HomeMy WebLinkAboutOrdinance 4319 ORDINANCE NO. 4319
AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND CHAPTER 171 , STREETS AND
SIDEWALKS, § 171 . 13(13)(6), WIDTH OF DRIVEWAY
APPROACHES, AND CHAPTER 172, PARKING AND LOADING,
§ 172.01 (C)(5)(b)( 1 ) & (2), PARKING LOT ENTRANCES, OF THE
UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE TO CHANGE THE WIDTH
OF A CURB CUT ALLOWED FOR COMMERCIAL DRIVEWAYS
AND TO PROVIDE FOR MINIMUM CURB RADIUS FOR
COMMERCIAL DRIVEWAYS .
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS:
Section 1 . That Chapter 171 , Streets And Sidewalks, § 171 . 13(B)(6),
Width Of Driveway Approaches, of the Unified Development Ordinance, Code of
Fayetteville is hereby repealed and the following shall be inserted in its stead:
§171 . 13 SIDEWALK AND DRIVEWAY SPECIFICATIONS.
B. Driveway Approaches. (See: Illustration, Standard Driveway Approach
Residential).
6. Width of Driveway Approaches.
a. Commercial.
(1 ). The width of commercial driveway approaches shall not
exceed 39 feet measured at right angles to the centerline of the driveway approach for
driveways that are one-way-in, two way-out.
(2). The width of commercial driveway approaches shall not
exceed 27 feet measured at right angles to the centerline of the driveway approach for
driveways that are one-way-in, one-way-out.
(3). The width of commercial driveway approaches shall not
exceed 15 feet measured at right angles to the centerline of the driveway approach for
driveways that are one-way-in or out.
(4). The minimum width of commercial driveway approaches
shall be 12 feet for one-way-in or out and 24 feet for one-way-in and one-way-out.
b. Residential. The width of residential driveway approaches shall not
exceed 24 feet measured at right angles to the center-line of the driveway approach and
the minimum width shall not be less than 10 feet.
ord . 4319
Section 2. That Chapter 172, Parking And Loading, § 172.01 (C)(5)(b)( 1 )
& (2), Parking Lot Entrances, of the Unified Development Ordinance Code of
Fayetteville is hereby repealed and the following shall be inserted in its stead:
§172.01 OFF-STREET PARKING LOT DESIGN REQUIREMENTS.
C. Parking lot design standards.
5. Parking Lot Entrances.
b. Entrances and internal aisle design. The driveway width into parking
lots shall meet the following guidelines:
(1). Entrances.
(a). If the driveway is a one-way-in or one-way-out
drive, then the aisle widths shall be a minimum of 12 feet wide up to a maximum of 15
feet wide.
(b). For two-way access, each entrance lane shall be a
minimum of 12 feet wide and up to a maximum of 15 feet wide and each exit lane shall
be 12 feet wide.
(c). Drive-ways that enter the major thoroughfare at
traffic signals must have at least two outbound lanes (one for each turning direction), and
one inbound lane.
(d). All commercial driveways should have a minimum
curb radius of 25 feet.
(2). Internal Circulation Drives.
(a). Aisles shall be designed so that they intersect at
90 degrees with internal drives where practicable.
(b). Aisles shall be designed to discourage cut-through
traffic by use of landscape islands.
(c). Aisles shall conform to § 172.01 (C)(3) with the
exception of aisles that connect to Commercial Driveways. Aisles connecting to
Commercial Driveways may be permitted to be 27 feet in width when the driveway is in
conformance with § I71 . 13(B)(6).
Ord . 4319
PASSED AND APPROVED this day of June, 2001 .
