HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008-03-03 - MinutesFAYETTEVILLE
PARKS AND RECREATION ADVISORY BOARD
Meeting Minutes March 3, 2008
Opening:
The regular meeting of the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board was called to order by
Parks and Recreation Board member Steve Hatfield at 5:35 p.m. on March 3, 2008 in
Room 326 at the City Administration Building located at 113 West Mountain Street,
Fayetteville, Arkansas.
Present:
Parks and Recreation Advisory Board members Biendara, Jones, Waite, Mauritson,
Hatfield, and Bider were present. Colwell arrived at 6:10 p.m. Davidson was absent. Park
Staff Edmonston, Coles, Wright, Jumper, Jones, Thomas, Trails Coordinator Mihalevich,
and the audience were in attendance.
1. Approval of February 4th, 2008 PRAB Meeting Minutes:
PRAB Motion: Mauritson motioned to accept the minutes as written. Biendara
seconded it. Motion passed by voice vote 6-0-0.
2. Rotary Club Presentation of $15,000 Donation for Gary Hampton Pavilion:
Howard Brill, Rotary Club President
The Rotary Club presented the check to Edmonston at their February meeting.
Edmonston said the Rotary Club has helped Parks and Recreation many times. One way
that they have helped is that they have given us seven scoreboards.
3. Botanical Garden Monthly/Greenhouse Report: Walt Eilers, BGSO Board
Member
Eilers discussed the monthly Botanical Garden report handout. He said the
greenhouse was moving right along, with the ribbing and base up. The greenhouse
will virtually reduce the cost of the plants to nothing. They do not spray chemicals;
they only use soap and water. If that doesn't work, they throw the plant out.
Edmonston commented that we are ready for warmer weather.
Filers said that the plants are ready also.
4. Frisco Trail Memorial Sculpture Proposal: Randy Werner, Technology
Coordinator for U of A Office of Pre -College Programs
Staff Recommendation: Approval of the Hoover Memorial Sculpture Proposal
on Frisco Trail. Trail Coordinator, Matt Mihalevich, also approved these
proposed sites. This project will be the first proposal sent to the Arts Council for
their endorsement.
Hatfield commented that it was a wonderful idea.
Edmonston said that this was the first project to go to the Arts Council. If it passed
the Arts Council, then it would go before the City Council. There will also be a
plaque with the sculpture.
Werner said the plaque would be in celebration of the Hoovers' lives.
Hatfield said that he like the second or third location best.
Werner commented that the sculpture would be on a concrete pad. The points on the
sculpture would be at least seven feet off the ground for safety reasons.
Mauritson said that the sculpture is a great idea and needs to fit in with the
environment.
Hatfield asked if a possible location would be across from the benches.
Mihalevich said that wouldn't be a good location, because the ground drops off really
quickly.
PRAB Motion: Mauritson motioned to accept Staff recommendation. Jones
seconded it. Motion passed by voice vote 6-0-0.
5. Park Land Dedication Alison Jumper, Park Planner
Project History:
Villas at Stonebridge Development was tabled at the February 4t" PRAB
meeting.
This project was presented to PRAB on 04/03/06 with 215 single family units and
50 multi -family units proposed. PRAB made a recommendation of accepting
money in lieu of land. The project had a significant change in the number of
units and therefore is required to go back through the system.
The current project proposes 169 single family units and 153 multi -family units.
Development Name: The Villas at Stonebridge
Engineer: Appian Centre for Design
Owner: Nock/Broyles Land Development
Location: South of Hwy. 16 East, east of Goff Farm
Road
2
Park District:
Units:
Total Acres:
Land Dedication Requirement:
Money in Lieu Requirement
SE
169 single family units, 153 multi -family
units
Approximately 53 acres
6.7 acres
$266,280
* Final fees to be determined at Planning Commission approval*
Existing Parks:
None within a one half mile radius
Developer's Request:
Staff Recommendation:
Money in lieu, trail easement from the west
along the abandoned rail corridor.
