Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-02-14 - MinutesSUBDIVISION COMMITTEE A regular meeting of the City of Fayetteville Subdivision Committee was held on Thursday, February 14, 2002 at 9:00 a.m. in Room 111 of the City Administration Building, 113 W. Mountain, Fayetteville, Arkansas. ITEMS CONSIDERED ACTION TAKEN LSP 02-9.00 (Lot Split, Bayles, pp 524) Page 2 ADM 01-45.00 (Administrative Item, Skiles, pp 563) Page 5 FPL01-8.00: Final Plat (Bridgeport Phase VI, pp 360) Page 7 Approved Approved Approved Discussion Item (Karstetter & Glass) No action Page 12 MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERSABSENT Lee Ward Sharon Hoover Don Bunch STAFF PRESENT STAFF ABSENT Kim Hesse Tim Conklin Sara Edwards Ron Petrie Keith Shreve Kim Rogers Subdivision Committee February 14, 2002 Page 2 Ward: Good morning, welcome to the Subdivision Committee meeting of the Planning Commission. Today is Thursday, February 14, 2002. Sharon, have you done anything for your sweetheart? Hoover: Tim, for the record has brought some sweet hearts. Ward: We have three items on the agenda this morning so we will get to those. LSP 02-9.00: Lot Split (Bayles, pp 524) was submitted by Katona Bayles for property located at 431 E. 6th Street. The property is zoned R-2, Medium Density Residential and contains approximately 0.44 acres. The request is to split into two tracts of 0.191 acres and 0.193 acres with.056 acres of right of way dedication. Ward: Number one is a lot split submitted by Katona Bayles for property located at 431E. 6th Street. The property is zoned R-2, Medium Density Residential and contains approximately 0.44 acres. The request is to split into two tracts of 0.191 acres and 0.193 acres with.056 acres of right of way dedicated. Tim, what do you have on this? Conklin: This item went to Plat Review on January 31n. The proposed lot split is located on the south side of E. Sixth Street between Wood Ave. and east of Willow Ave. on the west. The property is a through lot, meaning it has two fronts, between Sixth and Seventh Street. The proposed lot split will leave tract A with access to Sixth Street and tract B with access onto Seventh Street. The Master Street Plan shows Sixth Street as a historic collector and Seventh Street as a local street. Both street classifications require 25' street right-of-way from centerline be dedicated. The properties to the north, south, east and west are zoned R-2, Medium Density Residential. We are asking that this be approved at the Subdivision Committee level. The only condition is payment of parks fees for $470. That is a condition that we are going to discuss. The rest are standard conditions of approval, that is all I have. Ward: Ok, thank you. Petrie: I just want to point out one thing that most of the utilities at Plat Review, requested a 20' utility easement off of Sixth Street and Seventh Street and you need to get that added to the plat. Bayles: I am not going to give it to them. Ward: Go back over that one more time. Bayles: Utilities requested a 20' easement on top of the 25' easement I gave and I don't see why they need that easement. Subdivision Committee February 14, 2002 Page 3 Edwards: May I make a comment? Ward: Sure. Edwards: The utilities did not need an easement to serve this project, they just wanted it for future use so I felt like it was a little unfair to ask for that much of an easement on his property and I told him that I did not think he needed to give that. Bunch: Are the existing utilities in the right-of-way since this is an older one before the utilities started the practice of locating them outside? Edwards: Yes, and they have no plans of relocating them in this area right now. Ward: Ok, thanks Ron. Keith, are there any comments from Sidewalks? Shreve: No comments. Ward: Ok. At this time I will bring it to the applicant, are you Mr. Bayles? Bayles: Yes Sir. Ward: Our condition is that you will have to pay a parks fee of $470. When is that due? Conklin: That is at the time of the building permit. Ward: At the time of a building permit so I guess on tract B, when that lot gets ready to be built on whoever is going to get the building permit will pay the $470 in parks fees. That parks fee is just like we have a subdivision coming up in a few minutes, Bridgeport, it has 27 lots and it has to pay the $470 per lot. Bayles: Where is that money going? Conklin: The city is divided into four quadrants and there is a formula they use for how much parkland the citizens of Fayetteville need based on population. Every time we add another lot or single family home, the formula is .025 acres of land dedication or money in lieu of land dedication. We are not asking for land dedication with something this small. We don't want a small park on your lot there. It is a formula; it is based on the cost of land in Fayetteville. The money will be collected, it will have to be expended within a certain number of years within that southeast quadrant of the city to go for improvements or purchase of land. Bayles: Ok. Subdivision Committee February 14, 2002 Page 4 Ward: Motion: Are there any other comments or questions? Is there anyone that would like to make a public comment on this particular item? Seeing none, I will close it to the public and bring it back to the Commission. Bunch: I move that we approve LSP 02-9.00 at this level and note that there are no utility easements shown on the plat because the utilities are already located in the right-of-way. Hoover: I will second. Ward: I will concur. Thank you