HomeMy WebLinkAbout1986-01-27 Minutes•
•
•
MINUTES OF A MEETING OF
THE FAYETTEVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION
A meeting of the Fayetteville Planning Commission was held on Monday,
January 27, 1986 at 5:00 P.M. in the Board of Directors' Room of the
City Administration Building, 113 West Mountain Street, Fayetteville,
Arkansas.
MEMBERS PRESENT:
MEMBERS ABSENT:
OTHERS PRESENT:
Ernie Jacks, Fred Hanna,
B.J. Dow', Frank Farrish,
and "Butch" Robertson
None
Sue Madison, Stan Green,
Julie Nash, Paul Skwiot
Planning Consultant Larry Wood, Roger Staub, Mary
Bassett, Ery Wimberly, Cooper Lee, Wanda Blevins,
Biff Fouke, Charles Woolley, Codes Technician
Bobbie Jones, Planning Director Sandra Carlisle,
Paula Brandeis, members of the press and others
The meeting was called to order by acting Chair, Ernie Jacks who extended
a welcome to newest Commissioner, "Butch" Robertson and bid adieu
to Mrs. Bobbie Jones who announced her resignation after sixteen years
of service with the City's Planning Office. Jacks noted that her
absence would leave quite a gap.
MINUTES
Commissioner Dow made a correction to the minutes of the January 13
meeting: Page 2, third paragraph "Nash noted the entrance onto Township
from this property was not hazardous." This comment was entered by
Commissioner Dow. The minutes were approved with this correction.
CONDITIONAL USE REQUEST - CHURCH/SCHOOL IN R-1
1600 MISSION BLVD. - ROGER STAUB
The second item on the agenda was a request to allow a church and
and school as a Conditional Use in an R-1 District. The request was
submitted by Roger Staub on behalf of the Fayetteville Christian Fellowship
for property located at 1600 Mission Blvd.
Mr. Staub explained that his organization is over two years old and
has been using rented facilities for that period of time. He said
the congregation has grown to over 250 and is seeking a church location
that is central to both Springdale and Fayetteville. Staub said current
plans are to construct a building to serve as a sanctuary, classrooms
and offices which will be converted to an office complex in the future
if the need arises for additional seating. He said although there
are no immediate plans for a Christian School, he was advised through
the Planning Office to request Conditional Use for same at this time.
±O
•
•
Planning Commission
January 27, 1986
Page 2
Nash reported a neighbor of the proposed church site is concerned
that a mobile home will be temporarily used. Staub said there would
not be a mobile home but the existing home will be remodeled to serve
as a parsonage as it is a picturesque site.
Farrish inquired into the request for Conditional Use as opposed to
a re -zoning petition and Staub stated he was informed that this was
the appropriate route to follow. Parrish noted that where a Conditional
Use exists, the petitioner must return before the Commission if he
wishes any changes in the situation. Staub said he was aware of this.
Dow asked for more information regarding the Christian School and
Staub replied there is a growing interest in Fayetteville to have
a facility of this nature and that conversation with area pastors
was coincidental to the purchase of the land.
NOTION
Hanna moved approval of the Conditional Use as requested. Nash seconded,
followed by discussion.
Madison said she would vote against the motion because of the possibility
of a school being added. She expressed concern regarding the additional
traffic in this area of Root Elementary School where severe traffic
jams already occur. Dow agreed noting she would be in favor of approving
the Conditional Use for the church alone. Technician Jones said this
would be acceptable but Madison noted that it would be open to amendment
in the future. Director Carlisle pointed out that it would require
Commission approval.
Hanna said he believed the reason this petitioner was requesting the
use be applied to a school was because another church had encountered
a problem of not including a school at the time their Conditional
Use for a church was presented. He noted that this church is not
planning on a school but that if or when they did, he thought they
might stagger the beginning and ending time of the school so as not
to interfere with Root School traffic. Hanna said he thought it was
discriminatory to deny a Conditional Use for a Christian school because
the congregation has a right to locate in an area from which their
children may walk to and from school. He pointed out that the Commission
has recently approved doubling the size of Washington Elementary and
enlarge Jefferson Elementary when they also have traffic troubles.
