HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005-10-24 - Agendas - FinalIT Y OF FA F: LLE, ARKANSAS
113 W. Mountain St
Fayetteville, AR 72701
Telephone: (479) 575-8267
AGENDA FOR A MEETING OF THE
PLANNING COMMISSION
Monday, October 24, 2005, 5:30 p.m.
Room 219, City Administration Building
The following items will be considered:
Old Business:
1. RZN 05-1707: (CURRY, 482): Submitted by KEVIN CURRY for property located at 1501 W HOTZ DRIVE.
The property is zoned RSF-4, SINGLE FAMILY - 4 UNITS/ACRE and contains approximately 0.40 acres. The
request is to rezone the subject property to RMF -24, Residential Multi -Family, 24 units per acre.
Property Owner: DAVE ELLIS Planner: SUZANNE MORGAN
THE APPLICANT HAS REQUEST THIS ITEM BE TABLED INDEFINITELY
2. LSD 05-1462: Large Scale Development (RIDGEHILL APARTMENTS, 405): Submitted by N.
ARTHUR SCOTT for property located at NW OF GREGG AVENUE AT HOLLY STREET. The
property is zoned RMF -24, MULTI FAMILY - 24 UNITS/ACRE and contains approximately 1.68 acres.
The request is to approve a residential apartment complex on the subject property with 38 units and 56
bedrooms proposed.
Property Owner: BRANDON BARBER SCB INVESTMENTS, LLC
Planner: SUZANNE MORGAN
3. R-PZD 05-1635: Planned Zoning District (FALLINGWATERS @ STONEBRIDGE, 685):
Submitted by 112 ENGINEERING, INC. for property located E OF DEAD HORSE MTN RD. The
property is zoned R -A, RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL and contains approximately 136.70 acres. The
request is to approve a residential planned zoning district with 257 single family dwelling units proposed.
Property Owner: DEWITT C. GOFF Submitted on behalf of: LAMBERTH/CARLTON
Planner: SUZANNE MORGAN
New Business:
4. ADM 05-1794: Administrative Item (620 N. COLLEGE AVENUE): Submitted by ROBERT
SHARP ARCHITECT, INC., the applicant requests to amend the Master Street Plan at 620 N. College
Avenue to accommodate an existing structure and proposed development. The applicant requests that the
required right-of-way for College Avenue be modified from 55' right-of-way from centerline to 30' right-
of-way from centerline. Planner: SUZANNE MORGAN
5. LSD 05-1715: Large Scale Development (BARNHILL CONDOS, 482): Submitted by PROJECT
DESIGN CONSULTANTS for property located at 135, 1481, AND 1435 HOTZ DRIVE. The property is
zoned RMF -24, MULTI FAMILY - 24 UNITS/ACRE and contains approximately 1.92 acres. The request
is to approve a residential condominium with 43 units and 108 parking spaces.
Property Owner: KEVIN CURRY Planner: SUZANNE MORGAN
6. LSD 05-1747: Large Scale Development (LOT 6, WEDINGTON PLACE PH. H, 401): Submitted
by EB LANDWORKS for property located at W OF TAHOE DRIVE, N OF WEDINGTON. The property
is zoned C-2, THOROUGHFARE COMMERCIAL and contains approximately 1.21 acres. The request is
to approve a 4,295 s.f. restaurant and 1,400 s.f. additional retail/office space with 40 parking spaces
proposed.
Property Owner: EE -GE, LLC Planner: JESSE FULCHER
7. PPL 05-1733: Preliminary Plat (WEST HAVEN S/D, 280): Submitted by JORGENSEN &
ASSOCIATES for property located NORTH OF DOUBLE TREE ESTATES AND WEST OF WHEELER
ROAD. The property is in the Planning Area and contains approximately 49.57 acres. The request is to
approve a residential subdivision with 45 single family lots.
Property Owner: BLIND SQUIRREL, LLC Planner: ANDREW GARNER
8. PPL 05-1750: Preliminary Plat (BLUEBERRY MEADOWS SID, 571): Submitted by JORGENSEN
& ASSOCIATES for property located at HWY 16E, N OF SEQUOYAH MEADOWS SUBDIVISION.
The property is zoned RSF-4, RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY, 4 UNITS PER ACRE and contains
approximately 23.62 acres. The request is to approve a residential subdivision with 73 single family lots
proposed.
Property Owner: KARRY BAGGETT Planner: SUZANNE MORGAN
9. PPL 05-1745: Preliminary Plat (SUMMIT PLACE, 329): Submitted by JORGENSEN &
ASSOCIATES for property located on THE SOUTH SIDE OF TOWNSHIP STREET
APPROXIMATELY 500' EAST OF COLLEGE AVENUE. The property is zoned RSF-4, SINGLE
FAMILY - 4 UNITS/ACRE and contains approximately 30.77 acres. The request is to approve the
preliminary plat of a residential subdivision with 50 single family lots.
Property Owner: TMS DEVELOPMENT, INC. Planner: ANDREW GARNER
10. PPL 05-1748: Preliminary Plat (FALCON RIDGE SUBDIVISION, 609): Submitted by
JORGENSEN & ASSOCIATES for property located SOUTH OF HWY 16E, EAST OF HUNT LANE
AND WEST OF TALLGRASS DRIVE. The property is zoned RSF-4, SINGLE FAMILY - 4
UNITS/ACRE and contains approximately 24.58 acres. The request is to approve the preliminary plat of a
residential subdivision with 61 single family lots.
