HomeMy WebLinkAboutOrdinance 5156 ORDINANCE NO. 5156
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE XV: UNIFIED
DEVELOPMENT CODE OF THE CODE OF FAYETTEVILLE TO
AMEND CHAPTER 166: DEVELOPMENT IN ORDER TO
ADOPT STREET DESIGN AND ACCESS MANAGEMENT
DESIGN STANDARDS.
WHEREAS, the City of Fayetteville has adopted City Plan 2025 as its future land use plan;
and
WHEREAS, three of the six primary goals of City Plan 2025 are to: discourage suburban
sprawl, make traditional town form the standard, and to grow a livable transportation network; and
WHEREAS, the City of Fayetteville recognizes that street design and access management
standards will encourage the development of complete, compact and connected neighborhoods; and
WHEREAS, the City of Fayetteville recognizes that development that does not conform to
the desired standards may request variances or waivers from the adopted standards from the Planning
Commission at a public hearing,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS:
Section 1 . That Chapter 166: Development is amended by repealing and replacing all of section §
166.08 — Design Standards, a copy of which marked Exhibit "A" is attached hereto and made a part
hereof.
TR
�G •G\1 Y 0 SG'.
PASSED and APPROVED this the 5th day of August, 2008. ;v o° ' SFS
; FAYETTEVILLE ;
APPROVED: ATTEST:
ys,9QkANSPG,J�A �
By: By:
DAN CO D , Mayor SO RA E. SMITH, City Clerk/Treasurer
EXHIBIT "A"
Chapter 166: Development is amended by replacing §166.08 Design Standards with the following language .
166.08 Street Design and Access Management (4) Tangents. A straight tangent at least 100
Standards feet long shall separate reverse curves for
Collector and Arterial streets.
(A) Intent. These standards are intended to ensure
that development is designed to be inherently (5) Pedestrian. Pedestrian-vehicular conflict
safe, walkable, and efficient for the facilitation of points should be controlled through
traffic and pedestrian movements. signalized intersections and proven traffic
calming design principles.
(B) Fitness for development. Based on topographic
maps, soil surveys prepared by the Department (6) Street standards. All street requirements
of Agriculture and drainage information from the shall be met as set forth in the City of
Future Land Use Plan and the Hillside/Hilltop Fayetteville Master Street Plan and adopted
Overlay District, the Planning Commission may Minimum Street Standards.
require that steep grades, unstable soil and flood
plains be set aside and not subdivided until (E) Block Layout / Connectivity.
corrections are made to protect life, health, and
property. (1 ) Block Length. Block lengths and street
intersections are directly tied to the
(C) Applicability. The standards set forth herein shall functional hierarchy of the street pattern that
apply to land which is proposed to be developed exists or is proposed.
or redeveloped where the creation of public
streets are required, or proposed, or in which (a) Principal and Minor Arterial Streets.
new or existing access is created or modified. Signalized intersections should be
Developments that create private streets shall located at a minimum of one every
utilize these standards as guidelines. 2,640 feet (half a mile) along principal
and minor arterials and should be based
(D) Street design principles. on traffic warrants.
( 1 ) Extensions. All street extensions shall be (b) Collectors. Intersections should be
constructed to Minimum Street Standards. located at a minimum of one every
Street extension stub-outs to adjacent 1 ,320 feet (quarter of a mile) along
properties are required to meet block collector streets.
layout/connectivity standards unless existing
development or physical barriers prohibit (c) Locals. Intersections shall occur at a
such. minimum of one every 800 feet.
(2) Substandard widths. Developments that (d) Residential. Intersections shall occur at
adjoin existing streets shall dedicate a minimum of one every 600 feet.
additional right-of-way to meet the Master
Street Plan. (e) Variances. Block length standards may
be varied by the Planning Commission
(3) Street names. Names of streets shall be when terrain, topographical features,
consistent with natural alignment and existing barriers or streets, size or shape
extensions of existing streets, and new street of the lot, or other unusual conditions
names shall not duplicate or be similar to justify a departure.
existing street names. Developers shall
coordinate the naming of new streets (2) Topography. Local streets should be
through the GIS Office during the plat designed to relate to the existing topography
review process. and minimize the disturbance zone.
(3) Dead-end streets. Dead end streets are Length of Street Maximum Number of
discouraged and should only be used in Frontage Curb Cuts
situations where they are needed for design 0-100 ft. 1
and development efficiency, reduction of 101-250 ft. 2
necessary street paving, or where proximity 251 -500 ft. 3
to floodplains, creeks, difficult topography More than 500 ft. 4
or existing barriers warrant their use. All
dead end streets shall end in a cul-de-sac (c) Local and Residential Streets. Curb cuts
with a radius of 50 feet, or an alternative shall be located a minimum of 50 feet
design approved by the City and the Fire from the center line of an intersection or
Department. The maximum length of a dead driveway. In no case shall a curb cut be
end street (without a street stub-out) shall be located within the radius return of an
500 feet. adjacent curb cut or intersection. Curb
cuts shall be a minimum of fifteen (15 ')
(F) Access Management. Safe and adequate feet from the adjoining property line,
vehicular, bicycle, and pedestrian access shall be unless shared.
provided to all parcels. Local streets and
driveways shall not detract from the safety and Number of Curb Cuts Permitted
efficiency of bordering arterial routes. Property Length of Street Maximum Number of
that fronts onto two public streets shall place a Frontage Curb Cuts
higher priority on accessing the street with the 0-50 ft. 1
lower functional classification, ex. Local and 51- 125 ft. 2
Collector. 126-250 ft. 3
(1) Curb cut minimum distance from More than 250 ft. 4
intersection.
(a) Principal and Minor Arterial Streets. (d) Residential Subdivisions. In the case of
Where a street with a lower functional residential subdivisions, curb cuts shall
classification exists that can be be discouraged along arterial and
accessed, curb cuts shall access onto collector streets. When necessary, curb
those streets. When necessary, curb cuts cuts along arterial and collector streets
along arterial streets shall be shared shall be shared between two or more
between two or more lots. Where a curb lots. Curb cuts along all streets shall be
cut must access the arterial street, it located a minimum of five feet (5')
shall be located a minimum of 250 feet from the adjoining property line, unless
from the center line of an intersection or shared.
driveway.
(e) Variance. In order to protect the ingress
Number of Curb Cuts Permitted and egress access rights to a street of an
Length of Street Maximum Number of abutting property owner, a variance to
Frontage Curb Cuts the curb cut minimums shall be granted
ft. 1 by the Planning Commission to allow
0-500
0-500 ft. 2 an ingress/egress curb cut at the safest
3 functional location along the property.
1001 - 0500 .
Such a curb cut may be required to be
More than 1500 ft. 4 shared with an adjoining parcel if
feasible. If a parcel on the corner of an
(b) Collector Streets. Curb cuts shall be arterial or collector street provides such
located a minimum of 100 feet from the short frontage along a major street that
center line of an intersection or there is no safe ingress/egress functional
driveway. When necessary, curb cuts location on that street, the Planning
along collector streets shall be shared Commission may deny the curb cut or
between two or more lots. may limit such curb cut to ingress or
egress only.
Number of Curb Cuts Permitted
(2) Speed All streets should be designed to street lines or radial to curved street lines.
discourage excessive speeds. When a tract of land is subdivided into
larger than normal lots, such lots shall be so
(G) Non-conforming Access Features. arranged as to permit the logical location
and opening of future streets and appropriate
(1 ) Existing. Permitted access connections in resubdivision of the lots, with provisions for
place on the date of the adoption of this adequate utility connections for such
ordinance that do not conform with the resubdivision.
standards herein shall be designated as
nonconforming features and shall be brought (3) Developments outside city developed to all
into compliance with the applicable inside the city standards. If the City
standards under the following conditions: Council grants access to the City's sewer
system pursuant to § 51 . 113 (C) and the
(a) When new access connection permits owner/developer agrees to petition for
are requested; annexation as soon as legally possible and
develop the subdivision in accordance with
(b) Upon expansion or improvements all city development requirements including
greater than 50% of the assessed payment of all impact fees, the bulk and area
property value or gross floor area or requirements for this subdivision shall
volume; conform to those within the RSF4 Zoning
District rather than those within the planning
(c) As roadway improvements allow. area.
(H) Easements. Utility and drainage easements shall (Code 1965, App. C., Art. IV, §§C, D, F--H; Ord. No. 1750, 7-6-
be located along lot lines and/or street right-of- 70; Ord. No. 1801, 6-21 -71 ; Ord. No. 2196, 2-17-76; Ord. No.
way where necessary to provide for utility lines 2353, 7-5-77; Code 1991, §§ 159.45, 159.58, 159.51--159.53; Ord.
