Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-07-08 - Agendas - Final AGENDA FOR A REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION A meeting of the Fayetteville Planning Commission will be held Monday,July 8,2002 at 5:30 p.m. in the City Administration Building, 113 West Mountain Street,Room 219, Fayetteville,Arkansas. Roll Call Approval of minutes from the June 24, 2002 meeting The following items will be considered: Old Business: 3. PPL 02-4.00: Preliminary Plat(Ash Acres P.U.D. , pp 367)was submitted by W.B. Rudasill of WBR Engineering on behalf of Rob Stanley for property located south of Ash Street between Gregg Avenue & Woolsey Avenue. The property is zoned R-1, Low Density Residential and contains approximately 1.28 acres with 6 lots proposed. 4. CUP 02-8.00: Conditional Use (Ash Acres P.U.D., pp 367) was submitted by W.B. Rudasill of WBR Engineering Associates on behalf of Rob Stanley for property located at 243 & 245 Ash Street. The property is zoned R-1, Low Density Residential and contains approximately 0.17 acres. The request is for a tandem lot. 5. CUP 02-18.00: Conditional Use (Southwestern Bell Telephone,pp 484)was submitted by Larry Bates of Canino Peckham&Associates, Inc. on behalf of Southwestern Bell Telephone for property located at 138 N. East Avenue. The property is zoned C-3, Central Commercial and contains approximately 0.25 acres. The request is for an emergency generator,two fuel tanks, and a circuit breaker and transformer on the existing parking lot(use unit 3) and waiver of parking requirements in lieu of shared parking agreement. New Business: 6. LSD 02-17.00: Large Scale Development(Nelson-Berna Funeral Home, pp 99)was submitted by Michael Weir&Brian Moore of Engineering Services, Inc. on behalf of Scott Berna of Nelson-Berna Funeral Home for property located at the northeast corner of Crossover(Hwy 265) and Zion Road. The property is zoned A-1, Agricultural and R-O, Residential Office containing approximately 3.12 acres with an 8,350 square foot building proposed. H:I USERSICOMMONIPLANNlN02002 AGENDAIPCI7-8-02.DOC 7. CUP 02-20.00: Conditional Use (Nelson-Berna,pp 99) was submitted by Michael Weir and Brian Moore of E.S.I. on behalf of Scott Berra of Nelson-Berra Funeral Home for property located at the northeast corner of Zion Road and Hwy 265 (Crossover). The property is zoned R-O, Residential Office and A-1,Agricultural and contains approximately 3.12 acres. The request is for additional parking. 8. RZN 02-16.00: Rezoning (Lazenby, pp 560)was submitted by Landtech Engineering, Inc. on behalf of Bill Lazenby for property located west of Razorback Road and north of Baum Stadium Parking lot. The property is zoned I-1, Heavy Commercial/Light Industrial and contains approximately 6.99 acres. The request is to rezone to C-3, Central Commercial. 9. RZN 02-17.00: Rezoning(Mathias/Barnes,pp 364/403) was submitted by Dave Jorgensen of Jorgensen&Associates on behalf of Sam Mathias and Bleaux Barnes for property located south of Deane Street, west of Sang Ave and east of Porter Avenue. The property is zoned R-1, Low Density Residential and contains approximately 21.03 acres. The request is to rezone to RMF-6, Low Density Multi-Family Residential. 10. CUP 02-21.00: Conditional Use (The New School, pp 290) was submitted by Hannah McNeill of Criterion Architecture, Inc. on behalf of The New School for property located at 191 E. Sunbridge Drive. The property is zoned R-O, Residential Office and contains approximately 3.25 acres. The request is for an educational facility (Use Unit 4). Administrative: 1. ADM 01-15.00: Administrative Item (Outdoor Lighting)to adopt an ordinance that minimizes the impact of outdoor lighting on adjacent properties and improves nighttime visibility. 2. ADM 01-19.00 Administrative Item (Off-Street Parking Ordinance Amendments) to revise Section 172.01 Off-Street Parking Lot Design Requirements of the City of Fayetteville Unified Development Ordinance to provide a method for reducing off-street parking requirements for properties that share a common parking facility and to revise parking ratios for certain uses. All interested parties may appear and be heard at the public hearings. A copy of the proposed amendments and other pertinent data are open and available for inspection in the Office of City Planning(575-8264), City Administration Building, 113 West Mountain Street,Fayetteville,Arkansas. All interested parties are invited to review the petitions. Interpreters or TDD for hearing impaired are available for all public meetings. 72 hour notice is required. For further information onto request an interpreter;please call Hugh Earnest at 575-8330. H.I USERSICOMMONNLANN/NG12002 AGENDAIPC17-8-02.DOC ORDER OF PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING A. Introduction of agenda item - Chairman B. Presentation of request-Applicant C. Public Comment D. Response by Applicant/Questions &Answer with Commission E. Action of Planning Commission(Discussion and vote) NOTE TO MEMBERS OF THE AUDIENCE If you wish to address the Planning Commission on an agenda item, raise your hand when the Chairman asks for public comment. He will do this after he has given Planning Commission members the opportunity to speak and before a final vote is taken. Public comment will only be permitted during this part of the hearing for each item. Once the Chairman recognizes you, go to the podium at the front of the room and give your name and address. Address your comments to the Chairman, who is the presiding officer. He will direct them to the appropriate appointed official, staff member or others for response. Please keep your comments brief,to the point, and relevant to the agenda item being considered so that everyone has a chance to speak. Please, as a matter of courtesy, refrain from applauding or booing any speakers or actions of the Planning Commission. 2002 Planning Commissioners: Lorel Hoffman- Chairman Bob Estes -Vice Chairman Lee Ward - Secretary Nancy Allen Don Bunch Sharon Hoover Alice Church Loren Shackelford Addendum to Planning Commission Agenda Packet for July 8,2002 Replace Agenda Add minutes for Item 3 Replace 5.1 to 5.8 with 5.1a to5.9a Add page 5.41 & 5.42 Add page 8.21 FAYETTEVILLE THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE,ARKANSAS 113 W. Mountain St. Fayetteville,AR 72701 Telephone:(501)575-8264 _ PLANNING DIVISION CORRESPONDENCE TO: Planning Commission FROM: Shelli Rushing, Associate Planner THRU: Tim Conklin, City Planner DATE: July 8, 2002 ADM 01-15: Administrative Item (Outdoor Lighting)to adopt an ordinance that minimizes the impact of outdoor lighting on adjacent properties and improves nighttime visibility. BACKGROUND Complaints received by planning staff about outdoor lighting located within several new developments in Fayetteville prompted the Planning Commission to consider adopting an outdoor lighting ordinance. April 19,2001 -Planning Commission Agenda Session Staff presented preliminary research of existing outdoor lighting ordinances throughout the country. The Planning Commission appointed a four person subcommittee to discuss the issues related to drafting an outdoor lighting ordinance. May 9,2001 -November 14, 2001 Outdoor Lighting Subcommittee Meetings. The subcommittee met six times between May 9 and November 14. The November meeting consisted of a trolley ride in the evening to visit sites with outdoor lighting. The draft ordinance was finalized and sent to subcommittee members for review in December. January 28,2002—Planning Commission Meeting The proposed outdoor lighting ordinance was discussed and the Planning Commission voted 8-1- 0 to table the item for further review. Issues identified included the applicability of the ordinance to single family and two family