Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-05-28 - Agendas - Final AGENDA FOR A REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION A meeting of the Fayetteville Planning Commission will be held Tuesday, May 28, 2002 at 5:30 p.m. in the City Administration Building, 113 West Mountain Street, Room 219, Fayetteville,Arkansas. The following items will be considered: Consent Agenda: Approval of minutes from the May 13,2002 meeting 2. ADM 02-15.00: Administrative Item (Varvil, pp 524) was submitted by Nancy Varvil for property located at 531 E. Rock Street. The property is zoned R-2, Medium Density Residential. The request is for a partial refund of sidewalk funds put in escrow. 5. VAC 02-3.00: Vacation (Fayetteville School District(Leverett), pp 443)was submitted by Geoffrey Bates, P.E. on behalf of the Fayetteville School District for property located at 1124 W. Cleveland Street. The property is zoned P-1, Institutional and contains approximately 0.31 acres. The request is to vacate Eagle Street right of way. New Business: 1. ADM 01-28.00: Administrative Item (Hometown Development, pp 524) was submitted by Robert Schmitt on behalf of Hometown Development for property located south and west of the intersection of Fletcher& Rodgers Avenue. The request is for a waiver of the City of Fayetteville minimum street standards. 3. RZN 02-8.00: Rezoning(Nickell, pp 445/446) was submitted by Bob Hill of Nickle-Hill Group on behalf of J.C. & Alma Nickell for property located at 867 N. College Avenue. The property is zoned R-O, Residential Office and contains approximately 0.29 acres. The request is to rezone to C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial. 4. RZN 02-14.00:Rezoning (Kesner, pp 99)was submitted by Raymond Smith, Attorney on behalf of John& Janet Kesner for property located at the northeast corner of Crossover(Hwy 265) and East Zion Road. The property is zoned A-1,Agricultural and contains approximately 2.80 acres. The request is to rezone to R-O, Residential Office. 6. LSD 02-14.00: Large Scale Development(Fayetteville School District,pp 443)was submitted by Geoffrey Bates of Crafton, Tull, &Associates on behalf of Fayetteville School District for property located at 1124 W. Cleveland Street. The property is zoned P-1, Institutional and contains approximately 5.41 acres with 61 parking spaces proposed. RIUSERSICOM IONPLANNING12002 AGENDATCI5-28-02.DOC 7. CUP 02-14.00: Conditional Use (Leverett Elementary School, pp 443) was submitted by Geoffrey Bates of Crafton, Tull, &Associates Inc., on behalf of Fayetteville School District for property located at 1124 W. Cleveland Street. The property is zoned P-1, Institutional and contains approximately 5.41 acres. The request is for 15 parking spaces in excess of that allowed by code. 8. CUP 02-16.00: Conditional Use (Fayetteville School District(Leverett), pp 443 was submitted by Geoffrey Bates, P.E. on behalf of the Fayetteville School District for property located at 1124 W. Cleveland Street. The property is zoned R-1, Low Density Residential and contains approximately 0.98 acres. The request is for a playground (Use unit 4) in R-1. 9. PPL 02-4.00: Preliminary Plat(Ash Acres P.U.D. , pp 367)was submitted by W.B. Rudasill of WBR Engineering on behalf of Rob Stanley for property located south of Ash Street between Gregg Avenue & Woolsey Avenue. The property is zoned R-1, Low Density Residential and contains approximately 1.28 acres with 6 lots proposed. 10. CUP 02-8.00: Conditional Use (Ash Acres P.U.D., pp 367)was submitted by W.B. Rudasill of WBR Engineering Associates on behalf of Rob Stanley for property located at 243 & 245 Ash Street. The property is zoned R-1, Low Density Residential and contains approximately 0.1.7 acres. The request is for a tandem lot. All interested parties may appear and be heard at the public hearings. A copy of the proposed amendments and other pertinent data are open and available for inspection in the Office of City Planning (575-8264), City Administration Building, 113 West Mountain Street, Fayetteville, Arkansas. All interested parties are invited to review the petitions. Interpreters or TDD for hearing impaired are available for all public meetings. 72 hour notice is required. For further information or to request an interpreter,please call Hugh Earnest at 575-8330. H:I USE"COMMOMPLANNLNGI2002 AGF.NDAIP05-28-02.DOC ORDER OF PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING A. Introduction of agenda item- Chairman B. Presentation of request- Applicant C. Public Comment D. Response by Applicant/Questions &Answer with Commission E. Action of Planning Commission(Discussion and vote) NOTE TO MEMBERS OF THE AUDIENCE If you wish to address the Planning Commission on an agenda item,raise your hand when the Chairman asks for public comment. He will do this after he has given Planning Commission members the opportunity to speak and before a final vote is taken. Public comment will only be permitted during this part of the hearing for each item. Once the Chairman recognizes you, go to the podium at the front of the room and give your name and address. Address your comments to the Chairman, who is the presiding officer. He will direct them to the appropriate appointed official, staff member or others for response. Please keep your comments brief, to the point, and relevant to the agenda item being considered so that everyone has a chance to speak. Please, as a matter of courtesy, refrain from applauding or booing any speakers or actions of the Planning Commission. 