Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007-08-02 - MinutesSubdivision Committee August 02, 2007 Page I of]] MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE A regular meeting of the Fayetteville Subdivision Committee was held on August 02, 2007 at 9:00 a.m. in Room 219 of the City Administration Building, 113 W. Mountain, Fayetteville, Arkansas. ACTION TAKEN R-PZD 07-2649: (COLLEGE AVENUE TOWNHOMES, 291) Tabled Page 2 LSD 07-2633: (WALGREEN'S @ 6TH & ONE MILE RD, 558) Forwarded Page 4 ADM 07-2682: (CENTRAL UNITED METHODIST CHURCH) Approved Page 6 FPL 07-2650: (OAKBROOKE S/D PHASES I & II, 361) Tabled Page 7 FPL 07-2662: (EMBRY ACRES, 61) Approved Page 10 FPL 07-2663: (THE HAMPTONS, 608) Tabled Page 11 MEMBERS PRESENT Andy Lack (Chair) James Graves Lois Bryant STAFF PRESENT Jeremy Pate Andrew Garner Sarah Patterson Jesse Fulcher Glenn Newman MEMBERS ABSENT Subdivision Committee Chair Andy Lack called the meeting to order at 9AM. Subdivision Committee August 02, 2007 Page 2 of 11 Old Business: R-PZD 07-2649: (COLLEGE AVENUE TOWNHOMES, 291): Submitted by BATES & ASSOCIATES for property located SE OF COLLEGE AVENUE AND GOLDEN EAGLE DRIVE. The property is zoned C-2, THOROUGHFARE COMMERCIAL and contains approximately 2.34 acres. The request is for re -zoning, land use and development approval of an R-PZD, Residential Planned Zoning District with 5 buildings of 4 attached units for a total of 20 dwelling units and associated parking. Jesse Fulcher, Current Planner, gave the staff report, describing the pzd request. Many of the items for which the item was tabled at the previous Subdivision Committee have been addressed, including Tree Preservation, Fire dept. comments and many of the engineering comments. However, the Engineering Division has submitted information regarding the proposed retaining walls on the property that indicates they are out of compliance with applicable ordinance criteria, specifically with regard to setbacks. Changes to bring the walls into compliance could result in site plan modifications, therefore staff recommends tabling the item in order to work through these issues. Glenn Newman, Staff Engineer, discussed the location of the proposed retaining walls. The previous submittal contained an oversight by all parties as to the setback requirements for retaining walls. Newman explained the setback requirements for retaining walls, and stated it could have a significant impact on the site plan. Sarah Patterson, Urban Forester, stated that the development submittal had changed in preservation numbers since the initial submittal. The current plan meets the Code at 30.7%. However, the current concern is that moving retaining walls around could drop the project lower than 30%, which could then change her recommendation. Patterson recommended the southeast corner of the site be placed within a Tree Preservation Area, and that the landscape comments contained typical conditions of approval. No public comment was presented. Chris Waller (applicant) stated he represented the owner. They have worked diligently to get to this point and to meet all of staffs comments. They are now being handed comments about retaining walls from Engineering. Some walls were added to save more trees, but some were there before and no problems were mentioned then. Geoff Bates (applicant) stated that there was no way to move some of the walls, referring to the site constraints. He asked if there is a variance process to this requirement. Bates stated their hands are tied; some of walls can't be changed, though they would work to change those that could. Newmann discussed the requirements for the walls, and the review process and comments. Lex Broyles (applicant) stated he was confident these issues could be worked out before Planning Commission, and we would like to be forwarded. Subdivision Committee August 02, 2007 Page 3 of 11 Commissioner Lack asked for staff input. Jeremy Pate, Director of Current Planning, discussed the variance procedure under Ch. 169.06 of the Unified Development Code, which is a chapter administered by the Engineering Division. The requirements the Engineering Division had listed could be varied administratively, by the City Engineer, with geotechnical and structural information presented. Perhaps the applicants could get this information together to make their case, but it would be hard to do so by Monday at loam. Staff s concern is that if the walls change, this changes the tree preservation numbers, which could then result in a different recommendation for the project altogether. Commissioner Graves stated he typically likes to forward these projects to the full Planning Commission for a decision. However, it