HomeMy WebLinkAboutOrdinance 5240 Doc ID: 012925910002 Type: REL
Kind: ORDINANCE
Recorded: 06/22/2009 at 11:11:49 AM
Fee Amt: $20.00 Pace 1 of 2
Mashinoton Countv. AR
Bette Stamps Circuit Clerk
File2009-00019374
ORDINANCE NO. 5240
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING A RESIDENTIAL PLANNED ZONING
DISTRICT ENTITLED R-PZD 06-1883, ABSHIER HEIGHTS,
LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF ABSHIER DRIVE
AND HILLCREST AVENUE, CONTAINING APPROXIMATELY 4.11
ACRES, TO REFLECT REVISED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL AS
DESCRIBED HEREIN.
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Fayetteville approved a Residential Planned Zoning
District known as Absbier Heights (R-PZD 06-1883)on April 4, 2006 with Ordinance No. 4850; and
WHEREAS, the applicant was permitted until April 4, 2009 to obtain all building permits and
complete construction of all required street improvements, including speed tables; and
WHEREAS, all work interior to the site has been completed with the exception of vertical
construction; and
WHEREAS,the applicant has completed all street improvements as required and/or amended by the
Planning Commission on April 27, 2009, and requests that the speed tables to be installed on area streets be
revisited.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
FAYETTEVILLE,ARKANSAS:
Section 1: That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby approves an
extension of R-PZD 06-1883 (Abshier Heights),requiring the applicant to obtain all building permits by April
4,2014, or the PZD approval expires.
Section 2: That the requirement to install up to four speed tables is amended to require the
applicant to install one speed table if requested by the City Engineer prior to issuance of a Certificate of
Occupancy on the final building and to install one stop sign at the intersection of Oakwood and Hillcrest.The
entire cost of said improvements shall be the responsibility of the applicant.
Section 3: That all other conditions of approval for R-PZD 06-1883 Abshier Heights,including
the conditions as added by the Fayetteville City Council shall remain in force.
v SGS,
Y Qc•°�
PASSED and APPROVED this 19'h day of May, 2009. ms's
® FAYETTEVILLE:
APPROVED: ATTEST: pyso.gR,�ANnsp °JZ,>
Ae�de GTO
By 4. By:
J6&4ELD JO Mayor SOMDAA E. SMITH, City Cler reasurer
City of Fayetteville Staff Review Form
City Council Agenda Items
and
Contracts, Leases or Agreements
5/19/2009
City Council Meeting Date
Agenda Items Only
Jesse Futcher Planning Development Services
Submitted By Division Department
Action Required:
ADM 09-3263: (Abshier Heights Modification, 407): Submitted by H2 ENGINEERING for property located N &W
OF THE ABSHIER DR. AND HILLCREST AVE. INTERSECTION. The property is zoned R-PZD, RESIDENTIAL
PLANNED ZONING DISTRICT. The request is to modify the conditions of approval concerning the time frame to
obtain building permits and the requirement to install speed tables.
Cost of this request Category/Project Budget - Program Category/Project Name
Account Number Funds Used to Date Program/Project Category Name
Project Number Remaining Balance Fund Name
Budgeted Item Budget Adjustment Attached
DA-14.91 Previous Ordinance or Resolution#
Depa ment it c r Date
Original Contract Date:
S• (_Of Original Contract Number:
City Attom ((�� (� Date
`"rciu,)L Q vdoxY"^ 5-4^2oo9
Finance and Internal Services Director Date Received in City ��ERt
Clerk's Office
Chief of to Date
Received in
Mayors Office
R't~�Ma or Date�lL .:
Date
Comments:
Revised January 15, 2009
FAYETTEVILLE
THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE,ARKANSAS
113 W. Mountain St.
Fayetteville,AR 72701
Telephone:479-575-8206
ENGINEERING DIVISION CORRESPONDENCE
TO: Cit Council Members
FROM: Matt Casey P.E., Assistant City Engineer
DATE: May 1, 2009
SUBJECT: Abshier Heights Requests
The applicant for this project has requested that the speed tables that were required with the original
development approval be removed from their conditions of approval. At this time engineering staff
recommends approval of this request for the following reasons:
• Speed tables should be installed on streets with grades less than 5%. Abshier is from 6 to 8%
slope, Hillcrest is from 5 to 15% slope, Lakeridge is from 7 to 18% slope and Oakwood has an
average slope of 12% slope. Installing speed tables on steeper slopes may create tractions issues
during wet and icy weather conditions. It is possible to place a speed table on the west end of Abshier,
but this is outside the area that speeds are affecting the residences. It is also possible to install one on
Hillcrest between North and Oakwood,but sight distance is a concern in this area and the table would
be pushed too close to North street to be effective.
• Speed tables should be located a minimum of 250' from an intersection. The distance along
Hillcrest between Abshier and Oakwood is less than 500' not allowing enough distance to meet this
criterion. There is slightly more than 500' along Hillcrest between Oakwood and North, but this
location is in an area with inadequate sight distance for the south bound traffic.
Since the Planning Commission meeting,the Transportation Division performed a sight distance analysis of the
intersection of Hillcrest and Oakwood. There is inadequate sight distance for the traffic from the west that is
turning onto Hillcrest. When looking south,there is heavy vegetation and a crest in the roadway that limits the
drivers view. For this reason,this intersection warrants the installation of an additional stop sign on Hillcrest
to make the intersection a 3-way stop condition. The Engineering staff recommends that this stop sign be
added in lieu of installation of speed tables on Hillcrest. We feel thatthe addition of this stop sign would better
accomplish the goal of reduced speeds in this area.
Abshier Heights Page 1 of 1
City Council Meeting of May 19, 2009
Agenda Item Number
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO
To: Mayor and City Council
Thru: Jeremy Pate, Development Services Director
From: Jesse Fulcher, Current Planner
Date: April 28, 2009
Subject: Abshier Heights PZD Modification
RECOMMENDATION
The City Planning and Engineering Divisions recommend approval of an ordinance
amending the conditions of approval for the Abshier Heights Planned Zoning District(R-
PZD 06-1883).
BACKGROUND
On April 4, 2006, the City Council granted approval of R-PZD Abshier Heights on 4.11
acres of land with frontage on Abshier Drive and Hillcrest Avenue, with a maximum of
24 dwellings units in six buildings, at a density of 5.8 dwelling units per acre. All work
interior to the site has been completed with the exception of vertical construction, and the
street improvements adjacent to the property have also been completed.
The applicant is requesting that the City Council amend the following two conditions of
approval:
1) Installation of speed tables
The Engineering and Transportation Divisions have evaluated the street conditions of
Oakwood, Hillcrest, Abshier and Lakeridge to determine where speed tables could be
safely installed and where additional stop signs would be warranted based on the Manual
on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). Based on the steep grades common of
the streets in this area and site distance limitations, staff recommends that the requirement
to install up to four speed tables be removed. Staff finds that the installation of an
additional stop sign at the intersection of Hillcrest and Oakwood will increase vehicular
safety and reduce speeds on Hillcrest, likely providing the most benefit to the
neighborhood. Staff can support a speed table on Abshier between College and the
project entrance based on the techinical requirements listed herein. However, speed
reductions from this speed table will only be realized on Abshier, in close proximity to
the actual speed table.
City Council Meeting of May 19, 2009
Agenda Item Number
2) Timeframe to complete construction
Staff is supportive of extending the expiration date for five (5) additional years, given
that the project will be complete with the exception of vertical construction, and an
extension will allow the developer to construct additional units as demand increases.
DISCUSSION
This item was heard at the regular Planning Commission meeting on April 27, 2009 and
forwarded by vote of 7-0-0 with a recommendation for approval to the City Council. The
Planning Commission recommended that staff evaluate installing speed tables on
Hillcrest between Oakwood and North and on Abshier between College and the project
entrance. The commissioners also recommended that a stop sign be installed at the
intersection of Hillcrest and Oakwood.
BUDGETIMPACT
None.
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING A RESIDENTIAL PLANNED ZONING
DISTRICT ENTITLED R-PZD 06-1883, ABSHIER HEIGHTS,
LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF ABSHIER DRIVE
AND HILLCREST AVENUE,CONTAINING APPROXIMATELY 4.11
ACRES, TO REFLECT REVISED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL AS
DESCRIBED HEREIN.
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Fayetteville approved a Residential Planned Zoning
District known as Abshier Heights(R-PZD 06-1883)on April 4,2006 with Ordinance No. 4850; and
WHEREAS, the applicant was permitted until April 4, 2009 to obtain all building permits and
complete construction of all required street improvements, including speed tables; and
WHEREAS, all work interior to the site has been completed with the exception of vertical
construction; and
WHEREAS,the applicant has completed all street improvements as required and/or amended bythe
Planning Commission on April 27,2009,and requests that the speed tables to be installed on area streets be
revisited.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
FAYETTEVILLE,ARKANSAS:
Section 1: That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby approves an
extension of R-PZD 06-1883 (Abshier Heights),requiring the applicant to obtain all building permits by April
4,2014, or the PZD approval expires.
Section 2: That the requirement to install up to four speed tables be amended to allow the
applicant to install one speed table, one stop sign and associated warning signs as indicated in Exhibit"A"
attached hereto and made apart hereof. The entire cost of said improvements shall be the responsibility of the
applicant.
Section 3: That all other conditions of approval for R-PZD 06-1883 Abshier Heights,including
the conditions as added by the Fayetteville City Council shall remain in force.
PASSED and APPROVED this day of , 2009.
APPROVED: ATTEST:
By: By:
LIONELD JORDAN,Mayor SONDRA E. SMITH, City Clerk/Treasurer
Exhibit "A"
R-PZD 06-1883
4
"J
r rat f �� -�' �#� • �z
.a
� 5 tk-
1r�
L-Fl 3SY,-
�-IIFR DR
a � y
U.
t
s .a. d ,�.�' s., i t �-
�C
-
s a s
fiDIn 0--/- 3� (0:3 -H6�wtek &J CzJ
Exhibit "A"
R-PZD 06-1883 Oawa Akte&t
4 z
2m3
FayeV 1 PC Meeting of April 27, 2009
ARKANSAS
THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS
125 W. Mountain St.
Fayetteville,AR 72701
PLANNING DIVISION CORRESPONDENCE Telephone:(479)575-8267
TO: Fayetteville Planning Commission
FROM: Jesse Fulcher, Current Planner
THRU: Jeremy Pate, Development Services Director
DATE: X899 Updated April 28, 2009
ADM 09-3263: (ABSHIER HEIGHTS MODIFICATION): The request is to modify the
conditions of approval concerning the time frame to obtain building permits and the recommended
street improvements. Planner: Jesse Fulcher
BACKGROUND
Property Description: On April 4,2006,the City Council granted approval ofR-PZD Abshier Heights on
4.11 acres of land with frontage on Abshier Drive and Hillcrest Avenue,with a maximum of 24 dwellings
units in six buildings, at a density of 5.8 dwelling units per acre. All work interior to the site has been
completed with the exception of vertical construction, and the street improvements adjacent to the
property have also been completed.
Request: The applicant is requesting that the Planning Commission and City Council amend the
following three conditions of approval:
1) Street improvements
2) Installation of speed tables
3) Timeframe to complete construction
Street Improvements
Background: The applicant was original required to improve the project frontage along Abshier Drive
and Hillcrest Avenue 14' from centerline including pavement, curb and gutter, storm drains and 5'
sidewalks. After evaluating the amount of grading required for the installation of improvements at the
north end of Hillcrest, staff determined that the required street improvements along the south end of
Hillcrest and along Abshier would require significant tree removal. Extensive grading and tree removal
would have been counter to the conditions of approval associated with the City Council's approval, to
maintain as much tree canopy as possible as a screen for adjacent residents. Accordingly,the applicant
requested a modification to the required street improvements,which the Planning Commission approved
on June 9,2008. The amended improvements required the applicant to finish installing only the curb and
gutter along the remainder of the property frontage, install a left-turn lane at the intersection of Abshier
Drive and College Avenue, and install a 5' sidewalk west from the property entrance to College (see
Exhibit"A"). The curb and gutter work adjacent to the site is complete.
