Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1986-07-28 Minutes• • • MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE FAYETTEVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION n A meeting of the Fayetteville Planning Commission was held on Monday July 28, 1986 in the Board of Directors Room of the City Administration Building, 113 West Mountain, Fayetteville, Arkansas. MEMBERS PRESENT: Ernie Jacks, Sue Madison, Stan Green, Fred Hanna, Butch Robertson, Frank Farrish, B.J. Dow, Julie Nash and Paul Skwiot MEMBERS ABSENT: OTHERS PRESENT: None Bill Waite, Doug Hemingway, Mary Gosnell, Joan Smith, Richard Smith, Ery Wimberly, Larry Wood, Sandra Carlisle and Tessi Franzmeier The meeting was called to order by Chairman Jacks and the minutes of the July 14, 1986 meeting were considered. MINUTES The following correetions were entered by Commissioner Madison: Page 3, paragraph 2, should read,... Nash moved approval of this LSD...; Page 5, paragraph 6, should read,... If he had 6 chairs he would have 6 eosmotologist...; There being no further additions or corrections, the minutes were approved as corrected. PRAB RECOMMENDATION ON A GREEN SPACE AMENDMENT TO THE ORDINANCE The second item on the agenda was a reeommendation from the Parks Board on the Green Space Ordinance amendment, this item had been tabled from serveral meetings questioning the legallity of crossing quadrants in terms of land banking. Bill Waite stated legal couneil had said it would be legal to cross quadrant lines but after another meeting they felt it would not be in the best interest to do so beeause of some illegalities with the accounting that might prevent them from balancing the accounts between quadrants, therefore they amended the ordinance and would not be crossing quadrant lines. Jacks then asked if the amendment is to allow banking in the same quadrant and Mr. Waite answered yes. • • Planning Commission July 28, 1986 Page 2 MOTION Robertson moved recommending the amendment to the Green Space Ordinance to the Board of Directors for a public hearing, seeonded by Nash. The motion passed 9-0-0. APPROVAL OF PRELIMINARY PLAT OF SEQUOYAH PLACE JAMES LINDSEY - HIGHWAY 45 EAST AND WHIPPOORWILL The third item on the agenda was a request for approval of the preliminary plat of Sequoyah Place submitted by James Lindsey. The 1.188 acres is located at Highway 45 East and Whippoorwill and is zoned R-0, Residen- tial Offiee. Jacks stated this item was heard at the Subdivision Committee meeting on Thursday the 24th of July. Mr. Lindsey guaranteed aeeess for lots 1, 3 and 4 off Whippoorwill and had planned the same aeeess for lot 2 but was not guaranteed. Jaeks asked Carlisle if proof of notifi- cation to all adjoining property owners had been submitted and Carlisle said yes. Part of the motion was that the Green Space requirement would be met if this is developed as Residential property and proof of the 40' of dedicated ROW which Mr. Hemingway has submitted to the Planning Office and also a Bill of Assurance for a sidewalk along highway 45. Madison questioned the ownership of the Utility easement that fronts on the property in question and does the Planning Office have notification of that property owner as well. Mr. Hemingway stated he believed ownership was with the home owners association and Carlisle stated all the signatures are in the file. Madison stated she was bothered by not knowing who owned that utility easement and asked Hemingway if they made every effort to find the owners and Hemingway stated yes. MOTION Madison moved approval of this preliminary plat subject to the above conditions, seconded by Dow. The motion to approve passed 9-0-0. APPROVAL OF PRELIMINARY PLAT OF GLEN OAKS JAMES LINDSEY - EAST OF OLD MISSOURI ROAD AND SOUTH OF SWEETBRIAR The fourth item on the agenda was request for approval of the preliminary plat of Glen Oaks Subdivision submitted by James Lindsey. The 24.45 acres is located East of Old Missouri Road and South of Sweetbrlar and is zoned R-1, Low Density Residential District. • Jacks stated at the Subdivision Committee meeting on Thursday the 24th of July they referred the preliminary plat back to Plat Review. • • • • Planning Commission July 28, 1986 Page 3 MOTION Madison moved to refer the preliminary plat back to Plat Review, seconded by Robertson. The motion to refer passed 9-0-0. CONDITIONAL USE REQUEST - JULIAN ARCHER TANDEM LOT & LOT SPLIT - HALSELL ROAD & CROSS STREET The fifth item on the agenda was a request for a waiver of the Subdivision Regulations (lot split) and a Conditional Use request for a Tandem lot submitted by Julian Archer and represented by Mary Gosnell for property located at Halsell Road & Cross Street. Hanna stated he had trouble figuring out exactly what they wanted and Carlisle stated the request was for three lot splits and one tandem lot. Madison