The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2015-11-09 - Agendas - Final CITY OF a e evl jq AGENDA Y ARKANS Final Agenda Planning Commission Meeting November 9, 2015 5:30 PM 113 W. Mountain, Room 219 Members: Sarah Bunch (Chair), William Chesser (Vice Chair), Ryan Noble (Secretary), Kyle Cook, Tracy Hoskins, Ron Autry, Janet Selby, Matthew Hoffman, and Tom Brown. City Staff: Andrew Garner, City Planning Director Call to Order Roll Call Consent 1. Approval of the minutes from the October 26, 2015 meeting. Old Business 2. LSD 15-5184: Large Scale Development (SE CORNER N. BOB YOUNKIN DR. AND E. APPLEBY RD./WRMC OFFICES, 251): Submitted by USI ENGINEERS, INC. for properties located at the SE CORNER OF N. BOB YOUNKIN DR. & E. APPLEBY RD. The properties are zoned R-O, RESIDENTIAL OFFICE, and contain approximately 5.22 acres. The request is for two office buildings totaling 68,865 square feet and associated parking. Planner: Jesse Fulcher 3. RZN 15-5209: Rezone (NE CORNER OF MCGUIRE ST. &VAN ASCHE DR./MCCLINTON, 171): Submitted by TOM TERMINELLA for property located at the NE CORNER OF MCGUIRE ST. & VAN ASCHE DR. The property is zoned R-A, RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL and contains approximately 18.34 acres. The request is to rezone the property to C-2, THOROUGHFARE COMMERCIAL and C-3, CENTRAL COMMERICAL. Planner: Andrew Garner 4. RZN 15-5214: Rezone (WEST OF N. GREGG AVE. & W. VAN ASCHE DR./WG LAND COMPANY, 210): Submitted by TOM TERMINELLA for properties located WEST OF N. GREGG AVE. & W. VAN ASCHE DR. INTERSECTION. The properties are zoned R-A, RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL and contain approximately 186.65 acres. The request is to rezone the properties to C-2, THOROUGHFARE COMMERCIAL and C-3, CENTRAL COMMERCIAL. Planner: Andrew Garner Mailing Address: 113 W. Mountain Street www.fayetteville-ar.gov Fayetteville,AR 72701 New Business 5. CUP 15-5224: Conditional Use (3980 W. WEDINGTON DR./BLACKBIRD TATTOO, 400): Submitted by ERIC ALLEN for properties located at 3980 W. WEDINGTON DR. The properties are zoned CS, COMMUNITY SERVICES and contain approximately 1.71 acres. The request is for Use Unit 16 (Tattoo & Piercing) in a CS zoned district. Planner: Andrew Garner 6. CUP 15-5230: Conditional Use (2536 N. McCONNELL AVE./ARKANSAS FIGHT LEAGUE, 287): Submitted by RICHARD QUINN for property located at 2536 N. McCONNELL AVE. The property is zoned R-A, RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL and contains approximately 64.37 acres. The request is to allow Mixed Martial Arts events at the Washington County Fairgrounds. Planner: Jesse Fulcher 7. CUP 15-5202: Conditional Use (1335 W. DEANE ST./EAGLE HOLDINGS COTTAGES, 365): Submitted by ESI ENGINEERS, INC. for property located at 1335 W. DEANE ST. The property is zoned RSF-4, RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY, 4 UNITS PER ACRE and contains approximately 1.40 acres. The request is for Use Unit 44, Cottage Housing Development, in an RSF-4 zoned district. Planner: Jesse Fulcher 8. RZN 15-5223: Rezone (SE CORNER OF W. MILK BLVD. & S. STADIUM DR./STADIUM & RAILROAD, LLC, 522): Submitted by BLEW & ASSOCIATES, INC. for property located at the SE CORNER OF W. MLK BLVD. & S. STADIUM DR. The property is zoned RMF-24, RESIDENTIAL MULTI-FAMILY, 24 UNITS PER ACRE and contains approximately 2.53 acres. The request is to rezone the property to CS, COMMUNITY SERVICES. Planner: Quin Thompson 9. RZN 15-5194: Rezone (VARIOUS EXPIRED PZD LOCATIONS/EXPIRED PZDs, PP VARIES): Submitted by CITY PLANNING STAFF for VARIOUS PROPERTIES LOCATED WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS OF FAYETTEVILLE. The properties are zoned under expired PZD'S. The request is to rezone the properties back to their previous zoning before the PZDs were approved. Planner: Andrew Garner 10. VAR 15-5245: Variance (434 SPRING ST./SPRING STREET PARKING DECK, 484): Submitted by AFHJ ARCHITECTS, INC. for property located at 434 Spring St. The property is zoned MSC, MAIN STREET CENTER, and contains approximately 1.16 acres. The request is for a variance to the Downtown Design Overlay District requirements. Planner: Jesse Fulcher The following items have been approved administratively by staff LSP 15-5221: Lot Split (5132 E. GUY TERRY RD./DERRYBERRY, 103): Submitted by JENKINS SURVEYING, INC. for property located at 5132 E. GUY TERRY RD. The property is in the FAYETTEVILLE PLANNING AREA and contains approximately 6.50 acres. The request is to split the parcel into 2 lots containing approximately 4.97 and 1.50 acres. Planner: Jesse Fulcher Announcements 2 Adjourn 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 Chairrecognizes you, go to the podium and give yourname 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. 3 CITY OF Taye ARKeAN SAS le MINUTES AN Planning Commission October 26, 2015 5:30 PM City Administration Building in Fayetteville, AR, Room 219 Members: Sarah Bunch - Chair, William Chesser- Vice-Chair, Ryan Noble — Secretary, Ron Autry, Kyle Cook, Thomas Brown, Matthew Hoffman, Janet Selby, and Tracy Hoskins City Staff: Andrew Garner— City Planning Director, Jesse Fulcher— Senior Planner, Quin Thompson — Planner, Cory Granderson — Staff Engineer, and Kit Williams—City Attorney 1. Call to Order: 5:30 PM, Sarah Bunch 2. In Attendance: Sarah Bunch, Janet Selby, Thomas Brown, William Chesser, Tracy Hoskins, and Matthew Hoffman Absent: Ron Autry, Kyle Cook, and Ryan Noble Staff: Andrew Garner, Jesse Fulcher, Quin Thompson, Jonathan Ely, and Kit Williams 3. Consent Agenda: Approval of the minutes from the October 12, 2015 meeting. VAC 15-5204: Vacation (722 S. LOCUST AVE./SOUTHSIDE TOWNHOMES, 562): Submitted by INFILL GROUP, INC. for properties located at 722 S. LOCUST AVE. The properties are zoned DG, DOWNTOWN GENERAL and contain approximately 0.80 acres. The request is to vacate a portion of an alley easement and street Right of Way easement. ADM 15-5243: Administrative Item (2600 JUDGE CUMMINGS RD./MT. KESSLER REGIONAL PARK, 602): Submitted by CITY STAFF for property located at 2600 JUDGE CUMMINGS RD. The property is zoned P-1, INSTITUTIONAL and contains approximately 600 acres. The request is for an extension of LSD 14-4819 Mt. Kessler Regional Park Motion: Commissioner Chesser made a motion to approve the consent agenda. Commissioner Selby seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion passed with a vote of 6-0-0. Mailing Address: Planning Commission 113 W. Mountain Street www.fayetri9bRF.d63P15 Fayetteville,AR 72701 Agenda Item 1 10-26-2015 Minutes Page 1 of 12 4. New Business: CUP 15-5217: Conditional Use (2648 N. OLD WIRE ROAD/APPLE SEEDS, 292): Submitted by MARY THOMPSON for property located at 2648 N. OLD WIRE ROAD. The property is zoned RSF-4, RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY, 4 UNITS PER ACRE and contains approximately 0.86 acres. The