HomeMy WebLinkAboutOrdinance 45480
]Lr
ORDINANCE NO.4548
AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING A RESIDENTIAL
PLANNED ZONING DISTRICT TITLED (R-PZD 04-02.00)
LOCATED SOUTH OF WEDINGTON DRIVE AT THE
CORNER OF N. 461u AND PERSIMMON STREET
CONTAINING 38.48 ACRES MORE OR LESS;
AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP OF THE
CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE; AND ADOPTING THE
ASSOCIATED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN
AS APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION
AND AMENDED BY THE CITY COUNCIL
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS:
Section 1: That the zone classification of the following described property is
hereby changed as follows:
From
RA
Residential
Agriculture to R-PZD 04-02.00 as shown in Exhibit "A" attached
hereto
and
made a part
hereof.
Section 2. That the change in zoning classification is based upon the approved
master development plan and development standards as shown on the plat and approved by
the Planning Commission on February 9, 2004 except that Putting Green Drive shall be
extended to the east as a local street..
Section 3. That this ordinance shall take affect and be in full force at such time as
all of the requirements of the development plan have been met.
Section 4. That the official zoning map of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, is
hereby amended to reflect the zoning change provided in Section 1 above.
F AY E rrE:` PASSED and APPROVED this the 161h day of March, 2004.
w Iw�'S
v;N�
6rCA Cam'•-
APPROVE
By: 4
DAN COODY, Mayor
r—k
k IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
Doc ID: 007175720002 UPS: REL
Recorded:
$11.00/2004 Pace Ito 2238:39 PH
Washlnaton Countv. AR
Bette Stamps Circuit Clerk
Flle200440014669
EXHIBIT "A"
R-PZD 04-02.00
PART OF THE SEI/4 OF THE S W 1/4 OF SECTION 12, T 16N, R31 W IN WASHINGTON
COUNTY, ARKANSAS AND BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS
FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE NE CORNER OF SAID SETA, SWI/4 THENCE
S02037'23"W 1.63 FEET TO THE P.O.B., THENCE S02037'2311W 1320.10 FEET,
THENCE N87002' 10"W 1266.36 FEET, THENCE N0201613211E 1318.64 FEET, THENCE
S87006'18"E 1274.35 FEET TO THE P.O.B.; CONTAINING 38.48 ACRES MORE OR
LESS SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS AND RIGHT OF WAY OF RECORD.
County, AR
Washington ent was filed on
1041191certify is 2004'01W39 PM
al Estate
and recorded in g800014669
File Number 20
Bette Stamps Circuit Clerk
by
�i
NAME OF FILE: Ordinance No. 4548
wlEx. A
CROSS REFERENCE:
Item # Date Document
1
02/12/04
memo to mayor & city council
2
03/03/04
email to Sondra Smith
3
draft ordinance
4
02/03/04
memo to Planning Commission
5
12/03/04
memo to Jorgensen & Associates
6
01/20/04
copy of letter to Dawn Warrick
7
12/04/03
copy of letter to Planning Division
6
12/03/03
copy of Bill of Assurance ...
9
copy of Close Up View
10
copy of One Mile View
11
copy of Future Land Use
12
02/25/04
copy of memo to Suzanne Morgan
13
copy of Planning Commission minutes
14
02/19/04
Staff Review Form
15
03/22/04
memo to Dawn Warrick
16
03/24/04
Affidavit of Publication
17
two maps
NOTES:
04/19/04 file with the Washington County Circuit Clerk
City Council Meeting of March 02, 2004T
Agenda Item Number
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO ��Z/��yzl � /
To: Mayor and City Council
Thru: Tim Conklin, Community Planning and Engineering Services Director4e`lL
From: Dawn T. Warrick, AICP, Zoning and Development Administrators J
Date: February 12, 2004 W^
Subject: Residential Planned Zoning District for Cross Keys (R-PZD 04-02.00)
RECOMMENDATION
Planning Staff recommends approval of an ordinance creating the Residential Planned
Zoning District (R-PZD) for Cross Keys. This action will establish a unique zoning
district for development of a 38.84 acre tract located south of Wedington Drive at the
comer of N. 461h and Persimmon Street. The request is to rezone the subject property to a
Residential Planned Zoning District with a total of 108 single family lots.
BACKGROUND
The applicant requests a rezoning and preliminary plat approval for a residential
development within an R-PZD zoning district. The proposed use is single-family
residential, with 108 lots proposed. A detention pond is to be located off -site to the
south, on property also owned by the applicant. Density for the entire site is 2.81 units
per acre. The development is currently zoned R-A, Residential Agricultural. The site is
located on the northeast corner of the intersection of Persimmon Street and 46'h Street.
The applicant is proposing a fence along Persimmon Street and 46'h Street. Pedestrian
access to vacant tract to the east was approved by the Planning Commission. Vehicular
access to the project is provided from both 46'h Street and Persimmon Street. The
development has proposed covenants to ensure that all structures access interior streets
and homes will contain a minimum of 2000 square feet. The Parks and Recreation
Advisory Board and Planning Commission accepted money in lieu of a land dedication
due to the proximity of the Boys and Girls Club to this site.
DISCUSSION
The Planning Commission voted 9-0-0 in favor of this request on Monday, February 09,
2004. Approval of a planned zoning district requires City Council approval as it includes
zoning (land use) as well as development approval (preliminary plat). Street
improvements shall include the construction of Persimmon Street along the south
property line and allowable uses include use units 1, 8, and 24. Planning Commission
amended the preliminary plat to eliminate the street connection to the east and provide a
50' non -motorized connection.
BUDGET IMPACT
None.
From: Renee Thomas
To: Smith, Sondra; Williams, Kit
Date: 3/3/04 8:07AM
Subject: Cross Keys Ordinance
Kit and Sondra,
The reading for Cross Keys R-PZD last night was read from C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial to R-PZD.
This is incorrect, it should state from R-A, Residential Agricultural to R-PZD. I have attached a new copy
of the ordinance reading correctly. Please let me know if I need to do anything else.
Thanks,
Renee
Renee Thomas
City of Fayetteville
Planning Division
113 W. Mountain
Fayetteville, AR 72701
(479) 575-8268
rthomas@ci.fayetteville.ar.us
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING A RESIDENTIAL
PLANNED ZONING DISTRICT TITLED (R-PZD 04-02.00)
LOCATED SOUTH OF WEDINGTON DRIVE AT THE
CORNER OF N. 46T" AND PERSIMMON STREET
CONTAINING 38.48 ACRES MORE OR LESS;
AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP OF THE
CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE; AND ADOPTING THE
ASSOCIATED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN
AS APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS:
Section 1: That the zone classification of the following described property is
hereby changed as follows:
From RA Residential Agriculture to R-PZD 04-02.00 as shown in Exhibit "A" attached
hereto and made a part hereof.
Section 2. That the change in zoning classification is based upon the approved
master development plan and development standards as shown on the plat and approved by
the Planning Commission on February 9, 2004 except that Putting Green Drive shall be
extended to the east as a local street..
Section 3. That this ordinance shall take affect and be in full force at such time as
all of the requirements of the development plan have been met.
Section 4. That the official zoning map of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, is
hereby amended to reflect the zoning change provided in Section 1 above.
PASSED and APPROVED this the 16`s day of March, 2004.
APPROVED:
By: DRAFT
DAN COODY, Mayor
By:
SONDRA SMITH, City Clerk
171
EXHIBIT "A"
R-PZD 04-02.00
PART OF THE SEl/4 OF THE SW 1 /4 OF SECTION 12, T16N, R31 W IN WASHINGTON
COUNTY, ARKANSAS AND BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS
FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE NE CORNER OF SAID SETA, SWIA THENCE
S02037'23"W 1.63 FEET TO THE P.O.B., THENCE S02037'23"W 1320.10 FEET,
THENCE N87002' 10"W 1266.36 FEET, THENCE N0201603211E 1318.64 FEET, THENCE
S87006'18"E 1274.35 FEET TO THE P.O.B.; CONTAINING 38.48 ACRES MORE OR
LESS SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS AND RIGHT OF WAY OF RECORD.
R-PZD 04-02.00
Page r
FAYETTEVILLE
THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS
113 W. Mountain St.
Fayetteville, AR 72701
PLANNING DIVISION CORRESPONDENCE Telephone: 501-575-8264
TO: Fayetteville Planning Commission
FROM: Suzanne Morgan, Associate Planner
Matt Casey, Staff Engineer
THRU: Dawn Warrick, A.I.C.P., Zoning & Development Administrator
DATE: February 3, 2004
PC Meeting of February 09, 2004
R-PZD 04-02.00: Residential Planned Zoning District (Cross Keys, pp 438) was submitted
by Chris Brackett of Jorgensen & Associates on behalf of Charles Sloan and Sloan Properties for
property located south of Wedington Drive at the comer of N. 46th and Persimmon Street. The
property is currently zoned R-A, Residential Agricultural and contains approximately 38.48
acres. The request is to rezone the subject property to a Residential Planned Zoning District and
to approve the development of a residential subdivision with 108 single family dwellings
proposed. Planner: Suzanne Morgan
Findings: The applicant requests a rezoning and preliminary plat approval for a residential
development within an R-PZD zoning district. The proposed use is single-family residential,
with 108 lots proposed. A detention pond is to be located off -site to the south, on property also
owned by the applicant. Density for the entire site is 2.81 units per acre. The development is
currently zoned R-A, Residential Agricultural. The site is located on the northeast corner of the
intersection of Persimmon Street and 46'h Street. The applicant has proposed to erect a fence
along these two rights -of -way. The preliminary plat for Persimmon Place Subdivision, located
west of 46'h St., was approved with a condition that a privacy fence six feet in height be
constructed as required in the Bill of Assurance filed when this property was rezoned. This item
must be heard at City Council pursuant to the requirements for a PZD.
Surrounding Land Use /Zoning:
Direction I Land Use
South I One single-family home
East Vacant
(Persimmon
under
PPL is
RSF-4, Residential Single-family — 4
units per acre
RSF-4, Resid
units per acre
units per acre
K. WEPORM20041PC REPORM02-09-MR-PZD 04-02.00 CROSS KErSIR-PZD 04-02.00 CROSS KEYS DOC
Single-family — 4
—4
R-PZD 04-02.00
Page 2
Right-of-way being dedicated: 50' for all interior rights -of -way, 70' along Persimmon St., and
50' along 46's St.
Connectivity: Connectivity from this proposed residential subdivision is being provided west to
46`s Street, south to Persimmon St., and east to a vacant tract of land for connectivity to future
development.
Street Improvements: Construction of Persimmon Street along southern property line and a
recommendation from Engineering Division to cost share for the developer to overlay the entire
width of 46'" Street for the length of the project.
Master Street Plan Streets:
North: Wedington Drive (principal arterial) approximately % mile north
South: Persimmon Street (collector) planned for construction with this development
East: 46a' Street (local street)
West: 54`h Ave. (collector) is approximately'/4 mile west
Tree Preservation: Existing canopy: 0.13 %
Preserved canopy: 0.08 %
Mitigation: $1,050 payment into the City's Tree Escrow
Account prior to final plat approval.
Background: This proposal was heard at Subdivision Committee meeting on December 30, 2003
where it was forwarded to the Planning Commission. On January 12, 2004 the Planning
Commission tabled the item back to Subdivision Committee for lack of developer notification.
This item was heard again by the Subdivision Committee on January 29, 2004.
Recommendation:
Forward to the City Council with a recommendation for approval of the requested
rezoning.
Planning Commission approval of the proposed preliminary plat subject to the following
conditions:
Conditions of Approval:
Planning Commission recommendation to the City Council regarding the rezoning of the
subject property to the unique district for R-PZD 04-02.00 with all conditions of approval
as determined by the Planning Commission.
2. An ordinance creating this R-PZD shall be approved by City Council.
3. A Final Plat is required to legalize the lot configuration, filed pursuant to City of
Fayetteville requirements.
K: IREPORM20041PC REPORMOZ-09-041R-PZD 04-02.00 CROSS KEYSIR-PZD 04-02.00 CROSS KEYS. DOC
R-PZD 04-02.00
Page 3
4. Planning Commission determination of appropriate fence material, if desired, and
appropriate timing for installation. The fence shall not encroach upon right-of-way or
easement.
5. Planning Commission determination of street improvements. Staffrecommends /4'from
the centerliryt/e of 46` Street including curb, gutter, and storm sewer] a d c`�s(n.el:� ,
6. Payment of $1.050 into the City's Tree Escrow Account prior to final plat approval.
7. Allowed uses in this R-PZD shall be restricted to use unit 8, single family residential* on 1 t
.Py.
8. Covenants to be filed with the final plat to include maintenance of detention, common
open space, fences, entry features, and landscape islands. (A draft is included in the
report.)
Standard Conditions of Approval:
9. Payment of parks fees in the amount of $59.940 for 108 single-family units shall be
required prior to Final Plat.
10. Plat Review and Subdivision comments (to include written staff comments provided to
the applicant or his representative, and all comments from utility representatives - AR
Western Gas, SWBT, Ozarks, SWEPCO, Cox Communications)
11. Staff approval of final detailed plans, specifications and calculations (where applicable)
for grading, drainage, water, sewer, fire protection, streets (public and private),
sidewalks, parking lot(s) and tree preservation. The information submitted for the plat
review process was reviewed for general concept only. All public improvements are
subject to additional review and approval. All improvements shall comply with City's
current requirements.
1.2. Sidewalk construction in accordance with current standards to include a six foot sidewalk
and ten foot green space along Persimmon Street and a four foot sidewalk with a six foot
greenspace along 46 h Street and all proposed streets.
13. All overhead electric lines 12kv and under shall be relocated underground. All proposed
utilities shall be located underground.
14. Preliminary Plat shall be valid for one calendar year.
K: IREPOR7NI20041PC REPOR7SI02-09-041R-pZD 04-01.00 CROSS KEYSIR-PZD 04-01.00 CROSS KEYS. DOC
R-PZD 04-02.00
Page 4
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: yes Required
_ (Approved Denied
Date: February 09, 2004
Comments:On ^ 11 '• I t r
/100hiJ/ n n �f7 n.. ('� aW n9
b�wcla< d M icon w e zn0ye9 h 41 i 5 n bu eS(,n��e.01 J
Njal,�� yassu.Q 5-9 -
The "CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL", beginning on page one of this report, are accepted
in total without exception by the entity requesting approval of this development item.
By
Title
Date
K: IREPOR7Y20041PC REPOR7S102-09-041R.PZD 04-02.00 CROSS KEYSIR-PZD 04_02.00 CROSS KEYS Doc
R-PZD 04-02.00
Page S
Findings associated with R-PZD 04-02.00
Sec. 166.06. Planned Zoning Districts (PZD).
(B) Development standards, conditions and review guidelines
(1) Generally. The Planning Commission shall consider a proposed PZD in light of the
purpose and intent as set forth in Chapter 161 Zoning Regulations, and the development
standards and review guidelines set forth herein. Primary emphasis shall be placed upon
achieving compatibility between the proposed development and surrounding areas so as
to preserve and enhance the neighborhood. Proper planning shall involve a consideration
of tree preservation, water conservation, preservation of natural site amenities, and the
protection of watercourses from erosion and siltation. The Planning Commission shall
determine that specific development features, including project density, building
locations, common usable open space, the vehicular circulation system, parking areas,
screening and landscaping, and perimeter treatment shall be combined in such a way as to
further the health, safety, amenity and welfare of the community. To these ends, all
applications filed pursuant to this ordinance shall be reviewed in accordance with the
same general review guidelines as those utilized for zoning and subdivision applications.
FINDING: The subject property is adjacent to property zoned RSF-4 and R-A to the
north, and RSF4 to the east and west. There are single family homes to the north and a
preliminary plat has been approved by the Planning Commission for a subdivision of 154
lots on 58.11 acres (2.65 units/acre) to the west of this proposed development. The southern
property line boarders the City's Planning Area. The subject property is 38.48 acres with
108 single family lots proposed for a density of 2.81 units per acre.
(2) Screening and landscaping. In order to enhance the integrity and attractiveness of the
development, and when deemed necessary to protect adjacent properties, the Planning
Commission shall require landscaping and screening as part of a PZD..The screening and
landscaping shall be provided as set forth in § 166.09 Buffer Strips and Screening. As part
of the development plan, a detailed screening and landscaping plan shall be submitted to
the Planning Commission. Landscape plans shall show the general location, type and
quality (size and age) of plant material. Screening plans shall include typical details of
fences, berms and plant material to be used.
FINDING: The site has 0.13% canopy cover with 0.08% preserved cano�y proposed. The
applicant has proposed erecting a fence along Persimmon St. and 46' Street to shield
housing to the neighbors to the south and to be compatible with the fence to be placed
along the boundaries of the subdivision to the west. The preliminary plat for Persimmon
Place to the west was approved with a condition that a fence 6' in height be erected along
these rights -of -way.
K: IREPORIS00041PC REPORM02-09-04IR-PZD 04-02.00 CROSS KEYSIR-PZD 04-02.00 CROSS KEYSDOC
R-PZD 04-02,00
Page 6
(3) Traffic circulation. The following traffic circulation guidelines shall apply:
(a) The adequacy of both the internal and external street systems shall be reviewed in
light of the projected future traffic volumes.
(b) The traffic circulation system shall be comprised of a hierarchal scheme of local
collector and arterial streets, each designed to accommodate its proper function and in
appropriate relationship with one another.
(c) Design of the internal street circulation system must be sensitive to such
considerations as safety, convenience, separation of vehicular and pedestrian traffic,
general attractiveness, access to dwelling units and the proper relationship of different
land uses.
(d) Internal collector streets shall be coordinated with the existing external street system,
providing for the efficient flow of traffic into and out of the planned zoning
development.
(e) Internal
local
streets shall
be designed to
discourage through traffic within the
planned
zoning
development
and to adjacent
areas.
(f) Design provisions for ingress and egress for any site along with service drives and
interior circulation shall be that required by Chapter 166 Development of this code.
FINDING: Connectivity from this proposed residential subdivision is being provided west
to 46`h Street, south to Persimmon St., and east to a vacant tract of land for connectivity to
future development. All rights -of -way within the subdivision shall be dedicated to the City.
(4) Parking standards. The off-street parking and loading standards found in Chapter 172
Parking and Loading shall apply to the specific gross usable or leasable floor areas of the
respective use areas.
FINDING: Each lot shall be for single family use and provide the required two off-street
parking spaces per unit.
(5) Perimeter treatment. Notwithstanding any other provisions of a planned zoning district,
all uses of land or structures shall meet the open space, buffer or green strip provisions of
this chapter of this code.
FINDING: The land use meets all the requirements for open space, buffer or green strip
provisions of the chapter in the code.
K. IREPORM2004IPC REPOR7S02-09-041R-PZD 04-02.00 CROSS KEYSIR-PZD 04-02.00 CROSS KEYS. DOC
R-PZD 04-02, 00
Page 7
(6) Sidewalks. As required by §166.03.
FINDING: Sidewalk construction shall be in accordance with current standards to include
a six foot sidewalk and ten foot green space along Persimmon Street and a four foot
sidewalk with a six foot greenspace along 461" Street and all proposed streets within the
development.
(7) Street Lights. As required by § 166.03.
FINDING: Street lights are being provided along Persimmon Place and within the
development with spacing not to exceed 300 feet.
(8) Water. As required by § 166.03.
FINDING: Water shall be extended to the subject property.
(9) Sewer. As required by § 166.03.
FINDING: Sewer shall be extended to serve the subject property.
(10) Streets and Drainage. Streets within a residential PZD may be either public or
private.
(a) Public Streets. Public streets shall be constructed according to the adopted standards
of the City.
(b) Private Streets. Private streets within a residential PZD shall be permitted subject to
the following conditions:
(i) Private streets shall be permitted for only a loop street, or street ending with a cul-
de-sac. Any street connecting one or more public streets shall be constructed to
existing City standards and shall be dedicated as a public street.
(ii) Private streets shall be designed and constructed to the same standards as public
streets with the exceptions of width and cul-de-sacs as noted below.
(iii)All grading and drainage within a Planned Zoning District including site drainage
and drainage for private streets shall comply with the City's Grading (Physical
Alteration of Land) and Drainage (Storm water management) Ordinances. Open
drainage systems may be approved by the City Engineer.
