Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1985-05-13 Minutes• • • MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE FAYETTEVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION A meeting of the Fayetteville Planning Commission was held on Monday, May 13, 1985 at 5:00 P.M. in the Board of Directors Room of the City Administration Building, 113 West Mountain Street, Fayetteville, Arkansas. MEMBERS PRESENT: Newton Hailey., Melanie Stockdell, Ernie Jacks, Fred Hanna, Sue Madison, Stan Green, Joe Tarvin and Trey Trumbo MEMBERS ABSENT: None OTHERS PRESENT: Planning Consultant Larry Wood, City Manager Don Grimes, residents of the Township Road extension area, Jerry Hiett, E. Huntsville Rd. residents, Ery Wimberly,IMillard Goff, Lamar Pettus, Ivy Conley, 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 and the minutes of the April 22, 1985 meeting were considered. MINUTES There being no additions or corrections, the minutes were approved as distributed. SAM MATHIAS - LSD 3416-3422 N. COLLEGE AT MASONIC This item of unfinished business was discussed at the Subdivision Committee meeting of May 10 and Ernile Jacks, spokesman for that committee moved approval of this large scale development subject to 1. Plat Review comments; 2. satisfactory negotiation between the Street Superin- tendent and this developer regarding off-site improvements to Masonic. Tarvin seconded and the motion to approve passed 8-0-0. DISCUSSION OF EXTENSION OF TOWNSHIP ROAD Chairman Hailey noted that this discussion was to review plans for the construction of Township Road between Old Wire Road and Crossover Road and to determine which other streets will intersect with Township. Hailey advised that this segment of Township was added to the Master Street Plan as an arterial street in, 1970 and was downgraded to collector status in July, 1973 He said that Old Wire Road North (Creekwood 111 • • Planning Commission May 13, 1985 Page 2 Hills) Brookside East, Jerry Sweetser Sub., East Oaks One and Two and Cedarwood were all platted under Township's collector status. Hailey noted that, in June 1979, at the request of the City Board, the Planning Commission made a recommendation to locate the Township extension at its present site along with two "tack -ons"; to add sidewalks on both sides of Township and that Winwood and Yorkwood would not be connected to Township. He said that this recommendation was passed unanimously by the Planning Commission on July 3, 1979 and that he would not entertain discussion on the actual location of Township extension at this time. He introduced Mel Milholland, designer of the construction plans for Township extension. Milholland said that at the time he was given this assignment by the City, subdivisions bordering the extension location had already dedicated an additional 30 ft. of right-of-way with the exception of Winwood Estates which was platted before the extension was added to the Master Plan. He advised that two streets currently used to cross the proposed Township are Azalea Terrace and Primrose lane and the other streets, although they access the r/w of Township, are not used as through streets. Milholland said he has not been informed as to which streets will actually cross Township and he noted that the map being examined tonight is of the existing situation. In answer to Stockdell's inquiry, Milholland advised that there is 69.2 ft. from the face of the Fayetteville Baptist Church to the Township line or 19.2 ft from the existing recorded Township r/w to that church. Randall Garrison, Pastor of the Church stated that it is the wish of the Church that Winwood connect with Township as that has always been their main point of access. Madison asked how many members this church has and Garrison replied that there are about 120 families who are mainly from the neighborhood and he added that the church was built around 1972. In answer to Madison's question, Garrison replied that the only access to the church will be Township Road if Winwood is closed off. Carter Price said that, although he lives on Yorkwood, he is not in favor of opening Winwood. He proposed that the utilities along the proposed extension be installed underground and added that he was in favor of the proposal as it stands. Bill Clodfelter, 1618 Terry, asked if Terry would intersect Township and Milholland said it will unless he is informed differently. Clodfelter said that most people in his neighborhood prefer that Terry not intersect as there are many children living here. Mrs. Noble Hembree, 2399 Winwood, stated that she would like to see the street stay closed because it is winding and curvy and people drive fast on it as it is. She wanted to know why an additional five 190 • • • Planning Commission May 13, 1985 Page 3 feet of r/w was being taken and Hailey replied that it is to meet the requirements of the 60 ft. r/w. Hembree said that would bring Township Road right under her bedroom window. Kim Smith, 1533 Stewart, noted that the only access to Creekwood Hills is Stewart Street and if Terry opens to Township, he said he was concerned for the children who play in the street and rides bikes here. Diane Dynan, 2474 East Oaks, asked the definition