Fayetteville City Council recap: Jan. 3, 2023

Decision The council voted 8-0 to elect Sarah Bunch to another term as vice mayor

Appointees:

Transportation Committee – Sonia Harvey, Sarah Moore, Sarah Bunch, Holly Hertzberg, Chris Brown, Terry Gulley
Water, Sewer & Solid Waste Committee – D’Andre Jones, Mike Wiederkehr, Scott Berna, Teresa Turk, Tim Nyander
Nominating Committee – Sonia Harvey, Mike Wiederkehr, Sarah Bunch, Teresa Turk, Jonathan Ramirez
Ordinance Review Committee – D’Andre Jones, Sarah Moore, Scott Berna, Holly Hertzberg, Kit Williams
Active Transportation Advisory Committee – Holly Hertzberg
Advertising and Promotion Commission – Sonia Harvey, Sarah Bunch
Animal Services Advisory Committee – Sarah Bunch
Audit Committee – D’Andre Jones
Environmental Action Committee – Teresa Turk
Washington County Regional Ambulance – Holly Hertzberg, Chief Hardin
Equipment Committee – Sonia Harvey, Sarah Moore, Scott Berna, Holly Hertzberg
Town and Gown Advisory Committee – Teresa Turk
Fayetteville Arts Council – Sonia Harvey
Black Heritage Preservation Commission – D’Andre Jones
Stormwater Committee Utility Study – Sonia Harvey, Mike Wiederkehr, Sarah Bunch, Teresa Turk
NWA Regional Planning Commission – Mayor Jordan, Chris Brown, Jonathan Curth
Firemen’s Pension and Policemen’s Pension – Mayor Jordan, Kara Paxton

Background:
This proposal from Councilmember Turk would establish a program that allows city staff to remove graffiti from private property as long as the owner does not want the graffiti, similar to a program already in place in Springdale.

Dec. 6 Discussion:
Turk said she frequently bikes the trails and often notices graffiti. She said she wanted to open up the conversation about how to handle graffiti on private property since the city is not allowed to clean up graffiti unless it’s on public property.

Turk said she likes the language the city attorney drafted except for the sentence that allows a leaseholder or tenant of a property to sign off on the cleaning, and that the owner should probably have the final say.

Harvey said she’d like to table the ordinance to allow time for the Arts Council to discuss the proposal at their next meeting. The council agreed, and tabled the item until Jan. 3, 2023.

Jan. 3 Discussion:
Harvey asked if the council would table this ordinance to allow more time for the Arts Council to discuss the proposal because there was so much business at the panel’s last meeting that they weren’t able to take it up.

Background:
The City Council re-adopts its Rules of Order and Procedure at the beginning of every year. The rules were last revised on Dec. 6, 2022 when the council approved a change stipulating that speakers present in the council chambers shall be recognized before speakers participating through electronic means. There have been no other changes since then.

Discussion:
There was no public comment.

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

Background:
An automatic 3% annual cost increase in water and sewer rates is required by city law, however, the city administration is currently working on a new water and sewer rate study that will include recommendations sometime in the next few months. If approved, those recommendations would result in two separate rate changes for water and sewer customers. Staff said to avoid confusion and multiple financial adjustments, it is recommended that the annual 3% cost adjustment for January 2023 be waived, and that new rates be considered later this year once the study is complete.

Discussion:
There was no public comment.

Decision:
The council advanced the ordinance to the third reading, and voted 8-0 to approve it.

Background:
City staff said in order to act more quickly to repair broken water and sewer mains the city is allowed to waive competitive bidding for some pipes, fittings and hardware, but the law doesn’t always cover all the parts needed. This ordinance would solve that issue, staff said.

Discussion:
There was no public comment.

Decision:
The council advanced the ordinance to the third reading, and voted 8-0 to approve it.

Background:
WelcomeHealth is seeking $75,000 to help provide free medical and dental care to clients for a full year using a portion of the city’s $17.9 million in American Rescue Plan Act funds.

Discussion:
Former Councilmember Kyle Smith said the council should table this item and the following ARPA-related decisions for a few weeks to allow more time to consider how to use the remaining funds.

Representatives from WelcomeHealth and Magdalene Serenity House asked the council not to table the items, and to act now to provide assistance for those who have applied.

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

Background:
Magdalene Serenity House is seeking $128,789 to renovate a recently purchased house for four graduates of its program for formerly incarcerated women, increasing the organization’s total number of women served from 8 to 12 residents.