Estimated Annual Maintenance:
Justification:
The developer is providing over 7 acres in
P.O.A. owned and maintained greenspace
for the residents. Approximately 6 acres of
park land is anticipated to be dedicated with
the development of Falling Waters at
Stonebridge, located to the east. This future
park land is located within a half mile of the
Villas at Stonebridge.
Hatfield said that there were questions last month about the trail easement and the
retention pond.
Mihalevich said that the developer is working on it. He has not heard anything back from
them.
Hatfield asked Jacobs if there were any changes in the potential alignment of the trait.
Todd Jacobs, the representative from Appian Centre for Design, replied that the
detention pond is being reworked. There should be no problem putting in a 12' ramp as a
safety feature by the trail.
Mihalevich showed an area where the trail could possibly continue. He looked at the golf
course layout, and said that a potential place would be to continue the trail to Eagle Park.
Jacobs pointed out that the park space has been increased to two acres. There will be a
clubhouse sitting on a 1.25 area. There will also be about five and one half acres of high
quality green space in the development.
Bitter asked if playgrounds are being planned.
Jacobs replied the area around the clubhouse will be fenced off and controlled, but most
of the greenspace will be left open.
Hatfield said it would be great if the trailhead came into the park.
Jacobs replied that they actually have been trying to move it to that area, but there have
been several constraints due to some City requirements
Hitler asked about future park land at Falling Waters that was within a half mile radius.
He wanted to know if it was dedicated park land, and if we have the deed.
Jumper replied no, not yet. They only have a grading permit right now. They have not
started construction.
Mauritson asked when we would get the deed.
Jumper said we would get it when the final plat was filed.
Bitler commented that the park area would belong to the POA and would be for the
residents only. Maybe the money in lieu could be applied to make it into a public park.
Jacobs said they were not opposed to a public park, but it was easier to make it private. It
will be a high quality park.
Hatfield asked what the projected elevation would be for the houses versus the park.
Jacobs replied the houses would be 18" to 36" above the sidewalk.
Hatfield asked if there was going to be a sidewalk within the park area.
Jacobs said yes, there will be a sidewalk.
Mauritson asked if Staff discussed making it a public park.
Jumper said yes, and explained that with the other public parks in the area, Staff felt it
would be better to let the POA keep this park since it's so small.
Biendara asked that if the park was private, would there be a problem with the public
using it?
Jacobs said there would be no problem. Anyone can use it.
PRAB Motion: Hitler motioned to accept Staff recommendation, and Biendara
seconded it. The motion passed 6-1-0 by voice vote, with the dissenting vote cast
by Mauritson.
6. Park Land Dedication Alison Jumper, Park Planner
11
Project History:
Park Center Development was tabled at the February 4`" PRAB meeting.
Development Name: Park Center
Engineer: H2 Engineering
Owner: Zion Properties, LLC
Location: South of Lake Fayetteville on Zion Road
Park District: NE
Units:
15 multi -family units
Total Acres:
Approximately 8 acres
Land Dedication Requirement:
0.26 acres
Money in Lieu Requirement
$10,200
*Final fees to be determined at Planning Commission approval*
Existing Parks:
Developer's Request:
Staff Recommendation:
Estimated Annual Maintenance:
Justification:
Lake Fayetteville, Veteran's Memorial Park
Money in Lieu
Money in Lieu
No additional maintenance is anticipated.
The development is adjacent to existing park
property and trails.
This development is adjacent to Veteran's Park and provides an opportunity to
create a safer, more accessible entrance with the extension of Vantage Drive.
Staff recommends the connection and extension of Vantage Drive as conceptually
shown on the drawing. Additionally, the developer requests to use the required
money in lieu dedication to improve the new entry and existing drive into
Veteran's Park. Park Staff requests to rename Vantage Drive to Veterans
Memorial Boulevard if the street is built as a public street to the park.
Jumper explained that some of the questions from the last meeting no longer
apply because they are now providing a detention pond and are not increasing
flow into parkland.
Biller asked if a detention pond would be built.