asked if there was a platting of Maple through this property on the books and Carlisle stated no. Madison then stated Maple runs to the East and to the West of this property. Hanna asked if the total split would be 5.8 acres and Gosnell answered yes. Alex Johnson 1920 Halsell Road, stated he lived just West of this property and was concerned about how the sewer lines would run into this property. Joan Smith stated she had spoke with the City Engineer and he looked at the topographical map and saw no problem extending the sewer line across the road and up to the proposed tandem lot. Madison stated she did not see any overwhelming reason to approve a tandem lot for this location. She felt that the street patterns in that area are a maze at best. Sang pinks up in several different pieces and Cross does not extend North across Halsell at all. Madison stated as large as this parcel is there should be a platting of a subdivision with streets exending through. Tandem lots in the ordinances are justified by the terrain and she does not see justification and would be opposed the entire request. Richard Smith stated if they split the lots into three skinny narrow lots of 100 X 660 and had three driveways off Halsell road they would not be appealing lots to build on. He stated they do not want to build a subdivision they wanted three single family residents nestled in the woods. Smith stated they had checked with the City Engineer and with all the utilities and they saw no problems. Smith said the lots will be 2, 1-1/2 and 2-1/2 acres each. Farrish asked if all three lots will access off the 25' strip up to the tandem lot and Smith stated they could but there intent is to have a gravel drive off of the 25' access for each of the three residents. / r. • • Planning Commission July 28, 1986 Page 4 Farrish stated he did not understand 3 driveways accessing off Halsell road with long lots or 3 driveways accessing off the 25' access strip, either way there would be 3 driveways. Jacks asked the Smiths if they were the purchasers of the tandem lot and Joan Smith stated they are purchasing the entire 5.8 acres and are going to sell the 2 remaining lots. Madison stated she felt these people are putting in a subdivision and doing it by lot splits rather than going to plat review and subdividing this parcel into 3 lots and bring the streets up to City Standards rather than substandard. Carlisle stated the private drive for a tandem lot has to be to City standard for 25' off the existing street. Jacks stated the lot split process also has certain possibilities for off site improvements and Madison stated the only improvement would be on Halsell. Green stated if they made the improvements on Halsell they would have a street 31' wide with curb and gutter, probably storm drainage and a cul-de-sac at the end that would serve essentially one lot, the 2 lots in front already have access on Halsell road which may or may not be improved to City standard. Green stated he did not see what the City would get out of street that is several hundred feet wide with a cul-de-sac at the end of it, except an obligation to maintain the street in the future to service one lot. Farrish asked if they developed this parcel as a PUD could they build a street that is not equal to City Standards and Jacks said it would be a private street. Farrish then stated he did not see any overwhelming need to build a City street for the 3 lots if they agreed to maintain there 25' access drive. Madison stated if there were a City street it would be wide enough for 2 cars to pass at once and the 25' access driveway will not. Carlisle stated there is no parking on the 25' strip. Dow stated her problem with the request is that the tandem lot ordinance specifies unless terrain precludes other development and Dow stated she did not see the terrain as precluding other development. Jacks stated the intent of the tandem lot ordinance also had to do with the depth of the parcel. MOTION • Hanna moved to grant the request for Conditional Use for the tandem lot and a Waiver of the Subdivision Regulations for 3 lot splits with e5N Planning Commission July 28, 1986 Page 5 a Bill of Assurance for street improvements to Halsell road. Green seconded and, upon roll eall, the motion to approve passed 5-4-0, Skwiot, Dow, Nash and Madison voting "nay". Gordon McNeal 629 Gray Ave. stated he received a notice from the Planning Office of the proposed lot splits and tandem lot request. He stated that the alternative to this request would have been to go through the subdivision procedure but it had been deeided to allow this request and it would not be to the advantage to the community for this large parcel to be cut up in this fashion. McNeal stated some property eloser to him had been nut up in this fashion and it had stymied any intellegent development of the larger property