HomeMy WebLinkAbout1976-04-26 MinutesMINUTES OF A PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
A meeting of the Fayetteville Planning Commission was held at 5;00 P...M. Monday,
April 26, 1976, in the Board of Directors. Ropm, City Administration Building,
Fayetteville, Arkansas-.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman John Power, John Maguire, Keith Newhouse, Donald Nickell,
Ernest Jacks, Peg Anderson, Rita Davis, Jack Ray, Bill Kisor.
MEMBERS ABSENT:
OTHERS PRESENT:
Chairman John
None.
Bobbie Jones, David McWethy, Larry Wood, Janet Bowen, Bryce J. Davis,
E. L. Jorgensen, George Blackwell, John Everett, Marshall Carlisle,
John Matzler, Bob Summers, Lloyd Winscott, Jessie Patterson,
Albert Zinn, Charles Stewart, John B. Norton, Fred Bailey,
Ervan Wimberly, Frank Blew, Gerald Cates, William R. Rogers,
Bill Bequette, Myrna Beth Faires.
Power called the meeting to order.
MINUTES
The minutes of the April 12 Planning Commission meeting were approved as mailed.
Chairman Power said there had been a request to table Item 6 on this
agenda and he would like to take this up first.
The preliminary plat and conditional use on the proposed
mobile home park to be located North of existing Villa Mobile Home Park, West
of College Avenue, and South of Appleby Road (known as Villa North) was approved
on March 15, 1976, on the condition that additional ingress and egress to Highway 71
over and above what was shown on March 15th be obtained.
Attorney Marshall Carlisle was present and did request that this item be tabled.
Chairman Power instructed the Planning Administrator to place this item on the May 10th
Planning Commission agenda.
VILLA NORTH
Villa Boulevard
Third Access
Chairman Power opened the public hearing on REZONING PETITIONR76-15
Rezoning Petition R76 -1S, Bryce J. Davis, to Bryce Davis
rezone property located North of Highway 16 West, Highway 16 East $ Highway 71 By-pass
approximately 1 mile West of Highway 71 By-pass and approximately ; mile East of
Rupple Road from A-1, Agricultural District, to R-2, Medium Density Residential District.
Bryce Davis, Bryce Davis $ Co., was present to represent the request.
Planning Consultant Larry Wood said he had made an error in the Planning Report since
he had the wrong piece of property in mind. He said he would like to recommend the
same thing on the rezoning petition that he had recommended in 1973 when a request for
rezoning of this same property had been petitioned, that is, to rezone the South 800 feet
(the first 800 feet going North) to R-2 and the balance of the property he would
recommend to be rezoned to R-1. Mr. Wood said he recommended it this way because
of the density of the development along here. He felt that they should be tapering
the R-2 off
Ernest Jacks gave the Subdivision Committee report saying they had recommended
approval of the. large scale development plan for this property contingent on approval
of the rezoning.
Mr, Davis said back in May 1973, a rezoning petition had been submitted covering
this entire tract which was 110 acres. He said at that time there was also a
request to rezone other property in the area for a Howard Johnson Restaurant at which
there was considerable objection from residents of the Giles Addition because of
the increase in traffic which that would create. Therefore, Mr. Davis said they
did not go through with the rezoning to the Board of Directors since they felt
A
Planning Commission -2-
April 26, 1976
their rezoning application would also create an .even more hazardous traffic
condition at the interaection,o£ Highway:16 West with. the Highway 71 By-pass.
He pointed out that since that time there had been considerable changes made.
He mentioned that the overpass was being constructed over the By-pass
and would relieve the traffic situation as well as making it safer. He said that
sewer had also been put in along Hamestring Creek and he would run the sewer to the
development for Mr. Jorgensen (the developer). He also brought out the fact that
they were only requesting that 20 acres of the tract of land be rezoned in this
request.
Mr. Davis (in response to a recommendation made by Larry Wood that they cut the
apartment units back from 164 units to140 units) pointed out that according
to the ordinance, they could put 480 units on this tract of land but that they were
planning only 164 units along with a swimming pool, pro shop, tennis courts,
and a laundry facility. He also mentioned that it would not be economically
feasible to construct only 140 units on a piece of property of this size. He said
the development would coverthe whole 20 acres.
