HomeMy WebLinkAbout1964-02-11 Minutes53
The Fayetteville City Planning Commission met in a postponed Annual Regular meeting
at 00 P.m. on Tuesdays February U, 1964, in the City Council Chambers in the City
Administration Building* (This postponed meeting was to have been hold Tuesday,,
February 4. 1964, at 00 p*mo A quorum could not be present; therefore the meeting
was canceled*)
Members present: J. F. Palmer, Suzanne Lighton, Ernest Jacks, Allan Gilbert, Jr.,
Wade Fincher, Bryan Walker and Clark McClinton. Others present: Harold E.
Lieberenz, City Building Inspector; Hugh Dill; James Cypert; W. C. Rogers; Clyde
McClintock; H. Co Agee; Be L. Lewis,* Clifford Ward and two other interested parties.
Members absent: Bill Dalton and Henry Shreve,
J. F. Palmer, Chairman, called the meeting to order. Mr. Palmer welcomed the new
members to the Planning Commission: Ernest Jacks, Allan Gilbert, Jr.; and Wade
Fincher.
The minutes of December 3, 1963, were approved as written and mailed to the members
prior to this meeting.
J. F. Palmer reported that the neat item on the agenda was to give consideration to
and possibly take action on two rezoning petitions: The petition for rezoning of
Hugh W. Dill and Kathryn Dill and the petition for rezoning of W. C. Rogers and
Cleada Rogers. A brief summary of the public hearing was given for the benefit of
• those who did not attend the public hearing.
CommissionSuzanne Lighton moved that the Planning
becausethe petition of Hugh We and Kathryn Dill, husband and wife, be approved and
of the need for more multiewfamily residential areas.. the real estate described as
Fairgroundlots 6. 7 and 8 of Block I of the Addition to the City of Fayetteville,
voting,Arkansas, be rezoned from Rrn2 Two Family Residential District to Rw3 MultionFamily
Residential District. The motion was seconded by Clark McClinton. Before
Eftest Jacks.questioned the procedure of the petitions for rezoning. He was interested
in how much, if any,, real estate other than that real estate petitioned could be reaw
The Chairman explained that after a public
petitionthe property in the
RESCLDTION PC 144
'U'TtEAS, the City Planning Commission hold a public hearing .. the rezoning
WHEREAS,petition of He We Dill and Kathryn Dill,, husband and wife,, on Tuesday,, January 28,,
1960 and
..P. recommendation made. E
OF Y.ARKANSAS:
:59
SECTION 1. That the petition of H. W. Dill and Kathryn Dill for the
• rezoning from R-2 Two Fami3p Residential District to i=3 Multi -Family Residential
District of iota 6, 7 and 8 of Block 1 in the Fairground Addition to the City of
Fayetteville, Arkansas, be granted.
1964.
For the benefit of all present, Harold E. Lieberenz, City Building Inspector,
pointed out several areas which had been rezoned for the purpose of extending the
C-2 Thoroughfare Commercial Zone along Highway 71 North. These rezonings and
proposed rezonings were mentioned: Latrecchia, Cates and House; Cliff Mills;
L. M. McOoodwin; Ralph Brophy and the Holiday Inn. .The petitioners who requested
the orange in zoning felt that the 300 feet was not adequate for commercial use.
James Cypert, attorney for W. C. Rogers, spoke. Mr. Cypert said that Mr. Rogers
desired the depth of the C-2 zone as petitioned for proper commercial development.
Mr.Cypert commented on the feelings of the property owners. He said that at the
• public hearing the objecting residential property owners agreed that only the area
west of Lee Street might be rezoned; it was their opinion that further rezoning would
depreciate their property. Mr. Cypert said he had contacted Mr. Agee who said he
and the other property owners felt that nothing short of their proposal would be
agreeable; therefore Mr. Cypert said a meeting had not been held.
