HomeMy WebLinkAbout47-23 RESOLUTION113 West Mountain Street
Fayetteville, AR 72701
(479) 575-8323
Resolution: 47-23
File Number: 2023-374
APPEAL LSD 2022-039 (788 S. SHERMAN AVE./E. HUNTSVILLE RD. MULTI -FAMILY WEST):
A RESOLUTION TO GRANT THE APPEAL OF DCI AND TO APPROVE LARGE SCALE DEVELOPMENT
2022-039 LOCATED AT 788 SOUTH SHERMAN AVENUE IN WARD 1
WHEREAS, on January 9, 2023, the Planning Commission denied the application for Large Scale Development LSD-
2022-039 located at 788 South Sherman Avenue; and
WHEREAS, the applicant timely appealed the denial by letter to City Clerk -Treasurer Kara Paxton on January 19,
2023.
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 grants the appeal of DCI and approves
Large Scale Development 2022-039, with the conditions outlined in the staff memo attached to this Resolution.
PASSED and APPROVED on February 21, 2023
Page 1
Attest:
Kara Paxton, City Clerk reasurer
CITY OF
Pow,
FAYETTEVILLE
ARKANSAS
MEETING OF FEBRUARY 21, 2023
TO: Mayor Jordan and City Council
THRU: Susan Norton, Chief of Staff
Jonathan Curth, Development Services Director
Jessica Masters, Development Review Manager
FROM: Gretchen Harrison, Planner
DATE:
CITY COUNCIL MEMO
2023-374
SUBJECT: Appeal: LSD-2022-0039: Large Scale Development (788 S. SHERMAN AVEJE.
HUNTSVILLE RD. MULTI -FAMILY WEST, 565): Submitted by DCI for property located
at 788 S. SHERMAN AVE. in WARD 1. The property is zoned RMF-24, RESIDENTIAL
MULTI -FAMILY, 24 UNITS PER ACRE and contains approximately 1.21 acres. The
request is for a residential development with seven triplexes, one single-family
dwelling, and associated parking.
RECOMMENDATION:
City staff recommends approval and the Planning Commission recommends denial of a request for a multi-
family residential development as described and shown below. The Planning Commission denied the proposal
at the January 9, 2023 Planning Commission meeting and the applicant has appealed the decision to City
Council.
BACKGROUND:
The subject property is in southeast Fayetteville on the south side of Huntsville Road, about a quarter of a mile
west of the street's intersection with Happy Hollow Road. The property contains roughly 1.21 acres and is
currently undeveloped. Another multi -family residential development is planned just east of this site which is
currently under review as a Large Site Improvement Plan (LSIP-2022-0009). The applicant has provided a
combined drainage report that includes both proposed developments.
Request: The applicant requests Large Scale Development approval to develop the subject property with
seven triplexes, one single-family dwelling, and associated parking. Four variances from the Unified
Development Code have been requested. Each variance is described in detail alongside staff's
recommendations in the attached Planning Commission staff report.
Public Comment: Staff received no public comment regarding this request.
DISCUSSION:
At the January 9, 2023 Planning Commission meeting, a vote to deny this request passed with a vote of 7-2-0;
Commissioner Garlock made the motion with Commissioner McGetrick seconding. Commissioners Canada,
Garlock, Holcomb, Johnson, Madden, McGetrick, and Sparkman voted in favor of the denial. Commissioners
Johnson, McGetrick, and Sparkman expressed concerns about the requested variance from the City's access
Mailing address:
113 W. Mountain Street www.fayetteville-ar.gov
Fayetteville, AR 72701
management standards, stating that it may create or compound a dangerous traffic condition along Huntsville
Road. Commissioners Garlock, Johnson, and Madden also expressed concerns about the design of the site,
stating that it did not align with the City's goals for appropriate housing and infill and did not appear to meet the
intent of several city ordinances. Those commissioners felt that reducing the number of units or creating a
cluster housing development may be more appropriate on this site. Commissioners Brink and Winston voted
against the denial. Those commissioners felt that the applicant had designed a difficult site to the best of their
ability and were supportive of all requested variances. No public comment was offered at the meeting.
Conditions of Approval:
1. Planning Commission determination of right-of-way dedication. Staff recommends no additional right-of-
way dedication;
2. Planning Commission determination of street improvements. Staff recommends improvements along
the property's Huntsville Road frontage in line with the typical Master Street Plan section for a
Neighborhood Link street, including six-foot greenspace and 10-foot trail. Staff also recommends that
an accessible pedestrian connection be provided to Doc Mashburn Park with additional tree plantings
to be coordinated with the City's Parks Department;
3. Planning Commission determination of a variance to UDC §166.08(F)(2)(b), Access Management —
Neighborhood Links. Staff recommends denial of this variance for reasons outlined in the attached staff
report;
4. Planning Commission determination of a variance to UDC §172.03(E), Minimum Number of Accessible
Parking Spaces. Staff recommends denial of this variance for reasons outlined in the attached staff
report;
5. Planning Commission determination of a variance to UDC §177.04(D)(1), Perimeter Landscaping
Requirement — Side and Rear Property Lines. Staff recommends approval of this variance for reasons
outlined in the attached staff report;
6. Planning Commission determination of a variance to UDC §177.04(D)(2)(f), Perimeter Landscaping
Requirement — Screening. Staff recommends approval of this variance for reasons outlined in the
attached staff report;
7. Remaining comments from the Planning Division shall be addressed, including:
a. Clarify how the architectural design requirements in our Urban Residential Design Standards
will be met (UDC §166.23(D)). It is unclear what building materials will be used.
b. There may be a conflict between the four spaces in the turnaround and our vehicle maneuvering
requirements (UDC §172.04). Those spaces may create a potential conflict in the event of a fire
as well, since vehicles may be parked in a way that blocks the Fire Department's access. It's
also unclear how cars will park in the two 'parallel' spaces.
c. Striping should be provided across the turnaround for a pedestrian crossing.