(iv) Maximum density served by a cul-de-sac shall be 40 units. Maximum
density served by a loop street shall be 80 units.
K: IREPORTS110041PC REPOR7S101-09-041R-PZD 04-01.00 CROSS KEYSIR-PZD 04-01.00 CROSS KEYSDOC
R-PZD 04-02.00
Page 8
(v) The, plat of the planned development shall designate each private street as a
"private street."
(vi) Maintenance of private streets shall be the responsibility of the developer
or of a neighborhood property owners association (POA) and shall not be the
responsibility of the City. The method for maintenance and a maintenance fund
shall be established by the PZD covenants. The covenants shall expressly provide
that the City is a third party beneficiary to the covenants and shall have the right
to enforce the street maintenance requirements of the covenants irrespective of the
vote of the other parties to the covenants.
(vii) The covenants shall provide that in the event the private streets are not maintained
as required by the covenants, the City shall have the right (but shall not be
required) to maintain said streets and to charge the cost thereof to the property
owners within the PZD on a pro rata basis according to assessed valuation for ad
valorem tax purposes and shall have a lien on the real property within the PZD for
such cost. The protective covenants shall grant the City the right to use all private
streets for purposes of providing fire and police protection, sanitation service and
any other of the municipal functions. The protective covenants shall provide that
such covenants shall not be amended and shall not terminate without approval of
the City Council.
(viii) The width of private streets may vary according to the density served. The
following standard shall be used:
Paving Width
(No On -Street Parkine)
Dwelling
Units
One -Way
Two -Way
l - 20
14'
22'
21+
14'
24'
*Note: If on -street parking is desired, 6 feet must be added to each side where parking is
intended.
(ix) All of the traffic laws prescribed by Title VII shall apply to traffic on private
streets within a PZD.
(x) There shall be no minimum building setback requirement from a private street.
K9REPOR7S120041PC REPOR73102-09-04W.PZD 04-02.00 CROSS KEYSIR-PZD 04-02.00 CROSS KEYS. DOC
E
R-PZD 04-02,00
Page 9
(xi) The developer shall erect at the entrance of each private street'a rectangular sign,
not exceeding 24 inches by 12 inches; designating the street a "private street"
which shall be clearly visible to motor vehicular traffic.
FINDING: Rights -of -way shall be dedicated to the City of Fayetteville and constructed to
City standards.
(11) Construction of nonresidential facilities. Prior to issuance of more than eight
building permits for any residential PZD, all approved nonresidential facilities shall be
constructed. In the event the developer proposed to develop the PZD in phases, and the
nonresidential facilities are not proposed in the initial phase, the developer shall enter into
a contract with the City to guarantee completion of the nonresidential facilities.
FINDING: N/A
(12) Tree preservation. All PZD developments shall comply with the requirements for
tree preservation as set forth in Chapter 167 Tree Preservation and Protection. The
location of trees shall be considered when planning the common open space, location of
buildings, underground services, walks, paved areas, playgrounds, parking areas, and
finished grade levels.
FINDING: The site has 0.13% canopy with 0.08% preservation proposed. Mitigation of
$1,050 into the City's Tree Escrow Account is required.
(13) Commercial design standards. All PZD developments that contain office or
commercial structures shall comply with the commercial design standards as set forth in
§ 166.14 Site Development Standards and Construction and Appearance Design Standards
for Commercial Structures.
FINDING: N/A
(14) View protection. The Planning Commission shall have the right to establish
special height and/or positioning restrictions where scenic views are involved and shall
have the right to insure the perpetuation of those views through protective covenant
restrictions.
FINDING: Location of property is located on relatively flat land. No view shed has been
identified in this area.
(E) Revocation.
(1) Causes for revocation as enforcement action. The Planning Commission may
recommend to the City Council that any PZD approval be revoked and all building or
K. IREPORM200APC REPOR7SI02-09-04IR-PZD 04-02.00 CROSS KEMR-PZD 04-02.00 CROSS KEYS. DOC
R-PZD 04-02.00
Page 70
occupancy permits be voided under the following circumstances:
(a) Building permit. If no building permit has been issued within the time allowed.
(b) Phased development schedule. If the applicant does not adhere to the phased
development schedule as stated in the approved development plan.
(C) Open space and recreational facilities. If the construction and provision of all
common open spaces and public and recreational facilities which are shown on the
final plan are proceeding at a substantially slower rate than other project components.
Planning staff shall report the status of each ongoing PZD at the first regular meeting
of each quarter, so that _the Planning Commission is able to compare the actual
development accomplished with the approved development schedule. If the Planning
Commission finds that the rate of construction of dwelling units or other commercial
or industrial structures is substantially greater than the rate at which common open
spaces and public recreational facilities have been constructed and provided, then the
Planning Commission may initiate revocation action or cease to approve any
additional final plans if preceding phases have not been finalized. The city may also
issue a stop work order, or discontinue issuance of building or occupancy permits, or
revoke those previously issued.
(2) Procedures. Prior to a recommendation of revocation, notice by certified mail shall be
sent to the landowner or authorized agent giving notice of the alleged default, setting a
time to appear before the Planning Commission to show cause why steps should not be
made to totally or partially revoke the PZD. The Planning Commission recommendation
shall be forwarded to the City Council for disposition as in original approvals. In the
event a PZD is revoked, the City Council shall take the appropriate action in the city
clerk's office and the public zoning record duly noted.
(3) Effect. In the event of revocation, any completed portions of the development or those
portions for which building permits have been issued shall be treated to be a whole and
effective development. After causes for revocation or enforcement have been corrected,
the City Council shall expunge such. record as established above and shall authorize
continued issuance of building permits.
(F) Covenants, trusts and homeowner associations.
(1) Legal entities. The developer shall create such legal entities as appropriate to undertake
and be responsible for the ownership, operation, construction, and maintenance of private
roads, parking areas, common usable open space, community facilities, recreation areas,
building, lighting, security measure and similar common elements in a development. The
city encourages the creation of homeowner associations, funded community trusts or
other nonprofit organizations implemented by agreements, private improvement district,
K. IREPORM20041PC REPOR73102-09-041R-PZD 04-02.00 CROSS KEYSIR-PZD 04-02.00 CROSS KEYS. DOC
R-PZD 04-02.00
Page 77
contracts and covenants. All legal instruments setting forth a plan or manner of
permanent care and maintenance of such open space, recreation areas and communally -
owned facilities shall be approved by the City Attorney as to legal form and effect, and
by the Planning Commission as to the suitability for the proposed use of the open areas.
The aforementioned legal instruments shall be provided to the Planning Commission
together with the filing of the final plan, except that the Guarantee shall be filed with the
preliminary plan or at least in a preliminary form.
(2) Common areas. If the common open space is deeded to a homeowner association, the
developer shall file with the plat a declaration of covenants and restrictions in the
Guarantee that will govern the association with the application for final plan approval.
The provisions shall include, but not necessarily be limited to, the following:
(a) The homeowner's association must be legally established before building permits are
granted.
(b) Membership and fees must be mandatory for each home buyer and successive buyer.
(c) The open space restrictions must be permanent, rather than for a period of years.
(d) The association must be responsible for the maintenance of recreational and other
common facilities covered by the agreement and for all liability insurance, local taxes
and other public assessments.
(e) Homeowners must pay their pro rata share of the initial cost; the maintenance
assessment levied by the association must be stipulated as a potential lien on the
property.
FINDING: The applicant has submitted a Bill of Assurance and Protective Covenants and
Restrictions for Cross Keys Subdivision. (See attached)
Sec. 161.25 Planned Zoning District
(A) Purpose. The intent of the Planned Zoning District is to permit and encourage
comprehensively planned developments whose purpose is redevelopment, economic
development, cultural enrichment or to provide a single -purpose or mixed -use planned
development and to permit the combination of development and zoning review into a
simultaneous process. The rezoning of property to the PZD may be deemed appropriate if the
development proposed for the district can accomplish one or more of the following goals.
(1) Flexibility. Providing for flexibility in the distribution of land uses, in the density of
development and in other matters typically regulated in zoning districts.
(2) Compatibility. Providing for compatibility with the surrounding land uses.
K. IREPOR7S20041PC REPORTSI02-09-0-141R-PZD 04-01.00 CROSS KEYSIR-PZD 04-01.00 CROSS KE}S.DOC
C,
•
R-PZD 04-02.00
Page 12
(3) Harmony. Providing for an orderly and creative arrangement of land uses that are
harmonious and beneficial to the community.
(4) Variety. Providing for a variety of housing types, employment opportunities or
commercial or industrial services, or any combination thereof, to achieve variety and integration
of economic and redevelopment opportunities.
(5) No negative impact. Does not have a negative effect upon the future development of the
area;
(6) Coordination. Permit coordination and planning of the land surrounding the PZD and
cooperation between the city and private developers in the urbanization of new lands and in the
renewal of existing deteriorating areas.
(7) Open space. Provision of more usable and suitably located open space, recreation areas
and other common facilities that would not otherwise be required under conventional land
development regulations.
(8) Natural features. Maximum enhancement and minimal disruption of existing natural
features and amenities.
(9) General Plan. Comprehensive and innovative planning and design of mixed use yet
harmonious developments consistent with the guiding policies of the General Plan.
(10) Special Features. Better utilization of sites characterized by special features of geographic
location, topography, size or shape.
FINDING: The proposed R-PZD of 108 lots is located on land identified on the General
Plan as residential use. The density and use will not negatively impact surrounding
properties. The subdivision is near the Boys and Girls Club and will be able to promote
community in this area. (See attached comments from Raymond C. Smith regarding these
ten criteria.)
(B) Rezoning. Property may be rezoned to the Planned Zoning District by the City Council
in accordance with the requirements of this chapter and Chapter 166, Development. Each
rezoning parcel shall be described as a separate district, with distinct boundaries and specific
design and development standards. Each district shall be assigned a project number or label,
along with the designation 'PZD". The rezoning shall include the adoption of a specific master
development plan and development standards.
FINDING: Staff has reviewed the proposed development with regard to findings
necessary for rezoning requests. An ordinance will be drafted in order to create this
Planned Zoning District which will incorporate all conditions placed on the project by the
KAREPORM2004IPC REPOWSI02-09-MR-PZD 04-02.00 CROSS KEYSW-PZD 04-02.00 CROSS KEYS. DOC
I
R-PZD 04-02.00
Page 13
Planning Commission. Covenants
provided by
the developer will be
included in the R-PZD
ordinance. This ordinance will be
forwarded to
the City Council for
approval.
(C) R - PZD, Residential Planned Zoning District.
(1) Purpose and intent. The R-PZD is intended to accommodate mixed -use or clustered
residential developments and to accommodate single -use residential developments that are
determined to be more appropriate for a PZD application than a general residential rezone. The
legislative purposes, intent, and application of this district include, but are not limited to, the
following:
(a) To encourage a variety and flexibility in land development and land use for
predominately residential areas, consistent with the city's General Plan and the orderly
development of the city.
(b) To provide a framework within which an effective relationship of different land uses and
activities within a single development, or when considered with abutting parcels of land, can be
planned on a total basis.
(c) To provide a harmonious relationship with the surrounding development, minimizing
such influences as land use incompatibilities, heavy traffic and congestion, and excessive
demands on planned and existing public facilities.
(d) To provide a means of developing areas with special physical features to enhance natural
beauty and other attributes.
(e) To encourage the efficient use of those public facilities required in connection with new
residential development.
FINDING: The proposed residential planned zoning district allows single-family use which
is compatible with surrounding property. The property is currently zoned Residential
Agricultural and would allow for residential development at a lower density than that
allowable by a majority of the surrounding property. The density proposed will not
significantly increase the amount of traffic to cause congestion in the area which is served
by a local and collector street.
(2) Permitted uses.
Unit I City-wide uses by right
Unit 2 City-wide uses by conditional use permit
Unit 3 Public protection and utility facilities
Unit 4 Cultural and recreational facilities
Unit 5 Government facilities
Unit 8 Single-family dwellings
K. IREPOM120041PC REPORTS101-09-041R-PZD 04-02.00 CROSS KEYSIR-PZD 04-02.00 CROSS KEYS DOC
R-PZD 04-02.00
Page 14
Unit
9
Two-family dwellings
Unit
10
Three-family dwellings
Unit
12
Offices, studios and related services
Unit
13
Eating places
Unit
15
Neighborhood shopping
Unit
19
Commercial recreation, small sites
A(, Unit
24
Home occupations
Unit
25
Professional offices
Unit
26
Multi -family dwellings
FINDING: The proposed single-family dwellings are a permitted use under use unit #8.
ke.* Os< -On 1-*E` .
(3) Condition. In no instance shall the residential use area be less than fifty-one percent
(51%) of the gross floor area within the development.
FINDING: The PZD proposed is entirely residential in use.
RECOMMENDATION: Approval of R-PZD with conditions.
LAND USE PLAN: General Plan 2020 designates this site Residential. Rezoning this property
to R-PZD 04-02.00 is consistent with the land use plan and compatible with surrounding land
uses in the area.
FINDINGS OF THE STAFF
A determination of the degree to which the proposed zoning is consistent with land use
planning objectives, principles, and policies and with land use and zoning plans.
Finding: The proposed rezoning of the existing Residential Agricultural area to the
proposed development with residential single-family use with a density of
2.81 units per acre is consistent with the General Plan 2020 that identifies
this area for residential use. Single-family use is compatible with existing
and planned surrounding single-family residential homes and the
surrounding zoning.
The proposal is consistent with the following principles of the General Plan 2020
which are:
Creating a sense of place and connectivity within neighborhoods and
community.
Finding: Connectivity within neighborhoods and community is
provided.
Containing and strengthening the emergence of multiple activity centers.
Finding: The proposed subdivision is in close proximity to the Boys
and Girls Club and by utilizing it may strengthen the community
center.
KAREPOM120041PC REPOR7S102-09-04IR-PZD 04-01.00 CROSS KEYSIR-PZD 04-02.00 CROSS KEYS. DOC
R-PZD 04-02.00
Page IS
Increasing transportation efficiency.
Finding: The developer will construct Persimmon Street and improve
46`h Street for the length of the property to achieve connectivity and
the flow of traffic as shown on the Master Street Plan. There will also
be a stub out to vacant property to the east.
The proposal is consistent with the guiding policies for Residential Areas identified
in the General Plan 2020 which are:
9.8.f Site new residential areas accessible to roadways, alternative
transportation modes, community amenities, infrastructure, and retail and
commercial goods and services.
9.8 j Implement the Master Street Plan and incorporate bike lanes,
parkways and landscaped medians to preserve the character of the City and
enhance the utilization of alternative modes of transportation.
9.8.i Establish performance zoning design standards to mitigate adverse
impacts of contrasting land uses with residential land uses.
9.8.k Adopt a City policy of "connectivity'; meaning that commercial
areas and residential areas are easily accessible by vehicles, pedestrians and
bicyclists.
The following is from The General Plan 2020 regarding Community Character:
9.19.a Protect and enhance Fayetteville's appearance, identity and
sense of place.
9.19.d Discourage perimeter walls and guard houses around the
perimeter of new residential developments and promote "connectivity" to
increase accessibility and provide more livable neighborhoods.
2. A determination of whether the proposed zoning is justified and/or needed at
the time the rezoning is proposed.
Finding: The proposed density is consistent with the existing surrounding zoning.
3. A determination as to whether the proposed zoning would create or appreciably increase
traffic danger and congestion.
Finding: The proposed zoning will increase traffic but should not appreciably increase
traffic danger or congestion with the surrounding local, collector, and
principle arterial streets, and connectivity is provided from the proposed
development to these streets. Trip generation calculations indicated that 108
single family detached dwellings will produce 1034 two-way trips per day on
average. Wedington Dr. is a principal arterial and can sustain a volume of
20,600 trips per day. Current traffic counts on Wedington Dr, east of 46`h St.
are 15,000 trips per day according to the AHTD 2002 traffic count.
K. kREPORr3UOUPC REPORM02-09-041R-PZD 04-02.00 CROSS KEYSIR-PZD 04-02.00 CROSS KEYS. DOC
•
• R-PZD 04-02.00
Page 16
4. A determination as to whether the proposed zoning would alter the population density
and thereby undesirably increase the load on public services including schools, water, and
sewer facilities.
Finding: The proposed zoning will increase population density but should not
undesirably increase the load on public services, including schools, water and
sewer facilities. Using 2000 Census data for Fayetteville that indicates there
are 2.21 persons per occupied unit, the estimated population for a single
family development with 108 homes is 239 persons. The maximum
development allowable for this property with its current zoning designation
of R-A zone is 19 units for a population of 42 persons.
If there are reasons why the proposed zoning should not be approved in view of
considerations under b (1) through (4) above, a determination as to whether the proposed
zoning is justified and/or necessitated by peculiar circumstances such as:
a. It would be impractical to use the land for any of the uses
permitted under its existing zoning classifications;
b. There are extenuating circumstances which justify the rezoning
even though there are reasons under b (1) through (4) above why
the proposed zoning is not desirable.
Finding: N/A
K. IREPORTY20041PC REPOR73101-09-041R-PZD 04-01.00 CROSS KEYSIR-PZD 04-02.00 CROSS KEYS.DOC
FAYETTEVILLE
THE CT' OF FAYEFfEVULF, ARKAHSAS
PLANNING DIVISION
TO: Jorgensen and Associates Inc.
COPY: Suzanne Morgan, Associate City Planner
FROM: Craig Carnagey, Sr. Planner (Landscape Administration)
DATE: December 23, 2003
SUBJECT: Cross Key Subdivision
TREE PRESERVATION PLAN
1. A payment of $1,050.00 will be required to be made into the City's
Tree Escrow Account before Final Plat Approval.
FAYE!TEVILLE
THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS
January 20, 2004
Dawn Warrick
Zoning and Development Director
City of Fayetteville
113 W. Mountain
Fayetteville, Arkansas 72701
Dear Director Warrick,
RECEIVED
JAN 2 0 2004
PLANNING DIVA
POLICE DEPARTMENT
This document is in response to the request for a determination of whether the proposed
R-PZD 04-02.00: Residential Planned Zoning District (Cross Keys, pp 438) was submitted by Chris
Brackett of Jorgensen & Assodates on behalf of Charles Sloan and Sloan Properties for property located south of
Wedington Drive at the comer of N. 46th and Persimmon Street would substantially alter the
population density and thereby undesirably increase the load on public services or create
an appreciable increase in traffic danger and traffic congestion.
It is the opinion of the Fayetteville Police Department that this Planned Zoning District
will not substantially alter the population density and thereby undesirably increase the
load on police services or create and appreciable increase in traffic danger and congestion
in the area.
;Sin rely,
ieutenant William Brown
Fayetteville Police Department
FAYETTEVILLE POLICE DEPARTMENT
P.O. BOX 1988
FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS 72702-1988
(DELIVERIES) POLICE 100-A WEST ROCK STREET 72701
JAIL- 140-A WEST ROCK STREET 72701
PHONE: Sol-5873555 FAX: 501-587-3522
Bartisten Place, Suite 11
70 North College Avenue
yetteville, Arkansas 72701-6101
RAYMOND Co SMITH, P.A.
ATTORNEY AT LAW
December 4, 2003
City of Fayetteville Planning Division
125 West Mountain Street
Fayetteville, Arkansas 72701
Re: R-PZD Residential Planning Zoning District Request
Cross Keys Subdivision
Telephone (479) 521-7011
FAX (479) 443-4333
Toll Free 1-800-282-0168
Email rsniidi7011@sbcglobal.net
Site Location: Northeast comer intersection of Persimmon Street & North 46"' Street
Legal Description: The SE'/. of the SW'/. of Section 12, T16N, R31 W. in Washington
County, Arkansas , and more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the NE
comer of said SE'/., SW'/. thence S02°37'23"W 1.63 feet to the P.O.B., thence
S029T23"W 1320.10 feet, thence N87°02'10"W 1266.36 feet, thence N0201632"E
1318.64 feet, thence S8700618"E 1274.35 feet to the P.O.B.,, containing 38.48 acres
more or less subject to easements and right of ways of record.
The current owner of the above described property, The Hoyet Greenwood Trust A, Jean
Greenwood Jowers, Trustee, and Developer, Charles W. Sloan, Charles W. Sloan and
Associates, Inc., are now in final negotiations and a sales contract should be signed
momentarily, and are proposing a Planning Zoning District (R-PZD) be established for
the above described land. The land will be rezoned from A-1 to R-PZD will achieve the
overall objectives of a PZD. During subsequent phases of Cross Keys, additional 160
acres now situated in the county will be annexed into the city and become part of the
overall development.
