Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-01-25 MinutesPlanning Commission January 25, 2010 Page I of 9 MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION A regular meeting of the Fayetteville Planning Commission was held on January 25, 2010 at 5:30 p.m. in Room 219, City Administration Building in Fayetteville, Arkansas. ITEMS DISCUSSED ACTION TAKEN Consent. MINUTES: JANUARY 11, 2010 Approved Page 3 New Business: CUP 10-3504: (TWIN CREEKS VILLAGE LOT 19B-2,172) Approved Page 4 LSD 09-3497: (TWIN CREEKS VILLAGE LOT 19B-2,172) Approved Page 4 ADM 10-3509: (HAPPY HOLLOW SCHOOL) Approved Page 5 ADM 10-3515: (COBBLESTONE II FINAL PLAT, 246) Denied Page 6 ADM 09-3502: (UDC NEW COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICTS) Tabled Page 8 Planning Commission January 25, 2010 Page 2 of 9 MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT Craig Honchell Jeremy Kennedy Matthew Cabe Andy Lack Christine Myres Sean Trumbo Porter Winston Jim Zant STAFF PRESENT STAFF ABSENT Jeremy Pate Andrew Gamer Jesse Fulcher Dara Sanders Glenn Newman CITY ATTORNEY Kit Williams Jason Kelley, Assistant City Attorney 5:30 PM - Planning Commission Chair Sean Trumbo called the meeting to order. Commissioner Trumbo requested all cell phones to be turned off, and informed the audience that listening devices were available. Upon roll call, all members were present with the exception of Commissioner Zant. Planning Commission January 25, 2010 Page 3 of 9 Consent. Approval of the minutes from the January 11, 2010 Planning Commission meeting. Motion• Commissioner Winston made a motion to approve the Consent Agenda. Commissioner Lack seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion passed with a vote of 7-0-0. Planning Commission January 25, 2010 Page 4 of 9 New Business: CUP 10-3504: (TWIN CREEKS VILLAGE LOT 19B-2,172): Submitted by MCCLELLAND CONSULTING ENGINEERS for property located TWIN CREEKS VILLAGE, LOT 1913-2. The property is zoned C-1, NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL and contains approximately 5.62 acres. The request is for more parking than is allowed by ordinance for the proposed 7,428 square foot office building associated with Large Scale Development LSD 09-3497. LSD 09-3497: (TWIN CREEKS VILLAGE LOT 1913-2,172): Submitted by MCCLELLAND CONSULTING ENGINEERS for property located at TWIN CREEKS VILLAGE, LOT 1913-2. The property is zoned C-1, NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL and contains approximately 5.62 acres. The request is for development of a 7,428 square foot office building with associated drive aisle and parking. Jesse Fulcher, Current Planner, gave the staff report for the conditional use permit and large scale development, recommending approval of the project with conditions of approval. Ryan Gill and Leslie Tabor, applicants, stated that they were in agreement with the conditions and would likely use the "snout' catch basin as their option for improving storm water quality. Commissioner Winston stated that he recognized the need for additional parking for medical offices. No public comment was received. MOTION (CUP 10-3504): Commissioner Winston made a motion for approval finding in favor of all conditions of approval. Commissioner Myres seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion passed with a vote of 7-0- 0. MOTION (LSD 09-3504): Commissioner Winston made a motion for approval finding in favor of commercial design standards and all other conditions of approval. Commissioner Myres seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion passed with a vote of 7-0-0. Planning Commission January 25, 2010 Page 5 of 9 ADM 10-3509: (HAPPY HOLLOW SCHOOL): Submitted by CRAFTON, TULL, SPARKS & ASSOCIATES for property located at CROSSOVER ROAD (HWY. 265), 1/2 MILE N OF HUNTSVILLE ROAD. The property is zoned P-1, INSTITUTIONAL, and contains approximately 32.53 acres. The request is for modifications to the approved Large Scale Development, LSD 09- 3402 to modify the building footprint and street improvement requirements. Dara Sanders, Current Planner, gave the staff report and recommended approval of the applicant's request. Daniel Ellis, applicant, described the reasons for the modification request. No public comment was received. MOTION: Commissioner Lack made a motion to approve. Commissioner Winston seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion passed with a vote of 7-0-0. Planning Commission January 25, 2010 Page 6 of 9 ADM 10-3515: (COBBLESTONE Il FINAL PLAT, 246): Submitted by CHARLIE SLOAN for the COBBLESTONE CROSSING 11 FINAL PLAT. The request is to modify note No. 8 on the final plat and for a variance of the Access Management Ordinance to permit curb cuts onto a Collector Street Andrew Garner, Senior Planner, gave the staff report recommending denial of the request based on findings in the staff report. Charlie Sloan, applicant, stated that he did not notice the note on the previous two recorded final plats that specified a condition of approval that , "Corner lots adjacent to a Collector Street and a Local Street shall access Local Streets Only." He is building smaller homes and three car garages are a need for some customer. There are already houses that access onto Ika Lane, a Collector Street. Right now Ika will basically carry the residential traffic only. The applicant stated that he did not think of this request as a big safety factor. No public comment was received. Commissioner Winston discussed street size and asked about Collector Streets. Garner discussed that a Collector Street has a wider right-of-way than a Local Street to allow for a turn lane to be constructed. Commissioner Cabe discussed that this requirement was rather weak as it says, "...shall be discouraged...". Garner discussed that some lots only have access onto a Collector Street and therefore must access that street, which is why the ordinance has some flexibility. He discussed the general purpose of the ordinance to discourage curb cuts onto streets with higher