d. Shrubs should be provided for screening between the parking lot and the public right-of-way;
8. 10 feet of landscaped area should be maintained on the west side of the property to the east;
9. Conditions of approval from Engineering and Urban Forestry are included in the official conditions of
approval;
10. Impact fees for fire, police, water, and sewer shall be paid in accordance with City ordinance;
11. Plat Review and Subdivision comments (to include written staff comments provided to the applicant or
his representative, and all comments from utility representatives: Black Hills Energy, AT&T, Ozarks,
SWEPCO, and Cox Communications);
12. All mechanical/utility equipment (roof and ground mounted) shall be screened using materials that are
compatible with and incorporated into the structure. A note shall be clearly placed on the plat and all
construction documents indicating this requirement;
13. Trash enclosures shall be screened on three sides with materials complimentary to and compatible with
the principle structure. Containers may also be screened from view of the street by the principal
structure or vegetation. Elevations of the proposed dumpster enclosure shall be submitted to the
Mailing address:
113 W. Mountain Street www.fayetteville-ar.gov
Fayetteville, AR 72701
Planning and Solid Waste Divisions for review prior to building permit;
14. All existing utilities below 12kv shall be relocated underground. All proposed utilities shall be located
underground;
15. 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;
16. All exterior lights shall comply with the City lighting ordinance. Manufacturer's cut -sheets are required
for review and approval prior to issuance of a building permit;
17. All freestanding and wall signs shall comply with ordinance specifications for location, size, type,
number, etc. Any proposed signs shall be permitted by a separate sign permit application prior to
installation. Freestanding pole signs and electronic message boards (direct lighting) are prohibited in
the 1-540 Design Overlay District;
18. Large scale development shall be valid for one calendar year;
19. Contact the City's Emergency 911 Address Coordinator for addressing prior to building permit;
20. Prior to building permit, a cost estimate for all required landscaping is to be submitted to the Landscape
Administrator for review. Once approval is gained, a guarantee is to be issued (bond/letter of
credit/cash) for 150% of the cost of the materials and installation of the plants. This guarantee will be
held until the improvements are installed and inspected, at the time of Certificate of Occupancy; and
21. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the following is required:
a. Grading and drainage permits;
b. Separate easement plat for this project that shall include the tree preservation area and all utility
and access easements;
c. Exterior lighting package must be provided to the Planning Division;
d. An on -site inspection by the Landscape Administrator of all tree protection measures prior to
any land disturbance;
e. Project Disk with all final revisions; and
f. Completion of all required improvements or the placement of a surety with the City (letter of
credit, bond, escrow) as required by Section 158.01 "Guarantees in Lieu of Installed
Improvements" to guarantee all incomplete improvements. Further, all improvements necessary
to serve the site and protect public safety must be completed, not just guaranteed, prior to the
issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.
BUDGET/STAFF IMPACT:
N/A
ATTACHMENTS: Appeal Letter, Exhibit A, Exhibit B, Planning Commission Staff Report
Mailing address:
113 W. Mountain Street www.fayetteville-ar.gov
Fayetteville, AR 72701
City of Fayetteville, Arkansas 113 West Mountain Street
Fayetteville, AR 72701
(479) 575-8323
- Legislation Text
File #: 2023-374
Appeal: LSD-2022-0039: Large Scale Development (788 S. SHERMAN AVE./E. HUNTSVILLE
RD. MULTI -FAMILY WEST, 565): Submitted by DCI for property located at 788 S. SHERMAN
AVE. in WARD 1. The property is zoned RMF-24, RESIDENTIAL MULTI -FAMILY, 24 UNITS
PER ACRE and contains approximately 1.21 acres. The request is for a residential development
with seven triplexes, one single-family dwelling, and associated parking.
A RESOLUTION TO GRANT THE APPEAL OF DCI AND TO APPROVE LARGE SCALE
DEVELOPMENT 2022-039 LOCATED AT 788 SOUTH SHERMAN AVENUE IN WARD 1
WHEREAS, on January 9, 2023, the Planning Commission denied the application for Large Scale
Development LSD-2022-039 located at 788 South Sherman Avenue; and
WHEREAS, the applicant timely appealed the denial by letter to City Clerk -Treasurer Kara Paxton on
January 19, 2023.
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 grants the appeal of DCI
and approves Large Scale Development 2022-039, with the conditions outlined in the staff memo
attached to this Resolution.
Page 1
19 January 2023
City of Fayetteville
City Council
125 W. Mountain Street
Fayetteville, AR 72701
479.575.8267
RE: Appeal of Planning Commission denial of LSD-2022-0039
Project Name: E. Huntsville Road Multi -Family West
Owner: Nicholas Corter, 3216 N Deane Solomon Rd, 479.445.8075
Mayor and Council Members:
DEVELOPMENT
CONSULTANTS
INCORPORATED
I am requesting an opportunity to discuss an appeal of the Planning Commission decision to deny the
above -referenced Large Scale Development application for the property located on E Huntsville Rd at
the address of 786 S Sherman Ave (Parcel 765-15235-002).
Based on the conversation between the Commissioners on the night of the Planning Commission on
January 9th, 2023, the Commissioners based their determination on 3 factors: 1) They stated that the
number of Variances requested seemed excessive; 2) They perceived a possible safety issue related to
the Access Management Variance requested for the additional driveway curb cut; & 3) They felt that if
the Access Management Variance was denied that the entire project would need to be re -designed.
Planning Commission may not have had all of the facts needed to make a full review of the Large Scale
Development application and Variance requests. This project may still be able to be approved with
additional information regarding the 4 Variances requested, additional discussion regarding safety, and
discussion of the ability of the Large Scale Development design to be slightly modified if it were to be
approved with conditions or denial of one or more variance requests.
Thank you,
Allen Jay Young
Engineering
Planning
Land Surveying
landscape Architecture
2200 North Rodney Parham Road, Suite 220 • Little Rock, Arkansas 72212 • Telephone 501-221-7880 • Fax 501-221-7882
1 East Center Street, Suite 290 • Fayetteville, Arkansas 72701 • Telephone 479-444-7880
LSD-2022-0039 788 S. S H E RMAN AVE
Close Up View
RI-U
NS-G m
ic
D
PHUNTSVILLEAD�E=M�00,._
❑I�
Neighborhood Link
Unclassified
Residential Link
Hillside -Hilltop Overlay District
r _ Planning Area
_ Fayetteville City Limits
- - - Trail (Proposed)
RSF-4
C-1
LSD-2022-0039
EXHIBIT 'A'
W O G
W Q co J
NI z W NORTH
R-O
Feet
0 75 150 300
1:2,400
RSF-4
RI-U
RM F-24
Residential -Office
C-1
Community Services
450 600 Neighborhood Services - Gen.
P-1
LSD-2022-0039
EXHIBIT V
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
(FILE #2001-00001485) - PLAT PAGE NUMBER: 565
PT NW NW 23-16-30 1.25 AC FURTHER DESCRIBED FROM 2017-15896 AS: Part of the
NW14 of the NW/4 of Section 23, Township 16 North, Range 30 West of the 5th P.M.,
described as follows, to -wit Beginning at a. point 2320. 6 feet West of the Northeast corner
of the NW/4 of said Section 23, thence'West 100 feet; thence South 544.5 feet, thence East
100 feet, thence North 544.5 feet, to the point of beginning. LESS AND EXCEPT all that part
of the above described premises lying North of the South Right of Way of Highway 16 (also
known as 786 S. Sherman Ave, Fayetteville, AR)
CITY OF
FAYETTEVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION MEMO
%PF ARKANSAS
TO: Fayetteville Planning Commission
THRU: Jessie Masters, Development Review Manager
FROM: Gretchen Harrison, Planner
Melissa Boyd, Staff Engineer
Melissa Evans, Urban Forester
MEETING: January 9, 2023 (Updated with results from PC hearing)
SUBJECT: LSD-2022-0039: Large Scale Development (788 S. SHERMAN AVEJE.
