Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012-06-25 - Agendas - FinalPlanning Commission Officers Porter Winston, Chair Kyle Cook, Vice -Chair Sarah Bunch, Secretary aye evtlle ARKANSAS Tentative Agenda City of Fayetteville, Arkansas Planning Commission Meeting June 25, 2012 Planning Commissioners Blake Pennington William Chesser Matthew Cabe Ryan Noble Craig Honchell Tracy Hoskins A meeting of the Fayetteville Planning Commission will be held on June 25, 2012 at 5:30 PM in Room 219 of the City Administration Building located at 113 West Mountain Street, Fayetteville, Arkansas. Call to Order Roll Call Consent: 1. Approval of the minutes from the June 11, 2012 meeting. 2. VAC 12-4141: Vacation (555 W. MAPLE ST./555 MAPLE, 484): Submitted by MCCLELLAND CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. for property located at 555 WEST MAPLE STREET. The property is zoned DG, DOWNTOWN GENERAL. The request is to vacate a portion of un -built right-of-way. Planner: Jesse Fulcher 3. ADM 12-4136: Administrative Item (2768 E. SHAGBARK BEND/ZWEIG, 294): Submitted by ALAN REID AND ASSOCIATES for property located at 2768 EAST SHAGBARK BEND. The property is zoned R-PZD, RESIDENTIAL PLANNED ZONING DISTRICT (R-PZD 05-1618 HICKORY PARK SD) and contains approximately 0.23 acres. The request is to amend the setbacks of Lot 14 in the approved R-PZD 05-1618 Hickory Park Subdivision. Planner: Jesse Fulcher New Business: 4. ADM 12-4169: Administrative Item (519 W. DICKSON ST./GEORGES, 484): Submitted by NEAL CRAWFORD for property located at 519 WEST DICKSON STREET. The property is zoned MSC, MAIN STREET CENTER and contains approximately 0.45 acres. The request is for a parking variance to allow for the addition of back stage space and a dressing room. Planner: Jesse Fulcher 5. RZN 12-4135: Rezone (521 N. COLLEGE AVE./RODDEY, 445): Submitted by COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PARTNERS, LLC for property located at 521 NORTH COLLEGE AVENUE. The property is zoned C-2, THOROUGHFARE COMMERCIAL and contains approximately 0.34 acres. The request is to rezone the subject property to DG, DOWNTOWN GENERAL. Planner: Jesse Fulcher The following items have been approved administratively by City staff: LSP 12-4121: Lot Split (1201 S. MORNINGSIDE DR./NANTUCKET APARTMENTS PH. III, 563): Submitted by ROBERT J. CASTER for property located at 1201 SOUTH MORNINGSIDE DRIVE. The property is in zoned DG, DOWNTOWN GENERAL and contains a total of 3.76 acres. The request is to divide the subject property into two tracts of approximately 3.43 and 0.33 acres. Planner: Quin Thompson LSP 12-4000: Lot Split (E. OF 4412 MARTIN LUTHER KING BLVD./CAREER ACADEMY, 594): Submitted by ENGINEERING DESIGN ASSOCIATES for property located at EAST OF 4412 MARTIN LUTHER KING BOULEVARD. The property is zoned R -A, RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL AND CS, COMMUNITY SERVICES and contains a total of 5.40 acres. The request is to divide the subject property into two tracts of approximately 4.42 and 0.98 acres. Planner: Quin Thompson NOTICE TO MEMBERS OF THE AUDIENCE All interested parties may appear and be heard at the public hearings. If you wish to address the Planning Commission on an agenda item please queue behind the podium when the Chair asks for public comment. Once the Chair recognizes you, go to the podium and give your name and address. Address your comments to the Chair, who is the presiding officer. The Chair will direct your comments to the appropriate appointed official, staff, 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. Interpreters or TDD, Telecommunication Device for the Deaf are available for all public hearings; 72 hour notice is required. For further information or to request an interpreter, please call 575-8330. As a courtesy please turn off all cell phones and pagers. A copy of the Planning Commission agenda and other pertinent data are open and available for inspection in the office of City Planning (575-8267), 125 West Mountain Street, Fayetteville, Arkansas. All interested parties are invited to review the petitions. MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION A regular meeting of the Fayetteville Planning Commission was held on June 11, 2012 at 5:30 p.m. in Room 219, City Administration Building in Fayetteville, Arkansas. ITEMS DISCUSSED ACTION TAKEN Consent: MINUTES: May 29, 2012 Approved Page 3 Old Business: PPL 12-4099: Preliminary Plat (S.W. CORNER OF SALEM & WEIR RD./HOLCOMB HEIGHTS SD, 245):Page 4 Approved New Business: ADM 12-4144: Administrative Item (3078 N. COLLEGE AVE./SIEBERT, 252): Page 5 Approved ADM 12-4129: Administrative Item (3529 N. PAR CT./LINDSEY, 216): Page 8 Approved PPL 12-4126: Preliminary Plat (NORTH OF COBBLESTONE SUBDIVISION PH. II/COBBLESTONE PH. III, 207): Page 11 Approved LSD 12-4117: Large Scale Development (2395 N. COLLEGE AVE./ARVEST BANK, 444): Page 12 Approved CUP 12-4122: Conditional Use Permit (1529 E. MISSION BLVD./ROOT ELEMENTARY, 408): Page 