HomeMy WebLinkAbout135-24 RESOLUTION113 West Mountain Street
Fayetteville, AR 72701
(479) 575-8323
Resolution: 135-24
File Number: 2024-51
APPEAL: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT-2024-0011: (155 N. POWERHOUSE AVE/TRINITAS VENTURES,
483):
A RESOLUTION TO GRANT THE APPEAL OF COUNCIL MEMBERS SCOTT BERNA, D'ANDRE JONES,
AND BOB STAFFORD AND APPROVE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CUP 2024-011 TO ALLOW THE
INSTALLATION OF AN OFFSITE PARKING LOT AT 155 NORTH POWERHOUSE AVENUE AND
UNIVERSITY AVENUE TO SERVE THE APPLICANT'S PROPOSED APARTMENT BUILDING ON CENTER
STREET
WHEREAS, in June of 2023, the Powerhouse Seafood restaurant situated approximately halfway between W. Dickson
Street and W. Center Street closed permanently; and
WHEREAS, Fayetteville's Unified Development Code § 172.06 — Parking Lot Location Standards, stipulates that
parking lots that are not located on the same lot as the principal use require a conditional use permit approval from the
Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, the proposed parking lot is within a nearby vicinity to the proposed housing development that it intends
to serve and should reduce potential illegal parking by residents and guests; and
WHEREAS, on April 8, 2024, the Planning Commission voted 4-4 and so did not approve the applicant's requested
Conditional Use for an offsite parking lot; and
WHEREAS, Council Members Scott Berna, D'Andre Jones, and Bob Stafford have properly appealed the decision of
the Planning Commission pursuant to § 155.05(A)(3) of the Unified Development Code.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE,
ARKANSAS:
Section 1: That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby grants the appeal of Council Members
Scott Berna, D'Andre Jones, and Bob Stafford, finds that the proposed conditional use is compatible with adjacent
properties and other property in the zoning district, and approves Conditional Use Permit CUP 2024-011 for offsite
parking at 155 N. Powerhouse Avenue and N. University Avenue with all conditions proposed by Staff.
PASSED and APPROVED on May 7, 2024
Page 1
Resolution: 135-24
File Number: 2024-51
Page 2
Attest:
0GLE R K / ii���i
Kara Paxton, City Cle Treasurer ��V: CST YO F9�+
Aj
gyF�fV
.gyp ��((:
SN
'O i i i� i%���`
CITY OF
FAYETTEVILLE
ARKANSAS
MEETING OF MAY 7, 2024
CITY COUNCIL MEMO
2024-51
TO: Mayor Jordan and City Council
THRU: Susan Norton, Chief of Staff
Jonathan Curth, Development Services Director
FROM: Jessica Masters, Development Review Manager
SUBJECT: Appeal: CUP-2024-0011: Conditional Use Permit (155 N. POWERHOUSE
AVE/TRINITAS VENTURES, 483): Submitted by BLEW & ASSOCIATES for property
located at 155 N. POWERHOUSE AVE. The property is zoned MSC, MAIN STREET
CENTER and contains approximately 2.46 acres. The request is for offsite parking.
RECOMMENDATION:
City Planning staff recommend approval of a conditional use permit for an off -site parking lot as described
below and with the conditions outlined in the attached Planning Commission staff report.
A Planning Commission vote to approve the request failed.
BACKGROUND:
The subject property is in downtown Fayetteville with street frontage along N. University Avenue. Situated
approximately halfway between W. Dickson Street and W. Center Street, the site sits just south of the
downtown SWEPCO electric substation and was the former site of the Powerhouse Seafood restaurant that
permanently closed in June 2023. The property is zoned MSC, Main Street/Center, contains approximately 2.5
acres, and slopes downward to the east at an approximately 12% grade change.
Request: The applicant requests conditional use permit approval to install an off -site parking lot in the Main
Street/Center zoning district to provide parking for a proposed student housing project on W. Center Street.
Fayetteville's Unified Development Code, under §172.06 — Parking Lot Location Standards, stipulates that
parking lots that are not located on the same lot as the principal use require conditional use permit approval
from the Planning Commission.
Public Comment: Staff received inquiries from the public regarding this request, but no comments in opposition
or support. One member of the public indicated a preference for fencing along the southern and eastern
property lines.
Findings: Staff finds that granting the requested conditional use is unlikely to negatively impact the public
interest and is compatible with the current land use surroundings and future land use plans. The proposed
parking lot is within a nearby vicinity to the proposed housing development that it intends to serve and should
in some manner prevent residents and guests parking illegally in this area. Given the natural borders to the site
(a cemetery to the west, a substation to the north, and a railroad to the east), staff finds that the parking lot will
have limited visual impact to the surrounding neighborhood characteristics. Though a sidewalk is present, staff
recommends the improvement of the sidewalk along the property's frontage on N. University Avenue to be
Mailing address:
113 W. Mountain Street www.fayetteville-ar.gov
Fayetteville, AR 72701
improved to meet the Neighborhood Link Street requirements for sidewalks, street trees, and greenspace.
Further, to reduce the visual impact of the parking lot, staff recommends a hedge row to be constructed along
the N. University Avenue frontage to provide additional screening. While infill is cited as a top priority in City
Plan 2040, staff also finds that the illustrative Fayetteville Downtown Master Plan does not identify this specific
site as an infill opportunity. Given existing physical constraints on this property, including both slope and
overhead power lines, a parking lot is a generally suitable option for the near -term future of this site.
DISCUSSION:
At the April 8, 2024 Planning Commission meeting, the request failed to receive approval after receiving a vote
of 4-4-0 following a motion to approve by Commissioner Brink with a second by Commissioner Payne;
Commissioners Castin, Garlock, Gulley, and McGetrick were opposed. Commissioners in favor of the request
found that the site's location and existing features made the development of a parking lot a reasonable request
and would support the need for additional housing in the area; the parking lot is tied to the development of a
proposed student housing project. Commissioners' main concerns and opposition to the proposal included the
lack of preservation or redevelopment of the former Powerhouse structure, the length of the proposed 55-year
lease and whether a parking lot would need to remain on this site for that length of time, and potential street
and lighting improvements along N. University Avenue. Commissioners had questions about upgrading
sidewalk, trees, streetlights, and greenspace not only along the property's frontage, but expressed a desire to
continue the improvements to the intersection of N. University Avenue to W. Center Street. An initial motion
was made but was ultimately withdrawn regarding extending improvements south along University to W.
Center Street, given the lack of the feasibility of the request and constructability without additional land
acquisition. Further, Commissioners had concerns about the indefinite, or 55-year future of the land, ultimately
finding, based on staff and City Attorney's office feedback, that an amendment or formal abandonment to the
CUP would be required to decouple the parking lot from the housing development in the future. Commissioners
in opposition also found a general lack of compatibility with future land use plans for the area, and the City's
nearby investment in the Cultural Arts Corridor. No members of the public spoke during the meeting.
BUDGET/STAFF IMPACT:
N/A
ATTACHMENTS: Appeal Request Letter (#3), Council Member Berna - Affirmation of Appeal (#4), Council
Member Jones - Affirmation of Appeal (#5), Council Member Stafford - Affirmation of Appeal (#6), Planning
Commission Staff Report (#7), Underwood Powerhouse Property Letter (#8)
Mailing address:
113 W. Mountain Street www.fayetteville-ar.gov
Fayetteville, AR 72701
== City of Fayetteville, Arkansas
y 113 West Mountain Street
Fayetteville, AR 72701
(479)575-8323
- Legislation Text
File #: 2024-51
Appeal: CUP-2024-0011: Conditional Use Permit (155 N. POWERHOUSE AVE/TRINITAS
VENTURES, 483): Submitted by BLEW & ASSOCIATES for property located at 155 N.
POWERHOUSE AVE. The property is zoned MSC, MAIN STREET CENTER and contains
approximately 2.46 acres. The request is for offsite parking.
A RESOLUTION TO GRANT THE APPEAL OF COUNCIL MEMBERS SCOTT BERNA,
D'ANDRE JONES, AND BOB STAFFORD AND APPROVE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CUP
2024-011 TO ALLOW THE INSTALLATION OF AN OFFSITE PARKING LOT AT 155 NORTH
POWERHOUSE AVENUE AND UNIVERSITY AVENUE TO SERVE THE APPLICANT'S
PROPOSED APARTMENT BUILDING ON CENTER STREET
WHEREAS, in June of 2023, the Powerhouse Seafood restaurant situated approximately halfway
between W. Dickson Street and W. Center Street closed permanently; and
WHEREAS, Fayetteville's Unified Development Code § 172.06 — Parking Lot Location Standards,
stipulates that parking lots that are not located on the same lot as the principal use require a conditional
use permit approval from the Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, the proposed parking lot is within a nearby vicinity to the proposed housing development
that it intends to serve and should reduce potential illegal parking by residents and guests; and
WHEREAS, on April 8, 2024, the Planning Commission voted 4-4 and so did not approve the
applicant's requested Conditional Use for an offsite parking lot; and
WHEREAS, Council Members Scott Berna, D'Andre Jones, and Bob Stafford have properly appealed
the decision of the Planning Commission pursuant to § 155.05(A)(3) of the Unified Development Code.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS:
Section 1: That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby grants the appeal of
Council Members Scott Berna, D'Andre Jones, and Bob Stafford, finds that the proposed conditional
use is compatible with adjacent properties and other property in the zoning district, and approves
Conditional Use Permit CUP 2024-011 for offsite parking at 155 N. Powerhouse Avenue and N.
University Avenue with all conditions proposed by Staff.
