LIVE UPDATES: Fayetteville City Council recap: Dec. 15, 2020

NORTHWEST ARKANSAS REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY
Mike Johnson – One term ending 12/31/26
Blake Woolsey – One term ending 12/31/26

PUBLIC FACILITES BOARD
Marjo Burk – One term ending 12/31/25

The Housing Authority Board of Commissioners recommend the following candidates for appointment:

HOUSING AUTHORITY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
Monique Jones – One unexpired term ending 12/28/22
Kristen Bensinger – One term ending 12/28/25

The Nominating Committee recommends the following candidates for appointment:

ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE
John Ray – One term ending 12/31/22
Jeremy Rawn – One term ending 12/31/22
Daniel Greim – One term ending 12/31/22

AIRPORT BOARD
Ian Tholking – One Aeronautical term ending 12/31/25

AUDIT COMMITTEE
Ann Gearity – One CPA term ending 12/31/23

CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION
Spencer Brown – One unexpired term ending 03/31/24

ENERGY IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 1
Joseph Donahue – One term ending 12/31/22

ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION COMMITTEE
Jeff Pummill – One Community Citizen at Large term ending 12/31/23
Glenda M. Patterson – One Community Citizen at Large term ending 12/31/23

PARKS AND RECREATION ADVISORY BOARD
Joel Freund – One term ending 12/31/23
Andrew Brink – One term ending 12/31/23
Julie Chambers – One term ending 12/31/23

URBAN FORESTRY ADVISORY BOARD
Blake Tedford – One Tree Service Community term ending 12/31/22
Samuel Hunter Adkisson – One Community Citizen at Large term ending 12/31/22
Lacey Jennen – One Community Citizen at Large term ending 12/31/22
Zane Colvin – One Community Citizen at Large term ending 12/31/22

Background: This item was pulled from the Consent Agenda by Council Member Marsh at the request of a constituent who wants to comment on the resolution.

Discussion:
During public comment, there were no requests to speak. The council voted 8-0 to table the item until the New Business portion of the meeting to allow the person more time in case they still want to speak. The person later said she is concerned about the language and how it pertains to officers speaking to juvenile without them first being mirandized, and how parents could first be contacted to be present during any interviews. Another person spoke and asked the council to table the item for more consideration before it’s passed.

Police Chief Mike Reynolds said the policy follows updated rules of criminal procedure and is in line with state law. He said if the issue is tabled, the department would be out of compliance for a small amount of time, but it might not be a major issue since the council is only trying to soften the language.

Marsh and Smith said they would be fine approving the proposal tonight, and that time is of the essence when coming into compliance. Details could always be changed later, they said. Scroggin agreed.

Petty said it’s just a fact that noncustodial juvenile interviews need to take place from time to time. He said he’s fine with the proposal, but since the police chief said it won’t likely be an issue to wait a couple of weeks to get the language softened a bit, he’d like to table the item until the next meeting.

The council voted 5-3 to table the resolution until Jan. 5 (Bunch, Smith and Marsh voted against).

The project is similar to the previous item, in that it will extend access into the undeveloped property west of Gregg Avenue.

The partnership with the railroad also includes the closing of another crossing in town. The proposal calls for closing the crossing south of Township Street. Staff said it’s another low-use crossing that provides a second option for accessing Ridout Lumber and Arkansas Self Storage, but both businesses could still be accessed from the improved railroad crossing to the north at Township Street.

Funding will come from the 2019 Transportation Bond Program.

Location:

June 4 Discussion:
City staff suggested tabling this item as well after some council members questioned the economic benefit of this new crossing. The council voted unanimously to table the item.

Aug. 4 Discussion:
Staff said the developer of the property has shared conceptual plans for the remainder of the land that includes over $150 million in construction for Phase 1 of a development that includes a mixture of residential, restaurant/retail, and an anchor business that could all potentially employ almost 1,000 people. Staff said if those plans are developed to completion as proposed, the cost of the railroad crossing would be recovered by tax receipts from the construction alone, resulting in a net profit to the city’s tax base beginning in the first year after construction.

City Engineer Chris Brown offered an amendment requiring approval of a large-scale development for the first phase of development of 100,000 square feet of “commercial employment space” before the project could begin.

Economic Vitality Director Devin Howland gave a presentation on the project about what the new crossing would allow for. Howland said Washington Regional is planning a 100,000-square-foot medical facility that would also come with some apartments, and likely restaurants and retail development. The two phases would cost more than $150 million. Howland said he estimated the project would pay for itself in the first year after the development is complete.

The council agreed to table the item for two weeks. The discussion will continue on Aug. 18.

