HomeMy WebLinkAbout1980-07-17 MinutesMINUTES OF A PLAT REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING
A meeting of the Plat Review Committee was held at 9:00 A.M., Thursday, July
17, 1980, in the Board of Directors 'Room, City Administration Building, Fayetteville,
Arkansas.
UTILITY REPRESENTATIVES PRESENT:
CITY REPRESENTATIVES PRESENT:
OTHERS PRESENT:
John Kehn, Kenneth Wagner, Dennis Burrack.
Bobbie Jones, Cynthia Stewart, Don Bunn, John Durham,
Clayton Powell, Freeman Wood, Wally Brt.
Larry Wood, J. William Scott, Ralph Gray, Rick
Neal, William Webster and Al Hughes.
The only item for consideration this THE ASPEN A LARGE SCALE
morning was a Large Scale Development Plan, DEVELOPMENT
The Aspen, submitted by Ralph Gray, Owner and Developer. WEDINGTON DRIVE
The Large Scale Development is located West of Garland .
Avenue and North of Wedington Drive.
Ralph Gray - Owner, J. William Scott- Architect, Rick Neal - Contractor,
and William Webster - Attorney, were present to represent.
1. Don Osburn (City Water Meter Foreman): Phoned his comments in to Bobbie Jones
and she relayed them to the Developer. Mr. Osburn wondered if the Developer
was planning single meters for each unit, or a master meter for the entire
project.
Ralph Gray said he would prefer individual water meters for each unit.
Bobbie Jones asked when construction was scheduled to start. Mr. Gray
said he hoped to start construction November 1, 1980.
2. Freeman Wood (City Building Inspector): Asked if the Development would be
wood frame construction. William Scott replied that it would. Freeman
asked if the structures would be three stories high. Scott replied that they
would.
Freeman asked the Developer if he was aware that three-story construction
had to have one-hour protection. Scott replied that he was aware of that.
Wood asked if Scott was aware of the State Energy Requirements that would
have to be met. Scott replied that was a requirement he was not familiar with.
Freeman said the State Energy Code contained requirements for heating, insulation,
furnaces, air conditioning, etc. Scott asked if he could be furnished with a
copy of that code. Freeman said a copy could be obtained from the State Energy
Office, and that the address would be furnished the Developer.
Freeman stated there could be a problem with the railing on the stairs.
He said smoke detectors would be required. The bottom floor would require
2 x 6 construction. At least two exits out of each unit would be required.
Freeman asked what the total square footage would be of any one building.
Scott replied that the largest square footage of any one building would be
28,800 square ft.
Freeman said that, under the Building Code, the maximum square footage
for the first floor would be 12,000 sq. ft., for the second floor the maximum
would be 10,000 sq. ft. and for the third floor the maximum would be 6400 sq.. ft.
He stated that if these requirements are exceeded a four hour fire wall will
Plat Review Committee Meeting
July 17, 1980
Page 2
be required through the roof. Freeman said there are provisions in the code
whereby more square footage can be picked up, but not a very large amount.
Scott stated that as far as separation, in a typical building in the
development, not connected, containing twelve units, the main wall between the
units will consist of an unpenetrated, two-hour fire wall, that will extend from
the foundation up to the underside of the roof sheeting. He said the roof would
consist of one-hour protection four ft. inside from the two-hour fire wall. He
said that in the case where two buildings are connected, the same construction
will be used in a fire wall connecting the two buildings. Scott stated they
were trying to avoid, if possible, a wall that goes above the roof line.
Freeman stated he would study the matter and work with the Developer. He
said, however, if the developer did not wish the fire wall to extend above the
roof line, a four-hour wall is required. He said this might be handled by
having a non-combustible roof extending either side of the fire wall.
Freeman said that a one-hour fire break will be required every 3000 ft.
in the attic.
Scott said he understood Freeman as saying that the exterior envelope of
each apartment had to be one-hour fire resistance. Freeman said that was correct.
Scott asked if two layers of 5/8 fire code on one side is acceptible. Freeman
said that two layers of 5/8 sheet rock on the inside of the entire structure
would be acceptible.