Madison did not think staggering the beginning and ending hours would
eliminate the problem as the traffic would still encounter the children
walking home from Root if the church school ended later.
• Staub said agreed to any reasonable condition attached to reduce or
eliminate the problem was within his desire.
1.2
•
•
Planning Commission
January 27, 1986
Page 3
AMENDMENT
Hanna amended his motion as follows: If a school is included in the
Conditional Use, its' starting and dismissal hours would be either
30 minutes before or after Root School's beginning and dismissal times.
Nash accepted the amendment and upon roll call, the motion to approve
the Conditional Use as amended passed 8-1-0, Madison voting "nay".
REQUEST FOR WAIVER OF SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS
MARY BASSETT - 3107 NORTH COLLEGE
The third item on the agenda was a request for waiver of Subdivision
Regulations (lot split) submitted by Mary Bassett for property located
at 3107 N. College. The property is zoned C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial
and the request is for the third split.
Ery Wimberly, Northwest Engineers, spoke on behalf of the petitioner.
He presented a survey he made several years ago noting that property
owner, Frank Farrish, was granted 25' deeded access across King Pizza
to subject property. Wimberly said he understands there is a mutual
access agreement between all of the tracts involved with this property
but there is no access through to the Fiesta Square Shopping Center.
He further explained that the prospective owner, David Arthers, is
aware of the restrictions and requirements associated with the property
and would like to construct a 6,000 sq.ft. office and retail space.
Wimberly stated that J. B. Hays owns the 25' access and will deed
it to Arthers so the property will have frontage on a public street
which is a formality to insure ingress/egress to the proposed split.
Dow asked if that would make the property a tandum lot. Jones noted
there is no minimum street frontage required for a commercial property.
In response to Madison's question, Wimberly explained the previous
lot splits for this tract: Motel 6 bought a portion of the property
from Commonwealth Theatre in 1973 or 1974 which represented the first
split; Fiesta Square purchased the remainder of the Commonwealth property;
Brown's Little Jug purchased a portion of the property representing
the second split; and, J. B. Hays purchased that property and requests
the present proposed split which will be the third. Madison asked
if McNaughton's Realty was involved in a lot split at this location.
Dow said she would like to see the direction of the flow of traffic
be clearly marked if this request is approved as there are problems
with developments of this sort which have mutual access.
MOTION
Hanna moved approval of the request for waiver as requested which
was seconded by Green and followed by discussion.
•
•
•
•
Planning Commission
January 27, 1986
Page 4
Skwiot advised he would vote against the motion as it appeared that
the request was a case of expediency of the property owner and not
necessarily an attempt to foster good planning and property development.
Carlisle noted that this will represent the fourth split of this tract
and approval may be presented only as a recommendation to the Board
of Directors. She added that the property, including the access will
be equal to at least one acre which will require large scale development
processing.
The question was called and upon roll call, the motion to recommend
approval of a fourth lot split passed 6-1-2, Farrish and Robertson
abstaining and Skwiot voting "nay'
REQUEST FOR WAIVER OF SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS
ROBERT LEE, JR. - N. OF BAILEY RD & E. OF HWY. 265
The fourth item on the agenda was a request for waiver of subdivision
regulations (lot split) submitted by Robert Lee, Jr. for property
located north of Bailey Road and east of Highway 265. Property is
zoned A-1, Agricultural and the request is for the third split.
This item was approved administratively; Commission action not required.
CONDITIONAL USE REQUEST AND APPROVAL OF LSD - PLANT NURSERY
4522 NORTH CROSSOVER ROAD - THOMAS C. LEE (COOPER)
The fifth item on the agenda was a request submitted by Cooper Lee
for Conditional Use to operate a plant nursery at 4522 N. Crossover;
property zoned A-1. Lee submitted a large scale development plan
addressed by the Subdivision Committee at a meeting on January 23rd.
