Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-03-05Little Rock Board of Directors Meeting Minutes May 3, 2005 - 6:00 PM MINUTES BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING City Hall — 500 W. Markham May 3, 2005 6:00 PM The Board of Directors of the City of Little Rock, Arkansas met in regular session with Mayor Dailey presiding. City Clerk, Nancy Wood called the roll with the following Directors Present: Directors Pugh, Keck, Wyrick, Stewart, Hurst, Cazort, Hinton, Kumpuris, Vice Mayor Graves and Mayor Dailey. Directors Keck and Kumpuris were not present at roll called; Director Keck enrolled at 6:03 PM, and Director Kumpuris enrolled at 6:35 PM. . Director Adcock gave the invocation, which was followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. Mayor Dailey asked the Board to consider the listed modifications. Modifications: Change of Presentation Date: PRESENTATION - Central High Neighborhood Association Urban Forestry Essay Award Presentations. Note: The presentation date has been changed from May 3, 2005 to May 17, 2005. Deletion: PRESENTATION - Little Rock Port Redevelopment District Mayor Dailey announced that there was a written report on the Little Rock Port Redevelopment District included in the Boards packets. Mayor Dailey asked the clerk to read the Consent Agenda. PRESENTATIONS: Central High Neighborhood Association Urban Forestry Essay Award Presentations — Ethel Ambrose Little Rock Port Redevelopment District Update — Paul Latture & Jane Dickey See modifications for explanation regarding Presentations. The Consent Agenda consisted of Items 1 -11. 1. RESOLUTION 11,982 - Authorizing the City Manager to enter into contracts with Little Rock Dodge ($81,156) and Bale Chevrolet ($76,260) for the purchase of replacement vehicles for various departments within the City; and for other purposes. Staff recommends approval. Synopsis: Items will be purchased from the 2004 -2005 Arkansas State Contract. Little Rock Board of Directors Meeting Minutes May 3, 2005 - 6:00 PM 2. RESOLUTION 11,983 - Authorizing the City Manager to enter into a contract with Glover's Truck Parts & Equipment for the purchase of one (1) roll off truck with tarp; and for other purposes. Staff recommends approval. Synopsis: Glover's Truck Parts and Equipment was the low bid for meeting the specifications for Bid #5230 in the amount of $101,319. 3. RESOLUTION 11,984 - Authorizing the City Manager to enter into a contract with Glover's Truck Parts & Equipment for the purchase of one (1) 30CY trash -bed knuckle boom truck; and for other purposes. Staff recommends approval. Synopsis: Glover's Truck Parts and Equipment was the low bid for meeting the specifications for Bid #5231 in the amount of $112,608. 4. RESOLUTION 11,985 - Authorizing the City Manager to enter into a contract with Glover's Truck Parts & Equipment for the purchase of three (3) 25CY refuse trucks; and for other purposes. Staff recommends approval. Synopsis: Glover's Truck Parts and Equipment was the low bid for meeting the specifications for Bid #5232 in the amount of $334,119. 5. RESOLUTION 11,986 - Authorizing the City Manager to enter into a contract with Glover's Truck Parts & Equipment for the purchase of one (1) 13CY refuse truck; and for other purposes. Staff recommends approval. Synopsis: Glover's Truck Parts and Equipment was the low bid for meeting the specifications for Bid #5233 in the amount of $89,478. 6. RESOLUTION 11,987 - Authorizing the use of eminent domain on the Harrison Street Improvements Project (Lee Avenue to Markham Street). Staff recommends approval. 2004 Bond Project. Synopsis: Authorizing the use of eminent domain for up to four (4) parcels of land on the Harrison Street Improvements Project. 7. RESOLUTION 11,988 - Authorizing the City Manager to enter into an agreement with the Metrocentre Improvement District No. 1 to provide fleet maintenance and repair services. Staff recommends approval. Synopsis: The maintenance and repair of the Metrocentre Improvement District 1 vehicles will not negatively impact the City's Fleet Services Department. 8. RESOLUTION 11,989 - Authorizing the City Manager to enter into a contract with Fraley Roofing in the amount of $141,500 for repairing the Fleet Services Building located at 3314 J. E. Davis Drive. Staff recommends approval. Synopsis: Item is being purchased through the formal bid process. Only two competitive bids were received. Funds are to be allocated from the 2005 Short -term Financing Account. 9. RESOLUTION 11,990 - Authorizing the Little Rock Sanitary Sewer Committee to file a petition for the City of Little Rock for the use and benefit of Little Rock Sanitary Sewer Committee to annex certain lands in Pulaski County, Arkansas, outside the City of Little Rock on which is located the Little Maumelle Sewage Pump Station, a part of the Little Rock Sanitary Sewer System. Staff recommends approval. 