From the MINUTES OF THE APRIL 3 MEETING OF THE FAYETTEVILLE CITY SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE
A regular meeting of the City of Fayetteville Subdivision Committee was held on Thursday, April 3, 2003 at 8:30 a.m. in Room 111 of the City Administration Building, 113 W. Mountain, Fayetteville, Arkansas.
ITEMS CONSIDERED ACTION TAKEN
03-13.00: Large Scale Development
LSD 03-13.00: Large Scale Development (Duncan Avenue Apartments, 561) was submitted by Mandy Bunch on behalf of James Mathias of Mathias Rentals for property located west of Duncan Avenue and north of 12th Street. The property is zoned R-2, Medium Density Residential and contains approximately 2.46 acres with 48 units (80 bedrooms) proposed.
Hoover: The next applicant is LSD 03-13.00 submitted by Mandy Bunch. Sara?
Edwards: What we have here is property located west of Duncan Avenue north of 12th Street zoned R-2 containing 2.46 acres with a 48 unit apartment complex proposed with 80 bedrooms proposed. Parking provided is 87 regular spaces, 4 ADA spaces, 2 bike racks. Surrounding zoning north, south, and west are R-2 with the east being I-2. Single-family housing is existing to the north, south, and east, industrial food processing to the west. Water and sewer are available. They are proposing curb and gutter on the west side of Duncan. Tree preservation existing is 27.12%, proposed is 12.58%. The requirement is 20%, they are proposing mitigation on site. We are recommending that this be forwarded to the full Planning Commission with only standard conditions of approval.
Hoover: Thank you. Matt with Engineering?
Casey: As Sara stated, they are going to be doing the street improvements along Duncan with curb and gutter and storm sewer. They are also providing a 6' sidewalk and 6' greenspace. They are providing detention. There are wetlands in this area. She is going to work to mitigate that within the proposed detention area.
Turner: The Parks Board voted on March 3rd to take money in lieu of land so for 48 multi-family units the fees are $18,864.
Hoover: Tree and Landscape?
Hesse: I have an additional report to hand out to you. The numbers did change slightly. With the pond, the difference was there were trees along here and we added to that. Through the Plat Review process we requested changes to preserve this large tree here and this large tree here which they have done. They have changed the design in order to save a row of trees along this north boundary line to provide a buffer for that north property owner. At this point everything that I asked for in order to ensure the preservation is done.
Edwards: Kim, do you know how many trees were to be mitigated on site?
Hesse: Yes, it is 17.
Edwards: Thank you.
Hoover: Would the applicants introduce themselves?
Bunch, M: My name is Mandy Bunch with EB Landworks. I am representing James Mathias who is the owner and builder and he is here. He will stay the owner and maintain these. Basically we have 80 bedrooms total. We have met with the neighborhood association the Thursday before spring break and it seemed as if with them the bulk of the concern, we have been in contact with the adjacent property owner to the north on several occasions as well as the property owner across the street. We have had some conversations and will do some more discussions with the adjoining owner to the south. Basically what concerns we have heard thus far are traffic. From the neighborhood meeting we gathered that there are some regional issues with aged water and sewer lines which to the best of my knowledge from what I have heard from Water and Sewer, it is adequate to support the development of this site. There does seem to be over a period of years some things that have happened in the neighborhood and haven't been upgraded, etc. That seemed to be overwhelmingly some of the issues that the neighborhood had.
Hoover: Mandy, I am going to stop you for just a minute. Matt, can you respond to that?
Casey: I have not heard of any problems in the area. Dave Jurgens our Water and Sewer Superintendent gets copies of these and he responds through me on ones where he knows that the lines are inadequate and there was no response for this particular one. They do have existing sewer along Duncan and an existing water line, I didn't see the size labeled here.
Bunch, M: The waterline is a 6'. Both of the comments seem to be from sewer overflows and backups and things. One thing that we also discussed during a meeting was quite possibly it was a different front line that some of the complaints that were coming in was on. The neighborhood encompasses quite a bit of area that is not directly hooked onto that particular line.
Hoover: So what line this project is going to has been identified?
Casey: After this meeting before Planning Commission or agenda session I will get with Dave Jurgens and look at the lines that are out there.
Bunch: The other overwhelming comment from the neighbors was drainage. I believe based on the basin and where it is located, a great number of their problems I think developed over time with the development of the University and there is absolutely no detention upstream from their properties. This town branch creek goes south of the basketball arena, etc. and it continues through here. This is where a majority of the drainage issues the neighbors are discussing is. It is an identified floodway.
Hoover: Matt, are there known drainage problems to the city?
Casey: None that I'm aware of.
