HomeMy WebLinkAbout1974-10-10 Minutes•
•
MINUTES OF A PLAT REVIEW MEETING
A meeting of the Fayetteville Plat Review Committee was held at
9:15 A. M. Thursday, October 10, 1974, in the Directors Room,City Administration
Building, Fayetteville, Arkansas.
UTILITY REPRESENTATIVES PRESENT:
Clyde Terry, Randy Schneider, Kenneth Wagner,
Jack Whitting.
DEVELOPERS and/or ENGINEERS PRESENT: Tom Hodges, Col. R. L. Utley
CITY REPRESENTATIVES PRESENT:
Paul Mattke, Wally Brt, Clayton Powell,
David McWethy, Bobbie Jones.
The first item for discussion was the proposed Final Plat of
Sequoyah Woods Subdivision. Tom Hodges was present to discuss
the matter. Comments were as follows:
FINAL PLAT
of
Sequoyah Woods
1. Paul Mattke (City Engineer): They have a note on the plat that says structures
can be located over utilities in this power line easement. I don't think this
is a good idea. Water and sewer are both in there.They should contact Max Hall,
Engineering Consultant Services, Springdale, Arkansas on the sewer as he is the
only one who can reliably locate the lot corners and services. All our services
will be on the front. There is probably nothing on the West side at all. When
you get to lot 19 I have a 4 inch water line (36 inches deep) that comes up and
ends on the North property line which in the future will be extended to the
North enough to tie in to give us a loop feed to the subdivision (about 5 feet
behind the curb.) When you re -locate the gas line, if possible, locate it so
the water service can be extended through here without having to disturb you.
You are going to hit rock. I wish I could get the developer to extend this for
me.
2. Jack Whitting (Ozarks Electric): We have a buried 3-phase cable 30 feet
in on this easement that feeds this subdivision, this was on the original plan,
and we sure don't want any buildings over that.If there is more than one utility
in there they usually cover the water easement to begin with. We will need an
easement there on the East side because the cables are already in there. I will
send you a map of where the actual cable is buried. The street lighting is already
installed there and does not agree with the plat. I need a 10 foot easement to
get to the street lighting pole4etween Lots 15 and 16, between 104 and 105,
between 100 and 101, and between 56 and 57.
3. Clyde Terry (Warner Cable): If I am not mistaken, T. V. and telephone
service are also already in there and buried. T. V. Cable is in the same ditch
with Ozarks Electric. The cable is already buried and I don't really see any
problems other than this one easement which is going to be taken care of(up by
the highway.) We do have a piece of cable in there but we do not plan to use
it unless an emergency arises that we can't come in on this Northwest corner.
Other than that there is no problems.
4. Mr. Hodges: HQ.said"that the power company;.(SWEPCO) has, this 50'ft'--easement for
express purpose of tree trimming, and�that as long as they had room to trim
trees in there, there was no provision that the easement couldn't be built upon.
He said SIVEPCO had said they would be happy to write a letter to the developer's
lendor or title insurance company to this effect, and that if it were necessary
they could go through the process of reducing this easement but they preferred
f(08
Plat Review
October 10, 1974
not to do this because of the involved legal work. Mr. Hodges stated that
after talking to their abstract company and finding out that this was not a
problem to them, 'SO -they iid`not worry about it. He said he was not aware that
there was electric cable buried in this easement; that this easement is for
tree -trimming purposes only. The other utility easements had not been changed
to his knowledge. We thought we had a 25 feet there; about a month and a half
ago we found out that we had only 50 feet from our property line instead of
50 feet from the side of the road. (The original plat indicated that we had
a 25 foot easement. Obviously we cannot build houses over utility lines. I
will have to go back now and really find out where the lines are and make
whatever modification has to be made. We have a problem if we have to set
back 30 feet ---2 or 3 lots would not be buildable.