Scott said the Developers were planning to use a ply wood material for siding
and asked Mr. Wood if there would be any problem. Freeman stated the specification
was for one-hour fire protection assembly and if the Developers met that requirement
there should be no problem.with wood siding.
Gray asked Mr. Wood to elaborate on the problem with the railing. Freeman
said there is a problem with the railing as drawn on the plans submitted to him.
He said the railing must be 36 inches high, a curb is required 2 inches off the
floor, the space between the railing and the floor must be enclosed, either
horizontally or vertically, so that a 6:inch, round object will not go through
the space.
Freeman stated that certification will have to be furnished, on the plans,
that they meet the State Energy Code, or a letter submitted with the plans
certifying compliance.
Rick Neal asked Freeman Wood what all was covered under the State Energy
Code. Mr. Wood replied, the type of insulation required, the type of envelope
of the buildings, furnaces, air conditioning system, and hot water heaters.
Wood stated that anything over a four-plex was now regulated by State Law.
Bobbie Jones asked Freeman Wood if the Energy Code did not also cover the three
gallon limit on shower heads and also, regulated the heating of swimming pools.
Freeman stated that was correct, there is a three gallon per minute limit on
shower heads, but that it is hard to find a shower head that exceeds that limit,
so he did not think it was too much of a problem complying with that. He said
as far as the heating of the swimming pool, a limiting device would be required
that would cut the heat off after it reaches 80 degrees.
Rick Neal asked what type of requirements existed in regard to windows.
Freeman said that came under the classification of the overall envelope of the
building.
Scott asked if it was required that an Engineer seal the mechanical drawings.
Plat Review Committee Meeting
•July 17, 1980
Page 3
•
•
Freeman stated that the City does not require it, but the. State requires they
be certified and the City would prefer that the mechanical drawings are certified
by an Arkansas Registered Engineer.
Al Hughes (Adjoining Property Owner): Mr. Hughes stated that he was mainly
concerned with safety in regard to the ingress/egress point of the Development
having its centerline 200 ft. West of the centerline of Hall Avenue. Mr. Hughes
stated his driveway was 145 to 150 ft. West of the centerline of Hall Avenue.
Entering and exiting from his driveway is at times difficult, and he is on the
level side of the street. Hughes said the State Highway Department has posted a
speed limit of 25 miles per hour in this area, but that only about one in two
hundred cars goes by at 25 miles per hour or less. He said that persons living
in the Development will be travelling uphill, and coming into a blind area. Mr.
Hughes felt that a serious accident could result from this problem. He said
ingress/egress would be particularly rough during bad weather.
Ralph Gray asked Mr. Hughes for suggestions. Mr. Hughes stated that he would
propose moving the ingress/egress further to the West. He said that 90 percent of
the traffic coming out of the drive would be turning to the East. Mr. Gray stated
he would contribute to a caution light installation. Bobbie Jones stated that
anything of that nature would have to be taken up with the State Highway Department,
as Wedington Drive is solely under their jurisdiction.
Hughes said that when he was on the Planning Commission, there had been a requirement
of three points of ingress and egress in relation to a Large Scale Development.
Bobbie Jones said she recalled several situations in which the two points of
ingress/egress were required immediately and another point when the abutting
property developed, however, that had been imposed on Subdivisions with 90 to
100 lots. Hughes said even so, there would be a minimum of 132 cars entering and
exiting all day long several times per day. Hughes felt the Development needed
another entrance/exit at another point.
Ralph Gray said he would work with Mr. Hughes and look at the site with him
and consider alternatives.
4. Larry Wood (Northwest Arkansas Regional Planning Commission): He stated he had
three suggestions:
A. If the entrance is left as it exists on the drawings now, he suggested
considering a right turn in on the East side of the property, and a right
turn out on the West side.of the property.
B. If the drive is installed as indicated.on the drawing, he suggested at least
one car length level surface, so that a vehicle would be at grade with
Wedington Drive.
