Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1976-03-11 MinutesMINUTES OF A PLAT REYI,EW, COMMITTEE. MEETING A meeting,of the Fayetteville Plat.Review Committee was held at 9:08 A. M. Thursday, March,ll? 1976, in the Board..o£ Directors Room, City Administration Building, Fayetteville, Arkansas, UTILITY REPRESENTATIVES PRESENT: James Crownover, Roy Hawkins, Kenneth Wagner. CITY REPRESENTATIVES PRESENT: David McWethy, Steve Brown, Paul Mattke, Bobbie Jones, Wally Brt, Clayton Powell, Charles McWhorter, Janet Bowen. ENGINEERS and/or DEVELOPERS PRESENT: Frank Blew, Ervan Wimberly, John Cobb, Randall Barnes, Paul Rankin. The first item for discussion by the Plat Review Committee NORTHWEST ACRES was the proposed Northwest Acres Subdivision located Preliminary Plat North of Highway 16 outside the City limits about < mile Highway 16 East of Ruple Lane. John Cobb and Developer Randall Barnes were present to represent. Paul Rankin was also present. Comments were as follows: 1. Larry Wood (Planning Consultant): Not present at meeting but telephoned the following comments: Eliminate the alleys; I don't think we even plat those any more. As far as I am concerned the 60 foot street dedications could be reduced to 50 feet but I know the County Judge requests 60 feet of right-of-way. I think that is an excessive amount. Even though you do not have anything on zoning, I would like to see the office and commercial uses eliminated. I hate to see it go on septic tanks. I recommend sewer service. He said he would talk to the County Judge concerning the width of the street dedica- tions. He said they could make them 50 feet but that they could be made 60 fee right-of-way. He said they had 41 feet between the sidewalk and the property easement and they could move the sidewalk against the curb and they would still have 51 feet between the sidewalk and right-of-way line. He said they did plan on having sanitary sewer. He said they had a revision in which the alleys could be removed. He said this would rearrange the lots to where there would be two extra lots to each block (Blocks D and E - -typical blocks). He said this would not, however, alter street lines. 2. James Crownover (Ozarks Electric): I understand you plan to go underground. It looks like from a concensus of what we have got here that we need 25 -foot easements Mr. Cobb showed Mr. Crownover the revised drawing which eliminated the alleys and rearranged the lots in Block D and E. James Crownover: We will need a 25 foot easement (if all utilities are in it) starting at the back (East side) of Lot 3, Block K, come up to the back of the lots facing South.in Blocks A and B and go all the way across the jog down to get to the back of the lots in Blocks F and C, We would still need to go straight through. Block. E and back_ to the back. of Block B. This would be 12-11feeteach side of the property line on interior lots and down the exterior blocks we would need -24 feet. The other utilities represented at the meeting indicated.they would start at the highway (Highway --16) rather than at.Lot of Block K, and they said they would need to see a layout.of the whole thing before they could be sure of location of easements. Mr. Cobb asked the utilityrepresentatives.if they were aware of the 25 foot easement for water and gas located just outside.the 40 --foot dedication of Highway 16. Roy Hawkins (Southwestern Bell Telephoine): If this is written as a water easement the other utilities have no right to go in that easement. If you can get it changed to a utility easement we could go in there. If not, we will need an Plat Review March.11, 1976 additional easement. 3, Clayton Powell (Street Superintendentl;. This is outside the City limits but in our revised growth area, The'ordinance.requires that additional or existing right-of-way be dedicated'. Arkansas Highway 16 is designated an arterial street requiring 80 feet of right-of-way. The requirement is that half. -the additional right-of-way needed to be dedicated on each side of the centerline, or 40 feet from the centerline. I do not have knowledge of the existing right-of-way and your plat does not reflect this, but it needs to be brought up to 80 feet (right-of-way). Mr. Cobb said, after talking with the Highway Department and several other people, that the general concensus is that there exists an 80 foot dedication at this time. He also said they were planning to dedicate 40 feet from the existing centerline. You will need a permit from the State Highway District Engineer of Fort Smith on Randall and Grace Avenues for these street intersections with Highway 16 East. These applications are obtained through the City Engineer''s Office. There are some conflicts in street names. We already have two Irene Avenues in town, one Stephen, and Rollin is similar to Rolling Hills Drive and Roland. Also, Dianna is similar to Deanna which we already have. Since you are outside the City limits but within the Planning Area, your street details look great. I would like for your engineer to take a close look at the cost of the improved shoulder and and barrow ditches rather