Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996-10-01 MinutesMINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL A meeting of the Fayetteville October 1, 1996, at 6:30. p.m. Administration Building, 113 W. 389 City Council was held on Tuesday, , in the Council Room of the City Mountain, Fayetteville, Arkansas. PRESENT: Mayor Fred Hanna; Aldermen Cyrus Young, Woody Bassett, Steve Parker, Heather Daniel, Stephen Miller, and Kit Williams; City Attorney Jerry Rose; City Clerk/Treasurer Traci Paul; members of staff; press; and audience. ABSENT: Aldermen Jimmy Hill and Len Schaper. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Hanna called the meeting to order with six aldermen present. EPA AWARD Mayor Hanna officially recognized the City's first award from the Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6 office, for our sludge management program at the Paul R. Noland Wastewater Treatment Plant. This was the 1996 Environmental Excellence State Award for Beneficial Use of Biosolids. Billy Ammons, OMI, accepted the award. OLD BUSINESS UNDERGROUND UTILITIES Mayor Hanna introduced consideration of an ordinance requiring underground utility wires, lines, and/or cables in new residential developments requiring Planning Commission approval and in new commercial developments. This ordinance was left on its first reading at the September 17 Council meeting. City Attorney Rose suggested leaving this on the table and his reading the ordinance that came out of the Ordinance Review Committee. He read this ordinance for the first time. Mayor Hanna noted this at the last meeting. Alderman Bassett asked made. ordinance is different than the one tabled City Attorney Rose to point out the changes City Attorney Rose noted that in Section 1 we have deleted that the underground utilities shall be placed there at the developer's expense. We remain silent as to that and expect the utility company and the developer to work it out with the help, if 1 390 October 1, 1996 • necessary, of the Arkansas Public Service Commission. Rather than having.a separate Section 4 for omitting transmission lines, we have included that in Section 3 -of the ordinance ].ust read. ._In terms of street widenings and street extensions, we have omitted •that..+' -"The ordinance will,not apply to street ."widenings,.street extensions, or other geographical improvements. Itwill apply only `to these new commercial developments and residential developments . requiring Planning Commission approval. - Alderman Bassett stated there was a consensusat the -Ordinance Review Committee meeting that this is about as good as we can get it: The changes are good ones. There is some concern about the language eliminated in Section 1. Alderman Daniel read from a Planning Commissioner Odom's letter that had been distributed to the Council which stated it was his intent and the intent of the Unified Ordinance Committee to include the requirement that allutilities be placed underground on newly developed roads or roads that were being widened. Alderman Daniel stated she would like to see an estimate required of the utility companies to be presented to staff and Planning Commission when streets are widened so that it could be considered at the time. Alderman Williams stated what had been decided is that this must be decided on a case by case z basis, when it comes before the City Council. It was the sense of the Ordinance Review Committee that it would like the staff to do an estimate of the cost. This can be done informally administratively or we can do a resolution asking the staff to do. Alderman Parker stated that when utility companies are rcoming up with the additional costs for moving buried'lines-for street widenings, there is a provision.. that the utility company is -to charge $2 per customer per month for that service. The utility company should advise the Council if there is going to be any payback over time and staff should consider that when doing the cost report. -. Mayor Hanna asked for comments from the audience. Tommy Deweese, SWEPCO, had reservations about dropping the developer's expense in the ordinance but could work it out. There were no further comments from the audience. Mayor Hanna brought the discussion back to the Council. Alderman Bassett moved to go to the second reading. Alderman Young seconded. Upon roll call, the motion passed on a vote of 6 -to 0: 391 October 1, 1996 City Attorney Rose read the ordinance for the second time. Alderman Williams asked if this applies to lot splits. City Planning Director Little indicated it does not. Alderman Williams stated it was not the sense of the Council to require people who already have electrical utility service over