Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000-06-01 - MinutesMINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE A regular meeting of the Subdivision Committee was held on Thursday, June 1, 2000 at 8:30 a.m. in Room 111 of the City Administration Building, 113 W. Mountain, Fayetteville, Arkansas. ITEMS CONSIDERED LSD 00-9.00: (Hooker Construction, pp 209) LSD 00-10.00: (City of Fayetteville, Water & Sewer Operations Center, pp 638) LSD 00-11 00- (Ozark Electric Cooperative Corp, pp 440) AD 00-17.00: (Garroutte, pp 137) LSD 00-7.10: LSD/P.U.D. (Indian Springs phase II, pp 372) MEMBERS PRESENT Bob Estes Sharon Hoover Conrad Odom STAFF PRESENT Tim Conklin Sara Edwards Ron Petrie Chuck Rutherford Kim Hesse Kim Rogers ACTION TAKEN Forwarded Approved Forwarded Forwarded Forwarded MEMBERS ABSENT Lorel Hoffman Lee Ward STAFF ABSENT Perry Franklin Subdivision Committee June 1, 2000 Page 2 LSD 00-9.00: Large Scale Development (Hooker Construction, pp 209) Item submitted by Dave Jorgensen of Jorgensen and Associates, Inc. on behalf of Hooker Construction for property located at 1409 W. Van Asche. The property is located within the Design Overlay District and zoned C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial containing approximately 2.34 acres. The request is for two new office/warehouse structures. Odom: This is the June 1, 2000 Subdivision Committee Meeting. The first item we have is LSD 00-9 submitted by Dave Jorgensen on behalf of Hooker Construction for property located at 1409 W. Van Asche. The property is located within the Design Overlay District and is zoned C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial containing approximately 2.34 acres. Here we are. Come on up. Key: Sony gentlemen. No one else present either? Conklin: No, you are it. Odom. We saw this one at the last Subdivision Committee Meeting. Tim do you have something you need to go over? Estes: Mr. Chairman, it will be necessary that I recuse on item number one, LSD 00-9. Odom: Thank you Mr. Estes. Sharon are you going to be with me on this one? Hoover: Yes. Conklin: One of the main concerns that staff had at last Subdivision Committee was with regards to our Design Overlay District Standards and our Commercial Design Standards. With regard to the Overlay District Standards, one of the issues we had was the building did not have a front facing the street. They have resubmitted the new elevations and are showing a door that will now face Van Asche so that is taken care of. Another issue was the sides of the buildings. Did you ever find site elevations on those? Edwards: No. Key: We have one side shown here on the drawing for JM Hooker's building. Conklin: Okay. Key: The west elevation which is the one facing the open space. It's our intent to • • • Subdivision Committee June 1, 2000 Page 3 address it and the north facade both, full measuring, file accents, canopies. And on the building for Hydraulic Solutions, the front was being treated the same. The east facade on that building, I have a large copy of the plans for that to show you, Hydraulic Solutions building, facing the west facade of the Hooker Construction building will be very similar. The intent is on the south and west facades of the Hydraulic Solutions building and on the south and east facades of the JM Hooker building that we want to go with a standard pre -finished metal simulated board and batten metal panel with a beige color to match the beige concrete block Conklin: When you say simulated can you describe how that simulates the appearance of wood? Key: The standard R panel which has been used on other buildings in the Overlay District is pre -finished coating so it's a maintenance free finish It has a raised rib twelve inches on center which does give the effect of a batten, twelve inch plank batten board system that has been used on several facilities. I think from our previous discussions the thought was that if going with a pre -finished panel as opposed to a galvanized panel that the tighter rib spacing which we are proposing previously than the standard R panel with the twelve inch fluting, did give the effect of a board and batten system Conklin: I did have a question, your material sample board that you revised and submitted, you are showing the masonry unit, the split face and the one up above, are those going to remain unpainted? Key: They will remain unpainted. They are intricately colored masonry unit and have color added to the masonry so that they are colored throughout. Those are available in a variety of colors. The red that has been used on Wal-Mart Supercenter and the Service Merchandise complex has charcoal. This has been used on several facilities. Buff is the color we used on a previous project in the Overlay District, Liquor -to -Go. Hoover: Is there a problem with not painting it? Odom. Lei's try to get through staff and then we will bring it back. Conklin: I'm kind of asking questions, Conrad, and trying to understand what I'm looking at too, so I can let the subcommittee know. That is the color that the building will be? Key: That is the color it would be. • • • Subdivision Committee June 1, 2000 Page 4 Conklin: And that is an intimal color to that block? Key: Yes. Hooker: We are not painting it. Conklin: Once again, staff was concerned with our Overlay District Standards of having metal sidewalls that are required