HomeMy WebLinkAboutOrdinance 4672 m =Tno — ORDINANCE NO. 467. 2
-
m -
NNo �mo AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING A RESIDENTIAL
�
00 ' = PLANNED ZONING DISTRICT TITLED R-PZD 04- 1307,
a a�No - ASPEN RIDGE LOCATED SOUTH OF 6T" STREET,
� ocooN = WEST OF HILL AVENUE, NORTHEAST OF 11TH
C)C- w oa p STREET ALONG TOWN BRANCH CREEK
. 000 —
C)
oo —
O ^ p" `"o CONTAINING APPROXIMATELY 27.969 ACRES,
O m o � � =_ MORE OR LESS; AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING
C) ~ ND S
Nim = MAP OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE; AND
14 wm ADOPTING THE ASSOCIATED RESIDENTIAL
~r =_ DEVELOPMENT PLAN AS APPROVED BY THE
00 3 PLANNING COMMISSION
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS:
Section 1 : That the zone classification of the following described property is
hereby changed as follows:
From RMF-24, Residential Multi Family, 24 units per
acre, to R-PZD 04- 1307 as shown in Exhibit "A" attached
hereto and made a part hereof.
Section 2: That the change in zoning classification is based upon the approved
master development plan and development standards as shown on the plat and approved by
the Planning Commission on December 13, 2004.
Section 3 : That this ordinance shall take effect and be in full force at such time as
all of the requirements of the development plan have been met.
Section 4: That the official zoning map of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, is
hereby amended to reflect the zoning change provided in Section I above.
PASSED and APPROVED this 18`" day of January, 2005 .
APPROV
Z:
By: Wi
\1 n D CO O DY, Mayor
BY: UZ
SONDRA SMITH, City ClerkG%TY p ;sG�j
; FAYETTEVILLE ; 3
,
.�ys.9D/{AN%F'.a
��.��:
„umuuru'•
EXHIBIT "A"
R-PZD 04-1307
PART OF THE SOUTH %2 OF THE SW '/4 OF SECTION 16, AND A PART OF THE
NORTH %2 OF THE NW /40F SECTION 21 , T- 16-N, R-30-W, WASHINGTON
COUNTY, ARKANSAS, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS :
COMMENCING A THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST '/40F THE
NORTHWEST '/4 OF SAID SECTION 21 , SAID POINT BEING AN EXISTING IRON
PIPE; THENCE S87°04'09"E ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF THE NORTHEAST '/4 OF
THE NORTHWEST '/40F SAID SECTION 21 A DISTANCE OF 5 .92 FEET TO THE
POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE S87°04'09"E 418.49 FEET; THENCE S02°49 '04"W
514. 14 FEET; THENCE N87°04'09"W 424.40 FEET TO A SET 'h" REBAR; THENCE
S02049 '04"W 204.82 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 87004'09"E 139.00 FEET; THENCE
S02048948"W 293 .00 FEET TO A SET %2" IRON REBAR; THENCE N87°05 ' 54"W 183 .58
FEET TO AN EXISTING IRON; THENCE S02048 '00"W 181 .27 FEET; THENCE
58704102"E 84.31 FEET, THENCE S02040' 0599W 79.86 FEET; THENCE S37007'40"E
39.06 FEET THENCE S07040705"W 15 .00 FEET; THENCE N87018 '29"W 65 . 13 FEET
THENCE S02°40' 17"W 13 .01 FEET; THENCE N870 13 ' 13"W 222.57 FEET; THENCE
NO20391079'E 98.08 FEET; THENCEN87011 '50"W 222.77 FEET; THENCEN87°13'26"W
514.88 FEET TO AN EXISTING IRON ON THE EAST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF THE
BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD; THENCE ALONG THE EAST RIGHT OF
WAY LINE OF SAID RAILROAD N35029131 "E 52.81 FEET; THENCE N3201752199E
103 .24 FEET; THENCE N28025922"E 103.51 FEET; THENCE N24° 16'00"E 103.08 FEET;
THENCE N21019'30"E 102.24 FEET; THENCE N18°44'44"E 102.31 FEET; THENCE
N17042 '237'E 150.90 FEET; THENCE N19°09'44"E 46.21 FEET; THENCE N19°55' 12"E
130.59 FEET; THENCE N24°20' 10"E 111 .27 FEET; THENCE N28°56'24"E 112.03 FEET;
THENCE N33022101E 78. 14 FEET; THENCE N36027'09"E 61 .08 FEET; THENCE
N40040' 51 "E 107.01 FEET; THENCE S86014'53"E 62.45 FEET TO AN EXISTING IRON
ON A 1381 .79 FOOT RADIUS CURVE TO THE RIGHT; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY
ALONG SAID RIGHT OF WAY AND CURVE 417.54 FEET, THE CHORD FOR WHICH
BEING N51038 '45"E 415 .96 FEET, TO AN EXISTING ARKANSAS HIGHWAY
COMMISSION RIGHT OF WAY MONUMENT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF ARKANSAS
HIGHWAY 180 (WEST 6" STREET); THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY
LINE OF SAID HIGHWAY S87041 '4291E 40.98 FEET TO AN EXISTING AHC
MONUMENT; THENCE S87°40'49"E 26. 16 FEET TO AN EXISTING AHC
MONUMENT; THENCE S88° 18 '0"E 3 . 15 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID RIGHT OF
WAY SO1044550"W 153.30 FEET; THENCE ON A CURVE TO THE RIGHT WITH A
RADIUS OF 315.50 FEET AND A DISTANCE OF 81 .06 FEET; THENCE S16°28 ' 1 "W
8.54 FEET; THENCE ON A CURVE TO THE RIGHT WITH A RADIUS OF 215 .50 FEET
A DISTANCE OF 40.68 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, CONTAINING 27.969
ACRES, MORE OR LESS, FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS. THE ABOVE DESCRIBED
27.969 ACRE TRACT BEING SUBJECT TO THE RIGHT OF WAY OF DUNCAN
AVENUE, ANDERSON PLACE, HILL AVENUE AND ALL EASEMENTS AND/OR
RIGHTS OF WAY OF RECORD.
<16 7;z'
' • p2D
City Council Meelog of January 04, 2005
Agenda Item Number z/�o 70�
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO
To: Mayor and City Council
Thru: Gary Dumas, Director of Operations
From: Jeremy C. Pate, Interim Zoning and Development Administrator dr
Date: December 15, 2004
Subject: Residential Planned Zoning District for Aspen Ridge (R-PZD 04- 1307)
RECOMMENDATION
Planning Staff recommends approval of an ordinance creating a Residential Planned
Zoning District (R-PZD) for Aspen Ridge. This action will establish a unique zoning
district for a residential condominium infill development on a 27.969-acre tract located in
south Fayetteville, near the intersection of Hill Avenue and 6th Street. The proposal
consists of 220 condominium units in two phases.
BACKGROUND
Property Description: The property consists of a total of 27.979 acres located in south
Fayetteville, with access onto 6`h Street, Hill Avenue, I Ith/Duncan and 12`h Streets
proposed. The site formerly accommodated approximately 49 mobile homes and 6 single
family homes, which have been removed in the past two years by the applicant. The
property is bisected by Town Branch Creek, and is located in the midst of single family
homes, industrial property, and commercial properties. A large percentage of tree canopy
existing on-site has been evaluated by a professional arborist and deemed to be in poor
condition, due to years of abuse, fill and debris. A majority of the tree canopy preserved
and mitigation required is along the creek corridor and along the western portion of the
trail, to aid in the rehabilitation of Town Branch Creek.
Proposal: The applicant requests a rezoning and large scale development approval for a
residential condominium development within a unique R-PZD zoning district. The
proposed use of the site is for single family attached residential dwelling units consisting
of 220 units, with a total density of 7.87 DU/acre. A 0.86-acre public park is proposed, as
well as the dedication of 0.36 acres of land and construction of a public trail through an
old railroad corridor. A large tree preservation area and deed restricted wetland protection
area along the floodplain of the creek is also proposed. Two pedestrian crossings are
proposed across the creek to allow for connectivity to the public trail and surrounding
neighborhoods. Improvements to surrounding streets include curb and gutter on I I 1
Street, a turn lane at Hill and 6'h Street, repair of pavement on Duncan, and construction
of Brooks Avenue as a secondary means of access.
I
• City Council Melog of January 04, 2005
Agenda Item Number
DISCUSSION
The Planning Commission voted 8-0-0 in favor of this request on Monday, December 13,
2004. Approval of a planned zoning district requires City Council approval as it includes
zoning (land use) as well as development approval (large scale development).
Recommended conditions were approved by the Planning Commission, which are
reflected in the attached staff report.
Public discussion included current drainage and flooding along Town Branch Creek,
traffic flow in the area, wetland areas and affordable housing.
BUDGETIMPACT
None.
2
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING A RESIDENTIAL
PLANNED ZONING DISTRICT TITLED R-PZD 04- 1307,
ASPEN RIDGE LOCATED SOUTH OF 6T" STREET,
WEST OF HILL AVENUE, NORTHEAST OF IIT"
STREET ALONG TOWN BRANCH CREEK
CONTAINING APPROXIMATELY 27.969 ACRES,
MORE OR LESS; AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING
MAP OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE,AND
ADOPTING THE ASSOCIATED RESIDENTIAL
DEVELOPMENT PLAN AS APPR�ED\BY THE
PLANNING COMMISSION.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE�,CITY OF
FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS: \\/) 1\//
Section 1 : That the zone classification of the fo
llowing described property is
hereby changed as follows: \
From RMF-24, Residential Multi Family 24 units per 'R-PZD 04-1307 as shown
in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof,
Section 2. That the change in zoning classification is based upon the
approved master-development plan and development standards as shown on the plat
and approvedby t\la- nning Commission on December 13, 2004.
Section 3.� 'hat this ordinance shall take effect and be in full force at such
time as s al\the require tints of the development plan have been met.
S\ection 4. That.the of/tilcial zoning map of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas,
is hereby amen\\ reflect the zoning change provided in Section 1 above.
PASSED AND APPROVED this day of , 2004.
APPROVED:
By:
DAN COODY, Mayor
By:
SONDRA SMITH, City Clerk
EXHIBIT "A,' .
` R-PZD 04-1307
PART OF THE SOUTH %2 OF THE SW '/4 OF SECTION 16, AND A PART OF THE
NORTH %2 0 ' THE NW /40F SECTION 21 , T- 16-N, R-30-W, WASHINGTON
COUNTY, ARKANSAS, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS :
COMMENCING A THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST '/< OF THE
NORTHWEST '/40F SAID SECTION 21 , SAID POINT BEING AN EXISTING IRON
PIPE; THENCE S87°04'09"E ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF THE NORTHEAST ''/4 OF
THE NORTHWEST 'A OF SAID SECTION 21 A DISTANCE/OF\5 .92 FEET TO THE
POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE S87°04'09"E 418.49 FEET;fTHENCE S02049'04"W
514. 14 FEET; THENCE N87°04'09"W 424.40 FEET TO/A�SET�/2" REBAR; THENCE
S02049'04"W 204.82 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 87°04'09"E'139;00 FEET; THENCE
S02048'48"W 293 .00 FEET TO A SET '/2" IRON REBAR;THENCE'N87005 '54"W 183 .58
FEET TO AN EXISTING IRON; THENCE S02048'00"W 181 .27\FEET; THENCE
58704' 02"E 84.31 FEET, THENCE S02°40'05'W 79.86eFEET; THENCE S3/07'40"E
39.06 FEET THENCE S07040'05"W 15 .00 FEET; THENCE�N87° 18'291165 . 13 FEET
THENCE S02°40' 17"W 13 .01 FEET; THENCE N87° 13%13"W 222.57 FEET,-' THENCE
NO2039'07"E 98.08 FEET; THENCE N870 11 ' 50"W 2221TFEET; THENCE N87° 13 '26"W
514.88 FEET TO AN EXISTING IRON;ON THE EAST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF THE
BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD;THENCE ALONG EAST RIGHT OF
WAY LINE OF SAID RAILROAD N35°29'3-K''E 52.81 FEET; THENCE N32017'21 "E
103 .24 FEET; THENCE N28°25 '22"E 10354 FEET;THENCE N24° 16'00"E 103 .08 FEET;
THENCE N21019130'E�l02 24,FEET; THENCE NI8 44'44"E 102.31 FEET; THENCE
VA
NI 7042'23"E 150.90TEET; THENCE NI 9°09,;44"E 46.21 FEET; THENCE N 19°55 ' 12"E
130.59 FEET; THENCE4N24°20?30"E 111 .27 FEET, THENCE N28056'24"E 112.03 FEET;
THENCE N33022'01E\78�14/FEET;THENCE N36027' 09"E 61 .08 FEET; THENCE
N40040' 5 I "E-107-01FEET;THENCES860,4'53"E 62.45 FEET TO AN EXISTING IRON
ON A 138.1'79 FOOT RADIU&CURVE TO THE RIGHT; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY
ALONG(SAID RIGHT OF WAYEAND�CURVE 417.54 FEET, THE CHORD FOR WHICH
BEING-�N51038145 'E 41=5_,96 FEET, TO AN EXISTING ARKANSAS HIGHWAY
COMMISSIONRIGHT OF WAY MONUMENT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF ARKANSAS
HIGHWAY F8�(WEST 61 STREET); THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY
LINE OF SAIDXHIGHWAY S87041 '42"E 40.98 FEET TO AN EXISTING AHC
MONUMENT; THENCE S87040'49"E 26. 16 FEET TO AN EXISTING AHC
MONUMENT; THENCE S88° 18 '0"E 3 . 15 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID RIGHT OF
WAY S01044' 50"W 153 .30 FEET; THENCE ON A CURVE TO THE RIGHT WITH A
RADIUS OF 315.50 FEET AND A DISTANCE OF 81 .06 FEET; THENCE S16028 ' 1 "W
8 .54 FEET; THENCE ON A CURVE TO THE RIGHT WITH A RADIUS OF 215.50 FEET
A DISTANCE OF 40.68 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, CONTAINING 27.969
ACRES, MORE OR LESS, FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS . THE ABOVE DESCRIBED
27.969 ACRE TRACT BEING SUBJECT TO THE RIGHT OF WAY OF DUNCAN
AVENUE, ANDERSON PLACE, HILL AVENUE AND ALL EASEMENTS AND/OR
RIGHTS OF WAY OF RECORD.
7ayve Mlfll k, PC Meeting of December 13 , 2004
ARKANSAS
TI-{ E CITY OF 17AYETTEVILLE , ARKANSAS
125 W. Mountain St.
Fayetteville, AR 72701
PLANNING DIVISION CORRESPONDENCE Telephone: (479) 575-8267
TO: Fayetteville Planning Commission
FROM : Jeremy Pate, Senior Planner
Brent O'Neal, Staff Engineer
THRU: Dawn Warrick, A.I.C.P., Zoning & Development Administrator
DATE: Revised 12-16-04
R-PZD 04-1307: Planned Zoning District (ASPEN RIDGE, 522/561): Submitted by MATT
CRAFTON CRAFTON, TULL & ASSOC. for property located at THE SW CORNER OF HWY
62, S ON HILL AVENUE AND BORDERED BY 11TH STREET AND THE BURLINGTON
NORTHERN RR. The property is zoned RMF-24, MULTI FAMILY - 24 UNITS/ACRE and
contains approximately 27.969 acres. The request is to approve a Residential Planned Zoning
District with 220 condominiums in two phases proposed.
Property Owner: HANK BROYLES Planner: JEREMY PATE
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Required YES
Date: December 13, 2004 Approved O Denied
8-00
CITY COUNCIL ACTION: Required YES
O Approved O Denied
Date: January 04, 2005 (151 reading if recommended)
Findings:
Property Description: The property consists of a total of 27.969 acres located in south
Fayetteville, south of Hwy 62 (6`h Street), west of Hill Avenue, east of the Railroad, along Town
Branch Creek. The property previously was inhabited by a mobile home park, which was
recently removed by the applicant. Several tons of trash, debris, tires, etc. were separated and
removed from this property, beginning the cleaning up process. A total of 49 mobile homes and
6 single family homes were removed in an effort to combine the property for development. The
applicant has contributed much time and money in an effort to clean this particular site, which is
not readily recognized in the development review process. Approximately half of the site is
underneath tree canopy, the majority of which is located along College Branch Creek, a stream
K.'I Reporls120041 PC Repor1s112-13-041 R-PZD 04-1307 (ASPEN RIDGE) REIOSED.do
that bisects the site north and south. This stream, and associated runoff from surrounding
development, has been the source of many neighborhood concerns in past years, due to high
water, flooding and debris being washed into and down the creek during heavy rainfalls. There
are existing wetlands in the area, as well, much of which the developer is proposing to retain or
enhance.
Existing Development: The site is currently vacant, with remnants of the previous mobile home
park development evident.
Surrounding Land Use/Zoning:
Direction Land Use Zoning
North Hwy 62 — 6` Street, busy arterial RMF-24, C-2
South Pinnacle Foods, Single Family I-2, RMF-24
homes, approved MF development
East SF homes, Coors, Brenda' s Bur ers RMF-24, 1- 1
West Burlin ton-Northern Railroad RMF-24
Proposal: The applicant requests a rezoning and large scale development approval for a
residential development within a unique R-PZD zoning district. The proposed use of the site is
for a condominium-style development consisting of 220 attached residential dwelling units. Two
separate phases are identified. Phase I consists of 113 units on the east side of College Branch
Creek, and Phase 11 consists of 107 units on the west side of the creek. A future Phase III
consisting of mixed-use office/retail/commercial is indicated on the site plans at the corner of 6°i
Street and Hill Avenue, but is not the subject of this request.
Process: Currently, the project proposal is submitted as one large tract of land, consisting of
27.969 acres. There are several independent parcels that create this tract, all of which are being
combined into one for the purposes of development. Plans consist of all proposed buildings,
parking, driveways, public and private streets, landscaping, tree preservation and mitigation,
wetland mitigation, parkland dedication, trail construction, public utility extensions, etc.,
typically reviewed with a Large Scale Development. The developer intends to construct the
project much as a typical multi-family development, with all structures, public infrastructure and
utilities being constructed simultaneously. Though the process by which the request is being
reviewed is a Large Scale Development consisting of 220 condominiums, the intent is to sell
each of the 220 townhomes as a single-family residence and plat each townhome as a separate lot
once the infrastructure has been constructed and the exact locations of the buildings are set in the
field.
To clarify, a condominium and townhome are distinct from one another: Condo unit owners
own the inside of their units. Townhouse owners own the complete unit, including exterior
surfaces and the land on which the unit is built.
Condominium: a multiple-unit complex, the units of which are individually owned, with each
owner receiving a deed to the unit purchased . . . and sharing in joint ownership of any common
grounds, passageways, etc. (through an established POA/HOA) (paraphrased from Webster 's
K:I Reportsl20041 PC ReportsII2-13-041R-PZD 04-1307 (ASPEN RIDGE) REVISED.do
0 0
College Dictionary, 1991). This type of dwelling unit typically does not have land attached to its
deed, it is merely the unit alone, inside the walls of the structure.
Townhome: a row house on a small lot, which has exterior limits common to other similar
units. Title to the unit and its lot is vested in the individual owner with a fractional interest in
common areas, if any. (Source: mortgagewarehousemb. com) A townhouse is a home that is
attached to one or more other houses, but which sits directly on a parcel of land that you also
own (if you don't own the land, it is a condominium).
In order to plat individual lots for the townhomes in the future, an amended Planned Zoning
District plat will have to be processed and approved by the Planning Commission and City
Council, at that time. This will likely take the form of a Concurrent Plat, if it meets the
appropriate criteria. Otherwise, a Preliminary and Final Plat process will be required.
Proposed Land Uses:
• Use Unit 1 : City-wide Uses by Right
• Use Unit 8 : Single Family Dwellings
• Use Unit 26: Multi-family Dwellings — Townhouse development, more than three
attached units.
The total proposed number dwelling units on the 27.969-acre site is 220, therefore the proposed
density for the R-PZD is 7.87 DU/acre. The project site is currently zoned RMF-24, allowing
for a much higher density of development as a traditional multi-family complex. The potential
for a townhouse-style division of land, the inclusion of the public trail system, a public park, a
large Tree Preservation and riparian corridor protection area, the challenges presented by
existing natural conditions (drainage, slope and railway); all of these contribute to the need to
process a Planned Zoning District in order for the best project to result for both the applicant and
the city.
Building Setbacks: Building setbacks are proposed as indicated on the plat. Most setbacks are 8'
or 10' , with an exception at the 6`h Street frontage (20 feet) and Duncan/I I 1 Street frontage (25
feet).
Building Height: Maximum building height shall be 40 feet.
Greenspace: 51 .6% Impervious (greenspace), 48.4% pervious (streets, buildings, trail, parking)
Wetlands: A small percentage of wetlands on the property are being filled and mitigated for in
the riparian corridor along Town Branch Creek. As part of the Corps of Engineers permit to do
so, a buffer area is to be deed-restricted for protection from future development. A portion of this
area will also serve as the Tree Preservation and mitigation area.
Water & Sewer: Water and sewer lines are being extended to serve the development. The
applicant is extending public lines to service each unit individually, in order to legally subdivide
the property in the future.
K:Weporrs1200{IPC Repons112-13-041 R-PZD 04-1307 (ASPEN RIDGE) REVISED.do
0 0
Access: Access is from several streets in the area: 4
North: 61h Street (one-way entrance and exit, with a right-turn only allowed when
exiting)
South: Phase I has no access across the creek.
Phase II : l 1th and Duncan
Brooks Avenue and 12th Street. This separate access point is
recommended to provide a safe means of access into Phase I1 and
alleviate potential congestion at the intersection of I I1 and
Duncan.
East: Phase I access east to Hill Avenue.
Phase 1I access south and east onto Duncan/] It"/ 12'h Streets.
West: No access is available over the railroad.
