title
Minutes for the MAPC meeting on October 11, 2005.
body
Metropolitan Area Planning Commission Minutes, October 11, 2005
Commissioners Present: Beadles, Gott, Day, Roberts, Krennerich, Harpole, Halsey
Commissioners Absent: Moore, Sawyer
Staff Present: Crego, Harris, Martin
Chairman Beadles called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
Chairman Beadles announced prior to calling the meeting to order that item RZ-05-22 had been withdrawn by the applicants, and that item FP-05-10 should not have been included on the agenda, and would not be considered tonight.
The Chair announced that minutes of the September 13, 2005 meeting were not ready for review.
1. RP-05-69 Sid Pickle requests approval of a 3-Lot/1.21 acre replat, and review of a conceptual layout for Craighills, a residential development on 20 acres in an R-2 Multi-Family District. The subject property is a potion of the former golf course site on Craighead Forest Road. The Chair explained that the two items would be considered separately, beginning with the review of the conceptual layout. Terry Bare was present as proponent for the item, and recounted some of the recent history of the property. He also stated the owners of the subject property had been in contact with owners of the adjoining properties in an effort to develop a joint plan for the 80 acres that comprise the former golf course site. Mr. Bare also stated that the owner would like to build another group of three four-plexes next to the ones currently under construction. The conceptual layout shows a north-south street connecting Craighead Forest Road with Makala Lane. It also shows a proposed east-west connector, the location of which could be adjusted to meet proposed roadways on the adjacent properties. Mr. Day asked if the detention pond was adequate for the whole 20 acres. Mr. Bare stated that it would be adequate for the 20 acres and that, in response to a request by the City Engineer; the pond area had been increased by about one acre when plans changed from single-family development to four-plex development. He further stated that the impervious surface total for the currently proposed four-plexes was not that much greater than it would have been for the previously proposed single-family homes on small lots. He also stated that some of the wooded areas on the western portion of the golf course site might still develop as single-family homes. In response to a question from Mr. Krennerich for clarification, Mr. Bare stated that they four-plexes now under construction were shown on his drawings as ‘existing’, and the proposed four-plexes would be just to the west of those units. The Chair asked if there were any opponents to the conceptual plan for the 20 acre site, and there were none. The Chair then moved the discussion to the requested replat. Mr. Bare stated again that the owners wished to essentially duplicate the four-plexes already under construction on the land immediately west of those units. The Chair asked if any opponents to the replat were present, and there were none. The Chair asked the City Planner and City Engineer for comments. The City Planner stated that the proposed four-plexes met all R-2 requirements and that the conceptual layout was straightforward and seemed to address any concerns about circulation. The Chair asked for discussion or a motion. Mr. Harpole moved to approve the request for replat, and was seconded by Mr. Roberts. The motion to approve the replat passed on a vote of 5-1, with Mr. Krennerich casting the dissenting vote.
2. PP-05-09 SDS Development requests preliminary plat approval of Jamestown Manor Phase II, a 33-lot residential subdivision on 14.3 acres in an R-1 Single-Family Medium Density zoning district. The subject property is on the west side of Darr Hill Road approximately ¼ mile north of Southwest Drive. Carlos Wood, Project Engineer, was present as proponent. Mr. Gott asked about the offset between Williamsburg and Pam Drive. Mr. Wood stated that he thought that the centerline offset exceeded the 125’ minimum required by the Subdivision Regulations, but that he would make sure that it did, and present it to the City Engineer and Planner. The Chair asked if opponents were present, and there were none. The City Planner stated that as long as the street offset minimum was met, he would recommend approval of the plat. The City Engineer stated that he had listed 5 items for Mr. Wood, and that those items had been addressed. The Chair asked that the items be listed in the minutes (See Engineer’s comments below). The Chair asked for discussion or a motion. Mr. Day moved to grant preliminary plat approval subject to addressing the Engineer’s five items. He was seconded by Mr. Gott, and the motion passed on 6-0 vote.
