Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007-03-26 MinutesPlanning Commission March 26, 2007 Page I of 16 MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION A regular meeting of the Fayetteville Planning Commission was held on March 26, 2007 at 5:30 p.m. in Room 219 of the City Administration Building, 113 W. Mountain, Fayetteville, Arkansas. ITEMS DISCUSSED ACTION TAKEN MINUTES: January 22 and February 12, 2007 Approved Page 3 PPL 07-2506 (MINER ACRES, 1318) Approved Page 3 ADM 07-2548 (CREEL, 561) Approved Page 3 R-PZD 07-2452 (THE LINKS AT FAY., 400.401.361.362) Denied Page 4 CPL 07-2544 (WINDSOR S/D, 513) No Action Page 7 CUP 07-2499 (ALLIED STORAGE, 601) Approved Page 8 LSD 07-2480 (ALLIED STORAGE, 601) Approved Page 9 CUP 07-2508 (CLARK, 445) Approved Page 10 CUP 07-2505 (HIGHBARGIN, 367) Approved Page 12 ANX 07-2507 (SPENCER, 533.572.573) Forwarded Page 14 RZN 07-2503 (MOLER, 136) Tabled Page 15 RZN 07-2504 (SLOAN/COBBLESTONE S/D, 246) Forwarded Page 16 Planning Commission March 26, 2007 Page 2 of 16 MEMBERS PRESENT Jill Anthes Candy Clark Hilary Harris Audy Lack Christine Myres Sean Trumbo Lois Bryant Allan Ostner STAFF PRESENT Jeremy Pate Andrew Garner Suzanne Morgan Jesse Fulcher Glenn Newman/Engineering CITY ATTORNEY: Kit Williams MEMBERS ABSENT James Graves STAFF ABSENT Matt Casey/Engineering A DVD copy of each Planning Commission meeting is available for viewing in the office of the Fayetteville Planning Division. Planning Commission Chair Jill Anthes called the meeting to order. Mr. Pate called the Planning Commission roll. Graves was not present. Commissioner Anthes requested for all cell phones to be turned off and offered audio devices. Proceeded with election of Planning Commission officers. Jeremy Pate, Director of Current Planning, passed out ballots, collected and tallied votes. Jeremy Pate: The results of the 2007-2008 officer election are Chair — Jill Anthes, Vice Chair — Sean Trumbo, and Secretary — Candy Clark. Planning Commission March 26, 2007 Page 3 of 16 CONSENT: MINUTES: January 22 and February 12, 2007 PPL 07-2506: Preliminary Plat (MINER ACRES, 318): Submitted by RANDY L. RITCHEY for property located at 2493 DOUBLE SPRINGS ROAD, N OF WEDINGTON DRIVE. The property is in the Planning Area and contains approximately 24.46 acres. The request is for approval of a 7 lot subdivision (a renewal of the Preliminary Plat, PPL 05-1641 approved January 2006). ADM 07- 2548: Administrative Item (CREEL, 561): Submitted by JENNIFER CREEL for property located at 1136 S. DUNCAN AVENUE. The property is zoned RMF -24, RESIDENTIAL MULTI -FAMILY, 24 UNITS PER ACRE. The request is to amend the Conditions of Approval associated with the approved Conditional Use Permit, CUP 06-1990, regarding the driveway materials. Commissioner Anthes read descriptions of those items on the Consent Agenda. She asked if any member of the Commissioner or the public would like to remove any of the items on the consent agenda. Seeing no response, she called for a motion. Motion: Commissioner Clark moved to approve the consent agenda. Commissioner Trumbo seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion passed 8-0-0. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: Planning Commission March 26, 2007 Page 4 of 16 R-PZD 07-2452: Planned Zoning District (THE LINKS AT FAYETTEVILLE, 400.401.361.362): Submitted by CRAFTON, TULL, SPARKS & ASSOCIATES for property located at THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF WEDINGTON AND RUPPLE ROAD. The property is zoned R-PZD, RESIDENTIAL PLANNED ZONING DISTRICT 05-1636 (WELLSPRING) and contains approximately 152.23 acres. The request is for zoning and land use approval only for a new R-PZD. The proposed R-PZD would allow 1,258 residential dwelling units, 120,888 square feet of non-residential/commercial space, and 16,388 square feet of recreational buildings. The non-residential and recreational portions of the development would contain a golf course, a commercial `market' area, green space, park, and associated parking. Andrew Garner, Senior Planner, gave the staff report. Staff recommended denial of the project, based on findings within the staff report, primarily with inconsistency with the goals of the City's Future Land Use Plan, CityPlan 2025, the PZD ordinance, lack of "town form" as the standard for the development and a lack of public street infrastructure for the project. Hugh Jarratt (applicant) discussed that if this project meets one of the goals of the City Plan 2025 the Planning Commission has the authority to approve the plan. He also discussed the Planning Commission's general authority for approval of a planned zoning district (PZD). Kim Fuggitt (applicant) discussed that one of the major problems with the project according to staff is that this project doesn't meet the goal to provide a Traditional Neighborhood Town form. He also discussed how the plan evolved over time and has a streetscape along the street, and provides variety and flexibility in building types. Jim Lindsey (applicant) discussed that the