Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1976-03-29 Minutes• • • MINUTES OF A PLANNINNG,COMMISSION.MEETING A meeting of the Fayetteville Planning.Commission was held at 5;00 P, M,, Monday, March -29, 1976, in the Board of Directors Room, City Administration Building, Fayetteville, Arkansas, MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: OTHERS PRESENT: Chairman John Power, -Ernest Jacks, Donald Nickell, Peg Anderson, Bill Kisor, Jack. Ray, Rita Davis (arrived at 5:05 P. M.). Keith Newhouse, John Maguire.. Ben Winborn, Carl Yates, William Wolfe, John Hawley, Curtis Shipley, Ray Hightower, Bruce Armstrong, Richard Starr, J. E. McClelland, Kenneth Pummill, Bruce Kendall, John Cobb, Randall Barnes, Greg Dowers, Frank Blew. Fred Vorsanger, Gerald Cates, Anne Henry, Russell Purdy. Chairman John Power called the meeting to order. MINUTES Peg Anderson pointed out that on Page 7 of the March 15, 1976 meeting she felt the wording should be "Attorney Marshall Carlisle" rather than just "Attorney Marshall". The minutes were approved as corrected. The public hearing was reopened on Rezoning Petition REZONING PETITION R76-10 R76-10, City of Fayetteville, to rezone the following City of Fayetteville school property as indicated: Root School TRACT L: Root Elementary School located South of Highway 45 (Mission Boulevard) and East of Eastwood Drive, to rezone from R-1, Low Density Residential District, to P-1, Institutional District. (This item was tabled March 15, 1976.) Ben Winborn, 2332 Winwood Drive, was present to represent the School District. He told the Planning Commission that the Board of Directors had wanted school properties rezoned to Prl, Institutional District, and that he had been working on getting the legal descriptions of these properties in order to do this. He said the question that came up at the last Planning Commission meeting concerned two lots that the school acquired approximately 2 or 3 years ago facing Highway 45 by Root School. Rita Davis arrived at 5:05 P. M. He said these two lots (previously owned by Mr. Jackson) had been up for sale and he said their benefactor felt it should be for the school property. Therefore, he donated virtually all of the money so the school was able to acquire these two lots. He said the City of Fayetteville had approved a $10,000 grant (part of last year's money for Community Development grant), for tennis courts at Root School, and subsequently an engineering plan was done and application made to the Bureau of Outdoor Recreation for a grant to build two tennis courts on those two lots. He said the grant was now in the hands of BOR and had not yet been awarded to them. Mr. Winborn said he was on the City Parks: and Recreational Advisory Committee and that it was one of their highest priorities to get tenniscourt locations throughout the City. He said this was being done in cooperation between the City and the school in the use of school properties for City neighborhood parks. He said that it was in the original project for the tennis courts to be lighted, but that he had requested to the Committeethat they not be lighted since they were so close to residential property. He indicated that there was not enough. money £or.the lighting anyway. He said that this- was a City project but -he thought it was good to have it at this location since Root School wassosmall..' Mr. Carl Yates, 1400' Eastwood, said he was not present to argue the location of tennis courts at this location or any other location. Mr. Yates- said he felt the question • • Planning Commission March 29, 1976 before, the Planning Commission was a matter of approving or disapproving a rezoning petition rather than. tennis courts.. He presented and read a petition bearing'.S9 signatures of area property owners and residents who objected to the rezoning of. Lots 1 and 2, Block 6, Jacksonts First Addition to the City of Fayetteville, -Mr, Yates also read a telegram from Dr. $ Mrs. Frederick E. Joyce, Jr., property owners of the property at 1414 Eastwood Drive (property immediately adjacent and South. of the two lots in question). The telegram, which. was- addressed to Mr.. Harlan Black (who is a neighbor) which follows in its entirety is hereby made a part of these minutes: "Mr. Harlan Black 1505 Mission Fayetteville, Ar.72701 It is our understanding that the City Parks and Recreation Board and the School Board propose to rezone the property at the corner of Eastwood Drive and Mission from R-1, to P-1. We would like to register our objections to this proposal and, since we cannot attend the Planning Commission meeting on March 29, request that this letter be read into the minutes of the meeting. Our objections are as follows: 1. The property in question is newly owned jointly by the City of Fayetteville Parks Commission and the Fayetteville School Board and therefore should not be rezoned pro forma as other school property. 2. The property has always been prime residential property in a like area and if rezoned, the use of the property is taken out of the hands of the residents. This is not desirable. 3. Any usage of the property can be made by the Recreation and School Boards as it is currently zoned. This can be done, however, only with the Planning Commission's approval. This is desirable. 