Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1999-01-15 Minutes• • MINUTES OF A SPECIAL MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION A special meeting of the Planning Commission was held on January 15, 1999 at 2:00 p.m. in Room 326 of the City Administration Building, 113 W. Mountain, Fayetteville, Arkansas. ITEMS ADDRESS ACTION TAKEN CMN Business Park II, Phase II None COMMISSIONERS PRESENT C MMISSIONERS ABSENT Bob Estes Lorel Hoffman Sharon Hoover Phyllis Johnson Conrad Odom Loren Shackelford STREET COMMITTEE MEMBERS Heather Daniels Bob Davis Bob Reynolds Kyle Russell STAFF PRESENT Jim Beavers Janet Johns Alett Little Ron Petrie Charles Venable Brent Vinson John Forney Gary Tucker Lee Ward • Minutes of a Special Meeting of the Planning Commission January 15, 1999 Page 2 CMN BUSINESS PARK II, PHASE II Mel Milholland was present on behalf of the project and he presented the Commission and Street Committee with with a drawing depicting two options for a "flyover" connecting Highway 71 Business with Interstate 540. Milholland: You wanted me to get with Charlies and work up a couple of scenarios. These are not our proposals. These are proposals of what could be done in a very preliminary format. This is not my proposal or Charlie's proposal. It is my understanding from Alett that you wanted to see it. This is basically what could be done if someone had the money to do it. Charlie sat down first and the blue line is basically the same curvature that I used which is shown in red. I came up with a right lane option and his was a peel off from the left. We used the same design criteria. I got with him and Don Bunn yesterday and went over this. Charlie is here and I would like for him to come up and support what I'm saying. He had conversations with the Highway Department and they have no plans for any kind of project in that area. He feels that my design is just as good as his as far as accomplishing the same thing. If you can read on yours, the red • line is 65.5 feet along Lot 17 and what he originally had was 204 feet. The red will do the same thing as the blue one so really I would recommend that if you're going to look at something, look at the red. It accomplishes the same thing. • Venable: There are any combinations that you could use out there. I looked at this going to the left because there is not a very good way to come off except with a left turn. The right turn is probably the best. This one goes between Frontage Road. Both of them would probably run around $4 million by the time you do the engineering. Again, I talked to the Highway Department yesterday to make sure. I talked to the chief engineer and asked if they had any plans to do any of this. And, he said no, this was not in any plans. That is not to say ten years from now they won't have it. Right now, they don't have anything submitted. So that's about the best I can do. Davis: Do we have to acquire any right of way if we take the red? Milholland: There is a strip about 65 feet wide and it's about 500 feet long. Reynolds: Is that out of Lot 17? Milholland: Yes. This is all Lot 17. Davis: That part there close to the gas company, that is all our right of way to begin with? • Minutes of a Special Meeting of the Planning Commission January 15, 1999 Page 3 Milholland: The red is between the Frontage Road and the College Avenue. Odom. Before we get into questions and answers, I would like the opportunity for Alderman Young to come forward. Young: I'm glad you have some alternatives. It's obvious to you that if you decide not to do the flyover, I think that you need to have a viable alternative for how the traffic is going to move. Any motion or action that you take should have that in the motion for a change to the Master Street Plan. This was in the Master Street Plan as I understand but now you're thinking about not doing it. Changing the Master Street Plan to some other scenario whether it will be done or not, I don't know. That is your job and it may be appealed to the Council. It will be your decision. If you decide not to do the flyover, you need to figure out and state in your motion how it will look. Alguire: My name is Bob Alguire and I'm with Northwest Regional Planning and I have a few alternatives that may change the design of this and may solve a lot of your problems. I am a professor emeritus of Urban Transportation and Planning. I am also chairman of your TAC • committee of Northwest Planning Commission. I had a lot to do with starting this thing about 20 years ago. It's obvious that when you look at this, you have to think about getting traffic off of Joyce. The flyover is about your only alternative for that. In my opinion, we have no alternative. This town is going to grow. You are going to continue to have traffic that wants to get over to 540. You need access to the south side of the mall. This is where my next suggestion comes in. There is nothing sacred about that Fulbright Freeway being a freeway status from Gregg Street on in. It doesn't have to stay that way. You can get the Highway Department to agree with you and get it down graded to an arterial status, you can kill the freeway as you come off of 540. You'll have to leave the Gregg interchange. But you can reduce speed and as you come down the