Property Owner: CHARLES SLOAN Planner: ANDREW GARNER
11. RZN 05-1754: Rezoning (PARK WEST HEIGHTS, 208): Submitted by MEL MILHOLLAND for
property located at SE CORNER HWY 112 AND DEANE SOLOMON RD. The property is zoned R -A,
RESIDENTIAL -AGRICULTURAL and contains approximately 26.28 acres. The request is to rezone the
subject property to RSF-4, Residential Single Family, 4 units per acre.
Property Owner: TRACY HOSKINS
Property Owner: MIKE & BRENDA PRICE Planner: SUZANNE MORGAN
12. CUP 05-1752: Conditional Use Permit (GREEN DOOR, 407): Submitted by ROBERT
HATFIELD & APRIL LIZANA HAT -CO, LTD for property located at 1404 N COLLEGE AVENUE, IN
EVELYN HILLS SHOPPING CENTER. The property is zoned C-2, THOROUGHFARE
COMMERCIAL and contains approximately 17.21 acres. The request is to approve a dance hall, use unit
29, in the C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial Zoning District. Planner: JESSE FULCHER
13. CUP 05-1753: Conditional Use Permit (ASPEN RIDGE, 561): Submitted by HAL FORSYTH &
HANK BROYLES OF TOWN CREEK CONSTRUCTION AND DEVELOPMENT, LLC for property
located at SW OF 6TH ST AND HILL AVENUE. The property is zoned RMF -24, MULTI FAMILY - 24
UNITS/ACRE and contains approximately 30.61 acres. The request is for a temporary real estate sales
trailer. Planner: JESSE FULCHER
All interested parties may appear and be heard at the public hearings. A copy of the proposed amendments and other pertinent data
are open and available for inspection in the office of City Planning (575-8267), 125 West Mountain Street, Fayetteville, Arkansas.
All interested parties are invited to review the petitions. Interpreters or TDD for hearing impaired are available for all public hearings; 72 hour notice is required. For further
information or to request an interpreter, please call 575-8330.
ORDER OF PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
A. Introduction of agenda item — Chairman
B. Presentation of Staff Report
C. Presentation of request — Applicant
D. Public Comment
E. Response by Applicant/Questions & Answer with Commission
F. Action of Planning Commission (Discussion & Vote)
NOTE TO MEMBERS OF THE AUDIENCE
If you wish to address the Planning Commission on an agenda item raise your hand when
the Chairman asks for public comment He will do this after he has given Planning
Commission members the opportunity to speak and before a final vote is taken. Public
comment will only be permitted during this part of the hearing for each item.
Once the Chairman recognizes you, go to the podium at the front of the room and give
your name and address. Address your comments to the Chairman, who is the presiding
officer. He will direct them to the appropriate appointed official, staff member or others
for response. Please keep your comments brief, to the point, and relevant to the agenda
item being considered so that everyone has a chance to speak.
Please, as a matter of courtesy, refrain from applauding or booing any speakers or actions
of the Planning Commission.
2005 Planning Commissioners
Nancy Allen
Jill Anthes
Candy Clark
James Graves
Christine Myres
Alan Ostner
Audy Lack
Sean Trumbo
Christian Vaught
PC Meeting of October 24, 2005
CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS
PLANNING DIVISION CORRESPONDENCE
TO: Fayetteville Planning Commission
FROM: Suzanne Morgan, Current Planner
Brent O'Neal, Staff Engineer
THRU: Jeremy Pate, Director of Current Planning
DATE: October 20, 2005
125 W. Mountain St.
Fayetteville, AR 72701
Telephone: (479) 575-8267
RZN 05-1707: (CURRY, 482): Submitted by KEVIN CURRY for property located at
1501 W HOTZ DRIVE. The property is zoned RSF-4, SINGLE FAMILY - 4
UNITS/ACRE and contains approximately 0.40 acres. The request is to rezone the
subject property to RMF -24, Residential Multi -Family, 24 units per acre.
Property Owner: DAVE ELLIS Planner: SUZANNE MORGAN
The applicant requests that the Planning Commission table this item indefinitely
until such time that the applicant has resolved all issues associated with this project.
October 24, 2005
Planning Commission
RZN 05-1707 (Curry)
Agenda Item 1
Page 1 of 2
October 24, 2005
Planning Commission
RZN 05-1707 (Curry)
Agenda Item 1
Page 2 of 2
THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS
PC Meeting of October 24, 2005
PLANNING DIVISION CORRESPONDENCE
TO: Fayetteville Planning Commission
FROM: Suzanne Morgan, Current Planner
Brent O'Neal, Staff Engineer
THRU: Jeremy Pate, Director of Current Planning
DATE: October 19, 2005
125 W. Mountain St.
Fayetteville, AR 72701
Telephone: (479) 575-8267
LSD 05-1462: Large Scale Development (RIDGEHILL APARTMENTS, 405): Submitted by
N. ARTHUR SCOTT for property located at NW OF GREGG AVENUE AT HOLLY STREET.
The property is zoned RMF -24, MULTI FAMILY - 24 UNITS/ACRE and contains
approximately 1.68 acres. The request is to approve a residential apartment complex on the
subject property with 38 units and 56 bedrooms proposed.
