Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1972-11-01 Minutes0 11 0 a 43 145 MINUTES OF A PLAT REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING The Fayetteville Plat Review Committee met at 3:30 PM, Wednesday, November 1, 1972, in the Director's Room, City Administration Bldg., Fayetteville, Arkansas. Present: Clay -Lon Powell, Charles McWhorter, Paul Mattke, Bobbie Jones. Utility Representatives: Clyde Terry Developers and/or Engineers: Frank Vineyard The matter to be reviewed was a proposed large scale devel ' opment plan TOM COMLEY submitted by Tom C. Comley for Garland Apartments on North Garland Ave. GARLAND AVE. Frank Vineyard was present to represent the plan. Comments and require- APARTMENTS ments were as follows: L.S.DeveloDment le Clayton Powelle Mr* Powell stated that this plan, * as well as some others submitted in the past had several omi6sibris-6, There was no vicinity map on the plan, and the existing easements and streets were not indicated as called for, He felt they should be postponed unless all the information was submitted which was requested* He stated that this area is already a mess from previous developments because of Melmar Drive and because of garbage retainers sitting out in the streets, The parking lots constructed along the 20 ft. utility easement are not maintained by anyone, The entire area has had an excess- ive -amount Of surface water due to poor planning and drainage fa6ilitieszalready. For this development itself, in order to comply with the major street plan, we need a minimum of 5 ft* along Hwy. 112 or Garland Avenue for widening. He stated that he would actually like to have 10 ft. in order to have a true line dawn the East R.O.W. The South 20 ft. of this property is a dedicated 20 ft. easement on the Evans farm plat. This is already being used as a driveway with open parking spaces on both sides as indicated on the submitted plat, To accommodate a drive- way or street to serve this apartment complex, and also provide adequate room for garbage receptacles, this 20 ft. easement needs to be extended an additional 30A. North to make a 50 ft. street R.O,W. and a street developed to serve this complex which would tie into the existing Poplar Street. This would also be compatible with our major street plan, The notation says drainage will be to the East, or toward loeverett Street, Leverett St. is already flooded at this point; therefore, this 20 ft. easement to the North should be used to drain this entire area which is a natural drainage point and also goes under Leverett St. through a box culvert and continues on to Skull Creek. These existing ease- ments cannot be used as setbacks, green areas, or for parking or construction. There is no way we could permit this 20 ft. easement to continue to be used as a driveway to the parking lots for the apartment complex. They just aren't being maintained by the development owners. No other comments until Mr. Powell receives engineering plans and profiles to cover street construc- tion drainage, 11-1-72 � 2 - I q(a Mr. Powell gave the following additional comment: The parking lot along the North and East perimie'ter of this complex should be main- tained as priiratepropertZ� and no dedication except to leave an opening for these existing easements across the property. 2. Charles McWhorter: Mr. McWhorter asked how many stories there would be, would there be any fenceso and will there be any problems crossilg the curb or anything like that? Mr. Vineyard said there would be 2J stories, the only fence would be along the North and East property line. The buildings would be brick veneer construction with fire walls splitting the building in half. Mr. McWhorter said no problems as long as the buildings are 3 stories and under. 3. Clyde Terry: Trans -Video will either follow the telephone company or the power company. 40 David Tucker: David Tucker was not present, but his comments were given as follows: Need a 15 ft. easement on the South and West side of property. There is a cable on the South side put in on the assumed property line, pinpointed by the manager of the Ken -Claire Apartments toward the South, He would like a 15 ft. easement to cover the cable. From the West side, we have a future cable we want to put down through there. It would also serve one of his buildings�,on the far Northwest sides 11 5. Paul Mattke: There is water available on Hwy. 112 on the East side - an 8 inc. water main. You are in good shape on water. There is a sewer line on Hwy. 112 also. It appears to go to approximately the Southwest corner of the developments Recommend developers/engineer5 field check the location, because the water and sewer department have not physically found this sewer line. Also, check to see that you have enough grade to get this development into it, For every 100 ft,,you run, you are going to have to fall 1 ft* 6. Jack Whitting: Jack Whitting was not present2 but his comments were given as follows: He really had no problems, as he had worked all this out with the contractor earlier that day, 7* Larry Wood: Larry Wood was not present, but his comments were submitted as follows: The only thing that concerns him is what happens to that "Poplar Drive", the 20 ft. reservation being actually used at this time as access from Loeverbtt to Garland, If that is going to be encouraged, than we need to make this a safe place to drive. If it is going to be discouraged, then we should do something to funnel the traffic to the road (Melmar Drive), where it should be going. At the present time, Melmar serves almost totally as an internal route into the apartment complex. Most people take a straight shot on this 20 ft. reser- vation. Garland Avenue is a major street on the major street plan. We need a 40 ft. R.O.W. from the center of the street. I 4� 11-1-72 . 3 — So Bobbie Jones: The present sign regulations limit the sign to a 10 sq. ft. sign on the wall of the building or on a masonary wall; you show a 4 fte by 8 ft. sign. (The sign regulations are proposed for change. If they should change, then the sign should meet the new regulations when they are adopted.) If 30 ft. is to be dedicated, the South setback from the street R.O.W. will have to be over 25 ft, What is to be the height of the build- ing: Mr. Vineyard said there would be 23 ft. from the first floor level, or 19 ft. from the outside grade level. Property is zoned R-2. and the number of units on it are fine, The North, East and West setbacks are fine. Because the parking lots are closer than 20 ft. to adjoining properties, parking area must be screened with a view -obscuring fence or hedge. The parking on the East should not encroach on the 20 ft. reservation. But dedication for widening of the 20 ft. reservation on the South side would not only affect the setbacks of the building, but would also eliminate the parking spaces shown on the South side. The complex would then be short of parking spaces* One and one- half parking spaces must be furnished for each dwelling.unit, Although Luther Tharp, the Sanitation Supt. indicated he had no problems on this plat, it appears to me that there would be problems serving lodals with the location shown on the plat. Check the specific location for the lodals with Mr. Tharp before proceeding, The meeting was adjourned at 4:35, PoMe t 10;