Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-05-10 MinutesPlanning Commission May 10, 2010 Page I of 9 MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION A regular meeting of the Fayetteville Planning Commission was held on May 10, 2010 at 5:30 p.m. in Room 219, City Administration Building in Fayetteville, Arkansas. ITEMS DISCUSSED Consent: MINUTES: April 26, 2010 Page 3 New Business: ACTION TAKEN Approved ADM 10-3561: (UDC AMENDMENT CH. 151 DEFINITIONS AND CH. 164 SUPPLEMENTARY DISTRICT REGULATIONS) Page 4 Forwarded ADM 10-3567: (UDC AMENDMENT CH. 171 STREETS AND SIDEWALKS) Page 5 Tabled ADM 10-3568: (UDC AMENDMENT CH. 177 LANDSCAPE REGULATIONS) Page 7 Forwarded ADM 10-3571: (UDC AMENDMENT CH. 169 PHYSICAL ALTERATION OF LAND AND CH. 170 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT, DRAINAGE, AND EROSION CONTROL) Page 8 Forwarded ADM 10-3559: (WEIR ROAD EXTENSION) RECONSIDERATION Page 9 Approved Planning Commission May 10, 2010 Page 2 of 9 MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT Craig Honchell Sarah Bunch William Chesser Hugh Earnest Tracy Hoskins Jeremy Kennedy Porter Winston Matthew Cabe Andy Lack STAFF PRESENT STAFF ABSENT Jeremy Pate Andrew Gamer Jesse Fulcher Dara Sanders Glenn Newman Sarah Wrede CITY ATTORNEY Kit Williams, City Attorney 5:30 PM- Planning Commission Vice -Chair Matthew Cabe called the meeting to order. Commissioner Cabe 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 Commissioners Lack and Honchell. Planning Commission May 10, 2010 Page 3 of 9 Consent. Approval of the minutes from the April 26, 2010 Planning Commission meeting. Motion• Commissioner Earnest made a motion to approve the Consent Agenda. Commissioner Chesser seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion passed with a vote of 7-0-0. Planning Commission May 10, 2010 Page 4 of 9 New Business: ADM 10-3561: Administrative Item (UDC AMENDMENT CH. 151 DEFINITIONS AND CH. 164 SUPPLEMENTARY DISTRICT REGULATIONS): Submitted by CITY PLANNING STAFF for revisions to Fayetteville Unified Development Code, Section 151 Definitions and Section 164 Supplementary District Regulations. The proposed code changes will clarify the definition of 2 -family attached dwelling units. Jeremy Pate, Development Services Director gave the staff report. The proposed code changes clarify townhouses and duplexes for the purpose of zoning and development. Propose to remove and combine some definitions to allow the land under duplexes to be split into townhomes. There was no public comment. Commissioner Earnest thanked staff for the attention to detail and expected that the proposal will clear up similar issues that have been addressed in the past. Motion: Commissioner Winston made a motion to forward to City Council. Commissioner Earnest seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion passed with a vote of 7-0-0. Planning Commission May 10, 2010 Page 5 of 9 ADM 10-3567: Administrative Item (UDC AMENDMENT CH. 171 STREETS AND SIDEWALKS): Submitted by CITY PLANNING STAFF for revisions to the Fayetteville Unified Development Code, Chapter 171 Streets and Sidewalks. The proposed amendments will clarify the construction standards and practices for sidewalks and driveway approaches. Jeremy Pate, Development Services Director gave the staff report. The proposal is to update and clarify construction standards and methods that are already practiced by many contractors. Public Comment: Brian Teague, Director of Community by Design, read through the revisions and thinks that the changes will create a more walkable environment. He also believes that other standards could be included to allow for more pedestrian -oriented streetscapes and suggested that the street cross sections be updated to reflect. He asked if these alternative streetscapes were considered during the revision process. Commissioner Winston asked staff to address Mr. Teague's questions. Pate explained that staff did not look outside of the technical construction specifications for sidewalks and driveways but explained that staff reviews the Master Street Plan every 5 years and would consider alternative cross sections during that process. Commissioner Cabe asked Pate if design professionals could communicate issues between major code changes. Pate explained the process. Commissioner Hoskins expressed concern with the cost increase associated with the proposal and discussed soil strength and concrete strength with Engineering staff. He also expressed concern with the requirement to separate retaining walls from the back of a sidewalk due to the historical placement of landscape walls. He also doesn't believe that the associated grade requirement is not developer friendly. He discussed sidewalk and driveway thickness with staff and the Sidewalk Administrator and asked the reason for the change. Chuck Rutherford explained that 4 inches for a residential approach is the very minimum standard in the U.S. but that other cities require up to 15 inches. He also explained that 4 inches is the minimum to support the weight of a typical vehicle. Commission Hoskins also asked for simpler term for the material requirement. Rutherford explained that staff does indentify the name of the allowable material but that the common name for the material is blackboard expansion but the type of blackboard used for housing is not sufficient for driveways. Pate explained that staff can work on the name outside of the meeting. Planning Commission May 10, 2010 Page 6 of 9 Commissioner Hoskins and staff discussed the benefits of requiring square segments for the sidewalk in order to decrease weaknesses and cracking in the material, the sidewalk placement description, and driveway ramp width requirements. Commissioner Cabe asked staff if the item should be forwarded or tabled in order to address the revisions discussed by Hoskins. Pate stated that it is the commission's decision and restated the items in question. Commissioner Earnest asked Commissioner Hoskins if he was comfortable with the 2' separation requirement between retaining wall and sidewalk (shy zone). Commissioner Hoskins explained that he wasn't due to the pedestrian's perception of comfort when walking along the sidewalk with a landscape wall less than 30 inches and would like to see that exemption. He also stated his disinterest in increasing the concrete requirement for driveway approaches, as it will increase cost and the current requirement does not pose a problem. Commissioner Chesser asked Pate if there is an ADA reason for the shy zone. Pate answered that it is a Federal Highway requirement which are based on technical reasons due to pedestrian safety and sidewalk maintenance. Commissioner