Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1982-09-27 Minutes• MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION A meeting of the Planning Commission was held at 5:00 P.M. on Monday, September 27, 1982 in the Directors Room of the City Administration Building, Fayetteville, Arkansas. MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: OTHERS PRESENT: Chairman Ernest Jacks, Morton Gitelman, Newton Hailey, Jr., Julie Nash, Don Hunnicutt, Melanie Stockdell, and Barbara Crook. Windell Cullers and David Williams Larry Wood, Ervan Wimberly, J. B. Hays, Pete Estes, Jr., Dr. Leflar, Arthur Mueller, James Jones, David McWethy, Bobbie Jones, Suzanne Kennedy, members of the press and others The first item on the agenda was consideration MINUTES of the Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of September 13, 1982. Ernest Jacks asked for a correction to those Minutes on page four, paragraph one, that "small lot" be changed to read "narrow lot". Chairman Ernest Jacks opened the public hearing on Rezoning Petition R82-15, J. B. Hays, to rezone property located east of Leverett Avenue, north of Cleveland Street and south of North Street from R-3, High Density Residential District to C-1, Neighborhood Commercial District. Jacks said the history of this particular area is an interesting one, as the Planning Commission had never intended to have it be a commercial area. He said a laundry which was supposed to be for some apartments turned out to be commercial and has since turned into an office. He said what is now the Rec Room started out as an A.Q. Chicken drive-in which generated a lot of controversy but was approved by the Planning Commission, and has now become something other than a drive-in and is zoned C-2. He asked how the King Pizza place came to be in the neighborhood. Dr. Hays said there was a D X Station and a Minute Mart which were vacant and run down. He said he had bought it, fixed it up and turned it into the King Pizza. Mr. Jacks asked if the Rec Room is now a sit-down place. Dr. Hays said that property, which used to be A.Q. Chicken and is now Pizza Hut, has some seats and some games. Larry Wood reported from the Rezoning Application Planning Report included in the agenda. He said he had not recommended the C-1 District because 1) It is not consistent with the recommendations of the General Plan which called for a high density residential land use in that area, 2) The location of the proposed commercial zoning is not consistent with the locational criteria for commercial contained in the General Plan; and REZONING PETITION R82-15 800 BLOCK - LEVERETT AVENUE J. B. HAYS 137 Planning Commission Meeting September 27, 1982 Page Two 3) Additional commercial zoning at the requested location could lead to the eventual commercialization of Leverett Avenue in the future. Ernest Jacks pointed out the reminder note in this report which states that denial of commercial zoning was made for the southeast corner of North and Leverett in the past. Ernest Jacks asked to hear from any persons in favor of the rezoning. Ervan Wimberly (representing Northwest Engineers) said the property is right between the King Pizza delivery and Sweetser's construction office.. He said there are two old houses on the two tracts involved and Dr. Hays desires to expand the King Pizza office area. The north building extrudes onto the street right of way, because additional right of way was acquired after the house had been built, and the other building is too close to the road. He said they are not asking for a rezoning outside of what is already C-1 since the area north and south of the property is already C-1. The areas east of it and north of the King Pizza are already R-3 (apartments) and south of Sweetser's office are additional apartments. He said he thought it seemed doubtful that the area, particularly to the north, would change from the existing apartments to commercial installation. He said south of Sweetser's office there are one or two houses that might be subject to renovation in the near future. The west side of Leverett is mostly new apartments so he doesn't feel that closing the gap between the two C-1 districts would encourage C-1 in other directions. He said he agreed the rezoning proposal is in contradiction with the General land use map, but doesn't feel the map .has been wholeheartedly adhered to. Don Hunnicutt asked about the street right of way between the two existing houses under petition. Mr. Wimberly explained it was an old 30' wide street to the east of Leverett Avenue. He said they plan to try to have it vacated. He said they only have 135' deep and seriously considered asking for only partial depth - they need about 100', leaving 24' and 35' on the east side of the property. Dr. Hays said he originally had planned on asking for rezoning only on the north lot but, in discussing it with the owner to the south, Jerry Sweetser, Mr. Sweetser suggested he ask for the same zoning as his property is throughout (on both lots). He said, as regards taking the house down, he has no plans for a liquor store and plans to demolish the adjacent building. He said the properties are zoned C-1 on both north and south sides and across the street is C-2. He thinks his plans for the property would make the area look better than what is there now. Ernest Jacks asked if there was anyone to speak in opposition. Pete Estes, Jr. spoke on behalf of an owner in the area. He said his client thought the important point is the fact that denial is recommended by Larry Wood because it is not consistent with the general plan for the area, which was to attempt to prevent commercialization jumpiing up on property