The ingress/egress to the proposed 113 units in Phase I is from 61h Street and Hill Avenue. Based
on a traffic study prepared for this project, a turn lane and widening of the intersection is
warranted at Hill and 6'h Street due to the increase in number of vehicle trips per day, and plans
by the developer have been prepared accordingly. Ingress and egress to Phase II is more difficult,
due to the lack of frontage for this particular parcel. Staff has recommended, and the developer
consented, to constructing an additional means of access within platted right-of-way known as
Brooks Avenue, to connect to the portion of 121h Street that is constructed. The other entrance to
this phase is at the corner of I 11h and Duncan, which has been reviewed and determined to be
satisfactory by the Engineering Division.
Interior to the project, public streets are being provided within a varying right-of-way, with
sidewalks on both sides in most cases. Staff recommends that where possible, the sidewalk be . .
located at the right-of-way line, with a minimum distance of six feet from the curb, to meet
Master Street Plan requirements.
Adjacent Master Street Plan Streets: 61h Street (Principal Arterial), Hill Avenue, 11 "' Street,
Duncan Avenue (Historic Collector)
Street Improvements: Staff recommends street improvements to surrounding streets to bring
them to a safe and adequate level of service for the additional units proposed in this area. A
significant number of units are being added to this area, and much of the property being
developed has no direct frontage onto adjacent right-of-way. The following are staffs street
improvement recommendations for the developer to meet ordinance requirements for this
development' s proportionate share:
• Repair the broken pavement on ] 1 m Street, directly south of the proposed intersection at
the corner of 11th and Duncan, as part of the improvements to this stretch of street.
• Continue the existing sidewalk on the north side of 1 I th street to connect the proposed
sidewalk on Greystone Drive (approximately 20 feet).
• Complete the curb and gutter on the south side of I I1 street from the bridge west to the
constructed curb/gutter. Minimum street width should be 24 feet, face of curb to face of
curb (approximately 240 feet in length).
• Widen the intersection at Hill Avenue and 61h Street, including a turn lane, the cost of
relocating traffic signals and any necessary costs to add a left-tum signal to the existing
KlReporls12004WC Repons112-13-041R-PM 04-1307 (ASPEi\' RIDGE) REVISEDJd
signal system. (Recommended in traffic study)
• Improve that portion of Hill Avenue adjacent to the subject property where necessary, to
conform to City specifications. A six-foot sidewalk is required, at the right-of-way line.
• Relocate the sidewalk along 6`h Street to transition from the railroad bridge to the Master
Street Plan right-of-way line along the frontage of this project.
• Construct a secondary means of access to Phase II; The applicant proposes to construct a
24-foot wide public street within existing platted right-of-way of Brooks Avenue and
turning south to connect to 12`h Street. The Master Street Plan calls for a 28-foot wide
street in this location, based on the platted right-of-way and member of vehicle trips per
day to be generated. The applicant disagrees with this recommendation, stating the
Traffic Study indicates only 4% of all traffic from Phase II will utilize Brooks Avenue.
Based on this same report, the following is applicable:
o Phase II will generate approximately 627 vehicle trips per day.
o Figure 3 of the Traffic Report indicates slightly more vehicles will travel south
from Phase II than north (358 vs. 303) in a 24 hour period.
A 24-foot wide Residential Street is designed to serve a range of 300-500 vehicles per day,
maximum. Should '/z of the traffic within Phase II of the development travel south, many of them
will utilize the Brooks Avenue access. Typical traffic calculations by the City of Fayetteville,
when two access points are provided, are based on % of the traffic potentially traveling in either
direction. This would result in approximately 313 vehicles trips per day accessing the Brooks
Avenue access. Additionally, the street to be constructed to provide the only secondary means of
access to this site also fronts onto other properties that are vacant and have the potential to
develop in the future, thereby increasing their volume. A Local Street, by contrast, is developed
with a 28-foot width and can support up to 4,000 vehicles per day, per the Master Street Plan.
Staff recommends a 28-foot wide street be constructed, to transition to the existing 31 -foot wide
12`h Street. This is based on providing a safe and adequate means of access to the proposed
development, planning for this development along with potential other developments in the area
that may access the street, and Master Street Plan requirements.
Tree Preservation: Existing: 52.5%
Preserved: 15 . 1 %
Mitigation: On-site mitigation, to 25% minimum
Parks: The Parks and Recreation board recommends a combination of money, land and services
to meet park land dedication requirements. This will include 0.36 acres of land on which a 12-
foot public trail is to be constructed by the developer, per the City of Fayetteville specifications.
In addition, approximately 0.86 acres of land on the southern edge of the property is to be
dedicated as a public park. Credit will be applied to the developer to account for 55 existing
inhabited homes that were removed from the property. If remaining fees are due above and
beyond the requirements herein, they will be applied to amenities for the park.
Temporary Office Space: The applicant proposes to operate one ( 1 ) temporary office within the
development specifically for the purpose of selling townhomes for Aspen Ridge. One of the
constructed units in the Phase I area will be used as the location of the sales office, with office
hours of Monday through Friday, 8 am to 8 pm, Saturday and Sunday 10 :00 am to 6:00 pm.
K.IReporlsp0041PC Reporlsll1-13-041 R-PZD 04-1307 (ASPEN RIDGE) REVISED.dw
• w
Once all of the units in the development are sold, the sales office will be closed and sold as a
single-family residence.
Neighborhood Involvement• The applicant has met several times with adjoining property owners
and neighbors on Duncan, both in groups and individually. Much concern has been voiced
regarding the drainage and flooding problems associated with the Town Branch Creek. Many of
the homes that are adjacent to this creek are within the 100-year floodplain or floodway. The
developer has been involved with his engineers from the beginning of the process to best address
these concerns, and others voiced by the neighborhood. Though not all are pleased with all
aspects of the proposal, staff has received numerous calls from residents in this area pleased with
the clean-up effort, removal of the mobile home park and the efforts to better the drainage
situation, along with the proposal for single family attached units, rather than typical multi-
family units that are allowed by right on the property.
A draft of the future plat of lots, as well as the applicant's response to the Planned Zoning
District requirements and description of the project have been submitted and are included in the
staff report.
Recommendation: Staff recommends the Planning Commission forward R-PZD 04-1307 to
the City Council with a recommendation of approval for the requested
rezoning and associated development plans, with the following conditions
of approval :
Conditions of Approval:
1 . Allowed uses in this R-PZD shall be restricted to Use Unit 1 : City-wide Uses by Right,
Use Unit 8 : Single Family Dwellings and Use Unit 26: Multi-family Dwellings —
Townhouse development, more than three attached units.
2 . Planning Commission recommendation for future vacation of portions of existing
Duncan Avenue and Anderson Place rights-of-way to facilitate the proposed
development. Staff recommends approval of the vacation of these platted rights-of-way,
due to the changes in circulation proposed with the submitted site plans. The
connection these two streets make will be in an improved configuration, with a
boulevard section that enters into this neighborhood. PLANNING COMMISSION
DETERMINED IN FAVOR OF THE RECOMMENDED FUTURE VACATIONS.
3 . No structure shall be permitted that falls into existing platted right-of-way. Formal
vacation requests for Duncan Avenue and Anderson Place shall be submitted prior to
permitting of affected buildings.
4. Planning Commission determination of the applicant' s request for a temporary sales
office. Staff recommends approval, with the following conditions: One (1) dwelling unit
shall be permitted to house a temporary sales office for the sole purpose of selling
dwelling units within the Aspen Ridge Planned Zoning District. The sales office shall
appear in all manners as a dwelling unit, and shall cease operation and revert to its
intended use as a single family residence once the remaining units have been sold.
K:IReporls110041PC Reporls111-13-04IR-PZD 04-1307 (ASPEN RIDGE) REI'tSED.dw
C
PLANNING COMMISSION DETERMINED IN FAVOR OF THE REQUESTED
OFFICE.
5. Planning Commission determination of appropriate off -site street improvements. Staff
recommends the following improvements for this development:
• Repair the broken pavement on 11 `h Street, directly south of the proposed
intersection at the corner of 11 `h and Duncan, as part of the improvements to this
street being utilized for primary ingress and egress, to the satisfaction of the
Engineering Division.
• Continue the existing sidewalk on the north side of 11th street to connect the
proposed sidewalk on Greystone Drive (approximately 20 feet).
• Complete the curb and gutter on the south side of 11th street from the bridge west
to the constructed curb/gutter. Minimum street width should be 24 feet, face of
curb to face of curb (approximately 240 feet in length).
• Widen the intersection at Hill Avenue and 6`" Street, including a turn lane, the
cost of relocating traffic signals and any necessary costs to add a left -turn signal
to the existing signal system. (Recommended in traffic study)
• Improve that portion of Hill Avenue adjacent to the subject property where
necessary, to conform to City specifications. A six-foot sidewalk is required, at
the right-of-way line.
• Relocate the sidewalk along 6t" Street to transition from the railroad bridge to the
Master Street Plan right-of-way line along the frontage of this project.
• Construct a secondary means of access to Phase II; The applicant proposes to
construct a 24 foot wide public street within existing platted right-of-way of
Brooks Avenue and turning south to connect to 121 Street. Staff recommends a
28 foot street to meet Master Street Plan requirements for the vehicle trips per
day generated by this development.
PLANNING COMMISSION DETERMINED IN FAVOR OF THE
RECOMMENDED STREET IMPROVEMENTS, WITH A 24 -FOOT WIDE
STREET FOR BROOKS AVENUE.
6. Atypical interior street widths, sidewalk location, etc. shall be reviewed and approved
by the Engineering Division at the time of more detailed construction plan review, to
ensure emergency service vehicles, public service providers, solid waste, etc. is able to
access the proposed development.
A combination of land, money and services shall be contributed by the developer to
meet parkland dedication requirements, including 0.36 acres for a public trail,
construction of said 12 -foot wide trail, 0.86 acres land dedication for a park and all
remaining fees due in excess of the above requirements for 220 units to be utilized for
park amenities. Credit in the amount of $30,525 (55 units * $555/unit) will be applied
to the developer to account for 55 existing homes that were removed from the
property prior to development. All fees and deeds for land shall be submitted prior to
building permit.
8. The developer shall mitigate for the removal of 115,440 sf of tree canopy to meet Tree
K:1Reports120041PC Reports112-13-041R-PZD 04-1307 (ASPEN RIDGE) REPISED.doc
Preservation ordinance requirements. On -site mitigation shall consist of a minimum of
420 trees. If all trees can not be planted on -site, the balance shall be contributed into the
Tree Fund, as determined by the Landscape Administrator.
9. Specific location of the on -site mitigation trees shall be coordinated with the Landscape
Administrator for approval. Several sites exist on the property where mitigation trees
could benefit the overall development and enhance the creek corridor, currently not
indicated on the plans.
10. The property line adjustments to create the described 27.969 -acre parcel shall be
processed, approved and recorded prior to this item appearing before the City Council
for consideration.
11. Staff recommends a second pedestrian path be constructed from approximately between
buildings 35 and 36 in Phase II to connect to the public trail through an existing creek
crossing (see plat). A hard -surface (concrete or asphalt) path is desired. However, at
minimum, the path shall be constructed of a 4" minimum depth shredded mulch (or
equal) with appropriate edging on both sides. Trail slope, width, location through
existing tree canopy and specifications shall be approved by the City prior to
construction.
12.
Signage for the development shall be limited to one (1) monument sign at each of the
three primary entrances to the development. Sign size, location, height, etc. shall be
limited to the monument sign restrictions in an RMF zoning district, per city code.
(Maximum 16 square feet display surface area, six feet in height, 10 feet from the
property line).
13.
All dumpsters shall be enclosed on a minimum of three sides with access not visible
from the street. Landscape screening as shown shall be required.
14.
No structures shall be constructed over public utility easements, per city ordinance
(including, but not limited to, trash enclosures).
15.
Should the applicant desire to subdivide the land to create townhomes, an amended
Planned Zoning District will be required. The development review process will likely
be a Concurrent Plat, if all criteria are met. If not, a standard Preliminary and Final Plat
will be required to subdivide the property.
16.
All comments as itemized in the attached memo from the City Floodplain
Administrator shall be addressed at the appropriate time and are considered, by
reference, a part of the official Conditions of Approval (see attached).
17.
The maximum separation for fire hydrants shall be 500 feet in distance.
18.
Entrances into the subject property shall utilize a minimum width of 20 feet clear, to
allow for the passage of emergency vehicles.
K: IReporis120041PC ReporisI12-13-041R-PZD 04-1307 (ASP&V RIDGE) REVISED.doc
19. Maximum spacing for public street lights shall be 300 feet, along the proposed and
existing public streets.
Standard Conditions of Approval:
20. Plat Review and Subdivision comments (to include written staff comments provided to
the applicant or his representative, and all comments from utility representatives - AR
Western Gas, SWBT, Ozarks, SWEPCO, Cox Communications)
21. Staff approval of final detailed plans, specifications and calculations (where applicable)
for grading, drainage, water, sewer, fire protection, streets (public and private),
sidewalks, parking lot(s) and tree preservation. The information submitted for the plat
review process was reviewed for general concept only. All public improvements are
subject to additional review and approval. All improvements shall comply with City's
current requirements.
22. Planned Zoning District approval shall be valid for one calendar year, per city
ordinance.
23. All overhead electric lines 12kv and under shall be relocated underground. All
proposed utilities shall be located underground.
24. Prior to the issuance of a building permit the following is required:
a. Grading and drainage permits
b. An on -site inspection by the Landscape Administrator of all tree
protection measures prior to any land disturbance.
b. Separate easement plat for this project that shall include the tree
preservation area.
c. Project Disk with all final revisions
d. Completion of all required improvements or the placement of a surety
with the City (letter of credit, bond, escrow) as required by §158.01
"Guarantees in Lieu of Installed Improvements" to guarantee all
incomplete improvements. Further, all improvements necessary to serve
the site and protect public safety must be completed, not just guaranteed,
prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:yes Required
I Approved Denied
Date: December 13, 2004
The "CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL", stated in this report, are accepted in total without
exception by the entity requesting approval of this development item.
Date
K:IReportsl200MIPC Reportsll2-l3-0MIR-PZD 04-1307 (ASPEN RIDGE) REYISED.doc
Findings associated with R-PZD 04-1307
Sec. 166.06. Planned Zoning Districts (PZD).
(B) Development standards, conditions and review guidelines
(1) Generally. The Planning Commission shall consider a proposed PZD in light of the
purpose and intent as set forth in Chapter 161 Zoning Regulations, and the development
standards and review guidelines set forth herein. Primary emphasis shall be placed upon
achieving compatibility between the proposed development and surrounding areas so as
to preserve and enhance the neighborhood. Proper planning shall involve a consideration
of tree preservation, water conservation, preservation of natural site amenities, and the
protection of watercourses from erosion and siltation. The Planning Commission shall
determine that specific development features, including project density, building
locations, common usable open space, the vehicular circulation system, parking areas,
screening and landscaping, and perimeter treatment shall be combined in such a way as to
further the health, safety, amenity and welfare of the community. To these ends, all
applications filed pursuant to this ordinance shall be reviewed in accordance with the
same general review guidelines as those utilized for zoning and subdivision applications.
FINDING: The proposed Planned Zoning District has been reviewed in light of all
applicable development and zoning ordinances. The development achieves compatibility
with adjoining properties and enhances the surrounding neighborhood by creating buffers,
utilizing a density of 7.87 dwelling units per acre (as opposed to the 24 allowed), preserving
and enhancing the drainage associated with Town Branch Creek and by the overall
improvement to the property by the removal of refuse, abandoned structures, automobiles,
etc. Emphasis on appropriate tree preservation has been placed with the development
proposal, and appropriate routing of utilities, streets, and protective easements has been
achieved. Much of the tree preservation area is located along Town Branch Creek, along
with mitigation efforts to increase healthy canopy coverage in this area. Town Branch
Creek is being treated as a natural site amenity, to be retained as protected wetlands and
concentrated Tree Preservation area. Additionally, the development is situated to ensure
maximum protection of the watercourse from erosion and siltation. The proposed density
yield is 16 units per acre less than that which is allowed with the current zoning district,
which is a common zoning on surrounding properties. A public park is provided, along
with land and construction of a 12 -foot wide public trail along the Indian Trail corridor.
No large parking areas are proposed, as the units are for all intents and purposes to act as
single family homes, on separate lots. Landscaping, tree preservation, the design proposed
and overall public amenities required of the developer furthers the health, safety, amenity
and welfare of the community as a whole and enhances this neighborhood a great deal.
(2) Screening and landscaping. In order to enhance the integrity and attractiveness of the
development, and when deemed necessary to protect adjacent properties, the Planning
Commission shall require landscaping and screening as part of a PZD. The screening and
landscaping shall be provided as set forth in § 166.09 Buffer Strips and Screening. As part
of the development plan, a detailed screening and landscaping plan shall be submitted to
K:IReports120041PC Reporls1I2-13-041R-PZD 04-1307 (ASPEN RIDGE) REVISED.doc
the Planning Commission. Landscape plans shall show the general location, type and
quality (size and age) of plant material. Screening plans shall include typical details of
fences, berms and plant material to be used.
FINDING: Screening is required as a pert of this development to buffer adjacent
properties from those area viewed as less desirable, specifically the "back" of buildings
with their associated drive and parking areas. At the request of the Landscape
Administrator, screening has been added in the appropriate locations. A conceptual street
tree planting plan has been presented, along with a plan indicating mitigation trees. A
detailed tree planting plan is required prior to building permit, and may require some
changes to best locate mitigation trees in those areas along the creek that would benefit the
overall canopy coverage.
(3) Traffic circulation. The following traffic circulation guidelines shall apply:
(a) The adequacy of both the internal and external street systems shall be reviewed in
light of the projected future traffic volumes.
(b) The traffic circulation system shall be comprised of a hierarchal scheme of local
collector and arterial streets, each designed to accommodate its proper function and in
appropriate relationship with one another.
(c) Design of the internal street circulation system must be sensitive to such
considerations as safety, convenience, separation of vehicular and pedestrian traffic,
general attractiveness, access to dwelling units and the proper relationship of different
land uses.
(d) Internal collector streets shall be coordinated with the existing external street system,
providing for the efficient flow of traffic into and out of the planned zoning
development.
(e) Internal
local
streets shall
be designed to
discourage through traffic within the
planned
zoning
development
and to adjacent
areas.
(f) Design provisions for ingress and egress for any site along with service drives and
interior circulation shall be that required by Chapter 166 Development of this code.
FINDING: The internal street for Phase I is a public loop within varying right-of-way
width, due to the proposed landscape medians. The loop connects 6'h Street to Hill Avenue.
An extention of this street serves an additional 16 units to the west of the loop. No vehicular
access is provided across Town Branch Creek. For Phase It, an entrance is proposed at 11'h
and Duncan, with a secondary access from 12'h Street to serve the proposed 107 units. The
second access is a public street connection along Brooks Avenue right-of-way, proposed to
be 24 feet in width. Phase II internal drives are private, looping through the development
without a dead-end.
K: IReportsl20041 PC Reports)2-13-04I R-PZD 04-1307 (ASPEN RIDGE) REVISED.doc
A left -turn lane, traffic signal improvements and curve radii improvements are to be
provided at the intersection of Hwy 62 and Hill Avenue to improve this intersection.
Sidewalks are required on all sides of public streets within the development, at the right-of-
way line in most cases. Various improvements are also recommended for 111h Street,
including curb and gutter on the south side, pavement improvements and connection of
existing sidewalks in the neighborhood, per the comments detailed above.
(4) Parking standards. The off-street parking and loading standards found in Chapter 172
Parking and Loading shall apply to the specific gross usable or leasable floor areas of the
respective use areas.
FINDING: Standard parking ratios for single family units is enforced. Garages are
provided for all units, with pull -in space behind also allowing for visitor parking.
(5) Perimeter treatment. Notwithstanding any other provisions of a planned zoning district,
all uses of land or structures shall meet the open space, buffer or green strip provisions of
this chapter of this code.
FINDING: The development meets all open space and park land requirements.
(6) Sidewalks. As required by § 166.03.
FINDING: Four -foot sidewalks are to be constructed on both sides of all interior public
streets, with the exception of that area in which the 12 -foot wide trail is to be constructed.
Six-foot sidewalks are required along Hill Avenue and 6th Street.
(7) Street Lights. As required by § 166.03.
FINDING: All street lights installed shall be pursuant to the above -referenced code
section, with a maximum of 300 feet spacing.
(8) Water. As required by § 166.03.
FINDING: Public water is being provided to the project site, pursuant to city code.
(9) Sewer. As required by §166.03.
FINDING: Public sewer is being provided to the project site, pursuant to city code.
(10) Streets and Drainage. Streets within a residential PZD may be either public or
private.
(a) Public Streets. Public streets shall be constructed according to the adopted standards
of the City.
(b) Private Streets. Private streets within a
residential
PZD shall be permitted
subject to
K. IReports120041PC Reports111-13-O4IR-PZD 04-1307 (ASP&V RIDGE) REVISED.doc
the following conditions:
(i) Private streets shall be permitted for only a loop street, or street ending with a cul-
de-sac. Any street connecting one or more public streets shall be constructed to
existing City standards and shall be dedicated as a public street.
(ii) Private streets shall be designed and constructed to the same standards as public
streets with the exceptions of width and cul-de-sacs as noted below.
(iii)All grading and drainage within a Planned Zoning District including site drainage
and drainage for private streets shall comply with the City's Grading (Physical
Alteration of Land) and Drainage (Storm water management) Ordinances. Open
drainage systems may be approved by the City Engineer.
(iv) Maximum density served by a -cul-de-sac shall be 40 units. Maximum
density served by a loop street shall be 80 units.
(v) The plat of the planned development shall designate each private street as a
"private street."
(vi) Maintenance of private streets shall be the responsibility of the developer
or of a neighborhood property owners association (POA) and shall not be the
responsibility of the City. The method for maintenance and a maintenance fund
shall be established by the PZD covenants. The covenants shall expressly provide
that the City is a third party beneficiary to the covenants and shall have the right
to enforce the street maintenance requirements of the covenants irrespective of the
vote of the other parties to the covenants.
