title
Minutes for the MAPC meeting on December 12, 2006.
body
Metropolitan Area Planning Commission Minutes, December 12, 2006
Commissioners absent: None
Staff present: Spriggs, White, Rook, Crego & Martin
Introduction of new member, Mr. Jerry Sexton.
Approval of minutes from the November 14, 2006, meeting. Motion was made by Mr. Day, seconded by Mr. Halsey. Minutes were approved by unanimous vote.
1. RP-06-56 Jay Harmon request a replat of lot 10 of Harmon Industrial Park and Lot 15 of Harmon’s second replat of Harmon’s Industrial Park revised.
Attorney Brent Crews came forward as proponent for this item. Lot 15 was bisected by Nestle Road and this replat creates lots 15A and 15B. The irregular shape by the new highway, Lot 10 has a small corner will be added to the lot to fix the lot after the highway has come through it.
City planner Otis Spriggs stated that this was a previous industrial park subdivision that was approved by the planning commission back in January of 2002. There were concerns from staff since this subdivision was never completed and no bonds posted on the improvements. The Public Works Committee has informed us to be cognizant of a lot of developers who are coming in to do future improvements when we have non-improvements in the balance. We would like to know the plans to complete the infrastructure there.
Mr. Crews stated that it was his understanding that a buyer had purchased an improved lot next to Lot 10. That lot needs access to Nestle Road and is currently a truck terminal and the buyer will be cooperative with finishing the roads out.
Dr. Beadles stated there has been no bond posted for this property. Mr. Crews stated that he wasn’t aware of that concern.
Claude Martin was concerned with the infrastructure regarding bonding so that these streets will be completed.
Dr. Beadles stated that before a replat that this subdivision should be bonded.
The building department should not issue any more permits until the improvements are made. The bonding aspect has been in place since November of last year (2005) they moved from a letter of credit to a bond.
Mr. Halsey made a motion to approve this item with the stipulations as listed:
a. Subject to receipt of a bond for these improvements and this replat not be recorded until the bond is posted and no permits would transpire.
Mr. Collins seconded this motion. Mr. Collins voted aye. Mr.Roberts voted aye. Mr. Sexton voted aye. Mr. Krennerich voted aye. Ms. Norris voted aye. Mr. Day voted aye. Mr. Harpole voted aye. Mr. Halsey voted aye.
This item was approved with stipulations as listed.
2. C.U.-06-17 Linda Leonard request a Conditional Use to place a new Mobile Home at 4117 Kellers’s Chapel Road to replace her current residence. The zoning of the property is R-1 therefore requiring a Conditional Use approval.
Linda Leonard came forward as proponent for this item. Address is 4117 Kellers Chapel Road.
City planner stated that the code under the classification under R-1 will allow a mobile home to be permitted under certain stipulations. Stipulations were stated regarding the size and length, setbacks and regarding removing the single family home within six months.
Mr. Sexton asked Mrs. Leonard if they were planning to live in the single family housing unit while they move in the mobile home. Mrs. Leonard stated that once they move the mobile home in they were going to live in it and tear the house down. Mr. Sexton stated that he didn’t feel comfortable with leaving two structures on one lot. Mr. Sexton stated that upon approval that within 10 days she should begin the process of demolition permit. Mr. Sexton thought that a performance bond of 110% of the estimated cost of the demolition of the structure should be put into place.
City Planner stated that the enforcement of the approval of the conditional use is in place; Staff does have the teeth with the zoning resolution to get the single family home removed if violations are made to that effect.
Mr. Day made a motion to approve with the stipulations prepared by city planner. Mr. Harpole seconded the motion. Mr. Halsey voted aye. Mr. Harpole voted aye. Day voted aye. Ms. Norris voted aye. Mr. Krennerich voted aye. Mr. Sexton voted aye. Mr. Roberts voted aye. Mr. Collins voted aye.
This item was approved with the stipulations mentioned above.
3. RZ-06-22 A & B Investments, LLC (Kevin Alpe) request rezoning from R-1 residential to C-3 general commercial for 1.36 acres located at 2309-2411 Sunny Meadow Drive. (NOTE THIS ITEM WAS TABLED AT LAST MEETING)
Mr. Day motioned to un-table this item. Mr. Collins seconded. All commissioners voted aye to un-table.
