Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1979-05-25 Minutes• • • MINUTES OF A PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING A meeting of the City Planning Commission was held on Friday, May 25, 1979, at 5:10 o'clock P.M. in the Board of Directors Room, City Administration Building, Fayetteville, Arkansas. MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: OTHERS PRESENT: Chairman Ernest Jacks, Morton Gitelman, Beth Crocker, Keith Newhouse, Peg Anderson, Newton Hailey and Windell Cullers. Rita Davis and Bill Kisor. Bobbie Jones, Gail Biswell, City Manager Don Grimes, City Attorney Jim McCord, Administrative Assistant McWethy, Lois Cunningham, Harold Albright, Richard Atkinson, Chester House, Ervan Wimberly, Clifford Moyer, Danny Wright, George Blackwell, Gordon Houston, Mildred Allen, W. A. Smith, Barbara Jordan, Linda Marquardt, Arnold Christie, Rev. Donald Chesher, Les Kline, members of the press and unidentified members of the audience. Chairman Jacks called the meeting to order. There being no corrections, additions or deletions to be made to the minutes of the previous meeting of May 14, 1979, said minutes were approved. Continuation of a public hearing was had on Rezoning Petition R79-16, City Planning Commission, to rezone property located at 710 N. Frisco from I-1, Heavy Commercial and Light Industrial District, to R-2, Medium Density Residential District. The public hearing was tabled at the May 14, 1979 meeting. Chairman Jacks noted that this item had been tabled in order to obtain an opinion from the City Attorney with regard to the Planning Commission's authority to initiate rezoning petitions. Mr. Jacks acknowledged a letter from Mr. McCord which stated, in essence, that the Commission DOES have such authority. Mr. Jacks also acknowledged receipt of Mrs. Jones' history of the property. Attorney Richard Atkinson, present once again to represent property owner Lois Cunningham, stated that he had agreed with Mr. McCord not to argue "law" at the meeting. However, Mr. Atkinson stated that lots 9 $ 11 "are in the street if that is a street or if it ever was a street." "We also contend, as you know, that this never was residential property but has always been industrial property," he continued. Mr. Atkinson stated he "had little or no fuss" with the history that Bobbie prepared or with respect to some of the proceedings which occurred prior to this date, "although we do think there are some particular elements of them that aren't absolutely correct." Mr. Atkinson stated that Mrs. Cunningham takes the position that this is industrial property and has always been industrial property no matter what the zoning of the property may have been over the years. He stated that itwould be a serious financial loss to Mrs. Cunningham if this rezoning was taken upon by the Planning Commission and adopted. Also present in opposition was Harold Albright, Ozark Land Company, who has made a tentative sale of the property, contingent upon it being industrially zoned. MINUTES CONSIDERATION OF REZONING PET. R79-16 City Planning Commission 710 N. Frisco • • • Planning Commission Meeting • May 25, 1979 Page 2 Peg Anderson stated that the property was the only property in the area remaining industrially zoned. She noted that there are other industrial busi- nesses left in the area, but they are present only as nonconforming uses. She noted that immediately to the West of the property is a railroad. Keith Newhouse stated that he did not see why anyone would want to build a residential house near a railroad. After further discussion, Peg Anderson stated that she had difficulty with this proposal now. Earlier, she stated, she felt that rezoning would "tidy up" the area and thought it was desired by all involved. "In the long run I think we'd do better to see most of this as the Land Use Plan says that it is, as R-2 or R-3, but I'm not'particularly feeling that we should push this type of thing on someone anymore than we are changing the nonconforming uses of the others. I guess I would basically say that I think R-2 or R-3 is a much better use, but I don't feel ready to push this particular zoning." Mrs. Anderson then moved to deny the petition. Beth Crocker seconded the motion. After another short discus- sion, a vote was taken on the motion to deny, and same passed unanimously (7-0). Consideration next was had on a Condi- ERIC T. LLOYD tional Use Request submitted by Eric T. Lloyd Conditional Use Request for a carry -out chicken service at 352 N. 352 N. West Street West Street; property zoned R-0, Residential - Office District. No one was present to represent. Chairman Jacks noted that this item had also been tabled at the May 14, 1979, meeting. He noted that several members had questions to ask the petitioner and since he was not present at the meeting the item was tabled. Again, no one was present to represent. Windell Cullers moved to deny the request stating that he had tried to speak for them at the last meeting, but if the petitioner wasn't any more interested in his own request than this, he did not feel approval was merited. He also stated the lack of sufficient information as a reason for his motion. Peg Anderson seconded the motion to deny, which passed 6-1 with Mort