south of North Street along Leverett. He said this policy was reflected in a prior case where Jim Lindsey had asked for property on the corner to be rezoned from R-3 to C-1 and it was denied because of the wish to preserve the property south of North Street as residential. He said the Circuit Court upon appeal held that the criteria used by the City Board and Planning Commission were proper guidelines. He said the Supreme Court of Arkansas backed the Planning Commission, the City Board and the Circuit Court. His clients feel it simply would not be closing a gap that commercial property had earlier set up, but would end up with a situation whether in the future we would want other individuals adjoining the commercial property 138 • Planning Commission Meeting September 27, 1982 Page Three to see that the gap can be closed. He strongly urges the City Board and Planning Commission to deny the application. Ervan Wimberly stated he was not aware of the earlier rezoning case. Pete Estes said the rezoning appeal took place in 1974 for property at the S.E. corner of Leverett and North. Dr. Hays said he didn't know anyone was in opposition to his appeal. He asked if the property owner who was opposed lived close to the property. Mr. Estes said he lived in the general area of North Street and Leverett. Don Hunnicutt asked when the Sweetzer property and the King Pizza were rezoned. Bobbie Jones said that happened prior to 1970. Morton Gitelman said there was some controversy over the DX station about 1965 or 1966. He thinks the Planning Commission at that time approved the zoning for what is now the King Pizza. Newton Hailey said it was his opinion the lots are so small that there can't be a lot of building and he is not sure if very many things which would be put in there could adversely impact the situation. Dr. Hays said his plans were to leave the south building and improve it as apartments. He plans to demolish the existing small apartments and expand the parking and possibly the building to the south. He said he had applied for a permit to do an office for King Pizza but could not build it there because it was zoned R-3 on the south side, so they are now doing it on the north. He said he would not change the character of the south building except to improve it. Bobbie Jones said if the building is rezoned to C-1 it becomes non -conforming and they cannot increase the number of units. Ervan Wimberly said he intends to make improvements only, not to increase the number of units. Bobbie Jones said the street referred to by Dr. Hays, Hopper Street, at one time formed a cross with Bell Street and both streets have been vacated back to the property lines as shown on the map. Morton Gitelman moved to deny the rezoning petition as submitted. The motion was seconded by Melanie Stockdell. Don Hunnicutt said he didn't feel like C-1 is filling in between the two because the size of the lots will dictate what can be done with the property. Newton Hailey said he felt the area was commercialized so much now that he did not think the rezoning would make that much of a difference. Julie Nash agreed. The motion to deny passed, 4-3, with Melanie Stockdell, Ernest Jacks, Barbara Crook and Morton Gitelman voting "aye" and Newton Hailey, Julie Nash and Don Hunnicutt voting "nay". There was some discussion as to how many affirmative votes were required for approval, and Bobbie Jones stated five affirmative votes were necessary. Newton Hailey moved to approve the rezoning petition. The motion was seconded by Don Hunnicutt, and failed, 3-4, with Newton Hailey, Julie Nash and Don Hunnicutt voting "aye" and Melanie Stockdell, Ernest Jacks, Barbara Crook and Morton Gitelman voting "nay". Bobbie Jones read from page 2 of the Planning Commission Bylaws, where it states under Article III, Section E: "On all matters requiring the approval of the Planning Commission, the affirmative vote of at least a majority of the whole numbers comprising the Planning Commission shall be required for the adoption of any motion." )31 Planning Commission Meeting September 27, 1982 Page Four Don Hunnicutt brought up the topic of the Planning Commission perhaps recommending a different rezoning, such as to R-0. Dr. Hays stated that he is just trying to improve the property and would like to have an office. He would be willing to modify his request to ask for R-0. Ervan Wimberly stated they were not aware of the problems and Jerry Sweetser was in favor of C-1, but the R-0 would be satisfactory. He asked if they could amend the request. Ernest Jacks said the Planning Commission has the option to initiate a motion for a zoning of "lesser intensity" and has done so before. Morton Gitelman asked would Larry Wood want time to study this and make a new recommendation. Larry Wood stated he would support a recommendation for rezoning to R-0. Don Hunnicutt moved to approve the rezoning on Petition R82-15 from R-3 to R-0. The motion was seconded by Newton Hailey, Jr. Barbara Crook stated she felt better about this because it would lessen the chances that we would have a consolidated C -1 -area. The motion was voted on and passed, 6-1, with Morton Gitelman voting "nay". Ernest Jacks stated the Planning Commission would recommend to the City Board a rezoning to R-0. Chairman Jacks opened the PUBLIC HEARING public hearing to consider the AMENDMENT TO MASTER STREET PLAN following described amendment to BETWEEN ZION ROAD AND JOYCE STREET the Fayetteville Master Street Plan: a 60' north -south collector street between Highway 71 on the west and Old Missouri Road on the east and between Zion Road on the north and Stearns -Joyce on the south. Jacks said he had received a memo