Engineering Comments - Jamestown Manor Phase II
1. Drainage easements on Record Plat do not match drainage plans.
2. Need engineering certification stating no harm due to flooding to downstream
properties caused by this construction.
3. Show that excess runoff is detained in Phase 1 pond.
4. At Williamsburg & Darr Hill, how is drainage handled
5. Need flows into inlets with throat extension notes if necessary.
3. FP-05-09 Jim Coleman requests final plot approval of Coleman’s Lawrence Street Addition Phase II, a 33-lot residential subdivision on 9.4 acres in an R-1 Single-Family Medium Density zoning district. The subject property is on the north side of Greensboro Road between Mays Road and Sandino Drive. Carlos Wood, Project Engineer, was present as proponent. The Chair stated that there had been two stipulations attached to the preliminary approval for this plat. Mr. Wood stated that the items had been addressed. The Chair asked if any opponents to the proposal were present, and none were. The Chair asked Commissioners for discussion or a motion. Mr. Day moved to grant final approval to the plat, and was seconded by Mr. Gott. The motion passed on a 6-0 vote.
4. FP-09-10 Robert Chastain requests final plat approval for Windsor Landing Phases IV-IX, a 147-lot residential subdivision on 39.72 acres in an R-1 Single-Family Medium Density district. The subject property is on the west side of Clinton School Road. ITEM INADVERTENTLY ADDED TO AGENDA. IT WILL NOT BE HEARD TONIGHT.
5. CU-05-06 Quinn Outdoor Advertising requests conditional use approval for an off-premise sign in C-2 Downtown Fringe Commercial. The proposed site is adjacent to an existing building at 2307 Race Street. Jim Quinn was present as proponent. No opponents were present. Mr. Harpole asked if the distance to other off-premise signs met ordinance standards. Mr. Quinn stated that they had hired an engineer to make sure that the site complied. There was a short generalized discussion about the site and the surrounding area being zoned C-2, when most of the larger surrounding area was zoned C-3, which allows off-premise signs without conditional approval. It was also mentioned that the site was near a very major intersection, as well as to the convention center site. The Chair asked for further discussion or a motion. Mr. Harpole moved to approve the conditional use request and was seconded by Mr. Halsey. The motion passed on a 5-1 vote, with Mr. Krennerich voting against approval.
6. CU-05-07 Paula Wewers requests conditional use approval to establish a retail/service use in a C-4 Neighborhood Commercial District. The subject property is at 909 Southwest Drive. Ms. Wewers was present as proponent, and stated she wanted to open an art gallery, which would generate very little traffic, but required conditional use approval because it involved retail sales. No opponents were present. The City Planner stated there had been no complaints regarding the request. He also stated that any future use of this property that was substantially different from Ms. Wewers’ would require another review by MAPC before the use could be established. The Chair asked for discussion or a motion. Mr. Krennerich moved to approve the conditional use and was seconded by Mr. Harpole. The motion passed on a vote of 6-0.
7. RZ-05-26 Bowen Properties II, LLC requests rezoning from R-1 Single-Family Medium Density to C-3 General Commercial for a 7.44 acre parcel on the north side of Highway 63 between Willow Road and Richardson Road. Jerry Bowen, manager of Bowen Properties II, was present as proponent. He stated that the site was a portion of the former Fowler’s Trailer Park. A small portion (2.5 acres) of the former park site just east of the subject property is already zoned C-3. The Chair asked if there were any opponents to the proposal, and there were none. The Planner stated that the request was reasonable, and that his only request was for buffering to be installed between the C-3 uses and the residential neighborhood along Griggs Avenue just north of the subject property. Mr. Krennerich moved to be recommend approval of the requested rezoning with the stipulation that buffering be provided between C-3 uses on the subject property and the adjoining residential area. The motion was seconded by Mr. Roberts and passed on a 6-0 vote.
