Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2000-08-28 Minutes
• • • MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION A regular meeting of the Fayetteville Planning Commission was held on August 28, 2000 at 5:30 p.m. in Room 219 of the City Administration Building, 113 W. Mountain, Fayetteville, Arkansas. ITEMS CONSIDERED ACTION TAKEN VA 00-7.00 Vacation (Phillips, pp 523) Forwarded Page 2 LSD 00-19.00 Large Scale Development (Bradley, pp 177) Approved Page 3 RZ 00-21.00 Rezoning (Tyson, pp 565) Forwarded Page 5 CU 00-20.00 Conditional Use (Tumer, pp 484) Approved Page 17 MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT Nancy Allen Don Bunch Bob Estes Conrad Odom Loren Shackelford Lee Ward Sharon Hoover Lorel Hoffman Don Marr STAFF PRESENT STAFF ABSENT Tim Conklin Dawn Warrick Sheri Metheney Ron Petrie Planning Commission • August 28, 2000 Page 2 • • Consent Agenda: Approval of minutes from the August 14, 2000 meeting. VA 00-7.00: Vacation (Phillips, pp 523) was submitted by John Phillips for property located west of lot 2 block 42 in the City of Fayetteville The property is zoned C-4, Downtown Commercial and contains approximately 0.37 acres. Odom: Good evening ladies and gentlemen. Welcome to the August 28, 2000 meeting of the Planning Commission. The first items we are going to cover tonight are the approval of the minutes of the August 14, 2000 meeting and then our Consent Agenda. Items that are on the Consent Agenda will be approved without discussion and we can pull an item off the Consent Agenda should a member of the audience or a member of the Planning Commission wishes to discuss those before voting on them. The only item we have on the Consent Agenda is Vacation 00-7.00 which was submitted by John Phillips for property located west of lot 2 block 42 in the City of Fayetteville. The property is zoned C-4, Downtown Commercial and contains approximately 0.37 acres and the request is to vacate a platted alley. That item will be approved unless any member of the audience or Planning Commission wishes to pull that for discussion. PUBLIC COMMENT Odom: Does anyone from the audience wish to pull that for discussion? COMMISSION DISCUSSION Odom: Does any member of the Planning Commission wish to pull that for discussion? Would you call the roll on the Consent Agenda? ROLL CALL: Upon roll call Consent Agenda passes on a vote of 8-0-0. • • • Planning Commission August 28, 2000 Page 3 LSD 00-19.00: Large Scale Development (Bradley, pp 177) was submitted by Don Hunnicutt of Hunnicutt Construction on behalf of Jerry Bradley for property located on lot 1 of Millennium Place, north of Joyce Blvd., west of Hwy 265 (Crossover). The property is zoned C-1, Neighborhood Commercial and contains approximately 0.75 acres. The request is to build a retail store. Odom: The first item we have for discussion is item number two LSD 00-19.00 submitted by Don Hunnicutt of Hunnicutt Construction on behalf of Jerry Bradley for property located on lot 1 of Millennium Place, north of Joyce Blvd., west of Hwy 265. The property is zoned C-1, Neighborhood Commercial and contains approximately 0.75 acres. The request is to build a retail store. Staff's recommendation is for approval subject to nine Conditions of Approval. The first to be the determination of the Commercial Design Standards. Items two through nine are items that were specific to previous reports before Subdivision. Staff are their any further Conditions of Approval? Conklin: There are no further Conditions of Approval Odom: I would ask the applicant to please come forward at this time. Hunnicutt: I'm Don Hunnicutt. I am representing the owner. I think we complied with Subdivision requirements. There is some redesign. We have the architect here to answer any questions on the Commercial Design Standards that we resubmitted after the Subdivision meeting. Odom: Mr. Hunnicutt, item number one deals with us determining whether or not the application meets the Commercial Design Standards. Do you have any problems with the other Conditions of Approval? Hunnicutt: No. Odom: Items two through nine? Hunnicutt: No. PUBLIC COMMENT Odom: Okay. Let me ask if there is any member of the audience that would like to address us on this Large Scale Development? Planning Commission • August 28, 2000 Page 4 • • COMMISSION DISCUSSION Odom: MOTION Ward: Shackelford: Odom: ROLL CALL Seeing none, I will close the floor to public discussion and bring it back to Planning Commission for discussion of the Large Scale Development. Do we have any motions? I will go ahead and recommend approval of LSD 00-19.00 for the property out on Millenium Place. I was kind of the one that brought up at Subdivision that I didn't feel like especially the north elevation of the old plan really had enough features or characteristics or articulation. I feel like the new plans they have submitted to us with the windows and more brick and columns look much better. I am satisfied with it personally. I'll second. We have a motion by Commissioner Ward, second by Shackelford to approve LSD 00-19.00. Do we have any further discussion? Will you call the roll? Upon roll call LSD 00-19.00 passes on a vote of 8-0-0. Planning Commission • August 28, 2000 Page 5 • • RZ 00-21.00: Rezoning (Tyson, pp 565) was submitted by Read Hudson on behalf of Tyson for property located at the southeast corner of Hwy 16 and Happy Hollow Road. The property is zoned C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial and contains approximately 11.50 acres. The request is to rezone to I-2, General Industrial. Odom: Item number three on tonight's agenda is a rezoning request RZ 00-21.00 submitted by Read Hudson on behalf of Tyson for property located at the southeast corner of Hwy 16 and Happy Hollow Road The property is zoned