No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAboutORDINANCE 5895113 West Mountain Street Fayetteville, AR 72701 (479) 575-8323 Ordinance: 5895 File Number: 2016-0352 AMEND §164.23 SINGLE-FAMILY INFILL STANDARDS: AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND § 164.23 SINGLE-FAMILY INFILL STANDARDS WHEREAS, § 164.23 Single -Family Infill Standards should be renamed Small Lot Design Standards to recognize such standards would apply to small lots (50 feet wide or less) throughout the City; and WHEREAS, § 164.23's initial application to all lots smaller than 70 feet wide has created problems for several home builders and buyers and should be more focused upon truly small lots (50 feet or less). NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS: Section 1. That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby amends § 164.23 Single - Family Infill Standards by repealing it and enacting a modified version entitled Small Lot Design Standards as follows: "§ 164.23 Small Lot Design Standards (A) Purpose. The purpose of these standards is to better maintain visibility, security, safety and aesthetics for pedestrians, drivers and the residents of homes built on relatively narrow lots. (B) Applicability. These standards apply to new detached single-family homes with street frontage of 50 feet or less. (1) Each home shall have a clearly defined front door and windows on the fagade facing the street. This is only required on one side of a home where there is more than one street frontage. Page 1 Printed on 8/17/16 Ordinance: 5895 File Number: 2016-0352 (2) Garage openings that are on the same side of the home as the front door shall not protrude forward past the edge of the principal fagade. (3) The garage opening shall be less than 50% of the principal fagade length unless the house has a second story with windows facing the street or has a balcony, deck, or similar feature which projects at least flush with the garage opening toward the street." PASSED and APPROVED on 8/16/2016 Attest: Sondra E. Smith, City Clerk Treasurer tttt►i�+��rrrf���! ? �•' 2U•FAYFTTEVILLF_ *= • • NS 16 11141111100 O►tit Page 2 Printed on 8/17116 - 113 West Mountain Street City of Fayetteville, Arkansas Fayetteville. AR 72701 (479) 575-8323 Text File File Number: 2016-0352 Agenda Date: 8/16/2016 Version: 1 Status: Passed In Control: City Council Meeting File Type: Ordinance Agenda Number: B. 1 AMEND §164.23 SINGLE-FAMILY INFILL STANDARDS: AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND § 164.23 SINGLE-FAMILY INFILL STANDARDS WHEREAS, § 164.23 Single -Family Infll Standards should be renamed Small Lot Design Standards to recognize such standards would apply to small lots (50 feet wide or less) throughout the City; and WHEREAS, § 164.23's initial application to all lots smaller than 70 feet wide has created problems for several home builders and buyers and should be more focused upon truly small lots (50 feet or less). NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS: Section 1. That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby amends § 164.23 Single -Family Infill Standards by repealing it and enacting a modified version entitled Small Lot Design Standards as follows: "§ 164.23 Small Lot Design Standards (A) Purpose. The purpose of these standards is to better maintain visibility, security, safety and aesthetics for pedestrians, drivers and the residents of homes built on relatively narrow lots. (B) Applicability. These standards apply to new detached single-family homes with street frontage of 50 feet or less. (1) Each home shall have a clearly defined front door and windows on the fagade facing the street. This is only required on one side of a home where there is more than one street frontage. (2) Garage openings that are on the same side of the home as the front door shall not protrude forward past the edge of the principal fagade. (3) The garage opening shall be less than 50% of the principal fagade length unless the house has a second story with windows facing the street or has a balcony, deck, or similar feature which projects at least flush with the garage opening toward the street." City of Fayetteville, Arkansas Page 1 Printed on 811712016 Legistar ID No.: __- 2016-0352 AGENDA REQUEST FORM FOR: Council Meeting of August 2, 2016 FROM: City Council Member Martin Schoppmeyer ORDINANCE OR RESOLUTION TITLE AND SUBJECT: AN ORDINANCE TO AUTHORIZE THE CITY COUNCIL TO GRANT A VARIANCE IN THE SINGLE FAMILY INFILL STANDARDS TO SUPPORT ATTAINABLE, AFFORDABLE HOUSING APPROVED FOR AGENDA: City Council Member Martin Schoppmeyer City Attorney <it Williams (as to form) 1.2-,9 Date Da to Williams, Kit From: Mark Marquess <markm@riverwoodhomesnwa.com> Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2016 2:37 PM To: Williams, Kit; Schoppmeyer, Martin Cc: markm@riverwoodhomesnwa.com; 'Charles W Sloan Dba Sloan' Subject: Change to ordinance 164.23 Single family Infill Standards Kit and Marty, Please consider this a formal request for a variance to the Fayetteville Code of Ordinances, section 164.23 — Single- family Infill Standards. We would support an amendment to change the Single-family Infill Standards 164.23 to modify the 46' — 69' street frontage garage placement and setback standards. This would create a significant hardship for the builders ability to provide attainable priced housing. It would increase the cost several thousand dollars to the home buyer. Riverwood Homes will assist and seek support from other local and regional homebuilders to show approval for this ordinance. Thank you, MARK MARQUESS RIVERWOOD HOMES, LLC 3420 N. Plainview