LIVE UPDATES: Fayetteville City Council recap: Nov. 20, 2018

Background: This issue first came up at the Sept. 18 meeting. At the time, the committee recommended nominating Marsha Scott as an at-large member of the Town & Gown Advisory Committee. During that meeting, council member Marsh said Scott works with the University of Arkansas as a consultant, and that the at-large position should be held by someone who has no connection to the university. The council agreed to leave Scott off the Sept. 18 list of nominations, and revisit the issue later.

Discussion: Marsh said she still feels like Scott should not be ratified as a member of the council. Council members Kinion and Gray said they disagree, and that just because Scott has done consultant work for the university, that doesn’t mean she would be working against the interest of the public at large.

Decision: The council voted 6-1 to approve the recommendation. Marsh voted against. Bunch had not yet arrived at the meeting during the vote.

Background: This item was left on the first reading at the Oct. 16 meeting and then tabled on Nov. 8.

The Planning Commission and city staff recommend approval of the request.

Location: Here’s a map of the rezoning request area…

Oct. 16 Discussion: The first person to speak during public comment was against the request. She said if approved, this rezoning could set a precedent for other property owners who want to rezone their land to allow for redevelopment. If that continues to occur, she said, the character of the neighborhood would be lost.

About 10 people spoke against the rezoning, citing concerns about traffic safety, stormwater runoff, and a fear of not knowing what would be developed if the property is rezoned.

Council member Marsh said state law does not allow the council to consider a specific development when pondering whether a rezoning should be approved. She said a lot of homes in that neighborhood weren’t built well and are nearing the end of their life. Redevelopment, she said, allows for added density and a variety of new housing types, and people need more options for homes in that part of town. Marsh said by adding on-street parking and new sidewalks, traffic concerns could be alleviated. She said she’ll be voting in favor.

Council member Kinion said there’s already a master plan in place for the Walker Park area, so it troubles him to see individual spot zoning-style requests for rezonings across the neighborhood.

Council member Gray said she agrees with the residents who are concerned about losing the integrity of their neighborhood.

Council member Smith said he hears a lot of fear about the RI-U zoning, but said there’s a lot of opportunity for this particular district to add development while also fitting in with the current neighborhood. However, he said he agrees with Kinion in that smaller single rezonings are troubling.

The council agreed to leave the item on the first reading.

Nov. 8 Discussion:
Council member Gray was not present, but earlier requested the council wait until she returns to make a decision. The council agreed to table the item for two weeks.

Nov. 20 Discussion:
A petition was submitted to city staff with signatures from 39 residents who are opposed to the rezoning. A letter included with the petition states that the residents are worried about having 3-story homes built in the neighborhood.

Council member Marsh asked city staff what the current height limit is on the property. Staff said the current zoning district already allows for a 3-story structure. The proposed rezoning would reduce that height to 2 stories, unless the structure is set back 10 feet from the property line when it would be allowed to be 3 stories again.

Former council member Nancy Allen spoke against the rezoning. She said a group of neighbors is currently against the rezoning request. Allen said when she was an elected official, she listened to her constituents and did what they wanted, and so should this current council.

A total of six residents spoke against the request, citing concerns about traffic safety, stormwater runoff and loss of green space. Several said they don’t want to see rental homes in the neighborhood, which they believe the new zoning district would attract.

One resident spoke in favor of the rezoning, and said it would help add to the area’s housing needs.

Kinion said the Walker Park Neighborhood Plan does not envision the type of housing that this rezoning would allow on this particular block. He said the residents were promised something when the plan was developed, and the council needs to adhere to that promise.

Marsh said she believes the requested rezoning is very much compatible with the neighborhood. She said the requested zoning district was not yet created when the Walker Park Neighborhood Plan was developed, but is designed to encourage construction of housing that is compatible with existing single-family structures. She said the lot in question is directly adjacent to a group of multi-family structures (12th Street Apartments), which makes it a good fit for RI-U. She’ll vote for the request.

Smith said he’s unsure how he’ll vote. He said he understands some of the neighbors’ concerns, but also agrees with Marsh in that the new zoning won’t allow structures that are any taller than what’s currently allowed. He said there were several new homes recently built in the area that don’t look like what some people envision when they think of smaller homes that are built on lots that originally held one larger structure. Many residents complain about height during rezoning discussions, which is something the city might should go back and review.

