Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout290-22 RESOLUTION113 West Mountain Street Fayetteville, AR 72701 (479) 575-8323 Resolution: 290-22 File Number: 2022-0880 APPEAL CUP 22-039 (2992 N. OAK BAILEY DR./OAK BAILEY CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT): A RESOLUTION TO GRANT THE APPEAL OF COUNCIL MEMBERS SARAH BUNCH, TERESA TURK, AND SLOAN SCROGGIN AND APPROVE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CUP 2022-039 FOR A CLUSTER HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2992 NORTH OAK BAILEY DRIVE IN WARD 3 ALONG WITH A VARIANCE TO § 164.22(D) OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS PERMITTED, SUBJECT TO CERTAIN CONDITIONS WHEREAS, on August 22, 2022, the Planning Commission approved Conditional Use Permit CUP 2022-039 for a proposed cluster housing development on property located at 2992 North Oak Bailey Drive and also granted a variance to § 164.22(D) of the Unified Development Code which provides for a maximum number of dwelling units in cluster housing developments to twelve; and WHEREAS, Council Members Sarah Bunch, Teresa Turk and Mark Kinion have properly appealed the decision of the Planning Commission pursuant to § 155.05(A)(3) of the Unified Development Code. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS: Section 1: That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby approves conditional use permit CUP-2022-039 for a proposed cluster housing development subject to the conditions in Section 3. Section 2: that the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby approves a variance to § 164.22(D) of the Unified Development Code to allow 18 dwelling units in the development subject to Page 1 Printed on 1217122 Resolution: 290-22 File Number: 2022-0880 the conditions in Section 3. Section 3: Approval of the conditional use permit and variance are subject to the following conditions which must be accomplished by the owner/applicant/developer prior to receiving any certificate of occupation. The City Council has determined the compatibility of the conditional use permit and variance for the proposed project based upon the owner/applicant's satisfactory accomplishment of all to the following requirements. Shrubs and trees approved by the City Forester must be planted or preserved along the north, south, and west property line in the form of a vegetative screen. The screening trees may include any required mitigation trees. At a minimum, additional screening in the form of vegetation, hedge row, or low-lying fence not to exceed 48" in height shall be installed along exterior property lines where parking courts and driveways abut existing single family residences; 2. Approval of the conditional use permit does not ensure approval of a development application. The conditional use permit grants the owner/applicant the right to submit a development proposal based on the conceptual layout presented to the City Council. However, the owner/applicant must still comply with all other development requirements, including but not limited to, tree preservation, drainage, utility installation and Fire Department access. These details shall be reviewed with the development application. The final project design shall follow the general layout and design of the conditional use concept plan; 3. A condominium association, homeowner's association, or similar mechanism to maintain the common amenities shall be established prior to issuance of construction permits. The City of Fayetteville does not enforce these private agreements, but will require that this agreement be in place prior to issuing building permits; 4. Prior to receiving a certificate of occupancy for the first home, all shared drives, sidewalks and bike racks shall be installed. All development requirements, such as detention facilities, utilities, required landscaping, etc. shall be installed prior to any building permits being issued. The exact phasing of improvements will be determined at development review; 5. The maximum number of unrelated persons in any dwelling unit is three, pursuant to the underlying single-family zoning district; 6. Per UDC § 166.20, Expiration of Approved Plans and Permits, conditional use permit approval is valid for one year; Page 2 Printed on 12r7/22 Resolution. 290-22 File Number: 2022-0880 7. An exterior lighting package must be provided to the Planning Division prior to building permit approval. Common area lighting shall comply with UDC §176, Outdoor Lighting; 8. Provided consent is obtained from the property owners of Washington County Parcels 765- 31972-000, 765-31973-000, 765-31974-000 for grading within five-foot of a property line during construction of the project, a permanent shallow swale will be installed just north of the north property lines of those parcels; 9. A pedestrian pathway shall be installed connecting the proposed internal pedestrian circulation system to Old Wire Road. The pedestrian pathway will connect to the proposed internal pedestrian circulation system between proposed Lots 13 and 14. The pathway may be located on the east or west side of the existing detention pond. The pathway may be primitive. Steps in the pathway will be required at the north and south connection points; and 10. At least 7 of the 12 significant trees on the property shall be preserved. PASSED and APPROVED on 12/6/2022 Attest: �..•' clryo.F,�3 Kara Paxton, City Clerk Treasurer:y E(rj � rn4 s• 2'.1`INS AS .• r ���'� %c • .... . Page 3 Printed on 1217122 City of Fayetteville, Arkansas 113 West Mountain Street Fayetteville, AR 72701 (479)575-8323 Text File File Number: 2022-0880 Agenda Date: 12/6/2022 Version: 1 Status: Passed In Control: City Council Meetinq File Type: Resolution Agenda Number: B.3 APPEAL CUP 22-039 (2992 N. OAK BAILEY DR./OAK BAILEY CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT): A RESOLUTION TO GRANT THE APPEAL OF COUNCIL MEMBERS SARAH BUNCH, TERESA TURK, AND SLOAN SCROGGIN AND APPROVE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CUP 2022-039 FOR A CLUSTER HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2992 NORTH OAK BAILEY DRIVE IN WARD 3 ALONG WITH A VARIANCE TO § 164.22(D) OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS PERMITTED, SUBJECT TO CERTAIN CONDITIONS WHEREAS, on August 22, 2022, the Planning Commission approved Conditional Use Permit CUP 2022-039 for a proposed cluster housing development on property located at 2992 North Oak Bailey Drive and also granted a variance to § 164.22(D) of the Unified Development Code which provides for a maximum number of dwelling units in cluster housing developments to twelve; and WHEREAS, Council Members Sarah Bunch, Teresa Turk and Mark Kinion have properly appealed the decision of the Planning Commission pursuant to § 155.05(A)(3) of the Unified Development Code. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS: Section 1: That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby approves conditional use permit CUP-2022-039 for a proposed cluster housing development subject to the conditions in Section 3. Section 2: that the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby approves a variance to § 164.22(D) of the Unified Development Code to allow 18 dwelling units in the development subject to the conditions in Section 3. Section 3: Approval of the conditional use permit and variance are subject to the following conditions which must be accomplished by the owner/applicant/developer prior to receiving any certificate of occupation. The City Council has determined the compatibility of the conditional use permit and variance for the proposed project based upon the owner/applicant's satisfactory accomplishment of all to the following requirements. 1. Shrubs and trees approved by the City Forester must be planted or preserved along the north, south, and west property line in the form of a vegetative screen. The screening trees may include any required City of Fayetteville, Arkansas Page 1 Printed on 121712022 File Number: 2022-0880 mitigation trees. At a minimum, additional screening in the form of vegetation, hedge row, or low-lying fence not to exceed 48" in height shall be installed along exterior property lines where parking courts and driveways abut existing single family residences; 2. Approval of the conditional use permit does not ensure approval of a development application. The conditional use permit grants the owner/applicant the right to submit a development proposal based on the conceptual layout presented to the City Council. However, the owner/applicant must still comply with all other development requirements, including but not limited to, tree preservation, drainage, utility installation and Fire Department access. These details shall be reviewed with the development application. The final project design shall follow the general layout and design of the conditional use concept plan; 3. A condominium association, homeowner's association, or similar mechanism to maintain the common amenities shall be established prior to issuance of construction permits. The City of Fayetteville does not enforce these private agreements, but will require that this agreement be in place prior to issuing building permits; 4. Prior to receiving a certificate of occupancy for the first home, all shared drives, sidewalks and bike racks shall be installed. All development requirements, such as detention facilities, utilities, required landscaping, etc. shall be installed prior to any building permits being issued. The exact phasing of improvements will be determined at development review; 5. The maximum number of unrelated persons in any dwelling unit is three, pursuant to the underlying single-family zoning district; 6. Per UDC § 166.20, Expiration of Approved Plans and Permits, conditional use permit approval is valid for one year; 7. An exterior lighting package must be provided to the Planning Division prior to building permit approval. Common area lighting shall comply with UDC § 176, Outdoor Lighting; 8. Provided consent is obtained from the property owners of Washington County Parcels 765-31972- 000, 765-31973-000, 765-31974-000 for grading within five-foot of a property line during construction of the project, a permanent shallow swale will be installed just north of the north property lines of those parcels; 9. A pedestrian pathway shall be installed connecting the proposed internal pedestrian circulation system to Old Wire Road. The pedestrian pathway will connect to the proposed internal pedestrian circulation system between proposed Lots 13 and 14. The pathway may be located on the east or west side of the existing detention pond. The pathway may be primitive. Steps in the pathway will be required at the north and south connection points; and 10. At least 7 of the 12 significant trees on the property shall be preserved. City of Fayetteville, Arkansas Page 2 Printed on 121712022 File Number: 2022-0880 City of Fayetteville, Arkansas Page 3 Printed on 121712022 Requested Appeal of CUP-2022-000039: A Conditional Use Permit for a Cluster Home Development with a Density Variance Table of Contents TitlePage.........................................................................................................................................1 Tableof Contents.............................................................................................................................2 Letterof Appeal...............................................................................................................................3 Summaryof Request....................................................................................................................3 Justifications................................................................................................................................4 Conclusion.................................................................................................................................11 Signatures...................................................................................................................................12 Appendices.....................................................................................................................................14 Appendix A — Planning Commission Memo.............................................................................14 Appendix B — City Attorney's 2016 Memo...............................................................................80 Appendix C — Property Record for Proposed Development......................................................83 Appendix D — Property Record for Adjacent Frontage.............................................................84 Appendix E — Park Commons Prelim Plat.................................................................................85 Appendix F — Park Commons Record Drawings.....................................................................107 Appendix G — Park Commons Grading and Utility Permit.....................................................110 AppendixH — MLS Data.........................................................................................................114 MLSSearch Boundaries..................................................................................................114 MLSProperty Data..........................................................................................................115 August 2911, 2022 Council Member Sarah Bunch City of Fayetteville 113 W. Mountain Street Fayetteville, AR 72701 Subject: Appeal of Conditional Use Permit 2022-000039 — Oak Bailey Cluster Development Council Member Bunch, As members of the neighborhood surrounding the property at 2992 N Oak Bailey Rd in Fayetteville, we are writing to request an appeal of the Planning Commission's decision to approve the conditional use permit for a cluster home development on the previously stated property. The approved permit grants the owner of that property the right to construct a cluster home development containing 19 individual dwellings on a lot of approximately 2.67 acres. In approving this request, the Planning Commission additionally agreed to a variance from UDC § 164.22(D) permitting the requesters to exceed the codified maximum of 12 dwellings in a single cluster home development. We assert that this decision by the Planning Commission was made in error without sufficient consideration of the requirements contained in the City of Fayetteville's Unified Development Code. Pursuant to UDC § 155.04 and UDC § 155.05(A)(3), a city council member along with two other members may bring an appeal of a Planning Commission decision on behalf of any resident of the city. UDC § 155.02(A) states that all appeals must reference the applicable UDC sections and the reasons that the decision made was in error. We contend that this decision was made in error for the following reasons: 1. The Conditional Use Permit was approved with issues in the underlying proposal and application, which are at odds with the City of Fayetteville's Unified Development Code. (UDC § 156.03, § 163.02, § 164.16, § 164.22, and § 166.08); and 2. The Planning Commission Memo and subsequent consideration by the Planning Commission did not adequately consider compatibility with adjacent properties (UDC § 163.02(C)(3)(c)(ii)(h); and 3. Satisfactory provisions were not made so as to imbue confidence in the City's ability to ensure alignment with the remaining items specified in UDC § 163.02(C)(3). The subsequent sections of this document will detail specific justifications for each of the above reasons. After considering the justifications provided, it will be clear that this Conditional Use Permit proposal is not "in harmony with the purpose and intent" of the UDC and as such should have been denied by the Planning Commission per UDC § 163.02(B)(4). Accordingly, we ask that the City Council deny the request for a Conditional Use Permit for a Cluster Home Development at 2992 N Oak Bailey Dr. Issues with the Underling Proposal Issue - No Basis for the Variance The proposal for the Cluster Home Development hinges on a variance from UDC § 164.22(D)(1), which states "A cluster housing development shall contain a maximum of twelve (12) dwelling units". Per UDC § 164.22(I), variances from the Cluster Housing Development section will be considered as variance of General Design Standards except for section E — Zoning Regulations. When considered as a variance from the General Design Standards, UDC §156.03(C)(1)(a) indicates that a developer must show "undue hardship" in order for the planning commission to grant a variance. The application for the Conditional Use Permit does not specify any hardship for the proposed development'. Further, the Planning Commission Memo only states "requesting a density variance to allow one cluster housing development with 19 units will help the applicant streamline their process while reducing the amount of staff review needed as the development will be able to be considered as a whole plan rather than two separate proposals 12. A desire to streamline reviews and necessary processes does not rise to the level of a hardship. The justification contained in the Planning Commission Memo asserts that the variance should be granted because of the convenience such a variance would afford not because there is any hardship endured by the i Appendix A — Pages 15-16 2 Appendix A — Page 2 Dwellings Permitted requester. In a memo to the Planning Commission dated January 12, 2016 the City Attorney further affirmed that in most cases an undue hardship must be determined for a variance requeste3 Without a demonstrable hardship, this proposal does not meet the minimum requirements for a variance as laid out in UDC §156.03(C)(1). Issue — No Frontage on the Property Elaborating further on the convenience afforded by the requested variance, the Planning Commission Memo says, "The applicant has stated that the property has enough street frontage to allow the proposal to be split into two separate cluster housing developments that would meet the density requirement.-4 According to UDC § 166.08(E)(2), overlapping frontage for two properties is not permitted. Given this restriction, the property in the proposal (parcel 765-31975-000)5 would only have the required frontage for two cluster home developments if it had frontage to a public road in at least two spots which meet the minimum frontage requirements. According to property records for Washington County, Parcel 765-31975-000 has frontage only onto Old Wire Rd.6 However, the frontage as depicted in the property records is through a piece of the property which was previously developed as a part of the Park Commons subdivision. This piece of the property was developed into a detention pond as a requirement for the subdivision as shown in appendices E, F, and G. Additionally, that detention pond contains several of the trees required by the Urban Forestry Department for the previous Park Commons development.? The purpose of the frontage requirement is to provide "safe and convenient access for servicing, fire protection, and required off-street parking".8 In order to use this portion of the property as frontage, which meets the intent of the requirement, the requestor would have to remove the detention pond and trees. Both of which were requirements for previous development. The proposal before the City Council demonstrates no plans for meeting the prior requirements dictated by the City should such an action be taken. While the property has frontage to a public road in a way that meets the 3 Appendix B — Page 1, Paragraph 2 a Appendix A — Page 2 Dwellings Permitted 6 Appendix A — Page 15 6 Appendix C Appendix E — Pages 9-11 8 UDC §164.16 letter of the UDC, the intent of the code is clearly not met. As such, we submit that the portion of the property adjacent to Old Wire Rd. cannot be represented as adequate frontage for the proposed development. Further, the frontage off of Oak Bailey Rd. referenced in the proposal9 is not a part of the referenced parcel but rather a separate parcel with a different owner, Parcel 765-16035-001.10 The use of a separate parcel, with a different owner than the parcel referenced in the proposal, as the primary means of access to the development presents an issue for the safe ingress and egress from the property as required in UDC § 163.02(C)(3)(c). As it currently stands, this second parcel may be sold and the new owners may redevelop the land. This would result in the proposed community being cut off from nearby streets. As each area presented as possible frontage for this development has substantial issues, We assert that the property referenced in this proposal has no adequate street frontage. In UDC §164.16 the code is clear that "every building [... ] shall be located on a lot which has frontage on a public street". Since UDC § 164.22(B) retains the right to dictate street frontage requirements but UDC § 164.22 does not exempt Cluster Home Developments from the requirement, nor specify alternative requirements, and for the reasons outlined above, the proposal before City Council does not meet the minimum requirements for street frontage and therefore should not be approved as presented. Issue — No Sidewalk in Development On page 15 of the Planning Commission Memo (Appendix A), the requester submits that a color site plan which should meet all requirements of UDC § 164.22 was created.' 1 This color site plan does not depict a sidewalk throughout the community. UDC § 164.22(G)(8) mandates that the community be served by a system which connects to an existing or planned sidewalk. Without a sidewalk, this proposal does not meet this requirement. 9 Appendix A — Pages 16-18 10 Appendix D 11 Appendix A — Page 15 Issue — Proposal and Contained Drawings Do Not Align In the application letter for the Conditional Use Permit, the requester indicates that there will be "19 total, 3-bedroom single family homes" and "each of the homes will be approximately 1,650 square feet and contain 3 bedrooms and 2.5 bathrooms".12 Despite this representation, the detailed drawings for each floorplan shows 10 lots with less than 3 bedrooms.13 The detailed drawings for each floorplan also indicate that several lots have garages; however, many of the lots with garages are not depicted in the color drawing with any access to the garage. Where it may be assumed that garage access is provided, the driveway and the private courtyards on several units appear to be overlapping. The use of a driveway or parking areas as open space is prohibited by UDC § 164.22(G)(3)(c) and UDC § 164.22(G)(3)(b) requires a private open space connected to each dwelling. If the color drawing were to be followed, the overlapping driveway and courtyard would be a clear violation of the UDC. The Planning Commission voted to approve the Conditional Use Permit with the conditions set forth by staff. One of those conditions said, in part, "the final project design shall follow the general layout and design of the conditional use concept plan".14 With the contradictions contained within the proposal, it is possible for the final design to be what is presented in one of part of the proposal, what is presented in a different part, or some combination thereof. As a result of this inconsistency, condition of approval #4 as recommended by staff cannot be accurately fulfilled and the residents of the neighboring properties cannot have confidence that what has been presented in the proposal is what will have been built upon completion of the development. For this reason, the Conditional Use Permit should not be approved unless and until changes are made to the proposal to address the inconsistencies throughout. Compatibility with Adjacent Properties When the Planning Commission approved the Conditional Use Permit for a Cluster Home Development, they were required to certify that the proposal was generally compatible with "adjacent properties and other property in the district". 