Board of Directors

MINUTES BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING AUGUST 17, 2010, AT 7:00 P.M. The regular meeting of the Board of Directors was held on Tuesday, August 17, 2010, at 7:00 p.m., Board Chambers, City Hall, with Mayor Mike Bush presiding. The invocation was given by Ms. Paula Childs, and Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag was led by Mayor Bush. Mayor Bush called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. 1 Roll Call Roll call was as follows: Present: Directors Peggy Maruthur, Elaine Jones, Cynthia Keheley, Pat McCabe, Tom Daniel, and Mike Bush, total 6. Absent: Director Rick Ramick. 2 Approval of Agenda A motion was made by Director Jones, duly seconded by Director Keheley, that the agenda be approved; and upon voice vote, the motion unanimously carried. 3 Approval of Minutes of August 3, 2010 Board Meeting A motion was made by Director McCabe, duly seconded by Director Keheley, that the minutes of the August 3, 2010 Board Meeting be approved; and upon voice vote, the motion unanimously carried. 4 Recognition of Guests No guests were present for recognition. 5 Board of Directors Announcements Director Maruthur announced that District No. 1 held its meeting at the Tower of Strength Ministries and thanked those who attended. She reported that some of the issues that came out of the meeting were a request for a substation that was active and the discontinuation of the Police Department menu when dialing 321-6789. She noted that last night there was an incident, but they could not get in contact with the Police Department, and the officer was 25 minutes away but was not the officer’s fault. Also, at the meeting, she said they discussed numerous concerns, which are going to be addressed. She stated there were between 64 and 100 people who attended the meeting. She said the secretary-treasurer had stated there were around 100, but another person mentioned there were 64. CONSENT AGENDA The Consent Agenda consisted of the following: 6 Public Safety Committee Report (August 3, 2010). 7 Proposed Resolution No. R-10-178 Approving Certain Bid Awards - (a) Transfer Truck - Sanitation [awarded to Truck Center of Arkansas in the amount of $91,219]; (b) Transfer Trailer - Sanitation [awarded to Spector Manufacturing in the amount of $60,500]; (c) Aluminum Sulfate - Utility Administration [annual supply contract awarded to General Chemical - Final Contract Extension]; and (d) Digital Orthophotography - Utility Administration [reject RFP]. 8 Proposed Resolution No. R–10-179 Accepting a Grant from the Arkansas Department of Aeronautics to Construct an Addition to Fire Department Building No. 4 (Housing Air Rescue Firefighting [ARFF] Vehicle). 9 Proposed Resolution No. R-10-180 Awarding a Contract and Bid Award to Goslee Construction for Construction of an Addition to Fire Station No. 4 at the Airport to House Air Rescue Firefighting (ARFF) Vehicle, Subject to Grant Award. Board of Directors Meeting 2 August 17, 2010 at 7:00 P.M. 10 Proposed Resolution No. R-10-181 Awarding a Contract and Bid Award to Redstone Construction Group for Expansion and Rehabilitation of Aircraft Apron, Phase I, at the Airport. 11 Proposed Resolution No. R-10-182 Awarding a Contract and Bid Award to Redstone Construction Group for Rehabilitation of Runway 13/31, Phase IV. 12 Proposed Resolution No. R-10-183 Accepting a Grant from the Arkansas Department of Aeronautics for Various Airport Improvements; and Appropriating Funds. 13 Proposed Resolution No. R-10-184 Authorizing the Filing of a Grant Application with the Arkansas State Highway and Transportation Department Pursuant to the SAFE-TEA LU 2011 Arkansas Transportation Enhancement Program (Hot Springs Creek Greenway Trail, Phase 5, Utility Service Center Trail). 14 Proposed Resolution No. R-10-185 Approving a Participating Agreement Between the City of Hot Springs, Arkansas, and the USDA, Forest Service, Southern Region, Ouachita National Forest. 15 Proposed Resolution No. R-10-186 Awarding a Contract to Cobar Contracting, Inc. for 2010 Wastewater System Improvements - Project 2010-4-CHS. 16 Proposed Resolution No. R-10-187 Reinstating a Rebate Agreement Between the City of Hot Springs and Fountain Lake School District. 17 Proposed Resolution No. R-10-188 Allowing Garland County Habitat for Humanity to Expend Approved Funds on a Housing Development Across from Whittington City Park. Board of Directors Meeting 3 August 17, 2010 at 7:00 P.M. 18 Proposed Resolution No. R-10-189 Approving Change Order No. 2 to the Contract with Coakley Company, Inc. for the 2008 Water Line Improvements Project. A motion was made by Director Keheley, duly seconded by Director Jones, that the Consent Agenda be approved. Upon discussion, Director Maruthur stated that in regard to Item #10-217 of the Public Safety Report, she was asked by the owners of the Mexican Restaurant at 765 Park Avenue (Taquera el Amigo) to allow the City to put lines in front of their business. She stated that many people call them and report they did not know if they could park there. She said they would like to get permission for the lines to be drawn in front of their restaurant, pointing out it is a small, strip shopping center, which they own; and they are working hard to make it a success and have invested a lot of money. She asked that this item be removed from the Public Safety Committee for separate consideration. Mayor Bush announced that Item No. 10-217 of the Public Safety Report will be placed under New Business. Mayor Bush then called for a vote on the motion to approve the Consent Agenda, as amended (with deletion of Item No. 10-217 of the Public Safety Report); and upon roll call, the following voted “aye”: Directors Maruthur, Jones, Keheley, McCabe, Daniel, and Bush, total 6. Absent and not voting: Director Ramick; motion unanimously carried. NEW BUSINESS 19 Proposed Ordinance No. O-10-41 An ordinance entitled, “AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING CODE OF THE CITY OF HOT SPRINGS, ARKANSAS, BY REZONING PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE 200 BLOCK OF STACY STREET DESCRIBED AS LOT 5 OF CARTNEY’S SUBDIVISION BY ADDING MANUFACTURED HOME OVERLAY TO THE EXISTING R-1, RURAL RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT; AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES,” was taken from the agenda for consideration. Board of Directors Meeting 4 August 17, 2010 at 7:00 P.M.  