In doing some research, Mr. Davis said he had found that apartment complexes
were needed in Fayetteville especially among the young married couples who could
not always afford to purchase a home of their own. He said there had been
a cutback in building of apartments because of a rise in construction costs during
the past few years. He said this was now leveling off. He said the location
would be good because of the easy access to Springdale as well as Fayetteville
by way of the by-pass rather than placing an apartment complex such as this right
in Fayetteville where it would create traffic congestion on the streets.as those
on Leverett do.
Mr. Davis said he wanted to point out that they could not use the 80 acres
which was adjacent to this and was already zoned R-2 as had been stated in the
Planning Report. He said this property was owned by Mr. Leo Thomas who lives
on that property and since he was of retirement age, Mr. Thomas planned to live
there the rest of his life and does not wish to sell his property.
George Blackwell, 923 South Hill, was present stating that if the Planning Con-
sultant had made a change in his recommendation, he felt that the public should
be made aware of this change. He also asked about whether or not the size of
sewer would be able to handle a complex of this size.
Planning Consultant Larry Wood said he had not made a change in the recommendation
on this property but that he had another piece of property in mind when he made
the recommendation.
Bryce Davis said the sewer at the present time had nothing on it, and that it was
available and waiting for something to be put on it. He said in=talking with the
City Engineer, he understood. that this sewer would be capable of handling drainage
all along Hamestring Creek.
Mr. Blackwell said he then had no objections.
The public hearing was concluded.
There was some discussion concerning Larry Wood's recommendation.
Ernest Jacks pointed out that the Subdivision Committee did recommend approval
of the large scale development plan of this property contingent on the rezoning
request being approved.
John Maguire moved to recommend to the Board of Directors that the petition to
rezone the entire 20 acres be approved; Jack Ray seconded the motion.
John Maguire felt that this area was the ideal place for development of an apartment
complex. He said it was better in his opinion to have them located in that area
than it would be like those on Leverett Street or the ones on North Street.
Jack Ray said he agreed with. what Mr. Maguire had said and that his second still
stood.
A call for votes revealed 9 "Ayes".
The motion to approve the rezoning request was unanimous.
•
•
•
Planning Commission -3-
April 26, 1976,
1
REZONLNG.PETITION.R76-46
Next was the public hearing on Rezoning Washington County Livestock Auction
Petition R76-16;.W.;H, P, Mae Bartholomew and Government Avenue
Argil $ Emma BellBartholomew, d/b/a Washington County Livestock Auction
to rezone property located East of Government Avenue, North of Eleventh Street, and West
of School Avenue from R-2, Medium Density Residential District, I-1, Heavy Commercial
and Light Industrial District, and C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial District, to I-2,
General Industrial District.
Planning Consultant Larry Wood recommended in his Planning Report that the petition
be denied since the I-2 District is incompatible with the surrounding residential
development and the request is not in keeping with the General Plan.
Mr. Wood brought out in his Planning Report that there was a conflict in the General
Plan which recommends• medium density residential where the zoning ordinance zoned the
land light industrial. He further recommended that the General Plan and the Zoning
Ordinance should be reviewed by the Planning Commission and the inconsistency resolved.
Attorney John Everett ( P. 0. Box A, Prairie Grove, Arkansas) was present representing
the Washington County Livestock Auction.
He told the Planning Commission that the sale barn had been there for approximately
41 years and was now non -conforming and in order to make the improvements on it,
they would have to have the property rezoned. He said they were wanting to put concrete
floors in where there are presently dirt floors and when they concreted the floors
it would be necessary to raise the roof. It was felt that these improvements would help
eliminate odor since the concrete floors could be cleaned. Also, the raising of the
roof would give more space for the ammonia to escape.
Mr. Everett presented information from Larry E. Coombes, Department of Entomology,
University of Arkansas, which stated that concrete floors (which could be cleaned)
would: (1) Eliminate breeding sites and attraction of flies; (2) Reduce and/or
eliminate polluted places due to a mixture of manure and moisture that propagates
bacterial and viral pathogens. (3) Reduce the amount of ammonia and offensive odors
produced by manure left in the earthen floored pens.
He pointed out that some of these people objecting to the rezoning had bought property
in that area with the knowledge that the sale barn was there. Mr. Everett said the
sale barn was there to stay except in a case of unavoidable casualty, and pointed out that
the ?rezoning would allow them to improve this so it would be less of a nuisance to the
people living in the area.
