No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005-07-11 - MinutesPARKS AND RECREATION ADVISORY BOARD Meeting Minutes July 11, 2005 Opening: The regular meeting of the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board was called to order by Mike Hill at 5:30 P.M. on July 11, 2005 in Room 326 of the City Administration Building located at 113 West Mountain Street, Fayetteville, Arkansas. Present: Parks and Recreation Advisory Board members Hill, Bailey, Langsner, Marley, Pawlik- Holmes and Park Staff Hatfield, Edmonston, Wright, Mihalevich, Whillock and Audience. 1. Approval of June 6, 2005 regular meeting Minutes MOTION: Langsner moved to approve the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board June 11, 2005 meeting minutes. Marley seconded the motion. The motion was approved 5-0-0 with Hill, Bailey, Langsner, Marley and Pawlik-Holmes voting `yes' and Harrison, Davidson and Mauritson absent for the vote. 2. Introduction of Urban Forester, Sarah Patterson Connie Edmonston introduced Sarah Patterson, the new Urban Forester for the City of Fayetteville. 3. Fayetteville Fire Department Request: Chris Lynch The Fire Department is requesting approval to build Fire Station #5 at Routh Park. If approved, the Fire Department has committed to constructing public access to the trail head including public parking and park benches. Park Staff Recommendation: Approval to construct Fire Station #5 at Routh Park and the proposal for the Fire Department to construct public access to the trail head, a public parking area and park benches. Marion Doss and Chris Lynch of the City Fire Department presented the request and explained the plans should the request be approved to go forward. Paulik-Holmes asked if this would be a sale. Edmonston explained the land was originally dedicated therefore it would not be a sale. She also said this is a good joint project between Fire and Parks. She July 11, 2005 / 1 said that since 1982 there has always been a question of what would be the best use for the land. Marley asked if traffic would be a problem. Lynch said traffic around a fire station is always a problem and plans are still in the works for the best way to handle the traffic at that location. He also stated that needed parking for the future trail head would be installed along with some benches for a resting area. Hill stated he believes this is a great idea and asked for a motion. PRAB Motion: Marley moved to approve the request to build Fire Station #5 at Routh Park and to also approve the construction of public access to the trail head, a public parking area and park benches by the Fire Department. The motion was approved 5-0-0 with Hill, Bailey, Langsner, Marley and Pawlik-Holmes voting `yes' and Harrison, Davidson and Mauritson absent for the vote. 4. Fairlane park land potential expansion discussion: Background: Based on the May 2, 2005 PRAB recommendation, the Parks and Recreation division has received 1.34 acres of park land through the park land dedication ordinance with the development of Fairlane Apartments. The park land is located on Fairlane Street between Curtis Ave. and Happy Hollow Rd. in the Southeast park quadrant. The development contains 114 multi -family units on 6.22 acres. In order to create a larger neighborhood park, park staff has researched adjacent property and acquired an appraisal for 2.57 acres directly east of the park. Staff Recommendation: Actively pursue acquiring additional park land in this area. PRAB Motion: Pawlik-Holmes moved to accept staffs request to pursue the acquisition of additional land. Marley seconded the motion. The motion was approved 5-0-0 with Hill, Bailey, Langsner, Marley and Pawlik-Holmes voting `yes' and Harrison, Davidson and Mauritson absent for the vote. 5. Park Land Dedication: Matt Mihalevich, Park Planner July 11, 2005 / 2 Development Name: Engineer: Owner: Location: Park District: Units: Total Acres: Land Stonebridge Meadows Future Phases H2 Engineering Meadows Enterprises, Inc. Stonebridge Meadows development south of Hwy. 16, west of Roberts Road. SE Phase IV- 6 Single Family Phase V - 70 Single Family Future Phases- undetermined Phase IV - 9.24 acres Phase V - 26.61 acres Future Phases- undetermined Dedication Requirement: Phase IV - .144 acres Phase V - 1.680 Future Phases - undetermined Phase IV - $3,330 Phase V - $38,850 Future Phases - undetermined Eagle Park Land to expand Eagle Park for phases 4 and 5, with the remaining future phases to dedicate land up to the available remaining 4.95 acres. Land to expand Eagle Park for phases 4 and 5, with the remaining future phases to dedicate land up to the available remaining 4.95 acres. The developer originally reserved approximately 15 acres of land for a school and/or park; 5.45 acres has already been dedicated as Eagle Park for previous phases of Stonebridge Meadows. The expansion