ground to undo that and bury it. He asked if this is for new development only. Ms. Little indicated it is. Alderman Parker moved to suspend the rules and go on to the third and final reading. Alderman Miller seconded. Upon roll call, the motion passed on a vote of 6 to 0. City Attorney Rose read the ordinance for the third time. There being no further comments, Mayor Hanna called for the vote. Upon roll call, the ordinance passed on a vote of 6 to 0. ORDINANCE 3997 APPEARS ON PAGE OF ORDINANCE BOOB COMMERCIAL DESIGN STANDARDS Mayor Hanna introduced consideration of an ordinance amending Chapter 160: Zoning of the Code of Fayetteville to provide site development and architectural design standards for commercial, office, institutional, and industrial uses. City Attorney Rose suggested leaving this on the table and considering the revised draft that came out of the Ordinance Review Committee. He read this ordinance for the first time. Alderman Bassett stated there have been a number of lengthy discussions on this. There was general agreement in the Ordinance Review Committee with minor disagreement on sections A, B, and C; but, basically, a consensus was reached. Some substantial disagreement occurred under Section D. The consensus was to go ahead and get this passed, but outline what they did not want to see and get something on the books about that. There was also substantial discussion about a visual preference survey. City Attorney Rose put this draft together after that meeting. Alderman Daniel read from Alderman Schaper's letter of September 25 regarding Section D. 3 is 392. October 1, 1996 Alderman Williams stated Alderman Schaper would have opportunity -t6 explain his terms as this was not going to be rushed through at this meeting. There was -consensus at the Ordinance Review Committee meeting. What was arrived at was a conservative, least - restrictive ordinance that does not say what you should build, only don't build an ugly duckling. There are variances for someone who wants,to build a building that some would consider ugly if he has good reasons and can explain them. An important aspect is that this no longer applies to industrial activity. Alderman Parker stated the one phrase that is really helpful in understanding what this ordinance might do is the restriction that says, "A development should provide compatibility and transition between adjoining developments." This will allow development to transition:without a jumbled look and will do a lot towards keeping Fayetteville beautiful as we expand He was one of the ones who did not want to eliminateportions of this that said what we do want but had yielded to the consensus that anything well designed, compatible, and that generally follows these rules will be accepted. He supported the.idea of: incorporating in the near future a visual preference survey. Alderman Bassett reiterated this in no way is an effort to stifle creativity. It is not designed for unduly hamper commercial development. This is simply an effort to have some protection from thosebuildings or development's that don't fit. They are.few.and far between. Alderman Williams stated they also tried .to streamline the review process. This has been targeted toward the problems we've had; which are few and far between. Alderman Young stated this ordinance is basically what the Planning Commission brought forward, except for section D in which we are considering a visual preference survey. The Planning. Commission was considering this but could notdecide which way to go: An ordinance can be revisited. If a problem comes up,' we can add it later. Alderman Miller commented that any reference to lighting -has been omitted from this ordinance He:Has had several: commentsfrbm people regarding light pollution. ' He hada question regarding trees being planted at a ratio of one tree to 30': He asked if this would allow a landowner to plant every 20'. He suggested adding "minimum" to the ratio. He also noted neighborsshould be protected from seeing trash enclosures. Mayor Hanna opened the discussion to the public. • 393 October 1, 1996 Jim Foster, Chairman of the American Institute of Architects Northwest Arkansas, stated they support reasonable constraints on design, especially when they spring from the community, such as a visible preference survey. He understood the architectural portions of the ordinance being considered were temporary in nature to fix ugly buildings happening now. He hoped this is temporary. The AIA would like to collaborate with the City on a visual preference survey to develop a better long-term regulation and process. David Glasser, AIA, stated he had given Alett Little materials which included zoning ordinances