13 Approved June 25, 2012 Planning Commission PC Minutes 06-11-12 Agenda Item 1 Page 1 of 14 MEMBERS PRESENT Matthew Cabe Tracy Hoskins Craig Honchell Sarah Bunch Ryan Noble Kyle Cook Porter Winston STAFF PRESENT Andrew Garner Jesse Fulcher Quin Thompson Glenn Newman Sarah Wrede ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY Jason Kelley, Assistant City Attorney MEMBERS ABSENT Blake Pennington William Chesser 5:30 PM - Planning Commission Chairman Porter Winston called the meeting to order. Chairman Winston requested all cell phones to be turned off and informed the audience that listening devices were available. Upon roll call all members except Commissioners Chesser and Pennington were present. June 25, 2012 Planning Commission PC Minutes 06-11-12 Agenda Item 1 Page 2 of 14 Consent: Approval of the minutes from the May 29, 2012 meeting. Motion: Commissioner Cook made a motion to approve the consent agenda. Commissioner Cabe seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion passed with a vote of 7-0-0 June 25, 2012 Planning Commission PC Minutes 06-11-12 Agenda Item 1 Page 3 of 14 Old Business: PPL 12-4099: Preliminary Plat (S.W. CORNER OF SALEM & WEIR RD./HOLCOMB HEIGHTS SD, 245): Submitted by JORGENSEN AND ASSOCIATES for property located at the SOUTH WEST CORNER OF SALEM AND WEIR ROAD (HOLCOMB HEIGHTS SUBDIVISION). The property is zoned RSF-8, RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY, 8 UNITS PER ACRE and contains approximately 19.24 acres. The request is for development of a residential subdivision with 78 single family lots. Jesse Fulcher, Current Planner, read the staff report. Jared Inman, applicant, agreed with conditions. Commissioner Hoskins asked about how the existing residential driveways once it is realigned. ill be reconnected to Weir Road Fulcher stated that they will be placed in access easements and extended to the new street. Glenn Newman, Staff Engineer, stated that there is only one driveway and that it is owned by the same developer. Motion: Commissioner Cabe made a motion to approve PPL 12-4099 as recommended by staff. Commissioner Hoskins seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion passed with a vote of 7-0-0. Commissioner Chesser arrived late. June 25, 2012 Planning Commission PC Minutes 06-11-12 Agenda Item 1 Page 4 of 14 New Business: ADM 12-4144: Administrative Item (3078 N. COLLEGE AVE./SIEBERT, 252): Submitted by ERIC SIEBERT for property located at 3078 NORTH COLLEGE AVENUE. The property is zoned C-2, THOROUGHFARE COMMERCIAL and contains approximately 1.88 acre. The request is a variance to allow for an outdoor mobile vendor (Shave the Planet snow cones) for longer than 90 days. Andrew Garner, Senior Planner, gave the staff report. Jason Kelley, Assistant City Attorney, asked Commissioner Hoskins if he would be recusing from the item. Commissioner Hoskins indicated that he would be recusing. Commissioner Winston indicated that if Commissioner Hoskins was recusing he would need to leave the room. Commissioners Hoskins indicated he did not think he would need to leave the room as he was not directly involved in the application. Garner discussed that it was a general practice for commissioners to leave the room when recusing. Kelley confirmed that it was a general practice but not a legal requirement. Commissioner Hoskins left the room. Eric Siebert, applicant, discussed that ice cream and shaved are different. He discussed that Andy's Frozen Custard closed this year and they did not see an increase in business. They are not getting the same customers. Katie Siebert, applicant, discussed that people come for the experience and product. She discussed different customers that come to their business from long distances for their product (Bentonville, West Fork, Siloam Springs and further as far as Stillwell, Oklahoma). They come for our experience and our produce. It is a destination. Eric Siebert, applicant, discussed that they would be willing to plant a tree or anything we could do to make it a little more permanent. Katie Siebert, applicant, discussed that they are willing to work with the City. Public Comment: Andrea Lister discussed that the prices at Maggie Moo's are exorbitant. Shave the Planet is a place in town where I can take all my kids to get something for $2. Ice cream and shave ice are totally different markets and two different experiences. Shave the Planet is a homegrown business. Sarah McNeil, I work at Shave the Planet. She discussed that shaved ice and ice cream are very different products. This site has always been used for an ice cream stand and is not a transient vendor. I was offended by that. I have lived in Fayetteville all my life and there has always been shaved ice in this location. We have people coming all the way from Centerton three times a week to get this product. Shutting down a homegrown June 25, 2012 Planning Commission PC Minutes 06-11-12 Agenda Item 1 Page 5 of 14 business might be frowned upon. Shave the