dwellings; waivers/variances/appeals; temporary lighting for construction lights; industrial uses; and low voltage lighting. February 12,2002—Outdoor Lighting Subcommittee Meeting The subcommittee reviewed the ordinance and comments submitted by Planning Commissioners. Michael Green attended the meeting and offered to provide suggestions for the ordinance. March 27,2002—Outdoor Lighting Subcommittee Meeting The subcommittee agreed to incorporate the comments provided by Mr. Green. RECOMMENDATION Planning Commission July 8, 2002 ADM01-15 Outdoor Lighting H.IUSERSICOMMDNLSHELLIIREPOR7SIPCL4DOI-15 OUTDOOR LIGHTINGIREPORTS102-07-08PCREPORT.DOC Page Ll Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend the proposed outdoor lighting ordinance for adoption by the City Council FINDINGS At the January 28, 2002 Planning Commission meeting, Planning Commissioners asked that several issues be addressed. These are described as follows: Variance/Waiver. The Planning Commission requested that a provision be provided in the ordinance allowing for a variance from the ordinance. The ordinance now includes a provision in Chapter 156 Variances to allow the Planning Commission to provide a variance when the strict application of the ordinance creates an undue hardship. There are provisions within the outdoor lighting ordinance that allows the City Planner to approve fixtures that, although not strictly complying with the ordinance,meet the intent of the ordinance (e.g. §176.05 Subsections A.4, B.1 and B.2; §176.06 Subsection B.3). Temporary Lights. The Planning Commission requested that lighting for temporary construction lights be addressed. All temporary lighting, defined as "lighting intended for uses, by which their nature, are of a limited duration;for example; holiday decorations, civic events, or construction projects", is exempt, except where they create a hazard or nuisance. Also, all construction or emergency lighting are exempt. Low Voltage Lighting. The Planning Commission requested a better definition of"low voltage lighting". The low voltage lighting was originally intended to allow for the exemption of landscape lighting. The proposed ordinance now specifically exempts landscape lighting not more than 65 watts. The 65 watts was determined based on discussions with lighting specialist that stated they do not provide bulbs larger than 65 watts for landscape lighting fixtures. Industrial Uses. Another issue was lighting for industrial uses. Those uses are required to meet the ordinance. The option to request a variance is now available if the applicant can show that there is an undue hardship or that they are using fixtures that meet the intent of the ordinance. Security. Planning Commissioners also addressed the issue of lighting for security purposes. The ordinance now requires lighting to meet the minimum standards of the Illuminating Engineers Society of North America(IESNA) handbook, which is an industry standard. Again, the variance option is available. At the February 12, 2002 Outdoor Lighting Subcommittee meeting, Michael Green offered suggestions for revising the ordinance. Those revisions have been incorporated into the ordinance to more adequately reflect requirements based on lighting industry standards as identified by the IESNA. The proposed outdoor lighting ordinance can be summarized as follows: 1. The ordinance applies to all new outdoor lighting installations in all zoning districts, with the exception of single family and two family units. Planning Commission 2. Any fixture being replaced must also comply. July 8, 2002 ADMOI-15 Outdoor Lighting HIUSERSICOMMONISHELLIIREPORTSIPCI4DOI-15 OUTDOOR LIGHTINGIREPORTS102-07-08PCREPORT.DOC Page 1.2 - 3, The following exemptions are provided: temporary outdoor lighting, construction or emergency lighting,fossil fuel fixtures, landscape lighting, airport lighting, security lighting, searchlights, and egress lighting. 4. Blinking, flashing, and animated lights as well as lights on towers are prohibited. 5. The lighting standards to reduce light trespass are based on IESNA criteria and the Arkansas Energy code. 6. Upward lighting is allowed as long as 95% of the light is reflected back down. 7. Horizontal lighting is allowed as long as at least 90% of the light falls on the fagade, monument or architectural feature. 8. Non-cutoff fixtures are allowed for bulbs with 260 or less initial lumens. (See Table 1) 9. Semi-cutoff fixtures are required for bulbs between 261 and 8,500 initial lumens. (See Table 1) 10. Cutoff fixtures are required for bulbs more than 8500 initial lumens. (See Table 1) 11. All fixtures must be fully shielded to reduce glare, unless advanced or alternative technologies can be used that meet the intent of the ordinance. 12. Light projected at the property line of a residential use or residential zone shall not exceed 1.5 foot-candle,-measured at a horizontal position approximately three (3)feet above grade. 13. Lighting for vehicular canopies must not create glare off--site, using recessed fixtures or indirect lighting. 14. Outdoor recreational and entertainment facilities must tum lights off at 11 p.m., except to conclude an event that began prior to 11 p.m. 15. Upward flagpole lighting is only allowed for governmental flags. Table 1 Fixture Types 90° Cutoff Angle c.a. 80°Cutoff Angle c.a. Non-cutoff No limit No limit Semi-cutoff 5%emitted above c.a. 20%emitted above c.a. Cutoff 2.5% emitted above c.a. 10% emitted above c.a. Full Cutoff 0% emitted above c.a. 10%emitted above c.a. Planning Commission July 8, 2002 ADM01-15 Outdoor Lighting H.IUSERSICOMMONISHELLAREPORTSIPCI4DOI-15 OUTDOOR LIGHTINGMPORYY02-07-08PC REPORT.DOC Page 1.3 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE XV: UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE, OF THE CODE OF FAYETTEVILLE, TO PROVIDE FOR THE REGULATION OF OUTDOOR LIGHTIN INSTALLATIONS IN NEW DEVELOPMENTS. WHEREAS, unnecessary and improperly designed ix eM ca u glare, light pollution,wasted resources, and diminished ability to v 1.0 e night sky; WHEREAS, glare and light trespas n result }. dous c' ation conditions for all modes of transportation; lig ass into, i en neighbc pds; and poor visibility of the to d, _ WHEREAS, the 'z ty o#�. yettevil so pre health, safety and welfare p= ne al pub c, o proteo mgh slay ds to the quality of life o y j�NOW, T E_: , B IT wAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THEL ITY OF j- E VILL , SAS: Section:A _ ha apter 151: Definitions, Unified Development Ordinance, Code of Fad ttevill . s hereby amended by inserting Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a P :w ' Section 2. That Section 156.03(C), Unified Development Ordinance, Code of Fayetteville is hereby amended by inserting the following: §156.03 DEVELOPMENT. C. Consideration By The Planning Commission. 7. Outdoor Lighting Plan. a. Undue Hardship. So that substantial justice may be done and the public interest secured, a developer may petition the Planning Commission for a variance from the requirements of Chapter 176: Outdoor Lighting, by showing that their strict application would cause undue hardship as applied to the proposed development; provided that such variance shall not have the effect of nullifying the intent and purpose of the chapter. Conflicting lighting requirements imposed by other regulatory bodies having jurisdiction will be considered in reviewing Developer's petition. b. Conditions. In granting variances, the Planning Commission may impose such conditions as will, in its judgment, secure substantially the objectives of the requirements so varied. Planning Commission July 8, 2002 ADM01-15 Outdoor Lighting Page 1.4 Section 3. That Title XV: Unified Development Ordinance, Code of Fayetteville is hereby amended by inserting Chapter 176: Outdoor Lighting, a copy of which marked Exhibit`B" is attached hereto and made a part hereof. Section 4. That the following sections of Title XV: Unified Dev Ordinance, Code of Fayetteville be hereby deleted: _. a. Section 163.29 Wireless Communication a ` ities= Fara A, Subsection 3a; b. Section 161.21 Overlay District, graph D, 3 e 7; C. SectionIU.3. f, Neighb, o uCoMMM crc uses within amential districts, grap Subsecti 2.1--- dry eek on 17 1 Q treet P g, P section 4; and e. Se- 174 8 a ""'ns Para ph B. ate. ` wry. PA SD and .