C. The island shown North of the entrance, up in the parking area, might pose an
obstacle to Fire Equipment that might serve the Development, also Sanitation
Vehicles might have problems manuevering around it. Wood suggested redesigning
the island or eliminating it Completely.
Scott asked for an explanation of Mr. Wood's first comment concerning right turn in
and right turn out.
Larry Wood stated his suggestion was that there be a right -turn only, into
the development on the East side of the entire project, at or near the property
line, so that West bound traffic could turn right to enter the development.
Plat Review Committee Meeting
July 17, 1980
• Page 4
•
Then there would be an exit on the West property line for outbound traffic -
right turn only.
Scott asked Wood if he was suggesting that the drive as shown on the
drawing be eliminated. Mr. Wood stated what he was suggesting, was two
additional drives, restricted to one way traffic. In other words, the East
drive would channelize traffic to a one way entrance, which will not require
crossing a traffic lane. On the West side there would be an outlet where
traffic could only turn right or West, and would not have to cross the line
of traffic. The center drive would remain two-way.
Scott said the Developers were planning on granting a utility easement
on the East property line, and he wondered if there would be a problem
building the drive over the easement. Clayton Powell stated if the utility
companies had to go into the easement to service their lines, they would
have to tear up the drive.
Mr. Scott asked, in lieu of a right turn in and right turn out at
respective property lines, if perhaps the Developer could redesign the two
way entrance to channel traffic to right turn in and right turn out. Mr.
Wood replied that, in his opinion, the three drives would be better. Scott
said that there is an easement connecting to James from the Development, and
he would explore developing that access.
5. Wally Brt (City Sanitation Superintendent): Wally stated that in adverse
weather it may be impossible to provide sanitation service, because of the
slope.
Secondly, any trees that overhang on the drives will need to be trimmed
a minimum of sixteen feet above ground level.
Regarding the first trash enclosure, the two trees in that immediate
area will have to be eliminated, along with the island North of the entrance.
Wally said he would like to pick up the Southeast container first, back up,
continue West, the container on the West side will have to be resituated so
it faces East (it is shown on the drawing as facing North) then pick up
the container on the Northwest side. Wally said the container on the North-
east side of the Development would have to be resituated so that it would
face West.
Wally suggested four six yard containers.
Wally said that any enclosures for containers will have to have a
fifteen foot opening. The pads on which the containers will be placed will
be twelve ft. deep and 15 ft. wide. Three sides of the container may be
enclosed, but the front cannot be enclosed. Wally did not suggest enclosing
the containers, as tenants sometimes throw trash into the enclosure instead
of placing it in the container.
6. Clayton Powell (City Street Superintendent): Stated that he was -in concurrence
with Larry Wood's comment on an East side ingress only to be channelized with
a median restricting it to one-way in. Powell suggested a 14 ft. wide traffic
lane to facilitate use by emergency vehicles, fire trucks, etc. He was also
in concurrence with Mr. Wood's suggestion for an exit on the West property
line, channelized to accomodate one-way traffic only. He said the center
drive could remain ingress/egress, however, Wedington Drive is State Highway
16, it will require an Engineered, detailed drawing, to be submitted to the
State Highway Department, District Engineer's Office in Ft. Smith for approval.
Plat Review Committee Meeting
July 17, 1980
Page 5
Usually their requirements are equal to or greater than those of the City.
Wedington Drive is designated as an arterial street requiring an 80 ft.
right-of-way. As best Mr. Powell could determine from the plat book, it exists
as 60 ft. The Developer will have to provide one half of the additional
right-of-way to bring the right-of-way up to 80 ft. (10 ft.). This dedication
will have to be filed and recorded as a separate instrument.
The topography of the property shows a consistent 10 percent grade from
the South side of the property abutting Wedington Drive to the North property
line
The West side of the property reflects an existing hillside, natural
drainage ditch. The topo also reflects a 24 -inch underdrain of Wedington
Drive at about the West property line, which will have to be preserved.
Any drives will have to meet the minimum of 150 ft. sighting distance.