C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial and contains approximately 11 50 acres. The request is to rezone to I-2, General Industrial. Staff's recommendation is for approval of the request for rezoning based upon the findings as included as a part of this report. Staff do we have anything that you want to talk about with regard to background of this? Conklin: With regard to this rezoning, this is a Mexican Original Tyson facility located at Happy Hollow and Huntsville Road. I did hand out a memo from the City of Fayetteville which was a memo to the file regarding how this Mexican Original operation was classified. Back in 1980 they classified it under Use Unit 15 which was a Bakery. They had a similar request with regard to Shipley's Bakery down on Dickson Street and actually had an appeal to the Planning Commission on an interpretation issue in 1976. They classified that under Use Unit 13. Today we have a facility that has requested a building permit through the Planning Division office. Tyson was aware that any expansion of this facility under C-2, would be non -conforming and that rezoning would need to be applied for. They have applied for the rezoning. It's classified under Use Unit 23 which is Heavy Industrial, Food and Allied Products. I just want to give you a little history on why we are rezoning this today. It's to make sure that we do have a Food and Allied Manufacturing use in the right Zoning District and Use Unit. The City has issued building permits over the years. The City Council actually passed an ordinance issuing act nine revenue industrial bonds on this facility. The City Planning Commission through Large Scale Developments, building permits and City Council action the City was aware what Mexican Original was doing at this location. Today I do believe that they do need to be under Use Unit 23. Odom: Thank you staff. I would ask Mr. Hudson to please come forward at this time. Hudson: My name is Read Hudson and I'm with Tyson Foods I have with me today Darrell Proud. He is the Plant Manager of the facility we have been talking about. 1 think our application pretty well speaks for itself. We are here to answer any questions you may have with respect to the facility. What we do. What we are planning on doing and so forth. Planning Commission • August 28, 2000 Page 6 • • Odom: Go ahead Commissioner Ward Ward: This is more for Tim. Have we had any complaints about noise or smell and that kind of stuff from this particular facility? Conklin: I haven't directly received any complaints with regard to noise or odor. Going through the files for the last twenty-five years, I am aware of a complaint with regard to odor and a complaint about noise. Just two. That's all I could find. Ward: Okay. Thank you. Hoffman: I have a question for Tim. Did we get a report from Mickey Jackson about the setback on the proposed flour silos? Conklin: With regard to Mickey Jackson, he is at a conference. I was not able to get with him. I did speak with Dennis Ledbetter, the Fire Marshal for the City of Fayetteville. He gave me a copy of the State Fire Code which I have delivered to Tyson Foods with regard to minimum State standards, controlling dust in a facility that's working with flour. I believe Tyson has worked with Mickey Jackson in the past and they may have more information with regard to that facility. Hoffman: My main concern, just to relay to you the applicant, is that you have enough setback from the silos to any residential property. I'm not sure what it is but that you would have enough room. On fifteen acres surely that would not be an issue. Hudson: Right now we have four silos located on the west end of the property. The new silos that are going to go up to accommodate the tenant that's going to lease part of our property are basically going to go right next to those. I know that doesn't really answer your question. Hoffman: But you are aware of the fire code and will follow it? Hudson: Yes. Without a doubt. I knew you would raise the issue and I brought it up with Darrell and he informed me that they have worked extensively with Mickey on a variety of things. It's a partnering type thing that they worked together on hazmat training. I think we have a good enough relationship and a pretty good idea as to what we are supposed to be doing. Hoffman: Thank you very much. Planning Commission • August 28, 2000 Page 7 • • Bunch: Question for staff. Are the complaints that were filed previously there was one for noise and one for odor. When were those filed and what action, if any, was taken? Conklin: Let me try to find that information. With regard to the noise, I just heard about that, talking with Tyson, that they have received one on noise. With regard to odor it was fifteen to twenty years ago. I don't have an exact page marked on that. It was back during the time they were discussing the large scale development. I believe it was probably around early 1980's, 1982 or 1983. PUBLIC COMMENT Odom: I sort of Jumped off my normal track. Let me ask if there is any member of the audience that could address us on this issue? Erf: Hi. My name is Jeff Erf, 2711 Woodcliff Road. Some questions. I seem to recall a newspaper article about the odors emanating from this plant a few years ago. I know I regularly drop my child off and pick him up at Happy Hollow School. I often smell something I describe as tortillas or something corn, some sort of corn flour. I don't know if there are any residents from that area here tonight but as 1 recall the article included some interviews with some of those people and they were quite upset about the odor situation out there. I haven't smelled any this year, since Happy Hollow started but I don't know if they have done something to mitigate the odor problem. I don't know if they want to admit there is an odor