Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1981-04-27 MinutesMINUTES OF A PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING A meeting of the Planning Commission was held at 5:00, P.M., Monday, April 27, 1981, in the Directors Room, City Administration Building, Fayetteville, Arkansas. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Ernest Jacks, Martin Redfern, Newton Hailey, Elizabeth Crocker, David Williams, Morton Gitelman, Don Hunnicutt, Windell Cullers (arrived late). MEMBERS ABSENT: OTHERS PRESENT: Joe Wilson. Gail Mainard, Wade Bishop, Robin Hernreich, Bud Tomlinson, Alton McDaniel, Dr. Brian Buell, Herbert Hatfield, Bobbie Jones, Cynthia Stewart, and other members of the press and audience. The minutes of the April 13, 1981 Planning MINUTES Commission meeting were approved as mailed. The next item of business was the PRELIMINARY PLAT approval of the Preliminary Plat of HAPPY HOLLOW ADDITION Happy Hollow Addition, located East of TOM MATHIAS Happy Hollow Road, North of Fourth Street, and West of Ray Avenue, Tom Mathias - Owner and Developer. Zoned R-1, Low Density Residential District. Gail Mainard was present to represent. The Chairman asked for a recommendation from the Subdivision Committee. Don Hunnicutt, Chairman, stated that the Subdivision Committee is recommending this Preliminary Plat for approval with the following conditions: 1. Satisfy the Planning Administrator that Lot 6 has adequate frontage on Ray Avenue. No improvements are recommended to Ray Avenue as long as Lot 6 is developed single family, or is sold to the school. Any other development of Lot 6,may require improvements to Ray Avenue. 2. No improvements are recommended for Fourth Street. 3. Improvements to Happy Hollow will be as required by Clayton Powell and Bobbie Jones (with special attention given to the natural drainage across Lots 4 and 5). 4. Street lights will be located at the North end of Lot 1, and between Lots 4 and 5. S. All Plat Review Committee comments will apply. Hunnicutt stated that at the Subdivision Committee meeting the frontage of Lot 6 had not been confirmed and asked Mr. Mainard if he had confirmed that frontage. Mr Mainard replied that there is at least 95 ft. of frontage on Ray Avenue adjacent to Lot 6. Hunnicutt stated that Lot 6 would meet the minimum lot width requirements and moved that his recommendation be made a motion. Beth Crocker seconded. The motion passed (7-0). 7a Planning Commission Meeting April 27, 1981 • Page 2 • • The next item of business was the REZONING PETITION NO. R81-4 public hearing on Rezoning Petition N.W.A. DEVELOPMENT CO. R81-4, N.W.A. Development Company to NORTH OF MILLSAP rezone property located on the North side of Millsap Road (a/k/a Cemetery Road) and lying East of Northwest National Bank, from R-1, Low Density Residential District, to C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial District. Wade Bishop was present to represent. The Chairman asked for a recommendation from the Planning Consultant, Larry Wood. Mr. Wood stated that the requested C-2 District is recommended for the following reasons: 1. The requested zoning district is consistent with the recommendations of the General Plan. 2. Adequate public facilities are available within a reasonable distance to serve the potential development. Mr. Wood felt that if the developer does not intend to extend water and sewer facilities the zoning should be delayed until adequate facilities are provided. Mr. Bishop stated that the problem of extending facilities could be taken care of when a building permit is requested. Further, Mr. Bishop stated that the owners do not have any plans for the property. The property consists of 291 ft. of frontage on Millsap Road, part of which is zoned C-2 and part R-1, and he only wishes to make the zoning consistent for the entire tract. Jacks asked if Mr. Bishop would be willing to guarantee that adequate facilities will be run to the site prior to development. Bishop stated he is not the only owner, and that he did not feel that he could commit the interested parties that were not present. Jacks asked if there was anyone present in the audience appearing in opposition to the rezoning request. There was no one present in opposition. Martin Redfern moved that the request for rezoning be recommended for approval with the condition that adequate facilities be run to the site prior to issuance of a building permit. Newton Hailey seconded. The motion passed (7-0). Redfern asked if Mr. Wood would like to recommend a study of the intersection of Millsap Road with Highway 71 