The proposed PZD meets the criteria as set out in Sec. 166.06A, Planning Zoning District
(PZD), Title XV, Unified Development Code:
(1) Location. The above described property is eligible as it is situated within the City
of Fayetteville limits.
(2) Ownership. Landowner is eligible applicant and the development plan will be
binding upon all subsequent owners of the land.
RECEIVED
DEC 0 4 2003
DI Ahlhllhll�- r%nr
(3) Size. Although the site location contains approximately 38.48 acres, there is no
minimum tract size requirement.
The proposed PZD can accomplish one or more of the following goals specified in Sec.
161.25(A) Planned Zoning District, Title XV, Unified Development Code:
(1) Flexibility. Cross Keys Phase I Subdivision will include approximately 109 homes
with not greater than 2.85 houses per acre in a variety of styles of houses, each having not
less then 2000 sq. ft. of heated space.
(2) Compatibility. Cross Keys is certainly compatible with surrounding land use.
Persimmon Place, a subdivision development situated on 46d' Street, has a masonry fence
surrounding the subdivision. Cross Keys will have the same style masonry fences.
Although Persimmon Place has a minimum house size of 1850 sq. ft., Cross Keys will
have a minimum of 2000 sq. ft. The Proposed PZD will achieve compatibility between
the proposed development and surrounding areas so as to preserve and enhance the
overall neighborhood appearance.
(3) Harmony. This area in the western part of Fayetteville is currently being
developed as single family residential dwellings and this proposal will meet the purpose
and intent of R-PZD and the permitted use as Unit 8, as single family dwellings-
(4) Variety. Approximately 109 houses will be constructed in the PZD. Developer
will not sell the lots to a single builder but anticipates as many as twenty different
builders will be involved resulting in a variety of housing types and an increase
In employment opportunities and services.
(5) No Negative Impact. The Proposed PZD will not have a negative impact on the
future growth of the western part of Fayetteville.
(6) Coordination. Proposed PZD and the development of land surrounding the PZD is
being coordinated between the various developers. In coordination with John Knox and
the development of his subdivision, West Persimmon Street between N. 46"' Street to
Rupple Road will be developed, constructed and paved to a 24 ft. paved width.
(7) Open Space. The developer will develop adjacent land to include a golf course
that will complement the activities already in existence and planned near the Fayetteville
Boys and Girls Club.
(8) Natural Features. The preliminary plat of Cross Keys is planned to obtain
maximum enhancement and minimal disruption of natural existing features of the land
and surrounding areas.
RECEIVED
DEC 0 4 2003
PLANNING DIV.
(9) General Plana Proposed PZD will take into consideration tree preservation,
landscaping, water conservation, preservation of natural site amenities and the protection
of watercourses from erosion and siltation. All features shall be combined in such a way
as to further the health, safety, amenity and welfare of the community.
oud C. Smith
Attorney at Law
Owner Representative
1
RECEIVED
DEC 0 4 2003
PLANNING DIV.
BILL OF ASSURANCES AND
PROTECTIVE COVENANTS AND REWSTRICTIONS
FA TTTEVII,LE ARKANSAS
SE
KNOW ALL
es W. Sloan and ert
hereinafter rrred to a "Declarant"as owdev developer and sub divider allhe lots in
CROSS KEYS, Phase I, a subdivision to the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereinafter
referred to as "CROSS KEYS," by execution hereof, enters and declares the following
assurances, covenants, and restrictions with respect to the subdivision.
1. OWNERSHIP:
Declarant is the developer of the following described real property
being developed as the Cross Keys Subdivision, Phase I, of the City of
Fayetteville, County of Washington, State of Arkansas, to -wit:
The Southeast Quarter (SE%4) of the Southwest Quarter (SW%4)
Of Section Twelve (12), Township Sixteen (16) North, Range
Thirty-one (31) West, containing 40 acres, more or less
2. SINGLE-FAMILY LAND USE:
Lots within Cross Keys Subdivision Phase I are developed as a Planned Zoning
District to provide single family lots with approximately 2.8 lots per acre, with a Lot
minimum width of Eighty (80) feet, and shall be in compliance with or exceed the
regulations for RSF4 zoning as defined and interpreted by the City of Fayetteville,
Arkansas, and Courts of competent jurisdiction, and in compliance with the assurances,
covenants, restrictions, and conditions set out and contained herein, on the date these
covenants and restrictions were executed.
3. BUILDING LIMITATIONS AND REQUIRE1.fENTS:
The subdivision and building codes of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, as
such presently exist or are hereafter amended, shall be and are hereby made applicable to
all lots in Cross Keys Subdivision. All dwellings, other structures and/or improvements
shall comply with said ordinances as such exist on the date of such construction. Any
conflicts between such ordinances and the provisions of the conditions, covenants and
restrictions shall be resolved in favor of the more restrictive provisions. Building,
RECEIVED
DEC 0 4 2003
Bill of Assurances and Protective Covenants. Cross Keys p
'P °'NNING DI1/.
architectural, and design specifications shall be in accordance with the codes and
regulations of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, and specifically those pertaining to
development of Land zoned RSF4 (Residential Single Family w/4 units/acre).
Individual homes (Single Family, RSF4:
a. All dwelling structures constructed upon any lot of Cross Keys shall
contain a minimum of two thousand (2000) square feet of heated living
space.
b. Each dwelling shall have a private garage for not less than two (2)
vehicles. All garage interiors must be dry -walled and finished. All garage
doors must be of section type, with automatic garage door openers with
appropriate child safety features.
c. Each dwelling is required to have a concrete driveway.
d. All homes and/or other structures constructed within Cross Keys must have
an architectural asphalt, tile, or wood shingle roof.
e. No roof pitch on any structure shall be less than a 10/12 pitched.
f. All homes must have one hundred percent (100%) brick, stone or stucco on
all exterior walls up to the top plate of the 0 floor. Total percentage of
brick, stone or stucco on all exterior walls of each house must equal Eighty
(80) percent of the wall surface
g. Variance. Any lot owner may petition the Architectural Committee for a
variance from the building limitation and requirements. Each application
for a variance will be considered individually based on the overall design
of the proposed house in relationship to its compatibility with the other
homes in Cross Keys Subdivision. Any application for a variance shall
include all documentation that supports the quality of the proposed
construction that will be equal to or greater than the requirements set forth
in these building limitations and requirements.
Compliance with the above referenced ordinances, conditions, and restrictions,
and any future revisions and/or additions to said ordinances, conditions, and restrictions,
shall be judged, determined by and require prior approval by the Architectural
Committee. The Architectural Committee shall view and approve all exterior plans and
specifications for all structures prior to construction and be given the power to amend
and/or alter any design plans or specifications prior to construction and be given the
power to amend and/or alter any design plans or specifications prior to construction and
be given the power to amend and/or alter any design plans or specifications prior to
approval for construction with Cross Keys. Any alterations or recommendations made by
the Architectural Committee must be revised on said plans and be resubmitted to the
Architectural Committee for approval prior to construction. Revisions to prior approved
architectural are discouraged; however, any revisions made to said exterior plans must be
resubmitted again to the Architectural Committee for approval.
In order to be apprised of current requirements, all owners and builders should
contact the Architectural Committee prior to commencement of construction. The
specifications and requirements for RSF4 zoning designation shall be deemed minimal
RECEIVED
DEC 0 4 2003
Bill oCAssurances and Protective COVCnAnU- Cross Keys Page 2 of 13
PLANNINr.
nni
requirements for the architectural and design specifications for Cross Keys. The City of
Fayetteville specifications may be supplemented from time to time where not inconsistent
with the original plans and architectural intent of Cross Keys.
4. BUIDING LOCATION AND YARD RESTRICTIONS:
No building may be located within twenty-five (25) feet of any lot line
which is adjacent to a street, within eight (8) feet of the side lot lines, or within
twenty (20) feet (RSF4) If two adjacent lots are purchased for purposes of
constructing only one home, the interior side yard line limitations are removed.
No lots within the subdivision may be subdivided, except as follows: if owners
on both sides of a vacant joining lot elect to purchase said lot, they may subdivide
the only one time. This lot split of the joining lot then increases the size of both
adjacent lots and for building purposes the interior side lot line limitation would
be associated with and measured from the new property line created by the
division. If both portions of the split lot were ever recombined for purposes of
serving as a building lot, then the original restriction as to set back would apply.
The front yard, the side yards and a minimum of thirty (30) feet of the
backyard shall be fully grass sodded within sixty (60) days and ninety (90) days,
respectfully, following the date on which the dwelling is eligible for the issuance
by the City of Fayetteville of a temporary certificate of occupancy. Any variance
must be submitted and approved by the Grounds Committee. All front yards shall
be maintained and groomed as required to be consistent with the other homes
within the subdivision and to comply with the overall architectural objectives of
the Cross Keys Subdivision.
5. BULDERS AND CONTRACTORS:
Prior to commencement of any site work or construction, a lot owner shall
submit the name, address, and telephone number of the lot owner; the name,
address, and telephone number of the building contractor; a complete set of
construction plans include exterior colors and finishes; and a plat plan reflection
the location or all improvements, and set back lines, collectively referred to as
"Building Packet" to the Architectural Committee for review and approval.
Within thirty (30) days after receipt of the Building packet the Architectural
Committee shall act upon the request and provide the lot owner approval or
disapproval in writing. A building contractor is defined as a general contractor,
building contractor, construction contractor or consultant, architect, design builder
or the owner, if he/she acts as their own contractor.
If the Building Packet is complete and. the Architectural Committee fails
to respond to a lot owner within the specified time period, said member may
approach the Board of Directors of Cross Keys Property Owners Association and
request immediate action be taken to approve or disapprove the owner's
submission. The Board of Directors shall have the authority to approve or
RECEIVED
DEC 0 4 2003
Bill of Asswances and Protective Covenants- Cross Ks{yarLJA'1N ry¢e; of r� I
1•/G DIV.
disapprove the submission; however, must act within fifteen (15) working days of
receipt of the owner's written request.
If both the Architectural Committee and the Board of Directors fail to act,
if no suit to halt the proposed construction is commenced prior to the completion
of said construction, and if said construction is in compliance with the ordinances
of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, written approval form the Architectural
Committee shall no longer be required and the completed construction shall be
deemed in compliance with the Cross Keys conditions, covenants, and
restrictions.
No building materials shall be placed or stored on a lot prior to approval
Of the Building Packet and the scheduled date on which construction is to
commence. Construction sites shall be kept neat and orderly. Construction sites
are to be cleaned daily of trash and scrap material. If said requirements are not
adhered to, Cross Keys Property Owners Association may hire a cleanup crew to
perform the task. Should Cross Keys Property Owners Association incur expense
associated with the cleanup of a construction site, said expense shall be deemed a
lien upon the lot until paid. Portable toilets must be on all job sites during
construction. Upon completion of the building project all remaining materials,
trash, dumpsters, toilets, etc. shall be removed from the lot and subdivision within
ten (10) days.
6. HOME OCCUPATION:
Home occupations, as defined by the codes of the City of Fayetteville,
Arkansas, are prohibited.
7. FENCES
Fencing of the front yard is prohibited. Fencing of rear and side yards
must be of brick, decorative iron, or cedar wood construction. Except for fencing
constructed for the purpose of screening by Declarant, no fencing may exceed six
(6) feet in height. All fences shall be recessed at least ten (10) feet from the front
of the dwelling. No wire or chain link fencing is allowed. Fencing shall not
infringe on neighboring lots or the common grounds of Cross Keys. All fencing
plans and materials must be submitted to and approved by the Architectural
Committee. Unless a dwelling structure is built on a lot, fencing of the lot is
prohibited. Lots numbered seven (7) thru thirty-two (32) shall have six (6) ft. high
privacy fences constructed of cedar wood on the rear lot line.
8. SIDEWALKS, DRIVEWAYS AND STREETS:
A lot owner may not cut or cause to be cut a street within Cross Keys for
any reason. Concrete driveways and street access points are to be constructed and
completed by the owner prior to or at completion of the dwelling project. All
driveways are to be of concrete base and may have a decorative type finis
DECEIVED
DEC 0 4 2003
Bill of ftaSUrMCC9 and Protective Covenants- Cross K a 4 o 13
15MKNING
DIV.
0:
example: brick lines, brick expansions, aggregate finish pattern concrete, etc.
Concrete sidewalks shall be constructed at the expense of the lot owner and shall
be completed at the time the driveway is constructed. Sidewalks shall be four (4)
feet wide and constructed as designed and shown on the final plat.
Sidewalks shall be made of concrete with a light broom finish, expansion
joints are to be cut on eight (8) foot centers. The length of sidewalks will vary
with each lot, the sidewalk shall be the full street side width of the lot.
9. UTILTTES:
All utilities situated within Cross Keys subdivision shall be underground
and overhead service is not permitted.
10. SATELLITE DISHES:
Satellite dishes shall be twenty-four (24) inches or less in diameter and
shall not be visible from the street.
11. CABLE TV:
Cable television access shall be supplied to each lot within the
development.
12. OUTBUILDINGS AND PORTABLE BUILDINGS:
No portable structures are allowed. Outbuildings may be allowed and
constructed for use as storage of outside, lawn and flower garden equipment and
supplies provided the structure is similar in design to the home. All plans for such
structures must be presented to and approved by the Architectural Committee
prior to construction.
13. EASEMENTS:
Easements for installation and maintenance of utilities, drainage facilities
and any other such easements are reserved as shown on the recorded plat. Lot
owners are discouraged from constructing structures or improvements, or
landscaping located within an easement is subject to being damaged, destroyed, or
removed by the easement owner without compensation or replacement being
provided to the lot owner.
RECEIVED
DEC 0 4 2003
Bill of Assurances and Protective Covenants. Cross KeyMA N I N G D I V.
14. OIL AND MINING OPERATIONS:
No operations associated with the testing for, location, or recovery of, and
refining or processing of oil, gas or minerals found upon or underneath Cross
Keys shall be permitted or located within Cross Keys.
15. LIVESTOCK, POULTRY AND PETS:
No livestock, poultry, exotic, wild, non -domesticated, or other such
animals (except as noted within) shall be kept, raised or sheltered on any
residential building lot or common area within Cross Keys. Dogs, cats and other
household pets may be kept, provided they are not raised for commercial
Purposes. The outside living area for approved pets must be maintained and kept
clean at all times and screened from public view. All living areas for such pets
must be in the rear or side yard. The walking of permitted animals on a leash is
allowed, provided and owner/walker picks up any dropping from said animal.
16. PARKING OF VEHICLES:
All vehicles, except recreational vehicles, shall be parked in the garage or
driveway of the owner's respective lot. The Subdivision's streets shall not be
used as a place to park or store vehicles. The parking or storage of a vehicle on a
subdivision street for two (2) consecutive days of any given week shall be deemed
a "routinely parked" vehicle. Licensed and non -licensed recreational vehicles, of
any type, shall not be routinely parked on the streets of the subdivision or on any
lot within the subdivision.
The above restrictions apply to, but shall not be limited to recreational
equipment; motor homes, boats, travel trailers, campers, tmasport trailers and the
like. Any large trucks, tandem wheel tractors or large commerical vehicles are
strictly prohibited within the subdivision except for moving, and delivery
purposes and development of a lot and new home construction.
17. INOPERATIVE VEHICLES:
No inoperative or non -licensed vehicle shall be left on any subdivision
street or owner's driveway in excess of two (2) days.
18. TEMPORARY STRUCTURES:
No temporary structure shall be used for human habitation. The bRWEIVED
DEC 6 4 MdJ
Bill of Assurances and Protective Covenants- Cross KeYP N I N G -D I V.
I
and contractors are allowed such structures during the construction phase for
storage and construction use only. All such structures must be removed prior to
or at completion of the building project.
19. SIGNS AND POSTERS:
No signs or posters are allowed except as noted below:
a. A professionally made sign noting the property is for sale.
b. A professionally made construction sign noting the builder of the
improvements, which sign shall be removed once the improvements
are completed or occupied.
C. Political, garage sale, and commercial signs or posters are permitted
but only for the duration of their intended purpose.
d. Any lot owner may apply for a waiver of a sign or for permission to
place a sign on a lot by submission of the sign design, intended
duration, a purpose to Cross Keys Applications for waiver shall be
submitted prior to placement of a nonpermitted sign.
20. SIGHT DISTANCE AT INTERSECTIONS:
Walls, fencing, shrubs, hedges, trees or other improvements constructed or
made near or at the intersections of streets within the Cross Keys shall be located
and constructed in compliance with the codes, regulations, and ordinances of the
City of Fayetteville.
2 L MAILBOXES AND HOUSE NUMBER:
Prior to occupancy of any dwelling structure located on a lot, the lot owner
shall construct a mailbox and install a house number which has been approved as
to design and site location by the Architectural Committee.
22. STREETLIGHTS:
All streetlights shall be installed by Cross Keys and dedicated to the City
Of Fayetteville, Arkansas for public use and maintenance by the City.
23. CLOTHESLINES:
Outdoor clotheslines or poles are prohibited.
RECEIVED
DEC 0 4 2003
Bill of Assurances and protective Covenants_ PLANNING DIV,
Cross Keys Page 7 of 13
24. BASKETBALL GOALS:
The placement of all basketball goals must be approved by the Grounds
Committee.
25. TREE REQU]REMENTS:
Each lot owner and shall be responsible for the health of all planted trees
on the lot and shall be bound for the maintenance, care and monitoring for each
tree planted. Each lot within Cross Keys Subdivision is required to plant and
maintain two 2" inch diameter Native American trees in the front yard before the
structure is certified for occupancy. If at any time said tree is damaged
significantly or dies, it must be replaced within a two -month period. A list of
types of trees permitted will be provided by the Grounds Committee. Failure to
replant or maintain the tree after notice by the Property Owners Association could
result in an assessment and a lien upon the lot for the cost of planting and
maintaining the tree. The lot owner agrees a lien which results from a failure to
pay any assessment may be foreclosed in the same manner provided by Arkansas
Law for the foreclosure of a real estate mortgage.
26. NUISANCES:
No noxious, destructive or offensive activity as defined by City Ordinance
and State or Federal laws or regulations shall be carried on or upon any lot or
street, nor shall anything be done thereupon which may be or may become an
annoyance or nuisance to the Cross Keys community and its homeowners.
27. ENTRYWAY AND MEDIAN MAINTENANCE AND UPKEEP:
Entryways, retention ponds and surrounding areas, public areas and parks,
and common areas and improvements are an integral part of Cross Keys and it is
in the best interest of Cross Keys that said such entryways, medians, retention
ponds and surrounding areas, public areas and parks, and common areas and
improvements be maintained at all times.
The cost of the routine upkeep; maintenance and repair and replacement of
entryways, medians, retention ponds and surrounding areas, and common areas
and improvements shall be shared by each lot owner through annual or special
assessments. Any upkeep, maintenance and repair of public area and parks shall
be at the discretion of the Board of Directors of Cross Keys Property Owners
Association.
RECEIVED
DEC 0 4 2003
Bill of Asmrmn and F)"e" ° C-°«,-ft_ C�u Keys PPLA N N I N G D IV.
28. SVIM& vG POOLS:
Swimming pools must be underground and placed in the back yard and
properly fenced.
29. STREETS:
All streets within the Cross Keys development shall be dedicated to the
City of Fayetteville, Arkansas for public use and maintenance by the City.
30. HOLDING POND:
The Property Owners Association shall be responsible for the designated
holding pond (if any) within the subdivision development and shall publish the
rules and regulations applicable to the holding pond.
3 L GOVERNING STRUCTURE:
By accepting ownership of property within Cross Keys, each owner
accepts membership within the Cross Keys Property Owners Association, an
Arkansas non-profit corporation formed to promote the collective and individual
property and,civic interests of all owners of Cross Keys property and to own,
operate and maintain any area which is now or which in the future may be
designated common property and at its discretion publicly owned property such as
the park area so long as the development and maintenance of park and publicly
owned areas are in compliance with City codes and regulations.