than going ahead with curb and gutter and the amount of storm drainage needed. I think (from looking at the existing topography) that probably, if you went to a 31 foot back of curb to back of curb and street with a 4 foot sidewalk on one side, that the storm drainage requirements would not equal the cost of the street details which you have depicted here. Since you propose to construct Randall Street to the North end of Lots 1, Block B and Lot 6, Block A, enclose that with a curb and gutter across the end of the street since there is a possibility of future construction. If the drainage is to the North, leave storm drains or swales with the flow line so the drainage would continue out. Erect a standard barricade with reflective type paint in compliance with the uniform traffic control device manual. Alleys have been a thorn in my side in this City for 5h years, since people put gardens in them and my department is expected to maintain them as a super express way. Submit a copy of this engineering plan and profiles for the street, and I will review those. In the con- struction phase, I perform three inspections. (1) Sub-base.preparation. We make proctor density and plasticity index tests. The spacing of these tests is a maximum of 300 feet apart on all streets and I do make an inspection on the sub -base preparation. I want to be present when these tests are taken. If there is a place that looks like it might have a we -weather spring, I will want one test taken at that spot. (2) Once your sub -base is prepared, and you get your base work in (depending on whether you go with improved shoulder, or open borrow ditches, or curb and gutter, I make the second inspection on the base work. (3) The final inspection is after you get the two inches of hot mix asphalt on or cement concrete on. Since Rollin Street and Stephen Drive go to the perimeter of the property and stop, enclose the ends of those on the engineering plans and profiles with curb and gutter and a barricade so that people do not drive off the end of the improved street surface out into the fields or on someone else's property. This also prevents drainage from washing silt, debris, etc. onto the improved street, undercutting, eroding, and so forth.. I need 2 foot vertical and horizontal separation between drainage structures and utilities so I' can maintain these without disrupting utility services. You need to get your utility services- to each. lot and street crossings in before you do start your base work, 4. David McWethy (Administrative Assistant): In answer to Mr. McWethy's question, Mr. Cobb said they were looking for a top -grade subdivision and it was their feeling that there would be a street light at each. intersection; however, he said this would be left up to his engineers. Plat Review March 11, 1976 Street lights are not a requirement, I.f you decide on street lights, I would suggest that your engineer consider low-pressure sodium street lights since they are extremely_,efficient% (The City'wi.11.not participate in the cost of the street lights..) 5. Roy Hawkins (Southwester Bell Telephone); If you do put in street lights, it will require an additional easement to serve them, James Crownover (Ozarks Electric): We have in the past come down the roadway easement. It is possible that we might work this out. We will just wait until we get our electrical layout and then we can tell you for sure, 5. Steve Brown (Community Appearance): In answer to Mr, Brown's question, Mr. Cobb said in talking with the owner, he (the owner) was willing to do away with Commercial in Lots 4 and 5 of Block G. He said that in Block H, the owner was looking for a very low use R-0 zoning. On Lot 1 of that block, there was the possibility of a park to be maintained by the owner until the development starts filling up and then there was the possibility of a park to be maintained by the owner until the development starts filling up and then there was the possibility of a day-care center. Lot 2 would be a very low density office type space. Mr, Cobb said that if there was a request to leave this out, then they would do so. Mr. Randall Barnes said there was the possibility of duplexes (possibly Blocks G and H) whcih would be a buffer between any commercial property. He said for the rest of the property, they planned expensive homes of either brick - or native stone construction with 1500 dr more square feet of living area He said there would be no frame construction. Mr. Cobb said their original idea had been to ask for offices on Lot 2, Block H. and on Lot 1, Block H use similar to Use Unit 4 in the Zoning Ordinance (Park)to Lot 2 (R-0) and the -R-1 Zoning in Block J with Mr. Barnes retaining ownership of Lot 1. In Block G, on Lot 5, their plan was tentatively to put a convenience type store with self -serve gas and Lot 4, the possibility of a laundromat or maybe a drop-off dry clean service. He said on Lots 1,2, and 3, Block G they planned to ask for a waiver on R-1 Zoning for duplexes which would act as a buffer between the commercial and the R-1. He said now that they had be asked to do away with this C-1, on Lots 4 and 5 of Block G, it was a possibility that they would ask for approval on 6 lots that would appear there and ask for a waiver for duplexes. He said the lots would be large enough to put a duplex there meeting the urban zoning ordinance. 