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;