HomeMy WebLinkAbout2015-07-27 MinutesCITY OF
Tay e ARKAANNSAS
Planning Commission
July 27, 2015
5:30 PM
City Administration Building in Fayetteville, AR, Room 219
MINUTES
Members: Sarah Bunch - Chair, William Chesser - Vice -Chair, Ryan Noble — Secretary, Ron
Autry, Kyle Cook, Thomas Brown, Matthew Hoffman, Janet Selby, and Tracy Hoskins
City Staff: Andrew Garner — City Planning Director, Jesse Fulcher — Senior Planner, Quin
Thompson — Planner, Cory Granderson — Staff Engineer, and Kit Williams —City Attorney
1. Call to Order: 5:30 PM, Sarah Bunch
2. In Attendance: Sarah Bunch, Thomas Brown, Janet Selby, Tracy Hoskins, Matthew
Hoffman, Ron Autry, Ryan Noble, and Kyle Cook
Absent: William Chesser
Staff: Andrew Garner, Jesse Fulcher, Quin Thompson, Corey Granderson, and Kit Williams
3. Consent Agenda:
Approval of the minutes from the July 13, 2015 meeting.
VAC 15-5116: Vacation (808 N. HIGHLAND AVE./TUCKER, 445): Submitted by JOSEF
TUCKER for property located at 808 N. HIGHLAND AVE. The property is zoned RSF-4,
RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY, 4 UNITS PER ACRE and contains approximately 0.33
acres. The request is to vacate a utility easement.
Motion:
Commissioner Cook made a motion to approve the consent agenda. Commissioner
Autry seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion passed with a vote of 8-0-0.
Mailing Address:
113 W. Mountain Street www.fayetteville-ar.gov
Fayetteville, AR 72701
4. Old Business:
ADM 15-5111 Administrative Item (UDC AMENDMENT CHAPTER 163.03: BED AND
BREAKFAST FACILITIES AND CHAPTER 151: DEFINITIONS): Submitted by CITY
PLANNING STAFF for revisions to the Unified Development Code, Chapters 163.03. The
proposal is to modify bed and breakfast facility definition and use conditions.
Quin Thompson, Current Planner, gave the staff report.
No public comment was presented.
Tracy Hoskins, Commissioner, said that in his reading, it appeared that a 'guest' of the bed
and breakfast could be construed as anyone who has come to dinner, and suggested that
staff make clear that the intention is that 'guest' should refer to those staying overnight [or
attending an event at the facility.]
Motion:
Commissioner Cook made a motion to forward ADM 15-5111 recommending approval
as proposed by staff. Commissioner Hoffman seconded the motion. Upon roll call the
motion passed with a vote of 8-0-0.
ADM 15-5088 Administrative Item (UDC AMENDMENT CHAPTER 172.05 NON-
RESIDENTIAL PARKING REQUIREMENTS): Submitted by CITY PLANNING STAFF for
revisions to the Unified Development Code, Chapters 172.05. The proposal is to remove
minimum parking standards for non-residential uses.
Quin Thompson, Current Planner, gave the staff report.
No public comment was presented.
Tom Brown, Commissioner, spoke about research he had done, reading APA (American
Planning Association) best practices, reading codes from 17 cities and provided synopses
for the Commission to consider. None of those cities removed parking ratios entirely, but
linked incentives to allowing developers to reduce parking. Mr. Brown suggested that it
would not be a good idea to allow [development] community to make parking choices without
city regulation. He said he would be happy to show staff how to design a matrix of objectives
and incentives that would move the city towards its goals.
Tracy Hoskins, Commissioner, said he was looking for information regarding the idea,
proposed my Mr. Brown, for a fee structure for allowing less parking, but that it he did not
find that in the information provided by Mr. Brown. He said that the cities appeared to be
concerned with parking in dense downtown areas exclusively.