2 Little Rock Board of Directors Meeting Minutes May 3, 2005 - 6:00 PM 10. RESOLUTION 11,991 - Authorizing the City Manager to enter into a contract with Osburn Associates, Inc. for the purchase of reflective sign sheeting materials for the Traffic Control Section of Public Works Department; and for other purposes. Staff recommends approval. Synopsis: This is an annual bid for reflective sign sheeting for traffic control /information signs for the City of Little Rock. 11. RESOLUTION 11,992 - Authorizing the use of eminent domain on the Mabelvale Pike (Gum Springs to 56th Street) Road Reconstruction Project. Staff recommends approval. Synopsis: Authorizing the use of eminent domain for up to 11 parcels of land on the Mabelvale Pike (Gum Springs to 56th Street) Road Reconstruction Project. The Consent Agenda was read. Director Adcock made a motion, seconded by Director Cazort to adopt the Consent Agenda. By unanimous voice vote of the Board members present, the Consent Agenda was adopted. Director Kumpuris was not present for this vote. CITIZENS COMMUNICATIONS There were no speakers present for the Citizens Communications portion of the meeting. The Separate Items consisted of Items 12 —17 12. ORDINANCE 19,316 - Z- 6932 -B - Approving a Planned Zoning Development and establishing a Planned Commercial District titled Arkansas Association of Nigerians Revised Short Form PCD located at 9802 Geyer Springs Road, in the City of Little Rock, Arkansas; amending the Official Zoning Map of the City of Little Rock; and for other purposes. Planning Commission: 10 ayes, 0 nays, 1 absent. Staff recommends approval. Synopsis: The applicant is requesting to amend the previously approved PCD to add fraternal organization to the allowable uses for this site. The ordinance was read the first time. Mr. Moore explained, in response to the Boards request at the Agenda Meeting the previous week to look at the previous application to see if any landscaping or buffering conditions would apply, stated that when the property was developed, it was located outside the city limits and there were no landscaping requirements. In 2000 the location lost its non - conforming status, which was the reason for the rezoning. There are no additional landscaping requirements. Director Wyrick asked the applicant, Stephen Argon, who stated he was president of the organization, what his plans were as far as doing anything being done to the outside of the building. Mr. Argon replied as soon as they get approval from the Board, they will clean up the outside and have it looking nice so it will be attractive to the members of the neighborhood. He stated they would give the building a nice color, something close to the color of the church who is their nearest neighbor. Director Keck made a motion, seconded by Director Hurst, to suspend the rules and place the ordinance on second reading. The rules were suspended by unanimous voice vote of the Board members present being two - thirds in number, and the ordinance was read the second time. Director Keck made a motion, seconded by Director Hurst, to suspend the rules and place the ordinance on third reading. The rules were suspended by unanimous voice vote of the Board members present being two - thirds in number, 3 Little Rock Board of Directors Meeting Minutes May 3, 2005 - 6:00 PM and the ordinance was read the third time. By unanimous voice vote of the Board members present, the ordinance passed. Director Kumpuris was absent at the time of this vote. 13. ORDINANCE 19,317 - To establish Municipal Improvement District No. 9 of Little Rock, Arkansas — Brookside Park Project; and for other purposes. An emergency clause was written into the ordinance. (Deferred from 4- 19 -05). Staff recommends approval. The ordinance was read the first time. Director Keck asked for Mr. Carpenter's legal rendering as to what the Board is supposed to be voting on and what the limitations are, and asked Mr. Moore if the project moves forward, if there are requirements for the City, and when do these come in to play. Mr. Carpenter stated the only question before the Board tonight is whether to approve a municipal improvement district and the only issue is whether there is a majority in value of the property owners who have signed the petitions that have been presented. He stated the Board has been provided a affidavit from Beach Abstract that says that there is a majority in value and therefore the Board does not have a great deal of discretion. All that the Board would be approving tonight is that an improvement district can be in place within the geographic boundaries that have been presented to the Board. The Board is not approving a plat, or saying whether anything can be built or not built, and not directing any building permits to be issued. Director Cazort stated he was comfortable about things that would occur outside the boundaries of the improvement district that the Board has some control over, but regarding improvements inside the boundaries of the improvement district, asked if those are still subject to the city's