APPROVED:
By:
DAN COODY, Mayor
ATTEST:
By: A, _ Wi /. /�.,�.'�
Bather Woodruff, City Clerk
'�� Avc ,
o' F
l
NAME OF FILE: Ordinance No. 4319
CROSS REFERENCE:
06/05/01 Ordinance No. 4319
04/01 /01 Planning Commission Minutes (pp. 102- 105)
Copies of City of Fayetteville Commercial Driveway Design
06/05/01 Staff Review Form
06/ 18/01 Departmental Correspondence to Tim Conklin, Planning, from Heather
Woodruff, City Clerk
07/ 11 /01 Proof of Publication
NOTES :
PI
Mi
(P
Planning Commission
April 9, 2001
Page 102
AD 01-1.00: Administrative Item Amendment to Chapter 171 "Streets and Sidewalks", Section
171 . 13(B)(6) "Width of Driveway Approaches" and Chapter 172 "Parking and Loading" Section
172.0 1 (C)(5)(b)( 1 )(a-c) "Parking Lot Entrances" of the Unified Development Ordinance to change the
width of a curb cut allowed for commercial driveways.
Estes: The next item of business to come before us is an administrative item AD 01 - 1 .00 an
Amendment to Chapter 171 "Streets and Sidewalks", Section 171 . 13(B)(6) "Width of
Driveway Approaches" and Chapter 172 "Parking and Loading" Section
172.01 (C)(5)(b)( 1 )(a-c) "Parking Lot Entrances" of the Unified Development
Ordinance to change the width of a curb cut allowed for commercial driveways. Tim,
what is this about and why is this before us this evening?
Conklin: Staff has brought this forward to amend our driveway specifications. We've had some
situations where the island that is required in a driveway that has a one way in and a left
out and right out, with a ten foot island, has caused problems for motorists and delivery
trucks, tractor trailers from entering and exiting these curb cuts. Staff has removed the
requirement for the ten foot island and we do have a driveway that has an entrance lane
and then two exit lanes, the left and right out. The proposal is to have a 15 foot
entrance lane, a 12 foot exit lane, that' s a 27 foot drive for one way in and one way
out, then to have a 15 foot entrance lane and 12 foot exit lanes, right out and left out,
for a total of 39 feet. Staff believes this will help bring traffic off our streets in a more
efficient manner, cars are having to slow down. It will increase the capacity of our
roadways and also comply with the Arkansas Highway Transportation Department
standards for a maximum curb cut of 40 feet. That is why we have brought this
forward to you. In an effort to help minimize the conflicts that are occurring with the
automobile.
PUBLIC COMMENT:
Estes: Is there any member of the audience which would like to provide comment on
administrative item 01 - 1 .00?
COMMISSION DISCUSSION:
Estes: Seeing none, I ' ll close the floor to public comment and bring it back to the Commission
for discussion, questions of staff, motions?
MOTION:
Planning Commission
April 9, 2001
Page 103
Hoffman: Now that I'm fully aware of what it is we are discussing and having seen quite a few of
these projects go through with narrower driveways and broken down curbs being a
problem, I would like to move for approval of AD 01 - 1 .00 subject to staff comments.
Shackelford: I ' ll second
Marr: Just to communicate my position. I understand the widening issue. I have a concern
about taking out the island. I know that the rationale behind it is flow off a street such
as College to make the turn easier. I asked at agenda session to give me examples of
places where we had islands in, I was given Denny's, Walgreen's and First Security
Bank. I also have a safety concern that, I don't want people making speeding turns
into parking lots either. So, while I understand the City position on getting traffic off of
the main road, I also have a concern with safety. Islands serve the purpose to not let
someone make a two wheel turn. I also believe that when properly planted, they are
also adding an aesthetic to the community that is nice. Thirdly, I don't think the
rationale of someone who can 't drive by driving over one is a reason to remove it. For
that reason, I won't support this.
Hoover: I think that maybe I'm not educated enough to understand this because I don't
understand why we would be giving up the island. I would like to reiterate what Don
said but maybe I'm missing something here.
Conklin: There are always two sides to every argument. The islands are slowing traffic down
and they are causing it to be difficult for trucks to enter into the actual sites. One of the
things that we've done a tremendous job doing is eliminating two curb cuts and only
requiring one. When we do that, it sometimes requires like an "S" turn if they put it
right in the middle of their project and those trucks aren't able to maneuver and are
crossing the island. That' s what you see at Denny's. That's why they have a concrete,
mountable island because the trucks can't make that turning movement. At the most
recent past two access management seminars, I 've raised this question with regard to
the concrete island or the landscaped island that we place in our curb cuts in
Fayetteville. They recommended against doing that unless you had a wide enough drive
and radius in order to get the cars efficiently off the roadways to maintain capacity.
