Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000-11-07 - Agendas - Final FAYETTEVIA E40HE i CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS FINAL AGENDA CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 712000 please note time change A meeting of the Fayetteville City Council will be held on November 7, 2000 at 4 :30 p.m. in Room 219 of the City Administration Building located at 113 West Mountain Street, Fayetteville, Arkansas A. CONSENT AGENDA 1 . APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES : Approval of the minutes from the October 17, 2000 City Council meeting. 2OBRIDGEPORT SUBDIVISION: A resolution approving an agreement releasing liability in the repair of the roadway entrance into the Bridgeport Subdivision. 3, CEC TURNBACK: A resolution approving the 2 year renewal agreement with the State Board of Finance for turnback revenues for the Continuing Education Center under the Tourist Meeting and Entertainment Facilities Assistance Act. 4, WILSON PARK GREENHOUSE: A resolution approving the Wilson Park Greenhouse bid to Jack Morgan Construction Company in the amount of $33,821 plus an additional $ 10,000 for utilities and a project contingency of $5,000 and authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute a contract. S. EMPLOYEE INSURANCE: A resolution approving the renewal of the employee group policies from U S ABLE LIFE to provide, life, AD & D, LTD coverage and Sec. 125 cafeteria plan administration. 6. BENHAM GROUP: A resolution approving contract amendment #3 with Benham Group which provides for a $20,405 .00 increase in construction observation services in connection with the W/S Relocation and a $69,906.06 increase in additional engineering services in connection with the Dickson Street Enhancement Project, and a budget adjustment for the W/S part of the work. 113 WEST MOUNTAIN 72701 501521-7700 FAX 501575-8257 i r 7. GARVER ENGINEERS: A resolution approving an engineering agreement with Garver Engineers for the design of a multi-level parking deck to be constructed on the existing parking lot bounded by Center St. at the north, Mountain St. on the south, Church Ave. on the west and on the east of the buildings that front Block Ave. 8. POLICE VEHICLE PURCHASE: A resolution accepting Arkansas Contract Award ST-01 -0914, to purchase 7 units from Landers Ford Item #7, 2001 Ford Crown Victoria Police Interceptor Sedan including Option "IO" (53). Total bid award is $ 151 ,313 .00. 9. W/S RELOCATIONS HWY 265: A resolution approving Change Order #5 to the Construction Contract with Basic Construction Co., Inc. for Hwy 265 Widening (Hwy 45 to Hwy 16) Water and Sewer Relocation Phase ]I. B. OLD BUSINESS 1 . RZ 00-22 : An ordinance approving rezoning request RZ 00-22, submitted by James Key on behalf of James Mitchell Massey for property located at 28 S. University. The property is zoned C-1 , Neighborhood Commercial and contains approximately 0. 18 acres. The request is to rezone to R-3, High Density Residential. This ordinance was left on the first reading at the October 17, 2000 . meeting. C. NEW BUSINESS 1. BOTANICAL GARDEN: Botanical Garden Society of the Ozarks, Inc. Annual Report-2000. 2, SEWER CAMERA: An ordinance approving a bid waiver with Aries Industries for sewer camera system repair in the amount of $ 17,055.89, and approving a bid contingency of $2,000. 3. YOUTH CENTER: Discussion regarding the use of City Funds for the Fayetteville Youth Center. s November 3, 2000 FINAL AGENDA CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 79 2000 Instructions: 1 . Wilson Park Greenhouse: Add to Item A. 4. under the Consent Agenda. 2, Benham Group: Remove information for Item A. 6. from Tentative Agenda and use the attached information. 3. Graver Engineers: Remove information for Item A.7. from the Tentative Agenda and the Agenda Session and use the attached information. 4. Police Vehicle Purchase: Remove page one from Item A.B. and use the attached page. • 5. Ozark Mountain Outfitters: Remove from agenda. 6. Youth Center: Add the attached information to Item C. 3 . FAYETTEVIAEE • OHE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS FINAL AGENDA CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 7, 2000 please note time change A meeting of the Fayetteville City Council will be held on November 7, 2000 at 4 :30 p.m. in Room 219 of the City Administration Building located at 113 West Mountain Street, Fayetteville, Arkansas CONSENT AGENDA 7 1 . APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: Approval of the minutes from the October 17, 2000 City Council meeting. 2. ^'BRIDGEPORT SUBDIVISION: A resolution approving an agreement releasing • 1��. liability in the repair of the roadway entrance into the Bridgeport Subdivision. 3. vtEC TURNBACK: A resolution approving the 2 year renewal agreement with \ OD the State Board of Finance for tumback revenues for the Continuing Education \S ' Center under the Tourist Meeting and Entertainment Facilities Assistance Act. 4, WILSON PARK GREENHOUSE: A resolution approving the Wilson Park po Greenhouse bid to Jack Morgan Construction Company in the amount of $33,821 plus an additional $ 10,000 for utilities and a project contingency of $5,000 and authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute a contract. 5. 'EMPLOYEE INSURANCE: A resolution approving the renewal of the ��pU employee group policies from U S ABLE LIFE to provide, life, AD & D, LTD ' �j coverage and Sec. 125 cafeteria plan administration. 6. ✓BENHAM GROUP: A resolution approving contract amendment #3 with ' .00 Benham Group which provides for a $20,405 .00 increase in construction observation services in connection with the W/S Relocation and a $69,906.06 increase in additional engineering services in connection with the Dickson Street Enhancement Project, and a budget adjustment for the W/S part of the work. • 113 WEST MOUNTAIN 72701 501521-7700 FAX 501 575-8257 7 /t GARVER ENGINEERS: A resolution approving an engineering agreement with �V Garver Engineers for the design of a multi-level parking deck to be constructed on n the existing parking lot bounded by Center St. at the north, Mountain St. on the south, Church Ave. on the west and on the east of the buildings that front Block Ave. 8. ✓ POLICE VEHICLE PURCHASE: A resolution accepting Arkansas Contract A Award ST-01 -0914, to purchase 7 units from Landers Ford Item #7, 2001 Ford Crown Victoria Police Interceptor Sedan including Option "10" (53). Total bid �h award is $ 151 ,313.00. X19. V' WIS RELOCATIONS HWY 265: A resolution approving Change Order #5 to w the Construction Contract with Basic Construction Co., Inc. for Hwy 265 Widening (Hwy 45 to Hwy 16) Water and Sewer Relocation Phase Il. B. OLD BUSIINNESS 1. 1 / RZ 00-22 : An ordinance approving rezoning request RZ 00-22, submitted by VVV James Key on behalf of James Mitchell Massey for property located at 28 S. University. The property is zoned C- 1 , Neighborhood Commercial and contains approximately 0. 18 acres. The request is to rezone to R-3, High Density • Residential. This ordinance was left on the first reading at the October 17, 2000 meeting. C. NEWBUS ESS BOTANICAL GARDEN: Botanical Garden Society of the Ozarks, Inc. Annual afJt / Report-2000. 