A motion was made by Director Jones, duly seconded by Director Keheley, that the rules be suspended and the ordinance be read for the first time by title only; and upon voice vote, the motion unanimously carried. The ordinance was then read for the first time by title only; and upon the question “Shall the ordinance be passed as read?” and upon motion of Director Daniel, duly seconded by Director Keheley, that the ordinance be passed as read. Upon discussion, Ms. Kathy Sellman, Planning and Development Director, advised that notice was provided per Hot Springs Code §16-2-12(b) by mailing a letter of notice to all property owners within 200 feet of the subject property, by Notice of Public Hearing in The Sentinel-Record, and by posting the property with a suitable and pertinent sign. She stated that was all accomplished within the timeframes as prescribed in the Code. She said the applicants and property owners, Mr. Ricky Gillham, Mr. C. W. Gillham, and Mr. James Maynard, made application for zoning change to add Manufactured Home Overlay for Lot 5 of Cartney’s Subdivision, which is generally located in the 200 block of Stacy Street. She stated the subject Lot 5 is zoned R-1, Rural Residential; and previously the lot has been separated into five individual lots of record by metes and bounds with four of the five parcels currently being developed with single-family homes. She reported that the Planning Commission, at its regular meeting on May 13, 2010, on a motion to recommend that the Board adopt an ordinance amending the zoning map, voted 3-3, which motion failed. She noted the Board of Directors, on July 20, 2010, voted to reconsider this appeal. She mentioned should the ordinance be approved, upon redevelopment as may be desired by this owner or any future property owner of these lots, one manufactured home could replace one existing home. Regarding the appeal, she stated the primary fact is that Mr. Gillham presents that at the same meeting, the property across the street was approved for a lot split, and a new manufactured home in the same subdivision as the subject lot of tonight’s appeal. She said this appeal successfully demonstrates that the Planning Commission did err in its findings to deny recommending approval of the zoning change, and the Planning Commission’s stated findings suggest that some unstated number of manufactured homes placed here would have some increased material adverse impact over some lesser number. She reported that the 4.7 acre subject property already exists as five lots of record and can be developed, each one with one single-family residence. She advised that to add the Manufactured Home Overlay on this property would expand only the type of single-family residential redevelopment that might occur. On October 7, 2002, the Planning Commission voted to recommend approval for a Manufactured Home Overlay for the nearby Lot 1 in this same subdivision; and 30 minutes after denying the subject request, which is the subject of tonight’s appeal, the Planning Commission voted to approve a split of that lot, which Board of Directors Meeting 5 August 17, 2010 at 7:00 P.M. would increase the number of homes in the neighborhood. Therefore, the decisions regarding a lot across the street from the subject property demonstrate that Planning Commission has determined that manufactured homes placed on lots of record have no material adverse impact on the character of this neighborhood, that its decisions are appropriate, and they are in the public interest. Therefore, the recommendation is that the Board adopt the ordinance adding the Manufactured Home Overlay to Lot 5 of Cartney’s Subdivision because the standards for such a change are met; and under the appeal, finding that the Planning Commission failed to make a specific finding in accordance with Hot Springs Code §16-211. Director Keheley noted there are five parcels and the applicant owns four. She questioned who owns the fifth and if he is represented. Ms. Sellman replied that there are signatures of each of the owners of the lands that are under this request. Director Keheley asked if this overlay were approved and if these existing homes were removed, could they be replaced by the mobile homes; and Ms. Sellman advised by one manufactured home. She added this is the R-1 Zone District; and the minimum lot size in R-1 is an acre; therefore, it would be one acre per one home; and each of these lots are approximately an acre. Director Keheley commented there were several people who attended the meeting who were very concerned about this and asked if those neighbors changed their mind or if they are present. Ms. Sellman advised there are several in attendance to speak to the Board tonight. She added that several neighbors have provided written documentation which is included in the Board packet. Director Maruthur asked if Ms. Sellman would go on the record as recommending in her resume that this would be good for the neighborhood. Ms. Sellman replied that she is not making that recommendation but is quoting the finding of the Planning Commission. Director Maruthur asked if she did not want it in her record. Ms. Sellman responded that this is an appeal of the record, and her opinion on this, beyond what appears in the staff report and Board Action Request Form, is really not significant. Director Maruthur said that she thinks it is since she is the Planning Director and should she seek employment in the future, she feels this is critical. She pointed out that Ms. Sellman is taking a position and is head of that department. Ms. Sellman responded that the Code requires that finding to be made; and her statement in the Board Action Request Form is that the Planning Commission, through its action approving an additional unit across the street from the subject property, demonstrated its finding that this does not present anything that is counter to the requirements of the Code; and she stands by that finding. Board of Directors Meeting 6 August 17, 2010 at 7:00 P.M.  City Manager Lance Hudnell commented that is her responsibility under the Code as the Planning Director. Ms. Sellman added that is correct and to report the findings of the Planning Commission and to reflect in the record those actions which have occurred. Director McCabe questioned if the appeal were denied, does the Board have exposure through the court system of being arbitrary on this issue because one property was recently subdivided and another mobile home was allowed. He said from what he understood, this property had a mobile home on it, but it had been removed; and the time period in which to replace it had expired. City Attorney Brian Albright advised that any appeal of the Board decision in a zoning arena would go to Circuit Court and then tried de novo, which means that the court would look at it through the record but apply its own reasoning to that. He commented for him to try to speculate on what a Circuit Court Judge might find with regard to arbitrariness, he is not really prepared to do that. He added that a reclassification of property across the street outside of the area that is being sought to be put into an overlay would not necessarily have anything to do with this particular parcel. Director McCabe stated what he is hearing from the Planning Director is that it is her opinion that the denial is consistent with the City’s Code. City Attorney Brian Albright replied that is her position, and he does not dispute that position. Director Maruthur commented this is a neighborhood that is asking to remain R-1, Rural Residential District; and these residents are asking the Board to preserve, conserve, and stabilize their neighborhood and their property values. She commented the