(vii) The covenants shall provide that in the event the private streets are not maintained
as required by the covenants, the City shall have the right (but shall not be
required) to maintain said streets and to charge the cost thereof to the property
owners within the PZD on a pro rata basis according to assessed valuation for ad
valorem tax purposes and shall have a lien on the real property within the PZD for
such cost. The protective covenants shall grant the City the right to use all private
streets for purposes of providing fire and police protection, sanitation service and
any other of the municipal functions. The protective covenants 'shall provide that
such covenants shall not be amended and shall not terminate without approval of
the City Council.
(viii) The width of private streets may vary according to the density served. The
following standard shall be used:
K: IReportsl2004IPC ReporlsV 2-13-0t1 R-PZD 04-1307 (ASPEN RIDGE) REI'ISED.doc
•
CI
Paving Width
(No On -Street Parkine)
Dwelling
Units
One -Way
Two -Way
1-20
14'
22'
21+
14'
24'
*Note: If on -street parking is desired, 6 feet must be added to each side where parking is
intended.
(ix) All of the traffic laws prescribed by Title VII shall apply to traffic on private
streets within a PZD.
(x) There shall be no minimum building setback requirement from a private street.
(xi) The developer
shall erect at the
entrance of each private
street a rectangular sign,
not exceeding
24 inches by 12
inches, designating the
street a "private street"
which shall be
clearly visible to
motor vehicular traffic.
FINDING: All public streets for the proposed development are to be constructed
according to the adopted standards of the City. Interior, or private, drives to
each of the units shall also be constructed to adopted City Standards, as reflected
herein. Private drives shall be maintained by the developer or a POA; the
method and maintenance shall be set forth through the PZD covenants or other
such language.
(11) Construction of nonresidential facilities. Prior to issuance of more than eight
building permits for any residential PZD, all approved nonresidential facilities shall be
constructed. In the event the developer proposed to develop the PZD in phases, and the
nonresidential facilities are not proposed in the initial phase, the developer shall enter into
a contract with the City to guarantee completion of the nonresidential facilities.
FINDING: N/A
(12) Tree preservation. All PZD developments shall comply with the requirements for
tree preservation as set forth in Chapter 167 Tree Preservation and Protection. The
location of trees shall be considered when planning the common open space, location of
buildings, underground services, walks, paved areas, playgrounds, parking areas, and
finished grade levels.
FINDING: The applicant proposes a large contiguous preservation area along Town
Branch Creek, coinciding with the deed -restricted wetland area and riparian corridor.
K: I ReportsI20041 PC Reportstl2-13-041R-PZD 04-1307 (ASPEN RIDGE) REVISED.doc
These trees are in the best health of the trees on -site, as many of the large trees on the
property have suffered from years of abuse from pre-existing development. The applicant
proposes to retain 15.1% of the tree canopy on -site, and to utilize on -site mitigation in an
effort to create a larger, healthier canopy coverage in this area. Primary areas of emphasis
for the mitigation trees are along the creek corridor and within the established Tree
Preservation area. Other mitigation trees will be combined with required landscaping trees
both along the perimeter and interior to the site.
(13) Commercial design standards. All PZD developments that contain office or
commercial structures shall comply with the commercial design standards as set forth in
§ 166.14 Site Development Standards and Construction and Appearance Design Standards
for Commercial Structures.
FINDING: N/A
(14) View protection. The Planning Commission shall have the right to establish
special height and/or positioning restrictions where scenic views are involved and shall
have the right to insure the perpetuation of those views through protective covenant
restrictions.
FINDING: Staff finds no specific scenic views to be protected on the subject property.
(E) Revocation.
(1) Causes for revocation as enforcement action. The Planning Commission may
recommend to the City Council that any PZD approval be revoked and all building or
occupancy permits be voided under the following circumstances:
(a) Building permit. If no building permit has been issued within the time allowed.
(b) Phased development
schedule.
If the applicant does not
adhere to the phased
development schedule
as stated
in the approved development
plan.
(c) Open space and recreational facilities. If the construction and provision of all
common open spaces and public and recreational facilities which are shown on the
final plan are proceeding at a substantially slower rate than other project components.
Planning staff shall report the status of each ongoing PZD at the first regular meeting
of each quarter, so that_the Planning Commission is able to compare the actual
development accomplished with the approved development schedule. If the Planning
Commission finds that the rate of construction of dwelling units or other commercial
or industrial structures is substantially greater than the rate at which common open
spaces and public recreational facilities have been constructed and provided, then the
Planning Commission may initiate revocation action or cease to approve any
additional final plans if preceding phases have not been finalized. The city may also
issue a stop work order, or discontinue issuance of building or occupancy permits, or
K:IReports120041PC Reports112-I3-041R-PZD 04-1307 (ASPEN RIDGE) REVISED.doc
revoke those previously issued.
(2) Procedures. Prior to a recommendation of revocation, notice by certified mail shall be
sent to the landowner or authorized agent giving notice of the alleged default, setting a
time to appear before the Planning Commission to show cause why steps should not be
made to totally or partially revoke the PZD. The Planning Commission recommendation
shall be forwarded to the City Council for disposition as in original approvals. In the
event a PZD is revoked, the City Council shall take the appropriate action in the city
clerk's office and the public zoning record duly noted.
(3) Effect. In the event of revocation, any completed portions of the development or those
portions for which building permits have been issued shall be treated to be a whole and
effective development. After causes for revocation or enforcement have been corrected,
the City Council shall expunge such record as established above and shall authorize
continued issuance of building permits.
(F) Covenants, trusts and homeowner associations.
(1) Legal entities. The developer shall create such legal entities as appropriate to undertake
and be responsible for the ownership, operation, construction, and maintenance of private
roads, parking areas, common usable open space, community facilities, recreation areas,
building, lighting, security measure and similar common elements in a development. The
city encourages the creation of homeowner associations, funded community trusts or
other nonprofit organizations implemented by agreements, private improvement district,
contracts and covenants. All legal instruments setting forth a plan or manner of
permanent care and maintenance of such open space, recreation areas and communally -
owned facilities shall be approved by the City Attorney as to legal form and effect, and
by the Planning Commission as to the suitability for the proposed use of the open areas.
The aforementioned legal instruments shall be provided to the Planning Commission
together with the filing of the final plan, except that the Guarantee shall be filed with the
preliminary plan or at least in a preliminary form.
(2) Common areas. If the common open space is deeded to a homeowner association, the
developer shall file with the plat a declaration of covenants and restrictions in the
Guarantee that will govern the association with the application for final plan approval.
The provisions shall include, but not necessarily be limited to, the following:
(a) The homeowner's association must be legally established before building permits are
granted.
(b) Membership and fees must be mandatory for each home buyer and successive buyer.
(C) The open space restrictions must be permanent, rather than for a period of years.
(d) The association must be responsible for the maintenance of recreational and other
common facilities covered by the agreement and for all liability insurance, local taxes
and other public assessments.
K. lReporls17004 PC Reponsh 2-13-04 R-PZD 04-1307 (ASPEN RIDGE) REVISED.doe
(e) Homeowners must pay their pro rata share of the initial cost; the maintenance
assessment levied by the association must be stipulated as a potential lien on the
property.
FINDING: The applicant shall comply with the above requirements, as part of the
Planned Zoning District ordinance.
Sec. 161.25 Planned Zoning District
(A) Purpose. The intent of the Planned Zoning District is to permit and encourage
comprehensively planned developments whose purpose is redevelopment, economic
development, cultural enrichment or to provide a single -purpose or mixed -use planned
development and to permit the combination of development and zoning review into a
simultaneous process. The rezoning of property to the PZD may be deemed appropriate if the
development proposed for the district can accomplish one or more of the following goals.
(1) Flexibility. Providing for flexibility in the distribution of land uses, in the density of
development and in other matters typically regulated in zoning districts.
(2) Compatibility. Providing for compatibility with the surrounding land uses.
(3) Harmony. Providing for an orderly and creative arrangement of land uses that are
harmonious and beneficial to the community.
(4) Variety. Providing for a variety of housing types, employment opportunities or
commercial or industrial services, or any combination thereof, to achieve variety and integration
of economic and redevelopment opportunities.
(5) No negative impact. Does not have a negative effect upon the future development of the
area;
(6) Coordination. Permit coordination and planning of the land surrounding the PZD and
cooperation between the city and private developers in the urbanization of new lands and in the
renewal of existing deteriorating areas.
(7) Open space. Provision of more usable and suitably located open space, recreation areas
and other common facilities that would not otherwise be required under conventional land
development regulations.
(8) Natural features. Maximum enhancement and minimal disruption of existing natural
features and amenities.
(9) General Plan. Comprehensive and innovative planning and design of mixed use yet
K: Reports120041PC Reportstl2-I3-0JIR-PZD 04-1307 (ASPEN RIDGE) REY/SED.doc
harmonious developments consistent with the guiding policies of the General Plan.
(10) Special Features. Better utilization of sites characterized by special features of geographic
location, topography, size or shape.
FINDING: The proposal meets many of the guidelines set out by the Planned Zoning
District ordinance. It is flexible, in that is allows for new single family home ownership
within the established community of South Fayetteville, at a density that is very
comparable and compatible to surrounding properties. No negative impact is anticipated;
rather, a positive impact has already been achieved, based on several comments received
from neighbors both in the Planning offices and through public meetings. Though
attached, these single family dwellings are developed with many amenities enjoyed by
single family detached owners, including proposed lakes, creek frontage, tree preservation
and planting areas, a neighborhood park and public trail, all of which will also benefit the
surrounding community. A community at harmony with its surrounding neighborhood is
being proposed. Natural features are being protected along the creek, which provides the
existing neighborhood with a unique character that will be protected with the proposed
PZD. Parkland, lakes, open space, and a public trail are all proposed components of the
overall plan, as well. The proposal is consistent with many of the guiding policies of the
General Plan 2020 including:
Residential Areas:
9.8.a Utilize principles of traditional residential urban design to create compatible,
livable, and accessible neighborhoods.
9.8.f Site new residential areas accessible to roadways, alternative transportation
modes, community amenities, infrastructure, and retail and commercial goods and
services.
Environmental Resources:
9.16.a Identify areas of environmental concern and protect and preserve environmental
resources.
9.16.b Define and protect areas of significant foodplains, hillsides, trees and other
environmental resources through cluster development provisions, density controls,
protective easements and other new and existing development standards and regulations.
9.16.c Establish community -wide greenways which incorporate the protection of
floodways and foodplains, and areas determined to be of environmental concern.
Community Character:
9.19.i Promote higher density development and mixed used development within the City
limits to provide from more efficient development, create traditional neighborhoods, and
preserve open space.
(B) Rezoning. Property may be rezoned to the Planned Zoning District by the City Council
K. IReports120041PC Reportsll2-l3-O41R-PZD 04-1307 (ASPEN RIDGE) REVISED.doc
in accordance with the requirements of this chapter and Chapter 166, Development. Each
rezoning parcel shall be described as a separate district, with distinct boundaries and specific
design and development standards. Each district shall be assigned a project number or label,
along with the designation "PZD". The rezoning shall include the adoption of a specific master
development plan and development standards.
FINDING: The subject described real property is proposed to be rezoned to R-PZD 04-
1307. The development standards and plan approved shall be adopted with the rezoning.
(C) R - PZD, Residential Planned Zoning District.
(1) Purpose and intent. The R-PZD is intended to accommodate mixed -use or clustered
residential developments and to accommodate single -use residential developments that are
determined to be more appropriate for a PZD application than a general residential rezone. The
legislative purposes, intent, and application of this district include, but are not limited to, the
following:
(a) To encourage a variety and flexibility in land development and land use for
predominately residential areas, consistent with the city's General Plan and the orderly
development of the city.
(b) To provide a framework within which an effective relationship of different land uses and
activities within a single development, or when considered with abutting parcels of land, can be
planned on a total basis.
(c) To provide a harmonious relationship with the surrounding development, minimizing
such influences as land use incompatibilities, heavy traffic and congestion, and excessive
demands on planned and existing public facilities.
(d) To provide a means of developing areas with special physical features to enhance natural
beauty and other attributes.
(e) To encourage the efficient use of those public facilities required in connection with new
residential development.
FINDING: The proposed Residential Planned Zoning District allows single-family attached
residential uses in a clustered pattern, allowing for more usable common open space and
greater preservation of natural amenities. A general rezoning would not allow the type of
development the applicant is pursuing, based on the bulk and area requirements of typical
zoning districts, therefore a Planned Zoning District is more appropriate for the proposed
development. The applicant intends on subdividing the property in the future to create
townhomes, whereby each unit owner would also own the land underneath the unit. The
proposed development allows for a density and land use that is compatible with adjacent
properties, yet also allows for a flexible site plan and layout. A harmonious relationship
with surrounding developments is achieved, while allowing for a very different style and
type of development for South Fayetteville. Public improvements provided with the
K: Repor(s120041PC Repor1s112-13-041R-PZD 04-1307 (ASPEN RIDGE) REVISED.doc
I
development will ensure safe and adequate traffic movement continues, as well as provide
an increase in pedestrian ways.
(2) Permitted uses.
FINDING:
The highlighted uses above that
are proposed
are permitted uses within a
Residential
Planned Zoning District. All other
ancillary uses
(parks, trails, etc.) are allowed
by right.
(3)
Condition.
In no
instance shall the residential
use area be less than fifty-one percent
(51%)
of the gross
floor
area within the development.
FINDING: The proposed PZD proposed is entirely residential in use.
*Required Findings for Rezoning Request.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the rezoning request from RMF-
24, Residential Multi -Family, 24 units per acre, to R-PZD 04-1307, with the adoption of the
associated development plans.
LAND USE PLAN: The General Plan 2020 Future Land Use Plan designates this site as a
Residential Area. Rezoning this property to R-PZD 04-1307, with the associated development
plans, is consistent with the land use plan and compatible with surrounding land uses in the
general vicinity.
FINDINGS OF THE STAFF
1. A determination of the degree to which the proposed zoning is consistent with land use
planning objectives, principles, and policies and with land use and zoning plans.
K:IReports110041PC Reportsll1-13-041R-PZD 04-1307 (ASPEN RIDGE) REVISED.doc
Finding: The proposed rezoning of the existing RMF-24 property to the proposed
PZD development with attached single-family use at a density of 7.87 units
per acre is consistent with the General Plan 2020 that identifies this area for
residential use. The proposed land use is unique to the area with regard to
site layout and organization, meeting many of the objectives and principles of
the land use plan and the Fayetteville Vision 2020 Guiding Principles to
begin an establishment of a revitalized South Fayetteville.
2. A determination of whether the proposed zoning is justified and/or needed at the time the
rezoning is proposed.
Finding: - The proposed zoning is needed in order to develop this property in the
manner indicated. Though a multi -family development could potentially be
achieved at a density of 24 units per acre on the property without rezoning,
the intent of the developer to create a townhouse -style, attached single family
owner neighborhood in this manner is not currently available through
existing zoning ordinances.
3. A determination as to whether the proposed zoning would create or appreciably increase
traffic danger and congestion.
Finding: An base increase of 220 town homes in this area without additional access
points would substantially alter the population density and create an
appreciable increase in traffic danger and congestion, based on the opinion
of the Fayetteville Police Department. Currently there is limited access to
this location. A four -lane highway and a two lane residential street border
this property. There is no way to currently funnel this traffic onto a collector
street before it impacts the road system in that area. However, the traffic
study provided, development plans that are presented with two means of
access to each Phase, and the improvements recommended by staff alleviate
most, if not all, of the concerns for traffic safety. A total of 1,283 vehicle trips
per day is projected for both phases, which are easily accommodated by
surrounding streets, with improved access points from I I'h, 12'hBrooks
Avenue, 6th Street, and Hill Avenue. Additionally, improvements to widen
and create a left -turn lane at the intersection of Hill and 6th, add curb and
gutter to 11th street and work to improve the pavement sections on 11th
currently in disrepair are all off -site improvements to which the developer is
committing as part of the overall project.
A determination as to whether the proposed zoning would alter the population density
and thereby undesirably increase the load on public services including schools, water, and
sewer facilities.
Finding: It is the opinion of the Fayetteville Police Department that this rezoning will
substantially alter the population density in this area. The development
K. IReports120041PC ReporIs1I2-13-0JIR-PZD 04-1307 (ASPEN RIDGE) REVISED.doc
proposed would create, on average, 572 future residents in this area, thereby
altering the population density in the immediate vicinity. However, by right,
a total of 671 units yielding 1,744 future residents is allowed with the current
underlying zoning. Based on findings from public service providers, as
outlined below, an undesirable increase in load on public services would not
be created.
Fire - Water supply with fire hydrants is needed to serve development on this site. Fire
station #1, approximately 0.9 miles away, will serve this site once it is constructed. Fire
response time to the site is approximately 2-3 minutes.
Police - Projects existing in this area already receive police services. The same level of
service will be provided to this site as is currently applied to the existing surrounding
development. It is the opinion of the Fayetteville Police Department that this Planned
Zoning District will substantially alter the population density and thereby undesirably
create an appreciable increase in traffic danger and congestion in the area, without
improved access to the site.
Engineering — The proposed subdivision has been reviewed for access to public utilities,
including water and sewer, and will not undesirably increase the load on public services.
If there are reasons why the proposed zoning should not be approved in view of
considerations under b (1) through (4) above, a determination as to whether the proposed
zoning is justified and/or necessitated by peculiar circumstances such as:
a. It would be impractical to use the land for any of the uses
permitted under its existing zoning classifications;
b. There are extenuating circumstances which justify the rezoning
even though there are reasons under b (1) through (4) above why
the proposed zoning is not desirable.
Finding: N/A
K: IReports120041PC ReportsV2-13-041R-PZD 04-1307 (ASPEN RIDGE) REVISED.doc
FAYETTEVILLE
THE CrrY OF FAYETFEVILLE, ARKANSAS
113 West Mountain St.
Fayetteville, AR 72701
ENGINEERING DIVISION CORRESPONDENCE 479-575-8208
To: MattCrafton
Thru: Jeremy Pate, Development Coordinator
From: Mike Rozelle P.E., Staff Engineer
Date: December 3, 2004
Re: Subdivision Committee comments (3 December 2004 Subdivision Committee Meeting)
Development: PZD 04-1307:Aspen Ridge,pp 522/561
1. The floodway needs to be shown on the grading plan and Site Plan.
2. Label the proposed minimum finished floor on the site plan for all buildings within or
adjacent to the flood hazard zone AE.
3. The proposed finished floor must be 2 feet above the highest adjacent base flood
elevation.
4. Provide a benchmark on the site plan and grading plan indicating datum used for topo.
It appears it is necessary to fill designated flood plain areas, the following criteria must be met
prior to issuance of a building permit:
1. Submittal of a flood plain development permit and plans designed by a licensed engineer,
architect or landscape architect in a accordance with the Flood Damage Prevention Code.
2. For structures, bridges, fill or changes to the water course within the regulatory floodway,
a certification from a registered professional engineer must be provided stating tht the
encroachments shall not result in any increase in flood levels.
3. For structures, fill or changes to the water course that will increase the base flood
elevations, applicant must apply for a conditional letter of map amendment through
.FEMA prior to issuance of a permit, and the applacant must apply for a floodway revision
through. FEMA once the project is complete.
C
FAYETTEVILLE
THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS
113W. Mountain St.
Fayetteville, AR 72701
Telephone: 479-444-3469
TO: Jeremy Pate, Senior Planner
FROM: Alison Jumper, Park Planner
DATE: November 29, 2004
SUBJECT: Parks & Recreation Subdivision Committee Comments
##############################################################################
Meeting Date: December 3, 2004
Item: PZD 04-1307 Aspen Ridge, 522-561
Park District: SW
Zoned: RMF-24
Billing Name & Address: BHA Construction 3607 Clabber Creek Blvd. Fayetteville, AR 72704
Land Dedication Requirement
Money
in Lieu
Single Family
@ .024 acre per unit = acres
@
$555
per unit
= $
Multi Family
@ .017 acre per unit = acres
@
$393
per unit
= $
Mobile Home
_____@.024 acre per unit = acres
@
$555
per unit =
$
Lot Split
@
$555
per unit =
$
COMMENTS:
On November 8, 2004 Parks and Recreation Advisory Board made a recommendation of
a combination of money, land, and services to meet the park land dedication
requirements. The following is a summary of the land dedication, services to be
provided, and money in lieu:
Approximately .36 acres of land for the trail will be dedicated. The developer
will construct approximately 856 l.f. of 12' trail. All trail layout, design and
construction shall be approved by park staff. Trail shall be constructed per City
standard construction details for an asphalt trail. The trail construction will be bid
PZD 04-1307
by the developer and the actual cost for the trail will be applied to the remaining
fees due.
In addition, approximately .86 acres, located on the southern edge of the
development, will be dedicated.
Credit will be applied to account for existing inhabited homes that were removed
from the property.
Any remaining fees due will be applied to amenities for the park. Park design
will be coordinated with residents and Parks staff.
• Fees and a deed to dedicated park land and trail corridor are due before building permits.
PZD 04-1307
C
Crafton, Tull & Associates, Inc.
901 N. 47p1 Street, Suite 200 Rogers, AR 72756
479.636.4838 Fax: 479.631.6224 www.craftull.com
Architects, Engineers & Surveyors
Aspen Ridge
Park Land Dedication Computation
Proposed use:
Total acreage:
Proposed units:
City of Fayetteville
Park Land Ordinance Formula:
Park Land Required by Formula:
Proposed 16' Trail Dedication:
Proposed Park Land Dedication:
Balance:
Cash Required:
Value of 856' of Trail Grading & Paving:
Value of Trail Engineering:
Value of Playground Equipment:
Less value of 504'x5' of Sidewalk Land:
Less value of 504'x5' of Sidewalk Constructior
Cash Due from Developer:
Single Family Homes
27.969 acres
220 units
0.024 acres/unit
$555 /unit
5.28 acres
0.358 acres
0.860 acres
4.062 acres
169 units
$93,795
$43,137 Based on CTA's detailed cost estimate
$4,314 10% of Construction
$60,618
($1,338) ($23,125/acre)
($12,936) ($25/LF estimgted+)
KtC:LIVED
($0) I I TOV 4 2004
C
U
a
m
Co
a!
o
E
5
O
_
E
m
Wa
W
E
$
n
d
W
o
m
a
m
r
W
E
5
O
m
O
m
O
m
@
m
m
w
m
S
o.
u.0yf
m
n
9
r
r
m
E
r
r
e
m
W
O
E
T
a
o
'�
S.
w
m
U
N
f
-
m
n
O
•'
W
9
W
of
J
m
«
F
Q
W
O
W
O
O
m
o
o
6
p
n
K
t
m0.5
m
O
-c
E
I-
m
0
0
on
'
o'
m
LL
i
u
r
o
W
«
S.