For the benefit of the property owners in the Maplecreat Addition Mr. Cypert said
that W. C. Rogers had agreed to leave zoned Rt1B Single Family Residential District
for the purpose of a buffer zone a strip of land along the south side of Harold
Street between Lee Street and the proposed north -south street shown on the draw"
ging Mr. Rogers submitted. This buffer zone would commence at the eastern most
'boundary of that real estate petitioned for rezoning thence extend south 140 feet,
thence west to Lee Street, thence north 140 feet and thence east to the point of
beginning.
Mr. Cypert pointed out thatMr. Roger
adjacent to the Stubblefield Addition
will be developed for residential use
• himself; therefore if the commercial
not consider the rezoning.
Mr. Cypert said it was essential that the depth of the C-2 Zone requested be main-
tained; to restrict the depth would increase problems. His client had recognized
• the problems of the Maplecrest property owners and had provided a buffer zone
which would be located between Lee Street and the eastern most boundary of the area
petitioned for rezoning.
Suzanne Lighton inquired if the 60 foot east -'seat street shown on the submitted plan
as connecting U. S. Highway 71 with the Missouri Road would definitely be con—
structed and if so would it be as shown. Mr. Rogers said he was waiting to learn if
the area in question would be rezoned. The street would be dedicated and immediate
construction begun upon the approval of the zoning change even if the subdivision
were not started to the south. .
When Suzanne Lighton inquired about the size of lots in the buffer zone created for
the benefit of the Maplecrest Addition, Mr. Cypert said that he had checked the
zoning ordinance for the lot size and that the lots conformed to the zoning ordinance.
Mr. He Co. Agee who spoke for the Maplecrest Addition and the Stubblefield Addition
petitioners at the public hearing of January 28 also spoke for them at this meeting.
Mr. Agee reminded the Planning Commission that both subdivisions had been set back
off Highway 71 far enough to make an allowance for the commercial zone.
whetherIn reply to a comment made by James Cypert regarding Mrs Rogers doing danage to
his own property; Mr. Agee said that there were questions as to
wouldYAro Rogers' interests ._ devaluated as there is a for sale sign ..
mentioned the prope
Mr. Agee said he and the other interested parties and property owners were worried
about any future buyers. The parsonage being used as a church was also
by Mr. Agee (see minutes of the public hearing of JamvLry 28, 1964)
Cliff ord Ward, 1403 Stubblefield Road, arrived at the meting*
Mr. Be L. Lewis, Jr., 213 County Road (or Harold Street) said the proposed north—
south street as shown on the drawing presented by W. C. Rogers intersected Harold
Street in front of his house. Mr. Lewis said the traffic would be very dangerous
to his and his neighbors' children and the car lights at night would shine
directly into his house. In general the street location would devaluate his property.
Allan Gilbert inquired why the C-2 zone could not go east from the east line of
U. S. Highway 71 approximately 450 feet and the remainder of the property be
petitioned to•be rezoned to C-1. Mr. Cypert, attorney, replied that Mr. Rogers did
not want any problems to arise as to the businesses. .He pointed out that some
businesses which were permitted in the C-2 zone were not permitted in the C-1 zone.
Complications could airse if a building had to be abruptly stopped because the
type of business would not'be permitted in the C-1 zone.
Clyde McClintock asked about entrances to the buildings. He said with such a large
area being rezoned several streets could be constructed within the area and the
various commercial buildings face different directions.
Mr. W. C. Rogers said that such a layout as mentioned by Clyde McClintock would not
be feasible. The reason for the depth of the zone was because of the size of floor
space which would be needed. He said he had talked in terms of 800 to 12,000 square
feet of floor space to a couple of businesses.
• Suzanne Lighton mentioned again the possibility of restrictive covenants upon the
property as Has discussed at the public hearing of January 28. Mr. Agee reported
• he had checked into the covenants and nothing could be binding. He pointed out that
covenants in the Maplecrest Addition would not permit houses or buildings to be
moved in. A house Has moved into the addition and nothing Has done about it.
