LIVE UPDATES: Fayetteville City Council recap: Sept. 7, 2021

Background:
This project will include mill and overlay of Runway 16-34, construction of a new electrical vault and generator, and improvements to the current airfield lighting and signage system.

Discussion:
There was no discussion.

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

Background: This item was passed 8-0 on Aug. 3, but was reconsidered at the Aug. 17 meeting at the request of the city attorney in order to make some minor amendments.

Staff said many sections of the city’s building regulation laws are now over 20 years old and are in need of updating, general housekeeping, and a review for consistency. Two years ago the council approved a set of updates, including formalization of the temporary certificate of occupancy allowance, elimination of fire zones, and several text changes to align ordinance with codes adopted at the state level.

Staff said this proposed revision would align city ordinances with current building codes where possible, to eliminate unnecessary requirements that have little impact on the quality of the built environment within the city, and to improve the ability to enforce local building regulation laws.

July 20 Discussion: One person spoke against the ordinance. He said adopting the International Property Maintenance Code, which regulates the minimum maintenance requirements for existing buildings, could lead to more tenants complaining about the properties they’re renting since it’s more strict than current law.

Scroggin asked if other cities are using the code, and staff said there are cities in Arkansas using it, including Fort Smith and Little Rock.

The council agreed to leave the item on the first reading. The discussion will continue on Aug. 3.

Aug. 3 Discussion: There was no public comment.

Turk said a constituent asked her if the council could hold the item on the second reading since he couldn’t be present tonight to speak. Hertzberg said she’d like to hold it as well, but Scroggin, Bunch and Petty said they’d like to go ahead and vote. The motion to advance to the third reading passed 8-0.

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

Sept. 7 Discussion: This item was passed on Aug. 3, but later reconsidered at the request of City Attorney Kit Williams who said some minor amendments are needed to the exhibits which included very long and more current national building codes. Some sections, he said, included blanks to be filled in by local officials, and not all of them were filled in.

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

Background:
This proposal requests Mayor Lioneld Jordan to require all city employees to take a weekly COVID-19 test unless they opt out with proof of full vaccination.

The idea was proposed by Council Member Matthew Petty, and if approved, would encourage the mayor to establish a new policy in which all city employees would be required to submit results of a rapid PCR or antigen test to the Human Resources Department every week. Any employee who voluntarily presents a vaccination card showing that they are fully vaccinated would be exempt from the new rule (read more here).

Discussion:
At the start of this discussion, a group of people entered the council chambers without masks and said they wouldn’t leave unless they’re ticketed for violating the city’s mask mandate. The mayor told them they must leave, and the meeting was briefly put on hold. One man was removed in handcuffs and was told he would be charged in connection with criminal trespassing for not complying with the mayor’s orders to leave.

Five people spoke against the proposal during public comment. One person said he doesn’t think the vaccine works. Another person said she doesn’t think the tests work. One person said he thinks the proposal is a bullying tactic. Another person said the city should let the employees vote to see if they’d like to be tested weekly.

Council Member Scroggin said he’ll likely vote against the proposal because of the logistical issues the program could cause. He said he’s not against masks or vaccines, and he knows they work. He thanked Council Member Petty for bringing something forward to try and help, but ultimately he thinks it would be too difficult to implement and conduct weekly testing of so many employees.

“Hopefully we can come up with something, but I just don’t think this is it,” said Scroggin.

Council Member Hertzberg asked what the estimated cost would be. Mayor Jordan said early guesses are about $164,000 per month. The city is expected to receive about $17.9 million in COVID relief funds, and has already allocated $400,000 toward a cash incentive program to encourage vaccinations.

Hertzberg proposed an amendment that all city employees be polled to see if they would like weekly testing. There was no second for Hertzberg’s motion.

Council Member Petty said there would be logistical challenges, but he thinks they’re solvable. He said he hopes the mayor – if he chooses to implement the policy – would consult with the city’s Board of Health to iron out the details.

Petty said some have asked what would happen to an employee who refused to be tested. He said he hopes they would be treated the same way as anyone who refused any other direct order.

