Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1980-11-10 MinutesMINUTES OF A PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING A meeting of the Planning Commission was held at 5:00, P.M., Monday, November 10, 1980, in the Board of Directors Room, City Administration Building, Fayetteville, Arkansas. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Ernest Jacks, Morton Gitelman, Don Hunnicutt, Elizabeth Crocker, Keith Newhouse, Peg Anderson, Newton Hailey, Windell Cullers. MEMBERS ABSENT: Martin Redfern. OTHERS PRESENT: Larry Wood, Lamar Pettus, Cynthia Stewart, Bobbie Jones, Albert Miller, Bert Rakes, Leonard Greenhaw , Paul Milstead, Billy Mills, Gus and Ruth Ostmeyer Lonnie Nickle, Jan Mills, Mildred and Bill Graue, Patty Mayes, Roy Clinton, Jeff McLane, James Hoelscher, and other members of the press and audience. The minutes of the October 27, 1980 Planning Commission meeting were approved as mailed. Keith Newhouse, Chairman of the Subdivision Committee, stated that the plan for the Large Scale Development of American Biofuels, Inc. had been approved by the Subdivision Committee as presented. The next item of business was the approval of the preliminary and concurrent plat MINUTES LARGE SCALE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AMERICAN BIOFUELS FAYETTEVILLE INDUSTRIAL PARK PRELIMINARY AND CONCURRENT PLAT R $ W ADDITION W. ROGERS AND LEE WARD, of R & W Addition, located Northeast of Huntsville Road, Northwest of Barton Avenue, and South of Walker Street; W. Rogers $ Lee Ward, Owners. Zoned R-2, Medium Density Residential District. Lamar Pettus was present to represent. The Chairman asked for the recommendation from the Subdivision Committee. Keith Newhouse stated that the Subdivision Committee recommends the approval of the plat with the following contingencies: 1. Adhere to all Plat Review Committee comments. 2. Comply with Master Sidewalk Plan, for requirement on the North side of Huntsville Road. 3. Note 2 on the Plat will reflect that development of Lot 4 will comply with procedures for a Large Scale Development, including off-site improvements. 4. Recommend that the Board of Directors vacate the alley within the Subdivision off of Barton Avenue. Planning Commission Meeting November 10, 1980 Page 2 Keith Newhouse moved to approve the Preliminary and Concurrent Plat for R $ W Addition with the above mentioned conditions. Beth Crocker seconded. The motion passed (8-0). The fourth item on the LARGE SCALE DEVELOPMENT Agenda was the approval of the SHOPPING CENTER Large Scale Development plan LOIS STRATTON for a Shopping Center to be located at the Northeast corner of Highway 62 and One Mile Road; Lois Stratton, Owner and Developer. Zoned C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial District. Lois Stratton and Pat Pinnell were present to represent. Jacks asked for the recommendation on this Development from the Subdivision Committee. Keith Newhouse moved approval of this plan with the following conditions: 1. Approval is granted for the development of Phase I of the Large Scale Development only. (The Southwest corner of the development as designated on the plan with a dashed line.) Approval is conditioned upon the rezoning request to be considered by the Planning Commission at its November 24, 1980 meeting. 2. Sidewalks will be required only on that portion of the development abutting Highway 62 being developed now, particularly on the center island at this time. Improvements to One Mile Road will occur with Phase II of the Development. 3. Dedicate 25 ft. from Centerline on One Mile Road for right-of-way, as well as the requested 15 ft. utility easement outside the right-of-way on One Mile Road. 4. Approval subject to all Plat Review Committee comments. Beth Crocker seconded. Bobbie Jones asked if the Planning Commission would like to include in their motion that no further construction, other than Phase I has been approved in their motion. Beth Crocker and Keith Newhouse agreed, and this was made a fifth condition. With that addition to the motion, the Commission voted on Keith Newhouse's motion to approve, and it passed (8-0). Keith Newhouse stated that this Large Scale Development Plan had been approved as presented with two conditions: LARGE SCALE DEVELOPMENT NORTHWEST CENTER LINDSEY & SEXTON 1. The Plan will be subject to Plat Review Committee comments. 2. The Developers will seek a clarification of sidewalk requirements adjacent to this development from the Board of Directors. Planning Commission Meeting November 10, 1980 • Page 3 • The sixth item of business REZONING PETITION R80-25 was the Public Hearing on Rezoning ALBERT $ GRACE MILLER Petition R80-25, Albert and Grace 2002 SOUTH SCHOOL Miller, to rezone property located North of Nonnamaker Drive, South of 19th Street, and East of U. S. Highway 71 South (2002 South School) from C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial District to I-1, Heavy Commercial and Light Industrial District. Mr. Albert Miller was present to represent. The Chairman asked for the Planning Consultant's comments. Larry Wood stated he is recommending approval of the rezoning request for the following reasons: 1. I-1 zoning is consistent with the adopted General Plan for this area. 2. Public facilities and services are in place and available to serve Industrial