HomeMy WebLinkAbout1999-08-12 - Minutes•
•
•
MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE
A regular meeting of the Subdivision Committee was held on Thursday, August 12, 1999, at
8:30 a.m. in Room 111 of the City Administration Building, 113 W. Mountain, Fayetteville,
Arkansas.
ITEMS CONSIDERED ACTION TAKEN
LSD99-21: Bank of Fayetteville, pp401 Forward to Planning Commission
MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT
Lorel Hoffman None
Conrad Odom
Lee Ward
STAFF PRESENT
Tim Conklin
Sharon McCourt
Ron Petrie
Chuck Rutherford
Dawn Warrick
STAFF ABSENT
Kim Hesse
Janet Johns
•
•
Minutes of Subdivision Committee
August 12, 1999
Page 2
LSD99-21: LARGE SCALE DEVELOPMENT
BANK OF FAYETTEVILLE, PP401
This item was submitted by Roger Trotter of Development Consultants, Inc. on behalf of Bank of
Fayetteville for property located at Lot 2, Wedington Place Addition. The property is zoned C-2,
Thoroughfare Commercial and contains approximately 1.00 acres.
Roger Trotter was present on behalf of the request.
Committee Discussion
Conklin: This is a large scale development for the Bank of Fayetteville, they are proposing
to build a 3,372 square foot building. This will be the first project to develop within the
Wedington Place Subdivision. The project is located in the design overlay district and is subject
to commercial design standards and waiver of the overlay district requirements is requested.
Therefore, this project will have to go to the full Planning Commission. The project was first
presented to the Planning Commission on May 24, 1999. Several administrative requests were
brought forward with regard to this large scale development plan. One was a conditional use for
parking. At that time, the bank parking request was denied. It was for 22 spaces. This summer,
I have had staff research bank parking. After looking at the existing banks in Fayetteville and
looking at what has been approved in the past for banks, and what ratio should be used, I have
made a decision to use a ratio of 1 space per 200 square feet for banks. I do have a memo you
can put into your UDO regarding the decision that I have made. That allows this project 21
spaces. They are showing 21 spaces on their plan so it meets that requirement. That issue has
been resolved. Another issue previously at Planning Commission was a curb cut request on
Tahoe Place. That was approved and they are showing the approved curb cut on Tahoe Place in
that location as a result. The last request was a 35 foot curb cut on Steamboat Drive less than
250 feet from the nearest intersection. The Planning Commission did not take any action on this
request. They chose to wait until this large scale development came forth. The applicant revised
the request to show a 24 foot curb cut but it is still within the less than 250 feet from Steamboat
Drive. That is one issue that we do need to discuss today. We have met with Clary
Development, the owner of the original subdivision who platted this and they are concerned
about this curb cut with their ability to allow a curb cut on the lot to the north. At the time
Wedington Place was platted, there was a 50 foot access easement and they do plan on
developing that access easement all the way across their property. We have a conceptual type
plan that they have presented to us. That is something we can share with you when you're ready
to discuss it. That's all I have. Dawn, are there any other issues?
Warrick: In regard to commercial design standards, we are still looking for calculations to
• verify that 75% of the lot remains in open space in order to meet the overlay district
requirements. Also, conceming commercial design standards, we have information from Clary
•
•
Minutes of Subdivision Committee
August 12, 1999
Page 3
Development on the entire design theme that they are proposing for the Wedington Place
commercial subdivision. We feel like this development does comply with those and we'll share
those with you when you start discussion concerning commercial design standards compliance.
Cross access is an item that will need to be discussed. It's not currently being shown. There is a
request for a variance on the rear setback for the canopy over the dnve through lane That
request will need to be heard by the Board of Adjustment. That is not an item that the Planning
Commission can act on. Staff does support that request. It is listed on the plat as a variance
request. We'll need that to be resolved prior to building permit issuance. There is an assessment
that will be due for the Wedington widening project and that will be in the amount of
$14,033.25. That was calculated on the construction of half of a standard street and the applicant
was made aware that they could submit an altemate proposal for an assessment and that has not
been done. So, we're going with the half a city street calculation.
Hoffman: Is Wedington a state highway?
Conklin: Correct
Warrick: Sidewalk will be required along Steamboat and Tahoe. They are in place on
Wedington currently.
Petrie: The only other thing that's a problem -- I just want to point out again these trees
need to be 10 feet from the 18 inch water line.
Trotter: The response from the last meeting with the trees and shrubs -- are we bending
that a little bit?
Petrie: You can on the shrubs as long as they understand that if they have to come out,
the City will not replace them.
Trotter: Correct. Okay, we can shift the trees. We neglected to do that on the drawing.
We know we can do it.
Hoffman: Do you have any comment regarding the proximity of the driveway to the
intersection. Have you all looked at that with the traffic engineer?
Petrie: The answer to your question is no. If you want my opinion, the access is far
enough from this intersection for them to meet our requirements but there is a problem with the
intersection itself. It's only 100 feet from that intersection.
• Hoffman: The same question applies to when this cross access becomes open, we'll have
another one a shorter dimension between the 2 driveways. Is this the location of the cross
•
•
Minutes of Subdivision Committee
August 12, 1999
Page 4
access?
