Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1986-10-23 - Minutes• • • MINUTES OF THE SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE OF THE FAYETTEVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION A meeting of the Subdivision Committee of the Fayetteville Planning Commission was held on Thursday October 23, 1986 at 1:00 p.m. in Room 111 of the City Administration Building, 113 W. Mountain Street, Fayetteville, Arkansas. MEMBERS PRESENT: Stan Green, B.J. Dow and Frank Farrish MEMBERS ABSENT: Ernie Jacks FAYETTEVILLE CHRISTIAN FELLOWSHIP CHURCH - LSD 1600 MISSION BLVD. - ROGER STAUB The first item of consideration was the Large Scale Development Plan for the Fayetteville Christian Fellowship Church submitted by Roger Staub and located at 1600 Mission Blvd. This property is zoned R-1, Low Density Residential District. Mr. Staub said the State Highway required that the radius of the turn onto Hwy 45 not pass their property line boundry so they turned that drive .out a little bit so the radius would not pass the extension of their property. In answer to a question from Commissioner Dow, Mr. Staub said they were inside the 100' setback requirement for adjoining property. He said the Board of Adjustment granted a variance of 8' on the north end of the property abutting the Memorial Cemetary and the Memorial Park had no objection. Green asked about the screening requirements along the east and west boundry. Mr. Staub said the east boundry was in excess, of the 10% landscaping requirement with natural screening. Mr. Staub said they have submitted a letter to the Planning Commission for a waiver of the screening requirement for 10% landscaping on the west side. Green asked if they would have to landscape the southwest side of this property. Carlisle said the ordinance states any non residential use abutting a residential zone would be screened which would mean all of the west side. Green then said even though the old home site was a residential use and nothing was going to change on that side of the property. He said the homestead site had been that way for many years and the driveway was going to be screened and the church and all the parking was in the back of this property. Dow asked if the congregation would be using the home site and Mr. Staub said at some point in time they may have people out on the property. n0° • • Subdivision Committee October 23, 1986 Page 2 Farrish stated Mr. Staub could have submitted a plan for the north end of the property were the proposed church and parking was placed. He said they could have met the requirement for that section only because they were not doing anything with the south end and could have shown that as phase II. Green stated a view obscuring fence or view obscuring vegetation or a combination of the two shall be required between R-1 zones and all non-residential uses. In answer to a question from Green, Carlisle said a condition use was obtained on the whole property and the screening requirement would be required. Green said the way it worked was if Carlisle decided the requirement applied to the north end only there would be nothing the Subdivision Committee could do about it. He said the Planning Commission could grant the waiver of the 10% vegetation in lieu of the screening. Farrish stated they could take a piece of property they have owner ship to and only show that part which was going to be developed and have it approved. Carlisle stated the Planning Commission may impose reasonable conditions in the granting of a waiver or variance to ensure compliance or to protect adjacent property owners. She said she did not have the authority to say he did not have to screen the whole property. She said the Planning Commission has the authority to waive that requirement and grant the variance for the landscaping where they deemed necessary. Dow felt the screening requirement should be brought up at the Planning Commission and let them decide what they want to do with it. Green stated the parking was adequate and proof of notification to all adjoining property owners had been submitted to the Planning Office. He said the one way drive had been changed and the ROW requirement showed 40' plus the additional 25' utility easement. Carlisle noted Mr. Staub needed to sign the sidewalk Bill of Assurance for the required sidewalk on the front of the property. MOTION Dow moved approval of the Large Scale Development subject to: 1) Plat Review comments; 2) with the question of the screening waiver to be decided at the Planning Commission meeting on Monday; 3) Bill of Assurance for a sidewalk across the front of the property, seconded by Farrish. The motion to recommend approval passed 3-0-0. Oft • • Subdivision Committee October 23, 1986 Page 3 RUMENS ADDITION TO THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE - PRELIMINARY PLAT SOUTH OF OZARK SMORHOUSE, WEST OF HOOT OWL LANE - H.H. HUDGENS The second item of consideration was the preliminary plat of Hudgens Addition to the City of Fayetteville, submitted by H.H. Hudgens and represented by Ervan Wimberly, the property is located south of Ozark Smokehouse and west of Hoot Owl Lane. This property is zoned R-1, Low Density Residential District. Wimberly stated he had proof of notification of all adjoining property owners on the plat. Wimberly noted the only change from the concept plat was they included lots 5 and 6 that were approved by previous lot splits. Green said the only issue he had was the streets which he did not fully understand. Carlisle explained it was determined on the concept plat that the property owners would not asked the City to pave Smokehouse or Hoot Owl Lane. In answer to a question from Green, Wimberly stated the Bill of Assurance for Smokehouse trail was if the City decided to improve Smokehouse Trail Mr. Hudgens would pay his portion. Dow read the minutes from the Planning Commission meeting on the concept plat "Hanna moved approval of the concept plat as presented with the stipulation that a Bill of Assurance be given on Smokehouse Trail and that the stipulation be put on the plat that