type uses 3. There is currently Industrial activity.'; in the immediate area. Ernest Jacks asked if there was anyone in the audience appearing in favor of the requested rezoning. Albert Miller addressed the Commission. He stated that the property is currently being used for Industrial purposes, which is the manufacture of golf clubs. He stated that the use does not conflict with any other uses around the site. The Chairman asked if there was anyone appearing in opposition to the requested rezoning. There was no one present in opposition. Windell Cullers moved to recommend approval to the Board of Directors for Rezoning Petition R80-25. Keith Newhouse seconded. The motion passed (8-0). The Commission considered REZONING PETITION R80-26 Rezoning Petition R80-26, Bill Kisor, BILL KISOR to rezone property located West of Lee Avenue, North of Harold Street, and East of U. S. Highway 71 North (N. College Avenue) from R-1, Low Density Residential District, to Lots 1 $ 2 - C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial District, and Lot 3 - R-0, Residential Office District. Ernest Jacks said he had received a written request from Mr. Kisor that this item be tabled. Beth Crocker moved to table Rezoning Petition R80226, Newton Hailey seconded. The Chairman asked if there was anyone present in the audience appearing in regard to this rezoning request. Mrs. Viola Jackman, 101 Bertha, addressed the Commission. She stated that she lives Southeast of the property for which the rezoning had been requested. She had come to the meeting to find out what the plans are for this area. She stated that there is already a:iot of traffic in the neighborhood. Also, 1�� Planning Commission Meeting November 10, 1980 • Page 4 she said she had not received notice of the rezoning. The Chairman asked for the Planning Consultant's comments. Larry Wood stated he is not recommending approval of the C-2 portion of the request. He said he would recommend R-2 and R-0 zoning for the entire three lots. Larry said he was not recommending the C-2 for the following reasons: 1. The property under application does not have access to arterial or collector streets. The property is interior property and is platted as a residential area. 2. The subject property backs on to commercially zoned property and should be developed with a lesser intensity to serve as a buffer for property to the East. 3. Commercial zoning could set a precedent for commercial to the East and West along Highway 71. Mrs. Jackman asked what R-0 zoning would permit. Ernest Jacks replied that it would permit office space and high density residential development. Mrs. Jackman said she would not want the area to go multi -family. She said it would add traffic to an already congested neighborhood. Anderson stated she hoped that when the rezoning is reheard, that property owners adjacent would be notified. Ernest Jacks stated that Mrs. Jackman would be so notified.if the rezoning comes before the Commission again. At this time, the Commission voted on Beth Crocker's motion to table Rezoning Petition R80-26. The motion passed (8-0). The next item of business REZONING PETITION R80-27 was the Public Hearing on Rezoning BERT RAKES Petition R80-27, Bert Rakes, HAPPY HOLLOW ROAD to rezone property located South of Huntsville Road and West of Highway 16 By -Pass (Happy Hollow Road) from R-1, Low Density Residential District, to R-2, Medium Density Residential District. Bert Rakes and Leonard Greenhaw were present to represent. Ernest Jacks asked for the Planning Consultant's comments. Larry Wood stated that he is not recommending the change to R-2 zoning for this property. He suggested the Developer or applicant consider R-0, C-1 or C-2 as possibilities for the following reasons: 1. The General Plan recommends both sides of Happy Hollow Road be reserved for commercial activity. 2. R-2 could leave ay.small patch of residential between commercial developments. North and South commercial development is already occuring. West of this property is already committed to duplexes. 3. Property with good commercial potential should be preserved the same way as residential property is preserved. Planning Commission Meeting November 10, 1980 Page 5 The Chairman asked if there was anyone present in favor of the proposed rezoning. Leonard Greenhaw.. addressed the Commission in favor of the petition. He stated the property is located right across from the building where Abilities Unlimited is located. The property has 240 ft. of frontage on Happy Hollow Road and is 140 ft. deep. He said that although there has been some commercial development in this area, it has been almost nill. On one side of Mr. Rakes' property there is a single family residence, and on the other side there is another single family residence. Across the road and North of Abilities Unlimited, there are two duplexes. Mr. Greenhaw` stated that if Mr. Rakes is successful in getting this property rezoned, that he intends to build 16 apartments. Eight two-bedroom units and eight one -bedroom units. The site is in the immediate vicinity of the Industrial Park and Mr. Rakes feels there is a definite need for housing close to the Industrial Park. Mr. Rakes will try to provide inexpensive housing for persons that work in the various businesses located in the Industrial Park. Don Hunnicutt