problem. As far as making complaints about odor and noise, is it normal procedure to go through the Planning office or is it possible they could have complained to the Mayor's office and Tim you wouldn't know about it? Conklin: With regard to noise, typically that goes to the Police Department. Erf: Okay. So what about odor? Conklin: It varies. Sometimes people choose to call the Mayor, City Attorney, City Prosecutor... Erf: It is entirely possible that people have complained about it other than previously, you Just don't have anything on record in your office? Conklin: Yes. When they asked if I had any complaints to my office, I answered that I only found one in writing back in 1983. • Planning Commission August 28, 2000 Page 8 Erf: Okay. My concem here is that we have a situation that could be Bakery Feeds all over again. I have looked at the Tyson close-up here on the back of the packet you received and I see R-1 and C-1, C-2 surrounding this and what will eventually become, if you approve it and City Council approves it, I-2. It's going to be an island out there. You have to understand a lot of that residential development is down wind from that site. I don't live in that area but I drive through that area and I can smell Hanna's Potpourri from there and I can sometimes smell Mexican Original. I just caution you to go slow on this and get all the facts. One thing that I am curious about I-2 designation, what would be some examples of things that potentially could go in there. Could they put in another, for example, Bakery Feeds? Conklin: That would be an odor emitting business that would require a Conditional Use. Erf: So, it's been concluded then that was an odor emitting business. Could you put in a Hanna's Potpourri there? Odom: Jeff, what I recommend... • Erf: I am just trying to understand what I-2 designation is. • Odom: Let's not make this personal. It's already been established that if the business is an odor emitting business, it has to come in under a Conditional Use. There are some other things that can come in by right and Tim, what I would direct you to do in answering this question is to give him the types of industries that can come in by right without a Conditional Use under I-2. Conklin: I can tell you as Planning Director for the City of Fayetteville on an Industrial Use, I investigate, go out, do site visits, try to get a good understanding to figure out where they fall under our zoning ordinance. If it's a facility that is not producing an odor and it's heavy industrial, manufacturing, warehousing, those type of uses are use by right in 1-2. I can tell you it's on a case-by-case basis. I interview people. I call other cities. I try to define exactly what's happening. With regard to the additional four silos on this site, I did contact Tyson. I did ask if they needed an Air Permit. The response was "No." They responded that it didn't produce an odor. They are storing flour in four silos. With regard to what happened over the past twenty years, they relied on City building permits, large scale development approvals and act nine industrial bonds. Which during those meetings and in those minutes they talked about manufacturing at this facility. I really don't believe they are changing what they are doing at this site however, this year and I'm the Planning Director, I believe that it's under Use Unit 23 that • • • Planning Commission August 28, 2000 Page 9 Erf: Odom: requires I-2, it requires Heavy Industrial zoning for this use. My concern is that being rezoned to I-2 opens it up for new manufactunng expansion and by right they are allowed to do certain things that they are not allowed to do. Again, it's surrounded by C-2 and R-1 and I'll leave it at that. If I can address the Chair. I'm not sure what you meant by making this personal. I mentioned Bakery Feeds, I mentioned Hanna's Potpourri. I didn't say anyone by name. I'm not sure what you meant. Could you clarify that? You mentioned Hanna's Potpourri by name and asked specifically if Hanna's Potpourri is an odor emitting business and that's not really what's before us tonight. That's what I meant by getting personal. Erf: I was looking for examples of types of manufacturing that could go on. Odom. I thought your question was a good and valid question because you asked what were the uses permitted but asking to give specific examples of specific types of industries that you name, I don't think is appropriate. There is a list of the uses permitted under I-2 and if you would like I could read those. Do you have a copy of that? Erf: Yes. I have a copy of that. But I wasn't sure, for example, what it means by manufacturing. That's kind of open. Conklin: Jeff, I look at those Use Units and once again, I go out there and I interview the people, I do tours of the facility. I have to classify them under a Use Unit. I classify them under Use Unit 23. Erf: Tim, I'm not saying you are not doing your Job. I'm Just looking at... Conklin: I'm explaining how. You are saying manufacturing. I'm trying to explain exactly what I do on a daily basis at the Planning Division. That's the method I use. Erf: But you understand when I ask specifically of a manufacturing plant that I'm familiar with Hanna Potpourri, the Chair tells me that I'm being personal, I can't bring it up. I'm not opposing this. I'm not supporting it. I'm Just saying go with caution. I'll leave it up to your judgment to decide whether or not this is good for Fayetteville. Thank you. Odom: Would any other member of the audience like to address us? Planning Commission • August 28, 2000 Page 10 • COMMISSION DISCUSSION Odom: Seeing none, I will close the floor to public discussion and bring it back to the applicant and Planning Commission. Hoover: I have a question for staff and I think it's because that I haven't