President of Council Marjorie Harlow called Council to order on
November 5, 2008, at 7:00 p.m.
The governmental body and those in attendance recited the pledge of
allegiance.
Mrs. McNear took roll call. Present were Council members Danbury,
Diehl, Galster, Squires, Vanover, Wilson and Harlow.
The minutes of October 15, 2008 were approved with seven affirmative
votes.
COMMUNICATIONS
Mrs. McNear read a thank you letter from Larry Radel. I want to
thank you all for giving me that proclamation and Larry Radel day from the City of
Springdale. That night of October 15, 2008 will always be very special and dear to me. I
will keep it in my heart forever. You have made me feel very special for fighting and
serving the greatest country in the world. Thanks again. Im proud to say Im
living in the City of Springdale. Semper Fi.
Mrs. McNear said the second letter is from OKI stating that my term on
the board expires January 8, 2009 and they are looking for an appointment for next year.
Mrs. McNear agreed to do it again.
COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE
- none
ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS
-
none
OLD BUSINESS
-
none
PLANNING COMMISSION DISCUSSION
Mrs. Harlow said we have two letters from Planning Commission dated
October 29, 2008. The first letter is a recommend proposal for the Tri-County Retail
Revitalization Plan. It states that at their meeting of October 14, 2008 the Planning
Commission voted unanimously to recommend that City Council consider requesting a proposal
from McBride, Dale, Clarion Firm for a revitalization plan for the Tri-County retail
district. The second letter is in regard for a proposal for an updated Zoning Code.
Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend that City Council consider requesting a
proposal from McBride, Dale, Clarion Firm for updating the Zoning Code for the City of
Springdale.
Mayor Webster said I received this letter Thursday. I was a little
concerned because it sounded like what Planning Commission was requesting was very similar
to what weve been doing, although what we have been doing is more of a global vision
than actual study. So I immediately called Mr. Butrum and we talked it through a little
bit. I guess there was some miscommunications on the intent of the letter. I though there
was enough difference of opinion that its important that we all get on the same
page. I asked Mr. Butrum if he and Mr. Okum could attend the meeting tonight. I would like
Council to hear firsthand from them what their concerns are. Some of you were there last
Thursday to hear the final presentation on the study. It wasnt a whole lot different
from what Council heard back in April when KKG gave a presentation. Our recommendation on
the plan at this point is that Council adopt that as a vision of what wed like to
see there. Its not a detail retail study plan and its totally different than
the SR 4 Corridor Plan was about as far as dictating architectural, etc. We see the next
step is for Council to adopt that by ordinance or resolution and then Ive asked Jeff
Tulloch to convene with KKG, Anne McBride and Bill McErlane to come up with a next step
plan. In light of that Jeff has to put together a list of things they see as being
necessary. Id like to share that with Tony and Dave. Jeff thinks they can turn this
around in the next thirty days. If you would want to hold off adopting the study until
then, thats fine too.
Jeff Tulloch, Economic Development Director, said there is a step here.
Weve done a Comprehensive Strategic Plan that involves ten components that are
discreet kinds of things that the plan calls for us to address. You go from the Strategic
Plan to the next steps but they themselves require definition. For example, under Land Use
Planning and Zoning, which is one of the elements that will be addressed, we want to get
the input of KKG and Anne McBride to see what kinds of things there are that we need to do
immediately and long term to help facilitate the Strategic Plan. The short term things are
what do we do with new development that is being proposed, say at the intersection of
Kemper and SR 747? Planning Commission wants some direction as to whats going on
there. Another item would be our current Land Use Plan which probably requires updating.
There are things in the Strategic Plan that say that this areas ought to be multi-use,
office, mid rise residential, retail and even hotel, whereas the current Land Use Plan
calls for it as regional retail. We need to modify that. It goes beyond that into overlay
districts, PUDs, etc. The intent of the Strategic Plan wasnt to identify all those
steps. It was to identify those things as issues. Now we need to address and identify the
next steps and proceed with how we implement those. Thats just one item. There are
financing issues, tax increment financing, BID (Business Improvement District) which could
be a very important tool for implementation of the plan. Basically that involves an
additional assessment of the properties that exist within the retail district. It creates
a revenue stream to fund an entity that would be responsible for the promotion and
marketing of the retail district. We are addressing next steps that we intend to
accomplish within thirty days, come back to Administration and then to Council to identify
needs that we have in respect to implementation.
