Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOrdinance 4181 ORDINANCE NO. 4181 AN ORDINANCE VACATING AND ABANDONING A PORTION OF A TEN FOOT UTILITY EASEMENT LOCATED AT 1603 JORDAN LANE, AS REQUESTED BY TIM MCMAHON ON BEHALF OF MCMAHON BROTHERS CONSTRUCTION INC. IN VA 99- 10. WHEREAS, the City Council has the authority under A.C.A. § 14-54- 104 to vacate public grounds or portions thereof as may not for the time being be required for corporate purposes; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the following described utility easement is not required for corporate purposes. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS: Section 1 . That the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby vacates and abandons all of its rights Together with the rights of the public generally, in and to the following described utility easement: See Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof. Section 2. That a copy of this Ordinance duly certified by the City Clerk shall be filed in the, office of the Recorder of the County and recorded in the Deed Records of the County. ,ff .PY E lT_ � �t jy D APPROVED this Z day of September , 1999. r 4 , iaM 1 APPROVED: p r ilfj, All { B Fred Hanna, Mayor ATTEST: By: Heather Woodruff,City Mrk Ord . 4181 EXHIBIT "A" Property Description: Lot Numbered Thirty-four (34), Hidden lakes Estates Subdivision, City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, as per plat of said Subdivision on file in the Office of the Circuit Clerk and Ex-Officio Recorder, Washington County, Arkansas. Easement Abandonment Description: The north 2' of an existing 10' easement adjacent to south property line of Lot 34 Hidden Lake Estates, Fayetteville Arkansas. STAFF REVIEW FORM X Agenda Request _ Contract Review Grant Review For the Fayetteville City Council meeting of September 7 , 1999 . FROM : Tim Conklin Planning Public Works Name Division Department ACTION REQUESTED : To approve an for ordinance VA 99- 10 submitted by Tim McMahon on behalf of McMahon Brothers Construction Inc . for property located at 1603 Jordan Lane . The property is zoned R- 1 , Low Density Residential . The request is to vacate the northern most 2 ' of the 10 ' utility easement along the south property line . COST TO CITY : Cost of this request Category/ Project Budget Category/ Project Name Account Number Funds used to date Program Name Project Number Remaining balance Fund BUDGET REVIEW : Budgeted Item Budget Adjustment Attached Budget Coordinator Administrative Services Director CONTRACT/GRANT/LEASE REVIEW : GRANTING AGENCY : Acc unti g Manager D to ADA Coordinator Date 1 '� N C tyAtto e Date Internal Auditor Date Purchasing Officer Date STAFF RECOMMENDATION : Staff recommends approval of the utility easement vacation and the Planning Commission approved the request with a unanimous vote of 6-0-0 . Cross Reference Di n ead Date 8 Zc>-qS ar f ne r a e New Item : Yes No 1 ilServices Da e Prev Ord/Res# : Dir r rr� Y� y May r Date Orig Contract Date : VA 99-10. 00 Pagel PC Meeting of _09 Aug 99 FAYETTEVILLE THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS Utility Easement Vacation 113 W. Mountain SL McMahon Brothers, Inc. Fayetteville, AR 72701 TO: Fayetteville Planning Commission Members THRU: Tim Conklin, City Planner FROM: Ron Petrie, P.E. , Staff Engineer DATE: August 5, 1999 Project: VA 99.00-10.00: Utility Easement vacation as requested by McMahon Brothers, Incorporated for property located at 1603 Jordan Lane, Hidden Lake Estates, Lot 34 . The property is zoned R- 1 , Single Family Residential. The request is to vacate the northern 2' of an existing 10 ' utility easement located adjacent to the southern side of Lot 34 . Please refer to the attached drawings for exact location and dimensions. The applicant has submitted the required notification forms to the utility companies and to the City . The results are as follows: Ozarks Electric - No service. Southwestern Electric Power Company. - No objections. Arkansas Western Gas - No objections. SW Bell - No objections. TCA Cable - No objections. City of Fayetteville: Water/Sewer - No objections. Street Department - No objections. Solid Waste - No objections. Recommendation: Approval of the requested easement vacation. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: a Required Approved Denied Date: Planning Commission Meeting August 9, 1999 VA 99-10 McMahan Page IL I PETITION PETITION TO VACATE AN EASEMENT LOCATED IN LOT 34 HIDDEN LAKES ESTATES. FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS To: The Fayetteville City Planning Commission and The Fayetteville City Council We, the undersigned, being all the owners of the real estate abutting the easement hereinafter sought to be abandoned and vacated, located on north 2' of existing 10' easement adjacent to south property line of lot 34 Hidden Lake Estates, Fayetteville Arkansas. Petitioners state that the easement would only be encroached on by the overhang of the house being constructed on lot 34, and that the public interest and welfare would not be adversely affected by the vacation of the 2' section of the above described easement. WHEREFORE, the undersigned petitioners respectfully pray that the governing body of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, vacate the above described easement. Dated this 19 day of July 19, 1999 Tim McMahon, Applicant John McMahon, Owner *9�:i Planning Commission Meeting August 9,1999 VA 99-10 McMahon Page 11.3 VA99- 10 . 00 - MaMahon Brothers Construction - One Mile Diameter J S R-0 5 G2 1 C p G2 41 R1 R1 ; L m tp� G2 TOWNSHIP G2 m w G2 R-1 R•1R_1 R-1 00 8PEEL NNyHI G2 R1 1 Om, R•1 R-1Eg -1 OF1 O R•1 t�O R.1 R- OVERC R-1 R-1 SUS R-1 R -0 O R-1 G DEN OAKS R-1 < R-0 R-1 R'1 R-1 R-1p0 1 R 1 W G R •1 z G2 ¢ R 1 R-0 w WINBAUGH ELM R-1 rc R-1 a POPLAR B D BRA z 1 O -0 R1 R1 R1 R-1 m O � R-1 -1 3 P-1 R-1 -0 R-2 ASH A-1 w R1 w G2 S J -1 R-1 R 1 G2 R-0 3 } = ED R-1 C R_1 QS ; R-1 CAM p 1 G2 G2 R-1 BR� ETT Z 2 R 1 't LE U O m m Ri R1 w R RE R-1 HAMMOND CY R-1 g u R1 Cyy _JN ABSHIER LAKE GE � - 10N 1 P a MEANDERING � 1 R-1 PLEBURY � � m P-t G2 R_1 R-1 w y Rd R-1 Ifl❑❑� R1 Q a C R1 R1 R-1 R-1 US R-1 R-1 R•1 R-1 R R-1 m 1 $ RI O R-1 C R-1 I / R-1 2 j MANOR R-1 IBJ � J R = R_1 ❑ R 1 w y0 R 1 R-1 O Z w R-0 m R1 ROC R1 R1 R1 R-1 C -1 R-1 1 /7 1 ��••�JI R_1 R-1 R-1 = z R-1 y 1�e�ON O p O u G2 3 h P� w R-1 R- y I R. R-1 R-1 R•1 S 1400 0 1400 Feet N E Planning Commission Meeting August 9, 1999 VA 99-10 McMahon S Page 11.6 VA99- 10 . 00 - Mamahon Brothers Construction - Close Up R-1 R-1 R-1 R-1 R-1 R-1 R-1 R-1 R•1 R-1 R-1 R-1 R-1 R-1 R•1 Z R-1 Q L) lr o Ra 0 Z ' R-1 R-1 0 Q' R-1 R-1 } W R1 R1 R-1 ` R-1 R 1 R-1 R-0 L_LS R-1 R•1 GP.1N R R-1 R-1 C� O R-1 10 v R-1 Z R-1 R-1 R-1 MISSION N 100 0 100 Feet W* $ Planning Commission Meeting August 9, 1999 VA 99-10 McMahon S Page 11.5 PLAT OF &uu VE r F011 TIM McMAHON ° lo • or acafa t r. trnewn —• PROP Inr1 U11E O towullnONPat 0 SET InON Pat LOT 34 — x - 9— FENCE POB Point Or _ HIDDEN LAKE ESTATES 11E0INNING 1 586° 16'20' a , fao.o' E Y]LY ! Ex] — .. 'ro- vex[ a•nx[ - p v 30 • m .O .. m :,1 W W � !• •' 9 ¢ z ° m ^ n 0 > 6 aa `p _ p � a ut n = n ry m ^I.o• �e.a ' i o �I T]Lr [swr a oLoa s]m a e_ r'tB6016201'W nLe • y P�GISTER ' STATE OF n_ . N 8C ' : 0 LEGAL DESCRIPTION Lot Numbered Thirty-four , Hidden Lakes Estates .I Ky 1 3/1 Subdivision, City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, as per plat of said Subdivision on Nle In the Office of the Cimult Clerk and Eaoffielo Recorder, Washington County, Arkansas, SURVEYOR'S CEN'E'MCA71ON: I hereby wrdly that I have surveyed the herein described trael and dui the property Ilse and cnrser monvmesir are, to the heat of my knawied9e and ability. to wdy nublWbed an ahs Abs, my ease mens and/w eneroaehmmb r"wded by told Survey anawo hlRa WU"AM C. JE7S PLS No, 689 AR ,FMf,11NVF11fNli:NC. CEDAR ST. PlanningCommission Meeting Rdll 521-5231 August 9, 1999 VA 99-1D McMahon Page 11.4 Minutes of Planning Commission Meeting August 9, 1999 Page 14 VA99-10: UTILITY EASEMENT VACATION MCMAHON, PP408 This item was submitted by Tim McMahon on behalf of McMahon Brothers Construction, Inc. for property located at 1603 Jordan Lane. The property