Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1975-08-12 MinutesMINUTES OF A PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING A meeting of the Fayetteville Planning Commission was held at 4:00 P. M. Tuesday, August 12, 1975, in the Board of Directors Room, City Administration Building, Fayetteville, Arkansas. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Morton Gitelman, John Maguire, John Power, Donald Nickell, Ernest Jacks, Helen Edmiston, Bill Kisor, Rita Davis, Jack Ray. MEMBERS ABSENT: None. OTHERS PRESENT: Sylvia Collins, Richard Hipp, Deryle Easterling, Austin Fitzgerald, ClaudePrewitt, Oliver Ostmeyer, Pete Estes, Jr., John Slifer, Loris Stanton, Parker Rushing, Ken Lazenby, Donna Fellows, Tammy McConnell, Frank McDonald, Larry Wood, David McWethy, Bobbie Jones, Janet Bowen. Chairman Gitelman called the meeting to order. The minutes of the July 22, 1975, Planning Commission meeting MINUTES were approved as distributed. AMENDMENT TO ARTICLE 5 Public hearing was opened on the proposed amendment to Outdoor Advertising Article 5, Sections VIII and IV of Zoning Ordinance 1747 Public Hearing (Appendix A to the Fayetteville Code of Ordinances) to delete Outdoor Advertising as a permissible use in the I-1 and I-2 Zoning Districts, and for other purposes. Chairman Gitelman explained that the purpose of the proposed amendment was to resolve the conflicts between the Zoning Ordinance and the Sign Ordinance and would delete regulations entirely from the Zoning Ordinance and place it under the Sign Ordinance. There was no one present in opposition and there was no further discussion. The public hearing was closed. Ernest Jacks moved to approve the amendment to Article 5, Sections VIII and IX of Zoning Ordinance 1747. Helen Edmiston seconded the motion which was approved unanimously. Chairman Gitelman opened the public hearing on Rezoning Petition R75-13, Sylvia G. Collins, to property located at 645 Ray Avenue from R-1, Low Agricultural District. Planning Consultant Larry Wood gave the Planning of the request to change this to an A-1 District compatible with the surrounding area. Attorney Richard Hipp was present to represent. Mrs. Collins is requesting the reioning to A-1 so she would be allowed to keep a mobile home on the property which she recently moved on. Mobile homes in the City limits are restricted to mobile home parks except for usage as a residence three or more acres in an A-1 Zone. If this :rezoning is approved, Mrs. Collins still be required to go before the Board of Ad;•:stment to get a variance on the of acres. Mrs. Collins has 1.85 acres. Mr. Hipp submitted pictures of the mobile home for the Planning Commission to look over. He explained that this was a hardship situation with Mrs. Collins being a widow. He stated that Mrs. Collins had had a trailer house on the property for 7 years before the adoption of the present Zoning Ordinance (June 30, 1970), and it was not until she moved the older trailer off of the property and tried to move REZONING PETITION R75-13 Sylvia G. Collins rezone 645 Ray Avenue Density Residential, to A-1, Report. He did not recommend approval since it was felt this was not on would number Planning Commission August 12, 1975 -2- a newer one in that she found out about the regulations against mobile homes. He told the Planning Commission that Mrs. Collins' daughter and her family would be living in the mobile home and would like to live on the property. This trailer that was moved in would be adjacent to the home. He said the neighbors were aware of what Mrs. Collins was attempting to do because of the sign that was posted on the property and he felt there was no one present to oppose the request. He said this would fit in with the surrounding properties as most of them seemed to be single-family dwellings with accessory buildings on very large lots. Mrs. Collins was also present. She told the Planning Commission that she worked at night and would like to have her daughter there to watch her son that is still.in school. She had to stay with her other daughter. Planning Administrator Bobbie Jones told the Planning Commission that Mrs. Collins still needed to go before the Board of Adjustment for a variance on the number of acres that she owns. She said in the A-1 Zoning District the Planning Office could approve this on a one year basis, with renewal each year, with three acres, and if it met the required setbacks. There was no one present in opposition. The public hearing was concluded. Mr. Jacks told Mr. Hipp that the Planning Commission had to think about the other possibilities that would be allowed in an A-1 Zone. John Maguire said he would be in favor of allowing Mrs. Collins to have her mobile home on the property if they could find a way to do this. He felt like they might be opening "Pandora's Box" if this were rezoned to A-1. In answer to Mr. Maguire's question, Chairman Gitelman stated the Planning Commission did not have the legal authority to rezone this A-1 and limit it to a specific use. Helen Edmiston asked about approving it on a temporary basis (for example on a 6 months basis). Chairman Gitelman stated that under the zoning ordinance a mobile home was a temporary use in the A-1 Zone. Bobbie Jones repeated that these have to be renewed annually. John Maguire moved to recommend to the Board of Directors the approval of Rezoning Petition R75-13, Sylvia Collins. John Power seconded the motion. Ray, Power, and Maguire voted "Aye"; Nickell, Gitelman, Jacks, Edmiston, Kisor, Davis voted "Nay". The motion was denied. Chairman Gitelman opened the public hearing on REZONING PETITION R75-14 Rezoning Petition R75-14, Deryle Easterling, to rezone Deryle Easterling property located on the North side of West Sixth Street Highway 62 West (Highway 62 West) and immediately West of West Gate Shopping Center from A-1, Agricultural District, to C-2,_,Thoroughfare Commercial District. Planning Consultant Larry Wood gave the Planning Report. Mr. Wood said that amendment No. 4 to the General Plan recommended commercial and medium density residential as the future land use for that area. Therefore, in keeping with Amendment No. 4 to the General Plan Mr. Wood recommended the South 225 feet of the property under application for C-2 District and the remainder of the property for R-2 District. Mr. Easterling and Austin Fitzgerald were present to represent. Mr. Easterling said he felt that this C-2 Zoning should line up with the property to the West that he sold to West Gate Shopping Center. In answer to Mr. Maguire's question, Mr. Easterling said they had a buyer if the whole piece of property