Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1990-05-14 MinutesMINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE FAYETTEVILLE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION A meeting of the Fayetteville Planning Commission was held on Monday, May 14, 1990 in the Board of Directors Room on the second floor of the City Administration Building, 113 West Mountain Street, Fayetteville, Arkansas. MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: OTHERS PRESENT: MINUTES Jerry Allred, Fred Hanna, Jack Cleghorn, J. David Ozment, and Charles Nickle Gerald Klingaman, J.E. Springborn, Joe Tarvin and Jett Cato John Merrell, Don Bunn, Becky Bryant, Elaine Cattaneo, members of the press and others • The minutes of the regular meeting of April 23, 1990 were approved as distributed. Chairman Hanna pointed out that there are only five commissioners present at this meeting. He advised that five favorable votes are required for passage of rezoning petitions and conditional use requests. With all other requests, a majority of those members present is adequate. REHEARING OF REZONING PETITION R89-35 CAROLINE PARSONS - SW CORNER OF WEDINGTON & GARLAND The second item on the agenda was a rehearing of rezoning petition R89-35 submitted by Caroline Parsons and represented by Danny Wright, attorney at law, for property located on the southwest corner of Wedington Drive and Garland Avenue containing 5.32 acres. The request was to rezone from R-1, Low Density Residential, to C-1, Neighborhood Commercial. Danny Wright, representative for the owner, stated that, because of some recent developments, the petitioner requests that consideration of this rezoning request be tabled until the first meeting in June. He noted that they have been in negotiations with the school board since April regarding giving up some land to them and working out some water problems. It came to their attention that the expense of dealing with these problems will be more than anticipated by both parties. Therefore, they request some additional time for a legitimate appraisal by an engineer of the drainage problem to allow them to enter into a firm agreement with the school board. Also, they have been reviewing the staff report with respect to the proposal of the Planning Management Director, John Merrell, to recommend an R-0, Residential -Office, rezoning and the • • • Planning Commission May 14, 1990 Page 2 recommended restrictions. John Merrell, Planning Management Director, stated that the staff is prepared for this rehearing today, but they understand Mr. Wright's request. He added that it is up to the Planning Commission as to whether they want to postpone this. Chairman Hanna asked if a spokesperson of the opposition present would like to speak to the request to postpone this petition. Winston Simpson, School Superintendent, stated that he isn't present to oppose (particularly the recommendation of the planning staff), but he would like to encourage the Planning Commission to approve the request for postponement. MOTION Commissioner Ozment moved to table the rehearing until the first meeting in June, seconded by Cleghorn. The motion passed 5-0-0. PUBLIC REARMING - REZONING PETITION #R90-10 DON RUBLE - NW CORNER OF PEAR ST & SHADY AVE The third item was a public hearing for a rezoning petition #R90-10 submitted by Don Ruble and represented by David Horne, attorney at law, for property located on the northwest corner of Pear Street and Shady Avenue (lots 1,2,3,9 and part of lot 8, in Block 1 of the revised plat of block 5 of Parkers Plat of Valley View Addition). Request was to rezone from R-1, Low Density Residential, to C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial. John Merrell, Planning Management Director, stated that the staff had spoken with David Horne, the representative of the petitioner, who informed them that the request is being changed to some degree. Therefore, Mr. Horne has requested that the Commission consider postponing this item until the May 29th meeting. The staff recommends that it be postponed. MOTION Commissioner Allred moved to postpone consideration of this rezoning petition until the May oath meeting, seconded by Nickle. The motion passed 5-0-0. PRKLIMINARY PLAT OF SEXTON POINT SUBDIVISION JIM LINDSEY - W OF CROSSOVER RD, S OF JOYCE ST The fourth item was the preliminary plat of Sexton Point Subdivision submitted by Jim Lindsey and represented by Doug Hemingway, of Professional Surveyors, for property located on the west side of Crossover Road, south of Joyce Street and zoned R-0, Residential -Office. The property contains 1.55 acres with 2 proposed lots. Don Bunn, City Engineer, stated that the zoning is R-0, but the intent is to • Planning Commission May 14, 1990 Page 3 build single-family dwellings. There weren't any significant comments by any of the utility companies. Water and sewer are either directly available or just a short distance from the site. The staff recommends approval of the preliminary plat, subject to Plat Review and Subdivision Committee comments, payment of parks fees, constructions of sidewalks along Crossover Road, and subsequent approval of any necessary water and sewer extensions. Doug Hemingway, representative for the developer, didn't have any comments. John Teas, a member of the audience, asked how much of the drainage on this property has been accounted for. Mr. Bunn, City Engineer, stated that the staff doesn't have drainage plans on the project yet. He added that the drainage would go into the creek to the south and some drainage on to the west. He advised that there will be no change in the current drainage pattern. NOTION Commissioner Ozment moved to approve the preliminary plat subject to the staff's comments, seconded by Cleghorn. The motion passed 5-0-0. PRELIMINARY PLAT OF GREEKSIDE ESTATES FRANCIS FERGUSON - W OF CROSSOVER RD, S OF OLD WIRE RD The fifth item on the agenda