Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1984-11-26 Minutes• • • • MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE FAYETTEVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION A meeting of the Fayetteville Planning Commission was held Monday, November 26, 1984 at 5:10 P.M. in the Board of Director's Room of the City Administration Building, 113 West Mountain Street, Fayetteville, Arkansas. MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: OTHERS PRESENT: Newton Hailey, Melanie Stockdell, Ernie Jacks, Fred Hanna, Sue Madison, Stan Green, Joe Tarvin, Barbara Crook and Dr. David Williams None Planning Consultant Larry Wood, Pastor Red Dixon, Woody Bassett, Carol Hart, Dr. Tom Smith, Jack Farmer, Danny Wright, Ervan Wimberly, Donna Caudle, Bobbie Jones, Paula Brandeis, members of the press and others The regularly scheduled meeting of the Fayetteville Planning Commission was called to order by Chairman Hailey. MINUTES The first item on the agenda was the consideration of the minutes of the November 13th meeting. Sue Madison made the following corrections: 1. Page 10, last paragraph; "...accessory structures." 2. The last two votes should read 7-0-0, reflecting Madison having left the meeting at that time. With these corrections, the minutes stood approved. CHRISTIAN LIFE CENTER DETERMINATION OF PERCENTAGE REQUIRED FOR STREET IMPROVEMENTS The second item on the agenda was a request for a determination of the percentage of the contribution to be made by Christian Life Center for the future improvements of Millsap Road that will be reflected in the Bill of Assurance. The Bill of Assurance, as drafted, states that the portion of Millsap Rd. from Hemlock to this property's drive will be maintained with a double chip and oil seal surface until it is improved to full City 952 • • • Planning Commission November 26, 1984 Page 2 standards, which applies to tract "A" of this development. It also states that when further development takes place on any of the property described in Exhibit "B", (which describes all tracts, "A", "B" and "C") that the owner shall pay a certain percentage of the cost of bringing Millsap Rd. up to full City standards; that percentage to be determined by the Planning Commission. Commissioner Green stated that the percentage of the cost of improvements to be paid by this developer had not been discussed at the meeting of the Subdivision Committee. He said he thought the intent of the Committee was that this developer eventually pay 100% of the cost of street improvements as Millsap is not platted any further than their property to be extended any time in the future. Pastor Dixon agreed that this had been discussed and as stated by Green. Jacks said this developer had agreed to maintain Millsap from Hemlock to their driveway, but when further development takes place the percentage of acreage fronting on Millsap should be taken into account when requiring contribution for street improvements. He said he felt that a figure of 24% should be inserted in the Bill of Assurance as the figure that the church will contribute, as Tract "A" encompasses that proportion of land (of the total of approximately 14 acres) on Millsap Road. Jones advised that City Attorney had drafted the Bill of Assurance with its present wording and Jacks suggested that McCord review this wording because he felt a Bill of Assurance should speak to what happens when a property develops. Green indicated that any developer wishing to improve any of the remaining undeveloped portions of the property in question, would be required to come before the Commission because the area is over an acre. Crook clarified that the proposed church is not the only property owner from Hemlock eastward and that the distance owned by the church in that stretch appeared to be about 40%. Jacks said he felt a Bill of Assurance was necessary at this time specifically for Tract "A" as it was presently being developed. Stockdell expressed her concern that each time off-site improvements are addressed, there is much dispute between Commissioners. MOTION Jacks moved that the Bill of Assurance be re -worded by the City Attorney to reflect a percentage to be paid towards off-site improvements. He said that the City develops a system for dealing with specific issues via ordinances and then these ordinances are circumvented in some fashion. He stated that the City does not have the funds for off-site improvements on properties that are sub -standard. 033 • • • Planning Commission November 26, 1984 Page 3 Madison questioned the standard that shall be maintained in Part I of the Bill of Assurance and Jacks pointed out that double chip and seal was a measure of maintenance. Crook explained to Dixon that Jack's suggestion would involve taking the total amount of the acreage to be served by the road to be improved and take a percentage of the contribution that subject property makes to the total acreage. Jacks said he assumed that Millsap Road would eventually be improved to it's end, as yet undefined, and perhaps to be decided by whomever will own Tract "C". Madison agreed that Millsap's end is unknown at this time, and added that an easement has been dedicated to the eastern boundary line of this developer's property. Jacks said he would like to talk to the City Attorney with regards to the percentage that should be required of this developer for the improvements to Millsap Rd. He said if Tract "C" were sold and Tract "A" remained in this developer's ownership, the percentage required should be 24%. Chairman Hailey pointed out that any developer involved with that property east of the proposed church would need to participate in street improvements at the time that land is developed. Jones repeated the motion for approval that was made at the