HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005-01-25 - Agendas - Final Aldermen
Ward I Position I - Robert Reynolds
Mayor Dan Coody 1 Ward I Position 2 - Brenda ThielayeMel
Ward 2 Position I - Kyle a Cook
City Attorney Kit Williams Ward 2 Position 2 - Don Marr
Ward 3 Position I - Robert K. Rhoads
City Clerk Sondra Smith - - Ward 3 Position 2 — Bobby Ferrell
ARKANSAS Ward 4 Position I - Shirley Lucas
Ward 4 Position 2 - Lioncld Jordan
Final Agenda
Public Hearing
Special City Council Meeting
January 25, 2005
A Special meeting of the Fayetteville City Council will be held on January 25, 2005 at 5 :30 p.m.
in Room 219 of the City Administration Building located at 113 West, Mountain Street,
Fayetteville, Arkansas.
Call to Order
Roll Call
Pledge of Allegiance
A. New Business:
1. Highway 71 East Square Redevelopment District 41 Boundary Modification
Adoption: An ordinance modifying the boundaries of the Highway 71 East
Square Redevelopment District Number One pursuant to A.C.A. § 14-168-305 (f)
and A.C.A. § 14- 168-307(c) declaring an emergency.
PASSED AND SHALL BE RECORDED AS ORDINANCE NO. 4673.
B. Public Hearin%:
1 . Highway 71 East Square Redevelopment District #1 Project Plan
Amendment: A Public Hearing to allow all members of the public and
representatives of taxing entities to present their views on the Proposed Project
Plan Amendment for the Highway 71 East Square Redevelopment District
Number One.
113 West Mountain 72701 (479) 521-7700 (479) 575-8257 (Fax)
accessfayetiev i Ile.org
C. New Business:
1. Highway 71 East Square Redevelopment District #1 Project Plan
Amendment: An ordinance amending the Project Plan for the Highway 71 East
Square Redevelopment District Number One, finding the Plan is economically
feasible and declaring an emergency.
THIS ITEM WAS LEFT ON THE FIRST READING OF THE
ORDINANCE.
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 8:00 P.M.
113 West Mountain 72701 (479) 521-7700 (479) 575-8257 (Fax)
accessfayettev i I le.org
City Council Meeting January 25, 2A •
Subject: ALwW
Motion To:
Motion By:
Seconded: �
Lucas
E
Cook
Marr
Rhoads
Ferrell
Mayor Coody
Subject:
Motion To: +�
i mti .e CZJ�a-e-�
Motion By:
Seconded: � ' ;
Lucas
Jordan
Reynolds
r} Q Thiel
Cook
Marr
Rhoads ✓
Ferrell
Mayor Coody
City Council Meeting January25, 204)wa
• ,`GiQil14�
Subject: 41
0
Motion To: d�
Motion By:
Seconded:
Lucas ✓ too/
Jordan
1 Reynolds ✓ ,/ t/
Thiel
Cook ✓ /�✓ �/
MarrSe„� lJ-U X16
Rhoads ✓ t/ ✓
Ferrell
Mayor Coody
Subject:
Motion To: PCA �
Motion By:
Seconded:
Lucas ✓
Jordan ✓
Reynolds
Thiel
/ Cook ✓
Marr aj st.�
Rhoads ✓
Ferrell
Mayor Coody
1 - Q P ^"
City Council Meeting January 25, 20�
Subject: }�cii ,j eTUw
Motion To:
Motion By:
Seconded:
Lucas
Jordan
Reynolds
Thiel
Cook
�( � U Marr-
Rhoads
Ferrell
Mayor Coody
Subject:
Motion To:
Motion By:
Seconded:
Lucas
Jordan
Reynolds
Thiel
Cook
Marr
Rhoads
Ferrell
Mayor Coody
• Speaker Registration •
Annexation Public Hearing
Date of Public Hearing 1 ' P S�C
Speaker's Name Phone No, Address
Please Print Clearly)
2 SS u�Z-I - 317 -L,
3 Ij
6 — c3 (0 1.z
4
5 q� �J `J30 O� % S
6
7
8
Vv �rmy
9 W414. Z
10
11
12 YAZ
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Aldermen
Ward I Position I - Robert Reynolds
Mayor Dan Candy Ward I Position 2 - Brenda Thiel
Ward 2 Position 1 - Kyle B. Cook
City Attorney Kit Williams
Tavere;iile
Ward 2 Position 2 - Don Marr
ay Ward 3 Position 1 - RobK. Rhoads
City Clerk Sondra Smith Ward 3 Position 2 — Bobbyby Ferrell
ARKANSAS Ward 4 Position 1 - Shirley Lucas
Ward 4 Position 2 - Lioneld Jordan
Final Agenda
Public Hearing
Special City Council Meeting
January 25, 2005
A Special meeting of the Fayetteville City Council will be held on January 25, 2005 at 5 :30 p.m.
in Room 219 of the City Administration Building located at 113 West Mountain Street,
Fayetteville, Arkansas.
Call to Order
Roll Call
Pledge of Allegiance
A. New Business:
1. Highway 71 East Square Redevelopment District #1 Boundary Modification
Adoption: An ordinance modifying the boundaries of the Highway 71 East
Square Redevelopment District Number One pursuant to A.C.A. § 14-168-305 (f)
and A.C.A. § 14-168-307(c) declaring an emergency.
B. Public Hearing:
1. Highway 71 East Square Redevelopment District #1 Project Plan
Amendment: A Public Hearing to allow all members of the public and
representatives of taxing entities to present their views on the Proposed Project
Plan Amendment for the Highway 71 East Square Redevelopment District
Number One.
C. New Business:
1. Highway 71 East Square Redevelopment District #1 Project Plan
Amendment: An ordinance amending the Project Plan for the Highway 71 East
Square Redevelopment District Number One, finding the Plan is economically
feasible and declaring an emergency.
