Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1980-01-14 Minutesi MINUTES OF A PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING A meeting of the City Planning Commission was held on Monday, January 14, 1980, at 5:00 P.M. in the Board of Directors Room, City Administration Building, Fayetteville, Arkansas. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Ernest Jacks, Peg Anderson, Keith Newhouse, Elizabeth Crocker, Windell Cullers, Don Hunnicutt, Martin Redfern, Newton Hailey (arrived at 5:15), and Morton Gitelman. MEMBERS ABSENT: None OTHERS PRESENT: Bobbie Jones, Michelle Hale, Larry Wood, Kent Clement, Tom Hopper, Gary Carnahan, Jim McCord, Frank Parrish, J. B. Hays, Gary Deckert Ervin Wimberly, A. D. McAllister, Mr. F, Mrs. Leo Anderson, Marilyn Edwards, Mary Lynch, Viola Fisher, Oliver Wilder, Carolyn Wilder, P. R. Gray, Bill Greenhaw, Ken Mourton, and Larry Sumrow; Chairman Ernest Jacks called the meeting to order. Chairman Jacks welcomed Mr. Don Hunnicutt and Mr. Martin Redfern as new members to the Planning Commission. The minutes of the December 10, 1979 MINUTES meeting were approved as mailed. The first item for discussion was the FAYETTEVILLE CENTER SUBDIVISION approval of the concurrent plat for Fayette- Concurrent Plat ville Center Subdivision to be located at Hwy. 62 $ Hwy. 71 By-pass the SE corner of Hwy. 62 West and Hwy. 71 By-pass; Troy Parnell and The Parnell Group, Inc., Developers; Zoned C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial District. Kent Clement was present to represent. Mr. Newhouse stated the Subdivision Committee recommended approval with these 4 contingencies: (1) Closing the 60 ft. right-of-way street stub that goes into Hollywood Ave. by the City Board and to retain the utility easements; Close the 25 ft. wide street stub at the SE corner of the property and retain the utility easement; Waive the lot frontage requirements on Lot ,2 Block 1 and Lot 3,Block 2, -as provided 'in -Art. 8, Sec. 6 of the Zoning Ordinance; and' (4) Other problems.involved,have to do with the.Highway Department and the developer must continue his negotiations with the AHTD. • - Mr. Newhouse then moVed'to approve the concurrent plat. Mrs. Crocker seconded it, which passed 8-0. The next item•for discussion was THE PARNELL GROUP Large Scale Development Hwy. 62 $ Hwy. 71 By-pass the approval of the large scale develop- ment plan for The Parnell Group to be located at the SE corner of Hwy. 62 West and Hwy. 71 By-pass; The Parnell Group, Developer; Zoned C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial District. Mr. Newhouse stated the Subdivision Committee recommended scale development with 2 contingencies: (1) Compliance with Plat Review comments; andl (2)'' A note to be added to the plan that no access to as shown on the large scale development plan. Mr. Newhouse then moved to approve the large scale development. it, which passed 8-0. approval of the large Hwy. 62 be allowed except • Mrs. Crocker seconded • Planning Commission Meeting January 14, 1980 Page 2 Mrs. Anderson expressed her disappointment that there was any landscaping on this large development. no way to require The next item for discussion was HAZY HEIGHTS the preliminary plat of Hazy Heights, PUD a Planned unit development, located Township Rd. North of Township Rd. and East of Sherwood Lane; Clark C. $ Marie McClinton and M. N. Graue, Owners and Developers; Zoned R-1, Low Density Residential District. Mrs. Jones pointed out this was put on the agenda in error, so it was pulled. The next item for discussion was the KANTZ PLACE final plat of Kantz Place located North of Fiinal Plat Hwy. 45 East and West of Crossover Road; Hwy. 45 East F, Crossover Rd. E. J. Ball Family Trust, Developer; Zoned: North 50 ft. of Blocks 1 F, 3, R-1, Low Density Residential District; remainder of Blocks 1 $ 3, R-2, Medium Density Residential District, all of Block 2, R-0, Resid- ential -Office District; all 6 Tracts, R-1, Low Density Residential District. Mr. Newhouse stated the Subdivision Committee recommended approval with 4 con- tingencies: (1) The contract would not be on the entire Subdivision, but only on Lots 1-12 Block 2, Lots 17-23 Block 2, Lots 11, 12, and 13 Block 3, and subject to the approval of the City Engineer and Street Superintendent; (2) Amend the wording in Sec. 8, paragraphs A and B in the covenants by adding "subject to the approval of the Planning Commission"; On Lot 13 Block 3, change the setback from the North property line to 25 feet, and (4) Change Certificate of Ownership and dedication to read "I, E. J. Ball, in- dividually, and as trustee etc.", Mr. Newhouse then moved that the Final Plat of Kantz Place be approved with the above contingencies. Mrs. Crocker seconded it, which passed 9-0. (3) The next item was the appointment APPOINTMENT to the Subdivision Committee to replace Subdivision Committee Bill Kisor whose Planning Commission term expired December 31, 1979. Chairman Jacks asked Mr. Hunnicutt to replace Mr. Kisor. Mr. Hunnicutt The next item for discussion was the public hearing on Rezoning Petition R80-1, Frank Farrish $ J. B. Hays to rezone pro- perty located South of Hwy. 45 East and approx. 14 mile West of Hwy. 265 from R-1, Low Density Residential District, to ential-Office District. Frank Farrish, J. B. Hays, and Ervan Wimberly to represent. Mr. Wood stated the requested R-0 District is not recommended for reasons: (1) The zoning district requested is not in keeping with the recommendation of the General Plan. (2) The need for buffering does not exist at this location, the commercial zoning on the south side of Hwy. 45 needing the buffer is 903 feet to the East. Sewer facilities are not yet available to this site. REZONING PETITION R80-1 Frank Farrish L J..B. Hays Hwy. 45 E. $ Hwy. 265 R-0, were accepted. Resid- present the following (3) Planning Commission Meeting January 14, 1980 Page 3 (4) R-0 Zoning at the location requested would tend to commit the property to the East to the same zoning or a more intensive classification which would encourage strip development along the highway. Mr. Wimberly stated the balance of the 75 acre