15 In the findings presented to the 11 Appendix A — Page 15 General & Architectural Floor Plans and Elevations 13 Appendix A — Pages 19-63 14 Appendix A — Page 2 Conditions of Approval #4 15 UDC §163.02(C)(3)(c)(ii)(h) Planning Commission, the staff recommendation states that the proposal "is compatible with the adjacent properties and those in the surrounding neighborhood".16 Based on a conversation with the city planner assigned to this proposal, that finding is based almost exclusively on the zoning of the neighboring properties- because the surrounding area is zoned RSF-4 and the proposal is for a cluster home development on a lot also zoned RSF-4 and the proposal contains single- family homes as RSF-4 intends, the proposal is compatible with the neighborhood. It is not adequate to simply ensure that the zoning of the surrounding properties and the zoning underlying the proposal match as a measure of compatibility. To fairly determine compatibility in a way that preserves the public interest and the interests of the neighboring parcels, a more in- depth look at the proposal and the surrounding properties must be done. The permit approved by the Planning Commission is for 19 single family dwellings of "approximately 1,650 square feet and [with] 3 bedrooms and 2.5 bathrooms".17 The proposed development is on a 2.67 acre lot; however, approximately 0.31 acre is unavailable for development because of an existing detention pond and an unusable thin strip of land at the back of the plot. II Additional land must be used for common open space which would be a minimum of 0.22 acre but according to the requesters at the Planning Commission meeting (22 August 2022) will be approximately 0.5 acre. 19 When excluding the space not available for the development of individual dwellings, the proposal asks to build 19 detached homes in a 1.86 acre space. This proposal would leave each lot with 0.098 acre inclusive of roads, sidewalks, and other spaces required by the development code. According to data pulled from MLS and public records, the average square footage for the surrounding neighborhood is 2,022, the average lot size is 0.3 acre, 3/2 bed/bath layout, and all but one of the detached single-family homes has either a garage or covered parking available.20 For the 16 lots (14 houses) immediately adjacent to the proposed development the averages are: 2,187 square feet, 0.24 acre lots, and a 4/3 bed/bath layout.al 16 Appendix A — Page 9 17 Appendix A — Page 15-16 "Appendices C, E, F 19 UDC §164.22(G)(3)(a) 20 Appendix H, C, & D 21 The large property adjacent to the lot in the proposal was excluded from the averages to avoid an upward skew in the numbers. After comparing the information about the proposed dwellings with the surrounding and immediately adjacent properties, it is clear that the compatibility of the proposal stops at the underlying zoning. The surrounding houses are larger, on more substantial lots, and have covered parking. While the code only considers the total lot size according to the parcel, it is imperative that the functional size of the space is considered by the City Council when approving a Cluster Home Development- particularly a development with a variance permitting more dense development than normally allowed. This proposal would result in homes at a significantly higher density and which are not comparable to any other single-family property in the surrounding neighborhoods. Given these differences, it is not accurate to assert that the proposal is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. In absence of demonstrable compatibility, UDC § 163.02(C)(3)(c)(ii)(h) is not met and to establish compatibility would require substantial changes to the proposal. As stated by the City Attorney in past memos, "the most important factor and the underlying reason to have zoning in the first place is to promote compatibility among neighboring parcels".22 Therefore, this proposal should not be approved as it currently exists. Alignment with Remaining Provisions of UDC § 163.02(C)(3) While the Planning Commission was considering the Conditional Use Permit request, several neighbors attended the meeting and voiced their concerns with the proposed development. Under UDC § 163.02(C)(3), the Planning Commission had the authority to place conditions of approval on the permit which could have been used to mitigate concerns the neighbors have with this proposal. Unfortunately, only the concern about vegetation screening was addressed in a condition of approval by the Planning Commission. If the approval is upheld, the neighborhood's concerns about storm water management, forestry and wildlife, utilities, traffic congestion and density would be left unaddressed. Concerns about storm water management were echoed by every citizen that attended the meeting and spoke before the Commission. The land in the proposal is on a hillside and in the currently undeveloped state, the surrounding properties are prone to storm water run-off and flooding. Many properties along N Old Wire Rd. have had to install additional drainage to mitigate these issues. The changes uphill of those properties as a result of this proposal would 11 Appendix B — Paragraph 1, emphasis omitted lead to less water being absorbed and diverted away from those properties exacerbating the existing issues with storm water. Another concern cited by several individuals was the removal of mature, well -established trees. Fayetteville, and particularly East Fayetteville, is known for its forestry and green space. This proposal would remove tree canopy that has existed for well over 30 years in this area. The removal of these trees is contrary to the principles of preservation and the goals of the city as presented in City Plan 2040. While the City has tree preservation requirements for all development, these requirements typically allow for the removal of established trees so long as the trees are replaced with saplings. Unfortunately, there are not significant safeguards to ensure that those saplings survive unless and until the bond on those trees is near expiration. Saplings also don't provide the same benefits for "carbon sequestration, mitigating stormwater issues, [and] filtering pollutants".23 Allowing this proposal to move forward without conditions safeguarding the existing trees or a portion thereof would adversely impact the city's goals to preserve our green space and the natural benefits it brings while also removing space for our wildlife to thrive. Additionally, residents expressed concerns about the utilities, particularly sewage, being able to support the proposed dwellings. UDC § 163.02(C)(3)(c)(ii)(d) requires that the planning commission certify the availability of and compatibility with utilities. In the Planning Commission Memo, the staff finding did not address the capacity of the sewer lines or any other utilities instead deferring that determination to large scale development review.24 Should this proposal be approved, the City Council should include a condition of approval indicating that the permit would only remain valid so long as it is determined that the utilities can support it. Given that there is no data currently presented to demonstrate that the utilities can support a higher density than is prescribed in the code, the variance to allow for 19 dwellings instead of 12 should be denied unless additional evidence is provided. Finally, several current residents cited likely issues with traffic congestion and the safe flow of traffic as a result of the new development. Without the 19 additional houses, N Old Wire Rd. has significant traffic congestion during rush hours. The staff findings address vehicle safety 23 City Plan 2040 - Update-7-6-2020 Section 8.3 14 Appendix A — Page 8 but otherwise defer evaluation of this requirement to a future review.25 Without appropriate advance review of the impact on traffic congestion and safety for both vehicles and pedestrians, there is not enough information to approve either a cluster home development or the density variance in this proposal. If the proposal is to be approved, it must be with conditions that revoke the approval should there be any issues permitting emergency or city services access to the development or if the development is unable to support bi-directional traffic on the proposed private drive. In a 2016 memo, the City Attorney explained the litmus test for compatibility, saying, "substantial evidence of compatibility or the lack of compatibility is found in the reasonable concerns and opinions of the neighbors".26 The issues highlighted by current residents are reasonable and sound objections to a proposal for dense development in an existing residential area. When taken together, these concerns further confirm the lack of compatibility with the other properties, the city goals, and the intent of the city plans. Not only do these issues reinforce the lack of compatibility of this proposal, they also highlight adverse effects to the public interest. Unless there are conditions added to the requested conditional use permit to mitigate the impact to public interest and the issues highlighted above, the City Council should reject this request as permitted under UDC § 163.02(C)(3) for lack of satisfactory provisions and arrangements. Conclusion The proposal presented in this request for a Conditional Use Permit and variance contains significant issues which are adverse to the intentions of the Unified Development Code, the desires of the neighboring properties, and the goals of the City of Fayetteville. Accordingly, we ask that the City Council reject this request. The issues highlighted in the first section of this letter alone provide reasonable grounds for the rejection. Beyond the issues with the request, the proposal presented is not compatible with the adjacent and surrounding properties and the approval by the Planning Commission did not include appropriate conditions to mitigate the concerns of the neighbors nor ensure that the development would satisfy the requirements provided under the Planning Commission's authority. These issues, together, indicate that the zs Appendix A — Page 7 16 Appendix B — Page 3, Paragraph 3 proposal is not "in harmony with the purpose and intent" of the UDC covering conditional uses. As such, UDC § 163.02(B)(4) provides the City Council with the ability to deny the request entirely. If the City Council is not willing or able to reject the request outright, we ask that it reject the variance to UDC § 164.22(D) and add conditions to the approval to safeguard the interests of the neighborhood and the goals of the city: 1. The development must include the referenced parcel and the adjacent parcel used for frontage on N Oak Bailey as a single lot so as to prevent future loss of access to the development; 2. A sidewalk must be included in the developed community to provide walkability to the new residents. Further, to improve the walkability of the neighborhood- as is an intention of denser urban development- the sidewalk beginning at the entrance to this community on N Oak Bailey Rd. and ending at the Niokaska Creek Trail entrance at the intersection with Crossover Rd. must be completed; 3. That the permit would only remain valid so long as it is determined that the utilities can support the proposed properties; 4. That the permit would no longer be valid should there be issues permitting emergency or city services access to the development or if the development is unable to support bi-directional traffic on the proposed private drive; 5. A significant proportion of the mature, established trees presently in the lot are preserved and protected in addition to the trees required for landscaping and urban forestry purposes; and 6. Conditions 3-8 as proposed by Staff.27 Thank you for your attention to this matter, Nick Werner Planning Commissioner Jimm Garlock 2979 N Old Wire Rd Casey Wood Win Johnson 2979 N Old Wire Rd 2965 N Old Wire Rd 21 Appendix A — Pages 2-3 Conditions of Approval Abby Hill 2965 N Old Wire Rd Luke Brown 3053 N Quainton Ct Erika Matthews 3053 N Quainton Ct Hunter Sagely 3186 N Katherine Ave Morgan Sagely 3186 N Katherine Ave Rachel Holt 3260 N Warwick Dr J. Wiley Holt 3260 N Warwick Dr Tad Scott 3122 N Warwick Dr Laura Camargo 3060 N Quainton Cr Reed Adams 2971 N Old Wire Rd Dana Hyatt 2972 N Oak Bailey Dr Gary Machamer 2980 N Oak Bailey Dr Maribeth Sayre 2983 N Old Wire Rd Cheri Carden 2913 N Old Wire Rd John Carden 2913 N Old Wire Rd Whitney Carden 2913 N Old Wire Rd Lindsay Britt 3133 N Warwick Dr Kaitlin Cox 3235 Warwick Dr Ben Cox 3235 Warwick Dr Marisa Scott 3122 N Warwick Dr Nestor Camargo 3060 N Quainton Ct Anna Grace Adams 2971 N Old Wire Rd Allison Machamer 2980 N Oak Bailey Dr Appendices Appendix A - Planning Commission Memo -� CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE ARKANSAS PLANNING COMMISSION MEMO TO: Fayetteville Planning Commission THRU: Jessie Masters, Development Review Manager FROM: Gretchen Harrison, Planner MEETING DATE: August 22, 2022 SUBJECT: CUP-2022-0039: Conditional Use Permit (2992 N. OAK BAILEY DRJOAK BAILEY CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT, 254): Submitted by COMMUNITY BY DESIGN for property located at 2992 N. OAK BAILEY DR. The property is zoned RSF-4, RESIDENTIAL SINGLE-FAMILY, 4 UNITS PER ACRE and contains approximately 2.67 acres. The request is for a cluster housing development with 19 residential units. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of CUP-2022-0039 with conditions, based on the findings contained in this report. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve CUP-2022-0039, determining: • In favor of compatibility with adjacent properties; • In favor of a variance to UDC §164.22(D); and In favor of all other conditions as recommended by staff. " BACKGROUND: The subject property is in northeast Fayetteville, approximately 700 feet west of the intersection of North Old Wire Road and North Crossover Road. The property is currently zoned RSF-4, Residential Single -Family, 4 Units per Acre, contains approximately 2.67 acres, and is developed with two sheds. Surrounding land uses and zoning are depicted in Table 1. Table 1 Surrounding Land Use and Zoning Direction Land Use Zoning North Single -Family Residential RSF-4, Residential Single -Family, 4 Units per Acre South Single -Family Residential RSF-4, Residential Single -Family, 4 Units per Acre East Single -Family Residential RSF-4, Residential Single -Family, 4 Units per Acre West Single -Family Residential RSF-4, Residential Single -Family, 4 Units per Acre City Plan 2040 Future Land Use Designation: Residential Neighborhood Area Proposal. The applicant requests conditional use permit approval to develop the property with a cluster housing development containing 19 detached single-family units. Cluster housing developments are classified as Use Unit 44, which is a conditional use in the RSF-4 zoning district. Conformance with development requirements, including drainage, tree preservation, and fire apparatus access will be reviewed at the time of large scale development. Planning Commission August 22, 2022 Agenda Item 24 CUP-2022-0039 (OAK BAILEY CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT) Page 1 of 66 As a part of the proposal, the applicant has requested one variance from the Unified Development Code: UDC §164.22(D), Dwellings Permitted. A cluster housing development shall contain a maximum of 12 dwelling units. The applicant is requesting 19. • Staff is supportive of the requested variance. Zoning districts that allow cluster housing developments as a conditional use are allowed a density not to exceed two times the maximum density allowed in the underlying zoning district. Therefore, cluster housing developments on properties zoned RSF-4 are allowed a density of eight units per acre. The subject property contains roughly 2.67 acres which, with 19 units proposed, would result in a density of 7.04 dwelling units per acre. The applicant has stated that the property has enough street frontage to allow the proposal to be split into two separate cluster housing developments that would meet the density requirement. However, requesting a density variance to allow one cluster housing development with 19 units will help the applicant streamline their process while reducing the amount of staff review needed as the development will be able to be considered as a whole plan rather than two separate proposals. Public Comment: Staff received public comment from two neighbors who expressed their opposition to the request. Concerns were expressed about tree preservation, drainage, and impacts to surrounding property values. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of CUP-2022-0039, subject to the following conditions: Conditions of Approval: 1. Planning Commission determination of compatibility. Staff finds the proposed cluster housing development to be compatible with the surrounding neighborhood based on the findings herein; 2. Planning Commission determination of a variance to UDC §164.22(D). Staff finds in favor of a variance to UDC §164.22(D), Dwellings Permitted for the reasons stated above; 3. Additional screening in the form of vegetation, hedge row, or low-lying fence not to exceed 48" in height shall be installed along exterior property lines where parking courts and driveways abut existing single family residences; 4. Approval of the conditional use permit does not ensure approval of a development application. The conditional use permit grants the applicant the right to submit a development proposal based on the conceptual layout included herein. However, the applicant must still be able to comply with all other development requirements, including but not limited to, tree preservation, drainage, utility installation and Fire Department access. These details shall be reviewed with the development application. The final project design shall follow the general layout and design of the conditional use concept plan; 5. A condominium association, homeowner's association, or similar mechanism to maintain the common amenities shall be established prior to issuance of construction permits. The City of Fayetteville does not enforce these private agreements, but will require that this agreement be in place prior to issuing building permits; Planning Commission August 22, 2022 Agenda Item 24 CUP-2022-0039 (OAK BAILEY CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT) Page 2 of 66 6. Prior to receiving a certificate of occupancy for the first home, all shared drives, sidewalks and bike racks shall be installed. All development requirements, such as detention facilities, utilities, required landscaping, etc. shall be installed prior to any building permits being issued. The exact phasing of improvements will be determined at development review; 7. The maximum number of unrelated persons in any dwelling unit is three, pursuant to the underlying single-family zoning district; 8. Per UDC §166.20, Expiration of Approved Plans and Permits, conditional use permit approval is valid for one year; and 9. An exterior lighting package must be provided to the Planning Division prior to building permit approval. Common area lighting shall comply with UDC §176, Outdoor Lighting. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Required YES Date: August 22, 2022 Motion: Second: Vote: FINDINGS OF THE STAFF O Tabled O Approved O Denied §163.02. AUTHORITY; CONDITIONS; PROCEDURES. B. Authority; Conditions. The Planning Commission shall: 1. Hear and decide only such special exemptions as it is specifically authorized to pass on by the terms of this chapter. 2. Decide such questions as are involved in determining whether a conditional use should be granted; and, 3. Grant a conditional use with such conditions and safeguards as are appropriate under this chapter; or 4. Deny a conditional use when not in harmony with the purpose and intent of this chapter. C. Procedures. A conditional use shall not be granted by the Planning Commission unless and until: 1. A written application for a conditional use is submitted indicating the section of this chapter under which the conditional use is sought and stating the grounds on which it is requested. Planning Commission August 22, 2022 Agenda Item 24 CUP-2022-0039 (OAK BAILEY CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT) Page 3 of 66 Finding: The applicant has submitted a written application requesting a conditional use permit for Use Unit 44, Cluster Housing Development, in the RSF-4 zoning district, including permission to develop 19 cluster housing units. 2. The applicant shall pay a filing fee as required under Chapter 159 to cover the cost of expenses incurred in connection with processing such application. Finding: The applicant has paid the required filing fee. 3. The Planning Commission shall make the following written findings before a conditional use shall be issued: (a.) That it is empowered under the section of this chapter described in the application to grant the conditional use; and Finding: The Planning Commission is empowered under Unified Development Code §161.07, District RSF-4, Residential Single -Family, 4 Units per Acre to grant the requested conditional use permit. (b.) That the granting of the conditional use will not adversely affect the public interest. Finding: Staff finds that granting the requested conditional use is not likely to adversely affect the public interest. The detached, single-family dwellings are of a type and scale that is comparable to those in surrounding neighborhoods. Developing the property as a cluster housing development will subject it to the City's tree preservation and drainage requirements, which are both intended to minimize off -site impacts and protect the public's interest. Cluster housing developments also carry heightened design requirements for the structures themselves. Parking courts and driveways within the proposed development are shown to be screened with vegetation, further minimizing potential negative impacts on neighboring properties. (c.) The Planning Commission shall certify: (i.) Compliance with the specific rules governing individual conditional uses; and Finding: There are specific rules governing Use Unit 44, Cluster Housing Development, as follows: §164.22. CLUSTER HOUSING DEVELOPMENT D. Dwellings Permitted. Number of Cluster Housing Units Permitted. A cluster housing development shall contain a maximum of twelve (12) dwelling units. In multi -family zones where the proposed cluster housing development exceeds the minimum open space requirements of 164.22(G)(3)(a) by at least 20%, and in which at least 75% of the planned units are attached Planning Commission August 22, 2022 Agenda Item 24 CUP-2022-0039 (OAK BAILEY CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT) Page 4 of 66 dwellings, there shall be no maximum number of dwelling units, except to conform to the density limitations herein. Finding: The proposed cluster housing development would contain 19 detached single-family dwelling units. The applicant has requested a variance to the maximum number of dwellings units permitted, which staff is supportive of based on the findings outlined above. 2. Existing Nonconforming Structures. On a lot to be used for a cluster housing development, existing detached single-family residential structures, which may be nonconforming with respect to the standards of this section, shall be permitted to remain, but the extent of the nonconformity may not be increased. Such nonconforming dwelling units shall be included in the maximum permitted cluster density. Finding: There are no existing nonconforming structures on the subject property. E. Zoning Regulations. Permitted and Conditional Use. Cluster housing development is permitted as identified in Chapter 161, Zoning Regulations, as a permitted or conditional use. Finding: Use Unit 44 is a conditional use in the RSF-4 zoning district. 2. Density. Cluster housing development permitted as a use by right shall be allowed a density in conformance with the underlying zoning district. Zoning districts that allow cluster housing developments as a conditional use shall be allowed a density not to exceed two (2) times the maximum density allowed in the underlying zoning district. Finding: The proposed cluster housing development would have a density of approximately 7.04 units per acre. A cluster housing development in the RSF-4 zoning district is permitted a maximum density of 8 units per acre. 3. Bulk and Area Regulations. (a.) Lot Width Minimum. There is no lot width requirement for individual cluster housing lots. (b.) Lot Area Minimum. The lot area minimum for cluster housing lots is 750 square feet. (c.) Land Area per Dwelling Unit. The land area per dwelling unit requirement is 750 square feet. Finding: The provided site plan indicates that bulk and area regulations are being met. Lot widths, lot areas, and land areas will be fully considered at the time of large scale development review. 4. Setback Requirements. All structures shall meet setback and separation requirements of the International Building Code, as applicable. For zoning purposes: (a.) In single family districts, all cluster housing units shall have a minimum separation from one another of ten feet measured from Planning Commission August 22, 2022 Agenda Item 24 CUP-2022-0039 (OAK BAILEY CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT) Page 5 of 66 exterior wall to exterior wall, not counting eaves or other architectural projections. (b.) In multi -family districts, there are no separation requirements from one cluster housing structure to another. (c.) The setbacks from the exterior property lines of the original parent tract shall be set by the underlying zoning district. Finding: Setback and separation requirements for the RSF-4 zoning district will apply along exterior property lines. Based on the conceptual site plan provided, individual buildings appear to be meeting the separation requirements of the International Building Code. 5. Building Height Regulations. The height for all structures in a cluster housing development shall not exceed the permitted height requirement of the underlying zoning district. Finding: The RSF-4 zoning district permits building heights of three stories. All dwellings within the proposed cluster housing development are one and two stories. 6. Building Area. None. Finding: N/A 7. Accessory Dwelling Units. Accessory dwelling units are permitted in cluster housing developments by conditional use. Where a cluster housing development is permitted as a conditional use, accessory dwelling units may be requested within the same application. Finding: Accessory dwellings are not proposed. F. Common Property Maintenance. Community buildings, parking areas and common open space shall be owned and maintained commonly by the cluster housing development residents, through a condominium association, a homeowners' association or a similar mechanism, and shall not be dedicated to the city unless accepted by the City Council. Finding: Proof of common property maintenance regulations will be required during the development review process. G. Development Standards. The UDC outlines specific development standards for Cluster Housing Developments. Finding: Development standards including floor area, building orientation, open space, parking, bicycle racks, Fire Department access, pedestrian connectivity, utilities, and recycling and trash collection will be considered at the time of large scale development review. H. Building Design Standards. Planning Commission August 22, 2022 Agenda Item 24 CUP-2022-0039 (OAK BAILEY CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT) Page 6 of 66 Variety in Detached Cluster Housing Units Floor Plans and Architectural Treatments. These standards are intended to avoid the overly repetitive use of the same building design, structural features, detailing or finishes among detached units within the cluster housing development. In cluster housing developments, no two (2) structures shall be identical in terms of exterior finishes. All cluster housing units shall differ from each other by utilizing at least two (2) of the following options: (a.) Variations in building material finishes such as clapboard, shake shingles, stone, brick, etc., and building color; (b.) Variations in adjacent cluster housing unit floor plans that alter the location of exterior windows and doors; (c.) Variations in the size of main floor area and/or building height of adjacent structures; or (d.) A front porch with a minimum width no less than 50% of the front building fagade. Front porches shall have a minimum depth of six feet. No structurally identical front porches shall be located on adjacent cluster housing units. (e.) Variations in roof shapes or gables between adjacent structures. (f.) Other variations as approved by the Zoning and Development Administrator. Finding: In cluster housing developments, no two structures shall be identical in terms of exterior finishes and must vary in building height, main floor size, location of windows and doors, porches, and/or roof shape. The provided building elevations and site plan suggest that there are instances where building plans are repeated throughout the development. As proposed, without variation in exterior finishes, the development would require a variance from UDC §164.22(H)(1) to allow building types to be repeated. However, compliance with building design standards will be fully determined at the time of large scale development review. A variance to the building design standards has not been requested to date. §163.02, AUTHORITY; CONDITIONS; PROCEDURES. (continued) (ii.) That satisfactory provisions and arrangements have been made concerning the following, where applicable: (a.) Ingress and egress to property and proposed structures thereon with particular reference to automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control and access in case of fire or catastrophe; Finding: As proposed, the cluster housing development will have access onto Oak Bailey Drive. Oak Bailey Drive is a Neighborhood Link street designed to accommodate up to 6,000 vehicle trips per day. Four vehicle crashes were recorded at the intersection of Oak Bailey Drive and Old Wire Road between 2017 and 2021. Staff finds that the proposed cluster housing development is not likely to have an adverse impact on traffic given the relatively low number of units proposed and the site's access to Neighborhood Link streets. Planning Commission August 22, 2022 Agenda Item 24 CUP-2022-0039 (OAK BAILEY CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT) Page 7 of 66 However, any impacts to traffic danger or congestion will be fully evaluated and addressed at the time of large scale development review. (b.) Off-street parking and loading areas where required, with particular attention to ingress and egress, economic, noise, glare, or odor effects of the special exception on adjoining properties and properties generally in the district; Finding: The submitted site plan includes on -site parking in garages, parking courts, and driveways. In cluster housing developments, the owner/development may choose to supply one parking space per bedroom for the entire cluster housing development. Otherwise, parking will be required at a rate of 1.5 spaces per unit for dwellings less than 1,000 square feet in size, and at a rate of 2 spaces per unit for dwellings greater than 1,000 square feet. As proposed, 57 parking spaces are provided at a rate of one per bedroom. Two off-street parking spaces are provided for each unit with at least 19 parallel parking spaces planned along the shared drive to accommodate additional parking needs. (c.) Refuse and service