C
W
•'
Y
O
L
«
U
N
C
Q
C
O
Y
C
C
C
Q
C
O
b
.
a
•
E
Y
U
y
C
J C
O
N R
N N
O M O M O O O O
0) O M r r
.OO eD NO1-OOO
n O O O O
Co
'00,1000
J V Y Y
CDDD
C c555
C C
r M M GO LO
M N N l V
r
00
10
N N •U' "m" y W N UI
ESE E E c c= c
E ES E
) M r r, M M
V N r r.M N N
r '-
N
N
E
r
N N N
E'E'E'E
' r (V r
-rIIC�9L9L
D (1) U) (I) (I) (I) (1) Cl) (I)
M
M
x
z
l
l
=�
r
r
0O)
d
W
N
N
m
(<=__0W,)
N
g
V
N
W
O
r
N
M
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
BOOOOOOO
O
O
O
O
O
O
axzzzzzz
t
Z
N
N
N
N
N
N
C
Y
Teevlle ARKANSAS
THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS
PC Meeting of December 13, 2004
TREE PRESERVATION and PROTECTION REPORT
To: Fayetteville Planning Commission
From: Jeremy Pate, Landscape Administrator
Date: December 008, 2004
ITEM #: R-PZD 04-1307 (ASPEN RIDGE)
Requirements Submitted:
✓
Initial Review with the Landscape Administrator
✓
Site Analysis Map Submitted
✓
Site Analysis Written Report Submitted
✓
Complete Tree Preservation Plan Submitted
Canopy Measurements:
T�otal,Slte Area,
acres
26.751
square feet
1,165,274
�Existln Tree„LCano _.
acres
14.05
square feet
612,208
percent of site area
52.5%
iEzistirg' 42 Cano �aPreserved"
acres
4.04
square feet
175,880
percent of total site area
15.1%
bLC'6.ftD
_eent{M Per
a l •• Ax tiG $.` R'X8$`: �lx ']
nimum Gang , yRe cared fl,
25°/U
FINDINGS:
125 W. Mountain St.
Fayetteville, AR 72701
Telephone: (479) 575-8267
The desirability of preserving a tree or group of trees by reason of age, location, size or species.
K: UeremytLandsmpe AdminIPROJECTSV_SD-1004Wspen Ridge R-PZDITreePreservazonRepori - SC.dac
I
• The desirability of preserving those trees indicated along College Branch Creek is
very high, due to their location, size, and species. Many of these trees are in the best
health of those on the property, which contains many significant trees that have
been abused and are in poor condition.
Whether the design incorporates :he required Tree Preservation Priorities.
• The design of the Aspen Ridge community does incorporate the required Tree
Preservation Priorities. Though the minimum percentage (25%) of preserved
canopy is not being met, many of the trees proposed for removal are in poor
condition, in both my opinion and as evaluated by an independent urban forestry
consultant/certified arborist. The mobile home park that existed in this location
prior to the development did little to protect the integrity and health of the large
trees, especially on the Phase I side of the creek. Due to this fact, and limiting factors
with regards to grading of the site, the desired preservation area for continued and
permanent tree protection is along the riparian corridor.
The extent to which the area would be subject to environmental degradation due to removal of
the tree or group of trees.
• Degradation to the trees that are being removed has occurred for many years as a
result of the abuse and neglect received from prior development on the property.
Paving, debris, etc. have been piled upon and under trees, especially on the east side
of the creek. Significant environmental degradation would occur if the trees along
the creek were removed, for they retain the slope and hold the bank from eroding
completely along this stretch of the creek. The root systems help retain the soil, and
canopy coverage helps to reduce the temperature of the stream run-off from
adjacent impervious surfaces.
The impact of the reduction in tree cover on adjacent properties, the surrounding neighborhood
and the property on which the tree or group of trees is located
• The greatest impact in tree cover reduction would to the properties to the east.
However, existing canopy continues onto these properties, as well, so a significant
reduction may not be realized. Additionally, as part of the mitigation efforts,
screening and buffering will be required to protect the surrounding single family
homes.
Whether alternative construction methods have been proposed to reduce the impact of
development on existing trees.
• Though no alternative construction methods are proposed, the developer is choosing
to utilize the PZD process to develop a unique develop in south Fayetteville. By
right, the property owner can develop up to 24 units per acre in a conventional
multifamily development pattern. However, an alternative townhouse style is
desired for this area, and the Planned Zoning Districts allows for this process to
occur.
Whether the size or shape of the lot reduces the flexibility of the design.
K: UeremytLandsmpe Admin%PROJEC7SILSD-2004Wspen Ridge R-PZDITreePreservationReport - SC.doc
• The shape and size of the overall property does much to inhibit the design flexibility.
There is little frontage onto public streets, a creek corridor with associated wetlands
dividing the property, an old railroad bed that dictates much of the grading that has
to occur in order to utilize it for the proposed trail corridor, and an existing railroad
that limits access to the west.
The general health and condition of the tree or group of trees, or the presence of any disease,
injury or hazard.
• Actually, the general health of trees on this site is poor. The site has been developed
around, graded in years past, filled with debris and generally abused. Several tons
of trash was removed in the past year from this site, much of which was located
underneath canopy on the east side of the creek. An arborist was retained to
evaluate the condition of the trees on —site and determined, based on his criteria,
which were significant. In conjunction with the applicant, I then evaluated the other
trees and classified them based on size, location, type, and health, among other
criteria in the City of Fayetteville ordinance.
The placement of the tree or group of trees in relation to utilities, structures, and use of the
property.
Utilities will not encroach upon the trees preserved.
The need to remove the tree or group of trees for the purpose of installing, repairing, replacing,
or maintaining essential public utilities.
Additional trees will not be removed to install or maintain public utilities.
Whether roads and utilities are designed in relation to the existing topography, and routed,
where possible, to avoid damage to existing canopy.
• Much of the grading to construct roads and pads for the units for this development
was dictated by the existing elevations of the railroad corridor to be used for the
trail and the creek, along with off -site elevations. Existing topography, therefore,
has been utilized for design of the roads and utilities and routed, where possible, to
avoid canopy.
Construction requirements for On -Site and Off -Site Alternatives.
• N/A
The effects of proposed On -Site Mitigation or Off -Site Alternatives.
• On -site mitigation will increase the canopy on the subject property, and is located
appropriately in the Tree Preservation area where it will survive in perpetuity.
The effect other chapters of the UDO, and departmental regulations have on the development
design.
Few, if any, other division regulations have an effect on the design to preserve trees.
The extent to which development of the site and the enforcement of this chapter are impacted by
K: Ueremyllandscnpe AdmintPROJEC7SVSD-1004Wspen Ridge R-PZDITreePreservationReport - SC.doc
state and federal regulations:
Wetland mitigation is enforced by the Corps of Engineers.
The impact a substantial modification or rejection of the application would have on the
Applicant:
Staff is recommending approval of the Tree Preservation Plan, with mitigation
required.
Recommendation: Approval of the Tree Preservation Plan associated with R-PZD 04-1307,
with the following conditions:
Conditions of Approval:
The applicant shall mitigate for the removal of 115,440 SF of tree canopy with on -site
mitigation, to consist of a minimum of (420) 2 -inch caliper trees. If all trees can not be
planted on -site, the balance shall be contributed into the Tree Fund, as determined by the
Landscape Administrator.
2. Specific location of the on -site mitigation trees shall be coordinated with the Landscape
Administrator for approval. Several sites exist on the property where mitigation trees
could benefit the overall development and enhance the creek corridor, currently not
indicated on the plans.
K: UeremylLandscnpe AdminIPROJEC7SILSD-2004Wspen Ridge R-PZDITreePreservationReport - SC.doc
• Crafton, Tull & Associates, Inc.
® 901 N. 47m Street, Suite 200 Rogers, AR 72756
479.636.4838 Fax: 479,631.6224 www.craftull.com
Architects, Engineers & Surveyors
• Aspen Ridge
Tree Preservation Computation
Total acreage: 27.969 acres
• Less Park Land Dedication: 1.218 acres
Net area for calc. 26.751 acres
Area Required for Preservation (PZD): 25.0%
Area Required for Preservation: 6.688 acres
291,320 sq. ft.
SQ. FT.
Acres
Existing Canopy
612,208
14.054
52.5%
Total Canopy to be Preserved:
175,880
4.038
15.1%
Total Canopy to be Removed:
439,524
10.090
37.7%
Mitigation Canopy Required:
115,440
2.650
9.9%
Mitigation Canopy Proposed:
115,440
2.650
9.9%
Total Proposed Tree Area:
291,320
6.688
25.0%
Tree Mitigation Calculation:
1.
Mitigation Canopy Required:
115,440
s.f.
2.
Priority Type:
Medium
3.
Proposed Tree Caliper:
2"
4.
Density Factor Required:
290
s.f.
5.
Number of Mitigation Trees Required:
398
each
6.
Number of Trees to Meet City Landscape Requirements:
133
each
7.
Number of Trees Provided for Landscaping:
244
each
8.
Net Number of Mitigation Trees Required:
287
each
RECEIVED
NOV 24 2004
l IN er r. #r-r.n, n.. r
THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS
LANDSCAPE REVIEW FORM
To: Fayetteville Planning Commission
From: Jeremy Pate, Landscape Administrator
Date: December 13, 2004
ITEM #: R-PZD 04-1307 (ASPEN RIDGE)
Applicable Requirements:
✓
!OfftStheet Parkin - , " '
NCO merciaf} „eft ri Stantlar�ds'.
offers and Screenin US _.. } 1.... flUS
W:,R
✓IS40Desi
nQuverla `'
Plan Checklist:
/submitted by applicant
Xrequested
PC Meeting of December 13, 2004
125 W. Mountain St.
Fayetteville, AR 72701
Telephone: (479) 575-8267
Pr`ehm nary ynnai r 2 a(
:Submittal ' Submittal;*
Off„Street-Parktn ;and Loadm_ -' - =t 4,:
,'„,
✓
wheel stops curbs
✓
irrigation
✓
edged landscape beds indicated
✓
species of plant material identified
✓
size of plant material at time of installation indicated
✓
interior landscaping
narrow tree lawn (8'min. width, 17' min. length / 1 tree per 15 spaces)
wr:
tree island 10min. width / 1 tree 12 spaces)
per
✓
perimeter landscaping
side and rear property lines (5' landscaped)
' 4 `'• a: � "�" -
adjacentjto street R.O.W 15'
( greenspace exclusive for landscaping / I
_
tystreet
tree every 30 L.F., a continuous planting of shrubs and ground
r's=, "'�::r'
cover - 50% evergreen)
✓
soil amendments notes include that soil is amended and sod removed
./
mulching notes indicate mulching around trees and within landscape beds.
✓
planting details according to Fayetteville's Landscape Manual
K: UeremylLandsmpe AdminIPROJECTSILSD-2004t4spen Ridge R-PZDILandscapeReviewForrn - SC.doc
Preliminary
Submittal
Final
Submittal
Commercial Design Standards
greenspace adjacent to street R.O.W. (15' wide)
street trees planted every 30' L.F. along R.O.W.
outdoor storage screened with landscaping
Buffer Stiri s and Screenin
landscaped area (12' min.)`
fence required
outdoor storage screened with landscaping
non-residential landscape screen when adjacent to residential zones
landscape requirement for setback reduction
OO.v�erla. District Re•
[Iuirements
greenspace adjacent to street R.O.W. (25' wide)
__________
_________
street trees planted every 30'L.F. along R.O.W.
25% of total site area left in greenspace (80% landscaped)
parking lots and outdoor storage screened with landscaping
Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the Landscape Plan associated with LSD
04-1288, with the following conditions:
Conditions of Approval:
1. All required landscaping shall be guaranteed pursuant to City ordinance, prior to building
permit.
2. Detailed landscape plans shall be submitted at the time of building permit.
K: UeremyllLandsmpe AdmintPROJEC7SVSD-2004Wspen Ridge R-PZDV,andsmpeReviewForm - SCdoc
December 13, 2004
Mr. Jeremy Pate
Senior Planner
City of Fayetteville
125 West Mountain Street
Fayetteville, AR 72701
RE: Planned Zoning District Plan
Aspen Ridge
CTA Job No. 021111-00
Dear Mr. Pate:
We received a copy the city staffs recommendation to the Planning Commission
regarding the above referenced project. On behalf of Mr. Hank Broyles and Mr.
Hal Forsyth, the following comments are in reference to the city staffs
recommendations:
1. The property owners are Mr. Hal Forsyth and Mr. Hank Broyles
2. Regarding the proposed width of Brooks Avenue, we have discussed the
traffic report with Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc., and they have
confirmed that they estimate only 4% of the Phase 11 traffic will use Brooks
Avenue, or approximately 25 vehicles per day. We disagree with the
assumption that 50% of the Phase 11 traffic will use Brooks Avenue. In
addition, the potential for future development appears to be limited due to
the current plat design and the adjacent industrial plant. Thus, we
recommend that Brooks Avenue remain as originally proposed at 24 feet
wide.
3. The hours of operation for the temporary sales office within the
development should be Monday through Friday 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. and
Saturday and Sunday 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.
4. For the repair of the broken pavement directly south of the proposed
intersection at the corner of 11th Street and Duncan Avenue, the
developers propose to reconstruct approximately 2240 square feet of the
pavement in front of this intersection.
5. Regarding park, land dedication, the developers request that the dollar
amount of $30,525 (55 units * $555/unit) for the credit for the 55 existing
homes be included in the recommendation to the city council.
Architects,Engineers & S u r v e y o r s
6. For the additional pedestrian connection between Phases I and II, the
developers propose to construct a 5 -foot wide x 4" deep shredded mulch
trail with landscape timbers for the edging.
We sincerely appreciate all of the staffs time and efforts to make this a
successful project for the . city and the developers. Should you have any
questions, or require any additional information, please contact us at your -
convenience.
Sincerely,
Crafton, Tull & Associates, Inc.
Matt Crafton, P.E.
Chief Operating Officer
Crafton, Tull Assoc
Inc.
901N. 47th Street, Suite 200, Rogers, AR 72756 479.636.4838 Fax: 479.631.6224 www.craftull.com
December 7, 2004
Mr. Tim Conklin
Director of Community Planning and Engineering
City of Fayetteville
125 West Mountain Street
Fayetteville, AR 72701
RE: Planned Zoning District Plan
Aspen Ridge
CTA Job No. 021111-00
Dear Mr. Conklin:
On behalf of Mr. Hank Broyles and Mr. Hal Forsyth, attached are the revised
Planned Zoning District (PZD) plans and documents to support the proposed
construction of a 220 -unit townhome complex in south Fayetteville. Please
consider this letter along with the previous letters we submitted on November 4,
2004 and November 24, 2004 as our explanation of the project.
Mr. Broyles and Mr. Forsyth have agreed to all of the conditions listed in the city
staffs letter to the Subdivision Committee with one exception. The city staff
recommends that Brooks Avenue, which will be constructed by the developers,
be 28 feet wide rather than the 24 feet currently shown in the plans. According to
the traffic report for this project, only 4% of the traffic generated by Phase II, or
approximately 25 vehicles per day, is projected to use Brooks Avenue for the
entrance and exit to the site. This traffic volume is easily served by the city's
typical 24 -foot residential street.
Included with this submittal are the following to comply with City requirements:
1. Twenty-five (25) sets of the PZD plans for the proposed improvements.
2. Twelve (12) 11"x17" color sets of the overall proposed development plan,
and front, rear and side elevations of the town homes.
3. An updated traffic report. Some of the text in the report has been
corrected, but none of the actual traffic projections have changed.
Should you have any questions, or require any additional information, please
contact us at your convenience.
Architects,Engineers & Surveyors
0
Sincerely,
Crafton, Tull & Associates, Inc.
Matt Crafton, P.E.
Chief Operating Officer
Inc.
901 N. 47th Street, Suite 200, Rogers, AR 72756 -479.636.4838 Fax: 479.631.6224 www.craftull.com
November 24, 2004
• Mr. Tim Conklin
Director of Community Planning and Engineering
City of Fayetteville
.125 West Mountain Street
Fayetteville, AR 72701
RE: Planned Zoning District Plan
Aspen Ridge
CTA Job No. 021111-00
Dear Mr. Conklin:
On behalf of Mr. Hank Broyles and Mr. Hal Forsyth, attached are the revised
Planned Zoning District (PZD) plans and documents to support the proposed
construction of. a 220 -unit townhome. complex in south Fayetteville. Please
consider this letter along with the previous letter we submitted on November 4,
2004 as our explanation of the project.
The developers propose_ to provide an .exceptional development to the City of
Fayetteville. As shown on the color elevations and the overall development plan
provided herein, the townhomes will be brick multi -story units with garages in the
rear and porches that front the street, lakes or green space. Portions of the
streets to be dedicated as public rights -of -way will have landscaped medians and.
brick pavers at the entrances to the development. Mr. Broyles and Mr. Forsyth
have met with adjoining property owners several times and received favorable
comments on the proposed development.
The proposed development will assist the city in meeting one of the goals of the
General Plan 2020: Enhancing and revitalizing older urban areas. It will also
help meet one of the goals listed in the city's 2003 Survey of Citizens:
Development of south Fayetteville. The proposed site for development fonneriy
consisted of approximately 49 mobile homes and six single-family homes. The
area formerly had a high degree of vagrancy and crime. Mr. Broyles and Mr.
Forsyth have purchased the land, removed allof the former homes and cleaned
up the site at considerable personal expense, with the city and adjoining property
owners already receiving the benefit of this clean up.
The entire acreage is currently zoned RMF-24, and a PZD is proposed due to the
complex and unique nature of the development. Specifically, this PZD will meet
the.following goals of Section 161.25 of the city's PZD ordi nce: RECEIVED
NOV24 4 2004
Architects, Engineers I& cl oW FA E FEWLt1 of r s
1. Flexibility: to enhance the uniqueness and aesthetic appeal of the project,
the developers propose to construct non-standard streets with landscaped
medians and brick pavers at the entrances to the development.
2. No negative impact: this PZD should have the • positive effect of
encouraging additional investment in south Fayetteville.
3. Coordination:. the PZD will allow the city and the developers to cooperate
in the renewal of an area of the city that was deteriorating.
4. Natural Features: College Branch creeks runs through the site. The
developers propose to keep the area surrounding the creek_ in pristine
condition, with only a pedestrian bridge to be constructed over the creek.
Approximately 3.6 acres of this land will be deed restricted against future
development.
.To accomplish the proposed project, Mr. Broyles and Mr. Forsyth have
purchased several parcels of land. As part of the PZD, the developers propose
to combine several existing parcels into one 27.969 -acre parcel. In addition, the
developers propose to combine the parcels at the northeast comer of the site into
one parcel that is proposed as a . future mixed -use development possibly
consisting of residences, retail and offices in one building. These lot line
adjustments will be completed prior to the, city council meeting on January 4,
2005. The development is currently being treated as a Large Scale
Development, however the intent is to sell each townhome as a single-family
residence and plat each townhome as a separate lot once the infrastructure has
been constructed and the exact locations of the buildings are set in the field. A
concurrent plat will be submitted to the city for approval at that time, and a draft
version of the concurrent plat is attached herein for information purposes.
At the Technical Plat Review, the. city staff expressed concern that the
developers did not have complete access to.11 m Street to construct the proposed
entrance to the development at that location. Mr. Broyles and Mr. Forsyth have
entered into a contract with the adjacent property owner, Mr. Hoodenpyle, to
ensure they have enough land to construct the entrance road. In exchange for a
portion of Mr. Hoodenpyle's property along 11th Street, the developers will give
Mr. Hoodenpyle a strip of land along the north side of his current property line.
They expect to close on this land swap within the next two weeks. A lot line
adjustment will be submitted to the city and filed with the county prior to the city
council meeting on January 4, 2005.
The total tree canopy to be preserved is approximately 18% of the site. The
existing topography of the site necessitates a significant amount of cutting and
filling to produce a site on which the townhomes and streets can be built. We
have attempted to preserve as many of the significant trees as possible,
including large oak trees at the northern and southern entrances to the site. On -
site mitigation is proposed to make up the balance of the 25% required canopy.
The developers propose to operate a single temporary office within the
development specifically for the purpose of selling townhomes within the
development. One of the townhome units in the Phase I area will be used as the
location of the sales office. Hours of operation for the sales office will be
Tuesday through Friday. from 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. Once all of the units in the
development are sold, the sales office will be closed and sold as a single-family
residence.
Included with this submittal are the following to comply with City requirements:
1. Twenty-five (25) sets of the PZD plans for the proposed 'improvements.
2. Twelve (12) 11"x17" color sets of the overall proposed development plan,
and front, rear and side elevations of the town homes.
3. Receipts for the certified mailings notifying adjoining property owners of
the public meetings at which this project will be considered.
4. Working drawings of the tree preservation plan for use by the city's.
Landscape Administrator.
5. Park Land and Tree Preservation computations.
6. Draft copy of the proposed Concurrent Plat.
7. Revised legal description for the Phase I and Phase II area and revised
legal description for the future Phase III area.
8. Copy of the real estate contract. between the developers and Mr.
Hoodenpyle.
9. Compact disk with AutoCAD drawings of the plans included in this
submittal.
Should you have any questions, or require any additional information, please
contact us at your convenience.
Sincerely,
Crafton, Tull & Associates, Inc.
Matt Crafton, P.E.
Chief Operating Officer
Crafton, lull & Associates, Inc.
901 N. 47th Street, Suite 200, Rogers, AR 72756 479.636.4838 Fax: 479.631.6224 www.aaftun.com
November 4, 2004
Mr. Tim Conklin
Director of Community Planning and Engineering
City of Fayetteville
125 West Mountain Street
Fayetteville, AR 72701 .
