HomeMy WebLinkAbout1993-10-04 - MinutesPRAB REGULAR MEETING OCTOBER 4, 1993 The meeting was called to order by Bill Waite at 5:30 pm in room 326 of the City Administration Building. Members Present: Driver, Kimbrough, Palmer, Savage, Waite, Wright Members Absent: Staff Present: Guests Present: Anderson, McConnell Clark, Cox, Edmonston Botantical Garden - Donna Porter, Maryetta Carroll, Emmie Anderson, Diane Bostick, Stephen Zisner, Green Space - Tim Clark, Linda Buege, Celia Scott-Silkwood Media Present: Ron Wood, Bill Bowden BUSINESS: I. MOTION:KIMBROUGH/PALMER The minutes from the September 13, 1993 PRAB meeting were approved unanimously 4-0. II. GREEN SPACE EXPENDITURES Clark: We are in the process of getting a topo on the Lewis property. Palmer: Why is Lewis so high on the CIP list, when it was just acquired? Why is the our CIP? We do not need to know this. I thought it was just a Waite: We submitted our list and City it. If we those. Kimbrough:Can we get sports park in anything about concept. staff revised have objections, we should forward together with City staff? MOTION: DRIVER/KIMBROUGH The PRAB approves the expenditure of green space funds for a topographical survey for the Lewis property and for a picnic table at the Youth Center. MOTION APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY 5-0 • • PRAB Page 2 III. GREEN SPACE PLATS Justin Addition Owner/Developer: Charles Dunaway Location: N of Huntsville on Cherry Lane Park District: SE Acres: .97 acres Single Family Units: 4 Land Dedication: .1 acres Money in Lieu: $900 MOTION:PALMER/KIMBROUGH The PRAB recommends to the Planning Commission to accept money, $900, in lieu of land for the green space requirement for Justin Addition. MOTION APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY 5-0 Owl Creek Owner/Developer: Mike Location: S of Hwy 16 Park District: Acres: Single Family Units: Land Dedication: Money in Lieu: Pennington , E. of Double Springs NW 14.80 acres 100 2 acres $18,000 MOTION: KIMBROUGH/PALMER The PRAB recommends to the Planning Commission to accept money, $18,000, in lieu of land for the green space requirement for Owl Creek. MOTION APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY 5-0 DISCUSSION Waite: Driver: Edmonston: Clark: Kimbrough: Driver: Waite: If we acquire land in this area, it needs to be a big area (20 acres). $18,000 will pale in comparison to the two acres at some point. Could we sell it later if we found better land? I don't know if the ordinance would allow that. This is a high density development. It would alter the plan if we took 2 acres out of 15 acres. The intent is to provide green space, especially for high density areas. Growth is so rapid out there. There might not be any hope of connecting any other land to this two acres. It is hard to get land that is adjoining donated. • PRAB Page 3 Edmonston:This is so close to the city limits, it might be better to come east with a park. Scott-Silkwood:The master plan does suggest subneighborhood parks. This area does have a creek. Edmonston:There are houses farther south on large plots of land so there won't be any land for sale in that direction. If we keep taking green space, will we have enough money to develop and maintain? Driver: It seems we need a statement from the City Council on what they would like to see with parks. Will there be money later on for these? At the last public meeting, a citizen addressed the subject of concentrating on current parks conditions over development of more parks. Once we take land, we are obligated to develop it. The green space ordinance states we must benefit that subdivision. The master plan say sub neighborhood parks are a main priority. We need to follow the plan if we are going to present the plan to the City Council. Edmonston: Kimbrough: Boxwood Addition Owner/Developer: Atlas Const/Francis Ferguson Location: W. of 265, S of Old Wire Park District: NE Acres: 19.38 acres Single Family Units: 55 Land Dedication: 1.38 acres Money in Lieu: $12,375 DISCUSSION: Clark: The land runs along the creek from Azalea to Gulley Park. Palmer: Jerry Sweetser's family owns a lot of that area and they would like to help with walkways. Edmonston:We have walked this area before and tabled this issue. Tim Clark:The three problems that will worry neighbors if this were donated as a park would be 1. vandalism 2. people have gardens there 3. It scares the neighbors that the parks department might develop the land. If the parks departement does not take this