done many of these I -2's since I have been here. This qualifies under I-2 but then if it emits an odor it has to have a separate Conditional Use. Is that correct? Conklin: That's correct. If it is classified as an odor emitting business they all require a Conditional Use in Use Unit 31. Hoover: How is one classified as an odor emitting business? Conklin: There is a list. I can go over that list of uses that the City Council passed a few years ago. Let me just find that really quick. Manufacturing uses: chemical and allied products, food and kindred products, animal fats and oils rendering, beverages distilling, meat slaughtering and packaging, paper and allied products, rubber and plastic products, processing and sales: explosives, wholesale and warehousing: livestock, stockyards, explosive materials, apparel products: leather tanning, chemical and allied products: any process likely to emit odor or have the potential for explosion, paper and allied products: building paper and board paper, petroleum and related industries: bulk station and terminal, rubber and miscellaneous plastic products: inner tubes and tires. I can read Unit 23 since the question has come up Manufacturing uses: fabricated metal products, primary metal industries, textile mill products, processing and sales: auto salvage, junk yards, scrap metal, refuse, repair service: tire recapping, wrecking and demolition services, apparel products: industrial leather belting, clay products, food and allied products, which is what I am classifying this under, fumiture and allied products, glass products, lumber and wood products: millware, plywood, prefabricated structure wood, veneer, wooden container, paper and allied products: paperboard containers, petroleum and related industries: coal yard, lubricating oils and greases, primary metal industry: foundry, stone products, and housing for caretakers. Those are the uses under Use Unit 23. Hoover: Okay. Tim, now I'm really confused We are in Use Unit 23 because we are Heavy Industrial but you are saying that this is an odor emitting business or it is not? Conklin: I am classifying this business as a food and allied product. The business that they • are applying for the building permit is for flour silos. I will read you what they Planning Commission August 28, 2000 Page 11 submitted. Hoover: Wait one second. I thought this was a rezoning for the entire piece of property. Conklin: It is for the entire piece of property which was established in 1983. With regard to does it emit an odor? I'm not sure if it does or doesn't I would want to do some more research on that. Hoover: If I drive by and I smell an odor, does that count as emitting an odor? Or, does it have to go through some process? Conklin: Unit 31, facilities which are heavy industrial in nature but which have a potential to have adverse effects such as odor or the potential for explosions. That's what I have to determine. Odom: Let me ask, are they going to have to come back through this process? When they put their permit in to build, is that the time that you make the determination as to whether it's an odor emitting business or do you do that during the rezoning of it? Conklin: I really didn't consider this blending flour and packaging it into fifty pound bags as an odor emitting business which is what they applied for. Odom. You know what, first of all, I would like to apologize to Commissioner Hoover. I sort of Jumped in there. Did you have any further questions? Hoover: No. That's helping to clarify. I'm dust trying to understand how this process is working. Conklin: What I try to do is I talk to the industry, I talk to Arkansas Department of Environment Quality and I try to determine if it is. I physically go out there and I try to see what I can smell. I did that with regard to the last Tyson facility. 1 try my best to classify it. This is what they will be doing with regard to this building permit. "Silos will be loaded with white/wheat flour only. The process consists of white/wheat flour blended in a ribbon blender with some minor ingredients. No water is added to this blend. The blend is mixed for two to four minutes and is then bagged in fifty pound paper bags. The final product is palletized and loaded onto trailers to delivery to the customer. There are no odors emitted. This plant does not require an air permit." Kelly Pogue was called and she is sending a memo indicating this. I did get an email from Kelly Pogue stating that the Mexican Original East does not require a permit. Planning Commission • August 28, 2000 Page 12 • Hoffman: I dust had a couple of brief questions for staff. We have an existing use in place already and that has an existing legal use. That's really a separate issue than our rezoning which is only being brought about because we have an additional building permit needed for some silos. Is that correct? Conklin: Yes. Once again, there was an interpretation made back in 1980. When we talk about "What use unit does it fall?" I can tell you City staff, we try our best to make sure we are classifying these in the right use umt. At that time they classified it under Use Unit 15, a Bakery. It's been operating under Use Unit 15 as a Bakery all these years. I would not classify the Use today as a Bakery. I would classify it as a Food and Allied Product under Use Unit 23. That is why I requested and asked and required Tyson to come before the Commission and City Council. The decision is, based on my interpretation, there can be no more expansions at a facility that the City approved, in the past, building permits and large scale development plans and then an ordinance approving industrial revenue bonds. They relied on that information. I do believe that it should be zoned I-2 based on past City actions and their future building permit and