2. J SEWER CAMERA: An ordinance approving a bid waiver with Aries Industries for sewer camera system repair in the amount of $ 17,055 .89, and approving a bid contingency of $2,000. 3. / I ✓ YOUTH CENTER: Discussion regarding the use of City Funds for the o, ) Fayetteville Youth Center. k'g(o • FAYETTEVItLE 10HE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS , FINAL AGENDA CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 7, 2000 please note time change A meeting of the Fayetteville City Council will be held on November 7, 2000 at 4 :30 p.m. in Room 219 of the City Administration Building located at 113 West Mountain Street, Fayetteville, Arkansas CONSENT AGENDA 1 . APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES : Approval of the minutes from the October 17, 2000 City Council meeting. • 2. ^BRIDGEPORT SUBDIVISION: A resolution approving an agreement releasing liability in the repair of the roadway entrance into the Bridgeport Subdivision. 3. vtEC TURNBACK: A resolution approving the 2 year renewal agreement with the State Board of Finance for tumback revenues for the Continuing Education Center under the Tourist Meeting and Entertainment Facilities Assistance Act. 4, WILSON PARK GREENHOUSE: A resolution approving the Wilson Park Greenhouse bid to Jack Morgan Construction Company in the amount of $33,821 plus an additional $ 10,000 for utilities and a project contingency of $5,000 and authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute a contract. 5. v/EEMPLOYEE INSURANCE: A resolution approving the renewal of the employee group policies from U S ABLE LIFE to provide, life, AD & D, LTD coverage and Sec. 125 cafeteria plan administration. 6. V/ENHAM GROUP: A resolution approving contract amendment #3 with Benham Group which provides for a $20,405 .00 increase in construction observation services in connection with the W/S Relocation and a $69,906.06 increase in additional engineering services in connection with the Dickson Street Enhancement Project, and a budget adjustment for the W/S part of the work. • 113 WEST MOUNTAIN 72701 501521 -7700 FAX 501 575-8257 r� 7 GARVER ENGINEERS: A resolution approving an engineering agreement with O�IGJY Garver Engineers for the design of a multi-level parking deck to be constructed on the existing parking lot bounded by Center St. at the north, Mountain St. on the south, Church Ave. on the west and on the east of the buildings that front Block Ave. 8. ✓ POLICE VEHICLE PURCHASE: A resolution accepting Arkansas Contract Award ST-01 -0914, to purchase 7 units from Landers Ford Item #7, 2001 Ford Crown Victoria Police Interceptor Sedan including Option "IO" (53). Total bid award is $ 151 ,313 .00. 9. ✓ W/S RELOCATIONS HWY 265 : A resolution approving Change Order #5 to the Construction Contract with Basic Construction Co., Inc. for Hwy 265 Widening (Hwy 45 to Hwy 16) Water and Sewer Relocation Phase II. B. OLD BUSIINNESS 00-22: An ordinance approving rezoning request RZ 00-22, submitted by VVV James Key on behalf of James Mitchell Massey for property located at 28 S. University. The property is zoned C- 1 , Neighborhood Commercial and contains approximately 0. 18 acres. The request is to rezone to R-3, High Density • Residential. This ordinance was left on the first reading at the October 17, 2000 meeting. C. NEW BUS ESS BOTANICAL GARDEN: Botanical Garden Society of the Ozarks, Inc. Annual Report-2000. Y 2. �/ SEWER CAMERA: An ordinance approving a bid waiver with Aries Industries for sewer camera system repair in the amount of $ 17,055 .89, and approving a bid contingency of $2,000. I 3. ✓ YOUTH CENTER: Discussion regarding the use of City Funds for the ko fJ Fayetteville Youth Center. �% Fetp'91 y 9 ,ZdEl2 / ,.� Cp�p �GZr.�L GC O C r k'guoo Meeting of November 7, 2000 L DANIEL ✓ / ANTOS YOUNG RUSSELL ✓ REYNOLDS JlfBi/ AUSTIN ✓ DAVIS TRUMBO HANNA ✓ DANIEL v T YOUNG ✓ F SELLNOLDSTIN IS ✓ TRUMBO HANNA Meeting of November 7, 2000 r ANIEL 1 ANTO I YOUNG RUSSELL AUSTIN DAVIS TRUMBO HANNA DANIEL ( IXRTOS YOUNG RUSSELL AUSTIN DAVIS TRUMB HANNA w J • • Meeting of November 7, 2000 �. V ANIEL ✓ ✓ ✓ ANTOS ✓ �/ �' S YOUNG f� ✓ // RUSSELL ✓ ►/ 1/ AUSTIN DAVIS ✓ ►� ►� TRUMBO HANNA 7-(7 ANIEL SANTOS YOUNG RUSSELL AUSTIN DAVIS TRUMBO HANNA Meeting of November 7, 20001 ANIEL ANTOS L/ YOUNG RUSSELL ✓ AUSTIN ✓ DAVIS TRUMBO ✓ HANNA �eryANIEL ANTO S YOUNG RUSSELL AUSTIN DAVIS TRUMBO HANNA 1 � • MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE FAYETTEVILLE CITY COUNCIL OCTOBER 17, 2000 A meeting of the Fayetteville City Council was held on October 17, 2000 at 6:30 p.m. in Room 219 of the City Administration Building. PRESENT: Mayor Fred Hanna, Aldermen Reynolds, Austin, Davis, Trumbo, Daniel, Santos, Young and Russell, City Attorney Jerry Rose, City Clerk Heather Woodruff, Staff, Press, and Audience. CONSENT AGENDA APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: Approval of the minutes from the September 19 and October 3, 2000 City Council meetings. BID 00-66: A resolution awarding Bid No. 00-66 to Ron Blackwell Ford in the amount of $68,908.00 for the purchase of one cab/chassis with mounted utility body and lift. RESOL UTION 137-00 AS RECORDED IN THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK. BID 00-70: A resolution accepting a purchase offer and authorizing the sale of Unit No. 430, 1991 Mack RD 6885 cab/chassis with mounted leach 2RII Sanitation Body to RDK Truck Sales and Services, Inc. in the amount of $24,776.01 . RESOL UTION 138-00 AS RECORDED IN THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK. SEWER MANHOLE REHABILITATION: A resolution approving a construction change order with Kim Construction, Inc. for Sanitary Sewer Manhole Rehabilitation, Illinois Basin 6-9 and 16, and White River Minisystem 9A, in the amount of $ 104,503 and maintain a contingency of $ 15,000. RESOLUTION 139-00 AS RECORDED IN THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK. BLUE CROSS/BLUE SHIELD: A resolution renewing the BCBS Medical Contract for Policy Year January 1 , 2001 through December 31 , 2001 . RESOLUTION 140-00 AS RECORDED IN THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK. NEW WORLD SYSTEM: A resolution approving a three-year standard software maintenance contract with New World Systems, Inc. and authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to sign contract. RESOL UTION 141-00 AS RECORDED IN THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK. City Council Minutes October 17, 2000 Page 2 MUNICIPAL COURT SOFTWARE : A resolution approving a contract with New World Systems, Inc. for project management and installation of the Municipal Court system software, and authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to sign agreement. RESOL UTION 142-00 AS RECORDED IN THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK. BID 00-69: A resolution approving a budget adjustment and awarding Bid No. 00-69 to Total Data Services, Inc. for an IBM AS/400 model 720 and to Info Works, Inc. for an IBM AS/400 model 270. RESOLUTION 143-00 AS RECORDED IN THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK. DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE STUDY: A resolution approving phase one of the contract with James Duncan and Associates, Inc. to perform a development impact fee study. Approve the Mayor and City Clerk to sign the agreement with James Duncan and Associates, Inc. Additionally, authorize $4,500 in other project costs for phase one. RESOLUTION 144-00 AS RECORDED IN THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK. EDUCATIONAL ACCESS CHANNEL: A resolution authorizing an agreement with the University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, to operate the Educational Access Channel until October 31 , 2002. RESOLUTION 145-00 AS RECORDED 1N THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK. WHITE RIVER BASEBALL COMPLEX: A resolution approving a budget adjustment in the amount of $50,900 for White River Baseball Complex. RESOL UTION 146-00 AS RECORDED IN THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK. DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS ENTERPRISE PROGRAM: A resolution approving the revised Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Program to be implemented for all DOT/FAA grant assisted contracts entered into by the City of Fayetteville. The revised program is required by new DOT rules and regulations published in the Federal Register, 49CFR Part 26. The new resolution will replace Resolution No. 81 -88 approved on November 1 , 1988. RESOL UTION 147-00 AS RECORDED IN THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK. Alderman Daniel moved to approve the Consent Agenda, Alderman Davis seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion carried unanimously. City Council Minutes October 17, 2000 Page 3 OLD BUSINESS No Old Business. NEW BUSINESS RZ 00-22 : An ordinance approving rezoning request R. 00-22, submitted by James Key on behalf of James Mitchell Massey for property located at 28 S. University. The property is zoned C- 1 , Neighborhood Commercial and contains approximately 0. 18 acres. The request is to rezone to R-3, High Density Residential. Mr. Rose read the ordinance for the first time. -Alderman Daniel stated they normally did not pass a rezoning at the first meeting, especially since there is some controversy on the rezoning. Mr. James Key, applicant's representative, stated they had petitioned the City for a rezoning from C- 1 to R-3 . He presented a letter regarding the highest and best use concept for neighborhood analysis this property. The letter stated the principle of change as it applies to the evaluation of property is always at work on real property. Change is relentless. It could be rapid or slow, but in all cases this principle was driven by the economic and social forces at work in the market. Reasonable interpretation of probable directions are desirable. In determining the highest and best use or the most profitable use of property the use in which reasonable determination over a perceivable amount of time produce the owner the highest net return and will at the same time preserve the utility of the property. Property without utility have no value. In the growth factor of a neighborhood life cycle, principle of regression and progression are logical extensions of conformity and change. Regression suggest that the value of superior property suffers from by the introduction of a less valuable property as a neighbor. In contrast, progression holds that adjacent association with superior property enhance the value of a lessor property. In the case of the property located 28 South University a limited number of single family residences remain. Of the remaining single family residences, the majority is rental property or non-owner occupied. Directly across the street high-density apartment units dominate, as is the case to the east. To the south single-family and multi-family and high-density residential are predominate. The overall majority of the neighborhood is characterized by multi-family residential facilities. Most of the smaller unit apartment facility have been constructed over the last five-years. In his opinion, this neighborhood market reflects a reasonable determination that the typical investor would purchase the property with thoughts toward the current development trend which is multi-family residential use. Commercial facilities would also be feasible which would cater to the motoring public or foot traffic generated by the neighborhood makeup. However, considering the immediate surrounding influences of the property located at 28 South University, commercial property such as gas stations or eating establishments allowed by the current zoning with City Council Minutes October 17, 2000 Page 4 nonsimilar uses would tend to bring adjoining properties into a regression state. Conversely, development with similar type uses such as multi-family residential would tend to have a progressive affect or enhancement for the adjacent property. The letter is not intended to be an analysis of value, but of neighborhood trend. The letter was submitted by Mickey Bradley. The owners of the property had asked him to assist with the development of the property. They had looked at the issue of this property being zoned C- 1 and the residence being unoccupied and abandoned for a period of more than six-months. It has been almost two years since someone has occupied this home. Considering those factors, they could no longer be used as a single family residence with the current C- 1 zoning. If it was an accessory to a commercial, use, it possibly could be used as a residence. Considering the location of the building on the site and the quality of the structure, they had determined that it was not practical to use it as an accessory to a commercial use. They looked to see if commercial uses were practical in the development of this site. C-1 allowed by right, office and studios, eating places, neighborhood shopping, gasoline service stations, drive-in restaurants, and professional offices. Considering the size of the lot and the condition of the neighborhood, they felt a high density residential development was their best potential for a development that would bend with the neighborhood and will work with the area. He presented a zoning map of the neighborhood. All the homes in the area were zoned I- 1 as is the rail road right-of-way and the property to the west and north were R-3 . They felt R-3 was in compliance and compatibility with the rest of the neighborhood. They had stated on the record in the past that the house, which was thought to be of historic character and quality, that it was available at no cost to be removed from the property. The owner has had several calls. The owner was willing to up that offer and include $2,000 to assist in move this home from the site if it was practical. He had also made the site available to anyone who would like to purchase the lot and the residence. There had been no offers, so he was intending to proceed with the development of this property. He has not chosen to demolish the house, even though it was considered a hazard. He had spoken with the Inspector and Fire Marshall whose