The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2016-05-09 - Agendas - Final CITY OF % I-1 ! LY il 4 AGENDA U. TayARKANSAS Final Agenda Planning Commission Meeting May 9, 2016 5:30 PM 113 W. Mountain, Room 219 Members: Kyle Cook (Chair), Ron Autry (Vice Chair), Matthew Hoffman (Secretary), Tracy Hoskins, Janet Selby, Ryan Noble, Tom Brown, Leslie Belden, and Allison Thurmond Quinlan. City Staff: Andrew Garner, City Planning Director Call to Order Roll Call Agenda Session Presentations (May 5, 2016 Immediately Following Agenda Session) ■ Transportation Master Plan Work Session for Planning Commissioners Consent 1. Approval of the minutes from the April 25, 2016 meeting. Old Business 2. VAR 16-5423: Variance (SPRINGFIELD DR. & ALBERTA ST./COVES PH. II, 555): Submitted by RAUSCH COLEMAN HOMES, INC. for properties located in the COVES PHASE II SUBDIVISON. The properties are zoned RSF-8, RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY, 8 UNITS PER ACRE and contain approximately 10.22 acres. The request is for a variance of the single family infill design standards. Planner: Jonathan Curth 3. VAR 16-5427: Variance (521 N. COLLEGE AVE./TWIN ARCHES APTS., 445): Submitted by JORGENSEN & ASSOCIATES, INC. for properties located at 521 N. COLLEGE AVE. The properties are zoned C-2, THOROUGHFARE COMMERCIAL, and DG, DOWNTOWN GENERAL and contain approximately 0.54 acres. The request is for a variance to building design standards and compact parking requirements. Planner: Quin Thompson 4. RZN 16-5366: Rezone (NORTHEAST CORNER OF GREGG AVE. &VAN ASCHE DR./LOTS 20 & 21-CMN BUSINESS PARK, 172): Submitted by McCLELLAND ENGINEERS, INC. for properties at the NE CORNER OF GREGG AVE. & VAN ASCHE DR. The properties are zoned P-1, INSTITUTIONAL and contain approximately 19.34 acres. The request is to rezone the properties to C-1, NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL. Planner: Quin Thompson THE APPLICANT REQUESTS THE ITEM BE TABLED FOR TWO WEEKS. New Business Mailing Address: 113 W. Mountain Street www.fayetteville-ar.gov Fayetteville, AR 72701 5. VAC 16-5404: Vacation (1649 W. FARMINGTON ST./STEVENS, 560): Submitted by ANGELA STEVENS for property located at 1649 W. FARMINGTON ST. The property is zoned 1-1, HEAVY COMMERCIAL AND LIGHT INDUSTRIAL and contains approximately 0.23 acres. The request is to vacate portions of an access easement. Planner: Quin Thompson 6.ADM 16-5420: Administrative(DELAYED OFFSITE IMPROVEMENT ESCROW REFUNDS): Submitted by CITY STAFF. The request is for a refund to the current property owners for projects where the developer contributed funds for a project that did not occur within the 5 year timeframe. Planner: Jonathan Curth 7. VAR 16-5431: Variance (3421 N. GULLEY RD./TURNER, 219): Submitted by JORGENSEN & ASSOCIATES, INC. for property located at 3421 N. GULLEY RD. The property is in the FAYETTEVILLE PLANNING AREA and contains approximately 7.54 acres. The request is for a variance to the street frontage requirements on Chassy Rd. in relation to LSP 16-5405. Planner: Jonathan Curth 8. ADM 16-5429: Administrative Item (NE CORNER OF E. MORNINGSIDE DR. & E. PUMP STATION RD./PRISM EDUCATION CENTER, 603): Submitted by EB LANDWORKS, INC. for property located at the NE CORNER OF E. MORNINGSIDE DR. & E. PUMP STATION RD. The property is zoned 1-1, HEAVY COMMERCIAL& LIGHT INDUSTRIAL, and contains approximately 10.07 acres. The request is to reduce the required street improvements of a previously approved large scale development for the Prism Education Center (LSD 15-5213). Planner: Andrew Garner 9. RZN 16-5400: Rezone (SOUTHEAST CORNER OF PERSIMMON & BROYLES AVE./CROSS KEYS SOUTH SD, 477): Submitted by JORGENSEN & ASSOCIATES, INC. for properties located at the SOUTHEAST CORNER OF PERSIMMON & BROYLES AVE. The property is zoned R-A, RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL and NC, NEIGHBORHOD CONSERVATION and contains approximately 1.43 acres. The request is to rezone the property to NC and R-A. Planner: Harry Davis 10. ADM 16-5430: Administrative Item (UDC CHAPTER 164.22 COTTAGE HOUSING AMENDMENTS): Submitted by ALDERMAN MATTHEW PETTY AND THE CITY ATTORNEY for an ordinance to amend UDC Chapter 164.22 to change multiple code requirements for cottage housing developments. City Attorney: Kit Williams Alderman: Matthew PettV The following items have been approved administratively by staff: ■ LSP 16-5401: Lot Split (2571 S. CITY LAKE RD./REYNOLDS, 641): Submitted by JORGENSEN &ASSOCIATES, INC. for property located at 2571 S. CITY LAKE RD. The property is zoned RSF-4, RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY, 4 UNITS PER ACRE and contains approximately 14.97 acres. The request is to split the parcel into 2 lots containing approximately 11.95 and 3.02 acres. Planner: Jonathan Curth ■ LSP 16-5365: Lot Split (NORTH OF 211 N. BLOCK AVE./COATES, 484): Submitted by BLEW & ASSOCIATES, INC. for property located NORTH OF 211 N. BLOCK AVE. The property is zoned MSC, MAIN STREET CENTER and contains approximately 0.38 acres. The request is to split the parcel into 2 lots containing approximately 0.19 acres each. Planner: Andrew Garner 2 ■ FPL 16-5390: Final Plat (100 BLOCK VAN ASCHE DR./TWIN CREEKS VILLAGE, LOT 19-A, 172): Submitted by McCLELLAND & ASSOCIATES, INC. for properties located in the 100 BLOCK OF VAN ASCHE DR. The property is zoned C-1, NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL and contains approximately 9.15 acres. The request is for final plat approval of a commercial subdivision with 8 lots. Planner: Quin Thompson