Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009-03-23 MinutesPlanning Commission March 23, 2009 Page I of 18 MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION A regular meeting of the Fayetteville Planning Commission was held on March 23, 2009 at 5:30 p.m. in Room 219, City Administration Building in Fayetteville, Arkansas. MINUTES: March 23, 2009 Page 3 ACTION TAKEN Approved ADM 09-3238: (KANTZ CENTER/STAR-BUCKS CCP EXTENSION) Approved Page 3 RZN 09-3233: (PHYSICIAN'S SPECIALTY HOSPITAL, 175) Forwarded Page 4 ADM 09-3250: (RUSKIN HEIGHTS SIDEWALK AND CURB FINISH VARIANCE) Page 5 Tabled Informational Item: Election of Planning Commission Officers Page 18 Planning Commission March 23, 2009 Page 2 of 18 MEMBERS PRESENT Jill Anthes Lois Bryant Matthew Cabe James Graves Jeremy Kennedy Andy Lack Christine Myres Sean Trumbo Porter Winston STAFF PRESENT Jeremy Pate Andrew Garner Jesse Fulcher Matt Casey CITY ATTORNEY: Kit Williams MEMBERS ABSENT STAFF ABSENT Dara Sanders Planning Commission Chair Sean Trumbo called the meeting to order. Commissioner Trumbo requested for all cell phones to be turned off, and informed the audience that listening devices were available. Upon roll call, all members were present. Don Marr, City Chief of Staff, presented public service awards to Lois Bryant and Jill Anthes in recognition of their service on the Planning Commission. Consent. Planning Commission March 23, 2009 Page 3 of 18 Approval of the minutes from the March 9, 2009 Planning Commission meeting. ADM 09-3238: (KANTZ CENTER/STARBUCKS CCP EXTENSION): Submitted by CRAFTON TULL SPARKS for property located at the NW CORNER OF CROSSOVER RD AND CITIZENS DR. The property is zoned C-1, NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL and contains approximately 14.85 acres. The request is for a one year extension for the approval of the Concurrent Plat 08-2905. No public comment was received. Motion: Commissioner Graves made a motion to approve the consent agenda. Commissioner Lack seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion passed with a vote of 8-0-0, with Commissioner Kennedy abstaining. Planning Commission March 23, 2009 Page 4 of 18 RZN 09-3233: Rezoning (PHYSICIAN'S SPECIALTY HOSPITAL, 175): Submitted by CEI ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. for property located at 3873 NORTH PARKVIEW DRIVE. The property is zoned R -O, RESIDENTIAL OFFICE and contains approximately 2.97 acres. The request is to rezone the subject property to P-1, Institutional. Andrew Garner, Senior Planner, gave the staff report. Based on staff report findings, staff recommends approval of the request to rezone from R -O to P-1. Chai, CEI Engineering, applicant, stated he was available for questions. No public comment was received. Motion: Commissioner Graves made a motion to forward the request to City Council. Commissioner Anthes seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion passed with a vote of 9-0-0. Planning Commission March 23, 2009 Page 5 of 18 ADM 09- 3250: (RUSKIN HEIGHTS SIDEWALK AND CURB FINISH VARIANCE): Submitted by Ruskin Heights, LLC for the Ruskin Heights R-PZD located on the south side of Mission Boulevard, west of Crossover Road. The request is for a variance of the minimum street design standards to permit a smooth, exposed aggregate finish for the curb, gutter, and sidewalk, when the standards require a broom finish. Andrew Garner, Senior Planner, gave the staff report and recommending in favor of curb and gutter variance with a maintenance bond. Staff does not recommend in favor of the sidewalk variance request, for the reasons stated in the staff report. Dirk Van Veen, applicant, passed out information. The curb was mostly finished when we met with Ron Petrie on the site. We opted to replace a few sections with voids. We took care of that after his initial inspection. The entire curb along the highway is to AHTD standards. It is not the same curb that we have inside the project. He discussed older curbs in Fayetteville, and slump test/compressive strength results. The last paragraph in the AHTD document where it states that for slips and falls, design sidewalks for trails and access, broom finish should be used — I'm not familiar with that document. Our guiding document has been the ADA guidelines, and it doesn't state that anywhere. ADA simply states that you can't have a variance of more than an eighth of an inch. If you have cracks or contours or pavers, you can't vary them more than an eighth of an inch from peak to valley. Finishes are not discussed. Commissioner Trumbo asked if he has read the conditions of approval regarding the 20 -year bond. Van Veen stated that he has, and it seems excessive for something that we already have in Fayetteville and have had in Fayetteville for better than 70 years in some places and seems to be holding up fine. As a matter of fact, some of the literature we've got from Europe was an American study on asphalt vs. concrete and they used a lot of exposed aggregate and they were showing tests that were lasting 50 or more years of exposed aggregate. I believe we're looking for 30 years of useful life out of the curb. That doesn't seem to be a problem. Also, one other very important point is that this curb has already gone through a winter cycle, and it was a very severe winter cycle. It was Scott who brought to my attention that this curb will actually go through two winter cycles during its warranty period, and a curb or concrete generally fails within the first year if it is going to have a structural failure. I thought that was enlightening. I think 20 years is excessive for a curb that already exists in Fayetteville and other places. No, it's not a broom finish, but everything about this project has been about doing things differently. AHTD standards for Fayetteville street design is in my opinion a faulted policy. It