overpass, you can put an at grade major intersection somewhere west of the Eye Center and east of Brookside Medical Institute that ties into Millsap which solves another one of your problems and goes into the Mall Boulevard. This gives you access on the south side of the Mall. You need access to it with the overpass. The ramps at Gregg would have to be killed except for one of them. I recommend you leave the on ramp west bound and kill the off ramp so they can get off at this interchange and we can tie that in. We can tie in Millsap so everybody that wants to get on that road can come down Futrall through that interchange and get on to that Expressway there at that interchange. This also accomplishes another thing. It reduced your speed and design requirements of the flyover. You won't have to make your radius quite so big and it won't be quite as expensive. This alternative will allow you to handle what you're getting ready to do south of Wal-Mart. If you don't do that, you won't have any access. Gregg Street will become a nightmare and that interchange is impossible to work with. If you tie all these things • together and start looking at it, you will have something you can deal with and go on to the south side of that mall area. I spent three days laying all this out. I'll be happy to talk to your planning • • • Minutes of a Special Meeting of the Planning Commission January 15, 1999 Page 4 people about some of the design criteria This gives you the alternative of opening that area to satisfy the transportion. You've already have Joyce Street and it's right at capacity. You've got the Mall and Joyce Street and if you been at that intersection lately, it won't handle much more either. You're going to double the commercial activity down there. You've got to think about something like this in order to solve the problem. Johnson: It's very hard for me to follow that. I would like something to look at Alguire• I've haven't had time to design it. I've spent the last two days driving around out there trying to figure everything out. Johnson: Let me understand how the problem I was concerned about would be handled. If I'm travelling north on 71 Business and I'm wanting to get to 71 Bypass, the way I would do that under this scenario is, I would make a left at the Bypass -- Alguire: I'm not giving you an alternative to the flyover. Johnson: I still have no way to deal with the problem of travelling 71 Business north. Alguire: You'll use the flyover but it won't have to be designed to as high a standard. It would shorten up and get you a little better radius Johnson: I understand that you were saying that from the Bypass east of Gregg down grading. Really, that's local traffic. In conjunction with that, is there not a way on 71 Business travelling north that you could back track at an intersection with a light and allow a left lane that gets you on to 540. Alguire: I might say that's impossible. You would have to redesign that whole interchange. You would probably have one over pass that coming south bound and you would probably have to wait for that in order to handle the flows in and out. You would have to change that radius but you can't have a scewed intersection and then you'd have to bring it in which would give you a site distance problem to the right. I'm not saying it can't be done but that would take some real design to look at that and see if you could convert that whole interchange into a essentially a partial at grade intersection. It may can be done but by the time you carry out that interchange with all the traffic through there now, and widen that one bridge so that you could get an arterial under there and get all that interchange there you might be back in the same ball park as the flyover. I don't have a pencil on it and I haven't spent the time it would take to figure it up now. Davis: So you are saying the flyover is still needed? • • • Minutes of a Special Meeting of the Planning Commission January 15, 1999 Page 5 Alguire: Yes. Reynolds: What's the possibility of stopping the 540 bypass where it goes to Springdale and shut traffic off from coming to the east and going up through Fayetteville and going up in front of the mall. Alguire: You can handle your mall traffic with Mall Avenue and whatever at the same time you shut that extra traffic off and when you get down to that certain point, you could turn back left, go under the underpass, and feed your traffic back west to 540. It would save all of us money and time. What you're going to do is call it a dead end over here and if anybody wants to go over here, they have to get on the side streets. Reynolds: I'm not sure I follow what you're talking about. We'll have to get a better map. Alguire: I'll be happy to set down and work with anybody on the design. I don't think this meeting is the place to do this. There is an alternative there which does include the flyover. The flyover will help you greatly but it won't solve the problems you are talking about transportation wise when you open that whole south area. The only way you will be able to solve that is to put an intersection at Gregg if that's an arterial and provide the access that you have at Joyce Street there. The right of way is there. You could put dual left turn lanes there. You have room