on July 7, 1982 from City Manager Don Grimes saying the City Board asked Grimes to submit a memo to the Planning Commission to express their desire to see more access streets developed off Zion Road, to the south. This request was subsequently submitted to the Transportion Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) and they recommend that a collector street be added just west of the proposed multi -family (Park Lake) development. Further they recommend that steps be taken to conduct a comprehensive study of the high growth area around the Northwest Arkansas Mall from Johnson Road south to Milsap Road and from State Highway 265 west to Johnson Road west of the Mall. Jacks said the Planning Commission has advertised notice of this public hearing to amend the Master Street Plan and asked ifthere was anyone present to speak in favor of this proposal. No one present spoke in favor. Jacks asked if there was anyone who wished to speak in opposition. Art Mueller and Dr. Leflar said they had questions. Dr. Leflar asked where exactly the collector street would be located between Zion and Joyce. Ernest Jacks stated that the map shows the street is to begin just on the west edge of land which is currently zoned R-2. Mr. Mueller, property owner on Zion, stated he believed the area zoned R-2 abuts some present housing and Dr. Leflar's property is to the immediate west and jags around the property and goes out to Zion Road. He is interested in knowing how the proposed street will go around that jag. Mr. Mueller stated there are about three residences lying in the area where the proposed street would be. )Y0 Planning Commission Meeting September 27, 1982 Page Five Mr. Jacks said certainly the road would not be built in that fashion, and apparently this problem had not been recognized in past discussions. Mr. Mueller said he did not see how the road could be approved unless it were feasible to build it. Dr. Leflar stated he owns property immediately to the west of the new Park Lane area. He said if a straight road were to be put in along the west edge of the Park Lane property and along the east line of his property, he would be willing to donate of the requisite footage from the east side of his property. After getting past his property, the road would then run directly between the Park Lane property and the electric power station, and then it would run directly between the Park Lane property and a private residence, and the other owners might be somewhat reluctant to give up property along the line of their yard. He said he does not go along with the idea of a road which would run along the east edge of his property, and then come back in to his property somewhere and go out further down to the west to Zion Road. He said this would not be agreeable to him and would not make a very good road anyhow. Ernest Jacks asked Larry Wood, who sat on the TAC committee, if the exact location of the proposed street in relation to the property owners in the area was brought out at all. Larry Wood said this was not brought up, that the committee viewed the proposedstreet as beingin a general location and that it might be somewhere near the west edge of the R-2 zoned land to serve as a dividing point between the R-2 to the east and whatever may develop to the west of that. Dr. Leflar said he can conceive of another possibility where the proposed street might run down along the line of the Park Lane driveway which comes off Zion Road to the south for a considerable distance, and which would serve the purpose and not involve his property which is contiguous on the west side but not all the way up to Zion Road. Mr. Jacks stated that, as he understands it, the property owners speaking tonight are concerned that once the proposed collector street appears on the master street plan, its location might become more specific. • Mr. Mueller stated that this proposed collector street was once suggested by the residents in the area when the apartments were put in, but was turned down by the Planning Commission and the City Board because there were no funds available. He asked where the funds would come from now. Morton Gitelman pointed out that putting the collector street on the Master Street Plan does not mean there will ever be a street built there. Mr. Mueller brought up the point that, although Dr. Leflar offered to donate land for half of the street, if the apartments are going in, the clearance wouldn't be there as it will be too close to the boundary line where they plan to put their buildings. Melanie Stockdell asked how new streets shown on the master street plan are described as far as their exact location. Ernest Jacks said the drawing on the map is the only description. Morton Gitelman said the location is not specified when a street is first placed on the Master Street Plan and the location becomes fixed by the first person to come in with a development, since we must then secure, by dedication, part of the right of way and part of the improvement. Completing the street will then depend on other persons who develop property. If no one develops, there will not be a street. syr A • • Planning Commission Meeting September 27, 1982 Page Six Don Hunnicutt asked if the Doctors Clinic had an easement along one side for a street, as this is not shown anywhere on the map.' Bobbie Jones said that what is shown as Venetian Lane on the map is actually to the south. Ernest Jacks asked if Venetian Lane is a city street. Bobbie Jones said the Board had passed a resolution indicating an intent to dedicate it, but there is no record that they ever did. James Jones spoke and said he is in favor of a street from Zion Road going south to