Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1986-04-28 Minutes• • • MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE FAYETTEVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION A meeting of the Fayetteville Planning Commission was held on Monday, April 28, 1986 at 5:00 P.M. in the Board of Directors Room of the City Administration Building, 113 pest Mountain Street, Fayetteville, Arkansas. MEMBERS PRESENT: Ernie Jaeks, Julie Nash, Fred Hanna, Sue Madison, B. J. Dow, Frank Farrish, Paul Skwiot and Butch Robertson MEMBERS ABSENT: OTHERS PRESENT: MINUTES Stan Green Carl Behner, Marshall Dale Evans, Kenneth Rader, Sandra Carlisle, Paula Brandeis, members of the press and others Additions and corrections to the minutes of the April 14, 1986 meeting were as follows: By Commissioner Hanna; page 17, speaker's name is Debenport; page 4, 5th paragraph, Hanna expressed concern that Chestnut be opened even if it remains gravel temporarily. Commissioner Madison; page 8 at the bottom, the plat was recommended for approval; page 14, Hyland Park; page 15 last paragraph, route shown on the Master Street Plan; page 16 third paragraph, she had assumed; page 17 in the motion, condemn if neoessary; page 17 following the vote, Mr. Bill Willmore spoke in support of the motion. Commissioner Jacks; page 10 first paragraph, Jaeks intent was that a aul-de-sae would leave a safety valve for the possibility of through traffic in the future. Commissioner Skwiot; page 16, ...property may have to...; page 17, ...across the mountain at this time...; page 16 7th paragraph, ...is not addressed...; page 5, following Skwiot's motion, he expressed a desire to have more information included in the agenda packet regarding any lot splits. Commissioner Green; page 6, Jacks said he felt the cul-de-sac question (at the end of Sain Street) should be addressed, although SWE did not request a waiver as it believes none is necessary in view of the City Board ordinance addressing the cul-de-sac; page 6 paragraph 3, Jaeks inquired if SWE would accept a waiver if the Commission wished to grant one and Green indieated that SWE had no objection; page 6 paragraph ...expressed written support of... The minutes were approved with these additions and corrections. Commissioner Madison requested the minutes of the Public Hearing held on April 7, 1986 be addressed at the next regular Commission meeting. She also requested a copy of those minutes. YG • • • Planning Commission April 28, 1986 Page 2 REQUEST FOR WAIVER OF SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS CARL BEHNER & THOMAS FAULKNER - 201 W. SPRING The second item on the agenda was a request for waiver of subdivision regulations submitted by Carl Behner and Thomas Faulkner for property located at 201 W. Spring which is zoned R-3, High Density Residential. Commissioners reported having difficulty in locating the property. MOTION The petitioners were not present to speak and Hanna moved this item be tabled until the address can be verified. Robertson seconded and upon roll Ball, the motion to table passed 8-0-0. JEHOVAH'S WITNESS CHURCH - LSD OLD WIRE ROAD - KENNETH RADER The third item of business was the consideration of the large scale development plan for Jehovah's Witness Church. The property is located at 2837 Old Wire Road and has a conditional use for a church in this R-1 District (Low Density Residential). Chairman Jacks advised that this development was approved by the Subdi- vision Committee at their meeting of April 24th subject to plat review comments and the determination of what street improvements will include with the maximum being as per Clayton Powell's recommendation. He noted a request for a waiver of the screening requirement has been submitted. Jacks advised that a meeting is being scheduled with the Subdivision Committee, the Street Committee and the City Attorney to try to reach a conclusion of what off-site improvements should consist of. Attorney Marshall Dale Evans stated he was representing the owner of property adjacent to that under petition. He said his understanding was that a petitioner of a large scale development must own the property. Evans advised that the property owner to the north, Franklin, will dispute ownership to a portion of property which he has been using for more than 10 years and is now contained in the proposed church plan. He said the area in question is 25' X 35' and that the represent- atives of the church were aware of this area as it is graveled. Evans requested final approval of the large scale development be delayed. Madison clarified with Jacks that the Subdivision Committee has the authority to approve of a large scale development but he added that, in view of Evans' statement, the issue could be addressed by the entire Planning Commission. 9 • • • Planning Commission April 28, 1986 Page 3 Jacks asked Rader, representative of the church, if he were aware of the problem and Rader replied that he was fairly sure that vehicles were parking on the church's property at the time it was surveyed. He said he spoke to the renters of homes on the neighboring property who said they knew they were not parking on their own property. Rader said there has been no fence put up or improvements made to the portion in dispute except for a small amount of gravel and that cars have been gradually creeping onto the church property over the years. He said there are two ears parking there presently and that the area has no defined boundary and no claim made over the past seven years. Evans said there is an adverse claim for 10 years use and that the church knew the land was being used against their interest. Farrish said he felt it was not the Commission's position to resolve property disputes and that approval or disapproval needs to be decided on the basis of the large scale development presented. He advised the parties involved need to solve the dispute on their own. There was unanimous agreement among Commissioners. Jacks noted a request entered by the church to waive the requirement to erect view-obseuring screening between R-1 property and non-residential uses. He advised that 10% landscaping must be substituted for the screening if it is waived or varied. Dow advised she has spoken to a neighbor, Tom Pincher, who said he was under the impression that a fence would be erected and that he would help pay for said fence. Rader said he, too, had spoken to Mr. Pincher, advising him that a fence would be put up if necessary but that the church preferred the landscaping in lieu of fence. Madison asked what method is used to notify adjoining property owners that a waiver of