Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991-06-10 Minutes• • MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE FAYETTEVILLE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION A meeting of the Fayetteville Planning Commission was held on Monday, June 10, 991 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: Jana Lynn Britton, Fred Hanna, J. E. Springborn, Jerry Allred, Joe Tarvin, and Mark Robertson Jack Cleghorn, Jett Cato, and Charles Nickle Becky Bryant, Don Bunn, Sharon Langley, members of the press and others MINUTES The minutes of the May 28, 1991 meeting were approved as presented. Mr. Allred explained that five positive votes from Commission were absent, applicants wish to table rezoning requests and conditional use requests required the Commission. He pointed out three members of the leaving six members. He stated should any of the their items for two weeks, they could do so. PUBLIC HEARING - REZONING R91-11 BOB WALDREN - E SIDE OF UNIVERSITY, W SIDE OF GREGG, S OF DICKSON The second item on the agenda was a public hearing on rezoning request R91-11 submitted by Bob Waldren on behalf of SWEPCO for property located on the east aide of University Avenue, west side of Gregg Avenue and south of Dickson Street. The property contains 3.64 acres. The request is to rezone from R-3, High Density Residential, to I-1, Light Industrial - Heavy Commercial. The applicant requested this item be tabled for two weeks. MOTION Mr. Springborn moved to table the item for two weeks. Mr. Tarvin seconded the motion. The motion passed 6-0-0. PUBLIC HEARING - REZONING R91-14 MARK MARTIN - 2143 GREEN ACRES RD. The third item on the agenda was a public hearing on rezoning request R91-14 submitted by Mark Martin for property located at 2143 Green Acres Road (lot 1, Green Acres Subdivision). The property contains 1.68 acres. The request is to rezone from R-0, Residential Office, to C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial. Mr. Allred stated he would be abstaining from the discussion and vote because he owned property in the area. Becky Bryant, Associate Planner, reminded the Commission that in June of 1990, Mr. Martin had requested the property be rezoned from R-1, Low Density Residential, to R -O, Residential -Office. She stated that, in light of the fact that Green Acres Road had developed as a high quality professional office area and predominant zoning was R-0, staff recommended the rezoning be granted and it had been granted by the Planning Commission. She explained that now Mr. Martin 202 • • • Planning Commission June 10, 1991 Page 2 was requesting C-2 zoning in order to accommodate a prospective tenant who wishes to use the building for picture frame assembly and sales. She further explained such use falls under Use Unit 16 as permitted in C-1 or C-2 but not in R -O, and thus applicant was requesting new zoning. Ms. Bryant pointed out R -O zoning was an excellent buffer between commercial properties existing on the east side of Green Acres Road and to the north in the Colt Square area. She stated there were residential uses further to the west and also just south of the subject property. Ms. Bryant further stated it was her belief that it would be a very significant encroachment to allow commercial zoning to go across Green Acres and beyond the Colt Square area. She strongly recommended against the rezoning. Mrs. Betty Martin explained her husband had originally requested R -O zoning in order to construct his law office on the property. She sated that, because his office was currently located at First South, they had to move prior to construction of the new building. In the meantime, they had purchased another building to house the law office for approximately two years, allowing them to construct an office on the Green Acres property. She stated Mr. Bob Hammond had contacted them regarding renting the house at 2143 Green Acres Road in order to have a frame shop. She explained the frame shop was not a factory but an artistic endeavor. In response to a question from Mr. Hanna, Mr. Hammond explained that he often worked alone or with one other person. He explained his intentions were to make handmade frames, restore frames, construct regular frames and a provide a small gallery. He showed examples of his work. He stated he planned that approximately 300 square feet of the building would be a gallery, 120 square feet for designing, two areas for shops and then an area for an office. He explained he was hoping to get established and then, in two years, move to a larger area. In response to a question from Ms. Britton, Ms. Bryant explained staff had reviewed this request and a frame shop was specifically listed under use units not applicable to R -O zoning. She stated the distinction was