Ave. Fayetteville, AR 72703 479-435-2088 Phone markmAriverwoodhomes.com DEPARTMENTAL CORRESPONDENCE OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY TO: Mayor Jordan City Council CC: Don Marr, Chief of Staff Jeremy Pate, Development Services Director FROM: Kit Williams, City Attorney DATE: July 22, 2016 RE: Attainable and Affordable Housing Kit Williilllls C ty;1(lorncy Blakc Pennington Assistant City Allonucy Patti ML)Iford Paralegol City Plan 2025 "through a collaboration between City staff and urban design firm, Dove, Kohl and Partners, combines citizen input and ideas with concepts and policies that have been proven and tested in our own and other communities...." Preface to City Plan 2025, page 3. City Plan 2025 includes Vision and Strategies of the 2020 Long Range Plan adopted in the 20th century. The Visions include "Housing choices for all incomes...." The Means to reach that Vision lists "Attainable housing throughout the City." "Attainable housing" is also shown in support of "A revitalized South Fayetteville." Thus, for at least two decades, the Fayetteville City Council has supported the goal of affordable and attainable housing for our citizens. A major portion of both City Plan 2025 and City Plan 2030 has been its Chapter 4 Housing. Both Long Range City Plans end the Housing chapter with Housing Concerns which is devoted to the loss of affordability of housing because of its escalating costs. The average housing cost has been increasing faster than average household income "which significantly impacts the ability of home ownership for many potential home buyers." City Plan 2025 and City Plan 2030. City Plan 2025 present five overall goals or visions to guide the City Council. City Plan 2030 adopted by the City Council unanimously in July of 2011 added one more overall goal and vision: "Goal 6 We will create opportunities for affordable housing." In its attempt to improve home affordability, the City Council should be careful not to unintentionally increase the costs of attainable homes by enacting new regulations that might unnecessarily increase housing construction costs. The Planning Department presented proposed U.D.C. amendments to the Planning Commission with its memo of July 13, 2015. While the vast majority of proposed changes allowed easier development of single family homes in multi- family districts, reduced setbacks, lot widths and introduced the most dense single-family district to date, RSF-18, a final provision introduced single family design standards for any lot with less than seventy (70) feet of street frontage. Planner Jessie Fulcher explained the rationale to require design standards for these single family homes: "2. Chapter 164.23 Small Lot Design Standards. Introduce a set of design standards for single-family homes on small lots. • As noted above, Chapter 161 is being updated to allow greater variability in the types of residential units constructed in multi -family zoning districts, principally by reducing the barriers to construct single-family homes. However, as lot width and building footprints are reduced it becomes more difficult to design a home and maintain visibility between the street and building. A primary goal of Crime Prevention Through Environment Design (CPTED) is to maintain natural surveillance, or "see and be seen." Unfortunately, poor design choices when building smaller homes can greatly reduce and sometimes even eliminate natural surveillance. As a result, staff is proposing a relatively brief set of design standards for single-family homes on small lots (see exhibit 'B' attached). The code specifies the standards only apply to lots with less than 70 feet of street frontage. This exempts a majority of all single-family lots in the City which are typically located in the RSF-4 zoning district, with a minimum lot width of 70 feet and maximum density of 4 units per acre." 2 For years Fayetteville has been in the top 10 of American cities to raise a family, start a business, live and work. I think we are currently number 3 in the nation. Our Fayetteville Police Department has done much to ensure the safety of our citizens and neighborhoods. Our crime rate is low. Maybe other cities may need to implement Crime Prevention Through Environment Design to try to reduce their crime rate, but I think there is little evidence to support Fayetteville's need for such action. All over town in traditional neighborhoods zoned RSF-4, the City allows front yards and does not restrict the placement of garages. Does Planning think crime is rampant in these traditional neighborhoods or will be in the future because garages tend to be closer to the street than the house? Does this justify requiring home owners to move their garages back at least five feet behind the front of their houses? Indeed, how would building a garage flush with the front of the house impede any "surveillance' or "visibility between the street and building'? This alleged need to maintain "natural surveillance" of the street is a very week reed to base design requirements for home owners. Although passed on October 6, 2015 and therefore effective on November 7, 2015, no issues concerning these design standards surfaced until around March at the Planning Commission. Buffington Homes was two thirds of the way through an upscale "French Cottage" subdivision whose beautifully designed and constructed homes had garages that were not at least five feet behind the houses. Although Planning staff recommended denial of a variance to complete the subdivision as designed, just about the entire neighborhood appeared and requested approval of the variance