from a number of cities. He wanted to make a strong case for the visual preference survey. People generally opt for things they value most. Once a visual preference survey is in place, you have a broad-based body of information to refer to. Nothing contributes more to the value of property than these kinds of standards. He urged the Council to vote for this document and to consider implementing the visual preference survey. Connie Cramer, Friends for Fayetteville, applauded the purposes stated in Section 1. She urged the passing of the ordinance as soon as possible and hoped for the commission of the visual preference survey. Tom McKinney, Ozark Headwaters Group of the Sierra Club, urged the Council to pass this ordinance. Many folks try to convince that voluntary standards are the way to go; however, those who espouse that view are usually the ones who don't want to be covered by any regulatory standards. Those who are trying to be good citizens are not protected. He urged the Council to pass the ordinance and stated the survey was an excellent idea and offered the Club's help. Tera Little, audience member, stated it is crucial to implement the visual preference survey. One issue that has been brought up is the fear of industry leaving the area because of this ordinance; but a contradicting example is Wal -mart, which tried to go into Lawrence, Kansas. Lawrence would not let them come in because they have guidelines. Wal -mart did conform with the guidelines and is now using it as an example for new stores. Regarding stifling architectural creativity, you can do all sorts of different styles and still adhere to these guidelines. Not everything has to look the same. Jim Gaddis, audience member, passed out to the Council an article written by someone in the forestry program. He had highlighted a portion regarding how well-intentioned landscaping projects end up causing problems. He wanted the ordinance to address this. He'd 5 • • • X 394 October 1, 1996 also highlighted a portion regarding blocking drivers' linesof sight at intersections and :along ,roads. A setback of 15' is desirable to keep landscaping from interfering with traffic safety. Lacking in this ordinance is something to make sure trees are set back,so.they don't interfere with drivers' sight. *' Perry Butcher, architect, requested that consideration of section D be postponed until further study is made. He would appreciate the design community's input on that. It would be good to separate • ':the technical reviews from the design reviews. The design reviews could be done by a selected panel who ave backgrounds in development design. You need to simplify the ordinance.. There being no further .comments from the audience, Mayor Hanna brought the discussion back to. the Council. Alderman Williams suggestedleaving this on the first readingas it is an important ordinance which has Stirred up a lot of interest and a full Council needs to consider it. - Alderman Parker agreed. He stated visual preference surveys have been incorporated in a number of other communities in ordinances that address a similar project. He referred to a list given to Alett Little. Alett Little, Planning Director, stated she has done research on visual preference surveys. She has talked to two firms regarding the cost of a survey. The cost is between $25,000 and $35,000. She would not advise doing the visual preference survey .if3not reducing it to an ordinance. In getting the estimates, she told them we wanted broad-based community support and 17,000 households would have to be contacted if we contacted everyone in the city. She also made them aware that we have the ability to use the television station and she talked to them about the writing of the ordinance. The writing of the ordinance varies between $7,500 to $10,000. Alderman Parker asked if Ms. Little or the architectural community had ideas on how this could be done or may have been done in other areas in a more cost effective basis. Ms. Little stated that visual preference surveys have been used in areas of about 120 to 250 acres. They have been concentrated in specific areas of cities. She did not find anywhere that has used a visual preference survey city wide. These would be commercial design standards that would have to have broad applicability because they would have to apply to the whole city. 395 October 1, 1996 Alderman Parker asked if we already have sight distance at intersections to be taken into account. Ms. Little stated we do have that in two places in our regulations. Either the traffic superintendent or she can enforce it. Ms. Little passed out substitutions for the illustrations on pages four and five of the latest ordinance. In both of