sounds like moving walls around could change the tree preservation recommendation, and he would prefer to table. Bates stated he feels like they could make the changes before then; if not, the Commission could pull it off the agenda. Commissioner Graves explained that could be, however the Commission would still have to hear it and table the item, after everyone had been notified. Commissioner Lack confirmed that the project can not be approved at this level. With the amount of variability still left, it would be prudent to table the item. He stated he would like to forward; with these issues worked out, he could likely support the project, but at this time he would concur with staff's recommendation. Commissioner Bryant confirmed that she agreed with tabling the item for more work. Motion: Commissioner Graves made a motion to table the request. Commissioner Bryant seconded the motion. Commissioner Lack concurred, stating this was obviously a difficult project to develop, and the applicants were going about it the right way, but it was prudent to table to allow a little time to get it there. The motion passed with a vote of 3-0-0. Subdivision Committee August 02, 2007 Page 4 of 11 LSD 07-2633: (WALGREEN'S @ 6TH & ONE MILE RD, 558): Submitted by JEFFERY NICHOLAS SPRINGFIELD HOLDING GROUP,LLC for property located at 2964 W 6TH ST.@ THE INTERSECTION OF ONE MILE ROAD. The property is zoned C-2, THOROUGHFARE COMMERCIAL and contains approximately 1.96 acres. The request is to approve a 13,659 s.f. retail building with associated parking. Jesse Fulcher, Current Planner, gave the staff report, describing the development request. Many of the items for which the item was tabled at the previous Subdivision Committee have been addressed, including Tree Preservation and the recommendations on improvements to One Mile Road. The main issue to discuss was the proposed access to 6`h Street. Staff's recommendation is to remove the access from 6`h Street and have two access points onto One Mile Road, due to safety concerns with a very busy, signalized intersection in which queuing traffic backs up beyond the proposed entry. Staff recommends the item be forwarded to the full Planning Commission for a few determinations. Fulcher also recommended an additional condition #24 for a Subdivision Committee determination of the safety of the proposed curb cut onto 6`h Street. Staff recommended 14 -feet from centerline improvements on One Mile Road, instead of a turn lane, based on the traffic study information presented since the previous review. Additionally, the applicant has requested a waiver from the drive aisle dimensions as mandated by city codes. Glenn Newman, Staff Engineer, stated that the Engineering Department supported the removal of the access to 6`h Street as well, especially due to the large queuing line associated with the Wal-Mart and Lowes across the street. Sarah Patterson, Urban Forester, stated that she was now in favor of the tree preservation plan after meeting with the applicant to discuss alternative designs for the site. There were discrepancies and mistakes in the previous tree preservation plan submitted. A condition of approval was for the vacation of the easement along the north property line, so that the canopy in that area could count as preserved. If the easement is not vacated, then the large scale development will have to come back before the Planning Commission for a major modification. No public comment was presented. Jeff Nicholas, applicant, stated that he has been working with staff to resolve the issues associated with tree preservation, improvements to One Mile Road and access to 6a' Street. A traffic study has been provided that indicates no impact to 6th Street or One Mile Road from the traffic generated by the Walgreens development. The right -in at the 6'h Street access would maintain a level of service "A" and the right -out would maintain a level of service "C", while also alleviating traffic at the intersection of 6`h and One Mile. The projected traffic will be less than that generated by the gas station, which previously occupied the property. The development meets all ordinance requirements; however, a 27' driveway at 6a Street cannot be accomplished because of the turning movements of the large delivery vehicles. Nicholas stated it is unfair for staff to suggest the curb cut shouldn't be there. He asked the Subdivision Committee to forward the item with a recommendation of approval for the curb cut. The second item to discuss is the cross -access to the east. Staff has modified the wording in the conditions of approval, however it does not match what was discussed between staff and the applicants at a previous