The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2000-07-18 - Agendas - Final FAYETTEVIALE THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS FINAL AGENDA CITY COUNCIL JULY 18, 2000 A meeting of the Fayetteville City Council will be held on July 18, 2000 at 6:30 p.m. in Room 219 of the City Administration Building located at 113 West Mountain Street, Fayetteville, Arkansas. NOMINATING COMMITTEE REPORT A. CONSENT AGENDA 1, APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: Approval of the minutes from the June 20, 2000 City Council meeting. 2. BID 00- 13: A resolution awarding Bid 00- 13 to Crash Rescue Equipment Service for the sale of the Airport' s 1985 Oshkosh Fire Crash-Rescue Vehicle, Unit #20 in the amount of $38, 500.00. 3. ERNEST LANCASTER DRIVE: A resolution approving Amendment # 1 to Task Order 41 (Extension of Ernest Lancaster Drive) to the basic agreement with McClelland Engineers, Inc. for engineering services in the amount of $25,475 .00. 4, PUBLIC TRANSIT: A resolution authorizing the mayor and his representative to help create and participate in a steering committee to study the feasibility of a publicly owned transit system in Northwest Arkansas. 5, SOLID WASTE RATE STUDY: A resolution approving a contract with DMG- Maxim, s, Inc. in the amount of $34,600.00 for consulting services for the development of a solid waste cost of service rate study. 6, BUDGET ADJUSTMENT: A resolution approving a budget adjustment increasing the budget for fuel expense for various operating divisions, authorizing an additional position in Building Maintenance, increasing the Municipal Judge's salary and increasing overtime for the Police and Fire Departments. B. OLD BUSINESS 113 WEST MOUNTAIN 72701 501521-7700 FAX 501 575-8257 1. RZ 00- 17.00: An ordinance approving rezoning request RZ 00- 17.00 submitted by Northstar Engineering on behalf of Emad Damen for property located at 2323 Deane Street. The property is zoned R- 1 , Low Density Residential and contains approximately 1 .47 acres. The request is to rezone to R-2, Medium Density. The ordinance was left on the first reading at the July 5, 2000 meeting. 2. AD 98-8.00: An ordinance approving a AD 98-8 .00, administrative amendment to Chapter 172 "Parking and Loading" of the Unified Development Ordinance, Section 172.01 (13)( 1 ) "Standards for the Number of Spaces by Use-Off Street Parking" to revise the required parking for eating places (restaurants). The ordinance was left on the first reading at the July 5, 2000 meeting. 3. SHILOH DRIVE: 1 ) An ordinance approving a bid waiver with McClinton- Anchor, to allow the reconstruction of approximately 240 If of Shiloh Drive from the existing AHTD right-of-way east to the new Shiloh Drive extension at the CMN property line, including the radius and intersection of Northwood Avenue; 2) Approval of a construction contract with McClinton-Anchor in the estimated amount of $43,300.00 for the above described street reconstruction; 3) Approval of a 15% project contingency of $46,495 . 00 for material/construction testing and variations in final quantities. The ordinance was left on the first reading at the July 51 2000 meeting. 4. SHILOH DRIVE: A resolution approving a letter contract in the amount of $5,000. 00 with Milholland Company for engineering design, construction staking, construction management, and as-built drawings for the reconstruction of approximately 240 If of Shiloh Drive from the existing AHTD right-of-way east to the CMN property line and the intersection with Northwood Avenue. The resolution was tabled at the last meeting. C. NEW BUSINESS 1, LS 00- 17.00: A resolution accepting a lesser dedication of right-of-way than required by the Master Street Plan for the western extension of Howard Nickell Road, a principal arterial, as requested by George Faucette on behalf of Jo Ann Gladden for property located at Howard Nickell Road and Salem Road. 2. FIRE STATION: A resolution approving the sale of the Old Harold Street Fire Station to Howell Trumbo in the amount of $ 115, 850.00. 3. PARK LAND: An ordinance approving a waiver of Ordinance 3793 to accept money in lieu as the park land requirement of the Cornerstone Apartments Subdivision. 4. RZ 00- 19.00: An ordinance approving rezoning request RZ 00- 19.00, submitted by the Community Development Division on behalf of the City of Fayetteville for property located west of Deane Solomon Road, north of Moore Lane and South of West Salem Road. The property is zoned I- 1 , Heavy Commercial/Light Industrial and contains approximately 2.715 acres. The request is to rezone to R-2, Medium Density Residential. 5. AD 00-18.00: An ordinance for AD 00- 18 .00, administrative amendment to Chapter 166 "Development" of the Unified Development Ordinance, Section 166.04(A)(8) "Suburban Subdivision-Public Sanitary Sewer Not Accessible" to allow lots smaller than 1 '/2 acres that are on a septic system. 6. RZA 00-2.00: An ordinance approving annexation request RZA 00-2.00 submitted by Candy R. Burton of Phillips Law Firm on behalf of St. Joseph' s Catholic Church for property located on Starr Drive. The property is in the Planning Area and contains approximately 18 . 59 acres. The request is to annex the subject property into the City of Fayetteville. 7. PLANNING COMMISSION APPEAL: An appeal of a Planning Commission decision which denied rezoning request RZ 00-20.00 for property located at 2416 E. Joyce Street. The request is to rezone the property from A- 1 to R-O. ETTEVIWE THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS FINAL AGENDA CITY COUNCIL JULY 18, 2000 A meeting of the Fayetteville City Council will be held on July 18, 2000 at 6:30 p.m. in Room 219 of the City Administration Building located at 113 West Mountain Street, Fayetteville, Arkansas. NOMINATING COMMITTEE REPORT A. CONSENT AGENDA 1. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: Approval of the minutes from the June 20, 2000 City Council meeting. 2. BID 00-13: A resolution awarding Bid 00- 13 to Crash Rescue Equipment Service ,00 for the sale of the Airport' s 1985 Oshkosh Fire Crash-Rescue Vehicle, Unit #20 in X5 the amount of $381500.00. 3. ERNEST LANCASTER DRIVE: A resolution approving Amendment # 1 to �V,Op Task Order # 1 (Extension of Ernest Lancaster Drive) to the basic agreement with McClelland Engineers, Inc. for engineering services in the amount of $25,475 .00. 4. PUBLIC TRANSIT: A resolution authorizing the mayor and his representative to help create and participate in a steering committee to study the feasibility of a publicly owned transit system in Northwest Arkansas. 5. SOLID WASTE RATE STUDY: A resolution approving a contract with DMG- pp Maximus, Inc. in the amount of $34,600.00 for consulting services for the nl U development of a solid waste cost of service rate study. 