is zoned R- 1 , Low Density Residential. The request is to vacate the northernmost 2 feet of the 10 foot easement along the south property line. Tim McMahon was present on behalf of the request. Staff Recommendation Staff recommended approval of the utility easement vacation. Commission Discussion Johnson : This property is located in Hidden Lakes Estates. My understanding from our discussion of this at agenda session last Thursday is that the problem is that 2 feet of the roof line extends over into the utility easement and that this problem was observed when the City Inspector, Bert Rakes, was on site and the problem was observed prior to the footing being poured. The ditch for the footing had been dug and I think the rebar had been placed but the concrete hadn' t been poured. The inspector observed the mistake and said that it needed to be corrected but the applicant opted not to do that. Vinson: I have a brief history that I can present to you. In April of 1999, the applicant was in the process of pouring footings for a residence at 1603 Jordan Lane. An inspector, Bert Rakes, from the City of Fayetteville informed the applicant that the footing was violating a utility easement setback. The plan the applicant was using showed an 8 foot setback but the setback was suppose to be 10 feet. The inspector devised a way to alter the existing footing by increasing it' s width, allowing the wall and roof overhang to be built outside of the utility easement. Later, the applicant decided the wall could not be placed on the footing at the location he and the inspector had discussed and the wall was constructed with a setback of 10 feet, 2 inches. The roof currently hangs 2 feet into the utility easement. The applicant is now requesting a vacation on the north 2 feet of the 10 foot utility easement setback to accommodate the roof overhang. Johnson : All right. Would the applicant identify himself for us and tell us what you have to add to the overview that has been given? McMahon: My name is Tim McMahon and I am representing McMahon Brothers Construction, Inc. The only thing I have to add to Brent's comments are that the property is a little bit unique because it is located immediately adjacent to a property that is on the National Minutes of Planning Commission Meeting August 9, 1999 Page 15 Historic Register which is know as the Jackson House and there are several very large and pristine pine trees located on this property and what we were attempting to do when we were locating the structure on the property was to avoid damaging the root system of the very large pine tree that is part of the Jackson Estate before the property was subdivided. The plat that we used to layout the house and which I used to submit to the planning department was mistaken used by me. It was a preliminary plat. During the process of obtaining a building permit, I didn' t even realize I was using a preliminary plat. So, it was an honest mistake that I' ve made. We' ve built probably about 50 houses in the City of Fayetteville and this is the first time I' ve ever had a problem. We're very, very careful about this normally and it was just a mistake and an oversight. There are absolutely no utilities in the easement and there have been no objections by any of the utility companies or the City Engineering Department or any of the other parties that are involved. Johnson: Explain to me why there are no utilities in this utility easement. McMahon: Well, when I asked Ron Petrie about this -- actually, Ron was employed by the engineer who did the engineering on the subdivision. He told me that customarily an engineer would -- it' s just a matter or keeping clean lines when the lots were subdivided. There are utilities that come of the back corner of the property along that property line but it' s just partial . Johnson : Are you saying that there are no utilities in the 10 foot utility easement or there are no utilities in the 2 feet which you want vacated. McMahon: Along the property line that would be affected by the roof overhang, along that segment of the utility easement, there are