asked if the property to the North is zoned R-1 all the way to Highway 16 (Huntsville Road). Bobbie said that it is, the other side of the street is zoned C-1: Peg Anderson said she could not see keeping this commercial. She could see mixing the high density residential with the R-1. She moved to approve the Rezoning Petition R80-27. Windell Cullers seconded. Mort Gitelman asked if Mr. Wood felt a restudy of this area should be done, should the motion to approve pass Windell Culler pointed out that this is the third rezoning from R-1 to R-2 that the Commission has considered in this area. Mort Gitelman said the Land Use Plan calls for commercial in this area. He said that perhaps another look should be taken at the plan where Highway 16 By -Pass meets Huntsville Road Larry Wood said that the intersection of two arterial streets is the perfect location for commercial zoning. Wood said that there is currently a committment for commercial just South of this location. He did not feel the commercial zoning should be isolated. Peg Anderson said she could see more reason for commercial zoning at the intersection of Huntsville Road and Highway 16 By -Pass. Mort stated that if this property is rezoned to R-2, and there are more such uses along the by-pass, what would happen if commercial does start developing. He said he concurs with Larry Wood, that if the property is ideally commercial, it should be preserved. Anderson said she could not see the property South of Fairlane being developed commercially. Anderson made a motion to approve the rezoning request R80-27, and Windell Cullers seconded. The motion to approve passed (7-1) with Morton Gitelman casting the "Nay" vote. Beth Crocker said that the Commission ought to consider Peg Andersbn's suggestion of Fairlane being the dividing point between commercial and residential development. The ninth item of business COMMITTEE REPORT ON was a committee report on off-site OFF-SITE IMPROVEMENTS improvements not related to Subdivisions or Large Scale Developments. In introduction, Chairman Ernest Jacks said there is currently a provision �qJ Planning Commission Meeting . November 10, 1980 Page 6 • for off-site improvements for developments other than Large Scale Developments and Subdivisions located in the Street portion of the Code. He felt that something should be noted in the Zoning Ordinance as to off-site improvements. A committee had been formed consisting of Mort Gitelman, Keith Newhouse and Larry Wood to study this. Keith Newhouse said that the committee had studied this and felt that a change in the first paragraph of the Large Scale Development ordinance could cover the problem. Jacks asked if something should be added to the Large Scale Development ordinance. Mr. Gitelman and Mr. Newhouse said they would study the matter further and requested that this item be tabled. The tenth item of business CONDITIONAL USE REQUEST was a Conditional Use request submitted APOSTOLIC CENTER OF EVANGELISM by the Fayetteville Apostolic Center of 1018 TOWNSHIP ROAD Evangelism to have church services at 1018 Township Road; zoned R-1, Low Density Residential District. Paul Milstead, Pastor, was present to represent. The Chairman acknowledged a petition signed by residents in the neighborhood who are against the granting of the Conditional Use. The Chairman asked if there was anyone present in the audience appearing in favor of the proposed Conditional Use. Paul Milstead addressed the Commission. He stated his Church has only been in Fayetteville for two years He said that they had been renting an auditorium and that it had been sold. His Church feels this site would be a good location and that he does not want to downgrade the neighborhood, but to improve it. He said it is the Church's desire to renovate the existing house on the site and hold services until such time as a new sanctuary can be constructed. Ernest Jacks stated that the petitioner& main factor behind their opposition is they feel the Church will adversely affect the R-1 nature of the neighborhood. Ernest Jacks asked if there was anyone present in opposition to the proposed Conditional Use. Billy Mills addressed the Commission in opposition to the Conditional Use request He stated he owns the property immediately to the East of the proposed Church. He stated he feels the location of the Church adjacent to his property will adversely effect its value. Also, he felt the Church would cause traffic problems. Gus• Ostmeyer. 1140 East Township, addressed the Commission. He said that 99% of the property owners in the neighborhood feel the same way as Mr. Mills does. Ruth Ostmeyer addressed the Commission for Irene Davis. Ms. Davis was in opposition to the granting of the Conditional Use as she feels that the house is too small to house a congregation, and there are no parking facilities. Don Grimes, City Manager, submitted an objection he had received by telephone from Gladys Davis, who owns property adjacent to the proposed Church. Her objection being that the site is too small for a Church. Milstead stated that he did not think the existing house is too small as it contains 1300 square feet. • • • Planning Commission Meeting November 10, 1980 Page 7 Lonnie Nickle, 1025 Township Road,'addressed the Commission in opposition. He stated he had been in the house and did not feel it was fit to live in, much less to hold services in. Milstead stated he fully intends to improve the property and not leave it in its present state of disrepair. Jan Mills addressed the Commission in opposition to the Conditional Use. She said the house is small and sits back from the road. She stated the old house looks better than a large Church facility would. Beth Crocker said that the site falls far from meeting the requirements for a Conditional Use in R-1. 