HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016-11-28 - Agendas - Final CITY OF
Tay� LY i'I'l e� AGENDA
ARKANSAS
Final Agenda
Planning Commission Meeting
November 28, 2016
5:30 PM
113 W. Mountain, Room 219
Members: Kyle Cook (Chair), Ron Autry (Vice Chair), Matthew Hoffman (Secretary), Tracy
Hoskins, Janet Selby, Ryan Noble, Tom Brown, Leslie Belden, and Allison Thurmond Quinlan
City Staff: Andrew Garner, City Planning Director; Jonathan Curth, Senior Planner; Quin
Thompson, Planner; Harry Davis, Planner
City Attorney: Kit Williams
Call to Order
Roll Call
Consent
1. Approval of the minutes from the November 14, 2016 meeting.
Old Business
2. VAR 16-5661: Variance Item (710 N. CEDARWOOD AVE./FLEMISTER, 442): Submitted by
RICHIE LAMB for property located at 710 N. CEDARWOOD AVE. The property is zoned RSF-
4, RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY, 4 UNITS PER ACRE, and contains approximately 0.33
acres. The request is for a variance to UDC Chapter 166.08, Street Design and Access
Management Separation for a new curb cut. Planner: Andrew Garner
THE APPLICANT HAS REQUESTED THAT THIS ITEM BE TABLED.
3. ADM 16-5631: Administrative Item (UDC CHAPTERS 161 & 162 AMENDMENTS):
Submitted by PLANNING STAFF for revisions to several chapters in the Unified Development
Code. The proposal is to create two new zoning districts, a new use unit, and include accessory
dwellings as a permitted use in several existing districts. The intent of the code changes are to
facilitate greater flexibility in medium-intensity commercial and medium-intensity urban residential
development. Planner: Jonathan Curth
New Business
4. VAR 16-5652: Variance Item (495 W. PRAIRIE ST./PRAIRIE ST. APTS., 523): Submitted
by THE INFILL GROUP, INC. for property located at 495 W. PRAIRIE ST. The property is
zoned MSC, MAIN STREET CENTER, and contains approximately 0.21 acres. The request is
for a variance to parking space size requirements and parking lot greenspace requirements.
Planner: Quin Thompson
Mailing Address:
113 W. Mountain Street www.fayetteville-ar.gov
Fayetteville, AR 72701
5. PPL 16-5641: Preliminary Plat (SE OF PERSIMMON & BROYLES/SLOANBROOKE SD,
PH. II, 477): Submitted by JORGENSEN & ASSOCIATES, INC. for property located SE OF
PERSIMMON &BROYLES.The property is zoned NC, NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION and
contains approximately 28.20 acres. The request is for 103 single-family lots.
Planner: Harry Davis
6. PPL 16-5642: Preliminary Plat (NE OF 15TH & MORNINGSIDE DR./PARK MEADOWS SD,
564): Submitted by CRAFTON TULL &ASSOCIATES, INC. for properties located NE OF 15TH &
MORNINGSIDE DR. The property is zoned with a mixture of NC, NEIGHBORHOOD
CONSERVATION, CS, COMMUNITY SERVICES, and RA, RESIDENTIAL-AGRICULTURAL and
contain approximately 68.00 acres. The request is for 290 single-family lots.
Planner: Quin Thompson
The followinq items have been approved administratively by staff:
• LSP 16-5585: Lot Split (S. OF 3870 BLACK OAK RD./GOFORTH, 762): Submitted by
REID & ASSOCIATES, INC. for property located S. OF 3870 BLACK OAK RD. The
property is in the FAYETTEVILLE PLANNING AREA and contains approximately 31.26
acres. The request is to split the parcel into 3 lots containing approximately 3.18, 4.50,
and 23.58 acres. Planner: Jonathan Curth
Announcements
Adjourn
NOTICE TO MEMBERS OF THE AUDIENCE:
All interested parties may appear and be heard at the public hearings. If you wish to address the Planning
Commission on an agenda item please queue behind the podium when the Chair asks for public comment.
Once the Chair recognizes you, go to the podium and give your name and address.Address your comments
to the Chair, who is the presiding officer. The Chair will direct your comments to the appropriate appointed
official, staff, or others for response. Please keep your comments brief, to the point, and relevant to the
agenda item being considered so that everyone has a chance to speak.
Interpreters or TDD, Telecommunication Device for the Deaf, are available for all public hearings; 72 hour
notice is required. For further information or to request an interpreter, please call 575-8330.
As a courtesy please turn off all cell phones and pagers.
A copy of the Planning Commission agenda and other pertinent data are open and available for inspection
in the office of City Planning (575-8267), 125 West Mountain Street, Fayetteville, Arkansas. All interested
parties are invited to review the petitions.
2
CITY OF
Ta L MINUTES
ARKANSAS
Planning Commission
November 14, 2016
5:30 PM
113 W. Mountain, Room 219
Members: Kyle Cook (Chair), Ron Autry (Vice Chair), Matthew Hoffman (Secretary), Tracy
Hoskins, Janet Selby, Ryan Noble, Tom Brown, Leslie Belden, and Allison Thurmond Quinlan
Call to Order: 5:30 PM, Kyle Cook
In Attendance:
Members: Kyle Cook (Chair), Matthew Hoffman (Secretary), Ryan Noble, Tracy Hoskins, Janet
Selby, Tom Brown, Leslie Belden, and Allison Thurmond Quinlan.
Absent: Ron Autry (Vice Chair)
Staff: Andrew Garner, Jonathan Curth, Quin Thompson, and Harry Davis.
Assistant City Attorney: Blake Pennington
Consent Agenda:
1. Approval of the minutes from the October 24, 2016 meeting.
2. ADM 16-5649: Administrative Item (693 W. NORTH ST./NATURAL STATE-1 YR. MOBILE
VENDOR, 444): Submitted by AMBER CAFOUREK-BELASCO for property located at 693 W.
NORTH ST. The property is zoned CS, COMMUNITY SERVICES and contains approximately
0.89 acres. The request is for a one year mobile vendor permit.
3. ADM 16-5650: Administrative Item (EAST OF 600 E. VAN ASCHE DR./ALTITUDE
TRAMPOLINE, 174): Submitted by MILLER, BOSKUS, LACK ARCHITECTS, INC. for property
located EAST OF 600 E. VAN ASCHE DR. The property is zoned C-2, THOROUGHFARE
COMMERCIAL and contains approximately 6.64 acres. The request is for a major modification to
the previously approved LSD 16-5575.
Motion:
Commissioner Belden made a motion to approve the consent agenda. Commissioner Selby
seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion passed with a vote of 7-0-1. Commissioner
Hoffman abstained.