No. 4100, §2 (Ex. A), 6-16-98; Ord. 4757, 9-6-05; Ord. 4919, 9-
and drainage. The Planning Commission may 05-06)
require larger easements for major utility lines,
unusual terrain or drainage problems. Cross reference(s)--Bonds and Guarantees, Ch. 158;
Variances. Ch. 156; Notification and Public Hearings, Ch. 157
(1) Residential lots. The use and design of lots shall
conform to the provisions of zoning where City
zoning is in effect. When no City zoning
applies, the following standards shall govern
unless in conflict with more stringent city,
county or state regulations:
(1 ) Bulk and area regulations:
Planning Area
Lot area minimum 10,000 sq. ft.
Lot width minimum 75 ft.
Side setback 10 ft.
Front Sclback 25 ft.
Rear setback 20 ft.
Frontage on
improved street 75 ft.
(2) Size. The size and shape of the lots shall not
be required to conform to any stipulated
pattern, but insofar as practicable, side lot
lines should be at right angles to straight
O �
City of Fayetteville AIInl' II A `1 t
Staff Review Form
City Council Agenda Items 1 0a�l
or 1 "f ..""- 1_
Contracts
15-JUI-08
City Council Meeting Date
Leif Olson Long Range Planning Operations
Submitted By Division Department
Action Required:
ADM 07-2711 : (UDC Amendent - Chapter 166: Development - 166.08 Street Design and Access Management Ordinance):
Submitted by the City of Fayetteville. an ordinance amending Chapter 166— Development. to adopt Street Design and Access
Management Standards
Action Required: n/a n/a
Cost of this request Category/Project Budget Program Category / Pro'ect Name
n/a n/a n/a
Account Number Funds Used to Date Program / Project CategoryName
n/a n/a n/a
$
Project Number Remaining Balance Fund Name
Budgeted Item Budget Adjustment Attached
/
/)-7 O6 Previous Ordinance or Resolution # n/a
De�artmeennt D ector r Date( Original Contract Date: n/a
Original Contract Number: n/a
City Attorney Date
(as to form) ReClerk's Office
G l
Finance d Internal Service Director Date
Received in Mayor's Office
3 a
Mayor Date
Comments:
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO
To: Mayor and City Council
Thru : Gary Dumas, Director of Operations
Karen Minkel, Interim Long Range ;Planning Director
From: Lcif Olson, Long Range Planner
Date: June 25, 2008
Subject: UDC Amendment to Chapter 166.08 - Street Design and Access Management
Standards (ADM 07-2711 )
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of an ordinance amending Chapter 166 — Development to adopt
Street Design and Access Management Standards, as recommended by the Street Committee.
BACKGROUND
Staff was directed by elected officials to develop an access management plan that ensures that
development is designed to be inherently safe, walkable and efficient for the facilitation of traffic
and pedestrian movement . In addition, this was to further implement the adopted goals of the City
Council to create complete, compact and connected neighborhoods tluoughout the city. Planning
and Engineering staff have worked closely together since the fall of 2007 to create a clear,
consistent and enforceable ordinance. Many of the suggestions contained within the document are
modeled after ordinances from Bentonville and Rogers.
This ordinance was discussed at the May 12 and June 23, 2008 Street Committee meetings and
was forwarded to the City Council by a 3 to 1 vote at the June 23, 2008 Street Committee meeting
with a recommendation for approval.
The Street Design and Access Management ordinance was drafted and subsequent research and
graphic examples were created by Planning Staff because of specific requests from the Street
Committee for solutions to ongoing access and connectivity issues related to development.
Therefore, staff felt that it was appropriate to have the Street Committee discuss this item in order
to ensure that staff was proceeding in the right direction. Normally. the Planning Commission
would discuss and amend an ordinance changing the Unified Development Code prior to the item
moving forward to a body of the City Council . If the City Council so desires Planning Staff can
present this ordinance amendment to the Planning Commission for approval and bring this item
back at a later date. However, the UDC allows for ordinance amendments to be considered by the
City Council without referral from the Planning Commission (Section 154.01 (B) of the City of
Fayetteville Unified Development Code), and staff is proceeding as directed by the Street
Committee.
DISCUSSION
As noted, the Street Committee has considered the proposed ordinance on multiple occassions. In
addition, the City Attrorney has offered several policy questions and comments in the attached
memos. Staff recommends the ordinance that is presented as Exhibit "A` be considered for
adoption by the City Council.
BUDGET IMPACT
None.
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE XV: UNIFIED
DEVELOPMENT CODE OF THE CODE OF FAYETTEVILLE TO
AMEND CHAPTER 166: DEVELOPMENT IN ORDER TO
ADOPT STREET DESIGN AND ACCESS MANAGEMENT
DESIGN STANDARDS.
WHEREAS, the City of Fayetteville has adopted City Plan 2025 as its future land use plan;
and
WHEREAS, three of the six primary goals of City Plan 2025 are to: discourage suburban
sprawl, make traditional town form the standard, and to grow a livable transportation network; and
WHEREAS, the City of Fayetteville recognizes that street design and access management
standards will encourage the development of complete, compact and connected neighborhoods; and
WHEREAS, the City of Fayetteville recognizes that development that does not conform to
the desired standards may request variances or waivers from the adopted standards from the Planning
Commission at a public hearing,
NONV, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS:
Section 1 . That Chapter 106: D Velopnnent is amended by repealing and replacing all of section $ 166.08 —
Design Standards, a copy of which marked Exhibit "A" is attached hereto and made a part hereof.
i
r�
PASSED and APPROVED this the day of , 2008.
APPROVED:
t By.
DAN COODY, Mayor
ATTEST:
By.
SONDRA SMITH, City Clerk
EXHIBIT "A"
Chapter 166: Development is amender/ by replacing §166. Os Design Standards with dee following language.
166.08 Street Design and Access Management
Standards
(A) Invent. These standards are intended to ensure
that development is designed to be inherently (4) Tangents. A straight tangent at least 100
safe, walkable, and efficient for the facilitation of feel long shall separate reverse curves for
traffic and pedestrian movements. Collector and Arterial streets.
(13) Fitness for development. Based on topographic (5) 'Pedestrian. Pedestrian-vehicular conflict
maps, soil surveys prepared by the Department . f\points should - be controlled through
of Agriculture and drainage information from the - -'signalized intersections and proven traffic
Future Land Use Plan and the Hillsidell-lilltopf calming design principles.
Overlay District, the Planning Commission may
require that steep grades, unstable soil and flood ., ,�;. (6) Street 'slandards. All street , requirements
plains be set aside and not subdivided until slt' 11. 4 e' met as set forth in the City of
corrections are made to protect life, health, and v `^;, �* /Fayetteville Master Street Plan and adopted
property, Minimum Street Standards.
(C) Applicability. The standards set forth herein shall . ,.
apply to land which is proposed to be developed . (F) Block Layout / Connectivity.
or redeveloped where the creation of public ,
streets are required, or proposed, or in which ( 1 ) Block Length. Block lengths and street
new or existing access is created or modified. intersections are directly tied to the
Developments that create private streets shall functional hierarchy of the street pattern that
utilize these standards as guidelines. exists or is proposed. Waivers from the
' following maximum block length standards
(D) Street design principles. may be granted by the Planning
Commission, when justifiable.
( 1 ) Extensions. All sire& extensions shall be
constructed Io ,Minimum, Street Standards. (a) Principal and Minor Arterial Streets.
Signalized intersections should be
Street extension, atub-outs to adjacent g
properties are requAd to -meet block located at a minimum of one every
I layout/connectivity standards unless existing 2,640 feet (half a mile) along principal
development or Physical barriers prohibit and minor arterials and should be based
such. on traffic warrants.
l
(2) Substandard widills_?),evelopments that (b) Collectors. Intersections should be
adjoin existing.� .streets shall dedicate located at a minimum of one every
additional rig}ii-of-lvad� to meet the Master 1 .320 feet (quarter of a mile) along
Street Plan. ". collector streets.
(3) Street names. Names of streets shall be (c) Locals. Intersections shall occur at a
consistent with natural alignment and minimum of one every 800 feet.
extensions of existing streets, and new street
names shall not duplicate or be similar to (d) Residential. Intersections shall occur at
existing street names. Developers shall a minimum of one every 600 feet.
coordinate the naming of new streets
through the GIS Office during the plat
review process.