`' R this day of 2002. APPROVED: By: DAN COODY, Mayor ATTEST: By: HEATHER WOODRUFF, City Clerk Planning Commission July 8, 2002 ADM01-15 Outdoor Lighting Page 1.5 EXHIBIT "A" To be inserted at Chapter 151: Definitions,Unified Development Ordinance: Canopy Structure. (Outdoor Lighting) Any overhead protective structure which is constructed in such a manner as to allow pedestrian and vehicles to pass under. Cutoff. (Outdoor Lighting) A fixture's light distribution where no more than 2.4%of the fixture's total lumens are emitted at a cutoff angle of 90°or greater. Additionally,no more than 10% of the total fixture lumens may be emitted at a cutoff angle greater than 80°. Cutoff Angle. (Outdoor Lighting) The angle measured up from Nadir, between the vertical axis and the first line of site at which the bare source is not visible and as indicated by the manufacturer's photometric data of lumen distribution. Fixture. (Outdoor Lighting) The bulb and the assembly that holds the bulb (or lamp), in a lighting system, including the elements that provide light output controls. Foot-candle. (Outdoor Lighting) A unit of illuminance produced on a surface, equal to one lumen per square foot of that surface. Full Cutoff. (Outdoor Lighting) A fixture's light distribution where 0% of the total fixture lumens is emitted at a cutoff angle of 90° or greater. Additionally, no more than 10%of the fixture lumens shall be emitted at a cutoff angle greater than 800. Fully Shielded. (Outdoor Lighting) A fixture with an opaque housing or, W e shield attached thereto which prevents a line of sight to the bulb above the 1 plane. Glare. (Outdoor Lighting) Light emitting from & gao off int e great enough to reduce a viewer's ability to see and in extrem bases,,causing entary blindness. Glare Shield. (Outdoor-Lighting) E or intern w s adI g devic lock light in a given direction xture. Governmental a ag. =' door � _ � y fla ch has been officially ado to theA ve,=` ent of ion of s duly constituted internal isions (e tatep ov e, county, arish, == Height o T i K - ting) The vertical distance from the ground dim ly below cen i'ne of ' ixture to the lowest direct-light-emitting part of the fi e. - L scape Lighting. (Outdoor Lighting)A fixture designed to illuminate lan'< """ g features, including plants, flowers, shrub,trees and walkways that does not e eed 65 watts and is less than four (4) feet in height. Planning Commission Judy 8, 2002 ADM01-15 Outdoor Lighting Page 1.6 EXHIBIT "A Light Pollution. (Outdoor Lighting) Man-made light that is emitted into the atmosphere resulting in sky glow or atmospheric light pollution. Light Trespass. (Outdoor Lighting) The emission of light produced by a light fixture beyond the boundaries of the property on which it is located or which falls outside the area of intended illumination. Lumen. (Outdoor Lighting) A unit of measure of the quantity of luminous flux produced by a lamp (bulb) as indicated by the manufacturer. Non-Cutoff. (Outdoor Lighting) A fixture's light distribution where there is no emission limitations at any cutoff angle. Opaque. (Outdoor Lighting) Opaque means that a material does not transmit light from an internal illumination source. Applied to sign backgrounds means that the area surrounding any letters or symbols on the sign either is not lighted from within, or allows no light from an internal source to shine through it. Outdoor Lighting, (Outdoor Lighting) The night-time illumination of an outside area or object by any man-made device located outdoors that produces light by any means. Outdoor Recreation Facility: (Outdoor Lighting) An area designed for active recreation, whether publicly or privately owned, including, but not limited to, bas 1 diamonds, soccer and football fields,golf courses, tennis courts and swimmi Searchlight. (Outdoor Lighting) A high intensity outdooz li" t gne beam light directly into the night sky. Semi-Cutoff, (Outdoor Lighting) A fie's light dist utio ere n = ore than 5%of the total fixture lumens is emitted a 'utoll angle-za °' greaten: Additionally,no more than 200 of the total 1 lumems ma e e fitted at _• angle greater than 80° a # y . Te pprary Otx, oor Li ting (,_, ._ ,�,t hting) ting intended for uses, by w 'v dture,� united d ., ion; fo Canfr oliday decorations, civic e e , or constu ionug potl = Top do'- rght ug (®u lar ting) A fixture that is attached to the top of a sign at points w . Planning Commission July 8, 2002 ADM01-15 Outdoor Lighting Page 1.7 EXHIBIT "B" CHAPTER 176: OUTDOOR LIGHTING §176.01 PURPOSE. This chapter is 6. in storage yards, intended to: 7. in trails and parks; and A. Set minimum standards for the placement, orientation and fixture types of S. along streets. outdoor lighting fixtures; C. Any lighting system being B. Protect the privacy of property completely replaced on property in any owners by limiting the potential for glare zoning district, except single or two-family and light trespass from outdoor lighting- dwellings, shall comply wi _ the fixtures located on adjacent properties. requirements of this chapter. C. Protect drivers and pedestrians from §176.03 EXE W, h :.)lowing are . the glare of non-vehicular light sources that expressly e_ :_ o a e re 4 ements of can impair safe travel. this chapfe D. Promote efficient and cost effective A�k A. Tend y _ - outdo a lighting. lighting; and W' mporary b 'righting defined in Ater Unifieopment E. Allow for flexib, ' th ` le of _ " ance, cep t where' ey create a light fixtures. or n hce. §17b. LIC . IT emergency nstruction or ewer enc . E h ing. Construction or emergency A is chapti s sham appto r. lighting, provided such lighting is temporary and is discontinued immediate) upon outdo( lighting ;. "staleons r ew Y P develo`A ents, ex sin ex two-family completion of the construction work or dwell m abatement of the emergency necessitating " said lighting. B _ door lighting installations incl ut are not limited to, lights placed: C. Fossil fuel fixtures. All outdoor lighting fixtures producing light directly by 1. in parking lots; the combustion of fossil fuels, such as kerosene lanterns or gas lamps. 2. in landscaped areas; D. Landscape fighting. Landscape 3. in display areas; lighting not more than 65 watts. 