Aug. 18 Discussion:
Mayor Jordan said after meeting with AMR, there are still some issues with the removal of the crossing in front of Ridout Lumber. He said more time is needed to work out an agreement.

City staff said businesses in the area don’t want to see the crossing closed. Alternatives could include creating a connection south to Poplar Street, improving the current crossing or looking at other crossings in town that could be closed.

The council voted to table the item. The discussion will continue on Sept. 1.

Sept. 1 Discussion:
Staff said several options were presented to the Transportation Committee, including building an alternate connection to Poplar Street, paying for improvements at the crossing by Ridout to limit the railroad’s liability and see if that appeases the railroad, or closing another crossing in town at Frisco Avenue since the railroad really wants to close a crossing if a new one is added.

The Transportation Committee voted 3-0 to close the Frisco closing, but the Active Transportation Advisory Committee didn’t like that idea and voted 7-0 to recommend keeping that closing open to all traffic. The ATAC preferred that the council improve the Frisco crossing instead of just closing it.

Since then, city planners have come up with some preliminary drawings for three options to extend the existing road in front of Ridout to the south at Poplar Street.

Here are those drawings:

Some council members said they’d first like to get some input from the area businesses about the options before making a decision.

Council Member Marsh suggested closing the crossing at Jocelyn Lane or Quality Lane. Staff said Jocelyn has a home on it and sees trail traffic and Quality Lane has an apartment complex on it, but if the council wants to pursue closing those crossings, they will see what the railroad company thinks about it. Marsh also suggested closing both the Ridout crossing and the Jocelyn or Quality crossing to possibly allow the University Avenue crossing to stay open (a decision to close that crossing came at the previous meeting).

During public comment, Ross Ridout said the crossing in front of his business is absolutely necessary for his delivery trucks. He said those trucks can’t use the existing roadway that leads to the Township Street crossing because the road isn’t wide enough for two-way traffic, especially when railroad cars are unloaded there. He said the reason he chose the location for his business was because of the crossing access. He said he’s a good customer of the railroad and he thinks if the city pushes back hard enough, the railroad might agree to drop the issue and allow the crossing to stay open even with the addition of a new crossing for the planned development to the north. He said two of the options for an alternate route would require 18-wheeler trucks to have to turn around which isn’t safe. His preference, if something must happen, is for the city to pay for improvements to the existing crossing and see if the railroad would agree to that.

The council agreed to table the item until Sept. 15 to allow more time to discuss the issue with the railroad.

Sept. 15 Discussion:
City engineer Chris Brown said the city and the railroad are at a bit of an impasse at the moment in their discussions on some of the previously proposed crossings.

He said that closing a crossing at Jocelyn across from Stone Mill Bread is a possibility currently being discussed, but more work and discussion is needed.

Brown said staff needs at least a couple more weeks before making a recommendation.

The council voted unanimously to table the discussion until the Oct. 6 meeting.

Oct. 6 Discussion:
City Engineer Chris Brown said discussions with the railroad are ongoing, and requested this item be tabled.

The council tabled the item indefinitely to allow for the discussions to continue.

Dec. 15 Discussion:
The new proposal calls for removal of the Jocelyn Lane crossing instead of the previously proposed removal of at Garrett Drive in front of Ridout Lumber.

The street, which runs west from Gregg Avenue across from Stone Mill Bread Co., currently provides access to one residential driveway and serves as an access point for the city’s trail system to the west.

City staff said the plan is to work with the owner of the home to address how they’ll access the residence, and to build a new trail access route to the south which lead toward a public right-of-way in front of Meek’s Lumber and Hardware at Township Street. Here’s a drawing:

There was no public comment.

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

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

This contract will authorize a land purchase needed for the replacement parking deck to allow the project to move forward and expedite the completion prior to beginning the Arts Corridor Civic Plaza Project.

Dec. 1 Discussion:
City staff shared the following updated conceptual images of the new deck (see PDF here):

City Attorney Kit Williams said the contract is not ready to be approved. He said more time is needed to make adjustments to both sides of the deal.

There was no public comment.

The council agreed to hold the item on the first reading. The discussion will continue on Dec. 15.

Dec. 15 Discussion:
City staff said more time is needed to work with all parties to come to an agreement. City Attorney Kit Williams said he believes the council could wait to approve the contract and still meet the city’s bond obligation.

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

Background:
This item was tabled at the Nov. 17, Dec. 1 and Dec. 15 meetings.

The work is related to a replacement parking deck near the intersection of Dickson Street and West Avenue.

From a staff memo:

This amendment includes the Balance of the Architectural Services for the Architectural Elements of the Deck and West Avenue Police Substation including Design Development, Construction Drawings, Bidding and Negotiation, and Construction Administration. It also includes the structural Design of the Colonnade, Survey and platting.