Announcements Adjourn NOTICE TO MEMBERS OF THE AUDIENCE: All interested parties may appear and be heard at the public hearings. If you wish to address the Planning Commission on an agenda item please queue behind the podium when the Chair asks for public comment. Once the Chair recognizes you, go to the podium and give your name and address.Address your comments to the Chair, who is the presiding officer. The Chair will direct your comments to the appropriate appointed official, staff, or others for response. Please keep your comments brief, to the point, and relevant to the agenda item being considered so that everyone has a chance to speak. Interpreters or TDD, Telecommunication Device for the Deaf, are available for all public hearings; 72 hour notice is required. For further information or to request an interpreter, please call 575-8330. As a courtesy please turn off all cell phones and pagers. A copy of the Planning Commission agenda and other pertinent data are open and available for inspection in the office of City Planning (575-8267), 125 West Mountain Street, Fayetteville, Arkansas. All interested parties are invited to review the petitions. 3 CITY OF • 41%! Ile MINUTES TayA — 1 RKANSAS Planning Commission April 25, 2016 5:30 PM City Administration Building in Fayetteville, AR, Room 219 Members: Kyle Cook (Chair), Ron Autry (Vice Chair), Matthew Hoffman (Secretary), Tracy Hoskins, Janet Selby, Ryan Noble, Tom Brown, Leslie Belden, and Allison Quinlan. City Staff: Andrew Garner— City Planning Director, Jonathan Curth — Senior Planner, Quin Thompson — Planner, Harry Davis — Planner, Cory Granderson — Staff Engineer, Blake Pennington —Asst. City Attorney, and Kit Williams —City Attorney 1. Call to Order: 5:30 PM, Kyle Cook In Attendance: Kyle Cook (Chair), Ron Autry (Vice Chair), Matthew Hoffman (Secretary), Tracy Hoskins, Janet Selby, Ryan Noble, Tom Brown, Leslie Belden, and Allison Quinlan. Absent: none Staff: Andrew Garner — City Planning Director, Jonathan Curth — Senior Planner, Quin Thompson — Planner, Harry Davis — Planner, Cory Granderson — Staff Engineer, and Kit Williams —City Attorney 2. Consent Agenda: Approval of the minutes from the April 11, 2016 meeting. ADM 16-5403: Administrative Item (1898 E. MISSION BLVD./WHISTLER WOODS SD, 370): Submitted by PHIL CRABTREE for property located at 1898 E. MISSION BLVD. The property is zoned RSF-4, RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY, 4 UNITS PER ACRE and contains approximately 8.62 acres. The request is for an extension of PPL 14-4865 Whistler Woods Subdivision. No Discussion Motion: Commissioner Selby made a motion to approve the consent agenda. Commissioner Autry seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion passed with a vote of 9-0-0, M Planning Commission Mailing Address: May 9,2016 113 W. Mountain Street www.fayettev lleA�,EMRyItem 1 Fayetteville, AR 72701 4-25-16 Minutes Page 1 of 13 3. Old Business: RZN 16-5366: Rezone (NE CORNER OF GREGG AVE. & VAN ASCHE DR./LOTS 20 & 21-CMN BUSINESS PARK, 172): Submitted by McCLELLAND ENGINEERS, INC. for properties at the NE CORNER OF GREGG AVE. & VAN ASCHE DR. The properties are zoned P-1, INSTITUTIONAL and contain approximately 19.34 acres. The request is to rezone the properties to C-1, NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL. THE APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION TABLE THIS ITEM FOR AN ADDITIONAL TWO WEEKS. Motion: Commissioner Belden made a motion to table RZN 16-5366. Commissioner Selby seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion passed with a vote of 9-0-0. Tabled for 2 weeks. Planning Commission Ma 9,2016 Agen a Item 1 4-25-16 Minutes Page 2 of 13 ADM 16-5393 Administrative Item (UDC CHAPTER 151.01 AMENDMENTS): Submitted by ALDERMAN MATTHEW PETTY AND THE CITY ATTORNEY for an ordinance to amend UDC Chapter 151.01 to allow certain architectural features within a building setback. Alderman Matthew Petty presented the request to the commission. No public comment was presented. Commissioner Belden asked about separation of eaves. Alderman Petty responded to the inquiry. Motion: Commissioner Hoffman made a motion to forward ADM 16-5393. Commissioner Quinlan seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion passed with a vote of 9-0-0. Planning Commission Mair 9,2016 Agenda Item 1 4-25-16 Minutes Page 3 of 13 4. New Business: VAR 16-5422: Variance Item (SW CORNER OF JOYCE & STEELE BLVDS./UPTOWN APTS., 173): Submitted by SPECIALIZED REAL ESTATE GROUP, INC. for property located at SW CORNER OF STEELE & JOYCE BLVDS. The property is zoned C-3, CENTRAL COMMERCIAL and contains approximately 14.01 acres. The request is for a variance to the greenspace requirements. John Scott, Urban Forester, gave the staff report. Michael Pope, applicant, was present for questions. No public comment was presented. Commissioner Hoffman discussed support for the request. Motion: Commissioner Autry made a motion to approve VAR 16-5422 with conditions as recommended by staff. Commissioner Brown seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion passed with a vote of 9-0-0. Planning Commission Ma 9,2016 Agen a Item 1 4-25-16 Minutes Page 4 of 13 VAR 16-5423: Variance Item (SPRINGFIELD DR. & ALBERTA ST./COVES PH. II, 555): Submitted by RAUSCH COLEMAN HOMES, INC. for properties located in the COVES PHASE II SUBDIVISON. The properties are zoned RSF-8, RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY, 8 UNITS PER ACRE and contain approximately 10.22 acres. The request is for a variance of