HomeMy WebLinkAbout1976-04-08 Minutes•
MINUTES OF A PLAT REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING
A meeting of the Fayetteville Plat Review Committee was held at 9:12 A. M.
Thursday, April 8, 1976, in the Board of Directors Room, City Administration Building,
Fayetteville, Arkansas.
UTILITY REPRESENTATIVES PRESENT: John Carlon, Roy Hawkins, Clyde Terry, Floyd Hornaday,
James Crownover.
CITY REPRESENTATIVES PRESENT:
Perry Franklin, Steve Brown, Larry Wood, David McWethy,
Paul Mattke, Clayton Powell, Wally Brt, Bobbie Jones,
Janet Bowen.
DEVELOPERS and/or ENGINEERS PRESENT: Frank Blew, Bob Nickel, Clarence Young.
SOUTHWESTERN BELL TELEPHONE CO.
The first item for discussion was a proposed Harold Street
building to be used to occupy long distance Large Scale Development
operators for the Northwest Arkansas area to be located on the East side of
North College Avenue, behind K -Mart, South of Harold Street, and West of Sheryl Avenue.
Architect Clarence Young was present to represent. Comments were as follows:
1. James Crownover (Ozarks Electric): We have a guy (3-phase) on the East side
that will take up one of their parking spaces. There is not much of a way to
shorten it or move it so allowances will have to be made for it. This double guy
is in an old dedicated easement.
In answer to Mr. Young's question, Mr. Crownover said that there had been easements
across the rear of Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, Block 1, Oakland Hills Subdivision. The easement
on Lots 1, 2, and 3 had been closed; however the one (on Lot 4) that this guy
is in had not been closed.
John Carlon (Southwestern Bell) inquired about the possibility of setting another
pole to the East of that one and guying it.
Mr. Crownover said they would have to get permission from the present owner of
that property.
2. Floyd Hornaday (SWEPCO): As far as this building is concerned, we have gotour
service on Harold Street, but I believe REA would servethis. We will check it out
and see.
3. Clyde Terry (Warner Cable): Warner Cable does have service on two sides of
this building, and we will be able to serve this. I will have to work with the
builders to decide where to enter the building. We will request you to put in a
conduit going out probably parallel with the telephone company conduit. I am sure
we will come in from the East, since the easement on the East is where our feeder
cable is at the present time. Either that, or an extension of conduit from K -Mart.
If you want to go underground, we would need a conduit under your paved road in order
to get into the building. If you do desire T. V. cable service, I would ask that
you contact us in time to take care of this.
4. Steve Brown (Community Appearance): In answer to questions asked by Steve Brown,
Mr. Young said this would be a brick building with a plastic pre -formed facia around
the building which would be one story high with light steel frame. He said there
were no plans for expansion; that the only expansion in the plans that they had
would be to the South and the property was 900 feet deep. He said 50 foot is being
left on the West side of the building for access to the property if they ever needed it.
Steve Brown: If you need any help on appropriate plantings for the area, Community
Appearance is available for reference.
Mr. Young indicated that landscaping was planned.
135
Plat Review -2-
April 8, 1976
5. David McWethy (Administrative Assistant); No comments.
6. Paul Mattke (City Engineer): Water and sewer service is available from Harold Street
and they are showing that they plantto utilize it. It looks good.
7. Larry Wood (Planning Consultant): No comments on the existing proposal. I am
curious about the undeveloped part, only to the extend that if you propose to
consolidate your maintenance operation on Leverett with this, I would have difficulty
in rezoning for industrial on the back portion.
Mr. Young said he did not know of anything like that planned at this time.
Larry Wood: I am assuming your access from the South has been cut off, although
I think Johnie Bassett indicated that there was still some potential for coming in out
of the College Market Addition.
Mr. Young said it was his understanding that Mr. Bassett planned to give the part
adjoining this property to the church and that would cut off access from that addition.
Larry Wood: No other comments.
8. Clayton Powell (Street Superintendent): In 1971, the property from Highway 71
to the East perimeter of this undeveloped property was going to be developed by one
person. They had a local engineering firm prepare an engineering plan and profile.