land, the developers will eventually sell this land to someone else. If the City take the land, it would stay natural. There are times that Palmer: Driver: Palmer: PRAB Page 4 people don't want to go to Finger, or Land Fayetteville, they just want to throw rocks in the creek, let. their dogs go, or chase rabbits. As soon as the developer thinks Parks does not want the land, he will sell it. We heard this before with Gulley. They want to keep some natural. This area would qualify for the City's plan for linkage between parks. This land is not just Jerry Sweetser's, it is a Trust. T. Clark: The Trust owns both sides of Azalea Terrace, and Vansyoc owns to Highway 265. Clark: We need a strip the entire length of the creek. We don't just want a small portion. Waite: We need to talk to Jerry. Edmonston:We had neighbors in 1989 that complained about us acquiring this land. Waite: We need bigger and better maps of this area. Driver: Can we say that we will take the land contingent on getting the whole strip? Edmonston:There will be some problems such as current fences on the property. MOTION:DRIVER/SAVAGE The PRAB recommends to the Planning commission to accept land, 1.38 acres, in lieu of money for the green space requirement for Boxwood Addition. MOTION APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY 5-0 MOTION:SAVAGE/PALMER The PRAB recommends to amend the previous motion to include the stipulation that the land that is donated be adjacent to the creek. MOTION APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY 5-0 Sterling Estates Owner/Developer: H.L. Cornish/Sterling Location:E. of Crossover, between Zion and Joyce St. Park District: NE Acres: Units: Land Dedication: Money in Lieu: 6.85 acres 3 single, 24 duplex .56 acres $4,995 PRAB Page 5 DISCUSSION: Edmonston:The developer wants to donate the land in the middle. I have concerns. This area is bordered by a street all the way around. Linda Buege:Why don't you want this land? Clark: Traffic is a problem, would be difficult to maintain, and it is a very small piece of land. Buege: The developer would like to form an association that would maintain the area since it doesn't meet the land requirement. Edmonston:We can't take a contract for a green space requirement, only land or money. Clark: It is a beautiful idea. Buege: People would not be pulling off of 265 and causing traffic. It would just be a neighborhood park. Kimbrough:Many developers make their own green space. Driver: It is a tough call. We are for parks and recreation, not just beautification. This seems to be more for beautification than parks and recreation. Clark: I hope the homeowners still make this area a park. MOTION:PALMER/SAVAGE The PRAB recommends accept money, $4,995 space requirement for to the Planning Commission to in lieu of land for the green Sterling Estates. MOTION APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY 5-0 IV. MASTER PLAN Scott-Silkwood:I have the addendums. If there are any more changes let me know. Table nine includes the building permit information Kimbrough requested. Kimbrough:I wanted everyone to not the growth in the west part of town. Scott-Silkwood:The permit count was cut off in June 1993. There has been a lot of development since then. Kimbrough:Does the park plan work with the city plan? Scott-Silkwood:They work pretty well together. I wrote the facilities part ofthe city plan. When we did the plan, we had to write a recreation plan which came from this ) Waite: Driver: Palmer: Driver: Edmonston: Driver: Clark/Ed Driver: Edmonston: Kimbrough: Waite: Driver: Clark: Driver: Clark: Edmonston: Savage: Clark: PRAB Page 6 master plan. If we plan on having a public meeting for this master plan, I won't bind the copies in case the public has changes. The critical part will be getting the large scale maps, and then we can schedule a public meeting. How does the sports complex fit in to this master plan? No one knows anything about the sports complex, yet it is in our CIP plan. Can this make a difference in the current plan? How can you have a needs assessment without the " sports complex if it is a need? They omitted the Greathouse bridge and Walker Expansion from the CIP plan. This money must have been turned into the sports complex. Who is they? monston:City Staff, Budget and Administration Is the sports complex not our concern? The complex has not been brought to our level yet. What impact will this have on our other sports complexes? If we had our past budget to work with, would we