Suzanne Lighton told Mr. Agee that it was up to the property owners within the
subdivision to see that the covenants were enforced.
Clyde McClintock said the residential buffer zone south of the Maplecrest Addition
might never be developed. If not, it would remain a weed patch. Mr. McClintock said
he felt it was a matter of the shopping center coming to a residential area and not
a residential area going to a shopping center. He inquired in the 90% of signatures
of the residents of the two subdivisions counted in the Planning Commissionts
decision. J. F. Palmer said very definitely. Mr. Palmer said all signatures, etce
were considered.
Ernest Jacks asked if the Planning Commissionts policy was to abandon the 300
discussionco=iercial strip along the highway, He also wondered if the Planning Commissic:1
were aware that it was fostering a traffic problem should the area be rezoned.
short
H# C.'Agee thanked the Planning Commission for the time given to the residents of
the NaplecreSt Addition and the Stubblefield Addition. Jams Cypert, in behalf of
his client and himself also expressed his thanks.
Clark McClinton moved that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council
that the petition of W. C. Rogers and Cleada Rogers, husband and wife, be approved
provided that the residential buffer zone, a strip of land which would remain zoned
R=lB Single Family Residential District and which is located along the south side
• of Harold Street commencing at a point at the eastern most boundary of that real
estate petitioned for rezoning, extending thence south 140 feet, thence west to
Lee Street, thence north 140 feet and thence east to the point of beginning be
created. With the approval of Clark McClinton the motion was amended by Suzanne
Lighton to read that the petition be approved provided that the residential buffer
zone, a strip of land which would remain zoned Rr1B Single Family Residential
District and which is located along the south side of Harold Street commencing at
a point at the eastern most boundary of that real estate petitioned for rezoning,
extending thence south 140 feet, thence west to Lee Street, thence north 140 feet and
thence east to the point of beginning be created; and provided the proposed:' 60 foot
east�wsst street shown on the submitted plat as connecting U. S. Highway 71 with the
Old Missouri Road be dedicated to the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas. The notion
was seconded by Suzanne Lighton. Upon roll call the following vote was recorded:
Lighton, Fincher and McClinton "AyeTM; Gilbert and Jacks "Nay." There being three
"Ayes".and two "Nays" the chairman declared the motion had carried.
Bryan Walker left the meeting before any action was taken upon the petition of
W. C.,Rogers and Cleada Rogers.
RESOLUTION PC 2-64
• WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the City Planning Commission on
Tuesday, January 28, 1964, on the petition of W. C. Rogers and Cleada Rogers,
husband and wife, for the rezoning from R -1B " 0-1 to C-2 of real estate
east off U. S. Highway 71 and south of Harold Street; and
WHEREAS,. ., .:
the Planning Commission made its reconmendation to the City Council.
NOWP THEREFOREaEE IT RESOLVED Br THEPLANNING i THE CITY
SECTION 1. That the rezoning petition of W. C. Rogers and Cleada Rogers be
granted provided that a strip of real estate along the south side of Harold Street
and east of Lee Street remain zoned R -1B Single Family Residential District for the
purpose of serving as a buffer zone; and
SECTION 2. That upon approval of the petition of W. C. Rogers and Cleada
Rogers that the proposed sixty (60) foot east -west street connecting the Old
Missouri Road and U. S. Highway 71 -be dedicated to the City.of Fayetteville,
Arkansas, for street purposes.
RalphChairman Palmer reported that due to the time the officers of the Planning Comor
mission'would be elected at a later meeting,
A public hearing date was set for March 10, 1964, on the rezoning petition of
Do Brophy for the zoning change of property lying in an area between Township
Road and North College Avenue and on the rezoning petition of the property owners
and adjacent property owners of lots 1 through 12 of Park Village Addition to the
City of Fayetteville, Arkansas,
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 5:30 p.m.
•