which was finally granted by the Planning Commission. The same issue reappeared in April after Rausch Coleman Homes, Inc. was surprised to learn of the ordinance when building permits for its final phase of the Coves Development were rejected. Although Rausch Coleman said it could eventually comply, the costs per house would likely be $8,000 to $10,000. (Planning Commission Minutes, page 5 within Final Agenda of May 9, 2016). Eventually, Jesse Fulcher (now working for Rausch Coleman Homes, Inc.) persuaded the Planning Commission to grant variances for 21 houses because "to build in compliance will cost a significant amount of money." (Planning Commission Minutes page 4 of Final Agenda of May 23, 2016 meeting). I Finally, I recently met with Andrew Garner, Chris Brown and Mark Marquess over his request to build three "model" houses (with sufficient current frontage on Broyles and access to water and sewer) prior to his Final Plat approval, This complied with the U.D.C. so Andrew okayed his request. Andrew then told Mark about the Single-family design standards if a lot has less than 70 feet of street frontage (as do the vast majority of Mark's lots in his approved Preliminary Plat). This was surprising news to Mark. None of his house designs for his development would satisfy the moved back garage, and he agreed with Rausch Coleman Homes that compliance would cost his home buyers thousands of dollars. Because a principal goal adopted by the City Council in the 2030 Plan was to "create opportunities for affordable housing," I became concerned that our major affordable housing construction companies believe this garage location requirement would push up the cost of their houses and endanger these homes' affordability for our citizens. Since this would be contrary to the City Council's adopted primary goal to support affordable housing, I believed something might need to be done. When I explained my concerns to Alderman Schoppmeyer, he agreed that the City Council should empower itself to listen to the explanations of the home builders and grant any necessary relief as to garage location that might be required to ensure: "We will create opportunities for affordable housing." That it what his one sentence amendment to the garage location provision of the single family home design standards would do. 4 CITY OF 'Faye • lle ARKANSAS TO: Mayor, City Council COPY: Don Marr, Chief of Staff Andrew Garner, City Planning Director Kit Williams, City Attorney FROM: Jeremy Pate, Development Services Director--f DATE: August 10, 2016 SUBJECT: Single Family Garage Design Standards STAFF MEMO At the most recent City Council meeting, Council members Marsh and Tennant requested that the Planning Staff and Planning Commission offer suggestions and comments to the Ordinance Review Committee related to the recent ordinance amendment offered by the City Attorney, which proposes the creation of a new variance process to offer developers relief from current single family garage design -standards for more_n.arro-w lots than typical RSF-4 properties. The current proposal authorizes the City Council to grant a variance from the applicable design standards in order to support attainable, affordable housing. The Planning Commission reviewed the proposed amendment at its meeting on August 08, and offered the following input, as summarized by meeting notes: + There was a general consensus that the name of the ordinance section should be changed, from Single Family Infill Standards to Small Lot Design Standards, which is more indicative of the fact that this standard applies to all small lots, throughout the city. • No general consensus was reached on the best approach to resolve this question, or even if there was an issue to be resolved. Some Planning Commissioners expressed concern with having design standards for smaller lots, finding it an unfair application; others stated that the size of the lot and the house built upon that lot can create issues unique to that property which are not necessarily present in larger lots, so a design standard is appropriate. Some indicated if the concern was an unfair application and there was consensus that this was a safety issue, then the standards should be applied city-wide, regardless of lot size. • Some Planning Commissioners expressed their concern with creating a new variance process for a development matter for only the Council to decide, when the Planning Commission exists to review development matters. Others indicated that due to the complexity of what "affordable housing" is, if that is the test then the policy makers (City Council) should be left with that decision. • Several indicated there are very good reasons for the ordinance to be in place: safety for pedestrians on sidewalks, a deterrent to petty theft, burglary and the like, and aesthetics were all mentioned. Even among those opposed to the concept of single family design standards as a rule, there was some agreement that small lot development, due to its inherently closer homes Mailing Address: 113 W. Mountain Street www.fayetteville-ar.gov Fayetteville, AR 72701. and more densely developed properties, has the potential to be less safe if not built correctly, with clear views from the home to the street, and vice versa. • There was general disagreement on the topic that the ordinance created separate "classes" of homes, with one side arguing that the ordinance creates a higher standard for more affordable homes (those on small lots) and the other side arguing there is no exclusive correlation between the width of the lot and socioeconomic status of the resident. + The meeting ended with