Bunch: What we are going to be discussing with Mr. Woody to the south is that creek. Actually it is not a creek but it is a stream that runs along the south property line of this property and it cuts through this area and Mr. Woody owns these two homes and what we are going to discuss with him is existing erosion in that ditch that development has caused. The detention designed as it is now decreases the peak runoff by 17% to that ditch to the south and it decreases the runoff that is directly on his property by over 50% we also tried to do a little bit more to try to divert all of that drainage away from him and bring it directly into the ditch instead of having it sheet flow across. I want to address the wetlands a little bit. I know that is a concern of several people. Mr. Shepherd lives directly to the north here. We have had several discussions with him and a lot of his requests were part of our original updates to the plans. This set of updates comes directly from him with the tree mitigation issues. He was concerned about the bird habitat in the existing brush line and the trees along this property line. What Mr. Mathias has agreed to is to actually install his privacy fence inside his property to maintain all that existing brush in those areas. That seemed to have met Mr. Shepherd's approval on that particular item. Also, with regard to the neighbors across the street, we have talked to them and located the drive to where it was not going directly into their house and also have proposed to berm this area along the frontage as well as plant some evergreens in there to screen southern bound traffic. Also, on this site plan the only setback that is required is 25' and this building is setback 75' from existing property in that area to maintain that buffer as well. The bulk of the parking has also been taken away from that side. As far as the wetlands on the area, they seem to have been built over a period of time. The whole region has some soils that could be prone to become wetlands if they are not maintained and water is allowed to sit. It is my understanding that this property was fairly unmaintained in the past and just recently before Mr. Mathias' purchase was starting to be brush hogged some. The Corp. of Engineers has been on this site and concur with the study that Mr. Mathias had done on the site. The wetlands area was delineated. The Corp. concurred with that finding. They actually visited the site and concurred to that finding. It has been classified as a wet swale area. What we are proposing as mitigation items is that we have quite a bit of drainage that comes off the hill from the north/northwest. That is the bulk of the drainage that spans this area and the creek as well as the Pinnacle Food site directly to the west. To mitigate that we are proposing to maintain quite a bit of the upland vegetation to help with that. We are also creating a wet swale on the western property line. I have had more discussions with our wetlands scientist and we are going to be developing a wet swale along this property line to introduce the water into the pond. We are also going to construct the pond, it is going to be a little bit of a redesign here, actually just create the pond with a berm rather than taking any of this material out to aid in the creation of the wet swale area to the west we will be stockpiling the soils which are hydric in nature that are taken from this area and stockpiling them on site so they can be respread at a depth of 12' of existing going into the swale. We will also probably be introducing some different native plantings. Those are the things that we have done and we are doing. We have gone through the process with the Corp. and we have got clearance from the state as far as archaeological issues, etc. and also clearance from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife on site. I don't have much else to say. We are here for questions and comments.
Bunch: I have just a couple of questions. Is this fence going to remain or is that just during construction?
Bunch, M: That is actually a tree preservation fence during construction and then the line that is further in is the proposed 8' board fence that is requested.
Bunch: By virtue of setting this fence back from the property line to allow vegetation next to the Shepherd property who's responsibility is that going to be to maintain that? Has there been any arrangement made on that or is it just going to be allowed to grow up? What were the neighbor's concerns to set that fence back since you have been in contact with the neighbors?
Bunch, M: Their concerns were mostly for bird and wildlife habitat.
Mathias: It would obviously be ours to maintain. It would be on our property.
Bunch, M: The request is basically not to maintain at all, just to let it stay as it is now.
Mathias: I would maintain the fence.
Terry: Melissa Terry at 101 N. Locust. The streams are not on the plat review maps so it is kind of hard to keep them in context.
Radwell: Thank you for hearing me out before I leave. I think people in the neighborhood are much more aware of the conditions than I am. I have walked the site and talked to a number of people who live around there. I would just like to go on record about a couple of specific issues. First of all there is a drainage on the property that I have walked and it does have standing water and it does have flow into the little drainage that you mentioned that flows into this person's property. I believe his name is Mitch and I believe he is here. At the present time that particular piece of property is serving a very important function retaining and preserving that water. I really wanted to point out to everyone today that as of March 10, 2003 the City of Fayetteville did issue a notice of intent to the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality that they would be developing a storm-water management plan. They are under federal mandate to do so under the EPA storm-water Phase II. Many of the issues that are involved with this particular site and the development of any land in that particular area are very relevant to storm-water Phase II. That is a federal program with certain mandates that is intended to try to help communities such as Fayetteville and the entire northwest Arkansas region to deal with the kinds of problems that become cumulative during urban development. We already have seen those kinds of things. We have a problem in Fayetteville that is very well known on the Hamestring Basin and there are a number of people who have flooding. They have spent a considerable, I believe it is something like $93,000 to study the problem and there are millions of dollars in improvements that would need to be done to prevent flooding of these people's property. That is an issue that was developed some time ago. The purpose of Storm water Phase II is to prevent those kinds of things from surfacing in the future. We really need to consider all of those issues when you look at this piece of property and what is coming down the pipeline relative to this area. This places things in a somewhat different context than what it was in the past. In the past, people had very little recourse and when people built detention areas, the idea of a detention area is to hold water and yet I can site a number of detention areas in Fayetteville that have failed. They completely failed during the first time there was flooding and there was no recourse and there was no way for anybody to have done anything about it. They are simply areas that have never functioned from the very beginning. There was little recourse that anybody had up to that point. There has been considerable debate at the Northwest Regional Planning Commission's storm-water meetings about the liability of those issues now that that Storm Water Phase II has been signed on of our intent to comply. What the liability will be with regard to the city and to the developer remains to be seen. However, there will be a liability; so, if this detention area does in fact fail, then people who live in this area do have recourse. There are two major issues with regard to Storm Water Phase II. One of them is the amount of water. When you convert land from land that is holding water to impervious surfaces, obviously the amount of flow is going to change considerably. This is a site that had two homes on it and behind those two homes was a plot of roughly 2 acres that had a drainage that has standing water on it much of the time and water that actually flows across it during storms. I have been out there and I have seen the water flow across it. The corps has been out there and they can recognize it as well. We are now talking about taking that two and a half acre parcel that had two homes and this 2-acre drainage area and converting it to 48 