Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1983-12-12 Minutes• • a 1 1 1 s MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING A meeting of the Planning Commission was held at 5:00 P.M. on Monday, December 12, 1983 in Room 107 of the Continuing Education Center, Fayetteville, Arkansas Members Present: Members Absent: Others Present: Morton Gitelman, Don Hunnicutt, Newton Hailey, Jr., Melanie Stockdell, and Ernest Jacks. Windell Cullers, Barbara Crook, David Williams $ Julie Nash. B. W. Graue, LaVerneCooper, Tom McMillan and Lyndon Holmes, and Philip J. Warford. Chairman Newton Hailey called the meeting to order. The first item of business on the Agenda MINUTES was the approval of the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of November 28, 1983. There were three corrections to read as follows; on Page One, Number 2 of Motion made by Barbara Crook should read, "Waiver of the 10% landscaping requirement between street and parking for the east/west access road. Number 5 should add;,. Two north/south easements as requested by the utility companies, running perpendicular along the access road and the utility easements along 71 on the west side of the airport. On page four, the sentence should read "Crook stated that her vote against the Houston rezoning of the interior portions across the road in the past dealt mostly with the fact that it was an interior area difficult to access and had a drainage problem. The minutes were otherwise approved as mailed. The second item of business was the PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE Proposed Amendments to the Planning PLANNING COMMISSION BYLAWS Commission Bylaws. Chairman Hailey advised these had been on and off of the agenda for six months to a year. He advised the Planning Commission had received proposed copies from the committee's report two meetings ago with a short note from Chairman Hailey. He stated the intent of the changes would take five positive votes to carry.items ascfollows: a. Zoning changes; b. Amendments or changes to the Master Plan; c. All conditional uses. Part two of this amendment states that a simple majority of those present (assuming a quorum, of course), would be needed to grant rehearings and adoption of any other motion not covered under No. 1. Chairman Hailey asked if there were any questions and advised it would take affirmative votes of all five present to amend the Bylaws. Morton Gitelman moved for approval of the Amendments MOTION to the Bylaws. Motion seconded by Ernest Jacks. Motion passed 5-0. Chairman Hailey requested the Planning Office prepare an updated set of Bylaws and distribute copies. The third item on the Agenda was a public hearing on Rezoning Petition R83-22, B. W. Graue, to rezone property located at 4041 Wedington Drive, from A-1, Agricultural District, to R-0, Residential -Office District. REZONING PETITION R83-22 B. W. GRAUE 4041 Wedington Drive • PLANNING COMMISSION PAGE TWO DECEMBER 12, 1983 Larry Wood, Planning Consultant made the following recommendations: Mr. Wood stated he did not recommend the change to R-0 for the following: 1) R -p District is in conflict with the medium density residential pattern established in the amendment to the general plan. 2) The City of Fayetteville is currently studying ways of providing sewerage facilities to the area, and any zoning districts that allow intense use of the property should be delayed at this point, and; 3) With the number of non -conforming uses that there are in that general area, any deviation from the Plan at this point could establish a precedent for strip development along Highway 16 West. Chairman Hailey requested knowledge of the conflict with the medium density and wanted to know if thi3 was the plan which was adopted at the public hearing held at Ozark Electric that the Engineers had to work from. Wood advised that this was Alternate 1. The public hearing was opened. B. W. Graue, Property Owner, stated he wanted this property, which he thought was adjoining with R-0, to conform with what has already been approved. Mr. Graue stated that when they were in the county, they had a Real Estate Office and also an Antique Shop there at one time. He stated that the garage was built for an office and is still active as such. Chairman Hailey asked if the adjacent property is currently zoned R-0. Mr. Graue stated he thought it was zoned R-0 all the way to Ruple Road. Wood clarified that it was recommended in the plan for R-0, but has not yet been rezoned from A-1. Jacks questioned the fact