deals with grades that are not local to Fayetteville; it involves cuts, undercuts and tree excavations of existing trees that normally would not have to be done if we still built contours. Public Comment: Don Connor, asked if this is about an exposed aggregate for the sidewalks and curbs. Commissioner Trumbo stated that the main issue is it's been power washed off the top, so it is somewhat more exposed. Planning Commission March 23, 2009 Page 6 of 18 Connor stated that he would like to recommend in the view of public safety not to have exposed aggregate. I'm sure most of you have been on an exposed aggregate driveway when it's wet and it's just not too safe. I think you should stick to the UDC on it. No more public comment was received. Commissioner Winston stated that exposed aggregate requires 85% of the aggregate to be exposed, leaving 15% under the surface. Are we talking about this in terms of the UDC not allowing exposed aggregate, or are we talking in terms of the UDC requiring a broom finish and if so, anything other than a broom finish would not be allowed? Matt Casey, City Engineer, stated that the latter would be correct, we require a broom finish only, so this would be a variance for that. The top of the exposed aggregate finish that we have right now is not typical. If you were to construct a home and request a contractor to build you an exposed concrete finish, this is probably not what you would get, but it's the closest term we could come to that would describe it. The aggregate is exposed, it has been washed off, and we can see ii when you look at the curb. It's not sticking up as much as your typical exposed aggregate would be. But as Mr. Van Veen said, the top layer of coating on the cement has been washed off, and that protective coating is now gone, and it is our opinion that that is going to shorten the life of the concrete. He gave you copies of the concrete tests that GTS had done. We're not arguing that. The compressive strength is there, we're not arguing that. It's the long-term life and integrity of the curb as it's exposed to continuous weathering cycles, the elements, traffic, that's the concern. Commissioner Winston asked if the concern about slip resistance is a primary factor in consideration. Casey stated that on the sidewalk, yes. The curb and gutter, we can accept that, but we're asking for the extended bond because we're worried about the lifetime being shortened. The sidewalk, we're recommending denial because of the traction. If you're making the finish less slip -resistance, slicker, then that combined with the steepness of the development concerns me. We'll have pedestrians out there on something slicker than normal on sidewalks steeper than normal. Staff s recommendation is that we deny the variance for the sidewalks. Commissioner Winston stated that this really isn't an exposed aggregate, because you don't have the portion of graveled rocks protruding through the surface, and the mix they're using has a lot more broken limestone, chips and sand on the surface. Normally if you're going to do an exposed aggregate, you would wash it after a couple of hours and that really gets down into the surface, whereas what they're doing here, if it was going to be sold to somebody, it would be distressed concrete. It leaves a lot of the fine sands actually attached and up on the surface too, and I felt that when it felt extremely grippy. I'm uncomfortable saying it's less safe as far as slip -resistance than, say, a broom finish, just because it's got so much grip to it. I think the argument about it maybe not lasting as long has more merit, but I don't know if we can find some tests that have been done on slip -resistance for this method rather than using exposed aggregate. Because that clearly is a very slippery surface. Have you found any research that specifically looks at this method as opposed to the broom finish? Planning Commission March 23, 2009 Page 7 of 18 Casey stated that no, not specifically the power washed or distressed concrete finish you're talking about, but I did cite a reference from a USDOT design manual that says specifically that a broom finish should be used for concrete sidewalks, and it does mention that exposed aggregate shouldn't be. You could get into the argument that this is not the true exposed aggregate rock, but that document does specifically say that broom finish should be used. Our AHTD specifications call for exclusively broom finish on pedestrian sidewalks, as well as our Code. It's a tried and true method that has withstood the test of time. Commissioner Winston asked if that's the difference between the "should use" and "shall use;" the sidewalk is the "shall use?" Casey stated that the DOT publication says "should." The specifications we have for the AHTD and our own say "shall." There's no room for other interpretation there, that's why they're requesting the variance. Commissioner Winston stated that they are doing a lot of things that are outside the box, and I do like to encourage creativity, if they can show that there's not an issue with slip resistance, I'd like to give them the time to do that. I don't know if they could come up with that research, if that research would satisfy the Commission's requirements, or yours, but it seems like a question that could be answered. Jeremy Pate, Development Services Director, stated that in terms of the sidewalk, even if the slip - resistance were not an issue, I think staff would still have a concern about the wear and tear, but also keep in mind that this is a subdivision and each contractor that builds a house builds the sidewalk in front of the house, so there's no specification for this. Each contractor will build to their own specification and we won't have the ability to inspect that, unless we write a brand new specification just for this particular sidewalk, which is a nightmare