Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1983-04-25 Minutes• • • MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION A meeting of the Planning Commission at 5:00 P.M. in Room 107, Continuing East Avenue, Fayetteville, Arkansas. was held on Monday, April 25, 1983 Education Center, Center Street and MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Newton Hailey, Jr., Ernest Jacks, Melanie Stockdell, Windell Cullers, Morton Gitelman, Julie Nash, Barbara Crook MEMBERS ABSENT: OTHERS PRESENT: David Williams, Don Hunnicutt Robert Whitfield, Leon Edens, Harry Gray, Bryce Davis, Rodney Wallace, Donna Caudle, Jeremy Hess, James Maddox, Mrs. York, Richard Hipp, Kathryn Coatney, Marie Terry, David McWethy, Bobbie Jones, Suzanne Kennedy, members of the press and others With no corrections or additions, MINUTES Chairman Newton Hailey stated the Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of April 11, 1983 stand approved as mailed. The second item on the agenda was to CONCURRENT PLAT consider approval of the concurrent OAKLAND TOWNHOUSES plat for the Oakland Townhouses to 1376 NORTH OAKLAND AVENUE be located at 1376 North Oakland (on ROBERT WHITFIELD, INC. the east of Oakland Avenue, north of Holly Street and south of Sycamore Street), zoned R-2, Medium Density Residential District. Owner, Robert Whitfield, was present. Chairman Hailey said the Subdivision Committee had considered this plat at their meeting on Friday, April 22 and Committee member, Melanie Stockdell, reported for the Committee. She said the Committee recommends approval, subject to Plat Review comments and the signing of the Evaluation of Site Related Improvements form. Bobbie Jones explained the Evaluation form is for parcels not large enough for Large Scale Developments, to evaluate street conditions abutting the property, the amount of right-of-way and pavement and what is needed to bring the street up to City standards, that she prepares basic information and the Street Superintendent expands this to include definite requirements. In regard to the Green Space Ordinance, Jones said City Attorney McCord said we should inform developers this is on appeal and if the City wins the appeal, it will be applicable to cases being processed in the interim, but we are not requiring anything at this time. Melanie Stockdell moved to approve the concurrent plat of the Oakland Townhouses, subject to Plat Review comments and the signing of the Evaluation of Site Related Improvements form. The motion was seconded by Ernest Jacks. Windell Cullers asked about the landscaping requirement and Bobbie Jones said he is required to have 10% landscaping between the parking area and the street. The motion passed, 5-0, with Crook, Hunnicutt, Williams and Nash absent. • • • Planning Commission Minutes April 25, 1983 Page Two The third item of business was consideration of approval of the Large Scale Development plan for an apartment complex to be located in the 1300 Block on the East side of Leverett Avenue between Lawson and Holly Street, zoned R-2, Medium Density Residential District. Owner, Leon Edens, and Harry Gray of Northwest Engineers were present. LARGE SCALE DEVELOPMENT PLAN APARTMENT COMPLEX LEVERETT AVENUE - 1300 BLOCK LEON EDENS Hailey said this had gone before Subdivision Committee on Friday, April 22. Committee member Stockdell stated they recommend approval, subject to the submittal of required easements and the submittal of a revised legal description for street widening to read 151 feet to the center line. Bobbie Jones explained the Street Superintendent had a question whether or not to require the existing 26 -foot street pavement to be widened to 31 feet, since it does have curbs and gutters and he felt the Planning Commission should decide whether to require a Bill of Assurance that would require the owner to pay a share of the costs of street widening, should it ever be widened in the future. She said the right-of-way should read 30 feet off the west side of the legal description. Stockdell said it was explained to the owner what a Bill of Assurance would mean and he agreed to sign one. Jones said if it were ever widened, probably the only portion the owner would be required to pay for would be the difference between the existing 26 feet of pavement and 31 feet required for a minor street to meet present standards. Melanie Stockdell moved to recommend approval of the Large Scale Development, subject to submittal df easements required and the revised legal description for street widening to read thirty feet of right-of-way (before a building permit is issued) and subject to executing a Bill of Assurance for the owner's share of costs to widen the road to a maximum of 31 feet total width at some future date. The motion was seconded by Ernest Jacks. The Chairman asked Mr. Edens if he understood what would be required and he said that he did. The motion passed, 5-0, with Crook, Hunnicutt, Williams and Nash absent. Public hearing was opened on Rezoning Petition R83-4, owners Frank Lynch and Frank Krupa, to rezone property located west of Highway 71 Bypass and north of Old Farmington Road from A-1, Agricultural to C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial and R-2, Medium