K.Teports12009W ReportsV l-Apri1271ADM 09-3163(Abshier Heights_Modication).doc
Proposed amendment to street improvements: In-lieu of installing a left-turn lane at the intersection of
Abshier and College, and installing a 5' sidewalk from the project entrance on Abshier to College,the
applicant is proposing to improve Hillcrest. Specifically,the improvements would include milling and an
asphalt overlay of a 23' wide section of Hillcrest north of Woodcrest Drive (see Exhibit`B"). The 9'
section of milling and overlay shown in the exhibit is required to be completed by the developer due to
street damage that occurred from installing the curb and gutter.
Recommendation: Staff recommends in favor of the applicants request to mill and overlay sections of
Hillcrest in-lieu of the remaining improvements west of the project. The pavement on Hillcrest is
severely deteriorated north of Woodcrest, likely requiring the City to spend money from the overlay
program for improvements that can be accomplished by the developer at this time. While the installation
of a turn-lane at Abshier and College would be convenient,the traffic study submitted with the original
PZD application indicates that there are very few vehicles turning left at this intersection.
Installation of speed tables
Background: During the original review of the development,the applicant agreed to install speed tables
on Hillcrest,Abshier, Lakeridge and Oakwood as a 50/50 cost share with the City of Fayetteville. This
requirement was negotiated between the developer and neighbors,and was agreed to by the City Council
during their review of the project.
Proposed amendment to speed table requirement: The applicant is proposing to eliminate the required
speed tables and as an alternative, install stop signs at strategic locations to slow vehicle speeds in the
neighborhood.
There are several techincal requirements typically evaluated by cities before installing street tables. These
include street classification,speed limit,traffic volume,street grade,block length and street construction.
In general the streets in this area fail to meet the following requirements:
1) Speed tables should be installed on streets with grades less than 5%. The average grades for the four
streets mentioned above exceed 5%and in some cases exceed 10%.
2) Speed tables should be located a minimum of 250' from an intersection. There are only two areas
where there is more than 500' between intersections and in both cases there is limited visibility due
to topography and jogs in the street.
3) Curb and gutter should be located on both sides of the street. The streets in this area were
constructed several decades ago and therefore curb and gutter was not installed except for along the
project frontage.
Recommendation: Staff supports removing the requirement to install speed tables on Oakwood,Hillcrest
and Lakeridge due to steep grades and limited visibility in this area (see related Engineering Division
memo). Installing speed tables on steeper slopes can create traction issues during wet or icy weather
conditions and reduce the visibility of speed tables by approaching motorists. Staff can support a speed
table on Abshier between College and the project entrance based on the techinical requirements listed
herein. However, speed reductions from this speed table will only be realized on Abshier, in close
proximity to the actual speed table. Staff finds that the installation of an additional stop sign at the
intersection of Hillcrest and Oakwood will increase vehicular safety and reduce speeds on Hillcrest,likely
providing the most benefit to the neighborhood.
K.IReports12009W Reports lll-Apri1271ADM 09-3263(Abshier Heights_Modification).doc
Timeframe to complete construction
The project expiration, as amended by the City Council, is April 4, 2009. The applicant submitted the
extension request to the Planning Division on March 24,2009,prior to extension period ending on April
4, 2009.
Proposed amendment to expiration date: The applicant is proposing that the project expiration be
extended to either five (5) years from the expriation date of April 4, 2009, or that the City remove the
expiration period entirely.
Recommendation: Staff is supportive of extending the expiration date for five(5)additional years,given
that the project will be complete with the exception of vertical construction,and an extension will allow
the developer to construct additional units as demand increases. The applicant shall be allowed until
April 4,2014 to receive all permits necessary to complete construction of the project. If all permits have
not been received by this time, development approval shall be revoked.
Conditions of approval
Planning Staff recommends approval of ADM 09-3263, the requested modification to conditions of
approval for the Abshier Heights R-PZD 06-1883, with the following conditions.
1. Planning Commission determination of street improvements. Staff recommends that Hillcrest
Avenue be improved as indicated in Exhibit "B" to include milling and asphalt overlay of the
western 9'ofthe street between Abshier and Woodcrest and 23'ofthe street north of Woodcrest.
All street improvements shall be completed prior to receiving a final certificate ofoccupancyfor
the first building.
4/27/09: THE PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVED THE AMENDED STREET
IMPROVEMENTS.
2. Planning Commission recommendation regarding the installation speed tables.Staffrecommends
that the requirement to install speed tables be removed, due to limited visibility and steep grades
common of the streets in this area. Staff does recommend that the applicant coordinate the
installation ofadditional stop signs at the intersection of Oakwood and Hillcrest and Abshier and
Hillcrest. Neighbors have voiced concerns about speeding vehicles on Hillcrest and the lack of
visibility for residents backing their vehicles onto Hillcrest below the crest of the street. Final
improvements as determined by the City Council shall be completed prior to receiving a final
certificate of occupancy for the first building.
4/27/09: THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED THAT STAFF DETERMINE THE
EXACT LOCATIONS FOR SPEED TABLES AND ADDITIONAL STOP SIGNS PRIOR TO CITY
COUNCIL REVIEW.SPECIFICALLY,THE MOTIONER RECOMMENDED THAT SPEED TABLES
BE INSTALLED ON ABSHIER DRIVE BETWEEN COLLEGE AND PROJECT ENTRANCE AND
ON THE SOUTH END OF HILLCREST AVENUE BETWEEN NORTH STREET AND OAKWOOD
STREET.
3. Planning Commission recommendation for extending the timeframe to complete construction.
Stafffinds in favor of the request to extend the timeframe to obtain all necessary permits to April
4, 2014, given that all construction will be complete with the exception of vertical construction.
K-Weporis1200911`C Reportr111-April 271ADM 09-3263(Abshier Heights_Modification).doc
4/27/09: THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED IN FAVOR OF THE FIVE YEAR
EXTENSION.
4. All other conditions of approval for R-PZD 06-1883 Abshier Heights, including the conditions as
added by the Fayetteville City Council shall remain in force.
5. All permits necessary to complete construction shall be applied for and approved prior to project
expiration on April 4, 2014.
Planning Commission Action:
Motion: Lack
Second: Cabe
Vote: 7-0-0
Meeting Date: April 27, 2009
O Approved O Denied O Forwarded
K:IRepom120091PC ReporIsll ]-April 271ADM 09-3263 (Abshier Heights_Mod jcation).doc
c�7
ENGINEERING, INC.
March 24, 2009
City of Fayetteville
Planning Division
113 West Mountain Street
Fayetteville, AR 72701
RE: ABSHLRE HEIGHTS - R-PZD 06-1883
REQUEST FOR MODIFICATIONS OF CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
To Whom It May Concern:
Please consider this correspondence as an official request to modify the conditions of approval
pertaining to R-PZD 06-1883 (Abshire Heights).
Condition 1 (a) in part: Street improvements shall extend off -site to include the
intersection of Abshire and College Avenue.
Findings: The width of Abshire west of the project frontage is over 20 feet wide. An electrical
transmission pole is located at the intersection of Abshire and College Ave and is certain to be a
potentially complicated and/or expensive problem. The offsite section of Abshire is in good
condition. Conversely, the integrity of the pavement along Hillcrest is rapidly deteriorating.
Cost Analysis (Bid from Fochtman):
Abshire Improvements: $22,259.00
Hillcrest Overlay & Cold Mill: $24,300.00
Recommendation:
The developer is requesting to reallocate the off -site street improvement costs from Abshire
widening to the overlay of Hillcrest. It will actually cost the developer a little more money to
overlay Hillcrest, but in our opinion, it would be a much better value.
Condition 8: The applicant shall be granted one (1) year from the date of Planning
Commission approval to receive all permits necessary for development with a one (1) year
extension available.
Findings: Due to the state of the economy, it would be inexplicably poor judgment to construct
all of the remaining units in the allowable timeframe. Prudent management of inventory helps to
sustain property values and is beneficial for all property owners in comparable facilities. All
utilities have been installed for the entire property and all street improvements will soon be
complete.
2827 Millennium Drive Suite 2 Fayetteville, Arkansas 72703 Phone: 479.582.4234 Fax: 479.582.9254
Recommendation:
The developer is requesting the City to consider one of the two following options:
(1) Eliminate Condition of Approval #8 from the project; or
(2) Allow the project five (5) years from this date to procure all necessary building
permits.
Additional Condition: Speed Tables
The initial approval required 4 speed tables which were to be cost shared on a 50-50 basis
between the developer and the City. Since the initial approval, City Engineering staff was
supportive of reducing the speed tables to 3 in this area due to the difficult grades.
Findings: Use of speed tables has been stopped by City Engineering due to the lack of success
and community complaints. The intent of the speed tales in this area was for traffic calming
measures.
Recommendation:
The developer is requesting to use the development funds originally appropriated for speed
tables for the installation of stop signs cqf strategic intersections. The cost would be 100% of
the developer with no City participation. City staff will dictate the configuration of the signage.
Thank you for your consideration in this matter.
Respectfully,
Kipp Hearne, P.E.
2827 Millennium Drive Suite 2 Fayetteville, Arkansas 72703 Phone: 479.582.4234 Fax: 479.582.9254
Abshier Heights R-PZD 06-1883
Planning Commission Minutes April 27, 2009
Planning Commission
April27, 2009
Page 9 of 19
ADM 09-3263: (ABSHIER HEIGHTS MODIFICATION): Submitted by H2
ENGINEERING for property located N & W OF THE ABSHIER DR. AND HILLCREST AVE.
INTERSECTION. The property is zoned R-PZD, RESIDENTIAL PLANNED ZONING
DISTRICT. The request is to modify the conditions of approval concerning the time frame to
obtain building permits and the recommended street improvements.
Jesse Fulcher, Current Planner, gave the staff report, recommending approval with conditions as
listed in the staff report.
Kipp Hearne, H2 Engineering, stated it was another chance for him to come through and work
through a rather tough infill project in the City. As we move through the development process, a
lot of things crop up. Trying now to make the best use of our development dollars. Obviously,
with the condition of Hillcrest vs. what we're trying to accomplish on Abshier, we feel like that's
basically a better use of our development dollars to wove those up and make those
improvements. With regard to the speed tables, the developers have spoken to some of the
property owners and their concerns are slowing traffic through the neighborhoods He would be
happy to pay for some additional stop signs or signage throughout that area, and we can
coordinate that with staff in the most appropriate manner. With regard to the timing of the
building permits, obviously that's just prudent management with your inventory, not trying to put
too much inventory on the ground at one time, Much hurts other property values and is basically
a management decision. I think he's been very diligent in trying to accomplish the goals set forth
early on in the project. I know we've been back before you a couple times trying to revise these,
it's the nature of an infill project, and we're trying to make the most of it and utilize those dollars
in the most apnropriate manner.
Shay Hopper, neighbor, stated that when this project initially went through in 2006, our
neighborhood spent,, hundreds of hours and energy and time working with the developer and
architect,t ' twe fait like when we left that everybody was happy and satisfied. When the public
notice sign was posted that this would he revisited, hundreds of emails among the neighborhood
started flying. The street improvements; sidewalk, and curb and guttering, we understand that the
grade is incredibly steep there and we don't want any of the tree canopy removed. On the
timeline issue, five years is what we're asking for and agreeing to as well, indefinite is not really
acceptable to the neighborhood. Our concern with that is it will continue to erode the initial
agreement we made the longer this project drags on. Also, as the neighborhood discussed what a
difficult infill project this would be because of the nature of the land, the condo saturation in
2006 was a great deal here in Fayetteville. I feel like we addressed that. Our biggest issue that
we've communicated with Jeremy and Don and Kyle is the speed tables. This is a very
dangerous neighborhood, that's one of the reasons we all fought hard to address this initially.