5. Kenneth Wagner(Arkansas Western Gas): We had planned on making 2 crossings
along Fred Starr Road and running one leg up to catch Lots 76, 77, and 78 and
80 and 81 and coming up about the middle_on the West side into that area, but
since there is an extension of Whippoorwili on out to Highway 45 we would eliminate
the crossing of Fred Starr Road to come in between Lots 79 and 80 but would re-
tain the crossing to the Southeast corner of Lot 83, run a leg up to catch all
of the block, and then come back in off Highway 45 and have a 2 -way feed.
6. Randy Schneider (SWEPCO): Everything looks fine to me. We are already
buried in and we have the same easement that they show.
7. Wally Brt (Sanitation Superintendent). No comments.
8. Clayton Powell (Street Superintendent): Mr. Powell discussed the proposed
street stub of Cherokee toward the West. Mr. Powell said that on temporary culs-
de-saciruis required that the turning circle be constructed to minimum street
standards with curb and gutter. Provision can be made to have the excess
right-of-way revert back to the adjacent lots if the street is ever extended.
Otherwise it creates problems with the Sanitation Department and other vehicular
traffic turning around using other private driveways'›or driving off the end of
the street right-of-way into private property. Mr. Hodges objected to the
temporary cul-de-sac because it would cut into the sizes of the lots (at this
time) and.because-of the future cost of breaking out and removing the cul-de-sac
if the street is extended. Mr. Powell offered to permit them to enclose the
end of this street with a curb and gutter and a standard type barricade and
put a "Dead End" sign on the corner and leave it as it is and then the barricade
will control the drainage and keep traffic'from/going out onto private property,
turning around in the field, and tracking mud and debris back onto the street.
Another problem is that the final plat does not show a drainage easement through
Tract C of the multiple -family tract. Currently when the street planvprofiles
were submitted the drainage that was collecting into an existing pond and then
draining on to the ditch on Fred Starr Road I have to know the location of
the drainage easement and how we propose to eliminate the pond because of drainage.
Also, there has been a lot of discussion on the development of Joe Fred Starr Road and
I think the final decision was that the developers of Sepuoyah Woods would post
a bond for half of the amount of constructing this road up to current City street
standardslfrom the North property line to Cherokee and before acceptance of the
final plat I would like to insure that we have a current engineering estimate for
this cost and the bond posted. Mr. Hodgescsaid he would like to just write
a check for the amount. Clayton Powell; said he would like to reserve further
comments regarding easements and so forth on this. He then cautioned them that
he requires the Proctor densities and plasticity indexes be taken in his presence.
Mr. Powell stated that everyone had been very cooperative in the requirements
•
Plat Review -3-
October 10, 1974
to meet street specifications and he was complimentary toward the Engineering
Firm in their willingness to cooperate in the design and the necessary; drainage
requirement.
Mr. Mattke (City Engineer ) asked who made the agreement on what part of Fred
Starr Road was to be paved in order for him to be able to certify the plat and
also the bond.
Mrs. Jones, Planning Administrator, explained that at the Planning Commission
Meeting Mr. Grimes, City Manager, personally wanted this all the way to Highway
45, but the Planning Commission said from Cherokee to the North property line.
9. Bobbie Jones, Planning Administrator):
1. On Seminole and Choctaw Courts what does the word "South" mean?
it is confusing.
2. Sidewalks do not go all the way around the culs-de-sac. I will have
to check and see if there is anything that says specifically part of the way
around but generally they do require them to be all the way around.
3. Note #2 says that all building lines are a minimum of 25 feet from
property line: There is no notation to make any further setback and that would
give you a 25 foot side setback which is going to be prohibitive on a 70 foot
lot. I feel this means from street right-of-way and should be clarified.
4. Note #4 says iron pins. are set at all property and boundary corners.
Regulations require iron pins at all property corners and changes of distance
and bearing (of the curves) and concrete monuments at subdivision corners.
Also, there should be a legend to indicate• location of iron pins and
concrete monuments.
5. There should be a legend for utility easements for utility companies
to indicate "utility and/or drainage easements."