7. Wally Brt (Sanitation Superintendent): In answer to Mr. Brt's question, Mr. Barnes said they hoped to be brought into the City services. Wally Brt: I see no problems. It would not be feasible for us to go over there now. However, when you get them all in there (even though it is not in the City limits) if you request it, we will go. Mr. Barnes said they had other ideas in mind towards acquiring more property and that once they got through. withwhat they were hoping to do, they would be adjoining the City limits and probably petition for annexation 8. Paul Mattke (City Engineer); I: talked to them before about this subdivision and was very happy to hear them say they were planning to provide public sewer and water, I do concur what was said about the street names. I would point out that it appears that Randall Avenue (or whatever it will be called) is going to become a collector and you wi11 probably have tostay with your 60 foot right-of-way on that street, Beyond that I' await engineering design on water and sewer. This is external to the City limits and fire hydrants will not be installed at this time. What you need to do is design a system that will support fire hydrants, place the 12'3 r • • Plat Review March 11, 1976 -4- tees that are in the, ground,. Then whenthe.area does annex the City will put the fire hydrants in, Even.though.,the plat does.not have to go to the Board.o£ Directors for acceptance; they' wi.il have to specifically approve the sewer, since it is outside the City, 9. Charles McWhorter (Fire Chief); Most of the comments have been made other than one that I was going to make.. The street names will give us- fits because of the . similarity and we do not have time to think about two different street names being the same. - Outside the City limits there is no such thing at this time as guaranteed fire protection. We come out only on a call basis witha charge being made to the property owner. At such time as it becomes part of the City, then it is part of our system. The nearest fire hydrant is across from REA (Ozarks Electric). However, when we go out, we will operate with what we have with us,as that fire hydrant:will be too far away to do us any good. • 10. Bobbie Jones(Planning Administrator): Since this is outside the City there is no zoning in force. If it does come into the City, (and it would have to be contiguous to the City limits to do that) it would come in as A-1 (Agricultural) and would have to be rezoned. All property coming into the City is zoned A-1. The Subdivision Ordinance says that lots outside the City or lots where no zoning applies should be 125 feet wide. Mr. Cobb said they would probably ask for a waiver on this. We will need some written response from the County on this also. I would suggest that, if you eliminate the alleys, make the revisions and show the easements as you understand them, and bring the plat back for the Plat Review Committee to see again. If they receive the revision by Monday, they could probably review it again next Thursday (March 17). There has been a recommendation to eliminate the commercial and office use and these recommendations will go to the Planning Commission for them to approve or disapprove. If this did come into the City, it would all come in as A-1 (Agricultural) and you would have to have it rezoned. I don't think there would be any problem in getting the R-1 Zone but I do not know about the commercial and office use. You would have to petition to the Planning Commission if it were inside the City, and they would then make a recommendation to the Board of Directors. Bobbie Jones told Mr. Cobb that they might consider taking the plat as is to the Planning Commission to see what their feelings would be on this. She did suggest that there be a note added that there be no driveway access from Lot 5, 4lock G and from Lot 4, Block K to Highway 16. Mr. Cobb inidcated that even if they had R-0 Zoning on Lot 2, Block H, the access would be only to Grace and Randall Avenues Bobbie Jones: I will need 10 copies of the revision. OLD WIRE ROAD NORTH The next item for discussion was the Preliminary Plat Preliminary Plat of Old Wire Road, a proposed subdivision located East of Old Wire Road, and West of Winwood Addition. Frank Blew (Blew and Associates) was present to represent. Comments were as follows: 1, Larry Wood (Planning Consultant),, not present but telephoned the following comments: Recommend stub into the South_property whi=ch -is Dr, Vinzantts property for an extra tie to a street platted down South. (Susan). We need in the worst way to get to Township to the West.. 2. Frank Blew- (Blew and Associates): Mr. Blew -said this was. just Phase 1 of the develop- ment and that Phase 2 would go all the way to Old Wire Road and that there would be a complete North-South cross in the middle that would stub out to Dr, Vinzant's