areas, with particular reference to ingress and egress, and off-street parking and loading; Finding: The Recycling and Trash Collection Division will review the proposed site plan at the time of large scale development review. Ingress and egress to the development is proposed through a looped private drive. (d.) Utilities, with reference to locations, availability, and compatibility; Finding: Utilities are currently available to the site. Six- and eight -inch sanitary sewer mains are present on site, and six-inch water mains are available along Oak Bailey drive and Old Wire Road. Determinations of capacity or the need for improvements will be determined at the time of large scale development review. (e.) Screening and buffering with reference to type, dimensions, and character; Finding: Given the single-family residential nature of the proposal and surrounding areas, staff recommends limited buffering. Because parking courts and private driveways are proposed to abut adjoining residences, a condition requiring screening is included with staff's recommendations. (f.) Signs, if any, and proposed exterior lighting with reference to glare, traffic safety, economic effect, and compatibility and harmony with properties in the district; Finding: Any proposed signage and exterior lighting in common areas will be subject to the City's ordinances and all the regulations therein. Planning Commission August 22, 2022 Agenda Item 24 CUP-2022-0039 (OAK BAILEY CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT) Page 8 of 66 (g.) Required yards and other open space; and Finding: The submitted conceptual plan suggests that the open space requirements for cluster housing can be provided. All required yards and open spaces will be fully reviewed at the time of large scale development approval. (h.) General compatibility with adjacent properties and other property in the district. Finding: Staff finds the applicant's proposal to be compatible with adjacent properties and those in the surrounding neighborhood. While varying from a typical single-family residential neighborhood, cluster developments are intended to orient dwelling units around a common open space and foster a sense of community. When considering the intent of cluster housing in relation to the proposed single-family residential cluster housing development, staff finds the proposed use to be generally compatible. Further, the property is located near public trails, retail, and other services, which suggests that it is an appropriate location for dense development. BUDGET/STAFF IMPACT: None ATTACHMENTS: • Unified Development Code o §161.07 — RSF-4, Residential Single -Family — Four (4) Units Per Acre o §164.22 —Cluster Housing Development • Request Letter • Variance Request Letter • Site Plan • Floorplans & Elevations • One Mile Map • Close -Up Map • Current Land Use Map Planning Commission August 22, 2022 Agenda Item 24 CUP-2022-0039 (OAK BAILEY CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT) Page 9 of 66 161.07 - District RSF-4, Residential Single -Family - Four (4) Units Per Acre (A) Purpose. The RSF-4 Residential District is designed to permit and encourage the development of low density detached dwellings in suitable environments, as well as to protect existing development of these types. (B) Uses. (1) Permitted Uses. Unit 1 I City-wide uses by right Unit 8 Single-family dwellings Unit 41 Accessory dwellings Unit 46 Short-term rentals (2) Conditional Uses. Unit 2 Unit 3 I City-wide uses by conditional use permit Public protection and utility facilities Unit 4 Cultural and recreational facilities Unit 5 Government facilities Unit 9 Two-family dwellings Unit 12a Limited business Unit 24 Home occupations Unit 36 Wireless communications facilities Unit 44 Cluster Housing Development (C) Density. Single-family dwellings Two (2) family dwellings Units per acre 4 or less 7 or less (D) Bulk and Area Regulations. Single-family Two (2) family dwellings dwellings Lot minimum 70 feet 80 feet width Lot area 8,000 square 12,000 square minimum feet feet Land area per 8,000 square 6,000 square dwelling unit feet feet Hillside Overlay District Lot 60 feet 70 feet minimum width Hillside Overlay 8,000 squareTfe square District Lot feet area minimum Land area per 8,000 square 6,000 square dwelling unit feet feet (E) Setback Requirements. Front Side Rear Planning Commission August 22, 2022 Agenda Item 24 CUP-2022-0039 (OAK BAILEY CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT) Page 10 of 66 15 feet 5 feet 15 feet (F) Building Height Regulations. Building Height Maximum 3 stories (G) Building Area. On any lot the area occupied by all buildings shall not exceed 40% of the total area of such lot. Accessory ground mounted solar energy systems shall not be considered buildings. (Code 1991, §160.031; Ord. No. 4100, §2 (Ex. A), 6-16-98; Ord. No. 4178, 8-31-99; Ord. No. 4858, 4-18-06; Ord. No. 5028, 6-19-07; Ord. No. 5128, 4-15-08; Ord. No. 5224, 3-3-09; Ord. No. 5312, 4-20-10; Ord. No. 5462, 12-6-11; Ord. No. 5921 , §1, 11-1-16; Ord. No. 5945 , §8, 1-17-17; Ord. No. 6015 , §1(Exh. A), 11-21-17; Ord. No. 6245 , §2, 10-15- 19) Planning Commission August 22, 2022 Agenda Item 24 CUP-2022-0039 (OAK BAILEY CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT) Page 11 of 66 164.22 - Cluster Housing Development (A) Purpose. The purpose of the cluster housing development ordinance is to encourage innovation and variety in housing while ensuring compatibility with established neighborhoods, and to provide housing opportunities for a population diverse in age, income and household size. (B) Applicability. The provisions of this section shall apply to proposed cluster housing development proposals, as defined in Chapter 162, Use Units, and authorized by Chapter 161, Zoning Regulations of the Unified Development Code, however zoning and development regulations such as density, bulk and area, building area, street frontage requirements, lot splits and other standards for cluster housing development are enforced subject to the criteria adopted in this chapter. (C) Development Review Process. For the purpose of development review, cluster housing developments less than one (1) acre shall be processed as a site improvement plan. Cluster housing development on lots one (1) acre or larger shall be processed as a large scale development. If individual cluster housing unit lots are proposed and the proposal meets all of the requirements in this section, the subdivision shall be processed through the subdivision platting process as a lot split regardless of the number of lots created. (D) Dwellings Permitted. (1) Number of Cluster Housing Units Permitted. A cluster housing development shall contain a maximum of twelve (12) dwelling units. In multi -family zones where the proposed cluster housing development exceeds the minimum open space requirements of 164.22(G)(3)(a) by at least 20%, and in which at least 75% of the planned units are attached dwellings, there shall be no maximum number of dwelling units, except to conform to the density limitations herein. (2) Existing Nonconforming Structures. On a lot to be used for a cluster housing development, existing detached single-family residential structures, which may be nonconforming with respect to the standards of this section, shall be permitted to remain, but the extent of the nonconformity may not be increased. Such nonconforming dwelling units shall be included in the maximum permitted cluster density. (E) Zoning Regulations. The parent tract prior to development shall conform to the zoning criteria of the underlying zoning district. (1) Permitted and Conditional Use. Cluster housing development is permitted as identified in Chapter 161, Zoning Regulations, as a permitted or conditional use. (2) Density. Cluster housing development permitted as a use by right shall be allowed a density in conformance with the underlying zoning district. Zoning districts that allow cluster housing developments as a conditional use shall be allowed a density not to exceed two (2) times the maximum density allowed in the underlying zoning district. (3) Bulk and Area Regulations. (a) Lot Width Minimum. There is no lot width requirement for individual cluster housing lots. (b) Lot Area Minimum. The lot area minimum for cluster housing lots is 750 square feet. (c) Land Area per Dwelling Unit. The land area per dwelling unit requirement is 750 square feet. (4) Setback Requirements. All structures shall meet setback and separation requirements of the International Building Code, as applicable. For zoning purposes: (a) In single family districts, all cluster housing units shall have a minimum separation from one another of ten feet measured from exterior wall to exterior wall, not counting eaves or other architectural projections. (b) In multi -family districts, there are no separation requirements from one cluster housing structure to another. (c) The setbacks from the exterior property lines of the original parent tract shall be set by the underlying zoning district. (5) Building Height Regulations. The height for all structures in a cluster housing development shall not exceed the permitted height requirement of the underlying zoning district. (6) Building Area. None. (7) Accessory Dwelling Units. Accessory dwelling units are not permitted in cluster housing developments. (F) Common Property Maintenance. Community buildings, parking areas and common open space shall be owned and maintained commonly by the cluster housing development residents, through a condominium association, a Planning Commission August 22, 2022 Agenda Item 24 CUP-2022-0039 (OAK BAILEY CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT) Page 12 of 66 homeowners' association or a similar mechanism, and shall not be dedicated to the city unless accepted by the City Council. (G) Development Standards. All cluster housing developments are subject to the following standards: (1) Floor Area. The total conditioned floor area of any individual cluster housing unit shall not exceed 2,500 square feet. (2) Building Orientation. A minimum of 75% of dwelling units in a cluster housing development shall be oriented around and face the common open space, a public trail or towards the street, having pedestrian access to the common open space and the street. Where a cluster housing unit fronts onto a public trail, the fagade facing the public trail shall be considered a principal fagade for the purposes of meeting design standards. (3) Open Space. (a) For units up to 1,500 square feet, a minimum of 250 square feet of common open space shall be provided per unit. For units exceeding 1,500 square feet and up to 2,000 square feet, 500 square feet of common open space shall be required per unit. For units exceeding 2,000 square feet, 750 square feet of common open space shall be required per unit. Common open space is subject to the following performance criteria: (i) No dimension of a common open space area used to satisfy the minimum square footage requirement shall be less than ten feet. (ii) Required common open space shall be divided into no more than two (2) separate areas per cluster of dwelling units. (iii) Common open space shall be improved for passive or active recreational use, garden/food production, social gathering spaces or landscaped areas. Examples may include but are not limited to courtyards, orchards, landscaped picnic areas, plazas or gardens. A detailed site plan of the common open space depicting the design and amenities of the space shall be reviewed with the site plan for approval. (iv) Amenities such as permanent or movable seating, landscaping, trails and paths, barbeque or eating facilities, covered shelters or water features shall be included within the common open space. Low Impact Development stormwater management facilities may be placed within the common open space when they are integrated with the amenities listed above. (b) Each cluster housing unit shall be provided with a private open space of 250 square feet with no dimension of less than ten feet. Private open space should be contiguous to each dwelling unit, for the exclusive use of each respective resident. In multi -family zones in which at least 75% of the planned units are attached dwellings, private open space shall not be required where the development exceeds the minimum open space requirements of (G)(3)(a) by at least 20% and it can be demonstrated that each unit has easily available access to open space amenities. (c) Parking areas and driveways shall not be counted as open space. (4) Fences. Fencing located between a cluster housing unit and a public street or trail or the common open space shall not exceed 48 inches in height. (5) Parking Requirements and Standards. Parking areas should be located within the cluster housing development in such a way as to maintain the character along the public street and to minimize the noise and light impacts on private residences and public spaces. Reductions in parking space allowances are permitted in cluster housing developments as described in Chapter 172, Parking and Loading. Permitted on -street parking spaces adjacent to a project's frontage may count towards the parking requirements of the development. Parking standards for cluster housing developments shall be as follows: (a) The owner/developer may choose to supply one (1) parking space per bedroom for his or her entire cluster housing development. Otherwise, the required number of parking spaces shall be determined according to the square footage of the cluster housing unit as described below: (i) Dwelling units less than 1,000 square feet shall have one and one-half (1.5) parking spaces provided. (ii) Dwelling units over 1,000 square feet shall have two (2) parking spaces provided. (b) Shared covered parking shall be designed to be similar and compatible to the design, materials and roof pitches used for the cluster housing units. (6) Cluster housing developments shall provide at least one (1) bicycle parking rack per cluster housing unit. (7) Fire Department Access. Fire Department access shall be determined at the time of development review. (8) Pedestrian Connectivity. All buildings and common spaces shall be served by a pedestrian circulation system that connects to an existing or planned sidewalk or trail system. Planning Commission August 22, 2022 Agenda Item 24 CUP-2022-0039 (OAK BAILEY CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT) Page 13 of 66 (9) Utilities. Individual cluster housing lots shall have a unique connection to the main water and sewer lines. Main water and sewer lines on private property servicing cluster housing unit developments shall be located in a dedicated easement. (10) Community Buildings. Indoor or covered common areas less than 2,000 square feet are permitted by right in cluster housing development. These structures shall be architecturally integrated with the architectural style of the cluster housing development. (11) Recycling and Trash Collection Service. For the purposes of recycling and trash collection cluster housing developments are considered a residential use and should receive residential recycling and trash collection service (individual carts and recycling bins) where possible. In certain instances, it may be necessary to service cluster housing developments with commercial trash collection equipment (dumpsters). This may occur when a project is located in a predominately commercial area serviced by commercial trash pickup. It is incumbent on the developer to design recycling and trash collection facilities into the cluster housing development plan early in the process. The final determination of recycling and trash collection service and pick-up areas will be made at the time of development review by the city. Specific requirements for residential and commercial trash and recycling pick-up shall be as follows: (a) Residential trash and recycling collection service requires a designated location near the street curb for trash carts and recycling bins. This location shall be kept clear of obstructions on the designated pick-up day. If this location is also used for on -street parking it shall be clearly marked and a sign posted restricting use for the designated pick-up day. An appropriate linear distance is required to accommodate each cluster housing unit's trash cart and recycling bin, subject to city approval. (b) Commercial trash collection service requires a dumpster location that is freely accessible for front end loading and screened from public view. (c) Recycling and trash facilities shall be located behind the front building setback line and shall be screened from the right-of-way and adjacent property owners by either architectural treatments or vegetative screening. (H) Building Design Standards. (1) Variety in Detached Cluster Housing Units Floor Plans and Architectural Treatments. These standards are intended to avoid the overly repetitive use of the same building design, structural features, detailing or finishes among detached units within the cluster housing development. In cluster housing developments no two (2) structures shall be identical in terms of exterior finishes. All cluster housing units shall differ from each other by utilizing at least two (2) of the following options: (a) Variations in building material finishes such as clapboard, shake shingles, stone, brick, etc., and building color; (b) Variations in adjacent cluster housing unit floor plans that alter the location of exterior windows and doors; (c) Variations in the size of main floor area and/or building height of adjacent structures; or (d) A front porch with a minimum width no less than 50% of the front building facade. Front porches shall have a minimum depth of six feet. No structurally identical front porches shall be located on adjacent cluster housing units. (e) Variations in roof shapes or gables between adjacent structures. (f) Other variations as approved by the Zoning and Development Administrator. (2) All attached cluster housing units shall comply with §166.23, Urban Residential Design Standards. Where a cluster housing unit fronts onto a public trail or open space, the facade facing the public trail or open space shall be considered a principal facade, for the purposes of meeting this section. (1) Variances From the Minimum Cluster Housing Development Requirements. Variances of this section, Cluster Housing Development, shall be administered as normal development regulations for variances of General Design Standards, except that (E) Zoning Regulations shall be administered as zoning regulations for variance purposes. (Ord. No. 5921 , §5(Exh. A), 11-1-16; Ord. No. 6067 , §1, 5-1-18) Editor's note— Ord. No. 5921 , §5(Exh. A), adopted Nov. 1, 2016, repealed §164.22 and added a new section as set out herein. The former §164.22 pertained to cottage housing development and derived from Ord. No. 5462, adopted Dec. 6, 2011. Planning Commission August 22, 2022 Agenda Item 24 CUP-2022-0039 (OAK BAILEY CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT) Page 14 of 66 community -by -design i ■ -+ i ■ a.r nr�i _` :� .....+ ..ram ...r TOWN PLANNING.URBAN ENGINEERNG July 12"', 2022 Via EnerGov Ms. Jessica Masters Zoning and Development Administrator City of Fayetteville 125 West Mountain Street Fayetteville, Arkansas 72701 RE: Oak Bailey Cluster Development — Conditional Use Permit Application Submittal Package Ms. Masters, As a representative of the Marker Development LLC, owner of Washington County Parcel 765-31975-000, please find the attached Conditional Use Permit Application for the development of a cluster housing development. The application includes the following supporting documents attached to this letter: • One (1) copy of a written submittal letter describing the project • One (1) copy of a variance request letter • One (1) copy of a county parcel map • One (1) copy of a consent of owner form • One (1) copy of a annotated site or master plan • One (1) copy of draft architectural floor plans and elevations General - The property is zoned RSF4 and contains approximately 2.70 acres. A color site plan has been created which should present a proposal that meets all of the zoning requirements of UDC 164.22 Cluster Housing Development. The request is for the zoning approval of a cluster housing development containing 19 total, 3-bedroom single family houses. Fire, Solid Waste, Vehicular Access and Parking — Fire, solid waste, and vehicular access is proposed along a new looped shared private drive. The concept is for the shared private access to accommodate both pedestrians and vehicles and expand upon the common open space. The shared access will maintain a minimum clear width of 20' to meet requirements for fire and solid waste access. The shared access is planned to be paved with permeable paving to meet drainage requirements. In addition to 2 "off-street" parking spaces planned for each house, at least 19 parallel parking spaces are also planned along the shared access to accommodate more parking if needed for a total of 57 parking spaces or 1 parking space per bedroom. Architectural Floor Plans and Elevations — Each of the houses are proposed to be approximately 1,650 square feet and contain 3 bedrooms and 2.5 bathrooms. Floor plans and elevations for each of the 19 proposed houses are included with this submittal. The houses have been designed using massing and detailing that is characteristic of traditional Ozark vernacular farmhouse. As proposed each house has a large front porch and also a private courtyard. Common open space is also provided in the central green. Elevation variation is provided focusing on roof structure massing or projected gables, window and door placement, window trim detailing, porch column and beam detailing, paint color, and roof shingle color. 100 West Center Street Suite 300 F ayettevi lIlrenrA�CaWQAO, 4 7 9 A@ 03167, R522 Agenda Item 24 CUP-2022-0039 (OAK BAILEY CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT) Page 15 of 66 Letter to Jessica Masters RE: Oak Bailey Cluster Development July 12, 2022 Compatibility and Traffic Impact - The proposal is compatible with adjacent properties and the neighborhood primarily by maintaining a detached single- family house type, similar in size to the existing houses in the neighborhood. By incorporating Ozark farmhouse vernacular architecture into the house designs, the proposal adds to the formerly rural character of this neighborhood. The proposal will not have a measurable impact on vehicular traffic in the area. The proposal utilizes an existing curb cut onto Oak Bailey Drive with access to Crossover Road only a 1/4 mile away, via Old Wire Road. Proximity to everyday shopping is also approximately 1 mile away with retail shops and restaurants at the intersection Crossover Road and Mission Boulevard and also at the intersection of Crossover Road and Joyce Blvd. Thank you for your consideration of this request. Please let me know if you have any questions or if you need additional information. Sincerely, Brian Teague Community By Design Planning Commission August 22, 2022 CUP-2022-0039 (OAK BAILEY CLUSTER DI T) Page 16 of 66 community -by -design ♦- i.� � .+ i ■ a.r nr�_` i TOWN PLANNING.URBAN ENGINEEMNG July 12"', 2022 Via EnerGov Ms. Jessica Masters Zoning and Development Administrator City of Fayetteville 125 West Mountain Street Fayetteville, Arkansas 72701 RE: Oak Bailey Cluster Development — Conditional Use Permit Application Variance Request Ms. Masters, As a representative of Marker Development LLC, owner of Washington County Parcel 765-31975-000, I am requesting a variance from UDC 164.22(D)(1) to allow a cluster housing development that contains 19 dwelling units when the maximum allowed by code is 12. The property contains 2.70 acres and is zoned RSF4. In accordance with UDC 164.22(E)(2), the density allowed shall not exceed two times the maximum density of the underlying zoning district or 8.00 dwelling unit per acre. The proposed density is 7.04 dwelling units per acre. With at least 70' of street frontage on both Old Wire Road and on Oak Bailey Drive, it is possible to break the project into two separate cluster developments. The first cluster development would contain the 9 northwestern most houses proposed and the second would be the 10 southwestern most houses proposed. However, a variance for one cluster development containing 19 houses would be the most straight forward approach if the variance is granted. Thank you for your consideration of this request. Please let me know if you have any questions or if you need additional information. Sincerely, Brian Teague Community By Design 100 West Center Street Suite 300 Fayettevi4r8,, #CaWQAon 4 7 9 ,/ @ ,(. 47, R522 Agenda Item 24 CUP-2022-0039 (OAK BAILEY CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT) Page 17 of 66 00000iv I 3 m = _ N_ ti Oak Bailey Drive 80000 • f w • a C'Jti o _ 0 ti e. 1 1�- -- R — — 0. m� Od cn O� cv rn CD C'o N < C-0 CD CO • E3 o \ CD 7 w N =3 I • I 0 I I W. .• tAkl- C� 3 o 7 = ZC 9 z.■ z ■� c• s:.1 � i z ����f�"' °"a mmission -=� 22' 2022 n+ a It m 24 (OAK BAILEY CLUB WE Pfy�IENT) Page 11 of 66 § a k . N) � � � � : � © & 2� % �& w�Q ®. « ^j\CD _0 J> � _ \ ; Q §q/ b, 2 k2 §\} \2 = c C)F o y>rz / R m k m, , UR2k±«k & Ke E �cLUs 9 §�\ P 2 @ \\ 0 0 0 0 I / z ;G 90 / 0 0 � / z § a k . N : �k _,&gc, w�Q ®. « _§q/ % 2 22 § \ \ \) ) = CD 7 0 .` / R m k m UR2k±«k & K B IL �CLUs 9 §�E P 2 age 2¥+ p E> a z m r m G D O z a z m r m G D O z o� N sA2.3 F; io 0o s s Im y =Fz, I° -I- z$ omz 6$ �18 £Fo z V V mN mR _ mo o mm u c� c y n N o r co CD cm >f�, n ND CD Z�� �cCi)�mD Fm * �mm �m*�� zaa 'm3�$8 mz. zFz oyb mt NFD3 �$y mg z� �� mOz S macro zFo Av m z mp o Inc 6g oM z.-of_; no z_ I a °oFa pz `go A Ey to � Ho go I 5_ 3 a z SF z o 8m 0 nfo 9 ,I° 9o_lo m m > y F 05 a„„cEariT�" iy �C 3 BAH la fission _'" 22 2022 UP-200-"b039 (O K BAIL CLUST F4 L P ENT) Page 21 of 66 NOW L� }§ :\ p / 0 z ®//E/ `R RiR J! ); r;!- 22. ;; 2in !,§! -;_ j) /) \) )F T H �z \ /0 .., A {0 9{ p / a 0 z a k { C 00 cm ) 9 \ / } ) � CD 7 \ :!§ *�� ) # \ 7Qom CD0 \ � , J a » §) 3r a! E. !!) |! l:;, ° . , ;! �� |§{ \ \ I r ^)\\))(\ 4 / (; /�) � \ /) §I) ))\) )() )! z [ §) ) § . !mac � ■ & 2 2 \ _lwgn. �2 la « (a/' - � \ J� Q ■, 2 k2 Item ®f ^ ® k , rr, � UR2d±/k & Ke E� CLUs FB PL P Ems) Page 2¥+ @ -0 ,{ 0 \ z $ \ 0 z / 0 } 0 c § ƒ 0 Cim l) \ \ 0 e 0 z § a k . � : © & 2 % �« r � _,&gc, w�Q la « ^j\ CD _0 CD � §co q/ 2 k2 o ®� / Item k 6\ ) f \\7 Qo m * rn � , _ UR2d±/k & Ke E� CLUs 9§L P Ems) _ Page 2¥+ § a k . Q r � : aU _!« m (®; , 2 k2 e ( cn o ou� _z + c m o x � C Rmk ) k , ! UR2d±«k & KeLUs 9§-L \ 3 O n O m n r N o''<m'gF. n m o n O = _ € ..4 la in fission 22 2022 Cr � W � N o '',•; �a'"',zOl-a�',, �a�' A!� Item 24 N m m S UP-202 =Ci039 (O K BAIL CLUST F4 P ENT) Page 25 of 66 FF� IN man sun p: n NIN m i Eo Io of - gyp= m �18 EA wIP2. Fez m ro y 'm� °o z .zz pIz No z S m r m G D O z 2E: IV: Px " a 2- � S8 E"o s pFF3 g8 ;so o m o o $�f°o Fe o F�m9 F g m g0 aN 0 o � ogee bolo �e°o g o9 c� c o y n W r N O co pow cnOppDr, �v z<o C M r 0 zxmFn�m � U s� n O c,a„„cEa.r_iT60o•, lap' rr ct ission '"�22 2022 Item 24 UP-202 '-0039 (O K BALUST F4 P ENT) Page 26 of 66 � L� }§ :\ p / 0 z 3 2z r/ s. ; )\ ]; §; ;[!| !( > §) ! ( !, :_,! • :' = r` . ;; ;] );!! )() §j §) )�§§ )) {0 �{ p / a 0 z $ )( �§8 §) � P, ƒ) \ } ( �j 3; /\ /E �}} &) \§ !,! !; §{ FF. , ; § ) z§ / j \ }( i\ r` ;! a k �\ o � 5 m cn o 00 Dr, \� \ > k z .. ¥» \\� � � : ( -q (! # d /\; |\\\\(\ P, �\/)§{) (,.: )� § §; ® § G`` |i§ :!§ ( ` } U §| § . !mac ■& 22\ _lw g n. F. V b . « ( 4 It. \ J Q ■, 2 k2 ®f^ ® Item rr, UP-2 & K e E� cLUs � &�L P ENT ) Page 2¥+ I � § a k . Q N) : © & 2J o _laec, w2Q la« As -®;Q§q /,2 k2j( ul o 0_ % .ƒz m\Zm ' ` ®�Rmk \ � \ UR2k±«k & K B IL CLUs F4 2 age 2¥+ § a k . \ o � : �©& 22� _ -r/g 9!®5 b « (~jr m - ( ^9 yz \ %. 