could be rezoned to C-2. The usage would be for offices. Mr. Maguire said an R-0 Zone would serve this purpose. He then asked Planning Con- sultant Larry Wood what his position would be on offices on the back side of the property A 1 • • • • Planning Commission -3- August 12, 1975 with C-2 Zoning in front and R-0 Zoning in the back. Mr. Maguire said this would still serve as a buffer and would satisfy Mr. Easterling's needs too. Mr. Wood said they would still have room to step down from that on the property to the West if the service road were placed through there. It would not be in keeping with the amendment to the General Plan but it could be worked with. There was no one present in opposition. The public hearing was closed. Bill Kisor asked about zoning the whole thing R-0 and Helen Edmiston felt the front should be C-2. Mr. Fitzgerald felt if the front 225 feet only were zoned C-2 and then the road was widened it would not allow them much room to build since the legal description is written to the center of the highway. Mr. Easterling said the prospective purchasers would not buy it unless it was all zoned C-2. Mr. Easterling felt the C-2 should line up with the West Gate Shopping Center property. Some of the Commissioners explained that the R-0 Zoning would allow them to build offices and asked Mr. Easterling if they were wanting this rezoned for some other usage in addition to offices. Mr. Easterling and Mr. Fitzgerald said they were wanting to put offices on the property. Helen Edmiston moved to recommend to the Board of Directors that the'front §outh) 225 feet be rezoned to C-2 and the remainder of the property be rezoned as R-0. Donald Nickell seconded the motion. Planning Administrator Bobbie Jones asked if this would be from the right-of-way or as described in the legal description. Larry Wood said he had scaled it from the right-of-way so there would actually be 225 feet of the property zoned C-2. - Mr. Easterling and Mr. Fitzgerald still felt that this should be C-2 all the way to line up with West Gate Shopping Center property. Mrs. Edmiston said this would give them offices. Chairman Gitelman said if this motion passed, it would give Mr. Easterling a week to see if this would satisfy the prospective purchaser's needs and if it did not, they could appeal it to the Board of Directors. John Maguire agreed with Mr. Easterling and Mr.Fitzgerald in that the C-2 should be ex- tended at least to the back to Rutledge Lane. John Maguire moved to amend the motion to move the C-2 line back to 350 feet North of the Highway right-of-way. Jack Ray seconded the motion. Maguire, Power, Nickell, Jacks, Edmiston, and Ray voted in favor of the amendment to the motion. Those opposed were Gitelman, Kisor, and Davis. The motion passed. Those voting in favor of rezoning the South 350 feet to C-2 and the remainder of the property to R-0 were Maguire, Power, Nickell, Jacks, Gitelman, Edmiston, and Ray. Kisor and Davis opposed., The motion was approved. The public hearing was opened on Rezoning Petition R75-15, REZONING PETITION R75-15 Jeremy Hess for Earvel E. Fraley (property owner), to Jeremy Hess for Earvel Fraley rezone property located at 1035 Cato Springs Road from R-1, 1035 Cato Springs Road Low Density Residential District, to R-2, Medium Density Residential District. Planning Consultant Larry Wood gave the Planning Report and recommended approval of the request since it was consistent with the General Plan. Claude Prewitt was present to represent Mr. Hess. He said Mr. Hess had a buyer for this if the property could be rezoned so a duplex could be constructed there. He said the house trailer that was there woud be removed. No one was present in opposition. 10• • • ft Planning Commission -4- August 12, 1975 Ernest Jacks moved to recommend the approval of Rezoning to the Board of Directors. John Maguire seconded the motion which was approved by a Helen Edmiston abstaining. Petition R75 -1S, Jeremy Hess vote of 8-0-1 with Next was the public hearing on Rezoning Petition R75-16, REZONING PETITION R75-16 Oliver W. Ostmeyer, to rezone property located at Oliver W. Ostmeyer 701 North College Avenue from R-0, Residential -Office 701 North College Avenue District, to C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial District. Planning Consultant Larry Wood gave the Planning Report. He said the General Plan recommended low density residential as the future land use for this area. He also pointed out that this particular tract of land had been studied four times in the last four years; Three times property owners had requested a change from office zoning to commercial zoning and one time the City Board of Directors requested an overall study of all R-0 District property and each time the recommendation to the Planning Commission and the final decision was to discourage extensive commercial use of the property on the West side of Highway 71 (identified as a principal arterial). The last zoning action (R72-46) was taken to court and the Court upheld the City and dismissed the case. Mr. Wood said the facts and physical characteristics had not changed in this area to date. The traffic volume remains about 20,000 vehicles in a .24-hour period. The property is near the bottom of a hill, with a curve in Highway 71 and a retaining wall to the North of the property under application creating visual problems for South bound traffic. He did not recommend the request for a change to C-2 District. Mr. Ostmeyer was present to represent. He submitted pictures of the Planning Commission showing visibility from the North and South of the site. He said there were about four single-family dwellings North of Prospect Street. He said one of these had been abandoned and the others are around 30 or 40 years old and they have no access to College Avenue and that from all practical purposes, Pollard was their street for access. He felt that this would not develop as a low-density residential area. He also felt that the visibility was better at this location than it was in other places on Highway 71. The previous rezoning petition had been from Trenton to North and this request was just for the one lot and yet the recommendation was exactly like it was at the original request. He said he would like for the Commission to put this in its perspective. There was no one present in opposition. The public hearing was closed. Bill Kisor was in favor of the rezoning. He felt this was a valuable piece of property that should be zoned C-2. Jack Ray felt the visibility would not be any worse on the West side of College Avenue than it is on East side with Rebecca emptying