Old Business:
NONE
Mailing Address: Planning Commission
113 W. Mountain Street www.fayettev�Yember28,em 1
Fayetteville, AR 72701 ,2016 Item 1
Y Nov 14,2016 Minutes
Page 1 of 10
New Business:
4. PPL 16-5584: Preliminary Plat (NORTH OF COLFAX LOOP/THE COVES SD, PH. III & IV,
555): Submitted by CRAFTON TULL & ASSOCIATES, INC. for property located NORTH OF
COLFAX LOOP. The property is zoned NC, NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION and R-A,
Residential-Agricultural and contains approximately 37.00 acres. The request is for 109 single-
family lots.
Jonathan Curth, Senior Planner: Gave the staff report
Taylor Lindley, Crafton Tull, Applicant's Representative: Agrees with the conditions of
approval and is available for questions.
Public Comment:
No public comment was presented.
Matthew Hoffman, Commissioner: Inquires as to the lot average lot widths.
Andrew Garner, Planning Commissioner: Provides that they are approximately 51 feet in
width on average.
Hoffman: Expresses disappointment and asks the applicant if it would be possible to tie the
subdivision sidewalks in to the proposed trail.
Lindley: Notes that there is a connection proposed.
Hoffman: Questions whether the applicant intends to comply with the small-lot design
standards.
Lindley: Notes that the applicant deliberately sought to avoid being subject-
Hoffman: (Cuts off the applicant) Expresses further disappointment that the applicant's intent
was not to be required to comply with these design standards and thanks the applicant.
Kyle Cook, Commissioner: Comments about the proposed sewer, and that he sympathizes
with anyone that buys these properties and has to maintain a grinder pump.
Andrew Garner, Planning Director: Recognizes that it is unusual, and because of this staff
crafted conditions so that buyers would understand what they are purchasing.
Motion:
Commissioner Selby made a motion to approve PPL 16-5584 with conditions as recommended
by staff. Commissioner Noble seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion passed with a
vote of 7-1-0. Commissioner Quinlan voted `no'.
5. VAC 16-5582: Vacation (41 E. NORTH ST./ANDONA PROPERTIES, 445): Submitted by
ANDREA FOURNET for property located at 41 E. NORTH ST. The property is zoned RSF-4,
RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY, 4 UNITS PER ACRE and contains approximately 0.74 acres.
The request is to vacate a portion of a street right-of-way.
Planning Commission
November 8,2016
Agen a Item 1
Nov 14,2016 Minutes
Page 2 of 10
Quin Thompson, Planner: Gave the staff report.
Ramona Jones, Applicant: Said she was present to answer questions.
Public Comment:
No public comment was presented.
Alison Quinlan, Commissioner: Said that she had asked that the item be removed from the
consent agenda. She added that the value of land in the area led her believe that
redevelopment of the property was likely and that a new street would be beneficial in the future.
Tom Brown, Commissioner: Said that he would not be in favor of vacating the property for the
reasons stated by Ms Quinlan.
Tracy Hoskins, Commissioner: Asked staff about block length and street separation.
Andrew Garner, Planning Director: Said that the block configuration would meet code.
Hoskins: Asked applicant what her plans were for the property.
Jones: Said she had no plans at this time.
Matthew Hoffman, Commissioner: Said he cannot imagine this street being built, but that he
would be in favor of waiting to vacate until rezoning the area is studied.
Leslie Belden, Commissioner: Asked about other right-of-way in the area of Cleburn Street.
Garner: Said that the Cleburn right-of-way had been partially vacated.
Kyle Cook, Chair: Said that he had no issue with vacating this, there is a significant amount of
drainage and nice trees. Unlikely to see developer paying to build that street.
Ramona: The neighbor to the south has no other area on which to park, other than this ROW.
Quinlan: Said that this is 60' of very valuable land that the City is just giving away to the
landowners? I would maintain that this land has a great deal of value to the City and should not
be given away.
Motion:
Commissioner Hoskins made a motion to forward VAC 16-5582 with recommended approval.
Commissioner Selby seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion passed with a vote of
5-3-0. Commissioners Hoffman, Quinlan, and Brown voted `no'.
6. VAR 16-5661: Variance Item (710 N. CEDARWOOD AVE./FLEMISTER, 442): Submitted by
RICHIE LAMB for property located at 710 N. CEDARWOOD AVE. The property is zoned RSF-4,
RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY, 4 UNITS PER ACRE, and contains approximately 0.33 acres.
The request is for a variance to UDC Chapter 166.08, Street Design and Access Management
Separation for a new curb cut.
Planning Commission
Novembery-8,2016
Agenda Item 1
Nov 14,2016 Minutes
Page 3 of 10
Andrew Garner, City Planning Director: Gave the staff report.
Richie Lamb, Applicant Representative: Discussed the reasons for the variance request and
was present for questions.
Public Comment:
Rob Koser, lives on Halsell Road: Is there anything that will reduce the amount of parking on
Cleveland?
No more public comment was presented.
Kyle Cook, Commissioner: Asked the applicant if the curb cut on Cleveland will remain.
Lamb: Responded that no changes are proposed to the driveway on Cleveland Drive.
Matt Hoffman, Commissioner: I understand why it is uncomfortable to back out onto Cleveland
Drive. I don't think I can support this without abandoning the driveway onto Cleveland. If we give
a variance for this new driveway then we should probably be looking to reduce the impact of the
impervious surfaces and the existing driveway on Cleveland Drive.
Tracy Hoskins, Commissioner: Asked about the building elevations.
Garner: Pulled up photos of the house on the screen and indicated the front of the house with a
garage faces Cleveland Street.
Allison Quinlan, Commissioner: Asked if the applicant would entertain making the curb cut on
Cleveland compliant.
Lamb: Indicated they could make it compliant.
Quinlan: Indicated that she could approve the variances with conditions with the condition that
the driveway on Cleveland be brought into compliance.
Blake Pennington, Assistant City Attorney: Discussed that if we force them to bring the
driveway onto Cleveland Street into compliance it may be a legal taking that we have to
compensate the property owner. A trade off from one part of the site to another is not a part of
the variance request.
Lamb: Discussed that if the property owner were here they would be in favor of reducing the
driveway width on Cleveland if that is what it takes to get the variance for the circle drive on
Cedarwood. He discussed agreement with the conditions of approval recommended by staff.
Leslie Belden, Commissioner: I don't have any issue with the driveway distance from Cleveland.
From a safety standpoint I have no objections. The house across the street has a circle drive. The
fact that they are putting in so much concrete is a concern.
Hoffman: I can't support it as proposed with a 40-foot curb cut on Cleveland and 28 feet of curb
cut on Cedarwood.
Planning Commission
November 8,2016
Agen a Item 1
Nov 14,2016 Minutes
Page 4 of 10
Hoskins: Asked about the curb cut width requirements allowed by code.
Garner: Gave the maximum curb cut width of 24 feet.
Tom Brown, Commissioner: Asked about impervious coverage of the property overall, and if
the site would comply with the addition of this drive.
Garner: Indicated that the site would comply with the overall impervious surface requirements.