was a preliminary plat of Creekside Estates submitted by Harry Gray of Northwest Engineers on behalf of Francis Ferguson for property located west of Crossover Road and south of Old Wire Road. The property is zoned A-1, Agricultural, and contains 18 acres with 7 proposed lots. Don Bunn, City Engineer, stated that this property was recently brought before the Planning Commission with a request to rezone to R-1 for the purpose of a subdivision. The proposal at that time was for 27 single-family lots on the 18 acres. The Planning Commission approved the rezoning, but the Board of Directors denied it. This development is consistent with the A-1 zoning requirement of a two acre minimum lot size. The developers are asking for a waiver on the minimum frontage requirements for lots 1 and 7. One of the lots has a 0' frontage and one has approximately 50' of frontage. With those exceptions, the development does meet the city's requirements for A-1 development. He pointed out that duplexes are allowed by right in an A-1 district. Therefore, a single duplex could be constructed on all of the lots except the two tandem lots. There were no significant comments by any of the utilities. No expansion of either the water or sewer will be required to serve this property. The staff recommends that the development be approved along with the required waivers subject to 1) full compliance with the City's flood plain ordinance; 2) no change in the cross sectional area in the flood plain (any filling in the flood plain area should be matched by an excavation); 3) Highway Department approval of access for lots 3, 4 and 5 onto Crossover Road; 4) payment of the required parks fees; 5) construction of sidewalks along Crossover Road as required by the Master Sidewalk Plan; and 6) Plat Review and Subdivision Committee comments. <1 • • • Planning Commission May 14, 1990 Page 4 Harry Gray stated that there is a each have 25' frontage on Magnolia. permanent access easements to them. north to the center of the 50' rig the staff comments. correction on the plat - lots 1 and 7 will The two tandem lots (2 & 6) will have 25' The east line of lot 7 should be extended ht -of -way. He added that they agree with John Teas stated that he is concerned about the runoff, no matter how slight, as well as the swiftness and volume of water that runs through Mudd Creek. Dorothy Maguire of 2672 Ferguson asked how many units would be allowed to be constructed on each of the seven lots. Chairman Hanna noted that there will only be one single-family unit or one duplex allowed per lot. Mrs. Maguire stated that, since the previous rezoning petition was discussed, letters were sent to the Corp of Engineers by the City. She asked if the feasibility study will still be done. Mr. Bunn advised that it will still be done regardless of the whether this plat is approved. Shay Lastra of 2752 Wakefield Place asked if the buildings will be built according to the new topographical study updates or according to the outdated topographical study. Chairman Hanna stated that they would be built according to what is on the at the books currently. Mrs. Lastra asked if someone would fill her in regarding the walking trail that is being considered from Gulley Park to Routh Park. Harry Gray stated that walking trail was discussed at the last Parks Board meeting, but he wasn't present. Mrs. Lastra stated that her commentary would be that the walking trail not be allowed for a number of reasons. First, if there is a walking trail, there will be people standing behind the existing homes, which will only serve as an enticement to increase burglary. Also, that area is constantly flooded. Leo Van Scyoc of 2910 Old Wire Road stated that his property adjoins a branch leading into Mudd Creek. He added that in the 30 years he has lived there, he has seen water up to the fence which is about 400' from Old Wire Road. He urged that there be no more development because of the runoff of Mudd Creek. Don Bunn stated that the plat notes that there will be only single-family residential homes on these lots. However, they do wish to take advantage of the A-1 zoning, so 5 of the lots have the potential for a duplex. Tandem lots are restricted to single-family residences. Chairman Hanna noted that this property has been before the Planning Commission two or three times previously for rezoning and preliminary plat. This time, the petitioner is not asking for any exceptions other than the frontage on the cul-de-sac. The only way to alleviate the frontage problem would be to build a street which would add to the problem. Therefore, the Planning Commission is almost to the point where, if they deny the use of the property, it would be considered inverse condemnation. • Planning Commission May 14, 1990 Page 5 Mr. Van Scyoc asked what potential there is for future lot splits on this property. Don Bunn advised that, as long as the zoning does not change, Lot 6 would be the only lot that could possibly be split relative to the size requirements. However, Lot 6 is a tandem lot and a split would create a double tandem lot which is illegal. Mr. Van Scyoc asked what the relationship is between agenda items 5 and 6. Mr. Bunn advised that they are both on the same 18 acres. MOTION Commissioner Allred moved that the preliminary plat be approved as presented subject to the staff's comments, seconded by Ozment. The motion passed 5-0-0. LARGE SCALE DEVELOPMENT PLAN OF MUDD CREEK FARM FRANCIS FERGUSON - W OF CROSSOVER RD, S OF OLD WIRE RD The sixth item on the agenda was a large scale development plan for Mudd Creek Farm submitted by Harry Gray of Northwest Engineers on behalf of Francis Ferguson for property located on the west side of Crossover Road, south of Old Wire Road containing 18 acres. The property is zoned A-1, Agricultural. • MOTION • Commissioner Allred moved to table this request until the second meeting in June to provide time for