Chairman Kyle Cook reminding the Commissioner and City Attorney that even in disagreement on topics, everyone should try to be mindful and respectful of others' opinions, and leave the meeting on good terms. The Mayor also asked staff to respond to some of the statements recently made at public meetings: 1) "The purpose of this ordinance was to prevent crime." The purpose of the adopted ordinance, which was adopted by the City Council unanimously as Ordinance No. 5800 on October 05, 2015, "is to maintain visibility and security of the primary residence to and from the streetscape, provide pedestrian safety, and reduce opportunities for criminal activities." The "Whereas" clauses of the ordinance, which are attached to this document, demonstrate that for multiple reasons, staff was proposing reduced lot width and size in many of the City's zoning districts, to encourage small -lot single family development with a higher density, a concept supported by the City's future land use plan. Small lot development is appropriate in many areas of the city, and reducing the zoning restrictions to allow this was one of the primary purposes of this ordinance. The adopted ordinance enabled developers to LLevelop more homes on the same amount of land than they were allowed to be ore. It was also recognized that small -lot development comes with its own challenges, particularly when setbacks are smaller, houses are closer, and density increases. Sight distance for drivers -exiting garages, pedestrian and child safety along sidewalks, and the potential for deterring crime by promoting and maximizing visual transparency between homes and the street were cited as reasons to create new design standards for small -lot development. During the drafting phase of the ordinance, the planning division met with the Fayetteville Police Department, who voiced support for the concepts of maintaining visibility between a home and a street, stating: "The focus of CPTED (Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design) is lowering the opportunity for unwanted activities (break ins, burglaries) to occur. Windows on the front of the home is a good crime deterrent, for example. Windows provide natural surveillance to and from the road, when shades and curtains are open. Anyone who is considering an unwanted activity can never be sure they wouldn't be seen. I believe this is a very positive design element that reduces crime." The Planning Staff proposed these standards as part of a larger ordinance amendment in several sections of the Unified Development Code. For the design standards, we chose two thresholds with slightly different requirements: 46-69 feet of lot width and less than 46 feet. Lots 70 feet and above are not subject to the ordinance. By far the majority of lots in the City of Fayetteville 2 are zoned RSF-4, and thus have at least 70 feet of lot width required. Some of the City's newer zoning districts like Neighborhood Conservation, RSF-7, RSF-8, and now RSF-18 allow lots of 30, 40, 50, and 60 feet in width. Many traditional neighborhoods were platted with lots of this size, and most do not have garages that project forward of their front facade. In keeping with this tradition, and for reasons relating to safety and aesthetics, the city staff proposed and City Council adopted these new standards, "making traditional town form the standard." 2) These standards now apply to the majority of residential properties; if one is looking for developable land to be built on, RSF-4 is definitely less than all of the Neighborhood Conservation that has been zoned recently. The Planning staff is not sure where this information is sourced, though it was stated at least twice at the most recent Planning Commission discussion. The GIS division maintains a database of all properties in the city, what they are zoned, and whether or not they are developed into lots. As of today: The single family zones that require lots to be developed 70 feet wide or larger, and thus are not subject to this ordinance, contains approximately 10,881 acres. RSF-4 is by far the majority of this acreage, at 9,535 acres. 56% of this acreage is developed in residential lots; the remaining 44%, or 4,176 acres, is considered undeveloped, The single family zones that permit lots to be smaller than 70 feet wide contain 962 acres; 722 acres of this is Neighborhood Conservation. These more dense zones do not require lots to be less than 70 feet, but they do allow them to be so. 3) This design standard targets and discriminates against affordable homes. This topic was debated at the Planning Commission at length. The size of a lot does not automatically equate to an affordable home, though it certainly cari help, if that is the goal. One of the most valuable homes in the City of Fayetteville is on a lot that is 30 feet wide, and many small lots in the historic districts of Fayetteville have homes that are very high in value. Conversely, a small lot can reduce the cost to a homebuyer when that is the intent, in that it is less property to purchase. Reducing the frontage requirement and setbacks for many of our higher density single and multi -family districts allows a developer additional tools to provide a greater variety of house size and price point, thereby making them more attainable to a greater segment of our population. The design standard in and of itself has not been proven to increase the cost of a house; the "cost increase" that has been discussed in almost every case thus far is due more to the fact that an already designed house plan is planned for a specific development or lot and changing that already developed house plan would cost time and money. The standard does not attempt to make homes less affordable; one of the very purposes of the ordinance was to improve the land use efficiency by increasing density, where it is appropriate, and at the same time maintaining a high quality of life and safe neighborhoods. The design standard in place is a setback, not unlike other building setbacks or stepbacks in all zones. 