Page 1
APPLICANT APPEAL LETTER
From: Suzanne Clark <sclark@clark-firm.com>
Sent: Friday, April 12, 2024 1:13 PM
To: Pennington, Blake <bpennington@fayetteville-ar.gov>; Stafford, Bob <bob.stafford@fayetteville-
ar.gov>; Jones, D'Andre <dandre.Jones @fayetteville-ar.gov>; Moore, Sarah <sarah.moore@fayetteville-
ar.gov>; Wiederkehr, Mike <mike.wiederkehr@fayetteville-ar.gov>; Berna, Scott
<scott.berna@fayetteville-ar.gov>; Bunch, Sarah <sarah.bunch@fayetteville-ar.gov>; Turk, Teresa
<teresa.turk@fayetteville-ar.gov>; Hertzberg, Holly <holly.hertzberg@fayetteville-ar.gov>
Cc: Anna Langner <alangner@clark-firm.com>; CityClerk <cityclerk@fayetteville-ar.gov>; Williams, Kit
<kwilliams@fayetteville-ar.gov>; Curth, Jonathan <jcurth@fayetteville-ar.gov>
Subject: RE: Trinitas Ventures - Appeal - CUP 2024-0011
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the City of Fayetteville. Do not click links or open attachments
unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
With apologies, I believed the staff report referencing the code section provided that requirement,
but to clarify, it is the decision denying the CUP UDC 172.06 — Parking Lot Location Standards that
is being appealed.
Suzanne G. Clark
CLARK LAW FIRM, PLLC
121 W. South Street
P.O. Box 4248
Fayetteville, AR 72702-4248
Tel: 479-856-6380
Fax: 479-856-6381
sclark@clark-firm.com
www.clark-firm.com
CLARRKK -
Send Me a Secure Email
Confidentiality Notice
This e-mail transmission and any documents or other attachments accompanying it contain confidential information
that may be protected by the attorney -client privilege. In the event that this e-mail contains a forwarded message or
is a reply to a prior message, some or all of the contents of this e-mail transmission or any documents or other
instruments may not have been produced by Clark Law Firm, PLLC.
From: Pennington, Blake <bpennington@fayetteville-ar.gov>
Sent: Friday, April 12, 2024 1:06 PM
To: Suzanne Clark <sclark@clark-firm.com>; Stafford, Bob <bob.stafford@favetteville-ar.gov>; Jones,
D'Andre <dandre.iones@favetteville-ar.gov>; Moore, Sarah <sarah.moore@favetteville-ar.gov>;
Wiederkehr, Mike <mike.wiederkehr@favetteville-ar.gov>; Berna, Scott <scott.berna@favetteville-
ar.gov>; Bunch, Sarah <sarah.bunch@favetteville-ar.gov>; Turk, Teresa <teresa.turk@favetteville-
ar.gov>; Hertzberg, Holly <holly.hertzberg@favetteville-ar.gov>
Cc: Anna Langner <alangner@clark-firm.com>; CityClerk <cityclerk@favetteville-ar.gov>; Williams, Kit
APPLICANT APPEAL LETTER
<kwilliams@fayetteville-ar.gov>; Curth, Jonathan <jcurth@fayetteville-ar.gov>
Subject: RE: Trinitas Ventures - Appeal - CUP 2024-0011
Council Members,
Section 155.02(A) requires appeals to be "submitted in writing referencing the applicable UDC
section(s) and setting out the reasons the applicant contends the decision was in error." Ms.
Clark's email satisfies the writing requirement and the requirement to set out the reasons they
believe the decision was in error; however, it does not reference any applicable UDC sections or
specifically cite any of the factors to be considered on conditional use permit applications.
Because this is a conditional use permit, Section 163.02 of the UDC says the Planning Commission
and, on appeal, the City Council, must determine that the proposed use is compatible with
adjacent properties and other properties in the district, is compatible with the goals and intent of
the City's adopted land use, transportation, and other strategic plans, and granting the conditional
use will not adversely affect the public interest.
There are other requirements that may be at issue but I want to confirm with Ms. Clark that the UDC
section applicable to this appeal is Section 163.02 and also confirm that any council member who
wishes to sponsor the appeal concurs.
Thankyou,
Blake E. Pennington
Senior Assistant City Attorney
City of Fayetteville, Arkansas
bpennington fayetteville-ar.gov
Direct: 479.575.8312
www.fayetteville-ar.gov
CITY OF
FAYETTEVILLE
ARKANS
wRKwNsws
From: Suzanne Clark <sclark@clark-firm.com>
Sent: Friday, April 12, 2024 12:30 PM
To: Stafford, Bob <bob.stafford@fayetteville-ar.gov>; Jones, D'Andre <dandre. *ones @fayetteville-
ar.gov>; Moore, Sarah <sarah.moore@fayetteville-ar.gov>; Wiederkehr, Mike
<mike.wiederkehr@fayetteville-ar.gov>; Berna, Scott <scott.berna@fayetteville-ar.gov>; Bunch, Sarah
<sarah.bunch@fayetteville-ar.gov>; Turk, Teresa <teresa.turk@fayetteville-ar.gov>; Hertzberg, Holly
<holly.hertzberg@favetteville-ar.gov>
Cc: Anna Langner <alangner@clark-firm.com>; CityClerk <cityclerk@favetteville-ar.gov>; Pennington,
Blake <bpennington@fayetteville-ar.gov>
Subject: Trinitas Ventures - Appeal - CUP 2024-0011
Importance: High
APPLICANT APPEAL LETTER
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the City of Fayetteville. Do not click links or open attachments
unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Dear Council,
On behalf of my client, Trinitas Ventures LLC, I am requesting the opportunity to appeal to the
Fayetteville City Council the Planning Commission's denial of the attached petition for a
Conditional Use Permit. I need three (3) Council members to agree to hear the appeal in order for
it to be placed on the Council's agenda. If you are willing to hear this matter, I would request you
respond with your agreement to hear the appeal. I certainly understand that approval to hear the
appeal has no bearing on your vote regarding the merits of the appeal.
I have attached the staff report that was submitted to the Planning Commission. I have also
attached a few slides from our presentation regarding the development and the proposed remote
parking lot. You can see from the staff report that this was recommended for approval and that Fire
and Police are in support of the petition as well. The matter failed before the Planning Commission
with four (4) commissioners in favor and four (4) against.
My client explored several sites that would meet the code requirements regarding distance from
the residential site before settling on the Powerhouse lot for the CUP application. This site was
considered by staff, police, and fire as the best option for many reasons. In addition to the
conditions required of staff, with which my client is in agreement, there will be significant
improvements to the site which will provide improvements from both an aesthetic and safety
perspective. The site is not amenable to other development options specifically because of the
power lines traversing the property.
Fayetteville recently declared a housing crisis. This development, which add over 600 beds in the
heart of downtown, has an infill score of 13 out of 14. It will help provide housing options primarily
for students, which will in turn open up some of the more affordable housing options that students
currently occupy. I would respectfully request that you allow this matter to heard by the City
Council and give my client the opportunity to present why approval of this CUP is a good decision
for Fayetteville.
Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Suzanne G. Clark
CLARK LAW FIRM, PLLC
121 W. South Street
P.O. Box 4248
Fayetteville, AR 72702-4248
Tel: 479-856-6380
Fax: 479-856-6381
sclark@clark-firm.com
www.clark-firm.com
CLARK
APPLICANT APPEAL LETTER
Send Me a Secure Email
Confidentiality Notice
This e-mail transmission and any documents or other attachments accompanying it contain confidential information
that may be protected by the attorney -client privilege. In the event that this e-mail contains a forwarded message or
is a reply to a prior message, some or all of the contents of this e-mail transmission or any documents or other
instruments may not have been produced by Clark Law Firm, PLLC.
CO
CV
O
N
Q
cm
Z
O
v
Q
F-
Z
ry
F-
V)
fu
V)
c
Q
a)
M
LL
U)
c
UI
O
c
innintA
g
u E cu
Q u mtn
a
N Y Y
++ N Q �u�o t ° �i.2
googola1 oa m v > Nu L
= Y. 2 y E,�a o
MEN
C1 i O u~c'Co i +' cn�yoa
Q N U ._ Y c 06 O7 cn O
Y
1\ll u C_a yM t U ) 0C) N 3 �' O
= O Ua>~�~ C mJNln 0
Denim
r
■
:fC1
I
N
■ 1 �.
l
Cl)
1
Z cn
■
■ ■
II
f � ... - �•uuum�
�� �1 {� EiJ'Jin
wmm
1l- f ® l ®
moo• —.�a—.a�� —. _ter _. -. _. _ _-
11
-11
I�A W14 C
,. � � r�:IL'
1 ''- ��' 1� ,'I� ,I��� I'L�.�.�-��. �: � �
< �,.
V
LLI
1�' \��
l`'��1
i" 1t \1. l�� l
Is A I
Cf)
CI)
nil as oil
mu Nei
r
MI on 111,11i
,g
m
0
own%
C'm
E
CD
0
0
L
0
c
0
0
r-
m
0—
m
4-0
a
a
a
E
uj
CD
Z
Z
m
(1)
(1)
m
>
..=
0
0
CL
LU
c
a a 1 !!
- ��' ♦ i r Wain
-
m o
O 1
0 IL
G1 cC � t O .
C1 mN Ocn� a
r- Q Q N — ..
C d fn fn E L Mh a :.