to have the appearance of wood. That's why I was asking that question to have Mr. Key go over that with this committee as to how that has a similar appearance to wood. If the Planning Commission does not feel like it has a similar appearance to wood, it would need to be a variance in our Overlay District Standards and I believe the Commission would have to grant that. My opinion, I'm not sure if it does have the appearance of wood. I'll have to think about it before the Commission and I'll let you know. One other thing we did talk about at last Subdivision Committee was this fence up front. Have we revised that? Odom. We said wrought iron I thought. Key: We did address that in the last meeting. I'm not sure if Mr. Jorgensen revised his submittal on the site plan, but the intent was the row of shrubry shown down the middle of the property dividing these two properties would be moved to the west property line and the fencing facing the street on the north portions between the buildings attaching the existing chain link fence to the new structures would be a decorative fencing as opposed to chain. We are not sure at this point what that decorative fencing will be but it will comply with the ordinances wether it's wrought iron or wood. It will not be a chain link fence. Conklin: For your benefit, Sharon, this is zoned C-2. They are required to get a conditional • use under unit 21 to allow contractor services. This will be a building contracting office with warehouse in the back and outdoor storage yard. This is Hydraulic Solutions. Key: Which is a pump rebuilding and manufacturing business. Small office up front and a shop in back. Odom: What is there now? Key: Nothing is there now. The site is vacant. There is a building that was there that was used by another company that has since vacated the site. We have cleaned up all the debris. That building in the front will remain but it is not conducive to the Subdivision Committee June 1, 2000 Page 5 use we need. It will likely be used for additional shop space, maybe for vehicles or maybe leased Conklin: Overall, I'm comfortable with the buildings and how they look facing the street. I think it is a big improvement with having the masonry down the west side of the Hooker building and the east side of the Hydraulic Solutions building. The metal sidewalls on the other two sides, I think one consideration is we do have Tomlinson Asphalt located adjacent to this Hooker building and the Solutions building is behind the existing metal building and fairly far back from the street. Also, for the Subdivision Committee's information, this adjoins our city limits. Directly across the street is a concrete processing plant. Their zoning in Johnson is I-2, Industrial. This will be a big improvement at this location. One thing we might want to consider too is that being on the city limit line and having industrial zoning right across the street, what they are proposing is a big improvement over what could potentially happen directly across the street from them. I'm comfortable with what they are showing and I just need to determine if they need a variance which I'm inclined to support on this project. Key: A variance for metal siding? Conklin: Yes. Odom: We can do it an either/or way. Conklin: Make a determination if it looks like wood. Odom: And if it does not then a variance can be built into it. Are you finished, Tim? Conklin: Yes, that's all I have. Odom: Ron? • Petrie: Just a couple of items. We talked about moving those trees to the west property line and I just want to make sure you understand we want those 10 feet from the sewer line Key: Right. Petrie: You said they are zoned 1-2. They are labeled C-2 on the plat. Conklin: The property across the street in Johnson is industrial. • • • Subdivision Committee June 1, 2000 Page 6 Petrie: Then it's labeled wrong. Conklin: I talked to Johnson last night and it is industrial. Thanks for catching that. Rutherford: I would like for you to remove this curb and gutter line in the sidewalk. Put a start and stop on each side of the road. Key: Okay. Hesse: On the west property line the existing easement, did we determine that was for the sewer line? Key: It is. The sewer lines are at a slight angle through there and is actually in the easement for a majority of the property. But down towards the southwest comer it actually comes out of the easement. That was part of the reason for adding the additional easement was to make it wide enough that all of it would be contained within a utility easement. Hesse: Are the other utilities, gas, electric, run down through there? Key: I think our discussions at plat review that they do. The electric is coming from the street rather than from the rear. Hesse: I'm concerned about the gas lines. We may need to move those pine trees to the east of the sewer. Key: To the east inside the property a ways away from the utilities. Hesse: Yes. Key: I know I have my notes here from when we spoke at plat review and I'll go back and coordinate with Arkansas Western Gas to make sure and if we need to we can place the trees according to the utilities there. Odom: Is that all from staff? We don't have parks & rec? Conklin: No, that's everybody. Odom: I'll bring it back for questions. Sharon you were not here for the first one were you? • • • Subdivision Committee June I, 2000 Page 7 Hoover: Conklin: Right. But I'm starting to catch on. I need to re -read my Overlay District Standards. I have them in the staff report on page 3. First are the Commercial Design Standards elements to avoid. Then the Design Overlay District Standards. Odom. You want to look at this real quick and I'll ask about if it has to be a painted surface? That's colored. Is that not the same thing? Conklin: Key: Odom: Conklin: Odom. MOTION: Hoover: Yes, that is fine. Tim just want it on record, before we were proposing a raw concrete block that was not going to be painted. We wanted the effect of the bare concrete. Now it's a precision concrete block. I consider these more of a decorative concrete block by how they are marketed, sold and priced. They are not just your regular gray concrete block. I can see the difference. I'm just making sure there isn't some requirement that they be painted. I don't have any problems on this. I'd like to make a motion to send LSD 00-9 to the Planning Commission. Odom. I'll second and I'll say I sure liked the building before but this one meets the standards. Key: Thank you very much. Odom. And you will phrase something in the conditions of approval that it either looks like wood, tastes like wood or grant a variance? Conklin: Yes. • • • Subdivision Committee June 1, 2000 Page 8 LSD 00-10.00: Large Scale Development (City of Fayetteville Water & Sewer Operations Center, pp 638) Item submitted by Thad Kelly of Cromwell Architects Engineers on behalf of the City of Fayetteville for property located at 2150 South Razorback Road. The property is zoned I-1, Heavy Commercial/Light Industrial and contains approximately 19 47 acres. The request is for an expansion of current facilities. Odom: The next item we have on the agenda is LSD 00-10 for Fayetteville Water & Sewer Operations Center submitted by Thad Kelly of Cromwell Architects and Engineers on behalf of the City of Fayetteville for property located at 2150 South Razorback Road. The property is zoned I-1, Heavy Commercial/Light Industrial and contains approximately 19.47 acres. The request is for an expansion of the facilities. Conklin: This is a large scale development for a water and sewer operations center. There is an expansion proposed of 10,900 square foot building and will contain offices and classrooms. That is what you see that is in this patched area right here. Also, they are expanding the warehouse facilities by 3,856 square feet. That is what you are looking at in this area. The existing buildings are the ones labeled renovated and they also plan to add additional parking for 90 cars up front for the employees who come to this facility and for the public that will need to come to this facility for classrooms and training from other Jurisdictions that will be held at this facility. The parking for the city vehicles will be located to the east of the new building and that parking is being looked at as an area for storage and not being counted as a need for additional parking. Staff is recommending approval at this committee level. One thing I do want the committee to look at is the design of the building in compliance with our Commercial Design Standards. That is all of the conditions we need to address on this large scale development. You may recall that we did rezone it to I-1 in March, 2000. It was zoned R-2 and there was a proposed 180 unit apartment complex for the site. That developer backed out of that deal. We then did rezone it so we could bring this large scale forward to expand current facilities. That is all I have, Conrad. Odom: For clarification, on Commercial Design Standards in Industrial area? Conklin: We are looking at it because it is office and classroom space. Odom: It's more of a use thing? • • • Subdivision Committee June 1, 2000 Page 9 Conklin: Kelly: Conklin: Odom: Petrie: Kelly: Odom. Petrie: Odom: Yes. That is how we have always looked at it. I-1 is heavy commercial/light industrial and anytime we have buildings used other than for warehouse or storage we have applied those standards. We do have that new warehouse building located up on the north end of the site and I believe that is a standard metal building, correct: Yes. Which will not have to comply with our Commercial Design Standards. It is a warehouse. Ron? I want to point out for the commissioners, it's vague on this plan, there are 2 fairly large detention ponds being built. One in the northeast corner and one in the south east corner. It's shown on the grading plan. And we are trying to change the one from concrete to earth so it won't be a maintenance issue. Is that it Ron? Yes. Chuck? Rutherford: They made the corrections I asked for. Odom: Hesse: Odom: Hesse: Kelly: Hesse: Kim? They will meet standards. They will meet the standards and then some? Yes. They are not taking out any trees at all except for the fence row. There is one hickory in the back that because of the retention bond it is having to go. Then there is an elm in the front as you come in that is in the way. But it's a 10 inch elm and a 14 inch hickory on the back. Okay. • Subdivision Committee June 1, 2000 Page 10 Conklin: I think it would be appropriate to have Mr. Kelly go over the design of the building. It is fairly unique This roof you see right here is not a regular hip or gabled roof. It is round standing seam metal, white in color. Kelly: This is really a facility for people