applicant has revised the plan substantially over the various submittals. He also discussed the benefits of this plan in compliance with all City requirements. He discussed the amenities provided in this development such as golf course, pool, clubhouse, and tennis court. He compared this plan to the existing approved Wellspring PZD on the property. Jeremy Pate, at the Planning Commission's request, discussed the difference between the Unified Development Code (UDC) and City Plan 2025. Kit Williams, City Attorney, discussed the requirements for approving or denying a PZD or re- zoning. He stated that a project must meet the requirements of the PZD ordinance. The City Plan 2025 is not a requirement, but a guiding policy. Commissioner Anthes discussed that the UDC refers to the City Plan 2025, and other policy and ordinance requirements, and that the City Plan 2025 is a shift from the existing ordinance requirements. Kit Williams determined that any ambiguity in the UDC should be interpreted in favor of the applicant. He also discussed other compliance requirements and the discretion of the Planning Planning Commission March 26, 2007 Page 5 of 16 Commission. Jeremy Pate discussed that the overall findings lead to a recommendation of denial although the project has many positive aspects as noted in the staff report. Commissioner Anthes questioned staff as to whether or not the project met the six primary goals of City Plan 2025. Jeremy Pate responded that many of those goals are subjective and that this project may meet several of these goals to a certain degree. The staff report provides the discussion and analysis and leaves the conclusion to the reader. Commissioner Anthes discussed the large volume and scale of the site combined with lack of street connections and lack of unit types is a concern of commissioners. She questioned whether or not the UDC requires a certain amount of variety based on the size of a property. Jeremy Pate confirmed that the UDC does not specify that a certain size of property has to meet a certain degree of variety, or number of unit types. Commissioner Ostner questioned how the existing land use and zoning should be compared to the proposed project. Jeremy Pate explained that the General Plan 2020 under the Wellspring PZD approval and the City Plan 2025 under which the current project is being evaluated are very different, and that comparing the two is difficult, as the City Council has adopted a new policy through the City Plan 2025 that differs greatly from before. Commissioner Ostner discussed that the approved Wellspring PZD may get a negative recommendation under the current City Plan 2025. There is a different set of rules under which the Wellspring PZD was approved. The City Council decided to change the goals and policies from General Plan 2020 to City Plan 2025. Commissioner Lack asked the applicant about their reference to hiring an urban planner. Jim Lindsey responded that he is willing to look at changes to the project and has contacted an urban planner recommended by the Mayor. He stated that the timing of the project needs to move forward and that he has made no real progress with the urban planner he has been talking to. Commissioner Lack stated that this project does not meet all of the goals of the City Plan 2025, but meets the UDC. Motion: Commissioner Lack made a motion to forward the project with a recommendation for approval Planning Commission March 26, 2007 Page 6 of 16 with staff recommended conditions. Commissioner Trumbo seconded the motion. Commissioner Myres stated she will vote against the project for reasons stated in previous meetings. Commissioner Trumbo stated that development of this project in compliance with the City Plan 2025 has not been proven to be financially viable. The homes for Rupple Row are now being leased and are too expensive to be sold. He stated that he would like to see an example of a project under City Plan 2025 that would work economically. Commissioner Anthes discussed how this project has improved throughout the three Planning Commission meetings. However there are too few public streets and connections that result in too much circulation through parking lots, the south access is a private drive and not a public street. She is also concerned with the lack of variety of unit types, however the golf course does provide some buffer to surrounding properties from the large volume of apartments. Upon roll call the motion failed by a vote of 3-3-2 with Commissioners Anthes, Myres, and Ostner voting `No', Commissioners Lack, Trumbo, and Bryant voting `Yes', Commissioners Harris and Clark recusing, and Commissioner Graves was absent. Planning Commission March 26, 2007 Page 7 of 16 CPL 07-2544: Concept Plat (WINDSOR S/D, 513): Submitted by JORGENSEN & ASSOCIATES for property located EAST OF DOUBLE SPRINGS, SOUTH OF WEDINGTON AND NORTH OF SELLERS ROAD. The property is zoned RSF-2, RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY, 2 UNITS PER ACRE and contains approximately 34.44 acres. The request is to review a