any appeals of the preliminary plat approval on this property, seconded by Cleghorn. The motion passed 5-0-0. LARGE SCALE DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR PROCTOR & GAMBLE SALES OFFICES RON TABOR - S OF MILLSAP, W OF N COLLEGE AVE The seventh item on the agenda was a large scale development plan for Proctor & Gamble Sales Office submitted by Ron Tabor of Flake & Company in Little Rock for property located south of Millsap Road and west of North College Avenue and zoned C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial. Don Bunn, City Engineer, stated that this is in an established subdivision and the staff doesn't have any problems with the large scale development. He added that the staff report noted a requirement of a 5' sidewalk along the south side. However, since there is already a sidewalk started on the north side, the one on the south side will not be required. The staff's recommendation is to approve the large scale development. Chairman Hanna advised that there aren't any members of the Subdivision Committee present to give a report of their meeting. George Faucette, representative of the developers, stated that this is a straight forward plan with no waivers requested. There was no one else in the audience wanting to speak to this item. • Planning Commission May 14, 1990 Page 6 MOTION Commissioner Allred moved to approve the large scale development plan subject to the staff's comments, seconded by Nickle. The motion passed 5-0-0. LARGE SCALE DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR ARKANSAS FARM & RANCH SUPPLY ROBERT PIKES - S SIDE OF SIXTH ST, E OF HOLLYWOOD AVE The eighth item on the agenda was a large scale development plan for Arkansas Farm & Ranch Supply submitted by Robert Fikes and represented by Dave Jorgensen, of Jorgensen & Associates, for property located on the south side of Sixth Street, east of Hollywood Avenue. The property is zoned I-1, Light Industrial & Heavy Commercial. Don Bunn, City Engineer, stated that there were no significant comments by the utility companies. Water and sewer are available to the property. He noted that after the staff's report was written, it was determined that there is an existing asphalt sidewalk along this property which will be acceptable. The staff recommends approval of the large scale development plan. There was no one else wanting to speak to this. • MOTION Commissioner Cleghorn moved to approve the large scale development plan subject to the staff's comments, seconded by Ozment. The motion passed 5-0-0. PRELThINARY PLAT (REPLAT) OF PARK PLACE - PHASE IV JIM LINDSEY - CAMBRIDGE RD, S OF MISSION BLVD The ninth item on the agenda was a replat of the preliminary plat of Park Place - Phase IV submitted by Jim Lindsey for property located on Cambridge Road, south of Mission Boulevard and zoned R-1, Low Density Residential. The property contains 8.51 acres with 18 proposed lots. Don Bunn, City Engineer, stated that the staff report covers Phases IV, V, and VIII of Park Place all of which are related and adjacent to each other. He advised that Phases IV and V had been previously approved by the Planning Commission but are back before the Planning Commission, because it has been longer than a year since their approval. Phase IV is adjacent to the existing Phase III of Park Place and Phase V is located just south of Phase IV. Phase VIII is a revision of a plat that was approved by the Planning Commission recently and is located adjacent to Phases IV & V and to Crossover Road. He advised that there is an overall plan of the Park Place Subdivision in the agenda packet. Mr. Bunn noted that considerable discussion took place among the utility companies as to easements that would be required, but there were no significant problems. Phases IV & V were approved previously subject to a road being constructed through to Crossover. It was required because the Planning Commission felt that a second access was needed to serve emergency vehicles. 5cl • • • Planning Commission May 14, 1990 Page 7 This tie -through would be completed with the approval of Phase VIII as platted. The staff does recommend approval of all three phases as they are platted subject to 1) the Plat Review and Subdivision Committee comments; 2) the construction of sidewalks in accordance with the city ordinances; 3) the payment of parks fees; 4) subsequent approval by the City Engineer's office of the water, sewer, streets & drainage plans; and 5) no direct access to Crossover Road from any of the proposed lots. Jim Lindsey request that a temporary gravel drive be approved on Phase VIII with the knowledge that it will be brought up to standards within a year. Mr. Bunn advised that the staff doesn't have a problem with this, knowing that Phase VIII is to be started within a year. Chairman Hanna advised that he had spoken with the Fire Chief about the possibility of those roads being used for emergency access, and he was agreeable to that. John Merrell stated that the staff will agree to that but he wanted to remind the Commission that one reason they have a Master Street Plan, zoning ordinance and subdivision regulations is so that this City doesn't develop with pockets of subdivisions without connections between them. The staff doesn't feel that this through street will become a shortcut when Phase VIII is developed. Chairman Hanna advised that originally it was decided that a paved road be required to Crossover Road before any further development. At this point, Mr. Lindsey is asking permission to do Phases IV & V with a gravel road which would be paved when Phase VIII is completed. Mr. Merrell stated that Mr. Lindsey had assured the staff that the developer would deal with any maintenance problems in connection with this gravel road without compromise. Commissioner Nickle clarified that the plan is to gravel the road through Phase VIII into Phases V & IV. He asked if it