8. RZ-05-27 Lonnie Clark requests rezoning from R-1 Single-Family Medium Density to C-3 General Commercial for a 0.50 acre parcel at 2301 North Patrick Street. Mr. Clark was present as proponent. He stated that the buildings on the subject property were commercial buildings that were constructed before the property was annexed. He had always assumed they were zoned for commercial uses, and had always used them for commercial purposes, primarily as warehouse space. He further stated that he had spoken with several adjoining property owners, and they had no problems with the property being used for commercial purposes. The Chair asked if there were any opponents to the proposal. Ed Payton, owner of the property immediately north of the subject property was present to oppose the rezoning. Mr. Payton stated that he had lived next door for six years and that for the first few years the building had been used for storage and there had been no problem. He further stated that his main concern, because of the close proximity of his residence to the subject property, was that unlimited commercial use of the buildings might result in excessive noise. After a lengthy generalized discussion, a consensus was reached that the buildings clearly were intended for commercial uses, and had been used as such for many years. It was also determined that it would likely be impossible to determine what the buildings had been used as at the time they were annexed. Therefore it would be impossible to establish what uses could be considered to be ‘grandfathered’ as legal nonconformities. The City Planner suggested recommending rezoning to Council, but either a lower classification, or with limitations to C-3 intended to prohibit noisy uses, such as vehicle repair. There followed discussion about whether to consider a lower classification or to stay with C-3 with limitations. Mr. Day asked Mr. Clark if he would consider a C-4 classification. He then read the Zoning Ordinance list of permitted uses for the C-4 zone. Mr. Clark indicated that the C-4 would suffice. Mr. Harris asked if it would be possible to include storage/warehousing as a permitted use, since it appeared that had been the predominant use of the buildings over the years since annexation. The Chair asked for discussion or a motion. Mr. Day moved to recommend rezoning to C-4 Neighborhood Commercial, with storage/warehousing allowed as a legal nonconforming use. He was seconded by Mr. Roberts and the motion was passed on a 6-0 vote.
9. RZ-05-28 Michael Brand requests rezoning from R-1 Single-Family Medium Density to C-3 General Commercial for an 18.63 acre parcel on the north side of East Highland just west of Grisham Road. Mr. Halsey recused himself from discussion of this item, and left the meeting. Troy Sheets was present as proponent. Mr. Sheets stated that he thought the subject property was part of the extensive 1989 annexation, and came in as R-1. He further stated that the owners felt that this zoning designation was not appropriate for this property and that residential development fronting on Highland Drive was unlikely. There were no opponents to the proposal. The City Planner stated that he was concerned about Highland Drive turning into a long narrow strip of commercial development, but that he agreed that R-1 did not seem appropriate. The Chair asked for discussion or a motion. Mr. Day moved to recommend approval of the requested rezoning and was seconded by Mr. Harpole. The motion passed on a 5-0 vote.
10. RZ-05-29 Richard and Patsy Foster requests rezoning from R-1 Single-Family Medium Density to C-3 General Commercial for a 2.21 acre parcel on the east side of Highway 141 just south of Philadelphia Road. At this point Mr. Halsey rejoined the meeting, and Mr. Roberts recused himself and left the meeting. Mr. Skip Mooney, Attorney, was present as proponent. Mr. Mooney asked that the item be withdrawn. The Chair stated that the item was withdrawn. Mr. Day asked how many citizens were present in opposition. The Chair asked those opposing the request to stand, and approximately 12-15 people stood. At this point, Mr. Roberts rejoined the meeting.
11. RZ-05-22 INHOC, LLC request rezoning from R-1 Single-Family Medium Density to C-3 General Commercial Limited Use Overlay and R-5 Multi-Family Limited Use Overlay for a 6.78 acre parcel located on the north side of Highland Drive between Wofford Street and Rains Street. THIS ITEM WAS WITHDRAWN BY THE APPLICANT.