to the East. CONDTIONAL USE REQUEST — OAKRIDGE, LTD TANDEM LOT — 1100 E. TOWNSHIP The sixth item on the agenda was a Conditional Use request for a tandem lot submitted by Oakridge, Limited and was represented by Ery Wimberly for property at 1100 E. Township. Wimberly stated they ineluded in the agenda a vicinity map but neglected to show North of Township, Wimberly stated there is a street going North on Township, Township Common that street lines up with the East edge of this property. Wimberly noted they are planning a subdivision on this property and the preliminary plat had been turned into the Planning Office for Plat Review and Subdivision procedures. Wimberly stated the reason for the request of a tandem lot is not the physieall lay of the land, it is a deep hill side but after we dedieate additional ROW to Township Road there will be .240' left, that is not enough depth to run a street East and West of this property and have lots on both sides of the street and lots on Township. Wimberly stated the critical dimensions of this property is the reason for the request for the tandem lots if they did not do tandem lots they would end up with 75' X 240' lots and the bank half of this property would be useless and they are trying to utilize the land to it's fullest potential. Wimberly stated he was noneerned about the driveways onto Township and had provided a sketeh as to how the developer planned to tie each of the four lots together with two 25'strips as a common drive with paving to the required turn a round and be maintained by the property owners. Jacks asked under this proposed arrangement would they be willing to guarantee the six lots that face Hummingbird aeeess off Hummingbird and Wimberly stated he thought that would be a fair request and Jaeks stated there would be only two drives off Township road. Wimberly stated Hummingbird was already stubbed to the South and he felt the Planning Commission would want Hummingbird to be extended onto Township. Jacks asked if they could eonstruet this subdivision with 2 driveways onto Township and Wimberly stated those 2 driveways Kt • • • Planning Commission July 28, 1986 Page 6 would be serving 8 lots and Green asked with Hummingbird extended to Township and Wimberly stated yes. Green asked where Hummingbird would intersect and Wimberly stated 125' West of Township Common. Ruth Ostmeyer 1140 E. Township, stated how many lots would be on the 4 aere traet and Wimberly stated there would be a total of 14 lots. Mrs. Ostmeyer asked if the proposed homes would nompliment the value of the existing homes in that area and Wimberly said he thought they would be a little smaller and all single family units. Mrs. Ostmeyer stated that would be a lot of homes for sueh a small pareel and Wimberly stated for R-1 distriet and 4 aures City Code would allow 16 units. Mrs. Ostmeyer felt the size of the proposed homes would devalue the price of the existing property. Johns Schisler Rt. 11, asked if they had a general figure on the price of the proposed homes and Wimberly stated approximately $60,000 to $70,000 dollar units with approximately 12 to 1400 sq.ft. Dow stated one potential problem she had was if Hummingbird was extended people on Old Wire would eut across Overerest and up Hummingbird, something like the Winwood Overerest problem that we have now. Madison stated if these four tandem lots are approved prior to approval of the preliminary plat for this subdivision those lots are there, she felt this should have gone through the subdivision process first. Jaeks stated those were eoneept questions and assumed they did not want to go through the subdivision proeess until the tandem lots were approved. Wimberly stated their intent was to go through the subdivision proeess with a Conditional Use request for tandem lots, but there had been a mix up and the Conditional Use request was submitted to the Planning Office in time for this Planning Commission meeting. Jaeks stated the coneept approaeh is in the City ordinanee for developers who would like an opinion from the Planning Commission as to what they would approve, before the developer goes to the expense of engin- eering fees and submitting preliminary plats to the City for Plat Review. Farrish stated with the amount of traffic on Township this is probably the best development for that piece of property beeause it would limit the aceess on Township with 2 driveways and the extension of Hummingbird. MOTION Farrish moved approval of the Conditional Use request for Tandem lots as shown with the provision of the proposed subdivision being approved and no more than 2 driveways onto Township, seconded by Hanna and 722 • • • Planning Commission July 28, 1986 Page 7 followed by further discussion. Dow asked if it would be feasible in terms of lot size to extend Hummingbird through and run a street East and