6. BUDGET ADJUSTMENT: A resolution approving a budget adjustment increasing the budget for fuel expense for various operating divisions, authorizing Lt OD an additional position in Building Maintenance, increasing the Municipal Judge's salary and increasing overtime for the Police and Fire Departments. B. OLD BUSINESS 113 WEST MOUNTAIN 72701 501521-7700 FAX 501575-8257 - 1V� lYt/�RZ 00-17.00: An ordinance approving rezoning request RZ 00-17.00 submitted by Northstar Engineering on behalf of Emad Damen for property located at 2323 �c) Deane Street. The property is zoned R- 1 , Low Density Residential and contains �?/ approximately 1 .47 acres. The request is to rezone to R-2, Medium Density. The � / ordinance was left on the first reading at the July 5, 2000 meeting. ~ 2, W/VAD 98-8.00: An ordinance approving a AD 98-8 .00, administrative amendment to (� Chapter 172 "Parking and Loading" of the Unified Development Ordinance, syn , Section 172.01 (D)( 1 ) "Standards for the Number of Spaces by Use-Off Street Parking" to revise the required parking for eating places (restaurants). The /ordinance was left on the first reading at the July 5, 2000 meeting. 3Y ►" SHILOH DRIVE: 1 ) An ordinance approving a bid waiver with McClinton- Anchor, to allow the reconstruction of approximately 240 If of Shiloh Drive from the existing AHTD right-of-way east to the new Shiloh Drive extension at the n Z� CMN property line, including the radius and intersection of Northwood Avenue; �n 2) Approval of a construction contract with McClinton-Anchor in the estimated amount of $43,300.00 for the above described street reconstruction; 3) Approval of a 15% project contingency of $46,495 .00 for material/construction testing and l� variations in final quantities. The ordinance was left on the first reading at the July 51 2000 meeting. 4. SHILOH DRIVE: A resolution approving a letter contract in the amount of O $5,000.00 with Milholland Company for engineering design, construction staking, ,Q construction management, and as-built drawings for the reconstruction of approximately 240 If of Shiloh Drive from the existing AHTD right-of-way east to n / the CMN property line and the intersection with Northwood Avenue. The resolution was tabled at the last meeting. C. NEW BUSINESS 1. ✓ LS 00-17.00: A resolution accepting a lesser dedication of right-of-way than required by the Master Street Plan for the western extension of Howard Nickell h Road, a principal arterial, as requested by George Faucette on behalf of Jo Ann Gladden for property located at Howard Nickell Road and Salem Road. �D 2. r/ FIRE STATION: A resolution approving the sale of the Old Harold Street Fire HOZ OD Station to Howell Trumbo in the amount of $ 115,850.00. 3. liv PARK LAND: An ordinance approving a waiver of Ordinance 3793 to accept money in lieu as the park land requirement of the Cornerstone Apartments �Il Subdivision. U` 1� 4, / RZ 00-19.00: An ordinance approving rezoning request RZ 00- 19.00, submitted1 �V U ' by the Community Development Division on behalf of the City of Fayetteville for roperty located west of Deane Solomon Road, north of Moore Lane and South of W West Salem Road. The property is zoned I- 1 , Heavy Commercial/Light Industrial and contains approximately 2.715 acres. The request is to rezone to R-2, Medium / Density Residential. 5, Y AD 00-18.00: An ordinance for AD 00- 18.00, administrative amendment to Chapter 166 "Development" of the Unified Development Ordinance, Section )66.04(A)(8) "Suburban Subdivision-Public Sanitary Sewer Not Accessible" to allow lots smaller than I ''/z acres that are on a septic system. 6�� 'ZA 00-2.00: An ordinance approving annexation request RZA 00-2.00 ///'submitted by Candy R. Burton of Phillips Law Firm on behalf of St. Joseph's Catholic Church for property located on Starr Drive. The property is in the Planning Area and contains approximately 18.59 acres. The request is to annex the subject property into the City of Fayetteville. / V%J 7. ✓ PLANNING COMMISSION APPEAL: An appeal of a Planning Commission )q� l��" rr; decision which denied rezoning request RZ 00-20.00 for property located at 241C1/a n4 E. Joyce Street. The request is to rezone the property from A-I to R-O. / I y�J J� � �� 5�� - �� d ��s � �� • SANTOS YOI NG REYNDI ITS AUSTIN DAVIS TRUMBO MAYOR HANNA 4 PIP N DANTEI SANTOR Yn] LNG REVNC)l TTI; AT ISTIN DAVIR TRI JMRC) MAYOR HANNA DANIEl qANTOR pre- Al 19TFN DAVIS TRUMBO MAYOR HANNA Z O l DANIFT SANTOS RI ISSELT DAVIS Z TRUMBO ✓ MAYOR HANNA p3 � DANIFI SANIDS Al ISTIN DAVIS TRI JMR0 MAYOR HANNA o . 7-/-p. i 2 SANTOS YM fNCT AUSTIN DAVIS TRUMBO +� MAYOR HANNA IF.Pr FP DANIEL SANTOR RIJSRELI REYNOT US AUSTIN DAVIS IRITMBO 7 MAYOR HANNA DANIEL SANTOS RIISSELT REYNOT US AITSILN nAVIR IRIIMBQ MAYOR 14ANNA ✓ r „ �U- DANIFT SANTOS Vol WC, REYNDI US ATISTIN DAVIR TRUMBO MAYQR HANNA nANIFT REYNOLDS DAVIS TRIJMRn MAYOR HANNA nANIFI REYN01 DS DAVIS MAVORHANNA -o . 7v ;P--o . CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE Final Agenda 1 , Y ►' /y CITY COUNCIL July 18, 2000 man Adnft1PA meeting of the Foyntovilk City Council will be held on July 8. 2,000 m.00 a 6:30 p. in Room F 119 of the City Administration Building located at 113 West Mwmntin Street. Fayetteville, AR 11& U0 NOMINATING COMMITTEE REPORT MORTHWW A& c3 i A. CONSENT AGENDA Pm& m A xaPWCweet 1. APPROVAL OFTHE MINUTES: Approval of the mintues from the �� FaK Be* �1 j �4 .� Junc 20, 2000 City Council mating. Bye* D (5 1 ) 44 2. BID 00-13: Aresolution awarding bid 00-13 to Crash Rescue Bt:ffi poft To4-1700 Equipment Service for sale of the Airport's 1985 Oshkosh Fre Ctash- �Pd d �� Rescue Vehicle, Unit #20 in the amount of $38,500. 3. ERNEST LANCASTER DRIVE: Aresolutiat approving Amendment #I to Task Order #I (Extension of Emcst Lancaster Drive) to the basic agreement with McClelland Engineers, Inc. for enfineering services in the amount of $25,475. 4. PUBLIC TRANSIT: A resolution authorizing the mayor and his repre- sentative to help tacatc and participate in a steering committee to stud the feasibiriry of a publicly owned transit system in Northwest Arkansas. 5. SOLID WASTE RATE STUDY: A resolution approving a contract with DMO-Maximus, Inc. in the amount of $34,600 for consulting services for the development of a solid waste cost of savicc rate study. 6. BUD(;ET ADJUSTMENT`. A resolution apprc:ving a budget adjust- ment increasing the budget for fuel expense for various operating divisions, authorising an additional position in Building Mairtenance, increasing the Municipal Judge's salary and increasing increasing overtime for the Police and Fuc Dlgdrtments. B. OLD BUSINESS L RZ 00-17.W: An ordinance approving rezoning request RZ (X117.00 submitted by Nor chstar Enpineerine on behalf of Einad Damen for tmsnerty 100 30dd sno 103dd W06A 3�1N I1t10� DANIFT SANTOS DAVIS TRUMBO ✓. vu✓ ✓vou•uw L RZ 00-17.00: An ordinance apU&Ppg rezoning request RZ 00, 17.00 submitted by Northsmr EngineeriiW behalf of Ernad Darren for property located at 2323 Deane Succt. The property is zoned R-1 , Low Density Residential and contains approximately 1.47 acres. 