of a collector street and the speed limit allowed on same. Planning Consultant Wood explained that the speed limit is set by the City and that the purpose of a collector street is to gather the traffic from the local streets and carry it: to an arterial as well as the reverse of that. Ed Novotny, 2408 Jonquil Court, said that he thought the definition of a collector street was to serve the people in the neigborhoods and if nobody in the neighborhood wanted the street, why build it? Hailey advised that the decision of whether or not to build the extension of Township is out of his hands and was not debatable at this time. Barry Fink, 1606 Terry, noted that an opposing petition signed by 33 residents of Creekwood Hills has been submitted to the Planning Office and Jones added that the names on that petition represented all of the occupied homes in that subdivision (two homes are vacant). Jack Hill, 1516 Terry said that, he too, was concerned about the potential for much traffic if Terry is opened. He said he wants it closed. P.L. Greenwood, 1600 Stewart, expressed his concern regarding the Highway Department's decisions on where street connections will be. Smith wished to advise the Commission that Creekwood Subdivision does not go anywhere and felt there was nothing to be gained by opening it up to Township. He noted that there are at least 17 children on Stewart Street alone. Marsha Kerl, 1541 Stewart, said that it was important not to open Creekwood as it would increase the traffic on Stewart which is very steep. Jones noted that the r/w of Creekwood does not intersect Township. Hailey asked if there were any citizens present to speak in favor of connecting Winwood or Yorkwood. Jim Hill, 1965 Bois D Arc, said that he would like to see Winwood open because his street has been gathering all of the traffic from Winwood Estates and added that he didn't see the purpose of coming within 400 ft. of Township) and then rerouting around three blocks I9► • • • Planning Commission May 13, 1985 Page 4 to get to the same point that could be reached directly. Hill said people use Bois D Arc/Primrose route to get to the Mall. Mary Bassett, 2388 Yorkwood, presented a petition signed by all 11 property owners on Yorkwood stating that they wish their street to remain closed. She added that there are 12 elementary age children on Yorkwood. Arleta Carson, 2390 Winwood, advised that Winwood is very narrow and crooked. She said she thought Township would be a better access for the Baptist Church as the it sounds like the Indianapolis Race Track on Winwood each Sunday as parishioners leave for home. Jill Robbins, 2355 Yorkwood, asked why Township is being built, who is supposed to benefit from it and how far it is supposed to go. City Manager Grimes replied that some arterial and collector streets are necessary even though they are not liked and most people would prefer to live on a dead-end street. He said that Overcrest, a local street, is currently being used as a cross/through street and that when Township is built, it will serve that purpose instead. Grimes added that collector streets are necessary for emergency vehicles. He said that there is a large area of undeveloped land from mid -way along the proposed extension to the north through which he hoped there could be a connection so that fire equipment from the north station on Old Missouri Road could reach these subdivisions as expeditiously as possible. Grimes said that Township will benefit both those who live in the adjacent subdivisions and those citizens who have to travel east/west in the community. He added that Township will extend as far as Highway 265. Tracy Goff, 2409 Robin Court, said that he bought his house last July and was not informed that Township was going through. He asked if the street would take up the entire easement. Stockdell inquired who Goff bought his property from and he replied Tarver Realtor who informed him that the easement was for utilities. Milholland replied that the easement is 60 ft. and the paved street will be 31ft. back to back of curb, although there is thought of expanding it to 4ft. in the future. Green commented that standard street design requires 36ft. of pavement width for an urban collector street and he asked Milholland how he got from 36ft. to 49ft. Milholland replied that the bid proposal stated this figure. Tarvin asked what the r/w requirement is fora 49ft. street and Milholland replied that it is 60ft. 122 • • • Planning Commission May 13, 1985 Page 5 Lois Morris, 2411 East Oaks Drive, asked if through trucks would be allowed on City streets (Township) and Wood replied that it is up to the City Board. Grimes said that, although he couldn't speak for the Board, he didn't think it was their intent to allow through trucks on this street and that Joyce Street was designed for that purpose. Ed Novotny asked how far from the existing telephone poles the street will be and Milholland replied that most of the poles are within two to three poles of the r/w. Gary Lehren, 2203 Jonquil Court said that he, too, was not informed that Township Road would be extended and he asked what procedure to follow to prevent it from going through. He said Grimes' comment