V
0 Si
Fayettevi I le Ywm&m Partners
January 24, 2005
Fayetteville City Council
113 W. Mountain St.
Fayetteville, AR 72701
Dear City Council,
On January 18'", the Fayetteville Downtown Partners Board of Directors met and
unanimously voted to support the Mountain Inn redevelopment project. We believe
this project is an integral component to our Downtown Master Plan and will
contribute greatly to the health and vitality of our community. We are not alone in this
sentiment. In the Downtown Master Plan , the citizens of Fayetteville identified the
Mountain Inn as one of their top priorities on the immediate project listings.
We urge the City Council to provide the leadership needed to assist in the
implementation of the redevelopment. For years, this abandoned building has
greeted visitors to our downtown area--- its dilapidated appearance sending a
message of apathy, indigence, and instability. We envision a new and vibrant hotel
complex that will restore our eastern downtown border, while creating a special place
that all of Fayetteville can enjoy.
Fayetteville Downtown Partners' looks forward to working with the City and its
citizens as we continue to develop the most exciting downtown experience in
Northwest Arkansas.
Best Regards,
Won Hoover
President, Fayetteville Downtown Partners
Our mission is to ensure a dynamic downtown area through economic development
initiatives, capital improvements and effective marketing of the district.
ORDINANCE NO,
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE PROJECT PLAN
FOR THE HIGHWAY 71 EAST SQUARE
REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER ONE,
FINDING THE PLAN IS ECONOMICALLY FEASIBLE,
AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY
WHEREAS, on July 27, 2004, the Fayetteville City Council held a Public
Hearing concerning the creation of the Highway 71 East Square Redevelopment District;
and
WHEREAS, on August 17, 2004, the City Council passed Ordinance No. 4608
creating the Highway 71 East Square Redevelopment District and authorized preparation
of a Redevelopment Project Plan; and
WHEREAS, the City with input from the proposed redevelopers of a Twenty-
Two Million Dollar hotel project to be constructed after removal of the blighted
Mountain Inn has prepared a proposed Project Plan; and
WHEREAS, on November 30, 2004, the City held a Public Hearing on this initial
Project Plan proposed for the Redevelopment District; and
WHEREAS, on December 7, 2004, the City had a further public hearing on this
Project Plan and passed Ordinance 4646 adopting the Project Plan; and
WHEREAS, because of a minor, technical notification discrepancy, the City
determined the need to renotify all statutorily required officials and republish notice of
the public hearings for the Redevelopment District; and
WHEREAS, the City Council after 15 day published notice held another public
hearing on December 28, 2004 at which all interested parties were given the opportunity
to express their views on the proposed adoption of the Project Plan for the Highway 71
East Square Redevelopment District Number One of Fayetteville, Arkansas; and
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted this Project Plan on December 28, 2004
by Ordinance No. 4663; and
WHEREAS, the Arkansas Attorney General in January 2005 has opined that the
25 mills required by Amendment 74 to be sent to the State may not be used for tax
incremental financing; and
WHEREAS, removing the 25 mills from the tax increment requires amendment
of the Project Plan; and
WHEREAS, the required fifteen day statutory notification of taxing entities and
two publications of notice of the intent to amend the Project Plan have been
accomplished prior to the public hearing for the Amendment to the Project Plan on
January 25, 2005 ; and
WHEREAS, the Amendment to the Project Plan complies with all statutory
requirements of A.C.A. § 14-168-306 and 307.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS:
Section 1 : That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby
finds that the Amended Project Plan for the Highway 71 East Square Redevelopment
District (attached as Exhibit A) is economically feasible.
Section 2: That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby
adopts the Amended Project Plan for the Highway 71 East Square Redevelopment
District and determines it has complied with all requirements set forth in A.C.A. § 14-
168-306.
Section 3 : Emergency Clause. If this ordinance is not immediately effective, the
goal of the Redevelopment District and its Amended Project Plan to remove a dangerous,
dilapidated firetrap could fail due to lack of time-sensitive funding. The City Council,
therefore, determines and declares an emergency exists which would imperil the public
peace, health or safety, and consequently this ordinance shall be in full force and effect
from the date of its passage and approval.
PASSED and APPROVED this 250i day of January, 2005.
APPROVED:
By:
DAN COODY, Mayor
ATTEST:
By:
SONDRA SMITH, City Clerk
G_
w ;
• bid 0-tr�i►n�.,� - 30 ,c,
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE MODIFYING THE BOUNDARIES OF
THE HIGHWAY 71 EAST SQUARE REDEVELOPMENT
DISTRICT NUMBER ONE PURSUANT TO A.C.A. §14-168-305 (f)
AND A.C.A. §14-168-307 (c) AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY
WHEREAS, several public hearings were held concerning the boundaries
of the Highway 71 East Square Redevelopment District Number One (which was
created and its boundaries adopted by Ordinance No. 4662, December 28, 2004);
and
WHEREAS, a public hearing was also held concerning the possible
formation of a redevelopment district of the remainder of the Downtown Master
Plan study area, but such creation has been indefinitely tabled in light of
budgetary concerns when the Attorney General's Opinion removed the 25 mills
authorized by Amendment 74 from tax incremental financing districts; and
WHEREAS, to adequately finance a reduced project plan to remove the
blighted area of an surrounding the Mountain Inn and to finance important
transportation improvements on the western side of the Downtown Master
Planning area, the boundaries of the Highway 71 East Square Redevelopment
District No. One should be expanded to include the entire Downtown Master
Planning Area as permitted in A.C.A. § 14-168-305 (f).
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS:
Section 1: That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas
hereby modifies the boundaries of the Highway 71 East Square Redevelopment
District No. One of Fayetteville, Arkansas to expand this district to the west to
include the area of the Downtown Master Plan as shown on the map attached as
"Exhibit A".
Section 2: That the City Council hereby finds that the real property within
the modified boundaries of the Highway 71 East Square Redevelopment District
Number One of Fayetteville, Arkansas, will be benefited by the
redevelopment project by eliminating or preventing the development or
spread of blighted, deteriorated, or deteriorating areas, or discouraging the loss
of commerce, or employment, or increasing employment, or any combination
thereof.
I
Section 3: Emergency Clause. If this ordinance is not immediately
effective, the goal of the Redevelopment District and its Project Plan to remove a
dangerous, dilapidated firetrap could fail due to lack of time-sensitive funding.