Conceptual Plat for a proposed modification to the existing Windsor residential subdivision for 67 lots, including 34 lots rezoned to RSF-4, Residential Single Family, 4 units per acre, and the remainder of the lots remaining RSF-2. Andrew Garner, Senior Planner, gave the staff report. Staff did not give a recommendation. Chris Brackett (applicant) gave the applicant's presentation, discussing how the project would still provide two units per acre, but would the applicant would request to rezone a portion of the property to RSF-4 in order to get more lots and make the municipal sewer system financially viable. The outer lots would remain RSF-2 to provide transition to neighboring properties. The Planning Commission suggested notifying the public of concept plats in the future, and discussed interest in surrounding neighbor's comments regarding the changes. Staff discussed the lot size and density requirements of RSF-2 zoning. Commissioner Ostner discussed the specifics of the subdivision and requested the "elbow" in the northeast corner of the site to be removed; having lots front onto Double Springs Road with the potential for a short alley for rear access to have "eyes" on the street and no privacy fences onto Double Springs Road. Commissioner Ostner also discussed his desire for a southern street stub -out. Motion: No action is required to be taken on a Concept Plat. CUP 07-2499: Conditional Use Permit (ALLIED STORAGE, 601): Submitted by STEVE Planning Commission March 26, 2007 Page 8 of 16 CLARK for property located at 85 W. 15TH STREET. The property is zoned I-1, HEAVY COMMERCIAL/LIGHT INDUST and contains approximately 14.98 acres. The request is for mini - storage buildings (Use Unit 38) in the I -I Zoning District. Suzanne Morgan, Current Planner, presented the Planning staff report for both the CUP and LSD. She emphasized that the existing illegal signs will need to be removed immediately and that the tree preservation area as shown on the Large Scale Development site plan will need to be slightly modified at the time of easement plat review. Staff recommended approval with conditions. Steve Clark, the applicant's representative, introduced himself and the development proposal. He stated that it was the owner's intent to build the larger storage building first. It may be necessary for the applicant to request an extension of the LSD approval in the future depending on the owner's phasing of the development. Motion: Commissioner Trumbo moved to approve CUP 07-2499 with staff s recommendations. Commissioner Clark seconded the motion. Commissioner Anthes requested an amendment to the motion, moving to limit the office hours of the mini -storage facility from 8 AM to 6 PM, Monday through Saturday. Jeremy Pate stated that the business was an existing establishment in an Industrial zoning district. It is standard to limit hours of operation only for uses such as daycares or other businesses that are located within a residential zone. Commissioner Anthes agreed and withdrew the motion to add an addition condition to limit hours of operation. Commissioner Ostner asked staff what the plans were for the future of Walker Park, located to the north of the property, and asked if it would change uses at any time, as he had heard. Jeremy Pate stated he was not aware of any plans at this time to alter the use of Walker Park; to do so will require City Council approval and a public meeting. Upon roll call the Planning Commission voted 8-0-0 in favor of the motion to approve CUP 07-2499. Planning Commission March 26, 2007 Page 9 of 16 LSD 07-2480: Large Scale Development (ALLIED STORAGE, 601): Submitted by CLARK CONSULTING for property located at 85 W. 15TH STREET. The property is zoned I-1, HEAVY COMMERCIAL/LIGHT INDUSTRIAL and contains approximately 14.98 acres. The request is for a two phase addition to the existing facility to add three storage buildings, a total addition of 25,425 square feet. This item was discussed in tandem with the Conditional Use Request. Staff recommended approval with conditions. Motion: Commissioner Clark moved to approve LSD 07-2480. Commissioner Myres seconded the motion. Commissioner Lack discussed the need for the trail corridor as noted by the Trails Coordinator in the staff report and requested this be included as a condition of approval. Steve Clark stated that it was not a requirement to grant a trail easement. The owner agrees in principle, but does not want to make an official agreement before he can see the details regarding the location of the trail, etc. Commissioner Lack asked staff whether not dedicating a trail easement was acceptable. Jeremy Pate stated that dedicating easements in accordance with the Fayetteville Alternative Transportation and Trails Plan is not an ordinance requirement. It is a matter of the Trails Coordinator working with the individual property owner(s) with the details of the easements on site. Steve Clark stated, in summary, that the owner has expressed interest in the trail but is not willing to dedicate an easement at this time. Upon roll call the Planning Commission voted 8-0-0 in favor of the motion to approve LSD 07-2480. CUP 07-2508: Conditional Use Permit (CLARK, 445): Submitted by BEN CLARK for property Planning Commission March 26, 2007 Page 10 of 16 located at 525 N. VANDEVENTER AVENUE. The property is zoned RMF -40, MULTI FAMILY - 40 UNITS/ACRE and contains approximately 0. 