regarding emergency and service vehicles was well taken but added that these trucks have not yet had any problems reaching this neighbor- hood. Hailey said that Lehren could ask to have this issue put on the Board of Directors agenda for discussion. Grimes said that a petition might be presented to the Board but that he didn't think there would be much of a chance to change things as this has been on the Master Street Plan years and available for purchasers of property to see. He said that the adjacent subdivisions have developed subsequent to the extension being added to the Street Plan with developers knowing full well that Township would be built here. Grimes said he thought it would easier if the City could pay for and install these improvements up front so that everyone could see them, but that it is not always possible. Jeanie Hill, 1965 Bois D Arc, said that Bois D Arc "t's" at Primrose right in front of her house. She said there is a great amount of traffic there now and she would like to see some other streets open to Township so that the Winwood to Bois D Arc traffic will be defused. Mary Bassett, 2388 Yorkwood, said that no houses should front on a collector street and trucks of 6000 pounds or under are allowed on a collector street. She asked if the exact location of Township will be in the middle of the r/w or to the south or north of the centerline. Hailey said that the City usually tries to center streets along the r/w. Bassett said that her house is on the corner of Township and Yorkwood and that the City is proposing to take an additional 5 ft. of r/w from her lot. She said that her house is presently 20 ft. from her lot line and if 5ft. more are taken, her house would be 15ft. from the r/w and non -conforming for an R-1 District. Bassett suggested taking a larger portion of r/w from the acreage on the north side of Township and pleaded with Commissioners not to take the additional 5 ft. Hailey said he thought that the 5 ft. would not be taken if additional r/w is available on the other side of the proposed extension route. He appologized saying he knew that an appology does no good. 123 • • Planning Commission May 13, 1985 Page 6 Hailey said he thought the people who are working these things out will do their best to minimize the impact to the entire area. Carter Price agreed that taking all of the r/w from the Church property on the north side of Township was preferable. Lois Morris said that, although sidewalk was recommended along both sides of Township, the City Board did not take action on this. She said that between Azalea and Crossover Rd., a sidewalk would make absolutely no sense because the houses will be screened with board privacy fences and if a resident wished to use the sidewalk, they would first have to climb the fence. She asked if the City will provide the board fences if they are necessary. Hailey said if the Board reviews the sidewalk issue and finds that it makes no sense, they may waive that stipulation. The pastor of St. John's Lutheran Church said that his church has property on Hwy.265 at Township and he questioned access onto Township from the Church. Hailey replied that the City has asked that no drives access Township although there is no ordinance that would deny that access. He said that the Subdivision Committee will address that issue when development plans are brought to them for approval. Carlon Bassett, 2380 Yorkwood, said it seems to him that many issues find their way to City Board agendas without the necessity of residents organizing and signing petitions. He said he felt that the presence of the individuals at the meeting tonight indicated a request to review the Township plan of fifteen years ago without having to go through the process of getting on the Board agenda. Hailey advised that the usual process is to take input at a Public Hearing followed by action at the following meeting. Stockdell said that before she arrived tonight, she felt that she would follow normal Public Hearing procedure, but that she now felt that it wasn't fair to ask the audience to return. She said this Public Hearing was called to review the plan for Township to determine which other streets will intersect with it and she felt that it wasn't fair to change the plan that has been adopted previously regardless of how she felt about it personally. She also felt apologetic and that it was unfair that these people were somehow led to believe that the Planning Commission might be able to change the plans. Jacks agreed with Stockdell and said he had thought that the issue of Winwood and Yorkwood not intersecting Township had already been decided and the purpose of this meeting was to determine which other streets would intersect Township. He said that he didn't think Terry should tie in because it is so close to Old Wire Road but that Azalea, Primrose and Creekwood tying in made sense with the others being culs. 19y • • • Planning Commission May 13, 1985 Page 7 Madison said that Grimes and City technical staff have not heard from regarding the technical aspect of the extension. that, because the r/w of Yorkwood and Winwood already intersect they seemed more likely to connect. Madison said she felt "last