(2) Topography. Local streets should be Number of Curb Cuts Permitted
designed to relate to the existing topography Length of Street Maximum Number of
and minimize the disturbance zone. Frontage Curb Cuts
0- 100 ft. 1
(3) Dead-end streets. Dead end streets are 101 -250 ft. 2
discouraged and should only be used in 251 -500 ft. 3
situations dictated by difficult topography or More than 500 ft. 4
existing barriers to connecting adjoining
properties. All dead end streets shall end in a (c) Local and Residential Streets. Curb cuts
cul-de-sac with a radius of 50 feet, or an shall be�llocated a minimum of 50 feet
alternative design approved by the City and from die center line of an intersection or
the l=ire Department. The maximum length driveway- In no case shall a curb cut be
of a dead end street (without a street stub- locaied within the radius return of an
out) shall be 500 feel. adjacent, curb cut or intersection. Curb
-cuts shalLbe a minimum of fifteen ( 15 ')
(F) Access Management. Safe and adequate feet from ilie adjoining property line.
vehicular, bicycle, and pedestrian access shall be
provided to all parcels. Local streets and `-�
driveways shall not detract from the safety and Number of Curb Cuts Permitted
efficiency of bordering arterial routes. Property Length of Street Maximum Number of
that fronts onto two public streets shall place a
1=rontageCurb Cuts
higher priority on accessing the street with the 0-50 ft. I
lower functional classification, ex. Local and 51 - 125 f[. 2
Collector. n!`"'k
126-250 ft. 3
( 1 ) Curb cut minimum distance fram More than 250 fl. 4
intersection. "+
k (d) Residential Subdivisions. In the case of
(a) Principal and Minor Arterial Streets. -
Where a street with a lower : functional r - residential subdivisions, curb cuts shall
classification exists that can be be discouraged along arterial and
accessed, , curb cuts shall access onto collector streets. When necessary, curb
those streets. When necessary, curb cuts cuts along arterial and collector streets
along arterial streets shall be shared . shall be shared between two or more
between two or more lots. Where'a curb lots. Curb cuts along all streets shall be
�eut :must access the arterial street, it located a minimum of five feet (5')
shall be. located.a minimum of 250 feet from the adjoining property line.
*. from the center. finc of an intersection or
driveway.
(2) Speed. All streets should be designed to
Number of Curb Cuts Permitted - discourage excessive speeds.
Length of Street Maximum Number of
Fronts ez ' ' ' Curb Cuts (G) Aron-conforming Access Features.
0-500 ft. - 1 ( 1 ) Existing. permitted access connections in
501 - 1000 ft. 2 place on the date of the adoption of this
tool - 1500 ft. 3 ordinance that do not conform with the
More than 1500 fl. 4 standards herein. shall be designated as
nonconforming features and shall be brought
(b) Collector Streets. Curb cuts shall be into compliance with the applicable
located a minimum of 100 feet from the standards under the following conditions:
center line of an intersection or
driveway. When necessary, curb cuts r
aloe collector streets shall be shared (a) are
new access connection permits
g are requested;
between two or more lots.
(b) Upon expansion or improvements
greater than 50% of the assessed payment of all impact fees, the bulk and area
properly value or gross floor area or requirements for this subdivision shall
volume; conform to those within the RSFA Zoning
District rather than those within the planning
(c) As roadway improvements allow. area.
(H) Easements. Utility and drainage easements shall (Code 1965. App. C., An. IV, §§C. U. F--H: Ord. No. 1750, 7-6-
be located along lot lilies and/or street right-of- 70; Ord. No. 1801 , 6-21 -71 ; Ord. No. 2196. 2-17-76; Oid. No.
way where necessary IO provide for unlit lines 2353, 7-5-77; Code 1991 , §§159.45, 159.58, 159.51 --159.53; Ord.
Y rY p Y No. 4100, §2 (Ex. A), 6-16-98; Ord. 4757, 9-6-05; Oid. 4919, 9-
and drainage. The Planning Commission may 05-06)
require larger easements for major utility lines,
unusual terrain or drainage problems. Cross reference(s)—Bonds and Guannices. Ch. 158;
Variances. Ch. 156; Notification and Public lieanngs. Ch. 157.
(1) Residential lots. The use and design of lots shall
conform to the provisions of zoning where City
zoning is in effect. When no City zoning
applies, the following standards shall govern
unless in conflict with more stringent city,
county or state regulations:
( 1 ) Bulk and area regulations: �� �� `>
Planning Area
Lot area minium 10,000 sq. (t.
Lot width minimum 75 ft.
Side setback 10 fl.� "�,.
L
nt Setback F 25 fl.r setback !ntageonroved street
(2) Size. The size and shape of the lots shall not
be required to conform to "any stipulated
pattern, but insofar as. practicable, side lot
lines should be at right angles to straight
street lines or radial to curved street lines.
When a tract of land is subdivided into
larger than normal lots, such lots shall be so
arranged as to permit the logical location
and opening of future streets and appropriate
resubdivision of the lots, with provisions for
adequate utility connections for such
resubdivision.
(3) Developments outside city developed to all
inside the city standards. If the City
Council grants access to the City's sewer
system pursuant to § 51 . 113 (C) and the
owner/developer agrees to petition for
annexation as soon as legally possible and
develop the subdivision in accordance with
all city development requirements including
�lyJt'e LLe Il le
f ARKANSAS
THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE , ARKANSAS
STREET COMMITTEE MEMO
To: Street Committee Members
Through : Karen Minkel, Interim Long Range Planning Director
Ron Petrie, City Engineer
From : Leif Olson, Long Range Planner
Date: June 18, 2008
Subject: Access Management Ordinance
Background :
Following the Street Committee meeting of May 12, 2008, Planning Staff began a project
to apply the proposed street connectivity regulations in order to compare them with the
typical sub-division design that has been constructed in the recent past. Staff created two
different scenarios on the same tracts of land located west of Rupple Rd. and south of
Persimmon St. This area is relatively flat with a significant flood plain bisecting the 40
acre quarter sections.
In the first scenario, Planning Staff laid out a series of streets in a typical cul-de-sac
design with low connectivity. Like most of the development in the surrounding area the
homes face inward on dead-end streets. Access is limited by a small number of
connections with adjoining subdivisions and collector and arterial streets. Neighbors that
live in close proximity, but on different cul -de-sacs, are required to travel a long distance
by street to visit one another. On a small scale, this type of development pattern may not
look that bad. However, after complete build-out, the conglomeration of this kind of
development creates disjointed auto-centric sprawl accessed by way of a board fence
lined collector street. This neighborhood discourages pedestrian traffic and increases
vehicular traffic congestion at the small number of points of ingress and egress along the
surrounding arterial and collector streets.
The second scenario utilizes the proposed street connectivity standards. A grid street
pattern is established utilizing local , residential, low-impact and alley cross-sections.
There is a high degree of connectivity. Houses front onto the collector and 'local streets,
and alleys provide access to minimize curb cuts along collector streets. Cul-de-sacs are
utilized in situations that warrant them, such as proximity to the floodplain. This type of
development pattern provides superb walkability and fits into the larger context of what
is required to make great neighborhoods. A traditional grid also allows for change over
time and the ability to provide a mix of housing types and sizes.
The following is a breakdown of the buildable lot area and the square footage of the
proposed streets and alleys within the development scenarios.
Conclusion:
The benefits of a grid street network can be measured in both city infrastructure
efficiencies and community cohesiveness. Benefits to city infrastructure include:
• Efficient dispersal of vehicular traffic in the context of the larger neighborhood,
• "Looping' of water and sewer services is preferable,
• Emergency services have multiple points of neighborhood entry,
• Solid waste, school buses and delivery services gain efficiency,
• Increased alternative transportation opportunities reduce automobile dependence
and lead to less traffic congestion.
Benefits to the greater community and neighborhood include:
• Superbly walkable neighborhoods,
• Promotes active lifestyles for people of all ages,.
• Reduces automobile dependency for all ages,
• Encourages a mixture of housing types, sizes and densities,
• Promotes mixed use neighborhoods — residentially as well as commercially.
Planning Staff recommends that the Street Committee forward the proposed Street
Design, Block Layout/Connectivity and Access Management ordinance to the full City
Council for discussion and adoption.
Street
Pavement in
Total
Area
Buildable
Area
Street Pavement S.F.
Project
Cul-De-Sac
5,809,202.7 Sq.
Ft.
/ 133 Acres
5,
193,174 Sq.
Ft.
/119 Acres
616, 028.7
Sq. FL /14 Acres
11"/0
Traditional Grid
5,809,202.7 Sq.
Ft.
1133 Acres
5,
194. 189 Sq.
Ft.
/ 119 Acres
615, 013.5
Sq. FL /14 Acres
11%
• i:Jj
V 'ti
e•
C
{a 'ettvffle
ARKANSAS
THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS
STREET COMMITTEE MEMO
To: Street Committee Members
Through: Tim Conklin, Planning and Development Management Director
Ron Petrie, City Engineer
From: Leif Olson, Long Range Planner
Date: November 27. 2007
Subject: Access Management Ordinance
Background:
Access Management is generally defined as: a means of ingress or egress between a
public street and abutting property or the intersection of public streets. In lay terms,
access is also defined as entrances or driveways from properties to a public street system.
Access management is needed because the City's street system serves to move through
traffic while also enabling access to adjacent properties. The efficiency and safety of the
street system is impacted by the frequency and character of traffic interruptions and
vehicular turning movements. Conflicts are created by vehicular movements to and from
businesses, residences, streets and other developments.
