Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011-12-12 MinutesPlanning Commission December 12, 2011 Page I of 9 MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION A regular meeting of the Fayetteville Planning Commission was held on December 12, 2011 at 5:30 p.m. in Room 219, City Administration Building in Fayetteville, Arkansas. Consent: MINUTES: November 28, 2011 Page 3 Old Business: ACTION TAKEN Approved CUP 11-3982: Conditional Use Permit (2012 W. MARTIN LUTHER KING BLVDJUSA DRUG, 520) Page 4 Approved New Business: LSD 11-3977: Large Scale Development (NW OF THE INTERSECTION OF WEST ST. & LAFAYETTE AVEJ555 MAPLE, 484) Page 5 Approved LSD 11-3984: Large Scale Development (N.W. CORNER OF JOYCE BLVD. AND VANTAGE DR./LIBERTY BANK, 175) Page 7 Approved PLANNING COMMISSION BYLAW AMENDMENT Page 9 No action MEMBERS PRESENT Craig Honchell Sarah Bunch William Chesser Hugh Earnest Tracy Hoskins Chris Griffin Porter Winston Matthew Cabe Kyle Cook STAFF PRESENT Andrew Garner MEMBERS ABSENT Planning Commission December 12, 2011 Page 2 of 9 CITY ATTORNEY Kit Williams, City Attorney 5:30 PM - Planning Commission 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. Planning Commission December 12, 2011 Page 3 of 9 Consent. Approval of the minutes from the November 28, 2011 meeting. Motion• Commissioner Winston made a motion to approve the Consent Agenda. Commissioner Chesser seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion passed with a vote of 6-3-0. Planning Commission December 12, 2011 Page 4 of 9 Old Business: CUP 11-3982: Conditional Use Permit (2012 W. MARTIN LUTHER KING BLVDJUSA DRUG, 520): Submitted by JORGENSEN AND ASSOCIATES for property located at 2012 WEST MARTIN LUTHER KING BOULVARD. The property is zoned C-1, NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES AND C-2, THOROUGHFARE COMMERCIAL and contains approximately 0.93 acre. The request is for parking in excess of that permitted in Chapter 172, Parking and Loading. Dara Sanders, Current Planner, presented the staff report. Justin Jorgensen, representative, explained that he and the applicant are working with the property owner to the east in an effort to secure a shared curb cut and stated that he agrees with staffs findings, including staff s recommendation for denial of the eastern curb cut as proposed, which did not include shared access with the property owner to the east. No public comment was presented. Commissioner Chesser clarified with the representative that the applicant is okay with staffs recommendation for denial of the eastern curb cut as proposed. Jorgensen verified that they are. Motion: Commissioner Chesser made a motion to approve CUP 11-3982 with the following determinations: • Condition of Approval #La: In favor of the western curb cut. • Condition of Approval #Lb: In favor of the eastern curb cut only if the curb cut is shared with the neighbor adjacent to the east. • In favor of all other conditions of approval listed in the staff report Commissioner Earnest seconded the motion Upon roll call the motion passed with a vote of 6-0-0. Planning Commission December 12, 2011 Page 5 of 9 LSD 11-3977: Large Scale Development (NW OF THE INTERSECTION OF WEST ST. & LAFAYETTE AVE./555 MAPLE, 484): Submitted by MCCLELLAND CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. for property located northwest of the intersection of WEST STREET AND LAFAYETTE AVENUE. The property is zoned DG, DOWNTOWN GENERAL and contains approximately 2.96 acres. The request is for a multi -family development with 183 dwellings. Dara Sanders, Current Planner, presented the staff report. Seth Mims, applicant, expressed agreement with conditions of approval, discussed the ways in which the proposal meets the guiding policies of City Plan 2030, and addressed the variance request from the height regulations of the DG, Downtown General, zoning district. Public Comment: Irene Pritchard, neighbor, discussed her concern with density and the fact that the four-story/56-foot requirement indirectly limits density in a zoning district that does not specify a density maximum. Paula Marinoni, neighbor, thanked the Planning Commission for their service and discussed the impact of the development of future development in the area and the view of Old Main. She expressed opposition to the applicant's variance request. James (inaudible), neighbor, spoke in favor of the project, finding that it will benefit Fayetteville by providing infill and services for downtown. Fred Stevens, neighbor, was not opposed to the project, but he was opposed to the size of the structure and the number of unsupervised students that would live on the site. He also discussed visibility of Old Main. Joe (inaudible), neighbor, discussed the number of unsupervised students on the site, the current parking issues in his neighborhood, and the precedent that the height variance will establish. Mikel Lolley, Fayetteville resident, discussed his support for the development, the Transportation Oriented Development aspects of the project, and the way in which the project works to frame the view of Old Main, which strengthens the view instead of detracting from it. He discussed the importance of walkability and attainable housing and encouraging diversity. Ethel Goodstein-Murphree, Fayetteville resident and architecture professional, expressed support for the project, finding a high level of articulation and proportion. She discussed the balance of the past and the presence. She addressed previous comments on the impact of the development on the view of Old Main, specifically that this one building shouldn't be the driver for the City. Instead, the driver should be about viability, services, and density. Stephan Pollard, resident of 555 Maple Street, expressed support for the project and discussed his experiences in living in this location and with property management of this type. Sally (inaudible), neighbor, discussed her opposition to the height variance and wanted the applicant to change the types of bedrooms and units for the proposal. Aubrey Shepherd, Fayetteville resident, discussed trees and greenspace on the site. He believes that all variance requests should require City Council approval. Planning