if Hoot Owl Lane was ever improved it would be at the expense of the property owner and not the City". Green said he thought the motion was for curb and gutter only. Wimberly said he was under the impression it meant their share or their half of the street. Mr. Hudgens asked in the event a lot sold and the people wanted to build down there, would they be required to pave their portion. Wimberly said the Bill of Assurance would go with that lot. Carlisle said it would be picked up in the abstract as part of the deed. Farrish explained that the Bill of Assurance comes into play only if the City was going to pave that street. He said if they do decide to pave the street then they would call the Bills of Assurance they had collected and acess those people for their portion. Green said there was something about a fire hydrant in the plat review minutes. Wimberly said it would not be worth the effort to run a 6" line for a hydrant out there. • • • Subdivision Committee October 23, 1986 Page 4 Green asked if the 25'requirement for paving on the tandem lot could be waived. Carlisle said the requirement could be appealed to the Board of Adjustment. Dow stated she had a problem with the water line. Wimberly said it was approximately 300' from Hwy 62 and the estimated cost to put in a fire hydrant would be $2500.00. Farrish asked how they felt about putting in a fire hydrant when the first lot sold. Farrish said the Fire Chief had a question about providing adequate fire protection to houses as they are build because of the distance involved to the nearest hydrant. He said if there were no houses then there would be no need for a fire hydrant. Farrish stated when the first lot of lots 3, 4, 5 or 6 sold then they would be required to put in a hydrant. Mr. Hudgens said that was reasonable. MOTION Dow moved to recommend approval of the preliminary plat subject to: 1) a the stipulation that a Bill of Assurance be given on the abutting sections of lots 1 and 2 on Smokehouse Trail for curb, gutters and their portion of the street; 2) with a stipulation that if Hoot Owl Lane was ever improved it would be at the expense of the property owners and not the City; 3) a fire hydrant be installed when the first lot of lots 3, through 6 were sold; 4) green space fee of $525.00 as requested by the Parks Department, seconded by Farrish. The motion to approve passed 3-0-0. DR. BEN ISRAEL - PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION PLAT EAST OF HWY 265, NORTH OF FREDD STAIR RD The third item of consideration was the preliminary plat for Dr. Ben Israel submitted by Ervan Wimberly. This property is located east of Hwy 265, north of Fredd Starr Rd. and contains 31.7 acres. This is outside the City limits. Green asked if proof of notification has been submitted to the Planning Office and Wimberly replied "yes". Dow questioned the two access onto Hwy 45. She said she like the one access from Hwy 45 that serviced the remaining 5 lots but did not like the access from lot 1. Green said there probably would never be a driveway coming off lot 1 because Mud Creek was to the north and a sewer out fall line was to the south. epR • • • Subdivision Committee October 23, 1986 Page 5 Wimberly stated lot 1 would probably never sell or develop. He said it had too many bad marks against it. Dow said she hated to potentially approve this with 2 access onto Hwy 45. Green said there were driveways all up and down Hwy 45 and the State Highway Department would have to approve a cut and he did not see a big problem. Dow stated the only problem was Joe Fredd Starr Rd. and she did not know where the driveway would be for lot 1. Green asked Dow if this were a 36 acre subdivision would she want just one way out onto Hwy 45. Dow replied "no". Wimberly stated there had been some interest in large tracts and wanted to go ahead and get the preliminary plat approved and see if they could sell the large tracts. If they could not get any interest or actual cash interest they would come back with a revised preliminary plat and do a conventional subdivision. Wimberly said they would not process a final plat on this for a while. MOTION Farrished moved to recommend approval of the preliminary plat as submitted, seconded by Green. The motion to approve passed 2-1-0, with Dow voting "nay". EAST OAKS APARTMENTS PHASE II - LSD LOTS 16, 17, & 18 - JIM LINDSEY The fourth item of consideration was the Large Scale Development Plan submitted by Jim Lindsey and represented by Gary Carnahan for 56 units, Phase II of East Oaks, lots 16, 17 and 18. This property is zoned R-0, Residential Office. Green asked if a Conditional Use request was on the agenda for Monday's meeting and Carlisle replied "no". Green said they could go ahead and approve this contingent upon the granting of a Conditional Use. Green stated the parking was adequate and asked if proof of notification of adjoining property owners had been submitted Carlisle said they had notified everyone with the exception of E.J. Ball who was out of town for several weeks. Gary Carnahan stated E.J. Ball was selling the property to Jim Lindsey. • • • Subdivision Committee October 23, 1986 Page 6 Dow asked if there was a reason why the sidewalks did not• extend all the way to intersect with the sidewalk on East Oaks Drive. Carnahan replied there was no particular reason because they felt they would not be used. Carnahan said most apartment folks were in and out. Dow assumed there may be a lot of children and Carnahan said there usually were not any children. Carnahan said they could extend the sidewalk if it were required of this committee. Green said he did not want to require the sidewalk as part of the approval. Farrish asked Green replied sidewalk in if MOTION if the ordinance required them to have a sidewalk and "no". Farrish felt they should not have to put the it was not required by ordinance. Farrish moved to approved the Large Scale Development Plan contingent upon the granting of a Conditional Use request by the Planning Commission for apartments in an R-0 district, seconded by Green. The motion to approve passed 3-0-0.