'llic request is to rezone to R-2, Medium Density. The ordinance was left or, the first reading at the July 5, 2000 mocting. 2. AD 98-&00: An ordinance approving aAD 98-8.00, administrative amendment to Chapter 172 "Parking and Loading ' of the Unified Development Ordinance, Section 172.01 (D)(1) "Sandards for the Number of Spaces by USe-Off Sven Parkinb' to revise the required parking for eat- ing places (restaurants). The ordinance was left on the fust reading at July 5, MM meeting. 3. SHILOH DRIVE: 1) An ordinance approving Z. bid waiver with McClimon-Anchor, to allow the reconstruction of approximately 240 If of Shiloh Drive from die existing AHTD right-of-way east to the new Shiloh Drive extension at 04N property line, including the radius and intersection of Northwood Avenue; 2) Approval of a construai(n contract with McClinton-Anchor in the estirnawd amount of$43,300 for the above described street reconstruction; 3) Approval of a 15 Yo project contingency of$46.495 for matcriaUconstructim and variations :n final quantities. The ordinance was left on the first reading at the July 5. 2000 meeting. 4. SHILOH DRIVE: Aresolution approving a leltz contract in the amount of$5,000 with Milholland Company for en Jineering design, con- sttuoticn staking, construction management and as-built drawings for the reconstruction of approximately 2401f of Shiloh Di.ve from the existing AHTD right-of-way east to the QMN property fine ,uhd the inrersecuon with Northwood Avenue. The resolution was tabled at the last meeting. C. NEW BUSINESS L LS 00-17.00: A resolution accepting a lesser dedimlion of right-of-way than required by the Master Street Plan for the wesum extension of Howard Nickell Road, a principal arterial, as rcquest�d by George Faucette on behalf of Jo Ann Gladden for property located at Howard Nickell Road and Salem Road. 1 FIRE STATION: A resolution approving the sale of the Old Harold Street Fro Station to Howell Trutnbo in the amount of$115,550. 3. PARK LAND: An ordinance approving a waiver of Ordinance 3793 to accept money in lieu as the park land requirement of he Cornerstone Apartments Subdivision 4. RZ OU ]9.00: An ordinance approving rezoning rertrest RZ 00-19.00, submitted by the Community Development Dives on cn behalf of the City Of Moore d south located west of parte SOJn:non Road, north of Moore bane and south of 'Acst Salem Road. The propctty is zoned f-1 , Hees. Comm est is It'ght Industrial w d contains approximately 2-715 acres. Ilse request is m rezone to R-2, Medium Density Residential. 10 S' AD 00 1&00: cv ordinance for AD O(} 18.00. adm n;s ve e tion 166,04(A)(8) r 166 "Development" of the Unified Develo Section 166.04 A' g •. arrrendment Accessible" to allow lots Subdivision-Public Sar" Ordinance, cern, smaller than 1 12 < • tt^' Sewer Not >wes that are on a septic syy 6. RZA 00-Z01):OU: An ordinance approving annexation subtnirted by Candy R. Burton of pltillips Law Pian on Joseph's Catholic request RZA 00-2 00 is in the P1 '"I"(11 ai�h for propctly located on St lx:half of St. is to annex 19 Area and contains Sumapproximatel Drive. The property 7' PLANING COh l"perry into die City of .59 F yettevillet� The request C- PLA sNI decision WMIONAPPEAL- erty ]orated az 2416 E. ch denied rezon n anal of a Planning fium A-1 to R-O. JOyce Street. The request is to ez n-o 20.00 for prop t0 (C20nc: dee: properly Td WULO : 80 0002 Lt ' 1of LL7SEM7 'ON XUd S3W11 SUSNUA6U 1S3MHiNON WOdd Fred Hanna Mayor 1141 E . 29th Circle Fayetteville , AR 72701 575-8330 Dan Coody Mayor 1418 E . Rodgers Drive Fayetteville , AR 72701 443-6758 Paula Marinoni Mayor 617 W . Lafayette Fayetteville , AR 72701 444- 6170 Mustin Mayor 401 W . 24th Street , Suite 118 Fayetteville , AR 72701- 6965 442- 7948 Ron Austin Ward 1 Position 2 1227 N . Crestwood Fayetteville , AR 72701 444-9445 Rick Cochran Ward 2 Position 2 1724 N . Garland Ave . Fayetteville , AR 72703-2110 527-9408 Butch Green Ward 2 Position 2 855 Windy Hill Fayetteville , AR 72703 521- 1028 Lioneld Jordan Ward 4 Position 2 1600 Arrowhead Fayetteville , AR 72701 442-5415 • STAFF REVIEW FORM • XX AGENDA REQUEST CONTRACT REVIEW GRANT REVIEW For the Fayetteville City Council meeting of JulV 18 , 2000 FROM : John Maguire Admin Services Department Name Division Department ACTION REQUIRED : Consideration of a resolution authorizing the Mayor and his representative to help create and participate in a steering committee to study the feasibility of a publicly owned transit system in Northwest Arkansas . COST TO CITY : $ - 0 - at this time Cost of this Request Category/ Project Budget Category/Project Name Account Number Funds Used To Date Program Name Project Number Remaining Balance Fund BUDGET REVIEW : Budgeted Item Budget Adjustment Attached Budget Manager Administrative Services Director CONTRACT/GRANT/LEASE REVIEW : GRANTING AGENCY : Accounting Manager Date Internal Auditor Date City Attorney Date ADA Coordinator Date Purchasing Officer Date Grant Coordinator Date STAFF RECOMMENDATION : Staff recommends approval of resolution . Division Head Date Cross Reference New Item : Yes No a t D for ,�/lD to �J / /t � Prev Ord/Res # : Adm ' istrative S vices Director Da e Orig Contract Date : Mayor Date Orig Contract Number : STAFF REVIEW FORM X AGENDA REQUEST CONTRACT REVIEW 7// op/OJ GRANT REVIEW For the Fayetteville City Council meeting of July 3 , 2000 FROM : Tim Conklin Planning Public Works Name Division Department ACTION REQUIRED : To approve an ordinance for AD 98-8.00: Administrative Amendment to Chapter 172 "Parking and Loading"of the Unified Development Ordinance, Section 172.01 (D)( 1 ) "Standards for the Number of Spaces by Use - Off-street Parking" to revise the required parking for eating places (restaurants). COST TO CITY : Cost of this Request Category/ Project Budget Category/ Project Name Account Number Funds Used To Date Program Name Project Number Remaining Balance Fund BUDGET REVIEW : Budgeted Item Budget Adjustment Attached Budget Manager Administrative Services Director CONTRACT/GRANT/LEASE REVIEW : GRANTING AGENCY : Accou ng M a e Date Internal Auditor Date � ' Za ly a ty Attoi ey Date ADA Coordinator Date Purchasing Officer Date STAFF RECOMMENDATION : Staff recommended approval and on June 12, 2000, Planning Commission unanimously voted 9-0-0 to recommend approval and forward the amendment to the City Council. lC - /6- 00 ' vision Head Date Cross