2 22 o _ % ; z o ' rz ® D o , . ` C Rm 2 \\ ) f[\\a , ! �UR200«9 & KBE CLUs F4 FP 2 Q 0 k g 0 0 _ \ z .� � -n 2 z 0 0 z _ 0 0 2 y z � " a ) �................ \ C:) » �®5 E#/� mo � _........ � �CLw � eel� . . UR2d±«k & KBE X� 2022 mk ¥+ ;_ m § \ 0 z \0 � P / a 0 z / \\ \ ;|! \ @ ;r ;; §! @ § !! ) ) t! \ ! ( § G # q g 1.5 h §Tu \ § § j (§ [ � A 2 A / !\ § I§ �t § 4 � :: .o ;;\ \ \ \\ , , _ } \ \ \ } ,I) \)/ ; ` §§}§ I I\ I \ \ ! a k y o / C3) { § \ \ \ @( Q. = CD CD_ 2 *A$y� m : m i/ i§ is i§ i( � § § . !J-2 � ■ & 2 �2 bq«(a/■k2At m24 �UR2d±/k& KBE CLUs F4 2 1A$¥+ q m \ 0 z \) c m 0 a 0 z ■�° -.1: :I° � / � � a ) �................ \ ' © 5 mCDo�CD_ ) f a / cri ! R-y & U00, KBCLUl 2022 mk § a k . o wq\© bq « \f\ ) 3 _ \\ ) \ %A 2 22 2 ,f. , m + +5==a -FD ' " p Rm 2 co Fm , ! UR20069 & Ke E� cLUs 9 E P / -n § z m 0 0 z _ 3 0 0 _ 3 > z ;Q 90 E z _ 0 0 7 � \ z (t ,<D ,<:D § a k . o '' q^\ \ « wq\© bq « 3 _ \ \ ) \ %A 2 22 2 ,*. , m + +i==a ' " p Rm k ) f\\i5 co m r" -< 7. _ UP-20069 & KBIL CLUs 9§P 2 4 G) m r m D O z � 2 H� F- 8 3g H oEo 84 VFc�I z �= of �= Iz y o I i 11 I I Of D m r m D O z m o N � ono v�� w _, -n 40 z m r m D O z o g o rn i0 s A J O n� no O CIA c� m O co BCD W Sp C � CD � �mm co �mm�� a ao - e - �N P oog� a3 >o �3 �^ xm m _ Fmmz zsC Ba y� y I I I I I I F IN F IN to IT s A to Jlo I� o,a„„cEariT�•, 3 = AR la fission _'" 22 2022 UP-200=iy039 (O K BAIL CLUST F4 L P ENT) Page 3 of 66 § a ) �................ o ,igam -lJg @! F. §q/� " o C �CLUl ) \ � ) $ ?\\i5 r" -< UP200«9 & KB IL 7 , ! 2022 mk § a k................ � � �� q�\ o « wq\© bq « §\f\ ) co 3 �_ _) §\/ A 2 k2 +5==® ' rzx ` C Rm k \\ ) f[\75 � m , ! UR2k±«k & Ke E� cLUs F4 P 2 -n § z m 0 0 z _ 3 0 0 _ 3 > z (t ,<D ,<:D § a k . ' q�\ o « P bq « co 3u_ CD El 2 k2 ' rzx Rm k UR2k±«k & KeEs 9 L P 2 4 G) m r m D O z � 2 H� F- 8 3g H oEo 84 pl poow VFc�I z �= of �= Iz y o I i 11 I I Of D m r m D O z m o N � ono v�� w -n 40 z m r m D O z o g o rn i0 s A J O n� no O CIA c� m n O co n o = CD W CO �ocoW CF=Q mm< CD s e �N P oog� a3 >o �3 �^ xm m _ Fmmz zsC Ba y� y I I I I I I F IN F IN to IT s A to Jlo I� o,a„„cEariT�•, ro �'A �m 3 = �,���• la fission _'" 22 2022 ;. ➢ _� ' oo Z,„No«�°'` ����! It m 24 UP-200-,,0039 (O K BAIL CLUST F4 P ENT) Page 3 of 66 § a ) x o. ) � � � � � � -•s# e; r/& .� /!� m o � � ACLU, ) #\\7\ � m UR2k±«k & KB IL , ! 2022 mk § a ) . m PPa « - % ) Q 2 k2 :,m� o - � � � Rm k M r�, , UR2d±«k & KBEs F4 P 2 -n § z m 0 0 z _ 3 0 0 _ 3 > z (t ,<D ,<:D § a ) . m ' ' } PIH /.' « >CD Zo - �Q U2 k2 , m= o ' Rmk )\\7( m m � , , UR200 & KeEs 9§�E P 2 4 G) m r m D O z � 2 H� F- 8 3g H oEo 84 VFc�I z �= of �= Iz y o I i 11 I I Of D m r m D O z m o N � ono v�, w _, -n 40 z m r m D O z o g o rn i0 s A J O n� no O CIA c� CD m n o 2 C W ZO jCDCyN QO F= CO �m m� m r^ s P oog� a3 >o �3 �^ xm m _ Fmmz zsC Bz y y I I I I I I F IN F IN to IT s A to Jlo I� o,a„„cEariT�•, ro J-2 F*c Ham. la l�fission _'" 2 2022 z,➢n� eeo b'�„No«���It m24 UP-202��=iy039(O KBAIL CLUST F4 ENT) Page 4 of 66 § � wgo� P,j _ rr-i Dr- Fo\\7( � � UR2d±«k & KeE m , 2022 mk § a k . � : : F. 22\ bq. « ) z o §a/, _ (�\ { CD o - ............. y Q .. 2 k2 .f, m Rm k \\ ) f [ \ § 5 m Mrn , ! UR2d±«k & K B IL CLUs F4 P / -n § z m 0 0 z _ 3 0 0 _ 3 > z (t ,<D ,<:D § a k . 0 : : PP.4 22\ bq. « _ \�\ { o - \ d . 2 k2 .f. , m-c o - x{' � R m k\) f\\§5- m UP-2d±«k & Ke Es Fl& P / P-;u ;$ m § j e z Of ' ( \ \ \ \ \ !; N ! \i #\) #_ ; i2 | =i§ §i� ! !i0 :: � � \ \\\ \ / \) w m \ § z ;|)§ M.o }\) 3 90 � m \ e 0 z . o \\ � a k \y\ { C) CD c o ) #\\ §5 -< 7 , ! z i§ | i§ \\ }§ 0 . !mac � ■ & 2 2 \ _lwgn. �2 la « MW \ J Q ■, 2 k2 ®f ^ ® t m k rr, - UR2d±/k & K B E CLUs F4 L PI 2 �A4¥+ § a ) �................ c 'g ) o -!/\ /! F* §#/ o o C .f. . | � ) #\\§5 m UR20±«9 & KB IL�CLUl r< , ! 2022 mk § a k . PCCD 2-r6g R! la « 7m J« Q 2 k2 " %/Rm k 3 , ! UR2k±«k & KeEs F4 P / 8 0- H 0 0 d"„cEari�.•, ,,' VLC p la 1�N1 fission 2 2022 — ,.,p.�Qo r o Z It m24 m 0 s UP-202 =�039 (O K ST F4 ML P ENT) @ © HM | ) A \ (( ) - !! §| ); !!(; | H ( {0 ,r p / g 0 z PO ([ ); i] ;! §) .2g §) |( )§ () \) ](( [] § (( | \:§!�:/\/§1i/\ ': \ i (!§)))//)5!0 •. ) \ ,!, a\/'\\(\} \(m # gzaz; /{ \ !!§»}!224;mj p! \f; !` , \�\\\§|�� \§ \\ )\/\: / \).21 - , \ ) { & \! \� / \ � ) z j § $) §% § ƒz /�\ zo j - a ) � ................ ''= �f CD C-0 w/& §� / \ >\[ 22= ? D _} ®� gr \ \7 r 3 UR2k±«k OPKAICLw , ! 2022 mk ) m % a 0 z I / -,., ,. G » \ / p r. _ ƒp a - !:§ ! : , �_` \) \( ;: : (�_\)§{ k ` d / ) ! k) \ \ i; 7 , & )( \ \\ J a IO /\ \ j ! / 3 aN |N ;I m \ e 0 z a k CD = BCD \Fw � 3 G D> \ §{\ 2 * \\7 m , ! §\|;}\ \\: R! § - ` ƒ $ ) G; /) \(\/ I m §) § `` § . � ■ & 2 ~ _lwgn.�2 b « (a/" \ J Q .J2 k2 ®f ^ ®Itmk , rr, � � UR2d±/k (0 K B E CLUs &2 Page S¥+ / § a k . �©& 2~� �\ o -< 2 w�Q ®)q « CD m \J « Q . % 2 22 2 = C" % ^ ®� /� Rm 2 ) \\ G� ) # \; � 3 , ! UR2k±«k & KB IL�CLUs F4 P / § a k . aD � %As ND CD m _,&gc, la « b, 2 k2 2/ c m o ' rz / Rm k ) I y $ rn = -< 7, UR2k±«k & KeLUs 9 §�E P 2 @ cn 0 0 0 0 � \ z ;G ;0 z 0 0 � / z � § a k . Q � � : � � � : P Nj o m _l-,H la « m \ ®/2 k2 § ) 9 7 0 ® ' ` ' ramRmk /\ k y UR2k±«k& KeEs 9 §�E P 2 a g oy� m> S _ a °3 o8 0 o FF S x Bal �S Szn �30. IN man sun m^o �S oo I Im m� 0 Io j Ez -moot fm 0S �z FsV S A� �z oF�'7 _ gyw�F B - p: n NIN m i Eo In of - E-" o gyp= mo �18 EA F'oZ "ro S'o z �?z plz m r m G D O z f. xIV: Ao11 Px " a % 2 ^z SuS z°o {ns pFF3 N ffz S$S m > S� ° g8 ;so o m o o $�f°o w$ 7 n $Oo Fe n F�m9 F g m g0 c 0 'o ogee °oo g °F9 V Vo c� ^c n ~ CD CNO _ > f W '�° n m' ' � < = = N C:) Nj rn C:) 50� U s� n O o,a„„cEariT�•, ro 60� on,,�m � o m � m 3 = �,�IR�• la fission RM _'" 22 2022 Item 24 UP-200-"15039 (O K BAIL CLUST R4 L P ENT) Page 56 of 66 IN L� }§ ,\ p / 0 z 3 2z < )\ j \\ \} ;; (] );!! !() ] §;_ �! ))( !; §(R !) sA § $ /( �o , ƒ) 3; /! �� §) \ } ( j; /( HE 0,j {0 9{ p / a 0 z &) \§ ol �() }) Ali. ; ; :|•[ ); a k { o % FR { As \ ) m \ \ \ CA3 m , , § ( )! ()_ !§( T) / ) \) b'§ !! \/0 ,o ) § % K} : ( ( ; : ! § . !mac ■& 22\ _lwgn. �2 la « (.4 \ J Q ■, 2 k2 ®f ^ ® Itmk -UR2d±/k (OP KeE� cLUs&�EP 2 Page S¥+ I 0 d"„cEari�.•, ,d -Tim mo m �,� � rt o ➢ W O cO _:°➢no3 �;y�m lain rr ission -� 22 2022 z< o Qp C rn r O z '.,� rvoii� r L. It m 24 w _: N m w m� 7S UP-202 =Ci039 (O K BAIL CLUST F4 L P ENT) § a k . 2 � : © & 2 % �& o _laec, w�Q !. « - ( ®; Q §q / , 2 22 e [) \ w o - '�z m /\§+ c0Fo x ®� C Rm 2 ) ; \\ ) 7 , ! UP20069 & KB E� CLUs 9§-\ P 2 @ \\ 0 0 0 0 I / z ;G 90 / 0 0 � / z § a k . PD C _laec, !. « - ; Q , 2 k2 [o -0 > - ' � z m c0Fo x C Rm k ); \\7 UR2d±«k & KB Es 9 E P 2 CAB¥+ p zH I e _E_ a3 s as $�° o os m° zfi v� �z�� m r m G D O z z8°, � � �i = = m3 Iz oo 2 o1 Foy Im ° y s=$ Ioslo p= >$ �18 =o ml€lo s $a a v° z V V 4m� < 8zz _ y m B z c� o p co _ n S 00co WO-0DN ZF o Sp O � Fm '^'m CCn m ern* -< E No zz ,. o Fot ogz mn� fw Tm p o o % Iz toy - a> a off o H= �1O 5� v mF.polo �`Tp g Oo zo o[}, �v ��s `8 g n o,a„„cEariT�•, ro 3 = �,���• la ission _'" 22 2022 ;. ➢ _� ' oo Item 24 o UP-202��=iy039 (O K BAIL CLUST F41 L P ENT) Page 61 of 66 NOW L� }§ :\ p / 0 z p §§) �z ! ) % ) \ �) /(; i§ J p » gq 4r = a! en / 2 ,z M. r - 2 °. , (�)) ;| w. `r )_ ; ;;. _ \) \ a k { o % 5 o -0 5> ND \/\ { � ) \ \ \\ ) � 7 , ! /�] !| ] \I / z ( ( !i ];I / [ s) ( / \( § o�� § . !mac aF. &2 \b. « '�\ J� Q ■, 2 k2 Itm24 -UP-2d±/k& KeLUs F4&4EP 2 Page B¥+ @ -0 ,{ 0 \ z m \ 0 z / 0 } 0 c § ƒ 0 § a k . 2pv: © & 2 % �& o _laec, w�Q !. « - ( ®; Q §q / , 2 22 e [) \ w o-0> m §+ c o x ®� C Rmk ) f \\) 7 , ! UR2d±«k & KB E� CLUs 91�E P 2 Page B¥+ CUP-2022-0039 One Mile View 11 NC 2992 N Oak Bailey Dr 0 0.13 0.25 0.5 Miles • �. W .O P, rn Subject Property i 1 III 1� I W "O YWv a RSF-4 VORTH SKILL RN RD I I I I � I � I I \ � I � I op I I / I � � I / I I I RPZD I _ r RA � I I � I 1 Zoning �I-2 General industrial Regional Link --- RESIDENTIAL SINGLE-FAMILY EXTRACTION NS-G 11 iiiiiiiii Neighborhood Link _ _ _ _ - - - - - - M. RI-u COMMERCIAL 11I-12 ResltleniiaFOfice Unclassified DNS-L G1 _ �ResltleMlal-�rialW21 ��-2 Residential Link _ RSF 1 FORM BASED DISTRICTS ■ 1 Planned Neighborhood Link - RS11 Gown—ncare RSF4 MU—Thamug— Planned Residential Link RSF-] �MBin Sireat Center RSF-8 ■ Osxniown General Shared -Use Paved Trail ' �Communiry seNmea RESIDENTIAL MULTI -FAMILY � ryeigbborbaoa semices Q RMF-8 NeigM1borM1ootl Canse m- - — Trail (Proposed) �RMF-12 PLANNED ZONING DISTRICTS r r � i _ _ _ _ _ i � � RMF-ie � Commercial, Intluslnal, Resltlentlal 1 Fayetteville City Limits ; Planning Area — _ RMF-2a INSTITUTIONAL RMFI" _P1 1 Planning Area INDUSTRIAL p Fayetteville City Limits 1-1 Heary�ommendal-dLight Ind -Running Commissi n 2 Agenda Item 24 CUP-2022-0039 (OAK BAILEY CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT) Page 64 of 66 CUP-2022-0039 2992 N Oak Bailey Dr. Close Up View o o z 0"�X_ N KATHERINE A " LU w Y—WARWICK-DR m v X QG WARWICK•DR 74 y�0 Subject Property RSF-4 ■ ■ ■ i i i m~� o m� OLD WIRE RD Z o STRAWBERRY•DR I , J P-1 W � Ak m W J i� R-ANORTH Regional Link Neighborhood Link Residential Link Residential -Agricultural Planned Neighborhood Link r � � Planning Area Feet RSF-4 Fayetteville City Limits P-1 0 75 150 300 450 600 - — - Shared -Use Paved Trail — — — Trail (Proposed) 1 :2,400 Planning Commissi n 2 Agenda Item 24 CUP-2022-0039 (OAK BAILEY CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT) Page 65 of 66 Agenda Item 24 CUP-2022-0039 (OAK BAILEY CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT) Page 66 of 66 Appendix B - City Attorney's 2016 Memo TO: Planning Commissioners FROM: Kit Williams, City Attorney DATE: January 12, 2016 RE: Compatibility with neighbors should be considered when determining whether or not to recommend rezoning to City Council For almost 15 years, my advice to the Planning Commission has consistently asked you to evaluate and apply the statutorily authorized and Supreme Court approved zoning considerations to an applicant's rezoning request. My advice has also been: "Probably the most important factor and the underlying reason to have zoning in the first place is to promote COMPATIBILITY among neighboring parcels." (City Attorney memo to City Council of November 15, 2012; emphasis in original). There was some discussion among the citizens and commissioners last night that "compatibility" was subjective and maybe too general or vague to try to apply to a rezoning request. That is incorrect. Although not susceptible to mathematical formulas, it is no more vague that the "reasonable standard of care" test determined by the jury in every car accident case. "Undue hardship" must be determined by the Planning Commission for almost all variance requests. We do not ask Planning Commissioners to leave their common sense and good judgment at the door of the Chambers, but to use them for rezoning, variances, and conditional uses. The first test of the constitutionality of zoning reached the United States Supreme Court in Village of Euclid v. Ambler Realty Company in 1926. Euclid was a small suburb of Cleveland, Ohio. Euclid wished to protect portions of its residential neighborhoods and therefore "established a comprehensive zoning plan for regulating and restricting the location of trades, industries, apartment houses, two-family houses, single-family houses, etc., the lot area to be built upon, the size and height of buildings, etc." Id. 272 U.S. 365, 379-380 (1926). Ambler Realty Company obtained an injunction against Euclid to prevent its enforcement of the zoning ordinance on Due Process grounds as the zoning ordinance restricted the uses allowed for Ambler's property and thus devalued its property. Although the United States Supreme Court acknowledged the lessened value caused by zoning regulations, it reversed the injunction and upheld the zoning regulations. The Court did not expressly refer to "compatibility", but it discussed how apartment buildings could be incompatible with a single family neighborhood. "With particular reference to apartment houses, it is pointed out that the development of detached house sections is greatly retarded by the coming of apartment houses, which has sometimes resulted in destroying the entire section for private house purposes; that in such sections very often the apartment house is a mere parasite, constructed in order to take advantage of the open spaces and attractive surroundings created by the residential character of the district. Moreover, the coming of one apartment house is followed by others, interfering by their height and bulk with the free circulation of air and monopolizing the rays of the sun which otherwise would fall upon the smaller homes, and bringing, as their necessary accompaniments, the disturbing noises incident to increased traffic and business, and the occupation, by means of moving and parked automobiles, of larger portions of the streets, thus detracting from their safety and depriving children of the privilege of quiet and open spaces for play, enjoyed by those in more favored localities, -- until, finally, the residential character of the neighborhood and its desirability as a place of detached residences are utterly destroyed." Id. at 394. Ninety years later, we do not take such a dim view of apartments, but we still recognize that increased traffic on local roads, large parking lots, increased noise, etc. may still adversely affect and thus call into question their compatibility with nearby residential neighborhoods. Every time the Planning Commission considers a request for a Conditional Use, it must consider such request's "General compatibility with adjacent properties and other property in the district." Although "compatibility" cannot be measured like setbacks, bulk and area requirements, height limitations, density, etc., compatibility is the underlying purpose for all such measurable zoning limitations. The dictionary defines compatibility as "capable of existing together in harmony." Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary, Tenth Edition. Substantial evidence of compatibility or the lack of compatibility is found in the reasonable concerns and opinions of neighbors. A primary and fundamental purpose of zoning regulations is to protect the interests of neighboring parcel owners from uses that would be unreasonably disruptive and incompatible with their neighborhood. That does not give neighbors a veto power over any new development, but their concerns should be carefully considered and weighed along with the property owner's right to make fair and reasonable use of property. I remain convinced COMPATIBILITY with neighboring parcels must remain the lodestar in every rezoning consideration. Appendix C - Property Record for Development Washington County MARKER DEVELOPMENT LLO Assessor's Office Address: 2992 N OAK BAILEY DR Russell Hill, Assessor Legal: N/A Parcel: 765-31975-000 RPI D: 127194 Acres: 2.66 HUNTINGTON S r ' ° r 1!�7 P a qL i.' i �'' F L dEL .46 IF 1111117% 7 -011 .i f Date Created: 8/24/2022 1 Inch = 85 feet Created By: actDataScout This map should be used for reference purposes only and should not be considered a legal document. While every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of this product, the publisher accepts no responsibility for any errors or omissions nor for any loss or damage alleged to be suffered by anyone as a result of the publication of this map and the notations on it, or as a result of the use or misuse of the information provided herein. P44 "f*d By ktaUt www.actDataScout.com v via DataScout OneMap Appendix D - Property Record for Adjacent Frontage Washington County PARKER INVESTMENTS LLC Assessor's Office Address: N OLD WIRE RD Russell Hill, Assessor Legal: PT SE NE 0.21 AC Parcel: 765-16035-001 RPI D: 121961 ik— Acres: 0 1 4 IL pe6 ,=� r -- r-- r.x � �4 Wit: ��.��.'&Ihp r S►. '' = s ' a t L T- 4 r , Ilk, h l i� �l � ,t •. • I � ,qi� � l r - � 4 �_� Date Created: 8/24/2022 1 inch = 65 feet Created By: actDataScout This map should be used for reference purposes only and should not be considered a legal document. While every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of this product, the publisher accepts no responsibility for any errors or omissions nor for any loss or damage alleged to be suffered by anyone as a result of the publication of this map and the notations on it, or as a result of the use or misuse of the information provided herein. P44 "f*d BY kII:aUt www.actDataScout.com v via DataScout OneMap Appendix E - Park Commons Prelim Plat P40 CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE ARKANSAS TO: THRU: FROM: PLANNING COMMISSION MEMO Fayetteville Planning Commission Andrew Garner, City Planning Director Harry Davis, Planner MEETING DATE: September 10, 2018 UPDATED W PC RESULTS SUBJECT: PPL 18-6115: Preliminary Plat (NE OF OAK BAILEY DR. & OLD WIRE RD./PARK COMMONS S/D, 254): Submitted by BLEW & ASSOCIATES, INC. for properties located NE OF OAK BAILEY DR. & OLD WIRE RD. The properties are zoned RSF-4, RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY, 4 UNITS PER ACRE and contain approximately 1.84 acres. The request is for 7 single-family lots. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of PPL 18-6115 with conditions. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve PPL 18-6115 with conditions as recommended by staff, including determinations: • In favor of Condition #1 for payment in -lieu of parkland dedication. • In favor of Condition #2 for street improvements. • And all other conditions of approval." BACKGROUND: The subject property is an undeveloped 1.84-acre parcel located north of the intersection of Oak Bailey Drive and Old Wire Road in east Fayetteville. Old Wire Road and Oak Bailey Drive are classified as Collector Streets. The property is zoned RSF-4, Residential Single-family, 4 Units per Acre. The surrounding land use and zoning is depicted on Table 1. Table 1 Surrounding Land Use and Zoning Direction Land Use Zoning North Residential RSF-4, Residential Single-family South Residential RSF-4, Residential Single-family East Residential RSF-4, Residential Single-family West Strawberry Hill SD RSF-4, Residential Single-family Proposal: The applicant proposes a new 7 lot subdivision located on 1.84 acres at the northeast corner of Oak Bailey Drive and Old Wire Road. No new street infrastructure is required as all seven lots will front directly onto existing streets. A stormwater detention area will be located off -site on an adjacent residential property. Mailing Address: 113 W. Mountain Street www.fayetteville-ar.gav Fayetteville, AR 72701 INFRASTRUCTURE: Block Length/Connectivity: As proposed, the subdivision will have frontage onto Oak Bailey Drive and Old Wire Road. No new streets are proposed. Right-of-way to be dedicated: Since both Oak Bailey Drive and Old Wire Road are classified as Collectors per the Master Streets Plan, the applicant is required to dedicate right-of-way 35-feet from the centerline of Oak Bailey Drive and Old Wire Road near the intersection for 175 feet along both streets. This dedication will then taper back to 29.5-feet from the centerline. Street Improvements: Staff recommends construction of a 5-foot wide sidewalk and 9- greespace at the Master Streets Plan right-of-way line along both Oak Bailey Drive and Old Wire Road with the construction of each new home. Street lights are also recommended at every intersection and are to be proposed and placed no farther than 300-feet from each other along the project's street frontage. Staff originally recommended the applicant pay a fee -in -lieu for widening streets to 14-feet from centerline to back -of -curb, curb and gutter, and storm drainage along Old Wire Road. The cost estimate for street improvements beyond sidewalk and streetlights (approximately $54,376.00, see attached) exceeds the rough proportionality test for seven new residential lots. Staff is only recommending the applicant pay a fee -in -lieu for curb and gutter along Old Wire Road, totaling $8,619. Tree Preservation: Canopy minimum requirement: 25.0% Existing canopy: 62.4% Preserved canopy: 25.5% Mitigation required: 27 trees Parks: On November 7, 2016, the Parks Recreation and Advisory Board reviewed this project and had a conditioned recommendation as follows: • Project was originally reviewed by the PRAB on November 7, 2016 at which time PRAB accepted the developer's request for payment of money in -lieu rather than a land dedication. • Fees in the amount of $6,440 are due before signing of the final plat. • The total amount of fees will be determined by the actual number of buildable lots and the parks fee formula at Planning Commission approval of the Preliminary Plat. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approving PPL 18-6115 with the following conditions: Conditions of Approval: 1. Planning Commission determination of parkland dedication or payment of fees -in -lieu. On November 7, 2016, the Parks Recreation and Advisory Board reviewed this project and recommended fees -in -lieu in the amount of $6, 440 be accepted prior to final plat. Subdivision Committee recommended in favor of this condition. 2. Planning Commission determination of street improvements. Staff recommends construction of a 5-foot wide sidewalk at the Master Streets Plan right-of-way line along both Oak Bailey Drive and Old Wire Road. Street lights are required at every intersection and are to be proposed and placed no farther than 300-feet from each other along the project's street frontage. Staff is only recommending the applicant pay a fee -in -lieu for GAETC\Development Services Review\2018\Development Review\18-6115 PPL NE of Oak Bailey Dr. & Old Wire Rd. (Park Commons SD) 254\ curb and gutter along Old Wire Road, totaling $8, 619. Subdivision Committee recommended in favor of requiring the applicant to pay an assessment to fully improve Old Wire Road. However, a dollar amount was not available for committee review. 3. Since both Oak Bailey Drive and Old Wire Road are classified as Collectors per the Master Streets Plan, the applicant is required to dedicate right-of-way 35-feet from the centerline of Oak Bailey Drive and Old Wire Road near the intersection for 175 feet along both streets. This dedication will then taper back to 29.5-feet from the centerline. 4. There must be a note on the plat that all lots will conform to access management standards. Shared driveways along Old Wire Road and Oak Bailey Drive must be within an access easement from the right-of-way to the end of the driveway. 5. All tree preservation, landscape, engineering and fire department conditions included herein shall apply. All revisions shall be addressed prior to Planning Commission hearing. Standard conditions of approval: 6. All existing overhead utility lines 12kV and under shall be relocated underground. All proposed utilities shall be located underground; 7. Sidewalk along all commonly owned lots (detention ponds, Lot 25) shall be constructed prior to final plat. All other sidewalks shall be constructed or guaranteed prior to final plat; 8. All street names shall be approved by the 911 Coordinator and indicated on the final plat; 9. All lots shall be labeled with addresses as approved by the 911 Coordinator on the final plat; 10. A floodplain development permit is required prior to construction for any grading or structures in the flood zone; 11. Plat Review and Subdivision comments (to include written staff comments provided to the applicant or his/her representative, and all comments from utility representative: Black Hills Energy, SWBT, Ozarks, SWEPCO, Cox Communication) 12. Staff approval of final detailed plans, specifications and calculations (where applicable) for grading, drainage, water, sewer, fire protection, streets (public and private), sidewalks, parking lot(s) and tree preservation. The information submitted for the plat review process was reviewed for general concept only. All public improvements are subject to additional review and approval. All improvements shall comply with City's current requirements; and 13. Preliminary Plat approval shall be valid for one calendar year. GAETC\Development Services Review\2018\Development Review\18-6115 PPL NE of Oak Bailey Dr. & Old Wire Rd. (Park Commons SD) 254\ Planning Commission Action: ,PlApproved O Tabled O Denied Meeting Date: September 10, 2018 Motion to approve as part of consent agenda Motion: Belden Second: Johnson Motion passes Vote: 8-0-0 BUDGET/STAFF IMPACT: None. Attachments: • Engineering Division comments • Urban Forestry Division comments • Fire Department comments • Applicant's request letter • Site Plan • Street improvements cost estimate • One Mile Map • Close Up Map • Current Land Use Map GAETC\Development Services Review\2018\Development Review\18-6115 PPL NE of Oak Bailey Dr. & Old Wire Rd. (Park Commons SD) 254\ CITY OF _ FAYETTEVILLE ARKANSAS TO: Harry Davis, Planner FROM: Jonathan Ely, Development and Construction Manager Engineering Division DATE: September 10, 2018 SUBJECT: PPL 18-6115 Park Commons Street Improvement Recommendations STAFF MEMO Street Improvement Recommendations Oak Bailey Drive Oak Bailey is currently improved approximately 30 feet wide, with curb, gutter, and sidewalk along the east side at back of curb. Street improvement recommendation for Oak Bailev is to remove the existina sidewalk. and reconstruct it to master street plan section for a Collector Street, with 9 ft of _greenspace, and 5 ft width. This is shown on the plans. Street Improvement Recommendations Old Wire Road Old Wire Road along the project frontage is currently 28' of paved width, but is unimproved beyond that. The estimated cost to add curb, gutter and storm drainage is approximately $54,376, which exceeds the rational nexus to impact of this development. Therefore, we recommend the following: The developer should construct a 5 ft wide sidewalk at the master street plan right of way, and pay fee in lieu of street improvements to cover the costs of the curb and gutter. A cost of $8,619. The remaining cost for drainage improvements totaling $45,757, is due to stormwater from an uphill basin, and is not the result of impact caused by the proposed development. Therefore, this cost should not be assessed to the development. Mailing Address: 113 W. Mountain Street www.fayetteville-ar.gov Fayetteville, AR 72701 ®CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE ARKANSAS TO: Harry Davis, Planner FROM: Jonathan Ely, Development and Construction Manager Engineering Division DATE: August 24, 2018 STAFF MEMO SUBJECT: Subdivision Committee Engineering Comments for PPL 18-6115 Plan Comments: 1. Recommended Street Improvements along property frontage of Old Wire a. Construct 5' wide sidewalk at MSP ROW as shown on the plans. b. Pay fee In -lieu of street improvements: i. Street widening to 14' from CL to BOC ii. Curb and Gutter iii. Storm Drainage 2. Include the remainder of parcel 765-16035-000 as another lot, and part of the proposed plat. 3. Provide minimum 1 ft "flat" adjacent to sidewalk along Old Wire Road. 4. Retaining wall proposed for the stormwater detention areas must conform to requirements described in UDC Ch. 169. Analyze setbacks to ensure compliance, and provide detailed engineering design documents for review at time of construction permitting. Drainage Comments: 1. The development is proposing to meet minimum drainage standards by implementing a variety of stormwater techniques. A combination of Hydrodynamic Separator, and bioretention will be used for water quality, and a detention pond will be constructed to control stormwater flow rates. a. At time of construction permit review, provide detailed caluculations showing sizing for the hydorodynamic separator, as well as all storm sewer pipes, inlets and swales. Standard Comments: 1. All designs are subject to the City's latest design criteria (water, sewer, streets and drainage). Review for plat approval is not approval of public improvements, and all proposed improvements are subject to further review at the time construction plans are submitted. 