plans at this facility. Hoffman: Okay. With that in mind then, when they do apply for another building permit, is it a Large Scale Development? Conklin: No. Large Scale Development is only required when you have an addition of 10,000 square feet or more, over twenty-five parking spaces being added or a new curb cut. It will just be a building permit. Odom: Commissioner Allen? Allen: I'm still having trouble understanding the odor issue. I don't know whether that is something that has already been determined and if so, who determined it? Can you explain that to me? Conklin: Have I determined that this is an odor emitting facility that produces adverse effects? No. I have not determined that. I looked at what they proposed to add to the facility and what they apparently do out there. I classified it under Use Unit 23. Allen: How do we get that resolved? How do we determine? Conklin: I'll have to make a decision. It's not going to be tonight. They need I-2 zoning • even if they need a Conditional Use. You can't apply for an odor emitting • • Planning Commission August 28, 2000 Page 13 business outside of I-2 so the rezoning is required. If I determine that Tyson Mexican Original produces odors that are adverse, what I'll do is I'll go out there and see what I can smell and talk to the Tyson officials and talk to ADE Q again. I'm the Planning Director. It's my Job. I'll do it. It's not just black and white. Is it producing adverse odors out there? Odom: I think Jeff makes a valid point that how do we stop the Bakery Feeds from happening again? This is something that's already there and something that I would like to know is if, let's just say this plant didn't exist and they are wanting to build this plant, is it when they come in when they ask for the rezoning? We don't ask at the rezoning "Is it an odor emitting business?" We ask at the Large Scale Development "Is it an odor emitting business?" Conklin: This business with regard to mixing up flour and putting it into fifty pound bags is not Tyson. It's a separate company. That's what I'm looking at. We issue something called a Certificate of Zoning Compliance through our office. I'm looking at a Building Permit, the piece of ground that they are placing this Use in, where do you classify that? Where do you classify mixing of flour? To be honest with you, I didn't look at what Tyson Mexican Original has been doing the past twenty years or so. I'm looking at this Building Permit like I do on every Building Permit and does taking flour, putting minor ingredients in it, mixing it and putting it into paper sacks going to produce an odor? That's why I asked that question. I have the email here where I asked it and the answer was "No." I'm reasonably sure that flour mixing and putting it into a paper bag is not going to produce an odor. I'm Just sharing this with you to show you what road I went down to come to the point where I did with regard to "How do I issue a building permit and where does that Use fall within our code?" Odom: Tim, correct me if I'm wrong but we don't ask whether or not it's an odor emitting business when someone is coming forward with a rezoning request. We ask that at either the next stage which is the Large Scale Development stage or the Building Permit stage. Conklin: I ask twenty to fifty questions every day when I have an Industrial Use and yes one of my questions is "I want to know up front, does it produce an odor?" I did ask them if mixing flour and putting it into fifty pound sacks produces an odor. Odom. What I'm asking you is that's a separate request? What we are to be considering right now deals really with the rezoning itself. • Conklin: That's correct. If it doesn't get rezoned then if I had a Building Permit for a Use Planning Commission • August 28, 2000 Page 14 1 • that produced an odor they couldn't be located in that area. Odom: Right. But it would be a Conditional Use request and they would have to come forward? Conklin: Yes. Odom: Okay. Conklin: I do, when I take those Building Permits, look at where the Use is occurring and whether or not it's producing an odor. Odom: But that's at the Building Permit? Conklin: Yes. Mr. Hudson, we had conversations on the phone with regard to what they intended to lease part of this property and what kind of use it was and that's where these questions came from and this information. Estes: Tim, if I understand correctly, what we have before us is a rezoning request only. That is to rezone from a non -conforming Use to a conforming Use. Is that correct? Conklin: That's correct. Estes: It was in your investigation that you made the determination that what was appropriate for this property was Use Unit 23 which is Food and Allied Products. Is that correct? Conklin: That's correct. Estes: The applicant brings this rezoning request to us at your request. Is that what I understand? Conklin: That's correct. MOTION Estes: Mr. Chairman, with that said, I would move that we approve RZ00-21.00. Hoffinan: I will second that. • • • Planning Commission August 28, 2000 Page 15 Odom: We have a motion and a second to recommend approval to rezoning RZ00-21.00. I will remind members of the audience that our decision is for recommendation only, that this goes on to the City Council. Any further discussion? Hoffman: Mr. Chair? Odom: Yes. Hoffman: I just have a further comment to make on my reason for second. Not only is this just a rezoning to bring the property into conformity, there are some surrounding industrial zonings, but it's my belief that if there were valid odor complaints and had been a history of problems over the last twenty-five years, a. we would know about it by now, b. if the new silos in some way generate or start that kind of odor problem, this does not prevent the City in any way from taking further action to