you never see but that you use every day. They are the pipe people. They take care of everything we use for the water and sewer. The concept of the building is for pipe guys and gals and so it's a pipe in a pipe. It's a round roof and it's a series of different round roofs that interconnect. The materials will be contrary to some of the City's standards. There will be corrugated metal siding Everything on the building is representative of water and of the piping system. The lower band is a terra cotta concrete block which is reminiscent of the orange pipes they used to use for drainage and sewage. The corrugated metal siding is reminiscent of some of the piping they use. The round white roof will also be reminiscent of how a pipe works. The structure is expressed in the building. The pipes are flanged and bolted together so it will be expressing pipes throughout the interior. I have a model. The structure will be expressed inside the building. Odom: Will it have big straws going through it? Kelly: No. That will be your duct work. We do have a sprinkler system. Everything inside the building will be exposed. As you walk in, the classroom as Mr. Conklin mentioned, is for teaching. We have a backflow preventer in this and it's going to be a glass wall of the classroom so they can turn on the lights and say this is our backflow preventer. There will actually be three backflow preventers. There will be the domestic water, lawn irrigation and the sprinkler system. So they will having working models they can show. It's front and center. Everything that can be highlighted or celebrated with water will be done in here. Conklin: I asked at plat review if you could give me a number or percentage of metal on the building. This is what you'll see from Razorback Road. With our last discussion over corrugated metal, I was concerned about the use of that. I believe this is outside the Overlay District so we don't have that standard of no metal sidewalls. Odom: But it can't dominate the main facade. Conklin: It still can not dominate the main facade. They are using a lot of glass on the front. Do you have that percentage? • Kelly: Right. It's really not glass it's cal wall which is a translucent material that allows light in. There will be some glass in the bottom to have light out, but again it's an Subdivision Committee June 1, 2000 Page 11 industrial area and an industrial look. 56 percent of that main facade which is the west facade will be windows. 44 percent will be the siding. It is roughly the same proportion on the north and south. Odom: Something else you have is that the roof dominates the main facade as well. Kelly: That's the thing. This site is sub-terrainean to the road. You see the roof of the two existing facilities when you look down. Usually there is ponding water on it. It's dead level flat. The thing that you are going to see as you buz past this, and that is a 40 mph road out there, five lanes, you are just going to have a little wink at the building as you come by it. The main thing that you need to have as an identification for the city that this is a pipe yard and a pipe facility is the main roof. You will look down and it will wink at you. You'll see clear story windows as the roof changes heights. They will be translucent on the south and on the north they will be glass. There is a vista out to the skyline of the City of Fayetteville. Conklin: This elevation we are looking at will be facing Cato Springs Road? • Kelly: That's correct. At the last meeting with all of the changes and everything and David Jurgen telling me our budget had dropped about $300,000. We dropped off the warehouse. Conklin: This new one? Kelly: Right. That's why it's not shown. That is just the existing building that is shown in the elevation there. Conklin: They did increase the landscaping along Cato Springs Road and did add additional trees to help screen that building. Odom: The existing building? Conklin: Both. Odom: If we approve it are we approving also the new building as well so they don't have to come back through? Conklin: I would say yes. • Odom: Is that your presentation? • • • Subdivision Committee June 1, 2000 Page 12 Kelly: Yes. I'll field any questions you have. PUBLIC COMMENT: Odom: Any public comment? COMMITTEE DISCUSSION: Odom: Seeing none we will close the floor to public discussion and bring it back to Subdivision for questions or comments. I will start off. There is not any unpainted precision concrete block is there? Kelly: There is a terra cotta color concrete block at the base. Odom: It is definitely not a square box -like structure. The metal siding, as we have been told, does not dominate the main facade or it doesn't appear to me to dominate. It does not have large blank unarticulated wall surfaces. This is heavily articulated. And I don't see any signs. Where are the signs on this besides this here? Kelly: The signs will be up at the front. Odom: Not on the building? Kelly: The building itself will be its own sign. On the other elevation there is way finding for the general public. If you coming to the water you will come to the blue door. If you are coming to the red door. Hot on the left, the red door on the left. It will be easy way finding when staff tells people which division they need to see. Odom: Great. I think the design is kind of cool. Kelly: We didn't have very much budget