HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007-10-22 - Agendas - FinalTayelteyi;le
113 W. Mountain St.
Fayetteville, AR 72701
Telephone: (479) 575-8267
AGENDA FOR A MEETING OF THE
PLANNING COMMISSION
Monday, October 22, 2007, 5:30 p.m.
Room 219, City Administration Building
ORDER OF PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
A. Introduction of agenda item — Chair
B. Presentation of Staff Report
C. Public Comment
D. Presentation of request — Applicant
E. 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 please queue behind the podium when
the Chair asks for public comment. Public comment occurs after the Planning Staff has presented the
application and will only be permitted during this part of the hearing for each item. Members of the public
are permitted a maximum of 10 minutes to speak; representatives of a neighborhood group will be allowed
20 minutes. The applicant/representative of an application before the Planning Commission for
consideration will be permitted a maximum of 20 minutes for presentation.
Once the Chair recognizes you, go to the podium at the front of the room and give your name and address.
Address your comments to the Chair, who is the presiding officer. He/She will direct them to the
appropriate appointed official, staff member or others for response. Open dialogue will not be permitted:
please ask any questions, and answers will be provided once public comment has been closed. 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.
2007 Planning Commissioners
Jill Anthes
Lois Bryant Matthew Cabe
James Graves Porter Winston
Audy Lack Christine Myres
Alan Ostner Sean Trumbo
WeAyifle
TENTATIVE AGENDA
113 W. Mountain St.
Fayetteville, AR 72701
Telephone: (479) 575-8267
AGENDA FOR A MEETING OF THE
PLANNING COMMISSION
Monday, October 22, 2007, 5:30 p.m.
Room 219, City Administration Building
The following items will be considered:
Consent:
1. Approval of the minutes from the October 8, 2007 Planning Commission meeting.
Old Business:
2. ADM 06-2380: Urban Residential Standards: Submitted by Planning Staff to forward an ordinance
establishing urban residential design standards to the Ordinance Review Committee.
Planner: Karen Minkel
New Business:
3. ADM 07-2768: Administrative Item (Sowder Park Land Dedication): Submitted by Glenn and
Victoria Sowder requesting dedication of 0.74 acres of park land for Scull Creek Trail with an equivalent
park land bank credit for 43 multi -family units for future development in the southwest park quadrant.
Planner: Jeremy Pate
4. CUP 07-2753: (BRISIEL, 524): Submitted by LEGACY VENTURES, LLC for property located at
540 EAST HUNTSVILLE ROAD. The property is zoned RSF-8, SINGLE FAMILY - 8 UNITS/ACRE
and contains approximately 1.79 acres. The request is for a tandem lot. Planner: Dara Sanders
5. LSP 07-2744: Lot Split (BRISIEL, 524): Submitted by LEGACY VENTURES, LLC for property
located at 540 E. HUNTSVILLE RD The property is zoned RSF-8, SINGLE FAMILY - 8 UNITS/ACRE
and contains approximately 1.79 acres. The request is to divide the subject property into 3 tracts of 1.40,
0.18, and 0.21 acres. Planner: Dara Sanders
6. CUP 07-2749: (MATHIAS, 372): Submitted by H2 ENGINEERING, INC. for property located on
BOX AVENUE, NW OF MISSION BLVD. The property is zoned RSF-4, SINGLE FAMILY - 4
UNITS/ACRE and contains approximately 1.46 acres. The request is to construct duplexes in the RSF-4
Zoning District. Planner: Jesse Fulcher
7. CUP 07-2752: (MORTON/NORTH ST., 445): Submitted by MORTON ASSET MANAGEMENT
for property located at 533 NORTH STREET. The property is zoned RSF-4, SINGLE FAMILY - 4
UNITS/ACRE and contains approximately 0.27 acres. The request is for a detached 2nd dwelling unit.
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.
ia)etteville
ARKANSAS
PC Meeting of October 22, 2007
THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS
PLANNING DIVISION CORRESPONDENCE
TO: Fayetteville Planning Commission
THROUGH: Tim Conklin, Planning and Development Management Director
FROM: Karen Minkel, Senior Long Range Planner
DATE: October 11, 2007
125 W. Mountain St.
Fayetteville, AR 72701
Telephone: (479) 575-8267
ADM 06-2380: Administrative Item (Urban Residential Design Standards):
Submitted by Planning Staff to forward an ordinance establishing urban residential
design standards to the Ordinance Review Committee.
Planner: KAREN MINKEL
BACKGROUND
City Plan 2025 lists developing urban residential design standards as one of the goals in
Year 1 for increasing the supply of quality attainable housing. The first version of this
ordinance was presented to the Planning Commission on December 11, 2006. Several
concerns were expressed by members of the public and the Commission about the
legality of the ordinance and its potential to significantly increase infrastructure costs.
Staff addressed these issues in a second version that was presented to the Planning
Commission on January 22, 2007, which included a comparison of the proposed
ordinance with ordinances used in peer cities. The main concern expressed by the
Commission at the second meeting was the stipulation that required urban residential
buildings to front onto public streets, eliminating a developer's ability to front buildings
onto private drives or greenspace. Staff attempted to find a compromise that would
satisfy these concerns, but a viable solution was not found.
Staff proposed separating building form from the design standards at a Planning
Commission agenda session on July 19, 2007. Site planning and building form will be
addressed in a traditional neighborhood development ordinance that is scheduled to be
addressed in Year 3 of City Plan 2025. The Planning Commission agreed to pursue this
option and review a revised urban residential design ordinance that primarily addresses
architectural design standards.