The goal of an Access Management Policy is to preserve roadway capacity and create a
safer environment for the entire transportation network by:
- Reducing the number of conflicts
- Separating potential conflict points
- Removing or minimizing turning vehicles and queues from through traffic movements
- Protecting the City's investment in the current and future capacity of the roadway
- Ensuring that access to future development is planned in the safest and most effective
manner
The benefit of adopting a strict and enforceable Access Management Ordinance is to
provide a safe street system and decreasing the number of severe crashes and congestion.
The public receives operational benefits when conflicts points are minimized or
separated, street capacity is increased, delays are reduced and the free flow of traffic is
expedited. Environmental benefits are also gained because vehicle emissions are reduced,
fuel economy is increased, and travel time' is reduced.
The Unified Development Ordinance currently regulates street design, connectivity and
access management in Chapter 166: Development, Section 166.08 Design Standards.
Currently curb cuts are allowed no closer than 50 feet from an intersection for local
streets and 60 feet for collector and arterial streets. The distance between curb cuts is a
minimum of 25 feet for local streets and 30 feet for collector and residential streets.
While these standards are straight forward and enforceable, they are not necessarily
appropriate for all development generally. Streets with high traffic volumes or travel
speeds such as collectors and arterials need a much larger spacing between such conflict
points.
Access Management Ordinance Intent:
The Planning Staff was directed by the elected officials to develop an access management
plan that would ensure that development is designed to be inherently safe, walkable and
efficient for the facilitation of traffic and pedestrian movements. The regulations
currently in place are not as specific or as binding as what is desired in order to achieve
safe and accessible development patterns.
Planning and Engineering staff have worked to develop a policy that will be
unambiguous and enforceable. The Access Management Ordinance that is proposed was
modeled after the policies that have been adopted in Bentonville and Rogers. The City
Attorney has raised issues with some of the "shall" statements that are included in the
proposed regulations. For instance Section 166.08(E) (1) (c) Locals reads: "Intersections
shall occur at a minimum of one every 800 feet". The City Attorney would prefer to
make all "shall" statements into "should" statements. Staff feels that to make these
changes per the City Attorney's advice would make the ordinance non -binding and
difficult for staff to enforce.
Resources:
The following links are access management policies and ordinances that have been
developed and adopted by other regional municipalities:
Bentonville's Access Management Requirements
See Page I l of 20 - SEC. 1100.9 ACCESS REQUIREMENTS
http://www.bentonvillear.com/docs/planning/subdivision_regulations/art 1100design _sta
ndards.pdf
Rogers's Access Management Requirements
http://www.rogersarkansas.com/planning/Accessmanagernent doc %20(4).pdf
Recommendation:
Staff recommends that the Street Committee forward the Draft Access Management
Policy to the City Council for adoption with no amendments to the current language.
AYETTEVILLE
THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS
KIT WILLIAMS, CITY ATTORNEY
DAVID W HITAKER, ASST. CITY ATTORNEY
DEPARTMENTAL CORRESPONDENCE LEGAL DEPARTMENT
TO: City Council Street Committee
FROM: Kit Williams, City Attorney �--
DATE: May 10, 2008 ----____........_...__.__...._.__....
RE: Street Design Standards
At least as far back as 1976 and probably much earlier, Dead-end or cul-de-
sac streets have been authorized and regulated by the Fayetteville Code of
Ordinances. These regulations have not prohibited or discouraged dead-end
streets, but tried to limit their length to 500' in ordinary terrain and 1,000' in hilly
terrain. (Ordinance No. 1801 of 6-21-71; Ordinance No. 2196 of 2-17-76;
Appendix IV §D of the 1965 Code of Fayetteville).
The 1991 Code of Fayetteville as supplemented through January 1998 had
somewhat more detailed requirements for street construction, but continued to
allow and not discourage dead-end streets. (See §159.49 Street design
principles of the 1991 Code of Fayetteville) Three of these street design
principles probably encourage dead-end streets. First, subsection (G) "Through
traffic. Local Street systems should be designed to . minimize through traffic
movements." Disallowing dead-end streets so that every street is on a grid system
encourages through traffic on this grid system of local streets. Through traffic is
discouraged by dead-end streets.
Second, subsection "(J) Economy. A minimum amount of space should be
devoted to street uses." Use of dead-end or cul-de-sac streets in new subdivisions
often reduces the amount of street surface needed to access housing lots.
Finally, "(L) Street pattern. The arrangement of local streets should permit
economical and practical patterns, shapes and sizes of development parcels."
Requiring all streets to connect (grid pattern) necessarily prevents the design
option of cul-de-sacs to efficiently and practically use different shapes and sizes of
development parcels.
So, ten years ago (and for at least 20 years before then) the
Fayetteville Code's development section's street design principles favored at least
the occasional use of dead-end or cul-de-sac streets to discourage through traffic
and promote efficiency and practicality.
The development code went through two major reviews and codification
(1998 Unified Development Ordinance and 2003 Unified Development Code).
The street design principles in code have remained exactly the same as to dead-end
streets. §166.08 Design Standards (C) Street design principles. Subsection (7)
Through traffic still states: "Local street systems should be designed to minimize
through traffic movements."
Subsections (10) Economy and (12) Street pattern also remain unchanged
and thus supportive of the availability of dead-end streets in the developer's tool
box.
There is a new subsection (15) Dead-end streets which now require a 50'
radius cul-de-sac. There is even a one-third of a page chart on dead-end street
design criteria (Chapter 166, page 31).
Dead-end streets that would not connect over Mount Sequoyah were
mandated by •a unanimously supported 1996 City Council Resolution which was
reaffirmed a few years ago by this City Council.
In the face of unanimous and clear City Council intent to allow dead-end
streets and cul-de-sacs, Planning Staff has presented a revised §166.08 Street
Design Standards that basically would outlaw future dead-end streets unless a
developer can prove a dead-end street is "dictated by difficult topography or
existing barriers to connecting adjoining properties." Even short cul-de-sacs
designed to most efficiently use a developer's land or avoid having to build a
bridge over a creek would now be denied by the Planning Commission.
It is probably within the City Council's lawful power to reverse the decades
old policy of at least allowing, if not promoting, the occasional use of dead-end
streets or cul-de-sacs. The policy question for the City Council is: Do you want to
remove a new home buyer's choice to live on a cul-de-sac because you "know
better" than the citizens where they should live?
PA
Our General Land Use Plans (2010, 2020 and 2025) have long generally
promoted connectivity. I believe these general guidelines have been enough to
prevent any real problems with new developments and new cul-de-sacs. What
development approved in the past decade has had so many dead-end or cul-
de-sac streets that our Planning Department thinks it should not have been
approved? There should be a major problem, not just an academic or theoretical
concern, before an established principle is reversed. This is especially true when
the government seeks to restrict one of its citizens' most important rights ... where
to live.
I was on the City Council in the 90's when we approved Mayor Coody's —
well designed, attractive and desirable development at the end of a long dead-end
street, Rogers Drive. Should the City have forced Mayor Coody to build a street
"to connecting adjoining properties" such as the Methodist Assembly land or down
to Happy Hollow? Such a policy would serve only to destroy land and trees and to
waste money, thereby driving up the costs for home owners. Instead Mayor Coody
wisely preserved most of his land. The development ordinances worked well
allowing an efficient, ecologically beneficial design, even though it extended a
dead-end street.
The current Unified Development Code's restrictions on the length of a
dead-end street coupled with our General Land Use Plan's encouragement of
connectivity have served Fayetteville well. Planning's suggested change appears
to be a solution in search of a problem that does not really exist.
The City Council needs to realize the significance of the amendment
proposed by -the Planning Department. This would, in effect, ban virtually any
new cul-de-sac or dead-end street in Fayetteville.
J
3
166.08 Street Design, Block Layout!
Connectivity and Access Management
Standards
(A) Intent. These standards are intended to ensure
that development is designed to be inherently
safe, walkable, and efficient for the facilitation of
traffic and pedestrian movements.
(B) Fitness for development. Based on topographic
maps, soil surveys prepared by the Department
of Agriculture and drainage information from the
Future Land Use Plan and the Hillside Overlay
District, the Planning Commission may require
that sleep grades, unstable soil and flood plains
be set aside and not subdivided until corrections
are made to protect life, health, and property.
(C) Applicability. The standards set forth herein shall
apply to land which is proposed to be developed
or redeveloped in which the creation of public
streets are required or proposed or in which new
or existing access is created or modified.
Developments which create private streets shall
utilize these standards as guidelines.
(D) Street design principles.
(1) Extensions. All street extensions shall be
constructed to Minimum Street Standards.
Street extension stub -outs to adjacent
properties are required- t�::meet block
layouUconnectivily standards unless existing
development or' physical barriers' prohibit
such.