request is to allow Use Unit 4 and Use Unit 12 to allow Apple Seeds to operate an office and teaching farm. Jesse Fulcher, Senior Planner, read the staff report. Mary Thompson, applicant, stated that she agreed with the conditions of approval and described the Apple Seeds project. No public comment was presented. Commissioner Hoskins asked why the driveway didn't have to be paved. Commissioner Chesser stated that the land use seemed appropriate. Commission Brown asked if the street improvements to Old Wire would take care of the gravel driveway. Fulcher stated that it would through the right-of-way. Commissioner Hoskins stated that he wanted the site improvements to be consistent with other commercial-type uses. Thompson stated that she was hoping to add a small amount of gravel for parking. Commissioner Hoffman stated that he supported the proposal. Andrew Garner, City Planning Director, stated that this is a residential area, so we don't want to see the parking areas paved and stripped as if it were in a commercial area. Commissioner Hoskins asked if the conditional use was indefinite. Garner stated that it runs with the land. Motion: Commissioner Chesser made a motion to approve CUP 15-5217 with conditions as recommended by staff. Commissioner Selby seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion passed with a vote of 5-1-0. Commissioner Hoskins voted "no". Planning Commission November 922015 Agenda Item 1 10-26-2015 Minutes Page 2 of 12 VAR 15-5231: Variance (722 S. LOCUST AVE./SOUTHSIDE TOWNHOMES, 562): Submitted by THE INFILL GROUP, INC. for properties located at 722 S. LOCUST AVE. The properties are zoned DG, DOWNTOWN GENERAL and contain approximately 0.80 acres. The request is for a variance of the curb and turn radius for a drive and for a sidewalk immediately adjacent to the curb. Quin Thompson, Current Planner, read the staff report. Matthew Petty, Applicant, gave a presentation, and said that he was working to maximize the use of the property. He said that the project was spending a lot on the site, and could not afford [required off-site] improvements. Petty said he felt the proposed sidewalk design was better because the sidewalk was in a straight line. He said this avoided critical root zones and provided a better condition for pedestrians without a deformity. Concerning the curb radius, Petty said that driveways are not street. He said that he felt the standards should be less and that he wanted to provide an `open book' development adding that most people feel that development is a black box full of money and jerks. He said that the smallest possible curb radius is the safest and can reduce speed of vehicles. No public comment was presented. Commissioner Hoffman said that on the sidewalk question he was in complete agreement with staff, and that as far as the curb, he had mixed feelings, agreeing with both staff and the applicant on some points. He agreed that the curb radii could be smaller, but said that curb extensions were more useful than paint. He suggested that the design use a raised curb but with a smaller radius. Commissioner Chesser said he agreed with the applicant about sidewalk location [at back of curb] and that he agreed with Hoffman about the curb returns. Commissioner Hoskins asked if the tree canopy was near overhead power lines. Brian Teague, applicant, said that the lines would not affect the trees that the project wished to preserve. Commissioner Hoskins said it was likely that the power company would come by and remove the canopy of these trees in the future, and asked about amount of fill at the back of the proposed sidewalk. Teague said he thought it would be no more than six inches. Commissioner Hoskins said that if the true goal was to protect the trees, he said it would be difficult because the trees would be impacted on both sides, both by easement/sidewalk in front and by building activity on the other side. Derek Linn, Urban Forester, said that he had not seen a grading plan indicating how these trees might be saved. He said he was reviewing the current proposal, but would not feel comfortable speaking to the likelihood of these trees being saved. Planning Commission November 932015 Agenda Item 1 10-26-2015 Minutes Page 3 of 12 Commissioner Hoskins said he knew it would not be a popular decision, but he felt that perhaps the sidewalk should follow the Master Street Plan (MSP) section. He said it would be great to save the tree, but said that the tree will be impacted negatively either way, and therefore he saw no reason to support the variance. Commissioner Brown said that he had no problem approving the variances except for two things. He said paint would not keep people from parking in the turning radius, and said that there is no sidewalk [on this side of the street] now, but future development will place sidewalk according to the MSP section. He said he liked the presentation, but couldn't support a short-term issue with a long-range impact. Petty asked if mountable curbs would be allowed, saying that the Fire Department may have concerns about the narrow curb radius. Commissioner Hoskins noted that mountable curb comes with its own problems. Motion #1: Commissioner Hoffman made a motion to approve the sidewalk variance for VAR 15- 5231 as requested by applicant. Commissioner Chesser seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion passed with a vote of 4-2-0. Commissioners Hoskins and Brown voted "no". Motion #2: Commissioner Hoffman made a motion to approve a curb return radius variance for VAR 15-5231 requiring a raised curb with a 5-foot radius unless the Fire Department requires a different design. Commissioner Chesser seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion passed with a vote of 6-0-0. Planning Commission November 942015 Agenda Item 1 10-26-2015 Minutes Page 4 of 12 LSD 15-5184: Large Scale Development (SE CORNER N. BOB YOUNKIN DR. AND E. APPLEBY RD./WRMC OFFICES, 251): Submitted by USI ENGINEERS, INC.for properties located at the SE CORNER OF N. BOB YOUNKIN DR. & E. APPLEBY RD. The properties are zoned R-O, RESIDENTIAL OFFICE, and contain approximately 5.22 acres. The request is for two office buildings totaling 68,865 square feet and associated parking. Jesse Fulcher, Senior Planner, read the staff report. Larry Shackelford, applicant, discussing the need to expand their facilities. The site plan meets all requirements. This is our 14'" site plan. We've tried to be good neighbors with adjacent property owners. Public Comment: Ruth Cahoon, neighbor, stated she's lived in the adjacent neighborhood for 16 year. We believe our homes will be impacted by this project. The new building will be very close to Ms. May's property. She was asked not to come to the meeting. We object to the building and we would like the Planning Commission to ask them to move the building to the street. Please table