basic opinions were that the City would be appreciative if the house was removed. Alderman Trumbo stated he considered this a down zoning. He stated it would never be a single family residential home unless someone bought it. He thought the owner would be fixing up a piece of property and cleaning it up. He knew the neighbors would be concerned about added traffic, which would be a concern because it was a narrow street. Mr. Keys stated some of these concerns came up during the Planning Commission meeting. They would be limited to approximate five to six units, because of the size of the lot. They were hoping for six one-bedroom apartments, which would require six parking spaces. Currently, as a C- 1 zone there are no side yard setbacks or height limits. The property to the north was commercial. The property to the south was industrial. There were no height limits or side set backs. They were wanting to build a small residential structure unit that was compatible to the surrounding neighborhood. There were two multi-family units directly across the street. There J City Council Minutes October 17, 2000 Page 5 was another one within two-tenths of a mile. There were several others to the east. Alderman Davis asked how long has the owners offer to move the house or to purchase the property been out to the public. Mr. Keys replied the offer had been covered by the television and press a little over two weeks ago. There was some concern about being able to move the house off the site without affecting the largest tree on the site. There was some logistics about moving the house. There would be some impact and affects from the move. Alderman Reynolds asked when Mr. Massey had purchased the property and added the neighbors never knew that the property had been for sale. Mr. Keys stated the property had been a trust-and was not sure how or when he purchased the property. The property had been zoned Commercial for thirty years or more. Alderman Reynolds stated a lot of the residential property in the older part of town was zoned crazy. In response to questions from Alderman Daniel, Mr. Key stated he did not know how old the home was. He had gone through all the historical records. There was a house in approximately this location. It appeared to be about twice the size of this structure. He really did not know the age of the structure. The owner was not interested in saving this property. They had a contractor look at the property. The foundation was crumbling and the structure itself was in bad shape. He thought it would be more feasible to tear down the existing structure and build a new one. Alderman Trumbo asked Mr. Keys if in his opinion would the proposed multi-family complex in any way inhibit the current values of the existing single-family residents along the street. Mr. Keys stated he thought that it would actually improve. He thought that it would have a positive effect or a progression on the values of the neighboring properties. A commercial development would not have the same impact. Alderman Austin stated he was interested in seeing more projects in the interior of the city to make better use of our infrastructure. This project would help avoid urban sprawl. But on the other hand, it was an old neighborhood. There was a need for affordable housing in Fayetteville. There was a question about its historical value. This was a difficult issue for him to decide on. He stated he would like to hear from the neighbors. Alderman Santos stated this was the kind of development that they needed in the intercity. It was higher density within walking distance of downtown, the University, and it was on a transit line. City Council Minutes October 17, 2000 Page 6 It was adjacent to an area that the city was going to construct a trail. It would increase neighboring property values. It was in character with the rest of the neighborhood. He was going to support the rezoning. Mr. Keys stated it was close to the trail, but the rail line that was directly to the east of this property was not the subject of the Prairie Trail development. It was the main line for the Arkansas Missouri Railroad. It was going to remain so. Alderman Reynolds stated one of the apartment complexes faced Center Street, the one to the west was on Putman Street. The only apartments on this street were at the far south end on the right-hand side on the hill. The rest of the street was seventeen residential houses. It was an older neighborhood with affordable housing. Ms. Mary Ann Beasley, an area resident, stated all of the people on this street were against this development. They had everyone's signature opposing this development. They felt that if this were turned into an apartment complex, it would be the beginning of the end of the neighborhood that they loved. She stated she planned to live in her house for the rest of her life. They considered this development a threat to their livelihood. She questioned how anyone could tear down a house that was pre-civil war, even though they did not know the date. She had not heard about this until two weeks ago today. They did not know it was even for sale. There were apartments all around there that went unrented. They did not need more apartments in the area. They could not stand any more traffic on South University. They loved their neighborhood. Children were up and down the street all the time. The increase in traffic was going to present a greater threat. They had no sidewalks. She asked for more time. They would find an owner. This was their home. Alderman Trumbo asked Ms. Beasley if they would rather have the house stay in its present condition. Ms. Beesley stated they wanted to buy it and rebuild it. They wanted a family there. They wanted more time. This could be on the historical registry. In response to questions, Mr. Conklin, Planning Director, stated they had placed the notification sign up as required. The adjoining property owners were notified. He could not guarantee that the US Mail got it to their house. They ran a display ad in the Sunday paper. They had also placed a legal ad in the paper prior to that. Alderman Young stated the Planning Commissions vote could have been different if they had heard from the neighbors. Mr. Cyrus Sutherland, retired Professor of Architecture, stated the house date is approximately City Council Minutes October 17, 2000 Page 7 1850. It preceded the Headquarters House on Center Street which was 1853 . The prime difference was that Headquarter House was Greek Revival Architecture. The Shoemaker House is a modest example of Greek Revival Architecture. It was an echo of the Ridge House which was 1836. There were two requirements that brings a house back to life, that was will and money. Its foundation needed to stabilized. Members of the joist system needed to be replaced. Many of the houses along University had been owner occupied for eighteen years. It was a residential neighborhood. There was the possibility of getting the Shoemaker House on the Historic Registry. This would take some time. Ms. Maria Westley, 129 S. University, stated she had watched all the children grow up the neighborhood and she had watched all