Planet is a locally owned business. Jacqueline Buntin, is thankful for the existing 90 -day permit. I trust the City will make a fair decision. I have known Eric and Katie for eight years. They are really interested in obeying the guidelines and doing this right. Shave the Planet has 25 total employees. Fifteen of them work at this College Avenue location. This keeps people with a job during the summer months. When I decide I want ice cream I have 10 locations in Fayetteville, that is not counting the fast food restaurants. There is plenty of competition for ice cream in Fayetteville. Their business is successful and they should be rewarded. Cody Buntin, a resident of Fayetteville my entire life, commercial realtor. This business creates another reason to drive and spend money in this area of Fayetteville. Fiesta Square is not what it used to be. It seems out of place to deny extending this permit to a successful permit. They are just bringing more traffic to this side of town. Ben Israel, I own the property that Shave the Planet is on. I don't pay any less taxes because they are only there for six months. They pay sales tax. I'm a little confused by a brick -and -mortar is preferred over this kind of business. I would encourage you to give them this variance. Justin Leflar, school teacher at Holt Middle School. He spoke about a donation from Shave the Planet to their school to reward kids for their hard work. If this is denied where will the kids use their voucher. Cody Yancey, he discussed that it is an unfair advantage that he has to go thru all this to be in business. He has to apply for a different variance every year why he has to carry the same insurance for his employees. Snow cones and ice cream are two separate things. No proof that it is detrimental to their sales. Mena Shombod (sp?), Shave the Planet employee. We really rely on this job. There are not a lot of places where you can find a summer job so you can focus on academics during the other time of the year. This is a great opportunity for high school and college students to gain experience and grow their character. This stand on College has established itself as a great environment for customers. There have not been issues with traffic or any other detrimental effects. I hope that you guys consider that. Celeste Hoskins, Maggie Moo's. I like Shave the Planet and eat there with my kids. What I was asking for that they take into consideration that there are ordinances. We have no issue with the 90 -day permit. What I am asking for is that when they are asking for that extension that an ordinance be established so that we are all on the same playing field. I think it's great to support the community. I like the couple and Shave the Planet it is just the ordinance. I think we need to establish some playing rules here. I think this is a great business model. What stops someone like me or other businesses from doing it. I don't think this is about competition or a customer base. I'm just wanting to see some guidelines on where we're going with mobile or transient vendor. If this is something you want to set a precedent for that's great. No more public comment was presented. Commissioner Chesser asked about the mobile vendor ordinance. Garner discussed that this ordinance is under examination. Commissioner Chesser discussed that this body doesn't write ordinances we just interpret the ordinance. There is a very specific part of the ordinance we are considering regarding whether this is a similar business. You said you had proof this was not a similar business? June 25, 2012 Planning Commission PC Minutes 06-11-12 Agenda Item 1 Page 6 of 14 Katie Siebert, applicant, discussed the HMR tax records for March, April, May, and June of last year for Shake's, Andy's, Maggie Moo's, and us. Last year Andy's was the highest grossing and they are now out of business. Last year we saw a 113% increase in our sales and most of that was due to the weather. This year you would expect since an ice cream shop went out of business we would see an increase. However, we only saw a 101% increase in our sales, this is 12% less than last year. It kind of shows that an ice cream business going out of business didn't help us. Commissioner Chesser asked staff how an extension would hurt when the first three months of the busy season have been utilized. That seems like something we should take into consideration. The bulk of the problem is already occurring. Garner discussed that we are really just looking at the variance findings and he read the variance findings. Commissioner Chesser asked staff why staff felt it was a similar business. Garner discussed that we did not do a market study. In our drafting the findings and for the commission to consider, the rationale was what would a reasonable person think. I thought yes they are similar because it is a dessert, you eat it mainly during the summer it is similar. Would it create an unfair advantage? I thought it could because you could have