2. Any damage to the existing public street due to construction shall be repaired/replaced at the owner/developers expense 3. Water and sewer impact fees will apply for the additional impact to the system. The fees will be based on the proposed meter size and will be charged at the time of meter set. Mailing Address: 113 W. Mountain Street www.fayetteville-ar.gov Fayetteville, AR 72701 4. Note, the following portions of all projects will typically not be reviewed by the Engineering Division until time of construction -level review (unless specifically requested at plat review): o Storm Sewer pipe/inlet sizing, gutter spread, profiles, or utility conflicts o Sanitary Sewer pipe sizing, profiles, or utility conflicts o Waterline fittings, callouts, or utility conflicts o Street profiles o Fine grading/spot elevations 5. The Engineer of Record shall: a. Review and approve material submittals. Approved submittals shall be submitted to the City for concurrence before grading permit is issued. b. Perform "Full Time" Inspection for the utility installation and shall be "In- Charge" of the approval testing. c. Provide a qualified representative for all testing and inspection. d. Schedule testing with the Public Works Inspector. e. Authorize geotechnical testing laboratory to provide reports directly to City in PDF format. Reports shall be submitted in a timely manner. f. Prepare material data sheets and test reports required by the specifications. g. Insure that daily inspection reports and data sheets are submitted to the City of Fayetteville's public works inspector weekly in PDF format. 6. 2017 Standard Water & Sanitary Sewer Specifications & Details apply 7. Demolition shall not begin until the appropriate erosion control measures and required tree preservation fencing are installed 8. Prior to Project Acceptance (Final Plat) the following items must be performed or provided to the satisfaction of the Engineering Department: h. The work shown on the civil site package must be complete and the items on the final punch list completed. i. Vegetation must be established and perimeter erosion controls removed. j. One (1) set of as -built drawings of the complete project (excluding details) as a hard copy, digital file .dwg, and PDF format; i. Public infrastructure and services shall be surveyed after installation in relation to easements, property lines, and rights -of -way. 1. More than 2 ft deviation of design alignment of shall require new easement dedication or adjustment of the utility/storm drain. ii. Sanitary Sewer, and Storm Drainage (Including Private) elevations must be verified and updated. (Elevations out of design tolerance must be corrected) iii. Street Centerline, Width, Profiles and Cross slopes shall be verified. 1. More than 6 inches deviation of design alignment of shall require new right of way dedication or adjustment of the street section. iv. Adequate verification survey to confirm accuracy of drainage report. v. As-builts should include the following information in a table; Linear Feet of new public streets, sidewalk (categorized by width), waterline, and sanitary sewer. Square feet of newly dedicated right-of-way. k. Unit price construction costs for review and approval and a single 2 year maintenance bonds in the amount of 25% of the public improvements; I. Certification that the streets, sidewalk, storm sewer, water, fire line, and sewer lines, etc., were installed per approved plans and City of Fayetteville requirements; i. Provide all Inspection Reports; approved submittals; Data Forms from Utility Specifications (Including Consultants sewer TV report); compaction test results, etc... m. Certification that the designed retaining walls were installed per approved plans and City of Fayetteville requirements(Inspection and Testing Reports required); n. Cross Sections, Volume Calculations, and Certification Retention/Detention Ponds are in accordance with the approved Drainage Report. o. Surveyor's Certification of Compliance for monuments and property pins. p. The As- Built Final Drainage Report in PDF format updated per as -built invert, slope, inlet opening, road profile, cross slope, etc... q. Bond, guarantee, or letter of credit for all sidewalks not constructed prior to final plat approval (150% of the estimated cost of construction); r. Cross Sections, contours, spot elevations, and Certification that the site has been graded per the approved MRLGP within the right of way, drainage easements, and utility easements. I� CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE ARKANSAS URBAN FORESTRY LANDSCAPE PLAN COMMENTS To: Blew & Associates, Pa From: John Scott, Urban Forestry CC: Harry Davis, Planner Meeting Date: August 30, 2018 Subject: PPL: 18-6115: NE of Oak Bailey Dr. & Old Wire Road : Park Commons SD 1. General Landscape Plan Checklist Yes No N/A a. Irrigation (notes either automatic or hose bib 100' o.c.) X UDC Chapter 177.03A7g, 177.04B3a b. Species of plant material identified X UDC Chapter 177.03A7d,e c. Size of plant material (minimum size 2" caliper for trees and 3 gal. shrubs) X UDC Chapter 177.03A7b,c d. Soil amendments notes include that soil is amended and sod removed X UDC Chapter 177.03C6b e. Mulch notes indicate organic mulching around trees and within landscape beds X UDC Chapter 177.03C6c,d f. LSD and Subdivisions plans stamped by a licensed Landscape Architect, others Na by Landscape Designer UDC Chapter 177.03B g. Planting bed contained by edging Na UDC Chapter 177.03C6f h. Planting details according to Fayetteville's Landscape Manual X UDC Chapter 177.03C6g i. Provide information about 3-Year Maintenance plan. The owner shall deposit X with the City of Fayetteville a surety for approved landscape estimate. UDC Chapter 177.05 A2e 2. Parking Lot Requirements 1 Tree : 12 Parking Spaces Yes No N/A a. Wheel Stops/Curbs X UDC Chapter 177.04B1 b. Narrow Tree Lawn (8' min. width, 37.5' length) X UDC Chapter 177.04C c. Tree Island (8' min. width, 18.7' min length OR 150 square feet) UDC Chapter 177.04C d. Placement of Trees (either side at entrances and exits) UDC Chapter 177.04C2 3. Perimeter Landscaping Requirements a. Side and Rear Property Lines (5' wide landscaped area) UDC Chapter 177.04D2a b. Front Property Line (15' wide landscape) UDC Chapter 177.04C2a c. Shade trees planted on south and west sides of parking lots UDC Chapter 177.04D2e d. 50% Evergreen shrubs if parking lot adjacent to ROW UDC Chapter 177.04D4a 4. Street Tree Planting Requirements a. Residential Subdivisions 1 Large Shade Species Tree per Lot UDC Chapter 177.05 b. Non -Residential Subdivisions 1 Large Species Shade Tree every 30' (planted in greenspace) UDC Chapter 177.05 c. Urban Tree Well — Urban Streetscapes Trees every 30' (8' sidewalk) UDC Chapter 177.05B3a-f d. Structured Soil — Urban Tree Wells Include a note and/or detail of structural soil on Landscape Plan UDC Chapter 177.05B3a-f e. Residential Subdivisions Timing of planting indicated on plans UDC Chapter 177.05A4 f. Residential Subdivisions Written description for method of tracking planting UDC Chapter 177.05A4e 5. Landscape Requirement Totals Mitigation Trees Parking Lot Trees Street Trees / Lot Trees M M Yes No N/A X X X X Yes No N/A X X x x X X X Amount 27 0 7 lot trees 2 Detention Pond — Large Trees (1 Tree/3,000 square feet) Detention Pond — Small Tree/Large Shrub (4 small trees or large shrubs/3,000 square feet) Detention Pond — Small Shrubs/Large Grasses (6 shrubs or grasses (1 gallon)/3,000 square feet) 6. Review Status (See Comments) Conditionally Approved Approved Tabled Denied Comments 3 13 19 -M,&ch Plat Subdivision Planning Committee Commission 08-15-2018 08-30-2018 02-28-2018 1. Address items above marked "No" and all Redlines provided. 2. Please note timing of the trees planted with lots 1-7 to be planted after home construction is complete. URBAN FORESTRY TREE PRESERVATION COMMENTS CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE ARKANSAS To: Blew & Associates, PA From: John Scott, Urban Forestry CC: Harry Davis, Planner Meeting Date: August 30, 2018 Subject: PPL 18-6115 : NE of Oak Bailey Dr. & Old Wire Rd.: Park Commons SD 1. Submittal Requirements Yes No N/A Initial Review with the Urban Forester X Site Analysis Map Submitted (if justification is needed) X Site Analysis Written Report Submitted (justification is needed) X Complete Tree Preservation Plan Submitted X Tree Mitigation Table on Plans X Tree Preservation Wavier Submitted (only use if no trees onsite or near P/L) x 2. Tree Preservation Calculations Tree Preservation Calculations Square Feet Percent of site Total Site Area *Minus Right of Way and Easements 66,946 100% Zoning Designation * Select Below with drop down arrow RSF-4 Single -Family Residential, Four Units Per Acre 16,737 25% HHOD * Select Below with Drop Down Arrow No 0 0% Total Canopy for Minimum Preservation Requirements 16,737 25.0% Existing Tree Canopy * Minus Right of Way and Easements 41,765 62.4% Tree Canopy Preserved 17,052 25.5% Tree Canopy Removed *On Site 24,713 36.9% Tree Canopy Removed *Off Site 5,837 Tree Canopy Removed Total 30,550 45.6% Removed Below Minimum 0 Mitigation Requirements 5,837 tigation Requirements Canopy below Number of 2" caliper requirement trees to be planted High Priority 5837 27 Mid Priority 0 0 Low Priority 0 0 Total Mitigation Trees Required 5837 27 4. Mitig Yes No N/A On -Site Mitigation X Off -Site Mitigation X Tree Escrow (See Conditions of Approval) x 5. Tree Preservation Plan Checklist Tech Subdivision Planning UDC Chapter 167.04H1 Plat Committee Commission a. 5 year Aerial Check on Existing Trees Yes Yes b. Property Boundary Yes Yes c. Natural Features (100ft beyond limits of disturbance) Yes Yes d. Existing Topography and Proposed Grading Yes Yes e. Soil Types No No f. Significant Trees Yes Yes g. Groupings of Trees Yes Yes h. Table Inventory List (species, size, health, priority) Yes Yes i. All Existing and Proposed Utilities Yes Yes j. All Existing and Proposed Utility Easements and ROW's Yes Yes k. All Streams (with approximate center line) NA NA I. Floodplains and floodways Na Na m. Existing Street, Sidewalk or Bike Path ROW Yes Yes n. Submitted Site Analysis Plan (if required) Yes Yes o. Shows ALL Proposed Site Improvements Yes Yes p. Delineates trees/canopy to be preserved and removed Yes Yes Tree Protection Methods a. Tree Protection Fencing Yes Yes b. Limits of Root Pruning NA Na c. Traffic flow on work site Yes Yes d. Location of material storage No No e. Location of concrete wash out Yes Yes f. Location of construction entrance/exit Yes Yes 6. Site Analysis Report (if required) Yes No N/A UDC Chapter 167.04H4 a. Provide graphic examples of multiple options used to X minimize removal of existing canopy b. Submitted Analysis Statement — Note the process, iterations, X and approaches to preserve canopy. 7. Review Status (See Comments) Tech Plat Subdivision Planning Committee Commission Conditionally Approved 08-16-2018 08-30-2018 Approved Tabled 02-28-2018 Denied Comm( 1. Address items above marked "No" and all Redlines provided on plan. CITY OF IleT. � ARKANSAS TO: Harry Davis, Planner CC: Assistant Chief Brad Hardin Battalion Chief Brian Sloat, Fire Marshal FROM: Rodney Colson, Fire Protection Engineer DATE: August 27, 2018 SUBJECT: PPL 18-6115: Preliminary Plat (NE of Oak Bailey Dr. & Old Wire Rd./Park Commons S/D, 254) The Fire Department has reviewed the Preliminary Plat for minimum compliance with the Arkansas Fire Prevention Code and has no comments. FAYETTEVILLE FIRE MARSHAL'S ❑FFICE 833 N. Crossover Road www.fayetteville-ar.gov Fayetteville, AR 72701-2701 'SNOISAHN O CD OLZL --W aue,j p—psvD qI oN ZgLb Ial�Ied -,Iq uw DZZ `SIuauusanul J33IJu I y poy -F pl0 p- —Cl A.7q 0'N SuOLuLuOD 3iJud Leuw9ad Q���� :a°I �%Id OJ 45z �&d IEld AI?D i � 8 aN =ee3��E5 �w�Np sa sss nLLs III g ■ Z. cs" E sa - sm gW e "$ a ms�aY =yf"soagd F. QFE e�v`y - 3� LL�X2Yoo �vL�85g_i�:83�a, �u os" jesd�gac�s$��a�" yya�?aw€eg�=�9 xbxa��srgm� ms%EXRsm%=%=,%§sda% a 5 ffi � z o � a s .a�s5 Ut kk a� j �gg a z °pe ME O3 � afi /s R p it g � � 3 F OLIEL s -W aue,j po psuD qI oN ZgLb Ia3[aep.,Iq uw :)ZZ `Sjuauusanuj xaxzed pe d -F p[O pu —Cl A.7q TO'N SuOLuLuOD 3iJud Leu-id y Oli bSz ICI Itild AITD Izld fi3ZuRu[23d :SNOISIAHN N •. i J e r_ o` u�,�S�K3` Ya u u 3"`uSd N e33m"» 8€ I I I Ililk ta■ a ;■ m lilk ;■ Sm Z. Rua o ° oz S E E g m w v�=�rsarv�•xav caiw •a�ee � na��n=s • ®wa wscs etozisie � eao�a-a�esw rv� cev�t�=suwaene���n�wwo=r,w cevvtw„i�a\:� OLZL sasu-W aue,j p—psvD qI oN ZgLb Ial�Iep -,lq uw :)ZZ `Sjuauusanuj xaxzed poy -F plo p- —Cl A.7q TO'N SuOLuLuOD 3iJud :ao3 �%Id Leuw9a�d y Q���� QJ v5z BEd 3uld AITD uuld a11S a :SNOISTAUN : N ry -ei S v�=.f WpN+x Rv s>aaW •a�ee � nay>n=s • ®wa swroasim/sis � ewo�y-a�zsrou pa cevrei��avn,i.�n�wwo=ry.w cevviwo:ld��o Mike Parker Park Commons SD - Old Wire Improvements Project #16-687 Conceptual Cost Estimate R.O.W. IMPROVEMENTS 18" Curb and gutter Storm Drainage/R.O.W. 18" RCP 24" RCP Curb Inlet 4' Curb Inlet Extension Flared End Section 5-Sep-18 Quantity Unit Unit Cost Total 663 LF $13.00 $8,619.00 17 599 5 10 1 LF LF Each Each Each $40.00 $43.00 $2,500.00 $625.00 $570.00 $680.00 $25,757.00 $12,500.00 _ $6,250.00 $570.00 Blew & Associates, PA [date] Page 1 PPL18-6115 PARK COMMONS SD A& One Mile View NORTH I 0 0.125 0.25 0.5 Miles RI-12 �i TUBBLEFIE4O � R-A �Q e J O NS-G AAAV� fk&,y. MM Subject Property RSF-4 W J Q M Legend <Limits Planning AreaFayetteville City Limits Shared Use Paved Trail Trail (Proposed)PlaBuilding FootprintFay I I I I 1 I I I I 1 SKILLERN 1 I1� RPZD ZORIRg EXTRACTION RESIDENTIAL SINGLE-FAMILY = E-1 �Resaennel-Agricwaml COMMERCIAL RSF-.5 Raddwfid-ORce RSF-1 C-1 RSF-T C-T RSFA C3 RSF-T FORM BASED DISTRICTS 1 RSF-8 Downtown Cora RSF-18 — TM1o1ou9hfar RESIDENTIAL MULTI -FAMILY Mein Street Caner RT-1T Rasae 1 Two end TM1ree-family Downtown General RMI 6 Community Services RMF-1T NaigM1borM1-d Se . RMF-18 NeighborM1cod Conservation RMI I PLANNED ZONING DISTRICTS RMI. IIIIIIII Commerdal, Industrial, Residential INDUSTRIAL INSTITUTIONAL I-1 Neevy Commercial end Light Industrial -2 Geneal lndu,M,l PPL18-6115 Close Up View PARK COMMONS SD ROLLING HILLS 'm`---- Z J f� W In W J m Legend Planning Area Fayetteville City Limits Trail (Proposed) Building Footprint Feet 0 75 150 300 450 1 inch = 200 feet RSF-4 :11 A& 111 NORTH Residential -Agricultural RSF-4 Residential -Office P-1 PPL18-6115 Current Land Use l KATHERINE WARWICK-DR -=- 4C PARK COMMONS SD ii x _ 0 BERRY l'Z SERA Z Single Family UJ �YARWICK Single Family Subject Property Single Family y . =i w 'Q:CI �Il�.ilf LU Fire Station > .� , � 1 :: Streets Planned FENIA Flood Hazard Data MSP Class COLLECTOR Streets Existing too -Year Floodplain MSP Class Feet Floodway COLLECTOR PRIN ARTERIAL PKWY 0 112.5 225 450 675 900 1111 Trail (Proposed) 1Planning Area 1 inch = 300 feet 1 —1 Fayetteville City Limits ecord Drawings AUTHORIZATION: Elaine Ave F .- Par( to �\ U \y0oo°1 < 0 `Go s � QC E�c',o Y z <1- �� 0 S Picasso PI (Local) cipal N. Old Wire Rc (Collector) X KECOKD DRAVINGSforoo m m 0 U U � U Y O m N. Oak I VICINITY MAP N.T.S. I X A minimum of forty eight (48) hours prior to any excavation or grading, Contractor shall contact the State One -Call system at 811to locate all underground utilities. The Contractor shall notify the Engineer of Record immediately in the event that underground utilities are not shown on plan and / or conflict with proposed civil works. X The Engineer of record shall not be held responsible for survey inaccuracies, survey omissions, or for design errors or omissions resulting from an inaccurate survey. X Construction Contractor and his Subcontractors agree that in accordance with generally accepted construction practices and OSHA safety standards, Construction Contractor and his Subcontractors will be required to assume sole and complete responsibility for job site conditions during the course of construction of the project, including safety of all persons and property; that this requirement shall be made to apply continuously and not limited to normal working hours, and construction Contractor and his Subcontractors further agree to defend, indemnify and hold Design Professional harmless from any and all liability, real or alleged, in connection with the performance of work on this project, except liability arising from the sole negligence of design professional. X It is the responsibility of the Contractor to maintain all erosion and sediment control devices through all phases of construction. Erosion and sediment control devices may only be removed upon 80% stabilization of the site as defined by the State's Department of Environmental Quality's General Permit for Construction. X The Contractor is to be solely responsible for any damage to neighboring properties during construction of this project. X This project was designed in accordance with currently accepted industry design standards. The Engineer of Record does not warrant any work completed on site unless direct inspection by the Engineer of Record & proper testing by a state certified qualified inspection lab occurs during all phases of construction. X The Contractor shall review the construction documents prior to any construction, and notify the Engineer of Record immediately upon discovery of any discrepancies that may occur on the drawings. All work shall discontinue until such time that the Engineer of Record has resolved said discrepancy. X The Contractor shall be responsible for disposal of construction waste materials including but not limited to demolition materials, debris, contaminated soils / materials, etc. in a lawful manner, at state and federally accepted disposal sites. X The Contractor is responsible for obtaining and constructing in accordance with the stricter of: these construction documents and any associated details & specifications; and all municipalities / governing agencies' standards and specifications for construction. X This drawing set and associated site, grading, utility, etc. plans are representations of the construction design and shall not be scaled to determine dimensions. A PART OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER AND A PART OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER, ALL IN SECTION 36, TOWNSHIP 17 NORTH, RANGE 30 WEST, WASHINGTON COUNTY, ARKANSAS, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER, AND RUNNING S02-11'12"W 1387.63', S63°53'20"W 64.84', AND S57°22'29"W 20.31' TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING, SAID POINT BEING A SET IRON PIN LOCATED ON THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY OF OLD WIRE ROAD, AND RUNNING ALONG SAID RIGHT OF WAY THE FOLLOWING 7 COURSES: S57°22'29"W 73.27 , S53 59 27 W 86.48 , S51 5912 W 109.84 , S50 17 59 W 82.06 , S46 15 20 W 64.16 , S44 49 33 W 88.72 ,AND S40047'04"W 56.40' TO A FOUND 5/8" REBAR, THENCE LEAVING SAID RIGHT OF WAY AND RUNNING o " o " o " N01 51 54 E 342.46 ,THENCE S88 23 56 E 126.52 TO A SET IRON PIN, THENCE NO2 52 43 E 23.45, TO A SET IRON PIN, THENCE S86°36'13"E 72.00' TO A SET IRON PIN, THENCE N52°24'42"E 27.73' TO A SET IRON PIN, THENCE N56015'55"E 98.47' TO A SET IRON PIN, THENCE N58004'03"E 88.12' TO A SET IRON PIN, THENCE N64033'58"E 49.43' TO A SET IRON PIN, THENCE S02°52'43"W 137.11' TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, CONTAINING IN ALL 1.84 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS AND RIGHTS OF WAY RECORD. * AS -BUILT DISCLAIMER * THIS RECORD DOCUMENT HAS BEEN PREPARED BASED ON THE BEST AVAILABLE INFORMATION. THE ACCURACY AND/OR COMPLETENESS OF THIS INFORMATION HAS NOT NECESSARILY BEEN VERIFIED AND BLEW & ASSOCIATES, PA SHALL NOT BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY ERRORS OR OMISSIONS WHICH MAY BE INCORPORATED HEREIN AS A RESULT. ]?ark Commons Ba0 iley Dr & N. Old Wire Road Fayettev DEVELOPER / PROPERTY OWNER: Engineering Department Parker Investments, LLC 125 West Mountain Street PO Box 10395 Fayetteville, AR 72701 Fayetteville, AR 72703 Ph: (479) 575-8206 Ph: (479) 571-1515 Fax: (479) 575-8202 CIVIL ENGINEER: Blew & Assocates, PA 3825 N. Shiloh Drive Fayetteville, AR 72703 Ph: (479) 443-4506 Fax: (479) 582-1883 LAND SURVEYOR: Blew & Assocates, PA 3825 N. Shiloh Drive Fayetteville, AR 72703 Ph: (479) 443-4506 Fax: (479) 582-1883 CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE: 113 West Mountain Street Fayetteville, AR 72701 Building Department City Administration Building 125 West Mountain Street Fayetteville, AR 72701 Ph: (479) 575-8233 Fax: (479) 575-8202 Planning Department 125 West Mountain Street Fayetteville, AR 72701 Ph: (479) 575-8267 Fax: (479) 575-8202 Police Department 100 A W Rock Street Fayetteville, AR 72701 Ph: (479) 587-3555 Fire Department 303 West Center Street Fayetteville, AR 72701 (479) 575-8365 Arkansas Sheet Index CIVIL PLANS 1 Cover Sheet 03/14/2019 2 Utility & Detention Pond Record Plan 03/01 /2019 3 Sanitary Sewer Plan & Profile (Record) 03/01 /2019 ``011IIIIII/tt/// OF AU1 ti • •• BLEW & .ASSOCIATES, PA; No. 1534 /1111111/ U N a a� O v 0 � 0 •mow � .� v � � � `p p ', "�.14 O "ti O is � o v ao o a f1. O v ,D 0 N W¢ 24 O O ~ OU �O ai 6 .43 � r O .rj O ti 0 O a, 'v f 0 0 "G w A. Ww v 0 U N� o U �+ d A N c�-g 14-1Q.1 o o O O -� O V U y, U aI � U F� C, SEAL: w rn ctio c� Q b 0 U U TM �U c� 4 1' 1 � 4-4 ^ � c� cn O t` O 75 4 O C lu U �--� ;-4 Q 4'4-4 U Z nCd c ^^.. PL i 0 0/ ARK SAS ,on ZJ 'PR SIQJCA� ,71 INEER No.12006 , /0DuQuefl ib/tu/2o RCP Reinforced Concrete Pipe TC Top of Back of Curb (Spot Elevation) FIRM CMP Corrugated Metal Pipe G Gutter / Bottom of Sidewalk (Spot Elevation) BLEW`v, & ASSOCIATES, PA HDPE High Density Polyethylene Pipe TW Top of Wall (Spot Elevation) C1VII_. ENGINEERS &LAND SURVEYORS SLMP Smooth Line Metal Pipe BW Bottom of Wall at Grade (Spot Elevation) 3825 N. SHILOH DRIVE PVC Polyvinyl Chloride Pipe Hp High Point (Spot Elevation) FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS 72703 DI Ductile Iron Pipe LP Low Point (Spot Elevation) OFFICE: 479.443.4506 J-Box Junction Box TB Top of Box (Spot Elevation) FAX: 479.582.1883 www.BLEWINC.com FES Flared End Section BC Back of Curb RW Retaining Wall FC Face of Curb Certificate of Authorization Ns 1534 DRAWN BY: 'OB NUMBER: HW Head Wall FH Fire Hydrant Assembly J. Rennick 16-687 WTI Wing Wall GV Gate Valve SUBMITTAL DATE: SCALE: AE Access Easement MJ Mechanical Joint 2019-03-14 As Noted DE Drainage Easement N North DRAWING NAME: TCE Temporary Construction Easement E East 16-687 Record 001.dwg UE Utility Easement W West SHEET NUMBER BS Building Setback S South 1 I C / Cn R� S a — S S S`3Sg , , i9 S , ,, S, -462s '45, 5'" 00 ` --- d.S.W aad NW7 poogj6gL ,6iaN - l/eyds --s9€------------ - b',d� ♦ \ �711??(T �7/5'8�ibO Hlc`JON OOHP♦\ '�,L� ' G ♦\ — OH 0 —�gg1— \ \6LTtj6 89$�Z 6d L601Po8) \ \ -�\ -i ` — — �°° -� �{p =-0HP c —QH 3 \ \ 1363 ♦ \ ` \ �- — -� — 1362-- \nr \ \ \ - 3fi4-� I \ 1362 I \ --- Tapping — \ -_--------------------------1 ♦` \ \�\ \� \ \ \ -_ \ \\ \ 1 �"'-- \ \\ \\ -- 5leeveW/ ---�- -I- -_-_-` 1361 I ► 1 � \ ♦� \� �\�\ \ \ --_-- \ \\ \ - -----_ \ \ \� �� �_ -� -�_ Valve I� � N \ --- 1360 I \i3�"'- \g \ \ \ \ o /� C \ \ 1359 I 1 \ -- ---- \ \ \ O III � 1355 I 1 7,357 1357— ♦�� \ ��r 3 \\ \ \ -\ --L- \ ilk — — — I— �13 I I �� BUILDING \ I Ch 1 I —2 I \ I� Lj o I / 1 5UILDING \0 — 3�3� y \"£Z— 4351 ,/},, i — 11 \ %r_ Oe OB;eld) "\ Zee '�\` --� -iY8"69 J oCiO N � S� 5 134— Fire Hydrant A55embly Gate Valve_ �- �— C C —'� N s s S ?S'_ — — — c �\ \ �`', \\� (6698Z ' a '— u 8� /� --'' G' — s — S — - - — S — y\ C�133g� \ \ \----- \ ��� \ _-_____►_' _-134�-_-_-_----- �LO�i'/O j 'y -�'/ ��`dl\^ s s _ / ONINId11-N 55 MANHOLE A Kim:1338.22 1344-_ r - \ 132 \\\ \ - --___ \ 8" NE:1330.37 / 1327\ \\ 33� \ - ��- \ --1341 \ �,' / ♦ I / \ \24 \ 525 321 ► \\ "O \\ ♦\\ -- -""` \ \ •Qq•.�O \ \ �,i \\` �- �1336-- C41- 20 , \ 9' `\� \ \ \` - -1525 \ \ \ ,- \�"` ` -\ \ l y / \ \ \ `. \ _ _ - - -' \ / 1332 / p�p / o r= Y LOT C ♦♦`- `27\ 4O _ \ \ L --� ` \ \�\\ J - 133�---_------'''/ g� Know what's bel ow. C31I before you dig. GRAPHIC SCALE i W W W - S — S — S _ ( IN FEET ) 1 inch = 40 ft Property Line Onoite Property Line Offoite Property Line Right-of-way Line Easement Line Storm Catch Baoin(s) Storm Pipe Water Line Fire Hydrant & Assembly Sanitary Sewer Line Sanitary Sewer Service Sanitary Sewer Manhole S C ♦♦� \� �\ �O 1` 7\ \\ - - _ �- o� \ \y \ ---\- <� 6uippe �' 1324 55 MANHOLE A-2 Kim:1318.31 8" NE:1312.21 - \ \ \ `♦ -- / \ \ 7,322 306 \ \ \ \ 8" 5W:1312.46 1322 / /.' \ '. , ���iNG , VU O \ \ ` � .3 \ �/ \ \ / � f�' _ \ gU1�DING o��� ` S � s� \\ `.- X y T\ _ -�_ "�� 1� ►♦ 13 rp 55 MANHOLE A 4 �'w\ I \ /♦ —g �� -- - ----goer 21 Rim:1315.10 '\ `♦ _ �� J \\\ \ S / 6" North:1310.55 --' \ �� ► .'- 8" 5outh:1310.65 ,� — T —( 00 /d)� 55 MANHOLE A-5 OiU.E. Pe/ 1hZ1 t \ / \ \��' k— ? 7\ Rim:1299.51 r - ®. 8" North: 1291.61 ' - \ \ \ \ �. .' � �Z9z' 1 �� �� vy 8" 5outh:1291.71 Outfall tr ctu�i e \ �`� / , o \ ` 1' - ` / -- _ _ SS S/4 25torm 1 _ ----` - -35- \ \O '� 55MANHOLEA3 �\ \\ , u t, ddLO$ \ (i �d �0 e —T— �� Y I 1"N),LL"808 Kim:1317.16\\�l ldi" 5y/ 8" North:1511.11 1311 \\\ \ \ \ / / / �� / \ \ / i / ��' / �,�'�� .. \ \ , a,i '0 s 8" 5W:1311.21'�__ \\\ / / / \ \ \ \ 55 MANHOLE A-6 1 OZ \ _ _\ \\\\ ♦\ Lt�� \ / \ i \ / \ i / // Kim:1299.05 a 4 \ South: 1291.20 I O 7`goi 1 `\ 1. 0 cn U) I 0 lY Z VICINITY MAP N.T.S. W WQ�HWO�x ppz �ozQo�i � �D pp Q zz�44 W W r� a 0 pWUZ�r� � x�zz� �U F•�•I •� VJ � O 3 • ♦L!4-4 U N O 00 Q 3-1 O U P4 SEAL: //ojksj AFL TE F�� �RK�s / or EXIBINEER No.12006 J -"" DUQVES/%7//1 10l1 ql z o FIRM BLEW & ASSOCIATES, PA CIVIL ENGINEERS & LAND SURVEYORS 3825 N. SHILOH DRIVE FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS 72703 OFFICE: 479.443.4506 FAX: 479.582.1883 www.BLEWINC.com Certificate of Authorization Ns 1534 DRAWN BY: JOB NUMBER: J. Rennick 16-687 SUBMITTAL DATE: SCALE: 2020-09-22 As Noted DRAWING NAME: SHEET NUMBER 16-687 Record 001.dwg 2 e--i W O 7� V LIn N 00 O N O N O ra Appendix G - Park Commons Grading & Utility Permit February 27, 2019 Jorge Du Quesne, P.E. Blew & Associates, PA 3825 North Shiloh Drive Fayetteville, AR 72703 CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE ARKANSAS Sent Via Email: jorge@blewinc.com Re: Park Commons — Full Grading and Utility Permit Dear Mr. Du Quesne: The plans submitted for the above referenced portion of the project have been reviewed for general compliance with City Engineering Division and Urban Forestry requirements and are approved subject to the following conditions: Special Comments: 1. This approval supersedes the previous approval for sanitary sewer only on this project. Plan Comments: 1. Sheet C4-1: Contours shown on the proposed driveway on lot 1 indicate nearly 20% grade at the back edge of the sidewalk. This will create a significant breakover and hinge point that will cause clearance issues for passenger vehicles. Review and soften grades in this area. 2. Provide a plan and profile for the proposed waterline extension on Lot 1. a. The waterline extension will require a blow off or hydrant at the end of the line. b. Specify the type of material that will be used PVC C900 DR 14. 3. The Safety Guard Rail Detail provided does not meet requirements to be considered a safety guard rail. Must be 42" tall, with openings no greater than 4" in any direction. Drainage Report Comments: 1. Provide additional description in the drainage report narrative for Minimum Standard #1, explaining how the bioretention feature proposed does not account for development on Lot 10, and that the feature will need to be sized and expanded to accommodate new impervious area associated with development when it occurs. Standard Comments: The review by the Engineering Division was for general compliance and does not warrant your design and does not relieve the owner from any items discovered during construction which are deemed necessary to comply with city ordinances and criteria. Mailing Address: 113 W. Mountain Street www.fayetteville-ar.gov Fayetteville, AR 72701 The approval of the Engineering items on the plans for water, sewer, drainage, and grading is not a guarantee of approval of this project by other City divisions. 