the examples, there is parking between the building and the street. We have been encouraging the pulling up of the building so these have been revised to show the parking on the side. This is section 2b(1) on page 4 and section 2b(2) page 5. City Attorney Rose stated he would insert them. CONSENT AGENDA Mayor Hanna introduced consideration of items which may be approved by motion or contracts and leases which can be approved by resolution and which may be grouped together and approved simultaneously under a consent agenda. A. Minutes of the September 17 regular City Council meeting; B. A resolution approving Change Order No. 1 to the Rockcliff Construction contract in the amount of $60,995 and approving a budget adjustment in the amount of $42,289; RESOLUTION 101-96 AS RECORDED IN THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE. C. This item was removed. D. A resolution awarding Bid 96-59 to Mitchell Oil Co. to provide gasoline and diesel fuel and an alternate fueling facility for the City; RESOLUTION 102-96 AS RECORDED IN THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE. Alderman Young noted that in the minutes under Other Business Alderman Schaper had referred to Duncan Street but meant Oliver Street. Alderman Young moved to adopt the consent agenda with that one change. Alderman Miller seconded. Upon roll call, the motion passed on a vote of 6 to 0. 7 396 October 1, 1996 NEW BUSINESS` DRAINAGE STUDY AND PROJECT Mayor Hanna introduced consideration of a request from the Planning Commission that the Mayor and City Council consider performing a drainage study and a drainage project in the vicinity of Ridgely; Manor, and Crossover roads. Alderman Bassett stated. -that his parents -are neighbors of the proposed Marvin Gardens subdivision. He grew up there and knows many of the people present to speak on this issue. He stated it is appropriate for him to participate in a discussion about a drainage study, and a project that affects every taxpayer in town. With respect to a vote by the Council on whether or not to hear th"e appeal, he could vote on this; but when it comes down to a discussion of the merits, assuming the appeal is heard, on the preliminary plat for the Marvin Gardens subdivision, it would not be appropriate to participate in the discussion or the vote. Kevin Crosson, Public Works Director, stated Mr. Venable has looked at this and the staff has selected an engineer to begin this work: Staff will go ahead and proceed with -the study and bring it to the Council when it is completed. f. . Alderman Daniel stated there 4City''s responsibility to see problem is not made worse by, is a serious problem there.- It is the that something is done and that the any other activity. • Alderman Parker asked Mr. Crosson what the best way for residents who have observed -drainage problems to bring these to the attention of the City so that information is passed on to the engineer. Mr. Crosson stated Milholland has been selected to do the study and residents can contact them or the City. Mayor Hanna asked for comments from the audience. There were none. MARVIN GARDENS PRELIMINARY PLAT APPEAL Mayor Hanna introduced consideration of an appeal of the Planning Commission's -decision to approve the preliminary plat for Marvin Gardens Subdivision. This was -requested by Alderman Parker°and would require a vote of theCouncilto hear it Alderman Miller so moved. Alderman Williams seconded. 397 October 1, 1996 Alderman Williams noted he is Alderman Bassett's first cousin. He had no problems in voting to hear the appeal. He had not yet made up his mind on voting on the final issue, as there is a connection. City Attorney Rose stated it was up to the Council as to whether or not to open the discussion to the audience regarding hearing the appeal Upon roll call, the motion passed on a vote of 6 to 0. Alderman Parker noted for the record that some of the reasons had been heard at the agenda session. They included complaints about potential drainage, traffic, and notification problems. Mayor Hanna opened the discussion to the public. Maryann Bassett, Manor Drive, assured the Council that they would not have come to them for a rehearing if they didn't feel they had serious concerns. This is an unusual 40 acres of property on the side of Mt. Sequoyah. This project was originally known as the Foster Brophy Addition. The decision at that time and the decision made now are opposites. In 1990 this same 40 acres with 62 lots was turned down for traffic concerns. There was only one entrance at that time; and though there are two now, both go through neighborhoods and end up going into Highway 265 within a long city block of each other. It was felt that 62 lots