would be available for public access. Mr. Lindsey stated that it would be blockaded with movable barriers for emergency access only. Commissioner Nickle voiced his concern about potential problems for emergency vehicles getting through the barriers in a timely manner. Bill Bleil of 1731 Cambridge Road advised that he is representing the views of the owners of property in Park Place. He added that they have a petition signed by at least 95 percent of the homeowners, supporting the proposal he is going to present. He advised that the property owners do not wish to oppose, deter from or detract from the development in any way. They only wish to suggest a couple of improvements to the proposal that Mr. Lindsey has presented. He noted that they are concerned with three issues: 1) the traffic flow, 2) the Fayetteville tax base, and 3) the safety of their children. Their concern about the traffic flow is the potential for traffic from the additional development here and farther to the south in addition to traffic from Crossover Road. He advised that there is a traffic problem in East Oaks north of Mission Boulevard, and fourteen of the fifteen homeowners there signed the petition.He • • Planning Commission May 14, 1990 Page 8 stated that their proposal calls for a much more equitable distribution of traffic through the neighborhood and the adjoining development. Traffic from their development would exit north. Traffic from other developments would exit to Crossover Road. There would be back to back cul-de-sacs between Phase V and Phase VIII with only an emergency access. Cambridge Road would be closed off between Phase V and any development to the south. As far as the tax base, Mr. Bleil stated that isolated areas without through streets are very attractive and tend to attract upper scale homes. They feel that, with their proposal, they will be attracting those kinds of homes therefore maximizing the contribution of the tax base of Fayetteville. Because each separate phase of development can be built with only the access to that phase being necessary. This would facilitate the development of this project. Relative to the commercial tax base, they feel that Crossover Road is the thoroughfare intended for the traffic flow with the commercial area at the intersection. If Mr. Lindsey's proposal is permitted, the traffic flow will take traffic away from that commercial area as opposed to having the traffic routed to Crossover Road, having an impact on those businesses and any additional businesses going in. Their proposal calls for maximizing the tax base in the commercial and residential areas. The third concern is the dangerous situation that the traffic is going to cause for their children. He advised that there are 94 children in their development with 60% under the age of 10 years. Sixty-five percent of the homes in the neighborhood are either directly on Cambridge Road or up the hill. Also, their neighborhood is built around their amenities, and in order to get to those amenities, sixty-five percent or more of the homes will have to cross Cambridge Road. Their proposal has several improvements over the plan that was already presented. He advised that they are requesting approval of Jim Lindsey's plat as presented with two improvements: 1) moving the extension to accommodate Phase VI from its present location to the southwest end of Phase VIII and 2) back-to-back cul-de-sacs be provided at the east end of Phase V with an emergency -vehicle -only access in the middle. Given the potential traffic flow concerns and the fact that the Commission has the authority to approve the plat with the two changes, he requested that the Commission vote on their proposal. Chairman Hanna clarified that, with Mr. Bleil's proposal, when Phases IV, V and VIII are completed and the roads are completed, there will be back-to-back cul- de-sacs with only emergency access. Mr. Bleil agreed. Chairman Hanna stated that they would close this to the Planning Commission and the staff for discussion of Mr. Bleil's proposal. Mr. Merrell stated that the staff isn't comfortable with the way Mr. Bleil's proposal affects the issue of connecting Crossover Road and Mission Boulevard. Many of his arguments could be applied to any similarly located subdivision. He recommended that the Commission hear all pro and con who wish to speak on the overall issue and then vote as usual, rather than vote on this particular request. Commissioner Nickle asked if Mr. Bleil's proposal would exclude the amenities Planning Commission May 14, 1990 Page 9 from direct access. Mr. Bleil advised that the southern development would not be a part of their Property Owners Association and isn't incorporated by the covenants currently. Chairman Hanna advised that, there were street dedications through the subdivision, when the original plat of Park Place was accepted. This proposal would change a platted subdivision at the request of someone other than the person that owns the subdivision. He noted that this is complicated because there are three savings and loans involved in three separate pieces of property. They bought or loaned money on that property with the understanding that they were loaning money on a plat that was accepted by the City of Fayetteville. He added that they can't change streets without having a plat submitted and approved by the Planning staff for changes. Mr. Bleil stated that in his discussions with Don Bunn, City Engineer, under John Merrell's authority, they were told that the Commission had full power to approve the plat that Mr. Lindsey had submitted, subject to changes recommended by someone other than the developer. Mr. Merrell stated that would be correct, but the staff would like to know the developer's opinion on it. Mr. Bunn stated that it should be understood that it is the developer's land and plat, and he should have final say. Commissioner Allred asked if they are