The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutORDINANCE 6015♦..4� 4nrr,TF` &r t I RkAI;;h 113 West Mountain Street Fayetteville, AR 72701 (479)575-8323 Ordinance: 6015 File Number: 2017-0646 CHAPTER 151 AND 161 UDC REVISIONS: AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE TO CHANGE BUILDING HEIGHT RESTRICTION MEASUREMENTS FROM FEET TO STORIES IN CHAPTER 161 AND TO AMEND §151.01 DEFINITIONS TO DEFINE "STORY" WHEREAS, the Planning Department and Planning Commission recommend that all building height limitations be changed from feet to stories; and WHEREAS, the Planning Department has presented all such necessary amendments to Chapters 151 and 161 to accomplish this change in measurement within Exhibits A attached to the Planning Department's Memo. 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 those portions of Chapter 161 as described in Exhibit A attached to the Planning Department's Memo in order to change all existing height restriction measurements of buildings from feet to stories within this Chapter 161 of the Unified Development Code. Section 2. That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby repeals §151.01 Definitions of "Building height" and "Story" and enacts the new definition of "Story" as follows: "Story (building height). Building height when measured in stories shall be as defined by the International Building Code." Page 1 Printed on 11/27/17 Ordinance: 6015 File Mirnbi2r, 017-0646 PASSED and APPROVED on 11/21/2017 Attest: J44-� Sondra E. Smith, City Clerk Treasurer Page 2 Printed on 11/27/17 EXHIBIT `A' ADM 17-5939 Proposed Code Changes CHAPTER 161: - ZONING REGULATIONS 161.03 - District R -A, Residential -Agricultural (F) Height Requirements. There shall be no maximum height limits in the R -A District, provided, however, if a building exceeds the height of one story, the portion of the building over one story shall have an additional setback from any boundary line of an adjacent residential district. The amount of additional setback for the portion of the building over one story shall be equal to the difference between the total height of that portion of the building and one story. 161.04 - District RSF-.5, Residential Single -Family - One Half (1/2) Unit Per Acre (F) Building height Regulations. Building Height Maximum 3 stories 161.05 - District RSF-1, Residential Single -Family — One (1) Unit Per Acre (H) Building Height Regulations. Building Height Maximum 3 stories 161.06 - District RSF-2, Residential Single -Family - Two (2) Units Per Acre (H) Building Height Regulations. Building Height Maximum 3 stories 161.07 - District RSF-4, Residential Single -Family - Four (4) Units Per Acre (F) Building Height Regulations . I Building Height Maximum 3 stories 161.08 - District RSF-7, Residential Single -Family - Seven (7) Units Per Acre (1) Building Height Regulations. Building Height Maximum 3 stories 161.09 - District RSF-8, Residential Single -Family - Eight (8) Units Per Acre (F) Height Regulations. Building Height Maximum 3 stories 161.10 - District RSF-18, Residential Single -Family - Eighteen (18) Units Per Acre (F) Building Height Regulations. Building Height Maximum 3 stories Page 1 EXHIBIT `A' ADM 17-6939 Proposed Code Changes 161.11 - District RI -12, Residential Intermediate, Twelve (12) Units Per Acre (F) Building Height Regulations. Building height maximum 1 2 stories/3 stories* *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 two stories. 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 three stories. 161.12 - District RI -U, Residential Intermediate - Urban (F) Building Height Regulations. Building height maximum 2 stories/3 stories* * 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 two stories. 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 three stories. 161.13 - District RMF -6, Residential Multi -Family - Six (6) Units Per Acre (F) Building Height Regulations. Building Height Maximum 12 stories/3 stories* *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 two stories. 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 three stories. If a building exceeds the height of two stories, the portion of the building that exceeds two stories shall have an additional setback from any side boundary line of an adjacent single family district. The amount of additional setback for the portion of the building over two stories shall be equal to the difference between the total height of that portion of the building, and two stories. 161.14 - District RMF -12, Residential Multi -Family - Twelve (12) Units Per Acre (F) Building Height Regulations. Building Height Maximum 2 stories/3 stories* *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 two stories. 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 three stories. If a building exceeds the height of two stories, the portion of the building that exceeds two stories shall have an additional setback from any side boundary line of an adjacent single family district. The amount of additional setback for the portion of the building over two stories shall be equal to the difference between the total height of that portion of the building, and two stories. Page 2 EXHIBIT `A' ADM 17-5939 Proposed Code Changes 161.15 - District RMF -18, Residential Multi -Family - Eighteen (18) Units Per Acre (F) Building Height Regulations. Building Height Maximum 12 stories/3 stories* *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 two stories. 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 three stories. If a building exceeds the height of two stories, the portion of the building that exceeds two stories shall have an additional setback from any side boundary line of an adjacent single family district. The amount of additional setback for the portion of the building over two stories shall be equal to the difference between the total height of that portion of the building, and two stories. 161.16 - District RMF -24, Residential Multi -Family - Twenty -Four (24) Units Per Acre (F) Building Height Regulations. Building Height Maximum 2 stories/3 stories/5 stories* *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 two stories, between 10-20 feet from the master street plan right-of-way a maximum height of three stories and buildings or portions of the building set back greater than 20 feet from the master street plan right-of-way shall have a maximum height of 5 stories. If a building exceeds the height of two stories, the portion of the building that exceeds two stories shall have an additional setback from any side boundary line of an adjacent single family district. The amount of additional setback for the portion of the building over two stories shall be equal to the difference between the total height of that portion of the building, and two stories. 161.17 - District RMF -40, Residential Multi -Family - Forty (40) Units Per Acre (F) Building Height Regulations. Building Height Maximum 2 stories/3 stories/5 stories* *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 two stories, between 10-20 feet from the master street plan right-of-way a maximum height of three stories and buildings or portions of the building set back greater than 20 feet from the master street plan right-of-way shall have a maximum height of 5 stories. If a building exceeds the height of two stories, the portion of the building that exceeds two stories shall have an additional setback from any side boundary line of an adjacent single family district. The amount of additional setback for the portion of the building over two stories shall be equal to the difference between the total height of that portion of the building, and two stories. Page 3 EXHIBIT `A' ADM 17-5939 Proposed Code Changes 161.18 - NS -L, Neighborhood Services - Limited (F) Building height Regulations. Building Height Maximum 3 stories 161.19 - NS -G, Neighborhood Services - General (F) Building Height Regulations. Build ing height maximum 3 stories 161.20 - District R -O, Residential Office (F) Building Height Regulations. Building Height Maximum 1 5 stories If a building exceeds the height of two stories, the portion of the building that exceeds two stories shall have an additional setback from any side boundary line of an adjacent single family district. The amount of additional setback for the portion of the building over two stories shall be equal to the difference between the total height of that portion of the building, and two stories. 161.21 - District C-1, Neighborhood Commercial (F) Building Height Regulations . Building Height Maximum 5 stories If a building exceeds the height of two stories, the portion of the building that exceeds two stories shall have an additional setback from any boundary line of an adjacent residential district. The amount of additional setback for the portion of the building over two stories shall be equal to the difference between the total height of that portion of the building, and two stories. 161.22 - Community Services (F) Building Height Regulations. Building Height Maximum 5 stories 161.23 - District C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial (F) Building Height Regulations. Building Height Maximum 6 stories *If a building exceeds the height of two stories, the portion of the building that exceeds two stories shall have an additional setback from side boundary line of an adjacent residential district. The amount of additional setback for the portion of the building over two stories shall be equal to the difference between the total height of that portion of the building, and two stories. Page 4 EXHIBIT `A' ADM 17-5939 Proposed Code Changes 161.24 - Urban Thoroughfare (F) Building Height Regulations. Building Height Maximum 1 5 stories/7stories *A building or a portion of a building that is located between 10 and 15 feet from the front property line or any master street plan right-of-way line shall have a maximum height of five stories. A building or portion of a building that is located greater than 15 feet from the master street plan right-of-way shall have a maximum height of seven stories. If a building exceeds the height of two stories, the portion of the building that exceeds two stories shall have an additional setback from any boundary line of an adjacent single family district. The amount of additional setback for the portion of the building over two stories shall be equal to the difference between the total height of that portion of the building, and two stories. 161.25 - District C-3, Central Commercial (F) Building Height Regulations. Building Height Maximum 5 stories/7stories* *A building or a portion of a building that is located between 0 and 15 feet from the front property line or any master street plan right-of-way line shall have a maximum height of five stories. A building or a portion of a building that is located greater than 15 feet from the master street plan right-of-way line shall have a maximum height of seven stories. 