In answer to Bill Kisor's question, Mr. Everett said there were no plans for an addition
right now but that he (as well as anyone else) could not assure the Commission that 20 years
from now some addition might not be made.
Planning Administrator Bobbie Jones explained that non -conforming uses were allowed some
improvements per year, but they could not expand the cubic content of the structure.
She said the raising of the roof would expand the cubic content of the structure.
Mr. Everett added to this that they had to raise the roof in order to put concrete
floors in.
He said they would need to get it rezoned if they were going to put that much money into it.
Commissioner Anderson said the sale barn property was assessed at $15 front foot whereas
the R-2 property across the street was listed at $100 front foot. She felt that with
the amount of money that would be invested in the improvements they had proposed
would actually amount to more than what the property was worth and wondered why it would
not be to the Bartholomews' advantage to sell this property and move the location
of the sale barn somewhere outside the City,
(Mr. Bartholomew felt the improvements would probably amount to around $100,000 to
$150,000.)
Attorney Marshall Carlisle was present to represent Hollis Spencer and his brother.
Mr. Carlisle submitted a petition bearing signaturesof approximately 20-23 residents
on West, School, Government and Van Buren Avenues (those streets that either border the
sale barn or are within 1 block. of it). In addition, Mr. Carlisle presented a letter from
the Post Commander of the Shelton -Tucker Post #27 of the American Legion protesting
•
•
L
r
Planning Commission -4-
April 26, 1976
any rezoning which would further damage the appearance for the area of.the
National Cemetery.
Mr. Carlisle said the sale barn was in the country.. when it was built, that the
City had grown toward it, and that this was an incompatible situation.
He said the people living in this area were faced with a rezoning petition in 1972
and they were told at that time that it would be another 5 years before they would be
faced with this again.
Mr. Carlisle said it appeared to him that (according to the drawing) the property
they were asking to be rezoned covered a great deal more than was necessary to raise
the roof and concrete the floors of the sale barn.
He felt if all the property were rezoned, there would soon be an expansion of the
business and there would be an encroachment on the people.
Mr. Carlisle said that when the City of Fayetteville reached the decision on the
original general land use plan, they had, in effect, meant for this to eventually
be moved into a non-residential area. In conclusion, he asked that the Planning
Consultant's recommendation be followed and that the Planning Commission deny the
rezoning request.
A. M. Zinn (637 Government Avenue) felt that the proposed improvements would not help
the situation any and asked the Planning Commission not to approve the rezoning.
George Blackwell (932 S. Hill) said he was not aware of a petition against this and
that he did not have a chance to sign it. He told the Planning Commission that he could
get signatures of people living on Hill Street that were opposed to this if that would
help. He said he was against the rezoning petition in 1972 feeling that it would
eventually outgrow itself. He said it had done so and that they were now wanting to
expand and he felt that they should not be allowed to do so.
John Metzler (Superintendent of the Fayetteville National Cemetery and a resident at
700 Government Avenue) said the cemetery had been established in 1867, long before
the existance of the sale barn. He submitted pictures showing the sale barn situation.
He said the National Cemetery had spent a number of dollars trying to hide the sale
barn; however, they could not hide the odor from that business. He said they would
like to see the sale barn moved but that they were not in a position to do this.
He said a rezoning would open the door to any expansion that the sale barn wished
to do.
He told the Planning Commission that the sale barn being next to the cemetery was
always among the comments made by people (relatives) during interment or when people
were visiting the cemetery. He also said that the crew taking care of the cemetery
had to pick up scattered debris that was left at the sale barn because nobody else would
do it.
Bob Summers (1310 S. West) said the rezoning of this would open the door for full
expansion. He said they were using heavier vehicles in the sale barn operation which
were causing the pavement to crack on the street that they had paid for. He complained
of odor, flies, and listening to loud speakers until 2:00 A. M.
Lloyd Winscott, representing the American Legion said the Bartholomews were good people,
but that the National Cemetery should be preserved in as nice a way as possible
since it was a historical point in the area.