tract would be developed re- sidential. He said sewer was not available at this time but they do plan to pro- vide it. Mr. Wimberly said this was a spot zoning not strip zoning. He said they were only asking for the front part of it for R-0. He said they had a lay -out that can economically be built. They are thinking about either offices or condominiums. Mr. Wimberly stated they were willing to have the R-0 Zoning contingent on the filing of a subdivision plat with covenants, they would not take the rezoning until the plat and covenants were signed. He said the lots would have common access across the South side of these lots to the proposed street with only 2 other driveways to Hwy. 45. Mrs. Anderson asked if this was a PUD. Mr. Wimberly said no. Mr. Wimberly added that this would be done in phases and the average lot size would be 115' by 105'. Mrs. Anderson said she didn't like the idea of rezoning this property to R -O, because Highway 45 is the only entrance into Fayetteville that isn't ruined. She added she would consider rezoning it to R-2, Multi -family Residential District. Mr. Farrish stated if you leave it R-1 you create a traffic problem coming off Hwy. 45. He said it was a matter of economics. Mr. Farrish stated they could have 10 residences across the front with 10 driveways off the highway. Chairman Jacks asked if they would be interested in an R-2 Zoning. Mr. Wimberly said yes. Chairman Jacks said the City has set the limits of the Commercial $ R-0 Zoning across the highway. Mr. Hays stated if it was R-0 it would be for residential and offices only. He said they would put a lot of restrictions on it. Mr. Farrish pointed out they owned more land than this behind it, he said he wouldn't want anything else in there. Mr. Gitelman sided with Mrs. Anderson. He said he was opposed to any more R-0 Zoning, he is opposed to the office type use He said the R-0 was intended to take care of offices and apartments. Mr. Gitelman added if the Commission is disposed to an R-2 Zoning, they may choose to have more property included in the rezoning. He added he would vote against R-0. Mrs. Jones pointed out it would have to be readvertised if more property than originally asked for were rezoned. Mr. Hailey asked Mr. Wood's opinion. Mr. Wood said he had some design problems. He said the creation of five street intersections in a row within the subdivision and no access to the East would be a problem. Mr. Wood said what was happening is that the Planning Commission is opening this land to the East up to something other than R-1 development. He added that an R-2 Zoning wouldn't bother him. Mr. Farrish and Dr. Hays indicated they would accept an R-2 Zoning. Mrs. Anderson moved to recommend to the Board of Directors that Petition R80-1 be amended to rezone to R-2 rather than R-0 and that the amended petition be approved. Mr. Gitelman seconded it, which passed 9-0. The next item for discussion was the conditional use request for a tandem lot at 827 Township Rd. by Gary Deckert; property zoned R-1, Low Density Residential District. Present to represent was Mr. Deckert. Mr. Deckert stated he couldn't see any reason for objection. He said he wanted to build himself a home on the tandem lot and sell the existing house in the front. He said an additional 17 ft. is needed off his property for the widening of Township Road. Marilyn Edwards (2330 Juneway Terrace) stated she was in opposition of the CONDITIONAL USE REQUEST Tandem Lot 827 Township Road Gary Deckert 3 Planning Commission Meeting January 14, 1980 Page 4 request. Viola Fisher (836 Peel) stated her opposition to the request. She quest- ioned how he could build a house in the back lot and meet the setback. Mary Lynch was present to represent her mother Mrs. D.N • Street (1350 Sunny -RID). She expressed her opposition. Oliver Wilder (2344 Juneway) stated he had an objection to starting anything like this in the neighborhood. He said there are a number of long lots in that area including the one just to the West of the subject lot. He stated there is one lot between the subject property and the back of the houses on Juneway Terrace but he did not like to see tandem lots started. Mrs. Jones stated that 8 people had been notified. There was a lot of confusion because some people said they weren't notified. Chairman Jacks pointed out the not- ifications were not required by ordinance, but as a matter of policy and then only to the abutting property owners. Mrs. Crocker asked Mrs. Jones about the driveway safety zone. Mr. Deckert said the driveway for the existing house is on the West part of the lot and this one will be on the East part. Mrs. Anderson was concerned because the tandem lot ordinance did not state a minimum lot size. Mr. Gitelman pointed out this would result in a 11,250 sq. ft. lot. Mr. Cullers asked Mr. Gitelman if this request complied to the Ordinance. Mr. Gitelman stated if it meets all of the existing requirements of the Ordinance to turn it down would be arbitrary. Mrs. Jones informed the Commissioners that the reason the court overruled them on a past tandem lot request was not because there was no basis in the ordinance to deny it, but because the motion in the minutes did not reflect any reason based on the ordinance for denial. Mrs. Lynch pointed out that Township Road is located on a mountain and it is on a slope. Mrs. Wilder stated when they bought their home there were beautiful trees and developing that area is going to destroy them. Mr. Gitelman moved to approve the conditional use request Mr Cullers seconded it. Mr. Hailey pointed out that the new lot to be developed is only approximately 3,400 sq. ft. less than the other lots. The motion to approve passed 9-0. The next item for discussion was CONDITIONAL USE REQUEST the conditional use request for a tandem Tandem Lot lot at 1335-1337 Township Road submitted 1335-1337 Township Road by Leo Anderson, Jr.; property zoned R-1, Low Density Residential District. Attorney Bill Greenhaw and Mr. $ Mrs. Anderson were present to represent. Mr. Greenhaw presented some photos to the Commission. He said what the Anderson's were proposing is a single-family