Gitel- man casting the nay vote. Consideration was then had on the proposed KANTZ DRIVE preliminary plat of Kantz Drive to be located be- Preliminary Plat tween Crossover Road and the proposed East Oaks Crossover Rd. Drive, North of Hwy. 45; E. J. Ball Trust, owner; property zoned R-2, Medium Density Residential, and R-0, Residential -Office District. Bob Crafton was present to represent. Keith Newhouse, Chairman of the Subdivision Committee, moved to approve the preliminary plat based upon the recommendations made by the Subdivision Committee, which were: 1. Radii from curbs being shown as 30 ft. on the Hwy. 265 entrance cut; 2. Four ft. wide sidewalks being constructed along the North side of Kantz Drive; 3. Five street lights being placed at 300 ft. intervals along the street; 4. Notation made on the plat and signed by the developer covenanting with the City that no sale or further division of the property will be made Planning Commission Meeting May 25, 1979 Page 3 without approval by the Planning Commission of a Large Scale Development plan for the property. Beth Crocker seconded the motion, which passed unanimously (7-0). Consideration was had on the request for CEDARWOOD ADDITION approval of the preliminary plat of Cedarwood Preliminary Plat Addition, a 38.8 acre subdivision containing W. of Highway 265 123 lots to be located East of Brookside East subdivision, West of Croosover Road and North of the proposed extension of Township Road; Atlas Construction Co., Inc., developer; Chester House, owner. Mr. House and Ervan Wimberly were present to represent. Keith Newhouse, Chairman of the Subdivision Committee, moved to approve the plat based upon the recommendations made by his Committee, which were: 1. Flood plain data be shown on plat; 2. Sidewalks installed and noted on the plat as going all the way around the cul-de-sacs; sidewalks installed on Crossover Road; 3. Note on plat that no driveway cuts will be permitted onto Crossover or Township Roads; 4. Waiver of street light spacing permitted; and 5. Waiver of length of tangents between reverse curves and sight distances at center lines permitted. Mr. Newhouse stated that Mr. Hailey had requested that public records be documented noting that any houses built on lots 3 or 4 would be constructed upon fill. He also stated that the Planning Commission has not been requesting any participation by developers in the cost of extending Township Road, but noted that the developers had made the necessary right-of-way dedication therefor. Newton Hailey seconded the motion. Cecelia Tu, property owner across Highway 265, stated objections to the in- crease in intersections along Highway 265. She stated that additional cuts onto the highway would increase a dangerous situation and suggested a traffic light be installed in the area. It was noted by Mr. Wimberly that there would be a dis- tance of 540 ft. between cuts when the State Hwy. Depart requires only a distance of 300 ft. therebetween. Mrs. Jones noted that the zoning ordinance requires only 415 ft. clearance. After a short discussion, a vote was taken upon the motion to approve as stated above. Said motion passed unanimously (7-0). A public hearing was had on Rezoning Peti- tion R79-18, Clifford $ Harriet Moyer, to rezone property located on Coach:Road, North of Sunrise Mountain Road from A-1, Agricultural District, to R-1, Low Density Residential District. Attorney Danny Wright and petitioner Clifford Moyer were present to represent. Chairman Jacks noted that Mrs. Jones had submitted comments on this petition stating that Sunrise Mountain Subdivision is not platted in the City Plat Books since the plat was filed while the property was outside the City. Mrs. Jones had also commented that some of the lot lines are not dimensioned and some which are CONSIDERATION OF REZONING PET. R79-18 Clifford & Harriet Moyer Coach Road • • • Planning Commission Meeting May 25, 1979 Page 4 dimensioned do not agree with the scale shown on the plat. In view of those facts, he stated, Mrs. Jones felt that the location of the property might not be accurate on Planning Office maps. Mr. Jacks also read from the planning report of Planning Consultant Larry Wood who was unable to attend the meeting. Mr. Jacks summed up the report stating that Mr.Wood felt the area lacked the necessary public facilities (adequate water, sewer, fire protection and improved streets) and he therefore recommended that the requested R-1 District not be approved. Mr Jacks stated that Mr. Wood felt that approval of the requested R-1 would establish a precedent for further urban development "in an area not ready for it." Attorney Danny Wright, present to represent the petitioners, made a lengthy presentation rebutting Mr. Wood's planning report and arguing for the approval of the petition. In summary, Mr. Wright stated that the petitioners felt there was not a lack of public facilities since electric service, gas and water are available. Mr. Wright stated that water is available by two lines, a 1" line and a 11/4" line, as well as a pond being suitable for fire fighting water supply. Mr. Wright referred to a 1971 letter from Wes Howe (the then Fayetteville City Manager) indicating the City would issue building permits and accept Coach