was not in order because of drainage and the lay of the land. It was then proposed to start with an area on Meandering Way, one street, and this was turned down. Now people on Manor Drive are involved. The piece of property before the Council now is a center section of the 40 acres. In 1990, there was a question on how to enter Ridgeway Drive. It was also recognized at that time that that section had many water problems and a lot of work would have to be done to the entire Ridgely Street and intersection. These citizens are asking for a drainage study on the full 40 acres. What's being asked to be developed is a center section but it does not take in a huge portion of the area directly behind Shadow Ridge and onto this 40 acres. Dave Jorgensen, engineer for this project, gave additional history of this project. The process began about a year ago. The first portion of the project was on the north side of the 40 acre tract. The Planning Commission asked to bring this to the west over Mt. Sequoyah. The next submittal showed this and turned out not to be a feasible option. For the third submittal, they went back to a cul-de-sacon the west end with a street connected on the east end. The Planning Commission wanted more access. Another submittal had three accesses. The Planning Commission asked for a plan that conformed to the contours and made better use of the property. Another plan was submitted. The biggest issue was there was not 9 398 October 1,'1996 adequate access. The latest plan connects to Meandering and the street extends and connects to Ridgely. Mr. Jorgensen stated he has met with the Boardwalk Property Owners Association to discusstheir concerns. They want to keep their separate identity, and a concern was whether the engineers could provide a means of deviating when you leave Boardwalk and go to this new subdivision. They are open to that suggestion. Drainage seems to be the prime issue now.• They have gone' to great lengths to provide a drainage studyfor the whole 40 acres. As a result of this appeal, they have finalized the drainage report. He passed out copies. Alderman Young asked if the final report was for the entire 40 acres. Mr. Jorgensen replied it is for the entire 40 acres. Alderman Parker asked if the folks who areconcerned about the drainage have had access to the report. Mr. Jorgensen replied no as it was just completed in the last couple of days as a result of the questions that have come up. He noted that the block is in the middle is the 40 -acre tract being talked about.. Lines represent the proposed streets and lots that are Phase I ofthis subdivision. It connects to the north:to Meandering Way or Boardwalk_ Phase I, and it connects to the southeast to Ridgely and .will connect to another phase in the northeast corner of the property. There are several ways"of accessing the property. He noted the area that contributes water to Manor Drive from the 40 acres. This is a future phase. Mr. Jorgensen stated that there are two detention ponds that are sized in the report. They will fit. A third detention pond will be developed when phase two or three is done. Alderman Williams stated his biggest concern is there are s� many lots if the entire 40 acres are developed. No matter what you might try to do, the more houses, roads, utilities, the worse the drainage will be. Mr. Jorgensen stated the drawing he passed out shows the lot sizes in this project are in the ballpark size -wise of the lots in .Boardwalk to the north.. The sizes of the lots were increased. ' Alderman Young asked if the land alteration ordinancewas considered when they sized the lots. . 10 399 October 1, 1996 Mr. Jorgensen stated they looked at the lots that were built in Boardwalk, Phase I, and Park Place, Phase V, IV, & III and it is a similar situation. It will require retaining walls without a doubt. Mr. Jorgensen stated the surrounding property owners have asked what is going to be built in this subdivision. He had a copy of the Boardwalk covenants. This project will use the same covenants where they apply. There are 39 lots in Phase I. A concept plat for the whole thing shows 93 to 95 of similar size lots. Alderman Parker asked what the safety factor of the retention ponds is in a heavy rain. Mr. Jorgensen stated the drainage ordinance requires that the post - development flow does not exceed the pre -development flow. There was discussion between Mr. Jorgensen and members of the audience regarding drainage. Mayor Hanna stated what is being discussed will occur and be addressed if the next phase is done. The Council has voted to do a drainage study on Manor Drive so there will be better information when the future phases are done. Alderman Parker pointed