residence. Mrs. Lynch stated that as a result of the driveway that's already in there they have a mud and water problem on her mother's property on Sunny Hill Drive. Mr. P. R. Gray (1370 Sunny Hill) stated he never got any notification and would like a chance to look into this request further. Chairman Jacks pointed out that if water was diverted onto their property they could take legal action. Mrs. Jones informed the Commission that the Planning Office had received a tele- phone call from Gay Shaner who was opposed to the request. Mr. Greenhaw stated the Anderson's intend to live in the house on this tandem lot. The lay -out of the land would be a buffer at the back. Mr. Cullers moved to approve the request subject to either an easement or ownership of the driveway being provided to the tandem lot. Mr. Newhouse seconded it. Mr. Redfern stated there were alot of lots on Township that could go into tandem Planning Commission Meeting January 14, 1980 Page 5 lots. He said he was disconcerted that the ordinance has been challenged in Court. Mr. Gitelman pointed out the reasoning for the tandem lot ordinance at the time it was adopted was not only because of the topography but because development in the City had created some extremely deep lots with narrow frontage and because of "by- passed" land. Chairman Jacks stated when he was pushing it,he was concerned with these steep areas (topography). Mr. Cullers stated there was a lot of land in town that would be feasible to develop into tandem lots and would have enough land to make a lot out of it. The motion passed 9-0. Mr. Newhouse left at 6:30. The next item for request to vary safety widths at 330 E. North by A. D. McAllister, Jr be off Hillcrest Avenue discussion was the zone and driveway Street submitted ▪ Driveway to • Present to represent DRIVEWAY WAIVER A. D. McAllister 330 E. North St. was A. D. McAllister, Jr. Mrs. Jones stated Mr. McAllister had the alternative of taking the driveway off North Street and he would not have had to come to the Planning Commission. Mr. McAllister explained he was trying to save a maple tree and needs a waiver in the width of the driveway as well as the safety zone from North Street. Mrs. Anderson moved to approve the waiver. Mr. Hailey seconded it, which passed 8-0. The next item for discussion was OFF-SITE PARKING the request to amend approval of off-site - Hilton Hotel parking previously granted for the proposed Hilton Hotel. Present to represent were Attorney Ken Mourton and Architect Larry Sumrow. Mr. Mourton stated the City had planned on building the parking garage and leasing the parking spaces to the hotel, however, they are not able to do it in conjunction with the Continuing Education Center. He said the City would operate the lots for dual parking usage. Jim McCord, City Attorney, stated he was there on behalf of the City Manager and the Mayor. He said the City Manager is of the opinion that the City will build a parking garage at a future date. Mr. McCord said the City Manager has no ob- jection to the hotel being permitted to count all the spaces on the City's lot. Mr. McCord said the garage will be available to the general public. The Hotel and CEC will get cards to use the garage. Mr. Gitelman said there are a lot of people who work in the area presently using "Lot A" in this request. It is presently a metered lot. Mr. Mourton said there is enough space in the lot East of the hotel and on the NW corner of Meadow and East Avenue to provide 250 parking spaces with 20% of them compact spaces; however, they proposed to have valet -type parking. He said they intend to request the Board of Adjustment to permit them to use valet parking. Mr. Cullers said when you take out the parking garage it makes it really bad. Mr. McCord said the City will build a parking garage at a later date, it is not feasible at this time. Mr. Cullers moved to approve the request for off-street parking. Mr. Gitelman seconded it. Mrs. Crocker asked how many cars the parking garage is proposed to take care of. Mr. McCord said, as originally proposed, approximately 300. He added the 2 surface lots will be 40. spaces short of the required parking spaces unless the Board of Adjustment grants a variance from the minumal.stall and aisle widths. The motion to approve the request for off-street parking passed 8-0. 6 • • • Planning Commission Meeting January 14, 1980 Page 6 The next item to be discussed for the Hilton Hotel was the request to waive the driveway safety zone. Mr. Sumrow stated the entrance to the hotel was no longer on Meadow Street, but it is on East Avenue. Mrs. Jones stated the driveway violates the Ordinance only in the setback from the intersection of the two streets. Mrs. Anderson said you would have an impossible time getting on Hwy. 71B at Meadow Street. She was also concerned about people making a left-hand turn onto Meadow. Mr. Cullers asked why the driveway was not taken back onto East Avenue. Mr. Sumrow said if they turn out to East rather than Meadow they will come out right at the street intersection. Mr. Hailey stated it would be better to narrow the entrances and to come out onto both Meadow and East. This would make it easier to get to the parking lot on the NW corner of Meadow and East. Mr. Cullers moved to deny the driveway lay -out as presented. Mrs. Anderson seconded the motion. The motion passed 8-0. Mr. Hailey moved to accept the variance in parking based on the premise that a revised drawing be submitted to have a reduced exit onto Meadow Street and a re- duced exit onto East Avenue,and to waive the safety zone from the street inter- section on both streets. Mrs. Jones pointed out that they would be reducing the safety zone for both streets. Mrs. Crocker stated you need to prevent a left turn onto Meadow Street. Mrs. Anderson seconded the motion, which passed 8-0. Mr. Cullers then movedto approve the truck loading bay as shown on the new revised plan. Mr. Hunnicutt seconded it, which passed 8-0. The next item for discussion was the Committee Reports on Home Occupations and Green Space COMMITTEE REPORTS Home Occupations Mrs. Anderson stated she, Rita Davis, and Newton