sales. Ms. Britton explained she was trying to find an accessory use that would come under R -O. Ms. Bryant stated it appeared Mr. Hammond's principal business was assembly and sales. Mr. Hammond pointed out unit 4, art galleries, were permissible in R-0 zoning with permission from the Planning Commission. There was discussion regarding whether Mr. Hammond was going to reside at the site, enabling him to have a home occupation. He stated he was not. In response to a question from Mr. Tarvin, Ms. Martin stated they hoped to construct an office on the Green Acres site within the next two years, but it did depend on how rapidly her husband's business grew. There was further discussion regarding other alternatives to rezoning the property to C-2. Ms. Bryant explained the proposed use could not be approved through a conditional use nor could C-2 zoning be granted for a certain time period. Kathy Schraffer, 58 East Elm, appeared before the Commission and stated she was strongly opposed to the property being zoned commercial. She agreed that, while the proposed use did not sound so bad, once the property was zoned commercial, any commercial enterprise could take place at the property. • • • Planning Commission June 10, 1991 Page 3 Mr. Hanna stated he preferred to interpret this item as an art gallery and give the applicant a conditional use under R -O rather than rezoning to C-2. He explained the area had been being used as a buffer zone between commercial and residential areas. He stated he feared that approving C-2 zoning for this area would set a dangerous precedent. Mr. Springborn asked if staff had reviewed the use units as fully as possible with the applicant. He suggested staff see if there was a possibility of working this matter out. Mr. Allred suggested the entire item could be tabled, allowing the applicant to work things out with the planning staff. Ms. Britton stated she would like to see the problem be resolved. Ms. Bryant stated she would meet with the applicant so he could show her what part of the facility could be used for each function and what percentage of income was predicted from each area. The application would then be re-evaluated on that basis. MOTION Mr. Hanna moved to table the request pending further investigation by the Planning staff into the use and possibility of a conditional use. Ms. Britton seconded the motion. The motion passed 6-1-0 with Mr. Allred abstaining. PUBLIC HEARING - REZONING R91-15 MARE MARQUESS - E OF SALEM RD, N OF WEDINGTON DR. The fourth item on the agenda was a public hearing on rezoning request R91-15 submitted by Mark Marquess on behalf of BMP Development for property located east of Salem Road and north of Wedington Drive, containing 34 acres. The request is to rezone from A-1, Agricultural, to R-1.5, Moderate Density Residential. Ms. Bryant explained that this tract was open pasture with a wooded perimeter that currently had no access. She explained Mr. Marquesse planned to obtain and develop two access points via Salem Road and via Florence Street. She explained the property was surrounded by R-2, Medium Density Residential, A-1, Agricultural, and a small area of R-1 zoning. She further explained that staff believed the type of development proposed by Mr. Marquess was compatible with surrounding land uses. She recommended the request be granted. Mr. Harry Gray, Northwest Engineers, stated he was sure the Commission was aware of BMP's pursuit of affordable housing projects in Fayetteville. He explained this tract was between the Jiles Addition and the Walnut Grove Addition. He stated they had drafted a development plan for 151 lots with half of the lots being affordable housing and the other half moderate priced residential homes. He pointed out the zoning to the east was R-2, except for one small R-1 area, and the zoning to the west was R-2. In response to a question from Ms. Britton, Mr. Gray stated that basically the frontage on Anne Street and everything south would be typical R-1 development and everything north would be affordable housing. Mr. Charles Couch, 111 Florence Street, stated he had no specific objections to the development but did object to the entrance and exits they had at the present time. He explained there was only one entrance and one exit to the Jiles z03 • • • Planning Commission June 10, 1991 Page 4 Addition, which was Shiloh Drive. would add to the traffic problem. use the streets in Jiles Addition Mr. Gray stated the connection to because he thought the Planning connection could be eliminated. He expressed concern that a new development He stated the new development would have to as entrances and exits. Jiles Addition (Anne Street) had been added Commission would want it. He stated that Mr. Allred pointed out they were talking about the