Property Owner: BRANDON BARBER SCB INVESTMENTS, LLC
Planner: SUZANNE MORGAN
Findings:
Property: The subject property is located north of North Street adjacent to Gregg Avenue. The
property is zoned RMF -24 and contains 1.68 acres. Central Baptist Church is located south of
this property and much of the surrounding development is a mixture of single-family and multi-
family development due to the variety of adjacent zoning. The property does have a significant
slope into which the proposed residential development will be developed. The railroad and
associated cut -slope is adjacent to the west.
Surrounding Land Use / Zoning.:
Direction
Land Use
Zoning
North
Vacant; duplexes further to the north
RMF -40, Res. Multi -family — 40 units/acre
South
Central Baptist Church
RMF -24, Res. Multi -family — 24 units/acre
East
Gregg Ave, residential
RSF-4, Res. Single Family — 4 units/acre
West
Railroad, duplex development
RMF -40, Res. Multi -family — 40 units/acre
Proposal: The applicant proposes to construct four residential structures (three 3 -story and one
2 -story buildings) with 38 apartments. There will be a total 56 bedrooms and 52 parking spaces ,
which is compliant with the parking ordinance. Density of the site at the proposed full build -out
is 22.6 units per acre. The applicant additionally proposes a 6' wood board privacy fence along
the southern property line as requested by the adjoining Church.
Background: The Subdivision Committee forwarded this item to the Planning Commission on
April 14, 2005. Topics discussed included the height of the structures adjacent to the side
setbacks and the retaining wall along Gregg Avenue. The applicant has addressed concerns
October 24, 2005
Planning Commission
LSD 05-1462 (Ridgehill Apartments)
K:1Reports120051PC Reports110-24-051LSD 05-1462 (RidgehillApartments).doc Agenda Item 2
Page 1 of 24
regarding the height of the structures to the north by increasing the setback 1' for a total 21' as
required by ordinance. The applicant submitted a cross section of those structures adjacent to the
Church south of the property. The site plan has been revised to indicate construction of a
retaining wall no greater than 10' in height. Though the project was on the Planning
Commission agenda for the regular meeting on August 22, 2005, it was tabled by the applicant
without being discussed.
Right-of-way being dedicated The applicant shall dedicate additional right-of-way adjacent to
Gregg Avenue, a Minor Arterial, for a total 45' from centerline.
Street Improvements: A 6' sidewalk shall be constructed through the drive at the right-of-way
line along the lengthof the property and connect to the existing sidewalk along Gregg Avenue.
At the time of building permit, the site plan will need to be modified to reflect the sidewalk
connection shown on the plans submitted for Subdivision Committee review.
For the past several months, the Street Committee has reviewed a variety of concept plans for an
alternative alignment of Gregg Avenue. After many meetings with the public, Ward Two, and
City Staff, the Street Committee has recommended approval of the Gregg/Arkansas Avenue
Connection Concept Plat alignment of Gregg Avenue. This plan involves the realignment of
Gregg Ave. through the subject property (see attached proposal), which would not allow for the
current proposal. At this time, the City Council has not adopted a realignment of Gregg Avenue;
however, the plan selected by the Street Committee is scheduled to be reviewed by the City
Council for consideration at a later date.
Water/Sewer: Water and sewer shall be extended to serve those proposed units in compliance
with ordinance requirements.
Parks: Parks fees in the amount of $14,934 for 38 units shall be paid prior to issuance of a
building permit.
Adjacent Master Street Plan Streets: Gregg Street — Minor Arterial
Tree Preservation:
Existing Canopy: 29.0%
Preserved Canopy: 17.9%
Required Canopy: 20.0%
Mitigation: Required, 4 trees on-site
Public Comment: Staff has received comments from three adjoining owners, two of whom
objected to the development. No specific concerns or objections were listed in these responses.
Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of LSD 05-1462, with the following
conditions:
Conditions of Approval:
1. Dedication of right-of-way in accordance with the Master Street Plan for a total 45'
from centerline of Gregg Avenue is required prior to issuance of a building permit.
2. The plat shall be revised to show construction of a 6' sidewalk shall be through the
drive at the right-of-way line along the length of the property and connect to the
October 24, 2005
Planning Commission
LSD 05-1462 (Ridgehill Apartments)
Agenda Item
K:IReports120051PC Reports110-24-051LSD 05-1462 (Ridgehill Apartments).doc
Page 2 of 24
existing sidewalk along Gregg Avenue. Any broken or unfixed sidewalk shall be
removed and replaced at the time of construction as required by the Engineering
Division. The revised site plan submitted by for Planning Commission consideration
indicates construction of a new 6' sidewalk at the right-of-way line for Gregg Avenue.
Based on a site evaluation of the terrain and existing conditions of the sidewalk, the
Sidewalk Coordinator recommends construction of a 6' sidewalk through the
proposed driveway to connect to the existing sidewalk adjacent to the curb as shown
on the plans submitted for Subdivision Committee review.
3. Should the applicant request grading within 5' of any adjoining property, the
applicant shall provide proof of notification to said property owner to the Engineering
Division at the time of grading permit request.
4 In the RMF -24 district, any building which exceeds the height of 20 feet shall be set
back and additional foot from side property lines for each foot in excess of twenty
feet. If additional setback is required, this could alter the site plans.
5. All grading and construction of retaining walls shall be in accordance with City
regulations. No retaining wall greater than 10' in height shall be constructed as part
of this development.
6. A lighting plan and cut sheets of proposed parking lot or building lighting shall be
provided at the time of building permit application. All lighting shall meet the
requirements of the Outdoor Lighting Ordinance.