2002 Planning Commissioners: Lorel Hoffman- Chairman Bob Estes - Vice Chairman Lee Ward- Secretary Nancy Allen Don Bunch Sharon Hoover Alice Church Loren Shackelford LSP 01-30.00 Page] PC Meeting of MaV 28.2002 FAYETTEVILLE THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE,ARKANSAS Varvil Administrative Item 113 W. Mountain St. Fayetteville,AR 72701 TO: Fayetteville Planning Commission Members THRU: Tim Conklin, City Planner,A.I.C.P. ( FROM: Sara Edwards,Associate Planner DATE: May 25,2002 Project: ADM 02-15.00: Administrative Item (Varvil, pp 524)was submitted by Nancy Varvil for property located at 531 E. Rock Street. The property is zoned R-2, Medium Density Residential. The request is for a partial refund of sidewalk funds put in escrow. Findings: The applicant was assessed $4,212.00 in June of 2001 as part of building permit for a new single family home. This was in accordance with the ordinance in effect at the time which assessed $3.00 per square foot of sidewalk. The square footage of sidewalk required was based on the two street frontages of the lot. Since this time the Sidewalk Ordinance has been revised and the assessment for a single family home is $630.00. The applicant is now requesting a refund of the fees assessed to her. Recommendation: Refund $3,582.00, the difference between the$4,212.00 assessed and the $630.00 required in the current ordinance to the applicant. Planning Commission May 28, 2002 ADM02-I5 Varvil Page 2.3 200-2- ORDINANCE aoZORDINANCE NO. 4387 • AN ORDINANCE REPEALING SECTION 171.12 OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE, PROPERTY OWNER TO CONSTRUCT SIDEWALK OR CONTRIBUTE COST OF SIDEWALK AND ADOPTING A REPLACEMENT SECTION 171.12 OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE,ARKANSAS: Section 1. That§171.12 of the Unified Development Ordinance, Property Owner to Construct Sidewalk or Contribute Cost of Sidewalk; Subsection A. Requirement;Subsection B. Application of Provisions shall be deleted and the following inserted in its stead: " §171.12 Property Owner to Construction Sidewalk or Contribute Money In Lieu of Construction" A. Requirement The owner of any property abutting a public street or highway for which a sidewalk is required by City's Master Street Plan shall construct a sidewalk along said street or highway upon receipt of notice issued at the time a building or parking lot permit is issued. 1. The property owner shall construct the sidewalk in accordance with section 171.13 Sidewalk and Driveway Specifications. 2. A property owner may request a waiver to subsection 171.12 A.1. requiring sidewalk construction. The Sidewalk Administrator shall review the following factors to determine whether or not to grant the waiver: A. pedestrian traffic generators such as parks and schools in the area; Planning Commission May 28, 2002 ADM02-15 Varvil Page 2.5 Ord.. 4,387 B. the existence of a sidewalk network in the area; . C. the density of current and future development in the area; D. the amount of pedestrian traffic likely to be generated by the proposed development;. E. whether the terrain is such that a sidewalk is physically practical and feasible, and the extent to which trees, ground cover and natural areas would be adversely impacted by the construction of the sidewalk; and F. the overall need for a sidewalk to be constructed on the lot. 3. If the Sidewalk Administrator grants the waiver to construct a sidewalk, the owner shall have an option to construct the sidewalk or to contribute money in lieu of construction as set forth below: A. The amount of money in lieu of construction to be • dedicated shall be determined based upon the rough proportionality of the impact of the development upon the sidewalk infrastructure needs near the development including consideration of the persons served by the development and approximate pedestrian trip generation rates of the development. B. To facilitate administration of this ordinance for certain recurrent types of development, the City Council has determined that the City will accept, as the roughly proportionate impact, the amount shown below: 1. Single family house $630.00 2. Duplex $720.00 C. Unless the developer presents evidence that the number of persons served by the development and the pedestrian trip generation rates of the development justify a reduced Planning Commission May 28, 2002 ADM02-15 Varvil Page 2.6 Ord... 4387 • contribution in lieu of the construction of sidewalks, all industrial, commercial, and multi-family developments shall make a cash contribution in lieu of the construction of the sidewalk at a rate of Three Dollars $3.00 per square foot of the sidewalk that normally would have been required. The amount per square foot and amounts for a single family house and a duplex shall be reviewed by the City Council at least every five years. D. Contribution in lieu of construction of sidewalks shall be paid or construction of the sidewalks shall be completed before receiving final plat approval, or issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. E. Contributions must be expended within one (1) year to build a sidewalk close enough to serve the project being constructed. F. If the owner voluntarily consents in writing, the contributions may be used to construct sidewalk projects where most needed as determined by the Sidewalk Administrator. 