12. RZ-05-08 B&G Land Company requests rezoning of 33.52 acres from R-1 Single-Family Medium Density to R-5 Multi-Family, and the rezoning of 16.16 acres from R-1 Single-Family Medium Density to R-6 Multi-Family. Both parcels are located along the north side of the Union Pacific Railroad (former Cotton Belt), southeast of the curve weather Aggie Road becomes Paragould Road. John Easley was present as proponent. Mr. Easley went over the specifics of the proposal as to which housing types would be used and in what locations. He stated that the developers wanted to develop a neighborhood. The Chair asked if opponents were present. Richard Carvell, 4214 Brenda Street, spoke next. Mr. Carvell stated that he was here representing the ‘Respect Our Neighborhoods’ (RON) organization. Mr. Carvell stated that there was already a neighborhood in the area, and it was a single-family neighborhood. Their group is concerned that the area will become another ‘apartment city’. Mr. Carvell also stated that representatives of RON had met with the property owner and made suggestions regarding the subject property, which the owner chose not to incorporate into his proposal. Mr. Carvell also reminded the Commissioners that the proposal had been before, and that a large number of opponents had attended those meetings. Mr. Carvell also stated that the development’s entrance in the curve where Aggie Road becomes Paragould Road would be a ‘death trap’. In closing, Mr. Carvell stated that the developers had not maintained the MAPC rezoning signs in a visible condition, thus, had not complied with the notification requirements. Next to speak was George Ezell, a 30-year resident of Prospect Road. Mr. Ezell stated there had been a flooding problem in the area for years, and that this proposed project would likely exacerbate this condition. Mr. Ezell also stated that the impact of apartment development on this property would result in serious traffic problems. Next to speak was Brad Partee, a resident of Sagewood Drive. Mr. Partee stated that the Aggie Road/Airport Road intersection was already overloaded, resulting in drivers shortcutting through his neighborhood. He stated his concern that the proposed development would make this traffic situation worse and more unsafe for Countrywood Subdivision residents, due to increased numbers of ‘shortcutters’. Perry Smith, a resident of Countrywood Subdivision, spoke next and reiterated the points made by the previous opponents. Rick Wyatt spoke next, and stated that his concern was the high density, and what might happen if the developer gets the requested zoning, then sells the property to others, rather than developing it himself. The Chair asked how many people were present to oppose the proposed rezoning and approximately 30-35 people stood. Mr. Easley stated that the developer wanted to create a neighborhood that would retain its quality, and that a bill of assurance would be developed, and that property owners’ associations would be recommended, or possibly mandated. This would be for all the requested zones. He also stated that the developer would work with the City to make the entrance at the curve safe, and to address other traffic concerns. He also stated there were two other access points. Mr. Easley stated that drainage would have to be dealt with regardless of what was proposed, and that the developer had to address those concerns to the City’s satisfaction. Mr. Easley then passed to each of the Commissioners a sheet showing the proposed numbers of units for each zoning district in the development. The sheet showed that R-1 zoning would allow 426 units and that their proposal was to construct 616 units if the requested rezoning were granted. There followed a generalized discussion regarding whether the rezoning could be recommended, but with limited use stipulations that would restrict the number of units built to what is listed on the handout distributed by Mr. Easley. The City Attorney and City Planner agreed that such stipulations could be included on any motion. The City Planner also stated that such a limitation would run with the land, so that subsequent owners would have to comply with those limits. Dr. Eugene Smith, a resident of University Heights, spoke next. Dr. Smith reiterated many of the earlier points then added that he did not feel that the developer had demonstrated that the subject property could not be developed successfully under the current R-1 zoning. He stated that he understood that was one criterion by which requested rezoning were reviewed, and that maximizing the developer’s profit was not a criterion. Todd Burton, a resident of Aggie Road area, stated that he thought the development density, even with the limitations being discussed, would overwhelm the infrastructure of the area. The Chair asked if a commissioner was ready for a motion. Mr. Krennerich moved to recommend to Council that the rezoning be denied, and was seconded by Mr. Gott. Mr. Easley then requested that the item be withdrawn. The Chair stated that because there was a motion and a second on the floor, the vote would be taken. On a roll call, Mr. Krennerich’s motion to recommend to the Council that the rezoning be denied passed on a 6-0 vote. The Chair reminded the applicant that an appeal could be mad to the City Council.
The meeting adjourned at approximately 7:45 p.m.