bedrooms and 96 parking places, it is my understanding. If you stop and look at that, what it is going to take to get 48 units and 96 parking spaces it is going to be a lot of impervious surface. I understand these people have talked about their mitigation of those problems and they need to be aware that there will be serious consideration given to what the liability is if those steps do not in fact mitigate for the problem of the quantity of water. The second issue is quality of water. This has to do with how much impervious surface can you put. You have parking lots, you have anti-freeze, you have dripping oil, you have whatever else comes from 96 parking places so that does in fact, impact those waters. I have not had time to look at where Town Branch fits into the rest of the picture, but we already have some empiric waters coming into Fayetteville. One of them is West Fork. It is already on a treatment list for the EDA. The purpose of this program is to address these issues, and I do not know where this puts these people. If you proceed, I am not sure if these people have any recourse at this point or do they have recourse after the damage is done. I do want you to be aware that this is the situation and I can't answer all the specifics of it. I think you would find it difficult to get all of the questions as to where they are going to proceed with this. This area is a prime example of the kinds of issues that Storm Water Phase II was intended to address. This is a part of the city that is well known for its drainage problems. You heard people start to laugh and snicker as people said the sewage and everything is OK. I have talked to people and they have told me of the problems that they have. Eleventh Street I was told about a water line breaking three times in the past two years and shooting water 100' in the air. If you don't believe it go down there and look at it. They have had to fix it three times. I have also heard of backups and sewer water coming up out of their toilets and into their homes. I will leave those people to speak more specifically to their issues, but I did want to make you aware that there is a sincere and deliberate effort being made to try to address the kinds of issues that we have here. This is a very, very intensive development in a single-family residential area. I was very surprised to see that it was zoned this way because if you go down there you will see single-family homes. One of the problems that we are sustaining right now is that there are a lot of parcels undeveloped. Parts of that area were not developed for the very reasons that we are talking about, because of the kind of drainage problems that there are in that area. Now that we have run out of other land, we are starting to look at these pieces that are potentially very, very wet. I have looked at the delineation done by EGIS Environmental Consulting and I would concur that he did a reasonably good job of delineating it; but essentially what they are planning on doing is slabbing over the existing wetland. Whether the detention area and swale that they are talking about is sufficient to mitigate it that is a question that remains to be seen. I am going to have to go on to another meeting. I think the people who live in this area have been well articulated to me and I hope that they will convey their concerns and that you will bear in mind that as of March 10, 2003, the situation has changed a bit. We have a long way to go. The city is required to pass with an input about how they want to plan for the future to avoid storm-water problems; so we have that challenge within the next five years. Thank everybody for their time today. Like I said, I think these people can speak very well for themselves.
Shepherd: That was Andrea Radwell, she is a stream ecologist. I am Aubrey Shepherd. As these folks have told you, I live just north of this property. This is the suggestion I had about not just our development but for this whole area. We understand that Hank Broyles and associates are buying property all the way from 6th Street, including some trailer parks and some existing buildings and so forth on up this way. The basin of Town Branch there is rather wide and there is a lot of wetland in the parts that he is buying. This particular part that our development is on is known as a mounded wet prairie. It has existed there, Larry is not here now but Larry was telling me when he was a boy in the 1950's and he helped mow hay on the dairy farm that was there but they never used this particular parcel to even mow hay simply because it was known as a wetland and they left it alone. They didn't put the cattle in there. This was his experience from that time. It was just simply prairie that was left alone. It was never developed for a reason and of course some of this other stuff that is up stream. What I am suggesting is that studies of, first the sewer lines do need to be replaced in that area, if not before this development, before the Broyles development for sure. It backs up in Don's yard. The water lines need to be replaced and then the street needs to be rebuilt. It seems a habit to pave a nice new street, putting the curb and gutter in and then having the water lines fail or the sewer have problems. They dig it up then. Those things paved in the last 10 years have now been patched. That is the reason. It wasn't done in the correct order. Some of the culverts such as near Mitch's house are washing out. He has got a photo here of it. The wash out from the street to the culvert is a foot from the edge of the pavement. Mandy has drawn a fine plan, she is good at this, but should there be a major storm that increases the runoff much more than what her pond can hold and you combine it with all the overflow from the Pinnacle Foods property that comes by Mitch's house to that little creek then not only could it take out the wall that supports his house, his lot, it could take out the street right there. Down stream from there there is a house. Mitch is going to show you pictures here in a minute. A lot of the houses are way down here near the thing. This creek comes from Mitch's. The street is trying to wash out there now. When it comes under here it goes down into their yard, turns with a rock wall to avoid their house and goes back here to Town Branch. Their house is lower than the creek is 40' in front of the house when the creek is full. It fills regularly. You can go down there and see it. What I am saying is that studies need to be done from here all the way up to 6th Street before those plans are firmed up. Those people are still talking about these issues. That study should be done. The Corps of Engineers, archaeological people and so forth should all be involved in this. The corps has some of these people on staff. I am asking that there be a complete study of the historical, environmental, archaeological, hydrological, and sociological values of the area from 6th to 15th before these other projects come to you, and it won't be long. Another consideration we don't talk about very much is they are talking about that they want to take out this trailer park, another trailer park by 6th Street. There are two of them up there. That sounds good to a lot of people because these trailers are not in great shape. On the other hand, they are sitting on lots with magnificent timber that has been growing there for a generation or two. At least the kids, if they don't have a nice home, they have a nice yard. It may be junked up or it may not be the way you would like it but they consider it home. It is what they can afford and they at least have shade so they don't have to have central heat and air all year around. There is certain value in the trailer parks. It is easy to look at them and say they have no value. That is not true. Some of them have lived there longer than some of us in that area. Some of the people in the trailer parks have been there for 30 years or more. The problem there is where do those people go? They can't afford some of these nice apartments that people are planning on putting in here. A lot of people in the trailer parks are paying rent by the week because they get paid weekly and they never have two weeks' rent, so they are paying $125 a week for trailers that aren't worth that; but you don't have to have a credit check to get there so they can get their kids indoors. It is not a great thing, but where do they go? I am saying that we should have a discussion, that this should be part of the planning process. If you displace people in a neighborhood, trailer park or whatever, is there some provision or housing plan for the people who are displaced by the removal of these things? I think this is important. Sixth Street shelter, Seven Hills Shelter, they can't take that many more people.