The City Council, therefore, determines and declares an emergency exists which
would imperil the public peace, health or safety, and consequently this ordinance
shall be in full force and effect from the date of its passage and approval.
PASSED and APPROVED this 25th day of January, 2005.
APPROVED: G�
By:
DAN COODY, Mayor
ATTEST:
By:
SONDRA SMITH, City Clerk
d
pan
amm
+ i DOWm• . P e 9 ■ e i@1 ■.o • fj a _ 1 sWDD _ 4P�� a
■. . ti 9 4 7 5 D i ® es.■7 ® ■■ tv
a. A • � " s i'�. •r at ■ e gdo" wo ■ ow=■ o¢a :r D >tr�0 °D � OoipV10S0..ST . • •
■ r $Op' ILA-ST ��.y as ! a•.
➢•'f a Y ° •Pee �I. Oo 4K ' g . � • ® i v s aK
, �i°Ia -,•w .+> > i Y9CNot
21B DS 7 mons * ® m11 ■ OsQ pC �
i,! emMe
REA ■ � ` `H ro', ae� S 'a t + �t: 3 is Q • Me ® ♦ _� e
"�•�'Jf'IFl>r/r r���. r� + • �f w a 0r;. "' � ! �i®ac - o > � 9 0= 1 . .
3 1 'kv4 �Dp t''''r ID 6 ■•O ■ 1■ ® " 7`'vv W ® 9G mD
Rds,r0 eros' ' M s cLnTim " ' 'J � 0 Q +r® ■ D
FdrY 1101
$ +a °� II ° :LAtiI ➢ ■ , rf ➢ige ■ a + a.` , 1-
a o
H ' ■ t♦ fCYD
'■a' ■ 4 XB�L€J--J F; 6 "�t ams q _ 1 Z ® . -v a
yr,,,>.'. IUB 34 s a rin fsa t ] * d 1S
,,-1 v nH WA • TD mLa'I ®W y • • .
ROBS a
y 0 [■y�pTg y ! ® L
NOE
or
IN& tui na 1.
.®4 `. rl ,ChST A dmxa., '. '• IA BA - ...,m.w
wAq
I.
4WKT--ESI !•va � �„SF"� r z + tr 'Yegoo_% :N ,e
j W C t.., a + l a, e G.. t @ , v J a■ 'i ..I ` arm
1
T , a u'^t'ah 2 0 mor■ 6t. b e .1 r trek. NR.S P
11* Ola f ■ Q Q i • Y
1' Iarf ■D!f ttw ° ® rv"' ee T, K � • rL11�
➢ ScOa "4 } 4 a ■�- '*' qgm YQry 1 _p ¢5s4 : 0 o aafAAd
�e♦� �. � ®� �i■ 1° aA + .a r Y� �,y. � +: ��e ®i $ i 6e=m'eoo ➢ w
' ¥� �e Nra ■ ® a?aaL '1141� �1ee '�Q ® "� �:n � �ol
� � ■
�' 4F �' :y{too ■ s-p a K ag P. •.
••�0� pS�y� CP " i � '� aa f � i :: 112w 0 � 8' 4
i3'z+,.i■. ®fldti�.9 :av y. i U:1 ; � 1Me
®° GENTERaSTe� a< Ir ®� ➢ rA�e
148zu � � A� db" a -: ' rov '+�%._ 1�GT.
ER.ST._
• ■ i F•re � na' y"a q®• ®®z t� 1 0. . O.,.s�,
yyrF . + MOUNTAN-S%Y.=U+.�'..> ° GN7.AIN.STa tl a o m
ILL r D to m
' �MAPI{® t• y of �Y" � v e`�t i� t � ■T.
�g O r $O*Re,
A ' ° ' kp 'b 0�: is • ® yA B ® O O
i•o■AI A n s a • F'' 2�' � tti v at� W+ST z . 417
B�� e1■ ■ r ' + f` i, s1Far ''...... - n v tl ® oA ...D A ~ 9 . B • ,t""�-._,..«.'r.]-..,,...,e....e:
M KQ • �t.ak,YlgiN~,{a .�� Fz Y: ..•m �" s m,; ®® � ` *WIt
�' • FF „f 4rS'4'y� v d Yi L y . v a m 4• Y 6S�
•® D tl tQc4, ^±}.'y"sG� " f11D • �p t ` i # s+ r e1 ✓ ■ sZ oJ• ° •O
Td P r4 �➢ s$ '4''�yc'k,P a t.� s l®®• '' jgB�'y. .Yp�
u.Fces 1t rism. e • 06 YI i e !
/A #OaY>t.pe `z`s� .t� . a■e: �■, 'u" ��Q•=Ta�.--..�5 . . . oA • ti9 _
. w s . ® 1 any;Ure �a's�,nF2� • � �? hm ➢ v f6 1@ \�P" � � A Oe?- i0 ® 4F1m � 1 r O 'o d(� Ayy�1. R.R '
e• • ® ! . ® •y.*.��4�';„:ifad a.i i� Y ��® ➢ �G� d® �r ® � ' ' �� � .. '(y@�o .
m e e0 O f t . {dx-k�h3va® � �w� Sa A^ ✓ A _ 001 s�.o Air � sCo•1 sp��♦ � 00 0
no PZ IR �'� �0 ■m � � toy ® 1 °� ° ➢ ° .484114 • .. +r • �O .�. . 0♦ ®�� ® t�4
➢ IF
aYif ■ -' m �• ° � a � a0. aZ No
... 0 • r OA :.
Q e2 G e
w ®� / AT®� ■ «. wf� a--`e, e§6 S�F,o• e
^' e (QJ
JIM
a + ➢ �,�0_'Iilei ft h ■ �.1 '� FQ .Q b _ Wr • d •C
o
° • r _ -e �rf. « h t ® . 'FE V ar.6R: as.. m T ° • • ■ .,,, o
• Y8 °jq�n �on
420 ® is Q3•-t"�.�st�6T1,1iSTwr.