to do all this work All you have to do is down grade that from a freeway to arterial status and then you can tie in Millsap and the hospital, you would have the mall. It would all be there. Hoffman: In the planning stage for CMN and associated development on the south side of 71/Fulbright Expressway, as a Planning Commission it is not really our Job to design these intersection but to leave enough room for them to be installed when needed. Does the red line for the flyover that was proposed by Mr. Milholland give adequate right of way for that eventual construction and is there additional right of way required on either the north or the south side of Fulbright Expressway. Alguire: There would need to be additional right of way on the northwest side. You are going to have to have enough right of way. Hoffman: The right part would be adequate? Alguire• Yes. A right exit ramp is the preferrable way. That is the standard. Hoffman: As you go on down the Expressway, this intersection reconfiguration could occur without additional right of way for either the developments for CMN Phase II. • • • Minutes of a Special Meeting of the Planning Commission January 15, 1999 Page 6 Alguire: You obviously will have to have some right of way to tie the road in. Hoffman: I think we're making provisions for that now. Alguire: I'm sure they would be more than willing to give that up to you if you provide that access. Hoffman: I want to make sure we leave enough room for all the intersections to occur whenever they do. Thank you so much. (Mr. Danny Forkner was present to address the Commission.) Forkner. I live in Springdale and I wanted to throw out an idea that in years past, I've always said we've needed a road that went from the Bypass over to 265. As far as this flyover, I've always wondered why can't they change from a flyover in the position that they're talking just going straight to Joyce Street. Then you could peel off the north bound lane at a clover leaf and join in. It would be like extending the Bypass straight to Joyce Street. You have a two way road -- traffic going to Joyce Stree and traffic coming from Joyce Street. As you're heading north on 71 Business, you peel off on a clover leaf and loin into the traffic taking the Bypass. Hoffman: There are a lot of existing buildings down there. Forkner: There's one area that isn't. That's right through the area where the creek comes through and all that open land behind Joyce Street makes the curve. Before all this development ever started, I feel we should have taken the Bypass straight on to 265 and connect that traffic. If they were to make a connecting road to Joyce Street and connect it with the Bypass, we could make two clover leaves to Joyce and not have to have a flyover there. It still would be overhead but it would serve the purpose for connecting people to Joyce. When ever you try to go from the Bypass over to Joyce, it's really tough getting from the inside lane all the way to the left to exit on Joyce Street. This way, you could use the same highway with a clover there and drive right into the Bypass. This would serve many purposes other than just trying to get the north bound traffic to the Bypass. Estes: On our Master Street Plan, travelling south on 265 and then west on Joyce, you would connect with Milsap and Milsap would go south and with the flyover you would then swing back and get to 540. If Milsap is extended as on the Master Street Plan, that connection is there. You would have to have the flyover to have that connection. The alternative is to turn north and make a U turn. I presume your concern is travelling south from Springdale. At 265, you would turn and go west on Joyce and then go south on Milsap and then back north on the flyover and get out on 540. • • • Minutes of a Special Meeting of the Planning Commission January 15, 1999 Page 7 Forkner: The only thing I was trying to point to out is before everything got built up, the Bypass should have been extended all the over to 265. Estes: It is fully developed down to Milsap now. I think that the extension of Milsap on the Master Street Plan would accomplish what you're driving at. On Charlie's blue line and Mel on your red line, are the arc degrees different? Milholland: They are the same. They are 20° arcs. Odom: The red street comes in a little closer than the blue street does and it's coming out of a pretty good curve from the highway that is already there. Would that be allowable under the Highway Department regulations? Venable: The only thing is that most of that is on a structure and it would have to filled back in. Milholland: This is the actual distance. Here is the front line and here is the west bound lane so there is plenty of room in here should they choose to make this a longer on ramp. We just showed that you could do it at this speed. Johnson: Neither of these options have made a connection to Van Asche. Venable: We're specifically talking about the flyover. A connection could be made to Mall Avenue and build a bridge here and go over to Steele Boulevard and go out that way. You are up in the air and this would be a one way connection. We didn't show that but that's certainly a possibility. Milholland: We did discuss it and we both concurred that adjacent to the right of way