4. An owner/builder may appeal the Sidewalk Administrator's refusal to grant a waiver or the Administrator's determination of the amount of contribution in lieu of construction to the Planning Commission pursuant to §155.06 D. B. APPLICATION OF PROVISIONS - The provisions of this section shall only apply to the following property: 1. New Structure. On which a new structure is build built. 2. Existing Residential Structure. On which an existing residential structure is being modified so as to increase the number of 1 Planning Commission May 28, 2002 ADM02-15 Parvil Page 2.7 Ord: 4387 • dwelling units located therein or to change the use to a nonresidential use. 3. Parking Lot/Garage. On which a parking lot or parking garage, having a minimum capacity of five automobiles, is constructed or enlarged. 4. Additions. Additions of 2,500 square feet or larger. 5. Conditional Use. Any development which requires conditional use approval. PASSED and APPROVED this the 16th day of April, 2002. APPROVED: E7T By: EYE DAN COODY, Mayor All atbee ' oodruff, City rk Planning Commission May 28, 2002 ADM02-15 Yarvil Page 2.8 Renee Thomas- s Street _ 1w, Page 1 From: "Ann Wilson" <awilson@fayar.net> To: <rthomas@ci.fayetteville.ar.us> Date: 5/1/02 3:08PM Subject: Ash Street Please let the Planning Commission know that as an adjacent property owner(220/222 ASH)we are opposed to the proposed development, Ash Acres. The integrity of our neighborhood will be compromised with the addition of so many apartments. Just turn the corner and see what the apartments have done to the once lovely Gregg St. As a lifelong resident of Fayetteville, I have seen too many .'quick"apartment units go up only to be abandoned or worse yet, fall into disrepair. I urge the city planning commission to deny the request. Thank you for your help. David and Ann Wilson 3310 Old Missouri Road Fayetteville, AR 72703 Owners of 220/222 East Ash. Planning Commission May 28, 2002 PPL02-4 Ash Acres Page 9.13 Tim Conklin' Page 1 From: <Nannyjean39@aol.com> To: <tconklin@ci.fayetteville.acus.> Date: 5/23/02 8:02PM Subject: overcrowding I am a member of the Woodland Association and I would like to address the issue of trying to build 5 houses on one lot an Ash St.. This would cause to much conjestion in such a small area. Also, our neighborhood takes pride in the uncrowded area for single families. This is a good drawing point to the area and keeps the value of our property what it should be. Jean Kirk, proud member of Woodland Association Planning Commission May 28, 2002 PPL02-4 Ash Acres Page 9.14 01600GR2.ad 5/23/02 11: AM ['uje 1 Job#0526s401 CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE u� A( 1!NDA NO'rl(:1. PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday,May 20,2002-5:30 p.m. _ City Administration Buildin,Room 219 113 West Mountain 1 jyVHCviRf,Afkalraae PUBLIC MEETING-OPEN TO ALL 'i"he following it imr will be M44idered: Appmnl of minutes from the May 13,2002 meeting New Business: AOM 01.211.011:Admiulmrat6e Item(Hoinclown Development,pp 524)was submitted by Robert Schmitt on behalf of Hometown Development for property nuc;1LO ovum and wait of the inreneniun of pletchtr dt Rudgeri Avenue. '1'ht request is for a waiver of the City of Faycnevillc minimum street standuds. ADM 112.15.1111:Adminim,aive nevi(VarvO,pp 524)WAS srtbinined by Nancy Vrml lot property located at 531 E,Rock Steel. The pmperty is named 143,Mndfit Datshy Re.idemi:d. The reyneyt is for:r partial rtP sd of eidcwalk Rmda put in escrow RZN 02-8.00:Acrania.-(Nickell,pp 445/446)was subminad by Ilnh fids of Nickle-Hill Gmup on behalfofl.C.&Almn Nickell Iur prvuerty located m 867 N.College Avenue:The poptrsy Is zoned WO,Rexidkidal Office and contains approximately 0,29 ices. The reggesl Is to ozone to C-2,Thorough into Cot n emkd. I1ZNU2 14.00: oo(hlg(crease pp Qq)en n it hmiuM by Raymund Smith,Money an behalf of lona 4a lar et Ke>ner fur pn pe ty IncaceO at me northeast cornaofCrossover(liwy 7J�•Ir^� '. 269) u d Fast Zluo RU aI The properly i.,zoned A.1.Agricultural and contains uppraximato- ly 2.80 acres. The emauem is m esione to R-O.Residential Office. VAC 02-3.00!Vacation(Fayetteville School District(Ltvelnc),on 441)wni yWumined by Geufltey Owes,Rai.on behalf ul'the fayeueville SehoOl District for property located at 1124 W.Cldvdamd SYr[CL.The property is zoned P-I,Institutional and cumin.apryoeim:ltely -\.. 0.31 Deet Tht rogucsl is to vnentt Gnp1e 5e'ett dOm pfwuy 1.50112.14.00:Large Scale Devetopmmul(Fayetteville School Distni t.pp d43)w'as u1bn,it. led by Geoffrey Bntet of C,&Ron,TAI,A Associates on be],,,H O'I ayoaevlme Sclteol Dldulol Ifo prnperry loemed:n 1124 W.(:IsvtlmW Slretl. 