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