1
p L M C C .� O 0 �� r•
CD
L Q m Q
y 0 co Q cn
V O
N
Ar. . .
y y MEW
E
K
w
y
=
�4N(�
r v
ca
N
*. -i
co O
d
'i
_
_
C
C =
�
0
O
.2 d
�00Ea>ClCRfNM
o a
ILO
.a
O
L J
J C C
Ci0_
G>O
.Na
d
=
E E
t)
O
O O
_
_
i
Q O
O
L L
Q Q
Gs M
O
d=u co
d=
L
I
. 7
t�
a
N
co
7
O
E
O
•�
U
N
M
c
LL
N
.c
H
cU
a
U
N
a
c
4-J
7
a_>
M
LJ
a
LL
W
a�
N
a�
_
aJ
oN
O
LL
3
c
O
u
�,
a
3
LL
O.N
3
N
N
�,
LL
'�
c
m
'0
>
c
C
N
c
Ln
rn
O
(%
0O
c
a°
o
°
c
c
O
a�
c
O
c
-
O
U
Q
I-j
H
o
LL
c
N
O>
-0
X
'�
.1
4--
O
c
O
E
Q
o
N
>
N
N
c
.O
i
c
N
._
H
c
O
tn
U
c
N
c
J
>,
a
N
•�
a
—
c
c
N
E
a
O
>
O
_
m
O
�
O
U
c
s
w
.V
O
a
,J
N
O
a
N
c
O
Q
n
c
O
�
c�
U
'E
�
;
U
'++
f0
CL
COUNCILMAN BERNA
From: Berna, Scott <scott.berna@fayetteville-ar.gov>
Sent: Friday, April 12, 2024 1:27 PM
To: Suzanne Clark <sclark@clark-firm.com>; Pennington, Blake <bpennington@fayetteville-ar.gov>;
Stafford, Bob <bob.stafford@fayetteville-ar.gov>; Jones, D'Andre <dandre.jones@fayetteville-ar.gov>;
Moore, Sarah <sarah.moore@fayetteville-ar.gov>; Wiederkehr, Mike <mike.wiederkehr@fayetteville-
ar.gov>; Bunch, Sarah <sarah.bunch@fayetteville-ar.gov>; Turk, Teresa <teresa.turk@fayetteville-
ar.gov>; Hertzberg, Holly <holly.hertzberg@fayetteville-ar.gov>
Cc: Anna Langner <alangner@clark-firm.com>; CityClerk <cityclerk@fayetteville-ar.gov>; Williams, Kit
<kwilliams@fayetteville-ar.gov>; Curth, Jonathan <jcurth@fayetteville-ar.gov>
Subject: Re: Trinitas Ventures - Appeal - CUP 2024-0011
Thanks for clarification Blake and Suzanne. I assume you would like for me to reconfirm my
willingness to hear the appeal. Please let this email reconfirm my consent.
Scott Berna
From: Suzanne Clark <sclark@clark-firm.com>
Sent: Friday, April 12, 2024 1:12 PM
To: Pennington, Blake <bpennington@favetteville-ar.gov>; Stafford, Bob <bob.stafford@fayetteville-
ar.gov>; Jones, D'Andre <dandre. *ones @fayetteville-ar.gov>; Moore, Sarah <sarah.moore@fayetteville-
ar.gov>; Wiederkehr, Mike <mike.wiederkehr@favetteville-ar.gov>; Berna, Scott
<scott.berna@favetteville-ar.gov>; Bunch, Sarah <sarah.bunch@favetteville-ar.gov>; Turk, Teresa
<teresa.turk@favetteville-ar.gov>; Hertzberg, Holly <holly.hertzberg@favetteville-ar.gov>
Cc: Anna Langner <alangner@clark-firm.com>; CityClerk <cityclerk@favetteville-ar.gov>; Williams, Kit
<kwilliams@favetteville-ar.gov>; Curth, Jonathan <icurth@fayetteville-ar.gov>
Subject: RE: Trinitas Ventures - Appeal - CUP 2024-0011
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the City of Fayetteville. Do not click links or open attachments
unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
With apologies, I believed the staff report referencing the code section provided that requirement,
but to clarify, it is the decision denying the CUP UDC 172.06 — Parking Lot Location Standards that
is being appealed.
Suzanne G. Clark
CLARK LAW FIRM, PLLC
121 W. South Street
P.O. Box 4248
Fayetteville, AR 72702-4248
Tel: 479-856-6380
Fax: 479-856-6381
sclark@clark-firm.com
www.clark-firm.com
CLARK -:.:.
COUNCILMAN BERNA
Send Me a Secure Email
Confidentiality Notice
This e-mail transmission and any documents or other attachments accompanying it contain confidential information
that may be protected by the attorney -client privilege. In the event that this e-mail contains a forwarded message or
is a reply to a prior message, some or all of the contents of this e-mail transmission or any documents or other
instruments may not have been produced by Clark Law Firm, PLLC.
From: Pennington, Blake <bpennington@favetteville-ar.gov>
Sent: Friday, April 12, 2024 1:06 PM
To: Suzanne Clark <sclark@clark-firm.com>; Stafford, Bob <bob.stafford@favetteville-ar.gov>; Jones,
D'Andre <dandre.tones@fayetteville-ar.gov>; Moore, Sarah <sarah.moore@favetteville-ar.gov>;
Wiederkehr, Mike <mike.wiederkehr@favetteville-ar.gov>; Berna, Scott <scott.berna@favetteville-
ar.gov>; Bunch, Sarah <sarah.bunch@favetteville-ar.gov>; Turk, Teresa <teresa.turk@favetteville-
ar.gov>; Hertzberg, Holly <holly.hertzberg@favetteville-ar.gov>
Cc: Anna Langner <alangner@clark-firm.com>; CityClerk <cityclerk@favetteville-ar.gov>; Williams, Kit
<kwilliams@favetteville-ar.gov>; Curth, Jonathan <icurth@favetteville-ar.gov>
Subject: RE: Trinitas Ventures - Appeal - CUP 2024-0011
Council Members,
Section 155.02(A) requires appeals to be "submitted in writing referencing the applicable UDC
section(s) and setting out the reasons the applicant contends the decision was in error." Ms.
Clark's email satisfies the writing requirement and the requirement to set out the reasons they
believe the decision was in error; however, it does not reference any applicable UDC sections or
specifically cite any of the factors to be considered on conditional use permit applications.
Because this is a conditional use permit, Section 163.02 of the UDC says the Planning Commission
and, on appeal, the City Council, must determine that the proposed use is compatible with
adjacent properties and other properties in the district, is compatible with the goals and intent of
the City's adopted land use, transportation, and other strategic plans, and granting the conditional
use will not adversely affect the public interest.
There are other requirements that may be at issue but I want to confirm with Ms. Clark that the UDC
section applicable to this appeal is Section 163.02 and also confirm that any council member who
wishes to sponsor the appeal concurs.
Thank you,
Blake E. Pennington
Senior Assistant City Attorney
City of Fayetteville, Arkansas
bi)ennington(a�fayetteville-ar.gov
Direct: 479.575.8312
www.favetteville-ar.gov
COUNCILMAN BERNA
CITY of
FAYETTEVILLE
ARKANSAS
From: Suzanne Clark <sclark@clark-firm.com>
Sent: Friday, April 12, 2024 12:30 PM
To: Stafford, Bob <bob.stafford@favetteville-ar.gov>; Jones, D'Andre <dandre.lones@fayetteville-
ar.gov>; Moore, Sarah <sarah.moore@favetteville-ar.gov>; Wiederkehr, Mike
<mike.wiederkehr@favetteville-ar.gov>; Berna, Scott <scott.berna@favetteville-ar.gov>; Bunch, Sarah
<sarah.bunch@favetteville-ar.gov>; Turk, Teresa <teresa.turk@favetteville-ar.gov>; Hertzberg, Holly
<holly.hertzberg@favetteville-ar.gov>
Cc: Anna Langner <alangner@clark-firm.com>; CityClerk <cityclerk@favetteville-ar.gov>; Pennington,
Blake <bpennington@favetteville-ar.gov>
Subject: Trinitas Ventures - Appeal - CUP 2024-0011
Importance: High
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the City of Fayetteville. Do not click links or open attachments
unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Dear Council,
On behalf of my client, Trinitas Ventures LLC, I am requesting the opportunity to appeal to the
Fayetteville City Council the Planning Commission's denial of the attached petition for a
Conditional Use Permit. I need three (3) Council members to agree to hear the appeal in order for
it to be placed on the Council's agenda. If you are willing to hear this matter, I would request you
respond with your agreement to hear the appeal. I certainly understand that approval to hear the
appeal has no bearing on your vote regarding the merits of the appeal.
I have attached the staff report that was submitted to the Planning Commission. I have also
attached a few slides from our presentation regarding the development and the proposed remote
parking lot. You can see from the staff report that this was recommended for approval and that Fire
and Police are in support of the petition as well. The matter failed before the Planning Commission
with four (4) commissioners in favor and four (4) against.
My client explored several sites that would meet the code requirements regarding distance from
the residential site before settling on the Powerhouse lot for the CUP application. This site was
considered by staff, police, and fire as the best option for many reasons. In addition to the
conditions required of staff, with which my client is in agreement, there will be significant
improvements to the site which will provide improvements from both an aesthetic and safety
perspective. The site is not amenable to other development options specifically because of the
power lines traversing the property.
Fayetteville recently declared a housing crisis. This development, which add over 600 beds in the
heart of downtown, has an infill score of 13 out of 14. It will help provide housing options primarily
for students, which will in turn open up some of the more affordable housing options that students
currently occupy. I would respectfully request that you allow this matter to heard by the City
COUNCILMAN BERNA
Council and give my client the opportunity to present why approval of this CUP is a good decision
for Fayetteville.
Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Suzanne G. Clark
CLARK LAW FIRM, PLLC
121 W. South Street
P.O. Box 4248
Fayetteville, AR 72702-4248
Tel: 479-856-6380
Fax: 479-856-6381
sclark@clark-firm.com
www.clark-firm.com
CLARK
Send Me a Secure Email
Confidentiality Notice
This e-mail transmission and any documents or other attachments accompanying it contain confidential information
that may be protected by the attorney -client privilege. In the event that this e-mail contains a forwarded message or
is a reply to a prior message, some or all of the contents of this e-mail transmission or any documents or other
instruments may not have been produced by Clark Law Firm, PLLC.
COUNCILMAN JONES
From: D'Andre Jones <dre91732000@gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, April 12, 2024 1:36 PM
To: Pennington, Blake <bpennington@fayetteville-ar.gov>
Cc: Suzanne Clark <sclark@clark-firm.com>; Jones, D'Andre <dandre.Jones @fayetteville-ar.gov>; Anna
Langner <alangner@clark-firm.com>; CityClerk <cityclerk@fayetteville-ar.gov>; Williams, Kit
<kwi I I is ms@fayettevi I l e-a r.gov>
Subject: Re: Trinitas Ventures - Appeal - CUP 2024-0011
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the City of Fayetteville. Do not click links or open attachments
unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Yes my commitment stands
Sent from my iPhone
On Apr 12, 2024, at 1:29 PM, Pennington, Blake <bpennington@fayetteville-ar.gov> wrote:
D'Andre,
I just wanted to confirm that you had seen Suzanne's latest email references Section 172.06 of the UDC
as the applicable section to be considered on appeal and that you concurred.
Thank you,
Blake E. Pennington
Senior Assistant City Attorney
City of Fayetteville, Arkansas
bpennington(abfayetteville-ar.gov
Direct: 479.575.8312
www.fayetteville-ar.gov
<image001.png>
From: D'Andre Jones <dre91732000@gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, April 12, 2024 1:08 PM
To: Suzanne Clark <sclark@clark-firm.com>
Cc: Stafford, Bob <bob.stafford@fayetteville-ar.gov>; Jones, D'Andre <dandre.lones@fayetteville-
ar.gov>; Moore, Sarah <sarah.moore@fayetteville-ar.gov>; Wiederkehr, Mike
<mike.wiederkehr@fayetteville-ar.gov>; Berna, Scott <scott.berna@fayetteville-ar.gov>; Bunch, Sarah
<sarah.bunch@fayetteville-ar.gov>; Turk, Teresa <teresa.turk@fayetteville-ar.gov>; Hertzberg, Holly
<holly.hertzberg@fayetteville-ar.gov>; Anna Langner <alangner@clark-firm.com>; CityClerk
<cityclerk@fayetteville-ar.gov>; Pennington, Blake <bpennington@fayetteville-ar.gov>
Subject: Re: Trinitas Ventures - Appeal - CUP 2024-0011
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the City of Fayetteville. Do not click links or open
attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
COUNCILMAN JONES
Hey Suzanne as promised I will support the hearing of the appeal!!
Sent from my iPhone
On Apr 12, 2024, at 12:30 PM, Suzanne Clark <sclark@dark-firm.com> wrote:
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the City of Fayetteville. Do not click links or open attachments
unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Dear Council,
On behalf of my client, Trinitas Ventures LLC, I am requesting the opportunity to appeal to the
Fayetteville City Council the Planning Commission's denial of the attached petition for a
Conditional Use Permit. I need three (3) Council members to agree to hear the appeal in order for
it to be placed on the Council's agenda. If you are willing to hear this matter, I would request you
respond with your agreement to hear the appeal. I certainly understand that approval to hear the
appeal has no bearing on your vote regarding the merits of the appeal.
I have attached the staff report that was submitted to the Planning Commission. I have also
attached a few slides from our presentation regarding the development and the proposed remote
parking lot. You can see from the staff report that this was recommended for approval and that Fire
and Police are in support of the petition as well. The matter failed before the Planning Commission
with four (4) commissioners in favor and four (4) against.
My client explored several sites that would meet the code requirements regarding distance from
the residential site before settling on the Powerhouse lot for the CUP application. This site was
considered by staff, police, and fire as the best option for many reasons. In addition to the
conditions required of staff, with which my client is in agreement, there will be significant
improvements to the site which will provide improvements from both an aesthetic and safety
perspective. The site is not amenable to other development options specifically because of the
power lines traversing the property.
Fayetteville recently declared a housing crisis. This development, which add over 600 beds in the
heart of downtown, has an infill score of 13 out of 14. It will help provide housing options primarily
for students, which will in turn open up some of the more affordable housing options that students
currently occupy. I would respectfully request that you allow this matter to heard by the City
Council and give my client the opportunity to present why approval of this CUP is a good decision
for Fayetteville.
Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Suzanne G. Clark
CLARK LAW FIRM, PLLC
121 W. South Street
P.O. Box 4248
Fayetteville, AR 72702-4248
Tel: 479-856-6380
COUNCILMAN JONES
Fax: 479-856-6381
sclark@clark-firm.com
www.clark-firm.com
<image001.jpg>
Send Me a Secure Email
Confidentiality Notice
This e-mail transmission and any documents or other attachments accompanying it contain confidential information
that may be protected by the attorney -client privilege. In the event that this e-mail contains a forwarded message or
is a reply to a prior message, some or all of the contents of this e-mail transmission or any documents or other
instruments may not have been produced by Clark Law Firm, PLLC.
<CUP-2024-0011 PC Report.pdf>
<612 Center St Parking - CUP Appeal.pdf>
COUNCILMAN STAFFORD
From: Stafford, Bob <bob.stafford@fayetteville-ar.gov>
Sent: Monday, April 15, 2024 1:05 PM
To: Suzanne Clark <sclark@clark-firm.com>; Jones, D'Andre <dandre.Jones @fayetteville-ar.gov>; Moore,
Sarah <sarah.moore@fayetteville-ar.gov>; Wiederkehr, Mike <mike.wiederkehr@fayetteville-ar.gov>;
Berna, Scott <scott.berna@fayetteville-ar.gov>; Bunch, Sarah <sarah.bunch@fayetteville-ar.gov>; Turk,
Teresa <teresa.turk@fayetteville-ar.gov>; Hertzberg, Holly <holly.hertzberg@fayetteville-ar.gov>
Cc: Anna Langner <alangner@clark-firm.com>; CityClerk <cityclerk@fayetteville-ar.gov>; Pennington,
Blake <bpennington@fayetteville-ar.gov>
Subject: Re: Trinitas Ventures - Appeal - CUP 2024-0011
Hi Suzanne et al.,
As per our earlier phone conversation, I will support hearing this appeal.
Thanks, Bob
Robert B. Stafford
Fayetteville City Council
Ward 1, Position 1
479.879.6802
From: Suzanne Clark <sclark@clark-firm.com>
Sent: Friday, April 12, 2024 12:30 PM
To: Stafford, Bob <bob.stafford@fayetteville-ar.gov>; Jones, D'Andre <dandre.lones@fayetteville-
ar.gov>; Moore, Sarah <sarah.moore@favetteville-ar.gov>; Wiederkehr, Mike
<mike.wiederkehr@favetteville-ar.gov>; Berna, Scott <scott.berna@favetteville-ar.gov>; Bunch, Sarah
<sarah.bunch@favetteville-ar.gov>; Turk, Teresa <teresa.turk@favetteville-ar.gov>; Hertzberg, Holly
<holly. hertzberg@fayettevil le -a r.gov>
Cc: Anna Langner <alangner@clark-firm.com>; CityClerk <cityclerk@favetteville-ar.gov>; Pennington,
Blake <bpennington@favetteville-ar.gov>
Subject: Trinitas Ventures - Appeal - CUP 2024-0011
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the City of Fayetteville. Do not click links or open attachments
unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Dear Council,
On behalf of my client, Trinitas Ventures LLC, I am requesting the opportunity to appeal to the
Fayetteville City Council the Planning Commission's denial of the attached petition for a
Conditional Use Permit. I need three (3) Council members to agree to hear the appeal in order for
it to be placed on the Council's agenda. If you are willing to hear this matter, I would request you
respond with your agreement to hear the appeal. I certainly understand that approval to hear the
appeal has no bearing on your vote regarding the merits of the appeal.
I have attached the staff report that was submitted to the Planning Commission. I have also
attached a few slides from our presentation regarding the development and the proposed remote
parking lot. You can see from the staff report that this was recommended for approval and that Fire
COUNCILMAN STAFFORD
and Police are in support of the petition as well. The matter failed before the Planning Commission
with four (4) commissioners in favor and four (4) against.
My client explored several sites that would meet the code requirements regarding distance from
the residential site before settling on the Powerhouse lot for the CUP application. This site was
considered by staff, police, and fire as the best option for many reasons. In addition to the
conditions required of staff, with which my client is in agreement, there will be significant
improvements to the site which will provide improvements from both an aesthetic and safety
perspective. The site is not amenable to other development options specifically because of the
power lines traversing the property.
Fayetteville recently declared a housing crisis. This development, which add over 600 beds in the
heart of downtown, has an infill score of 13 out of 14. It will help provide housing options primarily
for students, which will in turn open up some of the more affordable housing options that students
currently occupy. I would respectfully request that you allow this matter to heard by the City
Council and give my client the opportunity to present why approval of this CUP is a good decision
for Fayetteville.
Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Suzanne G. Clark
CLARK LAW FIRM, PLLC
121 W. South Street
P.O. Box 4248
Fayetteville, AR 72702-4248
Tel: 479-856-6380
Fax: 479-856-6381
sclark@clark-firm.com
www.clark-firm.com
` CLARK
Send Me a Secure Email
Confidentiality Notice
This e-mail transmission and any documents or other attachments accompanying it contain confidential information
that may be protected by the attorney -client privilege. In the event that this e-mail contains a forwarded message or
is a reply to a prior message, some or all of the contents of this e-mail transmission or any documents or other
instruments may not have been produced by Clark Law Firm, PLLC.
.CITY OF
FAYETTEVILLE
ARKANSAS
PLANNING COMMISSION MEMO
TO: Fayetteville Planning Commission
FROM: Jessie Masters, Development Review Manager
MEETING DATE: April 8, 2024
SUBJECT: CUP-2024-0011: Conditional Use Permit (155 N. POWERHOUSE
AVE/TRINITAS VENTURES, 483): Submitted by BLEW & ASSOCIATES
for property located at 155 N. POWERHOUSE AVE. The property is zoned
MSC, MAIN STREET CENTER and contains approximately 2.46 acres.
The request is for offsite parking.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of CUP-2024-0011.
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
"I move to approve CUP-2024-0011, determining:
• In favor of compatibility for an off -site parking lot serving a residential use;
• In favor of all other conditions as recommended by staff. "
BACKGROUND:
The subject property is in downtown Fayetteville with street frontage along N. University Avenue.
Situated approximately halfway between W. Dickson Street and W. Center Street, the site sits
just south of the downtown SWEPCO electric substation, and was the former site of the
Powerhouse Seafood restaurant that permanently closed in June 2023. The property is zoned
MSC, Main Street Center and contains approximately 2.5 acres. The site slopes downward to the
east at an approximately 12% grade change. Surrounding land uses and zoning are depicted in
Table 1.
Table 1:
Surrounding Land Use and Zoning
Direction
Land Use
Zoning
North
SWEPCO Substation
MSC, Main Street Center
South
University of Arkansas
MSC, Main Street Center
(Warehousing and Offices
East
Arkansas Missouri
MSC, Main Street Center
Railroad/Commercial/Multi-family
West
Evergreen Cemetery
MSC, Main Street Center
City Plan 2040 Future Land Use Designation: City Neighborhood Area.
Proposal: The applicant requests conditional use permit approval to install an off -site parking lot
in the Main Street/Center zoning district. The purpose of this request is to provide an off -site
parking lot for a proposed student housing project on W. Center Street. Fayetteville's Unified
Development Code, under §172.06 — Parking Lot Location Standards, notes that parking lots that
are not located on the same lot as the principal use, require conditional use permit approval from
the Planning Commission.
Planning Commission
April 8, 2024
CUP-2024-0011 (TRINITAS VENTURES)
Paqe 1 of 17
Public Comment: Staff have received inquiries from the public regarding this request, but no
comments in opposition or support. One member of the public indicated a request for fencing
along the southern and eastern property lines.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of CUP-2024-0011, with the following
conditions:
Conditions of Approval:
Planning Commission determination of compatibility for an off -site parking lot
serving a residential use. Staff finds the proposed parking lot to be compatible for
the reasons outlined in this report;
2. Conditional use permit approval does not grant any necessary development
entitlement approval for the associated parking lot, or for the related student
housing project. For the purposes of development review, development
entitlement for this parking lot and for the related proposed student housing
project (parcels 765-12932-001 and 765-12934-000, 765-01886-000 respectively)
shall be considered as one site and/or one project.
3. At the time of development entitlement, applicant shall supply adequate
ownership or long-term lease information that ensures the property can be
retained as a parking lot for a reasonable amount of time to serve the residential
structure.
4. Sidewalk, greenspace, streetlights, and street trees shall be installed along the
property's frontage along N. University Avenue in line with the typical master
street plan requirements for Neighborhood Link streets.
5. A hedge row, between 32 and 42 inches in height, shall be installed between the
parking lot and the street, and that a maintenance guarantee be provided to
cover the installation and care of the hedge until it is grown to sufficient height
and density to screen the parking lot as intended.
6. Off -site parking lots shall be prohibited from being located within the build -to -
zone, per 172.04(C)3. Associated spaces shall not be located within 0-25 feet
from the existing right-of-way, or master street plan right-of-way, whichever is
greater.
7. Accessible parking requirements shall be evaluated for compliance with the
Unified Development Code and the Americans with Disabilities Act;
8. Trash receptacles shall be provided for the convenience of the users, and shall
be screened from view of the public right-of-way. The property owner shall be
responsible for maintaining the property and keeping it free and clear of litter
and debris;
9. Signage shall comply with the UDC Chapter 174, Signs;
10. Outdoor lighting on this property shall comply with UDC Chapter 176, Outdoor
Lighting;
Planning Commission
April 8, 2024
CUP-2024-0011 (TRINITAS VENTURES)
Paqe 2 of 17
11. Existing non -conforming access features shall be brought into conformity in
line with the standard requirements in UDC Chapter 166.08(F);
12. Parking lot must meet all other standard design and development standards as
outlined in the Unified Development Code, including, but not limited to, paving
and construction, dimensional standards, landscape requirements, and
drainage requirements.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Required YES
jDate: April 8, 2024 O Tabled O Approved O Denied
Motion:
Second:
Vote:
FINDINGS OF THE STAFF
§163.02. AUTHORITY; CONDITIONS; PROCEDURES.
B. Authority; Conditions. The Planning Commission shall:
1. Hear and decide only such special exemptions as it is specifically
authorized to pass on by the terms of this chapter.
2. Decide such questions as are involved in determining whether a conditional
use should be granted; and,
3. Grant a conditional use with such conditions and safeguards as are
appropriate under this chapter; or
4. Deny a conditional use when not in harmony with the purpose and intent of
this chapter.
C. Procedures. A conditional use shall not be granted by the Planning Commission
unless and until:
1. A written application for a conditional use is submitted indicating the section
of this chapter under which the conditional use is sought and stating the
grounds on which it is requested.
Finding: The applicant has submitted a written application requesting conditional use
approval for an off -site parking lot.
2. The applicant shall pay a filing fee as required under Chapter 159 to cover
the cost of expenses incurred in connection with processing such
application.
Finding: The applicant has paid the required filing fee.
Planning Commission
April 8, 2024
CUP-2024-0011 (TRINITAS VENTURES)
Paqe 3 of 17
3. The Planning Commission shall make the following written findings before
a conditional use shall be issued:
(a.) That it is empowered under the section of this chapter described in
the application to grant the conditional use;
Finding: The Planning Commission is empowered under Unified Development Code
§172.06 to grant the requested conditional use permit.
(b.) That the granting of the conditional use will not adversely affect the
public interest;
Finding: Staff finds that granting the requested conditional use permit is not likely to
negatively affect the public interest. By including this off -site parking lot
within a nearby vicinity to the proposed housing development, staff finds
that residents and guests of the proposed housing development are less
likely to park in an illegal manner or in a way that would conflict with public
safety or emergency services access.
(c.) The Planning Commission shall certify:
(1.) Compliance with the specific rules governing individual
conditional uses; and
Finding: There are specific rules governing off -site parking locations in Unified
Development Code §172.06, Parking Lot Location Standards.
§172.06. PARKING LOT LOCATION STANDARDS.
B. Permitted Locations as a Conditional Use.
1. Parking lots located within residential zones which serve uses in
nonresidential zones may be allowed as a conditional use by the Planning
Commission.
2. Parking lots for uses allowed as conditional uses within residential zones
must also be approved as a conditional use. A conditional use for a parking
lot may be approved at the same time the use is approved or may be
approved separately if additional parking lots are developed later.
The Planning Commission shall make a finding based upon the size, scale,
and location of these activities that the proposed parking lot will not adversely
affect adjacent residential uses or the residential character of the
neighborhood.
Finding: The request is for a parking lot located within the same zoning district as the
principal use (both areas are zoned MSC). Staff finds that the proposed size
and scale is unlikely to negatively affect the surrounding neighborhood
characteristics.
C. Off -Site Locations. If off-street parking cannot be provided on the same lot as the
principal use due to existing buildings or the shape of the parcel, parking lots may
be located on other property not more than 600 feet distant from the principal use,
subject to conditional use approval by the Planning Commission.
Planning Commission
April 8, 2024
CUP-2024-0011 (TRINITAS VENTURES)
Paqe 4 of 17
Finding: The intent of the ordinance limiting the distance to 600 feet is meant to
provide an off -site parking lot that is still within a convenient, walkable
location for the proposed users. The proposed site is, as the crow flies, less
than 200 feet away from the proposed principal use at its closest corners,
but via a reasonable and legal walking distance, the parking lot is
approximately 675 feet from the primary use. The applicant has not provided
additional information about possible transportation or a shuttle service, but
intends to use existing public sidewalk and existing public trail for
transportation between the parking lot at the proposed housing use.
§163.02. AUTHORITY; CONDITIONS; PROCEDURES. (continued)
(2.) That satisfactory provisions and arrangements have been
made concerning the following, where applicable:
(a.) Ingress and egress to property and proposed
structures thereon with particular reference to
automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience,
traffic flow and control and access in case of fire or
catastrophe;
Finding: N. University Avenue is classified as a Neighborhood Link Street, which
typically requires a curb separation distance of 100 feet. The applicant is
showing an intent to provide vehicular access through two proposed curb
cuts, which are approximately 150 feet in separation. The site is currently
served by what appear to be two existing non -conforming driveways, one to
the south, and one to the north. The proposal would provide for safer and
more predictable vehicular access to the site. The site also has an existing
sidewalk and pedestrian crossing to the Razorback Greenway to the east;
staff would recommend improvements to the pedestrian crossing here, since
it is a likely desired path that individuals parking their vehicles in this site
would take to access the proposed housing to the south.
