Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1977-03-14 Minutes• • MINUTES OF A PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING A meeting of the Fayetteville Planning Commission was held at 5:00 P. M., Monday, March 14, 1977, in the Board of Directors Room, City Administration Building, Fayetteville, Arkansas. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman John Power, Vice -Chairman Rita Davis, Ernest Jacks, Peg Anderson, Keith Newhouse, Bill Kisor, John Maguire, Jack Ray, Donald Nickell. MEMBERS ABSENT: None. OTHERS PRESENT: Bobbie Jones, Angie Medlock, David McWethy, Jim McCord, Scott Van Laningham, Larry Wood, David Purvis, Mr. Ethridge Rush, Helen Blackwell, Mr. Lagrand, Nicholas Markov, Chad Kumpe, E. J. Ball, Ottis Watson, Mrs. Donald Blew, Mrs. Roger Ketter, Sylvia Howard, Tom Howard, Mrs. Harris, Laura Ketter, Lamar Pettus, Warren Seagraves, Morris Collier, Paul Eddy, "Rip" Lindsey, Younkin, Wade Bishop, Clarence Young, Mr. Milas, Ken Bryce Davis, Dr. William Schwab, Dr. J. B. Hays, and unidentified persons. Chairman John Power called the meeting to order. Mrs. Robert Lazenby, other The minutes of the February 28, 1977 meeting were approved as mailed. MINUTES The first item for discussion was the approval of the Preliminary Plat for Sunset - Sunset Addition, located North of West View Addition No. 2, South of Prairie View Addition and East of Sunny Acres Addition (between SUNSET -SUNSET Preliminary Plat Between Cleveland 4 Wedington, Sang 4 Sunset Cleveland and Wedington, Sang and Sunset); Developer, Holland House, Inc. Ernest Jacks stated that the developer has asked to withdraw the plat and made a motion to accept the withdrawal. Bill Kisor seconded the motion. Mr. Jacks said they are going to try a different idea and bring the plat back. The Commission voted unanimously to accept the withdrawal of the preliminary plat of Sunset - Sunset Addition. The second item for discussion was the public hearing on Rezoning Petition No. R77-2, Joseph David Purvis, Jr., to rezone property located East of Mission Blvd. and North of Viewpoint Drive, from R-1, Low Density Residential District District. Chairman Power acknowledged a letter from David Purvis asking to delay the hearing on this rezoning if the Planning Commission decides to study the entire area along Highway 45 from Old Wire Road to Highway 265. Chairman Power acknowledged a written request signed by Peggy Bishop, Wade Bishop, Linda Middlebrook, Mrs. Fred E. Kerr, and Joseph David Purvis to study the area and asked the Planning Commission if they would like to have a study done on the area from Old Wire Road to the intersection of Highway 45 and 265. Chairman Jacks asked Planning Consultant Larry Wood if he thinks the study is warranted in that area and Larry Wood said they have not had a study on this area since the original adoption of the comprehensive plan in 1970. Ernest Jacks said there seems to be traffic problems there, too. Larry Wood said as you get further west, there aren't very many vacant parcels of land. He noted that:the Commission has had several requests for commercial in this area. He said REZONING PETITION NO. R77-2 Joseph David Purvis E. of Mission F, N. of Viewpoint to R-2, Medium Density Residential • • • Planning Commission Meeting Margh 14, 1977 -2- he felt it would be worth taking a.look at. Rita Davis said she doesn't see any further development of Mission unless it is widened. She stated that she is not in favor of allowing R-2 until Mission is widened. Peg Anderson stated that it is difficult to keep Mission R-1 with the traffic situation. Bill Kisor made a motion that the study be made on Mission from Old Wire Road to the intersection of Highway 45 and Highway 265 to the buffer zone. Donald Nickell seconded the motion, which was approved unanimously. Bill Kisor then made a motion which was seconded by Peg Anderson, to table Joseph Davis Purvis' request for rezoning. The motion was approved unanimously. Next was the public hearing on Rezoning Petition No. R77-3, Jack Tidball Post 2722, VFW by Nicholas Markov, Quartermaster, to rezone property located on the Southeast corner of Rock Street and Church Avenue, from R-0, Residential Office District to C-3, Central Commercial District. Ernest Jacks questioned what the setbacks are in C-3. Larry Wood said it is 5 feet from the street right-of-way; in C-2, it is 50 feet, plus the setback for widening the street. Mr. Jacks said he felt C-2 is reasonable at that spot but would be against C-3 because of the setbacks. Planning Consultant Larry Wood agreed with Mr. Jacks. Mr. Ethridge Rush, Trustee of the Post, said they wanted to get the property changed to C-3 so if they decide to build they could build a Post home there. He said they have had the property for sale for some time and they think the way it is zoned is one of the reasons