Reference New Item : Yes artme Director Date ✓ a� Prev Ord/Res # : A in ' tr ' v ery ces Director L a e VI ke Orig Contract Date : May Date Orig Contract Number : M Planning Commission Minutes June 12, 2000 Page 28 AD 98-8.00: Administrative Amendment to Chapter 172 "Parking and Loading"of the Unified Development Ordinance, Section 172.01 (D)( 1 ) "Standards for the Number of Spaces by Use - Off-street Parking" to revise the minimum required parking for eating places (restaurants) from 1 space per 200 square feet of floor area to 1 space per 4 seats plus one space per employee on the maximum shift. Odom: Item number 14, which is the next item on tonight's agenda is an Administrative Amendment to Chapter 172 "Parking and Loading"of the Unified Development Ordinance, § 172.01 (D)( 1 ) "Standards for the Number of Spaces by Use - Off- street Parking" to revise the minimum required parking for eating places from 1 space per 200 square feet of floor area to 1 space per 4 seats plus one space per employee on the maximum shift. Staff recommends approval of the amendment to revise § 172.01 (D)( 1 ) to make the 1 space per 4 seats plus one space per employee on the maximum shift the maximum number of spaces allowed and retain the I spaces per 200 square feet of floor area as the minimum number of parking spaces required for eating places. Staff do you have any presentation you would like to make? Conklin: Commissioner Marr asked about when we could look at our parking lot ordinance with regard to increasing the amount of parking allowed for restaurants. As many of you probably recall we do typically have to grant waivers over and beyond what the maximum number of parking is allowed for restaurants. I went back and looked at our April 13, 1998 Planning Commission meeting where we did discuss this item and it did not pass. The biggest concern at that time was with regard to how this would impact restaurant development in our downtown square and Dickson Street area. Looking at that, I think the solution is to keep our existing parking requirements, which is 1 space for 200 square feet of floor area, and add as a maximum number the 1 space per 4 seats plus I space per employee on the maximum shift. That will allow restaurants in our downtown area not to have to meet the higher number of spaces that newer restaurants in our newer commercial areas are requesting. Staff is recommending approval. In approving this item it will have to go to City Council. It is only a recommendation and the City Attorney will prepare an ordinance to amend the current ordinance we have. That's all I have. PUBLIC COMMENT: Odom: Let me ask if there is any member of the audience that would like to address us on this issue? Planning Commission Minutes June 12, 2000 Page 29 COMMISSION DISCUSSION: Odom : Seeing none, I 'll close the floor to public discussion and bring it back to the Planning Commission. Commissioner Marr, do you want the floor or do you need an ambulance? MOTION: Marr: No, I am so excited that we actually are presenting this that I 'm all choked up. I 'm in full support of this motion to make this change and send it to the City Council. So, I'm going to move approval of AD 98-8.00. Hoffman: And I 'll add a hardy second to that. It sounds like a good plan. Bunch: For the record, this is the recommended motion as opposed to what is described after AD 98-8? Conklin: That is correct. Looking through and doing the research for staff report, I did make that change to reflect not to require the additional parking for restaurants that would be in our Dickson Street area or Square area. Hoover: Mr. Chair, I have a comment. I just want to thank staff for looking carefully at this whole situation. Originally I was not for this when it came in 1998 because of the downtown area and how it would affect all that parking. I think you have done a grand job here of solving problems in the downtown and the new restaurants that are outside that area. So, I am very much in support of this. Odom: I would just like to comment that we get so many of these waiver requests on restaurants and we routinely grant them that it only makes sense to take care of this by this motion. It also does take care of the concerns that were raised before so I think it is a good motion. Any further discussion? Call the roll. ROLL CALL: Upon roll call for the first time in the history of the Planning Commission Don Marr has a motion that passes unanimously 9-0-0. so so FAYETTEVILLE THE CITY OF FAYEtTEVILLE, ARKANSAS 113 W. Mountain St. Fayetteville, AR 72701 Telephone: PLANNING`DIVISION CORRESPONDENCE::.. . ser-yes azby <. TO: Fayetteville Planning Commissioners FROM: Tim Conklin, City Planner DATE: June 8, 2000 AD 98-8.00: Administrative Amendment to Chapter 172 "Parking and Loading"of the Unified Development Ordinance, Section 172.01 (13)( 1 ) "Standards for the Number of Spaces by Use - Off-street Parking" to revise the minimum required parking for eating places (restaurants) from 1 space per 200 square feet of floor area to I space per 4 seats plus one space per employee on the maximum shift. RECOMMENDED MOTION Staff recommends approval of the amendment to revise Section 172.01 (D)( 1 ) to make the 1 space per 4 seats plus one space per employee on the maximum shift the maximum number of spaces allowed and retain the 1 spaces per 200 square feet of floor area as the minimum number of parking spaces required for eating places (restaurants). BACKGROUND This item was heard at the April 13, 1998 Planning Commission meeting where a motion to approve the new standard was denied by a 3-5-0 vote (please see attached minutes). There was considerable discussion regarding the impact this change in required parking would have on new restaurant construction within the Downtown/Dickson street area. Staff has proposed retaining the I space per 200 sf. as the minimum number required and set the maximum at I space per 4 seats plus one space per employee on the maximum shift. This change would not penalize restaurants that don't need as much parking by not requiring the additional parking under this proposed change. Attached you will find a survey, published by the American Planning Association, depicting off- street parking requirements for restaurants in other cities which contains numerous methods of calculating parking requirements. The proposed amendment is comparable to other cities parking requirements. Planning Commission June 12, 2000 AD 98-8 Amendment Page 14. 