Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1975-02-11 Minutes• • • )1C -5:777 -5 - MINUTES OF A PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING A meeting of the Fayetteville Planning Commission was held at 4:00 P.M. Tuesday, February 11, 1975 in the Board of Directors Room, City Administration Building, Fayetteville, Arkansas. MEMBERS PRESENT: John Power, Ernest Jacks, Helen Edmiston, Donald Nickell, Chairman Morton Gitleman, John Lineberger, John Maguire. MEMBERS ABSENT: None. Bill Kisor, Rita Davis, OTHERS PRESENT: Larry Wood, Bobbie Jones, David McWethy, F.H. Martin, Pat Tobin, Ray Trammell, Marshall Carlisle, Jim Ogden, Gilford Heckathorn, Janet Bowen. Chairman Morton Gitelman called the meeting to order at 4:05 P.M. MINUTES The minutes of the January 28, 1975 Planning Commission meeting were approved as distributed. ANNUAL ELECTION OF Planning Commission Officers The next item to be discussed was the report from the Nominating Committee on the annual election of officers of the Planning Commission. Helen Edmiston, Chairwoman of the Nominating Committee, said the Committee wished to nominate Morton Gitelman as Chairman, John Power as Vice -Chairman, and Ernest Jacks as Secretary. Chairman Gitelman called for additional nominations from the Planning Commission members. There were none. John Lineberger moved to close the nominations. The motion was seconded by John Maguire and there being no objections the recommendations of the Nominating Committee were accepted by unanimous consent. RALPH DOFF, JR. Chairman Gitelman opened the public hearing on R75-1 Rezoning Petition R75-1, Ralph Goff, Jr. to Huntsville Rd. P, Jerry Ave. rezone property located on the Southeast corner of Highway 16 East (Huntsville Road) and Jerry Avenue from R-1, Low Density Residential District, to C-1, Neighborhood Commercial District. Larry Wood, Planning Consultant, gave the Planning Report, and since a study of Highway 265 is proposed by the Planning Commission in the future, he suggested that, if the applicant was not in a hurry, that the Planning Commission go ahead and hold the public hearingthen table the matter until after the Land Use Study is complete. Attorney F. H. Martin was present to represent. He said that this was land that was being sold on contract and from Mr. Goff's viewpoint it would not be a problem if this were tabled. He felt that they did need some kind of committment from the seller. After talking with James Holder he stated that there would be no problems if it were tabled until the next meeting. No one was present in opposition to the petition. • • • Planning Commission February 11, 1975 -2- Helen Edmiston moved to table Rezoning Petition R75-1, Ralph Goff, Jr. until the next Planning Commission meeting. Ernest Jacks seconded the motion. The motion was approved unanimously. PATRICK J. TOBIN Chairman Gitelman opened the public hearing on Rezoning R75-2 Petition R75-2, Patrick J. Tobin, to rezone property located at Township Road 20 East Township Road thru 60 East Township Road (lying West of Highway 71B) from I-1, Heavy Commercial $ Light Industrial District, to C-2 Thoroughfare Commercial District. Planning Consultant Larry Wood gave the Planning Report. He said this request was not consistent with the Land Use Plan and suggested a study on the Land Use Plan. Pat Tobin was present to represent. He said there were 44 acres directly across from his property and Shamblin Real Estate had an offer on this property and the use would be basically commercial due to the expense and high cost of the land. Another point that Mr. Tobin brought out was that at the time Mr. Pennington purchased the property he tried to get it zoned C-2, but that it was not broad enough to cover what he wanted to do at that time. His only recourse then was to go back to an I-1 Zone, but since that time C-2 has been expanded. There was no one present in opposition to the proposal. Helen Edmiston felt that there was no question that this should not be I-1, and that she was in favor of the rezoning. John Power felt that Township Road could not handle much more traffic without improvements. He felt that if commercial built up out there that the City should look into this. Larry Wood, Planning Consultant, said that this was a state highway and that it would be his guess that the Highway Department would take a close look at the connection onto Highway 71 when the City improves Gregg Avenue and Township Road which they are now doing. Chairman Gitelman agreed that even had the petition not been submitted, Township needed to be improved. In answer to John Maguire and Ernest