HomeMy WebLinkAbout1997-01-21 MinutesA MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
A meeting of the Fayetteville City Council was held on Tuesday,
January 21, 1997, at 6:30, p.m., in the Council Room of the City
Administration Building, 113 W. Mountain, Fayetteville, Arkansas.
PRESENT: Mayor Hanna; Aldermen Donna Pettus, Stephen Miller, Kit
Williams, Len Schaper, Heather Daniel, Cyrus Young, Randy
Zurcher, and Trent Trumbo• City Attorney Jerry Rose; City
Clerk/Treasurer Traci Paul; staff; press; and audience.
NOMINATING COMMITTEE REPORT
Alderman Daniel stated there was one nomination. The Fayetteville
Housing Board of Commissioners has asked the Council to approve
Janet Richardson for a second term.
Alderman Daniel moved that the Council approve her nomination.
Alderman Young seconded. Upon roll call, the motion passed on a
vote of 8 to 0.
Mayor Hanna nominated for replacement on the A&P Commission,
replacing Alderman Bassett, Kit Williams. Alderman Miller
seconded. Upon roll call, the motion passed on a vote of 8 to 0.
OLD BUSINESS
SEXUALLY ORIENTED BUSINESSES
Mayor Hanna introduced consideration of two ordinances pertaining
to adult entertainment businesses. There has been a request for a
report from the police department. They checked on three clubs in
town.
Tim Helder, Fayetteville police officer, stated that at the request
of Chief Watson, he and another officer visited each of the three
adult establishments the night before this meeting. They ran
across some areas that need definition. They contacted the
attorney for Alcohol Beverage Control, dealing mainly with the
nudity issue where liquor is sold or consumed on premises. They
are waiting to hear back as to whether they can write for
violations. Some violations are administrative rules that ABC has
established that cannot be enforced. The only ones that we can
enforce are the ones paralleled by State law, basically the nudity
laws. In one establishment they witnessed a couple of violations
dealing with the administrative side. Those reports are being
written and forwarded to ABC.
1
9
10
January 21, 1997
Alderman Williams stated the Ordinance Review Committee has
reviewed a couple of ordinances which parallel the State 'law
concerning nudity. He asked if that would give the police more
power or if they have enough power now under State law to make sure
they are in compliance with State law.
Officer Helder replied that if they are in violation under State
law, they can take action at that time. If. it is under the
administrative side, we submit reports and ABC takes action
pertaining to the alcohol permit. If the City enacts an ordinance,
we can enforce it as law. He has not read the proposed ordinances.
Alderman Williams stated they were drafted to track the State
statute and make it a violation of City ordinance to appear in a
certain state of nudity as defined by State law and the City
ordinance. He asked for clarification of the action the police can
take if the business is in violation of. State law. He asked if
they could arrest someone.
Officer Helder stated what they would most likely do is issue a
summons or citation to the manager or owner. They would try to
seek out the person on the liquor license and issue that person the
citation as they are basically responsible for all the employees.
In response to a question from Alderman Schaper, Helder replied the
establishment that does not hold a liquor license does not have to
abide by any of the rules that pertain to establishments that serve
alcohol. How this will be handled needs to be clarified by
ordinance. Other laws, such as the nuisance ordinance, might
apply.
• Alderman Pettus noted that the Council is interested in what other
types of criminal activity may be going on as a secondary effect of
that business being there. She asked if there was a track record
for the clubs that have been in existence for a while.
Officer Helder replied Chief Watson has asked for reports on the
businesses that have been operating for a while. There have been
several instances where the police have been called.
City Attorney Rose prefaced his first reading of the ordinances by
explaining what the Ordinance Review Committee has done. They
looked at a variety of ordinances. Two have been brought to the
Council. They essentially have to do with liquor and permitting of
places that dispense or sell alcoholic beverages. In addition to
these two ordinances, the Ordinance Review Committee is considering
ordinances having to do with zoning and the regulation of these
businesses through our zoning ordinances. The Mayor has some ideas
that may be included. The ordinances being considered at this time
are not all that will be done. These are the two in sufficient
2
January 21, 1997
form to bring forward and there was some urgency felt by the
Committee to do this.