161.26 - Downtown Core (G) Building Height Regulations. Building Height Maximum 1 5 stories/14 stories* *A building or a portion of a building that is located between 0 and 15 feet from the front property line or any master street plan right-of-way line shall have a maximum height of five stories. A building or portion of a building that is located greater than 15 feet from the master street plan right-of-way shall have a maximum height of 14 stories. 161.27 - Main Street/Center (G) Building Height Regulations. Building Height Maximum 5 stories/7 stories* *A building or 'a portion of a building that is located between 0 and 15 feet from the front property line or any master street plan right-of-way line shall have a maximum height of five stories. A building or a portion of a building that is located greater than 15 feet from the master street plan right-of-way line shall have a maximum height of seven stories. Page 5 EXHIBIT `A' ADM 17-5939 Proposed Code Changes 161.28 - Downtown General (G) Building Height Regulations. Building Height Maximum 5 stories 161.29 - Neighborhood Conservation (F) Building Height Regulations. Building Height Maximum 3 stories 161.30 - District 1-1, Heavy Commercial And Light Industrial (F) Height Regulations. There shall be no maximum height limits in 1-1 District, provided, however, that if a building exceeds the height of two stories, the portion of the building that exceeds two stories shall have an additional setback from any boundary line of an adjacent residential district. The amount of additional setback for the portion of the building over two stories shall be equal to the difference between the total height of that portion of the building, and two stories. 161.31 - District 1-2, General Industrial (F) Height Regulations. There shall be no maximum height limits in 1-2 Districts, provided, however, that if a building exceeds the height of two stories, the portion of the building that exceeds two stories shall have an additional setback from any boundary line of an adjacent residential district. The amount of additional setback for the portion of the building over two stories shall be equal to the difference between the total height of that portion of the building, and two stories. 161.32 - District P-1, Institutional (F) Height Regulations. There shall be no maximum height limits in P-1 Districts, provided, however, if a building exceeds the height of two stories, the portion of the building that exceeds two stories shall have an additional setback from any boundary line of an adjacent residential district. The amount of additional setback for the portion of the building over two stories shall be equal to the difference between the total height of that portion of the building, and two stories. Page 6 City of Fayetteville, Arkansas 113 West Mountain Street Fayetteville, AR 72701 (479) 575-8323 Text File File Number: 2017-0646 Agenda Date: 11/21/2017 Version: 1 Status: Passed In Control: City Council Meeting File Type: Ordinance Agenda Number: C. 6 CHAPTER 151 AND 161 UDC REVISIONS: AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE TO CHANGE BUILDING HEIGHT RESTRICTION MEASUREMENTS FROM FEET TO STORIES IN CHAPTER 161 AND TO AMEND § 151.01 DEFINITIONS TO DEFINE "STORY" WHEREAS, the Planning Department and Planning Commission recommend that all building height limitations be changed from feet to stories; and WHEREAS, the Planning Department has presented all such necessary amendments to Chapters 151 and 161 to accomplish this change in measurement within Exhibits A attached to the Planning Department's Memo. 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 those portions of Chapter 161 as described in Exhibit A attached to the Planning Department's Memo in order to change all existing height restriction measurements of buildings from feet to stories within this Chapter 161 of the Unified Development Code. Section 2. That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby repeals §151.01 Definitions of "Building height" and "Story" and enacts the new definition of"Story" as follows: "Story (building height). Building height when measured in stories shall be as defined by the International Building Code." City of Fayetteville, Arkansas Page 1 Printed on 11/27/2017 Andrew Garner Submitted By City of Fayetteville Staff Review Form 20,7-0646 Legistar File lid .1/21/217 City Council Meeting Date - Agenda Item Only N/A for Non -Agenda Item 11/3/2017 City Planning/ Development Services Department Submitted Date Division / Department Action Recommendation: Submitted by City Staff and Planning Commission for revisions to UDC Chapters 151 and 161. The proposed code changes would modify all zoning districts to change building height from feet to stories, and amend the definition of story. Budget Impact: Account Number Fund Project Number Project Title Budgeted Item? NA Current Budget $ - Funds Obligated $ - Current Balance Does item have a cost? No Item Cost Budget Adjustment Attached? NA Budget Adjustment Remaining Budget V20140710 Previous Ordinance or Resolution # Original Contract Number: Approval Date: Comments: IWA CITY O FAYETTEV LLE ARKANSAS MEETING OF NOVEMBER 21, 2017 TO: Mayor and City Council CITY COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO THRU: Garner Stoll, Development Services Director FROM: Andrew Garner, Planning Director DATE: November 3, 2017 SUBJECT: ADM 17-5939: Administrative Item (Various UDC Chapter Amendments): Submitted by City Staff and Planning Commission for revisions to UDC Chapters 151, 161, and 166. The proposed code changes would modify all zoning districts to change building height from feet to stories, and create a design overlay district along the College Avenue rezoning area between Maple and North Streets. RZN 17-5713: Rezone (College Ave. from North Street to Maple Street, 445- 446): Submitted by City Staff and Planning Commission to rezone properties along College Avenue from North Street to Maple Street. RECOMMENDATION: The City Planning staff and Planning Commission recommend approval of three ordinances to amend the Unified Development Code as depicted in the attached Exhibits Wand `8', and rezone the subject property as shown in the attached Exhibit `C'. Staff and Planning Commission have different recommendations for the details of the proposed College Avenue design overlay district as described below. BACKGROUND: In spring of 2017, the Planning Commission considered a rezoning proposed by staff along the College Avenue corridor between Maple Street and North Street. The Planning Commission forwarded the request to the City Council. After discussion at the City Council Ordinance Review Committee during June -July, 2017, the request was forwarded back to the Planning Commission for additional consideration. The Commission set up a committee to study changes to the Unified Development Code that were not initially a part of the rezoning, but were proposed as the discussion evolved. The Planning Commission committee met four times during August - September, 2017. A copy of the meeting minutes from the City Council and Planning Commission Ordinance Review Committees are attached. Mailing Address: 113 W. Mountain Street www.fayetteville-ar.gov Fayetteville, AR 72701 STAFF REQUEST: Staff requests that the City Council rezone the College Avenue corridor, and amend the Fayetteville Unified Development Code (UDC). The UDC amendments would: (1) change building height from feet to stories; and (2) create a design overlay district for most of the College Avenue rezoning area. The overlay district excludes five single family parcels that are being brought into compliance with a residential zoning with this project. The overlay district would require additional architectural design standards to encourage high quality, pedestrian -friendly buildings, and mitigate neighborhood concerns that tall, single use multi -family buildings could be built along the corridor. This proposal comprises three ordinances and separate Legistar items. The specific code changes are listed below and shown in the attached strikeout -highlight version. UDC Amendments Exhibit `A' (Le isfar-{tem 2017-06461 • UDC Chapter 151: Definitions o Delete current definition of story o Add anew definition of story to follow current International Building Code definition o Delete definition of building height based on number of feet • UDC Chapter 161: Zoning Regulations o Change building height in all zoning districts from feet to stories o Change building height step -backs in all districts to refer to stories instead of feet Exhibit B' (UL gistar item 2017-064$j IN UDC Chapter 166: Development o Clarify the applicability of the Downtown Design Overlay District (DDOD) Architecture Standards o Create an Overlay District for the College Avenue area following the boundaries as shown on Exhibit `C', with the following: ■ Comply with DDOD Architecture Standards ■ Minimum ground floor story height of 12 feet Residential use can occupy no more than three stories in a building College Avenue Rezoning (Exhibit `C' — Legistar Item 2017.0650) Along with the UDC Amendments described above, the College Avenue rezoning area is recommended to be rezoned utilizing Alternative 1 proposed with RZN 17-5713 (Exhibit C). This would allow council to consider both the code changes and the rezoning at the same time. DISCUSSION AND PUBLIC COMMENT: Committee and Planning Commission This item was discussed at the October 19, 2017 Planning Commission Committee meeting. The five members present reached a consensus in favor of the proposal as written. However, Commissioner Hoffman was not present and at the October 23, 2017 Planning Commission meeting he expressed concerns with restricting residential use to three stories. Commissioner Hoffman made a motion to forward the item to City Council without that restriction. The motion was approved on an 8-0 vote. Staff continues to recommend the restriction on residential uses to ensure appropriate contextual relationship between new buildings and the existing neighborhoods. This approach mitigates neighborhood concerns that tall, single use multi -family buildings, not compatible with adjacent structures, could be built along the corridor. Public Comment To ensure that the public has ample opportunity to comment on the current proposal, staff completed re -notification of the affected and adjacent property owners before the city council meeting. At the time of publication of this report public comment on the current proposal had not been received. BUDGET/STAFF IMPACT: N/A Attachments: ■ Exhibit A: code amendments for new height restrictions and definition of 'story' ■ Exhibit B: o Code amendments for creation of College Avenue Overlay District o College Avenue Overlay District Boundary ■ Exhibit C: rezoning map ■ Draft meeting minutes: October 23, 2017 Planning Commission ■ Planning Commission Staff Report (October 23, 2017) r -VII 11�1r I w I ADM 17-5939 Proposed Code Changes Shown in Strikeout and Highlight 151.01 - Definitions For the purpose of Title XV, Unified Development Code, the following definitions shall apply to the divider sections, chapters, sections or subsections, unless the context clearly indicates or requires a different meaning. B Oirrry hergl�f:.