Stop signs certainly would be more than welcome, we'll take anything we can get. But we feel
like we made a good faith agreement at the time with the developer to put in these speed tables.
Because only one structure has been built on the project, it has not greatly increased the traffic,
but we know that over the next five years, as the project continues to develop, the traffic will
continue to increase so we would like to address the problem now.
Planning Commission
April27, 2009
Page 10 of 19
Jan Wicks, neighbor, stated that there was a great deal of concern among neighbors that we had
all bargained in good faith, and one thing that was important to us was these speed tables. It still
appears that there are places that speed tables could be installed. That along with four-way stops
could help to preserve the character and safety of the neighborhood. Again, it's not just us, it's
the people who are going to be buying these condos. It's going to increase property values if it's
a nice, beautiful neighborhood safe for the elderly or children. This is something that's very
important is that we are again compromising, we are asking for the five year as the City
recommended, we're also going to go along with the other change.
was key to all of us. We see it as preserving the safety and integrity
it's taken away, it gives the impression that we should have no reas
first place. We're trying to protect what we feel is truly important it
David Beech, neighbor, stated that he wishes to echo what the
Initially we opposed the project because we felt there were an
coming to bear and affect our neighborhood. One of them wa:
issues, and a number of things we compromised on 1n order to
which wanted to generate density more than sprawl: Butwe M
extra traffic wasn't going to affect our neighborhood as far as
speed bumps would be the best way to do. that. I also think the
Even though it may be written somewhere, there's still going I
make sure that the guidelines we agreed upon are adhered to d
Daniel Griffin, neighbor,
was in the planning stage.'
on Abshier the embankzne
the sidewalk without ail
living in these condos alre
before people cold •occup,
little parK,11 honors ofa y.
would suggest a bond he=p
the City okayed this projec
to avoid the intersection at
been built.
that we were told,there v
:rstand the developer not
is is something that
•neighborhood. and if
to try and negotiate in the
figs neighborhood.
have said.
would be
traffic, there were water
e sure the City's 2025 Plan,
dto make sure that all this
We all agreed that the
-ar deadline is important.
c of intensity on wanting to
sidewalks when the project,
to put sidewalks in, because
down at about �t45 degree angle, and there's nothing to support
'e retaining wall. Another concern I had is that there are people
d I thought a prolee' had to be finished as far as improvements
wellmgs there Another concern is that there's supposed to be a
and if the developer goes bankrupt, who puts this stuff in? I
o guarantee completion of everything we were promised when
get ajlot .of traffic in the neighborhood, people cutting through
andLCollege. It's another thing in favor of the speed bumps
it was possible for people to occupy the units that have already
Jeremy Pate, Developiient Services Director, stated that it was possible since we issue
Certificates of Occupancy for individual buildings as they are complete.
Commissioner Trumbo asked about the park.
Pate stated it was something that the Planning Commission was not involved in, it was one of
the agreements made by the developer with the neighborhood at the Council meeting to remove a
building from the original development plans and build a small park at the corner of Abshier and
Hillcrest, if I remember correctly. It's still a condition of approval for the project, so we will still
Planning Commission
April 27, 2009
Page 11 of 19
enforce that before we issue the final C of 0 for the structures on the property. So, the project
can't be finaled out until all conditions have been met.
Griffin asked if it's alright for people to move in now, and the builder get their money, why
should he bother completing all the obligations?
Pate stated that ultimately it is enforced through our court system. When it comes down to it, if
a developer or property owner has not met all the conditions of approval, the PZD can be
revoked, it can be brought back before the Council. We have the authority in certain instances to
turn water off to residents, and so we certainly don't want to get to that point, but it's something
we could enforce through the court system.
Commissioner Lack stated that there were comments in they
still places on the streets that would meet the requirements of
Engineering standpoint. Are there places that would meet the
speed tables, or that would be so close that we might be inclin
th
Chris Brown, City Engineer, stated that there are some areas r
laid out in the memo, the west end of Abshier, the very north
Hillcrest, and the first block of Oakwood between Hillcrest an
question about the effectiveness of speed tables in those areas,
really need speed tables. But those areas would meet the requ
marginal because of sight distance and other problems, but as
requirements.
Commissioner L
Halfway between
Brown
and that is
them. Tkiasa marginal loi
art.
�w r:
Commissioner Lack stated
Brown stated it's iust'sotfth
speed
vary that jud
how there were
n an
.hts from the
do meet the criteria that are
>f Hillcrest, the south end of
aneetah. There was some
fther'those are the areas that
Sits. Some of those are
.s grade -wise, they do meet the
the intei*p$en the south end of Hillcrest would be.'
ormwould want to put it. The top of the hill is very near
ere the sight distance is a problem. You don't want to put a
hill,=a speed table in and all of the sudden it's on top of
n as far as safety goes.
the top of the hill is about at Oakwood and —
of Oakwood.
Commissioner Lack so somewhere between Oakwood and North, midway or so might be an
acceptable —
Brown stated it's possible.
Commissioner Lack stated he thinks that would be one that would impact the cut -through guys
the most from the locations we're still talking about. When you say "west end of Abshier," how
far west?
Planning Commission
April27, 2009
Page 12 of 19
Brown stated probably up to the entrance to the development. That's what I marked, I didn't
check it in detail. But basically the west half.
Commissioner Winston asked if you could easily get to a third point between College and
Hillcrest?
Brown stated yes, that's possible. The effectiveness of that, it could be effective. As far as
helping the neighborhood, not sure the effectiveness of that. It's really sort of out of the
neighborhood.
Commissioner Lack asked if staff can talk to us a little bit about where the speed tables are
shown now. Is there a shown location?
Pate stated it simply was brought up at the Council: meeting,
installed, and that was really the extent of that conversation a
reasons I think it's important to bring this back to you all and
because we need some guidance from both our Engineering
to where these are most appropriate if they are installed. Wit]
it's simply impossible to safely install their where everybody
we're looking for from the Planning Conumssron is a recomn
Council.`' ...
Commissioner Lack states
Engineering's stance iS it,
weather conditions,. Iltustxv
think the stop signs would
within the Crty nowbout
not really all 'they're gcJcc
hear comments from ofher
hearing mn?re dialogue abd
to four speed tables tobe
i the City. Which is one of the
Council at any rate, simply
artment and the neighborhood as
it Engineering studies up front,
ought we could. So, that's what
idation to go forward to the
I he Was very sympa etic and very'much in agreement with
and the danger that cot%jd be posed by the speed tables in inclement
cant to explore and see i!there's some compromise in some way. I
be a better traffic calming device. There's some contention even
peed tables tha, �e been put in or might be requested, and they're
d up'tq be. But, they still can be a useful tool. I'll be interested to
commissioners That would be the one item I would anticipate
at •I'm OK with the extension to five years with the change in street
Commissioner'Z1$ stated that considering the discussions from the public and their concerns
over item 2, is it pole that we could perhaps break that item out and have the City staff revisit
it a little further in teresif communication from the neighborhood, in terms of exactly where
Engineering and where'the neighborhood would feel speed tables and/or the use of stop signs
would be most effective? Is it possible to break it out and pass the rest of this?
Kit Williams, City Attorney, stated that of course this has to go to City Council for the final
decision, and I think in between here and the Council is when staff can look at this more
carefully again and scout out other locations. I think this has to go forward as a unit, I don't
think we can break it up, but certainly your comments will be listened to by the City Council, but
I don't think we can break it into two parts. I don't know if Jeremy feels otherwise.
Planning Commission
April27, 2009
Page 13 of 19
Pate stated that the recommendation from staff is based upon looking at general topography in
the area and overall effectiveness, looking at where neighborhood traffic is located within the
neighborhood, not just cut -through traffic, visibility for those utilizing the streets. You obviously
don't want to come around a hill and not know a speed table is there and hit the speed table at too
fast of a speed. Those are the types of issues we're looking at when making a recommendation.
I certainly think that with respect to this issue, really it's just the speed tables and the time frame
that are going to Council. The street improvements are really a decision by the Planning
Commission. This is all one administrative item, however. Number 2 and 3 are
recommendations that go forward to the full City Council for their consideration. In context to
what Mr. Williams stated, the minutes will be prepared for them for your comments and your
recommendation on those specific items as well. If you feel you would like for staff to explore
continue utilizing all four or drop that to two or one or none, that's what we would do after this
meeting and before City Council discusses this at length.
Commissioner Zant stated I can't tell you withoutEngineerim
and saying that we have to have speed tables here, and 'et stop
locations. So, I think if our concerns are then reflectadtoii the
further investigation, I think we could probably forward thrs or
has recommended this and I'm not hearing any objection on'ths
improvements that have been recommended
Commissioner Winston asked Brown about the locations whe
the one on Abshier about a third of the way up, the one on Oak
Hillcrest, and the one on Hillcrest between Oakwood and Nortl
Brown stated the very noith end of Hillcrest.
really looking at this specifically
>rgns will look perfectly at other
coed item, it may require a little
because I'm nothearing that staff
time frame or specific street
e speed tables could be. I caught
wood between Waneetah and
. Was there another one?
Brown stated yes, from the north entranceto the development, probably three lots back to the
south, 'the='grades are adequate there Lshould clarify, Oakwood meets the criteria for grades, but
with the two=netersections thdre, it doesn't meet the intersection distance. So, it doesn't meet all
of the criteria but the grades are really the critical safety issue.
Commissioner Wii" s§ta'fed that my inclination is towards stop signs at four-way or three-
way intersections becs'e they're less confusing than when you've got a situation where one
street has the right-of-wway through it and the other needs to stop. Are there issues with having
three-way and four-way stop signs on Hillcrest and Oakwood and Abshier as far as grade goes?
You don't want to have a stop sign where it might cause a car to slide back down the hill if it
loses momentum in weather conditions where surface traction is poor.
Brown stated that stop signs are used to control the flow of traffic and are not to be used as speed
control. Second, they can be used at three-way and four-way stops are used when you have
similar amounts of traffic coming from all directions. The other time you can use them is if you
have a sight distance problem, where there's an intersection where cars that approach the
Planning Commission
April27, 2009
Page 14 of 19
intersection can't see cars coming from the other way. Those are the reasons you install stop
signs. Really have not looked at the configuration of the intersections or the traffic or any of that,
so to say stop signs would be appropriate here or not, I would not be prepared to answer that.
Commissioner Winston asked what else we have in our bag of goodies for traffic calming, if
stop signs are not included in that bag?
Brown stated that there are a lot of traffic calming tools, horizontal deflections, islands in the
middle of the street for instance. You start getting into right-of-way issues:, Every traffic
calming measure has negative effects. But there certainly are other traffic calming measures that
could be considered.
Commissioner Winston asked if staff has looked at
others that would be appropriate to look at between I
Brown stated that most of the other options includecald
obtrusive to the adjacent properties. There are islands
side of the road, narrowing of the road, those sorts of thi
in the City, so there's no track record in the City of how
Commissioner Winston stated it gets in to thiiinc
has asked for traffic calming devices, and to "say we
devices, and speed tables are too dangerous, so sorr,
some responsibility to try to find something that\vil
have to look at what other cities'' are doing even if `v
Commissioner Lack stater
is also listed asa speed tab]
approved at City Council
impact We didn t talk`abo
Brown stated that between
no locations on that street s
Commissioner
require the devc
or any
Council.
it -of -way and areTrnuch more
[& of the road, islands in the
of which have been tried here
ild work.
xnfortable situation where the neighborhood
an't use stop signs as traffic calming
you don't get anything — I think there's
make this a safer situation,, and we might
haven't done it here before.
ed on the elan that came with the packet that Lakeridge
aas`umigthat's the list of streets that was discussed and
far reaching where I can see where it would have some
Lakeridge a candidate?
orizontal curvature of the roads and the vertical grade, there are
I would recommend a speed table.
that it really stretches quite a ways from the development, so to
project to do that seems like it could be argued.