Jack's questions, Mr. Tobin said the right-of-way along his whole strip had already been dedicated for the Large Scale Development. Ernest Jacks moved to approve Rezoning Petition R75-2, Patrick J. Tobin as requested. Bill Kisor seconded the motion which carried unanimously by a vote of 9-0. MAGUIRE DISTRIBUTING COMPANY East Gate Shopping Center The next item to be considered by the Planning Commission was a Conditional Use Request submitted by Maguire Distributing Company to park refrigerated trucks on the South parking lot of East Gate Shopping Center. (Use Unit 21, Warehousing $ Wholesale is a conditional use permissable on appeal to the Planning Commission in the C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial District. Use Unit 21 lists, among other uses, "warehouses, trucking establishments, wholesale establishments.") This item had been tabled until the surrounding property owners could be notified in case there were any objections to the request. No one was present to represent or oppose the request. Chairman Gitelman read a letter which had been given to the Planning Office from Mrs. Lillie Patterson, in opposition to the proposed operation because of the noise at night. Ernest Jacks moved to take the conditional use request submitted by Maguire Distributing Company off the table. Helen Edmiston seconded the motion which carried unanimously by a 9-0 vote. Planning Commission -3- February 11, 1975 Planning Administrator Bobbie Jones told the Planning Commission that the agenda and a copy of the applicant's letter had been hand delivered to the surrounding businesses and to the two duplexes that were located South of East Gate Shopping Center. Chairman Gitelman suggested that this conditional use might be approved with a time limitation on it. Donald Nickell said the people in the duplexes would be more affected by the noise. He said the compressors would not be plugged in except at night, and that the businesses would not be open at night anyway. He agreed that there should be a limit on the time that they could stay there. There was no further discussion. Ernest Jacks moved that the conditional use request submitted by Maguire Distributing Company be approved with a 90 limitation. (After 90 days they can seek a renewal.) Rita Davis seconded the motion. The motion carried by a vote of 8-0. John Maguire abstained. PETITION TO CLOSE TWO ALLEYS The next item to be discussed was a petition Block 1 of to close a portion of two alleys in Block 1 J. H. Mcllroy's University Subd. of J. H. Mcllroy's University Subdivision submitted by the Board of Trustees of the University of Arkansas. The petition is to close the West 176 feet of an East-West alley and the North 414 feet of a North-South alley lying in said Block 1 which is bounded by Dickson Street, Buchannan Avenue, Fairview Street and Ozark Avenue. Mr. Ray Trammell, Legal Consultant of the University of Arkansas, was present to represent. Mr. Trammell said this was the site where the new College of Business Administra- tion was planned, that they have already taken some bids from the contractors and were anxious to have the alleys closed. He said that (as the plat indicated) the alley on the North side (which runs East and West) was previously vacated through action of the Planning Commission and the City Board with an easement left there for an existing sewer line there that was owned by the City. He said the alleys they were asking to be vacated at this time all bordered on lots owned by the University.and that he was unaware of any other parties in interest as to the action. He said there were some alleys left that surrounded some lots not owned by the University which he believed would adequately serve that property (Thomas property.) Mr. Trammell also said the petition included consents from the City Water and Sewer Department and all the franchise public utilities that they were aware of and they included no objections to the request. Helen Edmiston moved that the Planning Commission recommend to the Board of Directors that the two alleys be closed as requested. John Lineberger seconded the motion which carried unanimously by a vote of 9-0. The next item to be discussed by the Planning USE UNIT INTERPRETATION Commission was the request for a use unit interpretar. Villa'Mobile Nome Park tion.submitted by Marshall N. Carlisle, Attorney for Villa Mobile Home Park, concerning sale of mobile homes within the mobile home park. Attorney Marshall Carlisle and Jim Ogden were present to represent. Mr. Carlisle stated that he had an error in his letter on this use unit inter- pretation. He said he had