Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1992-11-23 Minutes1-• • • • • • MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE FAYETTEVILLE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION A meeting of the Fayetteville Planning Commission was held on Monday, November 23, 1992 in the Board of Directors Room on the second floor of the City Administration Building, 113 West Mountain Street, Fayetteville, Arkansas. MEMBERS PRESENT: Jack Cleghorn, Jana Lynn Britton, Tom Suchecki, J. E. Springborn, Jerry Allred, Kenneth Pummill, Charles Nickle, Jett Cato and Joe Tarvin OTHERS PRESENT: Alett Little, Tim Conklin, Sharon Langley, members of the press and others Mr. Nickle advised that, item 2 on the agenda, Rezoning R92-37 submitted by Harry Gray on behalf of Richard and Jennifer Bundrick for property located on the south side of Sycamore, west of Porter Road, had been withdrawn by the applicant. MINUTES The minutes of the regular Planning Commission Meeting of November 9, 1992 were unanimously approved as distributed upon motion of Commission Britton and second by Commissioner Springborn. PUBLIC HEARING - REZONING R92-38 DICK KEATING - S OF MISSION BLVD , E OF CROSSOVER RD. The next item was a public hearing Jorgensen on behalf of Dick Keating Boulevard, east of Crossover Road (Lot request is to rezone .37 acres from Residential -Office. for Rezoning R92-38 presented by Dave for property located south of Mission 12 of Crossover Heights, Phase III). The C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial, to R -O, Mr. Conklin stated the surrounding property was part of the Crossover Heights, Phase III, subdivision which was rezoned on October 12, 1992 from C-2 to R-2 to. allow the development of single family homes. He explained Lot 12 was requested by the applicant to be left out of the rezoning to remain as C-2 for commercial use. He reminded the Commission they had approved the rezoning for the surrounding property from C-2 to R-2, subject to the petitioner applying for rezoning of Lot 12 to R -O. He advised the applicant had stated the intended use of Lot 12 would be professional offices. Mr. Conklin stated the surrounding land use included to the east a dentist office and real estate office along Mission Boulevard, vacant land to the west, planned single family homes to the south, and vacant land to the north. He advised the surrounding zoning included R-2 to the south and east and C-2 to the north and west. Mr. Conklin advised the proposed rezoning would be down -zoning the existing site and would act as a buffer between residential development and heavier commercial development. He recommended the Planning Commission approve the requested rezoning from C-2 to R -O based on the past Planning Commission action on October 12, 1992 for rezoning application R92-32 and findings obtained within the staff report. MOTION Mr. Tarvin moved to recommend approval of the rezoning. Mr. Cato seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. 2 L►s Planning Commission Meeting •c'ta1/49e0eber 23, 1992 Page 2 • • • • PUBLIC HEARING - REZONING R92-39 DICK KRATING - W OF COLLEGE, S OF DRAKE (2601 N. COLLEGE) The next item was a public hearing for Rezoning R92-39 presented by Dave Jorgensen on behalf of Dick Keating for property located on the west side of College Avenue, south of Drake (2601 N. College Avenue). The request is to rezone 0.569 acres from A-1, Agricultural, to C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial. Mr. Conklin explained the applicant was requesting to rezone part of the property - from A-1 to C-2 to be consistent with the existing zoning on the front half of the property. He stated the past use of the site was for a restaurant (Hong Kong Garden). He noted surrounding land uses included to the south Ozark Barber Shop, to the west a mobile home park, to the east Midas Muffler and Arkansas Pool and Spa, and to the north Rufino's Mexican Food. He advised the surrounding zoning included C-2 to the north and east, R-2 to the west, and C-2 and A-1 to the south. Mr. Conklin stated the applicant was requesting the rezoning in order to develop a mini storage facility. He noted mini storage facilities were a permitted use in C-2 zoning districts under Use Unit 17. He stated the proposed rezoning and use would be compatible with the surrounding land uses. He further stated there were other mini storage facilities located along Highway 71B (Key Port Self Storage). Mr. Conklin recommended the Planning Commission approve the requested rezoning from A-1 to C-2 based on the findings found in the staff report. He noted the recommendation had changed since the staff report had been prepared. He advised staff had originally conditioned the approval on the extension of Madrid Street to Highway 71B. He stated, after further research, staff had determined the extension was not feasible. Mr. Nickle asked if the rezoning was conditioned upon the construction of a mini storage facility. Mr. Conklin stated it was not. Ms. Britton pointed out the rezoning was not an acre. She asked if the applicant would have to submit a large scale development. Mr. Conklin stated the entire parcel was over one acre and