Nov. 17 Discussion:
Staff requested this item be tabled until the next meeting to allow more time to get an acceptable contract. The discussion will continue on Dec. 1.

Dec. 1 Discussion:
Mayor Jordan requested this item be tabled again until the next meeting to allow more time to work on the contract. The discussion will continue on Dec. 15.

Dec. 15 Discussion:
The council voted 8-0 to table this item again since it can only be approved after the previous item is approved. The discussion will continue on Jan. 5.

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

This property is just east of I-49 at the interchange with Wedington Drive. It is the site of the Marinoni farm, and is primarily rural and agricultural in nature. The site contains four parcels and includes at least one home constructed in 1926, with associated outbuildings and cattle pastures. The property consists of a variety of zoning districts, ranging from commercial to low-density residential. The applicant has not submitted an associated development proposal, but has indicated the intention is to develop it as mixed-use.

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

Location:

Dec. 1 Discussion:
One person who spoke asked how flooding would be handled in the area, and how traffic issues could be improved. Staff said the potential for flooding would be addresses whenever the property is eventually developed, and that changes are coming to the nearby area when the state transportation department redesigns the I-49 interchange to be safer and more convenient.

Three people spoke against the request, citing concerns about increased traffic, noise and density if the property were to be developed. One person said they’d prefer to continue seeing horses on the undeveloped property rather than buildings.

Council Member Turk said she’d like to hold the item on the first reading to allow more time for public input. Smith and Scroggin said they’d prefer to see a Planned Zoning District request for the property instead of a standard rezoning.

The council agreed to leave the item on the first reading. The discussion will continue on Dec. 15.

Dec. 15 Discussion:
The applicant, Paula Marinoni, said she won’t consider a Planned Zoning District for this project, as requested by Scroggin and Smith at the previous meeting. She said the application already includes what the city’s long-range planning documents call for when it comes to future development.

During public comment, seven people spoke against the request citing concerns similar to those expressed at the previous meeting (increased traffic, lowered safety, added noise and density if the property were to be developed).

Scroggin said the area can handle more density, but he won’t support the request. He said such a massive development needs a planned zoning district.

Smith said he knows development of the property is inevitable, but he shares some of the traffic concerns of the neighbors, particularly when it comes to funneling traffic onto Wedington Drive.

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

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

This property is located east of downtown, on the west slope of Mount Sequoyah at the northeast corner of Fletcher Avenue and Dickson Street. It includes three parcels along Fletcher. The northernmost parcel is undeveloped while each of the other two include a single-family dwelling. The property includes two built street frontages, Fletcher and Dickson to the west and south, and access to an undeveloped section of Summit Avenue’s right-of-way to the east. Although specific development details have not been provided, staff said the applicant has said that rezoning the property as requested will allow for single-family construction “that is complimentary to the character of the existing neighborhood.”

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

Location:

Dec. 1 Discussion:
Three people spoke against the request. Council Member Kinion said he’d like to hold the item on the first reading to allow more time for public input. Marsh said she’s in favor of the request, but agreed that it would be a good idea to hold off on voting for two weeks. The discussion will continue on Dec. 15.

Dec. 15 Discussion:
One person who spoke said she wasn’t against the redevelopment of the property, but asked that the water flow from Mount Sequoyah be considered since it’s already an issue in the area. Another two neighbors agreed and said water runoff is an issue.

One person said she would prefer not to have rental units on the property.

Kinion said there is a lot of runoff in the area. He said if the new development comes with drainage improvements, then that could be a good thing. If not, it would make the issue more problematic.

Marsh said she supports the request since the density level is appropriate for the area. She said the developer is responsible and the city has procedures in place for developments to ensure water runoff is considered. She and Gutierrez said renters and home owners are welcome in all neighborhoods and renters shouldn’t be looked at as people who might cause problems.

Petty agreed and said he’s in support.

Bunch said the request is for an appropriate zoning district for this area. She said the nearby historic district features smaller homes that are closer together. She said it’s a good fit.

The council voted 7-1 to move to the third reading (Kinion voted against).

Decision:
The council voted 6-2 to approve the ordinance. Turk and Kinion voted against.

Background:
The Police Department receives forfeitures because of civil proceedings concerning cash or property seized during a criminal investigation. By statute, federal and state forfeitures are to be spent for law enforcement purposes only and are tracked within the city’s accounting system.

Discussion:
Some people who spoke said they’d like to see more specific uses of the money be identified. Petty agreed.

Decision:
The council voted 7-1 to approve the resolution (Petty voted against).

Background:
The council in 2017 agreed to pay HBO $500,000 as part of an incentive package aimed at convincing producers to film True Detective Season Three in Fayetteville.