Hailey had met and had sub- mitted a Committee Report which she now read. A copy of said report appears on Page 8 of these minutes. Mr. Gitelman stated they did not intend to cover foster care. Mrs. Crocker was concerned with the proposed sentence "Use restricted to the property involved" since any use approved is approved Only for the property involved. Mrs. Anderson said on the basis of what Mrs. Crocker said to leave out that sentence. Mrs. Crocker moved to approve the Home Occupations Report, to ask the City Attorney to draft an ordinance, and to hold a public hearing for the purpose of amending the Zoning Ordinance as recommended in the amended report. The motion passed 8-0. Green Space Chairman Jacks stated City Attorney Jim McCord had prepared a resolution from the Planning Commission to the Board of Directors concerning green space. After some discussion, Mrs. Anderson moved to approve the resolution. Mr. Gitelman seconded it, which passed 8-0. A copy of Resolution PC 1-80 appears on Page 7 of the minutes. 6 • • Planning Commission Meeting January 14, 1980 Page 7 RESOLUTION NO. 7C -• SO WHEREAS, the Fayetteville Planning Commission has given careful study to the question of amending the City's Sub- division Regulations to require mandatory dedication of land for park sites or payment of a cash contribution in lieu thereof as a condition precedent to subdivision plat approval; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has decided not to recommend adoption of such an amendment at this time. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS: That the Planning Commission hereby recommends to the Fayetteville Board of Directors that funds for park develop- ment be obtained from an increase in ad valorem taxes at such time as such an increase is legally possible, from a voluntary tax, and from payments in lieu of ad valorem taxes under industrial development revenue boryd projects. PASSED AND APPROVED this 1980. ATTEST: SECRE 7.3t2. RY Chairman Jacks asked Mrs. Anderson OTHER BUSINESS to chair a committee with Mr. Hailey and Mr. Cullers to nominate persons for the annual election of officers of the Planning Commission on February 11, 1980. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 7:15. i • Page 8 REPORT OF HONE OCCUPATION COMMITTEE The committee recommends: 1. Licensed nursery or child care facilities be considered as Child Care Center, flursery School, which is listed under use unit 4 with use conditions 7. CommitLofurther recommends we consider adding this additional requirement to the use conditions tr child care, nursery schools: under (b): "In an R-1 zone, a child care facility may be approved as a conditional use for no more than 10 children or the number approved by the state licensing board, whichever is fewer." Committee also recommends that an additional requirement be added to the requirements for approval of a conditional use, namely: " (9) Use restricted to the property involved." 2. Child care of 6 or fewer children (those not requiring a license to operate) be treated by the Planning Administrator as a home occupation. This means: a. Planning Commissioner can approve by right in A-1, R-2, R-3 & C-3. b. Must be approved by Planning Commission in R-1, R-0, and C-4 c. Committee recommends one change in requirements and limitations on home occupations (use condition 10): Add to "May not be open to the public earlier than 8:00 a.m. or later than 8:00 p.m." the following: "except on waiver from the Planning Commission." PAGE SUBJECT 1 Fayetteville Center Subd., Concurrent Plat, Hwys. 62 & 71 By-pass 111/ 1 The Parnell Group, LSD, Hwys. 62 & 71 By-pass 2 Hazy Heights, PUD, Township Road 2 Kantz Place, Final Plat, Hwy. 45 East & Crossover Road 2 Appointment, Subd. Committee 2 R80-1, Frank Farrish & J.B. Hays, Hwy. 45 & 265 3 CU Request, Tandem Lot, 827 Township, Gary Deckert 4 CU Request, Tandem Lot, 1335-1337 Township Road 5 Driveway Waiver, A.D. McAllister, 330 E. North Street 5 Off-site Parking, Hilton Hotel 6 Committee Reports 7 Resolution No. PC1-80 9 CU Request, James E. Lindsey, 4044 Frontage Road 10 Houston Place, PUD Concept Plat, Porter Road 11 R80-2, Memorial Parks, Inc., Hwy 45 East 11 Harold Bemis, Lot Split, ROW Dedication, 1405 N. Gregg 12 Change of Non -Conforming Use, J.B. Hays, CEMS, 620 N. College 13 Public Hearing, Amend Zoning Ordinance 14 Public Hearing, Amend Zoning Ordinance 14 Public Hearing, Amend Zoning Ordinance 15 Report, Nominating Committee, Election of Officers 16 Discussion, Driveway Requirements 16 Discussion, Storage and sale of fuel, wood, hay, etc. 16 Skating Rink, Parking Requirements 17 R80-3, Frank Farrish & J.B. Hays, Hwy. 45 East & Crossover Road 18 Cambridge Place (Village East Add.), Preliminary Plat Hwy. 45 East & Hwy. 265 ® 19 R80-4, Mr. & Mrs. J.A. Pool, Mr. & Mrs. E.M. Pool, Sycamore & Garland 20 CU, Gail Brown, 2903 Inwood Lane 22 CU Request, Bequette-Perry Const., 320 Crossover Road. 22 CU Request, Central Christian Church, 1481 Crossover Road 23 Lot Split Variance, Lot 1, Blk. 5, Regency North, Phase 1, Wade Bishop 23 Committee Report, Tandem Lot 23 Waiver of Screening, Dr. Richard Ezell, 2017 Green Acres Rd. 24 Other Business, Razorback Transportation Co., CU, 1827 N. College, 25 Gary J. Deckert, ROW Requirement for Lot Splits 26 Replat of PUD in Blk 3, Sweetbriar Add, Concurrent Plat 29 Townhouse Development, Replat ofALots 2,3,4, & 5, Blk. 3, Kantz Place, Concurrent Plat, Jaems E. & Nita V. Lindsey 29 Baldwin Church of•Christ, 4399 Huntsville Rd., CU Request 30 R80-5, J.B. Hays, college & Rebecca 31 Gary J. Deckert, ROW Requirements for Lot Splits 31 John McDonnell, Planning Area West of City, Waiver of Lot Size on Lot Split 33 Dandy Oil Company, Township Road, LSD 34 R80-6, Fayetteville Ind. Dev. Corp., City Lake Road, Pump Station Road, Black Oak Road • DATE 01-14-80 01-14-80 01-14-80 01-14-80 01-14-80 01-14-80 01-14-80 01-14-80 01-14-80 01-14-80 01-14-80 01-14-80 02-11-80 02-11-80 02-11-80 02-11-80 02-11-80 02-11-80 02-11-80 02-11-80 02-11-80 02-.11-80 02-11-80 02-11-80 02-25-80 02-25-80 02-25-80 02-25-80 02-25-80 02-25-80 02-25-80 02-25-80 02-25-80 02-25-80 03-10-80 03-10-80 03-10-80 03-10-80 03-10-80.. 