->> ,,'r pall ire mE:jsliic-d j -- the -9 - s' e— trastr�re, u^l�' ^ ^las, antennas, w@te4 tan* -s- : ^.E:latGFs, shi,..fae --s etf �nrl nhn.�ra +ho Fl$t-FF}tEr�E--f6F-li:}'faR- iRE?r :# rfl 9SBS1rt�fr161F-itr I3 tar�ew$br�v�-the-ex-isN+� a#�r-al- rade-aa�r�5�-t#e-e�t#re-reel-lf-tire-str'usta�re-is-betew-the- �-I+ee- }h.3.,, S Story (building height). Building height when measured in stories shall be as defined by the International Building Code. Page 1 EXHIBIT 'A' Page 2 of 9 ADM 17-5939 Proposed Code Changes Shown in Strikeout and Highlight CHAPTER 161: - ZONING REGULATIONS 161.03 - District R -A, Residential -Agricultural (F) Height Requirements. There shall be no maximum height limits in the R -A District, provided, however, that any ihi iikriincuMihin__!i_o nrb ed"he he height 9f 1 6 faa} shall Ali F. m r�}h-nL_frr ++ * c1�e . ds+ e. r.f Rin � any xtl6 identral di 'ista ce of 1 0 f0atf,9r each feet of height in exses6 of 1�n} Such setbar_L� Alma -fae measuped frormn re FequiFed set ack lines. if a building exceeds the height of one story, the portion of the building over one story shall have an additional setback from any boundary line of an adjacent residential district. The amount of additional setback for the portion of the building over one story shall be equal to the difference between the total height of that portion of the building and one stor]L 161.04 - District RSF-.5, Residential Single -Family - One Half (%2) Unit Per Acre (F) Building height Regulations. 45 feet Building Height Maximum 3 stories tl•7 t, ,arl A rrn it- F*Gll ,•re.A _ e. -- in;—[end not 161.05 - District RSF-1, Residential Single -Family - One (1) Unit Per Acre (H) Building Height Regulations. 45 feet Building Height Maximum 3 stories {'pe^h#v 'uric CAQFh3--L_1FWvtaieS in this oiinrii4�mita`#.ry to arvii4d#Kj-"h1 of 4F feet Existing 0n in} 4 a ee.i A 5 Econ# in 'hni_1 all he gFandfa}hered in—.aAd-AG4-F idered nonGO 49 uses. 7 161.06 - District RSF-2, Residential Single -Family - Two (2) Units Per Acre (H) Building Height Regulations. 45 feet Building Height Maximum 3 stories F-�eigl�t-rlatia�s:-�tr�trr,�es- ibis-��strre-li�ildi►�g-heigi�F-a-few:-rE-aciatir� ht shah e-graFaetf3'fa,n ; .,a not uses. Page 2 CVUIQIT 'A I vase s or u ADM 17-5939 Proposed Code Changes Shown in Strikeout and Highlight 161.07 - District RSF-4, Residential Single -Family - Four (4) Units Per Acre (F) Building Height Regulations, 4S fppt Building Height Maximum 3 stories nra+�� Fate in his DieWst are. limited to a h n pain f A—. 9 ie � V1TT rr.Y�s�a"tT*vtl� �'�� '�'��-9�-4� s W ernweF +ham+ a ar! w Y, f, et4n height shall be grandfathered uses. 161.08 - District RSF-7, Residential Single -Family - Seven (7) Units Per Acre (1) Building Height Regulations. Building Height Maximum 45 feet 3 stories Nx',44IP' rrn- — I.— I-1irv+r'sr+,gra @i'I h+.sf A Fae rhr.rr+u r- r that a and A6 fee+ iii#e4ght shall be grandfathered in nd-ROt-�GORGi uses.7 �AFB�-Fa6raS91�9r�RiRp 77 161.09 - District RSF-8, Residential Single -Family - Eight (8) Units Per Acre (F) Height Regulations. ^cam Building Height Maximum 161.10 - District RSF-18, Residential Single -Family - Eighteen (18) Units Per Acre (F) Building Height Regulations. Building Height Maximum 3 stories Page 3 EXHIBIT 'A' Page 4 of 9 ADM 17-5939 Proposed Code Changes Shown in Strikeout and Highlight 161.11 - District RI -12, Residential Intermediate, Twelve (12) Units Per Acre (F) Building Height Regulations. Building height maximum 3Q/45 fms* 2 storiesl3 stories` *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 two stories. 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 three stories. 161.12 - District RI -U, Residential Intermediate - Urban (F) Building Height Regulations. Building height maximum 391 45 fee 2 stories/3 stories` * 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 29 feet two stories. Buildings or portions of the building set back greater than 10 feet from the master street pian right-of-way shall have a maximum height of 46 feet three stories. 161.13 - District RMF -6, Residential Multi -Family - Six (6) Units Per Acre (F) Building Height Regulations. Building Height MaxinwfTl AGMS feet 2 stories/3 stories* *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 two stories. 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 three stories. e4s-ti4�hekjht-Gf-20-feetair'all-beb Gk fromany oink_ boundary-fine-Gf an feet- If a building exceeds the height of two stories, the portion of the building that exceeds two stories shall have an additional setback from any side boundary line of an adiacent single family district. The amount of additional setback for the portion of the building over two stories shall be equal to the difference between the total height of that portion of the building, and two stories. Page 4 EXHIBIT 'A' Page 5 of 9 ADM 17-5939 Proposed Code Changes Shown in Strikeout and Highlight 161.14 - District RMF -12, Residential Multi -Family - Twelve (12) Units Per Acre (F) Building Height Regulations. �n/n�i* Building Height Maximum storiesl3 stories` *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 two stories. 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 three stories. Any building whir.h a eeds the h hl i 7R F ._.t shall be. set hack from any cine houndaFy line of �i�r�r--arrp--rg�r-�r*P rvr c�per .-rry ar�aGent single ` to efiotrint - arirlil ojjal djStaFjGe gf A At 20 fnat If a building exceeds the hei ht of two stories the portion of the buildin that exceeds two stories shall have an additional setback from any side boundary line of an adjacent single family district. The amount of additional setback for the poton of the building over two stories shall be equal to the difference between the total height of that portion of the building, and two stories. 161.15 - District RMF -18, Residential Multi -Family - Eighteen (18) Units Per Acre (F) Building Height Regulations. 1 70I45 fee;* building Height Maximum r stories/3 stories" *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 20 feet two stories. 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 three stories. A%-6ujl&Ny wW ed t�rteight of 20 feat shall 4.e sel ba&frmany side boundaryline ei .ter_. single family di t-Fi-4 -- - - difienal distaRse of 1 feet foF eash feet of height iR eXQe65 of 20 feet, If a_building exceeds the height of two stories,the portion of the building that exceeds two stories shall have an additional setback from any side boundary line of an adiacent single family district. The amount of additional setback for the portion of the building over two stories_ shall be equal to the difference between the total height of that portion of the building, and two stories. Page 5 EXHIBIT 'A' Page 6 of 9 ADM 17-5939 Proposed Code Changes Shown in Strikeout and Highlight 161.16 - District RMF -24, Residential Multi -Family - Twenty -Four (24) Units Per Acre (F) Building Height Regulations. � nlnr 1CI1 �®ar_* Building Height Maximum 2 stories/3 stories/5 stories* *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 two stories, between 10- 20 feet from the master street plan right-of-way a maximum height of 46 feet three stories and buildings or portions of the building set back greater than 20 feet from the master street plan right-of-way shall have a maximum height of GA feet 5 stories. A,ny-bulldk;q-whi'6�eed$-4%-rtGrd•7. ht of 20 feeth�[uEn-uczc�.�-t7a6`k-�r.. e.:rla !nrnnrl•�ru lent. of �n a,,.djaGent��ily in Rciditie- re -s1 dost of '1 feet „fW each �,nf height ia_rivn__v& . f -X feet If a building exceeds the height of two stories, the portion of the building that exceeds two stories shall have an additional setback from any side boundary line of an adjacent single family district. The amount of additional setback for the portion of the building over two stories shall be equal to the difference between the total height of that portion of the building. and two stories. 161.17 - District RMF -40, Residential Multi -Family - Forty (40) Units Per Acre (F) Building Height Regulations. Building Height Maximum 2 stories/3 stories/5 stories" *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 two stories, between 10- 20 feet from the master street plan right-of-way a maximum height of 45 feet three stories and buildings or portions of the building set back greater than 20 feet from the master street plan right-of-way shall have a maximum height of 69 feet 5 stories. Any building, ,htGt"Xree4G ir. f 9if fence! �h Flo L. �l �,a-j}�}��t� i--�e-6et�aGi(-frf3F�}-2Ff��jl�Sid�-i36k1Flda adjasent Gingle family distfic4aR addit! f 1 feet fe-F ea-Gh feet of height in- exseas-ef 20 feet If a building exceeds the height of two stories, the portion of the building that exceeds two stories shall have an additional setback from any side boundary line of an adjacent single family district_ The amount of additional setback for the portion of the buildin, over two stories shall be equal _t_o_the difference between the total height of that portion of the building, and two stories. 161.18 - NS -L, Neighborhood Services - Limited (F) Building height Regulations. Building Height Maximum 45 fee! 3 stories 161.19 - NS -G, Neighborhood Services - General (F) Building Height Regulations. Building height maximum 45 fee 3 stories Page 6 EXHIBIT 'A' Page 7 of 9 ADM 17-5939 Proposed Code Changes Shown in Strikeout and Highlight 161.20 - District R -O, Residential Office (F) Building Height Regulations. Building Height Maximum 60feet�*-5 stories Height Regulations. en , bUild"R ,ihieh e edS the height feet --hall be t h L f FAaRY r„j�, t3oundar-y=i4M7@--4#-an-adjace-nt-,ingle family d5street-an-addkiGRal-d stone`-Gf--1-foot••for-eaf4-fA9t--Bt�#(�kit4a e XGess of 29 feet If a building,exceeds the height of two stories the portion of the buildin that exceeds two stories shall have an additional setback from any side boundary line of an adjacent single family district. The amount of additional setback for the portion of the building over two stories shall be equal to the difference between the total height_ of that partion of the building,, and two stories. 161.21 - District C-1, Neighborhood Commercial (F) Building Height Regulations. Building Height Maximum qfi feet* 5 stories !A4y-bu4,Id4wj-whirh eGee+, st e -height of20 cet shall��fS,.�nL Fr....., -, x. h _ ....A.A .� lin ,�y res#ent+al ritrirtastans.E�^--slfi�r-tea footf height ms af4#ee'If a building exceeds the height of two stories, the portion of the building that exceeds two stories shall have an additional setback from- any- boundary line of an adiacent residential district. The amount of additional setback for the portion of the building over two stories shall be equal to the difference between the total height of that Portion of the building, and two stories. 