RE: Planned Zoning District Plan
Aspen Ridge
CTA Job No. 021111-00
Dear Mr. Conklin:
On behalf of Mr. Hank Broyles and. Mr. Hal Forsyth, attached are the Planned
Zoning District (PZD) plans and documents to support the proposed construction
of a 220 -unit town home complex in south Fayetteville. The project site is
bounded by 6"' Street on the north, Hill Avenue on the east, 111h Street on the
south and the Burlington -Northern railroad on the west. The entire acreage is
currently zoned RMF-24. A PZD is proposed due to the complex and unique
nature of the development.
The developers propose to provide an exceptional development to the City of
Fayetteville. As shown on the color elevations and the overall development plan
provided herein, the town homes will be. brick multi -story units with garages in. the
rear and porches that front the street, lakes or green space. Portions of the
streets to be dedicated as public rights -of -way will have landscaped medians and
brick pavers at the entrances to the development. Mr. Broyles and Mr. Forsyth
have met. with adjoining property owners several times and received favorable
comments on the proposed development.
The proposed site for development formerly consisted of approximately 49
mobile homes and six single-family homes. The area formerly had a high degree
of vagrancy and crime. Mr. Broyles and Mr. Forsyth have purchased the land,
removed all of the former homes and cleaned up the site at considerable
personal expense, with the city and adjoining property owners receiving, the
benefit of this clean up.
To accomplish the proposed project, the developers have purchased several
parcels of land. As part of the PZD, the developers propose to combine several
existing parcels into one 28.015 -acre parcel. In addition, the developers propose
to combine the parcels at the northeast comer of the site into ED
NOV042004
Architects, Engineers & I S
S •
proposed as a future mixed -use development possibly consisting of residences,
retail and offices in one building.
A Parks Board determination is not available at this date due to. the
postponement of the Parks Board meeting to November 8, 2004. However, the
developers have met with the Parks staff several times and reached a verbal
agreement on the land dedication and cash in -lieu requirements. A 16 -foot wide
trail easement will be dedicated from the east property line to the west property.
line. In addition, the. developers will construct the grading and paving for this trail
from the east property line to the east end of the old railroad bridge at the
western side of the site, An assessment report for this bridge will be donated to
the City. The developers will also dedicate 0.881 acres of land to the City along
the south property line, which is contiguous to land the City is purchasing for a
park. The developers will donate park equipment to meet the balance of the park
land dedication requirement.
A traffic study has been completed for the proposed development. The proposed
development is riot estimated to cause any significant traffic problems, especially
considering that the site was a previously developed residential. area. The
developers propose to construct a left turn lane on Hill Avenue at the intersection
with 6th Street. In addition, to provide additional access to the southern portion of
the site, the developers propose to construct Brooks Avenue from their south
property line to 12th Street. Brooks Avenue is a platted right-of-way, although the
street has never been constructed.
A Corps of Engineers Nationwide Permit was previously granted for this
development under a different site concept than is currently proposed: This
development will involve filling in a small amount of existing wetlands, .and as
mitigation, approximately four. acres along Town Branch Creek will be deed
restricted against any further development in the future. An amendment to the
Nationwide Permit is being sought from the corps, and the Corps staff has given
verbal confirmation that this amended proposal will be approved.
Water and sanitary sewer services are' available for the site. The City's
Wastewater System Capacity Assessment shows that the 12-inch/1 5 -inch sewer
line that runs through the site is onl� at 9% to 13% of its capacity. 6 -inch water
lines are adjacent to the site along 6 Street, Hill Avenue and 11"' Street.
Included with this submittal are the following to comply with City requirements:
Twenty-eight (28) sets of the PZD plans for the proposed improvements.
Twelve (12) 11"x17" color sets of the overall proposed development plan,
3-D rendering of the town homes, and front, rear and side elevations of
the town homes.
3. $1,445 check. for the PZD ($1,125), Grading & Drainage ($200) and Tree
Preservation ($120) review fees.
4. Preliminary. Drainage Report.
5. Two sets of typed mailing labels for adjacent property owners.
6. Receipts for the certified mailingsnotifying adjoining property owners of
the public meetings at which this project will be considered.
7. Park Land and Tree Preservation computations.
8. A copy of the deeds for the various parcels in this project.
9. A copy of the survey completed for this project.
10. A copy of the traffic study, completed for this project.
11. A copy of the county assessor's maps showing the parcel numbers.
12. Compact disk with AutoCAD drawings of the plans included . in this
submittal.
13. Completed application forms for the LSDP, Grading & Drainage, Tree
Mitigation Form, Landscape Review Form and Floodplain Development
Permit.
Should
you
have
any questions, or require any additional information, please
contact
us at
your
convenience.
Sincerely,
Crafton, Tull & Associates, Inc.
MattCrafton
Chief Operating Officer
EXHIBIT "A"
ASPEN RIDGE PLANNED ZONING DISTRICT
SURVEY DESCRIPTION
(PARCEL 1 - COMBINES ALL PARCELS FOR THE AREA CURRENTLY PROPOSED
FOR DEVELOPMENT - PHASES 1 & 2)
Part of the South 1/2 of the SW 1/4 of Section 16, and a part of the North 1/2 of the NW
1/4 of Section 21, T -16-N, R -30-W, Washington County, Arkansas, being more particularly
described as:
Commencing at the Northwest comer of the Northeast 1/4 of the Northwest 1/4 of said
Section 21, said point being an existing iron pipe; thence S87°04'09"E along.the North line
of the Northeast 1/4 of the Northwest 1/4 of said Section 21 a distance of 5.92 feet to the
Point of Beginning; thence S87°0409"E 418.49 feet: thence S02°49'04"W 514.14 feet;
thence N87°04'09"W 424.40 feet to a set 1/2" rebar, thence S02°49'04"W 204.82 feet;
thence S87°04'09E 139.00 feet; thence S02°48'48"W 293.00 feet to a set 1/2" iron rebar;
thence N87°05'54"W 183.58 feet to an existing iron; thence S02°48'00"W 181.27 feet;
thence S87°04'02"E 84.31 feet; thence S02°4005"W 79.86 feet; thence S37°07'40"E
39.06 feet; thence S07°40'05"W 15.00 feet; thence N87°18'29"W 65.13 feet; thence
S02°40'17"W. 13.01 feet; thence N87°13'13"W 222.57 feet; thence N02°39'07"E 98:08 feet;
thence N87°11'50"W 222.77 feet; thence N87°13'26"W 514.88 feet to an existing iron on
the east right-of-way line of the Burlington -Northern Railroad; thence along the east right-
of-way line of said railroad N35°29'31"E 52.81 feet; thence. N32°17'21"E 103.24 feet;
thence N28°25'22"E 103.51 feet; thence N24°1600E 103.08 feet; thence N21°19'30"E
102.24 feet; thence N18°44'44"E 102.31 feet; thence N17°42'23"E 150.90 feet; thence
Ni 9°09'44"E 46.21 feet; thence N19°55'12"E 130.59 feet; thence N24°20'10"E 111.27
feet; thence N28°56'24"E 112.03 feet; thence N33°22'01 "E 78.14 feet; thence N36°27'09"E
61.08 feet; thence N40°40'51 "E 107.01 feet; thence S86°1453"E 62.45 feet to an existing
iron on a 1381.79 foot radius curve to the right; thence Northeasterly along said right-of-
way and curve 417.54 feet, the chord for which being N51°3845"E 415.96 feet, to an
existing Arkansas Highway Commission right-of-way monument on the South line of
Arkansas Highway 180 (West 6th street); thence along the South right-of-way line of said
highway S87°41'42"E 40.98 feet to an existing AHC monument; thence S87°40'49"E 26.16
feet to an existing AHC monument; thence S88°18'0"E 3.15 feet; thence leaving said right -
of way S01 °44'50"W 153.30 feet; thence on a curve to the right with a radius of 315.50 feet
and a distance of 81.06 feet; thence S16°28'1"W 8:54 feet; thence on a curve to the right
with a radius of 215.50 feet a distance of 40.68 feet to the Point of Beginning, containing
27.969 acres, more or less, Fayetteville, Arkansas. The above described 27.969 Acre tract
being subject to the right-of-way of Duncan Avenue, Anderson Place, Hill Avenue and all
easements and/orrights-of-way of record.
Crafton, Tull & Associates, Inc.
Matt Crafton, E.
Project Manager
E
NOV24 4 2004
£!.'1:A PIII I
w
ASPEN RIDGE
One Mile View
P -I
0.1
RSFJ {, ¢il RI
C: Il n FOP'
RA
CJ
P -I
C-4
1
J1 4 IiI :
W.. a
• erg
iIj! ___ IS r'i
$3
r },'.+. 1�}i.Ka': yYyY.F�' -; a : 3 c. _t .> r•. IS'+' .r
F�> • .�, �a�..,A,il..'�5q a-"i�aW;4'5 h t� r�ir'T` .6j` 4 ,t'r�[���``. FY-`)`3i��gi i" �..,y� � �.E`,..p ' >r `t'y � °
a ® a4• 1• tii
ggyg�m� {..1 {.
A i
f� rt
Overview Legend Boundary Master Street Plan
Subject Property it��Plannirg Area Master Street Plan
--_-_;- _
•R.PZD04-1307 ,p000rt ` Freeway/Expressway
• • a , Oveday Distract
����+> Principal M¢ al
Outside City ® MlnorAdeiial
— Collector
• • • • Historic CNledar
®.010.20.30.4
Miles
• City of Fayetteville •
Staff Review Form
City Council Agenda Items
Contracts
4 -Jan -05
City Council Meeting Date
Jeremy Pate Planning Operations
Submitted By Division Department
Action Required:
An ordinance approving R-PZD 04-1307, Aspen Ridge, submitted by Crafton, Tull & Associates for property located
between 6th Street, Hill Avenue and 11th Street. Approving a rezoning from RMF-24, Residential Multi Family, 24
units per acre to R-PZD 04-1307 and adopting the associated residential development plan.
$0.00 n/a n/a
Cost of this request Category/Project Budget Program Category / Project Name
n/a
Account Number
n/a
Project Number
Budgeted Item
Department irector
n/a
Funds Used to Date
n/a
Remaining Balance
Budget Adjustment Attached EJ
n/a
Program / Project Category Name
n/a
Fund Name
Previous Ordinance or Resolution # n/a
2'2b'o'/ Original Contract Date: n/a
Date
Original Contract Number: n/a
12-i oy Received in City Clerk's Office
Date
Receiv
f o10 ��`� d in M yor's Office ENTERED
Date (J- Z,
Preliminary Drainage Design Computations For
Aspen Ridge Planned Zoning District
Fayetteville, Arkansas
CTA No. 021111-00
December 9, 2004
Submitted to:
Mr. Matt Casey, P.E.
City of Fayetteville
113 W. Mountain
Fayetteville, AR 72701
Prepared by:
Crafton, Tull & Associates, Inc.
Architects, Engineers & Surveyors
901 North 47th Street, Suite 200
Rogers, Arkansas 72756
(479) 636-4838 / FAX (479) 631-6224
Internet: http:/twww.craftull.com
i
PROJECT OWNER AND DEVELOPER:
BHA Construction
3607 Clabber Creek Blvd
Fayetteville, AR 72704
(479) 527-3996
PROJECT TITLE:
Aspen Ridge Subdivision, a Planned Zoning District
PROJECT LOCATION:
The project is
located
on 27.97
acres
of land
at the southwest
intersection of 6`° Street and Hill
Avenue. Please
see the
attached
vicinity
map for
details.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The proposed 27.97 -acre Planned Zoning District consists of 220 single-family town
system design of Phases I and
II takes
into account
the anticipated impact of Phase III on the
watershed. See the attached Site
Plan for
details.
EXISTING SITE DRAINAGE:
This project is a small part of a large drainage basin that flows into College Branch Creek. The majority
of existing land in Phases I and III flows to the southwest and into College Branch Creek at slopes
ranging from 3 to 8 percent. Approximately half of the existing Phase II property flows eastward into
College Branch Creek, while the remainder sheet flows off the property to the south, eventually ending
up in College Branch Creek. The existing slope of Phase II varies widely from 1.5 to 16 percent.
This property is in Flood Zone "A" (base flood elevations estimated) and is in the 100 -year floodplain as
shown on the National Flood Insurance Program's Firm Panel Number 05143C0092D. effective date J l__
21, 1999. A floodplain boundary with estimated 100 -year flood elevations for College Branch Creek is
shown on the attached Drainage Area Map. The estimated 100-yr base flood elevations are based on
the flood study conducted by the Corps of Engineers for the City of Fayetteville.
The drainage area for this site consists of approximately 35.28 acres (4.65 acres offsite and 30.63 acres
onsite). Approximately 22.08 acres within the property (Drainage Areas 2 and 3) currently flows
directly into College Branch Creek before leaving the site. Another 1.18 acres flows onto Hill Avenue
(drainage areas 4 and 5). The remainder of existing runoff flows off the south end of the site and
eventually into a downstream portion of College Branch Creek. It is at this point of College Branch
Creek where drainage areas 1, 2 and 3 are all contributing to the waterway. The Aspen Ridge drainage
system has been modeled so as not to increase the pre -development flow of the creek at this point.
Also, close attention has been paid so as not to increase the concentrated flow of storm water across
property lines.
Drainage Areas OS -1, 2 and 3 were determined to cross the Aspen Ridge property and have been
included in this drainage study.
Please see the Existing Conditions Drainage Area Map for details.
STORM DRAINAGE DESIGN:
The post -development runoff will be collected in a series of four ponds built in Phases I and II.
Detention requirements for Phase Ill, which is to be constructed after the completion of Phase II, have
been accounted for in the design of these ponds.
The total post -developed runoff exits the site via three separate routes:
1. Through 1 of the 4 detention ponds and into College Branch Creek (la -k, 2a -p, 3a -h, 4a -t)
2. Sheet flow into College Branch Creek (BY -1, 2, 3 and 4)
3. Sheet flow on to Hill Avenue (BY -5)
The combined allowable release from the four detention ponds has been calculated as the difference
between the pre -developed runoff into College Branch (drainage areas 1, 2 and 3 and OS -1, 2 and 3)
and the post -developed area that is leaving the site without being detained (BY -1, 2, 3 and 4).
Runoff amounts shown on the Proposed Conditions Drainage Area Map are peak flows based on the
minimum time of concentration. It should be noted that the peak flows shown in the Pond Pack
calculations were based on the storm durations that would require the greatest amount of storage area.
Again, the peak flows shown on the Proposed Drainage Map are merely the peak flows that are
contributing to each pond and do not necessarily represent the flows used for storage calculations.
The east edge of the property flowing directly on to Hill Avenue was modeled separately. The pre -
developed runoff from drainage areas 4 and 5 will not be increased following construction of the site.
The majority of Phase Ill will be routed to the west and through a Phase I detention pond. Only a small
portion of the Phase I frontage (drainage area BY -5) will drain towards Hill Avenue. As a result,
drainage areas 4 and.5 were not included in calculations for allowable release from the post -developed
site.
Composite runoff coefficients for the existing and proposed onsite and offsite drainage areas were
calculated based on soil type, slope, and impervious cover in the area. Please see the attached
drainage calculation spreadsheets for the computation of the existing flows and the Pond Pack output
data for the proposed runoff from the detention pond.
Stormwater will be retained in all four ponds to form permanent lakes. In the Pond Pack calculations,
discharge orifices were set at a desired normal pool elevation; this elevation was then modeled as the
bottom of each proposed detention pond. Peak release rates are shown for the 100 -year event below,
and ponds were designed with a foot of freeboard during these events.
SUMMARY OF RUNOFF/DETENTION:
See the attached worksheets for a summary of the runoff and detailed information on the detention
pond. The Modified Rational Method was used in the Pond Pack software to analyze and design the
proposed detention pond. The total post development flow will not be greater than the total pre -
development flow. Please see below:
100 -YEAR RUNOFF SUMMARY
Pre -developed Area
Q 100
Post -Development
Q released
(cfs)
Discharge Point
(cfs)
1.
21.14
Pond 1
19.96
2
32.69
Pond 2
1238
3
21.26
Pond 3
8.60
OS -1
3.93
Pond 4
17.50
OS -2
14.02
BY -1
2.52
05-3
5.89
BY -2
6.41
4*
1.13
BY -3
16.15
5'
3.95
BY -4
14.19
BY -5
1.55
Pre -developed Areas 4 & 5 and Post -developed Area BY -5 drain to Hill Avenue
100 -YEAR RELEASE RATE SUMMARY
Total Pre -developed flow Total Post -developed flow
contributing to College Branch Creek contributing to College Branch
Creek
Ponds 1, 2, 3, 4 &
Areas 1-3, OS -1, 2, 3 98.93 cfs BY -1, 2, 3, 4 97.71 cfs
Total Pre -developed flow Total Post -developed flow
contributing to Hill Avenue contributing to Hill Avenue Creek
Areas 4 and 5 5.08 cfs Area BY -5 1.55 cfs
EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL
Erosion and sediment control will be achieved by silt fences and straw bates.
CONCLUSION:
The proposed site improvements ^ll not increase runoff from this project due a system comprised of
rn four storm water detention areas. For this preliminary submittal, design calculations for the proposed
detention ponds have been based on the drainage sub -areas shown on the Proposed Drainage Area Map.
Inlet and storm sewer calculations will be completed in the Final Design Phase. All drainage design and
computations were performed in accordance with the City of Fayetteville's Drainage Criteria Manual.
The grading for the site was designed to convey the runoff from the 100 -year frequency storm event per
City of Fayetteville ordinance requirements. See the grading plans for details.
Should you have any questions or require any additional information, please feet free to contact us at
your convenience.
I
1 0
CERTIFICATION:
I, Robert M. Crafton, Registered Professional Engineer No. 9080 in the State of Arkansas, hereby certify
that the drainage studies, reports, calculations, designs, and specifications contained in this report
have been prepared in accordance with the requirements of the City of Fayetteville. Further, I hereby
acknowledge that the review of the drainage studies, reports, calculations, designs, and specifications
by the City of Fayetteville or its representatives cannot and does not relieve me from any professional
responsibility or liability.
Sincerely,
Crafton,
Tuull & Associates, In
c.
Robert M. Crafton, P.E. U
Project Manager
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE PLAN
Erosion and sediment control will be achieved through the use of hay bale ditch checks and silt fences.
The engineer or qualified representative will inspect the erosion control measures once a week, until
the project is complete.
Sincerely,
Crafton, Tull It Associates, Inc.
g ,4
Project Manager
G1O TAGS'{70c50. Gtm' Coanc t_ t4QcNOR
WULAND IN"IM cvb%
proposed as a future mixed -use development possibly consisting of residences,
retail and offices in one building.
A Parks Board determination is not available at this date due to the
postponement of the Parks Board meeting to November 8, 2004. However, the
developers have met with the Parks staff several times and reached a verbal
agreement on the land dedication and cash in -lieu requirements. A 16 -foot wide
trail easement will be dedicated from the east property line to the west property
line. In addition, the developers will construct the grading and paving for this trail
from the east property line to the east end of the old railroad bridge at the
western side of the site. An assessment report for this bridge will be donated to
the City. The developers will also dedicate 0.881 acres of land to the City along
the south property line, which is contiguous to land the City is purchasing for a
park. The developers will donate park equipment to meet the balance of the park
land dedication requirement.
A traffic study has been completed for the proposed development. The proposed
development is riot estimated to cause any significant traffic problems, especially
considering that the site was a previously developed residential area. The
developers propose to construct a left turn lane on Hill Avenue at the intersection
with 6th Street. In addition, to provide additional access to the southern portion of
the site, the developers propose to construct Brooks Avenue from their south
property line to 12th Street. Brooks Avenue is a platted right-of-way, although the
street has never been constructed.
1 A Corps of Engineers Nationwide Permit was previously granted for this
development under a different site concept than is currently proposed. This
development will involve filling in a small amount of existing wetlands, and as
mitigation, approximately four acres along Town Branch Creek will be deed
restricted against any further development in the future. An amendment to the
Nationwide Permit is being sought from the Corps, and the Corps staff has given
verbal confirmation that this amended proposal will be approved.
Water and sanitary sewer services are available for the site. The City's
Wastewater System Capacity Assessment shows that the 12-inch/1 5 -inch sewer
line that runs through the site is only at 9% to 13% of its capacity. 6 -inch water
lines are adjacent to the site along 6 Street, Hill Avenue and 11th Street.
Included with this submittal are the following to comply with City requirements:
1. Twenty-eight (28) sets of the PZD plans for the proposed improvements.
2. Twelve (12) 11"x17" color sets of the overall proposed development plan,
3-D rendering of the town homes, and front, rear and side elevations of
the town homes.
Traffic. Study
ASPEN RIDGE DEVELOPMENT
prepared for:
Crafton, Tull &
Associates, Inc.
PETERS & ASSOCIATES
ENGINEERS, INC
6th Street
and
Hill Avenue
Fayetteville, Arkansas
i' ARKANSAS
L
REGISTERED
PROFESSIONAL
ENGINEER
ERNEST J. PETERS
No. 468V
Project No.: P-1051
• CIVIL&TRAFFIC ENGINEERING
P.O. BOX 21638 (501)225-0500
LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72221
November 2, 2004
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
I
INTRODUCTION
4
THE SITE
5
STREET SYSTEM
7
EXISTING TRAFFIC CONDITIONS
9
TRIP GENERATION & SITE TRAFFIC PROJECTIONS
12
TRAFFIC VOLUME ASSIGNMENTS
13
CAPACITY AND LEVEL OF SERVICE
15
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
21
FIGURES
24
APPENDIX
Site Plan
Trip Generation Data
Vehicle Turning Movement Count Data
Capacity and Level of Service Calculations
3
PETERS & ASSOCIATES
ENCINO". INC.
>raic S_ ud
Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. conducted a traffic
impact study for a proposed residential apartment com-
plex and mixed -use development (Aspen Ridge Develop-
ment) located on the south side of 6th Street and on the
west side of Hill Avenue in Fayetteville, Arkansas. The
site is just north of 11th Street. Full build -out of the site is
proposed to consist of approximately 219 townhouse
units, approximately 12 apartment units and approxi-
mately 15,000 square feet of retail use. A reduced copy
of the site plan is included in the Appendix for reference.
