Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-19-022L? MINUTES Board of Directors Room City Hall — 500 W. Markham Little Rock, Arkansas February 19, 2002 6:00 PM The Board of Directors of the City of Little Rock, Arkansas met in regular session with Vice Mayor Cazort presiding. The roll was called by City Clerk, Nancy Wood, with the following Directors present: Hinton, Pugh, Stewart, Graves, Lichty, Kumpuris, Keck, Adcock, Wyrick. Mayor Dailey was absent. Director Pugh gave the invocation, which was followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. Modifications included the following: Deletion of Items 4 and 12. 4. RESOLUTION - Authorizing the Mayor to execute a quitclaim deed for the transfer of property in Block 35 in the Original City of Little Rock, Arkansas; and for other purposes. 12. PUBLIC HEARING & APPROVAL - Of the reassessment of local Sewer Improvement District No. 147 of Little Rock, Arkansas, filed in the City Clerk's Office January 18, 2002. (Pulled from Agenda. It was determined by legal counsel, that this item did not go before the Little Rock Board of Directors.) A motion was made by Director Keck to delete the two items; Director Kumpuris seconded the motion; and by unanimous voice vote to the board members present, the modifications were made as indicated. Director Lichty asked to conduct the public hearing on Item 11, and dependent on the action taken, see if all the remaining items could be grouped, with the exception of Items 9 and 10. Vice Mayor Cazort announced that he had received no cards indicating there were speakers for Item 11, and asked the audience if anyone was there to speak in opposition to that proposal. There were not any speakers either for or against Item 11. Director Lichty made a motion to open and close the public hearing on item 11, and then to group Item 11 with Items 7, 8, and 13. Director Graves seconded the motion, and by unanimous voice vote of the board members present, the items were grouped. Vice Mayor Cazort announced that the Trash Collection issue would not be discussed at tonight's meeting, that the meeting would be recessed and reconvened in one week for that discussion, at 4: 00 PM. PRESENTATIONS were as listed: Baseline Elementary School Choir — Mr. William Dunn Choir Director. Students from the school presented three songs. National Colon Cancer Awareness Month —Bernie Sherwood, Captain LR Fire Dept. Captain Sherwood announced that he had recently lost his daughter (Amanda Sherwood Roberts) to colon cancer and wanted to carry on some of the work she was involved in toward awareness of the disease. Vice Mayor Cazort presented a proclamation which read as follows Whereas, this year, more than 148,300 American men and women will be diagnosed with cola - rectal cancer and over 56,600 people will die form the disease and Whereas, as of this 1500 men and women will be diagnosed in Arkansas, and Whereas, despite it's high incidence, Cola - rectal cancer is one of the most detectable and if found early the most treatable forms of cancer and Whereas, over ninety percent of those diagnosed while the cancer is still localized survive more than five years, and Whereas, currently only 37% of cola - rectal cancers are detected while still localized, and Whereas, Amada Sherwood Roberts, fought valiantly to raise awareness of colon cancer throughout various local and national efforts, and Whereas, Little Rock Fire Department, Bernie Sherwood, continues to carry on Amanda's spirit by focusing on early detection and treatment. Now therefore, in recognition of these facts about cola - rectal cancer, I Jim Dailey, Mayor of the City of Little Rock, do herby proclaim March as National Cola - rectal Cancer Awareness Month. Hereunto set the Seal of the City, and signed as Mayor. Vice Mayor Cazort presented Captain Sherwood with the proclamation. Workforce Investment Act — Director Adcock and Mr. John Parke Director Adcock announced that a few years ago, the federal government did away with JTPA, and came up with Workforce Investment Board, and that Little Rock is a designated service area. She announced that through the leadership of John Parke, the Workforce Investment Board has "hit the sky ". She said that over the state and nation wonderful words and recognition of how the youth programs have served the youth of the community have been spoken. She introduced Ms. Jane English, the Director for the Arkansas Workforce Investment Board. Ms. English stated she felt there was a great opportunity in the state, and looked forward to building a workforce system that isn't based just on the old supply with unemployment oZ.W offices and things of that nature. She stated there was an opportunity to build workforce centers around the state that look to the future, look at the labor demands and are closely aligned with the economic development strategies in the state. Director Adcock introduced Mr. Derrick Moore, Director of the Arkansas Workforce Center at Little Rock located at 4`h and Main Streets, and also acknowledged his staff and acknowledged the Workforce Investment Board Members. Director Adcock then introduced Mr. John Parke, Chairman, of the Workforce Investment Board. Mr. Parke said it was the Workforce Investment