By accepting ownership of property within Cross Keys, each owner
acknowledges, said property is now or will be subject to periodic assessments to
be established and used for the construction development, improvement, repair
and replacement of the entryways, retention ponds and surrounding areas, and
common areas and improvements by the Board of Directors of the Cross Keys
Property Owners Association and agrees if said assessments are not timely and
fully paid said assessment and all costs, including legal fees, associated with the
cost of collection of same shall be deemed a lien on the property so assessed.
The owner(s) of each lot in Cross Keys shall be entitled to one (1) vote on
any proposition or action placed before the membership of the Cross Keys
Property Owners Association for a vote. If more than one person or entity owns a
single lot, the owners must collectively agree upon their single vote before casting
same. If one or more entities own more than one lot, the owner(s) are eAttEIVED
DEC 0 4 2003
M of Assurances and Protective covenants_ Cron `HIV IV I N G D IV.
13
one (1) vote per lot owned.
32. ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE:
The Architectural Committee is established to insure, within its limited
ability, that all dwellings and/or other exterior structures within Cross Keys are
compatible with the other dwelling and structures constructed or to be constructed
within Cross Keys.
The Architectural Committee for all new construction shall consist of
three (3) builders, appointed by the Cross Keys Developer and owning lots in
Cross Keys Subdivision. At such time when each of the three builders has sold all
owned lot and homes in Cross Keys that position on the Architectural Committee
will then be appointed by the Cross Keys Property Owners Association.
The Architectural Committee shall be appointed and shall serve at the
discretion of the Board of Directors of the Cross Keys Property Owners
Association. The Architectural Committee shall have no less than one (1)
member and shall have no more that three (3) members who shall own or be
representative of the owners of property within Cross Keys.
33. GROUNDS COMMITTEE:
The Grounds Committee is established to insure the streets, sidewalks,
common areas and improvements located thereupon, unimproved lots and the
front and side yards of improved lots, are maintained, groomed and kept in good
order. The Grounds Committee shall note any problems with mailboxes,
entryways, retention ponds and areas surrounding same, public areas and parks,
common areas and improvements within the Cross Keys development. Any
problems or violations noted by the committee shall be written up and reported
for repair or correction to the proper parties. If the needed repair or violation is
directed to a lot/home owner, said owner has fifteen (15) days in which to correct
the problem. If the owner fails to take measures to correct the problem, the
Grounds Committee may report the violation or problem to the Board of Directors
of Cross Keys Property Owners Association for further action and follow-up.
The Grounds Committee shall be appointed and serve at the discretion of
the Board of Directors of the Cross Keys Property Owners Association. The
Grounds Committee shall consist of no less that one (1) member and shall have no
more that three (3) members, who will be owners or representatives of owners of
property within Cross Keys.
RECEIVED
DEC 0 4 2003
PLANNING DIV.
Bill of Assurances and Protective Covenants- Cross Keys Page t0 of
W
13
34. VIOLATIONS:
Any and all violations against a lot/homeowner(s) may result in a levy
against the owner and the property by the Board of Directors of Cross Keys
Property Owners Association. All violations should be considered of the utmost
importance and be addressed and responded to in a timely manner.
Correction of the item in violation should began, as soon as possible. If
the property owner believes the violation is wrong or incorrect, the properfty
owner should contact the issuing party of the violation as soon as possible.
35. ASSESSMENTS:
Lots owned by Charles W. Sloan and Associates, Inc. shall not be assessed
an annual assessment fee as long as the lot remains an undeveloped lot. Once title
of a lot is transferred from Charles W. Sloan and Associates, Inc. there will be due
and annual assessment of two hundred and fifty dollars ($250.00) which
assessment shall be for a full calendar year. Assessments will be due January I"
of each year. For any lot purchased in mid -year, the lot owner at closing shall be
assessed and pay the annual assessment prorated for the remainder of that year.
Assessments shall be collected by and paid to the Cross Keys Property Owners
Association. Assessments shall be used for the repair, maintenance, upkeep, and
replacement of the entryways, retention ponds and surrounding areas, common
areas and improvements, public areas and parks, golf course and to pay the costs
associated with the operations of the Cross Keys Property Owners Association,
including costs and fees paid to lawyers and accountants. By a two thirds (2/3)
vote of the Board of Directors of Cross Keys Property Owners Association or a
majority vote of the owners of lots in Cross Keys Property Owners Association
the assessment may be periodically increased or decreased. By acceptance of
ownership of a lot within Cross Keys, a lot owner is agreeing to pay current and
future assessments and is agreeing assessments shall be deemed a lien against the
lot. The lot owner agrees a lien which results from a failure to pay an assessment
may be foreclosed in the same manner provided by Arkansas Law for the
foreclosure of a real estate mortgage. Each lot owner agrees to pay Cross Keys
Property Owners Association costs and legal fees associated with the collection of
delinquent assessments of foreclosure of liens.
36. DURATION OF COVENANTS AND RESTRICTTIONNS:
These restrictions and covenants are hereby declared to be covenants
running with the lots and shall be fully binding upon all persons acquiring
property in said subdivision whether by decent, devise, purchase or otherwiiRECEIVED
DEC 0 4 2003
Bill of Assurances and Protective CoveuaNa- Csoss Keys Page 11 of
PLANNING C-i` .
• �.
13
any person by the acceptance of title to any lot in this subdivision shall hereby
agree and covenant to abide by and fully perform the foregoing restrictions and
covenants.
These covenants are to run with the land and shall be binding for a period of
twenty-five (25) years. Said covenants and restrictions may be extended for
successive five (5) year terms if approved by a majority of the lot owners.
37. BINDING EFFECTS AND AMENDMENTS OF COVENANTS:
All natural persons or other legal entities who shall acquire any lot within
the Cross Keys subdivision shall be deemed to agree, accept, conform to and
observe the restrictions, covenants and stipulations contained herein, and the By -
Laws of Cross Keys Property Owners Association and accepts membership in the
Cross Key Property Owners Association.
Any amendment of these covenants and restrictions requires an approval
by a vote of seventy-five percent (751/o) of the lot/home owners of all phases
within Cross Keys.
No changes in the covenants and restrictions shall be valid unless the
amended covenants and restrictions are properly recorded in the recorder's office
of Washington County, Arkansas. No amendment shall be allowed which would
be in violation of RSF4 zoning in affect at the time of the amendment.
38. SEVERABILITY:
Invalidation of any restriction or portion of a restriction set forth herein, or
any part thereof, by an order, judgment, or decree of any court, or otherwise, shall
not invalidate or affect any of the other restrictions, or any part thereof; as set
forth herein, but they shall remain in full force and effect.
p
Executed on this S day of 2003.
Charles W. Sloan & Associates, Inc.
B wnelapd (,level�ey \jl
7harles W
President
RECEIVED
DEC 0 4 2003
PLANNING DIV.
Bill of As nccs and Protective Covenants- Cross Keys Page 12 of
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
State of Arkansas )
)ss.
County of Washington )
On this the,V day of December, 2003, before me, a Notary Public, the
undersigned officer, personally appeared Charles W. Sloan, President of Charles W.
Sloan and Associates, Inc., known to me to be the person whose name is subscribed to
the within instrument and acknowledged that he had executed the same for the purposes
therein contained.
In witness whereof, I hereunto set my hand and official seal.
No Public
My Commission Expires "OFFICIA
e^%s' Raymond C. Smith
Notary Public, some of Arkv
00unty0fWashington
M CnalMMM . MI 2009
RECEIVED
DEC 0 4 2003
PLANNING DIV.
13
Bill of Assurances and Protective Covenants- Cross Keys Page 13 of
MIS
0
R-PZD04-U.00
Future Land Use
.........................................................
..........................................................
....................
...........................
s
...........................
l ..............................
.........................
.....................:
Overview
CROSS KEYS
Legend Boundary
Subject Property
EM R-PZD04-02.00 c0000� Planning Area
9
a000000 Overlay District
Streets L _ _l City Limits
\_. Fxisgng � Outside City
Planned
Master Street Plan
4sill Freeway/Expressway
Principal Arterial
'01%.p Minor Arterial
0 % , Collector
000me Historic Collector
0 200 400 800 1,200 1,600
Feet
• • e ' 4'
&SS hLr
FAYErrEVILLE R"PZD ay-& oa
Naldq
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
Ms. Morgan:
Suzanne Morgan, Planning
Battalion Chief Kyle S-CUM(9)
February 25, 2004 < `
Time / 0is6hceMeasurements "Cross Key"
s _
0s�" k,
As per your request I
site of Fire Station #7
are approximations di
Fire Station #2
Miles — approxi
Time — approxu
Site of Fire SU
Miles — approxi
Time — approxii
ana'(
o the vanables that come into anyemerg
KeY is r
minutes 55°secon`ds c
o Cross Keay,; rI
:p
6nute36 seconds 3,
401
y..
Station #2 and the
nue. These times
response.
t
Subdivision Commit
• ass
t� /�
December 30, 2003 k—pz Q 0vad.2.60
Page 39 3/SL/ p
R-PZD 04-02.00: Residential Planned Zoning District (Cross Keys, pp 438) was
submitted by Chris Brackett of Jorgensen & Associates on behalf of Charles Sloan and
Sloan Properties for property located south of Wedington Drive at the corner of N. 46`s
and Persimmon Street. The property is currently zoned R-A, Residential Agricultural and
contains approximately 38.48 acres. The request is to rezone the subject property to a
Residential Planned Zoning District to allow for the development of a residential
subdivision with 109 single family dwellings proposed.
Bunch: Just a comment, the PZDs seem to take a little longer as they come
through but the added deal is if they had to come through individually as a
Rezoning and then a Preliminary Plat or Large Scale Development I think
it winds up taking even more time. On the surface these things look like
they are quite lengthy, and they are, but they are still shorter than having
the duality. As we move to the next item on the agenda it is another
Residential Planned Zoning District for Cross Keys submitted by
Jorgensen & Associates on behalf of Sloan Properties for property located
south of Wedington in the Persimmon and 46`h area. Suzanne, can you
give us the staff report on this please?
Morgan: Yes. The applicant has requested a Rezoning and Preliminary Plat for this
residential development for an R-PZD. The proposed use is single family
residential with 109 lots proposed with a detention pond located south of
the property. Also, the proposal is to have this community fenced with a
wood and brick fence. Also, the density for the entire site is to be 2.83
units per acre. The land is currently zoned R-A, Residential Agricultural
and the site is located north on Persimmon Street and east on 46`" Street.
The item must be heard at City Council pursuant to requirements for a
PZD. To the north the land use is single family residential zoned RSF-4
and R-A. To the south the land is in the Planning Area and used for single
family. To the east is currently zoned RSF-4 and to the west Persimmon
Place Preliminary Plat has been approved for the west of this
development. Water and sewer are to be extended to serve this
development. Right of way to be dedicated is 50' along all of the interior
rights of way and 70' along Persimmon Street as well as 50' along 46`s
Street, a local street. Street improvements are construction of Persimmon
Street along the southern property line. There are to be street connections
to the south and west of this property. Tree preservation information,
existing is .13%, preserved is .08%. Mitigation is $1,050 payment into the
tree escrow account. Staffs recommendation is to forward this R-PZD to
the full Planning Commission with a total of 13 conditions. Number five,
Planning Commission determination of connectivity. Staff is
recommending a street connection to the east to allow connectivity for
future development. Number six, modified to state Planning Commission
determination of street improvements. Staff is recommending 14' from
centerline for 46 h Street to include curb, gutter and storm sewer. Staff
will be recommending a cost share for the developer to overlay the entire
Subdivision Committl •
December 30, 2003
Page 40
width of 46 h Street for the length of the project. Item seven, payment of
parks fees in the amount of $60,495 for 109 single family units.
Bunch: Thank you Suzanne. Are there any additional comments from Parks?
Ohman: No Sir.
Bunch: Engineering?
Casey: Not at this time.
Bunch: At this time we will turn it over to the applicant. Will you introduce
yourselves and tell us about your project please?
Brackett: Yes, my name is Chris Brackett, I'm with Jorgensen & Associates
representing Charlie Sloan who is here with me. This is a PZD. The main
reason why this was brought forward as a PZD is because as a firm, we
were involved with the development of Persimmon Place adjacent to this
and there were many concerns with the adjoining property owners with
this development. Through the rezoning they had a serious problem with
not being able to see exactly what we were planning on doing. With this
process we felt that we were able to bring forward exactly what we were
proposing and present to the adjacent property owners. Also, this
development the density is more than the RSF-4 required and we had
some other slight changes to that zoning. We felt that it was appropriate
to bring this in as a PZD and will be happy to answer any questions you
might have.
Bunch: At this time I will take public comment. Is there anyone in the audience
who would like to address this R-PZD? Seeing none, I will bring it back
to the Committee for comments. One of the first comments we need to
address is what you just said about the density. There was considerable
complaint and comment concerning the development across the street
because of the density and the size of the lots and the impact that those
would have on the neighborhood, whether it be from perceived property
values or traffic or whatever. How is this going to exaggerate or help the
situation where you are getting more of Persimmon built? Are you
building both sides of Persimmon?
Sloan: Both sides.
Brackett: Persimmon brought through the Bill of Assurance we worked out with the
adjoining property owners required 80' wide lots. We are at least 80' with
the majority of these being 85'. My understanding of the problems with
Persimmon was they didn't want the 70' wide lots and pack them in kind
of development. They wanted a larger home with a little bit bigger lot
Subdivision Committl •
December 30, 2003
Page 41
than your normal, than some of the subdivisions that have been developed
in this area. This exceeds what Persimmon does and by the lack of public
comment I think we've achieved something that the adjoining property
owners are comfortable with.
Bunch: Can you tell us a little bit about the detention pond and how that is
working? I know that it is on the property that is owned by the same
owner.
Sloan: I am going to own all of it, both sides of Persimmon.
Bunch: Are there any kind of easements that need to be drawn up Matt for the
detention pond since that is part of this?
Casey: Before that goes to construction we will require offsite drainage easements
to be filed for that area.
Bunch: I guess by having both pieces of property that makes a much better
solution by putting it down next to the drainage area.
Sloan: It really came from
staff that we have that down there, we
have the
availability.
We are going to put one down there eventually for
the other
side so we
had space
to make it fit together. We already have
a natural
drainage to
that point
so why not just go ahead and continue on
with it.
There are some other things planned for the land across that
that may
benefit it in
a long run
by doing it that way.
Bunch: Is all 70' of right of way for Persimmon being dedicated in this proposal?
Sloan: Yes, we are going to be able to because we will be closing on everything
and then we will be able to dedicate both sides. We went back and sort of
worked something out so we do make sure that we do own everything
completely so we can dedicate it.
Bunch: All of your lots with just an exception of a handful of them are just over
11,000 sq.ft. The ones that are under are just barely under.
Sloan: We are putting up a 2,000 sq.ft. minimum on the space.
Bunch: How will the fence around this compare with the fence that is going in
across the street and will it create a monotonous corridor down through
here and a wind tunnel or what is the deal on the fences?
Sloan: Suzanne may be able to show a quick elevation of what we are proposing
for a fence. I knew that there was one across the street so we were trying
to do something like that. I had planned on an all brick fence but the more
Subdivision Committi •
December 30, 2003
Page 42
you look at a solid brick fence the more you don't really like a solid brick
fence. I thought maybe we can do a mixture where we have basically
brick across the bottom of everything and put maybe cedar or something
in between it to lighten it up and maybe breathe a little bit. Maybe we can
get together with the gentleman that owns the project next door and maybe
we can coordinate so they will complement each other and one doesn't
look like a stark contrast from the other.
Bunch: Was the one across the street supposed to be poured concrete?
Brackett: We were required to show it as a decorated concrete fence.
Sloan: One of the neighbors called me this morning and said that they would like
us to work with the owners of Persimmon Place and possibly coordinate
that fence. It may be a little bit different color but the same texture,
something that looks good. I am sure they would want to keep their
distinct subdivision. We are trying to tie something together on this side
of the street that ties together with the rest of the land across the street for
future expansion.
Bunch: I think it is just a matter of keeping it from being like a concrete canyon, a
little diversity in there and also a little breathing room. A solid fence was
predicated on sound and visuals and everything else. Now that the
situation has changed I think it is wonderful that you are working together
to try to create something that is a little friendlier.
Sloan: We are going to try to. The neighbors, at least the one I talked to, said that
he was going to try to get the neighbors to work together to support some
kind of change. They still want the fence there but they would like to see
a little bit more diversity rather than just a block fence or a solid masonry
fence.
Bunch: Is this going to have a P.O.A.?
Sloan: Yes. That will be taken care of through that.
Bunch: Through this one?
Sloan: Through all of them. Hopefully this will be Phase I of an overall project
and then each one will be just added to it. We will come back with the
southern part with another PZD because we will have multiple size lots
with a little bit bigger lots all the way up to an acre and possibly four or
five acres around the existing home.
Bunch: Are you going to restrict access to lots 36 and 37 to Turner Drive?
Subdivision Committo •
December 30, 2003
Page 43
Sloan: Yes.
Bunch: That begs the question of where is the fence. I guess the sidewalk will be
outside the fence?
Brackett: Yes, the sidewalk is in the right of way, the fence will be outside of the
right of way.
Ostner: Is there a space between the fence and the sidewalk?
Sloan: Yes, it will be landscaped.
Bunch: Also limiting access on lots 1 and 49?
Brackett: We have a note that all lots will access interior streets.
Bunch: There is that short turning radius and medians here will preclude some of
that.
Sloan: That will stop that for sure.
Bunch: Unless there is a car space between it. Of course, you build out most of
your subdivisions yourself don't you?
Sloan: I usually do but this one there will be quite a few builders, probably five or
six builders in there with me at least. I don't have a problem with that. I
just know on corner lots you guys like to have side garages but we are just
talking about four lots being affected. I don't have a problem with it, I
just hadn't thought about it.
Bunch: Do you think by the time this gets to full Planning Commission that you
will have a better handle on what the fence will be?
Brackett: We are going to propose that.
Bunch: The one across the street was just a regular subdivision, it wasn't a PZD.
Brackett: Right, it came in before that ordinance was approved.
Ostner: I have a question. I'm not sure it is even for you guys. These comer
elbows, I was trying to find some guidance in the development manual on
the limit of width of streets. I know we accept cul-de-sacs but these are
neither. How are these streets widening to 60' or 70' in the corners?
Casey: I don't know that you will find that in our manual anywhere. It has been
accepted practice for years to do this in a residential subdivision. Our
Subdivision Committy •
December 30, 2003
Page 44
minimum street standards state that the minimum radius for a street is
150'. If you did that in a subdivision like this you would have all radiuses
and no straight portions of the streets. This is an option to overcome that.
They allow the little bulb around the corners that gives plenty of room for
turning movements. It also gives the benefit of adding additional right of
way frontage for these corner lots. You are not forced to have the larger
lots in the corners to make your frontage requirements. There are a few
reasons for that. It has the same radius as our cul-de-sac which is 40' to
the back of curb. Other than that, I don't know that you could find that
anywhere in our minimum street standards or in our development code. It
is just accepted practice.
Ostner: So, 150'
minimum radius. I took
my
pen and paper last
night and I'm
pretty sure if it was just
a curve that
that
would be real close
to 150'.
Brackett: We've drawn it that
way. A
150' cuts this lot out and it
brings you out
into here. Because
this 150'
on the centerline and then
you have your
additional 25' on the
outside.
It is substantial.
Ostner: Since this is a PZD those are all on the table. You get an extra lot in every
corner. Those lots, even though their frontage at the right of way line is
70% their curb is tiny and the driveways tend to pile up as they do on many
cul-de-sacs. This is just something that concerns me. I'm not sure how to
resolve it because it is a standard practice but I just wanted to ask the
question.
Anthes: I'm with you Alan, these things drive me crazy too. We see them a lot, I
always know there is a Jorgensen plan coming through when we've got
these little elbows everywhere.
Bunch: One thing that we have to remember is that these are R-PZDs and not
Conditional Uses so we have to go by what the existing ordinances require
on these sort of things. If we have plans to modify this I think that there is
an avenue to present that to the Planning Commission and forward it to the
City Council to alter the methodology of development.
Brackett: Our point of view is that it is standard practice. We do do it a lot. I don't
feel that it is a safety concern. If the Planning Commission does feel like
it is something that they would like to see we would hope that it would be
brought forth as far as city policy before we are in the process.
Ostner: This
is
late into the game and
I'm
not sure that it
is fair
to ask it of you
now.