Brown: I think we need to listen to our legal staff. I would not be able to support a condition
requiring the applicant to reduce the curb cut on Cleveland against our legal staff's
recommendations.
Cook: We already have a safety issue with the driveway on Cleveland and this circle drive will
create another safety issue.
Motion:
Commissioner Hoffman made a motion to table VAR 16-5661 until the November 28th meeting.
Commissioner Quinlan seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion passed with a vote
of 8-0-0.
7. CUP 16-5625: Conditional Use (EAST OF 6377 W. SHREVE DR./PERGESON, 513):
Submitted by JACK PERGESON for property located EAST OF 6377 W. SHREVE DR. The
property is zoned RSF-1, RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY, 1 UNIT PER ACRE and contains
approximately 19.16 acres. The request is for construction of a secondary structure that is larger
than the proposed primary structure.
8. ADM 16-5662: Administrative Item (EAST OF 6329 W. SHREVE DR./PERGESON, 513):
Submitted by PLANNING STAFF on behalf of JACK PERGESON for property located EAST OF
6377 W. SHREVE DR. The property is zoned RSF-1, RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY, 1 UNIT
PER ACRE and contains approximately 19.16 acres. The request is for a waiver of the minimum
street frontage requirement.
Quin Thompson, Planner: Gave the staff report for both CUP 16-5652 and ADM 16-5662.
Jack Pergeson, Applicant: Said that this may seem a large shop for most people. He indicated
that he is a hobbyist, I rebuild old cars and do woodworking in the shop. I have a shop building
of a similar size and know that this is the amount of space I need.
Public Comment:
No public comment was presented for either CUP 16-5652 and ADM 16-5662.
Kyle Cook, Chair: Asked Mr. Pergeson if he agreed with the conditions.
Pergeson: Said that he did, adding that Foster lane is already in a private access easement.
Motion for CUP 16-5625:
Planning Commission
Novemberrg8,2016
Agenda Item 1
Nov 14,2016 Minutes
Page 5 of 10
Commissioner Hoffman made a motion to approve CUP 16-5625 with conditions as
recommended by staff. Commissioner Selby seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion
passed with a vote of 8-0-0.
Motion for ADM 16-5662:
Commissioner Hoffman made a motion to approve ADM 16-5662 with conditions as
recommended by staff. Commissioner Quinlan seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion
failed with a vote of 8-0-0.
9. CUP 16-5533: Conditional Use (1844 W. HALSELL RD./GUINN, 481): Submitted by BLEW
&ASSOCIATES, INC. for property located at 1844 W. HALSELL RD. The property is zoned RSF-
4, RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY, 4 UNITS PER ACRE and contains approximately 1.96 acres.
The request is for a tandem lot.
Jonathan Curth, Senior Planner: Gave the staff report
Steve Guinn, Applicant: Expands on staff's report by outlining that it is friends that want the
property, and they are ready to begin construction.
Public Comment:
Ron Woodruff, Attorney for an adjacent property: Is speaking in opposition, noting that the
existing drive is private and serves the Scroggs dwelling to the north. They oppose the split for
several reasons. The first is with regards to construction and vegetation removal causing more
runoff problems. The second is that they are not willing to share their driveway to the west.
Notes that most of the lots in the area are greater than the one acre proposed for the tandem
lot.
Robert Koser: Is the property owner to the south and approves of the request. Notes that there
are numerous tandem lots in the area, and this is a good use of the land.
Eloise Jane Scroggs: Lives to the north and bought this lot when it was zoned R-1. Comments
that the driveway is on her property, and that she built it without receiving payment for the use of
it. Notes that the applicant is infringing on her property and driveway without her prermission,
even going as far as to pave her driveway.
No more public comment was presented.
Tom Brown, Commissioner: Visited the site, and notes that it is very steep terrain with the
eastern portion of the lot being more level. Requests clarification about the access shown on the
plat to the east, and feels it is the best place for it.
Curth: Confirms that the intent is to access Halsell to the east, and that the condition is there in
case the applicant would ever seek to utilize the driveway.
Brown: Is comfortable then with leaving the condition as written. Does not have a problem with
approving this proposal, as long as access is going to be on the east side and not on the
existing driveway.
Planning Commission
Novemberr�8,2016
Agenda Item 1
Nov 14,2016 Minutes
Page 6 of 10
Matthew Hoffman, Commissioner: Also seeks clarification from staff as to the proposed
access to the east as opposed to utilizing the existing driveway.
Curth: Notes that the condition regarding access to the existing driveway can be eliminated if
the Commissioners see fit.
Leslie Belden, Commissioner: Inquires about other public comments and information about
who those people were since they do not seem to be here tonight.
Curth: The other public comments were made months ago by phone, with a preference to be
anonymous.
Motion:
Commissioner Hoskins made a motion to approve CUP 16-5533 with conditions as
recommended by staff. Commissioner Selby seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion
passed with a vote of 7-1-0. Commissioner Belden voted `no'.
10. RZN 16-5624: Rezone (SW CORNER OF GREGG AVE. & DRAKE ST./DRAKE ST.
HOLDINGS, LLC, 289): Submitted by COLLIERS INTERNATIONAL, INC. for properties at the
SW CORNER OF GREGG AVE. & DRAKE ST . The properties are zoned RMF-24,
RESIDENTIAL MULTI FAMILY, 24 UNITS PER ACRE and contain approximately 8.95 acres. The
request is to rezone the property to CS, COMMUNITY SERVICES.
Harry Davis, Planner: Read the staff report.
Ramsay Ball, Applicant: States that their team has worked extensively with staff to come up
with an approvable request.
Public Comment:
No public comment was presented.
Tom Brown, Commissioner: States they do not have too much of problem with staff's findings.
CS is a great form-based zone. He discussed that he is quite concerned about access onto
Gregg Avenue.
Tracy Hoskins, Commissioner: States that the railroad would probably not let them cross over
the railroad and onto Gregg Avenue.
Motion:
Commissioner Hoskins made a motion to forward RZN 16-5624 with a recommendation for
approval. Commissioner Quinlan seconded the motion.
Matthew Hoffman, Commissioner: Thanked the applicant for bringing this forward.
Upon roll call the motion passed with a vote of 8-0-0.
11. ADM 16-5631: Administrative Item (UDC CHAPTERS 161 & 162 AMENDMENTS):
Submitted by PLANNING STAFF for revisions to several chapters in the Unified Development
Planning Commission
November�28,2016
Agenda Item 1
Nov 14,2016 Minutes
Page 7 of 10
Code. The proposal is to create two new zoning districts, a new use unit, and include accessory
dwellings as a permitted use in several existing districts. The intent of the code changes are to
facilitate greater flexibility in medium-intensity commercial and medium-intensity urban residential
development.
Jonathan Curth, Senior Planner: Gave the staff report
Public Comment:
No public comment was presented.
Andrew Garner, Planning Director: Expands upon the staffs report to explain other reasons
that staff has made these proposals. Notes that although this is leading to more and more
zoning districts, it is arguably appropriate to develop districts for the appropriate context.