Gutierrez said she’ll support the proposal regardless of the issues that have been brought up tonight.

“We’re talking about people’s lives here,” said Gutierrez. “You can’t put a price tag on that.”

Council Member Bunch said the city should be doing something to help with the pandemic, but she’s not sure this is the right idea.

“I would love for everybody to get vaccinated,” said Bunch, who added that officials should have done a better job months ago when misinformation about the vaccines was being circulated. She said she doesn’t think there’s anything to be done at this point to entice people to get vaccinated if they’re adamantly against it.

Council Member Turk said she’s also concerned about the logistics of the proposal. She suggested an amendment that asks the mayor to investigate the idea further before implementing any new policy. Petty said he’s open to that idea.

Council Member Kinion said the city needs to do something to protect its employees, but he also wants to respect people’s right to choose. That balance can be tricky, he said, but anyone with an immune deficiency is likely terrified of being infected by the virus and those people’s well being should be taken very seriously. Kinion said the vaccines have been scientifically proven to work. He said although there could be logistical issues, the mayor has the capacity to properly evaluate the proposal before implementing a policy so the council needs to pass some type of resolution tonight to get things in motion.

A motion to ask the mayor to thoroughly investigate the proposal before implementing any policy was formally made by Petty and seconded by Turk.

Jordan said regardless of what’s decided tonight, he plans to implement some type of policy designed to protect the city employees. He said he will seek guidance from the Board of Health and will do his best to thoroughly explore the idea, but he will move quickly.

The amendment passed 7-1 with Hertzberg voting against.

Decision:
The council voted 6-2 to pass the resolution. Hertzberg and Scroggin voted against.

Background:
This item would establish the purposes, membership, composition, duties and meeting schedule for the recently approved commission that will make recommendations to the City Council about preservation of historical Black structures and cemeteries and the creation of Black historical markers.

The commission will be comprised of seven members, including one City Council member appointed by the mayor. One non-council member must be “very familiar with an Historical Black Church in Fayetteville” while the other five would be at-large members. Non-council members will serve three-year terms except two at-large positions will initially only serve for two years and one will initially serve only one year in order to establish rotation.

The commission may work with and coordinate its preservation goals with the Historic District Commission, and may recommend protection or preservation measures for particular Historical Black Churches, Structures, and Cemeteries. It will research and investigate sites of important struggles and achievements of Black residents and their supporters to promote diversity and equality and to oppose discrimination in the city. The group may recommend to the council that a marker memorializing such an important site be created and installed a such location.

Meetings will be held at least quarterly, and special meetings can be called with two days notice.

Discussion:
Kinion asked if the Nominating Committee could wait until the next quarterly round of commission and committee openings to interview and select candidates since the most recent round was just completed. Jones said that would be fine.

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

Background:

Staff said Pinnacle Ozone Solutions is the sole manufacturer and service provider for the brand of ozone generators (QuadBlock) that are installed at the Noland facility. The company submitted a quote for refurbishment of two QuadBlocks and all 46 heat sink fans in the disinfection system. They will also replace one solenoid valve and provide four critical spare solenoid valves.

Discussion:
There was no public comment.

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

Background:
The property is split-zoned C-2 and R-A, and is presently developed with a commercial structure. The entirety of the property is located within either the 100-year floodplain or floodway.

The Planning Commission recommends approval, but city staff recommend denial of the request.

Staff said rezoning the entire property to C-2 will allow for commercial development that is only partially compatible with other uses in the area. City planners said the property is located at an intersection on a prominent commercial thoroughfare within a quarter mile of I-49 which is typically ideal for C-2, but rezoning it would remove density and side setback requirements which may afford future development an opportunity to expand to the southern property line, which is vegetated and located within a FEMA floodplain. Staff said if the property were to be rezoned to C-2, the presence of the floodplain will reduce the development potential of the area unless multiple variances to the Streamside Protection ordinance are granted. Staff said the current R-A zoning district serves the function of limiting development in floodplains to a degree that is appropriate to its sensitive nature. Furthermore, staff said the area acts as a de facto buffer between the heavily commercial corridor and the neighboring single- and two-family residences to the south. Given that any future development of the site is unlikely to meet streamside protection requirements, staff finds the incompatibilities of the proposed rezoning make the request incongruent with natural features present on-site.

