Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1988-02-08 Minutes• MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE FAYETTEVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION A meeting of the Fayetteville Planning Commission was held on Monday, February 8, 1988 in the Board of Directors Room of the City Administration Building, 113 West Mountain Street, Fayetteville, Arkansas. MEMBERS PRESENT: Ernie Jacks, Butch Robertson, Julie Nash, Fred Hanna, B.J. Dow, Gerald Seiff, J.E. Springborn and Gerald Klingaman MEMBERS ABSENT: OTHERS PRESENT: Frank Farrish Steve Adams, Harry Gray, Larry Wood, Don Bunn, Sandra Carlisle, Tessi Franzmeier, members of the press and others PUBLIC HEARING - REZONING R88-2 HILA MAE WALKER - 1828 MISSION BLVD. The first on the agenda was consideration of rezoning petition R88-2 submitted by Hila Mae Walker and represented by Steve Adams. Request was to rezone a tract of land located on the south side of Hwy 45 approximately one half way between Viewpoint Dr. and Greenview Dr., from R-1 (Low Density Residential) District to C-1, (Neighborhood Commercial) District. Planning Consultant Wood's recommendation was; C-1 District is not recommended for the following reasons: 1. The requested rezoning is not compatible with the General Plan recommendation of low density residential; 2. The property under application is not at a major intersection which is the preferred location for commercial uses; and 3. Approval of a C-1 District at this location would set a precedent for other isolated commercial uses along major streets in the City. In 1970 when the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance were adopted it was the decision of the Planning Commission and City Board to not recognize isolated nonresidential uses in residential areas. This was done in an effort to keep from strip zoning all of the major roads which lead into Fayetteville. Over the past 17 years both the Commission and Board have held pretty tight to this policy. Chairman Jacks opened the public hearing and asked if anyone would like to speak for the petition as presented. Steve Adams advised he was representing Mrs. Walker. Mr. Adams noted that Ms. • • • Planning Commission February 8, 1988 Page 2 Walker had been the owner of the property in question for many years. He said the property was developed as a convenience store and gas station in 1966. He said the property had not been in use for approximately 6 months and Ms. Walkers understanding was that the use could not continue as a non -conforming use. Mr. Adams said the property owner was concerned that the area needed to be compatible with a use of the surrounding districts. He said the problem was the land was approximately 1.4 acres and was rather large for residential use in that neighborhood. Mr. Adams advised the property was located on a very heavily traveled thoroughfare (Hwy 45 East) and had been used essentially as neighborhood commercial purposes for the past 20 years. His contention was the R-1 use was not an appropriate zoning use for the land in question. He said it had not been an issue because it was used as a convenience store. Mr. Adams said the conversion of the lot to R-1 usage would require at least one lot split in order to have a tract of land suitable for R-1 usage similar to nearby tracts of land, and further it would require demolition of the existing structure. Mr. Adams felt the lot was not totally developed and that the area that was left in vegetation around all sides and the back would continue to serve as adequate screening from the residential uses behind the convenience store/gas station. Mr. Adams felt it would be unlikely that any residential use fronting on Highway 45 would develope. He said what had developed as far as residential usage had been futher out (Park Place & Kantz area) both of which were higher density residential uses and single family residential uses. Mr. Adams noted a garden center had come into place, a daycare center & church, Dillions grocery store, cemetary, and the Fellowship Christian School. Mr. Adams said that indicated to him that the property was not suitable for development as an R-1 type zoning and that C-1 would infact be the only suitable purpose for the tract of land in question. In answer to a question from Commissioner Nash, Mr. Adams replied Ms. Walker had no plans to build anything more than what was already there. Mr. Adams advised that Ms. Walker had not planned to reopen the store, but would like to sell the property. Nash asked why Ms. Walker would not rather apply for a conditional use on the property. Mr. Adams said in order to apply for a condidtional use the property had to be used for the existing use and she was not willing to reopen the store in order