Hoover: Can you speed it up a little please? Some of these issues are really for Council.
Shepherd: I will shut up now and let Mitch go next. Mitch, make it short and fast because these guys are ready to go.
Woody: My name is Mitch Woody and I live just south of this project. I have a rent house adjacent to it and then live next to the rent house. I have a bunch of pictures.
Hoodenpyle: I have seen water 2' deep in the house sitting next to the creek from this little deal. It didn't come from up that direction because the other creek comes down. That little house by the creek down there I have seen it half way up in that house in water.
Woody: I am going to hold these up so everybody can see them. I hope that these are in the same order as the ones I handed out. I live right down here and this creek comes down here and across and then comes down. One of the things that I wanted to mention, these two trailer parks, I heard a lot at the neighborhood meeting about traffic. Traffic is not my major concern but one thing to note is that I observe in the summer especially. All of the kids that attend school that live in these mobile-home parks know each other. They go to school together and naturally they go and visit each other quite a bit so it is not uncommon in the middle of the afternoon or anytime day or night, five or six or eight at a time wander through there looking at the sky, throwing their coke cans and stuff. That is OK too. They wander down through the middle of the street, six, eight or 10 of them at a time sometimes and they just wonder through and don't watch the traffic. People come around this corner and just glide around this corner. Others leave this mobile-home park and skyrocket north. These photos, I just wanted to show you. The first photo shows that this is kind of a family neighborhood. The apartment complex is on the right here. This is facing south, it shows Jennifer's house on the left. You can see the right side. This second set of photos is standing in what would now be the driveway of the apartment complex. Looking north you see the road sign turning to the right, that is the curve, that is 11th Street. As a matter of fact, it just happened that there is some kid riding a bicycle there. This other picture at the bottom is facing north. That is my rent house there. The gray fence is important because that is adjacent to the project. This other photo, I wanted to show the slope of this project. This property from the front of it looking down for about 50' in it looks OK and then it slopes rapidly downward. This other photo at the bottom I took from the middle of the property looking out. I wanted to show the slope there also. This mobile-home park up here, there are two little ditches for canals across the road. They are shown on the plat. There is one here and one here. This drains directly across these mobile-home parks and runs right off down here. This is actually a little high area here and it drains all the way down this side, which is where the parking area is shown and also there was to be a building here but that is right in the middle of that flow but it all flows down here. This is the channel that comes from the mobile-home park right across here. In fact, where you see my finger right here, that would be where the finger is here. One is facing north, one is facing south. This is the picture of the drainage problem across the road. Right next to my house is this drainage pipe. You can see right here whenever it floods it whips around in here. This is what Aubrey was talking about was right next to this street. This water comes across this creek and it just kind of whirlpools right here and is eroding right next to this street. Then on the other side of this street, on the other side, the east side of Duncan Street, you can see this drainage problem that is affecting this area there. They have got a nice rock wall built there and you can see how it is just eating it away there. This is my backyard here. I have a nice white walkover, some may call it a bridge. I have got some erosion problems right here. That little bridge is not attached and twice within the past two years it has actually floated away. One time it floated to this tree here but another time it floated all the way over to these people's house over here. One time it floated here, one time it floated way off down there. City Planning may say the solution to that is to get you a couple of rebars and nail it in. Further back in the back of my house, you can see this basketball net there and there, we are looking at the same one from different angles. You can see how it has eroded here right behind the house. That is after I put a bunch of rocks there to keep it down. This is actually only 200' from where the edge of the project would be. What happens is that the project would definitely impact my property and of course the property on up the road. This erosion has happened in the past three years sinceI moved there. It wasn't like this. You can see the retaining wall and you can see the erosion that is about a foot beneath that wall. Again, this has nothing to do with this project here, it's already there. If it is this bad now what is it going to be like in the future? My suggestion is that they do a retaining pond all the way across here rather than have a building here. I believe this drainage is coming right straight across here where that project is showing. Personally, I don't have a problem with the buildings up here. The drainage is coming off here and it is coming right across here. I have another picture that I didn't include here but it shows the back of the rent house and it comes straight across underneath that gray fence and runs right across the back of my back yard. I will share those with you before I leave.
Hoover: Did you say that your property does flood or is it just that this creek overflows at certain times or does your whole property flood?