03-10-80 03-10-80 03-24-80 03-24-80 PAGE SUBJECT DATE • 35 J.W. Eoff, 608 S. Crest Drive, CU Request 37 Richard Keating, Sheridan Avenue, Lot Split Waiver 37 Committee Report - Driveway Standards 37 Other Business - Request for Hearing Proposed Apts., Stephens & Wedington 39 Hamestring South Addition, Hwy. 16 West & County Road 877, Preliminary Plat Mitchell Oil Co., 19th & School Houston Place, Porter Road, Preliminary Plat Donald Williams, Lot Split Waiver, Moore's Ln. & Dean Solomon Rd. 03-24-80 03-24-80 03-24-80 03-24-80 04-14-80 39 04-14-80 39 04-14-80 40 04-14-80 40 Sunset Woods, Amend Common Property Dev. 04-14-80 40 Antennas, 608 Crest 04-14-80 41 Mitchell Oil Company, 19th & S. School, LSD 04-14-80 42 Driveway Standards, Committee Report 04-14-80 42 Farmington Planning Area 04-14-80 42 Downtown Fayetteville Unlimited 04-14-80 43 Arkansas Best Freight Terminal, Hwy. 112 & Truckers Ln., LSD 05-12-80 44 Mission Blvd. Baptist Church, 2006 Mission Blvd., CU & LSD 05-12-80 45 Butterfield Plaza, Oak Cliff St. & Old Missouri Rd., Proposed office05-12-80 47 The L.B.E., South of Sycamore St., and W of St. Louis & San Fransisco R.R. 47 Tandem Lot Request, Vernon Tarver, E of Juneway Terrace & W of Old Wire Road 49 Variance/Lot Split, S of Hwy. 62 West and W of Hollywood Ave, Troy Parnell • 50 R80-7, Stephens Avenue Property Owners 50 Off-site Parking, Transcendental Meditation Center, 321 51 City of Farmington Planning Area 52 Huntingdon Subd, R location of Sidewalk, Oak Bailey Rd. 52 Antennas & Tower, 608 S. Crest 53 Washington County Joint Planning Effort 54 L.B.E., Concept Plat, S. of Sycamore & W of St. Louis & San Fransisco Railroad 56 Washington Mountain Concept Plat 58 R80-8, J.B. Hays, N side of Old Farmington Rd. W of Hwy, 71 59 R80-9, E of Crossover Rd and W of Hillside Terrace 60 R80-10, Ben Hunt 61 CU, Barry Fink, 2824 Denver Avenue 61 Amendment to Fayetteville Master Street Plan, Submitted by Carl Robertson 05-27-80 63 Off-site parking, victims of Family Violence 05-27-80 63 Request for Variance of Lot size Requirement, Benham & Duncan 05-27-80 64 Request for Rehearing, Mission Blvd. Baptist Church 05-27-80 67 Ordinance for providing for development of Commercial PUD 05-27-80 68 R80-8, J.B. Hays 06-09-80 69 Oakland Meadows, Concept Plat, Lindsey & Rutledge 06-09-80 69 Lewis Estates, Con ept Plat, Replat 06-09-80 70 Rehearing, LSD Mission Blvd. Baptist Church 06-09-80 71 CU, Multi-purpose Senior Center, N. Sang Avenue 06-09-80 75 CU, 352 N. WEst Avenue, Eric Lloyd 06-09-80 75 CU, Elsie M. Johnson, 2016 Berry Street 06-09-80 • 77 James P. Jernigan, Waive requirement,lot 06-09-80 77 Request for approval to vacate alleys, Sunset & Fairpark Additions 06-09-80 78 Amendment to Planning Area Map 06-09-80 79 Side Setbacks, Building Height, Townhouses 06-09-80 05-12-80 05-12-80 05-12-80 05-12-80 W. Center 05-12-80 05-12-80 05-12-80 05-12-80 05-12-80 05-27-80 05-27-80 By-pass 05-27-80 05-27-80 05-27-80 05-27-80 • • • PAGE SUBJECT DATE 81 Brophy Circle Townhouses (PUD) 82 The Parts Store (LSD) 1513 W. 83 R80-11, New Testament Chapel 84 R80-12, People's Church, 690 Whillock 86 R80-9, Harold L. Cornish 88 First Pentecostal Church of God, DU, 1351 S. Morningside 89 Development Plan, Lindsey & Sexton, 4032 N. College 90 Waiver of Requirement Public Street Frontage, Joe Fred Starr 91 Property Line Adjustment, Sherwood Forest Estates, Doug Douglas 91 Request to vary driveway setback requirements, 2620 Kantz Drive 92 Study of Setback Requirements in Townhouse Developments 94 Brophy Circle Townhouses, Fefercorn-Prokasky, PUD, Prelim. Plat 95 R80-12, People's Church, 690 Whillock Street 96 Country Club Estates, Waiver of requirement that a lot have frontage on an improved public street, Joe Fred Starr 97 CU request, 848 Rockwood Trail, Rick Bashor 100 R80-13, Kathryn B. Stout, Sheperd Lane 101 R80-14, Virginia Gyroade 101 R80-15, Northwest Savings and Loan Assoc. 104 Rehearing - CU, Elsie Johnson, 2016 Berry Street 108 CU, 559 N. Walnut, Becky Watkins 108 Variance Lot Size requirement, Conley & Virginia Worley 109 CU Request, Michael G. Sheard, 325 W. Dickson 110 Variance Lot Size Requirement, Bill Graue, No. of County Rd. 667 110 Ordinances to adopt Master Sidewalk Plan, Admin. & Enforcement 115 Oakland Meadows, Jim Lindsey, Preliminary Plat 116 Concurrent Plat of Replat, Lewis Estates 116 Garland Court, PUD & Happy Hollow Court, PUD 118 VAriance Lot Size Requirement, Box -Fairchild, Elm 119 Off Site Parking, 24 N. Locust Ave, James Meller 120 Definition. LSD, Lot size requirement 121 Bd of Adj, Appeal, Jeremy Hess 121 Brophy Circle Townhouses, Relocation 121 Study on bulk and area and increased townhouse developments LSD, John Maguire, Hwy. 265 & Hwy. 45 Mcllroy Bank & Trust Motor Bank, Hwy. 71 By-pass & Hwy. 62 CU, Low Density Residential District, 1540 Huntsville Road CU, Apts. in R -O, Kantz Drive & East Oaks Informational Item, Street improvements Parks Study Board of Adjustment PUD, Garland Court, Garland & Sycamore Streets PUD, Happy Hollow Court, W side of Hap y Hollow Road Fefercorn-Prokasky Sixth Street Drive 123 124 124 125 126 126 126 127 132 136 136 140 144 145 146 147 147 148 St. of sidewalks side setbacks in 06-23-80 06-23-80 06-23-80 06-23-80 06-23-80 06-23-80 06-23-80 06-23-80 06-23-80 06-23-80 06-23-80 07-14-80 07-14-80 07-14-80 07-14-80 07-14-80 07-14-80 07-14-80 07-14-80 07-14-80 07-14-80 07-14-80 07-14-80 07-14-80 07-28-80 07-28-80 07-28-80 & Green Acres 07-28-80 07-28-80 07-28-80 07-28-80 07-28-80 07-28-80 08-11-80 08-11-80 08-11-80 08-11-80 08-11-80 08-11-80 08-11-80 03-18-80 08-18-80 LSD, Old 71 Drive -In property, GottliebCorp. & J.B. Hays 08-25-80 Preliminary Plat, Appleby Acres Subd., Bottlieb Corp. & J.B. Hays 08-25-80 R80-16, Crittenden & Mashburn, North Street between Woolsey & Park 08-25-80 R80-17, N of College & S of Rolling Hills, J.B. Hays 08-25-80 08-25-80 08-25-80 08-25-80 08-25-80 Amendment to a PUD, Sunset Woods, John & Ann Sugg Lot Split, W side of Oak Bailey Road, Helen Emiston CU, J.B. Hays, 2887 N. College Ave. Public Hearing - Proposed Amendmemt tp Fay. Code of Ordinances Other Business - Modification