would be a good place to put that. Johnson: So it would be one lane travelling west. Venable: It should be one way. You could have two lanes but is should be one way. The reason is because you have one way traffic coming around and this would prevent confusion. Once you got to the tie in location, it would still be one way. Milholland: It's up in the air On the Master Street Plan it shows that coming back north to where Mall Lane was suppose to be on to the west where it is now. This was intended to go up to the Mall. This would do the same thing. • • Minutes of a Special Meeting of the Planning Commission January 15, 1999 Page 8 Hoffman: I think it is too confusing to try and get an exit for Van Asche and an exit to the Frontage Road from the same flyover ramp. If we're coming down off the flyover and we get to grade and we're on the Frontage Road, is there a safe stopping distance or turning distance to tum right on to Mall Avenue without having rear end collisions. Milholland: Yes. Hoffman: So, we're not contemplating any kind of a stop sign or controlled intersection to get onto Mall Avenue. You could get off this ramp and then turn right. Milholland: Mall Lane intersects Shiloh and the way it is planned now, we could have continual traffic flow. This one way off would have to stop. Hoffman: Is there adequate stacking room to the east? Milholland: You have several hundred feet. Maybe 800 or 900 feet. Estes: When we were first considering this project, one of my concerns was an at grade intersection. I was thinking about it being more to the west to use the Futrall, Northhills Boulevard stop sign. Could that at grade intersection be further to the east Milholland: About halfway in between it is what is recommended. Estes: As an alternative, presume with me that the flyover never happens and an at grade intersection becomes viable. What kind of right of way grants do we need? Alguire: You need right of way that ties in from the intersection over to Milsap. You was need the access right of way that would tie you in to the Mall Avenue. Estes: Are we going to need to have provisions for right of way grants in addition to the flyover right of way for something like the at grade intersection? Alguire: The flyover is not an option. We will need that regardless. Estes: In addition to the flyover right of way, would there be a need for additional right of way on the north side of Fulbright Expressway for some sort of at grade intersection? Alguire: I wouldn't think so. There is quite a bit of right of way there. They've got four • lanes. You have a large median. You have all the east and west right of way you could possibly use there. The only other thing I can see that you are going to need is a connection from • • • Minutes of a Special Meeting of the Planning Commission January 15, 1999 Page 9 Fulbright Expressway to Milsap. Estes: So if we obtain a right of way for either the blue flyover or the red flyover on the north side of Fulbright Expressway out of Lot 17, we will have sufficient right of way for both the flyover and this at grade intersection. Alguire: You're traffic people could probably lay it out. I don't think you'll need any right of way on the east and west connections. It's the north and south that you'll have to tie in. Beavers: You're talking about an area that is fully developed. Estes: When we were first considering this, I was thinking about the at grade intersection more to the west but that is fully developed. Alguire: I don't know what's planned there but there is an opening between the Eye Center and Hillshire Medical Center that would be more than adequate to tie in. Beavers: We have just approved new offices for Lindsey. Estes: That's still an issue that at Northhills Boulevard and the stop sign as you come off of 540 with a sharp right and stop at the sign then turn right and get onto Gregg Street. Alguire• That option is still available to you. You will need a tie in to the Medical Center there with Gregg Street or Van Asche. If you could get a tie in there at either side of the Eye Center and it would work out. Venable: That is under the Federal Highway Administration and I'm not sure how that was acquired. They could say yes or they could say no. I don't know what their answer would be but it would require their approval to get access off of that road. Whether they would do that or not, I don't know. Hoffman: I want to talk about how this project now goes forward from here. We have two discussions going on at once. We have the at grade intersection and the flyover that does impact this project. What 1 would like to see would be that the flyover options be superimposed on the plat for eventual discussion at the full Planning Commission meeting. This should be forwarded to the full Commission with the addition of the dedication of right of way for the flyover on the part of the developer. Separately, we should have discussion about how to put together a plan to show the at grade intersection. Odom: Which flyover needs to be shown? • • • Minutes of a Special Meeting of the Planning Commission January 15, 1999 Page 10 Hoffman: I think the natural inclination is to have a right exit for a flyover. The left one is more complicated. I would be more in favor of the right exit. Odom. The