Any improvement of the natural drainage ditch on the West side is the property
owner's responsibility. If the drainage pattern for this tract of land should
be changed, and concentrates the drainage into one area or another, it would
be the property owner's responsibility to the property owners being damaged.
Clayton said,:as far as a traffic caution light, that should be discussed
with the State Highway Department, District Engineer. As far as the City
participating in the cost, that would have to be discussed with Perry
Franklin, City Traffic Superintendent.
The Planning Commission is impowered to require off-site improvements,
however, they have not set a precedent of requiring off-site improvements to
State Highways. They have, at times, required sidewalks along State Highways,
and may require a sidewalk along the North side of Wedington Drive. Clayton
said he felt, that with the number of apartments, a sidewalk would be desirable
along Wedington Drive, but the topography would make one difficult to install.
Mr. Scott stated that he could see a definite need for a sidewalk at
least from Hall Avenue to the Central Drive of the Development, but could not
see a need for a sidewalk on the West side of the Development.
Scott asked Clayton to explain the additional right-of-way to bring
Wedington Drive up to Master Street Plan Requirements. Clayton stated one
half of the remaining dedication required would have to be dedicated by the
Developers, which would be half of twenty feet. Scott asked if setbacks would
be measured from the new right-of-way and Clayton replied that was correct.
Bobbie Jones stated that the present legal description may measure into
the right-of-way and that the Developers would have to research that.
Clayton said that all maintenance of drives within the Development will
be the responsibility of the owners, it will be private property. He said
there will definitely be a problem traveling the roads in inclement weather.
Bobbie Jones stated that if the Developers could prove that the
additional dedication was less than the plat book shows, then the Developer
would be required to dedicate only that portion that would be equal to half
of the amount needed to bring Wedington Drive up to an 80 ft. right-of-way,
but it is the developer's responsibility to prove that. She stated that the
additional right-of-way requirement can only be waived by the Board of Directors.
Scott inquired as to the process for dedicating right-of-way. Bobbie
said that there is a form available from the Office of City Planning, and that
it would have to be recorded by the City Clerk in the County Courthouse.
Plat Review Committee Meeting
July 17, 1980
Page 6
Scott said that according to his site plan survey, the property line varies
from 50 ft. on the East side of the Development down to 25 ft. on the West side..
He said that the setbacks are sufficient on the East side, but there may be a
problem on the West side with meeting setback requirements.
Bobbie Jones said the Highway Department had already obtained additional
right-of-way East of the proposed Development, when they made the connection
from North Wedington across Garland. Ms. Jones suggested checking with the
Highway Department to see if they have obtained any right-of-way.
Neal asked if there was any requirement as to sidewalk elevation. He asked
if a sidewalk could be installed lower than the elevation of the street.
Bobbie said the sidewalks will probably be in the Highway Department right-of-way
and that should be checked out with the Highway Department.
Bobbie Jones said that Clayton had not been particularly concerned about
installation of sidewalks on the East side of the Development only. She said
that if the Highway Department tears up a concrete sidewalk in their right-of-way
they will replace it. She said the Planning Commission had recently waived the
sidewalk requirement on a State Highway and their decision had been overturned
by the Board of Directors. She said the Board of Directors currently has very
strong feelings about sidewalks. Bobbie said that for construction of a
sidewalk within Highway right-of-way a permit would have to be obtained from
the State Highway Department.
Scott asked what his setback requirements would be from the Highway Department
right-of-way, Bobbie Jones replied that they would be 25 ft.
7. John Durham (City Fire Inspector). Stated he would like to reinforce comments
pertaining to maneuverability of City Emergency and Sanitation vehicles, especially
in reference to the removal of the island North of the central drive.
He was also in accord with the additional drives, and felt they were well
worth studying.
Durham said some of the fire protection equipment has a 75 ft. turning
radius, some of the buildings being three stories high would require this equipment
(snorkel) if there was a fire. He said in order to use this equipment
effectively, they would need to get as close as possible to the structure. He
said parking areas are situated in such a way that the equipment would probably
have to pull up onto the lawn to get close enough to the buildings to be
effective. Durham said there is one building where the reach on the equipment
would be 51 ft. and felt that would be too great a distance for the equipment
to be effective.