Matthew Hoffman, Commission: Appreciates staff's work, but has concern about the lot width
requirements, particularly for duplexes. The proposal presupposes that duplexes are always
done side-by-side as opposed to over-under, or front-back. With regards to the vehicle-oriented
NS-G diagram, is curious why the NS-L is shown on the corner, separate from the residential
uses.
Harry Davis, Planner: Clarifies his reasoning that the diagram was used to demonstrate a
build-up of intensity.
Hoffman: He somewhat figured this, and feels it is part of the problem why NS is not used more
often in RSF-4 and other single-family uses.
Garner: Agrees with the point and clarifies further that the model was more of a tool to
demonstrate massing.
Tracy Hoskins, Commissioner: Echoes Commissioner Hoffman's points about everything,
with particular focus on duplex widths.
Garner: Note that staff has no problem with that comment, but brings it to the Commissioners'
attention that these districts are meant for single-family areas, and also that there may be issues
with development proposals slipping duplexes on to small lots that may present problems in a
rezoning request.
Hoskins: Would support reviewing the lot width. Follows up that he has no problem with
additional zoning districts, especially if they meet a need.
Leslie Belden, Commissioner: Has concerns about if development occurs under RT-U if it will
lead to numerous curb cuts and large areas of pavement.
Garner: Feels that there are sufficient checks and balances in other portions of the Code.
Allison Thurmond Quinlan: Asks about whether these will allow townhouses.
Staff: Clarifies that the way zoning use units are described in the City's Code, defines housing
more by the number of dwelling units rather than the type of structure.
Planning Commission
November�?8,2016
Agenda Item 1
Nov 14,2016 Minutes
Page 8 of 10
Tom Brown, Commissioner: Thanks staff for their work, and thinks they have made a very
good product. Hopes staff will integrate the comments that the Commissioners are providing.
The relationship he is concerned about is whether NS-L and NS-G would be appropriate if
placed in the midst of single-family areas. He would prefer more of a transition, but nonetheless
thinks these districts will be requested.
Hoffman: Questions whether fourplexes are allowed in NS-G.
Garner: Answers that fourplexes are included with multi-family as a conditional use and will
bump development in to drainage and other development considerations.
Hoffman: Would like to see fourplexes treated as a less-intensive form of multi-family
development, as they can be developed nicely. The two-over-two typology and others similar to
it are very nice and the City should make that easier. If nothing else, would like to see a fourplex
separated from multi-family. Does not want to upset the development process, but feels that
fourplexes are "on the wrong side" of the multi-family definition.
Quinlan: Notes similar housing on the north end of the City lots, and that housing like that is
highly desirable in other areas of the country.
Belden: Asks if one building can have a mixed-use of residential and commercial.
Curth: Confirms that this is the case.
Quinlan: Notes that there are practicality issues with regards to accessibility but it is possible.
Motion:
Commissioner Quinlan made a motion to table ADM 16-5631 until the November 28th meeting.
Commissioner Hoffman seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion passed with a vote
of 8-0-0.
The following items have been approved administratively by staff:
• LSP 16-5524: Lot Split(1780 N. CROSSOVER RD./PLANET FITNESS, 372): Submitted
by JORGENSEN & ASSOCIATES, INC. for property located at 1780 N. CROSSOVER
RD. The property is zoned C-2, THOROUGHFARE COMMERCIAL and contains
approximately 5.17 acres. The request is to split the parcel into 2 lots containing
approximately 4.83 and 0.34 acres.
• LSP 16-5613: Lot Split (5075 E. MISSION BLVD./CLARK, 297): Submitted by
JORGENSEN &ASSOCIATES, INC. for property located at 5075 E. MISSION BLVD. The
property is in the FAYETTEVILLE PLANNING AREA and contains approximately 5.73
acres. The request is to split the parcel into 2 lots containing approximately 2.25 and 3.48
acres.
• LSP 16-5632: Lot Split (6316 W. WEDINGTON DR./MORLAN, 396): Submitted by
DAVID MORLAN for property located at 6316 W.WEDINGTON DR. The property is zoned
RSF-4, RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY, 4 UNITS PER ACRE and contains
Planning Commission
Novemberq-8,2016
Agenda Item 1
Nov 14,2016 Minutes
Page 9 of 10
approximately 0.79 acres. The request is to split the parcel into 2 lots containing
approximately 0.44 and 0.35 acres.
• LSP 16-5618: Lot Split (103 N. PLAINVIEW AVE./MCMAHON, 213): Submitted by
BATES & ASSOCIATES, INC. for property located at 103 N. PLAINVIEW AVE. The
property is zoned RT-12, RESIDENTIAL TWO & THREE FAMILY and contains
approximately 3.34 acres. The request is to split the parcel into 4 lots containing
approximately 0.27, 0.27, 0.27 and 2.35 acres.
• LSP 16-5592: Lot Split (414 W. PROSPECT ST./CRABTREE, 445): Submitted by
BATES & ASSOCIATES, INC. for property located at 414 W. PROSPECT ST. The
property is zoned RSF-4, RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY, 4 UNITS PER ACRE and
contains approximately 0.45 acres. The request is to split the parcel into 2 lots containing
approximately 0.26 and 0.19 acres.
• LSP 16-5628: Lot Split (800 N. OLIVE AVE./PROFFITT, 446): Submitted by REID &
ASSOCIATES, INC. for property located at 800 N. OLIVE AVE. The property is zoned
RSF-4, RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY, 4 UNITS PER ACRE and contains
approximately 0.34 acres. The request is to split the parcel into 2 lots containing
approximately 0.17 acres each.
1. Reports: None
2. Announcements: None
3. Adjournment Time: 9:29 PM
4. Submitted by: City Planning Division
Planning Commission
Novembqir(�8,2016
Agenda Item 1
Nov 14,2016 Minutes
Page 10 of 10
CITY OF
T1""" • .
ay7yi1le PLANNING COMMISSION MEMO
ARKNSAS
TO: Fayetteville Planning Commission
FROM: Andrew Garner, City Planning Director
MEETING DATE: November 28, 2016
SUBJECT: VAR 16-5661: Variance Item (710 N. CEDARWOOD AVE./FLEMISTER,
442): Submitted by RICHIE LAMB for property located at 710 N.
CEDARWOOD AVE. The property is zoned RSF-4, RESIDENTIAL
SINGLE FAMILY, 4 UNITS PER ACRE, and contains approximately 0.33
acres. The request is for a variance to UDC Chapter 166.08, Street Design
and Access Management Separation for a new curb cut.
THE APPLICANT HAS REQUESTED THAT THIS ITEM BE TABLED INDEFINITELY.
