LIVE UPDATES: Fayetteville City Council recap: Oct. 15, 2019

File photo

On the agenda…

  • Allowing public alcohol consumption during certain special events.
  • Changes to allowed driveway widths in form-based zoning districts with a front build-to zone.
  • Converting the regional park baseball fields from natural to artificial turf.
  • Building four new baseball fields and a parking lot at the regional park.
  • Banning food service providers from using foam products.
  • Five rezoning requests.

» Download the full agenda

A meeting of the Fayetteville City Council began at 5:30 p.m. Tuesday, Oct. 15, 2019 inside room 219 of City Hall, located at 113 W. Mountain St. in Fayetteville.

Listed below are the items up for approval and links to PDF documents with detailed information on each item of business.


Roll Call

Present: Sonia Gutierrez, Sarah Marsh, Mark Kinion, Matthew Petty, Mayor Lioneld Jordan, Sloan Scroggin, Sarah Bunch, Teresa Turk, Kyle Smith
Absent: None

» View current attendance records


Mayor’s Announcements

1. Statement from Mayor Jordan – Mayor Jordan made a tearful announcement Tuesday evening that City Clerk Sondra Smith died in her home Monday night.


Consent

Consent items are approved in a single, all-inclusive vote unless an item is pulled by a council member at the beginning of the meeting.

1. Approval of the Oct. 1, 2019 City Council Meeting Minutes
Pass 8-0

2. Waste Management of Arkansas, Inc. (Details): A resolution to exercise the second five-year option to renew the agreement with Waste Management of Arkansas, Inc. for solid waste transfer and disposal services.
Pass 8-0

3. Community Development Block Grant Program Income and Donations (Details): A resolution to approve a budget adjustment in the total amount of $3,324.00 representing Community Development Block Grant program income and donations from citizens and local businesses.
Pass 8-0

4. 2019 Justice Assistance Grant Local Solicitation Award (Details): A resolution to authorize acceptance of a 2019 Justice Assistance Grant Local Solicitation Award in the total amount of $76,984.00 which will be used to purchase law enforcement training, equipment and supplies for the Fayetteville and Springdale police departments and the Washington County Sheriff’s Office, and to approve a budget adjustment.
Pass 8-0

5. Walton Family Foundation (Details): A resolution to authorize an application for a 50/50 matching grant from the Walton Family Foundation in the amount of $400,000.00 for the design of bicycle and pedestrian improvements along Porter Road, Deane Street and Poplar Street.
Pass 8-0

6. Northwest Arkansas Council (Details): A resolution to authorize Mayor Jordan to sign a travel expense reimbursement agreement with the Northwest Arkansas Council to provide for reimbursement of costs associated with business development manager Chung Tan’s attendance at the Economix Conference.
Pass 8-0

7. ADM 19-6816 (380 N. College Ave./Ozark Natural Food Co-op) (Details): A resolution pursuant to § 166.04(b)(3) of the Fayetteville Unified Development Code to approve the applicant’s request to not dedicate additional right of way for a redevelopment project at 380 N. College Avenue.
Pass 8-0

8. 2020 Recycling and Trash User Fees (Details): A resolution pursuant to § 50.40(a) of the Fayetteville City Code to waive the automatic annual price adjustment for all 2020 recycling and trash user fees.
Pass 8-0


Unfinished Business

1. Entertainment District Boundaries (Details)

An ordinance to establish boundaries for an entertainment district in the City of Fayetteville and to promulgate rules for the limited outdoor consumption of alcohol in certain public places.
Tabled indefinitely

Background:
This item was tabled at the Sept. 17 meeting.

This is a proposal to establish rules and boundaries where residents could drink alcohol at special events and festivals without having to stay inside a fenced-in beer garden (see our story from August).

It is a reaction to recently adopted Arkansas legislation that allows municipalities to create designated entertainment districts inside commercial areas that are exempt from state laws which prohibit public alcohol consumption.

Mountain Home was the first Arkansas city to take advantage of the new state law. In Mountain Home, people can drink in public in the entertainment district every day from 4:30 p.m. to midnight.

Fayetteville’s proposal is far more restrictive, and only allows outdoor consumption of alcohol during special events authorized by the mayor.