Gray agreed with Kinion and said she would side with the neighbors. “I don’t want to be a part of any government that makes a promise to residents and then changes its mind,” said Gray. She’ll vote against the request.

Petty said affordability is the biggest problem Fayetteville faces right now, and as a developer, he knows firsthand that construction is expensive. He said people are moving to town and they’re outbidding the current residents. The only way to fix that, he said, is to increase the housing supply. “I don’t like it, but the math is relentless,” Petty said. On this property, he said he’d rather have three smaller, relatively less expensive houses built on the lot instead of a larger, more expensive single home. He’ll vote in favor.

La Tour said he agrees with Petty in that the city needs more housing. He’ll vote in favor.

Bunch said the established neighborhood plan is the one thing that gives her pause about approving this. However, she said the community needs more housing and this particular request would be a good fit for the neighborhood, so she’s inclined to support it.

Mayor Jordan said he lives in a neighborhood with many renters and multi-family units. He said it’s unfair to characterize renters as bad neighbors.

Decision:
The request was approved 5-3 with Gray, Kinion and Tennant voting against.

Background: This item was left on the first reading at the Nov. 8 meeting.

Both city staff and the Planning Commission recommend approval.

Location:

Nov. 8 Discussion:
Council member Smith said he doesn’t have a problem with the rezoning request, but would prefer to wait until the drainage issues on this property are taken care of, which should be in the next two weeks.

Nov. 20 Discussion: City Engineer Chris Brown said the drainage work hasn’t yet occurred, but said once some paperwork is completed, he expects the drainage work to take about two weeks. Permits have been applied for and a contractor is in place, Brown said.

The council agreed to leave the item on the second reading.

Background: City officials say the easement is needed for a water line project that runs west of Razorback Road along Thomas Avenue, Hornsby Drive, Halsell Road and Oliver Avenue. The design is complete and the project is ready to be bid for construction, however, the owners of the property have refused to grant the easement necessary for the water line. The city hired Reed and Associates to provide an appraisal for the easement, and offered the appraised amount of $21,900 to the property owners as compensation. Staff said despite multiple conversations and negotiations with the owners, they still have not granted the easement. Staff said they will continue negotiations to avoid condemnation if possible, but the utility easement must be acquired in a timely manner so as not to delay the construction of the project.

Discussion:
City Attorney Kit Williams said the property owners’ attorney called him this afternoon and said they’d like to continue negotiations. He said he told them he’d be happy to continue negotiations, even if the council tonight agrees to move forward with taking possession of the easement.

Decision:
The council unanimously approved the resolution.

Background: The city has received $320,000 in grant money for this project, which will provide lighting for Cato Springs Trail, a 2.9-mile extension of the Razorback Greenway that runs from Greathouse Park along the Cato Springs Branch to the Kessler Mountain Regional Park.

Discussion:
There was no public comment on this issue.

Decision:
The council unanimously approved the resolution.

Background: Both the Planning Commission and city staff recommend approval of the request.

The subject property is located between Gregg Avenue and Woolsey Avenue on the south side of Miller Street. The applicant stated the rezoning will be a good transition between higher density along Gregg Avenue and lower densities to the east.

Location:

Discussion:
There was no public comment on this item.

Decision:
The council unanimously approved the request.

Background: The Planning Commission recommends approval of the request with the following conditions:

1. Lesser dedication of right-of-way shall be limited to the minimum necessary to accommodate the existing deck and concrete slab, totaling approximately 17 square feet; and
2. The encroachment into the Master Street Plan right-of-way shall be considered temporary. Should City improvements to 7th Street necessitate utilizing the encroachment area, the property owner shall be responsible for removing the deck blocking the right-of-way. However, the City may also remove the deck if necessary.

City staff are not in favor of the request. Should the council elect to approve the request, staff recommends the following condition:

1. Full dedication of right-of-way shall occur with the associated lot split, as required by ordinance. The encroachment into the Master Street Plan right-of-way shall be considered temporary. Should City improvements to 7th Street necessitate utilizing the encroachment area, the property owner shall be responsible for removing the deck and any other illegally constructed structures in the right-of-way. However, the City may also remove the deck if necessary.

