Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1997-04-01 Minutes99 A MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL A meeting of the Fayetteville City Council was held on Tuesday, April 1, 1997, at 6:30 p.m., in the Council Room, of the City Administration Building, 113 W. Mountain, Fayetteville, Arkansas. PRESENT: Mayor Fred Hanna; Aldermen Cyrus Young, Randy Zurcher, Trent Trumbo, Donna Pettus, Stephen Miller, Kit Williams, and Heather Daniel; City Attorney Jerry Rose; Deputy City Clerk Jane Heth; staff; press; and audience. ABSENT: Alderman Len Schaper Mayor Hanna called the meeting to order with seven aldermen present. NOMINATING COMMITTEE REPORT Alderman Daniel moved to nominate Curtis Shipley and Carl McGuire to the Advertising & Promotion Commission and Lorel Hoffman, Phyllis Johnson, and Lee Ward to the Planning Commission. Alderman Trumbo seconded. Upon roll call, the motion passed on a vote of 7 to 0. OLD BUSINESS MAINTENANCE OF SIDEWALKS Mayor Hanna introduced for consideration an ordinance amending Chapter 98: Streets and Sidewalks, of the Code of Fayetteville, to transfer the responsibility of repair and replacement of sidewalks from the property owners to the City. This was left on its first reading at the March 18, 1997, Council meeting. Alderman Miller moved to go to the second reading. Alderman Young seconded. Upon roll call, the motion passed on a vote of 7 to O. City Attorney Rose read the ordinance for the second time. Rita Hempen, audience member, took this opportunity to speak regarding the inadvisability of constructing a sidewalk on 24th Street from S. School, as it is much too steep. Mayor Hanna thanked Ms. Hempen for bringing this to the Council's attention. He explained the place to address this for recommendation is the Street Committee. 1 r 100 April 1, 1997 Alderman Williams announced there would be a Street Committee meeting April 10. Mayor Hanna assured Ms. Hempen this issue would be before the Street Committee when they meet. There were no further comments from the audience. Alderman Zurcher 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 7 to 0. City Attorney Rose read the ordinance for the third time. Alderman'Zurcher stated this is a great plan. The sooner we consider sidewalks as infrastructure, the more livable our city will become. There being no further comments, Mayor Hanna called for the vote. Upon roll call, the ordinance passed on a vote of 7 to 0. ORDINANCE 4029 IS FOUND ON PAGE OF ORDINANCE BOOK POSTPONE HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT Mayor Hanna introduced a resolution postponing the consideration of applications for subdivision or large .scale development approval until September 1, 1997, or until the adoption of a new or revised hillside ordinance. This resolution was tabled at the March 18 Council meeting. Alderman Young asked if a small change had been passed. City Attorney Rose stated there has not been a change. Alderman Williams stated he did not think there is an emergency. The Ordinance Review Committee is studying this and will' move ahead to do theright thing to ensure the correct development on hillsides. Philosophically, he does not support moratoriums. Alderman Miller attempted to photograph bad hillside developments and found mostly good hillside developments. One thing that bothered him was the steep cuts behind commercial buildings on 71 Business; but with our erosion laws, that is not common. He stated the Council does need to get serious about this. Alderman Young agreed. If it is an emergency, let's do. something. 2 101 April 1, 1997 Alderman Pettus also philosophically opposed moratoriums, unless you can demonstrate an emergency or irreparable harm or there is no other remedy. There are provisions in our ordinances now that can be used to prevent problems. She suggested talking to staff about being very strict in scrutinizing new subdivisions, grading issues, and tree ordinance issues. Alderman Daniel pointed out that the resolution doesn't address the site to be developed. It talks about the impact on surrounding development. Alderman Williams stated it is not easy to figure out the right grade. We can get busy and put out an ordinance, but whether it would be a good ordinance is not certain. We need to move carefully, not quickly. Alderman Miller stated it should be a priority. Alderman Williams responded it is a priority, a complicated priority. It is difficult to be fair to developers and still preserve the environment and quality of life in Fayetteville. It is a tough balancing act. Mayor Hanna asked for comments from the audience. Rick Nelson, builder, stated that, when used in its correct text, moratorium is an extreme measure. He would support any motion that would put down bad hillside projects, but a good hillside projects are needed in this town. Basement homes take full use of a lot otherwise not used by most people. As a builder, he's always trying to find ways to fill needs; he's done this