I
understand that staff and
no
one has brought
this up
until now.
Anthes: It is just something that we have been kind of commenting on in the
background and we need to start talking about. You are the first.
Subdivision Committelp •
December 30, 2003
Page 45
Bunch: You are the guinea pig to make this thing go forward to present to the City
Council to see what they think of it.
Ostner: Since this is going forward as a legislative act by the Council, this 46`h
Street I understand is a minor arterial.
Warrick: 46`h Street is a local street.
Brackett: It was
a collector
street before Persimmon
came through and that collector
street
was moved
over to Broyles.
Bunch: That was the relocation of the water line and everything for Broyles.
Ostner: The high speed alley that is being inadvertently created is not your fault.
You all are following our procedures. I think our development standards
need looking at. Part of the street's purpose is to provide frontage and we
are requiring no one to have frontage. You all had to duplicate frontage
on both sides. No one can face the street. We've got three streets where
one could work. I think that is expensive. I think it is backwards. It is
usually presented on the point of safety that this street is going to be high
speed and we don't want people coming out from their driveways. I
would like to challenge that philosophy. Not every street is a high speed
street. I believe with frontage it reduces speed. When you create an alley
of course you are going to speed, why not? No one is backing out, no one
faces it. Here again, this is not really relative to your project, you
followed the procedures. I want to bring that up. I don't think that is good
Planning. I don't think it is good for our city to create these high speed
alley ways.
Bunch: I guess what would really be the key to it is what happens if 46"' is
extended to the south.
Sloan: It won't be.
Bunch: As it stands right now, Persimmon is going to be a fairly close parallel if
we look on this, to Hwy. 16 that is going to go down to Shiloh and it will
go over to Double Springs. Broyles is being rerouted.
Ostner: That comes right back to the question is does every street that functions
over 40 miles per hour have to be restricted to no frontage? 1 disagree.
We have got lots of streets in town right now that function that way safely.
Bunch: The question here is this one being restricted for traffic reasons as much as
it is aesthetic reasons. Once we have, I know that the statement is made
Subdivision Committe4p •
December 30, 2003
Page 46
on
here that
we are restricting
the access to it.
I don't know if this is going
to
be a high
speed street but it
is going to be a
busy street.
Ostner: Then why do we
restrict access at all if it isn't
going
to be high
speed?
Why do we build
streets not just to get from one place
to another
but lots
of different functions.
I believe this street
has one function
to get
somewhere in and
out, not to have dialogue, not
to have
yards.
Bunch: If access were granted
along that street and
this
street
were moved over we
would still
have the same number of streets
and
same
number of accesses.
Ostner: This system where backs of houses touch backs of houses is sufficient,
there is one frontage. This system where the backs of houses all have a
very expensive street. It is awkward at the edges of development.
Bunch: If this street were here and a road was moved over that backed up to this
there still would be very little gain. It would be virtually the same situation
that we already have.
Ostner: No, you wouldn't have the backs of houses facing a street.
Bunch: That is one reason we have the fence in because of the backs of houses but
if the houses face the street and then you have the houses back up to this
and move this road over you are still going to wind up with the same
amount of roads and a similar number of lots.
Ostner: No you are not. This system right here with the backs of houses on the
backs of houses, four rows of houses and two streets. More than twice as
much asphalt, more than twice as much traffic. This is not really on the
point. I wanted to bring that up as a point of discussion.
Warrick: I would just add that I think it was during the development of Persimmon
Place that 46`h Street was downgraded from a collector to a local street and
we don't want to have all of those curb cuts on a collector street. When
that subdivision to the west was designed it was with the intent that that
would be a collector street and not to have that many curb cuts onto 461h
Street with it being classified in that fashion. After it was preliminary
platted 46`h Street was downgraded and Broyles was upgraded because of
other situations.
Ostner: I understand that. There are streets that carry more traffic faster than
streets that we call collectors.
Warrick: You were just
asking about
why we
had a fence
against that street for
Persimmon and
for this one.
This one
I believe the
developer just
chose to
Subdivision Committe
December 30, 2003
Page 47
mimic what was happening across the street. That was not a city
requirement that they not access 46"' Street.
Ostner: It makes sense. It has already been done once so you need to finish the
project.
Sloan: It complies with what they requested.
Ostner: I am just trying to bring up for discussion that just because of the fact that
it is a collector I disagree that it needs to have restricted access. We have
streets that are bigger than collectors, Old Wire off of Mission carries a
ton of traffic and people live on it.
Sloan: I agree with you. Across the street right here, we've had this discussion
already. We would like to mimic what's happening with this house all the
way down this thing with the wrought iron fence. These will be acre lots
with an individual automatic gate to each lot which their drive would
come out onto a collector street. We feel like 16 lots is not going to be a
tremendous deterrent to a street.
Ostner: I think
frontage is
a key.
An 85' lot on a major street might be dangerous,
a 200'
or 250' lot
there is
a big difference.
Sloan: That is what we propose to do on this side is to access this street this way
since we are basically building it again. That gives us the opportunity to
try to keep the character of the houses that are already there and then go
from there to the creek. Then we would hit the creek and have a natural
barrier.
Ostner: With a larger lot you are less apt to back out. You are more apt to turn
around.
Sloan: We would probably
require
an oval drive,
just like
this. Each lot would
have to have an oval
drive. so
they would be
heading
out forward.
Ostner: That is just common sense. America was built that way and we have sort
of fallen away from that.
Bunch: Looking
at how this
area is developing
overall, regardless of how 461s
Street is
designated, it
is going to function
as a fairly heavy traffic carrier.
Sloan: We are working with the two land owners here. One of them is a friend of
mine and we are basically going to be handling the development of that
eventually over the next couple of years and with John Nock to go ahead
and get this street built through eventually all the way through. We have
Subdivision Committee •
December 30, 2003
Page 48
sort of a gentleman's agreement
to try to
get this thing
resolved
immediately.
We are trying to funnel
our people
over to Rupple
Road.
Bunch: As Hwy. 16 gets widened, I think the next phase is to widen it out to
Double Springs. Eventually there may be a light at Double Springs and a
light at Rupple. As this goes through and then being a straight shot to
Shiloh, the current use of this area is going to change considerably. Of
course, with the sewer plant going down through here and with the change
in Broyles being a north south down to the Farmington area and Hwy. 62
we are going to see some major reconfigurations of the traffic patterns in
the whole sector.
Sloan: We are trying our best to keep people off of 46`h Street for the neighbor's
sake. We are going to improve it on our end of it. That is a point of
contingency that I have is I would rather my money be spent building
sidewalks for them all the way to Hwy. 16 than building our street out.
Leave the street like it is, put a sidewalk down it, back off the curb and
gutter and spend the same money. Cut the check to the city or we will
build it here is how many dollars we are going to spend to improve this
between myself and the other developer. Let us take it and do something
all the way to Hwy. 16 whether it be sidewalks, fill in one ditch on one
side or whatever we need to do. Right now the rules say we need to
improve this street.
Bunch: What we need is Charlie in on our long term planning for this area of town
because he is doing most of the work out there.
Sloan: We hope to be back. Our goal right now is between this development and
we have another project that we are trying to get annexed in, I know we
are going to be held up because of the annexations. Our goal is to put
Persimmon from Double Springs Road to the Boys Club. We will take
care of making all of those connections with the next two projects, John
Nock's project and the McBride project. That is what we are trying to
piece together right now so that we have a road running parallel from
Hwy. 16 from Double Springs. A lot of that comes from Farmington so
they could turn down Persimmon and then turn to go to Broyles verses
coming back on 16 and around.
Ostner: Hwy. 16 needs another outlet.
Sloan: We are trying to solve one of the problems as far as traffic.
Bunch: This part of Shiloh is one way isn't it?
Sloan: It is one way going south.
Subdivision Committee •
December 30, 2003
Page 49
Bunch: There is still Betty Jo and Rupple.
Sloan: Right.
Ostner: If the north bound people stayed on Wedington the south bound could use
this.
Bunch: We are diverging onto long range planning.
Sloan: We don't mind talking about long range with you.
Bunch: Especially since you are heavily invested in this area of town this is to
your benefit. Moving this forward are any of the conditions of approval
sticking points with the applicant issues for you all?
Ostner: Yes, number five.
Sloan: I know what is planned. We have two different neighborhoods. We are
going to build a street that will give you connectivity because we are
building a collector street that is only a few hundred feet away. We don't
understand why we should have to connect. He has a totally different
concept of what he wants to build there verses what we want over here.
We don't really want to connect the two subdivisions together. I went to
one of your street meeting things they had. Streets can be used for other
things besides driving on like kids and things like that. I feel like if you
keep making connections people will find a short cut even though there is
an easier street one block down the road they are going to keep cutting
through in places. He already has two or three connections that he has to
make to Meadowlands that are already there that he has to tie into. We
didn't see, since we would be making a connection here or here,
preferably we would not make a connection here. The neighbors really
didn't care to have this connection but we didn't see any reason if we are
building this street for you here why we should have to make a connection
here. It is not like they are going out on Hwy. 265 to go from Savanna to
one of the other subdivisions.
Bunch: How about an alternative transportation path through there and have them
walk or ride a bicycle as opposed to a street connection?
Sloan: We wouldn't have a problem if we had an easement or something through
there to connect.
Bunch: I would personally be more in favor of that than the automobile
connectivity just for the same reasons that you discussed to have the
concept of a neighborhood and if there is a different theme in the
Subdivision Committee •
December 30, 2003
Page 50
development next to it to have some sort of multi mobile connection but
not necessarily automobile.
Sloan: I live on a cul-de-sac and I have two little girls and they have road their
bikes out there for years on that cul-de-sac and I feel like if you can sort of
keep some of the traffic contained into some of these smaller areas that it
gives the kids an opportunity just to feel like you are not in a high traffic
place. That is the main thing that we were looking at. We didn't see any
sense in connecting those two together.
Bunch: I always use the Tulsa model of that where every ten blocks either north,
south, east or west there is a major thoroughfare, regardless of what it is
called, arterial or a collector or whatever. Within those ten block square
areas there is traffic calming and less access just for that reason to have a
neighborhood and have a place for children to play and to learn to ride
bikes and learn about traffic and that sort of thing. Those of us who are
addicted to automobiles have the every ten blocks we know that there is
something. We don't have to have a major cut through every two blocks.
Sloan: We don't have a problem with doing that. Then across the street we have
talked with Parks and Trails about connecting this neighborhood down
toward the creek which will eventually have a trail through it too. We are
trying to work it out where it will be more of a bicycle walking friendly
neighborhood. Obviously, for kids the big draw is the Boys Club sitting
over here and access to get there. That was one of the things that the
neighbors commented to me, just get my children a way to get to the Boys
Club without having to go around and that is what our proposal was. We
will work together and make sure that we get that.
Bunch: If there is some way of coming up with an alternative path down towards
Persimmon with bicycle and walking and all that, it would be a lot safer if
the kids could cut through.
Sloan: That is something that I would have to get with John to coordinate but I
don't think he would have a problem with it.
Anthes: What is his concept? How is it different?
Sloan: He is doing rear entry garages, smaller homes, alley ways I believe is what
he is looking at.
Casey: He is showing an alley back
here to
access
the back
of the homes
in the
preliminary drawings that I saw. The
access
would go
onto a public
alley.
Warrick: We have looked at the adjoining project concept in concept. It is
obviously, not in process yet. Staff is also recommending a connection to
Subdivision Committi •
December 30, 2003
Page 51
the east. Our recommendation would be that lot 11 extend to connect to
the vacant tract of land between 25 and 30 acres to the east. Yes, there is a
concept for the development of that project. However, that concept may
never come to pass. I believe it will. I fully believe that that project will
come forward. As Matt said, that developer is looking at some rear entry
alley access type configurations. When we spoke with him, when staff
made him aware of our intent to have a cross access between this
development and his he didn't love the idea but he did state of course, if
he was required to connect he would connect. He was following up this
project as he is following up development to the north that have stub outs
with intentional connectivity to this vacant tract of land for future
development. As his development is coming in behind all of these others
he is having to respond to those other decisions that were made with
regard to connectivity with that tract of land. In reality it is a timing issue
as to who comes first and who has to react based on other people's actions
and other decisions of the Planning Commission. Staff's opinion is that it
is not just getting people on foot from one development to the next. It is
getting mailmen, it's getting the UPS truck, the trash truck, getting
everybody who needs to travel from one development to the next off of
the more major streets for convenience purposes but also just because it is
reasonable to do it. We are planning a street system for the city, not for
individual developments and we need to ensure that they respond to each
other but that they also can protect the integrity of developments. I think
that it is very important that when we look at this we have to look at those
macro issues. This is the city street system that we are trying to ensure
reasonable connectivity in. That is why we made the recommendation. It
is obviously, a point of contention and Charlie and I have agreed to
disagree on this one and we will continue to do so amicably. We are
looking for the Planning Commission to make a decision with regard to
this connection.
Ostner: I would tend to agree with Ms. Warrick that these being developed from a
development to the east in essence says this is our street and then this
person says we have ours and we have ours. In my mind that is not what a
city is all about. A city is all about these are our streets. If this is built in
such a way that these people can't use it even to drive to their friend's
house it is not a macro vision. I think lot 11 is a great place to put the
connectivity. I think he could still have a completely different look. I
have driven from subdivision to subdivision sideways not out on the major
streets and you can tell how that changes. That could be his alley access
right there, I'm not sue. I'm in favor of condition number five and it is
something we have held a lot of other developers to.
Anthes: Exactly. I feel that there are a lot of other developments in this area that
we are putting the same condition on and we need to be consistent in those
decisions.
Subdivision Committlp 0
December 30, 2003
Page 52
Bunch: What about lot 13 then as opposed to 11 or 15? From an Engineering
standpoint, Matt, would that cause any problems with the turns and the
radii? It would give a traffic calming affect. 15 would definitely be a
straight shot through. 13 or 11, I realize I I doesn't go through to 46.
Ostner: This is already your traffic calming, offsetting intersections is second best
in my mind when intersections line up it is much safer. There are fewer
intersections, there is one instead of two. No one is going to want to go
through all of these stop signs as a cut through to go fast.
Sloan: How many times do I cut through Wilson Park a day?
Ostner: That is different. Those aren't offset like these. There is nothing for a
quarter or half mile. That is why we all do it. There is nothing that is
happening that way.
Sloan: There is a street that I'm building that is five lots down.
Ostner: That
is why traffic won't
cut
through I
believe because we find the path of
least
resistance and you'll
go
to it.
Sloan: I believe people will cut through here, through here and go through his.
Even though it is not logical to do it.
Ostner: If these were lined up I believe that could be a problem.
Sloan: That is just like saying these people won't go up 460' Street if we don't
have that there. They will still go up 46`" Street. That is the reason I can
see the neighbor's point of view. If this is here and we are funneling traffic
back that way there will eventually be a light at Rupple and that is what
we are hopefully planning on the traffic for that purpose.
Ostner: It is strange but cut throughs can go both ways. There is a high speed cut
through and a friendly neighborly cut through. Connectivity is all about
cut throughs but it is all about friendly, low speed neighborhood cut
throughs. It is not high speed I'm going to cut through and ruin those
people's neighborhoods. I think lot 11 would do that too.
Bunch: I know that this has been a rather drawn out meeting but I think we have
touched on some important issues here because this whole area of town,
these are issues that we are going to be looking at in the future and I would
like to thank Charlie for giving us the opportunity to look at these. We are
going to see this more and more as this area develops out so I don't think
that the time that has been spent today, I think may have been wisely spent
because these are issues that are constantly in front of us and that are
Subdivision Committee •
December 30, 2003
Page 53
going to be in front of more and more rapidly and particularly as
Persimmon goes through. Now that the Boys Club is built that is a
motivating factor. I think you could probably tell us more than anyone
since you have had considerable development in this area. I know that
you are having a rather rapid build out.
Sloan: It is. This is the growth of Fayetteville right now. The bigger growth is
going to be out in this area. The builders are excited about it. We have
home owners calling about this area. The Boys Club is a big attraction. It
is for myself. I have two little girls that made me join the new club. That
is a big drawing power and we have hopefully some great plans for
another benefit for the Boys Club with the next development. We hope to
do some stuff that we actually build some stuff for the Boys Club and give
it to them for additional recreational facilities for them. We have the
space and we have some other area that we are not going to utilize so that
is what we are trying to work with the other two land owners.
Bunch: Build out rates
on your developments over
off Double Springs
Road really
accelerated.
Sloan: It is unbelievable. It is going to make a great neighborhood. There are
beautiful homes.
Bunch: You were concerned with phasing those in and blinked your eyes and were
doing final build out. Are there any other comments on the conditions
Charlie?
Sloan: No, I guess I will give into Dawn and give on number five.
Warrick: I think it is a win/win situation.
Bunch: What if it is a gated community?
Sloan: I tried one several years ago and I didn't know what the Planning
Commission's feelings were on gated communities because it is a situation
where it could be done very easily. We are going to put fake gates up here
to match what goes up across the street. Is that a no around here?
Bunch: I don't know, we
haven't
run it
up the flagpole yet. One of the things we
will need Charlie
since
this is
a PZD we will need a height and better
description on the
fence,
height
and location.
Warrick: I think it is pretty well described in the elevation drawing. I would be
interested in understanding how it relates to the fence across on the other
side.
Subdivision Committee •
December 30, 2003
Page 54
Sloan: I just got a phone call this morning and he said please try to coordinate
something.
Brackett: The fence for
Persimmon was required by
the Bill of Assurance. This is a
voluntary act
by this
development and we really don't want to go into
extraordinary
lengths
of developing this
fence at this time when really
what we would
like to
do is work with the
developer across the street.
Bunch: I guess we can do that as a PZD, just call it out as an architectural type
fence and then allow some latitude or does that get into substantial change
venue?
Warrick: If you approve it allowing some latitude then it wouldn't be a substantial
change if they came back with something different. I think that it would
be appropriate for the fence to be of sufficient height to provide a screen
which is typically considered 6' to 8' and if you are going to suggest that
it is at least predominantly brick or masonry in structure then whether the
panels set in are wood or wrought iron or some other type of material we
can work that out.
Sloan: I would love to have wrought iron to match across the street but then you
are looking in the backyards, I don't want you to look in my backyard so
then you need to panelize that.
Bunch: I'm trying to limit the red tape on it. Normally PZDs are kind of nailed
down but I think we may have some latitude depending on how you
present it where we can specify an architectural fence compatible with the
fence across the street.
Anthes: If you could bring a photograph of the fence across the street that may
help as well.
Ostner: As part of the negotiating I would be much more willing to hand this off
into the hands of the staff if you all would agree to plant a tree every 40'
with a group of shrubs every 20'.
Sloan: Hopefully all the comers will be landscaped. I was hoping to come out
here and do a short wrought iron fence or something that matches here and
then we can do flower beds. The same thing with the entry. Chris has a
common area with the entry for planters and hopefully down here we can
do some small landscaping and maybe a tree wherever the panel happens
to hit with the brick panel.
Ostner: I think that would make a big difference. In fact, I would include that with
the fence in my mind because that is what you see, you see the fence and
Subdivision Committ• •
December 30, 2003
Page 55
the landscaping. Two fences with no landscaping can be really
oppressive.
Sloan: Landscaping will be there. That is to try to break it up. Brick fences look
good at first and then you need something to break it up.
Ostner: You've got a couple of trees and then some landscaping.
Sloan: I didn't know I was going to have to furnish that but that's easy enough to
draw that on a cad program, stick it in there and try to come up with
something pretty quickly.
Ostner: Since this is a PZD everything becomes law.
Sloan: I will try to get somebody to work on a couple of renderings and come
down with something.
Ostner: I would bet that more landscaping on paper would be more helpful.
Bunch: Actually he has a little extra time because of the holiday. This is Tuesday
instead of Thursday and then the agenda session so you have time to work
with your neighbors and then come up with a presentation. Let's get this
one on the road.
MOTION:
Ostner: I will make a motion that we forward R-PZD 04-02.00 to the full Planning
Commission.
Anthes: With the connectivity at lot I I?
Ostner: With condition number five talking about a street connection to the east
being made at lot 11.
Anthes: I will second.
Bunch: Do we want to specify at lot 11 or do we want to leave that to Charlie to
negotiate with staff between now and the full Planning Commission?
Brackett: We are going to put it on lot 11.