1. Ingress and egress will be through a 12 ft. existing drive, which is inadequate, in her opinion, and the Church does not propose to improve and widen the drive. 2. The Church is asking for a waiver of off street parking requirements, and that is a condition for approval. 3. The site is not large enough to accomodate the proper setbacks from a residential use and a non-residential use. 4. The Church will have to seek a waiver from the 12-1/2 ft. setback for a driveway from adjoining property. Crocker felt, for the above reasons, that the Church would not be compatible with the surrounding R-1. Crocker moved to deny the Conditional Use request for a Church in R-1. Peg Anderson seconded. Mort Gitelman stated that the side of the property on which the waiver is being requested in the setbacks from R-1, contains the City Water Tower, and he did not feel that was an unreasonable request. Milstead stated that there would not be any parking in front of the Church. The Commission voted on Beth Crocker's motion to deny and the motion passed (7-1) with Morton Gitelman casting the "Nay" vote. The next item of business CONDITIONAL USE REQUEST was the Conditional Use request submitted MILDRED GRAUE by Mildred Graue to construct 314 WEST ROCK STREET an 8-plex at 314 West Rock Street; zoned R-0, Residential Office District. A variance in minimum lot width was granted by the Board of Adjustment. Mildred and Bill Graue were present to represent. Ernest Jacks stated that he did not see how Mrs. Graue would be able to meet parking and drive requirements and still build her eight-plex. Keith Newhouse agreed. Bill Graue said that in order to meet parking requirements, 7 units may be installed instead of 8, but that the Developers fully intend to comply with parking and drive requirements. The Chairman asked if there was anyone present against the proposed Conditional Use. There was no one present in the audience in opposition to the Conditional Use. • • • Planning Commission Meeting November 10, 1980 Page 8 Mort Gitelman moved to approve the requested Conditional Use, with the condition that the Developers submit their development plan for approval to the Planning Commission. Peg Anderson seconded. The motion passed (8-0). The next item of business was CONDITIONAL USE REQUEST the Conditional Use request submitted PATTY MAYES by Patty Mayes to have child care for 2190 NORTH GARLAND up to ten children at 2190 North Garland; the property is zoned R-2, Medium Density Residential District. The Chairman asked if adjacent property owners had been notified. Bobbie Jones replied that they had. Ms. Mayes addressed the Commission. She stated there is presently plenty of off-street parking, and that the area is graded for parking. The yard is fenced the house and yard both have plenty of room to accomodate the children. She stated she is seeking to get state licensing, and that there is a definite need for licensed child care in the City. The Chairman asked if there was anyone in the audience appearing in opposition to the Conditional Use request There was no one in opposition. Windell Cullers moved to approve the Conditional Use. Don Hunnicutt seconded. The motion passed (8-0). The next item of business OFF-SITE PARKING REQUEST was the request for approval of SOUTHSIDE LIMITED off-site parking for the proposed Southside KEYSTONE GROUP Limited on the South side of the Square; submitted by the Keystone Group; zoned C-4, Downtown Commercial District. Roy Clinton and Jeff McLane were present to represent. Roy Clinton gave a presentation to the Commission consisting of the square footage that would be devoted to office space and retail establishments. He pointed out the locations of, what he felt, were adequate parking accomodations near and adjacent to the site. He stated he had counted vacancies in the parking lots around the site and felt that parking would be quite adequate off-site. Keith Newhouse asked Mr. Clinton how he thought adequate parking will be available after the First National Bank building is completed, the Hilton Hotel and the Continuing Education building. Clinton acknowledged the problem. He felt that the retailers would combine efforts to provide parking on the square when the need arises. He did not feel the need was great enough to warrant the construction of deck parking at this time. He cited that for the new First National Building, only twelve spaces for parking were being provided. Windell Cullers said that the type of uses the Developers are proposing for the Southside Limited project are basically office type uses which will not be come and go traffic such as a retail clientele might consist of. Cullers went on to state that anyone having a financial interest in the project may be hurt when the Hilton, CEC and new Bank Building are completed, and there is no parking. Clinton said he felt that