Mailing Address: Planning Commission
113 W. Mountain Street www.fayettevNPeembeor 28,2016
Fayetteville, AIR 72701 16-5661 F elmester
Page 1 of 1
CITY OF
TIleT 4 PLANNING COMMISSION MEMO
ARKANSAS
TO: Fayetteville Planning Commission
FROM: Jonathan Curth, Senior Planner and City Planning Division Staff
THRU: Andrew Garner, Planning Director
MEETING DATE: November 28, 2016
SUBJECT: ADM 16-5631: Administrative Item (UDC CHAPTERS 161 & 162
AMENDMENTS): Submitted by PLANNING STAFF for revisions to several
chapters in the Unified Development Code. The proposal is to create two
new zoning districts, a new use unit, and include accessory dwellings as a
permitted use in several existing districts. The intent of the code changes
are to facilitate greater flexibility in medium-intensity commercial and
medium-intensity urban residential development.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission discuss and forward ADM 16-5631 to the City
Council with a recommendation of approval.
PROJECT SYNOPSIS:
!November 14" Pianning Commission:This item was discussed and tabled at the November 14
2016 Plan6ing Commission meeting. The commission was generally in favor of the proposal. At
that meeting the commission regnested staff evaluate the potential to reduce the minimum lot
width for two-family dwellings in the Neighborhood Services districts (NS-L and NS-G) and to
evaluate including four-family dwellings as a use by right in the RT-U zoning district. Staff has
evaluated these comments and incorporated them into the proposed code changes, agreeing
that theV are in line with the intent of the overall proposail. Staff has also modified one of the
three dimensional diagrams to incorporate the NS zoning district within the residential single
family block as suggested by the commission.
Staff proposes the following code changes:
= Create two new zoning districts, a new use unit, and include accessory structures as a
permitted use in appropriate zoning districts to facilitate the goals of City Plan 2030 and
supplement the gaps in the existing zoning districts to encourage appropriate medium-
intensity residential and commercial development.
Q The Residential Two (2) and Three (3) Family, Urban (RT-U), zoning district is
intended to encourage attached and detached housing development that is more
urban and walkable than low-and medium-density residential, but with less impact
on services or adjacent properties than high-density housing. This district is
intended to allow similar development patterns as the DG, Downtown General,
zoning district, without the non-residential uses and high density apartment
Mailing Address: Planning Commission
113 W. Mountain Street www.fayettAflyg 2016
Fayetteville,AR 72701 Age'rl a Item 3
16-5631 UDC Ch 161 &162 Amend.
Page 1 of 79
buildings that can pose compatibility issues when a DG rezoning is proposed in an
existing neighborhood.
■ Properties developed under the proposed RT-U zoning district do not have
lot area minimums and have reduced setbacks and lot width requirements,
facilitating infill and traditional town form.
a The Neighborhood Services, General (NS-G) zoning district is a form-based
district that permits mixed-use and medium-intensity commercial development that
is limited in size and contextually sensitive to residential areas. This district is
intended to fill the gap in zoning between the existing NS, Neighborhood Services,
and CS, Commercial Services, districts.
■ The commercial uses allowed by right are generally considered to not pose
compatibility issues with adjacent residential areas.
• The increased allowed building size widens the breadth and viability of
commercial uses complimentary and adjacent to residential areas.
o Use Unit 12b, General Business, fits in between the current Use Units 12 and 15
with regards to the permitted uses and the 8,000 square foot maximum building
square footage allowed (UU-12 and -15 allow for 3,000 and 25,000 square feet
respectively)
t Use Unit 12b is proposed as a permitted use in Neighborhood Services,
General to permit the aforementioned greater array of allowed activities
and building size in between that allowed in the current NS and CS districts.
o The addition of Use Unit 41: Accessory Dwellings, is proposed to be added as a
permitted use to those zoning districts that permit single-family dwellings by right.
o The addition of Four (4) Family Dwellings to Use Unit 10, Three (3) Family
Dwellings,to facilitate the development of`middle missing' housing in a wider array
of zoning districts.
DISCUSSION:
Over the past year Planning staff has received feedback from developers, Commissioners, and
Alderman that the current zoning districts in the City of Fayetteville need to broadened to provide
sufficient flexibility to adequately pursue the goals laid out in City Plan 2030, particularly with
regards to the pursuit of appropriate infill and traditional town form. In the interest of facilitating
development that is complementary to the City's goals, staff developed the two new zoning
districts and a related use unit outlined above.
The first zoning district, RT-U, is proposed as a tool to foster infill development in an urban pattern.
Staff envisages this district increasing density and housing opportunities in areas with existing
services and facilities. A frequent concern in urban areas nationwide, and not an uncommon
complaint in Fayetteville, is that there is little in the way of housing variety between detached
single-family homes and larger multi-family developments. The RT-U zoning district can
potentially address and ameliorate this 'missing middle' and provide another option for attainable
housing.
The second proposed district, NS-G, General, seeks to address applicant, staff, Commissioner,
and Alderman concerns with recommending zoning districts that do not include uses
complimentary to residential areas in order to provide a needed form or function not otherwise
allowed. The most frequent instance of this has been the request for CS, Commercial Services
rezonings to allow for specific residentially-sensitive commercial uses that need a greater building
size than the 3,000 square feet allowed in NS, Neighborhood Services. Given the allowance of
buildings as large as 25,000 square feet and uses like gas stations and drive-through restaurants
Planning Commission
G:IETODevelopment Services Review12016\Development Reviewl16-5631 ADM Amend.to UDC Chs. 161 & 162 November 28,2016
(New Zoning Dist.)103 Planning Commission111-28-2016 Agenda Item 3
16-5631 UDC Ch 161 &162 Amend.
Page 2 of 79
in the CS zoning district, this presents potential compatibility issues. The proposed NS-G zoning
district and associated Use Unit 12b address these concerns by creating a form-based district
with uses determined to be residentially-sensitive and in structures of appropriate size. These
code changes are part of a continual effort to calibrate our zoning code to the market,
development trends, and adopted City policy. The new districts and use unit provide more refined
tools in the City's coning district 'toolkit,' encouraging a greater degree of compatibility and
transition in specific contexts.
Amendments and changes to the Unified Development Code are proposed as follows:
1. Chapter 160: Zoning Districts. Add RT-U and NS-G zoning districts to the Establishment
of Districts table.
2. Chapter 161: Zoning Regulations.
■ Add RT-U, Residential Two (2) and Three (3) Family zoning district. The proposed
zoning district requirements are attached.
• Add NS-G, Neighborhood Services, General zoning district. The proposed zoning
district requirements are attached.
• Amend the NS, Neighborhood Services, zoning district to read "NS-L,
Neighborhood Services, Limited"
• Amend all districts that allow Use Unit 10 as a permitted or conditional use to
include the unit's new language (See below).
Is Add Use Unit 41: Accessory Dwellings as a permitted used in all districts that allow
a single-family dwelling by right.
3. Chapter 162: Use Units.
• Amend Unit 10 to read "Three (3) and Four (4) Family Dwellings"
■ Amend Unit 12 to read "Unit 12a" and add Unit 12b.