some of the same types of customers. Commissioner Chesser asked if it would be worth it for them to only be there for 90 days. Katie Siebert indicated that they would open in this location even if it is only for 90 days. Commissioner Chesser asked about property tax on a brick -and -mortar versus a mobile vendor. Jason Kelley, Assistant City Attorney, discussed that more improvements create more value and more property tax. Commissioner Chesser discussed that lower property taxes could potentially be an unfair advantage. Commissioner Cook agreed with Commissioner Chesser that itis not our responsibility to legislate. In this case the City Council has established the factors and it is up to our judgement. I think it is compatible and it does not create an unfair advantage. Commissioner Cook made a motion to approve CUP 12-4144 Commissioner Cabe seconded the motion. Garner requested Commissioner Cook clarify condition of approval #3. Commissioner Cook clarified that condition #3 be modified to require the Urban Forester to approval the type and size of tree that is planted. Commissioner Cabe agreed with this modification to the motion. Commissioner Cabe asked when this applicant's previous application came before the commission. Katie Siebert confirmed that it was March 26th. Commissioner Cabe discussed that the new ordinance was revised and came through May 1 of this year. He also asked about the City Attorney's memo that was in their packet and direction for the commission on several of the terms in the ordinance such as `similar', `compatible'. 'not detrimental. June 25, 2012 Planning Commission PC Minutes 06-11-12 Agenda Item 1 Page 7 of 14 Jason Kelley, Assistant City Attorney, stated that it is completely up to your judgement based on the facts that have been presented. The best thing I can equate it to is if you are on a jury and you hear all this testimony and you have to decide. That is the job. Commissioner Cabe stated that the ordinance did change and it requires judgment. The ordinance was first written and first became an opportunity for businesses to get their legs under them and do something that is atypical. I fully feel like a seasonal business is exactly that sort of opportunity. Like the applicant said there are very few brick -an -mortar business of this type around the country and as a seasonal business model like pool cleaning or window washing. I will be able to support this without a problem. Commissioner Winston discussed that he has become convinced that there is a substantial amount of different between shaved ice and ice cream and I will support this. Upon roll call the motion passed with a vote of 6-1-1. Commissioner Honchell voted 'no' and Commissioner Hoskins recused. June 25, 2012 Planning Commission PC Minutes 06-11-12 Agenda Item 1 Page 8 of 14 ADM 12-4129: Administrative Item (3529 N. PAR CT./LINDSEY, 216): Submitted by BATES AND ASSOCIATES, INC. for property located at 3529 NORTH PAR COURT. The property is zoned RMF -24, RESIDENTIAL MULTI -FAMILY, 24 UNITS PER ACRE and contains approximately 0.65 acre. The request is a variance from the Streamside Protection Ordinance to allow an in -ground pool. Sarah Wrede, City Floodplain Administrator, gave the staff report. Geoff Bates, applicant, discussed that almost the entire site is constrained by the streamside ordinance. Travis Scott, applicant, discussed that a retaining wall is allowed in the streamside area regardless of this request. Approximately 90% of the lot area is in the streamside protection zone. Public Comment: Robert Briggs, lived two houses to the south, discussed the purpose of the ordinance is to protect further downstream damage. He discussed the watershed protection requirements around Lake Fort Smith. There is a balance between protection and property rights. Around Lake Fort Smith it was determined that preserving views of a property owner, allowing them to cut trees, was determined as a right for the property owner. The subject property would have nice views to the west. Aubrey Shepherd discussed that this is a very weak ordinance. To vary it would need more than a pool. He discussed swimming in the creek and other watershed issues. He does not support the request. Lyndy Lindsey, property owner, discussed that the pool will be at the elevation of the house. He has lived here for 16 years and has never seen the water from the creek come up to the house. The water has never come up to the 100 year floodplain. No more public comment was presented. Commissioner Cabe asked about the elevations of the house. Travis Scott, applicant, discussed the elevation of the house, the adjacent cul-de-sac street. The house is approximately two feet higher than the floodplain. Commissioner Cabe discussed that he has confidence in the City Engineer's recommendation. Commissioner Chesser asked about paving in the streamside protection zone. Jesse Fulcher, Associate Planner, answered 12 -feet wide. Commissioner Chesser stated that he has no