single family infill design standards. Jonathan Curth, Planner, read the staff report. Steven Lear, Applicant: Rausch Coleman has developed 200 or so homes across City, and this is the last 45 lots. Applicant can develop with the ordinance, but it may cost a lot. Approximately 90 days, $8,000-10,000 a house, and 120 days lost. Matthew Hoffman, Commissioner: Does Rausch Coleman intend to work further in the City? Lear: Yes. Hoffman: Does it intend to comply in the future? Lear: Yes. Hoffman: Reminds the Commission of a past variance to this ordinance approved for another subdivision, but in that case it was to match existing homes. Does not feel a variance is appropriate considering this is an unbuilt subdivision. Lear: Feels they are almost built out, and delayed because of the economy. Allison Quinlan, Commissioner: Asks if there areany lots with side- or rear-facing homes? Amanda Licato, Applicant: Yes, one on a corner with a side-oriented garage. Quinlan: Are the rest all front? Licato: There is a mix in the first phase. Quinlan: Is it possible to change? Licato: The existing lots are too shallow, or otherwise challenged to develop. Ron Autry, Commissioner: Hates to burden a substantial developer in the community and hamper development. Wants to echo Hoffman's importance on all future development complying. Tracy Hoskins, Commissioner: How do the lots in Phase I compare? Lear: They are smaller. Hoskins: How do they compare to the shared driveway lots in Phase I? And are they still in the Rausch Coleman portfolio? Planning Commission Ma%9,2016 Agenda Item 1 4-25-16 Minutes Page 5 of 13 Lear: I don't know, but shared driveways resulted in a lot of disputes. And the Phase I lots are generally deeper. Hoskins: What has been the dispute? Lear: Owners are upset when residents and contractors are not respecting the shared driveway, limiting homeowner access. Can see where a shared driveway would fit, but it creates a challenge in changing easements and re-grading. Planned for this subdivision (marketing, time, etc.) in the midst of the ordinance being passed. Might have to pull plans from archive to make it comply with the ordinance. Hoskins: Points out where a shared drive can be accommodated on the site. Lear: States that the applicant would have to relocate utilities. Hoskins: Can you not build over an easement? Lear: I don't know, and would have to ask staff. Andrew Garner, Planning Director: A driveway can be over most easements with the exception of a drainage easement. Hoskins: Outlines past work that came through as smaller, and with fewer implications. Does not feel that the argument that it would complete the subdivision is valid, as the housing plans look quite different. Thinks it's possible to create a compromise of different drive styles. Does not feel that Rausch Coleman has tried to make any adjustments. Suggests tabling item, and incorporating different design ideas. Lear: Agrees, but feels that time constraints and the potential for lost money made seeking the variance more appealing. Hoskins: Do you prefer an up or down vote? Lear: Do the commissioners have any suggestions? Leslie Belden , Commissioner: The curb cuts on Alberta look like they are built for shared drives(?) Lear: Yes, they are shared. The applicant wants to finish this project and move forward to compliant projects. Belden: One of the plans has a garage 4'11" set back, right? Lear: Yes. Autry: Sounds like you want to move on. Suggests 2 week tabling. Lear: Is open to tabling. Quinlan: Can sympathize, but feels Rausch Coleman has the potential to comply based on adjacent developments. Suggests identifying lots that can be built in compliance. Planning Commission Mai 9,2016 Agenda Item 1 4-25-16 Minutes Page 6 of 13 Lear: Clarifies for applicant's benefit; Agrees that the applicant is going to have to redesign no matter what considering the subdivision layout. Hoffman: Agrees with Hoskins regarding an alley. Suggests building all left-hand or all right-hand drives. Garner: Staff is open to reviewing the option. Kyle Cook: Asks for motion. Motion: Commissioner Hoskins made a motion to table VAR 16-5423. Commissioner Autry seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion passed with a vote of 9-0-0. Tabled for 2 weeks. Planning Commission Mair 9,2016 Agenda Item 1 4-25-16 Minutes Page 7 of 13 VAR 16-5427: Variance Item (521 N. COLLEGE AVE./TWIN ARCHES APTS., 445): Submitted by JORGENSEN & ASSOCIATES, INC. for properties located at 521 N. COLLEGE AVE. The properties are zoned C-2, THOROUGHFARE COMMERCIAL, and DG, DOWNTOWN GENERAL and contain approximately 0.54 acres. The request is for a variance to building design standards and parking requirements. Quin Thompson, Planner, read the staff report. Evan Niehaus: doing something different with this project, including a sweeping stair to the street. We want to move on with a new project, keeping fayetteville funky. Compact spaces are a minimal variance, several spaces have been removed to preserve trees on the site. Side parking, providing a very wide entry for two units, more than twenty feet. Yumi Rudzinski: architect, a variance of the requirement for one entry. My goal as an architect, is to build to code. I understand that there is no hardship, but it is important to respect the nature of College Avenue. I am only thinking of the residents of the two front units, not thinking of you and I driving down the street. Provided a grand entry suitable for urban nature and scale of College ave. We want people to be able to sit there and enjoy College