Alcohol would be allowed at longstanding special events, including the Saturday Farmers’ Market, First Thursday and Lights of the Ozarks.

Proposed rules:

  • Open containers would only be allowed on streets that are closed to traffic.
  • Open containers must be inside a compostable or reusable cup.
  • Only one drink is allowed at a time.
  • Containers are limited to 16 ounces or less.
  • Drinks from one bar can’t be taken into another bar.
  • Drinks are not allowed in other private establishments without the consent of the owner.
  • Drinks can only be consumed if they’re purchased from a vendor inside the entertainment district.

Proposed map:

Aug. 20 Discussion:
City Attorney Kit Williams said the police department and mayor have suggested an amendment to the ordinance that requires any alcohol permittee to place a wristband on anyone who takes an open container out into public.

Smith said he’s not against the idea of armbands, but he’s skeptical of how effective they’ll be in their implementation across several establishments with regards to style, color, etc.

Jordan suggested the amendment be more generic in language, so that any identifier could be used by a police officer to determine the age of a person, such as a stamp.

Scroggin moved to change the word “wristband” to “designated physical identifier.”

The amendment was passed unanimously.

Petty said he’s concerned that nobody from the city or council has spoken with the businesses that will be impacted from this decision. He said a conversation with business owners could be helpful in this discussion.

Mayor Jordan said he’s fine with holding this item for two weeks to allow some time to talk to business owners.

During public comment, one person – a representative from the Fayetteville Chamber of Commerce – spoke in favor of the ordinance. Nobody else from the public spoke.

The council agreed to hold the item on the first reading. The discussion will continue on Sept. 3.

Sept. 3 Discussion:
City Attorney Kit Williams presented an amended ordinance that he said simply clarifies definitions already present in the current draft, including “customers,” “owners” and “permittees.” The council voted 8-0 to approve the changes.

City staff said some business owners were concerned about liability in regards to who would be responsible in the event of an accident involving alcohol – the business that served the individual or the event organizer. Staff said they’ve asked the state ABC board for clarification on this, and will report back as soon as they have an answer.

Bo Counts, owner of Pinpoint Fayetteville, spoke and asked the council to strongly consider business owners’ concerns about liability uncertainty.

Mayor Jordan said he’d like the council to hold the item for at least two weeks. He said he’s heard questions and concerns from at least 40 business owners and he’d like some time to further consider their comments.

Sept. 17 Discussion:
Staff said they need another month to further fine tune the proposal.

Petty said he doesn’t like the current proposal’s requirement that the street be closed. He said he understands there are safety concerns about inebriated people walking near cars, but people are already allowed to drink in bars and then walk out onto streets that aren’t closed. He said none of the other cities in Arkansas have limited their districts by requiring street closures.

Petty moved to table the item until Oct. 15, and said he’d like to eventually see the street cafe portion of the ordinance voted on independently since it’s a separate issue. The council voted unanimously to table the item.

Oct. 15 Discussion:
Devin Howland, the city’s economic development director, asked the council to table this item indefinitely to allow more time to work through the proposal. He said ideally, he’d like a couple of months before bringing the item back to the table for discussion.

The council voted 7-1 to table the item indefinitely. Smith voted against.


2. Amend §172.11 and § 166.08 (Details)

An ordinance to amend §172.11, Driveway and Parking Standards for four (4) or less parking spaces and § 166.08 Street Design and Access Management Standards of the Fayetteville Unified Development Code to reduce driveway widths in zoning districts requiring a build-to zone and to reduce driveway setbacks for single-family homes in zoning districts requiring a build-to zone.
Left on the second reading

Background:
This item was left on the first reading at the Oct. 1 meeting.

Council members Sarah Marsh, Kyle Smith, Matthew Petty and Sloan Scroggin sponsored this proposal, which would reduce driveway widths in the front of a home in a form-based zoning district that require buildings to be within a certain range of the road. In those specific districts, the proposal limits driveway widths to the greater of 10 feet or 20% of the lot width.

Discussion:
A petition was recently circulated stating that the proposal would be the end of 2-car driveways and garages in Fayetteville, but Smith said there are several ways builders could still construct 2-car garages under the new rules. For example, he said the limitation on driveway width only applies within the front build-to zone, meaning beyond that, a driveway could be bigger. He said it could be connected to a garage that is recessed behind the build-to zone, or a side-loaded garage, or a 2+car garage on an rear alley.

