City of Fayetteville
File #: 18-153    Version: 1 Name: UDO Proposed Text Amendments
Type: Other Items of Business Status: Agenda Ready
File created: 4/3/2018 In control: City Council Work Session
On agenda: 5/7/2018 Final action:
Title: Overview of the Proposed Text Amendments
Attachments: 1. Summary of Amendments, 2. 1) accessory structure ord, 3. 2) churches house homeless ord, 4. 3) parking space-aisle one way ord, 5. 4) ncdot reservation and dedication ord, 6. 5) admin adj elevations ord, 7. 7) site plans to trc ord, 8. Ordinance Alternate Parking Plan
Date Ver.Action ByActionResultAction DetailsMeeting DetailsVideo
No records to display.

TO:                                            Mayor and Members of City Council

THRU:                      Jay Reinstein, Assistant City Manager

 

FROM:                     Marsha Bryant, Development Advocate

Gerald Newton, AICP, Development Services Director

 

DATE:                      May 7, 2018

 

RE:

Title

Overview of the Proposed Text Amendments                     

end

 

COUNCIL DISTRICT(S):                      

Council District(s)

District:  All                      

 

 

b

Relationship To Strategic Plan:

Fayetteville will be a highly desirable place to live, work and recreate with thriving neighborhoods and a high quality of life for all residents.

 

Executive Summary:

The proposed 7 text amendments include: 4 housekeeping items: 1) accessory structure size allowance in the AR district, 2) temporary homeless shelters at churches, 3) one-way drive aisle width, 4) street design to include NCDOT reservation and dedication requirements; also included are 5) allowance for alternative building elevation plans through an administrative adjustment process, 6) allowance for an alternative parking plan to increase and decrease parking in the Transition Design Standards, and 7) revision of the site plan review process increasing plans that are considered Major Site Plans.

 

Background: 

Development Services has been asked to bring proposed text amendments to Council twice a year, spring and fall.  Staff has prepared 7 possible amendments and are bringing them forward to Council for information and direction. Prior to Council holding a public hearing on any amendment, the Planning Commission shall first hold a public hearing and make a recommendation to Council.

 

 

Issues/Analysis: 

Proposed Amendments:

1.                     AR District Accessory Structures:  Amendment will increase the maximum allowed size of accessory structures in the AR district from 15% to 25% of the total lot area; making it more consistent with the maximum allowed in the SF15 and SF10 districts.

2.                     Temporary Homeless Shelters at Churches:  Amendment will allow temporary homeless shelters as an accessory use to a church; this is consistent with the NC Building Code.

3.                     One-Way Drive Aisles:  Amendment establishes drive aisle width standards for one-way traffic which is not currently addressed in the Code.

4.                     NCDOT Reservation and Dedication Requirements:  Amendment requires street design on State roadways, within the City Limits, to adhere to NCDOT right-of-way reservation and dedication requirements.

5.                     Alternative Elevation Plans:  Amendment revises the existing Administrative Adjustment Code that allows an alternative elevation option for Large Retail Design Standards to also include an alternative elevation option for Commercial, Office, and Mixed-Use Designs Standards; the resultant code will provide lee-way in architectural design standards that does not currently exist in the Code.

6.                     Alternative Parking Plan:  Amendment revises the existing Transitional Design Standards to allow an Alternative Parking Plan that may increase as well as decrease the number of parking spaces; currently it only allows a decrease in parking.  

7.                     Site Plan Review Process:  Amendment revises the existing site plan review process for Major Site Plans and Minor Site Plans by amending what is considered a Major vs. a Minor Site Plan; amendment will indicate that a Major Site Plan is any structure that is 1000 sq. ft. in size vs. 2500 sq. ft. in size. The project design teams find it helpful to meet with the Technical Review Committee (TRC) members, who provide input and discuss regulations as a group, versus the design team meeting with staff members on an individual basis. Based on 2016 and 2017 statistics the amended code will result in about 7 more projects a year being reviewed by the TRC. Many of these projects are already being reviewed by the TRC as a courtesy review.)

 

 

 

Budget Impact: 

There is no budget impact associated with these requests at this time. However, if item 7 moves forward in accordance with staff’s recommendation, it will slightly increase the revenue received for site plan review fees in future fiscal years.

 

 

Options

1)                     Direct staff to take all or some of the 7 amendments to the Planning Commission as public hearings.

2)                     Direct staff to further research all or some of the 7 amendments and/or other possible amendments.

 

 

 

Recommended Action: 

Staff to bring these items to Council at a work session to discuss and obtain feedback and direction from Council regarding how staff should move forward.

 

Attachments:

Summary of Proposed Amendments to include:

                     Current Code Redlined to Show Amendments

                     Explanations of why the Amendments are needed

                     Ordinances of Amendments