wanting to remove Phase VIII from the Property Owners Association. If so, that could have some legal aspects beyond the City's jurisdiction. Dave Jorgensen, Jorgensen & Associates, stated that he thinks the covenants of Park Place legal description encompasses all of Park Place proper. Mr. Bleil stated that they are requesting two improvements to the layout of the streets. Commissioner Ozment advised that, if the motion were made to add to or delete from Mr. Lindsey's proposal, they could act on that motion. He noted that they have attached some strings to developments in the past that differed slightly from what the developer proposed. Jim Lindsey stated that he has seen Mr. Bleil's proposed changes, and his position is not to fight against the opinion of the Planning Coouission or the property owners. He noted that he would be willing to work with some of it, but he doesn't want to go against the Planning Commission's philosophy or override the staff. He added that he is willing to allow the Planning Commission to make this decision and will yield to their decision. Mr. Bleil stated that Mr. Lindsey is caught in the middle, but he has indicated that their proposal is acceptable, if the Planning Commission chooses to approve it. The fundamental issue is the streets. Chairman Hanna stated that they have a preliminary plat for Phases IV and V, which they need to vote on individually. He added that, when they review the preliminary plat of Phase VIII, they will address the matter of a cul-de-sac on Victoria Lane. He suggested that they dispense with Phases IV and V, first, and then discuss Mr. Bleil's proposal, when they vote on Phase VIII. • Planning Commission May 14, 1990 Page 10 Leonard Gabbard, of Landtech Engineering in Springdale, stated that Ralph Brophy, who owns the property to the south of this development, has expressed his concern that the through street to the south bordering his 40 acres remain. He added that networking of these streets is very critical to providing good uniform flow of traffic. Although Mr. Brophy does have an access off of Ridgely Drive in the southeast corner of his land, he would like to go on record as being concerned that the thoroughfare may be deleted from the Master Plan. He requested that the Commission consider requiring the through street to connect to the north side of his property. Commissioner Ozment asked for staff comment on whether Cambridge Road is shown on the Master Street Plan as a through street. Mr. Bunn stated that he doesn't know if it is shown on the Master Street Plan, but it is shown on a Master Plan of Park Place. This document isn't a recorded document as far as he knows. Mr. Jorgensen stated that the Master Plan for the Park Place development is basically intended for a concept plan to show how Park Place could be developed. Commissioner Ozment noted then that, in that case, they aren't bound to act on it. Mr. Bunn stated that Phases IV and V were approved with streets dedicated previously. However, since they were not acted upon bythe developer within a year, they became null. Chairman Hanna stated that he was under the impression that the Planning Commission had approved an overall master plan for Park Place previously. MOTION Commissioner Allred moved to approve the replat of the preliminary plat of Phase IV, subject to the staff's comments and followed by discussion. JoAnn Teas of 1532 East Shadowridge stated that they didn't receive a certified letter of notification on Phase V, although their property does abuts this property. She stated further that Phases IV and V are to be built on an area that is heavily wooded with an indication of hazardous erosion according to an old soil survey. According to the contours, there are areas that have as much as 50% slope. In 1984, the Chairman of the Planning Commission questioned the engineer, Ery Wimberly, about the drainage at that time. Mr. Wimberly stated that the drainage ditch was cleaned out to the highway structure and widened to handle a 100 year flood. The engineer also stated that, because the channel is overexcavated, it will never discharge the volume it was designed for. In September of 1984, the Chairman again addressed concerns that drainage facilities be of sufficient size to handle the runoff all the way from the top of the hill. Mr. Wimberly said that all issues were addressed and explained that runoff from these areas would be taken to the first inlet on the uphill side of the cul-de- sac with french drains. Mrs. Teas advised that they have witnessed the drainage problem with the large chunks of concrete that have been dumped in the natural channel between phases III and IV. She added that they took a survey • Planning Commission May 14, 1990 Page 11 to see how affective the present system was and also interviewed people living in the area. She asked what they can speculate will happen with the added development relative to the following concerns: 1) no provision of greenbelt, 2) the noted steepness, 3) the erosion hazard, 4) the increased runoff, 5) a detention pond that has not taken care of the current rain situation and 6) the expected natural silting of this detention pond. She stated that it is the responsibility of this Planning Commission as a watchdog to carefully question what will happen with an environmental situation that will cause economic repercussions and damage down the way. John Teas stated that his main concern is the runoff water problem once it leaves the Park Place development. He stated that Phases IV and V are already in, and he doesn't understand how a developer can doze the 100 year old trees and put in a gravel street, when it hasn't been approved by the City. He asked who pays for the dredging of the pond. Mr. Bunn stated that the drainage plans have not been submitted to the City Engineering Office yet, but they would expect the developer to take care of whatever drainage comes through the subdivision. He advised that the detailed plans on construction don't have to be approved prior to approval of the preliminary plat. • Mr. Merrell advised that Fayetteville doesn't have a tree protection ordinance currently. • Jim Lindsey stated that Dr. Hays spent $100,000 to build a retention basin off- site of the three phases he developed in this subdivision. He added that this retention basin is a model situation and this is the only subdivision he knows of that has any type of retention basin. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Cleghorn and passed 5-0-0. PRELIMINARY PLAT OF PHASE V OF PARK PLACE ADDITION JIM LINDSEY - OFF OF CAMBRIDGE RD, S OF MISSION BLVD The tenth item on the agenda was a preliminary plat of Phase V of Park Place Addition submitted by Jim Lindsey for property located off of Cambridge Road on the south side of Mission Boulevard and zoned R-1, Low Density Residential. The property contained 11.05 acres with 24 lots. Chairman Hanna noted that this phase is where Mr. Bleil has requested a change in the plat as submitted by the developer. Mr. Bunn stated, in regard to Phases V & VIII, the staff's recommendation is that they be approved as submitted favoring the direct connection between Mission and Crossover rather than having only an emergency connection. Chairman Hanna stated that they should now vote on whether to deny or honor Mr. Bleil's request for back to back cul-de-sacs on Victoria Lane between Phases V & VIII. • • • Planning Commission May 14, 1990 Page 12 Commissioner Cleghorn stated that, when they were reviewing Foster Addition (located between Crossover Road and Rockwood Trail), everyone was adamant that there not be a through access. He stated that he doesn't understand the rational of being adamant about that access being blocked off and this access being open. Mr. Merrell stated that his recollection is that there were several people on top of and on the west slope of Mt. Sequoyah who were concerned that, if the Foster Addition were platted a certain way, there would be a road off of Crossover Road through that subdivision and over Mt. Sequoyah. Mr. Bunn advised that, regarding the Foster Addition, there had been considerable discussion about a route from downtown to Crossover Road with a couple of routes proposed: 1) one carrying Township on through and 2) a route further to south along Lafayette. At the time, the determination was that neither Township nor the other route would be considered as a tie through from downtown to Crossover Road. That was the specific reason that Foster Addition was not allowed to carry its street through. It was not necessarily in agreement with the Planning staff. MOTION Commissioner Cleghorn moved to approve Mr. Bleil's proposal of putting a cul- de-sac with an emergency access at the east end of Victoria Lane in Phase V, seconded by Nickle. The motion passed 3-2-0 with Cleghorn, Ozment & Nickle voting "yes" and Hanna & Allred voting "no". Chairman Hanna clarified that this vote is in favor of a cul-de-sac between the borders of Phases V &R./III) He added that it doesn't necessarily mean that street is permanently closed.. In answer to a question from Chairman Hanna, Mr. Lindsey stated that they will accept the change of a cul-de-sac on Victoria Lane between Phases V & VIII. Commissioner Nickle asked if he is correct in assuming, that they didn't preclude further extension to the south. Chairman Hanna answered, yes. Commissioner Allred questioned whether they needed to postpone voting on the preliminary plat of Phase V until the developers bring back a plat showing the change as proposed by Mr. Bleil. Chairman Hanna stated that they could vote on it, subject to that change. Mr. Bleil advised that it was his understanding that these preliminary plats could be approved, subject to changes, without having to go back through the preliminary plat process. Mr. Lindsey advised that he needs to know the Planning Commission position on Cambridge Road as it goes to Phase VI. He added that, with two separate cul- de-sacs between Phases V & VIII, he will need to know if he needs to extend • • • Planning Commission May 14, 1990 Page 13 Cambridge Road down to the southern border of Phase V for a later tie-in to Phase VI. If there isn't going to be a tie-in to Phase VI, he doesn't want to be out the expense of building that part of the street (approximately $15,000). Chairman Hanna advised that the Phase V plat that they are voting on still shows Cambridge Road platted to the southern border of Phase V. As to whether it goes through Phase VI further to the south, that will be voted on when Phase VI comes through. Mr. Bleil advised that his proposal includes elimination of the connection between Phases V & VI. In answer to a question from Commissioner Allred, Mr. Lindsey stated that they would probably build a separate set of amenities for the part of the development on the south. Commissioner Nickle stated that he understood that they had already voted to leave the continuation of Cambridge Road on to the south from Phase V to Phase VI, and he understood that they didn't include the access going east. In answer to a question from Commissioner Cleghorn, Mr. Lindsey stated that, if Mr. Bleil's proposal is accepted, Phases VI & VIII would be separate from the rest of the development. He stated that he doesn't have a problem with that as long as he knows where he stands with future development. In answer to a question from Chairman Hanna, Mr. Merrell advised that the staff stands on its recommendation. Commissioner Nickle stated that he had understood the motion they voted on was including the south tie to Phase VI, and all they were approving was the addition of a cul-de-sac without a straight tie -through to the east. Commissioner Cleghorn stated that what he had intended for his motion to include the cul-de-sacs on Victoria Lane and leave