Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1990-07-09 Minutes• • MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE FAYSITEVILLE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION A meeting of the Fayetteville Planning Commission was held on , July 9, 1990 in the Board of Directors Room on the second floor of the City Administration Building, 113 West Mountain Street, Fayetteville, Arkansas. MEMBERS PRESENT: Jerry Allred, Fred Hanna, J.E. Springborn, Jett Cato, J. David Ozment, and Charles Nickle MEMBERS ABSENT: OTHERS PRESENT: Jack Cleghorn, Gerald Klingaman and Joe Tarvin John Merrell, Becky Bryant, Don Bunn, Elaine Cattaneo, members of the press and others Chairman Hanna advised that they have had a request to table agenda item 115 (Preliminary Plat of Green Meadows Addition) to provide time for the location of the Salem Road extension on this property to be decided. The developer feels that location will have a bearing on two phases of the subdivision. He further stated that they have had a request to table item 1110 (lot split for property located on West Avenue) until further information is obtained. He advised that there will be no discussion on these two items from the Planning Commission tonight. However, if anyone in the audience has comments, they will have the opportunity to speak. PUBLIC HEARING - REZONING PETITION #R90-14 DALE & DENNIS CAUDLE - N OF WEDINGTON DR, E OF RUPPLE RD The first item on the agenda was a public hearing for rezoning petition 11R90-14 submitted by Dennis & Dale Caudle for property located on the north side of Wedington Drive, east of Rupple Road containing 5.05 acres. The request is to rezone from A-1, Agricultural, to C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial. John Merrell, Planning Management Director, stated that this property has frontage on both Wedington Drive and Rupple Road. As the staff understands it, the Caudles don't have any definite plans for development of this property at this time, except for the possibility of self-service storage units on some portion of the property. That use would require a C-2 zoning and a conditional use permit. The overall policy by the City over the last few years has been to try to carefully plan what happens on Wedington Drive to ensure that it doesn't become a commercial strip like North College Avenue. The City has identified the following three key nodes at which commercial development would be encouraged: a) the intersection of Wedington Drive and the Bypass, b) the intersection of Wedington Drive and Rupple Road, and c) the intersection of Wedington Drive & Double Springs Road. The staff feels that the City's plans have helped stabilize the area, protect property values and minimize traffic 79 • • • Planning Commission July 9, 1990 Page 2 problems. With respect to the nodes of commercial development, the City has been somewhat lenient about granting certain limited rezonings in the area on Wedington from the Bypass to Rupple Road. This is an area that is emerging as an office and institutional area with all R-0 uses. The staff's recommendation is to rezone this property to R-0 rather than C-2 to keep it in harmony with the type of growth the City has encouraged out there. This recommendation is subject to a Bill of Assurance on tree preservation which would require the owners to submit a tree preservation plan to preserve 60% of all existing trees with the caliper of 8" or more and protect the trees during the construction paving process with a proviso that, if a few more trees needed to be removed to make a good development, the staff has the administrative discretion to negotiate with the developer to the extent of 15%. Dale and Dennis Caudle stated that they would like to develop self -storage units on the back 3.5 acres of the property, which isn't visible from the highway. In order to do the mini -storage, they would need a C-2 zoning. He advised that they are environmentally conscientious and will save as many trees as possible. He noted that the front 1 5 acres of property along Wedington Drive could be left as A-1 or zoned to R-0. They are mainly concerned with the back 3.5 acres. Commissioner Springborn asked if mini -storage in the back half is compatible with the recommendation relative to the preservation of the trees. Mr. Caudle answered yes. Mr. Merrell stated that he would concur with that. In answer to a question from Mr. Merrell, Dale Caudle stated that their access to the self -storage development would be off of Rupple Road. Dennis Caudle stated that they feel there is a need for self -storage units on that side of town, but they also realize the buildings aren't usually attractive, so they are planning to place them 300' off of Wedington. Commissioner Allred stated that they have had prior