Terry Bare came forward as proponent for this item. A question was raised in the last meeting regarding Sunny Meadow’s stability. Mr. Martin (city engineer) stated that they do not have a standard for commercial but there are some standards for you to build to. There are no failures and Mr. Martin has seen large trucks traveling on that roadway.
Terry Bare stated that the buildings are not going to be removed but will be used at the time of the tenants leaving.
City planner Otis Spriggs stated that we need to make sure that we do not make nonconforming lots as it relates to parking. If the homes are changed, then the access management and parking will be judged by a different standard. To move these driveways into a commercial type development would not satisfy the 20 ft. side setbacks. He also recommended that MAPC put some type of stipulations for staff’s use in the future when approving these commercial lots to consolidate some of the entrances off of Sunny Meadow.
Mr. Bare stated that there is no problem in combining those drives that are abutting.
Mr. Day made a motion to recommend to City Council to rezone with the stipulation that no variances be granted in the future to bring these lots into a retail district. Second by Mr. Collins. Collins voted aye. Mr. Roberts voted aye. Mr. Sexton voted aye. Mr. Krennerich voted aye. Ms. Norris voted aye. Mr. Day voted aye. Mr. Harpole voted aye. Mr. Halsey voted aye.
This item was approved with stipulations listed.
4. RZ-06-25 Philip and Joanne Steed request rezoning from R-2 residential to C-5 Neighborhood Office District for .20 acres located at 219 E. Cherry Ave.
Attorney Skip Mooney came forward as proponent for this item. Northeast Arkansas Children’s Therapy Service would utilize this area for billing and office space. The property due east of this property was also brought before MAPC and was rezoned previously.
City planner Otis Spriggs stated that the request is supported by staff and is consistent with the prior request for rezoning. Now that the applicant is razing the two homes and building a new complex, the request will be in keeping with the area.
Mr. Harpole made a motion to recommend this item to City Council for rezoning. Mr. Collins seconded the motion. Mr. Halsey voted aye. Mr. Harpole voted aye. Mr. Day voted aye. Ms. Norris voted aye. Mr. Krennerich voted aye. Mr. Sexton voted aye. Mr. Roberts voted aye. Mr. Collins voted aye. This item was approved and recommended to City Council.
This item was approved.
5. RZ-06-27 Troy Coleman request rezoning from AG-1 Agricultural to R-6 Residential LUO (10 UNITS PER ACRE) for 125.64 acres located on Kathleen Street between Morton Dr. and Pacific Rd.
Brent Crews came forward as proponent for this item. Mr. Crews stated that as the previous 28 acres were rezoned within the past couple of months, that they would like this area to also be rezoned to R-6.
City planner stated that consistency was not achieved in the land use map because this area was planned for light industrial. This area is currently on the re-study of the new land use map. Staff is concerned about the area possibly having 1,250 units of multi-family on a corridor that primarily runs through an industrially highlighted area. This region might be impacted since the services are not currently there to support such a vast amount of multi-family. Also, we brought up a noise nuisance issue due to the airport being next to this facility and this was a concern for housing units. Our recommendation does not support this item.
Commissioners asked about the restudy time on this area in the land use map. Possibly 6 months maximum to get through this sector. Mr. Sexton asked why this was brought in as a rezoning instead of a Planned Unit Development. City planner stated that was a good question and should show the impact on city services and stages, etc. The property line of the airport very closely runs to the property line of this property. Mr. Sexton stated that there has been talk of a regional airport and if that is the case it would be very concerning if there were houses approximately 100 ft. from the airport property line. Mr. Collins stated that he felt this area would be better used as industrial instead of multi-family.
Mr. Collins made a motion to deny this item to City Council. Mr. Krennerich seconded.
Mr. Crews stated that the item will be withdrawn.
This item was withdrawn.
6. P.P.-06-18 Ridge Realty request Preliminary Subdivision Approval for PRAIRIE MEADOW. A 94- lot subdivision located on Flemon Road and west of Beaver Creek Subdivision. The zoning is R-1 Single-Family Medium Density.
Carlos Wood came forward as proponent for this item. The engineering comments were discussed by Mr. Wood and are as follows:
a. Need drainage report for proposed development.
b. Pipe information does not coincide in the profile and plan views.
c. Concerns with pond outlet directed straight towards roadbed.
