HomeMy WebLinkAbout1969-05-06 MinutesMINUTES OF A PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
• The Planning Commission met at 4:00 p.m. on Tuesday, May 6,
1969, in the Board of Directors Room of the City Adminis-
tration Building, Fayetteville, Arkansas,
Members Present: Clark McClinton, Ernest Jacks, Wade
Fincher, Allan Gilbert, Roy Clinton,
Byron Boyd, Morton Gitelman, Walter
Brown.
Members Absent: James Mashburn,
Others Present: Harold Lieberenz, Wesley M. Howe, Jim
Vizzier, Walter Nibblock, Bob Mayes.
The meeting was called to order by the chairman Clark
McClinton.
The first item of business was the case of Mrs. Delorah
Pilcher and the Red Arrow Land Company which was tabled at
the April 15, 1969 meeting.
Roy Clinton made a motion to approve the petition of the
Red Arrow Land Company and Mrs. Delorah Pilcher as amended
to rezone lots 1, 2, 3, of Block 1 of Red Arrow Subdivision
#2 and the north three hundred (300) feet of lots 11, 12 of
Cornelious Addition from R-2, Two Family Residential District
• to C-1, Neighborhood Commercial District. Mr. Clinton made
the motion on the grounds that in his opinion the topography
of the land would be inconsistent with residential usage.
The motion%was seconded by Wade Fincher,
Ernest Jacks stated that he would like to know about the
controlled access on Highway 16 By -Pass.
Morton Gitelman said that the question of traffic there is
important and that all members were concerned about this at
the April 15, 1969 meeting.
Chairman McClinton asked if the Planning Commission could
limit the entrance access on Highway 16.
Jim Vizzier said that the owner would probably want an entrance
and an exit.
After some discussion, it was decided by the Planning Commission
that they could not pass an ordinance at present to control
the number of access points onto the Highway 16 By -Pass.
An agreement was made by Walter Nibblock, attorney for the
petitioner, and the Planning Commission that the land would
not be developed for commercial use until the Planning
Commission could draw up an ordinance limiting the number
of access points on the Highway 16 By -Pass
- 20- 69
Delorah Pilcher
Red Arrow Land ComparXy
- 2 -
The motion was then voted on and passed unanimously.
• % RESOLUTION PC 21-69
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the Planning Commission,
Tuesday, April 15, 1969, fifteen (15) days after a sign was
erected on the property and after a notice was published in'..the
Northwest Arkansas Times, a newspaper of general circulation; and
WHEREAS, after the hearing the Planning Commission voted to
table the rezoning petition of the Red Arrow Land Company and
Mrs. Delorah Pilcher requesting rezoning from R-2, Two Family
Residential District to C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial District of
the property described as follows.
Lots 1, 2, and 3. Block 1, Red Arrow Subdivision #2
Lots 11 and 12 Cornelious Addition to the City of
Fayetteville as per plats on file in the Office of
the Circuit Clerk and Ex -Officio Recorder for Wash-
ington County, Arkansas.
WHEREAS, at a meeting on May 6, 1969, the petition was
resubmitted to the Planning Commission for consideration, and
the Planning Commission voted to make a recommendation to the
Board of Directors on the rezoning petition of the Red Arrow
Land Company and Mrs. Delorah Pilcher,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RECOMMENDED BY THE CITY PLANNING
•COMMISSION TO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE,
ARKANSAS,
SECTION 1. That the petition requesting the rezoning of the
property described above, from R-2, Two Family Residential District
to C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial District, be denied.
SECTION 2. That an ordinance be adopted for the purpose
of rezoning from R-2, Two Family Residential District to C-1,
Neighborhood Commercial District the property described as
follows:
Lots 1, 2, and 3, Block 1, Red Arrow Subdivision #2
and the north three hundred (300) feet of Lots 11
and 12 in the Cornelious Addition to the City of
Fayetteville as per plats on file int he Office of
the Circuit Clerk and Ex -Officio Recorder for Wash-
ington County, Arkansas.
SECTION 3. That the above described property be rezoned
from R-2, Two Family Residential District to C-1, Neighborhood
Commercial District,
PASSED AND APPROVED this 6 day of May , 1969.
• APPROVED:
CLARK McCLINTON, CHAIRMAN
• • ••• •• •• ••• •• ••••• •••• ••• • • • ••• ••• • • • •••• • • • •••• • •••
-3 -
The next item on the agenda was action on the closing of an McIlrov Bank
alley petitioned by the Mcllroy Bank and the Industrial Industrial Finance Compar�y
Finance Company.
Chairman McClinton stated that action could not be taken on
the closing of this alley until the signatures of the adjacent
property owners are obtained by the petitioners.
The next two items on the agenda, action on the final plat of Parkwood Subdivision
the Parkwood Subdivision and action on the final plat of the Phase II Winwood Estates
Phase II Winwood Estates could not be discussed because the
proper plans had not been submitted to the City Engineer by
the petitioner.