of Planning Area Boundaries & Discussion PUD Ordinance 150 Final Plat, Township Common, Northwood Homes Corp. 151 Mayes Oakwood Subd., Richard Mayes, Outside City 151 Southern Heights (Phase I), Preliminary Plat, S & J Company 152 Concept Plat - Replat, Kantz Place, PUD 08-25-80 09-08-80 09-08-80 09-08-80 09-08-80 PAGE SUBJECT DATE 152 Lot Split Variance, Size Requirement, Mitchell Singleton 09-08-80 •153 R80-18, Dickson & Olive, Mary Campbell Flether 09-08-80 153 CU, Mary Martin, 2335 Sweetbriar Drive 09-08-80 153 CU Duplex, Woodland & Sycamore 09-08-80 154 Discussion Item, Regulation & governing PUD 09-08-80 157 The Aspen, LSD, Ralph Gray 09-22-80 158 R80-19, John Maguire, S of Hwy. 16 East 09-22-80 159 R80-20, John Ambrose, N of Hwy. 62 West 09-22-80 160 CU, O.U. Green, TAndem Lot 09-22-80 160 CU, George Gray, Jr., TAndem Lot 09-22-80 160 CU, Tandem Lot, Joe Philips, 1690 Huntsville Road 09-22-80 161 VAriance from lot size requirement - Lot Split, Paul A. Mtarinoni,Sr.09-22-80 161 CU Use in R-0, Betty Joe Drive, Davis -Lazenby 09-22-80 162 Opinion from City Attorney 09-22-80 163 Report from Green Space Committee 09-22-80 163 Report from Townhouse Committee 09-22-80 163 Appointment of Committee to meet with members of the Board 09-22-80 164 Clarification of LSD Plan, Mission Blvd. Baptist Church, Emil Utecht 09-22-80 166 LSD, Apartments, Calvin Edens 10-13-80 166 Bronze Tree Village, Request to relocate sidewalks 10-13-80 167 Final Plat, Bronze Tree Village, Phase I. PUD 10-13-80 167 LSD, Bill Lazenby, Betty Jo Drive 10-13-80 167 Prliminary Plat, MEadowridge Subdivision, Ben Israel 10-13-80 168 Final Plat, Heritage East, Phase I, Charm Homes, Inc. 10-13-80 170 R80-23, HEritage East Subd., Wade Bishop 10-13-80 170 Final Plat, Regency North, Phase II, Charm Homes, Inc. 10-13-80 171 Discussion item - precedure for acquiring park lands 10-13-80 • 172 173 PUD, Tracts 1 thru 6, Kantz Place Subd. 10-13-80 R80-22, Bryce Davis, Betty Jo Drive 10-13-80 174 R80-21, Glenn M. & Lynn T. Monahan 10-13-80 175 CU. Bobby Hatfield, 2302, 2240, 2228 Wedington Drive 10-13-80 176 Off-site parking, Parker and Westphal, 123 W. Spring 10-13-80 176 Report from joint PUD committee - PC & Board of Directors 10-13-80 177 Committee Report - Study on off-site improvements & LSD 10-13-80 178 R80-24, Fulbright Investment Company, Razorback Road 10-27-80 179 LSD, Hog Country Distributing Company, Razorback Road 10-27-80 180 CU, Jack Burge, 693 W. North Street 10-27-80 180 Variance - Lot size requirement, Dr. G.A. Sexton, Hyland Park Subd. 10-27-80 181 Request for waiver, Driveway Safety Zone, 2620 Kantz Drive 10-27-80 182 Ordinance to ament Art. 7, Section 21 of App. A 10-27-80 183 Ordinance Amending PUD Regulations 10-27-80 185 Variance - Lot Size Requirement, Dr. G.A. Sexton, Hyland Park Subd. 10-27-80 186 WAiver Street Frontage Requirement - 22 E. Meadow, HErbert Hatfield 10-27-80 187 Ordinance amending App. A Zoning - Minimum Lot width and height 10-27-80 189 Off-site improvements not related to subdivisions of LSDs 10-27-80 190 LSD, American Biofuels, FAyetteville Industrial Park 11-10-80 190 Preliminary and concurrent Plats, R&W Add., W. Rogers & Lee Ward 11-10-80 191 LSD, Shopping Center, Lois Stratton 11-10-80 191 LSD, Northwest Center, Lindsey & Sexton 11-10-80 192 R80-25, Albert & Grace Miller, 2002 S. School 11-10-80 192 R80-26, Bill Kisor 11-10-80 193 R80-27, Bert Rakes, Happy Hollow Road 11-10-80 194 Committee Report on off-site improvements 11-10-80 • 195 CU - Apostolic Center of Evangelism, 1018 Township Road 11-10-80 196 CU, Mildred Graue, 314 Rock Street 11-10-80 197 CU, Patty Mayes, 2190 N. Garland 11-10-80 197 Off-site parking request, Southside limited, Keystone Group 11-10-80 198 Lot Split, Reba Demaree, Controlled Access Highway 11-10-80 198 Request to rezone Villa North Subd. from R-2 to R-1 11-10-80 • • • PAGE SUBJECT DATE 201 Amendment to Art. 7, Sec. 21, App. A, Tandem Lots 11-10-80 202 R80-28, Lois Stratton, East side of One Mile Road 11-24-80 204 Request for waiver, Roy CAte, 1320 Wimbledon 11-24-80 204 CU, Child Care, Mildred Sisemore, 2665 W. Sixth Street 11-24-80 204 Petition to vacate alley between Locust and Church, Richard Keating 11-24-80 205 Waiver of safety zone for drives, 2510 Brophy Ave., Ralph Brophy 11-24-80 205 Waiver of Safety zone for drives, E. Copper Oaks Plaza, R. Melton 11-24-80 206 Request for temporary drive, Lincolnwood 11-24-80 207 Committee Report - Off-site improvements 11-24-80 207 Committee Report - Green Space 11-24-80 208 Committee Report - Townhouses 11-24-80 208 Committee Report - Tandem Lots 11-24-80 209 Other Business - Heritage East Subd., Request to delete restrictions in covenants on density 11-24-80 211 Washington Mountain PUD, James Vizzier 12-08-80 211 R80-29, Lee W. Terry, N side of Stone, West of Sang 12-08-80 212 R80-30, J.B. Hays, N of Township, E of Hwy. 71 12-08-80 214 Request to waive screening, Popeye's Famous Fried Chicken, 2120 N. College 12-08-80 215 CU, Duplexes in R-1, Bird Haven Terrace, Wayne Bali 12-08-80 217 CU, Duplexes in R-1, Ed Torbett 12-08-80 218 Wavier of Lot size requirement, applicable to a lot split, Mally Wagnon Road, Ed Torbett 12-08-80 219 Amendment to Ordinance 12-08-80 219 Green Space Committee Report 12-08-80 220 Preliminary Plat, Washington Mountain PUD 12-22-80 221 R80-31, Donald W. Stanton, North St. w of Storer, E of Oakland 12-22-80 222 Revised Plot Plan, Mildred Graue, 314 W. Rock Street 12-22-80 222 Request to construct temporary drives on James Way, Ball, & Hatcher 12-22-80 223 Public Hearing - Ordinance to amend App. A, Art. 8, Sec. 11, LSD 12-22-80 224 Public Hearing, Ordinance to amend App. A, Art. 7, Sec. 21 12-22-80 224 Public Hearing, Ordinance to ament App. A 12-22-80 225 Committee Report - Green Space 12-22-80 • PLANNING COMMISSION ATTENDANCE RECORD FOR 1980 DATE �. M. Jacks Gitelman Newhous K. Crock B. P. -r And. N.�...—W. Hailey Cullers D. I M. Hunnicutt Redfern /-/4(- tia X i X X X X X X X )( �_ X X X 1 X X X X 2-11-80 X Abs. X X 2-25-80 X XIX X X X X 3-10-80 X X ! X. absent X X —X. X Abs. absent X X X X--_ X 4-14-80 ' ait LZ I qgd A X X 7 x 1 X X a abaoot X ; %< j X x 1( Qbw.r X 7,16120 61111:0 / 9/0 1/2/9-a X , %� 2c X , X x X 7C x X. x, X Qin. 0' i X_ / 2 X X / X air 04144 /< X X C .