'faro state,ty is zoned F.I.Institutional;rod comallli Appioxinutely 5 41 Acres with 60 parking sprees prunra4dC3.m U2.l 4.00: Conditional Use(Lewrett Glemtnary Schutd,pp 44n)w,nwnn rated by OcaMrcy Bales of (:r;dlun.Till,,y Associitas nuc„un heh;dfof Fuyetw:ille School District for property locate, az 1124 W.Cleveland Street. The property is zoned P-1.Inslitatiumd and comsins approxi. matoly 5.41 acres. The mqucst is for I I parking spaces in excess ol'Hat olluwM by code - CUP 02-16.00:Conditional Use(Favoneville SGWol OiArio((,"m ell),pp 443 was submit- I'll by Geull ty Danes,118.on beh;dfnf tut rayeut:dlt Sohaol District folproperty located UL 1124 W Cleveland Glrcet. The prepcny,is zoned R.1.Low Density Residemiil;led cum- Isms approximately 0.98 acres. The mqucst is for a olaygroond(I Ise onh a)in R.I. 1'19.02.4.00:I•mlinduary pl:,I(AA,Acta BII.D.,pp 367)was submiu4d by W.B.Rudnsill of WBR EuNnccring on behalf of Rob Stanley for proptny Ionated so,nh al'Ash Ruem between Gm�n AvenpC&Woolsey Asir , 'rhe properly IS zoned It-1.Low Density Residential and contains approximately 118 acres with b lots orasc cel. (,'(ll'02-11.1111:Cnndilipnal Ilse(A.dl Acme till U.,pp 367)was wbntiued by W.B.Rudnsill of WBR Engineering Asnii on behalf of Rob Stanley for property loc:med at 247 N.245 Ash Shoo. The properly is zoned R.I.Low Density RCihloa6l and cnnc...I,uppmxinlately 1111 aces. The mrpleo is fora antltm Wt. ' All interested parties may appear And be heard tit the public beating., A copy of me tum posed amendments and other pertinent data are coon and^dilblt lib ini,c ion in the Office of City Planning(575-8264).City AMdtdsu:dion Ii6lding, 113 Wane Mountain Sucel,Fayvesille,Ark Ma,15, All interested p:mio an:invited in mvicW the Petition$. Inlerweters"'TOD 0u heai mi,ingsi,ed aro available for all public nuelinpe. 72 hour notice is required. For further information or to request an Inlerpretu,tortes tall Hush I arness at 575-11330. £0iT0'd dL7S Z!" TOS 53w1i J 11 N bT:£T Z00Z-£Z-Able AGENDA FOR A REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION A meeting of the Fayetteville Planning Commission will be held Tuesday, May 28,2002 at 5:30 p.m. in the City Administration Building, 113 West Mountain Street,Room 219, Fayetteville,Arkansas. The following items will be considered: Approval of minutes from the May 13, 2002 meeting New Business: 1. ADM 01-28.00: Administrative Item (Hometown Development, pp 524) was submitted by Robert Schmitt on behalf of Hometown Development for property located south and west of the intersection of Fletcher& Rodgers Avenue. The request is for a waiver of the City of Fayetteville minimum street standards. 2. ADM 02-15.00: Administrative Item (Varvil,pp 524) was submitted by Nancy Varvil for property located at 531 E. Rock Street. The property is zoned R-2, Medium Density Residential. The request is for a partial refund of sidewalk funds put in escrow. 3. RZN 02-8.00: Rezoning(Nickell, pp 445/446) was submitted by Bob Hill of Nickle-Hill Group on behalf of J.C. & Alma Nickell for property located at 867 N. College Avenue. The property is zoned R-O, Residential Office and contains approximately 0.29 acres. The request is to rezone to C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial. 4. RZN 02-14.00: Rezoning (Kesner, pp 99)was submitted by Raymond Smith,Attorney on behalf of John&Janet Kesner for property located at the northeast corner of Crossover(Hwy 265) and East Zion Road. The property is zoned A-1, Agricultural and contains approximately 2.80 acres. The request is to rezone to R-O, Residential Office. 5. VAC 02-3.00: Vacation (Fayetteville School District(Leverett), pp 443) was submitted by Geoffrey Bates, P.E. on behalf of the Fayetteville School District for property located at 1124 W. Cleveland Street. The property is zoned P-1, Institutional and contains approximately 0.31 acres. The request is to vacate Eagle Street right of way. 6. LSD 02-14.00: Large Scale Development(Fayetteville School District, pp 443) was submitted by Geoffrey Bates of Crafton, Tull, &Associates on behalf of Fayetteville School District for property located at 1124 W. Cleveland Street. The property is zoned P-1, Institutional and contains approximately 5.41 acres with 61 parking spaces proposed. H.I USEXSIC0MM0NU'LANNING12002 AGENDA IPCI5-28-0d DOC 7. CUP 02-14.00: Conditional Use (Leverett Elementary School, pp 443) was submitted by Geoffrey Bates of Crafton, Tull, &Associates Inc., on behalf of Fayetteville School District for property located at 1124 W. Cleveland Street. The property is zoned P-1, Institutional and contains approximately 5.41 acres. The request is for 15 parking spaces in excess of that allowed by code. 8. CUP 02-16.00: Conditional Use (Fayetteville School District(Leverett),pp 443 was submitted by Geoffrey Bates, P.E. on behalf of the Fayetteville School District for property located at 1124 W. Cleveland Street. The property is zoned R-1, Low Density Residential and contains approximately 0.98 acres. The request is for a playground(Use unit 4) in R-1. 9. PPL 02-4.00: Preliminary Plat(Ash Acres P.U.D. , pp 367)was submitted by W.B. Rudasill of WBR Engineering on behalf of Rob Stanley for property located south of Ash Street between Gregg Avenue & Woolsey Avenue. The property is zoned R-1, Low Density Residential and contains approximately 1.28 acres with 6 lots proposed. 