The site is proposed to consist of three development
phases described as follows:
o Phase 1 - 112 single family townhouse units.
o Phase 2 - An additional 107 single family townhouse
units.
o Phase 3 - Mixed -use area consisting of retail and an
additional 12 apartment units.
Traffic operational analysis of proposed access was con-
ducted for existing vehicle traffic volumes plus traffic vol-
umes projected to be generated as a part of the develop-
ment for the following:
o Phase 1
o Phase 1 and 2
o Phase 1, 2 and 3.
Existing 24 -hour traffic counts were gathered on Hill Ave-
nue in the vicinity of the site and on 11th Street, just east
of Duncan Avenue. All traffic count data was gathered
while local schools were in session. Existing vehicle turn-
ing movement count data were gathered for the intersec-.
tion of 6th Street and Hill Avenue by this consultant as a
part of this study.
Projected traffic volumes for each phase of analysis of the
proposed development were calculated. These projected
vehicle trips for each study phase were added to the ex -
PETERS & ASSOCIATES
INC. Page 1
isting traffic volumes, which resulted in total projected
traffic volumes at the completion of each phase of devel-
opment.
The are no planned transportation improvement by the
City of Fayetteville or Arkansas State Highway and Trans-
portation Department (AHTD) in the vicinity of the site.
Capacity and LOS analysis for existing traffic ]inter-
sectionsions
for the intersection of 6th Street and Hill Avenpro-
jected traffic operations at the same intersectithe
access drive intersections with 6th Street, Hill e
and 11th Street proposed to serve the developwere
analyzed for each phase of development for thand
PM peak hours. All vehicle movements at the inter-
sections for existing traffic conditions and for pd
traffic conditions for all three development phahase
1, 2 and 3) either currently operate or are projeo op-
erate at what calculates as an acceptable LOSr bet-
ter for the AM and PM peak hours.
Recommendations of this study are summarized as fol-
lows:
• It is recommended that the access drives proposed to
serve the site be constructed as follows:
o Access Drive A (Phase 1) as a two lane me-
dian divided roadway, consisting of an inbound
lane (receiving lane for eastbound right -turn
and westbound left -turn vehicle movements
from 6th Street to Drive A) and a outbound
right -turn only lane.
o Access Drive B (Phase 1) as a three -lane
roadway consisting of an eastbound right -turn
lane, an eastbound left -turn lane and a west-
bound receiving lane.
o Access Drive C (Phase 2) constructed as a
three -lane roadway consisting of an outbound
right -turn lane, an outbound left -turn lane and
PETERS & ASSOCIATES an inbound receiving lane.
tI"INCCM. INC.
Page 2
>'
o Access Drive D (Phase 3) as a two lane roadway,
consisting of an inbound lane (receiving lane for
westbound right -turn vehicle movements on 6th
Street) and a outbound right -turn only lane.
o Access Drive E (Phase 3) as a three -lane road-
way consisting of an eastbound right -turn lane, an
eastbound left -turn lane and a westbound receiv-
ing lane.
• It is recommended that a minimum 120 -foot northbound
left -turn lane plus taper be constructed on Hill Avenue at
6th Street coincident with the development of Phase 1.
The alignment of the lanes for north / south vehicle move-
ments at this intersection must be addressed in the de-
sign of intersection improvements.
• It is recommended that radii on the southeast and south-
west corner of the intersection of 6th Street and Hill Ave-
nue should be increased as a part of the intersection im-
provements.
4
• It is recommended to modify the existing traffic signal at
the intersection of 6th Street and Hill Avenue as neces-
sary to accommodate street widening and intersection
radii improvements.
• Traffic signal and roadway improvements designs along
6th Street will require approval and must conform to de-
sign standards of the City of Fayetteville and AHTD.
• Roadway design to the site access drives intersecting Hill
Avenue and intersecting 11th Street will require approval
and must conform to the design standards of the City of
Fayetteville.
PETERS & ASSOCIATES
ENGINU . INC.
1
ff_ec Stud
Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. conducted a traffic
impact study for a proposed residential apartment com-
plex and mixed -use development (Aspen Ridge Develop-
ment) located on the south side of 6th Street and on the
west side of Hill Avenue in Fayetteville, Arkansas. The
site is just north of 11th Street. Full build -out of the site is
proposed to consist of approximately 219 townhouse
units, approximately 12 apartment units and approxi-
mately 15,000 square feet of retail use. A reduced copy
of the site plan is included in the Appendix for reference.
The site is proposed to consist of three development
phases described as follows:
Phase 1 - 112 single family townhouse units.
Phase 2 - An additional 107 single family townhouse
units.
o Phase 3 - Mixed -use area consisting of retail and an
additional 12 apartment units.
This is a report of methodology and findings relating to a
traffic engineering study undertaken to:
• Ascertain projected traffic operating conditions at 6th
Street and Hill Avenue and the access drive intersec-
tions proposed to serve each phase of the site.
• Identify the effects on traffic operations resulting from
existing traffic in combination with site -generated traf-
fic associated with the development.
• Evaluate proposed access to the site and make rec-
ommendations for mitigative improvements which
may be necessary and appropriate to ensure mini-
mum impact and acceptable traffic operations.
In the following sections of this report there are presented
traffic data, study methods, findings and recommenda-
tions of this traffic engineering investigation. The traffic
engineering study is technical in nature. Analysis tech -
PETERS & ASSOCIATES
wcmemv. WC.
Page 4
niques employed are those most commonly used in the
traffic engineering profession for traffic impact analysis.
Certain data and calculations relative to traffic operational
analysis are referenced in the report. Complete calcula-
tions and data are included in the Appendix of the report.
The location of the development is within the City of Fa-
yetteville in Washington County, Arkansas. The site is
located on the south side of 6th Street and on the west
side of Hill Avenue (and just north of 11th Street). The
proposed development site location and vicinity are
shown on Figures 1 and 2, which follow.
j� PETERS & ASSOCIATES
I' 3 "GIVER a. INC.
Page 5
lTiraffic Study
Each of the three phases of development are not connected.
Access to each phase of the site, as shown on the site plan, is
proposed from access drives described as follows:
Phase I (two points of access) - One access drive (Drive A) is
proposed to intersect 6th Street along the north edge Phase 1
of the development and serve right and left -turn vehicle move-
ments entering the site and only right -turn vehicle movements
exiting the site. The other access drive (Drive B) is proposed
to intersect Hill Avenue and serve full access (right and left -
turn vehicle movements entering and exiting the site).
Phase 2 (two points of access) - The main access drive (Drive
C) proposed to serve Phase 2 is planned to serve as the
northwest leg of the 11th Street and Duncan Avenue intersec-
tion. The other access drive (Brooks Avenue) is proposed to
be constructed along the south edge of Phase 2 and intersect
15th Street, south of the site.
Phase 3 (two points of access) - One access drive (Drive D) is
proposed to intersect 6th Street along the north edge of the
Phase 3 of the site and serve right -in / right -out vehicle move-
ments only. The other access drive (Drive E) is proposed to
intersect Hill Avenue and serve full access to Phase 3 (right
PETERS & ASSOCIATES and left -turn vehicle movements entering and exiting the site).
DICM[tIS. INC.
Page 6
affic Stud
The site development plan calls for the construction of sev-
eral buildings, plus associated parking, landscaping, and
access drives. The site plan shows the proposed building
locations and the approximate location of access drives,
parking and other proposed facilities.
6th Street, also Highway 180, consists of two 11 -foot east-
bound lanes, two 11 -foot westbound lanes and a 12 -foot bi-
directional center left -turn lane and is constructed with
curbs and gutters in the vicinity of the site. There are side-
walks and the speed limit is 35 miles per hour in the vicinity
of the site. 6th Street is constructed with asphalt.
Hill Avenue, is a 25 -foot wide roadway consisting of two
lanes and is constructed with curbs and gutters at the site.
The speed limit is 25 miles per hour in the vicinity of the
site. 6th Street is constructed with asphalt and sidewalks
are along the west side of the road.
11th Street, at Duncan Avenue, is a 25 -foot wide roadway
consisting of two lanes and is constructed with shoulders
and drainage ditches along the south side of the street and
curbs and gutters along the north side. The speed limit is
25 miles per hour in the vicinity of the site. 11th Street is
constructed with asphalt and sidewalks are along the north
side of the street.
There is one existing traffic signal in the immediate vicinity
of the at intersection of 6th Street and Hill Avenue. This is
a two-phase traffic signal with signal indications mounted
on mast arms. The controller is located on the northeast
corner.
The following photos show the general layout of 6th Street,
Hill Avenue, 11th Street / Duncan Avenue and surrounding
uses in the vicinity of the site. These were taken at loca-
tions as indicated in the photo captions.
PETERS & ASSOCIATES
LNCINtERR, INC.
Page 7
2
f'�J�-
�r.,�
y F ar `� �
NYC Ak4�•' iwk si ...
1 F
'-.•:4.... � .. 6.74-1'irW>{n
t
�.vv4l Jib CVy h_�' tlYv
Y ♦♦ Y }
d.� q .•��f {� JGQ I!!.�
4Y
c�k ( .' i'nv � Y ♦ _..J Yen` i li Yr
ek �
.1 (
P
i►tu
___Hourly, 24 -hour traffic counts were made on at the follow-
ing locations in the vicinity of the site by this consultant as
a part of this study. All traffic count data was gathered
while local schools were in session.
hi' a � , ) ` A ♦ T
..--.J..... fries c
_ 1 £CS.
I-._ _._ .,___..-
Hourly 24 -hour traffic count data for Hill Avenue, just
south of 6th Street and 11th Street, just east of Duncan
Avenue are summarized on Table 1 and Chart 1, "24 -
Hour Traffic Counts — Hill Avenue, Just South of 6th
Street," and Table and Chart 2. "24— Hour Counts - 11th
Street, Just East of Duncan Avenue."
Other traffic count data collected as a part of this study
includes AM and PM peak hour vehicle turning movement
counts at the intersection of 6th Street and Hill Avenue.
The AM and PM peak hour turning movement count data
at this intersection are summarized on the following
Charts 3 and 4 and are presented in detail in the Appen-
dix of this report.
24 -hour volume count data and AM and PM peak hour
vehicle turning movement counts made as a part of this
study are shown on Figure 3, "Existing Traffic Volumes."
PETERS & ASSOCIATES
wc"rt.va. INC.
Page 9
TIME
Hill AAenue, Just South of 6th Street
Northbound
Southbound
NB + SB
01:00 PM
51
46
97
02:00 PM
37
36
73
03:00 PM
51
51
102
04:00 PM
47
45
92
05:00 PM
40
56
96
06:00 PM
49
53
102
07:00 PM
39
42
81
08:00 PM
36
29
65
09:00 PM
25
19
44
10:00 PM
10
21
31
11:00 PM
11
12
23
12:00 AM
13
11
24
01:00 AM
2
2
4
02:00 AM
2
1
3
03:00 AM
4
2
6
04:00 AM
7
1
8
05:00 AM
1
9
10
06:00 AM
22
27
49
07:00 AM
53
23
76
08:00 AM
57
38
95
09:00 AM
56
39
95
10:0 AAM
37
39
76
11:00 AM
56
40
96
12:00 PM
53
59
112
24fiourTotal:
759
701
1460
Table 2 —Chart 2 24 -Hour Traffic Counts
11th Street, Just East of Duncan Avenue.
Tra is S ud
70 Hm[r.w b+laeesrn 3e«1-T7ARkHNmYmo•.
. MREoutl
m •sanea.tl
50
w
ao
zo
10
a
fi d' d� &' A' d M' ^^ ^tiro^' fi d'• d d� d�' d�' d+' ^°' ^^' ^'�
o^ °�' ^° o�
Nqs
Table 1 —Chart 1 24 -Hour Traffic Counts
Hill Avenue, Just South of 6th Street.
¢`e Q,e e`e ee e� ee eae ed eae e`1' e`e ae r`1' �' r`e rd es* ed ese ae Ve ae e e`e
^'t'��oi1' APyr9 R�1A $ cPocP^4' rP $,�IS,5$ cPys.P d1�R 7P R°R ^$,e$
Haw
PETERS & ASSOCIATES
IGwzcn. W[.
TIME
11th Street, Just East of Duncan AAenue
Eastbound
Westbound
EB + WB
01:00 PM
22
37
59
02:00 PM
18
25
43
03:00 PM
32
28
60
04:00 PM
24
34
58
05:00 PM
22
34
56
06:00 PM
15
17
32
07:00 PM
14
21
35
08:00 PM
10
9
-19
09:00 PM
3
5
8
10:00 PM
4
8
12
11:00 PM
1
7
8
12:00 AM
3
5
8
01:00 AM
0
4
4
02:00 AM
2
0
2
03:00 AM
1
1
2
04:00 AM
1
4
5
05:00 AM
2
3
5
06:00 AM
4
4
8
07:00 AM
15
16
31
08:00 AM
20
17
37
09:00 AM
16
16
32
10:00 AM
22
19
41
11:00 AM
26
23
49
12:00 PM
26
21
47
24 -Hour Total:
303
358
661
Page 10
■
wmnarTR4.
■
FFrrm ESA.aru
■
Fm,A5aY q
.
Frm/be.Rru
■
From fiial.ae
■
from YM 4
.
Frrm Pt' 4s1
■
From SeN'ay/1
■
From Vt . M1u
a9.
FMmniIm%I II
fl
H1w,
From5aa.Rry
■
ae9.
FgeYA Nn
U'-
260
200
also
X100
50
0
a)
N
i
,u,•iuui,•iiaiunui,r!
iuii".I,.I,.I,uiiiiuiI
-
_
HUH
s a s s a a a
Time of Day
Chart 3
AM Peak Hours Turning Movement Count Data
6th Street and Hill Avenue.
I I -
65
300(}
K!_ 1�}'
lin .�.7�YH/I Irrl��
iG
i
a ...t•m+,
250
.9263999'. ;, ::
; �1 '•:; , '.:,�,:
f Y,t , <::.:;1000
926
200
{ri
n.-r.i... 1.'.S r: 4..
150
9
100
A nt
Data
o
y
Chart 4
PM Peak Hours
Turning Movement
Count
Data
6th
Street and Hill Avenue.
NAw
From . r,aa4.
W. MAw.
From (e aru ■ Frm$aa•yse
■
Fmi. N1N.Rru
From ft;6L m1 . FrYMFV1
From tAn
om
■
Fr
From soa.aud . From ' il.a
iSIFrom
EWAyi
■
From San.aru immMhalf
300
300
250
250
200200
?
150-____
e
>
100
150
50
50
0 s
za ao
o
a•
n
r-
• a
M e o
a a o o
n
s
a
o
Time of Day
PETERS & ASSOCIATES
6IGINIEIO. INC.
e- Q1 OT M rN
Hill Ave.
J W N N
\_ 27
7 3 r�+�t�} \ I.L 1 _ c
}T / ty L 1 Ir �'#9� F,ir}Y ane d 7iy K ryr A v: . •'(n -'n uK. Y.
y 46 y' 040,' "v a1 . x9859148yr
l •r ~{i i.N.tl�'ly �i -�A�•,�i'1a�.♦M1p�j^. � I''AG� i:1�Lm'�•. ��!I]
10
-P nt Data
rn
0 N
t° 05:1 M
tPO N N m North
Hill Aver
Page II
iTraffI S ud j
The Trip Generation, an Informational Report, 2003, pub-
lished by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE)
and The Trip Generation Software (Version 5 by Micro -
trans), were utilized in calculating the magnitude of traffic
volumes expected to be generated by the proposed resi-
dential and retail land uses of this development. These are
reliable sources for this information and are universally
used in the traffic engineering profession.
Using the selected trip generation rates, calculations were
made as a part of this study to provide a reliable estimate
of traffic volumes that can be expected to be associated
with each phase of the development as proposed. Apply-
ing the appropriate trip generation rates to the land uses
proposed for the development makes these calculations.
Results of this calculation are summarized on Table 3,
"Summary of Trip Generation," below.
1
p
p
These calculations indicate the vehicle trips (combined in
and out) per average weekday projected to be generated
by the proposed residential and retail land uses on this site
for each phase of development. Of this total, vehicle trips
estimated during the traffic conditions of the adjacent
PROPOSED
LAND USE
24
TWO-WAY
APPROXIMATE ITE WEEKDAY
SIZE CODE VOLUME
-HOUR
AM PEAK
VOLUME
ENTER
HOUR
EXIT
PM PEAK
VOLUME
ENTER
HOUR
EXIT
,_--_ __ • ,
flI
. .
ICI
..-1• . 1 . -IPIUII11.
flflaomm
,
I
I
i . I 2,055
a i
mm®m
121
181
1 1 .
PETERS & ASSOCIATES
WCINIOt9. RIO
Page 12
street AM peak hour and PM peak hour are also indicated
on Table 3 for each phase of development.
These data have not been adjusted for "pass -by" trips (i.e.
that portion of the site -destined traffic likely to come from
the existing adjacent street traffic stream) due to the land
uses and location of the site. The majority of the vehicle
trips destined for the site is not expected to be in the exist-
ing traffic volumes.
Residential land -use, as will be associated with this site,
ordinarily does contribute to the adjacent street traffic con-
ditions during the on street AM peak traffic hour and the
PM peak traffic hour. Accordingly, both the AM and PM
peak traffic periods of the adjacent streets in the immedi-
ate vicinity of the site are the traffic operating conditions
which have warranted primary traffic analysis as a part of
this study.
Once projected traffic was estimated for the site, direc-
tional distributions were made to reflect the percent of left
and right turns at the study intersections. Directional distri-
bution percentages used in this report are shown on Fig-
ure 4, "Directional Distribution - Site Traffic."
The directional distribution percentages for site traffic have
been equated to percentage turns for each movement at
study intersections. These values are shown on:
o Figure
5-A, "Phase 1
Entering Traffic Percentage
Turns"
o Figure
5-B, "Phase
2
Entering Traffic Percentage
Turns"
o Figure
5-C, "Phase
3
Entering Traffic Percentage
Turns"
o Figure
6-A, "Phase
1
Exiting Traffic Percentage Turns"
o Figure
6-B, "Phase
2
Exiting Traffic Percentage Turns"
o Figure
6-C, "Phase
3
Exiting Traffic Percentage
Turns."
PETERS & ASSOCIATES
INGM66PS. INC.
Page 13
ffTtate,
The projected traffic volumes result from applying the per-
centages shown on Figures 5-A, 5-B, 5-C, 6-A, 6-B and 6-
C to the corresponding projected site -generated traffic for
each phase of development summarized on Table 3, "Trip
Generation Summary." The projected site -generated traf-
fic volumes are shown on the following figures:
o Figure 7-A, "Phase 1 Generated Traffic Volumes - AM
and PM Peak Hours"
o Figure 7-B, "Phases 1 and 2 Generated Traffic Vol-
umes - AM and PM Peak Hours"
o Figure 7-C, "Full Build Site -Generated Traffic Volumes
- AM and PM Peak Hours" (Includes Phases 1, 2 and
3).
Values shown on Figure 3, "Existing Traffic Volumes,"
have been combined with the site development projected
traffic volumes shown on Figures 7-A, 7-B and 7-C and the
results are depicted on the following figures:
o Figure 8-A, "Phase 1 Generated Traffic Plus Existing
Traffic Volumes — AM and PM Peak Hours"
o Figure 8-B, "Phases 1 and 2 Generated Traffic Plus
Existing Traffic Volumes — AM and PM Peak Hours"
o Figure 8-C, "Full Build Site -Generated Traffic Plus Ex-
isting Traffic Volumes — AM and PM Peak Hours"
(Includes Phase 1, 2 and 3).
Traffic volumes shown on Figures 8-A, 8-B and 8-C are
the values used in traffic volume assignments and capacity
and level of service (LOS) calculations conducted as a part
of this study. The effect of existing background traffic (i.e.
the adjacent street non -site traffic which exists) has thus
been accounted for in this analysis.
PETERS & ASSOCIATES
(OP6[O. INC.
Page 14
Generally, the "capacity" of a street is a measure of its
ability to accommodate a certain magnitude of moving
vehicles. It is a rate as opposed to a quantity, measured
in terms of vehicles per hour. More specifically, street
capacity refers to the maximum number of vehicles that a
street element (e.g. an intersection) can be expected to
accommodate in a given time period under the prevailing
roadway and traffic conditions.
Level of Service (LOS) ordinarily has a letter designation
relative to the various operating characteristics, ranging
from "A" as the highest quality to "F" representing consid-
erable delay. The various Levels of Service are generally
described as follows:
- •
•
VQv rTotal I)elaSec./fah
i c Qe'c i tion
This LOS'is a'free flow'condition?with,vehicles`acting-nearly
A
<10
independently,to:one another.There:isiittle or noidelay.•
'
This LOS is slightly, restrictive conditionwith,shorttrafficdelays.
B
>10 and <20
— .
The presense of other vehicles is noticable byjtheldrive .
•
This LOS is' the.designiev.•-.....................-.lerng the
C
>20 and <35
service',.life�of the.facility?hLOS1C;results;from'ari average'delay.
..
The traffic,flow.is stable„but more.restrictive. ,y•i;.
This; LOS _is noticeablyrmoreirestrictive;;and:there are long
D
>35 and s55
traffic delays. This LOS results in poor driver comfort and in
greater accident probabilities.
At this LOS, the intersection is operating at capacity with little or
E
>55 and <80
no gaps There are veryiong'traffic delays and'uhstable
ntersection:operatidn:''C iC t),� .;.;..'-'? - C•.
At this LOS, there are more vehicles arriving.at the approach
F
>80
than can be discharged. Extreme delays will'be encountered.
•. -•
PETERS & ASSOCIATES
ENCOMIRS. INC.
Page 15
J
affic Stud
.
1
Ay"�Tiot_a___ 7 se_
Descri Lion_
SS
3'
This LOS is a f veh es
A
<tQ ;;`f
$eejflow{conditionawith, aeting nearly
'-Nssi
independentlytojonelanotfier Thereislittleorrio'delay.
�: [�v..._.,
w 4' '. r f .
c- f •f *1 �' r ¢�'%d ^. .,.i{16i.u4`14..i.irv' M i �A t J
B
>10:and'<1'5
This LOS,isyslighdy restnchve condibonrvnth•short�VafficNdevays;.