Also, simultaneously with this, the State Highway Department was doing considerable
construction work on Highway 71. We requested that the box culvert underdraining
Highway 71 be lowered and moved South to get adequate drainage from Harold Street and
all intersecting streets. Since that time, four developers have become involved instead
of one and it has left this site in a critical condition.
The International House of Pancakes posted a $1,000 bond to improve Harold Street, to
widen it with curb and gutter and an underdrain. K -Mart as well as the
original developer was going to participate to bring Harold Street up to standards.
However, the consulting engineering firm that was employed to do the engineering work
gave no consideration to the problems of drainage on the North side of the street.
After the original developer and consulting eingineeiing firm were eliminated from the
picture, the International House of Pancakes and K -Mart had their own engineers and
contractors, who deviated from these plans which was on private property and they drain
a considerable part of K -Mart parking lot to the East into this property. The bottom
of the pipe elevation, using the old bench marks, is 68 feet.
Mr. Young, said McClelland Engineering was doing their work and that the first thing
they told him was that K -Mart drainage flowed to the West from theirinlets and their
storm drainage system.
Clayton Powell: I have been out there and pulled the grade off this inlet, looked
through the pipe, and have stood out in the rain and watched the water running out of it.
Mr. Young said they (K -Mart) had thecstorm drain in place and that what they
propose_. to do is to put a new inlet at such a point that it drop into their line
which would then make it a positive line solid all the way and water couldn't go
any place.except down the drain line.
Clayton Powell yt.Initia'lyrwetproposed a drop inlet at the West property line of
the Bell Telephone tract. However, because of the drainage problems on the North side
of Harold Street, we now propose that this be eliminated and that Southwestern Bell
fill this lot to drain out the driveway. This is the first time in my 10 years that
I have made such a recommendation. It is to insure proper drainage because the outlet
from K -Mart parking lot is 6 inches lower than the box culvert underdraining
Highway 71. The only way we can get of 1 percent fall from the East side of the
telephone company lot to that box culvert underdraining Highway 71 is to utilize the
existing grade depicted on the engineering plan and profile drawn by McClelland
Engineering dated 4-4-72. This means that the grades will have to be raised at the
intersection of Lee Street 1.5 feet and transition it for a distance of SO feet to
collect that drainage. Therefore, if it can be worked out, I would rather have the
Bell Telephone Company lot drain out their western driveway onto the street to be
picked up in a drop inlet that we propose to construct further West. All the drainage
136 j
i
•
•
r
Plat Review _
April 8, 1976
for Hrttl arold Street and this building would be picked up in the curb and gutter.
The drainage on the North side of Harold Street is a City problem; we have
• 7.1C that worked out.
50 Initially we thought that storm d ining across the front of the telephone company
property would be feasible. However, it is not feasible because of the critical
grades and the positive drainage element. Therefore, I would like to request that
the Bell Telephone Company voluntarily participate with the City in the cost
,p of improving Harold Street as it was originally proposed in 1971. We can do this
by the telephone company paying the cost of the curb and gutter at the City's
contractors cost (which is on an annual bid basis) to the City td establish
cT the centerline of Harold Street and widen it to 30 feet (15 feet each side of the
centerline and establish that as a flowline.
The telephone company goes to within 180 feet of the intersection of Sheryl Street.
There are two private dwellings there. If the telephone company would be generous
enough to pay for curb and gutter for that distance we would have the problems on
Harold Street solved.
Mr. Young said he had talked to the telephone company people in Little Rock and
they were willing to assume the expense of curb and gutter (which, he pointed out,
was really a City obligation) because they did not have the time to form an
improvement district. He said this would include curb and gutter in front of the
two private dwellings. He did indicate that Mr. Powell asking that the drainage
from this lot be carried out the driveway was another matter. He pointed out that
they had already had to raise the front of this lot where the building is to
set about 3 or 4 feet (this is the low point of the land). He said this would
probably have to be raised about another 2 feet which would be an additional
expense.
Clayton Powell: If you can make a workable drainage arrangement with K -Mart
and force the water to the West, you have my blessings.
9. Wally Brt (Sanitation Superintendent): Mr. Carlon indicated that they would
want a container.