shot" was being had at deciding which streets will and that no final contract had been executed determining this yet been She said Township, that one intersect issue. Madison said she felt that when Terry was paved into the r/w of Township it predestined it to intersect and pointed out that Creekwood Hills has only one point of ingress/egress and that is not an easy access. She asked Mr. Grimes if he had any information from the Street, Traffic or Fire Departments regarding their position on this situation. Grimes said he has not asked each one of them to come forward with plans because he felt that the Subdivision Committee had worked closer with these areas and subdivisions over the years. Stockdell asked what the construction time frame is and Grimes replied that it is hoped to be constructed by the end of the year. Stockdell said she felt that most of the people present were questioning the need for Township at all. She asked if the Commission could act on their behalf by sending the question to the City Board and Hailey replied that the Commission has no legal recourse and that the residents must take a petition to the Board. Stockdell said she would like to see the recommendation of the Street Committee and the Water and Sewer Department and added that placing the utilities underground is a good plan and asked to see a recommendation from the committee concerned regarding this possibility. Madison added Street and Traffic Departments to Stockdell's request. Tarvin said it seems that if the Boards' previous decision is accepted regarding Yorkwood and Winwood, there are on.Ly two other streets that will not cross Township and one of those does not yet exist. He said he felt that if the property owners along Terry Street do not want it to intersect, he would not argue with them and added that emergency vehicles could travel on the grass if necessary. Tarvin said he would like to come to some decision tonight as the Board has requested. In reply to Stockdell's hesitation on this point, Tarvin advised that the location of the r/w cannot vary much as it has to be placed in the center so as to not offend people on either side of that r/w. Jerry Sweetser, 1950 Bois D Arc, said he thinks the City has an obligation to think of the traffic situation and all of the people in the City rather than one or two people or the people who have showed up tonight. He suggested connecting all the streets in town and noted that the City has a contract with him to open Bois d Arc sometime after the opening of Township. He said that if Bois d Arc, Winwood and Yorkwood are not opened, the city has an obligation to construct culs-de-sac as it was very costly to bring the street up to the r/w. Sweetser las • • • Planning Commission May 13, 1985 Page 8 said he felt the traffic should be distributed amongst all of the streets in this area to consider the good of everyone. MOTION AND RECOMMENDATION Stockdell made a motion to recommend to the City Board that information from the Street Committee, Street Department, Water & Sewer Department, Traffic Department and Utility Companies be furnished for public inspection and that only Primrose Lane and Azalea Terrace intersect the section of Township Road between Old Wire Road and Highway 265. In answer to Jacks question, Stockdell replied that the purpose of requesting the above input was only to inform the public of the technical aspects in this situation. Hanna inquired of Milholland the length of proposed Township. Milholland replied that it was a fraction less than a mile. Hanna said he felt it was ridiculous to build a street of this length with only two accesses. Tarvin seconded the motion saying that he agreed with Hanna except that the citizens don't want the street at all. He said he felt this street would not be so much a collector street as it would be to get traffic from Highway 265 to Gregg Street and with that in mind, the less connections that are made, the less impact there will be to this area. Tarvin said the issue that concerns him is talk about extending Township further on to the east. Green agreed with Tarvin adding that he did not necessarily think that the proposed location was the best one, but that he lives in East Oaks and has always operated under the assumption that it would be there. He said he felt the fewer access points the better as these are residential neighborhoods first and foremost and added that the privacy and livability of the residential neighborhoods should be preserved as much as anyone's right to take a straight shot onto Township. Green said he felt that people chose to live in these residential neighborhoods to get away from traffic which is why they don't live on major highways. He said if the people in Creekwood Hills don't want Terry open, it should not be opened as they are the only ones to benefit from it. AMENDMENT Green requested a to add a friendly amendment to Stockdells recommendation with regards to the Board examining the fact that Township is on the Master Street Plan as a collector street but the plans, including the Transportation Improvement Plan, seem to think that it is a primary arterial which would be an 80 ft. r/w with 49ft. of pavement. He said