that this property was recommended for R-0 in the General Land Use Plan. Wood stated R-0 was recommended on either side of Ruple Road. Graue reiterated that he would just like to conform with what was going to be there in the future, plus get better use of the property. Jacks asked about the concern which Mr. Wood had in regard to strip developing.alpng.Highway 16. Wood stated that he was also concerned with, the sewer study going on as we would be jumping S00 feet west of Ruple Road and establishing an R-0 district. Jacks also questioned if the Graue property was contiguous with the recommended R-0 District. Wood advised it was. There was no one present to speak in opposition to the rezoning and therefore, the public hearing was closed and matter was returned to the Planning Commission. Ernest Jacks moved to recommend approval of the MOTION rezoning, but did state that the stripping of Highway 16 is of major concern and he doesn't wish to project the thought that the Planning Commission wishes this area to grow to the west, but this is so near what the Land Use Plan says, that Jacks recommends approval. Motion seconded by Don Hunnicutt Jacks also wished to clarify that the reason for his recommendation was that this had already been an office. Motion denied 2-3 with Don Hunnicutt and Ernest Jacks voting in the minority. The fourth item on the agenda was the Rezoning Petition R83-23, LaVerne Cooper REZONING PETITION R83-23 1693 Morningside Drive LaVerne Cooper 117 • • • PLANNING COMMISSION PAGE THREE DECEMBER 12, 1983 to rezone property located at 1693 Morningside Drive from R-2, Medium Density Residential to A-1, Agricultural District. Larry Wood, Planning Consultant gave his recommendations in this matter as follows: A-1 District is not recommended for the following reasons: 1) The General Plan recommends industrial as the future land use; and 2) With industrial as the future land use conflicting uses such as residential should be discouraged from developing in that area. Hailey clarified stating that the petitioner wants to build a house and would like to put a mobile home there during the construction phase which is impossible in the R-2 Zone. The public hearing was opened. Mrs. Cooper stated that her brother would probably drop the idea of putting a mobile home there since there is objection to it, but does still plan to build the home. She stated her mother lives there and needed someone there close to her as this is an isolated area. Mrs. Cooper stated that until she started checking into the possibility of putting a mobile home on this property, the petitioners thought it was zoned A-1. She stated the zoning was changed without the owner'sknowledge. She stated that regardless of whether they put the mobile home there or not, they would like the property changed to A-1. Cooper stated there was no plan to sell this property. .There was no one present to speak against the rezoning, however, Bobbie Jones advised there was a phone call from Juanita Lovelace, daughter of Otis Parker, deceased, who objected to the rezoning based on the fact that she felt their property value would be decreased. This was a long distance phone call from St. Louis. Cooper stated this property was rezoned without the knowledge of the owners. Melanie Stockdell made a motion to recommend MOTION rezoning of the property from R-2 to A-1. Motion seconded by Morton Gitelman. Jacks asked if this was A-1, then could a mobile home park be placed there. Bobbie Jones advised this would allow only a single mobile home. A trailer park would not be allowed. Jones stated that the only districts which allow a mobile home park are R-2 and R-3, and that is a conditional use requiring Planning Commission approval in those zones. Gitelman stated it was his feeling that there was less liklihood of intense residential development in an A-1 and it is more consistent with the plan than is R-2. Motion passed 5-0. The fifth item on the agenda was the Large LARGE SCALE DEVELOPMENT Scale Development plan for Ozark Forest OZARK FOREST PRODUCTS Products, located at 833 Beechwood Avenue. 