Woody: My property doesn't actually flood. The rent house does. It comes underneath the gray fence. The gray fence is straight across and then cuts down at an angle. Even when the two houses were next door and they had nice yards there, whenever it rained that water ran right underneath that gray fence and right down my property.
Hoover: So it does flood?
Woody: When I think of flood I think a foot deep. Let me show you one more photo.
Hoover: Let me just tell everybody also that this will be going to the full Planning Commission. We will also have an agenda tour and go to the property and look at it with all the commissioners just to let you know you will have more opportunities.
Peterson: I am Wanda Peterson. I live at 1325 Ellis. I just need five minutes. I think those pictures are worth a thousand words. First, a little history. This is a picture taken back when my grandfather owned this property. This is the railroad. This was taken by my mother in 1970. This is the one that allows the water to come through and into the creek. This was a picture of my grandmother and you can see the trestle in the background. Here is a better map than what we have here. I have been fighting floods since 1973; so this is from my old files. Here is the creek. This gives you a better view of how it flows. Here is the trestle right here. The tunnels that you see over there are back here. Here is an exploded view of ours. I live right here. The creek comes up behind me and it floods. I wasn't kidding about 15' in my back yard. That is one picture of my flood from my window. Here is our garden, or what was left of it after a flood. We didn't need water at the time, but we did have an irrigation system. Here is a little better picture of it. What you see here is the edge of our carport at that time. We have since built on back there. There is another picture of the garden. This is Carlson Terrace. This not applicable right now because it has been taken care of. At the time it hadn't. This was 1973. It is on the back of the pictures if you want to look and see the description of them. This is directly behind my house after a flood where the water has pushed the rocks into the center. This is my bank here, this is my eroded bank here. At that point, I already lost 4' to 8' off my property. This is the sewer that was in my backyard. Because we are on an angled street and not north, south, east, or west the sewer wouldn't cross. This has been taken care of although in taking care of it they did build an embankment that sticks out in the creek and is rocked. There again, it was a problem because it has deflected the water back onto our banks. That was after this. That is south of 11th Street bridge right there. This is a tree that was piled up north of the bridge. This walnut tree was 15' diameter back then. This is the 15th Street bridge. We finally got the state to come in and clean the debris out from the bridge, which did help the problem, but it didn't alleviate it entirely. You can see how low these bridges are. This is standing on my property looking back at that bank. The man who lived there at the time had property, because of the angle of the creek, he had property on our side of the creek. He lived over here. He had trucks and some sort of construction business. He channelized this creek, which made it terrible for erosion. He brought in to fill up his side huge pieces of concrete that he dumped into the creek. That naturally caused floods. This is the little ditch between Hill and Ellis (avenues). I don't know how that is working. They just built a duplex.
Hoodenpyle: It is all washed out.
Peterson: This is a little abutment at the corner of Dunn and Ellis that allows storm water to flow to 15th Street bridge. You can see how that goes. I think that is still there. This is brush along the bank. Here is the creek bed a natural, narrow, natural slate creek bed. It filled in at different places along there where there were very wide and very narrow portions of the creek.
Hoover: I think that we are getting the idea that there is a drainage problem.
Peterson: I have been there 43 years.
Hoodenpyle: You said 1972.
Peterson: I have been in the area, I know the history. I know the swampy land out there because we have some. I have lived 65 of my 66 years in this area so I do know something about it. Going back to the fence which was knocked down by the floods until they put it back.
Hoover: Thank you Wanda. I know that Jim Beavers is now doing our storm-water plan.
Casey: He is working on the Storm Water Phase II program that Ms. Radwell mentioned earlier.
Hoover: Have there been any areas identified or have we addressed this area and the problems they are having with drainage?
Casey: As far as I'm aware, there has not been a study of this area. I just wanted to double check and make sure that this is not an established floodway and floodplain, which surprises me with all of these comments.
Don Hoodenpyle Don Hoodenpyle. Twenty years ago you guys brought in this guy that was supposed to fix this situation. A lot of the problem that you have got right here is between my piece of property and the next piece of property over. My driveway used to go up to Hill Street, that is why I am listed as being on Hill Street, which I am not. I am on 11th and Duncan. They had a concrete embankment put in there and they had a bridge across there. The bridge washed out so they made 11th Street come on around and we started going out a different direction. This happened when I moved there over 30 years ago. That abutment thing, they let Christie (Arnold Christie, another neighbor who owns several acres in the area and recently donated part of an acre adjacent to Town Branch to Habitat for Humanity) come in there and dump 50 or 60 loads of gravel, or rock and concrete and stuff in over there so what it did instead of the water running over the top of Hill Street and then started coming back this other way. If they would cut a trench it would take a Cat about an hour or less to cut off a piece of my property where it starts rolling back if they would cut off a piece of my property 10' or 20' would alleviate a whole lot of this problem because the water wouldn't be backing up.
Hoover: Have you talked to the city?
Hoodenpyle: Yes I have. This guy promised he was going to come back.
Hoover: In the last few years recently.
Hoodenpyle: As far as the city goes, I think it is foolish that that is zoned R-2 but it is already zoned R-2 but the next one coming up is going to be worse. As far as the city and these water lines, I don't think you can fix that water line. The road is completely collapsed underneath and they keep putting this gravel back in it. The cars come across 11th Street, the more cars that come across there the more times that line is going to get broke. It broke three times last year in one day. It happened after hours on Friday and they were up until midnight on Saturday fixing that stupid thing. The reason that these guys don't know about what is going on up there (is) we have called the woman in the City Clerk's office, she goes to the guy that fixes it, the guy comes out and fixes it and these guys don't know anything about it. Swifty didn't have any idea that we were having any problems down there.