Jessie Patterson, 1900 Melmar, said she brought two letters (one signed by James Bayles
of 851 Melmar and one signed by Nora Bee Lingelbach, 1107 Ranch Drive in Springdale,
Arkansas): certifying that Mrs. Patterson had their vote by proxy to vote against
purchase of land by any person representing Fayetteville Sale Barn in the area of
the National Cemetery..
At the request of one of the Commissioners, Chairman Power read the letters and they
would be entered into the Planning Office files.
Charles Stewart, 2405 Jimmy Lane, (representing the Nora B. Adams Estate) was present
and stated they were opposed to the rezoning of 9th Street (that part'that has been
dedicated but not opened) as shown on the petition.
John Everett said the opposition that was being expressed was against the sale barn in
its present condition. He felt they should think about the capital that the
•
I
Planning Commission -5-
April 26, 1976
sale barn brought in,
Dr. Norton, Chief of Staff. of the Veterans Administration Hospital, opposed the rezoning
saying if this stayed non -conforming; the sale barn could not be re: -done or expanded;
however, if it were rezoned, they would be allowed to do so.
Fred Baley (143 South Hill) said he had a lot of friends and comrades in the
National Cemetery and he had hoped the sale barn would be moved. He felt
the Bartholomews would be doing everyone a favor if they moved it.
The public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Jack Ray asked if the purpose of raising the roof was to help disperse
unpleasant odors. Mr. Everett indicated it was.
Bobbie Jones explained further the fact that raising the floor would expand the
cubic structure.
Peg Anderson mentioned the public hearing that had been called for May 10th
concerning Use Unit 23 as a "conditional use" in the I-1 Zone. She felt this would
be a better way to handle this, rather than rezoning the property.
Mr. Jacks, however, felt they should not depend on that solution too heavily since
he had some doubts concerning this possibility.
John Maguire expressed his feelings pro and con and said he would probably abstain
from voting since he owned rental property in the area of the sale barn.
Commissioner Nickell said he would express the same thoughts that he did the last
time this came up for rezoning. He said the sale barn had been there for a long
time and he thought that it would stay there for a long time. He felt since it would
be there for a while it would be better if they could be allowed to make the improvements
so the place could be cleaned up quicker.
Attorney John Everett then asked about the possibility of just rezoning the part
that the sale barn was on so they could make the improvements.
Donald Nickell said he was not in favor of the whole tract being rezoned but would
like to see the improvements made on the sale barn itself.
There was no further discussion.
Peg Anderson moved to deny Rezoning Petition R76-16, Washington County Livestock
Auction.
Jack Ray seconded the motion.
Roll call revealed the following votes: John Maguire - abstained; Newhouse, Jacks,
Power, Anderson, Kisor, Davis, Ray - "Aye"; Donald Nickell - "Nay".
The motion was approved 7-1-1.
The next item was a public hearing on a proposed ordinance ORDINANCE 2202
to amend Ordinance 2202, (Appendix C. Article IV, Section I - Proposed Amendment
Fayetteville Code of Ordinances) to provide that lesser street right-of-way dedications
by the developer of a large scale development than that indicated by the Master Street
Plan shall be subject to approval of the Board of Directors; to amend the appeal
procedure prescribed by said ordinance; and for other purposes.
Planning Administrator Bobbie Jones said this had come about because of the
Large Scale Development Plan of Paradise Valley Golf Course (Ellis Bogan,
Planning Commission meeting of March 15, 1976).
She said when the ordinance was amended, it left out the provision that the
Board of Directors had to approve any lesser dedications and,therefore,
they wanted it back in the ordinance.
Ernest Jacks moved to recommend to the Board of Directors the approval of the
proposed ordinance to amend Ordinance 2202., (Appendix C, Article IV, Section I -
Fayetteville Code of Ordinances).
Rita Davis seconded the motion.
Jack Ray said at the time they made their decision on the golf course, he had thought
that it would have to go on to the Board of Directors.. He said he wanted to point
this out since he had, made the motion to approve it at that time.
There was no one present to speak in favor of or against the proposed amendment.
The motion was approved unanimously.
•
Planning Commission -6-
April 26, 1976
Chairman Power opened the public hearing on the PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS
proposed ordinance to amend Article 8, Section 12, "' Proposed Amendment
of Zoning Ordinance 1747. (Appendix A Zoning, -Fayetteville Code of Ordinances)
to amend the.requixements for Planned Unit Developments (PUD) in the City of
Fayetteville, Arkansas.