161.22 - Community Services (F) Building Height Regulations. Building Height Maximum qfi fppt* 5 stories 161.23 - District C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial (F) Building Height Regulations. Building Height Maximum 75#eet* 6 stories *Any exg-eeds; t4e44eight of 20 feet shall be set back from a bOURdar-Y We Of aRY FesideRtial district-a-distaese-of4-feet-far-eac#-foot-orf-height-in-exoess•of 2 -0 -feet: If a building exceeds the height of two stories the portion of the building that exceeds two stories shall have an additional setback from side boundary line of an adjacent residential district. The amount of additional setback for the portion of the building -aver two stories shall be equal to the difference_ between the total height of that portion of the building- and two stories. Page 7 EXHIBIT 'A' Page 8 of 9 ADM 17-5939 Proposed Code Changes Shown in Strikeout and Highlight 161.24 - Urban Thoroughfare (F) Building Height Regulations . Building Height Maximum 5c%et* 5 stories/7stories *A building or a portion of a building that is located between 10 and 15 feet from the front property line or any master street plan right-of-way line shall have a maximum height of 56 feet five stories. A building or portion of a building that is located greater than 15 feet from the master street plan right-of- way shall have a maximum height of 84 feet seven stories. .......... If a building exceeds the height of two stories. the portion of the building that exceeds two stories shall have an additional setback from any boundary line of an adjacent single family district. The amount of additional setback for the portion of the building over two stories shall be equal to the difference between the total height of that portion of the building, and two stories. 161.25 - District C-3, Central Commercial (F) Building Height Regulations. Building Height Maximum feet*r5 stories 7stories *A building or a portion of a building that is located between 0 and 15 feet from the front property line or any master street plan right-of-way line shall have a maximum height of fig feet five stories. A building or a portion of a building that is located greater than 15 feet from the master street plan right-of-way line shall have a maximum height of 84 #eet seven stories. 161.26 - Downtown Core (G) Building Height Regulations. Building Height Maximum 5"9 feet* 5 stories/14 stories* *A building or a portion of a building that is located between 0 and 15 feet from the front property line or any master street plan right-of-way line shall have a maximum height of 66 feet five stories. A building or portion of a building that is located greater than 15 feet from the master street plan right-of-way shall have a maximum height of 169 feet 14 stories. 161.27 - Main Street/Center (G) Building Height Regulations. Building Height Maximum 56/84 feet** 5 stories/7 stories* *A building or a portion of a building that is located between 0 and 15 feet from the front property line or any master street plan right-of-way line shall have a maximum height of 86 feet five stories. A building or a portion of a building that is located greater than 15 feet from the master street plan right-of-way line shall have a maximum height of 84 feet seven stories. Page 8 EXHIBIT 'A' Page 9of9 ADM 17-5939 Proposed Code Changes Shown in Strikeout and Highlight 161.28 - Downtown General (G) Building Height Regulations. Building Height Maximum 56 #eeVE 5 stories 161.29 - Neighborhood Conservation (F) Building Height Regulations. Building Height Maximum 49 t 3 stories 161.30 - District 1-1, Heavy Commercial And Light Industrial (F) Height Regulations. There shall be no maximum height limits in 1-1 District, provided, however, that any buildi g wh!Gh ex6eeds the height of 26 feet shall be set baGk 49- 1,9 residept41-diE#rl^+ a d4stanGe ofd feat # -eae4-#eat-sf- *O- t 4n -e &-of-2-54eet. if a building exceeds the height of two stories, the portion of the building that exceeds two stories shall have an additional setback from any boundary line of an adjacent residential district. The amount of additional setback for the portion of the building over two stories shall be equal to the difference between the total height of that portion of the building, and two stories. 161.31 - District 1-2, General Industrial (F) Height Regulations. There shall be no maximum height limits in 1-2 Districts, provided, however, that aRy-buwildin = eds t#e height -e -feet44aWb-L�ark from any bo radar I+Re-Gf-� t of height in excess of 25 f et. if a building exceeds the height of two stories, the portion of the building that exceeds two stories shall have an additional setback from any boundary line of an ad'acent residential district. The amount of additional setback for the portion of the building over two stories shall be equal to the difference between the total height of that ortion of the building, and two stories. 161.32 - District P-1, Institutional (F) Height Regulations. There shall be no maximum height limits in P-1 Districts, provided, however, aRy building whinh. ©XGeeds thn bei gh+ f 20 feet. hall be set h dt Frn� p t f -..ri. ��pp��..CC�J pp....+,.�{ ..��++�nw �-�.v.s-.rry eEu}cta�T,ifae-'o�,�.TP Ga, -,gam ne-fl;,;t-#er-earl--feat of-kaei^h+'^ ®x^gss ^#-2.0-feed if a building exceeds the height of two stories the portion of the building that exceeds two stories shall have an additional setback from any boundary line of an ad'acent residential district. The amount of additional setback for the portion of the building over two stories shall be equal to the difference between the total heioht of that ortion of the building, and two stories. Page 9 CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE ARKANSAS Planning Commission Meeting October 23, 2017 5:30 PM 113 W. Mountain, Room 219 MEETING MINUTES Members: Ron Autry (Chair), Matthew Hoffman (Vice Chair), Allison Thurmond Quinlan (Secretary), Zara Niederman, Sloan Scroggin, Ryan Noble, Tom Brown, Leslie Belden, and Matt Johnson Call to Order: 5:30 PM, Ron Autry (Chair) In Attendance: Members: Ron Autry (Chair), Matthew Hoffman (Vice Chair), Allison Thurmond Quinlan (Secretary), Zara Niederman, Sloan Scroggin, Ryan Noble, Tom Brown, Leslie Belden, and Matt Johnson Absent: Allison Thurmond Quinlan. City Staff: Andrew Garner - Planning Director; Jonathan Curth — Senior Planner; Quin Thompson - Planner; Harry Davis — Planner. City Attorney: Kit Williams. Old Business: ADM 17-5939: Administrative Item (Various UDC Chapter Amendments): Submitted by CITY STAFF AND PLANNING COMMISSION for revisions to UDC Chapters 151, 161, and 166. The proposed code changes would modify all zoning districts to change building height from feet to stories, and create a design overlay district along the College Avenue rezoning area between Maple and North Streets. RZN 17-5713: Rezone (COLLEGE AVE. FROM NORTH ST. TO MAPLE ST./COLLEGE AVE. REZONE, 445-446): Submitted by CITY STAFF AND PLANNING COMMISSION to rezone properties along COLLEGE AVE. FROM NORTH ST. TO MAPLE ST. Andrew Garner, City Planning Director: Gave the staff report for both ADM 17-5939 and RZN 17-5713. He discussed the unique nature of this section of College Avenue which was a part of the original town plat of Fayetteville with a historic street grid. This has led to relatively narrow lots along College Avenue and two historic single family residential neighborhoods that directly abut the corridor. The width of this section of College Avenue is much narrower than other portions of the corridor further north. This results in the need for a more context sensitive approach to rezoning this area that is compatible with the adjacent neighborhoods. No public comment was presented. Mailing Address: 113 W. Mountain Street www.fayettevllle-ar.gov Fayetteville, AR 72701 Matthew Hoffman, Planning Commissioner: There are some things I am a little bit surprised to see. This was a fundamentally different proposal than the last one I saw. The critical issue is the idea we had been discussing was that the increase in height of structures could bring adverse consequences to the pedestrian experience. We needed to mitigate the effect of really tall buildings throughout the entire city. We had three commissioners to bring forward proposals to define infill and/or include incentives at the last Planning Commission meeting. Are we making it harder, are we making it easier to do infill. I think we are making difficult regulations here. I think changing the definition of height to stories citywide is a great idea. The next idea is to extend Downtown Design Overlay District rules to this area. I think this is appropriate. Ground floor story height with a minimum of 12 feet is a new regulation that is not required anywhere else in the city. However, I support this code change as it supports the pedestrian experience. The very last thing in limiting the amount of a building can be occupied by residential calls out residential as a nuisance. For us to include this sort of provision in this area is inappropriate. It does not encourage infill. This is a little disturbing. Twelve months ago we had somebody come in and request UT, Urban Thoroughfare rezoning at the southwest corner of College and North Street and we were really excited about it. There is a danger here. I am left feeling like the feeling here was to do what we should have in the first place which is rezone this to UT and CS. Leslie Belden, Commissioner: I do remember discussing the three stories limitation at the committee meeting but would like for clarification from staff. Garner: Discussed the reasoning for this current proposal with the three-story limitation on residential use, which was to mitigate potential for tall, single -use multi -family buildings directly adjacent to the two historic neighborhoods that abut the corridor. Tom Brown, Commissioner: Discussed the existing condition of College Avenue and the current proposal. I feel very comfortable in voting to forward this to the City Council with a recommendation for approval. I am certainly happy to listen to what everyone has to say. I think it is important for us to all agree on what we want to forward to the city council. I don't have any problem in tabling this and discussing this again at the sub -committee level. Belden: What I remember that the commission wanted to encourage buildings to be between 3- 5 stories along this stretch of College Avenue. The intent was to have commercial on the ground floor with residential above. The difficulty is the residential use limitation. It might be better worded that in a residential use building the ground floor will be commercial. I understand why we don't want a seven -story apartment building here. I don't know if this has been worded to encourage what we want to encourage. Sloan Scroggin, Commissioner: I agree with this proposal and hope we can forward it based on the discussion that has occurred. I would like to forward it either as it is, or allowing even more floors