1 Residential, Multifamily, Studio •• Thirteen spaces per eac�t 1,000 sq.ft. of gross*floor area One space per dwelling unit (Orange Co., Calif.) (Albemarle Co., Va.) 1 .2 spaces per unit (Bellevue, Wash.) Sixteen spaces per 1,000 net sq.ft. (Bellevue, Wash.) 1 .25 per dwelling unit (Savannah, Ga.) One space for each 60 sq.ft. of usable floor area with a minimum of four spaces (Alpena, Mich.) Residential, Single-Family, Townhouse One space per 50 sq.ft. of eating area, plus one space 1 .5 spaces per dwelling unit (Clifton Forge, Va.) for each employee on the largest working shift (St. Clair Shores, Mich.) Two spaces per dwelling unit (Lexington Co., S.C), Fourteen spaces per 1,000 sq.ft. of gross floor area, 2.25 spaces for each dwelling unit (Plano, Tex.) plus five off-street waiting spaces per drive-in lane (Lake Co., Ill.) Residential, Single-Family Thirty spaces per 1 ,000 sq.ft. (lake Forest, Ill.) One space per dwelling unit (Clifton Forge, Va.) The greater of one space per 40 sq.ft. of customer Two spaces for each dwelling unit (Northport, Ala.) service or dining area or one space per 150 sq.ft. of Detached two spaces per dwelling if access to the lot gross building area (Omaha, Nebr.) is on to a public street; 2.5 spaces per dwelling if One space for each 25 sq.ft. of usable floor area access to the lot is from a private street, common (Alpena, Mich.) drive, or common parking court (Leesburg, Va.) Ten spaces per 100 sq.ft. gross leasable area, plus one Comment. Nearly every code examined required two additional space for every four outside seats spaces per unit. (Leesburg, Va.) One space for every two seats, plus two spaces for Restaurant every three employees on the maximum shift One space per 150 sq.ft. (St. Charles Parish, La.) (St. Louis Co., Mo.) One space per each 100 sq.ft. of floor area One space per four seats, plus one space per two employees where seating is at tables, or one space per (Glendale, Calif.) Ones ace for each 75 h. of usable floor area or one two seats, plus one space per two employees where P sq• seating is at a counter. For a fast-food restaurant with for each two persons allowed within the maximum no seating facilities: one space per 60 sq.ft. of net floor occupancy load, whichever is the greater area with a minimum of 10 spaces. For a fast-food (Alpena, Mich.) restaurant with drive-in facilities: in addition to the Fourteen spaces per 1,000 net sq.ft. (Bellevue, Wash.) parking requirements presented above, 11 stacking Two spaces per 100 sq.ft of floor area (Clifton Forge, Va.) spaces for the drive-in window, with a minimum of One parking space for every four seats. five such spaces designated for the ordering station. (Salisbury ng space , r e Such spaces shall be designed so as not to impede pedestrian or vehicular circulation on the site or on One space for every three seats, plus two spaces for any abutting street. (Fairfax Co., Va.) every three employees on the maximum shift Five spaces, plus one space per three seats in dining (St. Louis Co., Mo.) area or 10 per 1,000 sq.ft. gross floor area, whichever One space for each three persons for the first 150 is greater (Long Beach, Calif.) persons, and one for each two persons over 150 as determined by the fire marshall to be the maximum Retail, Outdoor capacity of the establishment (Bay City, Mich.) Ones ace r each three seating accommodations, One space per each 1,000(Bozeman, of lot .) floor area used P per g for display purposes (Bozeman, Mont) plus one space per each two employees on shift of Ones for each 600 ft. of lot area greatest employment (Charlotte-Mecklenburg Co., N.C.) Pace sq One space for each three fixed seats provided for (Bay City, Mich.) patron use, plus one space for each 200 sq.ft. of floor One space per 500 sq.ft. of open sales/display area, area provided for patron use but not containing fixed plus one space per employee (Fairfax Co., Va.) seats (South Burlington, Vt.) Three spaces per 1,000 sq.ft. of gross floor area Four spaces, plus one space for each three seating (Hillsborough Co., Fla.) accommodations (Northport, Ala.) One space for each 200 sq.ft. of stall space and cus- One space for each 2.5 seats or 40 sq.ft. of dining and/ tomer circulation area (Albuquerque, N.M.) or drinking space or area (Bozeman, Mont.) Retail Store Restaurant, Fast-Food One space per 1,000 net sq.ft.; if more than 15,000 net One space per 100 sq.ft. of gross floor area sq.ft., 1.5 spaces per 1,000 net sq.ft. (Bellevue, Wash.) (Norman, Okla.) One space per 300 sq.ft. of gross floor area One parking space per each 80 sq.ft. of floor area (Orange Co., Calif.) (Glendale, Calif.) If less than 5,000 sq.ft. of floor arm/Mt4ffi*rwHon June 12, 2000 22 AD 98-8 Amendment Page 14.2 u • MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE FAYETTEVILLE CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 20, 2000 A meeting of the Fayetteville City Council was held on June 20, 2000 at 6:30 p.m. in Room 219 of the City Administration Building located at 113 West Mountain Street, Fayetteville, Arkansas. PRESENT: Mayor Hanna, Aldermen Reynolds, Austin, Trumbo, Daniel, Santos, Young and Russell, City Attorney Jerry Rose, City Clerk Heather Woodruff, Staff, Press and Audience. ABSENT: Alderman Bob Davis. EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH Kevin Springer, Budget and Research, was awarded the employee of the month. His cost saving idea had been to use the Internet and Satellite Training at the Continuing Education Center to save travel expenses. Mayor Hanna presented Mr. Springer with a certificate and a check for his suggestion. CONSENT AGENDA • MINUTES Approval of the minutes from the June 1 , 2000 City Council minutes. TRACT #3X A resolution authorizing the Mayor to sign a 30-foot easement across property designated as Tract #3X containing approximately 3,000 square feet for 16 inch high pressure gas lines for the Arkansas Western Gas Co. RESOLUTION 81-00 AS RECORDED IN THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK. SOFTBALL COMPLEX A resolution approving a budget adjustment in the amount of $350,557.00 for Gary Hampton Softball Complex parking lot. RESOLUTION 82-00 AS RECORDED IN THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK. PARKS MASTER PLAN A resolution approving a contract with Lose and Associates, Inc. in the amount of $ 100,000.00 for Parks Master Plan. RESOLUTION 83-00 AS RECORDED IN THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK. • City Council Minutes • June 20, 2000 Page 2 FIRST NIGHT FUNDING A resolution approving funding for First Night in the amount of $ 15,000.00. RESOLUTION 84-00 AS RECORDED IN THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK. Alderman Santos asked for the minutes to be removed from the Consent Agenda since they had not had a chance to review them. Alderman Austin moved to approve the Consent Agenda with the removal of the minutes. Alderman Trumbo seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion carried unanimously. OLD BUSINESS RZ 00-15.00 An ordinance approving rezoning request RZ 00- 15 .00 as submitted by Bill Helmer on behalf of Clifford and Mary Clevenger and Mary Silvis for property located at 831 N. 54th Avenue. The property is zoned A- 1 , Agricultural and contains approximately 2.97 acres. The request is to rezone to R- 1 , Low Density Residential. This ordinance was left on the first reading on the June 6, 2000 meeting_ _ Mr. Rose read the ordinance for the second time. Alderman Trumbo moved to suspend the rules and move to the third and final reading. Alderman Young seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion carried unanimously. Mr. Rose read the ordinance for the third and final time. There was no public comment. Mayor Hanna called for the vote. Upon roll call the ordinance passed unanimously. ORDINANCE 4249 AS RECORDED IN THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK. PARTIAL PERMIT An ordinance repealing Section 156.04, Section 169.03 (B)(6), and Section 170. 