by building basement houses. Let the City staff do their job. If engineering says we've got a bad thing, listen and deal with it there. Charles Agee, audience member, passed out rulers and graphs to illustrate that most of Fayetteville is built on a 6 degree, 10 percent or greater slope. Elam Denham, a true friend of Fayetteville and the environment, asked why the Council was involving itself in trivia and nonsense ordinances like hillside management rather than doing something for the constituents they represent. He spoke specifically about a ditch the City dug across his driveway and yard two years ago that was improperly filled. He recently had it repaired and will send the City the bill. 102 April 1, 1997 Mr. Denham stated he completely disagrees with the hillside ordinance. Fayetteville is hillside town: There are no rational engineering or planning standards quoted in the ordinance. This ordinance would control interior growth and make it part of a no -growth policy. Mayor Hanna pointed out this is a resolution, not an ordinance. He asked staff to explain their response to Mr. Denham's ditch problem. Kevin Crosson, Public Works Director, explained the work was originally done by a contractor and was done to the City's standards and satisfaction, simply not to the Denhams'. Mr. Denham explained how the ditch was not correctly filled in. It settled after a period of time and he has had continuous trouble. He has not been able to work things out with the City. Steve Ward, Chamber of Commerce, urged a no vote. He asked that as progress is made on the hillside ordinance, it would be offered to the Contractor's Committee of the Chamber for their input. There being no further comments from the audience, Mayor Hanna brought the discussion back to the Council. Alderman Pettus asked what the proper motion would be to not pass the resolution. City Attorney Rose suggested moving the resolution. Alderman Miller moved the resolution to vote. Alderman Young ' seconded. Rose clarified this was a motion to adopt the resolution.. :Upon roll call, the resolution failed ona vote of l to ,6, with Alderman Zurcher voting in favor of theresolution:. CONSENT `Mayor Hanna introduced consideration of items which maybe 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 March 18, 1997, City Council meeting; B. Removed. See Park Improvements below. 4 103 April 1, 1997 C. A resolution awarding bids to Roofing Systems to reroof the Police/Courts Building and reroof the Fayetteville Library Main Building and approving a budget adjustment; RESOLUTION 34-97 AS RECORDED IN THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE. Alderman Williams moved the consent agenda. Alderman Miller seconded. Upon roll call, the motion passed on a vote of 7 to 0. NEW BUSINESS PARK IMPROVEMENTS Mayor Hanna introduced a resolution approving a contract with Mobley Contractors, Inc., in the amount of $159,057 plus a 596 contingency of $7,953 for improvements to Gulley Park and Davis Park. Alderman Miller explained why he had asked to remove this from the consent agenda. A tremendous amount of money has been spent on Gulley Park, to the detriment of other parks. He would like to see some trails, improvements, and brush and weeds cut in other parks. There is more to parks than soccer fields and baseball diamonds, and they do not have to have monstrous parking lots. Alderman Young shared Alderman Miller's concerns. It is his understanding that this is the last thing to come through of a large package done in phases. Alderman Zurcher added that when Penny for Parks was voted on, the first thing mentioned on promotional materials was acquiring more park land. He has not seen money going into that. Alderman Pettus does not want the Council to deprive people of a park just because they have to drive to the park. She could not use any park in the city if she did not drive there. We do need some parking places. She favored taking care of Gulley Park and all our parks. Alderman Williams asked if this resolution complies with the parking lot ordinance and landscaping trees. Kevin Crosson, Public Works Director, replied that it does and that is one of the reasons we are paving the lot. Most lots in other parks are hard surfaced. This is the second full year the City has had the HMR tax for the park system, and people are anxious to see addressed the needs that have been identified. Gulley Park is a regional park. The CIP shows money is being spread as fairly as possible. 