Commissioner Trumbo stated that we have installed, since this agreement was made, and it
sounds like it was made without the advice of any engineers at this time. We've installed several
speed tables throughout the City and it's my understanding that we have quit doing that, possibly
because of budgetary reasons or because they weren't as successful as we thought. What kind of
feedback are we getting about these?
Pate stated that we get as many calls from people wanting them removed as we do from people
who want them installed. It's a mixed bag. You are correct, we line -item pulled the amount for
Planning Commission
April27, 2009
Page 15 of 19
speed tables out of the budget.
Commissioner Trumbo stated he sees the problem with putting the speed tables in on this hill,
and that's where you would look at them and think they would need to go, would be right on this
slope coming down this hill. I'm not qualified to tell if the speedbump on Abshier that close to
College would help. Staff has recommended the stop signs and I assume they think that would
help, based on their experience. At least, it would stop the traffic and make people more aware
of their surroundings. So, I'm perplexed on the speed table issue. We can't install them if
they're not safe, that's my opinion on that. I'm okay with the street improvements. That road
does need to be overlayed, and I think that's a good compromise. I wasn't crazy about the left
turn lane out of Abshier, we probably don't need to be encouraging people to take a left turn out
of there. It's not the safest of lefts. I'm also okay with the time frame, I understand their
reasoning and it might take a full five years to build this out, so I'd be in support of that as well.
Commissioner Cabe stated that regarding item #2, I am hesitant to remove the equirement or
set a number of speed tables since it sounds like we heed both speed tables and stop signs. It
needs to be a combo effort. Do we need to set a number? It seems "like between now and•then
• that gives the developer and engineering enough time to assess the area. I want to make sure
• we're going to do what works and what is right. Do we actually need to saywe don't need four
because we got told at this meeting there were, two spots that were really great so we only put in
two, or can we leave it — I guess in the hands of people that we pay to do this kind of work, figure
out what's required and what really works.
Pate stated that he thinks that's: an option for you as a recommendation if you want to forward
this to the Council wrtl a recommendation that staff looks at a combination of those stop signs
and speed tables, ui derstanding the safety concerns that we've expressed, we can look at those
options. There are a couple of options at least that we can look at to see if it meets those criteria.
Commissioner Caliq stated that -after a study we find that we are better off without speed tables,
I don't want to force anyone's hand but I also don't want to remove the possibility of doing what
needs to be done. I agree with staff on the street improvements and the time frame, as well.
CommissioW11jionche1I stated that speed tables have been the only avenue that the City has
explored pretty`m $ predom'iriantly throughout. Where I grew up you had drainage runoff dips
at intersection and h" really helped with traffic. That's the first thing that came to my mind that
if you have a steep r"a flee that, and ifyou had a drainage dip in a road like that, if we could
Pg 91..� g
explore other avenues/the City has pretty much obligated themselves to the neighborhood, and
I think that puts the city in a precarious situation with what the neighbors said how they feel
disenfranchised when these things keep coming back through and more things drop off. It's like
what was said how stop signs are technically not a traffic calming device, they are used to
regulate traffic flow. Then you get into these neighborhoods where these neighbors are really
feeling like it doesn't matter what they say because once this thing keeps getting recycled, things
drop off. Is there other things we can do before this gets pushed further? Are there other options
that the City can pursue to try and appease everybody involved before this thing gets to a
situation where — it's just like what everybody is saying, I don't see much point in throwing four
Planning Commission
April27, 2009
Page 16 of 19
speed tables out there for the sake of saying we did what we said we were going to do. It looks to
me like on the east -westbound roads, you could probably put a speed table on those. Surely
there's someplace in the country that's had speed problems on a steep graded road, and if we
could explore those options before we take this much further. But I do support the time frame
and the road improvements also.
Commissioner Lack stated that one distinction that I see in what we're being asked for in this
item is item #1 we're asking for a determination, in items #2 and 3 we're asking for a
recommendation.
Motion:
Commissioner Lack made a motion to forward ADM 09-3z
recommendation for approval, with a determination for item
as modified. The recommendation for item #2 regarding spc
now and City Council time, Engineering work out a recomm
tables and stop signs. It seems to be logical that a speed tabl
just west of the entry would be effective. Without knowing;i
understanding and assumption of the south end of Hillcrest t.
effective there, but certainly I would not want engineering to propose or recommend something
that was too close to the top of the hill. If it did get too close, I would certainly support their
opinion on that. I think the north end of Hillcrest is not really feasible. I don't see the need that
far north on Hillcrest for the traffic diversion. But it would lie a recommendation for a
combination of speed tables and stop signs from engineering:; On the recommendation for
extended time frame that we would be in favor of the five-year time frame, and all other stated
conditions of approval Commissioner Cabe seconded the motion.
to City Council with a
in favor of streetimprz
tables would be that be
ation for a combinatio
r Abshier at a third noi
of speed
torsoor
topography with my
eras potential one could be
Commissioner Winston stated that item 5 is affected by item 3. If we change to five years then
item 5, which reads n`.a permits necessary to complete construction should be applied for and
approved-pnor to project expiration on April 4, 2009." That should be 2014, not 2009.
Trumbo statednit wa�� typo. It should read 2014.
stated lxe*amends his motion.
Commissioner Cabe"a J ded his second.
Upon roll call the motion passed with a vote of 7-0-0.
Abshier Heights R-PZD 06-1883
2006 Conditions of Approval
Abshier Heights R-PZD 06-1883
Conditions of Approval from 2006:
1. Planning Commission determination of street improvements, to include the following:
a. Installation of a 14' wide street from centerline of Abshier Dr., including 14'
pavement, curb, gutter, storm drains, and a 6' sidewalk. Street improvements shall
ctP9 kS extend off -site to include the intersection of Abshier Drive and College Avenue.
b. Installation of a 14' wide street from centerline of Hillcrest Ave., including 14'
pavement, curb, gutter, storm drains, and a 6' sidewalk.
c. Right-of-way to meet Master Street Plan requirements shall be dedicated prior to
building permit.
d. Egress from the proposed drive onto Abshier Drive shall be signed/marked to allow a
right out only.
*Staff recommends that the location of the sidewalks be determined by the Sidewalk
Coordinator and Urban Forester at the time of development so that existing canopy
along the right-of-way can be preserved.
2. All setbacks, protective easements, density, designated uses and other zoning criteria are binding with the
approval of the R-PZD. Submitted covenants are likewise binding to the project.
3. Structures shall be constructed as presented in the PZD, meeting the architectural design standards
established herein.
4. Parks fees in the amount of $13,086 for 8 single-family units and 22 multi -family units shall be paid prior
to issuance of building permits, or as constructed to meet the parkland dedication fee -in -lieu requirements.
The number of units was reduced to 24.
5. If street lights do not exist, they shall be installed with a maximum separation of 300 feet along Abshier
Drive and Hillcrest Avenue.
6. The applicant shall submit 15 sets of the plats, project booklets, and elevations along with any other
correspondence and information the applicant would request the City Council to review. Please submit
half-size drawings for City Council review.
7. Coordination with the Solid Waste Division for centralized trash pick-up. THE SOLID WASTE DIVISION
HAS REQUESTED THAT TWO DUMPSTER PADS BE LOCATED ON THE SITE. IF PLANNING STAFF
FINDS THAT THERE IS NOT SUFFICIENT ROOM FOR LOCATING A -DUMPSTER PAD, OR THAT
REQUIRING DUMPSTERS WOULD RESULT IN THE REMOVAL OF EXISTING TREE CANOPY THE
SOLID WASTE DIVISION WILL ALLOW INDIVIDUAL CARTS
8. The applicant shall be granted one (1) year from the date of Planning Commission approval to receive all
permits necessary for development with a one (1) year extension available.
9. All development shall meet applicable building codes and other ordinances of the City of Fayetteville.
10. Prior to City Council consideration, the applicant shall modify the project booklet and Site Plans to reflect
any recommended revisions from the Planning Commission.
11. No portion of any structure (i.e., porches, overhangs, etc.) shall encroach into building setbacks.
12. Access easement agreements for the driveways located off -site, shall be provided on the easement plat and
filed of record prior to building permit.
13. Manufacturer's cut -sheets shall be required for any outdoor lighting, prior to building permit.
14. Trees are required to be planted every 30 linear feet along the right-of-way, where existing canopy is not
currently located. Trees should also be planted every 12 parking spaces. Include these revisions prior to
City Council.
15. If after construction, open areas exist along the right-of-way, trees shall be planted within the open areas, to
provide a continuous buffer along the right-of-way between the PZD and the existing neighborhood
16. Two bicycle racks are required and shall be shown on the site plan and legend with revisions prior to City
Council.
Standard Conditions of Approval:
17. The Master Development Plan, Statement of Commitments and Architectural Standards submitted by the
applicant shall be considered binding and tied to the zoning of the property. Conditions of approval as
noted herein and other requirements placed upon the project with review of the Master Development Plan
— Planned Zoning District by the City Council shall also be binding.
18. Prior to building permit, a cost estimate for all required public improvements are required to be submitted
to Planning Staff 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.
19. Signs shall be permitted in accordance with Chapter 174 of the Fayetteville Unified Development Code,
and shall be subject to signage requirements for residential multi -family development. This shall be
reflected in the booklets and on the plats.
20. 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, Cox Communications).
21. 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.
22. All overhead electric lines 12kv and under shall be relocated underground. All proposed utilities shall be
located underground.
23. 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.
b. Separate easement plat for this project that shall include the tree preservation area.
c. Project Disk with all final revisions
d. 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 improvements
necessary to serve the site and protect public safety must be completed, not just
guaranteed, prior to the issuance of a Building Permit.
EXHIBIT "B"
R-PZD 06-1883
WE AS NEIGHBORS, THE AFOREMENTIONED DEVELOPER AND ARCHITEC\
HAVE RESPECTFULLY AGREED ED UPON THE FOLLOWING COMPROMISES: 1� Wa c \\z UA Co x�t�1 -
L Modifications to architectural design of development to complete and complement
existing neighborhood homes. Examples include.planter boxes with stone facades; the agreed upon
stone facade on the back of the development (on the side of the town homes facing-Hillcrest and
Abshier) the architect will modify rear elevations of development to include partial stone facades on
the back of the development (on. the side of the town homes facing Hillcrest and Abshier) for
approval ofabovementioned neighborhood representatives; house numbers re -styled and moved to
the lower portion of the front of the house near planter boxes; changes in paint palette in the natural
earth tones; enlarged window shapes and styles in the latest drawings presented to the neighborhood
— all to create a more natural, "softer" feel in line with the traditional character of the existing
neighborhood.
2_ Reduction in the number of units to 24.
3. Speed bumps to be built/installed on Hillcrest, Abshier, Lakeridge and Oakwood by
r$5 Developer and City with 50/50 cost share with up to four speed tables_
4. A permanent, WRITTEN plan for maintaining the park and greenspace throughout the
development included in the homeowner's association agreements and/or covenants for those who
purchase the town homes. The association agreements or covenants must be worked out in
consultation with the above -mentioned neighborhood representatives throughout the process and
approval. Additionally, new neighbors in the development must be aware that Lade Lucille and
surrounding property is a private entity and is not available for their use for swimming, fishing,
picnicking, etc. (only accessible by property owners in Lake Lucille/Clay Yoe subdivision).
5. Additional trees and shrubs are to be planted along Hillcrest and Abshier to fill in gaps
and ensure that the tree buffer is maintained and expanded. Trees and shrubs are needed to fill in
both high and low gaps and present an attractive, natural appearance to neighbors in the development
and across Hillcrest and Abshier.
