HomeMy WebLinkAbout1972-10-03 MinutesMINUTES OF A PIANNING COMMISSION MEETING
The Fayetteville Planning Commission met at 4:00 P.M., October 3. 1972,
in the Decision Room, Chamber of Commerce Building, 123 West Mountain
Street, Fayetteville, Arkansas.
Members Present: Donald Nickell, Dr. Walter Brown, Morton Gitelman,
Roy Clinton, Helen Edmiston, Al Hughes.
Members Absent: John Maguire, Christine Childress, Ernest Jacks.
Others Present: David Malone, Pete Young, David McWethy, Larr7 Wood,
RAY Tramm 1.11 Walter Niblock, Hoyt Greenwood, Gene
Thrasher, Jim Watson, Jack Burge, Harold Bottoms,
Richard Mayes, Peter L. Petty, Mrs. H.�J. Meenen,
Pdt Tobin.
Chairman Roy Clinton called the meeting to order.
The minutes of the September 19, 1972 Planning Commission meeting were
approved as mailed.
The first item on the agenda was the proposed ordinance to amend Ordinance
1747 regulating the location of liquor stores in the City of Fayetteville
which had been referred back to the Planning Commission from the Board PROPOSED ORD,
of Directors. Chairman Clinton said that he had been requested by the REGUL&TIWG
property owner of the only liquor store in the area in which the proposedjLqIOR STOR
ordinance would restrict liquor stores to continue this matter until a
later meeting so the property owner could attend the meeting and be
40 heard, Morton Gitelman told the Commission that there were other
alternatives for the ordinance, but the copy before the Commission was
the way it would have to be drafted for what the Commission had
recommended.
City Attorney David Malone was present and said that he had recommended
to the Board of Directors that the ordinance be sent back to the
Planning Commission. He thought the Commission should look at this and
see if this is what they really wanted to do. The Commission had recommended
that liquor stores be allowed in C-2 and C-3. but that the C�2 and C�3
areas bounded by the railroad tracks on the Eastp Highway 71 By�pass
on the North and West, and by Highway 62 on the South be designated as
not permitting liquor stores. He considered this draft of the ordinance
as havin a sted. This
g the best chand' of being legal if it is ever conte
proposed ordinance adds liquor stores to C-2 and C-3, sets up two new
districts to be known as C�2U and C�3U and does not permit liquor stores
in C -2U and C -3U. It also instructs the Planning Administrator to initiate
rezoning of all the C-2 and C-3 properties in the area in which the Commission
did not want liquor stores. Mr. Malone said that C -2U and C -3U would
still permit night clubs and taverns. He thought the Commission might
want to consider eliminating those in these areas also.
Chairman Clinton asked what some alternatives were.
Morton Gitelman said that when the Commission talked about making liquor
stores a conditional use in Gm2 and C-3, the objection was that it is
not pinned down enough to suit the University of Arkansas. Creating
the two new zones does not prevent the Commission from rezoning something
back in the future.
10-3-72 4�
Ray Trammell, Legal Counsel for the University, admitted that the
conditional use is a possible alternative for approaching the problem;
however, he liked this draft much better because the person who asks-_,
for rezoning as an exception to the zoning ordinance should carry a
larger burden than one who wants to establish a conditional use, He
thought the present draft fits more nearly the idea originally suggested
that the City take some positive approach to the problem that would be
of some assistance to the University of Arkansas. David Malone said the
big difference between rezoning and a conditional use is that the conditional
use does not require newspaper advertising or a sign on the property,
Chairman Clinton recommended to the Commission members that a public hearing
date be set in November to consider this proposal. David Malone said that
if the Commission was worried about someone trying to rush in and get
a liquor permit, the A.B.C. checks with both he and the Police Chief,
He would advise the A.B.C. of any impending change,
Morton Gitelman said he was worried about the boundaries set. Highway
62 is very close to the University of Arkansas and yet on the North
Highway 71 By�pass is ver7 far from the University. If the Planning
Commission wishes to restrict them also, David Malone suggested the
public hearing include night clubs and taverns,
Morton Gitelman moved that the Planning Commission schedule a public hearing
to be held November 21, 1972 for consideration of this proposed ordinance,
Dr. Walter Brown seconded the motion; it was approved unanimously.