Wally Brt: If the trash load is not too heavy, you may want to transfer the
2 -yard container that is at your maintenance operation on Leverett to this
Harold Street location and purchase another 4 -yard container for the one on
Leverett. A 4 -yard container is the smallest that I can get now. If you could
leave space at the South end (which would delete a couple of parking spaces)
it would be ideal! The truck can go on in and pick it up and go on out.
Mr. Young indicated that they would locate the trash container at the Southwest corner
of the building.
Wally Brt cautioned Mr. Young that his trucks were bad about tearing up the
driveways.
10. Perry Franklin (Traffic Superintendent): You mentioned landscaping this. Watch
your landscaping there at the exits and don't let it impair the site distances.
It should be under 3 feet in height and 25 feet from the intersection.
11. Frank O'Donnell (Arkansas Wes tern Gas): We have service available on three
sides, the East, West, and North., but it would probably be besttto come from the
East.
12. Bobbie Jones (Planning Administrator): The Plat Book shows 40 feet of
existing right=of-way on Harold Street, but it seems that I saw 60 feet of right-of-way
indicated somewhere else along the line. You are showing 60 feet. If there is
60 feet, that is fine; if it is 40 feet an additional 5 feet (from the centerline)
is needed.
In answer to Bobbie Jones' question, Mr. Young said this would be a one story and that
13-1 J
said that Mr. Meadows
If it is a concrete
get to an outlet,
Telephone service
13eJ
•
•
Plat Review -4-
April 8, 1976
it would not exceed 20: feet in height.
Bobbie Jones: I.f this ±s,only:.oneefloor there is approximately 9,000 square feet
of floor area; therefore, 34 parking spaces are required. You are showing more
than enough.
Mr. Young said the parking spaces would be 10' by 20t.
Bobbie Jones: The zoning does not permit the maintenance facilities to be located
there in the future with this existing zoning.
Free standing signs are not permitted in the R-0 Districts. You need to check
with 'Inspection Superintendent Harold Lieberenz or Building Inspector Freeman Wood
on the sign.
You are required, at the developer's expense, to notify the adjoining property
owners when the zoning is different from that of the property being developed.
You can do this one of three ways: (1) take a plat around to each one and have them
to sign it. (2) notify them by certified letter and bring the receipt to me.
(3) place an ad in the newspaper.
This will go before the Subdivision Committee of the Planning Commission and will
not go on to the Planning Commission unless the Subdivision Committee refers
it to them, or if someone appeals it to them.
I will work with Ervan Wimberly (McClelland Engineers) on the split that
Mr. Bassett is giving or selling to the church.
This is not in the fire zone.
If there is a food facility such as a kitchen with a stove and sink, it will have
to be cleared by Bill Parette with the State Health Department.
Mr. Young indicated that it would just be vending machines.
Bobbie Jones: The only problem I see is that the ordinance does require that
the parking containing 6 or more spaces in an R-Distiict be 25 feet from the street
line (which has been interpreted to be the right-of-way line). This would move
everything 10 feet to the South. You may want to go to the Board of Adjustment.
There is also a conflicting requirement that would require screening of that
parking there along the front and a conflicting requirement which says that there
cannot be anything which materially impedes the vision within the front yard
setback.
Mr. Young indicated that they wanted a canopy on the front where the employees
could pull up under it to get out in bad weather.
Bobbie Jones: The only exception the ordinance makes for canopies is for service
stations; therefore, the setback from the roof -overhang of the canopy to the
property line would have to be 50 feet.
The Planning Commission is studying the parking and screening requirements. It is
on their agenda for this next meeting (April 12).
Mr. Young indicated that they did not have the time for a study of these requirements
or to go before the Board of Adjustment.
He felt that the parking in the front would just have to be eliminated.
Bobbie Jones: I will need a revision of this to take before the Subdivision Committee.
Next item for discussion was the
large scale development plan submitted by
William N. Meadows for property at 3800 N. Crossover
Road (NE corner of Crossover Road and Joyce Road) to be used
purposes: tennis courts, swimming pool, and clubhouse.