Planning Commission chair Matt Hoffman spoke on behalf of the proposal and said this change would only apply in zoning districts that require a build-to zone. These district, including mixed-use, multi-family and single-family designations, make up about 14.8% of the city by acreage. Fayetteville has nine single-family zoning districts, and this change would only apply to two of them (RSF-18 and NC-Neighborhood Conservation). Together, those two zoning districts make up about 2.8% of the city.

Hoffman said while some developers have chosen to build neighborhoods in form-based districts, the resulting construction does not resemble traditional town form, which is the intent of those districts.

Restricting driveway widths would help solve that problem, Hoffman said, by allowing wider driveways on wider lots, and skinnier driveways on skinnier lots.

Hoffman said 10-foot driveways would be the bare minimum and would still be allowed even on the skinniest lots. He showed examples of homes built in the city that have narrow driveways which lead to a 2-car garage on the side of the house while still allowing for both a front yard and considerably large back yard.

The proposal would included a six-month delay before the changes take effect.

Council Member Kinion asked what the benefit of this would be.

Hoffman said this type of regulation is a key factor in encouraging traditional town form and walkable environments, the benefits of which are abundant. He said it was important for the commission to not recommend these changes in all zoning districts, but to instead propose them in form-based districts to further encourage traditional town form.

Scroggin said this change has been in the works for a while and he’s in no hurry to rush it through tonight.

The parts of town that would be affected are represented in the map below. The areas in red are where the changes would be in effect (for new construction only):

Council Member Petty said he sponsored this idea and would be voting for it, but he is willing to make some amendments to the current proposal. For example, he would support extending the six-month grace period.

Marsh said she thinks six months is plenty of time, and that time is of the essence in getting this change in place.

Bunch said she doesn’t think six months is long enough for a developer who might already be in the process of designing and planning a subdivision.

During public comment, a representative of the NWA Homebuilders Association said six months is not enough time.

Don McNaughton, who is president of the NWA Board of Realtors, said he thinks homes with side-load driveways, shared driveways, and rear-facing driveways are not as desirable to homebuyers. He also said six months is not enough because some subdivisions have pre-sales as early as one year out.

About a dozen residents spoke against the proposal. Most said they prefer houses with two-car garages to those with one-car garages. Others said six months isn’t a long enough grace period before the rules take effect, including Steve Clark, president of the Fayetteville Chamber of Commerce.

One local builder said it could cost more to build homes under these new rules, and that cost would be absorbed by the buyers, effectively raising the cost of housing in these areas.

Council Member Scroggin said he’d like to see the proposal amended to extend the grace period, and also to exempt developments that are planned and platted, but may not be finalized and ready for a building permit before the new rule takes effect.

City Attorney Kit Williams said he needs some time to look into when the best time would be to make this new rule effective so as not to put a burden on developers who are in various states of financing for any in-progress projects.

The council agreed to leave the item on the first reading. The discussion will continue at the next meeting on Oct. 15.

Oct. 15 Discussion:
Council Member Smith has proposed an amendment that would exempt all unexpired preliminary plats, final plats, concurrent plats, and lot splits approved after Dec. 31, 2014, and those approved within 12 months following the adoption of this ordinance. This exemption would also include any renewals or extensions and all subsequent phases of plats subject to this exemption.

During public comment, local real estate agent Mitch Weigel suggested 12 months might not be long enough to fully exempt applicants who have already invested time and money into a project that might not be ready for plat approval within that time period.

One other person spoke and said he is against this amendment because it is essentially just prolonging a problem the city is trying to resolve. The original proposal, he said, is a better idea.

City Attorney Kit Williams said he still has legal concerns about the ordinance, and said the amendment, while it is a step in the right direction, does not go far enough in exempting every property owner who may have already begun the process of developing their land using knowledge based on existing zoning and development standards.

Council Member Kinion agreed, and said it softens the blow of the original proposal, but said it ultimately is just “adding smoke and mirrors to an already bad ordinance.” He said this type of regulation should be handled using neighborhood covenants, not by city code.