4) Developers were caught by surprise or projects were already in process. Clearly there were subdivisions or lots already in process that were impacted by this ordinance when it was adopted, much like every ordinance that is adopted. To give some perspective on the timeline: • June 22, 2015 — Planning Commission discussion and table to allow public input • July 13, 2015 — Planning Commission discussion and forward to City Council • August 04, 2015 — City Council 111 reading, tabled to allow modifications • October 06, 2015 — City Council 2"d and 3d reading, adopted unanimously To date, the variance process through the Planning Commission has offered relief for several of these projects. The project that was discussed at the last meeting is a good example; this project was submitted during the process of City Council review, and approved by the Planning Commission as a preliminary plat on September 28, just before the ordinance was adopted. While the lots have actually still not been approved for construction of homes, the developer indicated that they have already pre -sold lots and house plans for the lots they plan to develop that are less than 70 feet in width. The options to them at this point are to 1) request a variance before the Planning Commission or 2) change their lots to a minimum 70 feet in width. 5) City Planning Staff Recommendations: At the request of the Council, the City Planning staff met to discuss this ordinance amendment proposal, and offers the following suggestions to consider if an amendment to UDC Section 164.23 is desired to allow more flexibility in design standards to meet the original intent of the code. These suggestions are shown in the attached strikeout -highlight version of the code and generally described below. Lot Size Applicability This option would simplify the code and lower the threshold of applicability only to lots 50 feet wide or less when the threshold currently applies to all lots less than 70 feet. The 50-foot lot dimension is what is typically understood in Fayetteville as a 'traditional' size. Many lots throughout older parts of the the City were originally platted in 25-foot or 50-foot increments, and we are seeing more lots platted with this size now. In staffs opinion, the 50-foot threshold is a more accurate dimension for what is considered to be small -lot single family homes, where the relationship between the width of the home and the width of the lot began to be more prevalent. As lot sizes get smaller and development patterns more compact, negative design impacts of single family homes such as 22-foot wide garages start to become compounded. As homes are developed at the 50-foot width and below, design sensitivity to the public realm is critical to maintain safe, attractive neighborhoods. Garage Door Placement This option would modify the code to be consistent with the Urban Residential Design Standards (UDC 166.23) which requires that garages not protrude forward from the principal fagade. The Single Family Infill Standards currently require garages to be recessed at least 5 feet behind the principal facade. This change would allow more flexibility while still maintaining the intent of eliminating prominent 'snout house' design where garages and garage doors are the primary visual feature of a home. Single Family Infill Standards — Rename Staff would suggest renaming this section to Single Family Design Standards, removing the "infill" name. A point was made at the last Council meeting that made good sense, these standards apply to new greenfield developments with small lots, as well, thus taking out the "infill" designation is more descriptive of its applicability. DISCUSSION: In summary, staff still feels thatthe Single Family Infill code is importantto guiding and encouraging small lot development in a pattern that is in line with the City's goals. Recent code changes were proposed and adopted lastyearto encourage and allow small -lot single family development. These changes reduced the single family lot width minimums to 30 feet in multiple zoning districts and included the adoption of a new district called RSF-18, Residential Single Family 18 Units per acre. The subject design standards are intended to ensure that small lot development is done sensitively, maintaining transparency and interaction at the street level to create a pedestrian -friendly, active, and safe neighborhood. As with any ordinance that is adopted, staff is open to review and revise if the language is not meeting the stated intent. We have made some suggestions here for the Council to consider. 