HUNTSVILLE RD. MULTI -FAMILY WEST, 565): Submitted by DCI for property
located at 788 S. SHERMAN AVE. The property is zoned RMF-24, RESIDENTIAL
MULTI -FAMILY, 24 UNITS PER ACRE and contains approximately 1.21 acres.
The request is for a residential development with seven triplexes, one single-family
dwelling, and associated parking.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of LSD-2022-0039 with conditions.
RECOMMENDED MOTION: 'I move to approve LSD-2022-0039, determining:
• In denial of a variance to UDC §166.08(F)(2)(b),
• In denial of a variance to UDC § 172.03(E),
• In favor of a variance to UDC §177.04(D)(1),
• In favor of a variance to UDC §177.04(D)(2)(t),
• In favor of the recommended right-of-way dedication,
• In favor of the recommended street improvements, and
• In favor of all other conditions as recommended by staff. "
BACKGROUND:
The subject property is in southeast Fayetteville on the south side of Huntsville Road, about a
quarter of a mile west of the street's intersection with Happy Hollow Road. The property contains
roughly 1.21 acres and is currently developed with one duplex which is slated to be demolished.
Another multi -family residential development is planned just east of this site which is currently
under review as a Large Site Improvement Plan (LSIP-2022-0009). The applicant has provided a
combined drainage report that includes both proposed developments. 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
CS, Community Services
South
Multi -Family Residential;
RMF-24, Residential Multi -Family, 24 Units per Acre;
Doc Mashburn Park
P-1, Institutional
East
Single -Family Residential
CS, Community Services
West
Multi -Family Residential
RSF-4, Residential Single -Family, 4 Units per Acre;
RMF-24, Residential Multi -Family, 24 Units per Acre
Mailing Address:
113 W. Mountain Street www.fayetteville-ar.gov
Fayetteville, AR 72701
Proposal: The applicant requests Large Scale Development approval to develop the subject
property with seven triplexes, one single-family dwelling, and associated parking. Four variances
from the Unified Development Code have been requested. Each variance is described further
below alongside staff's recommendations:
§166.08(F)(2)(b): Access Management - Neighborhood Links. Curb cuts shall be
located a minimum of 100 feet from an intersection or driveway. When necessary, curb
cuts along neighborhood links shall be shared between two (2) or more lots. The
applicant has requested a variance to allow the proposed curb cut serving this development
to be located approximately 70 feet away from existing and proposed curb cuts to the east
and west along Huntsville Road. The applicant has stated that this variance is needed due
to fire code requirements. If cross access were provided to the proposed development to the
east, the Fire Department would require that all buildings be sprinkled, or a secondary point
of access be provided. Per the applicant, a second point of access is not possible given the
location and size of the property and sprinkling the buildings would be cost prohibitive to the
owner.
o Staff recommendation: Staff is not supportive of this variance request. The subject
property currently shares a curb cut with the property to the west which is proposed
to remain but not be accessed by this development. A similar multi -family
residential development is proposed to the east, and staff recommends that a
combined access point be provided between those developments to
accommodate the maximum curb cut separation possible between new and
existing curb cuts along Huntsville Road, and based on the codified language that,
when necessary, curb cuts along neighborhood links shall be shared between two
or more lots. The intent of the City's access management standards is to ensure
safe and adequate vehicular, bicycle, and pedestrian access to all properties. The
site design appears to be a self-imposed hardship, as there is an existing curb cut
on the property that is not being utilized for this development, and there are
opportunities for shared access that would improve the safety of ingress and
egress. Since sprinkling is an option available to the applicant, which would allow
them to provide cross access to the proposed development to the east, staff does
not find fire code requirements to constitute a hardship in this instance.
§172.03(E): Minimum Number of Accessible Spaces. In parking lots that contain 26-
50 total parking spaces, a minimum of two (2) accessible spaces are required. The
applicant has requested a variance to allow no accessible spaces in a parking lot that
contains a total of 44 spaces. The applicant has cited the limited space available for
parking and the non -accessible architectural design of each unit as their reasoning for this
variance request.
o Staff recommendation: Staff is not supportive of this variance request. While the
applicant has stated that there is limited room for parking on site due to the size of
the property and the required parking ratios for single-family dwellings and
triplexes, staff finds that there are options available that would allow the applicant
to provide two accessible parking spaces. The City's parking ordinance allows up
to 20% of required standard parking spaces to be substituted with
motorcycle/scooter parking and bicycle parking. Since 44 spaces are required for
this development, up to nine standard parking spaces could be substituted for
motorcycle/scooter and bicycle parking, reducing the parking requirement to 35
standard spaces and providing room for two accessible spaces to be provided.
§177.04(D)(1): Perimeter Landscaping Requirement — Side and Rear Property Lines.
All parking lots shall have five feet of landscaped area between the property line
and parking lot. To maximize tree preservation on the west side of the property while
maintaining necessary fire lane widths, the applicant is requesting a variance from this
requirement to provide no landscape buffer between the east property line and the parking
lot proposed to serve this development. The adjacent property owner has expressed his
support for this request.
o Staff recommendation: Staff is supportive of this variance request. While there is
no landscape buffer proposed between the parking lot serving this development
and the subject property's east property line, a landscaped area with an average
width of 10 feet is currently proposed for the development to the east which is
currently under administrative review. Since the applicant has demonstrated an
intent to maintain a landscaped area between adjacent properties, staff is
supportive of this variance request with the added condition that 10 feet of
landscaped area be maintained on the property to the east. However, at
Subdivision Committee, the applicant requested that this condition be amended to
reduce the width to eight feet.
§177.04(D)(2)(f): Perimeter Landscaping Requirement — Screening. Parking lots
containing five (5) or more spaces shall be screened from the public right-of-way
and adjacent properties, where said parking areas are adjacent to residential zones,
with shrubs and/or graded berms. If graded berms are used, shrubs are also
required. Since no landscape buffer is proposed along the east side of the property, the
applicant is requesting a variance to provide no shrubs or graded berms for screening
between the proposed parking lot and the property to the east. The adjacent property
owner has expressed his support for this request.
o Staff recommendation: Staff is supportive of this variance request. Since there is
no landscape buffer provided between the proposed parking area and the east
property line, it is not possible to screen parking from the adjacent property with
shrubs or graded berms. Further, a bioretention swale is proposed in the
landscaped buffer on the lot to the east, making it difficult to install vegetative
screening on the adjacent property. Staff still recommends that shrubs be planted
between the parking lot and the public right-of-way.
Right -of -Way to be Dedicated: The subject property has frontage along Huntsville Road, a
Neighborhood Link street. Neighborhood Link streets typically require right-of-way in the amount
of 33.5 feet from the centerline of the road. Since the existing right-of-way is shown to total 33.5
feet from centerline, staff does not recommend any additional right-of-way dedication with this
development.