4. in recreational areas; E. Airport lighting. Airport lighting necessary to meet Federal Aviation 5. on buildings and structures; Administration (FAA) requirements. including canopies and overhangs, Planning Commission July 8, 2002 ADMOI-15 Outdoor Lighting Page 1.8 EXHIBIT "B" F. Security lighting. Security lighting 2. Horizontal lighting. A fixture controlled by sensors that provide may beam light horizontally and upward to illumination for 15 minutes or less. illuminate building facades, monuments and other architectural features if at least 90%of G. Searchlights. the light emitted from the fixture falls on the facade, monument or architectural feature. H. Egress lighting. Egress lighting as required for safety as recommended by 3. Fixture Type. The following IESNA (Illuminating Engineering Society of table shall apply, identifying the fixture North America). types required based on maximum lumen output: §176.04 PROHIBITIONS. Table 176.A A. Blinking, flashing, and animated lights. Blinking, flashing, and animated Initial a lights, not otherwise exempt under §176.03, Lumen Non- are expressly Prohibited. output CUNCutoff Equal or les' yes Ye Yes B. Lighting on towers. Lighting on than 260 ��� towers is prohibited, except as required by 20�8,500 ATS Y , Yes regulations of the Federal Aviation Administration. ) grethan Eo"� N Yes 25 qu1of, cies , §176.05 LIGHTING STA Nbt $DS _ 0 Iumes X20-watt incandescent lamp 8;1!00 Imp 00-watt metal halide lam A Ligl �ion ' � trol � y Ilhunm �' estgn le sh orm to 4. eet lighting, bike paths,public Illummahn Engineeri Soct of�orth parking lots. The provisions of this article America :_ NA) recq:' encu=ons fore are not intended to prevent the use of any specific a. cation anF� all i excee e design, material or method of installation power dei ty budg refere p in the not specifically proscribed by this article, Arkansas...W ergy de ght from all provided such alternate has been approved fixtures e ce eetlights and traffic by the city. For street lighting within the lights) shI utoff fixtures, as defined in right of way, bike paths and public parking Chapter 51 Definitions of the UDO, lot, the City Planner may approve any such directed downward and away from alternate provided that the proposed design, roadways and adjacent properties, with the material or method: following exceptions: 1. Upward lighting. A fixture may 1. Provides approximate equivalencies beam light upward if at least 95% of such to the specific requirements of this upward light is reflected back down by a article; and canopy, roof or other such structure and the fixture does not emit more than 8,500 2. Is otherwise satisfactory& complies lumens (equivalent to a 100-watt metal with the intent of this article. halide lamp). Planning Commission July 8, 2002 ADMOI-15 Outdoor Lighting Page 1.9 EXHIBIT 41 B. Glare and Light Trespass 1. Recessed fixture. Recessed Control. All outdoor lighting shall be Fully fixture incorporating a lens cover that is Shielded, as defined in Chapter 151 either recessed or flush with the bottom Definitions of the UDO, from adjacent surface (ceiling) of the vehicular canopy; or, residential properties with the following 2. Indirect lighting. Indirect exceptions: lighting where light is beamed upward and then reflected down from the underside of 1. Advanced or alternative the vehicular canopy. Such fixtures shall be technology. Fixtures that do not meet the shielded such that direct illumination is definition for Fully Shielded, yet employ focused exclusively on the underside of the advanced or alternative technology that vehicular canopy; or causes the photometric performance to meet the intent and purpose of this ordinance, Recessed Canopy Fixture may be approved by the City Planner. Such fixtures include, but are not limited to, period-style fixtures with refractive globes and internal cutoff reflectors. = l t a Lens 2. Outdoor recreational facilities. All lighting fixtures for outdoor recreational facilities shall be equipped with a light control "package utilizing louvers and/or -e=: For illustrative purposes only. shields designed to minimize spy d gw e r The use of other simil ' evice a r r Ot r methods. Any other technologies must be; re a ed e F g• P Pp prove s'- theCity Planner. City Planner, f m. door Recreational and C e ential Piru rty ine__ight Entertainment Facilities. projectedJ he propert ne Q res idenal use or res ntial zoneZ all qsa excee 1. Direction. Fixtures shall be foot-cand meas ur .< at rizontal mounted and aimed to light only the position oximat- thr ` feet above intended play or performance areas. grade. D. Ite g Equipment. Testing 2. Hours of illumination. equipment for measurement of foot-candle Illumination after 11 p.m. is prohibited, levels shall o a calibrated t of foot-candle heavy- except to conclude an event that began prior duty light meter or an approved equal. lighting 11 excluding maximum necessary lghtingg needed for maintenance and safety. §176.06 SPECIAL USE LIGHTING. 3. Modification, waiver or A. Canopy Structure. Lighting under variance. A modification, waiver or vehicular canopies shall be designed so as variance from the standards set forth in not to create glare off--site. Acceptable §176.05 may be granted by the City Planner methods for controlling glare include one or upon a finding that an outdoor luminaire, or more of the following: system of outdoor luminaires, required for a baseball, softball, football, or soccer field Planning Commission July 8, 2002 ADM01-15 Outdoor Lighting Page 1.10 EXHIBIT "B" cannot reasonably comply with the standard, and still provide sufficient illumination of 3. Wattage or Lumens per Fixture; the field for its safe use. Safe illumination levels for the type of field and activity shall 4. Zoning district and use of the be those practices recommended by the property; IESNA or other evidence if a recommended practice in not applicable. 5. Zoning district and use of the adjacent properties; and, C. Flag Poles and Monuments. 6. Description of the equipment, 1. Upward flagpole lighting. including fixture, glare reduction devices, Upward flagpole lighting is permitted for lamps, control devices, and reflectors. The governmental flags only. Flags should be description may include, but is not limited taken down at sunset to avoid the need for to, catalog cuts and illustratio .__ y lighting. manufacturers. 2. Cone of light Fixtures to B. Substitution d utdoor illuminate flags, statues or any other objects light fixture im e typ of li source mounted on a pole, pedestal or platform, therein, be chane a le a permits as been shall use a very narrow cone of light for the issued, a chang que" must b bmitted purpose of confining the light to the object tri to City Plaiiz o ' approval ogether RIO of interest and minimize spill-lig, d adequate" information f rm sure glare. - t ampl3 Ice v is code, w '` z_ ust be eceivnor tom bstitution. §176.07 EVIDENCROF CO LIA1T C. � ,�. rance. If the City Planner A B fission Cauntsr h e aiicant deters that the proposed lighting does INA for any pe .r rt required ariyro1oh of ,3 not comply with this ordinance, the permit the laws this lurisd ion Conn ` shall not be issued,nor the plan approved. with pro ed worlvol11g out r lighting f es shall mit : of the applicatiot or pee ence that the proposed or—k '- 1 comply with this ordinanc ould no other such permit be requi d, the installation or modification (except for routine servicing and same-type lamp replacement) of any exterior lighting shall require submission of the information described below. The submission shall include, but not necessarily be limited to the following: 1. Location of fixtures on the premises, both proposed and existing; 2. Type of illuminating devices, fixtures, lamps, supports,and other devices; Planning Commission July 8, 2002 ADM01-15 Outdoor Lighting Page 1.11 Planning Commission January 28,2002 Page 32 ADM 01-15.00: Administrative Item (Outdoor Lighting) was submitted by the Planning Commission Subcommittee on Outdoor Lighting to adopt an ordinance that minimizes the impact of outdoor lighting on adjacent properties and improves nighttime visibility. Estes: The next item on the agenda is an administrative item, Outdoor Lighting. This is to adopt an ordinance that minimizes the impact of outdoor lighting on adjacent properties and improves night time vision. The Planning Staff has received complaints about outdoor lighting located within several new developments in Fayetteville that has prompted the Planning Commission to consider adopting an outdoor lighting ordinance. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend the Outdoor Lighting Ordinance, which has been provided to you in your materials, for adoption by the City Council. Tim, do you have any comments or remarks that you would like to make? Conklin: I have a suggestion. That is before we go to those administrative items, if you would like to hear the request for items three and four. It is up to the Commission, of course, the applicant is here. Estes: We had a motion, which was called and voted on to move those to the last items on the agenda. We will go ahead and take the items on the agenda as they have been placed by the vote of the Commission. Conklin: Sure. Estes: Do you have any comments regarding ADM 01-15.00? Conklin: Yes. . This is a proposed outdoor lighting ordinance for the City of Fayetteville. The subcommittee has met for many months to develop this ordinance. A lot of research has gone into this ordinance basically requiring partially shielding or fully shielding outdoor lighting, based on the type of outdoor lighting that is proposed. It does have some controls with regard to the type of lighting that is allowed. Anything up to 20 watts there is no shielding, partially shielding or fully shielding required. Anything up to a 60 watt or 1,000 lumens, partially shielding is required. This means that you have an opaque top or solid top on top of the light. You can have some translucent sides, the light can shine through and then anything over a 60 watt has to be fully shielded which basically is on all four sides and the top is completely shielded and directed downward. It does establish some measurements, quantitated measurements for the amount of light that can be at a residential property line. That is a one and a half foot candle.. That is measured at three feet above grade. It does involve testing with a light meter. The fixture height has been established and it does have a formula three plus distance divided by three to the nearest property line for residential property. It sets the maximum height at 35'. That is the same as the overlay district. It also establishes that any Planning Commission July 8, 2002 ADM01-15 Outdoor Lighting Page 1.12 Planning Commission January 28,2002 Page 33 lighting for buildings not be taller than the buildings that they are lighting. Special use lighting includes some standards for gasoline stations or service station vehicle canopies, that is shall not create glare offsite. That can be accomplished by recessing the fixture within the canopy or indirect lighting that bounces back to the ground, not directly up in the atmosphere. Outdoor recreation facilities, there is a time limitation up to 11:00 p.m. except during events that extend beyond that that start earlier. Modifications or waivers from that can be approved by the City Planner. For flagpoles and monuments, upward lighting is allowed for governmental flags only. Any other type of monuments that are lit, a narrow cone of light shall be used. The rest are some requirements for information that has to be provided with the application to insure compliance with this ordinance. Basically, most new development is already complying with this ordinance. All Wal-Mart Supercenters and Neighborhood Markets that are built already do fully shielded lighting. Most new development that installs lighting in their parking lots is fully shielded. What we are trying to prohibit in this community is someone going out, buying a floodlight and lighting up an entire lot and beyond the lot into residential neighborhoods. Those are the areas that we have had complaints about at the Planning Division. We are trying to come up with some minimal standards to insure that we have lighting that is fully or partially shielded and directed downwards. As we move towards mixing land uses closer together with non-residential and residential that we have some standards for the amount of light that can go beyond the site into someone's backyard. Once again, the subcommittee has worked very hard on this ordinance. It does not go as far as some ordinances across the United States but it does establish a minimum standard for outdoor lighting control in the City of Fayetteville. If you have any questions, I would be more than happy to answer them. Estes: Thank you Tim. Tim, under the applicability portion of the proposed ordinance, is an exemption for single or two family dwellings. We have received some comments, particularly an email comment this afternoon from a constituent. What is the reasoning or thinking for excluding single or two family dwellings from the requirement of the proposed ordinance? Conklin: Once again, we were primarily trying to target those areas where we have had some problems in the past. That is on commercial properties, parking lots,probably to look at why we would exempt single family, similar to the reasons for the tree ordinance we exempt single family. We try not to create those regulations that would impact a single family or duplex residential use. There may be occasion where the ordinance would be beneficial but in this case we are really trying to address the main issue and that is outdoor lighting of parking lots, display areas where people in this community have gone out and bought floodlights to completely light the entire area and then the light trespasses onto other people's property. That is the main reason whythose are exempted. Planning Commission July 8, 2002 ADM01-15 Outdoor Lighting Page 1.13 Planning Commission January 28,2002 Page 34 Estes: Thank you Tim. Is there any discussion or any comments regarding this administrative item? Hoffman: I would just like to add a couple of things just by way of information for the Commission and the other committee members that are here, you can go ahead and jump in at anytime. We did look at this with a definite eye toward little or no economic impact or lengthening of the development process. This is mainly about which way we aim the lights. If we aim them down they are not going to give us the problems of glare and light trespass and so forth. We did follow and have industry input. The IESNA, which is the Illuminating Engineering Society, standards are referenced in this ordinance and we will be following those. These are industry standards, the height of the poles and so forth are pretty much standard across the country. I was impressed with the fact that Wal-Mart is already putting these types of lights in. I had not known that before we drafted the ordinance. With regard to the one complaint that we received, and I believe we have only received one complaint from a resident regarding another residential property. That has to do with a security light. Many people choose to put those domed security lights on their property for security purposes. I read in this letter that the resident is appealing to SWEPCO to put a different kind of light in on her neighbor's fixture. We had SWEPCO and Ozarks Electric involved in our meetings too. They simply do not stock the shielded security lights. That is another reason we left that out, the one and two family dwellings. It is just not feasible to have everybody take down their security lights. Also, we have exempted existing buildings and existing properties. With that being said, if there is anything that anybody else would like to add. Estes: Commissioner Allen, did you have a comment? Allen: Just to make sure that the public understood and that I do, that this is not retroactive thing that we are talking about future development. Hoffman: This is just new development, right. Conklin: Most new development already is complying with this ordinance. Hoffman: I want to say, she is not here tonight, but that Shelly Rushing put in a great deal of research time on the ordinance. She compared other cities of similar size and populations and came up with a lot of good ideas for us and when we took our nighttime tour and looked at all of the existing developments that we could, with the varying degrees of compliance and non-compliance. It was then that we came up