Grid intentions : Proposal would discourage use of cul-de-sacs , limit curb cuts
Posted on Thursday, July 17, 2008
Fayetteville planners want to see fewer cul-de-sacs used in city neighborhoods.
Planning staff is proposing an ordinance that would discourage developers from building dead-end residential streets.
Making a pitch to the Fayetteville City Council on Tuesday, Long Range Planner Leif Olson said cul-desacs have fallen out of favor with urban planners because they hinder connectivity among city streets.
Olson provided the example of several subdivisions built along Old Wire Road in the 1990 s, none of which connect to each other.
"I would challenge anybody to send their elementary school child on a walk to get to school in this location," he said. "The development pattern is very disconnected and very auto-oriented.
"If you're too young to drive, too old to drive or can't drive, you're better off staying at home... because you're not going anywhere."
Olson pointed out the ben- efits of having a connected street network. Traffic is more efficiently dispersed in a neighborhood, he said. When there is only one way out and one way in a subdivision, all of the traffic is dumped onto one street, he said.
It's also beneficial for emergency services to have multiple points of entry into a neighborhood, he said. The same applies to solid waste trucks, school buses and delivery services, he said.
The benefit to the community is that it creates walkable neighborhoods, which promote active lifestyles and reduce automobile dependency, Olson said. Connected street patterns also encourage a mixture of housing types, sizes and densities, he said.
Encouraging these development patterns accomplishes three of the goals of City Plan 2025, he said, by discouraging urban sprawl, making the traditional town form the standard and growing a livable transportation network. "That's what it's all about," he said. "You want to enable people to take care of some of their daily needs without getting into their car. That's what helps create a sustainable and great community."
Limiting cuts illegal ? While city planners say limiting the number of curb cuts will make for a safer street, City Attorney Kit Williams said it may be unconstitutional. Olson said the second part of the proposed ordinance deals with access management, specifically the distance between curb cuts on a street and the distance between a curb cut and an intersection. The proposed ordinance would limit the number of curb cuts allowed for new development. Under the new guidelines, a curb cut would be allowed for every 500 feet on an arterial road and must be located a minimum of 250 feet from the center of an intersection or driveway.
The ordinance aims to accomplish one of the goals outlined in City Plan 2025, which is to create a safer environment for the transportation network and ensure access to future development is planned in the safest and most effective manner.
According to Olson, limiting the number of curb cuts would reduce the number of conflicts along the road, or points where vehicles are turning left out of a driveway or parking lot.
Williams said he thinks certain parts of the ordinance may be illegal, unconstitutional and in violation of the rights of property owners who are entitled to an access easement.
"This has clearly been stated by the Arkansas Supreme Court," he said. "Even the council for the Arkansas highway department has acknowledged this."
By denying a property owner a curb cut, the city would basically be condemning the access easement that the property owner is entitled to, Williams said.
"Ultimately it's the City Council's responsibility as good stewards of the taxpayers' money not to put yourself in a position where we might be liable for inversely condemning property because we have denied a curb cut," he said.
Olson said staff does not agree with Williams' opinion.
"If you look at Rogers and Bentonville, they have ordinances that mandate a 250-foot separation," he said. "This is being done in other parts of the state."
The ordinance was left on first reading at the council meeting Tuesday. Planning staff, with Williams, will review the legal issues associated with the ordinance before the proposal is heard again in August.
FEEDBACK:
Something to say about this topic? Submit a Letter to the Editor online