used the word "variance" and Planning Administrator Bobbie Jones had told him that under the present zoning ordinance the Planning Commission could not grant a variance or a conditional use. He said that what he would then be asking for from the Planning Commission was an interpretation • 1 Planning Commission -4- February 11, 1975 of the Zoning Ordinance. Attorney Carlisle said that this was not the ' typical type of mobile home sales shop such as Beaver Homes. He said they were set up on lots just like the mobile homes that were occupied and were displayed to show how they would look on a lot. He felt that the sale of these mobile homes was similar to the sale of homes in a subdivision. Mr. Carlisle told the Planning Commission that this was not the type of mobile home sales that the Zoning Ordinance covered. Mr. Carlisle did not want to go into the problem of the sign as that was another matter. Jim Ogden, owner of Villa Mobile Home Park, said that this was an FHA mobile home park and they encouraged the sale of their FHA approved mobile homes on the lots. He said FHA financed their mobile homes to suit low -bracket incomes and that these homes had to meet more rigid standards than some mobile homes. He also said there was a stipulation in the contract that these FHA mobile homes had to be set up in a park that was FHA approved.(or on the owner's own property)meaning the park had to meet certain standards. Chairman Gitelman asked about the possibility of someone purchasing these mobile homes for rental purposes. Mr. Ogden said this was not a part of the plan. He told the Planning Commission that if it was requested by the purchaser, he moved the mobile homes from that trailer park to wherever they wanted to set them up. Ernest Jacks asked Mr. Ogden if it would affect him in any way if the Planning Commission requested the mobile homes that were sold be left in Villa Mobile Home Park. (The Planning Commission wanted to be sure these mobile homes that were being sold would not be grouped together close to the road or where they would be an "eyesore" to the mobile homes in residence at the park.) Mr. Ogden said if the Planning Commission would allow the continuation of the mobile home sales on that provision he would be agreeable to this. Mrs. Edmiston felt that the Planning Commission could not place this stipulation on the request because once someone purchased the mobile home it would be their own property, and they could not restrict it in this way. Chairman Gitelman commented that in the R-1 and R-2 Districts there was no use unit in the ordinance covering the sale of mobile homes. He said the only thing on this under the ordinance was Use Unit 17 which referred to retail mobile home sales operations. Ernest Jacks was in favor of revising the mobile home ordinance to allow this type of mobile home sales. Donald Nickell felt there was no difference in an empty trailer setting on these lots than the ones that were occupied. There was no further discussion. No one was present to oppose the request. Ernest Jacks moved that the Planning Commission have the City Attorney draft an amendment to the mobile home ordinance. Helen Edmiston seconded the motion which carried unanimously by a vote of 9-0. The Planning Administrator was asked to have the City Attorney contact Ernest Jacks regarding the proposed amendment. DONAL L. $ GILFORD L. HECKATHORN The last item to be considered was the Large Scale Development Large Scale Development Plan submitted by 1790 Birch Avenue Donal L. $ Gilford L. Heckathorn for property at 1790 Birch Avneue. Ernest Jacks gave the Subdivision Committee Report and told Chairman Gitelman that they had reviewed the Plat Review Notes and the only problem was that the developer had to provide 5 feet of right-of-way on Birch Avenue, and that the City Engineer had not given his comments yet. He said the Subdivision Committee recommended to the Planning Commission the approval of the Large Scale Development provided that the requested right-of-way on Birch was provided and that they satisfy the City Engineer. Planning Commission -5- February 11, 1975 Ernest Jacks moved to approve this Large Scale Development with the stipulations already mentioned. Donald Nickell seconded the motion which carried-unanimdusly by a'vbte of9 "Ayes".. Chairman Gitelman explained to Mr. Heckathorn that right-of-way would have to be given before they could approve it. There was no further discussion. The meeting was adjourned at 5:02 P.M. 3 • a RESOLUTION PC 4-75 • WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the Planning Commission, Tuesday, February 11, 1975, 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 a recommendation to the Board of Directors on Rezoning Petition R75-2, Patrick J. Tobin. • • • NOW, THEREFORE, BE 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 from I-1, Heavy Commercial & Light Industrial District, to C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial District, said real estate. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: A part of the SWI of the SWI of Section 35, T -17-N, R -30-W of the 5th P.M., and being more particularly described as follows, to -wit: Commencing at a point on the center line of Township Road, which point is 693 feet East and 20 feet North of the SW corner of said Section 35, and running thence N87°12'20"W, along said centerline a distance of 288 feet; thence North 328 feet, more.,,or less, to existing fence line running generally from the NW to the SE; thence S81°59'E along said existing fence line to a point which is 304:25 feet due North of the point of beginning; thence S81°59'E along said existing fence line a distance of 22 feet to the corner post; thence Southwesterly along said existing fence line a distance of 277.25 feet to the corner post; thence South 27 feet to the centerline of Township Road; thence N87°12'20"W along the center of Township Road to the point of beginning. ALSO, a part of the SW* of the SWC of Section 35, T -17-N, R -30-W, of the 5th P.M. being more particularly described as follows, to -wit: Commencing at a point which is on the centerline of Township Road, said point being 693 feet East and 20 feet North of the SW corner of said 40 acre tract, and running thence N87°12'20"W along the centerline of Township Road a distance of 388 feet for a point of beginning of the lands herein described, thence with the centerline of said road 587°12'20"E, 100 feet; thence North 326 feet, more or less, to a point which is N81°591W of an iron pin which iron pin is 321.75 feet North and 693 feet East of the SW corner of Sec. 35, T -17-N, R -30-W; thence N81°59'W, 100 feet, more or less, of the Luther W. Flora property; thence South along the East line of the Flora property 355 feet, more or less, to the point of beginning, subject to the right-of-way of Township Road along the South side thereof. SECTION 2. That the above-described property be rezoned from I-1, Heavy Commercial & Light Industrial, to C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial, so that the property owner may gain a greater flexibility in uses permitted. PASSED AND APPROVED this lith day of February , 1975. APPROVED: MORTON GITELMAN, CHAIRMAN • • • RESOLUTION PC 5-75 WHEREAS, the petition of the Board of Trustees of the University of Arkansas for vacating two alleys was presented to the City Planning Commission for recommendation, and WHEREAS, at a meeting on Tuesday, February 11, 1975, the City Planning Commission voted to make a recommendation to the City Board of Directors on said petition to vacate two alleys. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RECOMMENDED BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION TO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILIE, ARKANSAS. SECTION 1. That after the public hearing an ordinance be adopted for the purpose of vacating the two public alleys described as follows: (1) Beginning on the East line of Ozark Avenue at the SW corner of Lot 31, Block 1, J. H. McIlroy's University Subdivision of a part of the SW* of the NW* of Section 16, T -16-N, R -30-W, in the City of Fayetteville, Washington County, Arkansas, as shown by the plat of said Subdivision filed April 1, 1927, and recorded in the Office of the Circuit Clerk and Ex -Officio Recorder in and for said County, and running thence East 176 feet to an intersection with an alley which runs North to South; thence South fourteen feet; thence West 176 feet; thence North 14 feet to the point of beginning; (2) Also, beginning at the SE corner of Lot 31 Block 1, J. H. Mcllroy's University Subdivision of a part of the SW* of the NW* of Section 16, T -16-N, R -30-W, in the City of Fayetteville, Washington County, Arkansas, as shown by the plat of said Subdivision filed April 1, 1927, and recorded in the Office of the Circuit Clerk and Ex - Officio Recorder in and for said County, and running thence North 414 ft. to a point on the South line of Lot 8, Block 1, in said Subdivision; thence East 14 feet; thence South 414 feet to a point which is the Southwest corner of Lot 52, Block 1, in said Subdivision; thence West 14 feet to the point of beginning. PASSED AND APPROVED this llth day of February , 1975. APPROVED: Morton Gitelman, Chairman