they haven't been able to sell it. He mentioned that they tried to get the Post to apply for rezoning 'several years ago, but they didn't. It is presently zoned R-0; another problem is they don't have adequate parking. They need to get it rezoned so if they decide to build on the property they could place what- ever type of structure the City would allow them to place on it. Ernest Jacks mentioned that there is quite a bit of parking available within 300 feet. C-2 would allow almost the same uses as C-3 but the building would have to be set back farther from the road. Peg Anderson explained that the setback is 5 feet on C-3 and 50 feet in C-2. Bobbie Jones said the Post already has 20 feet of setbacks taken for the Master Street Plan. Church Avenue should be 80 feet wide but is only 40 feet now. In R-0, as it is now, they have minimum 60 -foot setback --10 feet on the east side and 50 feet on the west out of 86 feet. In C-2, there would be no setback on the east side but there would be a 70 foot setback on the west side. In C-3 without a setback on the east side, there would be a 25 foot setback from the west side without parking between the building and the street. Helen Blackwell, Box 992, Fayetteville, said they would like to have the property rezoned to C-3 to have more room for a building and to give them more leeway in trying to figure out a way to work out a money -making project there. Mr. Lagrande, West Fork, said that by setting the building back 30 feet on each running angle you would be setting the building back to the back of the lot. They wouldn't have enough room to put in a building of any size. The Post would have to have a large building (about 80 feet long) since they have nearly 100 members. Mrs. Markov stated that she would like to see the property zoned C-3. Chad Kumpe, said there is a proposal in which not only Church Avenue would be widened to 80 feet, but Rock Street also Mrs. Blackwell asked what the other lots near this property are zoned. Chairman Power said it is C-2 on the east side and the other lots to the south are R-0. Peg Anderson asked for the dimensions of the lot. Bobbie Jones said it is 86 feet across the north, 91 feet across the South, and 130 feet north -south. REZONING PETITION NO. R77-3 Jack Tidball Post 2722, VFW SE Corner of Rock Street $ Church • • • Planning Commission Meeting March 14, 1977 -3- John Maguire said if they want it zoned C-3, they would still have to set back 25 feet. from the street right-of-way. Peg Anderson stated that she felt it should stay zoned R-0. Peg Anderson made a motion to deny Petition R77-3 to rezone from R-0 to C-3. Rita Davis seconded the motion. Ernest Jacks asked City Attorney Jim McCord if they could amend the Petition to rezone it to C-2, and Mr. McCord said they could. Mr. Jacks also stated that they could petition the Board of Adjustment for a variance on the setback. He said he felt they should go to C-2 zoning. Mr. Rush said if the Post decided to build, they would let the City Engineering staff decide what they would let them place on the lot. If the post couldn't build on that, they would sell the lot and buy another parcel of land. The motion to deny Rezoning Petition No. R77-3, was approved 6-3, with Davis, Kisor, Anderson, Power, Newhouse, and Jacks voting "Aye" and Ray, Nickell, and Maguire voting "Nay". REZONING PETITION NO. R77-4 Next was the public hearing on Rezoning Fayetteville Housing Authority Petition No. R77-4, Fayetteville Housing Authority, to rezone property located: Tract 1 - South of Mountain Street and West of East Avenue; Tract 2 - Northwest corner of Mountain Street and Block Avenue, Tract 3 - Northeast corner of Mountain Street and East Avenue, from C-3, Central Commercial District to C-4, Downtown District. Administrative Assistant David McWethy stated that they have established a C-4 zoning district but this is the first request to rezone anything to C-4. Chad Kumpe said the property downtown needs the flexibility of development which C-4 would provide. No one was present in opposition. Bill Kisor asked what the boundaries are to be in C-4. David McWethy said there are no boundaries. Bobbie Jones stated that she thought the Commission had talked generally about one block on each side of the square. Ernest Jacks made a motion to approve the rezoning request. Bill Kisor seconded the motion, which was passed unanimously, 9-0. The fifth item for discussion was the public hearing on Rezoning Petition No. R77 -S, E. J. Ball, to rezone property located on the REZONING PETITION NO. R77-5 E. J. Ball NW Corner of Hwy 265 4 Hwy 45 East Northwest corner of Crossover Road (Highway 265) and Highway 45 East from R-1, Low Density Residential to R-2, Medium Density Residential, R-0, Residential Office and C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial Districts. E. J. Ball and Jim