be made at the request of the FAA and
would add a "Summary of Disadvantaged Business Enterprise
(DBE) Provisions" to the Program, replacing separate goals
for "minority and women -owned" firms with a single overall
BOOK
November 1, 1988
goal for "disadvantaged businesses" and amends the Airport's 343
overall goal for contracting with minority and women -owned
firms from 8% to an overall goal of 10% for disadvantaged
businesses.
RESOLUTION NO. ---81-88 APPEARS ON PAGE OF ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION
Director Martin, seconded by Kelley, moved to approve theconsent agenda. upon 343
roll call, the motion passed, 6-0.
REZONING/R88-18
,The Mayor introduced an ordinance rezoning approximately three acres located at 343
the northeast corner of Stonebridge Road and Highway 16 East, from A-1
"Agricultural" to C-2 "Thoroughfare Commercial", submitted by David Ferguson on
behalf of Preston and Eunice Ferguson.
The'Mayor explained the ordinance was read three times on October 4 and tabled on 343
October 4 and 18. It was moved by Martin and seconded by Kelley to remove the
item from the table. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 6-0.
The Mayor reported the Planning Commission, by a vote of 7-1, recommended 343
approval of rezoning the entire parcel to C-2. She said the Planning Management
Director, however, recommended C-2 zoning for only the first 300' of frontage
along the highway.
Engineer Ervan Wimberly was present on behalf of the petitioner. 343
It was clarified by the City Manager that the ordinance which had been read on 343
October 4 was for the entire three -acre parcel, as recommended by the Planning
Commission.
Wimberly noted he had prepared a map (included in
contours and location of a ravine on the property.
scale development process, the City will require, and
drainage easement. He said the owner, in order to
have to provide some storm drainage channelization and
top of that. He said the only usable land would be
the agenda) showing the 343
He said, during the large
the owner will provide, a
utilize the property, will
cannot build directly on
about 225-250' west of the
ditch. He said, when the rezoning was first submitted, Ferguson was not aware of
the triangular piece of property shown on the plat which he does not own. He
said Ferguson would be limited to about a 75' area from the triangle to the
culvert going under the highway, for his sole entrance. He said, by using the
eastern portion, he could have better entrances onto the highway. Wimberly
stressed that he was not presenting a large scale development to the Board but
was asking them to consider rezoning and the best use of the land.
November 1, 1988
144.1 Upon roll call, the ordinance passed, 4-2, Directors Johnson, Lancaster, Martin
and Kelley voting "yes" and Directors Marinoni/and Hess voting "no".
ORDINANCE NO. 3386 APPEARS ON PAGE 'M(0. OF ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION BOOK
7X,V
REZONING/R88-19
344.2 The Mayor introduced an ordinance rezoning .81 acre on the west side of Lee
Avenue, from R-1 "Low Density Residential" to C-2 "Thoroughfare Commercial",
submitted by Jim Hatfield. The Mayor reported the Planning Commission
recommended approval of R-0 "Residential Office" by a vote of 6-0.
344.3 The City Prosecutor read an ordinance, to rezone the property to C-2, for the
first time. Director Martin, seconded by Marinoni, made a motion to suspend the
rules and place the ordinance on its second reading. Upon roll call, the motion
passed, 6-0. The ordinance was read for the second time. Director Martin,
seconded by Marinoni, made a motion to further suspend the rules and place the
ordinance on its third reading. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 6-0. The
ordinance was read for the third time.
344.4 The Mayor asked if anyone present wished to speak against the ordinance. No
public comments were expressed in opposition to the ordinance.
344.5 Director Martin asked what commitment had been made toward paving and guttering
of Lee Avenue. Jim Hatfield said Lee Avenue has been an "approved" street for 31
years and it was his understanding from discussions with City staff that each
property owner as well as the City would participate. He noted Lee Avenue was
200' long.
344.6 In answer to a question from the Mayor, Planning Director Merrell said the City
did not have on file a Bill of Assurance for street improvements for property
which was rezoned last year, and being used for a child care center. Merrell
explained that property, because it is 8/10 acre, is not considered a large scale
development. He told the Board that property was rezoned R-0 "Residential
Office".
344.7 Director Hess asked Merrell who would be responsible for paving and guttering.
Merrell said it would be the responsibility of the City, the property was under
one acre in size, was not a large scale development, and therefore the City
cannot require off-site improvements or paving of the street.