Hoover: Matt, can you meet with the neighbors and Dave Jurgens tomorrow and talk about some of these issues?
Casey: For the water line?
Hoover: The drainage and maybe Dave Jurgens with the water.
Casey: Give me more time.
Diana Smith: They park a truck over the water line because it is exploding all over my house with the asphalt hitting my house, breaking my roof, breaking my windows. I thought the sky was falling literally, because this is beating my house in. The city says 'We'll fix it.' This was three times in one day but not only that it has happened three times since then that it has hit my roof like this.
Casey: Is this on 11th or Duncan?
Smith: 11th Street. It is running water and it breaks. The sewage line facing Duncan: There is a manhole, my husband goes and looks in the manhole, he loses a finger because he is trying to determine whether it is ours or the city's. I come home and go 'What happened to your finger?' He says 'I lost it in the manhole.' This is a regular occurrence. Several times a month we have sewage backing up into our houses.
Casey: This is along Duncan as well?
Smith: We have got a fire hydrant in our yard right in front of our house. This is where their drunkies are going to be coming out from the apartments into our yard, flashing our bedroom. Guess what? We have got a 45° angle coming onto this road where his cars are coming out into our yard.
Hoover: May I make a suggestion? I know the rest of you want to talk. Could you pass a list around and get their names and phone numbers so that the city can look into this? A lot of these issues seem to be not so directed at this project but existing problems.
Smith: This project being put in is a problem.
Hoover: We need to find out what these problems are.
Hoodenpyle: Can I address the little park? You said you are going to take some money instead of the park. The park manager came down and said that wasn't set in blood but they could go ahead and allow them to put a park in there if the people would keep the grass cut in the park and I think they would do that. I know I would. They said they were going to put it right on Duncan Street.
Smith: I have a problem too. He went in and tore these homes down and he did not clean up the mess. He tore the homes down and he has not cleaned up the mess. There was lead paint in these homes, etc. My father in law had these two homes. There was lead paint in these homes. There was tile that had asbestos in them. He tore these homes down and he did not have all of this stuff picked up. There are still piles of stuff there. My father-in-law had these two homes, and I know this stuff was in these homes.
Hoover: What was your name?
Smith: Dianna Smith. I live directly across. He had these two homes that I know have asbestos in them.
Hoover: Can we start wrapping it up please?
Smith: I am worried about the runoff of this stuff and the soil because the surrounding homes.
Jennifer Creel: Jennifer Creel: I live at 1116 S. Duncan directly across the street. You have seen my house from the pictures. It is the one that you see straight on from looking at those photos. You hear everybody talking about the kids that are in the street. The speed limit is 10 around the corner and people are flying up and down the street. The traffic is a huge issue. The other issue and the other things I can take up at the other meetings is the park. In order to have a safe place to go, for my children as well, I have three children. The children in the neighborhood have to cross either S. School or 15th to get to a park. We are locked in. I know that it was voted down by Parks and Rec. I was volunteering for Parks and Rec. as a soccer coach when the meeting took place, so I missed it. I don't understand how set in stone that is if it is going to come up for appeal or what is happening with that if there is a potential to get a park. They are saying something about if the neighborhood association would take care of the park that it was too small for Parks and Rec. but it seemed like a chunk of money.
Turner: I just spoke with Connie Edmonston, the Parks Director. This would be the first time that a neighborhood association would actually like to appeal a decision by the Parks Board. She believes that it would have to go to the Planning Commission. However, we would entertain a meeting with the neighborhood association if we went with the money in lieu of land to talk about where that $18,000 could be spent. It would have to be spent within the quadrant and the quadrant is a larger area than just your neighborhood, but we could see how that could benefit your neighborhood. I understand that there are some concerns with crossing major thoroughfares to get to parkland. Either way, you would have to appeal at the Planning Commission or if you wanted to go an alternate route we could set up a neighborhood association meeting.
Hoover: I think we should set up a meeting first.
Hawkins: My name is Lauren Hawkins, I live at 1101 S. Duncan. I would like to address the impact of this proposal to the neighborhood. The neighborhood is a single-family dwelling neighborhood primarily. Whatever one considers trailer parks, those are single-family homes. They have a lot of advantages of single-family homes. They have all got their own shared back yard. The development really seems not at all to fit in this neighborhood. Around the corner (where S. Hill Ave. turns into Ellis Ave.) from this neighborhood is an example of what I think the neighborhood feels is a good fit. A house burned down, a duplex was fit in. That fit precisely in the neighborhood. That is pretty much it. We have difficulty with this property because the obvious space for park space would be actually the only place that is buildable as I see it on this land where the two houses existed. The other part of the property is wetland. There is a stream that goes through there. There are turtles, crawdad holes. You can put a stick down into 3' of water down through the soil. I am really finding this proposal to be completely out (the character) of this neighborhood. I am guessing that because this is a working class neighborhood that perhaps folks don't find that terribly important but to have decided to develop a lot with apartments in a neighborhood that is single-family homes, this is important to us.
Hoodenpyle: It is a poor man's residence.