the request tonight. Tammy Most, neighbor, stated that Planning staff has asked them to move the building, but Washington Regional stated they were told to move the building back from the street. What is the story? Bob Hill, neighbor, showed an exhibit of the building height.We are opposed to Washington Regional developing this site, but we do object to the location of the building. Why didn't the City allow the building to move to the north? If this project goes forward our property values will decrease drastically. Ms. May already can't sell her house, nor can the neighbor sell his two new units. Avery Owlrey, neighbor, stated that the neighborhood was never included in the discussion. I just learned about this project from another neighbor. Betty Wallace, neighbor, they put all of their motorcycle space adjacent to my fence. No more public comment was presented. Commissioner Bunch asked staff what plans they had seen. Fulcher stated that staff was never presented with any design with the building near the street. We've seen the last few revisions, but not the first 10-12 that the applicant described. Commissioner Hoskins asked the applicant who they met with. Ferdi Fourie, applicant, stated they started with several options, but feel like this current design is the best design for all requirements. This design works with tree preservation. We will have a compliance issue if we remove more trees. We had a meeting in July and moved the building to the west to save trees. Commissioner Hoskins asked staff if they looked at trees. Planning Commission November 952015 Agenda Item 1 10-26-2015 Minutes Page 5 of 12 Derek Linn, Urban Forester, stated that we asked for better preservation when we reviewed the first plan.We did not see revisions 1-12. The current design is a pretty balance approach with 8% preservation. They did move the building to save the Elm tree. Commissioner Hoskins stated that moving the building north will still save the Elm tree. Linn stated that it's not just trees, but also grading, access and other site items. Commissioner Hoskins asked if they can deny the project. Fulcher stated no. The project meets all development code requirements. The neighbor's would like to see it tabled, so the hospital can look at other options. Shackleford stated they made changes to the design based on comments at the Technical Plat Review meeting. The building is currently 46 feet away. We asked they neighbors if moving it another 20 feet north would help, but we got mixed results. Commissioner Hoskins stated that he would like to see the building moved further north and for it to be tabled tonight. Commissioner Hoffman stated he agreed with Commissioner Hoskins. I'm not sure how through 14 designs that the building wasn't designed at the corner.What is the front setback. Andrew Garner, City Planning Director, stated that it's 15 feet. Commissioner Hoffman noted the applicant hadn't been good neighbors, since they didn't even move the dumpsters off the property line as was discussed at the Subdivision Committee meeting. Commissioner Chesser stated that this was discussed at the Subdivision Committee meeting and we told the applicant we would support less preservation if they moved the building north. I would like to table the project tonight. Shackleford stated that they can look at moving the building, but not sure we can. Jim Key, applicant, stated that they started working on this a few years ago. We can't fit building to the south, because the lot is too narrow. Moving the building up to the street makes the entries difficult. There are also lots of grade issues to work with. We had an additional 20 feet added to the setback, but were told to preserve the 42" oak tree. Commissioner Hoffman asked about the entry requirements. Garner discussed the commercial design standards. Commissioner Hoskins stated that the building can be moved north and probably keep detention where it is and save trees. Commissioner Brown asked to table the project, so it can be discussed further. Kit Williams, City Attorney, stated that if Washington Regional won't change the design, then we will need to approve it if it meets all codes. Planning Commission November 962015 Agenda Item 1 10-26-2015 Minutes Page 6 of 12 Commissioner Bunch stated she is in favor of tabling the project, but won't deny the building height. Motion: Commissioner Brown made a motion to table LSD 15-5184 until the next meeting. Commissioner Hoskins seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion passed with a vote of 4-2-0. Commissioners Selby and Chesser voted "no". Planning Commission November 972015 Agenda Item 1 10-26-2015 Minutes Page 7 of 12 CUP 15-5212: Conditional Use (4000 N. COLLEGE AVE./WHATABURGER NORTH, 135): Submitted by CRAFTON TULL, INC.for properties located at 4000 N. COLLEGE AVE. The properties are zoned C-2, THOROUGHFARE COMMERCIAL and contain approximately 2.00 acres. The request is for an off-site parking lot. Quin Thompson, Current Planner, read the staff report. Daniel Ellis, Applicant, said that the applicant was concerned with queuing and safety, adding that relocating the existing drive [as proposed by staff] was acceptable to the client. No public comment was presented. Commissioner Hoskins said that he could not support the request without more information. He asked if the existing slab would be used as parking. Ellis said that the plan was to remove the slab and stabilize with greenspace. Commissioner Chesser said the request seemed perfectly reasonable. Motion: Commissioner Chesser made a motion to approve CUP 15-5212 modifying condition #2 to require the removed slab area to be sodded or seeded. Commissioner Selby seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion passed with a vote of 6-0-0. Planning Commission November 9$2015 Agenda Item 1 10-26-2015 Minutes Page 8 of 12 CUP 15-5202: Conditional Use(1335W. DEANE STJEAGLE HOLDINGS COTTAGES, 365): Submitted by ESI ENGINEERS, INC. for property located at 1335 W. DEANE ST. The property is zoned RSF-4, RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY, 4 UNITS PER ACRE and contains approximately 1.67 acres. The request is for Use Unit 44, Cottage Housing Development, in an RSF-4 zoned district. No staff report or public comment was presented. Motion: Commissioner Chesser made a motion to table CUP 15-5202 until the next meeting. Commissioner Selby seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion passed with a vote of 6-0-0. Planning Commission November 992015 Agenda Item 1 10-26-2015 Minutes Page 9 of 12 RZN 15-5209: Rezone (NE CORNER OF MCGUIRE ST. & VAN ASCHE DR./MCCLINTON, 171): Submitted by TOM TERMINELLA for property located at the NE CORNER OF McGUIRE ST. &VAN ASCHE DR. The property is zoned R-A, RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL and contains approximately 18.34 acres. The request is to rezone the