164.23 Single-family i Small Lot Design Standards (A) Purpose. The purpose of the standards is to maintain visibility and security of the primary similar feature Ghall residence to and from the streetscape, provide h6' -12 'nnhno he„en.t the pedestrian safety, and reduce opportunities for The , ppe criminal activities. (6) shall alse have 0� (B) Applicability. The following standards apply to new detached single-family homes on lots with ler,s than 70 feet of street frontage of 50 feet or less. (b) GaFage openings that aFe OR the me F-;idp of the heme as the fFent door shall pMGipal fa§a4e-. t faau to -be + sce5sed Unnt door (2) Lets with Ie than 45 foot of otrnet freRtagO (1) Each home shall have a clearly defined front door and windows on the grsuad flee facade facing the street This is only required on one side of the home where there is more than one street frontage. { 4_ (2) Garage openings that are on the same side of the home as the front door shall not protrude forward past the edge of the principal facade, be reGes6ed at learA r feet bs#ai tfia priras+pa4#arade eraa-gara" Gannot be IOGatAedd at least -5 feet behind the ue—ito GharaGt9Fi6tiG6, at least two (+)___ (3) The garage opening shall be less than 50 percent of the principal facade length. The front daer shell he evep with or eXtend fowvard—of the garage eper�ir;g CD164:1 Page I of 22 113 wnt \rruntair straat Fayette%Ae, A.R 727Ql Ordinance: 5300 FileNumber: 2015-0330 ADS! 15-5093 (1 DC CHAPTERS 161,164 AND 172 - UNCLE FAMILY AND TWO FAMILY MILL) AN ORDINrANCE AMENDING TITLE Xk : UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEtiILLE, TO AMEND CILAPTERS 161, 164 AND 172 TO NIODIFY EXISMG BULK AND AREA REGULATIONS TO ENCOURAGE SNIALL-LOT, SNGLE FAMILY AND TWO FAVIILY INFII.L IN MULTI -FAMILY ZONIATG DISTRICTS: TO PERMIT ZERO LOT -LUTE DEVELOPMENT IN CERTAIN ZONLNG DISTRICTS; TO CREATE THE RSF-19 ZONLNG DISTRICT; AND TO INCLUDE MLN[IMUM DESIGN STA\TDARDS FOR THIS TYPE OF DEtiELOPMENT_ WHEREAS, the Ciq, of Fayetteville recognizes that the opportunity to provide appropriate neighborhood density through small lot development supports Cite Plan 2030 goals of prioritizing infill development and discouraging suburban sprala 1 and NA'HERFAS, small lot development with reducers lot sizes and building setbacks may enrouiage the creation of hriusing that may bt financially amimble to .i large segnient of the Fayetteville community; and WHEREAS, the Cite of Fayetteville recoanizrs that small lot dev6cjp tteuts are a3pprapziate m rrtanx areai of the city zoned for high -density, multi-faraily irousi w; and IITIEREAS, tl:e o.erall residential density of single-fantih, and two -fancily developnree=ts xl ntkl6- f'anuiy zacuie districts will betvpr ntatcir the underliir;o permitted density by reduciug the Iot s ze requirements for residentiat dc—elopmenr.. and V WHEREAS, design standards for narrow lot development shall be utilized to maxi-mize visual transparen.cy bets een hones and the street to mcreasse `cues on the street" and promote safe urban environments_ Page 3 P;rnte-d on la.7/15 https://www,muiiicode.cona/library/ar/fayetteville%ordinances/code of _ordinances?nodeld... 8/10,2016 Page 3 of 22 Ordinance 580 NOW, THEREFORE, BE rr ORDAWED BY THE CITY COUNCIL. OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKkN&kS: Section 1= That the City Council of Fazetteville, Arkansas hereby repeals the existing §161.10 RT-12, §161.L R 4F-6, §161.12 RW-1 2 §161.13 RW-18, 1!61.14 R-W-24, and §161.15 RMF-40 and replaces tires sections with the attached Exhibit "A", renumbering the subsequent sections accordingly. Section 2- That the City Council of Fayetteville. Arkansas adopts a nett' §161.10 District RSF 18, Residential Single Fm?7i1y - 18 Vt7its per acre, as shown in Exhibit "B' Section 3: That the City Council of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby repeals §164,11 Height or Setback Regulations; Exceptions and Horne Protection Requirements and replaces it with the attached Exhibit -C Sec6on 4: That the Cit}-- Council of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby anrcnds §164- Supplementa)-y Zonft Regulations by adopting §164.23 Single -Family hill Standards as shown on the attached Exhibit "D." tctiog _ That the City Council of Fayetteville. Arkansas hereby repeals f172.11(0)(2) Driismi:gys Bavond the Property 1 ine and replaces it with the following language: §1721l(Gx2). Drwewayw Beyond the Properiv Lm. Driveways shall be pared from the property line andior master street plan right-of-way with asphalt, concrete, brick or stone pavers, or other valid surface and shall extend 18 feet (length) into the promm•. To prevent vehicles from parking m er the public sidewalk: garages and carports shall be positioned to provide at least 18 feet bets een the sidetvalk or Master Street Plan right-of-way line and the garage or carport PASSED and APPROVED on 10/6 f2015 .1pproved. Attest: Lioneld Jordan, Mayor Sondra F. Smit is City Clerk Treasurer Page T Printed on 10i7>i5 https://www.municode.com/library/ar/fayetteville/ordinances/code_of ordinances?nodeld... 8/10/2016 CITY OF 7ayoo , I C ARKANSAS TO: Planning Staff; Planning Commission; Ordinance Review Committee THRU: Kit Williams, City Attorney FROM: Matthew Petty, Ward 2 Alderman DATE: August 4, 2016 SUBJECT: Ordinance No. An ordinance to authorize the City Council to grant a variance in the Single -Family Infill Standards to support attainable, affordable housing. Planners, Commissioners, and Committee Members, I support the intent of the ordinance in question. The regulations of our Unified Development Code are made more legitimate by a clear and accessible variance process. Yet I cannot support the proposed ordinance as constructed because it ignores current variance conventions. Bypassing the Planning Commission with variances for any development standard, including the design standards in question, is a mistake and further confuses our development review procedures. Please consider an alternative approach. The intent of this ordinance can be met by writing new flexibility into our existing variance chapter. I propose broadening the justifications a developer must demonstrate to be granted a variance from the City Planning Commission. As it