The public hearing on Rezoning Petition No. R72-33, Wayne Hinkle, for
property located at 3480 Highway 16 East, and to rezone from R�2, PETITION R72�33
Medium Density Residential District, to C�2, Thoroughfare Commercial WAYNE HINKLE
District, or alternatively C�l, Neighborhood Commercial District was 3480 Hwy, 16 Ee�
opened by the Chairman,
Larr7 Wood presented the Planning Report,
Attorney Walter Niblock represented the petition, Mr. Niblock stated
Mr. Hinkle wants to rezone the front 150 ft. of his property at this
location, He has a mobile home park under construction and he and
the engineers deem this portion of his property unsuitable for mobile
homes. He does not wish to sell this property, but wishes to use it
for commercial purposes such as a laundry, etc,
There was no opposition present and no further questions were asked.
The public hearing was closed.
The public hearing on Rezoning Petition No. R72-34, Hoy -t Greenwood, for
property located on the Northeast corner of the intersection of Buckner -
Braden Road and Highway 16 East, from R-1. Low Density Residential PETITION R72�34
District, to C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial District, was opened by the HOYT GREENWOOD
Chairman, Hwy* 16 East &
Larry Wood presented the Planning Report. Hwy, 265
Attorney Walter Niblock represented the petition. Mr. Niblock said that
it was his understanding that such locations as this at major intersections
should be used for C-1 or C�2 purposes. He said there might be some
problems with this site, but he felt these were problems for the developer
to solve with the City Engineer instead of with the Planning Commission.
Mr. Greenwood plans another Spee -Dee Mart along the same design as all
the others with self-service gasoline pumps. Mr. Niblock and Mr. Greenwood
both indicated they would accept C-1 instead of C�2,
Gene Thrasher said he did not oppose the rezoning, but hoped Mr. Greenwood
would give some right-of-way for Highway 265 which is only 40 ft. wide,
10-3-72 �3�
Mr. Greenwood said he would set back from the existing right-of-way
of Highway 265 the 70 ft. required by zoning and major street plan,
He said he has also had percolation tests run on the property.
The Comprehensive Plan had listed this piece of property as "public
and water." David Malone said this might be for the proposed fire
station for the Eastern part of the City. Larry Wood thought it might
also be the reason for the "public and water" being shown,
The flooding question was discussed. Mr. Greenwood said there has been
some fill on this property. He thought the fill might have been done
after the,Corps of Engineers report was made, Roy Clinton said he had
noticed that there had been no flooding on the property during the big
rain the previous week. He said that although this is not large enough
for a large scale development plan, he felt the Commission owes it to
the City to see that the curb cuts are properly co�ordinated with both
the Street Department and the Arkansas Highway Department on this property.
He did not think the Commission would want to allow him to dump traffic
right into that intersection. The already difficult traffic situation
at this intersection was discussed, I
There was no opposition present. The public hearing was closed.
The public hearing on Rezoning Petition No. R72�35, Hoyt Greenwood, for
property located at 1435 South Duncan Avenue, from R�2, Medium Density
Residential District, to C-1. Neighborhood Commercial District was opened
by the Chairman. PETITION R72-35
Larry Wood presented the Planning Report, HOYT GREENWOOD
Attorney Walter Niblock represented the petition. Mr. Greenwood was 1435 S. Duncan
also present. Mr. Niblock said this request was also made because Mr.
Greenwood proposed another Spee -Dee Mart with self�service gasoline
pumps at this location. He said Mr. Greenwood feels this is an
excellent location for such a store,
There was no opposition present. The public hearing was closed.
The public hearing on Rezoning Petition No. R.�2-36, Ottis Watson, for
property located South of Highway 16 East and on the East side of PETITION R72-36
Jerry Avenue, from A-11 Agricultural District, to R�l, Low Density CTTIS WATSON
Residential District, was opened by the Chairman. E. of Jerry Ave.
Larry Wood presented the Planning Report.