Mr. Osborn said when Jeff refers to the Land Use Plan he is not talking
about the Zoning Code. He is talking about the Comprehensive Plan. We all intuitively feel
that one of the first things that ought to happen is to modify the Comprehensive Plan to
reflect these recommendations. Leading up to that we would like our planners to give us a
more specific recommendation on specific steps we should take and how we should follow
those. Ultimately, we will solicit a proposal from Anne McBrides group to modify the
Comprehensive Land Use Plan but on the other hand, I think it would be premature to rush
in and start altering zoning classifications in those areas right now because this is a
dynamic plan, the intention which is to bring back a major redevelopment of almost 400
acres of land, very high priced land. Thats not going to happen by us trying to
dictate up front, this is how its going to happen because we are going to zone it
this way. We need to leave flexibility in the plan so we can attract major investors to
come in and say, within the framework of what you envision, this is how we see it being
built and being built in a way that is profitable to the private sector. Where is all the
money going to come from to do all of this? Its no coming out of the Citys
coffers; its coming from the private sector. So we have to have some type of outline
in place that would suggest what we would be willing to negotiate. Then we have to sit
down with that private sector group and have a give and take type exchange until we both
reach agreement on plan that we feel is beneficial to the community and they see profit
from their side. Land use is going to be on the front of this but in a more overreaching
sense and not specific.
Mayor Webster said thats the way we see the next steps. Having
shared that with you Id like to ask Dave and Tony how that doesnt fit with
what they are challenged with.
Mr. Butrum stated it does fit. The plan we are talking about in the
letter is really a little p, not big P. Its more of a general case of things that we
can do and put in place so that we have tools as we have applicants coming forth. We
already have applicants that are at ground zero of the revitalization district at SR 747
and Kemper with Thompson Thrift. If there are any tools that can be fast tracked that
gives us something to look at objectively so that when we render decisions like for this
applicant here now, and there are rumors to possible changes in development, when
were making decisions, we dont want those to be arbitrary. We want them to be
enforceable. We want to have some backbone to them. We wanted something in place that gave
us some guidelines and that sounds like thats the direction it is going. I think
there is an opportunity to impact the architectural features on the key corners right away
with the proposed development that Thompson Thrift is doing. Thats an area that
perhaps could be fast tracked. We werent looking to get more involved in the plan.
Its just where are opportunities to put things in place that would help us with
decisions.
Mr. Okum said I agree. I was here Thursday and Im extremely
excited about the proposal and the work that has gone into the plan. We can only hope that
at least part of those visions can come to be. At Planning Commission level we dont
want to be arbitrary. We want to be fair and we want to help them move to where this plan
and vision are. I didnt want Planning Commission to be put in a position that when a
proposal comes in that we are reacting and not being progressive. I think the
Comprehensive Land Use Plan is key. I think we are close to five years from the last time
it was updated so its a good time to look at it. I think Council acting on an
acceptance of the vision is critical to Planning Commission. It may not be in zoning
because I dont think the Zoning Code needs to be edited for that purpose. Its
too early for that but long term I believe it will require some changes. Another area
where Planning Commissions responsibility falls is the adoption of the Thoroughfare
Plan. There are some road elements that are on that vision. There is potential that there
might be a road there and when the developer wants to make a change or redevelop, at least
we have the tools so that we are fair. We are not trying to jump ahead of Council and the
Administration. Were just trying to get some direction.
Mr. Galster said I think it is important to remember when we started
the revitalization presentation we invited Planning and BZA. After that meeting everyone
was excited. There was thinking outside the box. A lot of things were set aside with an
understanding that we would need to be more flexible in order to make this kind of a
vision happen down the road. Planning Commission is asking what are we doing to start to
incorporate some of this into our thinking. Thats where it came up. We understood
the need to keep the revitalization plan separate from the Zoning Code. I agree with Mr.
Tulllochs points but there are three or four that I think are important to Planning
so how do we move forward to incorporate that so we are as equipped as we can be to deal
with any redevelopment that happens now, six months from now, or six years from now.