entire City is waiting to see how the Board weighs the request of these existing residents from very long-term residents against the desires of family individuals to convert this neighborhood into a Manufactured Home Overlay that the residents do not want. She pointed out on May 13, the request for the Manufactured Home Overlay was denied by the Planning Commission; and on June 6, the Board denied the request for the Manufactured Home Overlay. On July 20, the people came to the Board Meeting; but the Board did not allow any of the neighbors to speak. She mentioned that many came to City Hall and some were ill, and they were here to plead for their neighborhood. She noted that under Zoning Code §16-229 (Creation of New Zones), no new zones may be created within the land area of an existing zoning classification unless zoning is appropriate to the area; and it is in the general public’s interest and not merely the interest of an individual or small group. She stated such rezoning must be convincingly, must demonstrate that the character of the neighborhood will not materially or adversely affected and uses permitted in the proposed change. She Board of Directors Meeting 7 August 17, 2010 at 7:00 P.M. pointed out if there is something that is going to benefit a neighborhood, regardless of where the neighborhood is located, the people are certainly going to want it. She added that it says convincingly demonstrate and questioned where is the proof. She said two manufactured homes came down, one was burned, which was drug-related; and the other one was a meth lab. She noted the City’s mission statement is “Maintaining the high quality of life while improving the character and quality of all neighborhoods.” She reported there is also a police record of the two fires and calls that continued until 2007. She stressed that the people who live there call this their home and want to remain there and lay the groundwork for the future. She noted this is something that came up in the District 1 meeting. She stressed that people are very frustrated about the destruction of the neighborhoods, and it lends itself to crime. She mentioned these people are homeowners, and the manufactured housing can easily be converted into rental; and they know it. She noted that anything the Board rules on can be appealed and go to the Circuit Court. She stated in §16-23 of the Zoning Code, the purpose of zoning has changed; and it is to conserve and stabilize property values. She commented that maybe the Board’s mission has changed, and it is not to conserve and stabilize property. She noted she believes that stayed the same. She stressed that this does this include what the existing residents want. She added the residents of the City are tired of their concerns and requests being ignored, and the only other recourse the residents have is to speak at the ballot box on Election Day. She emphasized that the Directors do not live in this neighborhood, and all the Board can do is listen and respect the desires of those who wish to live within this community and they have to listen to what the Board does tonight. She then read an article from the August Arkansas Municipal League publication, in regard to the urban planner called “Jimmie’s BURPS,” the best urban regulatory practices. He calls it the “Bank President’s Rule”; and it is akin to the old football coach’s adage that one should never make a team rule that one would not be willing to enforce against the star player. She commented as applied to land-use regulations, the rule becomes never adopt a land-use regulation that one would not be quite willing to enforce against the town’s most powerful bank president. She stated that his legal mentor is Argumento DeMimimus, a Harvard grad attorney who pointed this out to him that people generally support the Constitution with their entire being until the moment one of its provisions becomes inconvenient because of a name. She added that he says it is harsh, but it holds true for land- use regulations. She noted according to the article, when a regulation becomes inconvenient to the powerful and/or influential, “we can become inconsistent and this is a big no- no.” He then goes on to talk about regulations that are sometime put in place to cover one occurrence or to permit a very specific benefit for a specific applicant. She pointed out that it is really clear from all the context, the existing neighbors do not want the 4.7 acres to be open to manufactured housing; and Board of Directors Meeting 8 August 17, 2010 at 7:00 P.M. at the present time, this is a wooded area. She mentioned that one of the people who came to her district meeting was from District 1 and said they have 15 cars sometimes and have been documenting all of the activities. She added it is a wooded, secluded area and is a lovely area; and the people there have worked very hard to secure their home place. Regarding the police report, she spoke to some residents who have been documenting; and there are many more police calls than this. She stated it is not a well-lit area, and people cannot get the license plate numbers, nor can they get the Police Department because of the menu. She stressed that people do not know what to do, but the reality is that this area is being inundated by people who are doing some kind of activity there. The Directors would not want a Manufactured Home Overlay in a secluded area, and that is why the Board changed the Code. She said there are mobile home parks now with management and very strict rules that protect the people who live there. She commented this is almost spot zoning and is not about one manufactured home for a relative. She mentioned there is a home in this area that many people have looked at and considered buying; and the family that did buy it is lodging the appeal tonight and is going to consider renovating it. She said that she has been told that two people tried to buy it, but it was way past renovation. However, they are going to look at it. She stated if this should be torn down, it is going to expand the amount of manufactured housing in the area; and it will become a manufacturing district, which she did not think is right for the residents. She pointed out if the residents were in favor of it, she would be supporting them. Regarding the police reports, she said there are many more than this. She urged the Board to listen to the people and the documentation. Mr. Joe Fisher, 101 Stacy, speaking in opposition, said he lives across from Mr. Gillham and has lived there for over 30 years. He pointed out he lived there when the property was not developed, and there were some homes there. He said he bought seven acres and built a $250,000 home. He advised that he attended the Planning Commission hearing in May for the overlay request that Mr. Gillham is seeking, and he did not feel the Planning Commission was misled as The Sentinel-Record reported or Mr. Gillham stated in his appeal. He said they discussed the matter for sometime before putting it to a vote, and the Planning Commission voted down Mr. Gillham’s request that