Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1990-10-08 Minutes• • • • • MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE FAYETTEVILLE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION A meeting of the Fayetteville Planning Commission was held on Monday, October 8, 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: Fred Hanna, J.R. Springborn, Jack Cleghorn, Jerry Allred, Jett Cato, Gerald Klingaman, and Joe Tarvin Charles Nickle John Merrell, Don Bunn, Becky Bryant, Elaine Cattaneo, members of the press and others MINUTES: The Minutes of the regular Planning Commission meeting of September 24, 1990 were approved as distributed. PUBLIC HEARING - REZONING PETITION R90-0 DAVE & JUDY STEVENS - S OF CATO SPRINGS RD, E OF 71 BYPASS The second item on the agenda was a public hearing for rezoning petition R90 -.a8 submitted by Dave & Judy Stevens and represented by Donald Wilson of Gunn & Associates for property located south of Cato Springs Road and east of the 71 Bypass. The request was to rezone from I-1, Light Industrial & Heavy Commercial, to R-2, Medium Density Residential. Chairman Hanna advised that this rezoning petition has been filed in connection with a conditional use request for a mobile home park. Becky Bryant, Associate Planner, advised that Dave & Judy Stevens own a carnival business. The Stevens intend to purchase the total twenty-three acres. The rezoning petition is only for part of lots 12 and all of lots 13, 14, 15 & 16. The remainder of the property will remain I-1. One of the issues is whether this constitutes a mobile home development. The staff has done extensive research and their opinion is that it does constitute a mobile home development. In the staff's estimation, this falls under Use Unit 11 which is "Mobile Home Park". On that rationale, the staff has recommended that this be considered as a mobile home park. The staff's recommendation is that, if the rezoning is granted, a bill of assurance be required stating that the zoning will revert back to I-1 if the Stevens do not take possession of the property within six months. If the conditional use is granted in conjunction with the rezoning, the staff suggests that the following stipulations be attached: 1) the mobile home/recreational vehicle park be limited to five pads., 2) no outside storage of equipment be allowed, and 3) the warehouses be repaired and maintained so that they are safe, sound, and sanitary as determined by the staff of the Inspections Department. The staff has discussed these requirements with the Stevens and their attorney and believe that they are in agreement with this. In answer to a question from Chairman Hanna, Ms. Bryant stated that the condition of no outside storage of equipment would be limited to the R-2 area. Although, they would need to look at what type of equipment they may want to store outside in an I-1 area to make sure it ie allowed. x°20 • • • • • Planning Commission October 8, 1990 Page 2 In answer to a question from Chairman Hanna, John Merrell stated that there isn't an ordinance against storing outside equipment. But, if it falls under the category of just plain junk, it would need to be screened. Donald Wilson, representing the petitioners, stated that they agree with the staff's recommendations. He pointed out that this park will not be public. It will only be used for family members and two employees of the Stevens. This park will only be used primarily during the months of October through April. The Stevens are willing to upgrade the warehouses or tear them down. He noted that one of the warehouses is currently occupied by a business, which requires a 90 day notice before evacuating the premises. He requested that time period be granted if the property is rezoned. He stated that the petitioners are very compatible with the bill of assurance. In answer to a question from Commissioner Allred, Mr. Wilson stated that what they mean by upgrading the warehouses is bringing them up to Code. In answer to a question from Commissioner Springborn, Mr. Wilson stated that they have no plans to store any equipment in the warehouses. They would continue to allow the current occupants to use them. The equipment would be stored in the back of the I-1 property. In answer to a question from Commissioner Springborn, Mr. Wilson stated that they would serve the trailers with the available utilities. They will comply with the requirements of the mobile home ordinance and submit a mobile home park plat for approval. James Jones, resident in the Clover Creek Addition, stated that they are opposed to a change in the zoning of this property to permit mobile homes. There is an existing mobile home park near the entrance to the Cato Springs area which is poorly taken care of. Their concern is that this will cause a deterioration in their property values. They are opposed to it. Chairman Hanna explained which portion of the property is being proposed for rezoning and what the Stevens are proposing for those who came in late. He noted that the petitioners didn't actually want to request a trailer park, but since the ordinances don't address motor homes/recreational vehicles, they have to be considered a recreational park or a mobile home park. He advised that this will only be for part of the year. The motor homes will be removed when they take their equipment on the road. In answer to a question from Commissioner