HomeMy WebLinkAbout1977-06-28 - Minutes - Archive•
•
MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING OF THE HOUSING AUTHORITY
OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS
The Housing Authority of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas met in
Special Session at 8:30 a.m., Tuesday, June 28, 1977, in the office
of the Authority, #1 North School Avenue, Fayetteville, Arkansas.
Upon roll call, the following were present:
Commissioners Present: •Endress, Taylor, Morgan, Underwood, Gould
Commissioners Absent: None
Others Present: Chad Kumpe, Bromo Wilson, Pat Warford, representatives
of the various proposals for the Old Post Office building, others
•
The Chairman ordered that the following Waiver and Consent be spread upon
the Minutes:
:,• 4
WAIVER•OF,NOTICE OF AND CONSENT TO SPECIAL MEETING'
1 s
We, the. undersigned; do hereby accept notice of'this SPECIAL MEETING,
waiving any and all irregularities in the service of notiie and do
hereby consent and agree that the Commissioners of the Housing Authority
of Fayetteville, Arkansas shall meet at-their`.regular meeting place at
8:30 o'clock a.m., on the 28th day of June, 1977, for the following
purposes:
1. Roll Call
2. Resolution Accepting Development Plan and Authorizing Execution of
Contract for Sale of Land in Project Ark. R-105
/s/ Bill Underwood
/s/ Judy Endress
/s/ Phillip Taylor
/s/ Sherman Morgan
/s/ J. W. Gould
There being a quorum present, the following business was transacted:
- Mr. Underwood asked the representatives of the Old Post Office proposals
present if there were any additional comments they wished to make before
the Board made their decision concerning the sale of the building.
Linda Welch, representative of the Northwest Arkansas Cultural Center,
requested a delay in the decision to allow the N.W. Arkansas Cultural
Commission to show the ability to raise the needed funds for the purchase
and redevelopment of the Old Post Office.
Dr. Harmon Lushbaugh stated that he wanted to point out to the Board that
neither he nor Dr. Cole would be doing the actual day to day management of
the proposed retail space in the building, but Mr. Bob Crisp would be in
charge of this..
•
•
•
2
Marshall Carlisle spoke in favor of the Morton and Company proposal, stating
that perhaps the basement could be rented to the Cultural Center.
Mr. Underwood asked Mr.Kumpe for any comments he might have. Mr. Kumpe
stated that he felt a great deal of light had been shed on each of the
proposals in the last few days and urged that the Board should consider
the continued economic value of the Old Post Office and also the compatibility
of the building's use with the Square as a whole.
Mrs. Marion Orton asked whether the City should have the cost of maintaining
the park surrounding the Old Post Office if the building is privately owned.
It was pointed out the City has already agreed to this, and it was further
pointed out that a private investor most likely wouldn't let the park
surrounding the building go unkept. Mrs. Orton stated that it was her
personal suggestion that a private investor might make contributions the
the upkeep and maintenance of the park. Mr. Paul Lewis stated that he felt
the park will be of great value to the people of Fayetteville, as well as to
visitors, and the City should maintain it.
Mr. Underwood pointed out thatthe purpose of this urban renewal project is
to revitalize the downtown area and attract people back to the Square, but
that each proposal mustebe financially stable. Mr. Gould suggested going
over each proposal and comparing to different headings that might be
considered relevant to the purpose of urban renewal. Mr. Underwood agreed
and asked Mr. Gould to give his thoughts concerning this.