That's the other issue. When you drive down College Avenue and you have a very
limited radius and you got almost a 90 degree turn, you have to almost slow down to a
stop to make it into those driveways. What we've recommended is eliminate the
landscaped island and that way cars are not inclined to slow down and stop which
reduces your capacity in the roadway and also recommend that the radius should be
about 25 feet. I put in the ordinance that it "should" be a requirement because in not all
Planning Commission
April 9, 2001
Page 104
situations will you want to have curb cuts designed in that manner. For example, in our
downtown area most of the time you will have a driveway which has no radius, it's just
a 90 degree turning movement that you make. On our major streets, this is why we are
recommending it, is where trucks are having problems getting into the driveways, cars
are having problems, cars are going in the wrong direction in some cases. Staff will
encourage developers to do a boulevard type entry when they can but it' s going to have
to be wider and the Highway Department is going to have to grant variances for those
types of things.
Hoover: Have we had any complaints from any of the business owners themselves or is this
something that you've been observing?
Conklin: We have to force business owners to do this design most of the time. As staff, we tell
them they have to do it and we bring it forward to you. Most of the time they do not
want to put this island in their driveway.
Hoffman: As it goes forward maybe you can talk about the different uses of the buildings because
if you have a smaller professional office building and won't need a delivery truck to
service it typically. You can work with the individual developers in that. I do see a
problem with, as pretty as they are, the islands that are being overrun and the inside
curb is the particular one.
Conklin: I've asked the question at two different conferences now with regard to access
management about our islands that we have in our ordinance. Once again, the negative
is it does allow vehicles to access into the parking lots in a faster motion than slowing
them down on the street in order for them to make a turning movement. They're
recommendation was not to have the islands when I asked that question.
Hoover: Is there a way to formulate this that the whole entry is wider and you still have an
island? I hate losing the island.
Conklin: I would say that' s a possibility. Most of our major streets in Fayetteville are State
highways and the Highway Department has already had to grant us a variance for a 48
foot drive with the island. Charles Venable and I went down to Fort Smith and actually
got that approval just in order for the Highway Department to be able to deal with it.
That was the other problem, the Highway Department wouldn't permit our driveway.
The rationale was that if we limit the number of driveways they would consider allowing
that to occur. If we go any wider, I ' ll have to go back down to Fort Smith and
convince the District Engineer to allow an even increased island. What they assume is
Planning Commission
April 9, 2001
Page 105
your driveway width is from curb to curb including the island. They assume that's a 48
foot curb cut.
Estes: We have a motion to approve AD 01 - 1 .00 by Commission Hoffman and seconded by
Commissioner Shackelford. Any other discussion or comment? Sheri, would you call
the roll?
ROLL CALL:
Upon roll AD 01 - 1 .00 is approved on a vote of 7-2-0 with Commissioners Hoover and Marr voting
no
�
' ! ® s ! § f § ® ` !
co
/ § ) | | �
2 ! / \ ` I / ;
\ ƒ ƒ § ] { ■ > E - ! fco
/ [ ± E ( / ( f # � � k
ƒ \ / ` } } \
! ! ]
M ! /
va
\ j
_ % \( S § \ \ ( -3 �$ } '
§
(
Ep! !p ƒ 2 ƒ ƒ / ) Z ° _k ¥ c B S . 4 : ( r % @
) fa
f � KlS : ? { fI ) » -
`
\ ( \ { ( § ! } { { / .: ®Ck
»
} ( \ { ! 2M @ ; f !
{ \ } $ ! \ / t [ . | ƒ . . . � . .
] > (
\ � �
�
n ak * cb
2 / _
2 O ¥ f
0
mo ,
$ CD
� . . .