Mr. Bob Nickle was present to represent. Comments were as follows:
WILLIAM N. MEADOWS
3800 N. Crossover Rd.
Large Scale Development
for recreational
1. Roy Hawkins (Southwestern Bell Telephone): Mr. Nickell
would probably want only one line.
Roy Hawkins: We do have cable in the vicinity to serve you.
block building, we will need a conduit stubbed in so we can
otherwise on a concrete wall, we have to run it on the face.
is available.
i
•
Plat Review -5-
April 8, 1976
2. James Crownover(Ozarks Electric): Ozarks Electric foresees no'problems serving
this property.
3. Clyde Terry (Warner Cable): We do not have T. V. Cable service in this area.
4. Steve Brown (Community Appearance): No comments.
5. Clayton Powell (Street Superintendent): Considerable drainage work has been
done at the intersection of Crossover Road and Joyce Road.
I did not check the Plat Book to determine the amount of e*isting right=of-way
for Joyce Street. Since this does abut Joyce on the East side and for a short distance
on the South and since Joyce is designated as a principle arterial on the Major
Street Plan requiring 80 feet of right-of-way, I would request dedication of 40 feet
of right-of-way from the existing centerline. Since this is an existing gravel
street at this location and curb and guttering would serve no useful purpose until
something else is developed, I won't impose a request of that nature.
If you have a driveway off of Crossover, you will have to have a State driveway
permit which you submit through the City Engineer's Office.
6. David McWethy (Administrative Assistant): Have you selected a name for this?
Bob Nickle: I think he is going to call it the Racquet Club (Eastridge Racquet Club).
7. Wally Brt (Sanitation Superintendent): This is a situation where they are trying
to put too much in too little of an area. I have problems with my big trucks getting
around. Since you are showing only one driveway, I would make it 40 foot width
with a 15 foot radius. You need a container, but I do not know where we would put
it so that we could pick it up and get back out. I definitely will not back one
of those trucks out on Highway 265. I would suggest that he have another driveway
where he has his paved parking and I would think it would be to his benefit to have
it as wide as he could get it (which is 40 feet).
He might want to put the container somewhere on the North part and bring his
entrance in the South side and have an exit on the North or vice -versa. It doesn't
really matter as long as we can put the container somewhere. I think an 8' by 12' pad
will be large enough for a 4 -yard container. I feel a little more work needs to be
done on this plat before it goes any further. These are suggestions. At this
time I will not determine where to put a container. From what I am shown here, I don't
have any room. It definitely needs another driveway somewhere and when it is
re -platted and brought back we will try to find a place for the container.
Planning Consultant Larry Wood commented that this drawing was not to scale and there
was probably more room than there looked like there was.
8. Perry Franklin (Traffic Superintendent): It looks like they are trying to put
a whole lot in too little of a space.
9. Steve Brown (Community Appearance): What will be in the proposed building?
Mr. Nickel: He plans for a locker room type facility, a grill to serve sandwiches.
10.1Paul Mattke (City Engineer): Water is available after a fashion. There is
a small water line on the South side of Joyce. The North-South water line shown is
a private line belonging to Mrs. Street.
Sewer is not available and there are no concrete plans.for it being available.
Nothing has been submitted on sewer on the Orthopaedic Clinic project. I question
whether the remaining land area will support this complex on a septic tank.
When was the field data obtained? I believe they deeded'. some right-of-way back
to Mr. Lightfoot along the East side of this property when;.they acquired the right-of-way
for Crossover and there may only be 35 feet of right-of-way existing. The drainage
ditch for the road lies behind Mr. Lightfoot's fence. There is a drainage problem
at that intersection.
Plat Review -6-
April 8, 1976
•
11. Frank O'Donnell (Arkansas Western Gas): We have a high pressure main line on the
East side of the old road and we can provide service from it.
12. Bobbie Jones (Planning Administrator): This is a conditional use in the A-1
Zone requiring Planning Commission approval. Regardless of whether or not the development
plan is ready to go to the Planning Commission, the use question itself is on the
agenda for the 4-12-76 Planning Commission meeting.
The setbacks for any buildings would be 35 feet from the proposed right-of-way.