2. A grading and drainage permit will not be issued until: a. A signed copy of the SWPPP is provided to the city. The SWPPP should include a copy of the NOI or NOC, and will become part of the grading and drainage permit. (In PDF format) b. The perimeter erosion controls, construction exit, and SWPPP/Grading permit box have been inspected and approved by the Engineering Division. (Applicant is responsible for contacting and scheduling the erosion control inspection by calling the assigned Public Works Inspector) c. The tree preservation fencing has been installed and inspected by Urban Foresters (Applicant is responsible for contacting and scheduling the tree preservation fence inspection by calling the assigned Urban Forester) d. The engineer of record shall also review and approve material submittals (approved submittals shall be submitted to the City for concurrence before preconstruction conference and material is ordered) e. A preconstruction conference has taken place with the following people: i. Engineer of Record (or appropriate design professional) ii. Inspector for Engineer of Record iii. Contractor(s): 1. Superintendent who will be on -site daily during all phases of construction. 2. All subcontractors responsible for installation of public infrastructure. 3. All materials and construction shall comply with the City of Fayetteville's requirements. In the case of conflicts, the City's criteria shall govern. 4. Any damage to the existing public street due to construction shall be repaired/replaced at the owner/developer's expense. 5. All public sidewalks, curb ramps, curb & gutter, and driveway aprons along this project frontage must meet ADA guidelines and be free of damage. Any existing infrastructure that does not conform to ADA guidelines or is otherwise damaged must be removed and replaced to correct the issue. Coordinate with the engineering department for inspection of existing facilities to determine compliance. 6. All material deliveries, construction staging, and worker parking must occur on your site and outside the public streets during all phases of the project. 7. If the superintendent on site changes after the City of Fayetteville pre -construction meeting, an additional pre -construction meeting will be required with the new superintendent. 8. The public works inspector shall be notified no less than 48 hours prior to the installation of public utilities, infrastructure, roadway, etc. Testing shall be coordinated with the PWI by the Engineer of Record. 9. A copy of the approval letter from ADH shall be presented prior to installation of public utilities. 10. Periodic inspection of SWPPP contractor inspection logs will be made. These must be kept up to date and neat, accessible, and on -site. 11. The engineer of record shall provide "Full Time" inspection for utilities and "Part Time" inspection for the storm drainage and roadway construction for this project — Mailing Address: 113 W. Mountain Street www.fayetteville-ar.gov Fayetteville, AR 72701 weekly inspection reports should be submitted to the City of Fayetteville's public works inspector. 12. Prior to Project Acceptance (Final Plat) the following items must be performed or provided to the satisfaction of the Engineering Department: a. The work shown on the civil site package must be complete and the items on the final punch list completed. b. Vegetation must be established and perimeter erosion controls removed. c. One (1) set of as -built drawings of the complete project (excluding details) as a hard copy, digital file .dwg, and PDF format; i. Public infrastructure and services shall be surveyed after installation in relation to easements, property lines, and rights -of -way. 1. More than 2 ft deviation of design alignment of shall require new easement dedication or adjustment of the utility/storm drain. ii. Subdivisions of land must include linework of all final plat lot lines, easements, etc. in the required CAD file (.dwg file). iii. Sanitary Sewer, and Storm Drainage (Including Private) elevations must be verified and updated. (Elevations out of design tolerance must be corrected) iv. Street Centerline, Width, Profiles and Cross slopes shall be verified. 1. More than 6 inches deviation of design alignment of shall require new right of way dedication or adjustment of the street section. v. Adequate verification survey to confirm accuracy of drainage report. vi. As-builts should include the following information in a table; Linear Feet of new public streets, sidewalk (categorized by width), waterline, and sanitary sewer. Square feet of newly dedicated right-of-wa. d. Unit price construction costs for review and approval and a single 2 year maintenance bonds in the amount of 25% of the public improvements. e. Certification that the streets, sidewalk, storm sewer, water, and sewer lines, etc., were installed per approved plans and City of Fayetteville requirements; i. Provide all Inspection Reports; approved submittals; Data Forms from Utility Specifications (Including Consultants sewer TV report); compaction test results, etc... f. Certification that the designed retaining walls were installed per approved plans and City of Fayetteville requirements(Inspection and Testing Reports required); g. Cross Sections, Volume Calculations, and Certification Retention/Detention Ponds are in accordance with the approved Drainage Report. h. Surveyor's Certification of Compliance for monuments and property pins. i. The As- Built Final Drainage Report in PDF format updated per as -built invert, slope, inlet opening road profile, cross slope, etc... j. Bond, guarantee, or letter of credit for all sidewalks not constructed prior to final plat approval (150% of the estimated cost of construction); k. Cross Sections, contours, spot elevations, and Certification that the site has been grade d per the approved MRLGP within the right of way, drainage easements, and utility easements. • Please email Kristin at en_ine�eringkfayetteville-ar.gov a PDF of the stamped final plans (with all revision clouds removed) and they will be electronically stamped and returned to you. At least 48-hrs prior to the preconstruction meeting, provide one hard copy of the stamped plans for our public works inspector to review. Mailing Address: 113 W. Mountain Street www.fayetteville-ar.gov Fayetteville, AR 72701 • Please also bring at least three additional copies to the preconstruction meeting which you may retain after the meeting. • Any additional copies you need may be copied from the approved plans. • One set of approved plans must remain onsite at all times during construction. If you have any questions, please email me at jely@fayetteville-ar.gov or call me at 444-3424. Sincerely, r Jon an y, P. . D elopment and Co ction Manager Engineering Divisi Mailing Address: 113 W. Mountain Street www.fayetteville-ar.gov Fayetteville, AR 72701 Status: Sold (626) Map Avg P16- -y fs alit Of Active Tow-im irs E L CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE ARKANSAS MEETING OF OCTOBER 4, 2022 TO: Mayor; Fayetteville City Council THRU: Susan Norton, Chief of Staff Jonathan Curth, Development Services Director Jessie Masters, Development Review Manager FROM: Gretchen Harrison, Planner DATE: September 16, 2022 CITY COUNCIL MEMO SUBJECT: CUP-2022-0039: Conditional Use Permit (2992 N. OAK BAILEY DRJOAK BAILEY CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT, 254): Submitted by COMMUNITY BY DESIGN for property located at 2992 N. OAK BAILEY DR. in WARD 3. The property is zoned RSF-4, RESIDENTIAL SINGLE-FAMILY, 4 UNITS PER ACRE and contains approximately 2.67 acres. The request is for a cluster housing development with 19 residential units. RECOMMENDATION: City staff and the Planning Commission recommend approval of a request for a conditional use permit for a cluster housing development as described and shown below. BACKGROUND: The subject property is in northeast Fayetteville, northeast of the intersection of Oak Bailey Drive and Old Wire Road. The property is zoned RSF-4, Residential Single -Family, 4 Units per Acre, contains approximately 2.67 acres, and is developed with two accessory structures. The property contains Lot 8 of the Park Commons Subdivision which was platted in 2020. Request: The applicant requests a conditional use permit to construct a cluster housing development on the property. Cluster housing developments are classified as Use Unit 44, which is a conditional use in the RSF-4 zoning district. As part of the proposal, the applicant has requested one variance from the cluster housing ordinance to exceed the maximum number of dwelling units permitted. Per that ordinance, a cluster housing development can contain a maximum of 12 dwellings units though 19 are requested with this development. Findings: Staff finds that granting the requested conditional use is not likely to adversely affect the public interest. The detached, single-family dwellings are of a type and scale that is comparable to those in surrounding neighborhoods. Developing the property as a cluster housing development will subject it to the City's tree preservation and drainage requirements, which are both intended to minimize off -site impacts and protect the public's interest. Cluster housing developments also carry heightened design requirements for the structures themselves. Parking courts and driveways within the proposed development are shown to be screened with vegetation, further minimizing potential negative impacts on neighboring properties. The proposed cluster Mailing Address: 113 W. Mountain Street www.fayetteville-ar.gov Fayetteville, AR 72701 housing development would contain 19 detached single-family dwelling units. The applicant has requested a variance to the maximum number of dwellings units permitted, which staff and the Planning Commission are supportive of. A cluster housing development in the RSF-4 zoning district is permitted a maximum density of 8 units per acre, and the proposed development has a density of approximately 7.04 units per acre. Compliance with the City's development standards, including tree preservation, drainage, fire access, utilities, and recycling and trash collection will be determined at the time of large scale development review. Public Comment: Staff received public comment from two neighbors who expressed their opposition to the request. Concerns were expressed about tree preservation, drainage, and impacts to surrounding property values. DISCUSSION: At the August 22, 2022 Planning Commission meeting, a vote to approve the item passed with a vote of 6-1-0; Commissioner Winston made the motion with Commissioner Johnson seconding and Commissioner Garlock dissenting. Commissioner Garlock expressed concerns about supporting infill at this location. Several neighbors spoke at the meeting in opposition to the request, citing concerns about increased density, habitat loss, and lack of compatibility with adjacent properties. BUDGET/STAFF IMPACT: N/A Attachments: • Exhibit 'A' • Planning Commission Staff Report CUP-2022-0039 2992 N Oak Bailey Dr. CUP-2022-0039 Close Up View EXHIBIT 'A' o o z 0 N KATHERINE A� Z w Y—WARWICK-DR m v X QG WARWICK•DR 71 y,xn o Subject Property RSF-4 i i i m~� o m� OLD WIRE RD Z o STRAWBERRY•DR I , J P-1 W � Ak m W J i� R-ANORTH Regional Link Neighborhood Link Residential Link Residential -Agricultural Planned Neighborhood Link r � � Planning Area Feet RSF-4 P-1 i— _ Fayetteville City Limits 0 75 150 300 450 600 - — - Shared -Use Paved Trail - - - Trail (Proposed) 1 :2,400 CITY OF _' FAYETTEVILLE ARKANSAS PLANNING COMMISSION MEMO TO: Fayetteville Planning Commission THRU: Jessie Masters, Development Review Manager FROM: Gretchen Harrison, Planner MEETING DATE: August 22, 2022 (Updated with results from PC hearing) SUBJECT: CUP-2022-0039: Conditional Use Permit (2992 N. OAK BAILEY DRJOAK BAILEY CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT, 254): Submitted by COMMUNITY BY DESIGN for property located at 2992 N. OAK BAILEY DR. The property is zoned RSF-4, RESIDENTIAL SINGLE-FAMILY, 4 UNITS PER ACRE and contains approximately 2.67 acres. The request is for a cluster housing development with 19 residential units. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of CUP-2022-0039 with conditions, based on the findings contained in this report. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve CUP-2022-0039, determining: • In favor of compatibility with adjacent properties; • In favor of a variance to UDC §164.22(D); and In favor of all other conditions as recommended by staff. " BACKGROUND: The subject property is in northeast Fayetteville, approximately 700 feet west of the intersection of North Old Wire Road and North Crossover Road. The property is currently zoned RSF-4, Residential Single -Family, 4 Units per Acre, contains approximately 2.67 acres, and is developed with two sheds. Surrounding land uses and zoning are depicted in Table 1. Table 1 Surrounding Land Use and Zoning Direction Land Use Zoning North Single -Family Residential RSF-4, Residential Single -Family, 4 Units per Acre South Single -Family Residential RSF-4, Residential Single -Family, 4 Units per Acre East Single -Family Residential RSF-4, Residential Single -Family, 4 Units per Acre West Single -Family Residential RSF-4, Residential Single -Family, 4 Units per Acre City Plan 2040 Future Land Use Designation: Residential Neighborhood Area Proposal. The applicant requests conditional use permit approval to develop the property with a cluster housing development containing 19 detached single-family units. Cluster housing developments are classified as Use Unit 44, which is a conditional use in the RSF-4 zoning district. Conformance with development requirements, including drainage, tree preservation, and fire apparatus access will be reviewed at the time of large scale development. Planning Commission August 22, 2022 Agenda Item 24 CUP-2022-0039 (OAK BAILEY CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT) Page 1 of 66 As a part of the proposal, the applicant has requested one variance from the Unified Development Code: UDC §164.22(D), Dwellings Permitted. A cluster housing development shall contain a maximum of 12 dwelling units. The applicant is requesting 19. • Staff is supportive of the requested variance. Zoning districts that allow cluster housing developments as a conditional use are allowed a density not to exceed two times the maximum density allowed in the underlying zoning district. Therefore, cluster housing developments on properties zoned RSF-4 are allowed a density of eight units per acre. The subject property contains roughly 2.67 acres which, with 19 units proposed, would result in a density of 7.04 dwelling units per acre. The applicant has stated that the property has enough street frontage to allow the proposal to be split into two separate cluster housing developments that would meet the density requirement. However, requesting a density variance to allow one cluster housing development with 19 units will help the applicant streamline their process while reducing the amount of staff review needed as the development will be able to be considered as a whole plan rather than two separate proposals. Public Comment: Staff received public comment from two neighbors who expressed their opposition to the request. Concerns were expressed about tree preservation, drainage, and impacts to surrounding property values. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of CUP-2022-0039, subject to the following conditions: Conditions of Approval: 1. Planning Commission determination of compatibility. Staff finds the proposed cluster housing development to be compatible with the surrounding neighborhood based on the findings herein; 2. Planning Commission determination of a variance to UDC §164.22(D). Staff finds in favor of a variance to UDC §164.22(D), Dwellings Permitted for the reasons stated above; 3. Additional screening in the form of vegetation, hedge row, or low-lying fence not to exceed 48" in height shall be installed along exterior property lines where parking courts and driveways abut existing single family residences; 4. Approval of the conditional use permit does not ensure approval of a development application. The conditional use permit grants the applicant the right to submit a development proposal based on the conceptual layout included herein. However, the applicant must still be able to comply with all other development requirements, including but not limited to, tree preservation, drainage, utility installation and Fire Department access. These details shall be reviewed with the development application. The final project design shall follow the general layout and design of the conditional use concept plan; 5. A condominium association, homeowner's association, or similar mechanism to maintain the common amenities shall be established prior to issuance of construction permits. The City of Fayetteville does not enforce these private agreements, but will require that this agreement be in place prior to issuing building permits; Planning Commission August 22, 2022 Agenda Item 24 CUP-2022-0039 (OAK BAILEY CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT) Page 2 of 66 6. Prior to receiving a certificate of occupancy for the first home, all shared drives, sidewalks and bike racks shall be installed. All development requirements, such as detention facilities, utilities, required landscaping, etc. shall be installed prior to any building permits being issued. The exact phasing of improvements will be determined at development review; 7. The maximum number of unrelated persons in any dwelling unit is three, pursuant to the underlying single-family zoning district; 8. Per UDC §166.20, Expiration of Approved Plans and Permits, conditional use permit approval is valid for one year; and 9. An exterior lighting package must be provided to the Planning Division prior to building permit approval. Common area lighting shall comply with UDC §176, Outdoor Lighting. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Required YES jDate: August 22, 2022 Motion: Winston ISecond: Johnson (Vote: 6-1-0 FINDINGS OF THE STAFF O Tabled ® Approved O Denied with all conditions as recommended by staff. §163.02. AUTHORITY; CONDITIONS; PROCEDURES. B. Authority; Conditions. The Planning Commission shall: 1. Hear and decide only such special exemptions as it is specifically authorized to pass on by the terms of this chapter. 2. Decide such questions as are involved in determining whether a conditional use should be granted; and, 3. Grant a conditional use with such conditions and safeguards as are appropriate under this chapter; or 4. Deny a conditional use when not in harmony with the purpose and intent of this chapter. C. Procedures. A conditional use shall not be granted by the Planning Commission unless and until: 1. A written application for a conditional use is submitted indicating the section of this chapter under which the conditional use is sought and stating the grounds on which it is requested. Planning Commission August 22, 2022 Agenda Item 24 CUP-2022-0039 (OAK BAILEY CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT) Page 3 of 66 Finding: The applicant has submitted a written application requesting a conditional use permit for Use Unit 44, Cluster Housing Development, in the RSF-4 zoning district, including permission to develop 19 cluster housing units. 2. The applicant shall pay a filing fee as required under Chapter 159 to cover the cost of expenses incurred in connection with processing such application. Finding: The applicant has paid the required filing fee. 3. The Planning Commission shall make the following written findings before a conditional use shall be issued: (a.) That it is empowered under the section of this chapter described in the application to grant the conditional use; and Finding: The Planning Commission is empowered under Unified Development Code §161.07, District RSF-4, Residential Single -Family, 4 Units per Acre to grant the requested conditional use permit. (b.) That the granting of the conditional use will not adversely affect the public interest. Finding: Staff finds that granting the requested conditional use is not likely to adversely affect the public interest. The detached, single-family dwellings are of a type and scale that is comparable to those in surrounding neighborhoods. Developing the property as a cluster housing development will subject it to the City's tree preservation and drainage requirements, which are both intended to minimize off -site impacts and protect the public's interest. Cluster housing developments also carry heightened design requirements for the structures themselves. Parking courts and driveways within the proposed development are shown to be screened with vegetation, further minimizing potential negative impacts on neighboring properties. (c.) The Planning Commission shall certify: (i.) Compliance with the specific rules governing individual conditional uses; and Finding: There are specific rules governing Use Unit 44, Cluster Housing Development, as follows: §164.22. CLUSTER HOUSING DEVELOPMENT D. Dwellings Permitted. Number of Cluster Housing Units Permitted. A cluster housing development shall contain a maximum of twelve (12) dwelling units. In multi -family zones where the proposed cluster housing development exceeds the minimum open space requirements of 164.22(G)(3)(a) by at least 20%, and in which at least 75% of the planned units are attached Planning Commission August 22, 2022 Agenda Item 24 CUP-2022-0039 (OAK BAILEY CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT) Page 4 of 66 dwellings, there shall be no maximum number of dwelling units, except to conform to the density limitations herein. Finding: The proposed cluster housing development would contain 19 detached single-family dwelling units. The applicant has requested a variance to the maximum number of dwellings units permitted, which staff is supportive of based on the findings outlined above. 2. Existing Nonconforming Structures. On a lot to be used for a cluster housing development, existing detached single-family residential structures, which may be nonconforming with respect to the standards of this section, shall be permitted to remain, but the extent of the nonconformity may not be increased. Such nonconforming dwelling units shall be included in the maximum permitted cluster density. Finding: There are no existing nonconforming structures on the subject property. E. Zoning Regulations. Permitted and Conditional Use. Cluster housing development is permitted as identified in Chapter 161, Zoning Regulations, as a permitted or conditional use. Finding: Use Unit 44 is a conditional use in the RSF-4 zoning district. 2. Density. Cluster housing development permitted as a use by right shall be allowed a density in conformance with the underlying zoning district. Zoning districts that allow cluster housing developments as a conditional use shall be allowed a density not to exceed two (2) times the maximum density allowed in the underlying zoning district. Finding: The proposed cluster housing development would have a density of approximately 7.04 units per acre. A cluster housing development in the RSF-4 zoning district is permitted a maximum density of 8 units per acre. 3. Bulk and Area Regulations. (a.) Lot Width Minimum. There is no lot width requirement for individual cluster housing lots. (b.) Lot Area Minimum. The lot area minimum for cluster housing lots is 750 square feet. (c.) Land Area per Dwelling Unit. The land area per dwelling unit requirement is 750 square feet. Finding: The provided site plan indicates that bulk and area regulations are being met. Lot widths, lot areas, and land areas will be fully considered at the time of large scale development review. 4. Setback Requirements. All structures shall meet setback and separation requirements of the International Building Code, as applicable. For zoning purposes: (a.) In single family districts, all cluster housing units shall have a minimum separation from one another of ten feet measured from Planning Commission August 22, 2022 Agenda Item 24 CUP-2022-0039 (OAK BAILEY CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT) Page 5 of 66 exterior wall to exterior wall, not counting eaves or other architectural projections. (b.) In multi -family districts, there are no separation requirements from one cluster housing structure to another. (c.) The setbacks from the exterior property lines of the original parent tract shall be set by the underlying zoning district. Finding: Setback and separation requirements for the RSF-4 zoning district will apply along exterior property lines. Based on the conceptual site plan provided, individual buildings appear to be meeting the separation requirements of the International Building Code. 5. Building Height Regulations. The height for all structures in a cluster housing development shall not exceed the permitted height requirement of the underlying zoning district. Finding: The RSF-4 zoning district permits building heights of three stories. All dwellings within the proposed cluster housing development are one and two stories. 