Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1974-03-26 MinutesA meeting of the in the Directors MEMEERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: OTHERS PRESENT: MINUTES OF A PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Fayetteville Planning Commission was held March 26, 1974 at 4:00 P.M., Room, City Administration Building, Fayetteville, Arkansas. Chairman Morton Gitelman, Helen Edmiston, Rita McRee, Ernest Jacks, Donald Nickell, Ernest Lancaster, John Power. John Maguire, Al Hughes. Bobbie Jones, David McWethy, F.H. Martin, J.E. McClelland, Iris Dees, Mayor Russell Purdy. Chairman Gitelman called the meeting to order. The minutes of the March 12, 1974 Planning Commission Meeting were MINUTES approved as mailed. A proposed amendment to the minutes of the January 22, 1974 Planning Commission meeting had been mailed to the Planning Commission and was also approved. The next item for discussion was the large scale development plan DR. NETTLESHIP submitted by Dr. Anderson and Mae Nettleship for a "plant nursery" Johnson Road to be located on the east side of Johnson Road north of Township. LSD Plan This item was tabled from March 12, 1974 for submission of a detailed plan. Mr. F.H. Martin was present to represent Dr. Nettleship. Ernest Jacks reported that the Subdivision Committee found everything in order with the plan and wanted to request dedication of 20 ft. of additional right-of-way on Johnson Road and 60 ft. of right-of-way for a proposed collector street. Chairman Gitelman said he thought they needed to know where the collector street would be before they asked anyone to dedicate right-of-way. Chairman Gitelman asked Attorney Martin if he had asked Dr. Nettleship about dedications. Mr. Martin said he had not discussed dedications with Dr. Nettleship. Ernest Jacks moved the large scale development plan be approved with a request that the owner dedicate 20 ft. of additional right-of-way along Johnson Road. Helen Edmiston seconded the motion which carried unanimously. John Power arrived at 4:10 P.M. The next item for discussion was the approval of plans for development LAKE FAYETTEVILLE `1 of Lake Fayetteville as a park site. Proposed Park Mr. J.E. McClelland was present to present the plans. Mr. McClelland said this is the first phase of development as a park. He pointed out the pavilion area on the south side of the Lake off Zion Road. He said the hiking trail that is shown is not a part of his contract; the Boy Scouts are going to make the trail. J He said future plans envision a shelter and bridges over ravines to be built along the ,) trail. He said on the north side of the Lake there will be an athletic field, concession stand,&complete baseball field but no night lighting is contemplated. He said the south pavilion will be served by septic tank and all the other areas will be served by the Springdale sewer system. David McWethy asked if the Professional Plaza went to Springdale could the south pavilion tie on to that. Mr. McClelland said it could be done. Some playground facilities are proposed. A long range plan calls for a tennis facility. Donald Nickell asked if the boat dock on the south side was just a landing facility and not a rental dock. .Mr. McClelland said it would just be for landing. Mr. McClelland said the park signs are practically all made; an effort had been made to keep this as natural as possible. There will be hand clearing done underneath to leave the big trees. Ernest Lancaster asked if the driveway off Zion Road was going to be gravel and },r. McClelland said it was. Planning Commission March 26, 1974 Page Two Mayor Purdy expressed concern if the south side pavilion is put on a septic tank. He said the developers of the Professional Plaza were told to try and work out something else by the Board of Directors. Donald Nickell said he could see one septic tank, but not fifteen septic tanks. Rita McRee asked when sewer out there will be available. Mayor Purdy said one is not planned soon, there is no money for it. Helen Edmiston asked about a private sewer system. Mr. McClelland said the State Board of Health frowns on these because if the system malfunctions it would take the sewage straight to the Lake rather than percolate into the soil as it would with a septic tank. Ernest Jacks moved the Commission approve the plan with the recommendation that they consult with the other developers in the area and try to work out a Joint effort in getting a sewer lift system or in other words, investigate something other than septic tanks. Helen Edmiston seconded the motion which passed unanimously. The last two items for discussion were the public hearing on LSD AMENDMENTS proposed amendment to Ordinance 1747 (Appendix A- Zoning, and proposed amendment to Ordinance 1750 (Appendix C- Subdivision Regulations, Code of Ordinances, City of Fayetteville, Arkansas) to amend requirements for large scale development plans. Chairman Gitelman pointed out that the amendment to Zoning Ordinance 1747 would remove the large scale development provisions from the zoning ordinance except to require compliance with the large scale development provisions in the Subdivision Ordinance 1750. He requested action on the proposed Ordinance be postponed until the Commission had reviewed the proposed amendment to the Subdivision Ordinance 1750 and was prepared to make a recommendation on that proposed ordinance. Chairman Gitelman said he had reviewed the proposed draft with the City Attorney. Chairman Gitelman said when they were redoing the zoning and subdivision ordinance in 1970 they came up with the idea of large scale development plan so the Commission could require the developer to come in before the Commission. This wouil give the Commission the opportunity to council with the developer and point out how things could be done better. The Commission has been running into right-of-way dedication problems and have been told they cannot compel developers to dedicate right-of-way. Some thought this should be changed to provide for compulsory dedication and other things. He said the City Attorney's idea was to take this out of the zoning ordinance and put it into the subdivision ordinance and Chairman Gitelman indicated he agreed. ' He said he talked to the City Attorney at some length and thought that the City of Fayetteville is the only City in Arkansas that really has regulations like this, so there is nothing to pattern it by. The reason the City can require dedications is because the Arkansas statutes define subdivision broad enough to include development. The Commission then discussed the changes and concerns they had for the amendment. David Mchrethy fxom,the,_City Manager's office, submitted a list of proposed changes to the proposed ordinance. Helen Edmiston asked what parcel meant as compared to lot. Bobbie Jones said a lot is either a platted lot or a parcel which can be described by metes and bounds. Perhaps it is simply in there because someone doesn't have a platted lot. Ernest Jacks was reluctant to remove the "provision access" part from the new definition. He said one of the main concerns the Commission has is ingress and egress. Chairman Gitelman pointed out that the Board of Directors does not presently see large scale developments except to accept dedications and that presently the City cannot require a right-of-way dedication. John Power requested more time to study the proposed ordinances. He asked that the words "undue hardship" as a reason for requiring lesser.` dedication of right-of-way be omitted. He said he thought "valid reasons" was sufficient wording. Donald Nickell said he thought there are cases where the Commission needs to show leniency. Chairman Gitelman said it does require that the Board of Directors also approve the lesser dedication and he likes "undue hardship" better than "valid reason". John Power also said he saw no reason for requiring a "financial plan". Chairman Gitelman said he felt perhaps this should only apply if some governmental funding was included. Planning Commission March 26, 1974 Page Three •John Power asked what kind of follow up there is between the Commission and the Board of Directors. Some of the Commission members informed him that David McWethy was responsible for "follow up". Ernest Jacks said if this is passed a building permit will not be issued until he meets right-of-way and other requirements. Under "excluded development", Ernest Jacks questioned the 25% or 10,000 sq. ft. provision. He felt driveway access was much more important. Bobbie Jones said you could have a man who starts out with a small operation and wants to expand into something perhaps three times as large. Ernest Lancaster and Donald Nickell left at 5:20 P.M. Ernest Jacks questioned why the 45 -day period from submission to Planning Commission to approval by the Planning Commission had been changed to 30 days. He thought the requirement for a 1"-100t scale should be deleted. The'Commission decided unanimously to continue their discussion on the two proposed ordinances until the next meeting. The meeting was adjourned at 5:30 P.M.