These items have been discussed with engineering and will be stipulations for the final approval.
Dr. Sanders came forward as an opponent for this item. He states that the code states that the preliminary plats should give certain information and the utility layouts. He stated that the sewer isn’t shown on this preliminary plat. He also stated that he believes there will be a traffic problem due to the entrance and exit. This is an area that was to be looked at for the drainage issues. Dr. Sanders discussed fire standards and a creek and possible fencing. Dr. Sanders feels that a green area needs to be put into this subdivision.
City planner stated that the connection to Beaver Creek will help with the emergency problems of fire or medical. The drainage will be handled properly by the engineering department.
Mr. Sexton asked questions regarding the fire response time and roads connecting to Beaver Creek. City planner stated that this area is in a remote area and 15 minutes sounds appropriate for this area for response time.
Mr. Wood was asked about the drainage area. Mr. Wood was asked about the connections and why there were none on the north or west. Mr. Wood stated that the property owner to the north would not approve of this and to the west is open area and there is no need for a street. Mr. Wood also was asked about the retainer ponds. Questions were raised about having only one entrance for 94 houses. It was explained that there would be access through Beaver Creek.
The drainage was discussed between commission members and Mr. Wood.
Dr. Sanders stated that there had been issues in the past with a 35 year flood retention pond, but Mr. Wood stated earlier that it was a 10 year flood retention that he was preparing in the plans.
Mr. Sexton stated that sidewalks are another concern in the City. City planner stated that we are trying to implement a plan for future sidewalks and connectivity.
A motion was made by Mr. Day to approve this item with the following stipulations:
a. Open ditches in the rear lot lines to be enclosed;
b. Street connection to line up on the West side to Beaver falls and have a street connection somewhere on the north side of the project;
c. I would like the detention project to be sodded;
d. Lots 55 and 56 to be a green space area that would not be designed to be a water holding area but a true green space for recreational spaces;
e. The three engineering stipulations listed above;
f. Fencing area between the green space and detention; and,
g. Property Association to maintain the area.
Mr. Halsey seconded this item. Mr. Halsey voted aye. Mr. Harpole voted aye. Mr. Day voted aye. Ms. Norris voted aye. Mr. Krennerich voted aye. Mr. Sexton voted aye. Mr. Roberts voted aye. Mr. Collins voted aye.
7. P.P.-06-19 Lakeside Contractors, LLC request Preliminary Subdivision approval for MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PHASES, III and IV, a 31-lot subdivision on 10.97 acres located on Keller’s Chapel Road, west of Southwest Drive. The zoning is R-1 Single-Family Medium Density.
Carlos Wood came forward as proponent for this item. There were some engineering comments and we have no problem agreeing to the items which are as follows:
a. Need drainage report for proposed development;
b. Show proposed improvements on Kellers Chapel Rd.; and,
c. Consider a radius for the curb changed from 90 degree curb angle.
City planner stated that these phases do comply in terms of lot configurations so there were no other comments from staff.
City engineer stated that there were engineering comments which they had agreed to.
Mr. Collins made a motion to approve this item subject to the engineering comments. Mr. Roberts seconded. Mr. Halsey voted aye. Mr. Harpole voted aye. Mr. Day voted aye. Ms. Norris voted aye. Mr. Krennerich voted aye. Mr. Sexton voted aye. Mr. Roberts voted aye. Mr. Collins voted aye.
This item was approved with engineering comments.
8. P.P.-06-20 P & J Development Co. (John Sloan) request Preliminary Subdivision approval for SLOAN LAKE ESTATES, a 49-lot subdivision on 51.16 acres bound by Strawfloor Road, Casey Springs and Riviera Dr. The zoning is R-1 Single-Family Medium Density.
John Easley came forward as proponent for this item. Engineering comments have been received and we will provide them with the information requested in the final. The engineering comments are as follows:
a. Need engineering statement from Big Creek Watershed District allowing increased storm water flows from development to be routed directly to lake without onsite detention measures. Based on the Districts response, an engineering drainage report may have to be submitted by the engineer of record;
b. Provide further clarification on the No Build zone and if flooded to elevation 321, how will the subdivision drainage system function;
c. Need typical section on street where Right of Way is 80 ft; and,
d. If irrigation is planned at entrance island, provide subsurface drainage system to protect street from failure.