: '
The;presensevof'other�vehides'is'hoticeable;bylthe d
#`' v'. ..:wld"3kYY^3
`�GJ`.₹,SitA2'X* I.'- .4
'
This+COStisithe_designllev„el4thatiengirieersistrive6for dunrig the
C
>15 and <25
service^life�of the facility. -.LOS'Gresultsxfrom anaverage'delay.
T- ieltraffic;flowti;Estable}{tint.more'srestrictive,
Tihis?L • ;lm .
OSa{smohceablymore;restnctive and,thereaare�longa.
D
>25 and <35
OSiresulisiinipoou,driverscomfortiand(in
ateraccid� eritjprgb b s';,,s
g liti :, : �i� „ ', s
- ?
gtjth LOS the inters, io i Iittle6k
E
>35 and+<50
ec Joperatingt�trcap�a aty/w3
nogaps �Therr are et Long trr affc;decays and�uhstable a
TIiW (tr lit = ` 1 - 1 ^'*
mtersectiomoperatipn
I
]!J^J r' VG. Y::] Fa 41St: d J u:: '.. G4.C: { : '•
F
>50
AYthis.LOS,.there are.morekvehiclestarrriiving'at the�approachfit.k
than can.be discharged. Extremeidelays willfbe?encountered.
i
'^•,y � �'��" ' ,....iSEir:J4will
Traffic operational calculations were performed as a part
of this study for traffic operating conditions of projected
traffic. This analysis was performed using Synchro Ver-
sion 6, 2003. This computer program has been proven
to be reliable when used to analyze capacity and levels
of traffic service under various operating conditions. De-
tailed calculations for all capacity calculations are in-
cluded in the Appendix. The adjacent street AM and PM
peak traffic periods were used for these calculations.
Factors included in the analysis are as follows:
• Existing traffic patterns.
• Directional distribution of projected traffic volumes.
• Existing and proposed intersection geometry
(including elements such as turn lanes, curb radii,
etc.).
• Existing background traffic volumes and projected
site -generated volumes.
• Existing and proposed traffic control.
PETERS & ASSOCIATES
CNGI66RS. INC.
Page 16
Tk
aiTL`.C�/
c
"*TRAFFIC'CONDITI0NS
- s
;'ii
.Iac1avu.l
AM 6th Street and KO Avenue
SIGNAL A A
A
A C C A
PM
A A
A
A G C A
Table 4
- Level of Service Summary -
Existing Traffic Conditions
CAPACITY ANALYSIS
Results and Level of Service Analysis -
Existina Traffic Conditions
Capacity and level of service analysis were performed for
existing traffic conditions for the worst -case adjacent
street PM peak hour for the intersection of 6th Street and
Hill Avenue. As indicated in Table 4, "Level of Service
Summary — Existing Traffic Conditions," currently all exist-
ing vehicle movements at the intersection of 6th Street
and Hill Avenue presently operate at what calculates as
an acceptable LOS "C" or better for the AM and PM peak
hours for existing traffic conditions. Traffic volumes used
for this analysis are shown on Figure 3, "Existing Traffic
Volumes."
Results and Level of Service Analysis -
Phase I Projected Traffic Conditions
Capacity and LOS analysis was performed for the pro-
jected traffic conditions for the AM and PM peak hours.
This analysis was performed for the following intersec-
tions:
o 6th Street and Hill Avenue
o 6th Street and Drive A
o Hill Avenue and Drive B.
For Phase 1 projected traffic conditions, analysis was
conducted with the following roadway conditions:
o The addition of a northbound left -turn lane on Hill Ave-
nue at 6th Street.
o Access Drive A as a two lane median divided road -
PETERS & ASSOCIATES
QICp6CR9. INC.
Page 17
way, consisting of an inbound lane (receiving lane for
eastbound right -turn and westbound left -turn vehicle
movements from 6th Street to Drive A) and a out-
bound right -turn only lane.
o Access Drive B as a three -lane roadway consisting of
an eastbound right -turn lane, an eastbound left -turn
lane and a westbound receiving lane.
As indicated in Table 5, "Level of Service Summary - Pro-
jected Traffic Conditions," all vehicle movements at the
study intersections for Phase 1 projected traffic conditions
are projected to operate at what calculates as an accept-
able LOS "C" or better for the AM and PM peak hours.
Traffic volumes used for Phase 1 projected traffic condi-
tions are shown on Figure 8-A, "Phase 1 Generated Traf-
fic Plus Existing Traffic Volumes — AM and PM Peak
Hours."
Results and Level of Service Analysis -
Phases 1 and 2 Projected Traffic Conditions
Capacity and LOS analysis was performed for the pro-
jected traffic conditions for the AM and PM peak hours.
This analysis was performed for the following intersec-
tions:
o 6th Street and Hill Avenue
o 6th Street and Drive A
o Hill Avenue and Drive B
o 11th Street and Drive C.
For Phases 1 and 2 projected traffic conditions, analysis
was conducted with the same roadway conditions as in
Phase 1 projected traffic conditions plus Access Drive C
constructed as a three -lane roadway consisting of an out-
bound right -turn lane, an outbound left -turn lane and an
inbound receiving lane.
As indicated in Table 5, "Level of Service Summary - Pro-
jected Traffic Conditions," all vehicle movements at the
' IPETERS & ASSOCIATES
' �I PETERS & ASSOCIATES
KNOINAERS. INS
Page 18
1
study intersections for Phases 1 and 2 projected traffic
conditions are projected to operate at what calculates as
an acceptable LOS "C" or better for the AM and PM peak
hours.
S
Traffic volumes used for Phases 1 and 2 projected traffic
conditions are shown on Figure 8-B, "Phases 1 and 2
Generated Traffic Plus Existing Traffic Volumes — AM and
PM Peak Hours."
Results and Level of Service Analysis -
Full Build Projected Traffic Conditions
(Includes Phases 1. 2. and 3)
Capacity and LOS analysis was performed for the pro-
jected traffic conditions for the AM and PM peak hours.
This analysis was performed for the following intersec-
tions:
o 6th Street and Hill Avenue
o 6th Street and Drive A
o Hill Avenue and Drive B
o 11th Street and Drive C
o 6th Street and Drive D
o Hill Avenue and Drive E.
For full build projected traffic conditions, analysis was
conducted with the same roadway conditions as in Phase
1 and 2 plus the following:
o Access Drive D as a two lane roadway, consisting of
an inbound lane (receiving lane for westbound right -
turn vehicle movements on 6th Street) and a out-
bound right -turn only lane.
o Access Drive E as a three -lane roadway consisting of
an eastbound right -turn lane, an eastbound left -turn
lane and a westbound receiving lane.
As indicated in Table 5, "Level of Service Summary - Pro-
jected Traffic Conditions," all vehicle movements at the
study intersections for full build -out of the site projected
PETERS & ASSOCIATES
RCI$IE S. INC.
Page 19
INTERSECTION
PEAK HR
INTERSECTION
PEAK HR
LEVEL OF SERVICE
FULL BUILD
• PROJECTED•
P
TRAFFIC CONDITIONS j �� Li � •, : - �,'
(Includes Phases 1,2 and 3)
-
L
INTERSECTION li
PL �L__J _____LA:
__JL�,J
PEAK HR PEAK HOUR -LEVEL OF SERVICE
0
[Taffic S ud
traffic conditions are projected to operate at what calcu-
lates as an acceptable LOS "C" or better for the AM and
PM peak hours.
Traffic volumes used for full build projected traffic condi-
tions are shown on Figure 8-B, "Full Build Site -Generated
Traffic Plus Existing Traffic Volumes — AM and PM Peak
Hours."
It is recommended that a minimum 120 -foot northbound
left -turn lane plus taper be constructed on Hill Avenue at
6th Street coincident with the development of Phase 1.
The alignment of the lanes for north / south vehicle move-
ments at this intersection must be addressed in the de-
sign of intersection improvements.
Additionally, radii on the southeast and southwest corner
of the intersection of 6th Street and Hill Avenue should be
increased as a part of the intersection improvements.
• • Findings of this study are summarized as follows:
• Traffic volumes projected to be generated by the site
at each phase of development are the following vehi-
cle trips (combined in and out) per average weekday:
o Phase 1 - Approximately 656 vehicle trips.
o Phase 2 - Approximately 627 vehicle trips.
o Phase 3 - Approximately 772 vehicle trips.
0 Total - Approximately 2, 055 vehicle
trips.
• The AM peak hour of the adjacent street (7:15 AM —
8:15 AM) and the PM peak hour of the adjacent street
(4:30 PM - 5:30 PM) have been determined to be the
two hours of highest traffic volumes in the vicinity.
• Capacity and LOS analysis for existing traffic condi-
tions for the intersection of 6th Street and Hill Avenue
and projected traffic operations at the same intersec-
PETERS & ASSOCIATES
MCINE[p. INC.
Page 21
Traffic Stud j
tion and the access drive intersections with 6th Street,
Hill Avenue and 11th Street proposed to serve the
development were analyzed for each phase of devel-
opment for the AM and PM peak hours. All vehicle
movements at the study intersections for existing traf-
fic conditions and for projected traffic conditions for all
three development phases (Phase 1, 2 and 3) either
currently operate or are projected to operate at what
calculates as an acceptable LOS "C" or better for the
AM and PM peak hours.
Recommendations of this study are summarized as fol-
lows:
• It is recommended that the access drives proposed to
serve the site be constructed as follows:
1 o Access Drive A (Phase 1) as a two lane me-
dian divided roadway, consisting of an inbound
lane (receiving lane for eastbound right -turn
and westbound left -turn vehicle movements
from 6th Street to Drive A) and a outbound
right -turn only lane.
o Access Drive B (Phase 1) as a three -lane
roadway consistingof an eastbound right -turn
lane, an eastbound left -turn lane and a west-
bound receiving lane.
o Access Drive C (Phase 2) constructed as a
three -lane roadway consisting of an outbound
' right -turn lane, an outbound left -turn lane and
an inbound receiving lane.
o Access Drive D (Phase 3) as a two lane road-
way, consisting of an inbound lane (receiving
lane for westbound right -turn vehicle move-
ments on 6th Street) and a outbound right -turn
only lane.
o Access Drive E (Phase 3) as a three -lane
roadway consisting of an eastbound right -turn
lane, an eastbound left -turn lane and a west-
bound receiving lane.
1
' PETERS k ASSOCIATES
VCWURPETERS A C. Page 22
1
• •
i -uu ' r
• It is recommended that a minimum 120 -foot
northbound left -turn lane plus taper be constructed on
Hill Avenue at 6th Street coincident with the develop-
ment of Phase 1. The alignment of the lanes for north
/ south vehicle movements at this intersection must be
addressed in the design of intersection improvements.
• It is recommended that radii on the southeast and
southwest corner of the intersection of 6th Street and
Hill Avenue should be increased as a part of the inter-
section improvements.
• It is recommended to modify the existing traffic signal
at the intersection of 6th Street and Hill Avenue as
necessary to accommodate street widening and inter-
section radii improvements.
• Traffic signal and roadway improvements designs
along 6th Street will require approval and must con-
form to design standards of the City of Fayetteville
and AHTD.
• Roadway design to the site access drives intersecting
Hill Avenue and intersecting 11th Street will require
approval and must conform to the design standards of
the City of Fayetteville.
PETERS & ASSOCIATES
ENGINEERS. INC.
Page 23
341
FILE: RECORD
ORDINANCE NO. 11c6 '93 JAN 27 ¶111 01
AN ORDINANCE VACATING AND ABANDONING: AN CO AR
PORTION OF THE STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR PROPERTY E YE R
LOCATED IN THE 1300 and 1400 BLOCKS OF BROOKS
AVE., NORTH OF• 15TH STREET, AS SUBMITTED BY
CAMPBELL SOUP COMPANY.
WHEREAS, the City Council has the authority under Ark. Code Ann. §14-54-104 to
vacate portions of streets which are not required for corporate purposes; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the following described portion of the
street right-of-way for the property located in the 1300 and 1400 blocks of Brooks Ave., and
North of 15th Street, as submitted by Campbell Soup Company, is a platted but unopened street
which 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
property located in Washington County, Arkansas:
See Exhibit "A", attached hereto and made a part hereof.
Section 2.
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.
PASSED AND APPROVED this 15th day of December , 1992.
APPROV
By:/
Fred Hanna, Mayor
ATTEST:
By:
Sherry . Thomas, City Clerk
.T5 j.,. f
47.4
////////111111111..1 v ��
H
11
II
ii
54 3 2 I j 4 3_.2 II"
1415 I 6` 17 I r5 6 �7 � 3�
•
J_ _ /
ROCKBLUFF Hi ST. J //
•I —I I
I'I
•
5 a 3r 2 IJ IL 3 4
'
PANSY _ST � ; J •� _ _
-T I I.•
ELEVE
Q' 1
I1 I I I
I
2 is 13 I I 2 is
it I
J I
C11012 12I gI'•
11111
2 ;t I IIii
`C ' G II I I
i QO 4 I•
II
�O -i LYO I s 22/.Q ;; I s TWELFTH STREET
• K
I IL
llf^i i Ia ;1
vl I= 9 1 I 6 1 .rra
' I I .IIIi
8 I
rJ ; . I I; AND RSO S .=DIV. y.
i
I. 8 I•
7 i 5 4 3 2 %'
I I w• I ro' fs' w' fl'-'
Mf-r
Sr
!C
f aai 9r,- I 18
nr r..r r.a 4 3 I .. 4;
.far 5
9 8 7 6 I J• I 19 ; L
II
20
IC aaa.a'
21
1 "Mr
fl Its rY . n' S. 22
Z
SOI 23 z
D
I l pTiNi5 c
�.Sec..21-16-30 V92-3
o Campbell Soup Co.
17 16 15 14 I3 12 II 10 '.R7O-W..Easement Vacation
_ _ _ , .� - 1300 - .1400 Elk. Brooks -Ave.
° S r �� PC:- 12-14- 92
'
.-- /nnn 1OO I) 76
FAYETTEVIILE ' _' as
vqZ-3
THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS
DEPARTMENTAL CORRESPONDEN
TO: Fayetteville Pla ng Commission
FROM: City Engineer iO--
SUBJECT: Proposed Street Closing
Brooks Avenue, Garriott Subdivision
North of 15th Street, Campbell Soup
DATE: December 9, 1992
The Campbell Soup Company is petitioning the City to close a
portion of Brooks Avenue located in the Garriott Subdivision to the
City of Fayetteville. The un-opened street is located just north
of 15th Street at the Campbell Soup plant.
All of the public utilities have indicated no objections to
the closing as requested by Campbell Soup. The City has no
utilities or other facilities located within the proposed street
closing area and have no plans to place facilities there in the
future.
It is the recommendation of the Staff that the un-opened
portion of Brooks Avenue north of 15th Street be closed as
requested by Campbell Soup.
71
E
Information Packet for
ASPEN RIDGE
Extension of Brooks Ave.
South to W. 15`h St.
Prepared by Mitch Woody
January 18, 2005
4 I
° 10 I I 5
91> ¶0)— 834 I ►a?q]
i...-15
TWELFTH STREET
,.. t�
I I qo3 I g99 I i— ]
eI
1 1 �^ cyos gq 1 '43
9 •6
1 I Itt !
r
— — a ANDERSON SUB.—D!V
I (
7 y 5 4 3 t 2
60 I r 90 I so I so' /765 � I
18
2 1 �' n. as
�J• I `v 1 9 --
N
NI
y 4
20 1! 3
21 n
r,
22
214,5'
-
cf
a, �ry /pW1 N"Kvf'Y'
�l rY
AI � 21 i, , 17i'
I24 25 - -
fi
q�l
- a II 25 u o 114-....r'
10 t ; -— £
I - ,33.5° !
1 p
40'
0
Routes from 11th Street & S. Duncan Ave. using
W. 15th Street.
Express Route to I-540 north and southbound lanes.
Scenic Route to University
Wal-Mart
& North I-540. No traffic lights
until the intersection of I-540
&
Hwy
62.
Route to University of Arkansas or Wal-Mart via Razorback Road.
Route to Washington County Courthouse and the Downtown area.
el
a
• Traffic Strdy •
ASPEN RIDGE DEVELOPMENT
prepared for:
Crafton, Tull &
Associates, Inc.
6th Street
and
Hill Avenue
a
Fayetteville, Arkansas
..
<t...-
3
F"PETERS & ASSOCIATES
ENGINEERS, INC
al • CIVII. & TRAFFIC ENGINEERING
P.O. BOX 21638 (501) 225-0500
LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72221
E
i' ARKANSAS
REGISTERED
PROFESSIONAL
ENGINEER
ERNEST J. PETERS
Project No.: P-1051
December 3, 2004
IL
N V U)
QQQ 1
(L DO a 20z z Q
ax 645% Z
X W
w()
W
awp o-90% aQO
a x uuw
Y ¢ t30%
awp o -z0%
a x 45% a x
¢wa= ¢ap I.x
��.
HILL AVE.
W W
� a Q
p H
f
D F O p w
DRNEA _ Z
W
Q j
Q r
K W
Y � J
xa 'r
...-
( F
Y Y a U
b 49.o g¢7 O
awp U!
Y W ax U)
a
i Ad
K cn
Y
Q 4%b a j ao W Z
¢ W p w Q W
N08})(
� 1lJ
' as
Aspen Ridge Development
• Fayetteville, Arkansas
P1051
1
1
1
1
MYH/. y.lr! YCIf- •••_ Y♦ Y..M•✓n .1♦ W!'43.4 T/. --.1.4N\. /.-.-M V N•
••... , 1•••' I.
,
rJ/Yyy�q•�m'.ln.. a.-,. _.v Y'LHR•YT �✓Mv.q.
RR
\.•!
IiY•Y V-- F
PHASE
1
Residential
Townhouses
112 Units
230
656
8
41,JI
39
19
♦ I- --.-.. - . -'.- .,-.-T. T+. .t\.n «\2 .CI'_ ...,. • .'-
a .'-
-
V. -l. a
'TY.uCa.- _..
T...p_.
PHASE
2
Residential
Townhouses
112 Units
230
627
7
40
37
18
PHASE
1 PLUS PHASE 2 SUB -TOTALS:
1,283
15
81
76
37
.p•C1—a.
-.?f I•.S'. a...n R._ c{Na.. _..e - ,. ,u`. _ • .__.
PrtiRV
— 7• —•
.-t-- . $s -].R-
N•. ,
T
PHASE
3
Residential
Retail
Condominiums
12 Units
15,000 Sq. Ft.
230
820
70
644
1
9
4
6
•
4
27
2
29
PHASE 3SUB-TOTALS:
B.
10
10
31
31
714
.+.m...-.c...Y.-•.--......n�-r.
n
- - ....-. ..-..-...
�.•.-n. --:H ;-.- .. O.-.n4-Lr+
.-r. n.u._v- t- FM•
'..(K .$ j•'NKM•1. 1M. r*fl.
FULL BUILD -OUT TOTALS:
I
I 25
91
107
68
TOTAL FULL BUILD -OUT ENTERING
+ ExmNG
7
4 , 1 'Sl j. ��
0 ♦ � N' ,♦ o ,� . ,,� . 1 , o1��. I 3. :1ft
FJ ) to\. J♦ C� \ii\i\ � ;O` I) '` �!�` Pn�v 1 �*-�"/1::.'t
W♦ .1 I/ Y��I x�l. 1(��n .f t �'.1�
1`0 vd {I T
1' �p ssllll'' y
1 . 0 )) ♦ t r.1i Il 11� L 1,
♦ D `C
♦• ♦ ) ' C )�. gypA �) - ♦♦�. • A'S .�{ •�'. ♦ d♦-
♦.,, .. 1
0 0
2 CJ V f ° Il I4 5'♦ Ip.A r
q
/!J'1) / \. iO l . G l=I' 1 �/ C' ♦1, ) 11 y1 /), �_
a
V ' \-
1=^��--v.h♦ �y. (. v1A'1 ��♦tl 11 �lW ,aa�. A_o_�p Al A��• .OS �t n V ��.l O.
1' �v .� c li�,♦� �'a try �l J w�� -/ y� .fl.l� ,I
.. _ �� ": Z..-rj'�= `� �� RV •vf�T/u° the °� b e ' �1 (1 g..uc k`A„!. y� y __.b
J -'` S� ♦ O1 U�-
• vC.� v0 .p O lJ ,(L f� 17 ,•• tpq',�-y
T� �� ♦114. �_�' V9.At. i lA tr Il l•w L♦lJ�i" ♦• y� ,.1 la Oi t 11{ n
I,
1
��44 ryµ
• J�:� �l.i op�P,♦\' v V. .\ IY�YO' \
�p TN
y.w �\
�11I J�A tP� .. tlA\2 S)'♦ CL� Q 1 11� I.
1 t=om C = c
d �• � 4 3 0 o v Se: R :s,:::.
it _ c
"�`Ci O P fi: �Jr � y♦ f a 4. n� +�
pq \ y p O ,•i
-. a � ° as r t-'�: � ti♦ .
��� L. `. •Ly TY1a \ �i F' A1:. 111 r1
O 4•LaGX_. r .11 ' ^�
��•� ah �` ° . .ti I y�� • `ti/Iy • '� a. f if .
•f1. In4r" `\r tJ' ..p \ /, ill �I
ro
• .aA V . • ,W4r�r.-T^y ♦ A•tT I� %��` 1 b I
.'� - J r l
CSACS�\`�Ce��� C .�. f V S • j1 -.n <�.�y� nJ,l.f"v1. yryp.�Y]� P_n♦-) .. _ ♦tea
O O ... y�µ]a f'. ��•V, R ] !_P 6\�ain�Y{� r I,. �4iJ.• �`4'/1'�. _
ff ". ♦ • { ♦ \A.C'^~L.'�✓4�' rf 'lw \�.Oi q} 1) IT Z1�"NVA t m •R, o f� �'I- ° O` . 1ST y 'Y♦ q.G"i'."ID,--���"�. !j ..