rezoning, not the preliminary plat. Mr. Mark Marquess appeared before the Commission and stressed they had been previously told to look for a suitable area more closely related to the type of homes in the area. He stated this property seemed very suitable for the project. He explained that R-1.5 had been chosen because it was a very compatible blend between R-1 and R-2 for affordable housing. There was discussion regarding access to the property from the north and the east. Ms. Britton stated she would prefer the access for Anne Street be left. MOTION Ms. Britton moved to approve the request. Mr. Springborn seconded the motion. The motion passed 6-0-0. PRELIMINARY PLAT - TIMBER CREST SUBDIVISION MEL MILHOLLAND - N SIDE OF MISSION BLVD, E OF CROSSOVER RD t The fifth item on the agenda was a preliminary plat for Timber Crest Subdivision submitted by Mel Milholland on behalf of Mike Pennington for property located on the north side of Mission Blvd., east of Crossover Road. The property is zoned R-1, Low Density Residential and contains 27.52 acres with 58 lots. Mr. Don Bunn, City Engineer, stated the property was located on the north side of Highway 265, east of Starr Drive and directly across the highway from property owned by the City of Fayetteville and C. J. Brocard. It is also adjacent to the City's treated wastewater discharge into a tributary of Mud Creek. He explained the property had recently been annexed into the City and is zoned R-1. He stated water and sewer were both available to the site although there was a question as to whether sewer will have to be provided by a pump station or gravity. Mr. Bunn stated the utility companies had raised the issue of the flood plain location along lots 1 through 6 of Block 1 but it had been determined that the lot lines were not in the flood plain. He recommended approval of the preliminary plat subject to plat review comments, approval of water, sewer, streets and drainage plans, construction of sidewalks in accordance with the master sidewalk plan, and payment of parks fees. Mr. Bunn stated there had been no Subdivision Committee meeting on this plat. Mr. Mel Milholland, Milholland Engineering, stated he concurred with staff's comments and would like to clarify that the flood plain map did not reflect a flood in that area but the abutting property. He explained the lots in the subdivision were larger than required for R-1, based on 97 feet wide by 185 feet deep. He further stated he concurred with all of the design requirements by the City of Fayetteville for streets, drainage, sidewalks, sewer, water distribution and fire protection. 20¢ • • • Planning Commission June 10, 1991 Page 5 Me. Britton stated she had a problem with the fill he was planning on using on lot 14 since the run-off would go right into Mud Creek. She suggested a detention pond where lot 14 was located. She asked the plan for the drainage that came from the northeast corner of the property. Mr. Milholland stated they would catch the run-off in the street system on the west north -south street, drain it over to the west side of lot 14, block 1, and discharge it in the existing drainage channel. He stated the water would be conveyed through the subdivision and discharged into the same place it discharges by natural drainage. Ms. Britton stated the velocity would be increased and, if fill was being used, there would be silt going into the stream. She asked what would happen to the drainage that normally flowed across the property once fill was used. Mr. Melholland stated stormwater would drain from the lot into the street system at the northeast corner of the subdivision, by curb and gutter it would drain around the street system to the west and south and be picked up with the storm sewers. He further stated he had not done a flow study design since this was the preliminary stage He explained that, if it were required due to water topping the curb, he would pipe it. Ms. Britton stated she was not receptive to a lot of fill. She further stated dumping fill on the lots would destroy the aesthetics of the property. She expressed concern regarding the overland drainage entering the stream. Ms. Britton again suggested a catch poind in order to filter any silt. Mr. Milholland explained the storm water discharging from the proposed system would probably be cleaner or as clean as the natural drainage water. Me. Helen Caribean appeared before the Commission and explained she was speaking on behalf of Mr. Brocard, who was not able to be present, and also because she owned land in the area. She explained the tract used to contain 31.7 acres but the City apparently purchased 4 acres for an easement. She further explained this property had a history of having Mud Creek overflow, and the city had paid damages for the