• Amend Units 12a and 15 to include language excluding areas dedicated to
residential uses from the maximum allowed building size.
• Add Unit 12b. General Business. The proposed Use Unit requirements are
attached.
• Amend Unit 26 to read "...multi-family dwellings of more than four attached ants..."
4. Chapter 164: Supplementary District Regulations.
• Amend Section A to read "In RT and all..." rather than "In RT-12 and all..."
5. Chapter 166: Development
• Amend the "Requirement" and "Excluded Developments" sections of Small Site
Improvement Plan to read "...two (2)single-family residences..." rather than "...one
(1) single-family residence...
6. Chapter 167: Tree Preservation and Protection
• In Table 1 of§167.04:
o Add RT-Urban, Residential Two (2) and Three (3) Family with a 15%
minimum canopy requirement.
Amend NS, Neighborhood Services, to NS-L, Neighborhood Services,
Limited.
o Add NS-G, Neighborhood Services, General, with a 20% minimum canopy
requirement.
7. Chapter 169: Physical Alteration of Land
■ Amend Permits Required/Exceptions to read "Construction of up to two (2) single-
family residences on a single lot..." rather than "Construction of one (1) single-
family residence..."
Planning Commission
G-ETODevelopment Services Review120161Development Review116-5631 ADM Amend. to UDC Chs. 161 & 162 November 28,2016
(New Zoning Dist.)103 Planning Commission111-28-2016 Agenda Item 3
16-5631 UDC Ch 161 &162 Amend.
Page 3 of 79
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the proposed code changes be forwarded to by the Planning
Commission to the City Council with a recommendation of approval.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Required YES
Date: November 28, 2016 ❑ Tabled ❑ Forwarded ❑ Denied
Motion: Second: Vote:
CITY COUNCIL ACTION: Required YES
Date: ❑ Approved ❑ Denied
BUDGETISTAFF IMPACT:
None
Attachments:
■ Proposed zoning districts and use unit:
o §161.12 RT-U, Residential Two (2) and Three (3) Family, Urban
o §161.19 NS-G, Neighborhood Services, General
o §162 Use Unit 12b
• Zoning District Comparisons:
RT-12 and RT-U
o NS-L and NS-G
• Plan view of proposed zoning districts:
o RT-U
o NS-G
• Idealized transects of proposed zoning districts:
o RT-U Traditional Town Farm
o NS-G Traditional Town Form
o NS-G Vehicular-Oriented/Suburban Development
• Proposed code changes as shown in strikethrough-highlight:
❑ §160 (Zoning Districts)
o §161 (Zoning Regulations)
a §162 (Use Units)
❑ §164 (Supplementary District Regulations)
o §166 (Development)
o §167 (Tree Preservation and Protection)
❑ §169 (Physical Alteration of Land)
Planning Commission
G:IETCIDevelopment Services ReviewQ016\Development Review116-5631 ADM Amend.to UDC Chs. 161 & 162 November 28,2016
New Zoning Dist. 103 Piannin Commission111-28-2016 Agenda Item 3
t 5 � 9 16-5631 UDC Ch 161 &162 Amend.
Page 4 of 79
ADM 16-5631
Proposed RT-U Zoning District
161.12-District RT-U, Residential Two (2)And Three(3)Family,Urban
(A) Purpose. The RT-U Residential District is designed to permit and encourage the development of detached and
attached dwellings in suitable environments,to provide a development potential between low density and medium
density, but with less impact than high density development,to encourage the development of areas with existing
public facilities and to encourage the development of a greater variety of housing.
(B) Uses.
(1) Permitted Uses.
Unit 1 City-wide uses by right
Unit 8 Single-family dwellings
Unit 9 Two(2)family dwellings
Unit 10 Three(3)and four(4)family dwellings
Unit 41 Accessory dwellings
Unit 44 Cottage Housing Development
(2) Conditional Uses.
Unit 2 City-wide uses by conditional use permit
Unit 3 Public protection and utility facilities
Unit 4 Cultural and recreational facilities
Unit 5 Government facilities
Unit 12 Limited business
Unit 24 Home occupations
Unit 26 Multi-family Dwellings
Unit 36 Wireless communications facilities
(C) Density. None.
(D) Bulk and Area Regulations.
Dwelling(all types)
i
Lot width minimum 18 feet
Lot area minimum None
(E) Setback Requirements.
Side Side Rear Rear,from
Front Other Single& Other centerline of
Uses Two(2) Uses an alley
family
A build-to zone that is
located between the
front property line and None 5 feet 5 feet 12 feet
a line 25 feet from the
front property line.
(F) Building Height Regulations.
Planning Commission
November 28,2016
Agenda Item 3
16-5631 UDC Ch 161 &162 Amend.
Page 5 of 79
Building height maximum 30145 feet
`A building or a portion of a building that is located between 0 and 10 feet from the front property line or any master
street plan right-of-way line shall have a maximum height of 30 feet. Buildings or portions of the building set back
greater than 10 feet from the master street plan right-of-way shall have a maximum height of 45 feet.
(G) Building Area.The area occupied by all buildings shall not exceed 60%of the total lot area.
(H) Minimum Buildable Street Frontage. 50%of the lot width.
Planning Commission
November 28,2016
Agenda Item 3
16-5631 UDC Ch 161 &162 Amend.
Page 6 of 79
ADM 16-5631
Proposed NS-G Zoning District
161.19 - Neighborhood Services, General
(A) Purpose. The Neighborhood Services, General district is designed to serve as a mixed use area of medium
intensity. Neighborhood Services,General promotes a walkable, pedestrian-oriented neighborhood development
form with sustainable and complementary neighborhood businesses that are compatible in scale,aesthetics,and
use with surrounding land uses.For the purpose of Chapter 96:Noise Control the Neighborhood Services district
is a residential zone.
(B) Uses.
(1) Permitted Uses.
Unit�� City-wide uses by right
Unit 8Single-family dwellings
Unit 9 __ Two-family dwellings
- Unit 10 Three(3)and four(4)family dwellings
Unit 12b General Business
Unit 24 Home occupations
Unit 41 Accessory Dwelling Units
r Unit 44 Cottage Housing Development
Note: Any combination of above uses is permitted upon any lot within this zone. Conditional uses shall need
approval when combined with pre-approved uses.
(2) Conditional Uses.
Unit 2 City-wide uses by conditional use permit
Unit 3 Public protection and utility facilities
Unit 4 Cultural and recreational facilities
Unit 5 Government facilities
Unit 13 Eating Places
Unit 16 Shopping Goads
Unit 19 Commercial recreation, small sites
Unit 25 Offices,Studios and Related Services
Unit 26 Multi-family dwellings
Unit 36 Wireless communication facilities'
Unit 40 Sidewalk Cafes
Unit 45 Small Scale Production
(C) Density.Eighteen (18)or less per acre.
(D) Bulk and Area Regulations.
(1) Lot Width Minimum.