Commission December 12, 2011 Page 6 of 9 Bill Rowell, neighbor, expressed concern with traffic No more public comment was presented. Commissioner Chesser discussed the issue of"unsupervised students" with the applicant and the City Attorney and found that legal adults would be the lease holders, subsequently not requiring supervision. Commission Chesser and Andrew Garner, Senior Planner, discussed the traffic study submitted by the applicant and the height limitation of the DG district. Commission Winston believes that the project is consistent with the goals of City Plan 2030 and is in support. Commissioner Earnest provided a description of the Subdivision Committee's review of the project. He agreed with Mr. Lolley's assessment of the project during the public comment and expressed that it is important to support appropriate infill. Commission Honchell and the applicant discussed the maximum number of people anticipated for each unit, parking maintenance, and public comment regarding the height issue. Commissioner Cabe expressed his support for the project, including the variance request, especially considering the design and proposal. He discussed the issue of density, proximity to services, and the anticipation of fewer cars on the road, and he commended the project team for their product. He also stated that he had been contacted by members of the public who requested that the item be tabled because they could not attend the meeting. Commissioner Hoskins stated that he was not in support of tabling. Commissioner Earnest did not see an advantage to tabling the request. Motion: Commissioner Griffin made a motion to approve LSD 11-3997 finding in favor of all conditions of approval as recommended by staff in the staff report. Commissioner Hoskins seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion passed with a vote of 9-0-0. Planning Commission December 12, 2011 Page 7 of 9 LSD 11-3984: Large Scale Development (N.W. CORNER OF JOYCE BLVD. AND VANTAGE DR./LIBERTY BANK, 175): Submitted by CRAFTON TULL AND ASSOCIATES for property located at the NORTHWEST CORNER OF JOYCE BOULEVARD AND VANTAGE DRIVE. The property is zoned C-2, THOROUGHFARE COMMERCIAL and contains approximately 2.60 acres. The request is for the construction of a 21,613 sq. ft. bank and associated parking. Andrew Garner, Senior Planner, presented the staff report. Daniel Ellis, applicant, discussed that the curb cut won't create an adverse impact to traffic on Joyce. No public comment was presented. Commissioner Winston asked to see the animation of the vehicular movements the applicant mentioned. The traffic model animation was shown on the screen. Ernie Peter, traffic consultant for the applicant, discussed the simulation of the results for traffic going into and out of the site with the curb cut. There are no site line issues. He discussed traffic safety at a bank/office is not an issues because it is a low traffic generator. Commissioner Chesser asked about the City Attorney's memo. Kit Williams, City Attorney, read the variance section of the ordinance and discussed the access management ordinance. He discussed that unless there is no safe place for the curb cut, the variance needs to be granted. He also discussed that the planning commission cannot reverse the previous decision of the City Council to grant a curb cut at this location. Jeremy Pate, Development Services Director, discussed that prior to the Access Management ordinance the only test for a curb cut was whether it would create a dangerous traffic condition. With the Access Management ordinance being adopted after the City Council granted a curb cut variance on this site, it has given guidance to staff and developers. He discussed that this is a new ordinance that was not in place at the time the previous curb cut was granted. Williams asked about an island in the middle lane for safety. Daniel Ellis, applicant, discussed that this island depicted on the video was just for modeling purposes and was not a part of their proposal. Commissioner Chesser discussed that based on the City Attorney's memo we should allow a curb cut. He asked if the curb cut can be modified and more controls added? Williams discussed that the curb cut may be restricted. Daniel Ellis, applicant, discussed that shifting the curb cut to meet the minimum is not an issue. Glenn Newman, staff engineer, discussed that the curb cut design could be more aggressive. He discussed access management and the engineering does not recommend this curb cut and that left turns create a majority of vehicular accidents. Planning Commission December 12, 2011 Page 8 of 9 Commissioner Earnest discussed that after the 2007 decision for the curb cut that the Access Management ordinance was adopted. Commissioner Griffin stated that courts have determined that in the state of Arkansas if you pay to have property on an arterial road, you get access to that road unless you compensate the owner. Motion: Commissioner Griffin made a motion to approve LSD 11-3984 with the following findings: Condition of approval l.a.: finding in favor of a variance to allow a curb cut onto Joyce. Condition of approval Lb: deny the curb cut separation variance. The applicant is permitted a left -in, right -in, right -out only (three-quarter) curb cut onto Joyce Boulevard. The design of the curb cut to be modified to the satisfaction of City Development Services staff. Finding in favor of all other conditions of approval as recommended by staff in the staff report. Commissioner Hoskins seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion passed with a vote of 6-3-0 (Commissioners Cook, Earnest, and Cabe voting `no'). Planning Commission December 12, 2011 Page 9 of 9 PLANNING COMMISSION BYLAW AMENDMENT: An amendment proposed by Planning staff, related to the number of votes required to forward a rezoning request and clarification for administratively approved items. Andrew Garner, Senior Planner, gave the staff report. The Commission gave a general consensus that they were in favor of the proposed changes to the bylaws. Garner discussed that staff will place this item on the next Planning Commission agenda for adoption. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:02 PM.