Jumper said yes.
Mauritson asked if the old driveway would be removed.
Jumper replied no, we will keep the existing Veteran's Drive.
Mauritson wanted to know how the north end of the new part of Vantage would
tie in.
Jumper said it would be a "Y" intersection. There will be a focal point to let
people know they are leaving the development and entering the park.
Mauritson said he thought it would be a good idea to change the name from
Vantage to Veterans Memorial Blvd. He has already spoken to Kyle Cook, who
will present it to the Council if necessary.
Colwell asked if the top right area on the map was wooded.
Jumper said yes, it was wooded.
Colwell wanted to know if it would stay wooded.
Jeremy Thompson, the representative from H2 Engineering, said it would stay
mostly wooded. Between .8 and .9 acres would be dedicated to tree preservation.
Colwell wanted to know if the entrance would cause a traffic flow problem.
Jumper said she spoke to Sgt. Brown, and he saw it as a positive aspect.
Mauritson said that the drainage was resolved. His concern was about the traffic
being pulled in. He would like neighborhood access.
Colwell asked if Zion was being widened.
Jones said yes, it was being widened from Vantage to College.
Bider said that if the entrance was improved, and the traffic flow changed,
possibly a traffic light would be installed there at Vantage and Zion.
Colwell said that would be good.
Mauritson said maybe they could put in an expanded cul-de-sac. Maybe a parking
lot could be put in.
Mauritson said that the parking lot could be on the north end of Vantage, and
people could walk into the park.
Edmonston said there would be a lot of usage for the park. A lot of green space
would be lost to the parking lot.
Jumper asked Thompson if he had any idea of the traffic counts.
Thompson said no, a traffic study has not been conducted.
Colwell asked how many people would be there working, appointments, living,
etc.
Thompson said there would be 250 parking spaces for the office building, and
fifteen residential units.
Edmonston said that this would be a possible place to put speed bumps.
Mauritson said he doesn't see the benefit to the park.
PRAB Motion: There were two motions. Biller made the first motion to accept
the Staff recommendation, and added that language needed to be sent to Planning
so that they would look at the non -park traffic, and develop more defined traffic
flows, and also that the Y in the road would be put closer to the development.
Colwell seconded it. The first motion passed 5-2-0 by voice vote, with Hatfield
and Mauritson casting the dissenting votes. Bitler made the second motion to ask
the aldermen at the City Council to rename Vantage to Veterans Memorial Blvd. .
Mauritson seconded it. The second motion passed 7-0-0 by voice vote.
7. Park Land Dedication
Development Name:
Engineer:
Owner:
Location:
Park District:
Units:
Total Acres:
Land Dedication Requirement:
Money in Lieu Requirement
Carole Jones, Park Planner
Markham Hill Cottages
Northstar Engineering Consultants
Homestead Homes, LLC
North of Maine Street and west of Cross
Avenue at the end of Nettleship Street
SW
10 multi -family units and 16 single-family
units
Approximately 2.37 acres
0.55 acres
$22,160
* Final fees to be determined at Planning Commission approval*
Existing Parks:
Hotz Park is located within a one-half mile
radius
Developer's Request:
Money in lieu
Staff Recommendation:
Money in lieu
Estimated Annual Maintenance:
N/A
Justification:
The relatively small size is the primary
reason for the request of money in lieu of
land. Site constraints such as topography
also restrict the possibility for public park
land.
Jason Engles was the representative from Northstar Engineering.
There was no discussion.
PRAB Motion: Colwell motioned to accept the Staff recommendation of money
in lieu, and Mauritson seconded it. The motion passed 7-0-0 by voice vote.
8. Oakbrooke Park Land Dedication Alison Jumper, Park Planner
Proiect Historv:
The Oakbrooke development was first reviewed by PRAB on March 7, 2005 with
78 single family units. Additional land and units were added to development and
the project was reviewed by PRAB again in April with 102 single family units.