with the 1.5 candles at 3' above the ground, which is the least stringent of any of the ordinances that we looked at. We just simply felt that that was not going tplabn z11 Fro l e stop July 8, 2002 ADM01-15 Outdoor Lighting Page 1.14 Planning Commission January 28,2002 Page 35 Estes: Commissioner Shackelford? Shackelford:I too, served on this subcommittee and want to thank Tim and his staff and commend them for the work that they did. It was a joint effort and I really appreciate all that they did. Tim, one question I did have for you. One thing that we talked about in the meeting was obviously, outdoor lights are used for security reasons and my concern is that there might be some exceptional situation somewhere where there might be a need for a waiver or consideration of a waiver of this for security reasons. Could you walk us through what sort of terms of appeal would be open for someone that wanted to ask for a waiver of this ordinance? Would it come back to the Planning Commission? What would that process be? Conklin: I am not sure if we have put in a formal appeal process of this ordinance. Hoffman: There is, it is on page 8.7 under substitution. Conklin: Ok. It states "Should any outdoor light fixture or type of light source therein be changed after the permit has been issued a change request must be submitted to the City Planner for approval together with adequate information to ensure compliance with this code which must be received prior to substitution." I am not sure if that exactly addresses what you are looking at. We looked at what is allowed in other communities. You should be able to adequatelylight your property or business and comply with the ordinance. It was interesting when the woman came up from Little Rock and talked about how Wal-Mart, the world's largest retailer, is already using fully cut off, fully shielded lights to light their parking lots and light around their buildings and still provide adequate security lighting. I can certainly get with our City Attorney's office and find out if we put a provision in there specifically allowing for a variance if that is something that you as a Commission would like to see. We did not see any applications where you could not comply with this ordinance and not be able to light your area adequately. Shackelford:My concern is that it is used so much in security: Particularly around commercial buildings and that sort of thing. One of the things that you said tonight that really stuck with me is that even on the ordinances that you make decisions on you always give an applicant the opportunity to appeal your decision. I would like to see that as a part of that ordinance as well. Hoffman: I agree. Do our bylaws, under the UDO can't the decision of the City Planner be appealed to the Planning Commission or do we have to put it in the ordinance itself? Conklin: Only in specific instances, and they are listed. Planning Commission July 8, 2002 ADM01-15 Outdoor Lighting Page 1.15 Planning Commission January 28,2002 Page 36 Hoffman: Well then we probably need to just put it in this ordinance. Conklin: That is not in here. The substitution part really doesn't talk about that. That is something that our City Attorney wanted to make sure on our tree ordinance that there was a specific variance procedure and amended the ordinance last year right when he came into his position. That is something that we certainly can add into this ordinance. Estes: Mr. Williams, you have been in the process of crafting a proposed ordinance that would provide a right of appeal to any person aggrieved by any administrative or administraerial action or any city function, would that provide the relief that Commissioner Shackelford is commenting on? Williams: It is possible. The variance I think is a little bit different in that the variance would just be saying "In this particular case for security reasons I need this'; as opposed to "This is more money than I should have to pay." I think probably the variance suggested here might be something that you would want to consider. Estes: Thank you Mr. Williams. Commissioner Shackelford, did you have a comment? Shackelford:I just wanted to reiterate, I am not trying to be difficult on this. Obviously, in my profession,being banking, we think about security a lot around ATM machines and that sort of thing. I just don't want to be in a situation to where a developer felt that they were having to take on additional liability if someone was to get hurt and could show that this ordinance or the lack of lighting in that situation had something to do with it. I would like to see some sort of appeal process for a variance that could be specifically spelled out as a part of this ordinance. Marr: I agree with that. Estes: Mr. Williams, would it be permissible for this proposed ordinance to go forward to the City Council and for you to craft a paragraph providing for a variance provision and that if the requested variance is denied then there is an appeal to the full Commission? Williams: Mr. Chairman, we can do that and we might actually even want to put a provision within our variance chapter as opposed to putting it within this particular ordinance. I will talk with our City Planner and see what we can come up with but I am sure that we can accomplish that. Estes: Is there any other discussion or motions? Planning Commission July 8, 2002 ADM01-15 Outdoor Lighting Page 1.16 Planning Commission January 28,2002 Page 37 Conklin: I was just going to explain why in our variance section that you see all the different items listed. When we compiled the Unified Development Ordinance each ordinance had an individual variance section, typically with it, when the UDO was put together all of those were moved into one section. You have appeals to the Board of Adjustments, appeals to the City Planner, appeals to the Planning Commission and they are all listed individually. We have not gone back and looked at how to streamline that. I am all in favor of looking at that and seeing how we can accomplish that without having to list every single item. Estes: Is there any member of the audience who would like to comment on ADM 01-15? Seeing none, I will bring it back to the Commission for motions or discussion. Hoffinan: We did talk about bank security lighting and we had some people come in that had some data, I don't remember which meeting it was but we talked about it. Our ordinance should be able to accomplish that but should it not, I do agree that we need some kind of variance procedure. Shackelford:I don't think it will be a problem very often. I would just like to have the variance there if it was a problem we could address it. Hoffman: Absolutely. Estes: Commissioner Bunch? Bunch: Yes, I have a few questions for the committee that crafted this. What about temporary lighting for construction job sites? I don't see any exemptions for it in here or any means of addressing it. Also, for industrial zones and yard lights and things like railroad switchyards and electrical utility switchyards. Some might come under display areas, some might come under buildings and structures. The first time we come through with this I think we need to be fairly comprehensive. Marr: If I could add onto Commissioner Bunch's comment and I have other questions when he is done, but what doesn't make sense to me about those two items is that they appear to be in the minutes of the committee. Industrial lighting and construction lighting requirements but nothing is in the ordinance. I think his comment is right, there is nothing in it but I am curious if the committee could address why you didn't move forward with it because it is in your minutes as an item. Estes: Commissioner Bunch, were you finished with your comments? Bunch: In that one part. Another was the