have proposed a sports complex? There has to be additional funding somewhere for the complex. Unless this is a dead document. We have been pricing fields such as an adult field and a field at Walker. This would be an automatic relief for what we don't have, especially girl's softball. We just never dreamed there would ever be enough money. The A & P will probably help budget this year. Do you see the complex as a component of the master plan? It wasn't a concept when we started the master plan. The last tournament survey we completed showed that $41,000 was brought into our community. We can't host htese kinds of tournaments without a good facility. Sixteen fields won't accommodate very many different ages. We are aiming for ages 13 and up. PRAB Page 7 Waite: We are aimed at hosting tournaments. Do we feel this complex is a need? Scott-Silkwood:Our plan does not include programs or facilities. Edmonston:Maybe we could add master plan under additional facilities. We need more fields. I don't think the plan should say we need a "sports complex". We don't know the money has been given to us. We want generalities, not specifically "sports complex". Scott-Silkwood:We have general standards in the plan. (one field per certain number of people) Wright: The hamburger tax might be available to us, or to someone else. Maybe someone would donate money for the complex. Scott-Silkwood:On the 4th page from the end, it discusses sports facilities in existing or new parks. this could imply a complex. Edmonston:I believe the current document is sufficient as a planning tool. We can set the public meeting at the November meeting. Waite: Palmer: the complex to the the section for V. BOTANTICAL GARDEN Waite: We need to have the facilities committee work with the botanical garden committee. We have problems negotiating uses for Lake Fayetteville South Park. I would like a specific recommendation from the botanical garden committee on three locations and a proposed first year budget with each location. Adnerson will work with you on maps, etc. We have to have flexibility. Clark: We need to have a volleyball representative to consult with this conjunction. Waite: With three suggested sites, the other two might affect other groups. Wright: Don't forget the Memphis garden started with two iris beds. We could lease out small area first. As their donations and budget grows, so could the area. Driver: That is what kind of proposal we want instead of PRAB saying how it will grow. Emmie Anderson:The City Board went to Denmark to see an incinerator, and it didn't work. PRAB should go see a garden. PRAB Page 8 Driver: You are making assumptions that we have not seen a garden. Edmonston:Eureka Springs has a garden. Porter: No, it is not a botanical garden by standards. It is unrealistic for a zoo with the population. Just because an idea is turned does not mean we don't like zoos. Sometimes things just are not matched to an area. The garden committee needs to meet with the facilities committee to work on locations, needs, and then come back to the PRAB. We need to consider the grant and the people that currently use Lake Fayetteville South Park and have a recommendation. I have looked at some other locations. I would like to work with someone on the Board. What is your starting point? When does this need to be done? The November 1 meeting. Wichita gave me a name of an ex - vice president of a large garden. I have already talked with him. Waite: Driver: Porter: Waite: Porter: Waite: Wright: Porter: MOTION:PALMER/DRIVER The PRAB requested for the facilities committee to review the botanical garden's proposal's and report back an November meeting. MOTION APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY 5-0 OTHER BUSINESS: SWEETSER LAND Palmer:I will try to contact Jerry Sweetser for the next agenda. ADVERTISING PARKS Edmonston:We are working on new park brochures. Palmer:We could have a "Park Day" in spring 1994. We could send out brochures with the water bills. DAVIS MASTER PLAN Clark:The Davis Park master plan is on the October 19 City Council meeting agenda. Waite will need to be present. Kimbrough:Did we ever verify the acreage? Clark:We are in the process. PRAB Page 9 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Edmonston:Specifications are now being prepared for Gulley, Finger and Walker restrooms by the City Engineering staff. Stephen Zisner:The volleyball club will be happy to move if there is an acceptable alternative. MOTION:KIMBROUGH/DRIVER The meeting adjourned at 7:40 pm. #16/PRAB1093 Minutes Approved: Secretary Lindsey & Associates, Inc. 3900 FRONT STREET P.O. BOX 1174 FAYETTEVILLE, ARK. 72702 (501) 521-6611 Alett Little City Planning city of Fayetteville Dear Alett, Post -It' brand fax transmittal memo 7671 OF of pain' 3 To ��// (, (jr n l �.