■3 r Iw 0 ; � mo o 0 v m—"u.:' TTH.S7.,W n
v{'� e ■ n a�e
Zw ME
max
j .■ W: a OfpmMieO KtlmtM trn eE OoxexnTFe
far a
WIN
M.
MONONA
4 ' �• +
FAYETTEVILLE
THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE. ARKANSAS
i
KIT WILLIAMS, CITY AWORNEY + - -
DAVID WInTAKER, ASST. CITY ATTORNEY -
DEPARTMENTAL CORRESPONDENCE
LEGAL DEPARTMENT
TO: Dan Coody, Mayor
City Council
CC : Steve Davis, Finance & Internal Services Director
FROM: Kit Williams, City Attorney
DATE: January 24, 2005
RE: Amendment to "Mountain Inn" TIF District Plan .
OPTIONS
The City Council will have several options to consider during your special
City Council meeting on January 25'". One thing appears certain, the original
Project Plan adopted by ordinance cannot now be considered financially feasible
and must be changed or repealed.
OPTION ONE — REPEAL
The. City Council is not bound to attempt to continue the Project Plan with
the loss of use of the 25 mills required for school funding by Amendment 74 to the
- Arkansas Constitution. Repealing the Project Plan ordinance would likely .end the
Project of removing the Mountain Inn and Courts Building and replacing them
with a $20 million plus hotel, condominium, convention and parking complex. It
would not end our responsibility to do something to eliminate the :dugerous and
debilitated Mountain Inn building.
We would probably need to issue a raze and removal order, through an
ordinance. I would expect litigation from the current owner. If successful, we
would have to use general funds to pay for the demolition of the Mountain Inn
1
(which would be more expensive if done between the Courts Building and
adjoining shelter to the west).
Once condemned and demolished, we would have a (million dollar?) lien
for our costs, but not be the actual owner of the land. It would be unlikely that we
would ever recoup the demolition costs. There would then be a block long brown
field along College Avenue.
OPTION TWO — TIF CONDEMNATION
If the City Council chooses not to enlarge the boarders nor go forward with
the original Mountain Inn Project Plan, only abut a million dollars in TIF bonds
could be marketed successfully until the issue of debt service ad valorem rate is
resolved by the Courts. The Plan would be modified to use all TIF proceeds to
remove the blighted Mountain Inn through eminent domain (if necessary).
Since most of the available TIF funds would be needed for demolition
costs, we could probably only offer (at most) the appraised "brown field" appraisal
we received from the developers' appraiser. Again, I expect litigation over the
current value of the Mountain Inn. We probably could not do any demolition until
a jury verdict about how much we have to pay for the Mountain Inn. If that
amount was substantial, we could not both buy the Mountain Inn and pay to
demolish it with TIF funds.
At best, the jury would determine the value of this dilapidated fire trap was
not worth the cost to demolish it so we could then tear.it down with TIF funds, but
would again be left with an empty brown field along College Avenue.
OPTION THREE — REDUCED PROJECT PLAN
This option is only viable if the developers agree to: (l ) buy the secondary
bonds on notes above the primary bonds supported by the undisputed 3 . 16 mills
and (2) absorb one million dollars that the TIF Project Plan had envisioned to be
paid for with TIF funds.
If the developers would agree to both proposals, then the Project Plan
would be amended to remove the purchase of the Red Bird Cafe and.Niblock Law
Office building and to use the purchase price of the 'raw land as a payment on the
TIF debt. Both options three and four require an injunction or declaratory
judgment action be taken to Court to resolve the issue of the debt service ad
valorem rate.
Whether or not the developers will take on the risk that the Supreme Court
will eventually decide the debt service ad valoem rate is as proposed by the
Fayetteville School District and the additional one million dollars in costs for this
project is for them to say.
OPTION FOUR — EXPAND THE DISTRICT BORDERS
This option requires two vital components. First, the City Council must be
willing to expand the boundaries of the East Square Highway 71 Redevelopment
District to the west to absorb the remainder of the Downtown Master Plan area.
Second, the developers will have to agree to purchase the secondary bonds and
notes at their risk for the disputed millage (between 3 . 16 and 7.66).
The developers ' notes or bonds would be paid only after the bonds secured
by 3. 16 mills were paid. However, once the Supreme Court rules on the debt
service rate, the secondary bonds might become .payable if the tax increment is
then sufficient.
No other definite project is planned for the enlarged district at this time.
Although there should be funds available for relatively modest projects like the
trail corridor from Frisco Trail to the Scull Creek Trail. This would help complete
a bicycle thoroughfare from 6`h Street to the Mall and Mud Creek Trail. Such a
safe and level thoroughfare could reduce motorized vehicle volume and parking
problems for the entire Downtown area. Depending upon millage available a
cooperative parking deck with the University or business might also become
feasible.
CONCLUSION
The first ordinance that will be presented to the` City Council for
consideration will be the expansion of the borders. of the redevelopment district
since option four can only be considered if you chose to enlarge the district.
After this decision, the City Council will have three options: 1 , 2, and
either 3 or 4 depending upon whether you enlarged the district's border and
whether the developers agree to the financing to make option 3 or 4 feasible.
77 3RE dtin
:
T,1 W i - F - _v W
'+ w u .v j x > W ; >
DAVIDSONAl
-
" �V ` ' Z IIA ST
.;� + m w r :.3V a Q ` Q �' �. n w ALLEY 519'.
7� — €w r• Z a d _ -.. 3 - ry Pik w
.> 'a -w,I _F z� � �� es N9 r 30 -' : A > .
> W r =,aQ a x a a s ¢If
w is
�„ - , .LEST 3,
9G , Llf 'le,, `i � � fv rw > r
p i s to r < ¢ t k Z 25 M.