(b.) Off-street parking and loading areas where required,
with particular attention to ingress and egress,
economic, noise, glare, or odor effects of the special
exception on adjoining properties and properties
generally in the district;
Finding: No substantial noise, glare, or odor effects on adjoining properties are
anticipated, though staff recognizes that a stagnant use such as a parking
lot may not provide necessary activation to the site that may help generate
economic activity in this area. That said, a parking lot in this location may be
one of the more reasonable uses that could be installed at this site; given
the substation to the north, staff finds that the site is likely encumbered by
many easements that could make building more vertically less likely.
Further, the site has natural borders; the cemetery to the west, the
substation to the north, and the railroad to the east limits access to the area.
The site also slopes significantly to the east, so any negative visual impact
from a parking lot is likely to be minimal. That said, staff recommend a
Planning Commission
April 8, 2024
CUP-2024-0011 (TRINITAS VENTURES)
Paqe 5 of 17
landscaped screen between 32 and 42 inches in height with a 50% opaque
minimum be installed along the N. University Avenue frontage.
(c.) Refuse and service areas, with particular reference
to ingress and egress, and off-street parking and
loading,
Finding: Minimal refuse generation is anticipated with the proposed off -site parking
lot. The property owner is responsible for maintaining the lot. Staff
recommends, however, that trash facilities be provided for and maintained
at this location for the convenience of the individuals parked here.
(d.) Utilities, with reference to locations, availability, and
compatibility;
Finding: No development is proposed on the subject property where water and sewer
services are necessary. The adequacy of existing infrastructure would be
evaluated at the time of any future development.
(e.) Screening and buffering with reference to type,
dimensions, and character;
Finding: The off -site parking lot shall be subject to the City's landscaping
requirements, and the applicant is showing an intent to provide required tree
islands. Staff recommends that screening and buffering be installed per the
requirements as outlined in chapter 177, Landscape Regulations. Staff also
recommends that a landscaped screen between 32 and 42 inches in height
with a 50% opaque minimum be installed along the N. University Avenue
frontage to minimize the visual impact of the parking lot from the public right-
of-way.
(f.) Signs, if any, and proposed exterior lighting with
reference to glare, traffic safety, economic effect,
and compatibility and harmony with properties in the
district;
Finding: Any proposed signage must meet the requirements as outlined by chapter
174. The applicant has not currently indicated any signage to be placed on -
site.
(g.) Required yards and other open space; and
Finding: No structures are proposed with this conditional use permit. Staff finds that
the proposal is generally meeting the landscape buffer requirements as
outlined in chapter 177, Landscape Regulations.
(h.) General compatibility with adjacent properties and
other property in the district.
Finding: Staff finds that the proposal is compatible with adjacent properties, though
not necessarily compatible with other allowable uses in the Main
Street/Center zoning district. Surface parking lots are becoming less
Planning Commission
April 8, 2024
CUP-2024-0011 (TRINITAS VENTURES)
Paqe 6 of 17
common in downtown Fayetteville, with the ongoing redevelopment of the
Civic Plaza property to the east from a parking lot to a city public park and
open space.
(i) General compatibility with the goals and intent of the
city's adopted land -use, transportation, and other
strategic plans.
Finding: Staff finds that the proposal is compatible with the goals and intent of the
city's adopted land -use, transportation, and other strategic plans. The
property in question was evaluated in 2004 with the adoption of the
Fayetteville Downtown Master Plan. While this plan is 20 years old, staff
recognizes that it is still the governing document for the area. The illustrative
plan for this site did not call for any form or redevelopment or infill, where it
did in other locations. There is no long-term plan for this site with this
proposal to become redeveloped, or to transfer to a different use in the
future, and approval of this conditional use permit would solidify its
development as such for the long-term.
BUDGET/STAFF IMPACT:
None
ATTACHMENTS:
• Unified Development Code
o §161.27 Main Street/Center
o §172.06 - Parking Lot Location Standards
• Location exhibit
• Fayetteville Downtown Master Plan (Excerpt)
• Applicant Request Letter
• Applicant Exhibit
• One Mile Map
• Close -Up Map
• Current Land Use Map
Planning Commission
April 8, 2024
CUP-2024-0011 (TRINITAS VENTURES)
Paqe 7 of 17
161.27 Main Street/Center
(A) Purpose. A greater range of uses is expected and encouraged in the Main Street/Center. The Center is more
spatially compact and is more likely to have some attached buildings than Downtown General or Neighborhood
Conservation. Multi -story buildings in the Center are well -suited to accommodate a mix of uses, such as
apartments or offices above shops. Lofts, live/work units, and buildings designed for changing uses over time
are appropriate for the Main Street/Center. The Center is within walking distance of the surrounding, primarily
residential areas. For the purposes of Chapter 96: Noise Control, the Main Street/Center district is a
commercial zone.
(B) Uses.
(1) Permitted uses.
Unit 1
City-wide uses by right
Unit 4
Cultural and recreational facilities
Unit 5
Government facilities
Unit 8
Single-family dwellings
Unit 9
Two-family dwellings
Unit 10
Three 3 and four 4 family dwellings
Unit 13
Eating places
Unit 14
Hotel, motel, and amusement facilities
Unit 16
Shopping oods
Unit 17
Transportation trades and services
Unit 19
Commercial recreation, small sites
Unit 24
Home occupations
Unit 25
Offices, studios, and related services
Unit 26
Multi -family dwellings
Unit 34
Liquor stores
Unit 40
Sidewalk Cafes
Unit 41
Accessory dwellings
Unit 44
Cluster Housing Development
Unit 45
Small scale production
Unit 46
Short-term rentals
Note: Any combination of above uses is permitted upon any lot within this zone. Conditional uses shall need
approval when combined with pre -approved uses.
(2) Conditional Uses.
Unit 2
City-wide uses by conditional use permit
Unit 3
Public protection and utility facilities
Unit 18
Gasoline service stations and drive-in/drive-through
restaurants
Unit 28
Center for collecting recyclable materials
Unit 29
Dance halls
Unit 35
Outdoor music establishments
Unit 36
Wireless communication facilities
Unit 42
Clean technologies
(C) Density. None.
(D) Bulk and Area Regulations.
(1) Lot Width Minimum.
Dwelling all unit types) 18 feet
(2) Lot Area Minimum. None.
Planning Commission
April 8, 2024
CUP-2024-0011 (TRINITAS VENTURES)
Paqe 8 of 17
(E) Setback Regulations.
Front
A build -to zone that is located
between the front property line
and a line 25 feet from the front
property line.
Side
None
Rear
5 feet
Rear, from center line of an alley
12 feet
(F) Minimum Buildable Street Frontage. 75% of lot width.
(G) Building Height Regulations.
Building Height Maximum 5 stories/7 stories*
* A building or a portion of a building that is located between 0 and 15 feet from the front property line or any
master street plan right-of-way line shall have a maximum height of five (5) stories. A building or a portion of a
building that is located greater than 15 feet from the master street plan right-of-way line shall have a maximum
height of seven (7) stories.
(Ord. No. 5028, 6-19-07; Ord. No. 5029, 6-19-07; Ord. No. 5042, 8-07-07; Ord. No. 5195, 11-6-08; Ord. No. 5312, 4-
20-10; Ord. No. 5339, 8-3-10; Ord. No. 5462, 12-6-11; Ord. No. 5592, 6-18-13; Ord. No. 5664, 2-18-14; Ord. No.
5735, 1-20-15; Ord. No. 5800 , §1(Exh. A), 10-6-15; Ord. No. 5921 , §1, 11-1-16; Ord. No. 5945 , §§5, 7-9, 1-17-17;
Ord. No. 6015, §1(Exh. A), 11-21-17; Ord. No. 6223, §1, 9-3-19; Ord. No. 6427, §§l(Exh. C), 2, 4-20-21)
Editor's note(s)—Ord. No. 6625 , §1 adopted December 6, 2022, "determines that Section 2 of Ordinance 6427
(Sunset Clause) be amended so that Ordinance 6427 and all amendments to Code Sections ordained or
enacted by Ordinance 6427 shall automatically sunset, be repealed and become void on December 31, 2023,
unless prior to that date the City Council amends this ordinance to repeal or further amend this sunset, repeal
and termination section."
172.06 - Parking Lot Location Standards
The location of all required and nonrequired parking lots with five (5) or more spaces shall meet the location
requirements below. All conditional uses hereunder shall be granted by the Planning Commission in accordance with
Chapter 163, governing applications of conditional uses; procedures.
(A) Permitted Locations by Right. Parking lots shall be located within the same zoning district as the use they serve.
Required parking lots for uses allowed by right within a zoning district are allowed as a use by right in the same
zoning district.
(B) Permitted Locations as a Conditional Use.
(1) Parking lots located within residential zones which serve uses in nonresidential zones may be allowed as a
conditional use by the Planning Commission.
(2) Parking lots for uses allowed as conditional uses within residential zones must also be approved as a
conditional use. A conditional use for a parking lot may be approved at the same time the use is approved
or may be approved separately if additional parking lots are developed later.
The Planning Commission shall make a finding based upon the size, scale, and location of these activities
that the proposed parking lot will not adversely affect adjacent residential uses or the residential character
of the neighborhood.