in trying to ensure that it's done consistently throughout a neighborhood. That's a concern on the sidewalk issue. The curb is a little different, and we're more receptive to that because the developer puts all the curb in at the same time, it's one contractor that does it, granted, we saw variations of the same curb out there but at least it's all done at one time. So it will be more consistent that way. Winston stated that because any contractor that comes in will build their own piece of sidewalk, we don't have an opportunity to ensure consistency on that, especially when it's concrete and once it's there it's there. That makes sense to format the rules for consistency in that case. Casey stated that the information you mentioned earlier about having the applicant provide additional data — that data has been requested a couple times over the last 2 weeks, and I haven't seen anything yet other than what you were handed tonight. I've instructed the applicant that if they can provide such data that our recommendation may change, if we can find something to back up their claim. Commissioner Winston stated that he felt the longevity issue can be taken care of with a bond, so the deciding factor to me is the safety issue. It sounds like, as safe as it might be, it would be impossible for us to really ensure that each piece of sidewalk that goes in is effective in the same Planning Commission March 23, 2009 Page 8 of 18 way. Commissioner Anthes asked Scott Hood with CEI Engineering if he was aware of the process taken when they poured the curb. Scott Hood, CEI Engineering, stated that they poured the curb, and as he said a true washed aggregate, you let it set for a little bit and you spray it off immediately. They applied a retardant and allowed it to dry. This takes off the first maybe eighth of an inch, which creates an antique rustic worn look. Commissioner Anthes asked if there was any kind of penetrating sealer used on the concrete after construction. Hood stated that a sealant was not applied. Commissioner Anthes asked how compressive strength affects longevity of concrete as opposed to the finish? Casey stated that the compressive strength would come into play more for failures. So, if a trash truck rode up on to the curb, if it had a low compressive strength it would be more likely to break, and not be able to withstand that load. So, it doesn't come into play as much for the surface integrity, which we're concerned about with this finish. Commissioner Anthes asked if Mr. Hood concurs with that, or if he has anything to add. Hood stated that he had called the American Concrete Institute and spoke with them about this situation. Recently, there was the European scan tour, which the federal highway department has a lot of failures with their asphalt highways, so they want to move to concrete. Reason being, they found in Europe that concrete can go 30 years without touching it before there's any durability issues. So, the process they explained was not common for what they use in highways. Basically, they're doing the same thing, washing the surface off and saying it gives better durability and friction surfaces for vehicles and makes less noise. Currently, we cut a bunch of slits over overpasses to allow for drainage, and they're saying this surface actually works better under this situation. The person I spoke with, Harold Beaver, said he had seen this in his scan tours and things, and was very similar to what we were trying to accomplish here, and he and the president of the American Concrete Institute didn't see any issue with what were doing. I think we handed out some information which shows different articles and research we've done over the last couple of days showing that exposed aggregate surfaces can often work better than just your trowel finish that you typically see in concrete. Commissioner Anthes asked if it was Harold Beaver from our highway department. Hood stated is formerly of our highway department, he was my first contact point and he guided me on some information. I'm not trying to quote Harold Beaver here, but he gave me some information and had me talk to another gentleman. On durability, I do not see it as an issue. I think when you wash you do have aggregate, you have streets in Van Buren, Arkansas I've seen stuff on the streets Planning Commission March 23, 2009 Page 9 of 18 there that's been there for 100 years. That one eighth of an inch will be worn off within ten at least. Any driving surface, highway 540 south, concrete, those top surfaces will be worn out within 10-20 years and you're looking at exposed aggregates, but those highways will stay in use for 50-60 years. So far as wear and tear, I see where Matt Casey and the City are coming from, but I don't necessarily agree that I think you're going to see failure in that curb within 20 years. Typically what you see, pop -out or some of the stuff that would cause water to get into the concrete, typically from aggregates and air voids in the concrete, and you see concrete fail that has the top surface on it mostly. It depends on the mix and whether their mix passes. Commissioner Anthes stated that she had done some research online and was looking at the Concrete Institute and various other places. Obviously, we all know pebble dash and various other surfaces had been around a long time, at least the early 1900's. I found a lot about proper technique for installing different finishes, different surfaces, this wash surface is called out in very specific terms about how you do it, how you achieve it. I couldn't find anything that compared longevity. However, I know anecdotally about different sidewalks on the University of Arkansas campus for example: there are the standard sidewalks and the ones poured for senior walks. The ones poured for senior walks are a higher PSI than the regular sidewalks and they last longer, as