would increase the size of the park to 7.27 acres, leaving approximately 4.95 to be used for future phases of Stonebridge Meadows. Approximately 73 acres remain for development. Money in Lieu Requirement: Existing Parks: Developer's Request: Staff Recommendation: Justification: Marley asked it the pieces are coming together to create a good park. Mihalevich said there is good street frontage and there will be good access for the proposed park area. July 11, 2005 / 3 Tom Hennelly representing H2 Engineering asked to have a discussion on the possibility of banking land donations that will be associated with future phases of the development and eliminate the need to come back before the Board. Edmonston said the main issue would be an unacceptable time span or the potential for a change in the number of units from what would originally be proposed. She reminded Hennelly that by city ordinance once land is deeded, and that would be the case for any land banked ahead of development, it is not given back. Hennelly then stated that the owner may not want to risk that so they will at this time give the land only for this phase of the development and will return for future phases. PRAB Motion: Langsner moved to accept staff recommendation to accept land to expand Eagle Park for phases 4 and 5 with the remaining future phases to dedicate land up to the available remaining 4.95 acres. Pawlik-Holmes seconded the motion. The motion was approved 5-0-0 with Hill, Bailey, Langsner, Marley and Pawlik-Holmes voting 'yes' and Harrison, Davidson and Mauritson absent for the vote. 6. Park Land Dedication: Matt Mihalevich, Park Planner Development Name: East Square Redevelopment Architect: Robert Sharp, Architect, Inc. Owner: East Square Development Location: East side of the Fayetteville square, West off College (71B) between Center and Mountain streets. Park District: SW Units: 36 Multi -Family Total Acres: 2.24 Acres Land Dedication Requirement: 0.612 acres Money in Lieu Requirement: $14,148 Existing Parks: Ralph "Buddy" Hays Park, Square Gardens Developer's Request: Money in lieu Staff Recommendation: Money in lieu July 11, 2005 / 4 Developer's Comments: ■..However, if the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board determines that a neighborhood park is not feasible or advisable, it may recommend to the City Council that a cash contribution pursuant to our ordinance be accepted in lieu of land dedication. The City Council will either accept the recommendation for a cash contribution or return the subdivision plat to the Parks Board with instructions or further study.. (Unified Development Ordinance No. 166.03K) Justification: The urban context of the project does not lend itself to a typical neighborhood park. In addition the land requirement for this development does not provide adequate acreage for a park. PRAB Motion: Marley moved to accept staff recommendation of money in lieu. Bailey seconded the motion. The motion was approved 5-0-0 with Hill, Bailey, Langsner, Marley and Pawlik-Holmes voting 'yes' and Harrison, Davidson and Mauritson absent for the vote. 7. Park Land Dedication: Matt Mihalevich, Park Planner Development Name: Mount Sequoyah Development Engineer: H2 Engineering Owner: Barber Group Location: East side of Hwy. 265 between the fire station and the Cliffs Park District: SE Units: 96 Total Acres: Approximately 80 acres Land Dedication Requirement: 2.3 Money in Lieu Requirement: $53,280 Existing Parks: Mount Sequoyah Woods, Ridgeway View Developer's Request: Land Dedication for full requirement and Donation Staff Recommendation: Land Dedication for full requirement and Donation Developer's Comments: ■..However, if the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board determines that a neighborhood park is not feasible or advisable, it may recommend to the City Council that a cash contribution pursuant to our ordinance be accepted in lieu of land dedication. The City Council will either accept the recommendation for a cash contribution or July 11, 2005 / 5 return the subdivision plat to the Parks Board with instructions or further study.. (Unified Development Ordinance No. 166.03K) Justification: This project is adjacent to Mount Sequoyah Woods which is approximately 70 acres. The land dedication and donation would expand the trail possibilities and add valuable land to the existing natural area at Mount Sequoyah Woods. Tom Hennelly with H2 Engineering said the developer wants to attach 30 acres to the existing 70 on Mt. Sequoyah. Currently there's an ordinance that discourages a connection of development from Highway 265 to streets on Mt. Sequoyah. The owner feels it is necessary to make those connections and is willing to adjust the layout of the development to discourage through traffic. However, until that's resolved they aren't comfortable giving 30 acres. So they want to simply