7. The plat shall be revised to label the amount of right-of-way required to be dedicated
in acres.
8. Signs proposed for this development shall meet the ordinance requirements for signs
with in the RMF -24 zoning district. This will result in the relocation of the
monument sign identified on the site plan.
9. The electric transformer shall be relocated out of the required 15' landscape area if
possible and screened with evergreen vegetation so as not visible from the right-of-
way.
10. Staff recommends a sidewalk connection from the sidewalk adjacent to the right-of-
way to the sidewalk shown to be provided north of Building D.
11. Street lights shall be installed along Gregg Avenue, meeting ordinance requirements
with spacing not to exceed 300 feet.
12. The Large Scale Development shall comply with the Outdoor Lighting Ordinance
which may result in the modification of the proposed parking lot lighting. A lighting
plan and details shall be submitted pursuant to city ordinance in order to determine
compliance at the time of building permit.
13. A minimum of four mitigation trees shall be planted on-site to meet Tree Preservation
ordinance requirements.
K: IRepons120051PC Reportsll0-24-051LSD 05-1462 (Ridgehill dpanmentsf doc
October 24, 2005
Planning Commission
LSD 05-1462 (Ridgehill Apartments)
Agenda Item 2
Page 3 of 24
14. A total of $14,938 for 38 multi -family units shall be paid to meet parkland dedication
requirements, prior to building permit.
Standard Conditions of approval:
15. Two bicycle racks shall be placed within 50' of the entrance of proposed structures
and comply with all requirements as specified in Chapter 172.10.
16. Trash enclosures shall be screened on a minimum of three (3) sides with materials
that are complimentary to and compatible with the proposed building. Elevations of
the enclosure shall be submitted for review at the time of building permit application.
Access to the enclosure shall not be visible from the street, pursuant to city ordinance.
17. All mechanical/utility equipment shall be screened using materials that are
compatible with and incorporated into the structure.
18. Plat Review and Subdivision comments (to include written staff comments provided
to the applicant or his representative, and all comments from utility representatives -
AR Western Gas, SWBT, Ozarks, SWEPCO, Cox Communications)
19. Staff approval of final detailed plans, specifications and calculations (where
applicable) for grading, drainage, water, sewer, fire protection, streets (public and
private), sidewalks, parking lot(s) and tree preservation. The information submitted
for the plat review process was reviewed for general concept only. All public
improvements are subject to additional review and approval. All improvements shall
comply with City's current requirements.
20. Large scale development shall be valid for one calendar year.
21. Prior to the issuance of a building permit the following is required:
a. Grading and drainage permits
b. Separate easement plat for this project.
c. Project Disk with all final revisions
d. Completion of all required improvements or the placement of a surety
with the City (letter of credit, bond, escrow) as required by §158.01
"Guarantees in Lieu of Installed Improvements" to guarantee all
incomplete improvements. Further, all improvements necessary to serve
the site and protect public safety must be completed, not just guaranteed,
prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy
22. Additional conditions:
K: IReports120051PC Reports\I0-24-051LSD 05-7462 (Ridgehill Apartments).doc
October 24, 2005
Planning Commission
LSD 05-1462 (Ridgehill Apartments)
Agenda Item 2
Page 4 of 24
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: yes Required
Approved Denied Tabled
Date: October 24, 2005
The "CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL", stated in this report, are accepted in total without
exception by the entity requesting approval of this development item.
By
Title
Date
K: IReports120051PC Reports110-24-051LSD 05-1462 (Ridgehill Apartments).doc
October 24, 2005
Planning Commission
LSD 05-1462 (Ridgehill Apartments)
Agenda Item 2
Page 5 of 24
ARKANSAS
THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS
LANDSCAPE REVIEW FORM
PC Meeting of August 22, 2005
125 W. Mountain St.
Fayetteville, AR 72701
Telephone: (479) 575-8267
To: Fayetteville Planning Commission
From: Jeremy Pate, Landscape Administrator
Date: August 17, 2005
ITEM #: LSD 05-1362 (Ridgehill Apts)
Applicable Requirements:
Plan Checklist:
✓submitted by applicant
Xrequested
K:I Urban ForesterlPROJECTSILSD-200ARidgehill Apts&LandscapeReviewForm - PCdoc
October 24, 2005
anning Commission
.,,. ,�.,� i.idgehill Apartments)
Agenda Item 2
Page 6 of 24
....e.._
✓
wheel stops / curbs
✓
irrigation
✓
edged landscape beds indicated
✓
species of plant material identified
✓
size of plant material at time of installation indicated
✓
interior landscaping
lawn
narrow tree (8'min_ width, 17' min. length / 1 tree per 15 spaces)
tree island (10' min. width / 1 tree per 12 spaces).
✓
perimeter landscaping
side and rear property lines (5' landscaped)
adjacent to street R.O.W (15' greenspace exclusive for landscaping / 1
street tree every 30 L.F., a continuous planting of shrubs and ground
cover - 50% evergreen)
✓ -
soil amendments notes include that soil is amended and sod removed
✓
mulching notes indicate mulching around trees and within landscape beds.