If you have 8 tennis courts that would call for 8 parking spaces for the tennis
courts. On the pool, there is a requirement for 1 parking space for every 300
square feet of pool and deck area. The pool is 110' by 50' which requires 18 parking
spaces even if there is no deck. There is also a requirement for 1 parking space
for each 300 feet of floor space for the clubhouse which would be an additional
21 spaces. Altogether this would be approximately 47 parking spaces that are required
and you do not have that many.
The building setbacks from the street rights-of-way apply for any part of a structure
over 30 inches high; so if there is a built up deck around this swimming pool, it would
also have to meet that setback.
You may have a fence in your setback area so long as it does not impede the vision.
Anything over 30 inches in height and which materially impedes vision could not be
within the setback.
Your driveway should be a minimum of 60 feet from the intersection of the street and
you are fine on that. It should be a minimum of 20 feet from=your North property
line as well.
Your parking must be 25 feet from your street right-of-way, and it must be either 5 feet
from the North property line with a view obscuring fence or hedge or 20 feet from
the:North property line. It must be paved and must have wheel stops. Your parking
spaces should be 10' by 20'. You need to obtain a permit for your driveway which is
submitted through the City Engineer's Office.
On a free standing sign, you are permitted one ( a maximum of 16 square feet).
They can have one sign on the building. He should contact Inspection Superintendent
Harold Lieberenz or Building Inspector Freeman Wood on signs. He doesn't
have any fencing shown, however, I feel that he may want some.
Mr. Nickel felt that Mr. Meadows would probably want some fencing in the pool area
and also on the back of the courts.
I don't think this is to scale, but I am wonderingiff he will have trouble meeting his
building setbacks. I agree with Planning Consultant Larry Wood, I think there is
probably more room than there appears to be just from looking at the drawing. He would
have to meet that 35 foot setback on the building or any deck that exceeds 30 inches
in height from the proposed right-of-way from all streets.
The Planning Commission may feel that this should meet the additional setbacks required
in the R -District. If they do, this will cause a problem since there would be aC100cfoot
setback from the property line on the tennis courts
We will have to have a revision that shows the required number of parking spaces
and the setbacks met drawn to scale. Before Mr. Meadows can obtain a building permit,
he must obtain clearance from the State Board of Health on the swimming pool and
the kitchen facilities. He may contact Bill Parette on this but clearance will have
to be from the Little Rock office.
Someone should be present at the Planning Commission Monday (April 12th) to represent
when they consider the conditional use At that time they may want to impose certain
conditions. They have the authority to do that as well as having the authority to deny
the conditional use.
The last item for discussion by the Plat Review Committee OLD WIRE ROAD NORTH
was the preliminary plat of the proposed Old Wire Road North Sub- Preliminary Plat
division, to be located East of Old Wire Road and West of Winwood Addition.
Frank Blew (Blew 6 Associates) was present to represent.
Comments were as follows:
•
•
Plat Review -7-
April 8, 1976
1. Wally Brt (Sanitation Superintendent): No comments. If you can get the
streets in, I am ready.
Frank Blew commented that this subdivision would not be done in phases.
2. Perry Franklin (Traffic Superintendent): I would like to see him go ahead and
name the street stub going South. It might eliminate a "rats nest" to go ahead and
name it before a lot of people moved in there.
3. Frank Blew (Blew and Associates): What this developer plans on doing is
complete curb and gutter, sidewalk, all underground utilities, street lights.
They also plan to build a bridge over the creek on what is shown on the plat
as Stewart Street. They are going to ask for some assistance from the City in design_
ing of the bridge.
4. Clayton Powell (Street Superintendent): The precedent is already established
and the policy exists in writing on the City's bridge policy. (It was not certain
how much of the cost would be shared by the City.)
Old Wire Road is a collector street and we want to insure that we have 30 feet
of right-of-way from the centerline of the East.
Frank Blew commented that they were dedicating 10 additional feet which would
make this' 40 feet.from the centerline.
