HomeMy WebLinkAbout1986-03-06 - Minutes•
•
•
MINUTES OF THE SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE
A meeting of the Fayetteville Subdivision Committee vas held on Thursday,
March 6, 1986 at 4:00 P.M. in Room 111 of the City Administration
Building, 113 West Mountain Street, Fayetteville, Arkansas.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Ernie Jacks, B. J. Dow, Stan Green and Sue Madison
MEMBERS ABSENT: None
BRADFORD PLACE LSD - REVISIONS
N. GARLAND - LINDSEY CONST.
The first item of consideration was revisions for the large scale
development of Bradford located on Garland south of Agri -Park submitted
by Lindsey Construction. Chairman Jacks advised this LSD was originally
approved with the stipulation that only 36 units could be built with
a single access and that Ernie Jacks Blvd. on the north border would
be constructed before additional units were built. Requested today
1s permission to build 36 additional units without construction of
Ernie Jacks Blvd.
Gary Carnahan, representing Lindsey, stated that a temporary second
access point will be constructed on the south boundary if permission
is granted to build the requested units. He said there are 24 units
completed at this time; buildings 15, 16, 17 & 18 with permission
to construct buildings 9, 10, 11, 12, 14 & 19 being requested. Jacks
noted the request is to allow 66 units with one access and a half
access. It was determined that the alley on the south boundary is
currently used by the adjacent church and that the paving is 12' wide
with ditches on both sides. Carnahan said there is not much traffic
on said alley.
Madison asked how long it would be before Ernie Jacks Blvd. would
be built and Carnahan said the project is being built to meet market
demand and could not give a definite time.
Green asked about construction after these proposed 66 units. Carnahan
advised that sale of these condominiums cannot be predicted. Jacks
said he would feel more comfortable with a time limit after which
this development would be re -considered because of the limited access.
MOTION
Madison moved the Committee grant the request for a temporary drive
onto the alley on the south border of the property with the provision
that, should a permanent second access point be provided within one
year, the alley access will be re -considered. Dow seconded followed
tOJ
•
Subdivision Committee
March 6, 1986
Page 2
by discussion. Green asked if this developer was still in agreement
with the construction of Ernie Jacks Blvd. and Carnahan said he was.
Carlisle asked about sidewalk scheduled for installation before the
second phase of development begins. Carnahan said permission was
given to defer sidewalk construction along Garland until a later date.
Green noted that, if the developer decides not to construct the units
proposed along the north side and does not build Ernie Jacks Blvd.,
there will not be another point of ingress/egress without tearing
down a building. Carnahan said the intent, at this time, is to continue
with plans as originally submitted. Green said the question had not
been addressed as to what arrangements should be made for access to
Ernie Jacks Blvd. if the northern portion of this property is developed
by someone other than this developer. He said he wasn't sure a second
access point was necessary and Madison said she felt it was.
Madison made the following amendment to her motion: Sidewalk construction
at the northwest corner of the property be delayed. Dow accepted
the amendment and the motion passed 4-0-0.
OAKSHIRE APARTMENTS LSD - REVISIONS
• RANTZ DRIVE - LINDSEY FAMILY TRUST
•
The second item of consideration today was revisions of Oakshire Apartment
complex large scale development located on Kantz Drive and East Oaks
submitted by the Lindsey Family Trust. Jacks advised that stipulations
of approval granted by the Subdivision Committee on 9-21-84 were that
internal drainage be carried to a City storm drainage facility and
that a second point of access be provided. He noted that a revised
plan has been submitted reflecting said revisions.
Carnahan said the original subdivision plat was approved with the
concrete drainage swale that is reflected on this plat. He said a
storm sewer has been added to the northwest corner of the property
which will carry the flow to the intersection of East Oaks and Kantz
(approximately 150'). He said the owner of this property also owns
that parcel to the east where the drainage will be carried.
Carnahan advised the parking lot shown in the northwest corner will
be relocated but all (utility) services would remain the same. A
provision to connect internal and external sidewalk was discussed
and it was determined that this stipulation was eliminated during
the Committee's review in October, 1985.
MOTION
Green moved approval of revisions as presented by Carnahan noting
that there is very little pedestrian traffic in this project. The
motion died for lack of a second.
��3
•
•
•
Subdivision Committee
March 6, 1986
Page 3
MOTION
Madison moved approval subject to connection of external and internal
sidewalks. Dow seconded followed by discussion. Green said he would
vote against the motion as he felt it would cost the developer unnecessary
money to install a sidewalk that is not required by code. Madison
said the Committee's role was to address safety in LSDs and Green
replied he didn't think the sidewalk was a matter of safety. Jacks
agreed with Madison's sidewalk request but advised that it did not
constitute a criteria for refusing approval. The motion passed 2-1-1,
Green voting "nay" and Jacks abstaining. Green noted that, because
of the resulting vote, the developer could either build the sidewalk
or appeal the request to the Planning Commission.
