HomeMy WebLinkAbout1986-11-10 - MinutesMINUTES OF THE SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE
OF THE FAYETTEVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION
A meeting of the Subdivision Committee of the Fayetteville Planning
Commission was held on Monday November 10, 1986 at 4:00 p.m. in Room
111 of the City Administration Building, 113 W. Mountain Street,
Fayetteville, Arkansas.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Ernie Jacks, Stan Green, B.J. Dow and Frank
Farrish
MEMBERS ABSENT: NONE
LARGE SCALE DEVELOPMENT PLAN - BANK OF FAYETTEVILLE
3120 N. COLLEGE - JOHN LEWIS
The first item of consideration was the Large Scale Development Plan
for the Bank of Fayetteville (Branch Bank) represented by John Lewis,
the property is located at 3120 N. College and is zoned C-2, Thoroughfare
Commercial and contains 1.02 acres.
Jacks asked if proof of notification to adjoining property owners
had been submitted to the Planning Office and Carlisle replied "yes".
Mr. Lewis said they planned to do some landscaping as to trees in
the back of the building and a garden in the front.
MOTION
Farrish moved to approve the LSD as submitted, seconded by Dow and
the motion to approve passed unanimously.
LARGE SCALE DEVELOPMENT PLAN - FAYETTEVILLE BIBLE CHURCH
2783 W. MOUNT COMFORT RD - RICHARD POLLOCK
The second item of consideration was the Large Scale Development Plan
submitted by the Fayetteville Bible Church and represented by Richard
Pollock. The property is located at 2783 Mt. Comfort Rd. and is zoned
P-1, Institution and contains 4.669 acres.
Jacks advised a Bill of Assurance was required to bring Mt. Comfort
Rd. up to current city standards.
Mr. Pollock turned over the Bills of Assurance for the Street improvements
and sidewalk to Sandra Carlisle.
•
•
•
Subdivision Committee
November 10, 1986
Page 2
Jacks stated Mr. Pollock has pictures of the natural screening on
the east, south and west of the property in question.
Mr. Pollock said he had submitted a letter asking for a waiver of
the screening requirements on the north side of the proposed Fayetteville
Bible Church. He said adequate screening existed on the east, south
and west side of the property.
Farrish asked if the Church had to screen next to a street and Carlisle
said the ordinance required screening from R-1 Districts and that
the Church was surrounded by R-1 on all sides. Carlisle said she
would accept the natural screening on the 3 sides but on the north
he was asking for a 10% landscaping in lieu of the screening requirement.
Farrish asked if the requirement for screening was view obscuring
trees or fencing and Carlisle replied "yes".
Carlisle stated the requirement could be waived by the Planning Commission
with a substitution of 10% landscaping, 18" high at the time of planting.
Farrish asked if the intent was to have a fence along the street to
hide a building and Carlisle replied "no".
Dow said the existing screening on the east and south were fine but
on the west side she wondered if the natural screening was adequate.
Jacks asked if there was any other questions other than the screening.
Mr. Pollock replied they had to provide an easement for utilites and
was reflected on the plat.
Green asked if Mt. Comfort was a local street and Carlisle replied
it was a collector. Green asked if it would be fair to suspend the
street improvement the Church was required to make. Jacks said they
would continue to impose the maximum improvements.
Carlisle asked if Mr. Pollock had brought proof of notification of
adjoining property owners and Mr. Pollock replied he has the signatures
but left them at the office.
Jacks advised proof of notification would be contingent upon approval,
approval would be subject to plat review comments.
Green said he did not have a problem with the existing screening on
the 3 sides.
Dow said she would feel better if there were a stipulation in the
motion as to a staff person going out and checking for additional
landscaping in between the gaps.
Subdivision Committee
November 10, 1986
Page 3
Jacks said that would probably be difficult in getting the City to
go out and figure out the additional landscaping for the gaps.
NOTION
Parrish moved to accept the existing landscaping on the south, east
and west and recommend a waiver of 10% landscaping on the north to
the Planning Commission, approval of the LSD was subject to Plat review
comments, contingent upon proof of notification of adjoining property
owners and to impose maximum off-site improvements, seconded by Green
and the motion to approve the LSD passed unanimously.