property to C-2, THOROUGHFARE COMMERCIAL and UT, URBAN THOROUGHFARE. RZN 15-5214: Rezone (WEST OF N. GREGG AVE. & W. VAN ASCHE DR./WG LAND COMPANY, 210): Submitted by TOM TERMINELLA for properties located WEST OF N. GREGG AVE. & W. VAN ASCHE DR. INTERSECTION. The properties are zoned R-A, RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL and contain approximately 186.65 acres. The request is to rezone the properties to C-2, THOROUGHFARE COMMERCIAL, C-3, CENTRAL COMMERCIAL and UT, URBAN THOROUGHFARE. Andrew Garner, City Planning Director, gave the staff report for both RZN 15-5209 (McClinton) and RZN 15-5214 (WG Land Company). Kit Williams, City Attorney, discussed the background for the Van Asche project and the memorandum of understanding between the City Council and WG Land Company. He indicated that because of the previous understanding the applicant's proposal should be approved. Tom Overby, applicant's attorney, discussed the background regarding the annexation and history of the WG Land Company property. He confirmed agreement with the history of what the City Attorney just discussed. Tom Terminella, applicant, also indicated agreement with Kit Williams' discussion. He discussed background of the design of Van Asche. Public Comment: Charlie Sloan, Ward 4 citizen. He is in support of the proposed zoning. I remember that this was supposed to be commercial. I thought that was the history of this. The City lives and dies off of sales tax. Out of the $145 million City budget, $53 million is generated from sales tax. No more public comment was presented. Commissioner Chesser discussed that previous agreements should be honored. I think that doing a traditional town form project might be better for you in the long term. I would encourage the applicant to at least consider the possibility of a traditional town form development pattern. I would like to appeal to that sense. Agreements previously agreed should be stuck to. Commissioner Hoffman discussed understanding the City Attorney's comments but disagrees that this memorandum should require us to disregard City Plan 2030. We have a lot of traditional town form zoning districts that provide for commercial developments. I think there are a number of ways we could do this that would satisfy both concerns. Obviously we have an interest in what's good for everybody. 77% of people graduating from college choose to live in walkable urban centers. The fact that we have stood up and have these goals up here is one of the reasons our community is growing the way it is. The City has spent millions of dollars in CMN business park because of the C-2 and automobile oriented Planning Commission November 3)p2015 Agenda Item 1 10-26-2015 Minutes Page 10 of 12 development. This new couple hundred acres is an opportunity for people to live, work, and shop in one area. All the things we cherish about Fayetteville can be encouraged here. Commissioner Brown discussed the magnitude and opportunity to implement the City Plan 2030. There are views from the north that are on a hillside and afford great views. There is rail along the east side and opportunity for mass transit. There are a lot of opportunities here. He discussed the City Plan designations of the property. Both the City Neighborhood and Urban Center areas indicate a mix of residential and non-residential uses. He discussed the economics included in City Plan 2030 for different development patterns. He discussed the applicant's proposed rezoning. The concern that I have is that the C-2 zone does not allow any residential. The C-3 zone and UT zone we allow residential development. In the UT zone we allow a variety of other commercial and residential uses. From my perspective the way you could improve that zoning is to move away from the C-2 and go with the C-3 and go for a mixed use approach for the final development. Tom Terminella, applicant, discussed the problems of the CMN Business Park area. He discussed problems with Mall Avenue. The bridge was never put in along Red Lobster to the cul-de-sac on the other side of the creek. I assume the bridge was too costly. We have had years to procure people to this property. Our goal all along was to create a mixed use development on the farm. We have a whole laundry list of users interested in this farm. We have a multi-family developer interested in the northern portion of the farm. South of Van Asche we have two end-users interested in bringing a lifestyle and nature user. We have some 40 acres near Gregg that has interest in a medical and office park. There is interest in bringing some car dealers from Texas and Oklahoma to this property. Keep in mind that Tune Concrete is going nowhere. He discussed other industrial uses in the direct area that are still there. On a daily basis we will have between 200-300 concrete trucks using the new road. He discussed additional industrial uses in the immediate vicinity. All of the road sections will basically be the same as Van Asche. This is the grand central station of transportation. Any type of development will take into consideration connectivity for all parcels. Commissioner Brown indicated that the zoning proposed should at least try to follow the plan. He is suggesting that in place of C-2 that the C-3 zoning be utilized because it at least allows the options for multi-family dwellings. To maintain a long term opportunity to have a mixed use development, a C-3 zoning will do that better for us. Commissioner Hoffman discussed making a motion to deny the proposed rezoning. Commissioner Chesser indicated a preference to table these. Tom Terminella, applicant, indicated willingness to table the item. Motion: Commissioner Chesser made a motion to table RZN 15-5209 and RZN 15-5214 until the next meeting. Commissioner Selby seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion passed with a vote of 5-0-0. Planning Commission November 812015 Agenda Item 1 10-26-2015 Minutes Page 11 of 12 5. Reports: No reports 6. Announcements: 7. Adjournment Time: 5:50 PM 8. Submitted by: City Planning Division Planning Commission November 3)22015 Agenda Item 1 10-26-2015 Minutes Page 12 of 12 CITY OF ayevi le PLANNING COMMISSION MEMO Y ARKANSAS TO: Fayetteville Planning Commission THRU: Andrew Garner, City Planning Director FROM: Jesse Fulcher, Senior Planner Corey Granderson, Staff Engineer MEETING: November 9, 2015 SUBJECT: LSD 15-5184: Large Scale Development(SE CORNER N. BOB YOUNKIN DR. AND E. APPLEBY RDJWRMC OFFICES, 251): Submitted by USI ENGINEERS, INC. for properties located at the SE CORNER OF N. BOB YOUNKIN DR. & E. APPLEBY RD. The properties are zoned R-O, RESIDENTIAL OFFICE, and contain approximately 5.22 acres. The request is for two office buildings totaling 68,865 square feet and associated parking. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of LSD 15-5184 with conditions of approval. BACKGROUND: Plan revisions: The project was reviewed at the October 26, 2015 Planning Commission meeting. The focus of the discussion was on the location of the building and the impact of a 4-story building on the adjacent homes. The Planning Commission asked the applicant to evaluate moving the building further north, possibly adjacent to the street, even if it resulted in removing additional trees. The applicant has submitted a revised plan with the building shifted approximately 24 feet further north. The resulting setback between the building and the neighbor's property line is approximately 68 feet. It should be noted, however, that the building setback from Appleby Road is still over 90 feet, so a much greater buffer could have been provided. Further, several of the existing trees along Appleby Road can be preserved even with the building being shifted 24 feet north. Unfortunately, the applicant has added 5 new parking spaces that requires the removal of every tree in this area. By removing these 5 parking spaces and adjusting the curb line to only provide the minimum drive aisle dimensions required for access, the applicant can save several healthy trees and increase their preservation from 4.9% to approximately 5.6%. Additionally, the applicant can also save a 10-inch Hackberry along the neighbor's property line by removing 3 parking spaces and adjusting the drive aisle width. Again, this small adjustment will increase on-site preservation of healthy tree canopy. The applicant has relocated the dumpsters further away from the neighbor's property and the motorcycle parking spaces have been removed the property line. Unfortunately, parking has been increased by 16 spaces and an additional 5,000 square feet of tree canopy is proposed to be removed. Mailing Address: Planning ommission ov ber 9,2015 113 w. Mountain Street www.faye -l4tQ9v Fayetteville, AR 72701 15-5184 WRMC Offices Page 1 of 38 The revised plans meet all Fayetteville Unified Development Code requirements. The subject property is located at the southeast corner of Appleby Road and Bob Younkin Drive. Properties to the north and west are developed with medical office uses, including Washington Regional Hospital. The properties to the east include the North Heights Subdivision, which are single-family attached townhouses within the RMF-24 zoning district. The subject property is comprised of three separate tracts. The eastern tract contains approximately 2.5 acres and was rezoned to Residential Office in 2000. There are no additional restrictions on this property and it's not a part of a platted subdivision. The remaining two tracts are Lots 11 and 12 of the Appleby Landing Subdivision. Both of these properties were rezoned to Residential Office in 2002, subject to a Bill of Assurance. The Bill of Assurance limited building height to one-story, with the exception of the north side of the property, described as 383 feet in width and 417 feet in depth (see exhibit). Therefore the building height limitation does not apply to Lot 12. The only height limitation for Lot 12 and the out lot to the east is set by the zoning standards for the Residential Office zoning district (attached). Surrounding land use and zoning is depicted in Table 1. Table I Surrounding Land Use and Zoning Direction Land Use Zoning from Site North Washington Regional Campus P-1, Institutional South Undeveloped R-O, Residential Office East Single-family Attached Townhouses & RMF-24, Residential Multi-family& R-A, North Hills Life Care and Rehab Residential Agricultural West Medical Office R-O, Residential Office Proposal: The applicant is requesting approval to develop two separate medical office buildings with approximately 235 parking spaces. Building 1 is a four-story clinic containing approximately 57,000 square feet. The building height from existing natural grade is just under 60 feet. Building 2 is a one-story clinic containing approximately 6,500 square feet. Water and Sewer System: There are existing utilities to serve the new development. Adjacent streets and right-of-way: This site is adjacent to Appleby Road (Collector Street) and Bob Younkin Drive (Collector Street). Street Improvements: Staff is recommending construction of a 5-foot sidewalk along Appleby Road with a connection to the North Hills Rehab property and street lights every 300 feet along Appleby Road. Additionally, staff is recommended new crosswalks across Appleby Drive at the intersection with Bob Younkin Drive and North Hills Drive. Tree Preservation:Existing 14.5%;Preserved 4.9%; Mitigation required in the amount of 56 trees. Access ManagemenUConnectivity: The applicant is proposing two curb-cuts on Bob Younkin Drive, with one serving as a future shared drive. A new entrance from Appleby Road is also proposed and an existing driveway at North Hills Rehab will be improved to allow cross access to both properties. All of the proposed driveways are in compliance with Access Management standards. G:\ETC\Development Services Review\2015\Development Review\15-5167 LSD(WRMCIBob Planning Commission Younkin)NO3 Planning Commission\11-9-2015\Comments and Redlines November 9,2015 Agenda Item 2 15-5184 WRMC Offices Page 2 of 38 Public Comments: Staff has spoken with several neighbors who are opposed to his development. The main concern is the height of the building and proximity to their properties and homes. Building Height: Many of the neighbors within the adjacent North Heights Subdivision have inquired about the height limitations and requirements of the Bill of Assurance. As noted above, the height restrictions in the Bill of Assurance (attached)do not apply to Lot 12 or the out lot where the buildings are proposed to be located. The Residential Office zoning district has a building height limitation of 60 feet as measured from the existing natural grade. There is a pronounced depression in the center of this property with elevations at the east and west end around 1256 feet AMSL and 1250 feet AMSL near the center of the site. The proposed four-story building will span across these elevations changes, so the center of the site will need to be filled. However, the building height is still measured from the historic grade. At no point may the building exceed 60 feet from historic grade. The elevations indicate the building will be 54 feet tall to the top of the roof. The parapet is not included the height limitation. The building height, plus the addition of fill will result in a building that is just under the 60-foot height limit. Neighbors have also requested information regarding an amendment to the height regulations in the Residential Office zoning district. Staff researched this change and found the subject code amendment that was adopted in March 2009 by Ordinance No. 5224. The Residential Office district has always contained a supplemental height/setback restriction, which increases the