in the area of this site. Larry Wood stated that would be a good recommendation as there will be further development in this area as Arkansas Western Gas Company develops their property. Martin Redfern moved that the intersection of Millsap and Highway 71 North on the East side of Highway 71 North be considered by the Technical Advisory Committee at their next meeting. Morton Gitelman seconded. The motion passed (7-0). The next item of business was the Rezoning Petition R81-5, Robin Hernreich to rezone property located at 15 North Church Avenue from R-0, Residential Office District to REZONING PETITION R81-5 ROBIN HERNREICH 15 NORTH CHURCH 73 Planning Commission Meeting April 27, 1981 Page 3 C-3, Central Commercial District. Robin Hernreich was present to represent. The Chairman asked for a report from the Planning Consultant. Mr. Wood replied that he does not recommend the requested C-3 Zoning for the following reasons: 1. C-3 District is not consistent with the General Plan nor the Center Square Urban Renewal Plan. 2. The proposed use, apartments, is a use permitted by Conditional Use in the R-0 District. 3. C-3 District would permit a more intensive reuse of a property which already has very limited parking facilities. Windell Cullers arrived at 5:10, P.M. Robin Hernreich stated that he had been advised that he needed to seek a C-3 Zoning. Bobbie Jones stated she had advised a rezoning. The applicant does not have enough frontage for his proposed use, also, if he wished to develop the apartment units in R-0, he would have to seek a Conditional Use. The rezoning was the easiest method as no variances would have to be obtained with that zoning classification. Robin Hernreich stated that the building as it exists, is vacant and unattractive. He said he would like to remodel the structure into nine units. David Williams moved that the request for rezoning be denied. Windell Cullers seconded. Hernreich asked what procedure he should follow to obtain a Conditional Use for his property. Morton Gitelman stated that the Planning Commission has the power to approve a rezoning for a lesser intensity, but he did not know if the Planning Commission could grant the Conditional Use, without the petitioner reapplying. David McWethy asked if the Planning Commission would grant the Conditional Use contingent upon the City Attorney saying it is in the Commission's power. David Williams moved to amend his motion to reject the rezoning request but grant the Conditional Use contingent upon the City Attorney's approval of the action. Windell Cullers stated he would not amend his second. The Commission voted on Williams' original motion to deny, the motion passed (8-0). David Williams moved to grant a Conditional Use for a nine unit apartment at 15 North Church Avenue based on an opinion from the City Attorney, Beth Crocker seconded. The motion passed (7-1) with Cullers casting the "Nay" vote. The next item on the Agenda was REZONING PETITION R81-6 the Public Hearing on Rezoning TOMLINSON ASPHALT COMPANY Petition R81-6, Tomlinson Asphalt BUD TOMLINSON Company, Inc. to rezone property located on the South side of County Road #896, East of the Hush Puppy, and East of Highway #112 from A-1, Agricultural District to I-1, Heavy Commercial and Light Industrial District Planning Commission Meeting April 27, 1981 Page 4 (Alternate for C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial District with a Conditional Use approval). Bud Tomlinson was present to represent. The Planning Consultant gave his report. Wood stated he is not recommending I-1 District but is recommending C-2 for the following reasons: 1. All of the uses currently in this area are either uses by right, or uses on appeal in the C-2 District. 2. Since most of the land between Highway 112 and the proposed Highway 71 is already developed with C-2 type uses, the proposed Highway 71 should serve as the transition between commercial and industrial uses. 3. C-2 District is consistent with the commercial land use pattern approved by the City of Johnson. Wood further stated that most of the land North of the By -Pass is already developed up to the Hush Puppy. This takes them back to the right-of-way of the proposed Highway 71. Wood felt that if 71 is to be relocated, it should serve as a transition between commercial and industrial East of Highway 112. Bud Tomlinson stated he had been operating his business at this location for four years. He stated the business would stay the same. If the Planning Commission chooses to grant C-2 zoning with a conditional use, he stated he has no