Mr. Bayles. Bayles: Thank you. Subdivision Committee February 14, 2002 Page 5 ADM 01-45.00: Administrative Item (Skiles, pp 563) was submitted by Cherry Pearson on behalf of South Fayetteville Community Development for property located at 1035 S. Washington. The request is to build on a non -conforming lot of record. Ward: The second item on the agenda this morning is ADM 01-45 submitted by Cherry Pearson on behalf of South Fayetteville Community Development for property located at 1035 S. Washington. The request is to build on a non -conforming lot of record. Who is going to handle this particular one? Conklin- I will go ahead. This is an administrative request. It is to allow a house to be built on a nonconforming lot of record. We are recommending that this be approved subject to the following conditions: 1) Compliance with the current setback requirements of the R-2 district. All required building permits must be secured for this project. Basically, in south Fayetteville and on the original town plat, there are quite a few lots that are nonconforming under today's zoning ordinance. This lot is 50'x140'. Under R-2 zoning for single family you need a minimum of 60' wide lot. That is all that I have on this one. There are maps attached to your agenda. Ward: Ok, thank you. Ron, do you have any comments from Engineering? Petrie: No Sir. Ward: Keith? Shreve: No. Ward: Ok, is Cherry Pearson here? At this time I would like to open it up for public comment. Is there anyone from the public that would like to make a comment on this administrative item? Seeing none, I will close it to the public and bring it back to our commission. What we are trying to do is redevelop the old south part of town. As has been explained, all the lots in the south part of town are pretty much nonconforming. There are a lot of 25' lots left down there if I remember right. Conklin- Yes. Ward: Who is community development? Where do they get the money to build this? Conklin: I wish someone were here to explain the program. The City of Fayetteville, with their last project, gave the South Fayetteville Community Development Corporation a lot. My understanding is that the Bank of Fayetteville funded the construction of that and then our CDBG funds, community development for the city, had some assistance on some Subdivision Committee February 14, 2002 Page 6 of the cost of constructing that house. It is kind of a partnership with the city and I'm not sure if the Bank of Fayetteville is doing this one or not. We are working with some local banks to bring these homes to market. The last one, I believe with the lot being free, helped to keep the house price lower to make it affordable. Ward: Ok. Bunch: The only question that I have before we make a motion. When I drove by it looked like they had done some grading work or placed some fill material. Edwards: I know that there was a house there previously and it had been removed so that may have gone on as part of that removal. Bunch: It looks like they removed the house and put some fill material in where the foundation is being because that is red dirt there. Does this need to be approved at this level? Conklin: Yes, it can be approved at this level. Motion: Bunch: I move that we approve ADM 01-15 at this level. Ward: Do I have a second? Hoover: I'll second. Ward: I'll concur. Hoover: On these small lots like this why does it say nonconforming? Conklin: We don't have any zoning district that has a lot width less than 60'. Hoover: Unless you do a P.U.D. Conklin: That is correct. We have all of these lots all over town on the original town plat. We are working on a lot of stuff. In our work program, you are going to see upcoming in the next couple of months, we still have outdoor lighting, we did sidewalks, we did our general plan, a planned zoning district is going to be presented to you at your next meeting. Subdivision Committee February 14, 2002 Page 7 FPL01-8.00: Final Plat (Bridgeport Phase VI, pp 360) was submitted by Michael Marie of Engineering Design Associates on behalf of Creekwood Hills Development, Inc. for property located at the west end of New Bridge Road. The property is zoned R-1, Low Density Residential and contains approximately 12.49 acres with 27 lots proposed. Ward: Hesse, S.: Ward: Hesse, S.: The final item on the agenda is a final plat for Bridgeport Phase VI, was submitted by Michael Marie of Engineering Design Associates on behalf of Creekwood Hills Development, Inc. for property located at the west end of New Bridge Road. The property is zoned R-1, Low Density Residential and contains approximately 12.49 acres with 27 lots proposed. I'm Steve Hesse. Do you have any presentation to start out with? I am just going to say that this is the sixth and final phase of Bridgeport, 27 lots, 9.3 acres I think. I believe everything is in. We have had some issues with downstream property owners and those have all been resolved. Really, I think we are getting very close. Ward: Ok, so actually this is 12.49 acres? Hesse, S.: The legal description says 9.3. Conklin: Ok, that may be an error, I'll change that. Ward: One or the other need to be changed. Tim, do you want to do your comments? Conklin: Sure. This is the final phase of Bridgeport Subdivision. This phase will connect Fairfield subdivision to the south and Newbridge Road was completed as a part of this phase. Newbridge Road is a collector, that is planned to connect Sunshine Road to Rupple Road in the future. That goes over to Fairfield subdivision, a preliminary plat that we approved