✓
planting details according to Fayetteville's Landscape Manual
o n•
K:I Urban ForesterlPROJECTSILSD-200ARidgehill Apts&LandscapeReviewForm - PCdoc
October 24, 2005
anning Commission
.,,. ,�.,� i.idgehill Apartments)
Agenda Item 2
Page 6 of 24
greenspace adjacent to street R.O.W. (15' wide)
street trees planted every 30' L.F. along R.O.W.
outdoor storage screened with landscaping
landscaped area (12' min.)
fence required
outdoor storage screened with landscaping
non-residential landscape screen when adjacent to residential zones
landscape requirement for setback reduction
greenspace adjacent to street R.O.W. (25' wide)
art
street trees planted every 30'L.F. along R.O.W.
25%0 of total site area left in greenspace (80% landscaped)
parking lots and outdoor storage screened with landscaping
Recommendation: Approval of the landscape plan associated with LSD 05-1362.
I:I Urban ForestertPROJECTSILSD-20051Ridgehill AptslLandscapeReviewForm - PCdoc
October 24, 2005.
Planning Commission
LSD 05-1462 (Ridgehill Apartments)
Agenda Item 2
Page 7 of 24
THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS
PC Meeting of August 22, 2005
TREE PRESERVATION and PROTECTION REPORT
125 W. Mountain St.
Fayetteville, AR 72701
Telephone: (479) 575-8267
To: Fayetteville Planning Commission
From: Jeremy Pate, Landscape Administrator
Date: August 17, 2005
ITEM #: LSD 05-1462 (Ridge Hill Apts)
Requirements Submitted:
✓
Initial Review with the Landscape Administrator
✓
Site Analysis Map Submitted
✓
Site Analysis Written Report Submitted
✓
Complete Tree Preservation Plan Submitted
Canopy Measurements:
acres
square feet
acres
1.68
73,181
0.49
square feet
21,260
percent of site area
acres
square feet
percent of total site area
FINDINGS:
29.0%
0.30
13,068
17.9%
20%
The desirability of preserving a tree or group of trees by reason of age, location, size or species.
• Most of the tree canopy on this property is in poor condition, and is located along
K:lUrban Fares ter1PROJECTSILSD-20051Ridgehill AptslTreePreservationReport - PCdoc
October 24, 2005
Planning Commission
LSD 05-1462 (Ridgehill Apartments)
Agenda Item 2
Page 8 of 24
the steep slope adjacent to the railroad and north of the property. The desirability
of preserving the canopy is low because of its species, but high because of its
function in maintaining the steep slope.
Whether the design incorporates the required Tree Preservation Priorities.
• The design of the subdivision does incorporate the required Tree Preservation
Priorities. The majority of canopy is proposed to remain, and on-site mitigation will
increase a better species of canopy on the property.
The extent to whichthe area would be subject to environmental degradation due to removal of
the tree or group of trees.
• Environmental degradation due to loss of canopy would occur on this site if
removed, and perhaps decrease the safety of the adjacent slope.
The impact of the reduction in tree cover on adjacent properties, the surrounding neighborhood
and the property on which the tree or group of trees is located.
• Adjacent properties would be not be impacted by the removal of canopy.
Whether alternative construction methods have been proposed to reduce the impact of
development on existing trees.
• No alternative construction methods are proposed
Whether the size or shape of the lot reduces the flexibility of the design.
• The size and shape of the lot does inhibit the flexibility of design, as the slope, Gregg
Street and the railroad are all considerable design factors.
The general health and condition of the tree or group of trees, or the presence of any disease,
injury or hazard.
- The general health of all groups of trees on this site is fair, with the presence of quite
a lot of damage and decay.
The placement of the tree or group of trees in relation to utilities, structures, and use of the
property.
• No utilities are structures are proposed within the existing canopy. Buildings are
proposed to remove some of the canopy, however.
The need to remove the tree or group of trees for the purpose of installing, repairing, replacing,
or maintaining essential public utilities.
• N/A
Whether roads and utilities are designed in relation to the existing topography, and routed,
where possible, to avoid damage to existing canopy.
• Utilities and the drive/parking area do not affect the tree canopy.
Construction requirements for On -Site and Off -Site Alternatives.
K:IOrban ForesterlPt?OJECTSILSD-20051Ridgehitl AptslTreePreservationReport - PC.doc
October 24, 2005
Planning Commission
LSD 05-1462 (Ridgehill Apartments)
Agenda Item 2
Page 9 of 24
• N/A
The effects of proposed On -Site Mitigation or Off -Site Alternatives-
• On-site mitigation will increase the desirable species on the property.
The effect other chapters of the UDC, and departmental regulations have on the development
design.
• N/A
The extent to which development of the site and the enforcement of this chapter are impacted by
state and federal regulations:
• N/A
The impact a substantial modification or rejection of the application would have on the
Applicant:
• Staff is recommending approval of the submitted Tree Preservation Plan.
Recommendation: Staff recommends the approval of the submitted Tree Preservation Plan
associated with LSD 05-1462 to the Planning Commission, with the following condition:
1. All tree protection fencing shall be inspected prior to the start of construction.
2. A minimum of four(4) mitigation trees shall be planted on-site to meet mitigation
requirements.