Ave and walk to grocery. Matthew Hoffman, Commissioner: I want to congratulate you on the project, very appropriate. Two blocks from some of the most desirable neighborhoods in Fayetteville. Millions of dollars are being spent on College Ave to create a walkable environment. I think a lot of great things are about to happen on College, and you are the first. Tracy Hoskins, Commissioner: Confused by the elevations, materials. Rudzinski: Redesigned and submitted last week, but it didn't get into the packet. Hoskins: No problem with parking deck. No problem with lack of front entrances. I do have a problem with the stair to 'nowhere'. It seems that a lot of design hasn't been resolved. Niehaus: The important part is that we aren't providing two separate unit entrances, but one large shared entry. Hoskins: It looks like a gated community without a gate. Not certain about the articulation requirement being met with the very small window. Hoffman: Nothing in the pedestrian scale that says 'entry'. Rudzinski: Rendering not illustrating the materials well. Hoffman: it is about scale of activity. The code is about creating spaces and places for people. Cook: Everyone seems okay with parking variance. Leslie Belden, Commissioner: I have an architecture degree, and appreciate your project. It blends commercial and residential very well. It's compatible with nearby Lacuna. I do walk this street, and think it could be a pleasant experience. Planning Commission Mal 9,2016 Agenda Item 1 4-25-16 Minutes Page 8 of 13 Ron Autry, Commissioner: Excited to see this project done. Tom Brown, Commissioner: Congratulate you on wonderful design. Nothing troubling about the 'compact' parking. Should be demarcated. Thompson: Marking is required, and paint on the pavement is typical. Brown: I think you have a great deal of detail in your mind, which has not been represented by the drawings. No problem with the variances for doorways, which could be contrary to your vision as an architect. No problem with Architectural design standards. Could you push the screen back so that the project 'appears' inviting from the street. Thurmond-Quinlan, Commissioner: Could we not provide wheelstops to give the appearance of more space. Andrew Garner, Planning Director: Wheel stops are required by code to prevent parking in grass. Motion #1: Commissioner Quinlan made a motion to approve VAR 16-5427 for compact spaces. Commissioner Brown seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion passed with a vote of 9-0-0. Brown: I can't see how the building relates to the public space, other than just the stairway. I don't see the elements that will make this project good for pedestrian. I need more information. Williams: The statute does not speak to landscaping in any way, but only to the building. Brown: It's difficult to assess without more information. Belden: We approved Variance one, Variance two is for front entry doors. Variance three is for architectural standards. Hoffman: Cannot support this projects in it's current form. Hoskins: Agree with Hoffman, need far more information. Developer does a great job on a lot of projects. I would love to be able to support this project. Cook: I think I agree with Hoffman and Hoskins, that in principal we don't have an issue about variances other than how the project meets the street. Hoffman: No, these elements are related. Entries on the street are important part of how the building meets the street. Motion #2: Planning Commission May 9,2016 Agenda Item 1 4-25-16 Minutes Page 9 of 13 Commissioner Belden made a motion to approve Variance 2 of VAR 16-5427 with conditions as recommended by staff. Commissioner Autry seconded the motion. No roll call. Motion #3: Commissioner Hoffman made a motion to table VAR 16-5427. Commissioner Hoskins seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion passed with a vote of 7-2-0. Tabled for 2 weeks. Planning Commission N"9,2016 Agenda Item 1 4-25-16 Minutes Page 10 of 13 CUP 16-5388: Conditional Use (EAST OF WASHINGTON AVE. BETWEEN 71H & 11T11 STREETS/WILLOW BEND SD, 563): Submitted by COMMUNITY BY DESIGN, INC. for properties located EAST OF WASHINGTON AVE. BETWEEN 7T" & 11T1 STREETS. The properties are zoned RSF-18, RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY, 18 UNITS PER ACRE, AND NC, NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION and contains approximately 9.12 acres. The request is for cottage lots in a single family zoned district. THE APPLICANT HAS REQUESTED THIS ITEM BE TABLED INDEFINITELY No staff report or public comment was presented. Motion: Commissioner Selby made a motion to table indefinitely CUP 16-5388. Commissioner Hoskins seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion passed with a vote of 8-0-1. Quinlan recused. Planning Commission AZI9,2016 a Item 1 4-25-16 Minutes Page 11 of 13 RZN 16-5385: Rezone (SOUTH OF PUMPKIN RIDGE DR./FALLING WATERS, 646): Submitted by JORGENSEN & ASSOCIATES, INC. for properties SOUTH OF PUMPKIN RIDGE RD. The properties are zoned R-A, RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL and contain approximately 35.31 acres. The request is to rezone the property to RSF-2, RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY, 2 UNITS PER ACRE, subject to a Bill of Assurance. Robert Rhodes: the RPZD was approved in three readings by unanimous vote in 2005. The owners have contributed to extension of water and sewer. Many neighbors spoke against traffic last year, traffic issues seemed to stem from connection to Pumpkin Ridge Road. Now the project is expanded and a construction access can be added to Dead Horse Mountain Road. The applicant is willing to change the Bill of Assurance to ensure this. The entire golf course is in the RSF-4 zoning district. The Plaza development has been approved further east, so this project is not sprawl, but actually infill. It is within your authority to pass this forward with a thumbs up to City Council. Public Comment: Wanda Altman: Neighbor, is concerned about environmental impact on the edge of Fayetteville. This cannot in any way be considered 'infill' development by any understanding I have of the term. This has been denied by the city because it is simply not compatible with the area or with City Plan 2030. 