Discussion:
Wiederkehr said Magdalene Serenity House serves a unique community that other nonprofits don’t address and that are especially impacted when it comes to housing. He urged the council to approve the resolution.

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

Background:
Councilmember Sonia Harvey sponsored this resolution that would allocate $3 million in American Rescue Plan Act funds for projects organized by arts and culture nonprofits operating in Fayetteville.

The proposal includes the following schedule:
January 2023 – Advertise the grant opportunity.
February 2023 – Applications can be submitted.
March 2023 – Eligible applications are reviewed and evaluated, and funding recommendations made by Fayetteville Arts Council.
April 2023 – The City Council reviews and acts upon the recommendations made by the Fayetteville Arts
Council.

Discussion:
Harvey said the arts and culture sector was hit hard by the pandemic and needs a boost. She said the Arts Council recommended asking for an allocation of $3 million.

Moore suggested tabling this ordinance for a couple of meetings to make sure there aren’t other projects that need more funding. Waiting, Moore said, could help the council better prioritize how it uses the remainder of the ARPA money.

Mayor Jordan said one thing that will likely need more funding is the city’s new childcare assistance program. Officials last week said judging by the amount of applications that have already been submitted, the council may need to appropriate more ARPA money to the program.

Wiederkehr said he knows the arts and culture sector was affected by the pandemic, but there might be some higher priority needs when it comes to allocating ARPA funds, such as food insecurity, housing or other life-pressing issues.

Berna said those who are still asking for specific assistance should be considered first. He said he knows the arts sector is important, but he thinks $3 million is too much to ask for right now.

Bunch agreed, and said childcare is the foundation of being able to function in society, so that program should be a priority. However, she said supporting arts and culture organizations is also a valid proposal.

“I do want to recognize the importance of the creative economy in our city,” said Bunch. “Because we wouldn’t just be giving money to the arts. We’d be supporting organizations that employ people and that help educate our children.”

About a dozen people spoke during public comment, most who urged the council to consider approving the proposal.

Turk said it might be helpful to have a workshop to review some of the applications that have already been submitted, but that haven’t yet been approved. Harvey agreed, and moved to table the item indefinitely. That motion passed 8-0.

Background:
Councilmember Teresa Turk sponsored this resolution that would allocate $1 million in American Rescue Plan Act funds toward a change that would allow nonprofit organizations to apply for financial help for pandemic-related losses that were incurred between March 2020 and March 2021 (the current rules only cover losses incurred between March 2021 to March 2022).

Discussion:
Turk said she would like the council to also table this item indefinitely for the same reasons as the above proposal. That motion passed 8-0.

Background:
A tree preservation easement was dedicated as part of the development of JD China restaurant when it was built in 2001. The trees were placed in a preservation easement in order to meet the development requirements on the lot so that the restaurant could be built. After the restaurant closed, Raising Cane’s purchased and subdivided the lot into two parcels, with one used for Raising Cane’s and the other encumbered with the tree preservation easement in question.

A new applicant would like to build on the property, but would need to first get the tree preservation easement vacated. The applicant has offered to exchange the preservation for two separate tree preservation easements in other parts of the city.

The first parcel includes 0.2 acres on the west side of the city along Owl Creek and adjacent to Harmony Pointe Park. The other parcel includes 0.6 acres on the east side of the city near South Ray Avenue in an industrial area close to a residential neighborhood.

City staff said they visited the properties and determined that they do not offer more benefit or environmental services than the existing tree preservation easement since they are both on relatively unbuildable lots in the Streamside Protection Zone and in flood areas which are already protected by city code.

Location:

Discussion:
The applicant said he and his partners plan to dedicate 20% of the homes in the proposed development toward affordable housing.

Moore said 20% is a good start, but that she’d like the applicant to consider dedicating even more homes to affordable housing by possibly working with the city with a rent-controlled group of homes.

Bunch said the property was put into a tree preservation for a reason, and it was meant to follow the parcel in perpetuity. She said the owners of the land knew what they were doing when they agreed to the preservation and so should have anyone else who has since purchased it.

“I am seriously not in favor of this,” said Bunch. “Removing a tree preservation is a big deal and I would challenge everyone on the council to look hard at what we’d be giving away.”

City Attorney said the council would need very strict rules to use a promise of affordable housing as a tradeoff for removing a tree preservation, but that kind of promise could be difficult to secure considering state law does not allow cities to impose rent control on private properties.