subdivision ordinance, if they come in and redo that area completely. Mr. Carpenter answered that they would have to bring something back. He stated the applicant has a plat that they say goes along with the improvement district but in fact, as has been pointed out once before, they do not have control of all the property where they intend to put streets, so there is no way they could get permits that would allow them to build the streets without having control of the property. Assuming they won't get control because the property is a cemetery, then they would have to come back to Planning and actually replat the development. Mayor Dailey reminded the persons who wished to speak, that Mr. Carpenter has stated the parameters under which the Board has the authority to move forward with this improvement district and would appreciate the speakers to keep their comments to anything that might speak to the value or something that would render the Boards decision, or question about the legality of the issue. Those opposed were: James M. Pierce, Etta Land, James LaBorde. The issues raised were that they did not think the district had control of 50% of the property, the boundaries appeared unclear, the development could affect the cemetery property, they were unclear what lots and blocks were owned by the district, they questioned why at one meeting the district was number 1 and now it is numbered 9, and believed some of the property owners were not notified. They asked why the issue did not go to the Planning Commission, and whether Mr. Clifton the developer was a real estate broker or a developer. David Menz, the Attorney for the improvement district, stated that in establishing these improvement districts the attorney and petitioners have to follow the State Statutes. The states say that there has to be a majority in value of the signatures before the local (Board of Directors) can approve an improvement district. He stated notice must be given to all the property owners which they have done, by certified mail, return receipt requested. Once the signatures are obtain, these are taken to an abstract company, in this case, to Beach Abstract, a very reputable company, who certified that over fifty percent of the areas value, what those people had signed the petition in order to form the district. The statue says that once that is done, M Little Rock Board of Directors Meeting Minutes May 3, 2005 - 6:00 PM that the board (Little Rock Board of Directors) shall create the district. He stated he understood that some of the neighborhood folks have gone to the Assessor to check the tax records. Mr. Menz stated it was explained to him by the abstract company that sometimes the tax records lag in the recorders office because the deeds are filed first in the recorders office and the assessors office pick them up later, so it may be that some of the property that was done right before the abstractors certificate was executed. He said they have paid Beach Abstract a substantial amount of money to make the certification. Director Adcock asked if the two lots were purchased to make the 51 % after the papers were filed. Mr. Menz replied that the two lots were obtained after the certification was obtained, so that would get the percentage up around fifty -six or fifty -seven percent. Those two lots were not counted. As a matter of record, they wanted Mr. Carpenter and the Board to know that Mr. Clifton had purchased two lots, even after the Abstractors had certified that over 51 % of assessed valuation was owned by the petitioners. Mr. Menz stated in response to concerns regarding the cemetery that they do not have any part of the cemetery within the district, it's beyond the boundaries of the district. It may be adjacent to, but obviously if streets, gutters, and drainage are put in, etc., a survey would have to be done, and would mind the boundaries of the cemetery and not affect the cemetery. Mayor Dailey stated, then for the public record, should the district find that there is any lap on the cemetery property, they would respect the cemetery. Mr. Menz said certainly they would, and there are state statutes that protect cemeteries. Ms. Wood, City Clerk in answer to the question regarding the discrepancy in the number of the improvement district, stated that those numbers are given to the district by the County Assessors Office, and that they realized they had duplicated a number, (Number 1) and reassigned (Number 9) to this district. Mr. Carpenter in response to the item not going to the Planning Commission; Mr. Carpenter explained in terms of denying the district, the creation of an improvement district is governed by state statute and there is a constitutional basis for these improvement districts and essentially you have a strict compliance with that, and that is why it did not go to the Planning Commission, it is in effect a levy district, to levy assessments. In terms of will they have to go to the Planning Commission and come to this Board