(2) Substandard widths. Subdivisions. that
adjoin existing streets. shall dedicate
additional right-of-way to rneet the minimum
widths listed.
(3) Street names. Names of streets shall be
consistent with natural alignment and
extensions of existing streets, and new street
names shall not duplicate:.or be similar to
existing street names. ,Developers shall
coordinate the naming of new streets
through the:GIS Office during the plat review
process.
(4) Tangents. A straight tangent at least 100
feet long shall separate reverse curves for
Collector and Arterial streets.
(5) Pedestrian. Pedestrian -vehicular conflict
points should be controlled through
signalized intersections and proven traffic
calming design principles.
(6) Street standards. All street requirements
shall be met as set forth in the City of
Fayetteville Master Street Plan and adopted
Minimum Street Standards.
(E) Block Layout / Connectivity.
(1) Block Length. Block lengths and street
intersections are directly tied to the
functional hierarchy of the street pattern that
exists or -is proposed. Waivers from the
following maximum block length standards
may be granted by the Planning
Commission, when justifiable.
(a) Principal and Minor Arterials. Signalized
intersections should be located at a
minimum of one every 2,640 feet (half a
mile) along principal and minor arterials
and should be based on traffic warrants.
(b) Collectors. Intersections should be
located at a miriimum of one every
1,320 feet (quarter of 'a mile) along
collector streets.
(c) Locals. Intersections shall occur at a
minimum of one every 800 feet.
(d) Residential. Intersections shall occur at
a minimum of one every 600 feet.
(2) Topography. Local streets should be
designed to relate to the existing topography
and minimize the disturbance zone.
(3) Dead-end streets. Dead end streets are
discouraged and should only be used in
situations dictated by difficult topography or
existing barriers to connecting adjoining
properties. All dead end streets shall end in
a cul-de-sac with a radius of 50 feet, or an
alternative design approved by the City and
the Fire Department. The maximum length of
_ a dead end street (without a street stub -out)
shall be 500 feet.
(F) Access Management. Safe and adequate
vehicular, bicycle, and pedestrian access shall be
7 provided to all parcels. Local streets and
driveways shall not detract from the safety and
efficiency of bordering arterial routes. Property
that fronts onto two public streets shall place a
higher priority on accessing the street with the
lower functional classification, ex. Local and
Collector.
{i)' Curb cut minimum distance from
intersection.
(a) Principal and Minor Arterial. Where a
street with a lower functional
classification exists that can be
FAYETTEYI .;I E
THE QTY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS
KIT WILLIAb1S, CITY ATTORNEY
DAVID WInTAKER, ASST. CITY ATTORNEY
CORRESPONDENCE
iPC Al Tien. omn
... ..._,. . A
TO: City Council
CC: Tim Conklin, Planning & Development Planning Director
Leif Olson, City Planner
FROM: Kit Williams, City Attorney
DATE: December 12, 2007
RE: Proposed Amendments to §166.08 Design Standards
When the proposed 'changes to §166.08 Design Standards (for.streets) of
the UDC was considered by the Street Committee on Monday (December 10th), it
had been about three months since I had reviewed the Planning Department's
proposal and suggested numerous changes. I had not been provided a copy of the
Planning Department's memo before the meeting and so was pretty rusty about
their proposal. I probably did not explain my concerns very well to the Street
Committee. Therefore, I have prepared this memo to explain some of the
significantchanges to current City policy as enacted in the Unified Development
Code that will occur if this proposal is adopted.
You might want to compare our current §166.08 Design Standards of the
Unified Development Code (attached) to the proposed new § 166.08 Street
Design, Block Layout/Connectivity and Access Management Standards to
ensure you are aware of all of the changes being proposed.
INTENT
The changes begin in the first subsection (A) Intent that would in the future
state that these "standards are intended to ensure that development is designed to
be inherently safe, walkable and efficient ...." Currently these "standards are
intended to help the developer achieve development that is safe, efficient,
pleasant, economical to build and easy to maintain."
CONNECTIVITY -
In the proposed standards, "Street extension stub -outs to adjacent properties
are required to meet block layout/connectivity standards No such
requirement exists in the current subsection. This requirement works in tandem
with the new virtual ban on dead-end streets found in §166.08 (E)(3), and
discussed below.
DEAD-END STREETS
Although dead-end streets now require a cul-de-sac with a radius of 50 feet,
they may extend up to 1,000 feet in "Hilly" areas (where several now already
probably extend that far — Lovers Lane, 28th Street, Rogers Drive). Our current
standards do not "discourage" dead-end streets, nor state they "should only be
used in situations dictated by difficult topography or existing barriers to
connecting adjoining properties." This newly proposed language seems to run
counter to City Council's previous unanimous rejection of forced connectivity over
Mt. Sequoyah (which had also been proposed by the Planning Department in the
90's)_
Although planning theorists dislike dead-end streets, many citizens all, over
our nation and within Fayetteville have chosen to buy a home on a dead-end street
where available. Should government remove that choice from new home buyers
because government "knows better" than its citizens? Our current regulations in
§ 166.08 place restrictions as to length for dead-end streets, but otherwise allow our
citizens the opportunity to choose whether to live on a grid street or cul-de-sac.
The "should only be used in. situations dictated by difficult topography or
existing barriers" language would probably be interpreted and used by the Planning
Commission to ban virtually any new cul-de-sacs. So if the City Council wants to
ban deadend streets, this is the appropriate language to adopt. If you wish to
continue the current UDC's regulations that allow developers and new home buyers
the freedom to .have homes on cul-de-sacs, then the above restrictive language
should not be adopted.
TANDEM LOTS
I recommend against using "shall" in subsection (E) Access Management
which would require pedestrian access "to all parcels." A tandem lot is a parcel
without sufficient street frontage and is allowed only by a conditional use granted
._...._.___ ._:..
by the Planning Commission to be behind a parcel with adequate street frontage.
There are many tandem lots throughout Fayetteville (some predating our
regulations). Requiring sidewalk access back behind the house on the street for a
house without street frontage seems illogical. Changing "shall" to "should" would
alleviate those situations where sidewalks make no sense. I would also remove
"bicycle" from "vehicular, bicycle and pedestrian access" since bicycles are
vehicles and share the same access rights in most cases.
CURB CUTS
The primary reason for this ordinance should be to lengthen the distance
between allowed curb cuts (as our neighbors to the north have already done).
However, we cannot legally prohibit curb cuts on arterials or collectors simply
because a lot also has frontage on a lower classified street (unless we want to pay
the owner for taking his access easement). Therefore the proposed new (F)(1)(a)
a
needs to be redrafted to remove the language that "curb cuts shall access only those
(lower functional classification) streets." I also recommend my other proposed
changes to F (1) which will give Planning Staff and developers more flexibility,
but still result in fewer curb cuts and more shared driveways.
CONCLUSION
This is important legislation that proposes numerous far-reaching changes in
our current Unified Development Code policy and regulations. Thus, it should be
examined and considered very carefully, sentence -by -sentence. Examples of
current application and proposed application (including possible unintended
consequences) Could be considered for each new subsection. The City Council
Street Committee or Ordinance Review Committee may wish to forward the
current and newly proposed § 166.08 to local developers for their input. The
developers might note unanticipated consequences or technical issues that we
could have missed.
FA TTE LI
THE CITY Of FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS
KIT WILLIAMS, CITY ATTORNEY
DAVID WHITAKER, ASST. CITY ATTORNEY
)EPARTMENTAL CORRESPONDENCE LEGAL DEPARTMENT
TO: Dan Coody, Mayor
Jeremy Pate, Director of Current Planning
Tim Conklin, Planning & Development Management Director
FROM: Kit Williams, City Attorney ��
DATE: September 6, 2007
RE: Access Management, Curb Cuts
I have reviewed the proposed changes to the City's access
management code sections of the UDC and have written suggested changes
in red (attached). My changes in the Block Layout section merely states
what I believe is more clear language than what Planning is recommending.
I also used the "should" language of arterials and collectors for locals and
residentials rather than their "shall" wording.
In (F) Access Management, the first sentence uses mandatory "shall"
language that could have unanticipated problems (such as with tandem lots:
should we require public sidewalk to access all rear tandem lots?)
The biggest legal problem is in (F)(1)(a) which attempts to prohibit
access to arterials or collectors if a lot also fronts on a lower classification
street. This has clearly been rejected in every case I have found. Just as
with the rest of this paragraph, replacing "shall" with "should" removes the
illegal mandatory prohibition while expressing the City's preference and
goals of better and safer traffic management. The "should" also makes our
development ordinance more flexible so that unusual land or lot
configurations can be more sensibly addressed. The mandatory "shall"
could force us to reject a proposal that actually makes sense in the context
proposed-
1664011 Street'Destgn,=Block Layout:/
Cobnechvity''antl`A&ess Management
Standards
(A) Intent. These standards are intended to ensure
that development is designed to he inherently
safe, walkable, and efficient for the facilitation of
traffic and pedestrian movements.