Next on the agenda was the review of a development plat of
the proposed Center Brook Subdivision as submitted by Kelley
Brothers Lumber Company,
Roy Clinton asked if Center Brook Subdivision has open access
to the U. S. 71 By -Pass on the southeast corner.
Jim Vizzier said that he thinks they do have open access there.
He stated that they want to use this access point instead of
building a service road.
Walter Brown made a motion that the Center Brook Subdivision
plat be tabled to require the petitioner to come in with a
. more detailed plat in the area where the property comes in
on the Highway 71 By -Pass,
Wesley M. Howe, City Manager, stated that he did not think
that the sketch of this subdivision gave enough information
for the Planning Commission.
Roy Clinton stated that he does not think it is reasonable to
ask Kelley Brothers Lumber Company to build a service road
across Skull Creek. He said that he thinks the Planning
Commission should ask them to build on the Highway Department
right of way.
The motion made by Walter Brown was seconded by Byron Boyd and
passed unanimously.
Mr. Byron Boyd had to leave the meeting at thisitime.
Next on the agenda was a discussion with Wesley M. Howe, City
Manager, on "Land Use Goals and Plans.',
Mr. Howe stated that this statement was also submitted to
the City Board of Directors. Mr. Howe also said that this
statement is an effort to put into writing what planning
and land use controls are all about.
• Walter Brown asked what the law is on nonconforming uses.
Center Brook Subdivision
-4 -
Mr. Vizzier, City Planning Consultant, stated that the theory
is that the nonconforming use of a building or land was started
•before the ordinances were passed and to restrict expansion of
said use so that in time they would be eliminated.
Next on the agenda was a discussion with Mr. Wesley M. Howe,
City Manager, on the "Administration of the Comprehensive Plan
and Zoning Ordinances."
Mr. Howe said that he had a suggestion which was to amend 1
Section E of Article III of the Planning Commission's By.
Laws to require a majority vote of the entire Planning
Commission to pass an item of business. /
After much discussion the Planning Commission decided to keep
the voting as it is now, that is to require only a simple
majority vote of a quorum of the Planning Commission to pass
an item of business. Mr. Howe stated that this was a matter
for the Planning Commission itself to decide.
Mr. Howes second suggestion was to add to the Planning
Commission By -Laws a section stating that the Planning
Commission shall determine that they have the proper_^4m
information, maps and a staff report before considering
any request for a zoning change. The proposed section
would read as follows:
ARTICLE VI. ADMINISTRATION OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ZONING;;ORDIMANCES
• :'A. Consideration of proposals for changes to zoning districts before
considering a request or proposal for the change of a zoning
district the Planning Commission shall determine that it has
before it the following:
1. A map of the parcel of land for which rezoning is proposed or
requested indicating the current zoning of the property in
the immediate vicinity.
2. A vicinity map indicating the location of the parcel of property,
the major thoroughfares and collectors streets in the area, and
the zoning of property within an approximate one mile radius of
the parcel of property in question.
3. A map indicating the planned land use and public facilities in
the area as indicated in the comprehensive land use plan.
4. A staff report from the City's planning consultant, staff
planner or City Manager containing the following information:
(a) General Information
(1) The name of the applicant
(2) The nature of the proposed rezoning and a
brief description of the property.
(b) Findings of staff:
(1) A determination of the degree to which the
proposed zoning is consistent with land use
planning':objectives; 0::prindipals;.iandcpolidie5
and with land use and zoning plans.
(2) A determination of whether the proposed zoning
is justified and/or needed at the time the
rezoning is proposed.
(3) A determination as to whether the proposed
zoning would create or appreciably increase
traffic danger and congestion.
-5-
(4) A determination as to whether the proposed
zoning would alter the population density and
thereby undesirably increase the load on public
facilities including schools, water and sewer
facilities, parks, and other public improvements.
(5) If there are any reasons why the proposed zoning
should not be approved in view of considerations
under (b) (1) through (4) above, a determination
as to whether the proposed zoning is justified
and/or necessitated by peculiar circumstances
such as: It would be impracticable'.to use the
land for any of the uses permitted under its
existing zoning classification; There are extenu-
ating circumstances which justify the rezoning
even though there are reasons why the proposed
zoning is not desirable.
(c) Recommendation of Staff.
Walter Brown moved that the Planning Commission amend its
By -Laws by adopting the above proposed section entitled
"Administration of the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning
Ordinances" and to request that the City Board of Directors
furnish the necessary staff to implement these regulations.
The motion was seconded by Allan Gilbert and passed on a
vote of 7 ayes and no nays.
Chairman McClinton stated that the Planning Commission had
received a letter asking that the Commission choose a member
• for the "United Community Services."
It was decided that since Mr. Howe. -City Manager, is repre-
senting the Board of Directors and the Planning Commission
is a branch of the Board of Directors that Mr. Howe would
represent the Planning Commission also.
The last item on the agenda was the approval of the minutes
of March 4, 1969; April 1, 1969; and April 15, 1969. Walter
Brown made a motion that these minutes be approved as mailed.
The motion was seconded by Allan.Gilbert and passed by a vote
of 7 ayes and no nays.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned
at 5:55 p.m.
0