issue with this request. Commissioner Winston asked about draining the pool. Geoff Bates, applicant, answered not directly in the creek. Wrede stated that this was a saltwater pool. Jason Kelley, Assistant City Attorney, discussed that the requirements for maintenance of the pool are June 25, 2012 Planning Commission PC Minutes 06-11-12 Agenda Item 1 Page 9 of 14 covered under other ordinances and are outside of this variance request. Commissioner Honchell asked how this is not a taking. Kelley answered that basically because the property owner can still use the property as it was before the ordinance it is not a taking. He referred to a more thorough explanation of a taking that was detailed in a memo from the City Attorney when this ordinance was adopted that is available for review. Commissioner Hoskins discussed that we all knew there would be people coming in for variances and that was why we have this option built in to the ordinance. He discussed that they have mitigated all that was impacted in the streamside protection area. Motion: Commissioner Cabe made a motion to approve ADM 12-4129 as recommended by staff. Commissioner Cook seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion passed with a vote of 8-0-0. June 25, 2012 Planning Commission PC Minutes 06-11-12 Agenda Item 1 Page 10 of 14 PPL 12-4126: Preliminary Plat (NORTH OF COBBLESTONE SUBDIVISION PH. IUCOBBLESTONE PH. III, 207): Submitted by JORGENSEN AND ASSOCIATES for property located north of COBBLESTONE SUBDIVISION PH. II. The property is zoned RSF-4, RESIDENTIAL SINGLE-FAMILY, 4 UNITS PER ACRE and contains approximately 24.60 acres. The request is for a residential subdivision with 59 single family lots. Andrew Garner, Senior Planner, gave the staff report. Blake Jorgensen, applicant, discussed that the variance request is to match existing homes in the neighborhood that have curb cuts on collector streets. Commissioner Hoskins recommended that the variance request be voted on separately. Commissioner Cabe agreed with Commissioner Hoskins. Motion #1 Commissioner Hoskins made a motion to approve the access management variance in condition of approval #1. Commissioner Honchell seconded the motion. Commissioner Chesser asked when the access management ordinance was adopted. Garner stated that it was adopted after the original preliminary plat was approved. Commissioner Cabe discussed that staff had outlined good reasons to deny the variance and that just because the previous development has curb cuts along the Collector doew not mean that we need to continue bad decisions along this street with this development. Commissioner Hoskins discussed agreement with Commissioner Cabe but that this is a small area to finish out this neighborhood. Upon roll call motion #1 (access management variance in condition of approval #1) passed with a vote of 6-2-0, with Commissioners Cabe and Cook voting 'no'. Motion #2: Commissioner Chesser made a motion to approve PPL 12-4126, with condition of approval #3 being stricken. Commissioner Honchell seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion passed with a vote of 8-0-0. June 25, 2012 Planning Commission PC Minutes 06-11-12 Agenda Item 1 Page 11 of 14 LSD 12-4117: Large Scale Development (2395 N. COLLEGE AVE./ARVEST BANK, 444): Submitted by GRAY ROCK CONSULTING for property located at 2395 NORTH COLLEGE AVENUE. The property is zoned C-2, THOROUGHFARE COMMERCIAL and contains approximately 1.92 acres. The request is the development of a 6,000 square foot Arvest Bank with associated parking. Jesse Fulcher, Current Planner, read the staff report. Dirk Thibodaux, applicant, agreed with conditions. Commissioner Chesser asked if Burger King was okay with the access changes. Thibodaux stated yes. Motion: Commissioner Chesser made a motion to approve LSD 12-4117 as recommended by staff. Commissioner Cabe seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion passed with a vote of 8-0-0. June 25, 2012 Planning Commission PC Minutes 06-11-12 Agenda Item 1 Page 12 of 14 Planning Commission June 11, 2012 Page 13 of 13 CUP 12-4122: Conditional Use Permit (1529 E. MISSION BLVD./ROOT ELEMENTARY, 408): Submitted by CRAFTON TULL AND ASSOCIATES, INC. for property located at 1529 EAST MISSION BOULEVARD. The property is zoned P-1, INSTITUTIONAL and contains approximately 7.64 acres. The request is for a conditional use permit for temporary modular classrooms (Use Unit 2). Quin Thompson, Current Planner, read the staff report. Motion: Commissioner Cabe made a motion to approve CUP 12-4122 as recommended by staff Commissioner Honchell seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion passed with a vote of 8-0-0. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 7:40 PM. June 25, 2012 Planning Commission PC Minutes 06-11-12 Agenda Item 1 Page 13 of 14 June 25, 2012 Planning Commission PC Minutes 06-11-12 Agenda Item 1 Page 14 of 14 ¶tLeviie ARKANSAS PC Meeting of June 25, 2012 THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS PLANNING DIVISION CORRESPONDENCE TO: Fayetteville Planning Commission FROM: Jesse Fulcher, Current Planner THRU: Jeremy Pate, Development Services Director DATE: June 20, 2012 125 W. Mountain St. Fayetteville, AR 72701 Telephone: (479) 575-8267 VAC 12-4141: Vacation (555 W. MAPLE ST./555 MAPLE, 484): Submitted by MCCLELLAND CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. for property located at 555 WEST MAPLE STREET. The property is zoned DG, DOWNTOWN GENERAL. The request is to vacate a portion of un -built right-of-way. Planner: Jesse Fulcher Findings: Property Description and Background: The subject property is bounded by Maple Street, West Avenue and Lafeyette Street, and is currently being developed with the Maple Street Apartments (555 Maple). There is approximately 1,489 sq. ft. of remnant street right-of-way on the north side of Lafayette Street that has not been used for public purposes since approximately 1940, when Lafayette Street was realigned to allow for a railroad crossing (see attached plans). Request: The applicant's request is to vacate the excess right-of-way for Lafayette Street. There will still be 50' of right-of-way after the vacation, sufficient to meet the minimum requirements of the Master Street Plan. Right-of-way Vacation Approval: The applicant has submitted the required right-of-way vacation notification forms to the utility companies and to the City with the result summarized below. UTILITIES RESPONSE Ozarks Electric No Objections Cox Communications No Objections Southwestern Electric Power Company No Objections Arkansas Western Gas No Objections G:\ETC\Development Services Review \20I2\Development Review \12-4141 VAC (555 Maple)\10 Planning Commission \06-25- 12\Comments and Redlines June 25, 2012 Planning Commission VAC 124141 555 Maple Agenda Item 2 Page 1 of 18 AT&T No Objections CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE: RESPONSE Water/Sewer No Objections Transportation No Objections Solid Waste No Objections Engineering No Objections Public Comment: No public comment has been received. Recommendation: Staff recommends forwarding VAC 12-4141 to the City Council with a recommendation for approval subject to the following condition: CITY COUNCIL ACTION: Required PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Required Planning Commission Action: O Forwarded O Denied O Tabled Date: June 25, 2012 Motion: Second: Vote: Notes: G:\ETC\Development Services Review \2012\Development Review\12-4141 VAC (555 Maple) \ICI Planning Commission \06-25- 12\Comments and Redlines June 25, 2012 Planning Commission VAC 124141 555 Maple Agenda Item 2 Page 2 of 18 Z 3 « O N O O ^p W 9 c E L O^^ Y C S B 9 E FE MYW WG�•Y' Oi 5Nc N 0 t'0 wo0N^ bOmJ 0 ^ypOp�L 0 O0p9NtL5O1VIOOYOOOWN; 90j_ ooeYO o EYEN ^O°YV.2nLa Nma 3 C3toUmpN Cpd^mOOLp^OSON 7: tYeN Ete dOoNN0..ON� CELE Lr0OL .-mm2 M.w`OpC EZAgo$ec^ Ea&0E4- Ertt nNM^ZOOEO �o.-W9Wc=Z90^Ow j1Y'J'-B1 _ M• dr eL e—= 1 o June 25, 2012 Planning Commission VAC 124141 555 Maple Agenda Item 2 Page 3 of 18 tO N CD 0 June 25, 2012 Planning Commission VAC 124141 555 Maple Agenda Item 2 Page 4 of 18 v°i ate. dSi Q 1.0 N 6 L'SL 2 -Ston B unit BO& and :ram. AEI-ont Hdpfif oll0 00 to 4(0 n . h K' ne r 5, 20 2 lanning Commission VAC 124141 555 Mapl Agenda Item 2 Page 5 of 18 el May 16, 2012 RE: Maple Street Apartments 555 Maple Street Right Of Way Vacation Dear Planning Commissioners & City Council Members, Due to site constraints, it has become necessary to vacate a portion of existing City ROW at the southwestern corner of the Maple Street Apartment (555 Maple) site, north of Lafayette Street. This ROW vacation, due to its location, will have no impact on adjacent properties. Ample ROW, in accordance with the City's Master Street Plan, will remain after this area of ROW is vacated. I have enclosed a reduced sized copy of the ALTA survey prepared by MCE that illustrates the location of this ROW vacation (.03 Acres). The hatched area located at the southwest corner of the site indicated as "Area of Tract 1 Lying South of the ROW Line of Lafayette Street", is the portion of ROW we seek to have vacated. As required by the City, I have also enclosed executed Utility Approval Forms, as well as delivered notifications to all adjacent property owners. If you should have any questions, concerns, or need any additional information regarding this ROW Vacation Application package, please don't hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Leslie Tabor ltabor@mcclelland-encrs.com ROW VAC, Maple Street Apartments (555 Maple) MCE It FY112178 June 25, 2012 Planning Commission VAC 124141 555 Maple Agenda Item 2 Page 6 of 18 PETITION TO VACATE PETITION TO VACATE (ROW) LOCATED IN (Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10 of Frisco Addition, an Addition to the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, and Lot 3 and Lot 4, Block 5, of the County Court Addition to the CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS TO: The Fayetteville City of Planning Commission and The Fayetteville City Council We, the undersigned, being all the owners of the real estate abutting ROW hereinafter sought to be abandoned and vacated, lying in Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10 of Frisco Addition, an Addition to the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, and Lot 3 and Lot 4, Block 5, of the County Court Addition to the CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS, a municipal corporation, petition to vacate ROW which is described as follows: METES AND BOUNDS DESCRIPTION OF ROW TO BE VACATED Part of the Northwest Quarter (NW 1/4) of the Northeast Quarter (NE 1/4) of Section 16, Township 16 North, Range 30 West, Washington County, Arkansas, being more particularly described as follows:Commencing at the Northwest corner of the NW 1/4 of said NE 1/4; thence South 02 degrees 39 minutes 13 seconds West a distance of 52.59 feet thence South 74 degrees 47 minutes 55 seconds East a distance of 115.08 feet;thence South 82 degrees 17 minutes 48 seconds East a distance of 62.79 feet;thence South 86 degrees 41 minutes 56 seconds East a distance of 184.18 feet;thence South 02 degrees 48 minutes 42 seconds West a distance of 429.62 feet;thence North 86 degrees 41 minutes 56 seconds West a distance of 121.00 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING (P.O.B.)thence South 69 degrees 48 minutes 50 seconds West a distance of 85.60 feet;thence North 10 degrees 55 minutes 22 seconds West a distance of 27.06 feetthence North 14 degrees 21 minutes 34 seconds West a distance of 8.29 feetthence South 86 degrees 41 minutes 56 seconds East a distance of 87.67 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING (P.O.B.), containing 1489 square feet or 0.03 acres. The petitioners pray that the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, abandon and vacate the above described real estate, subject, however, to the existing utility easements and sewer easements as required, and that the above described real estate be used for their respective benefit and purpose as now approved by law. The petitioners further pray that the above described real estate be vested in the abutting property owners as provided by law. WHEREFORE, the undersigned petitioners respectfully pray that the governing body of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, abandon and vacate the above described real estate, subject to said utility and sewer easements, and that title to said real estate sought be to abandoned be vested in the abutting property owners as provided by law, and as to that particular land the owners be free from the easements of the public for the use of said easement. Dated this day of , 20 . Specialized Sterling Joint Venture I, LP U of Ark, Inc By: General Partner Seth Mims Printed Name Signature June 25, 2012 Planning Commission VAC 124141 555 Maple Agenda Item 2 Page 7 of 18 1 1 June 25, 2012 Planning Commission VAC 124141 555 Maple Agenda Item 2 Page 8 of 18 DATE: UTILITY APPROVAL FORM FOR RIGHT- OF- WAY, ALLEY, AND UTILITY EASEMENT VACATIONS UTILITY COMPANY: --S APPLICANT NAME: L It=1-• t tPrcpcgAAA-hPP 5aNT #I'4%2•VZ7 REQUG$TED VACATION (applicant nuts !check allikat app(y): Utility Easement - Right-ofwayfor alley or streets and all utility easements located within thevacated right -0t way. - Alley C_ Street right<of way I have been notified of the petition to veeatethe ail lowing (alley, easement, right-of-way); described as follows: General location /Address (referring to attached document- mast be completed**) .. 6* ?rAYW 1' V 11.-L- Arlt (ATTACH legal' description and graphic representation of tchai is being vacated -SURVEY) UTILITY COMPANY COMMENTS: • No objections to the vacation(s) described above. No.objecti ns tdihe_.acation(s) describedabove.pmyidedifollowing:described easements are.relained.(Slate location, djfierrsions, and purpose below') • No objections provided the following conditions are met: 1 •stet lure of Utility Company cpresentative A!1. r. En44/.wf e Title iety;goy P geS June 25, 2012 Planning Commission VAC 124141 555 Maple Agenda Item 2 Page 9 of 18 DATE: % pi lg.- UTILITY APPROVAL FORM FOR RIGHT- OF- WAY, ALLEY, AND UTILITY EASEMENT VACATIONS UTILITY COMPANY: ` Wfe�'y APPLICANT NAME: L+0—' 1:4"- —rot A ONE: �j•-�..�%T'7 REQUE$TED VACATION (appUeantnutsr cheek dither op*: • Utility Easement - Right-of-way for allay or streets and alt utility easements located within the vacated right -o& way. - Alley Q Street right-o&way I have been notified ofthe petition to vacate the following (alley, easement, rlghr-of-may, described as -follows: Geneer/ra�ll locc�aatyti,on / Address (referring w attached dodument-must be completed") . ar 6e:/ s- iaki :.