19 acres. The request is for a professional office (Use Unit 25) in the RMF -40 Zoning District. Jesse Fulcher, Current Planner, gave a brief description of the project. Staff recommended approval with conditions. Melinda Klebanoff, a resident in the neighborhood, objected to the "rezoning" request. Did not want office uses creeping into the Wilson Park neighborhood. Ben Clark (applicant) described the reasons why he was requesting the conditional use. Commissioner Anthes explained to the public that the request was not for a rezoning, but for a conditional use to allow a professional office on the subject property. Commissioner Ostner stated that he shared the concerns with the neighborhood regarding expanding commercial uses into the neighborhood. However, he felt that the property created an appropriate barrier between the single-family district and the sorority houses to the south. Commissioner Clark stated that she was a past resident of the Wilson Park neighborhood and that she understood the concerns of the neighborhood. She stated that she had concerns because the business owner would not live on the property. Commissioner Trumbo asked the applicant if he was planning on purchasing the property. Ben Clark stated that he has made an offer on the property, but would not live there. He would be working there five days per week, however. Commissioner Trumbo stated that there is an advantage to having the landlord work on site five days per week. Commissioner Harris agreed that having the landlord on-site is a good thing for the property. Commissioner Anthes asked what is the recourse for the neighbors if the applicant violates the conditions of the conditional use permit. Jeremy Pate explained that the neighbors would need to contact him to log a complaint and then an investigation would be conducted. If the applicant was in violation of the conditional use permit or Unified Development Code, then the Zoning and Development Administrator could bring back the conditional use to the Planning Commission for revocation. Commissioner Myers stated she does not have any problems with the request since the applicant is held accountable for any violations. Commissioner Harris emphasized that, if warranted, she would revoke the conditional use application. Planning Commission March 26, 2007 Page 11 of 16 Motion: Commissioner Trumbo made a motion to approve the requested conditional use application. Commissioner Lack seconded the motion. Upon roll call, the motion passed 7-1-0, with Commissioner Clark voting no. CUP 07-2505: Conditional Use Permit (HIGHBARGIN, 367): Submitted by DALE TAFOYA for property located at 108 W. ELM STREET. The property is zoned RSF-4, SINGLE FAMILY - 4 UNITS/ACRE and contains approximately 1.35 acres. The request is for Planning Commission March 26, 2007 Page 12 of 16 a detached shop building. Jesse Fulcher, Current Planner, gave a brief description of the project, which requires a conditional use because the proposed accessory structure is over 50% of the size of the principal structure. Staff recommended approval with conditions. Commissioner Bryant stated that she has family members that live on Elm Street, but that it would not influence her vote. Scott Highbargin (applicant) explained that the accessory structure would be used for personal use, such as working on vintage vehicles with his sons. Commissioner Harris raised questions regarding the use of the structure and what would happen if a business was operated out of the structure in the future. Jeremy Pate explained the process for logging complaints from citizens for zoning violations and Code Compliance's investigation of sites. Commissioner Harris stated that the building was quite large and asked for staff s reasoning for recommending the request. Jeremy Pate explained staff s findings in the staff report, finding that while the size of the structure was large, it was also an irregularly large lot for the neighborhood, and that the placement of the structure in the rear of the property, which is adjacent to an industrial storage yard zoned I-1, was appropriate. Commissioner Lack asked staff if there was any public comment regarding the request. Jesse Fulcher stated that two neighbors had called regarding the conditional use request, however they did not speak for or against the project. Rather, they had questions regarding the use of the building, concerns with a business operation, what happens if the property owner sells the property; similar questions to what the Planning Commission had asked. Commissioner Anthes posed questions regarding future issues if the property sells, the potential for nuisances. Could the property be split? Jeremy Pate stated if the