discussion regarding mini - storage as a use by right in the C-2 zone. He asked if there is anything in the proposed new ordinances to address this situation. Mr. Merrell stated that he doesn't recall how it is addressed in the new ordinance. But, these type of facilities are a fairly good use in a C-2 zone because they tend to generate less traffic than other uses allowed in C-2 and are also relatively quiet. He stated that his opinion is that the mini -warehousing developments should be allowed by right in the C-2 zone. Mr. Merrell stated that the staff stands by their recommendation. However, if it is the consensus of the Commission to recommend a C-2 zoning for part of this property, the staff would like to recommend that it be subject to a Bill of Assurance limiting the use of that portion of the property to mini -warehousing. In answer to a question from Commissioner Allred, Mr. Merrell stated that there wouldn't be a screening requirement since this property abuts an A-1 zone on one side and Washington County on the other. Dale Caudle stated that they would agree to signing a Bill of Assurance to limit the development of that property. i • • Planning Commission July 9, 1990 Page 3 In answer to a question from Commissioner Nickle, Mr. Caudle stated that they have no development plans for the property fronting on Wedington Drive at this time. Mr. Merrell stated that the staff would like the Bill of Assurance to also include the access to the back property be limited to Rupple Road. There being no one else wanting to speak to this, the public hearing was closed. Chairman Hanna stated that mini -storage would be a compatible use for that area, and it is too bad they have to have a C-2 zoning for that use. With the Bill of Assurance that was offered, he feels that this is a reasonable request. MOTION Commissioner Ozment moved to recommend a rezoning of the north (back) 3.5 acres to C-2 with a Bill of Assurance that it will be limited to mini -storage development and that the access would be from Rupple Road and to recommend a rezoning of the south (front) 1.5 acres to R-0, Residential -Office subject to staff recommendations, seconded by Cato. The motion passed 6-0-0 with Cleghorn, Tarvin and Blingaman being absent. PUBLIC HEARING FOR REZONING PETITION #R90-16 GEORGE LEONARD MCCANDLESS - N OF SYCAMORE, W OF COLLEGE AVE The second item on the agenda was a public hearing for rezoning petition #R90- 16 for property submitted by George Leonard McCandless and represented by Steve Gunderson for property located on the north side of Sycamore, west of College Avenue. The request was to rezone from R-1, Low Density Residential, to C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial. John Merrell, Planning Management Director, stated that this piece of property fronts on Sycamore and adjoins commercial property on College. He stated that it is the feeling of the staff that an R-1 zoning does overly restrict Mr. McCandless, but they feel that C-2 is too intensive for that property for the reasons pointed out in the staff report. There are several R-0 businesses on the south side of Sycamore and the staff's recommendation is to approve a rezoning to R-0. Steve Gunderson, representing Mr. McCandless, stated that they requested a C-2 zoning, because there is a piece of property on the east side of the subject property zoned C-2. When he initially filed the petition, he wanted to have all of the property zoned in a similar manner. However, after reviewing the staff's recommendation and the city ordinances, the applicant is of the opinion that an R-0 zoning would be amenable. Charles Richardson, who lives at the corner of Sycamore and Green Valley, stated that this is a very viable neighborhood which is anchored by Woodland School. • • • Planning Commission July 9, 1990 Page 4 The neighborhood is apprehensive about the College Avenue commercial creeping into their neighborhood. He stated that he can see that eventually there is going to be some sort of buffer between the residential area and the commercial. The west boundary of the subject property would seem to be a reasonable place to stop the commercial development, so the R-0 seems like a reasonable request. There being no one else wanting to speak, the public hearing was closed. MOTION Commissioner Springborn moved to recommend approval of an R-0 rezoning, seconded by Nickle. The motion passed 6-0-0. PUBLIC HEARING FOR REZONING PETITION #R90-17 WASHINGTON COUNTY FARM BUREAU - (3389 WEDINGTON DR)S OF WEDINGTON,W OF BETTY JO The third item on the agenda was a public hearing for a rezoning petition //R90- 17 submitted by Washington County Farm Bureau for property located at 3389 Wedington Drive (south of Wedington Drive, west of Betty Jo Drive), containing 1.43 acres. The request was to rezone