Phase V alone with the intent that, when Phase VI was built, that road would come all the way to the beginning to Phase VI. At the time Phase IV is brought through, a decision would be made as to whether a road would be put in going east and west or continue on to the south into the next development. Commissioner Ozment noted that, if the subdivision is separated into two, the extra traffic would be directed out on to Crossover Road. Commissioner Allred advised that, if there is another entrance further to the south, the developer could put a street straight through to Crossover and totally violate everything that they have been trying to do. Commissioner Ozment noted that, if the south tie is eliminated, the traffic is forced to Crossover Road. Mr. Bleil noted that his proposal splits the traffic flow between Mission and Crossover properly and limits the amount of danger to their children. Their proposal is to end Cambridge at Phase V. • • Planning Commission May 14, 1990 Page 14 MOTION Commissioner Cleghorn moved to eliminate Cambridge Road at the end of Phase V, seconded by Nickle. The motion passed 4-1-0 with Cleghorn, Ozment, Allred & Nickle voting "yes" and Hanna voting "no". Chairman Hanna advised that they will now vote on Phase V of Park Place which has been changed to show a cul-de-sac between Phases V & VIII and Cambridge Road ending at Phase V. MOTION Commissioner Nickle moved to approve the preliminary plat of Phase V of Park Place Addition the following changes: 1) a cul-de-sac between Phases V & VIII and 2) Cambridge Road ending at Phase V. The motion was seconded by Cleghorn and passed 5-0-0. RESUBMITTAL OF PRELIMINARY PLAT OF PHASE VIII OF PARR PLACE ADDITION JIM LINDSEY - W OF CROSSOVER RD, S OF MISSION BLVD The eleventh item on the agenda was a resubmittal of the preliminary plat of Phase VIII of Park Place Addition submitted by Jim Lindsey for property located on the west side of Crossover Road, south of Mission Boulevard and zoned R-1, Low Density Residential. The property contains 20.05 -acres with 43 lots. Commissioner Allred clarified that Phase VIII will continue into Phase VI for a long cul-de-sac. Chairman Hanna answered, yes MOTION Commissioner Nickle moved to approve Phase VIII as submitted, seconded by Cleghorn. The motion passed 5-0-0. FINAL PLAT OF REGENCY ESTATES PARKS & RUSSELL LTD - W OF OLD WIRE RD, N OF MISSION BLVD The twelfth item on the agenda was a final plat of Regency Estates submitted by Parks & Russell Ltd and represented by Harry Gray, of Northwest Engineers, for property located on the west side of Old Wire Road, north of Mission Boulevard. The property is zoned R-1, Low Density Residential, and contains 6.52 acres with 23 proposed lots. Don Bunn, City Engineer, advised that the staff recommends approval of this plat subject to: 1) the filing of subdivision covenants, if any, 2) Plat Review and Subdivision Committee comments, 3) payment of the parks fees, 4) construction of sidewalks in accordance with City ordinance, 5) execution of a contract with the City for the remaining public improvements, and the 6) execution of a bond for off-site improvements. Harry Gray stated that they have no problems with the staff's recommendations. (9t • • • Planning Commission May 14, 1990 Page 15 There being no one else present wanting to speak to this item, it was closed to the Planning Commission. MOTION Commissioner Ozment moved to approve the final plat subject to the staff's comments, seconded by Allred. The motion passed 5-0-0. FINAL PLAT OF FIESTA PARK ADDITION - PHASE II BHP DEVELOPMENT - S OF APPLEBY, N OF DRAKE The thirteenth item on the agenda was the final plat of Fiesta Park Addition - Phase II submitted by BMP Development and represented by Harry Gray of Northwest Engineers. The property is zoned R-2, Medium Density Residential, and contains 9.34 acres with 44 proposed lots. Don Bunn, City Engineer, stated that the staff recommends approval of this plat subject to: 1) a notation on the plat that only single-family residences are allowed in this phase of development, 2) Plat Review and Subdivision Committee comments, 3) payment of the required parks fees, 4) construction of sidewalks in accordance with City ordinance, 5) the execution of a contract with the City for the remaining public improvements, 6) the execution of a bond for remaining off-site improvements, if any, and 7) a notation on the.plat that access to lots 61 & 62 is restricted to Evergreen Street. Mr. Gray stated that all those conditions were acceptable to the developer. He added that this is an affordable housing project. John Merrell, Planning Management Director, stated that the staff has met several times with Jack Burckhart, the developer, and was very impressed with the plans. He added that this development will help the City meet its goal for providing more affordable housing for modern income people. MOTION Commissioner Nickle moved to approve this plat subject to the staff's comments, seconded by Allred. The motion passed 5-0-0. CONDITIONAL USE FOR HOME OCCUPATION - BATON TWIRLING SUSAN WALKER - 1617 NORTH MAXWELL The fourteenth item on the agenda was a conditional use for a home occupation - Baton Twirling, submitted by Susan Walker for property located at 1617 North Maxwell and zoned R-1, Low Density Residential. John Merrell, Planning Management Director, stated that Ms. Walker is asking for permission to conduct baton twirling lessons in her home. She is also requesting a waiver of the time restrictions set for home occupations in an R- 1 zoning district. She has told the staff that she would be teaching only 1 to 2 students at a time at her home. For larger classes, she plans to rent some • Planning Commission May 14, 1990 Page 16 studio space. The staff recommends that the conditional use be approved subject to three conditions: 1) that there be no more than two students on the premises at one time, 2) that