in the future, the answer is yes. Even though you create the improvement district tonight, the improvement district cannot actually levy assessments until there is an express listing of the types of improvements that are to be made and then an allocation of the value of the value or benefit of those improvements to specific lots. That issue is then brought to the Board of Directors. What you have in this situation, he suspected, that if the district is formed tonight, they will have to figure out if they can really build the plat they had before, or they going to have to make changes. He stated we know for example, the plat they had before anticipated ingress and egress to a road that would go across part of the golf course at Hindman Park, and thought the Board has made it clear that that is not going to happen. The plat that he has seen will have to have a roadway through it that will go through the cemetery and understood, that is not going to happen. As changes are made as to how they wish to develop the property would image that would cause changes that would go to the Planning Commission and then once those are in place, they know what improvements would have to be made and have the assessments done, and that is what would be brought back to the Board of Directors. Mr. Clifton, developer, in answer to the questions to whether he was a developer or real estate broker responded that in the past acted as a developer, but in his case there is no developer per say in a special improvement district. There is a commission appointed that acts as the developer, nada that he would probably be on that commission. Mr. Clifton in answer to questions about the lots, stated there are 95 lots in the first phase, and anything above 46 lots constitutes over 51 % and there are twelve lots in Block 1. Little Rock Board of Directors Meeting Minutes May 3, 2005 - 6:00 PM Mayor Dailey asked Mr. Carpenter what would be the process, if the citizens chose to challenge. Mr. Carpenter stated if they have standing, meaning if they own property within the district, then they would challenge it in circuit court, saying the Boards decision was incorrect. Mayor Dailey asked Mr. Carpenter if the emergency clause was required to be approved. Mr. Carpenter answered it was not. Mayor Dailey recognized Mr. LaBorde, who wanted to know which lot Mr. Golden had purchased. Mr. Menz stated all they have is the recorded deed, and Mr. Clifton could get the lot number. Mayor Dailey asked Mr. Carpenter if this was of particular concern, or would impact the Board's ability to act on this item. Mr. Carpenter stated he did not think so, that there is more than 50% even without Mr. Golden's lot. Director Hurst made the motion, seconded by Director Adcock, to suspend the rules and place the ordinance on second reading. By unanimous voice vote of the Board members present, being two - thirds in number, the rules were suspended and the ordinances were read the second time. Director Hurst made the motion, seconded by Director Keck to suspend the rules and place the ordinance on third reading. By unanimous voice vote of the Board members present, being two - thirds in number the rules were suspended and the ordinance was read the third time. By voice vote the ordinance was adopted by the majority of Board members present. Director Adcock voted in opposition. The vote was 10 ayes, 1 nay. A roll call vote was taken on the passage of the emergency clause, and recorded as follows: Directors Pugh, yes, Keck, yes, Wyrick, no, Stewart, no, Hurst, yes, Cazort, no, Hinton, no, Adcock, no, Vice Mayor Graves, yes, Mayor Dailey, Director Kumpuris, no. The emergency clause failed. 14. PUBLIC HEARING & RESOLUTION 11,993 - Z- 6274 -A — To rescind the Planning Commission's action to approve a conditional use permit for Jose's Nite Club Latino located on the C -4 zoned property at 9110 Interstate 30. Planning Commission: 7ayes, 2 nays, 2 absent. Staff recommends denial of the Conditional Use Permit. Synopsis: A record objector is appealing the Planning Commission's action in approving a conditional use permit to allow a special events center on the C -4 zoned property at 9110 Interstate 30. Mr. Tony Bozynski, Planning and Development Director, gave an overview, saying this is for the approval of a conditional use permit to allow what is being referred to as a special event center /private club at 9120 I -30. It has access off of the service which can be accessed from Forbing Road. This service road is one -way to the west. It is zone C -4, and directly to the north is a multi - family development which is zoned MF -18, and a multi - family development to the west which is M -F -18, single family area to the east. In the immediate vicinity, adjacent to the property is the Shrine's Temple, the property to the west is zoned C -4 but is vacant, and further to the west is a mini - storage project. Staff is not in support of this conditional use permit for a number of reasons. There is concern