Andrew Garner, City Planning Director, said that parking has for decades been based on
parking counts made on maximum parking needs, specifically the day after Thanksgiving,
which is typically the busiest shopping and parking day of the year. He said that this is a
amendment on the progressive side in relation to other cities, but that it is not such a large
step that Fayetteville would be alone in this type of thinking.
Hoskins said that he supported staffs work on this proposal.
Matthew Hoffman, Commissioner, said that this was a straightforward proposal, noting that
cars don't buy goods, but that people do. He said that the majority of developed land in
Fayetteville is used for parking vehicles. He said that parking requirements limit the number
of businesses that can fit along city streets. He spoke about 'induced demand', in which
more parking and more roads create more congestion and incentive to drive. He said the
proposal is a simple market based approach to development. He noted that there is not any
such thing as 'free' parking; that businesses pay to build and maintain parking, and pass
those costs on to customers. He said that the current practices encourage a 'sub -par' style
of development. He said that he would like to see a city more progressive than Seattle and
more business friendly than Los Angeles.
Motion:
Commissioner Hoffman made a motion to forward ADM 15-5088 to City Council.
Commissioner Autry seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion passed with a vote
of 7-1-0. Commissioner Brown voted `no'.
New Business:
VAR 15-5115: Variance (690 N. BETTY JO DR./DOYLE, 523): Submitted by JAMES
DOYLE for property located at 690 N. BETTY JO DR. The property is zoned RMF -24,
RESIDENTIAL MULTI -FAMILY, 24 UNITS PER ACRE and contains approximately 0.30
acres. The request is for a variance of the fence height requirement.
Quin Thompson, Current Planner, gave the staff report.
No public comment was presented.
James Doyle, Applicant, was present to represent the project.
Tracy Hoskins, Commissioner, asked what type of fence was proposed; whether it would
be a box fence with wood on both sides.
Doyle said that he would agree to that if the neighbor wanted to share the fence [costs].
Hoskins said that the precedent is set on other properties, but that he does not think that it
improves either the safety or appearance of the neighborhood.
Kyle Cook, Commissioner, asked if the commission could require a double sided fence.
Andrew Garner, City Planning Director, said that it was possible to require that as a
condition of approval.
Janet Selby, Commissioner, asked if the existing fences were two sided and said she was
concerned about sightlines.
Hoskins said he did not know if they were, but that it is a common practice.
Ron Autry, Commissioner, said that he would support a two sided fence.
Hoffman said he would support a two sided fence, which he considered an incremental
improvement.
Sarah Bunch, Chair, said that the fence may improve the neighborhood slightly, noting that
the street had similar units without landscaping or any real differentiation. She said she was
in favor of the two sided 'shadow box' fence.
Autry asked Mr. Doyle if he agreed to the two sided fence.
Doyle said that he would prefer to the City do something about the trash collection
dumpsters, saying they looked terrible.
Motion #1:
Commissioner Hoskins made a motion regarding ADM 15-5115 to change condition of
approval #1 to say that the fence should be a "shadow box" style. Commissioner
Hoffman seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion passed with a vote of 8-0-0.
CI
Motion #2:
Commissioner Hoskins made a motion to approve ADM 15-5115 with the amended
condition #1. Commissioner Autry seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion
passed with a vote of 8-0-0.
CUP 15-5121: Conditional Use (SE CORNER OF STEELE & JOYCE BLVDS./CMN LOT
9E -BUFFALO WILD WINGS, 134/173): Submitted by RICKETT ENGINEERING for
property located at the SE CORNER OF STEELE & JOYCE BLVDS. The property is zoned
C-2, THOROUGHFARE COMMERCIAL, and contains approximately 1.72 acres. The
request is for additional parking.
LSD 15-5120: Large Scale Development (SE CORNER OF STEELE & JOYCE
BLVDS./CMN LOT 9E -BUFFALO WILD WINGS, 134/173): Submitted by RICKETT
ENGINEERING for property located at S.E. CORNER OF STEELE & JOYCE BLVDS. The
property is zoned C-2, THOROUGHFARE COMMERCIAL, and contains approximately 1.72
acres. The request is for construction of a 5,005 square foot restaurant with associated
parking.