Street Improvements: Huntsville Road is a Neighborhood Link street with asphalt paving and six-
foot sidewalk along the property's frontage. Staff recommends that six-foot greenspace and a 10-
foot trail be installed along the property's Huntsville Road frontage, in line with the Active
Transportation Plan and the Master Street Plan section for a Neighborhood Link street.
Access Management/Connectivity: Staff has determined that the proposed development is only
partially compliant with the City's access and connectivity standards. The applicant proposes to
access the site with one driveway onto Huntsville Road, which is located less than 100 feet away
from adjacent driveways. A variance from Unified Development Code §166.08(F) would be
necessary to place the curb cut as proposed. The applicant has requested this variance, as further
described above, though staff is not supportive of the variance since there is an existing curb cut
on site and there is potential to provide cross access with the proposed development to the east.
Design Standards: As a multi -family residential development, this proposal is subject to Unified
Development Code §166.23, Urban Residential Design Standards. In reviewing the provided site
plan and elevations, staff has determined that this development is likely compliant with applicable
design standards. Pedestrian circulation is proposed throughout the site and mechanical and
utility equipment is shown to be screened from the right-of-way. Four building types are provided
with variety in roof form and building color. However, descriptions of materials are needed to
confirm that variety in building material is also being provided.
Water and Sewer System: This project includes approximately 800 linear feet of new eight -inch
water mains. The applicant is proposing to connect to an existing 12-inch water main on the north
side of Huntsville Road and an existing six-inch main on the adjacent multi -family development
just west of Doc Mashburn Park. As proposed, the southern connection is shown to extend
through the existing utility easement on the multi -family development to the west of Doc Mashburn
Park. In terms of sanitary sewer, this project includes approximately 805 linear feet of new eight -
inch sanitary sewer mains. The applicant is proposing to connect to an existing eight -inch main
on Fairlane Street to the south by installing a new main through the west side of Doc Mashburn
Park. Approval from the City's Parks Department would be required to install any new mains on
Parks' property.
Parkland dedication or fee in -lieu: This proposal was discussed by the Parks and Recreation
Advisory Board (PRAB) at their November 7, 2022. PRAB recommended fee -in -lieu for this
development in the amount of $20,944 based on 22 multi -family units. PRAB also recommended
that an accessible pedestrian connection be installed between this development and Doc
Mashburn Park to the south.
Tree Preservation:
Canopy minimum requirement: 20%
Existing canopy: 46.6%
Preserved canopy: 12.6%
Mitigation required: 24 two-inch caliper trees
Public Comment: To date, staff has received no public comment on this item.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of LSD-2022-0039 with the following
conditions:
Conditions of Approval:
1. Planning Commission determination of right-of-way dedication. Staff recommends no
additional right-of-way dedication;
Subdivision Committee recommended in favor of this.
2. Planning Commission determination of street improvements. Staff recommends
improvements along the property's Huntsville Road frontage in line with the typical Master
Street Plan standard for a Neighborhood Link street, including six-foot greenspace and
10-foot trail, and staff recommends that an accessible pedestrian connection be provided
to Doc Mashburn Park;
Subdivision Committee recommended in favor of this.
3. Planning Commission determination of a variance to UDC §166.08(F)(2)(b), Access
Management — Neighborhood Links. Staff recommends denial of this variance for the
reasons stated above;
Subdivision Committee did not make a recommendation on this variance.
4. Planning Commission determination of a variance to UDC §172.03(E), Minimum Number
of Accessible Parking Spaces. Staff recommends denial of this variance for the reasons
stated above;
Subdivision Committee did not make a recommendation on this variance.
5. Planning Commission determination of a variance to UDC §177.04(D)(1), Perimeter
Landscaping Requirement — Side and Rear Property Lines. Staff recommends approval
of this variance for the reasons stated above;
Subdivision Committee recommended in favor of this variance.
6. Planning Commission determination of a variance to UDC §177.04(D)(2)(f), Perimeter
Landscaping Requirement — Screening. Staff recommends approval of this variance for
the reasons stated above;
Subdivision Committee recommended in favor of this variance.
7. Remaining comments from the Planning Division shall be addressed, including:
a. Clarify how the architectural design requirements in our Urban Residential Design
Standards will be met (UDC §166.23(D)). It is unclear what building materials will
be used.
b. There may be a conflict between the four spaces in the turnaround and our vehicle
maneuvering requirements (UDC §172.04). Those spaces may create a potential
conflict in the event of a fire as well, since vehicles may be parked in a way that
blocks Fire's access. It's also unclear how cars will park in the two 'parallel' spaces.
c. Striping should be provided across the turnaround for a pedestrian crossing.
8. Shrubs should be provided for screening between the parking lot and the public right-of-
way;
9. 10 feet of landscaped area should be maintained on the west side of the property to the
east;
10. Conditions of approval from Engineering and Urban Forestry are included in the official
conditions of approval, attached hereto;
Standard Conditions of Approval:
11. Impact fees for fire, police, water, and sewer shall be paid in accordance with City
ordinance;
12. Plat Review and Subdivision comments (to include written staff comments provided to the
applicant or his representative, and all comments from utility representatives: Black Hills
Energy, AT&T, Ozarks, SWEPCO, and Cox Communications);
13. All mechanical/utility equipment (roof and ground mounted) shall be screened using
materials that are compatible with and incorporated into the structure. A note shall be
clearly placed on the plat and all construction documents indicating this requirement;
14. Trash enclosures shall be screened on three sides with materials complimentary to and
compatible with the principle structure. Containers may also be screened from view of the
street by the principal structure or vegetation. Elevations of the proposed dumpster
enclosure shall be submitted to the Planning and Solid Waste Divisions for review prior to
building permit;
15. All existing utilities below 12kv shall be relocated underground. All proposed utilities shall
be located underground;
16. 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;
17. All exterior lights shall comply with the City lighting ordinance. Manufacturer's cut -sheets
are required for review and approval prior to issuance of a building permit;
18. All freestanding and wall signs shall comply with ordinance specifications for location, size,
type, number, etc. Any proposed signs shall be permitted by a separate sign permit
application prior to installation. Freestanding pole signs and electronic message boards