6. Core and soil sample testing will be conducted due to grade and incline, instability ofland
because of natural springs and previous construction difficulty in area with USA Drug.
7. We respectfully request that City Planning division allow that no bridges or steps leading
form the -town homes to Abshier or Hillcrest will be constructed_ This would only encourage street
parking and exacerbate traffic problems_ The only steps in the development that are agreeable to the
neighbors are those from the pocket park/viewing area to the parking area for the E. Fay Jones' home
as designated on plans_
8. Trees and/or shrubbery will be planted at the back of the development to screen the
development's residents from the shopping center. These also should include plantings to fill in high
and low gaps and present an attractive, natural appearance consistent with a high quality
development.
9. No parking signs to be installed along Hillcrest & Abshier on the development side, with
no parking allowed on either side of these two streets.
10. Landscape design, and any newly planted trees and shrubbery will, as closely as possible,
be in accordance with E. Fay Jones' written/drawn design plans for the property from the
U. of A. MulIens Library, Special Collections (neighbors have this document) (i.e. species of trees,
placement, etc.).
11. Above -mentioned neighborhood representatives will see sample/rendering of mailbox
design and of the sign for the development and provide input for approval, prior to installation.
12. Construction will be limited to daylight hours only.
13. We respectfully request that if this development, PZD 06-1883, Abshier Heights, is not
executed, that the City require that this property revert back to RSF-4 (R -I), not its current zoning of
record, C-2.
14. All agreed upon compromises will be put. in writing and officially recorded as
amendments to PZD 06-1883 and presented at the meeting ofthe Fayetteville City Council, Tuesday,
April4,2006. All compromises throughout this document are legally binding on the developer and
must be carried out.
Abshier Heights R-PZD 06-1883
2006 City Council Minutes
Printer Friendly View
Page! of I
City CaeocitMci il4n0a
April 4.2 2005
Page It elM
Mayor Coody thanked Mr. Rogers.
Claudette, a resident voice her opinion saying that the Chambers were right, there are many
structures in the neighborhood that are closer than 8' to the property line, they existed before any
ordinances, or any property tines did. She said that she was contacted by Ms. Wilson regarding
the plans but she had not seen the plan as yet. She states that she wanted her contractor to look
over them and explain them to her. She addressed the issue of having the right do with your
property as you wish and infringement on somebody else's property and how the property
owners have the right to protect their property.
Mayor Coody thanked Claudette and asked for further comment. He then closed the public
comment and asks for comments from Council.
Alderman Cook moved to table the ordinance to the April 18, 2006 City Council meeting.
Alderman Reynolds seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motionpassed unanimously.
This ordinance was tabled to the April 18, 2006 City Council meeting.
R-PZD 06-1883 Abshier Heights: An ordinance establishing a Residential Planned Zoning
District titled R-PZD 06-1083, Abshier Heights, located south of Evelyn Hills Shopping Center
• on Abshicr and Hillcrest, containing approximately 4.11 acres, amending the Official Zoning
Map of the City of Fayetteville; and adopting the Associated Master Development Plan. This
ordinance was left on the First Reading at the March 7, 2006 City Council meeting. This
ordinance was left on the Second Reading at the March 21, 2006 City Cairn cii meeting.
Alderman Rhoads moved to suspend the rules and go to the third and final reading.
Alderman Ferrell seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion passed unanimously.
City Attorney Kit Williams read the ordinance.
Jeremy Pate: We received at this meeting I'm assuming it's a draft agreement and worked out a
compromise between Dover and some of the neighbors in surrounding neighborhoods and we are
asking the applicant to go over those. There's a list of items that I assume needed to be
incorporated within the ordinance as well as a site plan that has been passed out to you.
Tim Cooper, architect stated he represented the developer, David Chance. He said that the list
and drawings which show before and after rendering shows where they started at Planning
Commission. A lot of the issues that are on this list show up in the renderings as changes and so
you can kind of reference those issues that were worked out. He stated some of the issues had
come upin the last week and they have reached compromises to accomplish this project. He also
explained the elevation changes. Mr_ Cooper stated the design was real modern and they
changed some of the colors to achieve a little more individuality of units- They added stones to
the sides to help tie it into the neighborhood. He spoke about the reduction from 30 units to 24
units. He said the developer and the neighborhood would like to see the city install some speed
bumps along Hillcrest, Abshier, Lakeridge and Oakwood. He said that the Planning Commission
also agreed because it was out of their jurisdiction and they would like the Street Committee to
tit West Mountain 72701 (479) 521.7700 (479) 575-8257 (Fax)
.xc sravatcviticora
httn://docs.accessfavetteville,oriz:8I /ADDXtender/DocPrintFriendly.asnx?DataSouree=AX... 4/20/2009
Printer Friendly View
Page 1 of 1
c:rCC4J,ate$ Memt
Apit 4, 2006
Yayt 12 of 33
consider that issue. The neighborhood also wanted to have some involvement in the covenants
in the POA setup of the development. The PZD would actually mull the side of the slopes in
some of the bare areas to help the canopy to be continuous.
Mayor Coody: Tim I see herethat you talked about speed bumps or speed tables that need to be
installed on Hillcrest that will be requested of the City. Are there any other requests of the City
in here? What's our obligation?
Mr. Cooper: I believe the only other obligation would be possibly the no parking signs on
Hillcrest. It's something that seems to be very important to the neighborhood.
Mayor Coody; I suspect that those are both doable.
Mr. Cooper: Other than that that's it. The landscape design, Faye ]ones had done a landscape
design for a pant and we've agreed to is that any opportunitywe have for the certain species that
lie used on the hillside that's what we would try to use in the same situation. We've also agreed
that landscaping and buffer will be added along the westside, the long piece behind the shopping
centerit will be a buffer between that and the C-2 shopping center there. The neighborhood also
wanted input on mailbox design and signage that would be on the site, that's no problem as well.
He stated they have representatives of the neighborhood that we've been working with.
Mayor Coody: We'll just enter this in with the PZD so this becomespart of the ordinance.
City Attorney Williams_ We'll add a Section 5 that will refer to that.
Mr. Cooper: We respectfully request that if this development is not executed, if it is not
actually built out that it would actually resort back to a previous zoning of RSF-4 instead of the
C-2. It's somethingthat's not a problem for us and I don't know how that can be done legally
with it reverting back to RSF-4.-
Jeremy Pate: By ordinance when a PZD for instance, is not constructed by its expiration date or
does notgo forward that property returns to the City Council for rezoning. It's zoned with that
development plan,with that master plan in place until such time as someone wants to change
that. There is a section in our code when a Planned Zoning District has essentially expired it
comes back before the City Council to zone it the way they feel is appropriate. 1 believe the
record would show that RSF-4 is obviously what has been desired at this point.
Alderman Thiel: I think most of these are great except I have some real reservations about the
city spending money on speed bumps whenever the justification for that is being created by
development. I don't thinkthese.aldennen have had a request for speed bumps on this area prior
to this development.
Mayor Coady. If we build them will you reimburse us our cost? They are expensive.
Mr. Cooper:. The speed bump was an issue in the neighborhood to begin with.
A discussion followed on the speed tables, speed bumps and the cost. Gary Dumas said they
were about $3,000 each.
t t3 west Mountain 74701. (479) $21.3700 (479) 575-&257 (Fax)
acccssfaycucv,iic.org
httn'//docsaccessfavetteville.ore:X 1 /AnnXtender/FhePrintFriendly asnx?DataSrntree=AX 4/20/7009
Printer Friendly View
Page! ofI
Cky Cowed Menucg Muwla
Apit4,2apo
Page 13 of35
Mr. Wicks stated the developers have been very cooperative.
Shay Hopper stated the neighbors, staff and developers have worked very hard to cometo a
compromise that they all feel comfortable with. Slit stated there are still many neighbors in the
neighborhood who disagree with the development completely. However they feel very fortunate
that they are working with Mr- Chance and Mr. Cooper on this project. She stated some of the
neighbors do support this agreement. They are asking the City that if for some- reason this
project is not executed that the zoning be reconsidered because of the historical difficulty, issues
and the questions that they have addressed atseveral meetings. We do want that to return to
RSF-4. That is very important to all of us.
David Barham stated he has never been in favor of the project and would rather see a park. He
stated he really feels like the architect and the builder listened to them more than they ever
expected them to. He stated he has come to the conclusion that this project is going. to happen
anyway and if it is going to happen he would like these developers to have it. He also voiced his
concern about the traffic and the speed of traffic. He stated if this project goes through or not
they need speed bumps in the. neighborhood_ He endorsed his support for these builders and: the
project they proposed.
Bob Alguire voiced his concern about the parking on Abshier. He is also concerned about the
steep access to the property. He feels there are some dangerous situations that will come out of
•this.. He voiced his concern about the traffic problems in Fayetteville. He also voiced his
concern with the incorrect rezoning that happened to this property and that the City should have
corrected it.
Rebecca Hass stated she was pretty road about this. She stated that she as a neighbor just might
have to give a little bit. She stated there are areas that might never need to be developed and this
may be one of them and it may not be one of them. She requested a 20 foot bufferand. a Bill of
Assurance regarding this buffer. She feels this is a true compromise.
Mayor Coolly: The 20 foot strip will be reserved and written into the PZD ordinance.
Jeremy Pate: Yes.
Mayor Coady: A PZD ordinance is better than a Bill of Assurance.
Rebecca Hass: These things get changed; a Bill of Assurance will stand unless it is abrogated.
A Bill of Assurance is stronger.
Kit Williams: We can not ask fai a Bill of Assurance a Bill of Assurance has to be offered
voluntarily.
Alderman Mart: I do not see the buffer specifically listed. Is it something you considered to
offer?
113 wen Mountain 72701 (479) 521.7700 (479) 575.5257 (Fax)
aecessfayettenitleorg
http://docs.accessfavetteville.or2:81 /AntXtender/DocPiintFriendly.asnx?DataSrnirce=A X... 4/20/2009
Printer Friendly View
Page 1 of I
Lily C7uncil Mmng Mnate5
Alnii4,?C05
Page 13 of 35
Mr. Cooper: We found that one of the big deals was that 20. foot buffer. Our buildings are 30'
to 40' from (he property line. Our treepreservation area is there as well. Theentire site tree
canopy is 17.9% and we will retain 17.5% tree canopy. That buffer should remain in tact.
Jeremy Pate: I think the buffer is protected with regard to any structures being placed in it. A
comment could be added that a 20' green space along Hillcrest shall be preserved without development of any s€ructure.
Mayor Coody: So you are offering a Bill of. Assurance on the 20'of green space. Mayor Coody
stated he appreciated €he compromise between the developer and the neighborhood.
Alderman Thiel: I agree with you. I think the developers tried to work with the neighborhood,
I think it is a good infill project and that the density is being cot down to satisfy the
neighborhood.
Alderman Jordan: My concern is if we start building speed humps them other neighborhoods
are going to request them and fences, etc.
Alderman Marr: 1 think whendevelopment comes forward and we have increased traffic counts
and neighborhoods that are going to have cut through traffic and then to say we will come back
and visit it later I think is bad planning. I think if we think this is an issue this is the time to ask
for it. I think we need to havepriorities. t am not comfortable with saying you might get it you
might not get it or you can ask for it later. I think if the request is genuine it should be treated
that way.
Alderman. Marr moved to amend the ordinance to add that speed bumps are to be built
and installed an Hillcrest, Abshier, Lakeridge and Oakwood by the. City and that there will
he a 50/50 costshare with the developer. Alderman Cook seconded the motion. Upon roll
call the motion passed 6-2. Alderman Rhoads, Ferrell, Reynolds, Thiel, Cook and Marr
voting yes. Alderman Lucas and -Jordan voting no.
Alderman Reynolds moved to amend the ordinance to add Section 5. Alderman Ferrell
seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion passed unanimously.