(C) Off -Site Locations. If off-street parking cannot be provided on the same lot as the principal use due to existing
buildings or the shape of the parcel, parking lots may be located on other property not more than 600 feet distant
from the principal use, subject to conditional use approval by the Planning Commission.
Planning Commission
April 8, 2024
CUP-2024-0011 (TRINITAS VENTURES)
Paqe 9 of 17
STAFF EXHIBIT
OFF -SITE PARKING LOT
LOCATION DIAGRAM
Orckson
30
r 366 3 , t 223 r
Proposed parking lot loft
— — i
<rem M
73.*
VIA
Z
cl_
0
r - jjT
�2-*
,f
'At 251
i
K.
r
ti'ad,ne
Baum
�t
Proposed housing
development
W Meadow 5t
7�
,
3 _
-
J
-�_ :.
rVA
i J Y
f
r W center
p,
_ •
Planning Commission
April 8, 2024
CUP-2024-0011 (TRINITAS VENTURES)
Paqe 10 of 17
Ir
_r
Ff J • e� I
LPL
411.
f f� .°
_ v&-, d=
lA STAFF EXHIBIT
2004 DOWNTOWN
MASTER PLAN
- ;i
11
• iMI�. �i
eP
i fti 1 Q 41
71
I
1.0 1
0.
4tQ i
!. Ta 1 Er
` I 1 ,. �. � �e �' �t��rr(i• ml3e(�II�I . •�1��ry�� __ - •���r;.�--'r -� -- •
ar FAYETTEVILLE DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN
ille, Arkansas �
-' City of Fayetteville, Arkansas Fayetteville, - M -,W.. w.e,
Idealized Buildout U.ss_Wu6 c7um+ces L
Planning Commission
April 8, 2024
CUP-2024-0011 (TRINITAS VENTURES)
Paqe 11 of 17
BLEW
Surveying I Engineering
Environmental
March 20, 2024
City of Fayetteville
125 W. Mountain Street
Fayetteville, Arkansas
SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit
Parcel 765-12932-001
To Whom It May Concern:
Trinitas Development, LLC is submitting a Conditional Use Permit for Parcel 765-12932-001 to develop said parcel as
a Parking Lot for use of the residents of the Trinitas Development properties. The attached site plan is conceptual
and may be modified based on site conditions.
Building size in square feet; existing and proposed
N/A, No buildings are proposed for this site.
Color elevations of all exterior sides of the structure
N/A, No buildings are proposed for this site.
Number of off-street parking spaces to be provided / number required.
This will be an offsite parking area to be used by residents of the Trinitas Development properties. The number of
parking spaces proposed will be a minimum of 194 spaces but no more than 221 spaces as required for the 612
Center Street Development. 194 spaces are needed to make up the difference for the principal use. The parking lot
will comply with the City of Fayetteville's Unified Development Code.
When request applies to a business or non-residential use: -Hours of operation -Number
of employees -Anticipated number of patrons, clients, children, customers, etc. (average
per day / peak hour)
Hours of Operation: 24 hours per day, 7 days per week.
Number of Employees: 0
Anticipated number of patrons: 194 vehicles
Outdoor lighting
Outdoor lighting meeting City of Fayetteville's Unified Development Code will be provided for the purposes of
security for the patrons of the parking lot.
Noise
Due to the nature of the project, the only expected noise would be generated from vehicular traffic on the site.
10 479-443-4506 O blewinc.com PIq0g$'Jftfhftowle Hills Pkwy
R,�qgg�,, JJk4nsas 72758
CUP-2024-0011 (TRINITAS VENTURES)
Page 12 of 17
Screening or buffering from adjacent properties.
The parking lot will be placed outside of the build to zone, so the requirements of 172.04(C) are not applicable. The
following will be provided: landscaping meeting the requirement of the municipal code; and a fence around the
property.
Trash and refuse service (with particular reference to visibilityfrom the street and adjacent
properties)
N/A, Trash and refuse service will not be provided at this site.
Ingress and egress to the property; traffic impacts
With 194 vehicles associated with this site, per the ITE Trip Generation Manual, we can expect 3.24 trips per Parking
Space on a Weekday. For this site, that would generate 629 vehicle trips per day with 50% Entering, and 50% Exiting.
Traffic would access N. University Avenue and N. Powerhouse Avenue (both being classified as an Urban Center
Road) having enough capacity for the added vehicle trips.
A response discussing the general compatibility of the proposed use with adjacent
properties and other property in the neighborhood.
To the north of the site is an electric substation controlled by Southwestern Electric Power Company. To the south
of the property is what appears to be a maintenance building for the University of Arkansas. To the west is Evergreen
Cemetery. To the east is the railroad and east of the railroad is mixed use building housing both residential uses and
commercial uses. This site was where the Powerhouse Restaurant was located (now permanently closed). The
proposed development will bring this site to current City Standards. The developer will be adding vegetation around
and within the Site that does not currently exist helping to add shade and reduce heat-island affect.
Sincerely,
orge Du Quesne
Blew & Associates, PA
BLEW 21 PAGE
Planning Commission
April 8, 2024
CUP-2024-0011 (TRINITAS VENTURES)
Page 13 of 17
9461-LSL (S9L)
a(acay.rsa�xcacr�v�v •awn
106L4 NI `auaSe3e7
cn�ava�o oay.uvr�io�ins oNa am
0001 oi710D-s Fyq [OZ
sesue�ry'afinauafz� iS ueunnd � ag any,(�rssanmR'S
40I2-4juci sslpyi,
xaNrv'1DS1a'IVi1JA'dDNOD * I
ueid a;rg remdaavoD
LON
79
22 � hex
Zaono a3a t� $=e
egaQ
�=�C ��Ei
`dn�O
9LL aie x"Pfl s`
A
6H
'x
b
QJU INN a aN ,
April 8, 2024
Paqe 14 of 17
CUP-2024-0011
One Mile View
Neighborhood Link
Institutional Master Plan
Regional Link - High Activity
Urban Center
- Unclassified
- Alley
- Residential Link
Shared -Use Paved Trail
Trail (Proposed)
Design Overlay District
Fayetteville City Limits
1 1 Planning Area
155 N. POWERHOUSE AVE
0 0.13 0.25 0.5 Miles
P-1 �fn
to
Z 1
1
Subject Property 1
1
Q 1
h
RMF-40 MSI
KING Jk BLVD
Planning Area`- Fayetteville City Limits ----
RSF-4
NORTH
i
I ^—
k=724%: UT
iu
0
w
J
zoning
= I-2 Ganarel Industrial
RESIDENT IALSINGLE-FAMILY
EXTRACTION
NSG
= E-1
RI-U
COMMERCIAL
RI-iz
Reside side .-.
NS-L
C-1
ResmanY&l erlcunurel
c-2
RSF-.5
C-3
RSF-1
FORM BASED DISTRICTS
RSF-2
� Downtown Gore
RSF<
Urban T.rug
RSF')
Maln Street Center
RSFA
Down— I--,RSF-15
Community Servi.a
RESIDENTIALMULTI-FAMILY
Neighborhood Sery
RMF.
Neighborhood Cone J.
RM112
PLANNED ZONING DISTRICTS
RMF-13
Commercial. Industrial. Residential
RMF-sa
INSTITUTIONAL
RM
P-1
INDUSTRIAL
I-1 Heavy CommarclalaM Light lndusidal
annlnn .nmmlcslnn
April 8, 2024
CUP-2024-0011 (TRINITAS VENTURES)
Page 15 of 17
CUP-2024-0011
Close Up View
P-1
DICKSON ST-
P.M r-
155 N. POWERHOUSE AVE
rDG
I
1
1`
=I� CENTE
Neighborhood Link
Institutional Master Plan
Urban Center
Unclassified
Alley
Residential Link
Planning Area
Fayetteville City Limits
Shared -Use Paved Trail
I Design Overlay District
W
a
co
W
W
z
M
DICKSON
Subject Property
_ Uak Ridge Trail
----- --
Feet
0 75 150 300 450
1.2,400
i
WSPRING ITST=
i W
>
� a
1=
� N
w
i 3
i
i
i
i
i
i
TI
o—
MEADOW,ST�
�1 0
I
1
1
1
1
1
Ak
1
1
'
N_
RMF-40
C-3
Main Street Center
■ Downtown General
600 P-1
April 8, 2024
CUP-2024-0011 (TRINITAS VENTURES)
Page 16 of 17
CUP-2024-0011 155 N. POWERHOUSE AVE
Current Land Use
NORTH
lilt
r
co
` Q ► Mixed Use t
�. DICKSON ST
a ' DICKSON ST '
! Irl
OFF fE ....@ .r ._ ..