well as giving them the fine detail to cut the letters in. They are also slippier, but that has to do with the finish for the engraving on the letters. I guess I keep coming down to, is that top layer of cement, particularly if you use a surface retardant, that says it's going to seal and harden from this point down and then you wash that off, is that actually a protective finish? Is that last coat of cement protective or not, and to what degree, and I don't have an answer for this. And it sounds like our staff engineer and our applicant's engineers are a little bit at odds about that. Hood stated that typically the retardant allows the aggregates to set into the concrete more and allow for a stronger set versus just spraying off the top. You get more to make sure that you don't. You said you get typically 15% of the aggregate, which in this case were probably more like 10% of the aggregate is exposed and 90% of it is under the concrete. The retardant does allow the aggregate to set in, so you don't get pop -out, you don't get failure of this concrete. And that's the purpose of the retardant. Commissioner Anthes stated that she got more comfortable with the curbs installed now once she found out that a retardant was used, because that is what, from her reading, she understood what happened. Whether that means there's 30 years of useful life as opposed to a broom finish curb, I'm not sure. But I also know that the City says they want traditional neighborhood development, we want these kinds of forms of development, but you can't do a standard broom curb and gutter with the rolling profile and have it really match the aesthetic of what our city is asking for. So, my question is, is there room for alternate finishes and construction methods within our Code, or is there not? And how do we reconcile that with what we're asking for? Casey stated that the only finish allowed for both sidewalks and curbs currently with the City of Fayetteville Unified Development Codes is the broom finish. So, there's not another alternative currently allowed other than going through the waiver process. Pate stated that he thinks this is the first time the City has been requested to look at any other alternative methods of construction, so it's not been an issue we've thought to bring to the Planning Commission March 23, 2009 Page 10 of 18 Commission for any type of ordinance amendment. Nobody's ever asked us about it either formally or informally. Certainly, the construction method we have different methods, so the type of curb that's poured, the more traditional squared -off curb is certainly something we have in terms of our allowances. But the finish is not. Commissioner Anthes asked if anybody knows what the cost of a 20 -year bond we're asking for is? Hood stated that he doesn't know if a 20 -year bond is feasible. The most I've heard of personally is a 5 -year bond, and it was pushing it to get that. Commissioner Anthes stated that you're thinking that most bond companies won't write a bond past 5 years. Hood stated he didn't know, he's never seen a 20 -year bond. Pate stated that what we typically do in that case is renew them after they've expired. We've got several bonds that we hold from the late 90's from projects that renew every one or two years, and we simply track those. Commissioner Anthes asked if they renew with the bonding company or renew with the City. Pate stated that they're either a bond or a letter of credit, and so they go for a certain amount of time. After that expiration date comes up, we ask the bank or the bonding company to renew that for an extended period of time. So, Zion Valley for instance, whenever that was constructed in 2000, we still hold a bond for the extension of Stearns Street. Rupple Road, we hold a bond for that expansion in 2001. Commissioner Anthes asked if those are for street improvements to come, rather than installed infrastructure. Pate stated yes, they are performance bonds as opposed to maintenance bonds. Commissioner Anthes stated that it is tough right now, and we're lucky that anybody's trying to build anything, and it's so hard to finance anything, that it's hard to think about tacking something else on in the process. Hood stated that if you look at the pictures he provided, I think if you look at the pictures from this site, those have been around 40-50 years for some of them, they had less design standards than we do today, and that concrete is still there. I'm not saying we shouldn't have design standards, I'm just saying that's still there, and I don't think anybody's disputing that that particular curb will probably still be there unless the City does some street improvements to the area, that it will last another 10- 20 years. Commissioner Anthes asked if he could speak to the question about the two winter cycles during the warranty period and when you see the most failures in concrete. Planning Commission March 23, 2009 Page 11 of 18 Hood stated that typically if you see a failure in the concrete or asphalt, you find evidence of it within the first year or two. If it's going to have a complete structural failure, it will happen quickly from my experience, it's not something that happens suddenly 20 years down the road. If you're going to have pop -out, it's going to happen during the first or second freeze/thaw cycle. Commissioner Anthes asked about the issue about the pressure -washed finish on the public sidewalks. Is it the intent of this applicant to install the sidewalks themselves so they can control the finish of that sidewalk, or is each sidewalk being installed by each individual homeowner? How is that quality going to be maintained? Van Veen stated that it's part of our design code. Beaver Concrete does the mix and then Double Eagle does all the installation. We saw that as something we wanted to see consistency in and so we prescribed it into the