344.8 Martin noted the street receives high usage as a "short-cut". He said he had
received a number of phone calls about the desirability of paving the street for
that reason. He added that it was a dust -generator for the neighborhood.
344.9 Merrell said there were two issues - one was the paving of the street and the
other was additional land that would be required to bring the street to city
•
345
November 1, 1988
standards. Hatfield said he agreed to provide the land and this was part of the
discussion at the Planning Commission meeting.
345
Martin said he thought the City should pave the street to some better standard 345
than it is now.
In answer to a question from the Mayor, Public Works Director Batie said this 345
street was scheduled as a capital improvement project to receive a chip and seal
surface sometime in the next five years.
Director Lancaster said he thought some commitment should be made to the shopping 345
center before there is any plan to build a street.
Director Marinoni asked Hatfield if R-0 zoning would fit his needs. Hatfield 345
said R-0 would not fit his needs and he would prefer to table his request rather
than accept R-0 zoning. He said the property to the west and north was zoned
commercial. He said there is a street to the east and there is R-0 zoning as a
buffer between the residential area and the property under consideration.
In answer to a question from the Mayor, Hatfield said if the property is rezoned 345
commercially, it would be his intention to talk with -the owners of the shopping
center regarding making the property more desirable for him and for the shopping
center.
The Mayor asked if the owner of Lot 4 had any objections to the rezoning. 345
Hatfield said the tenant living on Lot 4 attended one Planning Commission meeting
and expressed a desire to see the street paved.
Hess remarked that the shopping center at any time could decide to build a curb 345
to prevent ingress and egress, and then traffic generated from Hatfield's
property -would end up on Lee Avenue. Hatfield said if the shopping center did
that, he'd probably just continue keeping the lot mowed.
-In answer to a question from Hess, Hatfield said he was reasonably confident he 345
would be able to negotiate with the shopping center owners to have ingress and
egress off the existing parking area. He said the tenants of the shopping center
were in favor of his plan. He said he would try to direct traffic on and off the
existingparking lot. He said he didn't believe there would be a business on the
lot that would generate a lot of traffic.
The Mayor asked for the Planning Director's recommendation. Merrell said his 345
recommendation was in line with that of the Planning Commission, to rezone to R-0
without a Bill of Assurance.
Director Marinoni moved to amend the ordinance to rezone the property to R-0.
The motion was seconded by Johnson. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 5-1,
Directors Marinoni, Johnson, Lancaster, Martin and Kelley voting "yes" and
Director Hess voting "no".
345
There was no vote taken on the ordinance, as amended. 345
November 1, 1988
346.1 There was no first reading of the amended ordinance.
346.2 The Mayor declared the ordinance, to rezone to R-0, would be considered at the
next meeting.
346.3 Hatfield asked what information he needed to provide the Board for its next
meeting. The Mayor said Hatfield could provide the Board with additional
information relative to ingress and egress to the shopping center parking lot.
She said she was concerned about the possibility of commercial traffic going onto
Lee Street rather than into the parking lot.
346.4 Hess said he voted "no" because this is a problem property. He said with
Hatfield's assurance that the traffic would be directed in and out of the parking
lot, he thinks C-2 would be a more appropriate use for the property.
346.5 Johnson asked if he had to get the agreement of the shopping center owner to have
ingress and egress off their parking lot. Hatfield said if the City improves the
street, it would take the shopping center's curb away, and there would be natural
access. The Mayor suggested the City staff work on a different plan, commenting
that the last thing we want is an exit from Hatfield's lot right into the car
wash. Merrell said the staff would be glad to review that issue.
QUIT CLAIM DEED
346.6 The Mayor introduced a request for a resolution authorizing the Mayor and City
Clerk to execute a Quit Claim deed to property owners for .10 acre of land which
was acquired by the City in 1981 for purposes of drainage maintenance. She
explained it was later discovered the property was not accurately described in
the warranty deed and was not the location of the actual drainage channel.
346.7 Director Martin, seconded by Kelley, moved approval of the transfer of the
property. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 6-0.
RESOLUTION NO. 82-88 APPEARS ON PAGE OF ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION BOOK
UNSIGHTLY PROPERTIES
346.8 The Mayor introduced an ordinance ordering the abatement of unsightly conditions
and the razing and removal of unsafe structures at 1310 W. Pettigrew Street, 228
S. Block Avenue, 312 S. Block Avenue, 1750 Stone Street, 1519 W. Sixth Street,
1159 E. Farmer Drive and 803 Storer Avenue; left on first reading on October 18.
346.9 Director Marinoni, seconded by Martin, moved the rules be suspended and the
ordinance placed on its second reading. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 6-0.