when the need arises, the \co Planning Commission Meeting • November 10, 1980 Page 9 • retail establishments will push to provide deck parking. Peg Anderson said that downtown Fayetteville is no more congested than any other urban city and not as congested as most. She moved to approve the request for off-site parking for the Southside Limited project. Mort Gitelman seconded Peg Anderson's motion to approve. Jeff McLane addressed the Commission. He stated he felt that parking would be provided through the combined efforts of everyone having an interest in the development of the Square. Windell stated he felt that the off-site parking that had been granted to the various new buildings being constructed on the Square was going to catch up and there will be problems. Clinton said that if :a problem arises, a push will be made for deck parking. McLane said that the economic base must be accomplished before the parking problem can be solved. The Commission voted on Peg Anderson's motion to approve and it passed (6-1-1) with Cullers casting the "Nay" vote and Hunnicutt abstaining. The next item for consideration LOT SPLIT was the request for approval of a REBA DEMAREE lot split for property CONTROLLED ACCESS HIGHWAY abutting a controlled access highway submitted by Reba P. Demaree. Subject property lies West of Hwy. 71 By -Pass and South of Highway 16 West and is zoned R-2, Medium Density Residential District. Don Elliot, Attorney, was present to represent. He stated that he became involved in this lot split when Mrs. Demaree's brother-in-law sold his interest in a partnership. He quitclaimed this property consisting of eight acres to Mrs. Demaree. The deed cannot be approved until the lot split is approved. Elliot said that the property is South of Maple Manor Apartments and West of Highway 71 By -Pass. He said he would be glad to answer any questions the Commission may have. Peg Anderson asked where the new housing construction is in relation to this property. Bobbie Jones said it is immediately to the West of this property. Elliot said that there are presently no plans to develop this property, only to get the deed recorded. Keith Newhouse moved to approve the lot split. Beth Crocker seconded. The motion passed (8-0). ,The fifteenth item on REQUEST TO REZONE the Agenda was a request by a VILLA NORTH SUBDIVISION signed petition for the City FROM R-2 TO R-1 to initiate action to change the zoning for Villa North Subdivision from R-2, Medium Density Residential District, to R-1, Low Density Residential District. Jeff Slaton was present to represent the petitioners Planning Commission Meeting November 10, 1980 Page 10 Jeff Slaton, 2749 Villa Boulevard, addressed the Commission. He stated that single family home owners are concerned in that they bought homes within the Subdivision with the understanding that the internal portion of the subdivision would remain single family residential. Up until the last two weeks, the construction internally has been single family residences. Recently, with a change of ownership of the subdivision, construction has begun on duplexes and other multi -family housing. He said that on the plat, Drake Street is shown as a through street, but, in fact, has never been completed. If the Developers of the Subdivision continue with the multifamily development of the subdivision, all the traffic will be on four dead end streets. The density will be about 30 families instead of 14 or 15. Slaton said that the other petitioners as well as himself would like the opportunity to present facts to the Planning Commission and have a hearing. Jimmy Bean, 2759 Arroyo, addressed the Commission. He stated he had bought a lot and built a single family house He was told all the construction along his street would be single family when he purchased his lot. Adobe was the only street that was to have duplexes. The families that live there now are concerned about the high volume of traffic that will result down the dead end streets. Duplexes only provide one or two parking spaces, and he is afraid that persons living in the duplexes will be parking on the street. He felt it would be a dangerous situation. James Hoelscher, 2757 Barcelona, addressed the Commission. He stated he had bought his home in May and that it was the last single family home to be constructed. He bought the home because of its afordability and with the intent of turning it over in a few years. The builder had told him that he intended to build only single family homes in the internal part of the subdivision. He said he felt the builder intended to build single family homes, as he had ordered more. Due to some financial difficulties, the title to the subdivision has reverted back to the bank, and as a result, duplexes are being constructed internally. Mr. Hoelscher stated he is very concerned that he will lose his investment. Lamar Pettus addressed the Commission. He stated he is representing the present owner of the property. When the property was developed, in 1977, it was developed as a mobile home park. The property consisted of 20.88 acres. In 1978,Ogden and Holly, along with a few of the persons who signed the petition, entered into an agreement and covenants to replat the subdivision and allow Mr. Ogden and Mr. Holly to rezone the subdivision to R-2. Due to severe financial