Lindsey were present to represent. Chairman John Power acknowledged the following recommendation from Planning Consultant Larry Wood: The requested rezoning is in keeping with the General Plan (Highway 265 Study) to the extent that commercial, office, and multi -family uses are recommended for this corner of the inter- section. The application differs from the Plan in the arrange- ment and the amount of each zoning classification that is being requested. It is not the intent of the Plan to identify the exact amount of a particular zoning classification, that is the function of the zoning process. The arrangement or land use relationships as requested are in agreement with good planning principles. The problem that is presented with this application is the additional 400 or 500 feet • • • L Planning Commission Meeting March 14, 1977 -4- of commercial zoning that is being requested along Hwy. 45 west of Hwy. 265. A depth west of Hwy. 265 of about 500 feet has been established south of Hwy. 45 and approval of this applica- tion as presented will tend to commit additional commercial zoning along Hwy. 45 to the west. The additional property that ' is possibly being committed is an old service station site which now contains a motor repair service and is a nonconforming use. If the Planning Commission feels the nonconforming use on the south side of Hwy. 45 should be commercial then this application can be approved as presented. If the Planning Commission feels additional commercial zoning should not be committed then the application should be reduced to match the south side of Hwy. 45. Planning Consultant Larry Wood pointed out that there is an additional 400 or 500 feet of Commercial on Highway 45 in this petition opposed to the commercial south of Highway 45. Chairman John Power asked how much land Mr. Ball owns in that area and Jim Lindsey said he owns 186 acres. He said what they are trying to do is make the best use of the land; put the land in a position to be taken care of and committed to a zoning plan. Another point is the land on the Northeast corner of Highway 265, the land where Phillips Grocery is, is a very small piece of land. Mr. Ball is asking for approximately 19 acres of commercial (988 feet by 988 feet); 200 feet of R-0 in an L -shape around it, and 200 feet of R-2. The commercial requested squares up with the west boundary of Johnson Tractor Company. He believes it would be very difficult to stop the zoning anywhere east of that location, even though Johnson Tractor Company is a non -conforming use. Chairman John Power questioned why Mr. Ball is skipping C-1 and going to C-2. Rita Davis said the Planning Commission had turned down C-2 on Estes' property and Andre's property. Jim Lindsey said he feels that C-1 would be adequate. He stated that you need to have some depth to do anything nice in commercial property. They feel the plan they have will stabilize that corner and it is just a small part of a big tract of land. Mrs. Donald Blew who lives directly south of the area they are proposing to have rezoned, stated that she is opposed. Mrs. Roger Ketter, said she lives about two miles west and she is against any increased commercialization along Highway 45. She stated that Highway 45 is about the only highway that is not covered with fast-food franchises and she is completely opposed to their plans. She suggested that they go to College Avenue or Dickson Street if they want commercial property. Dr. J. B. Hays said he has 757 feet, containing 31.6 acres, across the highway from E. J. Ball's property. He feels the proposal is a perfectly reasonable use of the property since it is in a growth area. This would help the tax base, possibly help the schools, fire protection, etc. because it will increase taxes considerably to the City. He repeated that they are in the growth area and this is a perfectly reasonable use. Mrs. Harris, asked about the rights of the people who have homes on Highway 45 East. She said they should be considered. She wants to protect their homesites. She doesn't feel there is very much protection for the people who own homes. Clarence Young, 1625 Ridgeway, feels the intersection of Highway 265 and 45 has always been considered an intersection which should be commercial. He said he doesn't know any other good purpose for it. He said he would be opposed if he went any further away with commercial. He feels this is a reasonable request, to put the land in a definite pattern and let it develop that way. Tom Howard said that once commercial starts, he doesn't see how it can be stopped. • • • Planning Commission Meeting March 14, 1977 -5- Laura Ketter, 2213 Mission, said she is not ready for any major developments there. It would be a great waste to the area. Tom Howard, asked if the study Larry Wood was asked to make would cover this area and Chairman Power