Density Residential District. Bryce Davis was present to represent the owners. The Chairman stated he thought the petition should be considered as a whole but that the portions petitioned to be rezoned differently should be voted on separately. In the absence of Planning Consultant Larry Wood, the Chairman summarized Mr. Wood's Planning Report, which states the R-2 zoning district is REZONING PETITION R83-4 WEST OF HIGHWAY 71 BYPASS AND NORTH OF OLD FARMINGTON ROAD BRYCE DAVIS 45 • • • 3. co 0 0 Planning Commission Minutes April 25, 1983 Page Three recommended for the following reasons: 1. Utility facilities are available to serve the density potential of the R-2 District; 2. The access problem has been improved by the construction of the parallel service road, and 3. The topography and existing natural features warrants considera- tion of other than single-family construction. The report further states the C-2 District is not recommended for the following reasons: 1. The property under application does not meet the location guide- lines of the General Plan for commercial development; and 2. Approval of commercial zoning at the location requested would encourage commercialization of the Bypass service roads which is contrary to their design and function. Bryce Davis distributed a letter to the commissioners from adjoining property owner to the south and east, Paul Marinoni, Sr., who stated no objections to the petition. Davis said he had informed the owners of Larry Wood's recommendations and they have agreed to amend their petition to ask that the total property be rezoned to R-2, and to withdraw the C-2 portion of the petition. There was no one else present who spoke in favor of or in opposition to the petition. Commissioner Julie Nash arrived at this point (5:15 P.M.). Windell Cullers asked if Larry Wood's recommendations for R-2 referred only to that portion under petition to R-2, or to the property as a whole. Ernest Jacks said he thought the recommendation applied to the whole property. Bryce Davis said he interprets the recommendation as covering the entire property. He said the property came before the Planning Commission in 1977 at which time they did not have direct access and it was determined it would create too much traffic on Farmington Road Morton Gitelman moved to recommend rezoning the entire parcel of land to R-2. The motion was seconded by Ernest Jacks, and passed, 5-0-1, with Julie Nash abstaining and with Crook, Hunnicutt and Williams absent. The Chairman said the petition would go before the Board of Directors at their meeting on May 3. N6 • • Planning Commission Minutes April 25, 1983 Page Four Fifth on the agenda was a request for a variance from the lot size requirement applicable to a lot split VARIANCE FROM LOT SIZE REQUIREMENT FOR LOT SPLIT PUMP STATION ROAD $ ARMSTRONG AVENUE CAL -GAS submitted by Cal -Gas for property north of Pump Station Road and east of Armstrong Avenue, zoned I-2, General Industrial District. Mr. Rodney Wallace was present to represent Cal -Gas. Newton Hailey said this would be the fourth split, which the Planning Commission cannot approve, but must simply make a recommendation to the Board of Directors. He said the Planning Commission can waive the five - acre requirement for the lot size since the resulting lot would be less than 21 acres. In answer to Windell Cullers, Bobbie Jones said the City did own this property at one time. She said the sale price of property in the Industrial Park is supposed to have included funds to bring streets up to standards. Hailey asked the petitioner to explain where the split would be made on the McClelland Engineers sketch. Mr. Wallace said the split would be at the fence line. Windell Cullers moved to recommend the Board of Directors allow the lot split and that the Commission waive the five acre lot size requirement. The motion was seconded by Ernest Jacks and passed, 6-0, with Crook, Williams and Hunnicutt absent. The Chairman said this item will be on the Board of Directors agenda May 3rd. The sixth item was a conditional use request submitted by Donna Caudle to have a day care center for more than six children in her home at 1034 S. Washington Avenue, zoned R-2, Medium Density Residential CONDITIONAL USE REQUEST DAY CARE 1034 S. WASHINGTON DONNA CAUDLE District. Donna Caudle was present. Hailey explained this property is south of another request for day care which was tabled indefinitely at the last meeting. Ms. Caudle said her request is for ten children. Hailey asked if those persons who wrote letters in favor of the day care were immediately adjacent to the home. Caudle said yes. Ernest Jacks asked if those persons were the only adjacent property owners. Bobbie Jones said the office had notified those names supplied by Donna Caudle, and said she had received no calls. Ernest Jacks moved approval, seconded by Windell Cullers. Melanie Stockdell asked if Caudle had calculated the 80 square feet per child needed for outdoor play space. Caudle said she had 2500 square feet. The motion passed, 6-0, with Crook, Williams and Hunnicutt absent. 