Planning Administrator Bobbie Jones said this proposed ordinance was a result
of one of th eneetings of the "Task Force" Committee concerning Planned Unit
Developments.
She pointed out a conflict in Subsection (A), of Section 1 where it states:
"Seven (7) dwelling units per acre shall be allowed in any planned development
consisting of over three (3) acres."
She said the existing regulations say that the zone actually sets
the density and if this were in an R=2 Zone,it is limited to 7 acres for a
PUD which presently is up to 24 units per acre in an R-2 Zone. She said this
change would limit it more. She said she had called this to the City Attorney's
attention. He told her to bring this conflict out at the meeting and they could
make any changes in it before it went to the Board of Directors.
In answer to Peg Anderson's questions, Bobbie Jones explained that the four (4)
was the number of single-family dwelling units that could be put on one acre in
R-1 and the seven (7) dwelling unuts was for duplexes (per acre in the R-1 District).
She said it had been the intent that this would be in the R-1 District.
John Maguire said this had been put in there to keep apartments from being put in
with -single family.dwellings and calling them a Planned Unit Development.
Ernest Jacks felt that this proposed ordinance would allow apartment complexes
to be built in R-1 Zones.
Peg Anderson agreed with this.
Ervan Wimberly (member of the "Task Force" Committee) was present.
He said there were some tracts of land in nice residential sections of Fayetteville
(for example, along Rolling Hills Drive) that were difficult to develop as a sub-
division but were too large to use as a tandem lot or a single lot.
He said it was the intention of the Committee that these long,narrow lots could
be developed as Planned Unit Developments but to still maintain the density per acre
that was allowed in R-1.
Mr. Jacks felt that the acreage was not as important as some of the setbacks. He felt
they should still hold with the 100 foot setback
Ervan Wimberly pointed out that with a lot 200 feet wide, you could not have a set-
back of 100 feet.
Ernest Jacks felt that these were not the type of lots for PUD development.
John Maguire felt they might should drop this to 2 or 3 acres.
Mr. Jacks felt that Planned Unit Development should be encouraged, but not at the
expense of other property owners. He said he would hate to see this go below three
acres.
Rita Davis said she was not in favor of this.
John Maguire left at 6:45 P. M.
There was some discussion on Subsection 3, Section 3 concerning commercial
area as a use accessory to the residential uses in the planned development being
allowed only on appeal to the Planning Commission.
Several of the Commissioners were not in favor of this.
After some discussion, Ernest Jacks moved to deny the proposed ordinance.
The motion, seconded by Bill Kisor, was approved unanimously.
OLD WIRE ROAD NORTH
The next item was the proposed preliminary plat of Proposed Preliminary Plat
Old Wire Road North. Subdivision, a proposed subdivision to be located West of
Winwood Estates, East of Old Wire Road, and South..of Township extended, submitted
by W. T. F Roselyn Stewart, Developers.
Frank Blew (Blew $ Associates) was present to represent.
•
•
•
Planning Commission
April 26, 1976
Ernest Jacks gave the Subdivision Committee report stating that they had recommended
approval of the preliminary plat with three contingencies; (1) To add sidewalks all
the way around the culs-de-sac and down the two street stubs to the South (Elmwood
and Creekwood); (2) That the`Planning Commission waive street light distances which
slightly exceeded 300 feet in about three instances. Mr. Jacks said they were shown
at intersections which seemed to be the proper location for them; (3) That notes be
added to prevent any lots along Township or Old Wire Road from having driveway access
to those streets with the exception of Lot 5, Block 4. in the Southwest corner
which presently exists with a driveway onto Old Wire Road.
On Lot 5, Block 5 in the Northwest corner the note should reflect that its present
access could be retained but that in the future that access would be closed when the
house is removed.
(The developers of this proposed subdivision are
extension of Township Road and to remove a house
decides to put Township through.)
Ernest Jacks then moved to approve the preliminar
basis.
Jack Ray seconded the motion.
Roy Wilkerson, 2369 Yorkwood Drive, was present and asked about access to the concerned
property. Mr. Wilkerson was given a copy of the proposed subdivision. After looking
over the drawing, he made no further comments.
No one was present to speak in opposition.
