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