into College. In answer to Mr. Jacks' question, Planning Consultant Larry Wood said that the existing motel to the South was zoned R-0 and that there was a strip of R-0 from Baxter to North Street on the East side of College Avenue. Mrs. Edmiston felt that the view was not too bad there( it would not be any worse than trying to turn left anywhere else on College) however, she said pulling out from this property and turning North onto Highway 71 was terrible. John Maguire felt it would vary as to which usage (office or commercial) would generate the most traffic. He said some doctors' offices generated more traffic than some commercial establishments. Helen Edmiston asked Mr. Ostmeyer if C-1 would be suitable for his purposes. Mr. Ostmeyer said he would prefer C-2 and South of the motel it was C-2; therefore, this would be a continuation of the C-2 Zoning. (The motel is a non -conforming use in the R-0 Zone.) In answer to Mr. Maguire's question, Mr. Ostmeyer stated that there was a proposed development for this but the people had backed out. There was no further discussion. • • Planning Commission August 12, 1975 -5- Bill Kisor moved to recommend to the Board of Directors the approval of Rezoning Petition R75-16, Oliver Ostmeyer. Jack Ray seconded the motion. Kisor, Ray, Maguire, Edmiston voted "Aye"; Nickell, Jacks, Gitelman, and Davis voted "Nay". John Power abstained. The motion failed to pass as five affirmative votes are necessary on rezoning petitions. Chairman Gitelman opened the public hearing on Rezoning Petition R75-17, Cy Carney, Jr. to rezone property located at 2944 South School Avenue from R-1, Low Density Residential District, to C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial Dist Planning Consultant Larry Wood gave the Planning Report in the change from R-1 District to a C-2 District. Attorney Pete Estes, Jr. was present to represent Dr. Mona REZONING PETITION R75-17 Cy Carney, Jr. 2944 South School Avenue rict. which he did not recommend han who is the prospective buyer. Mr. Estes said Mrs. Monahan was a doctor of veterinary medicine and would like to open a clinic on the property. He said this would be on an outpatient basis only, that the animals would not be boarded there. He said all of the equipment and animals would be indoors. He said this would be a clinic for small animals only; that it would not involve horses or cows, but would be for domestic pets. Mr. Estes submitted some material to the Planning Commission consisting of: Exhibit 1: pointed out the C-2 Zoning in the area of the requested rezoning. Exhibit 2: pointed out the other three veterinarian clinics in Fayetteville. (a)Acorn Acres on Township Road which is primarily a large animal clinic. (b) Stanton Animal Hospital on Green Acres Road which is the only one in Fayetteville dealing with small domesticated animals. (c) Animal clinic on Highway 16 East which is a mixed type operation. Concerning Mr. Wood's recommendation as to residential in this area, Mr. Estes stated that the property under consideration was a part of the old Country Club Addition which was filed September 16, 1926. He pointed out on an aerialphoto where this had been subdivided but said that no action had been taken to develop roads dedicated, etc. He also pointed out that there were two dwellings on this property under consideration which also has two septic tanks. He stated that the proposed operation is to rennovate and use one of these dwellings and use both septic tanks. He felt that in the long run this usage would be less of a burden on the septic tanks than two families would be living there. Exhibit 3, Pages 1,2, and -3 listed the names of businesses from 15th Street to the Airport entrance. Mr. Estes said there were 53 commercial businesses altogether. Page 4 of Exhibit 3 listed the names of the 16 businesses located 11 mile on each side of the proposed site. Mr. Estes pointed out that this was zoned low density residential, but felt the character of the neighborhood was extending into a commercial area. He also pointed .out that there would not be as much waste or noise problem with this clinic being for small animals. He also said he wanted to point out that the highway starts widening for the divided highway which intersects with the bypass out in front of this property and is wider at this point than the normal portion of Highway 71 further North. He also said that in a recent act that had been passed Arkansas determined that there was a shortage of doctors of veterinarian in Arkansas. He felt that with the character of the neighborhood going commercial that the property should be rezoned for this usage. There was no one present in opposition. Planning Administrator Bobbie Jones said she had been contacted by someone right before the meeting that told her that in 1971 there was apparently some conflict over a property line and that the legal description as submitted to her includes a triangular piece of property On the South side being 15 feet at its widest point) of which title belongs to someone else. They do not object to the request but they do object to this piece of property being included. Planning Commission -6- August 12, 1975. Mr. Estes said he did not think the abstracts had been examined yet and the purchaser could not buy any more title to the land than what belongs to the owner. Mr. Jacks said if this were rezoned to C-2, it would allow them to go ahead and board the animals at the proposed location. Mr. Nickell said he was thinking about the noise factor if it were rezoned and the animals were boarded there. Mr. Estes stated that as this was proposed at the present time, there would not be any boarding of the animals and all surgery would be performed inside the building. He said there were plenty other clinics that handled this type of operation. Mr. Jacks stated he felt this was going commercial, but he was reluctant to have this in' the middle of what was residential: John Maguire said in view of the fact that since 1926 there had been only six or eight houses built in the subdivision he would move to recommend to the Board of Directors the approval of Rezoning Petition R75-17, Cy Carney, Jr., limited to the property owned by Mr. Carney. John Power seconded the motion which was approved unanimously. The public hearing was then opened on Rezoning Petition REZONING PETITION R75-18 R75-18, Fayetteville Planning Commission, to rezone Fayetteville Planning Commission property located at 2100 South School from R-1, Low 2100 South School Avenue Density Residential, to C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial District. At the July 22, 