from R-0, Residential -Office, to C-1, Neighborhood Commercial. John Merrell, Planning Management Director, stated that the staff feels that this is strictly a sign issue rather than a rezoning issue. An inspections staff member led Mr. Rodman, of Washington County Farm Bureau, to believe that a rezoning petition would be a better way to handle this instead of going to the Board of Sign Appeals. He explained that Farm Bureau would like to put a free- standing sign in the yard, but they aren't allowed in the R-0 zoning. That is their reason for requesting this commercial zoning. The staff has spoken to Mr. Rodman and explained that this is actually a sign issue, but Mr. Rodman decided to carry through with the rezoning petition. The staff's recommendation is that the Planning Commission refer this to the Board of Sign Appeals. Joe Rodman, representing Washington County Farm Bureau, stated that their purpose is to put up a free-standing sign. He noted that he did receive conflicting advice from the staff as to their best approach. They were first told to go through the application process for a sign permit which they did. This application was rejected and a member of the staff indicated that it would be a waste of time to appeal it. Instead, they should request a rezoning. Since then, the staff has indicated that, if that they did appeal it, the staff is prepared to recommend a variance to allow them to attach a 24 square foot sign to the side of their building. However, because of the way the property is situated and the location of the building, a 24 square foot sign attached to the side of the building would not be visible to traffic coming from the west. Mr. Rodman explained that the reason they are requesting this sign is that their State Farm Bureau organization and their National Farm Bureau organization are trying to standardize signs in all states. The purpose of the sign is to make it easier for Farm Bureau members, who aren't from this area, to locate the office when they have problems. 'g/ • Planning Commission July 9, 1990 Page 5 Paul Marinoni, a member of the City Board of Directors and a member of the Farm Bureau Board of Directors, stated that Washington County Farm Bureau has a membership of about 4,400 people. There is currently commercial activity there and to rezone it commercial would be completely logical, in his opinion. Furthermore, recently the Planning Commission considered an application by Bryce Davis to rezone property on the north side of Wedington Drive and granted C-2 up to Salem Road with the logic being that Salem Road would be a demarkation line where C-2 would stop. If Salem Road were extended south, the subject property would be included in the commercial zoning node of the Bypass and Wedington Drive intersection. He noted that their request is to rezone the property. There being no one else wanting to speak, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Springborn advised that he supports the staff's view of this application with all due respect to Mr. Marinoni and Mr. Rodman. He noted that the last time a situation like this came up he opposed considering a rezoning to accommodate a sign problem, and his feelings on this sort of matter haven't changed. When there is a sign problem, it should be pursued through the correct channels. • In answer to a question from Commissioner Allred, Mr. Merrell clarified that this has not gone before the Board of Sign Appeals. Commissioner Allred stated that they need to look at that area and develop a game plan with some logical planning. They don't really have a feel for how this area is going to develop. He requested that the staff review this area and give some feedback as to how they want to look at this growth area in the future. • Chairman Hanna advised that he has observed the Washington County Farm Bureau business for a number of years and it is very attractive, but he did have difficulty figuring out what kind of business it was because the sign wasn't that visible. He noted that Farm Bureau has stated that they don't intend to move, and they want to use the bigger sign to attract their insurance customers. They are also located across the street from C-2 and adjoin R-0 and C-2 on the west side. He has no objection to seeing it rezoned to C-1 regardless of the sign issue. Commissioner Ozment stated that they are using R-0 to accomplish some positive things, but apparently the sign situation is causing some anguish when a case like this comes up. He noted that he sees the merits of an R-0 zoning here and across the street, but he doesn't know how best to address the problem of signs in these locations. He stated that they have a potential problem that needs to be resolved with signage in R-0 zones to accommodate a business and at the same time protect