Trotter: Yes.
Hoffman: There's going to be a cross access? There's going to be a driveway on here
serving another amount of traffic?
Conklin: What is being handed out to you is what Clary Development, Inc. has given to us
as a conceptual plan of how they intend to develop the site. This plan was given to the Bank of
Fayetteville, prior to the purchase of their lot and this access easement has always been planned
between Steamboat and Colorado Drive.
Petrie: It is my understanding that if this is allowed, Clary will have to have a waiver.
Conklin: Yes. We have a distance from intersection of 250 feet from the curb cut and then
distance between curb cuts of 200 feet. Clary Development is really concerned about Planning
Commission granting this request. They want to be assured that they can have this access going
back behind this lot. This is somewhat similar to Fiesta Square with Hardee's and that bank.
You go up through Rolling Hills and up the drive and then you access that bank and Hardee's
from the access through the back. That's a similar type of design that Clary has proposed on this
development.
Hoffman: Clary is here today?
Conklin: No. There is no representative of Clary Development here today.
Ward: They're going to have another cross access back behind on that stuff, too, aren't
they? Further north?
Conklin: Yes. They have one along the front of the building along the north.
Hoffman: Obviously traffic is going to be our final issue. Let's go ahead and hear from
everybody else and get everything discussed and then come back to the driveways and such.
Rutherford: On Tahoe Place and Steamboat Drive, there needs to be something on there that
says minimum 6 foot green space between the curb and the sidewalk. That green space is not
shown.
Trotter: Chuck, that is the call I made to you the other day that this lot was platted prior to
• that requirement but we don't have the full 6 feet of green space.
•
•
Minutes of Subdivision Committee
August 12, 1999
Page 5
Rutherford: On the whole frontage?
Trotter: Neither side. As you get away from the first lot and the rest of the development
beyond, we have 6 foot. This road widens out at the end and the right of way apparently at that
time didn't provide the 6 foot green space. We have about 3 and a half feet, I think. We used the
maximum.
Rutherford: Anyway, there needs to be something on there indicating that. Also, on your
driveway approaches, the way you have them shown is with a concrete apron. Somewhere on
there, I'd like for you to add a note that the sidewalks be continuous through the driveways.
Because on the one along Steamboat Drive the way you have that arrow there --
Trotter. So, add a note that says sidewalk is continuous.
Rutherford: Put it on the driveway approaches on Tahoe and Steamboat.
Hoffman: Anything else?
Rutherford: No.
Ho man: Kim, could you give us a report on landscape?
Warrick: I don't have anything new from her from the minutes of plat review.
Hoffman: Will she be available at agenda session?
Warrick: I believe so. The comments that Ron made concerning the water line -- there is an
18 inch water line along Wedington. Those were her main comments, as well, at the plat review
meeting concerning moving those trees back off that water line at least 10 feet.
Hoffman: You all understand that?
Trotter: Yes, ma'am. Did you get a letter?
Hoffman: From who?
Trotter: Myself.
Hoffman: No.
• Warrick: Do you have a copy of that, Roger?
•
•
Minutes of Subdivision Committee
August 12, 1999
Page 6
Trotter: I'll read the letter if that is all right.
"On behalf of the Bank of Fayetteville, we are requesting a waiver from the design
overlay district §162.21(D)(6). This section states: No curb cuts shall be allowed within
250 feet of intersections. We are requesting a 24 foot entrance/exit drive off of
Steamboat approximately 171 feet from Wedington Road as shown on your plans. Our
client feels this curb cut is imperative for traffic patterns developing and necessary for
this bank and it's drive through teller operations. We further feel this is a safe and
workable entrance/exit for this site which would grant no special pnvileges to the
applicant. The proposed curb cut is the most reasonable location with the bank's property
of 190 feet of frontage along Steamboat. This cut would be in a widened section of
Steamboat. There would be room for 2 cars to stack turning left into the bank thus
allowing traffic to continue north on Steamboat. This 2 car stack will provide for
adequate stacking and will function during peak traffic. There is a 50 foot common
access easement on the bank's north border and we understand from plat review that this
is the planning department's preferred access point for the bank. This would mean cars
wishing to enter the bank would make a left tum off of Steamboat and then immediately
make another left turn onto the bank's property."
We're making 2 left turns that would not function during peak traffic. In other words, it would
back up traffic on Steamboat and possibly create a conflict there.
"...Lot 8 and 3R will be developed as a grocery store and other retail. In the absence of
the proposed curb cut shown for the bank, and their access being the common access
easement, cars entering the bank will impede traffic flow for the entire development to
the north. To sum up the waiver request, we show the design overlay distnct regulation
requirements would place a hardship on the bank and the future development to the
north."
Hoffman: My question is this is not the plan that was presented to the Planning Commission
to do the original driveway work with. It was configured differently. I like the fact that the drive
through has been put to the back and I don't remember the specific plan from before but this
seems to me that it has better circulation.
Warrick. The only difference from the plan you saw in May and the plan that you are
seeing now is that the curb cut on Steamboat was originally shown as 35 feet wide. The rest of
the configuration was the same.