6. Building Area. None. Finding: N/A 7. Accessory Dwelling Units. Accessory dwelling units are permitted in cluster housing developments by conditional use. Where a cluster housing development is permitted as a conditional use, accessory dwelling units may be requested within the same application. Finding: Accessory dwellings are not proposed. F. Common Property Maintenance. Community buildings, parking areas and common open space shall be owned and maintained commonly by the cluster housing development residents, through a condominium association, a homeowners' association or a similar mechanism, and shall not be dedicated to the city unless accepted by the City Council. Finding: Proof of common property maintenance regulations will be required during the development review process. G. Development Standards. The UDC outlines specific development standards for Cluster Housing Developments. Finding: Development standards including floor area, building orientation, open space, parking, bicycle racks, Fire Department access, pedestrian connectivity, utilities, and recycling and trash collection will be considered at the time of large scale development review. H. Building Design Standards. Planning Commission August 22, 2022 Agenda Item 24 CUP-2022-0039 (OAK BAILEY CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT) Page 6 of 66 Variety in Detached Cluster Housing Units Floor Plans and Architectural Treatments. These standards are intended to avoid the overly repetitive use of the same building design, structural features, detailing or finishes among detached units within the cluster housing development. In cluster housing developments, no two (2) structures shall be identical in terms of exterior finishes. All cluster housing units shall differ from each other by utilizing at least two (2) of the following options: (a.) Variations in building material finishes such as clapboard, shake shingles, stone, brick, etc., and building color; (b.) Variations in adjacent cluster housing unit floor plans that alter the location of exterior windows and doors; (c.) Variations in the size of main floor area and/or building height of adjacent structures; or (d.) A front porch with a minimum width no less than 50% of the front building fagade. Front porches shall have a minimum depth of six feet. No structurally identical front porches shall be located on adjacent cluster housing units. (e.) Variations in roof shapes or gables between adjacent structures. (f.) Other variations as approved by the Zoning and Development Administrator. Finding: In cluster housing developments, no two structures shall be identical in terms of exterior finishes and must vary in building height, main floor size, location of windows and doors, porches, and/or roof shape. The provided building elevations and site plan suggest that there are instances where building plans are repeated throughout the development. As proposed, without variation in exterior finishes, the development would require a variance from UDC §164.22(H)(1) to allow building types to be repeated. However, compliance with building design standards will be fully determined at the time of large scale development review. A variance to the building design standards has not been requested to date. §163.02, AUTHORITY; CONDITIONS; PROCEDURES. (continued) (ii.) That satisfactory provisions and arrangements have been made concerning the following, where applicable: (a.) Ingress and egress to property and proposed structures thereon with particular reference to automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control and access in case of fire or catastrophe; Finding: As proposed, the cluster housing development will have access onto Oak Bailey Drive. Oak Bailey Drive is a Neighborhood Link street designed to accommodate up to 6,000 vehicle trips per day. Four vehicle crashes were recorded at the intersection of Oak Bailey Drive and Old Wire Road between 2017 and 2021. Staff finds that the proposed cluster housing development is not likely to have an adverse impact on traffic given the relatively low number of units proposed and the site's access to Neighborhood Link streets. Planning Commission August 22, 2022 Agenda Item 24 CUP-2022-0039 (OAK BAILEY CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT) Page 7 of 66 However, any impacts to traffic danger or congestion will be fully evaluated and addressed at the time of large scale development review. (b.) Off-street parking and loading areas where required, with particular attention to ingress and egress, economic, noise, glare, or odor effects of the special exception on adjoining properties and properties generally in the district; Finding: The submitted site plan includes on -site parking in garages, parking courts, and driveways. In cluster housing developments, the owner/development may choose to supply one parking space per bedroom for the entire cluster housing development. Otherwise, parking will be required at a rate of 1.5 spaces per unit for dwellings less than 1,000 square feet in size, and at a rate of 2 spaces per unit for dwellings greater than 1,000 square feet. As proposed, 57 parking spaces are provided at a rate of one per bedroom. Two off-street parking spaces are provided for each unit with at least 19 parallel parking spaces planned along the shared drive to accommodate additional parking needs. (c.) Refuse and service areas, with particular reference to ingress and egress, and off-street parking and loading; Finding: The Recycling and Trash Collection Division will review the proposed site plan at the time of large scale development review. Ingress and egress to the development is proposed through a looped private drive. (d.) Utilities, with reference to locations, availability, and compatibility; Finding: Utilities are currently available to the site. Six- and eight -inch sanitary sewer mains are present on site, and six-inch water mains are available along Oak Bailey drive and Old Wire Road. Determinations of capacity or the need for improvements will be determined at the time of large scale development review. (e.) Screening and buffering with reference to type, dimensions, and character; Finding: Given the single-family residential nature of the proposal and surrounding areas, staff recommends limited buffering. Because parking courts and private driveways are proposed to abut adjoining residences, a condition requiring screening is included with staff's recommendations. (f.) Signs, if any, and proposed exterior lighting with reference to glare, traffic safety, economic effect, and compatibility and harmony with properties in the district; Finding: Any proposed signage and exterior lighting in common areas will be subject to the City's ordinances and all the regulations therein. Planning Commission August 22, 2022 Agenda Item 24 CUP-2022-0039 (OAK BAILEY CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT) Page 8 of 66 (g.) Required yards and other open space; and Finding: The submitted conceptual plan suggests that the open space requirements for cluster housing can be provided. All required yards and open spaces will be fully reviewed at the time of large scale development approval. (h.) General compatibility with adjacent properties and other property in the district. Finding: Staff finds the applicant's proposal to be compatible with adjacent properties and those in the surrounding neighborhood. While varying from a typical single-family residential neighborhood, cluster developments are intended to orient dwelling units around a common open space and foster a sense of community. When considering the intent of cluster housing in relation to the proposed single-family residential cluster housing development, staff finds the proposed use to be generally compatible. Further, the property is located near public trails, retail, and other services, which suggests that it is an appropriate location for dense development. BUDGET/STAFF IMPACT: None ATTACHMENTS: • Unified Development Code o §161.07 — RSF-4, Residential Single -Family — Four (4) Units Per Acre o §164.22 —Cluster Housing Development • Request Letter • Variance Request Letter • Site Plan • Floorplans & Elevations • One Mile Map • Close -Up Map • Current Land Use Map Planning Commission August 22, 2022 Agenda Item 24 CUP-2022-0039 (OAK BAILEY CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT) Page 9 of 66 161.07 - District RSF-4, Residential Single -Family - Four (4) Units Per Acre (A) Purpose. The RSF-4 Residential District is designed to permit and encourage the development of low density detached dwellings in suitable environments, as well as to protect existing development of these types. (B) Uses. (1) Permitted Uses. Unit 1 I City-wide uses by right Unit 8 Single-family dwellings Unit 41 Accessory dwellings Unit 46 Short-term rentals (2) Conditional Uses. Unit 2 Unit 3 I City-wide uses by conditional use permit Public protection and utility facilities Unit 4 Cultural and recreational facilities Unit 5 Government facilities Unit 9 Two-family dwellings Unit 12a Limited business Unit 24 Home occupations Unit 36 Wireless communications facilities Unit 44 Cluster Housing Development (C) Density. Single-family dwellings Two (2) family dwellings Units per acre 4 or less 7 or less (D) Bulk and Area Regulations. Single-family Two (2) family dwellings dwellings Lot minimum 70 feet 80 feet width Lot area 8,000 square 12,000 square minimum feet feet Land area per 8,000 square 6,000 square dwelling unit feet feet Hillside Overlay District Lot 60 feet 70 feet minimum width Hillside Overlay 8,000 squareTfe square District Lot feet area minimum Land area per 8,000 square 6,000 square dwelling unit feet feet (E) Setback Requirements. Front Side Rear Planning Commission August 22, 2022 Agenda Item 24 CUP-2022-0039 (OAK BAILEY CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT) Page 10 of 66 15 feet 5 feet 15 feet (F) Building Height Regulations. Building Height Maximum 3 stories (G) Building Area. On any lot the area occupied by all buildings shall not exceed 40% of the total area of such lot. Accessory ground mounted solar energy systems shall not be considered buildings. (Code 1991, §160.031; Ord. No. 4100, §2 (Ex. A), 6-16-98; Ord. No. 4178, 8-31-99; Ord. No. 4858, 4-18-06; Ord. No. 5028, 6-19-07; Ord. No. 5128, 4-15-08; Ord. No. 5224, 3-3-09; Ord. No. 5312, 4-20-10; Ord. No. 5462, 12-6-11; Ord. No. 5921 , §1, 11-1-16; Ord. No. 5945 , §8, 1-17-17; Ord. No. 6015 , §1(Exh. A), 11-21-17; Ord. No. 6245 , §2, 10-15- 19) Planning Commission August 22, 2022 Agenda Item 24 CUP-2022-0039 (OAK BAILEY CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT) Page 11 of 66 164.22 - Cluster Housing Development (A) Purpose. The purpose of the cluster housing development ordinance is to encourage innovation and variety in housing while ensuring compatibility with established neighborhoods, and to provide housing opportunities for a population diverse in age, income and household size. (B) Applicability. The provisions of this section shall apply to proposed cluster housing development proposals, as defined in Chapter 162, Use Units, and authorized by Chapter 161, Zoning Regulations of the Unified Development Code, however zoning and development regulations such as density, bulk and area, building area, street frontage requirements, lot splits and other standards for cluster housing development are enforced subject to the criteria adopted in this chapter. (C) Development Review Process. For the purpose of development review, cluster housing developments less than one (1) acre shall be processed as a site improvement plan. Cluster housing development on lots one (1) acre or larger shall be processed as a large scale development. If individual cluster housing unit lots are proposed and the proposal meets all of the requirements in this section, the subdivision shall be processed through the subdivision platting process as a lot split regardless of the number of lots created. (D) Dwellings Permitted. (1) Number of Cluster Housing Units Permitted. A cluster housing development shall contain a maximum of twelve (12) dwelling units. In multi -family zones where the proposed cluster housing development exceeds the minimum open space requirements of 164.22(G)(3)(a) by at least 20%, and in which at least 75% of the planned units are attached dwellings, there shall be no maximum number of dwelling units, except to conform to the density limitations herein. (2) Existing Nonconforming Structures. On a lot to be used for a cluster housing development, existing detached single-family residential structures, which may be nonconforming with respect to the standards of this section, shall be permitted to remain, but the extent of the nonconformity may not be increased. Such nonconforming dwelling units shall be included in the maximum permitted cluster density. (E) Zoning Regulations. The parent tract prior to development shall conform to the zoning criteria of the underlying zoning district. (1) Permitted and Conditional Use. Cluster housing development is permitted as identified in Chapter 161, Zoning Regulations, as a permitted or conditional use. (2) Density. Cluster housing development permitted as a use by right shall be allowed a density in conformance with the underlying zoning district. Zoning districts that allow cluster housing developments as a conditional use shall be allowed a density not to exceed two (2) times the maximum density allowed in the underlying zoning district. (3) Bulk and Area Regulations. (a) Lot Width Minimum. There is no lot width requirement for individual cluster housing lots. (b) Lot Area Minimum. The lot area minimum for cluster housing lots is 750 square feet. (c) Land Area per Dwelling Unit. The land area per dwelling unit requirement is 750 square feet. (4) Setback Requirements. All structures shall meet setback and separation requirements of the International Building Code, as applicable. For zoning purposes: (a) In single family districts, all cluster housing units shall have a minimum separation from one another of ten feet measured from exterior wall to exterior wall, not counting eaves or other architectural projections. (b) In multi -family districts, there are no separation requirements from one cluster housing structure to another. (c) The setbacks from the exterior property lines of the original parent tract shall be set by the underlying zoning district. (5) Building Height Regulations. The height for all structures in a cluster housing development shall not exceed the permitted height requirement of the underlying zoning district. (6) Building Area. None. (7) Accessory Dwelling Units. Accessory dwelling units are not permitted in cluster housing developments. (F) Common Property Maintenance. Community buildings, parking areas and common open space shall be owned and maintained commonly by the cluster housing development residents, through a condominium association, a Planning Commission August 22, 2022 Agenda Item 24 CUP-2022-0039 (OAK BAILEY CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT) Page 12 of 66 homeowners' association or a similar mechanism, and shall not be dedicated to the city unless accepted by the City Council. (G) Development Standards. All cluster housing developments are subject to the following standards: (1) Floor Area. The total conditioned floor area of any individual cluster housing unit shall not exceed 2,500 square feet. (2) Building Orientation. A minimum of 75% of dwelling units in a cluster housing development shall be oriented around and face the common open space, a public trail or towards the street, having pedestrian access to the common open space and the street. Where a cluster housing unit fronts onto a public trail, the fagade facing the public trail shall be considered a principal fagade for the purposes of meeting design standards. (3) Open Space. (a) For units up to 1,500 square feet, a minimum of 250 square feet of common open space shall be provided per unit. For units exceeding 1,500 square feet and up to 2,000 square feet, 500 square feet of common open space shall be required per unit. For units exceeding 2,000 square feet, 750 square feet of common open space shall be required per unit. Common open space is subject to the following performance criteria: (i) No dimension of a common open space area used to satisfy the minimum square footage requirement shall be less than ten feet. (ii) Required common open space shall be divided into no more than two (2) separate areas per cluster of dwelling units. (iii) Common open space shall be improved for passive or active recreational use, garden/food production, social gathering spaces or landscaped areas. Examples may include but are not limited to courtyards, orchards, landscaped picnic areas, plazas or gardens. A detailed site plan of the common open space depicting the design and amenities of the space shall be reviewed with the site plan for approval. (iv) Amenities such as permanent or movable seating, landscaping, trails and paths, barbeque or eating facilities, covered shelters or water features shall be included within the common open space. Low Impact Development stormwater management facilities may be placed within the common open space when they are integrated with the amenities listed above. (b) Each cluster housing unit shall be provided with a private open space of 250 square feet with no dimension of less than ten feet. Private open space should be contiguous to each dwelling unit, for the exclusive use of each respective resident. In multi -family zones in which at least 75% of the planned units are attached dwellings, private open space shall not be required where the development exceeds the minimum open space requirements of (G)(3)(a) by at least 20% and it can be demonstrated that each unit has easily available access to open space amenities. (c) Parking areas and driveways shall not be counted as open space. (4) Fences. Fencing located between a cluster housing unit and a public street or trail or the common open space shall not exceed 48 inches in height. (5) Parking Requirements and Standards. Parking areas should be located within the cluster housing development in such a way as to maintain the character along the public street and to minimize the noise and light impacts on private residences and public spaces. Reductions in parking space allowances are permitted in cluster housing developments as described in Chapter 172, Parking and Loading. Permitted on -street parking spaces adjacent to a project's frontage may count towards the parking requirements of the development. Parking standards for cluster housing developments shall be as follows: (a) The owner/developer may choose to supply one (1) parking space per bedroom for his or her entire cluster housing development. Otherwise, the required number of parking spaces shall be determined according to the square footage of the cluster housing unit as described below: (i) Dwelling units less than 1,000 square feet shall have one and one-half (1.5) parking spaces provided. (ii) Dwelling units over 1,000 square feet shall have two (2) parking spaces provided. (b) Shared covered parking shall be designed to be similar and compatible to the design, materials and roof pitches used for the cluster housing units. (6) Cluster housing developments shall provide at least one (1) bicycle parking rack per cluster housing unit. (7) Fire Department Access. Fire Department access shall be determined at the time of development review. (8) Pedestrian Connectivity. All buildings and common spaces shall be served by a pedestrian circulation system that connects to an existing or planned sidewalk or trail system. Planning Commission August 22, 2022 Agenda Item 24 CUP-2022-0039 (OAK BAILEY CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT) Page 13 of 66 (9) Utilities. Individual cluster housing lots shall have a unique connection to the main water and sewer lines. Main water and sewer lines on private property servicing cluster housing unit developments shall be located in a dedicated easement. (10) Community Buildings. Indoor or covered common areas less than 2,000 square feet are permitted by right in cluster housing development. These structures shall be architecturally integrated with the architectural style of the cluster housing development. (11) Recycling and Trash Collection Service. For the purposes of recycling and trash collection cluster housing developments are considered a residential use and should receive residential recycling and trash collection service (individual carts and recycling bins) where possible. In certain instances, it may be necessary to service cluster housing developments with commercial trash collection equipment (dumpsters). This may occur when a project is located in a predominately commercial area serviced by commercial trash pickup. It is incumbent on the developer to design recycling and trash collection facilities into the cluster housing development plan early in the process. The final determination of recycling and trash collection service and pick-up areas will be made at the time of development review by the city. Specific requirements for residential and commercial trash and recycling pick-up shall be as follows: (a) Residential trash and recycling collection service requires a designated location near the street curb for trash carts and recycling bins. This location shall be kept clear of obstructions on the designated pick-up day. If this location is also used for on -street parking it shall be clearly marked and a sign posted restricting use for the designated pick-up day. An appropriate linear distance is required to accommodate each cluster housing unit's trash cart and recycling bin, subject to city approval. (b) Commercial trash collection service requires a dumpster location that is freely accessible for front end loading and screened from public view. (c) Recycling and trash facilities shall be located behind the front building setback line and shall be screened from the right-of-way and adjacent property owners by either architectural treatments or vegetative screening. (H) Building Design Standards. (1) Variety in Detached Cluster Housing Units Floor Plans and Architectural Treatments. These standards are intended to avoid the overly repetitive use of the same building design, structural features, detailing or finishes among detached units within the cluster housing development. In cluster housing developments no two (2) structures shall be identical in terms of exterior finishes. All cluster housing units shall differ from each other by utilizing at least two (2) of the following options: (a) Variations in building material finishes such as clapboard, shake shingles, stone, brick, etc., and building color; (b) Variations in adjacent cluster housing unit floor plans that alter the location of exterior windows and doors; (c) Variations in the size of main floor area and/or building height of adjacent structures; or (d) A front porch with a minimum width no less than 50% of the front building facade. Front porches shall have a minimum depth of six feet. No structurally identical front porches shall be located on adjacent cluster housing units. (e) Variations in roof shapes or gables between adjacent structures. (f) Other variations as approved by the Zoning and Development Administrator. (2) All attached cluster housing units shall comply with §166.23, Urban Residential Design Standards. Where a cluster housing unit fronts onto a public trail or open space, the facade facing the public trail or open space shall be considered a principal facade, for the purposes of meeting this section. (1) Variances From the Minimum Cluster Housing Development Requirements. Variances of this section, Cluster Housing Development, shall be administered as normal development regulations for variances of General Design Standards, except that (E) Zoning Regulations shall be administered as zoning regulations for variance purposes. (Ord. No. 5921 , §5(Exh. A), 11-1-16; Ord. No. 6067 , §1, 5-1-18) Editor's note— Ord. No. 5921 , §5(Exh. A), adopted Nov. 1, 2016, repealed §164.22 and added a new section as set out herein. The former §164.22 pertained to cottage housing development and derived from Ord. No. 5462, adopted Dec. 6, 2011. Planning Commission August 22, 2022 Agenda Item 24 CUP-2022-0039 (OAK BAILEY CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT) Page 14 of 66 community -by -design i ■ -+ i ■ a.r nr�i _` :� .....+ ..ram ...r TOWN PLANNING.URBAN ENGINEERNG July 12"', 2022 Via EnerGov Ms. Jessica Masters Zoning and Development Administrator City of Fayetteville 125 West Mountain Street Fayetteville, Arkansas 72701 RE: Oak Bailey Cluster Development — Conditional Use Permit Application Submittal Package Ms. Masters, As a representative of the Marker Development LLC, owner of Washington County Parcel 765-31975-000, please find the attached Conditional Use Permit Application for the development of a cluster housing development. The application includes the following supporting documents attached to this letter: • One (1) copy of a written submittal letter describing the project • One (1) copy of a variance request letter • One (1) copy of a county parcel map • One (1) copy of a consent of owner form • One (1) copy of a annotated site or master plan • One (1) copy of draft architectural floor plans and elevations General - The property is zoned RSF4 and contains approximately 2.70 acres. A color site plan has been created which should present a proposal that meets all of the zoning requirements of UDC 164.22 Cluster Housing Development. The request is for the zoning approval of a cluster housing development containing 19 total, 3-bedroom single family houses. Fire, Solid Waste, Vehicular Access and Parking — Fire, solid waste, and vehicular access is proposed along a new looped shared private drive. The concept is for the shared private access to accommodate both pedestrians and vehicles and expand upon the common open space. The shared access will maintain a minimum clear width of 20' to meet requirements for fire and solid waste access. The shared access is planned to be paved with permeable paving to meet drainage requirements. In addition to 2 "off-street" parking spaces planned for each house, at least 19 parallel parking spaces are also planned along the shared access to accommodate more parking if needed for a total of 57 parking spaces or 1 parking space per bedroom. Architectural Floor Plans and Elevations — Each of the houses are proposed to be approximately 1,650 square feet and contain 3 bedrooms and 2.5 bathrooms. Floor plans and elevations for each of the 19 proposed houses are included with this submittal. The houses have been designed using massing and detailing that is characteristic of traditional Ozark vernacular farmhouse. As proposed each house has a large front porch and also a private courtyard. Common open space is also provided in the central green. Elevation variation is provided focusing on roof structure massing or projected gables, window and door placement, window trim detailing, porch column and beam detailing, paint color, and roof shingle color. 100 West Center Street Suite 300 F ayettevi lIlrenrA�CaWQAO, 4 7 9 A@ 03167, R522 Agenda Item 24 CUP-2022-0039 (OAK BAILEY CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT) Page 15 of 66 Letter to Jessica Masters RE: Oak Bailey Cluster Development July 12, 2022 Compatibility and Traffic Impact - The proposal is compatible with adjacent properties and the neighborhood primarily by maintaining a detached single- family house type, similar in size to the existing houses in the neighborhood. By incorporating Ozark farmhouse vernacular architecture into the house designs, the proposal adds to the formerly rural character of this neighborhood. The proposal will not have a measurable impact on vehicular traffic in the area. The proposal utilizes an existing curb cut onto Oak Bailey Drive with access to Crossover Road only a 1/4 mile away, via Old Wire Road. Proximity to everyday shopping is also approximately 1 mile away with retail shops and restaurants at the intersection Crossover Road and Mission Boulevard and also at the intersection of Crossover Road and Joyce Blvd. Thank you for your consideration of this request. Please let me know if you have any questions or if you need additional information. Sincerely, Brian Teague Community By Design Planning Commission August 22, 2022 CUP-2022-0039 (OAK BAILEY CLUSTER DI T) Page 16 of 66 community -by -design ♦- i.� � .+ i ■ a.r nr�_` i TOWN PLANNING.URBAN ENGINEEMNG July 12"', 2022 Via EnerGov Ms. Jessica Masters Zoning and Development Administrator City of Fayetteville 125 West Mountain Street Fayetteville, Arkansas 72701 RE: Oak Bailey Cluster Development — Conditional Use Permit Application Variance Request Ms. Masters, As a representative of Marker Development LLC, owner of Washington County Parcel 765-31975-000, I am requesting a variance from UDC 164.22(D)(1) to allow a cluster housing development that contains 19 dwelling units when the maximum allowed by code is 12. The property contains 2.70 acres and is zoned RSF4. In accordance with UDC 164.22(E)(2), the density allowed shall not exceed two times the maximum density of the underlying zoning district or 8.00 dwelling unit per acre. The proposed density is 7.04 dwelling units per acre. With at least 70' of street frontage on both Old Wire Road and on Oak Bailey Drive, it is possible to break the project into two separate cluster developments. The first cluster development would contain the 9 northwestern most houses proposed and the second would be the 10 southwestern most houses proposed. However, a variance for one cluster development containing 19 houses would be the most straight forward approach if the variance is granted. Thank you for your consideration of this request. Please let me know if you have any questions or if you need additional information. Sincerely, Brian Teague Community By Design 100 West Center Street Suite 300 Fayettevi4r8,, #CaWQAon 4 7 9 ,/ @ ,(. 47, R522 Agenda Item 24 CUP-2022-0039 (OAK BAILEY CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT) Page 17 of 66 00000iv I 3 m = _ N_ ti Oak Bailey Drive 80000 • f w • a C'Jti o _ 0 ti e. 1 1�- -- R — — 0. m� Od cn O� cv rn CD C'o N < C-0 CD CO • E3 o \ CD 7 w N =3 I • I 0 I I W. .• tAkl- C� 3 o 7 = ZC 9 z.