Location:

Discussion:
Gutierrez said she’d like to leave the item on the first reading since the applicant is not present. The council agreed. The discussion will continue on Sept. 21.

Background:
The property includes a portion of an existing general utility easement located on parts of lot 25 and 26 of the Evin’s Farm subdivision. It is currently developed with a 3,232 square-foot multifamily structure which was constructed on the property in 1940. In 2007 a portion of unused right-of-way was vacated, and a general utility easement was platted in its place. An overhead power line is located within a portion of the general utility easement. The applicant has not provided a stated intent behind the vacation request.

City staff recommend approval of the request with the following conditions:

1. A new, 20-foot access and utility easement is granted, centered on the existing overhead line as indicated in Exhibit C;
2. Any damage or relocation of existing facilities will be at the applicant’s expense.

Location:

Discussion:
There was no public comment.

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

Background:
This proposal would make changes to the downtown parking areas by modernizing the equipment and technology.

The changes would include:

• Allowing for additional payment methods at on-street parking meters;
• Allowing for pay station payment at off-street parking lots;
• Changing the rates at on-street meters from $0.25/hr. to $0.50/hr.;
• Changing the rates at off-street meters from $0.15/hr. to 0.25/hr.;
• Creating a residential permit program for the Downtown Business District; and
• Creating an employee discount program for the Downtown Business District

Approximately 250 coin-operated on-street parking meters would be replaced with “smart” meters that accept credit cards, contactless payment, and payment via mobile app. They would include sensor technology which allows users to view, in real-time through a mobile app, where available parking spaces exist. The sensors would also allow the city to offer a grace period of 15-30 minutes so people could park for short visits without having to pay the parking rate. Users can also extend their parking session remotely by entering their license plate into a mobile app. Rates for on-street parking would increase from $0.25 per hour to $0.50 per hour. Time limits would be removed for on-street meters (there’s currently a two-hour limit).

About 275 off-street meters in five city parking lots would be removed and replaced with seven pay stations to allow for payment and permitting by license plate. Using the pay-by-plate method for payment will allow for the same grace period options as the on-street sensors and will allow staff to enforce permits by license plate, thus foregoing the material and administrative costs associated with physical permits, according to staff documents. Additionally, license-plate based parking allows users to prepay for their parking prior to their arrival since their parking session is now tied to a license plate rather than a specific meter or stall number and it allows parkers the convenience of moving from one space (or applicable lot) to another as long as they have an active parking session. Rates in the parking lots would increase from $0.15 per hour to $0.25 per hour.

A residential permit program would allow residents to park at the same long-term parking lots where monthly permits are eligible. The allocation of permits would be administered by the Parking Division in the same manner as the other existing residential programs. The city would collect an annual fee not to exceed $25 per resident for participation in the program.

An employee discount program would be similar to the entertainment district program, in which area employees are issued a coupon code to enter at pay stations which automatically applies a discount to whatever time the employee is paying for.

Discussion:
Bo Counts, who owns Pinpoint on Block Avenue, spoke in favor of the proposal, and said he likes the increased payment options. He suggested the council be involved in any future discussions about rate increases.

Council Member Turk said she’d like to hold the item on the first reading to give everyone more time to consider the proposal.

Council Member Bunch said the plan is straightforward and only adds convenience and features for residents. She said she’s ready to vote tonight.

Mayor Jordan asked if the council’s Transportation Committee has seen the plan. Staff said the committee voted unanimously to recommend the changes.

Bunch’s motion to send the item to the second and third readings passed 6-2 with Kinion and Turk voting against.

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

Background:
This proposal would expand the Outdoor Refreshment Area boundary, and would make the program permanent (it currently includes a 2024 sunset clause).