City Attorney Rose read for the first time the ordinance making it
unlawful to bring, consume, or allow to be brought or consumed,
intoxicants or alcoholic beverages in commercial establishments
permitting the exposure of specified anatomical areas.
City Attorney Rose read for the first time the ordinance
prohibiting those who have received a license for the sale or
dispensing of alcohol from permitting any person to appear on the
licensed premises in such attire as to expose certain specified
anatomical areas and providing for the suspension or revocation of
licenses for violating such a prohibition.
Alderman Williams pointed out the Council is not doing anything not
already required by State law. This was done to give our police
more power to enforce the current State law.
Mayor Hanna stated one of the clubs falls through the cracks
because they are not subject to ABC One of these ordinances does
address this. It gives us some power we should have had all along.
Chief Watson is preparing a report on the types of calls made to
this place of business.
Alderman Trumbo stated that while needing to abide by case law, we
are trying to make it as restrictive as we possibly can.
In response to a question from Alderman Zurcher, Rose replied the
two ordinances are legally defensible.
Alderman Williams noted for the record that City Attorney Rose had
handed out a 50 page appendix which showed many studies indicating
that when you have these sexually oriented businesses especially
close to one another you can have bad secondary effects. These
sorts of crimes are a primary concern of the Council.
Mayor Hanna asked for comments from the audience.
Connie Kraemer, Friends for Fayetteville, echoed the concerns for
safeguarding families and children. They support local government
in the role of securing good land use which leads to a high quality
of life. Friends for Fayetteville supports the Council's proactive
stance in regulating the effects of sexually oriented businesses
within the boundaries of the city.
Mike McDowell stated he owns a business next to Regina's House of
Dolls. As far as quality of property, etc., they have been an
excellent neighbor.
3
January 21, 1997
Alderman Williams stated he would favor leaving this on the first
reading.
Alderman Daniel agreed, as the. Council is waiting for more
information from the police department.
Alderman Miller was curious as to how the number of police calls
regarding these clubs compares to the more rowdy clubs around town.
These ordinances were left on the first reading.
REZONING RZ96-18
Mayor Hanna stated that the attorney for this item had requested
that it be moved up on the agenda, before the Marvin Gardens
appeal, as it will be short. There was no objection to this.
Mayor Hanna introduced an ordinance rezoning 6.17 acres located at
the northeast corner of Cato Springs Rd. and Treat St. from R-2,
Medium Density Residential, to C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial, as
requested by Ronald Woodruff on behalf of Joyce Ogden.
Alderman Williams moved to suspend the rules and go to the third
and final reading. Alderman Miller seconded. Upon roll call, the
motion passed on a vote of 8 to 0.
City Attorney Rose read the ordinance for the third time.
Alderman Schaper voiced his concern for unnecessary commercial
rezonings in areas where there is already an oversupply of
commercial property. In this case we are looking at opening a
whole new area where there is no existing commercial in the
neighborhood. The land use plan was done without .regard to
topography. If we continue to rezone land in this way, we devalue
the existing commercial land. We have many, many unused properties
in the south end of town that need to be redeveloped. He would
like the Council to contain commercial growth to areas where we
need to redevelop.
Alderman Zurcher referred to the last election when quality and
responsible growth were discussed 'during campaigns. This is a
perfect opportunity to opt for quality growth when.. the time comes
and not rush to put more strip development there because there is
a five lane.
Alderman Daniel noted that the General Plan shows this as
commercial. She had concerns about the Council changing this.
13
January 21, 1997
Alderman Williams stated this was debated and voted on by the
previous Council, that a commercial node was appropriate for this
area, not a strip commercial area which the topography would not
allow. This is one of the few commercial areas that can be
developed there. We are rezoning only six of the acres. The other
four will remain R-2.
Alderman Pettus noted this will be subject to the design overlay
ordinance and the Council will have much more control over what
goes there and how it looks.
Alderman Zurcher stated that just because it is shown on the map,
it doesn't mean we need it right now.
Alderman Young stated when someone comes forward State law says you
take a look at your land use plan and what you planned for in the
beginning.
Alderman Schaper pointed out all the comments at that time about
this were negative.