Planning staff revised the urban residential guidelines, which now include the following
major points:
1) Purposes: a. Protect and enhance Fayetteville's appearance; b. Create appealing
street scenes; c. Minimize service and parking impacts; and d. Compose attractive
residential facades.
October 22, 2007
Planning Commission
ADM 06-2380 Urban Residential Design Standards
Agenda Item 2
Page 1 of 8
2) Applicability: The ordinance will apply to: a. two-family dwellings; b. three-
family dwellings; and c. multi -family dwellings.
3) Site Development Standards:
a. Building Siting: Buildings must front onto public streets unless the
building is sited more than 50 feet from the public right-of-way.
Underlying zoning setbacks shall supersede the siting requirements.
b. Vehicular Access/Circulation Parking: Garages entries and parking lots
shall be located behind the front build -to -zone, and on -street parking shall
be provided on at least one side of the street, counting toward the total
required spaces for the development. Public streets and private drives shall
be extended and connected to adjoining properties. (This section will
require amendments to parking ratios for multi -family dwelllings in
Chapter 172 of the Unified Development Code.)
c. Pedestrian Circulation: All ground floor entrances shall have a walkway
that connects to the public sidewalk, and projects shall incorporate
pedestrian connections to adjacent properties.
d. Screening for Services in Urban Residential Developments: Similar to
commercial design standards, all utility equipment and trash areas shall be
screened appropriately.
e. Fencing: Razor, barbed wire and chain link fences are prohibited. The
maximum height of a solid fence within the front yard shall be 42 inches,
which is consistent with the Downtown Design Overlay District.
4) Architectural Design Standards
a. Building, Mass, Form and Design: In developments containing three or
more residential structures, a variety of colors and building materials shall
be used to differentiate one building from another.
b. Ancillary structures shall be similar architecturally to primary buildings.
c. All principal facades shall be articulated using two or more options. (e.g.
balconies, porches, bays, etc.)
d. Architectural embellishments such as awnings, headers, sills, and molding
are encouraged.
e. Balconies, front porches and projected bays shall meet the requirements
outlined in the Downtown Design Standards.
Attaining community consensus about what makes an appropriate urban residential
project functional and attractive will help mitigate opposition to viable and desirable
projects. The proposed urban residential design standards identify key elements that make
development consistent with an attractive, pedestrian -friendly urban fabric.
October 22, 2007
Planning Commission
ADM 06-2380 Urban Residential Design Standards
Agenda Item 2
Page 2 of 8
RECOMMENDATION: Recommend that the proposed Urban Residential Design
Standards at the October 22, 2007 Planning Commission meeting be forwarded to
the City Council Ordinance Review Committee.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Required YES
Approved
Date: October 22, 2007
CITY COUNCIL ACTION: Required YES
Approved
Date:
Denied
Denied
October 22, 2007
Planning Commission
ADM 06-2380 Urban Residential Design Standards
Agenda Item 2
Page 3 of 8
Sec. 166.22 Urban Residential Design
Standards
(A) Purposes.
(1) To protect and enhance Fayetteville's
appearance, identity, and natural and
economic vitality.
(2) To create appealing street scenes so that
development enhances the image of the City
and provides safe, pedestrian -friendly
neighborhood environments.
(3) To minimize service and parking impacts in
order to preserve surrounding property
values and scenic resources that contribute
to the City's economic development.
(4) To compose attractive residential facades
that enhance the economic viability of and
provide compatibility with surrounding
property.
(B) Applicability. All references to urban residential
shall include the following uses as permitted by
right or conditional use in all zoning districts:
(1) 2-F, Two-family dwellings
(2) 3-F, Three-family dwellings
(3) MF, Multi -family dwellings
(C) Site Development Standards. The following site
development standards shall apply for all urban
residential development.
(1) Intent. The intent of these site development
standards is to create a pedestrian -friendly
streetscape.
(2) Building Siting.
(a) Buildings must front onto public right-
of-way and the principal fagade(s) must
be built in a build -to zone that is located
between a line 10 feet and 25 feet from
the public right-of-way, unless the
building is sited more than 50 feet from
the public right-of-way.
(b) The underlying zoning district setbacks
shall supersede the siting requirements
for urban residential development.
(3)
Vehicular Access / Circulation / Parking.
(a) Site access and internal circulation
should promote pedestrian safety,
efficiency, and convenience and
minimize conflicts between vehicles
and pedestrians. Continuous circulation
shall be provided throughout the site to
the greatest extent possible creating a
complete, compact, and connected
transportation network both within the
development and to the surrounding
neighborhood.
(i) Garage entries, carports, parking
lots and parking structures shall be
located behind the front build -to
zone and shall not protrude forward
from the remainder of the principal
facade.
(ii) Parking areas shall be accessed by
mid -block alleys whenever
possible.
(iii) On -street parallel parking shall be
provided on at least one side of the
street in front of all multi -family
buildings where feasible. Each on -
street parking space provided along
the project frontage shall count
toward the total required spaces for
the development.
(iv) Public streets and private drives
shall be extended to property lines
and connected to adjoining
properties where streets exist and
can be extended in the future to
provide for vehicular and
pedestrian connectivity.
(4) Pedestrian Circulation.
(5)
(a) All ground floor entrances shall have a
walkway that connects to the public
sidewalk where sidewalks exist.
(b) Urban residential projects shall
incorporate pedestrian connections to
adjacent residential and commercial
properties where sidewalks and/or trails
exist and can be extended in the future.
Screening far Services in Urban Residential
Developments.