K: I Urban Forester1PROJECTSILSD-20051Ridgehill AptstTreePreservationReport - PC.doc
October 24, 2005
Planning Commission
LSD 05-1462 (Ridgehill. Apartments)
Agenda Item 2
Page 10 of 24
FAYETTEVILLE
THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS
113 W. Mountain St.
Fayetteville, AR 72701
Telephone: 479-444-3469
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Suzanne Morgan, Associate Planner
Alison Jumper, Park Planner
April 13, 2005
Parks & Recreation Subdivision Committee Review Comments
*****************************************
Meeting Date: April 14, 2005:
Item: LSD 05-1462 Ridgehill Apartments
Park District: NW
Zoned: RMF -24
Billing Name & Address: SCB Investments
Land Dedication Requirement
Single Family @ .025 acre per unit = acres
Multi Family @ .02 acre per unit = acres
Mobile Home @ .015 acre per unit = acres
Lot Split
COMMENTS:
Money in Lieu
@ $555 per unit = $
38 @ $393 per unit = $14,934
@ $555 per unit = $
@ $555 per unit = $
■ On March 7, 2005, PRAB voted to accept money in Lieu of land to satisfy the Park Land
Dedication Ordinance. Park fees are assessed in the amount of $14934 for 38 multi
family units.
• Fees are due before issuance of building permit.
LSD 05-1462
October 24, 2005
Planning Commission
LSD 05-1462 (Ridgehill Apartments)
Agenda Item 2
Page 11 of 24
PROJECT .DESIGN CONSULTANTS• INC.
CITY OF'FAYETIE1fILLE.
ATT N: Mr. Jeremy Pater.
125W; Mountain
Fayetteville, AR; :72701
RE: .R.idgehilf;Apartments Site An
DearfltPat
is
March 1142005
We are developing approximately I.68 aces along Gregg Avenue hi Fayetteville, AR, 1t -is
zoned 01F-24,, containing 39 Units for Multi -Famine Residences. We have approximately 67
parking spaces.. ...
We are proposing underground detention for the site's runoff. This (eaves the_ existing. slope
vegetation as undisturbed as possible The soil types are EnC2 Enders Complex which is a
gravelly loam.: with 3%.-.'.8% slopes;- ErE - Enders Allegheny Complex which has. 8% - 20%
slopes.. - ..
The main factors shaped the design: The first. factor we addressed was the access tothe
site We allowed for only ane entrance onto the site because of the difficultsight distance
lcckry up toward the intersection of Gregg ft North.' The second Factor is the steep scope at the
rear of the property, The slope is steep and fragile. We wanted to preserve as much of the slope
aspossible. .. This Is the reason that we decided to detain runoff underground.
-
if you have any _questions; please call the at 479 248=I161
Sincerely,.
_in
Any C.SEott, ASLA
Corporate Secretary
139 N. MAIN • CAVE S'RINGS-,-AP. * 7 743
PHONE 4 248-1161 • FAX 479--z16-1467
October 24, 2005
Planning Commission
LSD 05-1462 (Ridgehill Apartments)
Agenda Item 2
Page 12 of 24
Suzanne MorganTRET Ridgehill Apartments
From: "Bryan Cooper" <bcooper@barberdevelopment.com>
To: "Suzanne Morgan" <smorgan@ciiayetteville.ar.us>
Date: 9/7/05 5:26PM
Subject: RE: Ridgehill Apartments
Suzanne & Jeremy,
This is a formal request to table Ridgehill Apts. until the issue with
the Gregg/Arkansas Ave. connection can be resolved with the city. After
discussions with Alderman Marr I hope the city can resolve this issue
soon and then we will know what to do with this project. Please let me
know if you have any other questions. Thanks for all your work.
----Original Message ----
From: Suzanne Morgan [mailto:smorgan@ci.fayetteville.ar.us]
Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2005 3:57 PM
To: Bryan Cooper
Subject: Ridgehill Apartments
Dear Mr. Cooper,
Two weeks ago the Planning Commission tabled the LSD for Ridgehill
Apartments to the September 12th meeting as requested in your email to
Jeremy Pate. This item, therefore, will be an item of old business on
the upcoming Planning Commission meeting. Should you wish to table this
item again, please send this request to staff via email by 10 am
tomorrow. Instead of tabling thisitem to a specific date, please
include in the request that the item be tabled until such time that
issues (whatever they may be) are resolved. This will allow staff to
place the item on an agenda when it is ready to be heard.
Thank you,
Suzanne Morgan
Suzanne Morgan
Associate Planner
City of Fayetteville
125 W. Mountain St.
Fayetteville, AR 72701
Ph. (479) 575-8267
Fax (479) 575-8202
planning@ci.fayetteville.ar. us
CC: "Jeremy Pate" <jpate@ci.fayetteville.ar.us>
October 24, 2005
Planning Commission
LSD 05-1462 (Ridgehill Apartments)
Agenda Item 2
Page 13 of 24
Subdivision Committee
April 14, 2005
Page 28
Clark: The final item on our agenda is LSD 05-1462, Ridgehill Apartments. Will
the applicant come on clown?
Pate:
This property is zoned RMF -24, Residential Multi -Family, 24 units per
acre, it is located directly north of the Central Baptist Church, which is
close to the corner of North and Gregg. The property to the north is
vacant and then there are a couple of duplexes or four plexes or
something. Directly to the west you will note on this first sheet, it is quite
steep. That is when the railroad bank went in I'm assuming. The railroad
does exist and is utilized there to the west. It is a very steep bank. In
reviewing trees on this property we just kind of looked over it and decided
not to walk down but they do have some slopes that they are dealing with
and the architecture of the structures and the design of the site has had to
respect that somewhat. The property contains approximately 1.68 acres.