directly west of this. This can be approved at this level. Conditions to address include a letter of credit for sidewalks of Phase II expired on February 1, 2002. This must be renewed prior to filing the final plat. Number two, a guarantee shall be submitted for the completion of sidewalks in Phase VI, prior to filing the final plat. Number three, street lights need to be installed for all six spaces prior to filing the final plat. Let me just say, Mr. Hesse and their client, we have not discussed this issue with them. We have a situation with regard to streetlights in another subdivision. Not Bridgeport but another subdivision in Fayetteville that streetlights did not get in and we are working on that right now. Those are something that we do not put in as a city, the utility companies put those in. We are asking that the streetlights be put in. You may want to discuss Subdivision Committee February 14, 2002 Page 8 that after my report because we are changing the way we are going to do it. We are going to require them to be put in ahead of time. Ward: Before the final plat? Conklin- Before the final plat is signed. We don't want to get stuck without streetlights. There are houses in other phases of Bridgeport that are built where the streetlights are still not in. We haven't really cracked down on the timing of when these are installed so we are going to start doing that. Number four, the final plat shall be forwarded to the City Council for acceptance of streets. That will be street dedication only and we will take care of that, getting that to council. Ward: Ok, did you have any questions Steve? Hesse, S.: The only comment, I talked to Bill Helmer just a little bit ago. They are putting streetlights right now in Phases IV and V. I think that some of the other cities just require the payment of the streetlights. That way it is the utility companies, it is up to them and their schedule, as long as the developer pays for them. Maybe that is something that you would want to consider. Conklin: Yes, we have been doing that. It is just trying to keep up with when the street lights are in and it is really making sure when the utility companies are paid. It would be nice if we have houses going in. One thing that we saw yesterday when we went out here and looked, there are houses within the subdivision and there are no street lights right now so it is dark. I am trying not to discuss this at this level, Subdivision Committee. I am trying to think it through too. When is it required because those phases have been approved for a year? Helmer: Which phase are you talking about? Conklin: The ones where you come across from the park. I am not sure when those were approved but it has been a while. We have people living out there and with no streetlights and we are trying to get a handle on the installation. Ward: Ok. Ron with Engineering? Petrie: The only thing I need on this is if you can label your right-of-way down the other street. Hesse, S.: Ok. Subdivision Committee February 14, 2002 Page 9 Petrie: I think if you put it down below it will be ok. It was pointed out to me to that you need to correct your description in your title block. The last thing is, I just wanted to bring it up for the Commissioners, anything that was required on the preliminary plat for the sewer assessment will be gone. We are no longer charging that. We are preparing to refund what has been collected and not spent because those improvements are no longer necessary so that condition has been removed from this final plat. I just wanted to make sure that you are aware of that. Edwards: I just want to add that the refund is not necessarily going back to the developer entirely. It may go back to the people who purchased lots in the subdivision and that is the way that the ordinance reads, that the Planning Commission will make a decision either to the developer or the lot owners or both. I don't want to mislead you to thinking that all the money will go back to the developer. Ward: How soon do they have to make an application to do that. Conklin: We are in the process of putting together a notification for all of the property owners for all of the lots in all of these subdivisions. There are 435 and we will have a special Planning Commission meeting to deal with all 435. You will get to make the decision of who gets the money back. Ward: Thanks a lot. Conklin: That is what the ordinance requires and that is what we are doing. Hoover: What was originally required? Conklin: Ron, can you explain that? Petrie: The requirement for the assessment? Hoover: Yes. Petrie: There was very limited capacity in this Hamstring basin. Particularly the lift station right there on the corner of Sunshine and Mount Comfort. That one was replaced and doubled in capacity with this assessment. What has been charged since then is to replace the forced main out of that lift station back over to I-540. It is limited in capacity in that portion. With the new plant though, it all goes away. We don't need it. Hoover: Ok. Bunch: There will still be a forced main won't there? The new plant is only eliminating a hand full of the lift stations. Subdivision Committee February 14, 2002 Page 10 Petrie: That is correct. That assessment was for one particular item and that is no longer needed. Ward: Ok, thanks Ron. Keith, are there any problems with sidewalks? Kim? Hesse, K: No. Ward: We know what the park assessment is on there. That is 27 lots at $470 each which is a total of $12,692.36. Edwards: There is an extra $3.36 that was a balance