definition of low voltage lighting. I am wondering if that was covered in some of the standards that were Planning Commission July 8, 2002 ADM01-15 Outdoor Lighting Page 1.17 Planning Commission January 28,2002 Page 38 mentioned because in the electrical industry there are multiple definitions of low voltage. It could be anything from well over 600 volts on down. I am just wondering which standard was called out to determine exactly what is low voltage lighting because this could come into problems in industrial sites and on construction sites. Hoffman: For some reason I can't find it in here but I know that we had something in there about utility lighting and that kind of stuff. Conklin: It is on page 8.5 under 176.03(b) exemptions. "All temporary emergency lighting needed by police or fire departments or other emergency or utility services are exempt." You could possibly add temporary or permanent that is needed to cover that. Hoffman: I'm not sure about putting in construction lighting at night because if they are trying to meet a deadline and they have got a commercial property next to a residential area, conceivably,they are exempt. They could be spending months trying to get a building built 24 hours a day with lights shining in the neighbors yard. I don't know if we should put that in there or if that could just be something that could go through the variance or appeal procedure. Ward: What I think I would like to do, in essence of time, is table this administrative item. I think we are really close to getting it done but we definitely need an appeal process or a variance process in it first of all. There are three or four other items that it looks like we need to address again. There is no use fighting it out here trying to figure out on four or five of those little items like Don has brought up. I would like to go ahead and table it for the time being because we have to do some work on it anyway and try to bring it back this next time. Estes: We have a motion by Commissioner Ward to table ADM 01-15, is there a second? Marr: Second. Hoffman: Before we do that can we get the whole list? Williams: I would like to ask a question. On the variance, I can understand it was for security, is there any other thing that you would want as far as another reason for a variance besides security? Estes: I would suggest Mr. Williams, that we not define the reason. That we just provide a right, as a matter of the ordinance, to request the variance.. Then if the requested variance is denied provide a provision that the aggrieved parry may appeal to the full Commission. Planning Commission July 8, 2002 ADM01-15 Outdoor Lighting Page 1.18 Planning Commission January 28,2002 Page 39 Shackelford:I agree. Hoffinan: I have written down that we have the variance, the temporary construction issue, the utilities I think have been answered, I don't know if they were satisfactory to you but I would like to know. Bunch: Where it is not just the emergency. I realize some of our variance towers, the support gear rooms or equipment sheds, if we lose capabilities on some of our cell towers or our transmission towers for radio systems. Some of those are located in residential areas and they could require temporary lighting to get back on line as fast as possible. Some of those would probably come under emergency services or utility services. Hoffman: They are all on generators so I think they would definitely be a temporary or emergency condition. Bunch: Well, it may not be just loss of power, it could be loss of function of some of their equipment that has to be replaced and they would need possibly lighting to do that. I just wanted to have enough room in this to accommodate some of the what ifs without having to list them specifically or without having to tie people's hands to wait for an act of congress before work can ensue to take care of things. The same way with our industrial areas. Often times they are not,they are kind of out of site and out of mind many times. We have industries that run 24 hours a day and we need to address situations in the industrial zones, particularly in the industrial parks. Hoffman: Those existing industrial uses are exempted and new ones would get. . . Bunch: Right, but looking down the line we do have an industrial park that hopefully at sometime that we would sell some of those lots and have some new industries in it to help support our community. We just need to not tie their hands. Allen: I call for the question please. Estes: Renee, would you call the roll? Roll Call: Upon completion of roll call the motion to table ADM 01-15.00 was tabled by a vote of 8-1-0 with Commissioner Hoffinan voting against it. Estes: The motion to table passes by a vote of eight to one. Perhaps Commissioner Bunch would accept an interim appointment as a defecto member of this committee. Planning Commission July 8, 2002 ADM01-15 Outdoor Lighting Page 1.19 Planning Commission April 23, 2001 Page 49 Discussion of AD 01- 15.00 Administrative Item (Outdoor Lighting)to appoint a sub-committee to consider regulating outdoor lighting. Estes: The last item on your agenda is discussion of AD 01-15.00, outdoor lighting to appoint a sub-committee to consider regulating outdoor lighting. Commissioner Hoffman has graciously consented to serve as Chair of that committee and I have appointed Commissioner Bishop, Commissioner Hoover and Commissioner Shackelford to serve . on that committee. Commissioner Hoffman, would you please get in touch with your fellow committee members and schedule an appropriate meeting? Hoffman: I would gladly do that and I would like Tim one thing about the outdoor lighting. You gave me some information at agenda session and I would like a little bit, we could possibly do this at the meeting, I would like to narrow the scope a bit from general outdoor lighting to commercial outdoor lighting? Conklin: That is the purpose of the first meeting. Staff is recommending that. We have researched ordinances across the United States and we would like to have more of a focus on what we want to look at. We can discuss some of the complaints that we've received in regards to new development in Fayetteville and kind of address what we currently do and what other cities in the United States are currently doing. Hoffman: We've been asking them to shield the lights but they don't seem to be having the desired affect I suppose. Conklin: The height of outdoor lighting adjacent to R-1 neighborhoods is also an issue. We don't have a height standard. Even if they are shielded, if they are 50 or 60 feet tall, they are still shining in the backyards if they are right on the property line. The location of the light poles,the height of the light poles,those are the type of issues that we want to discuss. Those are the areas where we've had some problems where we have allowed office complexes to go in and you have light poles right in the backyards of single family homes. Hoffman: I want to coordinate the scheduling through Tim so everybody knows. Conklin: Lunch meetings was the idea. Estes: Any other business? We are adjourned until our next regularly or special called meeting. Planning Commission July 8, 2002 ADM01-15 Outdoor Lighting Page 1.20 Planning Commission April 23, 2001 Page 50 Bunch: These will be public meetings and the press will be notified? Conklin: That's correct. Thank you. Planning Commission July 8, 2002 ADM01-15 Outdoor Lighting Page 1.21 Planning Commission July 8, 2002 ADM01-15 Outdoor Lighting Page 1.22 FAYETTEVILLE THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE,ARKANSAS 113 W. Mountain St. Fayetteville,AR 72701 Telephone:(501)575-8264 PLANNING DIVISION CORRESPONDENCE TO: Planning Commission FROM: Shelli Rushing,Associate Planner THRU: Tim Conklin, City Planner DATE: July 8,2002 