Chesser asked if there is a safety issue associated with residential sidewalk cracking. Rutherford stated that it could cause issues for the pedestrian. Commissioner Hoskins asked if there is any other governing body, other than the State and local governments regulating landscape walls in the City of Fayetteville. Pate stated that he did not believe any other governments regulate the City's street construction standards and explained the shy zone concept. Commissioner Hoskins and staff discussed maintenance and liability issues with retaining walls adjacent to a sidewalk. Motion: Commissioner Chesser made a motion to table the item to allow for staff to address the concerns. Commissioner Hoskins seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion passed with a vote of 7-0- 0. Planning Commission May 10, 2010 Page 7 of 9 ADM 10-3568: Administrative Item (UDC AMENDMENT CH. 177 LANDSCAPE REGULATIONS): Submitted by CITY PLANNING STAFF for revisions to Fayetteville Unified Development Code, Chapter 177 Landscape Regulations. The proposed code changes will clarify the specifications for shrub plantings to screen parking lots from the street. Data Sanders, Current Planner, gave the staff report, explaining that staff is proposing an amendment to the parking lot screening requirement in order to better meet the purpose of creating a seamless hedgerow to screen the parking lot from view at the public right-of-way. No public comment. Commissioner Kennedy asked if eight shrubs are not meeting the intent or if a certain shrub is not meeting the intent. Jeremy Pate, Development Services Director, verified that sometimes eight shrubs are sufficient but sometimes not. Commissioner Kennedy asked if the species and growth rates are listed in the Landscape Manual. Pate verified. Commissioner Hoskins asked if staff knows how many shrubs planted at the required 3 gallon size will grow to create a continuous hedge. Pate stated that there are a variety of shrubs that can be planted at the minimum 3 gallon size to grow into a continuous hedge; however, some species may require a 5 gallon size in order to form a continuous screen. Commissioner Winston asked if any development in the City would require a landscape architect to sign off on the landscape plan. Pate stated that only properties containing 1 acre or more would require a landscape architect. Winston asked if the Urban Forester reviews developments containing less than one acre. Pate verified. Winston stated that he was comfortable with letting the professionals determine which species will meet the ordinance. Motion: Commissioner Winston made a motion to forward the item to the City Council with a recommendation of approval. Commissioner Chesser seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion passed with a vote of 7-0-0. Planning Commission May 10, 2010 Page 8 of 9 ADM 10-3571: Administrative Item (UDC AMENDMENT CH. 169 PHYSICAL ALTERATION OF LAND AND CH. 170 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT, DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL): Submitted by CITY ENGINEERING STAFF for revisions to Fayetteville Unified Development Code, Chapter 169 Physical Alteration of Land and Chapter 170 Stormwater Management, Drainage and Erosion Control. The proposed code changes will clarify stabilization requirements, require phased construction for sites larger than 20 acres, clarify re -vegetation requirements, clarify requirements for cut and fill slopes and retaining walls, define maintenance responsibility for stormwater management systems, restrict the location of dirt and topsoil storage and define stabilization practices for dirt and topsoil storage, define a qualified inspector for erosion and sediment control BMPs, and require site plans for 1- and 2 -family residences to contain a plan for erosion and sediment control and final on-site drainage. Sarah Wrede, Floodplain Administrator gave the staff report. Public comment Brian Teague, Community by Design, believes that the ordinance will work hand in hand with the recently adopted LID and promotes compact urban design envisioned by City Plan 2025. Garland Hill asked why the ordinance is limited to 20 acres or larger. Commissioner Cabe asked staff to address Mr. Hill's question Glenn Newman, staff engineer, explained that the recommended size is related to sequencing phases. Commissioner Hoskins and Newman discussed the issue and history of rear lot drainage for clarification and the issue of sediment in the street. Commissioner Hoskins stated that he does not support holding smaller development to the same standards as large developments. Commissioner Chesser stated that the larger developments are held to a higher standard than the smaller developments and does not agree that they should be held to different standards. Commissioner Cabe asked for clarification of the differences between the existing requirements and the new requirements. Wrede explained that the code is intended to clarify the approved method of debris removal from the street in order to prevent sedimentary materials from reaching streams and that ADEQ regulate single-family construction when the lot is part of a larger development plan. Commissioner Chesser and Newman discussed single-family residential safety railing requirements for clarification. Motion: Commissioner Kennedy made a motion to forward the item to the City Council with a recommendation of approval. Commissioner Chesser seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion to forward was approved with a vote of 6-1-0 with Commissioner Hoskins voting "no." ADM 10-3559: (WEIR ROAD EXTENSION) RECONSIDERATION Planning Commission May 10, 2010 Page 9 of 9 Kit Williams, City Attorney, explained the rules of order to reconsider an item that has already been discussed and that public comment concerning the motion to reconsider could be permitted. Commissioner Winston stated that more information has been presented for ADM 10-3559 and requested that the item be brought up for reconsideration at the next regularly scheduled meeting. Public Comment: Sharon Green, neighbor, claimed that the neighborhood was not notified of the administrative item and requested reconsideration for an opportunity to comment on the extension request. Commissioner Chesser asked if notification was required. Jeremy Pate, Development Services Director, stated that the ordinance does not require notification Motion: Commissioner Winston made a motion to reconsider. Commissioner Hoskins seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion to 6-1-0 (Commissioner Cabe voted "no") was approved. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 6:51 PM.