Council Member Marsh disagreed, and said the point of the ordinance is to make neighborhoods more walkable and safer. She said the integrity of neighborhoods – many in south Fayetteville that were originally built in traditional town form – is at stake since that part of town is seeing a lot of redevelopment. She said she’ll support the amendment.

Council Member Bunch said she always leans heavily on the opinion of the city attorney, and while she’ll likely vote in favor of the amendment, she would like more time to think about the ordinance as a whole.

Council Member Smith said he hopes the ordinance is passed tonight, but that the ordinance itself is held until the next meeting (Nov. 5) to give people time to further consider the proposal and any more necessary amendments.

Council Member Gutierrez said she’d like all property owners to be grandfathered in under the current zoning regulations, and asked City Attorney Kit Williams if that would satisfy his concerns. Williams said no, it would be unreasonable for all property owners to be exempted from any changes that the city makes to its planning regulations. His concern, he said, is only about real estate developers who purchase land for single-family home construction. Those specific individuals’ investment-backed purchases, he said, should be protected.

Council Member Petty said he’s sensitive to the concerns that brought about the proposed amendment, and that he’ll support it and possibly any changes to it that might come up before the next meeting. He said he doesn’t like the suggestion that every property should be exempted going back to the previous transaction, mostly because of the precedent it could set for future code changes. He said when a developer chooses one of the two affected zoning districts, they’re essentially making a deal with the city in which the developer can build more homes than they could in their current district in exchange for complying with the city’s restrictions that are designed to be more environmentally friendly and to make more walkable and safer neighborhoods. This ordinance, he said, is an attempt to correct a problem with the current code that allows developers to build more homes without having to adhere to environmental- and walkability-based intents.

The council voted 7-1 to approve the amendment. Gutierrez voted against.

After over two hours, 24 people had spoken during public comment, and all were against the proposal. Over half of the speakers told the council that they personally prefer larger driveways and garages and gave varying reasons why they don’t think the city should be trying to stop the construction of 2-car garages. Several real estate agents spoke, some who said they don’t think homes built with smaller driveways would sell, and others who said they think this ordinance would result in larger home costs. A few residents said they think this idea is based solely on some council members’ personal aesthetic opinions about what houses should look like, and that they don’t think this will lead to more walkable or safe neighborhoods. Others who spoke said they simply don’t think cities should regulate development.

Petty said he was disappointed to hear so many people speaking to the idea that the city is trying to put an end to 2-car garages.

“Anyone who has told anybody that is simply wrong,” he said. “In fact, the super-majority of the city would still allow it.”

Petty said the idea is simple, and it’s about developers who want to build more homes on smaller lots being subject to stricter standards which is something that cities across the region and country are doing to address environmental and safety concerns in growing areas.

Marsh agreed.

“When we give you more density, we expect you to adhere to a higher standard,” she said. “This is about making safer, healthier and more desirable neighborhoods.”

Kinion said he doesn’t know why the council should go to all the trouble to change city code when it only affects such a small amount of the city. He said home builders and real estate agents know best when it comes to designing houses, and said they should’ve been asked before this idea was proposed. He said if home prices are increased because of this ordinance, it could have a negative impact.

The council agreed to leave the item on the second reading. The discussion will continue on Nov. 5.


New Business

1. RFQ #19-01 Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. (Details)

A resolution to approve a professional engineering services agreement with Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. pursuant to RFQ #19-01, in the amount of $116,450.00 for the development of an Advanced Metering Infrastructure strategy for city water meters.
Pass 7-1

Background:
Staff said this new system would send metering data over the network in much shorter time periods than the existing system, and would provide insight to utility managers so that valuable data and information about the water system can be obtained. The information would be used to manage customer water usage to plan for future growth, as well as track and address issues with non-revenue water (water loss). AMI also eliminates the need for driving to every house in the community to get meter reads and minimizes re-reads and misreads.

Discussion:
There was no public comment.

Turk said she opposes the resolution because she thinks this is an inherent government function that shouldn’t be outsourced, especially considering the cost of this agreement.

Kinion said it’s true the council should be careful when spending taxpayer money. However, he said hiring experts to do work that simply cannot be done internally saves money in the long run.

Decision:
The council voted 7-1 to approve the resolution. Turk voted against.