In regard to floor plans, he said he could not see adequate exits, that
only one entrance to each unit was shown. He said that windows can sometimes be
considered a secondary means of exit.
Scott stated that in all apartments, the windows would be sliding glass
type, with an area that would be sufficient for exiting.
Durham stated in that case, the minimum window opening size would be 5.7
sq. ft.
Durham asked if the doors in the club house would be sliding glass type.
Scott replied that they would.
Gray stated that in each apartment there would be a sliding glass door
going out. onto the deck, from the living room.
Scott asked if the one additional fire hydrant, centrally located was
Plat Review Committee Meeting
July 17, 1980
Page 7
acceptable. Durham replied that it was
Scott inquired as to requirements regarding smoke detectors. Freeman
Wood stated detectors are •required, and that a combination battery/electric
smoke detector was recommended.
8. Don Bunn (City Engineer): Asked Mr. Gray if there would be a laundry room.
Gray replied there would be, it would have nine washing machines and five
dryers. Bunn said it would also require a separate meter.
Scott stated that the laundry room would be part of the Club House Facility.
Bunn asked Gray if he would be the owner after the development was
completed. Gray replied that he would.
Scott stated that the Developers would like to bring water service into
the Development from the 12 inch water line along Wedington Drive. He said
the Developers would be supplying an additional fire hydrant that would be
centrally located.
Scott asked if there were any other special requirements.
Scott asked if the Water Department would be bringing water service into
a certain point and having the Developer take it from there. Bunn replied
the Developers were proposing allot of apartments, and he suggested having
water service or a main go into the area. He said the Developer's would be
responsible for constructing the main into the apartment complex. The Water
Department would then make taps off of that main, and set the meters for each
block. The Water Department will set two meters in one box. Regarding the
fire hydrant, the Developers would have to run an eight inch line from Wedington
Drive to the point where the hydrant will be set, but may use a smaller main
beyond that. Bunn said service could be tapped from the eight inch line run
for the hydrant. He stated that the eight inch line could also be tapped at
certain points on the way into the development.
Scott asked if the Water Department would do the construction from the
hydrant to the units. Bunn repeated that the Developer would do all the
construction except the setting of the meters. Bunn said the Developer would
run the main which would include the fire hydrant, plus any small mains that
might be required to serve the development. The Water Department will make
taps on that main and set the meter boxes, the Developer will go from there into
the different apartments with service lines.
Neal asked how large the meter boxes are. Bunn said they are 18 inches
and they are round.
Bunn said that Plans for the water mains would have to be submitted to the
City Engineer's Office for approval prior to construction of the mains. The plans
must also be approved by the State Board of Health before the construction is
begun on the mains. Bunn said he would furnish the Developer with a list
of materials that would be allowed in the construction.
Bunn said there is an existing six inch sewer line coming down James
Street which is 170 ft. more or less, from the Northeast corner of this property.
He said this could be used with gravity. He said there is also an eight
inch line available on the South side of Wedington that could be tied on to,
but there would have to be a lift station to pump into it. Bunn said that
he would like to get some idea of how large the load on the sewer system would
be before getting too technical.
Rick Neal asked how large the line was on Garland. Don Bunn replied that
the line serving Garland was also six inch, and it actually drains back
into the same system to the North.
•
•
•
Plat Review Committee Meeting
July 17, 1980
Page 8
Gray asked if there were any plans to enlarge the sewer lines in this
area in the future. Bunn replied there were not.
Scott asked Bunn that based on the load calculations requested by Mr. Bunn
if it may be acceptable to go all gravity. Bunn said that was correct, but
that decision would have to be reserved until he is given some indication of
volume. Bunn said he was interested in checking the data the Developers had
which had been instrumental in their determining that half of the sewage be
pumped and half gravity.