out that once you pull the trees off you change the natural flow and increase the run off rate. It might not be flowing into the Manor Drive area now, but once the road is brought down across the contours it can allow the water to flow faster and channel it into the watershed. Mr. Jorgensen stated they were using the ordinance and the equations given. The drainage is designed to meet that. He believes it will retain the water and absorb the shock of the peak. Darlister Mitchell, resident of Boardwalk, took exception to the comment that the issues have changed. There have always been several issues: access, traffic, drainage, and safety. All have been stressed at each level. She reviewed the history of Marvin Gardens. She stated she has video footage of where water flows from this preliminary plat. Buddy Babcock, Manor Drive, requested that the Council reverse the Planning Commission and move it back to the Planning Commission. There is now a drainage plan and report that was not available before. The residents have learned to deal with the situation as it is now. With the new development, a lot of water will come down and feed into the Ridgely Drive ditch or be piped further 11 400 October 1, 1996 :downstream. You cannot meet the drainage criteria of the drainage ordinance if this property•.is developed with 39 houses on 10 acres. The flow will be too great. This has not been thought out clearly: 'He asked the Council to refer it back to the Planning Commission and allow a public forum on the drainage report. Mr':;Jorgensen referred to the drawing he'd passed out to note the size .of the lots in Park Place. They.are similar to what is on Boardwalk Phase I. The terrain is steeper in those areas: Another issue that has come up several timesishow much water is coming off the southeast corner of this 40-acretract onto Manor Drive. The engineering department was there; there was no water coming from this 40 -acre tract onto Ridgely. This Council should have faith in its own engineering department. Alderman Young asked where -the flow from the two ponds goes out. Mr. Jorgensen responded the present flow is somewhat to the north of the southeast pond and the drainage path goes to -the east. Alderman Daniel stated it would be putting the cart before the horse to do any more building out there. The study willlead to a water project that will have to be done first, and it might not agree with the developer's'drainage proposals". Alderman Williams agreed more information was needed: He noticed the eastern part of the parcel looked about half as steep as the other parcel. It seems more conducive to development but is not being developed. He was concerned about the hillside. Fayne Gibson, Manor Drive, stated everyone knows there is a lot of traffic on Highway 265.. There are five to six hours a day when you cannot turn north out of Manor Drive. There must be another artery sometime, if that continues to grow. Alderman Parker pointed out-. if this happened to be in the Root School district; all the cars in the morning would have to be turning left -and going north. The school zone -would be a consideration regarding traffic. There being no further comments, Mayor Hanna brought the discussion back to the Council. City Attorney Rose informed the Council that the ordinance states they can affirm, modify, or•reverse the decision of the Planning Commission; or they can refer it back to the Planning Commission for additional findings; or the Council can table it. 12 401 October 1, 1996 Mayor Hanna stated that Charles Venable, Assistant to Public Works Director, had suggested that the Council wait until it gets the hydraulic study. Another option would be to refer it back to the Planning Commission to look at the hydraulic study to see if it changes their decision. Alderman Parker suggested tabling this until the study was completed. That would enable the City to look at the drainage plan that was submitted and look at our own drainage plan. It will enable the citizens to study Mr. Jorgensen's study and the City's study and come up with a study of their own if they wish. Then the Council could take their recommendation as one of the pieces of evidence when it decides to either take it off the table or send it back to the Planning Commission. Alderman Parker moved to table this until the completion of the City's drainage study of the area. Alderman Young seconded. Upon roll call, the motion passed on a vote of 5-0-1, with Alderman Bassett abstaining. Mayor Hanna called for a short break. FUELING FACILITY IMPROVEMENTS After calling the Council back to order, Mayor Hanna introduced consideration of a resolution awarding Bid 96-51 to Southern Co. N.L.R. Inc. in the