47 • • 1. r Planning Commission Minutes April 25, 1983 Page Five The seventh item was a request DRIVEWAY SETBACK WAIVER for waiver of 121 foot setback 11 NORTH DUNCAN AVE. on driveways from side property JEREMY HESS lines submitted by Jeremy Hess for property north of West Center and west of Duncan Avenue (11 North Duncan), zoned R-3, High Density Residential District. Mr. Hess was present. In answer to a question from Stockdell about the :Location of a large tree on the property, Hess described tree locations and said all those existing on the lot would be preserved, with the exception of some redbuds which he intends to transplant. Ernest Jacks moved approval, seconded by Melanie Stockdell. Windell Cullers remarked, if this affects the neighbors, he supposed some of them would be present to comment and that he thought this puts a lot of traffic next to the two properties on either side. Jeremy Hess said he had talked with the neighbor to the north who has no problem with this request and said he couldn't get in touch with the neighbor to the south. Melanie Stockdell asked Hess if he had considered building a larger drive in the location of the steps where the.ekisting house is. Hess said this would cause more congestion as there would only be one way in and one way out and said he thought it would be more of a hazard getting onto Duncan Street and also did not think they could save as many trees. The motion passed, 6-0, with Crook, Williams and Hunnicutt absent.. The eighth item on the agenda was a conditional use request submitted by Abundant Life Tabernacle for a church, bible school and parochial school north of Sycamore Street, East of Highway 71 Bypass and west of Porter Road, zoned A-1, Agricultural District. Dr. James Maddox was present to represent Abundant Life Tabernacle. CONDITIONAL USE CHURCH, BIBLE SCHOOL $ PAROCHIAL SCHOOL 1855 N. PORTER ROAD ABUNDANT LIFE TABERNACLE Dr. Maddox said he felt this was a good location for a church, that since it is proposed for medium density in the area, he feels the church would be a buffer between apartments and houses He said the church is over two years old with almost 200 members and about 12 enrolled in the parochial school, with grade levels from 1st through 4th grade. He said he anticipated eventually adding Kindergarten, and a grade each year. Ernest Jacks asked if adjacent property owners were notified. Bobbie Jones said the University Farm owns property across the street and the former owners through which the purchase is being negotiated are the owners on either side. 113 • • • Planning Commission Minutes April 25, 1983 Page Six Windell Cullers asked if Mrs. Porter owned all the property up to the point, except for the little house. Mrs. York, daughter of Mrs. Porter, said her mother's land goes all the way up to the point, with the exception of one lot sold to Lofton some time ago. Bobbie Jones said the following property owners had been notified: Rosemary York, Thomas Sanders, Robert Porter, Ben Porter, and possibly the U of A Farm. (Barbara Crook arrived at this point, 5:25 P.M.) Jones also said the church does intend to expand in the future and referred the commissioners to the map showing the purchase of two tracts in June, 1983, a proposed purchase for 1984-85 and a possible future purchase, 1986-89. Hailey asked what kind of future enrollment was anticipated for grades K-12, and Dr. Maddox said possibley as high as 50-100 eventually. Hailey said they need to take into consideration concerns such as traffic and Dr. Maddox said most children would be brought by car. The Chairman asked for comments from the audience. Richard Hipp, attorney representing Mrs. York and Mrs. Porter, said they had discussed the potential uses of the property and thought apartments seem to be the only other logical use, and he thought this might cause more traffic than the school might have. Newton Hailey said there have been requests for R-2 zoning in that area which were denied; that now the interchange has changed the complexity of that area and his opinion is this is a less intensive use than commercial or R-2. Windell Cullers moved approval of the Conditional Use. The motion was seconded by Ernest Jacks. Melanie Stockdell noted this will now be processed as a Large Scale Development and asked why it came before Planning Commission now instead of after the Large Scale Development process. Bobbie Jones said a Large Scale Development can be approved by the Subdivision Committee, unless a request for waivers makes it necessary to go before the Planning Commission. Gitelman pointed out this is in essence}- ke a rezoning, but in this case is a proper conditional use. The motion passed, 7-0, with Hunnicutt and Williams absent. The ninth item on the agenda VARIANCE FOR LOT SIZE REQUIREMENT was a request for a variance FOR A LOT SPLIT from the lot size requirement ABUNDANT LIFE TABERNACLE applicable to a lot split JAMES W. MADDOX submitted by Dr. James W. Maddox for property north of Sycamore Street, east of Highway 71 Bypass and west of Porteroad, zoned A-1, Agricultural District. Dr. Maddox was present. The Chairman said this is basically a waiver of the area requirement. (For a lot split adjacent to a controlled access highway, Planning Commission approval is required - the waiver is for Tract 5, 0.93 acres and Tract 6, 4.98 acres - there could be a potential