03 (A) of the Code of Fayetteville, Unified Development Ordinance, and amending those sections to prohibit nonfinal, partial and/or phased grading and/or stormwater management, drainage and erosion control permits. The ordinance was left on the first reading at the June 6, 2000 meeting. Alderman Young moved to suspend the rules and move to the second reading. Alderman Trumbo seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion carried unanimously. • • City Council Minutes June 20, 2000 Page 3 Mr. Rose read the ordinance for the second time. Alderman Austin stated they had discussed this item at the Ordinance Review Committee. The committee's recommendation had been to form an Ad Hoc Committee to address the issue and to hold off on any final action until they had received a report from them. Alderman Daniel stated she agreed. They should wait because this was a significant change. She was not ready to make a final decision. Alderman Young stated he would like to leave the item on the agenda and possibly table it at the next meeting. He stated he had concerns that they had appointed people to the Ad Hoc Committee that did not live within the city. Alderman Daniel stated she had inquired about that. Apparently, it was not mandatory that they live in the city. She had asked around city hall because there had been some confusion about that. Alderman Young stated that was a general requirement for serving on committees and that had • been told to some of the citizens. Alderman Daniel stated she had spoken with both Charlie Venable and Heather Woodruff. They had stated they had not told anyone that, but there could have been other employees. There was also the possibility that the citizen had not specified they wanted to serve on the Ad Hoc Committee. Other city committees did require them to live in the city. Alderman Austin stated there had been a number of people who served on his neighborhood committee last year that had not lived inside the city. They had taken every volunteer that wanted to serve and there had been a couple from outside the city. Alderman Young stated he personally was not that concerned about it. The public could speak to it. He was more concerned about the memo that had been sent out that stated they were not going to take public comment until they had an ordinance put together. He thought they needed to take as much public comment as possible. He suggested Mr. Beavers, City Engineer, get with Mr. Rose to draft an ordinance combining both the grading and drainage ordinance. Mr. Charles Venable, Public Works Director, stated that was what he thought the Ad Hoc Committee was going to do. In response to questions, Mr. Rose stated the council had a rule regarding the city' s formal committees that required volunteers to be citizens of the City of Fayetteville in order to belong to • them. This was an Ad Hoc Committee. It was not an official committee. It could be composed ,f City Council Minutes • June 20, 2000 Page 4 of whomever they desired. If they wished to have a rule that the Ad Hoc Committee could only be comprised of people from Fayetteville then they could do that. Alderman Trumbo stated he did not think they needed to do that. However, he did think that they needed public comment. Alderman Young stated if they had public comment during the committee meetings it would cut down on the comments at Council. He thought they needed something to get started with. Alderman Russell stated that when the ordinances were looked at individually they were easy to understand, but when they were put together, the process became confusing. He stated he would like to see a flow chart and/or a question and answer format which would go by the letter of the ordinances. It was not clear to him what people were to do at what time. It needed to be clear. He thought they needed to deal with the ordinances as a unit. A step by step process would be easier for the developers to follow and for the public to understand. Alderman Austin stated the Ordinance Review Committee could take that advice and work it into their final recommendation for the City Council. The Tree Preservation Ordinance was under consideration and they would be receiving a report from them. • Alderman Russell stated currently the process was confusing. The closest thing they had to step- by-step process was the city's development manual, which was not the law. It was a supplement to the law. He had never seen it. Ms. Lorel Hoffman, Planning Commissioner, had pointed out that the manual was not in direct compliance with the law, but that was what the city was giving the developers. He suggested making the ordinance into a step-by-step process which would solve the discrepancy problem between the two documents. Alderman Young suggested the first step for the Ad Hoc Committee was to decide if they needed a flow chart or exactly what they needed. Mr. Venable agreed that was what the committee needed to be doing. He stated he would be trying to keep up with the committee. The intent of the first meeting was for the committee to get together and go through everything and decide what changes needed to be made, then when they decided the changes that needed to be made, develop a draft ordinance for public input. THE ORDINANCE WAS LEFT ON THE SECOND READING. NEW BUSINESS URBAN FORESTRY ASSESSMENT A report presented by Natural Path Forestry Consultants, Inc. • J • City Council Minutes June 20, 2000 Page 5 Ms. Kim Hesse, Landscape Administrator, introduced Mark Duntemann with Natural Path Forestry Consultants, Inc. Mr. Duntemann had been contracted to assess the city' s forestry program. The contract was funded jointly by the Urban and Community Forestry Assistance Grant and the CIP Forestry Program. What Natural Path had been asked to do in their assessment was to conduct a sample inventory of