the people in the apartments come and go. She asked the council if they had lived in this neighborhood and had raised their children there, if they would want to see another apartment complex there. She would hate to see more traffic on the street. There were no-sidewalks and everyone parked on the street. Mr. Michael Lolly, 706 Tredwell, stated he had lived in the neighborhood for thirteen years. The neighborhood was going through a modest renaissance . He would like to see more development which would encourage more single family residents. There was a lot of property that was currently changing hands. It was going from absentee landlords, rental property, to owner occupied property. It was a modest renaissance. It was an interesting neighborhood. There were a lot of people his age that were moving into the neighborhood. It was diverse and colorful. They wanted to see development that encouraged less high density, less traffic. That was the only problem he had with the development. He did not think that it was what their neighborhood had in mind. Alderman Santos stated one thing they could do to protect their neighborhood, that had single family homes in an Industrial zoned area, was to get together and come to the city and ask them to down zone the property to residential. He thought they could waive the fees. That would allow them to keep the neighborhood that they had. Everyone that was willing to downzone their property should get together and contact Tim Conklin in the Planning Office. They would see what they could do to protect it. He thought they should do this. Mr. Conklin stated he had spoken with Joe Robson. He was going to provide a map of the area. He was encouraging the neighbors to look at their properties. He wanted the neighbors to come and see him and discuss what zoning was appropriate for the neighborhood. Keep in mind, that in 1970 this was zoned I- 1 , Heavy Commercial Light Industrial. The piece of property had been zoned C-1 . The current zoning allowed four dwelling units as an accessory use, plus a commercial use. The current zoning would allow for apartment units, plus a commercial use. The City of Fayetteville did not issue a permit to demolish a single family home. That included Washington/Willow, Mt Nord and Historic District. If someone wanted to demolish the building they did not have to contact the city. City Council Minutes October 17, 2000 Page 8 Mr. Lolly stated it would be great to get some kind of permit or notice in order to take out a structure. Mr. Joe Robson, an area resident, questioned the variance that they had been granted for the development from the Board of Adjustments. He also questioned the notice for the meetings. He asked if the property was ever advertised for sale. There was never a sign in Ms. Shoemakers yard indicating that the property was for sale. He stated they had every signature of the other property owner opposing this development. In response to questions from Alderman Trumbo, Mr. Conklin stated that under C-I zoning there was no minimum lot width requirement. Under R-3 zoning the minimum lot width requirement was ninety feet for three or more units. They had applied for a variance in order to be able to build more than three or more units on an eighty-foot lot. They had the required lot area, but the width of the lot was not adequate. The variance was subject to approval of the property being rezoned to R-3 . The Board of Adjustment had granted a variance to allow three or more units with a lot width of eighty-feet contingent on the rezoning. -Alderman Austin stated-byrightthey could-construct one-business and four residences. Mr. Conklin stated they had mixed-use developments. As an accessory use, they allowed residential uses. These residential uses were limited to the R-2 zoning district, which was twenty-four units per acre. Alderman Austin stated if they denied the rezoning it would remain C- 1 , which allowed one business and four residential units. Mr. Conklin stated that was correct. They would not need the variance, because there was no minium lot width. Mr. Keys stated there were multi-family residential property on the street. There were a lot of them on University Street. This was a high-density residential area. It has been promoted by the 20/20 Plan as being a mixed used, with the intention of promoting higher density residential development to support the infrastructure and the increase the student housing needs. Alderman Austin stated they needed to increase the density in the downtown area. However, there was an emerging pride in this neighborhood. In fairness they should be heard for the three readings. He thought the best thing to do was leave the item on the first reading and give the neighbors time to be heard. Mayor Hanna explained they usually did not move a rezoning request through two or three reading, when their was public opposition to it. They would let it go to the second and third City Council Minutes October 17, 2000 Page 9 reading. He did not think that they would vote it up or down tonight. He thought they had been given a lot of information that they needed to read. Letters and pictures from property owners. He thought the council needed the time to look at all this information. Ms. Marsha Robson, an area resident, stated she would like to express some of the adjacent property owners concerns. They were concerned about the traffic and if the lighting from the parking lot would disturb the neighbors. She was also concerned about the water run-off from the complex. She noted they did not have any sidewalks on the street. Alderman Young stated his house was in the same situation as this neighborhood. He lived in a residential neighborhood. The entire area was zoned commercial. He stated the city needed to address these zoning problems. When the rezoning were passed, the city had different views and priorities. One of the things that was needed was residential. One of the keys to maintaining a viable downtown area was owner occupied single-family residences. He use to live in this neighborhood. Those houses were not use buildings, they were homes to families. They were concerned about keeping their neighborhood. Fayetteville needed affordable houses. Someone could buy the house and slowly do the preservation. He thought the commercial with accessory units would be more compatible than the apartment complexes.It was not good for the long term benefit of the central part of the city. If they kept tearing down the single house and putting up apartments. In response to questions from Alderman Russell, Mr. Massey stated he had purchased the property with the intent of improving the neighborhood by developing a very tasteful development. THE ITEM WAS LEFT ON THE FIRST READING. The meeting adjourned and started the public /rearing for Water and Sewer Bonds. WATER AND SEWER BONDS: A public hearing on an ordinance providing for the issuance of $ 10,000,000 principal amount of Water and Sewer System Revenue Bonds, Series 2000: authorizing the execution and delivery of a trust indenture, an underwriting agreement, a remarketing agreement, a letter of credit and reimbursement