4. The owners of the property should be able to use the property as it is now zoned. If they cannot, then their plans are not synonymous with the interest of the residents. The lot as presently zoned is the only safeguard the neighborhood has to protect it from undesirable usage. We feel certain that the Planning Commission would always do a thorough job. However, if the property is rezoned the owners could proceed without the Commission's approval. By leaving the property zoned as is the residents of the neighborhood are assured that the property will always be used in a manner complementary to its surroundings. Thank you. Dr. $ Mrs. Frederick E. Joyce, Jr, owners of the property at 1414 Eastwood Drive" Mr. Yates pointed out that they were not in objection to the rezoning of the older tract where the original Root School was constructed before the surrounding property was subdivided, However, since theother two concerned lots were purchased after this had been subdivided and rezoned R--1, they felt this should be left R-1 so there would be some protection for those who bought lots there and built homes with the distinct understanding that they had every right to; expect that the Planning Commission would leave those lots in.the R--1 classification unless there was some overriding consideration. • • Planning Commission -3- March_29, 1976 He said in his opinion the_fact that.the School Board had. acquired those lots was not sufficient justification to rezone from R-1, Low Density Residential into P-1, Institutional District. Therefore? he said they would like for the Planning Commission to leave the two lots in question in the R-1 Zone so that anything that was not a "use by right" in the'R-1 Zone would have to -come before the Planning Commission. No one else present spoke in opposition. Chairman Power said he had talked with. City Attorney Jim McCord who had stated that if_the Planning Commission desired to do so, they could split off the two lots in question and leave them R-1. Peg Anderson said she thought one of the problems in that particular part of town was that there was no.space and that there had been no dedication of parks. Bill Kisor said tennis courts ::might not be the issue here, but that he did not know how the Planning Commission could allow tennis courts to be put up on those lots since they would require wind screens. He felt that Lots 1 and 2 should remain R-1. Donald Nickell said he felt that the P-1 would give the School Board a. little more latitude as far as building onto the school and that this seemed to be the issue. Mr. Nickell then moved to rezone the original school plot to P-1 Institutional District and leave Lots 1 and 2, Block 6, Jackson's First Addition as R -I, Low Density Residential District. The motion was seconded by Jack Ray. Rita Davis said she was delighted that the School Board had acquired those two lots. She said no houses had been built there and felt that the two lots should be P-1 and then let the School Board decide what they should put on the property. Anne Henry, 1418 Hope, was present and in answer to her question, Chairman Power said that if the motion on the floor was approved, the school would have to come back to the Planning Commission for conditional use approval. An unidentified member of the audience asked about other possible locations for tennis courts so her children would not have to go so far to play tennis. There was no further discussion. A call for votes revealed the following: Ray, Kisor, Power, Jacks, and Nickell voted "Aye" ; Davis and Anderson voted "Nay". The motion that was on the floor was approved 5-2. The next item for discussion was a Conditional Use Request SANITARY LANDFILL submitted by William Lloyd Wolfe for a Sanitary Landfill Pump Station Road lying South of Town Branch, East of Morningside Drive and William L. Wolfe North of Pump Station Road. (This property is zoned I-2) This item -as moved up due to the number of people in the audience concerning this item. Mr. Wolfe was present to represent. He said the landfill would save money for the citizens of Fayetteville over a three year period (which. is the life -expectancy of the: -landfill). He said it would be a shorter distance to drive for the trucks and it would save with the price of gasoline going up. He also pointed out that it would be more convenient for citizens inside the City limits and that it would be more under the control of the City. Mr. Wolfe said he had lived in Fayetteville for about 20 years, but had spent the past 4 years in Memphis working as an operator for 11 years and as superin- tendent foreman for two years at a landfill and he knew how to run the landfill operation efficiently., In answer to Chairman Power's question? Mr. Wolfe said he did have a copy,of the petition which had been submitted to the Planning Commission in opposition to this request and .he made responses to.the following items listed in the. petition, "(1) The surrounding area is overwhelmingly residential; and, if the landfill Planning Commission March. 