1 believe to think of it as a shared vision of what we would like our City to be; it is the future of the entire City that is at risk. This was a huge issue just last year. A cover letter from the engineer says the 'plan' is that Cherry Ridge Road would not be used for construction is not a legally binding document. Jay Ray, neighbor, 6 floods since 2005, the new bridge flooded this years. We have only one access when it floods, the unimproved Roberts Road. Imagine how much the houses and new road will impact flooding. Gregory Carter, neighbor, concerned about traffic getting onto the highway. This will not be improved. Larry Altman, we are beating a dead-horse mountain.We discussed this at length last year. Same issues, same discussing. Although it is a small rezone, I believe this an attempt at 'slow-rolling' development in this area. I believe it is the intention of the owner to develop the entire property over time. Commission: Cook: to Kit: please comment on the Bill of Assurance. A cover letter is not legally binding. Drainage is not to be considered during a land-use discussion. Flooding is an issue for the area, but not one for a re-zone. Hoffman: I get a lot of calls about development, but none speak to the goals of City Plan 2030 as well as Mrs Altman. I am thankful that we have these goals and cannot support the request. Thurmond-Quinlan: Project is counter to the goals of 2030 plan, is not economically responsible. Hoskins: Is the area in the HHOD. Planning Commission AM9,2016 a Item 1 4-25-16 Minutes Page 12 of 13 Garner: Yes Hoskins: The sprawl has already happened. A lot of money has been spent on the property. The land is within the City boundary. In order to get urban densities, we need rooftops. Construction traffic issue has been resolved. When the neighborhood connects to the north, it will give those neighbors a second way out. Brown: We need to support the 2030 plan. There is a logic to the plan. There is a transect from center to edge, where density is low. This should stay a low density residential area in order to limit erosion and disturbance. HHOD is in sensitive areas. Will not support the re- zone. Hoskins: The point of the HHOD was to encourage responsible development on hillsides. Mr. Brown's argument is not valid, it was never intended to restrict development. Brown: The HHOD is placed here to protect environmental assets. Autry: I did not support this request last year, for the same reasons I cannot support it this time. Hoskins: is the motion to forward with a recommendation to deny? Garner: No sir, an appeal is possible. The motion is to deny. Motion: Commissioner Hoffman made a motion to deny RZN 16-5385. Commissioner Quinlan seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion passed with a vote of 7-2-0. Commissioners Noble and Hoskins voted 'no'. 5. Reports: No reports 6. Announcements: 7. Adjournment Time: 7:16 PM 8. Submitted by: City Planning Division Planning Commission 115 9,2016 Agenda Item 1 4-25-16 Minutes Page 13 of 13 CITY OF • � l 4 PLANNING COMMISSION MEMO ARKANSAS TO: City of Fayetteville Planning Commission FROM: Andrew Garner, City Planning Director MEETING DATE: May 05, 2016 SUBJECT: VAC 16-5404: Vacation (1649 W. FARMINGTON ST./STEVENS, 560): Submitted by ANGELA STEVENS for property located at 1649 W. FARMINGTON ST. The property is zoned 1-1, HEAVY COMMERCIAL AND LIGHT INDUSTRIAL and contains approximately 0.23 acres. The request is to vacate portions of an access easement. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends forwarding VAC 16-5404 to the City Council. BACKGROUND: The subject property is located at the southeast corner of Martin Luther King Boulevard (MILK) and Beechwood Avenue and contains approximately 0.82 acres in the 1-1 zoning district. The property is developed with a metals powder coating company, which has been operating on the site for many years. Tractor trailers routinely deliver and pick up goods at the address. Loading and unloading is typically done with forklifts. In the year 2000, the City Council vacated the 30 feet of right-of-way (ROW) which was Old Farmington Street, at the request of the applicant, in order to eliminate a dangerous traffic condition on Farmington Street. The Transportation division found that the unimproved street was not needed and would not be improved by the City. The Planning Commission recommended and City Council approved the ROW vacation, finding that local traffic in this industrial area was unsafe. A condition of the vacation required that an access easement be retained for the Solid Waste and Recycling Division to serve the business. This access easement replaced the ROW and allows the general public full rights to cross this property. In recent years, multi-family development has occurred along Beechwood Avenue to the west and south of this