(direct lighting) are prohibited in the 1-540 Design Overlay District;
19. Large scale development shall be valid for one calendar year;
20. Contact the City's Emergency 911 Address Coordinator for addressing prior to building
permit;
21. Prior to building permit, a cost estimate for all required landscaping is to be submitted to
the Landscape Administrator for review. Once approval is gained, a guarantee is to be
issued (bond/letter of credit/cash) for 150% of the cost of the materials and installation of
the plants. This guarantee will be held until the improvements are installed and inspected,
at the time of Certificate of Occupancy; and
22. Prior to the issuance of a building permit the following is required:
a. Grading and drainage permits;
b. Separate easement plat for this project that shall include the tree preservation area
and all utility and access easements;
c. Exterior lighting package must be provided to the Planning Division;
d. An on -site inspection by the Landscape Administrator of all tree protection
measures prior to any land disturbance;
e. Project Disk with all final revisions; and
f. Completion of all required improvements or the placement of a surety with the City
(letter of credit, bond, escrow) as required by Section 158.01 "Guarantees in Lieu
of Installed Improvements" to guarantee all incomplete improvements. Further, all
improvements necessary to serve the site and protect public safety must be
completed, not just guaranteed, prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Required YES
JDate: January 9, 2023
IMotion: Garlock
(Second: McGetrick
(Vote: 7-2-0 (motion to d
BUDGET/STAFF IMPACT:
None
O Tabled O Forwarded M Denied
ATTACHMENTS:
•
Engineering Memo
•
Fire Memo
•
Urban Forestry Comments
•
Request Letter
•
Variance Request Letter
•
Site Plan
•
Elevations
•
One Mile Map
•
Close-up Map
•
Current Land Use Map
CITY OF
._ FAYETTEVILLE
ARKANSAS
TO: Gretchen Harrison, Planner
FROM: Melissa Boyd, Staff Engineer
DATE: January 4, 2023
SUBJECT: Planning Commission Engineering Comments for
LSD-2022-0039 E. HUNTSVILLE RD MULTIFAMILY WEST
STAFF MEMO
Access Management: The applicant requested a City Engineer waiver to UDC 166.08(F)(1) to
not provide the minimum 5' of separation between curb cuts and adjoining property lines (unless
curb cuts are shared) and 166.08(F)(2)(b) requiring a minimum of 100' of separation between
adjacent curb cuts on Neighborhood Links. As proposed, the separation between the existing and
proposed east and west curb cuts will be approximately 70' when measured according to UDC
166.08(F)(1). The subject property currently shares a curb cut with the property to the west that
is proposed to remain, but not be accessed by this development. The City Engineer is not able to
approve this request based on the addition of a curb cut on a property where one exists even
though the applicant is proposing to dedicate an access easement for the adjacent property owner
for the existing curb cut, so this curb cut will require a Planning Commission variance. The City
Engineer is able to approve the request for the lesser separation on the east proposed curb cut,
determining that it isn't adding a new curb to this property and provides the most separation from
the proposed west curb cut and the existing curb cut to the east, with it also being centrally located
on the property's frontage; however, Engineering is recommending a combined access point
between these two developments to provide the maximum separation possible between the new
and existing curb cuts on the adjacent properties, and based on UDC 166.08(F)(2)(b) stating that,
"When necessary, curb cuts along neighborhood links shall be shared between two (2) or more
lots."
Water: This project includes approximately 80OLF of new 8" watermain. They are proposing to
connect to the existing 12" watermain on the north side of E. Huntsville Rd. and an existing 6"
watermain on the adjacent multifamily development just west of Doc Mashburn Park. As
proposed, the southern connection is shown to extend through the existing utility easement on
the multifamily development and no longer through park property.
Sewer: This project includes approximately 805LF of new 8" sanitary sewer main. They are
proposing to connect to an existing 8" sanitary sewer main on E. Fairlane St. by installing sanitary
sewer through the west side of Doc Mashburn Park. Parks approval to install the sanitary sewer
main on the park property will be required.
Drainage: This development is required to meet the four Minimum Standards of the Drainage
Criteria Manual. Minimum Standard 1 water quality requirements will be met through use of
bioretention. They are showing to keep the peak flow of the 1-year, 24-hour storm below 2.Ocfs,
so the channel protection requirement of Minimum Standard 2 does not apply. Minimum Standard
3 Overbank Flood Protection and Minimum Standard 4 Extreme Flood Protection requirements
Mailing Address:
113 W. Mountain Street www.fayetteville-ar.gov
Fayetteville, AR 72701
will be met by the design of the pond outfall structure keeping peak flows post -development below
peak flows pre -development. Further review of the design will be conducted with the grading
permit submittal.
One administrative variance to the Drainage Criteria Manual is being requested, which has been
reviewed by the City Engineer and is outlined below:
1. The applicant is requesting to reduce the setback distance from buildings to 5' from 25' as
outlined in Appendix B of the Drainage Criteria Manual. The applicant provided a
recommendation from a geotechnical engineer, and this variance can be approved with
the requirement that the geotechnical recommendations be followed during construction.
Plan Comments:
1. Outlet structure detail in drainage report needs to include elevations.
2. Provide table with pipe size, material, and length of proposed water and sewer mains on
plans.
3. Confirm if the correct bioretention area for sub -basin W is included in the drainage report
as the post -development map has changed since the previous submittal, but the
calculations have stayed the same.
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. 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.
4. 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.
5. 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
To: Jesse Masters, Planner
CC: Battalion Chief Jeremy Ashley, Fire Marshal
From: Captain Andrew Horton, Deputy Fire Marshal
Date: 1 /4/2023
Subject: LSD 2022-0039 - 788 S. SHERMAN AVE, FAYETTEVILLE, AR 72703
Attached below I have provided the code as it reads for clarification.
SECTION D107 - ONE- OR TWO-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS
AFPC 2012 D107.1 Developments of one- or two-family dwellings where the number of dwelling units
exceeds 30 shall be provided with two separate and approved fire apparatus access roads and shall
meet the requirements of Section D 104.3.
Exceptions:
Where there are more than 30 dwelling units on a single public or private fire apparatus access
road and all dwelling units are equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system
in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1, 903.3.1.2 or 903.3.1.3 of the International Fire Code,
access from two directions shall not be required.
AFPC 2012 D104.3 Remoteness. Where two fire apparatus access roads are required, they shall be
placed a distance apart equal to not less than one half of the length of the maximum overall diagonal
dimension of the lot or area to be served, measured in a straight line between accesses.