the integrity of what they are trying to prevent from the abuse of signs. Commissioner Ozment suggested that they table this until the sign request is decided by the Board of Sign Appeals rather than vote on it tonight. Because, if it does not pass, they could not hear the rezoning petition again for another • • Planning Commission July 9, 1990 Page 6 year. Commissioner Nickle stated that they came across this situation just recently with the wallpaper business and ended up rezoning it to commercial, although the petitioner didn't have that in mind initially. He advised that all efforts should be exhausted in trying to achieve the signage they want before a rezoning of the property is considered. He noted that he isn't necessarily opposed to rezoning the property. NOTION Commissioner Springborn moved to table this rezoning petition to give the applicant an opportunity to ascertain whether the Board of Sign Appeals can handle this signage problem, seconded by Ozment. The motion to table passed 5-1-0 with 0zment, Allred, Springborn, Cato and Nickle voting "yes" and Hanna voting "no". LARGE SCALE DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR WALTON ARTS CENTER CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE & U OF A - SE CORNER OF WEST AVE & DICKSON ST The fourth item on the agenda was a large scale development plan for the Walton Arts Center submitted by City of Fayetteville and the University of Arkansas and represented by Andrew Gibbs for property located on the southeast corner of West Avenue and Dickson Street. The property is zoned C-3, Central Business Commercial. Don Bunn, City Engineer, stated that this large scale development plan went before the Plat Review Committee last week. All of the utility companies have been working with the Arts Center on servicing the property. He stated that the staff has asked that the easements requested by several utility companies on the site be written up and granted on separate legal instruments by the Arts Center representatives. John Merrell, Planning Management Director, stated that the request is to approve the large scale development plan based on the site plan for the area. He advised that, even though the utility companies and the city staff have been working very closely with Bill Mitchell, the Arts Center coordinator, approval of the large scale development plan is still required by the Commission. Andrew Gibbs, who is on the Arts Center Council, stated that he is present to represent on Bill Mitchell's behalf. He advised that John Mott, the Architect for the Arts Center, is also present. He noted that they are aware of the issue of the utility easements and are looking into whatever they need to pursue in that regard. In answer to a question from Commissioner Nickle, Mr. Gibbs stated that they aren't working with the layouts of the parking as part of their end of the project. He stated that the Arts Center Council has an arrangement with the City that the Walton Arts Center will be built contingent upon parking provided on Dickson Street by the City of Fayetteville. • Planning Commission July 9, 1990 Page 7 MOTION Commissioner Cato moved to approve the large scale development plan subject to the Plat Review Comments regarding the utility easements, seconded by Springborn. The motion passed 6-0-0. PRELB1JNARY PLAT OF GREEN MEADOWS ADDITION FLOYD HARRIS & HOWARD SANDERS - S OF MT COMFORT RD, E OF RUPPLE RD The fifth item on the agenda was a preliminary plat of Green Meadows Addition submitted by Floyd Harris and Howard Sanders for property located on the south side of Mt. Comfort Road, east of Rupple Road and zoned R-1, Low Density Residential. The property contains 30.6 acres with 89 proposed lots. Chairman Hanna advised that there is a decision to be made on where the Salem Road extension will be located in this particular subdivision. The engineers representing this subdivision, have decided to resolve that issue first. Therefore, they have requested that this plat be tabled. He asked if anyone in the audience had any comments to make regarding this plat. There being no response, a motion to table was made. • MOTION • Commissioner Ozment moved to table the preliminary plat of Green Meadows Addition, seconded by Allred. The motion passed 6-0-0. FINAL PLAT OF WALNUT HEIGHTS SUBDIVISION SAM ROGERS - W OF SALEM RD, N OF WEDINGTON DR The sixth item on the agenda was a final plat of Walnut Heights Subdivision submitted by Harry Gray of Northwest Engineers and represented by Sam Rogers for property located on the west side of Salem Road, north of Wedington Drive. The property is zoned R-2, Medium Density Residential, and contains 11.88 acres with 43 proposed lots. Don Bunn, City Engineer, stated that the staff recommends approval of this final plat subject to the Plat