required screening is being requested and Carlisle advised that such notification is not required by oode. She added that adjoining property owners were notified of the development plan by certified mail with all but one return receipts being received in the Planning Office. Carlisle said a newspaper ad was also taken. MOTION Madison, in view of the fact that the parking is planned around the perimeter of the development and the property is utilized as single family residential, moved to deny the request to waive the screening requirement. Nash seconded and upon roll Ball, the motion passed 8-0-0. It was noted that view -obscuring vegetation may be used as screening as long as it is maintained as view -obscuring and extend to the right-of-way between this and any R-1 property. • • • Planning Commission April 28, 1986 Page 4 WEDINGTON POINTE CENTER GARLAND AND WEDINGTON - LSD The fourth item on the agenda was the large scale development plan for Wedington Pointe Center located at 1215 and 1225 N. Garland and Wedington Drive. Property is zoned C-2, Thoroughfare Commereial. Jacks advised this plan was approved by the Subdivision Committee at their meeting of April 24, 1986 subject to plat review comments. He noted questions had been raised regarding off-site improvements for this development and that a meeting is being seheduled as mentioned earlier to determine a formula for requesting said improvements. BRADFORD PLACE - LSD REVISIONS N. GARLAND AT ERNIE JACKS BLVD. The fifth item of consideration was the revisions requested by the Bradford Place large scale development located on North Garland at Ernie Jacks Blvd. Property consists of 8+ acres and is zoned R-2, Medium Density Residential. Jaeks said the request for revisions include erecting a 5 -unit structure on the location previously reserved for the community building and to locate that community building in an existing duplex adjacent to the development. He said the new structure would bring the total of units to 144 and that the Subdivision Committee had approved of the revisions subject to all City ordinances including Greenspace. MOTION Hanna moved approval of the revisions as requested, seconded by Nash. Upon roll tall, the motion passed 8-0-0. Commissioner Nash requested that City Attorney McCord be asked for an opinion on off-site improvements. Jacks noted that, in the past, McCord has explained the ordinance but seems to take the position of not wanting to tell the Commission how to apply it. Nash urged McCord to enter a definite opinion on applying the ordinance regarding off-site improvements. Jacks reiterated his earlier statement advising of a meeting to be scheduled with the Planning Commission, the Street Committee and Jim McCord to determine developers" proportionate share of off-site improvements. He said, in the past, developers of property along unimproved City streets have consistently been required to improve that street. He noted that is not working at this time. Jacks said a full report will be brought to the Planning Commission. • • • Planning Commission April 28, 1986 Page 5 CONSIDERATION OF AMENDING THE ORDINANCE FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS The sixth item of business was the consideration of an amendment to the ordinance for conditional use permits as per a resolution from the Board of Directors. Jacks noted this was not a public hearing. The resolution is as follows: BE IT RESOLVED...the Board of Directors hereby requests the Fayetteville Planning Commission to consider whether the City's zoning ordinance should be amended to restrict conditional use permits to new structures. Commissioner Dow expressed concern that the resolution may not reflect the intent of Director Bumpass in drafting this resolution. She said perhaps he meant the ordinance be restricted to prohibit conditional use permits from applying to new structures. Dow also noted that Use Units 2 and 4 allow many uses to exist in any zone. Madison referred to the conditional use granted some time ago to a former property owner now being used by Jehovah's Witness Church and questioned whether conditional uses should expire after a specified time if not exercised. Carlisle said McCord has ruled that, unless expressly noted, approval of a conditional use does not expire after any length of time. MOTION Nash moved the resolution not be approved as written and be returned to the Board as the Commission does not believe the ordinance should be amended either to limit use permits to land only or improvements only. Skwiot seconded and upon roll call, the motion passed 8-0-0. Commissioner Farrish stated the committee studying the updating of Subdivision Regulations may address problems regarding zoning and use issues. He said, in Planning Consultant Wood's opinion, the current method of conditional use application in Fayetteville's zoning regulations is the best to date. Madison referred to Farrish's recently expressed opinion that conditional use requests be presented as rezonings instead. Farrish agreed that is his general feeling. COTNER WINERY - LSD 3481 N. HIGHWAY 112 (NEAR BY-PASS) The seventh item on the agenda was discussion of the Cotner Winery large scale development located at 3481 N. Highway 112 near the Highway 71 by-pass. Carlisle advised that all easements and dedications for this development have been received. 7� • • Planning Commission April 28, 1986 Page 6 MOTION Dow moved approval of this development seconded by Nash. Upon roll call, the motion passed 8-0-0. OTHER BUSINESS Jacks requested Gerald Bowman's petition to waive subdivision regulations submitted be placed on the next regular agenda. This item was tabled at the April 14th meeting because Bowman was not present to answer Commissioners' questions. Skwiot requested additional information be included in the packet for this discussion. ITEM #2 The petitioner for item #2 of tonight's agenda was present at this time and requested to be heard. Commissioners expressed no objection. Carl Behner, co-owner of the C-3 zoned property located at 201 N. Locust, stated the property is located on the north side of Spring Street and he presented a survey of the parcel. He noted his intention is to build a 4 -unit townhouse with a driveway across the north border of the property whish will serve both the new units and an existing house. Behner said the resulting two lots will each have 77.5' of street frontage and he explained the access for each parcel. MOTION Madison moved approval of the waiver seconded by Robertson. Upon roll tall, the motion pass 8-0-0. There being no further discussion, the meeting adjourned at 6:30 P.M.