Andrew Garner, City Planning Director, gave the staff report for both CUP 15-5131 and
LSD 15-5120.
Jeff Elliott, applicant was present for any questions.
No public comment was presented.
Commissioner Cook gave a subdivision committee report.
Commissioner Hoffman discussed that considering the development going on around this
he felt that additional bike racks would be appropriate.
Commissioner Hoskins asked about the motorcycle/scooter parking spaces.
Mr. Rickett indicated they are meeting the minimum number of motorcycle/scooter parking
spaces.
Mr. Elliott indicated they need all the vehicle spaces they can get on this site.
Motion:
Commissioner Autry made a motion to approve CUP 15-5121 with conditions as
recommended by staff. Commissioner Selby seconded the motion. Upon roll call the
motion passed with a vote of 8-0-0.
Jeff Elliott, applicant, indicated they would be happy to install the additional bike racks as
shown on the plans.
Motion:
Commissioner Hoffman made a motion to approve LSD 15-5120 as recommended by
staff, making note of the applicant's statement to install the additional bike racks.
Commissioner Brown seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion passed with a
vote of 8-0-0.
VAR 15-5133: Variance (1640 E. ROCKWOOD TRAIUSMART, 485): Submitted by
LESLIE SMART for property located at 1640 E. ROCKWOOD TRAIL. The property is zoned
RSF-4, RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY, 4 UNITS PER ACRE and contains approximately
0.67 acres. The request is for variance of the maximum size of an Accessory Dwelling Unit.
Jesse Fulcher, Senior Planner, read the staff report
No public comment was presented.
Greg Smart, applicant, had no additional comments
Motion:
Commissioner Hoskins made a motion to approve VAR 15-5133 as recommended by
staff. Commissioner Brown seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion passed
with a vote of 8-0-0.
7
ADM 15-5140: Administrative Item (1549 E. JOYCE BLVD./BANK OF THE OZARKS,
175): Submitted by POLK, STANLEY, WILCOX ARCHITECTS for property located at 1549
E. JOYCE BLVD. The property is zoned C-2, THOROUGHFARE COMMERCIAL and
contains approximately 0.96 acres. The request is a variance of the commercial design
standards.
Quin Thompson, Current Planner, gave the staff report.
No public comment was presented.
Craig Curzon, Applicant, was present to represent the project. He said that safety concerns
and having to staff two entrances were the major concerns of the bank.
Hoskins, Commissioner, noted that the Commission had recently supported a variance on
a similar project where the applicant redesigned the elevation to improve the appearance of
the elevation. He said that where a variance was sought, then some more creative design
should be necessary if an entry was not being provided.
Tom Brown, Commissioner, said that he thought there appeared to be a lower level
entrance behind a knee wall that added articulation that may be imagined to be an entrance
and that he would support the variance.
Curzon said that the knee wall was a screen wall for mechanical equipment.
Matthew Hoffman, Commissioner, said that he agreed with Hoskins. He said that
pedestrians are fooled by false windows and walls, and that buildings should be designed
for the corner lot condition.
Ron Autry, Commissioner, noted that several nearby banks do not meet this requirement.
Tracy Hoskins, Commissioner, suggested that an aerial image be consulted showing
nearby and recently approved banks.
Andrew Garner, City Planning Director, said that nearby banks mentioned were approved
before the ordinance required a primary entry on all facades facing a public street.
Tom Brown, Commissioner, noted that he is not an architect, but that it appeared to him
that the screen wall provides depth to the elevation. Mr. Brown made motion number 1.
Hoskins said he thought it would be appropriate to table the project to allow the applicant
time to redesign the project.
Garner recommended tabling the project for two weeks.
Motion #1:
Commissioner Brown made a motion to approve ADM 15-5140. Commissioner Autry
seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion failed with a vote of 3-5-0.