October 22, 2007
Planning Commission
ADM 06-2380 Urban Residential Design Standards
Agenda Item 2
Page 4 of 8
(a) Mechanical and utility equipment. All
mechanical and utility equipment
located on the wall and/or on the ground
shall be screened. All roof mounted
utilities and mechanical equipment shall
be screened by incorporating screening
into the structure utilizing materials
compatible with the supporting
building. Mechanical and utility
equipment over 30 inches in height
shall meet building setbacks, unless
located in a utility easement.
(b) Trash areas. Trash enclosures shall be
screened with materials that are
compatible with and complementary to
the principal structure. Access should
not be visible from the public right-of-
way.
(c)
Screening shall mean a view obscuring
fence, berm, vegetation, architectural
treatment consistent with the residential
architecture, or a combination of the
four of sufficient height to prevent the
view of the screened items from the
public right-of-way. Vegetation shall be
planted at a density sufficient to become
view obscuring within two years from
the date of planting.
(6) Fencing. The following types, height, and
location of fences shall be prohibited:
(a) Razor and/or barbed wire. Razor
and/or barbed wire fences are
prohibited, unless and except barbed
wire fences are used for agricultural
purposes.
(b) Chain link. Chain link fence is
prohibited if closer to the street than the
front of the building.
(c) Height of fences in front of buildings.
Fences in the front yard area shall have
a maximum height of 42 inches subject
to visibility requirements in Chapter
164.09 and 164.17.
(D) Architectural Design Standards.
(1) Intent The intent of these building design
standards is:
(a) To ensure that urban residential
buildings add to the character and
quality of the community, offer a sense
of security, and make a positive
contribution to the life of the street.
(b) To maximize the quality, value and
longevity of urban residential
neighborhoods.
(c) To make housing appealing and
comfortable for its inhabitants.
(2) Construction and appearance design
standards for urban residential
development.
(a) Building Mass, Form, and Design.
(i) In urban residential developments
containing three (3) or more
residential structures a variety of
colors and building materials shall
be used to differentiate one
building from another. Only three
of the same building type in one
development shall be permitted.
(ii) Ancillary structures such as
carports, garages, recreational
buildings and storage structures
shall be designed as an integral part
of the project architecture.
(iii) The following architectural
elements shall be required of all
principal facades on urban
residential projects:
a. Variations in materials;
b. Variations in roof forms;
c. A functional, architecturally
emphasized entry.
(iv) The principal facade(s) of all urban
residential buildings shall be
articulated through the
incorporation of two or more of the
following:
a. Balconies;
b. Bays or bay windows;
October 22, 2007
Planning Commission
ADM 06-2380 Urban Residential Design Standards
Agenda Item 2
Page 5 of 8
c. Insets or other relief in the wall
place;
d. Porches;
e. Dormers;
f. Porticoes;
Turrets; or
g
h. Consistent and complementary
fenestration patterns.
(v) Awnings, molding, pilasters and
comparable architectural
embellishments are encouraged.
Awning
(3) Balconies, porches and bay windows shall
comply with the following regulations:
(a) Balconies.
(1)
Definition. An open habitable
portion of an upper floor extending
beyond a building's exterior wall
that is not supported from below by
vertical columns or piers but is
instead supported by either a
cantilever or brackets.
Standard.
a. Depth. Balconies above the
second floor shall have a
maximum projection of 4 ft.
from the principal facade.
b. Height. 10 ft. minimum clear
to the underside of the
horizontal floor. Supports or
appendages may not extend
below 7 ft. clear.
c. Length. 80% maximum of
principal building facade for
the second floor. 40%
maximum for all balconies
above the second floor.
d. Roofs. Balconies may have
roofs, but are required to be
open, non -heated parts of the
building.
(iii) Placement. Balconies shall not
interfere with street trees, street
lights, street signs or other such
civic infrastructure.
Balconies
Front Porches.
Definition. A covered area
adjoining an entrance to a building.
(ii) Standard.
a. Depth. 6 ft. minimum from the
principal facade to the inside
of the column face.
b. Length. 25 to 100% of the
principal facade. Front
porches may be multi -story
and are required to be non -air
conditioned.
Porches Oc ober 22, 2007
Planning Commission
ADM 06-2380 Urban Residential Design Standards
Agenda Item 2
Page 6 of 8
(c) Projected Bay.
(1)
Definition. A window or series of
windows forming a bay in a room
and projecting outward from the
wall.
i) Standard. Bays shall consist of
habitable space. Supports and
appendages shall not extend below
7 ft. clear.
a. Depth. 4 ft. maximum from the
principal facade.
b. Height. 10 ft. minimum clear
to the underside of the
horizontal floor.
c. Length. 20% minimum of the
principal facade length.
v) Placement. Projected Bays shall
not interfere with street trees, street
lights, street signs or other such
civic infrastructure.
Secs. 166.23.--166.99. Reserved
October 22, 2007
Planning Commission
ADM 06-2380 Urban Residential Design Standards
Agenda Item 2
Page 7 of 8
October 22, 2007
Planning Commission
ADM 06-2380 Urban Residential Design Standards
Agenda Item 2
Page 8 of 8
ARKANSAS
T. CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS
PLANNING DIVISION CORRESPONDENCE
TO: Planning Commission Members
FROM: Matt Mihalevich, Trails Coordinator
THRU: Jeremy Pate, Director of Current Planning
DATE: October 2, 2007
PC Meeting of October 22, 2007
125 W. Mountain St.
Fayetteville, AR 72701
Telephone: (479) 575-8267
ADM 07-2768: (Sowder Park Land Dedication): Submitted by Glenn and Victoria Sowder
requesting dedication of 0.74 acres of park land for Scull Creek Trail with an equivalent park land
bank credit for 43 multi -family units for future development in the southwest park quadrant.