Klingaman, Mr. Jones stated that they don't really mind equipment stored in a light industrial zoning as long as it is not an abnormal amount of equipment. This is the south entrance into Fayetteville, and the new bypass is going to come in that general area, so they need to be concerned with the attractiveness. John Merrell, Planning Management Director, advised that the land uses by right in an I-1 property include most any kind of industrial use except for the extremely heavy industrial uses. It allows such things as manufacturing land uses, fabricated metal products, fabricated structural products, miscellaneous manufacturing textile products, warehousing and wholesale, gas stations, drive-in restaurants, trades and services, offices, agricultural land uses, and cemeteries. Mr. Jones stated that they wouldn't oppose a regular residential development. Kathleen Doss of 1125 Cato Springs Road had some questions regarding the Stevens business and use of the property. • • • • • Planning Commission October 8, 1990 Page 3 Mr. Wilson stated that this property will not be used to run any type of rides. What they want to do is store some equipment(on tractor trailer rigs) which will probably not be visible from the road. The existing mobile home park in this area does not comply with the mobile home ordinance, because it was grand- fathered in. They feel they will enhance the aesthetic value of that area. Me. Dose stated that she would like a guarantee that no repair work and running of the rides will be done on the property. She noted that one concern is that this will be an attractive nuisance to children. Eventually, there may be some run-down broken carnival rides left on the property. She asked if that would be fenced off so that children wouldn't be tempted to play on it. Another concern is the transient nature of the people who will be staying on the property. Judy Stevens, petitioner, stated that they have some tractor trailer rigs and smaller equipment that will be pulled with pick-ups. She understands that the general public is uncomfortable with the idea of carnival. However, they are mainly family people. They need the property in the winter to paint and ungrade their equipment. She advised that, as she understood, they could have used this property as it is currently zoned for that purpose. Their reason for a rezoning is to be allowed a mobile home area. The trailers and the people will leave when they go out on the road. That doesn't mean they wouldn't leave a small kiddy ride on the property. They would be willing to put up a fence to screen their equipment. In answer to a question from Chairman Hanna, Mrs. Stevens stated that they will be parking the equipment on the far back of the property. They would probably be living there from October to May. In answer to a question from Commissioner Klingaman, Mrs. Stevens stated that they have most of the equipment stored in Oklahoma at this time. She noted that they have approximately ten semi -trucks, around 5 small units, a van, and a pick-up. In answer to a question from Commissioner Springborn, Mrs. Stevens stated that they would hire someone to maintain the land when they are not there. They might possibly petition in the future for someone to stay there year round to maintain the grounds. John Casmus of the Clover Creek Addition stated that the cities of Rogers and Springdale are working so hard to develop areas for affordable single-family dwellings. The City of Fayetteville should consider that they need ample areas for R-1 development. With a little time and work, this area could be developed for that use. This area has a lot of potential. He is concerned about the potential for ugly equipment being stored here which would detract from the property values. He asked that they be careful how this is planned and consider the future. He added that Cato Springs Road is not great for truck traffic. Arvil Carnes of 1101 Cato Springs Road stated that he is concerned about the street that is proposed into this property. There is a drainage problem during the spring of the year which needs to be considered. Una Hutchens of the Clover Creek Addition stated that she agrees with Mr. Carnes about the water problem. She is concerned with the additional traffic on a street as narrow as Cato Springs Road, which has had some very serious accidents. She is concerned about the type of people who will be living there also. Ernestine Patton stated that she owns property on Clover Drive. There are a lot of homes in this area that people take pride in maintaining in good condition. • Planning Commission October 8, 1990 Page 4 What they want in this area is more residential which is well -kept. Marian Doss of 1125 Cato Springs Road stated that he objects to the idea of a mobile home park here. He would hope that this property would eventually evolve into residential. He is concerned about property values and the appearance of the neighborhood. Ken Adee stated that he lives in the general area of Cato Springs Road. He is concerned about carnival people living here There being no one else wanting to speak, the public hearing was closed. In answer to a question from Commissioner Klingaman, Mr. Merrell stated that he doesn't believe this property is within the designated flood plain on the FEMA maps. Becky Bryant advised that the mobile home ordinance states that a mobile home park has to be constructed