agreement, and a tax compliance agreement in connection therewith; approving an official statement in connection with the offer and sale of the bonds; providing for certain other matters relating thereto; and declaring an emergency. Mr. Hunt stated there had been some minor changes in the terminology. They did not have a Reimbursement agreement. They had a stand by bond purchase agreement. It accomplished the same thing. City Council Minutes October 17, 2000 Page 10 Alderman Young questioned if they would have to do a separate vote on the emergency clause. Mr. Rose replied they would need a separate vote. They would need to have a public hearing. They needed to make sure that it was a distinct part of the proceedings. They needed to have the public hearing, then they could read the ordinance and have the vote. Mr. Jeff Erf, 2711 Woodcliff Road, he asked them to explain what the money would be used for and who would pay the interest. Alderman Trumbo explained they were basically recouping the money they had already spent on the land, the architectural, and engineering. It was to recoup the money they had already spent so they were not earning any interest income for the city. Mr. Erf asked if it was for the new sewage treatment improvements. Was it strictly sewer or was it water. The ordinance read water and sewer. Alderman Trumbo stated that was the title of the bonds that it was under. The theory is to recoup what-they had-already-spent-out-of-the-sewer reserves-Even-ifthe-bond issue for the new proposed plant did not get voted in. They were still taking steps to recoup that money. They would earn about two hundred and fifty basis points spreads on the difference. Which was two and a half percent. It would be generating additional interest income for the city based on the lower amount of interest on the bond amount. What they were doing was creative financing in order to create more revenue for the city. Mr. Erf questioned if they were going into debt for ten million dollars to pay for land and engineering design studies for the proposed sewage treatment improvements? Alderman Austin stated they had money that was invested. They were drawing more money on their investment then they would be paying on the interest for this bond issue. They were going to make money on the deal. They had spent money on improving the system. Mayor Hanna stated this went back to the beginning of the project. They started spending money when they went outside their own sources. Mr. Erf asked where the money would be coming from. Mayor Hanna stated it would come from the receipts from the water and sewer bills. They had a built in excess there to build a reserve for emergencies and expansions. Alderman Trumbo stated there would not be any increase in the base water rates. City Council Minutes October 17, 2000 Page 11 Alderman Santos stated the way he understood it was that by selling these bonds they would get a lower interest rate than on what they could get on a return for the money. They would show a profit on it. Alderman Trumbo explained what they were trying to do was recoup ten million dollars that they had already spent out of the sewer fund. They had spent hard dollars to get to where they were today. What they were trying to do is float the double tax free bonds through Stevens Inc. to recoup the money they had already spent, and make about two hundred fifty basis point spread. So the money would come back into the city's bank account. They would have the money back in and no ones's water bill would be increasing. They were going to amortizing the bonds and paying the bond owners that money by allowing the city to recoup their money. They were going to be making money by doing this transaction. Alderman Davis stated our debt service was going to be less. than the interest they were going to receive back. Alderman Young asked if the money would be put back into the water and sewer fund. Mr. Maguire stated the money would be going back into the fund. About six and a half million would go back immediately. About three and half million would be held in trust for future expenditure. Mr. Erf asked where the exhibits were that were in the ordinance. Mr. Dennis Hunt, Stevens Inc., stated those exhibits had been presented to the City Clerk tonight. Mr. Erf stated there were financial advisors and lawyers and what was their cut on this. How much were we paying them? Mayor Hanna stated they had let those services out on bid. The one that bid the best rate was contracted with. There were no more public comments. Mayor Hanna closed the public hearing. Mr. Rose read the ordinance for the first time. Alderman Russell moved to suspend the rules and move to the second reading. Alderman Reynolds seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion carried unanimously. City Council Minutes October 17, 2000 Page 12 Mr. Rose read the ordinance for the second time. Alderman Austin moved to suspend the rules and move to third and final reading. Alderman Reynolds seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion carried unanimously. Mr. Rose read the ordinance for the third and final time. Mayor Hanna asked shall the ordinance pass. Upon roll call the ordinance passed unanimously. Mr. Rose stated they needed a separate vote on the emergency clause. Alderman Santos moved to approve emergency clause. Alderman Trumbo seconded the motion. Upon roll-call the motion .carried_unanimously. . ORDINANCE 4276 AS RECORDED IN THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK. Meeting adjourned-at 9:OOp. m. — -- - -- - - --- - CERTIFICATE OF RECORD State of Arkansas City of Fayetteville ss. I, Heather Woodruff, City Clerk/Treasurer for the City of Fayetteville, do hereby certify that the foregoing instrument. is a true and corfect copy Of the original � /� 7 LSD C file in my ffice on the D - Witness day of seal thi day of mYhand and M they M'oatlrufT, Ciry Clerk /Treasurer City Council Minutes October 17, 2000 Page 12 Mr. Rose read the ordinance for the second time. Alderman Austin moved to suspend the rules and move to third and final reading. Alderman Reynolds seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion carried unanimously. Mr. Rose read the ordinance for the third and final time. Mayor Hanna asked shall the ordinance pass. Upon roll call the ordinance passed unanimously. Mr. Rose stated they needed a separate vote on the emergency clause. Alderman Santos moved to approve emergency clause. Alderman Trumbo seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion carried unanimously. ORDINANCE 4276 AS RECORDED IN THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK. Meeting adjourned at 9: 00 p. m. gayettevi!