Board's charge to administer all the job - training funds within the City of Little Rock. He said their goals were to get people jobs, get people who are already employed better jobs and to get qualified applicants for the businesses in the community. All in all trying to help improve the areas economy. Mr. Parke presented a "PowerPoint" slide presentation overview the organization and goals. City of Little Rock Web Page — Mr. Ward Hanna. Mr. Hanna introduced the new city web page located at www.accesslittlerock.org. He stated that the Board Agenda, and Administrative Reports would now be available on the site, as well as financial information. He said there is an online procedure now where people seeking employment can access job information and not have to come down to city hall to apply for a job, and other services involving making reservations for ball parks, etc., and possibly schedule some city services. Mr. Hanna stated there is also a link to the Workforce Investment Board that Mr. Parke just presented, and said the 2002 Budget would be on -line soon. CONSENT AGENDA (Items 1 -5) 1. MOTION - To approve minutes from Regular Board of Directors Meeting: 12 -4 -01 and Reconvened meeting: 12- 11 -01. 2. RESOLUTION NO. 11,232 - Authorizing the City Manager to enter into a contract with various vendors for the purchase of vehicles /work equipment for various city departments. 3. RESOLUTION NO. 11,233 - To authorize local government endorsement of Wes - Pak, Inc. located at 9100 Frazier Pike, Little Rock, Arkansas, to participate in the Advantage Arkansas Program; and for other purposes. 4. RESOLUTION - Authorizing the Mayor to execute a quitclaim deed for the transfer of property in Block 35 in the Original City of Little Rock, Arkansas; and for other purposes. 5. RESOLUTION 11,234 - To set the date of Public Hearing for March 19, 2002, on the petition for the formation of Kanis Road Improvement District. (Resolution forthcoming) 6. RESOLUTION NO. 11,235 - Of support of the "Safe- Ride" program of Greater Little Rock Transportation Services; and for other purposes. The consent agenda was read (excluding Item 4). A motion was made by Director Adcock; Director Lichty seconded the motion, and by unanimous voice vote of the board members present, the consent agenda was adopted. Vice Mayor Cazort declared the public hearing open on Item 11. There were no speakers either for or against the item. Vice Mayor Cazort declared the public hearing closed. 7. ORDINANCE NO. 18,647 - Z -7131 - Establishing a Planned Residential District titled POLO Club Long -form PRD located on the south and west side of Chenal Valley Drive, approximately 1300 -feet north of Rahling 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 yes, 0 no, 1 absent. Staff recommends approval. 8. ORDINANCE NO. 18,646 - Authorizing the issuance of $9,500,000, City of Little Rock, Arkansas Library Construction and Improvement Bonds, Series 2002. 11. PUBLIC HEARING & ORDINANCE NO. 18,648 - To abandon Jonesboro Drive right -of -way between Zoo Drive and Monroe Drive in Memorial Park Addition, Little Rock, Arkansas. 12. PUBLIC HEARING & APPROVAL - Of the reassessment of local Sewer Improvement District No. 147 of Little Rock, Arkansas, filed in the City Clerk's Office January 18, 2002. (Pulled from Agenda. It was determined by legal counsel, that this item did not go before the Little Rock Board of Directors.) 13. ORDINANCE NO. 18,649 - Providing for the adoption of 48 Financial Policies for the City of Little Rock. Mr. Don Darnell, 7007 Wakefield ,spoke on Item 13, saying that he was glad to see the city adopt the policies and complimented the board for adopting financial policies. The grouped items consisted of Items 7,8,11, and 13. The ordinances were read once. The rules were suspended by a vote of two thirds of the board members present to provide for the reading of the ordinances the second and third times. The ordinances were 2 ok�_'SU read the second and third times and by a unanimous voice vote of the board members present the ordinances were adopted. It was determined that there was an emergency clause contained in Item 8, and with a unanimous voice vote of the board members present, the emergency clause was adopted. 9. ORDINANCE NO. - S- 1329 -A - Granting a variance from various lot development standards of Chapter 31 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Little Rock, Arkansas providing for a variance of minimum lot width and a variance of minimum platted side building line adjacent to a collector street for Covenant Cove — Preliminary Plat, located at the southwest corner of Rutgers Drive and Lehigh Drive. (Planning Commission: 6 yes, 4 no, 1 absent). Staff recommends approval. 