Jacks advised the large scale development plan was approved subject
to 1. dedication of 5' on Zion Road; 2. execution of a Bill of Assurance
for a 5' sidewalk along Hwy.265; and, 3. granting of Conditional Use
by the Planning Commission. Jacks noted that Lee has stated there
are no long range plans for the eastern portion of the 1,320' deep
property. Lee added that he hopes to open in mid-April.
Skwiot asked if bulk organic fertilizers will be stored and Lee replied
that the only bulk item planned on is top soil as he felt storing
bulk fertilizer was dangerous. He added that he plans a privacy fence
around a designated area for bulk materials.
Technician Jones noted that Randall Webb from "Plants Plus" had visited
the Planning Office speaking highly of Mr. Lee and expressing hope
the Commission would approve of Lee's request. Webb had stated that
Fayetteville could benefit from someone of Lee's caliber in this business.
•
•
•
Planning Commission
January 27, 1986
Page 5
MOTION
Dow, seconded by Madison, moved to approve the Conditional Use request.
Upon roll call, the motion passed 9-0-0.
CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING - BED AND BREAKFAST INNS
The sixth item on the agenda was the continuation of a Public Hearing
on a proposed ordinance to regulate Bed and Breakfast Inns.
Jacks noted that the committee addressing this issue has been chaired
by Fred Hanna and a proposal had been drafted by City Attorney McCord.
Jacks recognized Wanda Blevins who stated she was very much in favor
of the proposed ordinance. Blevins expressed her support in full
as recorded in the minutes of the meeting of January 13, 1986.
There being no others present to speak either for or against this
proposal, Jacks turned discussion among Commissioners
Green noted several changes to the proposal had been discussed at
the Commission's meeting of December 9, 1985 but that no action was
taken. He said it was suggested that the requirement of a structure
meeting the Southern Building Code be struck and other changes which
tie the proposal to Home Occupation regulations be added. Green noted
another suggestion inserting the word "owner" to "...occupied building..."
Jacks listed Home Occupation regulations which address ingress/egress;
parking; noise; glare; stability; screening, signs; yards; open space;
and general compatibility. He added that striking the requirement
of meeting the building code concerned him. Green advised that the
structure must still be inspected by the Fire and Building Inspectors
to insure compliance with Arkansas State Fire Code and that a requirement
to meet the Southern Housing Code has thus far been retained in the
proposal. Jacks said the Housing Code deals with light, ventilation,
etc. Green said he sees a problem in that older homes will be used
for this purpose and, while they do not meet the current building
code, are still perfectly safe for this use.
Madison expressed concerns regarding items covered by the Housing
Code such as spacing between rails on stairways which a small child
might fall through. Blevins advised that most Bed & Breakfast Inns
do not cater to children or animals and, although safety precautions
must be taken, rules and regulations should not tie things up so as
to force an owner to change the decor or traditional surroundings
of their home in order to comply.
Jacks asked if the older homes on East street were considered from
the standpoint of the building and housing codes. Jones replied that
it was not certain as to the existing wire and plumbing in the homes
•
•
•
Planning Commission
January 27, 1986
Page 6
but that all additions were required to meet code. She said the buildings
in question are in the first fire zone which allows wood construction
for residential use only.
Mike Green, an electrical engineer, responded to Jacks' next question
by noting that the Fire Code contains a section regarding wiring but
the National Electric Code tends to handle that through NFPA codes.
Farrish agreed the Southern Building Code is too restrictive for existing
older homes as some techniques were used long ago are not acceptable
today. He suggested the safety issue be addressed without using the
Southern Building Code.
Skwiot said he thought innkeepers would wish to do whatever they could
to insure the safety of their building to avoid prohibitive raises
on their insurance policies possibly rendering the business impractical.