due on Phase V that they are asking for as a part of that. Ward: I was wondering how it was off. Conklin: I have a question. Just for the record, the gentleman that we've been dealing with to the north with the drainage easement and the sewer line, is he completely satisfied with the fence and the grass and the drainage? Petrie: He is going to have to be on the fence. If we lift up the drainage and everything he will have to be before we will sign that. They have made an extremely large advancement in that direction. Helmer: Actually, Ron we did get him to sign an agreement to that affect. Petrie: Can you give me copies? Helmer: I will get you a copy of it. Conklin: We have been working with that property owner from the very beginning and they have. Issues keep on coming up. I have been out there a couple of times and Ron Petrie has been in my office a few times. I just want to make sure that everything is satisfied. Ward: That is fine. Bunch: This is where the new wooden fence came from? Hesse, S.: Yes. Ward: Is there any person from the public at this time that would like to make a comment on this particular item? If not, I will close it to the public and bring it back to the Committee. Subdivision Committee February 14, 2002 Page 11 Bunch: I have a question. On the guarantee for completion of sidewalks, just to refresh my memory, when do the sidewalks get built? Is it as each house is built? Yeah, I think the developer is required to post a bond for the total amount of the sidewalks. Conklin- The developer is responsible. How he chooses to get those sidewalks in is kind of up to him but he is ultimately responsible. That is why we do have the bond. Some developers will require the builders to do it at the time of construction. Sometimes we have a few with the sidewalks in. Ward: Are there any other questions or comments? Motion: Bunch: I move that we approve FPL 01-8.00 for Bridgeport Phase VI at this level with all conditions and rectifying the fact that it is in Washington County instead of Benton County and to determine whether it is 12.49 or 9.3 acres. Ward: Ok, do I have a second? Hoover: I will second. Ward: I will concur. Thank you. Are there any other items? Subdivision Committee February 14, 2002 Page 12 Discussion Item (Karstetter & Glass, pp 402) was submitted by Steve Clark. The property was heard previously as a large scale development. The applicant is requesting an opinion on a new site design. Conklin: Yes. Karstetter & Glass, Steve Clark, their engineer, asked if I would talk with some of the Commissioners, to kind of get your feel on this. This has been out there since forty-four years ago or fifty years ago. Here is the proposal; we went on a tour and kind of showed them other areas and talked about landscaping, we talked about the dumpsters and here is what they have proposed. They propose to take out this concrete and provide landscaping up front and they still want a 24' drive in the front. There is such a short distance between the front of the building. Here is the front of the building. They propose to screen the dumpster, still put the wooden fence up there. The difference is the landscaping up front and to reduce this curb cut to 24' instead of having these large curb cuts. The building is still a metal building on the back and I know that some Commissioners feel like commercial design standards are the building, that the building has to change, it just can't be landscaping. They felt like it would be better to do the improvements up front. They are asking to do the improvements up front with regard to landscaping in lieu of changing their building. Edwards: Do they know if those are just shrubs or what those are? Conklin: Those would be shrubs right there because that is a tree. It would have to be because of site distance. Bunch: That landscaping is going to have a tough time surviving with the traffic and expanses of pavement around it and that sort of thing. Ward: That is a pretty good area right there. Bunch: We still get back to the question of that east wall. I guess that is the one that would be the most visible on the metal siding. Conklin: Yes and we talked about that. They can put something on it. The end result, I'm not sure what we are going to achieve putting drivit. What you are going to see is the top 6' or 8'. It doesn't matter if we go up half the wall with brick or split -faced block. Bunch: There is going to be a privacy fence there that is going to cover most of it. The main thing is to break up that; it is not that long of an expanse but it is obviously metal siding. If they could put some columns in or something like cornus or a combination of the two. That would kind of break it up so they don't have to go back and have a whole new batch of siding. Subdivision Committee February 14, 2002 Page 13 Conklin: Ok, I will let them know. Hoover: Is this in the overlay district? Conklin: Yes it is in the overlay district. Bunch: I guess eventually that the west side could be visible depending on how it is used. We know that the east side is visible. Eventually some of the vegetation and trees and stuff disappear on the west side and things change up, there are not too many places where the west side is visible from are there? Conklin: No, not right now. Bunch: The access road just goes back to the apartments. Conklin: Once again, I made my speech about how many years it has been working with them. Mrs. Glass who has lived there owns the entire site. Her husband started the business. Bunch: Right, but somebody else has