right one has the least amount of economic impact on the developer. Hoffman: I'm assuming that both of these meet accepted engineering practices or standards. Odom: We are only talking about dedication of right of way. We're not talking about contribution or construction. Little: That's right. Hoffman: I want to make sure that we leave enough room for 20 years from now to have these road developments occur. Milholland: Are you asking us to reserve the red line so that no construction could take place? Could it possibly be used as a parking lot? The first 25 feet are going to be green space any way. Hoffman: Actually, I'm talking about a right of way dedication. Staff, would a right of way dedication allow a parking lot to be constructed? Little: A right of way dedication does belong to the City. If it were an easement, that would mean the City would have the right to use that for access purposes and that the developer could not do anything that would interfere with that right to use it for access purposes. So that would mean if the City did decide to use it all the way down to the ground in building the interchange, then the development wouldn't be able to use it. But if it were in fact in the air, then there could be something underneath it. Milholland: penny on. Odom: penney on it. Milholland: has even been Venable: now. We have a flyover that the Highway Department says they aren't going to pay a They say it's not in the budget now. They don't say they aren't going to pay a That's what Mr. Venable said that they have no information whatsoever that this suggested or proceeded with or paid for. The only thing they told me is that they don't have any plans to do anything right • • • Minutes of a Special Meeting of the Planning Commission January 15, 1999 Page 11 Hoffman: In terms of a right of way dedication, that is the generally accepted practice on a development for future right of way needs when those roadways are going to be immediately improved, then there would be a contribution which we are not at this time asking for. I'm trying to make sure we don't have a mess to clean up when and if the road does come through. Milholland: A contribution is normally on something that provides assistance to the project which this wouldn't. This would be for people wanting to go west. Odom: That's not true. This would connect up to Mall Avenue and Shiloh Drive. Mall Avenue directly fronts Lot 17 of this project. Milholland: Your suggesting right of way grant or easement. Whoever buys that lot couldn't use it for any purpose until that was built? Say it was never built. Could the person buying Lot 17 use that for a parking lot? Odom: No. If you use that for a parking lot then we have to tear it out and they are not in compliance with the Parking Lot Ordinance. Milholland: This has been discussed and that's the only reason I bring it up. Hoffman: My intention was for a right of way dedication. Little: I was present when Mr. Milholland asked about using the right of way grant as a parking lot. Mr. Venable said he was familiar with several scenarios in Little Rock where there was use of area underneath interstate. Irwin: If we gave an easement or a restricted use to whoever built a building on the property, and if somebody ever came along in the future to build this road and wanted to take the right of way we could park under it. If we didn't dedicate the right of way today but dedicated an easement or provide for some restriction saying we aren't going to put any buildings on there. In ten years if they came along and wanted to buy the property at that time, then at that time it would be addressed. It wouldn't be an improved piece of property. If we didn't decide to today to dedicate but if they ever decide to do it it wouldn't affect the sale of the lot. Little: Could we get a calculation of the land area that we are talking about? Milholland: It's a little less than an acre. Our concern is this, if that acre of land is left where my client couldn't sell it and it grows up and say in20 years the road still isn't built or ever built, you have a strip of land there that no one will maintain. If there was some way we could work together where the person that buys Lot 17 until this is built could have some type of use on it • Minutes of a Special Meeting of the Planning Commission January 15, 1999 Page 12 but not put a building on it. That's all we're asking. They will maintain it and make it look nice. Daniel: What is the dimension? You said an acre. Milholland: 65 feet by 600 feet. I'm just concerned about it growing up and no one maintaining it. What would we do with it? If we could work it where the person that buys the lot could utilize it until the flyover is built, we'll restrict the buildings. But, let them use it for something. Harrington: On behalf of the owners, I have a serious concern about the dedication requirement. The need for the traffic to go north and over to the Bypass has in no way any connection with this development. It's not site generated traffic. It has no impact to this area. This will be a problem in the future and it will be a problem that the City has It does not meet a rational nexxus test for dedication of land. I think the owners may be willing to live with if you put a condition on this