Staff said after looking at post-production reports, more than 1,895 Arkansas residents participated as part of the cast and crew (receiving payment), which was many more than the original estimation. Staff said local creative economy professionals also contributed to the series, highlighting the talent available in Fayetteville for future productions.

While specifics of the show’s payroll cannot be disclosed, staff said the project met and exceeded the payroll estimations of $37.6 million.

Overall tax revenue generated from the show is estimated at close to $1 million, according to staff documents, which also list a variety of other benefits the city and region received from the production of the show.

Discussion:
There was no public comment.

Decision:
The council voted unanimously to approve the resolution.

Background:
Staff said state law won’t allow Mockingbird Kitchen to serve alcohol on their patio. By adding a new ORA, the restaurant – along with the upcoming Big Whiskey’s restaurant – will be able to legally serve alcohol, as will any other restaurant that comes to Evelyn Hills Shopping Center in the future.

Location:

Discussion:
Molly Rawn, CEO of Experience Fayetteville, said the state has antiquated alcohol laws and if they were more current, the city wouldn’t need to declare an ORA just to allow a restaurant to serve alcohol on their own patio. But since that’s not the case, she’s in support of the proposal.

Decision:
The council advanced the item to the final reading, and voted unanimously to approve it.

Background:
The property includes almost 3,000 linear feet of unbuilt right-of-way bisecting a portion of Kessler Regional Park. Before the city annexed the area in 2005 and developed the park in 2015, Judge Cummings Road ran in the right-of-way. With the park’s development, the road was realigned to its current location with right-of-way dedicated along its length. In February 2020, a large-scale development was approved for expansion of the park’s baseball fields, service facilities, and parking. A condition of that project’s approval was the vacation of the subject right-of-way. This item would finalize that agreement.

Location:

Discussion:
There was no public comment.

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

Background:
Council Member Kyle Smith said this item is related to the following item in that they come from the same idea, but require two separate ordinances.

Smith said the idea is to address two big issues that the council has discussed for at least three years. He said the plan doesn’t remove any uses, but increases planners’ ability to conduce contextual review of projects.

The first change would move Use Unit 18, which is gasoline service stations and drive-in/drive through restaurants, to a conditional use for Community Services. He said proposed rezonings on Mount Comfort Road have been contentious in the past because of the potential for these types of uses.

The second change would move Use Unit 8 (single-family dwellings) and Use Unit 9 (two-family dwellings) to conditional uses. Smith said this is in response to development patterns on south Rupple Road. He said previous council members made it clear when they rezoned the land that it was intended for a walkable mixed-use center with a neighborhood that could access nearby services. Instead, he said, developers began exclusively building homes with no mixed uses at all. He said in order to protect the remainder of the property from the same fate, the council should make this change to allow the Planning Commission to look at whether or not the variety of uses being proposed is appropriate for that area.

He said it’s a band-aid approach, but without a major overhaul of the zoning code, this is the best option if the city is to get the type of development it wants.

Marsh agreed and said this has been needed for several years.

Bunch asked if real estate stakeholders were a part of this proposal. Kinion said stakeholders must be involved in a process like this. At the very least, it needs more discussion.

Smith said he’s happy to leave the item on the first reading to allow more time for people to consider it.

Scroggin said he doesn’t want to vote today, but it’s worth looking into. He said while some people say the city has too many restrictions, there are a lot of people who prefer living in a city with tight restrictions on development.

Marsh said she’d like to advance the item to the final reading tonight. Bunch disagreed and said developers need to have a say-so and should be given more time to consider the proposal.

City Attorney Kit Williams said this should have a slow rollout or phased implementation to protect the city from potential lawsuits. He said he can draft that language soon and have it ready at the next meeting.

Turk said the item should be held to allow time for more input.

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

Background:
This item is related to the above proposal which seeks to allow the Planning Commission to consider whether plans for a potential conditional use permit include an appropriate variety of uses for a particular piece of property.

Discussion:
Smith said this item is a companion to the previous topic.

Petty said this is straightforward enough and can stand on its own. He said he’d like to vote on it tonight.

Marsh said it’s an important ordinance since it requires thoughtful consideration of plans in every decision that’s made.

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

Background:
During implementation and adoption of the Energov system, the Development Review Division was allotted one temporary full-time planning technician to support permanent staff during the transition. That position is set to expire at the end of the year. The department has requested a one-year extension for that position. Staff said a variety of challenges related to the project, along with near-complete turnover of development review staff, COVID-19 related workload, and heightened development submittal numbers created the need for additional support.

Discussion:
There was no public comment.

Decision:
The council voted unanimously to approve the resolution.