that it is not compatible with the immediate area, especially because there is a fairly strong residential component. There is concern that there are a number of conditions attached to this application that deal primarily with the operation of the proposed use. Staff is concerned that those kinds of conditions will create problems for staff in terms of monitoring them and the enforcement of them. There is one condition that deals with having adequate security on site and if that number is not present, then the facility is supposed to be closed. It will be difficult to have staff there to ensure that does or does not take place. The compatibility with this kind of use does not work, the hours of operation, the days are Friday, Saturday and Sunday, the hours of operation on Friday and Saturday are until 2 am in the morning. At the Planning Commission meeting the applicant did amend the application to 2 Little Rock Board of Directors Meeting Minutes May 3, 2005 - 6:00 PM change the hours of closing on Sunday from 2 am to 10 pm. The Planning Commission felt that was a reasonable accommodation. Concerns raised by residents or property owners speaking in opposition included security on the site, traffic, possible cut - through traffic though adjoining single- family neighborhoods, noise impacts, possible increases in vandalism and crime from this proposed use. One individual raised concerns over impacts on property values in the immediate area. Mr. Bozynski stated the issue early on was what was being proposed for this property. The application mentions having receptions, concerts, and would have an area with pool tables and possibly a DJ playing music, so staff is assuming that when an event is not scheduled, such as a reception, the facility would still be open to allow members to come in. It has elements of either a nightclub or private club. Director Wyrick asked if the ordinance shouldn't specify that it is a private club rather than it is just implied. Mr. Bozynski answered that it probably needs to be included, that the original Planning Commission write up that was included. Director Wyrick asked if the Planning Commission approved a special events center or did they approve a special events center /private club. Mr. Bozynski stated they approved what was before them which had elements of a private club or night club. Directory Wyrick stated it did not say private club and wanted to make sure that if this passes, that all of it goes away, not just the special events but also the private club, and wanted to know what they approved. Mr. Bozynski stated the write up for the Planning Commission for the proposal stated "a conditional use permit is requested to allow use of the existing buildings on the C -4 zoned property as a special events center /private club. Director Wyrick asked why their write up didn't say that. Mr. Dana Carney, Zoning Manager, stated he wrote that resolution and it is clearly Hose's Nightclub Latino, Inc. under whatever use mix it may be, and the wording in the resolution itself should have perhaps been more consistent with what was written for the Planning Commission. Director Wyrick stated that was her point. Director Wyrick asked about the outdoor Flea Market that is proposed from 7 am to 4 pm on Saturday and Sunday, and music that would be broadcast on those days. Mr. Bozynski stated there are a couple of conditions that address this, and one condition is that outdoor music on Sundays is limited to three occasions. Three Sundays during the year, and there is to be no use of amplified music or speakers outside of the building. Director Adcock asked how many parking spaces are on the area. Mr. Bozynski answered that one of the conditions is to stripe the site to have 211 parking spaces. Director Adcock stated her concern was that if there is facility that can have up to 1000 people in it, and only 211 spaces, then where do they plan on getting the other parking spaces for their customers. She stated that some of the apartment complexes are located as close as within ten feet of the parking spaces and if there is activity until 2 am in the morning, every time someone opens and closes car doors, the residents would be able to hear the noises from their bedrooms, which are located to the back. Mr. Bozynski stated those were some of the concerns that staff has also. Director Adcock asked how many enforcement officers work on Friday, Saturday and Sunday. Mr. Bozynski stated there are none on Sunday; currently there is one working four hours on Saturdays, trying to address some areas that have been identified as having some problems. On Fridays, there is the normal complement out in the field. Director Adcock stated the police patrolling this area, since it is a large area would most likely be a low priority, and asked how the conditions would be enforced. Mr. Bozynski stated they would be handled on a complaint based issues. Director Kumpuris asked if the city has ever placed an entertainment facility in next to a residential area in the collective history of this Board. Mr. Bozynski stated he had discussed this with staff and could not think of any particular situation. Director Keck stated in the River Market, there are several entertainment venues that have been brought in and currently there is residential development. 