Jim Watson was present to represent the petition, He stated he just
wanted to build some houses on this property. Chairman Clinton said
he assumed the property is either all platted or that Mr. Watson will
do that. Jim Watson said they would take care of that. Mr. Wood said
there is one problem; the street along the West side of this property
is a gravel one. The Planning Commission felt that any problems such
as these could be taken care of on the subdivision process, There were
no further questions. There was no opposition present. The public
hearing was closed,
The public hearing on Rezoning Petition No. R72-37, Fulbright Investment
Company, for property on the South side of Rock Street between Block PETITION R72-37
Avenue and Church Avenue, and to rezone from R�O, Residential.�Office FULBRIGHT
District, to C-2. Thoroughfare Commercial District, or alternatively INVESTMENT CO.
C-3, Central Commercial District, was opened by the Chairman, Rock Street
Larry Wood presented the Planning Report. In his report, he recommended
that if the Planning Commission plans to recommend approval of the
rezoning petition that the Comprehensive Plan be amended before it is
rezoned,
10-3-72 4.
Jack Burge represented the petition. He asked for rezoning of the North
141.5 feet fronting on Rock Street. He said David White owns the corner
house at Block and Rock where there has been a fire; the house has not
been occupied recently. Fulbright Investment Company owns the next lot
which is being used for parking. David White owns the next piece of
property and his business there is non�conforming since the zoning
change in 1970. The V.F.W. owns the lot on the corner of Rock and
Church and they have been discussing plans for it with the Police
Department. The property was zoned C-3 when they acquired it. Fulbright
Investment Company proposes an automobile repair center for J. C. Penneys.
Mr. White is presently in Europe, but his office phoned to say they were
in accord with the requested change. Harold Bottoms, local representative
of David White, requested the zoning change for the White properties.
The public hearing was closed as there was no opposition present,
Al Hughes moved to approve Petition No. R72-37, Fulbright Investment PETITION R72�37
Company. Helen Edmiston seconded the motion and said that she thought '
instead of doing a study on the whole thing that as they come up and the
owners want to change from R-0 to C�2 or C-3 that the Commission should
consider rezoning it. The question was raised about whether the petition
actually should include the White and V.F.W. prope , rties. Bobbie Jones
asked Mr. Hughes whether his motion was to rezone to C-2 or to C-3. In
C-2 the proposed use is a use by right; in C�3 it is a conditional use;
however, the property across Rock Street is zoned C�3, Al Hughes amended
his motion to rezone to C-2 on3,y the properties owned by Fulbright Investment
Company and David White because they had representatives present requesting
the zoning change, but not to include the V.F.W. property because they
had not had a representative present. Helen Edmiston seconded the amended
motion, It was approved unanimously,
Chairman Clinton instructed the Planning Administrator that in the future MULTIpIE
any petition containing more than one ownership shall have the signatures PETITIONERS
or power of attorney shown for each property owner,
At Dr. Brown's request, Chairman Clinton asked Larry Wood to do a study 3 TUD Y OF
on the Comprehensive Plan around the downtown area. No date was set for DOWNTOWN AREA
the completion of the study,
Dr. Walter Brown moved that the Planning Commission recommend to the
Board of Directors that Petition R72�36, Ottis Watson, be approved, PETITION R72-36
Morton Gitelman seconded. It was approved unanimously,
Dr. Walter Brown moved that Petition R72-35, Hoyt Greenwood, be denied PETITION R72-35
for the reasons stated in the Planning Report. Morton Gitelman seconded.
From the audience Richard Mayes requested permission to speak. Chairman
Clinton explained that he must deny the request because the public hearing
had already been closed. The vote was taken. The petition was denied
unanimously.
Helen Edmiston moved to approve rezoning Petition R72-34, Hoyt Greenwood.
Al Hughes seconded the motion. Dr. Brown said he would Like to have PETITION R72-34
the motion amended to continue the petition. Mr. Gitelman said the
Comission needed something on the problems mentioned. Mrse Edmiston
amended her motion to make the approval contingent on Planning Commission
approval of a large scale development plan.' Al Hughes seconded the amended
10�3-72
.5 -
motion@ The amended motion was approved unanimously.