classification for safety and traffic flow reasons. Commissioner Trumbo discussed safety, access management and the Ordinance intent. Winston asked about traffic calming and the distance that the curb cut would be from the intersection. Trumbo discussed that he felt this was a `slippery slope' and if we start granting variances for curb cuts onto Collector Streets that we will start a negative pattern that is against the ordinance. Commissioner Honchell asked about the possibility of a four-way stop at this time for traffic calming. He also discussed concerns with traffic coming around this curve and the vehicles speeds. Commissioner Lack stated that he failed to see hardship. He also discussed the existing curb cuts on the Collector Street, but he was in accordance with staff findings. Planning Commission January 25, 2010 Page 7 of 9 MOTION: Commissioner Lack made a motion to deny. Commissioner Cabe seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion passed with a vote of 7-0-0. Commissioner Cabe left the meeting. Planning Commission January 25, 2010 Page 8 of 9 ADM 09-3502: (UDC NEW COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICTS): ADM 09-3502; (UDC AMENDMENTS, CHAPTER 161, 162, AND 164): Submitted by City Planning Staff. The request is to amend several chapters of the Unified Development Code (UDC) to create new use units, form - based zoning districts, and nonresidential design standards to permit administrative approval. Dara Sanders, Current Planner, gave the staff report, explaining the proposed amendments to modify existing use units, to adopt new use units, to modify existing zoning districts, to adopt new zoning districts, and to establish nonresidential design standards for administratively approved zoning districts. No public comment was received. Commissioner Lack and staff discussed the different applications of the proposed Use Unit 12 within the various zoning districts. Commissioner Lack expressed concerns with the proposed Nonresidential Design Standards, specifically the requirement that all buildings visible from the public right-of-way be divided in a base, middle, and cap, finding that it directs style. He suggested finding another method of requiring horizontal articulation instead of requiring a building to conform to a base, middle, top. Jeremy Pate, Development Services Director, explained that staff feels specific articulation requirements that don't specifically refer to style are necessary because the Planning Commission will not be reviewing projects that are subject to administrative approval. In the past, designers have proven their capability to produce creative designs within restrictive design regulations. He explained how staff finally reached the current proposal. The challenge is to create standards that are rigid enough for everyone to understand and will fulfill the expectation for administratively approved districts because if we don't meet the expectation the City Council may not be able to support a rezoning request. Commissioner Lack expressed concern with the minimum articulation distance requirement and the different interval requirements for mass and articulation. He suggested that staff eliminate the minimum requirement because it would not allow for elements such as a pilaster. He asked staff to consider another point of reference for the pedestrian level identified in the glazing requirements of the standards. Commissioner Myres suggested using "finished floor". Commissioner Lack and staff discussed the human scale elements. Commissioner Lack suggested finding another definition. Commissioner Winston expressed appreciation to staff for incorporating his comments provided earlier in the drafting process and asked about "untreated" concrete masonry units. Planning Commission January 25, 2010 Page 9 of 9 Pate clarified and stated that these are just standards for administrative approval. An applicant has the option to request Planning Commission approval of a variance from these standards. Commissioner Trumbo moved discussion on to Use Units. Commissioner Winston and staff discussed the relocation of some uses within Use Unit 17. Pate provided further clarification of Use Unit 12 as a conditional use, explaining that it won't always be appropriate when it is requested. There have been many instances where an applicant has been required to request a rezoning to allow for a specific use that would be appropriate and supported by the neighborhood but was denied because the district as a whole was inappropriate. Hopefully, allowing Use Unit 12 to be considered as a conditional use in most residential zoning districts will allow for an appropriate use with conditions and allow the zoning to remain intact. Discussion moved on to zoning districts. Commissioner Trumbo asked why the proposed "Neighborhood Services" zoning district isn't subject to administrative approval. Pate answered that, for the most part, this zoning district will be adjacent to residential areas. It an area that is between a neighborhood and a C -I zoning district, and staff wasn't ready to allow large scale projects to be approved administratively. Sanders said that because the only nonresidential use unit allowed by -right is the Limited Business Use Unit with a 3,000 s.f. limitation, most projects would be approved administratively through the small site improvement plan process. Commissioner Winston and staff discussed the relation between Use Units 12, 13, 15, and 25 and the times in which each is a permitted use and a conditional use and the reason that the parking regulations were being removed from the multi -family zoning districts. Commissioner Trumbo explained that he is inclined to table the request to allow for further review and to encourage public comment at the next meeting. MOTION: Commissioner Winston made a motion to table the item. Commissioner Myres seconded the motion to table. Upon roll call, the motion to table was approved with a vote of 6-0-0. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 7.19 PM.