■ z ■� c• s:.1 � i z ����f�"' °"a mmission -=� 22' 2022 n+ a It m 24 (OAK BAILEY CLUB WE Pfy�IENT) Page 11 of 66 § a k . N) � � � � : � © & 2� % �& w�Q ®. « ^j\CD _0 J> � _ \ ; Q §q/ b, 2 k2 §\} \2 = c C)F o y>rz / R m k m, , UR2k±«k & Ke E �cLUs 9 §�\ P 2 @ \\ 0 0 0 0 I / z ;G 90 / 0 0 � / z § a k . N : �k _,&gc, w�Q ®. « _§q/ % 2 22 § \ \ \) ) = CD 7 0 .` / R m k m UR2k±«k & K B IL �CLUs 9 §�E P 2 age 2¥+ p E> a z m r m G D O z a z m r m G D O z o� N sA2.3 F; io 0o s s Im y =Fz, I° -I- z$ omz 6$ �18 £Fo z V V mN mR _ mo o mm u c� c y n N o r co CD cm >f�, n ND CD Z�� �cCi)�mD Fm * �mm �m*�� zaa 'm3�$8 mz. zFz oyb mt NFD3 �$y mg z� �� mOz S macro zFo Av m z mp o Inc 6g oM z.-of_; no z_ I a °oFa pz `go A Ey to � Ho go I 5_ 3 a z SF z o 8m 0 nfo 9 ,I° 9o_lo m m > y F 05 a„„cEariT�" iy �C 3 BAH la fission _'" 22 2022 UP-200-"b039 (O K BAIL CLUST F4 L P ENT) Page 21 of 66 NOW L� }§ :\ p / 0 z ®//E/ `R RiR J! ); r;!- 22. ;; 2in !,§! -;_ j) /) \) )F T H �z \ /0 .., A {0 9{ p / a 0 z a k { C 00 cm ) 9 \ / } ) � CD 7 \ :!§ *�� ) # \ 7Qom CD0 \ � , J a » §) 3r a! E. !!) |! l:;, ° . , ;! �� |§{ \ \ I r ^)\\))(\ 4 / (; /�) � \ /) §I) ))\) )() )! z [ §) ) § . !mac � ■ & 2 2 \ _lwgn. �2 la « (a/' - � \ J� Q ■, 2 k2 Item ®f ^ ® k , rr, � UR2d±/k & Ke E� CLUs FB PL P Ems) Page 2¥+ @ -0 ,{ 0 \ z $ \ 0 z / 0 } 0 c § ƒ 0 Cim l) \ \ 0 e 0 z § a k . � : © & 2 % �« r � _,&gc, w�Q la « ^j\ CD _0 CD � §co q/ 2 k2 o ®� / Item k 6\ ) f \\7 Qo m * rn � , _ UR2d±/k & Ke E� CLUs 9§L P Ems) _ Page 2¥+ § a k . Q r � : aU _!« m (®; , 2 k2 e ( cn o ou� _z + c m o x � C Rmk ) k , ! UR2d±«k & KeLUs 9§-L \ 3 O n O m n r N o''<m'gF. n m o n O = _ € ..4 la in fission 22 2022 Cr � W � N o '',•; �a'"',zOl-a�',, �a�' A!� Item 24 N m m S UP-202 =Ci039 (O K BAIL CLUST F4 P ENT) Page 25 of 66 FF� IN man sun p: n NIN m i Eo Io of - gyp= m �18 EA wIP2. Fez m ro y 'm� °o z .zz pIz No z S m r m G D O z 2E: IV: Px " a 2- � S8 E"o s pFF3 g8 ;so o m o o $�f°o Fe o F�m9 F g m g0 aN 0 o � ogee bolo �e°o g o9 c� c o y n W r N O co pow cnOppDr, �v z<o C M r 0 zxmFn�m � U s� n O c,a„„cEa.r_iT60o•, lap' rr ct ission '"�22 2022 Item 24 UP-202 '-0039 (O K BALUST F4 P ENT) Page 26 of 66 � L� }§ :\ p / 0 z 3 2z r/ s. ; )\ ]; §; ;[!| !( > §) ! ( !, :_,! • :' = r` . ;; ;] );!! )() §j §) )�§§ )) {0 �{ p / a 0 z $ )( �§8 §) � P, ƒ) \ } ( �j 3; /\ /E �}} &) \§ !,! !; §{ FF. , ; § ) z§ / j \ }( i\ r` ;! a k �\ o � 5 m cn o 00 Dr, \� \ > k z .. ¥» \\� � � : ( -q (! # d /\; |\\\\(\ P, �\/)§{) (,.: )� § §; ® § G`` |i§ :!§ ( ` } U §| § . !mac ■& 22\ _lw g n. F. V b . « ( 4 It. \ J Q ■, 2 k2 ®f^ ® Item rr, UP-2 & K e E� cLUs � &�L P ENT ) Page 2¥+ I � § a k . Q N) : © & 2J o _laec, w2Q la« As -®;Q§q /,2 k2j( ul o 0_ % .ƒz m\Zm ' ` ®�Rmk \ � \ UR2k±«k & K B IL CLUs F4 2 age 2¥+ § a k . \ o � : �©& 22� _ -r/g 9!®5 b « (~jr m - ( ^9 yz \ %. 2 22 o _ % ; z o ' rz ® D o , . ` C Rm 2 \\ ) f[\\a , ! �UR200«9 & KBE CLUs F4 FP 2 Q 0 k g 0 0 _ \ z .� � -n 2 z 0 0 z _ 0 0 2 y z � " a ) �................ \ C:) » �®5 E#/� mo � _........ � �CLw � eel� . . UR2d±«k & KBE X� 2022 mk ¥+ ;_ m § \ 0 z \0 � P / a 0 z / \\ \ ;|! \ @ ;r ;; §! @ § !! ) ) t! \ ! ( § G # q g 1.5 h §Tu \ § § j (§ [ � A 2 A / !\ § I§ �t § 4 � :: .o ;;\ \ \ \\ , , _ } \ \ \ } ,I) \)/ ; ` §§}§ I I\ I \ \ ! a k y o / C3) { § \ \ \ @( Q. = CD CD_ 2 *A$y� m : m i/ i§ is i§ i( � § § . !J-2 � ■ & 2 �2 bq«(a/■k2At m24 �UR2d±/k& KBE CLUs F4 2 1A$¥+ q m \ 0 z \) c m 0 a 0 z ■�° -.1: :I° � / � � a ) �................ \ ' © 5 mCDo�CD_ ) f a / cri ! R-y & U00, KBCLUl 2022 mk § a k . o wq\© bq « \f\ ) 3 _ \\ ) \ %A 2 22 2 ,f. , m + +5==a -FD ' " p Rm 2 co Fm , ! UR20069 & Ke E� cLUs 9 E P / -n § z m 0 0 z _ 3 0 0 _ 3 > z ;Q 90 E z _ 0 0 7 � \ z (t ,<D ,<:D § a k . o '' q^\ \ « wq\© bq « 3 _ \ \ ) \ %A 2 22 2 ,*. , m + +i==a ' " p Rm k ) f\\i5 co m r" -< 7. _ UP-20069 & KBIL CLUs 9§P 2 4 G) m r m D O z � 2 H� F- 8 3g H oEo 84 VFc�I z �= of �= Iz y o I i 11 I I Of D m r m D O z m o N � ono v�� w _, -n 40 z m r m D O z o g o rn i0 s A J O n� no O CIA c� m O co BCD W Sp C � CD � �mm co �mm�� a ao - e - �N P oog� a3 >o �3 �^ xm m _ Fmmz zsC Ba y� y I I I I I I F IN F IN to IT s A to Jlo I� o,a„„cEariT�•, 3 = AR la fission _'" 22 2022 UP-200=iy039 (O K BAIL CLUST F4 L P ENT) Page 3 of 66 § a ) �................ o ,igam -lJg @! F. §q/� " o C �CLUl ) \ � ) $ ?\\i5 r" -< UP200«9 & KB IL 7 , ! 2022 mk § a k................ � � �� q�\ o « wq\© bq « §\f\ ) co 3 �_ _) §\/ A 2 k2 +5==® ' rzx ` C Rm k \\ ) f[\75 � m , ! UR2k±«k & Ke E� cLUs F4 P 2 -n § z m 0 0 z _ 3 0 0 _ 3 > z (t ,<D ,<:D § a k . ' q�\ o « P bq « co 3u_ CD El 2 k2 ' rzx Rm k UR2k±«k & KeEs 9 L P 2 4 G) m r m D O z � 2 H� F- 8 3g H oEo 84 pl poow VFc�I z �= of �= Iz y o I i 11 I I Of D m r m D O z m o N � ono v�� w -n 40 z m r m D O z o g o rn i0 s A J O n� no O CIA c� m n O co n o = CD W CO �ocoW CF=Q mm< CD s e �N P oog� a3 >o �3 �^ xm m _ Fmmz zsC Ba y� y I I I I I I F IN F IN to IT s A to Jlo I� o,a„„cEariT�•, ro �'A �m 3 = �,���• la fission _'" 22 2022 ;. ➢ _� ' oo Z,„No«�°'` ����! It m 24 UP-200-,,0039 (O K BAIL CLUST F4 P ENT) Page 3 of 66 § a ) x o. ) � � � � � � -•s# e; r/& .� /!� m o � � ACLU, ) #\\7\ � m UR2k±«k & KB IL , ! 2022 mk § a ) . m PPa « - % ) Q 2 k2 :,m� o - � � � Rm k M r�, , UR2d±«k & KBEs F4 P 2 -n § z m 0 0 z _ 3 0 0 _ 3 > z (t ,<D ,<:D § a ) . m ' ' } PIH /.' « >CD Zo - �Q U2 k2 , m= o ' Rmk )\\7( m m � , , UR200 & KeEs 9§�E P 2 4 G) m r m D O z � 2 H� F- 8 3g H oEo 84 VFc�I z �= of �= Iz y o I i 11 I I Of D m r m D O z m o N � ono v�, w _, -n 40 z m r m D O z o g o rn i0 s A J O n� no O CIA c� CD m n o 2 C W ZO jCDCyN QO F= CO �m m� m r^ s P oog� a3 >o �3 �^ xm m _ Fmmz zsC Bz y y I I I I I I F IN F IN to IT s A to Jlo I� o,a„„cEariT�•, ro J-2 F*c Ham. la l�fission _'" 2 2022 z,➢n� eeo b'�„No«���It m24 UP-202��=iy039(O KBAIL CLUST F4 ENT) Page 4 of 66 § � wgo� P,j _ rr-i Dr- Fo\\7( � � UR2d±«k & KeE m , 2022 mk § a k . � : : F. 22\ bq. « ) z o §a/, _ (�\ { CD o - ............. y Q .. 2 k2 .f, m Rm k \\ ) f [ \ § 5 m Mrn , ! UR2d±«k & K B IL CLUs F4 P / -n § z m 0 0 z _ 3 0 0 _ 3 > z (t ,<D ,<:D § a k . 0 : : PP.4 22\ bq. « _ \�\ { o - \ d . 2 k2 .f. , m-c o - x{' � R m k\) f\\§5- m UP-2d±«k & Ke Es Fl& P / P-;u ;$ m § j e z Of ' ( \ \ \ \ \ !; N ! \i #\) #_ ; i2 | =i§ §i� ! !i0 :: � � \ \\\ \ / \) w m \ § z ;|)§ M.o }\) 3 90 � m \ e 0 z . o \\ � a k \y\ { C) CD c o ) #\\ §5 -< 7 , ! z i§ | i§ \\ }§ 0 . !mac � ■ & 2 2 \ _lwgn. �2 la « MW \ J Q ■, 2 k2 ®f ^ ® t m k rr, - UR2d±/k & K B E CLUs F4 L PI 2 �A4¥+ § a ) �................ c 'g ) o -!/\ /! F* §#/ o o C .f. . | � ) #\\§5 m UR20±«9 & KB IL�CLUl r< , ! 2022 mk § a k . PCCD 2-r6g R! la « 7m J« Q 2 k2 " %/Rm k 3 , ! UR2k±«k & KeEs F4 P / 8 0- H 0 0 d"„cEari�.•, ,,' VLC p la 1�N1 fission 2 2022 — ,.,p.�Qo r o Z It m24 m 0 s UP-202 =�039 (O K ST F4 ML P ENT) @ © HM | ) A \ (( ) - !! §| ); !!(; | H ( {0 ,r p / g 0 z PO ([ ); i] ;! §) .2g §) |( )§ () \) ](( [] § (( | \:§!�:/\/§1i/\ ': \ i (!§)))//)5!0 •. ) \ ,!, a\/'\\(\} \(m # gzaz; /{ \ !!§»}!224;mj p! \f; !` , \�\\\§|�� \§ \\ )\/\: / \).21 - , \ ) { & \! \� / \ � ) z j § $) §% § ƒz /�\ zo j - a ) � ................ ''= �f CD C-0 w/& §� / \ >\[ 22= ? D _} ®� gr \ \7 r 3 UR2k±«k OPKAICLw , ! 2022 mk ) m % a 0 z I / -,., ,. G » \ / p r. _ ƒp a - !:§ ! : , �_` \) \( ;: : (�_\)§{ k ` d / ) ! k) \ \ i; 7 , & )( \ \\ J a IO /\ \ j ! / 3 aN |N ;I m \ e 0 z a k CD = BCD \Fw � 3 G D> \ §{\ 2 * \\7 m , ! §\|;}\ \\: R! § - ` ƒ $ ) G; /) \(\/ I m §) § `` § . � ■ & 2 ~ _lwgn.�2 b « (a/" \ J Q .J2 k2 ®f ^ ®Itmk , rr, � � UR2d±/k (0 K B E CLUs &2 Page S¥+ / § a k . �©& 2~� �\ o -< 2 w�Q ®)q « CD m \J « Q . % 2 22 2 = C" % ^ ®� /� Rm 2 ) \\ G� ) # \; � 3 , ! UR2k±«k & KB IL�CLUs F4 P / § a k . aD � %As ND CD m _,&gc, la « b, 2 k2 2/ c m o ' rz / Rm k ) I y $ rn = -< 7, UR2k±«k & KeLUs 9 §�E P 2 @ cn 0 0 0 0 � \ z ;G ;0 z 0 0 � / z � § a k . Q � � : � � � : P Nj o m _l-,H la « m \ ®/2 k2 § ) 9 7 0 ® ' ` ' ramRmk /\ k y UR2k±«k& KeEs 9 §�E P 2 a g oy� m> S _ a °3 o8 0 o FF S x Bal �S Szn �30. IN man sun m^o �S oo I Im m� 0 Io j Ez -moot fm 0S �z FsV S A� �z oF�'7 _ gyw�F B - p: n NIN m i Eo In of - E-" o gyp= mo �18 EA F'oZ "ro S'o z �?z plz m r m G D O z f. xIV: Ao11 Px " a % 2 ^z SuS z°o {ns pFF3 N ffz S$S m > S� ° g8 ;so o m o o $�f°o Fe n F�m9 F g m g0 c 0 'o ogee °oo g °F9 V Vo c� ^c n ~ CD CNO _ > f W '�° n m' ' � < = = N C:) Nj rn C:) 50� U s� n O o,a„„cEariT�•, ro 60� on,,�m � o m � m 3 = �,�IR�• la fission RM _'" 22 2022 Item 24 UP-200-"15039 (O K BAIL CLUST R4 L P ENT) Page 56 of 66 IN L� }§ ,\ p / 0 z 3 2z < )\ j \\ \} ;; (] );!! !() ] §;_ �! ))( !; §(R !) sA § $ /( �o , ƒ) 3; /! �� §) \ } ( j; /( HE 0,j {0 9{ p / a 0 z &) \§ ol �() }) Ali. ; ; :|•[ ); a k { o % FR { As \ ) m \ \ \ CA3 m , , § ( )! ()_ !§( T) / ) \) b'§ !! \/0 ,o ) § % K} : ( ( ; : ! § . !mac ■& 22\ _lwgn. �2 la « (.4 \ J Q ■, 2 k2 ®f ^ ® Itmk -UR2d±/k (OP KeE� cLUs&�EP 2 Page S¥+ I 0 d"„cEari�.•, ,d -Tim mo m �,� � rt o ➢ W O cO _:°➢no3 �;y�m lain rr ission -� 22 2022 z< o Qp C rn r O z '.,� rvoii� r L. It m 24 w _: N m w m� 7S UP-202 =Ci039 (O K BAIL CLUST F4 L P ENT) § a k . 2 � : © & 2 % �& o _laec, w�Q !. « - ( ®; Q §q / , 2 22 e [) \ w o - '�z m /\§+ c0Fo x ®� C Rm 2 ) ; \\ ) 7 , ! UP20069 & KB E� CLUs 9§-\ P 2 @ \\ 0 0 0 0 I / z ;G 90 / 0 0 � / z § a k . PD C _laec, !. « - ; Q , 2 k2 [o -0 > - ' � z m c0Fo x C Rm k ); \\7 UR2d±«k & KB Es 9 E P 2 CAB¥+ p zH I e _E_ a3 s as $�° o os m° zfi v� �z�� m r m G D O z z8°, � � �i = = m3 Iz oo 2 o1 Foy Im ° y s=$ Ioslo p= >$ �18 =o ml€lo s $a a v° z V V 4m� < 8zz _ y m B z c� o p co _ n S 00co WO-0DN ZF o Sp O � Fm '^'m CCn m ern* -< E No zz ,. o Fot ogz mn� fw Tm p o o % Iz toy - a> a off o H= �1O 5� v mF.polo �`Tp g Oo zo o[}, �v ��s `8 g n o,a„„cEariT�•, ro 3 = �,���• la ission _'" 22 2022 ;. ➢ _� ' oo Item 24 o UP-202��=iy039 (O K BAIL CLUST F41 L P ENT) Page 61 of 66 NOW L� }§ :\ p / 0 z p §§) �z ! ) % ) \ �) /(; i§ J p » gq 4r = a! en / 2 ,z M. r - 2 °. , (�)) ;| w. `r )_ ; ;;. _ \) \ a k { o % 5 o -0 5> ND \/\ { � ) \ \ \\ ) � 7 , ! /�] !| ] \I / z ( ( !i ];I / [ s) ( / \( § o�� § . !mac aF. &2 \b. « '�\ J� Q ■, 2 k2 Itm24 -UP-2d±/k& KeLUs F4&4EP 2 Page B¥+ @ -0 ,{ 0 \ z m \ 0 z / 0 } 0 c § ƒ 0 § a k . 2pv: © & 2 % �& o _laec, w�Q !. « - ( ®; Q §q / , 2 22 e [) \ w o-0> m §+ c o x ®� C Rmk ) f \\) 7 , ! UR2d±«k & KB E� CLUs 91�E P 2 Page B¥+ CUP-2022-0039 One Mile View 11 NC 2992 N Oak Bailey Dr 0 0.13 0.25 0.5 Miles • �. W .O P, rn Subject Property i 1 III 1� I W "O YWv a RSF-4 VORTH SKILL RN RD I I I I � I � I I \ � I � I op I I / I � � I / I I I RPZD I _ r RA � I I � I 1 Zoning �I-2 General industrial Regional Link --- RESIDENTIAL SINGLE-FAMILY EXTRACTION NS-G 11 iiiiiiiii Neighborhood Link _ _ _ _ - - - - - - M. RI-u COMMERCIAL 11I-12 ResltleniiaFOfice Unclassified DNS-L G1 _ �ResltleMlal-�rialW21 ��-2 Residential Link _ RSF 1 FORM BASED DISTRICTS ■ 1 Planned Neighborhood Link - RS11 Gown—ncare RSF4 MU—Thamug— Planned Residential Link RSF-] �MBin Sireat Center RSF-8 ■ Osxniown General Shared -Use Paved Trail ' �Communiry seNmea RESIDENTIAL MULTI -FAMILY � ryeigbborbaoa semices Q RMF-8 NeigM1borM1ootl Canse m- - — Trail (Proposed) �RMF-12 PLANNED ZONING DISTRICTS r r � i _ _ _ _ _ i � � RMF-ie � Commercial, Intluslnal, Resltlentlal 1 Fayetteville City Limits ; Planning Area — _ RMF-2a INSTITUTIONAL RMFI" _P1 1 Planning Area INDUSTRIAL p Fayetteville City Limits 1-1 Heary�ommendal-dLight Ind -Running Commissi n 2 Agenda Item 24 CUP-2022-0039 (OAK BAILEY CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT) Page 64 of 66 CUP-2022-0039 2992 N Oak Bailey Dr. Close Up View o o z 0"�X_ N KATHERINE A " LU w Y—WARWICK-DR m v X QG WARWICK•DR 74 y�0 Subject Property RSF-4 ■ ■ ■ i i i m~� o m� OLD WIRE RD Z o STRAWBERRY•DR I , J P-1 W � Ak m W J i� R-ANORTH Regional Link Neighborhood Link Residential Link Residential -Agricultural Planned Neighborhood Link r � � Planning Area Feet RSF-4 Fayetteville City Limits P-1 0 75 150 300 450 600 - — - Shared -Use Paved Trail — — — Trail (Proposed) 1 :2,400 Planning Commissi n 2 Agenda Item 24 CUP-2022-0039 (OAK BAILEY CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT) Page 65 of 66 Agenda Item 24 CUP-2022-0039 (OAK BAILEY CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT) Page 66 of 66 n rn proposal is not ` in harmony with the purpose and intent" of the UDC covering conditional uses. As such, UDC §163.02(B)(4) provides the City Council with the ability to deny the request entirely. If the City Council is not willing or able to reject the request outright, we ask that it reject the variance to UDC § 164.22(D) and add conditions to the approval to safeguard the interests of the neighborhood and the goals of the city: 1. The development must include the referenced parcel and the adjacent parcel used for frontage on N Oak Bailey as a single lot so as to prevent future loss of access to the development; 2. A sidewalk must be included in the developed community to provide walkability to the new residents. Further, to improve the walkability of the neighborhood as is an intention of denser urban development the sidewalk beginning at the entrance to this community on N Oak Bailey Rd. and ending at the Niokaska Creek Trail entrance at the intersection with Crossover Rd. must be completed, 3. That the permit would only remain valid so long as it is determined that the utilities can support the proposed_pmperties, 4. That the pemut would no longer be valid should there be issues permitting emergency or city services access to the development or if the development is unable to support bi-directional traffic on the proposed private drive; 5. A significant proportion of the mature, established trees presently in the lot are preserved and protected in addition to the trees required for landscaping and urban forestry purposes; and 6. Conditions 3-8 as proposed by Staff_s7 Thank you for your attention to this matter, Nick Werner Planning Commissioner Jimm Garlock 2979 N Old Wire Rd Casey Wood Win Johnson 2979 N Old Wire Rd 2965 N Old Wire Rd 27 Appendix A — Pages 2-3 Conditions of Appravul Abby Hill Maribeth Sayre 2965 N Old Wire Rd 2983 N Old Wire Rd Luke Brown Cheri Carden 3053 N Quainton Ct 2913 N Old Wire Rd Erika Matthews John Carden 3053 N Quainton Ct 2913 N Old Wire Rd Hunter Sagely Whitney Carden 3186 N Katherine Ave 2913 N Old Wire Rd Morgan Sagely Lindsay Ray -Britt 3186 N Katherine Ave 3133 N Warwick Dr Rachel Holt Kaitlin Cox 3260 N Warwick Dr 3235 Warwick Dr J. Wiley Holt Ben Cox 3260 N Warwick Dr 3235 Warwick Dr Tad Scott Marisa Scott 3122 N Warwick Dr 3122 N Warwick Dr Laura. Camargo Nestor Camargo 3060 N Quainton Cr 3060 N Quainton Ct Reed Adams Anna Grace Adams 2971 N Old Wire Rd 2971 N Old Wire Rd Dana Hyatt Allison Macliamer 2972 N Oak Bailey Dr 2980 N Oak Bailey Dr Gary Machamer Katherine Pickus 2980 N Oak Bailey Dr 2964 N Oak Bailey Dr Candace McCabe Stephanie Garman Hackman 3219 N Warwick Dr 3193 N Katherine Ave Clint Schnekloth Tresa C. Dixon 3205 E Charing Cross 3169 Katherine Ave John C. Dixon Leslie Ray -Britt 3169 Katherine Ave 3133 N Warwick Dr John Hackmann 3193 N Katherine Ave John Graham 2981 N Oak Bailey Dr Chris Goering 3187 N Katherine Ave Gina Graham 2981 N Oak Bailey Dr David Williams 3230 E Charing Cross Amanda Grell 3205 E Charing Cross ..,111"tZlinit U'd November 15*5 2022 City Council Members City of .Fayetteville 113 W. Mountain Street Fayetteville, AR 72701 Subject: Requested Conditions of Approval for CUP 2022-000039 Appeal Council Members, At the October-41 City -Council meeting, the appeal -of CUP 2022-000039 was tabled to give the developers and the neighbors supporting this appeal time to work together and find solutions for some of the issues with the proposal highlighted by the neighborhood. Some agreements have been reached between the neighbors and the applicants. As a result, the neighbors are willing to support approval of the conditional use permit with the following conditions of approval: From the Letter oflntent 1. A minimum of 7 of the 12 significant trees on the property must be preserved where at least 3 of the 5 trees proposed for removal should not be in good condition as determined by the Urban Forester, 2. A permanent shallow swale must be installed just north of the north property lines of Washington County Parcels 765-31972-000, 765-31973-000, 765-31974-000, and 765- 31971-000 in order to direct storm water to the existing detention pond. There is an understanding that the agreement of those property owners will be required in order to grade within 5' of the property line; 3. A pedestrian sidewalk must be installed connecting the proposed internal pedestrian circulation system to Old Wire Road The pedestrian sidewalk must connect to the proposed internal pedestrian circulation system. The sidewalk may be located on the east or west side of the existing detention pond. This sidewalk must be a part of a pedestrian easement or something of equivalent function; -4. Shrubs and trees must be provided along the north, south, east, and west property lines in the form of a vegetative screen. The screening trees may be City -required mitigation trees; 5. The covenants of the condominium association, homeowner's association, or similar mechanism for the community must include provisions to ensure the ongoing maintenance and continued survival of the vegetative screen in condition #4; 6. The sidewalk along the north side of Old Wire Road will be improved. The sidewalk on N Oak Bailey Dr ending in front of Washington County Parcel 765-31969-000 must be connected to the sidewalk on N Old Wire Rd ending in front of Washington County Parcel 765-31971-000. Additionally, the sidewalk on N Old Wire Rd ending in front of Washington County Parcel 765-31974 M must be extended to the west property line of Washington County Parcel 765-31975-000 and to connect to the sidewalk in condition #3; 7. Attempts will be made to improve the sidewalk conditions on the remainder of N Old Wire Rd between N Oak Bailey Dr and Crossover Rd. If there are no required improvements or changes to drainage infrastructure, grading, curb and gutter, or pavement in order to install a sidewalk along that tract of land, a sidewalk must be installed to connect the sidewalk (existing and from conditions 3 & 6) to the Niokaska Creek Trail along Crossover Rd. If the above improvements or changes are required in order to build the sidewalk, the City of Fayetteville will either provide those improvements and changes or reimburse Marker Development LLC for providing those improvements and changes. In the case of the later, a sidewalk must be installed to establish such a connection following the improvements and changes being done; 8. In addition to the proposed private drive and traffic mitigation designs incorporated into that private drive, speed bumps will be provided along the private drive so as to reduce the likelihood of speeding vehicles throughout the community and increase pedestrian safety; From StafJ`'Recommendations 9. Additional screening in the form of vegetation, hedge row, or low-lying fence not to exceed 48" in height shall be installed along exterior property lines where parking courts and driveways abut existing single family residences; 10. Approval of the conditional use permit does not ensure approval of a development application. The conditional use permit grants the applicant the right to submit a development proposal based on the conceptual layout included herein. However, the applicant must still be able to comply with all other development requirements, including but not limited to, tree preservation, drainage, utility installation and Fire Department access. These details shall be reviewed with the development application. The final project design shall follow the general layout and design of the conditional use concept plan; 11. A condominium association, homeowner's association, or similar mechanism to maintain the common amenities shall be established prior to issuance of construction permits. The City of Fayetteville does not enforce these private agreements, but will require that this agreement be in place prior to issuing building permits; 12. Prior to receiving a certificate of occupancy for the first home, all shared drives, sidewalks and bike racks shall be installed. All development requirements, such as detention facilities, utilities, required landscaping, etc. shall be installed prior to any building permits being issued. The exact phasing of improvements will be determined at development review; 13. The maximum number of unrelated persons in any dwelling unit is three, pursuant to the underlying single-family zoning district; 14. Per UDC § 166.20, Expiration of Approved Plans and Permits, conditional use permit approval is valid for one year; and 15. An exterior lighting package must be provided to the Planning Division prior to building permit approval. Common area lighting shall comply with UDC §176, Outdoor Lighting. The above conditions would mitigate the majority of the concerns that the neighborhood has and wishes to be addressed via this appeal. However, the issue of excessive density remains unaddressed and additional conditions or modifications to the permit to establish an appropriate number of dwelling units for the proposed development will be requested. community. ,y.de_- . M a a r_�fw rid i ._YAW PLAMrrNG URBAN/ rF*C.*IEERRJG November 11, 2022 Via Email: W erne r.nickc0onail.cam Mr. Nick Werner 2979 N. Old Wire Road Fayetteville, Arkansas 72703 RE: Oak Bailey Cluster Development — Neighborhood Meeting Summary / Letter of Intent Mr. Werner, As a representative of the Marker Development LLC, owner of Washington County Parcel 765-31975-000, I am writing this letter to summarize discussions that took place at an in person meeting on the site between representatives of Marker Development LLC and multiple neighboring property owners on November 10, 2022. In an attempt to address concerns from neighboring property owners regarding the appealed 2992 Oak Bailey Cluster Development Conditional Use Permit, Marker Development LLC offers the following: 1. Removal of 1 dwelling unit from the approved conditional use permit, reducing the total dwelling units proposed from 19 dwelling units to 18 dwelling units when 21.6 would be allowed by ordinance. At 18 dwelling units the density would be 6.67 dwelling units per acre while 8.00 dwelling units is allowed by ordinance. 2. For 7 of the 12 significant trees on the property to remain. This is an increase of 4 from the original proposal. 3 of the 5 significant trees proposed for removal are not in good condition. 3. During construction of the project, a permanent shallow swale will be installed just north of the north property lines of Washington County Parcels 765-31972-000, 765-31973-000, 765-31974-000, in an attempt to direct storm water to the existing detention pond. By code, the City will require an agreement from the owners of the 3 properties in order for grading of the swale to be performed within 5' of the property line. 4. A pedestrian pathway will be installed connecting the proposed internal pedestrian circulation system to Old Wire Road. The pedestrian pathway will connect to the proposed internal pedestrian circulation system between proposed Lots 13 and 14. The pathway may be located on the east or west side of the existing detention pond. Space is limited so cooperation from the neighboring property owners will likely be needed. The pathway may be primitive. Steps in the pathway will be required at the north and south connection points. 5. Shrubs and trees will be provided along the north, south, and west property line in the form of a vegetative screen. The screening trees maybe City required mitigation trees. 6. Attempts will be made to improve sidewalk connections along the north side of Old Wire Road. Due to the significantly unimproved conditions along the north side of Old Wire Road in off -site locations, Marker Development LLC expects the City of Fayetteville to improve drainage infrastructure, provide grading, curb and gutter, and or pavement improvements per the Master Street Plan, and provide right of way acquisition. Marker Development LLC is willing to attempt to negotiate a cost share for the installation of the actual concrete sidewalk along the north side of the City street. 100 West Center Street _Suite 300 Fayetteville, AR 72701 479.790.6775 Letter to Nick Werner RE: Oak Bailey Cluster Development November 11, 2022 Thank you for your consideration of these items. Please let me know if you have any questions or if you need additional information. Sincerely, Brian Teague Conubm fty By Design Cc: Sarah Bunch, saran bu=bj favetteville-r.wy Jonathan Curtly ' ettev -arjpy Jeff Martin, ief 49jajtnbuildiingVpgp.cam Mike Parker, miW 1 fximer d-com Max Parker, gggg3Z&g*i.rvm Page 2 of 2 Appeal of CUP 2022-000( FAYETTEVILLE CITY COUNCIL MEETING NOVEMBER 15T", 2022 ► Compatibility of the proposal with the surrounding properties ► Neighborhood compatibility ► Loss of natural land and trees ► Exacerbating existing storm water issues ► Currently: ► Average home size = 2,022sgft ► Average lot size = 0.3 acre/lot ► Immediately surrounding: ► Average home size = 2,187sgft ► Average lot size = 0.24 acre/lot ► The proposal: ► Requested homes = 18 ► Developable space = 1.86 acre ► Resulting lots = 0.10 acre/lot ► Each home = 1,650sgft ► Existing traffic congestion on Old Wire Rd ► The proposal contains a single point of ingress/egress ► An additional point of entry is not possible due to an existing detention pond ► Dense development encourages walkable neighborhoods ► Missing sidewalk connections to surrounding areas ► Old Wire Rd is not safe for pedestrians to walk on ► Proximity to Tier 2 City Center ► No sidewalk internal to the proposed community ► Many well -established, mature trees ► Several are likely 20+ years old ► On/Off-site mitigation doesn't have the same benefits as preservation ► Storm water run-off is already an issue ► The property is itself a significant hill ► Proposal adds a significant amount of non -permeable surfaces further reducing the absorption of storm water ► Existing detention pond isn't mitigating storm water issues Either: ► Approve the Conditional Use Permit with additional conditions & deny the density variance ► Conditions reflect the agreements reached with the developers ► Denying the density variance caps the proposal at 12 total homes Or: ► Deny the Conditional Use Permit for the Cluster Home Development ► All of the highlighted issues are either results of or are made worse by the density of the proposal ► Current proposal has 18 homes ► The neighborhood is requesting a maximum of 12 houses in this development ► Denying the variance to UDC §164.22(D) caps the permitted units to 12 ► There is no demonstrable hardship to form the basis for a variance ► Tree Preservation ► Installation of Storm Water Mitigation System ► Sidewalk Improvements ► Vegetative Screening ► Speed Bumps in the Proposed Community ► Staff Recommendations ► A minimum of 7 of the 12 significant trees on the property must be preserved where at least 3 of the 5 trees proposed for removal should not be in good condition as determined by the Urban Forester ► A permanent shallow swale must be installed just north of the north property lines of Washington County Parcels 765-31972-000, 765-31973-000, 765-31974-000, and 765- 31971-000 in order to direct storm water to the existing detention pond. There is an understanding that the agreement of those property owners will be required in order to grade within 5' of the property line ► A pedestrian sidewalk must be installed connecting the proposed internal pedestrian circulation system to Old Wire Road. The pedestrian sidewalk must connect to the proposed internal pedestrian circulation system. The sidewalk may be located on the east or west side of the existing detention pond. This sidewalk must be a part of a pedestrian easement or something of equivalent function