Alderman Lucas: I am gladto see the developers and the neighborhood workingtogether on
this project. I do notwant us to forget the North Street and Hillcrest intersection. That is not
going to be a safe traffic corner and that bothers me. Sometimes there isproperty that should not
be built on and maybe this is one of them. Because of the traffic and the safety issues I don't
know that I can support this.
Mayor Coody asked shall the ordinance pass. Upon roll call the ordinance passed 5-3.
Alderman Rhoads, Ferrell, Reynolds, Thiel, and Marr voting yes. Alderman Lucas,
Jordan and Cook voting no.
Ordinance 4850 as Recorded in the Office of the City Clerk
173 wal Mountain 72701 (479) 521.770►0 (479) 575-8257(Fax)
acessrayetcvillxorg
httn://does.accessfavetteville.ore:81/AnnXtender/DocPrintFriendlv.asnx?DataSource=AX... 4/20/2009
Printer Friendly View
PagelofI
ch, Council Medina Mint -
Math 7.2006
Po4t at59
Mayor Coody asked shall the ordinance pass. Upon roil call the ordinance passed
unanimously.
Ordinance 4843 as Recorded in the Office of the City Clerk.
R-PZD 06-1883 Abshier Heiehts: An ordinance establishing a Residential Planned Zoning
District titled R-PZD 06-1883, Abshier Heights, located south of Evelyn Hills Shopping Center
on Abshier and Hillerest, containing approximately 4.1 I acres; amending the Official Zoning
Map of the City of Fayetteville; and adopting the Associated Master Development Plan.
Jeremy Pate: Jeremy gave a brief description of the project. Jeremy stated that part of the
reason staff recommends this project is to preserve the buffer and to allow for that to remain.
Planning Commission voted 6-3 in favor of this request. Those who voted against the motion
discussed concerns regarding density, traffic, water pressure, and architectural compatibility in
the neighborhood, Staff recommends approval of this planned zoning district based on the
findings of facts as well as the 23 conditions of approval. He went on to describe the conditions
of approval,
Mayor Coody- Do we have anymore questions for Jeremy? Thank you very much.
Rob Wicks a resident of 1314 Hillcrest voiced his concerns about the rezoning and asked that.
this particular rezoning and development be denied. He suggested that the parcels of land in
• question be considered for a park or natural area and or detached single family or patio homes.
He stated they will be willing to work with the City to find grants that might be able to acquire
and: maintain the land.
Jeff Shannon, a citizen, addressed the historical significance of both Fay Jones and the house.
He voiced his concerns about the impact of development on the home and particularly a
development with this particular density.
Rob Wicks asked those who are opposed to the development to please stand for a moment,
Mayor Coady stated that they certainly understood that there where several here that are
opposed to the development -
Robert Alguire a resident of 1235 Hillcrest voiced his concerns about transition zoning and
water pressure, fie stated adding 30 more units on the same water line would not help with their
current situation. He also stated concerns regarding traffic coming in and out of this area.
Shay Hopper a resident of 1224 North Hillcrest-voiced her concerns with the price per square
foot and the density of the particular proposal. She stated she participated in the City Plan 2025
exercises she stated those exercises showed infill for this area but they did not take into account
topography, cater pressure, hillsides, grades and infrastructure, all of which apply to this
particular parcel. She stated the neighborhood is not opposed to appropriate infill for this piece
of property.
II) West Mountain 72701 1479) 52I-7700 14W) 5754257 (Fax)
a cessihvaavtneng
httn://docs.accessfavetteville.org:81 /AnnXtender/DocPrintFriendly.asnx?DataSource=AX-.- 4/20/2009
Printer Friendly View
Page 1 of!
City Co,,ncil Mctliag MItl,u�—
March 7,2W,,
cage 42 ar59
,Jimmie Beauchamp a citizen voiced her concerns about the history of the property. She also
talked about the tradition of the proposed property. She stated that the setbacks for the C-2
zoning would make it very restrictive for a developer to build a commercial businesson this
piece of property. She also stated access would limit C-2 businesses. She stated they are willing
to take a chance on this property being zoned C -2 -
Jan Wicks a citizen handed out information to the Council and stated that they're not opposed to
appropriate infill density of development, but in this ease they feel there has to be a special
consideration because of the unique situation. She also asked that this particular zoning request
and development be denied.
Mayor Coody: Thank you Jan. Does anyone from the Council have a question for anyone that
had a presentation tonight? Thank you for your organization and speaking to us as you have
tonight.
John Williams a citizen spoke about Fay Jones and his great talent, special designs, and special
quality to the architecture in Fayetteville and residential architecture. Since his home is located
close to this property the City should set aside space to continue Fay Jones home as special.
Alderman Cook: I know that there was an initial traffic study done and I understand that there
was an update to that traffic study, is that correct?
Tom Hennelly stated that there was an initial traffic study done and recommendations were
made based on the number of units. 0
Alderman Cook: I'm curious about the traffic study I have to admit because that's one of the
items that concerned me is the flow of traffic in and out and through that development. Also one
of the thingsthat we mentioned was water pressure and I think at some point there was a
comment that with tying a loop through your development I think at some point this might
actually increase the water pressure. I haven't actually looked at the distribution map to see what size lines are in there, I know there are a 6" line and an 8" line at one part, can you comment on
that?
Tom Hennelly stated we're under the impression from Brent O'Neal from the Engineering
Department that we're actually on the boundary between two pressure plains and that there is a
distinct possibility to connect this development with a totally different pressure plain then what
all this neighborhood is on, which would have obviously no affect on their water pressure flow
or supply. It comes from a totally different source and different water tower. Even if that were
not the case our plans would have to be reviewed just like any other development we do by
Engineering. The Fire Department has done flow tests on the hydrants adjacent to this project
and finds that thereinadequate flow to fight fire there. He stated the development of this project
will not make the neighbors water flow any worse_
Alderman Cook asked if Brent is looking at this and will we have a comment from staff on this?
Jeremy Pate: It is typically evaluated with more detail construction plans. We can probably (to
some kind of preliminary analysis of what will berequired to connect to a different pressure
113 Were Mourns, 71701 ('179) 52t-770 t (470) 575.5257 tF<)
acrosfyetevitle.arg
httn://docs.accessfavetteville.or2:8l /AnnXtender/DocPrintFriendlv_asi)x?DataSource=AX... 4/20/2009
Printer Friendly View Page 1 of I
City Costs, l Maly g.l5of n6
Mitch?, 2004
Pic 430159
plain. The Fire Department did state that they did test flows for the hydrants and they found that
all the hydrants have sufficient fire flow with the exception of one.
Mayor Coodv: We've heard a lot of comments tonight about the density and the multi family
use. Is there any possibility at all that there might be reconsideration in design and be able to put
in something a little lower density, something that might come a little closer to the neighborhood
compatibility? I. personally thinkthat the City needs infill and redevelopment of our old places
and this certainly is one of the areas. I don't find it to be a compliment to the good man Fay
Jones was and the family. It would be nice to have something there that would be complimentary
to the neighborhood_ Is there a way that this could be developed in such a way to where you
could accomplish your goal but come closer to the neighborhoods wishes because they have
stated that they wouldn't mind seeing something like that happen.
Toni flennelly stated it's my understanding that the neighborhoods wishes are to see a density
that's more similar to what they have there already. I don't believe that with the prices on land
and the requirements for infrastructure, street widening and that type of thing that the economics
would allow that.
Mayor Coady: I don't think RSF-4 would be a likely candidate for that piece of property either.
Tom- Hennelly stated that the residential density allowed under C-2 is much higher than what
this is. He felt that this density is certainly manageable notonly from a traffic stand point but in
that transition zone_ He stated they are as impressed with Fay Jones accomplishments and his
legacy as anyone is and they do not feel like they are impacting that.
Alderman Thiel asked how RMF-2.4 units per acre worked in the C-2 zoning.
Jeremy Pate stated that in commercial districts we have an allowance for attached and detached
residential units, one is by right and one is by conditional use. Attached residential units are
allowed in the C-2 Thoroughfare Commercial District however it's an accessory useto
commercial uses so it would have to be attached to those commercial uses. It would have to be
less than 50% of the gross square feet of the area unless a conditional use was permitted to have
more residential use on that property.
Alderman Thiel: Okay.
Alderman Marr stated that his biggest conceals with this project are the traffic congestion and
the exiting going south because if you do not use the Evelyn Hills parking lot as a planned access
then you are either going to use Abshier or you are going to go to the 3 -way stop so you can get
to the slop light on North Street. He went on todiscuss his concerns on this project.
Mayor Coody alright we'll leave this on the first. reading. We appreciate all of you coming out
tonight and you've done a very good job presenting your case.
Robert A Iguire stated' according to Walter Brown with the Physical Plant who's an old historian
back in the 60's there was a petition over the zoning and it got passed through the City on a
referendum. Will this make a difference?
I t 3 west Moumatn 72701 (479) 521 7700 (479) 575.8257 (Fax)
accessfaycttcvillearg
httn://does.accessfavetteville.org:8I /,ADoXtender/DoePrintFriendlv.asnx?DataSource=AX... 4/20/2009
Printer Friendly View
Page 1 of I
thy twmci?Mcninr Minwes
Hard', 34X)6
Pate 44 of 59
Kit Williams stated that his understanding was at one point it was zoned and then there was a
referendum and the zoning was reversed by the vote of the people. If that is the case then that
particular ordinance that had rezoned it certainly would be invalid at this point_ It would evert
back to the zoning prior to that time. That doesn't necessarily restrict the power of the City
Council in the future to go ahead and rezone that property.
Mayor Coody: Thanks Robert
Tom flennelly said he would like to get some direction before the next meeting. Fie stated there
maybe some things that they could supply before the next meeting. He asked Alderman Marr if
an expanded traffic study would be something he would be looking for.
Alderman Marr stated that he would also like any discussion or to understand better the actual
density number that you're at and if there could be any consideration for that number to be
reduced.
Alderman Thiel: I agree with Don I'd like to see if you can find anyway to reduce the density.
That does seem to be a major concern and I. have concerns with the traffic issues.
Tim Cooper: I was going to point out that we do have the construction materials board here and
we did make some changes after that meeting. So you may want take a look at that.
Mayor Coady: The roof is not reflective anymore very good.
Tim Cooper: The rest of the materials are similar. I can pull that out if you would like.
Alderman Cook: Can you do that.
Mayor Coody: Yes please.
Alderman Thiele Very quickly, yeah.
Alderman Reynolds: Mayor my biggest problem is the health, safety and welfare of the people
that live these currently_
Alderman Thiel: won't you show them too if they can see it. It's certainly a more natural
looking material.
Mayor Coody: Alright thanks Tim. Does that give you enough direction to figure out where
you need to go, Affright thank you very much. We are going to leave this on the first reading
tonight and we will revisit this again in two weeks. Thank you all for coming up. You did a
good job presenting your case.
This ordinance was left on the first reading.
713 west Mountain 72701 (479) 521-7700 (479) 575-8257 (lax)
accessiayeaecilie.a e
httn://docs.accessfavetteville.ore:81/AnnXtender/DocPrintFriendlv.asnx?DataSource=AX... 4/20/2009
Printer Friendly View
Page I of 1
- City ramc.I Ma:ag Mmufa
w:ncL 1l, 3006
rageeor16
UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
RZN 06-1868 Chambers: An ordinance rezoning that property described in rezoning petition
RZN 06-1868 for approximately .20 acres located at 347 North Willow Avenue from RSF-4
Residential Single -Family, 4 units per acre to RSF-8, Residential Single -Family, 8 units per acre.
This ordinance was left on the Second Reading at the February 7, 2006 City Council Meeting.
This ordinance was Tabled at the February 21, 2006 City Council Meeting to the March 7,
2006 Cry Council Meeting. This ordinance was Tabled at the March 7, 200b City Council
Meeting to the March 21, 2006 City Council Meeting.