the trees within the public rights-of-way and public lands in order to determine their maintenance and planting needs, policies, ordinances, and tree protection. He had been observing their current practices. The results of the assessment should bring their program up to a higher level in the future by giving them a program to implement. # Mr. Duntemann stated they had been contracted by the City to conduct an assessment, with recommendations of the City' s urban forestry program. Over the course of five months, the assessment had been carried out by interviewing staff, assessing the street tree population health, and reviewing the City' s policies. This report was the culmination of that assessment. The foundation of the assessment and recommendations were developed by using an Urban Forestry Sustainability Model developed by Dr. James Clark and Nelda Methaney. A sustainable system is one which survives or persists. In the context of urban forest, such a system would have • continuity over time in a way that provides maximum benefits from functioning of that forest. —Clark and Matheny developed a working model that defines nineteen specific cwriteria to evaluate sustainability. These nineteen cwriteria are separated into three types of resources: vegetation resource, management resource, and community resource. At the core of understanding the importance of sustainable urban forest is an attachment that the people have for the community. Their recommendations are tempered by what they feel is achievable by the City of Fayetteville within limited and potential resources. VEGETATION RESOURCE The improvement in the health of the individual trees and the collective urban forest is the general goal of any sustaining system. To that end the following four cwriteria were evaluated and recommendations for enhancing the overall vegetation resource were made. The four cwriteria that they looked at were canopy cover, age distribution of trees, species mix, and native vegetation. The bulk of the information came from a sample inventory that they did of all street trees. They used a model developed by Cornell University. They approximated that there were 42,000 street trees in Fayetteville. They also identified 4,600 planting sites and 73 different species. The overall condition of the street trees was good. The maintenance requirements on most of the trees are high. There was a lot of dead wood. They had noticed a lot of broken limbs. The appraised value of the trees was estimated to be more than seven and half million dollars. Within Arkansas the average street tree value per tree was approximately $ 1 ,800. Alderman Young asked if the planting sites were in addition to the existing sites. • City Council Minutes • June 20, 2000 Page 6 Mr. Duntemann replied they were additional planting sites that were vacant of trees. What they had looked at in identifying those had been the width of the tree lawn, the distance between the right-of-way and the sidewalk/ curb. Anything less than four feet was considered unplantable. They had also taken into consideration if there were overhead utility lines. It was still possible to plant under utility lines. Community Framework The second key element of a sustainable system is the interaction of all of the partners that play a role in maintaining or impacting urban vegetation. The following seven cwriteria were used: public agency cooperation involvement of large landholders, green industry cooperation, neighborhood action, citizen/government business interaction, general awareness of trees, and regional cooperation. Resource Manaeement The most difficult element of maintaining a sustainable urban forest is having the resources and tools available to manage. The nine cwriteria listed are citywide management, citywide funding, city staffing, assessment tools, protection of existing trees, species and site selection, standards for tree care, citizen safety, and recycling. They had evaluated these eight cwriteria and the other eleven and had rated them on a scale from low to optimum. The rating given Fayetteville was • between "poor" and "fair." The optimum for all nineteen cwriteria was difficult for cities to achieve. The model was use for a spring board to evaluate what was appropriate for the city to implement and the level they wished to achieve. Natural Path' s recommendations: Veeetation Resource The population of trees was low compared to the national average around the country. There were approximately a 50% stocking. The average was 80%. He thought there were more planting sites than trees. They recommended the city implement a practice planting of 250 trees per year in new developments and the central core. There were some issues with the core area. There was no incentive for planting trees in public rights-of-way. The second recommendation was to implement a five-year cycle pruning program. Currently, they were reacting to people asking that trees be pruned. The development of a cycle program could reduce the cost of individual tree pruning by half. The benefits of the program were that every tree would get worked on. It would reduce the number of service requests, and the trees would be regularly inspected and would receive care, the assessment of the woodland quality of the undeveloped areas of the city, the identification of areas for the future that have a high value to the town. Community Framework There were four recommendations: enhance inter-departmental cooperation, promote and improve pruning skills, promote educational opportunities for private sector contracts and • • City Council Minutes June 20, 2000 Page 7 increase community education outreach, and foster regional cooperation. Resource Management He strongly encouraged completing an inventory of public trees. This information .would be used for contracting and for removing problem trees and implementing a cycle program. The cost of implementation was approximately $ 10,000. He had encouraged the Landscape Advisory Committee to redevelop the preservation ordinance. He was available to provide input when needed. He added when an ordinance was new, they could expect to go through growing pains. He recommended increasing funding for arbor-cultural work. There was quite a bit of work which currently needed to be done. They would need to increase funding for future maintenance and purchase equipment for the crew to work more efficiently. He recommended an on-site chipper and a bucket truck with an extension arm that would reach sixty feet. Currently, the city was not capable of working on the larger trees and the work had to be contracted out. In order to implement an in-house pruning program, they would need to hire one field staff person. A five- year program was impossible with the