Mayor Webster said when someone wants to make an investment in the City
we try to welcome them with open arms but I think it is somewhat unfortunate that Thompson
Thrift happened when it did. The timing could not be worse. The first six months of this
year all we did was live with the GE project and this got put on the back burner. Had we
not been faced with that we would be way into this and would have had the tools enacted
that you need. With Councils concurrence we would like to not engage another firm.
Wed like to give Jeff another thirty days. I think we are going to be leaning on the
same resources for updating the Zoning Code as we are this and I think this is more
important before we do the Zoning Code.
Mr. Okum said if Council acts in the next thirty to forty-five days
that puts us two meetings away. There is a lot of importance and strength to Council
acting on a vision. That gives us something to work with at Planning Commission.
Mr. Tulloch said the presentation is substantially the same. I would
get a copy to Council members and then come in at the next meeting and request the
resolution.
Mr. Danbury asked where are we with the applicant?
Mr. Okum replied it is only a concept plan. I dont think we can
control the architectural elements at that sight anymore than whatve already
approved. They will be submitting a final plan in January.
Mr. Danbury asked if they already have something, wouldnt that
establish the standards?
Mr. Butrum responded that this is the danger or the positive depending
on what they come back with. There is the architecture of the building itself and then the
architecture of the feature that we would want to duplicate. We dont want that to be
ad hoc so that every corner looks different when it comes to those architectural features.
They proposed something that we did not comment on either way because we wanted to see
where the City is going. Things are happening rather quickly. They proposed two phases. We
are now talking three phases. One is the old BP, two is the Tiffany Glass building and
three would be incorporating Skyline and Ponderosa who still have ten year leases on their
sites.
Mr. Vanover said the initial concept was turned down because it only
involved the corner. Planning is not looking for a cookie cutter yet. We just want to know
where the stakes are. We need a defensible position we can barter from.
Mr. Osborn said the second item on the list is architectural standards.
We recognize that is something we need sooner rather than later. As to how we can
influence development in the interim, the consultant has pointed to the refurbished former
Penneys site as the style of architecture that he will be recommending. I dont
think its too late to have more influence on what the southeast corner looks like.
Jeff has been in contact with the owner, has tried to get the owner together with KKG to
bring the project closer to what weve seen occur at Tri-County Mall. What they are
proposing now is not that far off and wouldnt be a big cost item to modify further
to reflect what happened at Tri-County Mall.
Mr. Galster said the applicant has seen the vision and is excited about
it as is Fifth Third. Planning Commission took a lot of time to make sure the applicant
understood that this was a cornerstone development. We want them to understand how
important this property is to the overall picture and I think they do.
Mr. Diehl asked would it be beneficial to include Tony and Dave
involved in staff discussions?
Mayor Webster replied I think that would be premature. Lets let
them try to identify what resources we need in this first round. Later we would want
Planning Commissions involvement.
NEW BUSINESS
Mrs. McNear said we have a liquor license change of ownership for
Romanos Macaroni Grill. There were no objections.
Mrs. Harlow said we have board positions that are expiring and a couple
that have already expired. Mr. Bushs term on Charter Revision expires on 12/31/08.
Mr. Wilson, will you contact him and ask him if he wants to be reappointed? Mr.
Potts
position on Civil Service expires 12/31/08 and thats a Council appointment. The
Mayors appointments for Board of Health expire 12/31/08. Mr. Wetterer and Mr.
Kortaneks positions expired 5/31/08. The Volunteer Firefighters board appointments
are up for renewal on 12/31/08.
MEETINGS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
Board of Health
-
November 13
Planning Commission
-
November 11, 6:3 pm
Board of Zoning Appeals
-
November 18
Planning and BZA Training
-
November 11
Chamber of Commerce Business Expo
- November 6
Finance Committee
-
November 25
COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE - none
Mr. Danbury made a motion that Council go into executive session as a meeting of the whole
to discuss possible real estate acquisition. Mr. Vanover seconded. The motion passed with
seven affirmative votes.
Council went into executive session at 7:47 p.m.
Council reconvened at
UPDATE ON LEGISLATION STILL IN DEVELOPMENT - none
RECAP OF LEGISLATIVE ITEMS REQUESTED
Council adjourned at p.m.
Respectfully
submitted,
Kathy
McNear
Clerk
of Council/Finance Director
Minutes Approved:
Marjorie Harlow, President of Council
__________________________, 2008