Both times PRAB recommended accepting money in lieu of land. At the time of
Planning Commission approval, the average cost per unit was $23,125 and land
requirement was determined at .024 acres per single dwelling unit.
The City and the developer made a transaction in August 2006, leaving the
developer approximately 1.51 acres of banked land in the northwest quadrant. At
this point in time, the average cost per acre was raised to $40,000 and the land
requirement remained at the .024 acres per single family dwelling unit. The land
requirement was not changed because the U.S. Census determined that the
number of persons living in a single family dwelling was 2.4 people. The City's
standard of the number of acres needed per 100 people remained at 10 acres per
1,000 population.
The developer is requesting to use the value of the 1.51 acres at $40,000 per acre
($60,400) of banked land to meet the park land dedication requirements for
Oakbrooke.
"Ch. 166.03 (K) Park land dedication.
(1) Subdivision.
(fl Dedication ratios. Land shall be dedicated at a ratio of .024 acre of land for each single-
family dwelling unit and .017 acre of land for each multi -family dwelling unit.
(h) Dedication in excess. If a developer wishes to dedicate park land which exceeds the
requirement of this subsection, the developer shall make a written request to the Planning
Commission who may grant the developer a credit equivalent to said excess. Said credit shall
be applied toward the developer's obligation under this subsection for any subsequent
development located in the same park quadrant."
The ordinance, as referenced above in subsection (h) allows a developer to
dedicate land in excess for credit toward obligations in the same park quadrant.
The developer's request to use the value of the land requires a variance from the
ordinance with regard to banking land.
"Ch. 156.03 Development
Certain variances of the development regulations may be applied for as follows:
(B) Consideration by the City Council - park land dedication. Any variation in the land
dedication ratios or contribution formulas set forth in § 166.03(K) shall be considered a
variance and requires approval of the City Council. Upon recommendation of the Planning
Commission after consultation by the commission with the Parks and Recreation Advisory
Board, the City Council, upon determination that enforcement of
§ 166.03(K) would cause unnecessary hardship, or that the problems or merits of the
development reflect unique circumstances, may grant a variance of the requirements,
provided:
(1) Consistent with parks plan. Any dedication of land or contribution in lieu of land or
combination thereof shall adequately provide for the park and recreational needs of the
proposed development and be consistent
with the Fayetteville Parks Plan.
(2) Contributions of services, facilities, etc. If the developer proposes to contribute services,
facilities, or equipment in lieu of a cash contribution, such a contribution shall not be
accepted by the city unless the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board has been consulted and
provides a recommendation as to the appropriateness and safety of such contribution."
As outlined above, the developer must submit a variance request to the City
Council after consulting with PRAB and Planning Commission.
Oakbrooke was broken into two phases for development, Phase I includes 68
single family units; Phase II includes 40 single family units. Oakbrooke Phase II
has been filed for final plat utilizing 0.96 acres of the 1.51 acres of banked land.
As stated in the developer's letter, Phase I cannot be filed until the remaining
requirement for 68 single family units has been met. The developer has 0.55 acres
of banked land remaining to be used toward the requirements of a development in
the northwest quadrant.
Banked land is calculated in acres, not the value of the land, to ensure that
adequate acreage is being dedicated to meet the needs of a development. The
acreage ratio is directly related population, and is a constant number set in place
to adequately serve residents of the community. If a developer was to bank the
value of 8 acres of land today, for instance, and requested to use that banked value
10 years from now, the value could be much different, however, the acreage
would not, and would still be providing adequate recreational opportunity for the
citizens.
Staff recommendation: The developer has 0.55 acres of banked land remaining to
use toward the requirement of Oakbrooke Phase I. The requirement for Phase I
(68 single family units) is 1.63 acres or $37,740. If the 0.55 acres is utilized, 1.08
acres or $24,975 must be dedicated to meet the remaining requirement.
1.63 acres — 0.55 acres = 1.08 acres
1.08 x $23,125 = $24,975
Jumper explained the variance request and that this was the first step in the process for
Tracy to process the request.