the business now. Conklin: Yes, they have the business now. I don't feel responsible for the delays because they started doing this without any permits and they were caught. Then it was zoned R-1 and you can't really do a commercial development in an R-1. We changed the land use plan and changed the zoning. Bunch: Was her husband still alive and active in the business when they started this process? Conklin: No, I don't think so. Bunch: It is the people that are leasing or own the business or whatever, leasing the property that did this? Conklin: Yes. I will tell them that they need to do something on the building. Hoover: Did we talk about before having two drives? Conklin: I went out there and I asked them to eliminate it to just one drive and that is what they came back with. Hoover: What does our ordinance say within a frontage like this? Conklin: In the overlay district it wouldn't meet any standard. However, the Highway Department went out there and put up that continuance curb cut Subdivision Committee February 14, 2002 Page 14 Ward: across the front. Now they are busting up concrete that was poured two or three years ago and putting landscaping in. It concerns me, I know we need to widen our streets and everything but I look at some of these businesses along Sixth Street where the Highway Department widens these streets. It really impacts our commercial development and the ability for those developments to comply with any of our regulations without completely redoing their parking. Hopefully, if I was a business owner, I don't know what kind of weight you have with the Highway Department but they needed to pay me to redo the entire circulation of the parking lot and to put it further back. When you have a building right here, you've got to have a drive into here because there is no other way to get in there. You can't most vehicles couldn't even turn. Bunch: With the nature of their business it is required that they go through there unless they go to breaking out walls and put a new door in but with a body shop that is important, they have to have access. Conklin: Some of our biggest issues are where the Highway Department has gone in and widened the road and we have all of these nonconforming buildings and parking lots now and I think even parts of College Avenue you can see it. Bunch: Yes, most likely it was built when it was a narrow two-lane road. Conklin: It is very difficult to deal with it because we are talking about redoing the entire parking lot access circulation to make it work. I will get back with them and Steve Clark and I will say that they need to do something on the building. Hoover: The thing is if you are asking to do that then it only comes into play if they are doing what to their building? Conklin: Expanding. Hoover: Expanding the amount of square footage or any expansion? Conklin: Any expansion in the overlay district. Ward: They are adding a 2,400 sq.ft. building back there behind their shop is what they are doing. Hoover: I'm just accustomed to if you are making any change to your building you have opened yourself up to redoing the parking lot. Where I come from, that is a given. Subdivision Committee February 14, 2002 Page 15 Conklin: I am dealing with some individuals that apparently didn't realize that they needed a permit and now we are into the overlay district and large-scale development. It has been a learning curve for everybody I guess. Bunch: I can see where the property owner, not necessarily the new business, but the property owner would be; when they first build that that was so far out that there were no jurisdictions of any kind and they just did what they needed to do for their business. There weren't that many regulations that governed them. Hoover: Is there still a grocery store going in across the street? Conklin: I haven't heard anything. Hoover: Have we approved that corner? Conklin- We approved it for the preliminary plat. Hoover: We haven't done any large scales. Conklin: Marinoni is doing the Marvin's I think. Edwards: That is off of Wedington Place. Bunch: I thought Marvin's was over by McDonald's. Conklin: It is. Hoover: We haven't done anything on that corner besides the preliminary plat. Conklin: No. Bunch: Are they doing what they are supposed to on rerouting that creek? I was thinking that there had been a shift on that. Conklin: Yes, they have to contain the hundred year flows within the channel. Just like the Boys and Girl Club too, when you relocate it and you are trying to contain the flows the channels get large. Hoover: What is the Marinoni property zoned? Conklin: R-1, I will have to look. Ward: Some of it is C-2. Subdivision Committee February 14, 2002 Page 16 Conklin: The corner is Constine. That is not Marinoni, it was formally Marinoni. R-1 is the 80 acres they have for sale. I will get back with them and see what they can do. Ward: Jazz it up on the east side. You're not going to make it like it is sitting. Bunch: We had another metal building that got dressed up a little bit, was it the liquor store? Ward: The liquor store on 112. Conklin- I showed them that, I took a tour with Steve Clark and the people from Karstetter & Glass and showed them these buildings and this is what we came back with on the landscaping. I probably should take them by Morgan Hooker's building because maybe they could do some type of covering. Bunch: Yes, we let him use siding in the overlay district. Again though, that was kind of buffered into the industrial area in Johnson. Ward: Thanks. Conklin: Thank you.