HomeMy WebLinkAbout1975-04-10 MinutesMINUTES OF A PLAT REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING
A meeting of the Fayetteville Plat Review Committee was held at 9:15 A. M.
Thursday, April 10, 1975, in the Board of Directors Room, City Administration
Building, Fayetteville, Arkansas.
UTILITY REPRESENTATIVES PRESENT: Clyde Terry, Roy Hawkins, Kenneth Wagner,
Randy Schneider.
CITY REPRESENTATIVES PRESENT: Bobbie Jones, Clayton Powell, Paul Mattke, Wally
Brt, Janet Bowen.
OTHERS PRESENT: Kerry Schultz, Joe Hodges and Kirby Estes.
The first item for discussion by the Plat Review Committee
was the Large Scale Development plan of the proposed
Mcllroy Branch Bank located at North Garland and Wedington
Drive. Mr. Joe Hodges and Mr. Kirby Estes were present to
represent. Comments were as follows:
1. Clyde Terry (Warner Cable): If you do
comments. If you do, I think we will need
place to get into the building. I am sure
told Mr. Terry they would not be wanting T.
McILROY BRANCH BANK
N. Garland and Wedington
Large Scale Development
not want T. V. Service I have no
some conduits placed at the proper
you will want to go underground. They
V. Cable. Mr. Terry: No other comments.
2. Roy Hawkins (Southwestern Bell Telephone): I believe that we have a pole in
your driveway. We are on public right-of-way in this particular instance and when
you get ready to build you will have to have this pole requested to be moved or
removed at your own cost. Due to the amount of cement or asphalt that you will
have in this area we would need a 11 inch conduit to the property line on Garland
Street to come up in your building, In your building we will need some kind of
small location where we can terminate this cable and wire all of your telephone up.
It depends on the kind of system you want but if you have a blank wall (like in
a closet or storage room) enough that we can take about 4 feet of it from floor
to ceiling should be sufficient. And if they want a multi -button telephone system
we will also need an electrical receptacle at this location to furnish power for
the equipment, 110 volts is sufficient.
3. Kenneth Wagner(Arkansas Western Gas): I talked to Mr. Hodges and we do have
gas in front and just to the North a little. He told us that he would build a cement
guard in front for the gas meter. I would like to keep the low pressure from the
road up to the building. I would recommend putting a casing in from the road up
to the building in case this line ever gave trouble; it would save going in and
tearing the cement up. Gas is available for the standard equipment you will have.
4. Randy Schneider (SWEPCO): We don't have anything close to here. I think
the closest thing we have got is at your southwest property line; we have got a
single-phase that comes up to the road but does not come across. We will have to
put in a couple of poles to come down to your property whether we go up here on
street right-of-way or what. Since you want underground, we could work this out on
how far you want our poles. If I remember correctly, you have to have a minimum
of 75 KW a load to be eligible for this without having to pay any cost difference.
You would have to furnish the conduit and we would furnish the primary wiring for a
small padmount transformer and then you would have to furnish your secondary
out of the transformer, to wherever you would put your switches and fuse box.
I believe we furnish the wire up to 125 feet and after that you would have to furnish
the primary wiring, or pay the cost difference in what it costs. Since you do not
43__A
i/
Plat Review
April 10, 1975 - 2
want any underground service your voltage would be 120 - 208; this is the only
thing we can get padmount in without a special order. I usually need to know
what amp entrance you will want (400, 200, or 600). When we work this out there
will be some papers that will need to be filled out on this underground agreement
and the size. Where we set our transformer we will need close to a 4'.x 4'
square and we would have to have 10 feet of clearance in front of it for hot stick
work. It does not have to be enclosed, but if you do enclose it we would have to
have a gate or something in the front part where we can open it up and work with a
hot stick. As far as we are concerned the conduit could be scheduled
40 PVC. We would require steel 90 degree bends coming up into the transformer.
We will serve them off of Highway 16 highway poles. We will serve them off of
street right-of-way so easement will not be required. I will need to build
this line in before you start construction. We will have to have 2 weeks notice
before you start construction. There will be a charge for setting temporary service
because of a transformer setting.