Tracy Hoskins attended the PRAB meeting representing Oakbrooke. He stated that he
was not at this meeting to ask for a variance, and not arguing about what was owed for
0
the land. He wanted to talk about the value associated with the trade with the City. The
documents from the agreement with the City of Fayetteville say that the trade agreement
was based on the values of the land. When he tried to use the value to pay for the
Oakbrooke final plat, he was denied the value of the land, because only land can be
banked, not the value.
Hatfield stated that the ordinance was set up for park land. Only land can be banked.
Colwell said the amount of the land is a constant.
Hoskins said that they were not told that at the trade.
Hatfield said he didn't believe that PRAB has ever banked value of land —just the land
itself.
Hoskins replied that there should be a provision for the value of land. Maybe the
ordinance needs to be revised.
Mauritson asked if PRAB was being asked to request a variance. He said he didn't
understand what was being talked about.
Colwell said that Parks paid market value at the time. That is different than park land
value, which is lower.
Hoskins said that he doesn't think it's inappropriate to expect $40,000 for the land.
Planning told him that he needs a variance. He is asking to get the value for the land.
Bitler asked if Hoskins agreed with the Phase 2 calculations.
Hoskins replied no. He explained the subdivision was finished in June. They added things
to the subdivision to make it better. Now, because of this problem, they are six to eight
months behind for the final plat.
Bitler asked if Hoskins owes $24,975 for Phase I.
Jumper said yes and explained that a portion of the banked land from the trade agreement
was used to meet the requirements for Phase II.
Bitler asked if there was a variance in the recommendation.
Jumper replied no.
Edmonston said that Hoskins is looking at the value of the land, not the acreage.
Hatfield then said that if PRAB accepts Staff recommendation, then Hoskins can go to
Planning.
10
Mauritson then asked Hoskins how long he had been in business. He said that Hoskins
should already know all of this, and that ignorance was no excuse.
Biendara then asked that if PRAB votes yes, then he can proceed through the channels.
Bitler said that if PRAB supports what Staff recommends, then Hoskins can petition the
City Council.
Hatfield commented that he understands the circumstances, but PRAB has to follow the
normal order of things. The Board thinks in terms of land, not dollars. The ordinance is
what it is, and has to be followed.
Hoskins said that he understood completely.
PRAB Motion: Hatfield motioned to accept the Staff recommendation, and
Biendara seconded it. Motion passed by voice vote 7-0-0.
8. Square Gardens Improvements Alison Jumper, Park Planner
Edmonston said that Jumper has done an awesome job with the Square. It is going to look
great.
Jumper said the Square project is underway. Basically, the older materials, which are
falling apart, are being replaced with newer material. The sidewalks are being replaced
with colored concrete. The rotting wooden wall will be replaced with a stone wall, so
people can sit on it. There will be new lighting in the gardens. The cherry trees, which
were not healthy, will be replaced.
9. Regional Park Update: Connie Edmonston, Parks & Recreation Director
See attached ADEQ Report.
Edmonston said the project is still moving along.
Colwell asked if the project will be done in phases.
Edmonston said that she would like to get all 200 acres in one block. We need the deed in
hand. The park land dedication can come in phases with the development.
Bitler said that he thought we had accepted it.
Hatfield said that we had accepted the conceptual plan.
9. Other Business:
Colwell said that he got a call from "At Risk Youth", which is a court mandated program.
The program has had canoes and kayaks donated to them. They wanted to know if the
fees to store them at the lake could be waived.
11
Edmonston said that when there is an ordinance, it has to be followed consistently. The
program will have to go to the City Council to request a waiver. PRAB can't make
exceptions because we don't have the authority.
Colwell said that gave him a direction to tell the person associated with the program.
Edmonston then told the members that they have been given a copy of the Annual Parks
Report. She said to please look at it, and it would be discussed at the April PRAB
meeting.
Wright told the members that the agenda location has changed on the Access Fayetteville
website.
Adjournment: The meeting adjourned at 7:55 p.m
Minutes taken by Melanie Thomas.
12