The motion was approved unanimously by a vote of 8-0.
willing to dedicate 30 feet for the
valued at $20,000 if and when the City
y plat of Old Wire Road North on that
CATES HATCHERY and
Item 8 and 9 were more or less discussed jointly at the Arkansas Feed $ Grain
meeting. Mobile Homes
Item number 8 was a report from Inspection Superintendent Harold Lieberenz on a security
problem alleged by Gerald Cates( Cates Hatchery ). On March 29, 1976, the
Planning Commission had requested Mr. Lieberenz to report to them after Mr. Cates
appeared before the Commission requesting the Zoning Ordinance be amended to permit
the use of a mobile home as "caretaker's housing".
Mr. Cates had already placed a mobile home on his property for security purposes
and had been notified by the Inspection Department that this was in violation of the
Zoning Ordinance.
Item 9 was a letter from Marshall Carlisle, Attorney for Arkansas Feed and Grain,
concerning a similar violation consisting of the use of a mobile home for office
purposes. The Commission had also asked Mr. Lieberenz to report on this mobile home.
Attorney Marshall Carlisle was present to represent Ed Prince who was issued a
violation notice concerning a mobile home located on property of Arkansas Feed $ Grain
Company.
He told Chairman Power that the case he represented was similar to that of Mr. Cates
and felt they should be discussed together.
Chairman Power felt that although they did have some things in common, they were still
two separate items.
Mr. Power pointed out that utilities had already been connected up to the mobile home.
He said this had been before the Planning Commission several times and that the
Commission had sent it on to the Board of Directors and they had disapproved the use
of mobile homes to be used as caretakerts residences.
He felt they did not need to get into a discussion on changing the ordinance concerning
this for mobile homes since a decision had already been reached on this question by the
Board of Directors.
Attorney Carlisle pointed out that the mobile home ordinance did not apply in this case
since it was for a temporary use.
John Power said some of the temporary uses had turned out to be fairly permanent.
Donald Nickell felt that this had started out to be something that would have been
helpful but that it had been abused.
Planning Commission
April 26, 1976
John Power added that it was abused by some people that the Planning Commission
had taken in good faiththat this type of thing would be temporary.
Mr. Cates- (Cates Hatchery -.who also had moved in a mobile home for security purposes)
was present and in answer to Peg Andersons questions said that the use for the mobile
home was a permanent one.
It was the general concensus of the Planning Commission that they, as well as the
Board of Directors,had already expressed their views concerning this type of situation
when it came up before and that there was no need to reopen the matter.
They felt that Mr. Cates and Mr. Prince would have to work out the situation with the
Inspection Department.
WILLIAM R. ROGERS
The next item was a conditional use request submitted 500 Vinson Avenue
by William R. Rogers, 500 Vinson Avenue, to have a Conditional Use Request
"real estate sales office" in his home. "Real estate sales office" is classified
as a temporary, conditional use City-wide under Use Unit 2. The property is zoned
R-1 , Low Density Residential District.
Mr. Rogers was present to represent.
Mr. Rogers said he had just renewed his license for two years and was before them to
ask for approval of this use in his home until his license expired.
He said he generally transacted his business at the bank or some lawyer's office.
He said he did not have any employees, his phone was not listed as a business phone
and his sign was in compliance.
In answer to some of the Commissioners' questions, Bobbie Jones said there was not a
time limit set out in the ordinance, but that it was a temporary use in all zones.
She said that adjoining property owners had been notified.
There was some discussion about setting a time limit on this if it were approved.
Ernest Jacks moved to grant the conditional use for a period of 1 year.
Donald Nickell seconded the motion.
Mr. Rogers said it was his intention to move his business when it came time to renew
his license.
Peg Anderson commented that she was in favor of business in the home.
In answer to Jack Ray's question, Mr. Rogers said he was a licensed federal firearms
dealer at that location and had been for a number of years but that he transacted his
business elsewhere.
The motion was approved unanimously. BILL BEQUETTE
on behalf of
Next was a request for further waiver of subdivision George F. Blackwell
requirements submitted by Bill Bequette on Waiver of Subdivision Requirements
behalf of George F. Blackwell for property located outside the City but inside the
City Planning Area on an unnamed road South of Fayetteville -Farmington City Limits.
Bill Bequette and Mr. Blackwell were present to represent the request.
Mr. Blackwell said that the street now had the name of Blackwell Drive, Southwest.