so we are doing very simple materials but expressing them, we feel very well. Conklin: Your rainwater collection system too, is original. You might as well share that. Kelly: There are more subliminal in the process. We have copper guttering in the front and just as you experienced your water this morning, the rainwater will pour out of this copper gutter and just go to a drain just like in your sink this morning. We are doing that just as another little feature of the building. Instead of hiding it in the back of the building we are trying to bring it to the front. • • Subdivision Committee June 1, 2000 Page 13 Estes: Mr. Chairman, will there be any fencing or security for around the perimeter and if so, what? Kelly: There will be fencing but not along Razorback Road. It will only go from the existing fence, although we are having to move it since we are in the right-of-way on Cato Springs Road, it's for security on the back of the property and will come from the existing fence over to the existing buildings and from Cato Springs Road to the warehouse. It will be strictly for the security of the back supply yard. Estes: When you say back, are you referring to the south? Kelly: Yes. Estes: What type of fencing? Kelly: The existing fencing is there. Hoover: What is the fencing? Kelly: It's chain link. I think it's about 8 or 9 feet tall. I don't think it has razor wire on the top. It's overgrown with honeysuckle and poison ivy. The only part we will be doing is this very small portion of the site on the north from the warehouse to the east where it hits the corner. That's the only fence we will be doing. Other than extending a new fence coming from the south property line that will connect to the building to block off. Do you need me to show you? Estes: I can see it, thank you. Hoover: Mr. Chairman, is there a sidewalk down the highway? Kelly: There is a sidewalk on the highway which is right adjacent to the roadway. Hoover: It's existing now? Kelly: It's a highway so Mr. Conklin told me we could not continue that ourselves. Conklin: Chuck, you want to address the sidewalk? Rutherford: The sidewalk is existing on Razorback Road It's a 6 foot sidewalk. • Conklin: When they built Razorback Road Extension, they build that sidewalk. • • • Subdivision Committee June 1, 2000 Page 14 Hoover: And they put it right up on the road? Conklin: Yes. Hoover: I'm looking for an opportunity to do something there. MOTION: Estes: Odom: Conklin: Estes: Hoover Odom: Kelly: Mr. Chairman, I would move that we forward LSD 00-10 to the full Commission. I believe this is something we can approve here isn't it, Tim? It is if you would like to. Let me restate my motion and move that we approve LSD 00-10 I'll second. I'll agree. Thank you. • • • Subdivision Committee June I, 2000 Page 15 LSD 00-11.00: Large Scale Development (Ozark Electric Cooperative Corporation, pp 440) Item submitted by Dave Powers of McGoodwin, Williams & Yates Inc. on behalf of Ozarks Electric Cooperative Corporation for property located at 3641 Wedington Drive. The property is zoned A-1, Agricultural and contains approximately 44.36 acres. The request is for an expansion of current facilities. Odom: The next item we have is LSD 00-11 for Ozarks Electric submitted by Dave Powers of McGoodwin, Williams & Yates on behalf of Ozarks Electric Coop for property located at 3641 Wedington Drive. The property is zoned A-1, Agricultural and contains approximately 44.36 acres. The request is for an expansion of current facilities. Conklin: This is also a large scale development for Ozarks Electric Cooperative Corporation for their operations center. They are proposing to add 13,066 square feet of additional offices and 4,264 square feet of warehousing on the east side of the existing building. They will also be adding an 8,200 square foot service building and a 6,360 square foot vehicle parking canopy. This is an existing facility on Wedington Drive. The outdoor storage will be screened with chain link fence with vegetation. One rare tree is being removed due to the overall health of the tree. There is no minimum percent canopy preservation in the A-1 zoning district. Staff is recommending this go forward to the full Planning Commission. We do need to look at Commercial Design Standards with regard to their building design and determination of the requested waiver to allow 26 foot wide parking lot aisle widths to facilitate truck traffic in this facility. Staff is recommending approval of this 26 foot truck aisle width. On page C2 there is a close up of the entire site. Once again the site contains 44.36 acres. They are looking at about 16 acres on this site for the large scale development. Everything in this darker blue is existing. This is their new addition, this area, to include office space. There is an existing metal canopy for storage that they will be relocating over to this area. This is a new building for vehicle parking storage. This is a new building for service center and then there is an existing warehouse building in the back. They do plan to further go to the south and develop additional outdoor storage area, or relocate is a better term, relocate the outdoor storage area for the equipment they use in their operations. That is all I have. Odom. Ron: Petrie: I made a request that the applicant show the proposed location of the detention pond. Their