property, adding several hundred beds and the attendant traffic, most of which travels north to MLK, creating significant traffic congestion during daylight hours. This has resulted in a number of vehicles, including cars and scooters, turning right on the former Farmington Street in order to access MLK. Staff visited the site on a weekday in April, 2016, and witnessed at least 7 vehicles within 10 minutes using the access to avoid the intersection at Beechwood and MLK. Surrounding land use and zoning is depicted on Table 1. Mailing Address: Planning Commission 113 W. Mountain Street www.fa etteville May 9,em 2 Fayetteville, AR 72701 -5404 S Item 2 Y 16-5404 Stevens Page 1 of 23 Table 1 Surrounding Land Use and Zoning Direction from Site Land Use Zoning North Drive-thru restaurants C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial South Frisco Railroad ROW 1-1, Heavy Commercial and Light Industrial East Under Development CS, Community Services West Equipment Rental 1-1, Heavy Commercial and Light Industrial/ CS, Community Services Proposal:The applicant proposes vacation of an access easement to improve a dangerous traffic condition on this industrial property. DISCUSSION: Vacation Approval: The applicant has submitted the required vacation forms to the City utility departments and applicable franchise utilities, with the following responses: Adjacent Landowner to the East Response Monroe Eaton, LLC Objects to the vacation Utility Response Cox Communications No objections with conditions AEP/SWEPCO No objections with conditions Source Gas No objections AT&T No objections Ozarks Electric No objections City of Fayetteville Response Water/Sewer No objections with conditions Transportation No objections Recycling and Solid Waste No objections Public Comment: An adjacent landowner to the east with rights to use this easement has stated that they do not agree with the request. No other public comment has been received. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends forwarding VAC 16-5404 with the following conditions: Conditions of Approval: 1. Any relocation or damage to utilities and associated new easement dedication shall be at the owner/developer's expense. Planning Commission May 9,2016 G:\ETC\Development Services Review\2016\Development Review\16-5404 VAC 1649 W.Farmington St. Agenda Item 2 (Stevens)560\03 Planning Commission\05-09-2016\Comments and Redlines 16-5404 Stevens Page 2 of 23 2. The access easement shall be replaced by General Utility Easement. Planning Commission Action: O Approved O Forwarded O Denied Meeting Date: May 05, 2016 Motion: Second: Vote: BUDGET/STAFF IMPACT: None. Attachments: ■ Request Letter ■ Petition to Vacate ■ Utility Approvals ■ Easement Vacation Exhibits ■ Ordinance # ■ One Mile Map ■ Close Up Map Planning Commission May 9,2016 G:\ETC\Development Services Review\2016\Development Review\16-5404 VAC 1649 W.Farmington St. Agenda Item 2 (Stevens)560\03 Planning Commission\05-09-2016\Comments and Redlines 16-5404 Stevens Page 3 of 23 \r FILED FOR RECORD ORDINANCE NO.4252 AN ORDINANCE APPROVING VA00-6.00 TOQPA05;XV 2 41 ABANDON A PORTION OF CITY RIGHT-OF-W 49 '1fM CO AR AT OLD FARMINGTON RD.,BETWEEN BEECHWgQI�A-VA S ' AND EASTERN AVE., SUBMITTED BY JOE AND ANGELA STEVENS. WHEREAS,the City Council has the authority under A.C.A. §14-54-104 to vacate public grounds or portions thereof which are not required for corporate purposes,and WHEREAS,the City Council has determined that the following described right-of-way is not required for corporate purposes. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE,ARKANSAS: Section 1. That the City of Fayetteville,Arkansas hereby vacates and abandons all of its rights together with the rights of the public generally,in and to the following described right-of- way: See Exhibit"A"attached hereto and made a part hereof. Section 2. That a copy of this Ordinance duly certified by the City Clerk shall be filed in the office of the Recorder of the County and recorded in the Deed Records of the County. Section 3. That the above is contingent upon receiving the following:Dedication of the current 30' right-of-way as a general utility and access easement and dedication of a 15' utility easernviowed adjacent and parallel to the north side of the existing 30'right-of-way. D APPROVED this--5!—day of Ju1v 2000. APPROVED: By //a* ` ed Hanna,Mayor ATTEST: By Heather Woodruff,CityCler Planning Commissi n May 9,20 6 Agenda Ite 2 16-5404 Stevens Page 4 of 23 VA 00-06.00 Page I ` FAYETTEVILLE PC Meeting of 12 June 00 THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE.ARKANSAS 113 W. Mountain St. Street Right of Way Vacation Fayetteville,AR 72701 .foe&Angela Stevens TU: Fayetteville Planning COInmisslon Members THRU: Tim Conklin, City Planner FROM: Ron Petrie, Staff Engineer DATE: June 8, 2000 (Revised June 12, 2000) Project: VA 00-06.40: Vacation (Stevens, pp 521)was submitted by Joe&Angela Stevens for property located at 1629 Old Farmington Road. The request is to vacate the 30' unimproved street right of way for Old Farmington Road located between Beechwood .Avenge and Eastern Street. The applicant has submitted the required notification forms to the utility companies and to the City. The results are as follows: Ozarks Electric - No service in area. Southwestern EIectric Power Company - No objections provided that a 20' Utility Easement and access is retained to "protect existing overhead facilities along both sides of th existing street." e Arkansas Western Gas - No objections provided that a 15' Utility