Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOrdinance 4431 ORDINANCE NO, 4431 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE XV: UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE OF THE CODE OF FAYETTEVILLE, TO PROVIDE A DATE CERTAIN FOR THE EXPIRATION OF APPROVED DEVELOPMENT PLANS AND PERMITS BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS : Section 1 . That Chapter 166, Development of the Unified Development Ordinance, Code of Fayetteville, is hereby amended by inserting the following: §166.18 EXPIRATION OF PREVIOUSLY APPROVED PLANS AND PERMITS. All approved large scale developments, planned unit developments, conditional uses, and lot splits approved prior to July 1 , 2002, which have not received all required permits to begin construction, have not begun construction, have not been established, or in the case of lot splits, have not been recorded within twelve (12) months from the date of the passage of this ordinance, shall be required to comply with all current ordinances. The City Planner is authorized to approve minor plat modifications and/or design changes necessitated by compliance with this section. §166.19 EXPIRATION OF APPROVED PLANS AND PERMITS. A. Applicability. The provisions of this section apply to all of the following plans and permits: 1 . Preliminary plats; 2. Planned unit developments; 3. Conditional uses; 4. Large-scale developments; 5. Lot splits; 6. Physical alteration of land permits; 7. Stone water, drainage, and erosion control permits; 8. Tree preservation plans; 9. Sign permits; and, 10. Floodplain development permits. B. One-year Time Limit. 1 . All of the above-enumerated plans and permits are conditioned upon the applicant accomplishing the following tasks within one (1 ) year from the date of approval: a. For any renovation or new construction, receive a Building Permit; and/or, b. For a lot split, record a deed or survey at the Washington County Circuit Clerk's Office, stamped for recordation by the City Planning Division; and/or, c. Receive a Certificate of Zoning Compliance; and/or, d. Receive all permits and approvals required by City, State, and Federal regulations to start construction of the development or project. 2. Prior to the expiration of the one (1 ) year time limit, an applicant may request the Planning Commission to extend the period to accomplish the tasks by up to one ( 1 ) additional year. The applicant has the burden to show good cause why the tasks could not reasonably be completed within the normal one ( 1 ) year limit. 3. If the required task(s) are not completed within one ( 1 ) year from the date of approval or during an allowed extension period, all of the above-enumerated plans and permits shall be rendered null and void. C. Three-year Time Limit. 1 . All of the above-enumerated plans and permits are also conditioned upon the applicant completing the project and receiving final inspection approval and/or a final Certificate of Occupancy permit within three (3) years from the date of issuance of a Building Permit. 2. Prior to the expiration of the three (3) year time limit, an applicant may request the Planning Commission to extend the three (3) year period to complete the project by up to two (2) additional years. The applicant has the burden to show good cause why the project could not reasonably be completed within the three (3) year time limit. 3. If the applicant fails to meet the requirements of subsection C.1 . within three (3) years from the date of issuance of a Building Permit or during an allowed extension period, all of the above-enumerated plans and permits shall be rendered null and void. Section 2. That §163.02, Authority; Conditions; Procedures, of the Unified Development Ordinance, Code of Fayetteville, is hereby amended by inserting the following: E. Expiration if Discontinued. All existing conditional uses that are discontinued for more than one ( 1 ) year shall be rendered null and void, and shall not be reestablished without Planning Commission approval of a new conditional use permit. PASSED and APPROVED this 5`s day of November, 2002. APPROVED: By: 4 ILAzee� DAN COODY, Mayor ATTEST: By: lire ATHER WOODRUF Xity Clerk s • fAYEI�t 1 ,, NAME OF FILE: Ordinance No. 4431 CROSS REFERENCE: Item # Date Document 1 11 /05/02 Ordinance # 4431 2 09/24/02 Staff Review Form 3 10/23/02 Memo from Heather Woodruff, City Clerk to Tim Conklin, Planning NOTES : • STAFF REVIEW FORM _X_ AGENDA REQUEST CONTRACT REVIEW GRANT REVIEW FOR: COUNCIL MEETING OF October 15, 2002 MAYOR'S APPROVAL FROM: Tim Conklin Planning Division Name Division Department _ ACTION REQUIRED An Ordinance Amending Title XV: Unified Development Ordinance of the Code of Fayetteville, to Provide a Date Certain For the Expiration of Approved Development Plans and Permits COST TO CITY: Cost of this Request Category/Project Budget Category/Project Name Account Number Funds Used to Date Program Name Project Number Remaining Balance Fund BUDGET REVIEW: Budgeted Item Budget Adjustment Attached Budget Coordinator Administrative services Director CONTRACT(GRANT(LEASE REVIEW: GRANTING AGENCY: Acco rtin Manag Date Internal Auditor Date r^ g - ZH - a -s CityRkt ey I