said that this has already been studied about a year ago. Chairman John Power gave Mr. Howard some background on the area. He said they did hold a public hearing on the area at the time the study was brought back to the Planning Commission. They have studied the intersection and had questions on the intersection for the last two or three years. Larry Wood said the new study is west of the area they had studied before. Rita Davis stated that she hadn't thought about it being developed commercially as far west from Highway 265 as requested. It goes a lot farther west than she had hoped for. John Maguire said the quality of commercial is a depth situation is important. If you limit it to 400-600 feet and get unloading areas behind and setbacks, then you are almost limited to strip commercialization. If this is going to be competitive with the Mall, you will need to look at an enclosed structure. Rita Davis said they need a better road there first. Ernest Jacks said he felt you couldn't compare sizes of this property with the Mall. Jim Lindsey said it would be comparable to K -Mart or something like that as far as parking. They have not planned very well along Highway 71 and he feels if they have some good depth in their planning, they will end up with something they can be proud of. If not, the land is very attractive to be sold off in small parcels. Rita Davis asked if there is a bank interested in the property. Jim Lindsey said it is his understanding that First National Bank is interested in the intersection. He said he had heard that they have approached the Church and are interested in property in the area Jack Ray stated that this is only a rezoning request. He felt some of the people may be under the wrong impression. Jerry Sweetser stated he has property that joins Mr. Ball's property on the west. He feels this is an excellent use, they are going to have to have same commercial. He stated that he is in favor of the plan. Mrs. Blew said the southeast corner is already zoned commercial and that land is available. There is approximately 40 acres there. She feels that the attractiveness of Highway 45 is because of the spacing of the houses, trees, and the small amount of commercial. Mrs. Roger Ketter asked Mr. Ball if he plans to have a liquor outlet of any kind there. E. J. Ball said he does not have any plans for one. Mrs. Tom Howard said that most of the people there in opposition are home owners. Tom Howard asked Mr. Ball if he would object to C-1. Jim Lindsey said they would not have any objections to this. Mr. Ball said this property was Mr. Kantz's property, who came to this area about 1860. He said he had represented the family for years. He stated that the existing house is probably a landmark (about 107 years old) and he would try to preserve it. Mr. Powell, whom Mr. Ball bought the land from, is Mr. Kantz's nephew. Peg Anderson stated that there is a real difference in several small parcels of land against one large one. She is very much in favor of large areas; a small neighborhood commercial area. The idea of offices and apartments next to the commercial shows good long -scale planning. Many of the big cities have small shopping centers which have nice, small shops and are very attractive. She mentioned Breckenridge Shopping Center in Little Rock and Utica Square in Tulsa, Oklahoma. Rita Davis agreed with Peg Anderson that something like Breckenridge Shopping Center would be nice there. Peg Anderson said that she feels it is worth a try to save the trees and make it a beautiful shopping center. Tom Howard agreed that Breckenridge would be a good idea, but said there is no guarantee that they won't build a Wal-Mart. Peg Anderson said they could be guaranteed that there would be a strip zoning otherwise and this would be the only hope to rezone a large area. Jim Lindsey said they would run an L-shaped road between the R-0 and the R-2 off of Highway 45 into Highway 265. Bill Kisor asked where the two-story house is and Jim Lindsey said it is within the area requested for commercial. • • • Planning Commission Meeting March 14, 1977 -6- Chairman Power asked if they would be willing to drop the R-0 on Highway 265. Jim Lindsey said they would be violating having the buffer. Lamar Pettus pointed out that at the time he represented Dr. Andre on his rezoning which was denied, a significant point was made that about 30 acres on the southeast corner of Highway 265 and Highway 45 had been commercial for a good many years. Jack Ray made a motion that the request be recommended to the Board of Directors for approval with the exception that the C-2 request be changed to C-1. He stated that he does believe R-0 has a proper place in there because it would serve as a good buffer. Peg Anderson seconded the motion, which was passed 8-1, with Anderson, Ray, Kisor, Jacks, Newhouse, Nickell, Maguire, and