Review and Subdivision Committee comments, the execution of a contract with the City for the improvements within the subdivision, the filing of subdivision covenants, the payment of the parks fees, the construction of sidewalks, a notation on the plat that this will be a single-family residential development, and the restriction of driveway access to the interior streets rather than Salem Road. Harry Gray of Northwest Engineers stated their final design reflects only 43 lots rather than 44. He noted that they are in agreement with the staff's recommendations. However, they have requested that the Parks Department review the donation of land in relation to the Walnut Grove Addition. Bryce Davis dedicated 9.2 acres for greenspace at that time which is in excess of what he developed. Subsequently, this development may be covered by that and not be • • • Planning Commission July 9, 1990 Page 8 required to pay the parks fees. Commissioner Springborn stated that the point that Mr. Gray has raised relative to the parks fee was discussed at that Subdivision Committee. MOTION Commissioner Springborn moved to approve the final plat subject to Plat Review and Subdivision Committee comments with further clarification that the parks fee or land contribution be satisfied one way or the other, seconded by Nickle. The motion passed 6-0-0. CONDITIONAL USE FOR AN ANTIQUE SHOP MARGARET DITHER - 426 HIGHLAND AVENUE The seventh item on the agenda was a conditional use for an antique shop submitted by Margaret Ditmer for property located at 426 Highland Avenue and zoned R-2, Medium Density Residential. John Merrell, Planning Management Director, stated that the staff has a number of problems with this request. Parking is a serious problem here with literally no parking allowed on that side of the street. Even residents have to park on the strip of land between the curb and the sidewalk. Furthermore, there isn't a paved driveway or paved off-street parking at all. He added that the situation is worsened by the fact that this is located directly across the street from Washington Elementary School. There is a major traffic problem in front of this school in the mornings and in the afternoons. The staff's opinion is that it is the best interest of the City not to encourage either commercial rezonings or the establishment of commercial businesses across the street from elementary schools. He added that the argument could be made that this property does abut property on which there are businesses along North College. However, the staff doesn't feel that is grounds to establish commercial businesses on Highland. This has been a good R-2 buffer in between North College'and the school. The staff recommends that the conditional use be denied. Margaret Ditmer stated that there are two parking spaces immediately in front of the property between the pavement and the sidewalk which would be convenient for a little shop of only about 400 square feet. Furthermore, there are two parking spaces on the driveway. She would be using one space in the driveway which would leave three available spaces. There is also parking on the other side of the street for the school. The shop would only be open from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. She noted that she would be glad to offer, as a condition of approval, a on any other con'nercial business here. In answer to a question from Commissioner Allred, Mr. Merrell stated the parking would have to be on-site if it were a new structure. This looks as though it was once a single-family house that was converted into three units. He noted that he isn't sure what requirements were made for parking at the time it was converted. The parking still has to be on-site. • • • Planning Commission July 9, 1990 Page 9 Commissioner Allred stated that, even if this were allowed with the four existing parking spaces, it would force the other tenants to park somewhere else. Mrs. Dither advised that there is only one tenant who would be away at work during the shop's operating hours. The shop would replace the unit downstairs. Kathy Ward, who resides in this house, stated that she has lived here forfour years. She also works at the school and is a crossing guard. Therefore, she is aware of the traffic problem. However, she doesn't feel that the small space downstairs would be a major operation with much traffic. Morning school traffic is from 7:30 a.m. to 8:00 a.m. at which time the shop wouldn't be open. School is dismissed at 2:45 p.m., and the traffic goes until 3:00 p.m. She noted that Highland Street is used as a one-way street north to south everyday for approximately 15 minutes. She advised that the only "no parking" on the west side is in front of the fire hydrant. On the east side of the street, there are two signs which say "no