Mr. Gould:
(compatibility with downtown operation)
-County and Cultural neither fit with downtown
- Morton and Company, office space not needed downtown
-restaurant and retail center both seem to have very
high compatibility with downtown
(public use -not really required in relation to urban renewal)
- both County and Cultural Center high public use
-restaurant and retail, building would be available to public
-Morton and Company, lobby would be only area could be considered
public use
(rehabilitation of building)
-Morton and Company, restaurant and retail center would all
rehabilitate the building and restore historical significance
- County and Cultural Center neither have funds or propose to
rehabilitate the building so that.it might be a showplace
(long-range)•:' . r
- County would-be ;longrange
- Cultural Center is having trouble with funding at
should the Board decide to accept this proposal,
choice proposal if the Cultural Center could not
purchase and redevelop
-Morton and Company would be solid long range
-restaurants are sometimes not long range
-retail center, seems the people behind this
able to handle long range
present, but
could have second
show ability to
proposal are financially
Mr. Underwood asked the other commissioners for comments. Mr. Morgan had
no comment. Mr. Taylor agreed with Mr. Gould's comments. Mrs. Endress also
agreed with Mr. Gould's comments, and also commented concerning the Cultural
Center's funding. Mrs. Endress stated that she has no doubts about this.
proposal, but doesn't know if they are ready at this point to purchase and
•
•
,7.4.S"-.
V4
-3-
maintain the building. Mrs. Endress also stated that the County does not
seem to be what the public wants in the building, and Morton and Company
would not really draw public to the Square.
Mr. Underwood gave his comments concerning the proposals. He stated that
the Cultural Center funding seemsa problem and hopes they can find another
location to go ahead with their proposal. He further stated that the Morton
and Company plans for the interior of the building does not seem to make this
historical structure very available to the public. In his opinion the
restaurant would be of some benefit to the merchants and would draw people
to the Square at night, but doesn't really seem to help the retail status of
the Square. Mr. Underwood stated that the retail proposal would draw people
to the Square in the daytime and seems that this would draw retail business
to the Square and ward off the possibility of the Square turning into a
financial center.
There was a discussion of the continents and public input received by the
Board concerning these proposals. Most of the public input was in favor
of the retail and restaurant proposals and many against the County.
Mr. Underwood asked for a written ballot "straw vote" to determine the two
top ranking proposals. After reading the ballots, it was determined that
these two top ranking proposals were the restaurant and the retail center.
After the ballots were read, Mr. Taylor suggested delaying the final vote.
After discussion, it was decided to go ahead and have the final vote at this
meeting. Mr. Taylor withdrew his request for delay.
RESOLUTION NO. 267
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF
CONTRACT FOR SALE OF LAND IN PROJECT ARK. R-105
Mr. Underwood asked the Board to make their vote on written ballot, putting
which proposal was first choice and which proposal was second choice. The
ballots read as follows:
Gould. restaurant 1st, retail 2nd
Morgan: restaurant 1st, retail 2nd
Taylor: retail 1st, restaurant 2nd
Endress: restaurant 1st, retail 2nd
Underwood: retail 1st, restaurant 2nd
Resolution No. 267 was approved by motion of Mr. Taylor, seconded by
Mr. Gould, and carried unanimously.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned.
i
K6:
• n. Ji ., i
iS '
ATTEST.'
Tt -
• r
SECRE
•
•
'THE HO ING AUTHORITY iF E
'CITY4 FAY „1+ VILLJ'' • .AS
•
•
RESOLUTION NO. 267
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND AUTHORIZING EXECUTION
OF CONTRACT FOR SALE OF LAND IN PROJECT ARK. R-105
WHEREAS, the Housing Authority of the City of Fayetteville,
Arkansas, has advertised for development proposals on certain project
lands; and,
WHEREAS, said proposals were received by the Authority until
10:00 a.m., June 10, 1977, on disposition parcel C-8; and,
WHEREAS, said proposals have been reviewed by the Authority;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
OF THE HOUSING AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS:
1. The redevelopment proposal submitted by Donald E. Bumpass,
R. E. Bumpass, H. K. Cearley, Jr. _
is found to be in conformance with the offering documents and
zs hereby accepted.
2. The Chairman and Secretary are hereby authorized and
instructed to execute a Contract for Sale of Land with said
developer for disposition parcel C-8 in Project Ark. R-105.
PASSED AND APPROVED THIS 28 DAY OF June_
•
ATTEST'(
, 1977.
THE HOU NG AUTHORITY OF
CITY 0'• AYETTEVILLE,
CHAIRMAN
SEC' A'Y