- From !)e /-L /^7/GTr Co. Co. Dept. Pnone v FUM [ I /f 4 �3!(i Paz �7 T Ih REALTOR' As agreed upon at the Subdivision Committee meeting on 10-14-93, in lieu of any additional requirements to the improvements of Drake Street or Highway 180, our group will extend Drake Street from it's existing location to the intersection of John Wayne. It will be a four lane road for that distance. As a part of this letter I would also request a waiver of the Park fees, on the basis that I intend to build a nine hole golf course and leave it open to the public. I would point out that there will be some private memberships, but I will allow for public play. Thank you for your consideration. most sincerely, We Bring Great Neighbors Together Planning Commission October 25, 1993 Page 6 LARGE SCALE DEVELOPMENT - LAKESIDE VILLAGE APARTMENTS SIM LINDSEY - E OF GREGG, N OP TOWNSHIP The next item was a large scale development for Lakeside Village Apartments presented by Dave Jorgensen on behalf of Jim Lindsey for property located on the east side of Gregg Avenue, north of Township. The property is zoned R-2, Medium Density Residential, and contains 19.7 acres with 252 units proposed. Mr. Bunn stated the utility representatives asked for various easements and crossings which were agreed to by the owner. He noted staff remarks included comments on the need for an 8 -inch fire main, parka fees, drainage easements along Skull Creek and Sublet Creek, and the need for offsite improvements for Drake street and possible easement dedication for Gregg Street. He advised that, at the Subdivision Committee meeting, the discussion centered mainly around the need for offsite improvements to Drake Street. He further. stated it had been determined that the develper would construct approximately 850 feet of Drake Street (4 lanes) from the east, construct sidewalks in connection with the street construction, and provide for the planned golf course to be public for at least a period of 5 years in lieu of parks fees. The Committee recommended aprpoval of the Large Scale Development with the stipulations listed above. Mr. Bunn recommended approval of the large scale development subject to plat review and subdivision committee comments; approval of•the detailed plans for water, sewer, street, and drainage construction; approval of a grading plan; construction of Drake Street, as outlined above, with a sidewalk on the south side; dedication of additional right-of-way along Gregg, if required; and either payment of parks fees or approval of the golf course in lieu of parks fees. He noted it was to be specifically understood that the developer was asking that no other offsite improvements to Drake Street or associated bridges would be required by the developer in connection with this Large Scale Development. Me. Little advised she did have a letter from the developer agreeing to the extension of Drake Street and requesting a public golf course in lieu of parka fees. Me. Britton stated the recommendation regarding either payment of parks fees or. approval of the golf course in lieu of parks fees was not clear. Mr. Suchecki advised that had to do with the public use of the golf course. Ms. Little agreed. She explained public use of the golf course had been discussed at the Subdivision Committee meeting and the term discussed had been 5 years. She stated the letter received from Mr. Lindsey included a statement that he was requesting a waiver of the park fees, on the basis that he intended to build a nine hole golf course and leave it open to the public. Mr. Jim Lindsey presented a master plan for the entire 52 acre tract. He advised he did intend to sell some private memberships to the golf course but it would also be open to the general public.. He advised if the parks department was not willing to accept the golf course, he would be happy to pay the parks fees. He advised he believed in the parks fees system. He further stated the golf course would always remain open to the public, there would not be a 5 year time limit. He also explained he was willing to extend Drake Street and in lieu of contributing to associate bridges. He stated he would rather do improvements that would have immediate