property owner wanted to split the property such that the accessory structure was located on its own lot, then the request would have to come back to the Planning Commission as a conditional use, since the accessory structure would be located on the lot prior to the principal structure. Commissioner Anthes asked the applicant about specific nuisances; specifically engine noise, odors, etc. Scott Highbargin stated that he really only worked on engine/mechanics. Planning Commission March 26, 2007 Page 13 of 16 Motion: Commissioner Clark made a motion to approve the request with all conditions of approval. Commissioner Myers seconded the motion. Upon roll call, the motion passed 8-0-0. ANX 07-2507: Annexation (SPENCER, 533/572/573): Submitted by DAN & ANITA SPENCER for property located at 835 S. LEWIS WOODS LN, WEST OF LAKE SEQUOYAH. The property is in the Planning Area and contains approximately 13.22 acres. The request is to annex the subject property into the City of Fayetteville. Planning Commission March 26, 2007 Page 14 of 16 Andrew Garner, Senior Planner, gave the staff report, recommending approval of the request based on the findings within the staff report. Motion: Commissioner Clark made a motion to forward the item to City Council with a recommendation for approval. Commissioner Trumbo seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion to forward the item to City Council with a recommendation for approval passed with a vote of 8-0-0. Planning Commission March 26, 2007 Page 15 of 16 RZN 07-2503: Rezoning (MOLER,136): Submitted by BPB, LLC for property located at 1400 & 1606 ZION ROAD. The property is zoned RSF-4, SINGLE FAMILY - 4 UNITS/ACRE and contains approximately 4.24 acres. The request is to rezone the subject property to R -O, RESIDENTIAL OFFICE. Andrew Garner, Senior Planner, gave the staff report. Staff recommended denial of the rezoning request, finding the requested rezoning incompatible with the surrounding properties without appropriate transition. Staff recommended a PZD for this site. Chris Shock gave the applicant's presentation. Diana St. Clair also discussed the applicant's process for coming to this point of applying for a rezoning. She stated that this rezoning meets the City Plan 2025 in contrast to staff s recommendation. Dawn Moler spoke for the applicant discussing reasons for the Planning Commission to approve the rezoning. She also discussed that if the Planning Commission were against the R -O rezoning she would prefer the item be tabled and they may return with a PZD application. The Planning Commission discussed the item. Some members discussed that a PZD is a more favorable option than the R -O zoning. Commissioner Lack stated he was familiar with the property, and would support the rezoning request, due to the nature of surrounding properties and Zion Road improvements. Commissioners discussed that a mixed use development under a PZD would be appropriate due to the existing development and transition on Zion Road in this area. Motion: Commissioner Anthes moved to table this item to look at developing this property more intensely with a PZD. Commissioner Clark seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion passed with a vote of 7-1 with Commissioner Lack voting `No'. RZN 07-2504: Rezoning (SLOAN/COBBLESTONE SUBDIVISION, 246): Submitted by Planning Commission March 26, 2007 Page 16 of 16 DAVE JORGENSEN for property located SOUTH OF SALEM ROAD AND WEST OF DEANE SOLOMON ROAD in the interior of the COBBLESTONE SUBDIVISION. The property is zoned RSF-4, SINGLE FAMILY - 4 UNITS/ACRE and contains approximately 17.22 acres. The request is to rezone the subject property to RSF-8, Residential Single Family, 8 units per acre. Andrew Garner, Senior Planner, gave the staff report. Staff recommended forwarding this item to the City Council with a recommendation of approval, based on the findings in the staff report. Crystal Goederis discussed that she is in favor of the rezoning because it would provide affordable housing. Chris Bracket (applicant) stated he was there to answer any questions. Commissioner Anthes asked why higher density is internal to the subdivision, which seems counter -intuitive, and seems to be hiding the higher density within the neighborhood. Jeremy Pate responded that RSF-8 zoning internal to the subdivision ensures compatibility with other surrounding RSF-4 zoning, and allows the opportunity to provide a mixture of housing and lot sizes within the neighborhood. Chris Bracket responded this was a compromise with the existing neighbors, to provide similar lots to theirs along the property line, while adding a mixture of price point. The Planning Commission, staff, and the City attorney discussed whether economic and price point of residences can be considered in a rezoning. Motion: Commissioner Clark moved to forward this item to City Council with a recommendation for approval. Commissioner Ostner seconded the motion Upon roll call the motion passed with a vote of 8-0-0. All business being concluded, the meeting adjourned at 8.15 PM.