he felt that the residents of the area should have the right to address this situation and noted that it has been about six months /96 • Planning Commission May 13, 1985 Page 9 since a request for clarification in the matter of discrepancy in Township's classification was given to the Board of Directors. He said he would still like an answer to this question. Stockdell and Tarvin accepted the amendment. Stockdell clarified that her motion applies only to the section of Township Road that will be between Old Wire Road and Highway 265. Madison explained that she would vote against the motion because Township will be an important and expensive street and though many people here may declare that they don't need it, she could not envision them not using it once it is built. She pointed out that it will not only serve the residents of subject quadrangle, but all residents of Fayette- ville and that all of the traffic north of Mission and east of Old Wire Road will use Primrose and Azalea which are local streets the same as Winwood and Yorkwood because of the protecting of a few selfish interests of those who live on cul-de-sac streets. She said that these culs do not contribute to our arteries or network of streets but serve only those who live on those streets. Green said he thought Azalea and Primrose made more sense as connecting streets (than Winwood or Yorkwood) because they are not straight shots to Highway 45 which may discourage people from traveling through these residential neighborhoods. Sweetser asked the Commission to consider recommending the City install culs-de-sac on the streets they are recommending as remaining closed. The question was called and upon roll call, the motion as amended passed 5-3-0, Madison, Hanna and Hailey voting "nay". Tarvin said it was his understanding that Township was originally intended to be something other than a collector street, a minor arterial, and was downgraded in 1973. He said that the way he' understands street design, the dimension of a collector street is 36ft. paved width with 60ft. of r/w. He noted that the primary difference between a collector and a local street is parking allowed on both sides of a collector and only one side of a local. Tarvin said, bearing in mind that it has been previously decided to disallow drives onto Township, he saw no reason that there should be any parking except for breakdowns, and added that he had a problem justifying; taking another 5ft. of r/w when the street being proposed will only require 50 feet of r/w. He said he shared Green's concern that Township may be upgraded in the future. He advised that he measured both Mission and Crossover to be 22 feet wide and didn't see how the volume of traffic expected on Township at 31ft. wide could ever exceed the volume of traffic on Mission. He concluded that he had a problem with building a local street in width, requiring a collector street in r/w. I97 • • • Planning Commission May 13, 1985 Page 10 SPEE—DEE MART — HOYET GREENWOOD WRDINGTON AT RUPPLE ROAD — LSD The third item on the large scale development by Hoyet Greenwood and tabled at the meeting of problem in this area. agenda was consideration of Spee—Dee Mart, a located on Wedington at Rupple Road, submitted represented by Ervan Wimberly. This item was April 8, 1985 for further study on the drainage Wimberly stated that he thought the solution to the drainage problem could only be addressed by the Board of Directors as the City and the State are at odds as to the means of solving the problem. He noted, for the record, that he agrees with Street Superintendent Powell. Wimberly asked that the Planning Commission approve this LSD subject to a solution of the drainage problem so that he would not have to table at this time and return again. He advised -,that the State will have the last word in this case and if they and the City do not agree, this development cannot be built. Wimberly said that the City would like to install a 27" culvert under State Highway 16 (Wedington) and the State says they might permit two 36" culverts with the area south of the highway being cleared out for over one—half mile with r/w having been acquired. He said he didn't think the developer should be responsible for over 30% of the cost of culvert, headwall and curb inlet as per the recommendation of Barbara Crook of the Subdivision Committee. MOTION Jacks moved approval of this LSD subject to the drainage problem being resolved. Stockdell seconded followed by discussion. Millard Goff, a nearby resident, spoke in opposition to this development. He said that any size culvert under the highway would be a step in the right direction but he did not think it was right giving Greenwood permission to go ahead with his project and let the remainder of the residents worry about the drainage problem with the Highway Dept. and the City Board. Wimberly replied that he and Greenwood will be continuing the process of working out the drainage. Goff asked if Wimberly would agree to put in a drainage culvert across the highway and Wimberly replied that it would be up to the Board. Wimberly said that, according to Jacks' motion, the project cannot be built until the drainage problem is solved. Goff