0 ry�
f i o�^�P• i . h. V° ' C,. °�� 4h E, V'�..,`�'1' Y��1 ( 14r ✓�
: T—� .
e • OynQ - �p�IyQ 41� 0 O �a c "� � ♦ 4 l]�� p
�..��•� V -V'1 >. ���,� �. t
jr/��� �3
.- V" _D \'J•.iF ° �.t 't.
ab
p`'�, d a' O.qy t �Je� �� _aC• F 91'ar 'cp`• nom. •l••�`]-4oi .`rD�. er/.•c'
° �o �� ` % �e11 ! O d rj t"V�•IN�,]Y• I� 'Qe� f
♦
` ♦ t ' tl V V O. 1n "lI+.I. Ga �i. �Z `T•'' . ' r nli iaf O f r {
.S op I� a v` i`.,i•' O'{Yyi+''�"•i."tc-7°7� I c'[11 IV �W'rz �, ,' $l
UD Y� J e A
.ra m• ova or ��'� �Z,1 o"s \elf S Niv 1- a �.TSa•�a 1�/�c I I�
a0;j `✓I J%>5 �1`ry�a {K l aili ,�_` `J.'"+� ���' l
. _ e . x cw •Ae J p 1 �, �'"^C•o c ♦. �y `}� oi,' 0`A���f�jf-af�WA
D �� '�_C/� i� •0•j") �i 0 0. a^I d•o "�. a�!1I �."�•^�♦ (n ��0��.� ^ r.`��
.IL
l l rw /l _ l _ F l JIf r{ }AY. •
� � .. 0 � ere � q v V aY ate'• rl Q ��� ��
♦'lam ay�� aZ,
:F - o �� e 4e > tip♦ 1 1 �, Cr�ti
Oo F z . o i ri% • a v�71�.I. L 4aA••"�>le �.rl UJA.lI fl� Y
, n' i v ± . / i A `Y �.... .....an. V ', � f •'r i``\ ��"' V'L 11. , v �� ..
•
• ♦ T... r J4S ,> n' Ir f .•i' �'�—Nf_^. (a T\r`• la lav C li \ /y tr
I I . " l O • ,Q _ ♦S �y .f .may. 41//a .I -pa • 00 -
•�." w0 \... ."♦-y �✓0 t. �, M[ o��Ai 0. •Ju,
� rr o
c ° O r _ J.vi'.'hl♦1>M�-� I9�,
YY
f
1 G irl 4:J'.it r
;-":S
1i' 1' y U♦i %4' • e' \ pa
q
`•. nA".nun p / f H..l%lO j r r ]:'V ♦vA : LJ1
&,,g Q u o O J �ra - ` A A A
1ti
ti % a O �yJ�\a l l �a�� Qj
,,ma�yy r v �! 4"" `CI \ r " _-'\
.t ao �/ r, y P 'f , . O
ill U PII
From: Clarice Pearman
To: Pate, Jeremy
Subject: Ord. 4642, 4643, 4656, 4657 corrected Ex.A and Ord. 4671 & 4672
Jeremy attached are the above ordinances that had to be corrected because the legal descriptions were
wrong. There will be an extra expense for these type of mistakes to republished and refiled at the
courthouse. Please ask that the legal descriptions are proof very carefully before submitting.
Also attached are the ordinances passed by City Council January 18, 2005.
Thanks.
Clarice
��. 9 ! N' �I d':4ii j ► ►
"NorMwest Arkansas' most Wider Read Newspaper"
FIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION
12. NX� , do solemnly swear that I am the
Lega C erk of the Arkansa Democrat-Gazette/Northwest Arkansas
Times newspaper, printed and published in Lowell, Arkansas, and that
from my own personal knowledge and reference to the files of said
publication, that advertisement of:
Yl6Lil & 2110` n2J was inserted in the regular editions on
PO#
"* Publication Charge: $ O(U'. ) oy
Subscribed and sworn to before me this
fl
+'LJ day ofd ______________,2005.
1
I w n /l ��v
�
Notary. Public Sharlene D. Williams
My Commission Expires:
Notary Public
State of Arkansas
My commission Expires
October 18, 2014
" Please do not pay from Affidavit.
An invoice will be sent.
RECEIVED
FEB 0820G5
OITYOFFAYETTEVILLE
OW QEc XtOFFICE
P.O. BOX 1607 • 212 N. EAST AVENUE • FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS 72701 • 479-442-1700 • 479-442-5477 (FAX)
' arANCN NO. 4672
PN ORDINANCE
DA TRiCT Tr AL fl R-PZD T04- �� ��
PLANNED107. ZONING NRILOCATED
DRIOD H-(z'CF O4-sye
SWEET.
T. ES RIFLE LOVENU SOUTH OF 8TH
SPREES WEST OF HILL AVENUE, NORTHEAST OF
11TH STREET ALONG TOWN BRANCH CREEK ARKANSAS
CONTAINING APPROXIMATELY 27.969 ACRES.
MORE OR LESS: AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING
MAP OF THE CRY OF B MLLE; AND ADOPTING THE ASSOCIATED RESIDENT L DEVEIAP-
MENr PLAN AS APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION
U R ORDAan NY TI a CRY COUNCIL OF 711N CRY OF FAYNRMLLN, ARNAMYs
Section.1:'That the zone dasslfcatlon of the fdbwkg described properly Is hereby Ularped as tdlows:
Fran RAF -24, Resldarhtlel MMII FardN, 24 hilts per acre, to R-PZD 04-1307 as down In Edlbt'A'
atlatlhed hereto end made a part hereof.
SWW2: That the dwSe b zarhirg dasgkatlon Is based icon the approved master deelopnent plan
and deMopnern statards as atlW.e on the plat end approved by the Plarvtg Carrttlsslon on
December 13, 2004.
Section 3: That t4s ordinance sthall take effect end be , M face at ath tine as a9 of the regt*emahb
of the devdopmaht plan have been met.
1• 1 I r.' R.•,� lY
Imo. •.•..'.� 1• :..•
1, 1
D011BIT'A'
R-PZD 04-1307
T OF THE SOUTH 12 OFTHE SW 1/4 OF SECTION 16. AND A PART OF THE NORTH 1/2
1/4 OF SECTION 21, T -16-N, R -30-W, WASHINGTON COUNTY. ARKANSAS. BEING MORE
ILARLY DESCRIBED AS:
THE NORTH UNE OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 21 A DIS-
TANCE OF 5.92 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING: THENCE S87'04E 418.49 FEET; THENCE
502'49'04W 514.14 FEET; THENCE N87.04.09'N 424.40 FEET TO A SET _ RESAR: THENCE
S02'49'04'W 204.82 FEET, THENCE SOUTH 87'04'09'E 139.00 FEET; THENCE SOT48'48'W 293.00
FEET TO A SET 12' IRON REBAR; THENCE N87005.54V 183.58 FEET TO AN EXISTING IRON;
THENCE S02'48'00'W 181.27 FEET: THENCE S8704'0YE 84.31 FEET, THENCE SOT40'05'W 79.86
FEET, THENCE S37'0740E 39.06 FEET THENCE 507'40'0SW 15.00 FEET; THENCE N87'1S'29'W
65.13 FEET THENCE S02'4017'W 13,01 FEET. THENCE N87'13'13'W 222.57 FEET; THENCE
NOT39'07E 98.08 FEET; THENCE N8701150W 222.71 FEET; THENCE N8T13'26 W 514.88 FEET
TO AN DOSRNG IRON ON THE EAST RIGHT OF WAY UNE OF THE BURUNGTON NORTHERN RAIL-
ROAD; THENCE ALONG THE EAST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF SAID RAILROAD N35'29'31'E 52.81
FEET; THENCE N32'17'2I OE 103,24 FEED, THENCE N28R5'2TE 103.51 FEET; THENCE N24'16'00'E
103.08 FEET, THENCE N21.19'30E 102.24 FEET; THENCE N18'4444'E 102.31 FEET; THENCE
N17'4223'E 150.90 FEET, THENCE N19'O9'44'E 4621 FEET, THENCE N19055.12 -E 130.59 FEET;
THENCE N24'20'f OE.111.27 FEET; THENCE N28'5624'E 112.03 FEET; THENCE N33'22'01 E 78.14
FEET, THENCE N36'27'O9'E 61.08 FEET; THENCE N40'4051E 107.01 FEET; THENCE S8814'53'E
62.45 FEET TO`AN oaS nNG IRON ON A 1381.79 FOOT RADIUS CURVE TO THE RIGHT; THENCE
NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID RIGHT OF WAY AND CURVE 417.54 FEET. THE CHORD FOR WHICH
BEING N51'38'45E 415.96 FEET, TO AN E%1SRNG ARKANSAS HIGHWAY COMMISSION RIGHT OF
WAY MONUMENT ON THE SOUTH UNE OF ARKANSAS HIGHWAY 180 (WEST 6TH STREET;
THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY UNE OF SAID HIGHWAY 587'41'42"E 40.98 FEET TO
AN E IST1NG AFIC MONUMENT: THENCE 58740CE 28.16 FEET TO AN DOSTING AHC MONU-
OF RECORD.
THANK YOU!
Arkansas Democrat -Gazette, NW Ed.
212 N. East Avenue
Fayetteville, AR 72701
479-442-1700
VISA PURCHASE
CARD #************4345*
EXPIRATION DATE : *****
DATE 02-07-2005 #002034 A
TIME 14:35:11
SALE 208.32
APPROVED 012358
AVS: YES
CLERK :
MERCH ORDER#
ITEM DESC:
X
***PLEASE IMPRINT CARD***
----------- THANK YOU-----------
111110. IU.-I U111 •
Scalb: 1=160 BPS) Drawing Name: 021111-00\ENG\DWG\EXHIBI1DD.dwg (sa441)
Date: 11/23/2004 Xrefs Used: BOUNDARY SURVEY, 02111lbs, cofaark, cta22x34, 02111lbs—pr
FM
ts+'
cnZ
nwc
C.
TG
or
9o4fF
I i
j5 -
12Th STREET
0
CO
em STREET (IM' I) —i`
1 ! ice
ASPEN RIDGE
SUBDIVISION
FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS
0
/
T
Grafton, Tull & AssociatesInc.
4796364` 8F47 B3I00. 4 wARTfTse
901 01 N. 4" Street. FAX:ub 20 7. 1 www.oslWa.aom
•
Architects, Engineers & Surveyors
•1
/*I
I
I i4 MMMM
MINI
.y 1 � � AIU'� � I
• � r �
I �1 61
r
•rY �
�1 UE1JMJJ.J
. 11x1..8 D•r�ri L 4111 �_�IY II
•Crl ���1iLRM �I�f INT�Y411YIY N 1�rr111r
• J4ry■■e■y •-•.�•^T❑� •r 'jYdNRNRIWRIIXINWW 'p1� I,IIIII ayj 111 11
•.,..y Y �IIIIIII�._ -_-' y `r (-tr j.1 Tfi 11I I i� y� flt�i
II 1 r Rar i. r rl��^11^ r ``•��JI
f r ''1•'�� 'f )I rr �I�f rrf 11
f-•uu- •(i I' II IIII
WW00 I I
r� L / i?p�� N j °'r..�p,;ry i'� ,u iril� 1l yl�i;l'
+ i ♦� •tll �Tn(l D•, jil''� ` ii11II
' ' $ '�i1161. '.Ili 0
ti ` r .yL"d'4' 0 I �5 III I
•� y V✓ , (r1/I' y •-•�••ri
�I r � r—•—r---•❑1 uLM1p� �� ly �ji y
l IyJy' r I I [1
�� vtl ♦ �R �}}//''jj''''���((••� r ! iirJr� • 5 A P �rR � NII II��r1 I��
� O['1 rjr r ... f IIIIIII��� yr 6•Y �•lyrtr
+•(/�( ' LL�i3 \yr A.ZJS 1 rl rrf\•�r�i uuu�T_R❑I
r..�llr r �r^I +A`'I •! it 1u 11t• { rI p lM1 n,rl 1 R rl ; I�! Ir
`tr � •�r.Y•� �1 11 I� 'rf.�1,1LLWrY� (� I 11 1 9 �V x}�1111 ra ♦ II l i l � r
♦ II� .• 1 ,r, 4.i.lil �{Nl1! S I1�Ir IM1IIIII� 11�� A
' i 11'!1t` Jjl�t p J wI+i1R r yp I 1.'r rli rl , ly `
'41 N !' ',�it>>` I 1•� I_ az u� G. r ~ -11 hl °' I ��
�• II iY u 1 IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII Rrt� 1,` ,�
1
.: �- -'- � e� i� it ! • r � . � � `` � �,p�!�, I ��r� I •r � rl , , I , ti • � lip lylll
i U IY 1
��lJl r I Ir �� �I .t. yr �I I 1^.. i. r.l _ y♦.^ I Ire r iK
Y yy AAyy ryy` • 1
+ I Xr 1___ �.'itr.,�'�:i1 �. �t,i ❑ —� II�Yri 1' Iv �,rt�lllllljlll
■. r5'_I ., s@t 1 — [
�• r l .,,,���555,,,� �•: i j(j( . I �I 5 + toL[. - ' I �� II�I�I
���3�y �)•�ti .'�I� t,. r�•'���S.t) ����) IIII II�� � I •R� : tRi-T � 111i;1'11l tlri�
i�t1 I' Ir.M,�,A J -�,. � •I` t �I •(RI� �IIIMII\r Tom• Yi e-;. ` r 4 ? k Ij..
I 4 ��// y I
�. r 1
�jy� .� r R• � l,�"ut�• ° � II:YINIIJ•LI ^ N "' y r I � I 1�';f II
!ti • re _.rY r '�`` hf • �••i ��� I �:
E ri �� �' \ � 1 r � I ^�h �-Ii��1 II� �jfl �� � �
. r1' r 1A r-�0, 1°�ir. ft1 tR�.�7 t� �'
. YH I 1 5; 1 t I ^ f19i��r't 1 tl 1;
(]�� I :M1 � ;j 11 L— II� yl� I-I��e•ri �
i.` 1 +�,� r� {ti^� �: �1��{Ir�r ie��( �� 'E II .♦� - ar�l �S r+,. r��AI �� ��
• � � i I I•L� I� 11 S( 11 '�'����{•fit S a V � 9� � ^A 1 .(.tin' �I � ' I , --. rt ' r �' I�•• r
1'u_i�u b`1 !''llI(�tif'�
'�yr r It^i II I •I p 1 �t{�t tl�����tl�� �.f Y�
,;, '" r ,I r i� �G �N i N II' �a ���� ��Itl l�) �:Sj �,j Lw"Iq�.•�� ' I' 1 "�, 1 4I ;Iy W��y W�NA4
?v 1 I "1 1 ) !' �.Itr l't s k •••••••-1 ^mil GAR hR
i� li { {I R .��� �OI .tl_ R_NJ �^ 11111
.il �fNI r �Q V90 „OD • 111 ".�..t�. 1 f �a 1 r I �II j 1
.ry4, 1 F •iQ •.1 4'1 1'1V �' .T ^� IIIIIllIL7TiT
r' ' L .�t �! r �..'t I� �I11I li,
�m t r
71.% "_ �T��' �r r� ' �C ;,4� 1. � I ��) / •
.-.....�� Irl �' rl l 1 I ill jlrVr
IR[+�La !.�✓) ��[JI`'{ t.Grl�Y 1!
Jj v 1K Y7
�• 1 • ¢' r
ice'yyy �%'r • r .• ^ I1I�11 , Ix IIry��I (F 1 1 J r r i. r
♦ 1/ �uuu �T1 q1 ` 1 " JI1i.AN11R (bk- �1 NI 111' 1
rj 11
i iyfnrnn"Y.r0T 111 r1 q� N 1 I
u l_ INS .. ._
1'
�. �I N1 jn '' 1�4r�v I III �I
-•u•r^T�1❑I �` Mm14M1Y MIRYAI •r(j 1 11 111
_ r C �� 1
Lam. _ ' 1I r I'1+;'
fr
I 111 rr,rl
r ` (•� r ilk `Ir1r (111 .
t1
]YY,bb y1�1.1y11r11y r1YlY1[IIr11�A.n11111.W� 1{c� r
„��._..
•may
� r ._.� �� JfrJ • � t u
.4�}�9L�:AtWY S�
r q�
(—o
I
U p■
V
0 3
Fot
J gyo
ASPEN RIDGE
PLANNED ZONING
DISTRICT
FAYETTEVILLE,ARKANSAS
a- S *♦ �G o u• O
111.11'' 111111
n n g og
" BoCCtltltltltl 4 $ p
9 ~
m Z A 2 2 j
9 a
In
— -s a qo a W N— Z
Of fT A W N V O
m ca
fluT
fl
O m m
y yz O
m
T
m
• z
m
C)
I))Grafton. Tull & Associates. Inc.
2448 E. 61st Sbee4. Suke 1189 Tulsa. OK 1413]4282
818.884.8341 FAX 918.181.3183 wxw.aal Loa,
Engineers & Surveyors
0
ASPEN RIDGE
PLANNED ZONING
DISTRICT
FAYEfTEVILLE, ARKANSAS
Grafton. Tull & Associates, Inc.
2440E. 81S SflM. Sifts 1100 Tubs, OK T4137-42
018591.0361 FAK 010.684.3103 wwaaNA.wm
GD
C
[jF
L
Jq
O
6
y
0
r
6
N
ASPEN RIDGE
PLANNED ZONING
DISTRICT
FAYEITEVILLE, ARKANSAS
Grafton. Tull & Associates, Inc.
2MBE81.2 SflFAX
1780 Tin, OK 7/137282
818.880.0317 FAIL818.88/3783 w•w.aatW.mm
hA
a„gI
ASPEN RIDGE
PLANNED ZONING
DISTRICT
FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS
Grafton. Tull & Associates, Inc.
2445 E91ht Short, Sulk 1150 TWq OK 141311272
915.6510341 FAX 815.651.3161 wwwnS%jLlnn
w
Engineers & Surveyors
tpj
o
'
2
N
cn.i
L� 6
[b•
O ] $ \
ASPEN RIDGE
PLANNED ZONING
DISTRICT
FAYEffEVILLE, ARKANSAS
Grafton, Tull &i1Associates,
TWWMM3 Inc.
218.554. id 347 FAX
910. 1]00 3 V* W. eTh1t 2R
.518.318.03/] F�VC BIB.SBl3r6l NWw.EleR10.EOn1
Engineers & Surveyors
N g
ASPEN RIDGE
PLANNED ZONING
DISTRICT
FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS
Cratton, Tull & Associates, Inc.
9 B. E. Bid SbAI, 918. 1799 Tube.,, 741S7�7n
91St "? FAX:91SY137&1 vw.aandmm
Engineers & Surveyors
ci!,
I.
2
8
Grafton, Tull & Associates. Inc.
901 N. Q` sbM. &ea 200. Room AR TOSB
4]4.838.4338 FM 4)4.831. www.aate.am
Architects, Engineers & Surveyors
U
iii
IlUNlU
ii
iii
I.•h
t I%.Mn oab�x� onm-m'.DanOmaa z�c mt��ole�l (.un
am 1 X1eI BaIJorPr . a.m.. Qlmr-v. aw.a e.w.s
aTx
ma
Yc
4w
\
it
\
\ I
•$
\\
YPlm,-
T11
-
\ I
YPl d
IMQ I
n
\ I
1235.58
`
I`
I I
I
1 Y 1.1
SfA
0IH43
2C O
YP.G STA
4Yam
j I \ \
Off )
1237.51
l7n.0 +,
YP.G
+
-
F
p
gg
--..' j i I� \ �---.-, ._—
123&70
Yaz
.11W61
-.
YAtI_eU71
•1
_
_
+
1739.33
E --n
—
j'
•/-
i`
:i
I
i'
' \
•
x
SG . H
vDl STA'-
n
tl6to
. I"
I' x
YPl FL -1
%/
1 1 \\.
R-Iri
VP.T
STA I
-
1239.28
— — _
•
i /
�r I
I /
+123878
I I \ I I ,N
ii
I.I
I 111 11 I
it
\/,/
II
1238.28
!/
dp
I I
iII
I C
1 1 1
,11 Y STA.
m
) .-
++
1237.83
/
T•
I I I I
P Sf
- W
Pr&-i -
Q 1
I I 'L /
j
. 1XT/21
PT . 1=
Wl
C
�
I ._. — .— .�-
1
.
r. l -.'
YP . a. 17J7
1 1
123&08
I
____
I_I: - -'-'�;��_
✓' ,i / \
\
+12.3858
I
II
°
/ /
1
t
I
'j
1239,08
I
-- --;{W
/ `
8
J / t
I
I l \/
11 / /
I t
1 I I StII
1
/ i I
+
1239.58
1240.08
I r
one
I I l i
u / f
II
0 Jf /
F
1
_// / 1 // /
+
1240.58
3NIl 0i ' 1
�'
II
7
li
/ YI
�,
1241,08
1, //Ir "
_____
I-- //1
Xi
1
/VP13TA
- lSe.
YPc
/ J - `l /
71J100
`
$
\. .-, . _ - ..
l L__--_.� '— —' __ '-- J% '
\ \
INIA]
YP1 e.
F
1 C
\
1
'C- It X
+
VAT.
A - 7106
Yl
VAT.
-I241.73
/
j1p
/.
,.� / br l
T
/ •
/ _� \'-
7P
'
/ \
fl
Q1-
i J
cm
ASPEN RIDGE
a '� s PLANNED ZONING Crafton, Tull & Associates, Inc.
+ 2418 E AldSbW, &A 17MTIfl OK 74137.42e2
DISTRICT 91Me4a„7 FA 91l t&37S3 wia em.m ,D
$ a FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS Engineers & Surveyors
0
ASPEN RIDGE
PLANNED ZONING
DISTRICT
FAYETTEVILLE,ARKANSAS
Crafton, Tull S.
Assoc=TLdW 7413es, -42.
91t E91 7 FA - 91t 14.3783 On]/191 ]69
• 91&6B{A911 FAlt 91&6918199 wwr.vahJ.vm
Engineers & Surveyors
Washington County, AR
I certify this Instrument was filed on
02✓Q1/2005 02:15:31 PM
and recordad in Real Estate
File Number 2005 -
Bette Stam 00004788
Circ 't Clerk
by