Single-family 35 feet
Two(2)family 35 feet
Three or more 90 feet
Planning Commission
November 28,2016
Agenda Item 3
16-5631 UDC Ch 161 &162 Amend.
Page 7 of 79
All other uses None
(2) Lot Area Minimum.
Single-family 4,000 square feet
Two(2)family3,000 square feet per
or more dwelling unit
All other uses —I— None
(E) Setback regulations.
Front Side Side-Zero Lot Line* Rear Rear when contiguous to a
single-family residential district
A build-to zone A setback of less than
that is located five feet(zero lot line)is
between the permitted on one interior
front property 5 side, provided a None 15
line and a line feet maintenance agreement feet
25 ft.from the is filed**.The remaining
front property side setback(s)shall be
line_ 10 feet.
(F) Building Height Regulations.
Building Height Maximum 45 feet
(G) Minimum Buildable Street Frontage.50%of the lot width.
Planning Commission
November 28,2016
Agenda Item 3
16-5631 UDC Ch 161 &162 Amend.
Page 8 of 79
ADM 16-5631
Proposed Use Unit 12b
(Q) Unit 72b. General Business,
(1) Description, Unit 12b consists of small-scale establishments offering commercial goods and services that
are accessible for the convenience of individuals living in residential districts,while compatible in size,scale
and appearance with the surrounding neighborhood. These uses shall be subject to the regulations in
Chapter 164.All uses classified under Unit 12b must be within a building containing 8,000 square feet or
less, excluding area dedicated to residential uses.
(2) Included Uses.
Personal services -Day Care
•Dry cleaning
•SalonlBarber shop
•Tailoring
Retail •Antique/home d6cor sales
•Apparel
•Art/Architectural supplies
•Bakery/Pastry shops
•Bicycle shop
•Bookstore
•Coffee shop
•Delicatessen
•Drugstore
•Florists
•Food specialty stores
•Grocery
•Hardware store
•Health food stored
•Hobby/Craft shop
•Ice cream
•Meat market
•Restaurant/Cafe
•Small Appliance Repair
•Stationary store
•Toy store
•Video rental
Professional Offices •Accountant
•Architect
•Attorney
•Broker
•BusineWMgmt.Consultant
-Doctor
Planning Commission
November 28,2016
Agenda Item 3
16-5631 UDC Ch 161 &162 Amend.
Page 9 of 79
ADM 16-5631
RT-12 and RT-U Comparison
161.11 -District RT-12, Residential Two(2)And: 161.12 - District RT-U, Residential Two(2)And
Three(3) Family Three (3)Family, Urban
(A) Purpose. The RT-12 Residential District is (A) Purpose. The RT-Urban Residential District is
designed to permit and encourage the designed to permit and encourage the
development of detached and attached dwellings development of detached and attached dwellings
in suitable environments, to provide a in suitable environments, to provide a
development potential between low density and development potential between low density and
medium density with less impact than medium medium density, but with #ess impact than high
density development, to encourage the density development, to encourage the
development of areas with existing public development of areas with existing public
facilities and to encourage the development of a facilities and to encourage the development of a
greater variety of housing values. greater variety of housing.
(8) Uses. (B) Uses.
(1) Permitted Uses. (1) Permitted Uses.
Unit 1 City-wide uses by right Unit 1 � City-wide uses by right
Unit 8 Single-family dwellings Unit 8 Single-family dwellings
Unit 9 Two(2)family dwellings Unit 9 Two(2)family dwellings
Unit 10 Three(3)and four(4)family dwellings Unit 10 Three(3)and four(4)family dwellings
Unit 44 Cottage Housing development Unit 41 Accessory dwellings
Unit 44 Cottage Housing Development
(2) Conditional Uses.
r------- (2) Conditional Uses.
Unit 2 City-wide uses by conditional use permit
Unit 3 Public protection and utility facilities Unit 2 City-wide uses by conditional use permit l
Unit 4 Cultural and recreational facilities Unit 3 Public protection and utility facilities
Unit 5 Government facilities Unit 4 Cultural and recreational facilities
Unit 12 Limited business Unit 5 Government facilities
Unit 24 Home occupations Unit 12 Limited business
Unit 36- Wireless communications facilities Unit 24 Home occupations
Unit 26 Multi-family Dwellings
(C) Density.
Unit 36 Wireless communications facilities
Units per acre 12
- (C) Density. None.
(D) Bulk and Area Regulations. (D) Bulk acrd Area Regulations.
Single- Two(2) Three(3)
family family family _Dwelling (all types}
Lot width minimum 18 feet
Lot width 50 feet 50 feet 90 feet
minimum Lot area minimum None
Lot area 5,Q00 7,260 square 10,890
minimum sgfee a feet square
Planning Commission
November 28,2016
Agenda Item 3
16-5631 UDC Ch 161 &162 Amend.
Page 10 of 79
(E) Setback Requirements. (E) Setback Requirements_
Side Side Rear Rear Side
Front Other Single& Other Single Side Single& Rear Rear,from
Two(2) Front Other Other centerline of
Uses family Uses Family Uses Two(2}family Uses an alley
A build-to zone
that is located A build-to zone that is
between the front 20 located between the
property line and a 8 feet 5 feet feet 5 feet front property line and None 5 feet 5 feet 12 feet
line 25 feet from a line 25 feet from the
the front property front property line.
line.
(F) Building Height Regulations.
(F) Building Height Regulations.
Building height maximum 30!45 feet
Building height maximum 30145 feet
'A building or a portion of a building that is located
'A building or a portion of a building that is located between 0 and 10 feet from the front property line or
between 0 and 10 feet from the front property line or any master street plan right-of-way line shall have a
any master street plan right-of- way line shall have a maximum height of 30 feet, Buildings or portions of the
maximum height of 30 feet. Buildings or portions of the building set back greater than 10 feet from the master
building set back greater than 10 feet from the master street plan right-of-way shall have a maximum height
street plan right-of-way shall have a maximum height of 45 feet.
of 45 feet.
(G) Building Area. The area occupied by all buildings
{G} Building Area. The area occupied by all buildings shall not exceed 60%of the total lot area.
shall not exceed 50%of the total lot area.
(H) Minimum Buildable Street Frontage. 50% of the
(H) Minimum Buildable Street Frontage. 50% of the lot width.
lot width.
(Code 1965, App.A.,Art. 5(I1A); Ord. No.3128, 10-1-
85; Code 1991,§160.032; Ord. No. 4100,§2(Ex.A),
6-16-98, Ord. No.4178,8-31-99: Ord. No. 5028,6-
19-07; Ord. No. 5224, 3-3-09: Ord. No. 5262,8-4-09;
Ord. No. 5312,4-20-10: Ord. No. 5462, 12-6-11; Ord.
No. 5592,06-18-13;Ord, No. 5664, 2-18-14:Ord.No.
5800, § 1(Exh.A), 10-6-15)
Planning Commission
November 28,2016
Agenda Item 3
16-5631 UDC Ch 161 &162 Amend.