on well -drained property. Therefore, when this • development is brought through, they would look at drainage. In answer to a question from Commissioner Allred, Mr. Merrell advised that this would all fit in I-1 zoning except the mobile home/recreational vehicles. They could use this property as it is zoned to store the amusement park equipment. Chairman Hanna pointed out that the petitioners are requesting a rezoning to residential in order that they might live at this location. Residential development is not allowed in I-1 zoning. • Mr. Merrell advised that they need to keep in mind that the underlying zoning is I-1. There is a provision in the zoning ordinance that in the case of a auto salvage yard or scrape metal yard, etc., screening would be required. In answer to a question from Commissioner Klingaman, Mr. Merrell stated that he doesn't know of any plans for upgrading Cato Springs Road when the new bypass is constructed through this area. However, there probably will be an increase in traffic on this road as a result of the new interstate. He noted that Cato Springs Road is a state highway. • MOTION • Commissioner Springborn moved to recommend approval of the rezoning as requested (the three acre parcel), seconded by Allred. The motion passed 7-0-0. CONDITIONAL USE FOR MOBILE HOME/RECREATIONAL VEHICLE PARK DAVE & JUDY STEVENS - S OF CATO SPRINGS ROAD, E OF 71 BYPASS The second part of the second item on the agenda was a conditional use for a mobile home/recreational vehicle park submitted by Dave & Judy Stevens for property located south of Cato Springs Road and east of the 71 Bypass. Chairman Hanna stated that this request is in connection with the rezoning petition. It is contingent on that rezoning being approved. He noted that the staff has recommended approval of the conditional use with the following conditions: 1) the mobile home park be limited to five pads, 2) no outside storage of equipment, and 3) the warehouses be repaired and maintained so that they are safe, sound and sanitary as determined by the staff of the Inspections Department. In answer to a question from Commissioner Klingaman, Chairman Hanna stated that the no outside storage condition refers only to the three acre parcel up for rezoning and not to the I-2 area. Ms. Bryant stated that the screening • Planning Commission October 8, 1990 Page 5 ordinance isn't very clear about this. However, any condition can be attached to a conditional use, so it is up to the discretion of the Planning Commission as to whether they want to make screening a condition on the adjacent property (the I-1 zoned area). In answer to a question from Commissioner Allred, Mr. Merrell stated that they could approve this on a one-year basis. In answer to a question from Commissioner Springborn, Mr. Merrell stated that he thought an annual renewal of a permit for a mobile home pertains only to mobile homes that are located individually within the A-1 zoning. Ms. Bryant noted that it does apply to mobile home parks as well. Commissioner Allred stated that, according to the maps in the agenda, this property is about 300' off the road. Therefore, the mobile homes shouldn't be too visible. He added that it appears to him that they have an opportunity to work with these buyers to clean up an area on Cato Springs Road. As he • understands it, all the storage and the mobile homes will be on the southern portion of the property. The only thing that will be visible from Cato Springs Road will be some upgraded warehouses. MOTION Commissioner Allred moved to grant the conditional use subject to staff comments and recommendations and followed by discussion. Commissioner Springborn stated that he would like the motion to include a • condition that the mobile homes be in compliance with the mobile home ordinance. Ms. Bryant stated that would be inclusive in the staff's recommendations. Commissioner Springborn seconded the motion. The motion passed 7-0-0. LARGE SCALE DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR FAYETTEVILLE HIGH SCHOOL FAYETTEVILLE PUBLIC SCHOOLS - 1001 STONE STREET The third item on the agenda was a large scale development plan for an addition • to the Fayetteville High School submitted by Laleh Amirmoez of Hailey & Associates Architects on behalf of Fayetteville Public Schools for property located at 1001 Stone Street. The property is zoned P-1, Institutional. Don Bunn, City Engineer, stated that the staff recommends approval of the large scale development. • Warren Gardenhire stated that he understands that they will be taking up part of the existing parking lots for this addition. He asked what their intentions were to increase the parking space and how will it affect the property across from the high school on the corner of Buchanan & Stone. He stated that the rumor is that they can't even try to sell their property, because the school has an option to buy it. Laleh Amirmoez stated that they are developing the south side of the high school between the high school and Bates Elementary on the school's property for additional parking. It will actually take away the bus traffic and car traffic from Buchanan and exit it to Garland. Therefore, it would lighten the load on Buchanan. She added that she doesn't know of any plans by the school to take over any other properties on the east side of Buchanan. Chairman Hanna advised that it would not be legal for the school to have an option to buy those properties without the owner's agreement. J • Planning Commission October 8, 1990 Page 6 MOTION Commissioner Tarvin moved to approve the large scale development plan subject to the staff's comments, the Plat Review minutes, and the Subdivision Committee minutes. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Cleghorn. The motion passed 7-0-0. LARGE SCALE DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR MINI -STORAGE DENNIS & DALE CAUDLE - E OF SUPPLE RD, N OF WEDINGTON DR The fourth item on the agenda was a large scale development plan for Mini -Storage submitted by Dennis & Dale Caudle for property located on the east side of Rupple Road, north of Wedington Drive. The property is zoned C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial. Don Bunn, City Engineer, stated that the entrance to this development is proposed • to be off of Rupple Road. They were granted a conditional use just recently for the purpose of constructing mini -storage. There was a question at the Subdivision Committee meeting regarding the terms of the Bill of Assurance on tree preservation which was a condition of approval. The staff's recommendation is that the developers work with the staff to make sure that all the conditions of the Bill of Assurance are met. Also, the Fire Chief's recommendation of the placement of two fire hydrants within this development was questioned. The State Fire Code, which was adopted by the City of Fayetteville, requires a hydrant within 500' of each unit. A fire hydrant located at the entrance on Rupple Road would satisfy that requirement. However, the Chief has • indicated that, because of the construction there and what he considers the unusual conditions, a fire hydrant should be located in the development about half way. It is the staff's recommendation that the large scale development be approved subject to the installation of the fire hydrants as required by the Fire Chief and working with the staff on the Bill of Assurance. In answer to questions from Chairman Hanna, Mr. Bunn stated that the plat shows two phases of development for which they want approval at this time. In answer to a question from Chairman Hanna, Ms. Bryant stated that the question • of whether one fire hydrant placed in the middle of the development would meet the distance requirement of the ordinance was raised. She noted that the Fire Chief has stated that the ordinance gives him enough discretion to require an additional fire hydrant in certain circumstances regardless of the 500' criteria. And, he felt that there were circumstances on this property that would warrant two fire hydrants. Mr. Bunn stated that the Fire Chief felt that, if only one fire hydrant were placed in the center of the development, a fire at the entrance might preclude them reaching that hydrant. • MOTION Commissioner Tarvin moved to approve the large scale development subject to the staff's comments, the Plat Review comments, and Subdivision Committee comments including the installation of two fire hydrants. This was followed by discussion. Dennis Becker, representing the petitioners, stated that they agree with the staff recommendations. He noted that there isn't a fire hydrant at the corner of Rupple Road and Wedington Drive. There was not one installed in connection with the Speedee Mart development at that location. Because of this, the petitioner in this case is required to put in two. Had there been one on the corner, they would only have to install one. He stated that they were told that Speedee Mart didn't go through the large scale development process, so there was /23 • Planning Commission October 8, 1990 Page 7 no chance to look at the overall fire hydrant plan. Therefore, it slipped through. He suggested that in all fairness to developers, they look at this loophole between large scale development, which does its job in looking at utilities and fire hydrantes, and smaller properties that are developed without the same detailed review. Other than that, they are in total agreement with the staff recommendations. In answer to a question from Commissioner Cleghorn, Ms. Bryant stated that the questions about the percentage of trees to be preserved was resolved to her satisfaction. She believes that they will be able to meet the criteria. Commissioner Cato seconded the motion. The motion passed 7-0-0. LARGE SCALE DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR ADDITIONAL PARKING TYSON'S FOODS - 2700 SOUTH SCHOOL AVENUE The fifth item on the agenda was a large scale development plan for additional • parking submitted by Skip McLoud on behalf of Tyson's Foods. The property is located at 2700 South School Avenue and zoned I-1, Light Industrial & Heavy Commercial. Don Bunn, City Engineer, stated that this large scale development consists of the addition of 200 parking spaces at the Tyson's plant. The additional parking is required as a result of some additions inside the plant. Two issues were raised at the Subdivision Committee meeting: 1) the additional drainage that will be created by the new parking lot, and 2) the Planning staff's • recommendation that they do some landscaping within the parking lot, although it is not a requirement. The petitioners have agreed to look at their drainage ditches to make sure they are sized to handle the drainage properly. The staff is recommending approval of the large scale development