covenants. Commissioner Anthes asked if it will be the same installer on all sidewalks no matter what person is building? Van Veen stated that's correct, we have to; just like they have to use a certain siding. There are a myriad of external components on these houses that are required for specific vendors. This is just one more. Commissioner Cabe stated that for him, it's a durability issue. I can understand wanting to do something different, something outside the box that's not part of the UDC, but for us to really take it seriously we need to be doing apples to apples. Sure, there's 100 -year old concrete around here, I think the Romans still have some concrete around, but none of those met a power washer before they were cured. I feel it's the applicant's responsibility to show us why this is a viable alternative, and I for one haven't seen it. I'd be willing to entertain a table, but all this anecdotal back and forth isn't doing a whole lot to further the conversation. Commissioner Myres stated that the sticking point for her is the consistency of installation. Commissioner Winston and Commissioner Anthes have both commented on that. I appreciate the fact that the covenants that are going on with the development require a lot of very stringent adherents to certain requirements, but as a City and Planning Commission we don't have a whole lot to do with covenants. If I could be perfectly certain that the quality and the consistency of every one of those sidewalks was going to be as close as you can get, even with the broom finish you're going to have variation because of the time of year the sidewalk was poured and how long they waited until they broomed it and that sort of stuff. So, certainly I'm concerned about durability but I'm concerned about consistency, both in terms of visual and in terms of safety concerns. I'm still trying to come to terms with the fact of slip -resistance, and realizing that I know that site is very steep and I don't know that I would want to try to go up those sidewalks with a pair of crutches with rubber tips on the bottom, much less a wheelchair, seems almost impossible even if it was powered. But, it's the safety and the consistency of the installation that is my concern. I agreed with Commissioner Cabe that I appreciate all the anecdotal evidence that's been presented, but the points he made are very valid, we have no way of knowing whether this curb or the previous curbs are even made out of the same recipe for concrete, because it's changed over time. So, I'm just kind of waiting to decide whether it's going to be possible for all those sidewalks to be poured and finished to the same level Planning Commission March 23, 2009 Page 12 of 18 of care that was obviously taken with the curbs. I don't have any problem approving the variance for the curbs. I also would like to say that I think I would recommend maybe less than a 20 year maintenance bond for those. It seems a little bit excessive, I have to agree with the applicant, and I would be perfectly happy with ten. Commissioner Graves stated that he is a noted dis-liker of tabling things, but I am also inclined to think that this ought to be tabled, because I don't think I have enough information from staff or from the applicant on why the DOT recommends a broom finish. I know that they do, but I don't know why they do. I understand we're talking about a shell in the City's ordinances, but we have a variance process that the applicant is attempting to take advantage of So, if we're going to entertain a variance then I would like to know the why part of the equation and not just the fact that there is a recommendation by one government organization that that's how it ought to be constructed. With regard to the applicant's information, first of all I think that this body does attempt to promote getting outside the box, but at the same time I like to see the applicant getting outside the box before the fact and not after the fact and bringing it to us after it's already been done. So, it bothers me when I'm put in a position where a bunch of things have already been constructed a certain way and now I'm being asked for the variance, when we could have hashed some of this out on the front end before it was constructed. But, be that as it may, I would like to know the why, and I also think from the applicant's information, the fact that their curb and gutter constructed out there around the City, perhaps from the same material, we don't know, it looks the same but we don't know that the mix is the same. I don't know how many times they've had to repair those curbs and gutters around the City over the last 75-100 years, it may have to be repaired over and over again, so that certainly doesn't help me very much in determining what will happen with this curb and gutter. So, I would like some more information other than the City engineer saying we think it ought to be this way and here's why, and the applicant saying we disagree and here's why, but there doesn't seem to be any data comparing the two types of mixing or how it looks and whether that actually does cause more slips and falls, and whether that actually does require more maintenance, and I think that this body could maybe get a better handle on whether a 20 -year maintenance bond is appropriate if there are some statistics out there that compare maintenance on these two types of finishes on the sidewalk. Maybe it's not out there, maybe two weeks from now you're coming back and saying we couldn't find anything, or reasonable minds disagree and there's 50% in this camp and 50% in that camp. But we don't even know that right now, and I think we'd just be guessing and we want these sidewalks, curbs and gutters to last. They're on the side of a hill and you're constantly battling the elements when you're on the side of a hill anyway. I would just like more information