current staff. The number one thing they could do to reduce risk was to implement a maintenance program. Alderman Young asked him to elaborate on the risk reduction program. • Mr. Duntemann stated they had identified a few trees that were in public rights-of-way which had. a high probability of failing. The inventory would identify the high risk trees. The city, with limited resources, could try and remove those trees out of the system and replace them with a new tree. He encouraged the city to review the plan and to take it under consideration. In response to questions from Alderman Trumbo, Mr. Duntemann stated their final report would have the total cost of implementing the program. The largest ticket items were the annual maintenance program and contracted maintenance pruning work which would be approximately $25,000 per year. They did not believe that was available in the current budget for street tree activity. Alderman Austin questioned what had accounted for the "poor" rating they had received. Mr. Duntemann stated the maintenance program had been the most negative influence. Alderman Austin asked if he had conducted an Urban Forestry Assessment in any city and given them a high rating. Mr. Duntemann replied "good" had been the highest. The assessment was presented as goals. The highest quality town they had done had only rated "good." • In response to questions regarding litigation of failed trees, Mr. Rose stated Arkansas had City Council Minutes June 20, 2000 • Page 8 municipal tort immunity. Because of that, they did not have the same legal liability as most other states. In response to questions from Alderman Austin, Mr. Duntemann stated the "national average" in their report had came from the 140 cities they had inventoried, which were all different sizes. Alderman Austin asked if the city would receive their software "Canopy" to merge with the city' s GIS Programa Mr. Duntemann replied it was not part of this project. A physical inventory of trees would run approximately $ 12,000 and the cost of the software ranges between $3,000-$6,000. Alderman Daniel stated the city had implemented a parking lot tree ordinance which had impacted their city. In looking at some of the newly built parking lots, she had noticed a problem with maintenance. The trees were being damaged by weed eaters. She asked if he had any suggestions. Mr! Duntemann suggested encouraging public education and identifying key issues. He believed in education outreach. He suggested luncheons where they would discuss one topic and informal • meetings that were within the profession seemed to work well. In response to questions and concerns about funding, Mr. Duntemann stated there were some State grants and some national funding sources for these types of programs. Their report would cover some of those items. Alderman Russell stated he had read in the executive summary that they recommended that the current tree preservation ordinance be enhanced to remove any ambiguity and focus on preservation. He asked what kind of language other cities had used in their ordinances when they wanted to be serious about private development preserving a certain level of canopy. Mr. Duntemann stated he covered it in his plan. His company did a lot of preservation work. A lot of that work was representing the developer. They had found that being able to go to the site and map the trees and come up a conceptual design evened the playing field. A lot of conflicts could be prevented during preliminary design. Some suggestions were included in the report. Alderman Young stated Mr. Jurgens, Water and Sewer Superintendent, and Randy Allen, Street Superintendent, had concerns about planting trees in the rights-of-way. Their main concerns had been about roots growing into the pavement. Mr. Duntemann stated most of the problems were in the older parts of town. The technology for underground utilities has grown by leaps and bounds. Urban Forestry has also advanced at the • • City Council Minutes June 20, 2000 Page 9 same level. They would not recommend some of the species that have been planted. Most of the problems had been with those problem species that they would not recommend planting. The problem with the street pavement could be addressed with the species selection. Mayor Hanna stated Ms. Hesse would take the report to the Tree and Landscape committee and he hoped they would start priowritizing the things they could afford to do. Ms. Hesse stated she was on the Urban Forestry Board for the State of Arkansas. Every year they had a conference. This year it would be hosted in Fayetteville. This was a good chance for the citizens to learn about urban forestry, developing land with trees, and design issues. The conference would be in July. Ms. Fran Alexander, citizen, stated the Neighborwood Commemorative Tree Planting Project, which had planted more than 145 trees in the parks in Fayetteville, and have been growing out approximately 600 seedlings. They had these trees available to neighbors to plant for free. She would like citizens to get together and see about planting trees in their neighborhood or around their block. They had a variety of trees. She asked that they contact Kim Hesse if they wanted trees. • Mayor Hanna stated there was a Federal Program that was trying to purchase and preserve more park land and trees. He thought there was a possibility that they might qualify. He had also had an offer from a business man to furnish and plant a number of trees, if the city could find a location that they would be helpful. NO ACTIONREQUIRED. BEKKA DEVELOPMENT Consideration of a claim by Bekka Development for legal expenses and loss of parking space revenue in conjunction with the Town Center, Ms. Diane Boyd, Secretary for Bekka Development, stated Bekka Development' s position was that the lease for the land for the Town Plaza had been intended by all the parties involved that any expenses that they were out of would be covered under the lease. She noted there had been a change in the council since the lease had been signed so she explained that they had drawn up a lease which they had felt was reasonable for the property. Basically, they had agreed on the up- front amount of $ 120,000.00 plus one dollar per year. It was an evergreen lease. Bekka had given up the right to ever develop their property (they had planned to construct a building.) They had given up any connection to their two buildings other than what was written in the lease. They were not asking for something they should not have, but they felt they should be compensated for their loses. The lease had been signed in October of 1998. They did not know that there was • going to be a law suite. It was their intention with the lease that the money they would be out