night. He reported he did not attend the first Board Meeting on this but signed a petition to be presented at the first Board Meeting as being against this overlay since he was unable to attend the meeting; and that the meeting his request was again denied. He said he believes that bringing more mobile homes to their neighborhood will only bring property values down. Also when asking any real estate agent or land appraiser, they will say that it will bring down the prices. Also, any building contractor will state that a house built from the foundation and ground up is built stronger and more Board of Directors Meeting 9 August 17, 2010 at 7:00 P.M. sound structure. He mentioned he has nothing against mobile homes if the neighborhood wants them there, but he and his neighbors do not want this overlay request. He added that he and his neighbors are trying to bring the values back up in their area and build toward the future. He then asked the Directors how they would feel if these types of homes were moved next to them and they had invested as much money as he has in his home and property. Also, he has talked to the Police Department several times because he lives on the corner of Stacy and Cones Road, which is a location where people come to park, drink, party, and fight. He said by the time he calls the Police, they are gone. He added when the Police do come out, sometimes he talks to them and sometimes he tells them he does not want to talk to them. He said that he is asking the Board to do the right thing and show him and the neighbors that the Board hears their voices and show them that as citizens of Hot Springs, they still have rights also. He mentioned the Police Chief said that he did not have any calls in this area since 2007, but he talked to the Police Department today; and he has where he called on December 16, 2009, for some trouble that was going on at the corner of the street. He stated this is a street for people to gang up because it is a dead-end. He added he does not go out and talk with them to cause any problems but just calls the Police Department. He reported that Ms. Thompson, who lives at the end of Stacy Street, had people who were parked in her driveway at night, and she had an incident where there were two gentlemen parked in her driveway when she came in one evening from work. After a confrontation with them and they refused to move, she called the Police Department; and they then rammed her car. He said they were arrested and their car towed off. He stressed those are the kind of problems they have in that area. Director Maruthur pointed out that Mr. Fisher asked each Board Member to respond to his question, and she would like to see his question answered. Mayor Bush asked how she would answer it, and Director Maruthur said that she would not these types of homes moved next to her. Mayor Bush asked if anyone else wanted to respond to the question. There were no other responses from the Directors. Director Daniel commented this is an overlay district that has four acres and the total amount of mobile homes to be put on this four acres would be four. City Attorney Brian Albright advised that it is 4.7 acres and they could have five. He said they could have one per lot but not in addition to the home – only one home per lot, whether it is stick built or whether it is a manufactured home. Director Daniel asked if Mr. Fisher was saying that people who live in mobile homes would bring more trouble to the area, and Mr. Fisher replied that he believes it Board of Directors Meeting 10 August 17, 2010 at 7:00 P.M. would. He said that he does not have a problem with modular homes and mobile homes if they are in a mobile home park or a neighborhood that wants them, but their neighborhood does not want them. He pointed out bringing manufactured homes in the area will decrease property values. He stated he has invested too much money in his property and is still investing and building on his property where he has resided for 30 years. He mentioned he discovered after he built there; the trailers were rent trailers; and he has had problems with everyone who lived in those trailers. Director Maruthur said that she had answered “no” to having this next door to her and would be concerned about property value. She added that a site-built home can be destroyed also. However, the materials used in a modular or manufactured home are not standard materials and in today’s environment, unless they are in a mobile home park, they appear to become rental and are very easy to destroy. She added they are not likely to return to owner-occupied, and realtors have told her that if there is a manufactured home and the property is going to be shown, that perhaps they need to go in a different direction. She commented that she believes it is unethical, but it is done and is reality. She pointed out this is an old neighborhood that is at risk, and this neighborhood could go under if the Board allows it to. Director Jones stated that Mr. Fisher is having a lot of problems with the manufactured home going in there; and in her district, some of the manufactured homes look better than some of the homes that people live in. She said they are not $250,000 homes, but once people underpin them and dress them up, it is difficult to tell if it is a $200,000 home or just a manufactured home. She mentioned if someone is going to live there, there will not be the problem with drugs and drinking as they are having now. She noted it helped in her district. Mr. Fisher replied that it is not helping in his district. He added they also have problems with odors, which he reported to the Police Department; but they did not stop and check it. Acting Police Chief Mike McCormick reported as far as the odors, he understands from time-to-time, there are odors; and police officers drive through the Stacy Street area but have not been able to locate the nature of the odor. He advised that in 2004, there was a meth house, and arrests were made; and the house decontaminated. Since mid-2007, he said he was not aware nor do their records reflect a substantial crime problem in that area. Mr. Fisher noted this has just started in the last year. Board of Directors Meeting 11 August 17, 2010 at 7:00 P.M.  