29, 1976 were approved; the neighborhood peoplewould be exposed to new healthhazards from rats; vagrant dogs♦ varmints and insects," Mr. Wolfe said that at the end of a 24' --hour period, there would be 6 inches of cover material put on the daily refuse and that it would be compacted, He said this would eliminate any- insects or rodents, "(2) The slope of the designated hillside is such that runoff into the large stream 200 feet from the site is inevitable; and if the landfill were approved, contamination of Town Branch. and the White. River is almost a certainty." Mr. Wolfe said that the inspector of the landfill sites in the Northwest,: Arkansas area advised him to put water barriers on the Eastern and Southern portions of the property which would be 2 feet wide and 14 feet deep and would be filled with either a non -penetrating clay or bentonite. Mr. Wolfe said he did have the approval of the Department of Pollution Control and Ecology. "(3) The access roads to the site are in poor repair and unprotected from crosswinds and gusts; and, if the landfill were approved, a continuing health hazard and personal harassment would result from spilled and blown debris from the trucks as well as choking dust." Mr. Wolfe said he had agreed to oil the road as requested by the Street Department. He said this would eliminate that problem. "(5) The occupants of the nearby Industrial Park are equally opposed to the landfill; and, if it were approved, there is a strong possibility that further development would be retarded if not effectively ended." Mr. Wolfe said the land fill site was not visible from the Industrial Park area. "(7) The necessary activities of the proposed operation are such that, if the landfill were approved, a severe risk and extreme hazard of gas line explosion would be ever present as well as daily clouds of dust from the site itself." Mr. Wolfe said he had talked with Mike Hayes, the engineer, who had consulted with some people in Oklahoma who had a landfill with a gas''flne running through it. Mr. Wolfe said he had agreed to a 25 -foot easement either side of the gas lines which would eliminate any possibility of contamination whatsoever to the gas lines. Mr. Wolfe further commented that the difference in a sanitary landfill and a garbage dump was the appearance. He said the land fill would be maintained at all times and landscaped to eliminate any eyesores. Ernest Jacks said the Subdivision Committee in their discussion concerning the Large Scale Development had decided to bring this on to the Planning Commission. He said there was some question regarding fencing requirements sincethe ordinance states "garbage dumps" but not sanitary landfills. Attorney John Hawley, 515 West Spring was present to represent those in opposition. He said the area residents had met approximately a week ago and reviewed what they had encountered before by being exposed to the dump on Lake Wilson, and the traffic derived from that, the trail of debris and dust that occurred from that activity. _He said they also experienced the varmints and vermin that occurred when the incinerator was in the area. Mr. Hawley said the assurances as pointed out by Mr, Wolfe were appreciated but that the belief remained that some degradation and some imposition would be encountered by area residents. Concerning the cover that would be placed on the landfill every 24-hour period, Mr. Hawley said he would like to have more information as to what would occur in inclement weather when the cover material would probably be too moist to be used, and in dry weather, when the cover material itself is not oiled even though the access might be. It was felt that this would raise sizeable amounts of dust. He also questioned what would happen if a celliwas not completely_filled with residue before at the end of the day, how a partial cover would,affectuate true protection against vermin and stray animals, etc. • • • Planning Commission -5- March '29, 1976 He was also concerned about the "swimmingpool"' effect occuring from run-off (due to the s1ope1,. He said the water would have to go somewhere and that if the water was held,either behind the water barrier or in the cell as it is dug; it would be available for use by -mosquitos and other insects, Mr, Hawley said regardless of the oil on the road, the increased traffic would not increase the smoothness of the road and there was no indication that there would be paving or that maintenance would be employed to keep the road usable for the residents. Mr. Hawley also felt the proposed landfill would affect the development of the Industrial Park. Curtis Shipley, President of the Fayetteville Chamber of Commerce, was present in opposition. He said at its- monthly meeting last Friday, the Chamber of Commerce Board went on record that they were opposed to the granting of this request. They felt it would be detrimental to the -Industrial Park and to the industries presently located in the Industrial Park. He said they felt it would "kill"'the Industrial Park and put the Chamber of Commerce in the position where it would have to come back to the Planning Commission for them to reconsider other properties in the City for industrial purposes. Ray Hightower, Chief of Solid Waste