Q } F is \ AN _J
a2 .. REAGAN ST ` }ia � fix ( 4r3: 14 . '
x r 2s t QW " 'hg • $ "r }fl _L . + r `5 1,:a f J r
Q „ j - LAFAYETTEST ¢ xp :,0_..
i a.N - i ,} BOLES T Q "' ` g'Tf •I p - ° =3 2�Inl iii
e
a ¢
I,rF WATSON ST -' 3 = '.; �%' 3 SUTTON ST
ALEY 333 s: � f �YK{c -15 a Q n c
^�. t nc
JnJ Y V• p _ +2 C�3S Rt y
`,'�'$ rro y r P - v R t 1T� F`• ' S,Ef 79 t✓tk 1
_ i4�
>11Mk F, n, T W tq L�.44�. tea'. aR dq y b)' � _. .
tu Y4
3 Il ' �''_
WHiTESIDE ST *.fit , Rw ,�
O x : - Il
> +s z,� a NER ST. e
art yw ' i : + r-Swr,�.: � Q � Q : ,�3 gxt; -;c•
�t4 F !• rF.j
IL
L el
7
s,E,S eIRF ( ,aT x eOL.
v , O
v
L If IL I
- s MEADOW r >zR .
y.[. ,y
.'7 X .....
..�. s •c. .'CENTER ST y` r ,? �� - a s 3 CE a i' „ t P r,
TER.ST.
r$ -,rte > +'x8s
T.. "+5 t¢ ; y,v .� sr 8: of j2
_ , MOUNTAIN STS" �� kv =�'� ,� U UNTAIN ST • Rif
a-
.. . PUTMAN ST t . Yi s III � � t..�'�" �„`'ra .=v i
e - ^ F �• ROCKST !W
Q 3
4
p
,s,•cyb3iJ' ." 4'�3 ra$ -e
STONE$T'-� >_-" r l to a w --_"r �`�r�fr y MVV i. • k' '�Q y . w
a m ay z �� S �, , p u tiG .WALKERR
3' -:C'J..r cAll
P f 'A a H +r x it All" p G',?.N0 ._ � ' w i S(eryj ' t .
Ll'
k 3 Jlw
r Z'n
(Jp�
fiu ¢
x 5fiH ST ' x_;: 3� ST
_ r
Y
YF—
»s „ PRNATE 41 v W 5
IRA
LU
s x sIp >' r N W x =
ljf, 1;
in
rrrF'". .. -rv'p'x Q
IRV
W asi A > vz 9y c W 4 1
VI
n a ssp
Z .rco 7T}1.ST.
o
r
. i..'
V.7 . ALLE'! 799 ' . .�'`" s >70 '' .a
xr wX ':'`� & _ OWwua�tn mJ Dewrmwn TFs
W f L)
4
Am Am
s' 9TH ST /
�l
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE PROJECT PLAN
FOR THE HIGHWAY 71 EAST SQUARE
REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER ONE,
FINDING THE PLAN IS ECONOMICALLY FEASIBLE,
AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY
WHEREAS, on July 27, 2004, the Fayetteville City Council held a Public
Hearing concerning the creation of the Highway 71 East Square Redevelopment District;
and
WHEREAS, on August 17, 2004, the City Council passed Ordinance No. 4608
creating the Highway 71 East Square Redevelopment District and authorized preparation
of a Redevelopment Project Plan; and
WHEREAS, the City with input from the proposed redevelopers of a Twenty-
Two Million Dollar hotel project to be constructed after removal of the blighted
Mountain Inn has prepared a proposed Project Plan; and
WHEREAS, on November 30, 2004, the City held a Public Hearing on this initial
Project Plan proposed for the Redevelopment District; and
WHEREAS, on December 7, 2004, the City had a further public hearing on this
Project Plan and passed Ordinance 4646 adopting the Project Plan; and
WHEREAS, because of a minor, technical notification discrepancy, the City
determined the need to renotify all statutorily required officials and republish notice of
the public hearings for the Redevelopment District; and
WHEREAS, the City Council after 15 day published notice held another public
hearing on December 28, 2004 at which all interested parties were given the opportunity
to express their views on the proposed adoption of the Project Plan for the Highway 71
East Square Redevelopment District Number One of Fayetteville, Arkansas; and
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted this Project Plan on December 28, 2004
by Ordinance No. 4663; and
WHEREAS, the Arkansas Attorney General in January 2005 has «pined that the
25 mills required by Amendment 74 to be sent to the State may not be used for tax
incremental financing; and
WHEREAS, removing the 25 mills from the tax increment requires amendment
of the Project Plan; and
PROJECT PLAN AMENDMENT NO, I
OF
THE HIGHWAY 71 EAST SQUARE REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
NO* ONE OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS
(January 25, 2005)
REMOVAL OF PHASE II
In light of the probable reduction in the amount of millage that can be
included for incremental financing of the Project Plan envisioned for the
Highway 71 East Square Redevelopment District, that plan must be
amended so that only Phase One of the Project Plan can go forward and be
financed at this time. Therefore, the Project Plan is hereby amended to
delete pages 11 , 1.2, 13 , and 14 and all references to Phase II within the
Project Plan. Furthermore, the map of the district' s boundaries on page 3 is
amended to reflect the borders approved by the City Council on January 25,
2005, reflecting the entire Downtown Master Planning Area. (See attached
map as Exhibit "A")
ECONOMIC FEASIBILITY STUDY
Exhibit No. 1 (Economic Feasibility Study) is to be amended and
replaced by an updated Economic Feasibility Study by the U of A Center for
Business and Economic Research dated January 25, 2005. (Attached as
Exhibit `B")
service ad valorem rate should be no more than 19.2 mills for debt pursuant
to County Ordinance No. 2004-68 (Exhibit "E") levying such millage.
Exhibit No. 4 is also supplemented by the Washington County
Assessor' s Certification by letter dated November 20, 2004 (Exhibit "F") for
the proposed Downtown Master Plan Redevelopment District including
Washington County Ordinance No. 2004-68 the letter of September 21 ,
2004 from Lisa Z. Morstad of the Fayetteville Public School System
(Exhibit "G"), copy of ballot (Exhibit "H"), and parcel appraisals (Exhibit
"I"). Again the County Assessor's Certification for Debt Service Ad
Valorem Rate should be no more than 19.2 mills and the Applicable Ad
Valorem Rate should be at least 7.66 mills.