plat and talk about it in appeal. The idea of having that a set aside right of way dedication, I think the City should look at acquiring that right of way This is not the same kind of a legal situation as the streets in the subdivision or even an intersection coming out to the • south. I think that is one thing. But this is not going to serve the subdivision it's only going to affect it aesthetically. The nexxus question is not met here. Right of way is one thing. Dedication is another. • Odom. If a connection is made to Mall Avenue and Shiloh Drive, it has a direct impact on Lot 17. Harrington: There have been 15 different suggestion and one of the ways suggested does not affect this project. Odom: That's one of the reasons Ms. Hoffman was asking to have the actual planned drawing on the document and that way we would know what we're talking about. Little: The Master Street Plan was in existence at the time this property was rezoned. During those meetings, I made several statements talking about street alignments. I repeated that we should not talk about street alignments at this time. It is not in compliance with the Master Street Plan and we will discuss that at the development. This is not new news about our Master Street Plan and our plans for this area. The traffic to be generated by this development is about 44,000 cars average daily traffic. For comparison, the highway and the bypass carry about 30,000 adt right now. So this one development will equal or exceed what we are currently carrying on the Bypass and on College. So it may not have a direct impact but 1 cannot see how you can separate it from having some other kind of impact. The rational nexxus in our subdivision regulations is usually applied to improvements or escrow amounts for improvements. • Minutes of a Special Meeting of the Planning Commission January 15, 1999 Page 13 Our regulations also say that when there is a Master Street Plan issue any large scale, not subdivision, will dedicate to the City of Fayetteville what ever right of way is necessary to achieve that traffic pattern. Estes: I view the flyover as the only viable and feasible means or mechanism by which to move people from Fayetteville going north and people from Springdale going south on 265. The only way that can be done now is to travel north to the stoplight, do a U turn and come back. I would certainly second any motion made with Ms. Hoffman's comments. Johnson: We haven't talked about the fact that there is another large tract of undeveloped property east of 71 Business. If we do something now that is serious about planning for a flyover, my question to the traffic planners is whether we would do anything that would limit what we can do in the future as the land east of 71 Business and north and south of Joyce fills in because that will be built up. Will the plans we are talking about now limit us as that area is developed. Estes: I see Millsap as the way to move traffic off of Joyce over to 71 and then the • flyover to 540. • Venable: I think that's true. Millsap will eventually have to be widened. Johnson: Everything north of Arkansas Western Gas and the church and south of Zion Valley is going to be developed. Venable: That's the plan for Millsap going to the east and connecting in there and tying to Zion. That is part of the Master Street Plan as well. Johnson: Anything we do about the flyover wouldn't further limit what we could do on access over in that area east of 71 Business. There is nothing that we could plan for now to open that area up in the future. Beavers: I just want to make sure the Planning Commission requires both the red option and the blue option so that those could be evaluated further. I haven't spoken to Mr. Venable about this and this is the first time I've seen it. Venable: The red is just as good as the blue Odom. about it. If you review those and it looks like something doesn't jive, you could tell us • • • Minutes of a Special Meeting of the Planning Commission January 15, 1999 Page 14 Johnson: On the drawings that we are asking Mr. Milholland to bring us the next time the Commission see this, could we make sure that there will be an access drawn to Mall Avenue. Odom: I believe it is the consensus of the Commission that it is not only a flyover but it also does serve the property as well with a direct access to Mall Avenue and I assume that would hook up with Shiloh. Johnson: We are persuaded that the only drawing we want to see is adjacent to Fulbright Expressway versus what we last talked about which is the connection west to Van Asche. Can the revised plat show the green dotted lines of the Master Street Plan? MOTION Ms. Hoffman moved that this project be forwarded to the full Planning Commission for review with revised plats showing Option A, the blue line, and Option B, the red line, with proposed connections both down the Frontage Road, Shiloh, to Mall Avenue and with the inclusion of the Master Street Plan which is the extension of Van Asche to the east so that those layouts can be assessed and discussed. My intent is determation of how much right of way dedication and not a dedication of easement after discussion of the full Planning Commission. Separately, I would request staff get together an area map showing the proposed