10. CUP 02-8.00: Conditional Use (Ash Acres P.U.D.,pp 367)was submitted by W.B. Rudasill of WBR Engineering Associates on behalf of Rob Stanley for property located at 243 &245 Ash Street. The property is zoned R-1, Low Density Residential and contains approximately 0.17 acres. The request is for a tandem lot. All interested parties may appear and beheardat the public hearings. A copy of the proposed amendments and other pertinent data are open and available for inspection in the Office of City Planning (575-8264), City Administration Building, 113 West Mountain Street, Fayetteville, Arkansas. All interested parties are invited to review the petitions. Interpreters or TDD for hearing impaired are available for all public meetings. 72 hour notice is required. For further information or to request an interpreter,please call Hugh Earnest at 575-8330. H:IOSERSICOMMONIPLANNINGI2002 AGENDAIPCI5-28-02.DOC AD OI-28.00 Page I FAYETTEVILLE THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE,ARKANSAS 113 W. Mountain St. Fayetteville,AR 72701 Telephone:501-575-8264 ENGINEERING DIVISION CORRESPONDENCE TO: Planning Commission Members FROM: Ron Petrie P.E., Staff Engineer THRU: Sara Edwards, Associate Planner Tim Conklin, Planning Director DATE: May 24, 2002 (for May 28, 2002 P.C. Meeting) SUBJECT: Hometown Development(LSD 02-07.00) Center Street Construction Waiver Requests Project: AD 01-28.00: Administrative Item (Hometown Development., pp 524)was submitted by Glenn Carter on behalf of Hometown Developments for property located at the southwest corner of Fletcher Avenue&Rodgers Drive. The requests are for two (2)waivers from Section 3 of the City's Minimum Street Standards to allow the construction of Center Street adjacent to this development. Findings: The developer has requested that this item be placed before the Planning Commission because of the denial of the Hometown(Dandy/Schmitt) Large Scale Development(LSD 02-07.00). The construction of Center Street adjacent to this development would create the street frontage required to meet the UDO requirements for each tract. If Center Street was to be constructed by this developer, a project would not require the approval of the Planning Commission to proceed if each tract was developed separately. Staff Recommendation: Denial of the two (2)waiver requests listed below for the following reasons: 1. The applicant has not provided any explanation of the waiver requests and has not provided any information to prove an undue hardship as required by ordinance. 2. The installation of Center Street and the granting of the waivers as proposed would cause an unnecessary public safety hazard. 3. In addition to the waiver requests, a public safety hazard would be created by ending Center Street with a 14' vertical drop. 4. The installation of Center Street as proposed would block the existing access driveway to the adjacent residence located to the west of this property. Planning Commission May 28, 2002 ADM01-28 Hometown Development Page 1.1 AD 01-28.00 Page 2 Waiver Requests: 1. Planning Commission determination of a waiver request from Section 3-3 of the Minimum Street Standards which requires that the minimum angle of street centerline intersection be 75 degrees. The applicant is requesting an angle of intersection between Fletcher Avenue and Center Street of approximately 15 degrees. 2. Planning Commission determination of a waiver request from Section 3-3 of the Minimum Street Standards which requires a minimum distance of 150 feet between intersections for Local Streets. The applicant is requesting to allow a distance of 50 between the intersections of Center Street and Oklahoma Way onto Fletcher Avenue PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: ves Required Approved Denied Date: 05 / 28 / 02 Comments Planning Commission May 28, 2002 ADM01-28 Hometown Development Page 1.2 • • MINIMUM STREET STANDARDS 7 SECTION 3 STREET DESIGN PRINCIPLES 3-1 General: The principles governing the design of streets shall conform to the requirements of these standards, to the standards that may be referenced herein, and to appropriate City Ordinances . General criteria with regard to street classification and other characteristics shall be as stated in other sections of these standards. Parking, parking lots, driveways, stormwater drainage, and erosion control requirements are specified in separate ordinances and are not included in these standards. 