AUTHORIZATION OF
INJUNCTIVE OR DECLARATORY JUDGMENT SUIT
VERSUS WASHINGTON COUNTY ASSESSOR
Passage of the ordinance to adopt this Amended Project Plan
necessitates a suit be filed requesting that the Circuit Court require the
Assessor to issue a Certification of the "debt . service ad valorem rate and
the "applicable ad valorem rate" for the enlarged district in accordance with
Constitutional mandates. Therefore passage of this Amended Project Plan
authorizes the City Attorney to file such declaratory judgment or injunctive
3
PROJECT COST CLARIFICATIONS
The City shall pay not more than $887,000.00 for demolition and site
preparation work as shown on page 9. If this work does not require the full
$887,000.00, the remainder shall be used to pay debt service on the primary
TIF bonds.
After demolition of the properties purchased by the TIF district
pursuant to the Project Plan, the property cleared by the City shall be sold to
the developers for Three Hundred Thousand Dollars ($300,000.00) which
shall be used to pay the interest and reduce the debt of the primary,
"marketable bonds".
The developers have agreed to purchase and the City shall issue
sufficient bonds or notes above. the amount of marketable bonds so that the
City through TIF bonds and notes will receive $3.5 million net so as to be
able to finance the Project.
ZONING ORDINANCES AND OTHER PROJECT COSTS
The project does not require or propose any changes of zoning
ordinances. The Downtown Master Plan calls for the removal of the
Mountain Inn blighted area as a top priority. Apart from economic analysis,
bond counsel and underwriting costs and because of lack of sufficient TIF
5
i
Scull Creek Trail or a cooperative parking deck may be undertaken by the
City Council then serving.
1
I PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
s
The District may engage as may be necessary professional advisors,
consultants, attorneys and other TIF specialists to carry out the project plan
6
and related financings.
APPLICATION OF DISTRICT REVENUES
IL
I All tax increment collected for the established twenty-five year period
will be used to cover district indebtedness and/or other direct district
expenses including initial bonded debt and additional . bonds that may be
issued as district revenues permit. Excess revenues shall retire the district's
indebtedness or fund additional projects as may be approved by the City
Council in accordance with bond covenants and obligations.
1
l
INTEREST EARNINGS
I '
All interest earnings will be used towards debt service obligations on
i
issued Tax Increment Financing bonds/notes. Earnings may be applied to
the payment of Capitalized Interest and any prepayment of debt obligations
as may be permitted.
I
I
7
I
i 1 t
^ � i
a }
IIi
�� �� ` r, s rhe � ♦ t
•.cJ� ���t"Pr'i"fit Y� � _�v�c4 � � � T? �♦ � �q'� `R- : t
iN� i:ti �. �" 5-•$ v5 ��s '�' 5: (yt} e•Y`.�C � x.37 - x
'xkil.�Ct _ .•e _ai•_v '' .b � �
tl
K i- Thy
OMN,49
Flo
it Nft
t Land Use
Amended Boundary of
rte. . Highway 71 East Square
♦ ♦♦♦♦ iRedevelopment District No. 1
0
°
-F-
I
ORDINANCE NO. 2004-68
PAGE2
(F) Winslow 3.0 mills
(G) Farmington 4.9 mills
(H) Tontitown 2.0 mills
(1) Elm Springs 5.0 mills
(J) Johnson 4.8 mills
(K) Prairie Grove 9.4 mills
(L) Lincoln 6.5 mills
(M) Goshen 0.0 mills
1 .0 mill is a library millage and is to be collected only inside
the City Limits of Fayetteville; .8 mill is for all other legal
purposes.
ARTICLE 3. The following taxes are hereby levied for the Year 2004
for the respective school districts within Washington County, Arkansas:
REAL ESTATE/
PERSONAL PROPERTY
Debt M & 0 Total
(A) Fayetteville, #1 19.2 mills 25.0 mills 44.2 mills
(B) Farmington, #6 15.7 mills 25.0 mills 40.7 mills
(C) Elkins, #10 15.2 mills 25.0 mills 40.2 mills .
(D) Winslow, #20 8.0 mills 25.0 mills 33.0 mills
(E) Prairie Grove,#23 12.9 mills 25.0 mills 37.9 mills
(F) Lincoln, #48 14.8 mills 25.0 mills 39.8 mills
(G) Springdale, #50 14.5 mills 25.0 mills 39.5 mills
(H) Greenland, #95 12.9 mills 25.0 mills 37.9 mills
(1) West Fork, #141 14.0 mills 25.0 mills 39.0 mills
(J) Benton County, #21 15.0 mills . 25.0 mills 40.0 mills
. ARTICLE4. The levy of taxes for 2004 is in accordance with State law.
7 42 /C�F ' D /
J HIJNTON, County Judge DATE
(iREN
( �fJL/�I� 2f�
(REN COMBS PRITCHARD, County Clerk
Sponsor: Kurt Anderson
Date of Passage: December 9. 2004
Votes For: 12 Votes Against: 0
I Abstentions: 0 Absent: 1
_ i
t
I .
f, r
29
Faycttc%illc Public schools
CELEaaAT.10 TnL Pani WHOLE E.N9RACINO 1Ne FOYcaC
September 21, 2004
_ Ms. Lee Ann li-ivv
f County Asscror
W ashinglon County Courthouse
2801Ionh College - Suite 360
1 Fayetteville, AR 72701
Dear bis. Kizzar
Please be informed that the Fayctievillo Sehml Uistricls millagc stn)eture at lanoary 1 ,
2001 was as follows:
19.3 milks General Maintenance & Operation
23.7 mills Debt S nice
1 .0 mill Capital Onilay
44.0mills -
1 have attached the school ballot from that election for your reference. Please call me, if
YOU have any questions, .
Tbank you;
` a �1G(. fr�a
Lira 7, N, or id
f
ft EXHIBIT
f
4
i
r
f
' 1000 1Wc TT STnNC STRGCT PO awl BAD F.\iETT£v1LLE, ANKANeAf 72702 (501 ) 44h O
1
z
+'>�� DOWIVTbWN MASTER PLAN!*I€ED�t�Ld'M1;�N11`A,,��CT��- �' � � N
I
F .