Property Owner: Glenn and Victoria Sowder Trails Coordinator: Matt Mihalevich
BACKGROUND
Project Description: The subject property contains approximately 2.62 acres, located along the
eastern edge of the Arkansas -Missouri Railroad from Gregg Street south to Prospect Street.
Background: The City of Fayetteville Trails Coordinator contacted the Sowders several months ago
to discuss the need for a portion of their land for the construction of Scull Creek Trail. After a series
of meetings and discussions, the Sowders have agreed to dedicate the 0.74 acres needed for the
construction of Scull Creek Trail to the City of Fayetteville. In exchange for the land dedication, the
owners would like to bank the park land dedication credit for a future multi -family development in
the southwest park quadrant. For a multi -family development the park land dedication formula is
.017 acres/unit. With a dedication of 0.74 acres the total banked credit will accommodate 43 multi-
family units. The timing of this development project is estimated to be 5 to 10 years in the future so
the Sowders have also asked to be locked in to the current park land dedication rate of .017
units/acre.
Proposal: The applicant proposes a dedication of 0.74 acres to the City of Fayetteville for the
construction of Scull Creek Trail with a park land credit in the amount of 0.74 acres to be banked for
future development within the southwest quadrant.
In accordance with Ch. 166.03 (K)(1)(h) Park land dedication, Dedication in Excess, a developer that
wishes to dedicate park land in excess of the development requirement "shall submit a written
request to the Planning Commission who may grant the developer a credit equivalent to said excess.
Said credit shall be applied toward the developer's obligation under this subsection for any
subsequent development located in the same park quadrant." On October 1st 2007, the Parks and
Recreation Advisory Committee reviewed and recommended this park land dedication request,
finding it suitable for park purposes. The minutes from that meeting are attached.
October 22, 2007
Planning Commission
ADM 07-2768 Sowder Park Land Dedication
Agenda Item 3
Page 1 of 10
DISCUSSION
The dedication of this property to the City of Fayetteville is essential for the completion of Scull
Creek Trail in order to make the connection to Wilson Park and south to Dickson Street. Once
complete, Scull Creek Trail will connect Mud Creek Trail near the mall south 4.5 miles to meet
Frisco Trail near Dickson Street. This trail is currently the highest priority trail for the City of
Fayetteville because of the strong north -south connectivity to adjacent neighborhoods, schools, parks
and businesses. Currently 1.7 miles of Scull Creek Trail is complete with construction on-going
until the entire trail is finished. Property aquisition from only 9 properties (including this one)
remain to make the complete connection from Mud Creek Trail to Frisco Trail.
A small part of the proposed land dedication encompases Frisco Street. This street has been
improved from gravel to pavement over the years and is not centered within City right-of-way. With
this dedication, the Parks staff and Parks and Recreation Advisory Board has recommended a 30'
wide public access easement be created for Frisco Street and that the Transportation Divison assumes
all maintanance of the road. In addition to accomodating Scull Creek Trail, this land dedication will
also place part of Frisco Street on public property.
Approval of this land dedication does not guarantee development approval for the future
development.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the dedication of 0.74 acres of park land for the construction of Scull
Creek Trail and acceptance of a park land bank for 43 multi -use units to be used for future
development within the southwest quadrant.
Planning Commission Action:
Motion:
Second:
Vote:
Meeting Date: October 22, 2007
Comments:
O Approved O Tabled El Denied
October 22, 2007
Planning Commission
ADM 07-2768 Sowder Park Land Dedication
Agenda Item 3
Page 2 of 10
To: The Parks and Recreation Advisory Board
Thru: Matt Mihalevich, Trails Coordinator
From: Glenn and Victoria Sowder
Date: September 19, 2007
Subject: Park Land Dedication for Scull Creek Trail
Dear Parks Board Members,
Please accept this letter as our official request to dedicate approximately 0.74 acres of
land to the City of Fayetteville Parks Department and to create a park land bank to remain
with Glenn and Victoria Sowder or an associated entity to be used for future development
within the southwest park quadrant. We plan to build in the future as many as 60 multi-
family units along the remaining acreage of 765-14007-005, to the north along Frisco
Street and on other lots near the intersection of North and Gregg Streets. Although it will
be several years before we bring the development project forward, it is our understanding
that once dedicated, this particular dedication will be banked and locked into the current
park land dedication rate of .017 acres/unit. It is also our understanding that this park
land dedication rate of .017 acres/unit can be conveyed if we choose to sell to a non-
associated entity the remaining acreage of 765-14007-005 and/or nearby lots near the
intersection of North and Gregg Streets.
In order to expedite the construction of Scull Creek Trail, we would like to proceed with
this dedication prior to any development of the multi -use housing (which, as stated earlier
in this letter, we do not plan to bring forward to several years). This dedication will also
accommodate part of Frisco Street which is currently located on our property. As part of
the proposed development project, the northem part of Frisco Street should be relocated
to the east about 30 feet so it is within the existing street right of way.
Thank you for your consideration of this dedication.
Park Land Dedication Numbers:
0.74 acres dedicated divided by
.017 acres/unit
= 43 multi -family units to be banked
Victoria Sowder
October 22, 2007
Planning Commission
ADM 07-2768 Sowder Park Land Dedication
Agenda Item 3
Page 3 of 10
30' PUBLIC ACCESS
EASEMENT
MAINTAINED BY
TRANSPORTATION DIV.