overflow on two different occasions. She also stated it appeared there was only one entrance to Highway 45 which she did not believe was adequate for 56 homes. Ms. Caribean expressed concern regarding the entrance because that portion of Highway 45 was hilly. She also suggested extremely careful planning on the drainage because of its relationship to Mud Creek and the waste disposal. Ms. Britton expressed here belief that there should be an allowance on the plat for linkage to surrounding property that might develop in the future. She suggested the developer could leave an outlet to the north or to the east so that it could be interconnected with other developments at a later date. Mr. Bunn stated they could ask that the developer leave a 50 -foot roadway easement on the plat that could be used in the future. He stated he wanted to clarify that the city's purchase of four acres was related to the city's wastewater discharge. He explained the city bought approximately 4 acres of property on the north side of Mud Creek as a result of a settlement of a lawsuit. Mr. Bunn further explained that on the south side of the creek the property the city bought was the result of the wastewater discharge or the raw sewage flowing from one of the lift stations out to the plant and not related to storm water floods. MOTION Mr. Tarvin moved to accept the preliminary plat of Timber Crest Subdivision subject to staff comments. Planning Commission 1111 June 10, 1991 Page 6 • • Me. Britton asked if the motion included an extra easement. Mr. Tarvin stated it did not. The motion died for lack of second. Mr. Springborn stated he believed the drainage situation had not been adequately investigated. He stated he did not seem to be getting satisfactory replies to his question. MOTION Mr. Springborn moved to table this item in order to give staff and the applicant more time to work this out. Me. Britton seconded the motion. Mr. Bunn asked if they were talking about the drainage that comes across the subdivision from the northeast corner. Ms. Britton stated they were. The motion passed 6-0-0. Mr. Milholland explained he would design the storm drainage to city ordinance specifications. He questioned the reason for approval of the drainage plan prior to approval of the preliminary plat. He asked, if he met the city ordinance, why the plat should not be approved in the preliminary stage and let the city engineer approve the plans. Ms. Britton stated she was not satisfied with what was represented in the plat. She further explained she would prefer that this item be heard after the new ordinance became effective. Mr. Bunn stated the excavation ordinance approved by the Board of Directors on the previous Tuesday did not include drainage plans and would not become effective 30 days after publication. Mr. Bunn further explained this situation had an engineering solution that could be handled Mr. Milholland stated there was a swale on the northeast corner. He further stated there was a small ditch across lots 11 and 14. He explained he had shown it on the plat because he wanted everyone to see it. He further stated they would fill it. Ms. Britton stated she had walked the land and she thought it was more than a swale. Mr. Milholland asked if he had to have a final design on the storm sewer in two weeks? Mr. Allred stated he believed from the attitude and vote of the Commission, it would probably be in Mr. Milholland's beat interest to have something concrete worked out with the staff. Ms. Britton agreed the drainage plan would not need to be finalized but would need to be looked at closer. She explained that should the Commission approve the plat at this point, they could not intercede until presentation of the final plat. She stated she did not want to mislead Mr. Milholland. • • • Planning Commission June 10, 1991 Page 7 CONDITIONAL USE CU 91-12 - CHANGE OF NON -CONFORMING USE STEVE SMITH - 4363 WEDINGTON DR. The sixth item on the agenda was Conditional Use CU 91-12, change of non- conforming use submitted by Steve Smith on behalf of Mr. Burger for property located on the south side of wedington Dr., west of Rupple Road (4363 Wedington Drive). The property is zoned A-1, Agricultural. The change in use is from a retail business to an office. Ms. Bryant stated this Conditional Use request was premised on Section 160.139(c) which reads: "If no structural alterations are made, any nonconforming use of a structure or structure and premises, may as a conditional use be changed to another nonconforming use provided that the Planning Commission, either by general rule or by making findings in the specific case, shall find that the proposed use is equally appropriate or more appropriate to the district than the existing nonconforming use. In permitting such