$ \_ �
E �
£
\
/ § } on Om \ { § {
,: ;
{ \ ( \ R { ( \
\ \ ) 7 $
2�k ¥ cb
( � ( \ \ \ ) / � � � � `
be
q � § / }
\ ( \ \ $ \ ] ` ] LU{
( 0
� \
n
0
CD f � �k4cb
0�
E& z_ z
O � $
�+ U,
\ \ ` � ,
ve
2' ° !
�
Sity of Fayetteville •
Commercial Driveway Design
48ft
¢. Concrela or Asphalt
After Approach
0
24 Ifgo 150
ace a cum � Fam of Cub
Da
tstan°o
Property Una
Continuous Sidewalk see Note
6I ( Seo NOTE 6 )
Sae Hole 5
4I, I See Note 7 J
Concrete a
Pave StoeNBrick S
Mountable. c
a Inch high
gh c
Island
� d
concrete Approach 4
61nch depth on sidewalk and approach
street
NOTE 1: Please have all plans approved by tM NOTE 5: The sidewalk edge adjacent to Na street a Inches + lAv lutea
Sidewalk and Trails Cooridinator, at 5758291, prior shall have at least a one (1) inch deep groove joint
to Instalatian. mark (tan be a cold joint) b Geary define the
sidewalk through the driven
way and approach. 6 -
NOTE 2 A perimdt Is required by the ANTD prior to
construction on ad state highways. A•L•�•�•ti•\•1.1•L•ti•\•L•♦-ti•♦ ti�1.L.ti.L.�.ti.t.�.ti.+..�.
NOTE 6: The sidewalk elevation shall ba two r•r.r.r.r.r.r.r.r.r.r.r.r.r. r.r.r.r.r-r-r-r-r.r-� 6 •
C.r\•1.1.}..•.Y}.4 V.1.\.\.Y \:Y1.ti.\•�•1•YY1•\.ti.
percent abaveNe top olthe writ, sbping two r•r•r•r•r•r•r•r•r•r•r•r•r J•J•r•r•r•r•r•r•r•r•f•r• I
NOTE J: All aklawalks and arta cuts made la percenl towards the curb (one fourth Inch In each
driveway approaches require an Inspection prior to (oot). This elevation shall be wnlinuous through Cold Joint
the concrete pour. Ne drive and approach.
i
NOTE a: Sidewalks shall be contiraatn through NOTE 7: 1 ,2Inch deep con ral joints. spacing 10 Cancreto fZt, Gravel
driveways with a cold joint or expansion joint at the feet or less.
edge of the sidewalk opposite the street
4 inch Concrete Mountable Island Crossection
10 0 10 Feet
0 STAFF REVIEW FORM •
X AGENDA REQUEST
CONTRACT REVIEW
GRANT REVIEW
For the Fayetteville City Council meeting of June 5 , 2001 .
FROM :
Su
Tim Conklin Planning Public Works Fo
Name Division Department
ACTION REQUIRED : To approve a resolution for ADO 1 - 1 .00 to amend Chapter 171 "Streets and Sidewalks", Section
171 . 13(B)(6) "Width of Driveway Approaches" and Chapter 172 "Parking and Loading", Section 172.01 (C)(5)(b)(1 )(a-c)
"Parking Lot Entrances" ofthe Unified Development Ordinance to change the width of a curb cut allowed for commercial
driveways and provide for a minimum curb radius , submitted by the City of Fayetteville, Planning Division.
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 Manager Administrative Services Director
CONTRACT/GRANT/LEASE REVIEW : GRANTING AGENCY :
Accounting Manager Date Internal Auditor Date
4EZC
Ci y Attorn y Date ADA Coordinator Date
Purchasing Officer Date
STAFF RECOMMENDATION : Staff recommends approval and Planning Commission voted 7 - 2 - 0 to
recommend to City CC i1 .
Division Head Date Cross Reference
New Item : Yes
D partment Director DWe
I AA AM AA R, Prev Ord/Res # :
A nis rative rvices Director D
'
Orig Contract Date :
Mayor Date
Orig Contract Number :