1975 Planning Commission, Attorney Charles Williams (representing John Slifer) had petitioned for a rezoning. Mr. Williams had stated at that meeting that Mr. Slifer had moved his business to this location thinking that it was C-2 Zoning and when he went to obtain a Certificate of Occupancy it was found thh#t the property was zoned R-1. It was felt that there may have been a slip/clartl'Aey in the zoning map and, therefore, the Planning Commission felt they should initiate the rezoning. Planning Consultant Larry Wood gave the Planning Report recommending the approval of the request. He did, however, caution.that the property owner should be prepared, during the review of any large scale development plan to solve the access problem and cope with the potential of a collector street requirement adjacent to this property. He said there was a traffic hazard with traffic entering Highway 71. Mr. Slifer said he bought the property from J. W. and Marie Eoff and they had told him that the property was zoned C-2, and he also had letters stating it was C-2. However, when he went to get his Certificate of Occupancy it was discovered that the property was zoned R-1. There was no one present to object. Donald Nickell moved to recommend to the Board of Directors the approval of Rezoning Petition R75-18, Fayetteville Planning Commission. Helen Edmiston seconded the motion which was approved unanimously. The next item on the agenda was a conditional use request CONDITIONAL USE REQUEST for Radio Station KKEG, 3073 North College'Avenue (Part of KKEG Circle C Motel building), zoned C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial District. The applicant requested that this item (Item 9, KKEG) be deferred until the August 26, 1975 Planning Commission meeting so that a representative might attend the Planning Commission meeting. Ernest Jacks moved to table Item 9 (KKEG) until the August 26, 1975 meeting. Helen Edmiston seconded the motion which was approved unanimously. 1111 Next was the proposed Final Plat of Shadow Hill Subdivision, SHADOW HILL SUBDIVISION located on Old Wire Road across from its intersection Final Plat with Old Missouri Road and lying West of Colette Avenue; Loris Stanton and James 0. Witt, Jr., developers. Mr. Jacks gave the Subdivision_Committee Report and stated that the only question was • Planning Commission -7- August 12, 1975 regarding what arrangement the developer was planning to make for half of the cost to construct Collette Avenue. Mr. Stanton was present and stated that he had told the Board of Directors that he would sign a contract to this effect. There was no further discussion. Ernest Jacks moved to recommend to the Board of Directors the approval of Shadow Hill Subdivision as a final plat. Helen Edmiston seconded the motion which was approved unanimously. PARKER RUSHING The next item was a Conditional Use Request and Large Scale Conditional Use Request Development Plan of Parker David Rushing to develop Large Scale Development Ridgefarm Stables on a 60 -acre tract zoned R-1, Low Density Residential, lying East of Crossover Road and North of Stone Bridge Road. Parker Rushing was present to represent. Rita Davis moved to approve the Conditional Use Request. Jack Ray seconded the motion which was approved unanimously. Ernest Jacks gave the Subdivision Committee Report and stated that the Board of Directors had amended the zoning ordinance to allow stables in an R-1 Zone with several restrictions, one of them requiring 1 parking space per acre. Mr. Rushing would need 18,000 square feet in parking and he does not show that much. Another question was whether or not public water and toilet facilities would be required as City Engineer Paul Mattke had suggested. Mr. Rushing shows an existing spring on his plans. There was a question in Subdivision Committee meeting as to whether or not the Planning Commission could regaire this. Bill Kisor stated he felt it would be necessary for Mr. Rushing to provide public water and toilet facilities. Mr. Jacks felt Bill Parette, County Sanitarian, should be contacted to check on this matter. The third question was the word arena Mr. Rushing had used in his request. Mr. Rushing said he was trying to keep this as simple as possible and that if this started to grow he would have to come back with another plan anyway.. He stated that the parking would not be any problem. He said when this was discussed at Plat Review it was felt that the house would be close enough to provide toilet facilities. He stated that when he talked about arenas he was talking about a flat area with a fence around it ( a ring type thing) and that there would not be any grandstands or horse shows. There was no further discussion. Ernest Jacks moved to recommend for approval the Large Scale Development Plan of Parker Rushing with the provision that it meet the required parking as written in the ordinance. Helen Edmiston seconded the motion. John Maguire felt they should check with Bill Parette on the public water and restroom facilities. Mr. Jacks felt that this was not the concern of the Planning Commission. The motion was approved unanimously. The next item for consideration by the Planning Commission was a request KEN LAZENBY for a waiver of subdivision requirements submitted by Ken Lazenby for Lot Split property on the East side of East Farmers' Road. (This proposed lot split would create 5 lots; the Planning Office is authorized to approve only 3 splits which would create no more than 4 lots; therefore, this is referred to the Planning Commission). Mr. Jacks reported that the Subdivision Committee found there was a 10 foot requirement for a gas easement on the South side of the South lot and an additional 5 feet of right-of- way is needed on East Farmers' Avenue to meet the Master Street Plan requirement'. He said that in connection with that, Street Superintendent Clayton Powell is asking • 'rn Planning Commission -8- August 12, 1975 that Mr. Lazenby be required to pave, curb and gutter the street and provide street lights; however, the Subdivision Committee felt that he could not be required to do this. Mr. Jacks said, as he understood it, the City's policy that on an existing street had always been they have not been able to require the developer to pave it. Helen Edmiston agreed. There was no further discussion. Ernest Jacks moved to approve the waiver of subdivision requirements of Mr. Lazenby with the provision of the 10 foot gas easement and 5 foot additional right-of-way off of Farmers Avenue. Helen Edmiston seconded the motion which was approved unanimously. Next was a conditional use request