%0E6251 N:,,t. y i X ' x J(.7 X Zi McXaktdi ;.X /x,19 _. XAXXXA .) X x X y- 1 X .7.5%91� X _,r.. 2 _X .:.:Q . x,:. '- x ..X. x X x. x X x Zc X air 9_2-8a. ll- r0 -80 X X_>< g X x car- 1 • • ere • ' is : E' �17, 4. N, w• i U' cattez tihozUZI I1, i. X X ,.X :. X X aX X X .X 1 �--- --r 707. Pi_ I .. maxi 0 la ,1 7-- V . 77-- ,. y I I I , i I 1 I II I I 7 J • 10-16-79 185 -City Attorney McCord'eiplained further that the primary problem in new developments is with streets, as a developer might argue that he should not be required to improve the street. Following discussion, Director Henry moved that Section A (4)(a) be amended to read " . . . improvements, provided the Planning Commission, may use a different method of measurement when it is determined that use of the acreage standard would not bear a rational nexus to the needs created by the subdivision." The city manager agreed with this amendment. Director Osborne seconded the motion.- The recorded vote was: Ayes: Henry, Lancaster, Todd, Noland, Osborne, Malone, Colwell. Nays: None. The mayor declared the amendment approved.. There being no further discussion, the mayor asked if the amended ordinance should pass. The recorded vote was: O Ayes: Henry, •Lancaster, Todd, Noland, Osborn?, Malone, and Colwell. 03 Nays: None. The mayor declared the amended ordinance approve& ORDINANCE NO. 2570 APPEARS ON PAGE OF ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION BOOK VII. 185.1 185.2 185.3 anager Grimes hoted a recommendation from Ken Riley, Northwest 185.4 Arkansas Regional Planning Commission, that the 1970-1990 General Land Use Plan be updated. Grimes commented that the Regional Planning Commission has been involved in working with the City and have worked on problems encountered and amendments proposed to the General Land Use Plan. 1 Director Noland asked the Community Development director if this is, 185.6 in fact, 100% reimbursable by Community Development funds, and the director I - said he would check to make sure it is. Director Henry questioned if they should solicit bids from other interested 185.6 parties for the work and Malone said he did not feel they should be required to solicit bids, as this is a specialized service. He said, however, that they could ask for -proposals from interested parties. 185.7 Following a short discussion, Mayor Malone moved the Board solicit proposals from interested parties for the needed work, and submit to the Community Development committee for a recommendation on funding of the project. The Board agreed they would be interested in going ahead with the project if it is determined that it is 100% reimbursable by Community Development funds:. • . Director Colwell seconded the mayor's motion. The recorded vote was: - Ayes::.Henry, Lancaster; Todd, Noland, Osborne, Malone, Colwell. Nays: None. The mayor declared the motion passed. CONDEMNATION / Johnson Road/Highway 71 Sewer Line The city,.attorney advised that the right-of-way agent had informed him the proposed-condemnatton proceedings for acquisition of a sewer line easement in the,Johnson Road/Highway 71 area had been settled. OTHER BUSINESS ny The city attorney reported that the ordinance calling a special election l . for -the hospital bond issue had reflected a discrepancy in maturity dates of the bonds.He then read an ordinance amending the maturity date reflected in ; Section 2 of Ordinance -No. 2566. • 185.8 185.9 r y NORTHWEST ARKANSAS REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION P. 0.BOX 745 — SPRINGDALE ARKANSAS 72764 —(501)--751-7125 March 16, 1981 Don Grimes, City Manager City of Fayetteville Post Office Drawer F Fayetteville, AR 72701 Dear Don: RECEIVED MAR 181981 FF4Y ia.P Almost a year ago now we suggested that the "Fayetteville General Plan" was in need of updating. On August 18, 1980, the Planning Commission asked the City Attorney to draft a resolution to the City Board urging the Board to consider a Plan update as part of the 1981 CDBG application. The Board, for whatever reason, apparently chose not to include the Plan update in the CDBG application. As you well know the Plan is in its eleventh year and we feel Fayetteville should seriously consider a mayor update. Much of the infor- mation that the Plan was based upon is fourteen to seventeen years old. The Plan has been amended some nine or more times. Consequently copies to provide development guidance are no longer available to the public. In some cases development is pressing beyond the limits of the Plan, critical areas are void of recommendations because it did not appear in the Plan or conditions have changed since it was adopted. An example is the interchange at Highway 71 By Pass and Mt. Comfort Road which was not planned for construction when the Plan was adopted in 1970. With the possibility of some type of planning activity in the growth area, it appears now is an excellent time to consider coordinating the two activities. The existing Plan is mute of policy related to agri- cultural activities which is the primary land use in the growth area. We recommend that the City Board set aside $20,000 to $25,000 to contract with NWARPC starting July 1, 1981, to update the Fayetteville General Plan. The general work program proposed previously was: review the goals and policies making the necessary revisions; identify the areas of the Plan in need of revision drafting the necessary changes; review your implementing ordinances and revise as necessary; hold public hearings; and, print a condensed or popular revised plan document. Than you for your consideratio KDR/LW/mb is matter. Sincer Ke neth D Riley Director PL ANNING-MANAGEMENT— IMPLEM£NTAT ION o continuing process ,r • GbNMUNITY LAND USE. GOALS AND DEVELOPME1ft'QHJ3CTIVts (General statement of objectives to be used to introduce the proposed zoning ordinances to the'City'Board of :Directors.) `General The.greater Fayetteville community is,.and should continue to be, the educational, cultural and retail trade center of Northwest Arkansas: In addition:it is, and should