Bunch: I will concur. Good luck.
Planning Commission• •
January 12, 2004
Page 5
R-PZD 04-02.00: Residential Planned Zoning District (Cross Keys, pp 438) was
submitted by Chris Brackett of Jorgensen & Associates on behalf of Charles Sloan and
Sloan Properties for property located south of Wedington Drive at the corner of N. 46`h
and Persimmon Street. The property is currently zoned R-A, Residential Agricultural and
contains approximately 38.48 acres. The request is to rezone the subject property to a
Residential Planned Zoning District to allow for the development of a residential
subdivision with 108 single family dwellings proposed.
Hoover: On to item number two on the agenda, R-PZD 04-02.00 Cross Keys. This
is for property south of Wedington Drive at the corner of North 461h and
Persimmon Street. Suzanne?
Morgan: The developer's engineers failed to comply with the notification
requirements for this item and we are requesting that this item be tabled
until such time that the notification has been completed.
Hoover: Thank you. Do we need to vote on this?
Warrick: In order for it to properly go through the process notification will need to
be given in a different manner than it was originally and it will have to be
heard again at the Subdivision level as well as Planning Commission. I
think it is more of a procedural issue on the administrative side to ensure
that it gets through that process properly. Mr. Whitaker, do you think that
any additional action needs to be taken?
Whitaker: I think that since it was read as an item of the agenda and folks probably
were expecting to hear something about it a motion to table and a vote
would be appropriate for the record.
Anthes: I move to table R-PZD 04-02.00 to follow administrative procedures.
Bunch: I will second with
Planning Commission• •
February 9, 2004
Page 2
Hoover: Welcome to the Monday, February 9, 2004 meeting of the Fayetteville
Planning Commission. Renee, will you call the roll please?
Roll Call: Upon the completion of roll call there were nine Commissioners present.
Hoover: Thank you. The next item of business is approval of the minutes from the
January 12, 2004 meeting and the January 26, 2004 meeting. Do I have a
motion for approval of the minutes?
Allen: So moved.
Church: Second.
Hoover: Call the roll please.
Roll Call: Upon the completion of roll call the motion to approve the minutes from
the January 12, 2004 meeting and the January 26, 2004 meeting was
approved by a vote of 9-0-0.
Thomas: The motion carries nine to zero.
R-PZD 04-02.00: Residential Planned Zoning District (Cross Keys, pp 438) was
submitted by Chris Brackett of Jorgensen & Associates on behalf of Charles Sloan and
Sloan Properties for property located south of Wedington Drive at the corner of N. 46`h
and Persimmon Street. The property is currently zoned R-A, Residential Agricultural and
contains approximately 38.48 acres. The request is to rezone the subject property to a
Residential Planned Zoning District and to approve the development of a residential
subdivision with 108 single family dwellings proposed.
Hoover: Thank you. The first item of business is under old business, it is R-PZD
04-02.00 for Cross Keys. Suzanne?
Morgan: Yes Ma'am. The subject property is located south of Wedington Drive at
the corner of N. 46`h and Persimmon Street. The applicant is requesting a
rezoning and a Preliminary Plat approval for a residential development
with an R-PZD zoning district. The proposed use is single family
residential with 108 lots proposed. Density for the entire site is 2.81 units
per acre. Connectivity from this proposed residential subdivision is being
provided west to 46` Street, south to Persimmon Street and east to a
vacant tract of land for connectivity to future development. Street
improvements include construction of Persimmon Street along southern
property line and a recommendation from the Engineering Division to cost
share for the developer to overlay the entire width of 46` street. Findings
by staff include the applicant ha submitted a Bill of Assurance and
Protective Covenants for this Cross Keys subdivision. The R-PZD is
located on land identified on the General Plan for residential use and the
Planning Commission• •
February 9, 2004
Page 3
density will not negatively impact surrounding properties. The
subdivision is also near the Boys and Girls Club and will be able to
promote community for this area. Permitted uses, the applicant is
requesting Use Unit 1, City Wide Uses by Right, Use Unit 8, Single -
Family, and Use Unit 24, Home Occupations. Staff finds that a
development with 2.81 units per acre is consistent with the General Plan
and connectivity is being provided. Staff recommends that this be
forwarded to the City Council with a recommendation for approval of the
requested rezoning and Planning Commission approval of the proposed
Preliminary Plat subject to 14 conditions. Some of which include
Planning Commission determination of appropriate fence material if
desired and appropriate timing for installation. The fence shall not
encroach upon any rights of way or easements. Condition five, Planning
Commission determination of street improvements. Staff recommends 14'
from centerline of the 46"' Street including curb, gutter and storm sewer
and to modify condition seven to read "Allowed uses in this R-PZD will
be restricted to Use Unit 1, City Wide Uses by Right, Use Unit 8, Single -
Family, and Use Unit 24, Home Occupations. Staff has received signed
conditions of approval.
Hoover: Would the applicant come forward please?
Jorgensen: Yes, my name is Dave Jorgensen, I'm sitting in for Chris Brackett who is
on seminar all week long. We are here to answer questions and try to
move this along in the process speaking on behalf of the owner. As
Suzanne mentioned, we did sign all of the conditions. We are in
agreement with all of the conditions.
Hoover: Thank you. At this time I will open up this R-PZD 04-02.00 to the public.
Is there any member of the audience who would like to address this
Planned Zoning District? Yes Sir, please come forward.
Adams: My name is Gary Adams, I'm a homeowner at 760 N. 46 h Avenue which
is the feeder street that goes down to this proposed development. The only
problem I have is the fact that 46`h Street was a feeder street, I suppose
now maybe it has been changed, buy only by maybe definition. It didn't
meet all of the requirements. It is still lacking in those requirements and
yet we've got one new subdivision going in and we are asking for another
one now to be ok'd and 46`h is going to be one of the major arteries for
both of these subdivisions and it is going to cause a lot of potential traffic
problems out our way. We've got that concern. We wish something could
be done with 46'h Street. We were told when the other subdivision was
going in that there wouldn't be a lot of dump trucks going down our road
because it would be coming in from 54'h Street. If you take a drive down
our road today it is mostly red clay where hundreds of dump trucks have
been going up and down 46`h Street to the subdivision that is being built
Planning Commission•
February 9, 2004
Page 4
currently. We do have a bit of a problem with respect to 46'h Street. We
feel like it needs to be developed before we have additional units put in
there. Everything Charlie has told me about the project does sound like a
good project. It is just that I wish the city would do something with
respect to 46`h Street. I know that originally Charlie didn't plan to have an
outlet onto 46`h Street but the city apparently required him to do that and it
is going to be a pretty major problem I think whenever we get all of those
houses into our area. I wish something could be done on 46`h Street.
Thank you very much.
E
Hoover: Thank you. Is there any other member of the audience that would like to
address this Planned Zoning District? Seeing none, I will bring it back to
the Commission. Staff, would you respond to that question about street
improvements on 461h Street?
Casey: Street improvements are being recommended and proposed due to
development along 461h Street but only the length of the project. The other
streets involved with this entire construction, the entire width of
construction of Persimmon along the southern boundary of the project and
also the interior streets to the project. The thought behind this was with
the next phase of development that we will hopefully see this year will
connect Persimmon all the way to Rupple and Rupple will be one of the
main thoroughfares. Also, Broyles Avenue to the west through the
Persimmon Place subdivision that we saw last year, will be constructed all
the way up to Wedington this year. It has already been bid. Construction
should start at any time. We are looking at Persimmon almost 100%
improved through that area all the way to Rupple, Broyles all the way
from Persimmon to Wedington and then the section of 46'h Street along
the project side. There should be plenty of improved surfaces for them to
exit out to Wedington on in the near future.
Hoover: Thank you. Subdivision, were there any specific items that we need to
address or were all your concerns taken care of?
Bunch: I think most of the concerns were taken care of. There was one question,
it is the interconnectivity with this and the potential subdivision to the east
and I don't know if that has been addressed. We might have the applicant
respond to that. Basically, we talked about street improvements, fence and
that sort of thing. It is a pretty straight forward project.
Jorgensen: Thank you Don. I will try to address this connectivity. By any chance do
you all have in your packet a picture of this project and the project that is
immediately to the east of this? It would be a large sheet of paper. I was
thinking that you all had that. We have a version that shows these
connections. In lieu of that, if you will refer to your vicinity map that is
on the Preliminary Plat that will help us. It is up there in the right hand
• •Planning Commission
February 9, 2004
Page 5
corner of the Preliminary Plat. If you will notice the darkened area is the
40 acre project that we are talking about right now, Cross Keys.
Immediately to the west of that in the audience they have mentioned 461i
Street. Immediately to the west of that is Persimmon Street. Matt
mentioned that Broyles Street, you can see a dash going up to Wedington,
that is going to be constructed starting this year. The connectivity that
Don is mentioning is the project immediately to the east of that shaded
area which is the remainder of Meadowlands Phase II and Phase III, it is
also being referred to as Rupple Row, it goes all the way from this project
to Rupple Road. This project right here has 2.3 lots per acre. The project
to the east of this is I'm not sure what the density is, but it is definitely
more than this, it is a completely different type neighborhood. I am not
going to get into a dogfight on this connectivity issue but the developer of
Cross Keys and also the developer of the project to the east wish that this
connection not be made. I know it has been traditional that the Planning
Commission has asked for connectivity for obvious reasons but there is
two different types of neighborhoods. I will let Charlie Sloan address the
differences in these neighborhoods. It was thought that there would be
adequate connectivity by going down to the south down to Persimmon
Street and then going east over to Rupple Road or you could go west and
hit Broyles Avenue and I will let Charlie address that. He's got a better
idea about that.
Sloan: Hi, I'm Charlie Sloan, I'm the developer on this project and the owner.
After visiting with John Nock on his project proposed to the east of us we
really didn't want to make a connection. We didn't mind doing a
pedestrian connection but we felt like that on my project if you count there
are four lots down from where the connection is proposed, I'm building
Persimmon Street. We are going to build a collector street there. We felt
like we were still in the spirit of connectivity, we don't feel like you have
to get out and drive around like some of the neighborhoods where you
have to go maybe a mile around just to get to the next neighborhood. We
are talking just a few lots over. We just felt like with that connection that
we would have people cutting through. John feels like more through his
project that there was more of a chance that my people would cut through
his project than his would come through mine. One of the things that we
talked about was traffic going through there with that connection was the
fact that I attended one of the seminars here about uses of streets and street
designs. One thing streets can be used for besides driving on is for
children to play in. As long as you don't have.traffic that doesn't belong
in that neighborhood cutting through there those streets could be used for
more than just traffic and that is the reason we just felt like that connection
wasn't necessary. I know we discussed this twice in the Subdivision
Committee meeting. I know the policy is connectivity, it is just one of
those things that we wanted to address and see, we felt like maybe that
was something since we are building a road right here beside us that we
Planning Commission• •
February 9, 2004
Page 6
wouldn't have to connect. We didn't mind doing a walking which would
encourage walking, bike riding or something like that between the two
neighborhoods. His has rear entry garages is what he is proposing, which
will have alleyways backed up to me. We will be more of a ranch style
home, bigger homes. Technically you would leave my neighborhood and
go right into an alleyway of his is what you would end up with. We just
felt like we were two different type projects and we would just like to keep
that separation so each one could sort of keep it's identity. Yet, we didn't
feel like we were impacting. I think he has got three or four connections,
two connections to the Meadowlands he has to make, two on Persimmon
and I think one more on Rupple so he is going to have four or five
connections coming into his neighborhood. That's all I can say on that
particular reason. The other thing that I had talked with Gary Adams had
been 46'h Street. We are improving 46`h Street on the south end of 461h
Street. I think that the problems they are having are up on the north end.
Once again, we didn't have problems, I don't know if this is the forum to
address it. Money that we would spend on the south end could be spent
more or less on the north end to maybe widen that for so many feet so
when people pull off of Wedington it is not a narrow road. I don't care
where the money is spent as long as it is spent in the best place verses us
curb and guttering the south end which the problem is really not at the
south end, the problem is more at the north end. Whatever we can do, we
are proposing, it's not on the plans, we are going to go ahead and extend
our sidewalk up to the next street to try to make a connection so it would
be easier for that neighborhood to get onto our sidewalks to come on down
to hopefully be able to walk to the Boys Club and make it a little bit easier
for pedestrian traffic. That's all I've got .
Hoover: Thanks. Are there any other comments?
MOTION:
Ostner: I would like to make a motion that we approve R-PZD 04-02.00 to the full
Council with the conditions as stated.
Hoover: I have a motion by Commissioner Ostner, is there a second?
Allen: I will second.
Hoover: Is there more discussion?
Bunch: I would like to offer an amendment to eliminate the vehicular access to the
subdivision to the east and have it remain as a pedestrian and non -
motorized vehicle access way.
Hoover: Does anyone want to second the amendment?
Planning Commission •
February 9, 2004
Page 7
Shackelford: I will second it.
Hoover: We have an amendment by Commissioner Bunch and a second by
Commissioner Shackelford to make the eastern connection pedestrian
only, not vehicular.
Bunch: Not motorized vehicle. It could be bicycles, scooters.
Shackelford: For the record, that is the connection that lies between lots 10 and 11.
Hoover: First we are going to vote on the motion to approve as is on the drawings?
Williams: No, on the amendment first.
Hoover: Is there anymore discussion about the amendment?
Anthes: A question of the applicant. You say that Putting Green Drive if it extends
to the east lines up with the alley in Mr. Nock's proposal?
Sloan: Yes, he would have a street extending on. Once you leave my property
the first thing you are going to hit is his alley. He will run an alley parallel
with my property line. I guess I didn't make that plain. Obviously, if I
put a street to my property line he is going to pick up the street. I'm just
saying the first thing that we hit are his alleys feeding the back of his
properties and stuff like that.
Anthes: You would cross that alley but you would still be on a street?
Sloan: Right. He would have alleys feeding into that street. We agreed to put a
fence up between us and everything else. I'm just saying as you pass
through there he has alleyways running behind is what he is proposing
from behind his houses with all rear entry. I'm just saying that that is sort
of what we would be feeding into would be his alley ways there.
Obviously, it would be a street going into another street. One of the things
John is wanting to propose is because he is going to rear entries is to
propose the 24' wide street, the smaller residential street. Here again, that
is not determined by the numbers yet but that is what he is proposing. He
is going to have a little bit narrower streets so that is another reason for
him not wanting my traffic cutting through his neighborhood. There is
one little loop when he puts everything together there is one little short cut
that people might have a tendency to take to get to Rupple Road verses
going out Persimmon and taking Persimmon over to Rupple Road and
coming around. That is one of the fears that he had was more traffic. I
thought John would be here tonight but more of my traffic going through
his project.
Planning Commission• •
February 9, 2004
Page 8
Anthes: Staff, have you seen this project?
Warrick: We've seen a concept drawing of this project. It is not in process. If there
is a connectivity requirement or if there is not the Planning Commission
will be asked to review the project to the east of this site and determine the
appropriate connectivity and layout.
Anthes: My question is have you seen the layout and are you satisfied that this
connection can be met?
Warrick: Yes.
Anthes: Thank you.
Hoover: Is there any other discussion on the amendment?
Graves: 1 just have a question on the conditions of approval number four and five
have some Planning Commission determinations included and the motion
was to accept those conditions or include those conditions, we need to
make a determination even if it is the staff is going to decide that or
whatever, we need to make some kind of determination on that I think.
Hoover: Can we do that after we vote for the amendment?
Williams: Before the amendment but not before you vote for the whole thing.
Hoover: Right.
Graves: 1 think the amendment has to be voted on first.
Hoover: Is there any other discussion on the amendment?
Bunch: 1 would like to make one comment from the General Plan 2020, and this is
in your packets on page 1.15, 9.8F, it says "Site new residential areas
accessible to roadways, alternative transportation modes, community
amenities, infrastructure, and retail and commercial goods and services."
Having an alternative transportation mode connection does promote
alternative transportation and possibly would discourage people from just
jumping in the car and driving over to the next door neighbor's to
encourage walking and that sort of thing. There is still, if the amendment
is approved, there is reasonably close access for vehicular traffic and I
think that by changing that connection to an alternative transportation
mode that it is in keeping with our 2020 Plan directives.
Hoover: Is there anymore discussion?
Planning Commission• •
February 9, 2004
Page 9
Ostner: We've discussed this at Subdivision, as might be apparent at this point.
The reason I think that we should approve the drawing as drawn is that
when we start doing little sidewalk cut throughs, which is what we are
talking about. Changing this street connectivity, driving connectivity, to
everything but driving, I believe quite the opposite happens. I believe it
becomes for kids. I believe it becomes mostly for people who cannot
drive or who are not driving. I think connectivity has a certain status. I
think we are living in a car culture. We wrestle with that a lot but this is a
car culture. If we start to let subdivisions enclose themselves without
street connections, driving connections, like we did in the old days, our
other streets get traveled more heavily by cars because there are no other
options. That is really the point of connectivity is people say well, I have
no choice, I have no other way to go, I have to get out on this street. We
started doing connectivity to give people options because people do drive
a lot. With a full street people have all of the options. They can drive
because that is just what we do but they can also do everything else. They
can walk on the sidewalk, they can take bikes and alternative
transportation and that is the thing about connectivity that I believe is
important. Our whole town becomes, for lack of a better word, a cut
through, but we don't want it to be a fast cut through. If you have to get
through and you have to take another way there is another way. I believe
it should be a driving connection as it is drawn. That's it.
Allen: How would we proceed with this voting because Commissioner Ostner
was the one that offered the initial motion.
Hoover: All we are going to vote on is the amendment right now not to do the
vehicular eastern connection. Then we will proceed to the next level.
Shackelford: Obviously, I seconded the motion for the amendment so I'm in support of
this. I agree with Commissioner Ostner that this will be a place that kids
are going to use. I, on the other hand, I support that. I think this is going
to make this area safer for the kids in both neighborhoods. This is an area
that there are going to be a lot of kids walking and riding bikes with the
close vicinity to the Boys and Girls Club. Whenever I looked at this I
thought that was a good idea simply because there is pretty close
connectivity to the south and east on Persimmon if you had to take
vehicular transportation through here that this might be a safer alternative
for the children of both neighborhoods by cutting down on some of the
interior traffic on some of these smaller roads. That is kind of the thought
process that I went through in my decision of whether or not I would
support this.
Vaught: I have just two quick questions. It is my understanding that if we go to
pedestrian only the right of way remains the same, we are not going to
Planning Commission• •
February 9, 2004
Page 10
shrink that
down
to like 6'
wide that it is going to
be a
wider connection of
some sort?
Have
you guys
had that conversation
with
the developers?
Warrick: We don't require a right of way for a pedestrian connection. Usually it is
an access easement.
Vaught: I would like to see it remain the width it is so you don't shrink it down and
have fences on either side so it is a small little alleyway to get through
between the two. Also, my concern is the connection on the other side
that it remains of the same character getting them to the streets and
sidewalks in the next addition. You could build alleyways all down there
and that could dead-end to the back of houses if it is just a little access
easement. I would like to see that continued through in the next
development. I do like the idea of making it pedestrian only, or non -
vehicular only. I do think kids will primarily use it but I don't think that's
a bad thing. I think that could be good with the vicinity of the Boys and
Girls Club and some of the other things going in this area and the heavy
residential development in this area.
Hoover: Is there any other discussion? We have an amendment to do no vehicular
access on the eastern connection, that would be a yes vote.
Bunch: That would be
the
eastern
extension
of what is shown as Putting Green
Drive between
lots
10 and 11
and east
of Mulligan Drive.
Ostner: Yes means for alternative transportation only?
Hoover: Yes. Renee, would you call the roll please?
Roll Call: Upon the completion of roll call the motion to amend the conditions of
approval to eliminate the eastern connection of Putting Green Drive was
approved by a vote of 5-4-0 with Commissioners Anthes, Ostner, Hoover
and Allen voting no.
Thomas: The motion passes five to four.
Hoover: Thank you. Looking at the Planned Zoning District as a whole. We have
a motion but we have two discussion items. Item number four, staff would
you respond to this? Is there a recommendation on what kind of fence? 1
thought usually that would be decided on before it got here.
Warrick: The applicants presented a proposal, you should have drawings in your
packet. The question is should there be a fence and should it look like
what they are proposing.