5. Bobbie Jones (Planning Administrator): I think this has been divided off of a
larger piece of property. I need to know when it was done. If it was done prior
to June 29, 1970 I need a proof of Lot of Record. If it has been since then we
will need to go through a Waiver of Subdivision Requirements (Lot Split). I will
need a legal description for this. You have a setback problem on the South side.
You have a minimum setback of 50 feet after street right-of-way of 40 feet from
the centerline of the street. I assume the 30 feet shown is from the centerline.
If I go 40 feet from the centerlinethen measure the setback of 50 feet, that gives
me a required setback of 60 feet from the South property line. You have 20 feet
and 8 inches shown to the future expansion. From the East and South you have a
required setback of 60 feet from existing property lines. The ordinance does not
say "front setback". Setback is from street rights-of-way. We have supplementary
regulations that cover drive-in facilities and this does include a drive-in bank.
80 per cent of the area not covered by building should be developed by a permanent
surface such as concrete or asphalt with a minimum of 20 per cent for landscaped
open space. You do not have 80 per cent of the lot in parking. It would probably
be reasonable to say this is the depth of your development and would not be required
on the extreme back portion. It also calls for raised curb a minimum of 6 inches
in height to be constructed along the entire street property line except for drive-
ways. Also a screening wall is required to buffer this from any residential and
there is residential west of this property. However, I do not know if this applies
in this case since you are set back 90 feet from the West property line.
6. Clayton Powell (Street Superintendent): Both abutting streets are designated
State Highways and designated as principal arterials on the Master Street Plan,
thereby requiring 80 feet of right-of-way. We think we have existing 60 feet of
right-of-way but for the additional 20 feet of required right-of-way it is policy
that half be taken from each side; therefore, we would need 10 additional feet on
both Garland Avenue and Wedington Drive sides. It was almost a "go" project
2 years ago for North Street to be continued directly across Garland and the curve
and intersection with Garland on the West side but the State Highway Department ran
into a funding problem and since we did not have the adequate right-of-way for the
project, that was their prime reason to delay. However, it looks as though within the
current calendar year it might become a reality. If we had the right-of-way dedicated
the Highway Department could not use rthis .'as an excuse. The -maximum width for
driveways in commercial areas is 44 feet. The driveways do require a permit and
since this is onto a designated state highway (District 5 Enginner in Fort Smith)
will have to issue that permit. You submit your application through Mr. Mattke's
(City Engineer) Office. There is no indication of a driveway onto Wedington Drive
on the South side. You might give this some thought since it is a drive-through
facility and with the possibility of this continuation of North Street straight
Lq
Plat Review -3-
April 10, 1975
across to intersect wfth_Wedington Drive and eliminate that curve it might be
advantageous to have a driveway -on the Wedington Drive side. However, being hilly
terrain your driveways must be -50 feet from any intersection with. a 25 feet separation
between drives. You have no separation.problem since thele are no existing driveways
on either Garland or Wedington Drive. However, the 50 feet which is measured from
the right-of-way will have'to be adhered to or else the State Highway Department
District 5 Engineer will have to waive that. I request that you not empty your drainage
out of your paved parking and drive areas out onto the street. It does appear that
you have designated two drainage inlets at the throat'of the intersection on
Garland Avenue ---this is great If so, try to put a parabolic crown in your driveway
so that the water is picked up in these drop inlets'rather than being emptied out onto
the street. The contractor is responsible for keepting mud and debris off the
streets as he is pulling in and out of the construction area, I think this facility
will greatly improve that corner. We will provide you with. the State Highway Department
engineering plans and profiles for this extension of North Street and Wedington Drive
as soon as they are recieved.
7. Wally Brt (Sanitation Superintendent): Mr. Hodges and Mr. Estes told Wally
Brt that there would be 5 employees at this bank. Wally Brt: Let's use cans out
there (since there will be no more employees than that) unless you want a container.
I think it would be a waste to have a container. You might set some can holders so
that the garbage cans won't be rolling all over the parking area I think these can
holders are about $5 or $6 each.