(e Woutk eenter BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS 915 California Drive Fayetteville, Arkansas 72701 a Phone 442-9242 DATE: November 1 , 2000 TO: Members of the Fayetteville City Council FROM : John Benberg, Executive Director Fayetteville Boys & Girls Club (You h Center) SUBJECT: new facility plans/impact Per the request made at Tuesday' s agenda session I am writing to provide additional information about our proposed new facility and its anticipated benefits to our community. Included in this packet are ( 1 ) the August 11 press release announcing our grant award, (2) a letter from Tom Stockland, our Chief Volunteer Officer, about City support for this project, (3) a National Programs brochure from the Boys & Girls Clubs of America (BGCA), and (4) a copy of our most recent sports programs brochure. The architectural renderings of our building will be displayed and referenced in our short presentation to you on November 7h. Our organization is in the midst of a planned growth cycle—an evolution from "swim and gym" provider to world-class youth development organization with a full continuum of programs, activities and services. This direction is largely based on a strategic plan, developed last year with City support, which featured input from local stakeholders and visits to other communities to view the finest youth facilities in existence. In simplest terms, we have a blueprint for success and are eager to make it happen. A major step toward implementation of the strategic plan was to re-affiliate with the BGCA, a move made last fall. In re joining this international organization, we gained access to their extensive menu of age and gender appropriate programs (see enclosed brochure) that are perfect complements to our existing recreational sports foundation. So, we now have programmatic tools to teach life skills, develop leadership abilities, enhance academic achievement and prepare youth for employment that can be implemented quickly with adequate resources and space. Other benefits from the BGCA affiliation include ready-made staff and Board development packages, outcome measures for certain programs, organizational effectiveness evaluations, model polices/manuals and a direct connection to over 50,000 industry professionals around the globe. 0 0 Another benchmark on our path to excellence is the recent establishment of a permanent Branch Unit at Jefferson Elementary School in the southeast quadrant of town. Our presence there will provide youth a safe, structured and supervised alternative for the after-school time period that concerns parents and others the most. On a related note, we are seeking federal grant funds for an Outreach Program that would allow us to deliver youth and family oriented programs directly to local subsidized housing communities. New members acquired through the Branch Unit and any Outreach Program will benefit from the new facility too as we are committed to a transportation system that provides them access on par with all other local youth. Just the prospect of a new facility has given momentum to negotiating new and mutually beneficial partnerships. Of late the University of Arkansas has expressed interest in improving retention rates and we can help young people better prepare for the post- secondary school experience. Corporate employers are looking for better personnel and we have programs specifically designed to offer just that. Civic organizations seek human causes with value and we provide such. Other funders seek assurances their investments are well placed and we welcome those inquiries. There is literally no end to the synergies that might be created with the lever of a state-of-the-art facility for youth. If we are able to build and operate a new facility such as the one proposed, the impact will be dramatic and permanent. More young people will have a safe and positive place to go after school and on weekends. More young people will be able to develop a positive relationship with a caring adult, something that unfortunately fewer homes seem to provide these days. More young people will have access to a variety of developmental programming—whether it is help with homework, physical activity programs, computer training or any number of other possibilities—so they can acquire the tools necessary to succeed. Less obvious, but no less significant, will be the tremendous boost in self- concept that young members will realize when given access to a new and exciting place to call their own. We want to be a leader and catalyst toward making Fayetteville a national model for how a community supports it youth, and ask for your support toward meeting that goal. To: Fayetteville City Council From: Tom Stockland, Chief Volunteer Officer Fayetteville Youth Center d/b/a Fayetteville Boys & Girls Club As you know, the Fayetteville Boys & Girls Club has received a grant in excess of nine and a quarter million dollars from the Donald W. Reynolds Foundation. In 1995, the citizens of Fayetteville approved the HMR taxes. The taxes were specifically advertised to address several capital needs including renovation of the Fayetteville Youth Center. In 1996, the Fayetteville Youth Center began the process of attempting to renovate its facility through work with an architect. The renovation was estimated to cost roughly five million dollars that made funding solely from HMR prohibitive. The Fayetteville Youth Center applied for a grant from the Donald W. Reynolds Foundation for approximately four and a half million dollars to be used in the renovation of the current Fayetteville Youth Center. Although making it through several stages of the grant process to the site visit, we were notified that for a grant to be considered that a strategic plan would be necessary. It was the belief of the Donald W. Reynolds Foundation' s staff that there had not been enough long term planning to justify the renovation of the building. The Donald W. Reynolds foundation provided a grant of about $60,000 to pay a portion of the stategic plan, the City of Fayetteville made a commitment of nearly $ 100,000 and the Fayetteville Youth Center paid the remaining portion of the plan. Through the strategic plan, we learned that we could not meet the needs and desires of our citizens through a renovation of the current facility. The building is essentially land locked with no room for expansion, and we learned a new facility was the only construction we could justify. Interestingly, the staff of the Donald W. Reynolds Foundation had made that determination independently and was very comfortable that the stategic planning process would reach the same conclusion. We applied for a new grant to the Donald W. Reynolds Foundation requesting in excess of $ 14,000,000 for a new facility. The grant we were given was to construct the facility as drawn without the competitive pool and fieldhouse which reduces the projected costs of the facility to slighty more than $ 11 ,000,000. Value engineering will allow us to reduce the cost somewhat; however, without additional funds we will have to reduce the scale of the building to some degree. We expect this model facility to be built at a cost of around $90 a square foot. I would note that the Council has supported much more expensive projects such as the Senior Center and Library using taxpayer monies as the bulk of their financial support. The city has an opportunity to support a more reasonably priced facility for our youth and we have already raised 70% to 80% of the costs from private funding. The fact that our facility is not as expensive should not be interpreted as "cheap