--gra.Waireji
Y F2 PRO klt gc
BLOCK RETAINING WALLMk
WITH FENCE ABOVE
rtti
PROPOSED PARK
LAND DEDICATION
32,413 SF 0.74 AC
NEW SIDEWALK
CONNECTION TO
WILSON PARK TRAIL •"?
Scull Creek Trail
Octo 07
CT fl
AD11.4-67-276niowder Patk Land
Paging aSt ii 00 nn
Agenda Item 3
Page 4 of 10
FAYETTEVILLE
PARKS AND RECREATION ADVISORY BOARD
Meeting Minutes October 1, 2007
Opening:
The regular meeting of the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board was called to order by
Vice Chairman Jay Davidson at 5:37 P.M. on October 1, 2007 in Room 326 of the City
Administration Building located at 113 West Mountain Street, Fayetteville, Arkansas.
Present:
Parks and Recreation Advisory Board members Davidson, Biendara, Hatfield, Burke, and
Bitter were present, with Davis arriving later. Colwell and Mauritson were absent. Park
Staff Edmonston, Jumper, Jones, Wright, Coles, Thomas, Trail Coordinator Mihalevich
and audience were in attendance.
1. Approval of September 10th, 2007 PRAB Meeting Minutes
PRAB Motion: Bitter asked that the minutes be amended to show that he was
not present for the August minutes approval, so the vote should have been
7-0-0. Bitter said he arrived at the meeting after the vote. Bitter then motioned
to accept the amended minutes, and Davidson seconded the motion. Motion
passed by voice vote 5-0-0.
2. Park Land Dedication
Development Name:
Engineer:
Owner:
Location:
Park District:
Units:
Total Acres:
Land Dedication Requirement:
Money in Lieu Requirement
Existing Parks:
Developer's Request:
Staff Recommendation:
Carole Jones, Park Planner
Sowder Land Dedication for Scull Creek
Trail
N/A
Glenn and Victoria Sowder
North of Wilson Park., east of Frisco Street
SW
N/A
Unknown at this time
Unknown at this time
N/A
Wilson Park
Dedication of 0.74 acres to create a park
land bank
Several negotiations were made on this
project between the owner and city staff
before an agreement was reached on the
proposed land dedication. It is imperative
that the city obtain this land for Scull Creek
October 22, 2007
Planning Commission
ADM 07-2768 Sowder Park Land Dedication
Agenda Item 3
Page 5 of 10
Developer's Comments:
Justification:
Trail. Staff recommendation is approval as
submitted.
Developer is requesting to dedicate
approximately 0.74 acres of land to the City
of Fayetteville Parks Division and create a
park land bank to remain with Glenn and
Victoria Sowder or an associated LLC to be
used for future development within the
southwest park quadrant. In the future they
plan to build approximately 60 multi -family
units along the remaining acreage to the
north along Frisco Street and near the
intersection of North and Gregg Streets.
They are also requesting that their future
development be locked into the current park
land dedication rate of 0.017 acres/unit with
this dedication.
In order to expedite the construction of Scull
Creek Trail they would like to proceed with
the dedication prior to the development of
the multi -family housing. This dedication
will also accommodate Frisco Street which
is currently located on their property. As
part of the proposed development project the
northern part of Frisco Street should be
relocated to the east about 30 feet so it is
within the existing street right of way.
Burke wanted to know what we were going to do with the north part of the property.
Mihalevich said it offers options for future use for a trail and parking lot.
Davidson asked where the property line was located.
Jones replied that the property was to the north and on North and Gregg. Sowder owns the
entire main strip, and wants to develop the north part of the property.
Hatfield asked why the park land overlaps the street right of way.
Jones said that there were many meetings in which that subject was discussed. The floodway
line is the cut off point. Sowder wants to bank it for forty two or forty three family units.
Bitler asked if this was a take it or leave it proposition.
October 22, 2007
Planning Commission
ADM 07-2768 Sowder Park Land Dedication
Agenda Item 3
Page 6 of 10
Sowder said at some point it will be take it or leave it. He said for nine years he has been
paying taxes on the roadway. He attended all twelve of those neighborhood meetings. He said
this was not the first time his family had been involved with the City in this area. In the 1920's,
his grandfather took up a collection in the neighborhood and build the first bridge over Skull
Creek next to Wilson Park.
Hitler wanted to know if the Gregg St. expansion was going to affect this request.
Jones said she wasn't sure, but she thought the expansion had been dropped.
Bitter said he thought there was a sign on Gregg St. that said it was part of a bond for
expansion.
Sowder replied that it had been dropped. He said he had a contract on Maple St. and lost the
contract and $300,000 because the mayor won't put the street down the east side of the railroad
tracks.
Sowder then asked if there were any more questions.
Hatfield wanted to know if it's the City's request that they maintain the right of way on Gregg.
Sowder said that he owns that street now, and he hasn't started charging tolls on it yet. He said
he supposed the City could do anything that it wants.
Jones said that the City would propose to make it a thirty foot public access easement in which
the street and drainage would be maintained by the Transportation division.
Hitler asked if it would be deeded as park land.
Edmonston said she asked the City Attorney if the City could take in a public street as a private
park donation. She was told yes.
Hatfield asked if anyone had talked to the City Engineer about allowing public parking lots in
this area because of the floodland.
Mihalevich said there would hopefully be no long term parking, but possibly a trail head once
Wilson Park's parking lots become full.
Edmonston said the bottom line is that the City needs this land for the Skull Creek Trail.
Hitler said his concern is that we don't know what's going to happen with the Gregg St.
expansion project. What would happen if the highway decided to come through the trail?