5 April.1, 1997 Crosson was concerned about the anti -athletic sentiments sometimes expressed. This city has thousands of kids :that go through the City's athletic programs each year. They are the backbone of what you try to do with parks. Alderman Daniel had a concern about the proposed gazebo for. concerts. Gulley Park has natural beauty, whichshe does not want to see get too cluttered. Mayor Hanna asked for comments from the audience. There were none. Alderman Williams moved to pass the resolution. Alderman Pettus .seconded. Upon roll call, the motion passed on a vote of 7 to 0. RESOLUTION 35-97 AS RECORDED IN THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE. RZ97-1 Mayor Hanna introduced an ordinance rezoning .6 acres located at the southwest corner of Sycamore and Giles Rd. from A-;1 Agricultural, to R-1.5, Moderate Density Residential, as requested by James and Daniel Williams on behalf of Gary Lane. City Attorney Rose read the ordinance for the first time. Alderman Miller statedhe had toured this area and within two blocks he counted numerous triplexes and duplexes and a lot of single unit homes. The developer wants to build afourplex. It is a piece of land with weeds, chiggers, and briars and is surrounded on three sides by residential. The use would fit the area. Alderman Zurcher noted the request has been changed. Alett Little, Planning Director, stated R2 would allow up to 24 units per acre, but R1.5 would allow up to a triplex, 'more in keeping to what is there. She. 'stated the applicant•was•-in agreement and that is what the Planning Commission recommended to the Council. Alderman Williams moved to suspend the rules and go to.the second reading. Alderman Daniel seconded.- Upon: roll call, the motion passed on a vote of 7 to 0. City Attorney Rose read the ordinance for the second time. Alderman Daniel reported she had not heard anything pro or -con from constituents in her ward regarding this. 6 105 April 1, 1997 Mayor Hanna asked for comments from the audience. There were none. Alderman Trumbo moved to suspend the rules and go to the third and final reading. Upon roll call, the motion failed on a vote of 5 to 2, with Aldermen Young and Zurcher voting no. This will be on its third reading at the next Council meeting. REZONING APPEAL Mayor Hanna introduced an appeal of the Planning Commission's decision to deny RZ97-2 as requested by Michele Harrington on behalf of Freeland Romans. Michele Harrington, attorney, was present to appeal this rezoning. This property on Township is completely surrounded by C-2 with some I-1 in the area. This very much fits in to the projections of the 2020 Plan. It is completely within existing zoning ordinances. For all practical purposes, it should be rezoned with all the compatible uses around it. It is identical to the neighboring properties. Ms. Harrington stated there was some concern at the Planning Commission about the kind of uses that could go in, problems with the school, etc. The use going in is coming from further down the street on Township, a use already there just moving and expanding. Ms. Harrington stated there have been no opponents to this rezoning. She understands the City does not want or need a lot more C-2 property, but urban sprawl is a big concern. This concept of taking the parcels that have not been built in an area already developed and filling in with the same uses around it prevents urban sprawl. It is in -filling. Ms. Harrington stated there was discussion in Planning Commission about not wanting to create a strip. A strip is already there. Ms. Harrington stated there was also some confusion at the last Commission meeting about whether the 2020 Plan map shows the projected use of this Township stretch to be the same as North College. It is the same as North College, called community commercial. Ms. Harrington read from the zoning ordinance the definition of community commercial: "...consists of stores selling retail goods which are ordinarily purchased less frequently and often have a community -wide or regional market." This is one of those stores. That is exactly what it is. C-1, the recommendation of the 0'10 6 April 1, 1997 staff, is described as, "...a variety of frequently purchased goods where convenience of location is more important than comparative shopping. These uses are grouped in limited areas while prohibiting all others not necessary near the residential areas." The 2020 Plan describes neighborhood commercial'as,`"... a convenient way to meet the shopping needs of adjacent residents, limited to commercial uses that serve residential neighborhoods...provide job opportunities, goods and services, incubators for beginning businesses, and gathering places for nearby residents." The nearest residents to this strip are around the corner and up Gregg Street in the apartmentsway beyond the rest of the C-2 and down the street and around the corner. They are not adjacent and not nearby. The neighborhood commercial in the 2020 Plan and the neighborhood commercial of the zoning code do not fit with what this street and parcel are. Ms. Harrington stated Use Unit 16 is in place for community -wide Uses; you have C-2 all around this land; you have no opponents; you have an elderly gentleman in California who has been trying to market this property for eight years: It makes sense to rezone this C-2. Ms. Harrington addressed some staff concerns. The traffic of this business willmove down the street. It will not change a lot. Plus, the