The ordinance was read for the second time.
347
November 1, 1988
Merrell reported the property at 228 S. Block was issued a building permit on 347
October 17, with a provision that progress must be shown every thirty days.
Merrell said nothing has been done on that property as of yet. He reported the
property at 312 S. Block was issued a building permit today, with progress to be
shown within twenty days.
Director Martin, seconded by Kelley, moved that 228 S. Block and 312 S. Block be 347
removed from the ordinance, Upon roll call, the motion passed, 6-0.
Director Marinoni, seconded by Martin, moved the rules be further suspended and 347
the ordinance be placed on its third and final reading. Upon roll call, the
motion passed, 5-1, with Johnson voting in the minority. The ordinance, as
amended, was read for the third time.
Merrell said he would provide an update on these properties at the next Board 347
meeting.
The Mayor asked if anyone present wished to speak against the ordinance. No 347
public opposition was expressed.
Upon roll call, the ordinance passed, 6-0. 347
ORDINANCE NO. 3387 APPEARS ON PAGE y/F OF ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION BOOK
XX/V
UNSIGHTLY PROPERTY/1710 STONE STREET
The Mayor introduced an ordinance ordering the abatement of unsightly conditions 347
and the razing and removal of an unsafe structure located at 1710 Stone Street
and owned by Hank Mahler.
The ordinance was read for the first time. 347
Director Martin asked why this ordinance seemed to be worded differently than the 347
previous ordinance, commenting that he did not recall any property owners' names
being cited in the previous ordinance, nor the manner of demolition being
described in the previous ordinance. City Prosecutor Jones said there was a
description in the previous ordinance although it may not have been quite as
complete, directed at J. W. Eoff, Delmack, Inc., Kermit and Lorene Watkins, Hank
Mahler, Raymond Phillips, Kenneth Hanshew, Ernest Ray Keown and Ruby Owens.
Martin said he thought there was no reason the City should make reference to
personalities.
Hess said this was the first time he had heard names read in an ordinance of this 347
type, and suggested perhaps the City Attorney normally skips over the names and a
lot of the language when he reads these ordinances. Hess asked if Mahler had
been notified as to the intent of the ordinance.
November 1, 1988
348.1 Property Inspector Wilson reported the violation notice was hand -carried to Hank
Mahler's wife, Nancy Mahler, on August 25, 1988 when he was making an inspection
of another house owned by Mahler.
348.2 Steve Cummings, speaking from the audience, asked when was the last time a
residence was razed in Fayetteville. Merrell said the last house razed was one
located on Rollston which was demolished about three weeks ago. Cummings asked
if a lien is placed on such property. The Mayor said this is done when the
property owner does not comply with the ordinance within a thirty -day period
after the ordinance is passed.
348.3 Cummings said this was the first day he knew of the ordinance, and stated he held
the Note and Mortgage against the property, although Mahler has equity in the
property. He assured the Board that neither 1710 and 1750 Stone (included in the
ordinance previously passed) would be rented until he had an opportunity to visit
with the City property inspector. He told the Board he could not foreclose on
the Note tomorrow, although he considered Mahler to be in default on a contract.
He asked for time to either renovate or sell the property to someone who would
agree to repair it to the City's specifications.
348.4 The Mayor told Cummings he would have thirty days before the ordinance on 1750
Stone Street takes effect and, at that time, the City Manager would solicit bids
for demolition. She recommended Cummings talk with the City Manager regarding
holding off on the demolition, and talk with the Property Inspector regarding
what needs to be done to bring 1710 Stone Street up to city standards.
348.5 Director Kelley asked how Mr. Cummings could be given more time on both
properties.
348.6 The City Prosecutor advised that if Cummings is selling the property to Mahler by
a contract for deed, the City may not have given notice to the proper owner to
effect the ordinance. Jones said that, if it's a mortgage situation where Mahler
has legal title and Cummings is simply a Note holder, then it could take three to
six months to foreclose on the mortgage.
348.7 Kelley asked if 1710 and 1750 could be removed from the ordinances, table them
for thirty days, and get an update from the staff in thirty days.