Gray asked what would happen if the load from the Development was too
large to be handled by the existing sewer service. He asked about possibly
contributing to a new lift station. Don Bunn said he was not prepared to tell
the Developer what it would cost in the way of system improvements.
Scott asked if the Developers put in a lift station and pumped the sewage
out, if it could be turned over to the City for maintenance. Bunn stated that
the City would not accept that sort of arrangement, that it would be a private
lift station and must be privately maintained.
Bunn said that in the event that the City's sewer could not accept the
Development, the City would ask the Developer to make improvements to the
existing system, to allow it to accept the Development. He said the City
would contribute, and the Developer would be required to contribute. The
improvements could consist of additional main or a lift station.
Rick Neal asked how near capacity the sewer service was at this time.
Don Bunn said the problem lay in the main sizes rather than the lift station.
He said there are a number of lift stations which pump sewage from this entire
part of the City back to the treatment plant on the White River East of the City.
Gray wanted to know what to expect as far as improvements. Bunn said he
needed the load data before he could comment. He stated that if the
Developers would get the expected load data to him he would supply them with his
comments.
Gray asked if he would be penalized for a problem that everyone in the
area is contributing to.
Bobbie Jones said that there are several reasons that the Subdivision
Committee can use to turn down a Large Scale Development, and one of them
is if there is not water and sewer available, and no provision is being made
to extend them. This can be appealed to the Planning Commission, and a Planning
Commission decision can be appealed to the Board of Directors, if it is
appealed within .'ten days
Bunn said that if it was determined that the sewer was inadequate, it
would probably be a matter of negotiation between the City and the Developer
as to what improvements should be made.
Don Bunn stated that any water mains would require fifteen ft. easements.
If any other utilities are to be in the same easement as the water or sewer
lines, the easement will have to be widened to accomodate them. Plans for any
water or sewer lines will have to be submitted to the City Engineer's Office
for approval, in addition, they will have to be submitted to the Arkansas
Department of Health for approval. He further stated that any plans for
water or sewer lines would have to be prepared by an Engineer registered in the
State of Arkansas.
If a sewer main is required to be run from James Street, it will be
installed at the expense of the Developer.
A main extension fee will be charged for connection to the sewer. The
fee will run $.03 per square foot of development area. He said this does not
•
•
•
Plat Review Committee Meeting
July 17, 1980
Page 9
apply to the portion of the development where the Developer extends the main to
serve the Development himself. Since the Developer is extending the water
himself, the main extension fee on water service will not apply.
9. Dennis Burrack (SWEPCO): Stated that he needs some type of load information
before he couldocomment;on what type'of system would be put in.
Service will be underground. The Electric Company will be reimbursed
for a certain amount of the cost of the difference between the overhead and
underground service, He said cost is running about $65.00 per meter (one time
cost) or, an experimental rider of $1.15 per month on each individual customers
billing with no expiration date on this monthly fee. It is the option of the
Developer which type of reimbursement is preferred.
Scott asked what cost would run as far as installing service. Burrack
replied the Electric Company will invest up to $.40 per ft. for installation,
as far as ditching and back fill. Any excess cost will be paid by the Developer.
He stated that if telephone and television services are in the same ditch, they
willialso share some of the expense.
Scott asked if there would be a transformer at each building. Burrack
replied that he would need load information before he could comment. He stated
that the Development would be served from a loop type feed. He said if the
load justifies it, they could place a transformer for each unit.
Burrack said the Electric Company will install the primary cable, transformers
and pedestal, and, if need be, a secondary pedestal. Anything past the pedestal
will be run by the Developer. He stated the Electric Company will furnish meter
sockets or reimburse the Developer so much perohole, if approved units are used.
Meters will be furnished by the Developer. Meters will be installed by
the Developer. Developer will provide the service wire.
Scott asked if the meters will be near the transformer. Burrack replied
the meters will be on the building.
Upon the Developer furnishing load information, the Electric Company will
designate where easements are required. All easements will have to be filed
and recorded as separate instruments. Any easement for utilities will specify
that it is an utility easement and which utilities will be in the easement.