Planning Commission meeting Oct. 22, 1984 on Page 5 which stated that the church would extend the existing double chip and oil seal through their first driveway and maintain the total of double chip and oil seal on Millsap until it is brought up to City standards and that when any future development took place on their property (Tracts "A", "B" and "C") they would then bring Millsap up to standards. She said McCord has said when a Bill of Assurance is specified, a dollar amount is necessary. Crook said she thought McCord needs to take into consideration the fact that there are other property owners who will benefit from the street improvements between Hemlock and this property. Jacks said he interpreted this Bill of Assurance as a temporary measure to serve until Tracts "B" and "C" are sold and Green said the developer has not indicated that any of this property will be sold but that he needs to have the street improvements issue worked out presently because of lack of funds to establish those improvements at this time. The question was called and the motion to request the City Attorney to reword the Bill of Assurance passed 5-3-0; Green, Hanna and Hailey voting "nay". 25y Planning Commission November 26, 1984 Page 4 REZONING PETITION 84-21 PORTER ROAD & SYCAMORE ST. LIFE STYLES INC. • The third item on the agenda was a Public Hearing on rezoning petition 84-21 for property located on Porter Road and the future Sycamore Street by Life Styles, Inc. Property is zoned R-1, requested is R-2. Consultant Wood recommended the change to R-2 for the following reasons: 1. The property is located at the intersection of two collector streets and between a collector street and Highway 71 Bypass; 2. The General Plan recommends medium density residential for the adjoining property to the north; and, 3. The public facilities and services are available to serve the proposed development. Madison asked if the recommendation had been the same in 1981 when this petition was presented (and denied). Wood said there have been several requests for R-2 District in subject area in the last 6 to 7 years. He said the Planning Commission requested a study to determine whether or not to change the general plan in this area and chose not to adopt the study leaving the area low density residential district. Wood said that the recently added Porter Road interchange and improvements to Highway 71 have opened this area to a different land use than that originally contemplated. Woody Bassett, President of the Board of Life Styles, spoke for this appeal. He stated that Life Styles works with developmentally disabled adults in the Fayetteville area, teaching them how to become independent, providing them with an educational program and eventually moving them out into the general community. Bassett said that the program in Fayetteville is one of the most successful in the country, being in the top 5%. He pointed out that Life Styles does service to both its clients by helping them to live independently and to the tax payers by keeping said clients out of institutions. Bassett said Life Styles has recently received a grant from HUD which will allow them to build a new facility. He added that representatives from Life Styles have been talking with property owners in the area to tell them about the program and what is intended by the rezoning. Carol Hart, Director of Life Styles, said she placed a great deal of emphasis on familiarizing the neighbors with Life Styles proposed project. She requested a letter received from Phil Misenheimer, Pastor of the Calvary Baptist Church, 1410 Porter Road, be read into the record (see attached) which gives church support and states that the Life Styles plans as presented, will be an asset to the community. 255 • • • Planning Commission November 26, 1984 Page 5 Jack Farmer, HUD representative, said that HUD feels the Life Styles program was of such a high quality that they were one of 14 out of 50 applicants in Arkansas to receive a HUD grant. He added that HUD feels the proposed Life Style site is one of the best for their needs. Bassett then read a letter received from Dr. Tom Smith which he requested be read into the record (see attached) which states that the Life Styles program is the best in Arkansas. Green asked Farmer what conditions made subject property the most suitable and Farmer replied that the major reason is that most R-2 and R-3 zoned properties are unafordable while this parcel was not. A citizen stated that she has previously lived near the Life Style complex. She said the residents of Life Style have been wonderful neighbors and that it has been a positive learning experience for her family. Ms. Hart advised that HUD has a list of requirements for location as does Life Styles itself which include the proximity of the shelter to shopping districts and work areas. Hailey said that a consideration for the Planning Commission is whether or not the land is suitable for the change in usage. Farmer responded that there is an apartment complex across the street from the proposed location and he added that he felt the proposed site was more suited to the Life Styles plan than to single-family or any other construction. Madison inquired if a recent drainage study encompassed the proposed site and Jones replied that it may have and that certain drainage structures along Porter Road have been scheduled into the 1985 budget. Madison said she did not understand the reason for requesting that four acres be rezoned for only 12 units. She asked if additional structures will be added in the future. Farmer replied that the seller of the property would not divide the parcel and that he didn't expect very much growth, although there could be some. Jacks asked how transportation is provided and Hart replied that the Life Style Center provides this service via a van and individual bicycles. MOTION Crook, based on the fact that there were no objections from neighbors, moved that this petition be approved. Hanna seconded and upon roll call, the motion to recommend this rezoning passed 9-0-0. 