Blevins suggested an owner be notified by an inspector of questionable
situations in the Bed and Breakfast Inns and be given an opportunity
to submit proof of safety.
Jacks asked the process involved with child care in the home as a
comparison and Jones replied that she thought the Fire Inspector and
Health Department look for obvious hazards. Carlisle advised that
the Housing Code addresses such things as the size of windows, ratio
of bedrooms to baths and kitchen facilities.
Hanna said he wasn't sure someone could tell from that inspection
whether or not the building met the building code but felt the Housing
Code should be retained in the proposal.
Skwiot suggested an association of Bed and Breakfast Inn owners that
would be self -policing. Blevins commented that such a group exists
in Eureka Springs.
Farrish suggested drafting a an inspection check -list of safety items
to be included as part of the ordinance so as to eliminate the Southern
Building Code and Housing Code.
Carlisle recited the check -list supplied by the Fire Department and
Hanna suggested adding to that list covering other items of concern.
MOTION
Hanna made a motion to recommend the approval of the proposed Bed
and Breakfast Ordinance with the following amendments:
1. Section 2.(h) Delete Southern Standard Building Code and Southern
Standard Housing Code and insert "to assure compliance with the
Arkansas State Fire Code and to assure that no significant safety
•
•
•
Planning Commission
January 27, 1986
Page 7
hazard exists. No Conditional Use permit shall be issued for
a bed and breakfast facility if the building does not pass the
inspection".
2. Section 2.(a) Delete "..valid.." and insert "If no complaints
regarding those items required to be considered by the Planning
Commission prior to the issuance of a Conditional Use permit
as described in Art.9, Sec.6(c), App.A are received..."
3. Section 2.(b) Change 300' to 500'.
4. Section 3. Insert "owner" between "permanently" and "occupied".
Dow seconded and, upon roll call, the motion passed unanimously.
LANDSCAPE COMMITTEE; DISCUSSION
The seventh item on the agenda was a discussion led by the Landscape
Committee regarding a proposal to draft a landscape ordinance.
Green, Chairman of that committee stated that there have been three
meetings resulting in mixed feelings on the desirabilty of creating
a landscape ordinance He said the committee had considered drafting
an "incentive" type ordinance as opposed to an additional requirement
to be imposed on developers but were unable to reach a conclusion
on how to accomplish that task. Green noted that the committee decided
to ask the Planning Commission to solicit comments from interested
individuals.
Biff Fouke, Division Manager of SWEPCO, stated that he was neither
for or against the concept of a landscape ordinance but did wish to
address some concerns regarding same. Fouke cited background regarding
serving the community with electric power and explained that the ability
of the facilities to handle the capacity of the City is very important.
He added that, in checking SWEPCO's records, he found that franchise
tax from the utility has been a source of income for the City in the
amount $447,475 in 1985. Fouke pointed out that SWEPCO's concern
for trees is represented in their building at the intersection of
Dickson and N. College. He noted that a Maple tree which recently
died was replaced with as large a transplant as could be found. Fouke
stated that the ordinance does not make a provision for the removal
of trees which are on easement (public) property and asked that it
be addressed with SWEPCO's input. He advised that trees in utility
easements can grow up and interfere with overhead lines or expand
their roots and interfere with underground lines. He said there are
national codes as well as SWEPCO's own codes which govern the clearance
of limbs from electric lines and proceeded to cite the case of a child
hurt by accidently touching a power line while on a limb of a tree.
He continued by stating that SWEPCO is in a position where they cannot
•
•
•
Planning Commission
January 27, 1986
Page 8
afford to compromise as it would mean assuming liability in tremendous
proportion. Fouke said he thought the necessity of keeping rights-of-way
clear would be clear to everyone. He expressed concern over an ordinance
which would encourage the placement of trees adjacent to said rights-of-
way. He noted that representatives Bob Waldren and Floyd Hornaday
were present to answer any questions relating to construction or design.