Planning Commission• •
February 9, 2004
Page 11
Anthes: On page 1.15 of our packet, calling from the General Plan 2020 regarding
community character, 9.19d clearly states "Discourage perimeter walls
and guard houses around the perimeter of new residential developments
and promote "connectivity" to increase accessibility and provide more
livable neighborhoods." We have a strange condition here in that we are
building three streets where we really should be building two. These
backyards could easily adjoin each other without the street and creating
this alley condition going through with a raceway with fences on either
side. Can you tell us, at Subdivision when this was seen we didn't know
what was happening on the other side of the street from this development,
do we know now?
Warrick: We know now that the applicant for Persimmon Place Subdivision, the
Bill of Assurance that they provided when they were zoned for that
property to be developed for the single family subdivision, Persimmon
Place, one of the conditions in that Bill of Assurance was that they
construct a masonry wall adjacent to 46`h Street on the edge of the
property. Part of that had to do with concerns of the neighbors with regard
to noise and the appearance of the subdivision. They have in house
submitted to the Planning Division a request for the Council to consider
reconsideration of that Bill of Assurance to provide a more aesthetic fence
wall that is more consistent with what is being proposed for Cross Keys. I
have asked them to bring us that information so that it can be provided to
the Subdivision Committee as well as the Planning Commission before it
is forwarded to the full Council because it does have a lot to do with what
happened through the Planning process on the Persimmon Place project.
One of the reasons that I believe these two developments ended up
backing up to 46's Street, which is not necessarily, a desirable condition
based on the information that you just sited out of the General Plan, is that
when Persimmon Place came through the Preliminary Plat process 46`s
Street was designated a collector on the Master Street Plan. As that
project was approved and shortly thereafter in timing, that street was
downgraded from a collector status on the Master Street Plan to a local
street and the collector status was then granted to Broyles Road which is
on the opposite side of Persimmon Place west of the project. That had to
do with a better connection getting from Wedington Drive all the way
south to 6`s Street but it did affect what had already been approved through
the Preliminary Plat process for Persimmon Place. That is kind of where
we are with that process. These two projects, you are right, we do have
that section of the General Plan that discourages perimeter walls. There is
concern that with both of these subdivisions having large tracts of land just
walled off on either side of 46's Street that we will have a condition that is
not as conducive to community as we would prefer.
Planning Commission• •
February 9, 2004
Page 12
Hoover: If I'm understanding the plans correctly, because they have all their
backyards facing the street is the need for the fencing. That is not the
preferred way but I can see the reasoning behind it.
Anthes: It is because of the fact that we have this three street condition instead of a
two street condition which you would normally see in this instance.
Knowing that and knowing that the people that purchase these homes
would probably rather have some sort of screening, the idea that that
would be as they are shown masonry with a wood infill that might have a
little bit more transparency to it, seems a little nicer than a huge masonry
tunnel going down between those two properties.
Sloan: Precisely. I just wanted to address it. We started out trying to only
duplicate what had already been passed before just for compliance sake.
We didn't want to fight or do battle again. Once we sort of designed it
and looked at it and went and looked at some fences, a masonry fence is
pretty stark. It wasn't what we wanted. We were trying to figure out some
sort of textures. You do have the back of the houses looking at you and I
know in my home you don't want to see my backyard. You want me to
have a fence up so that is the reason we were trying to figure out what we
could do. Basically, do partially brick, partially shadowbox fence of some
design and the main thing was landscaping. We talked to Commissioner
Ostner about having trees every 40' or 50'. We went back and talked to
the owners of Persimmon Place and said could we not work something out
that compliments each other so we don't have one side looking like one
thing and another side looking like something else and so they were gladly
in agreement to do it. I said put a little bit more emphasis on landscaping
and everything. Across the street we are coming back with a proposal that
on the south side of Persimmon Street all the way from Broyles Road
possibly almost to the Boys Club that will all be white wrought iron
fencing. We don't want to block the view of everything to the south. We
are trying to do something with this one that sort of fits that project that
will come forward later on that compliments it and that is the reason, one
of the things for the curved wall at the intersection so we don't have a
square wall. Create more visibility and landscape that corner so that
although it is not the entry. What you are seeing is perspective of a
drawing sitting at 46`s Street and Persimmon looking east on a road that
hasn't been built yet. We are trying to make that a focal point on the
corner so it is not as stark and just a square box and not just boxed off so
we were just trying to look at some different products to use there. We
told staff we didn't mind working with them on what we came up with
between the two projects, something that is pleasing with the
neighborhood. We are visiting with the neighborhood. This started from
one of the neighbors saying look, I don't really want that wall. The person
that wanted that wall is no longer really there, I've bought him out. Now
Planning Commission* •
February 9, 2004
Page 13
maybe we will have an opportunity to relook at the thing if everybody is
willing to come up with something that is a little bit better of a plan.
Anthes: Will your P.O.A. maintain this wall?
Sloan: Yes, just
as it would the walkway
space and we have no problem
leaving
the same
spacing on the walk way
between the two projects.
Anthes: That is item four right?
Hoover: Yes. Is there any other discussion about the fencing? Onto item number
five, staffs recommendation for improvements 14' from the centerline of
461h Street.
Warrick: I would ask that as the Planning Commission is making those
determinations that you also determine that Persimmon Street on the south
be fully constructed. It is not listed on there but is listed in the findings.
Hoover: Do you want that to be item fifteen or include that with item five?
Warrick: It is pertinent with item five that it also include the construction of
Persimmon Street along the south property line to 28' with curb and
gutter.
Hoover: Are there any comments about staffs recommendations. Are we in
agreement or does anyone have a problem?
Vaught: I would rather see the road next to this fully developed instead of having
half of it developed on the other side of 46`h and leaving the other side
next to this addition not fully developed. I would like to see the whole
road finished out rather than take the money and shift it further north on
the road as the developer mentioned. I think that that will come in time as
well as more development comes through. I would like to see the road
completed.
Hoover: Staff, do you have a comment on that?
Warrick: I believe that is consistent with our recommendation.
Bunch: In that same view, a question for staff. Is the other side of this being
comparable improvements being put in by Persimmon Place?
Warrick: Yes, along 461h Street they have the same requirement.
Shackelford: Did we get a second to the original motion?
Planning Commission* •
February 9, 2004
Page 14
Hoover: We did but I can't remember who it was.
Thomas: It was by Commissioner Allen.
Hoover: I guess we need to ask the first and the second are you in agreement with
Persimmon Street on the south being constructed?
Ostner: Yes, to change condition number five to include staff recommends 14'
from the centerline of 46`h Street including curb, gutter, and storm sewer
and 28' along Persimmon along the south edge of the property.
Hoover: Is there anymore discussion? Renee?
Roll Call: Upon the completion of roll call the motion to forward R-PZD 04-02.00 to
the City Council was approved by a vote of 9-0-0.
Thomas: The motion carries by a vote of nine to zero.
STAFF IAIEW FORM - NON -FINANCIAL OOGATION
AGENDA REQUEST
For the Fayetteville City Council Meeting of: March 2, 2004
FROM:
Dawn Warrick
Name
Planning
Division
ACTION REQUIRED: Ordinance approval.
SUMMARY EXPLANATION:
CP&E
Department
R-PZD 04-02.00: Residential Planned Zoning District (Cross Keys, pp 438) was submitted by Chris Brackett
of Jorgensen & Associates on behalf of Charles Sloan and Sloan Properties for property located south of
Wedington Drive at the corner of N. 46th and Persimmon Street. The property is currently zoned R-A,
Residential Agricultural and contains approximately 38.48 acres. The request is to rezone the subject property
to a Residential Planned Zoning District allowing for 108 single family dwellings, a density of 3.56 units per
acre.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval.
any AA�tto�rney—
Department Director
Finance & Internal Services Dir.
Received in Mayor's Office
Date
2/ Iq/oy
Date
—/g—� Cross Reference:
Date
Previous Ord/Res#:
Date Orig. Contract Date:
�o�/ Orig. Contract Number:
Date
New Item: Yes No
Date
FAYETTEVI LLE
THE CITY OF EAYETTEVIILE. ARKANSAS
DEPARTMENTAL CORRESPONDEN
To: Dawn Warrick
Planning Division
From: Clarice Buffalohead-Pearman
City Clerk Division
Date: March 22, 2004
Re: Ordinance No. 4548
Attached is an executed copy of the above ordinance passed by the City Council, March 16,
2004, establishing a residential planned zoning district, R-PZD 04-02.00 containing 38.48 acres;
amending the zoning map and adopting the developmental plan.
This ordinance will be recorded in the city clerk's office, microfilmed, published in a newspaper of
general circulation and filed at the county courthouse. If anything else is needed please let the
clerk's office know.
Attachment(s)
Iasi 5A
..,.
P=1 0
PUBLICATION
I, ,�14 , /_ / ZlU/J/'. Z2.1,, do solemnly swear that I am
Legaf Clerk of the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette/Northwest Arkansas
Times newspaper, printed and published in Lowell, Arkansas, and that
from my own personal knowledge and reference to the files of said
publication, that advertisement of:
0 was inserted in the regular editions on
Po# Dom. &
"" Publication Charge: $ to
Subscribed and sworn to before me this
f'oy . day of 44C6 . , 2004.
My Commission Expires: 87A_5�/dOO
Please do
not
pay
from Affidavit.
An invoice
will
be
sent.
Official Seal
SEAN-MICHAEL ARGO
Notary Public -Arkansas
WASHINGTON COUNTY
My Commission Expires 07.25-2013
RECE►VED
MAR 2 5 2004
CITY CLERICS OFFICE
212 NORTH EAST AVENUE • P.O. BOX 1607 • FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS 72702 • (501) 442-1700
ORDINANCE NO. �E�B
AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING A RESIDENTIAL PLANNED -
ZONING DISTRICT TITLED (R-PZD 04-02.00l LOCATED SOUTH
OF WEDINGTON DRIVE AT THE CORNER OF N. 46TH AND PERism 1�i
,
STREET CONTAINING 38.48 ACRES MORE OR LESS; Exiiiiiii
AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF
FAYETTEMLLE; AND ADOPTING THE ASSOCIATED RESIOEN- ft Of Fay
AND AMENDED
DE IT ORDAINED BY THE CRY COUNCIL OF THE CRY OF FAYETTMLLE, ARKANEAE:
Section 1: That the zone classification of fhe foMowtrg described property is hereby cwh9ed as fobwa;
From RA Residential Agriculture to R-PZD 04.02.00 as shown In Exhibit'A' attached hereto and Made
a pert hereof.
Section 2. That the charge in z"" clazUficatcn Is based upon the approved master tlevelot t plan
and development standards as shown on the plat end approved by the Planning Corrahealan on
February 9. 2004except that PUthg Green DrNO shall be extended to the east as a local sweet..
Section 3. That the urdrence shall take effect and be in IUa force at such time as all o/ the requi erhand;
of the development plan have been met.
Section 4. TM fhe oMcal zorwrg map of the City of FayanavWe. Arkenea% Is heraby amended to rMect
the zorwg change provided h Section 1 above.
PAEEED mU APPROVED INS the 16M day of March, 2004.
EXHSIT'A'
R-PZD 04-02.00
OF THE SE1/4 OF THE SWIM OF SECTION 12, T16N, R31W IN WASHINGTON COUNTY,
NSAS AND BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE
)FINER OF SAID SE1/4, SWI14 THENCE S02037'23M 1.63 FEET TO THE P.O.B.. THENCE
7'23M 1320.10 FEET, THENCE N87.02.10M 1266.36 FEET, THENCE N02016'32'E 1318.64
THENCE S87"'18'E 1274.35 FEET TO THE P.O.B.; CONTAINING 38.48 ACRES MORE OR
SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS AND RIGHT OF WAY OF RECORD.
RECEIVED
MAR 2 5 2004
CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE
CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
a pp
t,. ,
f'rn
aryl. .,
,y 11 I"potr
t
.L r. ,i,
S5
&
.{Y."t I
t A'w Nk., m
le ILI
k i! r „.i__, i f` i 1 _I "'! t16?„ d�\ 4 �`•-.„ _ .. L..,. , h ILL,
assA A. 8 JCNNIFER'F. rrno
L xl
' ""` Lb262 v " ri r
723 N 46rw AVE ' a' I�i x e'� GREG J. 8 MARA A. 5tllRLF.� � � b..61 , , :i � 1. -...I
FAYETTEVILLE, AR 7)y704 �' 1 �� � 1 ,r 7l8 N. 46 AVE. � � � .-._� F f � I: lIVAYINEE' � NANCY P COWAN IILL
:.:,� _ x20N1NC+ k°h 4 - ,x e, FAYETTEVILLE, AR. 72704 5' '4 4485 W. L. TRELL. LANE .t ;�
1 xw ,.:�x , x ZONING = R_A I , ` .,..,..., _,.,_. FAYETTEVL4.LE, AR. 72701 .,.....1,."., "` a .�',7k .. ,e„ I_____I: k,-I.._.. ;,u-.ui £.....I-.._k.:..,*...
I zoN G R-A I NC' CORN
t 26. / 175.75' ... _!._- x " rr _.............. ''I'S`'s',ti I"YA! r :lr ...... ILL,',"'6„'I SE1 SWI14
I'LLd • l �. ?)i. ti,' � , Y 7 11 n"a ���;� "y Fp p jT , , j r a
i >- _.... --, ............ ; $1.0.9 8/. a3' A1.03'. _ ^, 7 Q�®'� ° �'�.,'�° < 1 2- 6'•SI
..,., „^.�j^ I fff i, ,.7 eu `-t_... ....... ._,__.,.. _ 8L0i .k 81 DI f F
_, = _ .�~'
(FOUND IRON P
.. 4. ° 1 to a § 30 3 J'�_ ........._ -._ RL 03"` • Bl. P3 8/.OJ ..._ )
i ~w r I r y. I "cro• 4 c-. h z o 20' F. ".M . - -` _.I` _.... ti._.,,. „_, ,,.._ OI.04' .. _ _ -
8m1, �`o. c,., 12,834 FT? ,y l?,1f51FT ua �° ra ,...v ,,,.,: °,w ...... _.,. _ >e _... .� .�, S02°37'23°W
w f $185 _ILL
AID
,;....__., t.,,.v -._,:._ '",,,.,,„,,, ° 0.00 ZQaF o .y P `t?.^•', la '�, t,^"=,,.20"Cf.E. ,._.. _ 1.63'
x _ x 1 �.- 'S f "� 10 844 FT . ..,t -s ^ c* °� r ` p
I 0�1 p A" WTR Is,407 F7 M y l0,934 FT ,,o v o " -
'_.__ "^•," 67' ' P. ", N "$-�._ r0, 416 FT ` "> 1Q;923 FTz 2 •r �' ° �, ;o v n, cx DIY �qw..,,"
I I •.,; 6 a,931Fr z N 2. q t x
I I f5.T54FT2o R �l,."...,...;. �, - - ,„:, 1D;7FT ^�! ,,a FT2 .,on (I670FTz" t3,424�FT' °h 5„,x Cf
,r 4' StGE14/AlSK !' 0,4•S5 " a b i o
"_, NM as' p I o� b / 4 57 36 8l 03 `11- $! 03'� _.. _ d° 5' BLDG SET ACK d ,fG E. IP 463FT2 „-,.. �r 7O.,0O.k q S� d I n ( d, w a
- Iwcp. :,,,, ,_� ." -. .. 8! Oi 8l Q3 Al 03 r �- .3•. ~6 4b x i ! PROPERTY LINE
' �- $l 03 _. ,,,.,, v 81.04` d 'h r
_ _ l..__...._, tS871146106 �Cn1.t. Af Q3 r p3 50 44 T b y x' F� 012 452FT ro 1 f ; I
SL �85.0
� � � ..� , a.� X SCALE In t0
ILL
1 I � _ ....,, /f'
u"3 05' SL 84 8b ,
ro ,. Ra° T
^I — — _ 4.R6' 4 bCz6 I �5'/Q ExrSrrNc, FENCE x
wro1 12,432 FT`�..m'p .o°s, .. ." "', x. :. %4"'
Ito-_, 84.8b' 85 03' SL { L07.4/`'_i"-
?• b 1 L' R° sWR. " z5' B�aG. sE BACK a u.E - �4_ _ o> (BARBED WIRE) s� " ( ..I° S87°02'l0"E uv' 1 ,�}, In w' i7 �"' " •c> "> ?" 34, f z I X
L, 20 UE. , z nr 11,5f0 FT2 Pn 100 '� 2 u� °��'a In °I `° '° ."� , .. ,g q�qq �y"' ¢gMIppgg o ..._. 'Sq - a ,..1f, 3,34 FT I roi
... ........ .._I H d+ ,y Il o II,510 ,-T «7 r 2 2 ,1. I .., n .x'' ^ "� I4. I
f4,LL Pr "' Ii '
_ I .' I I f1,,10 FT `2 lI,5f0 FTz I1,5G0_FTz /o k .o 'o
._;.. .,,. ,..,.....,.. ... 4.! I '"+, 2 o I 5I0 F.T .? M z
_ I� ro u.E. r 20
1 ° ., I I / $( FT 'C+IGalO ✓`T I , v S I.=..'„ ,� ••w .._. ... ."..--_� f._.'� ' _ ^ :•.,,......, ._.._., I I \ r u"i.. 14, 784 PT't' � l .,._,..AT°� 'I I
_ _.k __.. L J_S8T °OA lQ E f0 I 0 /
sA7°o 'loE"ILL 2Q
5 J�, 1 b �4�4P ^x,^rT ._.mm � r+ �� I�'�' 77(.'(F<''Lett
II4. Bb'__I--''84, (76 ,.....-,,,`�. $4.6F''.' ^ -'� --_.._- ----.. .._.. _ —„� (� ..... N41� � 58%"02'lOk"E� � r� � ro �w 13/5�{ zw,A� ---
I`
I20' U E. 2 u ro � ` 84.86' � MILL ILL "- " N 0 4L8 I'
., j .",t 60, R�W o 2 n, ._ -� 84x 84.86' ..._.. ..... ._.., ,_.. m 00 20' flT^" < W I i I ed ....,.� �...,.. __ A4.R6
r 9 ° d 2 0 I �n „I IL51100 FT ui rr5lO F�..'i'^ ,"'° "� t k - t I fl
I a J
92
21 ka 11,,510 FT2' IL510 FTz " ua"it, 510 FTz° 2= ,� e� „o, , 1,. .., c=... ,.._.
w _ - ...r ~r-�. u> 0,5ro FT r1,510�FTz" ui I1,5 T2r` bf 14,789 Tz o I,, „I32. 06'"1
8" WTR. - ... "' w N "' I m c�a 5 15 w. r 4025 ,.,......_,_ c4' SIDEW LA ._..- 7- :•'I n, ,d0,059 FT E
$S 03 "" . _.-. L GLILLILL_ -FT8ACk d U .. _�......... - - o - - {
*_ 2 ,-,, u_re $/0 86n.;5•. : A4A6 r ,. , $4. $6' , '--- �r_ j /I c;4 0. ,..,',: d, ro 20't U t3.1
.._.r �4--" _,_ __ - I . _ - .e.�_,'_-:-}- , R -�.:_.' A�b d_--.�,: ..-:-.�ILL'.,': e:, "• rµ 84 86 ^ , 84 86 . ,_ 84 A6 i 1 84.86,,,r) „T_ -"'• 1 (• �,m--- -
..A..,,.,. „.,..�.�,.,
...�. _ 85. 6- !
p
a 3a
f0 E
&aB'A"RClC GBt44PE Ile
I I I v -- �1 4.$6' `.., 4" 6' 84.$6xm w ..,,. , ; FT2' LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
_ 9L. 4.s6' A4,A6 S)f q'l• sF -T<$, $4.86' SL Stt.86' ',i 84. 86• acn 85.03 ILL
...:, t AL m ll;'Y)00
h�ro I?,L ACC (I.
