Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1975-02-27 MinutesMINUTES OF A PLAT REVIEW. COMMITTEE MEETING A meeting of the Fayetteville Plat Review Committee was held at 9:10 A.M. Thursday, February 27, 1975 in the Board of Directors Room, City Administration Building, Fayetteville;Arkansas. UTILITY REPRESENTATIVES PRESENT: Clyde Terry, Randy Schneider, Roy Hawkins, Frank O'Donnell. CITY REPRESENTATIVES PRESENT: Clayton Powell, Bobbie Jones, Paul Mattke, Janet Bowen. OTHERS PRESENT: Kerry Schultz. Preliminary Plat of The only item to be discussed by the Plat Review A Replat of Committee was the Preliminary Plat of a Replat of COUNTRY CLUB ESTATES Country Club Estates. Kerry Schultz was present to represent. Comments were as follows: 1. Paul Mattke (City Engineer). I think they have some serious problems. Water and sewer taps are already in across the street and if they move these lot lines they will not be usable. The streets cannot be cut unless they want to repave the whole subdivision. All the easements do not align with the location of the original easements, and the other utility companies have facilities in these easements. I say they are going to have a tremendous expense, possibly what it cost them originally. 2. Roy Hawkins (Southwestern Bell Telephone): I am in the same position as everybody else. We have served this almost totally with a buried system. Our pedestals are in the back of somebody else's yard. These will have to be relocated We designed our telephone system on the number of lots that were originally set up. Since then you have added enough extra lots that the system will have to be changed and re-buried_.to reinforce it to give the people the proper service. The easements are full. I don't really know if there will be enough room to go in there and start digging again to put cable in, much less moving the existing stuff. Since this was designed on a final plat I think the developer should pay for the reinforcement and relocation. Some of our system may be sufficient enough to serve all of this and part probably would not be.It would be better to go ahead and do this at this point than it would to wait until the lots were sold and go about it individually. Mr. Hawkins asked about the side dimension. being changed on old Lot 120 (New lot.274) and -also 'about the easement. between Lots 63 and 64 (new Lots 244 and 245). He said they may be out of the easement already. Kerry Schultz: I think that mistakes have been made on both of these. Mr. Hawkins: We need to know how these lots were shifted and changed the distance and if the easement is in the same location. 3. Randy Schneider(SWEPCO): We have got about 4 service pedestals that will have to be moved. The others are in good shape. We don't have that much underground. We do have street crossings made. Probably the cost of relocating these will be about $1,000. I don't know what you will have to do on street lights. I would like to go ahead and ask for street light easements in case we need them. In order to meet the present street light regulations I will need the following easements: Between Lots 17 and 18 on the old plat 5 feet each side of the property line. Lot 246 we need a 10 foot easement along the South property line. Between Lots 80 and 81, 5 feet each side of the property line. Between 266 and 267, 5 feet Plat Review -2- February 27, 1975 each side of the property line. Lot 111 probably a 5 feet easement along the street right-of-way would be alright since it does go along withthe street right-of-way on the -North -side of the property. Between Lots 97 and '248, 5 feet each side of the property line.' One between Lots. 227 and 88, and between Lots 221 and 222. (On the North side of'Lots 215 and 216';'we will need_the easement shown.) Between Lots 141 and 142, 5 feet each side of the property line. 5 foot easement running along the street side of Lot 141 (will have to go about the middle of their yard.) On Lot 164 I will need 5 feet easement running along the street. Between Lots 134 and 135, 5 feet each side of the property line; also between Lots 131 and 132. A 5 foot easement on the street side of Lot 131 in order to get into the street intersection. Between Lots 279 and 280 and between Lots 282 and 283, 5 feet each side of the property line. I will need 5 feet along the South lot line of Lot 44(along the street on Country Club Drive) and also on the South side of Lot 34 along the street (5 feet easement). I need another one between Lots 42 and 43 and between Lots 35 and 36. We will need an easement between Lots 51 and 52 and also need 5 feet on the street side of 51. Between Lots 237 and 238 and between Lots 242 and 243. Lot 244, 5 foot easement along with the street along 29th Circle (NW side). Between Lots 11 and 12 we will need an easement. Between 202 and 203. Do need 5 feet on Lot 205 running along the street. Between Lots 271 and 272. Between Lots 210 and 211. Will need a 5 foot easement on Lot 96 on the West side of the lot running with the street. Between Lots 252 and 253,we need a 10 foot easement and on the East side (street side) of Lot 253 a 5 foot easement. Kerry Schultz: We intend to ask fora waiver on the street lights. Mr. Schneider: I would like to have the easements anyway in case street lights are needed in the future. 