amount of $144,580 for Phase I of the fueling facility improvements for Happy Hollow and the Church Street locations. Ben Mayes, Administrative Services Director, explained this had been discussed at the agenda session. We currently have two fueling facility sites. This proposal will totally remove the fuel storage facilities at the Happy Hollow site. At the Church Street site, it will remove that tank and replace it with the required monitoring facilities and will allow the police department to continue their 24-hour fueling. In the future we can come back and add above ground tanks with appropriate measuring devices at that time. The item approved on the consent agenda allows the City to contract for fuel off site, which gets us out of the fueling business except for Church Street. Alderman Miller moved the resolution. Alderman Williams seconded. Upon roll call, the resolution passed on a vote of 6 to 0. RESOLUTION 103-96 AS RECORDED IN THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE. 13 7! 402 Octbber.1, 1996 RZ96-17 Mayor Hanna introduced consideration of an ordinance rezoning .26 acres located at 302 W. Poplar from R-1, Low Density Residential, to R -O, Residential -Office, es requested by Patrick Tobin. City Attorney Rose read the ordinance for the first time. Pat Tobin, petitioner, gave a brief history of this property. The property east of this is zohed R-0.. They have the right of first refusal on the property to the west. The property across that street is a parking lot. The property directly -across the street is zoned I-1. All the property owners adjoining this area are in favor of it. They do not--want-apartmentsor multi -family units. Alderman Williams moved to suspend the rules and go to the second reading. Alderman .Parker seconded: Upon roll call, the motion passed on a vote of 6 to 0. City Attorney Rose read the ordinance for the second time. Alderman Daniel moved to Alderman Miller seconded. vote of 6 to 0. go to the third and final reading. Upon roll call, the motion passed on a City Attorney Rose read the ordinance for the third time. There being no further comments, Mayor Hanna called for the Upon roll call, the ordinancepassedon a vote of 6 to 0. ORDINANCE 3998 APPEARS ON PAGE OF ORDINANCE BOOK VA96-9 vote. .Mayor Hanna introduced consideration of an ordinance vacating an easement located on lot 9:of Colt Square Subdivision located at the northwest corner of Colt Square and Green Acres Rd. as requested by Bill Keating. City Attorney Rose read the ordinance for the first time. 'Alderman Daniel commented on this She wondered how to prevent these being an after -the fact thing. from happening: Alderman Williams asked about the required approval forms. Alett Little, Planning Director, replied they have been. received. 14 11 403 October 1, 1996 Alderman Bassett moved to suspend the rules and go to the second reading. Alderman Miller seconded. Upon roll call, the motion passed on a vote of 6 to 0. City Attorney Rose read the ordinance for the second time. Alderman Daniel asked if this was a matter for the inspection department and also asked if the City can impose fines. Ms. Little replied the Inspection Dept. does check the footings at the time of the footing inspection. It wouldn't be a fine. Alderman Williams moved to suspend the rules and go to the third and final reading. Alderman Parker seconded. Upon roll call, the motion passed on a vote of 6 to 0. City Attorney Rose read the ordinance for the third time. Mayor Hanna called for the vote. Upon roll call, the ordinance passed on a vote of 6 to 0. ORDINANCE 3999 APPEARS ON PAGE OF ORDINANCE BOOK VA96-11 Mayor Hanna introduced consideration of an ordinance vacating a utility easement located on lot 19 of Bridgeport Addition Phase I located south of Sandingham St. and west of High Ave. as requested by James Wetwiska. City Attorney Rose read the ordinance for the first time. Alderman Parker moved to suspend the rules and go to the second reading. Alderman Miller seconded. Upon roll call, the motion passed on a vote of 6 to 0. City Attorney Rose read the ordinance for the second time. Alderman Williams moved to go to the third and final reading. Alderman Daniel seconded. Upon roll call, the motion passed on a vote of 6 to 0. City Attorney Rose read the ordinance for the third time. There being no further comments, Mayor Hanna called for the vote. Upon roll call, the ordinance passed on a vote of 6 to 0. ORDINANCE 4000 APPEARS ON PAGE OF ORDINANCE BOOK 15 404 October 1 1996 1996 PROPERTY TAX RATES Mayor Hanna introduced consideration of an ordinance adopting the real and personal property tax rates for 1996 for fire and police pensions. The rate to be adopted is 0.5 mils on real and personal property for fire pension and 0.5 mils on real and personal property for police pension. Mayor Hanna explained this is a renewal that must be done annually. • City Attorney Rose read the ordinance for the first time. Alderman Miller moved tosuspend the rules and go to the second reading. Alderman Daniel seconded. Upon roll call, the motion ..