future purchase of Tract 3, 2.57 acres or Tract 1, 5.677 acres.) I9 • • • Planning Commission Minutes April 25, 1983 Page Seven Ernest Jacks said since this has nothing to do with development of street improvements, which is the purpose of that ordinance, he moves to approve the request for variance. The motion was seconded by Julie Nash and passed, 7-0, with Hunnicutt and Williams absent. Tenth on the agenda was a request submitted by Kathryn C. Coatney to construct a car wash on property south of Highway 16 Bypass and west of Highway 71 B South, zoned C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial and I-1, Heavy Commercial and Light Industrial Districts. Ms. Coatney was present. WAIVER OF REQUIREMENT STRUCTURES HAVE ACCESS TO PUBLIC STREET 1639 S. SCHOOL KATHRYN COATNEY The Chairman said the Commission is requested to waive requirement that this lot have frontage on a public street as authorized in Article 8, Sec. 6, Zoning Ordinance. He said this is exempted from the large scale development process if (1) new construction has less than 10,000 square feet of floor area; (2) no more than 25 new parking spaces required; and (3) no new driveway access proposed. Ms. Coatney said she proposes to build a more modern car wash and close the one at South School and 15th Street. She said the property has a private street running north and south. Jacks asked about access and Ms. Coatney said the private street comes off both South School and 15th Street. Hailey asked how large of a paved area they would need and Ms. Coatney said 7,650 square feet (85' x 114'). He asked if the paving would merge with the street paving, and Ms. Coatney said there would be no curb and gutter. Bobbie Jones told Hailey that if the property had frontage on a public street, it would not have needed to go before the Planning Commission. Cullers moved to approve, seconded by Ernest Jacks and passed, 7-0, with Hunnicutt and Williams absent. The eleventh item of business was a request from Street Superintendent Clayton Powell that the Planning Commission determine whether or not phases of construction shall be permitted for Northbriar Subdivision (formerly Rolling Meadows, Phase located north of Rolling Hills Drive between Sheryl Avenue and Loxley and that they establish a time limit on completion of the subdivision reviewing the final plat. Ernest Jacks questioned why the Planning Commission is being asked to make this determination. Bobbie Jones said she thinks Powell is recommending, when the final plat is brought in, that a contract for no more than 24 months for total completion, be accepted and that the developer be allowed within that 24 -month period to have no more than two phases. SUBDIVIDER'S CONTRACT NORTHBRIAR SUBDIVISION (FORMERLY ROLLING MEADOWS, PHASE III) III) Avenue, upon 50 Planning Commission Minutes April 25, 1983 Page Eight Newton Hailey suggested the 24 months apparently came about as an arbitrary decision from a past Mayor on another project in the north part of town and he thinks, once a preliminary plat is approved by the Planning Commission, the developer has a year to get started and, if they are under construction, they can go for longer than that. He said he is not sure there is a "magic" time of 24 months and if there is, the City Board of Directors should address the issue. Jones said there is nothing in the Code which dictates the length of time or the number of phases that can be used, so that it is really a policy question. She said Powell does not agree with the developer and is asking the Planning Commission to resolve the difference and shealso thinks it should be resolved by the City Board or the City Manager. Melanie Stockdell asked if there was a precedent for the Planning Commission to resolve these questions and Jones said she knew of no case in the past, though she did know of a case where a Mayor once refused to sign a contract for five years. Windell Cullers moved to forward this agenda item to the Board of Directors with no action. Hailey suggested amending this to say Bobbie Jones would write a memo outlining the background. Cullers agreed to the amended motion, which was seconded by Stockdell. Jacks said he did not understand the need for setting a time limit and limiting phases. Hailey said he agreed but thinks Powell disagrees because he thinks there is a drainage problem. Jacks said he is happy with the ordinance as it was drawn up and would hate to see the City Board place arbitrary figures. Barbara Crook said she fears the Board will have the same reaction as the Planning Commission and wonders why the Commission is sending the issue to them. Jacks recommended the Chairman call the Mayor and tell him the feelings of the Planning Commission. After further discussion, Jacks suggested the motion could be amended to say the Commission agrees with the ordinance as it stands. Cullers restated his motion to say he moves the Planning Commission agrees with the ordinance as it stands and to pass it on to the City Manager for action as he sees necessary. The motion was seconded by Melanie Stockdell and passed unanimously, with Williams Hunnicutt absent. MOTION and Item 12 was a committee COMMITTEE REPORT report from Barbara Crook HOUSING TYPES FOR