6. No dimension is given on the North side of Lot 49.
7. On the lots that have less than 70 feet at the street right-of-way line
I need something that will dimension the actual width at the setback
line, even on the culs-de-sac These lots must be 70 feet wide at the
setback line.
street lights
8. On Navajo and Pawnee Courts'. exceed the 300 feet minimum separation
slightly.
Mr. Whitting said street lightilocations as shown are not true. They have al-
ready been installed,; between lots 15 and 16, between lots 38 and 39,
between 56 and 57, between lots 72 and 73, between 100 and 101, between lots
104 and 105. There are no lights between lots 14 and 15, between lots
55 and 56, between lights 94 and 95 between lots 99 and 100. All other
light locations are correct as shown.
9. On the outside dimensions the East line is not dimensioned in agreement
with the property description. Also the total dimension along the side of Lot
1115—and Whippoorwill. 'It is going to be confusing whereC"South" is written
across the West of Lot 37 because you are showing a North call. Correct
the drawing to follow the written description.
10. Would it be better to have a block number rather than calling it Tract C?
11.What is the purpose of 90 degree symbols at lot corners. Lot 110 shows
go minutes: -
Mr. Mattke said Lot 77 didn't appear to be 90 degrees and that this should
PO
Plat Review
October 10, 1974
be checked.
12. The way Lots 91 and 92 are drawn they show the radius; most of them do not
indicate distance in the radius. The way Lot 91, at the intersection is done, it shows
distance until you get into your radius and then shows the distance around the radius.
I need to know just what the radius is on this. Check note #5 --is it correct?
13. The distance to the center line of Highway 45 right-of-way and to the center
line of Fred Starr Road right-of-way should be shown on the plat as well as reflecting
any dedication.
The next item to be discussed was the Large Scale
Development plan to construct a storage building for
the Water and Sewer Operation Center.
Comments were as follows:
1. Paul Mattke (City Engineer): No problems.
CITY OPERATION CENTER
Cato Springs Road
Large Scale Development
2. Jack Whitting (Ozark Electric): I have a line here already so there are no
problems.
3. Clyde Terry (Warner Cable): No comments.
4. Kenneth Wagner (Arkansas Western Gas): No comments.
5. Wally Brt (Sanitation Superintendent): I would like to suggest that you
purchase a trash container for this location. It would be much easier to keep clean.
6. Clayton Powell (Street Superintendent): Since the property abuts Cato Springs
Road and on the Master Street Plan Cato Springs Road is designated as a collector
street this will require 60 feet of right-of-way. We now have only 50 feet of existing
right-of-way along Cato Springs Road so we need 5 feet of additional right-of-way or
30 feet from the center line. This should be properly deeded and filed in the Court
House. Also, on-site drainage should be controlled.
Mr. Mattke and Mr. Powell discussed the parking areas to be paved since the actual
paving will be done by the Street Department.
7. Bobbie Jones (Planning Administrator): Setbacks are 0. K. on this. This
property also abuts Highway 265 South and should also have 30 feet from the center
line on that.
The next item for discussion was a Large Scale Development
plan to erect a storage building for KFAY radio station
located at Holly Street (Big Chief Broadcasting Co.).
Comments were as follows:
1. Paul Mattke (City Engineer): No comments.
2. Wally Brt (Sanitation Superintendent):. No problems.
KFAY
Holley Street
L. S. Development
•
3. Randy Schneider (SWEPCO): I have no idea where we serve this from. I. wih1 have
to get back to you on it. -
l-7( A
Plat Review
October 10, 1974
4. Clyde Terry (Warner'Cable): No comments.
5. Clayton Powell (Street Superintendent): Holly Street abutting the perimeter
of this property has only 40 feet of right-of-way. Since Holly is an existing and
designated residential street there is a 50 feet minimum right-of-way requirement.
We need 5 feet of additional right-of-way abutting this property or 25 feet from the
existing center line.