Alderman Young stated the village concept was part of the idea of
making this commercial. This is a node.
Mayor Hanna asked for comments from the audience. There were none.
Alderman Daniel asked if the entire parcel is in the overlay
district.
Alett Little, Planning Director, replied the entire parcel is not
in the overlay district. That isthe reason the applicant did
offer a bill of assurance. They are subjecting themselves to
requirements that they would not normally be subjected to. They
are doing it voluntarily in an effort to assure the Council that
the development will be a quality development. The bill of
assurance goes with the property. The rezoning is subject to that.
Mayor Hanna called for the vote.
Upon roll call, the ordinance passed on a vote of 6 to 2 with
Aldermen Schaper and Zurcher voting no.
ORDINANCE 4012 IS FOUND ON PAGE OF ORDINANCE BOOR
PRELIMINARY PLAT APPEAL - MARVIN GARDENS
Mayor Hanna introduced consideration of an appeal of the Planning
Commission's decision to approve the preliminary plat for Marvin
Gardens Subdivision.
5
January 21, 1997
Alderman Daniel thought the Council was waiting for a report on the
detention pond.
Alderman Pettus stated she would recuse as she owns property next
to Marvin Gardens.
Dave Jorgensen, engineer on this project, reminded the Council of
Alderman Schaper's previous question regarding whether one of the
,detention ponds was sized adequately to accommodate the future
runoff. This question was generated from, page 37 of the
independent report from the Milholland firm. In reviewing his
drainage report, Mr. Jorgensen felt they did prepare that report in
accordance with the drainage manual. .The independent report
suggests sizing the detention pond in the southeast corner to
accommodate extra flow. The reason it was brought up is that if
and when a street is ever extended to the west up the hill, the
southern most street, that street will intercept water intended to
go to the pond on the south boundary line in the vicinity of Mrs..
Bassett's property. The pond in the preliminary report was not
designed to accommodate that. The lots located in the southeast
corner were sized large enough to increase the size of the pond in
the event we do need to accommodate more flow. We may have to
eliminate a lot for that reason. This item can be taken care of.
Marynm Bassett, 2210 Manor Drive, remarked that had they known the
engineer would speak 25 minutes at the agenda session, the
neighbors would have attended to defend their view. One reason
they had not asked for additional time to study the reports was the
feeling that the developers had been delayed too long in getting a
decision. Many of the delays were not due to the neighbors. She
gave a history of the delays. She passed out minutes of the
subdivision meeting and spoke of the confusion the neighbors felt
because of the information they were receiving. As an example, the
minutes showed three different answers to questions about how long
water would remain in detention ponds. Getting answers to many
questions was difficult. Notification of meetings had been a
problem.
Mrs. Bassett stated they have never said they expect the developers
to take care of existing problems. They have said they cannot take
anymore. That is what they are asking relief from. She does not
believe that the tree ordinance and the drainage ordinance could be
followed if all the work needed to control the water was done.
Mrs. Bassett stated the process has been frustrating. From the
beginning, subdivision meetings and Planning Commission meetings,
they'd been told the data for preliminary plat and the drainage
study had been done, but they did not have access to it. It had
been explained this was not ordinarily given out at the preliminary
plat. This process is set up for the benefit of the developer.
6
15
January 21, 1997
Property owners attend these meetings and cannot get any of the
data.
Ann Bradford, Londonderry Drive, stated they do have drainage
problems in Boardwalk and it has been brought to her attention that
Mr. Jorgensen designed this drainage system. She has been told by
Mr. Beavers and Mr. Bunn that the pipes are too small and don't
even meet the standards prior to the drainage ordinance. Now this
problem needs to be put on the Capital Improvement Plan to be
fixed. Lindsey developed Boardwalk based on what Mr. Jorgensen
said the pipes should be, and they are inadequate. She asked that
the Council consider cleaning up the mess Mr. Jorgensen has already
created before allowing him to make a new one.