7 Little Rock Board of Directors Meeting Minutes May 3, 2005 - 6:00 PM Director Kumpuris stated he thought that situation was different because the city has encouraged co- habitation of living, eating and playing in the same area. Director Adcock stated the people who live in the River Market area choose to do so; the people in Town and County and Old Oakes, and Village Green did not purchase or rent their home in an entertainment district. Director Keck stated he was only taking part in the discussion and not accusing people of desiring to live any where other than where they do. Director Hurst asked if the Board wanted to add a condition at this point would that be possible. Mr. Carpenter, City Attorney, stated what you have now is to approve or disapprove the appeal that has been taken. Mr. Carpenter stated if it is disapproved, meaning the appeal is granted, and then basically they have to start over again. Director Cazort asked what the time frame would be for them to re -file. Mr. Bozynski stated the time is twelve months. Mr. Dickson Flake, representing the applicant, and having a minority interest in the property, and stated present with him are the applicant Hose Contreras and Peter Buruman, an associate of Mr. Contreras. Mr. Flake stated the site is almost three and a half acres and the two major buildings of 18,000 and 9400 square feet and has two hundred and eleven parking spaces. One hundred and eighty are required by ordinance. Mr. Flake stated there were four concerns expressed when they met with the neighbors. One was potential adverse affect on public safety, the second was liter, the third traffic, and the fourth was noise. Mr. Flake stated that Mr. Contreras was not a new comer and had been in business for five years. He has a good record on public safety. He has committed to having two off -duty police officers in the parking lot at all times, to gate the lot that the officers would require at the close of business that all vehicles leave the premises and the gates would be locked before the officers would leave the premises. He also has security cameras on the lot, and will have private security inside the facility. Mr. Flake stated that in respect to liter, his records are that he not only took care of his won property, but the surrounding property before he lost that property due to fire. Mr. Contreras has committed contractually to take care of his own property and a sixty foot parameter around his property. With respect to noise, Mr. Contreras engaged an acoustic consultant, Dr. Tom Remer, to evaluate the buildings and his amplifier system, and to measure the noise that is generated. Dr. Remer made three recommendations which Mr. Contreras agreed to. Mr. Flake addressed the traffic issue and stated the site is surrounded by the interstate on one side, which is the only access, and three collector streets, Chicot, Mabelvale Pike, and Forbing Road. Mr. Flake stated this club has become an integral part of the Hispanic Community. The facility is used for Hispanic Debutante parties, wedding receptions, etc. Mr. Contreras sponsors concerts and beings entertainment that is for the Hispanic Community. Mr. Flake stated the applicant was in business for five years and had no complaints by the neighbors, a good relationship as a business person in the community. He had a fire and worked his lease out on September 2004. He then went to the Planning Commission for his Conditional Use Permit, and was on the Consent Agenda for December 16th. Some things came up at that hearing so it was deferred for six weeks, to February 3, 2005. The staff again asked for a deferral and Mr. Contreras agreed. It went to March 17, 2005 at which time the Planning Commission approved it, with a vote of seven to two. This appeal brings it to May 3, 2005. Mr. Flake stated Mr. Contreras serves as an important part of the Hispanic Community. He has had no problems, no bad publicity, and has a good five year business record. There was discussion comparing the old business to the new business such as parking, hours, noise levels of vehicles coming and going, doors opening and closings. It was determined that the old business was not as large or intense, and the apartments were not as close to the club. Jay Freeman, spoke in favor of granting the permit. He stated Mr. Contreras wanted to live the American Dream, that he was a good Little Rock Board of Directors Meeting Minutes May 3, 2005 - 6:00 PM neighbor and friend. He stated he had been to the club and had never witnessed any trouble. He stated this club would be good for the community. He asked the Board to grant the permit. Vinita Settlers spoke on behalf of