It does have significant slope. The applicant is proposing to construct four
residential structures with 38 apartments, a total of 62 bedrooms. The
proposed density at full build out is 22.6 units per acre, which is close to
that density requirement. For multi -family development one parking
space is required per bedroom. The minimum parking spaces allowed for
the proposed development is 44 spaces, that is with the 30% decrease. You
will note in your staff report, we have a bit of a concern just because we
know the nature of multi -family development. With revisions from Plat
Review a row of parking spaces was lost. They still meet ordinance
requirement, we just wanted to voice that concern and have it on the
record for the future. We would recommend that either look at talking to
the church and potentially getting some sort of shared parking
arrangement with them, not necessarily approved by this board because it
does meet ordinance requirement. Property surrounding this is zoned
multi family primarily with RSF-4 to the east across Gregg Avenue. 45'
from centerline is required to be dedicated and a 6' sidewalk is to be
constructed with a drive at the right of way line along the length of the
property on Gregg Avenue. Parks fees, I believe Matt will go over that.
The tree preservation, existing canopy is at 29%, most of which is low
priority volunteer species along the slope. There is not a lot of significant
canopy on this site. The applicant is preserving 17.9% and 20% is
required so four trees will need to be planted on site to meet those
requirements. Three adjoining property owners have submitted comments
to us. Two of which objected to the development. There were no specific
reasons, they just checked the I do object box verses the I don't object
box. We are recommending forwarding this LSD to the full Planning
Commission with 16 conditions of approval. I will go over a couple of
those, at Least one of those is Engineering's comments. Item one is just a
revision to update the number of units, it currently states there are 39
proposed and I believe it is 38. Building height has been a little bit of a
challenge on this project. In this zoning district if you have a building that
October 24, 2005
Planning Commission
LSD 05-1462 (Ridgehill Apartments)
Agenda Item 2
Page 14 of 24
Subdivision Committee
April 14, 2005
Page 29
is higher than 20' in height you have to set back an additional foot for
every foot in excess. The north building, Building "A" has been setback
12 additional feet. Actually, a section drawing was submitted showing the
adjacent grade and how I could measure that, so I was easily able to tell
building "A". I'm not sure about Building "D". I could not find anything
in our notes so I'm not sure if that is going to require additional setback or
not. If it does, obviously, the site plan will change dramatically. It is hard
to tell at this point about what that building height is. It might be fine. If
it is 20' then it won't have to be setback additional.
Scott: We will get something to prove that it is 17'.
Pate: That clarifies items two, three and four. There was one additional, the
drawings you submitted to me was 32' and then add the eave of the roof,
probably another 6", so it will probably be 13' additional. Item five, I put
this in just so we could talk about it today. Planning Commission
determination of a waiver of the maximum wall height of 10' along Gregg
Avenue. I need to talk with the Engineering Division to determine what
requirements and if they are being met and whether or not that is a waiver.
That is just something that I need to clarify just as much as the
Commissioners do. Item number six, street lights along Gregg Avenue do
need to be installed. I think they are shown on the other side of Gregg. I
think that is about it. Everything else was relatively straight forward.
Clark: Thank you Jeremy. Engineering?
O'Neal: On the retaining wall, there is no waiver that can be applied for. It is 10'
maximum height. You can step it.
Pate: Essentially, that condition needs to be stated that the wall height needs to
be revised to show a maximum of 10' in height prior to Planning
Commission.
O'Neal:
Also, on that wall just confirm the setbacks. There are some additional
setbacks that may be allowed for the wall from the property lines. It looks
like you are ok but just confirm that.
Clark: Parks?
Mihalevich: On March 7th the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board recommended
accepting money in lieu for the parkland dedication ordinance for 38
multi -family units, that total comes to $14,934 and those will be due prior
to issuing the building permit.
October 24, 2005
Planning Commission
LSD 05-1462 (Ridgehill Apartments)
Agenda Item 2
Page 15 of 24
Subdivision Committee
April 14, 2005
Page 30
Scott: My name is Art Scott, I'm with Project Design Consultants representing
Mr. Barber. They are proposing what I think is a pretty nice looking
complex here. They do have a material listing here.
Pate:
Stone veneer, asphalt roof shingles, stone clad windows, glass, steel,
concrete, stone veneer, base heaters, things like that. We don't require
elevations for multi -family, it is just a courtesy.
Scott: I think the multi level and split level on the site makes it unique and I seek
your approval.
Clark: I see nobody here in the audience so we will keep it with the Committee.
Scott: I did want to mention one thing, we met with some members of the church
before this and they expressed the desire to have a privacy fence and so I
told them I would put that in our plan and let you all know that we plan to
do that along the southern boundary.
Clark: My first question is the underground detention site runoff. I see a note in
the packet. I didn't see retention or detention, anything that is on a slate.
Do you want to talk to us a little bit about that? I am thinking storm water
runoff on a slope can be a deadly thing.
Scott:
We do have underground detention proposed in the parking lot and a pipe
system. Right now it is determined that we put it in here which is a part of
the asphalt section. The rest of this right here will runoff. I think we
probably can downspout this to get it to the parking lot.
Clark: I have never seen a system like that.
Scott: It is driven by land price. I have done a lot of projects around the country
and it only occurs where land prices are high, which is where we are at
here.
Clark: Is it equally efficient and what is the grade on the side of that hill going
down to the railroad tracks? Is it over 15%?
Scott: Yes.
Pate: If you look at the map on the very last page of your packet, this little
portion shows the slopes that are over 15% in the site. That is showing
that all of that is over 15%. Again, most of which was created with the
railroad cut.