side setback one additional foot for every foot of building height in excess of 20 feet. This section of code historically required this additional setback when adjacent to any "residential district." This language not only applied to single-family zoning, but also multi-family zoning, which is often developed with multi-story buildings. In response to a variance request in 2008 for an office building adjacent to an existing apartment complex, staff initiated a code amendment to change the setback language. The intent of the code amendment was to require the additional setback when a Residential Office development is adjacent to a single-family zoning district and not multi-family districts. In the case of the North Heights Subdivision, the lots are developed with single-family townhouses, and the underlying zoning is multi-family and therefore an addition side setback is not required for the subject development. According to the previous code the side setback along the North Heights Subdivision would have been 54 feet. The applicant's current proposal places the four-story building approximately 68 feet from the property line. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of LSD 15-5184 with the following conditions. Conditions of Approval: 1. Planning Commission determination of Commercial Design Standards. In staffs opinion both buildings are well articulated and meet the minimum design requirements. Additionally, both buildings have prominent entry ways facing both streets. THE SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE FOUND IN FAVOR OF THE BUILDING DESIGN. 2. Planning Commission determination of street improvements. Staff recommends the construction of a 5-foot sidewalk along Appleby Road with a connection to the North Hills Rehab property, and street lights every 300 feet along Appleby Road. Additionally, staff G:\ETC\Development Services Review\2015\Developmenl Review\15-5167 LSD(WRMCIBob Planning Commission Younkin)\03 Planning Commission\11-9-2015\Comments and Redlines November 9,2015 Agenda Item 2 15-5184 WRMC Offices Page 3 of 38 recommends new crosswalks across Appleby Drive at the intersection with Bob Younkin Drive and North Hills Drive, to facilitate increased pedestrian activity in the area. THE SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE FOUND IN FAVOR OF THE IMPROVEMENTS. 3. Planning Commission determination of the Tree Preservation Plan. Staff recommends that the applicant remove the 5 parking spaces north of the entrance drive and the 3 parking spaces south of Building 2, as well as adjust the drive aisles to the minimum width required in order to increase tree preservation to approximately 6% of the site area. Since the previous Planning Commission meeting the parking counts have increased 16 spaces. Staffs recommendation is to remove 8 of these spaces to increase tree preservation. 4. Pursuant to the Bill of Assurance and Chapter 166.25(D)(5)(b), the applicant shall provide an 8-foot wide greenspace along the entire south and east property line, which shall be planted with 2" large species, shade trees with a maximum spacing of 20 feet between trunks. All of the existing privacy fences along these same property lines shall be maintained or reconstructed with new materials. Any property line disputes are to be handled between private property owners. Further, a walking trail shall be provided along the east side of Lots 11 and 12 as generally indicated on the site plans. Coordination with the Urban Forester is required where work will occur within the existing tree preservation easement. 5. No disturbance shall occur within the 20-foot tree preservation easement along the east side of the property, with the exception of the required walking trail. 6. The applicant shall submit a photometric (lighting) plan clearly showing zero foot candles at the edge of pavement along the south and east property lines. 7. A portion of the parking lot will extend onto Lot 11 and 10. Unless a property line adjustment is processed, this is considered off-site parking and a conditional use permit must be approved-by the Planning Commission. The applicant shall submit and record a property line adjustment or receive approval for a conditional use permit prior to any construction activities commencing or building permits being issued. As part of a conditional request, staff will recommend that the motorcycle spaces be relocated away from any residential land uses. 8. With the exception of the shared driveway along Lots 10 and 11, no other construction shall occur on lot 10 and no parking shall be permitted.A temporary barrier shall be located on the south side of the shared drive. 9. Motorcycle/scooter and compact parking spaces shall be identified with either pavement marking or signage. 10. All tree preservation, landscape, engineering and fire department conditions included herein shall apply. All revisions shall be addressed prior to construction plan approval. 11. The following revisions shall be made prior to building permit approval: a. Identify location of wall-mounted meter packs on the utility plan and plan. b. Locate large species trees along east property line on landscape plan. G:\ETC\Development Services Review\2015\Development Review\15-5167 LSD(WRMC/Bob Planning Commission Younkin)\03 Planning Commission\11-9-2015\Comments and Redlines November 9,2015 Agenda Item 2 15-5184 WRMC Offices Page 4 of 38 Standard conditions of approval: 12. Impact fees for fire, police, water, and sewer shall be paid in accordance with City ordinance. 13.All ground mounted utilities shall be screened with vegetation and all building mounted utilities shall be screened with architectural materials that are compatible with the principal structure. 14. If applicable, a business license shall be obtained prior to opening the business to the public. 15. Plat Review and Subdivision comments (to include written staff comments provided to the applicant or his representative, and all comments from utility representatives: AR Western Gas, SWBT, Ozarks, SWEPCO, and Cox Communications). 16. Staff approval of final detailed plans, specifications and calculations (where applicable)for grading, drainage, water, sewer, fire protection, streets (public and private), sidewalks, parking lot(s) and tree preservation. The information submitted for the plat review process was reviewed for general concept only. All public improvements are subject to additional review and approval. All improvements shall comply with City's current requirements. 17.All exterior lights shall comply with the City lighting ordinance. Manufacturer's cut-sheets are required for review and approval prior to issuance of a building permit. 18.All freestanding and wall signs shall comply with ordinance specifications for location, size, type, number, etc. Any proposed signs shall be permitted by a separate sign permit application prior to installation. Freestanding pole signs and electronic message boards (direct lighting) are prohibited in the Design Overlay District. 