to sell it. Commissioner Springborn asked Mr. Adams what the situation was to the east and south of the tract of land in question. Mr. Adams advised both to the east and south were single family homes. Sandra Carlisle responded to Commissioner Nash in that a change in non -conforming use was not allowed because the existing use had not been used in a six month period. She added after the six month period the non -conforming use reverted back to the R-1 zoning use (single family). Commissioner Robertson asked if the non -conforming use could by chance be reinstated. Chairman Jacks asked if the legality of the non -conforming use had been checked with Mr. McCord and Carlisle advised she had checked with Jim McCord. Claude Prewitt said he spoke with Jim McCord and he suggested to proceed with the • • • Planning Commission February 8, 1988 Page 3 change in zoning because of reasons that Sandra Carlisle had stated. Mr. Prewitt advised another problem was obtaining financing for the property because of the present R-1 zone. Mr. Prewitt also said he originally applied for C-2 zoning and asked Sandra Carlisle who changed the requested C-2 to C-1. Carlisle advised someone from Prewitts office had asked her to change the requested C-2 to C-1. There was no opposition to the petition as requested, the public hearing was closed and discussion returned to the Planning Commission for discussion. Commissioner Robertson advised he would obstain from the vote. Chairman Jacks commented that the Planning Commission had been very protective in the area of Mission and Hwy 45. He felt it was one of the few nice and unstripped areas in Fayetteville. He felt the commercial area was concentrated at the intersection of Hwy 265, with the exception of one rezoning granted to Dillions because of an expansion of the store. Jacks said he had hoped the Commission could allow a change in the non -conforming use, but had not realized that once a non -conforming use ceased that it could not be reinstated. Commissioner Hanna said he could not see what purpose the R-1 use would serve because he felt an eyesore would be left in existance. Commissioner Klingaman asked if the property was rezoned, would the Commission have any say over any future changes or development in that area. Jacks advised whatever was permitted in C-1 would be allowed as a use by right. Commissioner Dow felt if the use remained the same it would not be intrusive, but by rezoning they would be opening up the property to whatever happened and that it would not ensure the buffering would remain. Chairman Jacks felt the service station that was presently used as a plant nursery had been an unused use for more than a six month period. MOTION Commissioner Nash moved to deny the petition as requested, seconded by Dow and followed by discussion. Commissioner Hanna felt he could not vote to deny the petition because he felt the property could not be utilized properly and felt the property would set there as an eyesore. He hoped by rezoning the property C-1, someone would come in and fix it up and possibly make a nice convenience store to serve the neighborhood. Commissioner Nash felt that denying the petition would not make the land worthless. Nash said she would like to have someone come before the Commission and tell them what was going to be developed there so the Commission would know what they were addressing. Commissioner Seiff asked if the petitioner was obligated to say what their intent • • • Planning Commission February 8, 1988 Page 4 was for the property. Jacks advised the petitioner was not obligated to make a commitment for the intent of the property. Seiff said he felt the property had been commercial for all this time and therfore he would have to vote against the motion. Mr. Prewitt advised he had two prospective buyers for the property and at least one of them would be willing to advise of the intent of the property. David Arthurs advised he was looking at the property with the intent to revert it back to a convenience store, and possibly rental offices for Doctors or Dentists. Commissioner Springborn felt if the rezoning was permitted that it would include the buffer zone which would allow room for considerable undertaking. The question was called and the motion to deny rezoning petition R88-2 as requested passed 5-2-1, Dow, Springborn, Jacks, Nash and Klingaman voting "yes" and Hanna and Seiff voting "nay" with Robertson "abstaining". APPROVAL OF A PRELIMINARY PLAT WITH CONDITIONAL USE FOR TANDEM LOTS GRAUE ADDITION - BILL GRAUE - EAST OF HILLDALE & WEST OF OLD WIRE The second item on the agenda was consideration of a preliminary plat of the Graue Addition and a conditional use for tandem lots submitted by Bill Graue and represented by Harry Gray of