ELDERLY OR on alternate housing types DEPENDENT RELATIVES for elderly or dependent relatives. The Chairman said this study evolved out of a request which came before the Planning Commission for a mobile home in a residential district; Hailey said that there had been legislation in committee before the State House of Representatives which would have allowed this, and which was never acted upon. 51 Planning Commission Minutes April 25, 1983 Page Nine Barbara Crook reported first on what is possible under the zoning ordinance. She read that "a second dwelling may be placed on a lot with an existing dwelling if conditions of Article 8, Sections 3 and 4 are met", which say that the second dwelling shall have the same bulk and area requirements as the first dwelling (double the bulk area, etc.). A prefabricated dwelling qualifies as a dwelling under this ordinance if it meets the building codes and is placed on a masonry foundation and is connected to city services. A mobile home differs from a prefabricated building in that a mobile home is not required to meet the building codes; a mobile home which meets the requirements of the building code and is placed on a masonry foundation and connected to city services appears to become a prefabricated dwelling. A mobile home which does not meet the building code can only be placed in an area zoned A-1, on a lot of not less than three acres. Crook stated, as to the Terry family who made the request for the mobile home for their elderly mother, they can place a mobile home which meets the Standard Building Code on their 3/4 acre lot, if it is on a permanent foundation and connected to city services. She said the Terry's could contact the Director of the Arkansas Manufactured Housing Association, who stated there are a limited number; of mobile homes which meet the Standard Building Code requirement. The Terry's asked how they could get some more information on this and Barbara Crook suggested they contact Mr. Kidd with the AMHA in Little Rock, but also said updated information is received by the City Inspection Office, but is not kept in such a way that it is possible to use it. Bobbie Jones said if a mobile home does meet the Building Code, it would be certified by the manufacturer and Melanie Stockdell said the City would then require the manufacturer's certification that it does meet the Standard Building Code. Julie Nash asked if there was a limit to the size of land upon which one of these mobile homes could be placed. Crook said, according to Article 8, Section 3 of the ordinance, "no accessory buildings shall be erected in any required yard. . . within ten feet of any other building" and Section 4 says "erection of more than one principal structure. . . may be erected on a single lot provided that yard and other requirements of this ordinance shall be met for each structure as though it were on an individual lot." Barbara Crook also passed out some information on "accessory residential structures" and said the committee has some recommendations which would make it possible to have manufactured housing with less bulk and area, on a temporary basis, with protection for the City in case the applicants did not remove the structure after the temporary time period. She said the committee is not recommending a change to the requirements for meeting the Standard Building Code. It was decided that the Planning Commission would read the information and address it at the next meeting. • • • Planning Commission Minutes April 25, 1983 Page Ten Morton Gitelman asked for an extension of time on his report on Chapter 18, Section 18-13, Code of Ordinances, Controlled Access Highway and Service to meet with the City Attorney. COMMITTEE REPORT CONTROLLED ACCESS HIGHWAY AND SERVICE ROAD REQUIREMENTS Road Requirements, as he was unable Windell Cullers asked Bobbie Jones about some discussion at the last Board of Directors meeting with Mr. Trumbo on this subject in the Stearns Road area. Bobbie Jones said she asked the City Attorney what portion of Section 18-13 the City could enforce and he said the portion that designates it as controlled access and swswe can still enforce control of access, but we could not, unless he wins an appeal, require the service road. She said in this particular case, there was a gravel driveway that had been access to a house and when the property was subdivided and developed, a paved street (to standards) was connected with Stearns Road at the south end and extended to a dead end. The house was then on the east side of the new service road, and under the terms of Sec. 18-13, it calls for the subdivider to sign an agreement to close any existing driveway access they had and it was this signed agreement Mr. Trumbo was asking the Board to release him from, and they declined. The Chairman said the City Manager's OTHER BUSINESS Office has proposals in from engineers for the Highway 16 West study and would like one Planning Commissioner to review.these.: Chairman Hailey chose Don Hunnicutt, as Chairman of Subdivision Committee, to do this review and told other members of that Committee they were welcome to view these proposals in the City Manager's Office. With no other business, the meeting adjourned at 6:05 P.M. 53