8. Paul Mattke (City Engineer): The only problem that I might have is that since
you only .purchased part of this tract from Mr. Wilson, you might need an easement from
him to go across it to get sewer, but I believe you have got sufficient fall (grade).
I would suggest you have the exact location of that manhole and make sure you have
considerable grade and obtain an easement from Mr. Wilson. Water is available from
a 12 inch main along Garland. It is on your side of the street.
The last item for consideration.bythe Plat Review Committee COUNTRY CLUB ESTATES
was the Replat of Lots 97-110 and 112--117 of Country Club Replat of Lots 97-110
Estates located on Country Club Drive. and 112 to 117
Kerry Schultz was present to represent. Comments were as follows:
1. Clayton Powell (Street Superintendent). Since this revision does not alter the
streets or drainage patterns I have no additional comments from last meeting we had
on Country Club Estates. However, the comments concerning streets and drainage from
the last meeting remain the same.
2. Paul Mattke (City Engineer): I have written Mr. Jim Nickell concerning the
water and sewer taps. I think we have figured out a way to do it. When we get the
go ahead and pre -payment on the taps, we will try it. If that doesn't work, we
will have to try to figure something else out. We are trying to keep from cutting
the streets.
3. Randy Schneider (SWEPCO): All the easements look fine to me for what we need to
put in here. (Mr. Schultz told Mr. Shcneider that he was trying to get a waiver from
the Planning Commission on sidewalks and street lights.) Randy Schneider: If street
lights are required I will need the -following easements: 5 feet on the North side of
Lots 214 and 215. Need a 5 foot easement on the South and East property lines of
Lots 217. I need 5 feet on the North prpoerty line of Lot 220. 5 feet on North
property line of Lot 201. That is six lights they would have to put in. This does not
allow for any lights on Country Club Road because they are not changing those lots.
If sidewalks are required, I need to know the location so we won't put street lights
over them.
45
I
Plat Review
April 10, 1975 -4-
4. Kenneth. Wagner (Arkansas.Western:Gas):. The easements lookpretty. good, We have
gas to Lot 112, We have a street crossing across 28th.Circle between Lots 112 and 207
going South and then back over on the Southside,o£ Lot 97 we have a street crossing
across 26th. Circle, Depending on how you decide to build in there we can work
arrangements before we put the gas line in.
5. Roy Hawkins (Southwestern Bell Telephone): Easements look good, They are
exactly what we asked for at the other meeting. The only thing I have to say is that
I would like to reiterate what I said at the last meeting and that is we will not put
service into this area until we have been notified that there has been some kind of
activity as far as selling or building.
6. Clyde Terry (Warner Cable): Easements are sufficient for Warner Cable and we
will cooridnate our work with telephone and SWEPCO in burying the cable.
7. Charles McWhorter (Fire Chief): No comments.
8. Bobbie Jones (Planning Administrator). I think this is zoned R-1 rather than R-2.
They show it R-2 and that needs to be changed. I want the wording changed on the
certificacy We are trying to standardize these. The approval of the water and sewer
system should be signed by the Water and Sewer Superintendent. Even though he is the
same as the City Engineer, the title of Water and Sewer Superintendent needs to be
on there. The monumentation should be actually shown as to where the metal rods
will be. Usually a little circle is used to indicate these. They should be at each
lot corner and each change of alignment for each lot. These should be metal rods
(15 inch by 30 inch). The ordinance calls for reinforced concrete monuments 4" x 4" x 30"
at the corner of a subdivision. I don't think this will be required on a replat.
I would like the waiver: request: in writing. I feel like you will be required to put
in some street lights; probably at the end of each cul-de-sac and at the intersection
of 26th Circle. If they do require sidewalks they would probably be required to be
installed by the person obtaining the building permit and they would probably be
required only on one side of the street and around the cul-de-sac. On corner lots the
setback from both street rights-of-way is 25 feet. We will need one black line print
and a couple of blue line prints to make copies for the Planning Commission meeting.
There was no further discussion.
The meeting was adjourned at 10:04 A. M.