Mailing Address
303 W. Center St. www.fayetteville-ar.gov
Fayetteville, AR 72701
URBAN FORESTRY
TREE PRESERVATION COMMENTS
CITY OF
FAYETTEVILLE
ARKANSAS
To: Allen Jay Young, DCI
From: Melissa M. Evans, Urban Forestry & John Scott, Urban Forester
CC: Gretchen Harrison, Planner
Meeting Date: December 29, 2022
Subject: LSD-2022-0039: E. Huntsville Rd. Multi -Family West: 788 S. Sherman Ave., 565
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
Square Feet Percent of site
Total Site Area *Minus Right of Way and Easements
52,624
100%
Zoning Designation * Select Below with drop down arrow
RMF-24 Multi -Family Residential -Twenty -Four Units Per Acre
10,525
20%
HHOD * Select Below with Drop Down Arrow
No
0
0%
Total Canopy for Minimum Preservation Requirements
10,525
20.0%
Existing Tree Canopy * Minus Right of Way and Easements
24,497
46.6%
Tree Canopy Preserved
6,631
12.6%
Tree Canopy Removed *On Site
17,866
34.0%
Tree Canopy Removed *Off Site
1,413
Tree Canopy Removed Total
19,279
36.6%
Removed Below Minimum
3,894
Mitigation Requirements
5,307
3. Mitigation Requirements Canopy below Number of 2" caliper
requirement trees to be planted
High Priority 5307 24
Low Priority
Total Mitigation Trees Required 5307 24
4. Mitigation Type Yes No
On -Site Mitigation X
Off -Site Mitigation
Tree Escrow (See Conditions of Approval)
5. Tree Preservation Plan Checklist
UDC Chapter 167.04H1
a. 5 year Aerial Check on Existing Trees
b. Property Boundary
c. Natural Features (100ft beyond limits of disturbance)
d. Existing Topography and Proposed Grading
e. Soil Types
f. Significant Trees
g. Groupings of Trees
h. Table Inventory List (species, size, health, priority)
i. All Existing and Proposed Utilities
j. All Existing and Proposed Utility Easements and ROW's
k. All Streams (with approximate center line)
I. Floodplains and floodways
m. Existing Street, Sidewalk or Bike Path ROW
n. Submitted Site Analysis Plan (if required)
o. Shows ALL Proposed Site Improvements
p. Delineates trees/canopy to be preserved and removed
Tree Protection Methods
a. Tree Protection Fencing
b. Limits of Root Pruning
c. Traffic flow on work site
d. Location of material storage
e. Location of concrete wash out
f. Location of construction entrance/exit
N/A
X
X
Tech
Subdivision Planning
Plat
Committee Commission
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
6. Site Analysis Report (if required)
UDC Chapter 167.04H4
a. Provide graphic examples of multiple options used to
minimize removal of existing canopy
b. Submitted Analysis Statement — Note the process, iterations,
and approaches to preserve canopy.
7. Review Status
Conditionally Approved
Approved
Tabled
Denied
Comments
Yes No
X
X
Tech Plat Subdivision
Committee
11-28-22
12-27-22
10-31-22
11-14-22
N/A
Planning
Commission
1. Address items above marked "No" and all Redlines provided.
2. Staff is concerned about trees due to new water line going through the park. Please adjust the tree
preservation calculations and fence around the trees due to the water line.
3. Please double check your mitigation numbers as 24 is the required number.
l�
CITY OF
FAYETTEVILLE
ARKANSAS
URBAN FORESTRY
LANDSCAPE PLAN COMMENTS
To: Allen Jay Young, DCI
From: Melissa M. Evans, Urban Forestry & John Scott, Urban Forester
CC: Gretchen Harrison, Planner
Meeting Date: December 29, 2022
Subject: LSD-2022-0039: E. Huntsville Rd Multi -Family West: 788 S. Sherman Ave., 565
1. General Landscape Plan Checklist
Yes No N/A
a. Irrigation (notes either automatic or hose bib 100' o.c.)
X
UDC Chapter 177.03C7g, 177.04B3a
b. Species of plant material identified
X
UDC Chapter 177.03C7d,e
c. Size of plant material (minimum size 2" caliper for trees and 3 gal. shrubs)
X
UDC Chapter 177.03C7b,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, LSIP, and Subdivisions (PPL & FPL) plans stamped by a licensed
X
Landscape Architect, others by Landscape Designer
UDC Chapter 177.03B
g. Planting bed contained by edging
X
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 A2g
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) X
UDC Chapter 177.04C
d. Placement of Trees (either side at entrances and exits) X
UDC Chapter 177.04C2
3. Perimeter Landscaping Requirements Yes No N/A
a. Front Property Line (15' wide landscape) and five on sides. X
UDC Chapter 177.04D2a
b. Side and Rear Property Lines (5' Wide Landscape Area)
UDC Chapter 177D1 No
c. Shade trees planted on south and west sides of parking lots X
UDC Chapter 177.04D2e
d. Screening of parking lot from adjacent residential properties. X
4. Street Tree Planting Requirements
Yes No N/A
a. Residential Subdivisions
X
1 Large Shade Species Tree per Lot
UDC Chapter 177.05B 1 a
b. Non -Residential Subdivisions
X
1 Large Species Shade Tree every 30' (planted in greenspace)
UDC Chapter 177.05B2a
c. Urban Tree Well — Urban Streetscapes
X
Trees every 30' (8' sidewalk)
UDC Chapter 177.05B3a-f
d. Structured Soil — Urban Tree Wells
X
Include a note and/or detail of structural soil on Landscape Plan
UDC Chapter 177.05B3a-f
e. Residential Subdivisions
X
Timing of planting indicated on plans
UDC Chapter 177.05A4
f. Residential Subdivisions
X
Written description for method of tracking planting
UDC Chapter 177.05A4e
Q
5. Landscape Requirement Totals Amount
Mitigation Trees 24
Parking Lot Trees 4
Street Trees 3
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) Tech Plat Subdivision Planning
Committee Commission
Conditionally Approved 12-27-22
Approved
Tabled 10-31-22 11-29-22
11-14-22
Denied
Comments
1. Address items above marked "No" and all Redlines provided.
2. This project is required and needs to be reviewed and stamped by a licensed landscape architect.
3. It is understood that the Owner and adjacent Property Owner do not want to provide shrubs along the east
side of the site to screen the adjacent residential zoning. The applicant applied for a variance on this and the
requirement for 5' of greenspace. The plan shows 2'-6" of greenspace. Since more greenspace is being
provided along the property line for the proposed development to the east, which is in review now, Urban
Forestry will support the variance request.
4. Please provide shrubs between the parking and E. Huntsville Road.
9
■
moci
DEVELOPMENT
CONSULTANTS
INCORPORATED
Written request and narrative to accompany petition packet for the
E. Huntsville Rd. Multi -Family West LSD at 788 S Sherman Ave, City of Fayetteville, Arkansas.
To: The Fayetteville City Planning Commission
On behalf of the landowners, I am petitioning the Fayetteville City Planning Commission to accept the included Large
Scale Development of the property located at 788 S Sherman Ave. in the City of Fayetteville. Arkansas.
This property is currently being used as a single-family residence with a one existing residential home.
Current zoning is MF-24, allowing up to 24 units per acre. The proposed multi -family development will include 22
units comprised of 7 triplexes and 1 stand alone unit fronting E. Huntsville Road. Improvements to water, sewer, and
drainage are included with this project. The proposed development intends to have a single point of vehicular access
along the north side of the property from E. Huntsville Rd. for all of the multi -family units.
A fee -in -lieu is being requested for the Park Land Dedication requirement. The fee -in -lieu totals to $20,944.00 for the
22 multi -family units.
Additionally, 22 — 2 inch caliper trees will be planted as part of the tree preservation plan.
By accepting this large scale development request, the current owners would benefit, and no other landowner would be
adversely affected.
The public interest and welfare would not be adversely affected by accepting tlus large scale development request.
