Fayetteville City Council recap: Nov. 16, 2021

Discussion:
There was no public comment.

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

Background:
This item was left on the first reading at the Nov. 2 meeting.

The property is located on the south slope of Millsap Mountain and north side of Old Farmington Road. The site slopes downward from its northern boundary to the two small ponds located roughly halfway to Old Farmington Road to the south. Between these ponds and Old Farmington Road, the site becomes more level. Approximately 6-7 acres of the property’s northern extent is designated as Hillside-Hilltop Overlay District in association with the terrain and tree canopy present. Another site characteristic includes a protected, unnamed tributary of the Farmington Branch which runs parallel to the western property line. In 2019, a request to rezone the property to NS-G, Neighborhood Services, General, was proposed. Staff recommended denial and the Planning Commission expressed concerns that prompted the applicant to ultimately table the request indefinitely. The applicant has not submitted development plans for the property, though the request letter says the intent of the rezone is to allow a cluster housing development. The applicant has suggested that a conditional use permit to that effect would follow if the rezoning is successful.

Both city planners and the Planning Commission recommend approval.

Staff received one phone call inquiry about the proposal, but the person did not issue any specific comments or concerns with the request.

Location:

Nov. 2 Discussion:
Harvey said she’d like to hold the item on the first reading to allow more time for consideration. The discussion will continue on Nov. 16.

Nov. 16 Discussion:
Both Ward 1 council members said they haven’t had anyone reach out to them about this item.

Harvey said it seems like a fair request and she’s inclined to support it.

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

Background:
This item was left on the first reading at the Nov. 2 meeting.

Fayetteville’s recently approved short-term rental ordinance included a six-month start-up period to allow time for owners of short-term rentals to come into compliance with the new regulations. Staff said they have since received 240 applications, of which 69 have been approved. Given the large number of applications still in review, totaling over 70% of the total received, staff recommends giving applicants and staff additional time through a three-month extension of the start-up period, for a total of nine months.

» Read more about this issue here

Nov. 2 Discussion:
Hertzberg said she would like to leave the item on the first reading to bring more awareness to the issue. The discussion will continue on Nov. 16.

Nov. 16 Discussion:
City Attorney Kit Williams asked the council to amend the ordinance to include an emergency clause so it can go into effect immediately since the startup period is currently set to expire in a few days.

City staff said they have received more applications in the last two weeks than in any two-week period so far. The press coverage likely contributed to that, said Jonathan Curth, the city’s development services director (read our coverage here).

Decision:
The council passed the emergency clause amendment 7-0 and advanced the item to the third reading before unanimously approving it.

Background:
Council members Scroggin and Hertzberg have proposed to end the city’s mask mandate because of reduced infections and hospitalizations, and the availability of vaccines.

This item includes an emergency clause which means a mask ordinance repeal would go into effect immediately. With the emergency clause, it would go into effect Dec. 18. Masks became optional for public school students in grades 7-12 on Nov. 15. Grades K-6 will become optional on Dec. 23.

The city’s Board of Health met last week and recommended matching the district’s Dec. 23 date to end the mandate.

Marti Sharkey, the city’s public health officer, last week said cases in Washington County had been trending downward, but have recently started to plateau and then increase slightly. Sharkey said as of Nov. 2, 58% of people in Washington County who were eligible for shots were fully vaccinated, and 68% had received at least one shot.

Discussion:
Hertzberg said she doesn’t think this is a discussion about the efficacy of mask usage, but rather about the efficacy of an ordinance that doesn’t have a strong enforcement structure. She said having this ordinance in place without much cooperation from the public and without enforcement makes the city look foolish, and mask policies are better left to individual businesses.

Scroggin said initially, he thought the ordinance had some good effects, but lately people aren’t really wearing masks anymore, and having a policy on the books that isn’t obeyed or enforced isn’t a good look.

Public health officer Marti Sharkey said local COVID and ICU hospital admissions are hovering around the point at which local medical officials say is a strained point for their facilities. She said the Board of Health would like COVID hospitalizations to stay near or below 30 across the region, and overall ICU bed usage to stay below 100 if masks are to become optional. Todays stats show 36 COVID hospitalizations and 96 ICU beds in use across Washington and Benton counties, according to the Northwest Arkansas Council.

Scroggin made a motion to amend the ordinance to end the mandate on Dec. 23 to match the school district’s plan to make masks optional for grades K-6 (grades 7-12 became mask-optional yesterday). His motion did not include a contingency for the 30/100 hospital data as recommended by the Board of Health. There was no second for Scroggin’s motion.

Harvey suggested a similar motion to amend the ordinance to end on Dec. 23, but with the hospital data contingency included.

Hertzberg said that idea seems too complicated for people to understand, and the council should just pick a date.

Bunch said it’s a difficult decision because people seem to be doing whatever they want regardless of the city’s mandate.

Kinion agreed, and said people who want to wear masks are wearing them, and those who don’t want to wear them simply aren’t doing so. He said it bothers him personally, because he is a strong advocate for mask usage, but said he’s struggling to determine at what point the decision should be left up to the public.

“I think at this point, there’s enough evidence out there for people to be able to make a choice,” he said. “It’s regrettable and this is not easy for me to say…but at this point we shouldn’t be mandating something that isn’t happening anyway.”

Turk said she’s disappointed that so many people won’t take the proper precautions to stop the spread of the virus, but she will support ending the mandate on Dec. 23. She said if the numbers spike back up, she would like to reconsider that date.