Mr. Bill Burrough, Sanitation Director, advised that in regard to the odors, there was a resident next door to Mr. Fisher’s; and he had a habit of burning rubber off of wire and other insulation. Director Maruthur asked if Mr. Fisher lives in a protected Historic District, and Mr. Fisher asked for clarification on a historic district. City Attorney Brian Albright explained there are two recognized Historic Districts. One is the Pleasant Street and the other is the Downtown Historic District. He asked if his home was located in the Pleasant Street area or downtown district, and Mr. Fisher replied that it was not. Mr. Allen Turner, 889 Ridgeway, stated that he lives on the corner of Ridgeway and Stacy, which is about 300 feet from the property owned by Mr. Gillham. He said that he is speaking against the Overlay District. He then distributed a Google photograph of the neighborhood in the area with red dots indicating the site-built homes in the area, which amount from 25 to 30. He stated this is a neighborhood that is established and has properties that are well-maintained and would be detrimentally affected by bringing to that area the possibility of five manufactured houses. Regarding §16-229 of the Code, one condition is that it serves the general public interest and not merely the interest of an individual or small group. He said it seems to him it is very difficult to find an interest shared by anyone in granting the overlay except Mr. Gillham and Mr. Maynard, and anybody else in the neighborhood would say that it is not in their interest. He commented if Mr. Gillham is severely impacted by the Zoning Code; and he has a special problem, he believes a variance may be the answer. He said they mentioned Block 2 to justify granting the overlay to Block 5. He noted there are significant differences in Block 2 and Block 5. To the immediate east of Block 2 is a wooded area, a creek, cows, corn, and other rural property. He commented south of there is a line of houses that he believes are in the neighborhood followed by a mountain. He said that property is distinguishable from Block 5 in that whenever figuring out how large a neighborhood is, they cannot get more than 10 or 12 houses there. In Block 5, within 3/10 of a mile, 30 houses are maintained well and serve as a significant property base for the City taxes now and in the future. He stated in his opinion, bringing into Block 5 the possibility of five manufactured houses would significantly impact the interest of the neighborhood. He pointed out the burden of proof does not lie with the neighborhood but lies with Mr. Gillham, who must demonstrate, according to the provision of the Code, that the neighborhood would not be adversely affected. He noted according to the written body of evidence that Mr. Gillham has presented to justify the overlay, nothing speaks to what will be the impact on the neighborhood. Board of Directors Meeting 12 August 17, 2010 at 7:00 P.M.  Mr. Rick Gillham, 204 Stacy Lane, said he has met all of the criteria that the City has asked him to do with the Planning Department; and they have approved it. He mentioned there is a problem, and the Police Department is working on it and can probably talk to the Captain about it in private because there is an ongoing investigation. He noted the two major ones complaining did not know there was an arrest made Sunday night on that piece of property, and they do not come out of their house or when there is wreck at the corner. He added they do not turn on their lights and do not care. He said he checks on it every time and wants to know what is happening. He advised that his dad bought this property in 1984, and this is the property where he resides and is not rental property. He pointed out that drug houses are not just mobile homes, and 75 percent of them are stick-built homes so they cannot place the stigma that it is a mobile home situation. He commented that one of the persons who is objecting to this wants to build a nice home, but his small home will probably become rental. He said that this is just a speculation, but that individual is speculating on what he is going to do. He stated there are five parcels, and he owns only four of them; and one of them has a manufactured home on it that will remain on that property. He noted if he wishes to replace it, he can replace it within 12 months for the rest of his life if he wishes to do so. Therefore, there is only room for three for him; and he was only asking to replace the one where Captain McCormick said there was a drug problem, made an arrest, hauled it off, and cleaned up the area. He said he purchased the property and has done nothing but bring up the value of the property. He pointed out that Mr. Fisher said that his home was valued at a certain amount, and his is valued at the same price as his on the tax deed. He added that his is $10,000 more than the other individual who was talking against it. He asked if Director Maruthur has been to the area, and she advised that she saw his property and what he is doing. He asked if she has seen the neighborhood, and Director Maruthur replied that she has. Mr. Gillham said the other point he wanted to make was on the mobile home that was just put in across the street, which is on Ridgeway Boulevard. Director Maruthur asked if his neighbor might move if this gets approved, and Mr. Gillham said that he would make an offer on their property. He then distributed photos of the neighborhood. Director Maruthur questioned how this was relevant, and Mr. Gillham replied that there has been discussion about the value of the neighborhood. Director Maruthur said she did not believe that they are allowed to move in old trailers, and Mr. Gillham explained that is the mobile home he moved off the lot to replace with a new one. Director Maruthur commented those are the rules and regulations of the City, and he has no choice. Mr. Gillham stated that the value of the property has increased. He noted that he could have lived in it if he wanted to, but he wanted to improve Board of Directors Meeting 13 August 17, 2010 at 7:00 P.M. himself and improve his neighborhood. Director Maruthur stated if he moves in a new manufactured home, it has to be a certain year to meet the City’s code. Mr. Gillham replied that when he put his double wide in there, it had to meet all standards that the City required. Director Maruthur asked if he had to get a variance, and Mr. Gillham replied that he did – not for the mobile home but for the property. He noted that every home in that neighborhood was built pre-1984, and the newest building in that neighborhood was what he put in there, which he underpinned with brick. Mr. Marcus Constancio, 104 Stacy Street, stated that he is opposed to the overlay at 208 Stacy Street because property values would be negatively affected. He said they are already struggling in the economy to try to keep up their property values, and this mobile home overlay would also break up the continuity of their neighborhood. He stated there is one mobile home there that Mr. Gillham lives in now, which is a very nice home and a new one at the corner. He said if he had known about the one on the corner on Ridgeway, he would have been before the Board opposing that one also. He added the overlay will create an opportunity for their neighborhood and the quality of the area to be downgraded. However, he is not saying that is what is going to happen but would produce the opportunity for that to happen. He presented a petition from his neighbors with 27 or 28 signatures, which he asked to be returned; and these are from residents in District 6 and 1 where Ridgeway is the boundary line. He mentioned there are neighborhoods down the road toward Westinghouse in that area where there are gated communities that have built $300,000 and $500,000 homes within these gated communities. He advised that he plans to build a home where he bought the three