Control Division of the Department of Pollution Control and Ecology. He briefly explained a sanitary landfill stating that the landfill site had to be tested by their department to determine that it would be adequate for landfill. He said they had made two soil tests at this proposed site. He said if the site was proven to be satisfactory for the sanitary landfill then there is a requirement for a registered, professional engineer to perform the engineering plans on it including all the drainage plans and the method of progression of the landfill throughout its life; drainage, on-site roads, construction and operation of the site. He explained that in a sanitary landfill, a technique is used where all of the waste is covered at the end of an operating day with at least 6 inches of good compacted earth. He said that all the wastes taken into a sanitary landfill would be compacted also to get it down to its smallest possible volume to allow a very minimum amount of water to enter the waste and also to allow the very minimum of settling after the landfill is completed. He said that the amount of settling which occurred depended on the amount of compaction that the: landfill equipment can perform on the waste. He said the landfill operators were required to maintain the final surfaces of the landfill for 2 years after it is closed. Mr. Hightower said that a lot of attempts of landfills in the past had been very poor. He said his department was out to make changes in that and that there would be a few landfills around the State that would be closed down if they did not get into good operation. Bill Kisor asked Mr. Hightower how the landfill would be covered in case of rain. Mr. Hightower said that on this particular site, a separate area had been set aside for wet weather operations and that they would not go into this area until it was absolutely necessary to when wet weather hindered operation on the regular area of the site. In this particular area, (set aside for wet weather situations) the operator would maintain adequate drainage and everything that was necessary to go in on short notice and begin operation there, In answer to Peg Anderson's question, Mr, Hightower said that top soil would be placed back on top of the landfill. Jackgay asked about constructing future buildings over the landfill site, Mr. Hightower replied that within a matter of five years there could probably be light construction over thisand that probably in about 1Q or 15 years; there could be relatively heavy construction over it. He said this depended on the landfill design. Planning Commission March 29, 1976_ John Hawley said he would still like to have the water barrier situation explained to him, Mr, Hightower said Mr,Wolfe,would have backhoe trenches dug down the Eastern and Southern sides of the property in the direction from which. the water would flow (a slow seepage) and they would be back --filled with. good quality clay or bentonite. He said this should stop the sub'tsurfaceflow ,of water and divert it down either side of the site, Bruce Armstrong, Plant Manager of Armstrong Tool Company (located in the Industrial Park) said he was 100 percent against the landfill request, He said they had spent quite a bit of money on landscaping, etc,; and were planning to construct a 20,000 square foot addition onto their plant, but indicated that if the landfill was allowed to go in on the proposed site, that this would be curtailed. Richard Starr (District Manager for the Beaver Water District) said that Beaver Water District was the water supply source for Fayetteville, Springdale, Rogers, and Benton- ville ---approximately 80,000 people and the largest concentration of food processing industry in Arkansas. He said they strongly objected to the siting of a landfill (sanitary or otherwise) at such a strategic location. He said the site was contiguous with the flood plain of Town Branch and a short distance from the West Fork of the White River, and they felt that this landfill would be a very strong source of pollution into White River and then into Beaver Lake. He said this location was upstream from their intake structure. Mr. Starr went on to say that the citizens of Northwest Arkansas had 5 million dollars invested in the lake itself as a water supply and an excess of 7 million dollars invested in treatment facilities just East of Lowell, Arkansas. In response to Mr. Hightower's remarks, Mr. Starr said he was aware of the shale outcroppings in this general area and said that this whole area was underlaid with shale. He said if shale was disturbed it did not provide any barrier whatsoever for leachate movement. He also pointed out that they did not indicate anything on the North side of the proposed site where the flood waters would come up. Mr. Starr said he had talked with a man in Rogers that handled expensive clays and he indicated that bentonite would be around 45 dollars per ton. In regard to the gas line across the proposed site, he said this could provide an open channel from the landfill area directly into Town Branch. In conclusion, he said he strongly objected to a landfill upstream from the intake site in the water shed of Beaver