Scott asked if the easement dedications would have to be done prior to
coming before the Subdivision Committee. Bobbie Jones said they would have to
be filed and recorded prior to issuance of a Building Permit. She said that
the Developer would have to be in agreement to furnish the easements as requested
by the Utility Companies at the time of the Subdivision Committee Meeting.
Burrack stated that all easements must be cleared to final grade by the
Developer. He stated that an easement for the Electric Company alone would be
fifteen ft. wide. He said that if other utilities were going to utilize the same
ditch, the easement would have to be twenty five ft. wide.
Dick Shaw from the Phone Company suggested that in a case like this, where
the Developer is trying to preserve trees, that the Developer provide the trench.
He said that if the Phone Company has to supply the trench, they will clear the
easement (however wide) of everything, to grade level.
Burrack stated where the electric line goes under a sidewalk or any kind of
pavement, it should be installed in pipe so that the pavement would not have to
Plat Review Committee Meeting
July 17, 1980
Page 10
be torn up.
10. Kenneth Wagner (Arkansas Western Gas Co.): Stated that Gas service would be
provided from the two inch gas line on the South side of Wedington Drive. He
stated that this line is up in Al Hughes' yard. He stated the line is about
20 to 25 ft. from the ditch line of Wedington Drive.
Wagner stated there is a road crossing which is approximately 625 ft. West
of the centerline of Hall Avenue, and about 100 ft. West of the property.
Scott asked if there would be a problem of getting to the Gas line on
Mr. Hughes' property. Wagner said there could be if he objects to the Gas
Company digging in his yard. Mr. Wagner said that getting gas to the Development
would be no problem, but tapping the line on Mr. Hughes' property would be the
easiest alternative.
Wagner requested a 25 ft. utility easement along the North side of
Wedington Drive, off the right-of-way dedication.
Service would come from the extension of a line on the West and on the
East from the Easement on the North side of Wedington Drive, and run service on
either the North or the South sides of the buildings. Or, the line could be
run down the center of the Development, with service lines teeing off in either
direction.
Scott replied that the Developers would prefer to run the line down the
center and feed off that point. He said that the only gas required may be to
the laundry room. If this was so, would the 25 ft. easement be requiredalong
the whole length of the Development.
Wagner stated that if service comes from Hall Street, and service is only
required to the laundry room, the 25 ft. easement would only have to come as
far as the center ingress/egress, on the North side. But, if service comes from
the West, an easement would be required along the North side of Wedington and
on the West side of the Development.
Wagner said that since this will be privately owned, the Developer will
be responsible for all charges in getting the gas line into the Development.
If the Gas Company has to bore under Wedington Road, there will be a road boring
charge, which would have to be determined at a later date, and would depend on
what problems the Company had boring.
Wagner stated that the Developer would be responsible, financially, for
running the main, but the Gas Company would run the service to the individual
meters.
11. Dick Shaw (Southwestern Bell Telephone Company): Asked that all utility easements
be specified "utility easements" on the plat and on the dedication instrument.
The Telephone Company will require a 20 ft. utility easement along the
East property line, the total length of the property. He stated that if the
Gas Company plans on using this easement it will have to be 25 ft. wide.
Mr. Shaw stated that if the Developer wants to save trees in this easement,
he will have to supply the ditch. If the Developer does not furnish the ditch,
the easement will have to be totally cleared to final grade.
Scott asked if there would be a problem with the Drive that had been
recommended on the East side of the Development. Shaw replied that he would
stipulate running steel pipe under the drive. Mr. Shaw stated he would have to
have a minimum of three inch steel pipe. SWEPCO stated he would have to have
two inch steel pipe. Shaw stated the Developer would furnish conduit for running
•
•
Plat Review Committee Meeting
July 17, 1980
Page 11
•
service from the line to the buildings.
Wagner stated that in a case where sewer
easement, there must be a ten ft. separation.
Shaw stated there
Phone Company along the
Developer should advise
this area.