Easement is retained "for Lots 1-4, Block 1, part of Sunset Addition parallel and adjacent to existing south property line. Also, retain a 15' Utility Easement for Lots 5 & 6, Block 1, part of Sunset Addition, center of easement being located where first line is laid." SW Bell - No objections provided that easement rights are retained for the existing buried cable in the right-of-way. COX Communications - No objections. City of Fayetteville: Water/Sewer - No objections provided that the vacated right-of-way is retained as an utility easement for the existing sewer line and future water line(s). t Street Department - No objections. Solid Waste - No objections provided that the vacated right-of-way is retained as an access easement for waste disposal vehicles, and is maintained in its current condition. (Originally the Solid Waste Division did not approve of this request, however, after meeting the applicant and Planning staff on-site the above mentioned condition satisfies all requirements of the Solid Waste Division.) The applicant has submitted the adjacent property owner notification forms as required. All adjacent property owners stated that they had no objection to the proposed vacation. i Planning Comm issi n May 9,20 6 Agenda l 2 16-5404 Stevens Page 5 of 23 . lrA 00-06.00 Page 2 Recommendation: Approval of street right,of way conditions: vacation subject to the following I. The existing 30' right-of-way shall be retained as a general utility easement. 2. A 2W (15') Utility Easement shat] be dedicated that is located adjacent and parallel to the north side of the 30' right-of-way. south:s' the 4. The existing 30' right-of-way shall be retained as an access easement and shall be maintained in its current condition in order to provide an appropriate route for solid waste disposal vehicles. The changes noted above were mode at the request of the petitioner and with the approval of SWEPCO- the utility which originally made the easement requests. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: _-Y-e Required —Approved —Denied Date: _A/_12/Q0 CITY COUNCIL ACTION: __y_e_Required F ,Approved Denied Date: / 1 Comments: The"CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL"listed in this report are accepted in total without exce t' entity requesting approval of this right-or-way vacation. p ton by the Name: Date: Planning Commiss n May 9,2 6 Agenda Ite 2 16-5404 Stevens Page 6 of 23 r -- 7 -5.7-1-44 6i1 000 _ 1765=07.575`-004 765`1.1.199-000765-11200-0[107.65=11203-00(77+65=11236=00D,7fi5-1 239-40b— lit 765-07573-000 765-11198-000765-11201-000755-11202-000 765-11237-000 765-07572-002 r,65-,11238-000 t - �- ! 765- .4579-000 f -- 75-14551-010 765-14842`-D0 10 765-14842-000 7615-14841-000 __ J 765-14849-01a� ;' ' �` J�, = 7fi5=1483fi-0001 765=14844-003 76-51-14843-00 00.14843- - 765"14844-001 765-14849-001AMR - �.. _ 765-14839-000 ' 765`1 -002," F 765-12168-000 — 'f I 765-14838-OM —. _ _ . . - _ _ ��+ �, ,.p r• WASH I �J n May 6 100 50 0 A��FOet 2 ® F4 Stevens age 7 of 23 ,� 765-11199-000 765-11200-000 765-1120 765-11239-000 03-000 755-1123fi-00fl icy 765-11198-000 765-11201-940 765-11202-000 765-11237-000 J 755-111.238-0(l0 765-14551-010 7'65-14842-0 1 Q -7165-14842-000 765-14841-000 Ilk .1 -Alk J 765-14844-003 5-14843-000 765-14844-001 WASH INOWOMM"J n May 9, 6 50 25 0 A5@nEFgD9km 2 ® 04 Stevens Page 8 of 23 r v � K -4 i A 1 Planning Commission May 9,2016 Agenda 0I Stevens .•- 9 of tJj Angela Stevens 429 E Sutton Street Fayetteville, AR 72701 4/8/16 City of Fayetteville Planning Commission and Fayetteville City Council Fayetteville, Arkansas Dear City of Fayetteville Planning Commission and Fayetteville City Council: In 2000 at the request of the Fayetteville Planning Commission we went through the process for the right-of-way to be vacated and to close the 1600 block of Farmington Street (it runs between Beechwood through Eastern) in Fayetteville. It was the determination of planning that this portion of the road did not meet city street standards and to bring it up to standard would be pointless now or in the future and they also wanted to increase the public safety on the property,there were real concerns that the nature of the business on this portion of street would have safety issues if the public used it. In time since this street vacation the area around our business has changed with growth. The traffic flow has increased on MLK. We now have up to 700 beds to the west of us and up to 700 beds to the south of us in student housing. The 1600 block of what was formally W. Farmington Street has become a cut through for mopeds and vehicles; we have students and general public travelling through the property to avoid traffic congestion at MIK and Beechwood. It is a very unsafe situation given the nature of our business on this site. Not only does it expose the people choosing to use it as a cut through to harm, it exposes our business,our customers, and our employees to risk when we are out working on fork lifts and when we have large truck deliveries taking place. Originally solid waste requested an access easement for trash pickup purposes (they no longer require this access),when the ordinance was written an access easement was platted so that solid waste could have access to the dumpster but the language made it a general access easement instead of a solid waste access.Now I am responsible for maintenance of what was formerly a city street but also have the liability of public use, I have no control of personal property that I pay taxes on. My request is for the City to vacate the general access easement, so I can responsibly control and use my property and insure the safety of my customers,my employees and the general public. I am not requesting vacating the utility easements, and I will always work with those various entities to provide the access they require to do their utilities work. �1 Sincerely, Angela Stevens Planning Commission May 9,2016 Agenda Item 2 16-5404 Stevens Page 10 of 23 Angela Stevens 429 E Sutton Street Fayetteville,AR 72701 4/$/16 Fayetteville City Planning Commission and Fayetteville City Council Fayetteville,Arkansas Dear Fayetteville City Planning Commission and Fayetteville City Council: We personally delivered the " Adjacent Property Owner Notification/Approval form"to Ryan Fowler of Monroe Eaton LLC on 3/30/16. 