stands, a developer must convince the Commission our development provisions are causing an undue hardship unique to the subject property, but it is clear there are many ways a development might satisfy the intent and purpose of our regulations that do not strictly comply with our code. The Plannina Commission should be able to grant variances based on the merit, broadfy defined. of any proposal that meets the intent and t)Urnase of the relevant provision. This approach solves numerous problems in addition to the issue before us. It will allow the Planning Commission to consider all aspects of city planning and development, such as housing affordability, design precedents and context, economic development goals, and infrastructural advantages. It will grant staff the flexibility to support variance requests which advance city goals but presently go unsupported because no hardship can be demonstrated. It's an improvement to the way we address development today. I respectfully request you give this suggestion the consideration it deserves. 3at lthew Pett Alderman Mailing Address: 113 W. Mountain Street www.fayetteviite-ar.gov Fayetteville, AR 72701 IN OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY DEPARTMENTAL CORRESPONDENCE TO: Mayor Jordan City Council CC: Don Marr, Chief of Staff Jeremy Pate, Development Services Director Andrew Garner, Planning Director FROM: Kit Williams, City Attorney C ` DATE: August 12, 2016 Kit Willi3i3ls City Attor-ijey Blake TIC1l1"ingtoll Assist l if Ciry:l.rt;-r rr.y Path Mulford Pro alegail RE: Ordinance Review Committee's Unanimous Recommendation for § 164.23 Single-family Inf ill Standards The Ordinance Review Committee had a productive meeting Thursday afternoon. After hearing from City staff and the public, they unanimously passed a motion to recommend to the full City Council the changes proposed by the Planning Department (attached). By focusing more clearly on relatively narrow lots (50 feet wide and narrower), most of the issues home builders and home buyers have had with the original code section will be resolved and will not likely reoccur. Because of this recommendation, the new variance procedure I had proposed with Alderman Schoppmeyer's sponsorship is no longer necessary. Therefore, the amendment to § 164.23 should now be primarily as proposed by the Planning Department. I informed the Ordinance Review Committee (after consulting with Andrew Garner and receiving his tentative approval) that I would seek to retain some of Planning's original language to allow garages in narrow lots to sometimes exceed 50% of the house's principal fagade's width. This is necessary for a normal 22 foot wide garage to fit along with the front of a house on a narrow lot. This would only be available if the house had a second floor with windows or a balcony or deck facing the street. Therefore, I would suggest that § 164.23 (B) (3) would be as follows: "(3) The garage opening shall be less than 50% of the principal fagade's length unless the garage has windows facing the street and the house has a second story with windows facing the street or has a balcony, deck, or similar feature which projects at least flush with the garage opening toward the street." After consultation with Planning on Monday, I will prepare and distribute a clean copy of the ordinance as recommended by Planning including the language of (3) above. I will also follow Planning's suggestion about renaming this code section to Small Lot Design Standards, probably add a reference to aesthetics to a Purpose section, and provide different Whereas clauses. If you wish to accept the Ordinance Review Committee's recommendation, please move to amend the current agenda item's ordinance to the new ordinance. 164.23 Single-family inM Small Lot Design Standards (A) Purpose The purpose of the standards is to maintain visibility and security of the primaryfeature Shall projeGt a residence to and from the streetscape, provide 'east 12 pedestrian safety, and reduce opportunities for are a The criminal activities. tJ �— �n�y- �������� floor{ have w' (B) Applicability. The following standards apply to the sireat. new detached single-family homes on lots with less than 70 feet of street frontage of 50 feet or less. street 4QRtagO. front dOOF and windows on the gFound only Faquired on one 61de of the- ha-m-9 *Ontage. (b) GaFage openings [hat aFe on the same ode- (a) A garaga does not havo-to barecessed behind !he pgFiGlpal Fagade if the garage-op�ir� is-kteated-sc�a-�liffareat side of the home -than -€A keAt•goor: r'etr wiiF� tessi+�4 feet of street fre»tagez (1) Each home shall have a clearly defined front door and windows on the ^�s�, d-goo facade facing the street. This is only required on one side of the home where there is more than one street frontage. (a-)— (2) Garage openings that are on the same side of the home as the front door shall not protrude forward past the edcle of the xt fr Vol facade, tea rsseMsect at-tr�as? S feat b Ghi► d tF rinsipal tcyads li3ere Etaracfa oar�r�ot-tom lesateci-at-least--�-feet-k�ek�ind-tbe prinGipall fa�ade. due to unique so GhaFaGtegsks, At 188-St Win- Of the f011OWiRg 6tandaFdG shall be antes# (0— (3) The garage opening shall be less than 50 percent of the principal facade length. CD164:1 DEPARTMENTAL CORRESPONDENCE OFFICE OF TflE CITY ATTORNEY TO: Mayor Jordan City Council CC: Don Marr, Chief of Staff Jeremy Pate, Development Services Director Andrew Garner, Planning Director Jonathan Curth, Senior Planner FROM: Kit Williams, City Attorney C DATE: August 18, 2016 RE: Amending § 164.23 Single -Family Infill Standards Kit Williams CityAtIorney