348.8 Cummings said it was not a mortgage situation, but a contract for sale. Jones
said, in that case, he would presuppose the City had not given notice to the
record title owner, since notice was given to Mahler. Jones advised the staff
could be directed to ignore both properties. The Mayor suggested the Board
direct the City Manager to ignore 1750 Stone Street for a specified period of
time, and leave the other ordinance (1710 Stone Street) on the table, without
moving it to its second or third reading, to be brought up in a specified period
of time. She asked the Board what time period they wished to set for ignoring
1750 Stone, and for how long they wished to leave 1710 Stone on first reading.
348.9 With Cummings reassuring the Board he would guarantee the residences would not be
November 1, 1988
occupied, the Mayor suggested for safety considerations the doors may need to be 349
nailed shut.
It was moved by Marinoni and seconded by Hess to table 1710 Stone Street for four 349
months. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 6-0.
TAXI SUBSIDY PROGRAM
The Mayor introduced consideration of a resolution authorizing the Mayor and City 349
Clerk to execute a contract with the Area Agency on Aging of Northwest Arkansas,
for the operation of a taxicab subsidy program for low-income elderly persons.
Elaine Walker, from the Northwest Arkansas Regional Planning Commission, was
present to speak on behalf of the program
Walker explained the program would operate with coupons, and once a citizen is
declared eligible, he or she would receive a set number of coupons each month,
valued at $2.00 apiece. Walker said she recommended issuing eight coupons per
month per person. She said such a program has been successfully operating in
Springdale since 1983, and another in Ft. Smith has been operating for two years.
She said that Lifestyles in Fayetteville has been using such a program for their
clients, working with the local taxi company.
Walker said very little administrative overhead would be .needed to operate the
program She said it would utilize existing resources by using the C & H Taxi
Company, and providing added income for the owner of the company. She said there
would be no capital costs, insurance or liability for the City of Fayetteville.
349
349
Walker said she thought the program provides mobility for the elderly. She said 349
in her evaluations of the Springdale program, she has been told by the users that
they are receiving good, prompt and courteous service from the taxi company
drivers. She said the coupons are used as money towards the cost of a ride in a
taxi. Walker explained the taxi company sends a monthly bill to the City to
receive reimbursement, after which the City is reimbursed by the Area Office on
Aging. Walker said in 1983 when the program first started, the Area Office on
Aging paid 5O% of program costs, but now they are paying 85% of program costs.
Walker said the Area Office on Aging has provided $2,000 between now and the end
of the year to be used for "startup" costs, such as printing of coupons and
identification cards. She said an additional $4,000 is allocated for the City
for 1989. She said one City of Springdale employee spends a maximum of two hours
per month administering the program
It was moved by Kelley and seconded by Hess to approve the resolution.
349
The Mayor clarified that the administrative side of the program would be handled 349
by the Fayetteville Community Development Department.
Upon roll call, the motion passed, 6-0.
349
November 1, 1988
RESOLUTION NO. 83-88 APPEARS ON PAGE OF ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION BOOK
RECODIFICATION CONTRACT
350.1 The Mayor introduced consideration of the award of contract for services to
recodify the Fayetteville Code of Ordinances; and an ordinance waiving the
requirements of competitive bidding. The Mayor said the City Manager recommended
the award of contact to American Legal Publishing Company, proposing a not -to -
exceed figure of $22,750. The Mayor said a staff selection committee followed
the City's Professional Contract Policy in recommending the firm after evaluating
four proposals which were submitted to do the work.
350.2 City Prosecutor Jones read the ordinance for the first time. Director Marinoni,
seconded by Hess, made a motion to suspend the rules and place the ordinance on
its second reading. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 6-0. The ordinance was
read for the second time. Director Marinoni, seconded by Hess, made a motion to
further suspend the rules and place the ordinance on its third and final reading.
Upon roll call, the motion passed, 6-0. The ordinance was read for the third
time.
ORDINANCE NO. 3388 APPEARS ON PAGE 7fol y OF ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION BOOK
XX/ \l
350.3 It was moved by Hess and seconded by Kelley to approve the award of contract to
American Legal Publishing Company. Upon roll call, the motion passed, 6-0.
NOTICE OF APPEAL
350.4 The Mayor introduced consideration of whether to hear an appeal from a decision
of the Planning Commission to approve a large scale development plan for the
Village Apartments, filed by Wade Bishop.
350.5 The Mayor explained the appeal may be heard only if a majority of the Board votes
to hear the appeal.