Page 11 of 79
ADM 16-5631
NS-L and NS-G Comparison
161.18- Neighborhood Services, Limited 161.19-Neighborhood Services, General
(A) Purpose. The Neighborhood Services, Limited (A) Purpose. The Neighborhood Services, General
district is designed to serve as a mixed use area district is designed to serve as a mixed use area
of low intensity. Neighborhood Services, Limited of medium intensity. Neighborhood Services,
promotes a walkable, pedestrian-oriented General promotes a walkable, pedestrian-
neighborhood development form with sustainable oriented neighborhood development form with
and complementary neighborhood businesses sustainable and complementary neighborhood
that are compatible in scale, aesthetics, and use businesses that are compatible in scale,
with surrounding land uses. For the purpose of aesthetics, and use with surrounding land uses.
Chapter 96: Noise Control, the Neighborhood For the purpose of Chapter 96:Noise Control the
Services district is a residential zone. Neighborhood Services district is a residential
zone.
(B) Uses.
(B) Uses.
(1) Permitted Uses.
(1) Permitted Uses.
Unit 1—F City-wide uses by right
Unit 8 —F Single-family dwellings Unit 1 i City-wide uses by right
Unit 9 Two(2)family dwellings r Unit 8 Single-family dwellings
Unit 10 Three(3)and four(4)family dwellings Unit 9 Two-family dwellings
Unit 10 Three(3)and four(4)family dwellings
Unit�12a Limited Business
Unit 24 Home occupations Unit 12b General Business
Unit 41 Accessory dwelling units Unit 24 Home occupations
Unit 44 Cottage Housing Development Unit 41 Accessory Dwelling Units
Unit 44 Cottage Housing Development J
Note:Any combination of above uses is permitted upon
any lot within this zone. Conditional uses shall need Note:Any combination of above uses is permitted upon
approval when combined with pre-approved uses. any lot within this zone. Conditional uses shall need
approval when combined with pre-approved uses.
(2) Conditional Uses.
(2) Conditional Uses.
Unit 2 City-wide uses by conditional use
Unit 3 Public protection and utility facilities Unit 2 City-wide uses by conditional use permit
Unit3] Public protection and utility facilities
Unit 4 Cultural and recreational facilities
Unit 5 Government Facilities Unit 4 Cultural and recreational facilities
Unit 13 Eating places Unit 5 Government facilities
r Unit 15 Neighborhood shopping goods Unit 13 Eating Places
Unit 19 Commercial recreation,small sites Unit 18 Shopping Goods
Unit 2.5 Offices,studios and related services f Unit 19 Commercial recreation,small sites
Unit 26 Multi-family dwellings Unit 25 Offices,Studios and Related Services
Unit 36 Wireless communication facilities" i Unit 26 Multi-family dwellings
Unit 44 Sidewalk cafes Unit 36 Wireless communication facilities'
Unit 45 Small scale production Unit 40 Sidewalk Cafes
i
Unit 45 Small Scale Production
(C) Density.
_ (C) Density.
Units per acre Ten (10)or less
Units per acre Eighteen (18)or less
Planning Commission
November 28,2016
Agenda Item 3
16-5631 UDC Ch 161 &162 Amend.
Page 12 of 79
(17) Bulk and Area. (Q) Bulk and Area Regulations.
(1) Lot Width Minimum. (1) Lot Width Minimum.
Single-family 35 feet Single-family 35 feet
Two(2)family 35 feet Two(2)family 35 feet
Three or more 90 feet r— Three or more 90 feet
Ail other uses None All other uses None
(2) Lot Area Minimum. (2) Lot Area Minimum.
Single-family 4,000 square feet Single-family 4,000 square feet
Two(2)family or 3,000 square feet of lot area per Two(2)family 3,000 square feet per
more dwelling unit or more dwelling unit
All other permitted All other uses None
and None
conditional uses
(E) Setback regulations.
(E) Setback Regulations.
Rear when
Front: A build-to zone that is located between 10 Contiguous
and 25 feet from the front property line. Front Side Side-Zero Rear to a single
Side j 5 feet Lot Line' -family
residential
Rear 15 feet district
A setback of less
(F) Building height Regulations. A build-to than five feet(zero
zone that is lot line)is permitted
Building Height Maximum 45 feet located on one interior side, 15
between the 5 provided a feet
(G) Building area. On any lot, the area occupied by front property feet maintenance Noneline and a line agreement is
all buildings shall not exceed 60% of the total 25 ft.from the filed".The
area of the lot. front property remaining side
(Ord. No. 5312,4-20-10; Ord. No. 5462, 12-6-11,Ord. line. setback(s)shall be
10 feet.
No. 5592, 6-18-13; Ord. No. 5664, 2-18-14,Ord. No.
5735, 1-20-15; Ord. No. 5800,§ 1(Exh.A), 10-6-15) (F) Building Height Regulations.
Building Height Maximum 45 feet
(G) Minimum Buildable Street Frontage.50% of the
lot width.
Planning Commission
November 28,2016
Agenda Item 3
16-5631 UDC Ch 161 &162 Amend.
Page 13 of 79
■
uLgan 'A ! wee
@@A ul pu e -OMj
.i jequap!s@H 'n-la
4-- N
Q
O.f
E r6
0 3 � OJ ru U-
0
i
D -J
a.
.� C (3)
Q
U. _a
o`nC E
r�
Planning Commission
November 28,2016
Agenda Item 3
16-5631 UDC Ch 161 & 162 Amend.
Page 14 of 79
ADM 16-5631
Plan View Transect of
Proposed NS-G Zoning District
RSF-4, Single-family,
4 Units per Acre
—.18 AC site
NS-L, Neighborhood
Services, Limited
3,000 —.25 AC site
sq. ft. 3,000 sq. ft. building
NS-G,
Neighborhood
Services,
d' General
�.55 AC site
•� 8,000 sq. ft.
building
CS,
Community J T
Services
1 .72 AC
site
25,000 sq. ft.
building
1p❑ Planning Commission
November 28,2016
Agenda Item 3
16-5631 UDC Ch 161 &162 Amend.
Page 15 of 79
a
A
7
f t
c-a
CG
Q
Loo
l0000
� 'o
C N
M U.
l[7 �
T ` CL
Q r
l0000
C N
O G
-' CLa
� a
H Q
Planning Commission
November 28,2016
Agenda Item 3
16-5631 UDC Ch 161 &162 Amend.
Page 16 of 79
v,
V
Z
til
+r�
Z
A
Z
�.Z..
V1
Z
V
} 1f1
' Z
r�
Z.
07 6. Z
C
C _ �r
E C
o
mw Li N
r L7
¢ 0 z
R m
C N
v_ o
CL
-� 0
� a
L �
o
Planning Commission
November 28,2016
Agenda Item 3
16-5631 UDC Ch 161 &162 Amend.
Page 17 of 79