Buddy Babcock, neighbor and chemical engineer, distributed a
handout. He stated there are many aspects of the preliminary
drainage study that concerned him but he would limit his remarks to
the proposed design of the detention pond and the peak discharge
that is part of the drainage ordinance. He is not talking about
preexisting conditions. He gave his credentials for understanding
the principles and purposes of a detention pond. The purpose is to
create a time lag. He reviewed the handout. The common sense
approach would be to drastically reduce the housing density,
something like two -acre lots.
Mr. Babcock made further reference to the handout in hopes of
convincing the Council that the proposed detention pond is much too
small. He summarized by stating once again the proposed plan will
not comply with Fayetteville's drainage ordinance. The two- year
and ten-year storms will violate it, not the hundred -year ones.
The Council needs to act responsibly and refer this subdivision
back to the Planning Commission with instructions to drastically
increase the lot sizes or drastically increase the pond sizes, with
corresponding reduction in density.
In response to a question from Alderman Young, Mr. Babcock replied
the numbers in his ten-year and two-year chart, post- and pre -
flows, are from Jorgensen's report.
Darlister Mitchell, recognizing there are numerous issues relating
to Marvin Gardens, confined her comments to the drainage issue.
She requested the Council not only hear the concerns but take
action on the deficiencies outlined in the drainage study prior to
development. Assuming "sump inlet" and "drop inlet" are used
interchangeably in this study, she referred to Mr. Milholland's
report. Londonderry and Meandering Way runoff goes into drop
inlets 17 and 18. She explained how the study shows all of the
runoff in Boardwalk goes into 17 and 18. Referring to the slope on
Meandering Way, she and a neighbor had used a smart level to
measure the slope where the stub -out will be for Marvin Gardens.
January 21, 1997
Coming from Marvin Gardens and making a right onto Meandering Way,
that slope on that curve registered 18.7%. There is a tremendous
amount of water at an excessive velocity coming off that slope. If
you add to that another development with an area steeper than
Meandering Way, the water is going to be transported down to
Meandering Way where it will bypass all the inlets above Meandering
Way and go down to inlets 17 and 18. The preexisting problem will
be aggravated by this development. If water bypasses the drop
inlets due to the steepness of Meandering Way, water would also
bypass inlets in Marvin Gardens down to Boardwalk creating
increased problems.
The study states that when the inlet capacity is reached the storm
water will overflow the highway. When the inlet capacity is
reached, the overflow will create increased problems for
homeowners. The study also states when the barrel capacity is
reached, it will overflow. When water is transported into drainage
pipes that have reached their limit, the water will overflow and
not be conducted through the existing drainage pipes. The majority
of the drainage system in Boardwalk does not handle a two-year
storm frequency. Referring to the land use ordinance, she noted
off-site improvements must 'be required .when it is evident they
create additional problems. It will create additional problems for
Boardwalk. Speaking for the homeowners, she requested the Council
to require off-site improvements, that the existing drainage
problems outlined in the drainage study becorrected prior to
future development on the east side of Mt.Sequoyah, that the
number of lots for Marvin Gardens be reduced, and that the City
endorse and strongly consider an. ordinance for hillside development
prior to proceeding and approving any further developments on this
side of the mountain.
Bill Bassett, resident of Manor Drive, referred to Ordinance. 3895.
It speaks of storm water management, drainage management and
control, and erosion control. The developers have -had plenty of
notice about what they are attempting to do. When you factor in
the number of homes that will ultimately go on that 40 acres and
'look at the hillside and superimpose that on the preexisting water
conditions, then you have a situation poised for disaster. If this
is passed, ultimately 95 homes will be dedicated to the City; and
iunder'the ordinance, the City will have to maintain it and it is
riot maintainable. In looking over the minutes of the Planning
Commission and videos, what passed at the Planning Commission was
10.2 acres with 38 houses. Then all of a sudden Alderman Schaper
is asking the engineer if we are talking about 10 acres or 17
acres. Under this ordinance, the engineering department of the
City acts as a regulator, but somebody must regulatethe
regulators. This is done through elected officials. He asked the
Council to overrule the Planning Commission and deny the approval
for the preliminary plat of Marvin Gardens. An alternative would
8
17
January 21, 1997
be to send it back to the Planning Commission with directions and
instructions.