C-1 uses --grocery stores, supermarkets, gas stations --would generate a lot more traffic. This is not a hillside issue. Lot coverage is not -a worry. On this size lot, with parking requirements, only 29% could be covered by a building. Ms. Harrington could see no way this does not meet C-2, Unit 16, and the 2020 Plan for community commercial. Therefore she asked the Council to rezone the property to C-2. Mayor Hanna asked City Attorney Rose if the Council needs to vote on whether or not to consider the appeal. Rose replied no, as they have an appeal by right. He stated at such time as the Council is ready to consider this, he will rend an ordinance to be voted up or down. - - Ms. Harrington asked if'it were possible to have a vote 'now, so her client would know where he stands, and then have an ordinance drafted after the fact. Rose agreed this could be done. Mayor Hanna thought an ordinance should be read. Rose proceeded to draft one. 8 107 April 1, 1997 Alderman Young stated his company might have something to do with this so he would not participate in the discussion and would abstain on the vote. City Attorney Rose read the ordinance for the first time. As Alett Little, Planning Director, had distributed to the Council` information about what is in the General Plan and the ordinances, to help with the terminology. She explained the handout and further explained the definitions. Little noted that the point had been made that this has the same designation on it that Highway 71 has and that most of Township already has. She pointed out that at one time, Township was the northern most point people came to to shop. In that respect, at the time some of those rezonings were done, it was proper for that to be considered a regional area. She did not agree it is proper for it to be considered a regional area anymore. She did not agree that the property is surrounded by C-2 uses. There is a whole new mainly commercial subdivision developed within the last two years just north of there. Sunbridge Center is mostly zoned R -O. A great deal of Gregg Street is zoned C-1. Under the current zoning ordinance, beyond C-2 the next heavier usage is an industrial use. Regarding having a strip along Township, Little stated the General Plan says we wish to discourage those. It encourages development at nodes. This is not at the node. It is at the center of the street, an inadequate street. Every property owner along there has been approached regarding dedicating right of ways to widen it and this has not been successful. Regarding the 2020 Plan, Little stated the neighborhood commercial areas will correspond to our current limited neighborhood commercial and is to be very residential in character. We are creating what we don't have now. Under the existing 2010 Plan, there are no distinctions between regional uses such as the mall and community uses such as grocery stores. That is exactly why we divided commercial areas into more definitive areas, so you now have that distinction. The distinction is between community, those uses meant to serve the entire community, and regional, those meant to bring people into the area. Regarding the grade, Little reported this site has been cleared and there is no grading plan or drainage plan filed. Alderman Williams asked what options the City has when someone clears a site without doing a grading plan or drainage plan. April 1, 1997 Little believed we have the ability - to put a stop work order on the site. Staff members have been'to the site andJthis has not happened. As it is next to a Creek; we h&;to be'careful'of runoff. Ms. Harrington did not have any comments regarding this. She was hired after the Planning Commission meeting and had no familiarity with this. Ms. Harrington pointed out that Alderman Young's employer is the. engineer for the proposed buyer.' Lynn Farrell, realtor, stated he had done clearing only,and had. worked with the City on that. The City inspected and agreed he was not grading, only clearing: Little stated the drainage ordinance states you cannot remove one blade of grass without a drainage plan. Ms. Harrington thought there may be adisagreement in how the interpretation of the ordinance is handled by the City. On behalf of her client, if he had the go ahead from the City inspector, he would be entitled to think he'd been doingthings like he wa$.supposed to. Kevin Crosson, Public Works Director, stated he would try to. verify this and find out, what the discrepancy Mr. Ferrell elaborated that when the building was. condemned, they were asked to remove the building or secure it and theyelected to remove it and did so under -City auspices.: The land'.was cleared, not graded, and the City agreed that was what'was being done and was within the guidelines. In response,to.a concern from Alderman Miller regarding erosion; -Mr. Ferrell stated he would be glad to do whatever is necessary. Ms. Harrington assured the Council that the_need to follow .t he ordinances from the start would be discussed with all the parties involved in this. Alderman Miller stated he did notsee`a neighborhood therefor Ithisto serve and the entire street is C-2: Little make -a future responded it is a key decision for the Council. difference as to how things are brought forward :Alderman Zurcher asked Little to explain her creating a neighborhood. 