256 • • • 3 Planning Commission November 26, 1984 Page 6 REZONING PETITION 84-22 HWY. 16 WEST AND RUPPIE RD. HOYET GREENWOOD The fourth item on the agenda was a Public Hearing on rezoning petition 84-22 by Hoyet Greenwood for property located at Highway 16 West and Rupple Rd. Zoned A-1, requested is C-2. Consultant Wood's recommendation is as follows: As indicated in the alternatives presented in the Highway 16 West Study, either the currently adopted land use pattern or a pattern indicating commercial at this intersection would be contained within the adopted goals and policies of the General Plan. If the Planning Commission decides to recommend a change in the General Plan, I would suggest C-1 District should be considered and some transition and buffering changes would need to be made. Jacks asked if approving this appeal would tend to strip Highway 16 West and Wood said that, although he did not think it would, it may add some pressure even the plan indicates one mile spacing for commercial districts. He added that this intersection will become a major one in the future and he advised that a problem to be faced may be requests for Conditional Uses in commercial activities. Danny Wright, Attorney representing Greenwood, stated that Greenwood purchased this property prior to the consideration of the long range plan for this area. He said there is existing commercial property directly across the street to the east which is currently non -conforming Wright said he did not think rezoning a small tract such as this 3 acre parcel would adversely affect surrounding property owners. He said he has not heard any adverse complaints from said neighbors. Wright said Greenwood is planning to construct a convenience store on the site with the potential of gas pumps and a car wash. Jacks asked if the property was owned by Greenwood before the annexation and Wright replied that he wasn't sure but there was a contract in existence at the time. Madison inquired why C-2 was being requested when a convenience store was acceptable in a C-1 district. Wright replied that C-2 allowed the potential for expansion without the restrictions of C-1. Madison asked if the convenience store down the road is open and Wright replied that he thought it was. Bryce Davis, realtor, asked if the property had access to public sewer and Crook replied that the sewer was 1700 feet away and it would be difficult to get it to this property. P57 • • • Planning Commission November 26, 1984 Page 7 Ervan Wimberly, Northwest Engineers, stated that he has already drawn up plans to make the sewer connections and he added that, although properties on the south side of Hwy. 16 would be difficult to connect because of the ditch being lower than the sewer, there will be no problem on this property located on the north side of 16. Crook advised that Alternate #1 for land use had been chosen because at the time there was considerable property to the west of the Bypass zoned C-2 and not being developed. She said that in terms of planning principles the Commission had thought that there wasn't any need for additional C-2 district in this area. Green asked Wood why he recommends C-1 instead of C-2 if any change is to be made in the Land Use Plan instead of C-2. Wood replied that he felt the size of the potential commercial at this corner (approximately 300 feet including all the corners) indicates that it is principally a neighborhood service -type commercial activity and should probably be restricted to such. Green asked if Highway 16 would qualify as a thoroughfare and Wood replied that it does. NOTION Stockdell made a motion that the Commission recommend this tract be rezoned C-1 in line with the recommendation by Consultant Wood. Jacks seconded. Crook asked to make a friendly amendment that a provision be made that sewer be accessible and Stockdell agreed. Wright said that, although C-2 would be preferable some time in the future, C-1 district was acceptable at this time. The motion to recommend a change to C-1 passed 9-0-0. Crook requested that Wood submit a recommendation for the General Plan to reflect R-0 across the road and added that if a change is in order, a Public Hearing must be held. This request was agreed upon unanimously. PUBLIC HEARING FULBRIGHT EXPRESSWAY/HWY. 62 W. GENERAL LAND USE PLAN Ernie Jacks, Chairman of the Committee for this study, reported that the Committee recommends proposing the plan which expands the R-2 area along the highway and maintains low density along Farmington Road; the plan also recommends maintaining R-1 on the slopes with R-2 in the flat areas. He said the plan does not call for any change in Commercial areas. 