Northwest Engineers. Property contains 2.3 acres with a total of 6 proposed lots, zoned R-1, Low Density Residential District. Property located east of Hilldale and west of Old Wire. Chairman Jacks advised this item was not heard by the Subdivision Committee because a quorum was not possible. Harry Gray presented proof of notification of property owners within 100' of the proposed subdivision. Mr. Gray advised 7 of the 10 certified letters had been received, with the rejection of one. Carlisle advised if the certified letters were refused or returned a time limitation would come into play. Carlisle noted that Mr. Gray made every effort to notify the property owners and felt proof of notification should be accepted. Mr. Gray noted the property in question was located on a steep incline with an existing house on the tract of land. Jacks asked Mr. Gray if he concurred with the plat review comments and Mr. Gray replied "yes". Chairman Jacks saw concern for the tandem lot driveway coming off Old Wire and would like as few driveways onto Old to see lot 3 (tandem lot) enter from Jacks advised a letter had been advising the extension of Hilldale to steepness of the terrain and with the Wire as possible. Jacks said he would like the cul-de-sac rather from Old Wire Road. received from the City Engineer, Don Bunn Old Wire was not logical because of the possibility of a dangerous situation. In answer to a question from Commissioner Seiff, Mr. Gray said it would not be a problem for the tandem lot drive (lot 3) to come off the cul-de-sac at Hilldale. • • Planning Commission February 8, 1988 Page 5 Commissioner Nash questioned the grade requirement ordinance. Carlisle advised the grade was 10% and anything over 10% had to be approved by the Planning Commission. Chairman Jacks asked if anyone in the audience would like to speak for or against the preliminary plat as presented. Mr. Andrew Van Eman, 2640 Stagecoach but had real concern of the water flow acreage in question and asked in which stated he was not for or against the plat, He noted a lot of water came off the direction would the excess water flow. Commissioner Seiff asked how the grading ordinance was coming along and Carlisle advised it would probably show up in the new subdivision regulations. Chairman Jacks felt the only recourse for drainage flow onto Mr. Van Eman's property was probably through the legal system. Don Bunn interjected all drainage plans had to be approved by him. Paul Batson, 2672 Stagecoach stated his concern was somewhat mutual with Mr. Van Emans. Mr. Batson said his water problem was more sub-teranian in that the water comes from a grade directly behind his home. He said the water drained out on the corner of his lot and then to Hilldale. He said a -gentleman came out from the City Engineers Office and discussed his problem. Mr. Batson said the gentleman said the answer to his problem was "this happens all over Fayetteville". Mr. Batson wished some consideration could be made before a final decision was made to go ahead with the proposed subdivision. MOTION Commissioner Seiff moved to approve the preliminary plat subject to; 1) plat review comments and; 2) lot 3 (tandem lot) driveway off Hilldale leaving two exits onto Old Wire, seconded by Commissioner Springborn. The motion to approve passed 8-0-0. Commissioner Dow added she was concerned about approving tandem lots, she noted the ordinance read "in order to approve a tandem lot the terrain of the area proposed as such that subdivision of said area into a standard block is not feasible". Dow said she did not consider the proposed terrain impractical. Chairman Jacks felt that the terrain would be a judgement call and in this case agreed there was a terrain problem. Commissioner Klingaman asked if the R-1 density was strictly single family. Jacks replied "yes" and there was possibility for duplex in an R-1 zone as a conditional use. • OTHER BUSINESS Chairman Jacks noted he had been told by the City Manager that a Professional Planning Commission February 8, 1988 Page 6 Planner would be staffed by the City. Chairman Jacks advised a Planning Workshop would be held sometime advised the new Planning Commissioners to attend if possible. Chairman Jacks for 1988. this Spring and announced the appointment of Officers to the Planning Commission Commissioner Robertson advised Officers for 1988 would be: Chairman, Ernie Jacks; Vice Chairman, Butch Robertson and; Secretary, B.J. Dow. MOTION Commissioner Nash motion to approve MINUTES moved to approve the elected Officers, seconded by Seiff. The Officers as elected passed 8-0-0. The minutes of the January 25, 1988 Planning Commission meeting were approved as distributed. • There being no further business the meeting adjourned at about 6:15 p.m. •