3-2 Alignment: Horizontal curves shall be circular curves with a minimum centerline radii of not less than 150 feet for residential streets and 200 feet for collector streets. Curves on streets with higher classifications shall be designed on an individual basis. A tangent of at least 100 feet shall separate reverse curves. All vertical curves shall be parabolic type curves. Minimum vertical curve lengths (L) shall depend on the design speed and shall be equal to K times A where K equals the coefficient as shown in the table below, and A_equals the algebraic difference in grades when the grades are expressed as a percentage. , Vertical Curve Coefficient (K) Speed K Values l 1 (mph) Crest Saa y_ L—"� 25 20 30 30 30 40 35 40-50 50 3-3 Intersections_ Intersections shall be planned and designed to provide a safe system for present and prospective traffic. Intersections shall be graded to provide positive drainage and shall conform to the alignment and grading requirements of these standards. f Planning Commissio%1 May 28, 2002 ADM01-28 Hometown Development Page 1.3 l The following standards shall apply to intersection design: l Design Consideration Ordinary Hilly Approach speed 25 mph 20 mph Sight Distance (Minimum) 90 feet 70 feet Grade Within 100 feet 0 % 4 Minimum Angle 75' 750 Minimum Curb Radius Local Streets 30 feet 30 feet Collector Streets 50 feet 50 feet Minimum Jogs Local Streets 150 feet 150 feet Collector Streets 200 feet 200 feet It is understood that the sight distances listed above are a minimum and that longer sight distances may be required where topography will allow and/or when streets with a classification of collector or higher are involved. 3-4 Cross Sections and Right of Wav Widths: Pavement cross sections shall conform to the details included in these standards and are included in Appendix "D" . Skewed street sections will not be allowed without specific approval of the City Engineer. Pavement cross slopes for all streets shall be a minimum of 2 . percent with a minimum crown height of 6 inches. Gutters shall be sloped to match the street. X*CLVI a 8h:�rw��,y sTq ES5 On the elevated side of a uniform cross slope or superelevated street, the gutter may slope. toward the street centerline provided the gutter cross slope does not exceed the cross slope of the adjacent lane. Transitions from normal crowns to uniform cross slope or superelevated sections shall provide for minimum longitudinal grades. Superelevated sections shall conform to the AHTD Standard Drawings. The minimum right of way shall be as called for in Section I- 3 . Greater widths may be required if needed to accommodate a particular street design. 3-5 Railroad Crossings: Grade crossings at railroads shall provide for the same minimum sight distances as street intersections. The ENGINEER OF RECORD shall be responsible for all coordination with the railroad company connected with approval of the crossing and shall work with the City in obtaining a Joint Use Agreement with the railroad. Planning Commis,46n2 May 28, 2002 ADM01-28 Hometown Development Page 1.4 r 3-6 Minimum and Maximum Grades: The minimum grades shall be that grade required to provide positive drainage for the street. The maximum allowable grade for local streets shall be 10 percent with a provision for a 15 percent grade for a maximum distance of 300 feet in the case of hilly terrain. For collector streets the maximum grade shall be 8 percent with a provision for 12 percent maximum grade for no more than 300 feet. 3-7 Siaht Distance Requirements and Design Speeds: Minimum sight distance for local and residential streets shall be 250 feet under ordinary conditions and 200 feet for hilly conditions. Collector streets shall have a minimum sight distance of 150-350 feet, depending on the topography. The Arkansas Highway and Transportation Department definition of site distance shall apply. The design speed shall be 20 to 30 mph for local streets and 25 to 35 mph for collector streets. i Planning Commission-3 May 28, 2002 ADM01-28 Hometown Development Page 1.5 ADM01-28.00 HOMETOWN DEVELOPMENT Close Up View - x Di R.2 D R4 n F { t • a \\ ® E3 3 \\\� Tl c DF rVSY \ T6, R S \ AS p ..._RY R Y- _FRS B \\ .. \ „ 10 G _- ....,_ ._- _.. ._. r i \ Subject Property I '. R-a ROCk ST is -... ...... • j l , t _. ft-Zt , Overview Legend .. ( Subject Property Boundary Master Street Plan !- 1. ADM01-28.00 —" ,,,. Planning Area Freeway/Expressway Overlay District Principal Arterial Streets OOO°° .I��'' a `7 C1.�- 1 City Limits Minor Arterial Existingl__ 4 1 o ♦ Collector Outside City PlanningCommission Plannetl .•.tea Historic Collector - s• May 28, 2002 0 75 150 300 450 Amt, 01-28 Jometown Development -,- Feet Page 1.6 • • ADM01-28.00 HOMETOWN DEVELOPMENT One Mile View - r AO I_'- R4 Jjlf -14L '=r Irl R.1• frY .t¢',P R1� 1✓. I - kill E •« ii -irk iTO- rc a.. -... re-1Rd5'S�fX, _€ "t-y •«•«•Mia}•wwfsw Mw- «:L •N R-F �' it tTilR ALLEY R`i a 1'R t'•�^ - c -w • •'�••s.�•iN f•:Ma•••►s+rtji�i 7. P tp�C- 2R fi R R A R 1 R 4ii n-1:4'4 ••lo •«•f iaM«ii.««s.ra• • RZY �-y/ - .._ �$ "� RYr - .`R- j�_ - ««•««a««•ww.•r•,«w�r - R2 �•� --_ r- i e R Q 2f tZ 9 R.1- R-.1fr:i y ... _ . cam, •a►ra«ais '*oo M•� € F fi.7 a R- 3z`. t __ 3 { G3 i i ••M..•�aads a•.s•a«�+•w«.asf x« e y Via• t fCC3:StT G-3 y'3 � -R.J ,x„ R22•� 7.`� !y«�, •w�� _ �R1 �\ -- 3 ." +apv«R es c, .-d ei ' `3 fbb.}9 �' x ? -FC_ 'I� P-1 t ^ P Y i Al R-QyR QiRO RO ,4-24 R2 R1 tSrr2 R3 -•!«f}a«•}:fi Lw�qUN wi --M-.�-r .�.---�-.,fir,_ ;v. £ - •l• 1- PPDD9_CK RD:::: R_3, R S•swrrraYa MN« « v' `^'; �e _._.. .!' ._ _..._ __ r--"YAR ,tf� C,3 ti. _ ... .' : -z+.�� w•f•t �P Y fR o R(y R 0 "Rti xi-R •• Ya: 2 , rr-; W; :Ro' RQ,3 Subject Property .... r-Y �w• : y.x ' t`&�+Rx ori �..1�'tL Ki F ;'r\2 4TN ST P 1 ' : }} •M••f1•if•!f•• waw � _. STH ST '- ;rez =• rz-z 1 -rx-r 4 2 4 a.. 00 L 1 1 , R -R 2 ?Y _' ur z sS R-z -�I _ 1 - F-4- '- t V- Iu R-2 l 4� 3 -R 41 -R 1 1 .. -� R1 '_ �. ' } R 9 f R-Z 1�. NpLEN ST 31i15T."