10 It will' in -the comments regarding 109 April 1, 1997 Little replied she did not suggest creating neighborhood commercial in that area. She was suggesting creating community commercial in that area, C-1. Alderman Miller explained to Ms. Harrington that the Council is loath to blaze through a controversial issue in one meeting. It would want to give the public a chance to speak. Ms. Harrington stated she understood this and would be present at the next meeting for the second reading. Mayor Hanna asked for further comments. There were none. He noted this would be automatically on its second reading at the next meeting. RURAL FIRE CONTRACT FEES Mayor Hanna introduced consideration of an ordinance amending Section 33.046 of the Code of Fayetteville to establish annual fees for rural fire contracts for the two year period of June 1, 1997, to May 31, 1999. City Attorney Rose read the ordinance for the first time. Ben Mayes, Administrative Services Director, stated this is a bookkeeping matter, where the City calculates the cost of providing this service every two years. This is about a 3.1% increase over two years ago. It is intended to recover the costs that we may incur if we provide fire protection. Mayor Hanna explained it is fully within the Fire Chief's discretion whether the City can service a contract or not. If he feels he cannot reach them in time to do the job, he has full power to turn down the contract. This is just like it has always been. Fire Chief Jackson reported that as of today, the City has 321 properties covered under this program and 37 association contracts and 12 individual contracts. It has grown fast in the last few years. He cautioned that at some point in time, we will need to declare we are saturated with these things. There is no area in Washington County that does not have fire protection. There is no time limit on how far the City goes. The ordinance says two air miles, and we accept people provided their property can be reached. Alderman Williams asked Chief Jackson to keep a close eye on this and to let the Council know if the ordinance needs to be changed. Chief Jackson responded we are getting near that time. 11 April 1, 1997 Alderman Trumbo moved to suspend, the rules and go to the second -.reading. Alderman Miller seconded. Upon roll call, the motion. passed on a vote of 7 to 0. City Attorney Rose read the ordinance for the second time. Alderman Williams moved to suspend the rules and go to the third reading. Alderman Trumbo seconded. Upon roll call, the motion passed on a vote of 7 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 7 to 0. ORDINANCE 4030 IS FOUND ON PAGE OF ORDINANCE BOOK BAUM BASEBALL STADIUM/FIREWORKS Mayor Hanna introduced an ordinance allowing the University of Arkansas to use fireworks for the celebration of the first anniversary of the Baum Baseball Stadium on Friday, May 9, 1997,. between 6:00 p.m. and 11:00 p.m. City Attorney Rose read the ordinance for the first time. Alderman Miller moved to suspend the rules and go to the second reading. Alderman Trumbo seconded. Upon roll call, the motion' passed on a vote of 7 to 0. City Attorney Rose read the ordinance for the second time. Alderman Trumbo moved to suspend the rules and go to the third reading. Alderman Miller seconded." Upon roll call, the motion passed on a vote of 7 to 0. Mayor Hanna asked for comments from the audience. There were none. He called for the vote. Upon roll call, the ordinance passed on a vote of 7 to 0. ORDINANCE; 4031 APPEARS ON PAGE OF ORDINANCE BOOK EARTH DAY. RECOGNITION Mayor Hanna introduced a resolution recognizing, adopting, and proclaiming Saturday, April 19, 1997, as Earth Day in the City Of Fayetteville. 12 111 April 1, 1997 City Attorney Rose read the resolution. Mayor Hanna asked for comments from the audience. Gregory Padgham, sixth -generation Arkansan, was happy to see the Council take up this issue. It is important from a symbolic aspect, to let citizens know Fayetteville is on the cutting edge of cities with regard to treatment of the natural environment and how that relates to people who live here. We can only gain and benefit from it. It is an encouragement for people to come here to live, do business, develop, or visit. He suggested the Council pass a future resolution adopting the Earth Day as Earth Day in the City so this will not have to be taken up each year. Alderman Miller moved the resolution. Alderman Daniel seconded. Upon roll call, the resolution passed on a vote of 7 to 0. RESOLUTION 36-97 AS RECORDED IN THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor Hanna adjourned the meeting at 8:25 p.m. 13