Ernest Jacks gave the Subdivision Committee report. He said this was the fourth
lot split involved in this property and was before the Planning Commission since
the Planning Office had the authority to clear only three lot splits.
In answer to Mr. Jacks' question, Bobbie Jones said she now felt that additional
right-of-way on the North-Southroad might be needed. She said when she looked
at this on the aerial photo it looked like this road went only to a barn.
Mr. Blackwell has since then told her that there are three houses there which represents
a road of public use. She said she did not know who was maintaining the road.
She said an additional 30 feet from the centerline was needed on the Northern
East-West road and that they had agreed to that; however, there is now a possibility
that (if this other road is a County road) additional right-of-way wauld•b.+needed
on it also.
Mr. Jacks said the Subdivision Committee had recommended the approval of the fourth
lot split with the dedication of additional right-of-way on the road on the North.
Planning Commission -9-
April 26, 1976
Peg Anderson said in their meeting with. the County, it was agreed that the roads
in the Planning Area should meet County standards.
Chairman Power aaked.Bobbie .Jones to notify Mr, Bruce Kendall from now on when they
have an item concerning roads in the Planning Area.
Mr. Blackwell said he had talked to the County Judge and that he had indicated they
were accepting roads with SO feet of right-of-way.
Peg Anderson said there was also the question of constructing the roads to meet
the County standards and asked Mr. Blackwell if he had done so.
Mr. Blackwell said that he had not.
After further discussion, Ernest Jacks moved to approve this waiver of subdivision
requirements with the provisionthat Mr. Bruce Kendall be notified and get his
approval.
Chairman Power felt that Mr. Kendall simply needed to be notified of this decision.
Peg Anderson commented that they still were not saying that the road had to be built
to County standards and she felt this is what the County actually wants.
Mr. Jacks amended his motion to recommend waiver of the subdivision regulations
if the County Planning Commission agrees with this.
Jack Ray seconded the motion which was approved unanimously.
The last item on the agenda was a conditional MYRNA BETH FAIRES
use request submitted by Myrna Beth Faires, 2009 Winwood 2009 Winwood Drive
Drive, for a child care facility in her home. Conditional Use Request
This is permitted on appeal to the Planning Commission under Use Unit 4.
The property is zoned R-1, Low Density Residential.
Mrs. Faires was present to represent.
She told the Planning Commission that she would be keeping 10-16 children and that
for 10 children,1 assistant was required and for 16 children (anythin over 10)
required 2 assistants. She said there were never over three cars at a time at her
house.
Bobbie Jones told the Commissioners that the two adjoining property owners had
been notified.
Rita Davis moved to table this request until the other property owners could be
notified.
Bill Kisor seconded the motion which was approved unanimously.
Chairman Power instructed Bobbie Jones to place this item on the May 10th
Planning Commission agenda.
OTHER BUSINESS
Commissioner Jack Ray said it had been brought to his attention that the new
muffler shop located at the corner of South School and Cato Springs Road were
throwing the old mufflers outside the building and he wondered if they could check
into acquiring some type of screening there.
He said he had driven by there and it was unsightly.
Jack Ray moved to have Planning Administrator Bobbie Jones to kindly direct whoever
is responsible to check into the unsightly debris on the South side of the muffler
shop located on the corner of Cato Springs Road and South School Street with the
possibility of screening their debris until it is removed.
Ernest Jacks seconded the motion which. was approved unanimously.
Ernest Jacks reported to the planning Commission that Southwestern Bell Telephone
the Subdivision Committee had approved the Large Scale Harold Street
Development Plan of Southwestern Bell Telephone to
construct a SACD (Automatic Call Operators) building on the property behind K -Mart
on the South side of Harold Street between Lee Avenue and Sheryl Avenue.
There was no further discussion..
The meeting was adjourned at 7;45 P. M.
•
•
L
RESOLUTION PC 30-76
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the Planning Commission,
Monday, April 26, 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
to make a recommendation to the Board of Directors on Rezoning Petition
R76-15, Bryce J. Davis.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RECOMMENDED BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
TO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVIJJF, ARKANSAS.