Dr. Walter Brown moved to deny Rezoning Petition R72-33, Wayne Hinkle,
for the reasons stated in the report of the consultant. Morton Gitelman
seconded the motion. Al Hughes asked if the petitioner had'not said PETITION R72�33
the land was not suitable for residential use, Mrs Clinton said they
had said it was not suitable for mobile homes. The Planning Commission
studied a topo map shown to them by Mr. Niblock. Dr. Brown said he
thought the Commission ought to support oufr plan out there and that
we are going to have problems. He saw no public necessity to rezone the
property. Rather, he thought it would be public harm. It would start
stripping, The vote was taken, Brown, Gitelman, Clinton, Edmiston,
and Nickel.1 voted "Aye" to deny the petitions, Hughes voted "Nay." The
petition was denied,
The next item on the agenda was a letter from Washington�Madison Baptist
Association requesting Planning Commission interpretation of use units.
Peter L. Petty was present, Mr. Petty said the Washington�Madison Baptist
Association is a nor�profitjorganization which works with 36 churches, INTERPRETATION
They ended up with the property when a church disbanded and intended to OF USE UNITS
sell it, but got to thinking it would make good office space, They
requested an interpretation as to whether the use outlined in their
letter could be permitted under Professional Offices, Use Unit 25*
Dr. Brown moved that the Commission interpret that with the use outlined
in the letter submitted by the Association that they can be interpreted
as being included under Use Unit 25. Donald Nickell seconded the
motion. It was approved unanimously,
0 Morton Gitelman left the meeting at 5:50 P -M*
The Planning Commission considered a letter from Gene Thrasher requesting
approval of the dedication of a street within Maple Manor Apartment complex
and requesting permission to name streets. Mr. Thrasher was present. GEM THRASHER
He said he was no longer concerned with naming the service road along REQUEST TO
Highway 71 By�pass, but felt it should have a co=on name its entire ACCEPT STREET
length, He said the street he wants accepted by the City furnishes
access from Maple Manor Apartments to Highway*16 West and crosses other
privately owned property, He said it has been constructed to the City's
minimum street standards,
Al Hughes moved that the Planning Commission recommend to the Board of
Directors that the street in question be accepted by the Board of
Directors. Helen Edmiston seconded the motion, It was approved
unanimously,
The next matter considered was a conditional use request for a day care
center on property on the North side of Douglas Street and West of MRS* H*J*MEENEN
Leverett Avenue, Mrs. H. J. Meenen, Building Chairman. Mrs. Meenen was Conditional Use
present to represent the request. Al Hughes asked whether the exit Day Care Center
marked on the plan would interfere with or tie up traffic on Iseverett,
He said it seemed a hazard to him. Mrs. Edmiston said she had looked
at it for the Subdivision Committee and this was the only question which
concerned her. Chairman Clinton asked whether there was a driveway there
now, Mrs. Meenen said there is. Mr. Hughes asked how much additional
traffic they expected this to create. Mrs. Meenen said this would decrease
the number of parking spaces in the parking lot and they hoped it would
offset itself* Dre Brown said he thought it would be more sensible to
10�3-72
4m',
change the traffic flow, Mr. Hughes agreed he would prefer to exit on
Douglas.
40 Helen Edmiston moved to approve the conditional use request subject
to compliance with other City and State regulations. Al Hughes seconded,
It was approved unanimously.
The last item of business was a request submitted by Pat Tobin for
Planning Commission interpretation of certain uses listed in Use Unit INTERPRETATION
17. He requested that an establishment primarily concerned with 'OF USE UNITS
servicing institutions and businesses on a range of furniture,
equipment and supplies, as well as warehousing and repair of said items
be interpreted as being included in either "institutional furniture and
and furnishings" or "general merchandise establishment". I
Roy Clinton said he thought the criteria on which the Commission should
judge any use should be traffic, The Planning Commission unanimously
interpreted the uses outlined in Mr. Tobin's letter can be included
under "institutional furniture and furnishings."