parking on pavement". The parking there is between the street and the sidewalk which accommodates two vehicles and then the driveway accommodates at least one vehicle. She noted that both her and her husband are at work during the hours that this shop would be open. In answer to a question from Chairman Hanna, Mr. Merrell stated that they would only be allowed signage for the R-2 zone. He noted that the staff received a letter from Mrs. Powers who owns property adjoining this. She objects to the conditional use primarily on the grounds of parking and traffic. He advised that the staff has been at this location during the hours that this shop would be open, and they have seen the traffic situation firsthand. Becky Bryant, Associate Planner, advised that the sign ordinance states that in an R & R-0 zoning district, one on-site wall sign is allowed per business no larger than 16 square feet. Commissioner Springborn stated that he supports the observations by the staff regarding the traffic problem and their recommendations. MOTION Commissioner Springborn moved to deny the conditional use, seconded by Cato The motion passed 6-0-0. CONDITIONAL USE - 2 TANDEM LOTS LORINE AMES - 1411 MISSION BLVD The eighth item on the agenda was a conditional use for two tandem lots submitted by Lorine Ames for property located at 1411 Mission Boulevard. The property is zoned R-1, Low Density Residential. Don Bunn, City Engineer, stated that this request is being submitted in combination with a request for three lots splits on that property which would create a total of four lots. Two of the lots would be tandem lots and two would front on Mission Boulevard. The lots would be of sufficient size, and the driveways shown are sufficient for tandem lots. The only problem the staff has • • • • Planning Commission July 9, 1990 Page 10 with it is the location of the access easements shown. This property is located just east of where Old Wire Road intersects with Mission Boulevard. Therefore, the staff has some reservations about additional traffic at that point. The staff recommends approval of both the conditional use for tandem lots and the lot splits, conditioned on eliminating one of the driveways for the tandem lots. The staff is requesting that one 50' right-of-way access be provided for the two tandem -lots. This would create a common driveway and eliminate one access to Mission Boulevard. That 50' access should be located as far to the east of the property as possible away from that intersection. As far as the lot splits, the staff recommends approval subject to coordination with the other utility companies to make sure that the easements are satisfactory, combining the driveway so that no more than two new drives be created onto Mission, the payments of parks fees for the additional lots being created, a dedication of additional right-of-way as called for by the Master Street Plan, and a sidewalk along Mission Boulevard. In answer to a question from Chairman Hanna, Lorine Ames stated that there is an existing sidewalk all the way across the front of this property. She added that she understands the conditions that the staff has set forth. Don Bunn, City Engineer, explained that there would be one 50 right-of-way to serve both tandem lots. Mrs. Ames stated that they could easily change their plan to accommodate this condition. MOTION Commissioner Nickle moved to approve the conditional use for two tandem lots subject to the staff's comments including the condition that one 50' access drive will be provided to access both tandem lots, seconded by Cato The motion passed 6-0-0. WAIVER OF THE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS - LOT SPLITS 1, 2 & 3 LORINE AMES - 1411 MISSION BOULEVARD (S OF MISSION BLVD,E OF OLD WIRE RD) The ninth item on the agenda is a waiver of the subdivision regulations - lot splits 1, 2 & 3 submitted by Lorine Ames for property located at 1411 Mission Boulevard(south of Mission Boulevard and east of Old Wire Road) and zoned R-1, Low Density Residential. MOTION Commissioner Nickle moved to approve the lot splits as submitted, seconded by Cato. The motion passed 6-0-0. WAIVER OF THE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS - LOT SPLIT 01 JEFF ARMSTRONG - W OF WEST AVE, N OF DICKSON ST The tenth item on the agenda was a waiver of the subdivision regulations - lot split 111 submitted by Jeff Armstrong for property located on the west side of (go - • • Planning Commission July 9, 1990 Page 11 West Avenue, north of Dickson Street and zoned I-1, Light Industrial -Heavy Commercial. Chairman Hanna advised that they have had a request to table this item. NOTION Commissioner Springborn moved to table this item, seconded by Ozment. The motion passed 6-0-0. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 6:20 p.m.