Power voting "Aye" and Davis voting "Nay". Mr. E. J. Ball asked to go on record stating that they do accept the proposed change from C-2 to C-1. Next was the duplex conditional use request for Duplex Conditional Use 10 duplexes submitted by Ottis Watson for property OTTIS WATSON located North of Mt. Comfort Road and East of W. of Trailwood Mobile Home Park Raven Lane, property zoned R-1, Low Density Residential District. (property lies West of Trailwood Mobile Home Park). Ottis Watson was present to represent. Mr. Watson said he has sold this land to Buddy Coleman and Mr. Coleman plans to put 10 duplexes like the ones across from Butterfield School back against the trailer park. Mr. Watson said he has 88 lots there and the rest of them would be single-family homes. John Maguire asked if this would be a buffer between the trailer park and the homes and Mr. Watson said "yes". Chairman Power asked Bobbie Jones if they had notified the adjoining property owners and Mr. Watson said he had. No one was present in opposition. Keith Newhouse asked if the Mobile Home park was the only property owner notified and Mr. Watson said he had notified the owner of the trailer park and Mr. Sonneman, who owns the property to the North. Mr. Watson said he had found no objection. Bill Kisor moved to approve the conditional use for 10 duplexes, John Maguire seconded the motion which passed unanimously. The seventh item for discussion was the conditional Duplex Conditional Use use request for a duplex submitted by Susie Harper SUSIE HARPER for property located on the east side of Oklahoma Oklahoma Way Way, between Missouri Way and Texas Way, property zoned R-1, Low Density Residential District. Attorney Lamar Pettus was present to represent Susie Harper. He showed the Planning Commission several photographs of the land near the property owned by Mrs. Harper. He said Warren Seagraves owns the house immediately north of the Harper home. Mr. Pettus said Mrs. Seagraves had told him that one of the reasons they bought this house was so it would not be used as a duplex. Mr. Pettus acknowledged a letter in opposition from Mr. Seagraves and a letter in opposition from George Faucette, who lives immediately behind. He said all of the property on the east side of Oklahoma Way is used for rental. property. Mr. Pettus stated that Mrs. Harper had rented the lower level of her home before she realized that the Ordinance prohibits that. Morris Collier, immediately north and across the street was present in opposition. He stated that the street is a narrow, two-lane street and when they have visitors, a fire truck or a sanitation truck cannot get through the street. With the street as it is, he doesn't feel it is suitable for duplex living. The lot is small and the street has enough traffic; he is opposed. Paul Eddy, 229 Oklahoma Way, is on the opposite side of the road of Mr. Seagraves. He mentioned the duplexes on the west side of his property which the owner assured them would be taken care of and have not been. He said he doesn't want any more duplexes there because they will not be taken care of. A • • • Flanning Commission Meeting March 14, 1977 -7- Warren Seagraves said that his letter to the Planning Commission states his position cn the conditional use. He is opposed. Howard "Rip" Lindsey lives directly across the street from the proposed conditonal use. He said he agrees with everything that is being said in opposition. He stated that he can't get out of his property when people park there on the road The house was built by the Harpers who poured the foundation before they ever obtained a building permit, then they had to get a variance. Lamar Pettus said this property is not suitable for single-family. He mentioned that one of the potential buyers is planning on changing the parking, so they can provide adequate parking. Mr. Ward, who is one of the potential buyers, said he would pave the driveway, but Mrs. Seagraves stated that she didn't want the driveway paved, she wanted the "natural" look. John Maguire made a motion to deny the request for a conditional use. Rita Davis seconded the motion. Peg Anderson said that she felt this is not the kind to be madec:into a duplex. The vote was unanimous to deny the request. Next was a conditional use request to construct an ROBERT L. YOUNKIN engine overhaul building on the property of Robert Conditional Use Request L. Younkin, Razorback Airport, property located South Razorback Airport of Appleby Road and WEst of Bishop Drive, zoned A-1, Agricultural District. Airports are conditional uses in all districts. Mrs. Robert L. Younkin was present. Mrs. Younkin said the reason for this request is that the engine overhaul business is the biggest part of their business. Mr. Younkin needs more space. The best way to do this is to put up the new building which will be close to