Adik
EXHIBIT
s
Fayetteville Downtown Master Plan TIF district
Parcel ID Time Total Amxaised Total Assessed
765-01653000 CM 186,850 25,926
765-01654-000 Cl 995,300 148,334
165-01677-000 CV 160,000 11,440
765-01676-000 RI 85,950 14,459
765-01679-000 GV 80,000 10,450
765-01680,000 Cl 182,000 30,007
765-01661-000 CV 180,G00 29,700
765-01682-000 RI 158,650 24,151
765-01683-000 Cl 138,800 25,333
765-01684-000 Cl 296,550 271957
765-01685-000 Cl 254,2[10 - 49,477
765-01066.000 CV 116,150 - 71951
765-01667-000 CV 21,100 1,444
765-01688.000 Cl 337.950 44,200
765-01690-GOO CV 58,000 6,163
765-01691,000 RI 112,250 17,760
765-01692-000 RI 157,050 27,317
76541693-000 RI 122,450 14,813
765.01694-000 RI 87,150 13,900
765-01695-000 Cl 476,400 690155
765-01696-000 RI 134,650 15,044
765-01697-000 RI 65,850 10,053
765-01698-000 RI 57,050 7,402
765-01699-000 RI 85,650 12,740
765-01700-000 CR 102,400 121601
765-01701-000 RI 76.950 12,572
765-01702-000 CR 287,950 52,426
765-01703-000 CM 00,150 11,341
765-01704-000 CR 239.500 36.594
765-01705-000 CI 207,750 26,984
765.01706-000 Cl 458.650 74,419
76501707-000 Cl 634,200 92,444
765-01708.000 CM 11 ,800 12,177
765-01700-000 Cl 270,550 24,574
765-0171 O-WO CT 69,000 7,445 !
765-01711000 CN 50,400 8,129
765-01712-000 RI 76,800 9,621
766.01713-000 EX 0 0
765-01714-000 RI 92,550 - 13,566
785-01715-000 RI • 1631750 20,203
765-01716-000 EX 0 0
765.01717-000 CR 134,600 16,130
765.01718-000 RI 66,260 8,850
765-01719-000 RI 199,550 31,021
- 705-01721.000 RI 169,450 28,940
765-01726-000 EX 0 0
765.01733-000 EX 0 0
765.01736-000 CI 605,300 127.523
765-01739-000 EX 0 0
765-01740-000 EX 0 0
785-01741-000 Cl 504,900 55,567
765-01742-000 EX 0 0
765-01743-000 Cl 10356,950 231 ,535
765.01743-002 EX 0 0
76501743003 EX 0 0
765-01744-000 ET 0 0
I 765.01745.000 PS 0 0
765-01745-001 EX 0 0
765-01745-002 - EX 0 0
i 1120/2004 _ 1
1
rJ4 ' C
y fl3 } y DybWNTibNt�1VIASTROTELE LOPMEATT DISTRICT` a r ¢
yr .+,� Tr-r I• rfi
I
u
33
Parcel 10 Tyre Total App-rats Total Assessed
765-01882-000 CR 276,150 45,624
765-01882-001 Cl 445,900 890180
766.01883-000 GR 231,000 46,200
765-01884-NO RI 75,350 12,735
765-01885000 RV 500 100
765-01886,000 Cl 75,700 9,482
' 765-01867-000 Cl 88,050 7,894
I 765-01888-000 RI 54,950 9,324
765-01889-000 RI 02,650 11,451
765-01890-000 RI 47,050 7,536
I 765-01891-000 RI 86,500 14,850
I 765-01B92-000 RI 107,000 17,586
4 765-01893-000 RI 100,500 13,002
I{ 765.01894-000 RI 86,000 15,389
765-01895-000 CM 135,200 12,598
765.01896.000 RI 100,950 15.766
765-01897-000 RI 137,550 18,690
765-01098-000 RI 137,350 17,593
765-0189D-000 RI 79,760 7,899
765-019OD-000 CV 58,400 3,080
765111901-000 CI 55,450 6,907
766-01902-000 RI 65,450 9,162
765-01903-000 - Cl 209,500 28,929
765-01904-000 RI 436,350 55, 159
765-01905-ODO CR 246,900 27,478
765-01906-000 CR 228,650 22,765
765-01907-WO RI 174,150 31,856
765-01908-000 RI 125,650 17,576
765.01909-000 - EX 0 0
765019104)00 RI 55$ 50 71136
+, 765-01911-000 EX 0 0
7 78501912-000 RI 52,750 10,550
765-01913-000 Cl 112,650 12,627
765-01914-000 ET - 0 0
765-01915-000 Cl 95,400 17,678
765-01916-000 Cl 362,450 37.752
765-01917.000 Cl 435,500 60,380
765-01904-000 Cl 294,300 52,613
765-01995-000 Cl 218.100 29,836
765-01096-000 EX 0 0
765,01991-000 EX 0 0
765-01998-000 EX 0 - O
i 765-01999-000 Cl 208,650 41,173
j 765-01999,001 Cl 141,ODO 20,933
785.02000-000 Cl 340,350 47,018
765-02001-000 Cl 285,650 40,865
i 765-02002-000 RI - 471,650 78,977
765-02003-000 Cl 341,350 56,049
765.02004-M Cl 334,350 39,344
765-02005-000 Cl 324,800 60,665
765-02006-OW RI 72.500 - 7,305
765-02007-000 CR 185,600 37,120
765-02008-000 RI 67700 10,978
765-02010.00 CT 146,050 26,950
.a 765.02020-000 Rl 98,700 10,915
765-02021-000 EX 0 - 0
765-02022-000 RI 49,400 4,730
766-02023-000 RI 79,850 10,008
786-02024-WO RI 65,550 71635
765.02025-000 RI 80.500 15.149
765-02026-000 EX 0 0
765-02027.000 R1 46,550 71908
ly 11!102004 3
1
GQ 6f Eay`effevllle
DOWNTOWN MASTER PX,Ar�N, ,�R DEVFLOPM&'f. I)IST121CT ,
'*II�OJ2, IA1N„�vT�. '. ✓ .+ . ` r �`.