request land dedication for the proposed 96 lots as it currently sits. He stated they will make sure the dedicated land will be adjacent to the city's land. Pawlik-Holmes inquired if the ordinance will have to be changed. Hennelly said there will be a variance needed to allow the connection over Mt. Sequoyah and this is necessary before they go to Planning Commission with the project. At this time they will simply request the necessary land dedication of 2.3 acres with exact location to be determined. PRAB Motion: Marley moved to accept staff recommendation to approve land dedication for the 2.3 acres to be attached to the existing park. Bailey seconded the motion. The motion was approved 5-0-0 with Hill, Bailey, Langsner, Marley and Pawlik-Holmes voting `yes' and Harrison, Davidson and Mauritson absent for the vote. 8. Park Land Dedication: Matt Mihalevich, Park Planner Development Name: Riverwalk Subdivision Engineer: Milholland Company Owner: Clint McDonald Location: South of Hwy 16, west side of Dead Horse Mountain Road and south of Goff Farm Road. Park District: SE Units: 288 Single Family Total Acres: 90 acres July 11, 2005 / 6 Land Dedication Requirement: 6.912 acres Money in Lieu Requirement: $159,840 Existing Parks: Combs Park Developer's Request: Combination of Money and Land Staff Recommendation: Combination of Money and Land - Minimum 3 acre neighborhood park with street frontage and a minimum 30' trail corridor along the abandoned railroad including the old bridge abutments. The location of the park shall be easily accessible by the majority of the residents. The remaining park land requirement shall be in the form of money in lieu to serve the SE quadrant. Staff does not recommend accepting construction services instead of money. Justification: Combs Park is located within the 1/2 mile service area; however this park is not suitable for a neighborhood park. The park lies in flood plain and is currently used for model airplane flying as well as a tree farm and future sod farm. With 288 units there is a need for a neighborhood park within the Riverwalk Development. Mihalevich said the cost of a bridge is prohibitive at this time so Parks wants to secure a future trail right-of-way on the old bridge abutment. Tom Jefcoat, representing MCO, said the developer wants to see the bridge installed to connect the development with Combs Park. He also indicated that developers generally can get better pricing on construction, such as the bridge, than Parks. Hatfield said the trail area ranks #47 out of 49 in level of importance and interest at this time. Also there's a concern for the current use of Combs Park by the Radio Control Airplane club. He said there's no immediate plan for Combs Park to be used for anything more than current use and the trail corridor is a long term plan. Jefcoat stated that the developer wants to leave room for ongoing negotiations with Park Staff. Edmonston reiterated the current use of the park by the Model Airplane Club is of considerable concern because of federal standards for their fly zone. Also, the July 11, 2005 / 7 City tree farm is located at Combs Park and the city uses the park for soil as needed. Hill said the idea is to provide a way across the creek for access to ball fields and ultimately access by bike all the way to Walker Park. Jefcoat restated he wants the negotiations to remain open and to continue to pursue the possibility. PRAB Motion: Bailey moved to allow developer to move forward and pursue bridge development with money in lieu and provide easement for trail. Staff will provide minimum requirements for trail and bridge corridor and developer will come back to the Board. Langsner seconded the motion. The motion was approved 5-0-0 with Hill, Bailey, Langsner, Marley and Pawlik-Holmes voting 'yes' and Harrison, Davidson and Mauritson absent for the vote. 9. Park Land Dedication: Matt Mihalevich, Park Planner Development Name: Blueberry Meadows Engineer: Jorgensen and Associates Owner: Carolyn Baggett Location: North of Huntsville Road, between Lake Sequoyah and Bayyari Park Park District: SE Units: 71 Single Family Total Acres: 24.22 Land Dedication Requirement: 1.7 acres Money in Lieu Requirement: $39,405 Existing Parks: None Developer's Request: Money in lieu Staff Recommendation: Money in lieu, pedestrian access on lot 74 to the north property line for connection to the White River trail corridor. Developer's Comments: ...However, if the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board determines that a neighborhood park is not feasible or advisable, it may recommend to the City Council that a cash contribution pursuant to our ordinance be accepted in lieu of land dedication. The City Council will either accept the recommendation for a cash contribution or July 11, 2005 / 8 return the subdivision plat to the Parks Board with instructions or