4. Clyde Terry (Warner Cable): We are in the same situation as far as moving pedestals. We can use the same plant that we have as long as it has not been torn up from other digging. We would ask the developer to pay for time and material other than for the new lots added. The only cost on our part would be mainly the splices and labor. We would furnish the new pedestals and multi -taps to serve the new lots. As far as the moving and setting back of the pedestals we want to stay uniform with SWEPCO and the telephone and we would ask that the developer pay for that. In order to keep the utility companies from having so much invested I would like to see on Large Scale Developments a way that these could be done a section at a time and then the utilities could go in and service that section. City Engineer Paul Mattke felt that it would be good for the utilities to do similar to what the City used to do; that is, to have the developer pay the cost to set the connections, meters, etc. before the lots were sold and then when the lots are sold they would get paid so much per connection for each lot. Mr. Mattke asked each of the utility representatives if they were aware that the moving of the lot lines affected the side lot easements even though it did not affect the back easements. Mr. Terry: In this case we might have to move something else. 5. Frank O'Donnell (Arkansas Western Gas): Have the easements between Lots 229 and 230 and between Lots 247 and 97 been moved? According to an old plat I have 247 and 230 are actually smaller than the original lots. We have a street crossing across the street not tied to anything. It is okay. All we would have to do would be conceivably run behind the curb to get to the new easement. Down between Lots 43 and 44 and Lots 45 and 46 has this side lot easement been changed? I don't believe it has. We are okay there. Back up on Country Club Drive Lot 106 as you turn the cul-de-sac we have a few street crossings but I think we are okay. Has there been a change between Lots 244 and 245. I don't see if we have any problems. It would be time and material. 9 J Plat Review -3- February 27, 1975 6. Clayton Powell (Street Superintendent): Mr. Powell said he had not had a chance to go out and see this but made the following comments: Every street in town has been duplicated. I think where street names are concerned this should be superimposed on a street map and make the streets as -contiguous as possible with the names. Mr. Powell said this would be confusing to the postal services as well as emergency vehicles.. On street lights the policy if any platted streets have not been constructed is that they are required every 300 feet, at every intersection and at the ends of the culs-de-sac. (This is unless the Planning Commission and Board of Directors waives the street light requirements.) I have not noticed any sidewalks in the subdivision. These would also have to be constructed or waived. On the new streets, I have to go out into the field and check to see if all the existing streets have been constructed that are platted. If they are not, we will have to go through the routine of the engineering plan and profiles, and approvals, and also any street that is not in, if it requires storm drainage it would have to be installed. Also if some of the existing streets that are not storm drained they may cause blockage. I am sure the storm drainage would have to be installed to make it functional. In the replatting a lot of the easements that are in some are designated specifically drainage easements, and if there are any drainage structures in existence that drainage follows a path that would not be included in the new ease- ments these easements would have to be re -aligned to incorporate the drainage. North of Lots 96, 220, 221, 222, 223, 92, and 224 you have dedicated an additional 35 feet roadway easement and utilities. I personally don't see any need for the road- way designation. Just delete roadway and make it a drainage and utility easement and leave it 35 feet if you like. If you want to make it roadway, make it 50 feet in compliance with the Master Street Plan and then if the street is to be developed it will be developed by the developer to current City street standards. Kerry Schultz said the reason this was shown as 30 feet roadway and utility was that the lot lines went up to Mr. Askew's property and they were giving him his road. (This is for an existing driveway and there are no public responsibilities for the maintenance of it.) Mr. Powell said the plat should reflect exactly what this is for and that it is not a public roadway. West of Lot 96 the property line goes out to the center line of the existing street (Country Club Drive). This should be moved to the East to reflect that there is dedicated street here. At Lots 282 and 283 the street right-of- way terminates there and reduces and there is an annotation to the width from about 30 feet from the line between Lots 282 and 283 on up to the Country Club. I don't know what happened but we do need the street widths reflected. Access to a subdivision is an important factor in the sellability of the lots. At present 24th Street does not meet street standards. We do plan to overlay 24th Street up to the curve where (according to all my City maps and plans) Country Club Drive begins. From there to the Country Club we just did not have the funds for an overlay. Mr. Powell said at one time Mr. Askew, the Country Club and the developers or investors of the Grandview Apartments were in favor of forming an improvement