Board OKs subdivision plan near Fayetteville

FAYETTEVILLE — A revised proposal for the Ellis Estates subdivision on Mission Boulevard just east of Fayetteville was unanimously approved Thursday.

The request heard Thursday was the third proposal for the property. It called for 45 residential lots on about 24.5 acres of land. Three other lots would be used for drainage and a septic system.

An earlier request for a conditional use permit for a 50-lot subdivision on the same property on East Mission Boulevard failed to garner enough votes for approval by the Washington County Planning Board in September.

The Planning Board voted 3-2 in favor of the permit for the Ellis Estates subdivision, but four affirmative votes are required from the seven-member board to approve a conditional use permit, meaning the motion to approve the permit failed. Two board members were absent from the September meeting.

The request had been tabled at the board’s Aug. 26 meeting when questions were raised about the authority and responsibilities of the county and the city. The property is about a half-mile outside Fayetteville but within the city’s planning area.

The permit for the Ellis Estates development would be needed to allow lots of less than 1 acre in size. Under county zoning, all property outside cities is zoned for agricultural and single-family residential use with a minimum lot size of 1 acre for residential development.

The revised proposal considered in September would have put 50 lots on about 25.5 acres. The original proposal had 54 residential lots.

The property is within Fayetteville’s planning area and must receive city approval in addition to county approval, according to the county’s planning staff. According to a memo presented by the planning staff at one of the earlier meetings, the Fayetteville Planning Commission approved the project unanimously on Aug. 9.

Several residents of the area attended the meeting to object to the development. The neighbors cited the higher density of the development, the increase in traffic that would result if approved, and the potential environmental harm of allowing such a large development on a septic system on land adjacent to Mud Creek.

The neighbors also objected to clearing trees and filling a pond on the land, saying it would be detrimental to wildlife habitat.

Claudia Clark said the number of small lots in the development is not compatible with surrounding homes that are each on lots of one or more acres. Clark also said there are two similar septic systems within a quarter-mile of this development that have already failed, leaving property owners associations that have little or no money struggling to repair or replace those septic systems.

Leah Randolph described the area as it is now, with “beautiful mature trees,” a pond and a creek. If the development were approved as presented, she said, “they’ll chop down all the trees and then fill in the pond.”

“I beg and implore you to keep this zoning to at least one acre,” Randolph said.

Other neighbors also said the county zoning limit of one house per acre needed to be maintained.

“If you approve this you’ll be making a city out of our little rural area,” Jim Carson told the board. “Please don’t do that.”

The Planning Board decision to approve the conditional use permit will go to the Quorum Court after a 30-day appeal period.