10. ORDINANCE NO. - Z -7113 — Approving a Planned Zoning Development and establishing a Planned Residential District titled — Covenant Cove Long Form — PD -R located at the southwest corner of Rutgers Drive and Lehigh Drive in the City of Little Rock, Arkansas, amending the Official Zoning Map of the City of Little Rock, Arkansas, and for other purposes. (Planning Commission: 6 yes, 4 no, 1 absent). Staff recommends approval. Mr. Jim Lawson presented an overview of Items 9 and 10 stating that Item 9 was a plat and Item 10 was a PRD. He stated this was a ten -acre tract that staff would consider infill, meaning the area around it has been developed, but this particular tract has not. He said normally when infill comes in, it is something different than what is already in the area. He stated the reason for that is whoever is developing the land is trying to come up with a concept that will work because if the concepts already developed, it would be developed property rather than undeveloped. He said the developer has come up with a "Brodie Creek" concept, and the reason for that is that Brodie Creek is a development that has tried this, with smaller lots and rear access easement that goes around it. Mr. Lawson presented slides of examples of the types of housing they would like to put in the development. He said the homes are usually narrower and two story, the lots may be 40 feet wide, and they do have as part of their PRD the restriction that the house have to be at least fifteen hundred square feet, heated and cooled. (Director Keck stated that the plans on many of the homes described in this presentation are twelve, thirteen hundred square feet, and that he was saying one thing, and there was something else on the paperwork.) Mr. Lawson stated these are not the exact plans that will be developed, these are the types of plans, and they would have to meet the fifteen hundred square foot requirement. He said these designs started many years ago at seaside in Florida. He said the land is zoned R -2, and there was concern about the density and said when this was fully developed it would be denser than the surrounding area, it would be five units per acre, rather than 4 per acre in the surrounding neighborhoods. Mr. Lawson stated that normally there would be a 25 -foot rear, 25 -foot front, and then 10% or either side, in this case it is 6 feet on either side and 25 feet front and rear. Many of the houses in nearby areas are along this same line in terms of setbacks. The footprint of the house would be thirty feet wide and have five feet on either side. It does meet the ordinance requirements in terms of width. Mr. Lawson stated the cars would be parking in the rear, creating nice views as you drive up, but the cars and access would be in the rear. One concern that came up at the Planning Commission level and has been discussed quite a bit, is why would a developer be allowed to go into an area like this, and put in something entirely different, and why would you put a fence all the way around the development, or board yourselves off from everyone else? Mr. Lawson explained that when people come home at different hours of the evening, car lights would be shining right into the homes in the back, because they have access in the rear as opposed to the neighboring developments that have access coming in off the front. He stated the wooden fence is a design and noise standpoint, if the fence were not there, light would be coming into other people's homes. Mr. Lawson suggested reading the ordinance the first time, leaving it on the agenda and let staff and the developer try and work these issues out. Director Lichty asked if Mr. Lawson could cite any other developments in Little Rock that would be comparable to this one. Mr. Lawson said there are some, Napa Valley, the Heights, Hillcrest, and Brodie Creek is probably the most recent, and there are other areas, which are fenced or walled off. The type of development is called Neo- traditional, which means trying to do something that was done many years ago. Director Wyrick asked what the main issues were at the Planning Commission as the vote was so close. Mr. Lawson answered that the main issue was that there were a lot of people in the neighborhoods opposed to it, and that was a concern. He said he didn't recall any other issues discussed other than it is different than what is there now, and there were people on the Planning Commission who agreed. Director Hinton asked about any traffic studies and drainage. Mr. Turner answered that the drainage would be underground and would require storm water detention; the piping would pickup at several locations and enters into the existing system. The traffic that would be generated by 52 units would approximately be 500 vehicles a day, approximately 10 trips per unit in a twenty four hour period and that the streets could handle that volume. Director Adcock asked if staff would have a problem with the fencing not going up around the area, if the developer agreed. Mr. Lawson said there would not be an objection from staff, but cautioned about the vehicle lights shining 1-4ZI into the other homes. Director Lichty asked if there were any architectural standards that go with this PRD. Mr. Lawson answered that in terms of a specific unit design, no, that they have footprints and minimum size. Vice Mayor Cazort asked Mr. Lawson if public discussion could be held on Item 9 and 10, as they were closely related. Mr. Lawson said they were related and it would be appropriate. Those speaking in favor of the development were Mr. Michael Williams, 1205 E. Twin Lakes Drive, an associate of the developer, said he thought much of the problem is communications, and taste and style, and the project was about