meeting. The applicants do not disagree with cross- Subdivision Committee August 02, 2007 Page 5 of 11 access, but they want the option to review cross -access when the adjacent property develops to protect Walgreens. Jeremy Pate, Director of Current Planning, stated that the language for the access easement is usually written into the easement, but that staff is agreeable to the applicant's request and will work on the wording of the condition of approval for cross -access. Commissioner Graves, stated that his personal feeling is that he needs specific information from staff to recommend against the curb -cut onto 6th Street. Maybe the City needs to run a traffic study. The right-in/right-out design does not work on state highways and people will be able to turn left into site where west bound traffic is entering the turn lane. The City does not have a lot of control with regard to barricades, etc. My inclination is to allow the curb -cut, but will see what the City Council decides regarding the appeal of the curb -cut for Liberty Bank on Joyce Blvd. I will express concern, for the record, however that the developer will not be able to design the access point to a level that will restrict access. Commissioner Lack stated that the City is trying to implement access management for overloaded arterials, but that the ordinances are not in place at this time. The curb -cut onto 6`h Street does not appear to compound a dangerous traffic situation and the design is similar to the Walgreens at College and Township, which functions well. You can enter the site from College without having to go through the intersection to the Township entrance. Can the City legally cause the restriction of turning movements by way of a barricade on state highways? He stated he would like to know about this at the Planning Commission. The project should move forward to the Planning Commission with access as shown. I can see the need for a drive aisle waiver due to the delivery trucks. Motion: Commissioner Graves made a motion to forward the request with the conditions of approval as recommended by staff, finding in favor of condition #1, #2, #3 and no recommendation for the proposed access to Oh Street. Commissioner Bryant seconded the motion. Commissioner Lack concurred, the motion passed with a vote of 3-0-0. Subdivision Committee August 02, 2007 Page 6 of]] New Business: ADM 07-2682: (CENTRAL UNITED METHODIST CHURCH): The request is for a major modification of the approved LSD 06-2300. The applicant proposes a 4 -story parking deck instead of the approved 5 -story parking deck. Andrew Garner, Senior Planner, gave the staff report, describing the request to modify the approved elevations for the parking deck from 5 -stories to 4 -stories. Staff recommended approval, with the condition that all original conditions of approval from the Large Scale Development (LSD 06-2300) still apply. Brian Swain, (applicant) was present for the applicant and stated that the reason for the change from 5 -stories to 4 -stories on the parking deck was for budget reasons. He discussed that the garage is being built to structurally support the two additional stories, however, he understands that the approval of two additional stories at some point in the future is not being approved at this time. No public comment was presented. Motion: Commissioner Graves stated that he finds the request reasonable and that it does not bring up any issues with the original large scale development approval. Commissioner Graves made a motion to approve the request with the condition as stated by staff. Commissioner Bryant seconded the motion. Commissioner Lack asked how the reduction of one story from the parking deck will impact parking ratios. Jeremy Pate, Director of Current Planning, responded that the church is currently well below the required parking ratios and needs additional parking. This parking deck will help improve parking ratios, and will meet Code. Swain stated that the church uses auxiliary lots on Sundays to help provide adequate parking currently, and that this would remain the case. Commissioner Lack concurred with the motion. The motion passed with a vote of 3-0-0. Subdivision Committee August 02, 2007 Page 7 of]] FPL 07-2650: (OAKBROOKE S/D PHASES I & 11, 361): Submitted by MEL MILHOLLAND for property located W OF RUPPLE ROAD, N OF WEDINGTON. The property is zoned R-PZD, RESIDENTIAL PLANNED ZONING DISTRICT and contains approximately 32.38 acres. The request is for approval of the Final Plat for a residential subdivision with 109 residential lots. Jesse Fulcher, Current Planner, gave the staff report, describing the final plat request and that the project presented was the same