The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2004-03-22 - Agendas - Final FAYETTEVILLE THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE,ARKANSAS 125 Mountain St. Fayetteville,AR 72701 Telephone:(479)575-8267 PLANNING DIVISION CORRESPONDENCE AGENDA FOR A REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION A meeting of the Fayetteville Planning Commission will be held Monday March 22,2004 at 5:30 p.m. in the City Administration Building, 113 West Mountain Street,Room 219, Fayetteville,Arkansas Roll Call Award Presentation by Mayor Coolly Consent Agenda: Approval of minutes from the March 8,2004 meeting. 1. VAC 04-03.00: Vacation(Sohraby,pp 295)was submitted by Kazem Sohraby for property located at 2474 Fennchurch Way. The property is zoned RSF-4,Residential Single-family, 4 units per acre. The request is to vacate a portion of the utility easement to allow for an existing eave.Planner: Suzanne Morgan 2. ADM 04-10.00: Administrative Item (O'Charley's)to request an extension of the expiration date of the Large Scale Development approved by the Planning Commission. Planner: Jeremy Pate New Business: 3. ADM 04-12.00: Administrative Item (Impact Fees)was submitted by Joel Fruend for property located at 1408 Rockwood Trail. The request is to appeal the application of impact fees under §155.06 Appeals from Staff Interpretations/Actions allowing a waiver of impact fees associated with a new swimming pool and pool-house development on the subject property.Planner: Dawn Warrick 4. R-PZD 04-04.00: Residential Planned Zoning District(Stonewood Gardens,pp 60) was submitted by David Gilbert of Jorgensen&Associates on behalf of Mark Foster for property located on Crossover Road, immediately north of the Stonewood subdivision. The property is zoned R-O,Residential Office, and contains approximately 3.36 acres. The request is to rezone the property to an R-PZD to allow the development of 14 lots with 12 single-family dwelling units proposed.Planner:Jeremy Pate 5. ADM 01-15.00: Administrative Item (Outdoor Lighting)to adopt an ordinance that minimizes the impact of outdoor lighting on adjacent properties and improves nighttime visibility. Planner: Leif Olson 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 TDO for hearing impaired are available for all public meetings. 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. 2004 Planning Commissioners Nancy Allen Jill Anthes Don Bunch Alice Church James Graves Sharon Hoover Alan Ostner Loren Shackelford Christian Vaught FAYETTEVILLE PC Meeting of March 22, 2004 THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE,ARKANSAS 113 W. Mountain St Fayetteville,AR 72701 Telephone:501-575.8264 PLANNING DIVISION CORRESPONDENCE TO: Fayetteville Planning Commission Members THRU: Dawn Warrick,AICP. Zoning& Development Administrator FROM: Suzanne Morgan,Associate Planner Matt Casey P.E. Staff Engineer DATE: March 11,2004 VAC 04-03.00: Vacation(Sohraby,pp 295)was submitted by Kazem Sohraby for property located at 2474 Fennchurch Way. The property is zoned RSF-4,Residential Single-family,4 units per acre. The request is to vacate a portion of the utility easement to allow for an existing eave. Planner: Suzanne Morgan Findings: See the attached maps and legal descriptions for the exact locations of the requested utility easement vacation. Background: The utility easement vacation request results from a single family home that was built with an 8.0 square feet portion of the southwest corner encroaching into a 10' utility easement along the south property line. Once the encroachment into the utility easement was discovered,the proper application and notification forms to utility companies and the City were submitted to request vacation of said easement. No objections from the adjacent property owners have been submitted to the City. The applicant has submitted the required notification forms to the utility companies and to the City. The results are as follows: UTILITIES RESPONSE Ozarks Electric No Objections AEP/SWEPCO No Objections Arkansas Western Gas No Objections SW Bell No Objections Cox Communications No Objections—See conditions of approval. March 22,2004 Planning Commission VAC 04-03.00(Sohraby) Page 1.1 CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE: RESPONSE Water/Sewer No Objections Transportation No Objections Solid Waste No Objections Engineering No Objections Recommendation: Approval of the proposed utility easement vacation 04-03.00 subject to the following condition: Conditions of Approval: 1. The remaining 9' shall remain as a general utility easement. 2. Relocation or damage to existing facilities within the easement shall be at the owner's expense. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: ves Required Approved Denied Date: March 22.2004 CITY COUNCIL ACTION: ves Required Approved Denied Date: March 22,2004 Planning Commission VAC 04-03.00(Sohraby) Page 1.2 i O BASSETT MIX AND ASSOCIATES, INC. To whom it may concerti This is a request from Mr.and Mrs.Kazem Soltraby to vacate the back eave of their home that is encroaching by I'foot into the utility easement.Allen Reid has drawn the survey to show the encroachment and the legal description Mr.and Mrs.Kazem Sohraby request that this matter be resolved to provide clear title to their property. Thank you for your consideration Sincerely, David Mix Agent/Representative RESIDENTIAL, FARMS AND COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE 3263 North College Fayetteville, Arkansas'72703 * (479) 521.5600# (479) 751-5900 Fax March 22,2004 �17a`7`tlnrtR tNt`Anission website: www.bassettmixxom VAC 04-03.00(Sohraby) THE STANDARD OF EXCELLENCE Page 1.3 Working For You M[S y e a O4z�p�o � �Nz" •r• ti q � � m z x Oq�p U .. Fwd "•.. ,•s�•�•l••• y F Q V 5$¢aiz+irApFr` UR r z R N9� x c�3o�� h c7 e' -Z' . •_ � W o W �. w `zz w. c'7N hj��fi1(- ....... • � N � ri O C i�q w PRd.... e • .. aPzzo � o �p�� 2z •se.Ib .*r<,(d) o� oF31tiz . .erla M`Sb,Yb.C! UH GG p �w�5 R��gwgFgo O QO1y1 .'E �ou�.3I3.nM o y' IJ/ yy' .tyl. -7 O Cl ^1 f Z mmzzm oza R. ' o n NUS � b2: O n \\/\ .00 m W .96.901-1 _______ no z / / ie NN3� - m B z ' March 22,2004 VAC 04-03.00(Sohraby) Page 1.4 VAC04-03.00 S O H RABY Close Up View 0, J \ R�F=4 / RSF-4 �� y I SUBaET PROPERTY�� II I I I i —_ _-------------� ' RSF-4 t I I I t — -------- ----- ; — _—__— — -_--- TOWNSHIP Sf I I RSF-4 I i i I i I � I Overview Legend 80000 OvetlaY0islricl Fsarass Prindpal Atlenal —FLOOOWAY ®0008 - Master Streat Plan MinprMerial — 100YEAR Master Street Plan Collector ---- 500 YEAR ;�`.l LI ✓/ Finaay/EVnaaw y Historic Collector =—_'LIMIT OF STUDY Oiry Limits - -RazeLine Profile \ Odatae Gil VAC04-03.00 ` 0 40 80 160 240 320 March 22,2004 Feet Planning Commission VAC 04-03 60(Subraby�L-- Page 1.5 VAC04-03.00 S O H RA B Y One Mile View RJA +-A ` t`fiSE n l\C RSFd PA ff T{SFd I R5F4 r' M1� fat tS ,Y �v,S ; r u ME Ii111fRjITtiSUT(Y�nwl+tSllLRrY9' L4FN� _ I J I,r y� Yk'M � A'J } {' RSF 6 RPID �RA R I Ri 'J/•--�j J i'� Y SFd Ii ,- � 4 'q x� RSF; r� + "t/i T i �.,Lr Z•1 )i 1� `� �ld lil. x .�6. �')`tz xr tiIr + Y{xsF�IX, �„' �f J SUBJECTMPERTI E �ff�, P-1 RA Z/v�rvnsE°y=fes �' sfA�'Hd �tR6F� J MF 24 I B IDIL I A -. C 1 I 1a `•� ^d 7 Fly yc--�-esl l 11 r F[za It .1 7 14— OAA RG v� A ,^,II \t� 4 -' r 3' t l SII t# r r IJ i al ' 01 I � I I l RSfd �l Y " F L 1 I RSFdII + Lml_ L 9, > r • 1 o-l � l — RIII RA R s4. 1 -I ct / 'S- i i'r'=t' e 7 xi•w�kdv r �'.„* - EEL It r w t -rr--iBSE'h a s g zcs J .TII - R _ RMFh2+` I i�•� 1 b:pz —`� �l i 11 js d :' -� ` J7 rril Wilt9_>��N/ a RA �avFHE_ 'py -LII 1 I I 1 1 � Rsp �._`tryM�99� I oo/ � t +.. a s=•r, s r�x ��s'�� f' �,�?�', IRSFd r r sf�yjFT Overview Legend - Subject Property Boundary Master Street Plan VAC04-03.00 '—S_,Planning Area * Free'r"Yi�press.y oPrincipal Anerlal Co a- Streets of overlay District Minor Adenal FxisaneI Ci b Limits coneclar March 22 2004 Outside Ci ••• Histodccollector > _I. H • Planning Commission VAC 04-03.00(Sohraby) 0 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 , Page 1.6 Mlles FAYETTEVILLE PC Meeting of March 22, 2004 THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE,ARKANSAS 113 W. Mountain St. Fayetteville,AR 72701 Telephone:479-575-8267 PLANNING DIVISION CORRESPONDENCE TO: Fayetteville Planning Commission FROM: Jeremy Pate,Associate Planner THRU: Dawn Warrick, AlCP,Zoning &Development Administrator DATE: March 17, 2004 ADM 04-10.00: Administrative Item (O'Charley's)to request an extension of the expiration date of the Large Scale Development approved by the Planning Commission. Planner: Jeremy Pate. The current request(ADM 04-10.00) is to extend LSD 03-25.00 (O'Charley's) approval until February 01, 2005. Background: Large scale development approval for this project was granted by the Planning Commission on May 12, 2003 with a condition that the approval would be valid for one calendar year. The approval is for an O'Charley's restaurant, located at the corner of Steele Boulevard and Shiloh Drive. The development includes a 6,413 SF restaurant with 76 parking spaces. The Planning Commission approved the Large Scale Development with a 9-0-0 vote. Current Status: A building permit has been requested however issuance of the permit is pending. The applicant has requested an extension of the Planning Commission approval in order allow permitting of this development without having to take it back through the development review and approval process. A letter from the applicant is included. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of an extension until May 12, 2005 (not February 01,2005). Retaining the one-year time frame enablesstaff to better keep track of the expiration date for future reference. After the May 12,2005 expiration date,the Large Scale Development is required,by ordinance, to be resubmitted in total for Planning Commission approval, in accordance with all development regulations. K:IReporat2004PC Reports103-22-04WDM04-10.00(OCharley's).doc March 22,2004 Planning Commission ADM 04-10.00(O'Charley's) Page 2.1 166.20 Expiration Of Approved Plans And Permits (A) Applicability. The provisions of this section apply to all of the following plans and permits: (1) Preliminary plats; (2) Planned zoning district developments; (3) Conditional uses; (4) 4 Ascan pMgM (5) Lot splits; (6) Physical alteration of land permits; (7) Storm water, drainage, and erosion control permits; (8) Tree preservation plans; (9) Sign permits; and, (10)Floodplain development permits. (B) One-year time limit. (1) Tasks to be completed. All of the above-enumerated plans and permits are conditioned upon the applicant accomplishing the following tasks within one(1)year from the date of approval: (a) Wwrenovation ore et 9904 io M7 'a W0161016 _ , 17 and/or, (b) For a lot split, record a deed or survey at the Washington County Circuit Clerk's Office, stamped for recordation by the City Planning Division; and/or, (c) Receive a Certificate of Zoning Compliance; and/or, (d) Receive all permits and approvals required by City, State, and Federal regulations to start construction of the development or project. - or use,, own mury Expiration. If the required task(s)are not completed within one(1)year from the date of approval or during an allowed extension period,all of the above-enumerated plans and permits shall be rendered null and void. K.WeportsU004PC Reports 103-22-04WDM04-10.00(O Charley's).doc March 22,2004 Planning Commission ADM 04-10.00(O'Charley's) Page 2.2 (&arleilk. Inc. RECEIVED MAR 0 8 2004 March 5, 2004 PLANNING DIV, Fayetteville Planning Division 113 West Mountain Street Fayetteville, AR. 72701 Attn: Sara Edwards RE: Building permit approval for the O'Charley's restaurant located in the CMN Business Park, County of Washington, City of Fayetteville, State of Arkansas. Dear Ms.Edwards: It has come to my attention that the building permit for the O'Charley's restaurant referenced above will no longer be valid after June 1, 2004. Due to conditions beyond the control of O'Charley's Inc., the time frame to begin construction on this project has been slightly delayed. O'Charley's intends to begin this project in late summer or early fall of 2004. This project will continue until early February of 2005. Please let this letter serve as a formal request from O'Charley's hic. to extend the permit expiration date to February 1, 2004. This extension would give O'Charley's enough time to ensure a smoother, more efficient construction process. Please contact me should you have any questions at 615-782-8872. Sincerely, jasonoHolland oject Manager O'Charley's Inc. March 22,2004 Planning Commission ADM 04-10.00(O'Charley's) Page 2.3 3038 Sidco Drive•Nashville, TN 37204.615-256-8500•Fax 615-782-5043 Planning Commission May 12, 2003 Page 29 LSD 03-25.00: Large Scale Development (O'Charley's, pp 212) was submitted by Edwards and Hotchkiss Architects on behalf of O'Charley's, Inc. for property located at the northeast corner of Steele Boulevard and Shiloh Drive. The property is zoned C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial and contains approximately 1.27 acres with a 6413 square foot restaurant with 76 total parking spaces proposed with 76 total parking spaces. Hoover: Item number five is a LSD 03-25.00 for O'Charley's. Dawn? Warrick: This is a proposal for a 6,413 square foot restaurant, 76 parking spaces. Surrounding land uses include the Target Store, other retail shops to the south Shiloh Drive and Hwy. 71. To the east retail and parking and to the west a vacant C-1, Neighborhood Commercial zoned area. Water and sewer are available to the site. There are no existing trees on the site. Staff is recommending in favor of the project with nine recommended conditions. 1) Applicant shall be required to provide a drainage report showing that the development is in compliance with all of the requirements of the approved storm water plan for CMN Business Park. 2) All utility equipment must be screened in accordance with §166.14. 3) Adherence to the Lighting Standards as noted in §161.21. That includes the parking lot lighting which is not to exceed 35 feet in height and shall utilize sodium lighting fixtures. 4) The applicant has proposed a green LED accent lighting band detail on the building. Staff recommends this detail be consistent on all four sides of the structure. 5) Planning Commission determination of compliance with Commercial Design Standards and Design Overlay Regulations. We had originally recommended that the freezer cooler units at the rear of the structure, which is the north elevation, be painted in order to be consistent with other development projects that have been approved in this area and to address some Planning Commissioner comments from the tour we have spoken with the applicant and we will recommend that the screening around the freezer cooler unit be masonry to be consistent with the materials on the structure and to continue the accents of the split face and brick that surround the building. Revised elevations pursuant to these requests shall be required. Other conditions are standard. Hoover: Thank you Dawn. Would the applicant come forward? Malloy: Good evening, my name is Steve Mallow, I am with Edwards and Hotchkiss Architects, I am here to represent O'Charley's. Just to add a little bit more. We are getting close to the 200th store for the O'Charley's chain. Their food is a variety, they tend to say it is American. Restaurant size is 6,273 square feet, 267 seats. I have read through the recommendations by the staff. O'Charley's agrees with them. I would like to point out for items four and five O'Charley's will add the LAD accent band all around all four sides and then in addition on item number five with freezer coolers they have also agreed to continue the same building 22,2004 Planning Commission ADM 04-10.00(O'Charley's) Page 2.4 Planning Commission May 12,2003 Page 30 materials, which will be CMU along the bottom and then brick above that. That will be consistent. I am here for any questions. Hoover: Thank you very much. Is there any member of the audience that would like to address this LSD 03-25.00, O'Charley's? Seeing none, I will bring it back to the Commission for comments. Estes: The lighting band that you just described, can you show us where that is and is it static or is it animated? Malloy: It is static. We have got it shown on the elevations shown here running along the top of the parapet, it comes across there and runs along. It is not on the actual pilasters themselves but it appears between each one and consistently around the building. Hoover: Commissioner Ostner, a report from Subdivision before I forget. You can do that one. Ostner: I could, but did I miss part of this? I don't recall anything other than the LAD questions and the cooler really, which they talked about. I didn't take notes, I didn't know I was going to have a quiz. My question is for staff. Item number four says that the applicant proposed the green accent on the front and you all requested that it go all the way around. Why is that? What is the reasoning? Warrick: They had originally proposed it on the front and then voiced a desire to have it on three sides of the structure and staffs interpretation or recommendation with regard to that is that it go ahead and circle the entire structure so that we don't have one side that is treated differently. All four sides of the structure are quite visible and we felt that having the accent light all the way around the structure would be consistent. It is not a real distracting element I don't think. It is pretty subtle and it really does accent that portion of the structure. We didn't feel that three sides would be desirable. We wanted to go ahead and circle the entire structure. Hoover: Are there any other comments? Allen: Sir, I wondered if you could describe briefly for us your plans for landscaping. Malloy: Did we or did we not submit a landscaping drawing? Have you been able to see any of this? Allen: Yes, I have but I thought there would be interested parties that haven't and maybe you could just briefly describe that for us please. March 22,2004 Planning Commission ADM 04-10.00(O'Charley's) Page 2.5 Planning Commission May 12, 2003 Page 31 Malloy: I will do my best. I think visually the plans are going to probably describe it as best we can. We have got trees along the sides with some smaller shrubs. I am not going to get into all of this. That is the actual plant schedule which will tell you what each one is. You can see we have got a lot of landscaping all around the building. We've got the building, pavement, sidewalk and any of the greenspaces have been landscaped with shrubbery and that sort of thing. Is that detailed enough? Allen: You did well. Hoover: Thank you. Is there any other discussion or motions? MOTION: Church: I would like to move for approval of LSD 03-25.00. Hoover: Thank you. We have a motion by Commissioner Church. Ostner: I will second it. Hoover: And a second by Commissioner Ostner. Is there any other discussion about O'Charley's? Shackelford: Just a real quick question. Conditions of approval numbers four and five had staff recommendations. Should we approve those with the recommendation language in there or should we make that part of the condition of approval? Hoover: Was the motion with it as written in the conditions? Church: I would say yes. Hoover: To the second was that agreeable with you? Ostner: Yes. Anthes: The way this is written it recommends the freezer cooler be better incorporated. I don't think that is very good language probably for the document and we should probably strike that and change it to the masonry to match the rest of the building. Warrick: I might be able to help. If we change the word painting to materials I think that that might achieve the desire of staff and hopefully the Commission. That would read "Staff recommends the proposed freezer cooler structures on the north side of the building be better incorporated. into the overall building structure with materials that coordinate with the March 22,2004 Planning Commission ADM 04-10.00(O'Charley's) Page 2.6 Planning Commission May 12, 2003 Page 32 different materials and colors." Maybe we should say with masonry. How about that? I think that keeps it to be consistent with the structure and that is the whole point. That is staff's desire. Hoover: You see in item number four we are ok with the way that that is stated. Our motion, Commissioner Church, is that ok with you? Church: Yes. Hoover: Our second, Commissioner Ostner? Ostner: Yes. Hoover: Thank you, we are all clear now. Is there anymore discussion? Seeing none, I will call the roll. Roll Call: Upon the completion of roll call the motion to approve LSD 03-25.00 was approved by a vote of 9-0-0. Thomas: The motion carries by a vote of nine to zero. March 22,2004 Planning Commission ADM 04-10.00(O'Charley's) Page 2.7 LSD 03-25.00 UUpp View O'CHARLEY'S 1 F g SUBJECT PROPERTY c z 3 .. 0 % ffi RR _ rr� m I -At I ' / p OR_..Ffa.a Overview Legend Boundary - �, - Subject Properly LSD03-25.00 Planning Area Master Street Plan I000C6Freeway/Expressway f:oV,> i o pyelo 0 8 Y District Streets L _I City Limits Principal Arterial Minor Arterial Existing ;Outside City r, ♦I Collector March 22 2004 Planned • ' • •.• Historic Collector Planning Commission 0 75 150 300 450 600 DM 04-10.00(O'Charley's) Feet Page 2.8 LSD03-25.00 O'C HARLEY'S One Mile View C-2 R ANZ- 1 °-• _ %6 T j - T-+r d PRNA«' RMF 12 - L x 30'^� `j ❑Q %4 �IVATE DR ?RtVATE DR yC21'�'iII� s �Lssa 1 �i V- -t- alga >� a E DR RI d l Did, t I - & l Oi-2 y"j �'i� - 23- ' "' c •7 G2 TRS C- X -2 R1`07r- I r t R-O - R O _ R-� SUBJECT PROPERTY " o. ; . r o C-2 Io °raoa�a y s 4 x- TAW G2 00 g.._ — r� v °_°.° 2 ' m 0 pOo°R-0 O o 0o E_ DDD A`��R'�pR z _. t o _ t�q 3u k W --- R-2 R-1 -t R 1 otDrHn o- r 'R-0 R-O rfiA E DR A 1 1� C 2 R ..�ri��S${iS7d§TStftif4' 7 -r :�-�Aaa��av�Ro..,p`aalE§r -t : C 2 s �oRtsr RO Al i R o° R1 _ r �R2 Ci6iicE t EN ° An1 ,8 oo°°ca000d8 0° .—�71k� i � air�.q� i� R-1 a'f5 ` R-O -�aa �.a>J—Oer�B 14R t tufo' cauttet. i 'R. " '- ftm 'i�n 'i{TfSjr"AmY.t '=^"�K�•$*.a+"�iV$�rlsy. a-,�'• ef 4� m ORMHiA DW � ^y S • ° _SYERyd A`�! P R 1 t g{ ] F R-2 i `R-1 w h 2__ R O Overview Legend Subject Property Boundary Master street Pian l..^7 =L5003-25.00 "'+..+Planning AreaFreewaylExpressway c 8000$ Pdndpal Arterial >� L o Overlay District + - �^ jF streets �°�� Mirror Arterial t- a vim:, y1 '"\..E songL_ I City Limits i„colle r � 4r,,. .:. ::I Outside City r/�o� Historic Collector March 22,2004 0 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.6 0. Planning Commission Miles DM 04-10.00(O'Charley's) Page 2.9 FAYETTEVILLE THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE,ARKANSAS 125 W. Mountain St. Fayetteville,AR 72701 • Telephone:(479)575-8267 PLANNING DIVISION CORRESPONDENCE ADM 04-12.00: Administrative Item (Impact Fees) was submitted by Joel Fruend for property located at 1408 Rockwood Trail. The request is to appeal the application of impact fees under §155.06 Appeals from Staff Interpretations/Actions allowing a waiver of impact fees associated with a new swimming pool and pool house development on the subject property. Planner: Dawn Warrick Background: The applicant was issued building and plumbing permits on August 28, 2003 for construction of a 288 s.f. pool house and storage building to be located at 1408 Rockwood Trail, on September 9,2003 a permit was issued for the associated in-ground swimming pool. In December, the applicant approached staff requesting to be exempted from the requirement to pay impact fees for new connections to the water and wastewater systems for this project. The impact fee administrator requested a written explanation of the project to better understand the nature of this request and to have material to reference in researching the situation further. A letter was submitted to the impact fee administrator on January 1, 2004 (see attached). In this letter the applicant describes that the new facilities will be located downhill from the existing single family home on the site and therefore cannot use the same utility connections to provide water and wastewater services. In response to this letter,the impact fee administrator researched the situation and applicable ordinances. Any new connection to the water and/or wastewater system requires capacity. That capacity is provided through capital improvements and upgrades to the systems which are to be funded at least in part with impact fees collected from new developments which cause a need for the improvements. The impact fee administrator responded to the applicant's letter on January 23, 2004(see attached). The determination was that impact fees should be collected for this new development. Water service is provided through a force main system and is not dependent upon gravity to flow. Use of the applicant's existing wastewater service could be provided with the use of a personal grinder pump to allow existing connections to serve the new development. On February 29, 2004,the applicant appealed this interpretation under §155.06 Appeals from Staff Interpretations/Actions stating that"the impact fees are `in excess of the rough proportionality of the impact of the development on the city's infrastructure." Current Status: Under §155.06,the Planning Commission is charged with reviewing this appeal with regard to the rough proportionality of the impact fees imposed for this development. Proposed fees for the project total$1,143.00 ($308.00 for water and$835.00 for wastewater connections). Approval of K Meports12004PC Reporls103-22-04hdm04-12_bnpac1feV f�rff'2gc2004 Planning Commission ADM 04-12.00(Impact Fees) Page 3.1 the appeal will result in a waiver of impact fees for this project,denial of the appeal will require that fees are paid in the amount of$1,143.00 at the time of meter set. 155.06 Appeals From Staff Interpretations/Actions (A) Appeals to City Council. The following staff interpretations/actions may be appealed to the City Council: (1) Zoning and DevelopmentAdministrator-DesignOverlayDistrictrequirements. Owners ofrecord may appeal the decision of the Zoning and Development Administrator not to exempt property from the Design Overlay District requirements as allowed in§161.21(G). (2) City Engineer-Drainage requirements. Owners of record may appeal the decision of the City Engineer to issue a violation notice related to drainage requirements. (B) Appeals to the Board ofAdjustment. The following interpretations and decisions maybe appealed to the Board of Adjustment: (1) Zoning and Development Administrator-Zoning. Any person aggrieved byan interpretation ordecision ofthe Zoning and Development Administrator regarding zoning matters may appeal. (2) Building Safety Division Director-Airport Zone. Any person aggrieved, or any taxpayer affected by any decision of the Building Safety Division Director,made in the administration of Airport Zone,Chapter 165, may appeal. (C) Appeals to the Board of Sign Appeals. The following staff interpretations/decision may be appealed to the Board of Sign Appeals: (1) Zoning and DevelopmentAdministrator-Signregulations- A person aggrieved by an interpretation or decision of the Zoning and Development Administrator regarding signs may appeal. (D) Appeals to the Planning Commission The following staff interpretations/actions may be appealed to the Planning Commission. (1) Floodplain Administrator-floodplain regulations. Any person aggrieved may appeal the decision of the Floodplain Administrator,provided that the Planning Commission shall hear and decide an appeal only when it is alleged there is an error in any requirement,decision,or determination made by the floodplain administrator in the enforcement or administration of this chapter. (2),Zoning and DevelopmentAdminisirator-Development. Owners ofrecord may appeal the interpretation ofthe development requirements by the Zoning and Development Administrator. (3) City Engineer-Grading requirements. Any person aggrieved may appeal the decision of the City Engineer related to grading requirements. (4) Landscape Administrator—Landscape and Tree Preservation and Protection requirements. Any person aggrieved may appeal decisions ofthe Landscape Administrator related to landscape and tree preservation and protection requirements. (5) Required dedications and improvements. (a) An owner or developer who is aggrieved by the requirements of the Unified Development Code for K.-Weporls12004 PC Reporu103-22-04Udm 04-12_inpactf 12'19r2004 Planning Commission ADM 04-12.00(Impact Fees) Page 3.2 land.right-of-way or easement dedications,construction of on-site or off-site improvements or payments in lieu of any dedication or improvement which are in excess ofthe"rough proportionality"of the impact of the development upon the city's infrastructure or services mayaappeal such requirement to the Planning Commission as a part of the submission of the preliminary plat, large scale development subdivision building permit lot split, development permit- or otherwise within 10 days of notification of such development requirements. The appeal must be presented to the Planning Division in writing and state the grounds,or reasons for the appeal. (b) The Planning Commission shall determine after public hearing whether the required dedications and improvements meet the`rough proportionalitd'of the impact ofthe development on city infrastructure and services. If the requirements are in excess of the"rough proportionality"the Planning Commission is empowered to modify or reduce such requirements to achieve`rough proportionality (E) Appeals to the Construction Board of Adjustment and Appeals. When the administrative authority under Chapter 173 shall disapprove an application;or the applicant is aggrieved by the interpretation ofthe administrative authority,the applicant may appeal the decision to the Construction Board of Adjustment and Appeals. (Code 1965,§1713-11.2(d),(e),App.A.,Art.10(6),19(2),App.B,§Ill,App.C.,Art 10(6),19(2),App.B,§III,App.C.,Art.V,§A;Ord.No.1747,6- 29-70;Ord.No.1750,7-6-70;Ord.No.2109,6-375;Ord.No.2252,7-6-76;Ord.No.2538,7-3-79;Ord.No.2585,12-4-79;Ord.No.2697,1-20-81; Ord.No.3153,11-19-85;Ord.No.3340,3-14-88;Code 1991,§§150.03,158.67(B),158.68(A),(B), 159.65,160.048,160.172,160.176(A),(B), 161.31,162..03(6),(C),163.10(D);Ord.No.3551,6-4-91;Ord.No.3587,§1,I-7-92;Ord.No.3699,§3,4-20-93;Ord.No.3716,§2,6-15-93,Ord. No.3806,§l,6-28-94;Ord.No.3895,§l,6-20-95;Ord.No.3901,§l,7-5-95;Ord.No.3901,§1,7-5-95;Ord.No.3925,§7,10-3-95;Ord.No.3963, §9,4-16-96;Ord.No.4100,§2(Ex.A),6-16-98;Ord.No.4368,§2,2-5-02;Ord.No.4377,§§1,2,3-5-02) K:Wepor1s12004NC Reports103-22-0417dm04-12_6npact fMdft4Vdz+,'2004 Planning Commission ADM 04-12.00(Impact Fees) Page 3.3 159.02 Water And Wastewater Impact Fees (A) Applicability. (1) The following provisions shall apply to all of the territory within the City's water and wastewater service areas, including areas outside the corporate city limits and within service areas located within Washington County and other incorporated cities after June 16,2003. (2) The following types of development shall be required to pay a water and/or wastewater impact fee: (a) New development seeking a new connection to the City's water or wastewater system. (b) New development seeking a new connection to the system of a wholesale customer of the City's water or wastewater system, where collection of the City's impact fee is required by the City's contract with the wholesale customer. (c) Residential redevelopment involving the construction of one or more additional dwelling units. (d) Nonresidential redevelopment seeking a larger capacity water meter. (B) Intent (1) The intent of wastewater and water impact fees is to ensure that new development bears a proportionate share of the cost of improvements to the City's water and wastewater systems; to ensure that the proportionate share does not exceed the cost of providing water and wastewater facilities to the development that paid the fee;and to ensure that funds collected from developments are used to construct water and wastewater facilities that serve such developments. Itis further the intent of this Ordinance to use the impact fees to implement the City's 2020 General Plan and future plan updates and to implement the City's Five Year Capital Improvements Program. (2) It is not the intent of this Ordinance to collect any money from any development in excess of the actual amount necessary to offset demands generated by that development for the water and wastewater facilities for which the fee was paid. (3) It is not the intent of this Ordinance that any monies collected for the water impact fee and the wastewater impact fee ever be commingled or ever be used for a type of facility different from that for which the fee was paid. (C) Time of Collection (1) ,Water and wastewater impact fees shall be paid at the time of installation of the water meter serving the property or of the connection to the wastewater system,whichever comes fust. (2) Development projects which have obtained building permits prior to the effective date of this ordinance shall not have to pay impact fees if the building is completed with water and sewer hook- ups installed and certificate of occupancy issued no later than six(6)months from the effective date of this ordinance. (D) Fee Determination (1) Schedule of Fees. The Impact Fee Administrator shall determine the amount of the water and wastewater impact fees for residential uses based on the type or size of the dwelling unit and for nonresidential uses based on the size of the water meter using the following schedule: KAReports12004TC Reports103-22-0412dm04-12_snp0ctf ru rc%'2i°c 2004 Planning Commission ADM 04-12.00(Impact Fees) Page 3.4 Waste- Land Use Unit Water Water Total Single-Family(average) Dwelling $308 $835 $1,143 Multi-Family Dwelling $219 $593 $812 (per dwelling unit) Nonresidential Meter $308 $835 $1,143 - (5/8"x 3/4"meter) Nonresidential (1"meter) Meter $770 $2,088 $2,858 Nonresidential (1-1/2"meter) Meter $1,540 $4,175 $5,715 Nonresidential(2"meter) Meter $2,464 $6,680 $9,144 Nonresidential(Y meter) Meter $4,928 $13,360 $18,288 Nonresidential(4"meter) Meter $7,700 $20,875 $28,575 Nonresidential(6"meter) Meter $15,400 $41,750 $57,150 Nonresidential(8"meter) Meter $24,640 $66,800 $91,440 Nonresidential(10"meter) Meter $35,420 $96,025 $131,445 (2) Redevelopment, Reconstruction, Change of Use. In the event of a redevelopment,reconstruction or change of use from an existing development or use,the fee shall be the difference between what the fee would be for the entire redevelopment or reconstruction project and what the fee would have been for the existing development or use. Enlargement of a single family home will not require any impact fee. (3) Mixed Use. If the proposed development includes a mix of the residentialland uses and/or nonresidential meter sizes that are listed in the impact fee schedule,the fee shall be determined by adding up all the water and wastewater impact fees that would be applicable for each residential land use type and/or nonresidential meter size as if it was a freestanding land use type. (4) Fire Suppression/Low Pressure. It is the intent of this ordinance to base water and wastewater impact fees on the typical usage in anew building or other facility. Extinguishing of fires is not apart of typical usage;to allow adequate fire flow to sprinklers and internal hydrants at some large and at- risk properties, it may be necessary for fire protection purposes to install a larger water meter than would be necessary to meet day-to-day needs of that facility. In addition, a larger meter may be required in areas of low water pressure than in areas of normal water pressure for the same type of use. In those cases, it is the policy of the City that the impact fee for water and wastewater should be based on the meter size needed by that facility for its typical usage, without regardsto fire-flow or unusual pressure conditions. (5) Irrigation. Any separate water meter installed for irrigation purposes only shall not be included in the calculation of the wastewater impact fee. (6) Affordable Housing Exemption. (a) Single family housing. Construction of single family housing funded wholly or primarily by federal Community Development Block Grants, non-profit service organizations such as Habitat for Humanity, Housing and Urban Development housing loans and similar programs designed to provide affordable, owner-occupied, single family residences to low income individuals shall be exempted from payment of impact fees pursuant to this ordinance by the Impact Fee K.:IReports120041PC Reports103-22-04hdm04-12_rnp=tfe eeehdJ,e2004 Planning Commission ADM 04-12.00(Impact Fees) Page 3.5 Administrator. (b) Appeal. A person aggrieved by the Impact Fee Administrator's refusal to grant an Affordable Housing Exemption may appeal the denial to the Planning Commission. (E) Use of Fees. (1) Establishment of Accounts. An Impact Fee Fund that is distinct from the General Fund of the City is hereby created, and the impact fees received will be deposited in the following interest-bearing accounts of the Impact Fee Fund: (a) Water Impact Fee Account, and (b) Wastewater Impact Fee Account. (2) Water Impact Fee Accounts. The Water Impact Fee Account shall contain only those water impact fees collected pursuant to this Ordinance plus any interest which may accrue from time to time on such amounts. (3) Wastewater Impact Fee Account. The Wastewater Impact Fee Account shall contain only those wastewater impact fees collected pursuant to this Ordinance plus any interest which may accrue from time to time on such amounts. (4) Order of Use. Monies in each impact fee account shall be considered to be spent in the order collected, on a first-in/first-out basis. (5) Use of Fees. The monies in each impact fee account shall be used only for the following: (a) Acquisition. To acquire land for and/or acquire or construct water or wastewater system improvements of the type reflected in the title of the account and as described in the Impact Fee Study as well as extension of service to new development paying an impact fee. (b) Debt service. To pay debt service on any portion of any current or future general obligation bond issue or revenue bond issue used to finance water or wastewater system improvements of the type reflected in the title of the account that created or will create capacity to serve new development. (c) As described in subsection F, Refunds. (F) Refunds. 1. The City of Fayetteville shall refund the portion of collected development impact fees,including the accrued interest that has not been expended seven(7)years from the date the fees were paid. Interest shall be based on a four percent(4%)annual rate. 2. A refund shall be paid to the present owner of the property that was the subject of new development and against which the fee was assessed and collected. 3. Notice of the right to a refund,including the amount of the refund and the procedure for applying for and receiving the refund,shall be sent or served in writing to the present owners of the property no later than thirty(30) days after the date which the refund becomes due. The sending by regular mail of the notices to all present owners of record shall be sufficient to satisfy the requirement of notice. 4. The refund shall be made on a pro rata basis,and shall be paid in full no later than ninety(90)days ays K..1Reports120041PC Reports 103-22-041adm04-12_rupactfeec frruCh 2 2004 Planning Commission ADM 04-12.00(Impact Fees) Page 3.6 after the date certain upon which the refund becomes due. 5. At the time of payment of the water or wastewater impact fee under this Ordinance,the Impact Fee Administrator shall provide the applicant paying such fee with written notice of those circumstances under which refunds of such fees will be made. Failure to deliver such written notice shall not invalidate any collection of any impact fee under this Ordinance." K.IReportsll0041PCReports103-22-04hdm04-12_mpactfe cefi Al 2004 Planning Commission ADM 04-12.00(Impact Fees) Page 3.7 1408 Rockwood Trail Fayetteville, AR 72701-2440 February 29, 2004 Ms. Dawn Warrick Planning Division City of Fayetteville Administration Building Fayetteville, AR 72701 Dear Ms. Warrick: Please consider this letter a formal request for an appeal of your decision in your letter dated January 23, 2004 on levying impact fees for connecting our pool house to the water and sewer system. I am requesting that you forward this letter, and all related documents to the planning commission,under Section 155.06 Appeals from Staff InterprelationslActions, subsection D5 of the Unified Development Code of the City of FayetieWfie. Although that section of the Code does not specifically mention the Impact Fee Ordinance, I believe that I should be able to request an appeal under this section because the impact fees are"in excess of the `rough proportionality' of the impact of the development on the city's infrastructure." As I stated in my original Ietter to you, we are building a swimming pool and a small pool house containing a shower and toilet facilities on our property.Because the pool is located approximately 150 ft. downhill from our house and existing sewer connection, it would be very difficult and expensive to connect to our existing connection. The distance of the pool from the house also makes it very inconvenient for swimmers. We would have to walk about 150 ft. up to, and then into the house. Locating the bath and toilet facilities in the pool house will eliminate this inconvenience and other less sanitary solutions. The pool house contains only a two rooms-,a small storage room and a changing room with shower and toilet facilities. It does not provide living quarters, and will not increase the number of persons dwelling at our residence.The pool itself will not connect to the water system. Section B2 of the Impact Fee ordinance states that: "It is not the intent of this Ordinance to collect any money from any development in excess of the actual amount necessary to offset demands generated by that development for the water and wastewater facilities for which the fee was paid." Clearly, this development is for the convenience:of our family, and will not result in an increase in number of occupants in the house,nor increased impact on the sewer system. Thus the impact fee would be in excess of the demand,which is not the intent of the ordinance. Thank you for your consideration ofthis request. Sincerely, —y— Joel S. Freund March 22,2004 Planning Commission ADM 04-12.00(Impact Fees) Page 3.8 FAYETTEVILLE THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE,ARKANSAS - - - - 125.W. Mountain St Fayetteville,AR 72701 Telephone;(479)575-8267 PLANNING DIVISION CORRESPONDENCE January 23,200 Mr.J 1 Fr nd -1408 c wood Trail Fayette. tile,AR 72701-2440 Re: Impact Fee interpretation regarding property at 1408 Rockwood Trail Dear Mr.Freund: I have reviewed the correspondence you sent to my attention regarding the proposed pool and pool-house project that you are planning. I understand that you wish to complete this project without having to pay water or wastewater impact fees to the City of Fayetteville for new connections to those systems due to site constraints present on your property and your determination that this new development will cause no new demand on the City's facilities. The building permits that you will need to secure for this project will be for a new pool-house and a new swimming pool,not for an addition to an existing single family home as you suggest. Under the applicability section of the City's adopted impact fee ordinance, §159.02(A)(2)states "The following types of development shall be required to pay a water and/or wastewater impact fee: a. New development seeking a new connection to the City's water or wastewater system."In fact,the project that you propose is a new development which seeks new connections to the City's water and wastewater systems. For this reason,you will be required to pay the necessary impact fees based upon the size water meter(s)that you install Your proposed development may be compared to the installation of a yard irrigation system for an existing single family home. It.may be argued that that customer would not impact the water system any more with a separate meter than by using the original house meter to water the yard, however, impact fees are required. Each new connection to either the water or wastewater system indicates a demand and the need for capital facilities to provide service to the user. Those capital facilities are expanded to allow for growth through the use of impact fees. Sincerely, Dawn T. Warrick,AICP Zoning&Development Administrator p K:Vmpact Fee StudylCorrespondmcey-und response rod'woodrefi 6�,2004 Planning Commission ADM 04-12.00(Impact Fees) Page 3.9 1408 Rockwood Trail RECEIVED Fayetteville, Alt 72701-2440 January 1, 2004 JAN 0 1'--2004 PLANNING DIV. Ms. Dawn'Warrick Planning Division City of Fayetteville Administration Building Fayetteville, Alt 72701 :Dear Ms: Warrick This letter is the document you:requested when we spoke at your Office approxlntately a week X408 Rockwood Trail. ago about impact fees for the swinmung pool and pool house we are building on our property'at To give you sonic background information. On the lower part of our property we are building a swimming pool and a small pool house containing shower and-toilet facilities..,No we would -not require new sewer and water connections for these structures, but as they wilt be located substantially downhill from the house and existing connection,it would not be passible to use the existing connections. Neither the pool house nor the pool-will provide living quarters, and will not increase the number of persons dwelling at our residence. As 1 stated'at that time,'I do not believe that the impact fees should apply to this construction, and I will indicate my reasoning in this matter. Section B2 of-the ordinance:states:that: `41 is not the intent of this Ordinance to collect any money fro",any development in excess of the actual amount necessary to offset demands generated by that development for the water-and wastewater facilities for which the Jee was.paid."Clearly, as this.construction is an enhancement of a single fanuiy residence which will not result in an increase in number of occupants, the.facilities will not create any increased demand. Thus the impact fee would be in excess of the demand, which is not the intent of the ordinance. Finally,I refer to the last sentence in Section D2 which states: "Enlargement of a single family home will not require an impact fee." For two reasons it seems that these facilitimcan legitimately beeansidered as an addition or enhancement of our single family home, and thus do not-require an impact fee. First, there will be no increase in the number of occupants or demand wesystem and second, we would have used the existing connections hadthat been possible. Thank you for your consideration of this request. Sincerely, s:�f Joel S:Freund March 22,2004 Planning Commission ADM 04-12.00(Impact Fees) Page 3:10 FAYETTEVILLE PC Meeting of March 22, 2004 THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE,ARKANSAS 113 W. Mountain St. Fayetteville,AR 72701 Telephone:501-575-8264 PLANNING DIVISION CORRESPONDENCE TO: Fayetteville Planning Commission FROM: Jeremy Pate,Associate Planner Matt Casey, Staff Engineer THRU: Dawn Warrick, A.I.C.P., Zoning &Development Administrator DATE: March 17, 2004 R-PZD 04-04.00: Residential Planned Zoning District(Stonewood Gardens, pp 60)was submitted by David Gilbert of Jorgensen&Associates on behalf of Mark Foster for property located on Crossover Road, immediately north of the Stonewood subdivision.. The property is zoned R-O, Residential Office and contains approximately 3.36 acres. The request is to rezone the property to an R-PZD to allow the development of 14 lots with 12 single-family dwelling units proposed. Planner: Jeremy Pate Findings: Proposal: The applicant requests a rezoning and preliminary plat approval for a residential development within an R-PZD zoning district. The proposed use of the site is for 12 single- family residential dwelling units,accessed from Crossover Road by way of a private drive. Twelve dwelling units on the 3.36-acre site are proposed, therefore the proposed density for the R-PZD is 3.4 DU/acre. The project site is currently zoned R-O, Residential-Office. The vacant site is located in north Fayetteville, east of Lake Fayetteville, near the intersection of Crossover Road and Albright Road. Immediate surrounding properties are primarily single family residential(including Stonewood Subdivision)and agricultural in nature, including the nearby future Botanic Gardens. Proposed Development: R-PZD, Residential Planned Zoning District Land Use Lots 1-12 Single Family Residential Lot 13 Detention Pond Lot 14 Common Area, Private Street, drive, utilities Access: The development is proposed to have one point of vehicular access, from Crossover Road. The applicant proposes a private street(Stonewood Court) that utilizes a controlled access point(privacy gate for the subdivision). The remainder of the subdivision is proposed to be within the perimeter of a wrought iron and brick fence in the rear and a 6-foot brick wall along the front, similar to that of Stonewood Subdivision to the south. A six-foot public sidewalk is to be constructed along Crossover for the length of the property. The applicant is requesting to not K..-IReports120041PC Reports103-22-0418-PZD 04-04.00(Slowwood Garde=).doc March 22,2004 Planning Commission R-PZD 04-04.00(Stonewood Gardens) Page 4.1 construct sidewalks within the development. A draft of protective covenants, as well as the applicant's response to the Planned Zoning District requirements and description of the project,have been submitted and are included in the staff report. Existing Development: The site is currently vacant. Surrounding Land Use/Zoning: Direction Land Use Zoning North Single family homes RSF-4,.Single Family Res, 4 DU/Acre South Single family homes R-O, Residential Office East Single family homes RSF-4, Single Family Res. 4 DU/Acre West Lake Fayetteville, Crossover Road R-A, Residential Agricultural Water &Sewer: Water and sewer lines will be extended from Crossover Road. Street Improvements Proposed: Six-foot sidewalks are required to be constructed along Crossover Road. The interior street is proposed to be a private street,24-feet in width. Vehicular access to the each lot is restricted to access from the rear, by way of a 14-foot wide one-way drive/alley. Adjacent Master Street Plan Streets: Crossover Road(Hwy 265),Principal Arterial Tree Preservation: Existing canopy: 9.1 % Preserved canopy: 6.6 % Required canopy: 9.1 % Mitigation: 16 mitigation trees (see condition of approval) Background: This proposal was heard at the Technical Plat Review meeting of January 14, 2004 and at the Subdivision Committee on March 11, 2004. Points of discussion include sidewalks along the interior street,the"gated community"and emergency/delivery access, utilization of the rear drive for access,the proposed wall within utility easements,and a turn-around at the entry gate. Recommendation: Forward to the City Council with a recommendation for approval of the requested rezoning. Planning Commission approval of the proposed preliminary plat subject to the following conditions: Conditions of Approval: 1. Planning Commission recommendation to the City Council regarding the rezoning of the subject property to the unique district for R-PZD 04-04.00 with all conditions of approval K.lRepor1s120041PC Repor1s103-22-0418-PZD 04-04.00(Stonewood Gardem).doc March 22,2004 Planning Commission R-PZD 04-04.00(Stonewood Gardens) Page 4.2