property. the Wire Road. r_) in g W3 Plat Review -5- March 11, 1976 He said the street on the. South_ side&( which. is presently a:cu1-de-,sac) would continue to the West to Old Wire Road.. He said the City had already acquired an easement for the extension of Township that would he matched by the developer on the South side and that Phase 2 would'extend this all the way to Old Wire Road. He said his purpose before the Plat Review Committee was to determine something concerning the Township extension, whether or not (since the City has already initiated an action to acquire a 30 foot easement on the North side from the adjoining property owners to the North, whether or not the developers could match that and dedicate to the City another 30 feet. He said the developer wanted to know if this would be sufficient access into this development. He said (in other words) the developer would be utilizing the easement the City had already obtained for the Township extension to get to this property. He said the developer needed to know if the developer would have to build the street on the 50 foot easement from his property back to Yorkwood since he was not involved with that. He said they would like to determine whether or not the Planning Commission would allow this phase of construction due to the fact of the one entrance coming out of Winwood Subdivision. He said these people were not financially able to build Township to Old Wire Road at this time. He said the developers were not able at this time to develop the rest of this (Phase 2) and that if they were allowed to build Phase 1, they would develop Phase 2 after getting some income from the lots they would sell in Phase 1. 3. Clayton Powell (Street Superintendent): In that case, I would recommend that the developer be required to construct one half of the collector street from Yorkwood Drive to the 50 foot street he proposed to build The City has the necessary right-of-way to the property line. We have 30 feet and if the developer matches that 30 feet, that brings up all requirements for right-of-way that are necessary. It is up to the Planning Commission and the Board of Directors as to whether they• will set a precedent to build half of the collector street (2 11 -foot lanes) or to whether the developer would build all of it to gain access to this property which still leaves us with the overly congested Winwood Drive as the only route out of that entire area" If the Planning Commission should require the developer to build a 31 foot back of curb to back of curb street, that meets the residential requirement but does not meet the collector requirement, which is the classification of this Township extension. I would want the engineering designs to be designed as a 44 -foot wide street, 4 11 -foot lanes flow -line to flow -line with parabolic crown centered. Then, if the Planning Commission should require the :curb and gutter on the North side, it could be removed to further widen the street to get the 4, 11 -foot lanes. If this proposed street (iinamed) is going to be continued in Phase 2, the policy on culs-de-sac is to either construct them including the curb and gutter, the 50 -foot radius withdedicated right-of-way (35 foot radius for the construction). If there are definite plans to extend that West to Old Wire Road I would rather (since he owns the property to the West) have it come down to the West perimeter of this. property and just make a "T!' rather than having a cul-de-sac with. curb and gutter and a portion of street to rip out to extend it later. There are several natural ditches there that carry a great volume of water that storm drainage can be channeled to., In answer to Frank.Blew"s question, Clayton Powell said it would satisfy the singular access problem if the developer (at his own cost) were to extend the cul-de-sac on the South, all the way to Old Wire Road; however, Mr. Powell said he would still have to require him to construct one half of the collector street - - (Township). 4. Daivd McWethy (Administrative Assistant): I understood you to say that property owner owns along the Township line on the North all the way to Old • Plat Review -6- March 11, 1976 Why couldn't he start with_Phase 1 tieing the part .along Old Wire Road? Frank. Blew said there .was :a family ownership involvement so that this has to be done before the owner will permit the use of property along Old Wire Road, David McWethy: I: can see the Planning Commission turning -this down if Winwood Drive is- the only access, I think if the developer were prepared to extend Township to Old Wire Road (2 11 -foot lanes) Ithink. it would do great things in terms of getting it approved. 5. Charles McWhorter (Fire Chief): T need some type of access to this whole area from the North. or West. We have to come all the way through Old Missouri Road and Overcrest to get into this area first response. Time is valuable and for the protection of the property, we need some means of access from the West or the North. 