Mihalevich said that the City is coming through first with the trail.
Davis then asked if the trail would follow the tracks.
October 22, 2007
Planning Commission
ADM 07-2768 Sowder Park Land Dedication
Agenda Item 3
Page 7 of 10
Mihalevich said it would to be to the south.
Davis wanted to know when the family units would be built.
Sowder said it could be up to ten years away.
Davis queried if Sowder would have to pay additional fees down the road.
Sowder replied that it was his understanding that he wouldn't have to.
Edmonston said the property would be banked at the existing rate. It can be sold to another
developer using the Park Land Dedication land.
Davidson asked if the land was subdivided, could it still be banked.
Edmonston said yes.
Bitler asked why the trail was coming down the east side and then the west side. Why not bring
the trail down to Lafayette?
Mihalevich said they wanted to make the connection with Wilson Park. On the west side is a
creek and a really big ravine.
Edmonston said she wanted the board to make a requirement that the drainage also be
maintained by Transportation.
PRAB Motion: Two motions were made. Davis motioned to accept as approved.
Bitler seconded it. Bitler then amended the motion to ask that Transportation
maintain the drainage. Davis seconded it. Both motions passed 5-1-0 by voice
vote, with Hatfield voting no.
October 22, 2007
Planning Commission
ADM 07-2768 Sowder Park Land Dedication
Agenda Item 3
Page 8 of 10
tdik
30' PUBLIC ACCESS
EASEMENT
MAINTAINED BY
TRANSPORTATION DIV.
PRIS63 AR;PR
LOCK RETAINING WALL
WITH FENCE ABOVE
PROPOSED PARK
LAND DEDICATION ffGI',
32,413 SF 0.74 AC <z
WEW SID AL
CONNECTION TO k;
WILSON PARK TRAIL;
vGy
PROPOSED TRAIL CROSSING
NDER THE RAILROAD TRESTLE
Wee
Scull Creek Trail
octo.[ 2007
Planning ___ -sion
ADr07-270 eowderpail(Lan: @' ation
Age .. Item 3
Page 9 of 10
October 22, 2007
Planning Commission
ADM 07-2768 Sowder Park Land Dedication
Agenda Item 3
Page 10 of 10
PC Meeting of October 22, 2007
PLANNING DIVISION CORRESPONDENCE
125 W. Mountain St.
Fayetteville, AR 72701
Telephone: (479) 575-8267
TO: Fayetteville Planning Commission
FROM: Dara Sanders, Current Planner
THRU: Jeremy Pate, Director of Current Planning
DATE: September 28, 2007
CUP 07-2753: (BRISIEL, 524): Submitted by LEGACY VENTURES, LLC for property located at
540 EAST HUNTSVILLE ROAD. The property is zoned RSF-8, SINGLE FAMILY - 8
UNITS/ACRE and contains approximately 1.79 acres. The request is for a tandem lot.
Planner: Dara Sanders
Background: On October 1, 2007 the Board of Adjustment approved a variance to allow for a 15'
side setback (a 5' variance) for two existing accessory structures on the subject property (BOA 07-
2737). This variance was necessary to bring the accessory structures into compliance with the
tandem lot development setback requirement of 20' from all property lines, should the lot split and
conditional use requests be approved by the Planning Commission. On October 11, 2007 the
Subdivision Committee forwarded the applicant's request for two lot splits (LSP 07-2744) on the
subject property to the full Planning Commission for review in conjunction with this conditional use
request.
Property description: The subject property contains approximately 1.79 acres and is zoned RSF-8. It
is located on Huntsville Road between Wood Avenue and Mashburn Avenue, north of Sixth Street.
The lot is approximately 640 feet deep and 136 feet wide, creating a long piece of property with
limited development options. A majority of the property is within the Hillside/Hilltop overlay district
(HHOD), and the topography of the property becomes steep to the north. The property fronts only on
Huntsville Road, and there is an existing single-family residence with two accessory structures
located on the rear portion of the property approximately 200 feet from Huntsville Road.. Currently,
the subject property is access from a driveway shared with the property to the west. This adjacent
property has an additional driveway at its west side property line as shown on the attached aerial
photo.
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING
K:IREPORTSI20071PC REPORTSI10-22-07ICUP 07-2753 (BRJSLEL).DOC
October 22, 2007
Planning Commission
CUP 07-2753 Brisiel
Agenda Item 4
Page 1 of 16
Land Use
Zoning
North, East, West
Single-family
RSF-8, Residential Single -Family, 8 units/acre
South
Commercial
C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial
K:IREPORTSI20071PC REPORTSI10-22-07ICUP 07-2753 (BRJSLEL).DOC
October 22, 2007
Planning Commission
CUP 07-2753 Brisiel
Agenda Item 4
Page 1 of 16
Request: The applicant proposes two lot splits to create two 55' wide lots (0.18 and 0.21 acres
respectively) adjacent to Huntsville Road and leave the existing single-family residence at the
rear of the property with approximately 27' of frontage on Huntsville Road in a 1.40 -acre tandem
lot. The request is for a conditional use approval to allow for a tandem lot development in the
RSF-8 zoning district.
Public Comment: Staff has received public comment both objecting to and supporting this
request in conjunction with the lot split request. A letter of objection is attached.
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
Staff recommends approval of the conditional use subject to the following conditions:
1. Development on the proposed tandem lot shall be limited to one single-family home and
permitted accessory structure(s).
2. All tandem lot setbacks shall be 20' from each property line with the exception of the
west side setback, which shall be 15' as approved by the Board of Adjustments.
3. The tandem lot owner shall continue to access the existing driveway for the single-
family residence and shall pave the drive at a minimum of 25' from Huntsville Road.
Only one new curb cut shall be allowed on Huntsville Road, centered on the shared lot
line between Tracts B and C in an access easement.
4. A residential cart for solid waste pickup shall be wheeled to an appropriate location on
collection day only and shall comply with solid waste collection requirements for curb
side pickup for single-family residences.
5. Staff recommends a shared access easement at the existing driveway to serve as access
for Tracts A,13, and C, creating access at the rear of Tracts A and B in order to reduce
the number of curb cuts on E. Huntsville Road. Should the adjacent property owner
refuse to sign a shared access easement, the existing drive shall remain for Tract A as a
pre-existing condition and one curb cut shall be allowed for Tracts B and C.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Required YES
9 Approved
Motion:
Second:
Vote:
Date: October 22, 2007
KIREPORTS120071PC REPORT51/0-22-071CUP 07-2753 (RRISIELJDOC
❑ Denied ❑ Tabled
October 22, 2007
Planning Commission
CUP 07-2753 Brisiel
Agenda Item 4
Page 2 of 16
Comments:
The "CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL" listed in this report are accepted in total without
exception by the entity requesting approval of this conditional use.
Name: Date:
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION
163.02. AUTHORITY; CONDITIONS; PROCEDURES.
B. Authority; Conditions. The Planning Commission shall:
1. Hear and decide only such special exemptions as it is specifically
authorized to pass on by the terms of this chapter.
2. Decide such questions as are involved in determining whether a
conditional use should be granted, and,
3. Grant a conditional use with such conditions and safeguards as are
appropriate under this chapter; or
4. Deny a conditional use when not in harmony with the purpose and intent
of this chapter.
C. A conditional use shall not be granted by the Planning Commission unless and
until:
1. A written application for a conditional use is submitted indicating the
section of this chapter under which the conditional use is sought and
stating the grounds on which it is requested.
Finding: The applicant has submitted a written application requesting conditional use
approval for a tandem lot.
2. The applicant shall pay a filing fee as required under Chapter 159 to cover
the cost of expenses incurred in connection with processing such
application.
Finding: The applicant has paid the required filing fee.
3. The Planning Commission shall make the following written findings before
K: I REPORTS12007IPC REPORTSII0-22-071 CUP 07-2753 (BRISIEL). DOC
October 22, 2007
Planning Commission
CUP 07-2753 Brisiel
Agenda Item 4
Page 3 of 16
a conditional use shall be issued:
(a.) That it is empowered under the section of this chapter described in
the application to grant the conditional use; and
Finding: The Planning Commission is empowered under Chapter 163.13 to grant the
requested conditional use permit.
(b.) That the granting of the conditional use will not adversely affect
the public interest.
Finding: Staff finds that granting the requested conditional use will not adversely affect
the public interest. The subject property consists of a large 1.79 -acres tract of
land. The proposed 0.18 -acre, 0.21 -acre, and 1.4 -acre tracts are equal to or
larger than the surrounding properties. Lots such as this have already been
created in this neighborhood; therefore, the proposal would be in keeping with
the character of the area.
(c.) The Planning Commission shall certify:
(1.) Compliance with the specific rules governing individual
conditional uses; and
Finding: The applicant has complied with specific rules governing this individual
conditional use request.
(2.) That satisfactory provisions and arrangements have been
made concerning the following, where applicable:
(a.) Ingress and egress to property and proposed
structures thereon with particular reference to
automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience,
traffic flow and control and access in case of fire or
catastrophe;
Finding: Ingress and egress to the property is provided with an existing driveway.
(b.) Off-street parking and loading areas where required,
with particular attention to ingress and egress,
economic, noise, glare, or odor effects of the special
exception on adjoining properties and properties
generally in the district;
Finding: N/A
(c.) Refuse and service areas, with particular reference to
K.- REPORTS120071PC REPORTS110-22-071CIP 07-2753 (BRISIELJ.DOC
October 22, 2007
Planning Commission
CUP 07-2753 Brisiel
Agenda Item 4
Page 4 of 16
ingress and egress, and off-street parking and loading,
Finding: The applicant shall coordinate with the Solid Waste division for appropriate
solid waste disposal. Staff recommends the use of a residential cart for the
tandem lot that may be wheeled to an appropriate location on collection day
only and comply with solid waste collection for the surrounding properties.
(d.) Utilities, with reference to locations, availability, and
compatibility;
Finding: Appropriate public utilities shall be extended to serve the proposed
development.
(e.) Screening and buffering with reference to type,
dimensions, and character;
Finding: Residential uses are not required to be screened.
(f.)
Signs, if any, and proposed exterior lighting with
reference to glare, traffic safety, economic effect, and
compatibility and harmony with properties in the
district;
Finding: No signage is being proposed.
(g.) Required yards and other open space; and
Finding: The proposed development shall meet all setbacks for single family units on
tandem lots with the exception of the west side setback for Tract A that was
approved by the Board of Adjustment as a 15 -foot setback instead of the
required 20 -foot setbacks for a tandem lot.
(h.) General compatibility with adjacent properties and
other property in the district.
Finding: The single family home on Tract A is existing and compatible with the
surrounding single family neighborhood. Tracts B and C would allow for
new single-family dwellings compatible with the size and layout of other
residents in the neighborhood.