problems, an arrangement was worked out and the property reverted back to the bank. The bank offered to sell portions of property back to the present property owners within the Subdivision. The bank needs to utilize the property as planned. Lamar stated he is unaware of any agreements between Mr. Ogden and the present residents within the subdivision. Lamar suggested the residents who felt their agreement had been reneged sue Mr. Ogden and Mr. Holly. The bank is developing the property as zoned, because it is more feasible to loan money for multi -family type housing than single-family housing. Pettus said that the bank has already sold the land to a Development company and more lots are being prepared to be built upon, he felt that this property would be grossly devalued if the zoning was changed back to R-1. Pettus further stated that an agreement had been formed in 1977 between the Developer and the City to construct Drake Street, to extend it to the West of Villa North. Pettus said he is presently looking into the engineering cost of completing Drake Street. • • Planning Commission Meeting November.10, 1980 Page 11 Pettus said that as a property owner and mortgagee, that perhaps the persons who purchased the property or homes within the Subdivision should have considered the zoning before they purchased their lots. The property was always zoned R-2. Pettus said it would be unfair to revert the zoning to R-1, there are presently duplexes and fourplexes within the subdivision, while South of this subdivision and adjacent to it there is a mobile home park. Mr. Slaton addressed the Commission again. He stated that if the Commission does nothing about this problem, a bad traffic problem will be compounded. He felt that, at least, Drake Street should be completed before any more multi -family construction continues.. Peg Anderson said unfortunately, the property was zoned R-2, when everyone of the property owners bought their lots. Anderson said she is sympathetic with the property owners of single family homes within the subdivision, and with the street conditions. She said that if it is any consolation, that the property owners can complain if, at any time, there are more than three unrelated persons living in the same unit. Lamar Pettus stated that there is a lien against the property until such time as the problem of Drake Street is resolved. He stated the bank fully intends to deal with the construction of Drake Street. Mr. Slaton said he had spoken with some people in a law firm, with.whom he had worked, and they said that in doing a title exam, zoning is not even considered. These twenty-two property owners have their greatest investment in these single family homes, and now the character of the neighborhood is being changed, and they are afraid of losing their investment. Peg Anderson said she did not see how this subdivision could be rezoned back to R-1, there are already duplexes and fourplexes and the Commission would be bombarded with Conditional Use requests. Newton Hailey said that most of the lots do not meet R-1 minimum requirements. Peg Anderson said that due to the above mentioned reasons, she is moving not to initiate action to rezone Villa North Subdivision to R-1. Newton Hailey seconded. Keith Newhouse said it was too bad there had been nothing in writing to the effect that the interior portion of the subdivision would be single family. He felt the reasons the Commission could not grant the petitioner's request exceeded the petitioner's reasons why the Commission should grant it. Beth Crocker said she felt the Commission would see the same problem cropping up in other subdivisions that are zoned R-2, and will have single family homes within them. The owners of the single family homes will feel that they have been made promises. Windell Cullers said he had made a proposal, that any person buying a lot should be furnished the zoning information about the property, and, also, what sidewalk and street requirements will be in regard to the lot. The buyer would be fully aware of what requirements would be in regard to his lot and what would be developing around him in regard to zoning. The Commission voted on Peg Anderson's motion to turn down the petitioner's request and the motion passed (8-0). Planning Commission Meeting November 10, 1980 Page 12 Cullers made a motion to recommend the drafting of a resolution to the effect that buyers would be furnished zoning, street and sidewalk information regarding the property they wish to purchase. Newton Hailey said that the Commission cannot babysit everybody. Beth Crocker seconded Windell Cutler!. motion and the motion passed (6-2) with Hailey and Newhouse voting "Nay". The next item for discussion was the proposed ordinance amdnding Art. 7, Sec. 21 of Appendix A to the Fayetteville Code of Ordinances tandem lot development. Mort Gitelman stated that he and Beth Crocker were to on the amendment, but had not. He moved to table this Beth Crocker seconded. The motion passed (8-0). AMENDMENT TO ART. 7, SEC. 21 APPENDIX A - FAYETTEVILLE CODE OF ORDINANCES - TANDEM LOTS to clarify the regulations work pertaining to get together and item. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 7:10, P.M. HAPPY THIRTIETH BIRTHDAY TO SCOTT VAN LANINGHAM FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION.