HomeMy WebLinkAboutOrdinance 5792IIII111IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIRIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
000 10: 016433990001 Type; REL
Kind: ORDINANCE
Recorded: 09/09/2015 at 10:24:17 AM
Fee Amt: $15.00 Pace i of i
4aahinpton County, AR
Kyle Sylvester Circult Clerk
File2015-00025646
ORDINANCE NO. 5792
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING A RESIDENTIAL PLANNED ZONING
DISTRICT ENTITLED R-PZD 04-06.00, RUPPLE ROW, CONTAINING
APPROXIMATELY 41.70 ACRES, TO MODIFY THE ZONING OF THE
DUPLEXES AND TRIPLEXES ON WORDSWORTH LANE TO ALLOW UP
TO FOUR UNRELATED PERSONS TO LIVE IN EACH DWELLING UNIT.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE,
ARKANSAS:
Section 1. That the change to R-PZD 04-06.00 Rupple Row to modify the zoning of the duplexes
and triplexes on Wordsworth Lane to allow up to four unrelated persons to live in each dwelling
unit is hereby approved.
Section 2: That the Planned Zoning District ordinance and official zoning map of the City of
Fayetteville, Arkansas, for R-PZD 04-06.00 Rupple Row as passed and approved by the City
Council on June 15, 2004 with Ordinance No. 4580 shall be modified with the revisions as
described in Section 1 above.
PASSED and APPROVED this 18`h day of August, 2015.
APPROVED: ATTEST:
\ iCY �U tAUi�u�llpry
I3
LI NELD JOl2D Mayor SONDRA E. SMITH, City Cle rt�i� s:
wUa 2
: FArcnevp:
•��ti ,Ik/fps ;•`..\tc
441)ir4111
`AY
washington County, AR
I certify this instrument was filed on
Ogtog/2015 10:24:17 AM
and recorded in Real =slate
File Number 2016-0002"
Kyle Sylvester- Circuit CIe� 1
by
>. City of Fayetteville, Arkansas
. Text File
File Number: 2015-0356
Agenda Date: 8/18/2015 Version: 1
In Control: City Council Meeting
Agenda Number: C. 8
R-PZD 04-06.00 (RUPPLE ROW)
113 West Mountain Street
Fayetteville, AR 72701
(479)575-8323
Status: Agenda Ready
File Type: Ordinance
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING A RESIDENTIAL PLANNED ZONING DISTRICT ENTITLED
R-PZD 04-06.00, RUPPLE ROW, CONTAINING APPROXIMATELY 41.70 ACRES, TO MODIFY
THE ZONING OF THE DUPLEXES AND TRIPLEXES ON WORDSWORTH LANE TO ALLOW
UP TO FOUR UNRELATED PERSONS TO LIVE IN EACH DWELLING UNIT
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE,
ARKANSAS:
Section 1. That the change to R-PZD 04-06.00 Rupple Row to modify the zoning of the duplexes and
triplexes on Wordsworth Lane to allow up to four unrelated persons to live in each dwelling unit is
hereby approved.
Section 2. That the Planned Zoning District ordinance and official zoning map of the City of
Fayetteville, Arkansas, for R-PZD 04-06.00 Rupple Row as passed and approved by the City Council on
June 15, 2004 with Ordinance No. 4580 shall be modified with the revisions as described in Section 1
above.
City of Fayetteville, Arkansas Page 7 Printed on 8/20/2015
City of Fayetteville Staff Review Form
2015-0356
Legistar File ID
8/18/2015
City Council Meeting Date - Agenda Item Only
N/A for Non -Agenda Item
Jeremy Pate 7/31/2015 City Planning/
Development Services Department
Submitted By Submitted Date Division / Department
Action Recommendation:
ADM 15-5135: Administrative Item (RUPPLE ROW SUBDIVISION PZD AMENDMENT, 439): Submitted by ROB KIMBEL
for properties located in the RUPPLE ROW SUBDIVISION. The properties are zoned R-PZD, RESIDENTIAL PLANNED
ZONING DISTRICT RUPPLE ROW (R-PZD 04-06.00) and contain approximately 41.70 acres. The request is an
amendment to the PZD to modify the zoning of the duplexes and triplexes on Wordsworth Lane to allow up to four
unrelated persons to live in each dwelling unit.
Budget Impact:
Account Number
Project Number
Budgeted Item? No Current Budget
Funds Obligated
Current Balance
Does item have a cost? No Item Cost
Budget Adjustment Attached? NA Budget Adjustment
Remaining Budget
Fund
Project Title
D
V20140710
Previous Ordinance or Resolution #
Original Contract Number:
Comments:
Approval Date:
CITY OF
T" aye vi le
ARKANSAS
MEETING OF AUGUST 18, 2015
TO: Mayor and City Council
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO
THRU: Jeremy Pate, Development Services Director
FROM: Andrew Garner, City Planning Director
DATE: January 29, 2015
SUBJECT: ADM 15-5135: Administrative Item (RUPPLE ROW SUBDIVISION PZD
AMENDMENT, 439): Submitted by ROB KIMBEL for properties located in the
RUPPLE ROW SUBDIVISION. The properties are zoned R-PZD, RESIDENTIAL
PLANNED ZONING DISTRICT RUPPLE ROW (R-PZD 04-06.00) and contain
approximately 41.70 acres. The request is an amendment to the PZD to modify
the zoning of the duplexes and triplexes on Wordsworth Lane to allow up to four
unrelated persons to live in each dwelling unit.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Commission recommends approval and staff recommends denial of
ADM 14-4930.
BACKGROUND:
Property Description and History: The Rupple Row subdivision contains 41.70 acres located
south of Wedington Drive and west of Rupple Road. In 2004 the City Council rezoned the property
to R-PZD 04-6.00 for the Rupple Row project. This master planned neighborhood was proposed
in a Traditional Neighborhood Development (TND) pattern and approved for 182 single-family
detached lots, 37 two-family lots subdivided into townhouse lots, and two three-family lots. All
homes are rear alley loaded in typical TND fashion with homes built close to the street with
prominent front porches.
DISCUSSION:
Background. Within the past year the applicant has become aware of the City's code regulating
the number of unrelated persons being able to live in one dwelling unit. Because the Rupple Row
PZD was approved as a single family planned zoning district (even though other uses are also
permitted), a maximum of three unrelated persons are allowed to live in each dwelling unit (UDC
Chapter 151, definition of Family). This is similar to an RSF district, where the predominant use
is single family, but either uses such as duplexes can be permitted as well. Regardless of the use,
however, the number of occupants is based upon the zoning district, not the type of unit.
In zoning districts'other than single family' up to four unrelated persons may live in in one dwelling
unit. The applicant discussed with staff that they thought their property (Lots 145-183) allowed up
to four unrelated people to live in each dwelling because they are two-fami ly/town homes.
However, the applicant's original assumption is not consistent with the adopted ordinance
requirements. As stated previously, the number of unrelated persons is based on the
Mailing Address:
113 W. Mountain Street www.fayetteville-ar.gov
Fayetteville, AR 72701
underlying zoning district and not the dwelling unit type. In the case of the Rupple Row PZD,
it is classified as a 'single family zoning district' because a majority of the dwellings are single
family homes. The Rupple Row PZD was never proposed or adopted by the City Council as a
multi -family zoning district.
To further explain how this ordinance is applied throughout the city, city code allows a two-family
dwelling located in the RSF-4 zoning district to have up to three unrelated persons because RSF-
4 is a single family zoning district. City Code allows a two-family dwelling located in the RMF -24
zoning district to have up to four unrelated persons because RMF -24 is not a single family zoning
district.
Proposal., The applicant proposes to amend the Rupple Row R-PZD to reclassify the zoning of
lots 145-183 (both sides of Wordsworth Lane) as 'other than single family zoning' to allow up to
four unrelated persons to live in each dwelling unit.
The subject area of Wordsworth Lane is developed with 37 two-family attached townhomes on
either side of the street that are located approximately 10 feet from the street, rear alley loaded
with two -car garages and driveways off of the alley. There are also two three-family homes located
on the cul-de-sac at the north end of the street. There are no single family detached homes within
the area in question. To staffs knowledge these homes have been developed with four bedrooms
in each unit.
Public Comment: Staff received two letters in favor of the applicant's request (attached).
Discussion: The Rupple Row subdivision was approved and developed as a TND with single
family detached homes and one internal street of townhomes in the central portion of the
neighborhood. Consistent with TND and adopted City policy, this neighborhood was intended to
serve a variety of home owners within walking distance of a school, community center and future
commercial corridor along Wedington Drive.
The Rupple Row neighborhood was developed with infrastructure including streets, driveways,
alleys, and garages for individual owner occupancy, not rentals with occupancy for up to four
unrelated people in each dwelling. A greater density of individuals living together, particularly
adults, can pose safety and nuisance issues if the neighborhood was not designed to
accommodate that density.
For instance, there is not enough parking for each dwelling on the subject properties to
accommodate four cars with individual occupancy. This will result in residents parking on the
street. However, Wordsworth Lane was not built to accommodate the number of vehicles
associated with residency of four unrelated people per dwelling. Wordsworth Lane is a 28 -foot
wide street and only allows parking on one side. Because both sides of the street are developed
with two-family townhomes, continuous parking on both sides of the street is needed to
accommodate the number of vehicles generated by the proposed occupancy. Continuous parking
on both sides of the street leaves only a 12 -foot travel lane that would be in violation of the fire
code that requires a 20 -foot clear unobstructed fire access road. A lack of adequate on-site and
on -street parking can result in other violation issues such as parking in the grass or in alleys.
Staff disagrees with the applicant's parking analysis where they indicate that there are no parking
problems for the occupancy proposed. The applicant assumes that four unrelated individuals will
park two vehicles in the two -car garages and two cars immediately behind the garages in the
driveway. This would effectively block two cars in the garage. In reality with four unrelated adults
living in these units it is unlikely that cars will be parked in the garages on a regular basis resulting
in two cars for every dwelling having to park elsewhere at various times during the day or night
as noted above. With a total of 80 dwellings in this area approximately 160 off-street parking
spaces are needed and only approximately 75 are provided on Wordsworth Lane. This is a
substantial parking deficit that could negatively affect the safety and welfare of the immediate and
surrounding neighborhood.
An additional negative aspect of this proposal is that allowing up to four unrelated people in each
dwelling would likely push this street and other surrounding homes permanently into the rental
market where dwellings are rented by up to four unrelated people. This is not in line with the intent
of the original PZD and may be counter to the public neighborhood interest in the long-term
viability of this neighborhood. It is staffs opinion that this is not an appropriate location for a large
section of student housing rentals, or general rentals with four unrelated people in each dwelling.
This type of land use pattern is more appropriate closer to the University of Arkansas and the core
of the city, not in this suburban neighborhood in west Fayetteville with inadequate parking
infrastructure. The original intent of this neighborhood, consistent with current city policy, was to
allow a variety of individual owner occupancy and price points within the neighborhood. This
proposal is inconsistent with that policy.
The Planning Commission voted 7-1-0 (Commissioner Brown voted 'no') at the July 27, 2015
meeting to recommend approval of the request as proposed.
BUDGETISTAFF IMPACT:
None
Attachments:
Ordinance
• Planning Commission staff report ADM 15-5135
• Applicant's Planning Commission presentation
CITY OF
TayaPLANNING COMMISSION MEMO
ARKANSAS
TO: Fayetteville Planning Commission
FROM: Andrew Garner, City Planning Director
MEETING DATE: July 27, 2015 Updated with Planning Commission results
SUBJECT: ADM 15-5135: Administrative Item (RUPPLE ROW SUBDIVISION PZD
AMENDMENT, 439): Submitted by ROB KIMBEL for properties located in
the RUPPLE ROW SUBDIVISION. The properties are zoned R-PZD,
RESIDENTIAL PLANNED ZONING DISTRICT RUPPLE ROW (R-PZD
04-6.00 and contain approximately 41.70 acres. The request is an
amendment to the PZD to modify the zoning of the duplexes and triplexes
on Wordsworth Lane to allow up to four unrelated persons to live in each
dwelling unit.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of ADM 15-5135.
BACKGROUND:
Property Description and History: The Rupple Row subdivision contains 41.70 acres located
south of Wedington Drive and west of Rupple Road. In 2004 the City Council rezoned the property
to R-PZD 04-6.00 for the Rupple Row project. This master planned neighborhood was proposed
in a Traditional Neighborhood Development (TND) pattern and approved for 182 single-family
detached lots, 37 two-family lots subdivided into townhouse lots, and two three-family lots. All
homes are rear alley loaded in typical TND fashion with homes built close to the street with
prominent front porches.
DISCUSSION:
Background: Within the past year the applicant has become aware of the City's code regulating
the number of unrelated persons being able to live in one dwelling unit. Because the Rupple Row
PZD was approved as a single family zoning district, a maximum of three unrelated persons are
allowed to live in each dwelling unit (UDC Chapter 151, definition of Family).
In zoning districts 'other than single family' up to four unrelated persons may live in in one dwelling
unit. The applicant discussed with staff that they thought their property (Lots 145-183) allowed up
to four unrelated people to live in each dwelling because they are two-family/townhomes.
However, the applicant's original assumption is incorrect. The number of unrelated persons is
based on the underlying zoning district and not the dwelling unit type. In the case of the Rupple
Row PZD, it is classified as a'single family zoning district' because a majority of the dwellings are
single family homes. The Rupple Row PZD was never proposed or adopted by the City Council
as a multi -family zoning district.
Mailing Address:
113 W. Mountain Street www.fayetteville-ar.gov
Fayetteville, AR 72701
For example, city code allows a two-family dwelling located in the RSF-4 zoning district to have
up to three unrelated persons because RSF-4 is a single family zoning district. City Code allows
a two-family dwelling located in the RMF-24 zoning district to have up to four unrelated persons
because RMF-24 is not a single family zoning district.
Proposal: The applicant proposes to amend the Rupple Row R-PZD to reclassify the zoning of
lots 145-183 (both sides of Wordsworth Lane) as 'other than single family zoning' to allow up to
four unrelated persons to live in each dwelling unit.
The subject area of Wordsworth Lane is developed with two-family attached townhomes on either
side of the street that are located approximately 10 feet from the street, rear alley loaded with
two -car garages and driveways off of the alley. There are also two three-family homes located on
the cul-de-sac at the north end of the street. To staff's knowledge these homes have been
developed with four bedrooms in each unit.
Public Comment: Staff received two letters in favor of the applicant's request (attached).
Discussion: The Rupple Row subdivision was approved and developed as a TND with single
family detached homes and one internal street of townhomes in the central portion of the
neighborhood. Consistent with TND and adopted City policy, this neighborhood was intended to
serve a variety of home owners within walking distance of a school, community center and future
commercial corridor along Wedington Drive.
The Rupple Row neighborhood was developed with infrastructure including streets, driveways,
alleys, and garages for individual owner occupancy, not rentals with occupancy for up to four
unrelated people in each dwelling. A greater density of individuals living together can pose safety
and nuisance issues if the neighborhood was not designed to accommodate that density, as in
this case.
For instance, there is not enough parking for each dwelling on the subject properties to
accommodate four cars with individual occupancy. This will result in residents parking on the
street. However, Wordsworth Lane was not built to accommodate the number of vehicles
associated with residency of four unrelated people per dwelling. Wordsworth Lane is a 28 -foot
wide street and only allows parking on one side. Because both sides of the street are developed
with two-family townhomes, continuous parking on both sides of the street is needed to
accommodate the number of vehicles generated by the proposed occupancy. Continuous parking
on both sides of the street leaves only a 12 -foot travel lane that would be in violation of the fire
code that requires a 20 -foot clear unobstructed fire access road. A lack of adequate on -site and
on -street parking can result in other violation issues such as parking in the grass or in alleys.
An additional negative aspect of this proposal is that allowing up to four unrelated people in each
dwelling would likely push this street and other surrounding homes permanently into the rental
market where dwellings are rented by up to four unrelated people. This is not in line with the intent
of the original PZD and may be counter the public neighborhood interest in the long-term viability
of this neighborhood. It is staffs opinion that this is not an appropriate location for a large section
of student housing rentals, or general rentals with four unrelated people in each dwelling. This
type of land use pattern is more appropriate closer to the University of Arkansas and the core of
the city, not in this suburban neighborhood in west Fayetteville with inadequate infrastructure. The
original intent of this neighborhood, consistent with current city policy, was to allow a variety of
individual owner occupancy and price points within the neighborhood. This proposal is
inconsistent with that policy.
G:\ETC\Development Services Review\2015\Development Review\15-5135 ADM Rupple Row SD
(Amend Rupple Row PZD)\03 Planning Commission\07-27-2015\Comments and Redlines
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of ADM 15-5135 based on the findings that
the streets, alleys, and parking in this neighborhood were not designed or built to safely
or efficiently support up to four unrelated persons in each dwelling. The proposal would
also be counter to the original intent of the PZD adopted by City Council for a variety of
individual home ownerships within the neighborhood.
Planning Commission Action: O Approved A Forwarded O Denied
(recommend approval)
Meeting Date: July 27, 2015
Motion: Autry
Second: Selby
Vote: 7-1-0 (Commissioner Brown voted 'no')
BUDGET/STAFF IMPACT:
None.
Attachments:
• UDC Chapter 151 definition of 'family'
• Applicant's letter
• Public comment
• Example two-family townhome plan
• Rupple Row Subdivision final plat
• Close up map
• Current land use map
• Future land use map
• One mile map
G:\ETC\Development Services Review\2015\Development Review\15-5135 ADM Rupple Row SD
(Amend Rupple Row PZD)\03 Planning Commission\07-27-2015\Comments and Redlines
Fayetteville UDC Chapter 151
Family. (Zoning) In R -A, Neighborhood Conservation and all single family districts including
single family Planned Zoning Districts, a "family" is no more than three (3) persons unless all are
related and occupy the dwelling as a single housekeeping unit. In all other zoning districts where
residential uses are permitted, a "family" is no more than four (4) persons unless all are related
and occupy the dwelling as a single housekeeping unit with the exception that the City Council
may permit a definition of "family" as no more than five (5) persons unless all are related and
occupy the dwelling as a single housekeeping unit in a specific Planned Zoning District with proper
safeguards for the surrounding neighborhood such as applying the parking requirements of
§172.11 (even though this is a multifamily PZD), requiring that each five person unit must be
placed within a freestanding structure of not more than two stories and be buffered from other
residential districts outside the Planned Zoning District, The City Council shall consider whether
an applicant's PZD with one or more five unrelated person structures would cause unreasonable
traffic into an adjoining residential neighborhood before approving any such PZD. Persons are
"related" for purposes of this definition if they are related by blood, marriage, adoption,
guardianship, or other duly -authorized custodial relationship. The definition of "family" does not
include fraternities, sororities, clubs or institutional groups.
G:\ETC\Development Services Review12015\Development Review\15-5135 ADM Rupple Row SD
(Amend Rupple Row PZD)\03 Planning Commission\07-27-2015\Comments and Redlines
July 8, 2015
Planning Commissioners and City Council Members,
I currently own 80 attached townhome units in the Rupple Row PZD. When I purchased these lots, my
intent was, and in fact I did, build the units to lease to upper class and graduate school college students.
Before I purchased the lots and started construction, I checked the zoning on my specific lots on the
plat, met with the POA as well as the architectural review committee who knew and understood exactly
what I wasgoing to build and they were in support of it. These lots are zoned "unit 9 two-family
dwelling "and "unit 10 three-family dwelling," so I built them with the intent to house four students per
unit in a more family like setting. Our units are 1850 sf with 4 bedroom, 3 baths and a 2 car garage.
There are 2 parking spots on the street as well as spots in the garage and 2 on the driveway, so parking
is not an issue.
Over the last three years, we have been operating under these assumptions with the support of our
local PZD and neighbors. We have been great neighbors within our PZD, to the point that they asked me
to serve on the board. To my knowledge, we have never had a complaint pertaining to over -occupancy
nor have we had complaints of traffic congestion. Lastly, I would point out that we have developed a
financial and mentoring partnership with the Boys and Girls Club and they have been very appreciative
and supportive of our students.
After speaking with city officials, it appears that there is some gray area and contradicting information
pertaining to zoning and the definition of family. In the Unified Development Code, family Is defined as
3 or less unrelated parties in a single-family district (unit 8). In all other districts, a family is no more
than 4 unrelated parties. (My assumption is "all other" would include "unit 9 two-family dwelling" and
"unit 10 three family dwelling.") Even in the definition of dwellings, there are two distinct definitions for
"attached single-family dwelling" and "attached two-family dwelling."
As the owner of lots 145-183 in the Rupple Row PZD, I would like to formally request a clarification and
update of the underlying zoning to facilitate what is already occurring on my properties and that my
properties be recognized as a unique within the Rupple Row PZD. In particular, this Planning Area would
recognize my properties as 'other than single-family for the purposes of the definition of "Family" in the
Fayetteville Unified Development Code.
Thank you for your cone
Kimbel
Planning Commission
July 27, 2015
Agenda Item 9
15-5135 Rupple Row S/D
Page 5 of 16
HOPS & GIRLS CLUB
OF FAYETTEVILLE
July 20, 2015
To whom it may concern,
As the Chief Professional Officer and a representative of the Boys and Girls (Jub of
Fayetteville, we want to show our support for Spring Creek Rentals and specifically their
partnership with our organization. The representatives from Spring Creek have taken strides
to promote community well-being through their partnership with our organization as well as
the community as a whole.
It is my understanding that there may be a concern over allowing four college students in
each townhome. From our perspective, we have not noticed any negative effects of this
arrangement. We are in support of allowing the Rupple townhomes to operate in the same
way they have for the last three years.
Regards,
Eric Schuldt
Boys and Girls Club of Fayetteville
Donald W. Reynolds Boys & Girls Club of Fayetteville
560 North Rupple Road • Fayetteville, AR 72704 • Tel 479-442.9242 • Fax 479.442-6192
www.favettevlllekids. ore
Great Futures Start Here.
Planning Commission
July 27, 2015
Agenda Item 9
15-5135 Rupple Row SID
Page 6 of 16
July 10, 2015
To whom it may concern,
I am writing in my capacity as president of the Rupple Row Property Owners
Association regarding the duplex homes on Wordsworth Ln. that Mr. Kimbel has
built and rented since 2013. To date, lam not aware of any major violations of the
POA covenants or city code related city services, and to my knowledge, Mr. Kimbel's
duplex homes have operated well within our established neighborhood covenants.
In more recent phases of building, Mr. Kimbel has been mindful to include extra
space for tenant parking, which when coupled with the available on -street parking,
has alleviated any potential parking issues. Moreover, Mr. Kimbel employs a rental
manager to ensure that residents comply with neighborhood regulations. Our
experience with Mr. Kimbel's management team has been nothing but positive and
we have found them to be very responsive.
It is the opinion of the POA that Mr. Kimbel's properties have not only been a
significant positive impact to the neighborhood, they have also strengthened our
community. With his support, the POA has been able to pursue a number of
important improvement projects, including the purchase and placement of new
mailboxes and the installation of trees throughout the entire PZD. His investment in
the neighborhood have also invigorated interest in the Rupple Row PZD, and as
such, we have been fortunate to see a number of new homes completed within the
last two years.
From my perspective, as POA President, there is no question that Mr. Kimbel's
properties should be allowed to continue to operate, as they have for some time,
within the Rupple Row PZD. Should you have further questions about Mr. Kimbel's
properties or about the Rupple Row POA, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
Ted Belden, Rupple POA President
Planning Commission
July 27, 2015
Agenda Item 9
15-5135 Rupple Row SID
Page 7 of 16
58499
I
` sl
III a'; ' ;r,. •lij2tJ
9Z 1. 1��1
ELEVATIONS
CDR ROTH HOME•LLG QIJYE DE516N5
R814DUPLEX ..,
'Ptah nc4 Commission
July 27, 2015
Agenda Item 9
15-5135 Rupple Row SID
Page 8 of 16
rE-
k !P.
t�i
{
S +E3 iat
�°f'
{
$?+y{fE g ppe '•^^�
�1 }{t�C a�
a+ x 1
F{RST FLOOR PLAN
woo uumw:.
APR ROTH HOME-LLG
RD 14 DUPLEXil1j"11,
m.rcw.+�.aton
pUyr D5IN5
.am..R.
66P8S
Commission
July 27, 2015
Agenda Item 9
15-5135 Rupple Row S/D
Page 9 of 16
i tq �'i ;. .._
AFad pt`FE
ADR ROTH HOME - LLGND
[ir::a
FLOOR PLAN
R814DUPLEX
ZEZL
„�•�a,
66b8S
Commission
July 27, 2015
Agenda Item 9
15-5135 Rupple Row SID
Page 10 of 16
L_
153 - B ' 1
naly� a' s.o
'/
-�'
14 Iii
I 1244.3 m .__ 3n ,_ an 5.0'
i0I.*'
1244.2 UE _a.. E t't� n: 0'
-20.00' i 1" ----
21. _ � I
L 1 2
,- A
1
R
245.0
242 i I
..� LOT 52-B
1 I J 1
c. �„ C7
--T ` 13n
1243.2: 1243.1 Cl)
1242.5 lm.l' _ C
UE i UE _
�'UE; — SUE
E' 3 . LOT 151 - A5
-20.00 " C.ONC
1r - FFE 1244.0'
11317 1 l._ r. I,
caNC;l " LOT 151—B
L.
i f I L.5.0
1242.0 1241.9 1241.8
ALLEY 09 'D
Planning Commission
July 27, 2015
Agenda Item 9
15-5135 Rupple Row SID
Page II of 16
ning Commission
July 27, 2015
Agenda Item 15-5135 y/RS/D
Page of
Neighborhood/Pa Trail
Natural Surface T it
ADM15-5135
` Footprints 2010
-"-' 0 150 300 600 900 1,200 Design Overlay Di trlct Feet Planning Con
July 27, 2015
15-5135 Rupple Row S/D
Page 13 of 16
S/D
Page 14 of 16
ADM 15-5135
Future Land Use
RUPPLE ROW PZD AMENDMENT
o
GROWN PLOWER DR
w
zo
z 799E z
s,
w F
LR CO
o Ct
BELL FLOWER DR
WOOD DR
LAGSTICK DR
q�
O o
z y
j
4
PUTTING GREEN DR
ag7`�T�, O�<
�v4saRFej4Y at(4
z
O
O
ZQ(0 Ui
J J44
Legend
Shared -Use Paved Trail
WEDGEONeighborhood/Park Trail MARLOWE.LN
•••_ Natural Surface Trail
Shared -Use Paved Trail ALLEY 509
...... ryeignol
— Natural
AUM15
FUTURE L,
CLASS
Natural
C=e ty Neighborhood Area
Urban Center Area
Industrial
Complete Neighborhood
Civic and Private Open
Civic Institutional
Non -Municipal Govemm
ROW
J
SUBJECT PROPERTY
v
0 150 300 600 900 1,200
Feet
J�Kp,`N%1vE'I'I DR.
ty,0
Planning Commission
July 27, 2015
Agenaa item a
15-5135 Rupple Row SID
Page 15 of 16
ADM15-5135 RUPPLE ROW PZD AMENDMENT
One Mile View
tt
y
�x RPZD ti t ms>
r f Via
..;L_,
Ryt SUBJECT PROPERTY
a v«
Rd1 -6 I`' W _ R_O t. t
it...........................................
..
y
. � m }'u• I
RSF-4
u di"
RSF 2
(;•-t
li-p
egend
Bred -Use Paved Trail
,t.
' Neighborhood/Park Trail
.' RSF-1°- Natural Surface Trail
Overview Legend Hills e -Hilltop Overlay District
-' ' Subject Property Desi jn Overlay District
^� ' Plan iing Boundary - -
Area
I I Fay tteville
0 0.25 0.5 1
Mles Planning Commi Sian
Agenda Item 9
15-5135 Rupple Row SID
Page 16 of 16
7/27/2015
Applicant's Presentation
July 27, 2015 Planning Commission Page 1 of 17
Fwd: Rupple Row
Rob Kimbel<rob.kimbel@kimbelmechanical.com>
Begin forwarded message:
From: gene dresel <gdresel@sbcglobal.net>
Date: July 27, 2015 at 12:50:58 PM CDT
To: Rob Kimbel<rob.kimbel@kimbelmechanical.com>
Subject: Rupple Row
Reply -To: gene dresel <gdresel@sbcglobal.net>
Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 12:54 PM
Please let this email serve as a reminder of our conversation during
our initial meeting regarding the construction of the four bedroom
townhouses in the Rupple Row Subdivision.
In 2012 I was serving the Rupple Row POA as a board member and
the Chairman of the Architectural Review Committee.
In April of 2012 the Rupple Row Architectural Review Committee met
with Rob Kimbel at my previous house at 4149 Bradstreet Ln in
Fayetteville AR. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss the
upcoming construction and review the plans for the townhouses in
the Rupple Row Subdivision. During the course of this meeting it
was discussed that Rob's intention was to lease the townhouses to
four students per unit. Rob's understanding of the zoning criteria was
that the single family residences in the neighborhood were limited to
3 unrelated people where the multifamily residences allowed for 4.
Over the course of time Rob submitted a number of different plan
types. It was always understood by the ARC/POA that Rob intented
to have four students residing in each unit.
Feel free to contact me at anytime to discuss.
Thank you
htlps:/lmail.google.com/mail!Wal7iA=2&ik=29b01a4730&view=pt&search=inbox&msg= l4edca5941d3ac6c&sim1= 14ed0a6941daac6c 1/1
Applicant's Presentation FPL 05-1547
July 27, 2015 Planning Commission Page 2 of 17 Page!
SC Meeting of September 01, 2005
ARKANSAS
lii Iii t!1 i A', I !' t r. f)i Av4 ;
125 W. Mountain St.
Fayetteville. AR 72701
PLANNING DIVISION CORRESPONDENCE Telephone: (479) 575-8267
TO: Subdivision Committee Members
FROM: Jeremy Pate, Director of Current Planning
Brent O'Neal. Staff Engineer
DATE: August 30, 2005
FPL 05-1547: Final Plat (RUPPLE ROW R-PZD, 439): Submitted by DAVE JORGENSEN
for property located at W OF RUPPLE RD., N OF PERSIMMON PL. The property is zoned R-
PZD, RESIDENT. PLANNED ZONING DIST. and contains approximately 41.70 acres. The
request is to approve the final plat of a Residential Planned Zoning District.
Property Owner: NOCK INVESTMENTS Planner: JEREMY PATE
Findings:
Proposal: The applicant is requesting final plat approval of Rupple Row Subdivision located at
the northwest corner of Persimmon Place and Rupple Road. The proposed use of the site is for a
"neo-traditional" development consisting of 182 single-family residential dwelling units and 78
two-family residential units, for a total of 260 dwelling units. The proposed density for the R-
PZD is 6.24 DU/acre. In June of 2004, the City Council approved R-PZD 04-06.00 for
development of Rupple Row Subdivision. This approval constituted a rezoning and preliminary
plat approval to construct necessary infrastructure. A final inspection has occurred, and
necessary infrastructure has been installed or will be guaranteed, pursuant to city ordinances. The
subdivision contains 182 single family lots and 78 two-family lots.
Existing Development: The site is located in west Fayetteville across from the Boys and Girls
Club on Rupple Road. Meadowlands Subdivision Phases I & II lie to the northwest, to the west is
Cross Keys Subdivision, to the south the Fayetteville School District is construction a new
elementary/middle school, and to the north is Fire Station #7.
Surrounding Land Use/Zoning:
Direction Land Use j
North Meadowlands S/D (duplex, SF) ,
Fire Station #7
_Zoning
RSF-4, Single Family Res. 4 DU/Acre
RT-12, Res. 2 & 3 Family, 12 DU/Acre
R -A, Residential Agricultural
_____South Fayetteville School
RSF-4
East Boys & Girls Club. vacant property
RMF-24, Res. Multi -family, 24
DU/Acre, R -A, Residential Agricultural
_
West Cross Keys Subdivision PZD
I R-PZD
C Dooun,eurs and Sertingrjpnre Desktop- bnp Sores. FPL 05.154(Rvrpk Ro"P2O1 II dcc
Applicant's Presentation FPL 05-1547
Page 2
July 27 2015 Planning Commission Pape 3 of 17
Water & Sewer: Water and sewer has been extended to serve the development.
Request: The applicant requests final plat approval for a residential subdivision within a unique
R-PZD zoning district to allow for the recording of the plat, sale of lots and construction of
homes.
ZONING CRITERIA: R-PZD Rupple Row
(A) Proposed Uses.
LOTS
USE UNIT
ALLOWABLE USES
Lots 1-226
Unit I
City-wide uses by right
Lots 1-226
Unit 2
City-wide uses by conditional use
Lots 1-144
Unit 8
Single-family dwelling
Lots 145-183
Unit 9
Two-family dwelling
Lots 164-165
Unit 10
Three-family dwelling
Lots 1-221
Unit 24
Home Occupations
Al! other uses allowed within the R-PZD =oning district shall not he permitted
(B) Density.
Units for entire Subdivision
Number of Acres
Units Per
Acre
260
41.70
6.24
(C) Bulk and area regulations.
All lots
Lot minimum width
37 feet minimum per dwelling/lot: lot width on curves and cul-de-sacs
measured as required by code.
Lot area minimum
3,700 SF minimum per dwelling/lot
Land area per
dwelling unit
Varies. Only one dwelling unit per lot permitted, with exception of lots
164-165.
• The typical lot size for lots ranges from approximately 40-45 feet wide x 110-120 feet deep. The
designated three family lots are proposed to be approximately 70 feet wide by 100 feet deep.
(D) Setback requirements.
Front Building Setback: 5'
Rear Building Setback: 20'
Side Building Setback: 0'. All detached units shall have a minimum 16 foot separation.
Attached units may have a 0 -foot setback on its common wall, but shall maintain a 16 -foot
separation, front adjacent units.
(E) Height. None.
(F) Building area. On any lot the area occupied'by all buildings shall not exceed 70°/b of the
total area of such lot. The range of home sizes shall be from 1600 SF to 2200 SF, as noted in
the associated covenants.
C. Documenrs and Serringsjpate Deskwp.Fnrp Scn es•FPL OS -154' (Ruppie RoaIZD) /Ldoc
Applicant's Presentation R-PZD 04-02.00
July 27, 2015 Planning Commission Page 4 of 17 Page!
FAYETTEVILLE SC Meeting of January 29, 2004
THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS
113W. Mountain St.
Fayetteville, AR 72701
Telephone: 501-575-8264
PLANNING DIVISION CORRESPONDENCE
TO: Subdivision Committee Members
FROM: Suzanne Morgan, Associate Planner
Matt Casey, Staff Engineer
THRU: Dawn Warrick, A.I.C.P., Zoning & Development Administrator
DATE: January 28, 2004
R-PZD 04-02.00: Residential Planned Zoning District (Cross Keys, pp 438) was submitted
by Chris Brackett of Jorgensen & Associates on behalf of Charles Sloan and Sloan Properties for
property located south of Wedington Drive at the corner of N. 46'h and Persimmon Street. The
property is currently zoned R -A, Residential Agricultural and contains approximately 38.48
acres. The request is to rezone the subject property to a Residential Planned Zoning District to
allow for the development of a residential subdivision with 108 single family dwellings
proposed. Planner: Suzanne Morgan
Findings:
Proposal: The applicant requests a rezoning and preliminary plat approval for a residential
development within an R-PZD zoning district. The proposed use is single-family residential,
with 108 lots proposed. A detention pond is to be located off -site to the south, on property also
owned by the applicant. Density for the entire site is 2.81 units per acre. The development is
currently zoned R -A, Residential Agricultural. The site is located on the northeast corner of the
intersection of Persimmon Street and 46th Street. The applicant has proposed to erect a fence
along these two rights -of -way. The preliminary plat for Persimmon Place Subdivision, located
west of 46'h St., was approved with a condition that a privacy fence six feet in height be
constructed as required in the Bill of Assurance filed when this property was rezoned. This item
must be heard at City Council pursuant to the requirements for a PZD.
Background: This item was approved at the Subdivision Committee meeting on December 30,
2003. It was tabled to Subdivision Committee at the January 12, 2004 Planning Commission
meeting due to lack of proper notification from the developer prior to the Subdivision Committee
and Planning Commission meetings.
Surrounding Land Use / Zoning
Direction Land Use Zoning _
----------_. -, ------
North Single family residential RSF-4, Residential Single-family — 4
units per acre
_ _ R -A, Residential Agricultural
South I One sinfamily home Planning Area �
A. REPORTS2004 SC REPORTS 0) 29-0; H-YZU 04.02 00 CROSS h'E};y DOG
Applicant's Presentation R-PZD 04-02.00
July 27, 2015 Planning Commission Page 5 of 17 Paget
East
Vacant
RSF 4, Residential Single-family — 4
I units per acre
West
Vacant (Persimmon Place PPI, is
under construction)
RSF-4, Residential Single-family — 4
units per acre
Right-of-way being dedicated: 50' for all interior rights -of -way, 70' along Persimmon St., and
50' along 46th St.
Connectivity: Connectivity from this proposed residential subdivision is being provided west to
46th Street, south to Persimmon St., and east to a vacant tract of land for connectivity to future
development.
Street Improvements: Construction of Persimmon Street along southern property line and a
recommendation from Engineering Division to cost share for the developer to overlay the entire
width of 46th Street for the length of the project.
Adjacent Master Street Plan Streets:
North: Wedington Drive (principal arterial) approximately', mile north
South: Persimmon Street (collector) planned for construction with this development
East: 46th Street (local street)
West: 54th Ave. (collector) is approximately � mile west
Tree Preservation: Existing canopy: 0.13 %
Preserved canopy: 0.08 %
Mitigation: $1,050 payment into the City's Tree Escrow
Account prior to final plat approval.
Recommendation: Forward to the full Planning Commission with the following conditions:
Conditions of Approval:
Planning Commission recommendation to the City Council regarding the rezoning of the
subject property to the unique district for R-PZD 04-02.00 with all conditions of approval
as determined by the Planning Commission.
4.
An ordinance creating this R-PZD shall be approved by City Council.
A Final Plat is required to legalize the lot configuration. filed pursuant to City of
Fayetteville requirements.
Interior street names shall be approved by the City 9-1-1 Coordinator.
Planning Commission determination of appropriate fence material, if desired, and
appropriate timing for installation. &n pJ ancneak urea',qua
Planning Commission determination of street improvements. Staff recommends 14'from
the centerline of 46th Street including curb, gutter, and storm sewer.
K, REPORTS '2004SC REPORTS 01-29-04R-PZD 04-02.00 CROSS )CE)S DOG
Applicant's Presentation
July 27, 2015 Planning Commission Page 6 of 17
"s!Icil
SUBl FVISION DESIGN 'CRITERIA
The Rupple Row neighborhood is designed to enhance the quality of life of those who
will call it home. A neo-traditional neighborhood such as Rupple Row is a unique
design approach that takes its inspiration from the "township" planning model that
prevailed in the United States early in the Twentieth Century. Key components of neo-
traditional neighborhoods include land development in a more compact and human
scale, with homes clustered within walking distance of parks, recreation facilities,
schools and a central meeting place.
Although the following information discusses neo-traditional developments in general the
developer reserves the right define and refine the intent and execution of any planning
and design.
Design Elements of Neo-traditional/new Urbanist developments include:
Limited Size: A village or neighborhood is limited to a % mile radius (up to 200 acres), or
a five minute walk from the center to a clearly defined edge.
Convenience to Services: The inclusion of recreational and commercial activity near
residential areas brings services and attractions within walking distance for all ages and
social groups.
Mixed Uses: A variety of housing types is a standard element, including single family, duplex,
townhouses, and apartments.
Information from Declarations of
Covenants of Rupple Row PZD
Applicant's Presentation
July 27 AQet Pe( de iipp Commission
Erosion. (Stormwater Management, Drainage
and Erosion Control) The removal of soil particles by
the action of water, wind, ice or other geological
agents.
Evergreen. (Physical Alteration of Land) A plant
that retains leaves or needles year-round.
Excavation. (Physical Alteration of Land) The
mechanical removal of earth material from water or
land.
F
FAA. (Airport Zone) The Federal Aviation
Administration.
Facilities emitting odors. (Zoning regulations)
Any function that involves a process which emits or
has the potential for emitting odor.
Facilities handling explosives. (Zoning) Any
function that involves a process dealing with a product
with explosive potential.
Fall zone. (Wireless Communications Facilities)
The area within which a tower or antenna might cause
damage to persons or property should the tower or
antenna be knocked down, blown over or fall on its
own.
Family. (Zoning) In R -A, Neighborhood
Conservation and all single family districts including
single family Planned Zoning Districts, a "family" isno
more than three (3) persons unless all are related and
occupy the dwelling as a single housekeeping unit. In
all other zoning districts where residential uses are
permitted, a 'family' is no more than four (4) persons
unless all are related and occupy the dwelling as a
single housekeeping unit with the exception that the
City Council may permit a definition of "family" as no
more than five (5) persons unless all are related and
occupy the dwelling as a single housekeeping unit in
•a specific Planned Zoning District with proper
safeguards for the surrounding neighborhood such as
applying the parking requirements of §172.11 (even
though this is a multifamily PZD), requiring that each
five person unit must be placed within a freestanding
structure of not more than two stories and be buffered
from other residential districts outside the Planned
Zoning District. The City Council shall consider
whether an applicant's PZD with one or more five
unrelated person structures would cause
unreasonable traffic into an adjoining residential
neighborhood before approving any such PZD.
Persons are "related" for purposes of this definition if
they are related by blood, marriage, adoption,
guardianship, or other duly -authorized custodial
relationship. The definition of 'Tamily" does not
include fraternities, sororities, clubs or institutional
groups.
Page 7 of 17
FCC. (Wireless Telecommunications Facilities)
The Federal Communications Commission.
FEMA. (Physical Alteration of Land) Federal
Emergency Management Agency.
Fenestration. (Development) An exterior opening
In the surface of a structure, such as a window, door,
clerestory window, curtain wall, etc.
Fill. (Physical Alteration of Land) A deposit of
earth material placed by artificial means,
First or ground floor. (DDOD). The finished floor
facing a street right of way.
Flashing sign. (Signs) An illuminated sign on
which artificial or reflected lights is not maintained
stationary and constant in intensity and color at all
times when in use.
Flood or flooding. (Flood Damage Prevention) A
general and temporary condition or partial or
complete inundation of normally dry land areas from
the overflow of flood waters, or the unusual and rapid
accumulation or run-off of surface water from any
source.
Flood boundary and floodway map, (Flood
Damage Prevention) The official map on which the
Federal Insurance Administration has delineated both
the areas of flood hazards and the floodway,
Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM). (Flood
Damage Prevention) The official map on which the
Federal Management Agency or Federal Insurance
Administration has delineated both the areas of
special flood hazards and the Floodway.
Flood Insurance Study. (Flood Damage
Prevention) The official report provided by the Federal
Insurance Administration that includes flood profiles,
the FIRM, the Flood Boundary and Floodway Map,
and the water surface elevation of the base flood.
Floodplain. (Stormwater Management, Drainage
and Erosion Control) For a given flood event, that
area of land that is temporarily covered by water and
that adjoins a watercourse. In FEMA regulated, or
established floodplains, the floodplains shall mean the
area subject to inundation from any source during the
regulatory event.
Floodplain or flood -prone area. (Flood Damage
Prevention) Areas that are subject to, or are exposed
to, flooding and flood damage.
CD151:10
ZONING CRI ! ERIA: R-PZD RIPPLE ROW
(A)
ALL OTHER USES ALLOWED WITHIN THE R-PZD
ZONING DISTRICT SHALL NOT BE PERMITTED.
exllnM It LW m'n,OML 00 WATER 0 SEWER STSVEFL
I HEREBY CERTIFY TIG1 me WATER DISTWEOTT I SYSTEM ARID SEWARS CCCLECTION ATSYEL WSFA(LED Ill THE SWpHSION
'LILLY MEET ME REONREHEN TS ➢F IRE ARKANSAS ETA It RD LLj^�YI. TJ FAYErREWLlf.
DATE TIYTEISIA2ER
CERTIFICATE OF ADMGPAL CF SSRFFTS ANO DRMNAOE:
HEREBY CERTIFY MAT me STR£G1 AND ORAM<DE SYSTEMS INSTALLED M TIRE 4KNYiSibl FILLY HEFT REOWRENEHTS OF
ME CITY OF £AYETTFYHLE.
t49 O6 --,
DA FE OTT SKINFFR
CFRnfSGT£ OF AFF5'al OF PARR LAND DEDIGTIW CA HAVFY LV UELC
HEREBY CERTIFY 1147 rles .Nat PLAY COMPLIES 111TH SECTION i69.JD(R) M:N NW 0,15050(5) DEDICATION OF �.
ACRES OR PATIOS INYf£U J 12 15
WARR.L/NtRE
i__IY DEED PER FALA.W RECORDED AS FILLOOW&ROOK C; Q_ PAGE #:,,,,___,_
Dh?t.Rp�taeAA—LYI Wit --
GETS EARRTYRfb1bT10EI2NSCn1R pggx QLAWI4 ,t
CERTIFICATE E£ AfRMVAL OF B4L➢W0 SETA G DIHENSwISTE CF RALOIV6 SETA G DSIRASIGIS' -
REPEaT CERTIFY THAT ALL BNLWNS SERACN OINF5iM'S SNOMN ON A? ARE iDO ACCORDANCE MM ME LL.MEVT
SETBAG(REOIPR�EHFR/1IS.
I� -
DATE Idt 8 APYADttATOW
CERTIFICATE Of APPROVAL FOR R£[ERwHD: � � ��
DOE PEAT IWASA//f\\/ROKO 8Y TIRE £A YffiEYICl2 PLANNING)
CwUNSSKKI AiAKKETING HELD•Pfk 0% 2➢5≤
DATE SECRETARY
ERY/IIGTE OF SNGVEY AID ACCLEAO T)
HERESY CERTIFY MAT ME PLAN 5140,170 AND DESCRwEO HEREON /S A TAR M9 CORRECT WMEY ANO PEAT M! MCVYKW' rl; MK NAVE 55550 PLACED AS STATED HfRECN AS AEOWRFO BY meSLROIIESIG4 .RSIM TQ4G OF me CITY Of
PATETTEWLLE A S.
1 I.W3 �. _
DATE 0101555050 14110 YETOR HROFESSIGAAL LAND SI)RYEYLR
CERTIFICATE OF AIYPOVAL OF TREE PROTECTION B flH550VAnQV:
MER£BY CERTIFY THAT TAS PLAY HAS COMPLIED WISH THE RE RESIENT5 OF TIE TREE P.PoRCn0.Y AND
ORDINANCE OP DIE CITY OF PAYEYTEVILLS CDOE.
GATE GNo#AE£ AON:.YN fRALOR
CERTIFICATE OF OWNERSHIP 8 DEDICATION:
8£ THE µIDFRSIENED OIVNERS REPRESENOBD ONE hENORED KEENS 000%) LM.EYANF OF THE REAL ESTATE 51101410 AND
001G 510 REREW. W HEREBY G FOIL EIEALIC OSNEFSPf, ALA, STREETS SO ALL VE.10 SHOWN QY THIS FLAT FOR
RMUC EENEFIT AS PRESCM.y LAW, BY CAW. TN! CORNERS ALSO OFACAM TO ME 1.Y ST FA Y.TTEWUE AND TD THE PUBLIC
UTILITY neL f) S (M60wNS ANY GAS TELEWSIPL COMPANY IrdPIRO A FRANCHISE BRANTED BY THE CITY Of
FATfYTEWLLE) ME EASEMENTS AS 5NSNYl CN MIS PIMP POE DIE S oo, FM INSTALLATION OP NEW FACILITIES AND THE
REPAIP OF £XIS TINM E FAITIE5. ALSO ESYAAISHED NQYRY IS 510 LINT OF VERSES AWE EGRESS TO Dam GSENE.YK. ME
RIGHT To PROHIBIT THE ERECTOR OF $101007045 STRUC TUNES. ON P Es WIT'S EAIfMLN#, AIW THE RIGHT TO
RENOYE OR TFLY TREES WITHIN SAID EASEMENTS. 1C //
DATE
//..�^ J((.� OHNER
--.LtI)-L Q ----�_—�_
DATE III .. SWM6L V N ^G DC_
�INC�JXi. �
CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL Of UTILITY SASENENYS'
WE HERESY CFRTIPT MAT ALL UTILITY EASFIEITS, LKLUw05 CABLE TELEVISION EASEMENTS, 44 EYED IN TIES
b49dWL0.V MR $RDat AS R£DUESTED AND GIRT APPROVED SY INe UNOEASISNED UTILITIES Of THE OTT DE
PA YEReWLLE. ARKANSAS
tJ31toc —
DAR DC
PAN I\a
DATE S VICE
(3( (c SAS (qtr ---
DATE TfCFAACHJ / ✓
51 h _ 77�
DA 9�9 sl
DATE L/- CITY Of fAYETiFVItLF
CERTIFICATE CERTIFICATE OF AFNDVA( Cf SASSWALA5Cf SACSWA0 :
fM5TRUCTMN OF ALL SIDEHALOS SHALL AS INSPECTED ST IRE CITY SlOEWAG AND MAILS MORDWATAY TO
MW0.Y W�IM PIE CITY SPECIFICATIONS, ME DFKW^£R SHALL S£ RKVOYSAE TIDE THE CONSTRUCTION MAD
[GYREfOF ILL SADEk4G5 SHOWN AR THIS FINAL
OATH OrE EYSIAEER
I. Si*oY0l0IINSULEiSEIABNDyiadiYiJW))W DRNau Eu11dis pOTaiSE art 0055501 bcesl/W.
2..'The sidewatt1*50*0couliDwus Through dnVERayE 11*1 mAYimlml 0(2% aou'aLYNAnd NC/SEWS
TEEIUCEW
Al)
UoDndapwcaf Ordinactt Soutiooi 171.15 (ak.a O/d. MK0S). An iMp Liva Es ra ithaljn
the GINraicryw.
A A«eSilaDp3 shall 6einr4lhdssperthis y1al.
9 A241wjosolp ofdnnwhk ovming (oMAao) dom )aMuld Ho inmllodSE if honnmol'ac
TrmDNimicuedI 00111/10 Rom i1M51d1555W m Ale SEEN.
10. Fugdglb Cryal 500foiaw.we/ERuiW al lamvak of50 RNIOTNESS Sa%vpiDnmmoIMREsO
inch dcDml sot reou4WetrCVulasinanil nNDm(otihuR brnN.
ll����ll�l�llllll3MG�III�II�IIIIIIh�ll�l�l{��IIIiIN
Doc 10: 009586010001 Type: PEL
Racorded: 01/10/22006 at 04:06:50 PM
Fee Amt: Pape 1 of I
Washlroton County. AR
Bette Stamps Ciroult Clerk
F11e023A=a00000196
JORGENSEN & ASSOCIATES DATE: 12A KGS 3541101 CEO tii' Dk:R
CIVIL ENGINEERS W SURVEYORS RUPPLE ROW SUBDIVISON1
Applicant's Presentation
July 27, 2015 Planning Commission Page 9 of 17
FAYETTEVILLE
THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS
113 W. Mountain St.
Fayetteville, AR 72701
Telephone: 479-444-3472
TO: Jeremy Pate. Director of Planning
FROM: Matt Mihalevich, Park Planner
DATE: August 30, 2005
SUBJECT: Parks & Recreation Subdivision Committee Comments
Meeting Date: September 1, 2005
Item: FPL 05-1547 Rupple Row, pp 439
Park District: SW
Zoned: R-PZD
Billing Name & Address: Nock Investments, LLC One East Center Street #301 Fay, AR 72701
Land Dedication Requirement Money in Lieu
Single Family
182 @
.024 acre per unit =
4.368 acres __C $555 per unit = $
Multi Family
80 @017
acre per unit =
1.36 acres $393 per unit = $
Mobile Home
@
.024 acre per unit =
_ acres @ $555 per unit = $
Lot Split
$555 per unit = $
Total =5.728
acres
-5_37 previously dedicated
.358 acres x 23,125 = $8,278.75
COMMENTS:
In October 2001, the developer banked 5.37 acres toward future development in the SE
quadrant. This banked land was used to locate the Boys and Girls club and Dale Clark
Park.
Rupple Row includes 182 Single Family units, 74 multi family duplex units and 6
multifamily triplex units. Based on these unit numbers, the Park Land Ordinance
requires a total 5.728 acres. After subtracting the 5.37 acres already dedicated, .358 acres
remains. Using the current cost per acre of $23,125 for .358 acres leaves parks fees in the
amount of $8,278.75.
Fees are due before signing of final plat.
FPL 05-1547
j;.
765-16251-0(0�II��N�C µ�yA�M6A�
A�l&aWA2iTres6Y&-d?MNT CO. fle
I ll�
July 27, 2( mn mmission Page Ii 17
A —I
2D' R/w N°27`41""* 421.7' 20' U.E.
128682.02 I Itl
_ 7912291
1q r 20' E — Ii90
; F 20_.E.' U 1 o f S89°0941E IP: Iii
( I Iv I L20''
0U.E.
00 �: � o ; Irt
NR. , Ia 166 I r v 783 o I _ I!
G
IN7po., bh2/ I\6B o9 a 75 f2 9 e 11:1
�,ea 8" SWR. III vi A 17.63 V p .YIb 0 1!2.44' ` IjI
o I7d! 10.52 Az L4 -' 3tA` i c 767 96� I
g" T
` 1633-- o= p s 89°56'26 v 3 1.
v' 7 20' D.E. s+d�� �a' 64.6T
n '3&'T.3'E s� hb20 R/W a c 754 19 v K 1�
5 v c
. / I .• 31.21 A 756 o I f 1
S'1
E' M 755 i .. ...._966_.. _. _..1. 7 11.44 I 1+
. .-.li-.. uuull/��t
- H ( --$ii2-- +I B a 754 9 0 ' v 20' U.E. I t0:
iiin 753 50' at
n w I : b 172.44
sI N89056 26•W '4.1y31215
{V, r- r 101.28' 114 09' 73
+' t: 73f A n I •al n 732 A20' R/W �. f1244' �f
i L� Io_.__-'-063s.. -.. a 729 14 rI p
73
'� 0 a " f.« o
{ M 0 112.44' m
0W3 101.28' o� o 115.07' f' vo 721 213 inI
Ptfh
20
A ol .1 q In 714 A r�: r, q'
960-_n"'m ,I 1 M1 �'16a - o 112.44' :I
.Jo I I
o 1711 oY oh it g o 7f2.. g 713 212 ?)
..._ x I C ' WTR ' `�11Id
112.44' ! -Iii.,
y r 0!.28' I !12.05' 705 211
0 ^ 699 A K M 700 A Iy v
hhhllllll '[:8$�..... "' I _._._ c 1244'
"o '% i66. o f0' U.E. w 697 90 I I f
v° 1697 °s 648 ® 6' SIDEWAL o III, B
:�� YM
s wa IS89°56'26•E n ;I
!01.28' o II Q' 111.03' ff2.44'.1
h I h I h ; 209 I I;
'n 1693 M: i " 69Z A I ' 691 E I nl I
°' 23''UU. E. `I o Io 0 112.44' I itI j
� n ro I 640 ® "? II
\ 641 N89°56'26"W T o 685 2®ii o 1I I
11
z. 1.
o IlO.OI' 112.44• - 11i
( 6LrJa....' 1679 207 I
i•s�i > o .... -174 - s `t S89°09'41 E 111:1
I I``IN 676 ® - Il2.44' _ It
E. I\{ w, Iv 671 206 I IIII
�. �1+. `� X. 8'WTR. �c 31{1• B
.� p Doi\'`�^..,�c, `II L'T?f 42.E
_ v 166125.75' -- ,Q4 LA_ L III
20 UE y A
2 { -957,_. r1f f( -, X11
' +659 0 hI j{ 36.88 34 51 T-94.64
I w 4C v h4' 17111,
S89°09'41 E- j ry O. A 654 I n b) 2�
o !01.10' o I N------472--- > m S89
i 1 3'i A �I *1
III NIPINIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIINNNINIII]IIIIIIill IIINNNIIII
Doc I0: 009535010001 Tvoe: REL & (r SALE: r,00' DATE REVISED cltcicED BY'Da4wN ee 8JI
Recorded: 01/10/2006 at 04:06:50 PM JORGENSENASSOCIATES DATE: RAUGO$ 10A0005 cab saiuexaxwataari
Fee Amt: Pace I of 1
BettettenStan s rc. AR RUFFLE ROW SUBDIVISON
BStamoe Circuit Clerk CIVIL ENGINEERS + SURVEYORS
FL1e023A®00000190 -- !?NIA— F'L-A 1
Applicant's Presentation
July 27, 2015 Planning Commission Page 11 of 17
Porches: Create spaces for a sociable transition from the public street to the private
home and provide shelter and shade.
Building Types: Designed for adaptation from one use to another, as the market dictates,
emphasizing local historical style.
New Urbanist subdivisions usually feature narrower lots that range from 16 to 40 feet in width.
Row houses (horizontally attached townhornes) may be constructed on adjacent individual lots, as
may narrow single family detached homes. Consequently, most neighborhoods will feature a
wider variety of house sizes, densities and affordabilities than standard subdivisions. In most
cases, garages for homes in Neo-traditional developments are located on the back of the house
and accessed via an alley. The result is that street scenes feature porches, windows and front
yards rather than garages and driveways.
information from Declarations of
;Covenants of Rupple Row PZD
Applicant's Presentation
July 27, 2015 Planning Commission Page 12 of 17
Notwithstanding the foregoing, each Single Family Residence must have constructed
adjacent to it and imbedded in its front yard fencing an approved pergolas in substantially that form
that is more fully illustrated and described on EXHIBIT D, attached hereto.
Section 8.13 Antennas and Other Projections. No television, radio, citizen's band, short
wave or other antenna, satellite dish, flag pole, solar panel, clothes line, pole (exclusive of
permitted basketball goals for Single Family Residences only) or other unsightly projection shall be
visible from the exterior of any Single Family Residence, including any such item attached thereto
or located in a yard or the Common Area. The Architectural Review Committee may, in its sole
discretion, approve satellite dishes which are twenty inches (20") or less in diameter or otherwise in
size attached to a Single Family Residence permitted by applicable laws and regulations subject to
all conditions which the Architectural Review Committee attaches to such approval, including the
location and applicable screening of the satellite dish, which conditions shall comply with all
applicable laws and regulations. To the extent that this restriction may be inconsistent with the
regulations of the Federal Communications Commission (the "FCC"), as amended from time to
time, this restriction shall be deemed modified to the extent necessary to comply with such FCC
regulations and still provide such limitations as are consistent with the intent of this restriction.
Section 8.14 Holiday Decorations. Christmas and other holiday lights and decorations
may be displayed on the exterior of a Single Family Residence on any Lot only during the period
beginning forty-five (45) days prior to and ending twenty-one (21) days after such holiday and they
must be removed at the expiration of such period. The method and means of installation of such
lights and decorations shall be only as established or permitted by the Architectural Review
Committee.
Section 8.15 Storage Tanks. No tank for storage of oil, propane, liquefied gas or other
product may be maintained in or adjacent to any Single Family Residence, garage or on any Lot,
whether above or below the surface of the ground.
Section 8.16 Refuse. No trash, ashes or other refuse may be thrown, dumped, stored or
burned on any Lot, the Common Area, except during construction of a Single Family Residence or
any addition thereto or remodeling thereof. The storage or burning of trash, garbage, old
appliances, junk or other refuse is prohibited on the Property outside of a Single Family Residence,
except such items may be set out for collection after 6:00 p.m. on the day before the scheduled
collection day. If there is an alley in the rear of a Single Family Residence, such items set out for
collection shall be placed along such alley.
Section 8.17 Signs: Advertising. Except as provided below, no signs, billboards or
advertising structures of any kind may be placed on any Lot or in or on any Single Family
Residence or be visible from the interior of any Single Family Residence or building on the Lot.
Signs advertising the lease or sale of an individual Lot, which do not exceed five (5) square feet in
size, may be erected or placed on the Lot being sold or leased. The Developer may erect or place
"bill board" type signs related to the Subdivision on any Lot owned by it or on any Common Area.
Section 8.18 Nuisances. No activity shall be carried on in, on or from any Lot, Single
Family Residence which is noxious or offensive or an annoyance or nuisance to the neighborhood.
18
I Wack lnvesm nts, LLCVtupple Raw\Declm lion ofCovenents v6.DOC
Information from Declarations of
Covenants of Rupple Row PZD
PARKING DISTR1'',, nnmg Commn PoPLE ROW PZD ssion Page 13 of 17
PARKING AT
356
UNITS
ON STREET
75
MAX TENANTS
320
TOTALAVAILBLE
431
PARKING
y
F
{fit
Y �
liil
s
i
` n
t k
Y
vx
l
{M9
�
Applicant's Presentation
July 27, 2015 Planning Commission Page 14 of 17
i[ Il•1.i,,ll�fjjrFJ'
iii : l [�---.p
,
On -Street Parking: Helps to slow down traffic, acts as a buffer between pedestrians and
moving traffic, and increases opportunities for drivers to find convenient parking.
Shallow Setbacks: Placing buildings close to sidewalks creates a friendlier "outdoor
room".
Alleys and Lanes: Give secondary access to property for deliveries: locating parking
garages, utilities and garbage collection here preserves the beauty of the streetscape.
Street Network: A traditional grid or web pattern creates a more understandable system
and more choices for travel routes, which is effective for pedestrians as well as the
automobile.
Sidewalks and Pedestrian Paths: An emphasis on "walkability", or the needs of the
pedestrian, makes destinations accessible to residents, including children and the
elderly. New Urbanism separates sidewalks from the curb by a landscape strip of five to
10 feet in width. Within the landscape strip, street trees are planted that create a canopy
of shade over the sidewalk and often even over the road itself. Curbside parking in a
project is used as a means of further buffering pedestrians from passing traffic. The
result is that people find the experience of walking in these environments to be safer and
more enjoyable..
Information from Declarations of
Covenants of Rupple Row PZD
@ _9i52acc ayerteii7eory t q=
"' 4p,-w.nS&tw ' USG57NM 20 4e ee N, M1 ("j y.: rv...,a<ces .. ac, :+.udlvDe{x..
V
... -13,379.4:127 De5re=S.
Anolicant's Presentation
July 27, 2015 Planning Commission
Page 15 of 17
Ci 6Trbwtrnmh
Applicant's Presentation
July 27, 2015 Planning Commission Page 16 of 17
July 10, 2015
To whom it may concern,
I am writing in my capacity as president of the Rupple Row Property Owners
Association regarding the duplex homes on Wordsworth Ln. that Mr. Kimbel has
built and rented since 2013. To date, I am not aware of any major violations of the
POA covenants or city code related city services, and to my knowledge, Mr. Kimbel's
duplex homes have operated well within our established neighborhood covenants.
In more recent phases of building, Mr. Kimbel has been mindful to include extra
space for tenant parking, which when coupled with the available on -street parking,
has alleviated any potential parking issues. Moreover, Mr. Kimbel employs a rental
manager to ensure that residents comply with neighborhood regulations. Our
experience with Mr. Kimbel's management team has been nothing but positive and
we have found them to be very responsive.
It is the opinion of the POA that Mr. Kimbel's properties have not only been a
significant positive impact to the neighborhood, they have also strengthened our
community. With his support, the POA has been able to pursue a number of
important improvement projects, including the purchase and placement of new
mailboxes and the installation of trees throughout the entire PZD. His investment in
the neighborhood have also invigorated interest in the Rupple Row PZD, and as
such, we have been fortunate to see a number of new homes completed within the
last two years.
From my perspective, as POA President, there is no question that Mr. Kimbel's
properties should be allowed to continue to operate, as they have for some time,
within the Rupple Row PZD. Should you have further questions about Mr. Kimbel's
properties or about the Rupple Row POA, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
Ted Belden, Rupple POA President
Applicant's Presentation
July 27, 20,Commission Page 17 of 17
BOYS & GIRLS CLUB
OF FAYEUEYRLE
July 20, 2015
To whom it may concern,
As the Chief Professional Officer and a representative of the Boys and Girls Club of
Fayetteville, we want to show our support for Spring Creek Rentals and specifically their
partnership with our organization. The representatives from Spring Creek have taken strides
to promote community well-being through their partnership with our organization as well as
the community as a whole.
It is my understanding that there may be a concern over allowing four college students in
each townhome. From our perspective, we have not noticed any negative effects of this
arrangement. We are in support of allowing the Rupple townhomes to operate in the same
way they have for the last three years.
Regards,
Eric Schuldt
Boys and Girls Club of Fayetteville
Donald W. Reynolds Boys & Girls Club of Fayetteville
560 North Rupple Road • Fayetteville, AR 72704 • Tel 479-442-9242 • Fax 479.442.9192
vn»v.favettevillekids.ora
Great Futures Start Here.
July 10, 2015
To whom it may concern,
I am writing in my capacity as president of the Rupple Row Property Owners
Association regarding the duplex homes on Wordsworth Ln. that Mr. Kimbel has
built and rented since 2013. To date, lam not aware of any major violations of the
POA covenants or city code related city services, and to my knowledge, Mr. Kimbel's
duplex homes have operated well within our established neighborhood covenants.
In more recent phases of building, Mr. Kimbel has been mindful to include extra
space for tenant parking, which when coupled with the available on -street parking,
has alleviated any potential parking issues. Moreover, Mr. Kimbel employs a rental
manager to ensure that residents comply with neighborhood regulations. Our
experience with Mr. Kimbel's management team has been nothing but positive and
we have found them to be very responsive.
It is the opinion of the POA that Mr. Kimbel's properties have not only been a
significant positive impact to the neighborhood, they have also strengthened our
community. With his support; the POA has been able to pursue a number of
important improvement projects, including the purchase and placement of new
mailboxes and the installation of trees throughout the entire PZD. His investment in
the neighborhood have also invigorated interest in the Rupple Row PZD, and as
such, we have been fortunate to see a number of new homes completed within the
last two years.
From my perspective, as POA President, there is no question that Mr. Kimbel's
properties should be allowed to continue to operate, as they have for some time,
within the Rupple Row PZD. Should you have further questions about Mr. Kimbel's
properties or about the Rupple Row POA, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
Ted Belden, Rupple POA Pr
f 'jl�
P.O. BOX 1607, FAYETTEVILLE, AR, 72702 • 479-442-1700 • FAX: 479-695-1118 • WWW,NWADG.COM
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION
I, Cathy Wiles, do solemnly swear that I am the Legal Clerk of the
Northwest Arkansas Democrat Gazette, printed and published in
Washington and Benton County, Arkansas, and of bona fide circulation,
that from my own personal knowledge and reference to the files
of said publication, the advertisement of:
CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE
Ord. 5792
Was inserted in the Northwest Arkansas Democrat
Gazette on:
August 27, 2015
Publication Charges: $ 84.31
Cathy Wiles
Subscribed and sworn to before me
This 2. day of GQp{-. , 2015.
PubliLwpzea��4'—
Notary I
My Commission Expires: IO(Z
af'',
**NOTE**
Please do not pay from Affidavit.
'
NOTARY`%� .
PUBLIC
# 1 7
' GTON CO��
RECEIVED
SEP 02 2015
CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE
CITY CLERKS OFFICE