said that one way of solving the problem was to do nothing. He added that he wanted the drainage project done properly. Commissioners reassured Goff that Wimberly's interpretation was correct but Goff said he felt that his right to do anything more has been taken away if conditional permission to proceed is given. )98 • • • • Planning Commission May 13, 1985 Page 11 Wimberly indicated that the drainage study requiring a culvert under the highway, and construction of a drainage channel from that point south to Owl Creek, is part of the Master Plan. He said it would be a problem to direct drainage across that property (to the south) without acquiring an easement. He added that it is the Street Superintendent's recommendation that the issue be taken to the Board for an answer. Madison asked if the concern was that the City would not spend the money required to proceed with drainage strictures with the project proceeding anyway and Goff agreed that it was. The question was called and the motion to approve contingent upon a solution to the drainage problem passed 8-0-0. Hailey advised that every decision the Planning Commission makes is appealable and can be heard by the City Board May 21 is the request if made by noon of Wednesday, May 15. REZONING PETITION R85-10 1ST NAT'L BANK OF TAHLEQUAH_ NE CORNER E. HUNTSVILLE RD. AND SHERMAN The fourth item on the agenda was consideration of rezoning petition R85-10 submitted by the 1st National Bank of Tahlequah, Oklahoma and represented by Col. Jerry Hiett. The property is located at the NE corner of E. Huntsville Rd. and Sherman. This petition was denied by the Planning Commission on March 25, 1985 and appealed to the City Board who referred the petition back to the Commission due to several errors on the part of the City made during the rezoning procedure. The property is zoned R-1 and has had a Conditional Use (expired); requested is C-2. Consultant Wood said that his recommendation remains the same: C-2 is not recommended because 1. Commercial development is contrary to the General Plan recommendation of residential; and, 2. C-2 District at this location would tend to commit other properties along Huntsville Street of a similar nature to commercial development. Wood added that R-0 might provide a reuse for the structure and serve as a tran- sitional use from the commercial to the east. If R-0 District is considered the General Plan should be revised. Hiett stated that he is the proposed buyer of this property if it is rezoned, and was also speaking for the 1st National Bank of Tahlaquah as they hold the mortgage on the property. He noted that one person who signed his petition stating that she didn't mind the C-2 zoning has changed her mind and that it still leaves 14 out of 30 names in favor of the rezoning and subsequent auction house business. Hiett advised that his auctions involve fine articles from estates as well as antiques and has been operating from the National Guard Armory for the last 15 years. He said he expected his opposition to say that his auctions create a great deal of noise, but he advised that he • • • Planning Commission May 13, 1985 Page 12 has operated in the same building with the Guard offices within 20 ft. without disturbing them and that the decibel of his voice at the moment was louder than when conducting an auction. Hiet said his customers are basically affluent people buying expensive items during daytime hours, once a week, when most other people are at their regular jobs. He said he is not after large numbers of people, but rather the quality buyer. Hiet said he has been a councilman in Rogers for eight years with an understanding of zoning and would never ask for a zoning change to C -District in the middle of a residential neighborhood. He said he felt that zoning this commercially would be bringing it back to its original classification (before 1970). Hiett said the building was constructed over 26 years ago and has operated commercially ever since. (Typist's note: When the City Ordinances took affect in 1970 this property was zoned R-1). Hiett advised that the appraisal on this property commercially is $85,000 and only $17,000 residentially with the Bank of Tahlequah holding a mortgage for $75,000 which was given as a business loan. He said that the highest and best use stated in the appraisal for this property was commercial and that the building is designed for commercial use and in his opinion cannot be economically developed as a single family dwelling. He noted that the area of E. Huntsville Road is a mixture of R-1 and C-2 with C-2 being the dominant classification. Hiet said he will upgrade the neighborhood as he intends to repair the building which has been empty and deteriorat- ing for some time. He said the only objection voiced which may apply is the lack of sufficient parking and he added that he plans on buying the property next door which is has been in estate and must have one of its buildings torn down. He said he would prefer not to table this issue until such time as he completes the process of purchasing that property and rezoning it to R-0 which is the least District in which parking would be allowed. Hiett concluded by saying