from staff and from the applicant on this to support what we're being told tonight, and I feel like right now I would just be making a guess and hoping it works out. I do have a question for staff about why we're asking for a maintenance bond on one part of this and not another, and why we're not asking for a maintenance bond with regard to the sidewalks. Pate stated it is because we're recommending denial of the sidewalks, the sidewalks have not been constructed yet, so we're recommending denial on them. Commissioner Graves asked if staff would have an alternative recommendation in the event that this body decided to grant a variance on the sidewalks, whether that's tonight or two weeks from now, with regard to a maintenance bond. Planning Commission March 23, 2009 Page 13 of 18 Pate stated that most likely it would be very similar. Commissioner Lack stated that he would like to start off by saying that he is in favor of what the applicants are doing with Ruskin Heights, I think it's a wonderful outside -the -box venture that you're going through with the City. I think there are things we've changed in the City in light of this sort of venture which has become commonplace. I think there are also some sides of it that we probably won't see things change, and we may not ever all agree on some of the things that may or may not be crucial to traditional neighborhood design. But I think even with what you've said tonight, basically you don't want the shiny new modern-day appearance of the concrete, so you take that 10 years of life off of it and it fits in a little better. It's kind of like in elementary school when you got shiny new tennis shoes and you had to scuff them up a little bit because they looked odd. I think it does degrade the surface somewhat, it does take some life out of the product, and those are things we have to be concerned with somewhat in the City. Its life still should have more longevity than any of us should care about. Concrete should last and should be around for many years, not just a 30 or 50 -year service life. So, when you took at the potential longevity of concrete as a material, 5 or 10 years taken off the top with a pressure washer might may 5-10% of its overall life, but it certainly does open up the ability to allow water in. When you rub the surface of the concrete it brings the fines to the top, so it's not only the fact that there's a covering over the top, but there is a factor of what that covering is that becomes somewhat different than what is an eighth of an inch below the surface. If you know about the working the concrete, it actually brings the fine cements to the top surface above the fine aggregates when it's worked, and it's what is more sealed. The added strength has some value in that it's more potent cement that gives you the additional strength generally in the mix, and the more potent cement is the more dense, and it's probably why the University sees a better wear on the higher strength concretes. I personally like the square curbs, I think that was a nice thing we've made a modification to. I don't know that not having broom finish really makes or breaks a traditional neighborhood design, I think you could say you have to have broom finish and white shutters, or certain more decorative components, but to me the thing that will either make or break a traditional neighborhood design is more about space and relationship and these things that outlast the changes in paint colors that have gone through hundreds of years in urban areas and are still thriving in downtown areas that are somewhat transitional. I am concerned about the slippage on the sidewalks. I think it might work; it might be just fine, because we are talking about a pitting process and all river rock which is what makes the true exposed aggregate so slick, so I think there's potential that that could work. I think I wouldn't want to go there without some documentation telling me that it will work, and I think that does put the responsibility on the applicant to give us a coefficient of friction for this application. I know that's available for exposed aggregate concrete, which you wouldn't want to look at, it's available for broom finish, and tile and everything. I don't know what that is for this and that would help immensely. That's probably the one piece of information that could be pivotal for me, in that if the coefficient of friction for the sidewalks was acceptable, I would have the potential to be in favor of casting the sidewalks and power washing them the same way. As it is, I'm not, but I would be willing to take a chance on the curbs. I think there is a degradation of lifespan, but it's not something we would be remiss in allowing. I think that curbs are more likely to be broken by tires than freeze/thaw spalling anyway. I would be more acceptable of that compromise. The sidewalk, I would have more concern over. The other thing with the sidewalks is if we do have freeze/thaw spalling, which we're more susceptible to, it is a walk surface that does have a surface variance regulation, and I think you even mentioned the eighth inch in a foot. That's basically my expression of what I know about it. I'm in Planning Commission March 23, 2009 Page 14 of 18 favor of allowing the curbs; I'm in favor of less than a 20 -year bond. I think 5 or 10, we're probably looking at a process that has removed 5-10 years off the top of the concrete of standard wear, so if we had that bond that would be something palatable. But as for the sidewalks at this time I would not be. Commissioner Trumbo stated that if we tabled, which I would prefer to do, also come up with some way to ensure consistency when these sidewalks are put in, at least bring us something showing how this will be done and remain consistent throughout. If we allow these curbs, which I like and am leaning towards doing, to have a brush