KIREPORTS120071PC REPORTSV 0-22-071CUP 07-2753 (BRISIEL).DOC
October 22, 2007
Planning Commission
CUP 07-2753 Brisiel
Agenda Item 4
Page 5 of 16
CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE
CHAPTER 163: USE CONDITIONS
163.13 Tandem Lot Development
(A) Where allowed. Tandem lot development shall be permitted for single-family
dwellings only and shall be a conditional use in all districts where single-family
dwellings are permitted. The development of one tandem lot behind another tandem
lot shall be prohibited.
Finding: The proposed lots are not located behind another tandem lot. The existing
dwelling on the proposed tandem lot (Tract A) is a single-family dwelling.
(B) Requirements. Before any conditional use for tandem lot development shall be
granted, the Planning Commission shall determine that:
(1) Tandem lot development will not significantly reduce property values in the
neighborhood. In determining whether property values will be significantly
reduced, the Planning Commission shall consider the size of nearby lots in
comparison with the proposed tandem lot or lots.
Finding: Staff finds that granting the requested conditional use will not adversely affect
the public interest. The subject property consists of a large 1.79 -acres tract of
land. The proposed 0.18 -acre, 0.21 -acre, and 1.4 -acre tracts are equal to or
Larger than the surrounding properties. Lots such as this have already been
created in this neighborhood; therefore, the proposal would be in keeping with
the character of the area. The single-family residences and lots on Mashburn
Avenue and Blair Avenue, adjacent to the east, are generally between 50'-60'
wide, similar to those proposed.
(2) The terrain of the area in which the tandem lot is proposed is such that
subdivision of said area into a standard block in accordance with Development,
Chapter 166 is not feasible.
Finding: The terrain of the property is steep, with a majority of the area within the
HHOD and heavily wooded. The existing house, driveway, and accessory
structures cover a majority of the width of the lot. These factors combined
with minimal street frontage prevent the feasibility of a through street and
development.
(3) The tandem lot will have access to a public street by way of a private drive with a
minimum width of 25 feet of equal and uniform width.
Finding: The existing residence on the proposed tandem lot (Tract A) is accessed off of a
shared curb cut with the adjacent property owner to the west. This drive will
K: REPORT512007(PC REPORTSI10-22-071CUP 07-2753 (BRISIEL).DOC
October 22, 2007
Planning Commission
CUP 07-2753 Brisiel
Agenda Item 4
Page 6 of 16
continue to be utilized to access this residence and will be required to be paved
at a minimum distance of 25 feet from Huntsville Road.
(4) The safety zone between the private drive of a tandem lot and any adjacent
driveway will not be less than the minimum distance between curb cuts in the
standards for street design of Development, Chapter 166, for streets having a use
designation higher than collector, the standards for collector streets shall apply.
Finding: Staff initially recommended to the applicant that the two new lots (Tracts B and
C) be accessed off of the existing driveway for the single-family residence (Tract
A) with rear access to the new lots, and the existing drive placed in an access
easement. However, the adjacent property owner to the west that also has a
right to this curb cut has refused to allow the two new lots in an access
easement; therefore, staff recommends that only one additional curb cut be
allowed for the two new lots, centered on the lot line between Tracts B and C.
(5) The tandem lot, excluding the 25 -foot private drive, will conform to the minimum
lot width and lot area requirements of the zoning district in which it is located.
Lot area calculations to determine whether a tandem lot meets minimum lot area
requirements shall not include any portion of the lot having less than the required
minimum width. No structure shall be placed on any portion of a tandem lot
having less than the required minimum width.
Finding: The property on which the conditional use is requested exceeds the minimum
lot area (5,000 square feet) and overall width (50 feet) of the RSF-8 district
requirements.
(C) Setback. Each tandem lot shall have a minimum building setback requirement of 20 feet
from all property lines and 25 feet from all street right-of-way lines.
Finding: The existing single-family house meets the minimum setback requirement;
however, two existing accessory structures on the west side of the property are
located in the required 20' side setback. On October 1, 2007, the Board of
Adjustments granted a side setback variance of 5' to bring these existing
structures into compliance.
D) Vehicle/private drive. No vehicles shall be parked at any time on that portion of a tandem
lot utilized as a private drive or on the vehicular turnaround required by subsection (E)
below. The dwelling structure on a tandem lot shall not be located more than 200 feet
from the end of the private drive nearest the structure.
K:IREPORTSI20071PC REPORTSII0-22-07ICUP 07-2753 (BRISIELJDOC
October 22, 2007
Planning Commission
CUP 07-2753 Brisiel
Agenda Item 4
Page 7 of 16
Finding: Parking shall be provided in conjunction with the development of single
family dwelling units. The end of the private drives shall not be more than
200' from the structure.
(E) Certificate of occupancy. Before a certificate of occupancy is issued for a dwelling
located on a tandem lot, the property owner shall:
(1) Construct a 30 -foot by 40 -foot hard surface vehicular turnaround equivalent to
SB -2 base or better at the end of the private drive and shall execute a written
agreement granting the city permission to enter upon the private drive and turn
around with sanitation vehicles; or
(2) Shall construct a masonry garbage can holder, with screening, for each garbage
can to be used, which garbage can holder shall be constructed alongside the street
onto which the private drive leads.
Finding: It is appropriate for a residential cart to be wheeled to an appropriate
location on the prescribed day for solid waste collection as is customary in
residential subdivisions and as currently utilized for the single-family
dwelling on the property. Staff, therefore, finds the above requirement for
construction of a masonry garbage can holder inappropriate for this
conditional use request.
K REPORTS120071PC REPORTS170-22-071CUP 07-2753 (BRISIEL).DOC
October 22, 2007
Planning Commission
CUP 07-2753 Brisiel
Agenda Item 4
Page 8 of 16