Clayton Powell: I still maintain that since the subdivision abuts the proposed
Township Road that they construct half of the street. Other than that, I have
no further comments until I see the engineering plans and profiles. As it
has been pointed out by Administrative Assistant David McWethy, the financial
condition of the City being such as it is, unless they want to wait until the
City can afford to support its policy on bridges, (probably not only this
subdivision, but also Brookside East, Azalea Terrace and all of the others
that expect the City to participate in the cost of bridges). .they may have to wait.
You have done a magnificient job on the plat.
4. David McWethy (Administrative Assistant): In answer to David McWethy's question,
Clayton Powell said that a collector street is built 44 feet wide from
flow -line to flow -line (4, 11 -foot lanes) and that where the developer is required
to construct a collector street, the City sustains the cost in excess of the
residential street standard which is 30 feet flow -line to flow -line.
Mr. Powell said that by the developer constructing only half of the collector
street (22 feet) the developer would not be constructing more than his residential
street; therefore, the City would not have to share the cost in this. He went
on to explain that when the property on the North side developed and constructed
their half, this would make the full width of the collector street.
David McWethy then commented to Frank Blew that he still didchot understand
where Yorkwood would be in respect to the concerned property.
Frank Blew: Yorkwood would be approximately 150 feet further East from the
East line of the proposed subdivision. He said they planned to dedicate 30 feet
off the North side of the entire length of the property for the Township extension.
He pointed out the present 30 foot easement that the City had obtained
(at their own initiative) from Winwood Baptist Church.
David McWethy: I think when we get on further down the line, if we had a drawing
like this showing the relationship of Creekwood Avenue and Yorkwood, it would
head -off some questions that people might have.'
Planning Consultant Larry Wood commented to Clayton Powell (Street Superintendent)
that 50 feet was actually all he would be able to get for the extension of Township
(Di
along the North end of Winwood Subdivision since the Board of Adjustment had
waived the side setback on the houses on the North end of this subdivision.
14I
(4>�
Plat Review -8-
April 8, 1976
He wondered (along the Northproperty line) if the curb could be jammed up against
the North right=of-way line and get all of the utilities on the South side of
the roadway. This would give 25 feet from them and the utilities to go through there.
Concerning the extension of Township Road, Mr. Blew made the following comments:
There is a house setting inside the 30 foot dedication shown for Township Road.
The' developer proposes to demolish this house (valued at around $20,000) and
move it if the City wants to build Township. The developers had him to design these
lots so that Township would not have to be used for any access for any of these
lots so they could go ahead and develop this subdivision as a whole without the
extension of Township being made because they do not feel like the:City or the
adjoining property owners are prepared to build Township at this time. The only
way Township can be built is for the City to condemn the residence North of this
subdivision. They are proposing to develop all the streets (everything to City
specifications except Township. They would agreetto go into something like an
improvement district to construct Township so that the other property owners
can contribute. They are asking that they do not do anything with Township
at this time: They are willing to go ahead and dedicate to the City the right-of-way
for Township and if and when the City initiates the Township construction, they
would be willing to destroy a $20;000 house for their part of it.
Clayton Powell (Street Superintendent): To make it less expensive and to keep your
lot lines straight, I would propose, rather than to construct the cul-de-sacs,
that you just come out to the centerline of the proposed Township with a "T"
which would serve the purpose of a turn -around at the end of the dead-end street.
Make your 30 foot radii and pave the 22 feet from end of radius to end of the curb.
5. Larry Wood (Planning Consultant): I would recommend pulling one of the cul-de-
sacs on Township back to eliminate so many intersections with the proposed Township.
I would prefer that for traffic pattern that Terry Drive cul be pulled back!
Frank Blew felt that Creekwood Avenue would be an access to Township if the
property to the South developed. He said he would possibly eliminate the curve
South of the cul-de-sac by culling it at the curve and it would save the cost
of paving approximately 510 feet of street.
Clayton Powell indicated no objection to this suggestion.
Larry Wood: I recommend that you indicate on the plat for those lots that abut
Old Wire Road and Township, "limits of no access".
David +IcWethy: A street light is required every 300 feet, at every intersection,
and at the end of cul-de-sacs I suggest you consider low-pressure sodium for
street lights. They cost more to install but use less power.