Lake. J. E. McClelland, 1206 Vandeventer, (Chairman of the Industrial Development Committee of the Fayetteville Chamber of Commerce) said it was the belief of the Chamber of Commerce that such an operation would seriously marr the beauty of the landscape as it presently existed and that it would further deter development in the Industrial Park. Kenneth Pummill (R and P Electroplating),also located in the Industrial Park, said he was strongly opposed to the landfill in the Industrial Park since he felt it would be detrimental to the industries coning into the area He said he did not think he would have located his business in the Industrial Park if there had been a landfill located there at the time, In conclusion, Mr. Wolfe presented pictures to the Planning Commission of the landfill site whichhe had operated in Memphis and told the Commission and members of the audience that he would have to put up a $50,000 performance bond.. He said that; if any time during the year, his permit is taken away, he would have to give $50,000 to the City to improve the development or whatever would be needed, Peg Anderson said she would like to know the purpose of I-2 Zoning if things that are unpleasant to a certain extend could not be placed in that zone, She pointed out that they did not have a zone in Fayetteville where landfills were proper. Rita Davis felt that this might be right for a conditional use in I-2, but questioned if this proposed location was the proper place in I-2 to put the landfill. She said this would be a short term operation and she did not want to jeopardize the development of the Industrial Park, or inconvenience the citizens in that area for such a short period of time. • • Planning Commission -7- March.29, 1976 Bill Kisor pointed out that, even if this was just for a short time, when the damage was done, it was done, Bill Kisor moved to deny the request. Donald Nickell -seconded the motion and a call for votes by the Chairman revealed Nickell, Jacks, Power, Kisor{ Davis- and Ray voting "Ayes' and Anderson voting "Nay" The motion to deny was approved 6-1, KKEG RADIO Next was the Conditional Use Request to place a broad Conditional Use Request casting transmitter on the existing tower at 3033 North College Avenue, submitted by Little Chief Broadcasting Companyof Fayetteville, Inc. dba KKEG Radio. This item was tabled at the March 15, 1976 Planning Commission meeting. Chairman Power said it was his understanding that they no longer wished to do this. Commissioner Jack Ray said he had spoken with Mr. Pat Demory and that this was correct. There was no one present at the meeting to represent KKEG. It was the general concensus of the Planning Commission that this item should be taken care of. Ernest Jacks then moved to deny the conditional use request. The motion, which was seconded by Bill Kisor, was approved unanimously 7-0. Next item was a report REPORT ON PARKING Y, FENCING REQUIREMENTS by Commissioner Ernest Jacks of a Committee meeting.held to study parking and fencing requirements as contained in the Zoning Ordinance. (This item was also tabled at theMarch 15, 1976 meeting.) It was decided, due to the time factor involved, that this item could be tabled until the next Planning Commission meeting. Ernest Jacks then moved to table his item until April 12, 1976. Bill Kisor seconded the motion which was approved unanimously. Next was a report from the Committee appointed to meet REPORT FROM COMMITTEE with the County Planning Board on mobile home Mobile Home Park Regulations park regulations outside the City but inside the .. (Outside City) Planning Area. Commissioners Nickell, Ray, and Anderson had been appointed to serve on that committee. Mrs. Anderson said they had a meeting concerning this and that it had been decided to let the County do the inspections in the County area, and she indicated that they would have no further meetings on this since they had reached an agreement. She said there was a letter as to the decision that was made at that meeting. It was then decided that this matter needed no further action. LETTER FROM CITY MANAGER Next was a letter from City Manager Don Grimes to Planning Commission Chairman John Power regarding a conflict between the City and County road standards within the Planning Area jurisdiction, Chairman Power appointed a committee consisting of Peg Anderson, Jack Ray and Bill Kisor to meet with. Bruce Kendall and the County Planning Board to discuss this and make a recommendation, Next was the preliminary plat of Northwest Acres Subdivision to .NORTHWEST ACRES be located North_of Highway 16, West of Rupple Lane, submitted — Preliminary Plat by Randall Barnes and John Cobb, This.proposed subdivision is outside Fayetteville City Limits but inside the.Planning Areal) John Cobb was present to represent. He said they proposed a 35 -acre residential area, and that there would be 73 residential lots in the siubdivision. He said he thought everything had been gone over thoroughly. Planning Commission March, 29r 1476 Ernest Jacks gave the Subdivision Committee report, He said. everything had been fairly well resolved except fox therequirement,o£ 125 foot lot widths on property which -is outside