submitted by Donna DONNA SPITZER FELLOWS Spitzer Fellows for a Montessori Pre -School in their res- Conditional Use Request idence at 213 Summitt Avenue, zoned R-1, Low Density 213 Summitt Avenue Residential District. Donna Fellows was present to represent. She told the Planning Commission that she would have no more than 15 children at one time for half days only (weekdays) and the adjoining property owners had been notified and they were not in objection to this. There was no further discussion. Ernest Jacks moved to approve the conditional use.request of Donna Spitzer Fellows for a Montessori Pre -School in her residence. John Maguire seconded the motion. The motion was approved by a vote of 9-0. The next item was a conditional use request submitted TAMMY McCONNELL by Tammy McConnell representing other parents who wish Conditional Use Request to establish a day-care center for pre-school children at 1440 1440 Markham Road Markham Road, zoned R-1, Low Density Residential District. Tammy McConnell was present to represent. She said all the adjoining property owners had been notified. Planning Administrator Bobbie Jones stated that copies of the agenda had also been mailed to the adjoining property owners on this. Helen Edmiston moved to approve the conditional use request as submitted by Tammy McConnell for a day-care center for pre-school children at 1440 Markham Road Donald Nickell seconded the motion. In answer to Chairman Gitelman's question, Mrs. McConnell stated that the building would not require any modifications. There was no further discussion. The motion was approved unanimously. The next item was a report from the REPORT FROM SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE Subdivision Committee on possible changes in the Subdivision Regulations Subdivision Regulations to prescribe traffic safety standards, and for other purposes. A public hearing would be required in order to change the existing regulations. Ernest Jacks reported from the Subdivision Committee Meeting and stated that they felt the ordinance as drafted by the City Attorney has a lot of advice for developers. He said there was a question in their minds as to whether the ordinance should be written in a more regulatory manner and pass out advice in another manner. They felt it should be written in a more specific manner. In Section 2 ---Access Control "Driveways to residential lots shall not have direct access to arterial streets. If possible, driveways to residential lots shall not have direct access to collector streets." • • Planning Commission -9- August 12, 1975 Mr. Jacks asked why it was written "if possible"? "Driveways to commercial and industrial property shall be a minimum of forty (40) feet from any intersection and shall be spaced three hundred (300) feet apart with every other driveway being limited to one way in and one way out." Mr. Jacks said he felt sure this was in conflict with the present curb cut ordinance and he felt that this was not something that could be enforced except in some rather newly developed big acreages of large industrial sites, shopping centers, or things of this nature Mr. Jacks said some of the ordinance had come out mandatory and some of it suggestive and he wondered if this was ready to advertise for a public hearing. Planning Consultant Larry Wood said this was a difficult area to work in because it dealt with what was existing and what was proposed at the same time. He said perhaps one way to cut it apart was to isolate it only to new developments. He felt like this would clear up the existing situation. He said (just as Mr. Jacks had stated) they could not impose this on Highway 71, except perhaps at the Mall area He said .he and the City Attorney Jim McCord would like some more guidance on how restrictive they might want to get. Mr. Wood agreed with Mr. Jacks in that the ordinance needed some more work to sift out the mandatory part versus what is recommended. Chairman Gitelman asked Planning Administrator Bobbie Jones to leave this item on the agenda and Planning Consultant Larry Wood agreed to contact Jim McCord concerning this. Chairman Gitelman felt that perhaps Mr. McCord should be present at the next meeting. The next item was recommendations for the Fayetteville- RECOMMENDATIONS FROM Springdale Transportation Plan (Major Street Plan). FAYETTEVILLE-SPRINGDALE Larry Wood said the recommendation back to the Planning Com- TRANSPORTATION PLAN mission was to go ahead and close Center Street and Mountain Street between East and Block, and that Center Street remain one-way to the East and Mountain one way to the West. He said he .thought this provision was in conflict with the Housing Authority's desires on Mountain Street and Center as far as the one-way traffic. He said Meadow has been added as a collector between East and Block and that they had introduced Rock Street as an arterial street cutting across the South side and giving a total circulation pattern around the square. He said they had basically stayed with the recommendations as far as the designation of these streets and the right-of-way that they would require. He then pointed out the note at the bottom of the drawing which stated "Right-of-way required in the center square Urban Renewal area shall be in accordance with the officially adopted renewal plan as concurred in by the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development." Mr. Wood said what this actually boiled down to is that the adopted plan carries a lesser standard than what was shown on the map so that if the Planning Commission were to assume that.they would be seeing 80 feet of right- of-way on East and Block, he did not think that would be a reality as far as what the adopted renewal plan actually says. He did feel that this basically takes care of the conflict that exists between the two and that the Urban Renewal can move on to redevelop- ment without getting into conflict in development problems on the right-of-way provisions. Mr. Wood said the Transportation Committee agreed with Mr. Lindsey's proposal on the relocation of Zion Road West of Crossover Road to take the jog out of the street. He said they recommended an extension of Old Wire Road East of Crossover Raod reducing it to keep it a minor arterial street; also the extension of Elaine East of Crossover Road as a collector street. Ernest Jacks moved to advertise for a public hearing to incorporate all of these recommendations into the Master Street Plan. Helen Edmiston seconded the motion. Chairman Gitelman suggested that this be scheduled for a public hearing for the second Planning Commission meeting in