West and Wimberly stated after they dedicated the additional ROW and setbacks it would not be feasible. Upon roll call, the motion to approve passed 8-1-0. DISCUSSION OF MASTER STREET PLAN The seventh item on the agenda was a discussion of the Master Street Plan. Jacks stated he asked that this be placed on the agenda for discussion. Jacks stated there is a need for reclassification of some Cities and streets according to use, rather than what the Commission had hoped they would become and had not. Jacks questioned how this process would go forward. Larry Wood Planning Consultant stated when we were declared a metropolitan area which Fayetteville and Springdale happen to be after the 80 census, those cities were eligible for an MPO (Metropolitan Planning Organiza- tion) which the Highway Department had designated the Regional Planning Commission as the MPO for the urbanized area. When they do this it formalizes the Transportation Planning process, Wood stated we had done transportation planning for 10 years but not until we were designated the MPO did we receive any funds for this. Once this process happens there would be a Technical Advisory Committee and a Policy Committee which Mr. Jacks serves on, then you go through a formal process with the Highway Department and the Federal Highway Administration for the transportation planning. In answer to Jacks question Wood stated yes this would go forward, starting with the Technical Committee level we would go through everone's master street plan as the committee had recommended it and revise the master street plan on a functional basis as opposed to a distribution basis. Wood stated there would be some changes in the Collector system that are functioning as minor arterials at present time. After the Technical Advisory Committee reviewed the plan then we would take it the the Polity Committee again and ask if they agreed or disagreed and if they agreed then we take it the Planning Commission for there review and then subsequent a public hearing and on to the City Board for there approval. Jacks inquired to a very small map that showed the tieing of Springdale and Fayetteville together and asked Wood if they were still available to the Planning Commission and Wood said he would find out if they are still available. Dow asked if the funding would be federal or state and Wood stated /Lp • • • Planning Commission July 28, 1986 Page 8 it would be federal monies that go to the state for the Planning Organ- ization. Wood stated it is an annual proness and the funding would amount to $29,000.00, which $6,000.00 of that would be spent on the Transportation and Planning for the City. DISCUSSION OF PROPOSED SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE The eight item on the agenda was a diseussion of the proposed Subdivision Ordinance. Jaeks noted, attaehed to the agenda is a detailed list of revisions from the Committee Aetion Group for the Proposed Subdivision Ordinance. Jaeks said he would like to offer a publie Thank You to Mel Millholland and Ery Wimberly for their detailed engineering information. Jacks stated the format for the revisions is refering to the existing subdivision regulations with a large "P" and the Reynolds proposed Ordinanae with a small "p". Jaeks gave a brief outline on the revised format. 1. General Provisions 2. Subdivisions 3. Large Seale Developments 4. Design Standards a. Streets b. Storm drainage a. Sidewalks d. Street lights e. Water f. Sewer 5. Administration Enforcement Janks asked Carlisle if they had comments from everyone for the Off -Site improvements and Carlisle said she had comments from everyone and Clayton Powell said he. would go along with Daryl Bureh's comments. Jacks then stated essentially we have all the eomments and Carlisle suggested the Subdivision Committee and the Street Committee meet one more time. Jaeks asked the Commission to read the revisions and make some comparisons with the proposed ordinanees. DISCUSSION OF THE PROPOSED TREE ORDINANCE The ninth item on the agenda was a diseussion of the proposed Tree Ordinanee. • • • Planning Commission July 28, 1986 Page 9 Jacks stated the Planning Commission had received a letter from Chairman Mills of the Board of Adjustment asking that further consideration of the proposed Tree Ordinanee be withheld until such time as all the existing Ordinances can be reviewed and updated. After further discussion it was deeided the Commission would study the revised proposed Tree Odinance. Carlisle said she would ineorpor- ate the revisions into the proposed Tree Ordinance and mail them to the Commissioners for further study. Jacks asked Wood if he could revise the on going maintenanee cost for the next Planning Commission meeting and Wood said he would try to work it into his sehedule. There being no further discussion, the meeting adjourned at 7:25 P.M. /� d