sidewalk that would kind of look odd and defeat the purpose. Maybe a little bit more information on how we're going to do this down the road as these lots develop and as the sidewalk comes in would be helpful as well. Pate stated that the best way to do that is if there's a specification written, because the contractor probably won't be around in 100 years when some of those last houses are constructed. We have houses all over Mt. Sequoyah where lots don't quite yet connect. So to us that's not really a palatable way to enforce anything, to have the same contractor do all the work. I don't know that it will be built out within that amount of time. Perhaps if there's a specification that City staff and their engineers can write so that we follow that for that project, it might be the best way to go about that. Trumbo stated that that's something I would want to see. There's a way to do the same process, make the sidewalks have more friction that might be something worth looking into as well. Commissioner Myres stated that it sounds as though most of us are comfortable with the idea of tabling this because we don't have enough information. Motion: Commissioner Myres made a motion to table the request to the next meeting. Commissioner Cabe seconded the motion. Van Veen stated that after Mr. Pate's comments, we can't afford another bond on the sidewalk as well. This sidewalk has paid more money per unit than any other project in the City of Fayetteville in off-site expenses, by meeting the 2025 Plan. We need to get out of here as cheaply as we can. So, throw the sidewalks off, and please tell me how we can get our curb approved without paying a maintenance bond on it that exceeds what normal maintenance bonds would be. The fortunate thing for Fayetteville is we can't afford to innovate any more, so we won't be. Commissioner Trumbo asked if Mr. Van Veen is asking us to go ahead and forego the sidewalk and deny that. Van Veen stated that's fine. Commissioner Myres stated she would be glad to withdraw her motion. Commissioner Graves stated he suspects that the applicant is speaking out of frustration right now. Planning Commission March 23, 2009 Page 15 of 18 I think several members of the Commission, including myself, have indicated that we probably agree that the maintenance bonds being requested with regard to the maintenance is likely too long, and I would like to see some statistics on maintenance with regard to this finish compared to a broom finish so I can be comfortable with that. I don't know if that will then influence where we go with the sidewalks, but I would suspect that if the ongoing expense related to the bond for the curb and gutter was reduced to a lower number of years, and I'm not promising that would be the case, but that's where I'm inclined right now if I get more information. I think it would be a comparable length of time with the sidewalk, whatever that length of time is. Commissioner Cabe stated that it seems like what we're asking for is for you guys to show us why you shouldn't have to pay more bond. So if you come back here in two weeks and you've got letters and stats that say it'll last just as long, then I think as a Commission we'll be a lot more amenable to your request. But we aren't going to leapfrog our Engineering Division. Van Veen stated that they will look further, but we've expended 15 hours of his time and over 60 of our own trying to find such data and have not. But we'll take another two weeks to look at it. Commissioner Winston asked how it works if you have a maintenance bond over 10 years and at the end of the 10 years you look at the curb and compare it to another curb that was poured at the same time with a similar condition and say that one's got spalling and that one doesn't? How do you go about saying what repairs need to happen after 10 years to a bonded curb? Casey stated that typically we're going to be looking for failure. The typical failures we see are curbs with excessive cracking, actual crushing, and breaking off the curb from the gutter section. That's what we typically see. After a 20 -year time period, or 10 or 15, whatever time period you'd want to look at, I don't see us taking minor finish defects as normal wear and tear and trying to get the whole curb replaced with that. What I'm looking for is more if we're going to see excessive cracking and deterioration throughout the entire subdivision. Commissioner Winston stated that you look at the issue large-scale for cracking and crushing. It's not really about whether the finished surface has some spalling. Casey stated that that's bound to happen over time. The topic here tonight is that we feel the finish that has been constructed is more likely to have the failures in the future, not necessarily minor surface failures but long-term structural as well. So as it is exposed to the elements, you're going to see that wear and tear more excessively in the future in my opinion. Commissioner Winston asked if you would expect to see that happening in a shorter period of time than 20 years. Casey stated he would think so. They are effectively taking 10 years of life off of it, so you've aged that concrete. What they're asking us to accept is a concrete from the time of final plat acceptance that's essentially 10 years old. That's why we were looking at a longer bond to try to provide some insurance to City that we're going to have a product that's going to last, and that we won't have to spend taxpayer money replacing something that the developer wanted to try and were instructed not to try from the very first pour. Planning Commission March 23, 2009 Page 16 of 18 Commissioner Graves stated that it seems to him that the problem with maintenance is on the back end, not on the front end. So putting a 20 -year front-end maintenance bond on it may not even get at what City staff is trying to get at. If