Williams said if the council votes to end the mandate on Dec. 23, but notices a dramatic increase in hospitalizations in mid-December, any council member could bring forward a proposal to extend the mandate.

Scroggin’s original amendment was reconsidered and passed 7-0.

During public comment, three people spoke in favor of repealing the mandate and one person spoke in favor.

Decision:
The council advanced the ordinance to the third reading, and voted 7-0 to end the mask mandate on Dec. 23.

Background:
The proposed budget is included in the agenda packet for this item (see it here).

Discussion:
Council Member Jones suggested adding $45,000 to the budget for added staffing at the Yvonne Richardson Community Center. Staff said they will look into that and get input from the center’s management.

The council voted 7-0 to table the resolution until the next meeting on Dec. 7.

Background:
The property is in south Fayetteville off Black Oak Road, immediately south of Combs Park. It includes four parcels that lie within unincorporated Washington County. It is undeveloped with most of the tree canopy present near the West Fork White River, and the eastern extent of the property is encumbered by the floodway and floodplain of the river. An unnamed protected tributary of the West Fork White River is present in the northeast quadrant of the property. The applicant has requested the annexation to provide additional residential housing stock to northwest Arkansas which they said is facing substantial current and projected growth.

Both city planners and the Planning Commission recommend approval.

Location:

Discussion:
Turk asked about the water and sewer availability in the area. Staff said the water line is big enough, but they’re not certain about the sewer line and would need to ask someone from the utilities department. Turk said she’d like that answer by the next meeting.

During public comment, four people spoke in favor – including two who either own parts of the property in question or that are representing the owners – and one person spoke against.

Turk said this is a tough decision for her, and she hopes the ordinance can be left on the first reading until the next meeting.

The council agreed. The discussion will continue on Dec. 7

Background:
This is the same property described in the preceding agenda item.

If the property is annexed into the city, the applicant has requested to rezone it to a Residential Planned Zoning District (R-PZD) with two planning areas. The first area includes 2.2 acres that’s intended to be commercial in nature, but still allows for some multi-family units. The second area is intended to be residential and parkland/greenspace in nature with allowances single-family, two-family, three- and four-family, and accessory dwelling units.

Both city planners and the Planning Commission recommend approval.

Location:

Concept Drawing:

Planning Areas:

Discussion:
Those who signed up to speak said they made their points during the previous discussion and chose not to speak again.

This item cannot be voted on unless the previous annexation passes, so it will also be held on the first reading and the discussion will continue on Dec. 7.

Background:
The property is located southeast of downtown Fayetteville, roughly 700 feet northwest of the intersection of East Huntsville Road and South Sherman Avenue and at the west end of East 5th Street. The easement and right-of-way in question are located on a property which totals approximately 6.81 acres and is an undeveloped greenfield site. Nearly the entire property falls within the Hillside Hilltop Overlay District. There is over 100 feet of declining elevation difference from the north property line to the south at a relatively steady grade of about 20%. A depression runs along much of the west property line. Further limiting the potential connectivity of the roadway is a City Council resolution approved in February of 1996 which established a policy to not extend streets over Mount Sequoyah finding that it was not in the best interest of the city to create narrow, winding, and congested streets.

The applicant proposes to vacate approximately 7,560 square feet of Overland Trail cul- de-sac right-of-way and 5,830 square feet of un-utilized general utility easement. Staff said the plan is to subdivide the property and create large lots.

Both city planners and the Planning Commission recommend approval.

Location:

Discussion:
There was no public comment.

Decision:
The council advanced the item to the third reading, and voted 6-0 to approve it. Harvey was not present for the vote.

Background:
Fayetteville’s Urban Residential Design Standards require dwellings to have street-facing entries and access to sidewalk when they are located on the ground level and street adjacent. Staff said recent projects have made evident a lack of specificity about the manner and degree of access. As a result, staff said some projects have utilized non-standard and possibly inadequate surfacing materials, including organic matter like mulch. Further, required pedestrian connections have been installed to direct residents and other users to fenced-in or otherwise inaccessible entries.

A further concern from planning commissioners is the inability to require pedestrian cross access where it is accommodated by adjacent properties. Staff said this has led to projects on large tracts of land with limited to no connectivity. Where a subdivision includes public streets that afford mobility, large multi-family developments often do not, resulting in reduced access and increased vehicle dependence.

To address the issues, the Long-Range Planning Subcommittee in conjunction with staff have drafted two amendments: The first addresses the standard for pedestrian connections to be unobstructed and made of durable materials, and includes an avenue for administrative relief from the city’s Zoning and Development Administrator. The second amendment requires connecting to sidewalks on adjacent commercial and residential properties when they are present.

Both city planners and the Planning Commission recommend approval.

Discussion:
There was no public comment.

Decision:
The council advanced the item to the third reading, and voted 6-0 to approve it. Harvey was not present for the vote.

Background:
This ordinance is being proposed by city staff in response to a request from the University of Arkansas. It would give event organizers the option to request open consumption and possession of alcoholic beverages (outside of beer gardens) in event areas throughout the city.

It includes an emergency clause to go into effect immediately so the University of Arkansas can allow open consumption during its pre-game party on Maple Street before the final home game of the season on Nov. 26.

» Read the letter from the UA

Discussion:
There was no public comment.

Decision:
The council advanced the item to the third reading, and voted 6-0 to approve it. Harvey was not present for the vote.