September, The motion was approved unanimously. A Planning Commission -10- August 13, 1975 The next item was a report on a special committee meeting to REPORT ON POSSIBLE C-4 study possible district regulations to create a C-4 Zoning ZONING DISTRICT • District. Chairman Gitelman reported that the committee came up with a proposed amendment to the Zoning Ordinance to add a C-4 District located not as extensively as the boundaries demonstrated on Mr. Clinton's map, but a much smaller area. He said they talked tentatively of boundaries of,Rock Street, Spring Street, Locust Street and they went to just the other side of the Court House (County Avenue). He said they did not try to locate the boundary specifically since they felt this needed to be done by the whole Planning Commission. He said they basically recommended that the new downtown district be a little more intense in its development potential than the C-3 District. He said this would cut down considerably on setback requirements. He said the part they came up with that would probably be the essential problem was the off-street parking. What they came up with would provide the Planning Commission and the developer with three alternatives: (1) To allow the property owner to provide whatever the off-street parking requirements in the ordinance might be. Chairman Gitelman felt the next two alternatives should be considered by the City. That is to allow the Planning Commission, with the Board of Directors approval, to waive off-street parking requirements on the basis of two different approaches. (1) One would be to allow the developer to purchase property elsewhere other than where he is going to put his building and to dedicate to the City an equivalent amount of property somewhere else within the C-4 District or within 1,000 feet of his property or (2) to pay to the City (a one-time, front-end cost) $500 per space. The developer would be asking for a waiver with the monies to be used for the providing of off-street parking in the C-4 District. • He said Mr.Clinton was strongly convinced that if they put it at the front end with a definite figure rather than some vague requirement of signing up for an improvement district in the future, it would be better for developers because they could borrow their money and get their building costs. With this knowledge in advance they could advertise this particular cost. He said Mr. Clinton felt the $500 was an acceptable figure to developers. If developers could not provide adequate parking where the building was located, this would go a long way in providing perhaps a double deck parking garage, or parking lots. Mr. Jacks commented that $500 would not start to buy a parking structure space. Chairman Gitelman agreed but stated that it was difficult to come up with a fair figure of assessment when they had the variation between commercial and office uses. Mr. Maguire said they felt that the redevelopment of small tracts would be hard to deal with because they would only be required to have four or five spaces for a small shop. Mr. Maguire felt that a larger development would realize that they would have to furnish enough parking anyway. Mr. Kisor said Mr. Clinton also brought out at their meeting that this $500 could be used by the City to purchase some more property, perhaps Urban Renewal property. Chairman Gitelman said there was not a shortage of parking spaces at the present time in the downtown area; however, if some arrangements were not made in advance they might find themselves "closed in". He felt that one of the big problems with the proposed C-4 Zoning District would be on where to draw the lines of this district. He said Mr. Clinton was told that the Planning Commission would not go for as large a district as Mr. Clinton had mentioned at the last Planning Commission meeting. Planning Consultant Larry Wood said he had had two additional thoughts since their meeting with Mr.Clinton. (1) the 1,000 feet bothered him in the distance in the • reality of someone actually walking that far (2) He would like to see a study of the actual cost of surfaced and elevated parking to see how close this parking fee comes to it. He said if it was too low they could end up "handcuffing" the City with obliga- tions to provide the parking on that variance. Planning Commission -11- August 12, 1975 John Maguire said it would depend on the source of the land as to what the cost would be. Administrative Assistant David McWethy said for the general average double deck parking garage the $25,000 for 50 spaces they were talking about would probably pay for the engineering and that a parking space would probably be about $2,000 or $2,500 each. John Maguire said they discussed building an escalator clause into this provision. He also pointed out that this dollar amount could be amended at any given time. He also said they were faced with trying to encourage redevelopment in the downtown area in 1975 and 1976 terms in a situation where there was excess parking spaces at the present time. He went on to say that in a sense they would be penalizing someone by looking at it in 1980 and 1985 terms, however, he said if there was suddenly a problem the amount could be moved up. Chairman Gitelman felt this was a better way of handling the situation than trying to form an improvement district. Mr. Maguire pointed out that this did not preclude that option, however. After further discussion Ernest Jacks moved to hold a public hearing on the for a C-4 (Downtown) Zoning District. John Power seconded the motion which was approved unanimously. Chairman Gitelman asked Planning Consultant Larry Wood to try to come up with some figures on the cost of the surfaced or elevated parking. proposal The last item for consideration was a waiver of subdivision requirements involving a tandem lot, a conditional use permitted only on appeal to the Planning Commission, submitted by Frank McDonald on the East side of Old Wire Road. Ernest Jacks gave the Subdivision Committee Report stating they had not found any problems., Mr. McDonald was present but had no comments. Ernest Jacks moved to approve the tandem lot request as submitted by Mr. McDonald. Helen Edmiston seconded the motion which was approved unanimously. There was no other business. FRANK McDONALD Lot Split Tandem Lot for property The meeting was adjourned at 6:35 P. M. RESOLUTION PC 39-75 WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the Fayetteville Planning Commission, Tuesday, August 12, 1975, fifteen (15) days 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 a proposed ordinance to amend Ordinance 1747 (Appendix A - Zoning, Code of Ordinance, City of Fayetteville, Arkansas) to amend Article 5, Section VIII and IX to delete Outdoor Advertising as a permissible use in the I-1 and I-2 Zoning Districts, and for other purposes. NCW,:THEREFORE, BE IT RECOMMENDED BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION TO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILIE, ARKANSAS. SECTION 1. That the proposed ordinance, attached hereto and made a part hereof, be adopted to amend Ordinance 1747 to amend Article 5, Sections VIII and IX to delete Outdoor Advertising as a permissible use in the I-1 and I-2 Zoning Districts and for other purposes. PASSED AND APPROVED this day of APPROVED: , 1975. Morton Gitelman, Chairman • • RESOLUTION NO. PC 40-75 WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the Planning Commission, Tuesday, August 12, 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 R75-13, Sylvia G. Collins. NO4, THEREFORE, BE IT RECOMMENDED BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION TO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILIE, ARKANSAS. SECTION 1. That the petition requesting the rezoning of property, described as follows, from R-1, Low Density Residential District, to A-1, Agricultural District, be denied. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Part of the SW*, SE*, SW}, -Section 14 and a part of the NW*, NEL, NW*, Section 23, aUl:1 LT -16-N, R -30-W, described as follows, to -wit: Be - 'ginning at a point which is 4.8 feet north of the Southeast corner of said first mentioned 10 acre tract, and running thence North 210 feet, thence West 260 feet, thence South 45 feet, thence West 100 feet, thence South 265 feet, thence East 100 feet, thence North 100 feet, thence East 260 feet to the point of beginning, containing 1:85 acres, more or less. To rezone from R-1, Low Density Residential District, to A-1, Agricultural District. SECTION_2., That the4tezoning:.of:the_above described real estate would not:be presently desirable. PASSED AND APPROVED this 12th day of August APPROVED: „1975. Morton Gitelman, Chairman • RESOLUTION NO. PC 41-75 WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the Planning Commission, Tuesday, August 12, 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 R75-14, Deryle Easterling, to rezone the property hereinafter described from A-1, Agricultural District, to C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial District. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RECOMMENDED BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION TO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS. SECTION 1. That Rezoning Petition R75-14, Deryle Easterling, be amended to rezone the South 390 feet of the property hereinafter described from A-1, Agricultural District, to 0-2, Thoroughfare Commercial District. SECTION 2. That Rezoning Petition R75-14, Deryle Easterling, be amended to rezone the property hereinafter described,"less and except the South 390 feet thereof, from A-1, Agricultural District, to R-0, Residential Office District. SECTION 3. That an ordinance be adopted for the purpose of rezoning from A-1, Agricultural District, to C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial District, and to R-0, Residential Office District, the following described property: LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Part of the NE*, NE*, Section 19, T -16-N, R -30-W, described as follows: Beginning at a point which is 991 feet South of the NW corner of said 40 acre tract, and running, thence North 601.2 feet; thence N 85°301 E 278.3 feet; thence South 761 feet to the centerline of U. S. Highway 62; thence S 69° W with the centerline of said Highway 240 feet; thence North bearing West 227 feet to the beginning point, containing 4.94 acres, more or less. SECTION 4. That the above-described property be rezoned from A-1, Agricultural District, to C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial District, and R-0, Residential Office District, so that the property owner may sell the property to someone to build office buildings thereon. PASSED AND APPROVED this 12th day of August , 1975. APPROVED• MORTON GITELMAN, Chairman • • RESOLUTION N0. PC 42-75 WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the Planning Commission, Tuesday, August 12, 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 R75-15, Jeremy Hess for Earvel E. Fraley, Property Owner. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RECOMMENDED BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION TO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILIE, ARKANSAS. SECTION 1: That an ordinance be adopted for the purpose of rezoning from R-1, Low Density Residential District, to R-2, Medium Density Residential District, said real estate. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Part of the N4, NW*, Section 28, T -16-N, R 30-W, described as follows, to -wit: Beginning at the Nd corner of said 40 acre tract, and running thence East 100 feet, thence South to the centerline of the branch, thence in a Southwesterly direction along the center of the branch to a point due South of the beginning point, thence North 515 feet, more or less, to the point of beginning. SECTION 2: That the above-described property be rezoned from R-1, Low Density Residential District, to R-2, Medium Density Residential District, so that the property owner may build a duplex thereon. PASSED AND APPROVED this 12th day of August APPROVED• , 1975. MORTON GITELMAN, Chairman RESOLUTION NO. PC 43-75 WHEREAS; a public hearing was held by the Planning Commission, Tuesday, • August 12, 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 R75-16, Oliver W. Ostmeyer. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RECOMMENDED BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION TO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVTLTF, ARKANSAS. SECTION 1. That the petition requesting the rezoning of property, described as follows, from R-0, Residential Office District,. to C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial District, be denied. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot 5 and the South 25 ft. of equal and uniform width off Lot 4, Block 17, A. L. Trent's Revised Plat of City Park Addition. SECTION 2. That the rezoning of the above described real estate would not be presently desirable. PASSED AND APPROVED this 12th day of August , 1975. APPROVED: MORTON GITELMAN, Chairman 1 1 RESOLUTION NO. PC 44-75 WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the Planning Commission, Tuesday, August 12, 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 R75-17, Cy Carney, Jr. to rezone the following described property from R-1, Low Density Residential District, to C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial District: LEGAL DESCRIPTION: All of Lots 1, 2, and 3 and part of Lot 4, consisting of a strip of land approximately 22 ft. wide of equal and uniform width across the northern boundary of Lot 4, being all of said Lot 4 which lies North of a line running due West from the Southeast corner of said Lot 3 to U. S. Highway 71, all in Block 7, Country Club Addition to the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas. 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 R-1, Low Density Residential District, to C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial District, the following described property: LEGAL DESCRIPTION: A11 of Lots 1, 2, and 3, Block 7, Country Club Addition to the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, and that part of Lot 4, Block 7, Country Club Addition to the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, described as follows: Beginning at the Northeast corner of said Lot 4, thence southerly along the East line of said Lot 4 to a point 22 ft. South of the NE corner of said Lot, thence westerly to a point on the East right-of-way of U. S. Highway 71 which is '. 7 ft. South of the Northwest corner of said Lot 4, thence northerly along said Highway right-of-way to the Northwest corner of said Lot 4, thence easterly to the point of beginning. SECTION 2. That the above-described property be rezoned from R-1,,Low Density Residential District, to C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial District, so that the property owner may sell the property to a doctor of Veterinary Medicine to be used as a diagnostic animal clinic for small animals. PASSED AND APPROVED this 12th day of August , 1975. APPROVED: MORTON GITELMAN, Chairman • RESOLUTION N0. PC 45-75 WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the Planning Commission, Tuesday, August 12, 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 R75-18, City Planning Commission. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RECOMMENDED BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION TO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE CITY OF FAIETTEVTLTP, ARKANSAS. SECTION 1. That an ordinance be adopted for the purpose of rezoning from R-1, Low Density Residential District, to C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial District, the following described property: LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Part of the NW}, NEI, Section 28, T -16-N, R -30-W, described as follows, to -wit: Beginning at a point which is 436.96 feet West of the NE corner of said 40 acre tract, and running thence S 11°30' W 186.4 feet, more or leas, to the centerline of a 20 ft. roadway, thence N 78°30' W with the centerline of said roadway to the centerline of U. S. Highway No. 71, thence N 12°22' E with the centerline of U. S. Highway 71 116.87 feet or the the North line of said 40 acre tract, thence East 415 feet to the beginning point, containing 1.35 acres, subject to an easement over and upon the South 10 ft. of the above described tract, LESS AND EXCEPT that portion embraced in U. S. Highway 71. SECTION 2. That the above-described property be rezoned from R-1, Low Density Residential District, to C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial District, because it is the feeling of the City Planning Commission that it was the intent to have this property zoned C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial District, when Zoning Ordinance 1747 and Zoning District Map were adopted on June 29, 1970. PASSED AND APPROVED this 12th day of August , 1975. APPROVED: MORTON GITELMAN, CHAIRMAN • • • L RESOLUTION PC 46-75 WHEREAS, at its regular meeting on Tuesday, August 12, 1975, the Planning Commission voted to make a recommendation to the Board of Directors on the final subdivision plat dated , 19 , known as Shadow Hill Subdivision submitted by Loris Stanton and James 0. Witt, Jr. developers and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended that because the necessary improvements have not been installed in said subdivision that Loris Stanton and James 0. Witt, Jr. 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 Shadow Hill•Subdivision described as follows: LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Part of the NEt of the SWk and part of the WA of the NW* of the SE* of Section 36, T -17-N, R -30-W, City of Fayetteville, Washington County, Arkansas, more particularly described as follows: Beginning at a point which lies S 0° 42' W 346.2 feet from the NE corner of said W§ of the NWt of the SEk, and running thence S O° 42' W 259.07 feet; thence S 89° 24' W 188.14 feet; thence South 13.86 feet; thence N 890 07' W 829.38 feet; thence N 29° 24' E 284.65 feet; thence Easterly along a curve to the right, the tangent of which bears N 29° 24' E and the radius of which is 318.38 feet, a distance of 463.06 feet; thence S 67° 16' E 199.10 feet; thence Easterly along a curve to the left, the tangent of which bears S 67° 16' E and the radius of which is 625.07 feet, a distance of 301.95 feet to the point of beginning. PASSED AND APPROVED this ATTEST: Ernest Jacks, Secretary day of , 1975. APPROVED: Mr. Morton Gitelman, Chairman RESOLUTION FC 47-75 BE IT RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, that a public hearing be called for the purpose of amending the Major Street Plan. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the the Planning Administrator is hereby authorized to give notice of said public hearing by having a notice published in a newspaper of general circulation at least 15 days prior to the date of said public hearing; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the date of said public hearing is hereby set for the second Planning Commission meeting in September, 1975. PASSED AND APPROVED this day of , 1975. APPROVED: Morton Gitelman, Chairman RESOLUTION PC 48-75 BE IT RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, that a public hearing be called for the purpose of amending Zoning Ordinance 1747 (Appendix A - Zoning;. Code of Ordinance, City of Fayetteville, Arkansas) to include a C-4 (Downtown) District. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Planning Administrator is hereby authorized to give notice of said public hearing by having a notice published in a newspaper of general circulation at least 15 days prior to the date of said public hearing. PASSED AND APPROVED this day of , 1975. APPROVED: Morton Gitelman, Chairman