�` r 4,
E 6 o ,^a> il. : u� M I I- 8" SWR. -"-'1 1-- .--- _ _.- _ � "", y (33, oS�`+"'!'1 d k' w' PART OF THE SEi/4 OF THE SWl/4 OF SECTION I2, TlC'AN, R,1/W IN WASHfNGTON
SIB I t ICI 14„984 FTz IT uy : 'o % � I � � `a 0 " va "I � � � "� -- .. �a v f a"
j m Nprn !'. w' 2 !" "" "I I ". "' e.a I I• 21' sq, Rew ",.,..I. .x" , COUNTY, ARKANSAS AND BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
SB` I..; ci 14,784)1FT N M 1/,5L0 FTz P1,5f0 FT' 'n "`' 'ca ^'a n o - 5R, ., "� I �`,,...,, r'
I Is " `, o 11,5l0FT2 2 ,ri w! I '� "� ✓' COMMENCING AT THE NE CORNER OF SAID SEIPI,., SWP14 THENCE S02037'23"W l.C?3
t I; y I I-` II5f0 FT 11,510 FT ,,..,. ., ".,.,I 11Il,5l 6 2° M / 7 2 0 LO �? A IL,041 FT
„" ! - •'F°�, 10'UE "` z M1I510FT2 I"� us/,50 T N r4,7$4FTz w „� .r /,d FEET TO THE P.a.B., THENCE S02°37'23"W1520,10FEET, THENCE N87°02'10"W
u z I ro
ILL
......._ n i I tT8 03"'w"�" i f 58TO l0"t 20' 1/.E. I ".""°,,.... , ,°"' q o I �1 F' 20' /k
- - - �,�I I- - . — f 1266.56 FEET, THENCE N02016'328E 1318.64 FEET, THENCE S87°0678"E 1274.35
„I �;[ ,oI 20,UF. 4y o ekd ,' t--._.,Il.._..�-'..�-- w LO'U.E.-�iIv`w n !—_.�______ 1 �'t� ca•,.. "- _,,, S87°02'10Ed _ f FEET TO THE P. Q. B.; CONTAINING 38.4$ ACRES r`10RE OR LESS SUBJECT TO
a SIR i1o.02' _ _� _J L." G
2 c6 m �:' Y TZ 64"&b"'" .,. — r __ __ ; -- ..,.,.._.. S87�02'LO E 4 I, - f 55.54''� /' EASEMENTS AND RIGHT OF WAY OF RECORD.
II,684 FT I I: _ 8" WTR I IZ, �6'_._, _.'_8T."A-s -. ---.^`-----•. "y r,
a ti z I I B4 6, k —_ ___ u
f 712
0 o aIz m
M `,. r .11(A.02'
s 84.86 ""$`4"A6 1
u w o - , „'" ld 84.`.'^ ---•� tj..m fL082 FTz .
SIOEWALG( ,. �E! : I L4,7f14 FT2 "r` ui 11,510�FT2 ° t.. 7 7 2. .�? % ! Pn .*'" :. f* ; .., " 1 / G� �58 02'l0" I ro WUM ILI
I "SWR. WFfM LAN[ IINVESTMEN7"S'"L ILL
,x^.� 4 ul j n't o �� E 1� N '� „.., M.... Lf� 11;5510lFT M 11,5/(°IpFT2" Ira 1/, 5J0 Tz ° �r �" 2 w �° r " o g,...,.. �, I _- ___.__ _ 0. e"S L366 OAKS'MANOR DR. :�.QciD PLAIN NOTE:
F r /050 T =L !
Ipccaa I. a �, uy 34.
kn r I. +. �, of 03
6d
! I
"J h. S r !!5/0 T r -2+"' FAYETTEVILLE,
2 u" wa F PTEY LL AR 72703
t° A• . I f! ba2 F7` I :� �!' 1. ''._.� r I _ :, A ^ y _.._ L5q e M t 'h I1,...rIQ'F7 l(, 510 FTzu> 1,j (4,7$9 FTz -��..' o! I 1 1 I vp' ZONNC, = RSF-4
I" I = 141 m.,. -8 "SWR. — 4' S{DEW LK 4hC SETDA1 o s 3,317 FTz I °"4 THIS PROPERTY IS NOT AFFECTED BY THE I00 YEAR FLOOD PLAIN
IleI R5 n2 94.$6 tl u _ A" WTR. Q I a � AS PER FIRM #0514,3CO091D DATED 07-21-99.
_I 13,5.49' ' " ^,', " A4 86 84.86 6
I, . }- --• _... �..._,=^"-'- 84 86 84 86 A4.8' ' .... ��... 39?1, o RBI
.,, ,�...,._ ,...�.: "^- . ' "P : �=. , „84, , h 84,66e$5
r7.
I I _
a? ? 11, 515 FT .,,-+r..^,: ` "".� .,.,",. -' k .,,.,,-�_ ,�„,•�,Pa�EpEN ®RPS/.�.�.(L: �!W � _ �;..,i,-... _.. J0�4 3_ PEDESTRIAN
.n $4.86' 4.8b' tr A,• :� . -.", Oar- _ _-_ •..:.. ,r.. - ,:,...,., • .�,.,m,� .,. �.., ACCESS NOTES:
- .
ILL
Le,
.I".^ "e I-,._..-.-__.•-._._F ! !�" .fy .•A:`.."' i' � l�
k
it - 86ILL
I r34.46' i ` ro _ �I n t !I� , `,�``WR. _.-_," �_ Re.86 A5.Oi' .SL' '�" "v ""` a i it I) THERE ARE Na KNOWN WETLANDS ON THIS PROPERTY,
IILL 25 BLDG. SE W f tl U:E. - 109: 2) DETENTION POND SHALL. BE MAINTAINED BY THE P,O.A.
,1. '7, 7, k P I.
I Ia I Pal o l4,TA0 FTz ° M z z I I ° ' , e1 I I 7�, � �— i L 3) TWO SIDEWALK ACCESS RAMPS WILL BE INSTALLED AT EACH STREET
j C �,. I { ( "p.°^" i, FT2 rri ,r5q °"> u�i ,SQ i
1 '
I' " �::..... rL510 FT M rr fb FT^ I' I ro u tell u,S �r f - z" I I ° ° ? ^ M ��. ._ ; CORNER.
I ! -It 429 F'Tr m I
'�pI k .. o !o �'I i�`f -,510 _..,, "� 11,5Lo FT >nr p u? �F _ 13, 166 F.T.2..�'�
L _ I .F. I I n 510 FT IIS/0 F(2N 4,7 z \ 4) ALL UTILITY CROSSING SHALL BE 6 4" PVC PIPES BURIED MINIMUM
--- U ! aA87 02IOE t 9 FT ,a ^ 20' UE,
1 .._.. ......_... I �'_ t33 44' o jn -Ne- ...._.__" ,-,,.. _w._. ......_J f.,_..._.. __.._... _...._,. � 10' U.E. -t� II , N q ! `' 1 i"'5 bc'fO°E� �i�� � 42" DEEP.
y 20' U Et
-
84.R6' — _ — _ S) LOTS MAY ONLY ACCESS INTERIOR STREETS.
2a' U.E. -. _ 1L0. 02' --- ,._...._. ,,... ,_ .._....._ ._.... '"" -..,. _,...._i: L:�W ...._..,..,, .._. I _ 9 I $4 R' — 1 6) THE DEVELOPER SHALL BUILD A DECORATIVE PRIVACY FENCE 2'
o 587a02'!0°E �)
ui _ ,�. !0' - °`.. 84. R6'" _,_ " t4 86' ` . - 5
_... I = ..>: , F -... - , ,....«. ,d 84 8f" fi"�...;., _.�. .._.. ....,. i w c Ih 1
`. o I OUTSIDE OF 46TH AND PER.SIMMaR1 STREET ,Rt{ uT_ }F._
I �pFILL?WAY S.
o i" ut "7 P;x.,,,^^' r t r SF3. .,w ", trt""1.:1c'r' [ -1 / �r:. \ lt,T.4:r �.:.
_ p I f4,789'FT2 o va.,.,,,, � ..G. o "a 'w t g ,.5 . .,,_ `.`; �4" WTR I m <'
F �a . I 2 2 :
w SPb'F �'� 5J F `e7 A 2 ,., ..., ,. T ll 0 T ui 2' ".,
26.62' _ 1 � 11i o ..� M I(,Tiw10 FT ui 1I5(0 FTz' ui ,� e o 9 w:: � M.� "" is � t 'SB7°02'IO°F IS.,..
IoI 21.03• ._�.. f �� 3a'r we :.. ,, �' nIf,510'PTz ;; lr570 FT 2` ui �" 2 °'49 wILL,,,, �,•� I :"' I S,® �I l03f4 FT! Vl7, It :.;. \ __-. ___. BLLILLDG,.wSE, TB ILLCK A U.E. `, na_.If,5t`0 FT ° ui � eo to /4, 789 FTz ��' 1 l_ 1,7b. 00' pf
85 03,.:..,. 86 `-- 84 86 BG.�fSlL9E' FiLKB 8" WTR. `> II, 5lO FTt o aa^�, I ua Ira, x,T
,. • I t p, `' ti fr"O, ..m ' -- 84 A6 84 8b -. .__ t _ `�k'. 1 p3'"' ",...,,.
-,+^r=^.�.,.. ,. .-:t^ 86 _ 84 86 _ 4e " 11,994 FILL? I`ILL, n
.. .,,5i ! I 4 I ...,. ._.... _....&....a, ®a5Q' R/T� MY�gPro-.'" _ _... .,:F... ,.0 .., ,., ,,,, , .. 84. Ab' 8R /' SL 4 \ F
LmIECmIEND
FOUND IRON PIN
I BOUNDARY CORNER
CENTERLINE MARKER
STREET LIGHT
SET IRON PIN
SEWER MANHOLE
FIRE HYDRANT
fL STREET LIGHT
CENTERLINE STREET
UTILITY EASEMENT
_ BUILDING SETBACK
8" SEWER LINE
8" WATERLINE
4 SIDEWALK
DRAINAGE PIPE
UTILITY CROSSING
TREE PROTECTION FENCE
ILL P ---^T P. -�L
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIF 2efelm ii I,1d' 4,r�. >i
0
STREET RIGHTwOF,,IWAY & SIDEWALK K TABLE
STREET RIGHT OF WAY STREET WIDTH SIDEWALK GREENSPACE
PERSIMMON STREET 70' 28' 6'** 15e
�...25;«
46TH STREET
14'* --
— 4t
DIVOT LINK
66
46'
4'
6'
WEDGE DRIVE
50,
28'
4,_6_
PUTTING GREEEN DRIVE
50'
28,
4'
6'
FLAGSTICK DRIVE
50'
28,
4'
Fa�
LOFTY WOOD DRIVE
50,
^�
�28,
4
6_
TOURNAMENT DRIVE
50,
28
4
MULLIGAN DRIVE
50
28,
1
4
69
ENGINEER
JORGENSEN 8 ASSOCIATES
CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC.
124 WEST SUNBRIDGE SUITE 5
FAYETTEVILLE, AR. 72703
(479) 442-9127
DEVELOPER
SLOAN PROPERTIES, INC.
3459 NOTTINGHAM PLACE
FAYETTEVILLE, AR. 72703
(479) 444-8404
OWNER
THE HOYET GREENWOOD TRUST A,
JEAN GREENWOOD DOWERS, TRUSTEE
452 NORTH 46TH STREET
FAYETTEVILLE, AR. 72701
ZONING = R-A
ALLOWABLE USE = SINGLE FAMILY
(USE UNIT 8)
PROPOSED DENSITY = 2.81 LOTS/ACRE
" DISTANCE TAKEN FROM CENTER.JNE.
SIDEWALK TO BE INSTALLED L ED O,I NORTHSIDE OF PERSIMMON STREET
ONLY AS SHOWN ON THIS PLAT.
Im
An.dalib"'d:.
G en•aai,.
T
SIDE REAR
PLAT PAGEw
#438
25'
8'
<. 0
s;le `x„ IT' 106 92. cry «.. d - �. _ .. ,:....,,,. e, D Ca
L -- _ w ' b°E SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS FOR .MEADOWL_ANDS-PHASE._1-8 It
na r
...'.'.. .>ar - .°:ems• ,,..,,.;n: - ' m.' B' �'- ;.. r t ,.23 N79 p9_,r" -
'.✓ I, r "_x- 2h' LOT 25 - 1968< - CRAIG LUTTREL-L, 441a BELT_ FLOWER DR., FAYETTEVILLE, AR. 7<704
�''"•,� I ! ,. ! I u* at `s-.' : ' -^re. -,., '. '- 948 93• '�^ s, TY^:..^, p` ^ n --> '� ,,, ^t
II
S
",, t , 5.00" 77. 0' "'^m*- �..-»•.,,.,";-a,�,.--�---��•-.c-,�.. m � R , o �n> F LOT 26 - 19663 - DEBBIE L. SCOGGLN, 4403 BELL FLOWER DR., FAYETTEVILLE, AR. 72701 q
of 17,330 FT - A ESMT.3 w, • 1 i _. _._,,,_ 'X an00'"•p x -` ... ^
NN,� cF. 7 Q f- 20 OkN. s 7 . � I
« h I 2 ,9.41. 113W�': F � v �, ._,.�, 8 a DO SL 52.0�.°,'�� yw.``m °� I "'j LOT 27 - i9684. -SPENCER 8 ALL.Y50h' BROWN, 4,387 BELL FLOWER DR., FAYC-'TTEVfLLE, AR. T2704
ux ba !, 84.41 of Id pro o - "a v o ,Q?^ o, t ..II
ti'`" '•I,,,,, I G I. -..I y qw ^I I� ri ^ 3 .....,..N AY. , 25 BLDG. 5 AC.K & L'E. �"I'. - "' " . ;^*"` 1 f4,920 FT2 `'w '` LOT 28 - 19685 - BRIAN SANDERS, 4371 W. BELL FLOWER OR., FAYETTEVIL.L.E, AR. 72704
I ti , , 2ui , ' y { " 8" SWR. "s?> 1' I LOT 29 - t96Bb - MtC,HA[L B. 6 JOANfJ L. TRAW 43'44 W. BELL FLOWER DR., FAYETTEVILLE AR. 72T04
ti wti a73 FT of i:l^ y,°y Ml1,529 FTz n 1,„ ?Q '�a 13, 7FT v n' w,., t,.,j �a 46.6 20' L/. E'. k F^a
-.- `x-'`,,,„ _I r" �I' L___ _,_,._� _�.. -_ y ,11, 524 FT o ? (�I5"z FT III . PLANTERS zI ro g9 1 m 1l3,Sd7 FT', � o �, £ 3 Z.I `� ,to � qx �. � 70,p0' 5,6. � LOT
LOT 30 - 19687 - THEODORE J. LS MARIAN R. STAHL., 882 N. OUE'FN ANNES LACE DR„ FAYETTEVILLE, AR. 72704 �
u u ] w
r•«r«'rP _ I ,�.n --.._J - ., - r.`.L _25 BL ISETBAK 9 U. 3'A, a C' .PLe4NTEI4i'Sw w 2 ff,524 FT I - 24*. ,.,M e-u I nr
�' ' "�"" ' LOT 31 - 19688 - EMADDUDfN GFIOL)SE, 431f W. BELL FLOWER DR., FAYETTEVILL.E, AR. T2704 r� "`^m•
."Ft""5�'i.'+ r-n �, 7854' (. _._ �T° I.. `" io :,p 11,529 FT -- l0' U. - _a" 11529 FT"`o^ n ._-a .n .. a
" '" ". f37.7.a g: 27° - N ,H �* ta.
,;t,i ,.,n.. F 85 a0 �. 85.00' `�.. o ",,,„,,,,,.x"" 'a r2,IA6 FT2 a''N 2 `w,a" `'+�« LOT 32 - 19689 - ROBERT S. HANNAK REVOCABLE TRUST, 4297 BELLFLOWER, FAYETTEVILLE, AR., 72704 1". --
_ -•""- 85 00 - - 9 cn 13,738 FT "•,cra. <a
SL "",.�„'., ,.:;_ ,. - 77.D0' w , ,.,. - - — a.„ L._.._.� _ ,_ I LOT 33 - I9b40 - GREC>ORY PROLlTY, 4275 BELL FLOWER DR., FAYETTF_V1LLE AR. T2T0/.
_- O .:,;... .xis ,.':':,Fn _...- n}^' s^r OL sw 5 QQr .s,. - [I A' CIACIA/fil K `,.. �.}
__
,..,BS o ,65.000 - 85.00
100-YEAR WSE _.
FL O'ODWAY
CONCRETE SWAL
DETENTION
POND
(SODDED)
CONCRETE WEIR
CHANNEL
100 YEAR
THE HOYET GREENWOOD TA
JEAN GREENWOOD JOWERS,
452 N. 46Ttt STREET
FAYETTEVILLE, AR. 72701
ZONING NIA (COUNTY)
�..._._.. -- _ _�_av 7^M'rILL I/ ~a.`s w)fve ILL -I,
WEDGE.e �... —" a aw,t"7'4".i: e'�' "i s."9r' Tx'J?V4
4' S1 EWALIiILI
R30
/ w t (6' GRE.. SPACE) R30`
_ 20, 20 '
u�ILL
ra r� i I b 26' E7LC)G. SETRACK & C . E.
-�100 Y`j WSE = 1204.17 y Ij:
Q
66' R/W
4
�
3,567 FT2 m 46
I
� � ' c 8 131567 FT ?
eLIQ t I
PLANTERS
98
PLANTERS b' SIDE AL.K
Rio (IS GR N;
I'LL,r ,5,/c^,,fi�',f`'^.,tiy +".`5 , ,.,r.,,=y P
,. _ R30 %r. > ,n 41,911, ILL
ear
., ee',
ILL— etL
LILL
)ODPLAIN
ENTERANCE DETAIL
SCALE /it = 50'
Lu III
cZi
TREE PROTECTION NOTE s c�
0 TREES SHOWN ARE TO SAVED AND i'ROTECTED Lm
DURING CONSTRUCTION BY INSTALLING HIGH
VfSABIL.ITY PLASTIC MESH FENCING THAT EXTENDS SIZE D.B.H.a q I
BEYOND THE DRIPLINE OF THE TREE Cq TREES. LABEL SPECIES IN, NOTES PRIORITY p;p��,,,
2) IF THE FENCE BARRIER MUST BE REMOVED, P ASH 3 REOPOVE MID w
BRIDGING OVER THE ROOT SYSTEM OF THE TREE 2 ASH 12 SAVE MID - r°'a
MUST BE USED IN ORDER TO AVOID CO'7PACTION 3 PIN OAK 7 SAVE MID c".t C),
LILLIVI
OF THE SOIL AROUND THE TREE OR TF'EES TO BE 4 ELM 12 REMOVE MID LU •":'
SAVED.
to3) CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS ARE Nor TO BE
STORED WITHIN THE FENCING OR DRlPLFNE OF THE ILL
TREE OR TREES. rC F.W
4) TRENCHING FOR SITE UTILITIES MUTT AVOID cn cj`•^.,
T14E DRIPLINE AREA OF THE TREES, IF UNAVOIDABLE,ILL
.
DRI INE TUNNELING UNDER THE DRIPLINE WILL BE AN ALLOWABLE 1,
11
ALTERNATIVE. x
5) IF A CHANGE IN GRADE OCCURS AROUND THE TREES, CYO �:r
baA PaoOa OaPaO OP@ O OPgP O O 00� O Oa0 P ILL'�"•A („ _ I
a o a o 0 o a o 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O a o 0 o THEN A RETAINING WALL MUST BE CCVSTRUCTED AT oaoP a aooaoo 0000o a oaoo
aoo ao 00000 ooao ao aao
oaaa a aoa000 oaao 0 oaoo THE DRIPLINE AREA, „
yLl
ILL
ILL
6) ANY EXCAVATION DONE AROUND Tf'E ROOTS OF 'TREES 1.4„
TO BE PRESERVED SHALL BE DONE BY HAND. ALL ROOTS w• :;
SHALK. 8E HAND PRUNED. ,� ell
HIGH VISABILITY - I
PLASTIC MESH FENCING ILI
TREE PRESERVATION NOTES_...�,con
�.,
TREE PROTECTION
_ , I AREA: 1,676,003 so rr 0�
NO SCALE TREE CANOPY EXISTING: 0.13% (2,245 So PT)
ILL
CANOPY PRESERVED O.OS % (877 5 J rT) C /•
TREE CANOPY REMOVED 0.08 % (1,368 Su FT) (�
NOTES: h Gti)
I.) EXISTING CANOPY THAT IS PROPOSED TO BE
REMOVED WILL BE MITIGATED BY A PAYMENT TO THE
CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE'S TREE FUND.
2.) THIERE ARE NO SIGNIFICANT TREES
ON TMIS PROPERTY.gel