Curtis Hogue spoke on behalf of the developer. He encouraged the
Council to make a decision at this time. The developer has spent
a lot of money and continues to spend a lot money getting to this
point and is anxious for a decision by the Council, though
certainly not a decision to send it back to the Planning
Commission. If no action is taken or if it is sent back to the
Planning Commission, it would appear an arbitrary standard has been
inserted at this point. There was a desire for an independent
study. He has reviewed it. Page 37 says properly designed
detention ponds will take care of predevelopment and
postdevelopment flow. All he is asking for is a decision on the
preliminary plat approval, then to get to the design stage.
Ed Fryer, Shadowridge, commented that when you look at the
preliminary plat there is an easement running out the southwest
corner that goes someplace. He asked why the easement is there.
Alett Little, Planning Director, responded it was not a staff
proposal. The Council has a specific regulation about connecting
streets over Mt. Sequoyah. It was brought forward from the
developer and has not been considered by the Planning Commission at
this time. It will only be considered at the time that phase of
the subdivision is considered.
Mr. Fryer asked if the Council votes to approve this preliminary
plat, would that vote have anything to do with this easement.
Little clarified that the part under appeal is Phase I of Marvin
Gardens. There are planned to be three phases.
Mr. Fryer stated it is not time yet to develop this property in
this fashion. The engineer has said these lots are comparable to
those on Shadowridge; his lot is substantially larger. He
requested that the Council deny this and send it back to the
Planning Commission and instruct the Planning Commission to work
with the developer and work with the neighbors to come up with a
development acceptable to both. The right time to develop would be
when the developer can afford to get direct access to Crossover
Road and has a water plan that will work.
In response to a request from Alderman Daniel, Kevin Crosson,
Public Works Director, stated the report in the Planning Commission
agenda packet was inaccurate. It was 17 acres.
Alderman Young asked Mr. Jorgensen about his chart on the ten- year
frequency. He asked if there was a time in which it would fill up
and these numbers come into effect.
18
January 21, 1997
Mr. Jorgensen replied detention ponds are a controversial issue.
He agrees .with .some of the literature Mr. Babcock referred to.
Unfortunately, the ordinance states we need to put -in detention
ponds to try to dampen these peak effects. He understands the
concern of the surrounding property owners about detention ponds.
Alderman Schaper expressed his concern that we can't fight the fact
that water flows down hill. There are still areas of this 40 acre
tract that when developed will not drain into the detention ponds
but drain off the edges of this property. The problem is building
suburban -style lawns on hillsides, not necessarily developing them.
Mr. Jorgensen noted page 37 of the report addresses this. It
states if the preliminary plat is approved, speciate attention
should be given to the construction of plans concerning the tie-in
with the existing Boardwalk subdivision stub -out street. The
preliminary drainage study clearly reflects that all drainage
intercepted on this new main street will be diverted to the
detention pond due east. We will have to address that and make
sure water does not go into the Boardwalk subdivision on the north
side at all.
Alderman Schaper stated it appears to be physically impossible to
do that, unless you build swales between every lot.
Mr. Jorgensen stated it has been suggested, they may have to install
a swale on the north side to direct into the detention pond and
make sure it does not get .onto Boardwalk. It is not in the
preliminary study. This is a concept. We are trying to get the
preliminary plat approved so detailed plans can be done.
Alderman Schaper stated that
difficult condition, they can
finished drainage study before
at any point, .if it is a very
be required to present the final,
approval of the preliminary plat.
Mr. Jorgensen agreed, although this is not the normal course of
events.
Alderman Schaper noted 18%. slopes are not normal. He asked if the
kind of decision they were looking for would be to say we agree you
can lay out the lots -the way they are, but you have to do the whole
study before this thing is approved.
Mr. Jorgensen replied that is correct.
Alderman Zurcher asked if the UDO Committee would.deal with the
ordinance.
10
19
January 21, 1997
Alderman Schaper replied the intent is not to do that at this time.
Mayor Hanna noted that both sides have requested a decision to be
made on the preliminary plat appeal at this time.
Alderman Trumbo moved to deny the preliminary plat. Alderman
Schaper seconded.