Shaw also stated that if the Developer changes the plans
he would like to be furnished with copies.
and gas are in the same
is an existing underground duct system belonging to the
Developer's South property line. He stated that the
the Phone Company before they do any excavating in
in any way,
12. Bobbie Jones (City Planning Administrator):
A. A complete legal discription will be submitted by the Developer.
B. A permit for sidewalks and driveways along or connecting with Wedington
Drive, must be obtained from the District Engineer's Office of the State
Highway Department in Ft. Smith.
C. There will be a thirty ft. separation between driveways. Drives along
side property lines will be 12 and 1/2 ft. from side property line.
D . Any waiver of the requirement of sidewalks along Wedington Drive will
have to be requested in writing to the Office of City Planning. The
Planning Commission has the right to waive it. The Board of Directors
can overrule a decision by the Planning Commission. As to location
of sidewalks (inside Highway right-of-way) it should be discussed
with the District Engineer's Office of the State Highway Department
in Ft. Smith.
E . All utility and right-of-way easements will have to be dedicated
before the issuance of a Building Permit. Each structure will have
a separate Building Permit, including the swimming pool. Construction
is to begin within six months of the date of issuance of the Building
Permit, and to be completed two years after issuance.
F. Parking will need to be completed, paved striped with wheel or bumper
guards by the time the building it is intended to serve is ready for
occupancy. If improvements cannot be made by the time the building is
ready for occupancy, there is an agreement form, that can be signed to
extend the time limit on these improvements, available in the Office
of City Planning. If the Developer wishes to delay these requirements,
the Office of City Planning should be contacted a week or two prior
to the date occupancy is desired.
G. Upon completion of the entire project, the Developer is required to submit
back to the Office of City Planning, an "as built plot plan". It will
show all easements, all utility services, including individual services
to each unit.
H . Plumbing and Gas riser diagrams must be submitted to the State Board of
Health, Building Safety Division, for approval prior to issuance of permit.
Plat Review Committee Meeting
• July 17, 1980
Page 12
The swimming pool must be approved by the State Board of Health, prior
to the issuance of a Building Permit to build it. It will also have to n,
meet State Department of Energy Regulations and have all required inspections
performed. Some pool contractors have failed to get these inspections
lately and this is necessary.
J . If a kitchen facility is installed in the Community Club House, the plans
will have to be submitted to the State Board of Health for approval,
Sanitarian Division.
K . Where the property is adjacent to C-1, to the East, and to the Northeast,
the property owners will have to be notified prior to the meeting of the
Subdivision Committee. Furnish the Office of City Planning the names
and addresses of property owners that are contiguous so that they can be
furnished with an Agenda.
L. The situations in which a Large Scale Development can be denied are as
follows:
1. If it is not submitted in accordance with the requirements of the
Ordinance.
• 2. If it would violate a City Ordinance, State or Federal Statute.
•
If the Developer refuses to dedicate street right-of-way, utility
easements, or drainage easements required by the Ordinance.
4. If it creates or compounds a dangerous traffic condition.
S. If City Waternand Sewer are not readily available to the property
within the Large Scale Development, and the Developer has made no
provision for extending such services to the Development.
M. A state Contractors License is required on.:this project.
N . Check with Gary Goff, City License Enforcement Officer, to see if the
Developer will need a City Business License.
O . Regarding the proposed Area Identification Sign, the Sign Inspector,
John Dietzen, has advised Bobbie Jones that it will be legal so long as
there is five acres in the Development and it does not exceed 32 sq. ft.
in. size. A permit will be required. Placement of the sign will be
determined by the Sign Inspector.
P . There will be no obstructions within the front yard setback that might
impede vision of vehicular or pedestrian traffic coming in or out of the
driveways. Nothing between a height of 30 inches and 10 ft. above ground
level.
•
•
•
Plat Review Committee Meeting
July 17, 1980
Page 13
Q. Parking spaces will be 9 x 19 with some compact spaces allowed. One
out of every twenty-five parking spaces will be accessible to the
Physically Handicapped.
R. There is no R-1 zoned property with a common property line, therefore,
no screening is required.