problem. He wanted the zoning to be such that if he chooses to sell his business, that person will be allowed to operate as he had. He said if he does sell the business, it will be to someone operating the same type of use. Ernest Jacks asked if there was anyone present in the audience appearing in opposition to the request. There was no one present in opposition. Bobbie Jones stated that under the present zoning, Mr. Tomlinson's business is non -conforming. She said that if the Planning Commission grants the C-2 zoning with the Conditional Use, the business would no longer be non -conforming. Morton Gitelman stated he was not sure that the intent of the I-1 District is not more in keeping with the use that's out there now, as the applicant proposes it. When the ordinance was formed over ten years ago, the Commission wanted truck intensive type uses away from residential and commercial shopping goods. He felt in this case, the I-1 is less intensive. With the truck farm on the other side of Highway 112, he was not sure that this area had not been recognized for this type of use rather than commercial for the shopping consumer. Gitelman did not feel that Mr. Tomlinson's use was in opposition to this area, he felt it was logical. Wood stated he is recommending C-2 for this whole area. Tomlinson stated that when the Highway comes through he will be backed up to it and that North of him is the City of Johnson. The business he is operating is an engineering and construction office and it generates very little traffic. He said that as things stand now, when the highway goes through, he will be under an overpass which will be about 38 ft. above his roof. Windell Cullers felt that when the highway is built it will be an attractive place for C-2. Gitelman said that there may be a shortage of less expensive land for I-1 if all the property adjacent to the Highway is zoned C-2. Martin Redfern asked if Mr. Tomlinson would be able to sell his business to the same type of operator if the Planning Commission sees fit to go with the General Plan and keep this property C-2. Jacks stated that is correct, but he would need a conditional use. Planning Commission Meeting April 27, 1981 Page 5 Ernest Jacks asked if there was anyone present in opposition to the request. There was no response. Windell Cullers moved to approve the change in zoning from A-1 to I-1. David Williams seconded. The motion passed (8-0). The next item for consideration CONDITIONAL USE REQUEST was the Conditional Use request submitted ALTON MC DANIEL by Alton McDaniel to have child care for 850 SOUTH WASHINGTON 10 children full time and 2 children after school in his home at 850 South Washington zoned R-2, Medium Density Residential District. Alton McDaniel was present to represent. Cynthia Stewart stated that she was not sure that all adjoining property owners had been notified. Mr. McDaniel stated that he had notified property owners to the North and the South. He stated that he had parking, off-street, for four cars. Also, he stated he has 1000 square feet of fencedin back yard. Windell Cullers felt that Nonnie Vance would regulate the child care facility. Windell moved that the conditional use be granted for one year. Newton Hailey seconded. Beth Crocker stated that the Commission usually requires some type of screening with this type of conditional use. Windell Cullers stated that the neighbors on both sides had been had not seen fit to object. He stated he felt Nonnie Vance would not if there was not adequate room for the children. The motion to approve passed (7-1) with Beth Crocker casting the vote. notified and allow the use "Nay" The next item of business WAIVER OF MINIMUM LOT SIZE was a request to waive the minimum APPLICABLE TO A LOT SPLIT lot size applicable to a lot split DR. BRIAN W. BUELL submitted by Dr. Brian W. Buell, for property located West of Highway 71 North, between Nelson's Funeral Home and Northwest Arkansas Mall. Also, to waive the requirement that a lot have frontage on a public street. Zoned C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial District. Dr. Buell was present to represent. He stated that he wishes to construct his office and perhaps some others on the third split of a piece of property. Also, he said he has an option on the balance of the property, and at some time in the future, he may construct some more offices. The property faces the frontage road to Highway 71 North. Buell stated as far as frontage, the property faces on a street, but the City has never accepted it. Bobbie Jones stated the street in question is an access