350.6 Director Martin asked what basis should be used by the Board in voting whether to
hear an appeal. The Mayor said if the Board votes to hear an appeal, she assumed
another time should be set to give all persons desiring to be heard an
opportunity to speak, and following the hearing the Board may affirm, modify or
reverse the finding of the Planning Commission.
350.7 Martin asked if the Board, in hearing an appeal, has to believe there was some
important fact not considered that should have been considered. Hess said he had
the same question. Martin said, if the Planning Commission considered all the
facts, he thought the Board needed to be faithful to the process whether or not
they agree with the Commission's decision. He said if the Commission didn't
November 1, 1988
;ibl
consider an important fact he was sure they, and the Board, would want the matter 351
heard.
City Prosecutor Jones advised the Board that, if they chose not to hear the
appeal, the petitioner will have exhausted his administrative remedies and may
appeal to the court. He said it would be an extension of the administrative
process for the Board to chose to hear the appeal.
Hess asked if the Board should grant the hearing just because it is requested or
if there were legal guidelines for the Board to consider in order to grant an
appeal. He said if the appeal was going to be a re -hash of all the information
the Planning Commission considered, he questioned whether the Board could do
anything. Jones said, like a court, the Board could hear the entire matter over
again, or could pick selected issues pointed to by the petitioner. Jones told
the Board the rules simply were that decisions of the Planning Commission are
appealable to the City Board
The Mayor stated the Notice of Appeal should specifically state the reasons the
appellant contends the Planning Commission's findings and decision were in error.
Marinoni pointed out the Notice of Appeal stated the reason to be that the
"commission erred . . . by not adequately considering that the proposed
development would create or compound a dangerous traffic condition."
Director Martin asked the petitioner, Wade Bishop, in what respect the traffic
question was not properly heard. Wade Bishop asked Attorney Bob Estes to speak
on his behalf. Estes said he was a resident of 222 Jason Street in the Regency
North Subdivision north of Appleby. He asked the Board to vote to hear the
appeal, stating the Planning Commission erred in not considering five issues
related to traffic. He stated the Commission:
(1) did not consider the traffic count on Drake Street, and no evidence was
presented to the Commission regarding traffic counts on Drake Street.
He said this was an important matter because the applicant produced a
witness that testified before the Commission that 80% of the traffic
generated by the Village Apartments would exit on Drake Street;
(2) did not consider the cost of any capital improvements to the Drake
Street/71 North intersection. He said this was important because the
applicant's witness testified that 80% of the traffic generated by the
development would exit on Drake Street. He said the only way to exit
from Drake Street is on Highway 71 North and presently consists of one
stop sign;
(3)
did not consider the cost of the capital improvement to Drake Street
West to intersect with Drake Street. He said this was particularly
important because Commissioner Robertson, who voted for the
development, did so with the caveat that the Drake Street improvement
be expedited. He said the Commission heard nothing regarding the costs
of such an improvement;
351
351
351
351
351
351
351
v v •..
November 1, 1988
352.1 (4) erred when they gave no consideration to traffic flow resulting from
improved Appleby Drive as opposed to unimproved Appleby Drive. He said
there were a number of developments on West Appleby. He said the
Commission took no evidence, gave no consideration, and heard no
witness regarding increased traffic flows resulting from improved
Appleby as opposed to unimproved Appleby; and
352.2 (5) did not consider the cost of improvement to Appleby/71 North
intersection. He said it was a ninety degree intersection with one
stop sign. He said no consideration was given to the cost of
signalization of the intersection.
352.3 Hess asked if the thrust of reconsidering the five issues would be for the
developer to be required to do more off-site improvements. Estes said one answer
could be "yes" but another answer could be to wait until the City has a
comprehensive land use plan in place. Hess said the land was properly zoned for
its proposed use and asked if the argument was the impact of the number of
apartments in that area in terms of traffic congestion it could create, and
alleged lack of due consideration on the part of the Planning Commission. Estes
said that was correct, and remarked that if the project is built as proposed it
would not only require but would mandate that some improvements be made.
352.4 Martin asked if the Board could hear from others. The Mayor cautioned the Board
against hearing the issue now, noting that others would need to be notified in
order to give them an opportunity, to speak. She advised the Board to consider
the five points raised by Estes in deciding whether or not to hear the appeal.
The City Manager stated that, if an appeal is to be held, the public would be
notified so that every interested party may participate at that time.
352.5 Hess asked if the Planning Commission can ask for off-site improvements for a
large scale development. Planning Director Merrell said that was correct. Hess
asked if the Commission could decide not to ask for any off-site improvements if
they felt the improvements were not necessary. Merrell said the Commission's
decision incorporated the recommendations of the Plat Review Committee which he
said did address improvements to Appleby Road for the 100 feet of frontage along
the road. Hess said three of the five points raised by Estes pertained to Drake,
one to Appleby, and one to the intersection of Appleby and 71 North. Hess said
those apparently weren't considered or were dismissed as being unnecessary.
Merrell said he thought whether or not they were considered was a debatable
point, since it was obvious that Estes felt they were not considered.
352.6 Engineer Ery Wimberly said he took exception to Estes' comments and felt the
Planning Commission studied the development very carefully. He said the
development was before the Commission on three different occasions. He said the
Chairman of the Transportation Advisory Committee for the Regional Planning
Commission and the City Traffic Superintendent Perry Franklin advised the
Commission on the impact of the development both on Drake and Appleby. He said
the development was also considered by the Plat Review and Subdivision
Committees.
1
•
3
November 1, 1988
Hess asked for comments from Planning Commission Chairman Ernest Jacks. Jacks
said he had not heard the five objections before. He said the cost of Drake
Street to the west was known, as it was included in both the CIP (capital
improvement program) and the TIP (transportation improvement program) He said
the Commission understood that, once Drake was extended to Gregg, probably some
of the other considerations wouldn't be factors anymore. He said the cost of the
improvements of the intersections of Appleby at College and Drake at College
weren't considered by the Commission, but. costs were not generally matters for
the Commission to be concerned with in the planning stage. Hess remarked that
there obviously was a lot of controversy at the Planning Commission meeting since
the vote was 5-4 on the development. Jacks said he thought the Commission felt
the development had been well -considered, being on their agenda three times.
Martin said it seemed to him that major developers would find it chilling to 353
find the traffic repercussions many blocks away affecting the approval or
disapproval of their particular project. Martin said he wasn't sure this
development should be made to bear the cost of certain traffic improvements
anymore than Bishop should have to bear the cost of traffic improvements to
Highway 71 or Stubblefield Road, or other places. Martin said property that was
appropriately zoned should be appropriately developed.
35:
Hess said he thought impact on the surrounding area had to be considered, said it
may not be reasonable to ask the developer to improve the intersection at Appleby
and 71 North, but it might be reasonable to ask the developer to make some
improvements on Appleby or Drake. Hess said he asked the engineering firm of
Northwest Engineers if Wimberly might suggest to the developer that there be an
additional ingress and egress onto Appleby Wimberly said the developer made
such an offer. Jacks said he thought the fact that Drake Street is on the TIP
and CIP was a large factor in the Planning Commission's decision.
The Mayor asked the Board to decide whether or not to hear the appeal.
353
353
It was moved by Martin and seconded by Marinoni that the appeal be denied. Upon 353
roll call, the motion passed, 6-0.
The Mayor noted that the extension of Drake Street was included in the CIP. The
City Manager pointed out that the CIP was contingent upon funding from the
proposed sales tax. Traffic Superintendent Perry Franklin said, if the sales tax
passes, the CIP does include signalization of the intersection of Appleby Road
and College Avenue. Franklin said ideal placement for the signal would be south
of the present intersection. The Mayor also noted that Appleby is presented
under construction right now.
SUNRISE.MOUNTAIN WATER DISTRICT
The Mayor introduced a request from Attorney Lamar Pettus, on behalf of property
owners living in the Sunrise Mountain area, for the City of Fayetteville to take
over, upgrade and maintain water service to the Sunrise Mountain area
353
353
v
November 1, 1988
354.1 Pettus told the Board he was representing the Sunrise Homeowners Association,
made up of people living on Sunrise Mountain. He said many years ago they
elected to build their own water system when the City chose not to extend water
to them. He said since then there had been a lot of controversy over future
development in the area which had always been resisted by the Board and Planning
Commission because there were not adequate utility facilities on the mountain.
He said because of defects in the water system, meetings were held with various
City staff to try to come up with a solution to the problems. He said
engineering studies had been done. Pettus said the City staff has indicated the
type of project the City would prefer to supply water to the area would cost
around $200,000. Pettus said the homeowners request the Board authorize a study
to be done by the City and engage in negotiations with owners in the area to come
up with a solution for water service to the area with a system operated and
maintained by the City. He said he didn't know of any other developed area in
the City with a water system owned by homeowners which is connected to the City
main almost 3/4 of a mile away from their pump station. Pettus said his clients
didn't object to the City building an 8" line, but in view of contributions to be
made by homeowners, asked that the City consider these factors - (1) that the 2"
line from Highway 71 which connects to the pump station that supplies Sunrise
Mountain would supply adequate water if it were replaced with a 4" line; (2) a
bid was sought from a local contractor who indicated he could install a 4" line
for approximately $20,000. He said just the material for an 8" line would cost
about $21,000. Pettus asked if the City would also consider building the
property in stages, with owners helping to pay for part of the cost. He said the
residents are not interested in the future development of the area, and do not
feel the individual homeowner should have to pay the cost of an upgraded 8" full-
scale system for future developers.
354.2 Pettus said he felt an ordinance could be passed to ensure that future developers
would pay a premium price to help offset the City's costs for the initial
development of the line. He pointed out a similar ordinance was passed for the
Shadowridge residents recently, which authorized the construction of the sewer
line, required the residents to pay an ordinary tap fee to hook onto the sewer,
with a fee being charged for those who hooked on within 120 days and then a.
larger fee was charged for those hooking on after 120 days.
354.3 Director Marinoni asked whether it was likely the users could form an improvement
district to accomplish their purposes. Pettus said they would prefer other
alternatives first. He said they would prefer the City bearing the burden of a
major portion of the initial project, yet still have some kind of fee structure
for future developers. Pettus said the City could also join with the property
owners in building a lesser system.
354.4 Martin suggested the staff bring an analysis of alternatives to the Board within
the next couple of weeks, including costs and financing alternatives. Pettus
said that was exactly what he was requesting. He said, although the staff has
been cooperative for almost 15 months, and because of the political history of
the subdivision he felt there needed to be a commitment from the Board. Pettus
said the property owners would prefer to pay the cost of a 2" system, towards the
building of an 8" system. He said realistically they thought it was fair for the
355
November 1, 1988
.City to recommend a 4" system as necessary and therefore, they based their cost 355
estimates on the 4" system.
It was moved by Hess and seconded by Martin to ask the staff to come up with a 355
series of proposals and recommendations.
The City Manager said it was impossible to get a report to the Board in the month 355
of November and suggested one could be prepared by mid-December.
Upon roll call, the motion passed, 6-0. 355
OTHER BUSINESS
CABLE TV FRANCHISE HEARING RE -SET
The Mayor asked that the Board re -set the date for public hearing to be held on 355
the cable television franchise ordinance, which was originally set for November
10. The Mayor asked that the hearing be re -set for Monday, November 21 at the
Continuing Education Center. She said the public hearing would be televised on
Fayetteville Open Channel.
AMENDMENT N0. 4
The Mayor introduced a request for approval of a resolution: endorsing proposed 355
Constitutional Amendment No. 4 (to repeal the personal property tax on household
goods).
Marinoni said he was personally opposed to the amendment and would vote against 355
such a resolution.
Johnson said she favored the amendment, from the City's standpoint, because it 355
makes it as easy to raise every tax as it is to institute a sales tax.
Hess said he favored the amendment but was not sure the City should go on,record 355
as approving or disapproving the amendment.
HILLCREST TOWERS' PETITION
The City Manager asked the Police Chief to report on concerns expressed in a 355
petition from residents of Hillcrest Towers.
Chief Watson reported Sam Guido had complained that residents of Hillcrest Towers 355
felt their parking,lots were not receiving adequate police protection.' He said
records from January 1 were checked and three complaints were found, one for a
stolen vehicle, one a complaint from Guido, and one a complaint from a man whose
car had been vandalized. He said he felt this was a minimal amount of complaints
for that periodof time. He said the Police Department had addressed the area as
far as extra patrol, and had given foot patrol to the area. He said he felt the
area was receiving more than adequate protection. He said if patrolling were
November 1, 1988
356.1 based on the number of incidents, Hillcrest Towers would be at the very bottom of
the priority list.
356.2 Watson said his research of the complaints did not address calls that are
normally received, such as reports of suspicious activity, but only addressed
actual incidents of damage or theft in the parking lots.
356.3 The City Manager said Guido would be provided with the same report received by
the Board.
"YOU CAN" PROGRAM
356.4 Hess asked that the staff get information about the "You Can" program to the
Board to review at the agenda meeting on November 9.