acres. He stated that instead of families building nicer, larger homes, which add to the tax base, these families move to different areas if the City allows these overlays to come into contact with these areas that are continuous of 3, 4, 5, or 10 acre lots. He stressed that he did not want Stacy Street area to become another neighborhood that goes down hill. Director Maruthur said at the District Meeting, one of the issues that came out that the Police Chief heard is that people will call the police; but it is not on a record because they do not get the officer’s number, or there is not an arrest. She questioned how many times within the last year that Mr. Constancio or his neighbors have called the Police from concerns. Mr. Constancio said he discussed this a couple of times with Mr. Fisher, who is at home while he is at work. However, he has called them at least two times. He reported there was a car accident at the corner last year, and Mr. Joe Fisher called them, and they showed up and cleaned it up. He said he did see an arrest in front of his house on Sunday night and heard the police car come by and did see several sheriff cars there and a tow truck. He explained that because he does not Board of Directors Meeting 14 August 17, 2010 at 7:00 P.M. come out of his house does not mean that he does not see what is going on. Director Maruthur asked if there were many times that he had concerns and saw a lot of activity at night where he did not place phone calls, but he watched. Mr. Constancio said that he did. Director Maruthur pointed out that is what she is getting at because he does not know what to do. Mr. Constancio commented that it is frightening because he does not know if he goes out there and confronts them, if there is going to be a gun or knife or fight. Director Maruthur noted they are nestled in a wooded area that is not well-lit and is conducive for criminal activity should such an element move in. Mr. Constancio said there are cars that pull in there and think they can do whatever they want, but he is not sure where that element comes from. He stressed that he did not want mobile homes in his neighborhood. Ms. Renee Constancio, 104 Stacy, said that she is opposed to the Manufactured Home Overlay and does not believe there has been any misrepresentation of the facts at any of the Planning Commission meetings or at the Board Meetings in the past. She pointed out the current city codes for their neighborhood are they are rural residential and require Mr. Gillham to include additional adjacent acreage in his overlay request to cover the minimum requirements needed for his application. However, by doing so, he changed the whole possibility of the outcome of these proceedings. She said she understands there are currently structures on some of these lots, including Mr. Gillham’s personal home. Of the others, one is a vacant lot (the one Mr. Gillham says he wants to put the mobile home on), one is currently a rental that is occupied, and two others are vacant and uninhabitable in their current condition. She said if the Board were to consider this overlay, she could see no reason that would keep the petitioners from bulldozing those other two structures and replacing them with manufactured homes. She said had they received notification of the one they are referring back to that was approved, they would have been here to oppose it. However, they did not receive notification because they are not within 200 feet. She said regarding the people who signed this petition, this will be a very significant change and will adversely affect their neighborhood. She pointed out if an area within an established community can be overlayed in one part of the City, then it can happen in another part; and no one will trust investing their money in anything but a gated community. She stated approval would only cast doubt about the judgment of the Zoning and Planning Board and downgrade a settled community and cast suspicion on why they would do that and completely nullify the judgment of those people who set the R-1 zoning to begin with. She stressed that the people in the community do not want this approved. She mentioned Mr. Gillham has pictures that he provided the Board in regard to property conditions. She then presented pictures of Mr. Gillham’s personal residence and noted these pictures were taken prior to the June 20 meeting. Board of Directors Meeting 15 August 17, 2010 at 7:00 P.M.  Director Maruthur said that what Ms. Constancio said is true, and she went out there and remembers what she saw in the yard, which was not very attractive. She noted that she knew that Ms. Constancio did not want to show these pictures. Ms. Constancio said that they have spent a lot of money and time having house plans drawn up for about a 3,000 square foot home that they wanted to build on their property. She said had it not been for the downturn in the economy, they would have already had the house built. Director Maruthur said that she wanted it noted for the record there is not a resident who is asking for this. She stated every single resident here or that signed or that lives in the area is asking that the Board not approve this appeal; and it is the will of the people. She stressed that the Board is their only line of defense, and it is up to the Board to protect them. She mentioned that this is an election year, and many people realize that people are tired of being ignored. She stated should an overlay go into this area and people leave it, the individual lodging the appeal would be glad to buy more property. She mentioned that she considers Mr. C. W. Gillham her friend regardless of what happens. She said that she knows him and has done business with him for many years. She advised that Mr. Gillham does not live in this area, and it is the will of this neighborhood that the Board deny this appeal. She said she is going to vote “no” because it is not the will of the people who live in this neighborhood. Director Keheley stated that she drove out to this area and saw the homes and the beautiful landscape. She noted it is a pretty area, and she looks forward to the future of this area. She expressed concern that this street is fragile, and there is such a mix on the street. She applauded those who have improved and taken care of their home site. She said the Board should look long and hard about new manufactured home overlays. She questioned the long-range impact and what this area will look like 5, 10 or 20 years in the future. She pointed out there is no guarantee in the future these people will own these homes or manufactured homes, and someday they could be sold. She noted it is unknown what the new owner will do with these properties. She urged caution. Director Daniel pointed out the issue of law enforcement people is repeatedly mentioned, but he did not think that was the issue. He reported that he calls the Police from his house regularly and lives in a comfortable home and just called them Sunday afternoon. He said there are things that happen in everyone’s neighborhood, and it is the times and is