6. Paul Mattke (City Engineer): As far as taking any additional traffic and dumping it into that -already overloaded Winwood Drive, I have already recommended on the last subdivision that this not be done, and would have to recommend the same thing here with the same strength of recommendation. I feel it would be a serious mistake. So the only solution I see is to tie to Old Wire Road on the Township alignment or extend the cul-de-sac to Old Wire Road As far as water supply and sewer service is concerned; ob iously sewer is well within reach of it. Water is not available from Yorkwood. You are going to have to come from Township due to the capacity of line size. We will have to work with your engineer and whenever they get ready to do this, you will have to build some of the lines through the Phase 2 portion to get to the Phase 1 portion. I would recommend that you take this plat back and show Phase 2 on one side showing lineation in connection with what you are going to build on this part for the benefit of the utility companies. Bobbie Jones: I would show Phase 1 and Phase 2 on the preliminary plat. 7. Wally Brt (Sanitation Superintendent): If they can satisfy Clayton Powell and Paul Mattke I will be satisfied. After talking with the utility companies, Frank Blew said he would bring this back with the other recommendations on the plat but without any utility easements on it. The utility companies could at that time discuss location and size of easements. 5. Bobbie Jones (Planning Administrator): You need to name your streets so we can compare them with other existing street names. If you tie back into Old Wire Road this does not apply where it exceeds the maximum length of a dead end street. You should show street lights at each intersection and every 300 feet in between and sidewalks down one side. You need a North arrow on the vicinity map and I also did not see one on the plat. I would also show the width of the street with the sidewalk. I did notice that direct alignment for Susan Drive to the South would be somewhere in the West half of Lot 8. Mr. Blew said if the developer said to extend this on, he would match it. Plat Review March.11, 1976 The last item for review:by the Plat. Review- Committee COLLEGE MARKET ADDITION was the revised'final.plat of College Market Addition; Final Plat a proposed comgercial subdivision located East_of Malco.Theatre, West.of Trinity Temple, and North_ef Rolling Hills: Drive.; Johnie.@assett, Developer, This plat has been approved by -the Planning Commission as- a preliminary plat and is now being brought before the Plat Review Committee for the utilities to review easements-. - Ervan Wimberly (McClelland Engineers) was present to represent.. Comments were as follows: 1. David McWethy (Administrative Assistant): Market Street is going to go through to K -Mart parking lot and that is the only question I had. I see that the street lights are shown: 2. Charles McWhorter (Fire Chief): No comments. 3. James Crownover (Ozarks Electric): We will use the 20 foot easement across the East side of Lots 1 through 4. We would serve this underground. The developer will have to dig the trench. Easements are sufficient for us. We will need an access (easement) to get to these three street lights. During a discussion about the location of an easement for this, City Engineer Paul Mattke pointed out that there was an existing 8 -inch water line in the easement at the back of Lots 1 through 4. In conclusion, the utilities represented decided that a 25 -foot easement at the back (East side) of Lots 1 through 4 would be needed for water, gas, telephone, electric, and T. V. Kenneth Wagner (Arkansas_Western Gas) said that the 20 foot utility easement (within the 50 foot building: setback) needed to be extended to the South on across Lot 7 for gas and street light purposes. The revised easements were sufficient with the utilities. 4. Paul Mattke (City Engineer): They are providing this development with water and sewer service. That is all I have. 5. Clayton Powell (Street Superintendent): I think the design is great and it meets the criteria in my opinion. I do hope that he plans to take the water off of Market Street at the natural drainage ditch and construct head walls so there will not be any erosion or undercutting around or under Market Street at that point. Mr. Wimberly has already submitted his street plans and I believe everything meets the requirements. Since the developer, I am sure, would not want to voluntarily construct drop inlets and take the drainage off Rolling Hills Drive, then North on Market Street into that drainage ditch, put a concrete swale across the intersection of Rolling Hills Drive and Market Street to carry the water straight on down Rolling Hills Drive to the drop inlets on College Avenue. (Unlessthe developer would like to place drop inlets at the intersection of Rolling Hills Drive, and storm drain the full length of Market Street and dump the drainage into the existing drainage ditch there on the North, I see no problem.) Mr. Wimberly promised to get a revised drawing backin time to mail with the Planning Commission agenda., There was no further discussion, The meeting was adjourned at 11:00 A. M, VI A