the present building. In order to do that he would have to move the building (#3), which is the storage hanger. Also, this would put the new building closer to the shop hanger (#1). Chairman John Power questioned whether the property owners had been notified and Bobbie Jones said they had been. Wade Bishop, adjoining property owner, was present and said they do not have any objections to what Mr. Younkin is proposing. Ernest Jacks made a motion to approve the conditonal use for the airport. Bill Kisor seconded the motion, which was passed unanimously. Next was a conditional use request for a church ST. JOHNS LUTHERAN CHURCH educational building submitted by St. John's Conditional Use Request Lutheran Church, for property located on the NE corner of Dickson $ Arkansas Ave. Northeast corner of Dickson Street and Arkansas Avenue, property zoned R-3, High Density Residential District. Also a request for off-site parking. Clarence Young and Mr. Milas were present to represent Clarence Young said they would like to tear down the frame structure north of the firewall and in its place build a one-story educational building. The problem is the setback and the parking requirements. Everything on the property is being used as it would be used. The Church does have permission from First National Bank to use their parking lot on Sunday; also they have verbal approval from U -Ark Bowl. Within 300 feet on Dickson Street there is a public parking lot; to the west there is a University parking lot. Mr. Jacks asked if the Church owns the ice cream parlor and record shop and Mr. Young said they do. The Church is entirely on an R-3 zone but has R-3, P-1, and C-3 surrounding it. Keith Newhouse asked if this would increase the capacity for people. Mr. Young said it would not, it may possibly decrease it. After further discussion, Rita Davis moved to approve the conditional use. Donald Nickell seconded the motion, which was approved unanimously. • • Planning Commission Meeting March 14, 1977 -B- Peg Anderson questioned whether there would be any room for parking on weekdays. Clarence Young said there is not, but immediately north, Mr. Pearson (U -Ark Bowl) has given them permission to use his lot. Ernest Jacks asked Bobbie Jones how many parking spaces they would need. Mr. Young said they need 69 spaces if everything is in use at the same time. The sanctuary requires 50 spaces. Mr. Young said they would have 30 spaces from the bank; on Sunday you can get 30 cars in the U -Ark Bowl, 39 in the City parking lot. Peg Anderson moved to accept the off-site parking, which was seconded by Bill Kisor, and approved unanimously. Next was the public hearing to amend Ordinance 1747 to AMEND ZONING ORDINANCE set forth that no application for a conditional use will Conditional Use be considered by the Planning Commission within twelve (12) months from the date of final disapproval. Ken Lazenby was present representing the Fayetteville Board of Realtors. He said they felt that the person presenting the petition should have a week or two to present their differences, the petitioner may fail to present all the facts. If some of the facts were not clearly developed, it seems unreasonable to askthe petitioner to wait for a year. Peg Anderson said she would not consider a rehearing if someone failed to present the facts Rita Davis agreed with Mrs. Anderson. A lengthy discussion followed about the time limit on the conditional use rehearings. Jim McCord pointed out that the Planning Commission By-laws have been amended to allow a majority of the Planning Commission (5) rather than the unanimous vote, that was needed previously to rehear a matter-- this amendment deals with a new application, not a rehearing. If the petitioner can prove that there has been a factual error or an ommission of facts, the Planning Commission could grant a rehearing provided the petitioner requests it within 30 days of the date of the denial. Chairman Power mentioned that one thing that the Planning Commission must consider in regard to rehearing matters is the workload for 1977 which is greater than it was in 1976. He feels that it is much fairer to the petitioner since a vote by the majority of the Planning Commission is all that is needed to rehear an item now. Keith Newhouse made a motion to recommend to the Board of Directors to adopt the amendment to Ordinance 1747. Ernest Jacks seconded the motion, which was passed unanimously. The last item for discussion was the policy covering POLICY revision of preliminary plats covering subsequent Revision to Preliminary Plats phases of a subdivision after a final plat has been filed and lots sold in previous phases when an overall preliminary plat was approved earlier. Dr. William Schwab was present. Ernest Jacks said it appears that a subdivision was made (in phases) showing community property and then all