Mr. Contreras as a business neighbor. She stated that he had a business located next door to hers at 7601 Geyer Springs. She said he was a very nice gentleman and pointed out that his business go so that he did not have enough parking space, and he came over and asked if he could rent their parking lot to help his customers park there since they would be closed at the time his business really got started. She stated that her son told Mr. Contreras hat he would not charge him rent if he would just kept he property clean. She stated that he went beyond what was asked of him. He cleaned the yard all the way around. Not only what his customers may have left and what the other business customers had left. He cleaned the whole area. She asked the Board to see fit to let him open another club. She stated he was a good business neighbor and never had any complaints about his business. Director Adcock said the impact on the back side of the Village Green Apartments would be more intrusive than it was on Willow Creek, the apartments that were located next to the old business. Don Wallace stated he was a neighbor and board member of Scimitar Shriners, the property next to the proposed club. He said their issue had to do with the safety of their members. They have 1711 members; the average age is 69.07 years. Safety was a concern for some of the family events, which included small children, and parking overflow, and where the overflow would park. Mr. Wallace stated one of their concerns was if they had a function and Mr. Contreras had a function; there would be a clash somewhere in the parking. There was the concern (at what might happen at any nightclub) after hours. He stated they had been in this location since 1985 and had never had any police called to the location. Herb Dicker, President of the Meadowcliff Neighborhood Association, spoke in opposition saying that traffic from the club could cut through neighborhoods and cause safety problems in patrons had consumed alcohol. He stated he did not think this type of facility in a Multi- family neighborhood was a good fit. Janet Berry, Southwest Little Rock United for Progress, stated their members voted against the application. Ms. Berry was concerned that the majority of the conditions are not worth the paper they are written on. Code enforcement is unable or unwilling to enforce those conditions. It will be up to constant complaints from neighbors for anything to get done for this. She stated that in the last few weeks the neighbors were notified that the facility would be transferring their private club. She stated when she visited the people at the ABC Board; they told her they are transferring an alcohol permit that is for a private club only. It does not work for special events, which means he could not serve beer or whatever he is serving at his receptions because that requires another permit. She stated this is a private club. The ABC Board shared with her some of the letters of opposition of the Alcohol Permit there. The Chief of Police of Little Rock is on record opposing this application, and asked the Board to not grant the permit. Director Wyrick asked Mr. Moore to explain the Chief's recommendation on the project. Mr. Bruce Moore, City Manager, stated the Little Rock Police Department is not supportive of ABC issuing the permit at the proposed location. Directory Wyrick asked about safety issues in regard to the Police Department. Mr. Moore answered that each application is reviewed on its own merit and in this instance they did review within their various divisions of the Police Department and concluded they would not support this application. Troy Laha, Vice President of the Cloverdale Neighborhood Association, stated they are directly south of the facility to leave and take the access road one way going west to Chicot, and cross over into the edge of their neighborhood. If they continue on down Chicot Road they are in their neighborhood. He stated they are getting a regular schedule of disturbances in Ottenheimer Park. They had a shooting in the park last Friday 9 Little Rock Board of Directors Meeting Minutes May 3, 2005 - 6:00 PM evening, and they are concerned this will increase this type of activity in the park. At the last two meetings the neighborhood association voted to oppose this application and request that the Board deny this request. John Honea, President of the South Brookwood Ponderosa Association, stated that several of the members voiced the same concerns that he had. In addition, Mr. Honea reported that he had also spoken with the police, who informed him that a club like this attracts prostitutes, drunks, and other criminal activities such as DWI and fights. He asks that the permit be denied. Director Adcock asked questions of Mr. Gentry, President of Town and Country Neighborhood Association, who has also voted against this development. Mr. Dickson Flake made rebuttal to the allegations of the opposing party of the development and asked the Board