19. Large scale development shall be valid for one calendar year. 20. Prior to building permit, a cost estimate for all required landscaping is to be submitted to the Landscape Administrator for review. Once approval is gained, a guarantee is to be issued (bond/letter of credit/cash) for 150% of the cost of the materials and installation of the plants. This guarantee will be held until the improvements are installed and inspected, at the time of Certificate of Occupancy. 21. Prior to the issuance of a building permit the following is required: a. Grading and drainage permits b. An on-site inspection by the Landscape Administrator of all tree protection measures prior to any land disturbance. C. Separate easement plat for this project that shall include the tree preservation area and all utility easements. d. Project Disk with all final revisions e. One copy of final construction drawings showing landscape plans including tree preservation measures submitted to the Landscape Administrator. f. Completion of all required improvements or the placement of a surety with the City (letter of credit, bond, escrow) as required by Section 158.01 "Guarantees in Lieu of Installed Improvements' to guarantee all incomplete improvements. Further, all G:\ETC\Development Services Review\2015\Development Review\15-5167 LSD(WRMC/Bob Planning Commission Younkin)\03 Planning Commission\11-9-2015\Comments and Redlines November 9,2015 Agenda Item 2 15-5184 WRMC Offices Page 5 of 38 improvements necessary to serve the site and protect public safety must be completed, not just guaranteed, prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. Planning Commission Action: O Approved O Forwarded O Denied Meeting Date: November 9. 2015 Motion: Second: Vote: BUDGET/STAFF IMPACT: None. Attachments: • Engineering Division Comments • Urban Forestry tree preservation and Landscape Comments • Solid Waste Comments • Letter from Mayor Jordan to Washington Regional Medical Center • Applicant's Letter • Bill of Assurance • Exhibit • Civil Plan(s) • Elevations • Floor Plan • Close Up Map • One Mile Map WETC\Development Services Revlew\2015\Development Review\15-5167 LSD(WRMCIBob Planning Commission Younkin)\03 Planning Commission\11-9-2015\Comments and Redlines November 9,2015 Agenda Item 2 15-5184 WRMC Offices Page 6 of 38 NEW PLANS Planning CommiE sion November 9,201 15-5184 WRMC Offices Page 7 of 38 Consulting Engineers Engineering the Future Ferdinand Fourie,P.E. Project Manager November 2, 2015 4847 Kaylee Avenue-Suite B Springdale,Arkansas 72762 479.872,7115 Telephone 479.872.7118 Facsimile Jesse Futcher www,usi-ce.com Senior Planner ffourie@usi-ce.com City of Fayetteville 113 West Mountain Street Fayetteville, AR 72701 Phone : (479) 575-8262 Re: Large Scale Development Resubmittal Washington Regional Medical Center Appleby Landing Medical Office Buildings LSD#15-5184 Dear Mr. Fulcher: Please find enclosed resubmittal items for the proposed Appleby Landing Medical Office Buildings for Washington Regional Medical Center(LSD#15-5184). This is in response to the request made by the Planning Commission at the October 26, 2015 meeting to investigate an alternative to reduce the impact to the adjacent residential subdivision by further relocating the proposed Medical Office Building 1 to the north. With this layout, Medical Office Building 1 has been moved 24-feet to the north and 8.5-feet to the west. Other concerns from neighbors related to the dumpster location and motorcycle parking has been addressed as well. Dumpsters have been relocated to the east property line and motorcycle parking divided between two locations away from the neighborhood property line. The impact to tree preservation of this revision is the deletion of the previously saved trees along the north side of the building. Therefore fourteen additional mitigation trees will be added to the project. Please let me know if you have any questions. Sincerely, ,-rerdi Fourie, P.E. Project Manager Planning Commission November 9,2015 Agenda Item 2 15-5184 WRMC Offices Page 8 of 38 NVId N011VA89S32dd 3381 I _y o •:emegN'aleunag C ! i9 • .. "s "'o '. ; o A :'.I0G3III iIg `'� SVSNMI9tl'3-nIA3113AV3 j -� �RumnsuoD � � SONimina 301JJO 1V0103W � i•�? k a m1I v e.,. � M - _ SW31SAS IV0103W IVN01038 NOIDNIHSYM i i i ii U m"1E ilmii(ii 11fu m 11 1 7 a0F 6i9aa0inn �I �uJ ;MO iililitiiiiiliiiiiii iiliilifi li!1 i 1 ii al PaGPa a a Da 4JlV �t"Y V'a9 dB i N g II HOW i41§iiii$0iiiati936fgSilit64 S 93 H i 4 9; I�� r �! �� ::.1 �il's'i33d3:gi13d3i3$i3lis�ddsl3 it 3'V?e i`i i � II �� igi sl it. 11 Gil iii �`; f 4(ff4irs942ff?S?if4 F?i Y?;milt d;t.•++.i e ��>e �I i � ! �pat i i is vt 1a t {i Ilii�l11ii= �f lo-��Pf� BY ��?".� +I I �� t• O �- 4 ter- q4q Y i led�� ' dof E'�$ ivt Pi l e - n v v it jjar ty� ii �o 4 PI r•� W¢ Sa 19 ��Ar v VvYi rs {iY kFaE n yn vl 5j 6 Y! 1 `7x LI g ^ g I— r — a vj 7 e MYL OI g, x - I �d� �HEDIGLor+�ce ommlrvet r'v �' Hmlp� �� 1 £a e' ebd m uda G9 1 Planr Ing Commission �..,.,....��,„,.._, ,.- t--,.......�.... .�_.__._. evember 9,2015 Agenda Item 2 15-5184 WRMC Offices Page 9 of 38 YL� 9 NOILdO S.Iaall[a'iva ISO— SVSNVNRatl•3l1IA3113)V *0V 10, peyJ•� ■� SJNIOlI n8301JJO IV0103W AB3lddtl ,. '1� ILII I n` H31N301V0103W 1VN0103tl N010NIHSVM ^�I�LJ�LI E •'�sa•eS=ag;.: - s a3 xe Y�- .6pE.. S,• 9.i,-, 3-d FS-E N'."..�3 r: i A t S II I :"2.r e:YA Vim p argiy;y3 a Ri yAaa£s YE a y 9 •, r :. tr 9 2a d • fI,L1nJJl '3 3 8 Y a � g QQ g g ' 7 t € 9 a1Y5 ig ddzG - �ae§ise4-� a � - =•a••3'C. � p � d .SSED da:,G,e . ] g •; d t 6.,qF ! � e x`gt� YYifipgd.:; •y` d d ad 1 • 3 .. v i F5 uy "zeu �Q[ 7 "ei- -� lei • `�' � �9Y Y l�� Y �ij£Fi 4��. I_�. f lIL i .�3 .ry x4 "- 1 FI •� � �e ayi �;� s � / :� �tool ��•�F �`�� 9393 t / Yi 1 f iS 33NOAO 3 1 Y ° � I y A '•'" "' ] MEDICAL ORIF BUILDING 1 CAL ', 6f 1 f MEDIOflCERWLDING3 'l I .J i i '1., ,_ "•1• 1� � �iP, `t, �` i �/ I -/^ - l-�i — � 1` iea X •R jig ri i t, Wi APPLEM r RD� a sf Ff --- as hPIanni g Commission ,___..v,_..„_._.,..,_�.,,.......• _ er 9,2015 Agenda Item 2 15-5184 WRMC Offices Page 10 of 38 PREVIOUS PLANS Planning CommiE sion November 9,201 Agenda Item 2 15-5184 WRMC Offices Page 11 of 38 o, ( Y l-H-ldaib FoAlk , a;F f qFd J . � I - c 3 A". LI L 61 ' FfTf: R Ri Cli C fah nn'eaw... z�manne asfio in�5aaw ' ' + 5ewmme a�Iddo mioaw r;6 I, d� _I.r _ sF Aid, 9" su J E CYCNEE ET n IF Y 4 - I d a , o g � do g �� 1 F■,�yJ■■�f} df g] 5 P i, LL i g Y F } Y Y f F f Y Y P4 9. Z p Y WASHINGTON REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER o xC APPLEBY MEDIC OFFICE BUILDINGS CO715LilY1SEg ` FAYETTEVILLE,ARKANSASlneeC5 sr.++€ Ie ArL�,au Planning ommission SITE PLAN Novemb 9,2015 Agenda Item 2 15-5184 WRMC Offices Page 12 of 38 J _ np q 1 IM(PIN Ali 1V 03w _ C z9rvla�ine i�liio�gla�. 