the community property was eliminated in another phase. He wondered if, in the process of looking into the subdivision, the covenants should be consulted and find out if the people who have bought into the subdivision should be notified that the next phase was being processed. City Attorney Jim McCord said this question was brought up in regard to Sequoyah Woods. He said he believes the developer has a right to revise his preliminary plat before requesting final plat approval. From the Planning Commission standpoint, the developer should have the right to change the preliminary plat after it has been approved. The only way a purchaser could protect himself is to get something in writing in the contract of sale or some type of protective covenants. Jim McCord stated that this would be a legal problem. Mr. Jacks asked if part of the process in plat review should be notification of adjoining property owners. Mr. McCord said he doesn't see how the Planning Commission can prevent breech of covenants. • • Planning Commission Meeting March 14, 1977 -9- Ernest Jacks questioned if there should be a public notification for a change. Dr. Schwab said the only way he found out about this change was through the "grapevine". People who bought lots in Phase One were told by the real estate agent that the land to the rear of the property would be a common area. Jim McCord said he isn't sure the Commission doesn't have an obligation here if Phase One showed community facilities. Chairman Power stated that he didn't think they have seen this type of thing before. Dr. Schwab said he understood this is the second time this has happened in Fayette- ville, once in Rolling Hills and now in Sequoyah Woods. Chairman John Power said he thought the final plat of Rolling Hills had been approved so he felt these cases are entirely different. John Maguire stated that he doesn't feel the Planning Commission is in the legal business. They are in the land use business by the citizens of Fayetteville and in addition they attempt to require subdivisions to follow what the City thinks is good building practices. He doesn't see that this is in the Planning Commission jurisdiction. Bill Kisor suggested that the developer present a plat of what has happened in Phase One when they present Phase Two. Jim McCord said in this case that this was approved as a Planned Unit Oevelopment. Larry Wood said there is still a piece of property that is part of Phase One that nothing_ has been done with yet. Ernest Jacks said the developer should notify the other owners that Phase Two is being considered and that he might like to take a look at it. Larry Wood said that under the Planned Unit Development you have an obligation because you are approving this as a condition of approval. Ernest Jacks said the Subdivision Committee should add that notification of adjacent property owners, by the developer, be required. The meeting was adjourned at 7:40 • RESOLUTION PC 10-77 WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the City Planning Commission, Monday, March 14, 1977, 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 Nicholas Markov, Quartermaster, Jack Tidball Post 2722, VFW, R77-3 for rezoning; • 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 petition requesting the rezoning of property, described as follows, from R-0, Residential Office District, to C-3, Central Commercial. District, be denied. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: A part of Block numbered (40) in the original plat of the town (now city) of Fayetteville, Arknasas, described as follows: Beginning at the Northwest corner of said block and running thence east (86) feet to a point in the center of an eight foot alley or driveway; thence south bearing eastwith the center line of said alley or driveway to a point which is (130) feet south of the north line of said block; thence west (91) feet, more or less to the west line of said block; thence north (130) feet to the place of beginning. SECTION 2. That the rezoning of the above described real estate would not presently be desirable. PASSED AND APPROVED this day of , 1977. APPROVED: John Power, Chairman • • RESOLUTION .PC --11-771:; WHEREAS, a public hearing was held March 14, 1977, fifteen (15) days after and after a notice was published in the of general circulation; and by the Planning Commission, a sign was erected upon the Northwest Arkansas Times, a Monday, property newspaper WHEREAS, after the public hearing the Planning Commission voted to make a recommendation to the Board of Directors on Rezoning Petition R77-4, Fayetteville Housing Authority. 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 C-3, Central Commercial to C-4, Downtown Commercial, said real estate. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Tract 1: All of Lots 2 and 3, and 14 feet of equal and uniform width off the East side of Lot 4, Block 30, Original City of Fayetteville. Tract 2: Lot 7 and 5 feet of equal and uniform width off the South side of Lot 6, Block 26, Original City of Fayetteville. Tract 3: All of Lots 10, 11, 12, 13, Block 28, Original City of Fayetteville. Also, Part of Lots 7, 8, and 9, Block 28, Original City of Fayetteville, described as: Beginning at a point on the Northeast corner of said Lot 7, thence West 45.5 feet, thence South 86 feet, thence East 45.5 feet, thence North 86 feet to the point of beginning. Also, Part of Lot 9, Block 28, Original City of Fayetteville, described as: Beginning at a point 6 feet South of the Northwest corner of said Lot 9 and running thence South 20 feet, thence East 100 feet, thence North 20 feet, thence West 100 feet to the point of beginning. Also, Four feet of equal and uniform width off the South side of Lot 9, Block 28, Original City of Fayetteville. SECTION 2. That the above described property be rezoned from C-3, Central Commercial District to C-4, Downtown Commercial District, so that the petitioner may develop property accordingly. PASSED AND APPROVED this day of , 1977. APPROVED: John Power, Chairman • • RESOLUTION PC 12-77 WHEREAS, a public hearing was held March 14, 1977, fifteen (15) days after and after a notice was published in the of general circulation; and by the Planning Commission, a sign was erected upon the Northwest Arkansas Times, a Monday, property newspaper WHEREAS, after the public hearing the Planning Commission voted to make a recommendation to the Board of Directors on Rezoning Petition R77 -S, E. J. Ball. 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 R-2, Medium Density Residential District, R-0, Residential Office District, and C-1, Neighborhood Commercial District, said real estate. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Tract 1: Part of the NEq of the SEa of Section 2, T -16-N, R -30-W, being more particularly described as follows, to -wit: Beginning at the SE corner of said forty acre tract and running thence N 88° 14' W, 988 feet thence N 0° 46' E. 988 feet, thence S 88° 14' E, 988 feet, thence S 016 46' W. 988 feet, to the point of beginning. Less and Except that portion on the South side embraced in State Highway 45 and that portion along the East side, East of the West'li.ne of Arkansas State Highway 265. To rezone from R-1, Low Density Residential District to C-1, Thoroughfare Commercial district. Tract 2: Part of the NEa of the SEa of Section 2, T -16-N, R -30-1V, being more particularly described as follows, to -wit: Beginning at the SW corner of said 40 acre tract, and running thence N 01° 46' E. 1320 feet, thence East to the West line of Highway 265, thence 5 00 56' W, along the West line of Highway 265 to a point 988 feet North of the South line of said forty acre tract, thence West to a point 983 feet (Vest of the East line of said forty acre tract, thence S 01° 40' West to the South line of said forty acre tract, thence N 880 14' W, to the point of beginning. Less and except that portion on the South side embraced in Highway 45. To rezone from R-1, Low Density Residential District to R-0, Residential Office District. Tract 3: 200 feet of equal and uniform width off the East side of the NWN of the SEa, 200 feet of equal and uniform width off the South side of the. Fractional E1 of the NEa, and a part of the Fractional WZ of the Fractional NE; described as beginning at :the SE corner of the Fractional W1 of the Fractional NE4, and running thence West 200 feet, thence North 200 feet, thence East 200 feet, thence South 200 feet to the point of beginning. All of which is contained in Section 2, T -16-N, R -20-W. To rezone from R-1, Low Density Residential District to R-2, Medium Density Residential. District. • • Resolution PC 12-77 March 14, 1977 -2- SECTION 2. That the above described property be rezoned from R-1, Low Density Residential District to R-2, Medium Density Residential District, R-0, Residential -Office District, and C-1, Neighborhood Commercial District, so that the petitioner may develop property accordingly. PASSED AND APPROVED this day of , 1977. APPROVED: John Power, Chairman • • • • • RESOLUTION PC 13-77 WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the Fayetteville Planning Commission, Monday, March 14, 1977, 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 Ordinances, City of Fayetteville, Arkansas) to set forth that no application for a conditional use will be considered by the Planning Commission within twelve (12) months from the date of final disapproval. 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 set forth that no application for a conditional use will be considered by the Planning Commission within twelve (12) months from the date of final disapproval. PASSED AND APPROVED this day of -, 1977. APPROVED: John Power, Chairman