Jeremy Pate: At agenda session Alderman Mau requested that this item be tabled until the next
meeting. The applicant is still working on some drawings for the Council- They would
appreciate that time as well so they can look at reducing the height of the structure.
Alderman Cook moved to table the -ordinance until the April 4, 2006 City Council meeting.
Alderman Thief seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion passed 7-0. Alderman
Mare was absent
This ordinance was left an the Second Reading and Tabled to the April 4. 2006 City
Council meeting.
R-PZD 06-1883 Abshier Heights: An ordinance establishing a Residential Planned Zoning
District titled R-PZD 06-1883, Abshier Heights, located south of Evelyn Hills Shopping Center
on Abshier and Hillcrest, containing approximately 4.1 I acres; amending the Official Zoning
Map of the City of Fayetteville; and adopting the Associated Master Development Plan- This
ordinance was left en the First Reading at the :March 7, 2006 City Council meeting.
Alderman Cook moved to suspend the rules and go to the second reading, Alderman
Ferrell secondedthe motion. Upon roll call the motion passed 7-0. Alderman Mare was
absent.
City Attorney Kit Williams read the ordinance,
.Jeremy Pate: I have two updates for you, one is the information that was passed out to you
prior to this meeting- One of those is a decrease in density as requested by the City Council
decreasingthe number of units. There is some more information that the architect would like to
go over with you at your next meeting. The other item requested by the City Council was a
traffic evaluation, if you have any questions the traffic engineer is here to answer any questions.
Tim Cooper, Cooper Architects, representing the owner gave a brief update- He stated since the
last meeting there was three items that stood out as being issues that they needed to work on and
get answers on. One was the density, trying to lower the density, the water situation and the
traffic. He stated the developer went back and negotiated with the property owner and he is
going to be more flexible on his price so they could cone up with a lower number of units, they
were able to eliminate 6 units from the project. They eliminated a building on the south piece of
property and created a little pocket park. There will be some additional spaces on the property
that could he accessed to walk up and view the Jones home- They also eliminated a building on
113West ntoenun 727()1 (4T9)52t-7710 (479)575-8257(Fax)
access rayeuecilte.urg
httn•//dne.s accessfavetteville.nru:SI/AnnXtender/foePrintFriendly.asnx?f)ataSource=AX.._ 4/20/2009
Printer Friendly View
Page 1 of I
4iry Council Huang Mines
Mani 21.2WW
P.gc 7 or 16
the north piece of property which allows for 30' to 40between the structures on the upper
portion of the property. A copy of the site section was given to the Council so they could see the
unit design. We started with 17.9% of existing canopy, previously the removed canopy was
going to be 1,730 square feet with this new change we are only going to remove 1,083 square
feet, which means that 17.3% of the current canopy will be saved. The previous percent of site
covered by the building was 17% and with these changes it is only 13.5%.
Alderman Thiel: What does this come out to density wise?
Tint Cooper: 24 units on 4,11 acres, which is 5.8 units per acre.
Alderman Thiel: That is pretty close to RSF-4.
Tim Cooper: Right. The other thing is that we have an access easement that we are not
counting in that 4.11 acres if you actually include that square footage it would drop it to around 5
units per acre.
Alderman Thiel: If this was zoned RSF-4 how could this be developed? Each home would
have a driveway off of Abshier and Hillcrest is that correct?
Tim Cooper: Right you would have individual drives accessing Hillcrest. It would also have a
dramatic change on the tree canopy because the grade that you would have to have from the
actual driveway out to maintain that slope would pretty much eliminate that tree canopy along
Hillcrest.
Alderman Thiel: You would not have to preserve the buffer then at that point.
Tim: Cooper: No. Actually if you look at this project as a whole, if this was RSF-4 already, this
is still an appropriate project with the Dover. Kohl plan and density wise to up zone for a PZD.
Mayor Coody: Tim, have you had a chance to let the neighborhood know about the changes
that you have made here?
Tim Cooper: Yes I have given the information to some of them.
Alderman Cook; Tim, you handed those out this evening is that correct?
Tint Cooper: Yes.
Jack Butt, stated he represents some of the neighbors on Hillcrest that are opposed to this
project because it is contrary to the existing zoning. This property used to be R -I now RSF-4 the
neighbors have defeated three different efforts over the last 30 years to change it to anything
else. This is RSF-4 property the planned development would bean upgrading of the property to
something denser with less protection for the neighbors than leaving it as RSF-l.
• Mr. Butt handed out infitmration to the Council. He gave a brief history of the property, the
rezoning of the property and the restrictive covenants that where filed on the property on August
31, 1962. In August, 1967 a petition was made that the property to the west be rezoned from K-
ID wrst Mountain 72201 (479)521.7700 ta"r91 s;iszn {Fa3
.s<u, ray nt«vttir. erg
hitn'//dnrc arreccfavefteville nra-R 1 /AnnXtvnter/IlnrPrintPrianAl , nenv9ilatnQnnrra—AY d/'flV7MQ
Printer Friendly View
Page 1 of I
Cuy Council Mming >tlnunc
Mace 21.2006
Page t ar 16
1 A to C-2, it was unanimously denied. In June of 1970 the City adopted a citywide map and it
confirmed on that map that, that strip was R-1 and in 1972 the strip was stilt R -l. In 1991 a
developer asked for a conditional use permit of the R -I zoning so he could build some duplexes
on Hillcrest, the Planning Commission voted to deny that. Between 1962 and 1991 there were
three requests for rezoning of this property, the Planning Commission, City Board and at one
point a public vote rejected those requests. There have been 19 other requests for zoning
variances or conditional uses and on all those occasions this property was reflected as R -I. In
1999 a glitch occurred, and the city map did not reflect the boundary between the C-2 zoning and
the R -I zoning. The City in 2003 undertook an effort to cleanup its zoning map, a map was
drawn by city staff and presented to the City. Council, it was voted on and approved. On that
map there is a clear demarcation that the C-2 zoning beginning at Evelyn Hills runs all the way
up the [till to Hillcrest. No one knows how this happened, either a draftsman made a mistake or
he intently scooted that line over knowing that he was altering the zoning.
He gave several options for resolving this mistake.
Alderman Cook: I do have a request that will be on the next agenda to re -zone that property to
RSF-4, if it is the council's wish we will discuss that at the next meeting_ With the Planned
Zoning District this could be zoned 1-1 or R -A, with the Planned Zoning District you are re-
zoning it based on that development. While I agree with what Mr. Butt said I think this should
be zoned RSF-4 because I think that was the intent of it all along, regardless of that this PZD.
stands on its own.
Alderman Ferrell: The next meeting you are going to bring forth to re -zone this to what?
Alderman Cook: Not all the property, just the piece of property that is in question which
parallels on Hillcrest Avenue which is where the discrepancy is in the map whether it was C-2 or
RI.
Alderman Ferrell: Will it state that you arc rezoningfrom one zoning to another?
Alderman Cook: From C-2 to RSF-4. Just the part that is in question.
Alderman Reynolds: Kit, do you agree with what has been said?
Kit Williams: I certainly will not argue with the history. The Planning Department has owned
up to the fact that they are not sure, when they did all of their research, that where they thought it
came back to C-2. When we did the citywide: rezoning it was rezoned C-2 at that point in time
so right now it is C-2.
Alderman Thiel: I think once the neighborhood has an opportunity to look over what is being
offered here they may or may not change their mind. I certainly would probably support
rezoning this to RSF-4 but that does not change the fact that we have a PZD before us that is
almost to that density, it is one unit more that the density allowed in RSF-4 and you will have
green space offered to you that you would not have if this was sold off as individual lotsor
developed out individually as single family residents_ You also have to have a curb cut for each -
one of these individual houses. I hope this neighborhood looks at this proposalbecause it is
probably a very good thing.
I t3 Wen Moun,ain 72701 t479) 521-7700 (419) 575-5257 (Fax).
accessfaynlavillcorg
httn-/!dne.c a . PCCfAVPttevillenrtrRI/AnnYtender[Dne..PrintFriendiv nsnv?flntaSnurrP.=AX 4nnnnn4
Printer Friendly View
Page 1 of!
City Council Meeting Minmes
Marsh 21.2006
Pug,, 4 of i6
Kipp Hearne with H2 Engineering addressed the water concerns, he said in that area of town
there are pressure problems and flow issues, he has met with staff to try to find ways to improve
the water system in this area.
Brian Vines with Carter and Burgess spoke on the traffic study. He stated the level of service
without the development and the level of service with the development remains the same_ There
are issues with pulling out on College Avenue- The development is adding about 176 cars to the
surrounding roadway network which is just a small amount on College Avenue. There is not
much traffic being added.
Mayor Coady. Jeremy, one gentleman brought up the widening of Abshier and Hillcrest as a
concern, fill us in on that detail,
Jeremy Pate: It is a requirement of the developer to improve both Abshier and Hillcrest. We
have tried to minimize the amount of grading especially with the sidewalks. Typically you
would have 14' from centerline improvement on these types of streets plus grading for the green
space and sidewalk. We have reduced that green space and sidewalk. We are recommending
14' from centerline which will increase the travel lanes. I believe both lanes are about 20' wide
currently, this would add 4' of pavement and curb and gutter on the north side of Abshier and the
west side of Hillcrest.
Mayor Coolly: What will that 4' of additional asphalt do to the slope and the grade of buffer
area?
Jeremy Pate: The slope and grade are actually minimal.
Mayor Coolly: So we would not have to build any retaining wall or do any damage to trees?
Jeremy Pate: Not that I aware of
Mayor Coody: Those questions were asked of me and I just wanted to reiterate those.
Alderman Ferrell: The density went from 30 to 24 and it is 5.8 units per acre. What size will
the six units be that will be there?
Tim Cooper: They will be 1,500 to' 1,800 square feet. The price will be in the neighborhood of
$150.00 per square foot.
Dan Griffin a resident saidhis problem wasthe bank on Abshier. He stated a retaining wall will
have to be installed. He thinks this will be expensive to the developer and is being overlooked.
Jeremy Pate: One of the conditions for this project is for the developer to work with both the
landscape administrator and the sidewalk coordinator in tandem when this development occurs
so that both goals are achieved simintaniously. The tree canopy and bufferremains as well as
• pedestrian paths and sidewalks where we can. The structures lookto be 40' to 45' away from
the streets so there is some room thereto include those improvements.
113 West Mountain 72701 (479) 521-'7700 (479) 575-8757 (Pux)
ac .'fiyatiteviltcorg
lion-//dncc acreccfavetteville nra•R1/A nnYtendprfflnrPrintPrienilh, acnYillatnZnnrra=AY a/9nrinno
Printer Friendly View
Page 1 of I
CitrCom¢il Meeting Mines
Martb 21.2006
Pc la of 15
Tim Cooper stated the PZD is flexible, he mentioned where the walkway would be.
Mayor Coady: We will leave this on the Second Reading and discuss it at the next City Council
meeting.
Alderman Cook: Yes, we need to give the neighborhood time to digest this new information.
This ordinance was left on the Second Reading.
Amend 5763.14; Wireless Communication Facilities: Anordinance to amend §163.14
Wireless Communication Facilities of the Unified Development Code. This ordinance was left
on the First Reading at the 1Warch 7, 2006 City Council meeting
Alderman Reynolds moved to suspend the rules and go to the second reading. Alderman
Ferrell seconded the motion. Upon rollcall the motion passed 7-0. Alderman Marr was
absent.
City Attorney hit Williams read the ordinance.
Kit Williams: I would ask that this be left on this reading. I. have been in contact with some
representatives of the cell phone industry, they aretrying to organize a meeting with various
representatives from the cell tower industry as well as the cell phone industry. There is some
input they want to have on particular warding,
Justin Eichmann, representing Smith 2 Way: We have submitted a revised plan, We have
amended the design and submitted these drawings to the Planning stall. We arelooking at a
flush mount for these cell panels that is in our application. It will be something that will not stick
out from the profile of the tower.
