HomeMy WebLinkAbout1985-11-12 MinutesMINUTES OF THE MEETING OF
THE FAYETTEVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION
A meeting of the Fayetteville Planning Commission was held on Monday,
November 12, 1985 at 5:00 P.M. in the Board of Directors Room in the
City Administration Building, 113 West Mountain Street, Fayetteville,
Arkansas.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Melanie Stockdell, Ernie Jacks, Sue Madison, Fred
Hanna, Joe Tarvin, B. J. Dow and Stan Green
MEMBERS ABSENT:
OTHERS PRESENT:
Newton Hailey Jr.
Planning Consultant Larry Wood, Carolyn Schisler,
Planning Director Sandra Carlisle, Codes Technician
Bobbie Jones, Paula Brandeis, members of the press
and others
The meeting was called to order by Vice -Chair Stockdell and the minutes
of the October 28th meeting were considered.
MINUTES
The following correction was noted by Commissioner Green: Page 5,
last paragraph should be "...did not think the planned..."
The following additions and corrections were entered by Commissioner
Stockdell: Item three, which was tabled, should be identified as
a request for approval of the large scale development of a mobile
home park; Page 4, motion should indicate that Stockdell, Madison,
Dow and Jacks voted affirmatively; Page 9, last paragraph should read
"...and covenants are not legally binding documents..."
There being no further additions or corrections, the minutes were
approved as corrected.
PUBLIC HEARING - CONSIDERATION OF CASH BOND
DANDY OIL - 210' OF SIDEWALK ON TOWNSHIP RD
The second item on the agenda was a Public Hearing to consider a $910
cash bond posted by Dandy Oil Co. in 1980 for a sidewalk along 210"
of frontage on Township Road.
It was noted that, under App.C, Art.III, Section A(4)(B), the posted
bond was to have been used by April 18, 1985 or this Commission must
determine the disposition of the money at a Public Hearing.
4/7
Planning Commission
November 13, 1985
Page 2
The choices available were to: (1) Determine that the improvement
is still needed and continue to hold the money for a period of time
to be specified by the Commission; (2) Determine the improvement is
not necessary, and (a) Refund the money with interest; or (b) With
the written consent of the owners, direct. that the money be utilized
for a different purpose which will specifically benefit the neighborhood.
Jacks clarified that the State Highway Department plans to widen this
street which has, thus far, made it impractical to install the sidewalk.
Jones noted that plans for widening have been discussed but have not
been included in the current priority list. She also noted that the
City holds other sidewalk Bills of Assurance in the same area.
Hanna suggested refunding the money which has been posted and to accept
a Bill of Assurance in lieu of the cash bond.
Stockdell opened the Public Hearing and, receiving no response from
the audience, returned discussion to the Commission.
NOTION
Jacks moved to return the funds posted by Dandy Oil contingent upon
that company executing a sidewalk Bill of Assurance. Hanna seconded
and the motion passed 7-0-0.
Planning Director, Carlisle, noted that it has been requested the
secretary call roll for each motion on the floor.
REQUEST FOR RE -HEARING RE -ZONING PETITION R85-29
HENRY HICKMAN - W. OLD FARMINGTON ROAD & BY-PASS
The third item on the agenda was a request, submitted by Carolyn Schisler
on behalf of Henry Hickman, to re -hear re -zoning petition R85-29 which
failed to pass by an even vote at the meeting of October 28, 1985.
Stockdell advised that Commission by-laws state a petition may be
re -heard if there has been a factual error, omission or oversight
in the first consideration, either on the part of the petitioner or
the Commission.
Jacks asked what constituted factual error, omission or oversight
in this case. Schisler replied that this was the first time she has
petitioned for a re -zoning and she neglected to leave her mailing
address, although she had indicated the mailing address of Mr. Hickman,
her client. Because of this oversight, she said she did not receive
the planning report.
c,9 tele
•
•
•
Planning Commission
November 13, 1985
Page 3
MOTION
Jacks said he saw no errors, omissions or oversights and moved to
deny the re -hearing. Madison seconded followed by discussion.
Dow agreed with Jacks and Green asked for further information regarding
Schisler not receiving the planning report. He said he would be willing
to re -hear the petition on this basis as he felt it constituted a
legitimate error or oversight.
Jacks said the information contained in this evening's packet did
not tell him anything additional regarding this petition. Green pointed
out that there was a traffic count included this time, as well as
other additional information and he advised that he would vote against
the motion for this reason. Madison said all the issues in the petition
for re -hearing were discussed at the first hearing.
Upon roll call, the motion failed to pass, 4-3-0 with Jacks, Madison
and Dow voting in favor of, Hanna Stockdell Tarvin and Green against.
MOTION
Green moved to re -hear the petition at this time. Tarvin seconded
and the resulting vote was Hanna, Stockdell, Tarvin and Green in favor
of and Madison, Dow and Jacks against. Stockdell advised that the
motion did not carry as five positive votes are required to approve
the granting of a re -hearing.
Green advised that Art.3, Sec.E(2) of the Planning Commission by-laws,
states "A simple majority of those present (assuming a quorum) shall
be needed to grant re -hearings..." Jones agreed that the by-laws
contain conflicting statements as Art.3, Sec.I states: "A favorable
vote by a majority of the whole number of members comprising the Planning
Commission shall be required before any matter upon which decisive
action has been taken may be reheard".