� 2
k
r /
, Subject PropertyAll Mgt
r
LU s .V
i t i+ PYfr Q t Y
Evergreen Cemetery t
Mixed Use .SPRING ST
and University of Arkansas - i
O
' O
i s co
r y
Mixed ResidentialLU
Z�a W �_ al _ 9
Q >
I� f' � Ff-fE ...5� � 4V'.• Cz R1
Neighborhood Link FEMA Flood Hazard Data
r_ Institutional Master Plan
Urban CenterIk 100-Year Flootlplain
Unclassified
Alley Feet Floodway
Residential Link
Planning Area 0 112.5 225 450 675 900
Fayetteville City Limits : 3'l+U00
_ _ I Design Overlay District
annlnq ommisslon
April 8, 2024
CUP-2024-0011 (TRINITAS VENTURES)
Paqe 17 of 17
Compiled public comment
CUP-2024-0011
From: Thomas Brown <tbrownii@icloud.com>
Sent: Sunday, April 7, 2024 12:59 PM
To: Garlock, Jimm <jimm.garlock@fayetteville-ar.gov>; Brink, Andrew <andrew.brink@fayetteville-
ar.gov>; Payne, Brad <brad.payne@fayetteville-ar.gov>; Gulley, Fred <fred.gulley@fayetteville-ar.gov>;
McGetrick, Mary <mary.mcgetrick@fayetteville-ar.gov>; Madden, Mary <mary.madden @fayetteville-
ar.gov>; Cabe, Matthew <matthew.cabe@fayetteville-ar.gov>; Castin, Nick <nick.castin@fayetteville-
ar.gov>; Werner, Nick <nick.werner@fayetteville-ar.gov>
Cc: CityClerk <cityclerk@fayetteville-ar.gov>; Masters, Jessica <jmasters@fayetteville-ar.gov>
Subject: CUP-2024-0011 The Development of the Powerhouse Property as an Offsite Parking Lot
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the City of Fayetteville. Do not click links or open attachments
unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Planning Commissioners,
I took note of the referenced CUP case regarding the development of an Offsite Parking Lot
on the Powerhouse property. As a resident of our Downtown Tier 1 Center and a supporter
of the development of the Cultural Arts Corridor and Dickson Street Entertainment District,
I feel compelled to voice my concern about the incompatibility of an expansive single use
parking lot located along the border of the Cultural Arts Corridor. The Corridor having as
one of its design objectives, the mixed -use (residential and commercial) development
along its edges. I am especially concerned about the potential loss of several important
opportunities that a creative mixed -use development on this historic Powerhouse property
could mean for the City, including:
• The opportunity to continue to demonstrate the power of the Cultural Arts Corridor
to attract successful mixed -use development around its edges. (This was one of the
Corridor Project's major investment objectives.)
• The opportunity to explore the potential application of a parking incentive with the
developer (Offering a parking variance for their adjacent Student Housing Project for
their willingness to support the Historic Preservation of the Powerhouse Building
and development of the balance of the property as a creative mixed -use
Project.) and test the concept of eliminating Residential Parking Minimums in a Tier
1 Center.
• The opportunity to restore and preserve the Powerhouse Building through its
continued adaptive use as a commercial establishment. (Hopefullya restaurant
which could become an historical culinary amenity for the Public Plaza Area of the
Cultural Arts Corridor.
• The opportunity to explore a partnership with the University as a potential occupant
in the ground level portion of a vertically oriented mixed -use high density residential
building complex.(This partnership could function as studio/instructional space that
Compiled public comment
CUP-2024-0011
strengthens the art's orientation of the Corridor and potentially present an
opportunity to justify the application of a parking reduction incentives by the City
through the implementation of a shared parking concept with the University.). The
mixed -use building complex could be located along University Avenue and the
southern boundary of the property.
• The opportunity to develop a multimodal public plaza space between the Historic
Powerhouse Building and an adjacent Mixed -use Building Complex that would be
designed to integrate and connect Powerhouse Drive to Greg Avenue and Spring
Street (Pedestrian only).
• The opportunity to explore the application of the City's affordable housing
objectives as a component of a mixed -use high density residential building complex
Located along University Avenue and the southern boundary of the property.
I believe the potential to support the successful realization of these opportunities deserves
the involvement of the City to include efforts in active coordination and support through
the application of incentives (parking, height, lot coverage, density, setbacks, fees, in kind
construction equity, etc.).
It is my hope that the Planning Commision and the City Management Team will play an
active role in helping the Developer and Property Owner fully understand and explore the
opportunities associated with the mixed -use development of the historic Powerhouse
property. This action can become an important and meaningful effort to continue the
implementation of the Cultural Arts Corridor Plan and test the concept of eliminating
Residential Parking Minimums in a Tier 1 Center.
Thomas Brown
P. S. As a member of the Planning Commission that recommended the elimination of
Commercial Parking Minimums, I feel it is important to let you know that during our
discussions regarding the concepts, there was a general understanding that eliminating
parking minimums was not eliminating all parking. It was making the decision, regarding
the number of needed parking spaces, a business decision and responsibility of the
developer.
From: Masters, Jessica
Sent: Wednesday, April 3, 2024 11:08 AM
To: tltlott@gmail.com
Cc: Pennington, Blake <bpennington@fayetteville-ar.gov>
Subject: RE: Tech Plat - CUP 2024-0011 115 N. Powerhouse
Compiled public comment
CUP-2024-0011
Tom,
Thank you for the question, and thank you for the patience in my response. The reason why this
item is being heard and considered by the Planning Commission is under 172.06(C).
"(C)Off-Site Locations. If off-street parking cannot be provided on the same lot as the principal
use due to existing buildings or the shape of the parcel, parking lots may be located on other
property not more than 600 feet distant from the principal use, subject to conditional use
approval by the Planning Commission."
As far as pedestrian access, you are correct that pedestrians will likely use the existing sidewalk
along N. University and connect to the site to W. Center. Further, there is also an existing
pedestrian crossing on the railroad tracks that leads into the Powerhouse site and onto the
Razorback Greenway. The applicant does not intend to make any changes to that existing path, and
would likely connect to that for an additional pedestrian route. I've highlighted it below for
reference.
Staff will make sure your comment is included in staff's report on the item. If you have any
additional comments, please let me know. We will be publishing our final reports on Thursday
afternoon, ahead of the 4:30 PM agenda session. Further, any written comment forwarded along to
staff after the published report will be forwarded to the Commission directly.
Thank you,
Jessie
Jessie Masters, AICP
Development Review Manager
City of Fayetteville, Arkansas
(479) 575-8239
www.fayettevi lle-a r. gov
Website I Facebook I Twitter I Instagram I YouTube
Aft CITY of
FAYETTEVILLE
ARKANSAS
Compiled public comment
CUP-2024-0011
From: tltlottLc�gmail.com <tltlott@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, March 11, 2024 8:03 PM
To: Masters, Jessica <*masters@fayetteville-ar.gov>
Cc: Pennington, Blake <bpennington@fayetteville-ar.gov>
Subject: Tech Plat - CUP 2024-0011 115 N. Powerhouse
CAUTICI, This email originated from outside of the City of Fayetteville. Do not click links or open attachments
unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Jessie — this will be discussed on Wednesday. I have a
question/observation. To me, this proposed off -site parking lot is far better
than previous proposals. But does it meet the City Code requirements?
City Code 172.06(A) does not seem to apply since parking does not seem
to be covered under City Code 161.27(B)(1).
City Code 172.06(C) permits it. But City Code 172.06(B) which governs
CUPs seems to apply only to nonresidential zones. All references in it are
to residential zones.
Or does City Code 161.27(B)(2) provide for the request as a Unit 2 use?
In addition, the proposed parking lot has no connection to the property at
612 Center Street. No access would be permitted across the railroad
tracks. The two properties do not touch each other. So, the only access to
115 N Powerhouse will be for users of the parking lot to use the sidewalks
to and from N. University Avenue and 612 Center Street. That would be
permitted. But the users may attempt to cross the railroad tracks onto
adjacent property and then to 612 Center Street. Is that a valid
consideration in reviewing a CUP by Tech Plat or the Planning
Commission? Could a fence along the East and South sides of 115 N
Powerhouse be required?
Thanks.
Tom Overbey
T1TLOTT(@_gmail.com
479-871-2180
Received By: Jonathan Curth 05/06/24 4:44PM
April29, 2024
Dear Council:
As owners of the property that has housed the Powerhouse restaurant, my family wanted to provide
some input regarding the appeal that will be presented to you on May 7, 2024 by Trinitas Ventures.
Trinitas, with our approval, applied for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP-2024-0011) to use the
Powerhouse property as a remote parking for residents of their Center Street housing project. We
are asking that you grant the appeal and allow the conditional use.
It is our understanding there are two primary issues of concern regarding the requested use. First,
the plan includes demolition of the building that has long served as the Powerhouse restaurant.
We appreciate and respect that many Fayetteville residents have fond memories of the
Powerhouse. Our family feels the same way. When my family acquired the building more than 30
years ago, it was a rundown, 100-year-old warehouse in need of repair. We put a lot of time, effort,
and energy into keeping it up and running. The decades that our family has tended to the
Powerhouse and the fact that it has been a beloved part of the community means a great deal to us.
However, the Powerhouse is now closed, and despite having marketed the property for roughly a
year, no viable interest has resulted in a tenant willing to continue operating the property as a
restaurant or for other commercial use. Additionally, the utility easements that crisscross
throughout the property create further challenges in finding productive ways to utilize the property.
The agreement we have with Trinitas is one that fits with our goals, and we would like to see it move
forward. While we respect and appreciate that many Fayetteville residents share our
disappointment in seeing the Powerhouse building removed, we hope you will also respect our right
to determine the ongoing use of our property.
Second, we have been informed that the length of our lease with Trinitas raises concern. The
current lease, for use as surface parking, is in support of Trinitas' plan to add much needed housing
in Fayetteville. Both parties to this lease expect, over the term of the lease, that Fayetteville's
municipal code will likely change. We are willing, if use as a parking lot is no longer necessary,
required, or desirable, to consider alternative development. We are not tied to a requirement that it
must be surface parking for the term of the lease if both parties agree otherwise.
The property is currently in use as a parking lot, though one that is not being controlled. We believe
the improvements that Trinitas has planned will provide for aesthetic improvements, controlled
parking, and the overall project will help address the critical need for housing in Fayetteville. We
ask that you grant the appeal requested.
Craig Underwood