Carroll Caldwell came forward as representative of Ridgepointe. In 1996 a study was made for the traffic study in this area on one entrance of Ridgepointe. Mr. Caldwell stated that there are two concerns. One, where it hooks onto Ridgepointe and that makes 125 ft. from an arterial street that they will open up in the middle of Ridgepointe. This would also place lot 1 west of Ridgepointe as having three streets on sides of this lot. There are letters from Ridgepointe property owners and Ridgepointe Country Club asking that you deny this item. Ridgepointe Drive should not be classified as a collector street. Mr. Caldwell stated that another entrance/exit should be made for this subdivision.
City Planner Spriggs stated that Strawfloor is planned for a scenic route and the trees are planning to be preserved. There are also plans for a Strawfloor connector and the developer may have some plans for that. The developer has stated that they are open to connecting that to Strawfloor. The lot configurations would comply. As to the lot in Ridgepointe, that lot would have to be treated in a unique manor.
City Engineer has four comments that they have agreed to address as above.
Mr. Easley stated that the connector at Ridgepointe Drive was not made due to discussions between P & J and the City of Jonesboro for the proposed greenway and proposed arterial. There are drawings of the proposed arterials to show the traffic patterns, etc. Mr. Easley discussed the different roads and connectors with the commissioners. Mr. Caldwell again addressed the commissioners regarding the connections and arterials. Mr. Sloan stated that this map was a very early stage conceptual map of what they might want to do and wasn’t a final. Mr. Caldwell stated that people that live in Ridgepointe can’t depend on what will or what will not happen. Mr. Caldwell stated that the traffic study stated that no more traffic can be put through Ridgepointe.
Commissioners stated that the residents of Ridgepointe only had one entrance/exit for a while and then another was added. The entrances and exits would be on Casey Springs and Strawfloor for the additional acreages. If the only argument is getting people into and out of Ridgepointe, then why is there an issue?
Mr. Collins stated that he had a few comments and first addressed Mr. Sloan regarding his initiative to provide a traffic study. The suggestion that was made on our part was to further review the Sloan study and the City’s study and merge those two together. The study looked good except for the collector street in Ridgepointe. Mr. Sloan stated that the City was the one who designated Ridgepointe as the collector, not his planners. The people in a subdivision normally buy at the edges of a subdivision buy those lots because of the privacy and lack of traffic. Ridgepointe Drive is deteriorating and additional traffic will also affect that road. There are no sidewalks in the subdivision with pedestrians walking children or jogging and this is a safety issue.
Dr. Beadles stated that Mr. Krennerich would step down and not enter this discussion. Mr. Day stated that right-of-ways should be taken from any developer who comes in. City planner states that Strawfloor is a recognized right-of-way but they want to preserve this as a scenic route.
Mr. Sloan stated that he has a legal right to connect to Ridgepointe Drive. When he sold the property for the back nine it was a requirement in the deed for them to give them two connecting streets for his property. These will be high value lots as the same development of Ridgepointe. There is a cart path that will be connecting. The connection for Ridgepointe is marketability of the lots. There is no reason to not connect.
Mr. Sexton asked if the parties could have a work session to discuss and try to resolve these issues including the MAPC members and the Planning Department. Also, the people making the decisions about the green ways and scenic byways need to be at the work session.
Mr. Halsey made a motion to table this item for 30 days with a meeting to take place within that time. Mr. Harpole seconded the motion. Mr. Halsey voted aye. Mr. Harpole voted aye. Mr. Day voted aye. Ms. Norris voted aye. Mr. Krennerich abstained from voting. Mr. Sexton voted aye. Roberts voted aye. Mr. Collins voted aye.
This item was tabled with a meeting to take place within 30 days.
9. F.P.-06-19 Lakeside Contractors, LLC request Final Subdivision approval for MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PHASES I & II a 41-lot subdivision on 14.71 acres located on Keller’s Chapel Road, west of Southwest Drive. The zoning is R-1 Single-Family Medium Density.
Carlos Wood came forward as proponent for this item. These two phases were approved as a preliminary and a final a few months back and we had intentions of selling the north portion of this project which we have just got preliminary approval for phases 3 and 4 but the sale fell through. We had to remove the cove that was in Phase I that was already final approved but the change had to be made.