continue to be, a commercial and industrial centerto provide diverse employment opportunities for.:its residents and for those of th'e surrounding area. Thus, the community is one of diversity and the objective of the land ..use plan is to. permit a wide choice. of residential, commercial, cultural' and educational opportunities fcr persons in Fayetteville. and vicinity;. while retaining orderly land use and transportation relationships to maximize public convenience and minimize conflictsibetween.land'uses. The Thad use and transportation plans and'zoning policies of the:City'chould reflect and encourage diversity while arranging different types of land Cf CW go. that they ate eompatibie and complementary to each thee: A. Itesidentiallland Use 1'. Roeidences'ahould be clustered to' formszoighborhoods of sires Which can be served by appropriately located cbmmercial outlets and. community facilities. ,Residential sprawl, whibh.:increases;thecost,of public, services and transportation,should be discouraged. 2. A diversity`of.residontial types - low. density, medium density, high density, at a variety of cost levels should;be:encouraged..'..Different types of residential.' opportunities need not be isolated but may ba,mixed • • through planned unit development (the clustering of dwelling units with small yards, but common open space which permit more dwelling units per acre without sacrificing of usable space per person), clustering of different types of residential structures, and other arrangements. 3. Apartments and row houses should be developed near the University and the central business district to serve single persons, the elderly, and small families. 01der, single family areas near the University and the central business district should be zoned to permit medium and high density residential uso. 4. Undeveloped land with future residential development potential is planned for general residential uso without specific designation as to density in order to permit the type of residential development most needed and appropriate in the future. B. Commercial Land Use 1. The central business district should be expanded and become a regional center of commercial, financial, professional, cultural and governmental activities. 2. Retail sales and related commercial land use other than in the central business district and other regional shopping centers should be clustered at approximately one mile intervals on or near major traffic arteries - preferably at arterial intersections - to serve surrounding residential neighborhoods of 3,000 to 5,000 people in order to retain the ability of traffic arteries to serve their primary function of carrying traffic, and to minimize conflicts between residential and commercial land use. Land along thoroughfares and traffic arteries should not be used for commercial -purposes except at such commercial centers, and buffer t • • • devices should separate commercial areas from adjacent residential property. Businesses related to the traveling public and automobiles should be clustered near the intersection of mayor traffic arteries and buffered from residential areas. 3. Land for warehousing, truck firms, and other uses related to the transportation of goods should be clustered near truck routes and buffered from residential areas. C. Industrial Land Use 1. Adequate land having an average slope of not more than 5 percent should be preserved for industrial growth and should be separated or buffered from other land uses and adequately served with transportation facilities and utilities. 2. A variety of types of industrial sites should be provided to encourage the attraction of a variety of industries. 3. Auxiliary services such as restaurants, service stations, repair garages, motels and other business services should be permitted to locate convenient to industrial land. D. Educational and'Other Public Uses 1. Land use which would inhibit University expansion within the University of Arkansas planned expansion area should be discouraged to facilitate University expansion. 2. Elementary schools and public parks should be located adjacent to one another to facilitate joint use of public areas and should be located in the center•of planned residential neighborhoods. • 3. Public buildings should bo located in the central business district to enhance its function as a center of professional, cultural and governmental activity and encourage a sense of community focus and unity. • 4 d • OBJECTIVES OF PROPOSED ZONING ORDINANCE The proposed zoning ordinance is designed to accomplish the community land goals and development objectives as outlined above. In general the proposed zoning regulations are more flexible in order to permit a wider variety of land uses while preventing conflicts between incompatible types of land uses. There are fewer residential zone classifications.with a wider variety of types of residential land use permitted within each zone, thus allowing a greater mix of different types of residential land uses, provided that such uses meet proscribed density (land area per dwelling unit) standards and other criteria. Planned unit development (the clustering of dwelling units with common open space permitting more dwelling units per acre without sacrificing usable space per dwelling unit) is permitted. In most of the zoning districts a wider variety of land uses is permitted with the provision that many types of land uses are permitted only upon review and approval by the Planning Commission, thus assuring more flexibility of land use, but with appropriate control. The proposed regulations permit greater freedom of home occupations, provided such uses meet certain criteria, and provide for greater control by the Planning Commission over the development of commercial shopping centers through the requirement that plans for on-site improvements be reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission. The proposed regulations encourage better public understanding of the zoning regulations and simplify administrative processes through reference to "use units" rather than to specific land uses. A use unit is a general type of land use.