location of the at grade intersection that has been discussed separately. Mr. Estes seconded the motion. Further Discussion Odom: The grade to access Van Asche would be very hazardous with a very steep intersection. Milholland: The flyover is up in the air quite a ways. Hoffman: There was discussion earlier about where both ramps get to grade at some point about in the middle of that lot. This is not my preference but we need to show all options. Little: The reason Van Asche is moved is because your development and our Planning Commission have agreed to move Van Asche from where it was planned on the Master Street Plan. I think Commissioner Forney particularly was interested in seeing how it would work with the currently designed Van Asche. Milholland: The grade elevation is too high. • • • Minutes of a Special Meeting of the Planning Commission January 15, 1999 Page 15 Venable: That wouldn't be adviseable. Hoffman: I just want the option shown should other members wish to discuss them. Little: I think the other thing you ought to keep in mind is Van Asche in Phase II. It doesn't have to remain straight. It could angle down to get back. Phase II has not been approved and that is what we're talking about. Harrington: I was informed this was a full Planning Commission meeting. If it is not a full Planning Commission meeting, what is it? Little: This is a special meeting. A preliminary plat cannot be approved at this meeting because we did not have time for adequate public notification. Odom. We wanted to get this done quickly because you have already been on one agenda so we agreed to take the time and deal with some of the the unclear issues. This prevented you from having to go back to the Subdivision Committee for revisions. Milholland: What is my revision deadline? Little: Those revisions will be due on Tuesday, January 19, at 10 a.m. Alguire: You might want to talk about where you are going to split off in your motion. Depending on where you decide to put the at grade interchange and depending on what they decide to do with Van Asche and the fact that you really don't want to do a split in the air, I think you should protect the right of way for the flyover. It's entirely possible to build that flyover to have a right turn only lane and have room to merge out through a yield sign into Mall Avenue. Amended motion Mr. Odom made an amendment to the motion to show access from the flyover to Shiloh only. Mr. Estes seconded the amendment to motion. Further Discussion Johnson: If the motion as stated passes, do we have all the right of way that would be needed for the at grade intersection. Irwin: We recognize that there is desire for a flyover here. I think it makes sense to say • • • Minutes of a Special Meeting of the Planning Commission January 15, 1999 Page 16 that we don't allow development of any structures there but we don't restrict the right of way at this point and then if the state determines this should be built, then they come to us and they buy the land. This doesn't restrict anybody and it lets us know that there may be a future need for a flyover in there. Condemnation may come into play in any event. Alguire: Those are State Highway issues. Whether they would allow parking under there or whatever would have to be negotiated. Johnson: If we decide to let the developer use that area for parking is there a way we can protect this area in the long term? Daniel: What about the Parking Ordinance requirements? Little: maintain it. If it's simply a matter of maintenance, I'm sure the City would step up and Hoffman: This is a subdivision and it will be in large scale development and just like any other, when we request the right of way, it is dedicated. This is not an issue of how long is it going to be. I'm concerned about setting a percedent for other developments to provide easements in lieu of right of way dedications. The ordinances are clear about it. Hoover: If we do allow them to do parking there when it comes through large scale and they have a certain number of parking spaces they are required to have, then if they build the flyover and it takes all their parking, then how do we proceed? Johnson: The City or the State has the power to condemn and anything they might utiltize it for they could come up with some other avenue for parking. They might have to build a multi - floor parking deck. Hoover: We wouldn't give them more parking than what is allowed. Johnson: They would have to make application and they have to propose something. Estes: As to the interim use issues, it is my understanding that when right of way is granted and there is a user of that right of way that the user simply becomes a tresspasser and whether that user plants fruit tree or builds parking spaces, that user has the status of trespasser and when it's time to build the road, the trespasser pays to remove the fruit trees or remove the parking and you build the road I can think of a number of cases and incidences where people have done some sort of improvement on right of way property and when it's time to use that they remove it at their cost and the road is built. This is a non issue. • • Minutes of a Special Meeting of the Planning Commission January 15, 1999 Page 17 Irwin: Let's make sure we don't create a problem for