all parking is restricted to her driveway, and 3) that the lessons be restricted to the backyard. The staff also recommends the waiver on the time restriction as she has requested. Susan Walker stated that she has rented a studio on Dickson Street. She noted that there is a car sitting in her driveway that she has made arrangements to have moved to make available parking. She advised that she only plans to teach makeup lessons at her home. This will be convenient for her without having to go to the studio. Wanda Wilson of 1246 South Maxwell stated that she was concerned about the parking and extra traffic that would be created by this business. She added that, if the business is conducted under the conditions Ms. Walker has discussed, there should be no problem. Chairman Hanna advised that this conditional use is approved for a one year period and at the end of the year, it is automatically renewed unless there are complaints or evidence that the conditions set forth when granted are not being adhered to. • NOTION • Commissioner Allred moved to grant the conditional use subject to the staff's comments and requirements, seconded by Nickle. The motion passed 5-0-0. CONDITIONAL USE (NON -CONFORMING USE) - ANTIQUE SHOP DORWIN KILGORE - 525 MISSION BLVD The fifteenth item was a conditional use (non -conforming use) - antique shop submitted by Dorwin Kilgore for property located at 525 Mission Boulevard and zoned R-1, Low Density Residential. John Merrell, Planning Management Director, stated that the building at this location has been operated as an antique store for several years. Virtually all the surrounding property is zoned R-1, Low Density Residential. He added that the staff isn't sure when this building was built, but it was well before 1970 (when the current zoning ordinance was adopted). Therefore, it is a non- conforming use under the zoning ordinance. Prior to 1982, the Planning Commission approved a change in a non -conforming use to a retail furniture store at this location. He advised that there is a provision in the zoning ordinance under the non -conforming uses which states that, if a non -conforming building is left vacant for longer than 120 days, the Planning Commission is under no obligation to approve a continuation of the non -conforming use. He noted that this building has been vacant for more than 120 days. Mr. Merrell further stated that the applicants have done certain alterations to the structure in advance to this request. However, they did voluntarily stop when they were informed that a conditional use was needed. The Kilgores do have 63 • • Planning Commission May 14, 1990 Page 17 a potential tenant for the half of the building that is being considered for an antique store. The staff does have some concerns such as ingress/egress, parking with cars backing into the street and heavy traffic. On the other hand, this building has previously operated as a successful commercial business. Therefore, the staff's recommendation is that the Planning Commission agree to waive the 120 day clause. At this time, the staff's recommendation is to approve a conditional use only for the proposed antique store in one part of the building. Chairman Hanna clarified that the staff is recommending that a conditional use be approved for half of the building for an antique store. Before the other half is rented, they would have to come back for an additional conditional use. Mr. Merrell answered, yes, that it could be an amendment to this conditional use. He added that the former business was very quiet. Now, with the possibility of two businesses, there could be problems. Dorwin Kilgore agreed that, if they do rent the other part, they will come back with another request. He added that he would want to have something with low traffic. Chairman Hanna advised that anything going in there would be by conditional use, and some uses wouldn't be acceptable in that location. Robert Melton of 535 Mission stated that he lives adjacent to this property on the north side. He added that they have no objections to an antique store being in the entire building. However, they do object to more than one business in the building because of the parking situation. He added that he originally owned the building and obtained the approval for the furniture store and he has witnessed the parking problem in front of his house. He reiterated that there isn't enough parking space for two businesses without parking on his property. Chairman Hanna advised that with a request for a second business in this building, the parking issue will have to be addressed. MOTION Commissioner Cleghorn moved to approve the conditional use subject to the staff's recommendations, seconded by Nickle. The motion passed 5-0-0. WAIVER OF THE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS - LOT SPLIT #1 MARVIN & MARIETTA JANZEN - S OF WHITE OAK, N OF W SALEM RD The sixteenth item on the agenda was a waiver of the subdivision regulations - lot split ill submitted by Betty Galloway, of Century 21 Realty, on behalf of Marvin & Marietta Janzen for property located south of White Oak Road, north of West Salem Road. The property is located outside the City Limits and contains 3.97 acres. • Don Bunn, City Engineer, stated that this tract of land is proposed to be split into two pieces of approximately two acres each. General utilities are • • Planning Commission May 14, 1990 Page 18 available to both tracts. Sewer isn't available, but they do meet the ordinance requirement of 1.5 acres for a septic system and perc tests have been approved by the County. The staff recommends that the split be approved. Betty Galloway, representing the owners, was present, but had no comments. MOTION Commissioner Allred moved to grant the lot split subject to the staff's recommendations, seconded by Ozment. The motion passed 5-0-0. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:05 p.m.