Joyce to help the residents have safer access to the south, but where it is placed is important. He said according to the map he received if the road is located in the curve, he thinks it is very disadvantageous because of the topography and because it goes into his neighbor's property. Morton Gitelman said if we put the collector street on the Master Street Plan there is a problem because they will not be locating it, but only recommending to the City Board a street in that general vicinity running from Zion to Joyce. If someone develops, for example, ; of a mile away from where a line is drawn on the map, then the street might be located a of a mile away from the original line where it was drawn. Mr. Mueller said the residents along Zion Road emphatically brought the need for the street to the attention of the Planning Commission and the City Board in the past and now he thinks this is'a typical example of doing things without thought. Morton Gitelman said he disagreed and said there is no need for a street there now because there is no development between Zion and Joyce and there won't be a need for a street until the property begins to develop. Don Hunnicutt said over the past two or three years, development on the south. end has caused several discussions about a through street which some of these residents. probably were not involved in. Bobbie Jones said when the apartment complex was in the planning stages, you could not require those developers to put in the collector street because it was not shown on the master street plan and, if there had been one shown, they might have built the street. Morton Gitelman moved to recommend to the City Board putting a proposed collector street between Zion Road and Joyce Street somewhere in the general vicinity as indicated. The motion was seconded by Barbara Crook. Don Hunnicutt stated he would like to see an ownership map worked up on that area for future reference. The motion was voted on and passed, 7-0. Ernest Jacks introduced the request OFF-SITE PARKING for approval of off-site parking for CITY HOSPITAL the City Hospital located north of ROCK STREET BETWEEN WEST $ SCHOOL Rock Street, south of Mountain Street, east of West Avenue and west of School Avenue; property zoned R-0, Residential -Office District and a request to defer "durable and dustless" surfacing. Lex Smith, Associate Administrator for City Hospital, was present to speak for City Hospital. Mr. Smith stated they had come before the Planning Commission .in December in regards to the parking requirements for the Hospital, in light of /1,Q • • • Planning Commission Meeting September 27, 1982 Page Seven new construction, and were given a waiver at that time until such time as they finish the construction program for the Hospital. In an effort to meet these parking requirements, they have recently acquired additional property directly across from the church building they have acquired for administrative service functions. They propose to use this newly acquired area for employee parking for the administrative area, thus freeing up parking for patients. He said there was a lot of underbrush on the property and they would try to maintain the large trees. He said there is an area on the west side where they would have to bulldoze an entrance, but after going back SO to 75 feet the terrain is fairly flat. Ernest Jacks asked for confirmation if they intended to preserve the large trees and Mr. Smith said that they would. Mr. Smith said that for now, they only intend to get access into the property and use it for parkingin the interim and, as the hospital continues on with its major building program, they will totally redo the parking lot with asphalt and curbing, to be durable and dustless, and meet all of the requirements as outlined by the City. Melanie Stockdell asked if a specific time could be set within which the parking lot would be made durable and dustless. Mr. Smith said their construction program is such that they plan to demolish the old central portion starting next week and the hospital building program and the parking lots should be finished within two years. He stated they would need at least a minimum of two years. Julie Nash moved approval of off-site parking for City Hospital and deferral of the durable and dustless surfacing for two years. The motion was seconded by Melanie Stockdell. It was made clear that the two year period was a maximum, not a minimum time period, and if there was a problem with the deadline, they would have to come before the Commission for an extension. The motion,passed, 7-0. Ernest Jacks asked for a report from COMMITTEE REPORT the committee on possible grandfather NON -CONFORMING LOTS AND clauses on non -conforming lots and NON -CONFORMING STRUCTURES non -conforming structures. He stated Morton Gitelman was chairman and other committee members were David Williams and Windell Cullers, who were both absent tonight. Morton Gitelman stated there was not a report. Don Hunnicutt pointed out that Mr. Cullers had requested this be placed on the agenda at the last meeting at which Gitelman was absent. Morton Gitelman recommended this item be taken up by the Update Committee at its next meeting. Ernest Jacks asked Larry Wood to make a note of this recommendation and stated he wished to call a meeting of the Update Committee soon. It was agreed to call a meeting sometime around a week from today. Chairman Jacks confirmed that the City has OTHER BUSINESS agreed to pay the $15 registration fee for any Planning Commissioners wishing to attend the Planning Commissioners Institute this coming weekend. With no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 6:00 P.M.