25? • • Planning Commission November 26, 1984 Page 8 A citizen in the audience, and property owner in subject area, inquired as to whether a change such as the one proposed, would have any effect on his property taxes. Hailey explained that no property should have its tax payment changed unless there is a change in the zoning of that particular parcel. He referred the property owner to the County Tax Assessor. Hailey also advised that the proposed change in the Land Use Plan would be used only as a guide for future rezoning issues. Hailey commented that, because of the manner in which the Bypass area was developing, he didn't think it was practical to place R-1 district along it's frontage. Stockdell said she would like to see the pattern suggested on the north side of Highway 62 mirrored on the south side of the highway. Madison expressed surprised that no Industrial districts were planned along the Bypass and Wood explained that the area becomes steep too quickly to allow enough space for Industrial development. MOTION Stockdell moved to recommend the General Land Use Plan be changed to reflect the proposal as submitted by Jacks with the addition that the area along the Bypass south of Highway 62 be similar to that area on the north side of Highway 62. Tarvin seconded and upon roll call, the motion to recommend this change to the General Land Use Plan passed 9-0-0. Madison said she would like to see more streets planned in this area and Jacks replied that the addition of streets would probably be addressed as the land is developed and could not be addressed by the Land Use Committee. REPORT FROM THE UPDATE COMMITTEE The sixth item on the agenda was a report from the Update Committee. Hailey advised that this discussion was to have been a Public Hearing but through a miscommunication, the Public Hearing will now be held on December 10th. Jacks said at a previous discussion regarding T.V. dish antennas, he had commented that there was not much difference between those and air conditioner compressor units. He said that there are apparently some litigations taking place over this issue in other areas. • Hanna asked if air conditioner compressors can be placed in setbacks and Jones explained that the setbacks apply to anything over 30 inches. VS9 • 1 • • Planning Commission November 26, 1984 Page 9 Williams, Chairman of the Update Committee, expressed gratitude to everyone for work contributed to the proposal. Green asked Wood if he had the results of where a minimum driveway width should be taken from as well as driveway safety zones on culs-de- sac. Wood replied that he would have that information by the time the Public Hearing takes place. Madison asked if carports or view -obscuring fences are allowed to extend into setbacks and Jones replied that they are unless they are determined to be a hazard to vehicular and/or pedestrian traffic. Jacks inquired if the proposed 1.5 Residential District will be put on the zoning map or if it will be added as it is assigned. Williams replied that this was still under consideration. OTHER BUSINESS Hailey said that City Attorney, McCord, has agreed that the mechanism requiring Donna Caudle to join a street improvement group (Planning Commission Nov. 13, 1984) looked legally questionable. McCord has stated that he prefer the Commission reconsider the issue tonight and decide whether or not Lee Street should be improved, and if so, how much, on a rational nexus basis, should the Commission request Mrs. Caudle to contribute. Hailey said McCord advised that it was not fair to ask someone to sign something obligating them to a yet unknown future liability. MOTION Crook made a motion to table this consideration so that she might have time to think about a decision. Williams seconded followed by discussion. Stockdell asked if there has been a traffic study along Lee Street with which to help make a determination of how much traffic results from the Consumer's Shopping Center. Phyllis Rice, Northwest Arkansas Times, said she felt that if Lee Street were improved, it would constitute a danger as the public would be encouraged to use it even more frequently than at present. Crook said she felt an exit is needed from the shopping center other than that onto Highway 71. Rice suggested that Lee Street might be aligned differently to avoid a hazardous situation. Jacks asked if Caudle's request for a Conditional Use for child care change the status of her property being "single-family" and Jones replied that, in her opinion, it does and that this must be treated differently from an ordinary Home Occupation. She added that McCord P64 • • • Planning Commission November 26, 1984 Page 10 had advised her that the Planning Commission should either fix a dollar amount or a percentage based on total cost of improvements (when accom- plished) on the Bill of Assurance. Jones said that according to McCord, if a percentage were assigned to the Bill of Assurance, and a street improvement group were subsequently formed, the street improvement district would override whatever percentage figure had been assigned because it would be based on fixed evaluation. Crook repeated that she did not want to figure out a reasonable rational nexus on such short notice and wanted time to think about it. Green said he felt he was prepared to make a decision because based on a rational nexus, Caudle's portion would be infinitesimally small. Stockdell asked if a Bill of Assurance is always required in a Conditional Use approval and Jones replied that in a Conditional Use approval, the Commission may impose conditions and safeguard that it feels are appropriate to the use. Tarvin said it thought paving the road was a negative factor without benefit for Caudle as it would increase the traffic exiting from the shopping center. The question was called and the motion to table this item passed 5-4-0, with Tarvin, Green, Hailey and Hanna voting "nay". Green suggested that, if McCord has requested the Commission to determine whether any off-site improvements should be made, the answer could be "none" which may provide the solution to this issue. Crook reported that Director Lancaster has said at a recent Street Committee Meeting that if a business is granted a Conditional Use, part of the cost of operations may include off-site improvements. Madison and Stockdell clarified that the intent of the original motion was that Caudle join a street improvement district but not that she be required to initiate that petition. Jacks advised that he would seek further guidance from McCord regarding this issue. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 6:55 P.M. Q)