the City, He said -the Suhdivision Committee recommended that the lot widths be approved, He said the letter from the County felt it was up to the Planning Commission to waive this lot width. requirement, Larry Wood (Planning Consultant) said he`.recommended the lot width waiver since these lots would be on public Water and sewer, Planning Administrator Bobbie Jones said the sewer connections would have to be approved by the Board of Directors.. Mr. Jacks said Larry Wood had recommended 50 foot rights-of-way (except for the collector streets which. require 60 feet of right-of-way) but they did not know how the County felt about this. Bruce Kendall (Chairman of the County Planning Board) was present and said that the County did like 60 feet on collector streets, but were willing to go 50 feet on internal streets. Ernest Jacks then moved to approve the preliminary plat with the stipulation that the lot widths be waived and that the widths of the streets be as shown on the preliminary plat. The motion, seconded by Jack Ray, was approved unanimously. WOODED HOLLOW ESTATES Next was the preliminary plat of Wooded Hollow Estates Preliminary Plat Subdivision to be located outside the City (but inside the Planning Area near Highway 112.) Ernest Jacks gave the Subdivision Committee Report. He said the Planning Commission approved this plat at a previous meeting with a waiver of a minimum jog distance. Developer Greg Dowers and Frank Blew (Blew and Associates) were present to represent. Mr. Dowers said he was before the Planning Commission at this time to ask that he be allowed to build the streets within the subdivision to County standards except a little better. Mr. Dowers said he planned a small subdivision with 1 to 5 -acre lots and that with 200 foot of road frontage, they could not justify the cost of the curb and gutter- ing as to the price of the lots. He said their streets would be private drives and maintained by the land owners. Ernest Jacks then asked if the County would allow gravel streets. Bruce Kendall said the meeting they planned to set up (in item 5 of this agenda) was a result of this proposed subdivision. He said he had found that the County was operating on one set rules and the City on another; he felt that something should be worked out so there would not be a conflict in what they should tell the engineers and developers. Mr. Kendall said he was against private road:in developments because the City or County should face the issue. He said the County did not require just a gravel road. He said these gravel roads had to be constructed so that they could be paved later on. He told the Planning Commission that if the roads were not sloped, graded,properly;-;ca. if...they did not have a good base? they did not approve it. He did say that they did not require paving or the build up on the sides or the curbs and gutters. He said they -were not trying to lower standards, but that they were trying to encourage larger lots in the County and sometimes the developer could not go to the expense of pavement and curb and guttering, Mr, Dowers said he intended to build the streets to the minimum that the County states and also that they intend to use at least 4 inches of compacted SB -.2 material and a heavy -double bituminous seal. He said what he objected to was the curb and gutter because of the expense involved, Fred Vorsanger, Vice President of the University of Arkansas, said the University of Arkansas owned property to the East of this proposed subdivision. He said they were not in opposition to the subdivision plat, but they did need a survey made Planning Commission March_ 24? 1476 since thee had been some encroachments on that property. He said they were concerned over the cul -de -_sac since it would prevent future development of that property, He said they were concerned over the cul -de. -sac since it would prevent future develop- ment,of that property. He said whether this was a dead-end. road or a cul-de-sac that could be later used for a road, they would like to suggest that a full 50 -foot strip be kept through there for possible entrance to the University of Arkansas property. Frank Blew (Blew and Associates) said the University had initiated a survey of that property and that Mr. Dowers had yielded to the monuments of that survey in_the planning of this subdivision. He also said they had made provisions to leave sufficient width for a street joining and adjacent to the University property running North and South. If the University wanted to develop their property and build half of the street, the cul-de-sac would divert back to the adjoining owners. He said this was not shown on this since it was a preliminary plat. Planning Administrator Bobbie Jones said the Subdivision Ordinance did not require curb and gutter outside the City. She said it allows them to.construct stabilized shoulders 4 feet wide with a sodded drainage swale 5 feet wide and 12 inches deep with a slope of 3 to 1 on the street side and 2 to 1 on the other side. She said, however, that she had been told by a number of people that this was even more expensive than constructing curb and gutter. Planning Consultant Larry Wood said that they