2. Kessler Mountain Regional Park Baseball Complex (Details)

A resolution to approve the purchase and installation of synthetic turf for the Kessler Mountain Regional Park Baseball Complex from United Turf in the amount of $547,140.00 plus any applicable sales taxes and freight charges, pursuant to a Sourcewell Cooperative Purchasing Contract, to approve a project contingency in the amount of $82,071.00, and to approve a budget adjustment.
Pass 8-0

Background:
This would convert the baseball fields at the regional park from natural grass to synthetic turf. Staff said the dirt infield area requires daily preparation for games which includes dragging, watering, and chalking. The natural turf outfield requires weekly or bi-weekly mowing, and the daily preparation of the dirt infield is complicated after rain events which requires extra preparation such as removal of ponded water, raking and dragging, and the addition of drying agents to the infield. With significant rainfall, staff said the infields become too muddy to prepare, resulting in a rainout until the fields have time to dry. Rained out games create extra work for maintenance crews, delay tournaments and league play, require re-scheduling make-up games and may also result in cancellation of tournaments which causes a loss of revenue. Staff said many parks agencies and school districts in the region are converting their football, baseball and softball fields to synthetic turf.

Discussion:
There was no public comment.

Council Member Marsh asked if there is any additional stormwater impact from artificial turf. Staff said the majority of natural surface baseball fields are nearly impermeable, and that there’s no meaningful difference when adding artificial turf. The Kessler fields are equipped with stormwater retention ponds, and this product would drain into those areas.

Decision:
The council voted 8-0 to approve the resolution.


3. RFQ #19-01 Garver, LLC (Details)

A resolution to approve a professional engineering services agreement with Garver, LLC, pursuant to RFQ #19-01, in the amount of $438,950.00 to provide surveying, design, engineering, architectural, and construction administration services for the addition of a four field baseball complex and parking lot at Kessler Mountain Regional Park, to approve a project contingency in the amount of $61,050.00, and to approve a budget adjustment.
Pass 8-0

Background:
The master plan for the regional park calls for four additional baseball fields. This item would provide for surveying, design, engineering, architectural work, and construction administration services for those four new fields as well as a new parking lot.

Discussion:
There was no public comment.

Decision:
The council voted 8-0 to approve the resolution.


4. Enact §114.10 Regulation of Expanded Polystyrene (EPS) Foam Single-use Plates, Bowls, Clamshells, Cups, and Similar Products (Details)

An ordinance to enact §114.10 Regulation of Expanded Polystyrene (EPS) Foam Single-use Plates, Bowls, Clamshells, Cups, and Similar Products.
Left on the first reading

Background:
The council in May voted to stop buying foam products with city funds, but several members expressed interest in an expanded ban of those types of products. Two weeks later the council voted unanimously to consider regulation of single-use plastic shopping bags and difficult-to-recycle-or-compost single-use plates, bowls, cups and utensils.

This proposal would give food service providers until May 1, 2020 to clear out their current supply of expanded polystyrene foam plates, bowls, clamshells, cups, and similar products. After that, they would be required to use products made of a different material.

The regulation would apply to restaurants; hotels; grocery stores with delis or food bars; cafeterias; convenience stores; coffee, tea and donut shops; caterers; and any other prepared, ready-to-eat food or drink providers.

Retailers (like grocery stores) could still sell the products on their shelves.

A survey conducted from July 7 through Aug. 22 asked residents and business owners for their thoughts on the idea. Staff said 2,167 residents responded, and 154 business owners completed the survey. In total, 74% of respondents said they support a ban on foam to-go containers.

Of the business owners who responded, 64% said they would support providing educational materials and resources to businesses on where they can purchase cost-effective compostable/recyclable products, 54% supported banning polystyrene/Styrofoam, 42% support banning single-use plastic straws, and 28% answered other.

Staff researched the costs of common single-use to-go containers to determine the price difference small businesses could expect if they move away from polystyrene. The following chart illustrates those cost differences:

Staff said a separate proposal to regulate plastic bags is expected to be presented at a later date.

Discussion:
There was no public comment.

Turk asked to leave the item on the first reading. The council agreed. The discussion will continue on Nov. 5


5. Amend Chapters 151, 161, 162 and 164 (Details)

An ordinance to amend Chapters 151, 161, 162 and 164 of the Fayetteville Unified Development Code to remove barriers to the development of solar energy systems in the City of Fayetteville and establish development standards for principal and accessory use of ground and roof mounted solar energy systems.
Pass 8-0

Background:
This item would add a variety of definitions and terms to city code that are designed to make it easier to add ground and roof mounted solar energy systems within the city limits.