A representative of KFAY in the summers of 1974 and 1973 has called and requested
oiling of Holly Street for dust control. They have accepted responsibility for
payment of this oiling and also for collecting from other property owners abutting
the area of Holly Street that was oiled. Whether or not they have collected from the
other property owners; >I do not know; I do know they have not paid the City even
after being billed and follow-up reminders being sent. I do not recommend the
issuance of a building permit for this improvement until payment for the street
oiling for the years of 1973 and 1974 isc received.
6. Bobbie Jones (Planning Administrator): Their legal description contains not only
Holly Street in front of their property but also to the East in front of private
property all the way to Lewis. Clayton Powell: In cases of this nature public
rights-of-way through adverse possession take precedence over private property deeds;
therefore, since it was not a practice to prepare separate deeds for public rights-of-
way until recently in the past, then the full 50 feet right-of-way for Holly Street
abutting this property should be deeded and properly recorded without enfringing
on the property rights of the property owners on the East side. The deed should be
given for what is being used as a 40 foot street now (all the way back to Lewis)
plus 5 feet across the South side of this property.
Col. R. L. Utley entered at this time and Mr. Powell (Street Superintendent) explained
to him about the oiling of the street, and the fact that public rights-of-way take
precedence over private property deeds. When Col.Utley found that Holly was not
a dedicated street and that it had been oiled both years, he told Mr. Powell that
a permanent improvement had been made in 1971 under what he presumed was the same
conditions that exist now.
Mr. Powell explained that the street oiling was not affected in 1971. The ordinance
was passed in 1974 that required the deeded right-of-way on the street plan.
Col. Utley asked if placed in a different light on the subject --the fact that this
is a temporary portable structure and that they want to relieve a temporary condition.
He said this is not a permanent installation. They are rebuilding, re -working,
and expanding their transmitter facilities. They just want a temporary building to
set in to store things to give them more work room inside the existing building.
Clayton Powell: It is my interpretation of the ordinance requiring the dedication
of the right-of-way that any changes or improvement to the property is that the right-
of-way has to be dedicated.
Bobbie Jones (Planning Administrator): The ordinance states that to execute a development
if the developer dedicates the street right-of-way and the utility and drainage easements
required by the ordinance the developer should not be required to submit a development
plan and approval of the Planning Commission and Board of Directors is not required.
One of the excluded ones is that a pre -fabricated movable accessory building if
no water or sewer lines are to be installed. Unless it is appealed higher the
property owner is still required to dedicate street right-of-way before this temporary
structure can be set up.
Col. Utley: I do not feel that it is a basis for denying someone a permit because
they have not paid their bills, when there is another legal procedure for collecting
their bills.
•
•
•
•
17a-�
Plat Review
October 10, 1974
The next item for discussion was a Large Scale
Development plan submitted by Bill Chester to add onto
an existing single-family residence.on Huntsville Road.
Comments were as follows:
3509 HUNTSVILLE ROAD
Large Scale Development
1. Randy Schneider (SWEPCO): This is in Ozark Electric's territory.
2. Clayton Powell (Street Superintendent): We need the required street right-of-way
to bring the street up to current City street requirements. No further comments.
3. Clyde Terry (Warner Cable): No problems.
4. Paul Mattke (City Engineer): Will have to check on this.
PAULINE REED
2883 S. School St.
Large Scale Development
The next item for discussion was a Large Scale Development plan
for Pauline Reed at 2883 S. School Street to build a residential carport.
Comments were as follows:
1.. Clayton Powell (Street Superintendent): Since this adjoins Highway 71, 80 foot
of right-of-way is required. Any additional driveways will require permits from
State Highway Department. According to the plat book, we have adequate street right-of-
way.
2. Kenneth Wagner (Arkansas Western Gas): Depends on where the carport sets. They
need to check where the gas yard line runs back to the rent house and not build over
that.
3. Clyde Terry (Warner Cable): No problems.
The meeting was adjourned at 11:05 A. M.
/Z3