infill, and the fencing was brought about to provide courtesy to the homes where vehicle lights would shine into the other homes. The development is being designed to bring about a blending; the market would be aimed at professionals who might not want large yards to maintain. He said they were trying to set up the development so it would be good for everyone and not offensive to anyone. He stated if there were a way to work through this and resolve it, they would be very willing to work with staff and the neighborhoods to bring this about. Ms. Ethel Givens, 1409 S. Tyler Street, a real estate broker, stated she strongly supported the Covenant Cove Subdivision saying that she had the opportunity to market the property through lots in Kensington, and it had really enhanced the area. Sellers were able to sell their homes at a higher price and Covenant Cove would benefit all the surrounding neighborhoods, Twin Lakes, Campus Place and Kensington. She said she was an impartial supporter in that she did not sell the developer the land, nor was she an investor in the project, and felt this would be good for property values in the neighboring areas. Ms. Rebecca Chandler, 18 Misty Court, a real estate appraiser in the central Arkansas area, spoke in support of the project saying she had no interest one way or the other in the development, but the trend across America is to go to these zero lot homes because you can't make more land, and cited higher property values as newer projects develop, allow for diversity in the neighborhood and bring a larger market share of dollars to the neighborhood. There were a number of citizens present to speak in opposition to the development: Mr. J. C. Brown, 9420 Dartmouth Drive, Mr. Brad Norris, 9409 Dartmouth Dr., Ms. Pearlie Ratliff, 9406 Vanderbilt Dr., Mr. Eddie Calloway, 2802 Romine Road, Ms. Judy DeVris, 9502 Vanderbilt, Mr. Michael Booker, P. O. Box 45154, Mr. Charles L. Armstrong, 3309 Dartmouth Ct. and Mr. Larry L. Bledsoe, 9907 Suffolk Dr. The listed citizens were opposed to the development mainly citing the issues of the density of the homes, lot sizes, the lack of green space in the area, the fencing, and added traffic, not family oriented, detracts from the beauty of the homes already existing in the established neighborhoods, and safety issues due to the closeness of the homes, possible drainage issues and the fact that the developer did not attend some of the meetings of the neighborhoods. Ms. Pam Courtney, the developer, said that it is clear there is opposition from some of the neighbors, and gave the board an overview of the project - from her perspective saying that she did take the time to meet with the neighbors and discuss their issues and concerns, and took their request under consideration, however, she also had to take into consideration the development of the project. She said this is infill land that the neighborhood has made clear that they would like to have single - family homes built. This project has the proposed value of over $6 million dollars to that area. She said the developers were not asking the city for any type of assistance with streets, curbs, gutters, etc. She stated that her plan had to offset that cost, and that is the difference of 44 homes vs. 52 homes. She asked the board to consider that Covenant Cove in her opinion and the appraised values would enhance the values of the properties located in Kensington, Campus Place and Twin Lakes. She said Covenant Cove would have a strict bill of assurance. The Planning Commission did not ask for a bill of assurance, but she would be happy to do one, to ensure there will be no homes less than fifteen hundred square feet, no homes that appraise for less than $100,000, and would put that in writing. She said she thought the fence was a good idea, and was not designed to segregate the area. She said as a developer, and citizen diversity should be allowed in neighborhoods as long as the diversity is of the same standard, or above. Ms. Courtney said she would be glad to meet again with the leadership of the neighborhoods and planning staff to try and work out the issues. The two ordinances (Items 9 and 10) were read the first time. Director Lichty made a motion, with Director Keck seconding the motion to go into executive session to make appointments to various boards and commissions. By unanimous voice vote of the board members present the meting was recessed at 7:55 PM. 16. RESOLUTION NO. 11,236 - Appointments to various Boards and Commissions. The meeting was reconvened at 8:20 PM. Mr. Carney announced the candidates for the various boards and commissions as follows: The Board of Adjustment: Mr. Andrew Francis, and Mr. Fred Gray, The Zoo Board of Governors: Mr. Mark Hartman, Ms. Brenda Sisson, and Mr. Gus Walton, The Museum of Discovery Board of Directors: Ms. Gertrude Clark, Ms. Carol Langston, Mr. Malcolm Moore, and Mr. Thomas J. Ricciardoni. Director Adcock made the motion to adopt the resolutions making the listed appointments; Director Keck seconded the motion, and by unanimous voice vote of the board members present, the resolution was adopted, and the appointments made. 4 Aaou Vice Mayor Cazort recognized Boy Scout Troop 4, who were working on their citizenship badge. 