Alderman Williams commented that though he is related to persons
interested in this, he will vote on this issue primarily because
his major concern does not touch their property; it is more
concerning the Londonderry Drive drainage. The way it is fixed
will adversely affect Londonderry Drive. Also, it is too dense for
this hillside.
Upon roll call, the motion passed on a vote of 7-0-1, with Alderman
Pettus abstaining.
Mayor Hanna hoped the City would address the drainage problems and
act on the report.
Kevin Crosson, Public Works Director, stated the intention is to
deal with this in the CIP process as any normal drainage issue.
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 January 7 regular City Council meeting;
B. A resolution approving Change Order 1 to the contract with
Edwards Design & Construction Co., Inc., in the amount of
$98,895 for the Wedington Drive Water & Sewer Relocation
Project to include Garland Avenue 12" Water Main Replacement
Project;
RESOLUTION 5-97 AS RECORDED IN THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE.
Alderman Daniel moved the consent agenda. Alderman lurcher
seconded. Upon roll call, the motion passed on a vote of 7 to 0,
with Alderman Schaper absent for the vote.
11
January 21, 1997
NEW BUSINESS
PARKING LOT PURCHASE
Mayor Hanna introduced a resolution and budget adjustment granting
the Mayor and City Attorney the authority to acquire the Off -Street
Parking Development District No. One's share of the parking lot
located between East & Block Avenue at Rock Street for an amount
not to exceed $133,500.
Alderman Daniel commented that the Council has been assured by the
staff that even if the center is not built, we will still benefit
from owning this property.
Alderman Williams noted this is the appraised value arrived at by
our own appraisers.
Alderman Pettus asked how it would be advantageous to buy this lot,
without the town center.
Ben Mayes, Administrative Services Director, gave a brief history
of how we got to this point. They have been looking at projects to
keep the downtown area revitalized. The town center concept was
taken to the A&P Commission, which endorsed it. They started a
feasibility study. Phase I involved looking at various sites. At
the end of Phase I, the Commission's desire was to decide the town
center issue. This lot was jointly owned by the City of
Fayetteville and the Downtown Parking Improvement District. We
came to the Council and asked to hire a bond counsel, which was
approved. We conferred with the bond counsel and with the
attorneys for the Parking Improvement District and this is the most
feasible and practical site if it is approved by the public. 'We
asked, if we could do this as a joint project, how we could
structure this. They advised that the best way would be for the
City to acquire this lot from the Downtown Parking Improvement
District"to simplify the ownership of the site and the process for
the town center. The A&P Commission doesn't want to go further
until they feel comfortable with that. Once we looked at it, we
felt purchasing this lot for this amount was a good deal for the
City. It not only gives us clear title to the entire tract of
land, itwould be a good deal even if the town center doesn't go
through.. This is the best scenario just to get it to a point where
we can continue the feasibility study and then go through_the A&P
Commission, come to the Council, and put it to a vote of the
people. It is not our intent to say we have done this, now we have
to do the town center. Our intent is to; clear up any issues
related to the site before we spend any more money.
If the people voted down the town center, this purchase would still
be an advantage. It will be about a 14 -year payback. It is our
intent to maintain it either as a parking lot or a parking deck
12
21
January 21, 1997
with a town center on top.
Mayor Hanna added there have been a number of requests over the
years for additional parking near the Square. A parking deck has
been suggested a number of times. It is a logical piece of
property for the City to own.
John Lewis, Downtown Parking District commissioner, explained the
purpose of the Downtown Off -Street Parking District No. 1. It is
governed by three commissioners. It was formed in 1976 to help
enhance the development and redevelopment of downtown. They own
most of the off-street parking lots downtown. In the early '80s
they issued $850,000 worth of bonds on about a 20 -year payout
schedule. Approximately $450,000 is owed on those bonds. Parking
has been an important civic improvement. Different ways of
structuring this transaction have been looked at. Speaking for
himself, as the Commission has not met to consider this, it looks
like the cleanest, simplest, best way to put the land together and
get it under one ownership and have better control over
construction contracts and construction.
Ben Mayes stated the bond issue has not been structured yet. The
maximum amount they are thinking about issuing is $7 million. That
is just preliminary. The Commission will have to structure a deal
they think they can afford and prove it to the Council before it
ever goes to a vote.