were operating within the gray area (of the land -use and planning) -of urban areas turning semi-urbanand that if they went with County standards, they were talking about a fairly heavy maintenance legacy for the City if the property were ever annexed. Mr Jacks said there were no other objections brought out at the Subdivision Committee meeting. Chairman Power pointed out that they were dealing with a waiver and a contingency on the provision for access to the University of Arkansas property for future development. City Manager Don Grimes asked the Commissioners if they were talking about a waiver of the curb and gutter alone or of curb, gutter and pavement, and whether or not they were going to go with City or County standards. Bruce Kendall suggested that the Planning Commission either grant Mr. Dowers the waiver and let the County make sure that he does it to their standards or vote him down. Chairman Power said he felt that Mr. Dowers had made a committment that he did not really have to make (going beyond the County road standards called for). He then called for a motion to accept or reject the preliminary plat. Peg Anderson moved to accept the preliminary plat of Wooded Hollow Estates with the contingency that a 50 -foot strip be left open toward the University of Arkansas property for future development and with a waiver of City street standards, but that they must be kept up to County standards. The motion, seconded by Donald Nickell, was approved unanimously. Mr. Nickell said (in regard to taking either the City or the County standards) that he felt each. subdivision should be settled on its own merits with regard to the proximity of the City of Fayetteville and how fast it might come into the City of Fayetteville, Planning Administrator Bobbie Jones said that as.she recalled the discussion at the time the Subdivision Ordinance was amended to the present improvement standards, the intent was to write the ordinance for the maximum requirements; then review each sub- division outside the City on an individual basis and waiver those standards in some cases. WASHINGTON. COUNTY SALES COMPANY The next item was a letter from the Letter froth Agricultural Committee Agricultural Committee,of the Fayetteville Chamber of Commerce to the City Planning Commission regarding relief to the existing non -conforming property known as Washington County Sales- Company by either: 1. Rezoning the property I-2,.General Industrial, or 2. Amend the Zoning Ordinance to allow Use Unit 23 as a "conditional use" in the I-1 Zone (Heavy Commercial and Light Industrial). Planning Commission March. 29, 1976 A public hearing would be needed in either case., Commissioner Jacks £elt.that.rezoningthis to k<2 would be the easiest solution, Attorney John.Everett4.Box A; Prairie Grove, was..present representing. the Washington County Sales Company, He said the Planning Commission recommended to the Board of Directors for this property-to be rezoned toy .2 arolnd two years ago but the City Board turned down the rezoning, Director Russell Purdy said there was- a large crowd at that Board meeting to object to the rezoning at that time, Mr. Everett said the Sale Barn would like to make some improvements, one of them being to put concrete floors in so that they could be cleaned up and this would keep the odor down somewhat. He said they presently had bare dirt floors, Donald Nickell said he felt that the Washington County Sales Company was there to stay since it seemed to be quite a money-making thing. He said to leave this a non-conforming use would be alright if it would die out; but he felt it was there to stay and that they should be given the opportunity to improve their facilities. Peg Anderson felt there was no reason to rezone • the property. Ernest Jacks moved to schedule this for a public hearing to rezone the property. Some of the Commissioners felt that if the people in that area realized that the Sale Barn would probably continue at that•location, they might be in favor of rezoning it so the improvements could be made. The motion was seconded by Jack Ray and approved unanimously.. Planning Administrator Bobbie Jones said she normally scheduled public hearings for the first meeting of each month but that she could schedule one on the second meeting in the month if advised by the Planning Commission to do so, Chairman Power instructed her to place this item on the agenda for the April 26th, 1976 meeting. -10- Next was a letter from Gerald and Marie Cates concerning the CATES HATCHERY possibility of placing a mobile home on property on South Garland South Garland (Cates Hatchery) to be occupied by one of their employees in order to protect their business. Mr. Cates was present to represent. He said others in the same area were having the same problem. He indicated that a mobile home had been moved in on property belonging to Arkansas Feed and Grain to be used for this purpose. Planning Administrator Bobbie Jones said this was another situation like the one requested by Mr. Pat Tobin some time ago. She said the Planning Commission had recommendec that the use of mobile homes be permitted in some zones for a caretakers use. The Board of