(B) Fitness for development. Based on topographic
maps, soil surveys prepared by the Department
of Agriculture and drainage information from the
Future Land Use Plan and the Hillside Overlay
District, the Planning Commission may require
that steep grades, unstable soil and flood plains
be set aside and not subdivided until corrections
are made to protect life, health, and property.
(C)
(D) Street design principles.
(1) Extensions. All street extensions shall be
constructed to Minimum Street Standards:
Street extension stub outs to adjacent
properties are required -to- meet block
layouticonnectivity standards unless existing
development or physical barriers:prohibit
such.
(2). Substandard widths. Subdivisions that
adjoin existing streets .Shall dedicate
additional:ht-of-way to meet the minimum
widths fisted. (3).Street -names. Names, of streets shall be
consistent with natural alignment. and
extensions of existing streets, and new street
names.shall not duplicate or be similar to
existing street names. DevelopePs �, shall
coordma'te'^the naming stryedts
ihrou' hth I `r `
g e,G S O[fii:b.dunng,Ihe;plat.•,revieiv Jl�
prodess: --..
(4)s•Tangdhts _ A�stre$ghtYtangentat,least .100
feet long,.sfitl�separ'�t•r,'ieverse curves: for
Collecfor and'Adenal streets.
Fayetteville Master Street Plan and adopted
Minimum Street Standards.
(E)e: Block Lay,( ut /Connectivity. -
4.l- ( j
(5) Pedestrian. Pedestrian -vehicular conflict
points should be controlled through
signalized intersections and proven traffic
calming design principles.
L fa
(d) ,Res' _ "r ec ion' rsha ,oc'lf cur•at� r _& (`c
( tq . irj nirr�um of afie e' 600 fe$t:n 574.E
(2) Topaogi2phy local streets,, should be
destgri$d fo relate oche existing topography
andmrnlmrze'ihe d!si_ufl5an_ce;2one:
(1) Curb '.;cut minimum distance` from
in78rsecfior6
(6) Street standards. All street requirements (a) Ptmeipa! and Minor Arterial. Where,a
shall be met as set forth in the City of street snn0r a- Itiwerr.:funcbonal
classiGcahon- ezisfs bal
ny
D
i
/DLa"1`�rf
at-'
NGrribeftoff:C;urbtt
uts`=P.ef%n tied o,u 4 r+
Length Q&Stcgetfronlage_`
Ma`wm`urh'Number of eurti
Cuts
1
50'1=1` _00:0
2
10011="15 Oft?
3
Moi_e tFiatht$06:R
4
2.
Nt7in"'ber of Cub:`Cuf's,Pe m iterl
Length of Stfee_Vre6ntago
Maxim'u'm-Nufbb'er of Curb
Cuts
04MI.
7.
_01;250'01
Z
25j51')D,"ft'
3
Motet 5it500-rL
1 1 (F)::
SWVK
Niinitief;of Curti -',Cuts Permitted
Length o(Sireet'Ft'htaye
Mm of Curb
Cuts
0=50A'
1
5:1 ;1ZSA:
2
126250 Nh-
3
MOre hah OOA.
- 4
Speed. All streets should be designed to
discourage excessive speeds.
cpnforming Access, Features.
(a). When nest' access -,connection permits
are rel)uesteN.
(b) Upon• - expansion Cl improvements
greater than 50% of. the assessed
property value 'or gross floor area or
volur ee;
' i•L4 (c)- Asroadway ietiprogemehts,atlow
(G) Easements. Utility and drainage easements shall
be located along lot lines and/or street right-of-
way where necessary to provide for utility lines
and drainage. The Planning Commission may
require larger easements for major utility lines,
unusual terrain or drainage problems.
(H) Residential lots. The use and design of lots shall
conform to the provisions of zoning where City
zoning is in effect. When no City zoning applies,
the following standards shall govern unless in
conflict with more stringent city, county or state
regulations:
(1) Bulk and area regulations:
Planning Area
Lot area minimum
10,000 sq. Ii.
Lot width
minimum
75 ft.
Side setback
10 fl.
Rear setback
20 ft.
Frontage on
improved street
75 ft
(2) Size. The size and shape of the lots shall
not be required to conform to any stipulated
pattern, but insofar as practicable, side lot
lines should be at right angles to straight
street lines or radial to curved street lines.
When a tract of land is subdivided into larger
than normal lots, such lots shall be so
arranged as to permit the logical location and
opening of future streets and appropriate
i
" oz
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO
To: Mayor and City Council
Thru: Gary Dumas, Director of Operations
Karen Minkel, Interim Long Range Planning Director
From: Leif Olson, Long Range Planner
Date: July 25, 2008
Subject: UDC Amendment to Chapter 166.08 - Street Design and Access Management
Standards (ADM 07-2711)
Staff recommends approval of an ordinance amending Chapter 166 — Development to adopt
Street Design and Access Management Standards.
BACKGROUND
The City Attorney and Planning Staff worked on some additional changes to the language of the
ordinance in order to clarify the variance process and remove inconsistencies. With these
additional changes both the City Attorney and Staff can support the legality and the effectiveness
of this ordinance. The major changes were to: add variance language to the block
layout/connectivity section, clarify situations where cul-de-sacs are warranted, and add variance
language to the access management section. The attached ordinance shows the new language in a
bold font.
BUDGE]' IMPACT
None.
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE XV: UNIFIED
DEVELOPMENT CODE OF THE CODE OF FAYETTEVILLE TO
AMEND CHAPTER 166: DEVELOPMENT IN ORDER TO
ADOPT STREET DESIGN AND ACCESS MANAGEMENT
DESIGN STANDARDS.
WHEREAS. the City of Fayetteville has adopted City Plan 2025,as its future land use plan:
and "}
a
WHEREAS, three of the six primary goals of City ',Plan'2025,are to: discourage suburban
sprawl, make traditional town form the standard, and to grow alivable transportation network; and
WHEREAS, the City of Fayetteville recognizesthat street design4and access management
standards will encourage the development of complete; compact and connected neighborhoods; and
;Y:. l`y
WHEREAS, the City of Fayetteville recogiizes that development that does not conform to
the desired standards may request variances or waiv rs from the adopted standards from the Planning
Commission at a public hearing, \ J. 7
t.. ,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINEDBY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS:
Section I. That Chapter. 166DeVelopment is. amended by repealing -and replacing all of section § 166.08 —
Design Standards, a copy of which marked Exhibit "A".is attached hereto and made a part hereof
vA j
m
I 1
PASSED and APPROVED this the day of. , 2008.
�� APPROVED:
DAN COODY, Mayor
ATTEST:
By:
SONDRA SMITH. City Clerk
EXHIBIT "A"
Chapter 166: Development is amended by replacing §166.08 Design Standards with dze following language.
166.08 Street Design and Access Management
Standards
(A) Intent. These standards are intended to ensure
that development is designed to be inherently
safe. walkable. and efficient for the facilitation of
traffic and pedestrian movements.
(B) Fitness for development. Based on topographic
maps, soil surveys prepared by the Department
of'Agriculture and drainage information from the
Future Land Use Plan and the Hillside/Hilltop
Overlay District, the Planning Commission may
require that steep grades, unstable soil and flood
plains be set aside and not subdivided until
corrections are made to protect life, health, and
property. F
(C) Applicability. The standards set forth herein shall .
apply to land which is proposed to be developed
or redeveloped where the creation of public
streets are required, or proposed,., or in which-`
new or existing accessris created or modified'.,• ,;,
Developments that create privatestreets shall
utilize these standards as guidelines.
(D) Street design principles.
(1) Extensions:` aAll street extensions shall 6e -
constructed•toMinimum'Street Standards.
'
Street extension _stub -outs - to adjacent
properties are required to meet block
layout/connectivity standards unless existing
development or physical barriers prohibit
• such:
I.
(2) Suhstandatd'svidths. /'Developments that
adjoin existipg._st eets shall dedicate
additional right-of-way to meet the Master
Street Plan. '"vr
(3) Street names. Names of streets shall be
consistent with natural alignment and
extensions of existing streets, and new street
names shall not duplicate or be similar to
existing street names. Developers shall
coordinate the naming of new streets
through the GIS Office during the plat
review process.
(4) Tangents.,'"A-straight tangent at least 100
feet long'sii ll separate reverse curves for
CollectorTand Arterial streets.
(5) 'P de 7ria . 'Pedestrian -vehicular conflict
xpoints should, be controlled through
'signalized intersections and proven traffic
• ,j'�'' calming design principles.
(6) SireePstandnrds. All 'street, requirements
•`
shall be met as set forili'ih the City of
A.- 6n. Qr
s„`,) ¢!Fayetteville Master Street Plan and adopted
�f,Mrmmum Street Standards.
(E) Block Layout/ Connectivity.