calculations that it was necessary and they also have a size on here and I need to know exactly where it will be. They have a lot of land back to the • • • Subdivision Committee June 1, 2000 Page 16 Estes: Petrie: Estes: Petrie: Odom. south of what is being developed so there is plenty of room for the detention pond if we can just get an approximate location that would help out. The only other comment, and if I don't make the comment now the plans will be like this, so, on this new water line you have drawn in for the fire hydrant, we try to eliminate all the 90° bends we can. It needs to be made into two 45° Ron, where is that on the plan? It's kind of hard to see. The 2 bends that go to that hydrant in that employee parking lot. Is that the two you are referring too? Yes. Make those two 45°turns instead of 90°. Chuck? Rutherford: The sidewalks that are existing out there where they join the new driveway will need to be cut in. Odom: Hesse: Kim? They meet all Commercial Design Standards, Parking Lot Standards. For your information, the 20 inch elm had a lot of dead in the top. I didn't feel it was necessary to try to save that tree. These trees are not of value and that's why I didn't feel it was necessary to change the use of the building. I would like to see, when you revise the grading plan, that this retaining wall be reflected. And I'm assuming the health of that tree was okay? I never did get a chance to get out there. Seaverson: Not too good. Hesse: Seaverson: Hesse: Powers. Seaverson: I may try to go out there. I don't know if it's worth trying to save. This was, I guess pretty much on both property lines? On the property line? It was over that line. It overhangs. It is not really a great specimen. • • • Subdivision Committee June 1, 2000 Page 17 Hesse: I'm comfortable with the plan. I would like to be in on the location of the detention pond. I haven't been back here. PUBLIC COMMENT: Odom: Okay. Any member of the audience like to address us? COMMITTEE DISCUSSION: Odom: Seeing none I will bring it back to the Committee for discussion or staff for further comments. Conklin: For the record, we are bring this under Use Unit 3, Public Protection of Public Utility Facilities. This is zoned A-1. Operations centers are in use by right in A- 1. I just want to make that statement for the record. With regard to Commercial Design Standards and I can let the architect go over their designs. This office addition and the distance of these buildings back behind it from Wedington Drive, you should not be able to see this new metal building from the street. That is something they looked into. Also, they worked with a landscaper to do some additional screening back along this employee parking area before you get back into this, between the two parking areas to help screen. There are existing large trees on the west side. This is their existing meeting room and existing parking lot. They contacted the highway department with regards to curb cuts and I believe they do have approval from the highway department to use this curb cut design as long as they don't request any additional curb cuts on this property. They do plan on having this drive through lane which is new, come across the front of the building underneath this canopy. Just wanted to get that all on the record. Powers: With regard to the divided entrance up there, the highway department has verbally approved that contingent upon us removing the small portion that is north of the sidewalk out in the right-of-way. Conklin: To the east we have the sports park with an existing chain link fence and over to the west we do have a church and fairly undeveloped land back over in here. They do plan to have some lighting in this outdoor storage area. My understanding is it will only be turned on during an emergency if they need to get in there and get equipment. Otherwise, it will not be turned on all night long. Is that correct? Seaverson: Yes. • • • Subdivision Committee June 1, 2000 Page 18 Powers: If you will direct your attention up here. In the plans this projected straight down. The existing building is from here over. All new construction is beginning with the drive through canopy. It starts right here and goes this direction. We have a new entrance coming in from the east parking lot out there on the east side, it comes in, we have a metal roof over that and extended out over this entry area right here. The rest of it is a lower profile. We are using a warm tone split face block base up to the first band then it is a utility or large brick soldier course and accent color. Two bands with conventional modular face brick in-between dry-vit or synthetic stucco fascia with, again, the same green trim or coping continuous. That same treatment will be extended over onto the existing building and a fairly significant change made in the existing meeting room from what you see out there now. We will have either green tint or reflective glass in the lobby and entry area. That's it in a nutshell. Here is the view as you approach it from the parking lot to the entry. Odom. Estes: Conklin: Commissioners, any questions? Mr. Chairman, Tim, could you go through again real quick the permitted use in A- 1. It's zoned A-1 under Use Unit 3, Public Protection and Utility Facilities. It allows for utility operation centers that are normally not located in the right-of-way. This is