Discussion:
There was no public comment.

Decision:
The council advanced the ordinance to the third reading, and voted unanimously to approve it.


6. Jack Tyler Engineering, Inc. (Details)

An ordinance to waive competitive bidding and accept a quote in the amount of $22,120.39 plus applicable taxes and freight charges from Jack Tyler Engineering, Inc. for the rebuild of a pump and motor for the Hamestring Sewer Lift Station, and to approve a budget adjustment.
Pass 8-0

Background:
This item would provide funding to pay for a pump and motor rebuild at the Hamestring Sewer Lift Station.

Discussion:
There was no public comment.

Decision:
The council advanced the ordinance to the third reading, and voted unanimously to approve it.


7. RZN 19-6708 (NW of Rupple Rd. & Faith St./Sloanbrooke Ph. IV) (Details)

An ordinance to rezone that property described in rezoning petition RZN 19-6708 for approximately 1.63 acres located northwest of Rupple Road and Faith Street from R-A, Residential Agricultural to NC, Neighborhood Conservation.
Pass 8-0

Background:
Both city staff and the Planning Commission recommend approval of the request. The property is part of a much larger parcel that has been subdivided in part for different phases of Sloanbrooke Subdivision. The larger property and area was rezoned in 2015 as part of a staff-initiated rezoning of over 600 acres in the new South Rupple Road vicinity. This rezoning proposal did previously pass through Planning Commission in July of this year and made it to City Council, but they forwarded the proposal back down to Planning Commission for more review. The original proposal included rezoning some city-owned land that was dedicated by the applicant for parkland.

The applicant has a revised proposal that requests to rezone property completely owned by the applicant. Over the last few years, the applicant has successfully revised the floodplain boundary and the currently proposed area for rezoning is not in the floodplain.

Location:

Discussion:
There was no public comment.

The developer offered a Bill of Assurance to include a wrought iron fence, shrubbery, and Bermuda grass along Rupple Road. Marsh asked that the Bermuda grass item be removed from the Bill of Assurance. The developer agreed. Turk asked if the shrubbery could be a native species. The developer agreed. The council voted unanimously to amend the ordinance to include the Bill of Assurance.

Discussion:
The council advanced the ordinance to the third reading, and voted unanimously to approve it.


8. RZN 19-6809 (NE of Gregg Ave. & Van Asche Dr./Fitzroy Fayetteville, LLC) (Details)

An ordinance to rezone that property described in rezoning petition RZN 19-6809 for approximately 20.71 acres located northeast of Gregg Avenue and Van Asche Drive from P-1, Institutional to UT, Urban Thoroughfare.
Left on the second reading

Background:
Both city staff and the Planning Commission recommend approval of the request. The property is currently undeveloped, and the applicant would like to rezone it to allow for future urban development on the site.

Location:

Discussion:
There was no public comment.

The council advanced the item to the second reading, but Scroggin said he’d like to hold the item there to allow more time to consider the proposal. The council agreed. The discussion will continue on Nov. 5.


9. RZN 19-6810 (1961 N. Porter Rd./Paradigm Development, LLC) (Details)

An ordinance to rezone that property described in rezoning petition RZN 19-6810 for approximately 0.92 acres located at 1961 N. Porter Road from R-A, Residential Agricultural to CS, Community Services.
Left on the first reading

Background:
Both city staff and the Planning Commission recommend approval of the request. The property boarders I-49 to the west and north and is across North Porter Road from University of Arkansas agricultural land to the east. The applicant said the goal is to have “the best potential use for this property.”

Location:

Discussion:
There was no public comment.

The council agreed to leave the item on the first reading. The discussion will continue on Nov. 5.


10. RZN 19-6818 (690 S. Ray Ave./Mills) (Details)

An ordinance to rezone that property described in rezoning petition RZN 19-6818 for approximately 0.60 acres located at 690 S. Ray Avenue from RSF-4, Residential Single Family, 4 units per acre to RSF-8, Residential Single Family, 8 units per acre.
Pass 6-2

Background:
Both city staff and the Planning Commission recommend approval of the request. The property is developed with a single-family dwelling. The applicant has stated that this rezoning is necessary to split the lot.