a reality. He noted there was a couple that bought their lot and before they bought that lot and looked at this property, there was a manufactured home Board of Directors Meeting 16 August 17, 2010 at 7:00 P.M. already there. However, they chose to buy the property knowing that the manufactured home was there, yet they want to deny four more manufactured homes (one per acre). He added an acre of property is an adequate size piece of property, and there are very few people inside the City limits who have a house on an acre. He said if lighting is the problem, they can get more lighting if that is going to help the security. He mentioned that he looked at those who signed the petition, and the reason they did not receive a letter is because some of them live on Circle Drive, Park Avenue, and most of them live out of that 200-foot area. He said he has seen every kind of home come and go, and mobile homes come and go in areas all over the City. He added that he bought a condo on the lake a few years ago; and just after turning into the area, there was a mobile home, but he purchased the condo knowing the mobile home was there. He pointed out he cannot judge who lives in what area, what size house, or the value of that home but judges people by merit and who they are. He said if somebody buys a piece of property and puts in a mobile home and plan to live there, that is all they could do or maybe that is all they wanted. He stated he cannot criticize them for that, and he cannot go back and criticize the Planning Commission or Planning Director if it were changed. He urged the Board to use caution also and think about all the people. Ms. Constancio stated when they bought the property, they knew the mobile home was there, but the codes and the time and the enforcement was “grandfathered” in; and there was nothing they could do about it. She said had she known that they could put five in and bulldoze these other vacant, dilapidated houses with the possibility of putting mobile homes in, she would not have bought the property and done the renovating and would not have spent the money on the plans. However, there one was there; and she wanted the three acres and wanted inside the city limits. Also, she and her husband wanted to be in a convenient location to operate their business. She stated she did not have a problem with the nice, double-wide mobile home but does not want any more, which is the issue. Director Maruthur commented this is a large area and apparently there are not that many residents in 200 feet. She noted this is called Rural Residential, which means the people do have a large quantity of land. She stressed that the residents in the neighborhood are urging the Board not to approve the change in this rural residential area; and the Board has to respect the will of the people. Director Jones mentioned that Director Maruthur had said the City is liable in court. Director Maruthur explained what she said was anytime there is an appeal, it can be taken to court. Therefore, no matter what the Board does, it is the last line of defense. Board of Directors Meeting 17 August 17, 2010 at 7:00 P.M.  Mr. C. W. Gillham, 215 Carpenter Dam Road, said that he has known Director Maruthur for several years. He explained in 1984 he bought this piece of property, which had a mobile home on it. He advised that Joe Fisher’s dad was there bidding against him, but he outbid Mr. Fisher. He pointed out if he were going to build a $250,000 home, at that time, with the yard full of vehicles and logging equipment, he would not put a $250,000 home on Stacy Lane. He commented he would not have put his son’s double wide the way it looked in 1984. He said it has improved some; but if they had driven down Cones Road, it might have changed their mind in buying the three acres at the end of Stacy Lane. He added it is not the most attractive sight going down Cones Road, and he doubts if there will ever be a $250,000 house built on that three acres. Mr. Fisher explained that the equipment on his property is the equipment he uses to make a living. Mayor Bush then called for a vote on the motion to adopt; and upon roll call, the following voted “aye”: Directors Jones, McCabe, Daniel, and Bush, total 4. Voting “no”: Directors Maruthur and Keheley, total 2. Absent and not voting: Director Ramick; motion carried. Whereupon the ordinance was declared passed. Director McCabe commented in regard to department heads coming forward and offering a statement of fact based upon the rules and regulations which govern the City, he believes that department heads should be able to come forward and speak directly to the Board without any comment regarding building a resume. He apologized for the comment made earlier, which was not made by him, and said he did not believe that any department head or employee should come up and do their job and have a subtle comment that was just made. As far as the seven Directors, he mentioned they are up for election every four years and sometimes people are recalled. 6 Item No. 20-217 of Public Safety Report A motion was made by Director Jones, duly seconded by Director Daniel, that Item No. 20-217 of the Public Safety Report be approved. Upon discussion, Mr. Steve Mallett, Deputy City Manager for Public Works and Utilities, advised this is a request for painting of parking space identification lines in front of a small Mexican food restaurant at Park Avenue by the Tower Motel; and customers do not know they can park there. He stated that staff findings were there Board of Directors Meeting 18 August 17, 2010 at 7:00 P.M. are currently no parking spaces marked on Park Avenue, and this area is consistent with all other areas outside the downtown location. He said it is understood that parking is allowed unless otherwise posted, and parking delineation is only considered when parking congestion is present. However, that is not the case in this situation. He mentioned that several visits have been made to the site, and there have been some cars parked and at other times there were numerous cars; and other times just a few. However, cars were parked in front of the business at the times when several of the staff members drove by. He advised that it is staff recommendation not to do that in order to remain consistent with all other areas outside the downtown location. Director Keheley stated it looks very likely if the City grants something for this one specific business, it is opening the door for the same thing for all the other businesses on Park Avenue. Mr. Mallett replied that it would and is concerned that the City would set that precedent for other areas. He stated that any markings the City puts down, the City has to maintain. He pointed out at the present time, the Traffic Department is short-handed with its seven-person crew. He said that two or three small marks would not make any difference; but it would open the door for others; and over time, it would make a difference. Director Keheley asked if they can have a different type of sign out front or do their own to help their business. Mr. Mallett