City Planner stated that the final plan does comply with the R-1 district.
City Engineer stated that they have 4 stipulations and they are as follows:
a. Need drainage report for proposed development;
b. Provide depth clarification for swale typical section as well as slope information;
c. Station 6+31+ on Trail Water Dr. - profile and plan view do not match; and,
d. Pipe information does not coincide in the profile and plan views.
Mr. Krennerich made a motion to approve with the listed stipulations from engineering. Mr. Collins seconded the motion. Mr. Halsey voted aye. Mr. Harpole voted aye. Mr. Day voted aye. Ms. Norris voted aye Mr. Krennerich voted aye. Mr. Sexton voted aye. Mr. Roberts voted aye. Mr. Collins voted aye.
This item was approved with engineering stipulations listed.
10. F.P.-06-20 Nix Development Corporation (Robin Nix) request Final Subdivision approval for Culberhouse Crossing a 12-lot subdivision on 3.14 acres located west of Culberhouse and south of Melody Lane and north of Parkview. The zoning is R-1 Single-Family Medium Density.
John Easley came forward as proponent for this item. We have received two additional comments from engineering and we have made those changes and have a new set of plans for Claude Martin.
City Planner has no comments.
City Engineer stated that if the two comments had been addressed then there were no more comments or stipulations. Those comments were as follows:
a. Appears that the swale is not contained in the drainage easement; and,
b. Show all proposed improvements along Culberhouse.
Mr. Collins made a motion to approve this item with engineering stipulations. Mr. Krennerich seconded the motion. Halsey voted aye. Mr. Harpole voted aye. Mr. Day voted aye. Norris voted aye. Mr. Krennerich voted aye. Mr. Sexton voted aye. Mr. Roberts voted aye. Mr. Collins voted aye.
This item was approved pending engineering comments are completed.
11. ADMINISTRATION MATTERS:
a. PUD Regulations
b. Addressing of new streets
c. SP-06-64 Haskell Co. on behalf of Frito-Lay, Inc. requests approval for a warehouse expansion of approximately 227,960 S.F. The project area is located within the southeast courtyard and does not exceed current bldg. perimeter.
a. City Planner stated that the first item was the PUD regulations and for the sake of time we will postpone that again. A few modifications were made and those have been given to you. Public Works Committee made a recommendation that government services and public utilities be exempt from the 5 acre minimum in the agriculture district and I added that as a stipulation. A motion was made on the modifications by Mr. Collins and seconded by Mr. Harpole. Halsey voted aye. Mr. Harpole voted aye. Day voted aye. Ms. Norris voted aye. Mr. Krennerich voted aye. Mr. Sexton withheld. Mr. Roberts voted aye. Mr. Collins voted aye.
b. City planner stated that the new improvements on Washington needed renaming of streets due to emergency services. Mr. Day stated that if there were two streets named Washington something it would be difficult (Washington Spur and Washington Loop). We have sent these to the 911 director and have had no problems with those. Mr. Day made a motion to change the name of Washington Loop to Razorback Road on the proposed plan prepared by the City staff and accept all other proposed names and designations. No second.
Since the name is Parker Road down further and will possibly connect in the future, a motion was made by Mr. Krennerich to change the name to Parker Road instead of Razorback Road. Mr. Day seconded the motion. Halsey voted aye. Harpole voted aye. Mr. Day voted aye. Ms. Norris voted aye. Mr. Krennerich voted aye. Mr. Sexton voted aye. Mr. Roberts voted aye. Mr. Collins voted aye.
c. Site plan review was forwarded to you regarding Frito Lay expansion. This location does not fall outside of the perimeter of the site. We are asking the commission to approve this concept.
Mr. John Early came forward as proponent for this item. The building addition is approximately 240,700 sq. ft. Mr. Krennerich made a motion to approve with the two engineering comments which are as follows:
1. Provide final storm water calculations; and,
2. Provide an elevation certificate.
Ms. Norris seconded the motion. Mr. Halsey voted aye. Mr. Harpole voted aye. Day voted aye. Ms. Norris voted aye. Mr. Krennerich voted aye. Mr. Sexton voted aye. Mr. Roberts voted aye. Mr. Collins voted aye.
Meeting was adjourned.