road that the Mall built when it made the Penney's addition. The Board of Directors refused to accept it as a public street for City maintenance. This property will be located behind Grandy's on a 60 ft. strip of street owned by the mall. Redfern asked if there was water and sewer to the property. Bobbie said there are easements around the property at various points and that Buell should be able 76 Planning Commission Meeting April 27, 1981 • Page 6 • • to work it out. Bobbie said a variance should be granted for the balance of the property, and also, a waiver granted for the minimum lot size in regard to a lot split. Cullers stated he felt a plan should be submitted for the remainder of the property. Buell stated he does not own the balance of the property at this time and, therefore, would not be able to obtain a variance for it. Morton Gitelman stated that after this split, a subdivision plat will have to be filed if further splits are desired. Bobbie Jones stated that there is an easement agreement between the mall and the owner of the property for use of the road Beth Crocker moved that the split be approved subject to extending all City utilities to the property and that a variance be granted for the third split and the balance of the property from the requirement that a lot have frontage on a public street. Morton Gitelman seconded. Martin Redfern asked if this meant that in the future, the Planning Commission is going to consider private streets to be public streets. Bobbie Jones stated that the street was designed and constructed to City standards prior to asking the City Board to accept it. She stated she had advised the developers to have the road inspected. The motion to approve both the waiver of the minimum lot size for a lot split and the requirement that a lot have frontage on a public street passed (8-0). The next item of business WAIVER OF MAXIMUM WIDTH was the request for a waiver of the FOR COMMERCIAL DRIVE maximum width of a commercial driveway HERBERT HATFIELD from 40 ft. to 60 ft. or waiver of the safety zone between separate driveways from 25 ft. to 4 ft. submitted by Marvin Bradley on behalf of Herbert Hatfield at 21 East Spring Street, Zoned C-3, Central Commercial District. Herbert Hatfield was present to represent. He stated he is proposing to build a structure that will match the others on the street using brick, make an opening drive and construct sidewalks. Jacks stated that the way the plan is proposed, it appears that people will back out on to the street. Hatfield stated there will be a throughway, with 12 ft. wide overhead doors. Hatfield stated he is retiring and that the building will probably be leased by the Michelin Tire Dealer in town. Windell Cullers stated there will be a problem here whether the waiver is granted or not. Hatfield stated there is a big safety zone at the end of the filling station now. He said from the end of the present building over will be about 20 ft. Jacks asked if customers would drive in on Spring and exit on College. Hatfield said that is correct. Cullers felt that if the drive is increased that people will be encouraged to back out into the street. He stated that the street would consist almost solely of drives, that there would be hardly any sidewalks. Cullers moved to deny the request for waiver of the maximum width of a drive and to deny the request for waiver of the safety zone between drives. 77 Planning Commission Meeting April 27, 1981 • Page 7 • • David Williams seconded. The motion failed to pass (4-3-1) with Windell Cullers, David Williams, Martin Redfern and Don Hunnicutt voting "Aye", Morton Gitelman, Newton Hailey and Ernest Jacks voting "Nay", and Beth Crocker abstaining. Morton Gitelman moved to approve the request for a waiver of the 40 ft. maximum width for a commercial drive, but not the 25 ft. safety zone between_:: drives. Beth Crocker seconded. Cullers stated that he doubted that Mr. Hatfield could get a 60 ft. drive in this area without a waiver of the safety zone. Hatfield said he would make a safety zone. Ernest Jacks asked if Mr. Gitelman's motion waived the safety zone. Gitelman replied it did not that the safety zone would have to be installed. Beth Crocker stated the safety zone would have to be 25 ft. between drives and 40 ft. from the drive to the intersection of Spring Street and College. The motion to waive the maximum width of the drive from 40 ft. to 60 ft. and not waive the safety zone passed (7-1) with Windell Cullers casting the "Nay" vote. The next item of business was a REPORT ON STUDY OF report from the Committee