Date ADA Coordinator Date Purchasing Officer Date STAFF RECOMMENDATION: v2 _ CROSS REFERENCE Division Head Date New Item: Yes No Department Director Date Previous Ordinance/Resolution No.: Ie ative ces Di for Dat Mayor Date ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE XV: UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE OF THE CODE OF FAYETTEVILLE, TO PROVIDE A DATE CERTAIN FOR THE EXPIRATION OF APPROVED DEVELOPMENT PLANS AND PERMITS BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OViTCIT ` OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS: Section 1 . That Chapter 166, Develo ment ofceruinifi d Development Ordinance, Code of Fayetteville, is hereby amen6e by inserting heofoll wing: I f §166.18 EXPIRATION O&PRE'VIOUSLY PP OVED P ANS AND PE S. All approved large scale-dee aelopme , ts, planne unit evelopments, conditions ses, and lot splits approved prior toJuly 1�, 02, while have n t recerveb all required permits to begin construction, have not beg construcii , halve nt been established, or in the case of lot ppiils have` not beeh�reec1 1 \ rded within twelve) ,)7 m nths from the date of the passage of this ordinance, hall be requireiJ to comply with all current ordinances. The City, Panner is authorized to approve miino plat modifications and/or design changes necessitated by coli nce 'th tliiss Win. §166.1 EXP TIONaO APPROVED PLANS AND PERMITS. A. AD fica bility. The provisions of this section apply to all of the following plans andypermrts: 1 . Preliminary plats; 2. Planned unit developments; 3. Conditional uses; 4. Large-scale developments; 5. Lot splits; 6. Physical alteration of land permits; 7. Storm water, drainage, and erosion control permits; 8. Tree preservation plans; 9. Sign permits; and, 10. Floodplain development permits. B. One-year Time Limit. 1 . All of the above-enumerated plans and permits are conditioned upon the applicant accomplishing the following tasks within one ( 1 ) year from the date of approval: ' a. For any renovation or new construction, receive a Building Permrtl ; and/or, b. For a lot split, record a deed or survey at theoWringt(Jnounty C ircuit Clerk's Office, stamped for recordation by the City Planning Divas and/or, c. Receive a Certificate of ZoningC m Bance; and/ , d. Receive all �P er'rmmits d appy 5 alss re uired by ity, State, an Federal regulations to start conArrulion of'�tfflle development or; oject. i rPrni or to the exp�ticn of thone (I ye ime limit, an applicant may requestnning Co i�sio to exten the per to accomplish the tasks by up to one (1 ) additional year. ITHe applicant has burden to show good cause why the tasks could not reasonably be +orppleted\1;0hin the normal one ( 1 ) year limit. 3. IVe regui lretasks) are not completed within one ( 1 ) year from the date of approval orr.�daring an allowed extension period, all of the above-enumerated plans and permits-shy 5e rendered null and void. C. Three-year Time Limit. 1 . All of the above-enumerated plans and permits are also conditioned upon the applicant completing the project and receiving final inspection approval and a final Certificate of Occupancy permit within three (3) years from the date of issuance of a Building Permit. 2. Prior to the expiration of the three (3) year time limit, an applicant may request the Planning Commission to extend the three (3) year period to complete the project by up to two (2) additional years. The applicant has the burden to show good cause why the project could not reasonably be completed within the three (3) year time limit. 3. If the applicant fails to meet the requirements of subsection C.1 . within three (3) years from the date of issuance of a Building Permit or during an allowed extension period, all of the above-enumerated plans and permits shall be rendered null and void. Section 2. That §163.02, Authority; Conditions; Procedures, of the Unified Development Ordinance, Code of Fayetteville, is hereby amended by inserting the following: E. Expiration if Discontinued. All existing conditional uses that are discontinued for more than one ( 1 ) year shall be rendered null and void, and shall not be reestablig � d without Planning Commission approval of a new conditional use permit. I PASSED and APPROVED this day of / 2002 . APPROVED- By: PPROVED:By Al OODY, Iv�ayor ATTEST \ By:. , 1 OX - H THER W ; ODR FF, Gity Clerk I i FAYETTEVILLE THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS 113 W. Mountain St. Fayetteville, AR 72701 Telephone: (479) 575-8264 PLANNING DIVISION CORRESPONDENCE TO: Mayor Dan Coody THROUGH: Hugh Earnest, Urban Development Director FROM : Tim Conklin, City Planner DATE: September 27, 2002 ADM 02-29.00: Administrative Item (Large Scale Development Ordinance/Expiration) To amend the Unified Development Ordinance to require all approved undeveloped or discontinued large scale developments, planned unit developments, conditional uses, and lot splits that have not received all required permits to begin construction, have not begun construction, have not been established, or recorded to meet all current Unified Development Ordinances. To amend the Unified Development Ordinance to set time limits for application/plan/project approvals by staff, Planning Commission, and City Council. BACKGROUND Staff has brought forward these amendments to the UDO in order to address the issues of `old" large scale developments and other approvals and permits that do not meet current ordinances and standards, developments that are occurring on "paper subdivisions" without public hearings or notice, and have no existing time limits for current and future approvals. The staff and the Planning Commission has dealt with all of these issues over the past few years and the public and elected officials have expressed concern regarding several developments, approvals, and permits that do not meet current ordinances or ever expire. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the proposed amendments. H:I USERSICOAfAfONIPLANN/NGIREPOR7SIPCREPOR7S2002LSEPTEMBERI9-9U SDAND EXP/RAT/ONOF PERMJ7S ADM02-29.DOC Planning Commission• • • • September 9, 2002 Page 25 ADM 02-29.00: Administrative Item (Large Scale Development Ordinance/Expiration) To amend the Unified Development Ordinance to require the development of any lot(s) in a previously approved and recorded subdivision, where required infrastructure such as sewer, sidewalks, streets, street lighting, or water is lacking or incomplete, .or in the judgment of the City Planner is otherwise inadequate to serve the proposed development, shall be processed in accordance with the requirements for a large-scale development, regardless of the size or number of lots. Hoffman: Our next item on the agenda is ADM 02-29.00, which is another administrative item for Large Scale Development Ordinances and Expiration dates. This item is to amend the Unified Development Ordinance to require the development of any lots in a previously approved and recorded subdivision where required infrastructure such as sewer, sidewalks, streets, street lighting or water is lacking or incomplete or in the judgment of the City Planner is otherwise inadequate to serve the proposed development shall be processed in accordance with the requirements for a Large Scale Development regardless of the size or the number of lots. Secondly, to amend the Unified Development Ordinance to require all approved undeveloped or discontinued Large Scale Developments, Planned Unit Developments, Conditional Uses and Lot Splits that have not received all required permits to begin construction, have not begun construction, have not been established or recorded to meet all current Unified Development Ordinances. Then thirdly, to amend the Unified Development Ordinance to set time limits for application, plan, and project approvals by staff, Planning Commission and the City Council. Conklin: Madam Chair and members of the Commission I would like for you to review this ordinance this evening however I would like to bring back to the next Commission a final version of the ordinance and there may be some people here tonight that would like to also offer comments but I think it would be valuable for staff to hear- from the Commissioners if we need to make any changes. The City Attorney and I can get together and we can produce a final draft. Basically we are trying to bring forward an ordinance that would amend our Large Scale Development requirement and place that Large Scale Development requirement for development that is occurring within or adjacent to what is called like a paper subdivision where the infrastructure has not been placed or installed. Also, within this ordinance we are trying to establish an expiration of a previously approved plan or permit. We currently have Large Scale Developments that have been approved by the Commission in the early 90' s, maybe even in the 80's that are existing that currently do not meet our current standards for tree preservation, commercial design standards, parking lot landscaping. This ordinance revision would require that they either build their development within 90 days from the date of passage of the ordinance or they be required to meet all current city ordinances. I have been fairly successful in getting these developments to meet our current ordinances, especially with commercial design standards. There were some metal buildings that were Planning Commission• • • • September 9, 2002 Page 26 approved a while back prior to our commercial design standards. You have some very prominent visible intersections in Fayetteville. However, it would be helpful to have this ordinance in place so I don't have to sit there and ask them to voluntarily comply with these standards. We have a commercial development on Hwy. 265 and Huntsville Road, right behind the gas station, a commercial shopping center that currently doesn't have landscaping within the parking lot. Also the back of the building will be visible from the back of the street. I am working with them to try to get into compliance as much as possible. There was no expiration. The commercial development at Rupple Road and Wedington Drive that went in, several of you asked about when we approved this. Well it was approved many, many years ago prior to probably anyone on this Commission. Once again, staff had to work with them to at least bring it up as close to compliance with our