Blake Pennington A>sishmf CityAllonncy Patti IVILllfol-d Prnrulegol Attached please find the ordinance amending § 164.23 as recommended by Planning and the Ordinance Review Committee. The name of this code section has been changed to: "Small Lot Design Standards." The Purpose section has been shortened, but broadened to include aesthetics as a support for these standards. I have also slightly modified (B) (3) from the changes Planning had initially recommended and retained their original wording in the current code. A traditional two car garage (normally around 22 feet wide) would probably take up slightly more than 50% of the front facade of a house on a 50 foot wide lot (with normal 5 foot side setbacks). Rather than requiring a variance request by the owner, the City Council through this code subsection would present two options: second floor windows facing the street or a balcony or deck flush with the garage front. Both of these options would increase visibility toward the street for better security and would improve streetscape aesthetics. By including these options rather than requiring a variance request, the City Council would simplify and speed up small lot design and give architects and home designers clear guidance about what would be approved if a garage opening needed to exceed 50% of the principal facade width. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND § 164.23 SINGLE-FAMILY INFILL STANDARDS WHEREAS, § 164.23 Single -Family Infill Standards should be renamed Small Lot Design Standards to recognize such standards would apply to small lots (50 feet wide or less) throughout the City; and WHEREAS, § 164.23's initial application to all lots smaller than 70 feet wide has created problems for several home builders and buyers and should be more focused upon truly small lots (50 feet or less). NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS: Section 1. That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby amends § 164.23 Single -Family Infill Standards by repealing it and enacting a modified version entitled Small Lot Design Standards as follows: "§ 164.23 Small Lot Design Standards (A) Purpose. The purpose of these standards is to better maintain visibility, security, safety and aesthetics for pedestrians, drivers and the residents of homes built on relatively narrow lots. (B) Applicability. These standards apply to new detached single-family homes with street frontage of 50 feet or less. (1) Each home shall have a clearly defined front door and windows on the fagade facing the street. This is only required on one side of a home where there is more than one street frontage. (2) Garage openings that are on the same side of the home as the front door shall not protrude forward past the edge of the principal fagade. (3) The garage opening shall be less than 50% of the principal fagade length unless the house has a second story with windows facing the street or has a balcony, deck, or similar feature which projects at least flush with the garage opening toward the street." PASSED and APPROVED this 161h day of August, 2016. APPROVED: By:._ LIONELD JORDAN, Mayor ATTEST: By: SONDRA SMITH, City Clerk/Treasurer NoRTHWESTARKANsAs Democrat Voazc& _.. . r,�,x. �.�,;. �� 1�:'.; 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 County 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. 5895 Was inserted in the Regular Edition on: August 25, 2016 Publication Charges $ 119.60 olzit- " Cathy Wiles Subscribed and sworn to before me This ?_D day of , 2016. o ary Public My Commission Expires: toingla-14, �PNE �A�EN ,o NOTARY '• .I PUBLIC �##111401379ry Cr 9� U:res 1012a`•1 *NOTE* '%�croN ca1 Please do notpay-from Affidavit. �� Invoice will be sent. Ordinance: 5895 File Number: 2016-0352 AMEND §164.23 SINGLE-FAMILY INFILL STANDARDS: AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND § 164.23 SINGLE-FAMILY INFILL STANDARDS WHEREAS, § 164.23 Single -Family Infill Standards should be renamed Small Lot Design Standards to recognize such standards would apply to small lots (50 feet wide or less) throughout the City; and WHEREAS, § 164.23's initial application to all lots smaller than 70 feet wide has created problems for several home builders and buyers and should be more focused upon truly small lots (50 feet or less). NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS: Section 1. That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby amends § 164.23 Single -Family Infill Standards by repealing it and enacting a modified version entitled Small Lot Design Standards as follows: "§ 164.23 Small Lot Design Standards (A) Purpose. The purpose of these standards is to better maintain visibility, security, safety and aesthetics for pedestrians, drivers and the residents of homes built on relatively narrow lots. (B) Applicability. These standards apply to new detached single-family homes with street frontage of 50 feet or less. (1) Each home shall have a clearly defined front door and windows on the fagade facing the street. This is only required on one side of a home where there is more than one street frontage. (2) Garage openings that are on the same side of the home as the front door shall not protrude forward past the edge of the principal fagade. (3) The garage opening shall be less than 50% of the principal fagade length unless the house has a second story with windows facing the street or has a balcony, deck, or similar feature which projects at least flush with the garage opening toward the street. PASSED and APPROVED on 8/16/2016 Approved: Lioneld Jordan, Mayor Attest: Sondra E. Smith, City Clerk Treasurer 73821871 Aug. 25, 2016