for their support of the development. Director Stewart asked questions regarding the occurrence of flea markets on the property. The applicant responded that flea markets would occur once a month during limited hours with no amplified music and no alcohol outdoors. Director Stewart also asked about concerts. The applicant responded that these would occur once a month for one day each. Director Stewart also expressed concerns about security and the opposition of the police department to the alcohol permit. Board of Directors asked more questions of the applicant regarding hours of business, types of events, and security concerns. Tom Carpenter, City Attorney, was questioned regarding the procedure for obtaining an alcohol license. Mayor Dailey closed the public hearing. Director Adcock made a motion, seconded by Director Wyrick, to pass the resolution. The roll call vote was recorded as follows: Directors Pugh, Wyrick, Stewart, Hinton, Adcock, Kumpuris, and Vice Mayor Graves voted yes; Directors Keck, Hurst, Cazort, and Mayor Dailey voted no. The resolution overturning the Planning Commission's decision was adopted. The Board members stated that they wanted to assist the applicant in finding an appropriate location for the development. 15. PUBLIC HEARING & ORDINANCE 19,315 - To establish Chenal Valley Municipal Property Owners Multi- Purpose Improvement District No. 10; and for other purposes. Staff recommends approval. Mayor Dailey opened and closed the public hearing; there was no one present to speak on the matter. Director Adcock, seconded by Director Cazort, made the motion to suspend the rules and place the ordinance on second reading. By unanimous voice vote of the Board members present, being two - thirds in number, the rules were suspended and the ordinance were read the second time. Director Adcock made the motion, seconded by Director Cazort, to suspend the rules and place the ordinance on third reading. By unanimous voice vote of the Board members present, being two - thirds in number the rules were suspended and the ordinance was read the third time. By voice vote the ordinance was adopted. A motion was made and seconded and by voice vote the emergency clause was passed. Director Keck, seconded by Director Wyrick made the motion to go into Executive Session to consider recommendations to various Boards and Commissions. By unanimous voice vote of the Board members present, the meeting was recessed at 8:12 PM. Mayor Dailey called the meeting back into session at 8:27 PM. Mr. Moore announced the following recommendation: River Market Design Review Committee, appointment of Ann Wait. Director Adcock, seconded by Vice Mayor Graves, made the motion to adopt the resolution making the appointments. By unanimous voice vote of the Board members present, the resolution was adopted. 10 Little Rock Board of Directors Meeting Minutes May 3, 2005 - 6:00 PM OTHER BUSINESS 16. ORDINANCE — 3rd Reading scheduled for May 17, 2005 - To repeal Little Rock, Ark. Rev. Code Chapter 3, Article II, Section 3 -11 through 3 -23; to replace it with a new False Alarm Ordinance to strive to improve public safety by further reducing emergency responses to false alarms; to encourage alarm users and alarm companies to properly use and maintain the operational effectiveness of alarm systems in order to improve the reliability of alarm systems and reduce or eliminate false alarms; and for other purposes. Staff recommends approval. (1st Reading held on 4- 19 -05). (2 "d Reading only). Synopsis: The ordinance more clearly states the responsibilities of alarm owners, alarm installation companies and alarm monitoring companies regarding false alarms. The ordinance establishes an alarm permit system. Bob Biles, Director of Finance, gave a detailed report on the most recent changes to the ordinance. The Board voted on each amendment separately. The first amendment was in regard to the omission of decal stickers in consumer doors and windows in Section 4. Director Hurst made a motion, seconded by Director Adcock, to accept the amendment. By unanimous voice vote of the Board members present, the amendment was adopted. The second amendment was in regard to the amount and type of information the City would require for individual alarm system permit. Director Cazort raised issues concerning public access to information that could be potentially used for criminal enterprise. Director Adcock made a motion, seconded by Vice Mayor Graves, to accept the amendment. By unanimous voice vote of the Board members present, the amendment was adopted. The ordinance was read the second time, as amended. 17. EXECUTIVE SESSION & RESOLUTION 11,994 - Appointments to Boards and Commissions. Synopsis: 1 position to the River Market Design Review Committee Director Wyrick made a motion seconded by Director Cazort to adjourn. By unanimous voice vote of the Board members present, the meeting was adjourned at 8:52 P.M. ATTEST: a cy Woo CMC City Clerk 11 APPROVED: r JJ4 Dailey %yor