Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1973-10-23 Minutesi MINUTES OF A PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING The Fayetteville Planning Commission met at 4:00 P.M., Tuesday, October 23,1973 in the Chamber of Commerce Board Room, 123 West Mountain, Fayetteville, Arkansas. Members Present: Members Absent: Others Present: Marvin Murphy, Donald Nickell, Morton Gitelman, Roy Clinton, Ernest Jacks, Helen Edmiston, Al Hughes, Christine Childress. John Maguire Bobbie Jones, David McWethy, Iris Dees, Jerre Van Hoose, Representatives from Hyland Park, Inc., James E. Lindsey. Chairman Roy Clinton called the meeting to order. HYLAND PARK Final Plat Chairman Roy Clinton asked for a Subdivision Committee Report on the first matter being discussed which was the Final Plat for Hyland Park, Phase I, with James E. Lindsey present, Mr. Jacks, Chairman of the Subdivision Committee, said the Committee found the final plat perfect. Ernest Jacks moved that the Commission recommend to the Board of Directors that the Final Plat of Hyland Park, Phase I, be approved with a Subdivider's contract in lieu of installed improvements. Helen Edmiston seconded the motion which was approved unanimously. Mr. James E. Lindsey thanked the Commission for the patience and help it had given them. The next matter discussed was the proposed Final Plat of the JOHNSON ROAD SUBDIVISION Johnson Road Subdivision, submitted by Kelley Brothers Lumber Final Plat and Supply Company, Inc., J.B. Phelps, President. Mr. Clinton asked for comments from the Subdivision Committee and Mr. Jacks said according to the information he learned from Bobbie Jones, it was his understanding that when the preliminary plat was submitted there was only 50 feet of right-of-way on Johnson Road required but the new Mayor Street Plan requires 80 feet and on the final plat 60 feet of right-of-way is shown possibly because the Street Superintendent asked for 60 feet. Mr.-•Clinton.asked_f the curb and gutters were in and Bobbie Jones said they were trying to get all improvements in so that they would not have to file a contract on this and on that basis she said the improvements were probably in. Roy Clinton said they could live with a 60 foot right-of-way if they had to. Mrs. Edmiston said they could not give any more unless they replatted. Bobbie Jones said this would affect the setbacks on lots along Johnson Road unless the Board of Directors waives or varies the Major_Street..Plan or the Board of Adjustment grants a variance. The Chairman, Roy Clinton suggested that they recommend to the Board of Directors that they accept this plat and show a variance on this particular stretch. He said because we are honorable men and women we are committed to this and we gave them no reason to do otherwise. Al Hughes expressed concern on a street coming onto Johnson Road every 200 feet and said it seems to be a pretty busy place out there. Mrs. Edmiston commented that it was on the preliminary plat and no one said a word about it. Chairman Clinton said that theoretically it would be servicing 10 units for each street and he didn't think it was that bad of a problem since they were not through streets. Mr. Jacks said they have a provision written in that driveways for those lots along Johnson Road have to be on the cul-de-sacs and at least 50 feet back from Johnson Road. Jerre Van Hoose with McGoodwii, Williams, and Yates arrived at this time to discuss the plat with the Commission. Mr. Clinton asked him what the 120 foot square at the end of Swallow Circle was for and he said that it is street ROW to provide access to Lot 41. Jerre Van Hoose said that on all the other streets the ROW is circular to match construc- tion of the street but in this case this is where the cul-de-sac will be built for that street. The right-of-way is kind of square and there will be a cul-de-sac built in that square. He said Lot 41 can never be anything other than what it is shown as, a utility and drainage easement. He said the flood plain comes up to the back side of these other lots and the ROW was made that way in the. event the City ever wants to take this Lot 41 for recreational purposes or whatever so a driveway could be put on it. • Planning Commission -2- October 23, 1973 Ernest Jacks told Mr. Van Hoose that on the new Major Street Plan Johnson Road requires 80 feet of right-of-way whereas originally it was approved for 60 feet. He asked Mr. Van Hoose if it was possible to move the whole thing 20 feet to the east and not get into the flood plain problem. Mr. Clinton added that they didn't want to jeopardize setbacks. Jerre Van Hoose said the Wren Circle Street is under construction and the utilities are in. Mr. Jacks suggested they go ahead and leave the 60 foot right-of-way since it was approved originally and Mr. Clinton said officialaction must be taken so as not to jeopardize setbacks, but he didn't see why the houses couldn't face Johnson Road if they wanted to. Jerre Van Hoose said that technically they could face Johnson Road but they will be