Rd. provided it was improved with 6 inches of gravel, 24 ft. wide. Mr. Wright stated that although it was assumed by the property owners that the City had ac- cepted the street, the City has not maintained the street in any manner since 1971. Mr. Wood's planning report stated: "To date Coach Rd. appears to be an unimproved one lane gravel driveway. If it was improved in 1971 it has since disappeared." Mr. Wright rebutted Mr. Wood's statement that approval of the requested R-1 would establish a precedent for further urban development in an area not ready for it by stating: "With regard to setting a precedent for the surrounding area as far as the area not being ready to be developed, Coach Road services only 4 lots. The property immediately east of Coach Road drops off considerably and is, I be- lieve, actually a part of Mr. Askew's farm. If there were any development along the East side of the road it would probably have to be serviced by another street." City Manager Don Grimes expressed his concern with the matter stating that the City Board has on numerous occasions talked to area residents concerning the inadequate water system which serves Sunrise Mountain. Mr. Grimes stated that the water system is a private system with a pumpstation at the base of the hill which pumps water up the mountain. He stated that the system frequently has problems and the people living in the area have asked the City several times what the City might do to help them. Mr. Grimes stated that the City has even done studies it- self to see what the prospects are for a better water system. Mr. Grimes stated that this area "is one of those areas which is trying to develop on an incremental basis without the necessary public facilities, making a real problem." He ex- pressed his concern that if the lots are turned loose for development that other people in the area will also ask for lots to be loosed for development. Mr. Wright rebutted Mr. Grimes' statements, stating that the two lots in question "lie lower down the hill than the system Mr. Grimes spoke of." He also stated that the lots are serviced on water lines independent of that system. • Discussion ensued. Windell Cullers moved to deny the petition, citing the various comments made by the City Manager as his reasons for so moving. Keith Newhouse seconded the motion, which passed unanimously (7-0). i • • Planning Commission Meeting May 25, 1979 Page 5 Consideration was had on the Conditional GORDON HOUSTON Use Request submitted by Gordon Houston to Duplex Conditional Use Request develop a duplex subdivision South of Deane Deane Street Street, East of Porter Road, and West of Sang Avenue; property zoned R-1, Low Density Residen- tial District. Mr. Houston was present to represent. Mr. Houston stated that about a year ago he had asked to have this property rezoned to R-2 and his petition had been denied. At the time of denial, he stated, the Planning Commission had recommended he come back and ask for a Conditional Use instead. Mr. Houston stated that he now requests permission to develop a 12-15 lot duplex subdivision on his 5 -acre property. Mr. Houston presented nine certi- fied mail return receipts as proof of notice to adjoining property owners of this proposal. Discussion ensued concerning the size of his lots and the minimum square - footage requirements for duplexes in the R-1 zone. Mildred Allen, a neighboring property owner, expressed opposition to the re- quest stating that she felt the Commission had made "a valid and fair assessment" of the situation at the time they denied the rezoning petition and she stated that she didn't see that anything had changed since then. Beth Crocker and Peg Anderson commented that the surrounding property owners had voiced a good deal of objection to duplexes at the rezoning petition. They noted that the neighbors were concerned about increasing the density of the area without having Porter Road paved. W. A. Smith, another adjoining property owner, stated that he was concerned whether more than one duplex could be built on each lot. Mr. Jacks assured him that more than one could not be built on each lot. Mr. Smith then stated that he would not object to the request, but wondered whether the road would be paved as a result of the construction. Mr. Grimes stated that the area is included in the Community Development budget of 1978 for street improvements. After further discussion during which Mr. Hailey expressed his concern that the request was "stretching" conditional uses allowed in residential zones, and during which Mr. Gitelman rebutted that duplexes are residential uses, Mr. Gitel- man then moved to approve the request. Mrs. Anderson requested that the motion be amended to limit the number of lots to a maximum of twelve. Mr. Gitelman so amended his motion and Mrs. Anderson then seconded same. Windell Cullers stated that he had no objections to allowing the duplexes, but he was concerned that such construction would be immature until further im- provements to the streets were made. A vote was taken upon Mr. Gitelman's motion to approve, which motion also limited the maximum number of lots to twelve. The motion passed 6-1 with Windell Cullers casting the nay vote. Consideration was had on a Conditional Use