construction" since we can point to the two recently completed middle schools which costs between $65 and $70 a square foot. This facility will be a first class facility for our youth. The grant we obtained will not pay all of the fees associated with constructing the building. The Fayetteville Youth Center will be responsible for a portion of the architect's fees, a portion of the engineering fees, all of the surveyors fees, all of the fees related to wetland delineation and various other fees. The grant will not pay for anything 0 0 outside the building. We will be responsible for parking, land cost, landscaping, fields, lights on field, walking trails, extensive dirt work, and many similar type of expenses that are not inside the building. In addition to the costs that the Fayetteville Youth Center must pay, we are required to raise $ 1 ,860,000.00 that will be put into a deferred maintenance endowment fund. That fund is a requirement of the grant and must be raised before we begin construction. This fund will be used to maintain the building to assure that the facility remains in first class condition because it is named after Mr. Reynolds. In addition, there will be costs associated with moving and expansion that are one time costs. There will be greater transportation needs and greater staff needs. We will increase involvement substantially, raising the costs of scholarships we provide to youth. We have substantially increased our scholarship costs in the last year, but expect the costs to increase much more. In addition to the deferred maintenance, we anticipate raising a similar sum to offset the increased costs of operation and participation over the next several years. We do not discount or ignore the significant assistance that has already been given to this project by the City of Fayetteville. We thank the City for its help in moving Rupple road forward by several years in its CIP budget, for its assistance relating to the lease of the park land, and for the money provided to assist in the strategic planning process. However, we come once again asking for more support. In addition to the annual support we receive from the city, we would request that the city provide us with the sum of $750,000 a year for three years. . Roughly, one million dollars of that amount would go directly into the building. The value engineering we discussed above and the $ 1 ,000,000 from the city would allow the building to be constructed without giving up any of the amenities important to programming. The remaining $ 1 ,250,000 would pay the remaining costs associated with construction of the building. For the price of $2,250.000 the City will have a first class facility for its youth that has a price tag in excess of $ 11 ,500,000. We will still be required to raise money from the area to meet the deferred maintenance fund and the costs associated with the move mentioned above, but this commitment from the City is essential. For 24% of the construction costs, we will build a reasonably priced facility that will have an impact on one of your most important constituents, our youth. ga yetteviUe Voutk eenter BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS 915 California Drive Fayetteville, Arkansas 72701 a Phone 442-9242 John Benberg, Executive Director August 11 , 2000 Fayetteville Boys & Girls Club "FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE" (501 ) 442-9242 The Fayetteville Boys & Girls Club (FBGC) is privileged to announce a $9,260,413 capital grant award from the Donald W. Reynolds Foundation for construction of a new facility off Wedington Drive in west Fayetteville. This new facility, envisioned to be in excess of 80,000 square feet, will include gymnasia, pool, classrooms, computer labs and other spaces along with outdoor playing fields specifically designed to support an exciting menu of sports and age-appropriate developmental programs for area youth. "It (the grant award) is great news and something we have been working toward for a long time," said Tom Stockland, local attorney and current President of the FBGC Board of Directors. "We owe the Reynolds Foundation a tremendous debt of gratitude for the money, obviously, but also for seeing our potential and pushing us in the right direction as an organization." The former Fayetteville Youth Center serves over 3 ,000 members now, with a lot more expected in the new facility. Executive Director John Benberg, who succeeded the retired Dale Clark in March of this year, says the additional space is long overdue but there is more to the new facility than just that. "We told Trustees and staff of the Reynolds Foundation that we wanted to be part of making Fayetteville and Washington County a national model for how communities support their young people, and that kind of goal is consistent with their mission. It also sends a message that all kids, regardless of means or talents, deserve a nice place to go and a strong menu of top quality programs. The Reynolds folks have made the facility possible, so the rest is up to us and the greater Fayetteville community." Of course a new building will not materialize instantly, there are lots of things to be done before construction even begins. For example, as a requirement of the Reynolds grant, the FBGC must raise a Restricted Fund for Building Maintenance, Repair and Equipment as well as funds for construction costs not covered by the grant. "We are gathering ourselves as an organization to prepare for fundraising, facility design modifications, decisions about programming and everything else that goes with an opportunity like this" said Stockland. "This community and northwest Arkansas in general has demonstrated a real willingness to step up and support good causes, so we are optimistic that a facility like this for area youth will be viewed in a very positive light." r 1 0 John Benberg, Executive Director August 11 , 2000 Fayetteville Boys & Girls Club "FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE" (501 ) 442-9242 Page 2 oft An advisory group, referred to as the "Community Council" according to Benberg, has been formed to help with bringing the new facility on line. "We'll have a diverse membership with varying perspectives to talk about transportation, programs, hours of operation, costs and a million other things. I am sure we'll have some public forums as well so everyone has a chance for input." Interested individuals will also be able to submit comments or suggestions via the FBGC web page once the changes currently underway are complete. The Donald W. Reynolds Foundation is a national philanthropic organization founded in 1954 by the late media entrepreneur for which it is named. Reynolds was the founder and principal owner of the Donrey Media Group. When he died in 1993 , the company included over 70 businesses, the majority of which were in the communications/media field. The sale of the Donrey Media Group in 1993 provided for the Foundation' s endowment. Headquartered in Las Vegas, it is one of the largest private foundations in the United States. For further information, contact John Benberg (442-9242) or Tom Stockland (521 -7130).