facing the other road Donald Nickellasked Jerre if they had developed the addition across Skull Creek and Jerre said yes, Kelley Brothers did. Mr. Nickellasked if they had any plan to get across Skull Creek over to this other addition and Jerre said there was no way to hook this addition to Centerbrook and there was nothing but lots on the other side and backed up to that creek. Roy Clinton asked them if they were going to have to maintain Lot 41 until the City decides whether they want to take it over as green space. Mr. Van Hoose said he was sure they will because it's their property and they will end up owning Lot 41 and he saw it no different from any other property in town. Mr. Jacks moved that the Planning Commission recommend to the Board of Directors that the Final Plat of the Johnson Road Addition be approved and that a note be sent to the Board of Directors that the Planning Commission is approving a street with less width than that on the Major Street Plan but that it be done in this case because the preliminary plat was approved and construction started on that basis. Mrs. Edmiston seconded the motion which was unanimously approved. The Commission asked that the Board of Directors be advised that this does not meet the Major Street Plan now, but it did at the time the preliminary plat was approved. Under other business, Ernest Jacks said he would like to talk about TANDEM LOTS deep property. He said the present zoning law is such that every Discussion lot must have at least 70 feet of street frontage in R-1 which pretty well prohibits tandem lots (one behind the other). He suggested that they try to write an amendment to the zoning ordinance which would allow a nice development of this kind to take place and schedule a public hearing on it. He indicated that the tandem lots should have a minimum of 25 feet street frontage usable for private drive purposes with setbacks and lot area to be figured on the full lot width portion of the lot and excluding the driveway portion. Morton Gitelman arrived at 4:20 P.M. Mr. Clinton said they were saying write a provision to allow tandem lot development in the R-1 district and asked if they should make this a conditional use in the case of tandem lot develop- ment, and did they want it in anything other than R-1 districts. Mrs. Edmiston asked why only R-1, why not R-2 and R-3? Chairman Clinton said that it would have to be a conditional use no matter where it is and would always have to come to the Commission. He added that there was no way to develop less than an acre anyway because anything under an acre would be chewed up by right-of-way. Mrs. Childress asked if he meant that if the lot is already there and established that size could not be split to equal 65 feet, and Mr. Clinton said this was whathe meant. Mr. Jacks said that they were saying this minimum street could only be a strip for a private drive. Mr. Nickell asked Mr. Jacks how wide a private drive he felt was necessary. Mr. Jacks replied a minimum of 25 feet and Mrs. Edmiston asked why 25 feet. This was discussed and it was felt that because there would also need to be an easement for utilities, 25 feet would be a minimum size. Mr. Van Hoose said most water lines are presently placed in street ROW because of Health Department requirements. Mr. Jacks said they were holding up some nice developments along REDUCE MINIMUM this line. Mrs. Edmiston asked if they should have the same LOT REQUIREMENT minimum lot requirements used. Mr. Jacks said what he is writing Discussion would not allow any structure to be placed on anything less than the required minimum lot width which is 70 feet in R-1. Al Hughes said he thought some- thing should be done on lots with less lot width than 70 feet. Bobbie Jones then read a section of the zoning ordinance that she said she wasn't sure whether they were familiar • • Planning Commission -3- October 23, 1973 with and it does not correspond to what Mr. Jacks said but goes along with what some of the others brought up. In the case of a nonconforming lot already established before the ordinance was adopted, the Planning Office can issue a building permit for a single family dwelling even if the lot does not conform in lot width or area provided that they meet setbacks and that the lot was in. single ownership or not the same ownership as the lots on either side of it on the day that the ordinance was in effect. Albert Hughes said in 1955 a plat was approved at 60 feet and now the lot has gained 5 more feet. He wants to build one house on it. Mr. Clinton told him the court is your only recourse. Mr. Gitelman asked Mr. Jacks if he was talking about T-shaped lots and Mr. Jacks said yes, T or L shaped lots. Mr. Van Hoose said subdividers always look for lot yield and with the requirements for sidewalks and street the cost of developing it is very expensive. Mr. Jacks said he thought there was need for a public hearing, and he also asked if he could consider it until the next meeting and write a proposal specifically for tandem lot division and not