something that is unique and t allows that use by right under A-1 zoning. I did want to get that on the record because it is fairly unique to have an A-1 piece of property and this facility as a use by right but it is a utility facility and that is how it's classified without having it go through a rezoning. Estes: And having the use by right can we apply the Commercial Design Standards and all other standards to the use and not to the zone? Conklin: Yes. That is what I've attempted to do on this development. Odom: Is the use not more industrial than commercial? Conklin: I would say the back half is industrial and the front is, once again, offices. Powers: Everything you see there is virtually office with the exception of the community room on the west end. So it's all office and operations related on the front. Odom: Did that clarify your question? • • • Subdivision Committee June 1, 2000 Page 19 Estes: Yes. Odom: Sharon did you have any questions? Hoover: No I don't. MOTION: Estes: Mr. Chairman, I move that we approve LSD 00-11. Conklin: I actually made a recommendation for this to go to Commission. We have a waiver. Estes: Then let me again restate the motion that we forward to full Commission LSD 00- 11. Hoover: I'll second. Odom: Thank you very much. • • • Subdivision Committee June 1, 2000 Page 20 AD 00-17.00: Administrative Item (Garroutte, pp 137) Item submitted by Rick Garroutte for property located at 2108 & 2110 Cinnamon Way, lot 11 Missouri Oaks Subdivision. The property is zoned R-2, Medium Density Residential. The request is for a triplex on a lot that was limited to a duplex by the final plat. Odom. The next item is an administrative item AD 00-17 submitted by Rick Garroutte for property located at 2108 and 2110 Cinnamon Way, lot 11 in Missouri Oaks Subdivision. The property is zoned R-2, Medium Density Residential. The request is for a triplex on a lot that was limited to a duplex by the final plat. Conklin: Mr. Garroutte approached our office a week or two ago and requested the ability to build a triplex on this property. We did look at the final plat that was approved and it did have a statement on there that these lots would be developed with duplexes except for lot 13 and 18 which were fourplexes. Not having the ability to change what was approved by the Planning Commission, I suggested that we come back to us and make a decision as to weather or not we allow something other than a duplex. I did require him to notify by certified mail all the property owners within the development so they are aware of this change. You don't have a plan on this other than what's in your packet. Sara, can you get the plat page, it's 137. Thank you. It meets the standards under the zoning to allow something other than a duplex such as a triplex or apartment. However, the condition was a duplex and my only concern was when people bought lots within this subdivision they saw that recorded subdivisions that said duplex only on those lots and now we have someone wanting to put a triplex on it. Odom: Garroutte: Odom. Conklin: Edwards: Conklin: Garroutte: And you have notified everybody by certified mail? It was by regular mail. Have we had any response to that? I have not received any response. Have we had any response, Sara, to the mailings? No. This is where we redid the intersection recently. There is a veterinarian clinic at this location. The subdivision probably sat empty for four or five years. A long time. • Subdivision Committee June 1, 2000 Page 21 Conklin: Odom: Conklin: Odom: Conklin: Garroutte: Conklin: Odom: • Conklin: Hoover: Conklin: Estes: Garroutte: Conklin: • Garroutte: Odom: Petrie: Odom: A long time. It's just recently started sprouting up. Yes. And fairly nice duplexes in here. This lot they built three townhouses. Any single family homes in there? No. There is a builder that I was speaking with that was contemplating building a single family home on lot 17 or lot 9 but he's not really pursuing that. So, we have a situation where our zoning allows something other than a duplex but the recorded subdivision had a condition that it be a duplex only. And building a triplex wouldn't knock it out of the zoning? No. What is over here? That is vacant. I believe it's zoned R-2 and owned by Sweetser. Is there anything on lot 13 and lot 12? I own lot 11 and 12. Lot 13 we did a split to allow three or four townhouses. He has build three. He built two townhouses together and then he was going to build two more but the drainage cost was so high he only built one stand alone townhouse on the lot So, basically this was approved for 4 units and three was all he was able to get on there even though there was plenty of property. It was just the way the property was shaped. Ron, do you have anything? Nothing. Chuck? • • • Subdivision Committee June 1, 2000 Page 22 Rutherford: No. It will come through the building permit process. Odom: Okay. That's a different time. Kim, you don't have anything either? Hesse: No. Odom: I didn't even see you there, Kim. Have I said your name yet? Okay, it's your turn. Go ahead. Rodgers: Kim Rogers with Parks & Recreation. There will be a fee of $375 for the unit. Odom: Okay. That's a deal breaker for you! Garroutte: I tell you. I don't know if I can swing that! Conklin: I Just didn't want to make the decision administratively by myself to change something that was approved