„passed,on a vote of 6 to O. City Attorney Rose read the ordinance for the second time. Alderman Williams moved to suspend the rules and go:to.the third and final reading. Alderman Daniel seconded. Upon roll call, the motion passed on a vote of 6 to 0 City Attorney Rose read the ordinance for the third time. There being no further comments, Mayor Hanna called for the vote: Upon roll call, the ordinance passed on a vote of 6 to 0. ORDINANCE 4001 APPEARS ON PAGE OF ORDINANCE BOOR BID WAIVER - WATER LINE Mayor Hanna introduced consideration of an ordinance approving,a bid waiver and authorizing the City to participate in`a cost -share for the oversizing of approximately 640 if -of water line adjacent to Hwy 265 at the Glennwood Shopping Center. City Attorney Rose read the ordinance for the first time. Alderman Williams stated we are just paying the difference in oversizing the line. Alderman Parker stated he would like to see costs specifically required by new development passed along to the folks building the new areas or moving into the areas. Kevin Crosson, Public Works Director, stated he understands the concept of impact fees but it is generally interpreted as not being legally defensible. 16 • October 1, 1996 405 Alderman Young moved to suspend the rules and go to the second reading. Alderman Miller seconded. Upon roll call, the motion passed on a vote of 6 to 0. City Attorney Rose read the ordinance for the second time. Alderman Williams moved to go to the third and final reading. Alderman Parker seconded. Upon roll call, the motion passed on a vote of 6 to 0. City Attorney Rose read the ordinance for the third time. Jim Beavers, City Engineer, asked about the cost figure, which is not to exceed $40,000. He stated he estimates it to be $39,000. He asked if he would be required to come back to the Council if it comes in higher than $40,000. City Attorney Rose informed him he would have to come back, because of the way it is written. There being no further comments, Mayor Hanna called for the vote. Upon roll call, the ordinance passed on a vote of 6 to 0. ORDINANCE 4002 APPEARS ON PAGE OF ORDINANCE BOOK INCREASE IN AIRPORT LIMO FARE Mayor Hanna introduced consideration of an ordinance amending Section 117.62 of the Code of Fayetteville increasing the maximum fare charged for airport limousine service to $12 per passenger, one way from point to point. City Attorney Rose read the ordinance for the first time. Kelly Johnson, Assistant Airport Manager, stated the last increase was in December of 1986. Alderman Daniel moved to go to the second reading. Alderman Miller seconded. Upon roll call, the motion passed on a vote of 6 to 0. City Attorney Rose read the ordinance for the second time. Alderman Daniel moved to suspend the rules and go to the third and final reading. Alderman Young seconded. Upon roll call, the motion passed on a vote of 6 to 0. City Attorney Rose read the ordinance for the third time. There being no further comments, Mayor Hanna called for the vote. 17 406 • October 1,,,1996 roll call „the ordinance passed on a vote of 6 to 0. OF. ORDINANCE BOOK ORDINANCE 4003 APPEARS ON PAGE INCREASE,.FUNDING/EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT PLAN Mayor Hanna introduced consideration of a resolution increasing employer funding for the General Employees Defined Contributions Retirement Plan. . Alderman Daniel stated she had asked that this be brought forward. Employers have to take responsibility to make sure their employees are saving. Ben Mayes, Administrative Services Director, stated staff looks at internal equity and external equity. When they brought the •Hay Plan update in December, they also wanted to bring this but did not have enough money at that time. -We now have enough money in the budget; sales tax has exceeded estimates. The effective date was left as 1-1-96, which was what was originally proposed. It can'be changed to 10-1-96, effective today; We do have the funds to>go back and give the employees a whole year. There being no further comments, Mayor Hanna called for the vote. Alderman Daniel moved the resolution. Alderman Miller seconded. Upon roll call, the resolution passed on•a vote of 6 to .0. RESOLUTION .104-96 AS RECORDED IN THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE. 'ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 9:52. 18