The meeting was adjourned at 6: iO P.M.
k)
'��Vt
0
RESOLUTION PC 72-32
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the Code of Ordinances of
the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, the City Planning Commission held
a public hearing on the following rezoning petitions, Tuesday, October 3,
1972, fifteen (15) days after a sign was erected upon the property and
after a notice was published in the Northwest Arkansas Times, a newspaper
of general circulation; and
WHEREAS, after the public hearing, the Planning Commission voted
to make recommendations to the Board of Directors on the following rezoning
petitions,
NOW, THEREFORE, HE IT RECOMMENDED BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
TO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS*
SECTION 1. That an ordinance
be adopted for the purpose
of rezoning
the following tracts of
property as hereinafter indicated:
PETITION NO* R72-34:
The petition of Hoyt Greenwood for property located on NE corner of
Buckner -Braden Road and Highway 16 iast; Described as: Part of Lot
37 in the Plat and Subdivision of W. E. Anderson Farm, being more
particularly described as follows, to�wit: Beginning at a point
245.51 South and 251 East of the NW corner of said lot, thence East
1381, thence 380 481 East 158.751 to the North line of U.S. Highway
16, thence South 75' 021 1011 West 1681, thence North 2001 to the
point of beginning. From R�l, Low Density Residential District to
C-20 Thoroughfare Commercial District.
PETITION NO*R72-36:
The petition of Ottis Watson for property located South of Highway 16
East and on East side of Jerry Avenue. Described as: A part of the
NW� of the NEI of Section 232 T-16-11, R -30-W, of the 5th P.M. being
4
more particularly described as follows: Starting at the ME corner of
said 40 acre tract, thence South 521.5010. thence S 840W,0886-501 to
a point in the centerline of Highway 16 East; thence S 4 E2 210*001
to the point of beginning; thence S 40 E� 3441 to a fence; thence S
83OW, 1451 to a fence corner post; thence N 4ow, 3441; thence N 83 0 E2
1451 to the point of beginning and containing 1.1 acres more or less,
From A�l, Agricultural District to R-11 Low Density Residential
District.
SECTION 2o That the petition requesting the rezoning of the following
tract Of Property be amended and that an ordinance be adopted for the purpose
.of rezoning the said property as hereinafter indicated:
PETITION NO. R 72-&37:
w000
The petition of Fulbright Investment Company for property located
on the So side of Rock Street between Block Ave. and Locust Ave,
Described as: 141o5l of equal & uniform width off the North side
of Block 40, Original Town Plat, City of Fayetteville, From Ro&O,
ResidentialsoOffice District I to Cmo2s Thoroughfare C rcials or
alternatively Gm3, Central Commercial District. Planning Commission
recommends that only the following portion of the above described
property be rezoned to C-2. Thoroughfare Commercial District:
Beginning at the Northeast corner of said Block 40, thence South
91*5 feet, thence West 82.5 feet; thence South 50 feet; thence
West 80 feet; thence North 14 feet; thence West 75 feet,* thence
North 127.5 feet; thence East 237.5 feet to the point of beginning.
SECTION 3. That the petitions requesting the rezoning of the following
tracts of property be denied:
PETITION NO. R72-33:
The petition of Wayne Hinkle for property located at 3480 Highway
16 East. Described as: The South 1501 of the following described
lands fronting Highway 16 to -wit, Part of the SWI, of the SE4 of
Section 13 in T-16�N of Ro,30�W, being more particularly described
as follows: -Beginning at the NW corner of said 40 acre tract, and
running thence East 5381 to the existing fence line, thence South
with said fence line 6571; thence in a Northwesterly direction
and parallel along the right-oof-way of State Highway 16 a distance
of 501; thence South 1501 to the North line of Highway 16, thence
in a Northwesterly direction with the North line of said Highway
3451; thence North 251'; thence in a Northwesterly direction and
parallel with said Highway 16 1351 to the West line of said 40
acre tract; thence North 5161, more or less to the place of beginning.
From Rso2s Medium Density Residential, to Co -2, Thoroughfare Commercial,
or alternatively Caolp Neighborhood Commercial.
PETITION NO. R!72-3
The Petition of Hoyt Greenwood for property located at 1435 South
Duncano Described as: A part of the SW4 of the NW4 of Section 21
in T,&16o-N. R�30-W of the 5th P.M.0 more particularly described as
beginning at a point which is 301 North of the SE corner of said
40 acre tracts running thence West 1711, thence North 1281, thence
East 1711j thence South 128, to the point of beginning. From R-2.
Medium Density Residential District to G..l$ Neighborhood Commercial
District.
PASSED AND APPROVED this day of . october 1972a
APPROVEM
0
Rol LUUONp CHAIMAN
0