by the Planning Commission. It's on the final plat. If you think it needs to go to the full Planning Commission to change it, that's fine. I'm Just trying to figure how you change something the Commission already approved. Odom: Here is what I would like to do. I would like to send it to the full Commission Just so we can have public Comment. PUBLIC COMMENT: Odom. Is there anyone here for public comment? MOTION: Odom: Let's put it on the consent agenda. That way it can be pulled off if anyone wants to show up. I doubt if anyone does. But I think that goes through the full process. Estes: Was that a motion? Odom: That's my motion. Estes: I'll second that motion. I'm not going to make another motion today. Odom. Is that okay, Tim? • • • Subdivision Committee June 1, 2000 Page 23 Conklin: That is fine. I think that is probably the best way to handle it and it puts everybody on notice. Odom: It's on notice and in the paper. It will be on the consent agenda which means it will be approved unless someone wants to pull it off and talk about it. But I don't see a problem with it. Garroutte: Okay. Odom: Thank you. • • • Subdivision Committee June 1, 2000 Page 24 LSD 00-7.10: Large Scale Development/P.U.D. (Indian Springs phase II, pp 372) Item submitted by Dave Jorgensen of Jorgensen & Associates on behalf of Sweetser Properties for property located south of Hwy 45 and west of Madison Drive. The property is zoned R-1, Low Density Residential and contains approximately 3.20 acres with 18 units proposed. Odom: Next item is LSD 00-7.10 for Indian Springs phase II submitted by Dave Jorgensen on behalf of Sweetser Properties for property located at Hwy 45 and west of Madison Drive. The property is zoned R-1, Low Density Residential and contains approximately 3.2 acres with 18 units proposed. This project was originally approved at the April 12, 2000 Planning Commission meeting. The applicant has changed the location of the northern most building. This changes the approved setback reductions. Staff's recommendation is approval. Estes: Why did you do that? Jorgensen: The reason we did that is that they were lined up all in a row and it looked like a row house. Odom: A row house? Sweetser: A mini storage building. Jorgensen: Yes. And so we did this to get a little bit more character. That is the reason for turning this one to the side like that. It's Just one of those things that had to do with looks. Odom: Is that the only change: Conklin: That is the only change. They asked me to approve it administratively and I'm not trying to be too conservative here but this was a variance from that 250 foot setback. We had numbers listed in our staff report at the Planning Commission meeting and I really didn't think I had the authority to change a variance that has been approved based on a number. That is why I'm bringing it back to you. Jorgensen: We are covering our bases here. Conklin: I'm really concemed about any time we grant a variance to allow them to even get closer to a residential zoned district. They originally were 105 feet and now they are about 80 feet. • • • Subdivision Committee June 1, 2000 Page 25 Odom: Petrie: Odom. Rutherford: Edwards: Rutherford: Jorgensen: Conklin: Odom: Hesse: Odom: Rogers. Odom: Hoover: Estes: Odom: Conklin: Ron? Nothing. Chuck? I have a couple of things. Dave, you need to remove your gutter line, oh it's already crossed out in this one. The design I had showed it over here and needed to be here. What about these ramps here? That was what I was going to bring up. Dave, we need to get two ramps here instead of one. That is going to be a new standard for the City of Fayetteville. Okay. I'm not opposed to this. I think anytime we can make it look more interesting and help avoid having everything just line up. I think the main concern here was you are going to have garage doors just lined up down the entire street and they are trying to offset that. I'm not opposed to that. But, once again, when we have a variance with a number I can't change that. Kim Hesse, do you have anything? No. Kim, do you have anything? No. Anybody else? Charlie you want to say anything? Sharon? No questions and no problem with it. Bob? No questions and no problems. Can we approve it here? 1 would like it to go to the full Planning Commission because of the variance. • Subdivision Committee June 1, 2000 Page 26 Odom. Because of the variance? So we are consistent with the whole variance issue? Conklin: I mean, it's a planned unit development. It's R-1. Odom: Could we, even though it's a variance, put it on consent because of the history of it? Conklin: Yes, I think so. Odom: Okay. Conklin: Why don't we put it on consent. I just think it needs to go to the full Planning Commission. Once again, this is R-1. They were allowed to do other than single family homes within that 250 foot setback. Odom: We didn't have any opposition did we? Conklin: There was no opposition and I just want to make sure that if someone comes to • our office I can say Subdivision and Planning Commission agreed. Odom: And despite whatever happens here, let's just say we turn this down, they still have their approved plan. • Conklin: Yes. MOTION: Odom: I move that we forward it to the Planning Commission and put it on the consent agenda. Hoover: Second. Estes: I agree. Conklin: Okay. Thanks. I think that is everything. Odom. We are adjourned.