APPLEBY APARTMENTS LSD - PRELIMINARY PLAT
GREGG STREET AT APPLEBY RD - LINDSEY CONST.
The third item of consideration today was Jacks noted Clayton Powell's
comment regarding consideration to the re -location of required sidewalk
from the north side to the south side of Appleby. Carnahan requested
the sidewalk required be left on the north side as reflected on the
Master Sidewalk Plan. Jacks noted plat review meeting discussion
of right-of-way requirement along Gregg Street and Carnahan advised
that this developer had agreed to dedicate a total of 60' to be reflected
as 15' on the west side of Gregg Street and 45' on the east. Carnahan
clarified that Powell had said paving could take place right up to
the railroad r/w on the west.
Parking spaces were discussed and Carnahan advised that he has eliminated
enough to bring the total down to the required 162.
Jacks asked if adjoining property owners have been notified and Carnahan
said he would present proof of same Monday, March 10th at the Planning
Commission meeting.
Jacks referred to a note from the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board
stating they would like to have a donation of land to which this developer
is agreeable according to Carnahan. He said the land will be applied
towards Greenspace fees for this project as well as credited towards
future Lindsey projects. It was noted that this park land will adjoin
park land donated by Wade Bishop in the neighboring Quail Creek Addition.
Carlisle clarified that accepting land for parks in flood plain zones
is permissible. She advised the Parks Board meeting took place Monday,
March 3rd and minutes will follow shortly.
Carnahan reiterated the developer will dedicate r/w on Gregg, widen
the street and build a curb & gutter as well as a 5' wide sidewalk.
He said he will also provide water and sewer extensions. He said
he prefers not to install sidewalk on Appleby Road.
114
•
•
•
Subdivision Committee
March 6, 1986
Page 4
Madison asked if any units were being specifically designed for the
handicapped and Carnahan replied they were not but spaces for handicapped
parking were being provided for visitors. Madison expressed concern
regarding handicapped spaces being vacant most of the time and perhaps
being misused.
Construction of Gregg was discussed and Carlisle noted it is on the
list for 1986. Green said he didn't feel this developer should have
to bear the cost of construction on this portion of Gregg when the
City is paying the cost of construction for the remainder of Gregg
Street. Referring to "rational nexus", Green said City Attorney McCord
has advised that it cannot be used "...to portray an indirect or remote
or vague relationship". He pointed out that a basis which can be
quantified and proved for requiring improvements must be provided.
Jacks said he has thought of "rational nexus" as a proportionate share
and Madison noted that 182 people will occupy this development. Jacks
was in agreement with Madison's suggestion that a bill of assurance
for street improvements be accepted to coordinate with the City's
construction schedule. Green requested discussion of "rational nexus"
basis so as to be able to defend same. Jacks suggested McCord attend
a Planning Commission meeting for such a discussion. Madison suggested
a traffic count in subject area to try to determine the "rational
nexus". Green and Jacks agreed it was difficult to arrive at equal
or fair proportions of contribution. Green clarified that he felt
it was not the code that is unfair, but the application that is being
proposed in this case. Green added he was also willing to accept
a bill of assurance for required street improvements. Jacks said
that, if asked to defend requiring off-site improvements, he felt
the development generates the proportionate need for what is required
by the ordinance. Green said he did not feel that was the intent
of the ordinance but that a relationship must be drawn between the
need this apartment complex creates for the improvement being required
to the total need for the improvement. He said he felt this development
was adding an incidental amount of traffic to a street already in
existence. Green quoted an opinion from McCord: "It must definitely
appear that the proposed action by the developer will either forthwith
or in the demonstratively immediate future, so burden the abutting
road through increased traffic or otherwise as to require its accelerated
improvement."
Carlisle cited Art.IV, Sec.i, 2(d) which states "...the developer
shall be required to bear that portion of the cost of off-site improvements
which bears a rational nexus to the needs created by the subdivision".
MOTION
Green moved approval of this large scale development plan subject
to 1. resolution of the Greenspace requirement; 2. resolution of off-site
improvements on Gregg Street; 3. proof of notification of adjoining
116
•
•
•
Subdivision Committee
March 6, 1986
Page 5
property owners with different zoning classification. Madison seconded
and the motion passed 4-0-0.
OLD BUSINESS
Madison commented that a sidewalk bill of assurance was recently granted
to St. John's Lutheran Church located on the northwest corner of Highway
265 and (proposed) Township Road on the basis there was no surrounding
sidewalk. She said, upon closer inspection, she has found sidewalk
existing south of Township and Highway 265 northward into North Oaks
Addition with the only gaps being on the property of St. John's and
the adjoining church to the north. Madison said she felt the developer
should have been requested to install the sidewalk at this time and
requested this type of situation be checked more thoroughly by the
Planning Office staff and Carlisle suggested same might be investigated
on the tour made by the Planning Commission the day of their meetings
as the Planning Office does not have the personnel to spare for such
a purpose.
There being no further discussion, the meeting adjourned at 5:15 P.M.