Wiederkehr said the applicant took a risk in purchasing a property that legally can’t be developed upon without an ordinance change. He said he commends the developers for being upfront and trying to work with the council toward a deal, but he can’t support the request.

Berna said the previous owners and some former council members made a promise together and he’s not comfortable going back on that promise because it could potentially set a dangerous precedent.

The council voted 2-6 to deny the resolution. Hertzberg and Jones voted in favor.

Background:
When an applicant requests a conditional use permit, city law requires public notification that the Planning Commission will soon hear the request. The law requires posted and written notification in order to alert neighbors about the proposed use of the property. If the application is denied, the applicant has the right to appeal the decision to the City Council, but there is no rule that requires public notification that an appeal has been filed. This ordinance would solve that issue, staff said.

Discussion:
There was no public comment.

Decision:
The council advanced the ordinance to the third reading, and voted 7-0 to approve it. Hertzberg left after item no. 8.

Background:
The property contains a single-family home and is on a street that has recently seen other rezoning activity with other portions of the block being rezoned to CS, Community Services as recently as October 2020 and December 2020. The applicant has not submitted any specific development plans to city staff.

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

Location:

Discussion:
There was no public comment.

Decision:
The council advanced the ordinance to the third reading, and voted 7-0 to approve it. Hertzberg left after item no. 8.

Background:
The property is in the Lierly Lane subdivision and includes one single-family home. The applicant proposes to vacate a portion of an existing utility easement.

City planners recommend approval of the request. The Planning Commission does not hear these types of requests.

Location:

Discussion:
There was no public comment.

Decision:
The council advanced the ordinance to the third reading, and voted 7-0 to approve it. Hertzberg left after item no. 8.

Background:
The property is undeveloped and largely covered by mature tree canopy. A two-family residential structure previously occupied the site. A demolition permit was approved in February of 2022 to raze the structure. The applicant proposes to vacate a portion of an existing utility easement.

City planners recommend approval of the request. The Planning Commission does not hear these types of requests.

Location:

Discussion:
There was no public comment.

Decision:
The council advanced the ordinance to the third reading, and voted 7-0 to approve it. Hertzberg left after item no. 8.

Background:
The property contains an incomplete structure that aerial imagery suggests was partially razed in 2013. The applicant proposes to vacate a portion of an existing water and sewer easement in the northwest portion of the property.

City planners recommend approval of the request. The Planning Commission does not hear these types of requests.
Location:

Discussion:
There was no public comment.

Decision:
The council advanced the ordinance to the third reading, and voted 7-0 to approve it. Hertzberg left after item no. 8.

Background:
The applicant proposes to vacate 18 separate pieces of public right of way totaling 6.54 acres along seven streets. In turn, a dedication of right-of-way totaling 1.43 acres is proposed along Razorback Road and between Nolan Richardson Drive to the south and Maple Street to the north. With this request, the applicant noted in their letter that existing utilities will be protected through easement dedication. Additionally, the applicant asserts that vacating the right-of-way will remove current and future sections of Senior Walk, landscaping, lights, and trees from the city’s responsibility.

City planners and the Planning Commission recommend approval with the following conditions:

1. Easements shall be dedicated for any existing facilities associated with this right-of-way vacation request, with review and coordination by the applicant with the utility provider, including the client properly identifying utilities in the field by means of surveying, pot holing, and coordinating with representatives.
2. Adequate accommodation for pedestrian access must be maintained whether through easement or agreement.
3. The applicant must dedicate right-of-way to the back of curb in any areas where right of way does not currently exist.
4. The applicant must dedicate a pedestrian access easement to the existing back of sidewalk or master street plan right of way in areas where sidewalk does not currently exist.
5. Signal poles and appurtenances must remain in the right-of-way, or an easement be dedicated over the areas where poles and appurtenances are located.
6. Drainage easements must be dedicated in areas of existing drainage facilities.
7. An agreement will need to be developed establishing responsibility (or lack thereof) for repairs to non-typical features behind the curb due to maintenance, installation, and repair of any city facilities located within vacated rights of way, including drainage facilities and water/sewer lines. The City will not be responsible for maintenance or repair of anything except a standard sidewalk.
8. Any damage or relocation of existing facilities will be at the property owner/developer’s expense.
9. All easements and agreements required as a condition of this vacation shall be reviewed by the City and signed by the Mayor.

Location:

Discussion:
There was no public comment. Turk said she’d like the leave the ordinance on the first reading to allow more time to consider the proposal.

The council agreed. The discussion will continue on Jan. 17.