project that was approved by the City Council in 2005 for Phase I and Phase II. There are assessments due for street improvements for Rupple Rd. and for the Rupple Rd. bridge. The property was approved for development of 110 lots, one of which is a tree preservation lot. The infrastructure necessary for the project has been installed. Staff recommended approval, with conditions as listed in the staff report. Glenn Newman, Staff Engineer, requested a 20' drainage easement to follow the flow path through Lot 110 if it will not affect the tree preservation requirements. A few items needed to be added to the plat, including finish floor elevations. Sarah Patterson, Urban Forester, stated that mitigation is required for 74 trees that are to be planted on site, bonded with a 3 -year letter of credit. Lot 110 was approved as a tree preservation lot and that the word "recreational" could be removed from the description. The tree preservation signature block was requested to be added to the plat. Karen Stewart (citizen) stated she contacted the contractor regarding a drainage problem after the pond was removed. Hamstring Creek is eroding and the engineer has stated that he will fix it, but he has not been to the site. (Ms. Stewart passed around pictures of the property during development) The drainage system allows the water to run too fast across the site and that the concrete steps that were installed have not alleviated the situation. A rain garden in the area or trees would help the situation. Stewart discussed at length erosion and siltation issues from the development, the ponds and trees that existed on the site pre -development, and the desire for resolution of the matter. Mel Milholland (applicant) stated agreement with all conditions of approval, but wanted to discuss condition of approval #21 regarding Lot 110. Tom Jefcoat (applicant) stated an updated tree mitigation plan had been submitted to Sarah Patterson yesterday. Patterson stated that the condition of approval allows three different options for Lot 110, and described the difference in the tree mitigation and tree preservation plans. Tracy Hoskins (applicant) stated that he has been working with staff and now understands the tree stuff a lot better. He stated he was okay with Lot 110 labeled as an open space/tree preservation lot and that the original design was for 1 large detention pond on Lot 110, but that the design was changed to 3 smaller ponds to reduce the amount of canopy removal. The current tree preservation numbers are based on the original plat, but that there is likely more preserved canopy than what he is getting credit for. Most of the trees approved to be removed were saved. He requested to allow the Subdivision Committee August 02, 2007 Page 8 of 11 Urban Forester allow for reduced mitigation numbers if they re -do the tree preservation plan. The options for Lot 110 listed in condition of approval #21 are discussed by Sarah Patterson and the applicants. Hoskins states that they are required to mitigate for trees that weren't removed. Patterson stated that an updated mitigation plan could be submitted for review. Hoskins requested information regarding the removal of Use Unit 13 and 15 from the plat. Fulcher stated that the PZD as approved by the City Council did not allow Use Unit 13 or 15. Jeremy Pate, Director of Current Planning stated that the an eating place/shopping for the club house properties were determined to be ancillary uses and that Use Unit 13 or 15 were not permitted with the approval of the PZD. If sundries (snacks, cokes, candy, etc.) are sold in the clubhouse, this does not constitute a restaurant or shopping area. Commissioner Lack asked for information from Engineering regarding the drainage issues voiced by citizen comments. Newman stated that he was not the engineer that reviewed the project, but that was unaware of any outstanding issues. Milholland stated that the project met the design criteria required by City ordinance; this issue was also discussed at the Preliminary Plat stage, and that the drain pipe had been enlarged for the 100 - year storm event to accomplish storage, and dissipates through a concrete structure, to accommodate these concerns. Hoskins stated that at one point gravel had washed onto the neighbor's property, but had been removed and that a driveway culvert had been replaced. He discussed drainage and run-off. The photos passed around by the citizen clearly indicates the silt fences are in place. Commissioner Lack stated that he was okay with condition of approval #21. He asked Patterson if she was comfortable laving the potential for reduced mitigation. Patterson stated that it may be possible to eliminate the need