1 texted him on 4/6/16 asking if he would email or drop the form back to me. I followed up with 8 call leaving a message on 4/08/16. 1 have not received the form back from the adjacent property own r. Thank you, Angela Stevens Planning Commission May 9,2016 Agenda Item 2 16-5404 Stevens Page 11 of 23 SAMPLE PETITION* PETITION TO VACATE A(N)(alley, easement,right-of-way)LOCATED IN(lot, block, subdivision),CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE,ARKANSAS TO: The Fayetteville City Planning Commission and The Fayetteville City Council We,the undersigned,being all the owners of the real estate abutting the(alley, easement, right-of-way)hereinafter sought to be abandoned and vacated,lying in(lot, block,subdivision),City of Fayetteville,Arkansas,a municipal corporation,petition to vacate a(n)(alley, easement, right-of-way)which is described as follows: (Legal Description of area to be vacated) That the abutting real estate affected by said abandonment of the alley are(lot, block, subdivision of each adjoining lot to the area requested to be vacated) City of Fayetteville used by the public for a period of many years,and that the public interest and welfare would not be adversely affected by the abandonment of the portion of the above described(alley, easement, right-of-way). The petitioners pray that the City of Fayetteville,Arkansas,abandon and vacate the above described real estate, subject,however,to the existing utility easements and sewer easements as required,and that the above described real estate be used for their respective benefit and purpose as now approved by law. The petitioners further pray that the above described real estate be vested in the abutting property owners as provided by law. WHEREFORE,the undersigned petitioners respectfully pray that the governing body of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas,abandon and vacate the above described real estate,subject to said utility and sewer easements,and that title to said real estate sought to be abandoned be vested in the abutting property owners as provided by law,and as to that particular land the owners be free from the easements of the public for the use of said alley. Dattp this day of Arr, Z 1'i nt N e Sign us' Printed Name Signature * Note: This is a sample - each applicant is responsible for submitting a petition which accurately reflects their specific request. December 2014 Page 4 Planning Commission May 9,2016 Agenda Item 2 16-5404 Stevens Page 12 of 23 I .j P UTILITY APPROVAL FORM FOR RIGHT-OF-WAY,ALLEY,AND UTILITY EASEMENT VACATIONS DATE: 3/22/16 UTILITY COMPANY: AT&T APPLICANT NAME: Angela and Joel Stevens APPLICANT PHONE: 479-263-7065 REQUESTED VACATION(applicant must check all that apply): Access Easement Right-of-way for alley or streets and all utility easements located within the vacated right-of-way. Alley Street right-of-way I have been notified of the petition to vacate the following(alley, easement, right-of-way),dew--ribed as follows: General location/Address 1600 block in the area of the former W. Fa i-glon from Beechwaod to Fasters ❑ (ATTACH legal description and graphic representation of witatis being vwca k"LIRVEI) UTILITY COMPANY COMMENTS: E)( No objections to the vacation(s)described above,and no comments. No objections to the vacation(s)described above,provided following described easements are retained. (State the location,dimensions,and purpose below.) No objections provided the following conditions are met: sign Company Representative MGR OSP Ping& Engrg Design Planning Commission May 9,2016 Agenda Item 2 16-5404 Stevens Page 13 of 23 UTILITY APPROVAL FORM FOR RIGHT-OF-WAY,ALLEY,AND UTILITY EASEMENT VACATIONS DATE: 32246 1 UTILITY COMPANY: Coy, C),1'r1Yr "r>> Col-1 0 r) APPLICANT NAME: Angela and Joel Stevens APPLICANT PHONE: 479-263-7065 REQUESTED VACATION(applicant must check all that apply): X Access Easement _. Right-of-way for alley or streets and all utility easements located within the vacated right-of-way. Alley Street rigbt-of-way 1 have been notified of the petition to vacate the following(alley, easement, right-of-way),described as follows: C.enmi,amnion l Addrrss 1600 block in the area of the former W. Farmington from Beechwood to Eastern 0 (ATTACH legal description and graphic representation of what is being vacated-SUR VF.Y) UTILITY COMPANY COMMENTS: No objections to the vacation(s)described above,and no comments. No objections to the vacation(s)described above,provided following described casements are retained. (State the location,dimensions,and purpose below.) No objections provided the following conditions are met: 'e ft4r ri refe, df Gr ,. Aj ? .l_ SignTf Utility Company Representative Planning Commission May 9,2016 Agenda Item 2 16-5404 Stevens Page 14 of 23