•' > (1)' Block Length. ]31ock lengths and street
intersections are directly tied to the
functional hierarchy of the street pattern that
exists or is proposed.
(a) Principal and Minor Arterial Streets.
Signalized intersections should be
located at a minimum of one every
2,640 feet (half a mile) along principal
and minor arterials and should be based
on traffic warrants.
(b) Collectors. Intersections should be
located at a minimum of one every
1,320 feet (quarter of a mile) along
collector streets.
(c)
Locals. Intersections
shall
occur at a
minimum of one every
800
feet.
(d) Residential. Intersections shall occur at
a minimum of one every 600 feet.
(e) Variances. Block length standards may
be varied by the Planning
Commission when terrain,
topographical features, existing
barriers or streets, size or shape of
the lot, or other unusual conditions
justify a departure.
(2) Topography. Local streets should be
designed to relate to the existing topography
and minimize the disturbance zone.
(3) Dead-end streets. Dead end streets are
discouraged and should only be used in
situations where they are needed for
design and development efficiency,
reduction of necessary street paving, or
where proximity to floodplains, creeks,
difficult topography or existing barriers
warrant their use. All dead end streets shall
end in a cul-de-sac with a radius of 50 feet,
or an alternative design approved by the
City and the Fire Department. The
maximum length of a dead end street
(without a street stub -out) shall be 500 feet.
center line of an intersection or
driveway. When necessary, curb cuts
along collector streets shall be shared
between two or more lots.
Number of Curb Cuts Permitted
Length of Street
Frontage
Maximum Number of
Curb Cuts
0-100 ft.
l
101-250 ft.
2
251-500 ft. it "
3
More than 500 ft't"' J
4
(c) Local and Residential Streets. Curb cuts
f.. shall be`located a minimum of 50 feet
from the`center line of an intersection or
driveway. In no case shall a curb cut be
'-''- located within -tile -radius return of an
Ar adjacent curb cut`' or' intersection. Curb
cuts shall be a minimumof fifteen (15')
,� feel from the adjoining/property line,
(F) Access Management. Safe and adequate '`imlessshared.
vehicular, bicycle, and pedestrian access shall be "
provided to all parcels. Local streets `and
driveways shall not detract from the safety'
efficiency of bordering arterial routes. Property'
that fronts onto two public streets shall place'a
higher priority on accessing the street with the
lower functional classification, ex. Local an"d
Collector.
(1) Curb cut minimum distance from •..
Number of Curb Cuts Permitted
Length of Street
*h, Frontage
Maximum Number of
Curb Cuts
51-125 ft.-:
2
126-250 ft.
3
More than 250 ft.
4
intersection. -
(a) Principal and Minor Arterial Streets.
,:Where a street with a lower functional
cla$siftcation •exists that can be
accessed, curb cuts shall access onto
those streets. When necessary, curb cuts
along arterial streets shall be shared
between two or more lots. Where a curb
cut must access the arterial street, it
shall be located a minimum of 250 feet
from the center line of an intersection or
driveway.
Number of Curb Cuts Permitted
Length of Street
Frontage
Maximum Number of
Curb Cuts
0-500 ft.
1
501-1000 ft.
2
1001-1500 ft.
3
More than 1500 ft.
4
(b) Collector Streets. Curb cuts shall be
located a minimum of 100 feet from the
(d) Residential Subdivisions. In the case of
residential subdivisions, curb cuts shall
be discouraged along arterial and
collector streets. When necessary, curb
cuts along arterial and collector streets
shall be shared between two or more
lots. Curb cuts along all streets shall be
located a minimum of five feet (5')
from the adjoining properly line, unless
shared.
(e) Variance, in order to protect the
ingress and egress access rights to a
street of an abutting property owner,
a variance to the curb cut minimums
shall be granted by the Planning
Commission to allow an
ingress/egress curb cut at the safest
functional location along the
property. Such a curb cut may be
required to be shared with an
adjoining parcel if feasible. if a parcel
s. iaiYlW4.
on the corner of an arterial or
collector street provides such short
frontage along a major street that
there is no safe ingress/egress
functional location on that street, the
Planning Commission may deny the
curb cut or may limit such curb cut
to ingress or egress only.
(2) Speed. All streets should be designed to
discourage excessive speeds.
(G) Non -conforming Access Features.
(1) Existing. Permitted access connections in
place on the date of the adoption of this
ordinance that do not conform with the
standards herein shall be designated as
nonconforming features and shall be brought
into compliance with the applicable
standards under the following conditions:
(a) When new access connection permits
ti
are requested: 1,
(b) Upon expansion or improvements
greater than 50% of the assessed
property value or gross floor area or
volume;
(c) As roadway improvements allow.
(H) Easements. Utility and drainage easements shall
be located along lot lines and/or street right -of:
way where necessary to provide for utility lines
and drainage. The ,Planning Commission may
require larger easements for major utility lines,
unusual terrain or drainage problems..
(1) Residential lots. The use and design of lots shall
conform to the provisions of zoning where City
zoning is in effect. When no City zoning
applies, the following standards shall govern
unless in conflict with. 'more stringent city,
county or state regulations:
(1) Bulk and area regulations:
Planning Area
W area minimum
10,000 sq. ft.
Let width minimum
75 B.
Side setback
10 ft.
Front Setback
25 ft.
Rear setback
20 A.
Frontage on
improved street
75 It.
(2) Size. The size and shape of the lots shall not
be required to conform to any stipulated
pattern, but insofar as practicable, side lot
lines should be at right angles to straight
street lines or radial to curved street lines.
When a tractof land is subdivided into
larger than normal lots, such lots shall be so
arranged as to permit the logical location
and opening of future streets and appropriate
iesubdivision of the lots, with provisions for
adequate Utility s, connections for such
resubdivision. .
(3) Developments outside city, developed to all
inside- the city standards.' -, If the City
Co» ncil grants access lo the City's sewer
system pursuant to § 51.113 (C) and the
owner/developer agrees to petition for
annexation as soon as legally possible and
develop the subdivision in accordance with
all city development requirements including
payment of all impact fees, the bulk and area
requirements for this subdivision shall
conform to those within the RSF-4 Zoning
District rather than those within the planning
area.
(Code 1965, App. C.. Art. IV, §§C, D, F --H; Ord. No. 1750, 7-6-
70; Ord, No. 1801, 6-21-71; Ord. No. 2196, 2-17-76: Ord. No.
2353, 7-5-77; Code 1991, §§ 159.45, 159.58, 159.51--159.53; Ord.
No. 4100. §2 (Ex. A), 6-16-98; Ord. 4757, 9-6-05; Ord 4919, 9-
05-06)
Cross reference(s)--Bonds
and Guarantees,
Ch.
158;
Variances.
Ch. 156; Notification and
Public Hearings,
Ch.
157.
(8.12.08) Clarice Pearman - Ord. 5156 Page 1
From: Clarice Pearman
To: Olson, Leif
Date: 8.12.08 1:44 PM
Subject: Ord. 5156
Attachments: 5156 Amend Ch 166 street design.pdf
CC: Audit
Lelf:
Attached is a copy of the above ordinance passed by City Council, August 5, 2008 regarding Chapter 166. Please let me
know if there is anything else needed for this item. Have a good day.
Thanks.
Clarice
1 . • eyy!!•..••n ♦ I
It. It
NORTHWEST ARKANSAS EDITION
•
Benton County Daily Record
P. O. BOX 1607
FAYETTEVILLE, AR 72702
PHONE: 479-571-6421
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION
I, Cathy Wiles, do solemnly swear that I am Legal Clerk of the Arkansas
Democrat Gazette newspaper. Printed and published in Benton County
Arkansas, (Lowell) and that from my own personal knowledge and
reference to the files of said publication, the advertisement of: City of
Fayetteville Ordinance 5156
August 13, 2008
Publication Charge : $348.15
Subscribed and sworn to before me
This/3 day of acc , 2008.
Notary Public _t_d.G
My Commission Expires: Ira,
Do not pay from Affidavit, an invoice will be sent
��pMM..�gp�
�
ass
ECEIVED
AUG 14 2008
CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE
CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
ONYINANCE NO. 518E + -
ANTE 1LORDINANCEE DING TITLE RV: VELOP- e evl le
NIFIED
DEVELOPMENT CODE OF THE CODE OF FAYET-
TEVIT I TO AMEND CHAPTER 1T DESIGN SAND
C E IS ORDER TO ADOPT IGN AND
ACCESS MANAGEMENT DESIGN STANDARDS.