Commissioners Hoskins, Cook, Hoffman, Bunch, and Selby voted `no'.
Motion #2:
Commissioner Hoskins made a motion to table ADM 15-5140 to the next meeting.
Commissioner Hoffman seconded the meeting. Upon roll call the motion passed with
a vote of 8-0-0.
ADM 15-5135: Administrative Item (RUPPLE ROW SUBDIVISION PZD AMENDMENT,
439): Submitted by ROB KIMBEL for properties located in the RUPPLE ROW
SUBDIVISION. The properties are zoned R-PZD, RESIDENTIAL PLANNED ZONING
DISTRICT RUPPLE ROW (R-PZD 05-1547) and contain approximately 41.70 acres. The
request is an amendment to the PZD to modify the zoning of the duplexes and triplexes on
Wordsworth Lane to allow up to four unrelated persons to live in each dwelling unit.
Andrew Garner, City Planning Director, gave the staff report.
Rob Kimbell, applicant, indicated that they are not asking for anything more than what we
are currently doing. He discussed that we are a unique PZD zoning district. It is a little bit
different than a single family zoning district. He discussed the background of the Rupple
Row PZD and the original language presented to the City Council. We have not had issues
in this neighborhood with over -occupancy. There are RT -12 rentals that abut this
neighborhood. We have the full support of the POA and the Boys and Girls Club. When I
started the price in Rupple the price was $77/sq. ft. and now it is around $100/sq. ft. I don't
feel that we've done anything that is damaging to the neighborhood.
No public comment was presented.
Commissioner Hoskins asked the City Attorney about determining in that it is not a
modification at all. They are appropriately using the property as originally approved.
Garner indicated that an appeal of the zoning decision could be taken to the Board of
Adjustment but it is not being proposed or considered here.
Commissioner Hoskins asked about the floor plan in the units.
Rob Kimbell, applicant, discussed the layout of the units.
Commissioner Hoskins asked about the two-family dwellings and up to four unrelated
dwellings.
Commissioner Hoskins discussed that this is not a single family subdivision. I am trying to
figure out how this PZD got labeled a single family neighborhood. If that means that we have
to okay a zoning change to bring them into compliance then that is what we need to do. I
am also looking at the use of the property there has not been in any problems. Every
indication is that I can put multi -family down this street.
Commissioner Cook discussed that there are no complaints and he has been operating it
this way with no complaints.
Commissioner Brown asked about the definition of family.
City Attorney, Kit Williams explained that if council changes the zoning classification the
definition of multi -family would be applied to this development. It would not be changing the
definition of family.
Commissioner Hoffman indicated that clearly the residents that live here choose to have
a fewer number of cars.
10
Commissioner Bunch made a comment about public notification of other property owners
in the neighborhood. Making a point that this is primarily a neighborhood of rentals, not
owner -occupancy.
Motion:
Commissioner Autry made a motion to forward ADM 15-5135 to the City Council with
a recommendation for approval as requested by the applicant. Commissioner Selby
seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion passed with a vote of 7-1-0.
Commissioner Brown voted `no'.
11
CUP 15-5119: Conditional Use (3332 E. CARMEL LN./HAYS, 411): Submitted by
JORGENSEN & ASSOCIATES for property located at 3332 E. CARMEL LN. The property
is zoned RSF-4, RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY, 4 UNITS PER ACRE and contains
approximately 3.53 acres. The request is for a tandem lot.
Jesse Fulcher, Senior Planner, read the staff report.
Dave Jorgensen, applicant, discussed the request and access to Gaddy Lane.
Public comment:
Scott Zotti, neighbor, presented a slide show presentation. The request should be denied,
because the tandem lot is inconsistent with other lots, Gaddy Lane is a narrow one -lane
driveway, the request violates the subdivision covenants and will be detrimental to other lots
in the subdivision.