that he wants to be a good neighbor. Madison asked what the connection is to Jeff's Transmission next door to subject property and Hiett replied that the property owners in this neighborhood are opposed to his rezoning because of the problems they have encountered regarding the non -conformity of the mechanics shop and house immediately adjacent. Hailey inquired as to the number of people expected an any one auction and Hiett replied that 70 is about average with about half that many or less vehicles. He said that presently he can provide for 28 cars. Lenora Grigsby, 1620 E. Hunstville Road, explained that the woman who wanted her name off the petition is 80 years old and didn't understand what Hiett wanted. She, also said that she didn't think more than 24 cars could be placed on the subject lot. 130 • • • Planning Commission May 13, 1985 Page 13 Chester Grigsby, 1620 E. Huntsville Road, said that Hiett's petition includes names of residents 1/4 mile away from subject property and added that he has spoken with several of these people who told him they want their names stricken from the petition because they were under the impression the property would be used for a warehouse. James Lacy, 1321 E. Huntsville Rd. next to this one into a parking lot of tearing down the shop building. difficult process to get rid of the be fair to the Dowers' Estate to allow said that turning the property would be defeating the purpose He said it has been a long and problem and that it would not this commercial concern. Homer McBroom, 1615 E. Huntsville Rd., said there is a dangerous hill along this stretch of Huntsville Rd. to which Hiett's parking problem would add to. He also said he thought the building in question could be made into two apartment units. McBroom indicated a letter from Mr. Gardner expressing his opposition to this petition. Bill Stiles, 304 W. Meadow, stated that he has the same problem as Hiett in that he has property with commercial -type use in a residential zone. He said he passes the subject property several times a day and thinks it is a mess and would be improved by Hiett's fixing it up for use one day a week. Stiles noted that Hiett is trying to provide parking and compared this situation to that of trying to park anywhere near the square. A representative from Lindsey and Assoc. stated that he has been dealing with Hiett regarding this property and was in full support of his attitude. He explained that Hiett has been doing his best to do what is right, including going to the expense of securing the adjacent property to provide parking. Grigsbys stated that their home would wind up immediately next to the proposed parking lot. Madison inquired as to the appropriate Use Unit needed for an auction house and Jones indicated it is C-2 or I-1. MOTION Stockdell moved to deny approval of this petition based on Planning Consultant Wood's recommendation. Madison seconded, congratulating the petitioner on his complete preparation and noting that this property is in the middle of the block and Commission policy is to try to limit commercial concerns to major intersections. She added that she felt Hiett's parking could flow over onto the highway causing problems. Upon roll call, the motion to deny approval passed 8-0-0. 131 Planning Commission May 13, 1985 Page 14 CONDITIONAL USB REQUEST - LEMAR PETTUS 246 E. SIXTH STREET AT WILLOW The fifth item on the agenda was a request fora Conditional Use submitted by Lenar Pettus for property located 246 E. Sixth Street at the corner of Willow. Property is zoned R-2 and request is to relocate Headstart administrative offices from Greenland to Fayetteville. Petitioner has received a waiver of the minimum lot area from the Board of Adjustment. Pettus stated that his property abutts a City park as well as Jefferson School. He said that he was approached by Ivy Conley, representative of EOA Headstart to rent a property in the southeast part of town and explained that he has entered into a covenant that the property use will revert to residential when Headstart no longer occupies it. Pettus said he may be required to install paved parking which could be a financial problem in that the cost would have to be passed on the tenant. He asked if the parking could be graveled. Ivy Conley, Headstart Directress of Washington County, stated that this area of town is desired by the organization in order to serve two nearby catchment areas, Willow Heights and Lewis Plaza. She said there are six staff members who are in and out all day so that a parking problem is not anticipated. In answer to Madison's question, Conley said that most parents visit with staff at their respective Headstart Centers and not the administrative offices. Hailey asked if adjacent homeowners have been contacted and Conley indicated that they have and had no objections to this proposal. MOTION Jacks moved approval. Seconded by Stockdell, the motion to approve passed 8-0-0. Madison stated that she would not like to see the parking area or the driveway in gravel. Hanna said he didn't mind gravel. Jacks There moved adjournment; seconded by Tarvin and approved unanimously. being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 8:20 P.M. /32