ADM 01-19.00 Administrative Item (Parking Ordinance Amendments) to revise Section §172.01 Off-Street Parking Lot Design Requirements of the City of Fayetteville Unified Development Ordinance to provide a method for reducing off-street parking requirements for properties that share a common parking facility and to revise parking ratios for certain uses. BACKGROUND On June 20, 2001, Laura Kelly submitted a proposed shared parking ordinance to the Planning Division. She then established a subcommittee with members of the Downtown Dickson Enhancement Project, Inc. to discuss the proposed ordinance. On November 13, 2001,the Downtown Dickson Enhancement Project, Inc.submitted a letter to the Planning Division expressing support for the revised proposal. On March 12, 2002, Ms. Kelly and the Planning Division staff discussed and revised the proposed ordinance. The proposed shared parking ordinance was presented to Planning Commission at the March 25, 2002 Planning Commission meeting. The item was tabled for further study. Staff,the applicant Laura Kelly, and members of the Planning Commission revised the proposed ordinance and are now presenting it to Planning Commission. Staff mailed a copy of the proposed ordinance to the Planning Commission on May 30, 2002 to allow adequate time for review. On June 3, 2002, City Attorney Kit Williams distributed a memo suggesting that the shared parking ordinance not go forward until the parking ratios are revised. Staff has researched parking ratios and is recommending changes based on this research. The ordinance mailed to the Planning Commission on May 30, 2002 has been revised to propose new parking ratios. The portion regarding shared parking has not changed. RECOMMENDATION Forward the revised off-street.parking ordinance to the City Council. Planning Commission July 8,•2002 ADM01-19 Off-Street Parking H.I USERSICOMMONISHELLAREPORTSIPCUD 01-19 SHARED PARKING ORDINANCEIREPORTSLSTAFF REPORT 6-20.DOPwge 2.1 FINDINGS Shared Parking Different land uses incorporated within one development may have different peak demands for parking. The proposed shared parking ordinance will allow developers to voluntarily reduce the supply of parking in these circumstances. Developers who choose to utilize this option may reduce the amount of impervious surface,reduce the cost of parking lot construction, and increase the amount of developable area. The proposed ordinance enhances the City's current Off-Street Parking Lot Design Standards by adding a mechanism to reduce required parking when it can be proven that the overall demand for parking will be actually reduced by the varying peak demand. The proposed ordinance is based on the principles provided in various guidelines and books regarding parking requirements. There are two main elements of the shared parking ordinance. • The first element is shared parking between developments. In these cases, uses that have non-conflicting demands, such as a church and a bank, may share parking facilities if they complete a shared parking agreement. This element is part of the current parking lot ordinance. • The second element is reduced parking within mixed use developments.In these instances, an applicant can use Table 4 Parking Occupancy Rates of the ordinance to calculate a reduction in parking. The steps for calculating the reduction are provided. Staff has created a worksheet that provides a step by step method for calculating the reduction. A copy of the worksheet is attached. Sources: • Shared Parking Planning Guidelines,by Institute of Traffic Engineers(ITE)Technical Committee. Published by ITE,Washington,D.C., 1995. • Shared Parking,by Barton-Aschman Associates.Published by the Urban Land Institute(www.uli.org), 1982. • Flexible Parking Requirements,Thomas P. Smith.Published by the American Planning Association,report #377,(www.nlanning.org), 1983. Parking Policy Evaluation,Evaluating Parking Options, Costs,Pricing and Revenue-by Tood Litman. Published by the Victoria Transport Policy Institute(www.ytpi.org). • Parking Solutions,A Comprehensive Menu of Solutions to Parking Problems,by Todd Litman.Published by the Victoria Transport Policy Institute(www.vtpi.org). • The Trouble With Minimum Parking Requirements,by Donald C. Shoup.Published by the Victoria Transport Policy Institute(www.vtpi.org), 1999. • Transportation Demand Management Status Report:Parking Pricing,prepared by K.T.Analytics,Inc., Frederick,Maryland, for U.S.Department of Transportation's Federal Transit Administration. Planning Commission July 8, 2002 ADMOI-19 Off-Street Parking H.I USERSICOMMONISHELLIIREPORTSIPCIAD 01-19 SHARED PARKING ORDINANCEIREPORISISTAFFREPORT 6-20.DMge 2.2 Parking Ratios Staff research included(1) a review of conditional use permits requesting an increase in the number of parking spaces permitted by ordinance; (2)reference to three books with parking ratio data and parking demand data(Off-Street Parking Requirements, David Bergman, 1991; Parking, Robert A. Weant& Herbert S. Levinson, 1990; and The Dimensions of Parking, Urban Land Institute &the National Parking Association, 1993), and (3) a comparison of Fayetteville's current ratios with those of other Arkansas cities and other college towns of similar size. Research suggests that parking ratios for certain uses are inadequate to meet the needs of those uses. Only one city,Fort Collins had a provision regarding maximum parking spaces,which was 20 percent of the required allowed as long as landscaping is also increased by 20 percent. Parking ratios for the following uses should be revised based on these findings. Bank: No requirements provided at this time. The city uses the sales office standard of 1 parking space per 200 square feet. Other cities studied calculate spaces using square feet and employees. Child Care: Other cities studied calculate child care based on employees and students. Churches: Applicants have requested conditional uses for additional parking spaces for churches. For example, St. Joseph Church was approved for an additional 113 spaces. However, 1 parking space per 4 seats appears to be common in other parking space requirements. Community Centers: Other cities studied calculate spaces by square feet, not seats. Dance Halls: Applicants have requested conditional uses for additional parking spaces for dance halls. 1 parking space per 100 square feet appears to be common in other parking space requirements. Funeral No regulations provided at this time. Most cities studied base calculations on Homes: seats, employees and company vehicles. Gas Service Most cities studied calculate spaces required by square feet of building or number Stations: of employees, not per service bay. Other cities also have different parking ratios for automobile service stations and fuel sales. Hotels/ 1 parking space per guest room is common. Other cities have requirements for Motels: uses accessory to the hotel, such as meeting rooms, restaurants and lounges. Restaurants: Applicants have made many requests for conditional uses for additional parking spaces for restaurants. Recent conditional use requests for additional parking spaces include Guido's in 2002 (90 spaces permitted, 104 spaces approved), Golden.Corral in 2001 (62 permitted, 152 spaces approved), JD China in 2000 (37 spaces permitted, 57 spaces approved), Olive Garden in 2002 (49 spaces permitted, 151 spaces approved), and McAlister's in 2002 (22 spaces permitted, 55 spaces approved). Table 1 shows restaurant parking ratios of Fayetteville restaurants, comparing what is allowed by ordinance and what is calculated using the formula of 1 space per number of seats. Planning commission July 8, 2002 ADM01-19 Off-Street Parking H.IUSERSICOMMOWHELLRREPORTSIPCI9D 01-19 SHARED PARKING ORDINANCEIREPORTSI STAFFREPORT 6-20.Dorage 2.3