mitigate any adverse odors. I see no problem with going ahead with the rezoning. Odom: Any further discussion? Hoover: Mr. Chair? I have one other question for Tim. I want to make sure I understand this correctly. We do the rezoning and then you will go out and determine if it's an odor producing business? Conklin: The business that's being applied for with this Building Permit, I don't believe is an odor emitting business. We have other businesses in town that were in existence, like this one, that may produce an odor. I don't have a list of those businesses. I believe I know one, Bakery Feeds, which is now gone. With regard to the other ones, I have not gone back and done an analysis of who is in existence with an odor emitting business. What I do is I get Building Permits and I sign off on all commercial, industrial zoning compliance to make sure they are in the right Use Unit. That's what I am looking at today. I'm not sure if we can go back twenty years and make someone get a Conditional Use on something that was permitted through the City of Fayetteville and is in existence. It concerns me greatly that they relied on our Building Permits and our Large Scale Development approvals and that they have been in operation many many years prior to that ordinance that was passed regulating odor producing businesses. I would be more than happy to have the City Attorney come to the next meeting and explain any legal problems requiring someone to come back through. That question does come up once in a while. It's difficult for me to make a business come back before this body when it was approved by this body years ago and now we have a different ordinance. It's very difficult for me to do that. I don't do that. Planning Commission August 28, 2000 Page 16 Hoover: Thank you. Odom: Any further discussion? Call the roll. ROLL CALL Upon roll call RZ00-21.00 passes on a vote of 8-0-0. Planning Commission • August 28, 2000 Page 17 • • CU 00-20.00: Conditional Use (Turner, pp 484) was submitted by Pattie Turner for property located at 40 E Center. The property is zoned C-4, Downtown Commercial. The request is for a dance hall. Odom: The last item we have on tonight's agenda is item number four which is CU 00- 20.00 submitted by Pattie Turner for property owned by C.T. Pearson and located at 40 E Center. The property is zoned C-4, Downtown Commercial. The request is for a dance hall. Staffs recommendation is for approval of the Conditional Use subject to six Conditions of Approval that I will read at this time. The first Condition of Approval is, the outdoor area around of the facility is not to be utilized by patrons to congregate or consume alcoholic beverages. No use of this area is to be made by this business unless a separate approval is obtained from the Planning Commission. The second condition is that, signage shall consist of wall signs as permitted by the City's Sign Ordinance, no freestanding signs shall be permitted. The third item is that, before a conditional use permit is issued for a dance hall, the building must be inspected by the Fire Marshal and Building Inspector to assure compliance with the Arkansas State Fire Code and to assure that no significant safety hazards exist. No conditional use permit shall be issued for a dance hall facility if the building does not pass inspection. The fourth one is, this conditional use shall be monitored by staff and will be brought back to the Planning Commission for reconsideration at any time that there are valid complaints concerning the dance hall. Water shall be turned off immediately and the professional office shall not operate if any of the conditions are not met. The sixth condition is that, this conditional use shall be automatically revoked if any condition is not met. Staff are there any further Conditions of Approval? Conklin: There are no further Conditions of Approval. We did hand out, this evening, a memo from our Building Inspections Director with regard to building code requirements that will have to be met prior to this facility opening up and there are nine listed on that memo that's dated 8-24-00. Also, at the Agenda Session, one of the Commissioners did ask about the upper deck of the municipal parking lot behind the Hilton Hotel. That upper and lower decks are leased by the Hilton so they are not available for public use. The middle deck, those spaces are leased to individual business owners. The municipal parking deck will not be available for public parking. Odom: Staff, as I understand it the departmental correspondence dated August 24, 2000, to Dawn from Inspections, those will have to be met. That's part of the Conditions of Approval that you have listed here. Conklin: Yes. Planning Commission • August 28, 2000 Page 18 • • Odom: Also, it's been brought to my attention that item number five states "water shall be turned off immediately and the professional office shall not operate if any of the conditions are not met." Should that be "dance hall"? Conklin: Yes. That needs to be corrected to dance hall in number five. Odom. So, item number five shall read "Water shall be turned off immediately and the dance hall shall not operate if any of the conditions are not met." Do we have a signed Conditions of Approval? Conklin: No. - Odom: I would ask the applicant to please come forward at this time. Turner: Good evening. Glad to be here. I'm Pattie Turner. This is my partner and life- long friend Deanie Heerwagen. Deanie and I grew up in Fayetteville. Deanie's father Bill Heerwagen was an architect and Interior Designer here. Her grandfather lived on Washington Avenue. My father was Ralph Pinkerton who owned Fashion Cleaners on Dickson Street for fifty years His brother was Guy Pinkerton who owned the Hob Nob Liquor Store for about sixty years. Deanie and I both love