Included in the Petition Packet is:
1 Application and Payment of applicable fees for processing the application $400.00.
2 This written description.
3 Authorization Letter
4 LSD Civil/Landscape Plans
5 Survey
6 Architectural Elevations
7 Drainage Report
8 Tech Plat Fire Review
Al en Jay g, Develo t Co n c.
Engineering 0 Planning 0 Land Surveying 0 Landscape Architecture
2200 North Rodney Parham Road, Suite 220 • Little Rock, Arkansas 72212 • Telephone 501-221-7880 • fax 501-221-7882
1 East Center Street, Suite 290 • Fayetteville, Arkansas 72701 • Telephone 479-444-7880
■
moci
DEVELOPMENT
CONSULTANTS
INCORPORATED
04 January 2023
City of Fayetteville
Planning Commission
125 W. Mountain Street
Fayetteville, AR 72701
479.575.8267
DCI Job Number: 2022-128 West
LSD Number: 2022-0039
Project Name: E. Huntsville Road Multi -Family West
Owner: Nicholas Corter, 3216 N Deane Solomon Rd, 479.445.8075
Project Narrative:
The E. Huntsville Road Multi -Family West development is located at 786 S Sherman
Ave, Parcel 765-15235-002, and is approximately 1.21 acres. This parcel is
approximately 110' along E. Huntsville Road and 507.9' deep. The project is a
multifamily development consisting of seven triplexes and one single family unit for a
total of 22 units. Each unit is designed to be a multistory building utilizing steps into the
home and stairs to the living areas on the second floor. Because of the architect's width
of the units and the tight layout of the site, the minimum number of required parking
stalls was met by utilizing spaces around the hammerhead turnaround.
The Owner of the subject property and the owner of the property to the east are
developing their properties simultaneously. They have agreed that their two
developments will share storm water management responsibilities, and that the
detention pond will be located on the property to the east. This development is utilizing
a bioretention swale for water quality that is located along the shared property line that
captures the subject property storm water and channels it to the detention pond for
storm water management. Due to the location of the bioretention swale, simultaneous
and similar development of their properties, and shared responsibility of the swale along
the common property line, the two landowners have agreed that they wish to not have
any side yard landscape buffer between their properties.
Variance Request:
On behalf of the owner, DCI is requesting variances to the following sections of the
Unified Development Code.
1. Variance to UDC Section 166.08.F, Access management. E. Huntsville Road is
classified as a Neighborhood Link in the Fayetteville Master Street Plan and thus
is required to have 100' spacing between curb cuts. The parcel is approximately
110' wide along E. Huntsville Road with existing neighbor curb cuts located on
the subject property western property line and approximately 55' east of the
eastern property line. So, this property needs a curb cut for access between two
existing curb cuts that are currently only 165' apart. DCI has designed this
development to create an equal spacing between the existing curb cut to the
west and a future curb cut to the east (shifted slightly east from current location).
The new spacing will be approximately 90' from each driveway centerline, or 70'
Engineering 0 Planning 0 Land Surveying 0 Landscape Architecture
2200 North Rodney Parham, Suite 220 • Little Rock, Arkansas 72212 • Tel 501-221-7880 • Fax 501-221-7882
1 East Center Street, Suite 290 • Fayetteville, Arkansas 72701 . Tel 479-444-7880
from the one curb cut to the next, which maximizes the distance between curb
cuts given the constraints of the site (see attached Exhibit A).
In this spacing, the driveway radius return also lies within 5' of the extension of
the east property line to the back of curb. Shifting the driveway west could meet
the requirement but would reduce the distance from the existing curb cut to the
west, resulting in a less desirable configuration. Additionally, this shift would
require the driveway to move approximately 10.2 feet west, reducing the
available footprint of Unit 1, making it less desirable for the owner. The adjoining
east property owner has agreed to this design for the radius to cross the
extension of the property line within the right-of-way. The existing driveway on
the western property line will be granted an access easement to the property
owner the west and not utilized for this project.
The option of a shared access drive with the neighboring property to the east
was explored, however whenever both properties share a common drive, the fire
department counts all of the units of both developments, which by code
necessitates a second access which must be separated from the first access by
a minimum of half the distance of the long diagonal of the combined properties.
In this scenario, it would require a second entrance at least 228 feet from the
potential shared drive. Due to the location of these parcels, the private
ownership of the properties on each side, and the public park to the south, this is
not possible. The only other option allowed by fire code would be to require that
every unit have an automated sprinkler system. We anticipated utilizing the 13D
fire suppression system at an estimated cost of $5,000 per unit. With the
combined properties having 45 units, that cost would be approximately
$225,000.00. That option is cost prohibitive to the owners and would inhibit the
ability of the owners to proceed with the development. We are requesting this
variance due to a hardship resulting from the fire code as described above, since
fire code allows each development to be developed with a separate entrance off
of E. Huntsville Road.
2. Variance to UDC Section 172.03.E, Minimum Number of Accessible Spaces.
Due to the limited parking on this site, with no additional room for more parking,
as well as the non -accessible architectural design of each unit, DCI is requesting
a variance from providing ADA Accessible parking. The addition of the two
required ADA parking stalls would be a net loss of 1 parking space for the site for
the ADA landing, thus requiring an elimination of one unit or an additional
variance for reduced parking, creating a hardship for the owner. Also, since each
unit requires steps to enter it and steps up to the second floor, and they are not
going to be built with other ADA accessibility traits within the units, it is
anticipated that they will not have any disabled occupants. Therefore, if we were
to include the two ADA parking spaces, they would not likely be utilized and
would take away from available parking for the anticipated residents of the units.
If we are required to include two spaces on the idea that a disabled individual
may decide to visit a resident of the development at some point in the future,
there would only be a 2 in 22 chance that the space would actually be in the
correct location to be utilized by that individual.
3. Variance to UDC Section 177.04.D.1, Perimeter Landscape Requirements on
Side and Rear Property Lines. In order to maximize tree preservation on the
west property line while providing the necessary fire lane widths, and due to the
narrow nature of the parcel, DCI is requesting a variance for the 5' wide side yard
perimeter landscape buffer requirements along the eastern property line. The
subject property owner and the owner of the parcel to the east have an
G:\2022\22-128 WEST\LSD Submittal\2022-12-21 Submittal 4
agreement that neither owner wants the buffer. Additionally, the bioretention
Swale is located along the eastern property line. In order to create the landscape
buffer on the east property line, the site would be required to shift west, either
impacting existing trees and reducing the tree preservation on the site, or further
reducing the units which only have a 575 square foot footprint as is, creating a
hardship for the owner.
4. Variance to UDC Section 177.04.d.2.f, Parking Lot Screening. In order to
maximize tree preservation on the west property line while providing the
necessary fire lane widths, and due to the narrow nature of the parcel, DCI is
requesting a variance for the parking lot screening requirement along the eastern
property line. The subject property owner and the owner of the parcel to the east
have an agreement that neither owner wants the screening. Additionally, the
bioretention Swale is located along the eastern property line, limiting the ability to
plant screening vegetation at this location. In order to create the screening on
the east property line, the site would be required to shift west, either impacting
existing trees and reducing the tree preservation on the site, or further reducing
the units which only have a 575 square foot footprint as is, creating a hardship for
the owner.