Directors, however, turned it down. Mr. Cates said he could put a movable building that would meet the Building Code on the property to be used for this, but he said it would not be as attractive as the mobile home. Chairman Power requested Bobbie Jones to talk to Inspection Superintendent Harold Lieberenz, get him to go down to the location and checkit out, and report back to the Planning Commission both on Mr. Cates', problem and on the Arkansas Feed and Grain. He also instructed the Planning Administrator to place this on the April 12th. agenda to be re -opened for discussion, Next was the referral of Villa North_£rom the Board of Directors VILLA NORTH back to the Planning Commission concerning access to Highway 71 North, Bobbie Jones said Mr, Ogden, developer of Villa North, had called the Planning Office and stated that he had been in the hospital and did not have time to prepare for the meeting. Therefore, he asked that it be placed on the April 12th. agenda, Chairman Power asked that this be placed on the April 12th agenda and asked each Commissioner to drive through Villa Mobile Home Park and to observe the intersection across from the Holiday Inn. Planning Commission -11- March 29, 1976 Planning Administrator Bobbie Jones asked the ::OTHER BUSINESS ' Commissioners to observe the copies of the appeal to the Fayetteville Board of Directors concerning right-of-way dedication°on Paradise Valley Golf Course, She felt this appeal was so that the Board o£ Directors would have a chance to take a look at this, The Commissioners indicated that they had thought this would go on to the Board of Directors when they approved this, There was no further discussion. The meeting was adjourned at 7:22'P. M. • • • RESOLUTION PC 24-76 WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the Planning Commission, Monday, March 15, 1976, 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 on March 15, 1976, to make a recommendation to the Board of Directors on Rezoning Petition R76-10, Root Elementary School, City of Fayetteville: WHEREAS, a public hearing was held March 29, 1976, fifteen (15) days after and after a notice was published in the paper of general circulation; and LEGAL DESCRIPTION: by the Planning Commission, Monday, a sign was erected upon the property Northwest Arkansas Times, a news - Part of the NE4, NE;, and part of the Sal, NE;, Section 10, T -16-N, R -30-W, more particularly described as follows, to -wit: Beginning at the SE corner of the NE' of the NE; and running, thence South 160 feet; thence West 500 feet; thence North 513.3 feet to the South right of way line of State Highway 45, thence in a Northeasterly direction with said right of way line approximately 543 feet to the East line of the NEa, NE4, Section 10, thence South with the East line of said 40 acre tract 547.3 feet to the place of beginning, containing 7 acres, more or less. ALSO, part of Lots 1 and 2, Block 6, Jackson's First Addition to the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, described as follows: Beginning at the NE corner of said Lot 1, running thence South 163.3 feet; thence S 800 30' W 100 feet; thence N 110 41' W 145.5 feet to the North line of said Lot 1 and running thence Northeasterly with said North line of said Lot 1, 133.6 feet to the Place of beginning. ALSO, part of Lot 2, Block 6, Jackson's First Addition to the City of Fayetteville, described as follows: Beginning at the NW corner of Lot 2 and running thence Northeasterly with the North line of said Lot, 156.6 feet; thence S 110 41' E 145.5 feet to the South line of Lot 2, running thence S 800 30' W 161.5 feet to the West line of said lot; running thence Northwesterly with the West line of said Lot 126.9 feet to the place of beginning. 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 P-1, Institutional District the following described real estate: LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Part of the NE;, NE'„ and part of the SE',, NE;, Section 10, T -16-N, R -30-W, more particularly described as follows; to -wit: Beginning at the SE corner of the NE; of the NE; and running, thence South 160 feet; thence West 500 feet; thence North 513.3 feet to the South right of way line of State Highway 45, thence in a Northeasterly direction with said right of way line approximately 543 feet to the East line of the NE;, NE1, Section 10, thence South with the East line of said 40 acre tract 547.3 feet to the place of beginning, containing 7 acres,more or less. • • Page 2. PC 24-76 SECTION 2. That the above described property be rezoned from R-1, Low Density Residential District to P-1, Institutional.District, so that the petitioner may develope property accordingly. PASSED AND APPROVED this day of , 1976. APPROVED: John Power, Chairman • • lg RESOLUTION PC 25-76 BE IT RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, that a public hearing be called for the purpose of rezoning the Washington County Livestock Auction; and 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; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the date for said public hearing is hereby set for April 26, 1976, Monday. PASSED AND APPROVED this day of , 1976. APPROVED: John Power, Chairman