of residential. Matt Johnson, Commissioner: This was sent back to us to consider by the city council. When we look at this, we want this section of College Avenue to be the testing ground for the rest of College Avenue. I am fully supportive of this but I am not a builder so I'm not sure what the costs of this proposal will be. Hoffman: College Avenue doesn't have a housing problem. I am sympathetic to the neighbors' concerns but we don't have an issue with this being a problem. I am real uncomfortable with all of these regulations. I think it flies in the face of the premise of form -based codes. We are going to have to let some of the market figure this out. I think we are adding some significant regulations that will help a lot some of the neighbors' concerns, without restricting residential use. Zara Niederman, Commissioner: If someone wanted to develop something taller than three stories, is there an opportunity for a variance? Garner: Yes Niederman: The design overlay could be changed at a later time if needed. I am happy to move forward as is, or we could remove the residential restriction problem on it. In terms of making some sort of compromise I'm willing to move forward as is. Ron Autry, Commissioner: Discussed the background for the current overlay district proposal. It is very complicated but it was unanimous that we want to try and move this forward. I am okay with the way it reads but am okay to reach a compromise tonight. Belden: I am hoping that we will spread this all the way to Joyce. The restriction on residential along the entire stretch of College all the way to Joyce would be too restrictive. Motion #1 ADM 17-5939: Commissioner Hoffman made a motion to forward ADM 17-5939 to City Council recommending approval as written except striking the restriction on residential use in the design overlay district. Commissioner Belden seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion passed with a vote of 8-0-0. Motion#2 RZN 17-5713: Commissioner Hoffman made a motion to forward RZN 17-5713 to City Council recommending approval as proposed. Commissioner Belden seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion passed with a vote of 8-0-0. I ' PLANNING COMMISSION MEMO CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE ARKANSAS TO: City of Fayetteville Planning Commission FROM: Planning Commission Ordinance Review Committee and City Planning Division Staff MEETING DATE: October 23, 2017 (Updated with Planning Commission results) SUBJECT: ADM 17-5939: Administrative Item (Various UDC Chapter Amendments): Submitted by FAYETTEVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION for revisions to UDC Chapters 151, 161, and 166. The proposed code changes would modify all zoning districts to change building height from feet to stories, and create a design overlay district along the College Avenue rezoning area between Maple and North Streets. RZN 17-5713: Rezone (COLLEGE AVE. FROM NORTH ST. TO MAPLE ST./COLLEGE AVE. REZONE, 445-446): Submitted by CITY STAFF to rezone properties along COLLEGE AVE. FROM NORTH ST. TO MAPLE ST. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends forwarding the proposed code changes and the College Avenue corridor rezoning to the City Council with a recommendation for approval. At the time of publication of this report, the Planning Commission Ordinance Review Committee has not reviewed all of the proposed code changes. BACKGROUND: In spring of 2017, the Planning Commission considered a rezoning proposed by staff along the College Avenue corridor between Maple Street and North Street. The Planning Commission forwarded the request to the City Council. After discussion at the City Council Ordinance Review Committee, the request was forwarded back to the Planning Commission for additional consideration. The Commission set up a committee to study changes to the Unified Development Code that were not initially a part of the rezoning, but were proposed as the discussion evolved. A copy of the meeting minutes from the City Council and Planning Commission Ordinance Review Committees are attached. Mailing Address: Planning Commission ctober 23, 2017 113 W. Mountain Street WWW.fayettevi"eAsj$9WItem 3 Fayetteville, AR 72701 17-5939 UDC Chs. Amend. Page 1 of 89 DISCUSSION: Request: Staff requests that the City Council rezone the College Avenue corridor, and amend the Fayetteville Unified Development Code (UDC). The UDC amendments would: (1) change building height from feet to stories; and (2) create a design overlay district for the College Avenue rezoning area. The overlay district would require additional architectural design standards to encourage high quality, pedestrian -friendly buildings, while mitigating neighborhood concerns that tall, single use multi -family buildings could be built along the corridor. The specific code changes are listed below and shown in the attached strikeout -highlight version of the code. UDC Amendments UDC Chapter 151: Definitions o Delete current definition of story o Add anew definition of story to follow current International Building Code definition o Delete definition of building height based on number of feet UDC Chapter 161: Zoning Regulations o Change building height in all zoning districts from feet to stories o Change building height step -backs in all districts to refer to stories instead of feet UDC Chapter 166: Development o Clarify the applicability of the Downtown Design Overlay District (DDOD) Architecture Standards o Create an Overlay District for the College Avenue rezoning area with the following: • Comply with DDOD Architecture Standards • Minimum ground floor story height of 12 feet • Residential use can occupy no more than three stories in a building Collette Avenue Rezoninct Along with the UDC Amendments described above, the College Avenue rezoning area is recommended to be rezoned utilizing Alternative 1 proposed with RZN 17-5713 (attached). This would allow council to consider both the code changes and the rezoning at the same time. To ensure that the public have ample time to comment on the current proposal, staff recommends this request not be placed on a City Council agenda until full re -notification of the affected and adjacent property owners has been completed. Planning Commission October 23, 2017 G:\ETC\Development Services Review\2017\Development Review\17-5939 ADM Various UDC Chapter Amendments\03 Planning Agenda Item 3 Commission\10-23-2017\Comments and Redlines 17-5939 UDC Chs. Amend. Page 2 of 89 RECOMMENDED MOTION NO. 1 (ADM 17-5939): Forward the proposed UDC Amendments in ADM 17-5939 to the City Council with a recommendation for approval. Planning Commission Action: Meeting Date: October 23, 2017 Motion: Belden Second: Hoffman Vote: 8-0-0 0 Approved 0 Forwarded C) Denied Note: Recommend approval as proposed except removing the restriction on residential use in the design overlay district. — RECOMMENDED MOTION NO. 2 (RZN 17-5713): Forward the proposed rezoning of the College Avenue corridor in RZN 17-5713 utilizing Alternative 1 to the City Council with a recommendation for approval. Planning Commission Action: Meeting Date: October 23, 2017 Motion: Hoffman Second: Belden Vote: 8-0-0. BUDGET/STAFF IMPACT: N/A 0 Approved 21 Forwarded 0 Denied Note: Recommend approval of Alternative #1 as presented in the staff report. Attachments: • Proposed code changes shown in strikethrough/highlight • Building setback/step-back diagram • City Council and Planning Commission Ordinance Review Committee meeting minutes • Proposed Overlay District Boundary • Alternative 1 Rezoning Exhibit Planning Commission October 23, 2017 G:\ETC\Development Services Review\2017\Development Review\17-5939 ADM Various UDC Chapter Amendments\03 Planning Agenda Item 3 Commission\10-23-2017\Comments and Redlines 17-5939 UDC Chs. Amend. Page 3 of 89 m O 16 0 c We CI- M W •yoEcw Ln N a) E O E M Q E N Ua m � U a .E O L U m N ` 0) C OFFICE OF THE Cnly ATTORNEY DEPARTMENTAL CORRESPONDENCE TO: Justin Tennant, Chair Adella Gray, Member Matthew Petty, Member John La Tour, Member CC: Andrew Garner, Planning Director Jonathan Curth, Senior Planner FROM: Kit Williams, City Attorney I. DATE: June 20, 2017 RE: Ordinance Review Committee MINUTES Kit Williams City Attorney Blake Pennington Assistant City Attorney Rhonda Lpich Paralegal The Ordinance Review Committee met in Room 326, City Administration Building at 4:00 p.m. on June 19, 2017. Chair Justin Tennant called the meeting to order. Three members of the committee were present: Justin Tennant, Adella Gray and Matthew Petty. Committee Member John La Tour did not attend. City Planning Director Andrew Garner discussed the issues and points presented in his Staff Memo of June 19,2-017. (A) Andrew recommended that Use Unit 40, Sidewalk Cafes be removed from Chapters 161 and 162 of the LDDC because they can be administratively approved by City Staff anyN,-here a res tau rant would be allowed. The Committee agreed that this should be handled by another ordinance from Planning and not be a part of this discussion concerning UT -L. (B) Andrew recommended not to add Clean Technologies as a use unit allowed within a UT -L district because such manufacturing may not be compatible with residential and commercial uses in UT -L. The Committee expressed general agreement with Andrew. Planning Commission October 23, 2017 Agenda Item 3 17-5939 UDC Chs. Amend. Page 72 of 89 (C) Andrew discussed building height issues. The Committee generally agreed that additional building setbacks for buildings over 20 feet tall were not needed. (D) Andrew discussed the floodplain and drainage issues at the bottom of the hill (Trenton intersection). He recommended against rezoning to R -A as inappropriate for this federal highway linking downtown and midtown. Andrew also discussed potential "takings" issues if the City rezoned to R -A to prevent further development in this flood prone area. I agreed with Andrew and cautioned about rezoning land into such a restrictive zoning district that a property owner could assert the rezoning would violate the Private Property Protection Act. (E) Andrew presented a potential definition of "active space" which could authorize an additional level of construction under some possible revisions of the ordinance. Planning Commissioner Allison Quillan suggested identifying "active space" by requiring some business or activity by use unit in the building. No definition of "active -space" could be agreed upon at this meeting. (F) City Attorney Kit Williams suggested a stylist change in the name of UT -L so that the "L" would match the "L" in Neighborhood Services - Limited. I expressed my belief that having "L" mean "Light" is one zoning district and "Limited" in another zoning district would be confusing. The Committee generally agreed so the proposed ordinance will slightly change the name of the proposed use unit to "Urban Thoroughfare - Limited". The Ordinance Review Committee decided another meeting would be required to fine tune the ordinance and definitions and scheduled the next Ordinance Review Committee on Thursday, July 13, 2017 at 4:00 p.m. in Room 326. Respectfully Submitted, Kit Williams ~`- - City Attorney 2 Planning Commission October 23, 2017 Agenda Item 3 17-5939 UDC Chs. Amend. Page 73 of 89 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE TO CREATE A NEW ZONING DISTRICT, URBAN THOROUGHFARE LIGHT; UT -1. AND TO CHANGE OR AMEND DEFINITIONS OF `BUILDING HEIGHT" AND "STORIES" WHEREAS, the Planning Commission requested that the Planning Department examine the zoning districts along College Avenue from North Street to Maple Street and recommend rezoning these parcels; and WHEREAS, the Planning Department presented its proposed rezoning to the Planning Commission on April 10, 2017 and received much public comment opposing the possibility of tall apartment buildings being constructed adjoining the historic single family neighborhoods; and WHEREAS, the Planning Department adjusted its recommendations and proposed the creation of new zoning district, Urban Thoroughfare Light, which reduces the allowed height of the current Urban Thoroughfare to lessen potential density; and WHEREAS, at the end of the third Planning Commission meeting on this issue, the Planning Commission recommend approval of the proposed rezoning and the creation of a new zoning district, Urban Thoroughfare — Light. 