Thank you for your consideration and we look forward to working with the City moving
forward.
Sincerely,
(�/Z'
—
Chase Henrichs, P.E.
ChaseH(o)DCIUS.PRO
479.444.7880
Development Consultants
GA2022\22-128 WEST\LSD Submittal\2022-12-21 Submittal 4
E SHERMAN AVE
0
cn
C)
c:)
FF
rF-
2'51"W 57.90'
b 0
jm
-T
-Ij
A m
0
cl)
T
c:)
c:)
L—J
z
28F
DEVELOPMENT CONSULTANTS INCORPORATED
fTl r,.) �', —1— — NSF—
E. HUNTSVILLE ROAD M
E AST
& WEST
CURB CUT SEPARATION EXHIBIT
RIREI
_R�._F< ' I R F =owR RSRa
EgE�m_ o s
Mz�eg�"�R�A����o
bbb�
m �
+a
HdUNT-SV --
ge az
-HUNTSVILL �,..., -
E EK „
o I 1
o
R3R
� � .�..,.,, o to I I •
o I 1
1
IIERLANoIARRKEssz, M,sz,E VI«E 11
w m oRR RMR-z° I I I Ra LI. II s ° I_ FAr'NN`RSF>
61 OIoI
/ OR"
a�
9
v - wo o ARIEL1o:,ss-,5132-00,
o
BE AD
BE SE
7
BE
p mm
— — — — — L III i '� l � ED I r
oa o0o N— I 71] 1 m�
I —1 D
oI I m
aaCER i%wj���
�s „w.°As gage IWHIM
csSm=
aTF
TOY To I
m AR E-oo, 3� _. v- Slaz sno3 as n eeEs" � w4o° H,
a I° 12NmT a I zoR rvc.R, io,
^ DEVELOPMENT CONSULTANTS INCORPORATED
♦ ! N PaaER,,,.E. E. HUNTSVILLE RD. MULTI -FAMILY WEST SITE PLAN n fi _ ■■
ESQ, A"z C2
� tl ' �'
G9oP SgM"G99m€ b
Wap
_ � I
I �°o�000wo,
a
o:I
I a
I
o RK, KS K.Fza05212o l
�
I
i
VI L
I
Fnverrev ue ae no, ..
N
_ I
:'p'CER 7%wj'• I w I Fn of
ate,, • cqi`•: m� a 4 I "„ o z.
wsgM�;ggy;gy3€�ggg�o'm;'�sgg
`zac`..,
'>,Nov'ti��o.° g' g I "•a,ss�m��:x cs�.� gPo°°ye
sy�r° �a
ems,. £�9M aPn'�
�n1a3��Sn ms0��$
H gym' oo°°N $ S�a m€€ ,
M&'i �sa >eFAN�ics'pcg°ass€�
mms�o � ng.gmmsgs,_m
m I sa
sh� ee€emz9c woo°m "$'$
Hm
Ei
I
^ DEVELOPMENT CONSULTANTS INCORPORATED
♦ I N PRwE�E E. HUNTSVILLE RD. MULTI -FAMILY WEST n fi �, _ ■■
tl
ESQ z�
SITE PLAN -
I
I
I
I
I
i A
I
I
E.
IPARCELID
M,sz,E ILLERD
FRS- -
m
nanex m
A
��T D
zzzsn r
ooemm Z
=: O
=c M
D D H~ y N
m m = Z
yrO
m N
D m M Z =
m0 m C
O
GZ ao yO E
�
Z m z o�mo
CMM o
zo�
m Oy Z m
N=o
=mo
ono
0mm
O
_�
o N 01 O A 00Ili Ili Lu
N 01 O
02
N -, Development Property for Nick Corter Katey Howard
0 a) Bentonville, AR
T M 501-580-3672
W rD
Single Family Unit
F� F2 N N
o N 01 0 A OD N Ol
(D
m
rD
O
o N Ol O A 00 N 01
Triplex
o N
0)
O
A
OD
N
01
(D
m
rD
O
cry
C
rD
m
rD
O�
o N 02 O A 00 Ni 01
cn
n
(D
rn
O�
LAf
m
Z
W
° � V1.2
4�, rD
Katey Howard Bentonville, Triplex
501-580-367.
o N 01 O A OD N Ol
(D
m
rD
O
o N Ol O A 00Ili NJ
Ni 01
Triplex
LSD-2022-0039 788 S. SHERMAN AVE
One Mile View NORTH
0 0.13 0.25 0.5 Miles
,
I I,
I,
l .
I
I
I
I
I I
Subject Property
I I SF-4
I I
I
DG CS
H�Nrs
- V�LLEAD_ _
--
NC I R-O 3
I O
I � J
J
I O
I
I a
n
a
x
c-2
1.
I
G RMF-24 NCJ�
i
Z
Z I ONS_G
01 RSF-8
' LF
Zoning 1-z General ma�emal
imms Neighborhood Link RESIDENTIALSINGLE-FAMILY EXTRACTION
M. RI-U COMMERCIAL
NS-G ME-1
Regional Link - High Activity ----- - =Rl-12 RasltlenuaFOfiw
NS-L
Unclassified DM
_ �ResltleMlalA,rialW21 M,-2
i— RSF-.5 �L,
Alley RSF-1 FORM BASED DISTRICTS
— RS11 M Go —n Core
Resldentlal LinkRSF4 MUman Th—ghrare
RSF-] M ..in Streat Cen[er
RSF-S Osxntown General
• •Shared -Use Paved Trail RSF-18 �wmmaeiyser�mea
RESIDENTIAL MULTI -FAMILY M Reighb.—d Sam
Q Neighborhood Conservation
— — Trail (Proposed) RMF-S �RMF-,g
t � PLANNED ZONING DISTRICTS
Fayetteville City Limits �RMF-11 ML.mmemial,Intl.—I,Realdentlal
1 _ _ Planning Area — �RMF-20 INSTITUTIONAL
MR.— _P1
Planning Area f�--I INDUSTRIAL
Fayetteville City Limits -— mil 1-1 Heary Commert i-d LightInauel I
LSD-2022-0039 788 S. S H E RMAN AVE
Close Up View
RI-U
NS-G m
ic
D
PHUNTSVILLEAD�E=M�00,._
❑I�
Neighborhood Link
Unclassified
Residential Link
Hillside -Hilltop Overlay District
r _ Planning Area
_ Fayetteville City Limits
- - - Trail (Proposed)
RSF-4
C-I
�w O o
W Q co J
NI z W NORTH
RMIJ
Feet
0 75 150 300
1:2,400
RSF-4
RI-U
RM F-24
Residential -Office
C-1
Community Services
450 600 Neighborhood Services - Gen.
P-1