This ordinance was lefton. the Second Reading.
NEW BUSINESS:
T -C Excavating, Inc — Sanitan' Sewer Main Replacement: A resolution approving -a
construction contract with T -G Excavating, .Inc. in the amount of 52,223,022,00 for.. sanitary
sewer main replacement and rehabilitation city-wide; and approving a 5% project contingency in
the amount of$l 111,151.00.
Alderman Cook: This has been through the Water and Sewer Committee and we discussed
them and approved it unanimously.
Alderman Jordan moved to approve the resolution. Alderman Ferrell secondedthe
motion. Upon roll call the resolution passed 7-0. Alderman. Marr was absent.
Resolution Na. 56-06 as Recorded in the Office of the City Clerk.
I t3 West Mountain 72701 (479) 521.?700 (479) 575-8257 (Fax)
acceufaycacvillc.org
httn:I/doe..q accessfhvettevllle orr'R I /AnnXtenfler/Iinc,PrintFtienclly ACny7IlAtnS/111rr a=AX d/7ni7nn4
Abshier Heights R-PZD 06-1883
2006 Site Access Study
irtenRiirr
SITE ACCE STUDY - ABSHIER HEIGHT
The site will have access from four different entry points. The first entry point is on
Abshier, the second is from Hillcrest and the third and fourth entry points are from the
Evelyn Hills Shopping Center.
U.S. 71B is west of the development and serves as a major north/south arterial in the state
highway system carrying approximately 31,000 Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT).
EXISTING PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC
24 Hour traffic counts were taken on College Avenue, Abshier, Hillcrest and North Street.
Turning movement counts were conducted at Abshier & College, Abshier & Hillcrest,
Hillcrest & Evenlyn Hill South Driveway and Hillcrest & North. Table I shows a
summary of the 24 hour traffic counts and Figure 2 shows the turning movements for the
PM peak hour at each intersection.
TABLE 1
QI IMMARV OF 9d COUNT VOLUMES
Location
College Ave.
Abshier
Hillcrest
North St.
Description
At Abshier
Bwtn. College/Hillcrest
N. of Abshier
S. of Abshier
At Hillcrest
Time
NB
SB
EB
WB
NB
SB
NB
SB
EB
WB
1100
863
844
8
6
15
12
31
16
108
191
1200
1120
997
4
6
18
19
17
19
162
209
1300
1193
1164
10
6
18
28
23
32
163
201
1400
1039
1105
7
7
17
19
18
33
185
171
1500
1045
1068
11
5
27
30
27
35
193
190
1600
1193
1138
23
16
30
25
38
42
226
231
1700
1183
1246
28
2
28
38
21
58
314
216
1800
1216
1365
31
19
23
35
26
57
337
237
1900
849
985
7
1
23
41
23
49
254
232
2000
629
687
5
0
8
16
8
22
155
132
2100
591
633
3
6
7
16
11
19
129
162
2200
321
432
0
0
6
7
8
7
87
118
2300
203
278
1
0
2
2
2
3
58
64
2400
158
165
2
0
0
1
0
2
34
30
100
92
67
0
0
1
2
0
2
21
5
200
79
50
0
0
0
0
0
0
17
12
300
53
44
0
0
0
0
0
0
13
12
400
40
43
1
1
0
1
0
2
10
5
500
37
42
0
1
2
1
4
1
13
17
600
112
124
0
6
8
1
10
0
9
39
700
255
298
7
20
9
5
20
6
50
115
800
729
890
11
27
18
7
34
18
150
342
900
774
780
12
19
17
9
31
16
140
270
1000
738
692
4
7
24
13
32
14
115
209
24 Hour Totals
14512
15137
175
155
301
328
384
453
2943
3410
3/17/2006 - 2 — Q
T:Vob\10071"/.[12 Eegin Abshicr HehMs42epohVepon 03 20-06.doc uBu Bess
1' SITE( ,CESS STUDY - ABSHIER HE' )ITS
I
Ii
3/17/2006 -3-
I
T:Uob\I00]f]A2E-&Ubshi Height$\Repartheport03-20-06,&c Cariet=Burgess
SITE 'CCESS STUDY - ABSHIER H. 3HTS
_I
. I
1
4
EXISTING PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC WITH DEVELOPED SITE
3/17/2006 - 6 -
T:Uob\10W V.H2 EoginAbshiec Heigh[s�Reportrt epon 03-20-06.doc
Carter-
11.1
SITE I iCESS STUDY - ABSHIER HE }ITS
1
The combination of existing traffic with the proposed traffic from the development is
shown in Figure 4. The results of the intersection analysis from HCS are summarized in
Table 5.
TABLE 5
Existing with Proposed Level of Service
PM Peak Hour
HCS
Abshier & Hillcrest
Abshier & College
S. Drive & Hillcrest
North & Hillcrest
Movement
EBL & R
NBL
SBL
WBL & R
NBL
EBL & R
EBL
SBL & R
Lane LOS
A
A
B
D
A
A
A
B
Control Delay
8.9
7.3
11.3
31.3
7.3
8.5
7.8
13.8
Approach LOS
A
D
A
B
The impacts of the development on the intersections of Abshier & Hillcrest, Abshier &
College, South Drive & Hillcrest and North & Hillcrest are negligible. More traffic will
use the intersections; however the overall traffic volumes and the development traffic
volumes are small enough to keep the delays low and allow the intersection to operate at a
LOS of A.
—*-SITE TOPOGRAPHY REGARDING ACCESS
The topography of the site slopes from
Abshier and Hillcrest down to the
Evelyn Hills Shopping Center.
Existing Slopes. Hillcrest slopes up from
north to south with an average grade of
5% from the north end to Woodcrest and
10.8% from Woodcrest to Abshier.
Abshier slopes up from US 71B to
Hillcrest with an average slope of 5.2%.
Proposed Drives and Improvements.
The access drives into the Evelyn Hills
Shopping Center having maximum
slopes of 14.85% on the southern drive
and 13.20% on the northern drive.
The north drive within the
development has a maximum proposed
slope of 5.38% and the south drive
within the development has a
maximum proposed slope of 5.43%.
3/17/2006 _ 7 _
T:Vob00717.H2 EnginV bshier Heights Reporttreport 03-20-06.doc
CarternBurgess
SITE 1 7CESS STUDY - ABSHIER HE 'HTS
at
0
O
Z
U
I
I
u
a)
O1
RECOMMENDATIONS
3/17/2006
T:Vob\I00717O2 Evgin\Abshler Hebh[s\Repoa\repoa 03-20-06.dac
24
23
1344 N
<23
HILLCREST
7
Ij
µ
[O M
1323
Carter=BUrgess
I
SITE rCESS STUDY - ABSHIER HE ➢HTS
- ).¢gnwan& S c t• -
Site access during inclement weather should be accomplished using the interior drives of
the development and Abshier Drive if trips have to be made. The proposed grading within
the site will allow a safer route for accessing the existing residences on Hillcrest north of
Abshier than before the development.
No improvements are recommended along Abshier, Hillcrest or at the intersections of
Abshier & Hillcrest, Abshier & College, Hillcrest & South Drive and Hillcrest & North for
traffic operations. The traffic generated by the development has insignificant impacts to
the existing roadways and intersections. However, both streets are substandard according
to the City of Fayetteville's Traffic and Transportation Study with a narrow cross section
and open ditches. Therefore, it is recommended the development improve Abshier and
Hillcrest along the street frontage of the property for the north half and west half
respectively of the existing streets.
3/17/2006 _9 _
T:Vob\I00]IZH2 EnginlAbshier Heighcsl eporttreport 03-20-06.doc
cOf1waBurge"
Abshier Heights R-PZD 06-1883
Exhibits & Maps
Y V V V Y r v
L
[XT. ER MANHOLE �'- -t
40' TO BE ADJUSTED • — _ _ _ _ _ _
m R/W 0 ASPHALT CRAG YELLOW SOLID StRIPIN I — I — - - _ 1 — "
I _ /
o-0 6
NOTE:
ALL PAVEMENT MARKING TO BE
THERMOPLASTIC MATERIAL.
TURN ARROW MARKING DETAIL
NOT TO SCALE
NOTES:
I. ALL STRIPING TO BE 4 0110111.
2. SPACING BETWEEN ADJACENT STRIPING TO BE 4'3. .
P STRIPING
VEMT0 BE rn LENGTH 141111 3D' V
MARKINGS TO BE THERMOPLASTIC
4. ALLPAVEMENTMATERIAL.
NOTE:
ALL PAVEMENT MARKINGS TO BE
THERMOPLASTIC MATERIAL.
ONLY" MARKING DETAIL
NOT TO SCALE
ry
GRAPHIC SCALE
eo
Teo
Pwozm
:"uS`lui
IN FEET)
Hera Exonxc
1L
E Enula
E*BIME0. CWFEE
i'MIx.tWPwrED MILLEgE
TYPICAL SECTION
U' 6'
ASPHALT
NOT TO S'NINIRS
• ABSHIER DRIVE
STREET IMPROVEMENTS
Suite ,
FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS 72703
PHONE: (479) 582-4234
I J N I I I\
I
AEDGEENT OF r
PAVEMENT 'V' `\
- -
1\
s
_ �;
cue � I
::j
_ _ _� NILC RfSTI gVfNUE \ a
!i A 1 1.{y. '�1 \ _ q `v A v vA 1 ��Y v v v♦ v` v A\ `v Cfl'\N\'\'I
i .:J,Y9'
I i I ,LrEXT. EDGE or ;S I II
PAVEMENT W i 1
GRAPHIC SCALE
-1 HILLCREST AVENUE
STREET IMPROVEMENTS
l Inch = 40 ft.
\229ueskc by Ykt cal 3X03
(5/18/2009 City Clerk Fwµletterao editor
_ Page i_
From: Tony <awap63@yahoo.com>
To: <city_clerk@ci.fayetteville.ar.us>
Date: 5/18/2009 12:03 PM
Subject: Fw: letter to editor
Hello,
I know its too late to put in the Councilmen's packets for tommorrow's meeting, but could you please
forward a copy of my letter to the editor to each councilperson's email? I cannot let this newspaper article
go unchallenged and at least the council can see my article in case it isnt published in time. Thank you
very much!
Tony Wappel
236-2548
--- On Mon, 5/18/09, Tony <awap63@yahoo.com> wrote:
> From: Tony <awap63@yahoo.com>
> Subject: letter to editor
> To: scotts@nwarktimes.com
> Date: Monday, May 18, 2009, 11:16 AM
> To the Editor,
> Yesterday's article about the proposed re -zone of South
> & College was completely biased in favor of the
> developer and did not include any interviews of the
> neighbors. The next time the Times does a story on a
> proposed re -zone, please interview not only the developer
> but also the neighbors!!
> I wish to clarify the position of many of my neighbors in
> the Walker Park Neighborhood. According to yesterday's
> article, we are opposed to diversity and renters. One, we
> are not opposed to diversity; there are numerous sections of
> the Walker Park Neighborhood planned for multi -family
> housing; 15th Street, Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard, and
> some areas near Jefferson School, to name a few pockets. The
> participants of the Walker Park Planning Charettes and the
> Fayetteville City Council previously agreed to these area.
> Two, we are not against renters. There are dozens of renters
> in our neighborhood, most of whom signed our petition to
> keep the neighborhood zoned Neighborhood Conservation. Many
> renters were former apartment complex occupants who often
> commented you cannnot raise a family in an apartment and
> that they were happy to be able to rent and/or purchase an
> affordable HOUSE in Fayetteville. So please consider the
> families needing affordable
> housing before supporting yet more apartments in
> Fayetteville.
> Thank you.
> Tony Wappel
> 11 East South Street
> Fayetteville, AR