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 enacts a new zoning district, Urban Thoroughfare Light; UT -I., as shown on Exhibit B of the Planning Departments' memo. Section 2. That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby amends § 151.01 Definitions to change or add definition of "building height" and "stories" as shown on Exhibit D of Planning Department's memo. PASSED and APPROVED this 6th day of June, 2017. APPROVED: ATTEST: By: - -- By:. LIONELD JORDAN, Mayor SONDRA SMITH, City Clerk/Treasurer Planning Commission October 23, 2017 Agenda Item 3 17-5939 UDC Chs. Amend. Page 74 of 89 4 DEPARTMENTAL CORRESPONDENCE OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY TO: Justin Tennant, Chair Adella Gray, Member Matthew Petty, Member John La Tour, Member CC: Andrew Garner, Planning Director Jonathan Curth, Senior Planner h FROM: Kit Williams, City Attorney DATE: July 18, 2017 RE: Ordinance Review Committee MINUTES Kit Williams City Attorney Blake Pennington Assistant City Attorney Rhonda Lynch Paralegal The Ordinance Review Committee met in Room 326, City Administration Building at 4:00 p.m. on July 13, 2017. Chair Justin Tennant called the meeting to order. All four members of the committee were present: Justin Tennant, Adella Gray, John La Tour and Matthew Petty. The minutes of the meeting of June 19, 2017 were approved. Chairman Tennant gave each member of the Ordinance Review an opportunity to discuss their concerns about the proposed ordinance. Planning Commissioner Allison Quillan was allowed to discuss her suggestions about building height and measurements in floors rather than feet. City Council and Committee member Matthew Petty explained his reluctance to enact a new zoning district rather than address height measurement issues and potential height bonuses for a building with "retail ready" space on the ground floor. Matthew moved that the Ordinance Review Committee recommend changing measurements at least for structures within a mixed-use, form -based zoning district from a maximum height in feet, to a maximum number of stories to achieve parity between the traditional commercial zones and the newer form - Planning Commission October 23, 2017 Agenda Item 3 17-5939 UDC Chs. Amend. Page 75 of 89 based, mixed-use zones and to provide potential one story bonuses if the building has "retail ready" space on the ground floor. The motion passed unanimously. Matthew moved to clarify the zoning code by permitting sidewalk caf6s as a use by right in any zone in which regular restaurants were authorized. This passed unanimously. Sufficiently wide sidewalks to ensure ADA compliance remain a secondary requirement. Finally, the Ordinance Review Committee voted to request the ordinance be taken off the table at the July 18th City Council Meeting and referred back to the Planning Commission for further study and incorporation of Ordinance Review Committee's proposals. Respectfully Submitted, Kit Williams City Attorney Attorney Planning Commission October 23, 2017 Agenda Item 3 17-5939 UDC Chs. Amend. Page 76 of 89 CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE ARKANSAS MEETING MINUTES College Avenue Rezoning Committee Meeting August 24, 2017 Immediately Following Agenda Session 113 W. Mountain, Room 326 Members: Allison Thurmond Quinlan (Chair), Ron Autry, Matthew Hoffman, Zara Niederman, Sloan Scroggin, Tom Brown, Matt Johnson Call to Order: 4:45 PM, Allison Thurmond Quinlan In Attendance: Members: Allison Thurmond Quinlan (Chair), Zara Niederman, Tom Brown, Sloan Scroggin Absent: Ron Autry City Staff: Quin Thompson, Planner; Andrew Garner, Planning Director; Jonathan Curth, Senior Planner; Harry Davis, Planner; College Avenue Rezoning: Allison Quinlan, Commissioner: Gave the background for the goals of the committee. Matthew Hoffman, Commissioner: Agreed with most of the goals to convert building height to stories and most everything else mentioned here. He discussed the biggest deficiency we have in our buildings is the first floor of the building. In what we want to emphasize, I would like to try to take on the ground level streetscape. Zara Niederman, Commissioner: Asked what is meant by keeping parity between the two zoning districts. Quinlan: Explained what is meant by keeping parity. Tom Brown, Commissioner: Asked about goal #4 regarding building code. Quinlan and Hoffman: Gave examples of consistency between various codes. Niederman: I would like to address curb cuts, connectivity, and how we get buildings up front along the street as well. Quinlan: Reviewed the approach to working through the code changes. Hoffman: Discussed concerns with the approach of limiting height to a maximum of three stories. He discussed some issues with the "bonus stories" applying across the city. I worry Mailing Address: Ianng Commission 113 W. Mountain Street www.fayetrev'Rikef! 2017 Fayetteville, AR 72701 Agenda Item 3 17-5939 UDC Chs. Amend. Page 77 of 89 about the approach of having everyone build storefronts everywhere where it is not needed or appropriate. Quinlan: Agreed that in writing the code we need to be sure we allow adequate flexibility. Hoffman: Discussed further concerns that making everything retail ready may not be appropriate. He gave examples of excellent, traditional building typologies in Brooklyn that are not retail ready and should not have to be retail ready. Quinlan: Asked about where the various typologies should apply. Hoffman: Discussed ideas about the different fabric of the city needing different building typologies. Sloan Scroggin, Commissioner: Gave the example of the new Uptown Apartments and if we want to require all the first floor of these apartments to have to be retail ready. He asked for clarification on the proposed code change. Quinlan: Clarified the application of the code. Scroggin: He discussed a desire to allow the Uptown Apartments by right, and what he is seeing here doesn't allow that. Hoffman: Agreed with Scroggin about not needing all ground floor units to be retail ready when they do not need to be and will never be retail. Quinlan: Brought up pg. 5 in the packet and the details of the 30 -foot minimum along the street frontage being the only portion of the buildings that must be retail ready. Ceiling height seems to be a good item we can agree on. Hoffman: Preferred a minimum clear ceiling height of 12 feet. Niederman: Stated he felt that commercial opportunities in buildings would be a good thing. Hoffman: Further discussed concerns with requiring buildings to be retail ready. Scroggin: Discussed living in Madrid and the consistent six stories and the percentages of residential units at the street. Niederman: Asked what size scale buildings do we want here in the next 30-50 years? I think in Fayetteville, around three stories is what we would expect in this city and that seven stories may look out of place. Hoffman: Stated that he sees concerns with this approach in that three story versus five stories will not help solve sprawl and discussed favor for a variety of building heights Planning Commission October 23, 2017 Agenda Item 3 17-5939 UDC Chs. Amend. Page 78 of 89 Quinlan: Gave background for where the three-story building came from. Quinlan: Asked for input if the approach of bonus stories is favorable. Brown: Liked the idea for bonus stories Quinlan: Solicited comment about converting the building height from feet to stories. Hoffman: Stated that there is not a concern with developers building very tall floor to ceiling. Brown: Agreed with reference to building code. The Commissioners had a consensus that the definition of story should be the most recently adopted IBC definition of story. The Commissioners had a consensus to replace height step back language in the zoning code with a diagram. Commissioner Quinlan: Discussed the architectural guidelines and potential changes that may be necessary to accomplish the goals. Hoffman: Indicated that he does not favor including trails in the requirements for build -to zones. Quinlan: Indicated that the next College Avenue Rezoning Committee Meeting will be directly following the September 7t" Planning Commission Agenda Session. Reports: None Announcements: None Adjournment Time: 5:40 PM Submitted by: City Planning Division Planning Commission October 23, 2017 Agenda Item 3 17-5939 UDC Chs. Amend. Page 79 of 89 CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE W-0 ARKANSAS MEETING MINUTES College Avenue Rezoning Committee Meeting September 7, 2017 Immediately Following Agenda Session 113 W. Mountain, Room 111 Members: Allison Thurmond Quinlan (Chair), Ron Autry, Matthew Hoffman, Zara Niederman, Sloan Scroggin, Tom Brown, Matt Johnson Call to Order: 5:00 PM, Allison Thurmond Quinlan In Attendance: Members: Allison Thurmond Quinlan (Chair), Zara Niederman, Tom Brown, Sloan Scroggin Absent: None City Staff: Andrew Garner, Planning Director; Jonathan Curth, Senior Planner; Harry Davis, Planner; College Avenue Rezoning: Allison Thurmond Quinlan, Commissioner: Summarizes the previous meeting, the agenda, and the goals. Also, goes in to the areas of agreement between the Commissioners who attended the previous meeting. Describes some of the options to incorporate density bonuses with specific mention of Lakewood, Colorado and its codes. Matthew Petty, City Council Member: Gives background on the politics of the decision by Council to send the item back to the Planning Commission for review. The Council's main concern was that a new zoning district was being created, and they felt the area could be rezoned through the existing zoning code. The second issue that councilmembers had at the Ordinance Review Committee was the monoculture of student housing, and mule -family housing in general, and that this should not necessarily be biased against, but should perhaps be held to a higher standard given its impact. Beyond that, the Ordinance Review Committee agreed that the design standards should receive an overhaul and retail -ready spaces may be valuable, but the underlying value should be walkability. Matthew Hoffman, Commissioner: Summarizes concerns he and other Commissioners had with a requirement for retail -readiness and the costs it could have on the development community. Shares that he spoke with people in these professions to seek their input and discussed alternatives like code change applicability to varying developments, where mixed-use is most appropriate in the City, and possibly a historical preservation element. Developers he spoke with stated that the suggested proposals would have a significant adverse effect on development, especially with the varying cost between developing and building commercial versus residential Mailing Address: Ian 'ng Commission 113 W. Mountain Street WWWJ yet�I Od%rdf2017 Fayetteville, AR 72701 Agenda Item 3 17-5939 UDC Chs. Amend. Page 80 of 89 spaces. Based on these conversations, he proposes that the development code be aligned with the building code which may mitigate the costs associated with making a bottom floor retail -ready. Tom Brown, Commissioner: Seeks clarity on how this would be worked in to the zoning code. Quinlan: Discussed the background for her original proposal with three stories and how it aligned with building, code. Hoffman: Reiterates that it would simply be the use of the existing building code requirements to require a retail -ready ground floor when the cost will already be present for developers to build a concrete podium when going over a certain height. These concrete podiums incorporate building height structural requirements with separation requirements between uses. Petty: Even in this context, most retail will happen in one, two, and three story buildings. We shouldn't fall into the trap that this will impact general retail when it will only affect a specific subset of development. I think that if we go after developer's input we should get formal feedback. Forget about retail ready from this. I think what is important is that when this goes back to the council and the neighbors get re-engaged. If we don't apply any of these extra standards until we hit the six story, we've lost the political gains from this approach. I don't think it's critical to directly align with building code. Brown: Asked where we want this bonus story to apply across the city? Maybe it should only apply along transit corridors or a certain distance from railway right-of-way or from bus routes. (He shared a map he created showing potential transit overlay areas on the screen.) Maybe overlay both of those, or look at what studies the UA has done or others have done for transit stops and the concept for transit -oriented districts. The thought would be that we not want to make it city-wide to create the environment for density and population that we need to make these mass transit scenarios viable. Maybe we want to focus these bonus provisions where the union of rail and bus transit interest for future commercial and mixed use developments. Hoffman: Shared a similar idea of using the Master Street Plan for some type of overlay. However, the bonus is a restriction in those areas where we want more density. Brown: I was just looking for an entry way to get this on the table for future discussion and evaluation by the Planning Commission. I distributed this and referred it as transit -oriented overlay districts. If we feel this is not applicable for this bonus story provision, I think we could look at density and parking incentives within these zones. Quinlan: She discussed why she thinks whatever we do should apply to all zones. What we are saying is that we should only see five or six stories when we reach these other standards. Petty: I love incentivizing transit oriented development but I don't think we're there yet. We have interest in a transit expansion. When we get there, I think we should absolutely look at those changes. The bonus stories should apply to all zones. We want to set the threshold where most of what happens continues. This would not affect big box stores or commercial strip centers. But Planning Commission October 23, 2017 Agenda Item 3 17-5939 UDC Chs. Amend. Page 81 of 89 it would affect a tall office tower in a C-2 zone. There is some compromise so that most of what is already happening can already happen. We don't want to go so far as discouraging good development. We agree that in general the downtown design codes are good. We need to strike that balance. I think pedestrian standards don't go too far, architectural standards don't go too far, but maybe retail ready goes too far. He also discussed the complications of enforcement in a complicated overlay system. Hoffman: In terms of the mechanism it should be important that it not be an extra cost burden. I think we should do things to incentivize taller buildings. Pedestrian orientation and build -to would be appropriate. What would be do in terms of pedestrian orientation? Brown: Seeks clarification on what direction things are headed and his misunderstanding about the focus of the subcommittee. Petty: Acknowledges Commissioner Brown's transit oriented development conversation is sound in theory, but one of the major considerations is to apply new requirements equally. Responds to Commissioner Hoffman's question about pedestrian elements by noting that the foundations already exist in the code and may need to be applied across the City. This could extend the goal to create active streets across the City. The Council recognized that retail -readiness may not be the route to this as it can create significant costs for the development community. Brown: Brings up design requirements, and that he feels the Downtown Design Overlay District requirements should stay applied to downtown. He proposes melding existing design standards to create one, over -arching standard to apply citywide. Quinlan: Discussed what applicable design standards should apply to the street level such as the Downtown Design Overlay District (DDOD) standards and the non-residential design standards. The non-residential design standards are more general. I think the downtown design standards are more applicable to what we're looking for. Hoffman: Agrees that the DDOD standards should be considered. Petty: Notes that the DDOD standards are the only elevated requirements in the City, and they ought to be applied elsewhere to reflect citywide growth. Contends that the North College issue needs to be considered independently of the larger City, and then citywide issues revisited later. Ron Autry, Commissioner: I don't want to see anything above three stories on College Avenue. The thought of scaring developer's away is not what we want to do with the retail ready standards. He discussed support for elevated standards for pedestrian oriented development. He discussed that it may be good to invite developers into this meeting and to take their views into the code. Quinlan: Whatever we do needs to be very achievable. It should not be a barrier but should be an approachable compromise between the developers, neighbors, and city goals. She clarified that retail -ready doesn't have to be utilized for retail. Planning Commission October 23, 2017 Agenda Item 3 17-5939 UDC Chs. Amend. Page 82 of 89 Quinlan: Inquires if the subcommittee ought to make motions or have votes. Andrew Garner, City Planning Director: Advises that it would help the process if there are motions on the record. Petty: States that it would help the City Council Ordinance Review Committee to have a framework with which to move forward. What is needed are to establish some details about elements of the proposed code language. Hoffman: Agreed with Alderman Petty's approach. Zara Niederman, Commissioner: Liked the idea for active pedestrian frontages. The one thing I see is an issue is the single use commercial that can happen. He discussed a desire to incentivize cross connection from the rear of properties. Petty: Responds that a default minimum buildable street frontage is being proposed for all properties with rear setbacks that will encourage vehicular rear -loading of properties. Niederman: Would like rear or alley access points to be encouraged too as a means of addressing the access management allowances. Quinlan: Reviewed slides of buildings that would and would not meet the retail ready code as currently written. Niederman: Cites another building example in Fayetteville. Hoffman: Speaks to the building code requirements that increase costs, but do not necessarily benefit the pedestrian experience. Quinlan: Her priorities are a minimum buildable street frontage, architectural standards, a door in to each unit, set ceiling heights, and windows. Niederman: Agrees that it would be nice to have commercial on the ground floor, but it's more about the pedestrian experience. Motion #1: Commissioner Quinlan made a motion that if we create a bonus stories code section, it would apply to all zoning districts. Those zoning districts that do not currently have a build -to zone or minimum buildable street frontage would have the following standards: a build -to zone between 0-25 feet from the street, and a 50% minimum buildable street frontage requirement. Commissioner Hoffman seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion passed with a vote of 6-0-0. Planning Commission October 23, 2017 Agenda Item 3 17-5939 UDC Chs. Amend, Page 83 of 89 Motion #2: Commissioner Quinlan made a motion that one of the requirement of the new bonus stories section of code be that the buildings shall comply with the Downtown Design Overlay District standards, and that the standards be re -named. Commissioner Autry seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion passed with a vote of 6-0-0. Motion #3: Commissioner Quinlan made a motion that the new bonus stories code section require a minimum ground floor story height of 12 feet. Commissioner Johnson seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion passed with a vote of 6-0-0. Niederman: Discussed relaxing residential parking as an incentive in the bonus story criteria. Hoffman: Stated he agreed with relaxing the parking requirement, but it would be difficult to get this approved particularly given the context on College Avenue adjacent to the two historic districts. He asked to clarify how the regulations would apply to basements and 1, 2, 3, and 4 - family buildings. Petty: Suggests that the definition be done in parity with the building code. Motion #4: Commissioner Quinlan made a motion to amend building height of all buildings from feet to stories per the chart attached to the committee's