results, such as putting Drake Street all the way through to Gregg, rather than contributing one-fourth the cost of a bridge. Planning Commission October 25, 1993 Page 7 In response to a question from Mr. Nickle, Ms. Little advised the plans for Drake street showed a four -lane road. She also advised the Parks Board would not meet until the following Monday and therefore, staff did not have their recommendation as to whether they wanted parka fees or would approve the golf Course in lieu of those fees. There was discussion regarding approving the large scale subject to the decision of the Parka Board. Mr. Nickle stated he appreciated all of the thought that had gone into the development and believed the citizens of the City did need another place to play golf. Be asked if they were obligating the city to improve Gregg Street in any certain length of time. Ms. Little stated that was correct. Mr. Springborn wanted to verify that upon construction of the levee proposed by. Mr. Lindsey, it would be reviewed by city staff and would not create any problems. MOTION Mr. Reynolds moved to approve the large scale development and highly recommended the Parks Department to accept Mr. Lindsey's offer in lieu of park fees. Mr. Pummill seconded the motion. In response to a question from Ma. Britton, Me. Little stated the city would not be obligated to provide upkeep for the golf course. The motion carried 9-0-0. 1604 East Zion Road Fayetteville, AR 72703 October 25, 1993 Parks & Recreation Advisory Board Bill Waite, Chairman 915 California Drive Fayetteville, AR 72701 Dear members of the board: We live on Zion Road on two acres of land adjacent to the Lake Fayetteville South Park. We have lived here for over thirty years. We would like to go on record as being strongly opposed to the abolishment of the park and its' replacement by a botanical garden at this site. Lake Fayetteville South Park is a beautiful area. We believe it should be kept in as natural a state as possible so that residents of Fayetteville can enjoy the benefits of nature and not have to pay an admission fee to do so.. With a little upgrading this park can be the most beautiful and best park in Fayetteville. Ms. Porter proposes a garden covering up to fifty acres. The cleared area of the park now covers approximately five acres. Other than this, there is a rather narrow strip of land between the water and the edge of city property. To cover fifty acres, this would extend across at least two and possibly three deep ravines and a heavily wooded area. It appears that these ravines would have to be bridged to move equipment to plant and maintain a garden. Much land would have to be cleared and many trees cut. There is an abundance of wildlife on the Lake Fayetteville property. A fifty acre garden would interfere with their habitat. The newspapers and other people have stated that this is a "little used" park. According to our observation, this is not true. Many groups and organizations use the park in addition to the volleyball association and other individuals and families. We have walked the nature trail frequently for many years and it has always been a pleasure seeing families with young children on the trail. Most people who plan outings like this could not afford to pay an admission fee. We feel that the park and nature trail are assets that should be kept for the enjoyment and benefit of all local citizens rather than being turned into a tourist attraction. We also object to a gift shop in the park area. We feel that this is a commercial use of property which is located in a residential area. We do not object to a botanical garden but we think it should be located in an area that is as yet undeveloped. Sincerely, Leslie and Betty Childress 1�+ 9 a 0 cu a) Q ct 4-4 [T ..w W cd cd 4) cd 0 V ed ct cd 4.4 jI? N c 0 .2' 6- E 0 o a) Z 0 N 0 >. Z 3 m U a o a c 0 id V -0'O c kJ OO Y (0 0 0_ CCO 0 a U m E m a oaN 0 m C 01 � W E F) c a o °' E ° t ° w c aocaE m O TD - 6 -0 c 0 2 C < 0 > ° 0 vi A N 0 c a N 4 bloom L0LccE Ea o C U "c- 5 m N > CD m CO coo 20 ea N 0 52-00 Tod 0 LL o In a C< LLL C N c 'a0 co n -.a O o N 77 lil CL m 00 v m O LL N 45.I 4N N o N wN ca0 N C m g m U 10 N D -p y 7N N c .= o co O. o c -' co LL N 0 C .� d Ce m 0 Q N c =B c O0 OHO W.? < a Q O CO c I T lg 17 LL C m`o my m M j tip J ° a Y Q N LL O N a < O `° y a wN 0 0 C LL C) Q oC co O '1- E 7 0 ON 0 0 Lr ail 1 a0 LL 7 -- N E'c Q E o rn LL Z 0 o Friends Membership Drive and Recruiting a. 4T. ry c u '!J C Cvco co c4� C d C .0 CF.D w 2 w a