district to bring 24th Street up to current City street standards. He said since the preliminary engineering plans and profiles and cost estimates were rendered and due to the bankruptcy of the Thrasher -May Corporation that was developing Grandview Apartments he felt that the Planning Commission and the Board of Directors would go along with his committment that if the investors or developers of this subdivision would cooperate to the extent of payingthe cost of materials and curb and gutters, that he would do it with City crews since it is an existing street at no cost to them for labor and equipment to pave the street and install the curb and gutters on at least one side and on both sides if they are willing to sustain the expense since the plat does reflect adequate right-of-way to widen the street (31 feet back of curb to back of curb). Mr. Powell said there was only a 15 cents per linear foot difference between the cost • • • Plat Review February 27, 1975 -4- of: a curb and gutter. and the cost of a curb,..gutter and sidewalk combination. This would correct the sidewalk situation which. has been omitted. Kerry Schultz said he understood there to be an agreement at the start of the development that the developers would pay a third of the cost of the improvement as well as the Country Club and City one-third each. He said, however, that the Country Club had reneged. Mr. Powell said he was -not aware of the original agreement but that his offer exceeded one-third of the improvement costs. He said if the developers wanted to talk to the Country Club again this would be agreeable with him. He said this street did need to meet current street standards'as most families have two cars and two cars per lot would amount to considerable traffic. Mr. Powell said some of the utility easements might have to be re -located depending on the drainage easements, the existing drainage structures as well as any additional drainage structures that would have to be constructed. He said it was his computation that the minimum depth for any utility was 4 feet and when an 18 inch tile was installed the tile would be within 6 inches of the utility line with 6 inches of cover on top. Clayton Powell called back at 2:30 P.M. and said he had been out and made an on-site inspection of Country Club Estates. He said he would welcome the further development of this subdivision to facilitate the installation of storm drainage which was omitted in the original development of the three streets which have been constructed. Also, he requested a topo map of this area since he had observed numerous natural drainage ditches on that hillside which had been blocked or filled, presumably by the developer and this cannot be done. 7. Bobbie Jones (Planning Administrator): I have not had a chance of comparing this minutely with the other one, but I think the main problems do come with your utilities. On the question of the street lights and sidewalks, I talked_to Mr. Grimes (City Manager) and Mr. McCord (City Attorney) and they both suggested that you ask the Planning Commission to grant a variance. I did get the impression from City Manager Don Grimes that if there are no street lights, he would like some street lights. You can check with him on this and in the meantime you can figure out what you would be willing to do. Under current policy it calls for side- walks to be installed by the person obtaining the building permit on_one side of the street only. It should be shown where it would be and it should be on file on the plat for the person buying the lot. If you receive a waiver you should note the waiver on the plat. On the street lights it would be a good idea to go on and show easements for the street lights even if you don't plan to put any in. This way they will be there if anybody ever does want street lights. The bearings on some of the easements have been changed. 8. Kerry Schultz: I came here hoping the utilities and everyone could help out. This development was a mistake in the first place but we are trying to go ahead with it since there are a lot of people with money invested in this. After considerable discussion by the utilities they felt it would be better to replat a smaller section at a time starting with the smaller lots where there are no (or at least not as many) utilities buried in. Utility representatives said it would be okay to replat the following lots: Lots 256,255,254, 253,252,251,250,249,248,97,269,268,267,266,265,264,263, 262, 261,260,259,258,257. DO NOT REPLAT: Lots 111 and 112.(Leave them like they are at present.) Leave Lots 247 and the lots along Country Club Drive (217, 218, 219,270, 271, 272, 273) on this plat as they were on the original plat. Comments follows on the lots designated to be replatted. Frank O'Donnell (Arkansas Western Gas): We will negotiate the areas to be served. ag Bobbie Jones (Planning Administrator):. In the legal description theyy should say_t'this is a replat of . . . . and list the lots they are replatting rather than describing the total property and they may want to draw only that section that is being replatted: Lot 111 has been sold but it will not be replatted so it is okay. You need to be sure and check with City Engineer Paul Mattke on this replatting. I would like for this committee to review this again after it is redrawn to make sure everything is covered. There were no further comments. ' The meeting was adjourned at 10:55 A.M. •