1 i_ XW'. _ F e� n p• i � -�� Ia, o' yNsabJn / • �1 Pcr19'trlr� • � ✓ =,e ,�i z: xiz dl g! 4 S" Di! }i a" §° b�lk�axe c ,a Ree as ;i 1e S! y o I $F.. .N I.n V ! j! R. to U YA �•g 9i.. � ��. 4t' � '< s- �9 ` yo x I R .! Ax[[issl{S� cxasaz.TE sR's z N i e, a a, .k^ 5g eF � s¢ IR.# si it $s gappegg 3?e„ i�R�A.11o xn�i�is3 pa ne Y',i fk �O 1 e 1 �SS¢ 2 tvk x i A iE� ! ¢c�¢ era zeizle a gd!! r! E A i° z 1 i1 g @ - ° S! z s g ae ey yx - 9 `Y ga z x eg €o o ,� - _4{ ` g"e j{41 {R a g kh 3 sz s 3 � ° i e E z � i 9 - n z9s g• G � 'kz E° � x v� d z:'. .. Ami X21 P O � � .(,��V7 n t t y i� s �e� R i ��• _:. a-e9 Qx �' x F nl 9 n; r ° I £ I � a I II � i i \ / G 6 i�. / IppIIs��II ✓, �'• [ � NA �" r 5 x S N N llll" i I � rL o, i �.•�� it P°- i!F 4^' i €i'Igi4zaiEiiSli'1'1"M. ,•i:.iii -' r W. !je!jI i��s!`GE!aEAIo-f�!iv Y,i!p 6.li {! < t �i� g 666 <I 1 e@Bi3Silesg£il@9991idHl°Si9B 9;;l k IIS A Iifgfll6i4lili!)li�l ' C _ YYY iG8@!i6ikk i89 id4 :S 4 g pyGG--iRRk 11 a dp fil.5l 11lM.!ld Ll Fl ifOEIOEdA ftllf a vii WASHINGTON REGIONAL MEDICAL SYSTEMS _ MEDICAL OFFICE BU ILDINGSConsulting FAYETTEVILLE,ARKANSAS � Eri lneers SPrinx�ale,Arkansas TREE PRESERVATION PLANI Planning Commission INUVulTID '9,2015 Agenda Item 2 15-5184 WRMC Offices Page 13 of 38 CITY OF Fay7 i e ARKANSAS Date: October 9, 2015 Subdivision Committee Staff Memo To: Jessie Fulcher, Senior Planner From: Jonathan Ely, Development and Construction Manager Engineering Division Re: Plat Review Comments Development: 15-5184 LSD WRMC Office Building(Appleby Road) Engineer: USI Plan Comments: 1. The improvements shown on neighboring property to the east will require approval of the adjacent property owner,and joint grading permit at the time of construction. 2. Construction Plans must show positive drainage for residential properties along the east side of the site. This will be reviewed in greater detail at construction level submittal. 3. The original drainage report for this subdivision shows lot 10 (to the south) draining across lots 11 and 12 to the detention pond. Stubout a pipe to Lot 10 that will convey future developed flow from this lot. 4. Prior to construction level review, must provide flow information to the existing hydrant on Bob Younkin Drive. The dead end 8" line is shown to support a new 8" fire line and a fire hydrant which may not be feasible. 5. All retaining walls over 411 tall shall be designed, inspected, and certified by a professional engineer. Provide retaining wall design documents at construction level review. All retaining walls greater than 30"be required to have a safety rail installed. 6. Note, the following portions of all projects will typically not be reviewed by the Engineering Division until time of construction-level review: a. Storm Sewer pipe/inlet sizing, gutter spread, profiles, or utility conflicts b. Sanitary Sewer pipe sizing, profiles, or utility conflicts c. Waterline fittings, callouts, or utility conflicts d. Street profiles, cross sections, paving sections, and striping e. Fine grading/spotelevations Drainage Report Comments: 7. Provide details of outlet structure and weir at construction level review. 8. The pond outfall should be modeled with a tailwater condition since discharging to an underground storm sewer system. 9. Post Development Drainage Area l indicates nearly 40%pervious area, but the site plan indicates there to be 26%. Adjust the curve numbers accordingly. This will be evaluated at construction level review. Mailing Address: ENGINEERING 113 W. Mountain Street www.fayetteville-argov Fayetteville, AR 72101 Planning Commission November 9,2015 Agenda Item 2 15-5184 WRMC Offices Page 14 of 38 10. The Post Development Drainage Map must include Drainage Area 8 as shown in the original drainage study. This 9.63 acres will also flow to the north pond and must be included as developed conditions, as shown in the original drainage study. Standard Comments: 1. All designs are subject to the City's latest design criteria(water, sewer, streets and drainage). Review for plat approval is not approval of public improvements, and all proposed improvements are subject to further review at the time construction plans are submitted. 2. Any damage to the existing public street due to construction shall be repaired/replaced at the owner/developers expense 3. Water and sewer impact fees will apply for the additional impact to the system. The fees will be based on the proposed meter size and will be charged at the time of meter set. 4. Fire Line monthly fees will be applied based on the size of the riser penetrating the slab. See Chapter 51.136 of the Unified Development Code for table of fees associated with pipe diameter. 5. Commercial structures that may require a fire sprinkler system must obtain a fire flow study submitted and approved by the fire department prior to approval of the project. 6. Prior to engineering approval of the building permit, either the required public improvements must be installed and accepted, or performance bonds in the amount of 150%of the construction cost for all public improvements must be submitted, accompanied by a unit price estimate approved by the Engineering Division. Special Comments: 1. The Engineer of Record shall: a. Review and approve material submittals. Approved submittals shall be submitted to the City for concurrence before grading permit is issued. b. Perform "Full Time" Inspection for the utility installation and shall be"In- Charge"of the approval testing. c. Provide a qualified representative for all testing and inspection. d. Schedule testing with the Public Works Inspector. e. Authorize geotechnical testing laboratory to provide reports directly to City in PDF format. Reports shall be submitted in a timely manner. f. Prepare material data sheets and test reports required by the specifications. g. Insure that daily inspection reports and data sheets are submitted to the City of Fayetteville's public works inspector weekly in PDF format. 2. 2012 Standard Water& Sanitary Sewer Specifications & Details apply 3. Demolition shall not begin until the appropriate erosion control measures and required tree preservation fencing are installed 4. Prior to Project Acceptance (Certificate of Occupancy, or Temporary Certificate of Occupancy) the following items must be performed or provided to the satisfaction of the Engineering Department: a. The work shown on the civil site package must be complete and the items on the final punch list completed. b. Vegetation must be established and perimeter controls removed. c. One(l) set of as-built drawings of the complete project(excluding details) as a hard copy and in Tiff or PDF format; i. Public infrastructure and services shall be surveyed after installation in relation to easements, property lines, and rights-of-way. Planning Commission November 9,2015 Agenda Item 2 15-5184 WRMC Offices Page 15 of 38