Ben Robinson, neighbor, lives across the street from property and understood that Lot 20
had been combined with Lot 14. This was a material decision in us buying our home. The
request should be denied.
Carla Gay, neighbor, stated there are only five houses on Gaddy Lane on lots of at least 2
acres each. A '/2 acre lot would be detrimental. Adding another house on a one -lane
driveway will make traffic worse. Am opposed to this request.
Joyce Arias, neighbor, wants to echo neighbor's comments. A small lot will impact quality
of like and property values. The request is for a lot that is half of the original Lot 20. Please
deny the application.
Kathy Mosely, neighbor, lived here since 1993 and knew the original developers. They
wanted large lots in the woods. Gaddy Lane wasn't built to road standards and don't want
to see construction vehicles on this driveway. Please deny the request.
Cheryl Zotti, neighbor, stated that Gaddy Lane wasn't built to road standards and is
buckling already. There are no provisions for this lot owner to make fix the road. The lot size
isn't consistent with neighborhood and is a reason to deny the request. The request is really
to split Lot 14, since Lot 20 doesn't exist anymore.
Greg Hays, applicant, stated that he's owned Lot 14 since 1995. The closest house to the
subject lot is 235. The letter from the Zotti's was discussed, since it referred to the
development of the subject property. My goal is to downsize and build a home for my
retirement on this property. I never would have sold a portion of the property to the Zotti's if
I would have known that I was losing my development rights.
Commissioner Hoskins asked for the width of Gaddy Lane and if there is a POA
Scott Zotti stated that it's 12' wide. There is no POA.
Commissioner Hoskins asked about the use of Gaddy Lane.
Scott Zotti stated there used to be a gate across Gaddy Lane, but it was damaged
12
No more public comment was presented.
Commissioner Hoskins stated he didn't believe the proposed lot would decrease property
values and don't' see one more house being a significant impact on the street.
Fulcher informed the Commission and neighbors that the lot layout would need to be slightly
amended to provide a 70' wide section south to the Zotti property. This would increase the
overall size of the property to approximately 3/4 of an acre. This must be done so it can be
classified as a tandem lot. The current proposal is a tandem lot behind another tandem lot.
Andrew Garner, City Planning Director, discusses the issue of compatibility
Commissioner Brown asked if the lots could be subdivided further.
Garner stated no.
Commissioner Hoffman discusses the original lot configuration. I think that adding a house
on the lot will be consistent with the relationship and distance between other houses.
Commissioner Autry asked the applicant if this will be there home for retirement. I don't
see how this will be an impact.
Hays stated that is their intent.
Commissioner Bunch stated that she didn't think this would adversely affect Gaddy Lane
- will support the request.
Motion:
Commissioner Autry made a motion to approve CUP 15-5119 as recommended by
staff. Commissioner Selby seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion passed with
a vote of 8-0-0.
13
CUP 15-5112: Conditional Use (2183 N. COLLEGE AVE./BLUE OCEAN LOUNGE, 368):
Submitted by NYLISHA BEASLEY for property located at 2183 N. COLLEGE AVE. The
property is zoned C-2, THOROUGHFARE COMMERCIAL and contains approximately 0.95
acres. The request is for a dance hall and lounge in an existing 5,000 square foot structure.
Quin Thompson, Current Planner, gave the staff report.
Nylisha Beasely, Applicant, said the request was for a dance floor in a private club
providing new music for patrons.
Public comment
Joanne Olszewksi, neighbor, said that her residence is on Elm Street, where she was one
of very few neighbors who had received notification of the hearing, because she is within
the 500' boundary in which notification is required, but that in the past live music at this and
nearby addresses had been a problem for neighbors. She asked if the club owner would be
responsible for parking lot noise caused by patrons of the club.
Kitt Williams, City Attorney, said that the business owner would not be responsible for
patrons outside of the club, but that city ordinances still apply to those patrons.
Olszewski asked how many violations of the noise ordinance would cause the Planning
Commission to consider the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) approval again?