packet, and for adoption of a new bonus stories code section in 164.11 that would limit the height of all buildings in all zoning districts across the city to a maximum height of three stories, unless they comply with the requirements in the bonus stories code section. Single family, two-family, three-family, and four -family buildings shall be exempt from the bonus story requirements. Commissioner. Niederman seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion passed with a vote of 6-0-0. Motion #5: Commissioner Quinlan made a motion to review the downtown design standards at our next committee meeting. Commissioner Hoffman seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion passed with a vote of 6-0-0. Hoffman: Discussed that he is concerned with districts that may currently allow five stories under the foot requirement and that they should perhaps remain at that height under the story requirement. Motion #6: Commissioner Hoffman made a motion that in converting building height from feet to stories, any zone that is listed at 56 feet be converted to 5 stories. Commissioner Quinlan seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion passed with a vote of 6-0-0. Planning Commission October 23, 2017 Agenda Item 3 17-5939 UDC Chs. Amend. Page 84 of 89 Petty: Feels that there is enough consensus to move this part of the item back to the Council. Matthew Johnson, Commissioner: Brings up the desire to involve developers. Petty: Inquires from staff about the procedure for moving forward. Garner: Advises that it be split in to code changes and the rezoning, with a public notification occurring again for the rezoning. The Committee and Staff generally discussed that the proposed code sections referenced in the motions approved at this meeting be presented at a Planning Commission meeting for review then on to City Council. Reports: None Announcements: None Adjournment Time: 6:40 PM Submitted by: City Planning Division Planning Commission October 23, 2017 Agenda Item 3 17-5939 UDC Chs. Amend. Page 85 of 89 CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE W4W ARKANSAS MEETING MINUTES College Avenue Rezoning Committee Meeting September 21, 2017 Immediately Following Agenda Session 113 W. Mountain, Room 111 Members: Allison Thurmond Quinlan (Chair), Ron Autry, Matthew Hoffman, Zara Niederman, Sloan Scroggin, Tom Brown, Matt Johnson Call to Order: 5:00 PM, Allison Thurmond Quinlan In Attendance: Members: Allison Thurmond Quinlan (Chair), Zara Niederman, Tom Brown Absent: Ron Autry, Sloan Scroggin, Matt Johnson City Staff: Andrew Garner, Planning Director; Jonathan Curth, Senior Planner; Harry Davis, Planner College Avenue Rezonin Allison Thurmond Quinlan, Commissioner: Discussed changing the name of the Downtown Design Overlay District Architectural Design Standards. Matthew Hoffman, Commissioner: Mentioned some confusion he has heard with the name of the design standards. Tom Brown, Commissioner: Asked about the applicability of the DDOD standards with this proposed code change. Hoffman: Responded that this would continue to apply in the downtown area and citywide where applicants decide to build over three stories. Andrew Garner, City Planning Director: Asked for clarification on application of the standards. Quinlan: Confirmed that in her motion approved by the committee, the bonus story criteria would apply to all buildings in the development, not just the first 30 feet of buildings as initially proposed with the `retail ready' requirements. Zara Niederman, Commissioner: Asked about the scenario with buildings on the front and back of a parcel. Quinlan: Discussed changes to the DDOD standards needed, beyond the name change and applicability. Mailing Address: 113 W. Mountain Street WWWJ yet�4 1 ng Cf°�r��nss017 Fayetteville, AR 72701 e em 3 Agenda Item 3 17-5939 UDC Chs. Amend. Page 86 of 89 Hoffman: Asked about confusing issues in the code and the idea to make things simple. Quinlan: Discussed differences in building types and architectural requirements. Hoffman: Responded that it is structurally very difficult to meet some of these standards while being cost effective. I think that we should revise the code so applicants don't have to put steel in buildings. The Committee discussed various building types and amounts of buildings and windows. Brown: Stated that he felt we should make sure we address pedestrian oriented standards. Hoffman: Indicated that he like the name "DDOD and Bonus Stories Design Standards". Brown: Asked if various standards and topics are covered in the DDOD and the proposed code changes. Quinlan: Responded to Commissioner Brown's inquiry about various pedestrian -oriented elements in the various design codes. The Committee generally agreed that the new name of the DDOD architectural standards would be DDOD and Bonus Stories Standards. Quinlan: Confirmed that this was the last meeting of the College Avenue rezoning committee and these proposed code changes would be discussed by the full Planning Commission and City Council. Reports: None Announcements: None Adjournment Time: 5:54 PM Submitted by: City Planning Division Planning Commission October 23, 2017 Agenda Item 3 17-5939 UDC Chs. Amend. Page 87 of 89 CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE ARKANSAS MEETING MINUTES College Avenue Rezoning Committee Meeting October 19, 2017 Immediately Following Agenda Session 113 W. Mountain, Room 111 Members: Allison Thurmond Quinlan (Chair), Ron Autry, Matthew Hoffman, Zara Niederman, Sloan Scroggin, Tom Brown, Matt Johnson Call to Order: 5:00 PM, Allison Thurmond Quinlan In Attendance: Members: Allison Thurmond Quinlan (Chair), Zara Niederman, Matthew Johnson, Leslie Belden, Ron Autry Absent: Sloan Scroggin, Matt Hoffman City Staff: Andrew Garner, City Planning Director College Avenue Rezoning: Andrew Garner, City Planning Director: Reviewed the current proposed code changes, the new overlay district, and the proposed rezoning of College Avenue. Allison Thurmond Quinlan, Commissioner: Discussed the general approach for the code changes and overlay district. Matthew Johnson, Commissioner: Asked for clarification on the building step -back diagram. Garner: Discussed the diagram. Zara Niederman: Asked about taking this approach and moving it further north along College Avenue. Quinlan: Responded that this approach should be something we can repeat on other properties moving north along the corridor. Leslie Belden, Commissioner: Asked if this proposal addresses the issue of connecting parking lots. Garner: Stated that the existing commercial design standards requires cross access between properties so additional language was not needed in this proposal to address that issue. Mailing Address: 113 W. Mountain Street www.fayetteville-ar.gov Fayetteville, AR 72701 Ron Autry, Commissioner: Indicated that he liked this proposal where it was limited to a specific area of the city and was not a citywide change. The Committee generally discussed agreement with the proposal and would hopefully recommend this be forwarded to council at the next Planning Commission meeting. Reports: None Announcements: None Adjournment Time: 5:20 PM Submitted by: City Planning Division 31 tu ---Jt=LU.w NORTH ST '" j J ; Q Q Area Boundaries Overlay Boundaries t:�"' ..... ....... . .,•. Proposed Zoning Districts - '� - d ' RSF-4 (2.48 acres) :: - f RMF-24 (0.16 acres).......... ....: ; �` + '• NS -L (1.63 acres) f NS -G (0.48 acres) r�•• - --, BAXTER LN i CS (8.56 acres) ' CLE UT (11.31 acres) u -- T C✓ • • Y dr'4 L I f ri • CLEB[URN ST S - L` �rx SRS .1 angy ,. - 1 GLEN- WINGLNW. LN?' Q / r '• �4 _[ D °'�:`�'"` "'►`a -.r• PROSPFC7 ST PROS>'E ' i-_ j c� .�. f t o a y•5 -- t ..� Cr5 F 1 WIf!SOIIcrST w PROSPE ;1 +. Park �..._i .. ',� I... � � M a4• " "O LU Rr -0 a � { Iij 1 �' � - -• REBECCA STS JO -------- � — ��ITIg}�q; G•aa r•.�� •wi rr.r� - _ ,.� ..ti '.,...._�Jr �-; ;'� •�,. I. as �� i 4 � —— ' 1. • • ••p• 'iii � _ J I { FN7pry' �,L h.lwir•`arr'Eia •" '. M . IMra AAL LOUISE ST _ ---- + a f ' . V ! ... SSA+JYDSON ST ILAST— w _ �. ___ 7-1 _._._.- y O1 -. x , . tom• 519 .._v..,.., t - `( lis �9) LL L_ -- t aF . _ +Y " ! x a 1 • . n • • . , . MPLE ST EE 300 150 0 300 Feet Proposed Zoning Districts PlanningYssion and oto 1 inch = 300 feet s 3' 2017 Overla y Boundaries Agenda men 3 17-5939 UDC Chs. Amend. Page 88 of 89 C, 0 0 0 A O 0 rn 0 0 0o 0 �t o m m Z � o O 0 n 0 0 (D — m >.m 0- c0 co 0 CD DCD 0 � m cQ :3 C: ---k _. CD cD N (n O Z (D a -f C p O � �n> CD vii o ccooD°7 �3 O M N N W 3 So. to a co J 7 WILSON PARK �qVE M x O X 7J C (n .m w OFC.RESFAVE m cn 2 In x 9 T � m A HIGHLANn AVF WILSON PARK �qVE M x rp 10 A gLLEY 46 n x A ."'�. r HIGHLAND AVE z 0 RECEEIVED NORTHWEST ARKANSAS DEC 12 2017 CTI' OF FAYETT 0 ante: 6015 umber: CITY CLERK'S DemocratVI'llazette 1AND646 CAPTER tsl AND 161 UDC REVISIONS: AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE TO - CHANGE BUILDING HEIGHT RESTRICTION MEASUREMENTS FROM FEET TO STORIES IN CHAPTER 161 AND TO AMEND § 151.01 DEFINITIONS TO DEFINE "STORY" AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION WHEREAS, the Planning Department and Planning Commission recommend that all building height limitations be changed from I Karen Caler, do solemnly swear that I am the Legal Clerk of the feet to stories; and WHEREAS, the Planning Department has Northwest Arkansas Democrat -Gazette, printed and published in 1� presented all such necessary amendments to Chapters 151 and 161 to accomplish this Washington County and Benton County, Arkansas, and of bona fide change in measurement within Exhibits A circulation, that from my own personal knowledge and reference attached to the Planning Department's Memo. to the files of said publication, the advertisement of- NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS: Section 1. That the City Council of the City CITY OF FAYETTEV ILLE of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby amends Ord. 6015 those portions of Chapter 161 as described in Exhibit A attached to the Planning Department's Memo in order to change all existing height restriction measurements of Was inserted in the Regular Edition on: buildings from feet to stories within this Chapter 161 of the Unified Development Code. November 3 0 2017 Section 2. That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby repeals §151.01 Definitions of "Building height" and "Story" and enacts the new definition of Publication Charges: $ 94.90 "Story" as follows: "Story (building height). Building height when measured in stories shall be as defined by the International Building Code." PASSED and APPROVED on 11/21/2017 Approved: Kare Caler Lioneld Jordan, Mayor Attest: Sondra E. Smith, City Clerk Treasurer 74356963 Nov. 30, 2017 Subscribed and sworn to before me This & day of b4t_ , 2017. Notary Public My Commission Expires: ` Z+ . kan CATHY WILES sas Bentonunty Notary rPubl c - Comm#C12397118 My Commission Expires Feb 20, 2024 **NOTE** Please do not pay from Affidavit. Invoice will be sent.