Biggers: My name is Phil Biggers and I appreciate the Committee to allow me to speak. Obviously I know this is zoned R-2 and the apartments must fit within the density requirements for that zoning within your city. If it is zoned R-2 and if it has been that in itself then it is OK. I think there are some greater issues and greater concerns here and that is the water, sewer, and flooding. I will attest to the fact that crawdads come up on that property in huge holes and in huge numbers. I would be really curious to see the environmental study that has been done. As far as the sewer issue goes, Fayetteville sewer called me to go up to the piece of property to the north (of the adjacent trailer park). In fact, they have been up there so many times there is a road along that creek where they have had severe problems. Last fall it flooded where the whole area smelled tremendously terrible. I think I called two or three times in addition to the neighbors. The really bad part was it flooded the entire creek through there. I realize that this (proposed development) is downstream from that area but there is a tremendous infrastructure problem. If Engineering is not aware of that, there is a lack of communication on the sizing and the age and condition of the infrastructure. I guess in some sense I am appalled that we would place that burden on the infrastructure that is totally outdated. I know that it is not within this Committee's jurisdiction to hold this project at this point. I think we need to address some of those with some studies. Let's address those issues. Let's not kill the project totally but at least address those issues with some serious studies that alleviate the problem and alleviate the concerns of the residents. I have not been privy to the neighborhood meetings, and I don't even know most of these people here; so I am not able to jump on the band wagon besides that. There are really some infrastructure problems. Number one is I would like to see a sewer study or the sewer department sign off saying that is a 6' line and it is OK. Before that moves forward, let's at least look at that.
Hoover: You mentioned the R-2. Sara, on this amount of property how many units could you put in an R-2 zoning?
Edwards: 62. It is 24 per acre. This is 2.46 acres.
Hoover: Do we have any other comments?
Terry: I just have a couple of quick things. My name is Melissa Terry and I am here as a representative of the Sierra Club. I have received several calls from different residents asking us to walk this site and to monitor the site. I did walk it yesterday and saw that the Corp. of Engineers has been out there and delineated some of the wetland. However, outside those wetlands I just thought that you would like to know that there is standing water even as dry as it is even 15' or 20' on the perimeter beyond what they have already designated. We have talked a lot about water and sewer, but it seems to me on a larger context is that this is a watershed problem. It starts under the parking lot at Carlson Terrace. Before you get to 6th Street it is experiencing strain and then it goes through there. All of those things compound what is happening on this site. For the big picture because there are going to be a lot of Large Scale Developments coming to you guys that are creeping up and down this watershed. On this particular piece, we would like to support the neighborhood association's request for an appeal the Parks Department in view of the problem that they are land locked. The families are locked in by state highways from accessing other parks in their area. We feel like it would be the highest and best use for the neighborhood, watershed, and water quality. The $18,000 that they would get in lieu of park space could be reevaluated and the park space stay on that land as greenspace as a water filter, a catch basin and an erosion-sediment control area.
Edwards: I would like to read a section of the UDO just so everyone understands about the parks. 'The developer and the Parks Board shall make a joint recommendation to the Planning Commission as to the land dedication or contribution in lieu. In the event they are unable to agree, they can make separate determinations to the Planning Commission who shall determine the issues.' I don't think there has to be a formal appeal filed but we can point out as an issue to discuss because it is the Planning Commission's decision.
Turner: May I also address that? That is if the developer and the Parks Board disagree. The developer and Parks Board agreed to take money in lieu of land so that decision is not being questioned here. It is now the neighborhood association that is questioning it, so it may be a separate issue altogether.
Smith: May I make a statement too? It is really a historic site. The wetlands start at the Bates' driveway and you can go up and look. That is where the Trail of Tears where the Indians actually stopped and sat. That whole area right across from Bates drained to this huge pond (which has been filled and has a giant metal power pole standing in its center). They moved the original sign. This is an historic site.
Hoover: I'm sorry. I am going to have to cut you off. We get the point. Is there anyone else that would like to contribute something new to discuss? Usually you only get to speak one at a time and once. This has been really informal today, and it won't be at Planning Commission. Is there any other issue that we have not covered that is a problem with anyone? I am going to close it to public comment if you don't mind. I appreciate it. Commissioners, what do you think?
Bunch: I would like to thank the people that are coming up next on the agenda for being patient. I know you folks that spoke on this one had to be patient while you waited through some of the other things that we had on the agenda. We also have people after you all. We are about to break for lunch. We want to give all these other people here the same opportunity that you have. We have a long list of issues. The first thing I would say is give the applicant a chance to respond to some of these to see if we can get a more clear picture of it.