Clark: I just know that the apartments that are on North Street right on the
railroad tracks are under the hill. This is going to be on top of the hill. I
October 24, 2005
Planning Commission
LSD 05-1462 (Ridgehill Apartments)
Agenda Item 2
Page 16 of 24
Subdivision Committee
April 14, 2005
Page 31
think runoff and erosion is always a major issue. Will this type of
detention work?
Pate:
Much in the same way, they will still have to meet our same criteria for a
detention pond, it is just this one is underground as opposed to a surface so
you don't see it on the surface, it is just located in pipes underground and
there is a flow associated with predevelopment that has to be released at
the same rate.
Clark: Where is it released?
Scott:
There is a drainage ditch on this side of the railroad tracks and it will be
released where it goes now through this pipe between the two buildings
here. There will be a device that prevents erosion from this outlet.
Clark: That is a steep drop, you are taking it down right? I'm just trying to figure
out, will there be a channel or something for it to get down?
Scott: Actually, it will be piped out of this pipe system down through and
released here into the ditch area. The ditch is out here. In that area we
will have a device that reduces the velocity of the water to prevent erosion
and then sod.
Clark: Everybody is happy with that?
Pate:
It obviously will go through our construction plan review process as well
as fine details that may be worked out then. Yes, the type of system is
sustainable.
Clark: Commissioners? Why are we forwarding it to the full Planning
Commission?
Pate: Because of the waiver request.
Clark: You heard specifically no comments from neighbors as to why they
oppose this and you are going to do the fence for the church?
Scott: Yes.
Pate:
With the exception of clarification of height of this building, that is the
only major question we have to forward. We could potentially forward
and put it on consent. There are no further questions.
MOTION:
Myres: I would like to forward LSD 05-1462 to the full Planning Commission.
October 24, 2005
Planning Commission
LSD 05-1462 (Ridgehill Apartments)
Agenda Item 2
Page 17 of 24
Subdivision Committee
April 14, 2005
Page 32
Graves: I will second that.
Clark: We are going to elaborate on number three and change number eight to the
correct amount of parks fees and I will concur. Thank you very much.
Announcements
Meeting adjourned: 10:25 a.m.
October 24, 2005
Planning Commission
LSD 05-1462 (Ridgehill Apartments)
Agenda Item 2
Page 18 of 24
East Fantle
File CopYElevations
THE BARBER G R O U
Alak,ul Stlsum
Gregg Street Apartments
Arenitects
October 24, 2005
:Planning Commission
Ridgehill Apartments)
Agenda Item 2
Page 19 of 24
D131 3a V3
O
1 H913H 3AY3
L
3217 ll93d02d HLI05
ZEI
2Li
h
(7o
Oo
Um
O
BUILDING 0 TRANSVERSE SECTION
October 24, 2005
Planning Commission
LSD 05-1462 (Ridgehill Apartments)
Agenda Item 2
Page 20 of 24
„0l-,9
ETE RETAINING
o
9
ti
3N/7 A183dObd H/8ON
TRANSVERSE SECTION - BUILDING A
RIDGEH/LL APARTMENTS
COOPER ARCHITECTS
0
N
O
October 24, 2005
Planning Commission
LSD 05-1462 (Ridgehill Apartments)
Agenda Item 2
Page 21 of 24
October 24, 2005
Planning Commission
05-1462 (Ridgehill Apartments)
Agenda Item 2
Page 22 of 24
�s�O5A:6W RIDGEHILL APARTMENTS
Overview
11
SUBJECT PROPERTY
Legend
eTir as
LSD05-1462
°O°Q- 0venay District +'^T^T+. Pi -mope! Anenal — FLOODWAY
Master Street Plan '*-= Minor Arterial ---- - 100 YEAR
Master Street Plan — — Collector
--T`= Freeway/Expressway •••• HistoricCollector
50 100 200 300
500 YEAR
,—'— LIMIT OF STUDY
BaseLine Profile
C Fayetteville
Outside City October 24, 2005
Planning Commission
LSD 05-1462 (Ridgehill Apartments)
00 Agenda Item 2
Feet Page 23 of 24
LSD05-1462
One Mile View
o
00 RA
100
RAPco
RIDGEHILL APARTMENTS
8
a\
-407
RSF-4
ig,gor Mk!
P-
RRFa t
T- L
G2� RSFA_ RSfd j
G2 F RS/ -4 - acex'
RSF-4
� ftMFdo- 2RMF 2a_ E RMF24
P f P linMF .I RSFd RSFy. I—
ilii RhjFr-0-O-'
j'+al��l��P'f.' I' �i RMF4� ..R9Pi 2
d0
p off_,10 RSF{ I RSF.d I R- l G2:.
RMyyyl
::":RMP ----°i:4
• f 03
R$Fd
,Fri S4 .414F-4
-4:CR i RSF-4 f RSFA 1-1
RSd 4 *RSRSFi
RMF -2d
RMF -40
R #.417 -it -41 R$F
?I�ygf�#VFf01s9 sa�
24
G9 �.^ ,`.
RMF-2dTY
Overview
Legend
Subject Property
LSD05-1462
0 0.1 0.2
Boundary
N., Planning Area
0,
'0000 Overlay District
Outside City
0.4
Master Street Plan
Master Street Plan
Freeway/Expressway
arra Principal Arterial
mune MinorArtenai
Collector
••• • Historic Collector
0.6 0.8
Miles
F24
October 74, 2005
Planning Commission
LSD 05-1462 (Ridgehill Apatments)
Agenda Item 2
Page 24 of 24