The proposal calls for South Gregg Avenue and North School Avenue to be the new eastern edge. To the south the proposed boundary is the trail that wraps the upcoming South Yard development. This change also brings the trail into the ORA program. The new wing will not be opened until construction of phase one of the cultural arts corridor is complete, and the South Yard extension will not be added until phase one of that project is complete.

Location:

Discussion:
Five people spoke in favor of the proposal, including Bo Counts from Pinpoint, Jeff Amerine of Startup Junkie and representatives from the Fayetteville Chamber of Commerce.

One person questioned why the area should be expanded to include Frisco Trail when there are no businesses along the stretch. Staff have said the trail should be included to allow people to move between the northern and southern parts of the district where businesses are located.

Turk said she likes the ORA, but said the city should move slow and keep the 2024 sunset clause intact to give more time to evaluate the program and adapt it if there are any problems in the next few years. She said the city will have more data after the pandemic ends and more people come out to take part in it.

Bunch said she’s comfortable with the proposal after seeing it operate with her own eyes, and after hearing so much praise from the business community. She said it’s been a lifeline for so many businesses during the pandemic, and the council will always have the ability to change it if necessary.

Scroggin agreed and said the investment businesses must make to be a part of the program is substantial enough that they need to have confidence the program is permanent. He moved to send the item to the second reading. The motion passed 7-1 with Turk voting against. Scroggin’s motion for a third reading was the same.

Decision:
The council voted 7-1 to approve the ordinance. Turk voted against and said she supports the program, but she thinks removing the sunset clause is premature.

Background:
Staff is not in support of the applicant’s request to construct three driveways along North West Avenue because they said the intent of several portions of the city’s Unified Development Code would be nullified by the approval of such a variance. They said decreasing the curb cuts in this portion of street would negatively affect the pedestrian realm, and also potentially negatively affect the public interest, as that portion of West Avenue is currently under redevelopment as part of the cultural arts corridor. Further, staff said the intent of the Urban Residential Design Standards, as they apply to two-family dwellings and above, would also be negated, as one of the main stated purposes of that portion of code is to minimize service and parking impacts in order to preserve surrounding property values and scenic resources that contribute to the city’s economic development.

Location:

Discussion:
Scroggin said the city has had longstanding plans for the cultural arts corridor project, and the developer should’ve followed the rules from the onset of construction to be in compliance. He said he doesn’t like it when developers ask to change the rules after they’ve already made a mistake.

Decision:
The council voted 0-8 so the resolution failed.

Background:
The property is on the site of a recycling facility, in which the paved parking area and backyard previously served as vehicle storage.

Earlier this year staff received a complaint that the recycling business was storing multiple trailers in front of the property and that the operation had expanded to 1236 S. School Ave. without a permit. A separate complaint was submitted to the Transportation Division due to dirt and mud being tracked onto South School Avenue. Multiple inspections confirmed the presence of the trailers and expanded footprint of the business. A violation letter was issued in April advising that the business is in violation of its conditional use permit.

The applicant requests to expand their permit to include the added property, stating that their business has grown in recent years due to rising metal prices and they have found it difficult to store their inventory and vehicles without overflowing onto the neighboring property.

Staff said the expansion would be inherently incompatible with the surrounding uses.

The Planning Commission voted 4-4 on the idea, so the request failed.

Location:

Discussion:
Hertzberg said since the Planning Commission was tied, she wanted to hear the applicant’s side and possibly break the tie. She said the company has been overwhelmed with materials since the pandemic began, and she thinks it’s reasonable to ask for a change with that in mind.

Bunch and Jones said they also sponsored the appeal because they wanted to at least hear more from the applicants.

Scroggin said he hopes the council will table the resolution to allow time to take a closer look at the situation. He said he would like to visit the property before voting. Bunch agreed, and suggesting tabling for two weeks.

Petty said he thinks the council is being lied to and that there’s a history of violations with the applicant that have occurred before the pandemic began. He said the business needs to find a new location if it can’t operate at its current location. He made a motion to approve the appeal, but to revoke the overall permit at the end of the year to give the business time to find a new location. There was no second for the motion.

The council voted 7-1 to table the resolution for two weeks. Petty voted against. The discussion will continue on Sept. 21.