Request submitted by Barbara Jordan to use a house at 854 S. Hill Street for a nursery school; property zoned R-2, Medium Density Residential District. Ms. Jordan was present to represent. BARBARA JORDAN Conditional Use Request Nursery School 854 S. Hill Street • Planning Commission Meeting May 25, 1979 Page 6 Ms. Jordan submitted a list of signatures of approval of all neighbors "down the street and around and behind the house." She stated that she had obtained approval from the fire department and from the licensing director of Nursery Schools. She stated that approval had been ob- tained by the Health Department contingent upon installation of another sink and toilet facility. Ms. Jordan noted that the school has been in existence for three years in another location in town. Linda Marquardt, a neighboring property owner, stated that she has a daughter who attends the school and that she is well acquainted with the way it is run. She stated that it is well run, fairly quiet, and that she has made an offer on a house next door to the school. She stated that she has her own business and practices instrument next door to the school without any interference or disrup- tion from the school. Mr. Arnold Christie, a neighboring property owner present in support, stated his approval of the school. He stated that he and other neighbors hoped that the school would be able to locate on the site since the house is large and sits on about 11 acres of land. He stated that he would much prefer for the school to situate there rather than have the house rented out to students, etc. Windell Cullers moved to approve the request without placing any time limit or other restriction on such approval. Beth Crocker seconded the motion, which passed unanimously (7-0). Consideration was had upon a Conditional Use REV. DONALD CHESHER Request submitted by Rev. Donald Chesher to con- Conditional Use Request struct a church building East of Hwy. 71, North East of Hwy. 71 of Willoughby Road, South of Whillock Street (Lot 15, Miller Addition); property zoned R-1, Low Density Residential District. Rev. Chesher was present to represent. Rev. Chesher stated that he wanted to build the church building and was will- ing to do whatever the City would require in order to build. He stated that he has already made an earnest payment on the property. Arthur Miller, property owner across the road, stated that the church site could not use the driveway shown on the plans as that is a private drive for the lot behind. Peg Anderson stated that she would like to be sure that Rev. Chesher under- stands the requirements for Large Scale Development plans. Discussion ensued concerning possible off-site improvements which might be required for a Large Scale Development application. Mr. Jacks noted that the property is located on a State Highway and that the Commission has not been requesting many improvements along such highways. Peg Anderson moved to approve the request. Keith Newhouse seconded the motion, which passed unanimously (7-0). Consideration was had upon a Conditional Use Request submitted by Les Kline to change a non -conforming use to a one or two man cabinet shop at 3535 Huntsville Road; property zoned C-1, Neighborhood Commercial District. Mr. Kline was present to represent. LES KLINE Conditional Use Request 3535 Huntsville Road • • • Planning Commission Meeting May 25, 1979 Page 7 Mr. Kline stated that he had begun a cabinet shop on Center Street and then found that he would have to move from his residence. While looking for a residence he stated that he found this property which has both a residence house (3539 Hunts- ville Road) and a store building (3535 Huntsville Road). He stated that the store building was being used as a second-hand store. Mr. Kline stated that he and his daughter would like to use the building as a cabinet shop. He stated that the building contains 800 sq. ft. of area. After a minimal amount of discussion, Peg Anderson moved to approve the re- quest. Newton Hailey seconded the motion, which passed unanimously (7-0). COMMITTEE REPORTS: Chairman Jacks• stated, thati.Larry Woodi is finishing up the final draft::and will then send it on to Jim McCord. Mort Gitelman stated that a second draft is ready for the review of either the Committee or the Planning Commission. Chairman Jacks stated that he felt it would be fine to go ahead and send the draft on to the Planning Commission. Newton Hailey stated that his Committee's work has been delayed, mainly due to his own medical problems. He stated that he felt the Committee would not be able to make its presentation to the Quorum Court at its June meeting, but probably would be able to at the July meeting. He stated that the Committee needed to meet again before making a presentation to the Planning Commission. Chairman Jacks stated that he and Mrs. Jones had conversed earlier in the day and that Mrs. Jones was to discuss the matter with Harold Lieberenz. He stated that he hoped to meet with both Mrs. Jones and Mr. Lieberenz later next week and that he would probably have a report to make at the next Planning Commission meeting. The meeting adjourned at 6:25 o'clock P.M. • PUD REGULATIONS OFF-SITE IMPROVEMENTS PLANNING AREA LAND USE CONTROL PARKING SPACE SIZES