14. REPORT - City of Little Rock Board of Directors 15. REPORT - City Manager's Activity Report — Mr. Cy Carney, City Manager, explained that the Mayor had requested a place on each agenda for the board of directors to speak to issues such as Homeland Security updates, etc. There was no activity report. The next portion of the meeting was devoted to Citizen Communications. Ms. Robin Williams, 1623 Caulden Drive, Mr. Patrick Farrell, 1623 Leander Drive, and Ms. Gina Hartsell, 1623 Leander Drive. They address issues of speeding, sub - standard streets, drainage problems, and the development of the Parham Pointe Apartments. They wanted to know why they were not registered as a Neighborhood Association, and denied existence in the staff report that went to the Planning Commission on the development. They said they had a meeting with city staff, their counsel and the developer of the project, who promised them a hundred and twenty apartments full of amenities, high rent, high tech, appeal to professionals that work at Baptist Hospital close by, and that it was a privately funded development with no HUD involvement. He said the developer promised to keep them informed, and they heard nothing for a year, except for over seven hundred cars a day rumbling past their homes. They asked the board to take a look at the issues associated with the development, and send it back to the planning Commission or investigate it so they, as citizens, they would receive a development that is properly planned, and would protect their property values. Ms. Hartsell said she was directly affected as her home was directly across from the project, and the only turn around is on her property, and there is confusion on whether this street is a city street or a private drive. She stated that last week, a new street sign was up and the name of the street had been changed to Parham Point Drive, and there was no notification that her address was changing. She said emergency services, and the post office was not notified of the change. She said this has since been corrected. Director Stewart asked for information on the project since she had inherited this area in the redistricting. Ms. Carol Fuller, 8805 Fairhaven Drive addressed the issue of a traffic sign at Barrow Road and Henderson School, saying that some good dialog had taken place with some board members and staff and asked the board to continue to listen to their issues. Ms. Mollie Irwin, 507 - Deerbrook Road, asked the board to work harder to get the signal light at Barrow Road and Henderson School. Mr. Herb Hawn, 325 Fern Avenue, said he felt that the solid waste fee increases were a tax increase in disguise. He said he was not wiling to give the city a $4.00 tax that he could not vote on. Mr. James Johnson, 1700 E. 2nd Street, Past President of the Little Rock Fraternal order of Police, addressed the issue of personnel files ending up in criminal hands. He said files have left the city somehow and have gotten into the wrong hands. He read a prepared statement from the Little Rock Executive Board of the Fraternal Order of Police. "The members of the executive board of the Fraternal Order of Police were made aware of a very serious situation earlier today. It has come to our attention that personnel files of Little Rock Police Department officers have been obtained illegally. These files include very sensitive data such as officer's addresses, family member names and highly personal information. This type of data in the hands of the criminal element is a very volatile situation. It appears that this highly sensitive information may have been obtained form the City of Little Rock. Our organization is deeply concerned for the safety of all little Rock Police officers and their families. We will take immediate action to ensure the safety of our officers and their families. We would strongly encourage the Little Rock Mayor and the City Manager to take immediate action to ensure the safety of all Little Rock Police officers. The Little Rock Fraternal Order of Police will be monitoring the actions taken by the city to protect Little Rock Police Department officers. We will hold an emergency meeting on Tuesday, February 26`h, to discuss the city's response to this serious situation. Mr. Cy Carney, City !i Manager stated he become aware of this situation earlier this afternoon and certainly takes it very seriously. There is a full blown investigation now proceeding with police personnel to examine the facts of this case and ensured the officers and the public that the city would take every appropriate action to get to the bottom of the situation, to determine what has happened and to take action to protect the affected personnel. He said at this point, there is only a sketchy outline, and it is of utmost importance, and would address it, and have a report back to the board and the public very quickly. Director Hinton moved to recess the meeting; to reconvene on February 26, 2002 to consider the ordinance to modify the rates for solid waste collection; Director Keck seconded the motion, and by unanimous voice vote of the board members present the meeting was recessed at 9:35 PM. ATTEST: ncy W d City Clerk i, APPROVED: JLqDailey Mayor Z