Frank Blew commented that they had not shown street lights on this plat since
they did not know how the easements would be provided for the underground cable
that would be serving them.
6. Paul Mattke (City Engineer): As far as the fill over the sewer line, I don't
believe that 2 feet is going to hurt it. We will have to be careful in getting
equipment across it. If it is necessary to raise the manhole, we would expect
the developer to pay for that.
I have not talked with anyone concerning water service but have been making;
the assumption that they will be providing the water and sewer facilities.
I would recommend that they try to dedicate a drainage easement containing the
creek.
7. Clyde Terry (Warner Cable): After some discussion, Clyde Terry asked for
the following easements for the utilities represented:
20 foot easement between Lots 2 and 3, Block 3; 20 feet between Lot 16 and 17,
Block 2; 20 feet between Lots 8 and 9, Block 2; 20 feet between Lots 2 and 3, Block 5;
20 feet across the complete South side of this addition.
Plat Review
April 8, 1976
Note: Frank O'Donnell (Arkansas Western Gas).was unable to attend the meeting
but telephoned the Planning Office that he wanted 25. feet (along the South property
line of the addition where Mr. Terry had asked for 20. feet).
Frank Blew said they would have a problem with 25 feet on Lot 5, Block 4 since
this easement might get into an existing residence.
Planning Administrator Bobbie Jones told Frank Blew to contact Mr, O'Donnell on
this since it might be negotiable.
Roy Hawkins (Southwestern Bell Telephone): We might could cuttdown to 20 feet
on that one lot, but on the rest of them we would want 25 feet.
Mr. Blew indicated that they would give the 25 feet if it didn't get into the
existing house.
Mr, Terry: I would like another 25 foot easement in Block 2 on the North side
of Lots 11 through 19 running East and West all the way through.
If you move this cul-de-sac back at the end of Terry Drive, I would like a 25 foot
easement between Lot 1 in Block 5 and Lot 2, Block 2.
The utilities also suggested to make the 25 foot frontssetback line to read
"25 foot building setback line and utility easement
Mr. Terry said SWEPCO would need a link -up or complete circuit around and Mr.
Hornaday (representative from SWEPCO -+ho had to leave the meeting earlier)
suggested that all front setbacks as shown be designated as setbacks and utility
easements in addition to the side and rear easements specifically requested.
It was suggested that it be shown on the plat this way and then they could be
deleted if necessary.
The utilities and City Engineer Paul Mattke said, since the utilities were all
going to be underground, they would need to see an overlay of this.showing
the location of the various utility lines.
The utilities indicated that they still needed the additional 15 -foot
easement where it adjoins Winwood Subdivision.
Frank Blew pointed out the 10' wide and 15' long easement in the Southeast
corner of this proposed subdivision (Lot 6, Block 1)
Roy Hawkins (Southwestern Bell Telephone): I need a 20 foot easement between
Lots 7 and 8, Block 5.
In answer to Mr. Hawkins' question, Mr. Blew said they would probably dedicate a 30 foot
drainage easement along the creek.
After some discussion, the utilities asked for a 25 -foot drainage and utility easement
each side of the centerline of the creek in addition to the 25 foot sewer easement.
8. Frank O'Donnell (Arkansas Western Gas) Not present at meeting but telephoned
the following comments: They don't show any easements which I am sure they
will be discussed at the meeting this morning. We will need at least 25 foot
easements (if everyone is in the same easement) all around the perimeter and in
Block 2, we need a 25 foot easement to serve all the lots in that block (Block 2).
Also, we would need a 25 foot easement between Lots 3 and 4, Block 1. Will try to check
back after the meeting to see what was discussed on the easements.
9. Bobbie Jones (Planning Administrator): The previous adjoining property owners
signatures did not 'show all of these adjoining properties. I will need this.
On the revised preliminary plat, show sidewalks down one side of each street and
all the way around the cul-de-sac. Show street light locations.
You are not going to have very much building area on Lot 6,of Block 3. Also
show the existing residences on Lot 5, Block 4 and in Block 5 on the revised plat.
There was no further discussion.
The meeting was adjourned at 12:00 P. M.
143