no utilities in the easement. Johnson: And how long a segment of that utility easement is it? McMahon: It is approximately about 36 feet. It' s right in the middle. Coming off the back of the property, there are utilities that come out in the easement. There is also another very large group of 3 or 4 big, pristine pine trees that are in that utility easement between the street and the back part of the property where there actually are utilities in the easement. Johnson : We have before us a plat or survey that you provided for lot 34 and it' s at page 11 .4 in our packet. Is it the section of the utility easement -- now I' ve confused myself -- is this easement on the south side of this house or is it on the north side of the house? The one that you are seeking to vacate. McMahon: It would be on the south side of the house. Conklin: What the applicant has stated is true. There are no utilities in that easement. When I talked with Ron Petrie this afternoon regarding this easement, he indicated to me that at Minutes of Planning Commission Meeting August 9, 1999 Page 16 the time it was going through plat review that the utility companies requested this easement and an additional easement and when they actually went to install the utilities in the subdivision, they did not go this direction with the utilities and therefore they did not use this utility easement. Johnson: Tim, as you understand, what part of that south line that is 140 feet long doesn' t have utilities in it? Where are the utilities? McMahon: I don't have the plat right in front of me but there -- I'm not sure it' s shown on the drawing you have but there is a property line that runs north and south going off of the southern east/west property line and that is as far they extend. Johnson: There are 2 utilities easements and 2 property lines going north/south. Is it the one on the east boundary or the west boundary of this lot. McMahon: It would be the west boundary, I believe. Johnson: Tim, do you understand that along this south boundary that we are -- the south utility easement, that there will never be utilities placed there to your knowledge? Conklin: That is correct. Johnson: In light of that fact -- let me ask whether there are other questions and I'm not sure I' ve asked for public comment. Bunch: In reading the petition and looking at the plat, it' s not clear -- are you asking for a 2 foot vacation along the whole southern border or just in the vicinity of where the overhang of the house is? McMahon : We would be pleased if we were granted a vacation just along the portion where the overhang of the house exists. However, the utility companies, when they stated what they would agree with on the forms that they signed, they said just the northern 2 foot of the utility easement. Bunch: Basically, it' s not really clear from this which request is being made. Whether is the overhang of the house area or along the whole, entire length. Public Comment None. MOTION Minutes of Planning Commission Meeting August 9, 1999 Page 17 Johnson: In light of the fact that there is no utility located in this easement and but for that, probably I would not have voted for this vacation because I think when the City Inspector is on site and says this is being built in the easement, I think the sensible course is to make the correction before the concrete is poured. But, if this utility easement is not being used, I take it we might even consider an application to vacate the entire easement along this section. In light of that, I will move that we approve vacation 99- 10 and that we recommend vacation of the northernmost 2 feet of the entire existing 10 foot utility easement on the southern side of lot 34. Estes: Madame chairman, I second the motion. Johnson: I have a motion by the chairman, seconded by Commissioner Estes that we approve vacation 99- 10 to vacate the northernmost 2 feet of the entire 10 foot utility easement on the south boundary of lot 34 and recommend that on to the Council. Roll Call Upon roll call, the motion passed with a unanimous vote of 6-0-0. Meeting adjourned at 6:24 p.m.