the concrete's going to break down 25 years from now as opposed to 35 years from now, the applicant has paid all this money for a bond, the concrete was in fact shortened by 10 years, but nevertheless we didn't get at the problem. So, I'm not sure that extending out the length of the bond really helps logically with the situation we're trying to get at, which is why I would prefer to see some type of statistics that compares maintenance costs for these two types of finishes. If that's not out there, maybe there's some information like the anecdotal stuff we've heard tonight about this finish and the fact that if failure is going to occur it's going to occur within X amount of time. Our City Engineer is recommending one thing, and the applicant is requesting another, and it makes it tough for this body, who doesn't have a lot of engineering expertise, to figure it out. My request is putting this on the staff as much as the applicant. I would like information from staff too, and I think I said that. Casey stated that Commissioner Anthes mentioned sealers earlier and if the applicant can come up with some sort of proposal that will ensure that sealers are placed on the front end and periodically over the next several years, that would certainly help the comfort level that we have with the lifespan of this. I have done some reading, and the sealers do help, but we have no way to require that the developers do that other than this process here. So, if it can be done with a bond or a contract of some sort, it would help staff with the recommendation for this waiver. Commissioner Anthes stated she was trying to think of places where we have seen sidewalks like that around here. Does Pinnacle Hills Promenade have a sidewalk like that? It is flat, but it is a large entity that obviously has a lot of liability. Maybe there have been some slip -resistance tests, or have measured the coefficient of friction on that sidewalk. If it's similar, even if we don't know what the mix was, we might know something compared to a broom finish. Upon roll call the motion passed with a vote of 9-0-0. Planning Commission March 23, 2009 Page 17 of 18 Election of Planning Commission Officers Commissioner Trumbo stated that the Planning Commission required a nomination for a new Secretary, and he would like to nominate Commissioner Winston. Commissioner Winston stated that Commissioner Cabe may be a little bit more available on a regular basis, so if he would be amenable that would be a more appropriate person, just for staff's convenience. Commissioner Myres stated that she didn't volunteer because she didn't work in town. Commissioner Anthes stated that she would be happy to nominate Commissioner Cabe for the position of Secretary. Pate stated that he had passed out ballots, and they could be filled out and returned to him. Planning Commission cast their ballots. Pate stated that the 2009 Planning Commission officers would be: Chair- Sean Trumbo, Vice-Chair- Audy Lack, and Secretary- Matthew Cabe. Commissioner Trumbo asked Pate if there was another item. Pate stated that there were two of you were on the Commission in 2004 when we saw an appeal of a Conditional Use Permit for Long Ago Antiques. It was an appeal of a Conditional Use Permit granted in 1985 for an antique shop and furniture repair shop, and the complaints from the neighborhood were revolving around odors from the antique shop, specifically with regard to the refinishing operation. We discussed that during two meetings during the fall of 2004, and ultimately the Planning Commission voted to retain the CUP in its existing condition without any additional conditions of approval. I've been asked by the administration last week to bring this to you as an item for your potential consideration. We've been receiving numerous complaints about similar concerns in the neighborhood. We'd like the Planning Commission to consider placing this on your agenda. If you choose to do that, I can place it on your agenda for the next meeting; if you do not, I will not. Just to let you know, there's quite a bit of history behind this and we can get you packets with all the Planning Commission meeting minutes and there's a lot of discovery that happened at the last public hearing over a period of two meetings with public comment from both property owners that are affected, the Long Ago Antiques owners, Styles, and the property owners to the north, as well as other property owners surrounding the area. So it's simply an item, if you wish to talk about that and consider a public hearing, you can make the decision at that meeting not to re- open the case if you so choose. It's not on the agenda tonight, so it's not open for public comment or debate, it's simply a question I'm posing to you. Commissioner Lack stated that with many Conditional Uses we see, we tell the concerned public that there are recourses and if the Conditional Use does not live up to expectations that there is an avenue for us to revisit, and I think that we may or may not overturn anything, but I think we do owe Planning Commission March 23, 2009 Page 18 of 18 it to our ward to revisit it and seems that there are many complaints that have reached a level where we should be reviewing it. Commissioner Trumbo stated he would agree with Commissioner Lack that he would like to see it put on the agenda. Pate stated that there weren't any official conditions, which is partially why we might want to reconsider it. There was a lot of discussion about what could happen, whether it could be overturned, whether additional conditions could be placed upon it, etc. Those are things we can update you on. Commissioner Myres stated that she feels we're all in agreement that we would like to see it on the agenda. Pate stated that they could expect to see it on the next agenda. All business being concluded, the meeting was adjourned at 6:53 PM.