SECTION 1. That an ordinance be adopted for the purpose of rezoning
from A-1, Agricultural District to R-2, Medium Density Residential
District, said real estate.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
Part of the W2 of the fractional NW4- of Section 7, T -16-N, R -30-W,
being more particularly described as follows, to -wit: Beginning
at a point on the north right-of-way of Highway 16 West, said
point being 1221.99 feet west and 78.4 feet north of the SE
corner of said W2 of the fractional NW4- of Said Section and
running thence north 1320 feet; thence east 660 feet; thence
south 1320 feet, to the north right-of-way of Highway 16 West;
thence west, along Highway right-of-way, 660 feet, to the point
of beginning, containing 20 acres, more or less.
SECTION 2. That the above described property be rezoned from A-1,
Agricultural District to R-2, Medium Density Residential District, so
that the petitioner may develope property accordingly.
PASSED AND APPROVED this
APPROVED'
day of , 1976.
John Power, Chairman
•
RESOLUTION PC 31-76
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the City Planning Commission,
Monday, April 26, 1976, fifteen (15) days after a sign was erected on
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 the petition of W. H.
and Mae Bartholomew and Argil and Emma Bell Bartholomew d/b/a Washington
County Livestock Auction, R76-16 for rezoning;
NCW, THEREFORE, BE IT RECOMMENDED BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
TO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS.
SECTION 1. That the petition requesting the rezoning of property,
described as follows, from R-2, Medium Density Residential, I-1, Light
Industrial and Heavy Commercial, and C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial, to
I-2, General Industrial District, be denied.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
Property located East of Government Avenue, north of Eleventh
Street and west of School Avenue, more particularly described as
part of the Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter and part
of the Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 21,
T -16-N, R -30-W, described as follows, to -wit: Beginning at a point
which is 414 feet south of the quarter section corner between
sections 16 and 21, and running, thence East 18 feet to a point
200 feet east of the east line of Government Avenue; thence North
to the south line of the former right-of-way of the K. C. & M. Rail-
road, at a point 220 feet south of the north line of said Section 21;
thence south 80° east with the south line of said railroad right-
of-way, to a point which is north of a point 16' east of the
Northwest corner of Block 16 in Ferguson's Addition, thence south
to a point 16 feet east of the Southwest corner of Block 17, thence
east with the south line of Block 16 to the west line of School
Street,'_thence South 55 feet to the northeast corner of Block 17,
thence west with the north line of Block 17, 284 feet; thence south
to the south line of Lot 16; Block 17, thence east 32 feet; thence
south to the south line of the northwest quarter of northeast
quarter, Section 21; thence west to the east line of National
Cemetery; thence north 441.18'; thence west to the east line of
Government Avenue; thence north 464.82', thence east 182 feet to
the point of beginning.
SECTION 2. That the rezoning of the above described real estate
would not presently be desirable.
PASSED AND APPROVED this
APPROVED:
day of , 1976.
John Power, Chairman
• RESOLUTION PC 32-76
•
•
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the Fayetteville Planning Commission,
Monday, April 26, 1976, 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 2202 (Appendix C, Article IV, Section I, Fayetteville Code of
Ordinances) to provide that lesser street right of way dedications by the
developer of a large scale development than that indicated by the Master
Street Plan shall be subject to approval.. of the Board of Directors; to
amend the appeal procedure prescribed by said ordinance; and for other purposes.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RECOMMENDED BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION TO THE
BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS.
SECTION 1. That the proposed ordinance, attached hereto and made a part
hereof, be adopted to amend Ordinance 2202 to provide that lesser street
right of way dedications by the developer of a large scale development
than that indicated by the Master Street Plan shall be subject to approval
of the Board of Directors; to amend the appeal procedure prescribed by
said ordinance; and for other purposes.
PASSED AND APPROVED this
day of , 1976.
APPROVED:
John Power, Chairman
•
•
RESOLUTION PC 33-76
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the Fayetteville Planning Commission,
Monday, April 26, 1976, 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
Article 8, Section 12, of Zoning Ordinance 1747 (Appendix Al Zoning, Fayetteville
Code of Ordinances)to amend the requirements for Planned Unit Developments
(PUD), be denied;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RECOMMENDED BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION TO THE
BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS.
SECTION 1. That the proposed ordinance, to amend the.requirements for
Planned Unit Developments (PUD) be denied.
PASSED AND APPROVED this
day of , 1976.
APPROVED:
John Power, Chairman