appointed to COMMERCIAL SUBDIVISIONS study Commercial Subdivision Regulations. Chairman, Ernest Jacks gave the report. He stated that the Committee had had only one meeting. Jacks stated that what is wanted and needed as far as commercial subdivisions is: 1. Footprint ownership with a Property Owners Association. Lots could be sold within the subdivision with joint ownership of the parking area. 2. The ability to subdivide if development occurs with formulation of some type of building envelope initially, and subdivide by other means after that. Jacks stated the Committee is trying to incorporate some improvements to be required with development such as landscaping and plantings. He stated that a resolution has not been formulated as far as amending the present Subdivision Ordinance or writing a Commercial Subdivision Ordinance. He asked the Commission if they had any objections or if the Committee should proceed. There were no objections. The next item for consideration RECOMMENDATION FROM was a recommendation from the Board BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT of Adjustment that consideration be given TRUCK RENTAL to amending the Zoning Ordinance so that truck rental would be permitted, on a restricted basis.in regard to number, in affiliation with filling stations, or be placed in a specific Use Unit. Bobbie Jones further stated this item had resulted from a complaint received about a truck rental operation in a C-1 District. A violation notice had been sent to the operator. Ms. Jones stated that as Planning Administrator, it is within her power to make an interpretation on a Use when it is not listed in a 78 • • Planning Commission Meeting April 27, 1981 Page 8 specific Use Unit. The complainant appealed her interpretation per ordinance to the Board of Adjustment. The applicant's representative contended that truck rental is incidental to the operation of a filling station. The definition of a filling station, in the ordinance, does not address truck rental in the list of items that are permitted in conjunction with a filling station. Ernest Jacks asked if the applicant, Don Johnston, owned the filling station. Bobbie Jones stated he does not, that he leases some spaces for the trucks to the operator of the filling station which is adjacent to Johnston's property. Jacks asked who had complained about the truck rental. Bobbie Jones replied Phil Colwell. Jones stated that she interpreted truck rental to be in the same Use Unit (17) an an auto rental agency. Martin Redfern pointed out that the person leasing the spaces for the trucks is not the operator of the filling station and that listing truck rental with a filling station would not necessarily apply to this case. Gitelman stated that he did not think a car rental agency was the same as a truck rental agency. Bobbie Jones said the Board of Adjustment had felt that in this particular case, with the nearness of apartments and the mobility of thepopulation in the area that it should be allowed to operate in this particular location. They felt it was a convenience to the neighborhood. Some of the members of the Board felt that truck rental should not be allowed in conjunction with a filling station in any district. They had discussed making truck rental a Conditional Use. As the ordinance reads, filling stations are allowed in a C-1 District and Auto Sales and Rentals are not. Morton Gitelman moved that a resolution be drafted in accordance with Bobbie Jones' interpretation that Truck Rental be listed in Use Unit 17. Don Hunnicutt seconded. Beth Crocker left the proceedings at 7:37, P.M. The motion passed (7-0). The May 25th Meeting of the MAY 25 PLANNING COMMISSION Planning Commission is scheduled for a MEETING Monday when City Offices are closed. The Commission agreed to meet the following Tuesday, May 26, 1981. Morton Gitelman stated he would be unable to attend and Beth Crocker would also be unable to attend. The next item for consideration PETITION TO CLOSE was a petition to close an alley ALLEY BETWEEN between Douglas and Taylor Street, DOUGLAS AND TAYLOR West of Whitham Avenue. Upon a motion by Martin Redfern and a second by Don Hunnicutt, the Commission voted to recommend to the Board of Directors that the alley be closed and Don Hunnicutt seconded. The motion passed (7-0). 79 Planning Commission Meeting • April 27, 1981 Page 9 • Bobbie Jones stated she will not attend the June 8, 1981 meeting of the Planning Commission and will leave early May 11, 1981. OTHER BUSINESS There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 6:45, P.M. $O