for mitigation if a new preservation plan is submitted and the minimum canopy required is preserved, and that yes, she is comfortable with that, as long as the correct information is presented. Commissioner Bryant asked if there are any drainage issues that would cause the Committee not to approve the item. Newman stated that final stabilization will need to occur before signing the final plat. Some run-off will always occur, and creates siltation issues. It appears that the drainage issues described by the Subdivision Committee August 02, 2007 Page 9 of 11 citizen were related to construction, and he feels comfortable with moving the plat forward. Commissioner Graves stated that there seems to be staff/applicant issues still left to deal with. There remains the issue that someone is still going to go out and recount trees, an easement through the detention area might affect trees, drainage and erosion into a creek on a neighbor's property and a number of items to deal with in the conditions, which are typically taken care of before a final plat is approved. Motion: Commissioner Graves made a motion to table the request to allow time for the applicant and staff to work out any issues with the plat. Commissioner Bryant seconded the motion. Commissioner Lack concurred, the motion passed with a vote of 3-0-0. Commissioner Lack stated that for the next Subdivision Committee, he would like Engineering to take a look at and have a more definite resolution on the adequacy of the drainage for Oakbrooke. Commissioner Graves stated that he would also like to know the history of the engineering, who contacted who, what inspections have been done and what haven't, and more answers provided than what they have now. Milholland stated that a walk-through has been conducted, and punch list items identified. Inspections have been made on the property. Commissioner Lack thanked the applicants for being present. Subdivision Committee August 02, 2007 Page 10 of 11 FPL 07-2662: (EMBRY ACRES, 61): Submitted by BATES & ASSOCIATES for property located at THE SW CORNER ALBRIGHT RD AND GEORGE ANDERSON RD. The property is zoned RSF-4, SINGLE FAMILY - 4 UNITS/ACRE and contains approximately 19.99 acres. The request is for a final plat of a residential subdivision with 56 single family lots. Jesse Fulcher, Current Planner, gave the staff report, describing the final plat request. The property was approved for development of 56 lots. All of the infrastructure necessary for the project has been installed. Staff recommended approval, with conditions as listed in the staff report. Sarah Patterson, Urban Forester, described the conditions of approval of the Tree Preservation Plan. No public comment was presented. Chris Waller, (applicant), was present for the applicant and described the project as a 20 -acre subdivision with 55 single family lots. No significant changes have occurred from the approved preliminary plat. The owner/developer is satisfied with all staff comments and conditions. Motion: Commissioner Graves made a motion to approve the request with the conditions of approval as recommended by staff. Commissioner Bryant seconded the motion. Commissioner Lack concurred, the motion passed with a vote of 3-0-0. Subdivision Committee August 02, 2007 Page 11 of II FPL 07-2663: (THE HAMPTONS, 608): Submitted by NORTHSTAR ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, INC for property located at S&E OF GOFF FARM AND ROBERTS ROAD. The property is zoned RSF-4, SINGLE FAMILY - 4 UNITS/ACRE and contains approximately 23.63 acres. The request is for a final plat of a residential subdivision with 69 single family lots. Andrew Garner, Senior Planner, gave the staff report, describing the final plat request. The property was approved for development of 138 lots as part of the preliminary plat. This request is for final plat approval of 68 residential lots. All infrastructure necessary for the project has been installed. Staff recommended approval, with conditions as listed in the staff report. Sarah Patterson, Urban Forester, stated that 122 mitigation trees were required. The mitigation plan was being revised, but is close to approval. The majority of the trees in the right-of-way were to be planted prior to May, 2008. No public comment was presented. Jason Ingalls, (applicant) was present for the applicant and stated a correction that 69 lots were being requested for approval. Motion: Commissioner Graves made a motion to approve the request with the conditions of approval as recommended by staff. Commissioner Bryant seconded the motion. Commissioner Lack concurred, the motion passed with a vote of 3-0-0. All business being concluded, the meeting adjourned at 10.29 AM.