Fayetteville and consider it home and have decided to make it our permanent home. Deanie herself has lived in Little Rock for the past twenty years where she was the Executive Director for the Kelly Foundation. I have been an entertainer here in the area for most of my life. I started out locally as a single artist and then worked in shows in Eureka Springs and Rogers. In 1985, my late husband Ed Turner and I bought and created our own show and dinner theater called ET's and was located in Jane, Missouri. We managed to perform six shows a week for nine years so I am familiar with business. Deanie and I have leased a building from my cousin Tommy Pearson at 40 East Center Street and would like to establish Tone's, an upscale private club featuring quality libations, excellent service and an exceptional variety of live music entertainers. We are asking the City of Fayetteville on this mission to grant us a Conditional Use Permit for dancing. Odom: Mrs. Turner, let me ask you, if you have either read or listened to the six Conditions of Approval that is recommended by staff. Are you in agreement with those six Conditions of Approval? Turner: Yes sir, I am. PUBLIC COMMENT • • • Planning Commission August 28, 2000 Page 19 Odom: Now let me ask before we get into any further questions, is there any member of the audience that would like to address us on this request? Hall: My name is Jo Hall. I live on Center Street two -and -a -half blocks from where this dance hall is planned to be. I'm not against dance halls but I think that dance hall would be too close to residential areas. I've been young and I did love to dance when I was of a dancing age but I think dance halls should be out of residential areas. I'm not for this dance hall. Odom: Thank you. Ma'am did you say your last name is Hall? Hall: Hall. Sophia Jo Hall. Odom: Thank you Ms. Hall. Any other member of the audience like to address us on this issue? Funkhouser: Good evening, my name is Beartie Funkhouser. I live on 210 E. Center, the second house from the old courthouse. I like sister Hall, I don't approve of a dance hall being that close to residential. I really don't. That's all I have to say. Odom: Thank you very much Any other member of the audience like to address us on this issue? Then I'm going to close the floor to public discussion and bring it back to the applicant for questions and comments of the Planning Commission. COMMISSION DISCUSSION Allen: I wondered what kind of clientele are you going to try to attract. Is this going to be college students or young adults? Tumer: It would have to be young adults. It will be a private club. No one under 21 would be allowed in. Allen: What sort of dancing? Turner: It's going to be a very small place. As you might of noticed on your papers, it's only 1500 square foot. The dance floor itself is going to be no bigger than what's in front of you here. The volume can't be very great in a room that size, I guess is the point I'm trying to make. We are going to have a variety of music, jazz, blues, groups that have not been featured in the area and will be new talent all through the area. Planning Commission August 28, 2000 Page 20 Allen. Most of it would be live music? Turner: Yes. Having been in entertainment in the area, I thought there's a lot of talent out there that is not getting showcased and that's kind of our ultimate goal as an entertainer and lover of music myself, is to showcase some local talent that hasn't had the chance to be heard I think a lot of people would like to hear good talent. Hoffman: I have a question for staff with regard to noise. I would assume that the citizens that have spoken up that live close by are concerned primarily with noise late at night. I understand your hours of operation will be until 2:00 a.m.? Turner: Yes. Hoffman: What does our noise ordinance say? What is their recourse if they are bothered should this Conditional Use be approved? Conklin: I don't have the noise ordinance in front of me. Of course they will be subject to that and if they violate it they will have penalties. Hoffman: If I remember right, there is something about 10:00 a.m. you have to turn the volume down and not be heard outside the premises. Conklin: I know the later it gets the decibel level does go down. I'm not sure what those numbers are. They will have to comply with the noise ordinance, it's the law. The police department would enforce that. Hoffman: Right. When we heard this at Agenda Session, my feeling was that it was one of the more appropriate places for a dance hall because of it's location west of College Avenue towards the downtown area and away from the residential area. I am very concemed that residents are not bothered by night club patrons and so forth but I have a feeling that College provides a pretty good barrier from pedestrian traffic entering your neighborhood. I would assume because the noise ordinance is there that you would have some recourse should you at all be bothered by this. We have had a history of another night club being closed down because the noise was excessive and it was rather recently. This is not something that you would be unable to change should there be an excessive problem with it. I want you to know that. I am more or less in favor of the location because of it's proximity due to the downtown area. That's all I have to say. Conklin: Commissioner Hoffman, condition number four on that Conditional Use, if there are any complaints with regard to the dance hall we would bring that back to you • • • Planning Commission August 28, 2000 Page 21 and I would think that if they are violating the noise ordinance and the residents are complaining about it, that Conditional Use would be brought back to you for revocation or other appropriate action. Hoffman: And the other only thing that