WHEREAS, the City of Fayetteville has adopted ARKANSAS
City Plan 2025 as its future land use plan; and rt
WHEREAS, three of the six primary goals of City Plan 2025 are to: discourage suburban sprawl,
make traditional town form the standard, and to grow a livable transportation network; and
WHEREAS, the City of Fayetteville recognizes that street design and access management stan-
dards will encourage the development of complete, carpal and connected neighborhoods; and
WHEREAS, the City of Fayetteville recognizes that development that does not conform to the
desired standards may request variances or waivers from the adopted standards from the Planning
Carnission at a public hearing,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS:
Section 1. That Chapter 166: Development is amended by repealing and replacing all of section § ;
166.08 - Design Standards, a copy of which marked Exhibit 'Ais attached hereto and made a part
hereof.
PASSED m8 APPROVED this the 5th day of August, 2008.
APPROVED: ATTEST:
DAN COODY, Mayer SONDRA E. SMITH, City CbtWRnnspnr
EXHIBIT A'
Chapter 166: Development is amended by replacing §166.08 Design Standards with the following
language . .
166.08 Street Design and Access Management Standards
(A) Intent. These standards are intended to ensure that development Is designed to be inherently
safe, walkable, and efficient for the facilitation of traffic and pedestrian movements.
(B) Fitness for development. Based on topographic maps, s6l surveys prepared by the Department.
of Agriculture and drainage information from the Future Land Use Plan and the Hi18deMilltop.
Overlay District, the Planning Commission may require that steep grades, unstable soil end flood',
plains be set aside and not subdivided until corrections are made to protect life, health, and prop -
set forth herein shall apply to land which is
creation of public streets are reouired. or om
n principles.
All street extensions shall be constructed
(2) Substandard widths. Developments that adjoin existing streets shall dedicate additional right-of-
way to meet the Master Street Plan.
(3) Street names. Names of streets shall be consistent with natural alignment and extensions of
existing streets, and new street mares shall not duplicate or be similar to existing street names.
Developers shall coordinate the nearing of new streets through the GI$ Office during Me plat review
process.
(4) Tangents. A straight tangent at least 100 feet long shall separate reverse curves for Collector
and Arterial streets.
(5) Pedestrian. Pedestrian -vehicular conflict points should be controlled through signalized inter-
sections and proven traffic calming design principles.
(6) Street standards. A11 street requirements shall be met as set forth in the City of Fayetteville Master
Street Plan and adopted Minlmum Street Standards.
(E) Block Layout I Connectivity.
(1) Block Length. Block lengths and street intersections are directly lied to the functional hierarchy
of the atreel pattern That exists or is proposed - , ' I '
(a) Principal and Minor Arterial Streets. Signalized Intersections should be located at a minimum of
one every 2,640 feet (half a mile) along principal and minor arterials and should be based on traffic
warrants.. rt.;.,. .:.1-�._..�..:� _�.. ,
(b) Collectors. Intersections should be located at a minimum of one every 1,320 feel (quarter of a
mile) along collector streets. I .
(c) Locals. intersections
shall occur c r aimum of one every y fe0t.
(a) Residential. riancs.lack length shall occur at a minimum t one every 600 feet.
(e)aphic lle.Block sth standards may be varied thaPlanning
o, o otherr when tconditions
o sli it ac features, existing barriers or streets, size or shape of the lot, or other unusual
juslity a departure.
(2) Topography. Local streets should be designed to relate to the existing topography and minimize
the disturbance zone. - 1
(3) Dead-end streets. Dead end streets are discouraged and should only be used In situatIons
where they are needed for design and development efficiency, reduction of necessary street paving.
or where proximity to fbodplafns, creeks, difficult topography or existing barriers warrant their use.
Al! dead end streets shall end in a cul-de-sac with a radius of 50 feet, or an alternative design
approved by the City and the Fire Deparment. The maximum length of a deed end street (without a
street stub -out) shall be 500 feet. +-.
(F) Access Management. Safe and adequate vehicular, bicycle, and pedestrian access shall be pro-
vided to all parcels. Local streets and driveways shall not detract from Me safety and efficiency of
bordering arterial routes. Property that fronts onto two public streets shall place a higher priority on
accessing the street with the lower functional classification, ex. Local and Collector.
(1)CurbcutnYnitum.dislance fromintersecibn .,:Q.. t -r fir:
(a) Principal and Minor Arterial Streets. Where a street with a lower functiohel'ClassifiCatlan exists Mat
can be accessed, curb cuts shall access onto those streets. When necessary, curb cuts along arte-
rial streets shall be shared between two or more lots. Where a curb cut must access the arterial
street, it Shall be located a minimum of 250 feet from the colter line of an Intersection or driveway.
Number of Curb Cuts Permitted
Length of Street Frontage Maximum Number of Curb Cuts
0-500 7G :1
501-10007t. 2
1001.1500 ft. •3
More than 1500 ft. 4
(b) Collector Streets. Curb cuts shall be located a minimum 01 100 feet Iron the center line of an
intersection or driveway. When necessary, curb cuts along collector streets shall be shared between
two or more lots.
Number of Curb Cuts Pemtitied
Length of Street Frontage Maximum Number of Curb Cuts
0.100 ft. 1
101-250 ft. - 2...,,'
251500 ft. 3
More than 500 h. 4
,
(c) Local and Residential Streets. Curb cuts shall be located a minimum of 50 feet from the center
line of on intersection or driveway. In no case shall a curb cut be located within the radius return of
an adjacent curb cut. or intersection. Curb cuts shall be a ranknum of fifteen (15') feet from the
adjoining property line, unless shared. - f l
RECEIVED
AUG 142008
CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE
CITY CLERKS OFFICE
Number or Curb Cuts Permitted
Length of Street Frontage Maximum Number of Curb Cuts
0-50 ft.
51-125 H. '2
126-250f1. v. 3
4
More than 25011:
;d) Residential Subdivisions. In the case of residential subtllvisins, cub cuts shoe be discouraged
song arterial and collector streets. When necessary, curb cuts along arterial and collector streets
shall be shared between two or more lots. Curb cols along a0 streets shag be located a ndnimun of
five teat (5) from the edpinmg property fine, unless shared. t
(e) Vedanta. In order to protect the ingress end egress access rights to a street of an abusing prop{
arty owner, a variance to the curb col minimums shall be granted by the Planning Commission to
allow an Ingress/egress Curb cut at the safest functional location along the property. Such a curb cut
may be required to be shared with an adjoining parcel if feasible. If a parcel on the comer of an artei
rlol or collector street provides such short frontage along a motor street that there is no safe
ingress/egress functional location on diet street, the Planning Commission may deny the curb cut o,
may lint such curb cut to ingress or egress only.
(2) Speed. All streets should be designed to discourage excessive speeds.
(Ca) Non -conforming Access Features.
(1) Existing. Permitted access connections in place on the date of the adoption of this ordinance that
do not conform with the standards herein shall be designated as nonconforming features and shall
be brought Into conglience with the applicable standards under the following conditions:
(a) When new access connection permits are requested;
(b) Upon expansion or Improvements greater than 50% of the assessed property value or gross floor
area or volume:
(c) As roadway improvements allow. _. -
(H) Easements. Utility and drainage easements shall be located along lot lines end/or street rigM-
of.way w'tiere necessary to provide for utility lines end drainage.. The Planning Commission may
require larger easements for major utility litres, unusual terrain or drainage problems.
(I) Residential lots, The use and design allots shall conform to the provisions of zoning where City
zoning is in effect. When no City zoning applies, the following standards shall govern unless In con-
flict with more stringent city, county or state regulations;
(1) Bulk and area regulations
Lot area min!mirn
Lot width minimum
Side setback
Front Setback
Rear setback
Frontage on Improved street
I (2) Size. The size and shape of the lots
but Insofar as practicable. side lot lines
curved street lines. When a tract of rem
be so arranged as to permit the logical I<
division of the lots. with provisions for et
l
Planning Area
10.000 sq. fl. ! '
75 ft.
10 f. I
2511.
2011. (.
75 ft.
lot be required to conform to any sepulated pattern,
be at right angles to straight street lines or radial to
bd'ivided into larger than normal lots, such lots shall
• and opening of future streets and appropriate resub-
e utility connections for such resubdivisbrt-44
I inside the city standards. If the City Council giants
access to the Crer system pursuant to § 51.113 (C) and theowner/developer agrees to peti-
tion for annexation as soon as legally possible and develop the subdivision In accordance with all
city development requirements including payment of all impact fees, the bulk and area requirements
for this subdivision shell conform to those within the RSF4 Zoning District rather than those within
i the planning area.
(Code 1965. App. C., Art. IV, §§C, D. F —H; Ord, No. 1750, 7F-70; Ord. No. 1801.6-21-71; Ord. No.
2196, 2.17-76; Ord. No, 2353,7-5-77; Code 1991,§§159.45.159.58.159:51-159.53; Ord. No. 4100,
§2 (Ex. A), 6-16-98; Ord. 4757, 9-6-05; Ord. 4919. 9-05-06)
Cross reference(s)--Bonds and Guarantees, Ch. 158; Variances. Ch. 156; Notification and
Public I,
LHearings. Ch. 157 — — —�—_