Green pointed out that there would not be a re -hearing unless decisive
action had been taken. He noted that no action had been taken on
this particular case which had resulted in a tie vote. Stockdell
advised that, according to Robert's Rules, the chairperson shall make
a determination in the case of a discrepancy and she proceeded to
rule that Sec. I of the by-laws would dominate and petition R85-29
would not be heard at this meeting. She advised that Schisler had
prepared an appeal which she would present to the City Board.
E-2 9 /
Planning Commission
November 13, 1985
Page 4
DISCUSSION ON DRAFT OF PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT
TO ALLOW "BED AND BREAKFAST" AS CONDITIONAL USE
The fourth item on the agenda was a review of the first draft of a
proposed amendment which would allow "Bed and Breakfast" concerns
in all districts as a conditional use. Stockdell advised that a Public
Hearing will be set for December 9th for further consideration of
this proposal.
Hanna, Chairman of the Bed and Breakfast Committee, noted a discrepancy
in that the committee had stated there would be no parties or receptions
allowed under this amendment, although it would allow tours of homes
on the Historical Register. Stockdell expressed concern that the
Planning Commission retain some method of control over Bed and Breakfast
operations. She also suggested three year permits be granted after
the initial first year if no complaints are received. Other Commissioners
did not agree.
Green suggested implementing restrictions similar to those found under
"Home Occupations" as they are protective to the surrounding neighborhood.
Jacks questioned the ratio of bathroom facilities and Hanna replied
that five bedrooms to one bathroom are allowed in boarding houses.
Tarvin questioned notification of property owners within 100' of the
Bed and Breakfast location and Jacks suggested it be extended to 300'.
Stockdell suggested a site plan be submitted in every case and that
this be added as a condition apart from Sec.1, 25(b)(2). She also
said she would like to see "temporary" inserted between "furnishing"
and "lodging" in the definition listed under Sec. 2.
Madison said she would like to see all complaints received by the
Planning Office taken seriously, rather than only those received by
neighbors. She also expressed concerns regarding parking situations
around Bed and Breakfast houses. Hanna replied that he was more concerned
about the possibility of front yards being torn up to provide required
parking. Madison said she felt there was a conflict between the existing
ordinance and the proposed amendment with regards to parking and requested
an opinion from the City's Attorney. Jones noted that this situation
may be viewed as an exception.
Green expressed concern regarding validity of complaints which would
force the Bed and Breakfast operator to return to the Planning Commission
after the first year. He cited such things as burned biscuits, monetary
disputes, and poor service as controls over which Commissioners should
not be concerned as their purpose is not to regulate quality but to
assure that the operation does not intrude upon other neighborhood
residents. After much discussion, other Commissioners agreed with
Green that only planning type complaints, such as traffic, noise,
t! t O
Planning Commission
November 13, 1985
Page 5
congestion, etc., not quality control, should be addressed by this
Commission. Green again recommended following the restrictions outlined
under "Home Occupation" regulations.
Jones read portions of the codes pertaining to "Home Occupations"
noting references to hours of operation, health, safety, peace, tranquility
and welfare of the neighborhood, traffic, ingress/egress, refuse,
off-street parking, etc.
MOTION
Jacks made a motion to hold a Public Hearing on December 9th to discuss
the proposed amendment to the ordinance. Tarvin seconded. The revisions
in the draft requested by Commissioners are as follows:
1. No parties or receptions will be allowed.
2. "Valid" be added to "...complaints being received..."
3. Neighbors within 300' shall be notified.
4. Subsection 3 be created to read "A site plan drawing must be
filed with the Planning Office before the Planning Commission
meeting at which the conditional use application will be considered.
5. "Two weeks" be changed to "14 days" for maximum length of stay.
6. The word "temporary" be inserted between furnishing and lodging.
Commissioners agreed that this conditional use shall be addressed
under Use Unit 2. Upon roll call, the motion to hold a Public Hearing
on the proposed ordinance amendment with revisions as stated above,
passed 7-0-0.
COMMITTEE REPORTS
A. Landscape Committee: Chairman Green announced that his committee
was scheduled to meet Wednesday, November 13th at 9 A.M.
B. Subdivision and Street Committee: Spokesman Jacks advised that
this committee has had two meetings and members were concentrating
on a pattern for street designations and controls which will
bring together functional requirements and structural requirements.
He said this committee will meet again the week of November 18th.
C. Committee for the Aged: Chairwoman Stockdell advised that committee
members are in the process of gathering information.
asp
Planning Commission
November 13, 1985
Page 6
COMMISSIONER BURGGRAF RESIGNS
Reporter for the Northwest Arkansas Times, Phyllis Rice, inquired
as to the reason for Stockdell's earlier reference to the Planning
Commission consisting of only eight members at this time. Stockdell
replied that, in accordance with the Commission's by-laws which state
a member may not be absent for three consecutive meetings except in
the case of illness or extraordinary circumstances, Commissioner Frank
Burggraf (verbally) tendered his resignation prior to this evening's
meeting. Commissioner Jacks noted that there are three positions,
excluding the vacancy left by Burggraf, open on this Commission as
of January, 1986.
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 6:20 P.M.