I
i
35
Parcel ID Type Total ApppkO Total Assessed
765.04345,000 RI 30,150 4,114 -
765-04346-OOD ET 0 0
765-04347-000 RI 58,300 10,A70
766-04348-ODO RI 68,550 10,054
766-04349-000 RI 78,250 11,682
765-04350-000 CI 301,850 50,736
766-04350-1-01 CI 223,400 39,556
765-04351-000 ET 0 0
765-04352-000 ET 0 0 -
765-04353-000 ET 0 0
765-04354-000 ET 0 0
765-04355,000 RI 55,250 7,465
765-04356-000 . RI 56,650 7,679
765-04357-000 - CR 119,750 14,915
765-04357-100 EX 0 0
765-04358-000 CI 54,000 10,800
765-04359.000 CI 81,350 14,377
765-04360-000 CI 70,350 12,033
765-04361-000 CI 11072,400 185,001
765-04362-000 - CI 393,700 64,625
765.04362-001 EX 0 0
- 765-04363-000 CM 168,900 _ 5,420
765-04383-001 EX 0 0
765-04354-000 CI 1 .225,1OD 177,117
765-04365-000 CI 265,350 42,400
765-04366-000 CI 85,550 11,703
765-04367-000 _ CI 110,200 91626
765-04368-000 CI 97,650, 11,005
765.04369-000 Cl 242,500 39,039
765-04370,000 CI 257,850 26,183
765-04371-000 CI 134,500 18,805
765-04372-000 CI 152,400 20.878
765-04373-000 CI 247,550 22,542
765-04374000 CM 106,450 16.145
- 765-04376.000 CI 830,250 - 105,770
76544376-OC-0 CI 255,000 37,336
t 765-04376.000 CI 255,000 37,336
+ 765-04378-D00 VP 0 0
765.04378,001 CI 280,300 43,618
765-04379 WO CI 51D.150 57,537
765-04380-000 ET 0 0
766,04381-000 ET 0 0
766.04382-000 ET 0 0
765-04384-000 ET D 0
�. 765-04385-000 - ET 0 0
765-04388-000 ET 0 - 0
765.04389.000 ET 0 0
765-C4390-000 ET 0 0
765-04391-OCO CI 341,500 68,300
765-04392-OOD RI 58,400 8,525
765=04393-000 RI 57,650 9,646
765-04394-COO RI 114,450 14,297
765-04395-000 RI 83,800 10,534
765-04396-00 RI 97.580 15,021
765.04397-OW CV 64,000 91900
j 765-043D8-000 CI 926,000 185,200
s 765-04399-000 CI 547,650 93,093
- 766-WOD-000 Ct 167,600 20,578
765-04401-DOD Cl 304,650 26,984
_ 765.04402000 Cl 210,850 19,133
765-04403-000 RI 78,100 14,626
1� 765-04404-ODO RI _ 41,400 61200
I
11/20!2004 5
ii
� �CilgtofFsyeftevil - ' r
4 A DOWNTOWN MASTERYLAN REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT Y h
,,.-
37
Pamel ID TV" Total Avera'¢ed T&A Assessed
765.05521-000 CI 120.050 19,524
765-05524-000 cl 40,100 5,764
765.05525000 EX 0 0
765-05526-000 - Rl 34,150 6,314
765-05527-000 RI 37,050 6,875
7654)6629-000 RI 54,450 9,938
765-05530-000 RI 31,700 51660
76546532.000 RI 42,150 6,291
785-05633-000 G 253,600 45,912
765-05534-000 CV 15,000 2,233
76505535000 RI 37,200 6,897
765-05536.000 RV 15,200 2,618
765-05537.000 RV 25,600 2,880
765.05538.OW RI 42,100 7,493
765-05539-000 RV 6,400 1,10
765-055414100 U 42,950 6,205
765-05541-001 EX 0 0
76505572-010 CI 338,350 58,344
765-05573-000 ET 0 0
766-05574-000 ET 0 0
765-05575,000 ET 0 0
766-05578-000 ET 0 0
76545577-000 ET 0 0
705055784000 RI 59,850 9,416
765-05579-000 ET 0 0
765-CSWD-0W ET 0 0
765-05581-000 ET 0 0
765-D5582-0OD ET 0 0
755-OSM-000 ET 0 0
765D56e4-000 RI 60.6CO 9.395
765-05585000 ET - 0 0
765-0568-000 ET 0 0
765-05587-000 ET 0 0
765-055884)00 ET 0 '0
765-05569-000 ET 0 0
765-05024-000 RI 124,450 22,825
765.05025-000 CV $2,850 9,009 .
85-05026-000 RI 218,500 41,635
765-00027-000 CI 748,650 147,180
765.06028-000 RI 80,800 12,999
7654)6029-000 RI 64,500 14,968 -
765-OMO-000 RI 254,000 48,710
765-06D31-000 RI 271,650 61,939
765.06032-000 RI 347.160 54,271
766.06033-000 RI 92,700 17,910
765-06034-000 RM 24,600 3,818
765-06035-000 RI 125,200 23,892
766-0603MOO cl 185,40028,328
765-08037-000 EX 0 0
76506038-M EX 0 - 0
76506039-000 RI 329,900 41,40
765-06040-000 CI 291,100 49,478
765.08139.000 RI 50,600 6,714
765.0614G-OW RI 48,750 7,5D8 �
765-06141-000 RI 40,300 7,040
705.00142-000 EX 0 0
765-MI43-000 ev 18.300 2,608
765.06144-000 RI 71,450 11,765
76506145-000 RI 49,500 7,921
76506147-OW RI 227,450 45,490
766-07123-000 RI 72,450 8,100
765-07124-000 RI 50,500 8,492
tU20120D4 7
� •' City of Fayetteville ., ;. -s j�� srsir't{ �, .'r -.
�t r ` DOWNTOWN_ MASTERPI.AIVREDE�T'.`LOPMENTDISTRI�Ca' " '' �e�r4'4 rS'ttj. va r r