current standards. That is the second part of the ordinance. The third part is to make sure any future approvals for the different things that the City of Fayetteville approves has an expiration date on them and we have a one year time limit and we have conditions for the projects once they are approved to begin construction or renovation, receive their Certificate of Zoning Compliance, record the lot split deed and file it over at the County, receive all the permits from the city, state, and federal regulations. Basically once we approve a project we want to make sure that that project is going to be built and it is going to be built within a time frame. After the permits are issued I also proposed a three year time limit. If you get your permit and you are under construction that within three years you need to complete construction. I have some projects out there that are many, many years old that have not completed construction. Certain things they have not complied with, it is more of an enforcement issue. I want it in writing in the Unified Development Ordinance to state that all your approvals will be voided if you don't start your project and complete it. I am not going to name the project but just a couple of Planning Commission meetings ago after Planning Commission approved the project I met with the developer and at that time we talked about meeting the conditions of approval by the Planning Commission. They talked about years, taking years to meet these conditions. That concerned me when we talked about screening, commercial design standards, landscaping. They were talking about doing this piece meal. I think it is very hard to keep up with as staff and we just need to clarify that in the ordinance. Those are the three major changes that are proposed with regard to Large Scale Development. Requiring that all previously approved development after 90 days will meet all of our current ordinances and setting up a three year time limit. Thank you. Williams: Madam Chairman, I just wanted to tell you that one reason we did not want you to go forward tonight is .that there were some suggestions made at your Thursday evening agenda session. We have not been able to get all that down in black and white. We are pretty close and will be getting you what we believe are more finished ordinances so don't waste too much time studying the ones you have in your packet now because we are going to incorporate the Planning Commission• . • 6 September 9, 2002 Page 27 suggestions that the Planning Commission made at it's agenda session and we will be getting you new clean copies of ordinances which I think are slightly improved from your suggestions. Hoffman: Thank you Mr. Williams. Is there any member of the public that would like to address us on these proposed ordinances? Seeing no one, I will bring it back to the Commission for discussion and motions. Bunch: Just a quick question for Kit and for Tim also I guess, in those revisions that you are contemplating do they include some system of extensions and also to accommodate phased jobs? Williams: I have drafted some language concerning the extensions. I haven't drafted anything specifically about phased jobs. Both of the extensions would have to come before the Planning Commission and the developer would have to show good cause why they could not complete the tasks within the time period originally allowed. It would be their burden and they would have to appear before the Planning Commission prior to their time period expiring and then the Planning Commission would have the power to grant an additional year in the first one and I tentatively have put an additional two years on the completion of the project. If you think that we need something else in a phased project then I welcome any sort of language that might incorporate that idea. I have not included anything in relation to a phased project. Hoffman: Thank you Mr. Williams. Shackelford: I was also someone who brought up a couple of points in the agenda session that I want to go ahead and get on record. The points that I made Thursday were that as this proposed ordinance is currently written that regardless of the size of the development or the lot in which this development is on something as minor as an incomplete sidewalk or a missing street light could force a project through the Large Scale Development process. My concern was that you have a small business owner, and we have seen several of these in my time on the Planning Commission, a very small building on a lot that he or she may own that this could be very cost prohibitive for that developer to the tune of 15, 20 or 30% additional cost just for the process to go through Large Scale Development. I would ask that the City Planner be given a broader discretion in the enforcement of this ordinance or some other situation which we can address. Williams: I have some proposed language and I am going to get with our City Planner that should take care of that situation I hope. Tim has been understaffed and with the lateness of the suggestions we just weren't able to get everything together for tonight. Shackelford: I understand, I just wanted to get that on public record.