Location:

Discussion:
City Attorney Kit Williams said with such a small lot, the dedication requirement would be about one-sixth of the entire property and might be unconstitutional. He recommended accepting the Planning Commission’s recommendation, but without any conditions.

There was no public comment on this issue.

Decision:
The council unanimously approved the resolution.

Background: During the development and permitting review of the new sorority house, the project required the sorority to make improvements to the sidewalk along both Maple and Vandeventer. City staff said this project creates an opportunity to partner with the sorority house to improve traffic flow and safety at the intersection by extending those improvements further east. The improvements included in the cost share would consist of new curb and gutter to reduce the overall paved width of Maple, while also defining the intersection better with proper radii and on designated on street parking. In addition, sidewalks will be reconstructed to city standards including new ADA ramps, and a new crosswalk.

Discussion:
There was no public comment on this issue.

Decision:
The council unanimously approved the ordinance.

Background: City staff said the unique relationship between the city, Ozarks Electric and Today’s Power Inc. has allowed the three organizations to develop a trilateral agreement that provides for the development, construction and operation of 10 MW of solar power generation and associated 24 MWh of energy storage at the two Fayetteville wastewater treatment facilities. The project consists of 5 MW of ground mounted solar photovoltaic panels and 12 MWh of battery storage at each facility. Solar panels will be installed on a sun tracking system that will allow maximum solar exposure throughout the day – this will translate to an approximate 15 percent increase in electricity production by the solar array.

Discussion:
One resident who spoke said he hopes the city won’t pave or place gravel under the solar panels, which he likened to trading one form of pollution for another. City staff said the plan is to use native plants, and not to use gravel or pavement.

Peter Nierengarten, the city’s director of sustainability, said in addition to the expected $6 million saved in energy costs over the project’s 20-year lifespan, the city anticipates a complete return on its investment in just over three years. He said the project will also raise clean energy consumption by city facilities from 16 percent to 72 percent, which is a major step toward Fayetteville’s goal of 100 percent clean energy by 2030.

Decision:
The council unanimously approved the ordinance.

Background: In November 2013, the council passed a resolution expressing support for the expansion of the Woolsey Wet Prairie to create 80 additional acres as a wetlands bank to be used for city projects. Additionally, a $350,000 CIP was funded for the construction of the wetlands. Since that time demand for wetland credits has decreased and none of the CIP money has been expended on the wetlands expansion. The site is popular with naturalists, especially those in the birding community. It has been designated as an Important Bird Area (IBA) by the Audubon Society due to the presence of over 182 species of birds reported on the site and on the surrounding city-owned property.

Location:

Discussion:
Jennifer Ogle, chair of the Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association, spoke in favor of the resolution. She said the oak savanna habitat was once a very common vegetation type, but has become highly endangered. She said preservation and restoration presents a unique opportunity for education and research.

Decision:
The council unanimously approved the resolution.

Background: Click here to view the proposed budget.

In a memo to the council, Mayor Jordan said local economic conditions in Fayetteville have “again been very strong” during fiscal 2018. City sales taxes are up approximately 5 percent compared to 2017 actuals through August 2018. The city has also seen increased activity in building development in 2018. Unemployment is at 2.5 percent for September 2018, which Jordan said compares favorably to the rest of the state and nation. “Even though economic conditions continue to improve, this budget has been formulated on conservative revenue and expenditure estimates,” he said.

Discussion:
There was no public comment.

Decision:
The council unanimously approved the resolution.

Background: City staff said other similar funds, such as tree escrow (seven years), have longer time periods to expend funds. State statute allows up to seven years. They said the three-year time frame has been challenging for the following reasons:

1. To design, bid and build projects within three years is a very short time and staff has struggled to meet this timeline.
2. There have been situations in certain park quadrants where there were not enough funds for a significant project which resulted in a phased or piecemeal project. Additional time to collect funds would have prevented this issue and made the project more efficient and beneficial to the public.
3. The strict timeline has forced other approved projects to be delayed due to lack of personnel and inflexibility of the timeline. The extension to five years would allow staff to add these projects to the five-year plan and have appropriate time and better funding to plan, design, bid and construct these projects.

Discussion:
There was no public comment.

Decision:
The council unanimously approved the ordinance.