Location:

Discussion:
There was no public comment.

Turk called this “spot zoning” and said she won’t support it. Kinion agreed.

Marsh disagreed and said it is the type of gradual density increase the city needs. Smith and Scroggin agreed with Marsh.

Bunch asked City Attorney Kit Williams what is considered “spot zoning.” Williams said traditionally, that term was used to describe when a single residential lot in a neighborhood was changed to allow commercial or industrial uses. He said a minor change in residential density isn’t really considered to be “spot zoning.”

Decision:
The council advanced the item to the third reading, and voted 6-2 to approve it. Turk and Kinion voted against.


11. RZN 19-6819 (4170 N. Hillside Terr./Chaisson) (Details)

An ordinance to rezone that property described in rezoning petition RZN 19-6819 for approximately 3.35 acres located at 4170 N. Hillside Terrace from R-A, Residential Agricultural to RSF-4, Residential Single Family, 4 units per acre, subject to a Bill of Assurance.
Pass 6-2

Background:
Both city staff and the Planning Commission recommend approval of the request subject to a Bill of Assurance. The property contains a single-family dwelling.

The applicant has submitted a Bill of Assurance that limits the property to one single-family home per lot and a maximum of three lots. Additionally, single-family homes must meet a minimum of 2,500 square feet of heated living space and said single-family homes must be permanent structures and not manufactured homes, trailers or mobile homes.

Location:

Discussion:
There was no public comment.

Smith said he thinks the requested rezoning is compatible with the surrounding area without the Bill of Assurance. He said he likes what’s proposed, but doesn’t want to tie the hands of any future landowner with what he thinks is an unnecessary set of conditions. Marsh agreed.

Two people spoke – one representative of the neighborhood and one representative for the client.

Smith moved to remove the Bill of Assurance, and that motion initially passed 6-2. Bunch and Turk voted against. Bunch said the neighbors wanted the Bill of Assurance, and that’s why she voted against removing it. Kinion said in the confusion of the moment (there was some confusion over which resident who spoke was the representative of the applicant) he didn’t realize that the neighbors wanted the Bill of Assurance, and he moved to reconsider the vote. Gutierrez seconded.

It was a 4-4 vote to reconsider the previous motion (Petty, Scroggin, Smith and Marsh voted against). Jordan voted to reconsider, so the Bill of Assurance vote was nullified. The vote was taken again, but this time it failed (only Petty, Scroggin, Smith and Marsh voted yes, and Jordan declined to vote).

Decision:
The council advanced the item to the third and final reading, and voted 6-2 to approve it (Marsh and Smith voted against).


12. ADM 19-6808 (North of Raven Lane/Crystal Springs s/d MSP) (Details)

A resolution to amend the Master Street Plan by downgrading the planned Collector Streets for property within the Crystal Springs subdivision north of Mount Comfort Road and east of Salem Road to Local Streets.
Pass 6-2

Background:
Both city staff and the Planning Commission recommend approval of the request to amend the Master Street Plan. The property is currently undeveloped with some land used for a street extension.

Phases 1 through 3 of the Crystal Springs subdivision are built and platted north of Clabber Creek and between Salem Road and Deane Solomon Road. Phase 4 was approved, but was never built and its approval and the associated conditions have expired.

In 2015, an amendment was proposed to remove the Clabber Creek crossing from the Master Street Plan, which made it to the City Council, but was indefinitely tabled as the item did not have staff’s or the Planning Commission’s support.

The applicant has now proposed to downgrade the planned Collector streets running through the property to be Local streets. Staff said the change will be more in-line with the proposed Master Street Plan associated with City Plan 2040. Staff is in support of this proposal, but would like to expand it to encompass a broader area.

Location:

Discussion:
One resident spoke and said while he supports a downgrade of the classification, there might be a better way to handle these types of issues in the future.

Marsh asked the council to hold the item on the first reading. Turk agreed.

Petty said the issue is straightforward and should be handled tonight.

Decision:
During the vote, the item passed 6-2. Bunch and Turk voted against.



Adjourned

This meeting was adjourned at 11:51 p.m.