therefore development would have to go through large scale. In response to a question from Ms. Little, Mr. Jorgensen explained the restaurant. presently located on the site would remain at the present time. He noted the mini storage would not be constructed in the near future. He further stated the trailer behind the restaurant would be removed. Ms. Britton advised that, when the large scale development was submitted, she wanted the development screened from College. She stated it bothered her that the City was almost encouraging warehousing on the main thoroughfares. She further stated warehousing was not attractive. She reminded the Commission the City dealt with tourism and, if they hoped to further that, they had to have an attractive thoroughfare. Mr. Jorgensen stated he believed the development would be similar to Key Port Mini Storage. Ms. Britton pointed out the subject property was below the grade so everyone could see down into it. She stated screening and greenspace would modify the site so it would not be so offensive. .z y • 4,vtn �Pl�an�ni�n�g Commission Meeting dober 23, 1992 Page 3 • • • • Gene Housely, owner of the Sierra Estates Mobile Home Park, explained that, over a period of two to three years, he would be spending a lot of money on the mobile home park. He expressed concern that his property was getting a great deal of run-off. He noted this matter would be addressed with the large scale development but he wanted the Commission to be aware of the problem. He advised this matter was becoming an increasingly serious problem with more of the surrounding area being paved. MOTION Mr. Tarvin moved to recommend approval of the rezoning. Mr. Pummill seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. OTHER BUSINESS: Amendment to Section 98of City Code Me. Little stated staff was in the process of amending Section 98 of the City Code, which was the process for closing streets, alleys and easements, in order to allow the process to proceed from the Planning Office to the Planning Commission to the City Council. She advised this matter would probably come before the Commission at their next meeting. Ms. Britton expressed concern that only adjacent property owners were notified. She requested a sign be posted on the subject property giving notification. MOTION Me. Britton moved that her recommendation regarding placement of a sign be included in the ordinance. Mr. Cleghorn seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. Amendment to Zoning Ordinance Me. Little advised the City had received, from a citizens group, a change to the zoning ordinance to increase the number of parking spaces required for nightclubs, taverna, etc. and also placing those uses (Use Units 14 and 19) into I-1 and 1-2 zones. She stated she was in the process of working with the City Attorney to respond to the request. She explained it required quite a bit more work and would probably reach the Commission sometime in January. Mr. Tarvin asked if the request was to allow such establishment only in I-1 and I-2 or in addition to where the establishments were now allowed. Me. Little stated the way it was currently written was in addition to. She further stated she did not believe that was the intent of the drafters of the proposed ordinance. In response to a question from Ms. Britton, Me. Little explained she believed placing such businesses in I-1 would be acceptable but entirely inappropriate in 1-2. She stated she was in the process of working on the proper number of parking spaces which should be required for nightclubs, taverna, etc. 2117 Planning Commission Meeting • AkiLameaber 23, 1992 Page 4 • • • • Mr. Springborn stated this was another band aid approach to the zoning ordinance. He stated the city had big money invested in the redraft of the zoning ordinance. and it had been well over three years since it had started. Ms. Little explained ordinances always came after the adoption of the general plan so the general plan was the first priority. She explained the ordinances were the enforcement tool that put the general plan into play. She stated she was not currently working on any ordinances. She further stated she was not pleased with the draft of the zoning ordinance received from the consultant. She further advised the subdivision regulations seemed to be in good shape. Mr. Springborn stated it appeared from Ms. Little's reaction that the zoning ordinance required substantial, additional work. He stated they needed to get it before the Commission or the Board in order to let everyone know where it stood at the present time. Ms. Little asked if Mr. Springborn wanted to do the zoning ordinance prior to completion of the land use plan. Mr. Springborn stated they had already handled the redraft and bringing up to date the land use plan up to date. He stated this was in addition to that. Ms. Little stated she was currently working on all aspects of She stated all elements of the plan were in draft form. She contract with the consultant was terminated in 1989 by the Management Director. She further noted there was a lot left The meeting adjourned at 5:25. the land use plan. further noted the previous Planning. to be done. l!8