833 Beechwood Ave. Property is zoned I-1, Heavy Commercial and Light Industrial. Chairman Hailey advised this was heard by the Subdivision Committee on 12/9/83 and requested recommendation from Don Hunnicutt. Hunnicutt moved that the Planning Commission approve the Large Scale Development as recommended by the Subdivision Committee as follows:.1) Bill of Assurance being provided for the sidewalks along Highway 62 to be built on the call of the City; 2) Bill of Assurance for improvements on Beechwood, with Ozark Forest Products assuming their proportionate share of the cost of the improvement along 16s PLANNING COMMISSION PAGE FOUR DECEMBER 12, 1983 that street, also to be constructed upon the call of the City; and 3) that vegetation be provided in lieu of screening along Highway 62 returning south- ward to the north right-of-way for the SPUR and again along Beechwood south of the existing development at Ozark Forest Products. The type of vegetation was to be determined by the Planning Commission; 4) This recommendation was to be subject to other Plat Review Comments. Hunnicutt wished to state also that the Subdivision Committee would recommend Seedling Pines in lieu of screening. Jacks asked about the spacing of planting and requested that the motion be amended to read that the vegetation should be placed at 6' centers. Motion seconded by Ernest Jacks as.. amended. Motion passed 5-0. The sixth item on the agenda was the ,._LOT,SPLIT request for a waiver of the minimum lot size PHILLIP J. F, JOYCE S. WARFORD applicable to lot split, for Philip J. 5277 East Huntsville & Joyce S. Warford, for property located at 5277 East Huntsville Road. Chairman Hailey stated that in discussion with Bobbie Jones, Jones advised that the Warford Property would meet the minimum area and frontage for this R-1 zoning. Jacks asked about the area east of the front house for the rear lot and expressed concern of the possibility of this being set up for a tandem lot. Warford advised that the reason this was divided in this fashion is because the property has two houses with the best house being in the front. Therefore, the property was divided in a fashion that the property going with the front house would be the best and left the remainder in the horse- shoe shape. Jacks made a motion to approve the lot split as stated. MOTION Motion seconded by Melanie Stockdell. Motion passed 5-0. The "seventh item on the agenda was the request from the City Board of Directors to the Planning Commission to prepare and submit to the Board of Directors, an amendment to the Fayetteville Parks Plan so as to comply with the decision of the Arkansas Supreme..Court in City of Fayetteville v. IBI, Inc. Jones advised that a resolution was passed November 1S, but nothing has been re- ceived from the Parks & Recreation Board as yet. Jacks stated that the matter should be brought to the full Commission, and he did not see why it should be sent to the Update Committee. REQUEST FROM THE CITY BOARD OF DIRECTORS TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION --AMENDMENT TO THE PARKS PLAN The eighth item on the agenda was discussion 1984 MEETING DATES. of the 1984 meeting dates which conflict with .. holidays. Chairman Hailey moved that the May MOTION and November regularly scheduled meetings, i.e. meeting of May 28, 1984 be moved to Tuesday, May 29, 1984 and that the November 12th meeting be moved to Tuesday, November 13, 1984 stating this would not conflict with any other meetings. Chairman Hailey also recommended that the meeting of Christmas Eve, 1984 be cancelled. Motion was seconded by Ernest Jacks. Motion passed 5-0. 16� • • PLANNING COMMISSION PAGE FIVE DECEMBER 12, 1983 The final item of business was a Waiver of the OTHER BUSINESS Driveway Safety Zone at 1502 E. Stewart Street which was accepted as a late item due to the fact that Mr. Whitfield would hot be able to get a building permit for an extended period of time if the matter were not heard Chairman Hailey advised that Clayton Powell had inspected the area and the sketch which has been submitted, and it is Powell's opinion that this is the most feasible way the driveway can be done and is in full favor of this waiver. Jacks questioned exactly where the driveway was, i.e., driveway being brought out in the curve? Jones advised this is 65' from the pavement, and that Clayton Powell recommended approval of this driveway due to the fact that it was the most feasible location. Morton Gitelman made a motion to approve MOTION the waiver of the driveway safety zone from street intersection. Motion was seconded by Melanie Stockdell. Motion passed 5-0. Chairman Hailey wished to express a formal appreciation to Don Hunnicutt, Julie Nash and Windell Cullers for their service on the Commission, with encouragement for them to re -submit to serve on the Planning Commission. Hunnicutt advised he would like to take a leave, but may be interested in serving again in a year or two. Meeting adjourned at 5:43 p.m. 170