cul-de-sac. Mrs. Edmiston asked about reducing the minimum lot sizes for duplexes in R-1. Chairman Clinton said there might be a need to reduce the lot sizes but that he has always felt and still feels that duplexes should not be in the R-1 district even on a conditional basis. He said people associate the "1" in R-1 with single family and thought there should be an additional zone between R-1 and apartments for duplexes. The meeting was adjourned at 5:00 P.M. • RESOLUTION PC 31.1-73 WHEREAS, at its regular meeting on Tuesday, October 23, 1973, the Planning Commission voted to make a recommendation to the Board of Directors on the final subdivision plat known as Hyland Park, Phase I submitted by Hyland Park, Inc. and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended that because the necessary improvements have not been installed in said subdivision that Hyland Park, Inc. enter into and furnish the City with the necessary subdivision contract before the Board of Directors accepts this final subdivision plat. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RECOMMENDED BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION TO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS: SECTION 1. The necessary subdivision contract be executed with the City prior to the Board of Directors accepting the final subdivision plat. SECTION 2. That the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas accept the final plat along with the land dedicated for streets and other public uses in the Hyland Park, Phase I Subdivision described as follows: A part of the Ei, SEk, Section 11 and part of the W4 of the SWk, Section 12, all in T -16-N, R -30-W, Washington County, Arkansas, more particularly described as follows: From the NW corner of the SWy, Section 12, run S 10 41' 56" E 1082.52 feet to the point of beginning; thence S 67° 11' 41" E 180 feet; thence S 90 00' 54" W 205.22 feet; thence 27.47 feet along a curve to the right having a radius of 290.17 feet; with a chord bearing and distance of N 72° 52' 17" W 27.46 feet; thence N 70° 9' 35" W 55 feet; thence 60 feet along a curve to the left having a radius of 187.26 feet; with a chord bearing and distance of N 3° 16' 14" W 59.74 feet; thence S 2° 26' 06" E 144.99 feet; thence S 58° 25' 58" W 102.58 feet; thence S 40° 24' 09" W 172.03 feet; thence S 28° 48' 35" W 121.25 feet; thence S 67° 26' 05" W 299.95 feet; thence N 68° 34' 16" W 434.14 feet to the easterly right-of-way of Arkansas State Highway 265; thence N 010 05' 01" E 182.49 feet along said right-of-way; thence N 06° 56' 47" E 100.07 feet along said right-of-way;thence N 10° 43' 25" E 99.99 feet along said right-of-way thence N 13° 17' 17" 99.93 feet along said right-of-way; thence N 19° 01' 46" E 100.00 feet along said right-of-way; thence N 22° 01' 30" E 100.02 feet;aibng-said right-of-way; thence N 24° 06' 00" E 99.98 feet along said right-of-way; thence N 24° 26' 05" E 207.50 feet along said right-of-way; thence N 88° 12' 57" E 921.37 feet to the point of beginning containing 22.74 acres, more or less. PASSED AND APPROVED this 23rd day of October , 1973. APPROVED: ROY CLINTON, Chairman ATTEST: =) • RESOLUTION PC 31.2-73 WHEREAS, at its regular meeting on Tuesday, October 23, 1973, the Planning Commission voted to make a recommendation to the Board of Directors on the final subdivision plat known as Johnson Road Subdivision submitted by Kelley Brothers Lumber and Supply, Inc. and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended that because the necessary improvements have not been installed in said subdivision that Kelley Brothers Lumber and Supply, Inc. enter into and furnish the City with the necessary subdivision contract before the Board of Directors accepts this final subdivision plat. NOW THEREFOREY BE IT RECOMMENDED BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION TO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS: SECTION 1. The necessary subdivision eontract be executed with the City prior to the Board of Directors accepting the final subdivision plat. SECTION 2. That the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas accept the final plat along with the land dedicated for streets and other public uses in the Johnson Road Subdivision described as follows: Part of the NA, SE, Section 26, T -17-N, R -30-W. Beginning at the SE corner of the NE*, SE*, of said Section 27, thence N 0° 47' W 1155.31 feet; thence S 89° 38' W 724 84 feet for a point of beginning. Thence S 89° 38' W 835.66 feet; thence S 2° 5' E along west ROW line of Johnson Road 1165.50 feet; thence N 89° 22' E 688.44 feet to the SW corner of Centerbrook Subdivision (said point of being S 89° 22' W, 839.17 feet of said SE corner of the NEI, SEI); thence N 0° 49' W 50.01 feet; thence N 70° 45' E 126.49 feet; thence N 25° 45' E 100.63 feet; thence N02953&'$O398.05zfeet;.•thence7N152532! W, 373.46 feet thence N 09° 17' W 210.54 feet to the point of beginning. PASSEDAND APPROVED this 23rd day of October , 1973. ATTEST: Ernest Jacks, Secretary APPROVED. ROY CLINTON, Chairman