Bunch, M: A couple of things, I think a lot of comments that we heard relate to what I said in the beginning. Some of the concerns are regional. We have some issues with water and sewer that need to be tracked down. On this developer's behalf we have done everything that we are supposed to do and everything we could do for this development and if the Water and Sewer Department say it is adequate for this development then that is their process. The watershed issues I think it is a huge issue for Town Branch creek. I don't know how much responsibility, if any, lies on this developer. His development is going to meet the drainage ordinance and the Town Branch creek issue is a cumulative regional problem that has developed project after project after project that didn't retain their water. I am sure historically and today it is a problem. It is a designated floodway. I have not looked at the floodway map, but I am guessing the house that is down here is in the floodway that has been established. I don't believe it is my professional opinion that that is not attributed at all to this development because this development handles it's water in accordance with the drainage ordinance which the City of Fayetteville has been extremely proactive of meeting the requirements of the NPDS etc. and all the things that we are talking about with the March 2003 deadline since 1994. Those original documents came into existence in 1992. The city already requires detention. The city already requires erosion control. The city already requires that developments be responsible neighbors. There has always historically been some sort of recourse on behalf of those people. If they get flooded, they sue whoever that responsibility lies in. This property is going to detain to less than predevelopment flows. Technically, there is nothing else this property can do unless it is a regional detention facility and I don't believe that burden lies on Mr. Mathias and his 2.46-acre site to fix the entire Town Creek area. As far as the kids, I know there is an existing sidewalk on Duncan. We have to put in a 6'. I know that this sidewalk is directly adjacent to the curb. I haven't measured it, but I believe it is probably 3' or 4' wide existing on Duncan. Again, we are having to put in the 6' back with the street improvements with our piece. As far as the traffic, I know we recently went around and around with another project of this size. 11th Street, even if you consider it as a local street as far as the functional classification of the street, which is our best tool, this project might attribute 5% or 6% of that volume. Engineering has already addressed that this is historically a collector, which I would agree. It is a straight shot between from 6th Street to 15th Street and there is a signal at 6th Street. I have heard several comments from neighbors at the neighborhood association that that was an issue. As far as greenspace and park space, there is a lot of greenspace on this site. If you look at the area that we are having to use for the wet swale for our mitigation areas, for the tree mitigation and preservation, brush areas, the detention pond, and this green area left up here, there is a huge amount of green area left on this site. Again, we are less than the density that is allowed by the zoning regulations. Also, I think there are some severe liability implications to having a park that is not owned by the city on this piece of property. I don't know how positive that is from an owner's perspective. I think it is something that he will need to consider. He has been very approachable and responsive to any comments that have been given. As far as anything else, I am not sure what else there is to respond to really other than the major regional concerns. Which, again, I don't feel should be a burden on this property owner.
Bunch: Mandy, what is the percentage of open space on this project?
Bunch, M: Total impervious space on this site is 51.5%. Approximately ½ of the site is impervious, ½ of the site maintains green area. That is a pretty good ratio.
Bunch: Sara, as part of our packet for if this goes to Planning Commission a FEMA map of the area? We have got our immediate map like this and a one mile radius. I guess we could look at the different 100-year and 500-year and the different zones if we could get that spelled out.
Ostner: On that same line a more careful consideration of which sewer line this is impacting.
Hoover: We are going to need a statement from all city staff on drainage, sewer, water.
Bunch: Phase II.
Casey: As far as Phase II is concerned I think the city requirements are already well ahead of the curve. We are working toward a complete plan with our grading ordinance and drainage requirements that we have. We have already got a lot of the stuff that is required in place. I would like to look at the drainage and sewage issue and the condition of the water line. I need to get with the Water and Sewer Division and research this and find out what the problems are in the area. Unfortunately, we rely on the communications of the two divisions to identify these before they get to this point but sometimes it gets busy and it doesn't always happen. We will be checking into that specifically and get a recommendation. If it is going to require offsite improvements if I can review them I would rather come back to this level and discuss that at this point. Without looking into it, I don't know. It sounds like whether the city cost shares with the developer to do this or what happens is yet to be determined.
Bunch: Sara, do you have any idea when the division of Long Term Planning is going to be up and running? A lot of people may not be aware that in addition to the current planning that we are working on that there will be a Long Term Planning Division.
Edwards: We do have a long-term planning department in place now. The leadership of that department has not been decided. They are hoping within the next couple of weeks to fill that position. They will be looking at projects such as converting R-2 zoning areas to residential zoning. It just ranges from everything that we have on our work plan. Hopefully within a couple of weeks we should be really rolling with that department.
Bunch: Would a watershed approach and Phase II and that sort of thing be addressed?
Edwards: Our Long Range Planner is already working on that Phase II to make sure we comply and to do some public education and those different things. I know that is in process right now.
Bunch: I guess when that comes up when people have problems that are not necessarily addressed by current planning and you have a whole neighborhood of watershed area it looks like problems would be directed to that department.
Edwards: Right now specific drainage complaints go to Sid Norbash of our Engineering Division. I can't say if he is aware of them and has had complaints. This is such a huge issue. This is really a big issue and it is not something that we can go and put a pipe in and fix. I would encourage you to talk to him as well as your aldermen.
??: I think they passed around a neighborhood list.
Hoover: What do you all suggest?
Bunch: I think I would like to look at it at this level again because we have had to kind of shorten public comment because we do have a lengthy agenda. Most of the items that we have had on the agenda have been more involved than what we normally would have. I know that this one has been a long time in process, but I would like to see some of these water and sewer line assessments at this level again. I am going to recommend that we table LSD 03-13.00 Duncan Avenue Apartments to be brought back to Subdivision after we get more information from staff on some of the issues that have been discussed today.
Ostner: I will second.
Hoover: I will concur.
Edwards: Just for the public to know, that meeting will be April 17th* at the same time and same place.
Hoover: That will give Matt and the Engineering staff time to get acquainted with the location.
* PLEASE NOTE: THE SECOND MEETING HAS NOW BEEN RESCHEDULED FOR MAY 15. Please request notification of updated scheduled >HERE.
Site design by Lauren Hawkins' LDHdesign