replied that it is actually the State Highway so they would have to get permission from the State Highway Department. He noted they would make a request to the State Highway Department that it be done by said department and then maybe they would be responsible for maintaining them. He mentioned that currently, the City maintains all the striping and marking parking-wise on Central Avenue. Therefore, he would assume they would probably defer to the City to maintain that and to install them. Director Keheley asked if there was any way to have a small sign, marquee, or a sandwich board, and Mr. Mallett replied that it is outside the CBID. Therefore, he is not sure what the sign regulations would allow them to do. Director Keheley said that she was trying to figure out a way the City might be able to help this business without opening the flood gates for the whole Park Avenue. Mr. Mallett said that he is not aware of anything that the City has done, but he can check and see what other cities have done. Director Maruthur commented in the Park/Whittington Neighborhood Plan, there is an anchor with the Math and Science School and the redevelopment of the Majestic Hotel. She said the City’s goal is to be an extension of the downtown area so it would be consistent according to the Neighborhood Plan. She commented the individual who made the request was willing to provide from his restaurant staff assistance, paint, etc. Board of Directors Meeting 19 August 17, 2010 at 7:00 P.M. and anything to make this happen. She added if a sandwich board is used, it is blocked by a couple of cars; and the only way people would know it is okay to park there would be to have the lines as in the other part of downtown. She pointed out the end of the district is by the gorge or the end of Ramble, and that is where the Neighborhood Plan was done. She stated the owner of the restaurant thought the City was going to be putting trees there, and he is willing to use his staff to assist the City. She stressed these are residents who are trying to help develop the Park Avenue area; and this is a “mom and pop” operation; however, they do own the entire center. Director Keheley asked if there was any way the Public Safety Committee would go back and look at this and get some options. Mr. Mallett said if the Board defers it back to Public Safety, the Committee can look at some other alternatives. He noted every time Public Safety drove by, there were always people parked there; but there may be times when they were not. He said it seemed fairly obvious that they should know they could park there since there were cars parked there. He commented it was more of an issue that the Public Safety Committee did not really agree there was an issue at that location, but the Committee will see if it can find a way to make it more clear that they can park there. A motion was made by Director Keheley, duly seconded by Director Maruthur, to send it back to the Public Safety Committee and ask them to work on some options to help this business on Park Avenue; and upon roll call, the following voted “aye”: Directors Maruthur, Jones, Keheley, McCabe, and Daniel, total 5. Voting “no”: Mayor Bush. Absent and not voting: Director Ramick; motion unanimously carried. Mayor Bush stated that one of the things as Mayor that he tries to do is always listen and study what the staff says; but just because is not a good reason for him. Therefore, that is the reason he voted “no.” OTHER BUSINESS 20 Board of Directors Items for Discussion Director Maruthur stated that on the issue of the overlay that was considered, she is personally very disappointed that the will of the neighborhood was ignored and denied. She said that a comment was made about staff, and she has a large folder which had to do with an issue that was addressed years ago regarding the Arkansas School for Mathematics, Sciences and The Arts She noted these were staff members and had to do with permits, a CO, and there were people who refused to sign and left Board of Directors Meeting 20 August 17, 2010 at 7:00 P.M. the City because they felt very strongly that this was not in the interest of public safety or the right thing. She said that she has the record, and other people signed in place of them for them, and they left. She added that people can give their personal opinion on an issue and say they are just doing their job, but they can can have an opinion. She stressed that people are tired of being ignored, which came up repeatedly at her district meeting; and it had to do with neighborhoods, security and what they are looking for in a Police Chief. Director Jones announced that at Wade Street Park, on August 21, 11:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., there will be a “Back to School Bash,” which is a free-community event sponsored by local nonprofits. Activities include sack races, a talent show, basketball games, music, etc.; also, there will be free hamburgers. Director Jones commented that she understands everything that Director Maruthur said, but she believes there is a time and a place; and the Board needs to be more concerned about its staff. She stated there is a way to talk to people. Director Maruthur said that she thinks the Whittington Valley Association was very hurt when Director Jones said she would never vote for anything for them. Director Jones replied that she did. 21 City Manager’s Report City Manager Lance Hudnell gave the following report: 1. Compliments were received from citizens on Steve Steed and Clifford Wilkinson with the Lift Stations; Michael Foshee with Utilities; Duane Cosgrove with Utilities; Mary Neilson with Sister City Program; Max Sestili with Stormwater; and Nathan Neighbors, Recreation. 2. Mr. Greg Speas, Fleet Service Director, was recognized in a national publication for his efforts with regard to online auction sales that he instituted. 3. There are two vacant positions on the Transportation Advisory Committee from all Board Districts. Board of Directors Meeting 21 August 17, 2010 at 7:00 P.M.  4. A Board listening session was held last Saturday by Director Maruthur, who has received many good comments on her meeting, which was the highest-attended. One more district (District 2) is remaining and will be held on Monday, at 6:30 p.m., at the Police Department. 5. The next agenda meeting and work session will be held on Wednesday, September 1 starting at 3:30 p.m. with the work session following. 6. He will be attending the AML Planning meeting in Mt. Home on Thursday, Friday, and part of the day Saturday and will be on vacation on Monday. 7. He said that he has the utmost respect for Director Maruthur, but this did have the tone of integrity; and in the future, he would ask that any Director address it to him and not to the department head. 22 ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting adjourned at 8:40 p.m., to meet again on Tuesday, September 7, 2010, at 7:00 p.m. ATTEST: _____________________ APPROVED:__________________ Lance Spicer, City Clerk Mike Bush, Mayor Board of Directors Meeting 22 August 17, 2010 at 7:00 P.M.