_" Y \ 11 t - GP R �R2 moi-. ..___. :.9 ...__-.. ...... R'2 iRz: R,2 A4 2 14 A-1 e ..__ Overview Legend iSubject Property Boundary Master Street Plan � ,nv n ADM07-28.00 '"'.�,, Planning Area Freeway/F�LPresswaY PsTi V' o_o_o Overlay District Principal Arterial --LI ❑ h� Streets ry Limits Minor Arterial S' Existing L— Ci Outside dry corrector Planning Commission -__Su; Planning Commission May 28, 2002 ADM01-28 Hometown Development Page 1.8 FAYETTENIILLE THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE,ARKANSAS KIT WILLIAMS,CITY ATTORNEY DAVID WHITAKER,ASST.CITY ATTORNEY LEGAL DEPARTMENT DEPARTMENTAL CORRESPONDENCE TO: Planning Commissioners FROM: Kit Williams, City Attorney DATE: May 13, 2002 RE: Appeals from those who paid sidewalk contribution_prior to revision of §171.12 of the Unified Development Ordinance The Planning Commission may soon hear appeals pursuant to the retroactive provision of rough proportionality appeal ordinance. This was retroactive only for individuals who paid money in lieu of construction of a sidewalk pursuant to §171.12. If the Planning Commission is facing such an appeal, I would invite you to consider the revised §171.12 which states: "The City Council has determined that the City will accept, as the roughly proportionate impact, the amount shown below: 1. Single family house .... $630.00 .... " §171.12 A. 3. b. Although the Planning Commission is probably not absolutely bound in a retroactive appeal case to that figure ($630.00) for a single family house, it would be consistent with our current law and could provide a desirable uniformity for deciding these appeals. ]"Iarruzrg Commission' May 28, 2002 ,4Dh202-?.5 5at4k Page,2.1 • ! RECEIVED. MAR t 7002 March 12, 2002 PLANNING DIV. Dear Members of the Fayetteville Planning Commission: Please consider this to be my formal request of a refund of some of the $4,212 "in lieu of sidewalks" fee I paid on April 16, 2001 when 1 applied for a permit to construct a house on at 531 E. Rock Street in Fayetteville. According to City Attorney Kit Williams, Duncan Associates (your impact fee consultants), and my own research, fees paid to a city by residents should be an amount "roughly proportional" to the value of the service or goods the resident receives. I think everyone agrees that residents of this 2 bedroom, 1285 square foot house will never receive $4,212 worth of use of Fayetteville's sidewalks. According to the schedule of proposed impact fees for Fayetteville recently suggested by Clancy Mullins, a single family residence would have $809 worth of impact on Fayetteville streets. If you figure that a sidewalk costs much less per lineal foot than a street, an appropriate sidewalk impact fee should be less than $809. Please determine the value of the amount of use people who live in this house will have from use of Fayetteville's sidewalks and refund the excess money that I have paid. Thank you for your consideration of this matter. Sincerely, Nancy Varvil ail � 67S;� oB/Y Planning Commission Alay'28,2002 4PA102-15 Varvif Page 2.2 FAYETTEVILLE THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE,ARKANSAS 113 W. Mountain St. Fayetteville,AR 72701 Telephone:(479)575-8264 PLANNING DIVISION CORRESPONDENCE TO: Fayetteville Planning Commission FROM: Dawn T. Warrick, Senior Planner THRU: Tim Conklin,A.I.C.P., City Planner DATE: May 22, 2002 RZN 02-8.00: Rezoning (Nickell,pp 445/446) was submitted by Bob Hill of Nickle-Hill Group on behalf of J.C. &Alma Nickell for property located at 867 N. College Avenue. The property is zoned R-O, Residential Office and contains approximately 0.29 acres. The request is to rezone to C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the requested rezoning based on the findings included as part of this report. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Required YES O Approved O Denied Date: May 28,2002 CITY COUNCIL ACTION: Required YES O Approved O Denied Date: June 18, 2002 (1" reading—if recommended) Comments: H:I USERSICOMMOMDAW VnPEPORTSIPCI2001_reponsW ickel!_rzn01-bloc Planning Commission May 28, 2002 RZN 02-8.00 Page 3.1 BACKGROUND: The subject property is located at the southwest comer of Clebum St. and College Ave. It is at the northeast edge of the Wilson Park Neighborhood and is within a strip of businesses which are between College Ave. and Pollard St. The majority of these businesses are offices or clinics in addition to a couple of retail outlets. The property being considered in this application was developed for an auto repair business many decades ago,prior to the zoning being established as R-O, Residential Office, which occurred in 1970 when the City adopted a new zoning map and ordinance.. The auto repair business continued to operate as a legal non-conforming use under the original ownership and later with a different business owner until relatively recently. When the most recent tenant ceased to utilize the property for an automotive repair business for more than six months, the non-conforming status of the property prevented the same type of business from using the site. At this time, the applicant is requesting that the property be rezoned to a C-2 designation in order to allow for a new tenant to operate a similar auto