Commissioner Dow asked the consequences of underground utilities and
Fouke replied that certain voltages can be handled very well but requested
that no trees be planted in rights-of-way for utilities.
Charles Woolley, Better Homes and Gardens Realty, spoke on behalf
of the Fayetteville Board of Realtors. He stated that, although,
the Board is in favor of landscaping, they feel the proposed ordinance
is totally unnecessary and very restrictive. He pointed out that
realtors "sell" Fayetteville and are concerned with the appearance
of the City. Woolley said the Board favored an incentive program
and wished to go on record as opposing the draft as it is now written.
In answer to Dow's request for specifics, Woolley replied that it
could not be mandated. He commended the Downtown Fayetteville group
on the appearance of the square. In reply to Madison's question,
Woolley noted that all members in attendance of the last Board of
Realtors' meeting voted against the proposal. Madison clarified with
Woolley that the Board of Realtors were not opposed to the landscaping
concept but would like the issue approached from a different standpoint.
Former City Board member, Frank Sharp, supported Fouke and SWEPCO
in their expressed concern regarding the preservation of trees. He
also advised that he had served on the landscape committee several
years ago and could see a spin-off regarding landscaping being addressed
in municipal facilities. As an example, he explained that there is
money in reserve to plant trees along either side of Joyce Street
which the City participated in the cost of. Sharp said it was not
radical for a City to have a landscape ordinance as supported by infor-
mation received from other towns in Arkansas. He applauded the concept
of taking action at this time and supported mandatory regulations.
He said work on the ordinance should the Chamber of Commerce, builders,
realtors and the Committee, as well as paid knowledgeable staff.
Dale Christy, Chamber of Commerce, noted he has been quoted as being
opposed to a landscape ordinance and clarified that the Chamber has
not taken a position at this point but will take one on the final
draft in which the Chamber would like to be involved. Christy expressed
concern regarding the creation of a specific ordinance for a specific
problem seemingly without direction as to its administration. He
noted the Commission has remarked that funds are not available to
administer another ordinance. He added that a landscape ordinance
should be included in the overall planning checklist as a comprehensive
routine. Christy said he felt reservation in singling out commercial
and industrial projects for compliance with a mandatory ordinance
Planning Commission
January 27, 1986
Page 9
while ignoring residential subdivisions as he felt a landscape ordinance
was important across the entire spectrum of the community and not
just one area. He stated the ordinance as proposed at this time would
be very devastating in the development of Industrial Park and if he
thought it would be inacted as proposed, he would probably bulldoze
all the trees in the Park. Christy said most developers who have
built in the Park have tried to save as many trees as possible and
landscape back upon completion of construction.
Christy said he felt a reasonable approach was necessary to avoid
making some sites impractical for development because of where utilities
and streets may already be in place. He also expressed opposition
to dictating what type of tree people may plant as he felt it should
be left up to the discretion of the property owner . He pointed out
discrepancies between the lists of landscape items which are acceptable
for planting in this area as presented by different groups.
Green asked if Christy were in favor of a landscape ordinance not
necessarily the one which has been talked about. Christy replied
he is generally not in favor of additional mandatory restrictions
which are not necessary. In answer to Green's next question, Christy
replied that he had previously expressed concern that Fayetteville
is becoming a relatively high-cost place for businesses to locate
and that attempts should be made to minimize additional costs within
context in regard to overall regulations. He added that Fayetteville
is already at the top end of development cost. Christy stated he dislikes
seeing an ordinance drafted which puts restrictions on business and
industry that is not placed on anyone else.
Patti Reid, City Park Horticulturist, stated she thought the City
needed something to protect the beauty of the City from those people
who are not concerned and that was what the proposed ordinance was
working towards.