change, the Planning Commission may require appropriate conditions and safeguards..." Ms. Bryant explained that the Planning Commission had never, by general rule, directed that these cases be automatically accepted. She further stated the history of the Planning Commission was to look at the cases individually and make findings in each specific case. The history of this specific property is that in 1984 Len Edens obtained a conditional use to upgrade the nonconforming use from a plumbing, heating and air conditioning business to a silk screening business. The property was then vacant for a period of time and then in 1990 Mr. Edens petitioned the Planning Commission to upgrade from the silk screening business to a retail sporting goods store. Me. Bryant explained the retail sporting goods store was never installed and the property remained vacant. She stated that now Mr. Burger has purchased the property and hope to use it for offices and storage. Ms. Bryant recommended the granting of the conditional use subject to bringing the gravel parking lot up to city standards, one space for each 300 feet of office space and one space for each 1,000 square feet of storage. The surface must be improved to a durable and dust free grade. Mr. Steve Smith, representing Mr. Burger, appeared before the Commission and stated part of the parking area (an area that would park 8 or 9 cars) was concrete. He explained there would be very little traffic to the building. Mr. Allred asked if Mr. Smith was aware that he would be required to pave the ingress. Mr. Smith stated he was aware of that. He stated they had not discussed how much additional area would need to be paved, but he would be willing to meet the requirements. MOTION Ms. Britton moved to accept the conditional use. Mr. Hanna seconded the motion. The motion passed 6-0-0. CONDITIONAL USE CU91-13 - CHILD CARE RENEWAL MILDRED CORER - 729 BETTY JO DR. The seventh item on the agenda was conditional use request CU91-13 for child care renewal submitted by Mildred Coker for property located at 729 Betty Jo Drive. 205' MID • Planning Commission June 10, 1991 Page 8 The property is zoned R-2, Medium Density Residential. Ms. Bryant explained that approximately a year ago Ms. Coker applied for a conditional use for a child care business in her home at 729 Betty Jo Drive. She further explained that the conditional use was granted subject to four conditions, one of which was that Ms. Coker re -apply for a conditional use after one year. Ms. Bryant stated staff had not received any complaints regarding the child care business. She recommended the granting of conditional use subject to the original conditions that (1) Ms. Coker acquire a state license, (2) Hours of operation be limited to 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., open Monday thru Friday, and (3) Ms. Coker could keep up to ten children. She explained Ms. Coker would have to continue renewing her certificate of occupancy on an annual basis, but staff did not recommend that she reapply for a conditional use annually. MOTION Me. Britton moved to renew the conditional use as submitted. Mr. Springborn seconded the motion. The motion passed 6-0-0. THE FAYETTEVILLE VISION Ms. Britton stated the Steering Committee was working on formulating goals discussed at the public neighborhood meetings. She explained they had ten goals they were concentrating on, coming up with concrete ideas to implement the goals. Mr. Allred stated he had received telephone calls complaining that the Vision Steering Committee was setting administrative policy instead of long-range planning. He stated the callers felt the steering committee was getting out of focus on some issues and delving in areas they should not be. He stated they needed to keep targeted on their objectives and not get off on the side tangents. Mr. Allred stated he believed it was their job to focus, and the staff's job to implement. He stated he did not believe the steering committee should be implementing policy but should set policy and let staff legislate and implement it. Ms. Bryant stated she did not think they would get to that level of detail. She further informed the Commission that staff was still trying to find a joint meeting time when the Planning Commission could meet with the Board of Directors and hold a public hearing. She stated the meeting might be July 9, 10, or 11. Mr. Allred stated he thought that they needed to implement the meeting. He stated he thought it was a good idea every once in a while for the planning commission and the board of directors to have a joint meeting. Mr. Allred introduced Don Mills, Chairperson of the Board of Adjustment, and commended her for her attendance at the Planning Commission meetings. The meeting was adjourned at 6:20 p.m. zo6