further study.. (Unified Development Ordinance No. 166.03K) Justification: The land requirement for this development does provide adequate acreage for a park. Expansion possibilities to the east are limited due to topographic constraints in that the property abuts Hwy. 16 to the south, and the West Fork of the White River to the north. The White River trail corridor runs along the White River and will provide connections to Lake Sequoyah and Bayyari parks. PRAB Motion: Marley moved to accept staff recommendation of money in lieu with pedestrian access to the White River trail corridor. Bailey seconded the motion. The motion was approved 5-0-0 with Hill, Bailey, Langsner, Marley and Pawlik-Holmes voting 'yes' and Harrison, Davidson and Mauritson absent for the vote. 10. Park Land Dedication: Matt Development Name: Engineer: Owner: Location: Mihalevich, Park Planner Lane Property Milholland Company Clint McDonald North of Huntsville Road (Hwy 16), between Lake Sequoyah and Bayyari Park SE 97 Single Family 23.62 2.328 acres $53,835 None within the 1/2 mile Service Area Money in lieu Land - Full land Requirement for Phase I and II. Park District: Units: Total Acres: and Dedication Requirement: Money in Lieu Requirement: Existing Parks: Developer's Request: Staff Recommendation: Justification: There are no existing parks within the 1/2 mile service area. The nearest parks are Bayyari (approximately 1 mile northwest) and Lake Sequoyah (approximately 3/4 mile east). In addition to the 97 units with this development, 71 units are proposed adjacent to this property at Blueberry Fields. July 11, 2005 / 9 Numerous existing homes are currently under served by park land in this area. PRAB Motion: Langsner moved to accept staff recommendation of land. Pawlik-Holmes seconded the motion. The motion was approved 4-1-0 with Hill, Bailey, Langsner, and Pawlik- Holmes voting 'yes', Marley voting 'no' and Harrison, Davidson and Mauritson absent for the vote. 11. Dog Park Discussion: Alison Jumper, Park Planner Parks Staff presented a potential dog park location in Gulley Park to PRAB at the June 6th meeting. Comments and concerns were heard from PRAB and the public. PRAB requested that Parks Staff further investigate alternate locations within Gulley Park and justify them with advantages and disadvantages for each site. Staff Recommendation: Option #5 Justification: Option # 5 will meet the needs for the dog park with the least amount of impact on neighbors and park users. This option will provide adequate acreage, room for expansion, shade and open areas. There was considerable discussion and comments from several citizens who attended the meeting regarding the run-off concerns, type of fencing to be used and possibility of using other parks in the Fayetteville park system instead of Gulley Park. Many stated they had been unaware of public meetings or even that Gulley had been considered for a dog park. Deric Moakley, citizen, said he wants to keep an open mind about the issue. He said Gulley Park is a dog friendly park already. He said it seems there's an effort to fix a problem that doesn't exist. He said the open fields are what Gulley Park is all about. He said his research on dog parks indicates they work best where population is dense and people don't have fenced back yards as is prevalent in Fayetteville. Pawlik-Holmes explained that Gulley Park was chosen for the first Fayetteville dog park because of generous open areas and its central location in the city. Robert Farrell, citizen and City Council member, stated that over 90% of the phone calls he has received have opposed the Gulley Park location. Deric Moakley suggested the people who want a dog park should improve the existing location at the Fayetteville Animal Shelter. They should prove they actually want and will use a dog park. July 11, 2005 / 10 Hill asked if the vote was going to be on a dog park in general or a dog park in Gulley Park. Bailey said his proposal would be to turn some other property into a potential dog park. Edmonston stated that she would hate to have the time and money that's been put into the planning so far to not be utilized as has been planned. Pawlik-Holmes stated that what troubles her the most is the citizens present indicating they had not been notified about the previous public meetings on the subject. (Tape on file for minutes to the July 11 meeting of Parks Board) PRAB Motion: Marley moved to reevaluate location and space taking Gulley Park out of consideration and to consider other parks throughout the City of Fayetteville. Bailey seconded the motion. The motion was approved 3-1-1 with Hill, Bailey, Marley voting 'yes', Pawlik-Holmes voting `no', Langsner `abstaining' and Mauritson, Harrison and Davidson absent for the vote. Adjournment Meeting was adjourned at 8:10 p.m. Minutes submitted by: Cheryl Whillock July 11, 2005 / 11