CITIZEN COMMENTS
356.5 Dr. John W. King addressed the Board, stating he was working for the University
of Arkansas and was a concerned citizen against the proposed ban on herbicides.
King showed slides to the Board which gave information about a possible
"vegetation management" program with the use of herbicides.
356.6 Dr. Ron Talbert addressed the Board, stating he was a professor at the University
of Arkansas and Chairman of a University weed science group. He said it was
ironic that in Fayetteville, where there is a renowned center of excellence in
weed science, that such a controversy about herbicide usage would develop. He
said he didn't blame citizens for being upset about inappropriate use of
herbicide products on the streets and sidewalks, but said he thought it was a
very serious overreaction to propose a ban on products which can safely be used
with great savings in human toil and expense. Talbert said he believed presently
labeled herbicides were safe by a margin of at least 100 times, and generally
1,000 times, and often millions of times. Talbert said he thought the problem in
Fayetteville has been communication, stating his group was willing to advise the
city or train workers to guarantee a safe and economically sound program of
vegetation management. He said they were now in communication with the Public
Works Department through Bob Kelly [city employee] and hoped to formalize this as
an official advisory group so that the citizens can have a renewed confidence in
the use of herbicide technology.
356.7 The Mayor said reports had been circulating that the product "Roundup" presently
being used by the City causes cancer. She asked if this was true. Dr. Talbert
said he read the advisory report being discussed and, although additional studies
have been called for, there was no indication that Roundup causes cancer. Dr.
King said two independent research articles show that Roundup is not even a
mutagen, a precondition to causing cancer. He said the reports circulating were
part of the "fear and hysteria" being brought on to the community.
356.8 The Mayor asked if the City had any liability from use of herbicide spray. King
said he understood the City's cost for repairing cars and broken windshield is
about $3,000 this year compared to the cost of about $100 this year to replace
•
U V
November 1; 1988
some damaged plants.. He said he thought mowing was ten times more dangerous, and
herbicide application would be -approximately 1/4 the cost of mowing.
357
Marinoni asked about the process by which these products are cleared for use by 357
the public. Talbert said it was the.. essentially the same program undergone by
medicines. He said the FDA, USDA and the EPA all have to agree that a product is
safe. He said the State Plant Board regulates pesticide use in Arkansas. He
said the approval process usually takes about seven years and is a very expensive
process.
King said we were ingesting ten -times the carcinogens in our natural foods 357
supply, commenting that alfalfa sprouts and peanut butter, for example, have
natural carcinogens. He said humans can handle those low doses of carcinogens.
He said the only two kinds of cancer that have increased in the last fifty years
are lung cancer and skin cancer.
Hess said he hoped the staff would take the professors up on their offer to help 357
the City.
Public Works Director Mike Batie asked Bob Kelly to explain some research he had .357
done on a California city which banned herbicides. Kelly said Cotati,
California, a small community just outside of San Francisco, banned herbicides in
1978. He said the group that led the ban, in 1986, got .the herbicides
reinstated. He said a staunch supporter of the ban told him "the weeds in our
parks are out of control." Kelly said they were confused on the issue when it
first came out and there was a lot of scientific misinformation.
Kelly estimated it would cost the City of Fayetteville an additional $387,500 per 357
year to for day-to-day maintenance without using herbicides.
In answer to a question from Cyrus Young, Dr. King said that Roundup degrades 357
into phosphorus, nitrate, carbon dioxide and water.
A.citizen asked if the City had investigated the cost of responsibly going about 357
a herbicide program He said a lot of people feel the program being implemented
this past summer was irresponsible.
Mayor Johnson said she thought the City was looking into a training program for 357
those employees who will be doing spraying work. Dr. King said the program will
include licensing the personnel.
King said research shows Roundup is less dangerous as a skin irritant than 357
Johnson's. Baby Shampoo. A citizen Said Roundup is now being investigated by the
EPA as suspected of causing cancer.
CHANGE IN MEETING TIME
Director Marinoni suggested the Board move its regular meeting up from 7:30 p.m. 357
to 7:00 p.m. because of daylight savings time. Director Kelley commented that a
lot of citizens are already accustomed to the 7:30 time.
November 1, 1988
358.1 The Mayor suggested this be discussed at the next agenda meeting.
ADJOURNMENT
358.2 The meeting adjourned at 10:40 p.m.