related business on the site,making use of the - existing building. Staff cannot recommend the requested rezoning because of the potential detrimental impact of this type of business activity on the adjoining residential neighborhood. This property is not conducive to high traffic volumes that can accompany auto related businesses. The building is very close to College Ave. and visibility at the intersection of Cleburn and College is compromised by a turn in College Ave. as well as the siting of buildings on this and nearby lots. In addition, the City's adopted General Plan 2020 and Future Land Use Plan have both identified appropriate areas (nodes at the intersections of higher level streets for example) for development of commercial businesses which are designed to serve the city as a whole and not just the immediate neighborhoods. The history of rezoning requests in this immediate area indicates the need to maintain compatibility with the surrounding neighborhood. Since 1970, several attempts to have been made to have these properties zoned commercially, either C-1 or C-2, which have resulted in withdrawn petitions, consistent opposition from residential neighbors and denials from the Planning Commission. The following list and accompanying documentation(see attached) reflect several historical rezoning requests on property in this general location: June 1970 - City wide rezoning changed designation of property from Commercial to RO,Residential Office July 1971 - 700 Block N. College (SW Corner of Trenton & College) Request rezoning from R-O to C-2 Staff recommendation for denial PC voted to deny Applicant requested appeal No record of pursuit of appeal to City Board K.IUSERSICOMMOMDAWMREPOR7SIPCI2001_reportslnickell mn02-81oc - Planning Commission May 28,2002 RZN 02-8.00 Page 3.2 July 1971 - 701 N. College(Lot 5, pt Lot 4 Trent's Revised Addition) Request rezoning from R-O to C-2 Staff recommendation for denial PC voted to deny August 1971 —Board of Directors directed City attorney to prepare a petition to amend the zoning ordinance to rezone the property on the west side of College from North Street to Trenton Street from R-O to C-2 Dec. 1971 — Staff processed a rezoning application reflecting the action directed by the City Board in August 1971 Staff recommendation for denial PC voted to deny the rezoning Decision upheld by Board of Directors Nov. 1972— Same request denied (701 N. College Ave.) August 1975—Same request denied Dec. 1983— Same request processed Staff recommended denial PC recommended denial City Board voted to approve rezoning to C-2 with Bill of Assurance to allow only limited uses (April 1985 - Bill of Assurance amended to permit only a pizza delivery service) Jan. 1984— SW Corner of North & College (Lots 1-4, Block 13) Request rezoning from R-O to C-2 Request denied by PC June 1990—901 N. College (NW Corner Cleburn & College) Request rezoning from R-O to C-2 PC recommended approval of C-1 City Board approved C-1 zoning - On several other occasions, rezoning requests were submitted and then withdrawn based upon opposition from surrounding residential neighbors and/or staff recommendations for denial. H:IUSERSICOMMONDAWNPREPORTSIPCI2002_reportslnickell rzno2-Noc Planning Commission May 28, 2002 RZN 02-8.00 Page 3.3 Staff believes that consistency with previous Planning Division recommendations is the way to ensure that this area maintains,compliance with the adopted policies and principles of the City. Conditions in this area have not changed significantly since the City determined that the appropriate uses for this area should be those allowed within the R-0 zoning district except that there is more traffic congestion along College Ave. Traffic volume maps produced by the Arkansas Highway& Transportation Dept. indicate 27,000 vehicle trips per day in the year 2000. This was an increase from the 23,000 vpd reported in 1999 (no volume was listed for this location on the 1998 map). The applicant has provided a Bill of Assurance that would limit the uses on the subject property to those uses permitted in the C-1 district and including automotive service and repair. A proposed tenant has indicated a desire to utilize the building for a lube and oil/tune up type operation, similar to the auto repair business that was previously located on this site. Staff is concerned with the proposal due to the high traffic nature of this type of business and the very limited amount of space on this site to accommodate a large number of vehicles. The existing building is non-conforming and there is no formal parking lot on the site. Should vehicles line up behind the service bays, visibility up and down College Ave. at the site as well as at the intersection of College Ave. and Cleburn St. would be compromised. SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING North: Cleburn St. /Retail. R-0 South: Vacant, R-0 East: College Ave. /Retail, C-2 West: Residential,R-1 H:IUSERSICOMMOMDA WN7WPORTSIPCI2002_repor[slnickellmn02-bloc Planning Commission May 28, 2002 RZN 02-8.00 Page 3.4 i `�• :d-0. fu ^54 i ��i'`XY& E •�. � [Nis G�9 itiyr[' sy �a fir E`- .t r. w.7A[3KA^ate, vim# � s 1 I 11 ' 111 1 1 129 A @ (4a1�t4 t Fpp � r pT a;ES"'`z�3J • 1 11 I11 1 ." 1 '