subject to an investigation of the increase in run-off, construction of a sidewalk along South School Avenue, the Plat Review comments, and Subdivision Committee comments. Skip McLoud, representative for Tyson's, stated that, based upon the Planning staff's recommendation on the landscaping, they have added landscaping in the center islands of the parking lot. They have studied the drainage and feel that it is adequately designed. He noted that the drainage at this time goes • to the west and north slightly. The drainage that comes towards the north of the building toward the subdivision property for which the citizens were concerned should not be affected by this parking lot because there is a break in the terrain. • In answer to a question from a member of the audience, Chairman Hanna advised that the new parking lot will be to the south of the building. MOTION Commissioner Cato moved to approve the large scale development subject to the staff's comments, seconded by Tarvin. The motion passed 7-0-0. CONDITIONAL USE FOR TANDEM LOT JAY BERRYMAN - S OF SYCAMORE ST, E OF COLLEGE AVE The sixth item on the agenda was a conditional use for a tandem lot in connection with the lot splits requested (the next item on the agenda) by Jay Berryman for property located south of Sycamore Street and east of College Avenue. The property is zoned R-1, Low Density Residential. Don Bunn, City Engineer, stated that the total property is about 8.8 acres and the proposal is to split the property into three tracts. Tracts 1, 2, & 3 will 'ay • • • • • Planning Commission October 8, 1990 Page 8 contain 5 acres, 2 acres, and just under two acres respectfully. Because of the way the tracts are being divided, tract one will be a tandem lot. All three of the lots have water and sewer available to them. Tract one, the tandem lot, adjoins the end of Rayview Street. The staff recommends that the tandem lot conditional use and the lot splits be approved subject to: 1) the dedication of an additional 10' of right-of-way, 2) the dedication of a 15' utility easement along the west and south sides of tract three, 3) payment of the required parks fees ($210), and 4) a dedication of any other utility easements that might be required by the other utilities to serve the lot. The construction of a sidewalk on Sycamore is required in the staff report. However, that sidewalk is already existing. Mel Milholland, representing the petitioner, stated that they concur with the staff's recommendations and respectfully request the Commission's approval. Forrest Brooks, owner of property to the south, stated that there is no access to a street. She questioned where they intend to put in a street. Chairman Hanna stated that tracts 2 & 3 will access onto Sycamore and tract 1 will access off of Rayview. Mr. Bunn advised that the property goes back to Hillcrest Drive, but they aren't requesting an access to Hillcrest. He added that there is no reason why an entrance to Hillcrest wouldn't be allowed if they wanted it. MOTION Commissioner Springborn moved to approve the conditional use subject to the staff's comments, seconded by Cleghorn. The motion passed 7-0-0. WAIVER OF THE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS - LOT SPLITS 1 & 2 JAY BERRYMAN - S OF SYCAMORE ST, E OF COLLEGE AVENUE The seventh item on the agenda was a waiver of the subdivision regulations - Lot splits 1 & 2 submitted by Jay Berryman and represented by Mel Milholland for property located south of Sycamore Street and east of College Avenue. The property is zoned R-1, Low Density Residential. MOTION Commissioner Cleghorn moved to grant the lot splits subject to the staff's comments, seconded by Allred. The motion passed 7-0-0. WAIVER OF THE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS - LOT SPLIT #3 PATRICK POWERS & CHARLES SLOAN - ON OAKLAND -ZION RD, N OF HWY 45 The eighth item on the agenda was a waiver of the subdivision regulations - lot split #3 submitted by Patrick Powers & Charles Sloan for property located on Oakland -Zion Road, north of Highway 45. The property is located outside the City Limits. Don Bunn, City Engineer, stated that there is no city sewer available to this property. The staff recommends that this lot split be granted subject to Washington County approval, the required parks fees, a survey of the property, and the granting of any easements that might be required from the other utility companies. In answer to a question from Commissioner Allred, Mr. Bunn stated that he has been told that parks fees can be assessed in the growth area. as • • • • • Planning Commission October 8, 1990 Page 9 MOTION Commissioner Allred moved to grant the lot split as requested subject to the staff's comments, seconded by Cato. The motion passed 7-0-0. OTHER BUSINESS John Merrell stated that he had sent out a memo to the Planning Commissioners last week suggesting a possible tour of the sites of the applications on the Planning Commission's agenda for each meeting. He advised that it would be almost impossible, because of such a heavy schedule, to conduct these tours on Monday or Friday. They could possibly do it on Thursday. He asked if they were interested in doing this and, if so, when. The consensus of the members was that it would be difficult to set a time for a regular group tour because of a conflict in schedules, etc. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 6:35 p.m.