the City of Fayetteville and say we recognize that at some point that may be right of way and we can say we cannot build where the red area is and we can use it for parking. We are trying to design an interchange that the State Highway Department hasn't been able to do. The City hasn't been able to do it. We don't know what kind of right of way will be required. It may be that if we give something it may not be adequate. If we restrict it then we haven't hurt anybody. This is strictly a position of compromise. Estes: Are you talking about a right of way grant or easement. Irwin: the red area. I'm talking about a deed restriction that we can develop the land that is shown in Estes: I wouldn't support that. I would support a right of way grant. Nothing less. Davis: What about a lease to the tenant with a one year option of notice to use it? That would satisfy everybody. Hoffman: That is an agreement that would go before the Council? Johnson: I think the Commission has effectively put the applicant on notice that there might be some willingness to allow some surface use of this land in the intervening years. I'm not sure the applicant wants that. If the applicant does, they can come forward with a proposal. Certainly a lease idea is a simple way. It would be ease to allow surface use or a building but whatever would have to come down in time. Daniel: Where does the Street Committee come in on this? Little: You would not come in on it but for the fact that the Planning Commission asked for as many members of the Street Committee to come. I want to thank all of you. The other thing is if the right of way for the flyover is not reserved, it does require an amendment to the Master Street Plan which will then have to come forward to the full Council. Odom: I think the Master Street Plan would have to be amended to show the flyover being hooked up to Shiloh instead of Van Asche. Little: I'll have to look at that. We need to look at the connectivity issues and so long the overall intent of the Master Street Plan is maintained, it doesn't require amendment. As long as the major connections are preserved, it doesn't require that full amendment. • Minutes of a Special Meeting of the Planning Commission January 15, 1999 Page 18 Venable: While the Street Committee is present, we will have a meeting following the Agenda Session on January 26. Harrington: I would like clarification regarding the multi use trail. During Phase I the trail was discussed to be located at the north side, not in the flood way or adjacent to the flood way. Phase I shows the trail to be 20 feet adjacent to the trail on the north side. Then in Phase II, staff recommended that is cross over and go to the south side so it could go under the highway on the south side. Mel has shown that on the plat as crossed over. On the north side, it was going to be a fee simple dedication with an easement back to the owners. Since this was some what of a surprise to us, we would prefer an easement to the City only rather than a fee simple dedication. It's much better for the developers to do it that way since we are agreeing to give 20 feet which is about an acre and half of land on the south side that we did not originally anticipate. Little: The trail extends from the north side of the creek on Lot 12 and on the south side of the Lot 17 so we have to have a crossing on Mall Avenue. Harrington: I don't think the City was asking for a fee simple in the first place on the north • side. • Little: That was in the letter of agreement that was made with the Council at the time that the property was rezoned and it does say in the flood area so there is some room for discussion. Daniel: This should come before the Trails Committee. Little: It's on the long range plan. Venable: I think everything has been discussed and I think everything has been signed off on for this trail. This is an extension of the trail that runs under Highway 71B on the south side and also on the north side. Beavers: I will commit to researching with the land agent on the benefits and requirements of easements versus right of way dedication. Johnson: We had a presentation at our last Planning Commission meeting from the Extension Service and the EPA about trying to utilize Mud Creek through this area as a natural, free flowing stream. The trail plan can certainly have an effect on that. At this stage, I don't know whether we are in any position to do much with their suggestions. The only example we have been given is like the river walk in San Antonio which is very unlike everything that was suggested to us the other night. If we are going to do anything about that, we need to do some • • • Minutes of a Special Meeting of the Planning Commission January 15, 1999 Page 19 work post haste; otherwise, that will be gone. Hoffman: It is my understanding tha they were going to be giving Mr. Milholland all the guidelines that had to do with the tree cover around the creek and the ways to avoid grading the creek and building the bridges in a way that minimizes impact. I assum that as this project goes forward, the Trails Committee will be involved in that and before any grading begins that we are going to see how to treat this creek. Roll Call Upon roll call, the motion passed with a unanimous vote of 6-0-0.