we're approving really is the dancing, the music and the place can be there. It's just whether or not we allow dancing. Conklin: Yes. We don't discriminate on what type of dancing people do or what type of music they listen to. At least I don't recommend you doing that. Estes: Mrs. Turner, Ms. Hall and her neighbor voiced their concerns. I understand that parking is not an issue before us but where do you expect your patrons to park with the municipal deck closed because of the Hilton leases? Turner. Well, there is a pretty good sized back lot behind us that is not used even in the day. It's just a drive through facility. There is a lot that we have that goes along with our lease right beside the building that has twelve spots in it. There is some on -street parking in front of the place too. Metered parking that they can use of an evening. I understand from watching the area before we leased the place, I've done quite a bit of research in the area There are several great restaurants right across the street from us, Hoffbrau and Cafe Santa Fe that attract large groups of patrons and it doesn't seem to be any parking problem existing on those. I notice they park over across the City lot. Estes: I understand that parking is not an issue that is before us but let me ask this, do you anticipate that any of your patrons will be parking east of College in Mrs. Hall's neighborhood? Turner: No. I wouldn't think anybody would walk up that hill that far. I don't believe so. Our place will only seat about eighty-five people so we are not talking about a large spot either that is going to require a large amount of parking. Estes: Thank you. Turner: If I may, if you all have been up on Center Street in the evening, they have quite a bit of music going on there already. I don't think it's a volume that's disturbing anybody and I don't believe mine would be any louder than what they are playing on Center Street now. Hall: Could you repeat that? Planning Commission August 28, 2000 Page 22 Turner: Hall: Turner: Bunch: Turner: Odom: Turner: Ward: Conklin: MOTION Ward: I said, I don't believe our volume is going to be any louder than the existing businesses across Center Street now. Across Center Street? Yes. There are several restaurants, two of which play music up until 2:00 a.m. already Since music seemed to be your concern, I thought I would mention that. On a slightly different subject, you were saying this seats 84 people? You are showing 75 people at tables and 19 at the bar which usually, unless it's new math, comes out to about 94. How many people do you anticipate at the bar? Perhaps my addition is wrong then. Sorry, I did add up to what was there to be 84. Your right. I'll have to recount. You understand that occupancy is 84? Occupancy by the City staff indicates that occupancy of 84. Well, when the Fire Chief was out last Friday and the inspector, they indicated to me that the floor plan... I have to take out walls and do quite a bit of restructuring on the inside and that is a tentative floor plan. I was under the understanding if there was room for more tables and chairs after the end of construction that the figure could be adjusted. That was my understanding. I wouldn't be held hard core at this initial stage for that exact head count until the building was structured and they came in to inspect it at that time. Like I say, it's only 1500 square foot so I can't get a large amount of people in there and don't intend to have a big place. Tim, can we approve the Conditional Use strictly for this particular applicant is that something we could follow? Typically, we haven't done that either but yes, you have done it in the past. Typically, if a dance hall is appropriate at this location, it shouldn't matter who the applicant is. A couple things, even though it's C-4 and we are not going to really consider parking, I do feel like a lot of the people coming there will probably use our municipal parking down below the old courthouse building because that's probably the most parking that we have that's just sitting idle. I don't believe Planning Commission • August 28, 2000 Page 23 • there will be much parking. I know on Friday and Saturday nights especially all around Center Street back all through there is packed full of cars. There is no place to park because I visit those establishments quite a bit. With that, I am going to go ahead and move for approval of CU00-20.00 and I feel like the way the property is zoned, C-4 and in that particular location dance would make a good use for it. Hoover: I'll second. Odom. We have a motion by Commissioner Ward, second by Commissioner Hoover for approval of Conditional Use 00-20.00 subject to all of staff's comments and recommendations. Is there any further discussion? Will you call the roll? ROLL CALL Upon roll call CU00-20.00 passes on a vote of 8-0-0. Odom: Thank you and good luck. Staff do we have any further items that we need to discuss tonight? Conklin: There are no further items. Odom: Planning Commissioners, anything else? Conklin: Chairman Odom? I would like to introduce Sheri Metheney, she is the new Senior Secretary and is taking the minutes and calling roll. Welcome. Odom: Good luck Sheri. Metheney: Thank you. Odom: We're adjourned. • • PC 8-28-00 ✓B. • VA Phillips, 00-7.00 pp 523 LSD 00-19 00 Bradley, pp 177 RZ 00-21.00 Tyson, pp 565 MOTION 1 Kb Ird tS i3,^ SECOND CVO r it\(�Y-C4 i- �Z f 1CUl /D. Bunch 11 Estes Y y 4. Hoffman y Y i ✓S. Hoover 7 N. Allen \/ x D. Marr flte P-rxsC'- '-,(L-\. fc- /C. Odom Y y � Shackelford S Y 'L. Ward \ / ) 1 Y ACTION App coual Prepre U Cd VOTE © o -0-0 "a - 0 - v PC 8-28-00 CU 00-20.00 Turner, pp 484 MOTION Ward SECOND ,�-0C)v es - D. Bunch B. Estes Y L. Hoffman Y S. Hoover 7 N. Allen \l D. Marr a -d- C.Odom Y Shackelford NI L. Ward Y ACTION 5C4 VOTE -0"0