�• rftn t 1Fac- (ATTACH' legal description pa graphic representation efwhat is being vneeted$VRVEY) UTILITY COMPANY COMMENTS: / �Go objections to the vacation(s) described above, CCC....... •.Nanbjectionatosha.Yacatian(s14cacribtdabnyerpmvided following described easementsare. retained. (State .. .. _....the .togation.dimeneions,.and purpose bolow.) - _.._. _. ..._..... ..._....... _......., . • No objections provided the following oonditionaarc met: Signature ofUCampany Reptescntative Title July 2009 Pagr 5 June 25, 2012 Planning Commission VAC 124141 555 Maple Agenda Item 2 Page 10 of 18 DATE: *Milt UTILITY APPROVAL FORM FOR RIGHT- OF- WAY, ALLEY, AND UTILITY EASEMENT VACATIONS UTILITY COMPANY: LdgfrA frifft454444t4 /12.1.0., 0 ip-fery APPLICANT NAME: APP ANT PRONE: ' • ..- 'ay.- • r REQUESTED VACATION (appflaatti mast cheek gift& apply): Utility Easement Right-of-way far alley or streets and all utility easements located yeithili the vacated right -DS way. • Anti Street rIght-cikvay I have been notified tithe petition to vacidethe following (alley, easement, right-otway), described as follows: General lotation / Address (referring to attached document- must be completed") rfritiet-sW C-ASVIL-Le• Ate (ATTAcil mdraphla sapreSentailan afishas Fs being vireared-SSINVEY) UTILITY COlrIPANY CONIKETITS: • No 063cent:twig the vacation(s) described above. • ationsio_theVocatien(sidescribodobenwasuvided thilowIng.deseribeel aasernents.aroretaiami- (Stale - -- littlettalimendOnSantpurposobeICOVJ . • No objections provided the following Conditions arc tact: All conduits are placed as requested by Cox Communications and all relocations cost will be paid by developer, Chad A. Hodge Signattneof Utility Oniony Representative Title Aly200 Pages June 25, 2012 Planning Commission VAC 124141 555 Maple Agenda Item 2 Page 1 1 of 18 DATE: UTILITY APPROVAL FORM FOR RIGHT- OF- WAY, ALLEY, AND UTILITY EASEMENT VACATIONS UTILITY COMPANY: ha-r`t -r fi 1G1 f'tf � k.PP PHONE: APPLICANT NAME: j - � '/11t}21'3*23Z'7 REQUESTED VACATION (appllemd Must check dii that opp091 • Utility Easement Right -of -my for alley or streets and all utility easements located within the vacated right- a. way. Alley Q Street right-of-way I have been notified of the pethlon to vacate the folloWing(oiley, cavemen!, righr-af-iray), described as follows: General location f Address (referring to attached -*remelt :Mot be completed') (ATTACH legal deterfyttongj4graphtereyreeenlmioh of whatfsbeingvaeoted-SIfRVEY) UTILITY COMPANY COMMENTS: • No objections to the vecation(s) described: above. • Np_objedtionslo:the.vaealion(s):descrihedahoYe,pmvidedfollowing.describgieasemeetzarzreiaineel.(State _ .. ._._. thsiorntiOn.dletensi9rts_and.pnro4sehelow4-___.._.. • No objections provided the Yellowing conditions are inch lI I_OGRitrl/vOf= OR.7AMo.GF.'Tc) .AIJVExlSf/IJG ATT FACU- t-f-1ES VJIu_ QE (?C 'j 4E 1?RD9F_YCJ `{ OLO YOSY2- r'— D1-3./Cl2.)PE12' S Signature of Utility Company Representative j`.NM I\3L YJ - O.SP Title Artv1009 Pogo 5 June 25, 2012 Planning Commission VAC 124141 555 Maple Agenda Item 2 Page 12 of 18 DATE: *leg's, UTILITY APPROVAL FORM FOR RIGHT- OF- WAY, ALLEY, AND UTILITY EASEMENT VACATIONS UTILITY COMPANY: ./ Ol-'j '....I/Q�ry ,(µ sthcr APPLICANT NAME: j'G. `A -'be ""! -� ANT PHONE: REQUESTED VACATION (applicant nmst check pilling app(): Utility Easement Right -of --way for alley or streets and all utility easements located within the vacated right- of- way. Alley © Street right-of-way I have been notified of the petition to vacate thefollowing (alley, easement, right-ofway), described es follows: General location / Address (referring to attached document- must be completed•A•,),. ,2377 (ATTACH legal description gagraphie representation el what is being vacaled-SURVEY) UTILITY COMPANY COMMENTS; QNo objections to the vacation(s) described above. .!... No_objcctionsloihevacation(s).descrlhed above, provIded.fnllnwing_described easements are.retained..(State . dia location, dime_ns_ions. and purpose. below.) • No objections provided the followipg conditions are met: Signature of Utility Co y Representative �/itilr{�CS /—)gi+tret My 2009 Page 5 June 25, 2012 Planning Commission VAC 124141 555 Maple Agenda Item 2 Page 13 of 18 UTILITY% APPROVAL FORM rrinjOren-op-, WAY,ALIKV, ArtI UTILITY EASEMENT VACATIONS 1508: :t/iii. trilLITY/CtiMPANY: . # APPLICAWITAME4 4:00041ee —r PAPPOWYVACIMORiiii0440111404.1iedigibdi 4:4140; r WI* 84408let -.., Eittettet4tvey fop alley orstrola end alfuta* 4040416041044tawld0414V4404d Mid* 4i. *ay. Amy? e $104,deiti0f4,143 t have becro6iStottlio netalbelo vanaln,titiiiiiviinniney, oniemen4 figlit4iy0; 40404d narallq4,4: GO*M-41.00*/ Adthiq fivrerifiEV:SPOSSkiiient,ithiSJ*.cOpIOW) 4.ta• ~:kew a1/4twor-smita--:-. 444 (4101C11legat descilpflim 01:001sierifiregOattofriteioltatlieWliotOpereatinEjj litany ce5Miketf1Y OpMNdENTS: billOaka ;16 thoweentierds).84serdind fl—iteagOalaNtiPdonr4dOseallictIAIM4MafidulaiduttIPsCrited-eacalSztertutnelif,Stato _The lActdbalalAttilllasirmiStlal Na 4404051.004 I.liftgiOS111.4001001.000:#10: siopitoo* cos .Novselbiotv Weact Ce n t- 4- 4- „tfr Title .111y200) F 1We 1 June 25, 2012 Planning Commission VAC 124141 555 Maple Agenda Item 2 Page 14 of 18