Cooper Lee, owner of Country Heritage Landscaping, said from dialogue
heard this evening and from his own experience he agreed with Fouke
regarding planting trees near electric lines. He also supported the
suggestion of involving someone who knows what they are doing to assist
with developing a landscape ordinance. Lee advised quality, not quantity,
in landscaping.
Commissioner Nash said, although many people have already been informed
regarding the landscape proposal, she would like to see a public forum
type discussion to receive further input from citizens. She expressed
support for mandatory regulations on landscaping. Hanna requested
such a public forum be held separately from the regular Commission
business meeting.
Green said he thought there would not be much more input as a great
deal of advertising regarding this issue has already been done. He
•
•
•
Planning Commission
January 27, 1986
Page 10
said the committee tried to structure things so as to hear everyone
who wished to speak on landscaping. He said he felt continuation
of the discussion would be a waste of Commissioners, as well as the
City's, time in terms of advertising.
Dow agreed the issue needed to be pursued further to find a reasonable
manner in which to achieve what she felt was a mutual goal. She said
she thought local developers had done much regarding landscaping but
expressed concern for out-of-state developers.
Green said he tried to approach this issue with an open mind but could
not see that including landscaping in the code of ordinances would
be anything other than mandatory additional requirements on the developer
for which he did not see the need.
Madison said that, although not everyone in Fayetteville could be
polled, she thought there were many ordinary citizens who would like
to see a protective landscape ordinance. She cited repeated negative
response from neighbors adjacent to property being developed in terms
of the destruction of the vegetation of said property. She supported
pursuing the issue further.
SWEPCO's Division Manager, Fouke, reiterated his concern that utility
easement in relation to tree placement be taken into consideration
and expressed his support in pursuing this issue further.
Realtor Mary Bassett reiterated Woolley's statement that members attending
the recent Board of Realtors' meeting unanimously opposed the draft
of the landscape ordinance. She said she has sold over two million
dollars worth of commercial property in 1985 and because of some of
the restrictions placed on developers at this time, several major
businesses have elected not to locate in Fayetteville. Bassett said
she hoped this would not be "the straw that broke the camel's back".
Commissioner Farrish said he thought a public hearing was premature
and suggested the rough draft be cleaned up before public presentation.
MOTION
Nash moved to place the landscape discussion on the agenda for the
meeting of February 24th and to ask the Landscape Committee to revise
the proposal in the interim. Dow seconded and upon roll call, the
motion passed 8-1-0, Green voting "nay". Green suggested nominating
a new chairman for the committee.
•
•
•
Planning Commission
January 27, 1986
Page 11
UPDATING THE GENERAL PLAN
The eighth item on the agenda was a discussion regarding the updating
of the Fayetteville General Plan.
Planning Consultant, Larry Wood, noted that $50,000 has been appropriated
to updating the General Plan. He advised that he was requested by
Planning Director, Carlisle, to assist in developing a scopework for
the update and he distributed the scopework used 20 years ago when
the plan was originally adopted. He explained that the previous plan
was fairly extensive, covering base mapping, subdivision ordinance,
zoning ordinance, Master Street Plan, general plan, Community Facility
Plan, traffic study of the downtown area, and total land use. Wood
requested Commissioners give their general reaction regarding the
scopework which will be discussed at the next meeting as a preliminary
to a rough draft.
APPOINTMENT OF MEMBER TO SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS COMMITTEE
The ninth item on the agenda was the appointment of a new member to
the Subdivision Regulations Committee. Chairman Jacks appointed Paul
Skwiot to serve on said committee.
OTHER BUSINESS
Jacks noted the Code of Ethics forms to be signed by Commissioners.
He also advised of a special Commission meeting called by Director
Carlisle, to be held Thursday, January 30 for the purpose of discussion
of general planning issues. Jacks advised that Commissioner Dow has
requested Commissioners indicate their choice of officers of the Planning
Commission for the coming year. Dow noted the Nominating Committee
will meet February 4th to elect those officers.
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 7:15 P.M.