Mayor Hanna stated we are not talking about extra taxes. We will
restructure the uses of the hamburger tax.
Alderman Williams moved to pass the resolution.
Alderman Daniel asked the staff where parcel 1979 was on the map.
She was informed there had been a misnumbering and the Council was
shown the location of this parcel.
Alderman Zurcher seconded the motion.
Fran Alexander spoke on her own behalf. It is not as though the
City needs the parking lot. It is $133,000 for something you
already have the use of. To purchase the land before the vote will
show the Council suffering from a case of horse -behind -the -cart.
If there is a threat that the City might lose the option on this
land, she suggested having a first -refusal option with the Off -
Street Parking Development District. She viewed it as the first
foot in the door, putting the voters at a disadvantage as the money
has already been spent. There has not been public dialogue about
this issue. She asked the Council to consider the design of the
south side of the Square. The back side of the south block of the
Square will be walls, three walls of parking lot. It will have a
13
22
January 21, 1997
deadening effect to interaction.
Steve Ward, Fayetteville Chamber of Commerce, stated the issue is
if the dollars are fair market value for that parking lot. He
believed it was prudent for the City to own that property whether
or not the town center comes to fruition.
Mayor Hanna called for the vote.
Upon roll call, the motion passed on a vote of 8 to 0.
RESOLUTION 6-97 AS RECORDED IN THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE.
VACATION VAC96-12
Mayor Hanna introduced an ordinance vacating a portion of a utility
easement located at 2810 Birdie Drive as requested by John Thorn.
City Attorney Rose read the ordinance for the first time.
Alderman Miller moved to suspend the rules and go to the second
reading. Alderman Schaper seconded. Upon roll call, the motion
passed on a vote of 8 to 0.
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 Pettus seconded. Upon roll call, the
motion passed on a vote of 8 to 0.
City Attorney Rose read the ordinance for the third time.
Mayor Hanna asked for comments from the audience. There were none.
Upon roll call, the ordinance passed on a vote of 8 to 0.
ORDINANCE 4013 APPEARS ON PAGE OF ORDINANCE BOOK
BID WAIVER --PARKING METERS
Mayor Hanna introduced an ordinance providing for a bid waiver on
the purchase of replacement parking meters and maintenance software
in an amount not to exceed $47,000 for 1997.
City Attorney Rose read the ordinance for the first time.
Alderman Schaper moved to suspend the rules and go to the second
reading. Alderman Daniel seconded. Upon roll call, the motion
passed on a vote of 8 to 0.
14
23
January 21, 1997
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 Schaper seconded. Upon roll call, the
motion passed on a vote on a vote of 8 to 0.
City Attorney Rose read the ordinance for the third time.
Alderman Williams explained the reason we are doing this is that
less than a year ago we put it out for competitive bidding and this
is the company selected then and we have had good luck with them.
Mayor Hanna called for the vote.
Upon roll call, the ordinance passed on a vote of 8 to 0.
ORDINANCE 4014 IS FOUND ON PAGE OF ORDINANCE BOOK
IN-HOUSE PAVEMENT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
Mayor Hanna introduced the award of bids for materials utilized in
the In -House Pavement Improvement Program and various operational
divisions of the City.
Alderman Daniel moved to accept the bid. Alderman Williams
seconded. Upon roll call, the resolution passed on a vote of 8 to
0.
RESOLUTION 7-97 AS RECORDED IN THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE.
DRUG ENFORCEMENT GRANT
Mayor Hanna introduced a resolution approving a grant application
to fund the Fourth Judicial District Drug Task Force in the amount
of $44,000 to cover Fayetteville's share of the cost.
Alderman Schaper asked if this was in the original budget.
Ben Mayes, Administrative Services Director, confirmed it is in the
original budget. Because of the granting requirements, there has
to be a formal resolution adopted.
Alderman Zurcher moved to pass the resolution. Alderman Young
seconded. Upon roll call, the resolution passed on a vote of 8 to
0.
RESOLUTION 8-97 AS RECORDED IN THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE.
The meeting adjourned at 9:42 p.m.
15