Williams noted that a private club can play music without a CUP; the reason for the request
was to allow dancing specifically.
Erik Danielson, Neighbor, said that the provided parking permissions were not valid,
indicating that the owner of King Burrito did not understand the implications of the
agreement. He said that the business owner's wife had signed but that her husband had
not. (Note: The applicant has indicated that all signatures are valid). Danielson said that he
shares a parking lot with the proposed business, and that his parking would be the easier to
access and closer than spaces on nearby properties. He said that the club intended to have
300 patrons, and said that he had concerns that his parking spaces would fill up first which
could affect his business. He said that the retaining wall to the north of the property was
dangerous and that he has added improvements to his property to reduce that danger.
No more public comment was presented.
Fadil Bayard, Property Owner, said that he was present to support his tenant [Nylisha
Bailey]. He said he was unaware of any accidents at the property. He assured the
Commission as the property owner that the applicant has permission to use the parking
associated with King Burrito. He said that he was present to support his tenant and would
make improvements as required by the Commission.
Tracy Hoskins, Commissioner, said that any parking issue on Mr. Danielson's property
could be addressed with signage and towing as necessary. He said that a condition could
be added to require that the club be responsible for cleaning the parking lot if patrons leave
trash. He added that he had previously owned the property to the north, and that there had
been an accident in which a patron of the former Clunk music hall [located in the subject
building] had fallen from the top of the wall and sustained very serious injuries. He said he
14
was in support of guardrails as proposed by staff. He added that he would be in favor of
evaluating the entire site for safety, especially along the property lines.
Tom Brown, Commissioner, asked if it would be possible to extend safety rail along the
retaining wall to prevent injuries. He noted that he was concerned about accidents related
to the retaining wall. He suggested that a fence be provided in addition to a guard rail.
Andrew Garner, Planning Director, said that the way the condition of approval was written,
staff would evaluate the area for safety and request improvements as needed.
Sarah Bunch, Chair, said she would be comfortable supporting this item with appropriate
measures to prevent someone walking or driving over the retaining wall.
Bayard said that there are trees and vegetation in the back and emergency exit only.
Williams suggested that back doors not be kept open in order to minimize sound impact on
the nearby neighborhood to the west.
Motion:
Commissioner Hoskins made a motion regarding CUP 15-5112 to approve the request
with conditions as recommended by staff except modifying condition of approval #3
to add that the entire property shall be evaluated for safety, adding condition of
approval #8 that the west doors be used for emergency exit only, and adding
condition of approval #9 that the parking lot will be policed at closing every night by
the club operator to clean up any trash. Commissioner Selby seconded the motion.
Upon roll call the motion passed with a vote of 8-0-0.
15
ADM 15-5124: Administrative Item (UDC Chapters 166/COMMERCIAL DESIGN
STANDARDS): Submitted by CITY PLANNING STAFF for revisions to UDC Chapter 166
for a minor clarification to the commercial design standards.
Andrew Garner, City Planning Director, gave the staff report.
No public comment was presented.
Commissioner Hoffman indicated that he is glad we are working on this. My concern is
that basically we include some kind of wording similar to what we required on the bank
earlier today. If you are not going to do an entrance then you need to go an extra mile for a
facade that addresses the street in pedestrian scale, and frontality. I would like to table this.
Commissioner Hoskins indicated agreement with Commissioner Hoffman. The applicant
needs to demonstrate that not creating an entry would be a hardship. The replacement
element adds another option. I would like to see the commission determining if it is a
hardship or not and the mitigation to offset not having the entrance.
Commissioner Cook also discussed agreement. If you are developing on a corner
applicants feel that it doesn't have to be a hard entrance on both street frontages.
Motion:
Commissioner Brown made a motion to table ADM 15-5124 for one month.
Commissioner Selby seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion passed with a
vote of 8-0-0.
5. Reports: No reports
6. Announcements:
7. Adjournment Time: 8:51 PM
8. Submitted by: City Planning Division
16