Trotter. I think it's been moved a little bit farther south to allow --
• Ward: The last time we saw it, if you entered off Wedington, you had to make 4 turns to
•
Minutes of Subdivision Committee
August 12, 1999
Page 7
get ready to go through the drive through. You had to turn off of Wedington, turn off, turn back
in and then go back through. You had to make 4 cuts to get through the drive through. Now, it's
only 1 turn to get through.
Conklin: Clary Development -- I hate to speak for them. They are not opposed to the curb
cut. If you grant this one, they want to make sure they have access up there.
Hoffman: I would like you to show this dimension on the plan for the Planning Commission
meeting. We have a dimension to the intersection here shown at Wedington. Would you also
dimension it to the middle of the 50 foot access easement to the north?
Ward: To me, that 250 feet curb cut was really set up on the overlay district more like on
Wedington, so there wouldn't be so many cuts along a major highway.
Odom: That's kind of what I thought.
Ward: I don't think on the side roads --
• Conklin: It's set up for public streets. That's something at the Planning Commission can
look at.
•
Hoffman: From the way this subdivision is laid out, when we denied access to Wedington
from it, I think that gives us a bit more latitude to work with in the back lot lines. I am
concerned about -- I wish I had my traffic engineer's crystal ball -- I am concerned about this
being too close: How big is the grocery store going to be?
Conklin: 42,000 square feet.
Hoffman: How many vehicles per day? Do we have any estimates?
Warrick: That plan has not been submitted. We don't have that information.
Trotter. There are several accesses to the grocery store. With this bank, if we restrict this
bank access to 2 left turns, then we're impeding traffic for no reason.
Warrick: There is about 33,000 square feet of retail attached to the 42,000 square foot
grocery store that is proposed.
Hoffman: There is 1 pad site that adjoins the bank property in the other side of the access
easement?
•
•
Minutes of Subdivision Committee
August 12, 1999
Page 8
Warrick: To the north.
Conklin: That is correct.
Hoffman: But, we haven't approved that yet either.
Conklin: We met with Clary Development and they do plan on bring plans forward fairly
soon. I think these guys are working on them.
Odom: I thought that the 250 feet rule was mainly for major artenals. I don't have a
problem with this
Hoffman: I would like to be able to forward this one to the Planning Commission with a
recommendation attached to it for approval. I'm not making a motion. I think I want somebody
else to do that. I want to make sure that without Clary being here --
Conklin: The final plat was approved with the access easement there. I think it's a given.
They just want to clarify and make sure the Planning Commission understands that they do plan
on having a drive all the way between these 2 streets.
Hoffman: Let's make an affirmative statement in our recommendation of approval that this
action does not preclude that use that we previously granted. Then, I like the way this functions
and I think the design is nice looking. I appreciate the fact the drive throughs are to the rear I
think it's an attractive building. We have to talk specifically about the building materials. Are
we going for a unified look in this development?
Conklin: Yes, we are. We did discuss that with Jeff Maxwell from Clary Development this
week and they submitted elevation drawings, a material list --
Warrick. We feel like it matches the elevation that is being proposed for the bank. There
are a few common elements that they are proposing and the most obvious one is this eyebrow
type feature at entry ways.
Hoffman: Is it the same brick?
Conklin: The Bank of Fayetteville was given the materials list prior the design of this
building and it is our understanding that the materials will be similar to the list Clary provided.
Warrick: We don't have a materials list but we have elevations.
• Hoffman: Let's get that, if we could, prior to the meeting so we can have that.
•
Minutes of Subdivision Committee
August 12, 1999
Page 9
Conklin: Clary Development has been working closely with Bank of Fayetteville and their
architects --
Odom: Make it a condition that the materials list is provided.
Trotter: Just a condition or do we need to actually --
Warrick: That can be done prior to building permit.
Hoffman: Right. The samples probably aren't available but as long as you can coordinate
and make sure they are going to be the same, I think that would be enough. Okay?
Public Comment
None.
Further Discussion
• Ward: The only thing I see on here is the cross access is not provided
Hoffman: I don't have any problem with the drive ways. I hope we're not creating a
problem with this --
Trotter: When you consider that you can turn right out of this development, the only place
you can put a cross access is right over in here and it would be more confusing than not.
Hoffman: If you had cross access, I think you would not be able to have one of these other
driveways. I agree somewhat with what you said. If we had it up here it would be too close to
the intersection. If you put --
Trotter. You might have people trying to enter there and it would really create a problem.
Exiting might not be so bad but I don't think you need it.
Hoffman: This is one lane in and one lane out?
Conklin: Yes.
MOTION
• Ward: I move that we approve LSD99-21 to be forwarded to the full Planning
Commission. I'll go ahead and go back over the things that we talked about as far as staff
•
•
•
Minutes of Subdivision Committee
August 12, 1999
Page 10
comments. Show the green space along both streets on the plat. Also, show the sidewalk to be
continuous Show the trees away from the water line and give us a material list. You don't have
to bring samples but at least provide a material list. And, all other staff comments.
Odom: Second.
Hoffman: Thank you everyone.
Meeting adjourned at 9:35 a.m.